Hikaru is like that person who says "no offense" then proceeds to say something really offensive. Then gets confused why people took offense despite him saying "no offense".


Why aren’t people taking no offense? I specifically requested it.


Dear U/DangerZoneh, That was a successful attempt at humor. Sincerely, Capt. Raymond Holt




He's responding to a reference from the same show. I don't know how much more expected it could be.


Furthermore, is it ever of interest to anyone when someone follows up a reference with an "/r/unexpected" sub tag? How is that anything other than spam


It pretty much is spam and is very unfunny.


You got offended by my statement? When I specifically asked you not to?


Make no mistake, Hikaru knows exactly what he's doing, he knows he can't say outright Hans cheated, but with heavily implying it he gets plausible deniability and more views


Let's dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He knows EXACTLY what he's doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country, to make America more like the rest of the world. That's why he passed Obamacare and the stimulus and Dodd-Frank and the deal with Iran. It is a systematic effort to change America. When I'm president of the United States, we are going to re-embrace all the things that made America the greatest nation in the world and we are going to leave our children with what they deserve: the single greatest nation in the history of the world.


Chris Christie calling that out real time was easily his greatest moment ever as a policitician. And Rubio still tried it again.


I will never forget watching that live. It was such a WWE moment.


Which of his statements heavily implies Hans cheated? His most controversial one was that Hans's interview and analysis was bad, which is exactly what Daniel Naroditsky and Eric Hansen said.


Didn't he also claim that Magnus had never played that line before, and the game that Hans was referring to didn't exist? Isn't this all verifiably false? Either Hikaru himself has fallen victim to the same thing that he claims draws suspicion to Hans - he couldn't remember the details about a game he studied in which Magnus played that line - or he is intentionally misleading people. The latter means that he is intentionally misleading people, while the former means that it is possible for Hans to misremember certain facts - just as Hikaru himself did (despite not being in a live interview after a career/life defining moment, and having access to tools that can check facts).


No, on a podcast Jan, Fressinet, and PHN say you can’t get from the Carlsen-So line to the one played in Carlsen Niemann. That’s also what Hikaru, Naroditsky, and Hansen said. You can get to that line from the Catalan, which Magnus does play, but not from moves that Magnus has made or by the most accepted moves in the line. In his follow up interview, Hans then said he got to that line from the Catalan.


It's not all verifiably false. Not a Hikaru fan but it's a bit ironic to say he's misleading people in a post where you also have the facts wrong.


>Didn't he also claim that Magnus had never played that line before, and the game that Hans was referring to didn't exist? Isn't this all verifiably false? No it is not. Hans was very specific about what game he remembered. Carlsen vs So in London Chess 2018. Wesly So wasn't even in that tournament. The game that is being passed around as "that must be the game" is accordong to Jan Gustafsson a completely different line and if you prepare that you most likely wouldn't look that deep into the bad sideline transposing to the game Carlsen vs Hans. More probable in terms of preparation is a transposition from the catalan opening, which doesn't fit the Carlsen-So game, but is more likely. If you want to look at them yourself again: https://www.chess.com/events/2022-sinquefield-cup/03/Carlsen_Magnus-Niemann_Hans_Moke https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1981206 Anyway, nothing of this is "verifiably false".


He did, but people misremember things a lot. That is not what is raising people's eyebrows though. The main suspicion comes from Hans's poor analysis of the Alireza game.


Alireza’s analysis was also poor. “I didn’t take the piece because I was scared” isn’t exactly earth shattering analysis.


Truly super gm tier stuff


It depends on what move he is referring to. Was he referring to move 6, or move 23? Nigel Short showed that he had played move 6 before. I don't think Magnus has ever played that line to move 23 before.


> Didn't he also claim that Magnus had never played that line before, and the game that Hans was referring to didn't exist? Isn't this all verifiably false? Hans initially said the game was against So in London. That game didn't exist.


This is a confusing take because he has literally outright said multiple times he does not think Hans cheated against Magnus..


This is only confusing if you’re a robot reading it as a transcript. Sure, he said that, then he spent 30 minutes making incredibly clear insinuations and suggestions to the contrary. You’re just taking him at his word.


Hikaru: The one thing I will say is... *10 minutes later* And the ONE thing I will say is... *15 minutes later* That being said the one thing I will add is... *next day* Uh OK guys I only said one thing...




> Sure, he said that, then he spent 30 minutes making incredibly clear insinuations and suggestions to the contrary. You’re just taking him at his word. He said things that would raise suspicion on Hans, sure - the main reason being the bad analysis from Hans. Even Eric and Daniel said the same thing. At the same time he said there's no clear proof that Hans cheated and that he's innocent until proven guilty. They aren't contradictory stances. They are normal, objective opinions that would cause people to raise their eyebrows but at the same time not make accusations without clear proof. Daniel pretty much said the same thing. You're insinuating that Hikaru has some sort of malice via a cryptic message telling the audience that Hans cheated through the video.


>You're insinuating that Hikaru has some sort of malice via a cryptic message telling the audience that Hans cheated through the video. But it's not cryptic. It's very obvious. And I didn't say it's malicious, just that he was saying one thing and insinuating another. To be honest, personally I think there's still a good chance that Hans did cheat. So I'm not Team Hans or anything. I'm just pointing out that it's dumb to be like "Hikaru said he doesn't think he cheated!" when anyone can tell that's not the thrust of these streams Hikaru did.


