|
How is is that every world champion from 1948-2000 (except Fischer) was Soviet/Russian? Were the soviets running chess gulag camps and injecting kids with experimental big brain drugs? Paying off FIDE? Did the rest of the world not give a single poo poo about chess? The soviets didn't rack up that much dominance even in ice hockey or anything else they did
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:How is is that every world champion from 1948-2000 (except Fischer) was Soviet/Russian? Were the soviets running chess gulag camps and injecting kids with experimental big brain drugs? Paying off FIDE? Did the rest of the world not give a single poo poo about chess? there were definitely accusations of soviet players and arbiters conspiring to get their best players all the way to the top. Not knowledgeable enough about decades-old drama to have an opinion on whether it's true but people definitely claimed it
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
Americans care more about hockey than they do about chess, and the Soviet chess system was very good and very extensive
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
having the government pay you to play chess definitely would have a positive effect on how many potential GMs you convert into actual GMs
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:07
|
|
|
How many professional chess players did each country have? From what I know, Americans had to rely on tournament winnings, grants, and sponsorships, while in the USSR a promising player could get a steady paycheck to keep playing chess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:08
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:How is is that every world champion from 1948-2000 (except Fischer) was Soviet/Russian? Were the soviets running chess gulag camps and injecting kids with experimental big brain drugs? Paying off FIDE? Did the rest of the world not give a single poo poo about chess? "Soviet" at that time is also pretty broad, and covers people from Latvia (Tal), Armenia (Petrosian), and Azerbaijan (Kasparov).
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:35
|
|
|
a.p. dent posted:play on chess.com when you’re sober, lichess when you’re hosed up Ah, hm, perfect I can tell right away that playing online is terrifying and I don’t know poo poo about gently caress anymore, especially in the endgame (where all I remember is ROOKS) so I will scroll through the thread and look for book recommendations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:46
|
|
|
I think the problem is that Magnus waited until he lost to Hans to make noise about it. If he'd said immediately upon Hans's admission into the tournament, "I don't want to play this guy, he's a cheater, we're not good at preventing OTB cheating and playing against a suspected cheater is terrible," then I can't imagine who wouldn't be sympathetic to that. But because he only spoke up after Hans beat him, it made him look like a sore loser and drew too much attention to the question of whether Hans definitively cheated in that particular game, when the real question is whether it's fair to make people play against a guy who might be cheating. Nissin Cup Nudist posted:How is is that every world champion from 1948-2000 (except Fischer) was Soviet/Russian? Were the soviets running chess gulag camps and injecting kids with experimental big brain drugs? Paying off FIDE? Did the rest of the world not give a single poo poo about chess? You still need a lot of money to run an ice hockey team. Chess boards are cheap and easily shipped all over the country. Same reason that the Soviets were world leaders in theoretical math/science but more modestly successful in scientific pursuits demanding expensive equipment. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Sep 28, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:51
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:there were definitely accusations of soviet players and arbiters conspiring to get their best players all the way to the top. Not knowledgeable enough about decades-old drama to have an opinion on whether it's true but people definitely claimed it Fischer claimed the Soviets all colluded in the 1962 Candidates to keep him out of the 1963 championship, which is at least partially correct in that they were most likely colluding with each other but not at his expense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:56
|
|
|
Weren't there KGB files that corroborated some of Fischer's accusations?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 22:59
|
|
|
gret posted:Weren't there KGB files that corroborated some of Fischer's accusations? iirc the conclusion was they were colluding to gently caress Keres, not Fischer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:How is is that every world champion from 1948-2000 (except Fischer) was Soviet/Russian? Were the soviets running chess gulag camps and injecting kids with experimental big brain drugs? Paying off FIDE? Did the rest of the world not give a single poo poo about chess? seems like they just worked really hard at it, though of course some cheating is also possible american chess was kind of a joke back then, wasn’t it? fischer came out of nowhere
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
The Soviet Union was simultaneously a great sponsor of the arts but also absolutely willing to play hardball in international competitions for prestige.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 00:26
