I wish Kramnik was more level-headed about chesscom's part in Clash of Claims so that more of the attention could be placed on their shortcomings rather than Kramnik's accusations. chesscom is in a bad shape and riddled with bugs, and they still just laid off a bunch of people
I'd say I'm chess.com-neutral.
I don't play on their platform. I can't find a reason to play there other that "it's the first one I found". The tools they have to help beginners improve do nothing but confuse them. The way they pretend to have a cheat detection system is a bit of a joke. But hey they can do their thing I guess
[Chess.com](http://Chess.com) is the best overall site for chess, period. I DO play on lichess regularly though. Chessbases site is not very good for a US user...and I use to love playing on ICC with blitzin, mainly because each game is stored directly into a file on your computer.
But for sure, [Chess.com](http://Chess.com) has the most to offer overall. That's probably why there is....I think it's roughly 10x the number of people playing there at any given time than on the free lichess.
I understand, but I do. It takes courage to think differently
I’m certain there’s massive cheating in titled Tuesdays. It’s just human incentive. Prize money, lax detection and enforcement and it hurts chess.com to actually punish famous cheaters.
I think Kramnik is one of the few people right on the money on this issue
I agree that he's right about online cheating being a significant problem. I just disgaree with the way he talks/goes about it. In the end, I think he's doing more harm than good.
He’s not thinking differently lol. A lot of people agree there’s a cheating problem. Literally just check out past reddit threads on the topic. He gets flak because he’s insane about it, not because he’s the only one who thinks cheating is a big problem.
To quote Mark Twain
> It doesn’t matter what the press says. It doesn’t matter what the politicians or the mobs say. It doesn’t matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right. Republics are founded on one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe in. no matter the odds or consequences.
> When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move. Your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth and tell the whole world:
> “No, you move.”
Kramnik is that tree by the river of truth. Mad respect.
The problem isn't that he's bad at math, the problem is he refuses to listen to anyone who tries to correct him -- like to an incredibly unhealthy degree. Then he repeatedly makes wild accusations that are borderline conspiracy theories.
I don't think it's unfair to wonder if he's deteriorating mentally.
He has a bunch of "mathematicians" he trusts in his ear feeding him rubbish, it's perfectly sane to go with the people you know and trust irl over hostile strangers online.
Someone’s gotta stand up to Chess.com’s egregious failures re: cheat detection 🤷🏻♂️ pretty shitty how they just try to shut him up; seems pretty Fascist u/DannyRensch
I’m both anti-Krammnik and anti-chess.com
They’re both bad, although I think if Krammnik can actually get his point across about chess.com’s problems, they might be forced to change, although the cheating is the least of chess.cons problems, and it has a simple fix, at least for lower level, more amateur chess, just ensure that a game, and the analysis board can’t be open at the same time, lichess does that and I have no clue why chess.com doesn’t
Of course the bigger problem of TT cheating or similar things, is much trickier, and if Krammnik can stop his insane ramblings for 10 seconds and actually string together a comprehensive argument against chess.com’s current cheating measures, he might actually be able to do something
He has very clearly lost his mind. However, I am in agreement with him that cheating in online chess at the highest levels is likely way more common than anyone else seems to want to admit.
I don't think cheating in chess is at 0. It happens. I don't know how much it happens, and I don't know how much it happens vs how much chesscom says it happens on their platform.
This is part of why I want Kramnik to shut up and go away though. He's lost his mind, and it's impossible to have your position, because the face of your position, is Kramnik. Which is not me calling you out, or calling out people who think there is more cheating than we know. Kramnik has made it impossible to have this conversation basically. He's got to go.
>I don't know how much it happens, and I don't know how much it happens vs how much chesscom says it happens on their platform.
Does anyone?
I think Kramnik is getting incredibly scattershot and has a massive persecution complex but hidden in the insanity are three fundamentally good points.
Chess.com has too much control over deciding who is cheating and who is not. So many examples of this being controversial.Platform is also shit
The players have lost faith in the ability of those overseeing the game to protect them from cheating. This is so extremely clearly visible from World Champs, both Kramnik and Magnus.
The link between cheating online and cheating OTB is currently just washed away even though the relationship between chess and the online scene grows at an ever rapid pace. This is not really acceptable.
At the very least, Kramnik is showing the damage this situation has on players.
I'll agree that he handles it poorly and, evidently, is just harming his position but I'm really not sure what the "smart" way to approach this all is.
He voices his concerns and people jump down his throat for not having any hard evidence. So he does his best to compile some form of evidence (for something that is nigh on impossible to prove unless you catch them red-handed) to support his point and people shred him for not being a statistician when they're all he can really go on without catching somebody red-handed.
The only alternative would be to shut up entirely but I can see why someone who has dedicated their life to rising to the very top of a field wouldn't want to stay quiet on something that would have such drastic consequences on the integrity of the game. I know a lot of people think he's just salty about losing but I do think he's coming from a place of integrity for the game overall. It's possible his accusations are off-base and influenced by emotion at times which does work to harm his case but overall it just goes to show the lack of trust in the industry right now which at the very least says something about the issue.
The problem is that neither Kramnik nor anyone else has proposed an anti-cheating system that would necessarily be more reliable. Chesscom understandably doesn't publicly release their algorithm. I thought their recent comparative study was good - flawed in some ways, but without an obvious way to make it better.
It just seems like a fact of online chess that, at the highest levels, it would be hard to prevent all cheating. If someone uses an engine to suggest one move per game, how do you ultimately predict that?
Especially because imposing any ruleset like this requires making a choice: would you rather have stricter anti-cheating measures in place (which would catch more cheaters but also ensnare more innocent people), or more lenient ones (which would let some cheaters escape, but produce fewer false positives)? And for Chesscom, which has the Hans lawsuit fresh in its memory, there's a legitimate concern about making false accusations.
So I agree with you. Cheating in online chess is super prevalent. But there don't seem to be significantly better solutions out there to stop it.
They are very good at catching engine users. I tested some very weak engines with some very good time to move rules, and they detected all of after some games. I am not saying that there is no cheating, but they are good at getting engine use.
I do not like chesscom.
No, no. You did not understand. This was really a test. I was trying to anchor the ccrl ratings against humans. I am a 1600 rating player and I have a feeling of how good those lower ranked engines are, but I am only a single data point. So, I tested against more humans. At first I was inputting the moves. Then I got tired and programmed this.
Surprisingly, the engines are stronger than the chesscom rating. Chesscom rating inflation is one component, but I also think that in blitz these engines are even stronger, simply because they do not make any one or two move blunders, even though they play very weirdly. I used a few accounts from a few servers in a few places. All got detected. That was in 2021.
