Wednesday, December 21, 2022

Four-Time Super Bowl Champion Running Back Franco Harris Has Passed Away

Franco Harris, a four-time Super Bowl champion with the Pittsburgh Steelers who was briefly the NFL's second all-time leading rusher behind only the incomparable Jim Brown (before Walter Payton surpassed both players during the 1984 season), passed away yesterday at the age of 72. Harris was the key participant in the most famous play in NFL history, the "Immaculate Reception," but his career was characterized not just by one great moment but rather by sustained greatness as he accumulated eight 1000 yard rushing seasons and earned nine Pro Bowl selections plus the Super Bowl IX MVP.

Harris made a big impact as a rookie in 1972, rushing for 1055 yards while averaging 5.6 yards per attempt and scoring 10 rushing touchdowns. He ranked second in the league in yards per attempt, third in the league in rushing touchdowns, and sixth in the league in rushing yards en route to winning the AP Rookie of the Year award and finishing eighth in MVP voting. The Steelers improved from 6-8 in 1971 to 11-3 in 1972, qualifying for the playoffs for the first time since 1947; the Steelers won at least 10 games in six of the next seven seasons, capturing four Super Bowl titles along the way (1974-75, 1978-79).

Although the 1972 playoff run did not culminate in a Super Bowl title, it was still quite memorable. In the Divisional Round, the Steelers faced 4th and 10 while trailing the Oakland Raiders 7-6 with 22 seconds remaining in the fourth quarter. Terry Bradshaw threw a deep pass to running back Frenchy Fuqua, who collided with defensive back Jack Tatum as the ball arrived. The ball flew back through the air before Harris caught it just inches above the turf and raced to the end zone for the game-winning touchdown. Raiders fans insist to this day that the play was illegal under the rules at the time--which would be correct if the ball hit Fuqua before Tatum touched the ball (an illegal "double touch" by the offense until that rule was changed in 1978)--but the point here is not what the officials called but rather that Harris put himself at the right place at the right time to make the game-winning play. Local sportscaster Myron Cope is credited with terming the play the "Immaculate Reception." 

The Steelers lost 21-17 in the AFC Championship Game to the soon to be 17-0 Miami Dolphins, but Harris' arrival signified the beginning of the Steelers' dynasty that dominated the NFL for the next several years. Before Harris joined the team in 1972, the Steelers had never won a playoff game. The Steelers went 14-5 in the playoffs with Harris (he missed one playoff game due to injury, a 24-7 loss to the Raiders in the 1976 AFC Championship Game). Former Steelers defensive lineman John Banaszak declared, "For me, Franco was one of the greatest money backs of all time. When the game was on the line, when the games got more important, when the championship was on the line the better Franco Harris was."

Harris' numbers back up Banaszak's statement. Harris set the Super Bowl single game rushing record (since broken) with 158 yards as Pittsburgh defeated Minnesota 16-6 in Super Bowl IX. He scored at least one touchdown in three of Pittsburgh's four Super Bowl wins, and his 354 career Super Bowl rushing yards remains the all-time record nearly 40 years after he retired. Harris retired as the NFL's career postseason rushing leader with 1556 yards, a total that has only been surpassed by Emmitt Smith (1586 yards).

Harris was a big, powerful runner who did most of his damage between the tackles, but he also had breakaway speed (he had a 75 yard run as a rookie, and he also had a 71 yard run in 1979). He never won a regular season rushing title, but he ranked in the top 10 eight times, including a second place finish in 1975 when he accumulated a career-high 1246 yards and only trailed O.J. Simpson (1817).

The 50th anniversary of the "Immaculate Reception" is this Friday, and the day after that the Pittsburgh Steelers will host the Las Vegas Raiders. Prior to Harris' passing, the Steelers had already planned to retire Harris' number 32 during that game (it is very surprising that his number had not been retired a long time ago). It is sad that Harris did not live long enough to celebrate that anniversary and see his jersey being retired.

The first football season that I remember clearly is 1978, and the first Super Bowl that I remember clearly is Super Bowl XIII, when the Pittsburgh Steelers won their third Super Bowl in five years by defeating the Dallas Cowboys, 35-31. Harris did not put up gaudy numbers in that game (20 carries for 68 yards), but his fourth quarter 22 yard touchdown run pushed the Steelers' lead to 28-17. That Super Bowl featured many dramatic plays and moments, and ranks high on the list of most memorable Super Bowls of all-time.

As a Cleveland Browns fan, I did not like Harris or the Steelers, but I respected their greatness, and I feared them as an opponent; it seemed to me as a kid that he saved some of his best performances for the Browns, and the numbers support my recollections: for example, his two top rushing performances in the 1979 regular season (153 yards and 151 yards) both came against the Browns.

As a child, sports superstars seem bigger than life, and indestructible. When I think about sports in the 1970s, many players dance across my mind, including Julius Erving, Pete Maravich, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, a host of my favorite Cleveland Browns (including Brian Sipe, Greg Pruitt, Mike Pruitt, and Ozzie Newsome), Bjorn BorgMario Andretti, and Pete Rose, but if I had to name one team that defined the 1970s I would probably pick the Pittsburgh Steelers--and it is impossible to think of the Pittsburgh Steelers without picturing Franco Harris. I can still see in my mind's eye his hip pads sticking up out of his yellow pants as his big thighs broke tackles and piled up yardage. 

I never rooted for Harris and the Steelers, but I have many childhood memories of watching in awe at their excellence. With Harris' sudden and unexpected passing, it feels like a part of my childhood is gone, or at least somewhere beyond reach.

Friday, December 9, 2022

Baker Mayfield Leads the L.A. Rams to Improbable Comeback Win Over the Las Vegas Raiders

The L.A. Rams' 17-16 Thursday Night Football win over the Las Vegas Raiders is one of the most improbable comebacks in sports history--and that is not hyperbole, it is demonstrable fact: according to the Elias Sports Bureau, the Rams' game-winning 98 yard drive was the longest go-ahead touchdown drive that began in the final two minutes of an NFL game in the past 45 seasons.

The reigning Super Bowl champion Rams stumbled into the game with a 3-9 record en route to what will likely be the worst season ever by a Super Bowl winner; the only other Super Bowl winners to lose at least nine games in the next season are the 1987 New York Giants (6-9 in a strike-shortened season), and the 1999 Denver Broncos (6-10). On Thursday against the Raiders, the Rams were down to their third string quarterback Baker Mayfield in the first quarter, because injured second string quarterback John Wolford only played the first series. Mayfield had just joined the Rams on Tuesday after being waived by the Carolina Panthers, who had demoted him to third string. 

The Raiders are not a powerhouse, but they had just won three straight games, and after a 36 yard field goal by Daniel Carlson increased their lead over the Rams to 16-3 with 12:25 remaining in the fourth quarter no one expected Baker Mayfield to transform into Tom Brady; just four days earlier, Brady led his Tampa Bay Buccaneers to a 17-16 Monday Night Football win over the New Orleans Saints after trailing 16-3 with 5:21 remaining in the fourth quarter--but Brady is a seven-time Super Bowl champion and that was his record-setting 44th comeback in the fourth quarter or overtime, while Mayfield's NFL resume is shorter and much less distinguished.

Mayfield does not fit either of the main prototypes for an NFL quarterback: he is not a big, strong, and tall quarterback who stands in the pocket until the last second, absorbing a bone-crunching hit before delivering an accurate 50 yard bomb, nor is he an elite runner who can threaten defenses with both the pass and the run. He is an undersized quarterback with good arm strength who uses his mobility to buy time to throw, but prefers not to run (he has never rushed for more than 165 yards in a season). 

Mayfield's best qualities are leadership and toughness. There is no question that his teammates rally around him, believe in him, and genuinely like him. There is also no question that he is tough, as shown by his willingness to play through injury (see below), and by his overall durability (he appeared in at least 14 games in each of his first four seasons).

When A.J. Cole's 65 yard punt rolled to the two yard line with two minutes left in the fourth quarter and the Raiders leading 16-10, Mayfield faced the daunting task of leading the Rams 98 yards for a touchdown with no timeouts. The drive did not begin well: Mayfield had two incompletions, and then his third pass was intercepted, but the interception was nullified by a pass interference call (the pass would probably have not been intercepted but for the pass interference against intended receiver Van Jefferson). After the automatic first down because of the penalty, Mayfield was sacked on first down, but the sack was wiped out by an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on Jerry Tillery, who knocked the ball out of Mayfield's hand after the play was over and the Rams were trying to hurry up to run the next play.

