Hans Nieman is the real deal - Chess Forums - Page 3

xzayin7

Dec 6, 2022

0

#41

llama36 wrote:

And I want to really hammer this point...

If he's such a cheater, why isn't his chess.com account banned?
And why is FIDE letting him continue to play OTB?

---

I'm not saying we won't find evidence in the future. I'm saying the world's leading authorities don't currently find him so suspicious, so why should you?

I think chess.com has a vested interest in protecting titled players ability to play on the site, as their fans will want to come here and watch them and their students will want to come here and interact with them. Think how much traffic the site would lose if, say, Nakamura were found to be cheating and banned.

Also scandal isn't good for the game or the site... or for FIDE for that matter.

Speaking of FIDE, I believe the investigation is ongoing.

lfPatriotGames

Dec 6, 2022

0

#42

BratwurstCastling wrote:

NervesofButter wrote:

BratwurstCastling wrote:

Falling_Fast wrote:

Doesn’t matter. He’s got a stamp of illegitimacy on his forehead.

Yes, if you are a religious nuthead witchhunter. Hans will be in eternal hell.

However, if you are a rational reasonable person, you will realize he cheated as a kid. That doesn't mean he is cheating in these current wins.

His reply did not insinuate he is cheating now. He stated that because of cheating in the past, he has a label on him.

Yes it did. If a kid stole candy, at some point we stop worrying about it.

The statute of limitations is five years.

So if we are to use your example, we still have a couple years to worry about his cheating.

xzayin7

Dec 6, 2022

0

#43

@willyng_kl

are you sure you're quoting the right person? I was responding to this video @premio53 linked to by some YouTuber named Epic Chess

willyng_kl

Dec 6, 2022

0

#44

NervesofButter wrote:

willyng_kl wrote:

premio53 wrote:

willyng_kl wrote:

Have none of you Hans supporters seen the interview Hans did after the Alireza match? Even if you're a genius player who plays absolute bot moves you would be able to give a logical reasoning behind your play, but he was unable to give a convincing analysis (lets be honest it was terrible, relative to someone who's supposed to be 2600+, even the commentator out-analysed him). "Chess speaks for itself" is a poor excuse for " I don't know what I was doing and I can't explain it because the engine gave me the moves so imma act mysterious and bow out".

Hans might not be cheating every game he plays but games like this are a valid reason why people are and should continue to be sus about him. The only "real" fact here is the fact that he has admitted, and been proven to have cheated, period. Yall need to stop with the "underdog beats champion" fantasy, it's not real lmao

Once again. Vishy and other world class players know a lot more about chess than you or I do. What's your problem?

I can't speak for them, I'm sure they had their reasons for forming the basis for their opinion. However, I am talking specifically about the Hans vs Alireza game here. I think the whole point of my argument is to say that if he's sus in one game, it raises a bunch of questions about how many more "sus" games he might have played, which have gone undetected.

Also, if you know what you're doing its actually fairly easy to cheat in chess (online chess, that is). While Hans may not be at super-GM strength, he is at the very least at IM/low GM strength (and thus we can assume he does in fact have quite a lot of theoretical knowledge). When cheaters (especially low rated players) first start out, they just throw in all the engine moves and get caught because they play all the best moves which just screams "HEY LOOK AT ME I'M USING ENGINE ASSISTANCE".

But strong players can use their theory (and relative knowledge of what kind of moves they can get away with that won't scream "SUS") to pick 2nd or 3rd best moves which, while not as strong as an absolute bot move, are still believable for their level of play. Obviously, this gets harder with OTB games because I suppose its difficult to get multiple lines fed to you, but this could also be possible if you had a strong player doing the "engine to human" analysis for you and feeding you the "human" moves directly.

Now, this would be incredibly difficult to prove (because I guess we need concrete and damning evidence before an innocent person can be pronounced guilty), and this is probably why FIDE hasn't actually sent the banhammer down on him, or why other strong GMs may have reservations about actually passing judgement (refer to the $100 million lawsuit; also don't forget that there are other GMs out there who are just as suspicious of his play as well).

Nevertheless, the Hans vs Alireza interview provides damning evidence against Hans. Possibly because he wasn't expecting the engine eval to be turned off (and hence he can't wing his way out of the situation because he doesn't know if the moves are good or bad), he screwed up majorly for the whole world to see, and this is why I think that he is a cheat. I'm not just basing my opinion on hearsay, I think this is a pretty logical conclusion to come by.

No need for a long post. Its already been proven he cheated since he rambled.

You seem to have something against me, but I believe in logical reasoning over mic-drops. If you have an opinion to share, I'd appreciate if you could give me the reason you think so.

My point is that a strong player thinks of their moves quite deeply, EPSECIALLY when it comes to tactics, because you don't just swing out of nowhere, you need to be absolutely sure (unless you blunder) that what you're doing is going to work. You don't even need to be a GM to do that, although reasonably we would expect to hold GMs to higher standards than say a 1000 player.

