Kramnik BLOCKED me after this podcast with him

[@VBKramnik]

Greg, you promised me to publish links to the episodes I refer to from the videos of mine but you didnt,would have been an important part of our dispute. Because that would expose your and your client 😉 manipulations. Now its late already, after a day or two,obviously It was promised to have links to CONCRETE EPISODES that I mention, refuting their lies, not FULL videos, it doesnt make any sense, everyone knows the videos anyways. Cheap, Greg I even offered to send exact cuts from those videos of episodes we mention in this conversation. Was reassured it is not needed, will be done by him. Just showing you real faces of those "opponents" But whaever tricks in front The truth will prevail

[@MustreaderChess]

Dear Vladimir Borisovich, as discussed, we've published the links to the videos referred to by you in the video description. You may have missed them - they are in the description of the video under "Kramnik's videos discussed in the podcast". We did everything as agreed. Please fact-check before accusing anyone of anything. The links are to concrete episodes of your fifteen-video investigation. If you want us to provide the exact time-codes from those episodes, we can do so - please send them to me here or in DMs on Telegram. And yes, you have offered me to send the exact cuts from those videos to insert them into the podcast, but I have told you on the call that we will not insert any graphics into this episode to be able to publish it as soon as possible, because otherwise video editing would have taken a long time, and you have agreed to that. I can publish the video where you say it if you want 😉

[@VBKramnik]

​@@MustreaderChess never mind, everything is clear for me about your ethics and methods, go on serving futher, I go on with fighting against lies and manipulations, cheers my friend 🙌

[@MustreaderChess]

@@VBKramnik Considering the fact you've accused me of lying without even checking basic facts, for you to accuse someone is an automatic reaction if they disagree with you. It looks like you're not fighting lies, but just spreading them, and once it turns out your "FACTS" were untrue, you say "never mind". Classic gaslighting. You cannot fight cheating using lies, manipulation, and cyberbullying. Worst of all, this discredits the anti-cheating movement in general. This will make it harder for the chess world to fight cheaters in future. You just feed your ego behaving in this way. You can (and probably will) continue doing this, but don't be surprised if the number of your followers gradually dwindles over time and you lose relevance. As you like to say, the truth will prevail.

[@VBKramnik]

​@@MustreaderChess 👏 bravo maestro Adios 😊

[@amirrezah-nb8qd]

See, kids? Kramnik is always right, and the whole world just wants to mess with him! You need help

[@abhigyandatta2008]

"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience" -- Mark Twain

[@aubreyjesseau6232]

This needs to be top comment

[@Castantic10]

very much agreed :D...I tell this to soo many ppl but they never listen :C

[@harimuchi3716]

its a world champion players play hes oppening hes good hes not idiot

[@drnickpol]

sure, you are right

[@_PawelPietrzak]

100% true. Kramnik shouldn't have taken part in this podcast, where it was clear from the start that the host wouldn’t be interested in data and facts.

[@martinpaddle]

Are you wearing the sunglasses so he can't track our eye movement during the last game?

[@happyrabbit7944]

actually keeping in mind that camera angle it's quite real. so funny people still talking about movements while the main strange was Danya's bishop move candidate when Kramnik made a poll among other GMs and no one found it within 10 seconds and even within 10 minutes.

[@martinpaddle]

@@happyrabbit7944 a single move like that proves absolutely nothing. In his "analysis" he conveniently leaves out the rest of the game. It is of low quality and Danya almost lost. I'm honestly getting a bit tired at people buying into this bs. It's like claiming the moon landing was fake by pointing at some weird shadows, implying that whoever faked it is an idiot and would leave such easy-to-spot clues.

[@JCBCoin]

This host is a bum clown. Deleting any comments pointing towards danyas guilt

[@happyrabbit7944]

@@martinpaddle Lol. It proves everything for professionals for sure.

[@martinpaddle]

@@happyrabbit7944 no, individual moves don't prove anything. If you have a sequence of 10 unexplainable moves, several games in a row, then this is suspicious. A single move in an otherwise blunder-filled game is completely irrelevant. Caruana pointed this out, if you are looking for an argument from authority ("proves everything for professionals").

[@mayank78207]

Like if you believe Kramnik needs to be held morally responsible for his slanderous accusations.

[@crazycrazy5111]

🤓

[@askebe3]

I hate like farmers, but..... fiiiine take my like, this is important

[@cluckycluck3053]

Like if you believe Kramnik is a hero fighting cheating in chess.

[@eedle.bendhaardt]

@@TheChessTheoretician the man is defending his integrity, his reputation and likely a considerable portion of his livelihood. You must be very young indeed if you can't understand how that could affect a person in the ways Danya states.

[@89Madridista]

There is a new channel called exposing chess cheaters and he is changing the opinion of many people that were thinking exactly what you are thinking now. Check that channel's videos and then think for yourself if it's very suspicious and if people like Naka are acting in a hypocrite way, by defending Danya about the same things he accused others of cheating. Check it yourself before accusing Kramnik in such a way

[@dmitriilarionov7308]

when the app is minimized, it means it is open, not closed

[@Baum17]

Schrödinger's Engine.

[@sorrynotsorry9044]

That’s what they are saying

[@zah936]

Exactly

[@anday7421]

Vladimir, people don't want to invite you because you don't know how to talk to people. You can't just keep talking over people and expect them to want to discuss anything with you. Be respectful, let people talk. Let them finish a sentence and then respond. Secondly, when you yourself are being disproved, you don't seem to be able to agree with facts. You can't pick and choose which facts to stick with and which ones to discard. There is no conspiracy. People simply don't want to discuss with someone who can't hold a respectful conversation.

[@Diffusion8]

💯

[@PrimeSuspect50]

Most of the time the podcaster was seemingly finishing a sentence and then as Kramnik tries to respond he kept going and sometimes wouldn't stop and could just keep going for minutes straight without giving him time because he always had a lot to say. It definitely was far from formal since no one could be given equal time etc.

[@libertas12]

Well said

[@polishman971]

i love Kramnik and agree with him, but you saying right things that could help

[@konrTF]

Bingo

[@WeiryGG]

Vladimir deliberately damages people's image but now crys foul when he says this is happening to him. I can't listen to this guy anymore. What a disgrace.

[@Meurth]

Sounds like Hikaru

[@scriptself6092]

​@@Meurthsounds like someone don't get any bltches

[@КлюевСергей-э5с]

you mean it doesnt matter if the image is genuine? Like, I am a doctor for instance, and that is true by the way, would it bother you if I bought my license but never studied?

[@nicholasintrepidity5073]

not damaging just asking questions i think you meant to write danya

[@johnygoodwin3441]

He's a master gas lighter

[@alocii]

Dany said in one interview regarding this that Kramnik would lie and when called out on that lie he would deny, when shown proof he would just say something like "lets move on its not relevant." Five minutes in we already have a prime example "he has recorded at least three times as much as me" "it is a fact, lets not move away from a fact if you disagree about it" and then when he is shown to be absolutely wrong with that number "this is not relevant, lets move on"

[@jasond.personal5433]

@@alocii in psychiatry it's called a "pathological liar"

[@ItsAsparageese]

​@@jasond.personal5433 That's a bit hyperbolic. Kramnik, while very incorrect and arguing irrationally, is not necessarily meeting criteria for that label. From the evidence we have available it's really only reasonable to say he's leaning into common cognitive distortions, ones that we're all susceptible to (to some degree). Pathological lying is a different story. Let's not misuse clinical labels just because we dislike a behavior.

[@alocii]

@@jasond.personal5433 100%! Ive seen the same thing in even worse people than Kramnik (not people i know but like criminal cases and crazy influencers) and unfortunately the only thing to do with them is what Hikaru suggest, dont play along at all. They dont feel shame and wont ever admit they are mistaken. It is unfoetunate when they get into positions of power as Kramnik but it is no use to try talking him into reason. The only positive here is that perhaps a few Kramnik-fanboys actually sees him for what he is, but based on the comments on his own videos it does t seem likely to persuade that many.

