“Chess.com does not discuss fair play matters publicly and, as such, we decline to comment on the happenings at Sinquefield Cup and/or any speculations made by the community” - Danny Rensch
Obvious wisdom in this.
But the TIMING of chess.com actions in banning Hans Nieman now, means chess.com have become an active part of the incident and supportive of one side over the other.
Chess.com actions are a 'comment' on the incident.
Where is the proof? Guilty until proven innocent??
No, in Hans Niemann's case, it is innocent until proven guilty. It's just that chess.com has no obligation whatsoever to release that proof.
I agree. I hope chess.com decides to unban hans if he's proven to be innocent, but there is still a chnce that he might be guilty...
...who lacked any principles.
making u (2) the perfect match.
Don't judge me,
uhh, yeah im going to.
I'm but a man!
uhh, ur really not. ur a lowlife cheat w/ (2) marshmallows that guide ur very being.
Hans last played here on August 29th. He wasn’t banned for what he did on the site.
has lichess banned han smoke ?
Just looked at this from a rational perspective and two main points come to mind.
Firstly according to the difference in their ratings 2864 v 2687 with a 177 point difference the probability is that Niemann should win 33% of the time, or 1 game out of every three. So the fact that Niemann won or even that he won two consecutive games against the same player should not be particularly surprising. Most of us wouldn't be suspicious if someone threw a 6 on two consecutive throws of a dice, but Niemann beating Carlson is statistically about 10 times more likely to happen.
Secondly, analysing the game shows that Carlson made 5 mistakes, 5 inaccuracies and 1 blunder while Niemann made 3 mistakes and 3 inaccuracies and no blunders. Carlson made 28 best moves while Niemann made 22 best moves and 11 great moves so looking at that it appears as though Nieman just played better chess. A more detailed analysis looking at the centipawn differences between the actual moves compared to the best engine moves and comparing that with their previous performance shows that Carlson played below par and Neilman played better than his average performance but well within the statistical deviation that would be considered normal for players at that level.
My conclusion is... Nothing about the facts that are currently available suggests that anything untoward has happened.
Because Chess.com decided to go the cowardly route just like most everyone else. Pandering to Magnus Carlsen
There are 3 possibilities here:
Hans is lying about chess.com closing his account
Chess.com determined Hans cheated OTB and closed his account
Chess.com determined @hansontwitch cheated recently in online games (he claims the last time he cheated online was when he was 16)
It is up to you to choose which happened, because chess.com has made it really clear that they don't disclose this stuff publically.
Or option 4 chess.com just hopped in bed with magnus for about 85 million dollars and they have every incentive to make hans look bad and magnus look good in fact as a company its expected they will do any and everything to maximize profits so as long as they think this is best course of action I have no reason to think chess.com has any reason to be transparent or honest. Until proven otherwise to me the most logical thing to assume is magnus talked to his boy at chess.com and threw his weight around. So while I'm sure magnus think dude cheatedI don't really care he has no evidence and the way he and chess.com have gone about this makes me think less of him and them but I guess since I'm not upset enough to cancel my premium subs no one cares I'm still lining there already heavy pockets.
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.
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.
If it's true that chess.com banned him, it should reveal the evidence given the circumstances. Credibility of the site is on the stale. Hans is the only one who does not need any information at all since he's the only one who knows for sure if he really cheated or not.
I haven't seen anything strange on his games, did he do some amazing calls? Yeah. So? It doesn't meen he cheated. I feel we wouldn't be having these discussion if Magnus was the one doing such good calls.
We should believe in people innocence until proven guilty. This is a very basic principle. If we can't be better than that there's something wrong with us and now I'm not talking about chess.
I think it's time to realice we are more than simple spectators. The main reason chess.com banned Niemann was probably not because of Carlsen twit. It was probably because of the social media impact. It was because we decided to judge Niemann without any kind of proof. That's disgusting no matter if he cheated or not.
This is not only about chess. Sooner or later these behaviors will bite us back, as all the disinformation bit us fighting the covid disease. Sry for going offtopic but I needed to say this
A different possibility: chess.com's cheat detection servers are heuristic and algorithmic. It's entirely possible a bunch of Hikaru supporters went to Hans' profile and clicked report, which automatically suspended him after enough people did that. The first 24 hours of this were filled with haters.
The longer chess.com waits to explain, the worse my opinion is of their policies. It's one thing to not share algorithms, it's another to not explain anything.
I agree with the posters above who say Chess.com needs to explain this decision, policy or no policy. The organization's credibility is on the line, especially with the proposed merger with Play Magnus Group. This is high profile, not a 1900-rated online cheater. Everyone needs to come clean here, starting with Magnus.
I am disgusted with chesscom decision to ban Hans at this moment without evidence. Shameful decision.
Proof is for scientists. When someone accuses an ugly woman of being a witch, I'm the guy lighting hay underneath a stake. Ain't waiting to get hexed first.
I hope Hans wins the tournament now - one more win and a few draws should do it. Ist place is now $110,500, because Carlsen isn't getting 10 1/2 Grand for finishing last and taking his bat and ball and going home. 
I think it is unfair to ban Hans this time before any solid proof comes out. Hans had admitted to mistakes he made when he was super young 12 and 16. I think it is fair those past times he was banned but this time is different. He does not deserve to be banned and it is upsetting. I feel no matter what the outcome of this situation is there is no winner
Triggered by the Carlsen/Niemann incident I wrote a longer article about what is generally possible and useful in cheating detection in strategy games, particularly Backgammon and Chess. One conclusion was that the responsible people - officials, organizers of tournaments, server operators and arbiters - should have a common, sophisticated and stringent plan. Ideally before things heat up. And developed by an umbrella organization.
After noticing the security modifications in St. Louis between round 3 and 4 and after reading the transcript of the interview with Hans Niemann from last night I get the impression of a chicken pile just keeping the rumor mill running. Sad to see. Perhaps chess.com should explain some things [edit: if it's correct what Niemann stated regarding the current ban and uninvitation].