Few points about the timeline of Niemann and Kramnik drama: 1) I looked at Kramnik's profile earlier today and I think that Kramnik did not post his latest statement after the Hans match but after he played blitz with Amin Tabatabaei. 2) Niemann's video response to Kramnik was a reaction to Kramnik's earlier video not to the last statement. 3) One of Niemann's fans contacted Kramnik last week and I think Kramnik got Niemann to be invited to some Levitov Chess event in Netherlands I think. So Kramnik might actually be cool with Niemann.
I really support Hans' continued presence in the Chess world. With each game we are inching toward the realization of "All-Nude" Chess division, in which only true hardcore players will participate.
All-nude women world chess championship would be interesting (no lipstick tubes allowed 😅). Although I suspect the cheating issues mostly concern males by a large margin. Anyway I highly doubt that Niemann was cheating in this game and I suspect Kramnik is the only high lvl chess player thinking that, this time.
No matter how you feel about anyone in this situation, there can be no doubt that cheating is an existential threat to competitive chess and that the possibility of cheating has real psychological impacts on the players. Anyone with a vested interest in the future of chess should be doing everything possible to ensure the integrity of the game in the most transparent fashion possible.
I really didn't like this Nieman guy before, not really sympathetic about him now either. But I constantly find myself defending simple points against bandwagon s storm. Cheating is ever looming threat in any sport, group or individual. And athletes just deal with it. No one is leaving pitch, field, track or pool if there's someone coming out from a ban on the other side. I swear, chess players for the most part are the whiniest & most arrogant lot.
Lessons learned from the legal teams, I bet. Good on him for keeping calm on an accusation now. But It will still be hard to clear his name from all the online cheating he did.
Inferior players [your 7 year old] or especially better players _having a bad game_ throw the toys out of the pram by accusing opponents of cheating instead of looking at their own deficiencies - it's an easy _but cowardly_ way to preserve ego.
I was really impressed with the maturity of Han’s response. Some thing that is so fun about it is that it would be a great response cheating or not. All the same much better to present as a professional. It made it look to me much less like he was cheating.
@@J4-4J-J4 Hanzssays you're more than welcome to go into his bedroom and inspect for beads in person. He's more than happy to compensate you for your time.
@@J4-4J-J4That was a meme made about him, he had nothing to do with beads ? It has no basis in reality, it’s NPCs like you that prove why disinformation can be so dangerous.
In all honesty, if Kramnik takes up Niemann and thereafter Kramnik is convinced, that'd be a good sign. I hope he takes Niemann up on the offer. It seems very reasonable.
Russians are not always reasonable, lol, lots of pride involved and I suspect Niemann knows Kramnik is unlikely to take him up on this offer, though Niemann is offering money so if I was Kramnik I would set a high hourly rate with a guaranteed minimum and I would take him up on the offer.
OTB CHESS DOES NOT Solve anything. Hans has been caught cheating before !! Also, Hans coach or former coach has also been caught cheating before. Another issue, the devices that can be used to cheat CANNOT BE DETECTED by ANY of the current scanning devices used in OTB chess events. NO one, not anyone, is safe until the scanning devices are changed to instruments of higher efficiency similar to the ones used at airports to detect drug smugglers. They really need to change the equipment used to detect cheating devices.
@@KancerKowboy You can look at this from different perspectives. If Hans Moke Niemann was sincere in his message; that'd imply (if given the correct circumstances to assess it) that mr. Kramnik would spot any cheating or dodgy business quickly, while Hans would be under the supervision of the aforementioned. To spend time with a potential (how likely this may or may not be) cheater, would be very beneficial in proving or disproving that they are, in fact, cheating. Once again, I'd be personally impressed if Hans Niemann would stand this 'Kramnik test'. And if not, it'd be some money in the pocket, plus a subset of anecdotal evidence against a cheater. Once again; it's all a matter of perspective.
One point to note. That video of Hans responding to Kramnik, it was posted much before this game. It was a response to either Kramnik's tweet about cheating or his talk in a podcast hosted by Fabi
What about the game between them, where Kramnik had the black pieces and intentionally set up a 3 move mate to lose, (f6, g5) and Niemann instead resigned the game as white.
Hans has nothing to prove to Kramnik. It is Kramnik that's making the claims he has the burden of proof. Every accusation demands specific evidence - it's not helpful to shout that there's cheating out there in the ether. Therefore, I'm glad Hans won this - and now he has a new fan !
I agree with harsh punishments for those found cheating. I actually believe Hans has had enough punishment at this point. I also would like to see the same derision for those who accuse others with no proof. Visual or audio proof. Radio frequencies or something real. Not analyzing games. That is BS. People have good days and bad. Is Magnus cheating when he finds 5 perfect moves in a row? Nope. Why not some other GM, then? No, it needs to be real evidence. If people have a problem and think it is too easy to cheat, then don't play the format and push for changes. I think 99% of the accusations are just whiny babies.
I'm a software engineer and a chess player. It's very much possible to set the engine parameters in such a way to make it match to your playing style and yet not lose the game.
I don't think Hans cheated in these games. Kramnik played poorly, but I sympathize with the frustration one can feel when playing against someone who is possibly cheating. I follow the Chessbrahs and watch Eric and Aman play against cheaters quite often (the number of cheaters they encounter is tragic), they just stop thinking once they see impossible moves from the opponent -- not that Hans played any impossible moves these games, but the possibility of cheating dissuades one from investing the effort to find good replies. It's simply not fun to play against a cheater or even a potential cheater. I also feel sorry for Hans though, I hope he can redeem himself, which is probably the best resolution, and his response to Kramnik is a wonderful step in the right direction
He won't ever be redeemed and his response was thought about for over a year. He had a whole year to think of it. His last reply to his cheating didn't go over well with any1. So he had to change his response and had this response waiting for any1 who accused him this time around. But make no mistake about it, hans is a cheater. Maybe not this game, maybe not the next, bit he will cheat again and again just like his past has shown him to do.
@@somebody700 cheating playing the top engine move is the dumbest way to cheat anyway. Smart cheating is knowing which move is the most humanly possible, but is the most complex move. Smart cheating is impossible to detect as countless of grandmasters already mentioned, like Fabi, Hikaru, etc, as they look for the move that is humanly possible, but at the same time the most confusing line. Don't forget that these are grandmasters, they see 5, 10, 15, 20 moves ahead, if they want to cheat smartly, it would be near impossible to detect. That's why accusers heavily rely on statistics and compare a cheater's statistics to the majority of the grandmasters, and Hans' statistics are crazy. It's either he's the most high-variance grandmaster ever with his up and down graph (one day he's beating Magnus, the next day he's losing to a 2200 rated player) or he's cheating. There's no in between
Usually I see Aman close the position down and then try to flag the cheater. When a player is creating brilliancies in the middle game but can’t handle a pawn-rook endgame under time pressure, something is off.
The thing is. At the very moment. If there is one player who is NOT cheating it would be Hans. With everyone looking at every damn game he plays he would be stupid to do so.
@@macmacIDAD It's rapid, and a little over 100 Elo difference is not enough to chastise someone for. Also, I suppose you'd talk the same junk about Hans, being as he has been losing to quite a few low rated IMs and GMs (2300-2500 Elo range) in his latest classical games since defeating Magnus at Sinquefield Cup.
Kramnik's complaints are very reasonable in general. He did not even stress too much on Niemann in particular. Online chess will never be safe from cheating. Just give an evaluation bar to a player, he will still play his own moves but gain a lot of strenght thanks to that info. How do you catch that?? He is playing his own moves, no engine usage..
There is no doubt that he is spot on. The sites greatly exaggerate their ability to detect cheating and by and large, has to maintain that position, as do all, or the industry crumbles. Lying and cheating, exaggerating and defending makes big money. It is the way of this sinful world.
@rohan1864 That is your opinion. You are entitled to that. Anyone who plays online chess is well aware that only a very small percentage of cheaters are caught. Again, it is human nature. Every single sport that exists has seen it over and over again and will always see it. That my friend is called reality. I highly recommend you try living in it.
@@rohan1864They'd lose a Huge percentage of subscriptions if they cracked down on cheating. The Twitch Format is the Worse, because its dual subs, Andrea Bortez has a huge teenage boy following for whom the game of chess is just a means to the bigger game of Streaming, Trolling, Subs Clicks & Views. Thats not a knock on it, it just is what it is.