[@jasond.personal5433]

@@ItsAsparageese you can't say that and be up-to-date with everything that has happened till now. Lying manipulating and deceiving are the only things he does

[@ItsAsparageese]

@@jasond.personal5433 I've been staying quite up-to-date, but that's not really as relevant as you seem to think it is. Pathological lying is a different thing from Lying A Lot And Doubling Down About It And Leaning Into Cognitive Distortions. I'm speaking as someone pretty literate in psychology and neuroscience; literally none of us have the evidence a licensed clinician would need to diagnose the behavior of pathological lying. _Maybe_ he meets those criteria (I doubt it) but none of us are or will realistically ever be in a position to evaluate that. To call him a pathological liar is to misuse that label. I know I'm being pedantic and I don't mean to pick on you or anything, it's just that this trend of people misusing psychology labels as loose adjectives is just plain not good for society, so I try to educate against it where I can. Kramnik is a huge jerk, being totally irrational, lying a lot, doing tons of mental gymnastics to double down on his lies, attempting to manipulate people and discourse, and just generally sucking. We can state all these true facts without fudging the definition of a specific clinical symptom as an approximation.

[@chesscomsupport8689]

4:35 "I will give facts, and we should not dispute facts." That's Kramnik's attitude in a nutshell. He considers what he says "facts" that are not to be disputed.

[@duartista]

100%, he doesn't want to have a civil discussion, he wants to be right, no matter if he actually is or not

[@MichaelSt]

No, he exactly explains what he means, argue with opinions, not with facts.

[@ultrasound1459]

Kramnik is the GOAT 🐐 and so Based 🗿📸

[@rhwing5095]

The problem is that the facts Kramnik has presented have NOT been disputed. How is that his fault? All Danya and his support group do is deflect and beat around the bush with such discussion like yours, complaining about the manner in which the facts are presented, or anything else besides confronting the facts presented.

[@fateaglio]

LMAO he says its fact that Danya recorded more on him even though it got disputed instantly by Greg. The first few minutes are already gold.

[@MichaelSt]

There is some terminology confusion here, for a program to be minimized it must be open. An open program can be minimized or not, but a closed program cannot be minimized.

[@zkprintf]

What does minimizing a program mean?

[@reav3rtm]

​@@zkprintfMinimize to task bar. Desktop operating systems have GUI that usually consists of taskbar, where all running GUI apps are shown. Might be unknown concept to someone who used smartphones for everything.

[@aubreyjesseau6232]

@@zkprintfhaving the site or app already open / loaded but minimized

[@XtopherBryson]

@@zkprintf He means to minimize a window on your computer. You can have an application running but the window is minimized. If the application is not running you can't minimize it because it's not running in the first place.

[@essaysandmore]

This was *killing* me lol Please, can Vladimir Borissowitsch let his daughter explain how the computer works?

[@droidgeist]

Kramnik is so passive aggressive. Pretending he's not accusing when he openly says there's an engine open on the side.

[@blunderlab]

Everyone knows what to do when you think people are cheating: quit the tournament and resign on the first move

[@tylerkay825]

Chill!! He isn't accusing he is just asking questions...BUT ITS VERY CLEAR. /s

[@blunderlab]

@@tylerkay825 yes, that's the legally correct way to do it

[@dmitrikonnov922]

"passive aggressive" is a vocabulary of crying gen-z liberals. He's deliberately avoiding a lawsuit.

[@droidgeist]

@@dmitrikonnov922 I'm late Gen-X, not Gen-Z. People of my generation have been using the phrase passive-aggressive since I was a kid. Besides, the term was coined during WWII. He might be trying to avoid a lawsuit, but it won't help him since he has explicitly said there is an engine on the imagined monitor off to the side of Danya's setup. This is a miscomprehension of the law, just like Kramnik's miscomprehension of statistics.

[@PellosMaxhthc]

I’ve watched a lot of Kramnik’s videos on Danya, I wanted to be as objective as possible and give both sides a chance, but after following both sides of the argument for a while it became painfully obvious that Kramnik is not in this for the truth, he merely wants to be right at all costs. No amount of persuading or counter-arguments can convince him of anything. My question from the very beginning was this: why does Kramnik feel like he is owed an answer by anyone to begin with? And, does he not see that it’s always a circular argument whether he receives an answer or doesn’t? It goes something like this: -Kramnik accuses someone of cheating: Scenario A -> the accused person defends themselves -> Kramnik says that the response is either not convincing enough for him or that the accused person is either lying or not telling the whole truth -> the accused either keeps defending themselves, OR they lash out, OR gives up as they think that no amount of counter-argument is enough -> Kramnik continues reiterating his point that the accused hasn’t provided substantial proof of their innocence and states that it has now become personal since the accused person lashed out at him verbally OR Kramnik says that the accused has stopped responding which makes the initial accusation more truthful. Scenario B -> the accused person chooses to ignore Kramnik’s accusations -> Kramnik says that not responding is suspicious because a person that doesn’t cheat has nothing to hide OR repeatedly harasses the accused person by posting accusatory content about them which in a roundabout way basically implies that the accused person is either a cheater or a liar-> the accused person get frustrated and responds in either a cordial or not so cordial way -> Kramnik brushes off the response as lies or not completely truthful. And in both scenarios this goes on and on without any endpoint in sight, the initial goal that Kramnii claims to have which is “truth” get completely lost and overshadowed by the total shitstorm of back and forth or lack thereof. Finally, the accused either gets their reputation stained or totally destroyed (depending on who it is) and Kramnki gets….well what does he get out of it? Publicity? Does it make him feel like his opinion matters? Does it make him feel powerful? Does he feel like the overall good he created (if any) from the whole situation outweighs all the bad? Or does he feel like he has revealed the truth which he was initially talking about, meaning his own “truth”? There is no winning with this guy’s approach, he is obviously very bitter and miserable, for reasons which are up for speculation, but the bottom line is that his approach has done more harm than good, and that he’s going to keep doing it because he has nothing to lose anymore in terms if reputation.

[@joshjac81010]

He doesn't even acknowledge that he is accusing Danya lmao

[@PellosMaxhthc]

@@joshjac81010 That’s true, the reason I said he’s accusing is because I also think that this is what he’s doing

[@joshjac81010]

@PellosMaxhthc oh yeah I got that. It's funny how Kramnik still is doing his mental gymnastics bit of "not accusing anyone, just asking questions"

[@PellosMaxhthc]

@@joshjac81010 He's acting like he's approaching it purely factually, scientifically, non-emotionally and with curiosity, but his "facts" are just pure bias based on his own observations rather than some sort of objective evaluation, his stats and understanding of stats are beginner level so his "scientific method" is phony too. And finally, his act of not being emotionally invested in this is as equally as bad as all of the above, he's extremely emotional and it is evident in how he obviously represses his bitterness and anger with passive-aggressive sarcasm and dismissal of counter arguments. There's a meme that describes him really well and it's the one with the guy who's wearing a smiley mask but crying under it.

[@sopliplily2204]

Yes, that's how a public interrogation happens: Danya responded, Kramnik puts forward new evidence why he believes Danya lied, Danya stops responding. Your Scenario A is disanalogous because Kramnik isn't simply repeating his points lol; he presented new evidence in his video titled "Exposure." Kramnik, there, went over why he thinks Danya didn't just use an engine once for his speedrun video and thinks Danya is lying because he found a more blatant instance (for stronger players at least) where Danya calculated mate in 7 and 8 instantly. In his email response to Mustreader, Danga *does* respond, but uses Fabiano's argument that a speedrun account isn't important/competitive in nature therefore anything is permissible. First, it's not obvious Fabi would agree constantly using an engine even for a speedrun is okay because the context he defends is the single accidental usage. Second, even if Fabi defends it, I think the majority of people would not agree because a speedrun account isn't the same as Ben Finegold's chess lecture where Ben can take back his opponent's moves and do whatever he can for "educational purposes" - clearly, the account is intended to reflect some competitive spirit of the game. And lastly, if Danya did not think it was a big deal, why didn't he simply state that he used it multiple times? Why did he lie and conjure up this weird scenario?

[@douglasquaid7550]

This season of chess has been amazing.

[@ultrasound1459]

Kramnik is the GOAT 🐐 and so Based 🗿📸

[@cooloutac]

Chess basically completely died off a year ago and has been in a downward spiral since Magnus accused Hans neiman. It's now a game only children take seriously.

[@hermionelovegood9814]

@@cooloutac There are many (also adult) people who play chess who have barely heard of Hans Niemann or don´t know who he is at all. And there are also enough people who follow chess because of the game itself and not for the Drama. It sounds like you get that impression because there are many videos made about all the Drama in chess but that doesn´t mean that that´s all there is.

[@cooloutac]

@hermionelovegood9814 because they probably follow OTB chess. 94% of active title players don't even play in online tournaments because they think it's a joke.

