He is a coward. Magnus will not say anything important like today. His only goal is to isolate Hans from the other chess players and fans because of his ego.
If he's afraid of saying something for the legal reasons - it's fine, but saying what is he afraid of and why doesn't he speak and why is he handling it this way has no possible legal reasons other than just being afraid
I mean, i don’t get this whole drama, yeah we know that hans cheated online in the past, regarding if it was 3 years ago or a couple of months ago (last time i mean) he didn’t cheat over the board at the sinquefield cup against magnus so i don’t get all this crying from magnus.
@@elias5658 for those of us who have followed chess for 20 years and not 20 minutes, Magnus has lost to young players thousands of times and never responded this way. Go watch Alireza kick his ass in rapid and bullet streams, watch the reactions and anger, then realize Magnus has mentored Alireza and loves and respects the kid. Same with Pragg.
Dude, I love this guy! I have the same opinions as him. I don’t like Hans because he embodies that whole “Arrogance of youth” idea. At the same time I don’t subscribe to ruining someones life / career over speculation and require some proof before grabbing my pitchfork.
I think that this commentary from Ben perfectly explain why Magnus did what he did. Ben is saying that it is frown upon in the chess community to accuse someone of cheating, even if he is cheating. That even if you are sure that someone is cheating, to resign or to quit is worse. This is exactly the kind of mentality Magnus is against, like he said in an interview one year ago. To find a cheater in chess is super difficult, like for doping. The only real way of contrasting it, like for doping, is to have harsh punishment if you get caught even once: you get caught? Lifetime ban. One free pass if you get caught as a minor. Magnus never said that Hans cheated in the cup, in that match. He cannot prove it, and he has not accused Hans of that. However, what he knows is that Hans is a cheater. He cheated multiple times, and he admitted so. Everyone playing against him, will always have the doubt. Therefore, he should not be allowed to play. He got caught cheating many times? He should not be play competitive chess. The fact that in chess people still say that is bad manner to point at cheaters instead of denouncing it is the reason of Magnus action. We need for chess a movement similar to what happened in the '90s for doping: if you used doping, people should not feel bad about not wanting to compete with you.
Implying someone is a cheater is worse than calling someone a cheater because without an actual accusation there is no way to defend yourself. If you suspect someone of cheating there should be an investigation, but there can't be an investigation without an actual accusation. Hans may very well have cheated but Magnus isn't doing the chess world any favours by being vague and encouraging a witch hunt.
i would agree but with an age restriction. like, if u have a history of cheating after age 18 or something... it would terrible to cancel potentially the next world champion for cheating online chess at age 16. cheating in online chess is the easiest , most readily available way to cheat out of all the major competitions. I think a compromise would be something like if you cheated in online at any age, u must abide by stricter anti cheating measures or something.
@@humanbean3 In another comment I was saying the same. My idea is: first time caught cheating, lifetime ban. If you are a minor, you get one "one year ban" probation. If as a minor you cheat more than once, lifetime ban. The case of Hans is peculiar. He cheated at 12, got caught. Cheated at 15-16, got caught. He confirmed those himself, so there is no doubt. After that, he claimed that he changed, but Chess com found him guilty of several more cheating cases, we do not know up to when, even in titled matches. Magnus decided that it is enough not to play with him, one can think otherwise of course. But what is sure is that to prove that Hans cheated in the specific match against Magnus is not relevant, nor Magnus accused him otherwise -- he cannot know it as we cannot know it, but to lose in a suspicious match against a known cheater is something that should not happen in a game.
These guys are chess prodigies. They were playing chess for 8 hours a day instead of socialising therefore a lot of them tend to be a little socially stunted
@@RevZman Thank you for saying that. I think we can all agree that some of these personalities to come from Chess are socially challenged to say the least.
So it's about the age? What if it was an actual crime like killing someone, I guess it would be very funny right, for someone to be mad about it, so funny.
Where are you getting that? XD Magnus agreed to play in the Sinquefield with Hans there, so the "grudge" as you call it is less than a year old. I don't think Magnus really knew many details about Hans' Chesscom cheating until recently.
I don't think Magnus is doing what he thinks is the most ethical, I think he's doing what he wants. But if we're on that subject, one person who always tries to establish themselves as more ethical than otheres is definitely you.
Exactly! Even THEN, Magnus HIMSELF dropped points. He didn't really hurt other people . Given his history with Hans (nothing against him at this stage btw), even something like THIS is foreseeable just on a psychological level (maybe not for everyone that don't take this as seriously but Magnus is CLEARLY a winner and EXTREMELY hard on himself at that) - in that losing again might be emotionally taxing especially if he, the world champion, who invested his blood, sweat, and tears over that board, lost to a cheater TWICE.
@@FoieGras idk what your definition of “didn’t really hurt other people” is but most people would put ruining someone’s reputation and career and trying to make a show of it in that category
@@MrPatty465 I don’t know HOW you got “ruining someone’s reputation and career” from but Niemann’s reputation was ruined LONG before this. If you could ruin somebody’s reputation simply by not wanting to PLAY, no accusations thrown, then wow! People’s reputations would be flying all OVER the place. No, ruining someone’s reputation would be what happened to Anna Rudolf! By a jealous opponent that can’t put UP! But I’m sure there are such people that thinks Magnus is the twisted type - probably the same type of people as Rudolf's opponent …
He didn't know until last second that Hans was playing in the tournament. At that point it was too late since he was already committed. Hans was a replacement player for that tournament.
There's a reason professionally run Rust servers don't let anyone with a game or vac ban play on their servers no matter how long ago the ban was. I was a Rust server admin. I can't speak to all games, but for that game, once a cheater always a cheater. Let a cheater on your server and they will find a way to cheat.
How is Magnus overreacting if Hans did in fact cheat?? This is exactly the mentality why cheating is becoming so prevalent in chess and spoiling the game for everyone! I think it's great that Magnus is 'overreacting' so that we start doing something about cheating in chess! In sports, it's either make it or break it, and careers can be literally destroyed when competitors start cheating.
Agree with everything here. It also looks particularly bad when you lose and withdraw. If there was an issue it may have been best to raise it before the game. The result of the game is irrelevant. Would Magnus have stayed in the S.Cup if he had beaten Hans? It would appear that it's okay to cheat if you lose.
