KRAMNIK: "I apologize, but I don't see any other way"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 чер 2024
- In this podcast episode with Vladimir Kramnik, we discuss his anti-cheating activism and the controversy around it. Has Kramnik gone too far in his fight? Are his methods correct? Does he agree that he has done some wrong things? Watch our full discussion to find out! At the end, we've played a chess game that Mr. Kramnik called "very interesting".
My Twitter: / mustreader
My Twitch: / gregmustreader
Kramnik's Twitter: / vbkramnik
My podcast with Fabi: • FABIANO CARUANA: "I co...
My podcast with Nepo: • NEPO on cheating, Magn...
My podcast with Aronian: • LEVON ARONIAN: chess p...
00:00 - What I think about Kramnik
2:50 - Start of the discussion
3:52 - Results achieved in fighting cheating
8:35 - What did Kramnik do wrong?
16:42 - Kramnik's ban on ChessCom
36:19 - An unusual theory about ChessCom
44:00 - How to detect a cheater
59:35 - ChessCom is afraid to ban people?
1:03:35 - Will statistics expose cheaters?
1:07:52 - Why suspect Hikaru?
1:15:32 - Why not Magnus?
1:23:40 - Public debate: ChessCom vs Kramnik
1:25:00 - Kramnik on refuting his statistics
1:30:50 - Could Kramnik be wrong?
1:38:40 - Which experts help Kramnik?
1:41:34 - Kramnik is Niemann's coach?
1:46:02 - Is Kramnik biased?
1:49:55 - What top GMs tell Kramnik
1:52:16 - ChessCom and top GMs
1:54:47 - Kramnik's role in exposing cheaters
1:57:20 - Match with Jospem
2:05:17 - We play an INTERESTING blitz game
2:12:55 - Kramnik's analysis of the game
2:14:32 - Farewell
My name is Greg Mustreader, I am a Candidate Master in chess, an entrepreneur and host of several podcasts.
In this channel, I interview top chess players (my guests include Nepo, Fabi, Kramnik, Aronian, Naroditsky and many others), play against chess AIs, analyze the most interesting chess games and combinations of today and of the past, as well as show you my path in chess and the way I work on my chess improvement (including recaps from the tournaments I play).
I live in Almaty, Kazakhstan and travel the world extensively (been to 50 countries). I'm 30 years old, I have a girlfriend, two dogs and three cats. I speak English, Russian, German, and a bit of French and Chinese.
Don't forget to subscribe!
#vladimirkramnik #kramnik #titledtuesday
Do you agree or disagree with the points raised by Mr. Kramnik in this episode? Looking forward to your comments!
My podcast with Fabi: ua-cam.com/video/1LMPYFf1iLo/v-deo.htmlsi=h4nXkUIq4vfsYRIK
My podcast with Naroditsky: ua-cam.com/video/-PqUZ2h9uGg/v-deo.htmlsi=k48TQMlmvZr2hp5c
My podcast with Nepo: ua-cam.com/video/sW-i4CPCa_w/v-deo.htmlsi=JGyAPuMnzzmOUlFl
My podcast with Aronian: ua-cam.com/video/THyL4D2Clbw/v-deo.htmlsi=labE_2IzS8Y5tEhR
Kramnik is single-handedly taking on the massive cheating of chess online...he should be respected by all....think not?..then explain how every top GM you ask will agree that cheating is out of control
and BTW why...are you going out of your way to prove everything he says is wrong?..did it EVER occur to you that he is RIGHT?
Terribly conducted interview. Interruptions all over the place, condescension, obvious bias.
I think Hikaru has to play title Tuesday in front of Kramnik on computer. That's it.
You honestly think Hikaru would volunteer for that?
@davew4304 yep, it's evident that he won't 😂😂😂
He has not. Kramnik has to prove what he says (and he can't), he's the one who accuse (even if he says he doesn't accuse, which is ridiculous because he accuse all the time).
How about speed chess championship that Nakamura played on stream, on camera and won 5 years in a row beating Magnus one of those years
@@Ism0Lait3la how many monitors he has when he’s streaming has never been shown. He’s constantly looking over reading chat and giving the impression that’s he’s multitasking and never showing any signs of mental fatigue is what makes him so sus. Especially when he appears to be in deep thought and drawing all those ridiculous arrows then suddenly changes his mind and channels a super move out of his rear end. Just like somebody that’s waiting on an engine .None of that is reasonably normal the way he acts on his stream even for a super” gm.He’s more focused on chat than the game and comes off like this unbelilevable genius to his gullible viewers that suspect nothing. Its a gimmik. He has the uncanny quick ability to explain just about any given position anywhere anytime on stream and that’s why he’s white listed. And that’s why they use his to promote the site. Daniel naroditsky truly has that ability as well and that’s why they use him too. And he’s sue as hell too.All thier chess streamers are white listed. It’s just one big cluster of a gimmik.
Very good interview Mustreader👏
Kramnik had his fair share of time to speak and you let him. He has his point and was able to explain it.
Will be interesting to see the match vs Jospem and look at the results.
the results will lead no where. if Kramnik wins so what ? Jospem fans will say its a bad day/bad form and Kramnik fans will say cheating. other way around doesnt prove or solve the problem. Jospem can be better player than Kramnik but still cheating. dont understand why people are so hype abt this match.
@@zigmaa69 thats basically what happened. Kramnik found a "bug" in the website and arbiters confirmed...lmao. and then he beat Jospem OTB and all the kids in the streams lost their minds and started bashing Kramnik. I mean you can't make this stuff up. Its so sad and depressing. I think online chess is already pretty much dead the past year. stick a fork in it. its just for kids now.
@@cooloutacok, now that the match ended… any updates?
@@MagnusAnand last I saw it was 10-10. dead even match. as I predicted before hand I surmised they are both 2600 in reality. But I still think FIDE needs to investigate how Jose got 100 points in a Moscow Open. and clearly fhe is not the GOd we thought online. I mean alot of these kids are still in denial though. Someone in comments said now Kramnik is challenging HIkaru. That would be awesome hahah. Hikaru techinically should be at least 200 points higher rated OTB at a minimum. double what Jospem was supposed to be hahah. Old retired Kramnik sure fairs alot better in real life. as predicted. Jose even said Kramnik is better on and offline to Levy.
So hyped to listen to it
Kramnik is right. Most of these players beating Magnus in titled Tuesday won't even finish in top 50 in world blitz championship
i follow titled tuesdays with the best engine in the world..cheating is so obvious it is laughable.....a recent winner won 9 in a row never heard of him and he NEVER MADE A BLUNDER in any game
Magnus is not drunken right from the beginning when playing the wbc
This is called chess on the internet, with a mouse, and a screen. It's a different game. Do you want me to play CS:GO IRL with tactical gear and real weapons with the same skill I play on the computer?
@@user-dm8nm6hu6cyou sound crazy man. We aren't talking about bullet we're talking about 3 + 1. None of the other top Pros over perform online. It's always the streamers or people we never heard of. Unlike any other video game chess is the only one that's exactly the same offline and online buddy.
