Really?
Occam's Razor Supports that Hans Niemann did not cheat against Magnus, or in OTB in general.
Sort:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
FIRESTORMTHIEF wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
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
If Hans didn't cheat OTB, which is seems like its the most likely case, then there were extremely questionable unlawful actions by many individuals exclaiming he cheated based on no evidence. These accusations hurt his income, opportunity costs, etc....I am not a lawyer.
Usually when defamation really becomes illegal defamation, is when it hurts someones career. I actually think he has a case against Magnus, Hikaru, and other individuals who have somewhat defamed.
But I actually think his case against chess.com is probably a loss. Chess.com had evidence of its claims, and it avoided saying Hans cheated OTB.
But the claims against Magnus and Hikaru seem much more reasonable.
You might be mixing up "illegal" with "suable". I think it only becomes illegal if it's shown to be suable libel. Perhaps not even then unless you're in Russia.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#284
Hans will indeed have to be very careful about casting aspersions at Carlsen and chess.com, both of which have reputations worth protecting. (For some reason he forgets his is already wrecked - the best he can do is draw a line under his past, and that can't happen quickly).
right.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#286
lfPatriotGames wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
FIRESTORMTHIEF wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
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
If Hans didn't cheat OTB, which is seems like its the most likely case, then there were extremely questionable unlawful actions by many individuals exclaiming he cheated based on no evidence. These accusations hurt his income, opportunity costs, etc....I am not a lawyer.
Usually when defamation really becomes illegal defamation, is when it hurts someones career. I actually think he has a case against Magnus, Hikaru, and other individuals who have somewhat defamed.
But I actually think his case against chess.com is probably a loss. Chess.com had evidence of its claims, and it avoided saying Hans cheated OTB.
But the claims against Magnus and Hikaru seem much more reasonable.
The way I see it, he has absolutely no case. He did cheat. So anyone suggesting or hinting or insinuating that he cheated in another venue was perfectly reasonable in doing so. Because he had a history of cheating. AND there is circumstantial evidence of him cheating.
So he can sue, but he should be prepared for a countersuit. Recently there was a case of a man suing himself, and he WON. And because Hans is THE only person directly responsible for the claims he's making he should probably sue himself first. If he's successful there, THEN consider suing other, less involved, individuals.
Saying that because he cheated on chess.com, that they are able to say he cheated OTB isn't legally acceptable.
Also, I don't see any circumstantial evidence he cheated OTB. At least not strong evidence. The evidence that he cheated OTB would never be accepted in a court case.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#287
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
FIRESTORMTHIEF wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
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
If Hans didn't cheat OTB, which is seems like its the most likely case, then there were extremely questionable unlawful actions by many individuals exclaiming he cheated based on no evidence. These accusations hurt his income, opportunity costs, etc....I am not a lawyer.
Usually when defamation really becomes illegal defamation, is when it hurts someones career. I actually think he has a case against Magnus, Hikaru, and other individuals who have somewhat defamed.
But I actually think his case against chess.com is probably a loss. Chess.com had evidence of its claims, and it avoided saying Hans cheated OTB.
But the claims against Magnus and Hikaru seem much more reasonable.
The way I see it, he has absolutely no case. He did cheat. So anyone suggesting or hinting or insinuating that he cheated in another venue was perfectly reasonable in doing so. Because he had a history of cheating. AND there is circumstantial evidence of him cheating.
So he can sue, but he should be prepared for a countersuit. Recently there was a case of a man suing himself, and he WON. And because Hans is THE only person directly responsible for the claims he's making he should probably sue himself first. If he's successful there, THEN consider suing other, less involved, individuals.
The evidence that he cheated OTB would never be accepted in a court case.
If it even gets to court it will be a civil case where the burden of proof is much lower. A bit like how it will be for you when you get sued for malpractice in your quack surgery.
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
FIRESTORMTHIEF wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
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
If Hans didn't cheat OTB, which is seems like its the most likely case, then there were extremely questionable unlawful actions by many individuals exclaiming he cheated based on no evidence. These accusations hurt his income, opportunity costs, etc....I am not a lawyer.
Usually when defamation really becomes illegal defamation, is when it hurts someones career. I actually think he has a case against Magnus, Hikaru, and other individuals who have somewhat defamed.
But I actually think his case against chess.com is probably a loss. Chess.com had evidence of its claims, and it avoided saying Hans cheated OTB.
But the claims against Magnus and Hikaru seem much more reasonable.
The way I see it, he has absolutely no case. He did cheat. So anyone suggesting or hinting or insinuating that he cheated in another venue was perfectly reasonable in doing so. Because he had a history of cheating. AND there is circumstantial evidence of him cheating.