I agree. At the very least, Magnus should have analyzed his own play first, and yeah, if he found that he played at 96% accuracy but still lost because Hans played at 99% accuracy, then more people would be sympathizing with Magnus. But Magnus accusing someone of cheating when that person played a game with accuracy in the low 90s and Magnus lost just because he played a game with accuracy in the 80s...doesn't make sense. If Magnus had analyzed his own game and seen that he played sub-optimally and that's mainly why he lost, I wonder if he would have done the unspoken accusation that he did.
Someone in the stream pointed out that what Magnus is doing may be sandbagging. As someone who just applied sandbags to his house for Hurricane Ian, I can tell you, that's not sandbagging
8:37 In my opinion, he had to play in this tournament. He signed the contract to play months ago. He is not punishing anybody other than himself and that should be respected. If he opens his mouth and says ANYTHING to the press or the organizers he can be sued. As long as he keeps quiet he is safe.
@@harrellt1405 no evidence? Its now out that Hans have cheated online way more that two times and is coaches by a known cheater. He cant analyze his own games after the game. It looks really bad for Hans.
@@ChengManChing You are very smart my brother ... Carlsen ALREADY opened his mouth and pretty much accused Niemann of cheating, so of course he can be sued NOW (9 days ago that wasn't the case)
We've heard that Magnus went through the back channel communications and it wasn't taken seriously. Apparently both he and Nepo had something to say before the Singfield Cup and they brushed it off. Fabi said the security wands they used wouldn't be able to pick up anything less obvious than if the players tried smuggling in guns. Though I guess that would be a pretty effective way of cheating.
Niemann is a known cheater, his coach is a known cheater, and he has played more than a dozen games the last two years with impossible score. Of course Niemann is a cheater. His career is over. Good.
How do you differentiate from having a suspicion that someone is cheating versus accusing them of cheating? To say Magnus Carlsen is "accusing Hans of cheating", you're kind of accusing Magnus of accusing someone. Ben, you literally give no way for someone to raise suspicion that someone is cheating. So then, how do we actually stop people from cheating then?
Disclaimer: I don't like Niemann for dishonouring chess by cheating in online games. He deserves all of the questions about his character that he gets. Having written that: Magnus knows exactly what he's doing. Carlsen is abusing his position in the chess community to destroy Niemann's reputation by forcing us to infer that Hans cheated just because Hans dared to win a game. That way, as organisers of other tournaments choose Magnus over Hans, logically enough, he can have plausible self-deniability that he did nothing directly. It is straight up bullying on the perfect patsy.
Whats wrong is that Magnus didn’t make the accusation himself and instead posted an insinuation online and let everyone else make the accusation. That’s wrong. Defamation is not cool (in fact its a crime). If you’re gonna allege that somebody did something, you have to do it clearly, and unequivocally, and to stand by it, and to face the legal ramifications if you are not able to prove it. You can’t accuse people of things and not be able to back it up. That’s a jailable offence.
Go Ben, you tell the truth. Pick one 1. Hans Niemann cheated at OTB chess 2. Magnus is losing the plot. I pick Magnus is losing it. Magnus is not playing for the world championship of Chess. Magnus has said he might retire. I have evidence Magnus is losing it. SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE HANS CHEATED AT OTB CHESS.
I was really really really hoping that Hans got paired against Carlsen in the quarters, it would have helped bring this whole sordid mess to a speedier conclusion.
You said that accusing of cheating is making huge backlash, but you know- Magnus is accusing without saying it directly, so all Hans is facing all the consequences of being accused of cheating, but Magnus is not taking responsibility for that in legal terms. It is just unsportsmanlike, especially when Magnus is a world champion and he has a lot of influence in both community and chess organisations
I don't think Magnus's actions more loudly assert that Hans cheated than a formal statement would. You have it backwards. His actions without a statement communicate that he has an opinion but holds that opinion with a certain amount of diffidence, or that he lacks the wherewithal to publicly defend it at this time. A formal statement by Magnus would communicate (A) what his opinion is; (B) that he holds that opinion confidently and is prepared to defend it if called upon. Accordingly a formal statement from someone with as much credibility as Magnus would by itself be significantly more damaging to Han's reputation than silently withdrawing from the tournament (and resigning) has been. Which is why everyone is still waiting to hear him speak.
Heres a fictitious plot: ONE week before the Sinquefield Cup, magnus' team inspected their computer system and found a bunch of packets left behind signaling that data had been extracted! Somebody had access to all of his prep. Magnus was not playing the best line when he lost to hans. No, He made a few "sensing" moves asking hans what he knew. "A nimzo indian you say" Hans knivingly whispers to magnus under his breath. "Nice IP address magballs". Magnus stammered back in a defeated whiny voice "youll pay for this Neiman!" As far as cheating over the board; even a 2400 elo could be magnus if they had access to the ONE move needed in a pinacle moment. Irrelevant, though.
Like a lot of famous people and top sports people, Carlsen is probably surrounded by Yes-men and sycophants, and the longer he's been champion, the fewer people nears him who are willing to say "No, don't do that!"
hes not overreacting if Hans cheated extensively online and Magnus found out about it recently (got additional info). Magnus is making a point. For some reason Magnus is not free to give all the details yet. He has to be concerned about slander as well if he cant prove it.
It's the opposite for me. I'm getting Commodus in Gladiator vibes from the guy. That said I think it's highly questionable if he cheated in the Sinquefield.
You can say its your belief that someone is cheating legally. You cant say someone is definitely cheating. At least here in Murica. Free speech. Whether you should morally or ethically is entirely different.
You're saying Magnus should or shouldn't do this or that, but nothing he's doing is against any rules. Magnus is clearly trying to make a statement, and it's working. In other words what Magnus "should" do depends completely on what he's trying to accomplish.
I agree with most of what you're saying, but Idk if magnus is ruining hans reputation, I think hans ruined his own reputation. I still think hans is a chronic cheater, but im also not a good chess player so I defer to magnus on that part. Who should I believe? A known cheater or someone who hasn't cheated and is the world champion.
I would argue that it is quite good for the sponsors, fans, streamers and UA-camrs. It's fantastic content and also scratches much larger (and quite topical) existential questions.
As an impartial outsider who is not part of the chess community, this scandal is the only one I've been made aware of. This isn't just me, this drama has quite a bit of attention even from people outside of the community. If Magnus doesn't provide solid evidence that can be held up in the court of law, he'll have single handedly ruined the reputation of the game than anyone else in recent years.
