http://www.shamema.com/pokeplot.htm

How old is Misty?

In article .com, "Larry Tapper" writes:
| Taylor Kingston writes:
|
| TK However, I repeat my offer of a thematic correspondence game to
| test the soundness of Sam's vaunted and beloved Damiano Defense, 1.e4
| e5 2.Nf3 f6 3.Nxe5 fxe5. One game, I play White, Sam plays Black, use
| of computers and books allowed. Minimum wager, say, $5,000?
|
| Now that's an interesting proposition. I think Taylor should offer draw
| odds though, or at least money odds.
|
| Over the years, many rgcp grudge matches have been proposed, but none
| have actually taken place as far as I know. Too bad, any of them would
| have been entertaining. My favorite was a long rancorous argument with
| Eric Johnson a few years ago about whether a typical B player could
| beat a grandmaster given odds of a knight. (Bob Musicant, if he's still
| lurking, would remember that one.)
|
| Maybe I need to stir up a grudge myself, now that I know that Tyrone
| Slothrop is a high roller in spite of his fictional status. Hmm, how
| about Jeremy Spinrad --- he and I are both within reasonable driving
| distance of the new USCF headquarters in Crossville. Hey Jerry, you
| moth-eaten antiquarian, you call yourself a historian? I challenge you
| to a match in the Crossville basement using only 19th-century openings!
| Cigars and pipes allowed! I'll give you 3 to 2 money odds --- Slothrop
| will put up the cash!

Tapper, you make me physically ill with your sensible posts in this newsgroup. I
will play only under the conditions that the winner gets to keep all the roadkill
either player accumulates during the drive to Crossville.

Jerry

|
| Larry T.
|

Bleeding heart liberal that I am, let me amend that: you are becoming a
useless piece of ****, Larry Parr. Perhaps (to borrow from the United
Statesian popcult) there's a little Anakin Skywalker left in Darth
Vader?

You've done some good things in the past, not least of which is the
afterword to the memorial book for our mutual friend, Bill Colias.

Whenever and wherever accused, every human is entitled to a vigorous
defense. But I am making an accusation based on facts, and you are not
even looking at the facts.

Taylor Kingston wrote:
Tyrone Slothrop wrote:
Only if you think that Sam Sloan at a USCF rating of 1931 (actual) is
really stronger than Taylor Kingston at 2270 (claimed).

Tyrone, please do not misrepresent me. As I made quite clear, the
2270 was a *postal* rating circa 1984. I was a correspondence master,
not an OTB master. I might consider a postal match, except that now it
is far too easy to cheat. In 1984 chess software was in its infancy;
now 2700-strength programs and 2-million-game databases are ubiquitous.

Then I stand corrected.

Restated: "Only if you think that Sam Sloan at a USCF rating of 1931
(actual) is really stronger than Taylor Kingston who 21 years ago had a
correspondence rating which reportedly mapped to 2270 USCF."

My $500+busfare still stands. Who else will put up some money? Larry
Parr is probably the closest. He has offered to bet $100 on the
outcome. How about kicking that into a prize fund, Larry? Then we'd
only need $400 more to make a round $1000.

You guys seriously underestimate my net worth if you think a mere
$1000 is sufficient inducement for me to spend hours within a few feet
of Sam Sloan, for any purpose, chess-related or otherwise.

Whatever. If your few hours is worth more than $1K, then I'd say you
are doing ok for yourself. Good for you. But, obviously this is not
true for the run of the mill tournament player who shows up to play
when even less is at stake, so I don't think it was too presumptive of
me.

However, I repeat my offer of a thematic correspondence game to test
the soundness of Sam's vaunted and beloved Damiano Defense, 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 f6 3.Nxe5 fxe5. One game, I play White, Sam plays Black, use of
computers and books allowed. Minimum wager, say, $5,000?

Not interested in sponsoring this one since play w/ computers is simply
not chess, in my book. Furthermore, the Damiano Defense is junk, so I
certainly wouldn't want to be caught backing it. I might back you
though against it, if the rules were different. But who would we find
to take the other side of such a lopsided contest?

Draw odds here would mean that if the match is drawn 2-2, Sloan wins.

Mike Murray wrote:
On 16 Jun 2005 23:11:50 -0700, "
wrote:

Draw odds: he wins a 2-2 match.

Does this mean each game has draw odds, just the match as a whole or
both ?

wrote:
Taylor Kingston wrote:
However, I repeat my offer of a thematic correspondence game to test
the soundness of Sam's vaunted and beloved Damiano Defense, 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 f6 3.Nxe5 fxe5. One game, I play White, Sam plays Black, use of
computers and books allowed. Minimum wager, say, $5,000?

I don't see why both parties should be allowed to cheat, surely playing
chess would be a fairer contest.

You misunderstand. The point is to test the objective soundness of
the opening, not the strength of the players. Based on his experience
against average players, Sloan believes the line is good for Black. I
say that after 3...fxe5 Black is objectively lost with best play by
both sides, and I'm willing to bet on it.

KINGSTON STILL BLOVIATING

NM Kingston is willing to bet that White stands to win against the
Damiano Defense. But he won't play a match with Sam Sloan, as I said
all along.

His latest excuse is that a thousand bucks is not enough to
compensate sitting near Sam Sloan. It would be a veritable fortune if
he felt he could emerge triumphant in such a high-profile grudge match.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Mr. Kingston's water carriers will try to arrange a postal match
that Mr. Sloan will not play. The argument will then be that the
behaviors of the Messrs. Kingston and Sloan are equivalent -- a
situation that won't enthuse Mr. Kingston very much, but it's best move
in a bad position.

Is your daughter still a virgin, Larry?

Also, there's a big difference between saying the Damiano loses (which
was never said) and 3...fxe5 loses (which is true, which, in the
Platonic realm, Sloan himself would admit--he just thinks it's a great
practical choice).

wrote:
Also, there's a big difference between saying the Damiano loses (which
was never said) and 3...fxe5 loses (which is true, which, in the
Platonic realm, Sloan himself would admit--he just thinks it's a great
practical choice).

"Sure. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6 3. Nxe5 fxe5 Now, Black is a knight up. The
rest is elementary." -- Sam Sloan, rcgp, Apr 27 2005, 4:45 pm