Why are there all of a sudden so many new threads on Nigel Short? What did he do this time?
Can you win by preventing your opponent to shake your hands?
Sort:
is handshake universal form of recognition/approval? I do not really think so.
macer75 wrote:
Why are there all of a sudden so many new threads on Nigel Short? What did he do this time?
He has become a victim, and hence the martyr.
Slow_pawn hat geschrieben:
Apparently they had to replay the game after Cheparinov was ordered to apologize.
What is even the point of an apology that someone has been ordered to do ? Obviously he's not sincere so why stand there and hear him babbling nonsense he doesn't mean ?
Graf_Nachthafen wrote:
Slow_pawn hat geschrieben:
Apparently they had to replay the game after Cheparinov was ordered to apologize.
What is even the point of an apology that someone has been ordered to do ? Obviously he's not sincere so why stand there and hear him babbling nonsense he doesn't mean ?
Out of the definition "apology is required by situation", by default ignorance of the law does not make you immune to it, however... and there is avalanche of cases when law (re)acted in past ( :
shcherbak hat geschrieben:
Graf_Nachthafen wrote:
Slow_pawn hat geschrieben:
Apparently they had to replay the game after Cheparinov was ordered to apologize.
What is even the point of an apology that someone has been ordered to do ? Obviously he's not sincere so why stand there and hear him babbling nonsense he doesn't mean ?
Out of the definition "apology is required by situation", by default ignorance of the law does not make you immune to it, however... and there is avalanche of cases when law (re)acted in past ( :
But why would anyone stand there wasting 30 secs of their life listening to some guy babbling a fake apology ?
Even picking their own nose instead would be a more interesting and productive usage of their time.
Fine. But comparing it to drunkenness, lateness, obnoxious behaviour, and so on; handshake seems to be nuisance. Is it good rule? Was it proper ruling? It is hard to apologise sincerely when you feel being bitch-slapped.
shcherbak hat geschrieben:
Is it good rule?
No, I don't think so.
Either someone has good sportsmanship or not.
Forcing those without to pretend and forcing them by rules to put on a show of fake sportsmanship is hypocritical in my opinion.
Let the fans see who has good manners and good sportsmanship and who has not. Then the fanbase can decide what they like or don't like.
micky1943 hat geschrieben:
Making a handshake mandatory is to make it meaningless. Punishing failure to shake hands by forfeiting is so stupid it makes my head hurt. Trust FIDE to try and destroy players over a meaningless "courtesy."
agreed.
And a forced apology is just as riduculous.
Mar 13, 2017
0
#31
I remember a match between Karpov and Kasparov when they didn't shake hands. Or was it Karpov-Korchnoi?
Speaking of hands, google images of Tal's Right hand, it's said he only had three fingers, but it's a much more gruesome deformity than that, he had some kind of lobster claw thing going on which would make people reluctant to shake it. I think it's called icthyosis or something.
DrSpudnik wrote:
Icky!
haha yes Icky-osis would be more apt.
Mar 15, 2017
0
#36
deromanderp wrote:
Is it possible to cover your hand with feces so you automatically win when your opponent refuses to shake your hand?
Nigel Short won when Cheparinov refused to shake his hands - this is an official FIDE rule.
Unless you play someone with young kids. Parents aren't afraid of getting a little feces on them lol.
I don't think there is a FIDE rule that prevents a player from covering their hands with feces.