From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Harper vs. DMC
Date: 4 Jan 93 13:26:58 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec31.165312.8479@progress.com>, disabito@progress.COM (Paul Disabito) writes:
> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
> 
>>Paul, DMC MADE this offer. Go back and read the times of the posts. I threw
>>down a rather spiked guantlet, and Mr. Harper is trying to get away...
> 
> 
> Yes, DMC, you made an offer. Bruce Harper rejected your offer. Did he reject
> it because he was afraid, or did he reject it because he didn't want to
> meet you in person? Well, in my opinion, if he was afraid to play you,
> he would not have made a counter offer (which offer, by the way, I was
> referring to in my post). 

Gee, nice of you to post Harper's motives.

However, the fact remains that sure, he was willing to play when there were no
stakes of any substance, but he is unwilling to play when there is even the
slightest risk.

Real conviction in his 'expert opinion'.

But, I guess you are right, when the man has nothing to lose, he is not afraid
of losing.


> 
> If I understand you clearly, you claim that Bruce does not have any "balls"
> because he rejected your offer. But his rejection of your offer does not
> prove anything other than that he rejected your offer. His motives have not
> been proved. Not wanting to meet you seems a perfectly acceptable motive.
> In fact, in light of Bruce's counter offer, it seems to be the true motive.

No, it appears he is unconvinced of his own jufgment. If he doesn't want to
meet me in person, another player has offered to drive from Dayton to Toledo to
play.

Mr.Harper does not have to meet me.

He has yet to accept the offer.

Therefore, his rejection is NOT based on an undesirability to meet me, it is
based on FEAR of my unknown skills.

Hey, if the guy believed what he said, but just didn't want to meet me, he
would jump at the option of having a 1600 player take me on.


> 
> You could argue that he is, in fact, afraid and that his counter offer was
> only made with the understanding that it would be rejected. It is not a
> serious offer, you could say, because there is no way to insure fairness.
> Either party could cheat. While it is true that both of you could cheat,
> it seems less likely that Bruce would cheat. He is, after all, a strong 
> player. At any rate, if you did contend that he rejected your
> offer because he was afraid of playing you, you could still not
> prove it. You are merely speculating as to his motives.

Ahhh...the better a chessplayer one is, the more honest he is.
And, if I start to kick his ass and he does NOT want a haircut, what will he
do then?

Right, he'll stay honest because he is a good chessplayer.

> 
> I'd like to see you accept his counter offer. You could--and probably will--
> reject it on the grounds that there is no way to insure absolute fairness.
> Too bad for us if you do. It would have made great spectacle.

Indeed.

Maybe he will let a champion decide his fate for him. the tournament would be
here, with an impartial judge who could be posting the moves real time for all
the net to watch.

Well, whatta 'ya say Bruce?


> 
> -Paul DiSabito
> 

Make no mistake, I am willing to play this through to the end. (God, what a
lousy pun!)