Post: #1

From here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/articl...d=11572837

"Controversial chess grandmaster Nigel Short is set to take on 20 women in a challenge to test his theory that women are not "hardwired" to play at the top level of the game.
Short, 50, will take part in a chess simul in central Auckland today, in which all 20 of his opponents will be women.
Dubbed "Beauty v The Beast" by organisers, the British grandmaster will take on the volunteers at Aotea Square from 11am today.
The challenge appears designed to confront Short's controversial statements about women in chess.
Last year, Short made headlines after he told New In Chess magazine that men and women should accept they are "hardwired very differently".
Asked about a lack of women in the game, Short said: "Why should they [men and women] function in the same way? I don't have the slightest problem in acknowledging that my wife [Rea] possesses a much higher degree of emotional intelligence than I do.
"Likewise, she doesn't feel embarrassed in asking me to manoeuvre the car out of our narrow garage.
"One is not better than the other, we just have different skills. It would be wonderful to see more girls playing chess, and at a higher level, but rather than fretting about inequality, perhaps we should just gracefully accept it as a fact."
The former British champion's comments provoked an angry reaction from female chess players, with the Casual Chess Cafe's Amanda Ross reminding him that former top female player Hungary's Judit Polgar beat Short eight classical games to three.
"She must have brought her man brain. Let's just hope Nigel didn't crash his car on those days, trying to park it. At least this resolves the age-old debate as to whether there's a direct link between chess-playing ability and intelligence. Clearly not," Ms Ross said at the time.
Chess website Chess Club Live tweeted at the time: "Most people in the chess world respect Nigel Short as much as he respects women."
Short wowed the chess world at the age of 10, when he defeated Viktor Korchnoi in a simultaneous exhibition. He earned his grandmaster title at the age of 19.
Short was ranked third in the world by FIDE, the international chess governing body, from January 1988 to July 1989.
In 1993 he became the first English player to play a World Chess Championship match, when he qualified to play Russian grandmaster and former world champion Garry Kasparov in the World Chess Championship 1993 in London, but lost.
He is currently ranked 41st in the world.
Short lives in Athens with his Greek-born wife, Rea, and their son and daughter."

Ok to be fair most of the competitors were kids. But still, this guy had to take on 20 at once. He's like the Little Dark of chess. I wonder if he chased them all down and told them to "go home" after?

Post: #2

He sensed the fear in their hearts, or was it soul? Either way, he channeled his inner ``Little Dark'' and emerged victorious.

Post: #3

Quote:The former British champion's comments provoked an angry reaction from female chess players, with the Casual Chess Cafe's Amanda Ross reminding him that former top female player Hungary's Judit Polgar beat Short eight classical games to three.

Oddly enough, all the players who've routinely beaten Judit Polgar have all been men.

Post: #4

I'm going to put these three tables here. They speak for themselves.

Post: #5

Quote:rather than fretting about inequality, perhaps we should just gracefully accept it as a fact.

Fucking heretic. Next he'll be saying shit like "the earth is round". Tie him to the stake.

Post: #6

Metric lowering much in the third table? Sexist FIDE! LOL

Post: #7

It's not all that impressive for a strong player to beat 20 people at one time. It's impressive if they beat 20 players at the same time who are resaonably rated. I.e. all people within 500 Fide of Nigel Short. Him beating 1500 Fide players would be laughable. I know that sounds strange but about 90% of moves can be just instinctive. I wouldn't read much into it. It would only be surprising if very difficult time controls were in place. I.e. he had 45 minutes and his clock would run while at other tables as soon as his opponent moved.

Post: #8

Why would there be women-only chess tournaments at all? This is not a question of physical attributes or capability like basketball or tennis. If women think they're equal to men, they would refuse to participate in these women-only games.

Post: #9

(01-15-2016 12:07 AM)Lucky Wrote:  Why would there be women-only chess tournaments at all? This is not a question of physical attributes or capability like basketball or tennis. If women think they're equal to men, they would refuse to participate in these women-only games.

I remember this, all the outrage. Funny thing is he was right. Men are more intelligent and more logical, so of course they are going to be better at Chess. Why do you think there are 55 men better than the highest ranked woman? But if you look at the facts, you are sexist, apparently

Post: #10

There are more men with high and low IQ's. There are more women in the middle-IQ range. It's no surprise that more men are chess masters than women.