That's the crucial point, nobody would be shocked to learn Hans cheated ever since 16 in some games if it is proven but as of now his games at St Louis don't provide any evidence of that. There are just so many up and coming youngsters who play excellent chess right now. Keymer for example had winning positions in almost every game at Julius Bär cup nobody suspects him of foulplay simply because he never cheated online or everywhere. The fact that Niemann can't prove a negative that easily eg that he didn't cheat since he was 16, is a huge problem for him. Magnus seemed very sure yesterday that he is right with his allegations, so it will be exciting to see what's gonna happen in the days to come. And let's be honest Magnus has to be right or his reputation is going to take a huge hit from that story/drama.
3:50 "It's just that most of the world doesn't agree with that being the way to do it." Well, I think that depends on how you define "most of the world" - in the sporting world, controversial protests of this nature has happened time and time again and those who take a stand are often celebrated. Magnus loves sport (more than he loves being fit), and may well have taken inspiration from those past stands against unfair play. Whether Hans still currently cheats or not isn't as relevant anymore to Magnus, especially if one were to subscribe to the belief "once a cheater, always a cheater". On the other hand, in politics, people love cheaters.
The problem is not Magnus Carlsen, the problem is the lack of a rulebook. Suppose a track and field athlete had doped at a competition and been caught. He would then be banned for life from major events. Hans Niemann has not only "doped" ("cheated") once, but several times. In any other sport (except chess obviously) he would be banned for life and everyone would accept that as a matter of course. But he is not banned, on the contrary, he participates in grandmaster tournaments, although he has cheated several times. That's a huge problem - and it's not Magnus Carlsen's problem. The real problem is that due to the lack of rules, chess players are left alone to decide how to deal with a cheater. It doesn't matter whether Hans Niemann cheated in the Sinquefield Cup. He has cheated along the way of his career.
A big point id like to make that doesnt take away from what you said because you addressed it sort of hans wasnt suppose to play in the tournament hans was a last second substitute. and he said he wouldnt have played if he knew hans was gonna play in the tournament.
I don't understand why accepting someone may be cheating is somehow morally better than resigning from a round robin. Sounds like it's all swimming in mud.
you cant make accusations wthout proof that can destroy a persons life , you cant call someone a wifebeater, a pedophile or a rapist and destroy his career for example and expect people to just role over if these accusations are untrue, when you call a professional chessplayer a cheater, you take his life away, if you do that and that person says you are going to be sued thats not a threat but just a normal consequence of harmfull toxic behaivior in a democracy where you have rule of law, presumpyion of innocence and all that good stuff. About his cheating in the past, that argument lost all validity the moment it was known he had cheated online, was forgiven and aloud back to play tournements, Magnus played against him in the past with that knowledge but apparently it only started to bother him when he started losing against him, which raises some questions about intellectual honesty, being a hypocrite and a sore loser... my 2 cents
That’s the thing with all this drama. I’m not disappointed because someone might have cheated in a tournament, I’m disappointed because Magnus has (and is) behaving very unprofessionally.
I don't tend to be pick pocketed, more less with an audience. If that happened I'd probably avoid cursing. Honestly it's sad that chess doesn't take itself seriously enough that people like you don't think that what we teach children on other sports applies in chess. Magnus is a public figure and should act like one.
@@theondono I agree. But I accept the reality that those days are long gone in these End Times. And the people who are still having kids these days are the screwiest of all. I looked around me and gave up on that idea way back in the 80s. Bringing children into a culture that is positively anti-family and even anti-civilization is next to insane. That said - you don't understand the shocking enormity of cheating at international chess. It's exactly like being robbed right out in the open. It's a public crime of personal violation. I don't expect anyone - not even you - to maintain his composure amid such an outrage. I only wish Magnus had played him again and this time in such a way as to expose a cheater - playing with extreme caution and defensiveness - extending the game to some very great length so to provide for a large number of moves to analyze and quantify. Playing so aggressively - he played right into the hands of a bot. If he had played again and this time focused on defense - he might have exposed Hans irrefutably. And so the pickpocket would've been apprehended.
To date Magnus has not said that Hans is cheating. But people are jumping to the conclusion that that is what he means. But that would be putting words in Magnus's mouth. Maybe he is taking a principled stand against tarnishing his reputation by playing someone who has admitted that they cheated in the past. Hans has cheated with impunity. How does that look to all the young players who are fighting their way up the ratings without cheating? It was notable that Magnus applauded his young opponent in the game after Hans. That suggested that he was giving him respect.
Defamation by insinuation. I sure hope he does. The chess community should also ban Magnus for throwing games OTB. In my view, this is the same thing as cheating.
There's something called defamation by insinuation. I am guessing Hans doesn't have the money for a lawyer, but what Magnus is doing is absolutely wrong and fits the criteria. Besides that, the chess community should not tolerate him throwing games. That is basically cheating as well because it affects the other players who will not make the next round and ultimately will lose money because of Magnus' childish actions. Also there is no speculation on that matter, it's objectively true. But I guess most people are just gonna talk about how Hans is a cheater because of mob mentality and simping for the world champion. Glad you keep it real Ben, not many people online are thinking clearly about this.
The point you made that i strongly disagree with is that Magnus shouldn't have played in the tournament. Using his pull to remove Hans from the tournament sounds awful.
Disagreed. Magnus's reaction is only incorrect if Hans is innocent, because what's left is him cheating and you know, it's perfectly reasonable to not want to play a cheater. You can diss him if we find out he's innocent. But so far, the red flags around Hans while not enough yet just keep piling up as more information comes out.
Sinquefield Cup organizers are pissed off by Magnus leaving? What??? Really??? Come on, Sinquefield Cup name is every-fkn-where these days. You can't get better reclame than this.
Nobody is actually a Hans fan. He was quite hated before the scandal. He's only loved for the drama/trolling. He will be quickly discarded. He's meme fodder.
Apart from the drama, its insane that such big and prestigious chess competitions havent figured out it should not be allowed in the rules to do such things. It directly affects the final results and is unfair for everyone playing the tournament that a single player will handle free wins to another targeted player in the competition. It shouldnt matter if you do it in protest or if ure whining, it should make you disqualified. Right now all the players have an extra strongest opponent (Carlsen) that while being their strongest opponent, is handling free wins to a DIRECT rival of theirs. What a shame that such childish behaviour comes from the world's greatest...
It seems Ben would truly be more outraged by Magnus being suspicious of a known cheater then if Hans cheats. Btw Hans does cheat online - where’s bens outrage
Being suspicious does not mean you have to quit and disrupt the tournament. He is shocked by how far Magnus has taken it without showing any evidence and owning up for his actions.
