Aaaaannd any last remaining respect I had for Hans is now gone.
Personally I don't know; I see smoke but no fire and I'm not qualified to judge the meaning of that smoke. Hans' admitted history of cheating before online makes me inclined to believe he's cheated again, but it doesn't prove anything. In the future going forward, I think the chess community should adopt a zero tolerance policy towards cheating; one strike and you're out even if you were a teenager when you did it. This would be the most fair to the players who never cheat even once. But this isn't the sort of standard that should be applied retroactively.
This is just an easy excuse.
"He cheated!" "There are anticheat measures" "They're not good enough"
It's a cycle that can never be solved. The loser can always claim the anticheat measures were "not enough".
You know what. I think Carlsen has cheated in every single one of his games. Prove the contrary.
Something might be placed inside the organism.
> I think Carlsen has cheated in every single one of his games. Prove the contrary.
That's easy. He streamed a lot of games with the tightest time requirements happening in the discipline, kind of 3 minutes per player plus extra 1 second per move. The speed of that game is so high that there is simply no time for having a conversations with cheating device. Also he always notice some suspicious moves (in not that fast games) which becomes correlating with chess engine.
https://www.chessdom.com/hans-niemann-was-thoroughly-checked...
Seems unlikely ...
Conversations? A cheating software can read the board and even move the pieces for him, this is ridiculous. 100% a cheater.
As far as I am concerned, once Niemann has passed all the tests his accusers can come up with, he would be vindicated, and they would be subject to opprobrium - it would be a vindication unavailable even through a successful libel suit. There's no infinite regress of suspicion in this view.
https://www.chessdom.com/hans-niemann-was-thoroughly-checked...
I don't know what else they could have done other than full body x-ray him. Make your own mind up whether these checks are stringent.
In addition, there was a 15 minute broadcast delay.
His record in that tournament for rounds 4 though 9 was loss, draw, draw, win, draw. Hans was the lowest rated player in the tournament by 57 points.
In any such proposal, he could reasonably require the same of his opponents and any monitors present.
Which would make libel and slander pretty untenable by my limited understanding.
Carlsen also had the perfect excuse for his bad performance by suggesting the other player cheated.
This is ultimately led to the WSJ article.