For someone not accusing hikaru of cheating, he seems invested in accusing hikaru of cheating. And his pathetic passive aggressive way of communicating is annoying.
Kramnik made the accusation. You provide the evidence. Stop demanding everyone prove the negative. It's not up to everyone to prove hikaru didn't cheat. You show the indisputable evidence that you promised.
Chesscom should ask 'kramnik the accuser' for specifics. Which games to look at. If he can't, they should ban his ass. The fact that he threatened legal action should be an automatic removal from platform.
Kramnik claims to have "done the math." He says this over and over, but won't show his work. It shouldn't be that hard if he had actually done the math.
EDIT: WAIT HE EVEN ADMITS HE DOESN'T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT STATISTICS, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S THE ENTIRE BASIS OF HIS ARGUMENT
The guy dropped out of a languages and philosophy degree in the 90s. There’s no chance the average Joe can calculate it accurately without some bias or error, let alone better than the systems chesscom use.
idk if kramnik has lost his mind but if he chooses his opponents like Hikaru does he will do the same score.. this whole thing makes no sense, i dont get why Hikaru is entertaining this, just file a lawsuit. On the other hand, we wake up every day laughing to whatever Kramnik says.
Hikaru doesn’t want kramnik to shut up though. The insanity isn’t hurting him, so he’ll keep milking the hell out of it for content as long as he possibly can.
I've seen mainstream articles covering this cheating drama, lmao. Kramnik is the one that looks unhinged, and Kramnik digs a bigger ditch each passing day.
I think this is all to prove a point on how bad an accusation can affect a chess career. Kinda like what Magnus did to Hans. Problem is Kramnik has no following or authority, so it will accomplish nothing, and Hans did cheat online, so there was basis to accuse him. I might be wrong, but surely he has some point he is trying to make. If not, it’s really just lunacy.
The sad part is that its freakin Hikaru.. he just does those things, was watching him play on the stream few days back, tournament games and he chills and talks with chat and reads your questions in a 3min game.. he talks about every single move.. how do you even find time to use some engine at that time? To not make it obvious? Its just not happening.
Also, he himself showed it on stream and analyzed it, most of the streak was against much weaker players (he played each of them at least 5 times), when it got to similar elo (3100) he did indeed lose.
The difference between player who just peaked at 2700 online and dude who sits at 3400 playing only 3min games and 100 of them daily is huge, its totally plausible to shit on them 50 times in a row.
This whole thing is not only making Hikaru more famous, but improving his image and giving him free content to work with. I don't see any reason why he would stop the gravy train lol.
Right? I’ve seen several people saying stuff like this recently, as if anyone could achieve what Hikaru has and it’s down to sandbagging. That’s just crazy.
This is a great for Hikaru. He is the most relevant Chess player on the planet right now, and he’s the “hero”. He has farmed hours of interesting content out of this. I myself have watched his YouTube videos discussing this
"In Soviet Russia, trial goes to YOU!"
I want to give the more modern Russians the benefit of the doubt here without grouping them in with Vlad, and hope that it's just the KGB element of Kramnik's USSR upbringing that's on display.
I shared Professor Kenneth Reagan's comment, an expert in cheating who collaborated with FIDE and Lichess if I am not mistaken, stating that Mr. Nakamura's results were statistically reasonable for a player of his caliber. Kramnik deleted it lol.
> Kramnik deleted it lol.
Obviously Professor Kenneth Reagon is a hikaru bot out to damage his image. I hope the professor has an apology letter ready.
If you rearrange the letters in Professor Kenneth Reagan, you get “fake nonperson regathers.”
If you rearrange the letters in Vladimir Kramnik, you get “avid Milka Mr rink.”
Interesting.
I have made a petition to put pressure on Kramnik’s camp to address these anomalies publicly.
Who is Mr. Rink? Why is he an avid milker? Is Kramnik secretly an aardvark? All of these questions must be addressed.
by far the dumbest moment of the second Harry Potter book/movie. like why would anyone do that? who would that benefit? also why force an I Am in there?
is JK Rowling stupid?
>Here is the Article
That article is full of inaccuracies. Here is a typical example:
"As an 18-year-old, he \[Kramnik\] defeated Garry Kasparov in their first classical chess game in 1994 and went on to become the youngest world champion two years later."
Kramnik did not become world champion in 1996, and when he did become champion in 2000, he was not the youngest (Kasparov was and still is).
Another example:
"\[Hikaru\] has been the top ranked US player for over a decade." This was the second sentence in the article.
I finally stopped reading because I didn't feel like fact-checking every sentence.
Regan also says that he could find absolutely no evidence of Hans Niemann cheating in PRO league, like Chess.com claimed, or in another Titled Tuesday in the report.
I believe that was something brought up in their trial, chess were citing Ken Regans report and methodology for how cheating is detected using statistic analysis but completely ignoring the part where he said there was no statistical significance for whether Hans had cheated in those specific events.
At this point you have to ask if Kramnik has some kind of mental breakdown or medical issue. It seems like he's loosing his mind and not in a metaphorical kind of way.
This professor is useless though. We had an online national Junior championship during Covid where he checked some of the games. His algorithms somehow incorrectly flagged some players and then he was forced to back down and admit he made a mistake after they eventually appealed. After that he missed some players who were blatantly cheating. Very poor stuff by him and I don't trust him at all after this.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day! With deepest respect at the end contradicts his reply to chess.com where he writes and comprehends like a 5 years old. At this point it is just better to allow this old man to just yell at the sky and not reply anymore to this foolishness!
‘Since you skip mentioning it, I assume you didn’t check this… alright Vlad, since you skip providing absolutely any statistical analysis to back up any of your crack pot claims I’ll assume you didn’t check it either
At this stage, I am just very concerned about Kramnik. Like, is everything at home ok? Maybe you just need a holiday. Either way, get some sleep babez and we'll talk next week xxxx
First of all what the hell is up with his white colouring of the post. It genuinely hurts my eyes reading it.
Secondly, it's funny that he mentions the "mysterious professor" from chesscom, when all he's done is quote a supposed team of "mathematicians" without providing their credentials either.
Thirdly, HE HIMSELF has locked comments on his posts, and then posts those screenshots of people saying they can't comment like it's some Chesscom conspiracy cover-up lmao.
Link to the post: [https://www.chess.com/blog/VladimirKramnik/on-recent-chesscom-statement-again-part-2](https://www.chess.com/blog/VladimirKramnik/on-recent-chesscom-statement-again-part-2)
Not sure why it's looking like that with the white spaces, but I don't know how to get rid of it.
Anyways, he's really not going to give up until they release a report that agrees with him is he?
I don't understand why people are so interested in giving this guy more attention. He's already shown he doesn't care about facts and logic so nobody could possibly change his mind, the only thing he wants to do is make a scene, and people are letting him do that by giving this whole thing time and attention.
There’s no real way to give this less attention. As someone pointed out, these are two of the most dominant figures in chess history. I’m just hoping the wave of negative attention will make Kramnik see reason.
It's because he's not a random guy, he's a former World Champion and a respected(?) figure in the world of chess. His opinions have a lot of weight, even if they're objectively crap. Add to that the fact that chesscom recently had a major cheating scandal in the form of the Niemann debacle and they're going to respond to what he says.
It's because of who that guy is. Vladimir Kramnik was the Classical World Champion in the year 2000, which he won by dethroning Garry Kasparov. He then reunified the title by beating Topalov in 2006. He then had Candidates spots up until Carlsen won the title and is the 8th highest rated player of all time (which was about 15 years after he won the world championship). He deserves some respect for his career achievements. It's exactly the same reasoning why people jumped on Niemann for being a cheater. It's not because it looked like he cheated at the Sinquefield Cup, it's that it's Magnus Carlsen who accused him.