So he can sue, but he should be prepared for a countersuit. Recently there was a case of a man suing himself, and he WON. And because Hans is THE only person directly responsible for the claims he's making he should probably sue himself first. If he's successful there, THEN consider suing other, less involved, individuals.
Saying that because he cheated on chess.com, that they are able to say he cheated OTB isn't legally acceptable.
Also, I don't see any circumstantial evidence he cheated OTB. At least not strong evidence. The evidence that he cheated OTB would never be accepted in a court case.
Well the whole issue of cheating in chess in general might not be accepted in court. How do you prove it? It seems to me the people accusing Hans of cheating were simply stating the obvious. Stating what Hans already admitted to. Hans can't be upset that people accuse him of cheating when, in fact, he cheated.
The issue seems to be online vs. otb. But chess is chess. The purpose of online chess is to simulate (as much as possible) otb chess. It's just a way to make playing more available and easy vs. in person.
Take for example zoom calls and meetings. They make it easier for people to work out ideas, plans, schedules, etc so that people don't have to fly a thousand miles to meet in person. So what if someone committed an offense (say slander) in person vs. a zoom call? Is there really a difference? Obviously YES there is a difference, one is in person, the other is online. But other than that, not much difference at all.
So the people calling out Hans are not wrong. The evidence is overwhelming that he cheated. I think trying to "prove" online accusations vs otb accusations will be extremely difficult. Given the purpose of online chess and given the circumstantial evidence of otb cheating.
He cooked his own goose. I think he just needs to be a little more humble and move on. He is clearly an extremely good chess player. He should build on that put the past behind him. Suing very reputable people and institutions puts him in even more bad light.
He had pretty much the best possible outcome then he does this lmao this kid really is a moron. Wouldn't be surprised if magnus doesn't let him drop the case and stiffs him with all the lawyers bills. They had no otb proof things were moving on he had more views thane ever looked like the good guy but nope he had to remind everyone he's both a narcissist and a moron. To prove libel hans has to prove magnus knew he didn't cheat and after hearing the comments from the document it feels more like a child's tantrum its like magnus acted childish and hans went " oh ya hold my beer".
Oct 21, 2022
0
#290
"The lawsuit speaks for itself". Yes, but due to his profound lack of self-awareness it doesn't say what he thinks it says.
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#292
MorningGlory84 wrote:
"The lawsuit speaks for itself". Yes, but due to his profound lack of self-awareness it doesn't say what he thinks it says.
Especially considering that the first ~20 pages of the lawsuit look like they were written by Hans.
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#294
lfPatriotGames wrote:
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
I don't know why you even dignify such comments with response. He probably writes 'FACT' at the end of his opinion online regularly.
lfPatriotGames wrote:
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
The burden of proof is on Magnus. He could have written a generalized letter about cheating but instead he singled out Hans in a very public way. He refuses to play against him or in tournaments Hans is in. So it seems undeniable that Magnus intended to prevent Hans from competing. Hence, ruining his career was the intention.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#296
MorningGlory84 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
I don't know why you even dignify such comments with response. He probably writes 'FACT' at the end of his opinion online regularly.
You can't just personally attack everyone you disagree with and think you come out looking anything other than petty.
The fact that Magnus's ultimate goal was to prevent Hans from participating and therefore negatively affecting his income, opportunity costs, overall career, etc...is a very valid reason to sue someone, especially if what they are saying is untrue. If Hans didn't cheat OTB, then Magnus should suffer legal consequences.
MorningGlory84 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
I don't know why you even dignify such comments with response. He probably writes 'FACT' at the end of his opinion online regularly.
You are probably right. But to me it's interesting. My neighbor is currently in a lawsuit and things like intent, and facts, matter. He was outside watering his flowers. His next door neighbor (who is VERY adversarial) approached him. So he sprayed him with the garden hose. Now his neighbor is suing for damage to his eye, mental distress, ptsd, etc. What are the facts, what was the intent (by both).
In the case of Hans, to paraphrase Pawn I believe it is, I think Hans is an idiot. Everyone he is suing has deeper pockets and better lawyers. Not only does this make Hans look bad, what he's doing actually DOES have the potential to ruin his career. If would have just admitted his past mistakes, been a little more humble, he could probably move on to a good career. Now he has chess tournament organizers thinking twice about inviting someone who is sue happy.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#298
lfPatriotGames wrote:
MorningGlory84 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
I don't know why you even dignify such comments with response. He probably writes 'FACT' at the end of his opinion online regularly.
