Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

[Pedro]

Brazilian Youtuber, owner of the biggest chess channel in Brazil on YouTube and who is also a programmer, seems to have managed to prove that Hans Nielman has cheated since 2018.

Video in english:


His YouTube channel (Xadrez Brasil, only portuguese): https://youtube.com/c/XadrezBrasil

[lkaufman]

Brazilian Youtuber, owner of the biggest chess channel in Brazil on YouTube and who is also a programmer, seems to have managed to prove that Hans Nielman has cheated since 2018.

Video in english:


His YouTube channel (Xadrez Brasil, only portuguese): https://youtube.com/c/XadrezBrasil

It does look very suspicious that he seemed to maintain a fairly steady accuracy rate from 2018 on, but I find it strange that his rating took so long to climb from 2300 to 2700 if he was playing at the same level all of that time. Hard to reconcile those two facts.

[dkappe]

Brazilian Youtuber, owner of the biggest chess channel in Brazil on YouTube and who is also a programmer, seems to have managed to prove that Hans Nielman has cheated since 2018.

Video in english:


His YouTube channel (Xadrez Brasil, only portuguese): https://youtube.com/c/XadrezBrasil

Some light instead of heat for a change. He published both code and data. Nice.

Now leave it to Nakamura to mangle the point.

[Uri Blass]

Brazilian Youtuber, owner of the biggest chess channel in Brazil on YouTube and who is also a programmer, seems to have managed to prove that Hans Nielman has cheated since 2018.

Video in english:


His YouTube channel (Xadrez Brasil, only portuguese): https://youtube.com/c/XadrezBrasil

It does look very suspicious that he seemed to maintain a fairly steady accuracy rate from 2018 on, but I find it strange that his rating took so long to climb from 2300 to 2700 if he was playing at the same level all of that time. Hard to reconcile those two facts.

I do not find the evidence convincing

I suspect that the same player can get better accuracy against weaker players so it is possible that hans got worse accuracy because of playing against better players and at the same time better accuracy because he became better and the sum of both factors is close to 0.

[Uri Blass]

I would like to have some analysis of average accuracy of players against players who are at least 100 elo higher than them and against players who are at least 100 elo weaker then them.

I may be wrong but I guess the accuracy against weaker players is significantly higher.

[dkappe]

I would like to have some analysis of average accuracy of players against players who are at least 100 elo higher than them and against players who are at least 100 elo weaker then them.

I may be wrong but I guess the accuracy against weaker players is significantly higher.

Well, this is real evidence, though whether it constitutes proof is another question. And you have legitimate questions. Fortunately he made his code and data public.

One can control for rating, time control, online vs OTB, etc., and begin to answer those questions.

I have too many other things cooking, otherwise I’d start answering them myself.

[AdminX]

Brazilian Youtuber, owner of the biggest chess channel in Brazil on YouTube and who is also a programmer, seems to have managed to prove that Hans Nielman has cheated since 2018.

Video in english:


His YouTube channel (Xadrez Brasil, only portuguese): https://youtube.com/c/XadrezBrasil

It does look very suspicious that he seemed to maintain a fairly steady accuracy rate from 2018 on, but I find it strange that his rating took so long to climb from 2300 to 2700 if he was playing at the same level all of that time. Hard to reconcile those two facts.

I do not find the evidence convincing

I suspect that the same player can get better accuracy against weaker players so it is possible that hans got worse accuracy because of playing against better players and at the same time better accuracy because he became better and the sum of both factors is close to 0.

You have his code, so why not test your theory with it.

[lkaufman]

Brazilian Youtuber, owner of the biggest chess channel in Brazil on YouTube and who is also a programmer, seems to have managed to prove that Hans Nielman has cheated since 2018.

Video in english:


His YouTube channel (Xadrez Brasil, only portuguese): https://youtube.com/c/XadrezBrasil

It does look very suspicious that he seemed to maintain a fairly steady accuracy rate from 2018 on, but I find it strange that his rating took so long to climb from 2300 to 2700 if he was playing at the same level all of that time. Hard to reconcile those two facts.

I do not find the evidence convincing

I suspect that the same player can get better accuracy against weaker players so it is possible that hans got worse accuracy because of playing against better players and at the same time better accuracy because he became better and the sum of both factors is close to 0.

If that is the case, why wouldn't it apply pretty much equally to Gukesh? Why the huge disparity between Gukesh's declining error rate and Niemann's steady error rate while both were making similar progress in their teen years? But then I don't have a better explanation for the similar rating climb with highly dissimilar error rate histories. It is a puzzle.

[Chessqueen]

Well, part of this thread has been about who we should believe.

I think you mix up something. It is not Carlsen vs. Niemann, Carlsen is not the only one who speaks out suspicions, also other GM's and different AI cheat detection systems are on the trigger. The question whether Hans is cheating or not has nothing to do with Carlsens credibility. so it is completely useless to question his credibility because he said "how" at the wrong time.

Also, there is no question that Carlsen really believes that Niemann is cheating. He may be mistaken about this, but it takes a flat earther to believe that Carlsen is lying.