[@AlRask-j3b]

@@cooloutac can't compare, man, a reasonable guy like Magnus with non-sensical looney; only children? hmm, maybe, considering how much younger GM's became; careful with your doom and gloom; chess is booming; just take a look at recent Paris blitz spectacle

[@NaveenKedilaya]

Krammnik just doesn't let anyone respond completely before interrupting them each and everytime. This is so childish and not at all professional. And then he cries no one responds to him or calls him on their channels. Maybe try respecting them and let them complete talking? He also keeps mentioning his views as facts. That is so wrong. His views are his views, not facts.

[@dandydrew]

Appreciate the great style of Chess content you are putting out. You got a new sub!

[@MustreaderChess]

Welcome aboard!

[@freeEnd_]

​@@MustreaderChess превет будеш моим другом

[@jasond.personal5433]

Kramik: "Where is your proof? Let's not be general, let's be very concrete and precise." Also Kramnik: "I have the proof, trust me, I know what I saw and it is a fact and if you don't believe me I will show it in court."

[@cooloutac]

We literally caught Daniel red-handed using an engine during a live rated match which he publicly apologized for. The problem is you think cheating for education is acceptable and I think that's a terrible precedent for Gaming website to allow this and a terrible example for children. not just bad for Esports in general but bad for society.

[@joshjac81010]

Kramnik has admitted to match fixing​@@cooloutac

[@nuorotikc]

​@@cooloutac context matters lol. Don't be delusional like kramnik 😊

[@cooloutac]

@nuorotikc There should never be exceptions for cheating my friend because that sets a bad precedent and example. like Kramnik I've only ever created 1 active account. I'm positive you can't say the same because you think there's nothing wrong with using multiple accounts like your favorite streamer. You think if that corrupt fraudulent website allows something that means its not cheating.

[@Sheldor4343]

​@@cooloutaci wouldn't call what Daniel did cheating since he looked at Position with the engine that was in the opening, while the game was already way down the line. So since he didn't could get an advantage on his Opponent, it was a fair play violation and not cheating. Still could be punished and maybe should be.

[@JarrettKirk]

Greg, I must applaud your effort, this episode was exhausting. Kramnik was barely letting you get your thoughts out and blatantly manipulating every subject. I wouldn't be surprised if this marks the last interview Kramnik gets invited too - he has shown his true colors and no sane person would want to have him as a guest. I wasn't familiar with you before, but I am a fan now!

[@jameslazer819]

Absolutely exhausting yes.

[@ielts_ology_eng]

It's even exauting to watch it... My respect to Greg for speaking his mind despite everything! And how Kramnik pronounces the word "fact"...

[@KF1]

It's def exhausting as a viewer. It's almost comical if it wasn't so painful to watch.

[@sherryw1919]

He seems to be either a bully or a victim; whichever serves him at the moment. I'm not aware of any proof of cheating except when Kramnik admitted he violated fair play rules in the not too distant past. That's cheating & it's next-door to other ways to cheat. He already thinks he's above the rules.

[@abolbuna8418]

arguing with kramnik is like arguing with a wall he wont listen to you and you just get tired.

[@zelareka]

braindead

[@leucio87]

Is quite the opposite actually

[@_PawelPietrzak]

@@leucio87 it is

[@hermionelovegood9814]

@@leucio87 Yes, unlike Kramnik the wall will let you finish your sentences!

[@chriskeith5742]

A very paranoid wall that talks back

[@panpan-vz3om]

Sent the kids away, turned off my phone, told my wife not to bother me and opened a beer. Another Kramnik video!

[@MustreaderChess]

That’s how you should watch my podcasts!

[@AlRask-j3b]

@@MustreaderChess MustCasts?

[@percyweasley9301]

​@@MustreaderChess❤❤😂😂😂

[@JB_inks]

Kramnik demonstrates exactly why nobody wants to talk to him about this.

[@mircodurrbaum9064]

he actually demonstrates way more ....he shows why no one wants to talk to him at all about anything At this point much respect @chesswithmustreader to endure this person for such an amount of time without starting to threaten him :D

[@PostTenebrasLux1517]

Yes, he is too rational and relies too much on facts.

[@ultrasound1459]

Kramnik is the GOAT 🐐 and so Based 🗿📸

[@reav3rtm]

​@@PostTenebrasLux1517"Alternative" facts.

[@MrDsmover]

@@ultrasound1459hopefully moderator of the channel will block you on this channel because of spamming same message over all conversation branches here.

[@JNA-h7c]

Under Kramnik's pinned comment, I explained that "episode" has multiple meanings and argued Greg probably misinterpreted Kramnik by assuming "episode" was a part of a series like Star Wars Episode 1 instead of "episode" as in a singular event of a sequence such as "he had a mental episode." I explained how because Kramnik was a psychology major and familiar with how "episode" is used in academia, especially when it's about mental events, he probably meant it in the second kind. So, "episode of a video" refers to a specific event in the video. Then I pointed out when Greg wrote he had linked the "episodes of the videos" just as Kramnik requested, this clearly shows what Kramnik had actually had in mind and Greg misinterpreted him. That is, "episodes of the videos" when episode is used like 'Episode 1 of Star Wars' does not make any sense, but makes completely sense in the second kind. The coward must have read my comment and proceeded to edit his comment and changed the sentences until we were left with this abomination of a sentence instead, "the links are to concrete episodes of your fifteen-investigation videos." Apparently this clown thinks if he changes the sentence so that Kramnik is a TV producer making a new season about Danya's investigation and each video is a part of the 15 episodes per season, then he can somehow convince people that Kramnik meant "episode" just as how Greg misinterpreted him. This is the type of person you guys are dealing with. Someone who won't own up to a mistake and would rather change the narrative to best suit his needs. As Kramnik put it succinctly, a liar and a manipulator.

[@mrmiller74]

I thought Kramnik's expectation was pretty clear. They discussed it earlier in the video as well that he'd like people to have links to see the specific time when Danya tried running the engine analysis, so yes he didn't just mean the entire videos. And I just checked and you can see the comment has been edited, which really shouldn't have been done after Kramnik has replied. So yes, the integrity is completely gone. Although tbf I don't think it was being chased. I watched the previous video recapping the Levitov debate and he seemed pretty balanced but here the mask was completely gone. I almost stopped watching when he just couldn't bring himself to concede Vlad's point that he hadn't done the analysis in 21 seconds, even although he claimed he had. Just chasing Hikaru speedrun / Botez viewers at that point...

[@JNA-h7c]

@@mrmiller74 The worst part is how Greg is so shameless about everything. Too bad my comment is going to get filtered out in the sea of comments and no one will know what really happened.

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

It is Kramnik who has recorded a TV-series worth amount of videos and then uses the term episode not to refer to them, but to refer to time stamps? Or what? No one uses the phrase 'episode of a video' to mean a time stamp, what are you even talking about? Ok, if it is a misunderstanding, then just saying 'adios' is not a mature way to resolve the issue. He could have ask to make a new video or something, but he just chose to be rude and to label people. Like you did using words like coward, liar, clown. What is the point of all that? And after all, Greg didn't have to edit Kramnik 'mental episodes' into his videos in the first place. The fact that he included the link to the episodes of Kramnik's investigation is already generous enough. So I am perfectly fine with what a person I am dealing here with.

[@JNA-h7c]

@@vladthemagnificent9052 It is up to Kramnik to deal with Greg or not. And if it isn't such a big deal or if no one uses "episodes of a video" to mean time stamp, why did Greg edit his comment? He should have just left it there. It is cowardly and clownish behavior to edit your comments to gaslight people into believing an alternate reality.

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

@@JNA-h7c it is of really insignificant importance to me, tbh. Ok, it is up to Kramnik not to act rude and immature, then it is up to Greg not to act clownish and cowardly. Then there's no reason in pointing it out.

[@andrewnguyen4801]

Kramnik being offended that his name/reputation is being unfairly mischaracterized/tarnished unjustly is laughable.

[@JohnnyDavis-sj3id]

Vlad is wrong and it's that simple. The reason Daniel is pissed with him is because he keeps publicly insinuating he's cheating. He's actually been remarkably polite given the circumstances, so good luck suing him for reacting badly to your trolling Vlad.

