BANNED For Cheating.
28.04.2024
➡️ READ THE ARTICLE:
➡️ Get My Chess Courses:
➡️ Get my best-selling chess book:
➡️ My book in the UK and Europe:
➡️ Mein Buch auf Deutsch:
➡️ Mi libro en Español:
➡️ Start Playing Chess FOR FREE:
➡️ Enjoy my videos? Donate Here :
Email me your games: [email protected]
Sponsors, Business, Media: [email protected] – [DO NOT SEND GAMES HERE]
⭐️ Follow Me If You Are Amazing:
➡️ CAMEO:
➡️ FACEBOOK:
➡️ SNAP:
➡️ INSTAGRAM:
➡️ TWITCH:
➡️ TIKTOK:
➡️ TWITTER:
➡️ GOTHAM DISCORD:
➡️ THUMBNAILS BY:
Done with the cheating garbage
Y’all win, catch me playing online if you can, that’s all.
Well, on another note, I just beat chess bot "QTCinderella" and she put the blame on yours truly – "NO WAY! You know what? This is Levy's fault. He's a bad coach. Let me try again."
Travelling in Europe? Let's grab a beer if you are in Copenhagen!
Your first claim about cheating not going on could just as easily mean higher rated players cheat more
I'm reading your book now and though I'm not done, I'm kinda surprised there's no section on cheating
Bro, please go to Barcelona
Ranking is simply not a good predictor for win, in blitz. It’s just a very noisy game, lots of randomness in the process.
What it tells me is that titled players play best when they aren't travelling and don't have to physically interact with the board.
A GM can easily get frazzled by going to grab a piece and knocking it over. Happens less with a mouse.
I’m a statistician. What stood out is that 22% vs 24% they mentioned. It seems small but if they have a sample of like 1000 that’s a big difference in means. That could be statistically significant even if it seems small in absolute percentages!
"The only way anyone could ever beat me is if they cheated." Donald Trump…and Vladamir Kramnik.
i think that kramnik would benefit from a psychologist.
Completely flawed hypothesis to test against. Cheating leads to higher rating, folks! Cheaters are NOT underdogs. When they first started cheating they were underdogs, but they soon become highly rated. You can use the evidence to argue the following. In person underdogs have more chances to score because they’re playing against highly rated humans. Online underdogs have less chances to score because they’re playing against highly rated cheaters. Humans blunder but AI doesn’t blunder. All makes sense now?
No matter how much I love the daily uploads, feel free to skip tomorrow to celebrate kingsday and taste some of the Dutch culture
"This video very interesting" Block and Report – Kramnik 2024
your spiderman background is weird Levy
That -6% is saying that the lower rated players 2600-2749 are losing more to players over 2750 and higher in titled tuesday. It means the highest rated players are possibly cheating
Correlation != Causation . upset and cheating are correlated not causation.
Now that Levy did some research into the online and over the board cheating, he decided to go for a GM title, interesting.
If someone is consistently cheating then their rating won't be lower. Therefore they wouldn't be considered an underdog.
Gukesh vs Ding Liren https://youtu.be/sRHFNSgFJCk?si=tFuzh9y2z2QHPArx
A
guess you left the netherlands already, but in the off case you didn't, did you enjoy kings day?
Given the short time in these matches, there are more likely to be human error committed, so more randomness of outcomes. If you looked at classical only, I'm sure there are much fewer upsets when the ratings are mismatched.
This just basically shows that not only underdogs are cheating. Lol
I dont think that anybody is reading the stats right.
If there is no big discrepancy, there can still be a lot of cheating – it would be spread out over underdogs and the high elo players.
This way there could be a lot of cheating while the presented stats dont vary much.
Spouting out criticism of the study while openly admitting you didn't read it is the epitome of both arrogance and ignorance. Kramnik has become a complete a-hole.
i feel like hikaru is so much stronger online cuz hes just much comfortable playing at home, no anxiety and stress playing face to face no need to socialize..
Heard Vlad accused himself of cheating.
The Kramnik jokes write themselves, he's his own parody! He wrote that entire wall-of-text rant before even looking at any part of the report 😅
have fun on Kings day!
I don't even understand why low/medium rated players would want to cheat online. It wouldn't even be fun to get paired against people who are way better than you. You'd never be able to play a real game against someone with your same skill. That sounds awful.
This comment from Reddit sums it up quite well:
They are surely rofling. Sometimes not showing your statistics could actually be a good idea.
