Chess Pro Explains How to Spot Cheaters (ft. GothamChess)

Chess Pro Explains How to Spot Cheaters (ft. GothamChess) | WIRED

Рет қаралды 5,683,931

Жыл бұрын

"Only a bot would play that!" Sacrificing a Queen in chess is a move you're much more likely to see a bot make as opposed to a human, as humans want to protect the game's most valuable piece. In the wake of the recent chess cheating scandal, Levy Rozman from GothamChess explains how you actually cheat at chess. Using artificial intelligence, see how people use everything from bathroom cell phones to ear pieces to try to skirt the rules and gain an edge.
Check out Levy's KZfaq channel: / @gothamchess
Director: Lisandro Perez-Rey
Director of Photography: Charlie Jordan
Editor: Louville Moore
Talent: Levy Rozman
Line Producer: Joseph Buscemi
Associate Producer: Samantha Vélez
Production Manager: Eric Martinez
Production Coordinator: Fernando Davila
Camera Operator: Corey Eisenstein
Audio: Brett Van Deusen
Production Assistant: Patrick Sargent
Post Production Supervisor: Alexa Deutsch
Post Production Coordinator: Ian Bryant
Supervising Editor: Doug Larsen
Assistant Editor: Ben Harowitz
Still haven’t subscribed to WIRED on KZfaq? ►► wrd.cm/15fP7B7
Listen to the Get WIRED podcast ►► link.chtbl.com/wired-ytc-desc
Want more WIRED? Get the magazine ►► subscribe.wired.com/subscribe...
Follow WIRED:
Instagram ►► / wired
Twitter ►► / wired
Facebook ►► / wired
Get more incredible stories on science and tech with our daily newsletter: wrd.cm/DailyYT
Also, check out the free WIRED channel on Roku, Apple TV, Amazon Fire TV, and Android TV.
ABOUT WIRED
WIRED is where tomorrow is realized. Through thought-provoking stories and videos, WIRED explores the future of business, innovation, and culture.

Пікірлер: 4 500

@GothamChess Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for having me, Wired! :)

@havenless3551 Жыл бұрын

living legend

@jexilus_ Жыл бұрын

Gotham i love you bro

@poopenfarten Жыл бұрын

WOOOOOOOOOOOOO

@bananaman-nt5nb Жыл бұрын

My man 💪

@gffg387 Жыл бұрын

Thank you for having us.

@TheSuperImmortalKing Жыл бұрын

I sacrifice my queen all the time and nobody has accused me of being a bot. Just because I lose my game, doesn't mean I'm not cheating.

@bellewjoshua7112 Жыл бұрын

Yea same here

@mistermiggens5555 Жыл бұрын

yeah this seems very scripted. the queen sac example could have been found out by anybody over 1k

@jermeyplunkett3744 Жыл бұрын

Definitely, i play chess to find opportunities to do moves like this sacrifice it's my main motivation to play finding the "impossible" moves More accurately "improbable" moves

@milico2935 Жыл бұрын

He's refering to sacrifices that are not very obvious. If you see gms playing engines for example the way they sacrifice pieces is very different, and the engine might do it completely out of the blue for no immediately seen advantage just because it evaluates the position as better The example here was just very bad

@kringle7804 Жыл бұрын

@mistermiggens but you often don't see cheaters in those elo levels as much as you do in lower ones. Sure they do cheat but it's alot more obvious

@lorddarthvader2215 Жыл бұрын

Me : " Blunders my Queen" Levy : He sacrificed the Queen. Only a bot can come up with that move.

@rainchopper898 10 ай бұрын

He also said that no human has ever made a move like the sacrifice that he showcased. This is misleading. It was a bad example. Rest of his ideas were really informative

@octobsession3061 10 ай бұрын

@@rainchopper898Pin of shame. Dude, not everyone watching this video is high-rated chess nerd, like come on, any 1k would probably see mate in 3 or 4 occasionally, it's just an example he gave to wider range public, the sacrifice which are not so obvious.

@case6189 10 ай бұрын

@@octobsession3061high rated chess nerd? On a chess website 1000 elo is practically still a beginner lmfao. The example sucked Levy talking out of his butt this is why he’s only good for teaching scrubs

@Ruzzky_Bly4t 9 ай бұрын

@@rainchopper898 He said that no human has ever made that particular sequence of moves. Not any sequence resembling that one. Obviously, he knows that people make queen sacrifices sometimes.

@yeetmaster9010 9 ай бұрын

@@rainchopper898 No, but said move is surrounded by so many other red flags.

