Why 50% of Players Could Be Cheating
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 10. 2023
- Hikaru reacts and gives his thoughts to the C-Squared Podcast and the claim that 50% of players in Titled Tuesday could be cheating.
👍LIVE MOST WEEKDAYS ON KICK ►www.kick.com/gmhikaru
♟️ LEARN CHESS & PLAY WITH ME ► go.chess.com/hikaru
🎁 GIVE 💎 CHESS ► www.chess.com/membership/gift...
🎬 CLIPS CHANNEL ► czcams.com/users/GMHikaruCli...
🎞️ MORE GMHIKARU ► czcams.com/users/moregmhikar...
💜 TWITCH ► / gmhikaru
📸 INSTAGRAM ► / gmhikaru
🐦 TWITTER ► / gmhikaru
✨ TIKTOK ► / gmhikaru
💛 DISCORD ► / discord
💙 FACEBOOK ► / gmhikaru
💚 SUPPORT ► streamlabs.com/gmhikaru
🤣 REDDIT ► / hikarunakamura
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
🎥 Edit and 🎨 Thumbnail ► Jaron / jaroniscaring
👌Channel Management ► Team Hikaru
📧 Global Business contact: TeamGMHikaru@gmail.com
📭Chinese Brand Business contact: gmhikaru_ydads@163.com
#gmhikaru #chess #cheatinginchess - Hry
The most overlooked problem with cheating is that the players who genuinely love the game start to lose interest in the game because its not worth it any more 😢
Happened to me after covid. Preferring puzzles over plating games.
it's never been worth it for players 💀
Yup
@@kimgysen10same here
If you love the game, go play some OTB chess!
That "Hans" Freudian slip at 16:04 was hilarious
LOL of course we know why he has Hans in his head. (Now I know it's called Freudian thx)
For real😂😂
The subconscious speaks for itself.
he did it on purpose :) hans was and probably still is a cheater, online
Hans lives rent free in his mind
It's still unbelievable to me that people who make it to that level of competition would have so little respect for the game as a whole
It is not surprising at all to me. Chess players are mere humans (like the rest of us), and no one's more tempted to cheat than someone on the edge of glory who, for whatever reason, can't quite make that final step to the top. Business and sports worlds are full of overly competitive and unscrupulous people willing to sacrifice their integrity to succeed.
No money in chess to reward hard work people have to resort to cheating
@@mooo9091 if so then it's surely a short sighted strategy as it will further cheapen the sport
In every sport there is someone that cheats, money and glory is a strong motivator.
Tbh, if someone is from a very poor country where t titled tuesday win would be a significant chunk of money and they have a family to feed its obvious what they would do.
When he kept saying Hans 💀
16:01 A classic Freudian slip from Hikaru.
Hahahah yes 😂
What's a freudian slip?
@@justinfoley7136when the subconscious speaks out instead of you consciously saying what you're thinking.
@justinfoley7136 when you actually say what's REALLY on your mind lol
Was playing a friend in daily games and he was consistently turning a completely losing position into a win, few weeks later he said his account got “locked” because he messed up his emails. With his new account he hasn’t played any online games unless it’s against his friends.. I have a hunch he was cheating and got caught.
I used to use clone email to make smurf account, never got banned. He is definitely cheating.
@@vutdat97 just out of curiosity, what would be the point in smurfing in chess? i didn't know it was a thing😅
@@riccardozanoni2531you probably don't think so but some people think it's fun. I know some people do it to place themselves higher so they can get practice against higher rated players. Some people might make their own engine to play with and want to see how well it does. There's a million reasons.
@@riccardozanoni2531 People like to win. Dopamine in the brain, bragging rights over your friends, perceived intelligence, etc.
@@riccardozanoni2531to play against players lower rated than yourself. Tecnically not cheating vut scummy
Fabi's analysis of chess and the challenges it faces is superb.
This issue has been going on for quite a long time, especially in online chess, at all levels. It's good to see the top players having this discussion. Cheating in chess, especially at lower levels is rampant.
Correct!
Cheating at lower levels 😂 don't justify your terrible play by claiming cheating at lower levels is "rampant". It's much more rare than the attention it's getting. People get really crazy about cheating
@@lukastux3024 its hard to tell without stats, but I agree that I think its less of an issue in lower levels, especially because I would imagine lower level cheaters are way worse at being able to cheat discreetly, and low level accounts that cheat are probably accounts that just started cheating- if they are using their cheats to win a lot, they will quickly leave low-level elo and therefore not be an issue at lower levels. This is just speculation, though, as I lack any data to base this on.
@@tweakr4377 yes, and furthermore, they will be detected very soon if they don't know how to play chess well...
Im wondering if different national responses to the pandemic had influence. If players on countries like the ones Hikaru mentioned, where there's a limited pool of players over a certain level and smaller improvement increments, the countries with stricter travel requirements or extended limits on larger events would limit OTB participation, it would make sense that now those players would be able to get those points. I mean, Ding almost didn't qualify for candidates for similar reasons. Anyone who was not Ding would have less opportunity
Once money is introduced into anything, chess, a hobby, asking someone for a favor, it changes everything.
there isnt much money in chess right? as far as i know only the very top of the top make a living off it. most money is probably made by hustlers, much like how it works in pool.
People underestimate how corrupt sports and racing is. If you bet on these games/races with the expectation everything is fair, no matter how smart your bet, you will 100% lose. Especially if the ability to rig the game is high such as in H2H games. Team games not so much. Racing is an exception since they are one big club in cahoots with the bookmakers and tipsters.
