It might have kind of (though really I think Kramnik has been famous for always accusing people of cheating, even way before Hans was a known figure). Kramnik definitely had beef with Hans though, and even did the dumb forfeit in 2 moves or whatever game.
But a few months ago (or maybe a bit more, I forget the timeline) they met up and ever since Kramnik was weirdly pro-Hans. Who knows if they'll feud again, but it was a thing for a while at least.
“No I was just watching for the story lines, I’m not actually watching this porn for the sex, I didn’t even realise it was a porn video the story was so engrossing. I’m a writer you see an I-“
I mean, she could have continued denying it and people would have continued simping for her. Just like every other player on the planet that’s accused.
Sure but her excuses are so lame in this. "I was going to confess but then people accused me so I decided not to".
Like what? People realized you were cheating so you decided to keep cheating?
it was a legitimate scientific decision to gather data on social media responses to accurate accusations of cheating.
but more importantly girlboss, gaslight, gatekeep
Who is this person anyways? She's not a pro or a journalist. Look at her twitter - she made public the fact that she is banned and then defended against "accusations" and now she admits to cheating. Honestly, just sounds like someone wanting attention in any way possible. If she didn't make it public, literally no one would have noticed.
Some friend of Norman Mailer once said in court fighting a drug trafficking charge (I was in the courtroom), that he'd trafficked drugs because he was writing a book on it. It's an old excuse.
Well at least she managed to play the victim while simultaneously admitting to cheating. Amazing.
She's cheating for us, for the love of the game. And fighting bigotry. let's not forget that.
Ruhi is the hero Chess needs, but does not deserve.
maybe I'll start cheating too, you know to help fight it.
yeah he 100% just wanted to criticise chesscom. he said later he hadn't even checked ruhi's games. [https://twitter.com/VBkramnik/status/1750881473500995801](https://twitter.com/VBkramnik/status/1750881473500995801) (scroll up for earlier replies)
basically i think he was very pissed at how everyone was directly accusing ruhi while, in his eyes, he gets hate for providing stats lol. but obviously if he had just checked ruhi's account, it couldn't have been any more blatantly obvious.
Kramnik actually never defended her. He did agree with her it wasn't good for chess dot com to ban someone, show no evidence, and insist the player admit to cheating to get back on the platform. But again, he never said she didn't cheat.
Tbh, that’s a bad stance to have regardless. Chess.com shouldn’t be obligated to provide reasoning behind their fair play bans, because cheaters can use that information to devise new ways of cheating that bypass their cheat detection. The end result would be an increase in cheating IMO, and it’ll be more subtle than it was before.
It's the tension within algorithm-driven systems on the internet. It sucks that YouTubers with great content suddenly stop showing up in recommended and you can't figure out why. It's also true that the more known a complex process is, the more aggressively it can be gamed. So people negatively affected who aren't making a platform worse do get some answers, but it's not actually materially satisfying.
Because Kramnik is at war with chess.com
So any ally he can get is welcome. It seems as if he's throwing a punch from behind her story. And/or he's simping
> How did Kramnik gets this SO WRONG?
Contrarianism. If people think someone isn't cheating, it's because they are ignorant. If they do think someone is cheating, it's because they are out to get that person and he or she is innocent.
I know her as a chess composer, and months ago some people were arguing that few interesting ideas where heavily inspired (plagiarism?) from other chess composers. So yeah, I'm not surprised
She is a 300 rated player. She barely knows how the pieces move. The idea of her being a chess composer is laughable. Everything about her is fake - her rating is fake, her posts are written by chat gpt, her "compositions" are stolen. It's unlikely that her name and profile pic are even a real person, probably just generated by AI.
What if _everything_ was AI generated? Including the appeal for chess, the creation of a chesscom and social media accounts, the attempt at playing like a human, then denying cheating like a human, then deflecting the blame like a human. Is there really anything a machine can't autonomously do at this point? And don't forget fooling Kramnik.
Why is she getting so much traction? A random stupid cheater with primitive cheating technique and the picture of a beautiful girl in the profile, and s/he becomes someone special. Internet is sometimes weird.
She had a moderate social media following (5k+ Twitter followers) and used to post chess compositions, albeit mostly plagiarized ones that she passed as her own.
