Carlsen Outrageous Behavior

@Molurus said in #49:
> No, it does not.
>
> In fact: the entire chess world is responsible for bringing the game of chess into disrepute, except for Carlsen. Carlsen is the one person who didn't.
Love your work. Please keep going.

this thread needs a break.

this cracked me up

youtube.com/shorts/etqUDUZNbj8?feature=share

Resigning any game now can clearly be taken as a sign that you suspect cheating or are suspicious that something else isn’t right or maybe you don’t like the other person or maybe reason unspecified.

Solution.. when you resign you should have to tick a box giving your reason...
A. I’m losing after move 1
B. The other bloke is cheating and I’m reporting him after move 1
C. I think the other bloke may be cheating but I’m not sure and I’m not going to actually accuse him but something ain’t right, I’m not reporting him but I am resigning after move 1
D. I don’t like the other player and don’t want to play him after move 1
E. The other bloke has a history of cheating, I don’t like like him and I don’t want to play him even though he probably isn’t cheating but might be so please post the Jose mourinho clip.

I think that covers all bases..

son talked about reddit losers in video game threads who post "electronic arts MUST FIX' this or Ubisoft NEED to bring back THAT. It is a bunch of whiners who act like companies and individuals MUST reply to their personal, petty annoyances, preferences, opinions.

hey folks, Magnus doesn't need to do JACK to satisfy your perturbed psyches. He took his resign loss like a man, will take any FIDE actions against him like a man, with no bitching and whining like so many here. :=-)

Dr. Ken Regan has spoken on a number of platforms clearly stating that there is NO evidence of cheating from Niemann's otb games over the past two years and certainly not in the third round win over Carlsen in St. Louis.

I see a civil court action looming against Carlsen and chess dot com for defamation of character. Should Niemann decide to go in that direction there will be any number of top tier plaintiff's defamation litigators willing to take Niemann's case on a contingency basis due to the very deep financial pockets of both Carlsen and chess dot com. As an attorney, I would not want to be stuck with the task of trying to defend them. Then again, with a sizable retainer up front and a good retainer replenishment clause, it could be a financial winner for defense counsel.

If Carlsen has ANY evidence that Niemann cheated in St. Louis, time is running out for him to present the evidence or apologize to Niemann and chess fans.

@hardbitten Could add to my list...

F. I’m a whinger, bitcher and a whiner and I’m resigning after move 1
G. After that suspicious second move, I’m resigning because my psyche is damaged.

Now I think I’ve covered it all. Thanks for the extra help

@VTWood said in #55:
> Dr. Ken Regan has spoken on a number of platforms clearly stating that there is NO evidence of cheating from Niemann's otb games over the past two years and certainly not in the third round win over Carlsen in St. Louis.
>
> I see a civil court action looming against Carlsen and chess dot com for defamation of character. Should Niemann decide to go in that direction there will be any number of top tier plaintiff's defamation litigators willing to take Niemann's case on a contingency basis due to the very deep financial pockets of both Carlsen and chess dot com. As an attorney, I would not want to be stuck with the task of trying to defend them. Then again, with a sizable retainer up front and a good retainer replenishment clause, it could be a financial winner for defense counsel.
>
> If Carlsen has ANY evidence that Niemann cheated in St. Louis, time is running out for him to present the evidence or apologize to Niemann and chess fans.

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that defending Carlsen should be a walk in the park because he didn't actually accuse anyone of anything, ever.

This "time is running out" story that Gothamchess is also arguing for... I don't buy it. If anything is a bad idea for Carlsen it's accusing Niemann now. Best thing he can do is the same thing he has been doing: not saying anything at all. There is no reason he should.

@VTWood i would like to tell u that u sir are a complete idiot, but sadly im not allowed to do so cause of the lichess rules...

To any of the idiots claiming "MC didn't say anything":

- it is an accusation of cheating by implication if you take SLCs increased anti-cheating measures (15 min delay, RF-sensors) the next day into account. There is a clear connection.
It may not hold in court, but if the drama goes on, it may force FIDE to act.

@coldcrow303 said in #59:
> To any of the idiots claiming "MC didn't say anything":
>
> - it is an accusation of cheating by implication if you take SLCs increased anti-cheating measures (15 min delay, RF-sensors) the next day into account. There is a clear connection.
> It may not hold in court, but if the drama goes on, it may force FIDE to act.

Carlsen certainly didn't ask SLC or FIDE to act in any way. Sure, everyone is suspicious of Niemann at this point, but as you say: this will never, ever, hold in court.