Tata Steel R7: Dubov forfeits, Carlsen leads

by Carlos Alberto Colodro
1/23/2022 – An eventful seventh round in Wijk aan Zee saw Daniil Dubov forfeiting his game against Anish Giri after declining to wear a mask during the game as requested by the organizers — someone in the Russian’s inner circle had tested positive for Covid-19. Later on, wins by Magnus Carlsen, Jorden van Foreest and Fabiano Caruana left the world champion in the sole lead. | Photo: Jurriaan Hoefsmit
Your personal chess trainer. Your toughest opponent. Your strongest ally.
FRITZ 20 is more than just a chess engine – it is a training revolution for ambitious players and professionals. Whether you are taking your first steps into the world of serious chess training, or already playing at tournament level, FRITZ 20 will help you train more efficiently, intelligently and individually than ever before. 

A matter of principle

One of the longest-running chess events in the world, the Tata Steel Tournament (previously known as Hoogovens and Corus) was organized every single year since 1938 — with only one exception, in 1945. The traditional event took place even in 2021, amid the pandemic. While last year only the Masters took place, this year both the Masters and Challengers are being played, with the amateur (open) tournaments cancelled on both occassions, naturally.

Of course, restrictions and sanitary measures must be in place during the pandemic. And, for the first time in the two Covid-affected events, an opponent lost by forfeit due to a disagreement regarding the rules. Daniil Dubov lost his round-7 encounter against Anish Giri after refusing to wear a mask during the game.

As the organizers informed, a member of Dubov’s inner circle tested positive for Covid-19, with the player himself testing negative to a quick-scan test — a PCR test was also performed, but the results were expected to arrive in the evening. In order to protect his opponent, the chief arbiter ordered the Russian to play wearing a face mask. Dubov refused, which led to him losing by forfeit.

A vigorous, assertive player, both on and off the board, Dubov indicated that his refusal was a matter of principle, as he told Jan Gustafsson that there was “a previous agreement that masks would not be required” during games. Dubov recently found himself in the middle of another controversy, as he faced criticism in Russia after working as Magnus Carlsen’s second at the 2021 World Championship, despite Carlsen’s rival being Russian.

Daniil Dubov

Daniil Dubov before the start of Friday’s sixth round | Photo: Lennart Ootes

Back-to-back wins for Carlsen

The first five rounds saw the world champion missing a few chances to score full points in games that would eventually end in draws. In the last two rounds, however, Carlsen has made up for lost opportunities by scoring back-to-back wins over Richard Rapport and Praggnanandhaa. These two wins have left him as the sole leader in the Masters.

Facing Pragg with black, the Norwegian had a slightly inferior position out of the opening. His teenage opponent faltered in the early middlegame though, giving Carlsen the upper hand.

 

Black is the one putting pressure on his opponent after 20...b4. The game continued 21.Na4 Nxd5, and here Pragg’s best chance according to the engines was to exchange queens with 22.Nxb6 Nxf4, entering an endgame a pawn down against the best player in the world (White will capture on e4 in the ensuing lines).

Understandably, the youngster rejected this alternative and kept the queens on the board by playing 22.Rxd5 — there followed 22...Qe6 23.Rad1

 

With the a4-knight far from the action, White will not be able to deal with Black’s coming threats — the e4-pawn is under attack, the rook will go to a8 to threaten a c4-push, the light-squared bishop might potentially be placed on the long diagonal, etcetera.

Carlsen never let go of the initiative and collected the full point before reaching the time control. The world champion will face Sam Shankland with black on Sunday.

 

Magnus Carlsen, Praggnanandhaa

Magnus Carlsen fist bumps Praggnanandhaa | Photo: Jurriaan Hoefsmit

Van Foreest and Caruana bounce back

The last two winners of the event also grabbed full points in round 7. Coincidentally, both Fabiano Caruana (tournament winner in 2020) and Jorden van Foreest (winner in 2021) came from losing on Friday. While both grandmasters have collected 3½ out of 7 points so far this year, the Dutchman has gone through more ups and downs, as he has won (and lost) three times throughout the event, while Caruana has one win and one loss to his name.

Van Foreest’s victory largely impacted the top of the standings table, as he took down former co-leader Vidit Gujrathi. The Indian faltered decisively on move 36.

 

White certainly is the one creating threats, but Black should be able to continue defending with the natural 36...Rf8. However, while in time trouble, Vidit erred with 36...Rc8, which gives way to a straightforward refutation — 37.d6 Qe6 38.Bf3 Nc5 39.Bd5 Qe5

 

The key point of the sequence is that after 40.Qxe5 fxe5, the rook infiltrates with 41.Rf7+, and 41...Kg6 is followed by 42.Rxd7 Nxd7 43.Be6

 

Vidit resigned. The whole line was almost forced, which proves that even top grandmasters blunder when the clock is dangerously ticking down.

