story
If he has a history of stealing cars AND his new car is hot wired? Possible it's legal? Sure. Let's not twist our hands about a grand theft auto charge, however.
This is a hilariously inaccurate description of magnus. He is widely regarded as the greatest chess player to have ever lived. His opinion on what it takes to play high level chess is worth taking extremely seriously. It's not like he has a history of temper tantrums or petulant behavior; he's an upstanding custodian of the mantle of world champion.
You know appeal to authorities are not always logical fallacies right? It can be, but it's not a "haha you quoted someone therefore you are wrong". Heavily invested and repeatedly successful individuals can be great sources for information on heuristic endevours.
> magnus lost to him and is claiming cheating which is clearly a huge conflict of interest
Except it is verifiable that he talked about leaving the tournament before even playing him. Therefore his suspicions and problems are older than the result. Also you might be overestimating how much chess players care about losing at that level. They play constantly against each other and most have pretty equal head to heads. Magnus usually is a bit ahead like 5 victories to 3 and then like 15 draws against most of them. Losing once against Hans is not gonna make someone cause all of this.
> His opinion should be heavily scrutinized.
By FIDE sure, not by people online whose knowledge of chess comes from the first Harry potter movie.
Most things that are called that are not.
This would be a fallacy:
1. World’s best player (to have ever lived)
2. Therefore his opinion is correct
This on the other hand is not a fallacy:
1. Ditto
2. Therefore one should take his opinions on this matter extremely seriously
It’s not fallacious since it doesn’t pretend or present itself as a derived fact.
He absolutely does. People forget because he so rarely loses a classical game. But he almost always shows petulant behavior when he loses an important classical game.
Is this a joke? He literally does have a history of being a sore loser.
By whom exactly? He has a large fan club on the internet and uses modern social network very well but I don’t think there is a wide consensus that he is better than Kasparov at his prime. I personally don’t believe him to be better than neither Fischer nor Botvinnik but that’s only me and is impossible to verify anyway.
And no, his opinion against his own opponent after suffering an embarrassing defeat poorly playing with white doesn’t hold much credibility.
I lost all respect I had for him. If you don't have foolproof evidence, you take your loss like a professional.
we can't accept Magnus's testimony on this point, but we can understand that Magnus can consider it himself to be evidence, and he's simply telling us that's what he's doing.
I also think Magnus believes he has additional information about the extent of Hans's cheating, and that's what he can't share without Hans's permission, probably Hans's logs of his online activity that chess.com has, or something like that.
But is it hotwired? That's speculation from someone who just lost a race to them.