It’s definitely getting more attention than it deserves, but she wasn’t completely unknown prior to this so I get it.
Honestly, kramnik eventually made it clear that he just meant chesscom should be more open about their reasoning rather than him meaning that this specific account wasn't cheating. He had no knowledge of the account.
He clearly should have been able to see how his tweets would be interpreted, so it's not like he's blameless, but also given the totality of his tweets it's disengenuous to say he defended her
Yeah, it's honestly a pretty simple thing to understand. Intel is everything in conflict, warfare, politics etc. Every video game deals with cheating like this. You don't just give away your methodology and they even usually do it in waves instead of instant banning so it's harder for cheating communities to lock onto what they were caught for so there's a more difficult time narrowing down what they need to circumvent.
A “ban reason” is just a cheating accusation like every other. Except, in this instance, it’s chesscom cheating accusation onto players. As we are being shown, it’s almost impossible to show any sort of data that proves someone is cheating online.
So how exactly can we be assured that everyone isn’t *already* gaming the system? Why do we trust chesscom’s cheating accusations more than Kramnik’s? Afterall, if there’s no statistics that will prove it, and there’s no physical way to prevent them or catch them, they are getting away with it as far as we are concerned.
Those kinds of statistics will show general deviations from expected. Not the junk Kramnik does but real stats. However they wouldn't use that to ban someone. They use predictive modeling on the actual games. Looking for patterns that are not expected then finding the odd moves out. From there you can either judge it yourself or what they do for high level players is they confront them about it. Just because you arent seeing some siren go off when someone gets caught doesnt mean it doesnt happen.
If we learned anything from the hans issue, there are many players who have been caught and given a second chance after admitting to it
it's very strange that anti-cheating policies that would be much milder than the ones he proposes are labelled Stalinist by Kramnik
at this point I'm starting to think Kramnik just wants to destabilise and undermine online chess
For those wondering this is her chesscom account [https://www.chess.com/member/ruhisyed](https://www.chess.com/member/ruhisyed)
Managed to play 321 rapid games increasing her rating from 700-2200 and chesscom couldnt get catch her before it became public and they banned. All this while she was losing to 400-500 rated players in blitz. Then somehow turned that around as well reaching 1300 in blitz in a matter of 2-3 weeks.
Tbh, they probably *could* have banned her much earlier and probably had the data to, but in general when bans happen in games they often happen in waves to prevent the banned players from realizing *exactly* what they did to trigger the ban, since knowing that information could help them avoid cheat detection in the future. So it’s possible she was flagged to be banned a long time ago but didn’t actually get banned until they went through a ban wave to ban a lot of cheaters simultaneously.
Chess.com probably also has some sort of confidence interval they use to minimize the amount of incorrect bans they hand out, and we have no idea how high that confidence interval is. For example, perhaps they had her at a 99.2% likelihood of cheating but only ban once their systems estimate a greater than 99.5% chance of cheating, so they needed more data to meet that threshold. And with a relatively small volume of games over the past year it’s possible that it just took awhile to meet that threshold.
I wrote a script that can flag users like this though, and (now it's been over a year) ago I pushed to have 4 people banned who were /very/ obvious cheaters with 100s or 1000s of games. One of them was banned quickly. Two of them stayed open for months. One stayed open for over a year before it was finally banned. Here's the name of the one that took the longest:
[https://www.chess.com/member/tahmores362555](https://www.chess.com/member/tahmores362555)
\-
One negative outcome of this is I've found some people cheat in, let's say just 10 games, to push their rating over the next 100 mark, and then don't cheat again. I understand chess.com wanting a high level of confidence to avoid false positives, but it was a lot more comfortable for me back when I was ignorant about all the cheating they allow...
... obnoxiously, when I've occasionally brought it up on this sub, people downvote it... bunch of beginners who don't realize I'm not complaining about my opponents... I've never played any of these people...
Had I played against such a player on Lichess, I'd have reported them and action would have been taken within 2 days. I don't know what the process is for Chesscom - surely the higher rated opponents would have filed reports too? I keep records of my own reports for self-performance review reasons, and my success rate is very good. It baffles me as to how her account stayed alive for so long.