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:How is is that every world champion from 1948-2000 (except Fischer) was Soviet/Russian? Were the soviets running chess gulag camps and injecting kids with experimental big brain drugs? Paying off FIDE? Did the rest of the world not give a single poo poo about chess? I think the Russian/Soviet dominance of chess from Botvinik through Kasparov was due to 1. they actually cultivated a strong culture of training and competition and produced many really strong players, and 2. it seems like the suspicion was that many Soviet players threw games to each other in the appropriate situations to maximize their numbers in Candidates etc. or help certain players advance or shut out others. If my understanding of this is wrong, please correct me. And I'm pretty sure the Soviet era did in fact produce a lot of dominance in specific areas of Olympic sports like weightlifting, wrestling and racking up golds in all kinds of little sports that only require a focus on that sport in funding, training, and/or performance enhancing drugs from the state. Nothing like the near total dominance of chess but that's a unique game where it's hard to replicate those conditions. The fact that chess only requires a cheap rear end board, pieces, a clock, some books and any weak PC for analysis is key, so any big country that decides to throw a lot of effort and resources into recruiting and training players and sending them to competitions can instantly boost the number of GMs and strong players generally in that country, see Soviet era and now China. If chess catches on culturally in a big country then it can also lead to an explosion of great players such as in India now (no idea the degree of state support and organization for chess there). The beauty of chess is that an individual genius can arise out of any place and dominate even the most organized national chess Mafia. It happened to be Fischer during the 60s and 70s but by sheer accident instead of any effort by the U.S. to produce a Fischer, the U.S. as a nation and culture, and as a government, is completely indifferent to stuff like chess compared to muscle head sports like American football, unless a genius happens to arise and be competitive for a championship. Especially with the ability to compete and hone skills online, that kind of talent could arise anywhere now, even out of a small country like Norway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 00:47
|
|
|
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qe5+ 4. Qe2 Qd6 5. Nf3 f6 6. d4 c6 7. g3 Nh6 8. Bf4 e5 9. Rd1 Qb4 10. dxe5 Qxb2 11. exf6+ Kf7 12. Ng5+ Kxf6 13. Qe5+ Kg6 14. Bd3+ Kh5 15. Ne6+ Kg4 16. h3+ Kf3 17. Qe4# 1-0 from one of my 5m gloryhole blitz games! proud of myself this time -- big change of pace from my usual style of playing slowly and badly! i blitzed out all the opening moves and still managed 90% accuracy! in this position, i was able to accurately refute my opponent's Qxb2 lunge. but it took me almost all my time to find the moves (i finished with 1m20s). cheers to my opponent for being patient with me and staying until the end!
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 01:31
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Ah, hm, perfect Somebody else posted this a few times and I ignored it a bunch, then it got posted again and I actually clicked it and by golly it's a good click. - http://chesstactics.org
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 03:21
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I mean one of the top guys in the previous FIDE regime literally filed fake tournament results. drat, i need to read up on fide lore Control Volume posted:Lol this is going the exact same way as when speedrunners cheat, my firm prediction now is that Hans cheated OTB The only question is how? That's something that I haven't seen much discussion on. Did all of Hans' games where he scored well take place in open tournaments where he could just go to the bathroom and look at his phone? If not, did he have a device in his shoe that would buzz when someone signaled a critical position (the DlugyTron 9000)? Does he really have a goony goon accomplice that can actually stand being around him?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:14
|
|
|
Anal beads
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:19
|
|
|
can we shut up about the anal beads!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:36
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I took Bilirubin's comment to be coming at it from the opposite direction. What does the spread of highly erratic players look like? Precisely
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:43
|
|
|
qsvui posted:can we shut up about the anal beads!!! never stop horny posting
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:44