@@mkn2929 1. I'm not your friend, but I hope you find some 2. I don't know why you're getting so pompously defensive xd I am a member of the Everyone who plays chess online group. It's obviously impossible to erradicate cheating, people can only be caught after they've committed it continually for some time, there's has to be a big enough sample to draw conclusions - but that's the only thing that you can claim to be obvious, and the sample sets of games for serious players are large. You don't know their methods, furthermore, even if you knew them you wouldn't understand them, because from the way you carry yourself I can tell with high ceratinity that you have no mathematical, let alone specifically probabilistic background. So you've no way of assessing their quality, obviously, and so you have no way of telling how greatly they exaggerate it. Your original comment is obviously a bit funny in how it lacks self-awareness in this regard, it's not my fault, it's yours, you wrote it, I only pointed it out. Then you write some extremely vague, unrelated monologue in return, and pretend to yourself you showed me where my place is. There's only the 2 of us here, you can chill, just try to be more self-aware next time.
Do professional chess players ever hire sports psychologists? The spiraling of weak play -> suspicion of cheating -> even weaker play seems common. Online play will never be completely clean so it stands to reason the best (and really only) option is to get over it and just play to the best of your ability. I'd think the ability to get psychologically rattled by seeing suspicious looking engine moves is no different than psyching yourself out when competing against a stronger opponent, which is a dynamic you're always going to face in competition.
Or: impose permabans like other e-sports to instill confidence in players that while cheaters may cheat, they WILL get punished severely and they can never do it again. Doesn't matter if you're a kid or not when it happened. You cheated someone out of money and livelihood--hence, you get the banhammer.
I've said it when Magnus accused Hans of cheating, and I will say it again: if you accuse someone of cheating, actually post your reasons as to why you think they cheated.
The bitterness speaks for itself! I think people should analyse their own innacuracies and compare with their own averages before calling cheat. Magnus lost with an accuracy well below his norm otb when he then went on to refuse to play Hans. It seems that people who suspect their opponents are cheating see their defeat as almost inevitable and they project their beliefs on to the board so defeat becomes a truly self fulfilling prophecy.
I would also like to point out that both players made punishable mistakes that could have turned the matches throughout....only if they are realised and punished though.
That doesn't solve anything Hans can cheat in OTB just as easy The scanning devices used in OTB events are not good enough to detect some of the reliable devices for cheating Read my post above
@@parthsavyasachi9348 Magnus has been measured already, throughout out his career. No abnormal climb to the top of chess. Hans, on the other hand, has been CAUGHT CHEATING before AND having a performance better than Fischer when Hans is a nobody and AFTER it is known that he has cheated. Your example is galaxies away , not remotely close.
As far as I am concerned, if you make an accusation - you'd better be able to back it up with actual evidence. Until then, I assume it's more bruised egos and elitist attitude than anything.
Kramnik lost a Winning 2nd game and calling hans a cheater..in which hans play gave him many chances to comeback... kramnik is now acting like a grumpy old man who thinks only he knows everything while in reality he hs lost the thread
a ,,minor,, correction just for the sake of being objective. The POWERFULL stockfish profies use after a minute or so telling g5 instead of most logical and safe Qe7 is the BEST move there. And, starting from move 14 till the end of the game, out of those 29,black made 24 first line moves 4 second line and the remaining 1 third. In an extremely sharp complicated position Just facts, everyone might check, using powerfull stockfish
I agree. We should also ban players who accuse others of cheating in a game when there is no evidence. If it is found that there is no real proof (physical video or audio evidence) of cheating and you accuse someone, there should be a penalty. It is slanderous. It would fix all of this 'cheating' business, and we could get back to playing.
@@bassmanjr100 only accepting your "real evidence" is not enough. There is always the evidence provided by statistics. Simply put one can create a chart that shows that the strength a player has correlates to a certain accuracy and centipawnloss over time. And then there is a consistency in results players have depending on their elo.
Well done Hans! Fair play on the video response. I think it's important to approach all situations with maturity, understand and grace. Life in chess won't be easy for him after the Magnus fiasco, and I'm glad he's choosing the right way to go about quelling any suspicion or concerns his peers may have. It would be a tragedy if we missed his genius. I look forward to his chess speaking for itself.
Hans response to Kramnik is fair enough.... He is offering to show his strenght in person but Karmnik seems to fail accepting his curve of performance is going down because of aging
The funny thing is that Kramnik actually lost against a much lower rated young Indian player earlier in the tournament but since it's Hans he knows he'll have a lot of support on his side even when there's little substance to his utterances
@@somebody700This wasn’t about Hans but Kramnik had changed his profile earlier referencing Hans and made like a 40 minute video with some nonsense analysis basically suggesting Hans is a cheater. Hans response was to that, so it’s pretty similar situation as it’s been shown.
In this game you can clearly see that Kramnik made so many inaccuracies and actually gave Nieman the edge.Its so ridiculous to then accuse Nieman of cheating when he(Kramnik) didn't play well.
@@salehibrahim3997....so every game now he cheats online if he has a good game lol....he was even accused of cheating OTB because Magnus had a bad game - getting ridiculous.
Hans comes out of this looking like the mature and sensible one, while I also understand Kramnik's frustration I think he's taking it out on the wrong guy. Kramnik is approaching 50-years-old and no matter what anybody says, it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain consistency and concentration. There will inevitably be more moments of losing to lower-rated players that he would never have lost to at the peak of his powers. That's losing a match against time, not cheating.
@@tak5256you rather believe someone making an accusation without evidence just because you are a fan. Alright, glad you are not in any position to make judgements
@@tak5256 Nothing has been proven about him cheating OTB though. A lot of analyses have proven to be completely dishonest and have proven to be manipulated.
I can fully understand top players not wanting to play against someone like that, and I don't think they should have to, at least without the offender serving a lengthy ban. However Kramnik is going way over the top with his accusations. He even accused Robert Ramirez of cheating in a game that finished in a draw! A high accuracy rating by your opponent means nothing if your own moves are not very challenging, and if (as Kramnik did in his games against Hans Niemann) you make mistakes, you're likely to lose against a titled player, however good you are. Unfortunately I think he's allowed the cheating issue to get into his head and it's having a detrimental effect on his play.
I know nothing about chess at a high level...........but I DO know that among a large community of people, if a way is found to cheat, some will use it. This is not to accuse Nieman specifically, just an acknowledgement that the diversity of character types ensures some will cheat if they can. The only way to stop this is to find ways to completely prevent cheating and I don't know if that is even possible.
The thing with Hans is that, while he did cheat in something like 10-15 games online, there is no evidence of him cheating over the board. Statistical experts have analysed his moves, he was patted down, searched with a metal detector, a time delay was added to live broadcasts of his games, and there was zero evidence found that he cheated or that he could have possibly cheated. I agree he shouldn't have cheated on those online games, but online and over the board are very different.
Its just so pathetic for a world champ to lose a game and then wirh no evidence acuse the opponent of having cheated - whether Kramnik or Carlson. When you lose then defame rhe other. What a low sportsmanship!
Imagine ignoring the fact that Hans has already admitted to cheating himself in the recent past, then coming here and imply they have no cause because there is no proof that he ever cheated lmao... pathetic is the right word.
It's funny how Hans is the only one acting like an adult in regards to Carlson's childish temper-tantrum after playing a bad game he decided to use as a basis for his unsubstantiated allegations of cheating.
Kramnik is right computers changed chess a lot. In the 90s and earlier, one player (unless his name was Bobby Fisher) couldn't just win by himself. It took some more chess players in your team to help analyze the games of the opponents, prepare some lines etc. Nowadays you just analyze the games with Stockfish. You can memorize long engine lines, play plenty of matchmade games online, run chess puzzle survivals. Even if you don't take your engine with you to a game, it already helped you in your preparation a lot.
@@shrewm Of course they have coaches. There is still a lot of benefit in that. But the possibilities for self-coached people are way better now than they used to be. They can still read some old books, but on top of that, they have all the tools for analysis, they can test their ideas against random opponents over the internet etc.