@@cooloutacactually if u see who won most titled Tuesday it's hikaru with 73- he rarely misses titled Tuesdays
Second is magnus with 16- he rarely played titled Tuesday up until some point becoz he was representing lichess also dimetrey andrakin with 16- but comeon he is good enough at blitz compared to other low tier GMs then u have Daniel dubov - former rapid wc and multiple time blitz runner up and then you have alireza no 3 in the world I mean there is cheating ofc but I don't think any of these guys would cheat for 1000 dollars comeon
Kramnik is extremely smart. Ask him, he’ll tell you.
Haha 🤣
Player who doesn't like his position is a bad player
Don Rickles, GM from USA... Ok, let's do the procedure♟
@@exergosu Rickles roasting De Niro haha
nothing wrong in someone knowing they are smart...the problem is dummies like you who think they are smart
Excellent interview by master Mustreader, well done.
Hope-to-be-soon Master Mustreader xD
@@MustreaderChess Everyone can be a talanted FIDE master nowdays, even you. Chess bot and lag switch might also help a lot. It's not even a secret for anyone with basic computer skills. No reason not to cheat. Even Naka uses a little help every now and then despite his own skill.
Love that queen side/king side analogy, Vladimir.
Great interview, you are making some excellent content with depth - I wish you well
Chess with Mustreader, This made me laugh so much! Thanks for sharing!
I thought you conducted this interview extremely well. Respectful, challenging Kramnik to further explain his views, and giving him ample time to do so. Well done.
Thanks!
I really like the poster behind you. Is it available for purchase anywhere?
I saw another poster with Alekhine in such style in video of another youtuber. So I think it can be purchased.
Try to reach to John Nunn from the UK he is a good chess player and his background is Math, so he can help you do this analysis or at least provide you with some contacts.
Great talk Grisha, and thanks to Mr.Kramnik, doesn’t matter if I support him or not this video was indeed very interesting😊
There are some things you can be completely sure about. For example, every interview with Hans speaks for itself, and every interview with big Vlad is interesting.
At 1:28:20 Kramnik actually identified the flaw in equating his statistical results to Truth. His calculated percentages are sensitive to the input parameters. Imagine how the results change when you factor out wins by dirty flagging, for example. Or offset the rating 200 ELO in either direction to better match "real" playing strength. Where's the objective proof that the input parameters can be trusted? In aerospace, fluid dynamics statistical models are corroborated with real-world data in a wind tunnel. Statistics without grounding in reality is just garbage in garbage out.
PhD in math? I can see 😂
@@VBKramnik Вы окончили школу?
@@VBKramnik Вы и Каспаров украли чью-то мечту. Вам не стыдно было играть матч за звание чемпиона мира, не заслужив и не отобравшись?
Это ли не самое большое ЖУЛЬНИЧЕСТВО? Что вы, что Каспаров. Один ради денег, второй УКРАВ чье-то право. Позор вам.
@@VBKramnikMaster's in aerospace engineering and 15 years experience. You disagree with my point... why?
@@maizenblue2441 because I am CHESSPLAYER that is why 🙂
Mustreader is interesting player
I agree with Kramnik.
good job good job!
Idea for the future: I would like to see an interview with a statistician... not necessarily a chess player, but someone who can look at the rating system and explain the principles on which the formula is built. It is my view that using statistics to detect cheating works better in events such as Titled Tuesday (where players are assigned their opponent) than in the sorts of videos where a streamer is choosing his/her opponent and playing that same opponent repeatedly. Much of statistics is founded upon principles of independent random events... but not all. So where does ELO fit in? And if so, can it be used to compute probability for "farming" videos? Should we only use it for open tournaments? Are there any caveats for closed round robin tournaments in which opponents are assigned, but not random? And so on.
You might google instead
This was an excellent podcast. Before this I thought Kramnik was definitely in the wrong, but now his viewpoint does seem to make some sense too. Honestly I think Greg was a bit disrespectful towards him at times, maybe thinking like I was, that Kramnik was wrong, but he was WC after all and having a strong character.
I'm very curious - what EXACTLY makes sense for you? Kramnik was like saying a lot while saying nothing at all. A lot of nonsense.
For me this is all simple. Let's say Nakamura. He proved over the board that he can play chess. This type of cheater you have to catch with the camera. Stats won't prove anything 100%. You are in a losing position against them. But those online only cheaters can't be taken seriously. They should't play in these events with prize money.
You’re not wrong. And…. The statistics of online performance vs otb performance don’t line up either. And when someone plays thousands of games and never getting a rating refund online with as many cheaters that are plaguing online chess is another statistical impossibility . I’d be impressed if a person can play 5 or even 10 blitz games without running into a cheater these days.
@@davew4304 I've gone on some long streaks in blitz so I'd disagree with 5-10 games but I play on Lichess. On the other hand, rapid is really a lost cause in my opinion...
@@shumbuk4383 yeah you can’t afford to play slower than 2+1 these days. Anything slower and you’re asking to play a cheater imo. You might get a handful of legit players in 3+2 games but I wouldn’t hold my breath. I also just stick to lichess
@@davew4304 sadly...
@@davew4304 ya but its got just as bad on lichess the past year unfortunately. the playerbase has really fallen off a cliff. now I see so many provisionals, and play the same opponents alot of times, when a year ago that almost never happened. It means all the alt accounts and engine users have more of an impact now. Both these websites also throw people in rotten pools sometimes if they feel they are a "problem" hoping people quit on their own. I truly believe that hahaha. Online Gaming has always been pretty dead unfortunately at least here in NA for the past 20 years.
Just a quick note on the issue of probabilities concerning a single event versus multiple events. When Mr. Mustreader suggests that alternative explanations could account for unlikely events, he is indeed correct. However, it is important to consider that the probability of numerous independent events occurring simultaneously tends to be lower due to the multiplicative nature of concurrent events: P(A and B and C) = P(A) * P(B) * P(C). Therefore, generally speaking, one should favor a single, robust explanation over multiple concurrent explanations, although this is merely a heuristic. Ultimately, calculations must be conducted to determine which explanation best accounts for a given outcome. That said, in practice, matters are not so straightforward. It is possible for events that appear independent to actually be correlated, thereby increasing the overall probability. Moreover, most of the time, we simply cannot compute the probabilities of every variable involved. For instance, we do not know the likelihood of opponents underperforming against a well-known player, so that becomes a blind spot in our calculations.
All those variables included already into ratings therefore performance is as reliable metrics as you can get
@@VBKramnik can you please at least watch some streams of Shimanov, Dubov, Yan, Magnus and many other players when they play TTs? Many of them are making fun out of the game, they do not even put 50% of afford they would put in OTB game. If one plays loosing gambit or not-calculated random line for fun and lose, you cannot say he was trying their best according to their rating.
