Author: KarinsDad
Date: 23:46:38 02/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 03, 1999 at 23:57:32, Reynolds Takata wrote: >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. Reynolds, I am going to respond to this post with a series of facts concerning the other posts mentioned. I will be putting in dates and times to illustrate that James and I were in the right with our statements and that you were incorrect. You may dispute this, but anyone who reads the posts will realize who stated the facts and who is trying to wizzyword. 1) James did not snip the post. The post he was refering to was in a different branch and he showed the pertinent portion of your post here. The two posts in question are: Feb 2 09:39:19 Re: Mutant Hiarcs 7 vs. GM x I have played Hiarcs enough to know that if i showed up at a tournament, and had to play Hiarcs well the result would not be a "natural result" because i wouldn't be playing as i normally play i would be doing all that i could to make the game a draw. Why, because that's the best i can do. Any attempt at winning results in Hiarcs7 beating me at the percentage that a GM should beat a player of my rating. AND Feb 1 19:18:54 GM shouldn't play H7 before match starts 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 The first post you claimed to have played it enough to get a draw at best. The second you claim that any 2200 master can beat H7 if that master prepared. You are a master, correct? >> >>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. 2) You have responded negatively in this post (I personally find the capitalized word above offensive and rude). Just like James sometimes ignores elements of a post (he did not in this case), you sometimes come off as arrogant. > 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?). 3) This is true. Your tone in that message was arrogant (or mocking as he put it) and I told James to take it as humor. >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. 4) Hello. This is a message board. If you did not wany any replies, you should not have posted. You should have Emailed. >If you would >note i was attempting to end the contact between Robertson and myself as to >maintain the quality of this group. 5) Not by posting the message you didn't. You outright ignored the facts and criticized James. Bad form old boy. > I would hope in the future that you take >the same view. 6) I respond to any post I feel like. I'm sure you do the same. > > Don't you hate it when someone >>successfully uses your own words against you? :) >> > >Yes don't you? 7) Actually, no. This was said in humor (note the smiley face). I'm man enough to admit when I contradict myself and have enough humor in life to realize that others can use words just as well and better than me, even against me. Learn to appreciate life and others more :) :) KarinsDad > >> >> >>>>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.