Mayfield hit Ben Skowronek with a 32 yard completion, placing the Rams at the Raiders' 40 yard line. Mayfield then completed two short passes to advance the ball to the 23 yard line before spiking the ball with :16 left in regulation. On the next play, Mayfield connected with Jefferson for the game tying touchdown. The Rams took the lead with a successful extra point kick, and they guaranteed the win with an interception on the Raiders' first play from scrimmage after the ensuing kickoff.

Mayfield is 0-22 in his career as a starter when his team trails by at least 13 points, but this was the second time he has led a 13-point comeback after coming off of the bench; he overcame a 14-0 deficit in his NFL debut in 2018.

That debut took place when Mayfield played for the Cleveland Browns. Mayfield's departure from Cleveland has engendered resentment and mockery from at least some Browns fans. I am a lifelong Cleveland Browns fan, but I am not a Browns fan who feels any animosity toward Mayfield. The Browns have been a dysfunctional franchise ever since returning to the NFL in 1999, and some of the team's best moments during that dreadful period have come with Mayfield at the helm. In 2018, Mayfield set an NFL single season rookie record (since broken) with 27 touchdown passes, leading the Browns to a 7-8-1 record. A seven win season may not seem impressive, but that was the Browns' best record since 2007, which says a lot not only about Mayfield but also about the decrepit state of the franchise. Mayfield threw 22 touchdown passes in 2019 and became the first Browns quarterback to start all 16 regular season games since Tim Couch in 2001, but Mayfield's interception total increased from 14 to 21, and the Browns' record slipped to 6-10.

In 2020, Mayfield tossed 26 touchdowns and just eight interceptions as the Browns went 11-5, qualifying for the playoffs for the first time since 2002. Mayfield again started all 16 regular season games. The Browns then defeated the Pittsburgh Steelers 48-37 in the Wild Card game, posting the third highest single game playoff scoring total in franchise history while notching the team's first road playoff win since 1969 and first playoff win overall since January 1995, when Bill Belichick coached the Browns. The Browns' playoff run ended with a 22-17 loss to the defending Super Bowl champion Kansas City Chiefs.

Mayfield led the Browns to a 3-1 record to start the 2021 season, but he had partially torn the labrum in his left shoulder in the second game, and that injury limited his effectiveness for the bulk of that campaign. Mayfield showed his toughness by playing in 14 out of 16 games, but the team should have protected him from himself and given him the opportunity to fully recover. Mayfield finished with 17 touchdowns and 13 interceptions, the Browns went 8-9 as the schedule expanded to 17 games, and the team traded Mayfield to Carolina after the season.

In sum, Mayfield had a very good rookie season, he led the Browns to their first playoff win in almost 30 years, and he fought through a painful injury to try to help the team win in 2021 (that may not have been the smartest thing to do, but no one can question his heart or his toughness). The Browns' problems--as evidenced by the team's 5-7 record this season--run much deeper than Mayfield's real or perceived shortcomings; he deserves a lot of credit for any success that the Browns had during his stint with the franchise, and not much blame for problems that existed for decades before he arrived and, sadly, persist after his departure.

I am neither a Rams fan not a Raiders fan, but I enjoyed watching Mayfield show his doubters and critics that he can still play. In terms of quarterback evaluation, I trust Super Bowl-winning coach Sean McVay a lot more than I trust any of the coaches or talent evaluators for the Cleveland Browns or Carolina Panthers (who have had four coaches but just one playoff appearance since losing the Super Bowl after the 2015 season). If McVay thinks that Mayfield can contribute to a winning program he is probably right, and on Thursday night Mayfield did his part to justify McVay's belief in him.

Friday, October 21, 2022

Hans Niemann Ties for Fifth in U.S. Championship, Files $100 Million Lawsuit Against Carlsen, Chess.com, and Nakamura

Hans Niemann tied for fifth place in the 14 player round robin 2022 U.S. Chess Championship held at the Saint Louis Chess Club located across the street from the World Chess Hall of Fame. He scored 7/13, 1.5 points behind first place finisher Fabiano Caruana, the 2016 U.S. Chess Champion who drew the 2018 World Chess Championship match against Magnus Carlsen before losing 3-0 in the Rapid Tiebreak.

Niemann's performance rating of 2699 in the 2022 U.S. Chess Championship exactly matches his pre-tournament over the board rating of 2699. Keep in mind that 2700 is often denoted as the minimum rating level for an elite chess player. There has been a lot of reckless speculation about Niemann cheating at over the board chess, but there is no evidence that Niemann has cheated at over the board chess, and there is no evidence that Niemann cheated in the U.S. Championship, which is the most prestigious tournament of the year in American chess.  

Some of Niemann's accusers/critics have suggested that Niemann play strong players under controlled conditions to "prove" that his high over the board rating is legitimate and to prove that he is not cheating. If the U.S. Championship is not a sufficiently secure event and proving ground then that means there are few if any secure events left in over the board chess. Niemann's performance in this strong 13 player event is compelling evidence that his rating is a legitimate reflection of his playing strength and not due to cheating. Does this one tournament result definitively prove that Niemann never cheated at over the board chess? No, but the burden of proof is not on Niemann to prove that he is not cheating or has not cheated; the burden of proof rests with his accusers. However, the notion that Niemann playing over the board in controlled circumstances would reveal him to be a cheater lost credibility in the wake of Niemann's U.S. Championship performance in his first appearance in that event, and anyone who asserted that Niemann would be exposed when playing against America's top players looks uninformed.

In related news, Niemann has filed a $100 million federal lawsuit against World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen, Chess.com, Grandmaster Hikarua Nakamura, Danny Rensch (an officer of Chess.com), and the Play Magnus Group (one of Carlsen's companies). You can read Niemann's 44 page complaint here. Niemann asserts five causes of action: Slander, libel, violations of the Sherman Act, tortious interference with contract and business expectancies, and civil conspiracy. 

Each count refers to a specific legal term of art with a specific legal meaning and a specific burden of proof necessary in order for Niemann to prevail. In non-lawyer terms, Niemann is asserting that the named defendants conspired together to defame Niemann in both written word and spoken word, that the named defendants conspired together to prevent Niemann from earning a living as a chess player, chess streamer, and chess coach, and that they interfered with specific contracts that Niemann already had in place to participate in chess tournaments and chess matches. Niemann's allegations are serious, but they are also difficult to prove in court. Niemann filed his lawsuit in the Eastern District of Missouri, presumably because this situation began in St. Louis when Carlsen withdrew from the Sinquefield Cup after losing to Niemann. Disputes over jurisdiction are a major aspect of litigation, and it will be interesting to see if one or more of the named defendants moves for dismissal based on improper subject matter jurisdiction and/or improper personal jurisdiction. It is also possible that one or more of the named defendants moves for summary judgment, which would be the assertion that even if Niemann's allegations are viewed in the most favorable light by the court he would not be able to meet the burden of proof on one or more of the causes of action.

I decline to speculate on how the court might rule on such motions, but this will be an interesting case to follow, and a case that potentially could have a significant impact not only in terms of the outcome of the litigation, but also on the chess community's methods of detecting chess cheating and the chess community's response when a player is suspected of cheating in the absence of credible evidence or a confession.

Monday, October 17, 2022

There is No Evidence That Hans Niemann Has Cheated in Over the Board Chess

It is interesting that people who actually know the strengths and limitations of using chess engines to analyze chess games while looking for signs of cheating find no evidence that Hans Niemann has cheated in over the board chess. International Master Ken Regan--who has a doctorate in complexity theory and is widely considered the leading expert regarding how to detect chess cheating--examined every game played by Niemann over the past two years and determined that the evidence does not support cheating allegations against Niemann.

In Let's Check: the elite are better than you know, Albert Silver provides a detailed description of the Chessbase tool "Let's Check," pointing out how it can (and has) been manipulated to make Niemann look like a cheater. The reality--as noted in the "Let's Check" article--is that, of all the participants in the Sinqufield Cup, Niemann's moves had the least correlation with the best moves selected by the top chess engines. In layman's terms, when Niemann beat Magnus Carlsen--after which Carlsen whined like a crybaby sore loser and withdrew from the tournament--Niemann played at a solid Grandmaster level while Carlsen played an awful game. One can speculate about why Carlsen played so poorly, but the larger point is that Carlsen lost because he played poorly and not because Niemann played at such a high level that only a supercomputer could match his moves.

