Merry Christmas everyone,

This seems like a good time to list some of the embarassing chess situations
I've been in, well not too embarassing.


The first happened when I was setting up tables, boards, and equipment at my
club, this setting up being about the only perquisite of club organisation
in the UK. After a few minutes a blind man guided by his dog came in, the
guidedog found a chair for his master, it then very sensibly tucked itself
out of the way. However, what it had not allowed for was me, I still
managed to trip over the beast, going flying, but somehow managed to avoid
crashing into anyone. I then instinctively started apologising, only to
realise what I was apologising to.


A second embarassment occurred when a friend JQ and I traveled down to York
from London to play in a chess tournament. We had arranged to meet JQ's
brother and a friend of his, who, having travelled up from Wales, were also
playing in the tournament, at a restaurant in the Cathedral city, only the
two brothers knew each other. We did meet up and had an enjoyable meal, at
the end of which this friend insisted upon paying; the two brothers and I
protested, insisting that we go dutch, but the friend perservered,
insisting that he had recently made a lot of money and that this was a way
of celebrating, we eventually gave in. Later on in the evening we turned up
for the first round. To my horror I discovered that I had been paired
against this friend; UK organisers try to keep connecteded players, e.g.
from the same club, apart, but this was a relationship unknown to them. I
was White and also outgraded my opponent by roughly 50 BCF grading points,
I therefore felt that it might be perceived of as charity if I were to
offer a draw; the last thing I wanted to do was insult my opponent, I
therefore hit upon the scheme of asking JQ's brother if his friend would be
amenable to a draw offer, the brother promptly refused. My opponent and I
took it in turns to get up after playing a move and chatting to the
brother, whose opponent had not yet appeared, on each occasion I indicated
that a draw would be acceptable, and on each occasion the brother refused
to convey the offer, adding, for good measure, "I'm enjoying this". After
about half an hour we had reached an endgame characteristic of the
Dillworth Variation of the Open Lopez, this endgame being unclear and
anything but drawn; fortunately my opponent then offered a draw, which I
accepted instantly. Incidentally, I then had a disastrous tournament,
bringing up the rear of our quartet until the final round, so who was doing
whom a favour and dispensing charity?


Anyone else got any embarassing chess moments?


Regards,

Simon.

I new a player in Rekyavic once who kept complaining about the height of his
chair. In retrospect I just should have shut up and played.

Maybe not exactly what you were after but in my first game for the club I
just joined I had knights on adjacent squares. I thought long and hard about
my move but somehow the connection between brain and hand moved everything
one rank down so instead of playing Nc5 to e4 I played Nc6 to e5 leaving the
c5 knight en prise.

BTW if you take a closer look you might find the Subject of the OP
*embarrassing*.

chapman Billy wrote in
message ...
This seems like a good time to list some of the embarassing chess situations
I've been in, well not too embarassing....

Dear Simon,

Here are two nearly forgotten predictions from two 'great men':

'For what? A war with Japan! But why should there be a war with Japan?
I do not believe there is the slightest chance of it in our lifetime.'
--Winston Churchill (15 December 1924)

As Chancellor of the Exchequer, Churchill ridiculed the Admiralty's efforts
to prepare for a future war against Japan. Under strong pressure from the
United States, the British government declined to renew its treaty of alliance
with Japan, which led to a serious 'loss of face' among the Anglophiles in
the Japanese government and armed forces. (General Homma, who defeated
General MacArthur in the Philippines and was unjustly--for war crimes of
which Homma had no knowledge, according to historians, including MacArthur's
admiring biographer, William Manchester--executed in revenge by MacArthur
after the war, had been decorated for bravery by the British for fighting as a
Japanese officer attached to a British regiment during the First World War.)

When his war against Japan began in December 1941, perhaps Churchill could
have invoked an inverse 'Ten Year Rule' about his quotations. :-)

'Germans of future generations will honour Herr Hitler as a genius,
as a brave man, a matchless organiser and much more.'
--Mohandas Gandhi (22 June 1940)

'It is alarming and also nauseating to see Mr. Gandhi, a seditious Middle
Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well-known in the East,
striding half-naked up the steps of the viceregal palace...'
--Winston Churchill (1930, on Mohandas Gandhi)

'A post-dated cheque (on a crashing bank)'
--Mohandas Gandhi (on Churchill's offer of postwar Dominion status for India)

Both Winston Churchill and Mohandas Gandhi have been the subjects of copious
hagiography. My impression is that British writers tend to be more critical
than American writers of Churchill because the former tend to know more facts
than the latter do about him that may be criticised.

