Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Uri Blass
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by Uri Blass »

M ANSARI wrote: Fri Sep 09, 2022 10:11 pm
Graham Banks wrote: Fri Sep 09, 2022 12:34 pm You can't accuse him of cheating in this tournament unless you have concrete proof.

It's a lot different than cheating online.

Is it ??? Really is it ??? For me it is morally the same! You take steroids to win your high school track meet ... does that mean that if you go to the olympics it will be completely different ???? I don't understand why people are being so soft on someone who cheats and ruins the game of chess. I only play 1 0 bullet online because of the rampant cheaters like Hans. Remember he was cheating from 12 to 16 years old (according to him). He got banned several times and my guess is that before they ban the guy he got several warnings. For each time he got warned he probably was cheating 1000x where it went unnoticed. He would get back and change his cheating protocol and try again ... so a serial cheater. Nepo and Tang have directly accused him of cheating against them online (he didn't get caught on those games) and Tang would never speak to him again. Chess.com has come out and said today that he has cheated way more than he is letting on. Someone like that should be nowhere near a competitive chess event! That would be like putting a peophile to take care of a kindegarten playground and saying that he is now reformed. Probably not a good idea!
Cheating is morally wrong but online and OTB is not the same.

First thing is that people know that the punishement is different and changing the rules for what happened in the past is morally wrong.
If you decide to have the same punishement for cheating online and cheating OTB then it can be only for the future and not for the past.

Also it is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not in every move.
It is not the same OTB.
User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 41484
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by Graham Banks »

Image
gbanksnz at gmail.com
CornfedForever
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 4:08 am
Full name: Brian D. Smith

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by CornfedForever »

Uri Blass wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 10:57 pm
Cheating is morally wrong but online and OTB is not the same.

First thing is that people know that the punishement is different and changing the rules for what happened in the past is morally wrong.
If you decide to have the same punishement for cheating online and cheating OTB then it can be only for the future and not for the past.

Also it is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not in every move.
It is not the same OTB.
I have to disagree with some of this. One I will overlook because of the wording.
However,

- "It is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not every move"

That is not the way it works from everything I have read. Besides, that would make it real easy to catch cheats....no need for fancy algorithms.
CornfedForever
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 4:08 am
Full name: Brian D. Smith

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by CornfedForever »

Graham Banks wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 11:32 pm Image
"No indication that any player has been playing unfairly..."

Which tells me either
1. Magnus has something but did not bother to give it to the the tournament officials. How (un!)realistic is this? That is the first place I would go.
2. Magnus presented something to the officials and they are essentially saying, 'sorry, we can't accuse someone of cheating based on 'that''.
3. King Creon...err (sorry, can't imagine why I keep doing this...) King Magnus is indeed 'flawed' and...well, I shall not repeat it all again, however reasonable my presumptions for his behavior may be.
Uri Blass
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by Uri Blass »

CornfedForever wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 11:33 pm
Uri Blass wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 10:57 pm
Cheating is morally wrong but online and OTB is not the same.

First thing is that people know that the punishement is different and changing the rules for what happened in the past is morally wrong.
If you decide to have the same punishement for cheating online and cheating OTB then it can be only for the future and not for the past.

Also it is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not in every move.
It is not the same OTB.
I have to disagree with some of this. One I will overlook because of the wording.
However,

- "It is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not every move"

That is not the way it works from everything I have read. Besides, that would make it real easy to catch cheats....no need for fancy algorithms.
If you cheat online in every move it is easy to have a convincing evidence against you.
If you cheat online only in some moves then I see no way to prove that you cheat online assuming you cheat in a smart way(of course the gain in elo points is limited but I guess that you can earn at least 100 elo points).

You still may make blunders in moves that you do not use an engine and even in the moves that you use an engine
you can still have a plan to play only computer moves that you consider as candidate moves so they are not strange from human point of view.
CornfedForever
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 4:08 am
Full name: Brian D. Smith

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by CornfedForever »

Uri Blass wrote: Sun Sep 11, 2022 12:14 am
CornfedForever wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 11:33 pm
Uri Blass wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 10:57 pm
Cheating is morally wrong but online and OTB is not the same.

First thing is that people know that the punishement is different and changing the rules for what happened in the past is morally wrong.
If you decide to have the same punishement for cheating online and cheating OTB then it can be only for the future and not for the past.