> But it's not cryptic. It's very obvious. And I didn't say it's malicious, just that he was saying one thing and insinuating another. It's only 'obvious' if someone is prejudiced against the speaker to begin with. I've never had prejudice against Hikaru, nor am I a fan of his. This sub has major bias against anything he says, stretches the truth a lot, and often makes wild interpretations that never gave me any of the impression that this sub claims. He said Hans has a history of cheating which gave context into the most likely reason why Magnus made the tweet. He said Hans's analysis was bad, at the same time he said innocent until proven guilty. The information I gained from that was that there is reason to suspect Hans based on the interview, but we shouldn't accuse him until Magnus comes up with damning proof. Eric and Daniel said the exact same thing. Daniel said Hans's analysis didn't appear to reflect the level of a 2700 player which gave me the same suspicion. At the same time Daniel said there's no concrete proof. I gained the exact same information and level of suspicion from Daniel and Eric as I did from Hikaru.


Eric is being similarly criticized, as he should be. And this is a subjective reading, but Daniel seemed to be much more tactful about it, saying "this seems weird, but who really knows." Hikaru was smirking and winking his way through it, then claimed he wasn't. There's a very clear difference in my opinion and I think anyone with social intelligence could point it out. It rubbed people the wrong way, something Hikaru is very good at.


lol, when Hikaru says, "I'm not suggesting anything", it definitely makes it sound like he is specifically suggesting that Hans cheated.


There is a clip of him literally saying it’s his opinion that Hans did not cheat


"I don't think he cheated, I definitely don't think he cheated. I just think the circumstances are suspicious. He didn't analyze like a top player, he speaks with a weird accent, he claimed to have studied a game that never happened. It's just suspicious to me. But I don't believe he cheated." You're right, clearly, he doesn't believe Hans cheated.


Them things are true though? He completely got his post game analysis terribly wrong which is weird. And he did refer to a game that didn’t exist whatsoever.


You are proving my point, lol. If those suspicions aren't leading Hikaru to believe he cheated, then what is he suspicious of? Not to mention that it's possible for a 19 year old to analyze less well than GMs who have played the game longer than he's been alive. Not to mention that the game *does exist* just that he misremembered the date/location.


Eh idk I'm not a naka fan but tbh I don't see anything wrong with it. E.g. ever play/watch pro FPS games? There have been so many cheating allegations. Some are cheaters, some look sketchy/fishy as fuck until they consistently can reproduce results over a long period of time. I don't think there's anything wrong with being suspicious, or even saying that its sus, while not having conviction to say that they're cheating. Seems like a common feeling to have as a human. Fwiw I don't think he handled this great, I think all parties should have given Hans the benefit of the doubt before accusing/insinuating.


There's really nothing wrong with that quote


What is he suspicious about?


And when did he say that? Because the YouTube video uploded on his main channel that summarized his stream on the day Hans and Firouzja played doesn't have that statement... Or perhaps he started to say Hans didn't cheat the day after, when it was clear the organizers couldn't find any foul play and wouldn't find any? You don't get to bet after the results are out. Or did his editor messed up and didn't include the quote? That would still reflect badly on Hikaru, especially after the copyright strikes drama last year.


Yes, but he heavily implied it multiple times


He said he cheated previously on chess.com which is a fact He said Magnus quit because he thinks Hans cheated which is true (most likely true given the increased security and Magnus not coming out and saying he quit for another reason) He said his analysis of the game was really strange and wrong for 2700 level GM (according to other GM’s and an engine this is a fact) He outright said the moves he made against Magnus weren’t abnormal and were human/expected moves. He outright stated that in his opinion he did not cheat against Magnus. I understand it’s popular to shit on Hikaru is this subreddit and I’ll most likely be downvoted to oblivion but he literally just presented facts, if anybody watching the full stream and not just clips thinks that Hans cheated it not is because they want to think so. As I’ve said Hikaru has repeatedly stated it is his stance/opinion that Hans did not cheat vs Magnus


Me irl


Hahaha, like that scene from Talladega Nights when Ricky Bobby says with all due respect them insults his boss. Boss gets upset and Ricky Bobby says I said with all due respect first lol


"Mr. Niemann, with all due respect, and remember I'm saying this with all due respect, your chess skills ain't worth a painting of a whale and a dolphin gettin' it on."


I'm just sayin, I'm just sayin'


so the takeaway from this is that Hikaru didn't officially accuse hans of cheating but is very suspicious and wouldn't be suprised if it was true.


Which is honestly what a lot of other top pros are saying. Honestly if it wasn't Magnus, I think the credibility of the accusations loses about 90% steam. People treat his word like gospel.


And it makes sense IMO. Even with no definitive proof, there's a series of improbabilities that mean little in isolation, but in sequence are sufficient to arouses suspicion. Meanwhile, Hans is very convincing with his claim to innocence and even a series of improbable events aren't impossible. With no evidence and Hans as convincing as he is, it seems completely reasonable for people to be suspicious and for Hans to be innocent. It wouldn't surprise me if even Hans can acknowledge as much even if the reasons why he wouldn't are obvious.


