GBTGBA wrote:
Does that mean I have to apologize to Magnus for calling him a bad sport ?
This means that all the young "down with the man...young guns 4ever, bro!" crusaders are about to get real quiet...
Chess.com banned Hans after beating Magnus. Why?
Sort:
Sep 8, 2022
0
#183
Chessisfunforme wrote:
btw i just checked hans's account and he is unbanned
im not sure whats going on
Hes not publically banned. They just deactivated his account
Sep 8, 2022
0
#184
Chessisfunforme wrote:
btw i just checked hans's account and he is unbanned
im not sure whats going on
AFAIK he was never banned... so I have to ask if you're sure.
AFAIK they locked him out of his own account without closing the account, and contacted him privately that he couldn't play in the world chess thing (whatever chess.com's tournament is).
The timing of this ban aligns perfectly with the deal with the Magnus group. Unless chess.com is looking more closely into all GMs and tournament participants, closing specifically Hans’ account is evidence that they’re listening to Magnus’ claims and taking action based on it.
This is immoral and I hope Hans pursues any legal avenues he has.
I’ve stopped playing on chess.com and will delete my account and demand a refund on my membership if they don’t reverse this soon.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#186
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
closing specifically Hans’ account is evidence that they’re listening to Magnus’ claims and taking action based on it.
1) Carlsen hasn't made any claims
2) His account wasn't closed
3) Chess.com contacted Hans with the evidence they have and have asked him to respond to it if he wants to argue he's innocent
Sep 8, 2022
0
#187
llama36 wrote:
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
closing specifically Hans’ account is evidence that they’re listening to Magnus’ claims and taking action based on it.
1) Carlsen hasn't made any claims
2) His account wasn't closed
3) Chess.com contacted Hans with the evidence they have and have asked him to respond to it if he wants to argue he's innocent
Regarding #2: for titled players they typically do not close the account but lock them out of it (i.e. scramble their password). So the account will show up as there, but if you look you will not see them log in ever again. They started doing that when Max Dlugy went 8/8 in a Titled Tuesday and mysteriously disappeared the last round.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#188
PawnTsunami wrote:
llama36 wrote:
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
closing specifically Hans’ account is evidence that they’re listening to Magnus’ claims and taking action based on it.
1) Carlsen hasn't made any claims
2) His account wasn't closed
3) Chess.com contacted Hans with the evidence they have and have asked him to respond to it if he wants to argue he's innocent
Regarding #2: for titled players they typically do not close the account but lock them out of it (i.e. scramble their password). So the account will show up as there, but if you look you will not see them log in ever again. They started doing that when Max Dlugy went 8/8 in a Titled Tuesday and mysteriously disappeared the last round.
Yeah, but it just annoys me... if someone wants to spew their righteous indignation and make demands then I'm going to pick on the details. In particular assuming the worst is true and then getting mad about it is foolish. We don't know why he was banned. We don't know what Carlsen thinks. We don't know what Carlsen has said to chess.com about what he thinks, etc.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#189
xor_eax_eax05 wrote:
Steven-ODonoghue wrote:
My post from here:
I don't think chess.com would ever close an account based solely on a tweet from Magnus. Danny Rensch has mentioned that chess.com's cheat detection is often used on elite OTB games and sometimes chess.com is the first to know when someone is cheating OTB, even before FIDE. If they closed Hans's account I would assume it's because they have analyzed his recent OTB games with their cheat detection algorithms and determined that he was in fact cheating.
xNETS wrote:
And no actual evidence is given.
Chess.com doesn't need to reveal any evidence publicly. Hans could probably email them to get more information.
The only thing they could analyse is the moves in the game and nothing else, since everything else is outside their control. They dont control the tournament nor the location. And considering we are talking about two top of the world GMs, they can't say they are cheating just because their engines told them they are playing moves close to what the engine suggests.
This site is crap, why? I'll tell you why, it's full of low 1000 elo playing at 30 centipawn loss or less, they all play exactly the same every game, even in 1+1 bullet games. I've even reported a 1000-elo player TWICE, who's playing Daily at 1500 level, with a record of over 70 wins and 1 loss, who even plays Daily 60-move games at under 10 centipawn loss (titled player strength)... YET he still plays Daily.
- But when someone is caught cheating, they accept their "apologies", and allow the cheater to open a new account and keep playing just a couple of days after getting banned (https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-com-community/im-back-with-an-apology-71661015).
- When Nakamura cried on his stream a guy had cheated playing him, chess.com immediately banned him, and then had to go and unban him and issue a public apology because they checked him and he was innocent. They just banned him because HIKARU SAID SO, not because he was found cheating.
- So it's not surprising they are banning Hans without proof or evidence, just because they don't want to have an issue with Magnus, especially now they are in the process of buying off his website PlayMagnus or whatever it's called.
I wonder how many other things are being swept under the rug on this site ...
it has advanced cheater detection;its far more advanced than just engine lines
your analysis of how they closed him for close to engine lines is false, theres probably more depth
examples of hikaru and such dont have time for an entire team to check, if the person isnt banned immediately then someone will cry on stream again about it about "slow anticheat"
Sep 8, 2022
0
#190
argument that top gms cannot cheat is false
ex: petrosian
id rather also have more anticheat with a bit of REPEALABLE false bans rather than loose anticheat and not flag cheaters too
take most popular fps games, lenient bans, full of hackers in lobbies
same with most lenient ban games
Sep 8, 2022
0
#191
The world is full of chess noobs who think they know how cheat detection works.
I've seen many comments (twitter / youtube / etc) saying something like "most of his moves were in the stockfish top 3"
lol, yeah, him and every super GM... idiots.