Also it is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not in every move.
It is not the same OTB.
I have to disagree with some of this. One I will overlook because of the wording.
However,

- "It is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not every move"

That is not the way it works from everything I have read. Besides, that would make it real easy to catch cheats....no need for fancy algorithms.
If you cheat online in every move it is easy to have a convincing evidence against you.
If you cheat online only in some moves then I see no way to prove that you cheat online assuming you cheat in a smart way(of course the gain in elo points is limited but I guess that you can earn at least 100 elo points).

You still may make blunders in moves that you do not use an engine and even in the moves that you use an engine
you can still have a plan to play only computer moves that you consider as candidate moves so they are not strange from human point of view.
"with no risk"...in a single game, perhaps, yes, I would agree with you.
But over a reasonable set of games where you do this (cherry pick your places to cheat) somewhat regularly so as to have your results benefit, my understanding is your risk of getting caught go WAY up if you ever get flagged to be checked.

Perhaps it is a bit like my answering "are you a smoker"? I've never considered myself a smoker, but for several years I would buy a pack...have 3 or 4 over maybe 6 months, tossing the rest eventually....then perhaps do that again after a couple of years. Did I smoke? Yes. Was I 'a smoker'...I certainly never saw it that way.
Chessqueen
Posts: 5591
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:16 am
Location: Moving
Full name: Jorge Picado

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by Chessqueen »

CornfedForever wrote: Sun Sep 11, 2022 1:22 am
Uri Blass wrote: Sun Sep 11, 2022 12:14 am
CornfedForever wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 11:33 pm
Uri Blass wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 10:57 pm
Cheating is morally wrong but online and OTB is not the same.

First thing is that people know that the punishement is different and changing the rules for what happened in the past is morally wrong.
If you decide to have the same punishement for cheating online and cheating OTB then it can be only for the future and not for the past.

Also it is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not in every move.
It is not the same OTB.
I have to disagree with some of this. One I will overlook because of the wording.
However,

- "It is easy to cheat online with no risk if you simply cheat in some critical moves and not every move"

That is not the way it works from everything I have read. Besides, that would make it real easy to catch cheats....no need for fancy algorithms.
If you cheat online in every move it is easy to have a convincing evidence against you.
If you cheat online only in some moves then I see no way to prove that you cheat online assuming you cheat in a smart way(of course the gain in elo points is limited but I guess that you can earn at least 100 elo points).

You still may make blunders in moves that you do not use an engine and even in the moves that you use an engine
you can still have a plan to play only computer moves that you consider as candidate moves so they are not strange from human point of view.
"with no risk"...in a single game, perhaps, yes, I would agree with you.
But over a reasonable set of games where you do this (cherry pick your places to cheat) somewhat regularly so as to have your results benefit, my understanding is your risk of getting caught go WAY up if you ever get flagged to be checked.

Perhaps it is a bit like my answering "are you a smoker"? I've never considered myself a smoker, but for several years I would buy a pack...have 3 or 4 over maybe 6 months, tossing the rest eventually....then perhaps do that again after a couple of years. Did I smoke? Yes. Was I 'a smoker'...I certainly never saw it that way.
GM Hans playing with White Versus GM Caruana playing with Black. In this position can White save the game, please do NOT check with any engine? The problem is that the White King is too far from the Black h4 pawn, which will promote and it is cut off by the Rook :roll:
[fen]6k1/8/7P/2r2B2/4P2p/1K6/8/8 w - - 0 1 [/fen]
Who is 17 years old GM Gukesh 2nd at the Candidate in Toronto?
https://indianexpress.com/article/sport ... t-9281394/
CornfedForever
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 4:08 am
Full name: Brian D. Smith

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by CornfedForever »

You take the bishop and promote. Is there a point?
Chessqueen
Posts: 5591
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:16 am
Location: Moving
Full name: Jorge Picado

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by Chessqueen »

CornfedForever wrote: Sun Sep 11, 2022 5:00 am You take the bishop and promote. Is there a point?
It is White Move, but you are correct in a few move simply take the Bishop and promote :roll:
Who is 17 years old GM Gukesh 2nd at the Candidate in Toronto?
https://indianexpress.com/article/sport ... t-9281394/
DrCliche
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:57 pm
Full name: Nickolas Reynolds

Re: Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

Post by DrCliche »

Here's some more fuel for the fire, but the tl;dr is that Niemann is overwhelmingly likely to be a chronic and habitual OTB cheater. Moreover, he was likely fiddling with a device behind his right ear in one of his Sinquefield interviews.

