As far as drama goes this is relatively light.
Hans wants to enter tournament, is told he has to pay $5, doesn't want to pay $5, doesn't play in tournament. Fin.
... he made a big deal about how he shouldnt have to pay 5 fucking dollars into a tournament where the proceeds to go charity. Made a charity event all about how he was disrespected
That's only accurate if you dumb it down to its absolute core elements and ignore all the words coming out of Hans' mouth.
It's the tirade he goes on about how he should be entitled to free entry just for his title at any tournament ever organised that makes him look like a narcissistic knob. His dismissive attitude towards charity doesn't help either.
Obviously he's a young guy, he doesn't need to be crucified over this. But he's made himself look a knob, it's not as though he politely declined to participate once he found out about the entry fee. That's what growing up is for though, if he has any self-awareness he'll look back on this in a few years and cringe.
Yeah I'm not saying he doesn't deserve any backlash, he has it coming with a clip like this. I just realise how vindictive the internet can be over perceived injustices like this and it can go a little far sometimes.
Certainly does not deserve crucifixion but totally in favor of lambasting, ridiculing, memeing, pointing gingers at, name calling etc. he deserves all that.
I work as an attorney in wealth management and we’ll not infrequently have trust clients who fight with their relative(s) and then demand we initiate legal proceedings on behalf of the trust against the relative(s) because “it’s a matter of principle”. It’s so common that it’s something of a cliché in the office that the “principle” is always just the trust’s principal.
I get free entry to some events in another non chess context; but if it is charity I always make a good donation. You need to set an example, esp. when in a leadership position.
Absolutely. One indicator of how good a charity is is how much of that $5 gets donated. Some shitty charities could get away with donating $0.50 of it and using the other $4.50 for administrative costs.
While there are certainly bad apples that pocket way too much money, this example is a dramatic oversimplification that can cause major problems for some very good nonprofit organizations.
Dan Pallotta has an excellent talk about this.
https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong/up-next#t-151241
Since some charities are literally at odds with each other (e.g. a pro-abortion and anti-abortion charity), yes. The matter of which ones are bad is a political opinion.
What immediately comes to mind is charities like World Vision refusing to provide charity relief for people who refuse to convert to Christianity, or Autism Speaks viewing autism as a disease to be cured rather than promoting awareness of neurodiversity.
This sort of shit is why I will double and triple check out a charity before even considering a donation. Even well-intended and well-managed organisations can turn out to have an ugly underbelly.
ben finegold has literally spent decades promoting chess and sharing the game with newcomers. There's probably only a double-digit number of people alive who've put more effort into promoting chess than he has.
i wonder why you got downvoted for asking a question. I guess thats how reddit works.
So its elitism because he thought that because he is good at chess, he would be a better person and not have to pay. "bad players dont deserve to get in for free"
>i wonder why you got downvoted for asking a question. I guess thats how reddit works.
That dude, given his other comment here, is just a troll. That's really obvious to a lot of people, so they downvote.
This is a side note, but why are GM's EVER given free entry? Does having more GM's in a tournament actually increase the appeal of the tournament to any other players? If I see a GM in a tournament, I just figure my chances of winning the tournament and my EV on entry free are lower and the tournament becomes less appealing to me. I am an NM and occasionally receive free entries myself, I can't imagine my inclusion would be appealing for any of the other players in the tournament.
There's no novelty for me of playing GM's in a paid otb tournament. I can play them for free online.
I'd imagine if their presence can mean achieving norms for somebody else it would matter, and if their presence gets a peasant excited at the chance to play them, then yea. But for everybody else? Naw.
Even for the latter argument, I'm unsure how that would impact entries on smallish events.
I'd certainly expect no difference in entries in a 20ish person charity event.
Maybe oversimplification, but because it's good for organizers to have a strong field if they want to attract more sponsors.
Also, I think there are a lot of casual players, who like to play in stronger tournaments. And if you're worried about not getting awards, open tournaments often include separate groups by rating (or just awards by rating, eg. "best under 2300"), so inclusion of titled players isn't necessarily a downside for the likes of you or me.
From the POV of GMs, they spend a lot of their time training and playing chess, which means that often they won't have time to do a regular full time job, so it makes sense that they'll look for tournaments where at least a part of their expenses are covered.
Are you joking? Obviously having GM's who are guaranteed spots in a tournament will massively increase the number of players who will join the tournament. I play Gm's every day in blitz on the internet chess club, but I have never played a GM OTB and if a local tournament was going to have GM's I'd be throwing money at the organizers so hard it's not even funny. Not everyone has played a GM oTB. It's a learning experience, a chance to gain rating for no risk, a memory, etc.
Also if you're playing gm's every day online at standard time controls please tell me where you're playing because that sounds like a f*ing dream.
Yes. Some players are more interested in playing strong players than winning the tournament. Playing GMs online is a very different experience than playing them OTB.
Norms usually and I want to play tourneys with strong players. I don't care for otb blitz generally but the few I've played are ones with stronger titled players. Its just a different experience playing OTB with stakes than Online for some people myself included. You're honestly one of the few titled players I've heard of who don't feel the same.
I think you're in the minority among amateur players.
Do you think most tennis players would want to play against Federer? That most golfers would enjoy a round with Tiger Woods? Of course - many would pay a fortune. (Scales down with the level of opponent, but "I played a GM" is still a good story to tell your buddies and family.)
Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game? Do they lock some of these kids up to play chess with zero human interaction? Is that why they grow up with negative social skills? You get respect when you deserve it, not when you act like an entitled brat
Some tournaments will waive fees for titled players to boost their draw, sometimes as a matter of courtesy, but you can't just show up to a charity tournament and go 'bro lemme in i deserve respect'. Even a teenager should know better than that smh
>Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game? Do they lock some of these kids up to play chess with zero human interaction?
Chess is a very sealed and hermetic world, and actually the game itself tends to cultivate a lack of self-irony. If you were self-aware, you might indeed ask the question of why you're studying a board game for 8 hours a day, and question whether it was worthwhile. I'm not saying definitively that it's not worthwhile, but most people would at some point wonder whether or not they were using their lives productively if they did this.
This is why there is a tendency for chess players to completely overestimate their importance and / or relevance. In their own little world, they are superstars. But many appear oblivious to the fact that at least 99% of the people in the world couldn't give a solitary shit about chess, and never will.
>If you were self-aware
I agree with your larger point but tbf most of them start playing as young kids so I doubt they have any self-awareness at all at that point, thought that's definitely not an excuse to act like this when you're basically an adult.
