Author: Don Dailey
Date: 08:22:43 04/29/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 1998 at 05:06:05, Amir Ban wrote: >On April 26, 1998 at 11:27:16, Don Dailey wrote: > >>>The existence of the first and only woman ranked in the first 100 is >>>EVIDENCE for the superiority of women in chess ? >>> >>>Is this 21st century logic ? >>> >>>Amir >> >>Amir, >> >>You made this statement up, designed it to be illogical, and then >>made it sound like it came from me. >> >>- Don > >?? > >I didn't make up any statement. You snipped it here, so readers should >go two steps up in the thread to find my quote, three steps up to find >where you wrote it. > >BTW, Judith Polgar does not compete in women's competitions. She thinks >they "don't count". > >Amir Hi Amir, I reread my posts and yours. I actually thought I had said she was in the top 10 and that you changed this to top 100 but I left that our for some reason. Anyway, I thought your post was designed to make it SEEM like I used this reasoning which is a bit unfair. Just to clarify, if 5 aliens came down to earth, studied chess for 1 year and 2 of them became top 10 players, I would probably feel quite comfortable with saying there was EVIDENCE that these aliens have a superiority in chess. You could always come back and say that this was only 2 out of their vast population of billions and proves nothing. I am claiming only evidence which is not proof. I only stated that I find it remarkable that percentage-wise, almost no women play chess seriously, and yet we find one in the top 10. This is proof of nothing and I never claimed it was. Evidence is not proof. So please don't make it sound like I claimed that I proved women are better because only one player made it in the top 100. - Don
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.