And getting 99% or 10 centipawn loss or etc doesn't mean crap... sometimes it indicates cheating, but other times not so much.
llama36 wrote:
1) Carlsen hasn't made any claims
2) His account wasn't closed
3) Chess.com contacted Hans with the evidence they have and have asked him to respond to it if he wants to argue he's innocent.
1) He posted a tweet insinuating Hans had cheated, then refused to comment further even when major news outlets (not just chess outlets) read his tweet as a cheating accusation. Even Kasparov stated Carlsen should clarify his tweet. PlayMagnus posted (and deleted) memes about Hans cheating. Either of these is sufficient, given the circumstances.
2) It was. You can nitpick on the word "closed", but I chose that word specifically because it is undefined per chess.com's terms of service. Any decent reader can understand what was meant.
3) Sure, not relevant to my points.
When a situation like this is going on, it's wise for a major player like chess.com to stay out of it. Why would they close Hans' account *now*? If anything they should *not* take action right now. All signs point to the deal with PlayMagnus group, Magnus' and Hikaru's tweets influencing their decision.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#193
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
llama36 wrote:
1) Carlsen hasn't made any claims
2) His account wasn't closed
3) Chess.com contacted Hans with the evidence they have and have asked him to respond to it if he wants to argue he's innocent.
1) He posted a tweet insinuating Hans had cheated, then refused to comment further even when major news outlets (not just chess outlets) read his tweet as a cheating accusation. Even Kasparov stated Carlsen should clarify his tweet. PlayMagnus posted (and deleted) memes about Hans cheating. Either of these is sufficient, given the circumstances.
2) It was. You can nitpick on the word "closed", but I chose that word specifically because it is undefined per chess.com's terms of service. Any decent reader can understand what was meant.
3) Sure, not relevant to my points.
#1 The tweet itself didn't insinuate anything. Even the timing of his withdrawal doesn't suggest one thing more than another. His silence after all the rumors suggests the rumors are correct... but the silence was after the ban.
#3 argues against your claim as to why Hans' account was "closed." You say it was closed because of Carlsen and I'm pointing out chess.com says it was closed due to evidence.
It also argues against your overall complaint (clandestine unjust activities against Hans) by saying that chess.com has shared this evidence with Hans and is offering the chance to respond to it.
llama36 wrote:
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
llama36 wrote:
1) Carlsen hasn't made any claims
2) His account wasn't closed
3) Chess.com contacted Hans with the evidence they have and have asked him to respond to it if he wants to argue he's innocent.
1) He posted a tweet insinuating Hans had cheated, then refused to comment further even when major news outlets (not just chess outlets) read his tweet as a cheating accusation. Even Kasparov stated Carlsen should clarify his tweet. PlayMagnus posted (and deleted) memes about Hans cheating. Either of these is sufficient, given the circumstances.
2) It was. You can nitpick on the word "closed", but I chose that word specifically because it is undefined per chess.com's terms of service. Any decent reader can understand what was meant.
3) Sure, not relevant to my points.
#1 The tweet itself didn't insinuate anything. Even the timing of his withdrawal doesn't suggest one thing more than another. His silence after all the rumors suggests the rumors are correct... but the silence was after the ban.
#3 argues against your claim as to why Hans' account was "closed." You say it was closed because of Carlsen and I'm pointing out chess.com says it was closed due to evidence.
It also argues against your overall complaint (clandestine activities against Hans) by saying that chess.com has shared this evidence with Hans and is offering the chance to respond to it.
Of course they will claim it was banned for a different reason, they don't want a lawsuit.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#195
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
Of course they will claim it was banned for a different reason, they don't want a lawsuit.
Claiming it's for a different reason doesn't stop a lawsuit... be serious.
llama36 wrote:
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
Of course they will claim it was banned for a different reason, they don't want a lawsuit.
Claiming it's for a different reason doesn't stop a lawsuit... be serious.
Of course not, you can initiate a lawsuit for any reason. But it can be an argument (or lack thereof) used in a lawsuit.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#197
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
llama36 wrote:
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
Of course they will claim it was banned for a different reason, they don't want a lawsuit.
Claiming it's for a different reason doesn't stop a lawsuit... be serious.
Of course not, you can initiate a lawsuit for any reason. But it can be an argument (or lack thereof) used in a lawsuit.
If Hans did decide to sue them, it would force them to do what they have always claimed they were prepared to do: defend their methods in court (assuming they did not fall back on the "it is our platform and we can do what we want on it" argument).
Sep 8, 2022
0
#198
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
llama36 wrote:
TheUndeadUnicorn wrote:
Of course they will claim it was banned for a different reason, they don't want a lawsuit.
Claiming it's for a different reason doesn't stop a lawsuit... be serious.
Of course not, you can initiate a lawsuit for any reason. But it can be an argument (or lack thereof) used in a lawsuit.
... yes, and that argument would be made in court, and backed up by evidence, but that's not what's going on right now.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#199
Anyway, more importantly, Hans publicly called chess.com full of BS, and so chess.com publicly said we have evidence and you're free to respond to it.
Hans has a few options. He can respond to it if he thinks he's innocent. He can be quiet and tacitly agree he's guilty, or he could claim chess.com is full of BS and they shared no evidence with him.
In any case it's not a situation where Hans is being banned without reason or recourse.
Sep 8, 2022
0
#200
GBTGBA wrote:
I think Hans will apologize profusely on YouTube and beg for 3rd chance.
I don't know... seems like the kind of guy who will try to play the victim. "Ok so maybe I cheated when I was 17? I said 16 but it was when I was living in _____ and it was just for my stream. I already apologized for this but they have to come out and call my statements inaccurate. I don't have the exact dates ok? And more importantly my OTB play is 100% innocent, and now they're calling me a liar on top of a cheater, it's just disgraceful. I love chess and I live in a suitcase" etc etc.
Maybe he just promised to not do it again. (for a while).