16:24 he continually applies odds of true random situations (lotto, coin flipped) to weighted situations. It's a pretty fundamental concept in stats classes to differentiate them
A chess master, or a 2500 GM, will not have the same understanding of the game as Fabi, Hikaru or Magnus. When these guys say there’s something fishy in any given game, chances are there is something fishy going on.
Its even more suspicious when a 2500 GM, who barely played blitz in otb events throughout a whole 7 year career, but dominates online winning tournaments and prize money left and right. Its bizarre. ANd its not even just 2500, its as low as 2200 FM's routinely beating gm's in title tuesday lol.
@@ГеоргийАковбян This is just silly. Why do they only have an emotional response to certain losses? The vast majority of the games they win, they're completely fine with them. You can give a 2500 GM the best engine ever made, he will never understand the game as well as a 2800.
@@ГеоргийАковбян They are not only talking about their own games though. Their own games are simply alerting them to the bigger issue at hand. Even if you say its just perception, perception matters greatly. And there is a reason they don't have the same perception in the OTB world.
The trouble with Eric's explanation offering statistical probabilities of outcomes, stems from the fact that his math is based upon analysis of something as simplistic as coin flips. Yes if you flip a coin a bunch of times, strange things could happen. I'd actually like to see a legitimate proof of this because even with the coin flipping analogy I still don't think you could flip a coin 50 times in a row and get heads every time. I don't care how many times you flip it. You see there is the problem is that in chess, they are not flipping coins. You are comparing players of incredibly disparate strength, and trying to explain away the strong pair losing because of coins flipping. What is lost in the statisticians explanation is that literally every ply of each move is yet another coin toss. This strong player had to lose a lot of coin tosses in a row. I have played strong players, I've not experienced where they lose 50 coin tosses in a row.
Magnus and Hikaru must be fuming that Hans soared to #3 online while playing poorly OTB and just won the latest titled tuesday. But as Levitov pointed out they seem to downplaying the issue of cheating now I guess cause they have much more interests in the website or maybe under contract. But seeing his name up there is really a smack to the face of online chess making it a total mockery. After he sued the website and basically won because they chickened out, I guess noone wants to even speak about it.
@@cooloutac Niemann’s cheating is blatant. They really must be fuming. If you pay attention, they always play Niemann now the way they would play an engine, which is to say, keep the game closed and straightforward.
@@alekhinesgun9997 Yeah, me and every top player out there. Maybe it’s just that you don’t want to face the fact that a player you like is an obvious cheater?
SO he is just insinuating the top players are sore losers? Basically telling Kramnik, Fabi, Nepo, and MVL, to kick rocks? Magnus and Hikaru are probably fuming Neiman just soared to #3 online and won titled tuesday, but I guess they are under contract to downplay the issue now. I would think they are all just sore losers if Kramnik never pointed out the drastic differences happening online compared to OTB. Or the fact they only take action on people with over a 99% probability. When a low 2300 rated player like Roman Shogdzhiev starts beating super GM's in the world blitz championships it makes the news. But he is a young child who just started chess 3 years ago and has been actively growing. But when that is happening 2 out of 10 times in a titled tuesday online and alot of times with players who have played for years and never showed such growth otb, that is extremely suspicious. Erik is trying to normalize these events online and I guess we will see what type of report they put out. But I have a feeling its going to be a joke like their reply to Kramnik over the Hikaru streaks and performance ratings. The fact they still don't implement fair play cams, don't have a downloadable client, still don't even look at otb performance, and are afraid to ban innocent people is insane to me. I'm supposed to believe they are gonna make players go to a clean environment and prove themselves on a clean pc? Sounds like its just going to be a formality if it even happens. Some guys local club as the proctor? jesus...I've lost all hope. I don't even know why pro players continue to play on the website.
Yes because the top players are not experts in detecting cheaters, in fact they're amateurs susceptible to human bias. Actual rigorous statistics is how you reason about data logically. You have 0 evidence for anything, it's all human guess, and humans suck at making interpretations of complex data. Yes all those top players have 0 idea what they're talking about, they do not know how even basic statistics works, so they have 0 ability to correct their incorrect intuition. If you actually spent years of your life studying math/statistics, then you realize there are a lot of completely unintuitive facts about the world, facts that even you know they're true and you stepped through the proof, you still can't wrap your head around how it's true. You think humans with no training in rigor can detect cheaters reliably? If you really think that, then you haven't come to realize that human intuition is incredibly unreliable when not trained, magnus and all those other players are trained in being good at chess, not trained in detecting cheaters, which while both involve chess, are completely different skills.