Even if you are totally new to the subj – you can guess that cheating is performed by small amount of players in small amount of games (usually last rounds). And big numbers just hide it.
Also "the upset" term by itself means 2600 steadily beating any other 2600 is "just ok, not an upset" – which initially ignores significant amount of games.
I just hope they have started from the wrong end and it is not "dust in the eyes" research.
Levy is high as fuck
If you're going to cheat, you should cheat to win something probably, says Levy. Good advice for kids.
I really like the vibe of your travel set up. It makes it feel like I’m just watching someone on a FaceTime.
The study is curious. It seems, the best interpretation is that rated players are as likely to cheat as underdogs. In other words, the assumption for the metric is that cheating is caught by checking the percentage of the upsets with huge rate difference, and that assumption is wrong. Instead, one very telling analysis would be to check the percentage of hard-to-find 1-st line moves. For that,
one needs to run the games through the same chess engine twice, with a different depth – and look for the rare moves that are NOT 1-st or 2-d line at depth, say 12, but are best on depth 20.
And then check how often statistically the players find these moves. I am pretty sure that for any given player, this percentage should be fairly consistent for OTB and online games. Once you see a significant deviation, that would be a reason for very serious suspicion of cheating. Note, that strong players need only few, maybe one move help. But during the game, there a few hard-to-find moves, so by concentrating the statistical research on these moves only will likely magnify the deviation.
Petition for Gotham to fix his hair lmao
Honestly if there is a difference and it’s mower doesn’t that in a way imply cheating? Those of higher ranks win more often and are upset less. If someone cheats they will climb and will lose to players lower than them almost never.
Aren't those numbers presented just implying that there is a massive cheating problem in titled tuesday? Cause if the numbers match, doesn't that mean that for any underrated kid like Faustino Oro OTB there needs to be one cheater online? And there are a lot of underrated kids and young adults in OTB blitz ratings for reasons you pointed out.
I really like Kramnik's life story. Dude was accused years back of cheating in a WC match and is now accusing every chess player he knows of cheating LOL. That is a hillarious story right there.
this is a survivor bias type error. this analaysis starts with a condinal probability assumption and that is we only care if a cheater beats somone with a higher elo than they are currently rated. this gives cheaters all the elo from opponents their elo rating predicts they will win. but we must assume cheaters have a higher elo than their unassited skill.
For the underdog range you mention, I thing it would be awesome to have a weighing scale. (Larger difference, larger impact)
Interesting story from Minecraft speedrunning: Player Dream was accused and convicted of cheating; it later turned out his accuser knew what to look for because he himself was cheating.
Makes me wonder if Kramnik is playing in an …interesting manner.
Blink Twice if you are okay. Once if you need help.
do you people not know cheating is not going anywhere. it’s in all online games. be lucky it isnt as bad as you all make it out to be. play chess where it’s meant to be played; and that’s definitely not on the internet.
Levy got kidnapped again
Gotham says that low-rated players cheating is stupid and makes no sense to him, but he doesn't ask the question WHY. He has no curiosity. Gotham will never read this, but here's why I "cheated" (used an engine) a LOT, for a LONG TIME. I'm uninterested in bad human chess. I'm much more interested in good human chess. Engines are tools that make humans better at chess. I would never say that a human using a spreadsheet is "cheating" and require that our economy only produce services without spreadsheets. At the time I was cheating, engines weren't amazing, especially the engines I had access to. I was about 18-1900 WITH AN ENGINE, and I learned to play as a "centaur", filling in the engine's gaps in chess "understanding". For example, I always knew which files to slide rooks to, but, if I took the engine's advice, would lead to late-game disaster. The engine always knew how to avoid really dumb blunders, so I always let it do that. Why would I blunder 1 or 2 move blunders if there exists a tool to just not do that? Why would I insist on mental math instead of digital spreadsheets? I wouldn't. And anyone who would is stupid. Technological progress is good. I prefer better things, and I prefer cheaper things. I prefer to play better chess.
Now why don't I cheat today? Couple reasons. I still prefer to watch engine v engine games, and only the highest-ranked engines play chess over humans. But I'm interested in improving myself, and curious what that takes. Cheating detection is better, so it's not "worth" it in that way. But also, what am I going to do, run an engine, constantly, and consult it discreetly once or twice a game, to TEMPORARILY boost my rating 100-200 points? My goal is to BECOME many hundreds of points better, so this doesn't help with that goal and it costs time and effort and attention, so it's not worth it in that way either.
cheating in chess offline is playing with your other girlfriend
Where is marlsen cagnus 😂😂