So after analyzing 300-400 games, his conclusion is that there is no cheating.
And yet some are willing to look at 1 game (vs Carlsen) and shout 'cheating!'. The 'unlikely' always seems to manifest itself in small sample sizes.
It is normal to see Carlsen winning, but if he lose to a lower rated player, the World will support his childish accusation behavior. I just hope Carlsen lose again versus GM Pragg or GM Han Tomorrow. I love to see the unexpected
It is beyond diotic to push the idea that Carlsen was just being "childish". Give the guy the benefit of the doubt that he had good reason ot pull out of the competition. It is not like Carlsen has never lost before ... he has and although I am sure he was not happy about losing he never left a tournament before, even with bad losses at the beginning of the tournament and even when he was very ill. He knows more about chess than you give him credit and he probably has a lot more information than any of us do. Most likely Chess.com gave his some additional data that made him really feel that "fair play" was compromised.
With regards to the Hiarcs engine playing without detection ... that is very interesting and more importantly very worrying. This is exactly the type of "White Hat" tries to circumvent anti cheating protocols that I would encourage. Obviously it shouldn't be done without controls ... but it makes sense to try something like that to test the protocols. Remember this is not someone trying to become the next MC (that would be obvious) ... it is someone who just want 100 or 200 ELO more.
Carlsen may have a good reason to believe the opponent cheated but
he had no good reason to leave the tournament.
Even if you are 100% sure that your opponent cheated and cannot prove it then it is not a good reason to leave the competition from my point of view.
It is not fair for the other players who were not cheating and wanted to play against Carlsen.
Carlsen had withdrawn from the biggest event that is World championship, so this is the small thing to do for him.
As for other players wanting to play Carlsen? What for, they would rather have a point than lose to Carlsen!
So after analyzing 300-400 games, his conclusion is that there is no cheating.
And yet some are willing to look at 1 game (vs Carlsen) and shout 'cheating!'. The 'unlikely' always seems to manifest itself in small sample sizes.
It is normal to see Carlsen winning, but if he lose to a lower rated player, the World will support his childish accusation behavior. I just hope Carlsen lose again versus GM Pragg or GM Han Tomorrow. I love to see the unexpected
It is beyond diotic to push the idea that Carlsen was just being "childish". Give the guy the benefit of the doubt that he had good reason ot pull out of the competition. It is not like Carlsen has never lost before ... he has and although I am sure he was not happy about losing he never left a tournament before, even with bad losses at the beginning of the tournament and even when he was very ill. He knows more about chess than you give him credit and he probably has a lot more information than any of us do. Most likely Chess.com gave his some additional data that made him really feel that "fair play" was compromised.
With regards to the Hiarcs engine playing without detection ... that is very interesting and more importantly very worrying. This is exactly the type of "White Hat" tries to circumvent anti cheating protocols that I would encourage. Obviously it shouldn't be done without controls ... but it makes sense to try something like that to test the protocols. Remember this is not someone trying to become the next MC (that would be obvious) ... it is someone who just want 100 or 200 ELO more.
Carlsen may have a good reason to believe the opponent cheated but
he had no good reason to leave the tournament.
Even if you are 100% sure that your opponent cheated and cannot prove it then it is not a good reason to leave the competition from my point of view.
It is not fair for the other players who were not cheating and wanted to play against Carlsen.
Carlsen had withdrawn from the biggest event that is World championship, so this is the small thing to do for him.
As for other players wanting to play Carlsen? What for, they would rather have a point than lose to Carlsen!
Wrong the other players once they saw that Carlsen lost to GM Hans, wanted to also beat him since Carlsen was not in form.
Note: Talking about Carlsen and GM Hans, I believe that GM Hans will have other chances to beat Carlsen ==>
So after analyzing 300-400 games, his conclusion is that there is no cheating.
And yet some are willing to look at 1 game (vs Carlsen) and shout 'cheating!'. The 'unlikely' always seems to manifest itself in small sample sizes.
It is normal to see Carlsen winning, but if he lose to a lower rated player, the World will support his childish accusation behavior. I just hope Carlsen lose again versus GM Pragg or GM Han Tomorrow. I love to see the unexpected
It is beyond diotic to push the idea that Carlsen was just being "childish". Give the guy the benefit of the doubt that he had good reason ot pull out of the competition. It is not like Carlsen has never lost before ... he has and although I am sure he was not happy about losing he never left a tournament before, even with bad losses at the beginning of the tournament and even when he was very ill. He knows more about chess than you give him credit and he probably has a lot more information than any of us do. Most likely Chess.com gave his some additional data that made him really feel that "fair play" was compromised.
With regards to the Hiarcs engine playing without detection ... that is very interesting and more importantly very worrying. This is exactly the type of "White Hat" tries to circumvent anti cheating protocols that I would encourage. Obviously it shouldn't be done without controls ... but it makes sense to try something like that to test the protocols. Remember this is not someone trying to become the next MC (that would be obvious) ... it is someone who just want 100 or 200 ELO more.
