FIDE Judgement In The Carlsen / Niemann Case

[CornfedForever]

And if you think that Carlsen should have had a reasonable suspicion when he withdrew, then well, he did get fined for withdrawing. It should not need to be mentioned that the EDC Chamber did not argue "reasonable suspicion" to justify imposing that fine.

Correct, that is my issue with the wording as occurs in this thread. And regardless of how they packaged their verdict, he withdrew 'because' of the suspicion he was cheated in the game he lost. Its was his wounded ego talking because nothing had changed from the day before....otherwise he probably should have withdrawn before playing or told the SLCC, I am not playing him unless ('x/y/z) are met. The result of the game is what was responsible for his withdrawal.

Of course that the FIDE President 'put his thumb on the scale' to minimize the sanctions against Carlsen to court and keep him interested in OTB chess is an abomination, but it what the heads of sporting groups have been known to 'protect the brand'. In his spot, I might have been tempted to do the same.

[syzygy]

And if you think that Carlsen should have had a reasonable suspicion when he withdrew, then well, he did get fined for withdrawing. It should not need to be mentioned that the EDC Chamber did not argue "reasonable suspicion" to justify imposing that fine.

Correct, that is my issue with the wording as occurs in this thread. And regardless of how they packaged their verdict, he withdrew 'because' of the suspicion he was cheated in the game he lost. Its was his wounded ego talking because nothing had changed from the day before....otherwise he probably should have withdrawn before playing or told the SLCC, I am not playing him unless ('x/y/z) are met. The result of the game is what was responsible for his withdrawal.

Of course that the FIDE President 'put his thumb on the scale' to minimize the sanctions against Carlsen to court and keep him interested in OTB chess is an abomination, but it what the heads of sporting groups have been known to 'protect the brand'. In his spot, I might have been tempted to do the same.

He got fined for withdrawing, in case you did not notice.

He did not accuse anyone when he withdrew.

You are seeing ghosts because you want to believe in them. I know, this is 2023 where facts and logic no longer count.

[h1a8]

And if you think that Carlsen should have had a reasonable suspicion when he withdrew, then well, he did get fined for withdrawing. It should not need to be mentioned that the EDC Chamber did not argue "reasonable suspicion" to justify imposing that fine.

Correct, that is my issue with the wording as occurs in this thread. And regardless of how they packaged their verdict, he withdrew 'because' of the suspicion he was cheated in the game he lost. Its was his wounded ego talking because nothing had changed from the day before....otherwise he probably should have withdrawn before playing or told the SLCC, I am not playing him unless ('x/y/z) are met. The result of the game is what was responsible for his withdrawal.

Of course that the FIDE President 'put his thumb on the scale' to minimize the sanctions against Carlsen to court and keep him interested in OTB chess is an abomination, but it what the heads of sporting groups have been known to 'protect the brand'. In his spot, I might have been tempted to do the same.

He got fined for withdrawing, in case you did not notice.

He did not accuse anyone when he withdrew.

You are seeing ghosts because you want to believe in them. I know, this is 2023 where facts and logic no longer count.

He did accuse Hans of cheating when he withdrew. It was in the video he posted.

[syzygy]

And if you think that Carlsen should have had a reasonable suspicion when he withdrew, then well, he did get fined for withdrawing. It should not need to be mentioned that the EDC Chamber did not argue "reasonable suspicion" to justify imposing that fine.

Correct, that is my issue with the wording as occurs in this thread. And regardless of how they packaged their verdict, he withdrew 'because' of the suspicion he was cheated in the game he lost. Its was his wounded ego talking because nothing had changed from the day before....otherwise he probably should have withdrawn before playing or told the SLCC, I am not playing him unless ('x/y/z) are met. The result of the game is what was responsible for his withdrawal.

Of course that the FIDE President 'put his thumb on the scale' to minimize the sanctions against Carlsen to court and keep him interested in OTB chess is an abomination, but it what the heads of sporting groups have been known to 'protect the brand'. In his spot, I might have been tempted to do the same.

He got fined for withdrawing, in case you did not notice.

He did not accuse anyone when he withdrew.

You are seeing ghosts because you want to believe in them. I know, this is 2023 where facts and logic no longer count.

He did accuse Hans of cheating when he withdrew. It was in the video he posted.

Maybe in your mind, but that does not make Magnus guilty.