Computers have changed chess a lot, absolutely. That is a completely different claim than saying one is playing against so many cheaters (thinly veiled accusation against Hans). Now of course Hans himself is known to have cheated online, but the likes of Magnus, Hikaru, Alireza, etc. play online plenty and only encounter cheaters fairly rarely. If Kramnik is only directing it at Hans that is one thing but claiming it's a widespread issue at his level... idk
Its only equal if you know the 10 million possible resulting variations for each side like stockfish does. Many times stockfish can say a move is good but its only good if you understand the broader theme.
@gravytraindrumming5167 The old man lost. He should quit acting like a child. If he has actual video or audio proof of cheating then produce it. Otherwise shut up.
Yeah, I see little point in moving the knight to e1 followed by c3 the next move, should've just moved it right away if he wasn't worried about bishop takes knight on b1...
Once cheater - always cheater. Knowing your opponent once have cheated, during the game you will wonder for any opponents move does he cheat. That gives the cheater huge psychological advantage even he doesnt cheat. So, any confirmed cheating must result with permanent ban. Anything alse is unfair towards the non cheater and destroy the game from inside.
Exactly. People do not understand this and discount Hans' cheating since he was a kid when he started (take note of that: STARTED). Many e-sports outright permaban whole teams for less drama yet somehow Hans gets off scott-free. People nowadays should learn about something called "consequences".
I have no deeper insight into this particular matter, but one thing I know is that in the absence of clear evidence people tend to start imagining all kinds of things, and certainly chess players - even on the hightest level - are not exempt from this. Also, it is almost impossible to get a good sense of the extent to which one is fooling onself in this kind of situation. People can convince themselves quite easily that a certain behavior can only be explained by a one particular explanation, and then go horribly wrong with it.
The recent Kramnik interview on the c-squared podcast is highly recommended. Kramnik presented some compelling statistics on Titled Tuesday suspicious play.
His so called "compelling statistics" are f*cking jokes. Dude just compared his opponents accuracy when they play against him vs when they play against Magnus. Well, flash news. Magnus is much better player than Kramnik therefore his opponents will always have higher accuracy against Kramnik than against Magnus.
@@kujklokp Thanks for your carefully considered response. I disagree with your analysis. Accuracy is not a statistic that depends on how well your opponent is playing. It depends on making a move in the position that decreases your advantage or increases your disadvantage the least. Kramnik's statistics were also not limited to accuracy; other parameters were also considered. These other analyses converged on the same conclusion: that a noticeable percentage of titled players are using assistance during online events.
@@StevenStJohn-kj9eb Accuracy most definitely does depend on how well your opponent is playing. There's 0 chance Magnus would play with 95+ accuracy against Stockfish or AlphaZero.
There's probably a modest effect of opponent strength. However, it's not large enough to explain the numbers Kramnik was seeing. There are situations in a chess game where it is easy to make the best move (e.g., forced variations) and situations where it's difficult (e.g., complex positions). A strong player can beat a weak player quickly by creating complex positions and avoiding forced variations. However, Kramnik was evaluating Titled Tuesday games in which he is, on average, rated higher than his opponents. Indeed, part of his analysis involved looking at the accuracy of 2500 rated players and noting that they played at very high accuracy. Kramnik would readily admit he's not as strong as Magnus, but Kramnik remains a very strong player who is comfortable in complex positions and is capable of putting pressure on opponents. Kramnik is, however, slower than many players of his strength. It may be that he puts less pressure on his opponents in the final minute or so of a game, allowing them to play at higher accuracy. This might account for some of the differential. Kramnik, however, found difficult to explain numbers for players playing against Caruana and other elite blitz/rapid players. His data were not limited to his own opponents. I'm surprised you're so quick to discount his analysis. It's an important issue for the chess community, and making progress on it requires an open mind and the willingness to learn from one another's perspective.
Hans might have become genuinely stronger and no longer cheat… but he is an infamous cheater in the past. Some people deserve second or third chances. Whether Hans deserves it is up to debate.
@@bassmanjr100 shut up what? learn some english my dude... i'm just saying everything from a neutral perspective and if u understand the language, u would have gotten it... ur just ardently defending him and it's fine... go tell that to Hans haters lmao
Kramnik just seems to struggle with understanding the style of engine-trained players, who have a different intuitive, gestalt understanding of chess positions which doesn't always marry with the principles built up before the existence of databases and engines.
I don't, personally. I don't think he is cheating now (or in the Magnus game, for that matter), but he is a proven cheater in the past, and the fact of the matter is that this alone is already an advantage, since it sows doubt in the opponent. I don't root for people who gain an advantage from cheating, be it past or present. To be fair, it is also on FIDE allowing the issue, proven cheating, imo, should warrant lifetime bans.
Vladimir has explain in russian his concerns: he didn't understand move timings. He feels like Hans simulates move delays artificially, like if someone is cheating w/o understanding of true move complexity. I believe two former WCC should feel such things properly, like other SGMs, but it's always hard to insist w/o direct evidences and only some unique players who is nothing to lose can start such theme.
Many games have been covered on here, that lower rated players have beaten higher rated players, by much greater rating differences, yet no question of cheating...they just had a great game and deserved to win (performances vary). I'm about 1550 rated but my performances are all over the place some as low as 800, some as high as over 2000 but I know, I'm not up-enough on theory and not bothered really. Next time Man City get beat in the Premier League by a team near the bottom of the league, I'll have to think...that team must have cheated :)
You're good. I'm about 2000-2100 online and consistent. If you are 2000 at your peak then it means you are as good as me on a good day. What you need to do is study openings more, and, this is key, cut down on your blunders. If you can do that, you can consistently play at 2000. As for football, they actually rank teams by the Arpad Elo system, I once saw this online.
Thanks. I know I'm being a bit lazy...learn more theory, concentrate and look for sacrifices, forks, pins discoveries etc I'll get round to it.@@raylopez99
It’s sad that mistakes made in life at an age when mistakes are often made could follow you through life, and it makes everything you do suspect. I believe a way to gain trust again is to have a independent group monitor a person’s game play either in person or through advance cameras and software that only allows two or three persons to view the game and the rest on a delay system.
Sad but that's how it works. 😂 Idiotic generation. Just because it's "sad" they allow a known cheater to continue to play at high level. Utter insanity. Everyone agrees about the threat of cheating ruining chess but let's not even bar known cheaters from high level competition. Way to keep it fair. 😂 stupidest shit I've ever seen.
I pointed out even when Magnus accused him of cheating, in that game also , there was nothing special about that game which would suggest cheating, same goes for this one ... I think more and more people simply go with the wind.. mistake that Niemann did that he was once caught cheating on online game.. you can never do that.. and people will simply make example out of him.
Kramnik put himself Into a difficult position and Hans just played moves that made sense. He tried to create complications but just made his own position extremely difficult to defend.
It does not matter if Hans is cheating now. The fact that being a known cheater is an advantage in chess, is enough. It's the only sport where that is the case, cheating in chess needs to be a one time offense that yields a lifelong ban.
While I understand your concern, people need to be forgiven and given another chance. At the same time, any success a reformed cheater may have will always be tainted with the specter, no matter how unlikely, that he or she did not play fairly. Is the reputation of the game more important than the individual? I lean more towards forgiveness and loving the individual than holding a grudge and punishing the player.
@@smhollanshead No. Magnus Carlsen started playing sub-optimal moves against him, caused by lingering fears of playing against someone who had checked computer lines as they were playing. If you don't bring the hammer down on cheating in chess, you will eventually end up with a situation where the optimal strategy is to intentionally get caught cheating while your young, to gain that mental edge on your opponent. "yeah i could be cheating, i've done it before, better visit the toilet a few extra times" There is no other sport that being caught cheating, gains you that advantage.
@@dyBBelyBTASTIC I suggest there is no human endeavor where cheating is the optimal long term strategy. While there may be some short term advantages to cheating, the long term results are disastrous. Because chess is played in the real world, people must be prepared to face and deal with cheaters. I suggest exposing the cheater and shaming them for their bad behavior is the best result you can get. Then encouraging them to play honestly. I find shunning these people for mistakes and sins we all make is unworkable.
@@smhollanshead Cheating has shown itself to be a optimal long term strategy for Hans, he is again being invited to tournaments, his ability to make a living playing chess has not been impacted in the slightest. Yet to this day, the mere fact that Hans once cheated, gives him an advantage. You just watched a game with a former world champion who himself said as much.