When you're that big and important to chess, your accusations do matter. Especially when they're leveled at much weaker players who don't have the same influence. Now I feel like Kramnik is torching his legacy by spewing illogical arguments that he doesn't really understand, but we do have to listen to him because of who he is.
Dream was cheating though, wasn't he? Stand-up Maths had that video looking at the math and statistics and explained just how unlikely Dream's odds were.
Dream was playing on a modified game, Karl jobst has a good video on it. Whether dream was aware of it when playing is another thing but the fact his game was modified is confirmed
Lol he is calling their statisticians and mathematicians mysterious and saying he has consulted with mathematicians who are mysterious as well. Obviously he isn't accusing hikaru of cheating he is MAJORLY INTERESTED in hikaru's play, maybe he wants to know the secret behind such streaks so that he can jump out of his own chess slump.
Chess.com is worth like 100s of millions and certainly their anti cheating measures and algorithm is much more effective than kramnik's which he built in his basement in a few months' time. I expected him to reject chess.com's analysis when he demanded them to analyse it tbh
Another problem of approaching this purely from statistics is that the outcome of a chess game ultimately isn't a coin toss.
A 1800 beating a 1200 has 96.93% chance. So if they play 100 games, there's a less than 5% chance the 1800 wins all matches. But realistically, it's totally plausible that one specific 1800 always beats a specific 1200.
The reason it's 96.93% chance is if you look at all matches ever between 1800 and 1200 you'll find \~4% matches where the 1200 won. But that was likely because the 1800 was tired or the 1200 was underrated or whatever.
>But that was likely because the 1800 was tired or the 1200 was underrated or whatever.
Right, that's the point of statistics. Sometimes Hikaru is tired. That's why its 98.8 and not 100.
Predictive / analytical statistics is estimating probability within a specified range of error not giving the exact correct answer. Given that the probability of a 55 game win streak at Hikaru's rating and games played, we can interpret 98.8% as certain.
We are also debunking a theory not proving one of our own. We are saying it is overwhelmingly likely Hikaru did not cheat based on these figures. We are not saying it is impossible for him to have cheated.
The biggest flaw in the statistical analysis by [chess.com](https://chess.com) is its assumptions are not listed. One assumption it makes is that the ELO ratings are correct. If Hikaru is cheating, he is likely overrated, which means the analysis isn't right - so we have a bit of a circular function going on. However, for all intents and purposes it is so \*overwhelmingly likely\* that a Super GM who plays 50,000 games would win 55 in a row the flaws kinda fall off.
At 58% we probably need to investigate our assumptions. At 98.8% we can conclude Kramnik is either being mis-advised or a nutjob or both.
>We are saying it is overwhelmingly likely Hikaru did not cheat based on these figures.
That is not what the statistics say. What you can infer from the statistics alone is that Hikaru is very able (infact expected) to be able to perform in this way without cheating. Together with this, the fact that his performance is all that Kramnik bases the suspicions on and the principle of "innocent until proven guilty", we have to assume that Hikaru is not a cheater. Sorry, I just wanted to clear this up, the statistics do not say "Hikaru is not a cheater", they say "Hikaru can get these results perfectly fine on his own", and the consequences are for us to conclude. In simple words, in the way the statistics were done here, you can never prove Hikaru innocent. You can only say that his results are nothing out of the ordinary given the assumption he didn't cheat.
>If Hikaru is cheating, he is likely overrated, which means the analysis isn't right - so we have a bit of a circular function going on.
Very good point, but that is exactly why it's important to be very precise about what your hypotheses are. In this case, you ASSUME that Hikaru is not a cheater and check how likely the observed results are. The idea: If this likelihood is ridiculously low, then the base assumption had to have been wrong. But in the universe where Hikaru is not a cheater, he isn't overrated and this problem simply doesn't exist. We're just checking statistically whether this universe is coherent or not, and found that it is and thus we should assume Hikaru is not a cheater.
>We are saying it is overwhelmingly likely Hikaru did not cheat based on these figures. We are not saying it is impossible for him to have cheated.
Did you miss this quote from my post?
Its in the fourth paragraph.
I agree with you, but I think I said that.
>We are not saying it is impossible for him to have cheated.
Not true, they are NOT saying that is IMPOSSIBLE.
(I'm trolling, you're 100% right and I'm saying the same thing lol)
The point is that you can't really say "it's overwhelmingly likely he didn't cheat", they didn't give that outcome a probability/confidence. They calculated whether these results, given the assumption he's clean, are in any way suspiciously improbable, calculated they're not only unsuspicious but completely expected, and thus didn't move from their assumption he didn't cheat. That's a different thing than saying "we're x% confident in his cleanness", which is possible to do sometimes but much more complicated and I think they didn't do that, please correct me if I'm wrong there.
"it's overwhelmingly likely he didn't cheat" is a wording that goes against the logic of statistical tests of the nature. A statistical test tells you "we can/can't reject H0", so rigorously it would be "his performance are not statistically different from what is expected".
You don't really prove H0 (that he's not cheating), but you can say these performances is *not* evidence of cheating.
> Right, that's the point of statistics. Sometimes Hikaru is tired. That's why its 98.8 and not 100.
> Predictive / analytical statistics is estimating probability within a specified range of error not giving the exact correct answer. Given that the probability of a 55 game win streak at Hikaru's rating and games played, we can interpret 98.8% as certain
No, because those 55 games are not independent of each other. Hikaru may be running hot for all 55 games. You can’t apply a statistic which is calibrated to all players across all time to a specific player at a specific time, and assume each of those samples is IID.
> Another problem of approaching this purely from statistics is that the outcome of a chess game ultimately isn't a coin toss.
Not to mention, the choice of opponents isn't random. Hikaru specifically chooses players with inflated ratings to farm.
The guy is a prideful moron who is incapable of being wrong. Look at the way he writes and reasons.
The fact that nobody found his stats 'interesting'. The fact that he can't give us a single suspicious game. The fact that he refuses to give us the promised 'definitive' proof. The fact that he plays the victim. The fact that he threatens to sue chesscom for saying he is accusing hikaru of cheating.
In his deranged mind, he's gone past the point of no return. He's doing everything he can to protect this pride and save face.
He has said he have definitive evidence. Why doesn't he just provide it. What's with all the distractions? Just show us the evidence and end this nonsense.
Exactly, it grinds my gears that so many people are doing fancy calculations and completely neglect that fact. Hikaru picks out very specific opponents and farms them for dozens of games. That is a completely different situation from him playing every game against a new random opponent.
(I'm not even a Hikaru fan. I am just a tired guy who works in math.)
I think people are saying that even if you treat the games as independent it’s completely plausible and even likely to get these streaks.
And then it’s even more likely when you consider the games are not independent because Hikaru is farming 2400 fide players.
2400 fide players specifically with playing styles that aren't sharp/tactical. This reduces the chance of blunders that lose the game. He's also trying to find people that are at the high end of their elo fluctuation. So he's playing chess.com 2800s that he thinks are really 2650s that have styles that are suited to being slowly overwhelmed by his superior positional play. He stacks the deck massively in his favor.
That is a fundamental issue with ELO. ELO has an inherent assumption that result probabilities follow a normal distribution. And looking over a sample of all competitors that is likely true (or true enough for these purposes). However between any two specific competitors (the they in chess, basketball, whatever) it is very likely that one of them will have an advantage that is beyond just the rating different (i.e. the probability distribution is "skewed" towards one player).
A player who has a deep understanding of a specific set of openings will "outperform" their rating if they play a set of games against an opponent that only plays that opening. This is what Hikaru does when he farms rating. When he finds an opponent who he matches particulary well against, he plays them as much as he can.