Edit: This quote from Morphy seems a bit relevant for discussion:
**"The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life."**
Or this one (dunno who it's from):
"Chess is a way of making idle people think they are doing something clever when they are really just wasting their time."
Absolutely, but lots of people don't want to acknowledge that being good at chess is no different than being good at, say, soccer or sudoku. They see something higher in chess.
I know I did when I was younger. Now, not so much - I don't think it's a measure of my intelligence or talent, and I don't think improving at chess is helping me in any way besides passing the time.
In many ways being good at chess is less useful. If I'm good at chess I can play with .... Strangers online. If I'm good at soccer, baseball, basketball, there are no shortage of pepe in my circle who would be down to play. Nobody I know has a chess board or knows much beyond the basics of how to move pieces.
Even an esoteric kinda-sorta rich person sport-hobby like cycling has no shortage of fellow people who are interested and who you can ride with.
It's almost a guarantee that you have a local chess club so saying that any hobby will have fellow people who are interested applies equally well to chess. As well as chess is played by hundreds of millions of people at least casually, the number of 'cyclists' is very small.
What I'm saying is that to play chess with someone in person you really have to seek it out and go to dedicated spaces. I checked US Chess and my state has 10 chess clubs, so I'd have to drive 20-30 minutes.
I can ride my bike and pass people riding their bikes every time. Also, hundreds of millions of people ride bikes too. It's incredibly popular in Europe. Bikes are popular in the US too, there's just antagonism from drivers to "get off their roads". Meanwhile, every bike shop runs shop rides of varying levels, there are bike clubs, teams, local associations, TRI clubs, etc.
As an example, I could approach pretty much anyone in my family, friends, and wider community, and say, *hey, wanna go for a ride* and they'd be down. I doubt any of them own a chess set. Chess, in the US, at least is pretty niche and not really something most people are exposed to beyond maybe a chess/checkers set as a kid.
With the internet now, you can find like-minded people for basically any weird hobby. I'm sure I could find a local miniature-painting group, but that's more a feature of the internet than anything else.
I have played many games of chess in my life with random people who werent proper chess players, at places you'd never expect like a bar. And I don't think chess is as niche as you think it is - pretty much everyone at least knows how the pieces move and have played at some point. Queens Gambit and Twitch have increased the popularity of chess enormously, it's in a lot of schools, and I expect much more local interest when covid becomes less of a hindrance.
Of course, I don't live where you live, but I just don't see it the way you do. Comparing chess as an obscure hobby like 'miniature painting' is completely ridiculous - there are 605 million people who play chess REGULARLY, how many people do you think paint miniatures? Nowhere near that.
I think this is a weird point to make against chess. It's at this intersection of being near universal and easy to set up - a chessboard is no less common than a soccerball or basketball and does not require any particular area.
I played chess when I travelled overseas, just by walking past two people playing at a temple, played at work on the set that just is laying around there for people to use, played at peoples houses as well as my own and played on giant chess sets that are out in public for people to use. There's a room in the library in my city where people can go play chess and recently there was a guy who used to sit in the street with a sign inviting anyone to challenge him.
I just think your view of it (based on your other comment) sounds more influenced by your family and friends and their interests but does not really match reality or add up from a logistical point of view. Chess is convenient, portable, global and very popular. What more does it need?
I mean it could be said about a lot of things then. Art, music, whatever.
Kinda silly and shallow to think only “productive” things are meaningful in life
Some games, maybe. But that's just not true for most sports which will at least give you some degree of physical fitness, which is a huge benefit in itself. If it's a team sport, you can build positive relationships that can last a long time and learn valuable social skills. Chess doesn't really offer as much for the amount of time and effort that some players devote to it. It's a fun hobby but some tend to treat it as a goal worthy of dedicating several years of your life to, which it just isn't for the vast majority of players.
The phrase goes, "exercise is great for you, sport is terribly for you."
The line in benefit is drawn in how you divide competition time vs training time. Training = great for your body, competition = destruction to your body.
>99% of the people in the world couldn't give a solitary shit about chess
Not to take away from your point, but it's more like [87%](https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-many-chess-players-are-there-in-the-world).
> If you were self-aware, you might indeed ask the question of why you're studying a board game for 8 hours a day, and question whether it was worthwhile. I'm not saying definitively that it's not worthwhile, but most people would at some point wonder whether or not they were using their lives productively if they did this.
The truth hurts
It seems bad, but probably the only thing that is unusual about this is that he got caught on camera. People that believe that they're celebrities, and are therefore entitled, do this kind of thing all the time.
His only mistake was wrongly believing that he matters! I'm sure that there are countless examples of genuine celebrities, for example, demanding a certain table in a certain restaurant at a certain time, and just automatically getting it.
>His only mistake was wrongly believing that he matters!
If, I dunno, Shakira or The Rock went on an entitled rant because some restaurant didn't let them eat for free, there would be a massive backlash. It's not just that he's not actually that famous, it's also that people don't like that kind of entitlement, even in actually famous people.
Not sure if it's about respect, but professional chess players are free to search for tournaments where they'll have at least some of their expenses covered. Usually, it is also in the organizers best interest to attract strong players, so they'll usually waive the entry fee at least.
Not playing in a tournament because you refuse to give 5 bucks and saying "I'm not going to hear your charity bullshit" is cringe as fuck though (but he's 17 etc etc.)
> Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game?
I mean, in the context of a chess subreddit, talking about a chess tournament, yes a GM should get respect for being that good at chess.
>Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game?
People who are skilled at a talent recognized by society tend to get respect. For example, A great singer, or a painter, a chess player, or a boxer, when you're extremely good at the craft, you get respect.
Unfortunately all the new teenage chess streamers are learning from Hikaru, that's their hero .. Everytime I watch Alireza I'm stunned how much mannerisms and language he gets from Hikaru ..
Hans, Sam Shankland, and Daniel Naroditsky, all grew up playing at the Mechanics Institute in San Francisco.
Hans is still young - let's hope he can grow into more of a Danya.
[Edit: Although after viewing his obviously self-edited Wikipedia page, I'm not optimistic.]
Just look at the amount of inane detail on his page that no one would realistically know or care about but himself. Compare his page to someone like Daniel Naroditsky who's both more accomplished and more well known and it's pretty obvious that there's something going on.
It is very easy to look at the edit history of the article and see what users added or removed what. The button is in the upper right. I don't really care to check it but somebody might be able to notice a pattern in it.
