My apologies for repeating myself but Google Groups failed to post my
last couple messages. I will be happy to withdraw as arbiter if Sam
has any objection whatsoever. There is no reason for me to recuse
myself absent such objection.

I note that Senior Tournament Director Larry Cohen has expressed an
interest in being a spectator. Perhaps Sam would prefer him to act as
arbiter. I would still be willing to give Sam a ride to Bill's office,
but I would be happy to find something else to do on Sunday.

Vince Hart




wrote:
MONEY

What a situation! The match "arbiter," Vinnie Hart, who has
threatened to try and put Sam in jail, assures us that Bill Brock, who
posts f-word headlines several times daily, will play fair in his
office. This assurance comes from a man who would volunteer to be an
arbiter in the first place in spite of the evident unfairness.

My advice to Sam: Be prepared for verbal abuse and possible physical
jostling when you get up from the board to stretch your legs.. YOU MUST
NOT LET
INTIMIDATION TO SHAKE YOUR GAME OR UNSETTLE YOUR TEMPER. EXPECT IT!

There is nothing in the match rules which prevents posting of
signage attacking you. If there is an audience, there will quite likely
be verbal attacks instigated by Mr. Brock in advance. Sam: I admire
your courage for walking into the lion's den. I understand why you are
doing it -- money.

But there is another way to view the situation. The 500 rode into
the valley of death willingly and bravely, but that did not make the
Charge either intelligent or the enemy praiseworthy. No gloryv
redounded on the enemy in such a slaughter, just as the German
machine-gunners claimed no glory at Loos.

The good news is that the odds are not so stacked against Sam as
they were against either the Light Brigade or the British tommies.
Overall, since Sam accepts the deal, Tyrone and his lads cannot be
faulted. But that does not mean we cannot discuss the objective merits
of the playing conditions.

Here are my worries, and why I agree with Chesstours that an
Internet match is infinitely preferable.

The match arbiter has launched repeated attacks on Sam Sloan
without offering proof of his charges. This is the man who volunteered
to be the arbiter. It speaks volumes about Mr. Hart that he would
offer his services in such a situation. The decent thing to do would
have been to recuse himself.

The office environment will likely be highly hostile. Perhaps
there will be signs in the playing room urging Mr. Brock on against his
favorite "pervert." Anything is possible with the Brock kind of
person.

If an audience is present, one may assume attempts at
intimidation, and that the f-word, Mr. Brock's favorite item of
expression, will be in evidence.

Four games in a single day is vicious and will take a toll on
Sam if the match gets that far. That's why Mr. Brock proposed this
deal: he knows Sam is 60 and hopes either that he will wilt or die.
It is not an example of Chritian charity, but it is an example of Mr.
Brock's sportsmanship.

The match that Should Have Been was Sam Sloan versus NM Taylor
Kingston, a 2300+ Elo tornado.

To be objective, I think that draw odds are probably more of an
edge to Sam than the rating numbers would suggest. And in spite of all
that I have written above, it is by no means obvious that Sam will not
win the match. He has a chance, though the playing field is not level.

Perhaps, once again in an attempt to be objective, all grudge
matches must, by their very nature, be skewed against the party whose
need is greater.