@cmd31220 Жыл бұрын

I just love how if you're called a bot in literally any other game, it means you're really bad. But in chess, it means you're amazing

@arthurb6882 Жыл бұрын

in what games does it mean you're bad?

@Rarezites Жыл бұрын

@@arthurb6882 For example, Minecraft, CoD, Fortnite, that stuff.

@toxicteapot7941 Жыл бұрын

@@arthurb6882 league of legends, dota, and other mmos, you're being called bad if you are called a bot.

@locrianphantom3547 Жыл бұрын

@Mark Berenger That’s the point…

@NoryLevi Жыл бұрын

Because in these game developers dont want to put a perfect bot in, AI in these games are designed to train players to be ready for iron or bronze gameplay. If you take a look at FIFA for example, the hardest difficulty (UT Ultimate) is like top 0.5% between players. Even in Dota, Open AI Five beat OG 2-0 after OG won back to back International

@risingscum1865 Жыл бұрын

One time I was playing against a guy and as I was about to checkmate he pulled out a comically large pawn and knocked down all my pieces and then told me I got pawned. I think he might have been cheating but idk, he said it was a hidden rule.

@hughg.rection8567 Жыл бұрын

Lmaoooo

@cheatlink11 Жыл бұрын

Grow your elo to grandmaster with this one weird trick!

@alexepic3255 Жыл бұрын

Should had read the pawn's effects in the bottom of the card

@dapperraptor8075 Жыл бұрын

Google en passant

@LightPink Жыл бұрын

When child my brother told me pawns can hop over other pieces and capture. I was amazed at this new rule and promptly lost that game.

@pauldraper1736 Жыл бұрын

The most suspicious moves are not sacrificial moves, but weird positional stuff. Like moving the queen back one space because 5 moves later it's gonna save you a tempo.

@NathanHedglin Жыл бұрын

Exactly this. Plenty of examples of queen sacrifices by humans. I saw one where the computer said to move a perfectly safe king. Made zero sense to a human that can't see 25 moved ahead.

@jasonruff1270 Жыл бұрын

Yeah, I felt that example was a bit too simple,.

@jasonruff1270 Жыл бұрын

Yeah I think he gave this example because it was simple and he was trying to cater to a mainstream audience

@rcmag13 Жыл бұрын

Agreed. This video is misleading as any good chess player would sacrifice a queen if it led to a checkmate in 2 to 3 moves. Its the niche positional ones that are like, what the?

@siltzi Жыл бұрын

Absolutely, you can almost instantly tell if someone is cheating by those moves. Random king move in the middle of a game that seems to achieve nothing (happens in lower elo and very high elo tho sometimes), or those weird queen/bishop one tile moves when there seems to be more forward progessing moves available.

@kilorl. 6 ай бұрын

Levy in this video: "sacrificing pieces is something a human would never do, those moves are very bot-like" Levy on his main channel: THE ROOOOOOOOK

@melonneleh 5 ай бұрын

Underrated 😂

@ItzOndra 4 ай бұрын

This comment has only one reply, let me fix that.

@Trashy2 4 ай бұрын

now 3 ;D

@WritingTeacher-jw4ul 3 ай бұрын

NOW 4!

@nxoryialzb Ай бұрын

now 5 ?

@ultimamateria1604 7 ай бұрын

The first mate he used is actually a pretty common mating pattern, the sacrifice is nice but the double bishop mate is a bodens mate and ive practiced it a lot on lichess, i could totes see a player spotting that move

@Buf037 4 ай бұрын

yeah the queen sacrifice wasn't super hard to find, it was more the fact that he had to sac his knight to even get to that point

@nickdasher5501 4 ай бұрын

Yeah like it was a nice sequence and not the easiest to find, but it's not like an unsolvable puzzle. If you post that position on r/chess I bet a lot of people would figure it out. Strange to use that particular example

@fennecbesixdouze1794 4 ай бұрын

Sacrificing the knight was completely intuitive, it opens up a completely devastating f-file on a vulnerable king with tempo.@@Buf037

@properp6922 2 ай бұрын

totes? is the full word too much time? you just typed an essay and ended on a strange made up word just wondering?

@Buf037 2 ай бұрын

@@properp6922 🤓

@anirbanchakraborty1464 Жыл бұрын

Levy is so consistent that he has started posting on other channels too. Incredible

@sabiiiir Жыл бұрын

Your comment is funny bro👍

@chauncyquest2779 Жыл бұрын

This one was less clickbaity though!