They simply need to play in a hall where there are no signals than can transmit or receive anything. Either an underground facility with very thick walls or those that have signal jammers similar when country leaders are present.
The way agadmator put it, it did sound wrong, if vlad did say this about nieman. Nieman is a talented gm, although he is weird, but he is a gm and talented for sure, he is not a random guy from the bar and the library, he might play some good moves no?
Inferior players or especially better players [in the past] having a bad game throw the toys out of the pram by accusing opponents of cheating instead of looking at their own deficiencies - it's an easy _but cowardly_ way to preserve ego.
Everybody cheats since engines are used to prepare... it is like to dope while training and then be clean during race... you used outside help to gain performance in both cases
Doesn't look like cheating at all. I am not a fan of hans, but this looks very human like. He's a 2600 player. It's not that any non 2700 is a handicap, or won't have great games. Plus, this is rapid, not even classical. Some players are way better in rapid time formats than slower ones.
I think that big names are taking advantage of the situation to polish their pride. At the same time, I think that to cheat at professional level is one of the mistakes that time can not fix. It is just a fair price.
@@abj136 Still not professional competition. Sporting event maybe. But one that has nothing to do with the federation. This is the deciding factor, not how high profile players are. Anyway, I said TT because that's like their biggest day to day event. They never really stated what it was.
And, as usual, a hater will lie. Haters like you if HMN: -wins, this is evidence of cheating -draws, same -loses, same -plays the best move, same -plays a good move, same -plays a bad move, same -makes a mistake, same -blunders, same FFS, no there isn't any "statistical analysis". No, a random FM who doesn't understand shit about stats isn't a "statistical analysis". No, really. No, but really.
@AlcyonEldara very, very true. It's even more likely the only cheating in that Niemann-Carlsen story took place in the "evidence", that was constructed to "prove" that Hans was cheating otb in past. But to understand that, it requires much more smartness and effort than to repeats chatters of self-declared "authorities".
@plavyn yes, agreed! There are experts for chess cheating detection, dedicating years to find very sophisticated methods to detect cheating. They are much more reliable than a frustrated world-champion and YT commentators, who just repeat this nonsense. Not to speak about the FM, who maybe even tricked in her "evidence".
Few points about the timeline of Niemann and Kramnik drama:
1) I looked at Kramnik's profile earlier today and I think that Kramnik did not post his latest statement after the Hans match but after he played blitz with Amin Tabatabaei.
2) Niemann's video response to Kramnik was a reaction to Kramnik's earlier video not to the last statement.
3) One of Niemann's fans contacted Kramnik last week and I think Kramnik got Niemann to be invited to some Levitov Chess event in Netherlands I think. So Kramnik might actually be cool with Niemann.
thanks for the info
Hans really likes Kramnik. I'm sure they well get together
I hope Agad sees this and clarifies it in the next video, there is no good in proliferating misinformation especially about cheating
But if that is the case, then why did Kramnik play fools mate to Niemann after his loss.
I think that at that point he thought Niemann was cheating but took it back later. This was before Kramnik was contacted by the fan.@@RyanHellyer
13:55 Agad's expression after Hans' speech was all the money!
lol
I really support Hans' continued presence in the Chess world. With each game we are inching toward the realization of "All-Nude" Chess division, in which only true hardcore players will participate.
He will be the only winner.
All-nude women world chess championship would be interesting (no lipstick tubes allowed 😅). Although I suspect the cheating issues mostly concern males by a large margin. Anyway I highly doubt that Niemann was cheating in this game and I suspect Kramnik is the only high lvl chess player thinking that, this time.
Not sure if Hans meant it, but his response was spot on. No accusations or drama, just an open invitation. Good for him.
It was condescending as fuck coming from a known multiple time caught cheater.
Not only does he let Stockfish help him improving at chess, he now has chatGPT to help him articulate. Well played, AI
Hans even admitted to cheating numerous times via online chess. I have no sympathy for a cheater, not even a so-called reformed cheater.
@@will224488guy He didn't cheat this match. And it was never proven. I'm not Hans fan but we have to be fair.
LMao @@dodekaedius
Hans winning the AI Cup would be quite a funny headline
AI standing for Anal Implant
😂😂😂😂😂
No matter how you feel about anyone in this situation, there can be no doubt that cheating is an existential threat to competitive chess and that the possibility of cheating has real psychological impacts on the players. Anyone with a vested interest in the future of chess should be doing everything possible to ensure the integrity of the game in the most transparent fashion possible.
Unreasonable and proofless accusations of cheating is a worse threat.
@@DrLawIrk💯
@@DrLawIrk "Unreasonable" - My God, what have you been smoking? 🥳
I really didn't like this Nieman guy before, not really sympathetic about him now either.
But I constantly find myself defending simple points against bandwagon s storm.
Cheating is ever looming threat in any sport, group or individual. And athletes just deal with it. No one is leaving pitch, field, track or pool if there's someone coming out from a ban on the other side.
I swear, chess players for the most part are the whiniest & most arrogant lot.
@@aventura8491 Ok. Show us the reasonable side. We're talking about Magnus match of course.
Hans ended 31st place in Champions Chess Tour AI Cup 2023 with 6 out of 9, neither good nor bad.
Nice
Psych advantage: when others THINK their opponent is cheating, they miss obvious winning chances.
*The Hans Effect 😂
Very good observation! I agree, good players "fail" because they assume Hans is cheating and that breaks their mental concentration.
a contemporary to "the Magnus effect". xD
I guess being a known cheater is an advantage now. Even more reason for people to be cheaters.
@@will224488guy Parahm has cheated too in the past and everybody knows that but he doesn't have the Hans effect
@@will224488guy yeah you can just hide your cheating through convoluted methods and laymen will support you for being legit
A very mature response from Hans, in heavy contrast to the public tantrums thrown by a much older and experienced professional.
Strangely mature from Hans.
A very mature response from Hans, in heavy contrast to his previous public tantrums.
It is an excellent "chessic" move from Hans, something which Kramnik would need to respond to if he is really serious about his accusations.
Read : Guy past his best looking for excuses
Lessons learned from the legal teams, I bet. Good on him for keeping calm on an accusation now. But It will still be hard to clear his name from all the online cheating he did.
Kramnik was also after Keymer when he flagged him. Questionable character. Not to mention Kramnik/Topalov. He's been seeing ghosts for years.
Kramnik topalov was all Topalov seeing boogie men, not Kramnik.
@@abj136context?
I remember Magnus not rating Kramnik well on Sanity score.
@@aminesosa8676He's russian, what do u expect
My 7 year old also accuses me of somehow cheating when he loses games
😂😂😂
Inferior players [your 7 year old] or especially better players _having a bad game_ throw the toys out of the pram by accusing opponents of cheating instead of looking at their own deficiencies - it's an easy _but cowardly_ way to preserve ego.
Well this is different, hans ain't 7 years old chump.
@@ensiehsafary7633It is and far Beyond any responsability.
There IS thing that you own and thing you dont.
Difference IS how would you raise them.
And that proves that Hans is not a cheater, obviously. #logic #facts #factsdontcareaboutyour feelings
I may only be 1454 rated right now but i still get gifted a handful of points back a month because yes cheating is RAMPANT on that site
I was really impressed with the maturity of Han’s response. Some thing that is so fun about it is that it would be a great response cheating or not. All the same much better to present as a professional. It made it look to me much less like he was cheating.
The fact that he’s known for beads pretty much negates any maturity he can ever have
He had a full year to come up with this comment. Also he was waiting for this comment to respond with his own comment.
Easy, when you have chatGPT available
@@J4-4J-J4 Hanzssays you're more than welcome to go into his bedroom and inspect for beads in person. He's more than happy to compensate you for your time.
@@J4-4J-J4That was a meme made about him, he had nothing to do with beads ? It has no basis in reality, it’s NPCs like you that prove why disinformation can be so dangerous.
In all honesty, if Kramnik takes up Niemann and thereafter Kramnik is convinced, that'd be a good sign. I hope he takes Niemann up on the offer. It seems very reasonable.
Russians are not always reasonable, lol, lots of pride involved and I suspect Niemann knows Kramnik is unlikely to take him up on this offer, though Niemann is offering money so if I was Kramnik I would set a high hourly rate with a guaranteed minimum and I would take him up on the offer.
Why would he waste time with a cheater?
OTB CHESS DOES NOT Solve anything.