Jorden van Foreest, Vidit Gujrathi

Jorden van Foreest took down former leader Vidit Gujrathi | Photo: Jurriaan Hoefsmit

Caruana’s victory over Jan-Krzysztof Duda came after 53 moves of a double-edged struggle in which both players missed chances to either win more quickly (Caruana) or equalize (Duda) — according to the engines, of course. It was a sharp, enjoyable chess battle from a human point of view! Caruana later confessed:

Things went wrong in the run-up to move 40 because I’m sure I had something much, much better than what I did — I don’t know exactly what, it’s all a bit of a blur now, but I’m sure that after move 40 he shouldn’t lose this position.

Go through Van Foreest and Caruana’s wins in the dynamic replayer below. You can try your own moves or check the engine’s analysis while replaying the game.

 

Round 7 results

 

Standings after round 7

 

All games - Round 7

 

Replay all the Masters’ games at Live.ChessBase.com

Nguyen in sole second place

While Arjun Erigaisi had a dominant first half of the event in the Challengers, it is still too early to relax for the Indian, as 20-year-old Czech grandmaster Thai Dai Van Nguyen is now a point behind the sole leader with six rounds to go. While Nguyen beat Marc’Andria Maurizzi on Saturday, Arjun had to work hard to hold a draw against second seed Rinat Jumabayev.

Lucas van Foreest, Jonas Buhl Bjerre, Daniel Dardha and Max Warmerdam also won in the seventh round. The latter scored his second consecutive win, as he defeated Polina Shuvalova with the black pieces. 

 

Shuvalova stubbornly defended her position an exchange down up to this point, but had to resign after 60...Kh7, as there is no effective way to deal with the threat of f6 and Rxh2. 

Max Warmerdam, Polina Shuvalova

Max Warmerdam beat Polina Shuvalova | Photo: Jurriaan Hoefsmit

Round 7 results

 

Standings after round 7

 

All games - Round 7

 

Replay all the Challengers’ games at Live.ChessBase.com

Links

Carlos Colodro is a Hispanic Philologist from Bolivia. He works as a freelance translator and writer since 2012. A lot of his work is done in chess-related texts, as the game is one of his biggest interests, along with literature and music.

Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

lajosarpad lajosarpad 2/4/2022 11:25
@arzi I also oppose the idea of mandatory vaccinations. Your body is your private property and it should be your decision whether you let a vaccine into it. However, while you are free to make that decision, it is not your freedom to decide whether other people are exposed to a potential infection. So, if there is a reasonable chance that you may infect others, then, as a consequence some events (like a chess tournament) might exclude you. The organizers at Wijk were lenient with Dubov, because at that point there was a reasonable chance that he may infect Giri. The only thing they asked him to do is to wear a mask until it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that he is not infected.

Omicron is less likely to bring you to hospital than other variants, we agreed about this all the time. What we disagreed about was something else. I argued that being less dangerous than other variants does not mean it's not dangerous. I also argued that we do not know about this illness enough to exclude the possibility of long-term undesirable consequences. And finally, I argued that if we let this illness to spread, then we create many opportunities for it to mutate into something else.

So, while I do not question your freedom to decide that you will not vaccinate, I consider that to be a bad decision. Bad decisions, by default are not illegal. In the meantime, in Finland the number of deceased people has raised to 2058. Will the current decision of Finland's decision-makers going to be a success? We'll see the numbers in two weeks. I wish you all the best of luck!
arzi arzi 2/3/2022 02:43
Today: "According to the analysis of the modeling group of THL (National Institute for Health and Welfare, Finland), omicron infection significantly reduces the number of hospital admissions in non-vaccinated people."

Prove my point in our previous discussions. End of story.
arzi arzi 2/3/2022 02:09
Lajosarpad, I may repeat myself, but I have never been against vaccination, only mandatory vaccination. I want to decide my own life myself. I do understand if vaccinations were mandatory because of the disease with which unvaccinated people infect other unvaccinated people. Unfortunately that is not the case. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated people will spread the infections. It doesn`t matter if the other one spread it less. Omicron is now the main variation in Finland because of its infectious and mild feature. The delta is now a thing of the past, and it is good thing. In a few weeks Finnish society is opened and restaurants, cinemas, etc. are opened to the public.
arzi arzi 2/3/2022 01:42
Even though infections in Finland have been almost tenfold because of omicron, patient places in intensive care units have decreased by about 30%.
arzi arzi 2/3/2022 01:34
Few days ago: "The use of a corona passport cannot be required now ... The Prime Minister of Finland, Sanna Marin, THL (Department of Health and Welfare) and the Ministry of Justice have assessed that the use of a passport would not be legally possible or epidemiologically justified."

