Author: Reynolds Takata
Date: 01:29:38 02/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 1999 at 02:46:38, KarinsDad wrote: >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. Yes they will and i'm glad that they will read it to see how an intentional deception was attempted by the person in question J.R (Hey there used to be a story line on T.V about "Who shot J.R?). Wizzyword?? Did you make that up all by yourself?
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.