Occam's Razor Supports that Hans Niemann did not cheat against Magnus, or in OTB in general.

Hans will not sue anyone.  Nor will Dlugy.  They will make the threat, but never actually follow through because even they know that during discovery, more stuff about them will come out.  For example, it is very easy to refute Dlugy's claim that he was crowdsourcing moves from his students during Title Tuesday events by issuing a subpoena for the list of students in the class at the time and asking them to tell their version.  Additionally, Magnus has not said anything directly that would carry any weight in a defamation lawsuit.  He has offered his opinion, but you cannot win a defamation lawsuit over someone's opinion.

If you actually think that is Magnus' motivation, you haven't been following chess but for the last 10 minutes.  I'd almost be willing to wager that you had never heard of Magnus Carlsen prior to the Queen's Gambit airing on Netflix.

What is his motivation? To stop cheating OTB in chess, but ONLY after he loses against someone, and not calling them out BEFORE?

It makes no sense. 

Magnus might not even be privy to understand his own actions, but it's clear that his ego was bruised after losing to Hans, and apparently that's grounds for trying to ruin his chess career.

Not saying anything before he was losing to Hans, only after, of course. 

You are either intentionally leaving out details, or are unaware of details.

Magnus did say something before - to the organizers.  FIDE has very harsh rules for publicly accusing someone of cheating, so saying something publicly would not have gone well for Magnus.  Instead, Magnus (and Nepo, and possibly a couple others from what Fabi has said) went to the Sinquefield organizers and asked for more enhanced anti-cheating measures before the tournament started.  Because they were laughed at, Magnus considered withdrawing from the event before it even started.

So, you have a guy that suspects another player of cheating, conveys his concern to the organizers, is laughed out, considers withdrawing, and then watches said player crush 2 of his contemporaries and himself in a row.  That is not an ego bruising issue - that is Magnus saying "I've had enough of this clown show".

To give a completely different sport as an example:  Last year, Leah Thomas was crushing women in NCAA swimming without really even trying.  There was talk about women lining up on the blocks and simply not moving when the races started to show their protests of the rather obvious unfairness of the situation.  They were told by their universities that if they did that, they would lose their scholarships.  Instead, they had to race, lose, and complain about it.  Was their complaint due to their bruised egos or the fact that they were forced to participate in a circus?

You are either intentionally leaving out details, or are unaware of details.

Magnus did say something before - to the organizers.  FIDE has very harsh rules for publicly accusing someone of cheating, so saying something publicly would not have gone well for Magnus.  Instead, Magnus (and Nepo, and possibly a couple others from what Fabi has said) went to the Sinquefield organizers and asked for more enhanced anti-cheating measures before the tournament started.  Because they were laughed at, Magnus considered withdrawing from the event before it even started.

So, you have a guy that suspects another player of cheating, conveys his concern to the organizers, is laughed out, considers withdrawing, and then watches said player crush 2 of his contemporaries and himself in a row.  That is not an ego bruising issue - that is Magnus saying "I've had enough of this clown show".

To give a completely different sport as an example:  Last year, Leah Thomas was crushing women in NCAA swimming without really even trying.  There was talk about women lining up on the blocks and simply not moving when the races started to show their protests of the rather obvious unfairness of the situation.  They were told by their universities that if they did that, they would lose their scholarships.  Instead, they had to race, lose, and complain about it.  Was their complaint due to their bruised egos or the fact that they were forced to participate in a circus?

I need to talk to some people here. After all, I'm given to magical thinking and this is the second time I've seen it mentioned, recently, as if it's something to be laughed at. OK, so I accept it's something to be laughed at but the only objection anyone should have against magical thinking would be because they assume it doesn't work and that therefore the magical thinker is retarded.

But what if it works?

Why wouldn't Magnus quit the tournament before he lost to Hans?

Why wouldn't Magnus resign the games against Hans before he lost to Hans?

The only difference in Magnus's actions before and after he decided to call out Hans was a fair and square loss when he had the white pieces.

The only variable between Magnus deciding to call out Hans or not was him losing. That's it.

Ask yourself if Magnus would have thrown a hissy fit against Hans if he would have beat him. If the answer is 'no', then that tells you everything you need to know. 

Again, your logic is flawed because you are stating with the conclusion and trying to backfill it.

Magnus played Hans in the FTX Crypto Cup 2 weeks prior to the Sinquefield Cup.  Hans beat him with the black pieces in that event (and proceeded to lose the next 3 games to lose the match).  If you look at that event, you'll see a very odd pattern:  Hans played 1 game in each match with a T3 score of 100% in 5 matches (including the one with Duda before the power went out).  So, why would Magnus not have an issue playing him in that event (where Magnus was one of the organizers) and yet have a problem with him 2 weeks later?  Did you ever stop to consider that?  Or is your knowledge of chess history start in September 2022?

Saying he cheated OTB isn't supported by any reputable individuals, especially not those highly trusted in the chess statistical world like Regan.

So if Magnus decided he's cheating based off of no evidence, or poorly perceived evidence in his mind, then that's his own undoing. 

I don't think that PawnTsunami should speak the way he did. However, Regan being widely trusted and Regan being worthy of such widespread trust are different things. I have no first hand knowledge of Regan but he seems to be a self-promoter and there has been quite a number of comments critical of Regan's true expertise. I know I can't recommend "my instinct" to you but it tells me that in all likelihood, Regan's mission is to support the status quo at least for the time being, and to defuse accusations of cheating, which could have lasting repercussions. From what I've heard, Regan is the expert he is claimed to be.

ABOUT a couple of years ago my son gave me an old fashioned double sided razor that takes standard blades. It came with one razor blade. I don't shave a lot but must have used it 40 times and only changed the blade last week.

The definition according to wikipedia is "a scientific and philosophical rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities."

Hans has been playing well, beating players like Magnus and Aronian in important tournaments, but also losing to players like Fabiano. Just recently he lost against Fabiano with the white pieces.

This dude is not cheating OTB.

The witch hunt only exists because Magnus lost a game vs. Hans with the white pieces and now he's going out way to ruin his chess career because of a bruised ego.

That's the simplest and most logical explanation. Don't overcomplicate things.

And I say this as a master degree chemist and physician, often times the most simplest explanation is the most realistic.

"when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras".

can you explain his new 100 million dollar lawsuit case against carlsen?

that's upright crazy

I see greed as well as other bad things

can you explain his new 100 million dollar lawsuit case against carlsen?

that's upright crazy

I see greed as well as other bad things