Niemann - Carlsen

[Vlad Drkulec]

https://time.com/6227677/magnus-carl...=pocket-newtab

[Sid Belzberg]

I had an interesting discussion with the author of this article on ChessBase https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-ha...-do-not-reveal
that you can see in the comments section of the article. He took the trouble to try to reproduce the flat STDCPL chart that claimed Nieman's was unique. His findings were that all of the players had the same flat chart, which actually came as a surprise.
At this point, in my opinion, even statistically, unless the original author can prove otherwise, Ken Regan is correct in no evidence of OTB cheating.

[Aris Marghetis]

good one Aris!

It was Peter McK who posted it!!

[Brad Thomson]

Hi Brad: Conceptually you are in the realm of the philosopher, North Whitehead, I think:

Whitehead argued that reality consists of processes rather than material objects, and that processes are best defined by their relations with other processes, thus rejecting the theory that reality is fundamentally constructed by bits of matter that exist independently of one another.

Thanks Bob, I have never studied Whitehead. Certainly, I agree with him when he contends that no matter exists (for Berkeley the word is unintelligible "jargon"), but I am not sure what his concept of processes means. I am very much a proponent of the philosophers Berkeley and Hegel. Only minds and their contents exist, as both of them would contend, but I side with Hegel in that God is not in my view fully developed or fully self-understanding or actualized from the beginning, S/he/it is rather in a state of becoming (a process?) over Time in and through human History. Thus, Time itself is Substance (the only thing permanent is change). Does this sound like Whitehead? I do not know. :)

[Bob Armstrong]

good one Aris!

[Aris Marghetis]

Just happened across this. Thought you might enjoy it given your philosophical bent.

LOL, thanks!

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Brad:

Conceptually you are in the realm of the philosopher, North Whitehead, I think:

Whitehead argued that reality consists of processes rather than material objects, and that processes are best defined by their relations with other processes, thus rejecting the theory that reality is fundamentally constructed by bits of matter that exist independently of one another.

Wikipedia

Alfred North Whitehead OM FRS FBA (15 February 1861 – 30 December 1947) was an English mathematician and philosopher. He is best known as the defining figure of the philosophical school known as process philosophy,^[21] which today has found application to a wide variety of disciplines, including ecology, theology, education, physics, biology, economics, and psychology, among other areas.

In his early career Whitehead wrote primarily on mathematics, logic, and physics. His most notable work in these fields is the three-volume Principia Mathematica (1910–1913), which he wrote with former student Bertrand Russell. Principia Mathematica is considered one of the twentieth century's most important works in mathematical logic, and placed 23rd in a list of the top 100 English-language nonfiction books of the twentieth century by Modern Library.^[22]

Beginning in the late 1910s and early 1920s, Whitehead gradually turned his attention from mathematics to philosophy of science, and finally to metaphysics. He developed a comprehensive metaphysical system which radically departed from most of Western philosophy. Whitehead argued that reality consists of processes rather than material objects, and that processes are best defined by their relations with other processes, thus rejecting the theory that reality is fundamentally constructed by bits of matter that exist independently of one another.^[23] Today Whitehead's philosophical works – particularly Process and Reality – are regarded as the foundational texts of process philosophy.

Whitehead's process philosophy argues that "there is urgency in coming to see the world as a web of interrelated processes of which we are integral parts, so that all of our choices and actions have consequences for the world around us."^[23] For this reason, one of the most promising applications of Whitehead's thought in recent years has been in the area of ecological civilization and environmental ethics pioneered by John B. Cobb.^[24][25]

[Neil Frarey]

The exsistence of God and Niemann cheating OTB are one in the same, ha!

Innocent until proven guilty.

[Neil Frarey]

The theory that all time, or all events in al of time, always exist, and thus there is no change from the full perspective, is the view of some thinkers, many Scholastics, and Spinoza. Berkeley rejects these thinkers as atheists and fatalists. If time does not include change, then we are not free, all is determined, and God does not exist.

The exsistence of God and Niemann cheating OTB are one in the same, ha!

[Brad Thomson]

The theory that all time, or all events in al of time, always exist, and thus there is no change from the full perspective, is the view of some thinkers, many Scholastics, and Spinoza. Berkeley rejects these thinkers as atheists and fatalists. If time does not include change, then we are not free, all is determined, and God does not exist.

[Peter McKillop]

It is not too late to read up on the subject. I suggest dialogues. Plato is the ultimate master, but both Hume and especially my favourite thinker, Berkeley, wrote some wonderful .....

Just happened across this. Thought you might enjoy it given your philosophical bent.

[Sid Belzberg]

So this is the first article I have seen that attempts to explain why Hans's average centipawn loss chart, while he climbed from 2500-2700, is very different than from other players that achieved this.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-ha...-do-not-reveal

They state:

"Most of the top grandmasters like to avoid risks when possible. Niemann seems more willing to take the game into murky territory, and especially to sacrifice material". Other chess experts have even compared Niemann’s style of play to Tal’s. In any case, such a risky style is of course prone to inaccuracies and mistakes and, even when successful – as it clearly is in Niemann’s case – would by all means increase the player’s ACPL."

I would like to see Tal's early games when he was up and coming to the top of the ratings run through the same analysis to test this theory. Kasparov's also would be interesting. if their patterns are the same as other players already listed, then I still remain skeptical until a counter-example can be produced. At least this is the first remotely plausible explanation I have read.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Very interesting!! Thank you for sharing that, Vlad. I hope the panel discussion at the Marshall Club will be a productive event.

I hope so too. At some point closer to the date we will publicize it but in the last month or so I have had an unprecedented series of interviews, with four of the seven being about the Niemann situation. Most involved exchanging emails and multiple conversations. The non-Niemann interviews were about support for chess by government, a pair of interviews about women's chess and one player in particular and chess in general around 2012 to 2014 and later. The third non-Niemann interview was about Shawn Rodrigue-Lemieux's winning at WYCC. The last month or so has seen about a year's worth of interviews. I had to turn down CBC radio for a last minute appearance on their radio network that would have been three hours long from 6 am to 9 am last Monday which would have conflicted with a critical series of appointments the day before an elderly family member was going for surgery.

My default is to do the interviews and events when I can and publicize when I have time.

Next week I am off to the Sports Tourism Canada conference in Edmonton where I will meet with communities interested in bidding for chess tournaments and officials from other sports federations. Sports Tourism Canada is paying for my flight, hotel and most of my meals. I will not be doing any media interviews for the next week as I expect to be kept pretty busy at the conference.

[Peter McKillop]

This refers to online cheating only, which the man has admitted to. What do you think about the suggestion that he had some way to cheat over the board in Saint Louis when he beat Carlsen?

I don't believe it. Early on I was willing to cut Carlsen some slack (not that Carsen needs slack from me :) ) on the assumption that Carlsen was a decent person who was standing up for the integrity of the game, and that details of Niemann's alleged/implied OTB cheating at Sinquefeld would be out shortly. That never happened and I now agree with you that it was a highly irresponsible move on Carlsen's part to drop out of a tournament (whose patron has been extremely generous with the U.S. and international chess communities) and leave everyone thinking that Niemann had cheated OTB.

[Brad Thomson]

Yes, I still think Niemann is as guilty as Chess.com alleges.

This refers to online cheating only, which the man has admitted to. What do you think about the suggestion that he had some way to cheat over the board in Saint Louis when he beat Carlsen?