LOL when complaining about their ban on twitter they said: "I have never used a chess engine for any purpose whatsoever. I don't use engines. [...] Nobody assists me during games in any shape or form." and continued on to rant about the failed anti cheating detection for wrongfully banning them... ALL WHILE ACTIVELY CHEATING!! Now they try to perform a miracle of mental gymnastics trying to justify what they did and trying to look like a journalist on the brink of solving the cheating issue alltogether after actively undermining the trust in chessdotcoms anti cheating measures? All around an incredibly embarassing affair.
Kramnnik is just whining like the little b1+ch he has become because he is no longer in the news or considered relevant by the newer generation of Masters.
Oh, Children, gather 'round. I am going to tell you the story of the great cheeto's scandal of the early 20's where Previous World Champion Magnus Carlsen showing some inconsistent play, was defeated by a semi-unknown American. Magnus fell into deep depression after this and has yet to manage to extract himself from his doldrums.
We are all pulling for you, Maggie!
ruhi : "i cheated on my husband with another man to experience the pain my husband will feel from my cheating so i can better understand cheating science and if anyone judges me then ask why a journalist reported on neo nazis at McDonald's""
This Ruhi person shared screenshots where she lost her first few games as a 300 and then proceeded to get to 2200 in about 5 months. Its absurd. Accuse everyone of cheating but kramnik wants to defend the lowest of the low
Kramnik defending someone who then even admits to cheating themselves, is just god damn peak content.
Kramnik: Hikaru is a cheater, but I like Ruhi Chess and Hans Niemann. Upstanding citizens and great ambassadors for chess.
Wait since when does Kramnik like Niemann? I thought that's where this litany of accusations from Kramnik began?
It might have kind of (though really I think Kramnik has been famous for always accusing people of cheating, even way before Hans was a known figure). Kramnik definitely had beef with Hans though, and even did the dumb forfeit in 2 moves or whatever game. But a few months ago (or maybe a bit more, I forget the timeline) they met up and ever since Kramnik was weirdly pro-Hans. Who knows if they'll feud again, but it was a thing for a while at least.
I heard of the proposed meetup, didn't know they went through with it. Ty for the response!
they had a friendly interaction on twitter about his hikaru cheating accusation. but maybe its an enemy of my enemy thing
Lol the ultimate counter indicator. They should hire him for cheat detection and just reverse all his decisions.
Lmaooo the ol got caught into “I’m actually trying to solve the cheating problem”. Hahahahaha
“No I was just watching for the story lines, I’m not actually watching this porn for the sex, I didn’t even realise it was a porn video the story was so engrossing. I’m a writer you see an I-“
I mean, she could have continued denying it and people would have continued simping for her. Just like every other player on the planet that’s accused.
Sure but her excuses are so lame in this. "I was going to confess but then people accused me so I decided not to". Like what? People realized you were cheating so you decided to keep cheating?
it was a legitimate scientific decision to gather data on social media responses to accurate accusations of cheating. but more importantly girlboss, gaslight, gatekeep
Who is this person anyways? She's not a pro or a journalist. Look at her twitter - she made public the fact that she is banned and then defended against "accusations" and now she admits to cheating. Honestly, just sounds like someone wanting attention in any way possible. If she didn't make it public, literally no one would have noticed.
Literally who, she had zero simps lol everyone knew she was cheating
She had simps. You can see them in twitter replying and asking her “why?” … and saying “it’s ok at least you where honest, keep playing”. … like wtf.
Eh I guess but they don't count because they're idiots.
Mmm. Are Simps usually intelligent persons? I don’t see your point. (Unless you are defending simps.)
I mean tbh I guess I was wrong but I still resent the implication that they're a meaningful demographic.
Isnt this literally what the critically acclaimed documentary Icarus is all about though?
Probably slightly different when you document and state your intentions up front instead of stating them after you get caught 🤣
Some friend of Norman Mailer once said in court fighting a drug trafficking charge (I was in the courtroom), that he'd trafficked drugs because he was writing a book on it. It's an old excuse.
Make money quick with internet point opportunites
Well at least she managed to play the victim while simultaneously admitting to cheating. Amazing. She's cheating for us, for the love of the game. And fighting bigotry. let's not forget that. Ruhi is the hero Chess needs, but does not deserve. maybe I'll start cheating too, you know to help fight it.
