On Mar 19, 7:59*am, wrote:
On Mar 19, 3:29*am, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"

wrote:
On Mar 13, 1:30 pm, wrote:

* In another thread, Sam Sloan wrote:

* "The fact is that Taylor Kingston
has never beaten a master."

* Would you care to bet on that, Sam?
If so, how much? I'd like a
minimum bet of at least $10,000,
but I'll go higher if you like.

Does it have to be Sam?

* Well, Sam's the only one to say such a thing here, as far as I know.

And he will never bet you either, with real money thats his.

On Mar 19, 12:33*pm, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"
wrote:
On Mar 14, 1:24 am, Sanny wrote:



We should not leave it on chances/luck.

Sanny, what is your "it" in the above statement?

====
Wlod

"it" here refers to the "Bet of $10,000" If the number of games are
increased we get much correct results. As the judgement based on 1
game may be wrong.

Bye
Sanny

Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

On Mar 20, 12:49*am, Sanny wrote:
On Mar 19, 12:33*pm, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"

wrote:
On Mar 14, 1:24 am, Sanny wrote:

We should not leave it on chances/luck.

Sanny, what is your "it" in the above statement?

====
Wlod

"it" here refers to the "Bet of $10,000" If the number of games are
increased we get much correct results. As the judgement based on 1
game may be wrong.

Sanny, you have failed to understand the bet. The bet is about a
matter of established fact: whether or not I have ever beaten an
officially titled chess master in an official chess game. Sloan claims
I have not, I know that I have. It has nothing to do with playing more
games. I am willing to bet $10,000 that I have already beaten a
master.
I did not seriously think Sloan would take the bet. I just wanted to
show what a liar and coward he is. He does not even have the courage
to admit he was wrong.
What's funny about this (and it also shows even more clearly how
dishonest and inept Sam Sloan is), is that a victory of mine over a
USCF master has already been published here on this newsgroup. I
posted it in 2006, in response to a request from Sloan. So he actually
has already seen that I have beaten a master, yet he still claimed I
have not.
That's the way it is with Sam Sloan. The same lies get repeated over
and over.

On Mar 20, 9:24 am, wrote:

"it" here refers to the "Bet of $10,000" If the number of games are
increased we get much correct results. As the judgement based on 1
game may be wrong.

Sanny, you have failed to understand the bet. The bet is about a
matter of established fact: whether or not I have ever beaten an
officially titled chess master in an official chess game. Sloan claims
I have not, I know that I have. It has nothing to do with playing more
games. I am willing to bet $10,000 that I have already beaten a
master.


As I understand the rules, Mr. Sloan would
have to pay Mr. Kingston $10K for every
game in which he defeated a USCF master.
For this contest, a "master" is considered
to be someone USCF-rated at least 2200,
including the feeble-minded ones who were
sitting on their rating floors. We don't care
about wall charts and so forth, but will take
the cross-tables on the USCF Web site as
definitive (despite the USCF's dismal record).


-- help bot

On Mar 20, 11:15 pm, help bot wrote:
On Mar 20, 9:24 am, wrote:

"it" here refers to the "Bet of $10,000" If the number of games are
increased we get much correct results. As the judgement based on 1
game may be wrong.

Sanny, you have failed to understand the bet. The bet is about a
matter of established fact: whether or not I have ever beaten an
officially titled chess master in an official chess game. Sloan claims
I have not, I know that I have. It has nothing to do with playing more
games. I am willing to bet $10,000 that I have already beaten a
master.

As I understand the rules, Mr. Sloan would
have to pay Mr. Kingston $10K for every
game in which he defeated a USCF master.
For this contest, a "master" is considered
to be someone USCF-rated at least 2200,
including the feeble-minded ones who were
sitting on their rating floors. We don't care
about wall charts and so forth, but will take
the cross-tables on the USCF Web site as
definitive (despite the USCF's dismal record).

-- help bot

No.
It is three matches, the first to begin on March 10th 2010.
The matches are the first to 10 wins, draws not counting (I have never
understood this 'draws not counting' provision - of course they don't
count!).
If the score reaches 9-9 then one player has to win by two clear
points, as in the last set at tennis. For example 652,233-652,231.
The time limit is one second a move plus one minute a move. This gives
the brilliant possibility of someone sitting at the table but losing
on time before move 1.
The match will be financed by the USCF, which has put up $2,000,000 in
Chinese-Pacific Railway Shares as a first prize. Second prize is a
laptop.
Free entrance will be given to all 300,000 children registered as
members of the USCF, so a good crowd is guaranteed.
Can you guess who the arbiter will be?
SPOILER SPACE







The arbiter will be that star of Gravity's Rainbow, Mickey Rooney!