23:12 the problem is hindsight. You can always find some reason why a vulnerability presented itself. Just because a clean player made a mistake doesnt mean that the dirty player didn't cheat to exploit it.
The actual problem is confirmation bias. People find evidence for anything they believe. Also, the worse your opponent plays, the higher your engine score will be, no cheating needed.
This proctor idea wouldn't help. The scale and expense involved would be ridiculous. You're really going to send guys all over the world just for titled tuesdays? And what are they supposed to find when they arrive? Or you send a local representative from that country? What is stopping the local guy taking a little money from here and there and duly giving the stamp of approval to their local player?
When they talk about winning strikes (like Hikaru 38:00) it can't be an example: Hikaru win not because he is always winning by the position, he win because he flags. And he win a lot of games with a losing position, but he manages time better then the opponent and finish to win with the clock.
Ratings are based winning or losing, so time management is part of that. If you play weaker moves faster and that leads to more wins, that will get you a higher rating than the guy who plays perfectly so slowly he gets flagged. And so probabilities based on those ratings will be roughly accurate.
at the end it'll be possible to catch them because they are repeating a pattern that is not human like, with enough data it will be possible at some point.
As to shortening time controls in CCT: I feel lowering increment is a bad idea for viewers. It results in games where players spend most of the time in the beginning phase of the game and then there is a wild scramble at the end. That scramble is about impossible to follow or for commentators to insert any kind of commentary there. Instead it's better to have lower base time and longer increment like for example 5+5 or even something like 1+10 or something in between. There are two arguments against it: 1)tournament time is less predictable 2)some top players don't like it. 1) is a fair point and that makes higher increment not practical for mass events like TT but it shouldn't be a problem at high level like CCT. Despite that 5+5 is still shorter than 10+2 (classical formula is base time + 60 x increment to compare time controls). As to 2) some players (like Magnus) feel it's more skill based with lower increment and higher base time because you have to manage your time better. It might be true but it shouldn't matter as the priority is watchability not comfort of some top players. Not having all your time available at the beginning makes it more feasible to play speculative openings and then there is more time for the viewers to follow the resulting exciting game.
I agree with magnus. And I think magnus is only saying that because most chess fans find the time scramble more exciting and more like other sports. I think you are talking about advance players who watch tournaments, vs your average noob fan. But I agree even as a noob fan I don't like to watch bullet because it is too fast to follow and understand. But having the pressure of a clock only at the last moment of a game imo, is very exciting and more sporting. I think increments tend to undermine the purpose of a clock. In America we prefer 5+0, in europe and the east they prefer 3+2.
@@cooloutac I remember Fabiano - Magnus scrambles. It was just completely impossible to follow. Because of it there is 0 drama because you don't know what's going at all. I mean even if you don't understand the game you need commentators to build the tension. If the moves are flying too fast there is none of it. I think playing without increment might be more fun to play but definitely not to watch. Magnus was very clear about why he prefers little/no increment - it's becaues it gives bigger edge for the better player as there is another difficult element (time management). It wasn't about how it is to watchi but purely from his standpoint as an elite player.
@@cooloutac Maybe he knows or maybe he doesn't. His view though was expressed only looking at what format is more reliable at determining the best player. Those are his own words and he is one guy who says what he thinks.
13:50 It doesn't prove anything. The fact that lower-rated players don't win more games in TT than outside of TT may indicate that cheaters' ratings are already unlawfully very high, and they are no longer considered to be lower-rated.
He has statistics? How can 2300-2500 who haven't played in real life for 5 years win against world's top 2nd player, also who's level of play is 30% higher than over the board? He said they ask for 2 angle camera view? I haven't seen that anywhere. I think they put these cheaters on purpose, then split the money. Why they would voluntarily give out 2 mil to anyone? What's the incentive? None. They should start showing these 2nd cameras views to see for us what's on players' screens while they play.
