It was the 43rd anniversary of my birth yesterday. A lovely prime number year. This birthday has been quite stealthy and slipped right under the radar and has the least celebrations of any of my birthdays on record. Today, it's a dreary rainy day. A friend is having their wedding ceremony and that knocks out most of the time. I hope to pop out the door for a run soon, probably will play a few games of online chess and in the evening, I'll enjoy a dinner out.
Anyway, the above contains a few updates: I'm running again, although it is still early days. The run-walk programme was gradual enough not to aggravate my Achilles and finally transitioned to proper running. Now I've brought my run lengths to 8km and I intend to try and celebrate today by running 10km, although as gently as possible. None of my runs thus far have been on consecutive days and I would like to go for a short jog tomorrow as a bit of a test.
My re-engagement with chess has not been mentioned in the blog apparently. For those who don't know, I was a junior chess player, never really that talented but hardworking. It was an obsession which drove me to read lots of books, but not playing that many games. It is strange to look back on the time because looking back in the chess archives I didn't play in that many tournaments at all. What I did play was interschool chess and club chess which was only a few games a month in effect.
Interschool was fun, though. Massey High School was dominant in Auckland with each board having sensible players. Even if other teams had a strong player, who could beat me they would still lose on the other boards. Not that I often lost. Below for historical purposes are my recorded successes and maybe my only published game:
By 1997, my interest faded and my time went elsewhere. I didn't play university chess and a brief foray into online chess in my 30s was short . It just didn't feel the same.
But after coming back to New Zealand, around the time of the 2018 World Chess Championship, I stumbled upon some Youtube videos of the matches, and live chess broadcasts of other tournaments. It was quite different from the earlier attempts to get chess on TV. Firstly, chess has now moved from emphasising classical games (long games that could last one or two days) to a whole range of possibilities from "rapid" chess (usually 10-30 minutes each side), blitz (5 mins each side), bullet (1-2 minutes each side) and other formats such as FisherRandom (where the pieces start positions are randomised to avoid preparation). The faster time controls are thrilling to watch and much more suited to viewing by even casual observers.
Secondly, technology meant games could be shown live and commentators, now of a much better calibre, could use graphics to show the dynamics. Also, there was the "evaluation bar" - a computer generated numerical analysis of who was winning. There was a thrill in moves being played and the bar swinging back and forth in favour of each players (in the past you'd have to just come up with your own thoughts, or trust the commentators for some qualitative analysis). Now, when a player blundered, or there was a clear win in the situation, the evaluation bar would skyrocket in one direction. Sometimes the bar would do so and the commentators would be completely in the dark as to why - often something only a computer would see.
Thirdly, the pandemic changed everything. Online chess between the best players exploded with so many tournaments forced online. Not only that, but online streamers, including some of the best in the world, allowed an accessibility to them that was unprecedented. One in particular, Hikaru Nakamura, an American, abandoned top level chess for a period, played in online tournaments and would play and commentate on his games as he played. And incredibly win despite the distractions.
During my anxiety period earlier this year, I dabbled again with online chess, and this time it stuck. I got over my initial adjustment period and now am quite comfortable and proficient. Seeing the board 2D did take some time and also noticing the clock and playing to it is a skill in its own right. The world is your oyster tournament hall with Russian, Indonesian, Indian and Australian hordes waiting to take you on. The games are "rated", too; there is a special calculation to allow chess players to know where they're standing. It also allows computers to always match similar players together so you are always having good games, rather than the real life vicissitudes of smashing weak players and being destroyed by strong players. My ratings are higher than they ever were as a teenager although at much faster time controls.
I'm now thinking of a return to the physical chess hall, which has always been just down the hill from me, and experiencing that one more time, maybe for a year.
The biggest news in chess for the last wee while has been the accusations of cheating by the current world champion, Magnus Carlsen, against an up-and-coming young player Hans Niemann. It has been quite a divisive issue because there is no objective evidence yet of Hans cheating over the board, yet the world champion has pulled out of a tournament with Hans in, resigned a game with him after a couple of moves and now has said he will no longer play in any tournament in which Hans is a competitor, perhaps meaning that tournaments can only have Hans if Magnus is not interested, and Magnus plays a lot of chess. He may have just destroyed the young man's career.