@@longdongmc.johnson The point Fabiano and Hikaru were making is that online Titled Tuesday for a prize of $1000 and once they relaxed it a little bit, all of a sudden you have a change in the rating and win trends. So if you have a chance to cheat easily for $1000 online... there is motivation. And if you use an engine, it's so easy to do.
@@Eye_Radiate_Light What kind of racing are you talking about? I bet on football and make profit. I do it for a living. I use to bet on chess until the website went inactive in my region.
@@longdongmc.johnson When people say this they mean to become wealthy off chess. Tons of people that are nowhere even near the top or even GMs can "live off it", they simply earn enough to get by. I live in Europe know 2 people that simply grind out every chess tournament they can find nearby and collect price money regularly, for them it's enough to live. One of them is only like 1800
The problem with ratings is not elo, it's exactly what Caruana said: the highest rated players just play among themselves, so it's impossible to have a big variation on their ratings. Then the only time they play someone that is as strong as them but outside of the group they will lose a lot of points because that person inevitably will be underrated.
Exactly it is blindly obvious.
You nailed it! The top 10-15 players are frequently playing in invitation tournaments, which also mean that they are essentially playing the same people year in year out. There are many players who don’t get the chance to play these top players but they are capable in doing so. That is why the top players often struggle when it comes to open tournaments. Qatar open is a great example.
the advancement of engines and opening prep tools has also affected the expected win rate based on elo difference
Lose. Thank you. I’m a one man crusade against millions who don’t understand the difference between losing and loosing. Don’t know when this started, but it needs to stop.
@@SuperEgo19 I assume loosing points means that the rating is less tight than it once was? Or he is letting go of the points, thus 'loosing' them? I don't know, it's very confusing.
Love this kind of content from Hikaru!
That inflation I noticed it first in lower levels. 2 years ago I started playing again after a long pause. In the past (10 years ago) players of 1600 didn't know much of openings and made blunders in the middlegame, and now that level is 1400, 1600 players now know a lot more theory and play decent middlegame and endgame, like it was for 1800 before. I think that this deflation has come to higher levels.
The USCF saw huge rating deflation in the 70's, enough so they felt they had to do something about it (Fischer effect). They saw significant deflation in the 90's where a lot of the low-end masters were losing their master status (possibly a rapid chess effect). Eventually everyone started to be able to study with the aid of computers; I don't think it can be no effect.
It is also true that cheating is pervasive at lower levels. I am a lowly National Master and even I can tell (mostly) when someone is cheating. I expect cheating is far more prevalent with lower rated people.
Crybabies
It’s just as prevalent at higher level, they’re just better at hiding it. Sadly cheating is a common trait in humans, no sport is untouched
higher level same
I do believe that tons of low level players cheat. I disagree that you can tell (mostly). You can suspect, but if you had god vision, I suspect your hit/miss ratio accusing people would be comparable to rolling dice. Unfortunately, it's just near impossible to know, and really easy to use as an excuse. Losing feels *bad*, and calling cheat ameliorates that, so it's an easy out.
@@GregHinz-jt6nqIt’s the truth
Cheating is so easy, and very common 🤷🏼♂️
It seems to me that the rating declines would be caused by a large group of younger players, growing quickly. Their rating would not be able to keep up with their current skill levels and thus they would constantly be underrated, and be draining points from higher rated players. Look at the large group of youngsters coming up out of India. Those kids are going to take points from many higher ranked players.
Yeah this seems like a reasonable assessment to me. I would imagine that it is a much bigger contributor to rating deflation than cheating.
In fact, that's the mathematical advantage of ELOs.
The mathematics of ELOs allow the balance of power to evolve, and the value of ELOs changes precisely because the average level of players evolves.
has anyone thought about inflation? I may be crazy, but could it be inflation of finance causes decline of elo? I may have too much time on my hands.
Overall rating numbers can decline because of the persistent cheating in chess, where top level players - regardless who they may be - are cheated against repeatedly and they lose points because of the cheating. THAT is the whole issue here: cheating, besides its effects on deflation of the ELO scores, PERMANENTLY damages the game. In the end, there will be 10,000 players with the rating of 2500-2600, and then everyone will know that the chess is DEAD.
@@kingkillah101 I'm sorry, but it might be the dumbest thing I've read online this year;)
6:00 Also the closed pool among 2700 players who often play invitationals with other super GMs means these strong low rated players have fewer chances to beat 2700's and gain rating.
Once I'm lost and suspect cheating, I just start 'blundering' all my pieces. If my opponents response time doesn't increase when the game is ever more easy to win then my suspicions are probably confirmed.
Thing is a smart cheater will just stop using engine once they get to a certain advantage they know they can win them self.
@@Jlang-es9lc Yep, I've had opening innaccuracies ruthlessly exploited and found myself in a hopeless mess, battled on, opponent has blundered pieces and then starts playing wonder moves again to finish me off 😂
I slow down once I’m winning because I think to myself, “OK, you’re already winning don’t mess this up” .
I’ve also heard people say that if there’s a difficult position on the board and the opponent takes too long, they suspect cheating because it means they walked away, looked at an engine and then came back with a good move. Personally, I think they take extra time to think in a difficult position because it’s a difficult position 😂
Hikaru greatly adapt his playstyle online to counter cheaters:
He rather play faster moves that are maybe not best or not direct to complex positions than calculating heavily to play most accurate and complex moves. That's why his games looks less spicy than some other players - viewers can even thinj that Hikaru sometimes play for a draw / early endgame than for a win. But when Hikaru creates position where engines gives opponent +0.1 +0.2 and after ten best moves it become +0.8 then cheater has to waste a lot of time to move pieces on the second board and play ten best moves to take only a little advantage over Hikaru. In that time Hikaru plays fast and take minute or more advantage on the clock that gives him a chance to win an endgame against cheater - because with only seconds on the clock cheater cannot really use engine and has to play by himself. I think that is the reason why Hikaru has so good results online even when a lot of people are cheating. I'm pretty sure than non of us amatours could defeat Hikaru in 3+0 / 3+1 even using an engine (without bot who makes moves for us).