@Reality9111 Жыл бұрын

I am routinely impressed by his dedication to posting content and always bringing the same energy in every video.

@mikeymouse4629 Жыл бұрын

I think Levy's video above has some major flaws in the logic presented. Just because your opponent sacrificed all of his pieces and yet won doesn't necessarily mean they cheated... they could just be playing on 'another level'.

@MultiTrace22 Жыл бұрын

LOL

@hyperthreaded Жыл бұрын

I'm a chess noob, but it looks to me like Wired cut the recording of Levy's computer move analysis into random confusing bits and pieces for dramatic effect because they don't trust their viewers to concentrate and stay attentive for more than 20 seconds.

@mysticseven6578 Жыл бұрын

If you'd like to see a video where Levy had the chance to explain in more detail, check out any of his chess cheating videos (try searching for "Gothamchess cheaters"). In those videos, he breaks down the games in funny but educational ways.

@Trippze Жыл бұрын

@@mysticseven6578 bro he obviously knows that he referred to him by his first name

@mysticseven6578 Жыл бұрын

@@Trippze Fair point! I was more talking to new viewers, but apologies to Olaf if I came off as condescending.

@doicaretho6851 Жыл бұрын

@@mysticseven6578 Don't apologize, that other guy is just being a jackass. There was no reason for him to say that. And thanks for the recommendation.

@jean8252 Жыл бұрын

They think everyone has zoomer attention span

@ultimatestuff7111 Жыл бұрын

0:09 does make some sense because it’s checkmate in only 2, however a human would probably sac the bishop instead of queen but I think it’s because psychologically an opponent is way more likely to take a queen than bishop

@Zombie_MB 10 ай бұрын

I don’t think it was even than crazy of an idea. It’s not hard to spot that move. Maybe the engine getting him to the position to be able to do this is what was fishy? Idk.

@ultimatestuff7111 10 ай бұрын

@@Zombie_MB it’s not but maybe the queen sac is not human, a human would sac the bishop

@Taterzz 8 ай бұрын

@@ultimatestuff7111 why? the queen would have more power if the sacrifice didn't go through and easily take 3 pieces while also dogging on the king.

@Victor_Gabriele 8 ай бұрын

@@TaterzzBasically: The queen sacrifice is human, but the Knight sacrifice that led to this is unhuman

@twainrocks4771 8 ай бұрын

I think most players over 1k elo are spotting a queen or bishop sacrifice mate

@SchadenfreudeUY Жыл бұрын

0:54 3 huge questions 1. why does a treadmill have chess 2. why does it's chess contain a GM level AI 3. where can I get one

@irrelevant_noob Жыл бұрын

1. To incentivize the user while they're doing something incredibly monotonous... 2. Because why not? xD 3. Guess you could ask at the gym that Levy was talking about... Sadly, i don't know the details, but maybe they're somewhere on the internet.

@hexagonk9665 Жыл бұрын

As an AI, I can affirm his statements are indeed solid.

@tayar3797 Жыл бұрын

Beeeeeep bop bleep boop beep

@HoUrZ343 Жыл бұрын

@@SpeedyProduction Why'd you make 5 comments xd

@YST187 Жыл бұрын

Like seriously lads, he is an AI

@Robert-Italy Жыл бұрын

Don't anthropomorphize the robots - they hate when you do that.

@jahjoeka Жыл бұрын

I like chat bots

@roottwo5459 Жыл бұрын

That was literally the most tame queen "sacrifice" ever. A human would absolutely play that move.

@1c0nic_player Жыл бұрын

they would have to be decent to find it still but yeah, its a bad example

@paolosworld99 Жыл бұрын

Anyone who has messed around for 30mins in lichess puzzles would be able to find that mate in 2 easy.

@anonymously94 Жыл бұрын

@@paolosworld99 It's not a mate in 2. Black doesn't have to capture the queen.

@taleladar Жыл бұрын

@@anonymously94 If black doesn't capture the queen, there's another followup move white can make that's instant checkmate. If white does other things to try to postpone or get out of that checkmate, their position suffers or they lose material.

@anonymously94 Жыл бұрын

@@taleladar There is no immediate mate for white if black doesn't capture the queen, unless black makes a blunder.

@digital5535 Жыл бұрын

‘A human would never play that move’ Me who makes random moves: you have yet to reach my level

@robertzeurunkl8401 Жыл бұрын

Queen to D5 is actually a BRILLIANT move. It's Mate in 4.

@robertzeurunkl8401 Жыл бұрын

0:20 - Ooops. I should have just waited.

