Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 27th 07, 07:57 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

Susan Polgar can call her tournament anything she likes, but Chess
Life magazine will refuse to advertise her tournament or list it in
the TLAs if she uses the word "National" without it being designated
by the USCF as a National event.

Susan Polgar was told in advance that she could not call her
tournament the "Susan Polgar National Open". Nevertheless she called
her tournament that anyway, and it slipped past the editors of Chess
Life magazine and was published this way by mistake.

I understand that Jerry Nash was the person who made that error.

She has been told in no uncertain terms that next year she will not be
allowed to publicize a "Susan Polgar National Open" or a "Susan Polgar
World Open".

Nevertheless, if her slate sweeps the election, that can be expected
to change.

Sam Sloan

  #2   Report Post  
Old May 27th 07, 08:04 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"


Susan Polgar can call her tournament anything she likes, but Chess
Life magazine will refuse to advertise her tournament or list it in
the TLAs if she uses the word "National" without it being designated
by the USCF as a National event.

Susan Polgar was told in advance that she could not call her
tournament the "Susan Polgar National Open". Nevertheless she called
her tournament that anyway, and it slipped past the editors of Chess
Life magazine and was published this way by mistake.

I understand that Jerry Nash was the person who made that error.

She has been told in no uncertain terms that next year she will not be
allowed to publicize a "Susan Polgar National Open" or a "Susan Polgar
World Open".

Nevertheless, if her slate sweeps the election, that can be expected
to change.

Sam Sloan


Being rebuffed by a female can often do serious,
long-term damage to the sensitive male ego. The
repercussions can, in some cases, linger on for
decades.

-- shrink bot


  #3   Report Post  
Old May 27th 07, 08:17 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

On May 27, 3:04 am, help bot wrote:
Susan Polgar can call her tournament anything she likes, but Chess
Life magazine will refuse to advertise her tournament or list it in
the TLAs if she uses the word "National" without it being designated
by the USCF as a National event.


Susan Polgar was told in advance that she could not call her
tournament the "Susan Polgar National Open". Nevertheless she called
her tournament that anyway, and it slipped past the editors of Chess
Life magazine and was published this way by mistake.


I understand that Jerry Nash was the person who made that error.


She has been told in no uncertain terms that next year she will not be
allowed to publicize a "Susan Polgar National Open" or a "Susan Polgar
World Open".


Nevertheless, if her slate sweeps the election, that can be expected
to change.


Sam Sloan


Being rebuffed by a female can often do serious,
long-term damage to the sensitive male ego. The
repercussions can, in some cases, linger on for
decades.

-- shrink bot


She did not rebuff me.

  #4   Report Post  
Old May 27th 07, 08:36 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

On May 27, 3:17 am, samsloan wrote:

Being rebuffed by a female can often do serious,
long-term damage to the sensitive male ego. The
repercussions can, in some cases, linger on for
decades.


-- shrink bot


She did not rebuff me.


:D


----

A gentleman never brags about his conquests.

In one of the many James Bond films -- the one
which has 007 up against an agent 006 turned evil
-- the latter inquires as to what the main female
character smells like, to which Bond politely replies:
"I wouldn't know". The evil villain, agent 006, shoots
back: "I would!" It is at just this point that we, the
audience, are supposed to realize that 006 has
"passed the point of no return". He has turned, like
a fruit overcome by a fungus; like a politician, who
has intertwined himself with the mob; like a seal,
who has passed through the teeth of a great white
shark -- there is no longer *any* hope of salvation.

Ah, but then, Sam Sloan is beyond all that
Victorian morality stuff... .

-- help bot







  #5   Report Post  
Old May 27th 07, 05:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2007
Posts: 27
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

"help bot" Ah, but then, Sam Sloan is beyond all that Victorian
morality stuff... .


If you read his memoirs, he is quite a gentleman. He moved in with a girl
and after she spent one night with him, she told him to sleep in his own
room. Like a gentleman, he did. For the next two months he listened to her
having sex all night with her other boyfriends.

Finally he moved out the night two guys showed up at the same time and his
girlfriend led the extra guy into Sam's room. He only rode the baloney pony
one time, and then he realized he was not bisexual. A true gentleman, rather
than turning down the horney guy, he sacrificed his own ego for the sake of
a greater good.




  #6   Report Post  
Old May 28th 07, 05:36 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

On May 27, 12:13 pm, "Silly Dummy" wrote:
"help bot" Ah, but then, Sam Sloan is beyond all that Victorian
morality stuff... .

If you read his memoirs, he is quite a gentleman.


I didn't even know that SS's memoirs existed! But
wait a second -- are you suggesting that if a man
writes (or claims) to have behaved in a certain
manner, that is sufficient to conclude it must be so?

I always like to observe the behavior objectively,
or at least from a source somewhat less biased
than the subject himself. For instance, when
Richard Nixon claims that he is not a crook, I
would like to see the facts before deciding one way
or the other. In much the same way, when Norman
Whittaker claims to have an unbreakable fortress
draw, I want to see him first *reach* the allegedly
drawn position perforce, and then hold against
every conceivable attack, including transfer of
the move (a subtlety which often escapes weak
or mediocre players).