Do you really need a second board to cheat?
@@cokomairena yep, if you use any bot to makes move automatically for you it will be much easier to detect, so the best option to cheat is actually use second device with engine.
@@kamilstolarczyk317it can just be an overlay over the board you are playing, just delay the move by a bit and you’re fine
You can implement a browser plugin that interacts with the board on the web page and also communicates with a service on a strong machine.
The moment you said "Hans" i was dead of laughter for 5 minutes straight😂😂. You're such a cool guy.
The best Freudian slip hahaha
"rent-free" 😅
LOL just got to this part I couldn't stop laughing
The number of times I have been playing a game against someone who was taking their time, 20-30 seconds per move, holding even with me, and then when I win a minor piece or a couple pawns, suddenly they start taking 5 seconds per move and finding absurd tactics... it makes me suspicious. It's like someone handed off the controller to their big brother in a fighting game. Watching a player who fumbles openings just like me, misses basic math on protected pieces, then ten moves later they're finding three-move-deep fork setups lightning fast? The math, it is not mathing.
Hans confessed to cheating online while streaming and no watching his stream noticed. I don’t think a camera will help detect cheaters. Maybe online tournaments need to be on a delay
Yah still plenty of ways to cheat when the monitor is filmed. Vibrations, ear pieces, ..
you just have to make it harder to cheat. most robbers won’t bother with smashing windows and cutting locks. they just try them if they are open. the same way many of the cheaters won’t cheat if it takes effort. won’t solve the problem, but it will definitely help with it.
Lifetime ban and cheating decreases. No harm for the honest players. Cheaters can look for a new occupation
@@morcjul💯
It’s also opening prep. An average 2400 can play like 2800+ for 20+ moves. To test them you need to play suboptimal novelties, and therefore outcomes dont match ratings difference
I mean honestly anyone with a decent memory can play book moves for X amount of moves in the opening. Opening theory is becoming more and more of a thing outside of competitive players. I met someone the other day who played and we talked about chess a little and they told me how they've been playing the kings indian a lot recently and I asked them what their rating was and they said 7ish. I thought they meant 1700 but no, 700 and change.
This is true, some people complain that their opponents play perfectly the opening but it is somewhat expected up to a certain level. If you’re opponent is playing perfectly in the late middle game and endgame it is far more suspicious than playing perfectly for the first 10 moves.
Maybe this is why Hikaru has gotten so much better, he's been playing with cheaters so much it's improving his game at a much quicker rate than someone like Fabi.
training against an engine without knowing it’s an engine is probably better than training against an engine knowing it’s an engine because you won’t have the same motivation to play your best knowing it’s an engine because you know you can’t win.
It's the only way you/we can proceed as players right now. Ignore cheating, presume people are people. Anything else is self-defeating. If people are cheating, so be it. If you're trying to improve your game, it truly does not matter.
@@bigheadrhino GMs do win games against the engine. They pick up the clues such as "moves exactly every 15 seconds" and "still theory" and they have strategies like "flagging" and "closed position".
@@teenspirit1 By winning they mean having a winning position or checkmating an engine. impossible
flagging is still winning@@blinkers88
6:34 Could it be that either cheater influx in lower brackets makes cascaded rating drop all the way to the top or a new generation of players learning with engines rather than books creating a the cascade?
100% true that cheaters will try and argue that those who think there is cheating are bad losers and that there is no cheating. They will act all innocent when it is suggested and ask how it is done and that sort of thing.
They would even imply chess speaks
I agree. I think this also applies to die-hard Niemann defenders. It's one thing to say "we'll never know if Hans actually cheated against Carlson" but it's quite another to say "Hans absolutely 100% did not cheat and Carlson is just a bad loser and should be sued"
Fabi's voice is so similar to Eric Rosen's voice.
Real
Love it! Great commentary
Cheating over the board is of course more difficult but still not very tough when there is no delay on stream. There is no way to scan players for small devices that are only receivers (devices that are listening for signals but not send any signals, especially when those type devices are turned off when scanning occurs...
I once played a game and was accused of cheating, it was the greatest compliment I ever received in chess.
I too, got accused of cheating in 600 elo. That day I felt like a grandmaster
I played a 98% accurate game once. Once. Just once.
@@jeromebarry1741 i got 100% like 5 times, but that is because my opponent blundered their queen on like 4th move and resigned
Same ! And then I review it, and I have only 80 accuracy. It was like : being accused of cheating for that ?!
Algorithms for cheating won't flag 98%+ games by us amateurs who don't cheat because those algorithms know by our play and our opponents play when that game is real. I've played a handful of 95%+ and a grand total of 3 over 98, but only one of those was longer than 10 moves. Most are low 80's or 70's. On a bad day? In the 50's. If I studied, I'd be more consistent but it's just a fun hobby to me. Why would I ever cheat? It wouldn't be fun anymore and would get me nothing. Hard to fathom why anyone would, actually.
There are so many cheaters online it's insane.... Don't even take it seriously anymore just for fun. OTB is the only place Chess can be taken seriously.
Maybe having a rating system that combined in-game strength and performance against stockfish would be an idea. Then you'd be measuring pure ability against perfect chess + ability to handle the pressure of playing another human in competition.