@danielyuan9862 Жыл бұрын

Yes, that's why Levy said it was a "non-human" move. Although, to be honest, that move is very human.

@tth-2507 Жыл бұрын

@@thedayofnewage That sacrifice will win the game - a reasonably good player (~1200ELO) will see and play that. Turned the video off after that.

@patrickdervan3444 Жыл бұрын

@@tth-2507 If you watched the video, you'd see he wasn't just commenting on the queen's move but also on the moves leading up to that sacrifice

@tth-2507 Жыл бұрын

@@patrickdervan3444 Then the intro of the video is cut very badly - further strengthening my believe that the video is not worth watching.

@maxkappert9795 Жыл бұрын

Tbh Levy explained it very well but the example could have been chosen better

@MaxLennon Жыл бұрын

A real example would probably have been like 10 moves long and the average audience member wouldn't have been able to follow, is my thinking.

@samuelblackmon Жыл бұрын

It's a decent example for low elo

@TheCagedK Жыл бұрын

@@MaxLennon the best explanation would be a endgame example when the chess ai unexplainably sacs a queen to get an extremely niche mate trap

@resir9807 Жыл бұрын

I just don't get why black takes the queen. Like I get it's a noob but it's literally a 1 move calculation

@jayadratha9836 Жыл бұрын

@@resir9807 Black shouldn't take the queen, but the move is still very strong even if you don't "fall for it." Qd5 threatens the knight on c6. Move the knight and you lose the rook on a8 and you're dying on the back rank. The bishop can't defend the knight because the queen can take it if it goes to d7 and if it goes to b7 it stops defending e6. Qd5 is one of those moves that looks impossible at first glance, but once you see it is possible then it becomes crushing. It isn't an example of a "bot move" at higher levels, since it'd be easily findable by a good player, but if played quickly at low levels it'd certainly be suspicious.

@somerandomdudefes31 Жыл бұрын

That example felt more like a normal chess puzzle than a cheater scenario, but other than that, great video.

@auzad3s601 Жыл бұрын

Well the point is that is very unlikely to see a so risky sacrifice sequence (there is the knight’s one also) in let’s say 10-12 sec, maybe Magnus, Hikaru and some others super GM could but…

@shtuffs Жыл бұрын

@@auzad3s601 no pretty much any competent player can figure out that mate pretty quickly. Humans are generally pretty good at attacking moves but it's usually the positional long termoves that they struggle more at. I think he used a bad example here

@danelyn.1374 Жыл бұрын

exactly, thought this was a bit weird. I feel like Levy gave a more simplified explanation for this as there probably would be moves that are definitely a lot of tactics that might actually be suspicious, but probably was a lot harder to explain in an interview than a 3-move tactic plus I suppose he's mostly explaining cheaters at a low elo, probably

@nmul8950 Жыл бұрын

@@shtuffsgood example explained poorly. the main point is that the opponent doesnt have to recapture, and u seemingly gain nothing by keeping ur queen in danger only defended by a flimsy tactic

@Av-uv6xu Жыл бұрын

Time control is very important here. Online chess, not classical. Carlsen said that he only need to get the hint when to look up for something to win majority of his games, so he would prob took his time and find this ez when someone said: now, but during the regular online which is usually blitz game, not really a chance to even search for something that crazy.

@pauld8379 10 ай бұрын

I had a great game recently, I won with a dubious checkmate. I used the computer analysis to see what the computer thought of my game. I had a 66% accuracy lol

@ComradeChams 9 ай бұрын

May I ask why you shared this information with us, and do you consider it to be a rather high, or low accuracy?

@pauld8379 9 ай бұрын

@@ComradeChams since then I had a 93% and a 96% once

@BarSalad 8 ай бұрын

@@ComradeChamslate comment but the context is: sometimes you end a game feeling that you played great, then you look at the computer analysis afterwards and realize you made a bunch of mistakes. In terms of accuracy percentage, it really depends on the game (disparity between players, if someone makes a significant blunder, opening knowledge, etc) but being in the 60% range is not good

@mghtutookhaung5449 8 ай бұрын

@@BarSalad its depends, I can score about 80+ accuracy against 1200s and win most games, but always score around 60~ against 1800s and lost most games. So you can't decide your play is good or bad by the accuracy alone.

@BarSalad 8 ай бұрын

@@mghtutookhaung5449 that’s already covered in my comment

@larsf478 Жыл бұрын

To be fair, at 0:01 there is no safe square for the Queen... And you would only have tonlook 2 moves ahead. That move alone seems very reasonable to me.

