well dave, what don't you insist on what 'us tournament means'? other
mind****ers already did it, then you can be right, which i think is your
entire [and pathetic] motive. go go go dave, be right! cummon dave, we know
that this is your motive, nail the point home!

or get over your 'understanding' of things, and write like a human being

pi

"David Richerby" wrote in message
...
Chess One wrote:
I made the simple statement that this was the highest category US
tournament

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! You wrote, `Strongest ever US Tournament'. It's
still there on the web at

http://www.chessville.com/Editorials...ive_2008Q2.htm

I quote it in its entirety (my emphasis):

Coming up later this Year -- **Strongest ever US Tournament**

September 19th to 28th sees a [so far] Category 15 tournament on US
soil in the 10 player SPICE CUP. Seven of the 10 invitees have
already signed up, and I understand average Elo is currently 2600.
Chessville's senior editor Kelly Atkins recently visited the SPICE
campus at Lubbock and will make an extended report on its current
and future activities.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Revolting Love Goldfish (TM):
it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a fish that you can share
with
someone special but it'll turn
your
stomach!

wrote in message
...
On May 21, 7:49 am, David Richerby
wrote:
Chess One wrote:
I made the simple statement that this was the highest category US
tournament

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! You wrote, `Strongest ever US Tournament'. It's
still there on the web at

http://www.chessville.com/Editorials...ive_2008Q2.htm

I quote it in its entirety (my emphasis):

Coming up later this Year -- **Strongest ever US Tournament**

September 19th to 28th sees a [so far] Category 15 tournament on US
soil in the 10 player SPICE CUP. Seven of the 10 invitees have
already signed up, and I understand average Elo is currently 2600.
Chessville's senior editor Kelly Atkins recently visited the SPICE
campus at Lubbock and will make an extended report on its current
and future activities.

It would appear that Mr. Hillery had a valid point. To call this the
"strongest ever US tournament" seems a definite exaggeration, in terms
of the rankings (rather than the ratings) of the players.

**Mr Hillery argues some point about 'rankings' not ratings? Qhat then is
his 'point'?

Here is the
list of prospective contestants Innes posted a day or two ago:

GM Onischuk, Alexander 2728 USCF / 2663 FIDE
GM Akobian, Varuzhan 2666 USCF / 2612 FIDE
GM Kaidanov, Gregory 2697 USCF / 2611 FIDE
GM Becerra, Julio 2644 USCF / 2601 FIDE
GM Kritz, Leonid 2667 USCF / 2600 FIDE
GM Miton, Kamil 2703 USCF / 2581 FIDE
GM Perelshteyn, Eugene 2623 USCF / 2549 FIDE

Of these, only Onischuk is even in the FIDE top 100, at #56. In
contrast, New York 1924 had the world's #1, 2, and 3, and several of
the top 10 or 20. At New York 1927 all but one of the players were in
the top 10 or 12 of the time and it had the clear #1 and #2.

**These are US Rankings, not ratings, understood. But again, his point?

Both
Piatigorsky Cup events (1963 and 1966) had the reigning World
Champion, the 1966 event had two soon-to-be World Champions, and they
both had a host of top-10 to top-20 players, the great majority of
whom were FIDE Candidates at one time or another.

**His point is that the field may not average 2600, foreigners being
included, but some players exceeded 2600?

This is not to disparage at all this group of current invitees,
which has an average FIDE rating of 2602, very commendable. I applaud
the organizers' efforts so far, and I hope the tournament is a great
success.
But let's not get carried away with hype.

** Or de-hype!

In terms of their rank in
the world chess hierarchy, this group is a far cry from the
contestants in the 1924, 1927, 1963 and 1966 events.

**Cry, cry the beloved country! Again, what 'point' does Kingston represent
for Hillary?

Phil Innes

"The Historian" wrote in message
...
On May 21, 8:10 am, "Chess One" wrote:

He is not alone in his 'idiotic claims.' To think that Showalter and crew
were of category XV is extraordinary! But enough of pure nonsense....

I agree it's nonsense to compare the assortment of players in the
SPICE Puff with Showalter, one of the best players in the world in his
era. I think H. N. Pillsbury is a better judge of such matters as
Showalter's ability than P Innes.

I disagree, I thing P. Innes is a better judge of overall field strength
than Harry Pillsbury who existed before there were ratings, and certainly of
contemporary GM performance.

Phil Innes

On May 21, 5:35*pm, "Chess One" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On May 21, 7:49 am, David Richerby
wrote:





Chess One wrote:
I made the simple statement that this was the highest category US
tournament

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! You wrote, `Strongest ever US Tournament'. It's
still there on the web at

http://www.chessville.com/Editorials...ive_2008Q2.htm

I quote it in its entirety (my emphasis):

Coming up later this Year -- **Strongest ever US Tournament**

September 19th to 28th sees a [so far] Category 15 tournament on US
soil in the 10 player SPICE CUP. Seven of the 10 invitees have
already signed up, and I understand average Elo is currently 2600.
Chessville's senior editor Kelly Atkins recently visited the SPICE
campus at Lubbock and will make an extended report on its current
and future activities.

