You are playing the part of the good chess arbiter and match host that
I am really sorry that this particular Vermont matchup is simply not
destined to be. Taylor Kingston has let us know in no uncertain terms
that there will never be a Sloan vs. Kingston OTB. And never is a
really long time.

Alas. It would have been interesting with superb fireworks.

Currently, the only possible matchups with real money behind them a
* $500+$100 for Sloan vs. Brock in Chicago, draw odds to Sloan (waiting
for another $400 of prize money)
* $500 for Sloan vs. Bauer at the Marshall, broadcast on Chess.FM

Am I leaving any real money offers off this list?

I have an idea though for a match with real fireworks possibilities:
Chess One vs. The Historian at knight odds to the latter. What do you
say to that? (I'm not yet offering any money on this one since I don't
know how sporting it would be!)


Chess One wrote:
Why don't we play Randy, I am a famous weakling player of about1400 elo
[best effort]. You could come too and make it a 4-some.

Otherwise we seem to have generated $500 + $100 for a Sloan/Kingston match -
series? How many games, what time controls? I waive all fees except for
MacNeils booze for both players and impartial arbiter, and I suppose I'd
better provide a barbecue dinner, maybe with orzo, rice, asparagas, green
salad and something on the grill?

In which case we have raised $600 of the necessary $1,100

Would anyone else like to buy a garden seat for this match? $50 is all it
costs. Plus $20 for booze and food. $35 to sleep over, and if the dog bites
you its your own damn fault.

Cordially, Phil

"Randy Bauer" wrote in message
news:xMsse.72639$nG6.40897@attbi_s22...
I like Bill Brock's proposal to play a match with Sloan better. First,
Bill is an over the board player, he probably detests Sloan even more than
Kingston, and he's not one to mince words. I'd put up $100 for that match.

Randy Bauer

"Taylor Kingston" wrote in message
ups.com...


Larry Tapper wrote:
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.

I'd be willing to offer both.

Taylor, you can't put up a purse for your own match, unless its for a title
or something - what would you suggest? I am putting up my coach, you have to
put up with Sam. Let the other opinions here be as wanton or blowhard as
they might, we are short $500 of prize and entertainment funds.

Yours, Phil

| I would even pay for Sam Sloan's roundtrip bus ticket to Vermont.

I think you could get more contributors if the bus fare was one way,

Hey!

and the
location significantly more distant.

There is nowhere more distant than Vermont, Jerry.

Jerry Spinrad

|
| I could pick him up at the bus depot exit 3 on I 91, [we are a 3 exit
town].
| Taylor is 3 hours by road north, Sam 4 hours by car south, 7 hours by
bus]

"Tyrone Slothrop" wrote in message
oups.com...
You are playing the part of the good chess arbiter and match host that
I am really sorry that this particular Vermont matchup is simply not
destined to be. Taylor Kingston has let us know in no uncertain terms
that there will never be a Sloan vs. Kingston OTB. And never is a
really long time.

Alas. It would have been interesting with superb fireworks.

Fireworks cost extra.

Currently, the only possible matchups with real money behind them a
* $500+$100 for Sloan vs. Brock in Chicago, draw odds to Sloan (waiting
for another $400 of prize money)
* $500 for Sloan vs. Bauer at the Marshall, broadcast on Chess.FM

Am I leaving any real money offers off this list?

I have an idea though for a match with real fireworks possibilities:
Chess One vs. The Historian at knight odds to the latter. What do you
say to that? (I'm not yet offering any money on this one since I don't
know how sporting it would be!)

Sure, unlike Sam Sloan I would even take Bill Brock blindfold. And beating A
players blindfold is not so easy.

The rest of this is talk, cheap talk. A match is a match, but we only have
one contestant in it, Taylor having retired before the first punch.

Phil

Cowardly, and weak in math.

Greyhound bus Friday--paid by Slothrop.

Draw odds give you approx. 50% chance of winning $1,000 purse: expected
$500

Greyhound bus Sunday night--paid by Slothrop.

Budget $100 for Chicago expenses, and you'll walk with either $900 or
$(100) = expected $400.

If you REALLY want to provide for your wife and baby, stop posting to
RGCP. (Me? I've got my share of billable hrs for the week already....)

Perhaps you misunderstand? I was proposing to put up a prize fund, not
bet someone that one side would prevail over the other. I wouldn't
expect either opponent to put up their own money. I propose to kick in
the money with other RGCP sponsors such as Randy who offered $100 for
this matchup. Winner takes the pot. And I offered to pay your busfare
to the battlefield. So you would really not have much at stake, except
your ego!

And as for the 111 ELO difference, I think the current discussion
revolves around some form of handicapping. Initially proposed was draw
odds, 2-2 and you take it. Bill Brock is now proposing that the match
is played until either you hit 2.0 or he hits 2.5. I think either of
these proposals would serve to level the playing field between the two
of you and compensate for the fact that he has always been a bit better
than you at this game.


Sam Sloan wrote:
I am sorry but I just checked his tournament record and Bill Brock is
probably a bit too strong.

...

This does not mean that I am afraid to play Bill Brock. I am ready to
play. However, I have a wife and baby to feed and I am not willing to
risk any significant amount of my own money on this venture.

...

Sam Sloan

Blindfolded? That's worth at least 100 points, I'd think.

I'd consider it, but frankly there's no fire in the belly for the
match, so it's not like I'm anxious to drive/fly to VT, as attractive
as you make it sound. (I've lost enough games in the last few weeks
that my ego wouldn't be overly bruised...)

Would have to be soon: I send the family to Wisconsin Northwoods for a
couple weeks while I hold down the fort here...then we take a vacation
together after the 4th. I could sneak away for a weekend before the
4th.

Playing blindfolded subtracts a good deal more than 100 elo points from
a player's actual strength. With the possible exception of the super
GMs, I would guess a 200 to 300 point strength loss would be a very
conservative estimate.

In fact, I would take Mr. Innes up on his bet with a wrinkle: he could
play me blindfold, and I will give him odds of a QN. We may be roughly
similar in actual OTB strength, but I would like my chances given such
a bet.

- Geof Strayer

I used to play three simultaneous blindfold in HS & college - three
times, and never lost a game. if you practice it often enough, it's a
parlor trick. But it's so much easier to make calculation errors....

I tried it again a couple years ago against an 1800 & two 1400s at
Ennui (my estimates of their coffeehouse strength, not their actual
ratings), and got my head handed to me--the 1800 mopped the board w/
me, one of the 1400s confused me, and the third game was still kinda
theoretical. Had to abandon the simul after less than 20 moves.

On 17 Jun 2005 15:51:23 -0700, wrote:

Playing blindfolded subtracts a good deal more than 100 elo points from
a player's actual strength. With the possible exception of the super
GMs, I would guess a 200 to 300 point strength loss would be a very
conservative estimate.

In fact, I would take Mr. Innes up on his bet with a wrinkle: he could
play me blindfold, and I will give him odds of a QN. We may be roughly
similar in actual OTB strength, but I would like my chances given such
a bet.

- Geof Strayer

Have you ever played blindfold under tournament conditions (standard
long time control, game taken seriously, etc.) ?

A 300 point loss in strength seems excessive to me, but I'm not aware
of anybody formally investigating this.