I always assumed they already had multiple fair play cameras in major events. I'm absolutely shocked this was never implemented. Along with a downloaded client to monitor the pc, I assumed this was all already done? wow. What is the supposed millions they are spending on anti cheat measures going towards?
Speaking around the cheating topic while giving cryptic non answers. If you’re so convinced your algorithms are leading the field with cheating detection with above 90% success rate then just give the public what they deserve already. Release the usernames of every player who has cheated over the past 5 years. Cheaters deserved to be shamed, not hidden behind their computer screens where they send an apologetic email to be promptly unbanned so that they can resume cheating.
they won't bc they are weak willed and they know that their detection software is not definitive. Without a confession data is just data and to your point, a lawsuit wouldn't end up in their favor. At the very least they should release the names of the users who have confessed.@@RobinMs5
@@Gush27 he is srawmanning their argument - none of them ever claimed that so-and-so is cheating because they lost - none of them - he is making up his own argument, then assigning it to hikaru and fabiano .. its the very definition of strawmanning
@@styleisaweapon True. in fact Fabiano said he knows there is a chance he could lose to such players statistically and admitted it has happened to him before. The problem is how often it happens. I guess we will see what kind of report Erik puts out lol. I'm not expecting it to be meaningful.
@@Gush27 None. They always point to the statistics of such happening especially compared to OTB. Do you really think 2 out 10 super gms are losing games to players 200-500 points lower rated them in open tournaments like world blitz or tata blitz for example? Maybe it happens once to one player if anything. And its big news BTW, where guys like Neiman and Nakamura always lose rating points regardless lmao.
Hikaru cheated Levon in the 2016 candidates. Magnus cheated Alexandra Kosteniuk in the 2009 blitz WCC. Garry cheated Judit in 1994 Linares. Q1 - How doesn't Fabi know about these well-known well-documented FACTS? See previous: ADK1o1sZ0s0 --- H1 - Hikaru cheated Levon. G1 - Garry cheated Judit. G2 - Garry cheated Vishy. G3 - Garry cheated Daniel Edelman. G4 - Garry cheated in 1999 MSN game. G5 - Garry cheated Alexei Shirov. M1 - Magnus cheated Anish. M2 - Magnus cheated Sergey. M3 - Magnus cheated Alireza. M4 - Magnus cheated Wesley M5 - Magnus cheated Danya TWICE. M6 - Magnus cheated Nepo. M7 - Magnus cheated Alexandra Kosteniuk. WBH1 - Bobby cheated no one. WBH2 - Hans cheated no one (as an adult). WBH3 - Wesley cheated no one. WBH4 - Hans supposedly cheated 100x, but Magnus definitely did. - cbarr81 asked: Do you ever log onto as an anonymous player, and just crush people for fun? - Magnus admitted in an AMA: Once in a while I’ve used some of my friends accounts and won a couple of games… or a lot… Source: p1w4Rr-jr --- Q2 - How can someone be against Alireza's LEGAL farming but not outright ILLEGAL cheating of Magnus, Garry & Hikaru?
2nd: 1 - Why hunt cheaters below & 2799 when the top 3 cheaters in history all 2800+ aren't prosecuted yet - Magnus, Garry, Hikaru? 2 - How can someone be against Alireza's LEGAL farming but not outright ILLEGAL cheating of Magnus, Garry & Hikaru? --- Before the 2022 Sinquefield Cup controversy, Magnus Carlsen, Garry Kasparov & Hikaru Nakamura had cheated the ff: - Daniel Edelman - 1988 simul - Judit Polgar - 1994 Linares - Vishy Anand - 1995 PCA classical WCC - 'The world' (MSN) - 1999 Garry Kasparov vs the world - Alexei Shirov - 2000 PCA classical WCC - Alexandra Kosteniuk - 2009 blitz WCC - Levon Aronian - 2016 candidates - Alireza Firouzja - 2019 blitz WCC (1 decade later in the same tournament - cheats again!) - Danya Naroditsky 2x - lichess 2020 & 2021 - Ian Nepomniachtchi - 2021 classical WCC - Sergey Karjakin - 2022 candidates - Wesley So - 2022 WFRCC (define 'slow rapid') Yet they had/later baselessly accused - Hans 2x (1 Magnus, 1 Hikaru - both 2022) - IBM (1997) After the controversy started, Magnus - cheated Hans Niemann - 2022 CGC (removal) - cheated Anish Giri - 2023 Superbet Blitz - baselessly accused Alisher - 2023 Qatar - baselessly accused Alice Lee - 2023 women's USCC ( as described in PgHQdOocI84 ) 8 of which were in world championships / candidates. All the victims are Jewish-or-American except Vishy & Alireza (but top French then was Jewish MVL). The list of victims of their cheating & baselessly accusing contains : - 19 Jews-or-Americans - 3 Jewish-or-American women - 2 Jewish-or-American girls - 3 minors - 6 teenagers / juniors - 10 (later 11 re Levon) Americans - 14 Jews
16:24 he continually applies odds of true random situations (lotto, coin flipped) to weighted situations. It's a pretty fundamental concept in stats classes to differentiate them
Great Interview! Respect Ilya🤩
A chess master, or a 2500 GM, will not have the same understanding of the game as Fabi, Hikaru or Magnus. When these guys say there’s something fishy in any given game, chances are there is something fishy going on.
