lichess.org
Donate

carlsen did it again. hans now has company

@Cedur216 said in #49:
> Good thing that posts of blocked users are hidden now ...
The facts don't care who you block, they just keep being there.
Confused. Just a guy having fun. Thuggish? Hardly.
@Jade-1 said in #52:
> Confused. Just a guy having fun. Thuggish? Hardly.
I will admit that I was going to retract it on your first comment, but I rewatched it and still thought he barged in and just took over the game. I am trying to think, for reference, if it would be okay to do this to someone in another situation, even if it wasn't cheating, like taking over someones tennis racket or golf stick.

From my perspective, nobody would have attempted to do that to me, but maybe most women don't mind that as I would have? Even in regular daily life, I couldn't have even thought of passing a phone over and grabbing the TV remote from a lady in that manner, for example. So I haven't any experience of this being acceptable, and wouldn't want to give it a try. Perhaps it's the norm in Norwegian culture, although my experience says otherwise. Maybe Magnus has a special charm with the ladies which makes him more endearing, "Brutish" charm? I suppose I can't tell, but I can't imagine normal men, or even other charming men, getting away with acting like this to a lady.

And I suppose it's down to what she thinks, she does give him a sideways glance, so it's difficult to say she thought it was appropriate.

In any event, I am not able to edit it now, so I will unfortunately have to leave it in, even if it is perhaps controversial.
@Nomoreusernames said in #50:
> Yes, not sexist or abusive, but definitely thuggish:

Doesn't look thuggish but sure looks like a TOS violation! Assuming he took over and played for someone else which is what appears to happen.
@Nomoreusernames said in #24:
> “I did ask an arbiter during the game whether watches were allowed, and he clarified that smartwatches were banned, but not analog watches. This seems to be against FIDE rules for events of this stature”

This is ridiculous. "Analog" does not mean "unsophisticated." There are plenty of analog G-shocks that have Bluetooth smartphone connectivity.
@sawchain said in #57:
> This is ridiculous. "Analog" does not mean "unsophisticated." There are plenty of analog G-shocks that have Bluetooth smartphone connectivity.

Sure. I believe the definition of analog watch is just a watch that displays the time via hands on a clock face. I'm not even sure the hands have to be mechanical -- some definitions say it just like I did here. So to the extent the definition includes my apple watch which I like to have display a digital clock face, yeah thats incredibly dumb -- one thing has nothing to do with another. BUT I take it the watch here probably had physical pieces for clock hands. How many of those watches would actually allow cheating? None that I know of, but maybe there is one out there. Is there a gshock that would allow that?

In any event, the thing that pisses me off about Magnus is that he is not actually claiming that the watch allowed cheating. He likely knows the watch probably does not actually allow that. Nonetheless, he is at least implying it could potentially allow cheating, effectively dragging his opponent into a media mess and taking away from his accomplishment. At the very least, extremely poor word choices in what he said.
@ArtofDefeat said in #58:
> Sure. I believe the definition of analog watch is just a watch that displays the time via hands on a clock face. I'm not even sure the hands have to be mechanical -- some definitions say it just like I did here. So to the extent the definition includes my apple watch which I like to have display a digital clock face, yeah thats incredibly dumb -- one thing has nothing to do with another. BUT I take it the watch here probably had physical pieces for clock hands. How many of those watches would actually allow cheating? None that I know of, but maybe there is one out there. Is there a gshock that would allow that?

if it has an electronic display, like an LCD, it has a digital circuit. the display might emulate an analogue watch face, but the display is controlled by a digital circuit. My take is it's a digital watch that emulates an analogue watch.

since anyone can buy an analogue watch for $50, remove the works and put the internals of a butt plug in it, the discussion about what's analogue and digital while interesting to me, isn't too important in the context of cheating in chess.

> In any event, the thing that pisses me off about Magnus is that he is not actually claiming that the watch allowed cheating. He likely knows the watch probably does not actually allow that. Nonetheless, he is at least implying it could potentially allow cheating, effectively dragging his opponent into a media mess and taking away from his accomplishment. At the very least, extremely poor word choices in what he said.

I agree. I think bringing it up in private to an arbiter was correct, broadcasting it publicly hours after losing was wrong.

I'm speculating carlsen might think he's a big deal and others should do whatever he wants. so when carlsen brought it up to the arbiter and the arbiter didn't do what he wanted, he got angry.

the last time carlsen threw his toys out of his cot in a tanty, chess.com bent over backwards to give carlsen what he wanted. that didn't turn out well for chess.com. Although carlsen and chess.com's actions did coin a new chess term, saying things like using the internals of a butt plug makes sense to chess people, so there's that.
@sawchain said in #57:
> This is ridiculous. "Analog" does not mean "unsophisticated." There are plenty of analog G-shocks that have Bluetooth smartphone connectivity.
Now I see Carlsen's point: an arbiter didn't acknowledge that a watch which wasn't used, could still fall under the category he used to describe a watch which he wouldn't allow to be used, for an instance everyone agrees was definitely not cheating. So what, should we start wearing tinfoil hats?

Is there any chance you are trying desperately to cling to Carlsen's rationality in all this? He is a prolific cheat, there is video evidence. There are even video's of him getting caught trying to cheat over the board.

Why not stop considering things which you know didn't happen, and look at why people might want to pretend to you that they did?

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.