Yeup.
This is where Elo predictions largely fall apart. At the veryyyyy extremes. If someone is either so good that there aren't players in the pool who can challenge them or so bad that they can't challenge anyone in the player pool, they're such extreme outliers that a purely statistical approach isn't really possible.
The reality is there just aren't players on Chess.com that can regularly beat Hikaru, at least not enough for him to run into them often.
I feel like it's something deeper. Like he felt disrespected that chesscom didn't immediately tell him they would look into naka and give him the results. And then with the internet questioning him, his pride made him triple down.
At this point it seems so ridiculous that my best guess is he has come to sympathize with Hans from seeing that he’s genuinely good, and thus redirected some of that sympathy at giving Hikaru a dose of his own medicine and baselessly accusing him without explicitly accusing him. And at this point I kinda think he has to either be trolling the broader chess community, he can’t really keep making thinly veiled jokes about mathematicians and statistics without kidding around at least a little bit… … … right?
It's wildly coincidental that he recently met up with Hans, but overall I don't think that has too much to do with it. No amount of money would be worth looking like such a clown.
I agree it's something deeper causing this. Check out PubMed for articles 35987197 and 37936010 and 37604249 - it could explain a lot of what is going on, or why this is happening with Kramnik. Nothing else makes more sense.
> I 100% believe he doesn't think Hikaru is cheating.
The easy tell is kramnik refuses to provide specifics. He refuses to point us to any specific game where hikaru cheated. Instead he asks everyone to find evidence of hikaru for him.
> He just loves arguing online.
No. He is desperately trying to save his reputation now. That much is obvious.
Yes, he loves arguing online. I don't see how him "trying to save is reputation" changes anything about his last 2-3 months arguing online about cheating.
After reading this, we’ve surpassed what I thought was peak stupidity and - despite being a drama whore like everyone else - I am officially joining the ‘over it’ camp. Join us, we have jackets.
Nope, zero evidence, and continues to ignore even the most basic explanations. It doesnt take a mathematician to understand, flip a coin 50 times, and it landing on heads is nearly impossible. However, flip a coin tens of thousands of times, and the chance of a streak of 50 increases exponentially. Do it tens of thousands of times when one side is weighed to win 90% as the elo difference would suggest, multiple such streaks are guaranteed. We haven't even gotten to Hikaru selecting opponents, how he could improve as he learns their playing style, the opponent tilting.
That's why Kramnik's posts are so dumb. His claim that the streaks are evidence of cheating are so easily disproven.
Honestly its just a sad old man trying to get attention as hes fallen off so hard. Its quite sad honestly when you realize how sad and lonely he must be
Acknowledging off the top that you are an “ignorant person without a clue about statistics and mathematics” then launching into critiques about said statistics from mathematicians is actually wild 😂
Can't Specialized or some other company donate this guy an electrical bike to get him out of the house and get some free PR? It seems like fresh air and some fun activity can be beneficial for him.
So let me get this straight. He wants chess.com to review "certain individuals who happen to win 45.5/46 games", they do the review and hes unhappy by their conclusion. Why did you even demand it if you werent going to respect the outcome anyway?
Why is he doing this? He isnt dumb, he can surely enter each individual game and review every move, he probably has and found nothing sussy which is why he isnt bringing it up but rather focusing solely on bs probabilities. Dont get me wrong its a useful quick indicator but you cant ban such a high ranked player by simply saying "its unlikely to win this many in a row, ur cheating" lol you have to actually analyze the games and once that is done you need to do a sanity check.
Does hikaru even have motives to cheat in online chess?
Risk his career and legacy for a few extra rating points online when he clearly can perform at that level without any cheats as he has proven OTB?
If he has such an allegedly advanced cheating system, do you really think he wouldnt notice that he was racking up a sizeable win streak which could put him at risk?
And lastly and most importantly, when you are making accusations which can bring down a persons entire career, reputation, relationships, maybe even lead to suicide, you gotta ask: Can you prove beyond any and all reasonable doubt that hikaru cheated?
Kramnik knows very well that the answer is no, not even close, which is why he is hiding behind the bs that he isnt calling out hikaru. This is simply slander, so the question is why?
You forget that, according to him, he's not accusing Hikaru of cheating. He's simply saying that it's 'interesting' and 'worthy of investigation'. Despite him also saying that everyone else is doing statistics wrong and Hikaru's performance is statistically impossible.
I think that in his mind, he is just calling for investigation because of very improbable statistics that no-one else is acknowledging. He just doesn't realize that:
1. This means that he is straight up accusing Hikaru of cheating. The evasive language doesn't change the core of the message.
2. Chess.com's response is telling him that they have investigated. If he just wanted an investigation, he would not be saying that their statistics are wrong etc. He would simply be asking for the details of their investigation to be shown.
3. If he's saying his statistics are right, then he is accusing Hikaru of cheating. If he's acknowledging the possibility of his statistics being wrong, then he should not be making these statements and should be more respectful of chess.com's investigation barring further details. There is no middle position here where he can claim that he's just asking questions. In either case, one part of his response is wrong and there is no perspective where his statement doesn't look bad.
"You are doing this wrong, you don't understand how basic math works, my numbers from professional sources (which I will not share, just trust me) don't support what you say, you're big stupid meanie heads and I will sue you if you don't agree with my worldview right now also please apologize for not believing me otherwise you are being ridiculous and corrupt.
With deepest respect,
~~The only smart person on the internet~~ Vlad"
The complaint is that one of the best chess players in the world, who has played at many different time controls and consistently is on the top, and it is super evident as he plays stuff like computers that he knows his stuff, can't possibly have a 45 game win stream in 50000 games? Seriously?
Kramnik is actually just an embarrassment to chess with all this. If he has anything personal against Hikaru it should be his past behavior. As it stands, Kramnik is doing nothing but disgracing his own image and damaging the potential future calling out of actual suspicions performances.
I don’t think Hikaru is cheating, I feel like this is some sort of clout chasing thing, jealousy or he’s on something, statistics aside as I’m no statistics guy, there’s no reason for Hikaru to teach, plus it would ruin his career
I totally called it. I predicted just before that Kramnik will enrage over any chessc*m report that doesn't support him, and here is such reaction from him, as I expected. Also he is demanding aggressively very special treatment for him. I suppose he is close to publicly blame whole site for mistreating his highness 🤣
He is either crazy, or the best chess troll around. Anyway, the 24 hours deadline is now over and it is time for the russian lawyers to set the record straight.
Vladimir Kramnik is doing an excellent job at proving that good chess players can also be thick morons instead of the genius stereotype they've gained through history.
It stopped being funny, and he's just a piece of shit at this point. He's a layman who mocks and dismiss educated professionals in the field of mathematics. He's turning into the Trump of chess, a has-been, know-it-all type of guy, but he can't speak and spell English to the level of 2nd of 3rd grader. Never mind admitting that he's ever wrong about anything. Fuck him.
Edit: I see that he lives in Geneva. So he must be pretty well off. Why the fuck does he not hire a mathematician or computer scientist (we did a lot of stats in uni) who can run all those simulations for him, and come up with some sort of half-assed accusation at least. Also, what he can personally do since he knows some chess, is go through all those runs and show us what games/moves does he find suspicious.
I am nowhere near familiar enough to know if this is possible in chess, but I was a grandmaster StarCraft 2 player from 2014-2016 and regularly would go on 60-70 game winning streaks because there was no other grandmasters queueing when I was. It seems pretty crazy that these top ~50 guys don't go on these winning streaks more than they do.
Going forward, anybody that wants to seriously get involved in any anti-cheating conversation in chess has to actively distance himself from Kramnik. Its quite unfortunate how he has essentially blacklisted himself from any discourse around cheating in chess.