Hans has been caught cheating before !! Also, Hans coach or former coach has also been caught cheating before.
Another issue, the devices that can be used to cheat CANNOT BE DETECTED by ANY of the current scanning devices used in OTB chess events.
NO one, not anyone, is safe until the scanning devices are changed to instruments of higher efficiency similar to the ones used at airports to detect drug smugglers.
They really need to change the equipment used to detect cheating devices.
This can be said for any ethnicity. @@raylopez99
@@KancerKowboy You can look at this from different perspectives. If Hans Moke Niemann was sincere in his message; that'd imply (if given the correct circumstances to assess it) that mr. Kramnik would spot any cheating or dodgy business quickly, while Hans would be under the supervision of the aforementioned. To spend time with a potential (how likely this may or may not be) cheater, would be very beneficial in proving or disproving that they are, in fact, cheating. Once again, I'd be personally impressed if Hans Niemann would stand this 'Kramnik test'. And if not, it'd be some money in the pocket, plus a subset of anecdotal evidence against a cheater. Once again; it's all a matter of perspective.
One point to note. That video of Hans responding to Kramnik, it was posted much before this game. It was a response to either Kramnik's tweet about cheating or his talk in a podcast hosted by Fabi
What about the game between them, where Kramnik had the black pieces and intentionally set up a 3 move mate to lose, (f6, g5) and Niemann instead resigned the game as white.
Hans has nothing to prove to Kramnik. It is Kramnik that's making the claims he has the burden of proof. Every accusation demands specific evidence - it's not helpful to shout that there's cheating out there in the ether. Therefore, I'm glad Hans won this - and now he has a new fan !
I'm not a Hans fan at all, but Kramnik is clearly out of line here. And not for the first time.
I agree with harsh punishments for those found cheating. I actually believe Hans has had enough punishment at this point. I also would like to see the same derision for those who accuse others with no proof. Visual or audio proof. Radio frequencies or something real. Not analyzing games. That is BS. People have good days and bad. Is Magnus cheating when he finds 5 perfect moves in a row? Nope. Why not some other GM, then? No, it needs to be real evidence. If people have a problem and think it is too easy to cheat, then don't play the format and push for changes. I think 99% of the accusations are just whiny babies.
I'm a software engineer and a chess player. It's very much possible to set the engine parameters in such a way to make it match to your playing style and yet not lose the game.
Amen
Gosh
I don't think Hans cheated in these games. Kramnik played poorly, but I sympathize with the frustration one can feel when playing against someone who is possibly cheating. I follow the Chessbrahs and watch Eric and Aman play against cheaters quite often (the number of cheaters they encounter is tragic), they just stop thinking once they see impossible moves from the opponent -- not that Hans played any impossible moves these games, but the possibility of cheating dissuades one from investing the effort to find good replies. It's simply not fun to play against a cheater or even a potential cheater. I also feel sorry for Hans though, I hope he can redeem himself, which is probably the best resolution, and his response to Kramnik is a wonderful step in the right direction
He won't ever be redeemed and his response was thought about for over a year. He had a whole year to think of it. His last reply to his cheating didn't go over well with any1. So he had to change his response and had this response waiting for any1 who accused him this time around. But make no mistake about it, hans is a cheater. Maybe not this game, maybe not the next, bit he will cheat again and again just like his past has shown him to do.
@@somebody700 cheating playing the top engine move is the dumbest way to cheat anyway. Smart cheating is knowing which move is the most humanly possible, but is the most complex move. Smart cheating is impossible to detect as countless of grandmasters already mentioned, like Fabi, Hikaru, etc, as they look for the move that is humanly possible, but at the same time the most confusing line. Don't forget that these are grandmasters, they see 5, 10, 15, 20 moves ahead, if they want to cheat smartly, it would be near impossible to detect. That's why accusers heavily rely on statistics and compare a cheater's statistics to the majority of the grandmasters, and Hans' statistics are crazy. It's either he's the most high-variance grandmaster ever with his up and down graph (one day he's beating Magnus, the next day he's losing to a 2200 rated player) or he's cheating. There's no in between
Hans can't cheat. He knows every move he makes will be examined by GMs and engines.
Usually I see Aman close the position down and then try to flag the cheater. When a player is creating brilliancies in the middle game but can’t handle a pawn-rook endgame under time pressure, something is off.
The thing is.
At the very moment.
If there is one player who is NOT cheating it would be Hans.
With everyone looking at every damn game he plays he would be stupid to do so.
"The strenth is in truth ✌🏽"
-Vladimir Kramnik, 2023
Kramnik blundered a "g" here, and I didn't even cheat by looking in the dictionary.
Kramnik showcased his strength by taking 2 loses against 2600elo player 🤪
@@macmacIDAD It's rapid, and a little over 100 Elo difference is not enough to chastise someone for.
Also, I suppose you'd talk the same junk about Hans, being as he has been losing to quite a few low rated IMs and GMs (2300-2500 Elo range) in his latest classical games since defeating Magnus at Sinquefield Cup.
Kramnik's complaints are very reasonable in general. He did not even stress too much on Niemann in particular. Online chess will never be safe from cheating. Just give an evaluation bar to a player, he will still play his own moves but gain a lot of strenght thanks to that info. How do you catch that?? He is playing his own moves, no engine usage..
I doubt Hans is cheating. He knows that all eyes are on him.
He knows people are too dumb to catch him
Dude has cheated several times and been caught. Lol
@@justinacevedo4353those who get caught don’t change, they adapt.
@@justinacevedo4353 so? we're talking about current events
@@justinacevedo4353 He admitted to cheating more than once. That is a blemish that cannot ever be erased.
There is no doubt that he is spot on. The sites greatly exaggerate their ability to detect cheating and by and large, has to maintain that position, as do all, or the industry crumbles. Lying and cheating, exaggerating and defending makes big money. It is the way of this sinful world.
I think you greatly exaggerate your ability to assess the site's ability to detect cheating
@rohan1864 That is your opinion. You are entitled to that. Anyone who plays online chess is well aware that only a very small percentage of cheaters are caught. Again, it is human nature. Every single sport that exists has seen it over and over again and will always see it. That my friend is called reality. I highly recommend you try living in it.
@@rohan1864They'd lose a Huge percentage of subscriptions if they cracked down on cheating.
The Twitch Format is the Worse, because its dual subs, Andrea Bortez has a huge teenage boy following for whom the game of chess is just a means to the bigger game of Streaming, Trolling, Subs Clicks & Views.
Thats not a knock on it, it just is what it is.
@@mkn2929 1. I'm not your friend, but I hope you find some
2. I don't know why you're getting so pompously defensive xd
I am a member of the Everyone who plays chess online group. It's obviously impossible to erradicate cheating, people can only be caught after they've committed it continually for some time, there's has to be a big enough sample to draw conclusions - but that's the only thing that you can claim to be obvious, and the sample sets of games for serious players are large. You don't know their methods, furthermore, even if you knew them you wouldn't understand them, because from the way you carry yourself I can tell with high ceratinity that you have no mathematical, let alone specifically probabilistic background. So you've no way of assessing their quality, obviously, and so you have no way of telling how greatly they exaggerate it. Your original comment is obviously a bit funny in how it lacks self-awareness in this regard, it's not my fault, it's yours, you wrote it, I only pointed it out. Then you write some extremely vague, unrelated monologue in return, and pretend to yourself you showed me where my place is. There's only the 2 of us here, you can chill, just try to be more self-aware next time.
Do professional chess players ever hire sports psychologists? The spiraling of weak play -> suspicion of cheating -> even weaker play seems common. Online play will never be completely clean so it stands to reason the best (and really only) option is to get over it and just play to the best of your ability. I'd think the ability to get psychologically rattled by seeing suspicious looking engine moves is no different than psyching yourself out when competing against a stronger opponent, which is a dynamic you're always going to face in competition.
Or: impose permabans like other e-sports to instill confidence in players that while cheaters may cheat, they WILL get punished severely and they can never do it again. Doesn't matter if you're a kid or not when it happened. You cheated someone out of money and livelihood--hence, you get the banhammer.
If Han Smoken Niemann lose, he's at his game. If Hans Smoken Neimann win, he cheats.
Very true, he's between a rock and a hard place.