I watched yet another commenter use an engine to show this game as "sus". They had trouble getting several of Hans' moves to appear in the top 3, so they changed depth and waited... and waited... and since Hans' sometimes never appeared in the top 3 suggestions the presenter pressed on. Later he admitted that Magnus played poorly and Hans played well but not perfect. Super. What we know about the "100% correlation" BS is that the algorithm used is unknown. What we do know about it is that they used several engines, several depths, and may even had to use a variety of CPUs (which actually does make a difference). If any one of those combinations showed a Hans move, then they counted it as a match for that move. And even THEN there are moves that do not show up as top for any engine. Of course the Hans-haters will say he chose to throw off those watching, which is too absurd to laugh at. You will never get 100% for any complex game if you choose one engine and one depth (using a set number of threads). You may get 100% if you cherry pick, and that proves nothing. If you were to take all OTB games in 2022 and remove player names, and reveal an algorithm that places Hans' games on the top of the "sus" list, then people will start to take notice. If you get Magnus on top then of course I would expect people to make their excuses about him being allowed to have such games. If player A comes on top of Stockfish at depth 20, then watch as player B comes on top at depth 30 or 10.
8:40 - "In my opinion, Magnus shouldnt have played in this tournament". Thats WEIRD!! Magnus NEVER cheated any tournament. But Hans Niemann did. So if there is any logic, Hans shouldnt have played this tournament (and neither any other). Thats the way, how it USUALLY works. Why should Magnus be banned??? He did not cheat ever. Why was Hans Niemann "forgiven", why was he not banned forever? That is the question we have to answer!
Perhaps Magnus went in the tournament, knowing that he was going to play Hans Niemen and believing that he is a cheater and by resigning he also wants to bring to light that he is cheating against others in the tournament
Magnus's withdrawal ruined earned scores in St Louis, and his 1 move resignation could have boosted Hans from 9th to 8th if that scenario played out. What he's doing is backwards to what he wants to achieve here. Magnus needs to beat him in the next tournament to eliminate Hans. Only then can he choose to never invite him back
Gm ben finegold i have a lot of respect for you and i appreciate your opinion. I don’t agree however with your conclusions. magnus is indeed in a tough spot like you said. we don’t know the whole story. You say that he should have not participated in the tournament but we also don’t know if it was maybe in his contract or not . And also he may still be waiting and solidifying his proof, which is why he has to wait and do it in the way he is doing it
Look honestly we can criticize magnus' actions all we want, but I think if youre a professional chess player and have a record of cheating online its completely reasonable for people to suspect you of cheating when you start playing way outside the norm in terms of how quickly you're improving your rating. If Hans didn't want that to happen he shouldn't have cheated to begin with. Some would even argue if you have a history of cheating online you probably shouldnt even be allowed to compete professionally because the simple fact is that now your actions will always be suspect if you start performing well. The only person Hans should be mad at is his younger self for acting unethically and now rightfully being considered suspect.
@@chungboislim2061 I mean not being honest about the extent of your cheating online is not a good start at trying to redeem yourself. It certainly undercuts any notion that Hans has grown up
I laughed so much when ben said "IF I ACCUSE RUFUS AND DUFUS" and someone in chat says "why do you do that to rufous?"
Well, the only way rufous could succeed in chess is by cheating.
Timestamp?
like 8:00 thereabouts
Magnus finally said today that he will make a statement after the current Julius Baer Generation Cup tournament is over.
I’m guessing there won’t be very much substance in that statement, but I hope I’m wrong, for his sake.
He is a coward. Magnus will not say anything important like today. His only goal is to isolate Hans from the other chess players and fans because of his ego.
If he's afraid of saying something for the legal reasons - it's fine, but saying what is he afraid of and why doesn't he speak and why is he handling it this way has no possible legal reasons other than just being afraid
I mean, i don’t get this whole drama, yeah we know that hans cheated online in the past, regarding if it was 3 years ago or a couple of months ago (last time i mean) he didn’t cheat over the board at the sinquefield cup against magnus so i don’t get all this crying from magnus.
@@elias5658 for those of us who have followed chess for 20 years and not 20 minutes, Magnus has lost to young players thousands of times and never responded this way. Go watch Alireza kick his ass in rapid and bullet streams, watch the reactions and anger, then realize Magnus has mentored Alireza and loves and respects the kid. Same with Pragg.
Dude, I love this guy! I have the same opinions as him. I don’t like Hans because he embodies that whole “Arrogance of youth” idea. At the same time I don’t subscribe to ruining someones life / career over speculation and require some proof before grabbing my pitchfork.
Hans Niemann has admitted cheating.
The proof is his admission ffs. Previous is used in criminal convictions too.
@@arsenalfanrichi So the things you do when you were under 18 are used after?
@@arsenalfanrichi More to the point… you never did anything, really stupid, before you were 18? Or even after?
@@jasonxoc I did stupid stuff, of course, that is part of growing up. But I NEVER did anything I knew would hurt other people or was clearly immoral.
This is why we love Ben; he's cynical - but realistic.
@@sleepyjoe7241 I know this is bait but wtf
@@davidshatto7604 seethe ]
And vulgar, unfortunately. The kids will no longer be viewing this guy.
@@EzPz44 he’s a jew, what do you expect?
I think that this commentary from Ben perfectly explain why Magnus did what he did. Ben is saying that it is frown upon in the chess community to accuse someone of cheating, even if he is cheating. That even if you are sure that someone is cheating, to resign or to quit is worse. This is exactly the kind of mentality Magnus is against, like he said in an interview one year ago.
To find a cheater in chess is super difficult, like for doping. The only real way of contrasting it, like for doping, is to have harsh punishment if you get caught even once: you get caught? Lifetime ban. One free pass if you get caught as a minor.
Magnus never said that Hans cheated in the cup, in that match. He cannot prove it, and he has not accused Hans of that. However, what he knows is that Hans is a cheater. He cheated multiple times, and he admitted so. Everyone playing against him, will always have the doubt. Therefore, he should not be allowed to play. He got caught cheating many times? He should not be play competitive chess. The fact that in chess people still say that is bad manner to point at cheaters instead of denouncing it is the reason of Magnus action. We need for chess a movement similar to what happened in the '90s for doping: if you used doping, people should not feel bad about not wanting to compete with you.
