Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

[CornfedForever]

... it is strange that Magnus Carlsen mentions his name ... and also strange that Hans... ... but in the interview it sure seems,,,

From one little post alone...

You sir are what is referred to as a 'significance junkie'. It is littered throughout everything you write.
Harmless and even entertaining to a degree to watch as you would weave together 'meaning' from diverse things.

Look ... I absolutely see your point of view ... I really do. I probably would be saying the same thing in some instances... but I am more plugged into online chess than you are....

And mighty presumptuous too! (again...borrowed from Chessqueens stash).

As I said, I'm in the Joe Friday camp.

When it comes to OTB - Trust but verify and big tourneys need to have cheating avoidance measures in place as best they can.
Online...(as I've said) where playing for $$ is involved (at least), sites should exchange info on known cheaters - a clearinghouse. Frankly, people should have to show their own names, not mere 'user names'. It's very possible Hans would not have been invited to the current tourney if that were the case....especially if they are not 'that' confident in their cheat detection measures.

I mention showing their own names in part because my most recent online 3 min game I won against someone Chess.com rated of 2648 and I looked him up...says he is from the very same city I live in. Doubtful there are any 2600's here, I casually asked whom he was. No reply. (that's from my stash).

[op12no2]

Interesting.

https://www.jimruttshow.com/currents-06 ... ess-drama/

[CornfedForever]

Interesting.

https://www.jimruttshow.com/currents-06 ... ess-drama/

Yes. The upshot was that both Rowson and the host lean towards Hans, not Magnus. Rowson thinks Magnus has likely seen chess.com 'evidence' from the past and has "Lost the thread" a bit, referencing the points I have made of the possibility of a meat-down befitting a 'Shakespearean King'.

[Chessqueen]

Interesting.

https://www.jimruttshow.com/currents-06 ... ess-drama/

Yes. The upshot was that both Rowson and the host lean towards Hans, not Magnus. Rowson thinks Magnus has likely seen chess.com 'evidence' from the past and has "Lost the thread" a bit, referencing the points I have made of the possibility of a meat-down befitting a 'Shakespearean King'.

GM Niemann has proven himself to be a strong 2700 after he came out of living inside of a Shoebox, here is another brilliant win, and Why GM Niemman did NOT resigned after moving 1.d4 Nf6 Like Carsen did
[pgn][Event "Julius Baer Generation Cup KO 2022"]
[White "Le,Quang Liem"]
[Black "Niemann,Hans Moke"]
[Site "Online"]
[Round "1.1"]
[Annotator "RC"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Date "2022.09.22"]
[WhiteElo "2728"]
[BlackElo "2688"]
[PlyCount "106"]

1. d4 {[%emt 0:0:0]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:0]} 2. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} e6 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 3. c4 {[%emt 0:0:1]} b6 {[%emt 0:0:1]} 4. g3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Ba6 {[%emt 0:0:9]} 5. b3 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Be7 {[%emt 0:0:10]} 6. Bg2 {[%emt 0:0:5]} d5 {[%emt 0:0:1]} 7. cxd5 {[%emt 0:0:8]} exd5 {[%emt 0:0:0]} 8. O-O {[%emt 0:0:27]} O-O {[%emt 0:0:2]} 9. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Bb7 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 10. Bb2 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Nbd7 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 11. Ne5 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Re8 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 12. Rc1 {[%emt 0:0:3]} a6 {[%emt 0:0:19]} 13. e3 {[%emt 0:1:31]} Bd6 {[%emt 0:0:16]} 14. f4 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Ne4 {[%emt 0:0:29]} 15. Nxe4 {[%emt 0:0:58]} dxe4 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 16. Qh5 {[%emt 0:2:26]} g6 {[%emt 0:0:38]} 17. Qh3 {[%emt 0:0:14]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:28]} 18. g4 {[%emt 0:0:26]} Bd5 {[%emt 0:1:24]} 19. f5 {[%emt 0:2:19]} Nd7 {[%emt 0:0:47]} 20. Nxd7 {[%emt 0:4:0]} Qxd7 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 21. g5 {[%emt 0:0:1]} Qe7 {[%emt 0:0:37]} 22. Qg4 {[%emt 0:0:51]} a5 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 23. Rc2 {[%emt 0:0:28]} a4 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 24. Rcf2 {[%emt 0:0:2]} axb3 {[%emt 0:0:12]} 25. axb3 {[%emt 0:0:0]} Ra5 {[%emt 0:0:15]} 26. Qh4 {[%emt 0:0:17]} Rb5 {[%emt 0:1:26]} 27. b4 {[%emt 0:0:45]} Bxb4 {[%emt 0:0:21]} 28. Bh3 {[%emt 0:0:17]} Bd6 {[%emt 0:0:29]} 29. f6 {[%emt 0:0:31]} Qd8 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 30. Ra1 {[%emt 0:0:12]} Rb3 {[%emt 0:0:16]} 31. Bc1 {[%emt 0:0:29]} Bf8 {[%emt 0:0:33]} 32. Rc2 {[%emt 0:0:14]} c5 {[%emt 0:0:12]} 33. Ra7 {[%emt 0:0:33]} cxd4 {[%emt 0:0:28]} 34. Rd7 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Qa8 {[%emt 0:0:1]} 35. Rcc7 {[%emt 0:1:8]} Rc3 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 36. Rxc3 {[%emt 0:0:1]} dxc3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 37. Qe1 {[%emt 0:0:1]} Qc6 {[%emt 0:0:15]} 38. Ra7 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Be6 {[%emt 0:0:13]} 39. Bxe6 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Qxe6 {[%emt 0:0:1]} 40. Qxc3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Qg4+ {[%emt 0:0:19]} 41. Kf2 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Qxg5 {[%emt 0:0:20]} 42. Bb2 {[%emt 0:0:1]} Qf5+ {[%emt 0:0:20]} 43. Ke1 {[%emt 0:0:12]} Qe6 {[%emt 0:0:34]} 44. Ba3 {[%emt 0:0:37]} Rc8 {[%emt 0:0:20]} 45. Qd4 {[%emt 0:0:6]} Qg4 {[%emt 0:0:29]} 46. Qd5 {[%emt 0:0:47]} Bb4+ {[%emt 0:0:10]} 47. Kf1 {[%emt 0:0:14]} Qf3+ {[%emt 0:0:11]} 48. Kg1 {[%emt 0:0:1]} Qxe3+ {[%emt 0:0:4]} 49. Kf1 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Qf3+ {[%emt 0:0:9]} 50. Kg1 {[%emt 0:0:1]} Qxf6 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 51. Bb2 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Qf4 {[%emt 0:1:0]} 52. Ra8 {[%emt 0:0:15]} Bc5+ {[%emt 0:0:30]} 53. Qxc5 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Qg4+ {[%emt 0:0:2]} 0-1[/pgn]

[CornfedForever]

GM Niemann has proven himself to be a strong 2700 after he came out of living inside of a Shoebox, here is another brilliant win, and Why GM Niemman did NOT resigned after moving 1.d4 Nf6 Like Carsen did
Qf4 {[%emt 0:1:0]} 52. Ra8 {[%emt 0:0:15]} Bc5+ {[%emt 0:0:30]} 53. Qxc5 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Qg4+ {[%emt 0:0:2]} 0-1

Why...do you quote someone just to post something really...unrelated to what you quote?

[CornfedForever]

... it is strange that Magnus Carlsen mentions his name ... and also strange that Hans... ... but in the interview it sure seems,,,

From one little post alone...

You sir are what is referred to as a 'significance junkie'. It is littered throughout everything you write.
Harmless and even entertaining to a degree to watch as you would weave together 'meaning' from diverse things.

Look ... I absolutely see your point of view ... I really do. I probably would be saying the same thing in some instances... but I am more plugged into online chess than you are....

And mighty presumptuous too! (again...borrowed from Chessqueens stash).

As I said, I'm in the Joe Friday camp.

When it comes to OTB - Trust but verify and big tourneys need to have cheating avoidance measures in place as best they can.
Online...(as I've said) where playing for $$ is involved (at least), sites should exchange info on known cheaters - a clearinghouse. Frankly, people should have to show their own names, not mere 'user names'. It's very possible Hans would not have been invited to the current tourney if that were the case....especially if they are not 'that' confident in their cheat detection measures.

I mention showing their own names in part because my most recent online 3 min game I won against someone Chess.com rated of 2648 and I looked him up...says he is from the very same city I live in. Doubtful there are any 2600's here, I casually asked whom he was. No reply. (that's from my stash).

Well, isn't this ironic.

I log into chess.com to play some blitz after work. My home page lists my most recent games at the top and I see...the very person I mention above peterwoo(2634) has had his account CLOSED: Fair Play. Go get'em chess.com !

[M ANSARI]

I found this interesting and is quoted from Dlugy in an interview he gave Chessbase when he exposed Ivanov as a cheater who was hiding an electronic device in his shoe.

If I had this gadget I would be killing people left and right, and nobody would know. This is the real danger, because if a 2600 player has this thing, he knows exactly how to behave, he knows exactly when to think, and he doesn’t to use it more than four times during a game. That’s plenty to destroy anyone. At the critical junction you switch it on and find out which way do I go: oh, this little nuance I didn’t see, okay, fine, boom, goodbye! That’s it. At that point you may think for a long time, although you know the move.

[Chessqueen]

I found this interesting and is quoted from Dlugy in an interview he gave Chessbase when he exposed Ivanov as a cheater who was hiding an electronic device in his shoe.

If I had this gadget I would be killing people left and right, and nobody would know. This is the real danger, because if a 2600 player has this thing, he knows exactly how to behave, he knows exactly when to think, and he doesn’t to use it more than four times during a game. That’s plenty to destroy anyone. At the critical junction you switch it on and find out which way do I go: oh, this little nuance I didn’t see, okay, fine, boom, goodbye! That’s it. At that point you may think for a long time, although you know the move.

What gadget are you referring to? Show us the link and how can it help GM Hans if he indeed used it. ?

[Rebel]

If MC doesn't come forward FIDE should ban him. Like Vas Niemann is branded for life.

[Alexander Schmidt]

I found this interesting and is quoted from Dlugy in an interview he gave Chessbase when he exposed Ivanov as a cheater who was hiding an electronic device in his shoe.

If I had this gadget I would be killing people left and right, and nobody would know. This is the real danger, because if a 2600 player has this thing, he knows exactly how to behave, he knows exactly when to think, and he doesn’t to use it more than four times during a game. That’s plenty to destroy anyone. At the critical junction you switch it on and find out which way do I go: oh, this little nuance I didn’t see, okay, fine, boom, goodbye! That’s it. At that point you may think for a long time, although you know the move.

That's the point. Some seem to think that a cheater would just play engine moves, but as GM you just need little hints from an engine to beat the WCC.
You will not see anything in the game, but if a GM can't explain his own good moves and don't know the sidelines of his own OTB analysis, it is a clear hint, that he is cheating.

Technically it is possible. There are ways that can't be recognized. One day Niemann will be exposed and the whole discussion here is obsolete.