Really chessbrah? 2 days in a row I need to teach you the same lesson??? Why are you still making videos about these BS accusations when you know they are 100% false? I cannot believe you called Hikaru the goat of calling others cheaters. HIKARU WOULD NOT DO THAT!! He respects the game too much to make false claims. You are just lying and making stuff up, LIAR. Now you are wearing a hawaiian shirt, too??? Are you trying to make fun of Hikaru's comfortable outfits? And my comment yesterday I noticed was pinned and a bunch of IDIOTS responded to me, but I ignored them because my message was for you, not those 15 iq fry cooks. Chessbrah if you do not change your ways, I will not only unsubscribe, but i might even consider reporting the video for misinformation. Learn your lesson kid, nobody cares about your opinion!

Kramnik: I fell off 🚫 Kramnik: Everyone is cheating ✅️

Eric rosen beeing the one catching strays is just the cherry on top 😂

Being good at chess does not equal being good at statistics. When Kramnik speaks of "TRUE" statistics and presents a small sample of 46 games he gives away that he really doesn't understand probablilities.

I'm no great fan of Hikaru but it's ridiculous to think he's cheating. There's no good evidence he's cheating and there's no motivation for him to cheat. He makes his money by streaming, and he explains his thought process while making moves. Not to mention how hard it would be for him to cheat in bullet, where he's absolutely dominant. Kramnik is just burning every bridge he still has in the chess community.

1% of the time, things with a 1% chance tend to happen.

Kramnik is really hurting his chances of winning the Hikaru Nakamura Sportsmanship Award

I want to see kramnik play hikaru blitz OTB and to see if he 'underperforms' against hikaru in blitz in 46 games... I can almost guarantee it

Magnus was 100% roasting Kramnik there! That was an absolute S-tier roast! Hikaru could only tip his cap to that one!

Interested in the probability calculations being done here. It doesn't seem that weird to me that Hikaru's hot streaks would be "statistically improbable" if one were, for instance, treating the games' results as independent, when In practice my intuition is that the results of individual consecutive blitz games (especially against the same opponent) sound like they would be highly correlated. If he's hot he's hot. Anyone know where I can find kramnik's mathers? I'm a little lazy.

You can’t go around looking for occurrences under one percent probability and label them suspicious. Hikaru has over 50,000 games. He SHOULD have a number of very low probability streaks in that sample. (If he didn’t, it would be suspicious.)

MVL is a mathematicien. Would love to hear from him... He is surely the highest rated mathematicien in the world.

the "they're flirting with each other" got me😂

Eric is like... easy content today $$$

Hikaru is definitely NOT the GOAT of blaming people to be cheaters. Get serious. Gata literally reports anyone who beats him even when he himself blunders a winning position (yes I saw it with my own eyes!).

The probabilities, implied by the rating system do NOT apply to a long match between 2 players. They apply more to a player playing single games vs a random sample from the player pool. This is the small trap, Mr. Kramnik stumbled into. I was watching Hikarus 46 game video and he was in lost positions multiple times - he did make blunders. But he just did not lose those fights because he is a wizard with the mouse and just survived long enough in those lost positions to steal the opponents time. This "fast-click-escape-hatch" is also not part of what the "statistics" of the rating system cover. And this explains, why Hikaru is rated higher online than otb. Because he still harvests points from lost games. So, in order to settle the issue, assuming Kramniks online rating is around 29xx or 3000... they should meet over the board for a blitz match (3+0) over 50 games. The mouse wizardry is then not a factor and it might be Hikaru loses a few more games compared to this online result - but I still think this would be a valid test. And it would be fun to watch :)

I like the fact you called out Hikaru on his actions before Covid and Hikaru getting rich. He was a big cry baby back in the days . Good honesty Eric

Eric you are one of the more level headed GMs out there- period- ignore these haters saying you don’t have a right to give your opinion- you absolutely have a right and we all want to hear it. Keep up the good work man your an inspiration to many of us lower rated guys (I’m 1600 and proud of it 😝 😅😂). Much love

Kramnik talking about the stockfish on the ceiling 🤣

Didn't know Hikaru used to make wide accusations too, really interesting stuff. Math-wise, a system like ELO doesn't model the top few players as well as the rest of the field. It's like how Magnus had a hard time getting enough games in to reach a new ELO height. Even if he was really deserving of a higher ELO at the time, by the time he gets enough games in to show it, many folks have caught up.

