Both Hikaru and Fabi have now come out in support of Kramnick's project ... 'the problem is serious' ... 'something must be done' ...
www.youtube.com/shorts/3hIPuyvAtes
www.youtube.com/shorts/3hIPuyvAtes
@boilingFrog said in #11:
> problem is serious' ... 'something must be done
I totally AGREE with you that there is a big problem with online cheating! Often the degree is overstated but even with reasonable estimates - it is still a big problem. OBJECTIVE cheat detection is a non-trivial problem and you really need to set high limits so that you avoid false positives.
I definitely do not think that starting with the Kramnik SUBJECTIVE detection approach is the way to go. He is suspicious of everyone (a bit paranoid like many top chess players who worked so very hard to get to the top) and subjectively focuses on people who beat or drew him or even give him a good game. It is silly to make many dubious reports like the two K's that are pretty much all unconfirmed. If you play Blitz (or faster) especially with no increment there is lots of room for many random upsets due to the number of mistakes inherent in these type of games.
Yes, some people cheat during the titled Tuesday events. The big need is an objective answer to the 'Who is cheating' question and that means that you need a sample of games unless the cheating is blatant / simplistic. You need to sets high limits to avoid false confirmations. Suspicions are one thing and strong statistical confirmation is another. Aleireza was apparently flagged on cheesedotcom when he was very young - he denied. He was given an test during a video conference with positions to solve - his performance was jaw dropping and he was cleared.
With chess, we are unlucky with the existence of such strong free open source chess engines and the nature of our game. With a cheap phone and and a free chess engine app, anybody in the world can beat all the top twenty human players easily and also slaughter the world champion. Imagine if in tennis, someone could get a free app and then proceed to obliterate all the top players - not possible with tennis but with chess it definitely is!
Cheers
PS: The Perpetual Chess Podcast had interviews with several professor types who are involved in cheat detection with mention of some specific cases. There was also one with a guy (cannot remember his name, will check) who used to work with cheesedotcom and some interesting and surprising things to say about cheating there.
> problem is serious' ... 'something must be done
I totally AGREE with you that there is a big problem with online cheating! Often the degree is overstated but even with reasonable estimates - it is still a big problem. OBJECTIVE cheat detection is a non-trivial problem and you really need to set high limits so that you avoid false positives.
I definitely do not think that starting with the Kramnik SUBJECTIVE detection approach is the way to go. He is suspicious of everyone (a bit paranoid like many top chess players who worked so very hard to get to the top) and subjectively focuses on people who beat or drew him or even give him a good game. It is silly to make many dubious reports like the two K's that are pretty much all unconfirmed. If you play Blitz (or faster) especially with no increment there is lots of room for many random upsets due to the number of mistakes inherent in these type of games.
Yes, some people cheat during the titled Tuesday events. The big need is an objective answer to the 'Who is cheating' question and that means that you need a sample of games unless the cheating is blatant / simplistic. You need to sets high limits to avoid false confirmations. Suspicions are one thing and strong statistical confirmation is another. Aleireza was apparently flagged on cheesedotcom when he was very young - he denied. He was given an test during a video conference with positions to solve - his performance was jaw dropping and he was cleared.
With chess, we are unlucky with the existence of such strong free open source chess engines and the nature of our game. With a cheap phone and and a free chess engine app, anybody in the world can beat all the top twenty human players easily and also slaughter the world champion. Imagine if in tennis, someone could get a free app and then proceed to obliterate all the top players - not possible with tennis but with chess it definitely is!
Cheers
PS: The Perpetual Chess Podcast had interviews with several professor types who are involved in cheat detection with mention of some specific cases. There was also one with a guy (cannot remember his name, will check) who used to work with cheesedotcom and some interesting and surprising things to say about cheating there.
@SaltWaterRabbit said in #12:
> PS: The Perpetual Chess Podcast had interviews with several professor types who are involved in cheat detection with mention of some specific cases. There was also one with a guy (cannot remember his name, will check) who used to work with cheesedotcom and some interesting and surprising things to say about cheating there.
Are you talking about "Professors Dan Simons and Christopher Chabris on Chess Cheating,Growth Mindset and Chess Improvement" episode #338?
> PS: The Perpetual Chess Podcast had interviews with several professor types who are involved in cheat detection with mention of some specific cases. There was also one with a guy (cannot remember his name, will check) who used to work with cheesedotcom and some interesting and surprising things to say about cheating there.
Are you talking about "Professors Dan Simons and Christopher Chabris on Chess Cheating,Growth Mindset and Chess Improvement" episode #338?
I'm replying to see why I'm getting 404 errors when clicking on the replies in my timeline.
Edit: OK, it didn't cure the errors. There is at least one reply from DrHotBuns that is visible on my timeline, but invisible here.
Edit2: The offending link from my timeline: lichess.org/forum/redirect/post/sLdYxcCz , others continue to work OK.
Anyway, "Perpetual Chess Podcast" is now available as a video version on YouTube, it no longer requires an Apple product to listen to. Additionally, one can view/listen to them through the Bing search engine which helps by removing Google ads that get inserted when watching through YouTube.
Edit: OK, it didn't cure the errors. There is at least one reply from DrHotBuns that is visible on my timeline, but invisible here.
Edit2: The offending link from my timeline: lichess.org/forum/redirect/post/sLdYxcCz , others continue to work OK.
Anyway, "Perpetual Chess Podcast" is now available as a video version on YouTube, it no longer requires an Apple product to listen to. Additionally, one can view/listen to them through the Bing search engine which helps by removing Google ads that get inserted when watching through YouTube.
@kalafiorczyk said in #13:
> Are you talking about "Professors Dan Simons and Christopher Chabris on Chess Cheating,Growth Mindset and Chess Improvement" episode #338?
IM Kenneth Regan
One professor type is IM Ken Regan at University of Buffalo who does fair play research (scientific papers on his university page) and does work for FIDE plus others.
Episode 136
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2019/7/23/episode-136-im-kenneth-regan
Ep 301- Computer Science Professor and IM, Dr. Kenneth Regan on the Carlsen/Niemann controversy and the Current State of Cheating in OTB Chess October 18, 2022
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2022/10/18/ep-301-computer-science-professor-and-im-dr-kenneth-regan-on-the-carlsenniemann-controversy-and-the-current-state-of-cheating-in-otb-chess
Episode 25- Thibault Duplessis (founder of LiChess.org)
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2017/5/23/episode-25-delayed
older but some parts on cheat detection
Episode 221-Chris Callahan of Lichess.org
NoJoke
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2021/4/6/episode-221-chris-callahan-of-lichessorg
Timestamp 33:15 Question General approach to cheat detection (NOT talk about specific methods)
40-50 people full time / full time equivalent on cheat detection only.
Average Reporter: reports less than 1% correct / result in action. (average very low due to many people who incorrectly report most anyone who defeats or draws them.)
Mean Reporter: if you are 50% correct then you are totally one of the very rare absolute best reporters like a GM! If you are 5-10% you are very good. (Mean reduces the effect of the many people who incorrectly report most anyone who defeats or draws them.)
Cheers
> Are you talking about "Professors Dan Simons and Christopher Chabris on Chess Cheating,Growth Mindset and Chess Improvement" episode #338?
IM Kenneth Regan
One professor type is IM Ken Regan at University of Buffalo who does fair play research (scientific papers on his university page) and does work for FIDE plus others.
Episode 136
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2019/7/23/episode-136-im-kenneth-regan
Ep 301- Computer Science Professor and IM, Dr. Kenneth Regan on the Carlsen/Niemann controversy and the Current State of Cheating in OTB Chess October 18, 2022
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2022/10/18/ep-301-computer-science-professor-and-im-dr-kenneth-regan-on-the-carlsenniemann-controversy-and-the-current-state-of-cheating-in-otb-chess
Episode 25- Thibault Duplessis (founder of LiChess.org)
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2017/5/23/episode-25-delayed
older but some parts on cheat detection
Episode 221-Chris Callahan of Lichess.org
NoJoke
www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2021/4/6/episode-221-chris-callahan-of-lichessorg
Timestamp 33:15 Question General approach to cheat detection (NOT talk about specific methods)
40-50 people full time / full time equivalent on cheat detection only.
Average Reporter: reports less than 1% correct / result in action. (average very low due to many people who incorrectly report most anyone who defeats or draws them.)
Mean Reporter: if you are 50% correct then you are totally one of the very rare absolute best reporters like a GM! If you are 5-10% you are very good. (Mean reduces the effect of the many people who incorrectly report most anyone who defeats or draws them.)
Cheers
@kalafiorczyk said in #14:
> Anyway, "Perpetual Chess Podcast" is now available as a video version on YouTube
On Perpetual Chess, I use Share and the download a pod files (Click to stop the pod from playing) and then I use open source VLC to play the pods and you have full control over what parts you listen to. Sometimes I just use a USB plugged into the car console/ radio.
> Anyway, "Perpetual Chess Podcast" is now available as a video version on YouTube
On Perpetual Chess, I use Share and the download a pod files (Click to stop the pod from playing) and then I use open source VLC to play the pods and you have full control over what parts you listen to. Sometimes I just use a USB plugged into the car console/ radio.
@kalafiorczyk said in #4:
> Kramnik's analysis analyzed by a professional data scientist:
Hey, I think I was one of those too! (back when I was a data entry clerk).
> Kramnik's analysis analyzed by a professional data scientist:
Hey, I think I was one of those too! (back when I was a data entry clerk).
@MrPushwood said in #17:
> Hey, I think I was one of those too! (back when I was a data entry clerk).
Hey - Go poop in your own pool, Pushy ...
> Hey, I think I was one of those too! (back when I was a data entry clerk).
Hey - Go poop in your own pool, Pushy ...
@SaltWaterRabbit said in #12:
>
best take in the thread. I don't blame Kramnik for being paranoid. He learned the game before computers were really dominant and he has to be able to tell that many players are not legit because he has played the best in the world for years.
We are only seeing the very beginning of this, when someone can install a microchip anywhere on their person there will only be more cheating in the big money tournaments.
Many people do not speak on this but what about the players that just at some point realize they will never be the best but a top 50 player receiving one bit of information once a game could potentially be the difference between becoming a financially successful player or a no name.
I am surprised that even at my level people will cheat for zero monetary incentive, Can't expect people to not understand that this game is basically under a dark cloud. Great to play for fun, but I can't see how top level events won't just be cyborg cesspits eventually. Funny enough Bobby Fischer was paranoid (rightfully at times) way back before computer dominance. Cheaters are scum and we know how scummy people put money before integrity.
>
best take in the thread. I don't blame Kramnik for being paranoid. He learned the game before computers were really dominant and he has to be able to tell that many players are not legit because he has played the best in the world for years.
We are only seeing the very beginning of this, when someone can install a microchip anywhere on their person there will only be more cheating in the big money tournaments.
Many people do not speak on this but what about the players that just at some point realize they will never be the best but a top 50 player receiving one bit of information once a game could potentially be the difference between becoming a financially successful player or a no name.
I am surprised that even at my level people will cheat for zero monetary incentive, Can't expect people to not understand that this game is basically under a dark cloud. Great to play for fun, but I can't see how top level events won't just be cyborg cesspits eventually. Funny enough Bobby Fischer was paranoid (rightfully at times) way back before computer dominance. Cheaters are scum and we know how scummy people put money before integrity.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.