--Nick

(Nick) wrote in message om...

As Chancellor of the Exchequer, Churchill ridiculed the Admiralty's efforts
to prepare for a future war against Japan. Under strong pressure from the
United States, the British government declined to renew its treaty of alliance
with Japan, which led to a serious 'loss of face' among the Anglophiles in
the Japanese government and armed forces. (General Homma, who defeated
General MacArthur in the Philippines and was unjustly--for war crimes of
which Homma had no knowledge, according to historians, including MacArthur's
admiring biographer, William Manchester--executed in revenge by MacArthur
after the war, had been decorated for bravery by the British for fighting as a
Japanese officer attached to a British regiment during the First World War.)

--Nick

The war crimes trials were conducted by jurists from several nations.
MacArthur is not accountable for the judgment reached against Homma.

David Ames

Subject: Those embarassing moments (OT)

(Nick) wrote in message
. com...

As Chancellor of the Exchequer, Churchill ridiculed the Admiralty's efforts
to prepare for a future war against Japan. Under strong pressure from the
United States, the British government declined to renew its treaty of
alliance
with Japan, which led to a serious 'loss of face' among the Anglophiles in
the Japanese government and armed forces. (General Homma, who defeated
General MacArthur in the Philippines and was unjustly--for war crimes of
which Homma had no knowledge, according to historians, including
MacArthur's
admiring biographer, William Manchester--executed in revenge by MacArthur
after the war, had been decorated for bravery by the British for fighting
as a
Japanese officer attached to a British regiment during the First World
War.)

--Nick

The war crimes trials were conducted by jurists from several nations.
MacArthur is not accountable for the judgment reached against Homma.

David Ames


General Masaharu Homma was put on trial as a war criminal for offenses which
had occurred in the Philippines during his 14th Army command in 1942, namely,
the Bataan Death March and murders of Filipino and American prisoners.
There is no doubt that such crimes occurred, but evidence indicates that Homma
was personally ignorant of them, and certainly never ordered or condoned them.
It is my understanding that he was undone by certain criminal or hostile
elements on his own staff, who worked behind his back to subvert his
intentions. For his sloppy supervision and naive delegation of authority, while
beset by the chaos and confusion of battle, Homma paid with his life, the main
argument of the American military prosecution being that he should have always
known what was happening under his command. Upon conviction, his death sentence
was approved without hesitation by MacArthur, whom Homma had defeated in the
field. MacArthur was unrelenting in his castigation of Homma, whom he held
personally responsible for the atrocities of 1942.

I was not aware that the war crimes trial against Homma (in Manila) was
conducted by jurists from several nations. I thought it was a U.S. military
court. Homma had a U.S. defense counsel.

George Mirijanian

(Miriling) wrote in
message ...
(Nick) wrote in message
om...
(snipped)
As Chancellor of the Exchequer, Churchill ridiculed the Admiralty's efforts
to prepare for a future war against Japan. Under strong pressure from the
United States, the British government declined to renew its treaty of
alliance with Japan, which led to a serious 'loss of face' among the
Anglophiles in the Japanese government and armed forces. (General Homma,
who defeated General MacArthur in the Philippines and was unjustly--for
war crimes of which Homma had no knowledge, according to historians,
including MacArthur's admiring biographer, William Manchester--executed
in revenge by MacArthur after the war, had been decorated for bravery by
the British for fighting as a Japanese officer attached to a British
regiment during the First World War.)

General Masaharu Homma (also spelled 'Honma') (1887-1946) won a Military Cross
while attached to the East Lancashire Regiment during the First World War.
General Homma was held in strong political disfavour by Prime Minister Tojo.
After his 1942 campaign in the Philippines, General Homma's perceived too
liberal policies toward the people under Japanese military occupation provoked
his dismissal from command.

David Ames wrote:
The war crimes trials were conducted by jurists from several nations.

That was true for the International Military Tribunal for the Far East
(the official name for the 'Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal), but *not* for
General Homma's separate trial by a United States military court in Manila.

