Hacker News Reader

Comment by Andrew_nenakhov | Hacker News Reader

Cheating at 3+2 games while streaming? How's it is even possible to input all moves/positions into a chess program in parallel too main game and also while commenting? IMO it is impossible without some very specialized software or external assistance who would do the clicks. And how does he cheat in over the board events?

View on HN

Computer vision for chess is widely available (and very useful!)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19563768 ("Chessvision.ai – Analyze chess position from websites, images or video", 49 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21162466 ("Show HN: ChessBoss – enhancing physical chessboards with computer vision", 36 comments)

Here's a story from Reddit about someone using these systems during over-the-board play to cheat: https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/xigy...

Things that are easy for some members of HN crowd are likely not that easy for a 19yo person who's only notable achievement in life so far is being really good at chess (well, presumably). Such software also doesn't explain his OTB results, which are consistent with his online results.

Some OTB tournaments allow players to go to the bathroom with their phone, others allow audience in same room - so an accomplice (such as Hans' coach Maxim Dlugy - another admitted cheat) could relay moves via signal. I've seen suggestion on Hiraku's channel that current scanning for players for communication devices is sub-par, although Hans has offered to play naked to disprove that theory (some porno site is calling his bluff by offering him $1M to actually do it). Anal beads? I dunno ...

Magnus has estimated it would usually only take one or two computer corrections per game for himself to play perfectly, so we're not talking about every move, just at key points. Apparently even just an indication that there is some key/winning move at a given point, without indicating what it is, is enough for the player to stop and put in the time to find it.

I don't know how market leading chess cheating software works, but it's not that hard to imagine that it just captures the screen, or scrapes the moves in any number of ways automatically is it? I'm sure it's not needed to manually type in all the moves.

As to how he'd cheat over the board, that's the big question. There are a couple of theories floating around, some more realistic than others, but if we knew for sure than this whole debacle would already be over.

Anyway his over the board results are more or less consistent with his online results, so either he has invented some cheating method that had evaded detection for many years at top level events, or that he is really good on his own.

I mean, probably the worst way to cheat is 'mindlessly'. If you're doing nothing more than 'transcribing' moves from one client to the other, sure. But if I'm cheating and trying to figure out maximum ROI, I'm looking at what the computer did for me, trying to understand it and figure it out. That way I can learn and get better myself, as well as talk/bluff intelligently about why "I" might have made a certain move.

3+2 is a lot of time to input the moves several times over and prepare coffee in the meantime. Seriously, it's not a slightest problem for a competent online blitz player.

OTB cheating: there are many possible ways. The simplest one being having a script reading the moves from the live broadcast and feeding them to an engine and then sending the info to the player. Hans' strength magically decreased in the Sinquefield cup once broadcast delay was introduced for example.

> Hans' strength magically decreased in the Sinquefield cup once broadcast delay was introduced for example.

So you discount a possibility that the controversy and allegations against him had at least some effect in him playing worse in the Sinquefield Cup?

Anyway, there were studies out there that there were no statistical differences in his rating gains in tournaments broadcasted with delays and without it. Study by Kenneth Regan also found no irregularities in his play, so the only 'evidence' of him using computer help are allegations by a company that is in business relationship with Carlsen, and his 'bad' analysis in post game interview. I'm not very impressed.

> Anyway, there were studies out there that there were no statistical differences in his rating gains in tournaments broadcasted with delays and without it.

It is exactly the opposite of what you claim: there is a massive statistical aberration in his performance of broadcast tournaments vs. non-broadcast. He is 200 Elo higher in the former.

https://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.php?p=933597&sid=1fd7...

You're clearly very invested in this case. How can you possibly be getting the polarity of the evidence wrong?

Because I have seen these claims you are referring to and they were refuted by a more full analysis. This is a carefully doctored result that took only a slice of data 2019-2020, and if you look at a bigger picture, which is actually in a reply to a tweet linked in the post you are referring to, irregularities even out:

https://twitter.com/NikolaosNtirlis/status/15688492214487818...

> You're clearly very invested in this case

Well, I'm probably into it because I don't believe in presumption of guilt over vague allegations. Also, someone is _wrong_ on the internet, you know.

What is happening is nothing but bullying, Magnus is using his popularity and fanbase to destroy am opponent and his fans are like a mob on a witch hunt who are out for blood, demanding severe punishment. I believe it is unfair and an aberration of sports conduct and my ideas of justice. Just crank up anti-cheating measures to 11 at the next OTB event, and see how Hans will play.

That's not a "more full analysis". It's a) not a statistical analysis, b) not "more full" as it's covering a totally different time period rather than being a superset, c) I don't really understand why the "Tournaments" and "no live games" section have totally different columns.

(Oh, haha, 2 out of the 3 tournaments under "no live games" from that tweet are in the small set that the chess.com report says merit investigation.)

Yet earlier in this thread, you were incredulous about even the possibility that a chess game state could be entered into software or communicated during play. Which is clearly a ludicrously blind statement. So pardon us if it's hard to be particularly impressed by, well, whatever you are impressed or not impressed by. Because you don't seem to have much grasp on the basics involved, here.

> Which is clearly a ludicrously blind statement.

This statement came from an experiment I conducted. I just tried playing lichess 3+2 game while running a nearby chess.com/analysis on a second display. ...

... and I was barely keeping up with all the clicks, and in the endgame was unable to keep up. So no, efficient cheating in fast games requires at least a special training, and better some automated software to keep up with the moves and to communicate best moves back to player.

So because you weren't able, therefore nobody is able? Including teenagers who have had years to practice their cheating skills?

I don't claim to have great cheating skills, yet, I'm pretty sure that doing such operations while streaming is very difficult and would be easily visible to the audience. They likely require an assistant or some specialized software.

> Hans' strength magically decreased in the Sinquefield cup once broadcast delay was introduced for example.

This might be the solution. But then on-site audience would need to be monitored as well.

It is very easy indeed. Stockfish would be an immense help. Best moves are calculated progressively, that is they are refined over a few seconds. Inexperienced players are given away by delaying over obvious moves waiting for the best move. It is definitely not rocket science. You can download and run Stockfish yourself. I think chess.com possibly runs it in the browser.

I know the basics how to do it, it is rather obvious. I just feel that operating two boards manually is really a chore, and definitely not while streaming.

Are you familiar with professional Starcraft II? Those guys are executing ten moves PER SECOND. While streaming.

This is two to four orders of magnitude faster than chess players in a classical game. One to two orders of magnitude faster than blitz.

StarCraft players also aren't really thinking, all micro is mostly almost reflexes. Chess does require way more analysis, so if you are on a very short time limit, checking up with an engine and operating it would eat all your time.

Human assistant?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com