"The strenth is in truth ✌🏽"
- topalov
Wasn't he accused of cheating from the way his coach would stand in the crowd, giving away the winning move?
kramnik should accept the Hans Gambit 😂
Near the start of the video, auto captions translate Kramnik as "comic". Very appropriate in the circumstances.
I've said it when Magnus accused Hans of cheating, and I will say it again: if you accuse someone of cheating, actually post your reasons as to why you think they cheated.
The reasons are obvious. Same reason why the first suspect in a robbery is the last guy who robbed the place. Too nuanced for most people, of course.
The bitterness speaks for itself!
I think people should analyse their own innacuracies and compare with their own averages before calling cheat.
Magnus lost with an accuracy well below his norm otb when he then went on to refuse to play Hans.
It seems that people who suspect their opponents are cheating see their defeat as almost inevitable and they project their beliefs on to the board so defeat becomes a truly self fulfilling prophecy.
How rediculous is it to blunder a drawn position with the occasional winning opportunity and then say you were cheated?
If Magnus was being cheated that would have impacted his accuracy, you can't just use that as evidence in itself.
@@joshs7160my point is emphasised by the fact that the lost players had their chances a plenty
I would also like to point out that both players made punishable mistakes that could have turned the matches throughout....only if they are realised and punished though.
@@cmwontner hans most likely cheated against magnus. stop defending cheating hans
The real punishment for cheating is not lost medals, money or glory but the indelible question mark defacing your integrity.
💯 BINGO 💯
pretty much sums it up, Hans made his bed now he gets to sleep in it for the rest of his career.
Yeah, Magnus is a real Piece of shite, no question about it.
13:38 Whatever else, Niemann's barber is guilty of a war crime.
The only way i can see to solve this matter between Hans & Kramnik is to play OTB chess then strenth is going to speak for itself !
Lol. He's not even immune to accusations in OTB games. Ask Magnus.
That doesn't solve anything
Hans can cheat in OTB just as easy
The scanning devices used in OTB events are not good enough to detect some of the reliable devices for cheating
Read my post above
@@naldebolis this the reason for magnus dominance??
@@parthsavyasachi9348 Magnus has been measured already, throughout out his career. No abnormal climb to the top of chess.
Hans, on the other hand, has been CAUGHT CHEATING before AND having a performance better than Fischer when Hans is a nobody and AFTER it is known that he has cheated.
Your example is galaxies away , not remotely close.
@@naldebol so mangus is not yet caught cheating.
Been waiting for this, Thanks Agad!!
As far as I am concerned, if you make an accusation - you'd better be able to back it up with actual evidence.
Until then, I assume it's more bruised egos and elitist attitude than anything.
Good thing you’re nobody
He's stated evidence on the C squared podcast. Idk if you agree with it or not, but he has stated what his evidence is.
but you know Hans did cheat online in the past on numerous occations?
@@rohan1864that is not evidence
proving that somebody cheated is very very tough
but... on the other hand, its not even like Hans had a crazy accuracy in this game
Kramnik lost a Winning 2nd game and calling hans a cheater..in which hans play gave him many chances to comeback... kramnik is now acting like a grumpy old man who thinks only he knows everything while in reality he hs lost the thread
Why you are so fast to not only judge, but condemn the guy? What do you even know about him and his life?
@@Cecil_Augus chess literally speaks for itself ... Hans games were far from computer perfect.... kramnik just has an ego the size of sun.
Where does Kramnik call Hans á cheater!?
Its difficult to play a known cheater, you will never be able to trust them again. Hans has no business playing against players of integrity.
Amen
Kramnik is not a player of integrity. Just ask Topolov
🤡🤡 That you?
a ,,minor,, correction just for the sake of being objective.
The POWERFULL stockfish profies use after a minute or so telling g5 instead of most logical and safe Qe7 is the BEST move there. And, starting from move 14 till the end of the game, out of those 29,black made 24 first line moves 4 second line and the remaining 1 third. In an extremely sharp complicated position
Just facts, everyone might check, using powerfull stockfish
I don't get why known cheaters get to play moneyevents. If you cheat once it should ne a lifeban on all moneyevents.
I agree. We should also ban players who accuse others of cheating in a game when there is no evidence. If it is found that there is no real proof (physical video or audio evidence) of cheating and you accuse someone, there should be a penalty. It is slanderous. It would fix all of this 'cheating' business, and we could get back to playing.
@@bassmanjr100 only accepting your "real evidence" is not enough. There is always the evidence provided by statistics. Simply put one can create a chart that shows that the strength a player has correlates to a certain accuracy and centipawnloss over time. And then there is a consistency in results players have depending on their elo.
The quote is mostly known because it was used in a gangster film, "brat", i.e. Brother
Hans' video response is respectful, appropriate and diplomatic. Thumbs up
Well done Hans! Fair play on the video response. I think it's important to approach all situations with maturity, understand and grace. Life in chess won't be easy for him after the Magnus fiasco, and I'm glad he's choosing the right way to go about quelling any suspicion or concerns his peers may have. It would be a tragedy if we missed his genius. I look forward to his chess speaking for itself.
Would be cool if Kramnik took Hans up on his offer
Hans response to Kramnik is fair enough.... He is offering to show his strenght in person but Karmnik seems to fail accepting his curve of performance is going down because of aging
Strenth*
@@Aiballa Shranhhhtgh*
@@Aiballa bro are you making fun of yourself?
@@Aiballastrength
Strange*
The funny thing is that Kramnik actually lost against a much lower rated young Indian player earlier in the tournament but since it's Hans he knows he'll have a lot of support on his side even when there's little substance to his utterances
at this point, it just looks like plain bullying
someone posted a timeline and showed none of this was referring to hans by kramnik. agad got the timeline wrong.
@@somebody700This wasn’t about Hans but Kramnik had changed his profile earlier referencing Hans and made like a 40 minute video with some nonsense analysis basically suggesting Hans is a cheater. Hans response was to that, so it’s pretty similar situation as it’s been shown.
In this game you can clearly see that Kramnik made so many inaccuracies and actually gave Nieman the edge.Its so ridiculous to then accuse Nieman of cheating when he(Kramnik) didn't play well.
It is very sad when someone has a good game against you or you lose, insinuated cheating is bought up with no evidence.
But this person has a history of cheating
@@salehibrahim3997....so every game now he cheats online if he has a good game lol....he was even accused of cheating OTB because Magnus had a bad game - getting ridiculous.
So does Kramnik Just ask Topolov@@salehibrahim3997
Don't just call it Twitter, do so unapologetically. We don't care how X feels about anything.
Hans comes out of this looking like the mature and sensible one, while I also understand Kramnik's frustration I think he's taking it out on the wrong guy. Kramnik is approaching 50-years-old and no matter what anybody says, it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain consistency and concentration. There will inevitably be more moments of losing to lower-rated players that he would never have lost to at the peak of his powers. That's losing a match against time, not cheating.
@@tak5256you rather believe someone making an accusation without evidence just because you are a fan. Alright, glad you are not in any position to make judgements
@@tak5256but on what move., it seems so blatant when u dont even speak what was cheaterish?
@@tak5256 Nothing has been proven about him cheating OTB though. A lot of analyses have proven to be completely dishonest and have proven to be manipulated.
@@tak5256 hahaha such an unbiased take
I can fully understand top players not wanting to play against someone like that, and I don't think they should have to, at least without the offender serving a lengthy ban.
However Kramnik is going way over the top with his accusations. He even accused Robert Ramirez of cheating in a game that finished in a draw! A high accuracy rating by your opponent means nothing if your own moves are not very challenging, and if (as Kramnik did in his games against Hans Niemann) you make mistakes, you're likely to lose against a titled player, however good you are. Unfortunately I think he's allowed the cheating issue to get into his head and it's having a detrimental effect on his play.
I do think Niemann isn't clean, but this specific game wasn't that "unnatural" compared to other Niemann brilliancies.
Hans reply is spot on..
5:30 rook to b8; clearly a blatant, illegal move by Hans
That thumbnail is so funny lol “The strenth” 😂
Rook e2 is also an interesting defense that leads to a queen-sac on h8 mat3 #suggestions
Ive been on pause for 28 mins and still didnt figure out the move.
Congratulations Hans!
I know nothing about chess at a high level...........but I DO know that among a large community of people, if a way is found to cheat, some will use it. This is not to accuse Nieman specifically, just an acknowledgement that the diversity of character types ensures some will cheat if they can. The only way to stop this is to find ways to completely prevent cheating and I don't know if that is even possible.
