I have a Scientific American magazine from the early 1970's with an article titled "Why computers will never play chess". Those were the good old days.
@@graniteamerican3547 *The Gambit and Defense both are. Just added a new move. There are tons of names for chess openings. The defense is always on the black side since white always go first. Gambit move pretty much mean you're playing a move that's a gamble. It could work out or flop big time. A Gambit move usually includes sacrificing a major piece or a pawn in hope of setting up a strong attack formation against black.*
Another form of taunting might be, when making a strong move, to drop the piece down hard enough to be audible. Not with a bang, but sending a clear message.
I'm picturing the rematch in a white room with an integrated Faraday cage under anechoic padding on the walls. Cameras mounted behind mirrors. The players wear prison jumpsuits; one black, the other white. The board, pieces, pencils, move sheets and the clock are the only things on the glass table.
They had a subsequent game and Magnus quit after one move saying it was in protest.... but was it because if he lost again, it would really destroy Magnus.
At live events, the board is usually visible to both the live and online audience. All you would need to cheat is an accomplice and a way for them to send a signal to you after they have analyzed the position with a chess engine. Something along the lines of what the MIT card counting teams have used to break blackjack in casinos would work. A small receiver in their shoe that can buzz them information from a team member for example. Personally, I think having them play in a Faraday caged area with little to no ability to see audience members should be implemented at least at big money tourneys.
What frequency do you attenuate with the cage? A cell phone still rings inside a microwave... It is actually quite difficult to block cell and wifi signal. Adequate solutions would cost millions.
Seems pretty clear to me they were specific about cheating because he admitted to cheating when younger online, and he could get caught in a trap if he said he "never" cheated.
Your idea of putting on a Chess Tournament between the two would be best solution. They should offer to split the pot based on the ratio of the number of games won over the number of games played! That way they both would be compensated for the match based on their ability! They need to play an odd number of games to ensure an ultimate winner! PS: I enjoy watching all your videos and you do a great service to everyone by expounding on all the crazy legal events that are happening around the USA!
There are absolute ways to taunt your opponent over a chess board. Even a smile, a grin, even making a fist, tense your body, reseat your butt in the chair, exhaust air from your mouth in relief.... I could go on and on.
attitude: And as a former frequent tournament player, SO WHAT? If people want to try to win by being a jerk and intimidating their opponent, they can do that, until the judges object. Do you want to win by playing better or being a jerk?
@@rpc717: None of that stuff (and I've seen plenty of it) matters at ALL re the position, the moves, or either player's actual skill. There's no luck in chess. There's a HIGH correlation between ability and results over time in tournament play.
@@rogergeyer9851 - You are singling me out and calling me out just for answering Steves question that he asked to his viewers, by presenting some ways to his understanding on how to taunt an opponent over a chess board? Obviously, you sir, do not know what or who the Jerk is.
Didn't know that Steve Lehto was a chess fan!! This is the best summation of the current situation in chess that I've heard so far. Incredible job by Mr. Lehto as usual!
The website itself needs to publish a list of suspected/confirmed cheaters through their websites because there are a lot of talk that the online chess website knows of Grand Masters who have been caught or flagged and not punnished or let known to the public. Be hilarious of Magnus has been flagged before and the website and him shrugged it off as "i play just as good as an engine". If that list exists I hope it comes out in discovery.
Steve beating someone with the black pieces is harder because white gets to move first and set the match to their style. Meaning you can very easily end up playing non stop defence the entire game if your not careful.
20:20 Chess tournaments and in chess matches they no longer do adjournments, these days games played in the classical time control typically last around five hours and a few might reach 7 or so hours but they end at the board when the timer runs out or when someone resigns/draws. In the past adjournments were considered safe to do because chess engines weren't very accurate back then but today they are so strong that if they did adjournments today then the player with the advantage would win simply by following the computer's advice.
TAUNTING: During the game, taunting is done using the chess pieces themselves, not by words or hands gestures. If so, taunting using chess pieces deviate your moves from those of the computer's 100% moves pattern, which would have made the move significantly sounded like he was cheating. How is thus cheating possible? A very small earpiece.
I'm not aware of what exactly happened during the game, but it's possible Hans "taunted" him, relative to normal chess etiquette. For example, pretending like you aren't putting much effort into a very challenging game (acting like you aren't thinking about the moves) could be considered "taunting behavior". It's weird..
was a instance during last week where a opponent aigent magnus rage quited when magnus did whats considerd the worst opening move for black. magnus have done simular opening moves multiple time including aigenst some of the best in the world
the post game interview revealed that Hans was in preparation for about 20 moves which means he already had studied the order of moves beforehand hence why he wasnt particularly concerned with some critical positions , watching Magnus play moves into a position he had already looked at would open the window for subtle taunts
Verbal taunting is common enough in "friendly" games. Taunting in a tournament is done by how you move and your body language. Tournament chess requires an insane amount of focus, and every little thing from your opponent registers.