@@VBKramnik You can say that many of those variables are related to ratings, but it is not possible to assume they are already included. In fact, a rating system can't accurately model every other relevant variable unless it is clear from its mathematical definition that it accounts for all of them. Current rating systems are based on the humble logistic regression, which sets a limit on the range of "phenomena" that are able to explain. On the bright side, it is possible to show that the rating system already explains the available data well enough, making an additional variable redundant. However, you need to have a way to describe mathematically all the variables involved, and this is usually not a trivial task. This concept is different depending on the modelling technique used (regularization, factor analysis, collinearity analysis, redundancy analysis, and so on). In summary, variables can be related to each other, but they usually don't have the same explanatory power and therefore, cannot be simply dismissed when used in different scenarios.
@@theonly1978 not true, I am more competent in this matter, imho
@@VBKramnik Thank you for imho part, so you are kind of open to fair critics, that's good. My only favor: please ban people less often, even aggressively talking ones, otherwise you can fall in a situation that only one supporting your action will be around and you will misjudge the situation. Common pitfall.
About ratings. Chesscom and lichess ratings are a joke, people go up and down all the time. You can change +-200 rating points easily, especially if you have it lower due to fun challenges, berserking or something. In OTB people do care about rating, many top players avoid playing open tournaments to keep the rating, so the rating is less actively changed and better reflect the reality. That's why it is a good idea to measure performance in FIDE blitz rating if all players have one. In case of Peshka4 it will be around 2420 or something in TTs, even a bit lower than usual OTB blitz rating. So, it's clear that he is not over-performing that much at all in TTs.
@mustreaderchess Гриша, а подкаст выходит на Apple Podcasts или Spotify? Не очень удобно слушать на Ютюб, пока едешь в машине.
Search “Chess with Mustreader” on any podcasting platform, you’ll see all the episodes in audio form there
@@MustreaderChess I did, but the last episode on Apple Podcasts is the one with Danya (9th May)
@@aparikk Will upload the new one, thanks!
the biggest point and stantment he can make is beating that GM in a real life blitz match
Somewhere at some point it seems like group of strong players would have to cheat to "cross validate" the detection rate.
The probability of life happening on earth is one in a million million but still here we are!
That's why ppl believe in God.
@@inguh7041 I don't think so.
You want to eliminate cheating - eliminate prize money foe online events. Or for prize-money tournaments, require multiple cameras to show what the player is viewing while playing.
Bro players cheat in normal rapid matches at 1500 rating
they do lol, they literally have a second cam in almost all online events
@@physco4641 Even lower than that they cheat and even get banned against me.
nah. Kramnik held that position at first then learned human nature is pretty bad. Most people who cheat don't do it for money bud.
ChessRay was making good videos up to a certain point. But when he started arguing about some things with Kramnik, showing some refutations, he was definitely manipulating. If you watch those videos out of context, it's hard to even guess that they are made by a mathematician. He tells some incredible things there, which a seventh grader might tell as arguments to their classmates. But definitely not a mathematician, let alone a PhD. So, I completely agree with Kramnik on the position of hiring a reputable mathematician with a good name, someone who is not involved in chess and has no vested interest in this matter.
It's not just numbers. People play Hikaru in Titled Tuesdays and they shit themselves after 15 moves. There's a huge psychological factor giving him the additional advantage most of the time.
Good point. The opposite is also true: sometimes GMs will lose to a CM (as happened recently with GM Narodinsky with a CM in Titled Tuesdays) because they are intimidated.
Hikaru had over 2900 in FIDE blitz. He could be 2950 FIDE today, he plays chess 24/7. Add psyhoclogical factor that for most players it`s hard to play against the best. This explains his cosmic winning streaks. But first of all, Carlsen and Nakamura would never cheat, I just know it, I can see the personality and also makes no sense to risk to ruin their reputation.
Explain his winning 85% and Magnus only winning 63%. Impossible.
@@flyandshy00 Magnus plays after two beers
and Hikaru after two shots of vodka
С непоколебимой уверенностью "любой человек, хотя бы чуть-чуть разбирающийся в стастистике, скажет вам, что выбор подпоследоватльности игр - это не черрипикинг". Блин, у меня хоть и 4 по статистике стоит, но это же просто не так.
Значимость гипотезы будет меняться в завимости от того, какую группу событый мы считаем выборкой. Пусть она и задается лишь 2 моментами времени, выборку можно подобрать именно так, чтобы максимизировать статистическую значимость желаемой гипотез, что и было сделано в выкладках по Хикару. Не говоря уже о том, что расматривать лишь длину стрика как единственную статистику, игнорируя при этом долгосрочный винрейт, например (как самую естественную метрику) - в чистом виде черрипикинг, избирательность среди статистик от данных.
А если про тех, кто критикет методологию, говорить "я не воспринимаю эту критику, потому что (1) предвзятость / (2) детские ошибки / (3) большие деньги на той стороне", реально можно кредабилити растерять. Грустно, блин
У Хикару перформанс на последовательности игр слишком высокий по сравнению с чьими угодно ОТБ показателями. Причём тут долгосрочный винрейт? Вы в итоге не так и не объяснили, почему выборка - черрипикинг. И сформулируйте тогда уж гипотезу, под которую рассуждения Крамника можно было подогнать как черрипикинг?
@@Friendly-Mahjong этот партизан копирует этот текст под разными видео, в том числе на моем канале, на службе, не трогайте человека, семью надо кормить 😊
@@Friendly-Mahjongтак нужно банить Хикару или нет, уже опоеделили его в читеры, или опровергли?
Если выбрать ЗАРАНЕЕ, какую подпоследовательность взять( до того, как игры произошли), тогда да. Но если выбрать подпоследовательность ПОСЛЕ, чтоделает Крамник, то да, это черрипикинг
@@DS-wm6rn браво,профессор
@1:16:35 "Why not magnus" is really good question.. it stumped kramnik. I dont understand how does kramnik came up with 2.7% probability for it. He should tell how did he arrive at that number by showing (all required outcomes/total possible outcomes).. This is why it's tough to believe kramnik despite him having good intentions.
Its another format video, first
Chesscome NEVER did it even when asked and publishing their so called reports. But you dont question THEIR credibility somehow
I have not done the calculation but you can easily calculate the probability of someone winning a game with a specific elo difference. There are even online web-based calculators. You can then multiply these probabilities and arrive at the result. I suspect he included Magnus's losses also because it's not fair to see (say) a win-streak of +10 and ignore a possible -10 lose-streak just before that in the same tournament.
@@ctsirkasscalculating probablity of a certain streak is MUCH MORE complicated actually
@@VBKramnik I agree, i question there methods and credibility too for having selective bias. But you shouldn't base your argument on a badly framed report to support your numbers and theory. I rephrased my sentence as it seems to have negative tone and offend you for using word credibility, which was not the intention
@@krackr6618 I do not base my position on their nonsensical reports but explaining reasons why dont trust them
GO KRAMNIK!!!
"Hikaru was 3500 in blitz."
O_O Doesn't matter.
