|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Sep-27-22
 | | MissScarlett: <Olimpiu Di Luppi @olimpiuurcan Fabiano Caruana [upon reviewing the Niemann versus Gretarsson game from the 2022 Reykjavík Open]: "This game to me is quite extraordinary. It's either the game of a genius or something fishy. It's one of the two..." 3:38 AM · Sep 27, 2022>
https://twitter.com/olimpiuurcan/st... |
|
| Sep-28-22 | | Chessius the Messius: Let's "analyse" this game. The opening seems nothing suspicious. 13. e5 is not the strongest according to my sources. See what happens:
click for larger viewPosition after 16. exf6
Black now takes with the Knight, while taking with the Rook is 0.0. d30 0.00 15... Rxf6 16. O-O-O e5 17. Bd3 g6 18. Rde1 Bd6 19. g3 Rf7 20. g5 Bb7 21. Rh6 Bf8 22. Rhh1 +0.47 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. O-O-O Bd6 18.Rh4 Rf7 19. Rdh1 g6 20. Nd1 Nf8 21. Bf3 e5 22. fxe5 Bxe5 23. Nf2 Bf5 d31 0.00 15.... Rxf6 16. O-O-O e5 17. Bd3 g6 18. Rde1 Bd6 19. g3 Rf7 20. g5 Bb7 21. Rh6 Bf8 22. Rh2 Bd6 23. Rh6 +0.41 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. O-O-O Bd6 18. Rdf1 g6 19. Na4 Rb8 20. Bg4 e5 21. g3 Nb6 22. Bxc8 Rfxc8 23. fxe5 Bxe5 d32 0.00 15... Rxf6 16. O-O-O Bd6 17. g3 e5 18. Bd3 g6 19. g5 Rf7 20. Rde1 a5 21. Rh6 Bf8 22. Bxg6 hxg6 23. Rxg6+ Rg7 +0.46 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. Rh4 Bd6 18. O-O-O Rf7 19. Rdh1 Nf8 20. Bd3 g6 21. Re1 Rb8 22. b3 e5 23. fxe5 Ba3+ d33 +0.28 15... Rxf6 16. O-O-O Bd6 17. g3 Rf7 18. Rh2 Rb8 19. Be3 e5 20. f5 Bc7 21. Rdh1 Nf8 22. Ba7 Ra8 23. Bc5 h6 +0.54 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. Rh4 Bd6 18. O-O-O Rf7 19. Rdh1 g6 20. Bf3 Nb6 21. b3 Ba3+ 22. Kb1 Nc4 23. Bc1 Bxc1 d34 +0.11 15... Rxf6 16. O-O-O Bd6 17. g3 Rf7 18. Rh2 Rb8 19. Be3 e5 20. f5 Bc5 21. Bd2 Bd6 22. b3 h6 23. Rdh1 Nf8 +0.54 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. Rh4 Bd6 18. O-O-O Rf7 19. Rdh1 Nf8 20. Bd3 g6 21. Re1 Rb8 22. b3 e5 23. fxe5 Ba3+ +0.68 15... gxf6 16. O-O-O Rf7 17. Rh6 e5 18. Rdh1 Bf8 19. R6h5 exf4 20. Bxf4 Ne5 21. g5 Ng6 22. Bd2 fxg5 23. Rxg5 Rf5 d35 +0.13 15... Rxf6 16. O-O-O Bd6 17. g3 Rb8 18. g5 Rf7 19. Rde1 e5 20. Bd3 e4 21. Nxe4 dxe4 22. Rxe4 Re7 23. Rxe7 Bxe7 +0.45 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. Rh4 Bd6 18. O-O-O Rf7 19. Bd3 g6 20. Rdh1 Nf8 21. Re1 e5 22. fxe5 Bc7 23. Na4 Ne6 +0.72 15... gxf6 16. O-O-O Rf7 17. Rh6 e5 18. g3 a5 19. g5 Bf8 20. Rh5 Rg7 21. f5 fxg5 22. Bxg5 Ba6 23. Bxa6 Rxa6 d36 +0.09 15... Rxf6 16. O-O-O Bd6 17.vg3 Rb8 18. g5 Rf7 19. Rde1 e5 20. b3 g6 21. Bf1 exf4 22. Bxf4 Rxf4 23. gxf4 Bxf4+ +0.54 15... Nxf6 16. g5 Nd7 17. Rh4 Bd6 18. O-O-O Rf7 19. Bd3 g6 20. Rdh1 Nf8 21. Re1 e5 22. fxe5 Bc7 23. Na4 Ne6 +0.75 15.... gxf6 16. O-O-O Rf7 17. Rh5 e5 18. Rdh1 exf4 19. Bxf4 Nc5 20. Bd2 Bxc3 21. Bxc3 Ne4 22. Be1 Bd7 23. Rh6 Rg7 So now we have a bit of an indication of what lines to follow, I assume. |
|
| Sep-28-22 | | stone free or die: OK, it's slightly interesting to see Urcan did a tweet, only insofar as it shows how little he has to contribute to the discussion. It's also completely useless. Takes Fabio statement out of context. Moreover, did anybody watch the analysis Fabio and his friend did. Sure, it's also interesting to see Fabio's off-the-cuff first impressions, and how he approaches a position (and let's not forget that he, like Wes, wants to see the engine lines too before they pop off too much - which I think is quite reasonable). But their analysis of Inglias' analysis is far, far, from conclusion. The methodology is so suspect, imo.
