- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

If Hans is cheating, then how is he doing it?

#31

I love how no one has even answered the gosh-darned question
HOW THE HECK DID HE EVN CHEAT OTB?
(And don't say anal beads.)

I love how no one has even answered the gosh-darned question HOW THE HECK DID HE EVN CHEAT OTB? (And don't say anal beads.)
#32

@codingmasterggg said in #31:

I love how no one has even answered the gosh-darned question
HOW THE HECK DID HE EVN CHEAT OTB?
(And don't say anal beads.)

Who says he cheated OTB? Anyone?

Or is this just a huge Niemann fan straw man?

@codingmasterggg said in #31: > I love how no one has even answered the gosh-darned question > HOW THE HECK DID HE EVN CHEAT OTB? > (And don't say anal beads.) Who says he cheated OTB? Anyone? Or is this just a huge Niemann fan straw man?
#33

Thank you, in a way, Onyx, for putting this matter in such clear relief

@Onyx_Chess said in #26:

Magnus did not imply anything.
Off to a bad start. Do you honestly believe what you have written?

Magnus stated, flat out,
After 2 weeks of implying that he had left the tournament due to his suspicions of cheating
that there was a plethora of abnormal, bizarre, and suspicious behaviours and circumstances, and it made him uncomfortable;
I never read or heard Magnus say any of that, provide a quote.
he stated that it was unfair that he should have to play under such pressure, and that, therefore, he had no choice but to withdraw from the tournament.
He actually stated that he was taking an action against an existential threat to chess, and that he was doing something about it.

This is not the same as an accusation.
"I believe Hans Niemann has cheated..." Magnus stated that and more, in writing.

This is the same as feeling uncomfortable and guarding our children when a registered offender is staring at them.
It's not an accusation, it's an uncomfortable reaction to a known predator.
What? Do you have an accusation which is inappropriate unless you put strange words in Magnus' mouth to justify, so "Magnus stated, flat out, that there was a plethora of abnormal, bizarre, and suspicious behaviours and circumstances", was to try to compare teenager Niemann to a registered sex offender? You need to take account of your mind.
Let's look at it:

  • Hans was/is a recent/current cheater.
    So you say, where's your evidence? Magnus cheated on video.
  • By Hans' own words "a miracle coincidence" in the opening prep.
    Even Hikaru doesn't find anything wrong with this
  • Hans' peculiar remarks after having just beat the worlds #1.
    Like what?
  • Hans' abnormal post-game analysis of the game.
    What?
  • A former teacher, and cheater, tweeting about being proud of Hans as a student and posting a picture of them embracing.
    He is a former teacher to most of the talented US chess players.
  • Magnus' perception that he didn't feel as if Hans seemed aware of, much less troubled by, any of the challenges that Magnus put in the position...yet finding the correct answers to those challenges.
    Magnus didn't play as well as he usually does. He lost, get over it.
  • Murmurs by Magnus' colleagues regarding concerns about Hans' legitimacy.
    Yeah, bullying.
  • Likely, Carlsen and other top GMs looked at Niemann's play in cash tournaments and made their conclusions.
    Yes, instead of looking for evidence.
  • Longstanding concerns with cheating not being prevented and cheaters not being dissuaded and punished enough.
    And then you go and turn things around. Completely with you here, but it has nothing to do with the rest of your post!
  • Magnus will have felt as if it was his responsibility to step up and make it an issue.
    He could have at any time, and he could have set an example himself by taking issue with his own provable cheating to illustrate his commitment for fair play.
    This is the perfect storm of pressure that Carlsen was under.
    And he chose to portray chess as a sport for bad sportsman, acted like a bad sportsman, and is therefore justified?

Lastly, anything and everything that we chastise in Magnus' actions...is 100% fruit of the poisonous tree which cheaters planted. All Magnus did was object to being forced to having to play under the conditions that cheaters have imposed.
Well no, people are taking offence to unfounded accusations.
One thing is for absolute certain...it was not the loss that caused Magnus to withdraw. It was the perfect storm of salient concern and suspicion which Hans created around himself.
So he would have done the same if he won?

