He is a coward. Magnus will not say anything important like today. His only goal is to isolate Hans from the other chess players and fans because of his ego.
If he's afraid of saying something for the legal reasons - it's fine, but saying what is he afraid of and why doesn't he speak and why is he handling it this way has no possible legal reasons other than just being afraid
I mean, i don’t get this whole drama, yeah we know that hans cheated online in the past, regarding if it was 3 years ago or a couple of months ago (last time i mean) he didn’t cheat over the board at the sinquefield cup against magnus so i don’t get all this crying from magnus.
@@elias5658 for those of us who have followed chess for 20 years and not 20 minutes, Magnus has lost to young players thousands of times and never responded this way. Go watch Alireza kick his ass in rapid and bullet streams, watch the reactions and anger, then realize Magnus has mentored Alireza and loves and respects the kid. Same with Pragg.
Dude, I love this guy! I have the same opinions as him. I don’t like Hans because he embodies that whole “Arrogance of youth” idea. At the same time I don’t subscribe to ruining someones life / career over speculation and require some proof before grabbing my pitchfork.
I think that this commentary from Ben perfectly explain why Magnus did what he did. Ben is saying that it is frown upon in the chess community to accuse someone of cheating, even if he is cheating. That even if you are sure that someone is cheating, to resign or to quit is worse. This is exactly the kind of mentality Magnus is against, like he said in an interview one year ago. To find a cheater in chess is super difficult, like for doping. The only real way of contrasting it, like for doping, is to have harsh punishment if you get caught even once: you get caught? Lifetime ban. One free pass if you get caught as a minor. Magnus never said that Hans cheated in the cup, in that match. He cannot prove it, and he has not accused Hans of that. However, what he knows is that Hans is a cheater. He cheated multiple times, and he admitted so. Everyone playing against him, will always have the doubt. Therefore, he should not be allowed to play. He got caught cheating many times? He should not be play competitive chess. The fact that in chess people still say that is bad manner to point at cheaters instead of denouncing it is the reason of Magnus action. We need for chess a movement similar to what happened in the '90s for doping: if you used doping, people should not feel bad about not wanting to compete with you.
Implying someone is a cheater is worse than calling someone a cheater because without an actual accusation there is no way to defend yourself. If you suspect someone of cheating there should be an investigation, but there can't be an investigation without an actual accusation. Hans may very well have cheated but Magnus isn't doing the chess world any favours by being vague and encouraging a witch hunt.
i would agree but with an age restriction. like, if u have a history of cheating after age 18 or something... it would terrible to cancel potentially the next world champion for cheating online chess at age 16. cheating in online chess is the easiest , most readily available way to cheat out of all the major competitions. I think a compromise would be something like if you cheated in online at any age, u must abide by stricter anti cheating measures or something.
@@humanbean3 In another comment I was saying the same. My idea is: first time caught cheating, lifetime ban. If you are a minor, you get one "one year ban" probation. If as a minor you cheat more than once, lifetime ban. The case of Hans is peculiar. He cheated at 12, got caught. Cheated at 15-16, got caught. He confirmed those himself, so there is no doubt. After that, he claimed that he changed, but Chess com found him guilty of several more cheating cases, we do not know up to when, even in titled matches. Magnus decided that it is enough not to play with him, one can think otherwise of course. But what is sure is that to prove that Hans cheated in the specific match against Magnus is not relevant, nor Magnus accused him otherwise -- he cannot know it as we cannot know it, but to lose in a suspicious match against a known cheater is something that should not happen in a game.
Yeah and there's legitimate chess skills backing him up, there's no way he's just some bozo like me over the board. This reminds me of world record holders and chasers in other sports/hobbies, to be the best even if you're cheating, you have to have some kind of foundation of skill and expertise. A total noob can't pull it off. And the closer you are to winning legitimately the more likely you are to be willing to take that extra step of cheating to reach the finish line, if you are so inclined. The desire to win is powerful. Some folks can't live with themselves if they know it's not legit, and that's sort of the only thing holding back other fierce competitors: it wouldn't be satisfying to win that way.
I've seen Hans playing out in streets like a GM but with no social skills. I don't think Hans got a chip up his ass telling him the moves. I love Carlson's games, his personality, his support of young talented players, and his gentlemanship representing chess players' culture.
If magnus “used his pull” to demand hans not be allowed to play in a tournament that would in and of itself be a scandal. Just because yours the world champion doesn’t mean you get to decide who plays or doesn’t - it would only show that magnus has far too much pull and would make him look even worse in the short and long run. I think you underestimate how badly that would go over
@@FoieGras That's what he has been doing since he tried to change the rules of the world championship by not defending his title. None of this shit would fly if it were any other player. You're blinded by fandom.
He didn't know until last second that Hans was playing in the tournament. At that point it was too late since he was already committed. Hans was a replacement player for that tournament.
These guys are chess prodigies. They were playing chess for 8 hours a day instead of socialising therefore a lot of them tend to be a little socially stunted
@@RevZman Thank you for saying that. I think we can all agree that some of these personalities to come from Chess are socially challenged to say the least.
So it's about the age? What if it was an actual crime like killing someone, I guess it would be very funny right, for someone to be mad about it, so funny.
Where are you getting that? XD Magnus agreed to play in the Sinquefield with Hans there, so the "grudge" as you call it is less than a year old. I don't think Magnus really knew many details about Hans' Chesscom cheating until recently.
I don't think Magnus is doing what he thinks is the most ethical, I think he's doing what he wants. But if we're on that subject, one person who always tries to establish themselves as more ethical than otheres is definitely you.
Exactly! Even THEN, Magnus HIMSELF dropped points. He didn't really hurt other people . Given his history with Hans (nothing against him at this stage btw), even something like THIS is foreseeable just on a psychological level (maybe not for everyone that don't take this as seriously but Magnus is CLEARLY a winner and EXTREMELY hard on himself at that) - in that losing again might be emotionally taxing especially if he, the world champion, who invested his blood, sweat, and tears over that board, lost to a cheater TWICE.
@@FoieGras idk what your definition of “didn’t really hurt other people” is but most people would put ruining someone’s reputation and career and trying to make a show of it in that category
@@MrPatty465 I don’t know HOW you got “ruining someone’s reputation and career” from but Niemann’s reputation was ruined LONG before this. If you could ruin somebody’s reputation simply by not wanting to PLAY, no accusations thrown, then wow! People’s reputations would be flying all OVER the place. No, ruining someone’s reputation would be what happened to Anna Rudolf! By a jealous opponent that can’t put UP! But I’m sure there are such people that thinks Magnus is the twisted type - probably the same type of people as Rudolf's opponent …
I want to say that it is weird that Hans broke Aronian’s opening with Be2 four moves before that …Ne5 that ended the game. But you are right about Sinquefield Cup (sic). Magnus played @ 85% accuracy, so he loses to any GM. Also, petulance is messed up to make him look like a fool.
GMs do opening prep all the time and it works much better in blitz where your opponent does not have that much time to analyze moves. So if you find something new that you can try, that might give you bad game IF opponent responds correctly (and has 1-2 good moves) but might play bad natural move giving you easy win, why not to try it? Maybe Hans currently just has very good opening preparation ready to jump at opponents weaknessess / where there might be gap in knowledge. Openings are still hard even for GMs if you get into unknown territory and blitz makes it even worse.
Yes, why did Magnus choose that moment to bow out of the tournament? It would have been different if he had played at 95% accuracy but was beaten by Hans playing at 99% accuracy. More people would be on Magnus's side on that one.