Fuck the math, the bottom line is Hikaru, Magnus, etc. is legit one of the best players in the world, so yes I believe he can run up ridiculous atreaks.

Does the thing about not knowing how the knight captures come from that game where Magnus verbally trolled Andrea Botez "So, do you know how a knight moves?"

Accusing a multi-millionaire and top 3 classical player of cheating in casual online chess is crazy. He would be risking his career/reputation for literally nothing, big Kram needs to take his pills.

Kramdik should be embarrassed. I bet he didn’t think his little post would blow up in his face.

Kramnik can say whatever he wants. Trying to silence him is ridiculous. The thing is, while I agree with Kramnik's statements, they're so vague! Of course cheating is bad, of course no-one should be above being checked. But WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE? To accuse Hikaru without anything solid is quite ridiculous. That's the problem here. Kramnik singled out Hikaru but a 45 game no-loss streak is not impossible. Especially when you consider the thousands of games someone like Hikaru plays - things which happen once every 100 games will happen every day for Hikaru since he plays that often! Also, players can have good and bad days and play above or below their average level. My accuracy is sometimes in the 90s, in the next game it might be in the 40s. My rating might be 1600, but sometimes I play like a 1300, other times like a 1900.

saying that odds of 1% are mathematically rare, and would cause the need for investigation is just plain stupid. the odds of having a car crash are like 0.001% every day, yet there are thousands of them every single day, and most of them are not caused intentionally. (no need for investigation). If hiki plays 50000 games of chess every year, it's more than likely to have a win streak of 50 at one point. he might just as well have a losing streak of 50 in there somewhere

Eric we need to talk about your thumbnails.

There will always be anomalies. I once won an arena tournament on LiChess for players rated under 1700, and I was rated under 1300. My accuracy was very high because my 5 opponents kept making obvious blunders and resigned early when they blundered a queen or heavy piece. When you play a lot of chess, it happens. Hikaru pointed out that these online ratings are highly skewed and when you look at actual ratings, he was an average of 300 points higher than the 46 opponents, ie, he was supposed to crush them.

Someone would have to be an idiot or have a grievance against Hikaru to think that he is cheating. He is playing a 3 minute online game, he is analyzing and narrating the game during play, explaining moves, and discussing strategy all in a blitz/bullet game. No cheating is involved, it is talent and mastery of the game on display.

Hikaru's comment to Carlsen about the knight is a reference to Andrea Botez interviewing Magnus during the Magnus-Nepo World Championship match.

It’s, as Kramnik says, “interesting” that he would try and imply Hikaru, but not Magnus of “sus activity”, seeing as Magnus has had multiple streaks of 30-40 wins in a row.

As a Mathematician, the former world champion has CLEARLY not spoken to a mathematician, a people were going on about a 2% or 1% change, a 0.5% will happen every single day if you are playing enough games, specially 3m games, we talking a play could play a minimum of 10 of those an hour, with just 10 games we talking a 10% chance of that 1% chance game happening, odds don`t work like that, there was once a lady that threw 154 times in craps and did not get a 7, outliners do happen, the thing is, how far are the odds and the results? Well for a just less than 1%, not that much

I calculated the probability of Hikaru's performance (say, 85% chance of winning, 10% chance of draw, 5% chance of loss) happening to be 0.3%. Yet Hikaru has played tens of thousands of games, so such a streak is to be expected (about 83% chance of happening at least once). And non-math aside all of eric's points make sense. I like the wholesome joking around at the end

We need LAN events for speed chess championships. I think that might open Kramnik's eyes to a lot of things about the digital age, not just chess.

