| |
Main
Date: 09 Dec 2008 13:56:17
From:
Subject: What has happened to Taylor Kingston?
|
Having been asked about his own claim - to be "2300+ Elo" which must
be 2400+ USCF, over his highest rating of 1800 USCF, Our Taylor has
gone silent.
I asked him if he used books and/or computers to boost his rating 600+
points? No reply.
Instead, he acknowledges that GM Nunn assessed 1911 players as -350
current rating, though disagrees with Nunn for no stated reason
[previously he accorded with Nunn about Botvinnik's opponents throwing
games to him, after first agreeing with Evans that they did so, he
agreed with Nunn that they didn't]
Then Kingston Taylor launched a nasty e-mail campaign [copied Edward
Winter, and several others here] to trash Evans and playwright Laurie.
Kingston Taylor does not acknowledge that he did so, but says 'he does
not recall', much like Ollie North.
On being offered the return of his own e-mails Kingston Taylor says
nothing about (a) his request that I do so, and (b) whatever was in
his mind when he did it.
On being asked why he would deny he sent me what he did, he has
nothing to say about the server's records of what he sent me, and what
I replied.
That is what goes on here - questions which have no effect when
answered.
The latest catastrophe from Kingston sets up his other hero, [his
previous was Lasker] Morphy, against the study of Nunn which sets
Morphy at some lower level - in fact 350 to 400 less than Elo's
estimate.
Dr Nunn is a mathematician.
That is the state of play here - only interupted by my ability to
point out his duplicity - therefore as we understand things - Morphy's
rating is dependent on my rating to point out what Nunn said about
Morphy's rating.
The usual US conflation of irreducible heroes, and any sense obtained
more generally in the whole world about such hero worship.
Phil Innes
|
|
| |
Date: 10 Dec 2008 08:07:07
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: What has happened to Taylor Kingston?
|
On Dec 9, 5:42=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
(Snipped amusing responses to Innes-crement.)
I think what has happened to Taylor Kingston is that he has chosen to
waste too much time answering the Brattleboro Bedlam. But Christmas is
coming, and so perhaps fruitcake is on his mind.
|
| |
Date: 09 Dec 2008 16:07:54
From: help bot
Subject: Re: What has happened to Taylor Kingston?
|
On Dec 9, 5:42=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> > Having been asked about his own claim - to be
To once /have been/-- what's happened to Dr.
IMnes? Has he been ripped from our Earthly
time zone?
> > I asked him if he used books and/or computers to boost his rating 600+
> > points? No reply.
> =A0 back in the early 1980s there weren't any good chess programs anyway.
Everybody knows this-- except Dr. IMnes,
apparently. Has he been sniffing glue again?
> > [previously he accorded with Nunn about Botvinnik's opponents throwing
> > games to him, after first agreeing with Evans that they did so, he
> > agreed with Nunn that they didn't]
What a dim-witted summary!
Dr. Nunn did not claim that anyone could not
have thrown games to anybody; what he
concluded, as would any rational human being,
was that Mr. Evan's "reasoning" was fatally
flawed; was utter nonsense. But to heck with
doctor Nunn; any freshman in Logic could tell
you this just as easily.
> =A0 I think Phil's been dabbling in hallucinogens again.
I'm no expert on drugs, but how can anyone
be certain it's not glue-sniffing?
> > Kingston Taylor does not acknowledge that he did so, but says 'he does
> > not recall', much like Ollie North.
> =A0 That's right, Phil. I have great difficulty recalling events that
> did not occur.
Um, but they *did* occur. I may be killed if
I reveal any of the details, but trust me, my
old pal was lying through his teeth-- like when
president Nixon said he was not a crook. Or
when, more recently, we were told about "a
mushroom cloud" which loomed.
> =A0 That's what goes on here =97 our Phil raving non-stop.
It's better that way. As with earthquakes, it
is not a good thing to allow the pressure to
build up over time; better if it is released more
gradually, lest we get another of Dr. IMnes'
famous violent tantrums.
> =A0 Looks like the brown acid is kicking in.
I always liked the smell of those purple
mimeographs they used to hand out in
school, decades ago. But I think our Dr.
IMnes may have moved on to the harder
stuff-- to sniffing Elmer's all-purpose or
maybe even Elmer's Ultimate glue.
Of course I'm no doctor, but he certainly
displays one of the symptoms of long-
term drug use-- severe brain damage.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 09 Dec 2008 14:42:05
From:
Subject: Re: What has happened to Taylor Kingston?
|
On Dec 9, 4:56=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> Having been asked about his own claim - to be "2300+ Elo" which must
> be 2400+ USCF, over his highest rating of 1800 USCF, Our Taylor has
> gone silent.
Nonsense, Phil, and you know it. The subject of my USCF postal
rating, which was close to Elo 2300 circa 1985, has been discussed
many times here. No need to prod that old horse any more.
> I asked him if he used books and/or computers to boost his rating 600+
> points? No reply.
I don't recall seeing that question from you, but I'll answer it now
anyway. I used no computer in my postal chess play; back in the early
1980s there weren't any good chess programs anyway. As for books, yes,
I used them in postal chess. That is entirely within the rules.
Everyone can do it, and in fact the literature USCF sent to postal
players encouraged use of books.
> Instead, he acknowledges that GM Nunn assessed 1911 players as -350
> current rating, though disagrees with Nunn for no stated reason
It's amazing how Phil fails to read what people write, and then
claims they haven't written it.
> [previously he accorded with Nunn about Botvinnik's opponents throwing
> games to him, after first agreeing with Evans that they did so, he
> agreed with Nunn that they didn't]
I think Phil's been dabbling in hallucinogens again.
> Then Kingston Taylor launched a nasty e-mail campaign [copied Edward
> Winter, and several others here] to trash Evans and playwright Laurie.
Since yesterday? That was when I disagreed about Nunn. Now I know
Phil's been smoking something illegal.
> Kingston Taylor does not acknowledge that he did so, but says 'he does
> not recall', much like Ollie North.
That's right, Phil. I have great difficulty recalling events that
did not occur.
> On being offered the return of his own e-mails Kingston Taylor says
> nothing about (a) his request that I do so, and (b) whatever was in
> his mind when he did it.
>
> On being asked why he would deny he sent me what he did, he has
> nothing to say about the server's records of what he sent me, and what
> I replied.
>
> That is what goes on here - questions which have no effect when
> answered.
That's what goes on here =97 our Phil raving non-stop.
> The latest catastrophe from Kingston sets up his other hero, [his
> previous was Lasker] Morphy, against the study of Nunn which sets
> Morphy at some lower level - in fact 350 to 400 less than Elo's
> estimate.
>
> Dr Nunn is a mathematician.
And our Phil is a newsgroup loon.
> That is the state of play here - only interupted by my ability to
> point out his duplicity -
Hmmm, as I recall, Phil, most of your recent posts here have
involved you lying about your USCF rating. You "pointing out
duplicity" is like Rush Limbaugh calling Barack Obama fat.
> therefore as we understand things - Morphy's
> rating is dependent on my rating to point out what Nunn said about
> Morphy's rating.
Looks like the brown acid is kicking in.
|
|
