Nate writes, 'While he admitted to cheating online, the question of whether Niemann cheated in that game against Carlsen, or in other OTB games, is also completely open. ' I disagree. Until Carlsen or his business partners come up with evidence for their claims, the matter in nearly completely closed.
In my opinion online and OTB chess should be viewed and penalized separately, as cheating online is much different than cheating OTB, simply for the fact that it is much harder to do so OTB. Either way, I believe harsher penalties should be considered when dealing with cheating in chess, such as lifetime bans from tournaments, or multi year bans. As technological advances in chess computers have removed a layer of trust, always having that thought in the back of your mind that your opponent on chess.com or lichess is using stockfish, may hinder your own quality of play.
Actually it's not as hard as you might think to cheat OTB, at least not in smaller tournaments. Here in San Diego we had a 1500 player beating an IM in rapid, turned out he had a device in his shoe. Smaller tournaments with lower price budget's can't afford metal detectors etc. This is a big problem. Very hard punishments must be introduced, I think Polgar suggested 2 year ban first time, lifetime next and I agree, something like that.
I think 2 years to start is not enough, especially when we’re talking OTB tournaments where prize money and rating points are at stake. Let alone the devastation that you must feel as a player if a lower rated opponent such as in your example defeats a master level chess player. But also checking in shoes doesn’t require a metal detector, unless it’s such a tiny device that can’t be spotted by the human eye.
As much as I'd love to give Carlsen the benefit of the doubt, I think it speaks volumes that he isn't refusing to play against Maghsoodloo at Tata Steel. That shows that he's not taking some sort of principled stance here. I wonder if Maghsoodloo will pass his vibe check when they play.
I assume Carlsen was only judging by OTB games and only found the OTB games suspicious. Perhaps he wasn't even aware of Hans's history of online cheating...
Think there are two elephants in the room.This cheating scandal also involves Carlsen"s lack of professionalism. A professional player should not abandon a high level tournament without substantial proofs on the issue.Is Magnus going to be sanctioned for false accusations in due case?.May be a 100 million dollar priced elephant to deal with.
Agreed, Carlsen's handling of the situation was disgraceful. He was right to start the discussion but should have done it in a different way. Chess.com's handling was very strange too and with the financial involvement with Carlsen, that raises a lot of questions.
I think Magnus's intention was to create this drama and to actually ruin Hans's chess career because he almost certainly believed foul play was involved. However, I do think that the lawsuit is very futile for Hans because he is a known cheater/liar.
You mentioned Fabi's podcast. You might find it interesting to listen to the other podcast where he showed some OTB games of Niemann's - and what he says about the worth of Ken Regan's assessments in this case.
Nate writes, 'While he admitted to cheating online, the question of whether Niemann cheated in that game against Carlsen, or in other OTB games, is also completely open. ' I disagree. Until Carlsen or his business partners come up with evidence for their claims, the matter in nearly completely closed.
Seems yesterday Niemman has added some new accusations on his lawsuit...if they are true it won't be easier for Carlsen"s team to solve. the puzzle...
In my opinion online and OTB chess should be viewed and penalized separately, as cheating online is much different than cheating OTB, simply for the fact that it is much harder to do so OTB. Either way, I believe harsher penalties should be considered when dealing with cheating in chess, such as lifetime bans from tournaments, or multi year bans. As technological advances in chess computers have removed a layer of trust, always having that thought in the back of your mind that your opponent on chess.com or lichess is using stockfish, may hinder your own quality of play.
Actually it's not as hard as you might think to cheat OTB, at least not in smaller tournaments. Here in San Diego we had a 1500 player beating an IM in rapid, turned out he had a device in his shoe. Smaller tournaments with lower price budget's can't afford metal detectors etc. This is a big problem. Very hard punishments must be introduced, I think Polgar suggested 2 year ban first time, lifetime next and I agree, something like that.
I think 2 years to start is not enough, especially when we’re talking OTB tournaments where prize money and rating points are at stake. Let alone the devastation that you must feel as a player if a lower rated opponent such as in your example defeats a master level chess player. But also checking in shoes doesn’t require a metal detector, unless it’s such a tiny device that can’t be spotted by the human eye.
As much as I'd love to give Carlsen the benefit of the doubt, I think it speaks volumes that he isn't refusing to play against Maghsoodloo at Tata Steel. That shows that he's not taking some sort of principled stance here. I wonder if Maghsoodloo will pass his vibe check when they play.
I assume Carlsen was only judging by OTB games and only found the OTB games suspicious. Perhaps he wasn't even aware of Hans's history of online cheating...
Think there are two elephants in the room.This cheating scandal also involves Carlsen"s lack of professionalism. A professional player should not abandon a high level tournament without substantial proofs on the issue.Is Magnus going to be sanctioned for false accusations in due case?.May be a 100 million dollar priced elephant to deal with.
Agreed, Carlsen's handling of the situation was disgraceful. He was right to start the discussion but should have done it in a different way. Chess.com's handling was very strange too and with the financial involvement with Carlsen, that raises a lot of questions.
I think Magnus's intention was to create this drama and to actually ruin Hans's chess career because he almost certainly believed foul play was involved. However, I do think that the lawsuit is very futile for Hans because he is a known cheater/liar.
You mentioned Fabi's podcast. You might find it interesting to listen to the other podcast where he showed some OTB games of Niemann's - and what he says about the worth of Ken Regan's assessments in this case.