What cultural gap? The only gap here is between Kramnik and reality. Accepting that many of his accusations are baseless is important step for any discussions. Unfortunately some Russian players would never accept it as they treat this conflict as a "Crusade against the west"
@juancruzariasTDF said in #1:
> Comments on lichess.org/@/juancruzariastdf/blog/the-cultural-misunderstanding-behind-cheating-accusations/gY2NyvlJ
Russian allways try to cheat others. Or and also cheat other Russian citizens. Is there something new, if some strong Russian GM like Kramnik is suspicious of some other players skills in chess at internet? It is not. That is normal Rusiaan paranoid attititude (same to western citizens thoughts and behavior to russians, one part of Putin goverment normal policy), and if computer analysis show that if player is very very good according to computeranalysis idea goes (I try to thought like Vladimir Kramnik somehow) "He must use computer program, because he/sjhe play so correct (% of good moves) chess in internet". That maybe so or maybe not, but if it is really so, player is soon banned by lichess.
So it seems so that Kramnik want to be a judge for other players in internet chess. If he proves to be false in this judging of other players, he shoud also say "I was wrong about player .... he is not cheating in internet games".
Trying to "analyze" how Russians as a people (based on Kramnik as an individual) would be prone to cheating accusations is borderline xenophobic.
I think there's a typo: "a shared international agreemenr" should probably be "a shared international agreement" <- note last letter
Kramnik accuse alot of players and making alot of stats about alot of things.
But he never shared stats about all the claims in total which where right and which where not right on his channel,any idea why ? :).
The OP article raises interesting issues and proposes some new ways of looking at the matter.
I would like to add some elements, based on my background in international policy and government relations. These might add more weight to reputational, geopolitical and economic angles into this element.
The initial article nowhere mentions the international UN and EU led economic sanctions against Russia and its sports. Sanctions mean no money is flowing into Russian chess. Certainly not to the extent that sponsoring, endorsement and merchandising gravitates towards the US (Saint Louis), Northern Europe (Oslo, Tata/Wijk) and the GCT.
This must have financial consequences for talented players stuck in Russia.
A similar lack of funding also blocks the meaningful development of AI and machine learning tools from taking place in Russia. They lack a reliable digital ecosystem for marketing and hosting these tools. The problem they face in chess on this point, is significantly larger in other areas of society and economy.
The reputational elements has geopolitical undertones. Murzin is the exception, but all other under 20's and under 15's talent, comes from India, the USA, Khazakstan, Uzbekistan. These are exactly the countries that Russia and its predecesor the Soviet Union belittled and tried to suffocate.
For the personality of Kramnik, who has taken it willingly upon himself to lead the crusade, I believe this explains the cheating accusations as a way of channeling frustration, feelings of loss, hurted pride and lack of opportunity, generated not by cheaters, but by the economic leadership in Moscow. The accusations are in that sense disguised jealousy and anger.
The boom of chess in India (thank you Vishy) and the Spanish speaking world (thank you Divis) points to the quality and attention of the school systems in those areas. Look at Ivanchuk heroically maintaining his chess teaching academy despite the state of his homeland. Could it be that failed achievement in this area also angers the Russian trolls?
Kramnik believes he speaks for the world of chess, when actually he just giving voice to a loss of relevance for himself and the cultural-economical world he came from.
Muy interesante tu artículo, Juan Cruz. De alguna manera tus hipótesis se corroboran cuando leo los comentarios de este foro. Un saludo.
The extra bit is that there's money to be made by grifting now. People do it for flat earth, atomically cleansing water, all sorts of bullshit, now kramnik does it about cheating. The grifter has no need to be accurate, just be provocative.
From the blog post:
> Crucially, this communication must be guided by a shared international agreement, with leadership from influential organizations in the chess world, such as the international federation (FIDE) and major platforms like Lichess and Chess.com.
That seems a bit optimistic, given that one of those platforms releases (consentual) spyware and loves drama, finding itself in US civil court over defamation (while also suggesting that real life chess needs better security, among many other distractions), while the other with a far lesser budget publishes working source code so anyone can test how it works and test its effectiveness. Unless chess viewers and players boycott those who profit from creating drama, the market incentives to create drama are too strong...
Perhaps someday there may be a market among chess viewers to develop a fourth estate / inquisitor (or players' union) to support true science and responsibly accuse or defend players, although that's hard to imagine!
@wateenellende said in #27:
> Kramnik accuse alot of players and making alot of stats about alot of things.
> But he never shared stats about all the claims in total which where right and which where not right on his channel,any idea why ? :).
Last year I commented on one of his videos that for his hypothetical examples, he could use real science/math, so it could be possible to have a real conversation.