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.
4 comments:
It does sound like Carlsen is being a sore loser, no doubt. But, I'm confused by your stances. You said in your own paper that repeat cheating offenders should be banned for life. Niemann is a repeat offender. Instead of just denigrating Carlsen, which does seem appropriate, shouldn't you also be talking about Niemann shouldn't even be allowed to compete at these events as well? I'm confused why you're defending Niemann when you think he should be banned for life. You've also said that cheaters in other sports(baseball as an example) should be banned for life. It doesn't seem that Niemann cheated vs Carlsen though I suppose it's possible. But, I understand the hesitation anyone would have playing Niemann in the future. This reminds me of Bouchard's harsh stance via Sharapova's PED use in tennis, which I thought was extreme, but somewhat understandable.
Anonymous:
I am not "defending Niemann." I am speaking up about the importance of the concept "innocent until proven guilty." Whatever Niemann may have done in the past, no one has presented evidence that Niemann cheated in the Sinquefield Cup game during which he defeated Carlsen.
In this article, I wrote, "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."
It is not clear how Niemann cheated or how often he cheated, so with the information that is currently known I am not 100% sure what penalty he deserved--but, under the rules that exist, he has already been punished, and even though I would probably punish cheaters more harshly I also would say that whatever the rules are they should be applied consistently.
The point now is that Carlsen is slandering Niemann by accusing Niemann of cheating against him without offering any proof beyond his "belief"--which is not proof at all.
If Carlsen had said--prior to agreeing to play in the same tournaments with Niemann and then losing over the board to Niemann--something to the effect of "Niemann cheated at Chess.com more than once, the chess world must punish chess cheaters more harshly, and until that takes place I refuse to play in a tournament with any players who have been caught cheating or admitted to cheating" then I would have been on Carlsen's side (assuming that he made statements backed by facts/evidence and not just his "belief").
That is not what happened here. Carlsen agreed to play in an over the board tournament with Niemann, he lost to Niemann in a game for which there is zero evidence that Niemann cheated, and sore loser Carlsen then withdrew from the tournament while implying that Niemann cheated. Now, Carlsen has made things worse--for himself--by publicly accusing Niemann of cheating without providing any evidence. If Carlsen has some evidence that he has not presented, he should present it soon, or he is at risk for being sued for slander if Niemann is so inclined.
I'm not disagreeing with anything you wrote concerning Carlsen. In fact, I strongly agree with most of what you said and he should've obviously taken his stance before playing Niemann if he felt that strongly about it instead of being a sore loser after losing, unless evidence is found of Niemann cheating which seems very unlikely especially since the Sinquefield Cup is over with.
I'm talking about what you think the punishment should be for multiple cheating offenses. While I think banning someone for life is too extreme for 2 cheating offenses, especially for a minor(which Niemann was at the time when he cheated twice at least what we know of), you have written that you think someone should be banned for life if they do this. Regardless of whatever rules are in place, Niemann shouldn't even be in consideration for professional chess tournaments according to you. If so, his matches with Carlsen would never have taken place. We do know Niemann has admitted to cheating at least twice which makes him a repeat offender.
If Niemann really is innocent, then he should be hiring a lawyer and suing Carlsen. I've yet to see that happen. And while this may have nothing to do with him, we now recent news that Niemann's coach has admitted to cheating himself.
Anonymous:
My first point is that Carlsen's behavior is awful and unsportsmanlike. Many people are ignoring that part of this story because they like Carlsen, because they don't like Niemann, or some combination of both. If Carlsen has a legitimate concern backed by evidence then he should present his evidence. Meanwhile, he owes the organizers and his fellow players an apology for withdrawing in the middle of one tournament and then giving Niemann a free win in the other tournament.
I have made it clear that I would punish proven chess cheaters more harshly than most organizations seem willing to do. I don't know exactly what Niemann did or how he did it or if he did more than he admits to doing, so it is difficult for me to say what punishment I would consider to be appropriate--but that is not the point here. Under the rules in place that apply equally to all players (or should apply equally to all players), Niemann was eligible to play in both of the tournaments in question. Further, there is no evidence that Niemann cheated in either of these tournaments. Therefore, Carlsen and anyone else who accuses Niemann of cheating in those two tournaments is 100% in the wrong unless/until they present evidence to the contrary.
The burden of proof is on the accuser, not on the accused. Niemann does not have to prove his innocence, nor does he have to sue Carlsen or anyone else if he does not feel like it or does not have enough money to hire a lawyer to take the case.
Anything that has been alleged about Niemann's associates--including Carlsen casting aspersions on a prominent Grandmaster--is hearsay and is not relevant to the above issues. Whether or not someone Niemann knows--even if that is or was his coach--cheated does not make Niemann a cheater. Guilt by association is a tactic of totalitarian regimes, not open and free societies. Further, the Grandmaster in question established himself as a very strong tournament player and very strong blitz player long before computer cheating was possible, so unless he had a time machine in the 1980s he most likely achieved his rating and status through legitimate means (unless one argues that he cheated some other way during that era, which would truly be reckless speculation without a shred of evidence). I have yet to see proof that the Grandmaster in question cheated in more recent online games or that he was banned for cheating, but I understand that some people have drawn that conclusion based on him withdrawing from an online tournament and then never playing at that particular website again (which suggests but does not prove that he was banned).
Post a Comment