It might just be the Magnus fan in me, but isn't denying the cheating allegation the only thing he can do? They can't go back in time to find a cheating device on him. He literally has no way forward than to say he didn't cheat and hope they don't dig anything up


It's not what he said, it's how he said it


Sounds reasonable.


i think that’s fair though. What Magnus did in combination with the unlikelihood of what Hans is doing AND the poor interview afterword *would* raise suspicion. I think Magnus is far more in the wrong here than Hikaru


Ok. And what is the problem with that? Like I don't think Hans actually cheated and a lot of "evidence" given to support that is stupid, but you'd have to be a complete moron to not have any suspicions


First sensible comment here that isn’t hikaru bad because hikaru


I mean, we really have two very unlikely scenarios: 1) Either he has had the fastest rise in chess history and we’re looking at a bit of a “late bloomer” that happens to probably be the next “greatest player of all time” Or 2) He cheated over the board systematically and didn’t get caught. Both are insanely unlikely but one has to be true, right?


There is actually a third, really likely scenario, where a great chess player simply beat an amazing chess player who had a bad day.


I’m talking about his rise. A lot of GMs seem to be saying that it is unprecedented.


The covid pandemic was unprecedented, causing an online chess boom and young chess talents playing a lot more chess tournaments than usual. The amount of tournament games Hans has played the past two years is ridiculously high. We are also seeing faster rating growth in other young talents for the past two years due to the pandemic. So there is a reasonable explanation I think.


It isn't. [Efim Bogoljubov](https://en.chessbase.com/post/efim-bogoljubow-a-chess-career) was also off to a late start and made it all the way to playing world championships.


It really doesn't seem unprecedented compared to the rise of any of the other young prodigies. https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/x98gz3/comparison_of_niemanns_classical_rating/


>1) Either he has had the fastest rise in chess history and we’re looking at a bit of a “late bloomer” that happens to probably be the next “greatest player of all time” 1) contains two statements that have little to no foundation in reality, seemingly only included to make it seem like 1) is far less likely than it is. Why are you claiming he has the "fastest rise in chess history"? A bunch of sixteen year olds have reached 2700 in the past and Hans is.. **nineteen** *and some months* old. Why are you claiming he's "probably the next GOAT" out of absolutely nowhere? >Both are insanely unlikely but one has to be true, right? [Read this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma).


The probability that someone \*with a history of cheating\* did it again systematically is not insanely low. Like I keep saying, you have to differentiate between the social and the epistemic question. He should only face formal consequences if the evidence is overwhelming. but in terms of the purely epistemic question, I mean come on. One hypothesis explains everything in a single swoop, the other needs to add a dozen wrinkles for why he rose so fast, why he happened to have a history of cheating, why other people were suspicious of him, why he messed up the line after the interview, why the world champion dropped out of a tournament for the first time in his career, why his performance immediately dropped in the sinquefield cup after increased scrutiny, why other people behind the scenes have accused him...


I think historically we've had more people cheating over the board than we've had greatest players of all time, and Hans has been caught cheating twice before. One scenario seems more likely to me. I don't know if Hans cheated in the match against Magnus but given the evidence available it seems more likely Hans has cheated and that's helped him achieve his current standing. His post game analysis, Magnus throwing a tantrum, Hikaru acting like Hikaru are all just drama around it.


This. Worth noting that he has cheated in the past as well. Multiple times which shows he clearly didn't learn or regret it. Doesn't mean that he cheated OTB but it does show his character - that if he wants something (ie. higher rating) he is willing to do nefarious things to make it happen. Because of this I would say that it's marginally more likely that he is somehow regularly cheating but it's impossible to know.


People need to factor in how many games Hans played when they talk about his increase in Elo.


Was it a lot or not?


Yeah, he played like 259 games in 2021. That's a lot. [https://twitter.com/HansMokeNiemann/status/1462383877050310668](https://twitter.com/HansMokeNiemann/status/1462383877050310668)


Is that Classical games?


That's what it says in the tweet.


Yes, I think over 200 in a year. An absolutely ridiculous amount. I fully believe him when he says that he spends 12 hours a day on chess.


Most GM who play and work at chess full-time play around 100 games a year. Hans has played 259 games in 2021. That is literally insane.


I think you meant "metaphorically insane"


I use the word literally figuratively.


LOL i love it


No I think it could be defined as literally insane. Like actual crazy person obsessed status


The meanings of words change over time based on usage...every major dictionary acknowledges that using the word "literally" to exaggerate non-literal things is an accepted usage.


no actually he meant meteorologically insane


in the metaphoric membrane.


Mind blowing amount.


And that the pandemic caused him to be underrated and that he moved to Europe where it's easier to gain rating and that he quit school to play full time.


Yes practically no Americans quit school to play chess like this


I'm an American who quit school. It didn't help my chess rating though


Let's not all pi pi in our pampers. Magnus vs Hans 1v1 under strict conditions. No pens, no shoes and inside a farady cage- match set up and designed by Vince Mc Mahon. Two games a day till he either beats Magnus or taps out and admits he cheated. Only way to settle this.


Both butt naked with blinders and earmuffs on.