It is worth noting that Carlsen not only declined to defend his World Champion title but he is also losing to other young, rising players in addition to losing to Niemann. The evidence suggests that it is more likely that (1) Carlsen is declining in playing strength, (2) Carlsen is keenly aware that he is declining in playing strength, and (3) Carlsen is disconcerted about his declining playing strength. That is not to say that Carlsen is not the best player in the world; the evidence also shows that Carlsen is still the best player in the world. The point is that the margin by which he is ahead of everyone else seems to be shrinking, and as Carlsen ages he is becoming more prone to having concentration lapses that cause him to lose to younger (and perhaps more ambitious) players. It is clearly not Carlsen's goal to break the record for longest time holding the World Champion title, so the only new thing left for him to achieve is reaching a 2900 rating, which seems statistically unlikely (as Carlsen has freely admitted). Thus, Carlsen's motivation and concentration may no longer be at peak value, and he has a host of young, highly motivated, and intensely focused players nipping at his heels.

There are many people whose lack of knowledge and understanding does not inhibit their propensity to make bold, unfounded allegations, but it is very important to uphold the principle of innocent until proven guilty. A person is not guilty of a specific offense because of something else that he did in the past, or because you don't like him, or because his behavior seems odd to you, or because his success seems implausible to you. A person should only be found guilty if there is credible evidence indicating guilt.

There is no credible evidence indicating that Hans Niemann cheated at over the board chess. Magnus Carlsen and all of Niemann's other accusers owe Niemann an apology--and could very well owe him money if Niemann decides to file a defamation suit. It should be noted that it can be expensive and difficult to prove defamation in court, so if Niemann chooses to not file suit that does not lend any credibility to what Niemann's accusers said about him: the burden of proof rests with the accuser, not the accused, in our legal system.

It will be interesting to see if FIDE's investigation of this matter results in sanctions against Carlsen and others. I predict that Carlsen will be reprimanded for his reckless statements, for withdrawing from the Sinquefield Cup, and for throwing a game to Niemann in the Generation Cup, but I doubt that FIDE will go beyond that, because Carlsen wields so much power and influence in the chess world.

Wednesday, October 12, 2022

National Chess Day at the World Chess Hall of Fame Fischer-Spassky Exhibit

In 1976, President Gerald Ford issued a Presidential proclamation establishing National Chess Day, celebrated on the second Saturday of each October. In 2022, the second Saturday fell on October 8, and I spent the entire weekend in Saint Louis, home to the World Chess Hall of Fame and the Saint Louis Chess Club. I arrived in Saint Louis late on Friday night, and I was happy to take some pictures of the exteriors of the World Chess Hall of Fame and the Saint Louis Chess Club in anticipation of touring both just a few hours later:

I had read about and seen pictures of the world's largest chess piece, but it was cool to actually stand in front of a 20 foot tall King weighing 10,860 pounds! The massive King stands guard in front of the World Chess Hall of Fame. Across the street, the Saint Louis Chess Club is undergoing a major expansion, as noted by the sign declaring "Our Next Move Coming Soon!"

The World Chess Hall of Fame opened at 10 a.m. on Saturday morning, and I was the first customer in the door. To the right of the entrance is the Gift Shop, but I stopped in there last so I would not have to carry my new treasures throughout the museum. The lobby had a display with several free chess posters, including one featuring the world's largest chess piece and another about the Fischer-Spassky exhibit.

The Fischer-Spassky exhibit--officially titled "1972 Fischer/Spassky: The Match, Its Origin, and Influence," and on view from August 18, 2022-April 30, 2023--is the main reason that I made this trip at this time. I had always wanted to visit the World Chess Hall of Fame, but there was no way that I was going to miss seeing this particular exhibit. Bobby Fischer left behind a mixed legacy, but purely from a chess standpoint he is my favorite player of all-time; his games have a clear, simple logic that belies the depth of his ideas, and playing over his games gives me the same sense of peace that I suspect that music aficionados feel when listening to the works of the all-time great composers. Fischer was an artistic genius and a fierce competitor--the only player both willing and able to win all 11 games in a U.S. Championship after 10 wins had already clinched the title. The mental illness that caused Fischer's retreat from the chess world and his descent into seclusion and paranoia is a personal tragedy for Fischer and a human tragedy for the world that was deprived of the full flower of Fischer's genius.

The World Chess Hall of Fame has three floors. Right now, the Fischer/Spassky exhibit takes up almost all of the display space on each floor. Before entering the main room on the first floor, there is a staircase, and next to the staircase is a television playing several videos of Fischer on a loop. The videos include Mike Wallace's "60 Minutes" interview with Fischer before the 1972 World Championship Match plus Fischer's appearances on the Bob Hope Show and on the Tonight Show featuring Johnny Carson.

The main room on the first floor focuses on Fischer's youth, and his rapid development into a world class chess player. Fischer was born in Chicago on March 9, 1943, and he spent part of his early childhood in Phoenix with his mother Regina and his older sister Joan. The family moved to Manhattan in 1949 before settling in Brooklyn in 1950. New York City was the epicenter of American chess at that time, and it is interesting to speculate about how Fischer's chess career would have turned out had he not spent his formative years in that environment.

One of the items on display is a copy of My Seven Chess Prodigies, a 1975 book written by John W. Collins, who mentored the young Fischer. In the book, Collins wrote, "Geniuses like Beethoven, Leonardo Da Vinci, Shakespeare, and Fischer come out of the head of Zeus, seem to be genetically programmed, know before being instructed." The book's inside front cover is inscribed with this message from Collins to Fischer, dated 24 June 1978: "For Bobby, With best wishes and the hope you will enjoy these maxims--Jack."

Fischer's participation in the Hawthorne Chess Club--based in Collins' home near where Fischer went to school--played an important role in his development. The exhibit includes a picture of Fischer playing against Collins at Collins' house, plus the actual furniture from the picture:


 

The exhibit includes a large display about Spassky's development from young player to World Champion. It should be remembered that Spassky was a great player in his own right, and not just an obstacle in the path of Fischer's rise to the top. 

Here is a collection of various medals that Spassky won:

The medal in the middle with the biggest ribbon is Spassky's board one gold medal from the 1970 Chess Olympiad, and the medal in the upper right with the blue ribbon is his 1969 World Chess Championship medal, awarded after he dethroned Tigran Petrosian.

Here is the trophy that Spassky won after capturing the 1955 World Junior Chess Championship:

Various video monitors include archival footage of events leading up to the match and recaps of the action during the match. Older visitors (or students of American mainstream media) will recognize Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, and other prominent broadcasters of that era leading the coverage. On the third floor, there is a video monitor that includes interviews with Fischer biographer International Master John Donaldson, Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan, and Grandmaster Maurice Ashley.

The 1972 World Championship Match between Fischer and Spassky nearly ended before it began because of Fischer's numerous demands about a host of issues, from the prize fund to the noise made by cameras in the playing area to the size of the squares on the chessboard. Fischer showed up late in Iceland, lost the first game after a risky sacrifice that is still being analyzed/debated 50 years later, and then forfeited the second game after refusing to play in the main playing hall because he felt it was too noisy. Game three took place in a back room, and Fischer beat Spassky not just for the first time in the match but for the first time ever. Spassky only won one more game the rest of the way, as Fischer cruised to a 12.5-8.5 triumph. 

The whole exhibit is fascinating, and I spent most of the day methodically working my way through each item on display. There were three items that I was most looking forward to seeing, and they remain my three favorites: the replica of the table used in the match, the board and pieces used in Fischer's famous game three win, and the famous "red book" of Spassky's games that Fischer took with him everywhere while he prepared for the match (you can see the "red book" during Mike Wallace's interview of Fischer).

The chess table used in the match was handcrafted, and by contract only three tables were ever made: the original one is in Iceland, and one of the two identical replicas is on display in this exhibit. The board in the chess table can be popped out and swapped with a different board. Which board was used for a given game was determined by Fischer's mood that day! The board on display in the exhibit was signed by both Fischer and Spassky. Naturally, I went as close as possible to take a picture of the board, and I asked one of the workers to take a picture of me in front of the table:


Here are the board (signed by both players) and pieces used in Fischer's game three win, which will be forever remembered for Fischer's unorthodox 11th move (...Nh5). The pieces are set up as they were positioned after move 11:

The red book is in the center of a display case featuring various books and note cards that Fischer used to prepare for not only the World Championship match but also for the Candidates Matches:


Here is a close up of the "red book." Note that you can see some of Fischer's handwritten notes in the margin!

