Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by sudhirj 1834 days ago
> He was the only player to defeat Anand, an obvious sign of computer assistance.

Ok this is a bit much. This was a celebrities simultaneously against the grandmaster match, and this guy is a serious player who competed when he was young, and likely plays regularly for fun and practice. Given this was an exhibition fundraiser, and the guy had nothing to prove (already runs a very successful brokerage and hedge fund, India’s youngest billionaire and all) why make an accusation of cheating?
3 comments
CrazyStat 1834 days ago
He has already publicly admitted and apologized for it [1].

[1] https://www.thehindu.com/sport/other-sports/chess-fundraiser...

link
sudhirj 1834 days ago
Ah, thanks. Yeah, makes sense. I still don't get how everyone jumped to the conclusion that he was cheating before, though. Is there something so utterly impossible about the situation that make it obvious? Do grandmasters never lose games to non-GM players even when playing multiple people for fun?
link
tylerhou 1834 days ago
Anand isn't a regular-ol GM; Anand is a former world champion. These super-GMs spend thousands and thousands of hours studying the game. Generally super-GMs don't lose to anyone except other GMs in classical time formats.

If a super-GM does lose, then it's probably because they blundered. That's not what happened — Anand played well, but Kamath played basically a perfect game with an accuracy of 99%. There are a handful of people on the planet who can do that consistently in classical, and they are all rated 2700+.

link
bspammer 1834 days ago
> Do grandmasters never lose games to non-GM players even when playing multiple people for fun?

Pretty much, yeah. Especially when they don’t make any big mistakes, as was the case here.

link
sickygnar 1834 days ago
The guy didn't just cheat, he blatantly cheated, using the computer for every move outside of his first move blunder. Then he bragged about winning in the post-game interview.

The guy obviously lied about his chess background, he lost to a scholar's mate (4 move checkmate) in one of his recent games. He probably just said he had a chess background to sound smart. Arrogant narcissist.

link
andrewzah 1834 days ago
There is a considerable gulf between "someone who competed when they were young" and a world champion. Looking at their rankings, Kamath is/was about 2055 and Anand is about -2753-. He is among a handful of players who have managed to peak above 2800. [0]

As to why people cheat, there are a plethora of reasons. Running a brokerage or hedgefund is whatever, nothing really special to anyone. Being able to defeat someone like Anand -is- an incredible feat to have under one's belt. The thrill of dominating and/or getting key victories in a competitive sport far surpasses things like running a successful business or being rich. Money can't get you that. Business acumen can't get you that. Only your personal knowledge and skill can get you that.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_players_by_peak_...

link