Its even more suspicious when a 2500 GM, who barely played blitz in otb events throughout a whole 7 year career, but dominates online winning tournaments and prize money left and right. Its bizarre. ANd its not even just 2500, its as low as 2200 FM's routinely beating gm's in title tuesday lol.
No, even 2 2500 GMs with engins can say more because of the emotional bias that Fabi, Hikaru and Magnus have.
@@ГеоргийАковбян This is just silly. Why do they only have an emotional response to certain losses? The vast majority of the games they win, they're completely fine with them.
You can give a 2500 GM the best engine ever made, he will never understand the game as well as a 2800.
@@ГеоргийАковбян They are not only talking about their own games though. Their own games are simply alerting them to the bigger issue at hand. Even if you say its just perception, perception matters greatly. And there is a reason they don't have the same perception in the OTB world.
The trouble with Eric's explanation offering statistical probabilities of outcomes, stems from the fact that his math is based upon analysis of something as simplistic as coin flips. Yes if you flip a coin a bunch of times, strange things could happen. I'd actually like to see a legitimate proof of this because even with the coin flipping analogy I still don't think you could flip a coin 50 times in a row and get heads every time. I don't care how many times you flip it. You see there is the problem is that in chess, they are not flipping coins. You are comparing players of incredibly disparate strength, and trying to explain away the strong pair losing because of coins flipping. What is lost in the statisticians explanation is that literally every ply of each move is yet another coin toss. This strong player had to lose a lot of coin tosses in a row. I have played strong players, I've not experienced where they lose 50 coin tosses in a row.
Hans Niemann is done if they actually do this.
Magnus and Hikaru must be fuming that Hans soared to #3 online while playing poorly OTB and just won the latest titled tuesday. But as Levitov pointed out they seem to downplaying the issue of cheating now I guess cause they have much more interests in the website or maybe under contract. But seeing his name up there is really a smack to the face of online chess making it a total mockery. After he sued the website and basically won because they chickened out, I guess noone wants to even speak about it.
@@cooloutac Niemann’s cheating is blatant. They really must be fuming.
If you pay attention, they always play Niemann now the way they would play an engine, which is to say, keep the game closed and straightforward.
@@rg7535 I have a feeling we will see less top players playing in online events.
@@rg7535 You're off your rocker
@@alekhinesgun9997 Yeah, me and every top player out there.
Maybe it’s just that you don’t want to face the fact that a player you like is an obvious cheater?
SO he is just insinuating the top players are sore losers? Basically telling Kramnik, Fabi, Nepo, and MVL, to kick rocks? Magnus and Hikaru are probably fuming Neiman just soared to #3 online and won titled tuesday, but I guess they are under contract to downplay the issue now. I would think they are all just sore losers if Kramnik never pointed out the drastic differences happening online compared to OTB. Or the fact they only take action on people with over a 99% probability.
When a low 2300 rated player like Roman Shogdzhiev starts beating super GM's in the world blitz championships it makes the news. But he is a young child who just started chess 3 years ago and has been actively growing. But when that is happening 2 out of 10 times in a titled tuesday online and alot of times with players who have played for years and never showed such growth otb, that is extremely suspicious. Erik is trying to normalize these events online and I guess we will see what type of report they put out. But I have a feeling its going to be a joke like their reply to Kramnik over the Hikaru streaks and performance ratings.
