| Jan-28-16 | | Marmot PFL: 29 Rxd5 ed5 30 Bxf5 would solve all white's problems, but instead comes the cold shower 29...Ba4! |
|
| Jan-28-16 | | JonathanJ: just a reminder: http://www.theguardian.com/world/20... |
|
| Jan-29-16 | | JoeBerylwood: Nigel had this one coming. |
|
Jan-29-16
 | | HeMateMe: sharp work by harika. sacking the pawn to get her LSB into the game seemed to turn the tide. |
|
| Jan-29-16 | | Pantagruel: It's remarkable and gratifying that even with her female brain, which some say is inferior for playing chess, Harika wiped The Mastermind off the board in just 31 moves -- with the black pieces. |
|
| Jan-29-16 | | patzer2: Black's 31...Bc2! is a really clever example of the zwischenzug (a.k.a. in-between move or intermezzo). Black has to capture the Queen on d5, but before doing so we get this important message: "Before capturing the Queen as White expected, we interrupt this game to bring him this important message: After 31...Bc2! Black threatens mate and protects the Knight on f5. After White moves to avoid the mate with something like 32. Be3, Black will be a piece up with a decisive material advantage after playing the one-move-delayed 32...exd5  ." |
|
| Jan-29-16 | | patzer2: Some how I can see Pat Benatar responding to Nigel's reported comment "men are hardwired to be better chess players" and celebrating this game with her best rendition of the song "Hit me with your best shot." Dronavalli took Nigel's less than best shot 29. Rxd5? (perhaps a loose wire caused a short circuit) and blew him off the board with 29...Ba4! |
|
Jan-29-16
 | | FSR: Short has lost two games so far this year - both to women! Ju Wenjun vs Short, 2016 |
|
| Jan-29-16 | | dehanne: Ugly game for white. |
|
| Jan-30-16 | | hedgeh0g: Not that Nigel ever said female players couldn't beat their male counterparts, but that doesn't stop the usual brigade of idiotic "gotcha" comments from the SJW crowd. Presumably, these people also think the existence of Yao Ming proves that the Chinese are not shorter than the Dutch, on average, that the existence of healthy smokers proves smoking is not harmful to your health and that the existence of snow debunks global warming. This is why the aliens don't visit us. |
|
| Jan-30-16 | | hedgeh0g: With that out of the way, 31...Bc2! is a lovely shot by Black :) |
|
| Jan-30-16 | | patzer2: I'm not a social justice warrior, I just think it's funny that Short made a generalization about men being better chess players than women, and not longer after lost to two strong female GMs. Nigel is a Super GM and a Chess legend, and he has a good sense of humor and irony. I'm sure he complimented the female GM in this game on her fine victory, and can appreciate some of his fans enjoying how this strong female GM from India proved the exception to his "men are hardwired to be better chess players" rule. |
|
| Jan-30-16 | | althus: I wonder if the people who are up in arms about Short read into his comments a smirking tone that isn't there. As in: "Men are hardwired to be better chess players <and it's a good thing too, so take that, all you stupid little dimwits.>" Whereas the truth is probably something more like, "I don't know why it is, and I wish it weren't the case, but looking at all the results taken together, there has just got to be something in the brain that makes it this way." As an aside, sufferers of autism tend to be overwhelmingly male, too. I think being super good at chess is a kind of autism as well, and I suspect it's not necessarily this unvarnished good thing to aspire to. |
|
| Jan-30-16 | | morfishine: Short is not a malicious individual and its been shown, his comments were taken out of context Obviously, social media is incapable of understanding the elementary concept of 'context' There really is no more to be said on this matter
***** |
|
Jan-30-16
 | | perfidious: <morf....Obviously, social media is incapable of understanding the elementary concept of 'context'> Lot of folks out there do their thinking with the other brain, to wit: Cappie Pondexter and her moronic tweets after the catastrophe in Japan a few years ago. |
|
Jan-30-16
| | HeMateMe: <This is why the aliens don't visit us.> But, we are a most promising species, are we not? |
|
| Jan-31-16 | | patzer2: While there is obviously a statistically significant difference in the average performance of women and men in Chess, the results of Laszlo Polgar's life experiment with the Polgar sisters would lead me to believe the differences are more the result of nurture than nature. At http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens... Susan Polgar strongly objects to Nigel Short's premise "men are hardwired to be better chess players." According to the database here at http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches..., out of 20 games against female Super GM Judit Polgar the results are Judit Polgar 12 wins (classical 8 wins)
Nigel Short 3 wins (classical 3 wins)
5 Draws (classical 5 draws)
Now, as Nigel argues, that doesn't disprove his premise that men on the "average" are "hardwired to be better chess players." However, it might suggest as Susan Polgar argues:
<Young female chess players, who are already a minority, walk away from the game because they don't feel welcome, Polgar says. And many don't pick up the game in the first place because their parents teach them that chess is a cerebral game, and therefore better for boys. "It's a numbers game. If you have a lot of girls playing chess, then there'll be a lot more girls who are good at it," she says. "Just imagine if Nigel Short would say blacks don't have the brains to play chess; how crazy that would sound ... It has nothing to do with the race or gender. It has to do with the opportunities."> |
|
| Feb-05-16 | | sonia91: This win earned Harika the best game prize of £1,000: https://twitter.com/GibraltarChess/... |
|
| Dec-09-19 | | jith1207: I agree with Susan Polgar, than Nigel Short.
While what Short said might not seem incorrect, it is based on how the game of Chess has evolved and given opportunities to everyone. The profession of Chess player isn't a lucrative one, and tends to profit only those who reach the top or willing to do a lot more on Chess rather than just play, in addition to having a personal life. While the opportunities and the ability to earn around this profession are improving, we still aren't there yet when lot more women would take up this as serious job. Only then we might get to know how women are also wired to be better chess players. |
|
Dec-09-19
 | | keypusher: < jith1207: I agree with Susan Polgar, than Nigel Short.
While what Short said might not seem incorrect, it is based on how the game of Chess has evolved and given opportunities to everyone. The profession of Chess player isn't a lucrative one, and tends to profit only those who reach the top or willing to do a lot more on Chess rather than just play, in addition to having a personal life. While the opportunities and the ability to earn around this profession are improving, we still aren't there yet when lot more women would take up this as serious job. Only then we might get to know how women are also wired to be better chess players.> That doesn't make any sense. If opportunities did improve, presumably more men, as well as more women, would be attracted to the game -- unless you think that women are more motivated by money than men are. If anything, women have superior economic incentives <now>, since they have separate, and much weaker, events to compete in, and also can compete for prizes available only to women (viz https://www.gibchess.com/prizes) in co-ed events. A woman rated 2500 has opportunities to earn more money playing chess than a man with the same rating. But in fact economic incentives to play chess are extraordinarily weak for both sexes (as they should be). People play chess because they fall in love with the game. I'm pretty confident that most of the people who fall in love with chess will continue to be male. |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 30...Qxd5