Hell in a cell part 2


When Hikaru was watching Hans' post-game analysis, it was pretty obvious to me that Hikaru was heavily implying that the quality of the analysis indicated that he didn't think Hans was capable of playing at a 2700 level, and therefore probably cheated. Hikaru also very heavily implied that he thought that Hans' time usage in the opening in the game against Magnus was suspicious, which again implies that it was evidence of cheating. I'm neither a fan nor detractor of Hikaru - I don't have a strong opinion on him one way or another. But I think that almost anyone who would watch the youtube video that Hikaru posted would come to the same conclusion that I have about what he was trying to say. **EDIT:** Just want to add that I think the hateful and vitriolic comments directed toward Hikaru are very wrong. Even if you think what Hikaru did was wrong, he's still a person, and he deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. You don't *really know him*, and none of us are perfect.


Yes, I don’t really watch Hikaru, but this was also how I felt. Hikaru seemed to think that Hans cheated in the clips the day after Magnus lost to Hans.


Hikaru said the interview was bad, which would indeed raise suspicions. Eric Hansen *and* Daniel Naroditsky said the exact same thing, and Daniel Naroditsky said he himself was only trying to be objective about it.


first thing I saw about this drama was his post game interview (after Magnus tweet) and with no additional information he DOES sound like a conman bullshitting his way through. having more insight I don't have the same view anymore


Same for me. I had no idea what the drama was but immediately thought “this guy is full of shit”




It’s not just Hikaru who said that. Hans’s analysis was objectively wrong according to the engine. Even the interviewer (who is a very strong player himself) was confused by what Hans was saying. Other GM’s have called the analysis bizarre and “incoherent.” Can you find any GM’s who describe Hans’s post-Alireza interview as 2700-level analysis? Either way, it’s pretty clear that Hans is playing at a 2700 level, and a bad interview doesn’t change that. He was either confused or flustered or had some other issue going on in that interview, but that by itself isn’t proof that he cheated against Magnus. (Not defending Hikaru here. He absolutely should’ve taken a better position and made it clear that Hans is innocent until proven guilty. I think he said that multiple times during his streams, but he was also over-representing the evidence against Hans in a misleading way. Still, I don’t think Hikaru said anything that’s not true or reasonable.)


>Can you find any GM’s who describe Hans’s post-Alireza interview as 2700-level analysis? Fressinet says he has given similarly incoherent interviews after big games while rated over 2700. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmldeic5NF8 Despite having a member of team Magnus on the podcast it is one of the least biased coverage of the whole situation.


Yeah, that’s totally reasonable. It can be the case that Hans’s analysis was well below 2700 because he was delirious due to mental fatigue. So I think the issue isn’t that Hikaru said it wasn’t 2700-level analysis (since he’s right). Hikaru should’ve given more context and pointed out that one interview doesn’t determine someone’s playing strength; their actual playing over hundreds of games does. Plus clearly Hans has given great analysis in other interviews.


> Can you find any GM’s who describe Hans’s post-Alireza interview as 2700-level analysis? I doubt that most GM's would even think in this category. That you can judge the level of analysis someone is capable of by a post game interview.


LOL I think we can all agree that wasn't 2700 analysis.




I didn't watch hikarus stream I watched then st louos stream. What about the bishop sack? And it wasn't just the moves, it was his presentation. I viewed it just the same as Naroditsky. The whole thing was just bizzare to everyone watching.




He discussed entire losing lines and said "look my pieces are beautiful this must be winning" when it's clearly losing and everyone watching was thinking the same thing. Listen, I don't think he cheated but your comments are the minority here. Everyone was furrowing their brow at this analysis. Even us baddies, wondering if we're just crazy.


What Bishop sac? If you mean Bxh6 in the followup to Qg3 vs. Alireza, that was correct, and not a sac (Black's only move there was g6, since the g pawn was pinned). And he was right about Bg5 f6 following that. The part that was weak there was incorrectly suggesting f4, and also missing Qf4 and h4 as good possible continuations. He just insisted just look at the position, that it must be winning, without being able to clearly articulate why.


The thing is that Hans appears to have some personality / communication issues. He has given some strange interviews in which he can barely talk coherently. It is quite plausible that Hans is just not one to be able to explain positions coherently -- but from everything I've heard about him, he is considered to be an extremely good player. My main concern is that he isn't going to get invited in tournaments where Magnus is attending. That will seriously impact his ability to get past 2700.


"This isn't 2700 level analysis" =/= "Hans can't play at a 2700 level". He was referring to Hans's analysis for that particular game.


Saying "this isn't 2700-level analysis" implies that he doesn't think Hans is capable of playing at a 2700 level, so I think the way I worded it is correct. But that's just a semantic thing - I think we probably agree on the underlying point here.