Without further ado:

----

https://twitter.com/atl_kings/status/1568656197812891653

Image

Note that the above table references Niemann's USCF rating, not his FIDE rating. You can verify the data from Niemann's tournament history on the USCF website: http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?15041466.2. Take care to look in the correct month, as some venues have multiple tournaments listed, and not all of them are classical.

The data is a contiguous block of classical tournaments in which Niemann played >0 games against opposition rated >2000 USCF on average.
  • Note, for example, that Magnus League, May 2019, isn't included because Niemann played no games, despite being listed in the event.
  • Note that in the USCF, "quick" (rapid) games also adjust one's "regular" (classical) rating with a smaller K-factor. Just because a tournament changed Niemann's classical rating doesn't mean it was a classical tournament.
For some of the listed tournaments I was unable to definitively confirm whether or not games were broadcast live in 2019/2020, but in zero instances did I find a tournament website that contradicted the claims of the above table. For the rest of my analysis I assume that the broadcast status claimed in the tweet is correct. I was unable to find any mentions of broadcast delay, and for the rest of my analysis I assume there was none.

More details, with direct links to the relevant cross tables:
If you run a regression on the above dataset, you will find that whether or not a tournament was broadcast live explains 67% (!!!!!) of the variation in Niemann's performance over that time period. (The rest of the variation is likely random, or at least isn't explained by age, number of rounds, or strength of opponents.)

Here are the regression coefficients, their p-values, and confidence intervals:

Image

As you can see, the coefficients for time (measured in months), number of rounds, and average opponent all have very high p-values, and are statistically indistinguishable from 0.

The way to interpret the coefficients is as follows:
  • Time — for each month that has passed since March 2019, Niemann is expected to gain 0.21 more Elo at a given tournament, though 0 is in the 95% confidence interval. (i.e. Niemann doesn't appear to be improving over time.)
  • LiveCast — if there's a live broadcast at a given tournament, Niemann is expected to gain 23.11 more Elo at that tournament, with a p-value of 0.0009, and a 95% CI of [11, 35]. (Holy shit!)
  • NumRounds — for each game played at a given tournament, Niemann is expected to lose 0.78 more Elo at that tournament, though 0 is in the 95% confidence interval. (i.e. Niemann doesn't appear to be affected by fatigue.)
  • AvgOpp — if you increase the strength of his average opponent at a given tournament by 100 Elo, Niemann is expected to gain 2 more Elo at that tournament, though 0 is in the 95% confidence interval. (i.e. Niemann doesn't appear to be "playing up" or "playing down" to his competition, nor to be affected by mathematical caps on his performance rating against low rated opponents.)
This is incredibly damning, and in my mind confirms beyond a shadow of a doubt that Niemann was cheating OVER THE BOARD at every available opportunity in 2019 and 2020. There's no reason to believe that he didn't and doesn't simply continue to cheat over the board at every available opportunity, period.

Obviously I haven't done an exhaustive search, but I was unable to find any other player that exhibited a similar pattern in their performances. Even if I had, I would take it to mean that player was also a cheater, not that Niemann was not.

(It goes without saying that all ratings agencies should probably be doing much more sophisticated analysis than this for all players and all tournaments at all times. The fact that they don't can only be interpreted as gross and willful negligence.)

----

At Sinquefield Cup, Niemann has gone from 2.5/3.0 before the 15 minute delay, to 1.5/5.0 after the 15 minute delay. Obviously, this is a very small sample. But, if you will permit some editorializing, despite Niemann's claims that "it's impossible to play under these conditions," he gives every indication of quite enjoying the attention.

----

During a quiet moment in Niemann's post round 3 interview, Niemann fiddles with something behind his ear, and his mic picks up a distinct mechanical clicking noise: https://looptube.io/?videoId=DCeJrItfQqw&start=633.0000000000009&end=640.4690265486713&rate=1.

The camera isn't on Ramirez the entire time, but he appears motionless throughout, having the same posture and hand position at all times. As such, it's unlikely the noise came from Ramirez, and it's obviously quite suggestive that it seemed to coincide perfectly with Niemann fiddling with the back of his ear. I tediously sat through all of the interviews given through the end of round 8, and detected no remotely similar sound in any of them.