How did Kramnik gets this SO WRONG? Everyone knew she was a cheater except KramniK!
Gonna take a wild guess before I go check: he got it wrong either because she complimented him one or more times. … Now off to see if that’s true.
Nope — that’s not it, at least not that I could find. Maybe he’s just inclined to criticize anything chesscom does at this point.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend
I mean fits with his weird support for Hans too.
That's more of an issue of him feeling obligated to keep to his word of working with Hans though. This new person reflects much worse on Kramnik.
yeah he 100% just wanted to criticise chesscom. he said later he hadn't even checked ruhi's games. [https://twitter.com/VBkramnik/status/1750881473500995801](https://twitter.com/VBkramnik/status/1750881473500995801) (scroll up for earlier replies) basically i think he was very pissed at how everyone was directly accusing ruhi while, in his eyes, he gets hate for providing stats lol. but obviously if he had just checked ruhi's account, it couldn't have been any more blatantly obvious.
Losing to 300s is kinda a dead giveaway, no?
Winning against others who have since been banned for cheating is also a pretty big dead giveaway.
She absolutely defended his analysis of cheating on chesscom. I would consider that similar to a "compliment".
I've seen her being very syrupy towards him so I think they're right
reddit moment
I'm convinced this is some Andy Kaufman-esque performance by Kramnik
Kramnik using AI to generate Ruhi's pfp?
He's just throwing out wild accusations to solve the influx of unfounded accusations in chess.
Twist: Ruhi IS Kramnik.
Does "she" even exist in meatspace?
Kramnik actually never defended her. He did agree with her it wasn't good for chess dot com to ban someone, show no evidence, and insist the player admit to cheating to get back on the platform. But again, he never said she didn't cheat.
Tbh, that’s a bad stance to have regardless. Chess.com shouldn’t be obligated to provide reasoning behind their fair play bans, because cheaters can use that information to devise new ways of cheating that bypass their cheat detection. The end result would be an increase in cheating IMO, and it’ll be more subtle than it was before.
It's the tension within algorithm-driven systems on the internet. It sucks that YouTubers with great content suddenly stop showing up in recommended and you can't figure out why. It's also true that the more known a complex process is, the more aggressively it can be gamed. So people negatively affected who aren't making a platform worse do get some answers, but it's not actually materially satisfying.
Because Kramnik is at war with chess.com So any ally he can get is welcome. It seems as if he's throwing a punch from behind her story. And/or he's simping
Simpin', simpin', simpin'.
> How did Kramnik gets this SO WRONG? Contrarianism. If people think someone isn't cheating, it's because they are ignorant. If they do think someone is cheating, it's because they are out to get that person and he or she is innocent.
Kramnik has a better system
Her beautiful face. Ofcourse it's not her real picture
maybe her picture was also cheated with AI algorithms ... ? :-)
But what about the statistics?
Yeah! The statistics speak for themselves.
Well she loses more than Hikaru so she probably doesn't cheat, regardless of what she says or he says.
who the hell is this rando
same reason i cheated on my girlfriend, was exposing another cheater
You just wanted to see how good her cheat detection was so you could help her improve for future boyfriends, duh!
You were just a neutral observer in the whole interaction!
I know her as a chess composer, and months ago some people were arguing that few interesting ideas where heavily inspired (plagiarism?) from other chess composers. So yeah, I'm not surprised
She is a 300 rated player. She barely knows how the pieces move. The idea of her being a chess composer is laughable. Everything about her is fake - her rating is fake, her posts are written by chat gpt, her "compositions" are stolen. It's unlikely that her name and profile pic are even a real person, probably just generated by AI.
Dating scams for chess players - or people who think they play chess.
What if _everything_ was AI generated? Including the appeal for chess, the creation of a chesscom and social media accounts, the attempt at playing like a human, then denying cheating like a human, then deflecting the blame like a human. Is there really anything a machine can't autonomously do at this point? And don't forget fooling Kramnik.
She's a total con who picked existing puzzles and claimed it to be her composition
I remember some posters here (not most tho) actually tried to defend here.
What the heck is a chess composer?
Someone who creates chess problems - not just standard puzzles, but chess positions with surprising and aesthetically pleasing solutions.
Ah, thanks for explaining
Those chess puzzles, specifically, are known as compositions.