I think Hikaru definitely indirectly accused him, and I think if he thought otherwise he would have just banned the commenters in this video saying Hans said indirectly. That's not worth correcting if it's not a meaningful difference. That being said, I definitely don't think it's fair to say someone who can't give 2700-level analysis is incapable of playing a 2700-level game. I agree it could imply that but I think that's not the right conclusion to draw whether Hikaru implied it or not. While using an ELO calculator isn't exactly accurate, as someone could perform differently against specific players skewing the percentage, a 2500-rated player would have \~1.46% chance of beating a 2865-rated player with the black pieces. This may not seem very high but these things can happen, especially since Magnus played something a bit offbeat. It would be fair to conclude Hikaru believed Hans is overrated from the post-game analysis, but I don't think it's fair to conclude that means Hans cheated against Magnus. Again, I think Hikaru definitely indirectly accused Hans. I think the difference between those two things is pretty significant. If you're, say, 50% sure Hans cheated - that is to say, the evidence on both sides seems about equal to you - you could allude to thinking he might have cheated, but you should probably still oppose him being banned from play (which is what you should want if you're willing to directly accuse them.) I'm not a huge Hikaru fan either but I don't think, based on the information available, that Hikaru overstepped at all. He simply stated some facts about Hans' history, gave his opinion on how much we should trust Magnus, and gave his opinion on Hans' analysis ability. If Hikaru was more sure Hans cheated, he WOULD have directly accused him. He would have said that Hans cheated and presented why he believes that. When you're forced to speculate because you don't really have hard evidence and just circumstantial evidence, you're going to end up thinking about things in probabilities, not as truth-statements. If I'm 50% sure someone is a murderer, I'm absolutely not letting them watch my kids, and I would tell all my friends and family not to let them watch their kids either - and if I was a streamer, I would tell my entire audience not to let them watch their kids - but I wouldn't convict them over it. If Magnus and Chesscom stay radio silent until CGC Finals, I will be upset and probably take a stronger stance in favor of Hans. I will give them some time, they might still be making decisions, but until then as a community everyone has to draw their own conclusions based on the evidence we have available. I find it pretty unlikely Hans cheated against Magnus but if 10 years from now Hans admits to it I wouldn't be shocked either, we just don't know enough. I know I typed way too much for a random reply, but here's my final thoughts. It's healthy as a community to take something seriously when the world champion, who has no history of doing something like this, indicates someone is cheating. We should scrutinize that player, and we should be suspicious. Best case scenario, the world champion is wrong, realizes they were wrong, and apologizes. Worst case scenario, the player actually cheated. If Magnus stays silent, the entire chess community is on Hans' side right now, it really won't be that bad for Hans. If Magnus was worried at the time of his tweet that there could be repercussions as a result of a direct accusation, naturally he wouldn't be able to provide evidence either. Let's give things time to play out, have a healthy level of suspicion (come on, he's cheated in the not-so-far past and the world champion is indirectly accusing him, you don't need anything else to at least be a little suspicious,) and let Hans play until we have a reason to stop him.


It was pretty obvious to every GM that has given opinion on the analysis that it wasn't 2700 level? What's so controversial about it?




> In any case, the insinuation Hikaru made is that Hans gave sub-2700 level analyses *and therefore he's cheating.* That's not the insinuation. The insinuation is that Hans gave sub-2700 level analyses *and therefore there is reasonable suspicion to believe he's cheating.* Naroditsky said almost verbatim the same thing, but was just more professional about it.


Qh4 in that position is factually not 2700-level analysis. It isn't even 1700-level analysis. The options are that Niemann (a) misspoke/misheard or visually missed something on the board, (b) was intentionally trolling that part of the interview or (c) is incapable of 1700-level analysis. I know nothing about Niemann, so I'm not even speculating as to which of a-c it could be, but those are the options...




Well obviously they are cheating just like Hans. /s


There is no implication, he is clearly stating that he thinks his actions are suspicious but are not proof of cheating. If he believed that these were evidence of cheating then he would have called him a cheater, but he recognizes that these aren't irrefutable proofs of cheating so he calls them suspicious and doesn't go any further. You are allowed to say that someone's actions are suspicious without making the final jump of stating that they are cheating. Him saying this isn't 2700-level analysis is an observation regarding something he is witnessing, you can assume that means he thinks he's cheating, or it can mean that he simply made a blunder at the moment. It is you who is making the jump here, not Hikaru, Hikaru is clearly going out of his way not to make this jump. Hans' analysis was shown to be comedically wrong by the engine, so what exactly is the issue for Hikaru, to witness low level analysis and then call it as it is? He doesn't have the burden of given Hans' actions any excuses, he saw something and called it as it is. Why is he not allowed to see something that is suspicious, and then call it suspicious? It is possible for an action to be suspicious yet for the person who is taking the action to not have been a criminal. Hikaru didn't make any conclusions, he didn't say oh boy Hans' analysis sucked here therefore this is undeniable proof that he cheated. He simply called it as he saw it, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.


I think you make a fair point. The overall impression I got from the original video was that Hikaru thinks that Hans most likely cheated in his game against Magnus, but that he doesn't know for sure. It's not a direct accusation, but it's as close to the line as possible short of crossing it. But I still understand why Hans, if he is indeed innocent, would be extremely upset toward Hikaru. And I think that if Hans is innocent, then it was wrong for Hikaru to make the video, particularly knowing the nature of his audience on twitch and youtube, where witch-hunting has a tendency to spiral out of control very quickly. That said, I think the vitriol that gets directed at Hikaru frequently around here is very hateful and disgusting, and that people shouldn't treat him that way. None of us are perfect.


> And I think that if Hans is innocent, then it was wrong for Hikaru to make the video Hikaru doesn’t know whether or not Hans cheated. How can the morality of his actions be later ascribed based on information nobody had at the time? To draw an analogy: if I hit a random pedestrian with a car, then my actions would probably be considered wrong by most people. If that pedestrian turns out to be a mass shooter on their way to kill a bunch of people, that does not vindicate my actions. Whether or Hikaru was wrong to make the video is left to you to determine for yourself, but that determination should depend only on the information available to Hikaru (and us) at the time.