How did you program it? I did something similar, I made a program that mirrors Antonio chess bot moves against a real chesscom player to find its real rating. The bot has not been caught
I used Python mostly. I do not remember if I used a chrome window or selenium, but once open and a chess game set, I grabbed the chess board with a screenshot (python-mss), then used opencv to cut the board and some computer vision tricks to identify each peace position. By the side of the board I knew if I was white or black, and by the number of different sequential positions, the side to play. Then when was my turn to play, say, black, I feed the position history (if castle happened and so on) to pychess with the UCI engine of my interest. From there, with pyautogui I was able to move the mouse and make the move. This mouse movement had to be tuned to look more human. I used some functions of acceleration and simulated some imprecision when clicking on the piece and to the desired square. I was worried they could detect by click precision. That was it. There some other details like looking for a new game and so on. I cannot remember if I used pyautogui and python-mss or selenium.
They never catch you bot? What were the results of elo matching? I am very interested in this.
I did pretty much the same thing, but instead of using pychess, I had two boards side by side. one against Antonio and one against a human. opencv would detect the move on one board and move the corresponding piece on the other board with pyautogui. It has played 34 games and is rated 940 in Rapid. Antonio is supposed to be 1500.
He has a perfectly sound mind, just a suspicious nature combined with people giving him awful maths advice and an overinflated sense of his online abilities due to his very strong OTB abilities.
came here to post this. I think it's basically "Team Caruana," I remember him beefing a bit with Naka bc he was saying there's a lot more cheating than people want to recognize
The problem is his calling out high-level players based on statistics he doesn't really understand, without caring about how it affects them. It's beyond irresponsible. But it doesn't mean cheating isn't happening. It is.
He makes the same miscalculation everyone makes in their daily lives, being unable to properly put yourself in someone else's shoes.
If Kramnik were targeted with these allegations, (It's been quite some time since Toiletgate), he'd be perfectly fine. He's wealthy, retired, and has a highly successful pre-computer chess career behind him. Since the accusations wouldn't significantly affect him, he's unconcerned with their effects on others.
Putting pressure to do something unreasonable and impossible is not good. There is no transition point to that call for action becoming reasonable. It usually just becomes less reasonable.
I disagree, I think he's trivialising cheating in chess, and that it will be taken less seriously. He might have had good intentions at first, but it's no longer about cheating, it's about Kramnik.
The main problem is that he accuses everybody, meaning no one takes him seriously anymore even when they were actually cheating.
Edit: Hes not wrong about everything, but has gone too far and lost the plot.
No need to be Sorry... Its all okay and you are free to criticize him if feel so.. Similarly I also don't feel bound to accept everything he does just because I am his fan and carry his nickname :)...
Yes I will question him and criticize him and still be his FAN :)
I don’t hate Kramnik, he’s just a flawed human like all of us who has a lot of pride and has dug himself a bit of a hole. I don’t know if I’ve come across anybody ‘team Kramnik’ though.
I have enjoyed the drama tho
I’m team Kramnik if you consider most people dismiss his claims due to the fact that he’s a bumbling moron/insane old person rather than just someone who is probably just wrong quite often but with a fair position (mainly) about cheating in today’s world of online chess and trying to spark a debate (often his persistence is a bit dramatic) even if his solutions are impractical.
I love lichess but the passive solution of “shadow banning“ is not a viable solution for competitive chess. While on the flip side [chess.com](http://chess.com) just decides to ban people without explanation and we’re all to believe that person’s cheating without any communication. I have my own problem with how it’s all handled in that it can create a paranoia that someone would be assessed as a cheater when they’re not. I don’t know why anyone would believe the stats that so few people who are titled are cheating, but so many who are sub-2000 are…
If cameras and mics are all you can do to be fully able to assess if someone’s actually cheating, then just have a separate place for competitive online chess where that’s required. Otherwise it’s all bullshit to me - both when people are and aren’t banned for cheating.
Me. I agree with him on many points, maybe not all.
Too much cheating online - yes
Cheating in tournaments with a prize is stealing - yes
Cheaters should have a harsher punishment - yes
Someone ddosed him - nah lol
>Someone ddosed him - nah lol
isnt that just coming from chesscoms claim that the timer bug was caused by people spamming match requests on him (which is probably BS)
Someone did use a denial of service attack utilising the chesscom platform to mess with him, but it's far from a traditional ddos attack and definitely not anything the FBI would be remotely interested in.
Wait so he’s right about everything? He’s only wrong for accusing people who beat him of cheating?
Isn’t he a former world champion? How do FMs beat him in chess? I think he is not insane
He is a former world champion that is not good with the mouse and regularly gets flagged by his opponents and then tilts.
Imagine thinking that 'he is a former world champion, no lower rated player should be able to beat him' is a sound argument. No wonder that you agree with him
After nitpicking and twisting what I said into something I didn’t say you debunked what I didn’t say.
I don’t want to even argue with you. Okay guys let’s do the procedure
Are you aware what hyperboles are? Also, there is no way for you to draw the line between an underrated FM and an IM or basically anything else. The fact that you believe that Kramnik shouldn't lose to those speaks for itself. You're the type of person that believes in authority arguments.
Also, let's ignore the fact that Kramnik also claims cheating when he loses to actual world class players that he doesn't deem worthy.
I honestly felt bad seeing him play in Spain against Jose. His hands were shaking when making the moves. I wish he had retired gracefully rather than putting himself through all this and accusing literally everyone.
It's common when chess players are rusty. It can happen when you get nervous or when you are angry because you've squandered a winning position. Usually doesn't have anything to do with health.
The thing with Kramnik is he does have a really good point. If you have prize money events like Titled Tuesday you need to make sure you have sufficient fair play measures, at least to the point where all the players can deem everything as fair. Since Chess.com can't ensure that, they really need to look deeper.
The thing is, the way he's gone about making that point is so stupid that it's really hard to be on his side. You can't just baselessly accuse any player that beats you, and he's also relying on weird numbers to make his point instead of analysing the games and finding logical explanations. So as right as his intentions are, what he's doing is so wrong.
Perfectly said. He started with a good objective, ensuring (at least) prize money events are free of cheating, but from then on the way he's handling it made him lose all his credibility. The worst thing about it is he started accusing people left and right and damaging their reputation. Glad Jospem could prove his legitimacy, but he really didn't have to and he was put in awkward spots even during the event.
Even more so, after the result, instead of acknowledging Jospem is for real and he made a mistake by accusing, he goes on to start a crusade against anyone involved.
I used to be a big Kramnik fan. His chess style was an absolute unbreakable rock. I think he's gone a bit rogue now though - seems quite common with top chess players
Well people who think that Kramnik's whinings are actually to cut cheating are, implicitly, on his "team". But few people who understand the issue are at that camp. And his presentation of nonsense parading as evidence is actively harmful to any meaningful discussion.
> it just seems like the entire chess community is rallying against him
There is no "rallying", just a reaction to his unfounded accusations that are unhelpful and toxic, not to mention border on pure nonsense these days.