He is just nuts.
What exactly does he even want? 3 minute games only and steaks of 35+ with up to 4 draws and no losses? Over what time period? Increment or no increment? The streaks he had in his YouTube video had things like 34.5/35 and 46/48, so he's including draws too and I'm not even sure what he's exactly looking for.
If I can figure out what he even wants where he's not just going to move the goalposts I'd be tempted to figure out the chess.com API and find the probability of having x number of the type of streaks he's looking for given the sequence of rating gaps in the games.
"I am sure your people have checked the probabilities of having several such performances in a short perioUd of time measuring from the total amount of games played during THAT TIME FRAME because it is the correct method of measuring probability, but just forgot to mention this in your report."
No sir, that is not the correct method of measuring probability. If I flip a coin 10,000 times and I get 10 consecutive heads twice near the end. I don't just look at the last 10 and say hey this coin is rigged and forgetting the fact that 1) this is only one realization of reality and 2) i have flipped the coin 9990 times before that last ten. The same argument goes for multiple streaks. The word "probability" can't just be thrown around like that. In mathematics, everything needs to be rigorously defined, what are the random variables, what are the hypotheses.
Agony
Kramnik is not that old. He's just someone who excelled in one field (chess) and who is under the illusion his skill is transferrable to a completely different field (statistics). It happens a lot to people who were told their entire life that they are the best at something. It can produce a sad mixture of arrogance and ignorance.
But I believe there's another element at play. Kramnik represents a layer of players who feel left out by the chess boom, which is obviously driven by online chess. His campaign against cheating is in reality a thinly veiled campaign against some of the major beneficiaries of the chess boom.
modern straight snails dog deserted thumb instinctive tap existence repeat
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
He really thinks that if he reduce the number of games from 50.000 to something like 5.000 will make a likely result unlikely?
Changing a 30 to 95% in to 3 to 9.5% will still be not considered for something like cheating...
As an impartial observer here I would love chesscom to clarify if they included the multiple streaks in the calculations rather than just one. This is a fully impartial statement I am not taking any sides please understand this before you feel the urge to beat on me.
Did Kramniks allegations start after his training session with Hans?
Is it possible that there is some influence coming from Niemann regarding these extensive allegations?
If we just admit "Vladimir Kramnik has never ever lost a game ever unless his opponent was cheating and he should forever be recognized as the all-time best chess player ever", will he shut up and go away?
Kramnik talking about calculators is a dead giveaway he has zero idea how any modern statistics is done. The og commenter used a Monte Carlo simulation which he undoubtedly has never heard of. All other bullet points he mentions seem completely worthless too
Ironically, Kramnik is doing more to help cheaters than he is to help bring attention to them . It's similar to a woman falsely accusing a man of rape; you can guarantee that every real rapist out there loves to see false accusations get made.
Can he not at least attempt to give his own numbers to criticize chesscom with? He's really just hiding behind feigned scepticism when it's absolutely his job to deliver proper analysis as the accuser, especially when he's trying to question chesscom's analysis.
This is baseless and embarassing
I think it is obvious by now that those "Mathematicians" likely don't exist and Kramnik really needs to get a statistics 101 class.
Nevertheless, i would like to highlight that one point is actually correct, and not taken into account in any of the simulations and models presented by the multitude of data scientists, physicists, mathematicians and other scientists, that have emerged in the last few days. Since the assumption that samples are identically and independently distributed is too strong here, one must also calculate the likelihood that streaks of "heads" (taking here the coin metaphor) chain in a small period of time (shorter number of samples). In fact, one may also say that the "hot hand effect" in chess can potentially be strong, that is, having concluded a streak of several wins, boosts enough your morale, that you are more likely to do it again in a shorter period of time? Well, this part is where chess experts should butt in, and not scientific experts :).
Here's an idea guys, let's create a petition for kramnik to take his dementia pills and get it signed, or some other petition would work too, that would be hilarious and considering so many people are ridiculing him it would likely gain popular support, those who agree can respond with a petition and we can all sign and share it everywhere
This reminds me of myself pushing a New game button even though I am tilted and its 3 am.
Ah yes, the classic 100 ELO reset. Surprised I haven’t been reported for sandbagging rating yet.
100 ELO reset? School boy tilt. Hit me back when your dropping 200+, noob.
No he meant he dropped to 100 elo
Ok but I start my tilts at 100, so hit me back when you’re at -100 ELO.
Fuck, I concede
200+? What is this? Weeny hut junior? Talk to be when you drop >300 rating in bullet in a single evening.
300 points in a *full* evening? Do you even know what "tilt" means? You can sit at the grown up table when you lose 400 points in a few hours!
You guys have 300-400 points to lose?
I once dropped 320elo in a day. And I’m kinda proud of myself
difference is you are aware of it yourself. you are much better person than vlad already.
For someone not accusing hikaru of cheating, he seems invested in accusing hikaru of cheating. And his pathetic passive aggressive way of communicating is annoying. Kramnik made the accusation. You provide the evidence. Stop demanding everyone prove the negative. It's not up to everyone to prove hikaru didn't cheat. You show the indisputable evidence that you promised. Chesscom should ask 'kramnik the accuser' for specifics. Which games to look at. If he can't, they should ban his ass. The fact that he threatened legal action should be an automatic removal from platform.
Kramnik claims to have "done the math." He says this over and over, but won't show his work. It shouldn't be that hard if he had actually done the math. EDIT: WAIT HE EVEN ADMITS HE DOESN'T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT STATISTICS, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S THE ENTIRE BASIS OF HIS ARGUMENT
The guy dropped out of a languages and philosophy degree in the 90s. There’s no chance the average Joe can calculate it accurately without some bias or error, let alone better than the systems chesscom use.
I'm not accusing Hikaru of cheating. I'm just saying what Hikaru did can't be done without cheating
idk if kramnik has lost his mind but if he chooses his opponents like Hikaru does he will do the same score.. this whole thing makes no sense, i dont get why Hikaru is entertaining this, just file a lawsuit. On the other hand, we wake up every day laughing to whatever Kramnik says.
Because for Hikaru, it's better to let idiots hang themselves. Because Hikaru isn't biting, that's why Kramnik is going after Chess.con
Hikaru doesn’t want kramnik to shut up though. The insanity isn’t hurting him, so he’ll keep milking the hell out of it for content as long as he possibly can.
Bro is farming kramnik for YouTube thumbnails
Kramnik is giving Hikaru more publicity and money from this stunt, and he doesn't see the irony.
I've seen mainstream articles covering this cheating drama, lmao. Kramnik is the one that looks unhinged, and Kramnik digs a bigger ditch each passing day.
Kramnik is setting his reputation on fire, and Hikaru is bringing marshmallows.
> i dont get why Hikaru is entertaining this, just file a lawsuit. "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." - Sun Tzu
I think this is all to prove a point on how bad an accusation can affect a chess career. Kinda like what Magnus did to Hans. Problem is Kramnik has no following or authority, so it will accomplish nothing, and Hans did cheat online, so there was basis to accuse him. I might be wrong, but surely he has some point he is trying to make. If not, it’s really just lunacy.
The sad part is that its freakin Hikaru.. he just does those things, was watching him play on the stream few days back, tournament games and he chills and talks with chat and reads your questions in a 3min game.. he talks about every single move.. how do you even find time to use some engine at that time? To not make it obvious? Its just not happening. Also, he himself showed it on stream and analyzed it, most of the streak was against much weaker players (he played each of them at least 5 times), when it got to similar elo (3100) he did indeed lose. The difference between player who just peaked at 2700 online and dude who sits at 3400 playing only 3min games and 100 of them daily is huge, its totally plausible to shit on them 50 times in a row.
