On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 22:19:42 -0700, Harold Buck
wrote:

In article ,
Ed Seedhouse wrote:

On 18 Oct 2003 16:10:31 GMT, (CCamp81318) wrote:

There are no outside influences on a game of chess so the winner is ALWAYS
the
player that played the best during the game in question.

What about those games, and there are more than a few, where the loser
resigned in a won position?


Resigning is part of the game. Resigning in a won position is a HUGE
blunder, and if you do it you've ultimately played more poorly in that
game than your opponent.

What if your opponent played 1. e4 and you resigned? You haven't made a
move, but you've played poorly, certainly more poorly than your opponent.

What about those games where one player comprehensively outplays
another and then loses with a terrible blunder? If one plays 49 good
moves and then one disastrously bad move is it fair to say that he was
outplayed?

Yes, since the net result is a loss.

What if there was a distraction that caused the blunder?


Part of the game is to shut out distractions; if you don't do that in a
game and your opponent does, perhaps he has played better in that game.

The point being, it just isn't that simple.

Or maybe it is.

Or maybe it just means that you have your own special definition of
"played best" that isn't consistent with normal English useage. No
one can stop you, but I advise you not to be too surprised when people
give up talking to you, like I just have.