The thing with Hans is that, while he did cheat in something like 10-15 games online, there is no evidence of him cheating over the board. Statistical experts have analysed his moves, he was patted down, searched with a metal detector, a time delay was added to live broadcasts of his games, and there was zero evidence found that he cheated or that he could have possibly cheated. I agree he shouldn't have cheated on those online games, but online and over the board are very different.
Its just so pathetic for a world champ to lose a game and then wirh no evidence acuse the opponent of having cheated - whether Kramnik or Carlson. When you lose then defame rhe other. What a low sportsmanship!
Hans is a proven cheater, but sure in this who knows, that is his problem always be suspected, he never can wash his well deserved reputation out.
Agree. It is ridiculous. These people are children.
Imagine ignoring the fact that Hans has already admitted to cheating himself in the recent past, then coming here and imply they have no cause because there is no proof that he ever cheated lmao... pathetic is the right word.
Haters be hatin'
Vibrators be vibin'
It's funny how Hans is the only one acting like an adult in regards to Carlson's childish temper-tantrum after playing a bad game he decided to use as a basis for his unsubstantiated allegations of cheating.
Magnus may be the greatest player but he looked like a total ass during that fiasco. 30 year old cry baby.
Kramnik is right computers changed chess a lot. In the 90s and earlier, one player (unless his name was Bobby Fisher) couldn't just win by himself. It took some more chess players in your team to help analyze the games of the opponents, prepare some lines etc. Nowadays you just analyze the games with Stockfish. You can memorize long engine lines, play plenty of matchmade games online, run chess puzzle survivals. Even if you don't take your engine with you to a game, it already helped you in your preparation a lot.
Except most top players have a team working with them including Magnus.
@@shrewm Of course they have coaches. There is still a lot of benefit in that. But the possibilities for self-coached people are way better now than they used to be. They can still read some old books, but on top of that, they have all the tools for analysis, they can test their ideas against random opponents over the internet etc.
Computers have changed chess a lot, absolutely. That is a completely different claim than saying one is playing against so many cheaters (thinly veiled accusation against Hans). Now of course Hans himself is known to have cheated online, but the likes of Magnus, Hikaru, Alireza, etc. play online plenty and only encounter cheaters fairly rarely. If Kramnik is only directing it at Hans that is one thing but claiming it's a widespread issue at his level... idk
Very interesting, the engine sees Na3 and Ne1 as equal. I will play Ne1 in future
Its only equal if you know the 10 million possible resulting variations for each side like stockfish does.
Many times stockfish can say a move is good but its only good if you understand the broader theme.
The chess speaks for itself.
Especially when you can't explain your own moves 😂
That's why I watch on mute
@gravytraindrumming5167 The old man lost. He should quit acting like a child. If he has actual video or audio proof of cheating then produce it. Otherwise shut up.
Yeah, I see little point in moving the knight to e1 followed by c3 the next move, should've just moved it right away if he wasn't worried about bishop takes knight on b1...
Once cheater - always cheater. Knowing your opponent once have cheated, during the game you will wonder for any opponents move does he cheat. That gives the cheater huge psychological advantage even he doesnt cheat. So, any confirmed cheating must result with permanent ban. Anything alse is unfair towards the non cheater and destroy the game from inside.
Exactly. People do not understand this and discount Hans' cheating since he was a kid when he started (take note of that: STARTED). Many e-sports outright permaban whole teams for less drama yet somehow Hans gets off scott-free. People nowadays should learn about something called "consequences".
I have no deeper insight into this particular matter, but one thing I know is that in the absence of clear evidence people tend to start imagining all kinds of things, and certainly chess players - even on the hightest level - are not exempt from this. Also, it is almost impossible to get a good sense of the extent to which one is fooling onself in this kind of situation. People can convince themselves quite easily that a certain behavior can only be explained by a one particular explanation, and then go horribly wrong with it.
The recent Kramnik interview on the c-squared podcast is highly recommended. Kramnik presented some compelling statistics on Titled Tuesday suspicious play.
His so called "compelling statistics" are f*cking jokes. Dude just compared his opponents accuracy when they play against him vs when they play against Magnus. Well, flash news. Magnus is much better player than Kramnik therefore his opponents will always have higher accuracy against Kramnik than against Magnus.
@@kujklokpI couldn't careless about statistics. Bring video or audio proof or give it up already.
@@kujklokp Thanks for your carefully considered response. I disagree with your analysis. Accuracy is not a statistic that depends on how well your opponent is playing. It depends on making a move in the position that decreases your advantage or increases your disadvantage the least. Kramnik's statistics were also not limited to accuracy; other parameters were also considered. These other analyses converged on the same conclusion: that a noticeable percentage of titled players are using assistance during online events.
@@StevenStJohn-kj9eb Accuracy most definitely does depend on how well your opponent is playing. There's 0 chance Magnus would play with 95+ accuracy against Stockfish or AlphaZero.
There's probably a modest effect of opponent strength. However, it's not large enough to explain the numbers Kramnik was seeing. There are situations in a chess game where it is easy to make the best move (e.g., forced variations) and situations where it's difficult (e.g., complex positions). A strong player can beat a weak player quickly by creating complex positions and avoiding forced variations. However, Kramnik was evaluating Titled Tuesday games in which he is, on average, rated higher than his opponents. Indeed, part of his analysis involved looking at the accuracy of 2500 rated players and noting that they played at very high accuracy. Kramnik would readily admit he's not as strong as Magnus, but Kramnik remains a very strong player who is comfortable in complex positions and is capable of putting pressure on opponents.
Kramnik is, however, slower than many players of his strength. It may be that he puts less pressure on his opponents in the final minute or so of a game, allowing them to play at higher accuracy. This might account for some of the differential. Kramnik, however, found difficult to explain numbers for players playing against Caruana and other elite blitz/rapid players. His data were not limited to his own opponents.
I'm surprised you're so quick to discount his analysis. It's an important issue for the chess community, and making progress on it requires an open mind and the willingness to learn from one another's perspective.
"The strength is in truth" is actually a quote from a very famous Russian movie - "Brother". It's so famous that almost every Russian knows it. x)
Hans might have become genuinely stronger and no longer cheat… but he is an infamous cheater in the past.
Some people deserve second or third chances. Whether Hans deserves it is up to debate.
Personally, I think he has more than paid for his sins. The time to move on was long ago. Bring evidence or shut up.
@@bassmanjr100 shut up what? learn some english my dude... i'm just saying everything from a neutral perspective and if u understand the language, u would have gotten it... ur just ardently defending him and it's fine... go tell that to Hans haters lmao
There are a lot of cheaters at all levels
Kramnik just seems to struggle with understanding the style of engine-trained players, who have a different intuitive, gestalt understanding of chess positions which doesn't always marry with the principles built up before the existence of databases and engines.
11:07 First time I found a move.
Truly beautiful move.
And now I am true master of incredible positions😂😂
Hoping for good things from Hans in the future and hope he continues to do well in the future as well.
I don't. I hope he completely breaks down to the point he poops himself at a game.
@@SonicMegaKingyou're a disgusting human
@@SonicMegaKingGet help.
@@SonicMegaKingWhy though?
I don't, personally. I don't think he is cheating now (or in the Magnus game, for that matter), but he is a proven cheater in the past, and the fact of the matter is that this alone is already an advantage, since it sows doubt in the opponent. I don't root for people who gain an advantage from cheating, be it past or present. To be fair, it is also on FIDE allowing the issue, proven cheating, imo, should warrant lifetime bans.
That’s a very great response from hans niemann
I dislike the appearance and personality of Hans. He appears as a person I would not trust for anything in the world.
Vladimir has explain in russian his concerns: he didn't understand move timings. He feels like Hans simulates move delays artificially, like if someone is cheating w/o understanding of true move complexity. I believe two former WCC should feel such things properly, like other SGMs, but it's always hard to insist w/o direct evidences and only some unique players who is nothing to lose can start such theme.
You mean Big Vlad doesn't know about pre-moves? lol
Sounds kind of narcissistic. "If I the wcc don't understand that move than that guy must be cheating".
Kramnik isn't exactly known for taking defeat well...
Someone should hand him a kleenex next time.