Agree with everything here. It also looks particularly bad when you lose and withdraw. If there was an issue it may have been best to raise it before the game. The result of the game is irrelevant. Would Magnus have stayed in the S.Cup if he had beaten Hans? It would appear that it's okay to cheat if you lose.
I agree. At the very least, Magnus should have analyzed his own play first, and yeah, if he found that he played at 96% accuracy but still lost because Hans played at 99% accuracy, then more people would be sympathizing with Magnus. But Magnus accusing someone of cheating when that person played a game with accuracy in the low 90s and Magnus lost just because he played a game with accuracy in the 80s...doesn't make sense. If Magnus had analyzed his own game and seen that he played sub-optimally and that's mainly why he lost, I wonder if he would have done the unspoken accusation that he did.
There's a reason professionally run Rust servers don't let anyone with a game or vac ban play on their servers no matter how long ago the ban was. I was a Rust server admin. I can't speak to all games, but for that game, once a cheater always a cheater. Let a cheater on your server and they will find a way to cheat.
You said that accusing of cheating is making huge backlash, but you know- Magnus is accusing without saying it directly, so all Hans is facing all the consequences of being accused of cheating, but Magnus is not taking responsibility for that in legal terms. It is just unsportsmanlike, especially when Magnus is a world champion and he has a lot of influence in both community and chess organisations
Someone in the stream pointed out that what Magnus is doing may be sandbagging. As someone who just applied sandbags to his house for Hurricane Ian, I can tell you, that's not sandbagging
A LOT of youngsters cheated online. 2 players on the Uzbek Olympiad winning team cheated online not too long ago. 1 player on the young Olympiad Indian team cheated online aswell. Hell, even Alireza Firouzja, former n. 2 in the world, cheated online and got banned for it - twice, but once it was unjustified.
I'm curious to know why Ben assumes that Magnus was planning to resign. To me it seems absolutely plausible that he sat down to play the game, got overwhelmed by negative emotions and decided in that moment that he couldn't do it and resigned. A common anger management strategy is to walk away from the situation that angers you. That's not to say that I don't find it plausible that it was a deliberate decision and that Magnus thought that this was the best way to expose/punish a cheater, but I wouldn't just assume so. I haven't followed this very closely, so I might be missing something, but I would be more than happy to be enlightened.
I thought the same thing. To me, it seems Magnus would rather resign the tournament than stand on the number 2 or 3 step. Possibly looking up at Hans? His lack of humility cannot handle that.
How is Magnus overreacting if Hans did in fact cheat?? This is exactly the mentality why cheating is becoming so prevalent in chess and spoiling the game for everyone! I think it's great that Magnus is 'overreacting' so that we start doing something about cheating in chess! In sports, it's either make it or break it, and careers can be literally destroyed when competitors start cheating.
On line cheating is rampant. But OTB? I don’t think so. Carlsen didn’t have an problem with Niemann until the kid started to beat him OTB. This is about a fragile ego, not a genuine cheating scandal. Full stop
Exactly, Hans obliterated him twice in 3 weeks. Every time Hans won a game against him it was a humbling experience. He wants to get to that 29 hundred so bad and Hans destroyed that and now he doesn’t know what to do with his life
8:37 In my opinion, he had to play in this tournament. He signed the contract to play months ago. He is not punishing anybody other than himself and that should be respected. If he opens his mouth and says ANYTHING to the press or the organizers he can be sued. As long as he keeps quiet he is safe.
@@harrellt1405 no evidence? Its now out that Hans have cheated online way more that two times and is coaches by a known cheater. He cant analyze his own games after the game. It looks really bad for Hans.
@@ChengManChing You are very smart my brother ... Carlsen ALREADY opened his mouth and pretty much accused Niemann of cheating, so of course he can be sued NOW (9 days ago that wasn't the case)
I was really really really hoping that Hans got paired against Carlsen in the quarters, it would have helped bring this whole sordid mess to a speedier conclusion.
We've heard that Magnus went through the back channel communications and it wasn't taken seriously. Apparently both he and Nepo had something to say before the Singfield Cup and they brushed it off. Fabi said the security wands they used wouldn't be able to pick up anything less obvious than if the players tried smuggling in guns. Though I guess that would be a pretty effective way of cheating.
In football, when the refs miss or blow a call the other team benefits from cheating. Nobody walks off the field and quits. In football we have re-play to prove the cheating and everyone handles it better than Magnus.
That’s not really the same type of cheating but ok. In most contact sports your kinda expected to see how much you can get away with and if the refs don’t call it, it’s on them. Like if you are very physical in soccer and the refs don’t call it ur not really a cheater. The refs should have called a foul. But their is no Grey area or luck in chess. You either maliciously cheat or play fairly.
Magnus is trying to make cheating high profile so he can get the anti-cheating measures increased. If you’re bringing a proven cheater in - you can at least use stronger measures to protect the players from cheating. We will see what the world thinks when the dust settles…if you think it is all over one loss - your extremely silly.
People of integrity don't want to be involved around cheaters. Magnus probably was irritated Hans was even invited to that tournament, it affected his play, he lost and blew up. Hans should never ever be invited to any chess tournaments for money. PERIOD Cheaters need to be eliminated from competitioin to send a message to young players. NEVER CHEAT.
How do you differentiate from having a suspicion that someone is cheating versus accusing them of cheating? To say Magnus Carlsen is "accusing Hans of cheating", you're kind of accusing Magnus of accusing someone. Ben, you literally give no way for someone to raise suspicion that someone is cheating. So then, how do we actually stop people from cheating then?
You're saying Magnus should or shouldn't do this or that, but nothing he's doing is against any rules. Magnus is clearly trying to make a statement, and it's working. In other words what Magnus "should" do depends completely on what he's trying to accomplish.
you cant make accusations wthout proof that can destroy a persons life , you cant call someone a wifebeater, a pedophile or a rapist and destroy his career for example and expect people to just role over if these accusations are untrue, when you call a professional chessplayer a cheater, you take his life away, if you do that and that person says you are going to be sued thats not a threat but just a normal consequence of harmfull toxic behaivior in a democracy where you have rule of law, presumpyion of innocence and all that good stuff. About his cheating in the past, that argument lost all validity the moment it was known he had cheated online, was forgiven and aloud back to play tournements, Magnus played against him in the past with that knowledge but apparently it only started to bother him when he started losing against him, which raises some questions about intellectual honesty, being a hypocrite and a sore loser... my 2 cents
Niemann is a known cheater, his coach is a known cheater, and he has played more than a dozen games the last two years with impossible score. Of course Niemann is a cheater. His career is over. Good.
Go Ben, you tell the truth. Pick one 1. Hans Niemann cheated at OTB chess 2. Magnus is losing the plot. I pick Magnus is losing it. Magnus is not playing for the world championship of Chess. Magnus has said he might retire. I have evidence Magnus is losing it. SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE HANS CHEATED AT OTB CHESS.
Apart from the drama, its insane that such big and prestigious chess competitions havent figured out it should not be allowed in the rules to do such things. It directly affects the final results and is unfair for everyone playing the tournament that a single player will handle free wins to another targeted player in the competition. It shouldnt matter if you do it in protest or if ure whining, it should make you disqualified. Right now all the players have an extra strongest opponent (Carlsen) that while being their strongest opponent, is handling free wins to a DIRECT rival of theirs. What a shame that such childish behaviour comes from the world's greatest...
A big point id like to make that doesnt take away from what you said because you addressed it sort of hans wasnt suppose to play in the tournament hans was a last second substitute. and he said he wouldnt have played if he knew hans was gonna play in the tournament.