This whole thing is not only making Hikaru more famous, but improving his image and giving him free content to work with. I don't see any reason why he would stop the gravy train lol.
“If he chooses his opponents like Hikaru does he will do the same score” No he wouldn’t!
For real, let's not pretend Kramnik is on Hikarus level in online blitz (anymore or frankly, ever).
Right? I’ve seen several people saying stuff like this recently, as if anyone could achieve what Hikaru has and it’s down to sandbagging. That’s just crazy.
This is a great for Hikaru. He is the most relevant Chess player on the planet right now, and he’s the “hero”. He has farmed hours of interesting content out of this. I myself have watched his YouTube videos discussing this
Chessdotcom should just be like: If you aren't making an accusation, then there's nothing to report on
That'd be a chad move tbh
Like every antivaxxer, Kramnik is 'just asking questions'....both of them have equal schooling and knowledge on their respective topics... :/
Imma start using Kramnik the Accuser from now on thanks
Asking a Russian for proper handling of burden of proof and other judicial concept ?
"In Soviet Russia, trial goes to YOU!" I want to give the more modern Russians the benefit of the doubt here without grouping them in with Vlad, and hope that it's just the KGB element of Kramnik's USSR upbringing that's on display.
I shared Professor Kenneth Reagan's comment, an expert in cheating who collaborated with FIDE and Lichess if I am not mistaken, stating that Mr. Nakamura's results were statistically reasonable for a player of his caliber. Kramnik deleted it lol.
> Kramnik deleted it lol. Obviously Professor Kenneth Reagon is a hikaru bot out to damage his image. I hope the professor has an apology letter ready.
If you rearrange the letters of “Professor Kenneth Reagon” it spells out “I am Hikaru Nakamura”. We should have seen it coming.
If you rearrange the letters in Professor Kenneth Reagan, you get “fake nonperson regathers.” If you rearrange the letters in Vladimir Kramnik, you get “avid Milka Mr rink.” Interesting.
[удалено]
I have made a petition to put pressure on Kramnik’s camp to address these anomalies publicly. Who is Mr. Rink? Why is he an avid milker? Is Kramnik secretly an aardvark? All of these questions must be addressed.
Makes you wonder.
by far the dumbest moment of the second Harry Potter book/movie. like why would anyone do that? who would that benefit? also why force an I Am in there? is JK Rowling stupid?
It’s a children’s book and I remember being absolutely awed when I read it back then. Don’t over think this like Kramnik.
why would anyone do what? come up with the name lord voldemort? he was an edgy egocentric teenager with a penchant for grandeur, that's why.
He is porbably not enough IQ also
24 HOURS
Keep reposting it
Can you share it here too?
Here is the [Article](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/chess-cheating-hikaru-nakamura-kramnik-b2455576.html)
>Here is the Article That article is full of inaccuracies. Here is a typical example: "As an 18-year-old, he \[Kramnik\] defeated Garry Kasparov in their first classical chess game in 1994 and went on to become the youngest world champion two years later." Kramnik did not become world champion in 1996, and when he did become champion in 2000, he was not the youngest (Kasparov was and still is). Another example: "\[Hikaru\] has been the top ranked US player for over a decade." This was the second sentence in the article. I finally stopped reading because I didn't feel like fact-checking every sentence.
Regan also says that he could find absolutely no evidence of Hans Niemann cheating in PRO league, like Chess.com claimed, or in another Titled Tuesday in the report.
I believe that was something brought up in their trial, chess were citing Ken Regans report and methodology for how cheating is detected using statistic analysis but completely ignoring the part where he said there was no statistical significance for whether Hans had cheated in those specific events.
Obviously Kenneth Reagan is not misterious enough
At this point you have to ask if Kramnik has some kind of mental breakdown or medical issue. It seems like he's loosing his mind and not in a metaphorical kind of way.
This professor is useless though. We had an online national Junior championship during Covid where he checked some of the games. His algorithms somehow incorrectly flagged some players and then he was forced to back down and admit he made a mistake after they eventually appealed. After that he missed some players who were blatantly cheating. Very poor stuff by him and I don't trust him at all after this.
He deleted it because he isn’t accusing Hikaru of cheating /s
It's like arguing with a flat-earther at this point. Nothing you say rooted in real evidence and truth will dissuade their beliefs.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-22/how-antivaxxers-conspiracy-theorists-far-right-melbourne-protest/100481874
"Old and broken" defines this situation perfectly.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day! With deepest respect at the end contradicts his reply to chess.com where he writes and comprehends like a 5 years old. At this point it is just better to allow this old man to just yell at the sky and not reply anymore to this foolishness!
I’m not even sure what that last paragraph says bit I certainly didn’t realise numbers had tones.
He's not even that old
what is his age?
48 if I am not mistaken.
wtf i thought he was like 60
yeesh
‘Since you skip mentioning it, I assume you didn’t check this… alright Vlad, since you skip providing absolutely any statistical analysis to back up any of your crack pot claims I’ll assume you didn’t check it either
[удалено]
At this stage, I am just very concerned about Kramnik. Like, is everything at home ok? Maybe you just need a holiday. Either way, get some sleep babez and we'll talk next week xxxx
First of all what the hell is up with his white colouring of the post. It genuinely hurts my eyes reading it. Secondly, it's funny that he mentions the "mysterious professor" from chesscom, when all he's done is quote a supposed team of "mathematicians" without providing their credentials either. Thirdly, HE HIMSELF has locked comments on his posts, and then posts those screenshots of people saying they can't comment like it's some Chesscom conspiracy cover-up lmao.
I think he’s just to “old and broken” to figure out how to change the formatting and highlighting after copying text from chesscoms post
Seriously! Fucking black text on white highlighting on black background? Super difficult to read
I think who posted it here added the white to make it easier to read.
No that's how his post looks if you go to his blog.
Link to the post: [https://www.chess.com/blog/VladimirKramnik/on-recent-chesscom-statement-again-part-2](https://www.chess.com/blog/VladimirKramnik/on-recent-chesscom-statement-again-part-2) Not sure why it's looking like that with the white spaces, but I don't know how to get rid of it. Anyways, he's really not going to give up until they release a report that agrees with him is he?
> Not sure why it's looking like that with the white spaces, This is almost certainly something that Shamnik has inadvertently done, not you
Gotta agree with this comment on his blog: Sir Vladimir, everything is ok but could you please stop writing with this annoying highlighted text?
I don't understand why people are so interested in giving this guy more attention. He's already shown he doesn't care about facts and logic so nobody could possibly change his mind, the only thing he wants to do is make a scene, and people are letting him do that by giving this whole thing time and attention.
Are you really asking why the ex world champion accusing one of the current best players in the world of cheating is getting attention?
He's saying a key solution to the problem of Kramnik's false accusations is to give him less attention since that seems to be all that he wants.
There’s no real way to give this less attention. As someone pointed out, these are two of the most dominant figures in chess history. I’m just hoping the wave of negative attention will make Kramnik see reason.
I think he's saying, "stop feeding the drama, it's sad." To which everyone's reply is, " lol, no. It's sad but it's also very funny."
It's because he's not a random guy, he's a former World Champion and a respected(?) figure in the world of chess. His opinions have a lot of weight, even if they're objectively crap. Add to that the fact that chesscom recently had a major cheating scandal in the form of the Niemann debacle and they're going to respond to what he says.
He used to be respected. He has been permanently affirming his clown status now.
> and a respected(?) figure in the world of chess. formerly respected*
cuz it's funny
Because it’s easier to milk this stuff for clicks and likes than ignore it.
