"help bot" wrote in message
...
On May 10, 1:58 pm, The Historian wrote:

Phil's prattle about QC vis-a-vis titles is ironic, given his aid,
comfort and general flackery in favor of questionable claims by one
well known USCF board member.

"Support" from the nearly-an-IM is, in effect,
precisely the opposite. It's akin to lending
"support" to vegetarianism, by stating that
Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian.

**2 geniuses discuss rating systems, completely ignoring looking at what
goes on at USCF. Having done that, what can be more natural [for them] than
to mention Hitler? It hardly matters what any nominal topic is, when you
have ratings-envy. Neither genius can figure out...

Leaving aside his own well-known claims to being "nearly an IM", of
course, and his alleged 2450 rating.

Not so fast! Mr. IMnes' actual claim was that
/in Europe/ he was once a nearly-an-IM with a
[presumably FIDE] rating of 2450.

**[I love the presumably g] That if I could play a season or two at
2400 -uscf equivalent- after taking 20 years away from chess still manage
2200 OTB, then that is even possible!

That seems
to zap the idea of him claiming to have had such
a USCF rating, since the USCF has not yet
taken over jurisdiction of Europe (one cannot
predict the future, however...).

**Help bitch is sick of strong players! So sick that that like Brennan it
becomes his /only/ topic!

NOW TO THE TOPIC(S)

**Anyone interested in chess ratings could assess 3 things -

(a) Has Sloan abboragated anyone's copyright
(b) do rating ceilings and floors exist withing Elo's system, and
(c) what alternatives to USCF's 'award' system are there? [see Alekhine's
Parrot this week at www.chessville.com for a precis of an alternate system,
as declaimed by its originator]

Phil Innes




-- help bot