I think Magnus is being a child because he doesn’t like Hans after he beat him legitamitely over the board. He’s not speaking on the issue because he simply does not have a justification and wants to make people suck up to him and hate on Hans
In other games, cheaters don't get notified of them being under surveillance and instead people play as normal and then cheaters get caught by surprise
I don't think Magnus's actions more loudly assert that Hans cheated than a formal statement would. You have it backwards. His actions without a statement communicate that he has an opinion but holds that opinion with a certain amount of diffidence, or that he lacks the wherewithal to publicly defend it at this time. A formal statement by Magnus would communicate (A) what his opinion is; (B) that he holds that opinion confidently and is prepared to defend it if called upon. Accordingly a formal statement from someone with as much credibility as Magnus would by itself be significantly more damaging to Han's reputation than silently withdrawing from the tournament (and resigning) has been. Which is why everyone is still waiting to hear him speak.
I think perhaps that Niemann's history of cheating is apparently far more extensive than has been made public so far, and players can't be referees. The "powers that be" behind the scenes should have weeded out Niemann before he got to this level.
I agree with most of what you're saying, but Idk if magnus is ruining hans reputation, I think hans ruined his own reputation. I still think hans is a chronic cheater, but im also not a good chess player so I defer to magnus on that part. Who should I believe? A known cheater or someone who hasn't cheated and is the world champion.
Disclaimer: I don't like Niemann for dishonouring chess by cheating in online games. He deserves all of the questions about his character that he gets. Having written that: Magnus knows exactly what he's doing. Carlsen is abusing his position in the chess community to destroy Niemann's reputation by forcing us to infer that Hans cheated just because Hans dared to win a game. That way, as organisers of other tournaments choose Magnus over Hans, logically enough, he can have plausible self-deniability that he did nothing directly. It is straight up bullying on the perfect patsy.
Like a lot of famous people and top sports people, Carlsen is probably surrounded by Yes-men and sycophants, and the longer he's been champion, the fewer people nears him who are willing to say "No, don't do that!"
That's the crucial point, nobody would be shocked to learn Hans cheated ever since 16 in some games if it is proven but as of now his games at St Louis don't provide any evidence of that. There are just so many up and coming youngsters who play excellent chess right now. Keymer for example had winning positions in almost every game at Julius Bär cup nobody suspects him of foulplay simply because he never cheated online or everywhere. The fact that Niemann can't prove a negative that easily eg that he didn't cheat since he was 16, is a huge problem for him. Magnus seemed very sure yesterday that he is right with his allegations, so it will be exciting to see what's gonna happen in the days to come. And let's be honest Magnus has to be right or his reputation is going to take a huge hit from that story/drama.
I don't like myself as a teenager, so ... no need to judge Hans now for what he did as a teenager. I'm sure he will grow out of his habit of online cheating. And, I cannot agree with you more re your comments on Magnus. Nice to have a rational and reasonable voice!
@@tonyhuynh707 it's an amazing example. It shows just how stupid the argument "you can't hold people accountable for their past actions because they are like in the past bro" is.
@@tonyhuynh707 guess we ought to let every murderer out who committed their crimes at the ages of 13 and 16, because those ages don't count. They were soooo cringe and I'm sure they hated themselves at those ages.
True story: In the days before Kasparov's match with Deep Blue, you could play the strong but undeveloped program online. As a B player, my friend always underperformed in over the board play. But as a world class software engineer, he had a terrific understanding of machine characteristics, so he played some stunning games against the machine. Didn't win all the time by anymeans, but often enough that the site administrator 86ed him for cheating. How he was supposed to do that against what was far and away the best machine of its day, they didn't say . . . .
By using another engine... sorry buddy but no one believes your story. Software engineering doesn't translate to being able to beat a machine at chess despite being bad at chess. Keep dreaming
The point you made that i strongly disagree with is that Magnus shouldn't have played in the tournament. Using his pull to remove Hans from the tournament sounds awful.
Whats wrong is that Magnus didn’t make the accusation himself and instead posted an insinuation online and let everyone else make the accusation. That’s wrong. Defamation is not cool (in fact its a crime). If you’re gonna allege that somebody did something, you have to do it clearly, and unequivocally, and to stand by it, and to face the legal ramifications if you are not able to prove it. You can’t accuse people of things and not be able to back it up. That’s a jailable offence.
Heres a fictitious plot: ONE week before the Sinquefield Cup, magnus' team inspected their computer system and found a bunch of packets left behind signaling that data had been extracted! Somebody had access to all of his prep. Magnus was not playing the best line when he lost to hans. No, He made a few "sensing" moves asking hans what he knew. "A nimzo indian you say" Hans knivingly whispers to magnus under his breath. "Nice IP address magballs". Magnus stammered back in a defeated whiny voice "youll pay for this Neiman!" As far as cheating over the board; even a 2400 elo could be magnus if they had access to the ONE move needed in a pinacle moment. Irrelevant, though.
hes not overreacting if Hans cheated extensively online and Magnus found out about it recently (got additional info). Magnus is making a point. For some reason Magnus is not free to give all the details yet. He has to be concerned about slander as well if he cant prove it.
the only problem I have with your contention is that if Magnus plays on it helps Hans because Magnus beating the other players only helps Hans out. Why should Magnus help Niemann by beating the other opponents who aren't machine aided?
It seems Ben would truly be more outraged by Magnus being suspicious of a known cheater then if Hans cheats. Btw Hans does cheat online - where’s bens outrage
Being suspicious does not mean you have to quit and disrupt the tournament. He is shocked by how far Magnus has taken it without showing any evidence and owning up for his actions.
4:46 that matches my opinion. Magnus will never again play Hans. Organizers that invite both Magnus and Hans will basically be daring Magnus to not sign on the dotted line. If Hans happens to reach the final in this tournament as well as Magnus, there won't be a match.
In this tournament, at least, Magnus giving Hans an unearned win did not change the qualifiers to the knockout stage. Giving Hans zero points instead of three would drop Hans down into a four-way tie from 6th to 9th on 21 points, but Giri would still have been the one to miss out because he had the worst tie-breaks.
It does affect seeding though. Also it doesn't really matter how it happened to work out. The point is that Magnus is the one who is essentially cheating now.
I suspect that Magnus isn't concerned about the ethics, but is resigning on move two to try and preserve his headspace for the upcoming games. Maybe. Idk. Seems more plausible than the idea that he's making a statement
Thought the Aronian game was suspicious as well. Plays Bd3 against the Siclian which is rare, ok but then he plays Be2 a couple of moves later, which was very unhumanlike. Then he also plays a Yugoslav pawn structure against a Dragon and castles kingside?? I'm a Dragon player and I've only seen that happen from an engine out of book, never seen a player do it over the board. Lev made some mistakes afterwards but 100% accuracy on the punishment by Hans. Thought the whole game looked odd.
I don't understand why accepting someone may be cheating is somehow morally better than resigning from a round robin. Sounds like it's all swimming in mud.
That's exactly why he did it as the statement he just made makes very clear. I was sorry to see Ben Feingold go down this anti-magnus rabbit hole but here we are
3:50 "It's just that most of the world doesn't agree with that being the way to do it." Well, I think that depends on how you define "most of the world" - in the sporting world, controversial protests of this nature has happened time and time again and those who take a stand are often celebrated. Magnus loves sport (more than he loves being fit), and may well have taken inspiration from those past stands against unfair play. Whether Hans still currently cheats or not isn't as relevant anymore to Magnus, especially if one were to subscribe to the belief "once a cheater, always a cheater". On the other hand, in politics, people love cheaters.