@telite7263 Жыл бұрын

My thought exactly. Finding a queen sacrifice resulting in mate in one doesn’t mean that they’re cheating. Granted, if they’re low ELO, it’s possible they could be, but I digress

@mrfake5251 Жыл бұрын

Levy has really come so far, I'm really proud of him.

@notmenotme614 Жыл бұрын

It’s interesting that when Gary Kasparov played Deep Blue, he thought IBM were cheating for the opposite reason… the computer suddenly changed its personality where it wouldn’t take predictable risks and cautiousness is a very human emotion. Gary tried to bait the computer but for some reason the computer wouldn’t take his piece. Imagine doing a move like the one in this video, when white goes to sacrifice their Queen and the black pawn just ignores it. He said it was the only computer (at the time) that wouldn’t take a high value piece when it could.

@PBMS123 Жыл бұрын

Unless you can see literally 2 moves ahead and go, wel gee if i take the queen, I'm moving my pawn out of the way of that bishop, dun dun. Although, the queen being there can also take and then you have check again.

@notmenotme614 Жыл бұрын

@@PBMS123 He described early computers as materialistic rather than thinking ahead . If they could take a high value piece, now, then they would. He also played a few games against the computer (maybe best of 5) and said the computers playing style or personality suddenly changed. If you haven’t seen it already, I highly recommend watching the documentary, I think it’s called “Game Over: Kasparov and the Machine”

@Rsconquest Жыл бұрын

@@notmenotme614 Early computers would overevaluate material after a long sequence. However, if they spot checkmate in a couple of moves after potentially taking a piece they just won't take.

@hansmahr8627 Жыл бұрын

This is not what happened in the Deep Blue match. Kasparov didn't bait the computer to take one of his pieces. There were two instances in the second match Kasparov played against Deep Blue that Kasparov found suspicious. In the first instance, Deep Blue avoided a variation that would have allowed it to win two pawns. It wasn't the best variation but engines back then didn't have a very good evaluation system and valued material gains more highly than other factors because material is easy to calculate. The second and more famous instance was in the last game of the match. Kasparov played a dubious opening with the black pieces because he thought that Deep Blue wouldn't be able to accurately evaluate it. The opening was dubious because there was a well-known knight sacrifice for white that refuted the line. Engines back then didn't go for sacrifices unless they would immediately lead to a win so Kasparov was sure that Deep Blue wouldn't go for it. But it did and Kasparov lost the game. To this day Kasparov claims that this move was not played by Deep Blue but that a human chess player made the move. After all, the knight sacrifice was well-known among high-level chess players. However, the Deep Blue team claimed that they had entered this exact line into the opening book of Deep Blue before the game. That would be a huge coincidence but who knows.

@whannabi Жыл бұрын

@@hansmahr8627 and they did not even allow him a rematch...

@filyboy7 Жыл бұрын

levy has really become the go-to guy for all chess content catered to the general masses. being a long time chess fan myself, i never really liked levy's videos, but i respect the hustle, and him making it to the top.

@brushtooth6636 Жыл бұрын

He definetly deserves this as well, pretty charismstic, a but controversial but entertaining

@Nomazzz Жыл бұрын

@@brushtooth6636 how is he controversial? Jusk askin started watching him just a few months ago

@TheZombieSlayerWave Жыл бұрын

he's ovbiously cheaper and less busy than the serious players.

@falc0n12 Жыл бұрын

@@Nomazzz he’s not controversial at all, i have no idea what these people are saying

@Nomazzz Жыл бұрын

@@falc0n12 hahah that was my first reaction too

@rannithewitch3180 8 ай бұрын

i was training a specific queen gambit yesterday, my opponent followed all the moves I had in mind, I reacted super fast, and asked me if I was cheating lmao...he just saw later that I only had the advantage at beggining

@pagp97 Жыл бұрын

To be honest, that Qd5 at the beginning is so majestic and not suspicious at all, the move itself does not mean cheating. The combination to get to that position though, may indicate otherwise

@ranDOm9431 Жыл бұрын

In combination with the knight sacrifice, it was a very weird move. On its own it would’ve been fine.

@bramvanduijn8086 Жыл бұрын

@@ranDOm9431The knight sacrifice makes perfect sense to me: It keeps pressure on the black king. Whenever you can control your opponent's king you should.

@trampy6449 Жыл бұрын

Levy is just such a great chess player, both professionally and on stream and video. Congrats for getting onto wired!