I also enjoyed looking at LeRoy Neiman's artwork about the match. His first encounter with Fischer involved almost bumping into him in the cafeteria in Iceland. Fischer was holding a chess book in one hand and his food tray in the other hand! Neiman captured that moment in his inimitable style:

Neiman described Fischer as a "rare bird," and he displayed great respect and compassion for Fischer's combination of genius and eccentricity; when the sound of Neiman making artwork annoyed Fischer during the match, Neiman kept changing his drawing implements until he found one that did not bother Fischer. That might be my favorite non-chess moment of the entire match; while others described Fischer as difficult or worse, Neiman understood what it means to be a genius at work striving for ideal conditions.

One wall on the top floor is a permanent touch screen display that includes a digital version of each inductee's plaque from the U.S. Chess Hall of Fame and from the World Chess Hall of Fame (the only physical plaques on display are for the inductees from the past two years, and those plaques are perched above the staircase after you reach the top floor). Part of the top floor has items from after the 1972 World Chess Championship Match. Spassky continued to compete in the World Chess Championship cycle, though he never again challenged for the title, while Fischer went into seclusion before reemerging in 1992 to play a 30 game match versus Spassky. 

The sad story of Fischer's final years is recounted, and there is a poignant video of Garry Kasparov visiting Fischer's grave in Iceland. Kasparov lamented the unfulfilled dreams to promote chess that died with Fischer's disappearance from mainstream chess, and Kasparov also expressed regret that he never met Fischer. One wall includes photos and items depicting how Rex and Jeanne Sinquefield have transformed St. Louis into not just the capital of U.S. chess but a world chess center.

My last stop at the World Chess Hall of Fame was the Gift Shop, where I bought a variety of items not only for myself but also for my daughter Rachel. 

After taking a break to eat, I made my first visit to the Saint Louis Chess Club. The U.S. Championship and the U.S. Women's Championship are being held there now, but the playing rooms are not open to the public. However, the main area on the first floor is open, and several of the top players came into the main area to analyze their games. I sat next to Grandmaster Awonder Liang and Grandmaster Sam Sevian as they went over their third round draw, and then I watched Grandmaster Levon Aronian and Grandmaster Ray Robson analyze their third round draw.

The "Saturday Night Main Event" is a Quick Rated tournament (G/10, two second increment) held each Saturday night at the Saint Louis Chess Club. I was the fifth seeded player, and I finished with 2.5/4. I won pretty easily in the first round and in the fourth round, but I was held to a draw by a 1300 in the second round and I lost to a 1787 in the third round. Four-time U.S. Blind Chess Champion (2018-2021) Jessica Lauser, who participated in the tournament, told me afterward that a Saint Louis 1300 is not a regular 1300. Based on my limited four game experience, I have to agree; it is known that a pool of local players who do not play much outside of their community can produce players who are either underrated or overrated compared to the national rating pool. I could have played better, but I am happy that I can say that I played in a rated event at the Saint Louis Chess Club. I previously played at the Marshall Chess Club, so I suppose that the Mechanics Institute is the most famous active U.S. chess club where I have not played.

I FaceTimed with Rachel right after the tournament ended, and she was impressed when I showed her the world's largest chess piece. "It is practically as tall as the building next to it!" Rachel exclaimed.

On Sunday, I went back to the Saint Louis Chess Club. The Club was not open yet, but I watched Nick Polson and FIDE Master Gabriela Antova playing speed chess on one of the chess tables outside of the club. The only other spectator was none other than Rex Sinquefield himself. I thanked him for what he has done and is doing for chess. Later, I took a picture of myself alongside him and Joy Bray, who is the general manager of both the World Chess Hall of Fame and the Saint Louis Chess Club:

Polson is one of the co-authors of a paper analyzing the statistical likelihood that Magnus Carlsen will achieve a 2900 rating. Polson told me that he presented his findings directly to Carlsen. I wondered how Carlsen reacted to the conclusion that he has less than a 5% chance of achieving this goal. Polson said that Carlsen is very realistic and objective about his rating, and that Carlsen was mainly interested in understanding what he needs to do to improve his odds. Polson told me that the K factor for players with 2700-plus ratings is not correct, and I had an interesting conversation with him about ELO ratings in general.

Polson also played some blitz games against Grandmaster Varuzhan Akobian. I told Akobian that I owe him a thank you because studying his games on the black side of the Czech Pirc helped me achieve some nice wins in rated tournament games. Akobian played the Czech Pirc in one of his blitz games versus Polson, and I joked that he was playing it in my honor since I had just mentioned the opening. 

After Akobian finished playing blitz, I took a picture with him:

I went back to the World Chess Hall of Fame to get a few more items at the Gift Shop and look at the Fischer/Spassky exhibit one more time, and then I went inside the Saint Louis Chess Club to follow round five action in the U.S. Chess Championship. I also played several blitz games. The afternoon went by very quickly, and soon it was time to make the drive home.

A lot has been said and written about Rex Sinquefield, the Saint Louis Chess Club, and the World Chess Hall of Fame--and everything wonderful that you have heard is true! I encourage anyone who loves chess to go to Saint Louis and experience this chess wonderland for yourself. Both facilities are first class operations, with employees who are friendly and helpful. Sinquefield is very down to earth and accessible. Most of the time that I was at the Saint Louis Chess Club on Saturday and Sunday he was seated in the main club area watching the U.S. Chess Championship games on the TV monitors. At first I was surprised that he did not have a chess version of the "luxury suites" that you see wealthy people sitting in at basketball games and football games, but after spending the weekend in Saint Louis I am not surprised: Sinquefield is not a very wealthy man who dabbles in chess; he is a chess lover who happens to be very wealthy, so he does not isolate himself from the chess community that he has built but instead he immerses himself in it.

Tuesday, October 11, 2022

Grandmaster Maxim Dlugy Fires Back at Magnus Carlsen and Chess.com

Grandmaster Maxim Dlugy has provided a detailed and strong refutation of recent allegations and inferences about his character and about his connection with Grandmaster Hans Niemann. In case you somehow missed it, World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen has accused Niemann of cheating against him without providing any corroborating evidence to support the accusation. Dlugy's name got dragged into the mud when Carlsen made a calculated offhand comment about Dlugy being Niemann's mentor, implying that Dlugy somehow helped Niemann to cheat. Many large mainstream media outlets publicized Carlsen's reckless claims and innuendos without doing much research to assess the credibility of what Carlsen said.

It will be interesting to see if the same media outlets who ran with anti-Dlugy stories will give equal time to Dlugy's response. 

I encourage everyone to read Dlugy's entire statement, but for those who do not have the time or inclination to do so here are some key points (all quotations are from Dlugy's statement; unquoted material is my commentary):

1) "A grandmaster and a chess professional for more than 40 years, I have found myself dragged into the cheating controversy rocking the chess world, following the release of confidential emails by chess.com – a company with a huge financial stake in supporting the version of events pushed by chess world champion Magnus Carlsen.

The first bolt from the sky came when Magnus said that I was a mentor to Hans Niemann, a former student of mine with whom I've kept in occasional touch over the years, insinuating that I helped him cheat.

Then came calls from reporters seeking comment on two-year-old emails between chess.com and me that the website had agreed in written form to keep confidential and released without my consent. In a roundabout way, the exchanges could be purported to prop up claims made by Magnus….with whom chess.com just happens to be negotiating a huge financial deal.

So even though I had absolutely nothing to do with the now infamous match between Magnus and Hans, I am now compelled to defend myself against completely absurd and slanderous accusations made against me."

Those who are too young to know or those who have not researched chess history may not realize how strong GM Dlugy was at his peak, particularly as a blitz player. Dlugy won many in person blitz games and rated games against strong players in the pre-chess computer era when there was no way for him to receive electronic assistance. Dlugy won the 1985 World Junior Chess Championship, and he was the World Blitz Chess Association's highest rated player from 1988-92.

2) "I didn't have anything to do with Hans' success in his game against Magnus, contrary to what Magnus has insinuated, as I don't prepare Hans for his games. That is his own job and potentially the job of his current coach. Since 2014, I have also not given Hans advice on actual game preparation for any other tournaments, whether online or OTB, as in my opinion, only a full-time coach would have enough knowledge to be able to do this in a professional manner."

3) "It looks like Magnus has been told by advisors to avoid direct accusations and work with insinuations. He insinuated that Hans cheated in their game, without saying as much, and when it came time to say something of note, he insinuated that Hans has a mentor, myself, who is doing a great job helping him to play well, which to Magnus now is equivalent to cheating. He then came out openly and claimed Hans has cheated and he will not be playing in tournaments with him anymore. Magnus' plan is to try to prove 'Guilt by association'. If Hans has a mentor who is a cheat, by definition Hans must be a cheat and therefore he did cheat in their game, as he looked relaxed or rather 'not tense' when playing him. The public was then directed to check out my alleged cheating incidents in 2017 and 2020 on chess.com, which would firmly establish that since I admitted to violating Fair Play policies of chess.com, I clearly helped or advised Hans that the only way for him to make progress in chess is by cheating.