To date Magnus has not said that Hans is cheating. But people are jumping to the conclusion that that is what he means. But that would be putting words in Magnus's mouth. Maybe he is taking a principled stand against tarnishing his reputation by playing someone who has admitted that they cheated in the past. Hans has cheated with impunity. How does that look to all the young players who are fighting their way up the ratings without cheating? It was notable that Magnus applauded his young opponent in the game after Hans. That suggested that he was giving him respect.
I would argue that it is quite good for the sponsors, fans, streamers and RUclipsrs. It's fantastic content and also scratches much larger (and quite topical) existential questions.
As an impartial outsider who is not part of the chess community, this scandal is the only one I've been made aware of. This isn't just me, this drama has quite a bit of attention even from people outside of the community. If Magnus doesn't provide solid evidence that can be held up in the court of law, he'll have single handedly ruined the reputation of the game than anyone else in recent years.
Disagreed. Magnus's reaction is only incorrect if Hans is innocent, because what's left is him cheating and you know, it's perfectly reasonable to not want to play a cheater. You can diss him if we find out he's innocent. But so far, the red flags around Hans while not enough yet just keep piling up as more information comes out.
You can say its your belief that someone is cheating legally. You cant say someone is definitely cheating. At least here in Murica. Free speech. Whether you should morally or ethically is entirely different.
There's something called defamation by insinuation. I am guessing Hans doesn't have the money for a lawyer, but what Magnus is doing is absolutely wrong and fits the criteria. Besides that, the chess community should not tolerate him throwing games. That is basically cheating as well because it affects the other players who will not make the next round and ultimately will lose money because of Magnus' childish actions. Also there is no speculation on that matter, it's objectively true. But I guess most people are just gonna talk about how Hans is a cheater because of mob mentality and simping for the world champion. Glad you keep it real Ben, not many people online are thinking clearly about this.
Hans's attitude to life in general might be a bit grating but that's no reason to hate him and completely destroy the man's reputation. Magnus is definitely overreacting and being a bit immature.
Perhaps Magnus went in the tournament, knowing that he was going to play Hans Niemen and believing that he is a cheater and by resigning he also wants to bring to light that he is cheating against others in the tournament
It's the opposite for me. I'm getting Commodus in Gladiator vibes from the guy. That said I think it's highly questionable if he cheated in the Sinquefield.
8:40 - "In my opinion, Magnus shouldnt have played in this tournament". Thats WEIRD!! Magnus NEVER cheated any tournament. But Hans Niemann did. So if there is any logic, Hans shouldnt have played this tournament (and neither any other). Thats the way, how it USUALLY works. Why should Magnus be banned??? He did not cheat ever. Why was Hans Niemann "forgiven", why was he not banned forever? That is the question we have to answer!
The problem is not Magnus Carlsen, the problem is the lack of a rulebook. Suppose a track and field athlete had doped at a competition and been caught. He would then be banned for life from major events. Hans Niemann has not only "doped" ("cheated") once, but several times. In any other sport (except chess obviously) he would be banned for life and everyone would accept that as a matter of course. But he is not banned, on the contrary, he participates in grandmaster tournaments, although he has cheated several times. That's a huge problem - and it's not Magnus Carlsen's problem. The real problem is that due to the lack of rules, chess players are left alone to decide how to deal with a cheater. It doesn't matter whether Hans Niemann cheated in the Sinquefield Cup. He has cheated along the way of his career.
Look honestly we can criticize magnus' actions all we want, but I think if youre a professional chess player and have a record of cheating online its completely reasonable for people to suspect you of cheating when you start playing way outside the norm in terms of how quickly you're improving your rating. If Hans didn't want that to happen he shouldn't have cheated to begin with. Some would even argue if you have a history of cheating online you probably shouldnt even be allowed to compete professionally because the simple fact is that now your actions will always be suspect if you start performing well. The only person Hans should be mad at is his younger self for acting unethically and now rightfully being considered suspect.
@@chungboislim2061 I mean not being honest about the extent of your cheating online is not a good start at trying to redeem yourself. It certainly undercuts any notion that Hans has grown up
I laughed so much when ben said "IF I ACCUSE RUFUS AND DUFUS" and someone in chat says "why do you do that to rufous?"
Well, the only way rufous could succeed in chess is by cheating.
Timestamp?
like 8:00 thereabouts
Magnus finally said today that he will make a statement after the current Julius Baer Generation Cup tournament is over.
I’m guessing there won’t be very much substance in that statement, but I hope I’m wrong, for his sake.
He is a coward. Magnus will not say anything important like today. His only goal is to isolate Hans from the other chess players and fans because of his ego.
If he's afraid of saying something for the legal reasons - it's fine, but saying what is he afraid of and why doesn't he speak and why is he handling it this way has no possible legal reasons other than just being afraid
I mean, i don’t get this whole drama, yeah we know that hans cheated online in the past, regarding if it was 3 years ago or a couple of months ago (last time i mean) he didn’t cheat over the board at the sinquefield cup against magnus so i don’t get all this crying from magnus.
@@elias5658 for those of us who have followed chess for 20 years and not 20 minutes, Magnus has lost to young players thousands of times and never responded this way. Go watch Alireza kick his ass in rapid and bullet streams, watch the reactions and anger, then realize Magnus has mentored Alireza and loves and respects the kid. Same with Pragg.
Dude, I love this guy! I have the same opinions as him. I don’t like Hans because he embodies that whole “Arrogance of youth” idea. At the same time I don’t subscribe to ruining someones life / career over speculation and require some proof before grabbing my pitchfork.
Hans Niemann has admitted cheating.
The proof is his admission ffs. Previous is used in criminal convictions too.
@@arsenalfanrichi So the things you do when you were under 18 are used after?
@@arsenalfanrichi More to the point… you never did anything, really stupid, before you were 18? Or even after?
@@jasonxoc I did stupid stuff, of course, that is part of growing up. But I NEVER did anything I knew would hurt other people or was clearly immoral.
You’re being the most well based person on the topic since the beginning. And yes, you were speaking on Magnus behavior since the first week
I think that this commentary from Ben perfectly explain why Magnus did what he did. Ben is saying that it is frown upon in the chess community to accuse someone of cheating, even if he is cheating. That even if you are sure that someone is cheating, to resign or to quit is worse. This is exactly the kind of mentality Magnus is against, like he said in an interview one year ago.
To find a cheater in chess is super difficult, like for doping. The only real way of contrasting it, like for doping, is to have harsh punishment if you get caught even once: you get caught? Lifetime ban. One free pass if you get caught as a minor.
Magnus never said that Hans cheated in the cup, in that match. He cannot prove it, and he has not accused Hans of that. However, what he knows is that Hans is a cheater. He cheated multiple times, and he admitted so. Everyone playing against him, will always have the doubt. Therefore, he should not be allowed to play. He got caught cheating many times? He should not be play competitive chess. The fact that in chess people still say that is bad manner to point at cheaters instead of denouncing it is the reason of Magnus action. We need for chess a movement similar to what happened in the '90s for doping: if you used doping, people should not feel bad about not wanting to compete with you.
Implying someone is a cheater is worse than calling someone a cheater because without an actual accusation there is no way to defend yourself. If you suspect someone of cheating there should be an investigation, but there can't be an investigation without an actual accusation. Hans may very well have cheated but Magnus isn't doing the chess world any favours by being vague and encouraging a witch hunt.
@@keldencowan you are wrong, hater. Magnus is doing a great thing for chess. Cheaters will think twice from now on.
Perfect!
i would agree but with an age restriction. like, if u have a history of cheating after age 18 or something... it would terrible to cancel potentially the next world champion for cheating online chess at age 16. cheating in online chess is the easiest , most readily available way to cheat out of all the major competitions.