@rikittu Жыл бұрын

Also a great chess explainer. Watched one of his videos randomly and it was very entertaining and informative. I know basically just a little more than the basics about chess and his video had me hooked.

@Morphysince94 Жыл бұрын

great chess player? either you're patronizing af or I read dat wrong

@ninous26 Жыл бұрын

Hes not a Grandmaster and he will never be one per his own admission. There are thousands of grandmasters

@quintapusyt Жыл бұрын

Yea I highly recommend checking him out if you haven't already!

@Unpug Жыл бұрын

Ikr

@bilbobaggins138 5 ай бұрын

That first move was a bad example. That was easy to spot

@adwaawddw4730 Жыл бұрын

Someone asked Kasparov about this and I found his answer very interesting-he said that at the grandmaster level, all a cheater needs to know is that they have a winning move. This is a signal that only has to be done once-making it incredibly hard to detect-because at grandmaster level it only takes 1 major mistake or oversight to lose the game entirely.

@AllTheArtsy Жыл бұрын

Nakamura basically said the same thing in his podcast ep with Lex Fridman. Not even winning move but just a more advantageous move- just a signal so he will spend more time and find it. The explanation is fine, but the example given is for the non-players, for sure.

@leventcelik6597 Жыл бұрын

Hikaru mentioned that you can cheat by simply relating a single beep. Beep means there's an important move to pay attention. If you know a move exists, you try hard to find it. No beep means the moves are not hard to find. You don't lose time.

@AbhishekKumar-xx7li Жыл бұрын

This is actually right. When you are solving a chess puzzles you try hard to spot the tactic but in normal games, most moves look simple and mundane.

@rdr6269 Жыл бұрын

One beep for important defensive move, two beeps important offensive move, three beeps important move which is defensive but is also offensive. How about that?

@TypicalAsian355 Жыл бұрын

Then the thing malfunctions and there’s never a beep

@Thelaretus Жыл бұрын

Coughing works too.

@AbhishekKumar-xx7li Жыл бұрын

@@rdr6269 Omg! You ppl now will make chess match happen in an enclosed cell.

@RamgateTV Жыл бұрын

When someone sacrificing quenn for nothing or exchange for a pawn you might think first there is something or it was just a blunder.

@kaibigan7084 Жыл бұрын

That knight and queen sacrifices are easier tricks than what i sometimes saw when i was young. Furhermore, that sacrifices are much easier to spot than most of chess puzzles solution that sometimes an amatuer can see!

@LeventButSpeedrunning Жыл бұрын

That position was probably not the best example, but still understandable by every level of player. Nice job!

@kaptenkrok8123 Жыл бұрын

I thought the same those moves are definately not beyond levys capabilities

@aidancooper9498 Жыл бұрын

Paul Morphy would play like that for even less compensation, lol

@tedros6917 Жыл бұрын

I feel like they edited it weird. even as a relative beginner, I've done puzzles that have used similar ideas so I think it's very likely even intermediate players would spot it

@Trip_Fontaine Жыл бұрын

Yeah, I'd be pretty uncomfortable playing anywhere that would deem me a cheater for making such moves. Those moves seem well within what even like an 1800-rated player could do, especially in slower time controls. I'm going through a tactics trainer intended for players around 1600 and some of the puzzles are not much easier than that. Of course, when you tell someone there is something to find like in a puzzle, it's easier than finding the same thing out of the blue in a real game.

@utoherozv Жыл бұрын

agreed! I don't think I would have found it, but it didn't look that crazy.

@TheWizardsOfOz Жыл бұрын

"If it can go into your shoe, it can go to other places" - Levy Rozman, 2022

@Aleixus Жыл бұрын

Btw just asking, are we allowed to have a visual representation of all the places the opponent can move/attack?

@gaelarturo2825 9 ай бұрын

Levy was holding the urge to scream THE QUEEN

@Bruh-bk6yo Жыл бұрын

I love how Levy can be both serious and funny. Especially at GTE🤣

@mrosskne Жыл бұрын

what's GTE?