[@jasonfleming9869]

LOOOOOOL... "I apologize if I interrupt but I thought you finished the sentence" @41:43

[@Tobi-pn2xs]

Lmao "Neither am I..." is apparently a complete sentence now @40:33. Such a clown

[@JNA-h7c]

@@Tobi-pn2xs Kramnik only apologized out of politeness and without understanding the dynamics of the discussion. Most people naturally interrupt others out of habit when others repeat things they have refuted to not waste time and energy. I have broken this section down thoroughly in another thread already but will paste it here as well. Greg tells Kramnik he believes that Danya thinks Kramnik used "slanderous lies with an evil spirit." Then Greg tries to argue that he also believes Danya is justified for having the belief (the start of this conversation is 39:53 in the video). Kramnik asks Greg to point out the slanderous lies. Greg replies that he can't read Danya's mind, which doesn't make sense because Greg only a moment ago tried to justify Danya's position. Kramnik correctly explains that because Greg was trying to justify Danya's position, Greg needs to explain why. And if Greg can't defend Danya's position then he shouldn't try to justify it! Greg doesn't realize his fallacy and claims Kramnik "interrupted him." Then after lecturing Kramnik about interruption, what is Greg's response...? Greg repeats his first point that he believes this is Danya's opinion while hiding or forgetting the fact that he also tried to justify the position. What Greg constantly employs in this interview is a fallacy known as motte-and-bailey. Greg presents Danya's arguments, even after Kramnik refutes them, as his own. This is the motte. Kramnik sometimes interrupts Greg and explains how he just refuted them. Then Greg accuses Kramnik of interrupting him and says he's only repeating what Danya said. This is the bailey. In nearly all the times Kramnik "interrupted Greg" it was when Greg was thoughtlessly trying to insert a ridiculous motte without dispute. Seriously, you can rewatch this podcast knowing Greg's trick and you will understand why Kramnik reacts the way he does. Simply put, this is the formula of the interview: Greg asks a rhetorical question disguised as a response that Danya had already given. Kramnik is well prepared and refutes Danya's position while giving his own. Greg follows up by repeating Danya's position, but as his own argument, that Kramnik had already refuted... So Kramnik annoyingly points out how he already refuted it. Greg then tells Kramnik not to interrupt him and repeats Danya's position, and adds this is what he thinks Danya believes.

[@Tobi-pn2xs]

@@JNA-h7c I see your point but this whole podcast was not set up as a debate and Greg's role was not to present Naroditsky. He just gave his view on everything. Meanwhile Kramnik got hung up on things like three second differences, refuses to believe that stream labs is a plausible explanation for the screen that keeps popping up and does not concede about the "Farming" allegations even after it's been made abundantly clear that Naroditsky has been playing those exact tournaments long before the FIDE rule changes. I agree that Greg could have been more explicit in justifying his beliefs but that is not the role he chose here. In my opinion Kramnik's performance was very weak, just getting hung up on technicalities. I lost the last bit of respect I had for him as a person watching this interview. When Kramnik claims that he refuted the fact that Naroditsky could set up the position in 20s after he did it in 23s, I cannot take that at all seriously. It's not a logical fallacy but that does not make it any less ridiculous

[@JNA-h7c]

@@Tobi-pn2xs If you honestly believe this podcast was an interview instead of a debate with the appearance of an interview, then I don't know what to say. An interview at least provides enough context to show why the person thinks the way they do. If Kramnik didn't dispute how he wanted specific timeframes or "episodes" of his videos by commenting on here, I wouldn't have known Greg had even linked his full videos in the description because he has it conveniently tucked right in the middle. The three seconds, farming allegations, etc. are all talking points that Greg brought up because he wanted to use Danya's defense. It is what I mean by Greg's interview questions are actually rhetorical questions disguised as Danya's responses. Because of this, we don't have Kramnik's most updated response since Greg constrains the "interview" to what Danya has already talked about. Instead, you would have to watch Kramnik's videos directly to hear his views. Whether you disagree or not, Kramnik refutes Danya's response. That is not to say what Kramnik is saying is the truth or he has the last say of an argument but that he simply moved the discussion forward. Then it is Greg's duty to refute Kramnik's refutation to move the discussion if that it is his goal. Greg, however, just repeats Danya's arguments that Kramnik refuted, so when Kramnik "interrupts," Kramnik is explaining how he already addressed this. He is not interrupting to hide information as what many people are implying, but out of impatience due to Greg's incompetent interviewing. To give you examples from the topics you mentioned. Getting hung up on the three second difference is because in his original video, Greg claimed that Danya started Chessbase under 20 seconds because this is what Danya claimed and Greg didn't fact check. None of the context is shown on the podcast. Kramnik is only arguing that it was 24 seconds and Greg finally concedes it was 23 seconds. But Greg doesn't actually admit his mistake and only implies he had made a mistake by pointing to how Kramnik also made mistakes in the past. Kramnik tells Greg to point to the mistakes, and if he agrees, he will apologize. After, Greg repeats Danya's point. Kramnik kept interrupting Greg because Greg kept trying to sidestep his mistake instead of directly acknowledging that he had made a mistake. It's the same thing for the farming allegation. Kramnik refutes Danya's argument by stating he wasn't trying to point out Danya's intentions, but only the consequences of his action that because Danya farmed his rating to 2700, it is his opinion that Danya isn't a true 2700. The point of video was to show why Kramnik thought Danya wasn't a true 2700, not why Danya chose to farm. And we saw this happen with Alireza's farming the ratings for a spot in the Candidates after his hiatus to become a fashion designer. No one examined Alireza's intentions or his tournament history to see if this was consistent behavior. People just saw he farmed his rating and thought his spot for the Candidates wasn't earned "the proper way." Whether you accept this explanation or not, it is a refutation of Danya's argument. How does Greg respond? He repeats Danya's point and if iirc, Kramnik coincidentally "interrupts" Greg because he already refuted it. I am serious. Rewatch the podcast and see this pattern of "interruption" over and over again. The amount of times Kramnik actually cuts Greg off is about the same as when Greg tried doing the same to Kramnik. A real interview is what GothamChess showed. Levy disagrees with Kramnik about many things but he gave him a level of respect to share his opinion by asking honest questions and providing proper context. And guess what? Surprise, surprise, Kramnik doesn't interrupt!

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

@@JNA-h7c your perseverance and writing skills are worthy of better use.🙂

[@lilclorox8558]

Vladimir says things like "I think hes cheating, the probability that im incorrect is like 0,001. Its just math" and then plays the victim saying he never accused anyone because he mentioned the "slight probability" that hes incorrect. This guy needs to be humbled so he can understand that the new generation of players who grew up with engines and the ability to play strong oponents whenever they wanted surpassed the old generation

[@hshura09]

Timestamp?

[@witheringhs7766]

or they grew up with engines and that's exactly why they have no shame in using them to "become someone"

[@cfffba]

​@@witheringhs7766Oh come on. Danya has a higher FIDE rating in rapid than Kramnik. Let that sink in. He's a better rapid player not only online, but also over the board... Sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative. Literally nobody but Kramnik thinks he's a cheater. He's a very strong, 2700 GM.

[@chinter]

Talking about Hikaru's streak for example, if you ask for the likelyhood of a new streak of 40+ games is astronomically small. HOWEVER if you take the probability of a streak like this happening within the space of 10000+ games, the probability of a streak existing from random chance alone is around 40% if I remember the calculation correctly.

[@ilyab.5127]

They can't play that good without engines. They grew up with engines and use them like they use socks.

[@unclesam8654]

"Factual actual evidence that I am not 100% sure" What???

[@strusiu91]

Watching this was physically hurting me. Jesus. Amount of times he mentions FACTS but ends the sentence with MY OPINION is just...

[@e4jasperi]

Cognitive dissonance masterclass!

[@edddo4314]

This is so typical method of russian propaganda. Same school. You don't have to be ACTUALLY right, all you need is to convince the listener that you are right.

[@adomaskuzinas2137]

CM with 1900 rating? Everything is clear to me. Lets start the procedure.

[@backupacct2165]

Constantly interrupting, and then playing the victim. Kramnik is an actual cockroach. If he shuts up and lets people analyse his arguments he'll have nothing to stand on

[@sopliplily2204]

When Kramnik mentions facts, he's not stating an opinion... You are jumping to conclusions. Kramnik is first trying to establish the facts (i.e. whether Danya opened Chessbase in 20 seconds or not is a verifiable fact - whether this makes him suspicious is an opinion). Kramnim didn't even defend his opinion because people keep trying to claim his facts aren't true (even though they are). So, all Kramnik has to do is say they are wrong because they aren't agreeing to the facts. If you want to refute Kramnik you would have to point out why his facts are irrelevant, not claim they are untrue when they are true. For example, Kramnik does this against Danya's factual claim that he can pull up his Chessbase game history; Kramnik dismisses this because his argument is anyone can modify the data and it's not necessary Danya must use Chessbase whenever he uses an engine to cheat: notice Kramnik isn't claiming Danya lacks a game history to make this point? One way a Danya supporter may have refuted Kramnik as to the load up time is that the margin of error is too slim that there can be other reasonable explanations such as the depreciation of the equipment, slower processing speed due to recording + call in the background, or Danya's email esponse that speedrun accounts are noncompetitive therefore his engine use in them do not point to cheating in normal games or prized tournaments. All of these points are debatable and will further the discussion.

[@CaptainFicus]

Great interview

[@ladro_magro5737]

This Kramnik is really impossible to communicate with.

[@NicoRTM]

33:40 you are calling him a cheater, even if you not use the word directly, that's just being dishonest

[@roharbaconmoo]

LOL Kramnik saying he will admit if he's wrong is the funniest thing I have seen since that Chappelle special from a few years ago.

[@captain_crunk]

I dunno, do you think that special was funnier than chapelle's Clarence Bixby character, the black white supremacist who was blind and no one told him he was black...and divorced his white wife for loving a black guy once he found out? I'm not sure if anything is funnier than that, but Kramnik is really trying to get there.

[@KF1]

Chapelle was never this funny

[@cooloutac]

Kramnik is a cool guy lmao. I think he is having the time of his life honestly. I mean hey . He is doing God's work.

[@amun1040]

A year ago when all this saga began(I was on Kramnik's side and felt that he was really bringing something to the discussion (especially regarding how to handle cheaters on Titled Tuesday etc...) but now, he is sort of a character of himself, nitpicking and avoiding actual talking points that would lead to a resolution. I am not a fan of the people he criticized, so I am completely neutral, but man is he annoying It is extremely sad what he has done to his name and image in the last few months. A world champion is something like a god-figure whose statue should be in the pantheon, but walking around and barking "cheater" at everyone who plays online, severely reduced him in my eyes.

[@daedalron]

Kramnik's legacy will likely end up like Fischer's. People will remember his chess, but everyone will act like his later years insanity didn't happen unless it is directly mentioned.

[@MustreaderChess]

Hey guys, it’s Greg. What’s your opinion of how the podcast went? And whom do you support in this matter: Kramnik or Danya? Looking forward to your comments!

[@Faulty-Sensei]

Danya because Kramnik is just out of his mind

[@protpvp1]

starting to watch if you don't call him on the constant bullshit and being always intellectually dishonest this is gonna be a shame

[@PC-vp2cg]

​@@protpvp1 I think it's okay to still have people who remain as neutral as possible. He wants to get as many people as possible on his podcast so he shouldn't burn any bridges.

[@zelareka]

seems obvious to me that theres is a third screen on some of those videos and the reflection proves just that

[@randomguypolololas]

Obviously Danya!

[@sephiroth6956]

I really wanted to give the guy the benefit of the doubt and understand his reasoning, but it is impossible. Kramnik is totally delusional and above all very rude and you deserve extra credit for keeping the interview going when after only 14 minutes into the conversation it was clear that Vlad would shout over anything you present him, simply based on his "fact checking" and there is absolutely nothing you can show him that will make him even remotely consider he is in the wrong here

[@abishekmuralidharan2]

Great Job Interviewing Vladimir Kramnik and asking relevant questions !👍

[@skaternesto]

The constant interruption from both sides made this hard to watch. I will look forward to your next video! ❤

[@sothisq5817]

Listening to kramnik talk is hilarious because he’ll use language like “proof” and “fact” for his beliefs and then concede on those exact same points less than a minute later

[@omarashour111111]

you are doing a very good job here, also standing for what you believe is better for chess is amazing... +1

[@Biscuitneilston]

The way all the angst melted away at the end in the blitz game was a nice reminder of why we all play chess

[@dystopiandreams1073]

Did I just hallucinate or did this lunatic actually say that he is talking with lawyers and considering suing Naroditsky? What kind of mind-boggling inverted reality is he living in..

[@jasond.personal5433]

@@dystopiandreams1073 he's scared and knows he's wrong that's the reason for his empty threats

[@Raywong543]

@@jasond.personal5433yep. Attack your enemy before they attack you. - Vladimir Sun Tzu

[@rhwing5095]

Did you at any point consider that you may be living in the inverted one? What’s your frame of reference?

[@HansNiemann-m7v]

you think Kramnik can win the lawsuit? Naro did call him vile and evil

[@joshjac81010]

​@@HansNiemann-m7vwhat is he gonna sue him for?

[@joaocustodio-vq8ot]

I think it´s time for the Final Procedure............. The Brain Procedure

[@ladro_magro5737]

hahahahaahha

[@nicoloconterno2881]

I think he would have a very compelling discussion with my 5 years old sister

[@saicharand7765]

The genesis of most of Kramnik’s “activism” seems to be personal grievance…

[@VedanthB9]

Isn't it true of most activism these days? Sigh.

[@gautam-narula]

I remember when an IM (or FM?) revealed Kramnik violated chesscom’s rules by using another player’s account in Titled Tuesday, Kramnik posted a video response where he said he’s going to look into that IM’s games. That made it abundantly clear personal grievance played a big role in who he went after, it’s just McCarthyism in chess form

[@some-basic-channel]

@@gautam-narula Not really. It was Kramnik who revealed himself in the comments to that video. He of course could deny any "accusations" as Danya did. But he showed himself as a man of honor, it was for real a gesture of an honest man.

[@MrPatchtkennedy]

@@some-basic-channel an honest nut. No doubt he really believes himself to be logical and factual. He just doesn't understand his own limitations. From that video where he said it was impossible for hikaru'a editors to add an eval bar quickly - which was completely wrong, but he was totally convinced. Because he doesn't know how to do it, it must be impossible. That's why he'll never admit he's wrong, he doesn't have the capacity to actually understand that he's wrong.

[@some-basic-channel]

@@MrPatchtkennedy Maybe he's wrong. Maybe you are. Why can't you be wrong? And if you are wrong, should everyone assume that you can NEVER be right anymore?

[@coolcat23]

27:47 No, Danya did not stop replying after there was a "very strong visual factual evidence". He stopped replying before that. How can Kramnik not accept that? Also, a few sentences earlier (at 26:52) Kramnik effectively said "In my opinion, I caught him lying, unless he proves otherwise". So clearly he considers the possibility that there is an explanation that implies that Danya wasn't lying. This possibility is incompatible with the claim "very strong visual factual evidence" unless "evidence" here is only meant to mean "circumstantial evidence", i.e., not proof. To my ears, Kramnik makes strong claims and then backpedals in other sentences, then makes strong claims again (at 48:30 he says "video proof", not just "evidence") and so on. This does not make sense to me. He can "just ask questions" by asking what the reflections in the glass are about, admitting that he does not know the answer, or he can make allegations that an engine was running. He cannot, however, do the latter and claim "I'm just asking questions". First and foremost, he should do all his investigation privately and only after not having received satisfactory answers, go public with his observations.

[@FKing85]

Kramnik managed to play 1+1 without significant problems. Legendary "one tempy" in the end.

[@akev2794]

When Kramnik doesn't even know the difference between closed and minimised, then we know we have a problem...

[@mgoogyi]

That's the point where I lost it...

[@zah936]

EXACTLY

[@berkhankarsli]

"I'm right. That's a fact!"

[@chriskeith5742]

Subjectively objective. Guy's a clown.

[@FaanaMusic]

🤣

[@Asdfgdgv]

K: It's 3 times more it's a fact. G: ok let's calculate....at most it is the same K: ok it is about the same So where do your 'facts' come from kramnik?

[@Cruz0e]

Will somebody explain to Kramnik? OPEN is not the opposite of MINIMIZED. A program can be OPENED and MINIMIZED at the same time. Opened means it is running (either in the front, or in the background). What he is arguing about is MINIMIZED vs. MAXIMIZED (or brought to front).

[@GAOMaster]

I was losing my mind at this part

[@c2c001]

1:08:40 - I'm excerpting a text from elsewhere: "A psychopath is someone who uses manipulation, violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs. They can be intelligent and highly charismatic, but display a chronic inability to feel guilt, remorse or anxiety about any of their actions." People can argue about words but understand the deeper underlying meaning.