Since Hans has by then already admitted that he has cheated when he was 12 and 16, it would get social media firmly behind the World Champion's plan of further implicating Hans by connecting one 'cheat' with another.

There are a number of problems with this concept:

Although to cheat with an actual device you do need an accomplice who has access to the device with a chess engine running on it, you also need a connection to the device which given the precautions taken at many of the modern tournaments, especially the Sinquefield Cup, is not even remotely a possibility.

None of the specialists tasked to find anything wrong with the actual Carlsen-Niemann game in question, came up with anything substantive pointing to any outside influence in generating moves. In fact, Hans has on at least two occasions during that game relinquished much of his advantage gained in the early opening phase, but Magnus failed to capitalize on it. Kenneth Regan, the accepted foremost authority on the subject presented a detailed report where he found no evidence of Hans using an engine neither in that particular game nor in any other Over the Board game. This hardly gives merit to the idea of a 'device' passing moves to Hans during the game.

There is no plausible method known to me or anyone I know, including thousands of social media posts, where I could be acting as an accomplice to Hans' insinuated cheating in his game with Magnus. There is no device, there is no actual cheating and I was in New York City when the game was played."

Dlugy is correct to be appalled by Carlsen's "guilt by association" tactics. I would like to see FIDE and chess organizers take action against Carlsen for his reckless words and irresponsible conduct, but Carlsen wields so much power in the chess world that he seems to be protected against any punishment.

4) "The emails submitted by chess.com showed that I indeed violated their Fair Play Guidelines twice in 2017 in two tournaments where one of my students in a class was shouting out moves together with other students while consulting with the engine.

I realized that the accusations in 2017 had some truth to them a few months later only after I caught the student in question cheating. As soon as this happened I immediately reached out to Danny Rensch and admitted to the breach of fair play guidelines that I didn't know I had committed until that moment. I admitted this was a violation, though the recent videos of Magnus Carlsen receiving advice from one of the top British players David Howell (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNMcnrmb97g) to beat a major competitor in a money tournament on lichess.org seems to be a larger violation, as he willingly played the move which won the game on the spot. It can be seen clearly in the video that Magnus didn't take this too seriously, admitting that he was cheating on the spot.

In my case, I truly had no reason to believe that I had actually cheated and was adamant I did not cheat until I realized what was happening months later, as the thought that kids rated over 1000 points lower than me could be helping me play better never occurred to me. I think I was negligent in not imagining that such a thing could occur, but having apologized for it and having offered to return the prize money for the event, an offer Danny Rensch did not comment on, I think I did as much as anyone would under the circumstances....

In the Spring 2020 tournament which I played in after my account was fully reinstated 3 years after the 2017 events, I was kicked out by chess.com during the 9th round of the tournament where I had a score of 6.5/8, while NOT USING ANY OUTSIDE ASSISTANCE!

I was shocked by this, as I was playing the tournament from my apartment and could not understand what occurred. I was informed that I was kicked out for Fair Play Guidelines violations and that given the past history, I would have 72 hours to confess to anything regarding Fair Play Guideline violations or my account would be closed permanently.

This created quite a dilemma. On the one hand, from my previous discussions with Danny Rensch on the subject, it became quite obvious that he believes in chess.com methodology more than in anything else, although having recently studied the materials on the chess.com website, I found out that it turns out that 5 or 6 appeals per month are actually satisfied and those accounts are reinstated. I simply didn't have the time to deal with this situation, and since I took chess.com at their word that the email exchange would continue to be confidential and private as stated in all of their correspondence, I made the mistake of agreeing to admitting that I used some help in some of the games in the event. The flip side would be potentially worse.

When you are kicked from chess.com, rumors start circulating immediately that you cheated and therefore were kicked out. Remembering the messages I got back in 2017, I decided that it's best to admit to wrongdoing, and if they ever made this public, I would always be able to prove that I didn't cheat by simply analyzing the games in question. Sadly, it has come down to this. Since chess.com can now not be trusted with keeping their promises, I will have to do what I do best: Analyze chess games. My analysis of the games in question will be at the bottom of this statement. I would also like to mention that since I 'confessed' to violating Fair Play Guidelines, my account was reinstated by chess.com and until recently, I regularly played using this account, which I agreed with chess.com would remain anonymous. This account is known by a handful of my friends as well as my students. It is a titled GM Diamond account."

It is fascinating that video evidence of Carlsen cheating in an online event is ignored by media outlets that keep pounding away at Niemann and Dlugy. I have seen comments that what Carlsen did was "innocuous," but I don't get it--if you receive outside assistance during a game, then you cheated. There is a difference in severity between stealing $1,000,000 and stealing $1, but stealing is stealing; there is a difference between cheating in a World Championship Match and cheating in an online event, but cheating is cheating. Carlsen presents himself as someone who is concerned that cheating threatens the integrity of the sport, so he should apply his standard to himself.

5) "When my name was first brought up in this scandal, a number of articles made a point of mentioning that I was 'imprisoned for embezzlement in Russia' as further 'proof' that my character is that of a cheater.

This is in reference to my waiting for trial in a Russian holding cell 17 years ago, a deeply painful and damaging time in my and my family's life. At the time some business rivals with close ties to Putin's government used my friendship with Garry Kasparov (who besides his role in the chess world was one of Putin's most vocal critics) to have me arrested and force a sham trial.

Even with the full force of the Russian judicial system working with the prosecution to keep me detained, they eventually had to acquit me when none of the false evidence could stand up to scrutiny. After I was acquitted, Garry sent his own head of security to make sure I made it back to Moscow safely. That evening I had dinner with Garry and his mother before flying back to New York the following day."

Dlugy's statement concludes with detailed analysis of his Titled Tuesday games from Chess.com in 2020. Dlugy's point with this detailed analysis is to show that the way that he played is consistent with his prior demonstrated performance level, and inconsistent with the notion that he received outside assistance during those games. 

I am a strong amateur chess player, but I am not a chess Grandmaster or professional chess player, so I will defer to Grandmasters and chess professionals to definitively assess the details of Dlugy's chess analysis, but I understand enough to say that it is much more plausible that Dlugy played these games without outside assistance than that he received outside assistance.

The larger issue here is that Carlsen and Chess.com enjoy a mutually beneficial economic arrangement with each other, and they appear to be colluding--either in a coordinated fashion or merely because their interests coincide--to defame Niemann and others to convince the public that (1) Niemann could not possibly have beaten Carlsen without cheating, (2) Niemann should be ostracized, and (3) chess players should have full faith in anything said by Carlsen and in the anti-cheating policies utilized by Chess.com.

There are good reasons to question the validity of all three points. Niemann, who has admitted to online chess cheating in the past, is far from a hero, but Carlsen and Chess.com both have behaved far worse than Niemann has regarding a "scandal" that is based entirely on unfounded accusations and sweeping innuendos. If Carlsen and Chess.com stay on their current path, it would not be surprising to see them as named defendants in a civil lawsuit for defamation. Chess.com would also appear to have potential liability for breaching confidentiality regarding Dlugy's emails and regarding Chess.com's "confidential" information about Grandmasters who allegedly cheated (I put "confidential" in quotation marks because Chess.com's 72 page report about Niemann provides more than enough information for anyone to figure out who the accused Grandmasters are, rendering the purported confidentiality a flimsy sham).

Wednesday, September 28, 2022

Carlsen Defames Niemann Without Providing Corroborating Evidence

If you believe something negative about a person but have no evidence to prove it, and you say that something in a public forum, you open yourself up to the potential of being sued for slander. 

After American Grandmaster Hans Niemann defeated World Champion Magnus Carlsen in the third round of the Sinquefield Cup, Carlsen withdrew from the event while strongly implying--but not explicitly stating--that Niemann cheated to beat him. Other people, most notably Grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura, then made more direct accusations against Niemann, and I reacted in an article titled Put Up or Shut Up: Hans Niemann's Accusers Need to Provide Evidence or Apologize: "If your opponent cheated and you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, then say so and provide the evidence. If you can't prove it, then shut up and take your loss like a responsible and mature adult."