* It would appear that Mr. Hillery had a valid point. To call this the
"strongest ever US tournament" seems a definite exaggeration, in terms
of the rankings (rather than the ratings) of the players.

**Mr Hillery argues some point about 'rankings' not ratings? Qhat then is
his 'point'?

*Here is the
list of prospective contestants Innes posted a day or two ago:

GM Onischuk, Alexander 2728 USCF / 2663 FIDE
GM Akobian, Varuzhan 2666 USCF / 2612 FIDE
GM Kaidanov, Gregory 2697 USCF / 2611 FIDE
GM Becerra, Julio 2644 USCF / 2601 FIDE
GM Kritz, Leonid 2667 USCF / 2600 FIDE
GM Miton, Kamil 2703 USCF / 2581 FIDE
GM Perelshteyn, Eugene 2623 USCF / 2549 FIDE

* Of these, only Onischuk is even in the FIDE top 100, at #56. In
contrast, New York 1924 had the world's #1, 2, and 3, and several of
the top 10 or 20. At New York 1927 all but one of the players were in
the top 10 or 12 of the time and it had the clear #1 and #2.

**These are US Rankings, not ratings, understood.

No, Phil, those are *_world_* rankings. How high each player ranks
in the whole world, not just one country. I thought you knew the
difference between FIDE and USCF.

But again, his point?

Well, _my_ point is that a tournament whose best player is only #56
in the world, and which has no one else even in the top 100, has no
business claiming it's "stronger" than tournaments that included the
likes of world's top three and many others from the top 10 or 20.

wrote:
On May 21, 5:35�pm, "Chess One" wrote:
wrote in message

....
On May 21, 7:49 am, David Richerby
wrote:





Chess One wrote:
I made the simple statement that this was the highest category US
tournament

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! You wrote, `Strongest ever US Tournament'. It's
still there on the web at

http://www.chessville.com/Editorials...ive_2008Q2.htm

I quote it in its entirety (my emphasis):

Coming up later this Year -- **Strongest ever US Tournament**

September 19th to 28th sees a [so far] Category 15 tournament on US
soil in the 10 player SPICE CUP. Seven of the 10 invitees have
already signed up, and I understand average Elo is currently 2600.
Chessville's senior editor Kelly Atkins recently visited the SPICE
campus at Lubbock and will make an extended report on its current
and future activities.

� It would appear that Mr. Hillery had a valid point. To call this the
"strongest ever US tournament" seems a definite exaggeration, in terms
of the rankings (rather than the ratings) of the players.

**Mr Hillery argues some point about 'rankings' not ratings? Qhat then is
his 'point'?

�Here is the
list of prospective contestants Innes posted a day or two ago:

GM Onischuk, Alexander 2728 USCF / 2663 FIDE
GM Akobian, Varuzhan 2666 USCF / 2612 FIDE
GM Kaidanov, Gregory 2697 USCF / 2611 FIDE
GM Becerra, Julio 2644 USCF / 2601 FIDE
GM Kritz, Leonid 2667 USCF / 2600 FIDE
GM Miton, Kamil 2703 USCF / 2581 FIDE
GM Perelshteyn, Eugene 2623 USCF / 2549 FIDE

� Of these, only Onischuk is even in the FIDE top 100, at #56. In
contrast, New York 1924 had the world's #1, 2, and 3, and several of
the top 10 or 20. At New York 1927 all but one of the players were in
the top 10 or 12 of the time and it had the clear #1 and #2.

**These are US Rankings, not ratings, understood.

No, Phil, those are *_world_* rankings. How high each player ranks
in the whole world, not just one country. I thought you knew the
difference between FIDE and USCF.

But again, his point?

Well, _my_ point is that a tournament whose best player is only #56
in the world, and which has no one else even in the top 100, has no
business claiming it's "stronger" than tournaments that included the
likes of world's top three and many others from the top 10 or 20.


At the risk of again confusing the easily confused Phil Innes as to
which of us is which -- that's a fair summary. Now, if you use enough
weasel words, and define the question as "the strongest tournament
held in the U.S. and consisting entirely of U.S. citizens or
residents," it might qualify (though I'd like to see some confirmation
on Kritz). But that's not what he said. Admittedly, it's often
impossible to determine what Philsy _meant_.

On May 21, 4:24 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

or get over your 'understanding' of things, and write like a human being

Does anyone else ever understand what he means by this part of the
rant?