If stockfish was perfect chess that would make sense but stockfish isn't perfect. Stockfish gets updated as well so you'd either have to wipe the ranking every new update or stick one update version with the same hardware.
This is how cheating is actually detected. By comparison to perfect play. It’s not about genius moves it’s about absence of poor moves.machines have consistently that people can’t match.
I think one thing to keep in mind is visualization. For me personally, I learned chess online and have a far easier time seeing tactics and weaknesses looking at an online board compared to OTB games. I'm not saying they're wrong about cheating, but you need a lot more evidence than "they play different online" because even missing one or two tactics/weaknesses in high level games could completely change how the games go. I wouldn't be surprised if there are players that just have an easier/harder time working through their ideas with the simplified/over head view of the online boards.
That's what I thought as well. But I think that's a valid point only for us lower rated players. A GM wouldn't have much difference in visualizing moves/tactics between online and physical boards.
Interview is top notch and Hikaru with his words makes this more understandable. Fabi is like a surgeon where as Hikaru like a pediatrician.
😂
Fabi is the doctor who comes in and tells you exactly what’s wrong with your body down to the latin name, hikaru is the nurse who then tells you that it’s completely fine and that you just have the common cold 😂
I think the main problem with underrated players is how much chess than they play online at a high calliper versus how much OTB Fide rated games they can play. They’re improving faster than their Fide rating can keep up with.
For young players too it is also nerves. It isn't as scary to play online, so you'll do better online generally.
Nah
That isn't the point. They're talking about the CALIBER in which they play not their elo itself. If that was to be the case it would be the opposite their online rating would be even higher than it already was. For example 2550 as they said otb would be around that elo but should then be over 2600 elo online. Hope you haven't been spelling CALIBER wrong your entire life
Nonsense
yes this is no point play OTB if you can play and won money online. OTB is stupid sport
Another point of note… for financially strict people… its not unreasonable that both spouses would offer insights into an ongoing game, effectively making it a 2v1. There are many situations that would be cheating that can be considered fair from there perspective…
Thanks for reacting to this podcast episode, Hikaru! I found it very lucid and interesting, so I can't wait to hear your thoughts.
As someone who plays chess, I can confirm that chess speaks for itself.
I say the same thing...and then awkardly waddle into the sunset
As someone who writes words I say sentences speak for the author.
"My chess speaks for itself" Hans Neumann
chess vibes for itself😌
Thank you for bringing this content Hikaru!!! Much needed with all the online cheating lately insane!!! Even in the bracket I play in 2000-2300 so much cheating!
Exactly. and if someone wasn’t a otb player before they were an online player how can they create an account so recently and be so high rated unless their other account got banned
The worst part seems to be at the 2000-treshold. It's such a magic number, and this attracts so many players, and baits them into cheating just a little.
@@SevenaikYT So true! Funny when 1800 players play like they're 2500 always makes me laugh
The absolute worst elo is 1700-1900. To get to 2100+ i ALWAYS have to get to a winning position, wait for the legendary 40 second pause in my opponents moves then know im gonna have to flag them. It literally happens in 99% of my games in that elo lmao. And websites wont ban then when its obvious like bro he played the best move EVERY MOVE after his position was completely losing and they wont ban them its ridiculous.
@@mubarkqardas46 pretty much 1700-2200 is a cheat zone cause it’s filled with strong players but not titled players
They need to stop making money tournaments in online chess.. cheating is too ridiculously easy to do in your own home.. a chess bot set to play moves at a 2600 level could beat even elite players in faster time controls while still making reasonable enough amounts of mistakes to not raise any flags... OTB should be the ONLY financial tournaments in chess.
Its actually psychologically very explainable: Imagine you start your dream of becoming the next Magnus at 7-8 years of age. You dedicate basically your entire youth and possibly life to this cause to then end up maybe not even 2500 or maybe 2600 which is also not even remotely close to the actualy big boys of chess that earn a lot of money....at some point it might corrupt you into thinking you "deserve" just more after sacrificing so much (which imo is what happened to Niemann without opening a discussion this is MY opinion). And then you have that nowadays cheating is much easier and thus seduction way higher with all the online chess going on and all the advances in technology as well.
adding cams wouldn't change the statistics. Because people will just cheat on cam, with a buzzer in their pocket that goes off whenever there is a winning combination on the board. The fact Hikaru doesn't see that immediately puzzles me. He blundered that logic
For me personally i can see how beeing in your "safe desk space" instead of high stress over the board enviroment would improve your game. Not saying cheating isn't happening, ofcourse it is but I think there is a big mental factor that should be counted in when playing over the board vs playing in the comfort of your home.
one reason why some may perform better online then on board is nerves. having said that ofc a lot of people are cheating. but checking online performance vs board performance can hurt some that struggle with nerves when eyes are on you
I just love how this channel is all chess all the time. No matter what I do throughout my day, I can bet hikaru is either eating, sleeping, pooping, or playing chess
I don't think ive caught a Hikaru video within an hour.
Yea it’s hard to keep up to Hikaru’s speed, even in chess.
This
What are u even doing with your life? 😳
Lol
Yes, online cheating has become an epidemic
A person that knows chess and is a smart cheater will never be caught, unfortunately
It’s ruining the game
I like that Fabi has been a world championship challenger and 2800 yet still admits, sometimes you just dont see the move, "If you see the move you play it, but sometimes moves just don't come into your mind." To me that feels like a universal chess experience that everyone has. Post game or move, how did I miss that moment?
not for me
@@user-ip8ij9yw3t zebra isnt camo, it is so when they run it creates an optical illiusion that mind focks there hunter
16:04, Freudian slip 😂
Inconsistancy is also how I detect cheaters in CS. If they play badly but then occasionally pull off stuff that would require world champion level skill I know they are toggling cheats.