"Honest players should keep their mouths shut, somehow sit and play chess like normal, and just completely ignore and presume innocence at all times, regardless of a myriad of red flags that 'said' cheater continues to pose."
unfortunately Magnus has cheated on video, repeatedly.
This position is completely untenable.
You said it!
Everything that people are asking of Magnus is untenable and completely lacks empathy for the position that he was in, alongside his ad hoc response to the position that he was in.
Nah, he lost mate, that's all there is. There is no evidence Niemann cheated, and the analysis was done by the experts and they agree there are no indication of unfair play, Magnus lost with black against the chess.con "doormat", that must have stung Carlsen's ego in terrible ways. Still, Magnus is responsible for his actions.

Thank you, in a way, Onyx, for putting this matter in such clear relief @Onyx_Chess said in #26: >Magnus did not imply anything. Off to a bad start. Do you honestly believe what you have written? >Magnus stated, flat out, After 2 weeks of implying that he had left the tournament due to his suspicions of cheating >that there was a plethora of abnormal, bizarre, and suspicious behaviours and circumstances, and it made him uncomfortable; I never read or heard Magnus say any of that, provide a quote. >he stated that it was unfair that he should have to play under such pressure, and that, therefore, he had no choice but to withdraw from the tournament. He actually stated that he was taking an action against an existential threat to chess, and that he was doing something about it. >This is not the same as an accusation. "I believe Hans Niemann has cheated..." Magnus stated that and more, in writing. >This is the same as feeling uncomfortable and guarding our children when a registered offender is staring at them. >It's not an accusation, it's an uncomfortable reaction to a known predator. What? Do you have an accusation which is inappropriate unless you put strange words in Magnus' mouth to justify, so "Magnus stated, flat out, that there was a plethora of abnormal, bizarre, and suspicious behaviours and circumstances", was to try to compare teenager Niemann to a registered sex offender? You need to take account of your mind. >Let's look at it: >- Hans was/is a recent/current cheater. So you say, where's your evidence? Magnus cheated on video. >- By Hans' own words "a miracle coincidence" in the opening prep. Even Hikaru doesn't find anything wrong with this >- Hans' peculiar remarks after having just beat the worlds #1. Like what? >- Hans' abnormal post-game analysis of the game. What? >- A former teacher, and cheater, tweeting about being proud of Hans as a student and posting a picture of them embracing. He is a former teacher to most of the talented US chess players. >- Magnus' perception that he didn't feel as if Hans seemed aware of, much less troubled by, any of the challenges that Magnus put in the position...yet finding the correct answers to those challenges. Magnus didn't play as well as he usually does. He lost, get over it. >- Murmurs by Magnus' colleagues regarding concerns about Hans' legitimacy. Yeah, bullying. >- Likely, Carlsen and other top GMs looked at Niemann's play in cash tournaments and made their conclusions. Yes, instead of looking for evidence. >- Longstanding concerns with cheating not being prevented and cheaters not being dissuaded and punished enough. And then you go and turn things around. Completely with you here, but it has nothing to do with the rest of your post! >- Magnus will have felt as if it was his responsibility to step up and make it an issue. He could have at any time, and he could have set an example himself by taking issue with his own provable cheating to illustrate his commitment for fair play. >This is the perfect storm of pressure that Carlsen was under. And he chose to portray chess as a sport for bad sportsman, acted like a bad sportsman, and is therefore justified? >*Lastly, anything and everything that we chastise in Magnus' actions...is 100% fruit of the poisonous tree which cheaters planted. All Magnus did was object to being forced to having to play under the conditions that cheaters have imposed.* Well no, people are taking offence to unfounded accusations. >One thing is for absolute certain...it was not the loss that caused Magnus to withdraw. It was the perfect storm of salient concern and suspicion which Hans created around himself. So he would have done the same if he won? >"Honest players should keep their mouths shut, somehow sit and play chess like normal, and just completely ignore and presume innocence at all times, regardless of a myriad of red flags that 'said' cheater continues to pose." unfortunately Magnus has cheated on video, repeatedly. >This position is completely untenable. You said it! >Everything that people are asking of Magnus is untenable and completely lacks empathy for the position that he was in, alongside his ad hoc response to the position that he was in. Nah, he lost mate, that's all there is. There is no evidence Niemann cheated, and the analysis was done by the experts and they agree there are no indication of unfair play, Magnus lost with black against the chess.con "doormat", that must have stung Carlsen's ego in terrible ways. Still, Magnus is responsible for his actions.
#34

@Nomoreusernames said in #33:

"I believe Hans Niemann has cheated..." Magnus stated that and more, in writing.