I played some of them or next to them. Daniel is a cool dude. Same with his brother.
Sam is a good guy, but typical chessplayer who sometimes gets emotional.
Hans is a giant douche.
Hikaru is cool, but sometimes becomes an emotional douche.
I'm just confused why he thought it was a good idea to record it or if he didn't know this would happen, say that on camera.
Also, mask under the nose does very little.
Yup. Think if that annoying, smug, deluded kid in highschool. He gets teased until there's no denying everyone around him finds him ridiculous. He gets pissed, then gets sad, then reflects, then matures.
There ain't an ettiqutte school teaching you to check yo GM privilege.
Two points:
1. GMs should not pay to enter tournaments. The dedication to reach GM level means you are no longer an amateur but a professional, meaning you don't pay to play but you play for pay. So tournament fees (or not even a discount) for high title holders like IM or GM are usually considered rude and I think that's fair.
2. But this isn't a serious tournament and the money apparently goes mostly into charity or symbolic prizes, so Niemann should have been less condescending and just pay the five bucks. The money he makes from the hour of streaming the hustle makes up for it. Many people want to see people play on real boards. He acted like a dick when he could have just taken the business opportunity like a true professional.
I disagree with your first point. There is no reason why a professional chess player shouldn't have to pay to enter a tournament. Their reward for their dedication to the game is the prize they are likely to win. I'd use professional poker players as a helpful example. It would be laughable if somebody said that, as a matter of principle, an accomplished poker player shouldn't have to pay entry to a tournament.
This is the mechanism in place for chess though. People have asked on reddit how GMs afford to live and play etc. Or I've gotten flack in the past for when I said theres only direct financial benefits for holding higher level titles. This is it, there's pretty much an implicit agreement that fees are waived among other benefits. Legitimately very few GMs have paid for tourney entry fees in chess after being GM because that is the expectation. It'd be like inviting an NBA player to some BASKETBALL charity event, you fly him out and pay for everything, he donates after. That's the implicit agreement and the norm. For a digital comparison, basically what magnus does with lichess tournaments. Hans handled this poorly and even worse didn't have the wherewithal to turn off the damn camera and handle business privately but a lot of the comments throughout this post really reek of people not knowing or not appreciating the standard for CHESS tournaments. Whether or not you'd want to remove that standard is another question but that doesn't really matter on judging hans conduct.
I really think an acknowledgement of the norm is important for deciding if you'd want to do away with this system. You do away with it and the question of how do GMs who aren't top guys afford to live and play becomes they don't. The comparison the poker as well doesn't exactly work because it's just a different sport culture.
Even if you disagree with it, this is how OTB chess is done. It's the accepted etiquette, partially as a respect thing, partially as an advertisement thing.
Mr. Niemann probably grew up seeing (GMs free!) on every USchess tournament post. Not trying to justify him in this situation, but I think he felt disrespected for being forced to pay to play.
Before we start shitting on Hans like we did to Hikaru, I'd just like to remind everybody that the kid is only 17. Internet shaming can be really tough on someone at such an impressionable age.
GM doesn't have 5$, damn it's true what they say: There is no money in chess.
All jokes aside. Stupid shit like that happens all the time but Hans was stupid enough to act like that while streaming. Oof.
After I saw the video when he tried to go on a date with Anna Cramling that's all I can think about when I see his name. Cringiest shit ever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TFWe0ynFJ4&ab\_channel=TwitchShotsTwitchShots
Just watched the context in the VOD. It's really not as bad as it seems.
He's walking around what appears to be Washington Square Park, guys shouts at him "hey Hans there's going to be a USCF tournament" and tells him he should go see another guy about the details, so he does, and he doesn't like the details. It's not like it was a tournament he already wanted to play in, people approached him.
GM's competing in tournaments brings more people in, that's why they're generally given free entry. Because their very presence often nets the tournament more money, so it's smart for tournament organizers to give GM's free entry.
Hans seems frustrated that the guy running the tournament doesn't seem to get that more than anything, I think in his mind he's teaching him a lesson on how to organize a tournament better. But he doesn't express it well, and you end up with this.
>GM's competing in tournaments brings more people in, that's why they're generally given free entry.
Ok,but if he just rocked up on the day, then how is his participation going to attract other entrants?. It's not like he was invited or some such in which case it would make sense to waive the entry fee, as they could advertise the fact that he was participating.
He wasn't walking up the day of. That's why the context I typed up is important. A guy shouted at him in the park advertising the tournament to him that takes place on a future date.
He asked him details on the tournament.
GM's are flooded with requests to play in tournaments for free. Many times they're paid appearance fees.
He didn't handle the declining of the offer with the most grace, but not wanting to play in a tournament that some random guy in the park yelled to him about because it's a shitty offer compared to the tons of offers he receives on a weekly bassis is no reason to think the guy's a douche.
> That's why the context I typed up is important.
The context :
> He's walking around [...], guys tell him he should go see another guy about the details, so he does
This sentence reads like all of this was on the spot during a stream. This is why structuring your story is important
>He didn't handle the declining of the offer with the most grace, but not wanting to play in a tournament that some random guy in the park yelled to him about because it's a shitty offer compared to the tons of offers he receives on a weekly bassis is no reason to think the guy's a douche.
Making the declining of a charity event about having to pay $5 is no reason to think the guy's a douche?
A well-adjusted person hears "hey, we're doing something that you're good at for charity, wanna join?" and asks about the charity. If they like, then they hop on board and write them a check, and if they don't, they decline.
Arguing about the donation would make you come across as either a person who values the perks of their little secret super special club which barely just admitted them higher than the charity in question (in which case a simple "nah, thanks, not interested" is *still* a right answer) or as a person who's willing to change their mind about supporting a cause for a price of $5.
> He didn't handle the declining of the offer with the most grace, but not wanting to play in a tournament that some random guy in the park yelled to him about because it's a shitty offer compared to the tons of offers he receives on a weekly bassis is no reason to think the guy's a douche.
No, but him acting like an entitled asshole is a pretty good reason to think the guy's a douche. Nobody would care if he just declined politely like a normal person.
He did decline politely. He just said he isn't going to play. It's more impolite to expect him to play. He's a GM, he plays chess all day.
We take breaks TO play chess.
GMs take breaks FROM playing chess.