Hans did not appear to demonstrate that he had thought through his moves deeply (or at all). He was just fobbing off questions with "there's no way black is better, there's no way white is worse" and "it's so obvious". Well if its obvious I find it difficult to believe he cannot offer a single decent line to defend his "obvious ideas", and it's even more difficult to believe that he just magically stumbled upon the correct continuation not once, but multiple times.

Finally, the fact that he simply refuses to take interviews may also suggest something; some will say that he just doesn't want to give any, and I think that's a perfectly fine reason. But being embroiled in such controversy, I would think that any competent person would be itching to clear their name by showcasing their skills (maybe he just had a bad day, and does great in subsequent analyses). Unfortunately, this was not the case, and any reasonable person would not be wrong if they formed the opinion that it seemed as if Hans was unwilling (or perhaps unable) to defend his ideas. Weird indeed.

llama36

Dec 6, 2022

0

#45

willyng_kl wrote:

llama36 wrote:

And I want to really hammer this point...

If he's such a cheater, why isn't his chess.com account banned?
And why is FIDE letting him continue to play OTB?

---

I'm not saying we won't find evidence in the future. I'm saying the world's leading authorities don't currently find him so suspicious, so why should you?

Again, the whole "it's hard to find physical evidence to justify" thing, which is why he's been banned only on chess.com. I'm not sure what you mean by chess.com hasn't banned him, I'm pretty sure he's banned now (the $100 million lawsuit against chess.com, and also I'm pretty sure chess.com released a long report about Hans' cheating case and how they justified that they had determined that he was in fact cheating, much more than he admitted and much more recently as well)

No, they haven't banned him. His account is @hansontwitch

After Hans beat Carlsen they locked him out by changing his password, but that's the only thing they've done.

After Hans said chess.com locked him out for no reason they got mad, and demanded he pubically admit to ALL the cheating he did 2 years ago (presumably they wanted to shame him after he shamed them). They said they'd give him his password back if he did that.

llama36

Dec 6, 2022

0

#46

xzayin7 wrote:

llama36 wrote:

And I want to really hammer this point...

If he's such a cheater, why isn't his chess.com account banned?
And why is FIDE letting him continue to play OTB?

---

I'm not saying we won't find evidence in the future. I'm saying the world's leading authorities don't currently find him so suspicious, so why should you?

I think chess.com has a vested interest in protecting titled players ability to play on the site, as their fans will want to come here and watch them and their students will want to come here and interact with them. Think how much traffic the site would lose if, say, Nakamura were found to be cheating and banned.

Also scandal isn't good for the game or the site... or for FIDE for that matter.

Speaking of FIDE, I believe the investigation is ongoing.

Right, which is why they usually keep cheating a secret and let titled players come back multiple times...

... but they DO ban them, for you know, a few days. And force them to make a new account.

Which is why it's particularly annoying they're mad at Hans for saying he cheated in a few games which wasn't the whole truth... he was more truthful than chess.com who hid 100% of his cheating for the purpose of making money... completely self serving, no principles at all.

willyng_kl

Dec 6, 2022

0

#47

NervesofButter wrote:

willyng_kl wrote:

llama36 wrote:

And I want to really hammer this point...

If he's such a cheater, why isn't his chess.com account banned?
And why is FIDE letting him continue to play OTB?

---

I'm not saying we won't find evidence in the future. I'm saying the world's leading authorities don't currently find him so suspicious, so why should you?

Again, the whole "it's hard to find physical evidence to justify" thing, which is why he's been banned only on chess.com. I'm not sure what you mean by chess.com hasn't banned him, I'm pretty sure he's banned now (the $100 million lawsuit against chess.com, and also I'm pretty sure chess.com released a long report about Hans' cheating case and how they justified that they had determined that he was in fact cheating, much more than he admitted and much more recently as well)

Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that he wasn't banned when he cheated here at 12? He wasn't banned when he cheated here at 16? When does he finally get banned? When he beats Magnus. So what does Magnus do? Throws a fit and quits because he "knows" Hans cheated. So what does that cause? The site bans him (finally) even though he supposedly cheated in over 100 games. The site is in the process of buying the playmagnus app (yes i know that the site said this has nothing to do with anything). So Magnus says he wont play with a cheater, and yet he plays in a tournament with French players that were proven to have cheated.

How does this whole thing impact me? It doesn't. How does it impact the local chess tournament circuit? It doesn't. It hasn't even been talked about in the last couple of months.

But it will remain alive and well online. Because its just fun to stir the pot.

@LLama, I think this reply will be relevant to you as well.

Hans has in fact been "shadowbanned". If you look at his "last online", you will find that he hasn't been online since Sep 5. Chess.com does not explicitly close the accounts of titled players who have been caught cheating, they simply stop them from logging in. I believe I have seen others discussing this before, you can search it up to verify for yourselves.