I also play Bridge a lot. Most of the best Bridge players are men as well.

Post: #11

(01-15-2016 12:07 AM)Lucky Wrote:  Why would there be women-only chess tournaments at all?

Because they're the only ones a woman can win.

Post: #12

(01-15-2016 12:35 AM)puckerman Wrote:  There are more men with high and low IQ's. There are more women in the middle-IQ range. It's no surprise that more men are chess masters than women.

I also play Bridge a lot. Most of the best Bridge players are men as well.

This is answer here. The male intelligence bell curve shows greater and more frequent extremes than women's. Simply put, the geniuses of the world will be a 10:1 male to female ratio, with the cream of the crop always being male. On the flip side, men also show greater numbers of general stupidity, severe mental disorders, homelessness etc compared to women.

It should be noted though that 99 % of the population aren't even mentally capable of competing at chess on a competitive level, including myself and most everyone on this forum. So I can't really criticize any woman for losing to a chess master when im just as incapable as the rest.

Post: #13

(01-15-2016 12:35 AM)puckerman Wrote:  There are more men with high and low IQ's. There are more women in the middle-IQ range. It's no surprise that more men are chess masters than women.

I also play Bridge a lot. Most of the best Bridge players are men as well.

Same thing with poker. Look at the poker world tournaments worldwide and the vast majority of the winners are men. If ability was so fluid across gender you would think some woman who is attracted purely to the financial rewards and has a good mind for it would have become good at this already.

Post: #14

I suck at chess.

Post: #15

WC (Would checkmate)

Post: #16

Post: #17

(01-15-2016 12:47 AM)mickeyd Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 12:35 AM)puckerman Wrote:  There are more men with high and low IQ's. There are more women in the middle-IQ range. It's no surprise that more men are chess masters than women.

I also play Bridge a lot. Most of the best Bridge players are men as well.

This is answer here. The male intelligence bell curve shows greater and more frequent extremes than women's. Simply put, the geniuses of the world will be a 10:1 male to female ratio, with the cream of the crop always being male. On the flip side, men also show greater numbers of general stupidity, severe mental disorders, homelessness etc compared to women.

I have used this fact to great effect when trying to rid myself of unwanted female company. Try it, it's like a grenade.

(01-15-2016 12:47 AM)mickeyd Wrote:  It should be noted though that 99 % of the population aren't even mentally capable of competing at chess on a competitive level, including myself and most everyone on this forum. So I can't really criticize any woman for losing to a chess master when im just as incapable as the rest.

Post: #18

(01-15-2016 12:51 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  Same thing with poker. Look at the poker world tournaments worldwide and the vast majority of the winners are men. If ability was so fluid across gender you would think some woman who is attracted purely to the financial rewards and has a good mind for it would have become good at this already.

Please do not compare poker to bridge. While there is certainly some skill to poker, it does not compare to the strategy of a game which features both bidding and trick-taking. It also has the entire deck. And, yes, Bridge does have a certain degree of bluffing.

Post: #19

(01-14-2016 11:22 PM)MIMIKCOP Wrote:  I'm going to put these three tables here. They speak for themselves.

Anna Muzychuk

WB






Alexandra Kosteniuk

WB

Post: #20

Post: #21

If he picks who he plays against then he's probably just going to pick the strongest female player out of the group, mirror her moves to trash the other 19 players, then just play his own game to beat the 20th female player.

I'd do that, if only to avoid having to work too hard.

Post: #22

(01-15-2016 05:00 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 11:22 PM)MIMIKCOP Wrote:  I'm going to put these three tables here. They speak for themselves.

Anna Muzychuk

WB






Alexandra Kosteniuk

WB

WPSCABC = Would Play Strip Chess And Bang Close

Post: #23

Everybody, jump the queen!

Post: #24

If you ever get a chance to world class level women play chess, check it out!
It is hilarious, the women in high heels, made up to the teeth, with catty attitudes trying to out vibe the other and designer handbags by their sides.
Watching the men IS like watching paint dry however.

Post: #25

(01-15-2016 03:18 AM)Cr33pin Wrote:  WC (Would checkmate)

You think that's how women play chess ?

Watch this girl make the tower disappear: