On Tuesday night, The Wall Street Journal revealed a high-level overview of a report produced by Chess.com, all about Hans Niemann, the participant suspected of dishonest on the Sinquefield Cup towards reigning five-time World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen. (Possibly, the web has repeatedly joked, with the assistance of anal beads.) Not solely did the chess web site defend its determination to ban Niemann from on-line play, it additionally made the surprising allegation that it had concluded the younger grandmaster had cheated in over 100 on-line video games. Now the complete report is out, and it’s a whopping 72 pages filled with graphs, appendixes, and displays of proof that roughly say the identical factor, however in additional element. The report additionally closely options different dishonest circumstances past those making the headlines, however we’ll get to that in a second.

I’m certain that many might be debating whether or not or not it’s honest to punish Niemann with out proof he ever cheated in a real-world setting, and why Chess.com thought it match to let Niemann proceed taking part in on its web site if, in reality, there exist dozens of pages of knowledge that counsel he’s a perpetual and recurring cheater. The proof is directly overwhelming, and has been for years, but Chess.com insists that its system is world-class to find cheaters, to the diploma that many who come beneath the location’s scrutiny find yourself confessing their misdeeds. Chess.com clearly found Niemann was a cheat, after all, however didn’t assume his historical past was a hazard till it grew to become an enormous controversy. Niemann was briefly banned from the web site in 2020, however went on to play in real-world settings alongside on-line tournaments that awarded prize cash not lengthy after. Somehow it took till now for occasions to essentially take a flip, as Niemann has been re-banned from the web site and in addition barred from taking part in in a Chess.com championship, with a prize pool of $1M, that he had beforehand been invited to.

The web site’s report actually says, emphasis ours, “…we had suspicions about Hans’ play against Magnus at the Sinquefield Cup, which were intensified by the public fallout from the event,” that means that the general public notion did play a component within the timing of this all. And the doc’s introduction has Chess.com positioning itself as a steward of the sport itself, with a accountability to develop the sport’s fanbase and preserve issues honest. With $1M on the road in Chess.com’s Global Championship, it argued, it merely couldn’t ignore the explosion that was underway.

To the location’s credit score, the doc’s introduction additionally admits that the group in all probability may have made higher selections about this example; it’s, in any case, run by people. But should you’re confused as to how or why occasions unfolded the best way they did, I deliver your consideration to the report’s “Exhibit C.” It comprises a sequence of emails which Chess.com cites for instance of an interplay it had with one other high participant who apparently cheated, and I believe it’s fairly illustrative of how the web site operates general.

“This person competed in a single event featuring 10 total games in 2020. Their Strength Score alone was not necessarily enough to act, but indicated that there was the potential for cheating,” the report reads, in reference to the scoring system the web site makes use of to catch fishy enterprise. “Even considering this player’s Elo rating of nearly 2700, our expert team was able to discern the truth that this player was indeed selectively cheating using a chess engine. When confronted with our allegations that they had used outside help, they confessed, as shown in the redacted email exchange attached as Exhibit C to this report. This email chain reflects the deliberateness of our process and how we engage with players like Hans, who are suspected of cheating on the platform.”

Read More: Chess Champion Breaks Silence On ‘Anal Bead’ Cheating Controversy

While the participant initially performs dumb, finally it turns into evident that they’ve been caught red-handed. But right here’s the place it will get actually fascinating, as relatively than merely banning the cheater outright, Chess.com offers him an opportunity to come back clear:

As a titled participant, we wish to give you an opportunity to reestablish your self throughout the Chess.com neighborhood, and due to that, we’ve got made no public statements relating to the explanations in your account closure or our findings. If you select to acknowledge any of the behaviors that you simply really feel may need resulted in your account being closed throughout the subsequent 72 hours, we could attempt to work with you privately to have a brand new account opened, outfitted with a title and Diamond Membership.

And right here’s the participant, complying (grammatical errors theirs):

Hello, I already wrote you within the earlier emails that I’ll absolutely cooperate. I used assist solely in a number of video games not as a result of I needed to win a prize however as a result of I used to be bored and simply needed to see how good is your crew. Before that I used to be certain that everyone is doing it, now I see that your crew may be very severe and good. I wish to apologise for my habits this can by no means occur once more! I’m sorry for what I did and really feel ashamed in regards to the reality. Thanks lots for giving me this opportunity and didn’t made this public. Actually I used to be stunned you catched me as a result of I cheated solely in 5 video games on this. I cheated video games. The others I didn’t thats why I believe you might be doing improbable job. Once once more I apologise for my habits.

Sure, this complete factor is usually right here for Chess.com to boast about its cheat detection: Not solely has it caught loads of gamers earlier than, a few of these gamers have been high tier! You ought to belief its methodology when it says that Niemann has cheated profusely, is its entire spiel. Even the cheater offers the detection crew props for a way good they’re. But what I would like you to remove from that is that there was an enormous component of belief positioned with the cheater, offered they have been prepared to come clean with what they did. Consequences have been suffered, however they nonetheless let the participant proceed utilizing the location beneath the belief that, as promised, they might by no means transgress once more. It didn’t matter that they have been a high 100 participant, they nonetheless acquired an opportunity to redeem themselves.

Which now brings us to Niemann. The website says Exhibit C is a showcase of the way it approaches conditions like that of Niemann, and presumably one thing very comparable occurred again in 2020, when he was initially caught. Chess.com says within the report that, much more lately, “It has historically been Chess.com’s general policy to handle account suspensions/closures and invitations for titled players (such as Hans) in a non-public manner.” Clearly it trusted him to come back again and play and hoped he would preserve it clear, as a result of the unique ban solely lasted six months. Perhaps it’s not a lot that that is coincidental timing, as a lot as it’s that the individuals who see themselves because the stewards of chess have at all times needed to create a wholesome neighborhood the place it’s potential to rehabilitate. Niemann could have been a cheat, however they needed to present him a chance to be a greater participant.

It may seem to be pulling this now could be a breach on Chess.com’s half, however bear in mind, in mild of the accusations, Niemann assured the general public he had solely cheated a few occasions, and that these cases occurred whereas in the past, when he was youthful. If Niemann was mendacity about that, and doing so very lately, you may make the argument that he broke the pact right here first and subsequently couldn’t be trusted to additional Chess.com’s bigger goal to maintain the sport sincere.

Of course, loads of observers will nonetheless have their doubts, particularly when you think about that the web site has made a suggestion to buy Magnus Carlsen’s firm for hundreds of thousands of {dollars}. The report repeatedly tries to guarantee the reader it isn’t favoring Carlsen in any approach, with one of many first large sections devoted as to if or not its selections have been influenced by the grandmaster. Nevermind that we nonetheless don’t have proof that Niemann ever cheated in an over-the-board setting, with theoretical anal beads or not.

Still, I encourage you to spend a while studying Chess.com’s monumental 72-page report: Whatever you’re taking away from it, it’s an enchanting and unprecedented look inside one of many 12 months’s largest aggressive scandals.