I think a compromise would be something like if you cheated in online at any age, u must abide by stricter anti cheating measures or something.
@@humanbean3 In another comment I was saying the same. My idea is: first time caught cheating, lifetime ban. If you are a minor, you get one "one year ban" probation. If as a minor you cheat more than once, lifetime ban.
The case of Hans is peculiar. He cheated at 12, got caught. Cheated at 15-16, got caught. He confirmed those himself, so there is no doubt. After that, he claimed that he changed, but Chess com found him guilty of several more cheating cases, we do not know up to when, even in titled matches.
Magnus decided that it is enough not to play with him, one can think otherwise of course. But what is sure is that to prove that Hans cheated in the specific match against Magnus is not relevant, nor Magnus accused him otherwise -- he cannot know it as we cannot know it, but to lose in a suspicious match against a known cheater is something that should not happen in a game.
Well we all know if Hans did indeed cheat, then he’s one of the most talented cheaters out there
Yeah and there's legitimate chess skills backing him up, there's no way he's just some bozo like me over the board. This reminds me of world record holders and chasers in other sports/hobbies, to be the best even if you're cheating, you have to have some kind of foundation of skill and expertise. A total noob can't pull it off.
And the closer you are to winning legitimately the more likely you are to be willing to take that extra step of cheating to reach the finish line, if you are so inclined. The desire to win is powerful.
Some folks can't live with themselves if they know it's not legit, and that's sort of the only thing holding back other fierce competitors: it wouldn't be satisfying to win that way.
I've seen Hans playing out in streets like a GM but with no social skills. I don't think Hans got a chip up his ass telling him the moves.
I love Carlson's games, his personality, his support of young talented players, and his gentlemanship representing chess players' culture.
@@ahmadkoopal3120 you like how magnus quit in a tournament? Grow up
So, in your eyes, cheating itself has a rating? I would say Hans is 2500 in cheating. lol
@@wrench9103 Everyone has the right to quit a tournament because of ... whatever reason or not wanting to play against an opponent by resigning.
This is why we love Ben; he's cynical - but realistic.
@@sleepyjoe7241 I know this is bait but wtf
@@davidshatto7604 seethe ]
And vulgar, unfortunately. The kids will no longer be viewing this guy.
@@EzPz44 he’s a jew, what do you expect?
If magnus “used his pull” to demand hans not be allowed to play in a tournament that would in and of itself be a scandal. Just because yours the world champion doesn’t mean you get to decide who plays or doesn’t - it would only show that magnus has far too much pull and would make him look even worse in the short and long run. I think you underestimate how badly that would go over
You're right, but I think he'd agree with you. Given how the pitchfork wielding Magnus mob has acted over the last few weeks, I'm not so sure though.
@@FoieGras That's what he has been doing since he tried to change the rules of the world championship by not defending his title. None of this shit would fly if it were any other player. You're blinded by fandom.
This is why I love Ben. Uncompromising levels of honesty.
After a few weeks Magnus comes out and says, "I'm not playing Hans because he stole my girlfriend. I never said Hans cheated in Chess."
Leave the guy alone
He didn't know until last second that Hans was playing in the tournament. At that point it was too late since he was already committed. Hans was a replacement player for that tournament.
Gotta admit. A grown ass man holding a grudge against a 15-16 year old kid for years is hilarious.
Just like somebody holding a grudge for a person being upset with facing somebody who is an established cheater
These guys are chess prodigies. They were playing chess for 8 hours a day instead of socialising therefore a lot of them tend to be a little socially stunted
@@RevZman Thank you for saying that. I think we can all agree that some of these personalities to come from Chess are socially challenged to say the least.
So it's about the age? What if it was an actual crime like killing someone, I guess it would be very funny right, for someone to be mad about it, so funny.
Where are you getting that? XD Magnus agreed to play in the Sinquefield with Hans there, so the "grudge" as you call it is less than a year old. I don't think Magnus really knew many details about Hans' Chesscom cheating until recently.
I don't think Magnus is doing what he thinks is the most ethical, I think he's doing what he wants. But if we're on that subject, one person who always tries to establish themselves as more ethical than otheres is definitely you.
Exactly! Even THEN, Magnus HIMSELF dropped points. He didn't really hurt other people .
Given his history with Hans (nothing against him at this stage btw), even something like THIS is foreseeable just on a psychological level (maybe not for everyone that don't take this as seriously but Magnus is CLEARLY a winner and EXTREMELY hard on himself at that) - in that losing again might be emotionally taxing especially if he, the world champion, who invested his blood, sweat, and tears over that board, lost to a cheater TWICE.
@@FoieGras idk what your definition of “didn’t really hurt other people” is but most people would put ruining someone’s reputation and career and trying to make a show of it in that category
@@MrPatty465 rememember: Hans is a proven cheater.
@@MrPatty465 I don’t know HOW you got “ruining someone’s reputation and career” from but Niemann’s reputation was ruined LONG before this. If you could ruin somebody’s reputation simply by not wanting to PLAY, no accusations thrown, then wow! People’s reputations would be flying all OVER the place.
No, ruining someone’s reputation would be what happened to Anna Rudolf! By a jealous opponent that can’t put UP! But I’m sure there are such people that thinks Magnus is the twisted type - probably the same type of people as Rudolf's opponent …
I want to say that it is weird that Hans broke Aronian’s opening with Be2 four moves before that …Ne5 that ended the game. But you are right about Sinquefield Cup (sic). Magnus played @ 85% accuracy, so he loses to any GM. Also, petulance is messed up to make him look like a fool.
GMs do opening prep all the time and it works much better in blitz where your opponent does not have that much time to analyze moves. So if you find something new that you can try, that might give you bad game IF opponent responds correctly (and has 1-2 good moves) but might play bad natural move giving you easy win, why not to try it? Maybe Hans currently just has very good opening preparation ready to jump at opponents weaknessess / where there might be gap in knowledge. Openings are still hard even for GMs if you get into unknown territory and blitz makes it even worse.
Yes, why did Magnus choose that moment to bow out of the tournament? It would have been different if he had played at 95% accuracy but was beaten by Hans playing at 99% accuracy. More people would be on Magnus's side on that one.
Why are so much comments to this topic blocked?
Is this a bug or censorship?
I think Censorship, I get it all the time
Ben Finegold hates the truth!
Can’t even see the comments to my post. Wtf?
Test. Can anyone see this?
There's no such thing as censorship on a RUclips channel run by some individuals.
Agree with everything here. It also looks particularly bad when you lose and withdraw. If there was an issue it may have been best to raise it before the game. The result of the game is irrelevant. Would Magnus have stayed in the S.Cup if he had beaten Hans? It would appear that it's okay to cheat if you lose.
Great point. This all would look very different if it didn't start at the precise moment he lost.
I agree. At the very least, Magnus should have analyzed his own play first, and yeah, if he found that he played at 96% accuracy but still lost because Hans played at 99% accuracy, then more people would be sympathizing with Magnus. But Magnus accusing someone of cheating when that person played a game with accuracy in the low 90s and Magnus lost just because he played a game with accuracy in the 80s...doesn't make sense. If Magnus had analyzed his own game and seen that he played sub-optimally and that's mainly why he lost, I wonder if he would have done the unspoken accusation that he did.
Magnus behind the scenes was upset that Hans was allowed to play at s.cup as a rushed in stand in b4 the game.
There's a reason professionally run Rust servers don't let anyone with a game or vac ban play on their servers no matter how long ago the ban was. I was a Rust server admin. I can't speak to all games, but for that game, once a cheater always a cheater. Let a cheater on your server and they will find a way to cheat.