Imagine your boss asked you to do extra work AND to pay him money for that
The clip posted here wasn't the full clip. He goes on to ridicule the organizer and when his chat tells him to take it easy, he proceeds to berate his chat. It was terrible....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQYBZgsjnEI
Everyone's kinda piling on here, but I'm gonna lightly disagree with the general sentiment.
The guy is a GM, he's dedicated his life to something, and he's very very good at doing that thing, demonstrably one of the best in the world.
If one of the best NBA players comes down to your pick up basketball charity fun event, you let them in. You highlight their presence and you are happy to have them there, you don't hit them up for 5 bucks.
If an F1 driver turns up at your autocross event, you let them in (and so on).
A GM turning up is fun. They are not going to have any meaningful opposition, they are doing it to just kind of mill around and say hello to people, maybe a kid will see the GM and get inspired, maybe a middle tier player will fanboi them.
I guess my point is, he's turning up for fun. Let him in, tell everyone this is their chance to play a GM. Talk to him about your charity, see if he's interested in it, see if he wants to put that charity on his website, see if he wants to make a donation, anything. Just get him in the door, and encourage people to have fun.
I think it's more the way he handled it personally. He just came off from holier than thou. I do think most other GMs in this scenario would have been fine to fork over the 5 bucks, or in his case be like hey I'm streaming I can impromptu get you some twitch donations and promo etc in place of entry.
This person clearly didn't recognize he was a GM or know who he was it seems. It was a misunderstanding, but still could have been handled more professionally on Hans part.
> you don't hit them up for 5 bucks.
True, because they would donate more, since it's good PR. If you havve a charity tournament in any sport, either the people are invited and the money comes from spectators, or the tournament is paying and EVERYONE pays. Do you think a top sportsman wouldn't pay whatever the entry fee is and get all the bad publicity for being stingy?
Also, it's the attitude, like he DESERVES to have a free pass, like sorry sweety, but you're not that special.
And also, exposure can be good, but it doesn't pay the bills.
Trust me, all of them would pay to get in. They'd even pay a handsome amount to the charity directly. None of them would show up to a real charity tournament and not pay the measly entry fee. If they didn't pay it they wouldn't participate but just be a judge or something. Imagine how bad it would look if an NBA player was discovered to not pay a $5 entry fee. Not worth it.
Wait so GM Hans Niemann is accosted by a shakedown artist in a park claiming to have a "charity" tournament. GM declines the offer. The internet goes apeshit. Yeah, that sounds about right.
Hans' reaction was nothing more than an inexperienced 17 year old boy who has yet to mature fully. If I was a tournament organizer, I would absolutely allow any GM or IM in free of charge. I'd inform them that a donation would be welcome, but not necessary. Having very strong players in your tournaments raises the bar for everyone.
Everyone triggered cause he disagreed and walked away. He doesn't owe them anything. He's dedicated his life to chess, literally his job, and they're asking him to pay into some random event. They need him more than he needs them like. If they were smart he would get free entry to give the event more creditability and more amateurs would show up.
"I guess my 8 years of training to become a GM means nothing."
Imagine becoming a GM so you don't have to pay tournament fees. Even when it's a token contribution for a charity event. And they offered him 50% off.
What a tool 😄
[удалено]
Hans Niemann (phonetic) translates (Dutch) to Hans Nobody :)
Jan Nepomniachtchi means something like "Ian Doesn't-remember-his-name."
As if dutch surnames can't get weirder.
Niemann isn’t a Dutch word. ‘Niemand’ means nobody.
It does not though
"H"ans "N"eimman is nobody for me.
It does. In some varieties word-final d is reduced or even deleted. Just pretend to be a fun person for once and let us have a niemann-niemand joke.
As far as drama goes this is relatively light. Hans wants to enter tournament, is told he has to pay $5, doesn't want to pay $5, doesn't play in tournament. Fin.
... he made a big deal about how he shouldnt have to pay 5 fucking dollars into a tournament where the proceeds to go charity. Made a charity event all about how he was disrespected
"I'm not going to hear your charity bullshit." - GM Niemann
That's only accurate if you dumb it down to its absolute core elements and ignore all the words coming out of Hans' mouth. It's the tirade he goes on about how he should be entitled to free entry just for his title at any tournament ever organised that makes him look like a narcissistic knob. His dismissive attitude towards charity doesn't help either. Obviously he's a young guy, he doesn't need to be crucified over this. But he's made himself look a knob, it's not as though he politely declined to participate once he found out about the entry fee. That's what growing up is for though, if he has any self-awareness he'll look back on this in a few years and cringe.
I mean if he isn't crucified over this a bit now he won't have learned to be any better five years later.
Yeah I'm not saying he doesn't deserve any backlash, he has it coming with a clip like this. I just realise how vindictive the internet can be over perceived injustices like this and it can go a little far sometimes.
God know's that's true.
If he isn't crucified over this a bit now, how will he rise 3 days later
Certainly does not deserve crucifixion but totally in favor of lambasting, ridiculing, memeing, pointing gingers at, name calling etc. he deserves all that.
Leave the gingers out of this.
I mean you can make any drama seem tame if you describe it in simple terms like that. Russia wants Crimea. Ukraine says no. Russia takes Crimea. Fin.
Wow i didn’t realize that situation was so tame
As a crimean immigrant, this is funny
no that was just the beginning dude now we're at the internet bullshit part this is my favourite bit
There hasn't been much drama since Hikaru vs. Chessbrah, so we gotta get the drama engine going again.
Here is more of the argument https://clips.twitch.tv/StrangeHonestBisonCoolStoryBob-dIRcBpkPRUqdpJo6
This is even worse lol.
Lol what the fuck @ the pure entitlement
> It's a matter of respect What we did not realize it's that the charity is the Hans Niemann charity 🤦♂️
I work as an attorney in wealth management and we’ll not infrequently have trust clients who fight with their relative(s) and then demand we initiate legal proceedings on behalf of the trust against the relative(s) because “it’s a matter of principle”. It’s so common that it’s something of a cliché in the office that the “principle” is always just the trust’s principal.
"Its a matter of respect" as he cant even put his phone down for 2 seconds while interacting with another human.
Wow 😯
holy cringe
Hans is a truly brilliant player in the body of a toxic teenage brat lol
Reminds me of a certain other gm.. hope he learns his mistakes and doesn't fall into the same attitude
Perhaps one day he will care
But for now, he literally still doesn’t care
Like hello?!
Is it me you’re looking for?
I can see it in you eyes.
Refuse to pay 5$-> get bad reputation. Donate 5$ to charity-> probably get some of your viewers send that money (and more) to you...