Then, in round six of the online Generation Cup Tournament, Carlsen played one move against Hans Niemann before resigning and turning off his camera, prompting me to write an article titled Magnus Carlsen's Resignation After One Move Embarrases Himself and Harms Professional Chess in which I declared, "Carlsen is disrespecting the sport and profession of chess. He should not be invited to another tournament until he explains himself and commits to behaving better. Of course, a big problem here is that Carlsen and his companies control, organize, and run many of the biggest chess tournaments. It is unlikely that Carlsen will not invite himself to his own events, but it is not an exaggeration to say that Carlsen is creating a crisis in chess, starting with his decision to not defend his World Chess Championship title--which lessens that title's value and damages chess--and now with his petulant and unsportsmanlike behavior."

International Master Ken Regan, who is considered to be an authority on uncovering chess cheating, examined every online and over the board game played by Niemann in the past two years and concluded that there is no evidence that Niemann cheated during that time period.

On September 23, FIDE issued the following statement

Last week, World Champion Magnus Carlsen resigned in a game played in an online competition against GM Hans Niemann before making his move two. The week before, he left an over-the-board tournament after losing the game to the same Mr. Niemann. 

These were not FIDE events; however, as the world’s chess governing body, it is our duty to protect the integrity of the game and its image, and in view that the incident keeps escalating, we find it necessary to take a step forward. 

First of all, we strongly believe that the World Champion has a moral responsibility attached to his status, since he is viewed as a global ambassador of the game. His actions impact the reputation of his colleagues, sportive results, and eventually can be damaging to our game. We strongly believe that there were better ways to handle this situation.

At the same time, we share his deep concerns about the damage that cheating brings to chess. FIDE has led the fight against cheating for many years, and we reiterate our zero-tolerance policy toward cheating in any form. Whether it is online or “over the board”, cheating remains cheating. We are strongly committed to this fight, and we have invested in forming a group of specialists to devise sophisticated preventive measures that already apply at top FIDE events. 

As we have already done before, FIDE calls for reinforcing the cooperation between major online platforms, private events and top players - most of whom have already expressed their will to join efforts with FIDE.

FIDE is prepared to task its Fair Play commission with a thorough investigation of the incident, when the adequate initial proof is provided, and all parties involved disclose the information at their disposal. We are fully aware that, in some cases, uncertainty can harm players' performance. It also can be damaging to a player's reputation - that's why we insist on the anti-cheating protocols to be followed.

It is our hope that this whole situation could have a long-term positive effect, if tackled properly. We propose to launch a dedicated Panel, that would include representatives of the leading chess platforms, Grandmasters, anti-cheating experts and FIDE officers, in order to fight this risk and prevent it becomes a real plague.

Arkady Dvorkovich

FIDE President

The FIDE statement correctly criticized Carlsen's actions, but did not go far enough: there should be a zero tolerance policy not only for false accusations of cheating but also for unsubstantiated allegations of cheating. It should be obvious that falsely accusing someone--that is to say, accusing someone when you know the accusation is not true--is a serious offense, but it is also a serious offense to accuse someone without any evidence. That is to say, even if Carlsen sincerely believes that Niemann cheated, it is irresponsible and damaging for Carlsen to publicly accuse Niemann without presenting credible evidence. 

Unfortunately, Carlsen's behavior deteriorated even after FIDE's slap on the wrist rebuke.

During the Generation Cup Tournament, Carlsen gave an interview that did not shed much more light on his actions, but he mentioned that he intended to issue a statement after the event concluded. After Carlsen won the Generation Cup, he released the following statement:

Dear Chess World,

At the 2022 Sinquefield Cup, I made the unprecedented professional decision to withdraw from the tournament after my round three game against Hans Niemann. A week later during the Champions Chess Tour, I resigned against Hans Niemann after playing only one move.

I know that my actions have frustrated many in the chess community. I’m frustrated. I want to play chess. I want to continue to play chess at the highest level in the best events.

I believe that cheating in chess is a big deal and an existential threat to the game. I also believe that chess organizers and all those who care about the sanctity of the game we love should seriously consider increasing security measures and methods of cheat detection for over the board chess. When Niemann was invited last minute to the 2022 Sinquefield Cup, I strongly considered withdrawing prior to the event. I ultimately chose to play.

I believe that Niemann has cheated more — and more recently — than he has publicly admitted. His over the board progress has been unusual, and throughout our game in the Sinquefield Cup I had the impression that he wasn’t tense or even fully concentrating on the game in critical positions, while outplaying me as black in a way I think only a handful of players can do. This game contributed to changing my perspective.

We must do something about cheating, and for my part going forward, I don’t want to play against people that have cheated repeatedly in the past, because I don’t know what they are capable of doing in the future.

There is more that I would like to say. Unfortunately, at this time I am limited in what I can say without explicit permission from Niemann to speak openly. So far I have only been able to speak with my actions, and those actions have stated clearly that I am not willing to play chess with Niemann. I hope that the truth on this matter comes out, whatever it may be.

Sincerely,
Magnus Carlsen – World Chess Champion

Carlsen's statement talks about what he believes and how he feels, but provides no evidence to support his serious allegations. The notion that Niemann must be cheating because in Carlsen's not so humble opinion no one could beat him that easily without appearing to be "tense or even fully concentrating on the game in critical positions" is ridiculous. Anyone who has played tournament chess knows that players display (or attempt to conceal) a wide range of emotions during games, and that some players may seem to not be concentrating when they are in fact very much focused--chess players often close their eyes or look away from the board without losing concentration on the task at hand.

Carlsen is coming across as a slanderous crybaby who cannot accept losing to a much younger player who he believes to be inferior to him. In the context of this series of events, Niemann's previous cheating is not relevant; Niemann has acknowledged that cheating and been punished for it. What is most relevant is that Carlsen is treating high level chess tournaments as if they are his personal property to do with as he pleases, regardless of the impact that his words and actions may have not only on Niemann but also on other participants who are affected by Carlsen withdrawing and/or throwing games. Even if it were proven that Niemann cheated versus Carlsen, Carlsen should still be disciplined for his unsportsmanlike conduct, lest these tournaments lose any semblance of organization and structure.

I must emphasize that I take a hard-line stance against proven chess cheating. In my 2015 paper Preventing, Detecting and Punishing Chess Cheating in the Digital Age I proposed strong penalties for documented chess cheating:

Someone who is caught in the act of cheating with physical evidence proving the cheating should be banned from tournament play for at least five years and should be forced to return any prizes won while cheating. Someone who is disqualified for cheating based on a preponderance of circumstantial evidence should be banned from tournament play for at least two years and should be forced to return any prizes won while cheating. Repeat offenders in either category should be banned for life. These rules should be incorporated into the bylaws of national chess federations and FIDE and bans issued by one such body should be enforced by all other such bodies. 

Chess cheating is a serious problem that threatens the very future of the sport and strong measures are necessary to prevent, detect, and punish chess cheating so that the sport does not lose all credibility in the eyes of participants, fans and the general public.

If someone argued that Niemann should have received harsher penalties based on his prior cheating, I would likely agree with that--but the reality is that Niemann has paid the price under the rules that are in place, and Carlsen never publicly complained about Niemann until Niemann beat him. It would not be fair to retroactively punish Niemann again in the absence of proof that Niemann either cheated again or cheated more often than he has admitted or been proven to have cheated.

This situation is very damaging for chess no matter what the reality proves to be. If Carlsen is just a crybaby/sore loser who is defaming a promising young player who is clean then that is awful--but if whiny Carlsen is speaking the truth and Niemann is an active cheater then that is also awful. I hope that FIDE follows through on the pledge to get to the bottom of all this, and then acts accordingly based on whatever the evidence shows.

Friday, September 23, 2022

Brett Favre Has Received Too Many Free Passes From Adoring Media Members

I have never understood why so many media members adore Brett Favre. I understand that he was a great quarterback, and I have written about that. There is a difference between analyzing a player's accomplishments, and gushing over him like he is a hero, role model, and wonderful person.

Brett Favre repaid $1.1 million in ill-gotten gains from Mississippi welfare funds--though he has yet to repay the $228,000 interest due from having those funds at his disposal--but recent reports indicate that his criminal culpability may well extend beyond that: a series of text messages between Favre and then-Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant suggest that Bryant helped Favre to cover up massive welfare fraud.

The media displays great interest in some cases of sexual misconduct/misogyny, but Favre's repeated failures in those areas are glossed over. Google the name Jenn Sterger if you are interested in the details--and you can look up Favre's behavior with massage therapists as well, because that is not difficult to find. It would not be true to say that Favre's misconduct has been ignored--as I indicated, you can find the details online--but the point is that his misconduct has not permanently stained his reputation. He is a media member himself now, and he is generally spoken of in reverential terms.

