All of Kramnik's REPORTS. A Tribute
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 มิ.ย. 2024
- "In the world of chess streaming, Vladimir Kramnik's presence was a beacon of brilliance. Though his streaming career, streaming 'Titled Tuesdays,' has come to an end due to unfortunate circumstances, let us remember that it's not the end that defines his legacy, but the unforgettable moments he gifted us along the way. Join us in this heartfelt tribute as we compile his peak moments, celebrating his mastery and passion for the game. #chess #vladimirkramnik #cheating #grandmaster #magnuscarlsen
Beyond his streaming prowess, Kramnik has been a relentless advocate in the fight against cheating in chess. Despite challenges, he has stood firm, and for that, we owe him our gratitude. Let's continue to support him in this crucial endeavor, recognizing the importance of fair play in our beloved game.
Thank you, Vladimir Kramnik, for your unwavering dedication. Your contributions to chess, both on and off the board, will always be remembered and cherished."
Twitter: / jopralo03
Instagram: / jonasprado_official
Lichess coach: lichess.org/coach/JonasPradoLobo
Lichess team: lichess.org/team/effective-ch...
Donations and email: Paypal jonasaje@gmail.com Revtag @jopralo
Chapters:
00:00 Little too strong
00:54 Let's do the procedure
02:34 Who is this genius?
03:43 No shame
06:02 No doubt about this player
06:24 d4, what a move
08:25 Everything is clear
10:47 Good start
11:47 Everyone plays +90 - กีฬา
Remember everyone to subscribe if you want more content like this!
This guy's composure and accent makes me think of a mafia boss. I would legit be concerned if he believed I had cheated him lmao
"The procedure" takes a whole different meaning now
Okay. Its very clear !
The comments section from this channel for the past few weeks: "You may be right about that guy. You most likely are. You should move on though. Online cheating is a fact of modern chess. You're approaching Kramnick-level obsession and that's not healthy." This channel's response-- look at my hero: V Kramnick.
Legend.
Kramnick has lost his damn mind
Kramnik 2024= Paranoia
Very bad atitude by mr kramnik. I also play many blitz games in chess com, im not as strong as kramniks calibre of players but i can say im also playing at a decently competitive level for begginer levels. Now my chess com blitz rating is usually around 2300 and some of my opponents are titled players and sadly this happens to me very often which sickens me. I got falsely accused or get blocked by them, all of the sudden when there is no reason, no abusive language etc. This happened to me many times just because i beat them with using my brain, but it is impossible to convince these people to think that i did not used any engine as their ego is little too big for accepting the reality. I never used engines or computer chess asistance to beat my opponents in my life and i have been playing online chess more than 10 years. So if you have no solid evidance or proof that your opponent has used engine just please dont immediately attack and report and block them, thats a horrible attitude. For some, when you lose you are an idiot, but when you win you are a cheater and this atitude makes me sick and very angry. Because of people like this i dont enjoy playing online blitz anymore as much as i use to.
lmao getting playing sooo well that titled players started accusing you is the biggest ever complement, you know, you know the truth that's it, no one can stop you
you know this is a dream compliment for beginners like us
Thanks for sharing, I have similar experience but for both ways. I have people called me out even though the accuracy was quite low like 80% but they think I used an engine just because I played well. On the other hand I have many of my opponents which had their accounts closed from cheating. I am around 2000 and trust me every now and then there is someone using an engine, but is usually quite obvious. I don't quite enjoy playing long games now because of that. I enjoy more in Blitz and bullet.
Jonas Prado and Vladimir Kramnik fighting for fair chess (in their own ways). Tho I disagree with GM Kramnik's method, as he is not as conservative as IM Prado, since Kramnik looks at individual moves rather than the entire game, I support the overall goal of what Kramnik is doing.
Also keep in mind that he is live on stream while I have time to calm myself and record the videos. Anyways I am sure he is not right 100% of the times but for sure more than 50% However I would stop this topic for a while, I should focus on my duties. Anyways I thought that vlad deserved a tribute!
@@IMJonasPrado Good point. I will say one thing: watching your videos actually saved me money. I *used* to donate to LiChess but when they put some pressure on you, when you pointed out an obvious cheater, that was it for me. No more money for them. When they back off and they are good with you, I will donate again. It's small beer for them, but I won't give a peso to a org that does not take a hard line on cheaters. One reason BTW I don't use PayPal much either (they almost always side on the side of scammers, not scam victims, is what the internet says).
@@raylopez99I used to be a donor too. However they dissapointed me. Even when they guy was banned I didn't received a single message from any of them. Anyways it's better to focus on the good things about them. They help you to get students, the lichess studies are great and the playing zone is very fast. Yeah I agree that PayPal have their issues especially huge fees if you receive money from abroad.