How did they get to this point? In August there was an interesting prelude with the Champions Chess Tour event, day two, they played a mini-match. The tournament has an interesting format - it's done with the players in the same room but through a computer console each with up to four rapid games each day against the same person in a mini-match. Hans had a terrible first day against another elite player where a setback in the first game put him "on tilt" (when a player is unsettled and basically goes "all in" each game often irrationally). In fact, he was a bit unhinged in all of his media appearances during the tournament with a lot of quotable statements. However, in his first game against the world champion, he surprisingly won with black. Carlsen does lose from time to time but the game was very one-sided, after which, Hans said a one sentence statement to the media: "Chess speaks for itself", which immediately became a meme, before walking away not answering any other questions. Magnus came back straightaway winning three games on the trot to defeat Hans in the mini-match. In fact, Hans won none of the mini-matches at this Champions Tour event ending with a big fat zero points. They appeared on good terms though and even on a rest day were seen playing chess on the beach, as you do (which Carlsen won both games of):
Something else happened that might have been pertinent in the lead-up. The major online chess site chess.com offered Play Magnus Group to join them. The Champions Chess Tour event was followed by a classical chess event, the Sinquefield Cup, in St Louis. Hans wasn't meant to be playing but the last minute withdrawal of another top player allowed him to join. According to Magnus's later statements, he considered withdrawing himself when he heard Hans was going to be playing because he had come into the knowledge that Hans had cheated. It is unclear when and how he learned this - clearly they were on friendly terms in August and by September there was a change.
At the start of the Sinquefield Cup, Magnus's concerns were mainly his private thoughts. Both Hans and Carlsen started the tournament very well, both drawing one and winning one. In Round 3, they played each other, for the first time in the classical format again with black (the less favoured pieces) and Hans completely outplayed him. The next day, Magnus tweeted that he was withdrawing and included a meme indicating that he couldn't state his reason why, with an allusion to cheating. This set the controversy ablaze.. Many people said that he was a sore loser but Magnus had never withdrawn from a tournament before and had been upset by junior players previously without making an issue of it. During the tournament the speculation put huge pressure on Hans, who was now under the microscope but spoke very coherently in his defence of himself but often poorly to explain his own play. After each game, commentators would usually ask the winners their thinking in different positions and in these Hans often couldn't. Some took this as a slip: that he was using technology and hadn't had to really understand the positions he was in. During his statements, he admitted publicly about two incidents of cheating online, explaining them as his desire to play against better opposition but that he has never cheated over the board (OTB).
Cheating in chess is an interesting thing to conceptualise. It is very easy to cheat in online chess - in fact, during my play online I'm often compensated back points when one of my previous opponents are found to have cheated and have now been banned. A cheater would do it by having a "chess engine", the most famous of which is called Stockfish, which is now far superior to humans at chess and can almost instantly evaluate a position.. OTB, it is also possible. The longer time controls do give people time to potentially leave the board to use a device secretly. Also, in normal tournaments there are spectators allowed. Even if players are not allowed to have devices, spectators won't be checked and a confederate might be able to communicate or signal in some fashion. The content of communication could be as simple as a stone age grunt to indicate a key position was on the board, to the technological option of a mini audio ear piece where actual moves are sent.
So the Sinquefield Cup was suddenly in turmoil with the champion leaving and suspicions around the player who was now the sole leader of the tournament. Organisers reacted theatrically giving security airport style security wands used on all players coming in, which was now part of the coverage. The Cup had also been streamed live, but after Carlsen's withdrawal, the live feed was delayed 15 minutes before going online to remove the chances of a confederate watching and sending the best moves.
Whether it be from the stress of the accusations or, plausibly, due to the inability to cheat, Hans faded in the event, but not without some rather odd press conferences. The issue divided the chess community, those who trusted Carlsen's insinuations and those that believed that no evidence had really been shown that in this tournament Hans had cheated. The crisis continued though in another tournament which started straight after with both Carlsen and Hans billed well in advance. There was a lot of expectation about what would happen when they were paired. What arose was just three moves - two by Hans, one by Magnus, before Magnus spontaneously and sensationally resigned. It was a weird decision as it granted his nemesis a point but incredibly, Carlsen still smashed the tournament with a record score. He promised at the end of the tournament to be make a statement and that he did, stating that he believed that Hans demeanour in key positions in his Sinquefield game. And there he made his decision that he'd never play a tournament with Hans competing. He said that cheating is an existential threat that most would rather ignore - he cannot and he would like cheaters to be punished.
Still, no "solid" proof has been given but the internet has been doing its thing, with people now scrutinising Hans' previous over-the-board games many of which show a high correlation of his moves and engine moves. The proof people want is almost impossible after the fact. Hans clearly hasn't been caught with a device in his hand. A confederate has not had loose lips to say how it happened, either. He is a quirky character so talk about his demeanour might be a red herring, unless he's using his quirks as a smokescreen. That's speculation, too.
There is now an investigation by the FIDE, the international chess body, that will interview both of the players and evaluate the claims. In the meantime, there is a shadow over all games with Hans. For what it's worth, I don't think anyone could say with certainty that he did cheat at this point but I would say it is more likely than not. That is unsatisfying for most and not a useful basis for any action - you can't ban someone without certainty. I just hope that the investigation can have some of the claims truly tested.
Either way, with a simplification of my work, I'm looking to play over the board myself at the Auckland Chess Centre from November this year. Can't wait!