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:I think the problem is that Magnus waited until he lost to Hans to make noise about it. If he'd said immediately upon Hans's admission into the tournament, "I don't want to play this guy, he's a cheater, we're not good at preventing OTB cheating and playing against a suspected cheater is terrible," then I can't imagine who wouldn't be sympathetic to that. Just lmao if you unironically think that people would have just taken Magnus's word for it if he brought it up before the tournament. Because firstly, it sounds like he actually did try to bring it up before the tournament, in private with the organizers. Only because that didn't work did he go with this more public route. And if he did kick up a fuss beforehand? "What evidence do you have? You're just being a big crybaby Magnus, are you afraid to lose ELO to Hans? He didn't cheat against YOU why do you care? What a drama queen over nothing!" And on and on and on. It's a lose-lose situation either way. The fact that Magnus chose to not stay quiet about it and go for this lose-lose option says something in and of itself. Choosing to play and lose to Hans first at least gives him the leverage to play the victim card.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:49
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I think the Russian/Soviet dominance of chess from Botvinik through Kasparov was due to In a workshop last year with GM Bareev (latter day Soviet era) he described quite the machine where young talents were taken to "schools" where they basically only lived breathed and thought chess and played physical sports like soccer all day every day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 04:54
|
|
|
AnacondaHL posted:Choosing to play and lose to Hans first at least gives him the leverage to play the victim card. nah it just makes him look like a big crybaby
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 05:31
|
|
|
at this point i dont think i would want to play against hans in a rated tournament, he might cheat and id lose elo
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 05:39
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:
It’s right. I read the same in the new Fischer bio (awesome, btw). All the big Soviet guys would gang up against Fischer and analyze the position whenever he had an adjournment, which is fine, but certainly made it tougher for him when he only had (I hope I’m remembering right here) Bent Larsen as a second in many of these tournaments. Picturing Tal, smoking late into the night with Petrosian, Spassky, and a bunch of others planning out the next day’s line.  The sovs would also intentionally draw against each other to preserve their energies and help ensure sov wins in big events. Botvinnik played a key role in organizing all of this, being a very savvy political operator by many accounts. Redmark posted:just expose all the online cheating GMs you cowards They totally redeem themselves by minting NFTs of questionable games by titled players.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 05:59
|
|
|
rollick posted:I don't know how many viewers chess got back in the Kasparov-Karpov days, but funny that it's been eclipsed by Hikaru Nakamura slowly reading magazine articles out loud for money Hikaru seems like a great guy to sit down and bullshit with. I really have to respect his whole schtick and how he's making money. The fact that he manages to just sit on twitch playing other people's videos and going 'No!' 'They didn't just say that, guys?' 'Guys? No. Guys???' and then posts those videos on Youtube too and gets all sorts of views is hilarious. The videos where he's just scrolling through memes about himself and going 'I don't get it' or 'Hahaha' also make me respect his entrepreneurial spirit. I'm not going to watch them, but the fact that they exist is a+ Also, he's the loving king of the humblebrag.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 08:07
|
|
|
I respect a man who bongclouds his way through chess.com
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 12:24
|
|
|
My play's been a bit lovely lately so I feel like showing off an actually good tactic I got. Black to move and win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:My play's been a bit lovely lately so I feel like showing off an actually good tactic I got. Black to move and win. Solution: 1...Rxc5 (starting with Rb1+ transposes) 2.Rxc5 Rb1+ 3.Kg2 Nf4+! 4.Kf3 Rb3+ 5.Kxf4 g5+ 0-1 (6.Kxg5 Qxe4 -+)
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 16:23
|
|
|
qsvui posted:drat, i need to read up on fide lore There are so many ways. What you'd really want is to consult a magician, but with an accomplice that gets the board state some way (so live transmission, live in the crowd, and that doesn't even admit any active broadcast methods a player might use) it's as simple as a predetermined way of standing. Or a predetermined piece of clothing. Or a predetermined sound in the hall. Or just a thumper sewn into clothing or a shoe (thumpers that evade most metal detectors cost like 200$ on ebay lol). It is extremely easy to broadcast a few bits of information surreptitiously, which is all you really need to get as a player from an accomplice with access to the board state. no spectators and no live transmission of board state is a pretty good start for an anti-cheat method since then you need active broadcast and that makes whatever comm device you use way bigger and more cumbersome to use. dex_sda fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Sep 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Solution: Love it. Does 3. Kg2 Ne3 work? or does it have to be Nf4?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 17:13
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:My play's been a bit lovely lately so I feel like showing off an actually good tactic I got. Black to move and win. Stockfish hit me with 5.Nd3 instead, which led to trading out the remaining queens and rooks until I was up a pawn and a knight. I almost gave up there because I am ridiculously bad at pushing pawns without losing my advantage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 17:29