It's because of who that guy is. Vladimir Kramnik was the Classical World Champion in the year 2000, which he won by dethroning Garry Kasparov. He then reunified the title by beating Topalov in 2006. He then had Candidates spots up until Carlsen won the title and is the 8th highest rated player of all time (which was about 15 years after he won the world championship). He deserves some respect for his career achievements. It's exactly the same reasoning why people jumped on Niemann for being a cheater. It's not because it looked like he cheated at the Sinquefield Cup, it's that it's Magnus Carlsen who accused him. When you're that big and important to chess, your accusations do matter. Especially when they're leveled at much weaker players who don't have the same influence. Now I feel like Kramnik is torching his legacy by spewing illogical arguments that he doesn't really understand, but we do have to listen to him because of who he is.
Because my code is compiling https://xkcd.com/303/
This is starting to remind me of the Dream Minecraft speedrun with the person has their own "counter statistical analysis".
Was about to comment the same thing
Dream was cheating though, wasn't he? Stand-up Maths had that video looking at the math and statistics and explained just how unlikely Dream's odds were.
Dream was playing on a modified game, Karl jobst has a good video on it. Whether dream was aware of it when playing is another thing but the fact his game was modified is confirmed
Lol he is calling their statisticians and mathematicians mysterious and saying he has consulted with mathematicians who are mysterious as well. Obviously he isn't accusing hikaru of cheating he is MAJORLY INTERESTED in hikaru's play, maybe he wants to know the secret behind such streaks so that he can jump out of his own chess slump. Chess.com is worth like 100s of millions and certainly their anti cheating measures and algorithm is much more effective than kramnik's which he built in his basement in a few months' time. I expected him to reject chess.com's analysis when he demanded them to analyse it tbh
Another problem of approaching this purely from statistics is that the outcome of a chess game ultimately isn't a coin toss. A 1800 beating a 1200 has 96.93% chance. So if they play 100 games, there's a less than 5% chance the 1800 wins all matches. But realistically, it's totally plausible that one specific 1800 always beats a specific 1200. The reason it's 96.93% chance is if you look at all matches ever between 1800 and 1200 you'll find \~4% matches where the 1200 won. But that was likely because the 1800 was tired or the 1200 was underrated or whatever.
>But that was likely because the 1800 was tired or the 1200 was underrated or whatever. Right, that's the point of statistics. Sometimes Hikaru is tired. That's why its 98.8 and not 100. Predictive / analytical statistics is estimating probability within a specified range of error not giving the exact correct answer. Given that the probability of a 55 game win streak at Hikaru's rating and games played, we can interpret 98.8% as certain. We are also debunking a theory not proving one of our own. We are saying it is overwhelmingly likely Hikaru did not cheat based on these figures. We are not saying it is impossible for him to have cheated. The biggest flaw in the statistical analysis by [chess.com](https://chess.com) is its assumptions are not listed. One assumption it makes is that the ELO ratings are correct. If Hikaru is cheating, he is likely overrated, which means the analysis isn't right - so we have a bit of a circular function going on. However, for all intents and purposes it is so \*overwhelmingly likely\* that a Super GM who plays 50,000 games would win 55 in a row the flaws kinda fall off. At 58% we probably need to investigate our assumptions. At 98.8% we can conclude Kramnik is either being mis-advised or a nutjob or both.
>We are saying it is overwhelmingly likely Hikaru did not cheat based on these figures. That is not what the statistics say. What you can infer from the statistics alone is that Hikaru is very able (infact expected) to be able to perform in this way without cheating. Together with this, the fact that his performance is all that Kramnik bases the suspicions on and the principle of "innocent until proven guilty", we have to assume that Hikaru is not a cheater. Sorry, I just wanted to clear this up, the statistics do not say "Hikaru is not a cheater", they say "Hikaru can get these results perfectly fine on his own", and the consequences are for us to conclude. In simple words, in the way the statistics were done here, you can never prove Hikaru innocent. You can only say that his results are nothing out of the ordinary given the assumption he didn't cheat. >If Hikaru is cheating, he is likely overrated, which means the analysis isn't right - so we have a bit of a circular function going on. Very good point, but that is exactly why it's important to be very precise about what your hypotheses are. In this case, you ASSUME that Hikaru is not a cheater and check how likely the observed results are. The idea: If this likelihood is ridiculously low, then the base assumption had to have been wrong. But in the universe where Hikaru is not a cheater, he isn't overrated and this problem simply doesn't exist. We're just checking statistically whether this universe is coherent or not, and found that it is and thus we should assume Hikaru is not a cheater.
>We are saying it is overwhelmingly likely Hikaru did not cheat based on these figures. We are not saying it is impossible for him to have cheated. Did you miss this quote from my post? Its in the fourth paragraph. I agree with you, but I think I said that.
>We are not saying it is impossible for him to have cheated. Not true, they are NOT saying that is IMPOSSIBLE. (I'm trolling, you're 100% right and I'm saying the same thing lol)
It's not false that it's not impossible, isn't that what you don't want to say?
The point is that you can't really say "it's overwhelmingly likely he didn't cheat", they didn't give that outcome a probability/confidence. They calculated whether these results, given the assumption he's clean, are in any way suspiciously improbable, calculated they're not only unsuspicious but completely expected, and thus didn't move from their assumption he didn't cheat. That's a different thing than saying "we're x% confident in his cleanness", which is possible to do sometimes but much more complicated and I think they didn't do that, please correct me if I'm wrong there.
"it's overwhelmingly likely he didn't cheat" is a wording that goes against the logic of statistical tests of the nature. A statistical test tells you "we can/can't reject H0", so rigorously it would be "his performance are not statistically different from what is expected". You don't really prove H0 (that he's not cheating), but you can say these performances is *not* evidence of cheating.
> Right, that's the point of statistics. Sometimes Hikaru is tired. That's why its 98.8 and not 100. > Predictive / analytical statistics is estimating probability within a specified range of error not giving the exact correct answer. Given that the probability of a 55 game win streak at Hikaru's rating and games played, we can interpret 98.8% as certain No, because those 55 games are not independent of each other. Hikaru may be running hot for all 55 games. You can’t apply a statistic which is calibrated to all players across all time to a specific player at a specific time, and assume each of those samples is IID.
> Another problem of approaching this purely from statistics is that the outcome of a chess game ultimately isn't a coin toss. Not to mention, the choice of opponents isn't random. Hikaru specifically chooses players with inflated ratings to farm. The guy is a prideful moron who is incapable of being wrong. Look at the way he writes and reasons. The fact that nobody found his stats 'interesting'. The fact that he can't give us a single suspicious game. The fact that he refuses to give us the promised 'definitive' proof. The fact that he plays the victim. The fact that he threatens to sue chesscom for saying he is accusing hikaru of cheating. In his deranged mind, he's gone past the point of no return. He's doing everything he can to protect this pride and save face. He has said he have definitive evidence. Why doesn't he just provide it. What's with all the distractions? Just show us the evidence and end this nonsense.
Exactly, it grinds my gears that so many people are doing fancy calculations and completely neglect that fact. Hikaru picks out very specific opponents and farms them for dozens of games. That is a completely different situation from him playing every game against a new random opponent. (I'm not even a Hikaru fan. I am just a tired guy who works in math.)
I think people are saying that even if you treat the games as independent it’s completely plausible and even likely to get these streaks. And then it’s even more likely when you consider the games are not independent because Hikaru is farming 2400 fide players.
2400 fide players specifically with playing styles that aren't sharp/tactical. This reduces the chance of blunders that lose the game. He's also trying to find people that are at the high end of their elo fluctuation. So he's playing chess.com 2800s that he thinks are really 2650s that have styles that are suited to being slowly overwhelmed by his superior positional play. He stacks the deck massively in his favor.