Something that has a 1% chance of happening should be seen about 1 out of 100 games. It would be statistically strange if peaks and valleys of performance DIDN'T happen.

You just know that Eric is loving this latest chess drama.

Classic misunderstanding, Kramnik forgot that Hikaru doesn't use the metric system when he calculated those stats

Let me tell you about STATISTICS, because i did that for living for a while: Saying something has LESS THAN 1% PROBABILITY so there is something WRONG with it is IGNORANT of Statistics! I doubt that Kramnik indeed talked to real statisticians because NO STATISTICIAN will say that! Think about this: If a disease appears in only 1% of the population, there are more than 3 MILLION people with that disease in United States alone!!! One in 100 is NOT RARE! Do u really believe that Hikaru is 1 in 100??? How many other Hikaru's do u know?? Hikaru is like 1 in 300 Million!! He is UNIQUE, he has been a beast for decades, and to say that his performance had 1 in 100 chance of being real is just INSULTING and Ignorant of Statistics.

Hikaru should invite Kramnik to his place and do a stream together

Kramnik actually did nt lose his mind and he talked to PHD mathematician and recieved same confirmation

I do have a math degree. I'm a bit rusty cause I'm not working in a stats field, but a quick primer on some key details about statistics and how to use them. Statistics are _not_ a magical tool to confirm or dispel cheating. Statistics are effective at finding irregular data. Statistics cannot tell you why the data is irregular, just that it is irregular. It is up to the statistician to propose possible explanations for the data. Cheating is of course one explanation, but not the only one. A key detail you covered in the last video was that Hikaru's games from his win streak had lots of repeat opponents. This means that each individual game was not *independent* of one another. This is very often a key detail in statistics. Variables are often assumed to be independent and it is very common for conclusions to be drawn with independence in mind. Since Hikaru played the same players multiple times, his games were not independent. This changes the data, as now we aren't looking at the odds of Hikaru winning 45.5/46 random games. We're looking at the odds of Hikaru winning 45.5/46 games against specific players. Put another way, the odds of Hikaru beating Magnus 45.5/46 are substantially different from him beating me 45.5/46. His opponents were high rated, but playing multiple times in a row and being more skilled, the morale of the other player and the intimidation factor is a consideration.

Go eric

I think the knight reply from Hikaru was in relation to when Magnus hung his queen to a knight capture in an online tourney a few months ago. Not sure if it was against Hikaru but I vaguely remember Magnus hanging the queen to a Nx.

Hikaru needs an anonymous astrophysicist to prove their math is wrong smh

Kramnik's post makes sense in general, and I agree that all players should be checked, no exception. But he doesn't elaborate when he mentions mathematicians' findings about the statistical probability of scoring a streak, nor he links to his sources about it (maybe he did that while answering the comments? If so, I missed it). With this I don't mean he's inventing numbers or anything like that: rather that the statistics he refers to might not be appropriate for the cases in question (*). Namely: - are the mentioned statistics based on single game results, and then elaborated in order to estimate winning/losing streaks' probability, - or are they actually statistics about how winning/losing streaks happen in online Chess games (i.e. NOT extrapolated from single game results)? Those two are not the same thing, and the 1st one might not be of much use in order to assess the chance of winning/losing streaks in online Chess. Thanks for your videos! (*) I'm no "expert" in statistics, but I did study a whole dedicated semester course on them and how they work at university level, like any other graduate in the experimental science field (at least in the Italian system, not sure how it works elsewhere), and I used them directly for some years when I did work in research... I mean I have quite some (mostly practical) experience with them, without being an expert.

