quote:

---

> On Nov 15, 2:38 pm, "Rob" <robmt...@msn.com> wrote:
.. No[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> 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??