One step to the right direction. No mandatory vaccination.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/31/2022 02:20
Jacob Woge this is not a choice between medical or political. This is a predominantly medical problem, which threatens with infection (or worse) every individual, decision makers need to cope with the situation somehow. It is true that coping with the situation on the decision-making level is political, but this is not independent of medical rationality. Countries aim to represent their citizens by protecting them from becoming infected, which is political of course. However, the fact that the experts agree with the policies and the policies are greatly inspired by the opinion of the experts, it is clear that the foundations of the policies are medical. Still, the decisions are made by mostly non-scientist politicians. However, taking the vaccines that were bought by taxpayer money and distributing it amongst non-citizens, who did not contribute with their tax money to the society would be treasonous. We would simply not pay taxes if the country would decide that we do not benefit of the services it should provide in return. Simple as that.
Jacob woge Jacob woge 1/30/2022 05:18
Disregarding the hyperbole, it seems that there is after all a common ground, namely the reference to decisions on this particular matter being based on political and economical arguments rather than medical foundation.
conillet conillet 1/29/2022 01:47
Groan - there are times when I wish this forum were moderated.....
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 07:15
@Jacob Woge

Every nation is to protect itself first. We do not have a global government (fortunately) and each nation struggles for its members first. I strongly disagree that while I pay large taxes each year, the country benefitting from my taxes would prioritize some random people at a different region of the globe from my tax money before I get a vaccine. If I pay for some services, then I expect those services to work.

"So, how many boosters do you need? Someone might need it more."

So, I should be generous. Have you donated all your money to the poor of the world yet? Have you eaten today? If so, why didn't you distribute your food amongst the beggars? Oh, by the way, it is absurd that you write your comment from a device, which is presumably yours when others do not have such a device.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 07:15
@arzi You effectively recommend the removing of a few defensive barriers because you consider COVID to be not dangerous. How many people claimed that they are not endangered by COVID because they are healthy. And they died due to it.

Nobody can (!) know at this point whether omicron raises the chance of getting cancer. There is no way to know it at this stage of the pandemic. You assume that it is not causing cancer (unless you do not care if the society would be full of people with cancer) and recommend letting the disease freely roam. I say that we do not know and we cannot know now. So I recommend prudence.

I did not advocate coercive measures (we do not live in a communist dictatorship, after all). I advocate that people should be adults and should take defensive measures if possible. If someone does not want to take protective measures, then I would like them to be left alone without any coersion. If you want to win the Darwin prize, then you should be free to do so. But you do not have the right of forcing others into your gamble. The tournament venue in Wijk is not the street. First of all, it is a closed space, second, the organizer is responsible for the health and safety of the players, so the organizer absolutely must make sure that nobody gets the disease at the tournament. This is why they asked Dubov to wear a mask. And Dubov has chosen to make a scandal, instead of respecting the will of the organizers. And he referred to "principles".

Even though I find your position counter-productive and your way of misrepresenting my points is reprehensible in my view, I do wish you the best. I hope you will never get the disease and if you do, then you will recover quickly. But I'm sure that knowingly choosing not to be vaccinated is a bad idea.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 07:15
@arzi "Many" is a vague term, I agree. I think that the 5 660 139 deaths in two years globally were too many. Way too many. Is it not many according to you? How many people should die in COVID until you decide that many people died? I'm genuinely curious. You acknowledged that the risk groups are in danger. We disagree about the young and healthy, so let's focus on the people we agree upon. So, how many people are above 60? According to statista.com, in Finland there were 1 297 780 between 60 - 79 years and 315 409 above 80. So, even according to you, there are 1 613 189 people in Finland who are endangered due to advanced age. And that's just a single risk factor. Is that many? According to me, yes. Especially in a country which has 5 530 000 people. And then there are the fat, the ones affected by auto-immune diseases, the people affected by cancer, parkinson, heart diseases, etc. and even smokers and hard-drinkers, especially those who have problems with their livers. I do not know how much are those who are of at least a risk group in Finland, but elder people alone consist 29.1715913% of the population, almost a third. If we would include the other members of risk groups, who happen to be younger, but risked due to some other condition (that they may or may not know about), this figure would raise well above 33%, maybe even above 50%. And you advocate that it's a good idea to let loose the virus into the society, advocate "only" the members of risked groups and whoever else wants a vaccine and then everything will be good. You do not know whether the disease would disappear for good and you do not know how many people would die due to your decision.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 07:14
@arzi We agree that COVID is contagious. Vaccination does not prevent the spreading of the disease. But it reduces 1. its chance and 2. its severity in most cases according to experts.

I'm not an expert about COVID. But I tend to trust the opinion of the experts. Merkely Béla is not "my" expert. He is a leading Hungarian expert. He said that omicron tends to show lesser symptoms, but it should be avoided if possible.

As about the researchers you have spoken about (without paper or researcher or journal reference), the point that you quoted from her is actually valid, COVID can be handled badly. I do not know more details about the interview you have mentioned and I cannot check them due to lack of references, so I cannot comment on the other details.

The 3.4% is global data about the mortality rate of the infected. It contains people from Finland, Hungary, Pakistan, you name it. A cold is not dangerous, because most people catching a cold will recover without long-term effects or hospitalization. COVID is different. Young and healthy people has died due to it, 3.4% total death rate is only the death rate, the serious, but nonlethal instances are not in this figure. In many countries the healthcare system crashed due to the many serious cases at the same time. Including young and healthy people, something, which did not happen due to a cold or flu season in the last few decades as far as I know. Technically one could die even due to a cold. But I don't see 5,660,139 deaths due to cold in the last two years.
Jacob woge Jacob woge 1/28/2022 04:41
While 1st world countries are aiming to (forcibly) vaccinate every single hoomin' being (except for toddlers), triply for starters, 3rd world countries are struggling to even safeguard their risk group.

I would argue this hogging of vaccines is akin with medical malpractice. It makes sense only politically.

Nationally, first focus was on risk groups. Internationally, it never was. As if virus respects state borders.

If vaccines were distributed sensibly throughout the global village, with focus exclusively on risk groups, instead of forcing it onto 1st world people who either don't want or don't need it, chances are the global death toll would be significantly reduced.

[ The mutative element might be reduced as well, but first, that is speculation, second, it is not necessarily a good thing. The more transmittable, the less dangerous. This is how they evolve. If HIV was transmitted by handshake, it could be just a passing fever - and we would probably never have got to witness the Short-Cheparinov incident. ]

Half a mil vaccines intended for kids 5-11 were eventually thrown out. Just 1 out of 5 parental couples agreed with state recommendations - which vary wildly from country to country. I am sure that batch would've been well spent elsewhere. Kids themselves of course, are at practically no risk, and parents realize that.

So, how many boosters do you need? Someone might need it more.

And - do you have a say at all?
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 03:04
Lajosarpad. See you next week. I do have a computer at home but I have stopped sitting at the computer on weekends. Life is too short and the omicron is behind the corner just waiting me to do the last mistake. Threatening image. Over the last four decades I `ve been sick almost 5 times, once a decade. Maybe omicron overpower me, hope not.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 02:44
Lajosarpad:"The number of casualties in Finland due to COVID means that people of that number died in Finland due to COVID. Since the figure that you have shared, the number of casualties raised more than 3x. Since I last checked, the Finnish figure was raised to 1,942. More deaths is precisely what I call a problem."

3x? New system? The problem is that every deaths that has happened after month or that way are put on the cause of the covid. They do not do any body examinations for the older people from rest home but they do mark them as the casualties of covid. Even though they may have died naturally. If some young man/woman/child dies then they will check reason of the death. A few weeks ago for a year the first under 20 year old citizen died because of the covid. Finland started to vaccinate children (under 12) in the beginning of January and the child who died belonged to the risk group.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 02:19
Lajosarpad:"@arzi "DO YOU KNOW ANY STATISTICS OF OMICRON IN CANCER?"

No. This is unkown currently. So we should be prudent until we find out more.

Globally 3.4% of COVID cases ended with a casualty. That means that a random person has 3.4% to die if he/she catches the disease."

So you just you throw me as an answer few possible unknown disease and make your point with them? Really?

Actually it is 5,64 million deaths around the world and the percentage, from the beginning 2% (30.12.2021). Those percentages depend on the country. USA is leading the statistics. India and Brasil are the next ones. Possibly India will bypass USA. Percentage depends on how those countries handle the epidemic. The prove that masks and other coercive measures work, China. That country must be the healthiest country in proportion to the population.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 01:57
Lajosarpad:"
So, let's apply elementary logic:
1. You claim that COVID is only dangerous to people belonging to a risk group
2. There are many who belong to a risk group

So, according to your claim, COVID is dangerous to many."

Question is how do you define many? When does certain number becomes many? Is it two? 2000? 2000 000? Does it mean that 1999 is not many but 2000 is? If you mean that all numbers over two is many then you are perfectly right. If you mean 2000 is many then you are also right. Is 2000 many if you can win a war against your biggest enemy? How about 200 000? How many people are in risk group? Many? Few? I guess it depends how are you doing those calculations and where? How do you define the risk group? Is it 10% of the population? 50%? 110%? You do the math and define me the number, what is many. Please?
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 01:42
Lajosarpad:"You misrepresent my point, as usual. (if you believe that you are right, then why do you need to resort to this kind of dishonest way of arguing?) I did not claim that all infectuous diseases are dangerous. A cold is not dangerous. COVID is. This is what I see from the data. If 3.4% dies from the infected, that means that if everyone catched the disease and no defense measures would be taken, then 272 000 000 people would die (I used 8 000 000 000 as the number of people in the world). How many people dies from the flu, which is a less serious disease? Far less, as pointed out earlier. And there are no lockdowns or other measures against the flu."

Actually, you made a false argument, once again. Dishonest way of arguing?"A cold is not dangerous." It may be dangerous for the people in the risk group. It does not have to be a covid risk group. Do you see the point? I have already given you statistics of Finland about deaths of common flu and covid. Some how you think that caring only for the risk groups means the same that defense measures would be taken to nobody? You count your numbers as if all the people around the world are from industrialized countries with good health care. Why don`t you use information of your country in your statistics? Hungary?
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 01:20
Lajosarpad: "@arzi Yesterday I have seen a video with an expert, Merkely Béla, who explained that knowingly catching the disease in order to get antibodies is insane. He also claimed that everyone should avoid the disease if possible by vaccination. He did not say that COVID is not dangerous. He is an expert of the field. You are presumably not. I know his name. I don't know yours. He has worked with COVID-infected people, treating them. He also leads researches about it. Did you?"