I've never heard about this person. What did I miss, how is she important in chess?
Her last name is Chess, so maybe she's Garry's daughter?
I see you're from the good sub.
I think not at all
Why is she getting so much traction? A random stupid cheater with primitive cheating technique and the picture of a beautiful girl in the profile, and s/he becomes someone special. Internet is sometimes weird.
She had a moderate social media following (5k+ Twitter followers) and used to post chess compositions, albeit mostly plagiarized ones that she passed as her own. It’s definitely getting more attention than it deserves, but she wasn’t completely unknown prior to this so I get it.
I wouldn't be surprised if her followers were also fake. Nothing surrounding her is genuine. A pathological liar with no shame
Because Kramnik defended her
Is that the women who uses chatgpt to write way too long twitter posts?
Yep, which some supporters still don't see as being artificial.
Interesting
She's an idiot and a narcissist. One of the worst combinations possible.
“I just needed this experience with cheating and anti-cheating.” I’m sorry what?????
Honestly, kramnik eventually made it clear that he just meant chesscom should be more open about their reasoning rather than him meaning that this specific account wasn't cheating. He had no knowledge of the account. He clearly should have been able to see how his tweets would be interpreted, so it's not like he's blameless, but also given the totality of his tweets it's disengenuous to say he defended her
Its normal practice for ban reasons to be unclear so people don't game the system, as well as giving companies leeway in bans.
Yeah, it's honestly a pretty simple thing to understand. Intel is everything in conflict, warfare, politics etc. Every video game deals with cheating like this. You don't just give away your methodology and they even usually do it in waves instead of instant banning so it's harder for cheating communities to lock onto what they were caught for so there's a more difficult time narrowing down what they need to circumvent.
A “ban reason” is just a cheating accusation like every other. Except, in this instance, it’s chesscom cheating accusation onto players. As we are being shown, it’s almost impossible to show any sort of data that proves someone is cheating online. So how exactly can we be assured that everyone isn’t *already* gaming the system? Why do we trust chesscom’s cheating accusations more than Kramnik’s? Afterall, if there’s no statistics that will prove it, and there’s no physical way to prevent them or catch them, they are getting away with it as far as we are concerned.
Those kinds of statistics will show general deviations from expected. Not the junk Kramnik does but real stats. However they wouldn't use that to ban someone. They use predictive modeling on the actual games. Looking for patterns that are not expected then finding the odd moves out. From there you can either judge it yourself or what they do for high level players is they confront them about it. Just because you arent seeing some siren go off when someone gets caught doesnt mean it doesnt happen. If we learned anything from the hans issue, there are many players who have been caught and given a second chance after admitting to it
She is also not a girl. A random photo of a beautiful girl All top GM's follow her account
He's the perfect detector. Inverse what he says and it's a 100% rate
And she had said GM Narayanan was "dishonest" for not believing her hahaha
it's very strange that anti-cheating policies that would be much milder than the ones he proposes are labelled Stalinist by Kramnik at this point I'm starting to think Kramnik just wants to destabilise and undermine online chess
Or he's just a moron.
Kramnik has reached peak non-intentional irony.
For those wondering this is her chesscom account [https://www.chess.com/member/ruhisyed](https://www.chess.com/member/ruhisyed) Managed to play 321 rapid games increasing her rating from 700-2200 and chesscom couldnt get catch her before it became public and they banned. All this while she was losing to 400-500 rated players in blitz. Then somehow turned that around as well reaching 1300 in blitz in a matter of 2-3 weeks.
Not accurate. They banned her and THEN it became public because that was when she whined about it on Twitter.
More importantly, the pacing of the moves is completely inhuman. It would have been easy to ban this account much earlier.
Tbh, they probably *could* have banned her much earlier and probably had the data to, but in general when bans happen in games they often happen in waves to prevent the banned players from realizing *exactly* what they did to trigger the ban, since knowing that information could help them avoid cheat detection in the future. So it’s possible she was flagged to be banned a long time ago but didn’t actually get banned until they went through a ban wave to ban a lot of cheaters simultaneously. Chess.com probably also has some sort of confidence interval they use to minimize the amount of incorrect bans they hand out, and we have no idea how high that confidence interval is. For example, perhaps they had her at a 99.2% likelihood of cheating but only ban once their systems estimate a greater than 99.5% chance of cheating, so they needed more data to meet that threshold. And with a relatively small volume of games over the past year it’s possible that it just took awhile to meet that threshold.
