Carlsen withdrawal after loss to Niemann

[Graham Banks]

Clear explanation of Regan's analysis.

[CornfedForever]

Clear explanation of Regan's analysis.

Thanks for this. It does make things more understandable.

[M ANSARI]

I don’t know whether Niemann cheated, but I’m not tempted to manufacture a case out of gossip, logical fallacies and innumeracy.

I haven’t picked a side. I just don’t like the way this social media circus with its whores (Hikaru) and cheerleaders (like yourself) has degenerated.
[/quote]

What you don't like is really not too important ... you can choose what you want to believe just as other can choose what they want to believe. But your personal insults and personal attacks are not the way to go. You obviously had no idea that Dlugy was kicked off during a tournament for cheating at Chess.com and MC name dropping Dlugy might mean something ... and when I pointed that out that I remember that tournmanent ... you immediately made your "gossip" accusation and posted a post about Dlugy accusing Ivanov of cheating ... obviously you thought that I had confused Ivanov with Dlugy (like you did). Had you waited a while and double checked the issue you would have realized that maybe some people have been around chess longer than you have and maybe there are some things you are still not aware of ... so do a little research before impulsively switching to personal attacks. I personally was 100% on Hans side and after MC loss I thought he was just acting out on a bad loss. But several things happened after that ... his game against Firouzja and his after the game interview. That was very hard to digest! Then most of all his admission of online cheating and that the fact that a lot of GM's thought he was a cheater (had no idea). Then checking his progress where his level of play can be godlike at times and very poor at others. Many little things that maybe on their own can be unusual ... but when compiled together they become hard to ignore.

[Alexander Schmidt]

How can the analysis of the expected performance find people who cheated their lifetime?

The analysis is saying, Niemann is not playing well, the opponents are playing bad. Statistically there is no differnece. It is unlikely that the opponents always play bad against a special player. A cheater could use a KI to set up positions where it is likely that the opponents make mistakes.

[M ANSARI]

I guess all of Hans games will be analyzed now ... including OTB games. I hope nobody will accuse me of "gossip" but this french chess player seems to have some interesting data using a Chessbase feature which can check many different engines at once and give you a percentage of the moves that match engine moves. It seems Hans has 100% perfect play in several games! I don't know how other players relate to this but would be interesting to find out.

You can watch this here

[AdminX]

I guess all of Hans games will be analyzed now ... including OTB games. I hope nobody will accuse me of "gossip" but this french chess player seems to have some interesting data using a Chessbase feature which can check many different engines at once and give you a percentage of the moves that match engine moves. It seems Hans has 100% perfect play in several games! I don't know how other players relate to this but would be interesting to find out.

You can watch this here

Wow, just wow. Yet nothing will ever be good enough for some when it comes to this topic. SMH

[dkappe]

I guess all of Hans games will be analyzed now ... including OTB games. I hope nobody will accuse me of "gossip" but this french chess player seems to have some interesting data using a Chessbase feature which can check many different engines at once and give you a percentage of the moves that match engine moves. It seems Hans has 100% perfect play in several games! I don't know how other players relate to this but would be interesting to find out.

You can watch this here

Wow, just wow. Yet nothing will ever be good enough for some when it comes to this topic. SMH

There are some great comments to that video, especially where it concerns selection bias and some errors in the data and calculations. I’ll let them speak for themselves.

[AndrewGrant]

I guess all of Hans games will be analyzed now ... including OTB games. I hope nobody will accuse me of "gossip" but this french chess player seems to have some interesting data using a Chessbase feature which can check many different engines at once and give you a percentage of the moves that match engine moves. It seems Hans has 100% perfect play in several games! I don't know how other players relate to this but would be interesting to find out.

You can watch this here

Wow, just wow. Yet nothing will ever be good enough for some when it comes to this topic. SMH

Why is it that not one of these titled players that makes a video of them looking at Hans game makes the effort to compare this to other players? I don't think this person cares at all, they are just farming the click-bait while the click-bait is good. And the 100% metric to me is pretty flimsy, if the claim is "If you hit 100% then you must be cheating". Because 1. Many games, 2. the metric of 100% is dictated by the engine, the depth, the hash, the other config, the version, was it cleared per position, ...; there are a billion factors.

Find a near perfect game from a player, and then try every Stockfish, Komodo, Ethereal, and Leela commit in the last year, see if one matches. If not, tinker with the depth. Then do the other settings. You will find a solution that suggests cheating. All it takes is some hacking of the sample size and a good selection of games with fairly forced positions.

[lkaufman]

I guess all of Hans games will be analyzed now ... including OTB games. I hope nobody will accuse me of "gossip" but this french chess player seems to have some interesting data using a Chessbase feature which can check many different engines at once and give you a percentage of the moves that match engine moves. It seems Hans has 100% perfect play in several games! I don't know how other players relate to this but would be interesting to find out.

You can watch this here

Wow, just wow. Yet nothing will ever be good enough for some when it comes to this topic. SMH

Why is it that not one of these titled players that makes a video of them looking at Hans game makes the effort to compare this to other players? I don't think this person cares at all, they are just farming the click-bait while the click-bait is good. And the 100% metric to me is pretty flimsy, if the claim is "If you hit 100% then you must be cheating". Because 1. Many games, 2. the metric of 100% is dictated by the engine, the depth, the hash, the other config, the version, was it cleared per position, ...; there are a billion factors.

