The Real Reason Hans Niemann is Accused of cheating and Banned by Chess.com

Hans made several human movements in this game, which indicates that there was no use of the engine. Both made human mistakes in the game, but Carlsen played worse.

I believe Hans was aware of Magnus' preparation. As it is practically impossible for Hans to have studied that very rare opening the day before, I believe he had privileged information... Espionage, betrayal, I don't know...

I don't trust HN.
Firstly: There is a saying: "Once a Cheater - Always a Cheater". Why does that matter? Because that's how the brain works. The brain of the observer. That's what I am talking about. The brain of the cheater? I don't know. It is an assumption. It's prejudice. Is it true or not?
Secondly: I believe (my opinion) that HN only admitted that he cheated (in the past) because he was presented with undeniable evidence. So is his "admission" of guilt a sign of honesty? No
Most importantly: His post game analysis (following the victory against MC). Evidently he gave false information in that interview.
He certainly could not explain his thought process leading to the winning position in a believable way. He made stuff up.
I personally did not recognise that during the interview. But the evidence I saw later convinced my that he was fabricating stuff to fool the audience. And once that evidence was presented to him he made up another story. Come on.
Was he cheating over the board? I don't know. But do I trust him? Absolutely not!

These are not really fair points and most importantly arbiters are discharging him

@Mactam said in #32:
> Most importantly: His post game analysis (following the victory against MC). Evidently he gave false information in that interview.
> He certainly could not explain his thought process leading to the winning position in a believable way. He made stuff up.
So you expect an extremely shocked and euphoric person who just won a game against on of the top GMs in the world to remember every single detail of their game while they are in a celebratory state?
Of course not.

@Cedur216 They.... Chess,com, MC and anyone else has definitive proof.. or not. I really didn’t think an explanation of ‘they’ would be necessary. We ain’t talking about Martians are we?

@FernandoCombinations said in #31:

> I believe Hans was aware of Magnus' preparation. As it is practically impossible for Hans to have studied that very rare opening the day before, I believe he had privileged information... Espionage, betrayal, I don't know...

This is completely absurd! From whom should Niemann have the information? And why would someone from Team Magnus give him information? How did Niemann get the information?

Why is it practically impossible that Niemann studied this particular opening the day before?

Yes, these are questions that you cannot answer.

And that's right: you don't know anything!

So please stop spreading rumours!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVAQxGpjmUE

@FernandoCombinations said in #31:
> I believe Hans was aware of Magnus' preparation. As it is practically impossible for Hans to have studied that very rare opening the day before, I believe he had privileged information... Espionage, betrayal, I don't know...

+1.
Access to Carlsens megafile further explains why Niemann recalls moves but is unable to explain the reasoning behind them. Plus Carlsen being suspicious about a potential leak explains why he recently went for rare lines, as given Niemann plays strong in them, this would strengthen the suspicion up to stochastic significance or near-certainity. Finally, this idea aligns well with Carlsen remaining silent despite the general desire for clarification on his part, and with Niemann being cocky in the post-mortems since.

A deduction could thus be that Carlsen withdrew based on the opinion that having access to someones prep megafile (let alone using it advantagely) goes against the spirit of fair play, and that the game in question was the last bit of evidence needed for camp Carlsen to reach a high enough conviction to act upon.

@R_PH_F said in #37:
> +1.
> Access to Carlsens megafile further explains why Niemann recalls moves but is unable to explain the reasoning behind them. Plus Carlsen being suspicious about a potential leak explains why he recently went for rare lines, as given Niemann plays strong in them, this would strengthen the suspicion up to stochastic significance or near-certainity. Finally, this idea aligns well with Carlsen remaining silent despite the general desire for clarification on his part, and with Niemann being cocky in the post-mortems since.
>
> A deduction could thus be that Carlsen withdrew based on the opinion that having access to someones prep megafile (let alone using it advantagely) goes against the spirit of fair play, and that the game in question was the last bit of evidence needed for camp Carlsen to reach a high enough conviction to act upon.

Lol, that's just as absurd. These are just claims and guesses. Without substance! Not more. Conspiracy theory nonsense! And it doesn't explain anything either. Prove your nonsense!

@odoaker2015 said in #38:
> Lol, that's just as absurd. These are just claims and guesses. Without substance! Not more. Conspiracy theory nonsense! And it doesn't explain anything either. Prove your nonsense!

Relax a bit, self-declared hero! All I'm saying is it is convincing in that it explains somewhat well what evidence there is. If you think otherwise, great for you. But to call this nonsense, when it is impossible for you to dismiss - and to cry for prove when someone puts forward a theory (the stuff that's not (yet) proven) - well, well...

@R_PH_F said in #39:
> Relax a bit, self-declared hero! All I'm saying is it is convincing in that it explains somewhat well what evidence there is. If you think otherwise, great for you. But to call this nonsense, when it is impossible for you to dismiss - and to cry for prove when someone puts forward a theory (the stuff that's not (yet) proven) - well, well...

You are saying: "All I'm saying is it is convincing in that it explains somewhat well what evidence there is."
Which evidence? There is no evidence at all! And I find it dangerous to spread such rumours and fake news! Trump did the same. And what did that lead to? To a horrific coup attempt with some dead! And what you say is not a theory either. Just unfounded claims! I see it as my duty to protest in the strongest possible way! I'm not relaxing and won't relax until you stop this nonsense!

There is a risk that someone will believe you.

You slander Niemann! And you're just spouting bs!

Stop spreading rumours or prove your bs!