No, I`m not the expert, neither are you. Actually I also read about vaccinations from a science journal, last year, maybe last September, I don`t recall the name of researcher and the journal number. The magazine interviewed a researcher who is involved in covid research in Oxford. The interviewee seems to even be the leader of the group. She talked about wrong handling of the epidemic. Same thing I have already written to you. Did your expert tell you that covid is dangerous or did she tell its not-dangerous feature?
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 12:59
fgkdjlkag:@azri, what are you talking about? heart attacks and alcohol are not contagious diseases, so obviously have to be treated differently. It's not possible to prohibit heart attacks either.

No, they are not. It was a different perspective about mortality rates in Finland. Also I tried to put some "humor" when talking about hearth attacks and alcohol. How can you prohibit heart attacks? We already had a ban on alcohol between 1919.1932.
I wrote: "According to Statistics Finland, a total of 55,500 people died in Finland in 2020. However, the total mortality in relation to the population and age structure did not increase from the previous year."
This means that covid was not a particularly unique event in Finland. Still it is not if we look at the statistics. The number of dead did not bounce to heaven because of covid. Seasonal flu did disappear completely from the statistics. I bet that if you all take the same statistics from your own country you will see the same kind of information.
I think that no one here denies that covid / omicron is contagious. The most of us also know that vaccination does not prevent the spreading of the infections.

fgkdjlkag: "Also the idea that natural immunity from infection is stronger than vaccination is false. It depends on the specific disease and vaccine"
Are we talking about covid or some other disease? If so, you think that getting covid naturally does not give us as good resistance as attenuated and modified rna-virus? Interesting.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:40
@arzi Yesterday I have seen a video with an expert, Merkely Béla, who explained that knowingly catching the disease in order to get antibodies is insane. He also claimed that everyone should avoid the disease if possible by vaccination. He did not say that COVID is not dangerous. He is an expert of the field. You are presumably not. I know his name. I don't know yours. He has worked with COVID-infected people, treating them. He also leads researches about it. Did you?
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:40
@arzi "Vaccinations may also produce bad side effects, maybe."

True. This is why I waited with the vaccination for a while. It can still cause long-term side-effects, but at least the goal of the vaccine was to protect me. The goal of the virus is spreading, which is independent of my interests. So I trust vaccines much more than diseases.

"Infectious disease does not always mean, automatically, dangerous. That is your mistaken conclusion."

You misrepresent my point, as usual. (if you believe that you are right, then why do you need to resort to this kind of dishonest way of arguing?) I did not claim that all infectuous diseases are dangerous. A cold is not dangerous. COVID is. This is what I see from the data. If 3.4% dies from the infected, that means that if everyone catched the disease and no defense measures would be taken, then 272 000 000 people would die (I used 8 000 000 000 as the number of people in the world). How many people dies from the flu, which is a less serious disease? Far less, as pointed out earlier. And there are no lockdowns or other measures against the flu.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:39
@arzi Delta is currently overcompeted by omicron, we agree on that one. But it still exists.

"You still talk about "what might happen, maybe"."

Yes! Because reasonable people recognize potential dangers as well. I don't know whether a car comes when I cross the street, but I still look around, because a car MIGHT come. That might happen, maybe. Is it probable? Well, in unfrequented roads it's unprobable. But I still look around, because the consequences would be dire if I would carelessly cross the road. With COVID we need to be aware that viruses MIGHT cause cancer long-term. Do we know that for sure? No, of course. But, if it happens to be the case and we allow all the healthy young people to catch the disease because we assume it to be safe, then we betting with their lives on COVID not causing cancer. It is a highly irresponsible approach, similar to not looking around when crossing a road.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:39
@arzi "That is your conclusion, not mine. Don`t tell me what I really meant in my writings."

So, let's apply elementary logic:

1. You claim that COVID is only dangerous to people belonging to a risk group
2. There are many who belong to a risk group

So, according to your claim, COVID is dangerous to many.

"There are far fewer people at risk group than in the general population."

??? So, you claim that the total number of everyone, who is old OR fat OR facing auto-immune problems OR sick otherwise is far fewer than the general population? At least in Europe the majority of the countries has a relatively high average age. And that's a single factor.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:21
@arzi "DO YOU KNOW ANY STATISTICS OF OMICRON IN CANCER?"

No. This is unkown currently. So we should be prudent until we find out more.

Globally 3.4% of COVID cases ended with a casualty. That means that a random person has 3.4% to die if he/she catches the disease. This figure is significantly higher than the desirable 0%. Your chances are affected by your current health, age, stress level, environment and the current status of your immune system. One catching a cold and COVID at the same time has worse prospects if he/she would catch COVID only. So, it is reasonable to say that the disease is dangerous and precautions are advisable for any individual.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:21
@arzi The seriousness of an epidemic in a country depends on defense measures, the responsibility of the people living there and luck. Finland was not hit hard - yet. Let's hope it will never be hit hard. As about your arrogant remarks of how superior your country's defense measures were, I don't really care. We should avoid letting the disease loose anywhere.