The fact they still don't implement fair play cams, don't have a downloadable client, still don't even look at otb performance, and are afraid to ban innocent people is insane to me. I'm supposed to believe they are gonna make players go to a clean environment and prove themselves on a clean pc? Sounds like its just going to be a formality if it even happens. Some guys local club as the proctor? jesus...I've lost all hope. I don't even know why pro players continue to play on the website.
Yes because the top players are not experts in detecting cheaters, in fact they're amateurs susceptible to human bias. Actual rigorous statistics is how you reason about data logically. You have 0 evidence for anything, it's all human guess, and humans suck at making interpretations of complex data. Yes all those top players have 0 idea what they're talking about, they do not know how even basic statistics works, so they have 0 ability to correct their incorrect intuition. If you actually spent years of your life studying math/statistics, then you realize there are a lot of completely unintuitive facts about the world, facts that even you know they're true and you stepped through the proof, you still can't wrap your head around how it's true. You think humans with no training in rigor can detect cheaters reliably? If you really think that, then you haven't come to realize that human intuition is incredibly unreliable when not trained, magnus and all those other players are trained in being good at chess, not trained in detecting cheaters, which while both involve chess, are completely different skills.
23:12 the problem is hindsight. You can always find some reason why a vulnerability presented itself. Just because a clean player made a mistake doesnt mean that the dirty player didn't cheat to exploit it.
💯
The actual problem is confirmation bias. People find evidence for anything they believe. Also, the worse your opponent plays, the higher your engine score will be, no cheating needed.
Ilya is such a positive, constructive force. Allbeest comes across as a man pushing a line and an agenda - and thus lacks credibility.
I'm not convinced.
i'm convinced now that they don't know what they're doing
you have to be an incompetent cheater to get caught by this lot, it's disheartening tbh
This proctor idea wouldn't help. The scale and expense involved would be ridiculous. You're really going to send guys all over the world just for titled tuesdays? And what are they supposed to find when they arrive? Or you send a local representative from that country? What is stopping the local guy taking a little money from here and there and duly giving the stamp of approval to their local player?
Do you deny the FACT that Hikaru cheated Levon in the 2016 candidates?
@@stoutlager6325nailed it
they have staff all over the world...@@stoutlager6325
When they talk about winning strikes (like Hikaru 38:00) it can't be an example: Hikaru win not because he is always winning by the position, he win because he flags. And he win a lot of games with a losing position, but he manages time better then the opponent and finish to win with the clock.
Ratings are based winning or losing, so time management is part of that. If you play weaker moves faster and that leads to more wins, that will get you a higher rating than the guy who plays perfectly so slowly he gets flagged.
And so probabilities based on those ratings will be roughly accurate.
You don't need to get chess on a higher level audience until you can cure the cheating. PERIOD.
It is very hard to spot the cheater. There are some people that uses in critical positions only. The way to go is always proctoring the games.
at the end it'll be possible to catch them because they are repeating a pattern that is not human like, with enough data it will be possible at some point.
As to shortening time controls in CCT: I feel lowering increment is a bad idea for viewers. It results in games where players spend most of the time in the beginning phase of the game and then there is a wild scramble at the end. That scramble is about impossible to follow or for commentators to insert any kind of commentary there. Instead it's better to have lower base time and longer increment like for example 5+5 or even something like 1+10 or something in between.
There are two arguments against it: 1)tournament time is less predictable 2)some top players don't like it.
1) is a fair point and that makes higher increment not practical for mass events like TT but it shouldn't be a problem at high level like CCT. Despite that 5+5 is still shorter than 10+2 (classical formula is base time + 60 x increment to compare time controls). As to 2) some players (like Magnus) feel it's more skill based with lower increment and higher base time because you have to manage your time better. It might be true but it shouldn't matter as the priority is watchability not comfort of some top players. Not having all your time available at the beginning makes it more feasible to play speculative openings and then there is more time for the viewers to follow the resulting exciting game.
I agree with magnus. And I think magnus is only saying that because most chess fans find the time scramble more exciting and more like other sports. I think you are talking about advance players who watch tournaments, vs your average noob fan. But I agree even as a noob fan I don't like to watch bullet because it is too fast to follow and understand. But having the pressure of a clock only at the last moment of a game imo, is very exciting and more sporting. I think increments tend to undermine the purpose of a clock. In America we prefer 5+0, in europe and the east they prefer 3+2.