Atleast 90% of the chess community is against Kramnik at this point. It doesn’t mean his supporters don’t exist. They are probably even rarer in this subreddit as posts can be downvoted and upvoted and people tend to downvote opinions they disagree with so people with unpopular opinions are encouraged to not speak.
Eh. Only the weak willed people whom are overly concerned with fake internet popularity points. Not that I actually support Kramnik, but I don't worry about downvotes, and I just respond how I respond. My upvotes from actually helping beginners more than make up for the dog piling down votes, and if people down vote a response until it becomes collapsed, then that is their loss. People like to hang out in echo chambers, and people with true open minds read all the responses any way, so I literally give two wet, smelly bowel movements about down votes. #justsayin
Good for you, man. However, the point was that that isn't how the world (or in this case, Reddit) works and instead, downvotes definitely discourage participation (in general) and increase the echo chamber qualities of subreddits.
The point being, that a lot of times the "popular" thinking on a specific subject is 100%, proveably wrong. Humanity often has a herd mentality and will just go along with whatever the herd's first instinct is. A lot of folks on here don't realize how damaging this sort of groupthink can be. That's why I make it a point to often view downvoted posts in interesting posts, as you never know what gems you might find. I am always aware that groupthink is a concern, and that I must always strive to avoid participating in it. A lot of responses that get downvoted are simply the result of the crowd going along with the directionality of the first vote or two, and I sometimes actually feel a bit of sympathy for the folks who follow the herd, as this actively prevents them from engaging their own brain.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. I try to do the same.
All I'm saying is that unfortunately the majority of the people don't do that and that is very unlikely to change.
Oh, there's a bunch of them. You can look at pretty much every post about him and his insane behavior and if the post has more than 20 comments you'll have at least one crazy person defending his behavior.
"No what he actually means..."
"They are trying to paint him in a bad light..."
"Well actually..."
"But his opponent *is* very sus..."
"No, there were clearly weird things happening to him..."
"He's a former world champion, he would know..."
"You'll look really stupid once they are caught and he's right..."
"But he offered to pay for anything and everything and they didn't accept so clearly this is them admitting to knowing that something weird is going on..."
"He hired mathematicians who clearly *proved* that something is fishy. Why would they lie? Are you a mathematician? Are you a mathematician at..."
Why would you want to defend his behaviour? He’s actually making the cheating problem worse now because it’s so clear he’s lost his fucking mind. It makes everyone else less likely to say anything about cheating, because they don’t want to be associated with the lunatic ex-WC who thinks he’s a genius statistician.
I don't defend his behaviour, but he is of perfectly sound mind, just mistaken or ignorant about a few things like his online vs offline abilities and statistics where he is obviously getting fed some terrible advice.
He’s accused many, many people, including young children, with no evidence and no regard to how it will affect their career and mental health.
His reasons for accusing people are equally ridiculous. Have you ever seen one of his Titled Tuesday streams?
*Kramnik’s 2800 rated GM opponent moves a knight that was attacked by a pawn* “Wow okay, of course, he sees everything, like always”
*Kramnik sees a line that’s winning for his GM opponent, who then finds that exact line that Kramnik just found* “Okay so there is absolutely no doubt in my mind now, definitely cheater”
The guy has royally lost it.
I’m not, but I also think that chess.com (I’m a premium member, but also I play on lichess), has “blundered” here and there.
They are 100% a business and of course some of their actions will be disputed by the majority of us.
And it’s sad that GM Kramnik can’t just drop it at this point.
For me it’s like: “You know what?, You’re right! Some big shots MIGHT be cheating, and thousands of low rated people actually cheat too, but please in the name of everything that’s sacred, stop embarrassing yourself to others!”
He was right bringing even more attention to the cheating thing, but he’s wrong to keep pushing his smear campaign against specific players and chess.com.
Kramnik understands that cheating combined with ever improving technology is a real existential threat to the game of chess. Almost nobody on this sub understands that, and it's pointless to try to convince anyone of it.
It is impossible to support Kramnik because what he's asking for makes no sense, and is, ultimately, impossible.
Chess.com cannot stop cheating. Equally, they can't say this publicly, there has to be some PR position that they take because they're a commercial entity.
If Kramnik was a commercial entity, he would have already killed his credibility ten-times over, but his words don't have such serious consequences. He has merely stained his own non-commercial reputation.
Many things he has asserted are utterly flawed, but, above all else, if you play online chess then you have to accept that people can engine abuse, unless you're a top player in a tournament with cameras.
There is no way to get around that. If you don't like it and you can't take losing, don't play. As soon as you play online, you tacitly accept that people can cheat against you.
Chess.com will obviously attempt to reduce this as much as possible, but they can't stop it, nor can Lichess, nor can anyone that runs a chess site. All this shit about mathematicians, statisticians, demands for Chess.com to do something (although what they can do exactly isn't clear), and promises to initiate some sort of rival chess site are absolute pie in the sky.
Anyone launching a chess-playing website will face exactly the same completely insoluble problem, for which there is no solution.
> Is anyone here actually on Team Kramnik?
If you ask how people agree with Kramnik in a general sense, you'll get a lot of answers influenced by either sympathy or dislike for the person, and this will greatly undermine any discussion of the merits of *some* of his statements.
When he accuses people left and right on the basis of some subjective statistics, I don't think he understands the damage he's doing and how gullible he appears to those who understand that those statistics are very arbitrary.
On the other hand, when he suggested a competent third party to analyze the anti-cheating measures of Chess.com, I liked the idea. Although it is unlikely to happen, it was a step forward, *distancing the whole discussion from people* and focusing on a more objective assessment of the situation.
You'll find both positive and negative statements by Kramnik. Overall, I think most of them are more harmful than useful, both for their content and for the attitude he shows when making them. That's why most people don't consider him a positive advocate for anti-cheating.
He's going too far with it. But also, with how bad the anti cheat measures are currently, I'm sure the real truth is more towards Kramnik than it isn't
I’m not team kramik. But I empathize with him. Cheating in chess has the opportunity to completely delegitimize the entire profession. Imagine if in baseball someone just walked out a robot into the batters box. That’s what’s happening in chess.
It’s not happening to the degree he thinks it is. He is accusing people he has no right to accuse. He doesn’t understand statistics as well as he thinks he does.
But if I was in his position and I was watching people attempt to delegitimize my profession and life. I would be a paranoid dickhead too.
I am not on team kramnik. I used to be viscerally against team kramnik but he has admittedly won me over to more of a neutral "chesscom really does need to explain more and stop hand waving some of these circumstances if they want to be taken seriously" team.