Implying someone is a cheater is worse than calling someone a cheater because without an actual accusation there is no way to defend yourself. If you suspect someone of cheating there should be an investigation, but there can't be an investigation without an actual accusation. Hans may very well have cheated but Magnus isn't doing the chess world any favours by being vague and encouraging a witch hunt.
@@keldencowan you are wrong, hater. Magnus is doing a great thing for chess. Cheaters will think twice from now on.
Perfect!
i would agree but with an age restriction. like, if u have a history of cheating after age 18 or something... it would terrible to cancel potentially the next world champion for cheating online chess at age 16. cheating in online chess is the easiest , most readily available way to cheat out of all the major competitions.
I think a compromise would be something like if you cheated in online at any age, u must abide by stricter anti cheating measures or something.
@@humanbean3 In another comment I was saying the same. My idea is: first time caught cheating, lifetime ban. If you are a minor, you get one "one year ban" probation. If as a minor you cheat more than once, lifetime ban.
The case of Hans is peculiar. He cheated at 12, got caught. Cheated at 15-16, got caught. He confirmed those himself, so there is no doubt. After that, he claimed that he changed, but Chess com found him guilty of several more cheating cases, we do not know up to when, even in titled matches.
Magnus decided that it is enough not to play with him, one can think otherwise of course. But what is sure is that to prove that Hans cheated in the specific match against Magnus is not relevant, nor Magnus accused him otherwise -- he cannot know it as we cannot know it, but to lose in a suspicious match against a known cheater is something that should not happen in a game.
Gotta admit. A grown ass man holding a grudge against a 15-16 year old kid for years is hilarious.
Just like somebody holding a grudge for a person being upset with facing somebody who is an established cheater
These guys are chess prodigies. They were playing chess for 8 hours a day instead of socialising therefore a lot of them tend to be a little socially stunted
@@RevZman Thank you for saying that. I think we can all agree that some of these personalities to come from Chess are socially challenged to say the least.
So it's about the age? What if it was an actual crime like killing someone, I guess it would be very funny right, for someone to be mad about it, so funny.
Where are you getting that? XD Magnus agreed to play in the Sinquefield with Hans there, so the "grudge" as you call it is less than a year old. I don't think Magnus really knew many details about Hans' Chesscom cheating until recently.
This is why I love Ben. Uncompromising levels of honesty.
Why are so much comments to this topic blocked?
Is this a bug or censorship?
I think Censorship, I get it all the time
Ben Finegold hates the truth!
Can’t even see the comments to my post. Wtf?
Test. Can anyone see this?
There's no such thing as censorship on a UA-cam channel run by some individuals.
I don't think Magnus is doing what he thinks is the most ethical, I think he's doing what he wants. But if we're on that subject, one person who always tries to establish themselves as more ethical than otheres is definitely you.
Exactly! Even THEN, Magnus HIMSELF dropped points. He didn't really hurt other people .
Given his history with Hans (nothing against him at this stage btw), even something like THIS is foreseeable just on a psychological level (maybe not for everyone that don't take this as seriously but Magnus is CLEARLY a winner and EXTREMELY hard on himself at that) - in that losing again might be emotionally taxing especially if he, the world champion, who invested his blood, sweat, and tears over that board, lost to a cheater TWICE.
@@FoieGras idk what your definition of “didn’t really hurt other people” is but most people would put ruining someone’s reputation and career and trying to make a show of it in that category
@@MrPatty465 rememember: Hans is a proven cheater.
@@MrPatty465 I don’t know HOW you got “ruining someone’s reputation and career” from but Niemann’s reputation was ruined LONG before this. If you could ruin somebody’s reputation simply by not wanting to PLAY, no accusations thrown, then wow! People’s reputations would be flying all OVER the place.
No, ruining someone’s reputation would be what happened to Anna Rudolf! By a jealous opponent that can’t put UP! But I’m sure there are such people that thinks Magnus is the twisted type - probably the same type of people as Rudolf's opponent …
He didn't know until last second that Hans was playing in the tournament. At that point it was too late since he was already committed. Hans was a replacement player for that tournament.
You’re being the most well based person on the topic since the beginning. And yes, you were speaking on Magnus behavior since the first week
There's a reason professionally run Rust servers don't let anyone with a game or vac ban play on their servers no matter how long ago the ban was. I was a Rust server admin. I can't speak to all games, but for that game, once a cheater always a cheater. Let a cheater on your server and they will find a way to cheat.
Why is nobody considering the possibility that Magnus cheated
Cheated AND lost, no wonder he's dragging Hans through the mud
How is Magnus overreacting if Hans did in fact cheat?? This is exactly the mentality why cheating is becoming so prevalent in chess and spoiling the game for everyone! I think it's great that Magnus is 'overreacting' so that we start doing something about cheating in chess! In sports, it's either make it or break it, and careers can be literally destroyed when competitors start cheating.
A lion does not concernhimself with the opinion of the sheep.-Tywinn Lannister. Best pseudo person quote ever.
Ben, you have by far had the most intelligent and honest take on this whole thing that I have come across. Massive respect to you
Magnus is just being a bully, that's how I see it.
100% agree. Passive - aggressive behavior.
Agree with everything here. It also looks particularly bad when you lose and withdraw. If there was an issue it may have been best to raise it before the game. The result of the game is irrelevant. Would Magnus have stayed in the S.Cup if he had beaten Hans? It would appear that it's okay to cheat if you lose.
Great point. This all would look very different if it didn't start at the precise moment he lost.
I agree. At the very least, Magnus should have analyzed his own play first, and yeah, if he found that he played at 96% accuracy but still lost because Hans played at 99% accuracy, then more people would be sympathizing with Magnus. But Magnus accusing someone of cheating when that person played a game with accuracy in the low 90s and Magnus lost just because he played a game with accuracy in the 80s...doesn't make sense. If Magnus had analyzed his own game and seen that he played sub-optimally and that's mainly why he lost, I wonder if he would have done the unspoken accusation that he did.
Magnus behind the scenes was upset that Hans was allowed to play at s.cup as a rushed in stand in b4 the game.
Someone in the stream pointed out that what Magnus is doing may be sandbagging. As someone who just applied sandbags to his house for Hurricane Ian, I can tell you, that's not sandbagging
Carlsen getting Niemann thrown out would have been even worse behavior imo.
@Stefan Kaitschick he didn't need to, Hans got eliminated and Magnus is in the Final.
@@raymondsublett3108 I mean getting him thrown out pre-tournament.