I hope I can be back speaking about the cheating issue soon. I suspect that a lot of people are cheating however I am not 100% of any, only 85% or so so if I ever make a video again about the topic it would be about someome that is 100% cheater like the ziromonody Guy:)
@@IMJonasPrado Agree. I like competition since having only one site is not good. But with the rise of popularity of chess I also feel they don't need my money. From what I understand LiChess has one or more very rich patrons so I doubt they will go bankrupt even if a lot of small fry like myself stop donating. As for students, FYI i went from 1800 or so on LiChess to 2100 (peak) by hiring a chess master (outside the USA) and taking lessons live (I lived outside the US for a number of years). It was very helpful and not too expensive either. Studying books and playing your PC is great but even better for me is a human. Bye and best of luck.
This kind of videos are pretty funny 😂
Do you also get inner satisfaction of laughter by watching this type of shit. Whenever I feel sad my mind says let see these videos where Every thing is pretty clear, He will see every thing, Let's do procedure. Kramnik normal life looks like a comedy show.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🎉😂😂😂
Who's this genius is epic😂😂😂
You two deserve each other
1:24 let's see the game review if its correct....
This guy plays better than stockfish???
By blocking good players hes simply eliminating the competition, its not a rage its a tactics 😂
6:49 K says d4 wouldn't cross his mind. C'mon, it threatens Nt fork on e2 if Qd4. I'm sure a super GM would not miss that.
No that fork is easy his point is the clearance of the d5 square for the knight is "too hard to see" so that cxd4 is met by Nd5 winning the knight. (Nh3+ won't work due to Kg2 defending the knight) and Nxd4 leaves f2 weak after nh3+ rxf2+ (which I assume happened in the game). It's a nice move but hardly a "computer only move" K is just tilting.
the opponent was a ukrainian kid not GM joker..
Crymnik
Please, do not disrespect 14th world champion Vladimir Kramnik. He has done more for chess than any of us, and his chess was always a great inspiration for me. I've studied his games myself since manila 1992, and it is a huge pleasure. I recommend you to do the same, more productive than disrespecting him.
@@IMJonasPradoBut he can't accuse anyone without any proof.There are many good players(beasts) at chess and whenever he losses to one of them he is doing a "procedure" and ban them🤡.This guy even accused hikaru of cheating 😂I mean ,yea
Wait, this video is unironically meant to be a tribute?
Absolutely. I am Kramnik's fan N°1, I will always support him and he is right in almost everything he says.
@@IMJonasPrado well, that's an unfortunate take, because Kramnik is making unfounded accusations without evidence, which is hurting reputations of players who have worked their entire lives to gain this reputation. Supporting him and stating that he is right in almost everything strikes me as irresponsible.
@@gobbedy Thanks for your opinion but I think you are wrong. First of all his opinion is worth more than our opinion, he has studied the game of chess more than you and me combined so he knows what he is talking about.
Secondly, I have experienced it myself, a lot of cheaters were not punished and when I tried to make things public they started to threatening me so I had to stop.
And last. He is not accusing anyone he is ponting out FACTS about statistic anomalies and he is demanding explanations about why is that posible nothing more than that. He is not saying he is cheating or she is cheating however I am hundred percent that at least 50% of the people with anomalies are cheating but 0 bans. Please watch the last video of Kramnik and explain to me why that Indian is not banned.
You are supporting cheating and cheaters with your opinion, and that says a lot about you. If I was overperforming like this people do, I wouldn't mind him to go open about it I'll explain my moves and ASK chess.com to provide as many evidence as posible that I am not cheating.
@@IMJonasPrado "his opinion is worth more than your opinion". Wrong. Please look up "Argument from authority" -- a logical fallacy you are employing here. You are suggesting that his arguments are more worthwhile merely because he is influential, not because his arguments have more merit at face value. Vladimir Kramnik's arguments are no less vacuous because he is Vladimir Kramnik. His inability to publish his so-called statistics are no less reprehensible because he is Vladimir Kramnik. His emotional response to losing a game is no less an emotional response because he is Vladimir Kramnik. And his inability to provide evidence to substantiate any of his accusations is no less troubling because he is Vladimir Kramnik. His arguments -- like those of anyone -- should be taken at face value, and assessed on their merit. If he presents hard evidence, it should be heard. If he presents only speculation, then that should be denounced. Unfortunately, he presents only speculation.
"Secondly, I have experienced it myself, a lot of cheaters were not punished and when I tried to make things public they started to threatening me so I had to stop." The lack of punishment of cheaters is a real problem. The solution, however, is not wrecklessly accusing presumed cheating without evidence.
