Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: GM shouldn't play H7 before match starts

Author: Reynolds Takata

Date: 20:57:32 02/03/99

Go up one level in this thread


On February 03, 1999 at 16:40:24, KarinsDad wrote:

>On February 03, 1999 at 16:06:25, Reynolds Takata wrote:
>
>>On February 02, 1999 at 20:24:27, James Robertson wrote:
>>
>>>On February 01, 1999 at 19:18:54, Reynolds Takata wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for trying to set up this match.
>>>>
>>>>However, i think it would be of most importance if the GM only agreed to look at
>>>>Hiarcs games, that have already been played.  The GM should have no access to
>>>>actually play it before the match.  After all Hiarcs will have absoloutely no
>>>>chance whatsoever to practice against the GM.  Him playing H7 before the match
>>>>is way too great of a handicap, i'd expect any 2200 master to beat H7
>>>
>>>This contradicts another of your posts. You said that if you (a master) try to
>>>win against H7 (and you admitted you have played it a lot), you lose with the
>>>same frequency that you would expect to lose to a GM. As a result, it seems you
>>>defeat your own argument.
>>>
>>
>>James stop snipping!! Now you know DAMN well that i said coming into a
>>tournament (swiss was being discussed) and planning against a comp for five
>>months are two different things.  Now i really wish you would just stay out of
>>my postings, in fact i wish you would just stop posting period, i perhaps should
>>be saying this in an e-mail but anyway i'm not going to ever look at another one
>>of your half braindead posts again so you have no need to write them, for me to
>>repsond too.
>
>
>Touchy, touchy Mr. Master. You cannot have it both ways. If your opinion (i'd
>expect any 2200 master to beat H7) does not match your own life experiences, how
>valid is the opinion?

I'm not having it both ways, and if J. Robetson hadn't snipped the post where he
did to cause a deception you would have realized that.
>
>Besides, James' post could not have been too far off the mark for you to respond
>that you would never read his posts again.

Your logic is highly flawed, don't imagine any tone on that statement that's not
there.  You neither hear my voice or see my face to know what tone it's in.  To
say that person (A)'s statement has some truth in it because  person  (B) reacts
to person (A) with pure disgust is faulty.  My disgust not only lies with
Robertsons attempt to cause deception, it starts from the very first post i ever
saw of Robertsons.  In wich he responds highly venomously, and in a matter of
fact attitude without tact while simultaneously making totally falacious
statements.  I responded to that post point by point, Robertson was left only to
say and i quote "Are you mocking me?" and nothing else.  I believe you yourself
responded to the post of Robertsons i just mentioned, telling him that yes he
does seem to not pay attention(how's that for using your own words?).
Regardless of all of this it would not be my behavior to jump into a dispute
between two parties that in no way concerns me as you have done.  If you would
note i was attempting to end the contact between Robertson and myself as to
maintain the quality of this group.  I would hope in the future that you take
the same view.

 Don't you hate it when someone
>successfully uses your own words against you? :)
>

Yes don't you?

>
>
>>>James
>>>
>>>P.S. I am assuming the cutoff between master and < master is 2200. Is this
>>>correct?

Master depends on where you are frequently. Here in the U.S however, I could be
2000 and a master as i have been awarded the "Original Life Master" title by
playing 300 games while maintaining a 2200 rating.



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.