The time they make moves is another indicator. When you take 5-6 seconds to make every move in a long move chain that is high level and then take 5 seconds to make the ONE move that is left, you aren’t a strong player.
It’s obvious most of the cheaters already know that they shouldn’t take the same time to make all the moves
If you are "skilled" at cheating, it's almost impossible to detect unfortunately
It's not like knowing it helps them since they need to enter the information into the engine to know the right move and that takes time.@@FC-fs7zp
A broken clock is right twice a day
I played against darts with a person who I shall not name but he was in the top 5 of people in our province. Averaged like 115 a lot of the time but eventually it came out that he used really small darts and when the darts were close he would still take off the high score cuz nobody was looking too close. They just assumed it must have been in there. Until he celebrated and started shaking hands one day before taking his darts out of the board. The guy he was playing against rushed past and moved his dart over so you could see it wasn't in the double. They he ounched him in the face. Then after that we realized that he could get 100s most of thr time but not 140s like it seemed. So he was still in like the top 10 anyway but it wasn't good enough for him I guess.
This sounds like a problem one could really easily solve by filming the games or just inventing rules for that :D
@@asdfasdf-mn8iu Like you know, not allowing the players to score themselves.
@zym6687 well this was just a league in a bar. He was ostracized after that and moved away or something. You don't take off your own score in competitive play. This was a large bar though so if you did win you were looking at like 400 bucks so it wasn't just glory he was after. My point was just that anybody can cheat, even people who don't need to cheat to win. They can still cheat even though they likely would have won anyway.
One reason of rating deflation is the talented new generation. I remember period when these top guys were drawing each other on purpose in big tournaments to maintain ratings. But then some tournaments got similar to Tata Steel, started inviting younger, talented players and then these top players were forced to win or faced with losing rating.
Adequate id checks instead of random online accounts for attendants, 2 cameras (one showing your face, another showing the area in front of you) and 2 year ban for cheating would help a lot.
That said, I don't think any amount of cameras can help because you could always have other methods of communicating with people near you that are simply not visible in any camera (which is easy to do when you get to setup the cameras).
The online cheating issue has gotten so bad that I have declined rematches after winning. Ever get that feeling your opponent is about to start cheating against you?
Man me too rematch is nearly always meaning that you will face a cheater
I love how Caruana is sometimes unintentionally funny
😂
A likely possibility that cannot be dismissed is that certain chess organizers who are not implementing or resisting actual anti-cheating measures are cooperating with the cheaters in some way and benefiting or profiting from such cheating. Obviously, honest tournament directors or organizers at this point in time have no excuse for their neglect of anti-cheating measures unless they themselves are corrupt, dishonest, and cooperative with the cheaters in some way.
Maybe not 2600 but 2700 for sure can use one or two assessment hints to beat top 10 consistently.
Man when hikaru saiu Hans name twice by mistake made me burst into tears laughing 😂
The only way to catch chess cheaters is to recruit a team of the highest rated proven cheaters. And keep replacing them with higher rated players that they in turn prove are cheating. Its like pay back the guilt debt and you get to play again
Cheating and being able to spot a cheater are two different things. A lot of cheaters have no idea what their moves are doing, so they have a very limited understanding of the game compared to a legitinate player, and would likely not recognise a human move and a bot move because they have little understanding of the human move.
Yes and those cheaters that are simply playing engine moves are the lower rated cheaters. At the titled players level, the cheater knows exactly which engine move to play so as to not raise suspicion. We need these people to detect other people's cheating
@@ishanjoshi1350 those people are the ones already detecting cheaters. They report them when they encounter them.
Trying to get Hans a job?
(sorry, I couldn't help it after Hikaru's freudian slip)
How is a camera or two supposed to stop some kinda side monitor or something even more hidden following and showing or communicating random good or best moves? 12:00
A behind the person camera with larger view coupled with a side camera is much better solution. if the camera is seeing the whole view within the max peripheral view of a person, then it takes a lot away.
And side camera can see anytjing infront of the person without showing the face.
Key point is eyes can only see whats in their periphery.
One aspect I rarely hear mentioned is how “it gets into your head” and takes focus away from the game. Instead of thinking about the game; I find myself thinking about whether or not I suspect my opponent is cheating.
It’s bad out there. It has gotten to the point where I only do puzzles and just play the bots themselves. That way I at least know I’m playing a bot.
…still stuck on Francis bot though. I have beat Noam (3 stars) so it seems possible. Once I blundered a winning position.
I find I play better when I suspect my opponent is cheating (I'm usually proved right later). When I know I'm against an engine, I feel less pressure because I know I'm not competing with a human who believes they can match me. I find myself relaxing at this and this sharpens my concentration, I suppose because I'm not using energy on anxiety. It doesn't help me win of course but I don't care much about that, tbh. I play to learn first, to win second, and casual games online are low-stakes, not like Titled Tuesday or OTB tournaments with FIDE rating on the line.
Hikaru is a master of using lots of words to say very little
He's a streamer through and through all right
At least you know what he means lmao 😂
16:02 That's a Freudian waterslide! 🤣
To one of the points made. If anyone is playing, they just need to be alerted the opponent made a mistake. For cheaters that are cheating to cheat, with little understanding of the game, that would not help. For people that know how to play, knowing your opponent made a mistake you see an evaluation bar jump, obviously you will look longer. But all you need is a signal.
