Chess grandmaster Hans Niemann sues champion Magnus Carlsen, others for $100 million over cheating claim

[dkappe]

Give it up. He doesn’t actually read or understand the material, just cites it as supporting his contention.

At least I try to discuss objectively. This is your 4th answer in a row to me without any substance, only personal attacks. Nobody will take you serious if you act like this.

You do realize that I wasn’t answering you but rather another poster? Case in point on how you don’t bother to read or understand.

[chrisw]

In your example you would be violating a law.

You mean in present days I would be violating a law? How about at the height of segregation times in the U.S. I am sure at some point of history this would be perfectly legal. I guess since it was legal at that time it must have been also perfectly ethically OK back then. (i.e.: for sure things can be wrong only after they become illegal )

Sure, at the height of segregation you would have gotten away with it. What is your point?

My point was that if Carlsen simply declared he doesn't like some other player and that he won't play him anymore, then that other player won't be awarded any damages if he goes to court. Don't turn this into "ethically bla bla".

If it were only that simple. In a world where Carlson and Niemann were just two A N Others, then maybe, but.

Just after merging (for 80 million US allegedly) the two major chess sites, Play Magnus and Chess.Com, creating a near monopoly, exclusion from which would be very damaging to Nielsen, Carlson intimates/hints/says/suggests the singled-out Niemann is a cheat, has cheated OTB, and arguably conspires with chess.Com to ban Nielsen. He is then banned. Chess.Com fan the flames and chess.Com employees/contractors are told to go out and trash Niemann.

If the court is persuaded that the adult Niemann is different to the child Niemann and that he doesn’t cheat OTB, nor since online, then Carlson and chess.Com look to be in trouble. On balance of probabilities (given the takeover/merger) it looks like a conspiracy.

[Alexander Schmidt]

I'm not sure why you say that I 'missed the point'. All I asked is, given what you cite, what you thought about Hans performance at the US Championship....it mirroring his OTB rating and with the extensive security precautions in place.

I don't think it is not worth discussing about the significance of a rating calculated out of 13 games, and we should also take into consideration, that there might be ways to cheat despite those security measurements.

You do realize that I wasn’t answering you but rather another poster? Case in point on how you don’t bother to read or understand.

Oh yes, I did. Still you talked about me, and you have to endure my reply. Maybe my English isn't good enough to precisely express myself, still I am sure you know exactly what I meant. To imply I "don’t bother to read or understand" is simply poor. If I were Niemann, I would sue you

[CornfedForever]

I'm not sure why you say that I 'missed the point'. All I asked is, given what you cite, what you thought about Hans performance at the US Championship....it mirroring his OTB rating and with the extensive security precautions in place.

I don't think it is not worth discussing about the significance of a rating calculated out of 13 games, and we should also take into consideration, that there might be ways to cheat despite those security measurements.

Of course you don't. It's actual real world data in a pretty solidly controlled environment.

Furthermore, the fact that you would find this "not worth discussing" and throw in the statistically improbably "there might be ways to chat despite those security measurements"...has finally convinced me (as it has at least one other here) that you have nothing to add to any discussion on the subject. My fault for giving you the benefit of the doubt.

[syzygy]

It is not good enough that Hans is negatively affected by something that Carlsen does. What Carlsen does that negatively affects Hans has to cross some line. (And I believe the decision not to play someone because you simply don't like him as a person does not cross any legal line. FIDE Ethics Commission might see it differently, but they don't award (huge) damages I believe.)

Ummm...indicating that he has cheated against you in OTB FIDE games, without offering evidence....and singling out Hans (of all the online cheats of the world) for refusal to play against...and therefore likely refusal to play in a tournament in which Hans might otherwise get invited... is kind of a big deal.

Again, you are taking this out of context. If you don't want to understand, then just don't.

[supersharp77]

Hans Niemann...."A Gift From The CHESS GODS"...."Must Have Fallen From The Skies"...."One Of A Kind"..."Keeps Giving"

"I Was Once Top Cyclist" Breaking News......

https://cyclingtips.com/2022/10/chess-o ... he-really/

[syzygy]

A completely different question is if Carlsen's refusal to play Niemann by itself means that tournament organisers should refuse to invite Niemann. My answer to that is "no". The mere fact that Carlsen does not want to play Niemann is not good enough. That would be like not inviting Israeli players just because an Iranian player (let's say a higher-ranked Iranian player) refuses to play Israeli players.

Older post but wanted to say I think this analysis is way too optimistic. Almost all of the elite tournaments are round robin events meaning Hans and Magnus would be required to play against each other and since Magnus wouldn't be willing to play the only way how to resolve it would be to agree upfront on the pre-arranged result - and no matter what this result would be (1/2 or loss for Magnus) this would be obviously unfair to other players as it could affect their standings, prizes etc.

No, it means that Magnus does not take part in tournaments where Niemann plays. (I don't think Carlsen would refuse to show up for individual games and lose them on time.)

Therefore I very much doubt something like this could ever fly on the elite level. The only thing you could imo argue is that the tournament organizers could choose between Carlsen and Niemann and Carlsen never demanded that they have to choose him. However in practice it seems very unlikely that Magnus intended to impose self-ban on events with Niemann and instead his intention was the exact opposite (or one could at least make strong argument that this is how it will be played out in practice most of the time).

If Magnus organises a tournament, he gets to invite the players. If he does not organise a tournament, he does not get to invite the players and he will have to accept whatever the tournament organiser decides.

We'll see how it goes. Most elite tournaments will anyway not invite Niemann as long as he's around 2700.

[Graham Banks]

... Most elite tournaments will anyway not invite Niemann as long as he's around 2700.

Thus one of the reasons for the lawsuit.

[lkaufman]

... Most elite tournaments will anyway not invite Niemann as long as he's around 2700.

Thus one of the reasons for the lawsuit.

No it's not, his point is that you currently need 2747 FIDE to be in top 10 or 2728 to be in top 20, so a 2700 FIDE player (without some special title like World's women's champ or World Junior or Rapid champ etc.) won't normally get invited to Elite tournaments. Niemann isn't yet at that level.

[Graham Banks]

... Most elite tournaments will anyway not invite Niemann as long as he's around 2700.

Thus one of the reasons for the lawsuit.

No it's not, his point is that you currently need 2747 FIDE to be in top 10 or 2728 to be in top 20, so a 2700 FIDE player (without some special title like World's women's champ or World Junior or Rapid champ etc.) won't normally get invited to Elite tournaments. Niemann isn't yet at that level.

Okay. Thanks for the clarification.