Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 166 to 174 of 174
  1. #166
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Ricki Barak View Post
    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?
    Defamation law is different everywhere so it's hard to say (even if I knew anything about it). Niemann has to be able to counter the claim of truth and couldn't achieve that through silence like a defendant in a criminal trial - it wouldn't be a criminal case and he wouldn't be defending.

    Carlsen could use various defences, and I imagine that he has run his latest release past a lawyer who may, for instance, have advised that expressing an opinion that someone cheated is not in law the same as making a specific claim of that.

    Proving that it's true Niemann cheated would be a good defence, but to what standard? Would a non-specialist audience think that prior cheating in online chess, plus a rapid rise in ranking, plus expert opinion of top GMs constitute sufficient proof - even some chess players think that.

    Overall it's a risk, at best it makes some money but doesn't really clear your name, and you can always do it next week.

  2. #167
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,047
    People usually sue for defamation because they have been damaged reputationally or monetarily. Niemann doesn't seem to have suffered any significant monetary loss - at least not yet - from what Carlsen said. And, as an admitted cheater (even if only online), he runs a risk of a jury deciding his reputation hasn't been damaged, or that it has been but making a nominal award of $1 (say) - as happened to William Shockley.

  3. #168
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,430
    I was going to refrain from posting until after what I thought was adequate time for Fide to get their house in order on this matter, or for the posts to die down, so that some kind of review could take place.

    But since now people are going off what I would call the deep end in talking about defamation action and other such talk, I think a review of what should have occurred is in order.

    After Magnus withdrew from the tournament and spoke with the organisers regarding his concerns, rather than seemingly trying to placate his concerns and keep good relations with him for next year, the Chief Arbiter should have handled matters very differently and these are laid out by the Fide Fair Play Commission and I believe also the Fide Ethics Commission.

    As soon as Magnus brought his concerns to the attention of the organisers, the Chief Arbiter should have handed Magnus Carlsen the Tournament Complaint Form and asked him to fill it in. That would then have made the complaints official to the Fair Play Commission and a lot of this would have been avoided.

    If Magnus responded by declining to fill in the form, then the Chief Arbiter should have informed him that if he withdrew from the event, he would be withdrawing from a Fide rated event without just cause and would be reported as such. It would then be up to Magnus to decide what to do.

    If he still decided to withdraw without filling out the Tournament Report Form, then all these matters would have been formalised, rather than the mess we have now.

    And what also should have happened is that the Fide Ethics Commissions Chair and Fide Fair Play Commission Chair should have contacted the Organisers and the Chief Arbiter and reminded them of their responsibilities in this regard.

    It is exactly why Fide has these procedures in place to try and avoid all this mess.

    And as for Fide's attempt now at grandstanding about how robust their procedures are: What a load of hogwash. Each time they get called on, they go missing.

  4. #169
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,430
    As a side note- It is not Fide's responsibility to take action, or to monitor online activities, unless a tournament was to be run and controlled by them under their rules. To suggest that Fide should take action against any player for their action in online events is really stepping outside of Fide's 'area of control'.

    And as has been noted on here: A lot of the server 'bans' are done by bots and computer analysis, not by a thorough human analysis with a complete appeal process. So to suggest that any player should be suspended from otb play because of claims from online play is really stepping into an area that is fraught with danger and best avoided.

  5. #170
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by Garvinator View Post
    As soon as Magnus brought his concerns to the attention of the organisers, the Chief Arbiter should have handed Magnus Carlsen the Tournament Complaint Form and asked him to fill it in. That would then have made the complaints official to the Fair Play Commission and a lot of this would have been avoided.
    As CA I would first conduct my own investigation, ideally before any evidence could be removed.

    Yes, giving the complainant the In-Tournament Complaint Form to fill in would have been the best practice. Do we know for a fact that this did not happen?
    FA Andrew Hardegen
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth) -- www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au
    Senior Vice-President, CAWA -- www.cawa.org.au

    Chief Organiser, 2023 Australian Open (2nd-10th January) -- https://sites.google.com/view/2023ausopen/home

  6. #171
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Hardegen View Post
    Yes, giving the complainant the In-Tournament Complaint Form to fill in would have been the best practice. Do we know for a fact that this did not happen?
    No, we do not know for a fact that this did not happen.

    But since a lot of people have been using deductive reasoning along a lot of lines to try and work out whether there has been cheating occurring at least, or a pattern, for at least one player, I think it is only reasonable to try and work out what steps did occur and what steps 'should' have occurred.

    I am of the opinion that the organisers and the CA decided to prioritise keep good relations with Magnus Carlsen over their responsibilities to follow the Fide Handbook practices. And as for the CA, it is clearly written that the CA must be objective at all times. The procedures in these cases are clearly laid out and are there to protect all players in the event and are designed to try and prevent just these type of 'lynching' investigations on masse.

    Unfortunately, Fide has form in this area of not being pro-active when these type of cases are before them and their Commissions prefer to do nothing, or wait until they are forced to take action.

  7. #172
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    14,564
    I don't know much about defamation law (but I know what I like!)

    More on Dlugy cheating, partial admission, promises not to cheat, cheating again, and timeline with Hans etc:
    https://www.vice.com/en/article/z34q...om-emails-show
    So what's your excuse? For running like the devil's chasing you?

    See you in another life, brotha.

  8. #173
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,505
    As a bit of an aside, the regulations for the tour

    https://chess24.com/tour/regulations/

    prescribe that as the next tournament is classified as "Regular" the top eight from Julius Baer qualify for it so we will see (or not) Carlsen v Niemann again.

  9. #174
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Garvinator View Post
    No, we do not know for a fact that this did not happen. But since a lot of people have been using deductive reasoning along a lot of lines to try and work out whether there has been cheating occurring at least, or a pattern, for at least one player, I think it is only reasonable to try and work out what steps did occur and what steps 'should' have occurred.

    I am of the opinion that the organisers and the CA decided to prioritise keep good relations with Magnus Carlsen over their responsibilities to follow the Fide Handbook practices. And as for the CA, it is clearly written that the CA must be objective at all times. The procedures in these cases are clearly laid out and are there to protect all players in the event and are designed to try and prevent just these type of 'lynching' investigations on masse.

    Unfortunately, Fide has form in this area of not being pro-active when these type of cases are before them and their Commissions prefer to do nothing, or wait until they are forced to take action.
    I agree that the above procedures should have been followed. But I'm not sure that it would have prevented a 'lynching' investigation of Niemann. The main reason this is happening is that he has admitted to cheating, although only online. So Carlsen can still use the argument that he doesn't want to play against players who have cheated repeatedly, because Niemann has admitted to cheating repeatedly!

    I assume that Carlsen could still be sanctioned for an unapproved withdrawal, even without the Chief Arbiter giving him the Tournament Complaint Form? He had already played Niemann, so his withdrawal can't even be justified on his suspicions of Niemann. But punishing Carlsen probably wouldn't help Niemann, as Carlsen would then appear as the victim. And I don't know that Carlsen would care very much what FIDE does, either. He is a multi-millionaire and World Champion, so he has seemingly achieved everything he wants to 'within the system'.

    Anyway, Niemann is playing in the US Championships (a Carlsen-free zone!) so he seems to be 'shaking off' the controversy.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 11 users browsing this thread. (4 members and 7 guests)

  1. Desmond,
  2. Kevin Bonham,
  3. Scott Colliver,
  4. Sheroff

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
  •