@odoaker2015
You didn't explain any difference, you asserted False Equivalency Logic and strawman debate.
Cheating = Cheating
Online or not.
Asked how you prove the negative.
You responded.
@odoaker2015
Apparently the problem is more widespread than what seems to be known.
Let's continue to turn our back on possibilities and remedies.
https://www.chessdom.com/gm-johan-sebastian-christiansen-discloses-for-vg-that-he-witnessed-match-fixing/
@odoaker2015 As for accusing Hans of cheating in that one specific game, it's fairly clear to me that nobody in these forums is able to distinguish computer from GM play; therefore, nobody in these forums would have the qualifications to accuse or exonerate Hans.
Nobody in these forums, that I've seen, has accused Hans of cheating against Magnus.
With that said...
Suspicion is a different thing.
Magnus was facing enough suspicion, in a context of prior suspicion shared by his GM colleagues, within the context of cheating being a matter where honest chessplayers didn't feel as if cheaters were being adequately dissuaded/punished, within the context of a truly bizarre series of events that amplified and multiplied the suspicion that was already present.
As such, Magnus made an ad hoc decision where he concluded that it's not equitable that he should have to play under such pressure and such context of suspicion.
But one thing is perfectly clear:
Magnus did not quit because he lost and magically got so upset that he quit the tournament for the first time ever.
Magnus quit because of cheaters choosing to cheat.
"There is too much suspicion, it's very distracting, it's less enjoyable, and I don't see why I should have to be involved with it." - Magnus (paraphrased)
This is not a formal accusation.
"I have suspicions about my opponent because of a laundry list of factors and a history of cheating...and therefore feel uncomfortable playing against him..."
...is not the same thing as saying, "My opponent cheated."
-
People say that Magnus should have withdrawn before he played Hans, but I believe that Magnus was legitimately trying to participate and overlook Hans' past.
However, upon "miraculous coincidence of opening prep" (Hans' words, not Magnus')...I can totally see how that one factor, alone, could have been the straw that broke the camels back and tipped the balance and caused Magnus to make an ad hoc decision to quit the tournament.
Add in the bizarre OTB behaviour.
Add in the bizarre post-game comment.
Add in the abnormal post-game analysis.
Give Magnus a break. The man is only human.
Magnus was under way more pressure than people are giving him credit for.
If we refuse to speculate on Hans' legitimacy and offer him grace, then we should also refuse to speculate on how much of Magnus' ad hoc decision was irrational and motivated by poor character, and how much of it was rational and cogent.
@Onyx_Chess said in #39:
> This is true. Refers to: A logic fail is to say Niemann cheated online therefore he cheated otb!
So why is that true?
@Edgy1 said in #42:
> @odoaker2015
>
> Apparently the problem is more widespread than what seems to be known.
>
> Let's continue to turn our back on possibilities and remedies.
>
> www.chessdom.com/gm-johan-sebastian-christiansen-discloses-for-vg-that-he-witnessed-match-fixing/
What does that have to do with Niemann?
@odoaker2015
What does cheating in Chess have to do with cheating in Chess?
@Edgy1 said in #42:
> @odoaker2015
>
> Apparently the problem is more widespread than what seems to be known.
>
> Let's continue to turn our back on possibilities and remedies.
>
> www.chessdom.com/gm-johan-sebastian-christiansen-discloses-for-vg-that-he-witnessed-match-fixing/
It is ill-advised to increase the overall temperature of 'suspicion around cheating':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Wiok4H1RY
@Edgy1 said in #41:
> @odoaker2015
>
> You didn't explain any difference, you asserted False Equivalency Logic and strawman debate.
>
> Cheating = Cheating
>
> Online or not.
That is not right. There is a distinct difference between online and OTB cheating. Therefore online cheating is not = OTB cheating. Nor can they be the same. Both take place under different conditions.
@Onyx_Chess
Believe it's ill advised to raise the temperature needlessly in any manner, including False Equivalency Logic and False Assertions.
The Most Empathy Model is the Least Amount of Objective Negatives to the Population.
AKA no BS.
When did Magnus assert anyone that beats him is a cheater, as the OP to this thread asserts?
Wanting to eliminate cheating in the game should be reasonable.
@odoaker2015 said in #36:
> A logic fail is to say Niemann cheated online therefore he cheated otb!
Correct. But it is not illogical to say that someone who has cheated multiple times online might be more likely to cheat in general.
Anyways. It feels like everyone's mind here is set and there's not much that can be done to change positions. The real issue I had in this thread was that we've not seen Magnus complain about fair play much, if at all, in his career, and so his highlighting of it is an outlier that is deserving of attention.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.