MacArthur is not accountable for the judgment reached against Homma.

General MacArthur had the power to commute General Homma's death sentence,
but (despite appeals from some British officers who had been Homma's friends)
he refused to do so.

General Masaharu Homma was put on trial as a war criminal for offenses which
had occurred in the Philippines during his 14th Army command in 1942, namely,
the Bataan Death March and murders of Filipino and American prisoners.
There is no doubt that such crimes occurred, but evidence indicates that Homma
was personally ignorant of them, and certainly never ordered or condoned them.
It is my understanding that he was undone by certain criminal or hostile
elements on his own staff, who worked behind his back to subvert his
intentions. For his sloppy supervision and naive delegation of authority,
while beset by the chaos and confusion of battle, Homma paid with his life,
the main argument of the American military prosecution being that he should
have always known what was happening under his command. Upon conviction, his
death sentence was approved without hesitation by MacArthur, whom Homma had
defeated in the field. MacArthur was unrelenting in his castigation of Homma,
whom he held personally responsible for the atrocities of 1942.

For further reading:
"A Trial of Generals: Homma, Yama****a, MacArthur" by Lawrence Taylor (1981)

I was not aware that the war crimes trial against Homma (in Manila)
was conducted by jurists from several nations. I thought it was a
U.S. military court. Homma had a U.S. defense counsel.

Dear Mr. Mirijanian,

You were correct. David Ames seems to have mistakenly assumed that
General Homma was tried by the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal.
The procedures at General Homma's trial were extremely biased in favour
of the prosecution, which provoked strong protests from the defence.

Here's a link about General Homma's appeal to the United States Supreme Court:
http://www.uscaselaw.com/us/327/759.html

"Hasty, revengeful action is not the American way....Today the lives of
Yama****a and Homma, leaders of enemy forces vanquished in the field of battle,
are taken *without regard to the due process of law*. There will be few to
protest. But tomorrow the precedent here established can be turned against
others. A procession of judicial lynchings without due process of law may
now follow...."
--United States Supreme Court Justice Murphy (11 February 1946)

--Nick

Nick wrote:
chapman Billy wrote:
This seems like a good time to list some of the embarassing chess
situations I've been in, well not too embarassing....

Here are two nearly forgotten predictions from two 'great men':

'For what? A war with Japan! But why should there be a war with Japan?
I do not believe there is the slightest chance of it in our lifetime.'
--Winston Churchill (15 December 1924)

'Germans of future generations will honour Herr Hitler as a genius,
as a brave man, a matchless organiser and much more.'
--Mohandas Gandhi (22 June 1940)

Both of those look like excruciatingly embarrassing chess situations, yes.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Disgusting Drink (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ refreshing juice beverage but it'll
turn your stomach!

David Richerby wrote in message
...
Nick wrote:
chapman Billy wrote:
This seems like a good time to list some of the embarassing chess
situations I've been in, well not too embarassing....

Here are two nearly forgotten predictions from two 'great men':

'For what? A war with Japan! But why should there be a war with Japan?
I do not believe there is the slightest chance of it in our lifetime.'
--Winston Churchill (15 December 1924)

'Germans of future generations will honour Herr Hitler as a genius,
as a brave man, a matchless organiser and much more.'
--Mohandas Gandhi (22 June 1940)

Both of those look like excruciatingly embarrassing chess situations, yes.

Mr. Richerby:

I clearly marked this thread as 'OT', which means 'Off Topic'.

If you persist in trolling me, then you should expect to have more
embarrassing moments.

--Nick

David Richerby wrote in message
...
Nick wrote:
chapman Billy wrote:
This seems like a good time to list some of the embarassing chess
situations I've been in, well not too embarassing....

Here are two nearly forgotten predictions from two 'great men':

'For what? A war with Japan! But why should there be a war with Japan?
I do not believe there is the slightest chance of it in our lifetime.'
--Winston Churchill (15 December 1924)

'Germans of future generations will honour Herr Hitler as a genius,
as a brave man, a matchless organiser and much more.'
--Mohandas Gandhi (22 June 1940)

Both of those look like excruciatingly embarrassing chess situations, yes.

Mr. Richerby:

I clearly marked this thread as 'OT', which means 'Off Topic'.

If you persist in trolling me, then you should expect to have more
embarrassing moments.

--Nick