8:37 In my opinion, he had to play in this tournament. He signed the contract to play months ago. He is not punishing anybody other than himself and that should be respected. If he opens his mouth and says ANYTHING to the press or the organizers he can be sued. As long as he keeps quiet he is safe.
He is safe, and hans suffer most of the backlash without evidence. How great magnus is
@@harrellt1405 no evidence? Its now out that Hans have cheated online way more that two times and is coaches by a known cheater. He cant analyze his own games after the game. It looks really bad for Hans.
Wrong! He can still be sued, and Niemann has a very strong case for damages.
@@ChengManChing You are very smart my brother ... Carlsen ALREADY opened his mouth and pretty much accused Niemann of cheating, so of course he can be sued NOW (9 days ago that wasn't the case)
We've heard that Magnus went through the back channel communications and it wasn't taken seriously. Apparently both he and Nepo had something to say before the Singfield Cup and they brushed it off. Fabi said the security wands they used wouldn't be able to pick up anything less obvious than if the players tried smuggling in guns. Though I guess that would be a pretty effective way of cheating.
4:06 "I will give you my opinion on something, and I feel strongly about it: DT Gregg subscribed."
Real quick: fen binegold
Bine Fengold
And you're not
Gold Fineben
Einhorn and Finkle.
Nine Finebolg
Niemann is a known cheater, his coach is a known cheater, and he has played more than a dozen games the last two years with impossible score.
Of course Niemann is a cheater. His career is over.
Good.
My theory is, Magnus knows hans is cheating, because hans rectal device signals are being recieved by magnus 9 years used rectal device.
You are using the word can't to much.
Magnus and everybody else for that matter, can do whatever they want and think is right.
How do you differentiate from having a suspicion that someone is cheating versus accusing them of cheating? To say Magnus Carlsen is "accusing Hans of cheating", you're kind of accusing Magnus of accusing someone. Ben, you literally give no way for someone to raise suspicion that someone is cheating. So then, how do we actually stop people from cheating then?
Ben is a fan of fair play and fair of conduct.
Also something you dont do is invite a former cheater being coached by a former cheater to play in a tournament with the best in the world
Disclaimer: I don't like Niemann for dishonouring chess by cheating in online games. He deserves all of the questions about his character that he gets.
Having written that:
Magnus knows exactly what he's doing. Carlsen is abusing his position in the chess community to destroy Niemann's reputation by forcing us to infer that Hans cheated just because Hans dared to win a game. That way, as organisers of other tournaments choose Magnus over Hans, logically enough, he can have plausible self-deniability that he did nothing directly. It is straight up bullying on the perfect patsy.
Nothing of this would happen if hans didnt cheat
Whats wrong is that Magnus didn’t make the accusation himself and instead posted an insinuation online and let everyone else make the accusation. That’s wrong. Defamation is not cool (in fact its a crime). If you’re gonna allege that somebody did something, you have to do it clearly, and unequivocally, and to stand by it, and to face the legal ramifications if you are not able to prove it. You can’t accuse people of things and not be able to back it up. That’s a jailable offence.
Magnus is on a bully power trip.
Go Ben, you tell the truth.
Pick one
1. Hans Niemann cheated at OTB chess
2. Magnus is losing the plot.
I pick Magnus is losing it. Magnus is not playing for the world championship of Chess. Magnus has said he might retire.
I have evidence Magnus is losing it.
SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE HANS CHEATED AT OTB CHESS.
I was really really really hoping that Hans got paired against Carlsen in the quarters, it would have helped bring this whole sordid mess to a speedier conclusion.
You said that accusing of cheating is making huge backlash, but you know- Magnus is accusing without saying it directly, so all Hans is facing all the consequences of being accused of cheating, but Magnus is not taking responsibility for that in legal terms. It is just unsportsmanlike, especially when Magnus is a world champion and he has a lot of influence in both community and chess organisations
I don't think Magnus's actions more loudly assert that Hans cheated than a formal statement would. You have it backwards. His actions without a statement communicate that he has an opinion but holds that opinion with a certain amount of diffidence, or that he lacks the wherewithal to publicly defend it at this time. A formal statement by Magnus would communicate (A) what his opinion is; (B) that he holds that opinion confidently and is prepared to defend it if called upon. Accordingly a formal statement from someone with as much credibility as Magnus would by itself be significantly more damaging to Han's reputation than silently withdrawing from the tournament (and resigning) has been. Which is why everyone is still waiting to hear him speak.
Heres a fictitious plot: ONE week before the Sinquefield Cup, magnus' team inspected their computer system and found a bunch of packets left behind signaling that data had been extracted! Somebody had access to all of his prep. Magnus was not playing the best line when he lost to hans. No, He made a few "sensing" moves asking hans what he knew. "A nimzo indian you say" Hans knivingly whispers to magnus under his breath. "Nice IP address magballs". Magnus stammered back in a defeated whiny voice "youll pay for this Neiman!"
As far as cheating over the board; even a 2400 elo could be magnus if they had access to the ONE move needed in a pinacle moment. Irrelevant, though.
Like a lot of famous people and top sports people, Carlsen is probably surrounded by Yes-men and sycophants, and the longer he's been champion, the fewer people nears him who are willing to say "No, don't do that!"
Yes-men in his team and in his fandom full of simps.
@Tim Peralta another Hans sympathizer? You clowns are another level of special.
hes not overreacting if Hans cheated extensively online and Magnus found out about it recently (got additional info). Magnus is making a point. For some reason Magnus is not free to give all the details yet. He has to be concerned about slander as well if he cant prove it.
For some reason I have found myself warming to hans this whole time, he’s a morally grey character and I like it.
he was just a dumb talented kid who had a bad mentor and baby magnus holds a grudge after taking the L
It's the opposite for me. I'm getting Commodus in Gladiator vibes from the guy. That said I think it's highly questionable if he cheated in the Sinquefield.
ben doesn't like Hans he just hates Magnus, got it
Hans played the guy on coffee chess, played pretty bad boston mike was leading at some point. I dont think Hans can play 95%+ games.
You can say its your belief that someone is cheating legally. You cant say someone is definitely cheating. At least here in Murica. Free speech. Whether you should morally or ethically is entirely different.
You're saying Magnus should or shouldn't do this or that, but nothing he's doing is against any rules. Magnus is clearly trying to make a statement, and it's working. In other words what Magnus "should" do depends completely on what he's trying to accomplish.
I agree with most of what you're saying, but Idk if magnus is ruining hans reputation, I think hans ruined his own reputation. I still think hans is a chronic cheater, but im also not a good chess player so I defer to magnus on that part. Who should I believe? A known cheater or someone who hasn't cheated and is the world champion.