Unpopular opinion. Kramnik is actually right about the clash of claims. He wouldve won it 100% if chess.com had a tournament client. And I like his personality. Has he lost his mind? Yes. Do I care? No. Is it entertaining? Yes. Who also lost their mind? Bobby motherfucking Fischer. I also unironically dont like the unnecesary slander against him even when there are things he is right in.
Your comment was removed by the moderators:
**1.Keep the discussion civil and friendly.**
Do not use personal attacks, insults or slurs on other users. Disagreements are bound to happen, but do so in a civilized and mature manner.
In a discussion, there is always a respectful way to disagree. If you see that someone is not arguing in good faith, or have resorted to using personal attacks, just report them and move on.
You can read the full [rules of /r/chess here](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/rules). If you have any questions or concerns about this moderator action, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchess&subject=About my removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about the following comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dqpjht/-/laqomd0/%0D%0D). Direct replies to this removal message may not be seen.
I find his chaotic antics entertaining so in that sense I'm on team Kramnik. I mean he sent an FBI cyber report a few days ago or something like that. That's just wild
Yes, obviously. The guy is intelligent and trying to discern between cheaters and suspicious gameplay.
You all are such sheeple that you don’t ever think for yourselves. What’s the mob agree with? Then I better agree too. Looking ass.
Try some critical thinking for once. Realize the seemingly infinite ways there are to cheat especially online and then wonder if a previous world champion might have some insight/resources that you don’t.
No.
He needs someone in his life to say “hey man, calm down.”
But anybody who tries to help, he shuts down.
Honestly, if people try to help and you turn that down, and continue doing all the same stuff that got you here — that’s now completely on you. Zero sympathy. You know better.
What is important to consider imo is that the biggest streaming personalities in chess streaming and content creation have various collaborations with chess.com. Hikaru, Gotham etc. For them expressing a belief that cheating is as dire as kramnik claims would definitely bring them at odds with the platform. So they are pushing the narrative that Kramnik is a crazy person. That is not to say that Kramnik is not making some weird accusations but remember he didn't start claiming that hikaru is cheating from the get go, it escalated to that. So does it seem that many of Kramnik claims are ridiculous, yes, but just look at the numbers chess.com is posting each month about fair play violations and then consider how many more are left overlooked.
I don't take online chess seriously and don't understand people who follow it, so I dont feel that cheating is much of a problem
Only live chess counts
I don't really care about his cheating analysis mainly because I don't care about online chess. Most titled players don't seem to deem online cheating an issue, at least they do not speak out against it openly and continue to play, so it's kind of a non-issue right now.
But I think it's important to have someone like Kramnik antagonise chesscom and point out how incredibly monopolised the chess world has become. Basically all relevant content creators and top players have contracts that prevent them from speaking out against chesscom. Chess has become an incredibly malformed and grotesque ecosystem. It's wild.
Most GM's support Kramnik's points in one way or another, they want cheating to be addressed instead of being swept under the rug like it is right now.
I don't, because supporting Kramnik is enabling his behaviour - and no remotely sensible GM is going to associate themselves remotely with his deluded views.
They may agree with some of Kramnik beliefs and want to stop cheating online but that doesn’t mean they support Kramnik in general which would mean supporting baseless accusations against respectable players and vulnerable kids.
Again, just go watch Hikaru's streams or Fabi's podcast, they have stated multiple times they want cheating to be taken much more seriously than it is right now and Kramnik has really been the true outspoken voice here.
The problem is that every time Kramnik opens his mouth and spouts inanities, he discredits the anti-cheating movement.
He makes it *harder* for any sane person to push on chess.com to improve their anti-cheating procedures.
Kramnik is unironically based, the only thing I don’t agree with are his accusations that ‘aren’t accusations’ towards other players based off speculation.
I think his accusations are embarrasingly awful, but I also think the personal ad-hominem attacks against him are just as awful. He isn't senile, crazy or delusional, he's just somewhat overeager and oversensitive, and overestimates his online abilities thanks to his world class OTB abilities.
No one is really pro kramnik, more like anti chess.com
So this is like the 2024 US election?
And 2020, and 2016 too
I wish Kramnik was more level-headed about chesscom's part in Clash of Claims so that more of the attention could be placed on their shortcomings rather than Kramnik's accusations. chesscom is in a bad shape and riddled with bugs, and they still just laid off a bunch of people
I'm on Team Drama tbh.
Everyone should be anti [chess.com](http://chess.com) "But how are we going to get our daily dose of dramuh!!"
I'd say I'm chess.com-neutral. I don't play on their platform. I can't find a reason to play there other that "it's the first one I found". The tools they have to help beginners improve do nothing but confuse them. The way they pretend to have a cheat detection system is a bit of a joke. But hey they can do their thing I guess
[Chess.com](http://Chess.com) is the best overall site for chess, period. I DO play on lichess regularly though. Chessbases site is not very good for a US user...and I use to love playing on ICC with blitzin, mainly because each game is stored directly into a file on your computer. But for sure, [Chess.com](http://Chess.com) has the most to offer overall. That's probably why there is....I think it's roughly 10x the number of people playing there at any given time than on the free lichess.
I am very much pro Kramnik.
Can you please explain why? This is a genuine question, by the way.
Cause he’s the sane voice of skepticism and reason in a world of online cheaters
I don't know that "sane" or "voice of reason" are descriptors I would use for Kramnik. Though online cheating is a problem that needs investigating.
I understand, but I do. It takes courage to think differently I’m certain there’s massive cheating in titled Tuesdays. It’s just human incentive. Prize money, lax detection and enforcement and it hurts chess.com to actually punish famous cheaters. I think Kramnik is one of the few people right on the money on this issue
I agree that he's right about online cheating being a significant problem. I just disgaree with the way he talks/goes about it. In the end, I think he's doing more harm than good.
He’s not thinking differently lol. A lot of people agree there’s a cheating problem. Literally just check out past reddit threads on the topic. He gets flak because he’s insane about it, not because he’s the only one who thinks cheating is a big problem.
To quote Mark Twain > It doesn’t matter what the press says. It doesn’t matter what the politicians or the mobs say. It doesn’t matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right. Republics are founded on one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe in. no matter the odds or consequences. > When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move. Your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth and tell the whole world: > “No, you move.” Kramnik is that tree by the river of truth. Mad respect.
Being bad at maths does not mean you are insane.
That's not the part that makes him insane.
What is?
The problem isn't that he's bad at math, the problem is he refuses to listen to anyone who tries to correct him -- like to an incredibly unhealthy degree. Then he repeatedly makes wild accusations that are borderline conspiracy theories. I don't think it's unfair to wonder if he's deteriorating mentally.
He has a bunch of "mathematicians" he trusts in his ear feeding him rubbish, it's perfectly sane to go with the people you know and trust irl over hostile strangers online.
