Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old December 27th 08, 07:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 27, 2:10*pm, help bot wrote:
On Dec 19, 5:44*pm, samsloan wrote:

Who is this "we", white man?


* I've always pictured Dr. IMnes as being purple in
color, with green spots. * How does Mr. Sloan get
"white"?

You have not been a USCF member since 1996.


http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?12529296


* This is the sort of idiocy we've come to expect
from Mr. Sloan. *In an apparent effort to substantiate
his claim that Dr. IMnes has not been a USCF
member since 1996, Mr. Sloan provides a link to
a crosstable... proving only that Dr. IMnes has not
played USCF-rated chess since then. * As we all
know, one can easily be a member of the USCF
without playing any rated games whatever.

* -- help bot


Unless you were joking, that is a mistake.

The above link provides the names and expiration dates of all USCF
members regardless of whether they have played a rated game of chess
or not.

Thus, it shows that Phil Innes has not been a USCF member of any kind
since 1996.

He did not even join to present his friend Boris from St. Petersburg
to a USCF board meeting that took place in March, 1999

Sam Sloan

  #2   Report Post  
Old January 1st 09, 04:16 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,390
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:23:08 -0800 (PST), PB
wrote:

On Dec 28 2008, 4:25?am, The Historian
wrote:

Further data - in his "youth", as he claimed on rec.chess.computer
back in 2003, P Innes boasted of a 190 BCF grading. Since P Innes is
in his 50s, his 'youth' would have been the 1970s. 190 BCF translates
to 2200 Elo.-


2120 actually, if you use the conversion formula promulgated by the
BCF (now ECF).

Paul Buswell


Which is pretty darned good, actually.
  #3   Report Post  
Old January 1st 09, 09:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 1, 11:16*am, Mike Murray wrote:

Further data - in his "youth", as he claimed on rec.chess.computer
back in 2003, P Innes boasted of a 190 BCF grading. Since P Innes is
in his 50s, his 'youth' would have been the 1970s. 190 BCF translates
to 2200 Elo.-


2120 actually, if you use the conversion formula promulgated by the
BCF (now ECF).


Which is pretty darned good, actually.



Which one-- the boast, or the claimed rating?

As for me, I prefer to see the ratings list for
myself-- not because of anything particular to
Dr. IMnes, but because ninety percent of the
chess players I've known have had extreme
difficulties in reporting on their own strength
accurately or objectively.

As we saw with Mr. Kingston, there is a
decided tendency to err to the upside, and to
focus on such things as "peak" ratings, and
compare to others' average ratings... as if
that were just normal procedure.

As for Dr. IMnes, I suppose he might have
an even worse case of delusional strength
syndrome, for we already know for certain
that he lied about his nearly-title and his
FIDE rating, and when caught doing so, he
imagined that those who /noticed/ his lying
were the problem-- not his lying itself!

One small point regarding this conversion
of British ratings to FIDE: is it possible that
the proper conversion may have changed
over time? Even if one were to (unwisely)
credit Dr. IMnes' earlier claim, that would
apply to the proper conversion from his
alleged heyday-- perhaps in the seventies.


-- help bot

  #4   Report Post  
Old January 1st 09, 09:31 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 232
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

Only chess players would delude themselves that rating means anything
more than chess skill.
  #5   Report Post  
Old January 1st 09, 10:24 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 1, 4:20*pm, help bot wrote:
On Jan 1, 11:16*am, Mike Murray wrote:

Further data - in his "youth", as he claimed on rec.chess.computer
back in 2003, P Innes boasted of a 190 BCF grading. Since P Innes is
in his 50s, his 'youth' would have been the 1970s. 190 BCF translates
to 2200 Elo.-


2120 actually, if you use the conversion formula promulgated by the
BCF (now ECF).

Which is pretty darned good, actually.


* Which one-- the boast, or the claimed rating?


Poor obsessed Greg Kennedy!

Whatever next? Even Neil Brennen reported my USCF rating 25 years
later as 2150. Then these buffoons say 'prove it'[ while admitting
that USCF rating pre-1990 have been trashed.

Instead this 'brave' commentator, who refused my challenge to play him
stating his usual reason for on-line play, that I would cheat, his
usual guard against his virginity, despite my playing 1000 on-line
correspondance games in the past 3 years myself, despite this risk...

I guess in the end you get opinion or you get some balls.

Kennedy, who recently also falsified my opinion on two other issues,
including one involving a law-suit is content to be logical in the
same way as Louis Blair.

Why such people obsess over others is not particularly obscure. Its
resentment of those who did better than they did - and they would
rather resent and negatively speculate than risk their own arse.

That's about the size of it, and REAL chess players get it right
away.