[@dawdus]

I really do not have a horse in this ract, but what exactly am I supposed to take out of that blurry reflection? Which monitor is that? How does it relate to other screens? What exactly am I looking at? It could have been what Kramnik says, sure - but a dozen other explanations make as much sense. And what about the fact that the presumably the least interesting part was edited out of a video? The dude sitting in silence entering the moves. Why would you keep that in the video posted for entertainment? And why was the most damning part left in? The part where Danya actually admits to using an engine? Why would you keep that part in if you wanted to hide “cheating”? How is it all a proof of anything?

[@ethanguo4219]

You require proof beyond reasonable doubt. Then you'd never catch any cheater unless they're extremely stupid. His online performance is world top level, far exceeding his proved strength in real life. Risk reward analysis shows he has great incentive to play at top level as a pure content creator. And he has virtually no risk of being caught. Kramnik's case presents a few valid suspicious points about danya. Danya's lack of participation otb and refusal to play kramnik in real life for fear of "what if bad performance by chance", these don't look good

[@dawdus]

​@@ethanguo4219 You can go to any other chess KZbinr video and - just as an exercise - convince yourself that they are cheating, and then try to look for evidence. You’ll find plenty. Weird looks, blurry reflections, strange cuts, weird pauses, odd calculation monologues. Everything can become suspicious if you’re emotionally attached to the idea that it is. Now the online vs real life performance - if granted -would be the only interesting avenue for investigation - but then again you need a solid “online vs real” benchmark among GMs, not just declare a single datapoint as odd. Also Daniel not wanting to legitimise this trial by voluntarily participating in it is not strange to me at all. Oh... and “proof beyond reasonable doubt” - what an odd approach to justice, right?

[@dawdus]

​@@ethanguo4219 You can go to any other chess KZbinr video and - just as an exercise - convince yourself that they are cheating, and then try to look for evidence. You’ll find plenty. Weird looks, blurry reflections, strange cuts, weird pauses, odd calculation monologues. Everything becomes suspicious if you’re emotionally attached to the idea that it is. Now the online vs real life performance - if granted -would be the only interesting avenue for investigation - but then again you need a solid “online vs real” benchmark among GMs, not just declare a single datapoint as odd… Also Danya not wanting to legitimise this which trial by voluntarily participating in it is not strange to me at all. Oh... and “proof beyond reasonable doubt” - what an odd approach to justice, right?

[@techbae6157]

Can't believe Kramnik said that Danya's latest Csquared podcasts happened before danya-kramnik-ilya on levitov. Danya literally referred to multiple moments in the levitov interview.

[@sveltemoody10]

U didn't listen carefully, try again Danya Bot.

[@akshathkumar9135]

exactly...typical example of his "slanderous lies". This should be pointed out more.

[@matteopriotto5131]

Danya clearly used stockfish to foresee the conversation on Levitov's channel... What a filthy cheater!

[@cfffba]

​@@matteopriotto5131 except according to Kramnik he uses Leela, not Stockfish... or at least he thinks Danya used Leela for that infamous Bc8 move. Which he didn't actually make... 😂

[@Rulfazar]

So Kramnik suggests, publicly, that Daniel Naroditsky is a cheater; and he reacts in an unpleasant manner towards Kramnik? My God, there are no words. Kramnik also doesn't seem to understand that the onus is on him to prove what he claims, not on the other guy to show him wrong. Plus, the conversation is oftentimes quite stupid. Who started the insults first? Who has more support from alleged top players? Jesus Christ.

[@cooloutac]

Daniel publicly apologized for cheating after we all caught him doing it in the act. The fact he was using the engine at all the shows how habitual and compulsive he is and he's probably been cheating for years. You are simply in denial.

[@k.m.7351]

He did prove it, Danya ran the engine while playing a game, that’s enough for a ban

[@Rulfazar]

So the guy said the only time an engine was ever used was when playing with random people online, specifically under some show where he plays and teaches folk who are straightforward noobs; the guy used the engine when the game was won and was reckless and stupid enough to run it before the inevitable resignation from the opponent - and you people point at this and shout CHEATER. Humans are receding all the way back to monkeys.

[@cooloutac]

@Rulfazar I think that's disgusting and such a horrible example to be setting for children. There's never an excuse to cheat and saying it's okay on random players is absolutely sociopathic. By the way this guy said he only had two monitors and kramnik proved that to be all lie as well...

[@ssep327]

I dont get it. These people are defending an obvious cheater. Is IQ of masses is declining or morals are dead? What a shamefull scene ...

[@grimlips6596]

I had to go watch the Levitov debate to check the 21 vs 23 seconds thing. It took Danya 11 seconds to enter the moves, with Chessbase already open. And somewhere between 15 and 20 more seconds (i can't really tell) for the engine to load. Kramnik has a strong point: chessbase is so clumsy that you would need for sure more than 20 seconds, it nearly takes 20 seconds alone for it to load. Making it indeed hard to believe that Danya's software was acually chessbase at that time. Danya's game-history on chessbase is irrelevant here, since the claim is that it is probably not chessbase. Damn man, Kramnik is friggin terrible at communicating his ideas and arguments.

[@ethanguo4219]

You are wrong! Mustreader theorem: 23=21, also 2+2=5 if danya says so.

[@MrFootofDavros]

This is what I did yesterday as well. For me it was 23/24 seconds. Starting at ~10.28 and finishing at ~10.51. Someone pointed out Chessbase flashes / blinks when the analysis is returned which you can see happening on Danya's screen. I think you are correct that the implication was that makes it impossible he was using Chessbase as stated but Kramnik looks like he didn't explain that well here because he didn't. He was just arguing that Mustreader wasn't honest in his previous podcast summarising their Russian debate as he claimed Danya proved he could do, when clearly he didn't.

[@jokulhlaup1143]

didn't Danya already say that his editor cut out this part because his opponent was thinking for a long time?

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

Interesting point. Is it plausible, that chessbase takes different time to load depending on the computer load, the board position and phase of the moon? I checked the recording of the Levitov's debate, the thing is that he was not in a big rush to enter those 8 moves, he could really do that faster. Besides, during the speed run it is not entirely obvious to me that the engine was completely loaded in 20 seconds, 20 seconds is the duration of the cut, but after that another handful of seconds elapsed before he said exactly what the engine shows. and why is game history irrelevant, wouldn't it be a solid proof that he used chessbase on that day on exactly that position? I am not a chessbase user, so I don't know what to make of all that.

[@MrFootofDavros]

@@vladthemagnificent9052 I thought he entered the moves reasonably quickly. Eight moves per player, so sixteen movements entered in ten / eleven seconds. Funny thing is I haven't seen one person mention the converse. i.e. I see a lot of people saying he could have done it a second or two quicker so no big deal, but not one person has asked why we would be expecting him to enter the moves at breakneck speed in an educational speedrun, whilst he's interacting with his chat, against an opponent taking his own sweet time? He wasn't expecting that twenty seconds to subsequently get "lost" and to blurt out about using an engine, so why would he even be trying to operate faster than he could when he was actually trying to prove just how fast he could open it...

[@Kimdk87]

It is not smart to go into a discussion about the 23/21 seconds, since Kramnik is obviously right about the statement. Danya said, he could do it in 20 seconds. He could not. You can say, that it is within the margin of error, but that is not Kramniks point. So any discussion about that, you will lose. Smarter to just acknowledge the obvious. Danya didn't manage it in the time he said he could manage it. After you give Kramnik that fact, then you can argue the other stuff about margin of error and so on. But Kramnik is very detail oriented, very black/white, so just acknowledge stuff like that. I also believe Danya is not cheating, but when you debate someone so black/white, you need to acknowledge the initial claim that Kramnik has. That he did not do it in 20 seconds. Which is correct. THEN start the debate whether it is important or not. I think that is the issue people debating Kramnik runs into. They can't understand how Kramnik is hyperfocused on small things that might have many explanations. Kramnik finds these things. And just take them on one by one. Acknowledge the factual part of his argument. Then you can talk about possibilities and values after that.

[@GAOMaster]

weirdo

[@Kimdk87]

@@GAOMaster What is wrong about what I say lol. I have defended Danya 10 million times, but you can't debate like this against him.

[@KF1]

​@@GAOMasterread it again, he understands the mental state. 20 vs 23 is immaterial to a normal person, but to Kramnik it is "evidence". This is actually how he thinks.