I have decided to completely revise my post to make it more complete. Kramnik said that 45.5/46 result is very unlikely. Let's consider a player A rated 3300 and a player B rated 2950, which seem to be, more or less, the ratings considered by Kramnik. All my calculations are based on information I took from Wikipedia. The Elo rating system is in used many sports. In sports where there are no draws a formula is: Probability of A winning = 1/(1+10^(-(RA-RB)/s)). For chess s=400. The 10 comes from using a logistic curve with base 10 for the expected score of player A. The value for s (the 400) come from USCF suggesting that a 200 difference points in rating should represent about 75% chance of player A winning, 25% chance of loosing and 0% of drawing. Note that the probability of drawing is not specified by the Elo system. Instead a draw is considered half a win and half a loss. If no draws are allowed and the Elo difference is 200 points then P(A winning) = 1/(1+10^(-200/400) = 0.76. If the Elo difference is 400 then P(A winning) = 0.91. Now obviously there are a lot of draws in chess. Considering draws the formula is: P(A wining) = (10^(r/400))/(10^(-r/400)+k+10^(r/400)), where r=(RA-RB). It seems that a value of 2 for k is reasonable. The higher is k the higher will be the draw probability. With RA-RB = 3300-2950 = 350, s=400 and k=2: P(A winning a game) = (10^(350/400))/(10^(-350/400)+2+10^(350/400)) = 0.78. Using the same formula gives the probability of player B wining is about 0.02. Consequently the probability of a draw is about 0.2. So the probability of the 45.5/46 score is 0.78^45*0.2*46 = 0.00012 or 0.012%. To put things into perspective. What is the probability of player A winning 0.78*46 = 36? The P(A winning exactly 36 games and not winning 10) = 0.14 (14%) which is also quite low. That is why it can make more sense to calculate the probability of A winning more than a specified number of games. To simplify let's just consider two scenarios Player A wins and Player A does not win (either draws or loses). In this conditions, the probability of player A wining is 0.78 and the probability of Player A not wining is 1-0.78=0.22. P(A winning 40 games or more) = 0.09 (9%) P(A winning 41 games or more) = 0.04 (4%) P(A winning 42 games or more) = 0.02 (2%) P(A winning 43 games or more) = 0.005 (0.5%) P(A winning 44 games or more) = 0.001 (0.1%) P(A winning 45 games or more) = 0.0002 (0.02%) P(A winning 46) = 0.0001 (0.01%) Now let's say that the true probability of player A winning is 0.9 or 90% then: P(A winning 43 games or more) = 0.31 (31%) P(A winning 44 games or more) = 0.15 (15%) P(A winning 45 games or more) = 0.05 (5%) P(A winning 46 games) = 0.01 (1%) If player A plays not 46 but 30000 games against player B, how many runs of 45.5/46 is he expected to have? This is a very tricky question and to answer it I did 1000 simulation of 30000 games and the average result is 3.5. My simulation may not be correct, I didn't verify everything, so take this result with a pinch of salt. But the results of my simulation are correct it means that is very likely that the 45.5/46 result actually happens for a player who has played so many games (30000). Finally note that, obviously the likelihood of the 45.5/46 result depends on the probability of player A winning. Also one needs to be careful when considering point probabilities because it tends to be low and it is zero for a continuous distribution. In this example remember that the P(A winning 36 games and not loosing 10) = 14%, and this is the most likely result out of 46 games using the 0.78/0.22 probabilities. My chess coach who is a strong GM and has a rating of about 2950 played 8 games with Hikaru recently and their result was 6-2. Using P(Hikaru winning a game) = 0.78 we have the following probabilities: 8 - 0 13.70% 7 - 1 30.92% 6 - 2 30.52% 5 - 3 17.22% 4 - 4 6.07% 3 - 5 1.37% 2 - 6 0.19% 1 - 7 0.02% 0 - 8 0.001% So the outcome of their match (between Hikaru and my coach) is very reasonable.