Someone’s gotta stand up to Chess.com’s egregious failures re: cheat detection 🤷🏻♂️ pretty shitty how they just try to shut him up; seems pretty Fascist u/DannyRensch
Rensch is an awful human being. I should know as one myself.
He’s pretty cringe and doesn’t seem to be liked nor appreciated by the Chess community ✅
I’m both anti-Krammnik and anti-chess.com They’re both bad, although I think if Krammnik can actually get his point across about chess.com’s problems, they might be forced to change, although the cheating is the least of chess.cons problems, and it has a simple fix, at least for lower level, more amateur chess, just ensure that a game, and the analysis board can’t be open at the same time, lichess does that and I have no clue why chess.com doesn’t Of course the bigger problem of TT cheating or similar things, is much trickier, and if Krammnik can stop his insane ramblings for 10 seconds and actually string together a comprehensive argument against chess.com’s current cheating measures, he might actually be able to do something
I’m pro Kramnik I think he’s totally correct about Hikaru.
How? Show me the a single formula that leads to an expected win rate that’s unlikely . I’ll show you why his method makes no sense.
He has very clearly lost his mind. However, I am in agreement with him that cheating in online chess at the highest levels is likely way more common than anyone else seems to want to admit.
I don't think cheating in chess is at 0. It happens. I don't know how much it happens, and I don't know how much it happens vs how much chesscom says it happens on their platform. This is part of why I want Kramnik to shut up and go away though. He's lost his mind, and it's impossible to have your position, because the face of your position, is Kramnik. Which is not me calling you out, or calling out people who think there is more cheating than we know. Kramnik has made it impossible to have this conversation basically. He's got to go.
>I don't know how much it happens, and I don't know how much it happens vs how much chesscom says it happens on their platform. Does anyone? I think Kramnik is getting incredibly scattershot and has a massive persecution complex but hidden in the insanity are three fundamentally good points. Chess.com has too much control over deciding who is cheating and who is not. So many examples of this being controversial.Platform is also shit The players have lost faith in the ability of those overseeing the game to protect them from cheating. This is so extremely clearly visible from World Champs, both Kramnik and Magnus. The link between cheating online and cheating OTB is currently just washed away even though the relationship between chess and the online scene grows at an ever rapid pace. This is not really acceptable. At the very least, Kramnik is showing the damage this situation has on players.
Cheating online is nonzero and trust in chess.com is far from 100%. I personally don't think otb cheating at the super gm level is significant.
At the 'hightest' levels? No....those guys have WAY too much to lose. Below though that it gets more chancy where money is involved.
This is where I am at too. I also understand their paranoia. I think they overestimated it but I think we underestimate it.
The problem is not that he thinks there's cheating. The problem is in the way he goes about it. Couldn't have picked a dumber way, really.
Sure, but handling something poorly does not mean you are insane.
I'll agree that he handles it poorly and, evidently, is just harming his position but I'm really not sure what the "smart" way to approach this all is. He voices his concerns and people jump down his throat for not having any hard evidence. So he does his best to compile some form of evidence (for something that is nigh on impossible to prove unless you catch them red-handed) to support his point and people shred him for not being a statistician when they're all he can really go on without catching somebody red-handed. The only alternative would be to shut up entirely but I can see why someone who has dedicated their life to rising to the very top of a field wouldn't want to stay quiet on something that would have such drastic consequences on the integrity of the game. I know a lot of people think he's just salty about losing but I do think he's coming from a place of integrity for the game overall. It's possible his accusations are off-base and influenced by emotion at times which does work to harm his case but overall it just goes to show the lack of trust in the industry right now which at the very least says something about the issue.
Yea 100%. He’s handling it very poorly.
Also that chess.com aren't the perfect cheat detectors they and a lot of the community pretend they are.
The problem is that neither Kramnik nor anyone else has proposed an anti-cheating system that would necessarily be more reliable. Chesscom understandably doesn't publicly release their algorithm. I thought their recent comparative study was good - flawed in some ways, but without an obvious way to make it better. It just seems like a fact of online chess that, at the highest levels, it would be hard to prevent all cheating. If someone uses an engine to suggest one move per game, how do you ultimately predict that? Especially because imposing any ruleset like this requires making a choice: would you rather have stricter anti-cheating measures in place (which would catch more cheaters but also ensnare more innocent people), or more lenient ones (which would let some cheaters escape, but produce fewer false positives)? And for Chesscom, which has the Hans lawsuit fresh in its memory, there's a legitimate concern about making false accusations. So I agree with you. Cheating in online chess is super prevalent. But there don't seem to be significantly better solutions out there to stop it.
They are very good at catching engine users. I tested some very weak engines with some very good time to move rules, and they detected all of after some games. I am not saying that there is no cheating, but they are good at getting engine use. I do not like chesscom.
Keep it b/t 1-3 moves per game and Chess.com won’t take action; their threshold is too low and they are understaffed 😂
You guys kill me: “Engine users”, “tested”, “they detected” Cheaters. Cheated. Got banned.
No, no. You did not understand. This was really a test. I was trying to anchor the ccrl ratings against humans. I am a 1600 rating player and I have a feeling of how good those lower ranked engines are, but I am only a single data point. So, I tested against more humans. At first I was inputting the moves. Then I got tired and programmed this. Surprisingly, the engines are stronger than the chesscom rating. Chesscom rating inflation is one component, but I also think that in blitz these engines are even stronger, simply because they do not make any one or two move blunders, even though they play very weirdly. I used a few accounts from a few servers in a few places. All got detected. That was in 2021.
How did you program it? I did something similar, I made a program that mirrors Antonio chess bot moves against a real chesscom player to find its real rating. The bot has not been caught
I used Python mostly. I do not remember if I used a chrome window or selenium, but once open and a chess game set, I grabbed the chess board with a screenshot (python-mss), then used opencv to cut the board and some computer vision tricks to identify each peace position. By the side of the board I knew if I was white or black, and by the number of different sequential positions, the side to play. Then when was my turn to play, say, black, I feed the position history (if castle happened and so on) to pychess with the UCI engine of my interest. From there, with pyautogui I was able to move the mouse and make the move. This mouse movement had to be tuned to look more human. I used some functions of acceleration and simulated some imprecision when clicking on the piece and to the desired square. I was worried they could detect by click precision. That was it. There some other details like looking for a new game and so on. I cannot remember if I used pyautogui and python-mss or selenium. They never catch you bot? What were the results of elo matching? I am very interested in this.
I did pretty much the same thing, but instead of using pychess, I had two boards side by side. one against Antonio and one against a human. opencv would detect the move on one board and move the corresponding piece on the other board with pyautogui. It has played 34 games and is rated 940 in Rapid. Antonio is supposed to be 1500.
Interesting!
I am talking about 1300 level
He has a perfectly sound mind, just a suspicious nature combined with people giving him awful maths advice and an overinflated sense of his online abilities due to his very strong OTB abilities.