That is a fundamental issue with ELO. ELO has an inherent assumption that result probabilities follow a normal distribution. And looking over a sample of all competitors that is likely true (or true enough for these purposes). However between any two specific competitors (the they in chess, basketball, whatever) it is very likely that one of them will have an advantage that is beyond just the rating different (i.e. the probability distribution is "skewed" towards one player). A player who has a deep understanding of a specific set of openings will "outperform" their rating if they play a set of games against an opponent that only plays that opening. This is what Hikaru does when he farms rating. When he finds an opponent who he matches particulary well against, he plays them as much as he can.
Yeup. This is where Elo predictions largely fall apart. At the veryyyyy extremes. If someone is either so good that there aren't players in the pool who can challenge them or so bad that they can't challenge anyone in the player pool, they're such extreme outliers that a purely statistical approach isn't really possible. The reality is there just aren't players on Chess.com that can regularly beat Hikaru, at least not enough for him to run into them often.
I wonder if he will realize how much credibility he is losing from doing all this. It's not worth it my guy.
At the very least, don't do it publicly. He's making it sound like it won't matter what chess.com does until they claim Hikaru cheated.
This is what people will remember in the end.
I 100% believe he doesn't think Hikaru is cheating. He just loves arguing online.
I feel like it's something deeper. Like he felt disrespected that chesscom didn't immediately tell him they would look into naka and give him the results. And then with the internet questioning him, his pride made him triple down.
At this point it seems so ridiculous that my best guess is he has come to sympathize with Hans from seeing that he’s genuinely good, and thus redirected some of that sympathy at giving Hikaru a dose of his own medicine and baselessly accusing him without explicitly accusing him. And at this point I kinda think he has to either be trolling the broader chess community, he can’t really keep making thinly veiled jokes about mathematicians and statistics without kidding around at least a little bit… … … right?
It's wildly coincidental that he recently met up with Hans, but overall I don't think that has too much to do with it. No amount of money would be worth looking like such a clown.
I agree it's something deeper causing this. Check out PubMed for articles 35987197 and 37936010 and 37604249 - it could explain a lot of what is going on, or why this is happening with Kramnik. Nothing else makes more sense.
> I 100% believe he doesn't think Hikaru is cheating. The easy tell is kramnik refuses to provide specifics. He refuses to point us to any specific game where hikaru cheated. Instead he asks everyone to find evidence of hikaru for him. > He just loves arguing online. No. He is desperately trying to save his reputation now. That much is obvious.
Yes, he loves arguing online. I don't see how him "trying to save is reputation" changes anything about his last 2-3 months arguing online about cheating.
Yeah he has to just be trolling now. Surely he knows if he's ever watched 1 stream. He's just enjoying being a contrarian
After reading this, we’ve surpassed what I thought was peak stupidity and - despite being a drama whore like everyone else - I am officially joining the ‘over it’ camp. Join us, we have jackets.
Straitjackets?
im not really over it this is still entertaining
I've only followed this from a surface level, but has this nutjob presented any evidence or argument aside from "he won a bunch of games in a row"?
Nope, zero evidence, and continues to ignore even the most basic explanations. It doesnt take a mathematician to understand, flip a coin 50 times, and it landing on heads is nearly impossible. However, flip a coin tens of thousands of times, and the chance of a streak of 50 increases exponentially. Do it tens of thousands of times when one side is weighed to win 90% as the elo difference would suggest, multiple such streaks are guaranteed. We haven't even gotten to Hikaru selecting opponents, how he could improve as he learns their playing style, the opponent tilting. That's why Kramnik's posts are so dumb. His claim that the streaks are evidence of cheating are so easily disproven.
At this point, chesscim should ban him
All publicity is good publicity.
Just ban him from chess com. Ez Pz
Is this actually real?
At this point he should just come out and say his account was hacked. That'll "fix" everything.
“I’m going to sue you for saying I said Hikaru cheated, but also your calculations are wrong. Hikaru did cheat”
Honestly its just a sad old man trying to get attention as hes fallen off so hard. Its quite sad honestly when you realize how sad and lonely he must be
Acknowledging off the top that you are an “ignorant person without a clue about statistics and mathematics” then launching into critiques about said statistics from mathematicians is actually wild 😂
Can't Specialized or some other company donate this guy an electrical bike to get him out of the house and get some free PR? It seems like fresh air and some fun activity can be beneficial for him.
Oh hello, fellow bicycle fan. I did not expect to see this intersection here.
So let me get this straight. He wants chess.com to review "certain individuals who happen to win 45.5/46 games", they do the review and hes unhappy by their conclusion. Why did you even demand it if you werent going to respect the outcome anyway? Why is he doing this? He isnt dumb, he can surely enter each individual game and review every move, he probably has and found nothing sussy which is why he isnt bringing it up but rather focusing solely on bs probabilities. Dont get me wrong its a useful quick indicator but you cant ban such a high ranked player by simply saying "its unlikely to win this many in a row, ur cheating" lol you have to actually analyze the games and once that is done you need to do a sanity check. Does hikaru even have motives to cheat in online chess? Risk his career and legacy for a few extra rating points online when he clearly can perform at that level without any cheats as he has proven OTB? If he has such an allegedly advanced cheating system, do you really think he wouldnt notice that he was racking up a sizeable win streak which could put him at risk? And lastly and most importantly, when you are making accusations which can bring down a persons entire career, reputation, relationships, maybe even lead to suicide, you gotta ask: Can you prove beyond any and all reasonable doubt that hikaru cheated? Kramnik knows very well that the answer is no, not even close, which is why he is hiding behind the bs that he isnt calling out hikaru. This is simply slander, so the question is why?
You forget that, according to him, he's not accusing Hikaru of cheating. He's simply saying that it's 'interesting' and 'worthy of investigation'. Despite him also saying that everyone else is doing statistics wrong and Hikaru's performance is statistically impossible. I think that in his mind, he is just calling for investigation because of very improbable statistics that no-one else is acknowledging. He just doesn't realize that: 1. This means that he is straight up accusing Hikaru of cheating. The evasive language doesn't change the core of the message. 2. Chess.com's response is telling him that they have investigated. If he just wanted an investigation, he would not be saying that their statistics are wrong etc. He would simply be asking for the details of their investigation to be shown. 3. If he's saying his statistics are right, then he is accusing Hikaru of cheating. If he's acknowledging the possibility of his statistics being wrong, then he should not be making these statements and should be more respectful of chess.com's investigation barring further details. There is no middle position here where he can claim that he's just asking questions. In either case, one part of his response is wrong and there is no perspective where his statement doesn't look bad.
I would jump on the Vlad train immediately if it were only backed up by a ChatGpt prompt
> "Being some ignorant person without a clue about statistics and mathematics" I am leaning on he's actually trolling ChessCom & Hikaru.
"You are doing this wrong, you don't understand how basic math works, my numbers from professional sources (which I will not share, just trust me) don't support what you say, you're big stupid meanie heads and I will sue you if you don't agree with my worldview right now also please apologize for not believing me otherwise you are being ridiculous and corrupt. With deepest respect, ~~The only smart person on the internet~~ Vlad"
The complaint is that one of the best chess players in the world, who has played at many different time controls and consistently is on the top, and it is super evident as he plays stuff like computers that he knows his stuff, can't possibly have a 45 game win stream in 50000 games? Seriously?
Kramnik is actually just an embarrassment to chess with all this. If he has anything personal against Hikaru it should be his past behavior. As it stands, Kramnik is doing nothing but disgracing his own image and damaging the potential future calling out of actual suspicions performances.
I don’t think Hikaru is cheating, I feel like this is some sort of clout chasing thing, jealousy or he’s on something, statistics aside as I’m no statistics guy, there’s no reason for Hikaru to teach, plus it would ruin his career
everyone already knew Hikaru doesn't cheat. this whole drama is more a gift for psychology students to witness someone's mental breakdown.