Love this channel❤
Very interesting
The problem with Nakamura is he want Chesscom to watch him play user surveillance, then it'll come back fine, then Nakamura will get another massive streak and Kramnik will blow another gasket saying he's cheating again. Kramnik says the numbers don't lie, so when you go through the whole process and look at them play in person, then the numbers still don't add up, where is the proof? Numbers are wrong or the process is just constantly wrong until they add up to the numbers. He never concedes until the process matches the numbers. 🤦♂
Kramnik clearly doesn’t understand the concept of farming.
the site the ensure that your opponent is not cheating will be great,
Great interview. However - what I didn’t quite understand is why this conversation was held in English, by two non-native speakers. It’s not ideal for English speakers and not ideal for Russian speakers. Would in my view have been better to have it in Russian and then subtitled to English, or even dubbed by one of the multiple Gen AI tools :)
The funny thing is that native English speakers are not the best in English which is peculiar....Scandinavians are by far the cleanest...UK guys are talk too much without meaning....
I'm 1700 and I also faced cheaters
~1700 is full of cheaters. It's easier to play vs 1800-2000 players. I have a theory there are some gaps where cheaters live.
@vlaer81 I totally agree with you 1700s are tough and they tend to cheat more often
Fabi also said that around that rating he was most likely to encounter cheaters when playing from a new account.
Caruana gave an interview where he said, on a speedrun, he encountered the most cheating at the 1900-2000 rating band. And he didn't even know! He thought he was just making some blunders..but the admins reported that to him after they checked all his games and booted the unfair players. Lol.
Funnily enough I have experienced the same..and though I'm 2300 OTB I just gave up at about 1950 in rapid. My theory is people like to reach 2000 and then 'retire'..I've seen a few people I suspected do it..sad creatures.
@shumbuk4383 yeah, it's hard foe us to play against the rating range from 1500 - 2000 simply because people cheat often
Hikaru 1:08:00
For a person that cares so much about the math, he does use a lot of sensationalism when referencing numbers. Like, "is many hundreds of times less probable" among other phrases. I have a bit of a background in math (studied computer science back in the day), and this type of language and rhetoric smells to me.
The mathematical fact of Kramnik is only a mathematical fact under certain assumptions, such as:
1. The games in a streak are independent from each other. Thus tilting does not occur at all. Experts sort of agree that this is not the case in chess.
2. ELO ratings are objective and valid predictor. (They are not.)
And it is a very interesting and valid question: when mr. Kramnik offers to pay the best mathematicians in the world to look at this and they refuse, why so?
Is it that the time of a guy like Terrence Tao is infinitely more valuable than Mr. Kramnik could afford to pay anyway?
Or is the problem simultaneously absolutely trivial (surely a string of chess games are not independent events, so basic statistics simply does not apply) and super duper difficult (you cannot really mathematically model and simulate human psychology, can you?).
BTW, phd in mathematics is overrated. PhDs in mathematics are not gods.
Interesting video
Do the procedure - like, comment, follow!
I would say sometime I read a book and skip some sentences that are too difficult to read and measure the reaction
I don’t know why but Grisha reminds me Danya. Nice guys both of them, but they Just want to be well respected in this community. Nice guys who want to sit on both chairs.
I agree. He has such a positive vibe, does a great job staying "curious" rather than "getting annoyed" like I would be in the face of so much confident nonsense.
Neplohoy episode
досмотрел наконец. Не, ну это было бы конечно супер смешно, если бы Борисыч продул партейку. Учитывая как Григорий защищал читеров и читер_ком, это приобрело бы новый поворот Пришлось бы записывать уже видос у себя на канале с разбором.
I've watched several hours of Kramnik interviews, with Caruana, etc. Does this one offer new insight into the man's psyche - can someone summarize? (Hmm ... I should know how to do this with AI.) Oh, here's a good part - some "PhD guy" understands statistics much worse than Kramnik the high-school graduate. Because parameters.
I've watched all of them while preparing, there are many new things in this one (since I've asked many new questions)
@@MustreaderChess Thanks. I will eventually listen to the whole thing. The question on my mind is "GM Kramnik, with your education, your 'statistics Elo' cannot be more than 1000, perhaps 1200 at the most. Yet you think you know better than many mathematics PhDs. What would you think of a 1200 player who confidently corrected and lectured you on chess strategy?"
@@sdaiwepm "If you have no Phd. in field X, your ELO in that field is max. 1200" is just a demonstrably false assumption
e.g. most of the best programmers on the planet (Let's say their ELO is 3200) don't have a Phd. in computer science
most of the most successful equity traders don't have a Phd. in economics, etc.
By the way if you were actually committed to this exaggerated respect for authority and credentials, you would logically side with GM Kramnik regardless of his arguments since we're talking about chess and he is one of the most credentialed and accredited players of all time. Personally to me Kramnik's credentials don't matter at all, I support him because I like his arguments, and I would support him even if his ELO was 200
@@sdaiwepm You can refute Kramnik (who makes good points in general) about "Naka winning streaks" using simple Elo differences and an online "cumulative binomial calculator". Nakamura did not cheat when he had those winning streaks, based on his opponents Elo from what I estimated. I published a bunch of stuff in UA-cam comments. From memory I recall Naka had a less than 5% probability of doing what he did, but 5% is not close to being impossible (the standard these days in statistics is 1% chance or less, not the older 5% chance) and well within the margin of error for having a good streak, as happens to us all.
@@raylopez99 Kramnik and his merry band of Poles do not care about your disquastung logics!!
Kamnik and the theorist guy that wanders in random Comment sections are starting to make sense
Very good video. I don't really agree with the way Kramnik goes accusing people of cheating. That's all his problem. We can all agree that Hikaru's streakes are on the extreme of the probabilities, and a good argument could be made that he has accounts at his dispossal to play against and get rating and views. But then Kramnik goes to lose and blatantly and instantly accuses the oponnent of cheating, that seems petty and salty and takes all the seriousness from anything he can say. And his position is "anyone i accuse must be investigated until they are cleaned".
If you only look at numbers, you will surely fare wrong. There are so many parameters to take into account that doesn’t show up in statistics, or at least it would be almost impossible to list them all.
This is extreme tunnel vision
we know half the people cheat. The problem is it probably can't be proven and the website knows this. But Kudos to Kramnik for bringing up the issue. Because the worst thing that could of ever happened was FIDE partnering with this corrupt website. Thank goodness FIDE saw the light and told them to screw off.
Hmmm...
Why platform a guy who slanders everyone
Pls organize what kramnik says...where both sides play the same game😁 online math match between 2 parties.
Vladimir's answers are so long it looks like you're getting tired😂 I don't mind listening to him talk though
17:30 is just ridiculous man
edit: all of this is just ridiculous it's not even worth debating with this guys ego
I’ve watched countless Hikaru real time live Title Tuesday matches. He explains every move he makes while playing. How could he cheat? How does Krammnik explain that?
Theoretically speaking, top players can explain certain moves, but doesn’t mean they can calculate accurately enough to choose the better one.
He actually doesnt, most of the time it's just 'h6 looks right' or 'of course I play b4' or 'i think he blundered here'
that doesn't mean hes not cheating bro. Not sure why you think it does.
Hikaru has been undoubtably the best speed chess player (bar magnus) for years and years. Hikaru has played more recorded chess games than possibly anyone ever and put these 2 things together and you are going to get streaks that no other player can touch.
