In Russia guilt is often determined quite literally by the weight of the evidence. So if you pile up a large pile of BS it will be weighty and therefore compelling to the average Russian jurist. Kramnik often comments on how much evidence there is even when the evidence itself is not probative of his point.
Let's not blame it on the language barrier. There are many Russians that agree that Kramnik went too far
@SarKarlsen17 said in #4:
> 2500 rated Kids in year 2200: "Who was the 14th World champion?" "That 'interesting... perhaps we should start the procedure' guy"
I am a 2500 rated kid i know :D
@Mag1c1an01 said in #14:
> I am a 2500 rated kid i know :D
But my Sentence says live untill 2200 year and then say! :D
i know i was just saying :D
For me, Putin's war in Ukraine, online trolls, fake news factories and hybrid operations are the logical context of these cheating accusations.
In the most famous cheating scandal of recent years, the accuser was a Norwegian and the alleged perpetrator was an American. What evidence is there that this is a particularly Russian problem? It seems like you've taken a subset of a phenomena and substituted it for the whole thing.
Too many chess players are fixated on cheating accusations is the problem. Zeroing in on Russian players only is justified based on what?
Dude, don't take those pills anymore
Because Kramnik thinks some players are using computers other people need more cultural understanding? What exactly is your point?