Secondly, @Nervesofbutter, he has actually been banned before. Like I said, they don't explicitly close his account for the world to see, but I suppose he was also shadowbanned. Chess.com has released emails which show Hans apologising for cheating, which is why he was allowed to play again afterwards; I think a simple google search will give you all the answers to your questions.

So yes, Hans is by all accounts (including his own) a former convicted (by chess.com at least) cheater. Whether or not he is still cheating right now? I guess to each their own; as far as I'm concerned the evidence shows that he's pretty sus.

willyng_kl

Dec 6, 2022

0

#48

Sorry if I'm replying to the wrong messages lol, its pretty confusing for me to follow especially since new comments aren't updated in real time

xzayin7

Dec 6, 2022

0

#49

willyng_kl wrote:

Sorry if I'm replying to the wrong messages lol, its pretty confusing for me to follow especially since new comments aren't updated in real time

NP

llama36

Dec 6, 2022

0

#50

willyng_kl wrote:

Chess.com does not explicitly close the accounts of titled players who have been caught cheating.

That's incorrect. His old account is @hanscoolniemann

They don't display the cheater designation because Hans promised to not cheat again and they like to hide cheating of titled players... but they do force them to make a new account.

When chess.com does not give them the option to come back, their account will display a cheater icon such as with @tigranlpetrosyan

willyng_kl

Dec 6, 2022

0

#51

llama36 wrote:

willyng_kl wrote:

Chess.com does not explicitly close the accounts of titled players who have been caught cheating.

That's incorrect. His old account is @hanscoolniemann

They don't display the cheater designation because Hans promised to not cheat again and they like to hide cheating of titled players... but they do force them to make a new account.

When chess.com does not give them the option to come back, their account will display a cheater icon such as with @tigranlpetrosyan

Ah I see, I stand corrected, never really tried to look it up myself

willyng_kl

Dec 6, 2022

0

#52

NervesofButter wrote:

"...as far as I'm concerned the evidence shows that he's pretty sus."

And if that is your opinion that is fine. My only issue with all of this "drama" is when people try and present their opinion as fact.

Ngl, I do have a pretty strong opinion here. I can't really fathom how anyone can come up with an alternate explanation that makes sense without going into copium territory. I can understand if his other "sus" games are disputed where there is no concrete evidence to be had, but the Alireza game interview was pretty damning; I have an IM friend who watched the interview and he too thought that the analysis was pretty sus. I get that some people might think that past actions do not necessarily justify future labels on a person's character, but with this incident being so recent I think its understandable that I have my reservations about his actual ability.
Still hoping to find someone who might provide strong evidence or arguments to the contrary if there are any takers lol

llama36

Dec 6, 2022

0

#53

willyng_kl wrote:

NervesofButter wrote:

"...as far as I'm concerned the evidence shows that he's pretty sus."

And if that is your opinion that is fine. My only issue with all of this "drama" is when people try and present their opinion as fact.

Ngl, I do have a pretty strong opinion here. I can't really fathom how anyone can come up with an alternate explanation that makes sense without going into copium territory. I can understand if his other "sus" games are disputed where there is no concrete evidence to be had, but the Alireza game interview was pretty damning; I have an IM friend who watched the interview and he too thought that the analysis was pretty sus. I get that some people might think that past actions do not necessarily justify future labels on a person's character, but with this incident being so recent I think its understandable that I have my reservations about his actual ability.
Still hoping to find someone who might provide strong evidence or arguments to the contrary if there are any takers lol

He's definitely suspicious.

I'm not upset because I think he's a completely honest player. I'm upset because I think chess.com acted inappropriately. They locked him out with zero evidence and tried to come up with evidence afterwards... which they didn't find. Then they keep his account locked because he badmouthed them in an interview.

I can understand them wanting to protect and grow their business, but they need better policies. If Hans was so suspicious he shouldn't have been invited, or been disinvited earlier... don't wait until the hour after he beat Carlsen OTB. That's ridiculous. And don't keep his account locked for essentially no reason. Don't author reports to smear his name, when in reality, to the best of your investigation's knowledge, he kept his promise to not cheat.

Don't screw up his career because you dislike him and he's suspicious.

Luckily for chess.com they (probably) didn't fk it up badly enough to owe him money, so the court case will (probably) fail. But ethically and procedurally I think chess.com needs to improve.

premio53

Dec 6, 2022

0

#54

willyng_kl wrote:

Nevertheless, the Hans vs Alireza interview provides damning evidence against Hans. I'm not just basing my opinion on hearsay, I think this is a pretty logical conclusion to come by.

Carlsen rejects an interview here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXVPizPubzc

Carlsen refuses to discuss game after losing to Nepo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5oxIkvTJQc

Carlsen trolls the post-game interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLmogDwZLh0

Here is Carlsen giving a detailed post game interview that makes Hans look like a genius.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq0npx1DZ28

Yes. These post game reactions are very sus.

llama36

Dec 6, 2022

0