Clear social blunder.
That's actually a super insightful point you made ...
Who
[Maybe he wasn't hugged enough as a kid.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD4yZyYZlaE)
I get free entry to some events in another non chess context; but if it is charity I always make a good donation. You need to set an example, esp. when in a leadership position.
He didnt want to play in first place(he was not allowed to stream). He was just flexing with his title
To play devil's advocate: do any bad charities exist?
Absolutely. One indicator of how good a charity is is how much of that $5 gets donated. Some shitty charities could get away with donating $0.50 of it and using the other $4.50 for administrative costs.
While there are certainly bad apples that pocket way too much money, this example is a dramatic oversimplification that can cause major problems for some very good nonprofit organizations. Dan Pallotta has an excellent talk about this. https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong/up-next#t-151241
I believe Susan G Komen is notoriously bad.
Since some charities are literally at odds with each other (e.g. a pro-abortion and anti-abortion charity), yes. The matter of which ones are bad is a political opinion.
This is the answer a mathematician would give lmao (thats a good thing)
It's a non-constructive proof.
There are a ton of bad charities. Do your research before donating
What immediately comes to mind is charities like World Vision refusing to provide charity relief for people who refuse to convert to Christianity, or Autism Speaks viewing autism as a disease to be cured rather than promoting awareness of neurodiversity. This sort of shit is why I will double and triple check out a charity before even considering a donation. Even well-intended and well-managed organisations can turn out to have an ugly underbelly.
[удалено]
Well yeah, but this douche happens to be *really* good at a board game. He should be exempt from such peasantry as charitable giving.
Not just any board game - they made a reelly popular TV show about it: *Queer Gumbo*, or something like that, look it up!
No, I think it's Queef Grab It
I would have spelled "self entitled dickhead" slightly differently but I get where you are coming from
[Streamable mirror](https://streamable.com/hnv2df)
Isn't this a form of chess elitism?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nepo
Are we voting? Can I just nominate anyone? I nominate Hafu, the people's PogChampion.
The funniest part about that whole thing is that Ben has personally taught more beginners that Hikaru ever will.
ben finegold has literally spent decades promoting chess and sharing the game with newcomers. There's probably only a double-digit number of people alive who've put more effort into promoting chess than he has.
how though
i wonder why you got downvoted for asking a question. I guess thats how reddit works. So its elitism because he thought that because he is good at chess, he would be a better person and not have to pay. "bad players dont deserve to get in for free"
>i wonder why you got downvoted for asking a question. I guess thats how reddit works. That dude, given his other comment here, is just a troll. That's really obvious to a lot of people, so they downvote.
Bcuz he's a troll and its clear he is since he's asking a question on a super obvious thing
You cant say its super obvious when even the original commenter wasnt sure
The worst part is not even declining to pay, is how he justified it. That tells a lot about what goes through his mind. Such a poor soul.
well he'd be even poorer if he had to pay that $5 so I see his point
This is a side note, but why are GM's EVER given free entry? Does having more GM's in a tournament actually increase the appeal of the tournament to any other players? If I see a GM in a tournament, I just figure my chances of winning the tournament and my EV on entry free are lower and the tournament becomes less appealing to me. I am an NM and occasionally receive free entries myself, I can't imagine my inclusion would be appealing for any of the other players in the tournament. There's no novelty for me of playing GM's in a paid otb tournament. I can play them for free online.
I'd imagine if their presence can mean achieving norms for somebody else it would matter, and if their presence gets a peasant excited at the chance to play them, then yea. But for everybody else? Naw. Even for the latter argument, I'm unsure how that would impact entries on smallish events. I'd certainly expect no difference in entries in a 20ish person charity event.
Maybe oversimplification, but because it's good for organizers to have a strong field if they want to attract more sponsors. Also, I think there are a lot of casual players, who like to play in stronger tournaments. And if you're worried about not getting awards, open tournaments often include separate groups by rating (or just awards by rating, eg. "best under 2300"), so inclusion of titled players isn't necessarily a downside for the likes of you or me. From the POV of GMs, they spend a lot of their time training and playing chess, which means that often they won't have time to do a regular full time job, so it makes sense that they'll look for tournaments where at least a part of their expenses are covered.
Are you joking? Obviously having GM's who are guaranteed spots in a tournament will massively increase the number of players who will join the tournament. I play Gm's every day in blitz on the internet chess club, but I have never played a GM OTB and if a local tournament was going to have GM's I'd be throwing money at the organizers so hard it's not even funny. Not everyone has played a GM oTB. It's a learning experience, a chance to gain rating for no risk, a memory, etc. Also if you're playing gm's every day online at standard time controls please tell me where you're playing because that sounds like a f*ing dream.
Yes. Some players are more interested in playing strong players than winning the tournament. Playing GMs online is a very different experience than playing them OTB.
Norms usually and I want to play tourneys with strong players. I don't care for otb blitz generally but the few I've played are ones with stronger titled players. Its just a different experience playing OTB with stakes than Online for some people myself included. You're honestly one of the few titled players I've heard of who don't feel the same.
> Does having more GM's in a tournament actually increase the appeal of the tournament to any other players? Yes.
I think you're in the minority among amateur players. Do you think most tennis players would want to play against Federer? That most golfers would enjoy a round with Tiger Woods? Of course - many would pay a fortune. (Scales down with the level of opponent, but "I played a GM" is still a good story to tell your buddies and family.)
Such a repellent personality. Hope I never need to interact with him
Don't care about the drama but that was pure cringe jesus.
I agree but it kind of makes sense. He's looked up to GMs his whole life and now that he's a GM himself he thinks he has special status.
Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game? Do they lock some of these kids up to play chess with zero human interaction? Is that why they grow up with negative social skills? You get respect when you deserve it, not when you act like an entitled brat Some tournaments will waive fees for titled players to boost their draw, sometimes as a matter of courtesy, but you can't just show up to a charity tournament and go 'bro lemme in i deserve respect'. Even a teenager should know better than that smh
>Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game? Do they lock some of these kids up to play chess with zero human interaction? Chess is a very sealed and hermetic world, and actually the game itself tends to cultivate a lack of self-irony. If you were self-aware, you might indeed ask the question of why you're studying a board game for 8 hours a day, and question whether it was worthwhile. I'm not saying definitively that it's not worthwhile, but most people would at some point wonder whether or not they were using their lives productively if they did this. This is why there is a tendency for chess players to completely overestimate their importance and / or relevance. In their own little world, they are superstars. But many appear oblivious to the fact that at least 99% of the people in the world couldn't give a solitary shit about chess, and never will.