From what I have read here, SS seems to be
exactly the type I mentioned before, the 006 gone
batty. My interpretation of your story is that maybe
SS was avoiding a rape charge by not forcing himself
on his roommate. Does that not fit the events just as
well as your interpretation? In any event, one incident
is not compelling enough to judge by -- especially
when it is mere hearsay. If we wanted to swallow
whole every claim that comes our way, we might well
believe that SS is an Expert or Master, as some have
claimed here.

-- help bot

  #7   Report Post  
Old May 28th 07, 05:52 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

On May 27, 11:13 pm, Ambassador wrote:

Susan Polgar is a ****ing bitch. She is rude, and she is broke. These
two character traits do not fare well for her investments in chess. In
this case, Sloan is right.


How does being broke have any relevance here?

It might be helpful if you were to give some examples
of her alleged rudeness, rather than just sounding like
a mad dog howling. In my experience, there are rude
people and then there are people who are self-obsessed,
and many famous people are the latter. I once played
a famous player who was very rude at the board, but I
fully expect he thought that I was the one being rude,
since it was an insult for him to even be paired against
a player of my caliber and I should of course resign on
the first move out of shock and awe. :D

As for SS being right, the first paragraph of his post
stated that SP's tournament would not be advertised
by the USCF, and so forth. The very next paragraph
*contradicted* this claim, saying that it had already
been. How can this kind of flip-flopping be described
as being right?

At any rate, the tourney was inappropriately named,
but when the USCF is involved, it is inevitable that
incompetence will outweigh other factors such as
policies or who is right. I am left wondering why
anyone would even want to name a tournament the
"John Doe" National Open, for it sounds ridiculous
to me.

-- help bot

  #8   Report Post  
Old May 28th 07, 07:11 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2007
Posts: 27
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

"help bot" As for SS being right, the first paragraph of his post
stated that SP's tournament would not be advertised by the USCF, and so
forth. The very next paragraph *contradicted* this claim, saying that it
had already been. How can this kind of flip-flopping be described as being
right?


Sloan states that the official USCF position is that the tournament is not
supposed to be advertised on the Chess Life mag because it is using the
"National" title. Then he states that some scumbag on the magazine had
already run the ads "by mistake." The implication is that the USCF corruptly
bent the rules for Polegar. What trouble did you have in understanding this?

Why don't you go back to the Pokemon page and jack off, since you seem
obsessed with anime-porn.


  #9   Report Post  
Old May 28th 07, 07:41 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

On May 28, 2:11 am, "Silly Dummy" wrote:
"help bot" As for SS being right, the first paragraph of his post
stated that SP's tournament would not be advertised by the USCF, and so
forth. The very next paragraph *contradicted* this claim, saying that it
had already been. How can this kind of flip-flopping be described as being
right?

Sloan states that the official USCF position is that the tournament is not
supposed to be advertised on the Chess Life mag because it is using the
"National" title. Then he states that some scumbag on the magazine had
already run the ads "by mistake." The implication is that the USCF corruptly
bent the rules for Polegar. What trouble did you have in understanding this?


The only trouble I had was in understanding why he
would write what you just said in such a way as to
contradict himself, when it is so *easy* to put things
such that they make sense (as even you just did above).


Why don't you go back to the Pokemon page and jack off, since you seem
obsessed with anime-porn.


It is clear from this comment what *your* obsession
is.

Why don't you go back and re-read SS's original
post and then tell us why you think he had so
much trouble expressing such a simple idea. It
seems to me that if a silly dummy can do it, then
even Sam Sloan ought to have no trouble! LOL



That aside, his attack came off -- much like that of
another poster who shouted obscene names here --
as a man who had a personal ax to grind. Now, the
mixing up and stirring in of personal issues is not the
best way to go about such things as addressing a
Chess Life policy issue.

Often as not, these USCF-related rants come
across as petty infighting amongst petty people
who can't get along because of jealousy and, yes,
pettiness!

-- help bot


"It doesn't pay to be petty, like THEY are." -- BF






  #10   Report Post  
Old May 28th 07, 11:35 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2007
Posts: 27
Default "Susan Polgar National Open"

"help bot" these USCF-related rants come across as petty infighting amongst
petty people who can't get along because of jealousy and, yes, pettiness!


Everyone in the USCF is petty and pathetic. The USCF has been doomed ever
since the greatest chess hero of the USA turned out to be a sociopathic,
petty, pathetic loser named Bobby Fischer. It is hard to overcome that.

Look at all the great Russian Chess players. Most, if not all of them have
brought credit to their nation and culture and conducted themselves as
champions within the limited scope of the chess word.

Bobby Fischer on the other hand has only brought disgrace to himself since
being stripped of his championship and becoming a scummy recluse. What does
the USCF have in terms of chess celebrities? Apparently Susan Polegar is the
best of the US.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Susan Polgar National Open" samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 27 June 3rd 07 12:47 AM
"Susan Polgar National Open" samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 26 June 3rd 07 12:47 AM
Goichberg's List samsloan rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 1 March 19th 07 09:09 PM
Goichberg's List samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 0 March 19th 07 07:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017