On May 21, 6:22Â*pm, wrote:
wrote:
On May 21, 5:35�pm, "Chess One" wrote:
wrote in message

....
On May 21, 7:49 am, David Richerby
wrote:

Chess One wrote:
I made the simple statement that this was the highest category US
tournament

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! You wrote, `Strongest ever US Tournament'. It's
still there on the web at

http://www.chessville.com/Editorials...ive_2008Q2.htm

I quote it in its entirety (my emphasis):

Coming up later this Year -- **Strongest ever US Tournament**

September 19th to 28th sees a [so far] Category 15 tournament on US
soil in the 10 player SPICE CUP. Seven of the 10 invitees have
already signed up, and I understand average Elo is currently 2600.
Chessville's senior editor Kelly Atkins recently visited the SPICE
campus at Lubbock and will make an extended report on its current
and future activities.

� It would appear that Mr. Hillery had a valid point. To call this the
"strongest ever US tournament" seems a definite exaggeration, in terms
of the rankings (rather than the ratings) of the players.

**Mr Hillery argues some point about 'rankings' not ratings? Qhat then is
his 'point'?

�Here is the
list of prospective contestants Innes posted a day or two ago:

GM Onischuk, Alexander 2728 USCF / 2663 FIDE
GM Akobian, Varuzhan 2666 USCF / 2612 FIDE
GM Kaidanov, Gregory 2697 USCF / 2611 FIDE
GM Becerra, Julio 2644 USCF / 2601 FIDE
GM Kritz, Leonid 2667 USCF / 2600 FIDE
GM Miton, Kamil 2703 USCF / 2581 FIDE
GM Perelshteyn, Eugene 2623 USCF / 2549 FIDE

� Of these, only Onischuk is even in the FIDE top 100, at #56. In
contrast, New York 1924 had the world's #1, 2, and 3, and several of
the top 10 or 20. At New York 1927 all but one of the players were in
the top 10 or 12 of the time and it had the clear #1 and #2.

**These are US Rankings, not ratings, understood.

Â* No, Phil, those are *_world_* rankings. How high each player ranks
in the whole world, not just one country. I thought you knew the
difference between FIDE and USCF.

But again, his point?

Â* Well, _my_ point is that a tournament whose best player is only #56
in the world, and which has no one else even in the top 100, has no
business claiming it's "stronger" than tournaments that included the
likes of world's top three and many others from the top 10 or 20.

At the risk of again confusing the easily confused Phil Innes as to
which of us is which -- that's a fair summary. Now, if you use enough
weasel words, and define the question as "the strongest tournament
held in the U.S. and consisting entirely of U.S. citizens or
residents," it might qualify (though I'd like to see some confirmation
on Kritz). But that's not what he said. Admittedly, it's often
impossible to determine what Philsy _meant_.

Phil in a way is much like Ray Goulding's character in the classic
Bob & Ray "Komodo Dragon" skit. One answers his questions, and he then
proceeds to ask the same questions again, as if they had not been
answered. I have yet to figure out definitely whether Phil's
comprehension is simply poor, or (more likely, IMO) this is a
deliberate dodge on his part, albeit a very inept one.

Younger readers not familiar with the skit can hear it by going
he

http://www.bobandray.com/listen.html

and clicking on the appropriate icon by "Komodo Dragon."

Nyah, nyah - yah big stoopid turd..










another brave anon with a bigger mouth [at a distance] than even Kingston...
zzzzzzz

what a circle jerk!

needless to say these people have rating's-envy like Sam Sloan has
vagina-envy.

quote me.

phil innes

"nobody" wrote in message
...
help bot wrote:

The comments regarding posturing and ****y-posting
seem to indicate that nearly-IMnes was complaining about
one of *his own* postings (while quoting jkh and cursing at
TK). Why should PI have to apologize to TK, when the
attack focused on weaknesses in Dr. IMnes' own position?

Devoid of your fanciful convolutions helpnot, the ineluctable fact is
Phil blundered badly in so confusing jkh's drivel with a TK post. The
onus now rests with Phil to manfully 'own his words' & apologise to TK
for his stupid behaviour..




No, I say the one owed an apology is Mr. Brennen-- for
the impersonation of a nearly-an-IM 2450 while trashing
NB in multiple newsgroups, including rgc*. Sir IMnes has
a perfect right to curse TK (for upstaging him in the area
of real-life chess ratings). Look, Lord IMnes is a very
busy man; he cannot be expected to keep track of all his
critics, as they probably number in the hundreds. I say
if the nearly-an-IM wants to trash himself for posturing or
****y-posting, let him be... .

-- help bot

The Historian wrote:

Devoid of your fanciful convolutions helpnot, the ineluctable fact is
Phil blundered badly in so confusing jkh's drivel with a TK post. The
onus now rests with Phil to manfully 'own his words' & apologise to TK
for his stupid behaviour..

Don't hold your breath.

No! - in an earlier post Phil has owned his words & apologised for being
a moron (in cod latin no less)..

SBD wrote:

On May 21, 4:24 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

or get over your 'understanding' of things, and write like a human being

Does anyone else ever understand what he means by this part of the
rant?

Yes, I think Phil is having a go @ Dave R's automaton type persona &
also the gawdawful way he (Dave) is always trying to show how smart he
is..