"He is not accusing anyone" -- Wrong. He is, very literally, reporting people for cheating. Reporting a cheater is quite literally accusing someone of cheating. Surely you agree with this? Your entire video is literally a tribute to Vladimir Kramnik accusing very specific people of cheating. But asides from the reports, when he says "[Deeply sarcastic tone] Ok great move. No shame. We all know what is going on here.", do you mean to tell me that you do not believe his making a very clear accusation? If I were to say "Vladimir Kramnik walks weirdly around children. *writes visible report on camera accusing Vladimir Kramnik of being a pedophile* Pedophiles have no shame. Shameful behaviour from Vladimir Kramnik. It's clear what is going on here. Pedophiles need to be stopped." -- Are you really saying that I would not be accusing Kramnik of being a pedophile? If so, then you have a very different definition of "accusation" then that I do. And if you really don't think that is an accusation, then surely you can agree that it is slander? And should therefore be stopped?
"You are supporting cheating and cheaters with your opinion." -- That is technically true. I am denouncing wreckless accusations which have countless false positives. When your test has too many false positives, it also has more correct positives. So yes, the side effect of asking Kramnik and others (like yourself) to stop wrecklessly accusing people, is that some cheaters will get away. It is doubtless that some of Kramnik's accusations (possibly a majority?) are real positives, but a large portion are false negatives. As a society we generally accept "innocent until proven guilty", and that is specifically because we demand zero rate of false accusations. In turn, this high bar for culpability inevitably means some guilty parties get away with their crime. That is the price we pay to make sure only truly guilty parties are found guilty. But anything else is highly irresponsible, because we do not tolerate wrongful convictions. So while you are technically correct that I am "supporting cheaters with my opinion", you are basically accusing me of being ethically responsible. You, on the other hand, are wreckless and irresponsible.
@@IMJonasPrado I thought I had replied already but I don't see my reply. Here it is again..
"his opinion is worth more than your opinion". Wrong. Please look up "Argument from authority" -- a logical fallacy you are employing here. You are suggesting that his arguments are more worthwhile merely because he is influential, not because his arguments have more merit at face value. Vladimir Kramnik's arguments are no less vacuous because he is Vladimir Kramnik. His inability to publish his so-called statistics are no less reprehensible because he is Vladimir Kramnik. His emotional response to losing a game is no less an emotional response because he is Vladimir Kramnik. And his inability to provide evidence to substantiate any of his accusations is no less troubling because he is Vladimir Kramnik. His arguments -- like those of anyone -- should be taken at face value, and assessed on their merit. If he presents hard evidence, it should be heard. If he presents only speculation, then that should be denounced. Unfortunately, he presents only speculation.
"Secondly, I have experienced it myself, a lot of cheaters were not punished and when I tried to make things public they started to threatening me so I had to stop." The lack of punishment of cheaters is a real problem. The solution, however, is not wrecklessly accusing presumed cheating without evidence."
He is not accusing anyone" -- Wrong. He is, very literally, reporting people for cheating. Reporting a cheater is quite literally accusing someone of cheating. Surely you agree with this? Your entire video is literally a tribute to Vladimir Kramnik accusing very specific people of cheating. But asides from the reports, when he says "[Deeply sarcastic tone] Ok great move. No shame. We all know what is going on here.", do you mean to tell me that you do not believe his making a very clear accusation? If I were to say "Vladimir Kramnik walks weirdly around children. *writes visible report on camera accusing Vladimir Kramnik of being a pedophile* Pedophiles have no shame. Shameful behaviour from Vladimir Kramnik. It's clear what is going on here. Pedophiles need to be stopped." -- Are you really saying that I would not be accusing Kramnik of being a pedophile? If so, then you have a very different definition of "accusation" then that I do. And if you really don't think that is an accusation, then surely you can agree that it is slander? And should therefore be stopped?
"You are supporting cheating and cheaters with your opinion." -- That is technically true, though highly misleading. I am denouncing wreckless accusations which have countless false positives. When any test has too many false positives, it also has more correct positives. So yes, the side effect of Kramnik (and by extension, yourself), being wildly irresponsible in accusing anyone he is suspicious of, is that he will also accuse actual cheaters of cheating. A broken clock is right twice a day, as the saying goes. So by asking Kramnik to stop being wildly irresponsible, I am *technically* letting those actual cheaters he happens to have accused off the hook. As a society we generally accept "innocent until proven guilty", and that is specifically because we demand zero rate of false accusations. In turn, this high bar for culpability inevitably means some guilty parties get away with their crime. That is the price we pay to avoid wrongful convictions, because wrongful convictions are intolerable. Surely you can understand the impact of wrongfully accusing a chess player of cheating? It's common sense: someone who has build their entire career around their chess skill depends completely on their reputation, and so a wrongful accusation can destroy their lives.
So while you are technically correct that I am "supporting cheaters with my opinion", you are conveniently ignoring that I am, more importantly, defending innocent players from wrongful accusations, and that I holding that as having the utmost importance. You, on the other hand, would prefer to cast a wide net, and catch cheaters at the expense of wrongfully accusing innocent people and destroying their lives. In other words, you are wreckless and irresponsible.
He's a slug both in and out of chess hahahaha
😂😂😂