"Any sickness may have severe short-term or long-term consequences! So what?"

I cannot imagine more important questions regarding an illness than the nature of its short-term and long-term consequences.

The swine flu turned out to be a false alarm. Maybe it was successfully contained in time. Maybe it was not as serious a problem. But COVID is a pandemic, which already killed millions in the two years since its appearance.

"You cannot prove that all sickness are 100% not dangerous or dangerous."

Around 2024 we will have statistical data about what happened with the health of people catching COVID and what happened to those who did not catch it. Then we will know more about long-term effects.

"I'd rather take covid to myself than some nasty side effect."

Good luck!
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:20
"Because I follow my own advice. Focus on the things you know better. "

Cheapo. We should be both truth-seeking. I do not care how much you know about Finland. We are speaking about Dubov's refusal to wear a mask and about COVID. When we speak about COVID, the potential of the danger is represented by the situation that arised in regions that were hit hard. One can research COVID on the South Pole, but he/she will not find out anything. Why? Because that region was not hit by it at all. The USA was hit hard. The loss of 902,140 is a figure which almost reaches 1/6 of the number of casualties in Auschwitz (6 million). So this is the magnitude. You speak about the population of the USA, noting that it is a bing country with lots of citizens. Europe is much larger. And it still cannot recover from the guilt of letting 6 000 000 innocents die. And you would advocate that the disease should be spread in the society and, if I understand, you recommend the vaccination for the risk group. Now let's ignore that this is precisely how mutants and variants appear, let's focus only on the current situation for now. What if you are wrong? What if the world follows your advice and spreads the disease everywhere, vaccinating the risk group. What if things get out of hand and healthy young people will die by the thousand? You assume that this would not happen. I do not know. But I do not want to find out.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:18
@arzi What 9/11 card did I use?! I have shown you that the death of 3 000+ people shaked the U.S.A. Now it has 30x that figure. And you think it's not a serious problem. You claim that I do not understand the figures I have presented. I'm fine with you believing it, honestly, I do not care about what you believe about me. I care about making sure that others, more responsible people that are reading our discussion understand that your position is bogus, it is conflicting with the opinion of the experts and it is irresponsible. Even one unnecessary death is too many. Yet, the idea that you argue for, namely, to let the disease spread would inevitably lead to the death of many people.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:16
@arzi "I`m against mandatory vaccinations which is targeted to whole population."

I'm also against it. I advocate vaccination even for healthy people, because it is infinitely better to avoid a disease than to catch it. But I never said that people should be saved against their will. No. You do not know vaccination? Fine. Don't take it. I wish you the best of luck. You are a free rider then, protected by the more responsible people around you. But you do not have the freedom to infect others. Wherever there is a potential that the higher risk caused by your lack of vaccination may result in the infection of others, it is a government's responsibility to protect others from you.

I did not claim that I'm a hero. Why do you misrepresent what I said?

I did not claim that I'm an expert about everything. In our discussion I am the one who relies on the opinion of the experts and you are the one who ignores it. You have a right to do so, but don't invert the role. At least if you have a drop of honor.

The number of casualties in Finland due to COVID means that people of that number died in Finland due to COVID. Since the figure that you have shared, the number of casualties raised more than 3x. Since I last checked, the Finnish figure was raised to 1,942. More deaths is precisely what I call a problem.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 12:15
@arzi indeed I do not know whether you are dishonest. But I'm fully convinced about it based on what you have shown here. You can call me whatever you want.

You disagree that COVID is dangerous, but you say that it is dangerous to the risk groups. So it IS dangerous to many, even according to you. I of course disagree that COVID is only dangerous to the risk groups. I have heard the experts say otherwise and have heard about healthy people dying from it. So I strongly disagree with your position. But, even if we consider your position, it is logical to conclude that many thousands would die if the disease would be let loose. Maybe you believe that you are strong and healthy. Many believed that. They are no longer with us. WHO says that the flu claims 290 000 - 650 000 lives every year worldwide. So the figure is around 500 000 (I'm being generous here with you). 5 658 352 people died so far in the two years of COVID pandemic. This means that COVID claims 5x as many lives as the flu each year. It also causes long-term and medium-turn side effects, like losing the sense of smell, difficulty in breathing, etc. The flu and COVID are not of the same magnitude. We do not know about really long-time effects of COVID, spanning in 5+ years. We know a lot about the flu and the cold. We know much less about COVID.

"and mandatory vaccinations should also target on them"

I never claimed that mandatory vaccinations should be needed. You - as usual - misrepresent my point and then attack your own misrepresentation.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 12:06
Lajosarpad:"arzi:NOT DANGEROUS to normally healthy man, woman or child."

That's a shortsighted and egoistic point of view. Shortsighted, because you do not see that a highly
infectuous disease can become extremely dangerous any time, even if it is less dangerous in a point of
time and shortsighted, because healthy people were killed in many cases, especially by the delta variant.
And it is egoistic, because, assuming (maybe wrongly) that it's not dangerous for healthy people, you advocate letting the disease spreading through the whole of society, which will inevitably lead in the death of many of the endangered, even if your assumption is correct. Advocating to let the disease spread and infect everyone is immoral, irresponsible and idiotic. For me an increased number of casualties is bad. Period."

