On her website, Polgar also complains about another rule, but she does
not explain the reason for the rule:

After invitational ratings have been calculated for the highest rated
players for all but one spot on the team, the following method shall
be used to determine the final spot: Average of the 1) current
published USCF rating at time of invitation; 2) current published FIDE
rating at time of invitation. To this number shall be added the
following adjustment points based on the player’s age as of January 1
of the Olympiad year: 5 points for age 25, 10 points age 24, 15 points
age 23, 20 points age 22, 25 points age 21, 30 points age 20, 35
points age 19, 40 points age 18, 50 points age 17, 60 points age 16 or
below.

"This is absurd. It is blatantly unfriendly against players 25 and
older.", writes Polgar.

The reason for the rule is that in 2004 Hikaru Nakamura was rapidly
improving. He gained 118 rating points that year and won the US
Championship. He was 16 years old.

However, because of the USCF Rule about averaging in a player's old
FIDE rating and old USCF Rating, Nakamura's average rating was too
low. Instead, players like Gulko who had not played at all for a long
time had a higher average rating and therefor was sent.

As a result, Nakamura did not make the team and did not get to play in
the World Chess Olympiad in 2004, even though he was the highest rated
player in the US by the time that the Olympiad was played.

Also, the US has had poor results with older players. At the 2000
World Chess Olympiad in Istanbul the youngest player on the US team
was 41. Our team finished 21st, one of our worse results ever.

The point is that we do better when we send younger players, than when
we send elderly players like Polgar.

Sam Sloan

On Aug 1, 11:20 am, "Chess One" wrote:
"samsloan" wrote in message

...
On her website, Polgar also complains about another rule, but she does
not explain the reason for the rule:

The point is that we do better when we send younger players, than when
we send elderly players like Polgar.

Sam Sloan

---
As was illustrated by the Olympiad, where the 'elderly' Polgar led USA to
its highest place finish ever, the Silver medal.

Susan Polgar had a great result in the 2004 World Chess Olympiad, no
doubt about it. Not only did she wipe out the opposition but she
played all 14 games without a break. She was the iron-man of the
Olympiad. Nobody else accomplished this.

I was very proud of her, since I had been her biggest supporter up
until that time.

However, look at what she did in her next tournament, which was the
last open tournament in which she has ever played, the 2005 US Amateur
Team East


Round Opponent Rating Result

1 Roberto Jose 1796 L

2 David Jacobi 1500 W

3 Adithya Sundar 1619 W

4 Shirley Ben-Dan 1976 W

5 John Leo Vehre Jr. 2229 W

6 Dylan Mc Clain 2290 D


Her last round game against the New York Times Reporter was hard
fought and was one of the last games in the tournament to finish.
Polgar needed to win to secure one of the top prizes for her team. It
was a rook and pawn endgame. Some observers thought she could win but
I felt certain that it was a draw and it turned out that I was right.

Her average Opponent excluding the players rated 1500 and 1619 was
2073.

Performance rating for this tournament was 2173.

Polgar lost 17 rating points in this tournament, with her rating
dropping from 2574 to 2557.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

Roberto Jose (1796) - GM Susan Polgar (2561)
USATE 2005, TL 40/2 SD/1, Feb. 19, 2005,ECO A87
Dutch Defense – Leningrad System 5)Nf3
1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8
8.Re1 Qf7 9.Qb3 h6 10.Bd2 Ne4 11.Rad1 Nxd2 12.Rxd2 e5 13.dxe5
dxe5 14.Red1 Nc6 15.Nd5 e4 16.Ne1 Ne5 17.Qb4 Re8 18.Nc2 c6
19.Nde3 Be6 20.Nd4 Bxc4 21.b3 Ba6 22.Qa5 Re7 23.Bh3 Rd7 24.Ndc2
Rxd2 25.Rxd2 Bf6 26.Nd4 Kh8 27.Ng2 Rd8 28.Nf4 Rd7 29.Kf1 h5
30.Nfe6 Ng4?! 31.Bxg4 hxg4 32.Qc5 b6? 33.Qxc6 Bb7 34.Qa4! Qh7?
35.Kg1 e3 36.fxe3 Qh3?? 37.Nf4 Qh7 38.Nxg6+ Kg8 39.Nxf5 1–0

Her result in this tournament must be one of the worst results ever in
history for a grandmaster and her game against Ruberto Jose must be
the worst game ever played by a grandmaster. True, every grandmaster
makes horrific one-move blunders now and then, but in this game Polgar
made a whole series of bad moves.

Polgar is now 39 years old, an age when most players start losing
their sharpness. She needs to start proving that she can still play
top level chess rather than constantly talking about her great results
years ago.

If she no longer wishes to play, she should step aside and make room
for younger improving players.

Sam Sloan

On Aug 1, 4:58*pm, samsloan wrote:


The point is that we do better when we send younger players, than when
we send elderly players like Polgar.

Funny.


Her last round game against the New York Times Reporter was hard
fought and was one of the last games in the tournament to finish.
Polgar needed to win to secure one of the top prizes for her team. It
was a rook and pawn endgame. Some observers thought she could win but
I felt certain that it was a draw and it turned out that I was right.

"Could win" and actually winning are two
different things. (How about a link to the
position you are discussing?)


Her average Opponent excluding the players rated 1500 and 1619 was
2073.

Performance rating for this tournament was 2173.

Polgar lost 17 rating points in this tournament, with her rating
dropping from 2574 to 2557.

Her result in this tournament must be one of the worst results ever in
history for a grandmaster and her game against Ruberto Jose must be
the worst game ever played by a grandmaster.

Statements like that one reveal exactly why
Mr. Sloan is widely regarded as *a kook*.


Polgar is now 39 years old, an age when most players start losing
their sharpness. She needs to start proving that she can still play
top level chess rather than constantly talking about her great results
years ago.

If this is a reference to the SP Web site, I
believe she brags there about the
accomplishments of all three Polgar sisters,
plus Vera Menchik and several others, as if
they all were /her/ accomplishments. Even
her toad-eaters admit this, calling it mere
hyperbole, instead of fabrications and lies.


If she no longer wishes to play, she should step aside and make room
for younger improving players.

Well, if you want to order Ms.Polgar
around like this, why not join the Army
and then get her to sign up at the same
time? Surely, they must have a
division of some kind for elderly folks
who want to be boot-camp sergeants.

Personally, I think the young, improving
players will make their own way by
simply taking rating points away from the
elderly players (who no longer get
feedback points). The "elderly" trained
with books and against other weak
humans, while the new generation are
training with ChessBase, Fritz and their
Pentium Quad-Core computers; with an
edge like that, they don't need no stinkin'
help, man!


-- cool bot

On Aug 1, 6:28 pm, help bot wrote:

Personally, I think the young, improving
players will make their own way by
simply taking rating points away from the
elderly players (who no longer get
feedback points). The "elderly" trained
with books and against other weak
humans, while the new generation are
training with ChessBase, Fritz and their
Pentium Quad-Core computers; with an
edge like that, they don't need no stinkin'
help, man!

-- cool bot

The young players cannot take rating points away from elderly players
who never play.

That is Polgar's ace-in-the-hole. She has not played in years but
still brags about how she is so much stronger than the others.

By the way, why has Rob ("the Robber") never "challenged" her to a
game?