If you would know statistical researches you would understand that ALL factors are INCLUDED in probability number. This number is so high 😊 CONSIDERING all that
They literally aren't, he essentially calculates the probability that on a specific day someone gets a streak of 40+. To properly calculate it you need to calculate the chance that given a player plays 100,000+ games what are the chances that at some point they have a 40+ streak. Once you properly calculate this you find that it is inevitable a player of Hikaru's strength will have a streak given enough games played.@@VBKramnik
@@jimboslice4468 let me repeat,you know nothing about stats in general and this case in particular, your "arguments"reveal this,just repeating what you have heard from varios manipulators. Get some knowledge first and we continue
You really didn't consider all of the factors though. During these streaks Hikaru is actively choosing players he knows he can beat consistently. He's playing FMs, IMs or relatively low-rated GMs, players that are seriously outclassed by Hikaru. Another factor is tilt, these players lose a couple of games, as expected, then they get frustrated and annoyed and they start playing worse. Then you have all the games where Hikaru swindles them, they get winning positions but they take too much time and Hikaru flags them (something he is extremely good at). Add mouse-skills (another factor you completely ignore) and the fact that Hikaru plays tons of games everyday and these streaks start to look completely normal and expected. In fact it would be weird if there weren't any streaks like that.
You yourself could probably recreate these streaks if you wanted to. Play lots of games, choose opponents you're comfortable with and who are much lower rated than you, keep doing it everyday and you'll start seeing long winning streaks.
I really think you should reconsider your methods. Cheating is a real problem but false accusations only discredit your methods and allow real cheaters to continue doing what they do.
@@hansmahr8627 you should learn something instead, how probability calculated, bit of basic mathematics,before advising something 🤝
It seems that aggressive interviewing doesn't work with Kramnik as he did not say much new
Well, nothing works. He has no introspection; essentially he plays a prepared tape no matter what the question.
One problem with the probabilities given is that the odds of losing games during a streak is not independent. E.g. after losing 9 games in a row, most players are likely to underperform their rating in the 10th game due to tilt or bad form. So if you calculate the probability of a n winning streak simply as p^n, where p is the win probability of a single game, you’re likely to underestimate the probability of the streak.
I would be very interested to see the result if Kramnik collected statistics from strong players on the relative performance rating on n+1th game after losing n games in a row. This could be based on otb games if you’re concerned about cheating online. Then on round n, calculate the win probability assuming the opponent has a rating lower than his initial rating due to the tilt factor calculated after n games. I think would substantially increase the probability assigned to the long streaks.
is this really true? someone who is on a giant winning streak could become more careless and lose focus because they are winning so many times in a row they become overconfident.
@@austenr4126 true,collected some statistics on this, tilting concept refuted by stats
@@VBKramnik Did you publish these data somewhere? I would be interested in looking at them
i think for hikarus streaks it helps to think of it in terms of the possible permutations. that is, 32k wins (80% win rate) distributed over his 40k played games. the question is what percentage of the possible permutations includes N win streaks X or greater. for N=1(that is a single win streak greater than X) i am able to quickly calculate that 70% of the permutations have a win streak of 50 or greater, but only 1/10,000 of the permutations have a win streak of 100 or greater. this is only a first order approximation (his win rate is taken as his average win rate of 80% regardless of opponent) but it does fit the data we see. we do find win streaks of 50, but not of 100.
@@austenr4126 you cant because of the opponents level, it makes a big difference
22:14 no way. Vlad has a psychological issues and he just does not see he blunders a won game then says that the opponent was cheating when he had the upper hand in the whole game.
I must say that @mustreaderchess did a very good job. Interviewing someone who dont let you talk, and go on autopilot to repeat again and again the same general non specific points, is monster job. How its possible to argue with someone like Mr Kramnik? as long as you are agree with him its possible, otherwise you become the target. I watch many interview of him, he speak alot but he never bring anything convincing except auto-repeating again and again without any substance. The only thing that seem clear for me, its many people who become older like him and Gata, cannot accept to be outplayed by better players than them. More easy to blame others than admit their own failure. cheating is a problem in chess but in Kramnik case is more than that.
Interview was conducted very well and much respect shown for Kramnik. Good job. I do not agree with Kramnik on most points of his online cheating and accusations simply because he bases his comparisons with over-the-board rating. Kramnik fails to realize that online skills are quite different from OTB chess and there are specialist players who have adapted their play style to perfectly suit online chess (flagging / finding 2nd or 3rd best moves in much shorter time / mouse skills etc)
Not at all.
you favourite mouse won't help you if you don't understand chess basics. You can't be CM offline and GM online.
@@ankeborg9122 lol...try forcing Kramnik to play hyperbullet 10 second match against Nihal and then say mouse skills don't matter. I am pretty sure I will beat Kramnik easily lil
@@AdityaPal_sciencepal but thats the point. They don't matter in 3+1. You sound crazy with your false equivalency. hyperbullet is not even chess imo. Kramnik was 2950 last I checked and he doesn't even drag the mouse. Its alarming when only the streamers and people we never heard drastically overperform online. People aren't stupid man. 96% of titled players don't even play online tournaments cause they know its a joke.
@@cooloutac Check Aronian's tweet today on the Clash of Claims: The match between Kramnik and Alcantara was exiting and proved few points. 1. Jose has a lot of respect towards Vlad and didn’t mind any format or condition. 2. Online chess and OTB levels can vary a lot. 3. My generation lacks mouse skills :)
If you still say that Kramnik is correctly accusing GMs like Hikaru, Jose and upcoming youngsters like Nihal using his baseless and selective statistics, you are delusional just like him
Is kramnik biased? For sure. For example, he played with GM Minh Le three games of 3+2 and lost and then immediately blocked him. He lost one game to Hans, and we saw how he reacted. He has a hard time handling the defeat and accepting the fact that he is no longer a top player.
The weirdest part is that he is still a top player
Just not in online blitz where he is merely among the best but still salty
@@herrjo7461 open fide profile of GM Kramnik. His Blitz rating is rapidly dropping from peak 2841 in 2017 to 2664 in 2024 (today). In the last year he lost more than 50 points and he was only playing 2 tournaments in this period of time!
If he had been playing more OTB tournaments, the rating probably would have probably been even lower, because 2 tournaments a year does not allow the rating to be in sync with actual level of play.
because that dude is a known cheat man. He is a smurfing streamer, they all ridiculously over perform online. Kramnik probably already had it in his mind he was a cheater before even playing him. Of course he was biased against him. I once was in Minh Lees channel telling smurfing is wrong its dishonest. So he put his name in the description of his account. And he got 10 aborts in a row and had to go back to being anonymous. Anyone who smurfs is a disohonest person man. That goes for Danya, that goes for them all.
Is it just me or is Kramnik not vaping at 2:06:46 I can literally see the vapour coming out of is mouth
Kinda looked like a thc oil pen when I zoomed in but not sure. imagine he’s just getting faded for the blitz match against mustreader
He vapes and is unvaxxed, and was recently hospitalized for Covid. A real big brain.
