not to get off topic but...since when are actual odds not very trusted in court. They are generally trusted if you can provide an accurate source and experiment to confirm those odds. Where on earth did you get the notion that odds arent trusted in court?
Chess.com banned Hans after beating Magnus. Why?
Sort:
Magnus Carlson and Hikaru Nakamura are creating hype so they can make more money. It doesn't matter that they have no evidence. Chess.com is just following their Golden Calf. It's really sad that Chess.com praises Hans Niemann and then dumps him based on innuendo. Pathetic.
Magnus has lost to lower rated and less famous people in other events as well.
When he made such insinuation it means he is almost sure of what he is talking about. Otherwise it's not worth it to quit the Sinquefield Cup for a suspicion.
Candace08 wrote:
Couldn't it just be a matter of his preparation getting leaked?
It is probably that.
InsertInterestingNameHere wrote:
not to get off topic but...since when are actual odds not very trusted in court. They are generally trusted if you can provide an accurate source and experiment to confirm those odds. Where on earth did you get the notion that odds arent trusted in court?
I watched a vsauce video (im pretty sure it's true)
https://youtu.be/mTNlVAz2fdA
according to this, the prosecutor straight-up made up odds in an attempt to prove them guilty.
i find it quite a compliment to be called a cheater when i never have before. means i played like a heroine...yee !
Sep 6, 2022
0
#49
LEGOs_Rock wrote:
It's really sad that Chess.com praises Hans Niemann and then dumps him based on innuendo.
How do you know that's the reason?
awesome1184 wrote:
InsertInterestingNameHere wrote:
not to get off topic but...since when are actual odds not very trusted in court. They are generally trusted if you can provide an accurate source and experiment to confirm those odds. Where on earth did you get the notion that odds arent trusted in court?
I watched a vsauce video (im pretty sure it's true)
https://youtu.be/mTNlVAz2fdA
according to this, the prosecutor straight-up made up odds in an attempt to prove them guilty.
That's an extreme outlier, and according to the video, the California Supreme Court used an appeal in an attempt to crack down on bad math in the courtroom.
Also, this happened in 1968. Little outdated, wouldn't you say?
InsertInterestingNameHere wrote:
awesome1184 wrote:
InsertInterestingNameHere wrote:
not to get off topic but...since when are actual odds not very trusted in court. They are generally trusted if you can provide an accurate source and experiment to confirm those odds. Where on earth did you get the notion that odds arent trusted in court?
I watched a vsauce video (im pretty sure it's true)
https://youtu.be/mTNlVAz2fdA
according to this, the prosecutor straight-up made up odds in an attempt to prove them guilty.
That's an extreme outlier, and according to the video, the California Supreme Court used an appeal in an attempt to crack down on bad math in the courtroom.
Also, this happened in 1968. Little outdated, wouldn't you say?
it's still interesting though
Sep 6, 2022
0
#53
ScatteredWealth wrote:
I'm surprised staff haven't intervened yet
Maybe they're busy!
raminguy wrote:
I am absolutely disgusted that chess.com did this. He needs to be unbanned ASAP. This makes their anti cheating measures lose all credibility if they think they can ban someone with zero evidence.
It is their site, they can ban whoever they want, but this does throw shade on how people are banned if they will willy nilly ban Hans even though there is no proof that he cheated. People will believe whatever Carlsen and Nakamura say, a lot of people would rather believe their favorite personas than actual proof or lack of there of.
****
Ohh...let me have that faraway reach
as those before me sought to find
and so goes the addict of a lux mind
frumma balloon on high i slide this pawn
global i go...yet alone in grey
someone take me from this glassy cage
some lie 'bout me
some bald to you
others just want me all through
hey nineteen ?...where am i going ?
****
Sep 6, 2022
0
#56
awesome1184 wrote:
raminguy wrote:
I am absolutely disgusted that chess.com did this. He needs to be unbanned ASAP. This makes their anti cheating measures lose all credibility if they think they can ban someone with zero evidence.
1. there is overwhelmingly obvious evidence
2. they wouldn't ban without #1
3. HANS ADMITTED TO CHEATING.
Hans cheated when he was 16. I did ethically wrong stuff without thinking when I was that age, things I would never do now. Most adults can say the same.
"Let he who is without sin cast for the first stone!" I admit I've also cheated... on my girlfriend with this smoking hot blonde who lacked any principles. Don't judge me, I'm but a man!
Sep 6, 2022
0
#58
Chess.com should do the right thing, restore Hans Niemann account, let him play any game format. Why would other personalities influence chess.com.? give the chess community evidence that he has cheated.
Chess.com can a little unfair sometimes
That makes no sense. He used numbers, because they are a convenient and easy way to gauge things. In his mind, there is about a 95% chance that he cheated. An easy way to measure how likely you think it is that he cheated. Hence why he said "I think"
Fools like them are why actual odds aren't very trusted in court.