Can you say "confirmation bias"? I knew you could! At least Regan has a true unbaised statistical analysis. And it was done over the entire data set of the past two years. . |
|
| Sep-28-22 | | Chessius the Messius: I've found something peculiar lol
First of all, Black's second mistake was 17... e5, Black should've played 17... Bd6 +0.4 That said, at move 20 in the game, Black still had everything under control: Depth 42
+0.26 20... e4 21. Nxe4 dxe4 22. Bxe4 Nc5 23. Bxc6 Ra7 24. gxh6 Rf6 25. Bd5+ Be6 26. Be3 Bxd5 27. Rxd5 Rd7 28. Rxc5 Bxc5 So Black already made 2 mistakes, 15... Nxf6 and 17... e5, but but White has yet booked no significant advantage after move 28, theoretically spoken. How is this possible, considered that Niemann played with "100% accuracy"? Does not sound "genius" to me so far. Spoken chesswise. Obviously, I have found a better move. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: Thematically, this is a lot like the Carlsen game -- aggressive pawn pushing for space, despite the position not being configured for traditional pawn storms. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Dohboy: Clearly, Hans Niemann is the greatest player who ever lived. Move over Bobby and Garri, and Magnus. Step aside Alekhine and Capablanca. A human player with computer like ability has suddenly appeared. What other explanation could there be? |
|
Sep-29-22
 | | offramp: Can anyone understand the first post of < Chessius the Messius: Let's "analyse" this game.>? He is analysing the same 2 moves over and over and over again, with identical results. What is the point? He could have written, "Nxf6 or Rxf6, both the same". |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | stone free or die: < Hans Niemann is the greatest player who ever lived> It should be very interesting to see what kind of player Niemann ultimately becomes. Provided he survives this ordeal (which may, or may not, be of his own making). |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Chessius the Messius: <offramp>
Good observation! Essentially, the variation should lead to a draw. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | EvanTheTerrible: It's a shame that for the foreseeable future, no discussion of Hans's games will go without mentioning Magnus's allegations. While I hate to contribute to the discourse on this shameful topic, I have a few points to bring up and questions I am looking for answers to. Under what circumstances would it make sense for a person to cheat by playing moves that match the engine 100% of the time? It seems the narrative changes at the drop of a hat, whatever is most suitable to make someone's argument against Hans stronger in that very moment. Sometimes, he is a a sneaky cheater who only gets a vague suggestion at an opportune time in the game and other times he is so brazenly cheating that it's Stockfish playing the entire game! While Regan has noted certain shortcomings of his methodology, I find it hard to believe that his method would fail to detect continuous, complete concordance with an engine. Something that I did want to bring up to contextualize this game is Hans's performance in the rest of the event. Overall, this was not a good event for Hans: he lost 4.2 rating points (2582 performance rating) and he lost the games immediately before and after this game to significantly weaker players (2434 and 2465). |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Petrosianic: My Stockfish says 96.5% accuracy for White, 91.0% for Black, and considers 13. e5!? to be an inaccuracy. Good, but not the first game I've heard claimed to be 100% that turned out not to be. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Petrosianic: <EvanTheTerrible>: <Under what circumstances would it make sense for a person to cheat by playing moves that match the engine 100% of the time?> Well, he hasn't done that, only 96%. But to answer your question, it would make sense if a player was simply lazy, just wanted to win easily, and didn't think he was under any scrutiny. You would only play less than best moves deliberately if you thought you were being watched, and wanted to make it more believable. <It seems the narrative changes at the drop of a hat, whatever is most suitable to make someone's argument against Hans stronger in that very moment. Sometimes, he is a a sneaky cheater who only gets a vague suggestion at an opportune time in the game and other times he is so brazenly cheating that it's Stockfish playing the entire game!> It is, of course possible that he does both of those things, just not at the same time. On the other hand, if the claim is that good moves prove cheating, and bad moves prove cheating just the same, the argument devolves into nonsense. At this point, of course, he knows he's under the microscope. If he continues to play games like this, that would lend credence to the genius theory. |
|
Sep-29-22
| | offramp: This game floated into the field of vision of the great User: MissScarlett.