Turns out Magnus was right & Ben was WRONG
According to Fabi, magnus losing to Hans has nothing to do with him quitting the tournament. He was doing it anyway.
I would argue that it is quite good for the sponsors, fans, streamers and UA-camrs. It's fantastic content and also scratches much larger (and quite topical) existential questions.
As an impartial outsider who is not part of the chess community, this scandal is the only one I've been made aware of. This isn't just me, this drama has quite a bit of attention even from people outside of the community. If Magnus doesn't provide solid evidence that can be held up in the court of law, he'll have single handedly ruined the reputation of the game than anyone else in recent years.
They’re gonna get matched together in the final and Magnus is gonna play the Hippo
That's the crucial point, nobody would be shocked to learn Hans cheated ever since 16 in some games if it is proven but as of now his games at St Louis don't provide any evidence of that. There are just so many up and coming youngsters who play excellent chess right now. Keymer for example had winning positions in almost every game at Julius Bär cup nobody suspects him of foulplay simply because he never cheated online or everywhere. The fact that Niemann can't prove a negative that easily eg that he didn't cheat since he was 16, is a huge problem for him. Magnus seemed very sure yesterday that he is right with his allegations, so it will be exciting to see what's gonna happen in the days to come. And let's be honest Magnus has to be right or his reputation is going to take a huge hit from that story/drama.
600 rated chess players like you shouldn't express an opinion on such a topic
3:50 "It's just that most of the world doesn't agree with that being the way to do it."
Well, I think that depends on how you define "most of the world" - in the sporting world, controversial protests of this nature has happened time and time again and those who take a stand are often celebrated. Magnus loves sport (more than he loves being fit), and may well have taken inspiration from those past stands against unfair play. Whether Hans still currently cheats or not isn't as relevant anymore to Magnus, especially if one were to subscribe to the belief "once a cheater, always a cheater". On the other hand, in politics, people love cheaters.
The problem is not Magnus Carlsen, the problem is the lack of a rulebook. Suppose a track and field athlete had doped at a competition and been caught. He would then be banned for life from major events.
Hans Niemann has not only "doped" ("cheated") once, but several times. In any other sport (except chess obviously) he would be banned for life and everyone would accept that as a matter of course.
But he is not banned, on the contrary, he participates in grandmaster tournaments, although he has cheated several times. That's a huge problem - and it's not Magnus Carlsen's problem. The real problem is that due to the lack of rules, chess players are left alone to decide how to deal with a cheater. It doesn't matter whether Hans Niemann cheated in the Sinquefield Cup. He has cheated along the way of his career.
Magnus has no problem until he was beaten. It was the second time Hans beat Magnus, but Magnus did not cry the first time.
A big point id like to make that doesnt take away from what you said because you addressed it sort of hans wasnt suppose to play in the tournament hans was a last second substitute. and he said he wouldnt have played if he knew hans was gonna play in the tournament.
Rensch's Tweet says it all. Of course Magnus got inside info. Niemann must have cheated a lot and probably more recently than he admits.
What is the tweet?
I don't understand why accepting someone may be cheating is somehow morally better than resigning from a round robin. Sounds like it's all swimming in mud.
Ben's thoughts were always mine on this subject, and I felt Magnus came off very poorly on the matter (but really wasn't held to account).
you cant make accusations wthout proof that can destroy a persons life , you cant call someone a wifebeater, a pedophile or a rapist and destroy his career for example and expect people to just role over if these accusations are untrue, when you call a professional chessplayer a cheater, you take his life away, if you do that and that person says you are going to be sued thats not a threat but just a normal consequence of harmfull toxic behaivior in a democracy where you have rule of law, presumpyion of innocence and all that good stuff. About his cheating in the past, that argument lost all validity the moment it was known he had cheated online, was forgiven and aloud back to play tournements, Magnus played against him in the past with that knowledge but apparently it only started to bother him when he started losing against him, which raises some questions about intellectual honesty, being a hypocrite and a sore loser... my 2 cents
Magnus isn't ruining his rep at all
He resigned which only cost him,so what
That’s the thing with all this drama. I’m not disappointed because someone might have cheated in a tournament, I’m disappointed because Magnus has (and is) behaving very unprofessionally.
How do you behave when you've been pickpocketed?
I don't tend to be pick pocketed, more less with an audience. If that happened I'd probably avoid cursing.
Honestly it's sad that chess doesn't take itself seriously enough that people like you don't think that what we teach children on other sports applies in chess. Magnus is a public figure and should act like one.
@@theondono I agree. But I accept the reality that those days are long gone in these End Times. And the people who are still having kids these days are the screwiest of all. I looked around me and gave up on that idea way back in the 80s. Bringing children into a culture that is positively anti-family and even anti-civilization is next to insane. That said - you don't understand the shocking enormity of cheating at international chess. It's exactly like being robbed right out in the open. It's a public crime of personal violation. I don't expect anyone - not even you - to maintain his composure amid such an outrage. I only wish Magnus had played him again and this time in such a way as to expose a cheater - playing with extreme caution and defensiveness - extending the game to some very great length so to provide for a large number of moves to analyze and quantify. Playing so aggressively - he played right into the hands of a bot. If he had played again and this time focused on defense - he might have exposed Hans irrefutably. And so the pickpocket would've been apprehended.
Yeah I didn’t think Magnus would play in this tourney, and yet he did.
No half stepping
Preach.
Is tryingtolearn123 still awful at chess?
With all the money he donated on twitch he should have been a super gm right now 😂😂😂, but hey, can’t buy skill
To date Magnus has not said that Hans is cheating. But people are jumping to the conclusion that that is what he means. But that would be putting words in Magnus's mouth. Maybe he is taking a principled stand against tarnishing his reputation by playing someone who has admitted that they cheated in the past. Hans has cheated with impunity. How does that look to all the young players who are fighting their way up the ratings without cheating? It was notable that Magnus applauded his young opponent in the game after Hans. That suggested that he was giving him respect.
GM Ben Finegold in "it matters if someone did the thing they're accused of" shocker
magnus still hasn't said hans cheated to defeat him.
How on earth did he cheat? I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me and I don't want to hear this: his prep got leaked nonsense
Thanks Ben for being the voice of reason. It's like the whole chess world has gone crazy and won't even listen to reason.
If you cheat and someone doesn't trust you later, regardless of what happened later then it's your own damn fault.