Kramnik needs to get it through his head that there will always be exceptions in every field. Everyone can't be at the same level. There will always be the top 1% that breaks the statistics which is why are the exceptions not the rule. We have the Einstein's, Isaac Newton's, Usain Bolts, Michael Jordan's, Muhammed Ali's. They exist in every field, in Chess it's Magnus and Hikaru. Kramnik is a classic example of someone who can't get to a certain level so instead they try to pull others down to their own level to stay relevant.

Data engineer here.. Only looking at stats without looking at the actual games (the data behind those stats) is foolish and means nothing. Human behavior can't be defined simply by numbers.

Can't believe Chessbrah didn't play the "I'm the data scientist now, bish" clip from Hikaru.

Although rare, if you play as many blitz matches as Hikaru, I think you're going to see some outlier performances from time to time.

God I'd pay to see Hikaru and Kramnik do a long otb blitz match now.

Regarding the Cesar's wife phrase, what it actually means is that someone who holds a position of fame/power, he is required not only actually being just/innocent etc but also to APPEAR as such, ie perception matters. If I am not mistaken the phrase originated from Cezar divorcing his wife after being accused for smth because of the sole reason of her being accused, regardless of her innocence, because the wife of the ruler should never even be questioned.

Was not the Hikaru ‘knight moves’ comment to Magnus a reference to an Andrea Botez question to Magnus at a press conference?

LOL just saw these Hikaru clip for the first time here. Juicy stuff Eric, thanks for sharing hahahah

nobody want to see my cam, noooo don't say that erric

This is a bit of the crows coming home to roost. As soon as the only real “evidence” against Hans was high accuracy games, all of the tippy top GMs guaranteed there would be allegations against themselves eventually

"I didn't break into the upper echelon of chess players, he's got a different lounge than me" LOL

Kramnik is going full blown Bobby Fischer. Same pattern of statements, and outlook after his prime. Very soon he will say that chess is boring memorized positions and that he hates the game.

During his 46 game streak he played the same player over 10 times and that person has a 300 point gap on Hikaru. You should expect Hikaru to win 100% of those games every time. Cherry-picking your data is an easy way to go wrong. Streaks happen, it's not indicative of anything. A professional mathematician would know that.

It caught me off guard hearing hicky go 'I literally don't care' when eric was sorting out his headphones

Kramnik is Hikarus wife

Issue is he's picking the hot streak he had against a handful of players. What if you include a few games before and a few games after? Then there's a couple losses in there, and suddenly it adds up. Using the ELO predictor on a select number of games doesn't work too well and is cherry picking data. I'm personally around 2150 in blitz and bullet and had a hot streak of 13 wins in a row yesterday. Which was followed by several defeats. The online rating system also isn't as accurate at the extremes and FIDE blitz should be used instead. There's only a couple players close to Hikaru's rating so most his games are against against players who are significantly lower rated online. So even if he's winning 7/8 games, he loses so much rating with the one loss that it makes it really difficult to push past a certain rating. The openings and gameplay ought to be considered as well. Do some of his opponents try to go for innovative moves or unusual openings to try and surprise Hikaru because they want to beat him? That would significantly increase the probability of a decisive result in a given game. It also doesn't consider flagging which is a big component of online chess and skews the result. In OTB blitz with increment, a drawn game will most likely end in a draw. Online though? Hikaru wins a decent amount of drawn positions by flagging his opponent. These tactics and factors aren't considered by an ELO calculator. It's plainly a mathematical model for how a player of a certain rating is expected to perform against a player of x rating. And it seems like all Kramnik has is math derived from the probabilities given by that very calculator.

Accusing ppl while on tilt is different than presenting yourself as a ‘data scientist’ and incorrectly claiming the statistics corroborate third party cheating allegations.

Hikaru also pointed out that Kramnik was using the blitz ratings (which are heavily inflated) rather than the FIDE ratings for his math, which is how Kramnik came up with the 3600+ number that Hikaru supposedly played at while he was on his streak.

