On page 3: “Despite the public speculation on these questions, in our view, there is no direct evidence that proves Hans
cheated at the September 4, 2022 game with Magnus, or proves that he has cheated in other OTB games
in the past.”
(I missed that OTB means on the board).
But regardless, there is no concrete proof as you are suggesting, the report is speculation based on other player styles. As they say themselves, it’s very difficult to know whether younger players may have learnt chess playing against AI and developed styles to match that.
But regardless, there is no concrete proof as you are suggesting, the report is speculation based on other player styles. As they say themselves, it’s very difficult to know whether younger players may have learnt chess playing against AI and developed styles to match that.
This doesn’t make it less ridiculous to claim the report contains no evidence of Hans cheating more frequently and more recently than he admitted. It’s not definitive proof, but it’s pretty darn likely. That’s the neat thing about statistics: even if you can’t prove a single case definitively, you can make likely inferences.
Yep, I am Hans, well foiled.
On page 3: “Despite the public speculation on these questions, in our view, there is no direct evidence that proves Hans cheated at the September 4, 2022 game with Magnus, or proves that he has cheated in other OTB games in the past.”
(I missed that OTB means on the board).
But regardless, there is no concrete proof as you are suggesting, the report is speculation based on other player styles. As they say themselves, it’s very difficult to know whether younger players may have learnt chess playing against AI and developed styles to match that.
This doesn’t make it less ridiculous to claim the report contains no evidence of Hans cheating more frequently and more recently than he admitted. It’s not definitive proof, but it’s pretty darn likely. That’s the neat thing about statistics: even if you can’t prove a single case definitively, you can make likely inferences.
You said:
“Yes, after which it was proven that he cheated later than he admitted and more often than he admitted.”
This is what I am disputing. It hasn’t been proved.