@@sdaiwepm I don't see the big deal? I mean I'm vaxxed. I had covid. I vape. lol
@@RichACBlues Apparently you’re smarter than Kramnik.
@@sdaiwepm well if you think vaping gives you covid, he's smarter than you too.
Monopoly
Kramnik is a legend not only for Wchmp but for all this
It's so hilarious that kramnik says he has a 'team of statisticians' , only he can't reveal any names. This guy is a clown
Because they tried their best to explain to him that the data do NOT say what GM VK thinks they say. Finally they gave up and asked GM VK to at least not mention their names.
This is just an educated guess, but I do think this is likely the reason.
So cheaters like you can attack them like you attack him?
I’ve been such a great Kramnik fan that some years ago that I memorized all the moves from his great matches with Kasparov, Leko, and Topalov. Kramnik has always been a calm, fair, and balanced voice in the chess world, but over the past few years, he seems to be seriously on tilt.
In this interview, Kramnik stated that he’s prepared to personally fund a cheating study conducted by top data analysts, and to calmly and rationally discuss cheating issues with all fair-minded people.
On Twitter/X, I recently asked Kramnik if it wouldn’t have been better to privately conduct such a highly professional anti-cheating study before launching non-accusations regarding Hikaru, Jospem, and countless other players.
Kramnik simply deleted my post and blocked me.
He’s been a great player and a great man, but this is all very sad.
I NEVER delete posts like that unless insulting or agressive. Dont lie
I will not ask you to go through the trouble of checking your Twitter records to confirm that you did, indeed block me for asking an honest question.
I will simply ask you the same question on this page:
If you have been ready to privately fund a cheating analysis by top data professionals, wouldn’t it have been more responsible, better for chess, and better for your own credibility to conduct such a study before making non-accusations against Hikaru, Jospem, and many other players?
@@kramnikstudentc24 or maybe because his arguments are not valid, not reliable, simply wrong and, thus, not convincing? Do you consider this option?
@@kramnikstudentc24 there is bunch of people who openly and clearly stated against Kramnik arguments. Third-party ones like Chess-Ray and some scientists (like 4+ published articles), and people who called suspicious (if not cheaters) by Kramnik. They all provided arguments (with or without emotions) that are not any less convincing than Kramnik have. But the argument and debates still did not happen.
@@VBKramnik You've deleted my comments (not "posts") on your own youtube page. In your mind, anything and anyone that disagrees with you is "insulting." And then you accuse people of "lying," which is actually an insult.
I’m not sure I agree about Hikaru. I do however agree with almost all of what Kramnik is saying. If you play regularly online, you know cheating is happening extremely consistently. It’s so nice when you can tell it’s not and you have a great game with another honest person.
Kramnik does not understand statistics so it would be bad taste to agree with him lol
His response regarding Hikaru is hilarious -- dude has zero understanding of basic principles of mathematics and statistics. Apparently the brain drain really hit the Eastern bloc harder than anybody knew.
Guy wins almost every blitz and rapid tou8rnament online that he enters. And loses every single one he plays in offline. It makes no sense. 3+1 vs 3+2 is the same game. And this is the case for all the smurfing streamers, and none of the top pros. The website is to blame imo.
@@RichACBlues Hikaru has been ranked top 2-1 blitz for 10 years, stfu
@@Ism0Lait3la doesn't change my point bud. ratings is politics. The guy says smurfing and farming players online made him a better player. What the cheating did was get him alot of money to be more picky and choosy with what tournaments he enters to protect his rating. I mean that jospem guy got 100 points at a moscow open and was losing points ever since. He is 2700 but probably really only 2600 as one example of why ratings are so meaningless to me. FIDE should investigate that moscow open. Only sport I know of that ranks people based on politics and not tournament wins. Its to the point now I'm assuming rampant cheating goes on in classical OTB matches. I only want to see OTB Blitz from now on as a fan.
Крамник - легенда в шахматах и абсолютный дилетант в статистике и математике в целом. С тем же успехом он может записывать лекции по вирусологии. Я задал Крамнику вопрос - где аналитика от математиков с именем, ответа ноль. Я спросил, насколько нормально сказать "У Хикару интересные результаты, а потом трусливо оговориться "я его ни в чем не обвиняю". Ответа ноль. Человек с таким поведением не годится в моральные авторитеты, извините. :) Более того, ни один ТОП ГМ обвинения Крамника в сторону Хикару не поддержал. Это ж надо, какой он уникальный правдоруб, а все прочие нет. Удивительно. Человек очень неуклюже пиарится на теме, семью-то кормить надо и ЭГО просевшее тоже надо поддувать. Типичная старость, с которой человек не справился. Можно лишь выразить респект Каспарову, который отойдя от проф. шахмат, не скатился в такое.
Отрыгнули свою чушь,полегчало чуток если, рад 😁
Many criticized Kramnik for using the Berlin Defense against Kasparov. In a World Championship match, you're supposed to be more aggressive, not play for boring draws. But Kramnik was very stubborn and stuck with his plan. People were saying he was playing scared, that he didn't have the guts to take on Kasparov head-on. He ignored them, kept playing his way, and in the end, shocked everyone by actually winning.
It's the same thing with this whole cheating drama. Kramnik is throwing around accusations, using all this statistical evidence, and many are telling him he's wrong, that he needs more proof. But he doesn't care. He's convinced he's right, and he's not backing down, just like he did against Kasparov. That stubborn streak is just part of who he is.
That criticism sounds like made up nonsense
we all know hes right. Its just a matter of is it possible to even prove. People denying half the people cheat online are probably children or cheaters themselves.
Some observations about Kramnik :
- Somehow he can pick up on basic mistakes but real experts with PhDs in the field can’t? Only Kramnik as self-professed amateur and his mysterious team of mathematicians are apparently able to figure this whole thing out? Does he know what getting a PhD entails?
- you’re entirely biased if you only accept takes from people that repeat exactly what you say (mysterious Mike Kagansky for example) but dismiss every other expert opinion as manipulation, biased, wrong etc
- how does he not understand it would be completely against his own goals and NOT an independent investigation if HE was to select and pay people.
*btw I do believe cheating is a serious issue in online chess. I don’t think anyone disagrees, including Hikaru and others who he likes to accuse, BUT importantly, Kramnik has NO clue how to go about catching them ..
They're POLISH mathematicians!
Are you the one, that gonna do fully qualified and unbiased analysis for all of us for free? And what are your academic merits exactly so we would trust your majesty?
average rapid rating is 600 on that well-known platform. Can you imagine what kind of people argue with Kramnik in these comments... Most of them are subscribed to Nakamura. They don't understand what he says in most cases. The only thing they understand is when he eats pasta on his stream.
Come on, man... come on. This "one in 50 billion" 'statistic' he keeps throwing around is not based on actual math. It's so, so flawed and he won't listen to why.