That’s a good point, actually. I guess you could say that I feel it was wrong of Hikaru to make the video regardless, because it would be devastating for Hans to be falsely accused. I really do feel terrible for the guy.


Yes. And I think he was wrong about the time usage, but he just was looking at it for the first time and just raised it as a question to ask. I think it was a reasonable point to raise, but when you look at the details, his time usage makes sense.


Dude saying he doesn't think it's 2700 analysis is a matter of opinion. It's perfectly fine to say, it's not a cheating accusations. Any top player can have a 2500 ELO game on occasion


Everyone was thinking that though; and without hindsight there is much bigger case for cheating, than against. At that moment in time literally all of reddit was suspicious, and then his interview came out and everyone switched up. The one thing I dislike about reddit is the whole hivemind thing, doing whatever or thinking whatever is popular.


Well, implaying that someone has cheated because you think he did is not the same as accusing someone of cheating because you know he did, so I don't see your point here.


we really should make a compilation with all the times Hikaru heavily implying that Hans cheated so him and his annoying fans can't weasel themselves out with this "HE NEVER ACCUSED HIM" excuse anymore. I'm so tired of the childish games.


Ok, Niemann did say "direct accusation" in his interview, TECHNICALLY Hikaru didn't accuse him directly. But is this really where we're at right now? Are we in some kind of internet court judging if Hikaru technically defamed Niemann? Hikaru knows what he did and what he implied, and everyone does. He should look back to what he did and properly apologize


Yeah I got the same feeling. In the video, to me, it seems like Hikaru makes a clear distinction between direct and indirect accusation. Okay great so maybe just apologize for indirectly saying he cheated lol. I really don't get what's so hard about apologizing. I honestly think it's a great life skill to have for any relationship. Like seriously, imagine trying to argue with your partner about whether your insult was direct or indirect. Point is, it doesn't matter and just show some compassion.


Accepting that you're in the wrong is a very important skill. But some people really, really suck at it, and will bend everything backwards and unleash countless excuses to avoid admitting fault.


>I really don't get what's so hard about apologizing. Presumably you have to think you're wrong or care what the offended party thinks. In the most simple reading (and what he repeats in the clip), while he doesn't think Hans has cheated on the board before, he knows Hans cheated online and that is a character assessment that he feels is relevant. So yes, it damages Hans' reputation by factual statements. The point is he doesn't really care; he's just making content while trying not to get sued.


Hans damaged his own reputation by cheating... Multiple times. What is so hard to understand here


Yeah, Amber Heard didn't directly name Johnny Depp in the article she got sued for and ended up losing 10 mill in court.


Yes, but Heard's statements directly accused the unnamed of abuse. Hikaru name Hans, but didn't directly say he did anything wrong.


This non-apology is so lame. He may not have directly said Hans cheated, but he heavily implied it for hours on stream. This guy has the maturity of an 8 year old.


> This non-apology is so lame He needs a way to keep milking this issue while not getting hated by everyone, so he needed to address this in some way. Remember, he's not even playing in this tournament but somehow made more from it (on twitch) than anything in the past 6 months.


The problem for Hans going forward will be not getting invited to tournaments in which Magnus is playing. Like what is going to happen if Magnus and Hans are matched in a game again?


Pure entertainment?


Apology for what? At the moment everything that day was very very very suspicious. Everyone, including reddit and other GMs were speculative.


Including Reddit?! Say it ain't so! When have we ever gotten something wrong?


I'm saying it's not fair to hate on hikaru for it. When someone does wrong, try to relate their mistakes to your own. Personally after I speculated as well, I have no right to be upset at anyone who was also speculative.


I appreciate what you're saying, and agree that people are far too quick to judge. However, I also think that because of Hikaru's large following and influence in the chess community, he should hold himself to a higher standard, because his words are disproportionately impactful. I mean, imagine if Hans truly is innocent, and he just made the greatest accomplishment of his career, how crushed he must be feeling right now.


I agree, hikaru should watch his words more. That being said I don't think he made any *real* accusations; and a lot of the clips on here are out of context. A viewer asked hikaru why magnus would be suspicious; and hikaru stated that hans cheated online. Other than that he was just reacting to hans bizzare interviews and analysis like almost every other chess fan. I don't think his speculation warrants hate to this level. With that also being said he could have used a better word choice on everything he spoke; but hikaru isn't known for being an exactly 'nice' person. I really feel for Hans right now, poor fellow is just in an unfortunate situation. I hope magnus releases a statement soon to release tension. However, He legitimately might not be allowed to make a statement if there is a FIDE investigation in effect. This whole situation is probably the most poorly held issue I've ever seen regarding chess. Hope everyone goes home happy.


I'll push back a bit against this point. People with large audiences and wide reaches should be held to a higher standard, especially when these people are speculating to the audience.


I disagree, I think everyone should be held to the same standards. Morally, I can't say something I did shouldn't be okay for someone else just because they have a following. If I do something wrong, it is wrong if they do it too. And if I do the same wrong as them, I have no right to hate on their wrong. I think we just have differing philosophy on ethics, and that's okay. Just my two cents.