You could have someone on camera all day. They could be using anything as the signal. They are physically making the moves, they are actively playing, but every time their opponent makes a mistake. I think many people could convince themselves it isn't cheating. Over the board, if anyone has real time access to the moves, how hard is it to hide something, that all it has to do is send a minor shock, or someone in the room smiles.
Money does motivate people to cheat, but a lot of them just do it to cheat, to beat a system. There really isn't a solution. I had one of my best friends cheat in a game against me, just because he wanted a win against me.
The point with the camera is just to „verify“ the account and make sure each person has only one account. The „punishment“ for cheating is a banned account, which is no actual punishment because you can make a new account for free. But with cameras, a ban would be an actual punishment because your „face“ would be banned instead of your account.
pretty sure Fabi is referring to Xiong, whom he has never beaten in a Titled Tuesday event. Placed 2nd about 10% of the time and winning around 1 in every 10 events he competes in.
thank you. who else ? do you have other names ?
I don't think so. Fabiano was refering to players who are much weaker than him. Xiong is rated around 2700. He's very capable of beating Fabi or winning Title Tuesday. For players rated 2600 or lower it's another story.
Not without engine help. It's 2 years since Xiong was 2700. In all their classical OTB games, Xiong has won just once.@@bobing1752
I have lots. We'll stick with the one Fabi is talking about for now.@@kalgon57
Well who has won title Tuesday in the last 3 years? Then look at the rating average over last 3 years in classical. Shouldn't be difficult to create a short list if info is available.
Camera is not going to solve cheating online, even if there are multiple cameras.
I think it will give a lot of players peace of mind.
Youll be able to see where their eyes are going and such, and you'll be able to go back and see the recording for when suspicion of cheating is suspected because if you take 20 seconds and play 3 of the best moves and see your eyes wondering, it'll be easier for people to tell.
It will serve two purposes. Firstly, it will definitely work as a deterrent because potential cheaters won't want to go through the effort of going on cam and hiding their cheating. It's way more effort. Also people are less likely to cheat if they aren't anonymous.
Additionally, if a person does cheat and there is suspicion, there will at least be some sort of evidence to look at to back it up.
@@danielshapiro2472 When money is involved (titled tuesday) you'll get people spending more on inner ear pieces.
@@danielshapiro2472what about cheating through headphones
Im not totally sure how the math works but I think part of the rating depreciation is because of all the great young talents coming up and taking rating points from some of the older more established players. So they are on the way up and the older ones are on the way down so we are just in a "down" time rating wise but I think in the next few years they will go back up again as the young guys establish themselves as the new super gms.
Camera plus that test taking software that prevents other windows as well as sharing the tasks running on the system.
Great resources - much better than before. Young players using them. That would seem to be enough to explain all the rating issues.
Cheaters come in, play until near top rating, snack a few wins of top players, then their accounts become inactive/banned. repeat. this stuff happens in other elo rated games as well, its also the cause in those examples and solutions have been found. Chess on the other hand has no solution yet. That is the main problem.
Here is my recent lichess experience as a rapid 2000 Sensei Danya: Here's this Najdorff variation that Fabi lost to in a blitz out of the opening Me: Oh yay, a real chess weapon as Black [4 out of 5] 800 ELO players playing second best Stockfish move, for 20 moves, every time 2 minutes ahead of me
Me: But you are lower than me in Every Area of the Game by 200 pts(Including Puzzles, 3 Check, 960 and KOTH, not to mention, Bullet ) Lichess Mods: There is no Conclusive proof that these 4 players are cheating.
There is one Tiny difference between King Hikaru and us low mortals : Hikaru would destroy most of them while they are still cheating, the rest of us could not hope to, even when they(the smarter cheaters) stop after playing 25 near pefrect moves and reaching a decisive edge. On my level 2000 rapid, 1900 blitz, it's 4 out of 5 that cheat. It's a lottery where the odds for an honest game are not in your favor:)
play 30 seconds chess, and tell me waht happen in this teorical situattion
This is a reason I only ever play bullet chess. It is so hard to cheat on bullet above 2000 rating without getting banned in like 10 minute
true, becouse you have no time to elect the moves@@JevonChen
@@immanitodeplomo if they cheat in bullet they also need to play fast and win fast so they often will play the best move most of the time making it super easy to tell. If they use some program to play the move instantly, then that’s just even easier to tell that they cheating. In short, play bullet to avoid dealing with cheating
this is my point bullet is the only way to play chess, @JevonChen
It is possible that very strong players emerge from online chess and classes aswell as youtube tutorials and courses etc, and OTB they have played to little, explaining the changes in the elo ratings
As a programmer I can only see this becoming worse as it becomes easier to cheat and remain undetected. It may already be in existence, but using overlays to highlight the best move, or moves would be fairly easy to implement and then, even if you have a camera on the player, if you don't have one on the monitor then you're not even going to be aware that the player is cheating.
Cameras would discourage some for sure…I mean laziness is likely driving a portion of cheats.
Wouldn’t be difficult at all to work around cameras tho. Small earpiece and a buddy off camera. Overlays could probably even be done in a way that isn’t picked up on video clearly.
Why would anyone think that is a solution? I agree that the penalty isn’t severe enough. Put titles at risk and see what happens!
You could even have someone remoting in using parsec or something and they are actually making the moves
The idea of the camera is not to stop cheating immediately but to make sure confirmed cheaters don’t come back with a new account just an hour later
@@PfropfNo1 Well it certainly is not to prevent someone creating a new account within an hour, like you suggest. That's for sure. Those who use cameras while playing chess are pretty much already high profile chess players.
Not good for them to get caught and they certainly would not be able to sneak back into online chess without people noticing.