Kramnik seems to have a very rudimentary understanding of how probabilities work. You can't cherry pick the data and just pretend it's a randomly selected event. His argument is basically dude won the lottery, interesting it's one in a million to win the lottery thus he was cheating. If you can't se the flaw in that argument I don't see why I should take your opinion seriosly
Only that chess is not a game of chance. And with the lottery, millions of people play it. For someone to win the jackpot in a long period of time it is almost certainty.
And that I make researches without cherry picking, my PhD mathematician 😊
@@VBKramnik Of course you do cherry picking (you have no math method at all, more generally). You even compare online blitz/bullet streaks (30, 40 games) from guys who played 10k games per year to OTB long games tournaments (not even OTB streaks, and if you do you will notice for exemple Caruana did a "3500+ perf" - as you would say, and you could also say it's a 3900 or 4000 perf if we use online rating, logically - in 2014 on an 7-streak OTB long games with 7/7 against 2803 fide standard average rated players, which is far more unlikely happening than all Hikaru's streaks online against FM or IM combined), which is so ridiculous (like most of your arguments).
And the worst part is to see you, an ex-world champion, a legend for many (including me), accusing (without any sort of proof, because your "stats" are not a proof at all, and i do have a math background) so many great players (because yes, you're accusing, all the time, when you say "it's almost impossible" or "99% chance it's fishy" it's clearly accusations). Doing this, you don't serve the noble cause (the cheating problem) you defend.
@@jeanpierrepierrrejean4199 not ashamed wriitng lies after lies? Must have little selfrespect, think about this
@@VBKramnik I'm not lying, I'm trying to help you understand but that's not the point. The fact is : The only "proof" you give is your statistics, these "stats" mean nothing and you know nothing about stat (not even basic knowledge), any statistician could tell you that.
For example, you said about Hikaru's stats "we can multiply" (the stat of each streak), which is completely absurd for what you are trying to prove. I roll a dice ten times, I get the number 6 twice (normal result). After this, do you want to do "5/6 (= not get the number 6) raise to the power of 8 multiplied by 1/6 (= get the number 6) raise to the power of 2" (which is equal to less than 0, 01%) to estimate my chances and conclude that it is "almost impossible" (less than 0.01% chances) to obtain the number 6 twice ?
I support our man Kramnik! The truth will be revealed
Play with someone and when ur are losing use SF and if your opponent win is because is a cheater
Kramnik saying that the PhD guy doesn’t understand the full story, has set the wrong parameters is.. INTERESTING when you consider Kramnik keeps saying he’s just looking at the facts, and never takes into account the wider context (playing against weaker players, better mouse skills, young kids not playing OTB as much etc etc)
Of course those things considered, and more, try better argument if you care about argumentation
@@VBKramnik Do you want action to be taken based on statistics? "The probability of this 12-win-streak is 0.001" ok so now what we do? Like YRMW1983 said you might have forgotten some parameter when you did the math calculation. Now imagine if you ban someone based on that?!
It's time to make a podcast with some hairdressers
Kramnik doesn't have a clue about math. His stats and all numbers he gives ("99% sure it's fishy", "0.1% chance to do this streak", his "stats" for Hikaru's streaks etc) are so ridiculous. No methodology explain, no reference, no names, nothing, just absurd numbers who fall from the sky (most of them based solely on his "impression", indeed). "My team of mathematicians" 🤣. What a joke.
When Hikaru plays, in blitz or bullet (online), 500 games around 2300-2400 players (fide classical rating), Kramnik will find a streak of 30 wins and think this is an obvious (and his only) cheating proof (and he will ask for a super-mathematical-proof-that-he-didn't-cheat), while it is indeed quite normal given Hikaru's strength on this format (which is proven by a lot of things, and for many years).
People like Fabi (and many many others) doesn' find anything suspicious in those streaks when they look at them as an experts of chess. But Kramnik claims that there's like 0,01% probability.
It's clear that something's with the Kramnik's mathematics is wrong then.
?? 🤡🤡
Fabiano literally said HIkaru farming people is an example of why online ratings are meaningless. In fact He has insinuated that HIkaru has cheated many times, and HIkaru has publicly called him out on it twice, and Fabiano denied it. But Fabiano has to be politically correct for his career. Kramnik is a retired world champ who has nothing to lose. History will favor him in the long run. You can trust that.
@@RichACBlues Lol, what a speech, very convincing, sound like a politician (and Kramnik) 🤣 But this is too funny, looks like you've really mixed up what is farming and what is cheating. You're right, Fabiano literally DID say what you just said indeed but looks like you have no clue that it means exactly OPPOSITE of what you concluded 🤣🤣🤣 Is someone cheats, he doesn't need to FARM. Those things are actually quite opposite while you talk like they're the same for some reason.
Let us do the procedure (like + comment)
Обманщик Крамник наезжает на Накамуру. Нелегитимный чемпион, укравший вместе с Каспаровым мечту Широва.
Туалетный читер. Позорище.
He really just makes up these statistics and how they apply.
I do statistics for a living - and what he is saying is inaccurate. The result of any chess game is more than one factor. I found over 23 factors - and I am grouping some, and probably missing some.
After I ran the analysis myself, the factor of 'cheating' that potentially goes into any game is less than 1% of the total result. That means everything else, combined, is 100x more influential in the end result than any cheating will be (age of opponents, time of day, accuracy of opponent, result(s) of previous games immediately preceding this one - all of these have a higher impact on the result than 'cheating.')
Kramnik - you said you welcome a mathematician. I welcome anyone to check my work, and I encourage him to let me do the same to what he claims is true. For free. I want to verify what you are claiming - or I want to change your prospective. I will be open minded.
Where is your work? Genuinely curious.
Really appreciate you pushing back on all the nonsense. Not easy to do at all, he has a strong personality.
The sad part is, of course he’s generally correct about online cheating. But he’s discrediting that obvious fact with all of his fallacies and accusations.
Типичная позиция жулика. Мне можно -- другим нельзя. А других поймали? Накамура играл под чужим акаунтом, таким образом влияя на призы?
Логика школьника, укравшего пирожок в столовой. Я голодный. Мне можно. Крамник -- позорит себя. Мало того, что нелигитимный чемпион,
вполне возможно жульничал в матче с Топаловым (это исходя из того, что играл под чужим акаунтом. Один раз жулик -- всегда жулик!).
Ему можно. Стыдоба с маразмом и душком от жульничества, нечестности и непорядочности.
You see, I want to believe him but he talks with such confidence about things he does not fully understand. He sounds like a conspiracy theorist with the language he uses. If he went to any university and asked for a simple dissertation to be based on his collected data, that would go a long way, but from the evidence he provides I find it unlikely. He is basically saying "trust me everybody else is wrong and I'm right, because... reasons (that I cannot release to the public)"
The whole video was a "trust me bro" moment, with certain parts that literally dived into the conspiracy theory realm. He doesn't allow for anyone else to express any opinion that disputes him, he just says he is right and they are wrong without any proof.
but "trust me" lol
He has told you multiple times in multiple videos that he use the help of several professional mathematicians with his analysis but you were too busy with writing your own precious comments to comprehend that
@@AleksandrKis but he won’t name any of them or show any proof, so it’s useless. Just cause you say something, doesn’t mean it’s true.
why do you need to "believe" him. Do you even play video games or chess online? Its an absolute joke buddy. The only question is how do you prove it and that should be your criticism. But if you are asking if 50% of the people online really cheat, then you have no awareness at all. in fact if you are using multiple accounts in rated games. You're just another cheater and that would explain alot lol.