You still talk about "what might happen, maybe". Vaccinations may also produce bad side effects, maybe. Infectious disease does not always mean, automatically, dangerous. That is your mistaken conclusion. I wouldn`t say your conclusion is untruthful, immoral, idiotic, irresponsible or dishonest like you would probably use from my writings? What is the reason of increased number of casualties? Is it possible that people in risk group were not sufficiently protected? They did not get the vaccinations fast enough? I think we both know that before vaccinations the only way to protect people in the risk group and also in the whole population were face masks, hand hygiene and protection gloves. After vaccinations of the risk group we don`t need to protect the whole population any more.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 11:33
Lajosarpad:"You earlier stated that it's not dangerous to healthy people. So, even according to you it is dangerous to
many. So, in the above your statement essentially means that omicron is okay to spread, because only the endangered people would die."

That is your conclusion, not mine. Don`t tell me what I really meant in my writings. Only, the endangered people would NOT die because all the power put in vaccination event has targetted on them. There are far fewer people at risk group than in the general population. Vaccination will happen faster when it is targetted to the right group.

Lajosarpad: "Also, evolution is not a linear model. Omicron is a variant, but other variants also exist. The Delta variant has not disappeared. It is outcompeted by the more infectuous omicron variant. So, while the delta variant still exists, the omicron is more frequent. So, what if we let the disease spread? Maybe the omicron or the delta or another variant will mutate into a highly infectuous and highly lethal new variant."

Actually there are proofs that the delta variant(s) are disappearing or at least in decline, some of those older covid variants may even die out because of omicron. Yes, omicron has also now a new variant, at least one. But still it is milder than delta variation.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 10:01
Lajosarpad:"Malaria is a disease caused by a parasite. Earlier you have said we should not speak about bacterial
infections. Now, all of a sudden it is okay to speak about parasite-caused diseases? Why are you
shifting your goalposts?
A dangerous disease is a disease which can cause you severe consequences, like death, paralysis, etc.
without medical care. If COVID was not a dangerous disease, then the level of healthcare would be
irrelevant, because people would not even need to go to the hospital"

Yes, but covid is not dangerous disease. Risk group people may need the medical care because covid is dangerous to them. The plague and malaria are dangerous. Also ebola is dangerous but its deadly feature prevents global spreading.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 09:50
Lajosarpad:""It is dangerous ONLY for the risk group."

By "dangerous" I mean that it may have severe short-term or long-term consequences. Saying that it's not dangerous for those who are not of the risk group, as you claim, essentially means that does not have the potential of having severe short-term NOR long-term consequences. Can you cite the scientific paper which says that it was proven that omicron DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER long-term?"

Any sickness may have severe short-term or long-term consequences! So what? If you drive an accident by a car there may be some short-term or long-term consequences, even death. You may have a short-term or long-term consequences if you have a seasonal flu. Few years ago there were a swine flu, also in Finland. There was a vaccination at hand. It was not mandatory vaccination but people could have it if they wanted and many did take it. Unfortunately, the vaccine also produced nasty side effects, narcolepsy, to some people. You cannot produce the vaccine that is 100% well-functioning. Same is also in different sickness. You cannot prove that all sickness are 100% not dangerous or dangerous. There are always people who react badly on medicines or mild sicknesses. I prefer to choose my medicine especially in mild diseases. I'd rather take covid to myself than some nasty side effect. I know my health status better.
Lajosarpad:" Can you cite the scientific paper which says that it was proven that omicron DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER long-term?"

When you shout your words it doesn`t mean that they are correct or logical. But I will follow your example. DO YOU KNOW ANY STATISTICS OF OMICRON IN CANCER? DO WE HAVE TO PROVE IN EVERY OTHER SICKNESS TOO THAT OMICRON DOES NOT CAUSE THEM? Really?
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 09:20
Lajosarpad:"It is true that you have addressed the USA since my remarks, but you started to speak about its healthcare problems, rather than the fact that almost 900 000 people died there due to the disease. So even when you mention the USA, you start to argue based on your leftist views about poor people. But it's irrelevant to the topic, because almost 900 000 people died there. So the disease is dangerous. Was 9/11 dangerous? Yes. It killed 3 000+ people. COVID killed almost 3 000 * the number of people killed by 9/11."

Actually I asked about USA health care. Have they acted right way? This character, ?, means at least in finnish language, a question mark. Leftist views? Why don`t you say communist view? You want to say that but you are too polite to use so rude meaning, right? When you gave me once again a number, 894,880, I just wanted you to put those numbers to the right perspective. Like the number 1894 you gave me. You are very eager to give numbers but you don`t seem to understand them? How many people live in USA? 330 million people? In Finland there are about 5.5 million. Previously I put some statistics of Finland, different causes of death. Some people use Hitler-card during the heated conversations but you used 9/11 -card. Maybe I should use "the Winter War of Finland in 1939-1940" -card where Soviet Union attacked Finland and no FREE country, like USA, came to our help? This is finnish humor so you don`t have to start new world war against the poor Finland and its citizens. Yep, I promised not to use humor in my writings but the promises shall be broken.

