Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 327
  1. #151
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    41,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    There seem to be far more online cheaters than OTB ones, so online cheating may not be that predictive. And I agree that the probability calculation is dubious - wouldn't the results be correlated?
    They may well be. What I was thinking with the prior for him being an OTB cheater is that most players do not cheat online, hardly anyone cheats OTB, but most likely anyone who does cheat OTB these days has also cheated online first. Say 1 in 100 players cheat online and 4 in 5 OTB cheats cheat online as well, then knowing someone is an online cheat means the prior probability they are also an OTB cheat is about 1 in 125, and at that point if there is a genuine 1 in 80,000 run of form in their OTB history then they're almost certainly cheating OTB. Of course, that's assuming that being busted for cheating online doesn't affect the probability of them cheating offline too (which it might).

    It is a lot like AGW in that a little knowledge of statistics, probability and science is a dangerous thing.

    Here is a video arguing that Mishra - Niemann with the striking ...Nh2 isn't suss:

    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  2. #152
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    577
    The apparent "1/76000" for a run of 6 consecutive tournaments out of 51 is extremely unremarkable. Generating sets of 51 normally distributed random numbers, I get a 6-tournament run with such a "probability" about 44% of the time. Someone on Twitter represents it graphically (my results agree with theirs).

  3. #153
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    14,639
    So what's your excuse? For running like the devil's chasing you?

    See you in another life, brotha.

  4. #154
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    14,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Would be interesting to know how many 100% games you would get in a large sample from other players of similar rating.
    yes I agree. Apparently Gukesh didn't have any in his incredible olympiad performance, for example.

    I was also a bit cautious about the seemingly Bayesian probability analysis because a run of 5-6 strong events in a row might be a 1 in 80,000 or whatever chance but the probability that a player would get such a run at some stage in their career is going to be higher. On the other hand, I would say that knowing a player has cheated online reduces the prior for them cheating OTB from the 1 in 10,000 in the video to considerably lower, so that could well cancel out.
    She has since realised the error in the "6 consecutive tournaments" part. It wasn't really the part I found most interesting but seems to have generated the most response. For me it was more about the 100% games.
    So what's your excuse? For running like the devil's chasing you?

    See you in another life, brotha.

  5. #155
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,523
    In response to the Yosha video some of the readers' comments seem to be assuming that the figure of 100% is the correlation to the first choice of Stockfish 15. I'm not sure exactly what it is as the explanation is somewhat rushed but it clearly isn't that; I gather it relates in some way to evaluations stored in the cloud from anyone having run a position through an engine. In any event Stockfish 15 wasn't available when some of the games were played, though it would still confirm that a good move is a good move.

    The rebuttal video identifies 33...b5 as a clanger so you couldn't get 100% correlation on any measure, unless you were test flying weak engines to decide which was being used. In fact chesscom has a utility which correlates moves with engine choices and this is what it says about the Mishra game:
    mishra.jpg

    So on the one hand it doesn't look so computery, but on the other it goes into the exhibits so as to claim that ...Nh2 must have been found with a computer.

    Carlsen's comments aren't much use. He essentially had a hunch that Niemann was cheating because he wasn't overawed or terrified as required by the rules, but FIDE can't ban players on hunches. Calling for more cheating controls won't meet opposition, but trying to keep out players with online priors has its problems. Probably most of Carlen's (or anybody else's) opponents have done something dishonest in their lives, just not necessarily chess-related.

  6. #156
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    14,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    In response to the Yosha video some of the readers' comments seem to be assuming that the figure of 100% is the correlation to the first choice of Stockfish 15. I'm not sure exactly what it is as the explanation is somewhat rushed but it clearly isn't that; I gather it relates in some way to evaluations stored in the cloud from anyone having run a position through an engine. In any event Stockfish 15 wasn't available when some of the games were played, though it would still confirm that a good move is a good move.
    From what I understand, it means the percentage of moves that are the top engine choice, after the opening/book moves, from a number of engines (not stockfish 15 only).

    The rebuttal video identifies 33...b5 as a clanger so you couldn't get 100% correlation on any measure, unless you were test flying weak engines to decide which was being used.
    That's right, it was not one of the games said to be 100%. It was stated to be high 70-something, IIRC.
    So what's your excuse? For running like the devil's chasing you?

    See you in another life, brotha.

  7. #157
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    ... Carlsen's comments aren't much use. He essentially had a hunch that Niemann was cheating because he wasn't overawed or terrified as required by the rules, but FIDE can't ban players on hunches. Calling for more cheating controls won't meet opposition, but trying to keep out players with online priors has its problems. Probably most of Carlen's (or anybody else's) opponents have done something dishonest in their lives, just not necessarily chess-related.
    Even Niemann supports stronger measures against cheating - it's completely uncontroversial! Unfortunately Carlsen didn't say what further measures he thinks are necessary.

    Has Carlsen made previous complaints about online cheats playing in OTB events? I can't recall any. It seems he didn't have a problem with this until Niemann beat him

  8. #158
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Even Niemann supports stronger measures against cheating - it's completely uncontroversial! Unfortunately Carlsen didn't say what further measures he thinks are necessary.