Just because Carlsen is about 200 rating points higher does NOT mean GM Hans cheated, there are several other upsets where the difference in ratings are much higher and the higher rated player do NOT accuse the lower of cheating. Here are some latest Upsets. These two lower rated indian players were hibernating during COVI-19 and only studying chess the same as GM Hans, Gukesh, GM Pragg, and GM Arjun ==>
https://chessbase.in/news/1st-Bikaner-G ... d-1-report

[Event "1st Bikaner Open International Grandmast"]
[Site "Banquet Hall of Ashirwad Bhawa"]
[Date "2022.10.01"]
[Round "1.14"]
[White "LAXMAN, R.R.."]
[Black "SWAYHAM, P DAS."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A06"]
[WhiteElo "2378"]
[BlackElo "1902"]
[Annotator "Shahid"]
[PlyCount "106"]
[EventDate "2022.10.01"]
[EventRounds "10"]
[EventCountry "IND"]

1. d4 {1} d5 {9} 2. Nf3 {5} Nf6 {8} 3. c4 {4} c6 {6} 4. e3 {5} e6 {25} 5. b3 {6
} Nbd7 {11} 6. Bd3 {6} Bd6 {54} 7. Bb2 {10} b6 {91} 8. O-O {9} Bb7 {29} 9. Nc3
{49} O-O {17} 10. Qe2 {171} Re8 {83} 11. Rfd1 {37} Rc8 {148} 12. Rac1 {34} Qe7
{63} 13. cxd5 {66} Nxd5 {208} 14. Ne4 {571} Bb8 {189} 15. Ne5 {198} Nf8 {321}
16. Qh5 {315} f6 {155} 17. Nc4 {66} Nb4 {1261} 18. Bb1 {118} Red8 {382} 19. a3
{292} Na6 {171} 20. b4 {24} Rd5 {415} 21. Qe2 {137} Rcd8 {83} 22. Ncd2 {32} Nc7
{104} 23. Nf3 {231} R5d7 {295} 24. Re1 {197} Nd5 {225} 25. Qc2 {80} Qf7 {118}
26. Ng3 {28} Rc8 {92} 27. Ba2 {90} Kh8 {178} 28. Qe2 {399} Qe7 {50} 29. Ne4 {21
} Qf7 {54} 30. Bb1 {151} Qe7 {22} 31. g3 {22} Kg8 {77} 32. Ned2 {8} Qd8 {193}
33. Ba2 {125} Kh8 {15} 34. e4 {7} Ne7 {75} 35. Nf1 {23} Neg6 {69} 36. h4 {9}
Qe8 {109} 37. Ne3 {80} c5 {123} 38. d5 exd5 {136} 39. Nxd5 {41} (39. exd5)
39... Ne5 {75} 40. bxc5 {125} Rxc5 {66} 41. Rxc5 {2} bxc5 {4} 42. Bxe5 {45}
Bxe5 {10} 43. Qc4 {38} Ne6 {371} 44. Nxe5 {92} fxe5 {4} 45. Rb1 {50} h6 {87}
46. a4 {58} Bc6 {163} 47. a5 {408} Rd8 {8} 48. Qa6 {515} Qd7 {46} 49. Ne3 $2 {
116} (49. Ne7 Bxe4 (49... Qxe7 50. Qxc6 Nd4 51. Qb7) 50. Re1 Nd4 51. Rxe4 Qxe7
52. Kg2) 49... Nd4 $19 {50} 50. Bd5 {5} Qh3 {43} 51. Ng2 {39} Bxd5 {49} 52. Qd3
{29} Bc4 {12} 53. Qe3 {5} Ne2+ {4} 0-1


[Event "1st Bikaner Open International Grandmast"]
[Site "Banquet Hall of Ashirwad Bhawa"]
[Date "2022.10.01"]
[Round "1.15"]
[White "SINGH, PRITAM."]
[Black "NGUYEN, DUC HOA."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D80"]
[WhiteElo "1899"]
[BlackElo "2360"]
[Annotator "Shahid"]
[PlyCount "43"]
[EventDate "2022.10.01"]
[EventRounds "10"]
[EventCountry "IND"]

1. d4 {1} Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Ne4 5. Nxe4 dxe4 6. e3 f6 7. Bh4 Nc6 8.
a3 h5 9. h3 e5 10. dxe5 {295} Qxd1+ {32} 11. Rxd1 {48} g5 {9} 12. Bg3 {34} h4 {
15} 13. Bh2 {26} Nxe5 {31} 14. Bxe5 {146} fxe5 {6} 15. Ne2 {178} Rh6 {228} 16.
Nc3 {56} Bf5 {27} 17. Be2 {140} Rb6 $4 {278} (17... Rd8 18. O-O (18. Nd5 c6)
18... Rxd1 19. Rxd1 Rd6) 18. Nd5 $18 {768} Bd6 {1183} (18... Rc6 19. Bh5+ Kd8
20. Nb6+ $18) 19. c5 {247} Bxc5 {18} 20. Nxc7+ {10} Kf8 {30} 21. Nxa8 {75} Rxb2
{5} 22. Bg4 {91} 1-0

[CornfedForever]

I would like to have some analysis of average accuracy of players against players who are at least 100 elo higher than them and against players who are at least 100 elo weaker then them.

I may be wrong but I guess the accuracy against weaker players is significantly higher.

On this later point, I at last think we find common ground although my 'evidence' is anecdotal...and 'significantly' is an arbitrary measure.

I only have to look at my own games and the various 'accuracy' measures assigned to the games via programs within chess.com or chessbase or other sites. I do wish these would allow me download the scores to put into a spreadsheet so as to check the idea against various rating ranges of opponents over enough games.

I strongly believe chess games are largely 'lost' not 'won' with some great play. Higher rated players, make fewer mistakes. Lower rated players make more.

If I can spot those mistakes (large or small) I am more likely to find 'good' moves and the game is easier to play. When I have (or notice) less to target...I will find less and may flounder as I fish around for play. This...mostly 3/0 but would think it true in my OTB games as well.

I would think it only stands to reason that ones play against people of lesser strength will signal high and vice-versa against those higher rated...and the same for everyone up and down the ratings scale...outliers like players who are 'under-rated' at the time aside. Even then, if the sample size is large enough, that would not matter so much in the end.