This is like yelling fire in a pool

kramnik's statistics are wrong. i don't know why he created this drama unless he is jealous.

Really good (and overlooked) point about breaking someone's will/mentality. When you lose multiple games in a row, and your emotions start affecting your play, you no longer play as a 2950 ... maybe as a 2750. Then the stats of winning 45.5/46 aren't as significantly unlikely. Can't measure emotional impact via stats unfortunatley

1% is NOT low probability. .0001% isn't even low probability. 1 in 8x10^62 is a low probably. It's beyond frustrating to see people use statistics in bad faith.

About the "math". The ELO system is not perfect, especially when looking at the extremes. There are only a few players at Hikaru's level, and most of them don't focus on their rating like he does. The upper extreme of the rating will never be as accurate as let's say the 2500 range with thousands of players. Therefore most if not all of the players in the top 10 will be underrated. They don't have enough competition at their level. That's why these statistically improbable outcomes are going to happen more often than they mathematically should. I don't think Kramnik understands the math as well as he thinks.

Not enough comments talking about Eric in that thumbnail lol.

what I've been waiting for. Love you, bro.

He likely meant public relations when writing PR at the end, not performance rating.

Anyone who says “nobody is above the law” is not a serious person.

Not to mention it's 3 mins...Hikaru is the best or top 2 in the world at that time frame. And the rating argument, it is so true that these players are all over rated online so he doesn't even take that into account or Hikaru's main strength which is getting out of lost situations and speed!

In a streak when playing way lower rated players it is normal to overperform, especially since Hikaru is specialist in the format.

While the individual probability of such occurrence is less than 1% (0.2% to be precise). Hikaru has played enough online blitz games over his entire career that multiple occurrences such probability are likely.

There is also this idea that if I play against Magnus Carlsen, I'll lose, let's say, 10000 games and win 1. Then if you take the sample space of the last 2 games, you can say I have 50% win rate against Magnus while being 1500 elo so I'm obviously cheating. Hikaru's win streak is a less exaggerated but similar case. He lost the games just before and after the streak so when you include them, you get like 45 out of 48 which is more believable.

I think investigating a player to see if they might show signs of cheating is fine. When you have results you then have RESPONSABILITY to be completely TRANSPARENT AND HONEST. That is not what Kramnik has done here. He made a blog post where he presents claims without evidence. That is no way forward. If he wants to talk about his feelings regarding the possibility of Hikaru's cheating he should not include suggestions that he has evidence without presenting his work. Properly presenting evidence leaves no room for feelings and should be accompanied by dispassionate evaluations of how much weight that evidence might hold, including the error range. Without this Kramnik appears dishonest and sneaky to me. He mixes feelings with only the suggestion of "fact". Show your work, or keep it to your feelings, don't mix the two in order to attempt to give your feelings the semblance of legitimacy.

"Caesar's wife must be above suspicion" doesn't mean that someone in an important position can't be questioned, it means that if their integrity is questionable on that level then they don't deserve the position. There were rumors flying around about his wife Pompeia, so he divorced her and supposedly said that phrase.

That was hysterical I just pause the video and googled "no one is Caesar's wife" to learn of the reference. And then you go on to explain it. That was pretty funny.