@@cooloutac I remember Fabiano - Magnus scrambles. It was just completely impossible to follow. Because of it there is 0 drama because you don't know what's going at all. I mean even if you don't understand the game you need commentators to build the tension. If the moves are flying too fast there is none of it. I think playing without increment might be more fun to play but definitely not to watch.
Magnus was very clear about why he prefers little/no increment - it's becaues it gives bigger edge for the better player as there is another difficult element (time management). It wasn't about how it is to watchi but purely from his standpoint as an elite player.
@@punter11235 Magnus knows what the fans want.
@@cooloutac Maybe he knows or maybe he doesn't. His view though was expressed only looking at what format is more reliable at determining the best player. Those are his own words and he is one guy who says what he thinks.
@@punter11235 That was his way of saying it is more sporting.
I even didn't think before that Erik is so cool
13:50 It doesn't prove anything. The fact that lower-rated players don't win more games in TT than outside of TT may indicate that cheaters' ratings are already unlawfully very high, and they are no longer considered to be lower-rated.
That's not the core issue. If the games are looked at, the likelihood of getting caught is exactly the same.
Im waiting the hunt.
He has statistics? How can 2300-2500 who haven't played in real life for 5 years win against world's top 2nd player, also who's level of play is 30% higher than over the board?
He said they ask for 2 angle camera view? I haven't seen that anywhere. I think they put these cheaters on purpose, then split the money. Why they would voluntarily give out 2 mil to anyone? What's the incentive? None. They should start showing these 2nd cameras views to see for us what's on players' screens while they play.
I always assumed they already had multiple fair play cameras in major events. I'm absolutely shocked this was never implemented. Along with a downloaded client to monitor the pc, I assumed this was all already done? wow. What is the supposed millions they are spending on anti cheat measures going towards?
Robert Hess is also a great commentator. And of course Peter Leko.
This guy has a bs excuse for everything. I bet he regularly lies to his own mother.
The commentary for the Magnus events were incredible and somehow the quality of commentary has dropped so much overall
Great interview, though the interviewer constantly SPEAKS IN ALL CAPS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)
Очень хорошее Интервью.
Speaking around the cheating topic while giving cryptic non answers. If you’re so convinced your algorithms are leading the field with cheating detection with above 90% success rate then just give the public what they deserve already. Release the usernames of every player who has cheated over the past 5 years. Cheaters deserved to be shamed, not hidden behind their computer screens where they send an apologetic email to be promptly unbanned so that they can resume cheating.
I guess they are not gonna do that because they would likely get sued by some of the players :)
they won't bc they are weak willed and they know that their detection software is not definitive. Without a confession data is just data and to your point, a lawsuit wouldn't end up in their favor. At the very least they should release the names of the users who have confessed.@@RobinMs5
У него восьмиструнная гитара!
"I'm very familiar with this" right after you strawmanned 3 top players, putting words in their mouth, and just drooling out "feelings" nonsense.
What exactly is he straw-manning? Pointing out that statistics point different conclusions than emotional, biased chess players? Be serious
@@Gush27 he is srawmanning their argument - none of them ever claimed that so-and-so is cheating because they lost - none of them - he is making up his own argument, then assigning it to hikaru and fabiano .. its the very definition of strawmanning
@@styleisaweapon True. in fact Fabiano said he knows there is a chance he could lose to such players statistically and admitted it has happened to him before. The problem is how often it happens. I guess we will see what kind of report Erik puts out lol. I'm not expecting it to be meaningful.
@@styleisaweaponNone of them have claimed that so and so have cheated because they lost? Lol.
@@Gush27 None. They always point to the statistics of such happening especially compared to OTB. Do you really think 2 out 10 super gms are losing games to players 200-500 points lower rated them in open tournaments like world blitz or tata blitz for example? Maybe it happens once to one player if anything. And its big news BTW, where guys like Neiman and Nakamura always lose rating points regardless lmao.
Will they remove the grey flag of shame they make all Russian players play under?
just dont be russian
Or at least take away Israeli, US and UK flags too. Problem is, if you start going down that drain, not a lot of flags will be left.
