💾 Archived View for alaskalinuxuser.ddns.net › 2022-10-20.gmi captured on 2024-12-17 at 10:09:35. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2024-09-29)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
">
61w, https://alaskalinuxuser3.ddns.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/
Screenshot_20221013-062209-1-135x300.png 135w" sizes="(max-width: 300px)
100vw, 300px" />“No mistakes found for black.”
A slightly different post today, and certainly not my usual style. Opinion
pieces are not usually my thing, but today I played a chess game that made me
stop and think about the current chess scene allegations.
Above is a game of chess that I played online today. It was a good game for me,
as you can see from the moves and board. Granted, my opponent was 130 points
lower in ELO rating than myself, so I was expected to win the game. But that’s
not why I’m bringing this game forward.
Currently, the entire professional chess world is split over whether Hans
cheated during a tournament game against the world chess champion. Perhaps he
did, or perhaps he didn’t. I still see no evidence of *how* he cheated, since
it was a live game, with a real board, and officials and spectators. As of
today, the only reason cheating is suspected is because he did so well, when he
statistically shouldn’t have.
However, I’d liked to present three thoughts for you about players who happen
to do better statistically then they should:
1. Players who unexpectedly do well in tournaments are often accused of
cheating.
In December of 2007, Anna Rudolf was accused of cheating when she beat the top
seed player at a tournament. Allegedly, her lip balm was supposed to be a radio
that received the best moves from the internet. Three prominent members of the
tournament refused to shake her hand during the games and called on officials
to have Anna removed from the tournament.
They inspected her lip balm and found no evidence to support this claim. To the
best of my knowledge, there has never been any evidence of her cheating, yet
the stigma sticks.
2. Often throughout history, you will find tournaments where one player beat
the champion, while loosing to all the other players.
It was often said of tournaments with Rashid Gibiatovich Nezhmetdinov that Tal
would beat everyone except Nezhmetdinov, and Nezhmetdinov would lose to
everyone, but beat Tal. There are other examples of this, but this is one that
stands out in my mind.
3. Sometimes people can play a “perfect” game. That’s why I brought up my game.
Win or lose, it is unusual for a human player to play the best computer decided
moves. Often, after a game, it can be evaluated by a computer, and given an
accuracy score. This score represents how closely your moves matched the
computer’s preferred moves.
Today, despite being a player below 2000 ELO rating, I played a “near perfect”
game. Per the computer, I made no mistakes, no blunders, and had an accuracy
score of 96%. This is, more or less, what I understand Hans to be accused of.
So, by that reasoning, I must also be accused of cheating, even though I did
not.
I honesty don’t know if Hans cheated or not. I do wonder though, if there is no
evidence, why is it that a lot of the top players are convinced that he did?
Perhaps I don’t see it because I am too lowly rated to understand their point
of view. Just a few honest thoughts from a guy watching from the sidelines.
Take it with a grain of salt.
Linux – keep it simple.