    Has Carlsen made previous complaints about online cheats playing in OTB events? I can't recall any. It seems he didn't have a problem with this until Niemann beat him
    That is simply not true. Carlsen had a problem with Niemann before the Sinquefield Cup started and seriously considered withdrawing before the tournament started. So it was not just the fact Niemann beat him that caused him to withdraw.

    Of course Carlsen's suspicions might be wrong, but he was not the only one to have them. Nepo asked for measures to stop cheating to be increased when he heard Niemann was replacing Rapport in the tournament, which did not happen.

  9. #159
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Colliver View Post
    That is simply not true. Carlsen had a problem with Niemann before the Sinquefield Cup started and seriously considered withdrawing before the tournament started. So it was not just the fact Niemann beat him that caused him to withdraw.
    I didn't actually say that Carlsen didn't have a problem with Niemann. I said: "It seems he didn't have a problem with this [online cheats playing in OTB events]". But did Carlsen say anything publicly about online cheating or Niemann before the Sinquefield Cup? I don't recall any public comments, although he says now that he had reservations.

  10. #160
    CC Grandmaster Basil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Subtropical Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    11,248
    Unlike his chess prowess, Carlsen’s statement - after an eternity - demonstrates, to the surprise of no one, he has nothing.

    Carlson has behaved brattishly and in a manner not befitting his status. Notwithstanding his boyish persona and legion fans he should consider himself lucky if he escapes from all of this unscathed insofar as a FIDE and other legal mechanisms are concerned.
    There is no cure for leftism. Its infestation of the host mostly diminishes with age except in the most rabid of specimens.

  11. #161
    Banned Hydra
    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Basil View Post
    Unlike his chess prowess, Carlsen’s statement - after an eternity - demonstrates, to the surprise of no one, he has nothing.

    Carlson has behaved brattishly and in a manner not befitting his status. Notwithstanding his boyish persona and legion fans he should consider himself lucky if he escapes from all of this unscathed insofar as a FIDE and other legal mechanisms are concerned.
    Yes, if Niemann is innocent why doesn't he sue Carlsen for defamation?

  12. #162
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Ricki Barak View Post
    Yes, if Niemann is innocent why doesn't he sue Carlsen for defamation?
    It would be expensive and high-risk. Carlsen has plenty of resources and success for Niemann would depend on proving that he is not cheating, which is pretty much impossible. People who think he is cheating would persist in believing it whatever the outcome, and if the case fails it would be interpreted as a court having in effect convicted him.

    That's not to say it won't happen, eventually, but it probably needs Carlsen to say something more outrageous first.

  13. #163
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    41,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    It would be expensive and high-risk. Carlsen has plenty of resources and success for Niemann would depend on proving that he is not cheating, which is pretty much impossible.
    Usually in defamation cases the burden is on the person making the claim - if the claim damages Niemann's reputation then truth is a defence but Carlsen has to demonstrate truth. However there would be several obstacles to a case - in which jurisdiction does an American sue a Norwegian for a claim made on a global social media platform, and would the Norwegian actually pay up if he lost? (American defamation law is considerably laxer than Australia's.) Also Niemann's reputation is that of a known recent cheat who is coached by someone banned from a platform for cheating so how much is it damaged if someone says he is still cheating? And there is also the Streisand Effect to consider, and the likelihood that if Niemann did take legal action a number of other players would boycott playing him as well.

    Niemann could lodge a FIDE Ethics complaint but FIDE might well decide that whether or not Carlsen's claims are true, they are neither reckless nor manifestly unfounded and are therefore allowed.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  14. #164
    Banned Hydra
    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout View Post
    It would be expensive and high-risk. Carlsen has plenty of resources and success for Niemann would depend on proving that he is not cheating, which is pretty much impossible. People who think he is cheating would persist in believing it whatever the outcome, and if the case fails it would be interpreted as a court having in effect convicted him.

    That's not to say it won't happen, eventually, but it probably needs Carlsen to say something more outrageous first.
    As Carlsen is making the claim of cheating, shouldn't the onus be on him to prove the positive claim rather than Niemann prove the negative?
    I cannot imagine how falsely being accused of cheating could result in anything other than instigating legal action.
    Last edited by Ricki Barak; 28-09-2022 at 12:23 PM.

  15. #165
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    41,129
    Another issue with a possible defamation claim is that it may be that Niemann has not been cheating OTB, but has cheated more extensively online than he admits. If true, that would be very likely to come out in any defamation case.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sinquefield Cup 2022
    By Metro in forum Overseas Tournament News and Results
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 17-09-2022, 05:30 PM
  2. Karyakin's withdrawal
    By Vlad in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 17-04-2016, 04:20 PM
  3. Cheating at German Championship (sf GM Feller found guilty of cheating at Olympiad)
    By Garrett in forum Overseas Tournament News and Results
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-06-2011, 04:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •