Hikaru cheating allegations is the last thing his peers need

Yes, agreed.

Perhaps chess.com could implement a system where titled events require double-cameras (as they do in big events) for all participating players, which are streamed/uploaded to the site on the back end ... and if any player's games are deemed suspicious, the staff could pull up the video feeds to manually check.

Might be more reliable than just looking at the game moves alone ...

Though I'm not sure about the technical requirements for this. Perhaps it would be impractical.

Oh, Kramnik is correct about Hikura? What about Hikaru?

Yes, I'd never heard about those claims until now, either. And I used to watch Hikaru play on ICC, back when he was called "Smallville" (and then later on: "CapilanoBridge").

The only thing I remember notable about him (aside from his high-level of play) was his tendency to "rage quit" whenever he mouse-slipped, or blundered. Sometimes it was accompanied by insults hurled at his opponent. It was what he was known for.

But cheating was never something of a concern.

Oh, also, if he lost, he would sometimes threaten to never play that opponent again, unless they gave him X-number of rematches ... because he wanted to demoralize them and punish them for that one victory ...

Ah, good times.

28 - I only know about his comment from the YouTube video. But he's a titled player here, so his words count for something don't they? : Profile

The whole thing is weird and does chess, or all sides involved, no good. No one looks good here. The worries (sensible) about cheating are getting out of hand. I'm not sure what the answer is, as online I imagine it's really hard to prevent cheating.

I don't think he cheated. If you are going to make a public accusation you better be able to prove.

Cheating hurts the sport, so does making false accusations.

Ridiculous comment of course, but oh man I miss playing card games on Pogo!

I'm glad this happened. I think we can all now agree that Kramnik is a Sovereign Citizen of chess, and nothing he says has any basis in reality.

I strongly believe naka wouldn't do such a thing. Also his body language and reflected psychology tells he is very confident.

I don't know what kramnik thinks and why, even though i respect his title and history, i couldn't care less to be honest

this is like.. navara accusing magnus or something to me.

One of the best chess videos ever; Nakamura giving such dirty looks to Aronian for playing a questionable move. Probably giving those looks to Kramnik now Lol

You've got all your bases covered lmao

Why does the vid say GM Hikky.

I don't think Vlad was insinuating Hikaru was cheating at all. He was simply showing what he thought were impressive stats. It was only a compliment. Maybe Hikaru has a chip on his shoulder.

Hikaru adressed this in his video. The statement is very carefully phrased to be taken as an insult, a compliment, a joke, of even just a sharing of a statistic. The only 'chip' on Hikaru's shoulder is the fact that Vlad purposefully left himself a way out, he would rather have Vlad just come out and say what he really means

Hikaru posted a video of his blitz session in question, Kramnik picked out games that Nakamura had streamed live!!
LMAO!

When I suggested to Kramnik that he look into the 'money on the line' round 11 Titled Tuesday performances, that seemed to be well received, by Kramnik himself and then by the likes of Levon Aronian. I specifically proposed one individual who would have won 11/11 in Titled Tuesdays since May when money was at stake, were it not for dropping mate in 2 in one game, a few moves after a dominating performance followed by a queen sac which took him to +10. In the loss it was clear that he had cheated up to a point but had stopped since he was winning so easily. The chances of him winning the other 10 potential money games in a row, based on OTB blitz ratings, was less than one in a thousand. More than half of his round 11 opponents were rated higher than him in blitz OTB. That was the sort of 'interesting' statistic that I was hoping Kramnik would publicise.

He now goes after Nakamura suggesting that he has found 'numerous' examples of Nakamura's performances which have 'way below one percent' probability of happening. I suggest that, if you look at enough games, you are bound to find such examples. I'll give Kramnik one from this week. Nakamura lost twice in a row to a 2359 (blitz OTB) IM. The chances of this happening are less than 2 in a thousand, based on OTB blitz ratings. Last week Nakamura lost 3 in a row to Pranav (2562 blitz OTB). The chances of this are about three in a thousand. If you look at enough examples, you will find such anomalies, both good and bad.

What Kramnik has done by accusing Nakamura is to take two steps back, having just taken one forward. He cannot maintain any level of credibility with a scattergun approach like this. He said at the end of his latest video that he doesn't care about his legacy, his reputation. After this latest accusation, I think that, at least, is something that everyone can agree on.