The practice of adjourning games was discontinued approximately 20 years ago due to computers. All modern tournament classical chess is now played in a single day, usually with a maximum of 3 hours per side. FIDE is pronounced feeday. Expect another incoming lawsuit from Max Dlugy. That's a great idea to have Hans and Magnus battle it out!
@@zapazap Sealed moves were standard procedure for adjourned games, but it was only the next move to be played obviously. They would not lessen the advantage of looking at the engine after the adjournment.
@@davidsanders5861 Ok. I wonder though why consultation with one's team was not enough a concern. Was it always a concern, but computers have made the concern to overwhelming to ignore?
@@zapazap I played in some organized team games. The etiquette allows you to watch your teammates play, but you are not allowed any signals to your mate. The usual suspect being that he forgot to press his clock after a move and is now losing time while the opponent seems to be 'thinking hard' while he's running down the clock. It's a weird feeling when you at some point yourself notice that the opponent forgot his clock. And now you have to sit there like a stone block trying to keep his attention so he doesn't look at it and notice his mistake.
@@groermaik I was tossing up whether to reply on your comment about not seeing a sword. I think it looks like a St Bernard with lawyer's wig and white, red and black robes, very English?? 😁
How much does it actually cost to file a lawsuit? Surely they already have lawyers working for them. What if this whole thing is a setup so that both companies raise more money and they arrange a sponsorship for an upcoming match?
This is the most neutral unbiased and best summing up of the lawsuit on RU-vid. Thankyou because im bored of streamers just trying to get views as they are owned by the chessworld.
"Can you imagine if tennis matches did that?" It did once. John Isner vs Nicolas Mahut at Wimbledon 2010. That match spanned THREE days. And Isner's reward for winning was getting swept out in straight sets in the next round.
Heres an idea as Magnus refuses to play Neimann, get one of the big IT companies to sponsor the event and instead of playing each other they play the AI and see who does best (obviously the AI will win, but the money would go to the best human player - and the games would only take half as long).
I think your solution would work. In Computer Gaming there is a thing called “speed runs” and it’s possible to calculate the limits of “a run”. If someone defies those limits it’s highly probable they cheated.
I love that idea of a rematch chest unfortunately I also unfortunately I also am of belief that that those 2 can play each other and the winnings would go back-and-forth depending on what day each of them is having still a brilliant idea though at least they have that for that time period till they meet again
In the absence of physical evidence, the cheating allegations rest solely on statistical probability. It's going to be difficult to get jurors to understand this - I've seen professors fail at fairly elementary "real world" statistical problems, like the Monty Hall problem. On the other hand, if we could take inspiration from chess and introduce blitz legislation, justice might be well served.
Don't dismiss that option. There probably is one in the pipe. Considering the size of the cheese business, I bet there have been a few cheese lawsuits. Don't know how big.
Honestly your proposed solution makes more sense, and if this guy honestly believes he's as good as he says he is, can't see why he wouldn't go for it. Both he and his opponent would have much to gain, not just in money but in reputation, if they won. Everyone wins but the lawyers (no offense to present company lol).
Magnus is the highest rated chess player in the entirety of chess. The only thing with a higher rating are the chess engines. He is that good. Cheating talk around Hans had been taking place for years before this match occurred.
He was a child playing chess online. Imho what happened here is Magnus got his ass kicked and pitched a fit. Btw steves claim is false..i believe magnus lost 3 games in the current tournament
@@cdreid9999 Being a child doesn't mean you get off scot free for Murder. If you cheated, ever, even once, and get caught. You should be banned for LIFE. Permanantly. You become untrustworthly. Time going by will not make you a better person. You cheated, why would you NOT cheat again? EVERY single person ever caught cheating in any kind of sport, competition, or leaderboard system, it has ALWAYS been found that they have cheated MULTIPLE times. There has NEVER been a situation of 1 person cheating, and then never cheated again. It is always multiple times.
Federal Court doesn't stream their cases, state courts can if they choose to. So this potentially could be streamed but we would jave no way of knowing if it will or wont
Never thought I would see this topic here, but here we are and I'm happy to see the take. I've been following the drama since it happened and I wouldn't completely rule out some kind of settlement for Hans. Yes its true that Hans admitted to cheating, but only for online play. The players have definitely insinuated that this also has happened over the board which is a whole different kind of event. If Hans can prove that the slander has impacted his livelihood when there is no proof (either caught red handed or by expert testimony) his ridiculous lawsuit could have some legs under it. I definitely think its a long shot, and it doesn't help that the paperwork submitted contains grammatical errors, but it will be fun to see how this thing goes.
Enh, cheaters have won lawsuits for defamation before. It’s happened in Arcade gaming, and Fishing off the top of my head. If Hans doesn’t submit conclusive evidence of how he beat Magnus then I’m not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t care for chess but even I know if you can’t explain how you beat the world champ after beating the world champ then you can’t get full credit for your work if you don’t show how you got it
The statistics of Neimanns over the board play speaks for itself. Seriously though, they'll come up in court and it'll only be worse for Hans if it makes the courtroom.