Carlsen may have a good reason to believe the opponent cheated but
he had no good reason to leave the tournament.
Even if you are 100% sure that your opponent cheated and cannot prove it then it is not a good reason to leave the competition from my point of view.
It is not fair for the other players who were not cheating and wanted to play against Carlsen.
Carlsen had withdrawn from the biggest event that is World championship, so this is the small thing to do for him.
As for other players wanting to play Carlsen? What for, they would rather have a point than lose to Carlsen!
Wrong the other players once they saw that Carlsen lost to GM Hans, wanted to also beat him since Carlsen was not in form.
Note: Talking about Carlsen and GM Hans, I believe that GM Hans will have other chances to beat Carlsen ==>
Well, he'll have his chance tomorrow, second round of the day. Today both did very well, along with the two Indian juniors and Ivanchuk (!!). As far as I could tell from watching, nothing looked suspicious today.
Well, he'll have his chance tomorrow, second round of the day. Today both did very well, along with the two Indian juniors and Ivanchuk (!!). As far as I could tell from watching, nothing looked suspicious today.
If one could "tell from watching", there would be no need for all the elaborate security measures.
I saw an interview with the Director of the Meltwater tour today. He mentioned some of their precautions and that they do more than other online events...and alluded to others he would not go into. He did confirm they had checked and there was no indications in the Tour of any indication of cheating.
Funny how he said players could not leave their desk when playing. I saw Magnus leave today...go out of sight for 10 full seconds against Giri and came back with some food or something in his mouth. Does this count as a 'red mark' against Magnus? What if it were Hans?
Well, he'll have his chance tomorrow, second round of the day. Today both did very well, along with the two Indian juniors and Ivanchuk (!!). As far as I could tell from watching, nothing looked suspicious today.
Funny how he said players could not leave their desk when playing. I saw Magnus leave today...go out of sight for 10 full seconds against Giri and came back with some food or something in his mouth. Does this count as a 'red mark' against Magnus? What if it were Hans?
That seems a bit extreme, no use of the restroom if you have to use it? They do have front and rear cameras in the room after all for the players.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
Well, he'll have his chance tomorrow, second round of the day. Today both did very well, along with the two Indian juniors and Ivanchuk (!!). As far as I could tell from watching, nothing looked suspicious today.
Funny how he said players could not leave their desk when playing. I saw Magnus leave today...go out of sight for 10 full seconds against Giri and came back with some food or something in his mouth. Does this count as a 'red mark' against Magnus? What if it were Hans?
That seems a bit extreme, no use of the restroom if you have to use it? They do have front and rear cameras in the room after all for the players.
Hey, I'm just repeating what the head guy said!
Besides...these are really pretty short - 15 min each games. I think someone could go prior to the game and otherwise, 'hold it'. Yes, multiple cameras...but if Magnus (or someone cheating) had a tablet already open/on a table (tables are pretty thin) , sitting by the fruit bowl....he could steal a look at something....prep, something a confederate is feeding to his email, txt, etc.
Well, he'll have his chance tomorrow, second round of the day. Today both did very well, along with the two Indian juniors and Ivanchuk (!!). As far as I could tell from watching, nothing looked suspicious today.
Funny how he said players could not leave their desk when playing. I saw Magnus leave today...go out of sight for 10 full seconds against Giri and came back with some food or something in his mouth. Does this count as a 'red mark' against Magnus? What if it were Hans?
That seems a bit extreme, no use of the restroom if you have to use it? They do have front and rear cameras in the room after all for the players.
Well, he'll have his chance tomorrow, second round of the day. Today both did very well, along with the two Indian juniors and Ivanchuk (!!). As far as I could tell from watching, nothing looked suspicious today.
Funny how he said players could not leave their desk when playing. I saw Magnus leave today...go out of sight for 10 full seconds against Giri and came back with some food or something in his mouth. Does this count as a 'red mark' against Magnus? What if it were Hans?
That seems a bit extreme, no use of the restroom if you have to use it? They do have front and rear cameras in the room after all for the players.
Give them all adult diapers to wear.
Thank God at 58, I am not an adult yet!
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
With regards to the WCC, Carlsen did not withdraw from the tournament, he simply stated that he would not defend his WCC title ... huge difference. I think he just got tired of all the stuff that has to happen and the severe opening preparation you need to do before a WCC championship. It is probably hard to motivate yourself over and over again and suffer the months stuck in daily preparation before such an event ... with all the hoopla that comes with it. Withdrawing from the last tournament was completely different and I think very few people know the full details of why he did that.
As for the Meltwater tournament ... by far the biggest standout was Ivanchuck! What a genius !!! Although he had a one move blunder in time trouble in a totally winning position against Pragg... he outplayed and crushed them all His incredible ability to recount move by move with full coherent analysis without having a board around is really amazing. Compare his post game analysis to what Hans had to offer. No ... "the chess speaks for itself" ... or "no analysis needed here" ... just blow by blow recap of how his brain was churning out the position. Really a treat to watch!
