Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:52:01 05/29/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 2004 at 09:43:47, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >On May 28, 2004 at 08:28:24, Albert Silver wrote: > >> >>>>>>Vincent suggested matche that will never happen because he wants money for it. >>>>>>I responded and suggested a match that can happen. >>>>> >>>>>This is not true. If hyatt would be just 51% sure he would win, he would do such >>>>>a match. But he is not even 1% sure. >>>> >>>>No >>>> >>>>hyatt refuse to bet for money as a principle. >>>>It is clear that you throw the bet idea only to avoid the match. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I dont see the relation of this declaration with all the topic of this thread. >>>Can you clarify what you are talking about? >> >>Looks pretty clear to me. >> >> Albert > > >What is the relevance and the relation? I dont see it. Explain it. Are you intentionally being obtuse or just stupid? Vincent said "This is not true. If hyatt would be just 51% sure he would win, he would do such a match. But he is not even 1% sure." That is complete bullshit. He has previously said that I would not attend a wccc because I didn't think I had a chance. Now Crafty's coming. Be interesting to see how he retracts his statement. Uri pointed out "hyatt refuse to bet for money as a principle. It is clear that you throw the bet idea only to avoid the match." That is _exactly_ what I told Vincent. I'll play him any time. Any day. Any time control. But I don't bet on chess games, particularly with someone as dishonest as he is... If you can't see Uri's "relevance" to what Vincent posted, you have a _real_ problem... Vincent is the one that continually changes the topic when he loses on one angle of attack. Not Uri. Not me... You have been hanging around Vincent too long. It appears to have had a negative influence on you...
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.