Why is Kramnik risking his reputation and legacy by accusing people left and right of cheating in Title Tuesday on Chess.com? In my post ‘What Chess Players Need to Know About Chess.com’s Accuracy Score
Great article. Russia (Soviet Union) has been motivated to dominate chess as means of achieving soft power. Globally chess is a very popular sport, with emphasis on sport. Now, that Russia has returned fully to autocracy, corrupt and cult of personality, articles like this are more important than ever. Chesscom is an American project and now has European partners after absorbing PlayMagnus so it seems inevitable that it would be attacked by Putin. While I have problems with the opaque nature of chesscom's anti-cheating and would love to see competitors, certainly Russian monsters aren't the answer.
Like many, I have seen Kramnik's recent accusations as unjustified. Obviously we need real data scientist to investigate and not an old world champion filled with grudge possibly from his own decline. At least, so I thought. But something was always bugging me in the cheating discussions: the complete disregard of deep intuition of some of the greatest chess player we have. We can name Carlen, Caruana, MVL. and it seems there are many more. Then I stumbled on a discussion involving MVL and Kramnik on the Blitztream YT channel. Kramnik talks about the methodology he uses, and although I am not able to judge its validity, he seems to bring a very interesting point in saying that investigations needs high level science coupled with high level chess players guidance to properly use the right parameters.
Chess.com is defending itself very well on the logical and mathematical sides of its anti cheating measures, but is it possible that on the chess understanding ( "intuitive") side they might not be so well equipped.? The question is worth asking it seems… If we do not address question such as these, the debate will unsurprisingly migrate on the field of people's reputation, the same way Erik Allebest, CEO of Chess.com, kind of threw Fabiano Caruana under the bus in his interview on Perpetual Chess Podcast.
A final though on the geopolitical aspect of the article. If we look the geocultural aspect of this, there is a fight involving the kind culture we want to live, enjoy and promote,. Transposed on the 64 squares, the question might sound something like this for some people: Do we want to live in a chess culture promoting gamification and instant gratification? The point here is every side will have its own interests. Kramnik said he is doing it for chess and Allebest probably will say the same, but their cultural view will be different.
"Kramnik talks about the methodology he uses, and although I am not able to judge its validity, he seems to bring a very interesting point in saying that investigations needs high level science coupled with high level chess players guidance to properly use the right parameters."
I'm just afried that this for Kramnik means that he is cherry-picking the most interesting stats that jumps into his eyes.
And about the cultural aspect it might also play into this. Something I will keep an eye on in future debates!
While I have no objection to people making alternatives to chess . com, the conflicts of interest here are interesting. People are free to make the choices they wish, so long as they're not hurting others.
I am not invested in the choices of Kramnik as an individual. I will say, that I think it is rather tragic that international games and sports have become so divisive. I think that people generally are better off when we can have fun interactions with other people from around the world.
So, I am saddened by those things that are forcing wedges between people of different nations.
I think the saying goes that when people tell you who they are, believe them. Kramnik is in my opinion truly concerned with cheating. However, he's operating on the principle of everyone is a cheater until proven otherwise.
That's my problem with him. He's asking the chess world to prove a negative. It's logically inconsistent. We can have all sorts of numbers, we can have all kinds of feelings but those don't add up to cheating. I agree cheating is a problem but he's not offering solutions just accusations. It's a witchhunt.
But I don’t think he is playing with open cards in regards to what he is doing in the chess world. In an interview asked about what he would do in retirement he said he would like to work multifunctional, what that means is a bit unclear. I just don’t think we naively should believe that he is on a lone crusade against cheating
Great article. Russia (Soviet Union) has been motivated to dominate chess as means of achieving soft power. Globally chess is a very popular sport, with emphasis on sport. Now, that Russia has returned fully to autocracy, corrupt and cult of personality, articles like this are more important than ever. Chesscom is an American project and now has European partners after absorbing PlayMagnus so it seems inevitable that it would be attacked by Putin. While I have problems with the opaque nature of chesscom's anti-cheating and would love to see competitors, certainly Russian monsters aren't the answer.
Thank you, Coach Q! It is noticable how the loss of PlayMagnus has changed the power dynamic in the chess world
A very insightful article, now I see this whole story with Kramnik and Nepo with different eyes. Thanks, Martin!
Thank you, Ivan! There is more tweeting from nepo and kramnik https://x.com/lachesisq/status/1795559706846490626?s=46
Like many, I have seen Kramnik's recent accusations as unjustified. Obviously we need real data scientist to investigate and not an old world champion filled with grudge possibly from his own decline. At least, so I thought. But something was always bugging me in the cheating discussions: the complete disregard of deep intuition of some of the greatest chess player we have. We can name Carlen, Caruana, MVL. and it seems there are many more. Then I stumbled on a discussion involving MVL and Kramnik on the Blitztream YT channel. Kramnik talks about the methodology he uses, and although I am not able to judge its validity, he seems to bring a very interesting point in saying that investigations needs high level science coupled with high level chess players guidance to properly use the right parameters.
Chess.com is defending itself very well on the logical and mathematical sides of its anti cheating measures, but is it possible that on the chess understanding ( "intuitive") side they might not be so well equipped.? The question is worth asking it seems… If we do not address question such as these, the debate will unsurprisingly migrate on the field of people's reputation, the same way Erik Allebest, CEO of Chess.com, kind of threw Fabiano Caruana under the bus in his interview on Perpetual Chess Podcast.
A final though on the geopolitical aspect of the article. If we look the geocultural aspect of this, there is a fight involving the kind culture we want to live, enjoy and promote,. Transposed on the 64 squares, the question might sound something like this for some people: Do we want to live in a chess culture promoting gamification and instant gratification? The point here is every side will have its own interests. Kramnik said he is doing it for chess and Allebest probably will say the same, but their cultural view will be different.
"Kramnik talks about the methodology he uses, and although I am not able to judge its validity, he seems to bring a very interesting point in saying that investigations needs high level science coupled with high level chess players guidance to properly use the right parameters."
I'm just afried that this for Kramnik means that he is cherry-picking the most interesting stats that jumps into his eyes.
And about the cultural aspect it might also play into this. Something I will keep an eye on in future debates!
While I have no objection to people making alternatives to chess . com, the conflicts of interest here are interesting. People are free to make the choices they wish, so long as they're not hurting others.
I am not invested in the choices of Kramnik as an individual. I will say, that I think it is rather tragic that international games and sports have become so divisive. I think that people generally are better off when we can have fun interactions with other people from around the world.
So, I am saddened by those things that are forcing wedges between people of different nations.
It is definately a sad path we are following at the moment
I think the saying goes that when people tell you who they are, believe them. Kramnik is in my opinion truly concerned with cheating. However, he's operating on the principle of everyone is a cheater until proven otherwise.
That's my problem with him. He's asking the chess world to prove a negative. It's logically inconsistent. We can have all sorts of numbers, we can have all kinds of feelings but those don't add up to cheating. I agree cheating is a problem but he's not offering solutions just accusations. It's a witchhunt.
But I don’t think he is playing with open cards in regards to what he is doing in the chess world. In an interview asked about what he would do in retirement he said he would like to work multifunctional, what that means is a bit unclear. I just don’t think we naively should believe that he is on a lone crusade against cheating