Chess Scandal

[Phoebe]

Has anyone been following this recent chess scandal, where one player has been, rightly or wrongly, suspected of cheating? And now he is suing another player and chess.com for defamation?

https://www.npr.org/2022/10/21/11304423 ... defamation

The story is that Hans admits to cheating online on a few occasions when he was 12 and 16. He's now 19 and claims he has never cheated since then or in an over-the-board tournament as opposed to online. The cheating generally means getting recommendations from the computer about which move is optimal. Sometimes good chess players are already following those recommendations, but sometimes they deviate, or there are options, or humans think about the situation differently than the computer for other reasons (e.g. an intimidating move is chosen because you know the opponent is under time pressure and you're sending a message).

However, he was suspected of unfair play in the last few months by the current world champion, Magnus Carlsen, and the chess.com people (who had sanctioned him), and others who have performed various analyses of uncertain import. The chess.com people say he has cheated more in the past than he admitted to, which is a big strike against him because if you want to be believed today, you should be fully forthcoming about your past sins. Apparently he has not been - though maybe that's one of the items disputed in the lawsuit.

The other complaint his defenders will make (and that the lawsuit makes) is that Carlsen was just angry and saving face with these claims after Niemann beat him. In their next match, Carlsen quit after making only one move, causing a great scandal in the chess world! Did he somehow know Niemann was cheating, was he just mad, or what? However, the claim that Magnus is a sore loser makes no sense because he loses all the time to brilliant younger teenage players despite overall remaining dominant at the game, and he is always gracious and supportive of these newcomers. So it makes no sense to say he reacts badly to losses - nobody can challenge his GOAT status at present, certainly not Hans, who is top ten in the US but far behind many others worldwide who are a greater threat (and younger, with more room to develop). Maybe Magnus dislikes Hans personally, so reacted worse to losing to him? Who knows.

Whatever the truth of the matter is, a fascinating issue is how being trained by computers that are better at chess will affect the development of human players. Are we now seeing this with young people who have spent several years learning by looking at what the computer recommends? Or have new technologies for cheating been created that permit people to take a few cues from the computer? If you could know the computer's recommendation in just 2 or 3 places, combined with your own superior chess skill, it might be enough to profoundly affect the outcomes.

Hans is also a very odd duck, but interesting. Supposedly he was born in the US and lived most of his life here, but has lived a year or two overseas - it's not clear why he is said to have a Hawaiian family background as well. Yet if you listen to him speak, it appears that he speaks with wildly different and pronounced accents at different times - sometimes he seems to be affecting a European accent and other times it's impossible to say what accent it is, except that it's not standard "grew up in California and New York" speech. He sulks and scowls all the time but is also naturally unusual-looking, so maybe that's just his face in the normal state? Most other chess players at his level seem to dislike him but he has friends and defenders as well, so it's not clear how that shakes out. The chess players are weird and the chess world is weird, so who can really understand it? The lawsuit seems pretty crazy but the accusations against him are confusing and are indeed unfairly damaging if untrue. Can they really know he has cheated? Lots of people are disputing the methods they would even use to figure this out. Without obvious evidence like "we find a radio chip in your ear", it's hard to say.

The other TRULY weird thing about this situation is that Hans, despite being accused of cheating, is BY FAR the most popular player in the US with all these seemingly deranged online followers, even though other players are obviously better than him and also charismatic, chatty, etc. I can see why some of those guys aren't developing an online following because they're very quiet and unglamorous, but Hans is not special among them apart from the cheating accusations and his greater quantity of hair. Maybe they really like his hair? It's a mystery. He's popular with online jabberers in the same way that you see people complaining about the Woke kids and Vaccine dangers and Ukraine being the actual nazis. What does that mean? Is the same group of idiots also the group of Niemann fans? Or are they a different group, dumb in their own unique way? Why are they so outnumbering normal chess fans - like people who follow chess and are good at it tend not to be Niemann fans, but jokers who know less about chess seem to love him. It's almost like shitty people are specially attracted to and supportive of him precisely BECAUSE he was accused of cheating. Like the liars want to stick with someone they think is one of them? Why? I want to know!

Anyway, now that I've gone down this rabbithole my phone wants to show me nothing else, so presumably, I'll find out eventually.

[Tahlvin]

I've read a few stories about the allegations and saw a headline about the lawsuit, but haven't been following super closely. The chess.com accusation on his past behavior is interesting. And his rise up the rankings from where he was a couple years ago has been abnormal. But like you said, I don't know how he could be cheating in over-the-board games short of having an earpiece and an accomplice feeding him moves. If they're just pissed that he memorized combinations of moves, then hell, isn't that what most chess players do?

[poorpete]

I've read a few things and listened to a few podcasts on it. It sure is interesting, and Hans is sure shifty, but honestly have no idea who is right, other than gut feelings. From what I can tell the second event, where Magnus quits after a single move, was a standard protest move, as he feels Hans was not properly punished (still playing the best in the world is a sign that you probably weren't punished enough) and further appropriate steps from the community to stem cheating for the future. I heard because of this chess games are now streamed online with a delay, which is a good step.

IMO, Hans lose his defamation case (can a cheater be defamed as a cheater?) and may drop the case as soon as the defense is allowed discovery.

I also do wonder how strategy games survive the era of AI and finger-tip knowledge. At least competitively.

Reminds me, semi-aside, I know people who solved a Rubix cube by looking up the correct strategy on YouTube. Horray? I've solved it a few times, but mostly by getting 90% of the way with strategies I've discovered (the fun part) and then moving things around until it finally appears in the right order (can take a few minutes or hours). Now, should I look up the solution? Should I live with my imperfect strategy? Or should I work on the cube until I can discover the last missing strategy? I feel the last one is more rewarding, but if money was on the line, and this was a competition, the yearn for help/cheats is high.

Note: to be honest, I do use help/cheats on video games when the kids are watching me play, after 10 minutes of not knowing what to do, I get frustrated and they get bored, so best I keep them entertainment then have Link continuously try out different songs on the Ocarina of Time.

[Phoebe]

Haha, that's maybe the only thing I could even do in the game!