Find a near perfect game from a player, and then try every Stockfish, Komodo, Ethereal, and Leela commit in the last year, see if one matches. If not, tinker with the depth. Then do the other settings. You will find a solution that suggests cheating. All it takes is some hacking of the sample size and a good selection of games with fairly forced positions.

Yes, what I think is needed now is for someone (whether the same person or another who knows the details) to run all the classical games of Magnus Carlsen for year 2019 (his best year probably) thru the same metrics. If none of them show more than the 98% that was supposedly the best (achieved by a cheater) prior to Niemann, while Niemann showed several at 100%, that would be pretty convincing. It would not only indicate cheating, it would indicate "stupid cheating"; a clever cheater would at least either make occasional inferior moves or use an engine like Lc0 that is sufficiently unlike Stockfish to avoid a high match percentage; the assumption would be that cheat-detectors would be unlikely to check with Lc0 for several reasons. It should be relatively easy for a neutral party to confirm or refute these charges by comparing Carlsen 2019 with Niemann during the period in which cheating is alleged.

[Uri Blass]

I guess all of Hans games will be analyzed now ... including OTB games. I hope nobody will accuse me of "gossip" but this french chess player seems to have some interesting data using a Chessbase feature which can check many different engines at once and give you a percentage of the moves that match engine moves. It seems Hans has 100% perfect play in several games! I don't know how other players relate to this but would be interesting to find out.

You can watch this here

Wow, just wow. Yet nothing will ever be good enough for some when it comes to this topic. SMH

Why is it that not one of these titled players that makes a video of them looking at Hans game makes the effort to compare this to other players? I don't think this person cares at all, they are just farming the click-bait while the click-bait is good. And the 100% metric to me is pretty flimsy, if the claim is "If you hit 100% then you must be cheating". Because 1. Many games, 2. the metric of 100% is dictated by the engine, the depth, the hash, the other config, the version, was it cleared per position, ...; there are a billion factors.

Find a near perfect game from a player, and then try every Stockfish, Komodo, Ethereal, and Leela commit in the last year, see if one matches. If not, tinker with the depth. Then do the other settings. You will find a solution that suggests cheating. All it takes is some hacking of the sample size and a good selection of games with fairly forced positions.

Yes, what I think is needed now is for someone (whether the same person or another who knows the details) to run all the classical games of Magnus Carlsen for year 2019 (his best year probably) thru the same metrics. If none of them show more than the 98% that was supposedly the best (achieved by a cheater) prior to Niemann, while Niemann showed several at 100%, that would be pretty convincing. It would not only indicate cheating, it would indicate "stupid cheating"; a clever cheater would at least either make occasional inferior moves or use an engine like Lc0 that is sufficiently unlike Stockfish to avoid a high match percentage; the assumption would be that cheat-detectors would be unlikely to check with Lc0 for several reasons. It should be relatively easy for a neutral party to confirm or refute these charges by comparing Carlsen 2019 with Niemann during the period in which cheating is alleged.

I wonder how did they get the 100%

I checked the first game when 100% is written and I do not see 100% same moves

[pgn][Event "7th Sunway Sitges 2020"]
[Site "Sitges ESP"]
[Date "2020.12.19"]
[Round "6.5"]
[White "Niemann, Hans M"]
[Black "Cornette, Matthieu"]
[Result "1-0"]
[BlackElo "2558"]
[ECO "D31"]
[Opening "QGD"]
[Variation "3.Nc3"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[TimeControl "300"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "71"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "human"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 h6 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Bd3 dxc4 7. Bxc4 a6 8.
a4 c5 9. O-O Qc7 10. Qe2 Bd6 11. dxc5 Bxc5 12. e4 Ng4 13. h3 Nde5 14. hxg4
Nxc4 15. e5 Bd7 16. Bf4 Na5 17. Ne4 Be7 18. Rfc1 Qb6 19. Be3 Qb4 20. Bd2
Qb6 21. Be3 Qb4 22. Nd6+ Bxd6 23. exd6 Qxg4 24. Rc7 Nc6 25. Rc1 Ne5 26. Bb6
Nxf3+ 27. Qxf3 Qxf3 28. gxf3 Rb8 29. Ba7 Rd8 30. Rxb7 O-O 31. b3 e5 32. Bb6
Rb8 33. Rcc7 Be6 34. d7 Ra8 35. Bc5 Rfb8 36. Be7 1-0
[/pgn]

18.Rfc1 is not the correct move based on stockfish and it seems 18.Rac1 is better

[fen]r3k2r/1pqbbpp1/p3p2p/n3P3/P3NBP1/5N2/1P2QPP1/R4RK1 w kq - 5 18 [/fen]

They show Rfc1 after 9:38 minutes in the evidence by Stockfish7/gambit man but of course if you take enough engines you may find this move by some weak engine and I do not understand why taking Stockfish7/gambit man specifically for that move when they do not take this engine for every move.

I do not know what is Stockfish7/gambit but Stockfish7 is from 2016 and I see no reason to pick Stockfish7 in a game from 19.12.2020 only for this move when part of the moves have no analysis by stockfish7.
https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2016/stockfish-7/