[@sopliplily2204]

@@KF1 Read the OP again... The point isn't about what is considered evidence but acknowleding the factual events. When you want to solve a murder, you first establish the list of facts, then you argue why such and such is a suspect because such and such facts. People in the comments, yourself included, keep conflating the FACTS as the CLAIMS and assume they must be mutually inclusive.

[@Nicole-yy1kn]

“I am not a defender of Daniel but…” 😂😂😂

[@eurabio]

42:50 the narcissist says a huge lie. Kudos for Greg for not letting him go away with it.

[@kiitc]

"facts"

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

Oh it is not important let's move on 🤣

[@linitwee1906]

It is interesting to hear Kramnik’s view but I still disagree with his “analysis.” Thanks for maintaining parity despite your conflicting views!

[@tml7189]

Kramnik clearly can't accept even the simplest factual counter-argument. I wonder if he even accepts to have ever lost a game of chess or made a blunder on the board.

[@Blabla-od7vt]

When Magnus wins against him, he apparently calls it a "miracle".

[@tenorhighc1]

nice shades! What brand are they?

[@MustreaderChess]

Some noname brand bought on the street, if I recall correctly. I have dozens of sunglasses, some are expensive brands (2-3 pairs), but most are just random cheap ones from places I visit across the world

[@12oq]

@@MustreaderChess а дешевые очки из не оч хорошего материала не могут быть вредны для глаз?

[@zyto7904]

Terribly conducted interview like last time, keep up the shit work.

[@kdiigx]

No way is he saying he’s being bullied and having his image damaged lol he’s lost it.

[@chessgains8075]

yea. Only have himself to blame.

[@predragnikolic3040]

@@chessgains8075 He didn't sad that he sad that Daniel language was much more hursh, but it doesn't matter because hi is strong man and he can handle it.

[@ziganovak9526]

@@predragnikolic3040 He is a weak minded individual, that is completely out of touch with his emotions, lashing out at players that beat him in online chess, that he seems aren’t on his level, which is completely overestimated in his delusional mind.

[@predragnikolic3040]

@ziganovak9526 If he is weak he won't do this, he is fighting online cheating alone, with all the consequences, to do that you must be very strong individual, very onest as well.If nouone does nothing, with all the technology it will become treath to otb chess, it is very serious issue, and it must be taken seriously and now..

[@predragnikolic3040]

@@ziganovak9526 Deletenig comments, likes, what else ?

[@MrZordex]

Why nobody wants to invite him I wonder...

[@ChessAndKungFu]

So painful to watch this legend demean himself and to make himself smaller with every word.

[@qdlaty23]

Danya responded to every single deluded accusation even though he didn't have to. Kramnik saying Naroditsky replied to none of his questions just makes Kramnik a clown at best.

[@johnygoodwin3441]

What a great interview, no holding back and being completely candid with him. Subscribed

[@NicoRTM]

5:11 Even if Danya has made more videos on the topic, it is in his right, obviously he has to defend himself from the accusations.

[@softan]

Its easier to accuse someone of cheating than it is to defend yourself

[@ChessNate1992]

Did Kramnik just say he is thinking of sueing? Is he for real, how are you going to make 15 videos accusing somebody of cheating and trying to ruin their entire reputation and then sue them.

[@RosayRosado]

Kramnik ranting about 2-3 seconds for 15 minutes made me lose 2-3 years off my life.

[@roohelio]

Such a joyful blitz game! And the ending was pretty positive! How is it possible you end up in an argument with bans and so on!? It`s crazy, ребята

[@ielts_ology_eng]

It seems like Kramnik has learnt some phrases from Dany's answers and uses them against him. Kramnik says that he defends his name? But, to be honest, it feels like he is just taking his own medicine...

[@kaidoChess]

Bro! Where did you come from and how do you get all these amazing interviews !

[@MustreaderChess]

I was born in Kazakhstan, lived in Russia for most of my life, currently living in Kazakhstan (Almaty). As for the rest, this week I'll record a video where I answer these and other questions

[@kaidoChess]

@ that is amazing man! I love your videos! If my channel ever gets big enough I’d love to do a collab! Keep the interviews coming they are incredible !

[@MustreaderChess]

@@kaidoChess Thanks!

[@saadinurazisbek5139]

Kramnik is a vampire. He gets energy by sucking blood from people. It's quite usual for old people in Russia

[@roharbaconmoo]

Wow Kramnik is a master of projection

[@ArthurCravan-pr3bh]

I thought i was taking very bad my chess losses, but Kramnik is at another level

[@shaner3723]

We live in cancel culture , so anyone expressing their opinion that does not fit the narrative is considered mad

[@Diffusion8]

Kramnik keeps looking to his left... And right... What is he looking at?? He's acting like a baby - "They were mean to me, so I'll be mean to them!" Sad man. Pathetic.

[@MrFootofDavros]

Questions no one asks:- 1. Why would a Grand Master need to look at an engine to assess positions after eight (not twenty, eight!) moves against an 1100 rated player. Shouldn't he be able to "educate" his viewers based upon his knowledge being a GM and knowing opening theory? 2. People say "Oh Danya could have done that a couple of seconds faster, so nothing proven re the missing twenty seconds". But no one asks, er why exactly would be busting a gut to try and do it FASTER than that time when he was, you know, trying to show how fast he could open it? Why in the middle of a casual speedrun, whilst interacting with his chat, against a beaten opponent just taking his own sweet time, would he suddenly be in such an incredible rush? Did he forsee he was going ro blurt out he was looking at an engine and mysteriously "lose" the twenty seconds of footage leading up to that?! 😂

[@Ethan-fh9lq]

Have you seen the stream you’re referring to?

[@MrFootofDavros]

​@@Ethan-fh9lq Yes.

[@Ethan-fh9lq]

@@MrFootofDavros If you watch it again then you might have all your questions answered.

[@MrFootofDavros]

​@@Ethan-fh9lqHow could they possibly be answered - the second question is raising the point that coverage is actually missing when he was potentially shooting through putting the moves in and analysing the position. So how could it provide any answer to that?

[@ChessAndTriceps]

Workshopping an idea here. There’s a few things going on here but a way to summarize from Kramniks perspective is this: in the early days of civilization there comes a point where people realize we need some type of authority force to keep criminals in line. And if there was a hesitancy to create such a force, you could expect to see cases of citizens take up vigilante work and they would very often pick on the wrong suspects due to a lack of of structure of investigations, biases, bad days, and dozens of other reasons. The creation of an established authority force would put alot of these people out of work as they could also be subject to punishment. For better and worse (admittedly I don’t see the better right now) Kramnik is essentially one of the early vigilantes standing on his principles and taking up a cause he believes in. And if no one cares enough to establish that force that would take up this fight against cheaters we’ll continue to see this until he finds something else he cares enough to pursue. Fascinating time in chess, unfortunate that he picked out someone that so many of us have been positively influenced by

[@MrPatchtkennedy]

No kramnik is an increasingly insane narcissist who is fighting to be considered right

[@enginekid88]

Let me ask a question. It's now common knowledge Danya knew at the time of recording his stream it started immediate controversy about him using an engine, right? So, why did he then download that stream from Twitch and edit out the two parts that would have proven he did not have an engine constantly running? To me this is the only question. It seems illogical to edit those parts out. Many will say it's logical because he always edits his videos for youtube to make them shorter. But those two edits only total 31 seconds. An extra 31 seconds is nothing. He uploaded the video and its something like 1 hour and 16 minutes long. So why edit out the 31 seconds that would show him maximizing Chessbase on his second monitor and inputting the position? Do people understand why that might be regarded as suspicious? If he knew that VOD contained a potential cheating controversy, and then he edited those important parts out, he would also know some people will take notice and want answers. This is why it's still a controversy and why Kramnik is still talking about it, right?

[@gamma9141]

It’s obvious Daniel Narocheatsky is cheating

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

I don't get the nature of your confusion. he (or rather his editor) edited out the the boring parts of staring at the monitor before uploading the video, and the controversy only happened after that, when some viewers drew attention to analyzing with engine lines in the opening while the game has not yet ended which he initially did not recognize as controversial (because it is not in any way cheating). I am not even sure it is possible to get the deleted parts back at that point.

[@bjoolm]

i'm curious what anish giri thinks about the video from vladimir kramnik about the monitor usage of daniel naroditsky

[@SamuelJSung]

“It’s amusing how Kramnik is eager to ask questions and get answers, but when people expect the same from him, he just blocks them.” I was blocked as well. Keep up the good work Mustreader!