Skip Bayless loves to call Terrell Owens "Team Obliterator," but Favre is the real team obliterator. As I wrote after Owens was belatedly inducted in the Pro Football Hall of Fame:

Owens' journey from deprivation and hardship to the Pro Football Hall of Fame is inspirational. I would rather have a guy who says "Who can make a play? I can!" and then does it, as opposed to a "gunslinger" who is going to sling interceptions with everything on the line. Favre was a great player and a deserving Hall of Famer in his own right but the media's hagiographic treatment of Favre while constantly belittling Owens shines a disconcerting light on how much personal bias influences the stories that are fed to us on air, in print and online.

I previously analyzed some of the disinformation techniques used by various media members against Owens specifically and also in other situations. Media members demonize Owens and others who they do not like, but they lionize Favre and others who they like.

The reality is that Favre is a criminal, a creep, and a bad teammate, but many media members ignore those aspects of the Brett Favre story. The ongoing investigation into the extent of Favre's involvement in the multi-million dollar welfare fraud case is treated as an afterthought, not as a headline-worthy story.

Charles Robinson is one of the few media members who is not driving or even riding the Favre hype train:

Lest we forget, in the final weeks of his career, the NFL said Favre failed to fully cooperate with a league investigation into whether he sent former New York Jets employee Jenn Sterger multiple unsolicited photos of his penis while both were with the team in 2008. The NFL fined Favre $50,000 in the wake of that investigation in 2010. Sterger certainly hasn’t forgotten, commenting on Favre’s latest issues Tuesday with a series of tweets, including: “Oh.. NOWWWWW he gets in trouble for inappropriate texts.”

Then there was the 2013 civil settlement over a lawsuit brought by two massage therapists in response to allegedly sexually suggestive text messages Favre sent while with the Jets in 2008. Or the questionable business dealings, one involving litigation over bankrupt digital sports media company Sqor (which was ultimately thrown out, but not until after Favre had been named as one of the defendants in a fraud lawsuit brought by an investor); and in another case, a U.S. Justice Department investigation of Rx Pro, a brand that Favre heavily endorsed that later came under scrutiny for statements made about pain-relieving creams that hadn’t been approved by the FDA.

Robinson quotes Jeff Pearlman, Favre's biographer and one of the Favre hagiographers, stating that he now feels like no one should read his Favre biography. That is probably the only Pearlman statement that I will ever agree with, because--as I indicated in my review of Pearlman's awful Walter Payton biography--no one should read anything that Pearlman writes.

Like anyone, Favre is innocent until proven guilty regarding the as-yet unproven portions of the welfare fraud case--but it is a fact that he paid back over $1 million that he was not entitled to receive, it is a fact that he has yet to pay back the interest, and it is a fact that his name has been linked to the larger investigation. Those facts are newsworthy, and those facts deserve much more coverage than they have been given. 

It is overly simplistic to assume that the disparities in media coverage are just based on race. Ray Lewis is a Black ex-NFL player who obstructed justice in an unsolved double murder for which he was a prime suspect and media members slobber over him shamelessly. I am not saying that race plays no part in poor media coverage; I suspect that racism is part of this particular problem, but that the larger problem has to do with a toxic mixture of money, popularity, charisma, and various personal/group agendas that shape not only how news is delivered but what news is discussed versus what news is buried.

Tuesday, September 20, 2022

Magnus Carlsen's Resignation After One Move Embarrases Himself and Harms Professional Chess

Magnus Carlsen's latest stunt embarrassed himself, damaged the credibility of professional chess, and impacted all of the participants in a major tournament with a $150,000 prize fund. In round six of the online Generation Cup Tournament, Carlsen played one move against Hans Niemann before resigning and turning off his camera. This comes on the heels of Carlsen abruptly withdrawing from the Sinquefield Cup while strongly implying that Niemann cheated to beat him. 

After Carlsen withdrew from the Sinquefield Cup, I wrote that if I were an organizer "I would be disinclined to invite him to my event until he clarifies why he withdrew and under what circumstances he is willing to play." Carlsen is demonstrating that my concern was prescient. By throwing a game to Niemann without a fight and then competing hard against all of the other players, Carlsen has placed every player other than Niemann at a disadvantage. In short, there is no proof that Niemann cheated against Carlsen, but there is proof that Carlsen threw a game. As Grandmaster Jon Ludvig Hammer--a fellow Norwegian Grandmaster who has served as Carlsen's second--declared, "It's completely unacceptable behaviour to lose on purpose. It's the most unsportsmanlike [act] you can do in a competitive sport."

Carlsen is disrespecting the sport and profession of chess. He should not be invited to another tournament until he explains himself and commits to behaving better. Of course, a big problem here is that Carlsen and his companies control, organize, and run many of the biggest chess tournaments. It is unlikely that Carlsen will not invite himself to his own events, but it is not an exaggeration to say that Carlsen is creating a crisis in chess, starting with his decision to not defend his World Chess Championship title--which lessens that title's value and damages chess--and now with his petulant and unsportsmanlike behavior.

Uninformed people who know little about chess and even less about statistical analysis do not hesitate to express their opinions on social media, so it is worth noting that Dr. Ken Regan--an International Master who is an expert at detecting chess cheating--examined every over the board and online game played by Niemann for the past two years and found no evidence of cheating.

Niemann does not have to prove that he is innocent. Carlsen and others who besmirch Niemann overtly and/or implicitly have the burden of proof to demonstrate that Niemann has done something that is against the rules--and if Carlsen is unwilling or unable to do that, then chess organizers and the chess world should draw conclusions accordingly and not welcome Carlsen's participation. 

I hope that we are not witnessing Carlsen unravel psychologically in a manner similar to the way that previous champions such as Morphy, Steinitz, and Fischer unraveled.

The Cleveland Browns Flunk Situational Football

In the 1940s and 1950s, the Cleveland Browns were one of the most dominant teams in pro football history, reaching the championship game for 10 straight years (1946-55, including four AAFC seasons and six NFL seasons) and winning seven titles. 

Since the Browns returned to the NFL in 1999, they have been one of the most inept, poorly managed, and poorly coached teams in NFL history. 

The Browns are currently coached by Kevin Stefanski. Stefanski is a young coach, and maybe he will develop into a great coach, but coaches younger than he is now (40) have won Super Bowls--including Mike Tomlin of the division rival Pittsburgh Steelers, Jon Gruden (then with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers), and, most recently, Sean McVay of the L.A. Rams.

Let's just say that right now Stefanski does not appear to be on the fast track to becoming a Super Bowl-winning coach.

A fundamental part of NFL success is understanding situational football, meaning that the coaching staff instructs the players how to make decisions and plays that maximize the opportunity for success in any given situation. 

I have been watching NFL football since the 1970s, I have been a Cleveland Browns fan for that entire time, and it pains me to say that the last time that the Cleveland Browns consistently understood the concept of situational football was when Bill Belichick coached the team in the 1990s. That era ended unceremoniously in 1995 when Browns' owner Art Modell moved the team to Baltimore and fired Belichick. You could fill a wing in the Pro Football Hall of Fame just with coaches fired by Modell: start with Paul Brown, then add Marty Schottenheimer (who had a Hall of Fame caliber career but has not yet been inducted), and finish with Belichick, who won six Super Bowls after being dumped by Modell.

Sunday's debacle versus the New York Jets is just the latest example of the Browns snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Browns led 24-17 and had the ball deep inside the Jets' territory with the fourth quarter clock winding down to the two minute mark. The Jets had no timeouts left, so the Browns were one first down and a few kneeldowns away from victory. Kareem Hunt took a handoff with 2:09 left, but instead of making sure that he stayed inbounds so that the clock would run all the way down to the two minute warning he fought for meaningless extra yards and ended up going out of bounds with 2:02 left. The goal of the next play should have been obvious: gain yardage if possible but above all don't fumble--and don't score, because the only way that the Jets could win is by getting the ball back. Instead, Nick Chubb raced around the left side of the offensive line and run into the end zone. The Browns now led 30-17 with 1:55 left. What could go wrong?

Here is the list (in addition to the miscues by Hunt and Chubb, the two plays that made all of the ensuing mayhem possible):

1) Cade York missed the extra point.

2) The Browns blew a coverage and gave up a 66 yard touchdown pass.

3) Onside kicks are rarely successful, but the Browns mishandled the ball and the Jets recovered (this is not new for the Browns; they also failed to recover an onside kick in week 14 versus the Ravens last season, but won anyway because the defense saved the day).