Apologize for speculating on matters you had no knowledge of and financially benefitted from? Great nobody knows anything, then why are you going on stream all but calling Hans a cheater?


because he did cheat in chess.com?


he has the right to imply it, hans was a cheater, hikaru has the right to give his opinion


I think your comparison is insulting to 8 year olds.


I have a friend who said Hans slept with Magnus' mom. I won't state his name, but he believes that. No, guys I didn't say that about Hans, it was my friend, I am just informing you. Thank you for the subscriptions! No guys, I'm not directly saying anything, there are just rumours in the chess community. And I'm not saying it happened, but Hans is a well known seducer, so it's possible to say the least, just being suspicious, just passing some informative news. /s obviously, but would actually enhance the leaking prep theory.


Lets make this less disingenuous. "I have a friend who thinks Hans slept with his mom. I know for a fact that Hans sleeps around a lot with peoples mothers and has been caught on a number of occasions. When he was asked about this specific occasion he put on a silly voice and wasn't able to give a sensible reason for being in their house. However, noone has actually caught him in the act and there isn't any evidence. Also, it's good to see you guys after taking some time away from streaming to play over the board. Thanks for renewing your subs now I'm back."


I think everyone is forgetting the real issue here. We need to know if Hans cheated or not. This has still yet to be determined. We can only wait for magnus or [chess.com](https://chess.com) or SQC to find some definitive evidence.


There's no way to know for a fact. If Magnus had actual proof why wouldn't he have come out with it by now?


My take is that Magnus has very strong suspicions but little to no hard proof. The implications of Magnus suggesting cheating are obviously massive, he’s not only the world champion and strongest chess player ever, but he is also not the type of guy to call out cheating. I’ve seen many streams of him playing on chess24 against obvious blatant cheaters and he would just win by flagging or force a drawn position, and even then he would just smirk, not say anything, and move on to the next game. So for him to publicly insinuate cheating is a big deal and shouldn’t be taken lightly.


Because he would submit it to SLCC instead of to random public on Twitter? Chances are he told the organizers what he thought, hence the increased security. If they investigate and find no evidence which seems most likely, Magnus will eventually release a statement once the investigation into his likely report is completed.


might still be processing for some users edit: should be fine now edit 2:[ Hikaru's video on his main channel](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCzwLk6fXXs)


God y’all hate Hikaru around here


His personality rubs people the wrong way. Other chess GMs don't like him for the same reason.


Just hearing this man talk removes the blood under my nails. I don't understand how anyone can listen to this for more than 5 minutes let alone taking pleasure from it. He speaks every sentence in such an excruciating manner it makes me want to punch something. It must have something to do with him pronouncing every sentence as a question even though it's not a question.


Every other thread on reddit, and pro player that made the same conclusions as hikaru are fine. But hikaru = bad because hikaru. - Reddit


I'm not really into the comp chess community and I still don't have strong opinions about him, but man this response was shit


Did Hikaru not continually bring up that "there have been rumors for years" that Hans has been cheating? It's not just airing out his chess.com past. "People /r/chess adore say Hans cheated," Hikaru said. He said he didn't fully believe it before, but because of Magnus' tweet he thinks there is something to it now. Then countless insinuations like [this](https://www.twitch.tv/gmhikaru/clip/ComfortableTacitAnteaterCorgiDerp-uLJwMUQ94K4H28qH) and [this](https://www.twitch.tv/gmhikaru/clip/FuriousBetterSangDoritosChip-kii_E-OpbrntBHkR). Edit: Referenced clips https://www.twitch.tv/gmhikaru/clip/AnnoyingCharmingAsteriskMrDestructoid-Wl4fkxvgNSRsOSP6 https://www.twitch.tv/gmhikaru/clip/TriumphantSquareSmoothieCurseLit-4NVQ2S_gDzuyy2Wl


Hasn't that all been proven correct though? Ian Nepomniachtchi is one of those who previously accused him. Someone found a clip of him from two years ago suggesting on a stream that he thought Hans was cheating. And Hans in his interview even admitted it was true. He admitted he was caught cheating on Chess.com. This is the first Hans has aired out that very recent past (<3 years ago). Hikaru is just reporting facts here. And he is correct that this context is likely to have something to do with Magnus's actions.


I 100% agree People are mad mostly because of interview analysis, every strong player that made statement agreed to it, so why are they not mad at everyone else? I remember watching stream live and he kept saying 'to be clear I do not think hans cheated'. Buuut since analysis was suspicious and got most highlight it appears that previous statments dont matter anymore.. Personally I would wait week or 2 to see if magnus and chess.com come up with some statement. Right now everything still unclear and people should be a bit more patient


> He said he didn't fully believe it before, but because of Magnus' tweet he thinks there is something to it now. That is not what he said. He said there's reasoning as to why Magnus and a few others may find it suspicious. He did not say "there is something more to it" as in there is more evidence to believe that Hans cheated due to the tweet.


In the first stream on the topic he said he dismissed the allegations and refused to believe them but after reading Magnus' tweet is now more skeptical.


What a child. Everyone knows what he was implying, even if he didn't accuse him directly. He should just admit it, say sorry and move on.


I think Hikaru is heavily suspicious. Is that illegal or defamatory against a known repeat cheater? Ffs you're the one being a child.


