Chess

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
3,190
5,350
113d 32m
So the report from Chess.com is released:


The fucking baffling part to me is that Chess.com clearly offered Hans a way out if he would just fess up, admit what he'd done, and move forward. Really classy move on their part. But amazingly, given that this is all now public it seems Hans chose to decline.

"I’m going to bring my letter to a close with an offer to have a call. If you are willing to correct the false statements you made about having never cheated when it mattered (now that you have said these untruths publicly), acknowledge the full breadth of the above violations, and cooperate with us to compete under strict Fair Play measures, Chess.com would be happy to consider bringing you back to our events. In fact, I think it would be a wonderful redemption story for the full truth to come out, for the chess world to see this and acknowledge your talent regardless of your past, and give the community what they deserve: The truth."
 

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
3,190
5,350
113d 32m
These were interesting as well. The poster did a analysis of 400,000 positions by elite players and calculated their accuracy relative to Stockfish 15 along with their move consistency. The tldr is that there is a very clear path that players take as they grow, with accuracy and consistency improving with rating, and those metrics being shared by other competitors at the same rank. Hans, however, experienced in 2018 (2300 ELO) a massive jump in accuracy and consistency but then failed to improve as a player as his rating climbed to 2700. He was winning games despite having significantly lower and noisier performance than his peers. Very odd indeed.

The statistical analysis was less interesting, as the guy obviously isn't a statistician, abused some concepts of correlation, and didn't do any actual hypothesis testing or provide error information.


 
Last edited:

Cutlery

Kill All the White People
<Gold Donor>
4,965
12,966
123d 8h 34m
So the report from Chess.com is released:


The fucking baffling part to me is that Chess.com clearly offered Hans a way out if he would just fess up, admit what he'd done, and move forward. Really classy move on their part. But amazingly, given that this is all now public it seems Hans chose to decline.

"I’m going to bring my letter to a close with an offer to have a call. If you are willing to correct the false statements you made about having never cheated when it mattered (now that you have said these untruths publicly), acknowledge the full breadth of the above violations, and cooperate with us to compete under strict Fair Play measures, Chess.com would be happy to consider bringing you back to our events. In fact, I think it would be a wonderful redemption story for the full truth to come out, for the chess world to see this and acknowledge your talent regardless of your past, and give the community what they deserve: The truth."

Hes 19. He lacks the wisdom to understand what the correct thing to do is. He's gonna keep doubling down on stupid shit because that's what you do when you're a dumb fuck 19 year old.
 

Gankak

Vyemm Raider
3,840
2,489
62d 20h 22m
Hes 19. He lacks the wisdom to understand what the correct thing to do is. He's gonna keep doubling down on stupid shit because that's what you do when you're a dumb fuck 19 year old.

Especially when his coach is a cheater as well
 

Abigailicious

Golden Knight of the Realm
118
261
1d 7h 19m
I don't know much about chess, except I play okay for someone who doesn't play. I do know this, this guy cheated. He's 19, he didn't defeat the world champion by blind luck or his own acumen. He's admitted to cheating as far back as age 12, he is accused of cheating over 100 times by analysts.

The one time in my professional career we had a little office chess tournament going, the asshole in the group cheated. So yeah, people cheat.

He cheated.
 

Hateyou

Not Great, Not Terrible
<Bronze Donator>
14,413
37,279

I wish this had sound. Why’d he take his king and break the cross off? Lol

 

Grabbit Allworth

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
1,127
5,326
I know only the absolute basics about Chess and I've probably played 2 or 3 complete games in my entire life. That said, I have a question.

At this point, isn't Chess a 'solved' game where there is always a 'correct' move/counter-move?
 

Cutlery

Kill All the White People
<Gold Donor>
4,965
12,966
123d 8h 34m
I know only the absolute basics about Chess and I've probably played 2 or 3 complete games in my entire life. That said, I have a question.

At this point, isn't Chess a 'solved' game where there is always a 'correct' move/counter-move?

Yes, and it's fucking annoying.

I haven't played in 25 years, and the game is so much different now. Now it's all computer engine driven. When you play online, you can fucking tell when someone's loading up an engine. You put them in a bad position and all of a sudden they take an extra minute to move and do some off the wall bullshit that only makes a difference 8 turns later.