@larisavela Жыл бұрын

@@mrosskne GeT bitchEs

@Bruh-bk6yo Жыл бұрын

@@mrosskne Guess The Elo

@bangeyboi2143 Жыл бұрын

Or how to lose at chess😂

@EyeOfThePhi Жыл бұрын

this guy looks racist af no cap

@E_D___ Жыл бұрын

If someone moves his queen like that in a game your first thought would be "wtf is this??? Is it just a bait or am I dead already" When someone does this kind of move you know you are in a problem not because you think the enemy is cheating, but because you know your opponent had to have a reason to do this "idiotic " move

@crabman2 Жыл бұрын

then just sacrifice your queen and hope they’re scared to take it lmao (they always take it hence why it works)

@E_D___ Жыл бұрын

@@mhkk1491 I don't think you need to be a grandmaster to suspect a bait vs a blander. It depends on how much time is left (is he in a rush?), The playstyle your op had till that point, and how obvious it is. In this example the fact the queen can die is super obvious, so unless it was a missclick or op nearly put of time, it is probably a bait

@GuidoHaverkort Жыл бұрын

Unless you're 600 like me

@sws212 Жыл бұрын

The example is literally just an oversimplified version of it for the audience. This is not actually a video for chess pros, dude. The real life example is them giving up their queen for a checkmate 4 or 5 moves away which not even most grandmasters can do.

@aminulhussain2277 Жыл бұрын

@Richard L Probably just wired editing away the rest of the footage leaving only that single move for the initial example.

@Journey22405 Жыл бұрын

in Isolation that queen move is something you would see occasionally but in the sequence that led up to that move you can tell its a bot. a human could see a queen sac mate, a bot will definitely see the queen sac will see it 5 in advance so will make all the moves necessary to make that sac mate happen.

@blademastedgaming5385 11 ай бұрын

Me: plays e5 Levy: a human would never play that

@khoa4k266 Жыл бұрын

I would never think that gotham chess would get on wired

@Loki1v9 Жыл бұрын

The first example is tragically bad imo I guess its fine not to give a new player that credit but the King is very obviously vulnerable and you only need to think 1 move ahead to conclude Queen sacrifice

@finesseandstyle Жыл бұрын

It's an exaggerated example that explains his point pretty well IMO. He then says that the bot does that but worse and pretty much at every turn.

@Manakyn Жыл бұрын

It may have been edited poorly by Wired (which they are known to do). Its possible his example was more in depth and they only kept the last part.

@bleekcer Жыл бұрын

@@Manakyn Yes, he talked about a sequence of moves, and Wired probably showed only the end.

@JoshuaVance1124 Жыл бұрын

Yeah I’m almost sure they simplified it. Most likely gotham explained a longer sequence and they just showed the end, or he had a different example and wired vetoed it because it was too confusing. This is meant to be for people who don’t play chess so the example couldn’t be too complicated

@Kauk77 Жыл бұрын

I think he or Eric Rosen has a video explaining that position and it is actually a very deep move because accepting the queen results in checkmate, but declining the queen isn't possible either without losing. Thing is, in that position you can decline the sacrifice in a variety of ways, and you have to find refutations for all of them. Not only you'd have to calculate a large number of possible lines but you would also have to have the confidence that you aren't wrong in any of them

@Hrishiraj2003 4 ай бұрын

Mikhail Tal: I didn't know I was a cheater my entire career.

@Ryuzakku Жыл бұрын

On that first one, it makes sense if you have the time of classic chess to look at the board. Sacrificing a Queen to ensure checkmate. Doing that in bullet or blitz though? Yeah, likely a cheater. Sacrificing the knight is much more of a cheater move though on that one.

@heroclix0rz Жыл бұрын

That queen gambit is really straight forward. It's mate in 2. I get that there are other queen sacs that only a computer would see, but I would expect anyone as good as Levy to see that particular example.

@cheshire1 Жыл бұрын

Keep in mind that most of the people watching this channel aren't chess players. You can't really expect them to understand why the actual moves that GMs consider 'bot moves' are even good at all.

@XCMasterchief Жыл бұрын

that was my first thought too, but it's also contingent on Ng5+ being found first. It's a tough find but not unreasonable

@adamwoolston253 Жыл бұрын

Definitely a believable human move, but real bot moves sac the queen the uncork some ten move combo that a general audience wouldn’t be able to follow lol. Also I’d say it depends on rating. A 500 finding a queen sac for mate in 2 is sus.

@LauriKarjanlahti Жыл бұрын

Im pretty sure that example was more about finding that knight sac. You know now that it works, but you dont normally simply even consider and calculate a move like that because moving a knight under attack when your own queen is already under one is very counter intuitive.

@rcmag13 Жыл бұрын

@@LauriKarjanlahti I've done it before but I'm a very aggressive player. I think a lot of the moves were edited out as this example is pretty bad at best.

@user-ok4ql8nw6q Жыл бұрын

Levy: No human in history has ever played a sequence of moves like that. Mikhail Tal: Am I a joke to you?