I am deeply saddend that no one has run the probability of hikaru having such a streak in all the blitz games played by him and that Vlad is out of his mind. This is such an easy probability question and yet people like kramnik got no idea what they are talking about. This is why people who don't know basic maths should stay away from it. Here we go I will make it easier for you gu to understand this. This is exactly like the question. If a fair coin is tossed 1000 times, what's the probability of you having a series of 10 heads consecutively No.of outcome = 1000 Heads series = 10 Probability of each outcome = 50% (38.5% probability of having a series of 10 consecutive heads in 1000 tries) In hikaru's problem No of outcomes = 33,468 Win series = 45 Probability of win/outcome = 89% (100% certainty of such a streak happening) Lets get more detailed Since kramknik specifically talked about 45.5/46, it means he has considered for no lose streak instead of exclusive win streak, this gives us the chance of finding hikaru's exact probability of having a 45.5 score(no loss) No of outcomes = 33,468 No loss(win + draw)% = 87%(hikaru's actual no loss rate) No loss streak = 45.5 (Hikaru has a probability of 99.976% of having a streak of 45.5 in the total amounts of games he has played) Yea it's so unlikely according to cramnik that hikaru can't achieve a 99.976% chance event out of 33,468 games he has played. It will be frightening if he does not achieve such streak from time to time. Anyone who has studied just bit of risk management knows this formula. Would not expect it from kram tho. Guys I give you full freedom to paste this copy pasta everywhere so people can know about basic school level probability.

Another amazing video

17:40 Eric says "I can't say for anybody it's 100%" (that they aren't cheating). If Eric weren't cheating himself, he should be able to say so 100%. Interesting.

Kramnik: "Anyone who performs better than me online is a cheater." Hikaru: "Suck my ceiling Stockfish" Kramnik: "You're not above suspicion" Hikaru: "I literally don't care"

You can just tell in the very first few seconds of the video that Eric is very amused by all of this.

They're flirting! Ahh... the bromance... 🤣

What a lot of people seem to not understand, saying something is low prob or extremely low prob is subject to interpretation and opinion and has to be put into perspective: an astefoid of size >1km in diameter hitting our planet is an extremely low prob event, but given enough time - billions years of history - this is going to happen. So, even if having such a streak could be a "low" probability event for someone of Hikaru's caliber, he's playing thousands of games -> this is inevitably going to happen now and then.

Objectively only unknown lines used need consideration for bot influence, simply if a bot can only play it, that's interesting

Dude please adjust your mic settings. Clipping and background noise.

mate, this is juuuuuuicy

One theory was Kramnik was pointing to the players Hiki beat and they were the cheaters which made them easier to farm when they played casual and didn't cheat.

A low probability phenomenon (a super GM) has low probability performances, the study concluded.

Kramnik cherry picked that 46 game run but the actual games played in that session was like 55. that streak was a true streak because a game just before he lost and had a draw just after. Hikaru should win roughly 90% of the games (2800 vs 2400 average) and guess what he won 93% of the 55. Also a lot of the games the other player timed out so if there was more time would have been a draw or even a loss for Hikaru thus Kramnik is a moron because he didn't take this into account (Hikaru can play fast) and Kramnik is dishonest because he cherry picked the data.

Hikaru obviously didn't literally mean "senile." He meant that players over 40 can't compete in the top 10 elite level, which is something I thought everyone in chess knew.

maybe the likelihood of an 80% probability coming up 45 times in a row is 1%. Applying that to Hikaru's best recent streak isn't good statistics, it's cherry-picking. What if you just included the losses before and after that streak and it's 44/48? Suddenly it looks a lot more mundane. Or apply it to a random sample of 45 games rather than his best recent streak. As a statistical "gotcha" this find of kramnik's is a complete flop that can't pass even the slightest scrutiny.

Bruh. I’m enjoying your take and opinions on all the drama! Keep up the good content! Also, thanks for representing Canada as a top GM - you deserve more recognition. By the way, i happened to read your chat in the background during this vid and noticed that there sure are alot of morons who complain in there. You certainly have more patience and poise than I. Earned my subscription.

Good to see Kramnik updating and actually publishing a blog instead of making his profile banner the blog lol

I am not a strong player and never will be, but I love chess and the chess drama is great. Even if it is just to get people more interested in the game... the content is great in my eyes.

Eric seriously doesn’t know where that Hilary comment comes from? He doesn’t watch the sisters?

This one I watched.. I think you made some good points. If Kramnik sincerely believes Hikaru is cheating, he should be willing to put something of value to him behind his accusation, like money or playing chess professionally, for an investigation.