Nobody is saying Magnus has to trust him. His behavior is what is in question.
Always respect your insight Ben
I hate agreeing with everything someone says.
Very much appreciate your commentary on this Ben
niemann should be able to sue magnus for worsening his reputation and such...
Defamation by insinuation. I sure hope he does. The chess community should also ban Magnus for throwing games OTB. In my view, this is the same thing as cheating.
There's something called defamation by insinuation. I am guessing Hans doesn't have the money for a lawyer, but what Magnus is doing is absolutely wrong and fits the criteria. Besides that, the chess community should not tolerate him throwing games. That is basically cheating as well because it affects the other players who will not make the next round and ultimately will lose money because of Magnus' childish actions. Also there is no speculation on that matter, it's objectively true. But I guess most people are just gonna talk about how Hans is a cheater because of mob mentality and simping for the world champion. Glad you keep it real Ben, not many people online are thinking clearly about this.
The point you made that i strongly disagree with is that Magnus shouldn't have played in the tournament.
Using his pull to remove Hans from the tournament sounds awful.
It would be epic if Magnus just walked away from all the BS and watched the chess world unravel.
Magnus is WINNING the whole tournament tho. that's the better option.
Disagreed. Magnus's reaction is only incorrect if Hans is innocent, because what's left is him cheating and you know, it's perfectly reasonable to not want to play a cheater. You can diss him if we find out he's innocent. But so far, the red flags around Hans while not enough yet just keep piling up as more information comes out.
Whether you liked him or not is irrelevant to the discussion. Character defamation is not helpful.
Intelligent guy
Slowly the chameleon shifting colours
Sinquefield Cup organizers are pissed off by Magnus leaving? What??? Really??? Come on, Sinquefield Cup name is every-fkn-where these days. You can't get better reclame than this.
Nobody is actually a Hans fan. He was quite hated before the scandal. He's only loved for the drama/trolling. He will be quickly discarded. He's meme fodder.
It's not defamation to say you think someone is cheating though, is it? If he says he knows he's cheating without evidence maybe then it is, right?
Totally agree with you, Sir
Apart from the drama, its insane that such big and prestigious chess competitions havent figured out it should not be allowed in the rules to do such things. It directly affects the final results and is unfair for everyone playing the tournament that a single player will handle free wins to another targeted player in the competition.
It shouldnt matter if you do it in protest or if ure whining, it should make you disqualified. Right now all the players have an extra strongest opponent (Carlsen) that while being their strongest opponent, is handling free wins to a DIRECT rival of theirs. What a shame that such childish behaviour comes from the world's greatest...
It seems Ben would truly be more outraged by Magnus being suspicious of a known cheater then if Hans cheats. Btw Hans does cheat online - where’s bens outrage
Being suspicious does not mean you have to quit and disrupt the tournament. He is shocked by how far Magnus has taken it without showing any evidence and owning up for his actions.
well said.
Hans cheated online when he was young but he doesn’t cheat now.
I watched yet another commenter use an engine to show this game as "sus". They had trouble getting several of Hans' moves to appear in the top 3, so they changed depth and waited... and waited... and since Hans' sometimes never appeared in the top 3 suggestions the presenter pressed on. Later he admitted that Magnus played poorly and Hans played well but not perfect. Super.
What we know about the "100% correlation" BS is that the algorithm used is unknown. What we do know about it is that they used several engines, several depths, and may even had to use a variety of CPUs (which actually does make a difference). If any one of those combinations showed a Hans move, then they counted it as a match for that move. And even THEN there are moves that do not show up as top for any engine. Of course the Hans-haters will say he chose to throw off those watching, which is too absurd to laugh at.
You will never get 100% for any complex game if you choose one engine and one depth (using a set number of threads). You may get 100% if you cherry pick, and that proves nothing. If you were to take all OTB games in 2022 and remove player names, and reveal an algorithm that places Hans' games on the top of the "sus" list, then people will start to take notice. If you get Magnus on top then of course I would expect people to make their excuses about him being allowed to have such games. If player A comes on top of Stockfish at depth 20, then watch as player B comes on top at depth 30 or 10.
Hey Ben, what's up with your boy hans
8:40 - "In my opinion, Magnus shouldnt have played in this tournament". Thats WEIRD!! Magnus NEVER cheated any tournament. But Hans Niemann did. So if there is any logic, Hans shouldnt have played this tournament (and neither any other). Thats the way, how it USUALLY works. Why should Magnus be banned??? He did not cheat ever. Why was Hans Niemann "forgiven", why was he not banned forever? That is the question we have to answer!
Perhaps Magnus went in the tournament, knowing that he was going to play Hans Niemen and believing that he is a cheater and by resigning he also wants to bring to light that he is cheating against others in the tournament
Magnus's withdrawal ruined earned scores in St Louis, and his 1 move resignation could have boosted Hans from 9th to 8th if that scenario played out. What he's doing is backwards to what he wants to achieve here. Magnus needs to beat him in the next tournament to eliminate Hans. Only then can he choose to never invite him back
Why can't I read the comments?
If im correct now that the 8 are qualified the only way is if they make it to the final match
correct
Gm ben finegold i have a lot of respect for you and i appreciate your opinion. I don’t agree however with your conclusions. magnus is indeed in a tough spot like you said. we don’t know the whole story. You say that he should have not participated in the tournament but we also don’t know if it was maybe in his contract or not . And also he may still be waiting and solidifying his proof, which is why he has to wait and do it in the way he is doing it
Very well said Benjamin
yeah magnus should just play normally and let chess speaks for itself. quitting on move 2 surely not a calculated move as a world champion
Look honestly we can criticize magnus' actions all we want, but I think if youre a professional chess player and have a record of cheating online its completely reasonable for people to suspect you of cheating when you start playing way outside the norm in terms of how quickly you're improving your rating. If Hans didn't want that to happen he shouldn't have cheated to begin with. Some would even argue if you have a history of cheating online you probably shouldnt even be allowed to compete professionally because the simple fact is that now your actions will always be suspect if you start performing well. The only person Hans should be mad at is his younger self for acting unethically and now rightfully being considered suspect.
In a world without redemption all we have are mobs with pitchforks, and not one is immune to being called a witch.
@@chungboislim2061 I mean not being honest about the extent of your cheating online is not a good start at trying to redeem yourself. It certainly undercuts any notion that Hans has grown up
u missed 3rd option! resign vs niemann and win the tournament anyway. I am fan of calrsen and Niemann.