[@ladro_magro5737]

He blocked everyone. 😅

[@Nicole-yy1kn]

That’s not what happened

[@dsuleyma]

I did not know Kramniks opinions are fact! Surly this will transform all human understanding! Commence Procedure!

[@RebuildYourChess]

First they ignore you, Then they mock you, Then they fight you, Then you win.

[@MrPatchtkennedy]

Danya is at the fighting stage now. I guess winning is next. But kramnik will never shut up, he doesn't have anything else to do

[@some-basic-channel]

@@MrPatchtkennedy Your guess it is Danya who was ignored first? Oh you are little disingenuous troll)

[@MrPatchtkennedy]

@some-basic-channel Daniel didn't do anything wrong, and if you have any credibility you'll understand that eventually. When you do, you'll realise what a little piece of shit you are. But this idea that somehow kramnik's idiocy will go from being mocked to respected is dumb. Maybe, very occasionally, a stupid idea turns out to be correct. Vastly more often, as it is in this case, a stupid idea turns out to be stupid. Considering the sheer amount of idiocy kramnik has already put his name to, this will be the same. Your promised land isn't coming, clown.

[@MrPatchtkennedy]

@@some-basic-channel I don't know what dumb point you're trying to make. My point is that the concept that there is some certain trajectory for kramnik going to not believed to believed is ridiculous. The more he does this idiotic stuff, the clearer it is for everyone that he is paranoid. However, if you're trying to say that kramnik has been ignored, then factually that's wrong. Everyone treated him with great respect until he made it impossible for them to continue to do so. He is the one destroying his own image. And because I think he's a disgraceful person, I love to see it, cause you know he can't stop right? He will just keep doing this and doing this until it's clear to everyone except you what a nut he is. Have a nice day.

[@vladthemagnificent9052]

@@some-basic-channel unfortunately the whiny clown Kramnik was never ignored as he should have been.

[@a000ab]

The translation of "Please don't interrupt me" that the interviewer keeps on repeating: "Mr. Kramnik, I have some negative opinions about you and hence want to condemn you in this debate. But, on the other hand, me having a lower IQ than you, obviously I cannot do it in a fair debate. So, I would like to claim many things against you, one after another, and I would like to ask you not to answer them."

[@ElReyGarcia11]

When Kramnik started writing “We demand proof N O W” to Danya on Twitter, in this sort of tone, I just thought enough is enough.

[@ycjason1]

Regarding the 21 second vs 23 or 24 second. The point is not whether Daniel did it in 21 seconds or not at that moment. It's more about "Did Daniel demonstrate that it is possible to do so for him in the cut out time in video", which most people would agree that "If Daniel can casually enter the moves and it took 23/24 seconds, it should certainly be possible to enter it faster than 21 seconds"

[@syfett]

Other streamers did that and entered both around 20 moves in 24 seconds. So For Danya, it was easy to enter just 8 moves and enable the engine. Moreover, Danya said he has a history of entering moves in Chess Base, and he could show it to Kramnik (and everybody, during the battle on Levitov chess), but Kramnik sad "No no no".

[@PrimeSuspect50]

​@@syfettI'm pretty sure he said he pasted the pgn in it and then started using his keyboard to get to the 8th move since it was pasted in

[@some-basic-channel]

But he did not "demonstrate that this is possible". All what we know now - he is clearly can win in bullet on fractions of second but was unable to reproduce his own actions within 21 seconds limit.

[@JD-xz1mx]

@@some-basic-channel Are all Kramnik's fans this scummy? Its not Daniel's responsibility to prove that he can do it in 21 seconds. Its Kramnik's repsonsibility to prove that he can't. You don't prove innocence. You prove guilt. Grow some integrity.

[@some-basic-channel]

@@JD-xz1mx But... he ALREADY couldn't. He tried and couldn't. I don't understand what you want from me. To forget about it? To ignore it? You know that when you close your eyes, the world around you doesn't disappear, right?

[@a000ab]

I don't know about the whole story. But just judging on this video, I can see that the interviewer has a very disgustingly dishonest approach. It seems that he has already made his decision about disagreeing to whatever Kramnik says, regardless of anything. No good faith or anything constructive in his opinion.

[@geckogeico2212]

I mean so has Kramnik, bad faith arguments induce more bad faith responses

[@a000ab]

For example, why should the interviewer disagree about the language of that quote from Daniel being insultive towards Kramnik? Obviously it has insultive words. I cannot understand why he resists to accept this. This makes me lose my trust on him.

[@Shaughnism]

Great video my friend! You were prepared and stayed strong when Kramnik tried to deflect!

[@moonboi3948]

Appreciate the video, but this is the last I can take of this "drama". By now it's clear that Kramnik has some agenda, what it is only he knows, and he's willing to commit morally questionable actions and lie to push it forward. This is no longer drama, it's just some guy lying and accusing people based on his own arbitrary criteria

[@Stillandyet]

What would be an example of a based suspicion in online chess to rightfully raise questions? Daniel said if a 2100 wins TT or beats a 2900 then they should be investigated? Ok, anything else?

[@malefistus5963]

Greg I am extremely sorry I will not watch the entirety of your video as I literally cannot bear the sheer rudeness of your guest. This behavior is an affront to both the grandmaster title let alonme the title of the world champion. However I find your channel a very nice addition to the chess media sphere and I will be following your content thank you.

[@mikan709]

pretty sure Nepo has sth to do with Kramniks confidence in his nonsense accusations

[@cooloutac]

94% of active title plays don't play in online tournaments cuz they think it's infested with cheaters my friend. Fabiano said half the people cheat and ratings are meaningless are you going to call him crazy too? Kramnik is retired so he doesn't care and the other players might not agree with his methods but they agree that cheating is a huge problem in online chess is simply not viable. I can understand why this community of naive kids just believe their favorite cheating streamer but for adults in this community to not care and take the time to bash him is extremely suspicious .

[@nuorotikc]

​@@cooloutacbut Danya isn't a cheater ...

[@cooloutac]

@@nuorotikc Smurfing is cheating and that's what he built his career on kid. You're a cheater too if you use more than 1 active account in rated games. It takes someone with a very low moral character and unsporting attitude to condone omething like that. engine use goes hand in hand.

[@tannerjmewborn7470]

@@cooloutacit’s not smurfing it’s approved official educational accounts where ratings are refunded. Someone using them to teach players does not insinuate low moral character, that is a ridiculous take

[@Bazar988]

@@cooloutaclowiq

[@-zelda-]

So what was Danya supposed to do about those blitz tournaments? He was playing them before the rule change so now that the rule was added back he is supposed to stop playing? I don't think Kramnik only mentioned what favored his point, I think he didn't even look at old tournaments at all and now that Danya pointed it out he is forced to shift his narrative.

[@SirShrimpey]

It's just tough to listen. I'm sorry, the whole 20 seconds debate is painful to watch. Kramnik does not listen to questions and just keeps shouting the word "fact" and not addressing the problem at hand. I wonder if in case Kramnik was forbidden to say the word "fact", would he be able to talk at all?

[@Dr_stogie]

Does Kramnik not understand that minimizing an application is not closing it? The application Chessbase can be running (open) while it is minimized.

[@rey_pato]

Good job, Greg. I think in the last 30 minutes you got some good responses from Kramnik that we hadn't heard from him before. While I still do not agree with his approach, it did give more insight into why he is doing this.

[@Nicole-yy1kn]

Mustreader is such a biased nobody

[@geckogeico2212]

Kramnik blind supporter, classic

[@mushroompower1120]

Kramnik is completely delusional, latching like a baby to specific instances like the 24 seconds, if he tries to do it as quickly as possible if chessbase is open (it was not the 1st game of the speed run so of course it was open) it will probably take him even less than 20 seconds? So the fact that when he was on stream with 2 people who were obviously aggressive towards him he did it in 3 more seconds proves something? I mean how stupid can you be? This guy just gaslights everything screaming the words "factual" and "this is the reality" when only in his deluded head it is.

[@YRMW1983]

it is so difficult to get through this episode.. it's day 2 and I've only gotten to minute 32.. let's see if and when I finish the whole thing

[@joshuabgambrell]

lmao I was wondering if I was the only one who had to watch it in 3-5 minute chunks

[@YRMW1983]

@ welcome to the club, maybe we can all gather here 😂

[@minty0960]

What is the significance of 23 seconds vs 21 seconds they are talking about ?

[@sdaiwepm]

Apparently it proves that Danya is LYING and therefore Danya is a mere puppet of chesscom and therefore everything VKramnik says is proven to be true.