I've played chess for over 40 years and if you have someone who cheats you don't want to play them ever or you play over the table speed chess. I heard allegedly how he cheated and would play touch move when playing him. Touch move is if you touch the chess piece you have to move that pice.
Put them in a box with CC-tv watching. Soundproof the room and only show the board so they can be in a tee shirt and boxers only so no backside plug can be hidden. That gets rid of the MacGuffin interfering and it would also eliminate any fish.
Don't know if you ever heard the song "CCCP" by American Soviets (1986), but the basis of the song is the leaders of countries sit down to a chess game instead of war.
There used to be chess by mail. Chess by internet means that only over the board chess is trustworthy and that the competitors need to be in a faraday cage while playing, and escorted on bathroom calls.
Friends taunt, and in rated matches at chess clubs. Been there, done that. Not just in USA but was on a German chess club years ago when stationed there.
In the UK they have almost a winner takes all scenario in world championship snooker, ok, the runner-up does get 2nd place cheque. However often the winner only becomes apparent in the last frame and sometimes the very last ball to be potted. These matches make record audience viewing, as even the best players can crumple under pressure.
You mentioned watching the movies about Bobby Fisher, so you must have seen Searching for Bobby Fisher with Micheal J Fox. I was an extra (background actor) in that movie, I played a vendor at the baseball stadium (which was the old Exhibition Stadium the former home of the Toronto Blue Jays).
Haha, I imagine them playing in Svalbard with radio interference set up and both players wearing clothes with no metal parts and going through treatment with strong electromagnets before each game!
Thank you for a very interesting video! I want to address one thing though. At the end you were talking about chess not being that interesting to watch for people that aren’t into it. I get your point, but actually people that aren’t chess players themselves watch chess in Norway, it’s become a big thing because of Magnus. It’s broadcasted on many different channels, and people watch it even if Magnus is not playing. So it can be done😊👍
Magnus never accused Hans of cheating. What he did say was that Hans appeared to not have struggled at all during a game and that Hans had cheated in the past and Hans admitted to it and so Magnus said he refused to play with someone who has a history of cheating. All of which is 100% true.
How does reasonable belief factor in. No they cannot prove he cheated beyond any reasonable doubt. But they are accusing him of cheating not prosecuting him in court. If their algorithm is shown to be reasonably accurate, and they reasonably believe he cheated is it really slander? Assuming they never claim that its impossible for the algorithm to be wrong, and just stuck with we determined it was likely he was cheating on several occasions. Is this legal slander? I wouldn't think so. I realize this lawsuit is more complicated than that, but just based on this they should be able to stick behind their algorithm and methods of cheat detection even publicly without worrying about slander. As long as they state that its just a reasonable belief based on their algorithm and tested accuracy of said algorithm.
Hi Steve, I noticed that your Falfa's Speed Shop t-shirt says Home of the Infamous '56, but when I googled it, all references are regarding a '55 instead. I wonder if that t-shirt design may have been an error?
I've only professionally played card games but there is rampant cheating all the time in all levels of play. Both soft cheating and hard cheating so I wouldn't be surprised if there was rampant cheating in the chess world at well even at the highest levels.
After watching your last video on the chess cheating allegations I ended up going down a rabbit hole…about the marathon cheating you mentioned in the same video.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but how does an American sue someone in another country? Does the company have an American component? Is this covered by some treaty?
The accuracy is a confusing one and I’m speaking here as an actual chess grandmaster who used to be quite good. In general the greats of the game such as Carlsen, Kasparov and Fischer will be well into the high 90s% in any given game. Indeed often Carlsen will play at over 98% accuracy. I think what the figure of 70% is referring to is how often their move actually corresponds to the computers top choice in any given position which is something slightly different and becomes a lot more suspicious if a player is close to 100% accuracy on that metric.
Magnus Carlson is the all time King of taunting his opponents. He trolled Spasky by getting up and walking around during a game. He was quite young at the time.
An interesting legal question comes to mind... If the accused cheater was being sued in civil court, as I understand it, they would have to prove the cheating by preponderance of the evidence BUT...as defendants (i.e. the accused cheater is the one suing) the defendants (to negate the libel/slander accusation) would now have to prove the person was cheating beyond the shadow of a doubt... Correct? or wrong?
Mark Twain wrote a short story about a man who was on trial for gambling. The law specifically banned betting on "games of chance". The defendant argued in court that the game at issue was a game of skill, and not chance, and therefore was not illegal. The jury was divided six vs. six on the verdict, and were hopelessly deadlocked, until someone proposed that the two sides play the game against each other. Whichever side won would return the verdict and the other side would go along. At some point in the deliberations there was a request by one side (the side claiming that it was a game of chance) to borrow some money from the court spectators. Eventually that side went bust and the defendant was acquitted.