I have never experienced such negative projections before except from
certain kinds of Americans. They seem to think that by mouthing off
their **** at a distance makes them credible or there expressed
speculations are in some way credible. This particular sub-personality
who is coward to append [ow eve admit] his own name takes on my
record, Fischer's, Kasparov's.

Right!

Kennedy, play some chess and talk of your own life. I will never be
your boy-friend, whatever tactic you employ. Sorry, I don't swing that
way, and maybe I didn't make it as plain as dirt?

Now go grovel with Brennan that I rejected you as main bitch, and have
an ice day.

Phil Innes

* As for me, I prefer to see the ratings list for
myself-- not because of anything particular to
Dr. IMnes, but because ninety percent of the
chess players I've known have had extreme
difficulties in reporting on their own strength
accurately or objectively.

* As we saw with Mr. Kingston, there is a
decided tendency to err to the upside, and to
focus on such things as "peak" ratings, and
compare to others' average ratings... as if
that were just normal procedure.

* As for Dr. IMnes, I suppose he might have
an even worse case of delusional strength
syndrome, for we already know for certain
that he lied about his nearly-title and his
FIDE rating, and when caught doing so, he
imagined that those who /noticed/ his lying
were the problem-- not his lying itself!

* One small point regarding this conversion
of British ratings to FIDE: is it possible that
the proper conversion may have changed
over time? * *Even if one were to (unwisely)
credit Dr. IMnes' earlier claim, that would
apply to the proper conversion from his
alleged heyday-- perhaps in the seventies.

* -- help bot




  #6   Report Post  
Old January 1st 09, 10:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 114
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 1, 4:24*pm, wrote:

Kennedy, who recently also falsified my opinion on two other issues,
including one involving a law-suit is content to be logical in the
same way as Louis Blair.

Why such people obsess over others is not particularly obscure. Its
resentment of those who did better than they did - and they would
rather resent and negatively speculate than risk their own arse. *

That's about the size of it, and REAL chess players get it right
away.

I have never experienced such negative projections before except from
certain kinds of Americans. They seem to think that by mouthing off
their **** at a distance makes them credible or there expressed
speculations are in some way credible. This particular sub-personality
who is coward to append [ow eve admit] his own name takes on my
record, Fischer's, Kasparov's.

Right!

Kennedy, play some chess and talk of your own life. I will never be
your boy-friend, whatever tactic you employ. Sorry, I don't swing that
way, and maybe I didn't make it as plain as dirt?

Now go grovel with Brennan that I rejected you as main bitch, and have
an ice day.

Phil Innes


More of the gentle rhetoric that causes so many of us to skip most of
Mr. Innes' posts.

As it happens, the player whose chess credentials Mr. Innes is
questioning (a) holds a master's rating and (b) is a former state
champion. Whatever his reasons for being disinclined to play Mr.
Innes, I think we can safely eliminate lack of skill as a possibility.
  #7   Report Post  
Old January 1st 09, 11:23 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Rob Rob is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,053
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 1, 4:55*pm, Wick wrote:
On Jan 1, 4:24*pm, wrote:



Kennedy, who recently also falsified my opinion on two other issues,
including one involving a law-suit is content to be logical in the
same way as Louis Blair.


Why such people obsess over others is not particularly obscure. Its
resentment of those who did better than they did - and they would
rather resent and negatively speculate than risk their own arse. *


That's about the size of it, and REAL chess players get it right
away.


I have never experienced such negative projections before except from
certain kinds of Americans. They seem to think that by mouthing off
their **** at a distance makes them credible or there expressed
speculations are in some way credible. This particular sub-personality
who is coward to append [ow eve admit] his own name takes on my
record, Fischer's, Kasparov's.


Right!


Kennedy, play some chess and talk of your own life. I will never be
your boy-friend, whatever tactic you employ. Sorry, I don't swing that
way, and maybe I didn't make it as plain as dirt?


Now go grovel with Brennan that I rejected you as main bitch, and have
an ice day.


Phil Innes


More of the gentle rhetoric that causes so many of us to skip most of
Mr. Innes' posts.

As it happens, the player whose chess credentials Mr. Innes is
questioning (a) holds a master's rating and (b) *is a former state
champion. *Whatever his reasons for being disinclined to play Mr.
Innes, I think we can safely eliminate lack of skill as a possibility.


Sam Sloan?!?
  #8   Report Post  
Old January 2nd 09, 09:33 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
PB PB is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 51
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 1, 9:20*pm, help bot wrote:

* One small point regarding this conversion
of British ratings to FIDE: is it possible that
the proper conversion may have changed
over time? * *Even if one were to (unwisely)
credit Dr. IMnes' earlier claim, that would
apply to the proper conversion from his
alleged heyday-- perhaps in the seventies.