User: MissScarlett stoked the controversy.
He researched the quote and posted it. User: MissScarlett was the first kibitzer for this game.
User: MissScarlett devised a pun for this game.
User: MissScarlett selected this game for Game of the Day,
User: MissScarlett selected his pun as the title for this game.
I wonder if User: MissScarlett is computer-assisted, |
|
Sep-29-22
| | MissScarlett: <Smoke - Flawless Victory> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y-... It must be said that Gretarsson played this game at a very high level. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Chessius the Messius: Nonsense! Niemann completely missed the boat in this game versus Greta Gretarsson. Which blows this "accuracy" thingy out of the water. Speaking of water.. I will hold my horses until the cracks are on par with what I have found in this "suspicious" mindgame while messing around with Rambo45. Took 12 hours of my life! 12 hours eating grilled meat from a real barbecue. |
|
Sep-29-22
 | | FSR: How does one get Stockfish 15 to state the percentage accuracy for each player? |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | alphamaster: If this game is proof of cheating then there is no cheating. Furthermore, 6.5/9 in this tournament and sharing 4th place with other 9 players is a very poor result for someone who cheats. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | goodevans: If they're looking for evidence of cheating then I think they need to look elsewhere. I don't see a single move by White that looks at all suspicious (well, maybe just one but I wouldn't question the integrity of Niemann on the basis of just one slightly surprising move). After the somewhat dubious 13.e5 it may well be the case that every White move agreed with the computer but every White move looks pretty darned obvious to me. Okay, I must admit that I'd expected <20.Rh5> rather than <20.Rh2> but I'm sure better players than me can see why the latter is superior. So is there anything stylistically that suggests that this must be <"the game of a genius">? <Cheapo by the Dozen> says it has <"aggressive pawn pushing for space, despite the position not being configured for traditional pawn storms"> but I'm struggling to see which move or moves he refers to. Was it <11.g4>? Well that was Karjak's choice in Karjakin vs J Cori, 2020 so was he cheating then? Was it <13.e5>? The computer doesn't even like that move. What about <16.g5>? I'm sure that would have been the choice of most players in that position. The question I'd like to know the answer to is why so many senior players like Caruana seem so desperate to prove recent cheating that they present such flimsy evidence. 'There's nothing to see here so move on'. |
|
Sep-29-22
| | MissScarlett: <How does one get Stockfish 15 to state the percentage accuracy for each player?> <Analyzing games with Let's Check> https://en.chessbase.com/post/analy... |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Chessius the Messius: Oh no, not this guy again!
https://en.chessbase.com/author/ken...
Other than uh chessbase.. do we have a "second opinion" aboard, captain? |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | goodevans: <Petrosianic: My Stockfish says 96.5% accuracy for White, 91.0% for Black...> Even I can play with uncommon accuracy when the best moves suggest themselves. |
|
Sep-29-22
| | MissScarlett: Analysis of the game by Ingvar Thor Johannesson giving some information on Niemann's time management: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3v... His only long think was over <19.Bd3> which took ~23 minutes. His remaining moves averaged ~30 seconds (they were playing with an increment of 30s per move), so he finished the game with around an hour on the clock. |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Chessius the Messius: Ok, but Niemann missed 19. Bf3
click for larger view |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Chessius the Messius: Telepathic stuff going on, I just watched the video from 16:00-17:00 🙃 |
|
| Sep-29-22 | | Chessius the Messius: PS at depth 34 SF still analyses 19. Bd3 as better, but it is not planet Claire. 19. Bf3 is better. The Bishops belongs on the long diagonal. So to speak. White is going to sac Rh4 for Be7 (Bxh4, Rxh4). |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 