|
|
|
butros posted:Love it. I didn't check it with the computer but Ne3 blocks Rb3+, meaning you can't push the king away from the queen. Baronash posted:Stockfish hit me with 5.Nd3 instead, which led to trading out the remaining queens and rooks until I was up a pawn and a knight. I almost gave up there because I am ridiculously bad at pushing pawns without losing my advantage. If you're doing it as a puzzle you can end it after 5.Nd3 Nxd3 6.Qxb7 Nc5+ 7.Qxb3 Nxb3 -+. If that still gives you trouble, I guess it's an opportunity to practice your technique.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I didn't check it with the computer but Ne3 blocks Rb3+, meaning you can't push the king away from the queen. Ah I see it, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 19:23
|
|
|
Cast_No_Shadow posted:Also on the hans engine matching thing. Cast_No_Shadow posted:There is no quality control on the engines used or depth. Cast_No_Shadow posted:This means two things. Cast_No_Shadow posted:2. If someone, for some reason is attracting a lot of attention, their scores will be higher. Cast_No_Shadow posted:Someone dug into one of the 100% games of hans and found that yes, every move was a tip engine line, found by at least 1 of 150 different engines. Every position was compared against three engine lines, not 151 engine lines. People suggesting that people using Let's Check Analysis are cherrypicking engines to get this result are fundamentally misunderstanding the tool and the Let's Check database. In fact the reason it is not a good tool for cheat detection is that the top moves of engines present when the game was played can get overwritten by newer engines. For example, if Hans played a game when the latest Stockfish was version 10, and would have scored 100% match with Stockfish 10, but now scores 80% against three versions of Stockfish 15, should we say that Hans didn't cheat because that 100% is "really" now a 80%? Of course not. So an actual anti-cheating tool like this SHOULD actually compare against very many engines because an outlier match against a specific engine may itself reveal something. I saw someone suggest that in one Hans game for example there were a couple of suboptimal moves according to Sf 15 that were preferred by Sf 11. The ability to have a smart guess as to what engine a suspected cheater is in practice using gives you a great leap forward in comparing their games against a single engine's output. Programmatically producing "If player X is cheating, they are likely using engine Y" is likely something being worked on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 19:32
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:So an actual anti-cheating tool like this SHOULD actually compare against very many engines because an outlier match against a specific engine may itself reveal something. I saw someone suggest that in one Hans game for example there were a couple of suboptimal moves according to Sf 15 that were preferred by Sf 11. I disagree, this method is only useful for catching trivial cheaters, and honestly isn't very practical at that. Very few engines are robust/stable in their outputs, and in complicated positions will give different output depending on a lot of factors other than the position itself and the engine version. There is no such thing as "this is the top recommendation by stockfish 11" because the result depends on the number of cores used, the depth searched, the amount of memory it is given, whether endgame tablebases are used. And even if you standardize all that, stockfish actually has a stochastic element to it in certain scenarios. On top of all that, if it is using a cloud service then you kind of have to vet the evaluation uploaded by XxSexyChessManxX. Even if you could solve for this technical element (which nobody has even attempted) the math behind this analysis is seriously flawed, as are the assumptions behind it. Like, no serious statistian would propose something like this without first going through the absolute basics of running it on the complete game history of a lot of players first. I'm sus of Hans but if this is the best the community has to offer as far as cheat detection then we have a long way to go.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
Based on what you wrote then there wouldn't be the consolidation across multiple engines of best moves presuming they all have sufficient depth, but there most certainly is. Most improvements to engines have to do with how quickly (meaning low depth) they find the correct move. But not only is there a large amount of consistency in the same engine no matter how many cores or memory, there will also be a very high match at high depth from any post-NNUE stockfish or other NNUE engine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
I'm willing to bet that there isn't anyone in this thread that knows more about chess engines and related topics than Sub Rosa.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
I feel like the fact that chess.com has a giant database of chess cheaters with confessions they've gotten out of them, while simultaneously refused to share any of the evidence of methods of determining such cheating, to be an insane ticking time bomb. How the gently caress is this thing not at the center of the whole controversy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 18:52
|
|