4) The Jets marched down the field in six plays, never needing a single third down conversion before scoring a 15 yard touchdown pass with :22 remaining.

5) The Browns still had a chance to win by reaching field goal range, and they have a kicker who made a 58 yard game-winning field goal last week (although he also had just missed an extra point)--but when the Browns were just one medium-range pass completion away from entering field goal range, quarterback Jacoby Brissett threw an interception. The Jets did not try to score a touchdown on the interception return, instead kneeling down to seal the victory.

How rare is it for an NFL team to blow a lead of at least 13 points with less than two minutes remaining? The last 2229 teams to enjoy such leads won the game. Not surprisingly, the previous team to blow such a lead was the Cleveland Browns in 2001 versus the Chicago Bears. When it mattered most versus the Jets, the Browns repeatedly failed to understand situational football and to execute fundamental plays, including kneeling down to keep the clock running, making an extra point, making sure that no defensive back is beaten deep with a two score lead with less than two minutes remaining, recovering an onside kick, getting one defensive stop, and running a two-minute drill to get into field goal range. If the Browns' special teams, defense, or offense understood situational football then the team would not have made so many plays that were not only bad but stupid. Situational football is all about what the coaches teach and how well they teach it. A well-coached team might lose but a well-coached team will not beat itself.

The Browns have had some awful teams since 1999 that simply did not have enough good players to be competitive no matter who coached them (though the coaches were generally awful, too), but even when the Browns have had reasonably talented teams (like they have now) they are done in by their own ineptitude.

After the loss to the Jets, Stefanski said that it is his responsibility to tell Chubb to kneel down before the play--but that comment just shows that even in the postgame press conference Stefanski still missed the point; this is not something to figure out or discuss in the heat of the moment: this is what you are supposed to be practicing and thinking about repeatedly, so that when situations arise the whole team understands what the correct play is.

ESPN's NFL Rewind show contrasted the Browns' meltdown with the end of the Patriots-Steelers game. The Patriots knew to kneel down, run out the clock, and win 17-14. As a Browns fan, it is great to see the Steelers lose, but every time Belichick's Patriots execute sound situational football I think about how many Super Bowls the Browns might have won if there had been a way to get rid of Modell, keep Belichick, and keep the team in Cleveland.

In his postgame press conference, Stefanski mentioned that the Browns are a young team. I cannot recall Belichick ever using that excuse--or any other excuse--after a loss. Steelers' coach Mike Tomlin often says, "The standard is the standard." In Pittsburgh, the standard has been three coaches in the Super Bowl era (Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher, and Mike Tomlin), each of whom has won at least one Super Bowl. It does not take 20 years--or even five years--to build a Super Bowl contender if you know what you are doing. The great Bill Walsh took over an inept San Francisco team and won a Super Bowl three years later, which he considered to be the standard: "I am often asked how long it should take to turn an NFL franchise around. My short answer is: three years. Not every team will win the Super Bowl in its third season under a new coach (as we did in San Francisco in 1981) but it is reasonable to expect at least some signs of improvement by that time...There are reasons why some teams are able to remain competitive year after year while others never seem to get over the hump...My point is that it takes a concerted commitment from ownership, the front office, the coaching staff and the players for a team to succeed. It's the old 'a-chain-is-only-as-strong-as-its-weakest-link-theory' theory. If one of the four areas is weak, it's extremely difficult to overcome that flaw." Notice that Walsh's blueprint does not include tanking, which has been proven to not work in the NBA, and is not effective (or necessary) in the NFL.

The Browns are approaching a quarter century of historic ineptitude (including a three season run of 3-13, 1-15, and 0-16) briefly interrupted by just two playoff appearances and a single playoff win. In a league designed with parity as the goal, this is disgraceful and inexcusable.

Monday, September 12, 2022

He's Back: Tom Brady Returns in Style

Before Sunday night's Tampa Bay-Dallas game, NBC played a video of Michael Jordan talking about how he took almost two years off before coming back but Tom Brady's retirement did not last even two months. Jordan described the deep attachment that he and Brady feel for their respective sports, and he urged everyone to enjoy watching Brady because such greatness is rarely seen. Few people would understand Brady's retirement and return better than Jordan. Jordan did not win his first game back, but he did lead the Chicago Bulls to three consecutive NBA titles before retiring again (and coming back one more time, with less success).

In his first game back from his retirement--and is it really a retirement if you did not miss any regular season games?--Brady led the Buccaneers to a 19-3 win over the Cowboys, lifting his personal record against Dallas to 7-0. Brady became the oldest starting quarterback in NFL history (45 years old), and a video montage shown during the game proved that his release time and throwing motion now are indistinguishable from his release time and throwing motion from early in his career and from the middle of his career. Brady's numbers were solid but not great by his lofty standards--18-27, 212 yards, one touchdown, one interception, 87.3 passer rating--but he made the throws that needed to be made, he mixed the pass with the run very well, and he limited his mistakes to one bad throw, the interception that he freely admitted was his fault.

During his postgame interview with NBC's Melissa Stark, Brady said, "I always play the game for my team, my teammates and the organization. Just being around them is something I always enjoy. It keeps me very grounded, very humble. I feel like just one of the guys. Not many places where I can go where I feel like just one of the guys, but the locker room's definitely one of those places."

Last season, Brady led the NFL with a career-high 5316 passing yards plus 43 passing TDs (the second highest total of his career, topped only by his 50 TDs in 2007 for the 16-0 New England Patriots). From the standpoints of physical skill set and motivation level, it would seem that Brady can be an elite quarterback for the foreseeable future--but football is a violent game in which a season or career can come to a crashing halt after just one play. Brady has been incredibly durable save for the 2008 season when he missed 15 games after tearing his ACL in the opener, but Sunday night provided a reminder of how tenuous NFL life can be: late in the game, Dallas quarterback Dak Prescott's right hand crashed into the hands of a pass rusher on two consecutive plays, resulting in a hand injury that apparently will require surgery and cause him to miss several weeks (the exact diagnosis will not be official until further examination is done, but Prescott and Dallas owner Jerry Jones both stated the expectation that Prescott will be out for an extended period).

Brady may ride off into the sunset as a Super Bowl champion, but he already had that opportunity after the 2020 season and instead he returned in 2021. Jordan kept coming back until his balky, swollen knees forced him to accept that the end had arrived. I once compared the end of Jordan's career to the end of Jerry Rice's career

There is a beauty and a sadness to the way that Jordan and Rice's careers ended. There is great beauty in loving the game so much that you continue to play even though you have nothing left to prove and you risk being mocked by cynical writers, young fans who don't remember your greatness and jealous rivals who couldn't touch you in your prime but salivate at the chance to embarrass you now. Yet, there is sadness when one watches a singular performer unable to dominate the game in his usual manner. Ray Lewis can be heard on NFL Films saying, "The same thing that will make you laugh will make you cry." Watching the end of Air Jordan's career and the conclusion of Flash 80's run, I understand that statement perfectly. I take two memories from Jordan's Wizards career: first, his soaring, two handed block of Ron Mercer, pinning the ball to the glass to preserve a win against Jordan's old team, the Chicago Bulls. That clip was later shown in a Nike commercial, with a Jordan voiceover intoning "Love is playing every game like it's your last." I'm not ashamed to say that I got goose bumps every time that spot ran; second, the image of Jordan dragging his bad leg up and down the court, trying to act like everything was fine—his heart and determination made you smile and the intimations of his (and our) mortality made you cry. For Rice, my two memories of his dénouement are the aforementioned Monday night comeback from the ACL injury and the fact that last year, on a Seattle team with wide receivers who drop so many passes they should change their names to Edward Scissorhands, Seattle did not even attempt to utilize him at the end of a 27-20 playoff loss to the St. Louis Rams.

Jerry Rice's retirement leaves me feeling the same way that I did after Michael Jordan’s last season with the Wizards: I am sad that Jerry Rice will no longer play in the NFL—and yet I am glad that he left now rather than spend a season sitting on the bench. Yes, the same thing that will make you laugh will make you cry.

Kobe Bryant once vowed to play until the wheels fell off, and he pretty much accomplished that, summoning up the requisite energy to drop 60 points in his career finale after being hobbled by multiple injuries that limited him to just 107 out of a possible 246 games in his final three seasons. 

Will Brady leave on top, or will he ride it out until the wheels fall off? Jordan is right that we should savor Brady's greatness--not only because such greatness is rare, but because it could end suddenly and unexpectedly.