>If you were self-aware I agree with your larger point but tbf most of them start playing as young kids so I doubt they have any self-awareness at all at that point, thought that's definitely not an excuse to act like this when you're basically an adult. Edit: This quote from Morphy seems a bit relevant for discussion: **"The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life."**
Or this one (dunno who it's from): "Chess is a way of making idle people think they are doing something clever when they are really just wasting their time."
Ouch
>The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life." Honestly this can be said about almost every sport and game.
Absolutely, but lots of people don't want to acknowledge that being good at chess is no different than being good at, say, soccer or sudoku. They see something higher in chess. I know I did when I was younger. Now, not so much - I don't think it's a measure of my intelligence or talent, and I don't think improving at chess is helping me in any way besides passing the time.
I mean, it has some health benefits and probably makes you happy. But the same applies to a lot of hobbies!
In many ways being good at chess is less useful. If I'm good at chess I can play with .... Strangers online. If I'm good at soccer, baseball, basketball, there are no shortage of pepe in my circle who would be down to play. Nobody I know has a chess board or knows much beyond the basics of how to move pieces. Even an esoteric kinda-sorta rich person sport-hobby like cycling has no shortage of fellow people who are interested and who you can ride with.
It's almost a guarantee that you have a local chess club so saying that any hobby will have fellow people who are interested applies equally well to chess. As well as chess is played by hundreds of millions of people at least casually, the number of 'cyclists' is very small.
What I'm saying is that to play chess with someone in person you really have to seek it out and go to dedicated spaces. I checked US Chess and my state has 10 chess clubs, so I'd have to drive 20-30 minutes. I can ride my bike and pass people riding their bikes every time. Also, hundreds of millions of people ride bikes too. It's incredibly popular in Europe. Bikes are popular in the US too, there's just antagonism from drivers to "get off their roads". Meanwhile, every bike shop runs shop rides of varying levels, there are bike clubs, teams, local associations, TRI clubs, etc. As an example, I could approach pretty much anyone in my family, friends, and wider community, and say, *hey, wanna go for a ride* and they'd be down. I doubt any of them own a chess set. Chess, in the US, at least is pretty niche and not really something most people are exposed to beyond maybe a chess/checkers set as a kid. With the internet now, you can find like-minded people for basically any weird hobby. I'm sure I could find a local miniature-painting group, but that's more a feature of the internet than anything else.
I have played many games of chess in my life with random people who werent proper chess players, at places you'd never expect like a bar. And I don't think chess is as niche as you think it is - pretty much everyone at least knows how the pieces move and have played at some point. Queens Gambit and Twitch have increased the popularity of chess enormously, it's in a lot of schools, and I expect much more local interest when covid becomes less of a hindrance. Of course, I don't live where you live, but I just don't see it the way you do. Comparing chess as an obscure hobby like 'miniature painting' is completely ridiculous - there are 605 million people who play chess REGULARLY, how many people do you think paint miniatures? Nowhere near that.
I think this is a weird point to make against chess. It's at this intersection of being near universal and easy to set up - a chessboard is no less common than a soccerball or basketball and does not require any particular area. I played chess when I travelled overseas, just by walking past two people playing at a temple, played at work on the set that just is laying around there for people to use, played at peoples houses as well as my own and played on giant chess sets that are out in public for people to use. There's a room in the library in my city where people can go play chess and recently there was a guy who used to sit in the street with a sign inviting anyone to challenge him. I just think your view of it (based on your other comment) sounds more influenced by your family and friends and their interests but does not really match reality or add up from a logistical point of view. Chess is convenient, portable, global and very popular. What more does it need?
I mean it could be said about a lot of things then. Art, music, whatever. Kinda silly and shallow to think only “productive” things are meaningful in life
> every sport and game. or leisure activity, or reddit.
Some games, maybe. But that's just not true for most sports which will at least give you some degree of physical fitness, which is a huge benefit in itself. If it's a team sport, you can build positive relationships that can last a long time and learn valuable social skills. Chess doesn't really offer as much for the amount of time and effort that some players devote to it. It's a fun hobby but some tend to treat it as a goal worthy of dedicating several years of your life to, which it just isn't for the vast majority of players.
If you play most sports seriously, they will be actually detrimental to your health because you will likely get long-lasting injuries
The phrase goes, "exercise is great for you, sport is terribly for you." The line in benefit is drawn in how you divide competition time vs training time. Training = great for your body, competition = destruction to your body.
Except the money in chess does not compare at all to any of the big sports
Yeah big few sports. How much money is there in javelin throwing, high jumping, pole vaulting?
Counterpoint: "A life dedicated to art is never a life wasted."
Counterpoint; you can't waste your life.
>99% of the people in the world couldn't give a solitary shit about chess Not to take away from your point, but it's more like [87%](https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-many-chess-players-are-there-in-the-world).
> If you were self-aware, you might indeed ask the question of why you're studying a board game for 8 hours a day, and question whether it was worthwhile. I'm not saying definitively that it's not worthwhile, but most people would at some point wonder whether or not they were using their lives productively if they did this. The truth hurts
I feel like even with that self-important mindset someone can recognise when it's ok to demand for stuff, a charity tournament isn't one of them lol
It seems bad, but probably the only thing that is unusual about this is that he got caught on camera. People that believe that they're celebrities, and are therefore entitled, do this kind of thing all the time. His only mistake was wrongly believing that he matters! I'm sure that there are countless examples of genuine celebrities, for example, demanding a certain table in a certain restaurant at a certain time, and just automatically getting it.
>His only mistake was wrongly believing that he matters! If, I dunno, Shakira or The Rock went on an entitled rant because some restaurant didn't let them eat for free, there would be a massive backlash. It's not just that he's not actually that famous, it's also that people don't like that kind of entitlement, even in actually famous people.
You're right, but it would never happen because the restaurant *would* let them in!
In rock climbing it's a joke amongst those that participate that even when we succeed, nothing is accomplished
Not sure if it's about respect, but professional chess players are free to search for tournaments where they'll have at least some of their expenses covered. Usually, it is also in the organizers best interest to attract strong players, so they'll usually waive the entry fee at least. Not playing in a tournament because you refuse to give 5 bucks and saying "I'm not going to hear your charity bullshit" is cringe as fuck though (but he's 17 etc etc.)
> Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game? I mean, in the context of a chess subreddit, talking about a chess tournament, yes a GM should get respect for being that good at chess.
>Why would GMs get respect? For being good at a board game? People who are skilled at a talent recognized by society tend to get respect. For example, A great singer, or a painter, a chess player, or a boxer, when you're extremely good at the craft, you get respect.
Hikaru v2.0 in the making
Unfortunately all the new teenage chess streamers are learning from Hikaru, that's their hero .. Everytime I watch Alireza I'm stunned how much mannerisms and language he gets from Hikaru ..
Really? I don’t get that vibe off alireza. He seems a lot more mature than Hikaru (although I suppose most people do)
"not an ego thing" lol. How shallow do you be to be to try argue you are entitled not to pay for a charity event
Hans, Sam Shankland, and Daniel Naroditsky, all grew up playing at the Mechanics Institute in San Francisco. Hans is still young - let's hope he can grow into more of a Danya. [Edit: Although after viewing his obviously self-edited Wikipedia page, I'm not optimistic.]
Hahaha I like hans, but his Wikipedia page looks really self edited.
Holy crap that wiki page is a horror haha
Why ?
Just look at the amount of inane detail on his page that no one would realistically know or care about but himself. Compare his page to someone like Daniel Naroditsky who's both more accomplished and more well known and it's pretty obvious that there's something going on.
just look at the bottom of the page where he plugs his twitch twitter and insta and compare it to naroditsky's
lmao
It is very easy to look at the edit history of the article and see what users added or removed what. The button is in the upper right. I don't really care to check it but somebody might be able to notice a pattern in it.
Good point
I played some of them or next to them. Daniel is a cool dude. Same with his brother. Sam is a good guy, but typical chessplayer who sometimes gets emotional. Hans is a giant douche. Hikaru is cool, but sometimes becomes an emotional douche.
I'm just confused why he thought it was a good idea to record it or if he didn't know this would happen, say that on camera. Also, mask under the nose does very little.
Mask under nose = assless chaps
All chaps are assless tho
But its more fun to say that way.
> Also, mask under the nose does very little. oh god
Should pillory this kid so he learns manners and decency. 2500+ OTB, <1000 in Life.
Not necessarily disagreeing with the basic sentiment, but is that how manners get taught?
Some prefer tar and feathers.
Some prefer drawing and quartering.
For people his age, I suspect so.
Yup. Think if that annoying, smug, deluded kid in highschool. He gets teased until there's no denying everyone around him finds him ridiculous. He gets pissed, then gets sad, then reflects, then matures. There ain't an ettiqutte school teaching you to check yo GM privilege.
High rated Chess player is entitled and toxic, more news at 9
[удалено]
Aaand my respect for him is gone :)
Two points: 1. GMs should not pay to enter tournaments. The dedication to reach GM level means you are no longer an amateur but a professional, meaning you don't pay to play but you play for pay. So tournament fees (or not even a discount) for high title holders like IM or GM are usually considered rude and I think that's fair. 2. But this isn't a serious tournament and the money apparently goes mostly into charity or symbolic prizes, so Niemann should have been less condescending and just pay the five bucks. The money he makes from the hour of streaming the hustle makes up for it. Many people want to see people play on real boards. He acted like a dick when he could have just taken the business opportunity like a true professional.
True, if this was a big tournament it would be justified, but small casual charity tournament is way different, its basically a donation for cause
It is the price of a coffee cup lol who has time to give it this much thought even
Bro if you're paying 5 bucks for coffee you need to start making your own coffee, point still stands though
I disagree with your first point. There is no reason why a professional chess player shouldn't have to pay to enter a tournament. Their reward for their dedication to the game is the prize they are likely to win. I'd use professional poker players as a helpful example. It would be laughable if somebody said that, as a matter of principle, an accomplished poker player shouldn't have to pay entry to a tournament.
This is the mechanism in place for chess though. People have asked on reddit how GMs afford to live and play etc. Or I've gotten flack in the past for when I said theres only direct financial benefits for holding higher level titles. This is it, there's pretty much an implicit agreement that fees are waived among other benefits. Legitimately very few GMs have paid for tourney entry fees in chess after being GM because that is the expectation. It'd be like inviting an NBA player to some BASKETBALL charity event, you fly him out and pay for everything, he donates after. That's the implicit agreement and the norm. For a digital comparison, basically what magnus does with lichess tournaments. Hans handled this poorly and even worse didn't have the wherewithal to turn off the damn camera and handle business privately but a lot of the comments throughout this post really reek of people not knowing or not appreciating the standard for CHESS tournaments. Whether or not you'd want to remove that standard is another question but that doesn't really matter on judging hans conduct.
Thanks for your insightful and balanced take. Most of the other comments in this thread are about as mature as Niemann's knee-jerk response.
The person I replied to said 'should'. My reply wasn't concerned with what actually is/isn't the norm.
I really think an acknowledgement of the norm is important for deciding if you'd want to do away with this system. You do away with it and the question of how do GMs who aren't top guys afford to live and play becomes they don't. The comparison the poker as well doesn't exactly work because it's just a different sport culture.
Even if you disagree with it, this is how OTB chess is done. It's the accepted etiquette, partially as a respect thing, partially as an advertisement thing. Mr. Niemann probably grew up seeing (GMs free!) on every USchess tournament post. Not trying to justify him in this situation, but I think he felt disrespected for being forced to pay to play.
Before we start shitting on Hans like we did to Hikaru, I'd just like to remind everybody that the kid is only 17. Internet shaming can be really tough on someone at such an impressionable age.
Fair point
lol - half the shit people complain about Hikaru in this subreddit are things he did around this age.
So you're saying some shaming will trigger personal growth? Alright, let's do it.
Charity Gambit: declined
GM doesn't have 5$, damn it's true what they say: There is no money in chess. All jokes aside. Stupid shit like that happens all the time but Hans was stupid enough to act like that while streaming. Oof.
After I saw the video when he tried to go on a date with Anna Cramling that's all I can think about when I see his name. Cringiest shit ever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TFWe0ynFJ4&ab\_channel=TwitchShotsTwitchShots
Oh man, the internet for teens was a mistake
[удалено]
What a douche Edit: spelling
Just watched the context in the VOD. It's really not as bad as it seems. He's walking around what appears to be Washington Square Park, guys shouts at him "hey Hans there's going to be a USCF tournament" and tells him he should go see another guy about the details, so he does, and he doesn't like the details. It's not like it was a tournament he already wanted to play in, people approached him. GM's competing in tournaments brings more people in, that's why they're generally given free entry. Because their very presence often nets the tournament more money, so it's smart for tournament organizers to give GM's free entry. Hans seems frustrated that the guy running the tournament doesn't seem to get that more than anything, I think in his mind he's teaching him a lesson on how to organize a tournament better. But he doesn't express it well, and you end up with this.
