On Suhas / Cheating
Now that I'm back home and not working for a few days, I thought I'd add a slightly different perspective. I will add the disclaimer that I consider myself a good friend of Mike Lean's, but I had no knowledge of any of this business until the last day of the tournament. I'll also add that as a psych student, my perspective will inevitably be coming from that domain.
Any time anecdotal evidence is put forward, it can not be accepted as gospel. There are numerous social psych studies that absolutely destroy the concept that eyewitness testimony is always reliable. Confirmation bias (where people favor info that confirms their ideas regardless of whether or not it's true) only further complicates matters here, especially when it is combined with the misinformation effect (memory bias that occurs when misinformation affects people's reports of their own memory). Does this mean that I think that everyone made stuff up about Suhas? No, but it has to be considered. When Gary Skowronski says something along the lines that "one time he could have sworn he saw 5 tiles in Suhas' rack and 3 in Suhas' hand, but didn't think much of it at the time," that has the possibility of being tainted by the misinformation effect, or even more generally, retrospective bias.
wallydraigle and others that have strong statistics backgrounds have already commented on the statistical improbability of Suhas' performance, so I won't elaborate on that. It is important to note, however, that statistical improbability ≠ statistical impossibility. Again, this does not mean that I think that Suhas is innocent. It just means that it has to be considered that it is possible (albeit very improbable) that Suhas' performance was a once in a lifetime feat.
Another thing to consider is that this is not the Division 3 of 6 that rafij52 won in Phoenix in 2006 or the Division 3 of 6 that Piengkamol Intarasuwan won in Orlando in 2008. Suhas was the winner of Division 3 of 4. The skill level was significantly higher in the years that players like Rafi and Piengkamol won. This year, the average rating was slightly below 1200. The top ten did not have ratings in the 15-1600s as they did in the past (Kenneth Rubin even got 1700+ the year he made 3rd in Div 3); rather, the top 10 had ratings in the 1400s, with Suhas' exception (without acceleration points on his side, he would have likely suffered the same feat). There were 6 people with 3 digit ratings in the division and one unrated.
All of this might make me look like I'm on Suhas' side. That's not it at all. I just wanted to provide a slightly different perspective on the issue.
Any time anecdotal evidence is put forward, it can not be accepted as gospel. There are numerous social psych studies that absolutely destroy the concept that eyewitness testimony is always reliable. Confirmation bias (where people favor info that confirms their ideas regardless of whether or not it's true) only further complicates matters here, especially when it is combined with the misinformation effect (memory bias that occurs when misinformation affects people's reports of their own memory). Does this mean that I think that everyone made stuff up about Suhas? No, but it has to be considered. When Gary Skowronski says something along the lines that "one time he could have sworn he saw 5 tiles in Suhas' rack and 3 in Suhas' hand, but didn't think much of it at the time," that has the possibility of being tainted by the misinformation effect, or even more generally, retrospective bias.
wallydraigle and others that have strong statistics backgrounds have already commented on the statistical improbability of Suhas' performance, so I won't elaborate on that. It is important to note, however, that statistical improbability ≠ statistical impossibility. Again, this does not mean that I think that Suhas is innocent. It just means that it has to be considered that it is possible (albeit very improbable) that Suhas' performance was a once in a lifetime feat.
Another thing to consider is that this is not the Division 3 of 6 that rafij52 won in Phoenix in 2006 or the Division 3 of 6 that Piengkamol Intarasuwan won in Orlando in 2008. Suhas was the winner of Division 3 of 4. The skill level was significantly higher in the years that players like Rafi and Piengkamol won. This year, the average rating was slightly below 1200. The top ten did not have ratings in the 15-1600s as they did in the past (Kenneth Rubin even got 1700+ the year he made 3rd in Div 3); rather, the top 10 had ratings in the 1400s, with Suhas' exception (without acceleration points on his side, he would have likely suffered the same feat). There were 6 people with 3 digit ratings in the division and one unrated.
All of this might make me look like I'm on Suhas' side. That's not it at all. I just wanted to provide a slightly different perspective on the issue.