| Taylor Kingston 2006-11-19, 8:43 pm |
|
On Nov 15, 2:38 pm, "Rob" <robmt...@msn.com> wrote:
quote:
> <snipped>
>
No[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> LOL. this is too funny. Sorry but I don't think a hair can be split any
> farther. Did anyone finish below him? I think in most sports, if noone
> finishes below you ,you are last. But I may be proven wrong, wouldn't
> be the first time either. :-)
Um, Rob, not to be rude, but did you actually read what I wrote? The
nonsensical nature of your question rather takes me aback. There were
*_15_* players in the tournament. Lasker finished tied for 7th-8th
place. That means that 7 other players finished below him. If there had
been no one below him in the standings, then he would have been in 15th
place, not =3D7-8th.
Just to make it absolutely clear, here are the full standings:
1-2. Capablanca, Botvinnik: 10-4
3-5. Fine, Reshevsky, Euwe: 9=BD-4=BD
6. Alekhine: 9-5
7-8. Lasker, Flohr: 8=BD-5=BD
9. Vidmar: 6-8
10-11. Tartakower, Bogolyubov: 5=BD-8=BD
12. Tylor: 4=BD-9=BD
13. Alexander: 3=BD-10=BD
14. Thomas: 3-11
15. Winter: 2=BD-11=BD
Now, Rob, if you look very carefully, and read in the normal Western
fashion from top to bottom, you will see that several names are listed
*AFTER* Lasker and Flohr. You will also see that their scores are worse
than Lasker's. That means they finished *BELOW* him. If you add them
up, you will see that they total 7. That means 7 of the 15 players
finished *BELOW* Lasker!
Do you get it now??
|