13.4 An examination of the chronology of events lends the question of what may be considered an accusation of cheating; is a mere withdrawal from the tournament tantamount to an accusation of cheating without any express words to that nature? When the Respondent withdrew from Round 3, his only public comment was an announcement of his withdrawal alongside a video of Jose Mourinho saying `I prefer really not to speak. If I speak, I am in big trouble. His actions provoked speculation of cheating on Niemann´s part. The EDC believes that a withdrawal in itself is not tantamount to an accusation of cheating, especially when nothing was expressly stated to support an accusation. It was Niemann on his own accord that made the public confession after Round 5 in an interview.

Niemann himself turned the withdrawal into an accusation.

Anyway, my point is that, contrary to that the EDC report is not mixing up the timeline, contrary to what Corned stated.

[CornfedForever]

And if you think that Carlsen should have had a reasonable suspicion when he withdrew, then well, he did get fined for withdrawing. It should not need to be mentioned that the EDC Chamber did not argue "reasonable suspicion" to justify imposing that fine.

Correct, that is my issue with the wording as occurs in this thread. And regardless of how they packaged their verdict, he withdrew 'because' of the suspicion he was cheated in the game he lost. Its was his wounded ego talking because nothing had changed from the day before....otherwise he probably should have withdrawn before playing or told the SLCC, I am not playing him unless ('x/y/z) are met. The result of the game is what was responsible for his withdrawal.

Of course that the FIDE President 'put his thumb on the scale' to minimize the sanctions against Carlsen to court and keep him interested in OTB chess is an abomination, but it what the heads of sporting groups have been known to 'protect the brand'. In his spot, I might have been tempted to do the same.

He got fined for withdrawing, in case you did not notice.

He did not accuse anyone when he withdrew.

You are seeing ghosts because you want to believe in them. I know, this is 2023 where facts and logic no longer count.

He did accuse Hans of cheating when he withdrew. It was in the video he posted.

Maybe in your mind, but that does not make Magnus guilty.

13.4 An examination of the chronology of events lends the question of what may be considered an accusation of cheating; is a mere withdrawal from the tournament tantamount to an accusation of cheating without any express words to that nature? When the Respondent withdrew from Round 3, his only public comment was an announcement of his withdrawal alongside a video of Jose Mourinho saying `I prefer really not to speak. If I speak, I am in big trouble. His actions provoked speculation of cheating on Niemann´s part. The EDC believes that a withdrawal in itself is not tantamount to an accusation of cheating, especially when nothing was expressly stated to support an accusation. It was Niemann on his own accord that made the public confession after Round 5 in an interview.

Niemann himself turned the withdrawal into an accusation.

Anyway, my point is that, contrary to that the EDC report is not mixing up the timeline, contrary to what Corned stated.

Did he use words to indicate he withdrew due to a belief Hans had cheated in that game? It depends on your definitions.

One country does not like something another does and starts bombing the crap out of them, sending in troops, taking land. Is that 'War'....did they 'declare war' on the offending country? Well, if they do not use those specific words or pass some resolution saying they are at war...that is going to leave wiggle room for the minds of some to justify anything because...well, it's not a war. It's...something else, maybe a 'police action' or a picnic gone awry...

But it is what it is...you can't put lipstick on a pig as they say. I suppose you can and call it something else.

Remember, Magnus then played Hans in an online tourney just weeks later. He made 1 move and resigned. And while he knew by then he had run afoul of a FIDE rule, he did not withdraw from the tournament...gifting Hans a free point when he did not do that for other players...that was cheating his fellow players by giving one opponent a free point. I don't recall...was that in the report?

FIDE/EDC picked their charges carefully...and the FIDE President made it clear he did not want their finding to bring any real harm to Magnus. Thus we got what we got.

I'm care nothing about Hans....except that if he is truly innocent of OTB cheating, I would love for him to succeed. Parham sure looks a few inches away from qualifying for the candidates and this despite his having been caught cheating on chess.com and admitting it. Has he cheated OTB? Not that I know of so it's good to see him in the position he is currently. I did find it curious that AFTER the chess.com info came out about Parham, Magnus continued to play against him. Of course, I don't think Parham has ever beaten Magnus...probably never worn a watch while playing him either...

What I don't like is to see corruption succeed and have double-standards for people.

[syzygy]

Did he use words to indicate he withdrew due to a belief Hans had cheated in that game? It depends on your definitions.

Good luck twisting, but my point stands. You mixed up the timeline, not the EDC.

That you then switch your position and accuse the EDC of being corrupt was entirely predictable.