At rating 1300. Yeah, naw dawg, dont believe that shit for a minute.

The entire meta of the game now is to do it fast so that you can prove you're not using a fucking engine to play
 

Gankak

Vyemm Raider
3,840
2,489
62d 20h 22m
At this point, isn't Chess a 'solved' game where there is always a 'correct' move/counter-move?

No it is not solved Hikaru was on Lex Friedman's podcast 2 days ago and was asked that very question and said no. Yes engines are used at the highest level for position evaluations but its far from being solved.
 

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
3,190
5,350
113d 32m
At this point, isn't Chess a 'solved' game where there is always a 'correct' move/counter-move?
It's believed to be inherently a drawn game with perfect play, but given the staggering number of possible positions we don't have the computing power to truly reduce it to a "if this move then that move" decision tree. Even the engines that can look 30-40 moves deep don't see everything (of course they utterly destroy any human player by insurmountable margins).

you can fucking tell when someone's loading up an engine
This is why I basically only play games with people I know.

The entire meta of the game now is to do it fast so that you can prove you're not using a fucking engine to play
The fast time controls are legit more fun to play and watch because there's so much more instinct and pattern matching involved. I'd like to see more traction for some of the randomized variants, too (Fisher/960).

The latest meme of "duck chess" is hilarious. I tried it OTB with my son and it's quite fun.
 

Cutlery

Kill All the White People
<Gold Donor>
4,965
12,966
123d 8h 34m
Last guy i played on Chess.com....96.7% accuracy. Suuuuuure.

I find Lichess to actually be a better site. I suspect Hikaru drives too many shitbags to chess.com.
 

Djay

Trakanon Raider
2,243
267
16d 17h 58m
I legitimately had a game a week or two ago that was somewhere around 94-96%. It was against a bot...trying to see if I can find it, but it looks like chess.com only archives human games.
Not sure my point...it can happen like monkeys at a typewriter writing Shakespeare, but whether it's legitimate or not it will be suspicious now.

I've never been a fan of speed chess...because I always overanalyzed things, but I did like the randomized variants since I also didn't like to memorize openings. Not sure if those variants help with the computer issues, though.
 

Chris

Potato del Grande
14,617
1,021
103d 8h 8m
Last guy i played on Chess.com....96.7% accuracy. Suuuuuure.

I find Lichess to actually be a better site. I suspect Hikaru drives too many shitbags to chess.com.
Problem for me is that I'm 1200-1300 on chess.com and 1500-1600 on lichess.

Chess.com games seem much more difficult to me, though maybe that's cheaters.
 

Gankak

Vyemm Raider
3,840
2,489
62d 20h 22m
Im ~1700 on Chess.com and haven't had run ins with the number of cheaters you guys claim. Occasionally I get an email from them saying they gave me some ratings points cause they found one of my opponents used a computer but Ive not had that big an issue
 

Cutlery

Kill All the White People
<Gold Donor>
4,965
12,966
123d 8h 34m
Problem for me is that I'm 1200-1300 on chess.com and 1500-1600 on lichess.

Chess.com games seem much more difficult to me, though maybe that's cheaters.

I am also about 400 rating higher on Lichess. And I am baffled as fuck about it.
 

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
3,190
5,350
113d 32m
I am also about 400 rating higher on Lichess. And I am baffled as fuck about it.
Lichess overall has higher ratings by several hundred points. It's just a symptom of their player population dynamics and implementation of ELO. Both Lichess and Chess.com will give ratings somewhat higher than you'd get OTB.
 

Cutlery

Kill All the White People
<Gold Donor>
4,965
12,966
123d 8h 34m
Lichess overall has higher ratings by several hundred points. It's just a symptom of their player population dynamics and implementation of ELO. Both Lichess and Chess.com will give ratings somewhat higher than you'd get OTB.

I figured that was probably the case with 10x more players on chess.com, I just didn't think it would be quite so drastic.
 

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
3,190
5,350
113d 32m
LOOOOOOL


Edit: Non-paywall link.


I expect Hans to lose this badly, stupid damage requests aside. You can't get pissed at being called a cheater when you're in the act of lying about how much you cheated.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Worf
Reactions: Gankak