* -- help bot


To the best of my knowledge - and I do have some knowledge of English
chess administration in earlier years - the conversion formula for
conversion of English grades to Elo numbers (and vice versa) has
remained unchanged for a good 25 years or more. Note my wording: I
am referring only to conversion between national systems as the
formula has varied occasionally in terms of converting official FIDE
ratings to English.

Whether the formula used has statistical integrity is not something I
am competent to speak on.

Paul Buswell

  #9   Report Post  
Old January 2nd 09, 12:23 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 1, 5:55*pm, Wick wrote:
On Jan 1, 4:24*pm, wrote:



Kennedy, who recently also falsified my opinion on two other issues,
including one involving a law-suit is content to be logical in the
same way as Louis Blair.


Why such people obsess over others is not particularly obscure. Its
resentment of those who did better than they did - and they would
rather resent and negatively speculate than risk their own arse. *


That's about the size of it, and REAL chess players get it right
away.


I have never experienced such negative projections before except from
certain kinds of Americans. They seem to think that by mouthing off
their **** at a distance makes them credible or there expressed
speculations are in some way credible. This particular sub-personality
who is coward to append [ow eve admit] his own name takes on my
record, Fischer's, Kasparov's.


Right!


Kennedy, play some chess and talk of your own life. I will never be
your boy-friend, whatever tactic you employ. Sorry, I don't swing that
way, and maybe I didn't make it as plain as dirt?


Now go grovel with Brennan that I rejected you as main bitch, and have
an ice day.


Phil Innes


More of the gentle rhetoric that causes so many of us to skip most of
Mr. Innes' posts.

As it happens, the player whose chess credentials Mr. Innes is
questioning (a) holds a master's rating and (b) *is a former state
champion. *Whatever his reasons for being disinclined to play Mr.
Innes, I think we can safely eliminate lack of skill as a possibility.


You yourself are rated 2100+ right, Wick? In our games it is 2-0 to
me, right? And both in under 20 moves as I recall.

What I am saying to Kennedy is that he thinks its big to put down
other people, but is not actually brave enough to illustrate his own
games, or even his name.

Of course, I doubt that our chess play together Wick, will have soured
your opinion, or skewed it to any degree.

Phil Innes


  #10   Report Post  
Old January 2nd 09, 12:52 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Jan 2, 7:23*am, wrote:
On Jan 1, 5:55*pm, Wick wrote:



On Jan 1, 4:24*pm, wrote:


Kennedy, who recently also falsified my opinion on two other issues,
including one involving a law-suit is content to be logical in the
same way as Louis Blair.


Why such people obsess over others is not particularly obscure. Its
resentment of those who did better than they did - and they would
rather resent and negatively speculate than risk their own arse. *


That's about the size of it, and REAL chess players get it right
away.


I have never experienced such negative projections before except from
certain kinds of Americans. They seem to think that by mouthing off
their **** at a distance makes them credible or there expressed
speculations are in some way credible. This particular sub-personality
who is coward to append [ow eve admit] his own name takes on my
record, Fischer's, Kasparov's.


Right!


Kennedy, play some chess and talk of your own life. I will never be
your boy-friend, whatever tactic you employ. Sorry, I don't swing that
way, and maybe I didn't make it as plain as dirt?


Now go grovel with Brennan that I rejected you as main bitch, and have
an ice day.


Phil Innes


More of the gentle rhetoric that causes so many of us to skip most of
Mr. Innes' posts.


As it happens, the player whose chess credentials Mr. Innes is
questioning (a) holds a master's rating and (b) *is a former state
champion. *Whatever his reasons for being disinclined to play Mr.
Innes, I think we can safely eliminate lack of skill as a possibility.


You yourself are rated 2100+ right, Wick? In our games it is 2-0 to
me, right? And both in under 20 moves as I recall.

What I am saying to Kennedy is that he thinks its big to put down
other people, but is not actually brave enough to illustrate his own
games, *or even his name.

Of course, I doubt that our chess play together Wick, will have soured
your opinion, or skewed it to any degree.

Phil Innes


Sorry to discourage you, but Mr. Wick is a C-player.

So your score of 0-2 even with computer help indicates that you are a
D-player.

But who knows, with hard work you might even get up to Class B in a
few years.

Sam Sloan
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Motion for Summary Judgment in Polgar vs. USCF - First Draft samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 3 October 6th 08 03:55 AM
Motion for Summary Judgment in Polgar vs. USCF samsloan rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 October 5th 08 09:15 PM
Answer by Sam Sloan to Ethics Complaint by Grant Perks samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 0 January 27th 07 02:54 PM
$am $loan for USCF Executive Board Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 12 May 2nd 06 08:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:51 PM.

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