From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: DMC vs. Harper
Date: 1 Jan 93 13:24:37 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1hvqecINNgaf@agate.berkeley.edu>, jeff@emily10.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely) writes:
> I want to see this match.  We will all see that DMC is not a chess player
> and he'll have to go find some other group to annoy.

If YOU are so sure I can't play, why don't YOU accept the challenge???

Jeff, (and all others like him) you sig line should read:

"Another all-talk blowhard"

I am willing to place my checkbook on the line--are YOU? Bruce wasn't,
Sven is going to do his best to weasel out of it, and YOU will, I bet,
foloow suit.

> 
> Now both of you are dismayed at the other declining the match which means
> that each of you are willing to play.  Why doesn't one of you name a specific
> day and time to play a game on ICS.  If the other fails to show up, then the 
> argument can be considered settled.  So.. How about it!?  

If you, or anyone else can answer me two things, I'll gladly play ANYONE on
ICS:

1. How is a modem/fiber linkup going to 'prove' I know how to play chess? How
can ANY of you assure I just won't be dialed in on my 386 while my 486 runs a
chess program at max skill??? (Use your brains people, you can't.) So, even if
I win, people like YOU and SVEN and BRUCE will STILL claim I don't know how to
play.

2. What does my ability to play have to ANYTHING with the issues I raise? Are
you 'people' so damned egotistic that you believe only a GM or IM can have a
valid opinion on an issue??? No wonder you bought Benjie's article
wholesale--you are too wrapped up in titles to, just for one second, realize
that a GM is only an expert at ONE thing. And that one thing is playing chess.
NOT commenting on other GMs games. NOT international politics. NOT the law. NOT
ANYTHING except playing chess. Suppose Bruce trounces me wholesale? So what?
Does that prove I don't know how to play? Does it mean the issues on policies
and law I raised are invalid? If I beat Benjamin Himself, would that make his
views wrong and mine right?

Have a clue people. You are advancing a lame argument (Fischer should be locked
up and Benjamin's critique was valid) and you are trying to swerve it into some
totally unrealted area. Why? Because you hope the beating I take there will
hurt me as much as my words have hurt you here.

You don't care about truth anymore than Sven does. You people have posted
several slams against him, but from what I have seen, most of you are exactly
like him. (Perhaps that is why you dislike him so?)

As for my challenge to Harper. The man postulated an opinion based upon no
facts. When I pointed out how wrong he was, he called me a liar. Said he still
thought I didn't know how to play the game. My challenge to him is designed to
do one thing--hurt him. He either backs down and faces humiliation for not
having a spine, or he isks paying for a plane ticket.

Sure, I'd GLADLY play him over the fibers IF there were some way of proving no
one/thing was giving me moves. That way, even if I lost, I would still shame
him into admitting that his 'expert opinion' was flat out wrong.

I want to humiliate that man to the very last degree. So, if any of you can
come up with an honesty assurance program, the match WILL happen.

(And, I refuse to accept Harper's claim that he trusts me to be honest. If he
trusted me, he never would have posted his 'belief' that I could not play a
second time!)


> 
> By the way, anyone got a good library of rating supplements?  What's DMC's 
> rating?  Elliot?

You won't find me in there. It has been too long since I have played a
tournament.

Looks like Harper is going to have to go on no information there. (Of course,
he felt comfortible doing so when he postulated his opinion. So, this should be
nothing unusual for him.)