You said that accusing of cheating is making huge backlash, but you know- Magnus is accusing without saying it directly, so all Hans is facing all the consequences of being accused of cheating, but Magnus is not taking responsibility for that in legal terms. It is just unsportsmanlike, especially when Magnus is a world champion and he has a lot of influence in both community and chess organisations
Someone in the stream pointed out that what Magnus is doing may be sandbagging. As someone who just applied sandbags to his house for Hurricane Ian, I can tell you, that's not sandbagging
Ben, you have by far had the most intelligent and honest take on this whole thing that I have come across. Massive respect to you
A LOT of youngsters cheated online.
2 players on the Uzbek Olympiad winning team cheated online not too long ago.
1 player on the young Olympiad Indian team cheated online aswell.
Hell, even Alireza Firouzja, former n. 2 in the world, cheated online and got banned for it - twice, but once it was unjustified.
I'm curious to know why Ben assumes that Magnus was planning to resign. To me it seems absolutely plausible that he sat down to play the game, got overwhelmed by negative emotions and decided in that moment that he couldn't do it and resigned. A common anger management strategy is to walk away from the situation that angers you. That's not to say that I don't find it plausible that it was a deliberate decision and that Magnus thought that this was the best way to expose/punish a cheater, but I wouldn't just assume so. I haven't followed this very closely, so I might be missing something, but I would be more than happy to be enlightened.
I thought the same thing. To me, it seems Magnus would rather resign the tournament than stand on the number 2 or 3 step. Possibly looking up at Hans? His lack of humility cannot handle that.
How is Magnus overreacting if Hans did in fact cheat?? This is exactly the mentality why cheating is becoming so prevalent in chess and spoiling the game for everyone! I think it's great that Magnus is 'overreacting' so that we start doing something about cheating in chess! In sports, it's either make it or break it, and careers can be literally destroyed when competitors start cheating.
On line cheating is rampant. But OTB? I don’t think so. Carlsen didn’t have an problem with Niemann until the kid started to beat him OTB. This is about a fragile ego, not a genuine cheating scandal. Full stop
Brainlet
Just Magnus being salty honestly. If he can't definitively prove anything, all this is for naught.
Baby World Champion cry more
Exactly, Hans obliterated him twice in 3 weeks. Every time Hans won a game against him it was a humbling experience. He wants to get to that 29 hundred so bad and Hans destroyed that and now he doesn’t know what to do with his life
@@cmc2110 he doesn't seem to mind being beaten by prag, so maybe your summary is not the whole thing either
Why is nobody considering the possibility that Magnus cheated
Cheated AND lost, no wonder he's dragging Hans through the mud
8:37 In my opinion, he had to play in this tournament. He signed the contract to play months ago. He is not punishing anybody other than himself and that should be respected. If he opens his mouth and says ANYTHING to the press or the organizers he can be sued. As long as he keeps quiet he is safe.
He is safe, and hans suffer most of the backlash without evidence. How great magnus is
@@harrellt1405 no evidence? Its now out that Hans have cheated online way more that two times and is coaches by a known cheater. He cant analyze his own games after the game. It looks really bad for Hans.
Wrong! He can still be sued, and Niemann has a very strong case for damages.
@@ChengManChing You are very smart my brother ... Carlsen ALREADY opened his mouth and pretty much accused Niemann of cheating, so of course he can be sued NOW (9 days ago that wasn't the case)
I was really really really hoping that Hans got paired against Carlsen in the quarters, it would have helped bring this whole sordid mess to a speedier conclusion.
We've heard that Magnus went through the back channel communications and it wasn't taken seriously. Apparently both he and Nepo had something to say before the Singfield Cup and they brushed it off. Fabi said the security wands they used wouldn't be able to pick up anything less obvious than if the players tried smuggling in guns. Though I guess that would be a pretty effective way of cheating.
In football, when the refs miss or blow a call the other team benefits from cheating. Nobody walks off the field and quits. In football we have re-play to prove the cheating and everyone handles it better than Magnus.
Also the cheerleaders are better in football
That’s not really the same type of cheating but ok. In most contact sports your kinda expected to see how much you can get away with and if the refs don’t call it, it’s on them. Like if you are very physical in soccer and the refs don’t call it ur not really a cheater. The refs should have called a foul. But their is no Grey area or luck in chess. You either maliciously cheat or play fairly.
Magnus is trying to make cheating high profile so he can get the anti-cheating measures increased. If you’re bringing a proven cheater in - you can at least use stronger measures to protect the players from cheating. We will see what the world thinks when the dust settles…if you think it is all over one loss - your extremely silly.
People of integrity don't want to be involved around cheaters. Magnus probably was irritated Hans was even invited to that tournament, it affected his play, he lost and blew up. Hans should never ever be invited to any chess tournaments for money. PERIOD Cheaters need to be eliminated from competitioin to send a message to young players. NEVER CHEAT.
Nothing affects Magnus' play and he can only get demolished by a bot.
How do you differentiate from having a suspicion that someone is cheating versus accusing them of cheating? To say Magnus Carlsen is "accusing Hans of cheating", you're kind of accusing Magnus of accusing someone. Ben, you literally give no way for someone to raise suspicion that someone is cheating. So then, how do we actually stop people from cheating then?
You're saying Magnus should or shouldn't do this or that, but nothing he's doing is against any rules. Magnus is clearly trying to make a statement, and it's working. In other words what Magnus "should" do depends completely on what he's trying to accomplish.
you cant make accusations wthout proof that can destroy a persons life , you cant call someone a wifebeater, a pedophile or a rapist and destroy his career for example and expect people to just role over if these accusations are untrue, when you call a professional chessplayer a cheater, you take his life away, if you do that and that person says you are going to be sued thats not a threat but just a normal consequence of harmfull toxic behaivior in a democracy where you have rule of law, presumpyion of innocence and all that good stuff. About his cheating in the past, that argument lost all validity the moment it was known he had cheated online, was forgiven and aloud back to play tournements, Magnus played against him in the past with that knowledge but apparently it only started to bother him when he started losing against him, which raises some questions about intellectual honesty, being a hypocrite and a sore loser... my 2 cents
Niemann is a known cheater, his coach is a known cheater, and he has played more than a dozen games the last two years with impossible score.
Of course Niemann is a cheater. His career is over.
Good.
Go Ben, you tell the truth.
Pick one
1. Hans Niemann cheated at OTB chess
2. Magnus is losing the plot.
I pick Magnus is losing it. Magnus is not playing for the world championship of Chess. Magnus has said he might retire.
I have evidence Magnus is losing it.
SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE HANS CHEATED AT OTB CHESS.
Apart from the drama, its insane that such big and prestigious chess competitions havent figured out it should not be allowed in the rules to do such things. It directly affects the final results and is unfair for everyone playing the tournament that a single player will handle free wins to another targeted player in the competition.
It shouldnt matter if you do it in protest or if ure whining, it should make you disqualified. Right now all the players have an extra strongest opponent (Carlsen) that while being their strongest opponent, is handling free wins to a DIRECT rival of theirs. What a shame that such childish behaviour comes from the world's greatest...
My theory is, Magnus knows hans is cheating, because hans rectal device signals are being recieved by magnus 9 years used rectal device.
A big point id like to make that doesnt take away from what you said because you addressed it sort of hans wasnt suppose to play in the tournament hans was a last second substitute. and he said he wouldnt have played if he knew hans was gonna play in the tournament.
4:06 "I will give you my opinion on something, and I feel strongly about it: DT Gregg subscribed."