Kramnik doesn't have a clue and Hans is an oddball. The end.
Many games have been covered on here, that lower rated players have beaten higher rated players, by much greater rating differences, yet no question of cheating...they just had a great game and deserved to win (performances vary). I'm about 1550 rated but my performances are all over the place some as low as 800, some as high as over 2000 but I know, I'm not up-enough on theory and not bothered really. Next time Man City get beat in the Premier League by a team near the bottom of the league, I'll have to think...that team must have cheated :)
You're good. I'm about 2000-2100 online and consistent. If you are 2000 at your peak then it means you are as good as me on a good day. What you need to do is study openings more, and, this is key, cut down on your blunders. If you can do that, you can consistently play at 2000. As for football, they actually rank teams by the Arpad Elo system, I once saw this online.
Thanks. I know I'm being a bit lazy...learn more theory, concentrate and look for sacrifices, forks, pins discoveries etc I'll get round to it.@@raylopez99
The absolute villain arc we needed
It’s sad that mistakes made in life at an age when mistakes are often made could follow you through life, and it makes everything you do suspect. I believe a way to gain trust again is to have a independent group monitor a person’s game play either in person or through advance cameras and software that only allows two or three persons to view the game and the rest on a delay system.
Sad but that's how it works. 😂 Idiotic generation. Just because it's "sad" they allow a known cheater to continue to play at high level. Utter insanity. Everyone agrees about the threat of cheating ruining chess but let's not even bar known cheaters from high level competition. Way to keep it fair. 😂 stupidest shit I've ever seen.
Cheating in 100+ games is not a "mistake". Jesus, people nowadays know nothing of consequences and that's how cheaters get away with so much crap.
@@akaneriyun4774same thought. Calling "cheating" a mistake is ridiculous. Next time, people say "the good Hitler made some mistakes"
I pointed out even when Magnus accused him of cheating, in that game also , there was nothing special about that game which would suggest cheating, same goes for this one ... I think more and more people simply go with the wind.. mistake that Niemann did that he was once caught cheating on online game.. you can never do that.. and people will simply make example out of him.
Kramnik put himself
Into a difficult position and Hans just played moves that made sense. He tried to create complications but just made his own position extremely difficult to defend.
lifetime bans for cheaters. they ruin the game for everyone else.
I agree...all those found cheating and admitting to it should be banned for life
I agree. As long as we have the same for accusers with no evidence.
Banning people who blame others is much more important imo
Hans has been caught cheating 2 times already. He should be ban on all forms of chess where money is involved. People who defend him are his own kind.
@@elyas4637amen
It does not matter if Hans is cheating now.
The fact that being a known cheater is an advantage in chess, is enough.
It's the only sport where that is the case, cheating in chess needs to be a one time offense that yields a lifelong ban.
Correct, and Hans is a repeat offender who lied and downplayed his cheating.
While I understand your concern, people need to be forgiven and given another chance. At the same time, any success a reformed cheater may have will always be tainted with the specter, no matter how unlikely, that he or she did not play fairly. Is the reputation of the game more important than the individual? I lean more towards forgiveness and loving the individual than holding a grudge and punishing the player.
@@smhollanshead No.
Magnus Carlsen started playing sub-optimal moves against him, caused by lingering fears of playing against someone who had checked computer lines as they were playing.
If you don't bring the hammer down on cheating in chess, you will eventually end up with a situation where the optimal strategy is to intentionally get caught cheating while your young, to gain that mental edge on your opponent.
"yeah i could be cheating, i've done it before, better visit the toilet a few extra times"
There is no other sport that being caught cheating, gains you that advantage.
@@dyBBelyBTASTIC I suggest there is no human endeavor where cheating is the optimal long term strategy. While there may be some short term advantages to cheating, the long term results are disastrous. Because chess is played in the real world, people must be prepared to face and deal with cheaters. I suggest exposing the cheater and shaming them for their bad behavior is the best result you can get. Then encouraging them to play honestly. I find shunning these people for mistakes and sins we all make is unworkable.
@@smhollanshead Cheating has shown itself to be a optimal long term strategy for Hans, he is again being invited to tournaments, his ability to make a living playing chess has not been impacted in the slightest.
Yet to this day, the mere fact that Hans once cheated, gives him an advantage.
You just watched a game with a former world champion who himself said as much.
They simply need to play in a hall where there are no signals than can transmit or receive anything. Either an underground facility with very thick walls or those that have signal jammers similar when country leaders are present.
“The Dark Side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural.” Hans Niemann.
Hey it begs the question, why is there such a discrepancy between everyone's Lichess and Chesscom rankings?
I rarely saw mr kramnik win, rather ive seen him complaining much..😄
He was nigh unbeatable for a long time.
Do you mean the former world champion for 6 years? I think he won one or two games then
former world champion 2700+ curren rating, ya right the dude never wins
I know he is a former world champion and a giant of theory. Im talking about his recent performance against top gms, as far as ive seen
The way agadmator put it, it did sound wrong, if vlad did say this about nieman. Nieman is a talented gm, although he is weird, but he is a gm and talented for sure, he is not a random guy from the bar and the library, he might play some good moves no?
At 10:48 why didn't kramnick capture the knight? Or even a few moves earlier what was the downside of capturing the night with the white queen?
Inferior players or especially better players [in the past] having a bad game throw the toys out of the pram by accusing opponents of cheating instead of looking at their own deficiencies - it's an easy _but cowardly_ way to preserve ego.
Everybody cheats since engines are used to prepare... it is like to dope while training and then be clean during race... you used outside help to gain performance in both cases
Krammnik just does not have it anymore like he used to
You wish.
pERHAPS IF HE WAS BLINDFOLDED@@quantitativediseasing9988
Its hard to play a known cheater, you always have that in the back of your mind.
I am pretty sure, Kramnik is done with regular chess players, too ..
Having people doubt your skills every time you win is an appropriate punishment for having cheated multiple times in the past.
Come on wtf we did dumb things as kids
I also think people who accuse people of cheating without evidence should get the same treatment.
Doesn't look like cheating at all. I am not a fan of hans, but this looks very human like. He's a 2600 player. It's not that any non 2700 is a handicap, or won't have great games. Plus, this is rapid, not even classical. Some players are way better in rapid time formats than slower ones.
AI cup is fitting for Hans
I see what u did there. 🤣
Spicy title. Before Niemann files the lawsuit, maybe reconsider the title? 😅
I think that big names are taking advantage of the situation to polish their pride. At the same time, I think that to cheat at professional level is one of the mistakes that time can not fix. It is just a fair price.
Granted.
But Titled Tuesday is not professional competition.
@@D0BR0VECE it pays 1000$ and chess pros angle to win that money. This makes it professional even if it's not controlled like higher level events.
@@abj136 Still not professional competition. Sporting event maybe.
But one that has nothing to do with the federation. This is the deciding factor, not how high profile players are.
Anyway, I said TT because that's like their biggest day to day event. They never really stated what it was.
Vova with the Brat 2 vibe
Multiple super GMs, world champions, statistical analysis say Hans is dodgy, but random YT commentators choose to make him their hero
And, as usual, a hater will lie.
Haters like you if HMN:
-wins, this is evidence of cheating
-draws, same
-loses, same
-plays the best move, same
-plays a good move, same
-plays a bad move, same
-makes a mistake, same
-blunders, same
FFS, no there isn't any "statistical analysis". No, a random FM who doesn't understand shit about stats isn't a "statistical analysis". No, really. No, but really.
Super GM are experts in playing chess, but no experts to identify cheaters.
@AlcyonEldara very, very true. It's even more likely the only cheating in that Niemann-Carlsen story took place in the "evidence", that was constructed to "prove" that Hans was cheating otb in past. But to understand that, it requires much more smartness and effort than to repeats chatters of self-declared "authorities".
@@Junkerjoerg1517 when you spend your life doing something you have a better sense for the minor intricacies than some random YT commentator
@plavyn yes, agreed! There are experts for chess cheating detection, dedicating years to find very sophisticated methods to detect cheating. They are much more reliable than a frustrated world-champion and YT commentators, who just repeat this nonsense. Not to speak about the FM, who maybe even tricked in her "evidence".
What would be the point of cheating?
Winning.
@@marginality270 - I’m a bit confused. If your cheating your not beating anybody.
You’re just lame. I blame your mom.