Anal beads to toilet gate Chess Grand Masters cheating scandal or Hollywood script
- 1277
- 7
-
- Last Comment
Following Carlsen’s departure from the Sinquefield Cup, Niemann admitted to two counts of cheating in online chess, once aged 12 and once more aged 16 in a post-match interview with GM Alejandro Ramirez. However, the American grandmaster maintains that as the extent of his infraction.
Chess.com, the online chess platform on which Niemann played, announced in a Sept. 8 statement that it had removed Niemann’s account in light of “information that contradicts his statements regarding the amount and seriousness of his cheating.”
The row between Carlsen and Niemann represents the most prominent cheating scandal rocking the chess world since the 2006 World Chess Championship, when GM Topalov’s camp accused his challenger, GM Kramnik of receiving computer assistance while taking an “unreasonable number of trips” to the bathroom during the match.
Dubbed “toilet-gate,” it was the first incident that put Regan’s name on international notice and paved the way for the emergence of his now-FIDE-recognized cheat detection methodology.
The professor uses a “garden-variety predictive analytic model” with two stages. Regan first compares results between players with similar ELO ratings and computes the deviation from the mean.
“Flipping a coin 100 times, 50 is the expectation, and the standard deviation is five,” Regan said.
From there, Regan runs “a predictive analytic model” which generates a probability on every possible outcome of an event or decision.
It’s a model Regan says is applicable to every walk of life, from modeling consumer behavior when choosing a toothbrush brand to insurance companies modeling the probabilities of home damage caused by natural disasters.
The science and models trying to understand whether or not Niemann cheated have broader implications for social behavior, according to Regan.
“This sets up an interesting scientific divergence,” Regan said. “I’m measuring directly the agreement with the computer and the amount of error on moves that don’t agree — something related directly to the cheating mechanism. Whereas Pawnalyze is measuring something on the output — how many points did he score? — And reaches an opposite conclusion.
“This is a societal case, where you could reach completely different conclusions based on the instrument of measurement that you choose.”
https://twitter.com/MagnusCarlsen/status/156684...
- Sort By
There's no doubt that Hans cheated during the game against Magnus. He has been a known cheater on chess.com and his violent behavior after losing games or matches adds more colors to his overall temperament. There's a very long video that Naka posted on his channel a few days ago and it included a detailed analysis of Hans's games against other top chess players. It also included his recent and fast rise through the ranks by playing a consistent above 70% engine moves which raise eyebrows, considering the fact that Arjun has only 2 games above 90% in his entire chess career and the reputation of the rising star Arjun speaks for itself.
Magnus has done his part and in today's chess world, there's nobody with a level of chess understanding as his. He doesn't owe any apology or explanation to anyone.
Waiting for new netflix series on niemann.
At 6:25, this cheater asks, "What's the engine's evaluation at this position?" He has no idea if he's talking stupidly or not, so to check, he's asking for an evaluation. That's crazy and he defeated Magnus? Impossible. He'll be banned sooner or later.
![Sunfeast Farmlite Oats & Almonds Cookies (Cookie) 300g [location specific]](https://cdn2.desidime.com/topics/photos/1779975/medium/Screenshot2024-04-24at11.13.10PM.png?1713980638)
Jeetne ke liye log andar me kaise kaise cheez dalte hai
True Baazigar