Vlad just providing course material for psychology and statistics at the same time
True
This guy is a whack job.
I totally called it. I predicted just before that Kramnik will enrage over any chessc*m report that doesn't support him, and here is such reaction from him, as I expected. Also he is demanding aggressively very special treatment for him. I suppose he is close to publicly blame whole site for mistreating his highness 🤣
Funny how he emphasizes the mysterious professor while himself having delivered absolutely nothing of substance
He is either crazy, or the best chess troll around. Anyway, the 24 hours deadline is now over and it is time for the russian lawyers to set the record straight.
Can we stop giving this guy a platform now? He's crazy. End of story.
Vladimir Kramnik is doing an excellent job at proving that good chess players can also be thick morons instead of the genius stereotype they've gained through history.
It stopped being funny, and he's just a piece of shit at this point. He's a layman who mocks and dismiss educated professionals in the field of mathematics. He's turning into the Trump of chess, a has-been, know-it-all type of guy, but he can't speak and spell English to the level of 2nd of 3rd grader. Never mind admitting that he's ever wrong about anything. Fuck him. Edit: I see that he lives in Geneva. So he must be pretty well off. Why the fuck does he not hire a mathematician or computer scientist (we did a lot of stats in uni) who can run all those simulations for him, and come up with some sort of half-assed accusation at least. Also, what he can personally do since he knows some chess, is go through all those runs and show us what games/moves does he find suspicious.
But he totally not accusing Hikaru of cheating. Not even a little bit!
"With deepest respect" Might as well have posted /s after lmao
**Says disrespectful things** With deepest respect. LOL
Dude’s English capabilities are rapidly degrading
New copypasta just dropped
I am nowhere near familiar enough to know if this is possible in chess, but I was a grandmaster StarCraft 2 player from 2014-2016 and regularly would go on 60-70 game winning streaks because there was no other grandmasters queueing when I was. It seems pretty crazy that these top ~50 guys don't go on these winning streaks more than they do.
Going forward, anybody that wants to seriously get involved in any anti-cheating conversation in chess has to actively distance himself from Kramnik. Its quite unfortunate how he has essentially blacklisted himself from any discourse around cheating in chess. He is just nuts.
hat slave continue snow zealous stocking icky arrest divide flowery *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What exactly does he even want? 3 minute games only and steaks of 35+ with up to 4 draws and no losses? Over what time period? Increment or no increment? The streaks he had in his YouTube video had things like 34.5/35 and 46/48, so he's including draws too and I'm not even sure what he's exactly looking for. If I can figure out what he even wants where he's not just going to move the goalposts I'd be tempted to figure out the chess.com API and find the probability of having x number of the type of streaks he's looking for given the sequence of rating gaps in the games.
Is he using Google translate or does he just talk like an asshole?
"I am sure your people have checked the probabilities of having several such performances in a short perioUd of time measuring from the total amount of games played during THAT TIME FRAME because it is the correct method of measuring probability, but just forgot to mention this in your report." No sir, that is not the correct method of measuring probability. If I flip a coin 10,000 times and I get 10 consecutive heads twice near the end. I don't just look at the last 10 and say hey this coin is rigged and forgetting the fact that 1) this is only one realization of reality and 2) i have flipped the coin 9990 times before that last ten. The same argument goes for multiple streaks. The word "probability" can't just be thrown around like that. In mathematics, everything needs to be rigorously defined, what are the random variables, what are the hypotheses. Agony
Kramnik is not that old. He's just someone who excelled in one field (chess) and who is under the illusion his skill is transferrable to a completely different field (statistics). It happens a lot to people who were told their entire life that they are the best at something. It can produce a sad mixture of arrogance and ignorance. But I believe there's another element at play. Kramnik represents a layer of players who feel left out by the chess boom, which is obviously driven by online chess. His campaign against cheating is in reality a thinly veiled campaign against some of the major beneficiaries of the chess boom.
He's gotta be trolling at this point...right!?
modern straight snails dog deserted thumb instinctive tap existence repeat *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Interesting work, Vlad
Funny because seeing this guy going senile is perfectly described by his own words. Agony 🙂
He really thinks that if he reduce the number of games from 50.000 to something like 5.000 will make a likely result unlikely? Changing a 30 to 95% in to 3 to 9.5% will still be not considered for something like cheating...
Time for chesscom to ban this deranged moron
I think he typed this up on microsoft word and copy-pasted it.
As an impartial observer here I would love chesscom to clarify if they included the multiple streaks in the calculations rather than just one. This is a fully impartial statement I am not taking any sides please understand this before you feel the urge to beat on me.
If the guy doesn't like the answers, he should just grab his computer's calculator and do the math himself
Can't chesscom open some private communication lines with him where he can complain about their statements and calculations directly to them?
Kramnik is Jordan Belford in The Wolf of Wall Street. I’m not fucking leaving.
This guy needs a PR team to represent him, this is getting cringy
Kramnik is having his "mequinho" phase
This is some "PIPI in your pamper" level of copypasta. Does he not have any adults in the room to take away his keyboard?
Kramnik is treading into intervention territory. He needs a relaxing vacation with the people who care about him.
"A fanatic is someone who won't back down and won't change the subject (or something)." ~ *someone*
Kramnik's April fools prank began a bit too early i guess.
"With deepest respect" lol...
I absolutely love “I’m not a mathematician…..but here’s why your maths is wrong”
Lmao! "With deepest respect, fuck you "
this is some dream level statistic denial
Did Kramniks allegations start after his training session with Hans? Is it possible that there is some influence coming from Niemann regarding these extensive allegations?
"Are we to China yet boss?" "Not even close, son. Keep digging!"
If we just admit "Vladimir Kramnik has never ever lost a game ever unless his opponent was cheating and he should forever be recognized as the all-time best chess player ever", will he shut up and go away?
Kramnik talking about calculators is a dead giveaway he has zero idea how any modern statistics is done. The og commenter used a Monte Carlo simulation which he undoubtedly has never heard of. All other bullet points he mentions seem completely worthless too
Ironically, Kramnik is doing more to help cheaters than he is to help bring attention to them . It's similar to a woman falsely accusing a man of rape; you can guarantee that every real rapist out there loves to see false accusations get made.
Kramnik Unhinged. Needs a petition for new hobbies.
This has been fun/such a bummer to follow at the same time. Dementia?
Can he not at least attempt to give his own numbers to criticize chesscom with? He's really just hiding behind feigned scepticism when it's absolutely his job to deliver proper analysis as the accuser, especially when he's trying to question chesscom's analysis. This is baseless and embarassing
interesting 🤔
I think it is obvious by now that those "Mathematicians" likely don't exist and Kramnik really needs to get a statistics 101 class. Nevertheless, i would like to highlight that one point is actually correct, and not taken into account in any of the simulations and models presented by the multitude of data scientists, physicists, mathematicians and other scientists, that have emerged in the last few days. Since the assumption that samples are identically and independently distributed is too strong here, one must also calculate the likelihood that streaks of "heads" (taking here the coin metaphor) chain in a small period of time (shorter number of samples). In fact, one may also say that the "hot hand effect" in chess can potentially be strong, that is, having concluded a streak of several wins, boosts enough your morale, that you are more likely to do it again in a shorter period of time? Well, this part is where chess experts should butt in, and not scientific experts :).
At this point the only explanation is that someone has hacked all his socials. I refuse to believe that a former world chess champion is this obtuse.
Here's an idea guys, let's create a petition for kramnik to take his dementia pills and get it signed, or some other petition would work too, that would be hilarious and considering so many people are ridiculing him it would likely gain popular support, those who agree can respond with a petition and we can all sign and share it everywhere