You are probably right. But to me it's interesting. My neighbor is currently in a lawsuit and things like intent, and facts, matter. He was outside watering his flowers. His next door neighbor (who is VERY adversarial) approached him. So he sprayed him with the garden hose. Now his neighbor is suing for damage to his eye, mental distress, ptsd, etc. What are the facts, what was the intent (by both).
In the case of Hans, to paraphrase Pawn I believe it is, I think Hans is an idiot. Everyone he is suing has deeper pockets and better lawyers. Not only does this make Hans look bad, what he's doing actually DOES have the potential to ruin his career. If would have just admitted his past mistakes, been a little more humble, he could probably move on to a good career. Now he has chess tournament organizers thinking twice about inviting someone who is sue happy.
It's in little ways like this that I am reminded how different the US is to the UK. I've always found this litigiousness bemusing.
Hans doesn't need to pursue this avenue at all, no tournaments have banned him yet, so if he's as good as he think he is we will see him crowned world champion before long. Right?
Oct 21, 2022
0
#299
lfPatriotGames wrote:
MorningGlory84 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
rookNoob1982 wrote:
The fact is the only reason Magnus said what he said was to prevent Hans from competing. That’s the only reason. So Magnus did intentionally intend to destroy Hans career. So this lawsuit seems perfectly reasonable to me and I hope Hans wins.
That just doesn't make any sense. And it would be impossible to prove. The ONLY reason Magnus wouldn't want Hans to complete is if Hans is suspected of cheating. Hans, being an admitted cheater, is going to be open to suspicion of cheating.
You can't say it's a "fact" that your belief is a reason Magnus said what he said. Magnus has openly said he wants more anti cheating measures. If Hans finds his career in trouble it might have less to do with those who are against cheating, and more to do with Hans himself cheating.
I don't know why you even dignify such comments with response. He probably writes 'FACT' at the end of his opinion online regularly.
You are probably right. But to me it's interesting. My neighbor is currently in a lawsuit and things like intent, and facts, matter. He was outside watering his flowers. His next door neighbor (who is VERY adversarial) approached him. So he sprayed him with the garden hose. Now his neighbor is suing for damage to his eye, mental distress, ptsd, etc. What are the facts, what was the intent (by both).
In the case of Hans, to paraphrase Pawn I believe it is, I think Hans is an idiot. Everyone he is suing has deeper pockets and better lawyers. Not only does this make Hans look bad, what he's doing actually DOES have the potential to ruin his career. If would have just admitted his past mistakes, been a little more humble, he could probably move on to a good career. Now he has chess tournament organizers thinking twice about inviting someone who is sue happy.
Just because someone has deeper pockets, doesn't give them to legal right to defame, etc.
It's unfortunate that people with money can avoid being sued by having more money than the people they defame, etc.
But having a lot of money in itself isn't always enough to protect you from illegally defaming, etc.
If I were Hans and I beat the world champion at chess OTB without cheating, then had my career ruined by the world champion, then I would probably fight it too. It's just the right thing to do.
You can't have chess players who lose decide who can have a chess career and who can't, based on no proof.
Oct 21, 2022
0
#300
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Saying that because he cheated on chess.com, that they are able to say he cheated OTB isn't legally acceptable.
So, we are instructed to believe that some unnamed persons said that because Niemann cheated on chess.com, this gives the unnamed persons the capability to say (doesn't that just mean having a functional tongue and vocal chords?) that he cheated OTB, and that doing so "isn't legally acceptable".
How about now identifying who the unnamed persons are and then showing where they claimed Niemann cheated OTB?
Just kidding - some posts are simply full of sloppy nonsense.
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
If Hans didn't cheat OTB, which is seems like its the most likely case, then there were extremely questionable unlawful actions by many individuals exclaiming he cheated based on no evidence. These accusations hurt his income, opportunity costs, etc....I am not a lawyer.
Usually when defamation really becomes illegal defamation, is when it hurts someones career. I actually think he has a case against Magnus, Hikaru, and other individuals who have somewhat defamed.
But I actually think his case against chess.com is probably a loss. Chess.com had evidence of its claims, and it avoided saying Hans cheated OTB.
But the claims against Magnus and Hikaru seem much more reasonable.
The way I see it, he has absolutely no case. He did cheat. So anyone suggesting or hinting or insinuating that he cheated in another venue was perfectly reasonable in doing so. Because he had a history of cheating. AND there is circumstantial evidence of him cheating.
So he can sue, but he should be prepared for a countersuit. Recently there was a case of a man suing himself, and he WON. And because Hans is THE only person directly responsible for the claims he's making he should probably sue himself first. If he's successful there, THEN consider suing other, less involved, individuals.