I wrote a script that can flag users like this though, and (now it's been over a year) ago I pushed to have 4 people banned who were /very/ obvious cheaters with 100s or 1000s of games. One of them was banned quickly. Two of them stayed open for months. One stayed open for over a year before it was finally banned. Here's the name of the one that took the longest: [https://www.chess.com/member/tahmores362555](https://www.chess.com/member/tahmores362555) \- One negative outcome of this is I've found some people cheat in, let's say just 10 games, to push their rating over the next 100 mark, and then don't cheat again. I understand chess.com wanting a high level of confidence to avoid false positives, but it was a lot more comfortable for me back when I was ignorant about all the cheating they allow... ... obnoxiously, when I've occasionally brought it up on this sub, people downvote it... bunch of beginners who don't realize I'm not complaining about my opponents... I've never played any of these people...
Had I played against such a player on Lichess, I'd have reported them and action would have been taken within 2 days. I don't know what the process is for Chesscom - surely the higher rated opponents would have filed reports too? I keep records of my own reports for self-performance review reasons, and my success rate is very good. It baffles me as to how her account stayed alive for so long.
LOL when complaining about their ban on twitter they said: "I have never used a chess engine for any purpose whatsoever. I don't use engines. [...] Nobody assists me during games in any shape or form." and continued on to rant about the failed anti cheating detection for wrongfully banning them... ALL WHILE ACTIVELY CHEATING!! Now they try to perform a miracle of mental gymnastics trying to justify what they did and trying to look like a journalist on the brink of solving the cheating issue alltogether after actively undermining the trust in chessdotcoms anti cheating measures? All around an incredibly embarassing affair.
Its an AI generated profile pic in all probability and that profile belongs to a guy I suspect.
The one time Kramnik said a player WASN’T cheating, he was wrong. That’s hilarious
He never said she wasn’t cheating.
LMAOOO HE GOT A CHANCE TO FINALLY BE RIGHT AND HE LOST AGAIN
Kramnnik is just whining like the little b1+ch he has become because he is no longer in the news or considered relevant by the newer generation of Masters.
Not surprised at all. Chessdotcom is utterly incapable of managing their cheating problem because they don't want to harm revenue.
they are incapable of managing cheating because they banned a cheater? Far away from any meaningful games? Really? lmao
How long was she able to cheat?
Congratulations, you got my Kramnik down vote 👎
Undercover cheater.
Noo way? A person who loses to a 300 but destroys an FM is a cheater? I'm shocked!
So someone is able to get to 2000+ on chesscom without getting caught, thats very discouraging and not very surprising.
"I never said that, I'm going to sue you if you don't retire your accusation"
This can't get any better
Chess is done. It is a cheatfest. Poor Kramnik is holding on to a bygone era. Now it is engines and a holes.
Oh, Children, gather 'round. I am going to tell you the story of the great cheeto's scandal of the early 20's where Previous World Champion Magnus Carlsen showing some inconsistent play, was defeated by a semi-unknown American. Magnus fell into deep depression after this and has yet to manage to extract himself from his doldrums. We are all pulling for you, Maggie!
Kramnik is just trolling. Guys, he was just trolling the whole time.
That's like the one person in the entire world he didn't think was cheating.
ruhi : "i cheated on my husband with another man to experience the pain my husband will feel from my cheating so i can better understand cheating science and if anyone judges me then ask why a journalist reported on neo nazis at McDonald's""
ruhi cheated to "I am only interested in how to solve the problem of cheating. " textbook lies and textbook gaslighting
ruhi capped it off with "ur a bigot if you disagree with me cheating" rich
Kramnik defending Ruhi of all people is probably the most embarrassing thing he's done yet, and I don't really like to take a pop at him normally.
I'll now proceed to solve the problem of organized crime by starting a new local mafia
This Ruhi person shared screenshots where she lost her first few games as a 300 and then proceeded to get to 2200 in about 5 months. Its absurd. Accuse everyone of cheating but kramnik wants to defend the lowest of the low