Lajosarpad:"Do we agree that Dubov should have been wearing that mask in that round?"
No, did he play? Disrespecful? No.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 08:32
Lajosarpad:"Since we do not live in a communist dictatorship, we can express our views. I'm openly stating that
I do not trust your honesty and I'm openly stating that it's my subjective view, which contains some
assumptions. If you want to prove that you are honest, then you will represent your position with far
less fallacies. If you do not care about what I think subjectively about your honesty, then you can
accept the fact that I disbelief in its presence."

Blaa, blaaa, blaaa. Same silly arguments. "Because I`m the hero of the FREE nation and we are not living in a communist dictatorship ... I have a right call you whatever comes to my mind. This is free world!" I think that even in communist country there are rules for insults, I don`t know. You should know that because you are probably expert on everything, on every areas of life. 42.

Lajosarpad: " And speaking with me as if I ever claimed that I know more about Finland than you is a final proof of your dishonesty in my view. So you have those two possible choices."

Actually you tried to prove your point throwing me figures of Finnish covid without checking, however, what the figures really meant. Maybe you should focus on the things you really know?

Lajosarpad:"I was not saying that you are ignoring "my" writings / events. I was saying that you focused on Finland, but not on the USA."

Of course. Because I follow my own advice. Focus on the things you know better.

Lajosarpad:"Finland's data somewhat supports your narrative, because the country was not hit very hard by the epidemic"

You know this what you say is bull sh...manure. Do you think that because we have so good defence in ice hockey we also have very good state borders preventing virus arrival in our country? How seriously the country is hit by covid depends on actions in that country. We acted better than USA, I guess, before we/you even had any vaccination to use.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 07:47
Lajosarpad:"So, people are dying of this disease, we can establish this fact. Epidemic handling is unnecessary
if the epidemic is not a serious problem. So, do we agree that COVID is a serious problem?..."

No, we do not agree. I have told you before that covid is dangerous for the risk groups only. That we do agree, right? It is serious problem for the risk groups. But serious problem to whole population? No, unless you agree that also seasonal flu, cold and cough, are serious problem to whole population and mandatory vaccinations should also target on them. Actually we should demand that all the different virus infections, bacterial disease ... should be treated by the mandatory vaccinations orders.

Let me make my point clear to you. I`m not against vaccinations. I recommend people to take vaccinations if they belong to risk group or they are afraid of the covid disease. I`m against mandatory vaccinations which is targeted to whole population.
arzi arzi 1/28/2022 07:24
Lajosarpad: "No, because your fallacies can be read by anyone here, so we have the factual basis that led me to
form that opinion. And, as I have explained earlier, I might be wrong. It is possible that you are
honest and you just do not know how to form an argument properly."
Let`s start from this sentence, shall we? It does not matter what you BELIEVE about me. Your believings are not the truth. They are just your "might be right, might be wrong" words.

"I might be wrong. It is possible that you are honest ...."

You don`t KNOW me and still you are using words like, dishonest, about me. If you don`t know me so why should you even start mention such a thing? That sentence was a cheap trick from you. Yes, my native language is not english but still you should select your words better. I do write better in finnish but it would be in vain between our conversation because you could not comprehend the beauty of the nuances in my language. You don`t have any factual basis about my honesty/dishonesty. If you insisted to say that again and again I would say you were egoistic liar, in my humble subjective opinion. But I don`t know you so I do not call you by any bad names/words. I hope same courtesy from you too.

Lajosarpad."Let me quote my third point, because it seems that you have missed that part when reading my comments:"

Actually I meant by my phrase that my counting ability contains only the first three digits, in numbers. My mistake. I did not know your ability understand humor, finnish humor. I promise I won`t use humor any more in our discussions.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 1/28/2022 02:46
@fgkdjlkag I believe the main impact of this pandemic is caused by the human factor. If all humans would be more prudent, not because being forced, just because they recognize their own interests and respect the interest of others at the same time, then this pandemic would have been much milder. This is of course not a reality, because some people severely underestimate the disease, which is their right, of course, but the problem is that they loudly advocate and advertise their egoistic and irresponsible approach to this issue.

Experts say that vaccination is better than the disease. Vaccinated people are less likely to catch the disease and even if they catch it, they will likely get through it with less severe symptoms.

In this case, Dubov was not asked to vaccinate, he was only asked to wear a mask until they figure out whether he is infected, with the PCR test hopefully confirming the rapid test's negative result.
fgkdjlkag fgkdjlkag 1/27/2022 04:37
Vaccines do not need to be mandated. The risk that one poses to others can be modeled and then economically incentivised. If someone had to pay more monetarily to not be vaccinated, it would affect numbers considerably. Private employers can also require vaccination because of the particularities of the job/environment. If a worker does not with to be vaccinated, let them get a job elsewhere.
Previous1234Next