I think Magnus is being a child because he doesn’t like Hans after he beat him legitamitely over the board. He’s not speaking on the issue because he simply does not have a justification and wants to make people suck up to him and hate on Hans
In other games, cheaters don't get notified of them being under surveillance and instead people play as normal and then cheaters get caught by surprise
I don't think Magnus's actions more loudly assert that Hans cheated than a formal statement would. You have it backwards. His actions without a statement communicate that he has an opinion but holds that opinion with a certain amount of diffidence, or that he lacks the wherewithal to publicly defend it at this time. A formal statement by Magnus would communicate (A) what his opinion is; (B) that he holds that opinion confidently and is prepared to defend it if called upon. Accordingly a formal statement from someone with as much credibility as Magnus would by itself be significantly more damaging to Han's reputation than silently withdrawing from the tournament (and resigning) has been. Which is why everyone is still waiting to hear him speak.
I think perhaps that Niemann's history of cheating is apparently far more extensive than has been made public so far, and players can't be referees. The "powers that be" behind the scenes should have weeded out Niemann before he got to this level.
Finegold states subscriptions as factually as Dwight Schrute says "It is your birthday." 😂
Ben is a fan of fair play and fair of conduct.
I agree with most of what you're saying, but Idk if magnus is ruining hans reputation, I think hans ruined his own reputation. I still think hans is a chronic cheater, but im also not a good chess player so I defer to magnus on that part. Who should I believe? A known cheater or someone who hasn't cheated and is the world champion.
Disclaimer: I don't like Niemann for dishonouring chess by cheating in online games. He deserves all of the questions about his character that he gets.
Having written that:
Magnus knows exactly what he's doing. Carlsen is abusing his position in the chess community to destroy Niemann's reputation by forcing us to infer that Hans cheated just because Hans dared to win a game. That way, as organisers of other tournaments choose Magnus over Hans, logically enough, he can have plausible self-deniability that he did nothing directly. It is straight up bullying on the perfect patsy.
Nothing of this would happen if hans didnt cheat
Like a lot of famous people and top sports people, Carlsen is probably surrounded by Yes-men and sycophants, and the longer he's been champion, the fewer people nears him who are willing to say "No, don't do that!"
Yes-men in his team and in his fandom full of simps.
@Tim Peralta another Hans sympathizer? You clowns are another level of special.
That's the crucial point, nobody would be shocked to learn Hans cheated ever since 16 in some games if it is proven but as of now his games at St Louis don't provide any evidence of that. There are just so many up and coming youngsters who play excellent chess right now. Keymer for example had winning positions in almost every game at Julius Bär cup nobody suspects him of foulplay simply because he never cheated online or everywhere. The fact that Niemann can't prove a negative that easily eg that he didn't cheat since he was 16, is a huge problem for him. Magnus seemed very sure yesterday that he is right with his allegations, so it will be exciting to see what's gonna happen in the days to come. And let's be honest Magnus has to be right or his reputation is going to take a huge hit from that story/drama.
600 rated chess players like you shouldn't express an opinion on such a topic
I don't like myself as a teenager, so ... no need to judge Hans now for what he did as a teenager. I'm sure he will grow out of his habit of online cheating. And, I cannot agree with you more re your comments on Magnus. Nice to have a rational and reasonable voice!
Doesn't work like that. "yeah I stole from your wallet last week. But I don't like myself a week ago so like get over it or whatever"
@@lolmanyeah1 this wasn’t a week ago this was years ago. Terrible example
@@tonyhuynh707 it's an amazing example. It shows just how stupid the argument "you can't hold people accountable for their past actions because they are like in the past bro" is.
@@tonyhuynh707 guess we ought to let every murderer out who committed their crimes at the ages of 13 and 16, because those ages don't count. They were soooo cringe and I'm sure they hated themselves at those ages.
GM Hans Niemann is not a Ben Finegold fan either
True story: In the days before Kasparov's match with Deep Blue, you could play the strong but undeveloped program online. As a B player, my friend always underperformed in over the board play. But as a world class software engineer, he had a terrific understanding of machine characteristics, so he played some stunning games against the machine. Didn't win all the time by anymeans, but often enough that the site administrator 86ed him for cheating. How he was supposed to do that against what was far and away the best machine of its day, they didn't say . . . .
By using another engine... sorry buddy but no one believes your story. Software engineering doesn't translate to being able to beat a machine at chess despite being bad at chess. Keep dreaming
@@tuckerspradley9592 I agree with you.
Being a world class software engineer is completely irrelevant.
The point you made that i strongly disagree with is that Magnus shouldn't have played in the tournament.
Using his pull to remove Hans from the tournament sounds awful.
Whats wrong is that Magnus didn’t make the accusation himself and instead posted an insinuation online and let everyone else make the accusation. That’s wrong. Defamation is not cool (in fact its a crime). If you’re gonna allege that somebody did something, you have to do it clearly, and unequivocally, and to stand by it, and to face the legal ramifications if you are not able to prove it. You can’t accuse people of things and not be able to back it up. That’s a jailable offence.
Heres a fictitious plot: ONE week before the Sinquefield Cup, magnus' team inspected their computer system and found a bunch of packets left behind signaling that data had been extracted! Somebody had access to all of his prep. Magnus was not playing the best line when he lost to hans. No, He made a few "sensing" moves asking hans what he knew. "A nimzo indian you say" Hans knivingly whispers to magnus under his breath. "Nice IP address magballs". Magnus stammered back in a defeated whiny voice "youll pay for this Neiman!"
As far as cheating over the board; even a 2400 elo could be magnus if they had access to the ONE move needed in a pinacle moment. Irrelevant, though.
hes not overreacting if Hans cheated extensively online and Magnus found out about it recently (got additional info). Magnus is making a point. For some reason Magnus is not free to give all the details yet. He has to be concerned about slander as well if he cant prove it.
A lion does not concernhimself with the opinion of the sheep.-Tywinn Lannister. Best pseudo person quote ever.
Carlsen getting Niemann thrown out would have been even worse behavior imo.
@Stefan Kaitschick he didn't need to, Hans got eliminated and Magnus is in the Final.
@@raymondsublett3108 I mean getting him thrown out pre-tournament.
the only problem I have with your contention is that if Magnus plays on it helps Hans because Magnus beating the other players only helps Hans out. Why should Magnus help Niemann by beating the other opponents who aren't machine aided?
Magnus could do like Alekhine, banning Capablanca from all tournaments where he plays, but that will not be right.
It seems Ben would truly be more outraged by Magnus being suspicious of a known cheater then if Hans cheats. Btw Hans does cheat online - where’s bens outrage
Being suspicious does not mean you have to quit and disrupt the tournament. He is shocked by how far Magnus has taken it without showing any evidence and owning up for his actions.
well said.
Hans cheated online when he was young but he doesn’t cheat now.
4:46 that matches my opinion. Magnus will never again play Hans. Organizers that invite both Magnus and Hans will basically be daring Magnus to not sign on the dotted line. If Hans happens to reach the final in this tournament as well as Magnus, there won't be a match.
You are using the word can't to much.
Magnus and everybody else for that matter, can do whatever they want and think is right.
According to Fabi, magnus losing to Hans has nothing to do with him quitting the tournament. He was doing it anyway.
In this tournament, at least, Magnus giving Hans an unearned win did not change the qualifiers to the knockout stage. Giving Hans zero points instead of three would drop Hans down into a four-way tie from 6th to 9th on 21 points, but Giri would still have been the one to miss out because he had the worst tie-breaks.
It does affect seeding though. Also it doesn't really matter how it happened to work out. The point is that Magnus is the one who is essentially cheating now.