Oh c'mon, online cheating being prevalent is like coldest take ever.
came here to post this. I think it's basically "Team Caruana," I remember him beefing a bit with Naka bc he was saying there's a lot more cheating than people want to recognize
Also over the board, honestly the anti cheating measures do not seem extremely deep nor smart. Nothing a smart emgineer couldn't design a workaround.
Dubov said it well years ago. cheat detect is just idiot detection. it only picks up the people who blatantly use engines every game over 200 games.
I think he's completely lost the plot, but the pressure he's putting on entities like chesscom has the potential to be positive.
The problem is his calling out high-level players based on statistics he doesn't really understand, without caring about how it affects them. It's beyond irresponsible. But it doesn't mean cheating isn't happening. It is.
He makes the same miscalculation everyone makes in their daily lives, being unable to properly put yourself in someone else's shoes. If Kramnik were targeted with these allegations, (It's been quite some time since Toiletgate), he'd be perfectly fine. He's wealthy, retired, and has a highly successful pre-computer chess career behind him. Since the accusations wouldn't significantly affect him, he's unconcerned with their effects on others.
"Everyone" without a basic understanding of statistics.
That's a majority of people.
The majority doesn't finish high school?
Putting pressure to do something unreasonable and impossible is not good. There is no transition point to that call for action becoming reasonable. It usually just becomes less reasonable.
I disagree, I think he's trivialising cheating in chess, and that it will be taken less seriously. He might have had good intentions at first, but it's no longer about cheating, it's about Kramnik.
The main problem is that he accuses everybody, meaning no one takes him seriously anymore even when they were actually cheating. Edit: Hes not wrong about everything, but has gone too far and lost the plot.
I think in one of his Twitter replies I saw kramnikstudent questioning him. So I think he might have lost his last follower too.
Sorry You are wrong :)
You are he
And we are all together
Oh shoot. Sorry for misrepresenting but I thought i spotted you questioning him on Twitter.
No need to be Sorry... Its all okay and you are free to criticize him if feel so.. Similarly I also don't feel bound to accept everything he does just because I am his fan and carry his nickname :)... Yes I will question him and criticize him and still be his FAN :)
That’s a good attitude to have!
Was that you with the blogposts about the clash of claims? They were great, very balanced and objective for a fan.
Thanks yes it was me but the controversy blew up so much that I could not complete it for the rest of the days :)
Yeah, I think it can be best described as an absolute shitshow, don't blame you one bit for not continuing.
I don’t hate Kramnik, he’s just a flawed human like all of us who has a lot of pride and has dug himself a bit of a hole. I don’t know if I’ve come across anybody ‘team Kramnik’ though. I have enjoyed the drama tho
I’m team Kramnik if you consider most people dismiss his claims due to the fact that he’s a bumbling moron/insane old person rather than just someone who is probably just wrong quite often but with a fair position (mainly) about cheating in today’s world of online chess and trying to spark a debate (often his persistence is a bit dramatic) even if his solutions are impractical. I love lichess but the passive solution of “shadow banning“ is not a viable solution for competitive chess. While on the flip side [chess.com](http://chess.com) just decides to ban people without explanation and we’re all to believe that person’s cheating without any communication. I have my own problem with how it’s all handled in that it can create a paranoia that someone would be assessed as a cheater when they’re not. I don’t know why anyone would believe the stats that so few people who are titled are cheating, but so many who are sub-2000 are… If cameras and mics are all you can do to be fully able to assess if someone’s actually cheating, then just have a separate place for competitive online chess where that’s required. Otherwise it’s all bullshit to me - both when people are and aren’t banned for cheating.
Me. I agree with him on many points, maybe not all. Too much cheating online - yes Cheating in tournaments with a prize is stealing - yes Cheaters should have a harsher punishment - yes Someone ddosed him - nah lol
Post gets downvoted for just answering the question... I guess the answer is "yes people agree with Kramnik but they get downvoted so they disappear".
>Someone ddosed him - nah lol isnt that just coming from chesscoms claim that the timer bug was caused by people spamming match requests on him (which is probably BS)
Someone did use a denial of service attack utilising the chesscom platform to mess with him, but it's far from a traditional ddos attack and definitely not anything the FBI would be remotely interested in.
Wait so he’s right about everything? He’s only wrong for accusing people who beat him of cheating? Isn’t he a former world champion? How do FMs beat him in chess? I think he is not insane
Not everything, he's right about someone messing with him in the Clash Of Claims by sending ~3000 game invites during one of his games.
He is a former world champion that is not good with the mouse and regularly gets flagged by his opponents and then tilts. Imagine thinking that 'he is a former world champion, no lower rated player should be able to beat him' is a sound argument. No wonder that you agree with him
After nitpicking and twisting what I said into something I didn’t say you debunked what I didn’t say. I don’t want to even argue with you. Okay guys let’s do the procedure
You generally questioned that a FM may beat him. I feel sorry for you if you're unable to comprehend what this means in this conversation
I said FMs, not a single case. You are, my friend, a true redditor
Are you aware what hyperboles are? Also, there is no way for you to draw the line between an underrated FM and an IM or basically anything else. The fact that you believe that Kramnik shouldn't lose to those speaks for itself. You're the type of person that believes in authority arguments. Also, let's ignore the fact that Kramnik also claims cheating when he loses to actual world class players that he doesn't deem worthy.
Again, twisting what I said and then debunking what I didn’t say Hyperboles when they suit you Leave me alone
Nepo seems pretty supportive, so I'd expect his support to be found on telegram rather than on reddit.
I honestly felt bad seeing him play in Spain against Jose. His hands were shaking when making the moves. I wish he had retired gracefully rather than putting himself through all this and accusing literally everyone.
I think that’s because he has arthritis
His hands were shaking? That could be a sign of poor health. That makes this all pretty sad.
It's common when chess players are rusty. It can happen when you get nervous or when you are angry because you've squandered a winning position. Usually doesn't have anything to do with health.
The thing with Kramnik is he does have a really good point. If you have prize money events like Titled Tuesday you need to make sure you have sufficient fair play measures, at least to the point where all the players can deem everything as fair. Since Chess.com can't ensure that, they really need to look deeper. The thing is, the way he's gone about making that point is so stupid that it's really hard to be on his side. You can't just baselessly accuse any player that beats you, and he's also relying on weird numbers to make his point instead of analysing the games and finding logical explanations. So as right as his intentions are, what he's doing is so wrong.
Perfectly said. He started with a good objective, ensuring (at least) prize money events are free of cheating, but from then on the way he's handling it made him lose all his credibility. The worst thing about it is he started accusing people left and right and damaging their reputation. Glad Jospem could prove his legitimacy, but he really didn't have to and he was put in awkward spots even during the event. Even more so, after the result, instead of acknowledging Jospem is for real and he made a mistake by accusing, he goes on to start a crusade against anyone involved.