>He should just admit it, say sorry and move on. This is Hikaru we're talking about. Saying he should admit he was wrong and apologize for something is as plausible as saying he should grow wings and fly across the Atlantic.


So magnus shouldn’t apologize for implying hans cheated as well even if it wasn’t as accusatory as hikarus statements? You guys are so biased against hikaru it’s hilarious how this sub pounces on every chance to join the hikaru is a shitbag bandwagon


He should say sorry for implying that a known cheater may have cheated?


If it weren't for Hikaru's nutsack, this sub would have nothing to hang on to.


So much hate for Hikaru, no matter what you think of his (past) behavior, he clearly did not accuse Hans of cheating OTB against Magnus. There is even video of him saying precisely that. He did state that Hans cheated before, that his post game analysis was below 2700 level and that he thinks Magnus believes he cheated. People then extrapolate and hate on Hikaru...


Hikarus original video is actually a pretty good synopsis of the events as they're happening in real time, giving context from multiple sides. I mean, Magnus fucking Carlson quit a tourney midway through, and Hikaru tried to offer some context/reasoning to a community desperate for answers. Sure it is Hikaru and he has a way of being a drama queen, but I think this sub just has a raging hate boner for him regardless of what he does/says.


This is how I feel. They hated him because he spoke the truth.


I agree with him


Fuck cheaters. Boo fucking hoo.


Hikaru is completely right. And people here saying he should apologize.... That's ridiculous!


Since when have Reddit crusaders ever accepted an apology anyway? This sub would say the apology isn't genuine and would continue to shit on him constantly regardless. The Hikaru hate is absolutely absurd around here, and I'm not even really a Hikaru fan other than occasionally watching a video of his every now and then.


The craziest part is that people here manage to blame hikaru more than magnus for the whole situation. Absolute insanity. Not only that, but they want hikaru to apologize for saying exactly what hans himself admitted, because he “heavily implied” stuff or whatever. Unreal


Exactly, people seem to forget that magnus has still said nothing whatsoever


People on Reddit are wild lmao. Multiple other GMs have stated the exact same thing Hikaru has yet everyone bashes Hikaru and Hikaru only The dude literally said why he and/or other GMs might have found Hans suspicious which is his very right to voice those opinions. Just because you state why something might be suspicious does not equal saying they are guilty. Other GMs have came out and said the exact same thing and y’all aren’t on here bashing them. Everyone just has a hate boner for Hikaru. Everything that has happened including Hans past very justifiably raises red flags and concerns. Absolutely nothing wrong with that and there’s nothing wrong with a player/streamer/or anybody else for that matter voicing their concerns. Stop riding this hate train and let things play out. If it were to come out that Hans did cheat everyone here would look really silly asking Hikaru to apologize for something he may or may not be right about with his suspicions


fact based and reasonable analysis, logical


Hikaru wants to accuse Hans of cheating in his game against Magnus, but not be held accountable if it turns out that Hans didn't actually cheat in his game against Magnus. "I did not say Hans cheated over the board." Sure, bud. If any actual evidence is found, Hikaru will be the first to leap to his feet shouting "See! I told you!" Hikaru and Magnus were my two favorite people in chess, but the way they have acted in the past week leaves a really sour taste. There has been such an utter and complete lack of maturity from them that I don't think I can be their fans anymore, regardless of how the issue with Hans turns out. Can you imagine how terrible it is if Hans didn't cheat? Hikaru and Magnus have robbed him of the joy from what should have been the greatest moment of his life.


tl;dr: no offense, I literally don't care


Hikaru is an entertainer. He is allowed to share his thoughts. His thoughts seemed reasonable, and he has definitely given the disclaimer that Hans may not be cheating. Yes he's a weird dude, but what's all the hate, he seems to be being genuine. Whether wrong or right, he's allowed to have his suspicions and speak about them openly.


At 6:07 Hikaru says that he talked to a participant of the St. Louis Rapid & Blitz who told him that they are sure that „Hans has done something“. Do I understand this correctly? (I‘m not a native English speaker) If yes, he says that there is a concrete suspicion that Niemann cheated in St. Louis.


Niemann was not playing in the Rapid & Blitz, so they were talking about previous tournaments. The Sinquefield Cup was right afterwards.


Hikaru bad give upvote pls


r/chess hateboner against Hikaru means he'll get criticized no matter what he says or do, it's actually hilarious and sad


It takes this long to process??


it should be fine now.. yeah, it depends on the length of the video


Big event today that’s nuking reddit’s servers


Hikaru has falsely accused others of cheating before, hasn't he? I read about GM Supi I saw a clip about Andrew Tang


I think the list of GMs who have accused someone of cheating is longer than a list of those who haven't


I am not going to accuse anyone directly, but there is a very good chess player and popular streamer who is a complete piece of crap. He doesn't care if he destroys a person's reputation/career as long as he gets more views, likes or subs. Disgusting. But I'm not accusing anyone.


Harsh summary of Gotham.


Maybe don't cheat if you don't want your reputation destroyed?


Yeah, Magnus definitely screwed up here.


tf did you say about me?!


Relax, I said very good chess player, not blunder machine or En Passant decliner.


Hans destroyed his own career by cheating.


For me, a lot pivots on the timing of the chess.com ban. If this preceded hikaru’s rant then he is more or less in the clear as this is evidence the damage was already mostly done.