@@anythingpeteives
It’s not my opinion, just what hikaru said
Fabi is spot on - one can flag someone for inconsistency in level of play between OL and OTB over enough games - but it’s still not proof.
It'd be more convincing if someone actually did a mathematical analysis here.
@@Idiomatickwhy don't you take on the mantle and do it for us?🥺🥺
@@idehenebenezer802 I left a basic stats comment and it got removed for w/e reason, the channel warned me i could be banned so. :x
@@Idiomatick It still wouldn’t constitute as proof.
But there is deterrent value in an algorithm that would:
1) Compare a player’s level of play in OL tournaments vs OTB tournaments, and return a “discrepancy score”. If the discrepancy score crosses a certain threshold, that player would get a private alert, and would get privately flagged.
2) Monitor that player’s discrepancy score over time. If the score remains past the threshold, and/or gets even further past it, that player would get a warning, and not be able to participate in OL tournaments. But they can still participate in OTB tournaments.
Additionally: Anti-cheating measures and cheating consequences need to be reformed.
1) OTB: No watches, electronics body scan every time a player exits and enters the play area would be a start.
2) OL: At least one camera showing a particular angle, and a government ID.
For consequences, since all tournaments would require a government ID, any caught cheater would be put on a public offender list and be banned for a number of years. Once the ban expires they can play again, but their name will have a stain on it.
Doing the above would at least serve as a decent deterrent and would be a decent start.
No idea why tournament organizers don’t do something like this.
@@Idiomatick No mathematical analysis can confirm that it is my nerves that prevent me from performing my best otb.
There has also been a massive increase in sore losers.
Interesting comment at about 3:15 that the difference is mostly in playing black.
I wonder how the top player's ratings would change if you only looked at white vs. black games. Obviously there should be a difference, but if there is a significant difference, it might say something about lower strength GMs' level of preparation as white and ability to force drawish positions against higher rated opponents. Thus the rating would go down.
We all know the most accurate rating system is average speedrun peak ELO. Clearly this is the superior method to determine someones true ELO.
If anyone has a more accurate measurement, that covers the whole rating range and a players ability over a wide range of openings in different time controls, I'd be happy to hear them!
There are actual bullet chess Engines that you can program. Not even that is safe.
I could find only 3 people
Aryan Tari is very strong so I’m not surprised he would win a couple Titled Tuesdays
Congrats to them for two life achievements!
I think they are referring to classical strength
They mean OTB strength generally
Bortnyk or Jospem are always in thé top 10, i think Caruana speak about one of them
42:20 that's so funny he thinks this now but not when he was analyzing the "engine correlation" conspiracy with the Hans drama
What would happen if there are completely different rati ngs for online vs otb. Zero changes in otb raking if you win online
I have a lot to say but for now I'll just say that yes, everyone is cheating but Super Grand Masters are also losing their F'ing minds.
A few months ago I was accused by a GM.
To make a long story short, I've been playing very seriously for over twenty years. My peak was in the 2300s. In those twenty years I played roughly half a million games (obviously including a lot of blitz and bullet), out of all these games I have 5 wins against GMs and the GM STILL thought I'm a cheater.
Right... 5 out of 500,000 is 0.001%. That means that for roughly every 25 thousand games I play I manage to beat one GM in a fast time control.
And the GM still couldn't accept it.
Sorry people... you're losing your freaking mind and with it all of our respect towards you.
I don't think this is related with cheating, at least not significantly.
The access to engines during practice and preparation allows players that would otherwise have to be creative at their own strenght to be inspired by a 3700 rated machine.
Add good memorization skills and you have that today's 2500s can play confortably at the 3300 level for the first 10 - 15 moves of the game at least.
This is compounded by the facts that a. the general principles of defending like an engine are becoming commonplace, b. the fact that lower rated players have the ability to select openings and replies that are more likely to lead to tamer outcomes with less play, skewing heavily in the game outcome to draws, c. the fact we have diminishing returns in additional engine depth, implying that Super GMs get less from engines than GMs.
What this in turn means statistically is that we should expect lower rated players to consistently take points from higher rated ones, mostly through draws.
The main reason one can consider as to why this is hapenning now and not 5 years ago, is likely due to the availability of cloud computation and engines with high depth at the public in general's disposal as the marginal benefit of further layers of depth cannot be capitalized on by humans, e.g. the 50th or 60th layer of depth is of little value in the context of an OTB game - adding to the diminished returns mentioned above in SGM vis. GM.
And also lastly likely because the player pool is now full of technologically literate humans that can yield these technological tools, in the first place.
I believe that it is easy to forget just how impactfull small effects can be when compounded across a populatjon through multiple iterations, and even easier to forget how Databases and Engines have shaped how everyone prepares and analyses their games.
Although, cheating is likely to have its influence, I would challenge the notion that it would represent more than 1% of the total elo stolen by each elo bracket to the its subsequent.
I would suggest using a regression model to test the correlation between elo loss at each 100 rating interval to its preceding, with the trend in player accuracy at each level, using the time series of the appropriate data.
I'm sure Chess.com's team of Data Analysts are more than apt for the challenge.
Any takers?
How do you think burner accounts and rating climb speedruns effect rating inflation ?
Many players use alt accounts in order to play lower rated players for fun or other reasons.
Example, a 2000 elo player can be playing a 1000 elo opponent on a burner account with an 800 elo rating.
(or playing many players from 100 up to 2000 if doing a rating climb speedrun.).
This real 1000elo player has no chance against the 2000elo player, but loses elo as if he was playing an 800.
This elo won from these victims then vanishes when the good player closes the burner account.
