@esmiro said in #30:
>
I would agree that it is no sound, not that it was utterly ridiculous, but I can't eliminate the possibility that someone was thinking that instead of being "alt-right", especially as that is what they said:
@kassanen said in #12:
> how come my remark was transphobic?
> i just refer to what the following post says
> www.chesstech.org/2022/can-yosha-compete-as-a-woman/
> which in my opinion this is another form of cheating
@Nomoreusernames said in #31:
> I would agree that it is no sound, not that it was utterly ridiculous, but I can't eliminate the possibility that someone was thinking that instead of being "alt-right", especially as that is what they said:
You have every right to defend Niemann, but you shouldn't compare situations that have nothing to do with each other
@esmiro said in #32:
> You have every right to defend Niemann, but you shouldn't compare situations that have nothing to do with each other
I am not defending Niemann, I don't know that he didn't cheat, I just know that people accusing him without proof is using flawed logic. Nor have I defended kassanen, in fact I laid out his flawed thought clearly to him, and he has accepted and agreed that it was wrong. Are you sure you are clean of agenda?
@esmiro said in #30:
> This false equivalence is so utterly ridiculous that I wouldn't know where to start to address.
start by respect everyone else's opinion here even if its different than yours or doesnt fit to ur agenda
@Nomoreusernames said in #33:
> I am not defending Niemann, I don't know that he didn't cheat, I just know that people accusing him without proof is using flawed logic. Nor have I defended kassanen, in fact I laid out his flawed thought clearly to him, and he has accepted and agreed that it was wrong. Are you sure you are clean of agenda?
What do you need to see to know he cheated? This is something no one seems to talk about who defend Hans. Apparently showing his moves matching up with Stockfish isn't enough. His past history of cheating in money tournaments isn't enough. Chessbase Let's Check Analysis isn't enough. His post game interview isn't enough. Body Language Analysis, and analysis of his statements showing his deception isn't enough. They only thing left is for Hans to come out and admit to cheating in his games with Magnus, and that probably won't be enough either. "He was pressured into confession". What level of proof do you need?
well, a mechanism would be nice. how did he do it? and why does analysis of that specific game between Magnus and Hans not support it? he did cheat in the past, probably much more than he admitted, but that doesn't mean he cheated in St. Louis. and body language analysis is pretty much fake science, on a par with "lie detectors". there is definitely evidence that he would cheat if he could, but so far none as far as I can see that he did in the St. Louis tournament. and Carlsen imo really mishandled it; he should have withdrawn from the tournament before it started if he had such qualms about Hans being there--it was an impulsive decision, and it weakened his position.
With Borislav Ivanov it was pretty blatant, they knew he was hiding something, and when they demanded he take off his shirt or his shoes he refused, and went on to his further career in a different kind of fraud. Pretty much everybody agrees it is easier to cheat online than otb in a major tournament. Caruana said he know somebody had cheated, and was subsequently cleared by Regan. I'd be interested in how that happened, but so far no details,
You are trying to analyze the body language of a lvl 99 geeky Chess champion through the standards we would use for normal people.
You've already lost.
@pretzelattack1 said in #36:
> well, a mechanism would be nice. how did he do it? and why does analysis of that specific game between Magnus and Hans not support it? he did cheat in the past, probably much more than he admitted, but that doesn't mean he cheated in St. Louis. and body language analysis is pretty much fake science, on a par with "lie detectors". there is definitely evidence that he would cheat if he could, but so far none as far as I can see that he did in the St. Louis tournament. and Carlsen imo really mishandled it; he should have withdrawn from the tournament before it started if he had such qualms about Hans being there--it was an impulsive decision, and it weakened his position.
I generally agree with you and think there's a lot of crazy speculation and rudeness going on. I would say that I was 100% in agreement with you until last week when I saw this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/xl1ufw/as_someone_with_intimate_knowledge_of_magic/
It appears there are devices available that would enable cheating that are not adequately screened for.
The means to cheat existing does not prove his guilt, of course, and I would want to see definitive proof... But it needs to be said that the means do exist.
i certainly don't question that cheating is possible--it's rampant in sports in general. and I remember it took the Amazing Randi to debunk Uri Geller after some legit scientists thought what he was doing had some paranormal basis. not to mention that some professional cheats used various mechanisms to cheat casino games like roulette and blackjack, concealed somewhere on their body.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.