The Historian wrote:
On Apr 30, 5:50 am, Brian Lafferty wrote:
wrote:

Brian Lafferty wrote:
samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.
Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416
Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228
It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?
He obviously played one game as a house man. If you had any experience
directing or playing in chess tournaments ... well, you wouldn't be
such an easy target.
So, like Las Vegas, the house always wins. And if you were at a
tournament, John, with a prize list that went down to 20th place, would
you feel good about the organizer pocketing extra cash because of 1/2
point byes not afforded to others when you finished in 11th place? I'll
have to look for tournaments where I can take 1/2 point byes for 3/4 of
the rounds.

It would have been proper for Mr. Truong to refuse a prize for playing
as a filler. In a situation like that, the prize list might have been
extended to compensate for his 11th place finish.

That is to say, his placing is bogus unless every other player was
afforded the opportunity to get 1/2 point byes for 3/4 of their rounds.

Do you have any
evidence that Truong accepted prize money for playing as a house man,
or is this charge merely another example of your usual Sam-ish
"kitchen sink" attacks on the Trolgars?

I never said there was prize money of any kind in this case. I asked
John a purely hypothetical question. I wrote, "And IF YOU were at A
tournament, JOHN, with a prize list that went down to 20th place, would
you feel good about the organizer pocketing extra cash because of 1/2
point byes not afforded to others when you finished in 11th place?"
[emphasis added]

Interestingly, if you look at his tournament record over the past few
years, he appears to play to keep his rating up by playing in
tournaments where he faces opponents who are usually rated 500 points
(often 1000 or unrated) below him. He then takes byes in the later
rounds if there is significant opposition in the tournament. It's a
good way to inch your rating up. Of course, he isn't the first or only
player to do that. Too bad the USCF records only go back to 1990 or so.