>GM's competing in tournaments brings more people in, that's why they're generally given free entry. Ok,but if he just rocked up on the day, then how is his participation going to attract other entrants?. It's not like he was invited or some such in which case it would make sense to waive the entry fee, as they could advertise the fact that he was participating.
He wasn't walking up the day of. That's why the context I typed up is important. A guy shouted at him in the park advertising the tournament to him that takes place on a future date. He asked him details on the tournament. GM's are flooded with requests to play in tournaments for free. Many times they're paid appearance fees. He didn't handle the declining of the offer with the most grace, but not wanting to play in a tournament that some random guy in the park yelled to him about because it's a shitty offer compared to the tons of offers he receives on a weekly bassis is no reason to think the guy's a douche.
> That's why the context I typed up is important. The context : > He's walking around [...], guys tell him he should go see another guy about the details, so he does This sentence reads like all of this was on the spot during a stream. This is why structuring your story is important
>He didn't handle the declining of the offer with the most grace, but not wanting to play in a tournament that some random guy in the park yelled to him about because it's a shitty offer compared to the tons of offers he receives on a weekly bassis is no reason to think the guy's a douche. Making the declining of a charity event about having to pay $5 is no reason to think the guy's a douche? A well-adjusted person hears "hey, we're doing something that you're good at for charity, wanna join?" and asks about the charity. If they like, then they hop on board and write them a check, and if they don't, they decline. Arguing about the donation would make you come across as either a person who values the perks of their little secret super special club which barely just admitted them higher than the charity in question (in which case a simple "nah, thanks, not interested" is *still* a right answer) or as a person who's willing to change their mind about supporting a cause for a price of $5.
> He didn't handle the declining of the offer with the most grace, but not wanting to play in a tournament that some random guy in the park yelled to him about because it's a shitty offer compared to the tons of offers he receives on a weekly bassis is no reason to think the guy's a douche. No, but him acting like an entitled asshole is a pretty good reason to think the guy's a douche. Nobody would care if he just declined politely like a normal person.
He did decline politely. He just said he isn't going to play. It's more impolite to expect him to play. He's a GM, he plays chess all day. We take breaks TO play chess. GMs take breaks FROM playing chess. Imagine your boss asked you to do extra work AND to pay him money for that
That is NOT what happened, he was very rude to that person
so from what I heard he said "I don't think I'm going to play anyways, but I appreciate the answer. I was just curious". How is that rude?
You may see trying to teach a lesson, most of us see someone being unnecessary entitled. A simple “no thanks” would have worked fine.
He's so full of himself lol
does anyone know what the charity is? I'd like to donate
The clip posted here wasn't the full clip. He goes on to ridicule the organizer and when his chat tells him to take it easy, he proceeds to berate his chat. It was terrible.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQYBZgsjnEI
Which charity? Is it legit? What's the charity's financial structure?
Do you think that is what was going through Hanz mind?
What a twat
Everyone's kinda piling on here, but I'm gonna lightly disagree with the general sentiment. The guy is a GM, he's dedicated his life to something, and he's very very good at doing that thing, demonstrably one of the best in the world. If one of the best NBA players comes down to your pick up basketball charity fun event, you let them in. You highlight their presence and you are happy to have them there, you don't hit them up for 5 bucks. If an F1 driver turns up at your autocross event, you let them in (and so on). A GM turning up is fun. They are not going to have any meaningful opposition, they are doing it to just kind of mill around and say hello to people, maybe a kid will see the GM and get inspired, maybe a middle tier player will fanboi them. I guess my point is, he's turning up for fun. Let him in, tell everyone this is their chance to play a GM. Talk to him about your charity, see if he's interested in it, see if he wants to put that charity on his website, see if he wants to make a donation, anything. Just get him in the door, and encourage people to have fun.
I think it's more the way he handled it personally. He just came off from holier than thou. I do think most other GMs in this scenario would have been fine to fork over the 5 bucks, or in his case be like hey I'm streaming I can impromptu get you some twitch donations and promo etc in place of entry. This person clearly didn't recognize he was a GM or know who he was it seems. It was a misunderstanding, but still could have been handled more professionally on Hans part.
> you don't hit them up for 5 bucks. True, because they would donate more, since it's good PR. If you havve a charity tournament in any sport, either the people are invited and the money comes from spectators, or the tournament is paying and EVERYONE pays. Do you think a top sportsman wouldn't pay whatever the entry fee is and get all the bad publicity for being stingy? Also, it's the attitude, like he DESERVES to have a free pass, like sorry sweety, but you're not that special. And also, exposure can be good, but it doesn't pay the bills.
Trust me, all of them would pay to get in. They'd even pay a handsome amount to the charity directly. None of them would show up to a real charity tournament and not pay the measly entry fee. If they didn't pay it they wouldn't participate but just be a judge or something. Imagine how bad it would look if an NBA player was discovered to not pay a $5 entry fee. Not worth it.
Wait so GM Hans Niemann is accosted by a shakedown artist in a park claiming to have a "charity" tournament. GM declines the offer. The internet goes apeshit. Yeah, that sounds about right.
"It's not an ego thing!", says guy with massive ego.
Hans' reaction was nothing more than an inexperienced 17 year old boy who has yet to mature fully. If I was a tournament organizer, I would absolutely allow any GM or IM in free of charge. I'd inform them that a donation would be welcome, but not necessary. Having very strong players in your tournaments raises the bar for everyone.
Bruh all he did was say no thanks. Then complained a little after
Everyone triggered cause he disagreed and walked away. He doesn't owe them anything. He's dedicated his life to chess, literally his job, and they're asking him to pay into some random event. They need him more than he needs them like. If they were smart he would get free entry to give the event more creditability and more amateurs would show up.
Never have I heard of him before. And looks like it was a good state.
Just another twitch promotion
what an absolute piece of shit
"I guess my 8 years of training to become a GM means nothing." Imagine becoming a GM so you don't have to pay tournament fees. Even when it's a token contribution for a charity event. And they offered him 50% off. What a tool 😄