This is a fact by Hans' own admission.

If you read the rest of that quote, you'll find that he was also correct about Hans cheating more often, more severely, and more recently than he admitted to.

And, again, the idea that Magnus was in a position to ignore all of the red flags and pressure, is untenable.

...that must have stung Carlsen's ego in terrible ways. Still, Magnus is responsible for his actions.

There is no evidence of this...but there is a plethora of cogent and salient red flags that couldn't be ignored.

@Nomoreusernames said in #33: > "I believe Hans Niemann has cheated..." Magnus stated that and more, in writing. This is a fact by Hans' own admission. If you read the rest of that quote, you'll find that he was also correct about Hans cheating more often, more severely, and more recently than he admitted to. And, again, the idea that Magnus was in a position to ignore all of the red flags and pressure, is untenable. > ...that must have stung Carlsen's ego in terrible ways. Still, Magnus is responsible for his actions. There is no evidence of this...but there is a plethora of cogent and salient red flags that couldn't be ignored.
#35

@Nomoreusernames said in #33:

I believe Hans Niemann has cheated

You should be fully aware that this statement wasn't about OTB play. It was a factual statement that isn't in any way in dispute.

The full statement was:

"I believe that Niemann has cheated more - and more recently - than he has publicly admitted."

This isn't a claim that he cheated OTB. It's a completely correct factual statement, and you know it. Why are you twisting this?

@Nomoreusernames said in #33: > I believe Hans Niemann has cheated You should be fully aware that this statement wasn't about OTB play. It was a factual statement that isn't in any way in dispute. The full statement was: "I believe that Niemann has cheated more - and more recently - than he has publicly admitted." This isn't a claim that he cheated OTB. It's a completely correct factual statement, and you know it. Why are you twisting this?
#36

@Onyx in #26

This is not the same as an accusation.

@Nomoreusernames said in #33:

"I believe Hans Niemann has cheated..." Magnus stated that and more, in writing.

@Onyx_Chess said in #34:

This is a fact by Hans' own admission.
If you read the rest of that quote, you'll find that he was also correct about Hans cheating more often, more severely, and more recently than he admitted to.
And, again, the idea that Magnus was in a position to ignore all of the red flags and pressure, is untenable.

So it is an accusation then?

@Onyx in #26 >This is not the same as an accusation. @Nomoreusernames said in #33: >"I believe Hans Niemann has cheated..." Magnus stated that and more, in writing. @Onyx_Chess said in #34: > This is a fact by Hans' own admission. > If you read the rest of that quote, you'll find that he was also correct about Hans cheating more often, more severely, and more recently than he admitted to. > And, again, the idea that Magnus was in a position to ignore all of the red flags and pressure, is untenable. So it is an accusation then?
#37

@Nomoreusernames said in #36:

@Onyx in #26

So it is an accusation then?

That Niemann cheated over 100 games online is a known an not disputed fact, not an accusation.

@Nomoreusernames said in #36: > @Onyx in #26 > > > > > > > So it is an accusation then? That Niemann cheated over 100 games online is a known an not disputed fact, not an accusation.
#38

@Molurus said in #35:

You should be fully aware that this statement wasn't about OTB play. It was a factual statement that isn't in any way in dispute.
The full statement was:
"I believe that Niemann has cheated more - and more recently - than he has publicly admitted."
This isn't a claim that he cheated OTB. It's a completely correct factual statement, and you know it. Why are you twisting this?
Because it's an accusation.

@Molurus said in #35: > You should be fully aware that this statement wasn't about OTB play. It was a factual statement that isn't in any way in dispute. > The full statement was: > "I believe that Niemann has cheated more - and more recently - than he has publicly admitted." > This isn't a claim that he cheated OTB. It's a completely correct factual statement, and you know it. Why are you twisting this? Because it's an accusation.
#39

@Molurus said in #37:

That Niemann cheated over 100 games online is a known an not disputed fact, not an accusation.
Then why didn't chess.con say that instead of "likely cheated"?

@Molurus said in #37: > That Niemann cheated over 100 games online is a known an not disputed fact, not an accusation. Then why didn't chess.con say that instead of "likely cheated"?

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.