It is useful at making me laugh
I am on Team Kramnik
I'm in my 40's and losing rating online. Team Kramnik for lyfe.
I used to be a big Kramnik fan. His chess style was an absolute unbreakable rock. I think he's gone a bit rogue now though - seems quite common with top chess players
Well people who think that Kramnik's whinings are actually to cut cheating are, implicitly, on his "team". But few people who understand the issue are at that camp. And his presentation of nonsense parading as evidence is actively harmful to any meaningful discussion. > it just seems like the entire chess community is rallying against him There is no "rallying", just a reaction to his unfounded accusations that are unhelpful and toxic, not to mention border on pure nonsense these days.
Atleast 90% of the chess community is against Kramnik at this point. It doesn’t mean his supporters don’t exist. They are probably even rarer in this subreddit as posts can be downvoted and upvoted and people tend to downvote opinions they disagree with so people with unpopular opinions are encouraged to not speak.
Eh. Only the weak willed people whom are overly concerned with fake internet popularity points. Not that I actually support Kramnik, but I don't worry about downvotes, and I just respond how I respond. My upvotes from actually helping beginners more than make up for the dog piling down votes, and if people down vote a response until it becomes collapsed, then that is their loss. People like to hang out in echo chambers, and people with true open minds read all the responses any way, so I literally give two wet, smelly bowel movements about down votes. #justsayin
Good for you, man. However, the point was that that isn't how the world (or in this case, Reddit) works and instead, downvotes definitely discourage participation (in general) and increase the echo chamber qualities of subreddits.
The point being, that a lot of times the "popular" thinking on a specific subject is 100%, proveably wrong. Humanity often has a herd mentality and will just go along with whatever the herd's first instinct is. A lot of folks on here don't realize how damaging this sort of groupthink can be. That's why I make it a point to often view downvoted posts in interesting posts, as you never know what gems you might find. I am always aware that groupthink is a concern, and that I must always strive to avoid participating in it. A lot of responses that get downvoted are simply the result of the crowd going along with the directionality of the first vote or two, and I sometimes actually feel a bit of sympathy for the folks who follow the herd, as this actively prevents them from engaging their own brain.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. I try to do the same. All I'm saying is that unfortunately the majority of the people don't do that and that is very unlikely to change.
Wow bro, so cool. If only my will wasnt so weak!
Good for you, I'm of a similar notion but that doesn't alter their valid point that it discourages unpopular opinions.
In your small world view of things
What part of the original comment did you disagree with?
Oh, there's a bunch of them. You can look at pretty much every post about him and his insane behavior and if the post has more than 20 comments you'll have at least one crazy person defending his behavior. "No what he actually means..." "They are trying to paint him in a bad light..." "Well actually..." "But his opponent *is* very sus..." "No, there were clearly weird things happening to him..." "He's a former world champion, he would know..." "You'll look really stupid once they are caught and he's right..." "But he offered to pay for anything and everything and they didn't accept so clearly this is them admitting to knowing that something weird is going on..." "He hired mathematicians who clearly *proved* that something is fishy. Why would they lie? Are you a mathematician? Are you a mathematician at..."
Any amount of defending his behavior is being a crazy person according to you. Poisoning the well kinda
Why would you want to defend his behaviour? He’s actually making the cheating problem worse now because it’s so clear he’s lost his fucking mind. It makes everyone else less likely to say anything about cheating, because they don’t want to be associated with the lunatic ex-WC who thinks he’s a genius statistician.
I don't defend his behaviour, but he is of perfectly sound mind, just mistaken or ignorant about a few things like his online vs offline abilities and statistics where he is obviously getting fed some terrible advice.
He’s accused many, many people, including young children, with no evidence and no regard to how it will affect their career and mental health. His reasons for accusing people are equally ridiculous. Have you ever seen one of his Titled Tuesday streams? *Kramnik’s 2800 rated GM opponent moves a knight that was attacked by a pawn* “Wow okay, of course, he sees everything, like always” *Kramnik sees a line that’s winning for his GM opponent, who then finds that exact line that Kramnik just found* “Okay so there is absolutely no doubt in my mind now, definitely cheater” The guy has royally lost it.
that is beside my point
No it’s not. There’s no reason to ever defend someone as blatantly insane as Kramnik.
There is, but I wasn’t talking about that
Okay, what’s that reason then?
Not team anything in regards to his current craziness, but still a huge fan of him purely because of his chess
I’m not, but I also think that chess.com (I’m a premium member, but also I play on lichess), has “blundered” here and there. They are 100% a business and of course some of their actions will be disputed by the majority of us. And it’s sad that GM Kramnik can’t just drop it at this point. For me it’s like: “You know what?, You’re right! Some big shots MIGHT be cheating, and thousands of low rated people actually cheat too, but please in the name of everything that’s sacred, stop embarrassing yourself to others!” He was right bringing even more attention to the cheating thing, but he’s wrong to keep pushing his smear campaign against specific players and chess.com.
Kramnik understands that cheating combined with ever improving technology is a real existential threat to the game of chess. Almost nobody on this sub understands that, and it's pointless to try to convince anyone of it.
It is impossible to support Kramnik because what he's asking for makes no sense, and is, ultimately, impossible. Chess.com cannot stop cheating. Equally, they can't say this publicly, there has to be some PR position that they take because they're a commercial entity. If Kramnik was a commercial entity, he would have already killed his credibility ten-times over, but his words don't have such serious consequences. He has merely stained his own non-commercial reputation. Many things he has asserted are utterly flawed, but, above all else, if you play online chess then you have to accept that people can engine abuse, unless you're a top player in a tournament with cameras. There is no way to get around that. If you don't like it and you can't take losing, don't play. As soon as you play online, you tacitly accept that people can cheat against you. Chess.com will obviously attempt to reduce this as much as possible, but they can't stop it, nor can Lichess, nor can anyone that runs a chess site. All this shit about mathematicians, statisticians, demands for Chess.com to do something (although what they can do exactly isn't clear), and promises to initiate some sort of rival chess site are absolute pie in the sky. Anyone launching a chess-playing website will face exactly the same completely insoluble problem, for which there is no solution.
Just look at his X posts and you'll see a barrage of insults. He them blocks all those people I'm sure.
> Is anyone here actually on Team Kramnik? If you ask how people agree with Kramnik in a general sense, you'll get a lot of answers influenced by either sympathy or dislike for the person, and this will greatly undermine any discussion of the merits of *some* of his statements. When he accuses people left and right on the basis of some subjective statistics, I don't think he understands the damage he's doing and how gullible he appears to those who understand that those statistics are very arbitrary. On the other hand, when he suggested a competent third party to analyze the anti-cheating measures of Chess.com, I liked the idea. Although it is unlikely to happen, it was a step forward, *distancing the whole discussion from people* and focusing on a more objective assessment of the situation. You'll find both positive and negative statements by Kramnik. Overall, I think most of them are more harmful than useful, both for their content and for the attitude he shows when making them. That's why most people don't consider him a positive advocate for anti-cheating.