Im guessing at least 10% of games online are people using alt accounts in order to play easier opponents.
They are talking about real elo not online elo though... @@vlnow
From the intro, I thought Hikaru was being interviewed in this podcast but never mind 💀😂😂
Hans…I mean…Fabi. Best Freudian slip ever.
only Hikaru can play so fast- Fabi also mentioned that it is astonishing to see Hikaru play in real life, finding tactics so fast, it was super-human
Cheaters are in the comments below, rationalizing their low moral character.
They always do.
They always give themselves away with their comments. Cheaters aren't very bright to begin with.
My FIDE is 1920 and I'm 1600 to 1800 online depending on the time control. I can't be that unique, can I?
I can see online chess doing something like a lockdown browser with a cam and nothing else open in the pc
I play a lot online chess and amount of cheating in low level/anonymous chess is insane. In 90% of my games, when my opponent is on a losing position he/she suddenly pulls up 15 move stockfish combo and beats the hell out of me.
He doesn't have an ace of his sleeve, he has a bishop
16:03 Freudian slip is the psychological phenomenon that just keeps on giving 😂
lol even "Freudian slip" people are like..."C'mon"
It's much harder to detect cheating if they do it sparsely. Like say a person cheats one in 50 moves. Are you gonna find out if they're cheating? Probably not if they're any kind of intelligent about it.
Exactly. Unfortunately cheating is also a skill and if it's done really in a clever way there's no way to catch it
You find out by importability of results. Single move or game doesn’t matter, it’s the aggregate score over many games. 2500 rating is there because probability says so. If they play above that consistently, they cheat. People after the age is 25 dobro improve dramatically or at all any more.
They make open-source software where you can see a person's entire display like remote desktop, VNC or PC anywhere where it's impossible to cheat when you can see everything the player does on their displays. They could eliminate cheating by incorporating that software unless a person is using 2 separate computers to cheat. The developers could include the software as a requirement for tournament play so you can see everything people are doing for cheating purposes because they can see their displays. That would help with cheating. In fast play the software used to cheat is most likely on the same device so seeing their device would really help get rid of cheating. Used to use software like this when I was a programmer, and you'd never know I was on your computer, could see everything you did and actually control everything on your computer, but the software could be easily view only. It's like logging into a server backwards with full display views instead of window views.
You can get around that very easily by using a second device e.g. a smartphone.
Yeah, wouldn't help either unfortunately. Just use a second device or even a virtual machine or whatever
lol this ideas somehow even dumber than requiring webcams
Smartphones.
I really fail to see how cameras are going to help. I can thing of a lot of ways to defeat cameras. Option 1 duplicate screen in the next room where someone replicates moves with an engine. After that hiding a device outside of the cameras view to return information to the player should be trivial even with multiple cameras. Hell you can even connect a second mouse in the next room and have the person with the engine do the moves.
I don’t know how much of a difference this would make or the impacts, but in school we use HonorLock lockdown browsers for online tests which record webcam, audio, screen, and only limit you to the monitor in front of you.
I disagree with one point caruana makes about players being better online than over the board , yes huge gap in ability is questionable but I personally would expect players to be stronger online than at board since that's where most people play and learn now
My opinion is that the ELO system is not perfect, but nothing ever would be. Plus, much like physical strength, some days are better than others as far as ability. As for top players losing rating, if a group of people keep playing each other over and over (as the top players do) most ELO scores will eventually balance out a little. If a 2600 plays a 2400 and wins, there is very little benefit score wise. Wheras if the 2400 wins, there is a big jump and if a draw, still a bigger jump than the win for the 2600. And as someone else mentioned, the lower rated players are probably playing a LOT of online chess!!! All that experience and gained ability will make their OTB ELO deceptive to their actual ability.
Elo system will never be perfect.. There will always be someone who breaks it
"I dont know why hans name is in my head"
Don't worry Hikaru, his name was in everyone's head.
I was thinking of Magnus, because he's become so inconsistent lately. He can be beater by sub 2700s, some who just became GMs. What's up with that? Clearly Magnus has been cheating because of his inconsistency.*
* Hikaru "logic"
Regarding the statistics provided by Kramnik, we need to see the standard deviations. What is the range/skew vs just the mean of accuracy... otherwise even if there is a 5% difference between 2 players, it could be statistically not significant.
Bro's a statistician lol
My take on the rating deflation is that it is due to 3 main factor: a) close-pool effects in countries like India or China where some of the players are severely underrated (as an example, a 2300 elo from India/China can often mean a GM level) b) the huge crop of young talents (typically teenagers < 18 year old, especially from india but also uzbekistan and many other countries) and c) the advent of easily accessible super strong engines that levels the quality difference between 2500+ and 2700+ players, especially when these lower rated players play with the white pieces. Therefore I think the rating system should be updated, taking into account all these factors, to make it so it is less "punitive" for superGMs, in order to get more superGMs back in open tournaments. Because rating-wise, it is currently not worth for superGMs to play open tournaments where they are going to draw against a bunch of 2500-2600 rated players and therefore lose rating points
Usually ratings will always inflate over time with elo systems because of the influx of new people. Unless everyone starts at 0 elo, there will always be points accumulating in the system.
SuperGMs losing points over time because they lose games to a 2500 should be offset by the amount of games they win vs. 2500. 2500's that are underrated might take some of those points away, but will usually mostly drain points from their bracket until they move on.
If there's unfair advantages like cheating for 2500's though, SuperGMs would lose more rating on average, because they lose more games than they should. Either there are quite a number of heavily underrated players or it's just a combination of underrated players and cheating.