Community update:
Kedaha may find it even harder to pretend the report isn’t clear who made things public this time. Hans could have stayed silent or been honest. By publicly lying in a way that misrepresented Chess.com, he brought further public scrutiny on himself.
Couldn’t happen to a smugger guy!
Brave Sam Sevian took justice in his own hands, grabbed Hans’ king and checked it very, very subtle for hidden spy tech. Broke the tip of the king off, and in disgust, sent the king back to a different position on the board. There you have it, Hans. That’s what happens when you fuck a stranger in his ass…
What’s even funnier about this is that that was the piece Hans wanted to move with; he was taking the pawn on b2.
Imagine the other player just grabbing the piece you wanted to move with off the board while your clock is running. /foreheadslap
You’d sort of think picking up pieces of your opponent on his clock would disqualify you or something.
I mean if there’s a touch rule for your own pieces one would think something more strenuous results for a player picking up and moving or in this case temporarily removing from the board one of your opponents pieces.
I’m not quite sure what rules even say about what happens when a player grabs an opponent’s piece. Maybe a time penalty.
The best part is when Sam just kind of casually slides it back across the table. He doesn’t even bother putting it back on its square! ‘Here, have your stupid King’.
Of course this happens on one of Hans Niemann’s games.
I should have dug around to find out who won the game, do you know?
Hans went on to win, although it looked like a pretty tight end game.
Two minutes time bonus for the victim.
As funny as the whole thing looked, things like that can become quite serious.
Imagine Hans only has 5 minutes for 10 moves. Then, while he’s in the middle of calculating a critical variation, his opponent grabs Hans’ king. This brutally pulls him out of his thinking process. In that case it’s even unsportsmanlike behaviour. A referee could declare the game lost at that point, although the chances for that are very slim.
FIDE clarified the rules regarding touching pieces a week or two ago. Now you are not allowed to touch anything on the board, if your own clock isn’t running. So no “J’adoube” after you have pressed the clock.
Well yeah, he’s the only one currently known to deserve such disdain and suspicion.
That said, in this case Hans was actually the victim. I’m sure he’ll play up that angle as hard as Fox News.
Speaking of playing the victim…
What about suing that guy on reddit that came up with the anal beads meme? That’s at least $10 million.
Oh yeah, heck piece touching can lead to serious turmoil just between class players playing a G/30. I remember one time playing this guy, and we were in a time scramble and racing to queen a pawn, but I was ahead. I was still fairly new, so I went to move my pawn to like b1 (can’t remember which) and went to grab the queen to place it down, and he moved as I was doing that and then moved again to queen his pawn as I was placing down the queen even though I’d never hit the clock.
lol $400M?
Hans trying to cite the Sherman Act has big anti-vaxxers citing HIPAA energy.
Many people have stated they do not like me and do not want me playing
Same.
Yosha, as a Chess24 employee, should be happy she wasn’t drawn into this lawsuit.
There is new info - or rather the confirmation of old info - regarding engine correlation in Let’s Check analysis on the Chessbase website:
When you analyze a game with it, it will not only tell you what a variety of engines thought of each move, it will give you a summary called Engine Correlation at the top, showing the percentage of times a player’s moves matched the top choice of an engine.
However, unlike a plain engine comparison, it won’t compare with just one top engine move, it will compare with several, and if the move matches any of those engines, then it is a match for Engine Correlation.
So, there you have it from the horses mouth. Engine correlations stack. Which makes this tool useless dor finding out if somebody has cheated or not.
Yeah, I finally got around to booting up Windows and going to look in chessbase, and using let’s check would be stupid. Especially since the default is that when you fire up an engine to look at a position it sends the analysis to the chessbase servers, so most people following the games with Fritz or Chessbase would’ve sent engine data to CB if they fired up an engine.
I think maybe the more useful tool is the one that looks at the centipawn differences between moves played, and what the engine considers the strongest move, which is what I figured they were using.
Niemann is the outlier with both tools compared to the strongest players. Even if chessbase is not the best tool, it is strange that Niemann has many games above 90% or even 100% whereas other GMs don’t.
The centipawn loss is more interesting. How do players compare against a strong engine. Niemann is also an outlier here. But not always. That’s the strange thing. He is very inconsistent.
But maybe that’s his style? Who knows OTB. If he would not have played 100+ games where he cheated online (according to chess.com analysis) , I would think nobody would made a big deal about his OTB play.
I find it interesting, what Nakamura said about Niemanns play when he was younger compared to other super GMs. The other kids games showed sometimes brilliance, whereas Niemanns games were nothing special…
This will be an interesting law suit. I hope it clears things up.
Something like 98% of all civil cases settle before trial, so putting aside the other issue that trials are not about getting to the truth, this one in the end will never see the light of day.