I suspect that Magnus isn't concerned about the ethics, but is resigning on move two to try and preserve his headspace for the upcoming games. Maybe. Idk. Seems more plausible than the idea that he's making a statement
Thought the Aronian game was suspicious as well. Plays Bd3 against the Siclian which is rare, ok but then he plays Be2 a couple of moves later, which was very unhumanlike. Then he also plays a Yugoslav pawn structure against a Dragon and castles kingside?? I'm a Dragon player and I've only seen that happen from an engine out of book, never seen a player do it over the board. Lev made some mistakes afterwards but 100% accuracy on the punishment by Hans. Thought the whole game looked odd.
Exactly. This is what the other GMs think... then Hans can't explain things like this after matches in interviews.
Also something you dont do is invite a former cheater being coached by a former cheater to play in a tournament with the best in the world
I don't understand why accepting someone may be cheating is somehow morally better than resigning from a round robin. Sounds like it's all swimming in mud.
Whether you liked him or not is irrelevant to the discussion. Character defamation is not helpful.
Real quick: fen binegold
Bine Fengold
And you're not
Gold Fineben
Einhorn and Finkle.
Nine Finebolg
What if Magnus is doing all his actions that are very drastic, to draw more attention to the situation and Hans in specific?
That's exactly why he did it as the statement he just made makes very clear. I was sorry to see Ben Feingold go down this anti-magnus rabbit hole but here we are
3:50 "It's just that most of the world doesn't agree with that being the way to do it."
Well, I think that depends on how you define "most of the world" - in the sporting world, controversial protests of this nature has happened time and time again and those who take a stand are often celebrated. Magnus loves sport (more than he loves being fit), and may well have taken inspiration from those past stands against unfair play. Whether Hans still currently cheats or not isn't as relevant anymore to Magnus, especially if one were to subscribe to the belief "once a cheater, always a cheater". On the other hand, in politics, people love cheaters.
To date Magnus has not said that Hans is cheating. But people are jumping to the conclusion that that is what he means. But that would be putting words in Magnus's mouth. Maybe he is taking a principled stand against tarnishing his reputation by playing someone who has admitted that they cheated in the past. Hans has cheated with impunity. How does that look to all the young players who are fighting their way up the ratings without cheating? It was notable that Magnus applauded his young opponent in the game after Hans. That suggested that he was giving him respect.
Magnus is on a bully power trip.
They’re gonna get matched together in the final and Magnus is gonna play the Hippo
How on earth did he cheat? I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me and I don't want to hear this: his prep got leaked nonsense
I would argue that it is quite good for the sponsors, fans, streamers and RUclipsrs. It's fantastic content and also scratches much larger (and quite topical) existential questions.
As an impartial outsider who is not part of the chess community, this scandal is the only one I've been made aware of. This isn't just me, this drama has quite a bit of attention even from people outside of the community. If Magnus doesn't provide solid evidence that can be held up in the court of law, he'll have single handedly ruined the reputation of the game than anyone else in recent years.
Magnus is just being a bully, that's how I see it.
100% agree. Passive - aggressive behavior.
Disagreed. Magnus's reaction is only incorrect if Hans is innocent, because what's left is him cheating and you know, it's perfectly reasonable to not want to play a cheater. You can diss him if we find out he's innocent. But so far, the red flags around Hans while not enough yet just keep piling up as more information comes out.
You can say its your belief that someone is cheating legally. You cant say someone is definitely cheating. At least here in Murica. Free speech. Whether you should morally or ethically is entirely different.
There's something called defamation by insinuation. I am guessing Hans doesn't have the money for a lawyer, but what Magnus is doing is absolutely wrong and fits the criteria. Besides that, the chess community should not tolerate him throwing games. That is basically cheating as well because it affects the other players who will not make the next round and ultimately will lose money because of Magnus' childish actions. Also there is no speculation on that matter, it's objectively true. But I guess most people are just gonna talk about how Hans is a cheater because of mob mentality and simping for the world champion. Glad you keep it real Ben, not many people online are thinking clearly about this.
It's fun to get a quasi-inside scoop on all this. Love this dude.
Hans played the guy on coffee chess, played pretty bad boston mike was leading at some point. I dont think Hans can play 95%+ games.
It's not defamation to say you think someone is cheating though, is it? If he says he knows he's cheating without evidence maybe then it is, right?
Hans's attitude to life in general might be a bit grating but that's no reason to hate him and completely destroy the man's reputation. Magnus is definitely overreacting and being a bit immature.
A bit?
magnus still hasn't said hans cheated to defeat him.
interesting, but maybe we don't know the whole story yet
How is Magnus supposed to handle it though? I feel as though the only way to find out if he is right is to put a lot of attention on hans.
Thanks Ben for being the voice of reason. It's like the whole chess world has gone crazy and won't even listen to reason.
Rensch's Tweet says it all. Of course Magnus got inside info. Niemann must have cheated a lot and probably more recently than he admits.
What is the tweet?
Wise beyond your years, and thats saying something! Cheers ben.
Perhaps Magnus went in the tournament, knowing that he was going to play Hans Niemen and believing that he is a cheater and by resigning he also wants to bring to light that he is cheating against others in the tournament
For some reason I have found myself warming to hans this whole time, he’s a morally grey character and I like it.
he was just a dumb talented kid who had a bad mentor and baby magnus holds a grudge after taking the L
It's the opposite for me. I'm getting Commodus in Gladiator vibes from the guy. That said I think it's highly questionable if he cheated in the Sinquefield.
I was unaware.
8:40 - "In my opinion, Magnus shouldnt have played in this tournament". Thats WEIRD!! Magnus NEVER cheated any tournament. But Hans Niemann did. So if there is any logic, Hans shouldnt have played this tournament (and neither any other). Thats the way, how it USUALLY works. Why should Magnus be banned??? He did not cheat ever. Why was Hans Niemann "forgiven", why was he not banned forever? That is the question we have to answer!
The problem is not Magnus Carlsen, the problem is the lack of a rulebook. Suppose a track and field athlete had doped at a competition and been caught. He would then be banned for life from major events.
Hans Niemann has not only "doped" ("cheated") once, but several times. In any other sport (except chess obviously) he would be banned for life and everyone would accept that as a matter of course.
But he is not banned, on the contrary, he participates in grandmaster tournaments, although he has cheated several times. That's a huge problem - and it's not Magnus Carlsen's problem. The real problem is that due to the lack of rules, chess players are left alone to decide how to deal with a cheater. It doesn't matter whether Hans Niemann cheated in the Sinquefield Cup. He has cheated along the way of his career.
Magnus has no problem until he was beaten. It was the second time Hans beat Magnus, but Magnus did not cry the first time.
If you cheat and someone doesn't trust you later, regardless of what happened later then it's your own damn fault.
Nobody is saying Magnus has to trust him. His behavior is what is in question.
Look honestly we can criticize magnus' actions all we want, but I think if youre a professional chess player and have a record of cheating online its completely reasonable for people to suspect you of cheating when you start playing way outside the norm in terms of how quickly you're improving your rating. If Hans didn't want that to happen he shouldn't have cheated to begin with. Some would even argue if you have a history of cheating online you probably shouldnt even be allowed to compete professionally because the simple fact is that now your actions will always be suspect if you start performing well. The only person Hans should be mad at is his younger self for acting unethically and now rightfully being considered suspect.
In a world without redemption all we have are mobs with pitchforks, and not one is immune to being called a witch.
@@chungboislim2061 I mean not being honest about the extent of your cheating online is not a good start at trying to redeem yourself. It certainly undercuts any notion that Hans has grown up