So yes, IF he was cheating, he likely would have started cheating on move 1.
So yes, IF he was cheating, he likely would have started cheating on move 1.
Probably cheating after the 5 or 10 or 15 move if the opponent did something interesting may give someone an edge, but getting help in the first of second move it's unbelievable at this level.
Note that there is a whole page in Wikipedia about all the possible good possible second move of Niemann: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alekhine%27s_Defence
Even at a very low intermediate level of chess, you can easily know an opening like this for 8 - 10 moves across 2 - 5 variations. I know cause I do.
Master Level Prep of the Kings Indian goes 20 moves deep across 5 - 8 possible variations. This has been demonstrated over the board several times.
It's trivial to find opening theory lessons on youtube on playing the kings indian defence covering 5+ counter lines going 10+ moves deep, even on weird lines. And then there are books about this opening.
There is zero value in starting to cheat on move 1.
I've definitely heard that knowing that puzzles are much easier for GMs/etc because they know there is a winning move in that situation. Checking the board periodically with an engine to know the evaluation would also let you know when there is a very good move to play.