People still struggle with probability. His points are valid and solid
You are obviously talking about me when you say people
exactly, i think what Kramnik is missing is that most people are stupid
This entire video is a "trust me bro" moment. He provides 0 sources and seemingly random numbers on repeat but wants you to assume he's correct, unbiased and truthful somehow
no he isnt..you are just not incapable of understanding what he says
if you listen carefully, Kramnik spits logic and facts and common sense.
@@zigmaa69 I did listen carefully and heard 0 of that
@@jadezee6316 Actually you're the one not incapable of understanding here. Kramnik's speech sounds good, he speaks with an overconfidence but there's no depth in it. He said really NOTHING.
You should not have to trust him that cheating is rampant and online gaming is a joke. You only have to trust his methods can prove it. Which might very well be impossible. But pretending the issue doesn't exist is even worse.
29:40 all Kramnik has to offer: "I can guarantee you"
Shut up. Are you also a cheater?
Guys support Kramnik
Kramnik is a dumbass
Girls support Levy.
@@notsoeloquent nah they support that IM Eric Rosen dude. and it makes me so jealous. that weirdo!! hahaha. Its only kids that support Levy. Like most of the smurfing streamers.
Kramnik is right. Cheating is a real problem. I don't believe the Nakamura stuff.
You don't believe Naka or don't believe he cheated?
@@jimboslice4468 Naka isn't cheating ofc
@@Chris.M but you don't know 100%
@@vlaer81Yes we do. Naka was the top player on ICC crushing everyone in legendary fashion before engines were what they are now.
@@mikecantreed Will all my respect, but no you don't. You can only believe that he is not cheating. You don't sit on Naka's lap every Tuesday and you don't see what is happening in his monitor or headphones. As I said in some other threads, at least he proved that he can play over the board. He is a super GM - no doubt. There are other patients with FM titles who are way more suspicious. These days I wouldn't even surprised, if Vlad plays on Naka's account from time to time and they both make some youtube show :)
Kramnik talks as if mathematical probabilities were absolute truths. This is so blatantly wrong that one is tempted to think he is trying to deceive. But I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he is just very ignorant.
Mathematical probabilities are not absolute truths. He even says “facts”. Saying they are “facts”, as he repeatedly says, is ridiculously misleading. They are numbers calculated, not facts.
Mathematics is called “exact science”, but it is exact only within the framework of its assumptions (axioms). The bridge between those axioms and reality can be huge. When he says “the mathematical probability is one in a trillion” (or whatever) he omits the fact that a probability is an exact number for the idealized mathematical problem, not for the real-life situation. The modeling of real-life situations into mathematically well-defined problems have a number of idealizations that are almost never granted, often not even approximately.
And accusing, directly or indirectly, specific people of cheating without a proof is nasty.
I don't think it's as bad as Kramnik says. Kramnik just doesn't like losing, so half the people he accuses are probably just having a few good games.
I hear, once he was great , but see only a fool. I think its time everyone did 'the procedure' and block him, and he's flawed rants. R.I.P Mad Vlad
🤡🤡
so kramnik argumentation - talk to me, give me numbers, but I dont believe anything you will say anyway. his focus on hikaru streaks (which as I understand are livestreamed). and kramnik is not on side of 99,9%, I dont remember anyone else agreeing with him on case of streaks. he is alone 0.01%.
livestreaming doesn't prevent cheating bud. not in the slightest.
Kramnik is so right
But 80%? Really? I find 80% absolutely crazy estimate.
@@u.v.s.5583 well 50% of people admit to cheating other online video games where its is much harder to cheat in and way easier to detect and catch. so I imagine its gotta be way more in online chess. And that is just engine use. But let me ask you a question bud. Do you use multiple accounts in rated games? Just because they website doesn't enforce measures to stop you doesn't mean its not against TOS, because it is considered rating maniuplation and CHEATING. so if you count all the people abusing alt accounts to smurf or reset ratings, or for whatever lame false excuse they have for cheating. 80% is probably a low estimate lol.
But when 40% of players admit to using engines in other online video games that are harder to cheat in and easier to catch, you have to assume it is way more prevalent in online chess. 80% is not crazy when you count all the alt accounts in rated games that the website does absolutely nothing about. Even encourages it by letting their streamers smurf for entertainment.
Kramnic and Garry, Bobby and many of GM’s I have respect for. Kramnic is historical great Chess player. Kramnic in my mind is doing the work that needs to be done to help to build a better chess environment, and it is a tuff road because he will get critical remarks which are unfair to him. I am Old School, and I respect his view, because it is accurate. I am very skeptical about playing online other than bots. Now when ai have played if I win I am a cheater, and if I lose I wonder if I had been cheated. Magnus opened a can of worms when he got beaten by Hans, and claimed cheating. Magnus was beaten he needed to deal with that as a simple loss, nothing more. But the sheeple chess fans attack a person trying to help the game.
We need a software programmer to figure out a way to accurately determine if a person is cheating online, surely there is a way.
Detecting chess cheaters requires mathematicians to come up with better models but it's impossible to detect a clever cheater who maintains 55-70 % win ratio and maintain accuracy of 80-90% accuracy i.e. is to use engine when necessary. Full video coverage of player is only way to see if he is using secondary device. But people are too sceptical about that too because of recent Neiman allegations
@@krackr6618 might be impossible to prove. But at least Kramnik was the reason why FIDE told that corrupt website to screw off with their partnership. Won't even talk to them anymore according to the CEO Erik in the perpetual chess podcast interview. Where he said he can't get any sponsorships to host tournaments and will probably be leaving the company in 5 years lol.
@@krackr6618 ya. I don't even want ot watch OTB classical anymore because of guys like Neiman or HIkaru. Now I really understand why Magnus was ready to give up on it. I prefer to watch blitz now so less chance of any cheating. I mean this neiman guy soared to #3 online behind Magnus and HIkaru and won that weeks titled tuesday and it shocked the adult chess world. To the point St Louis wrote a letter banning him that same week. Meanwhile the kid is ranked #92 offline. and has gotten worse cause now he is #98, probably won't even be top 100 anymore in blitz soon. Look at this kid Jospem. 2700 only because of a rigged Moscow open tournament a couple years ago that gave him 100 points. now he just lost to Kramnik in their match. The website tried to cheat kramnik in multiple games on the computer online which the arbiters confirmed and they had to to stop it!!! And then Kramnik dominated Jose in the OTB portion. Jose claims he was really prepared which is nonsense. I doubt Kramnik prepared anything for that match and jose is much higher ratedshould of smoked kramnik according to his online performance. And all these kids are still in denial. I think online chess is so corrupt I've stopped watching tournaments months ago. and I only play on Lichess now. RIP.