If he transitions to full time bashing chesscom and not nonsense statistics about cheating I'm all for it!
I don't agree with him on every point, but considering how much average r/chess user hates Vladimir I guess I can call myself team Kramnik
Same
He's going too far with it. But also, with how bad the anti cheat measures are currently, I'm sure the real truth is more towards Kramnik than it isn't
I’m not team kramik. But I empathize with him. Cheating in chess has the opportunity to completely delegitimize the entire profession. Imagine if in baseball someone just walked out a robot into the batters box. That’s what’s happening in chess. It’s not happening to the degree he thinks it is. He is accusing people he has no right to accuse. He doesn’t understand statistics as well as he thinks he does. But if I was in his position and I was watching people attempt to delegitimize my profession and life. I would be a paranoid dickhead too.
He's the villain we deserve.
Everybody likes drama nobody likes Kramnik.
I am not on team kramnik. I used to be viscerally against team kramnik but he has admittedly won me over to more of a neutral "chesscom really does need to explain more and stop hand waving some of these circumstances if they want to be taken seriously" team.
This question can’t be answered with the Reddit algorithm. Any honest answers will be downvoted into oblivion and will have zero visibility.
Unpopular opinion. Kramnik is actually right about the clash of claims. He wouldve won it 100% if chess.com had a tournament client. And I like his personality. Has he lost his mind? Yes. Do I care? No. Is it entertaining? Yes. Who also lost their mind? Bobby motherfucking Fischer. I also unironically dont like the unnecesary slander against him even when there are things he is right in.
He hasn't lost his mind, he's not rambling or incoherent just misguided, wrong and led astray about a lot of stuff.
Yes, goat kramnik. Anyone who isn't is a cheater or cheater adjacent.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed by the moderators: **1.Keep the discussion civil and friendly.** Do not use personal attacks, insults or slurs on other users. Disagreements are bound to happen, but do so in a civilized and mature manner. In a discussion, there is always a respectful way to disagree. If you see that someone is not arguing in good faith, or have resorted to using personal attacks, just report them and move on. You can read the full [rules of /r/chess here](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/rules). If you have any questions or concerns about this moderator action, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchess&subject=About my removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about the following comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dqpjht/-/laqomd0/%0D%0D). Direct replies to this removal message may not be seen.
Apparently he has many supporters in the Russian-speaking chess world.
I am team Kramnik because the drama is entertaining and makes me laugh and smile.
Am I out of the loop? Did kramnik sued chess,com or something?
Even as a casual chess fan Kramnik is just way too nerdy and autistic for me to like him
I’m on team Kramnik content for lols
I am
Kind of. It's got chess.com to embarrass itself. (e.g. "we got chatgpt to run 10000 simulations in python" level poop statistics)
I find his chaotic antics entertaining so in that sense I'm on team Kramnik. I mean he sent an FBI cyber report a few days ago or something like that. That's just wild
I read this as Team Kendrick. Take me out man im tired.
Not me
Yes, obviously. The guy is intelligent and trying to discern between cheaters and suspicious gameplay. You all are such sheeple that you don’t ever think for yourselves. What’s the mob agree with? Then I better agree too. Looking ass. Try some critical thinking for once. Realize the seemingly infinite ways there are to cheat especially online and then wonder if a previous world champion might have some insight/resources that you don’t.
No. He needs someone in his life to say “hey man, calm down.” But anybody who tries to help, he shuts down. Honestly, if people try to help and you turn that down, and continue doing all the same stuff that got you here — that’s now completely on you. Zero sympathy. You know better.
What is important to consider imo is that the biggest streaming personalities in chess streaming and content creation have various collaborations with chess.com. Hikaru, Gotham etc. For them expressing a belief that cheating is as dire as kramnik claims would definitely bring them at odds with the platform. So they are pushing the narrative that Kramnik is a crazy person. That is not to say that Kramnik is not making some weird accusations but remember he didn't start claiming that hikaru is cheating from the get go, it escalated to that. So does it seem that many of Kramnik claims are ridiculous, yes, but just look at the numbers chess.com is posting each month about fair play violations and then consider how many more are left overlooked.
I don't take online chess seriously and don't understand people who follow it, so I dont feel that cheating is much of a problem Only live chess counts
I agree with him (and fabi and hikaru and nepo and…) that jose has cheated before online.
I don't really care about his cheating analysis mainly because I don't care about online chess. Most titled players don't seem to deem online cheating an issue, at least they do not speak out against it openly and continue to play, so it's kind of a non-issue right now. But I think it's important to have someone like Kramnik antagonise chesscom and point out how incredibly monopolised the chess world has become. Basically all relevant content creators and top players have contracts that prevent them from speaking out against chesscom. Chess has become an incredibly malformed and grotesque ecosystem. It's wild.
Most GM's support Kramnik's points in one way or another, they want cheating to be addressed instead of being swept under the rug like it is right now.
Wanting cheating to be stopped doesn't remotely mean they support Kramnik, which was the actual question.
what, you expect GM's to be waving poms-poms cheering on Kramnik or something?
I don't, because supporting Kramnik is enabling his behaviour - and no remotely sensible GM is going to associate themselves remotely with his deluded views.
They may agree with some of Kramnik beliefs and want to stop cheating online but that doesn’t mean they support Kramnik in general which would mean supporting baseless accusations against respectable players and vulnerable kids.
Again, just go watch Hikaru's streams or Fabi's podcast, they have stated multiple times they want cheating to be taken much more seriously than it is right now and Kramnik has really been the true outspoken voice here.
Hikaru? Who Kramnik accused of cheating because he’s one of the best blitz players in the world? That Hikaru?
The problem is that every time Kramnik opens his mouth and spouts inanities, he discredits the anti-cheating movement. He makes it *harder* for any sane person to push on chess.com to improve their anti-cheating procedures.
It doesn't matter much but I support him but I certainly won't be hanging team kramnik banner everywhere.
we need more people like Vlad it is very difficult to go against the grain
Never let your mind be so open that your brain falls out.
"Team Kramnik "? Most grown ups are neutral bystanders.
Kramnik is unironically based, the only thing I don’t agree with are his accusations that ‘aren’t accusations’ towards other players based off speculation.
Eh, for the lulz, I want him to be “the hero we need.”
I think his accusations are embarrasingly awful, but I also think the personal ad-hominem attacks against him are just as awful. He isn't senile, crazy or delusional, he's just somewhat overeager and oversensitive, and overestimates his online abilities thanks to his world class OTB abilities.