Forums

Certain British GMs are opinionated

Sort:
David
PawnTsunami wrote:
cap78red wrote:

And when i was online playing rated casual games on lichess and a young friend asked if he could play my engine, he knew i was using an engine but wanted to see how he would do against it-i got banned from lichess for that.

There is no such thing as a "rated casual game".  It is either rated, or casual (i.e. unrated).  You do not get banned for using an engine in casual games on LiChess.

It's the same on Chess.com - in unrated games, you can get help, use an engine, whatever. If cap used the engine against the person in a rated game, I can see the automated systems detecting that and auto-banning him. If it had been on Chess.com, if cap's opponent submitted an appeal on cap's behalf to Chess.com support explaining what happened, I would think that Chess.com would unban him, but I have no idea what the Lichess processes or practices would respond.  

David
BonTheCat wrote:

Dr Kenneth Regan has analyzed Niemann's OTB and online games over the past two years and he makes the very interesting point that not only is Niemann's games perfectly consistent with human play

https://en.chessbase.com/post/is-hans-niemann-cheating-world-renowned-expert-ken-regan-analyzes

In the interview I queried specific points being brought up online and elsewhere such as a possible difference between games that were broadcast and games that were not.

"What I'm saying, as justifying my not needing to take the time to individually look into tournaments to see which were broadcast and which were not, is that if there is any bias in my data, then it's towards broadcast games (i.e more of it is analyzed due to availability) and yet I show something entirely normal."

I'd be interested in what Regan's algorithm would say if limited to those games that were broadcast: I expect that's the sort of thing that Chess.com did after Carlsen's resignation: that they had already flagged potential cheating but not to the level of certainty required to ban a titled player, but on running some more targeted reports found strong enough evidence of "the amount and seriousness" of Niemann's cheating on Chess.com (more than Niemann has publicly admitted to) and therefore banned him.

As an example - and note I am just pulling numbers out of thin air, because I don't know what the threshholds are - if someone's engine match rate over all of their games was 85%, but it rises to 95% for those broadcast over live relay and drops to 80% for those not broadcast, that's pretty significant.

jjupiter6

I wonder if his algorithms can detect hijacked threads

Elroch

Personally, I recognise that it is significant if someone plays 300 points stronger in a large sample of live relayed games against delayed ones. (And then, applying the scientific principle of testing, we then find he plays over 300 points stronger in the portion of Sinquefield 2022 that was live relayed).

There is no doubt that a professional chess player who has cheated for financial and personal benefit and has been caught twice is likely to try to disguise his cheating, but in order for it to be worth cheating, he can't fully disguise the boost to his results.

Steven-ODonoghue
David wrote:

It's the same on Chess.com - in unrated games, you can get help, use an engine, whatever. 

Unless the rules surrounding this have changed in the past ~12 months, I'm pretty sure this isn't correct.

I was under the impression that cheating in unrated games was still against TOS, unless the opponent was aware assistance was being used and agreed before the game, in which case it is fine.

PawnTsunami
Steven-ODonoghue wrote:

Unless the rules surrounding this have changed in the past ~12 months, I'm pretty sure this isn't correct.

I was under the impression that cheating in unrated games was still against TOS, unless the opponent was aware assistance was being used and agreed before the game, in which case it is fine.

Yes, according to the TOS, it has to be known that one (or both) are getting assistance.  On LiChess, casual games means anything goes (they do not even check them).

Snookslayer

If it looks like a cheat and acts like a cheat, it's either a duck or Hans Niemann.

stopvacuuming

his dumbazz posed to bust a right his dumbazz bust a left evil

stopvacuuming
Snookslayer wrote:

If it looks like a cheat and acts like a cheat, it's either a duck or Hans Niemann.

cope!

cap78red
stopvacuuming wrote:
Snookslayer wrote:

If it looks like a cheat and acts like a cheat, it's either a duck or Hans Niemann.

cope!

Cymru am byth

stopvacuuming

cope

Rook_Handler
stopvacuuming wrote:

cope

oh look, it's you again

smarkia28

ok

Elroch
Snookslayer wrote:

If it looks like a cheat and acts like a cheat, it's either a duck or Hans Niemann.

You're quackers.

OneEdgeU2
I think Anish is arrogant
Elroch

For so long, whenever I saw his name, I read it as "girl".

dfgh123

amish girl