@cuberious1419 Жыл бұрын

9:27

@48rhxR3agenT Жыл бұрын

Bruh

@kerimtezel5408 Жыл бұрын

or literally anyone who's over like 1700

@szarekhthesilent2047 Жыл бұрын

Since when is Tal human?

@Dyzz21 Жыл бұрын

Yeah that queen sac was mate in 1 how is that a bot move

@OhBeEye 8 ай бұрын

That was a fantastic time. Thanks!

@Ashlevon 6 ай бұрын

*sacrifices one or two pieces for a 3-turn play you've been planning for the past 4 turns* GothamChess: "That's an AI move right there, no doubt about it."

@Quintinity Жыл бұрын

so kind of levy to bring attention to smaller channels, what a cool dude

@deepuniverse4840 Жыл бұрын

smaller?

@edpsussyfortniteamogus8373 Жыл бұрын

definitely not smaller

@rebel2809 Жыл бұрын

yeah, how kind of him! maybe wired will be as big as levy some day

@porygon-z8270 Жыл бұрын

@@edpsussyfortniteamogus8373 come back once you've learned what sarcasm is. Enjoy kindergarten!

@edpsussyfortniteamogus8373 Жыл бұрын

@@porygon-z8270 be quiet dawg, reading text on a screen doesn’t as easily convey emotions or even sarcasm as easy as hearing it in person.

@thsand5032 Жыл бұрын

The opening example feels a bit weird, I think any slightly experienced player would see that the queen to D5 move is safe because an attempt to take the queen results in immediate checkmate, and an experienced opponent would see that taking the queen results in checkmate as well.The full version of it later does however feel completely absurd.

@Skel_fgc Жыл бұрын

Yeah agreed, that Queen move is pretty normal high level stuff, but that knight play? Not so much…

@MrB10N1CLE Жыл бұрын

I don't think the editor knows much about chess, hence the weird opening.

@TIMEWALKDG22 Жыл бұрын

Good video though I don't find the last position particularly hard to grasp maybe it was simplified for people in the video to understand but if I see this position in "puzzle rush" I find this 100% since you win back the c6 knight after the discovered check. There was this famous chess youtuber I know who always says to check captures and checks on every move since they are forcing. I find this makes puzzle rush easy now you could argue you cant find this over the board but i would whites queen is trapped maybe it was a blitz or bullet game in time control but its in fact the only move that saves the queen it can't go anywhere else I guess maybe looking for bishop a3 or bishop d3 danger levels and saccing the bishop is more natural not sure since i already knew the solution.

@joseandresochoaroa4520 Жыл бұрын

I used to be 1900 ELO when I was younger, now probably after so many years I'm 1300-1500 but even for me, the move Ng5 was one of the best moves in the position, if night taken I could take a lot of material threatening mate, if not, the sacrifice of the queen was also one instant move I saw. I think they are better examples of how cheaters sometimes move a pawn 15 moves before they even put a espectacular move coordinated with the pawn, even +1900 can't see 15 moves ahead unless they are spectacular players and I mean almost all GM CANNOT SEE 10 COMPLEX SEQUENCES AHEAD, of course we can see easy sequences but not like that. That's a better example of cheating 'cause these ones cause a little to much fear in new players, and most of plataforms are good at taking down cheaters.

@o.v4069 Жыл бұрын

🧢

@RickyJC Жыл бұрын

More people need to accept the notion of losing to improve and winning to know you did something right.

@cubicinfinity2 Жыл бұрын

When I lose, the game was so bad that I don't want to look at the analysis. When I win, I'm more likely to analyze it because I can see what I did wrong and feel better about still winning.

@costelo_6297 Жыл бұрын

3:33 oh yes, The Vibrating Device. Yes, in the shoe, where else? Under armpit... oh

@GMFossAnderson Жыл бұрын

0:22 personally i would of seen that. Am i a ROBOT?!?!

@professionalyeeter2138 7 ай бұрын

Can you be sure you're not?

@MrMohl1 Жыл бұрын

IMO the example is misrepresented, not because of the "risky" queen gamble, but because it was also preceded by the knight move. I feel that rather than being focused on a 1-turn checkmate if they take the queen, it should have been emphasized more that it was done TWICE in a row to get to that board. Im sure gotham went into more detail, and it was a bit too complicated or long-winded for non-chess-players, but pinning the black knight to the rook while also threatening checkmate (with the single move by itself) doesnt look THAT counterintuitive.