@@rg7535 I think the only time any of those countries threatened Nuclear since the cold war, Is when Trump threatened to wipe out North Korea lol.
@@cooloutac YT keeps deleting replies, but what else is new.
Their actions have been far more destructive than anyone’s statementsz
let them play under the Ukrainian flag, it's Russkij Mir after all isn't it
Hikaru cheated Levon in the 2016 candidates.
Magnus cheated Alexandra Kosteniuk in the 2009 blitz WCC.
Garry cheated Judit in 1994 Linares.
Q1 - How doesn't Fabi know about these well-known well-documented FACTS?
See previous:
ADK1o1sZ0s0
---
H1 - Hikaru cheated Levon.
G1 - Garry cheated Judit.
G2 - Garry cheated Vishy.
G3 - Garry cheated Daniel Edelman.
G4 - Garry cheated in 1999 MSN game.
G5 - Garry cheated Alexei Shirov.
M1 - Magnus cheated Anish.
M2 - Magnus cheated Sergey.
M3 - Magnus cheated Alireza.
M4 - Magnus cheated Wesley
M5 - Magnus cheated Danya TWICE.
M6 - Magnus cheated Nepo.
M7 - Magnus cheated Alexandra Kosteniuk.
WBH1 - Bobby cheated no one.
WBH2 - Hans cheated no one (as an adult).
WBH3 - Wesley cheated no one.
WBH4 - Hans supposedly cheated 100x, but Magnus definitely did.
- cbarr81 asked:
Do you ever log onto as an anonymous player, and just crush people for fun?
- Magnus admitted in an AMA:
Once in a while I’ve used some of my friends accounts and won a couple of games… or a lot…
Source:
p1w4Rr-jr
---
Q2 - How can someone be against Alireza's LEGAL farming but not outright ILLEGAL cheating of Magnus, Garry & Hikaru?
You absolute psycho lol
Please don't put this non sense under any video. It's embarrassing
@@trevorochmonek9024
how can a truthful statement be nonsensical?
@@Gush27
and so jen shahade is as well for calling out alejandro ramirez?
@@nicbentulanEven if it's true. You sound like a crazy guy by spaming this text over and over again. Please stop it unless you have proof
2nd: 1 - Why hunt cheaters below & 2799 when the top 3 cheaters in history all 2800+ aren't prosecuted yet - Magnus, Garry, Hikaru?
2 - How can someone be against Alireza's LEGAL farming but not outright ILLEGAL cheating of Magnus, Garry & Hikaru?
---
Before the 2022 Sinquefield Cup controversy, Magnus Carlsen, Garry Kasparov & Hikaru Nakamura had cheated the ff:
- Daniel Edelman - 1988 simul
- Judit Polgar - 1994 Linares
- Vishy Anand - 1995 PCA classical WCC
- 'The world' (MSN) - 1999 Garry Kasparov vs the world
- Alexei Shirov - 2000 PCA classical WCC
- Alexandra Kosteniuk - 2009 blitz WCC
- Levon Aronian - 2016 candidates
- Alireza Firouzja - 2019 blitz WCC (1 decade later in the same tournament - cheats again!)
- Danya Naroditsky 2x - lichess 2020 & 2021
- Ian Nepomniachtchi - 2021 classical WCC
- Sergey Karjakin - 2022 candidates
- Wesley So - 2022 WFRCC (define 'slow rapid')
Yet they had/later baselessly accused
- Hans 2x (1 Magnus, 1 Hikaru - both 2022)
- IBM (1997)
After the controversy started, Magnus
- cheated Hans Niemann - 2022 CGC (removal)
- cheated Anish Giri - 2023 Superbet Blitz
- baselessly accused Alisher - 2023 Qatar
- baselessly accused Alice Lee - 2023 women's USCC ( as described in PgHQdOocI84 )
8 of which were in world championships / candidates.
All the victims are Jewish-or-American except Vishy & Alireza (but top French then was Jewish MVL).
The list of victims of their cheating & baselessly accusing contains :
- 19 Jews-or-Americans
- 3 Jewish-or-American women
- 2 Jewish-or-American girls
- 3 minors
- 6 teenagers / juniors
- 10 (later 11 re Levon) Americans
- 14 Jews