| Louis Blair 2006-11-19, 8:43 pm |
| I wrote (15 Nov 2006 18:34:49 -0800):
7 Phil Innes wrote (Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:28:46 GMT):
7 7 ... And here is the cross table for the [Nottingham 1936]
7 7 tournament. Seems like Lasker did not only come 8th, but
7 7 came last!
7 7
7 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Rest Total
7 7
7 7 1/2 Capablanca * 0 =BD =BD 1 1 =BD =BD 4 6 10 =A3175
7 7
7 7 7/8 Flohr 1 * =BD =BD 0 =BD =BD 1 4 4=BD 8=BD
7 7
7 7 3/5 Fine =BD =BD * =BD =BD =BD =BD 1 4 5=BD 9=BD =A358
7 7
7 7 1/2 Botvinnik =BD =BD =BD * =BD =BD =BD =BD 3=BD 6=BD 10 =A3175
7 7
7 7 6 Alekhine 0 1 =BD =BD * 0 1 =BD 3=BD 5=BD 9
7 7
7 7 3/5 Reshevsky 0 =BD =BD =BD 1 * 0 1 3=BD 6 9=BD =A358
7 7
7 7 3/5 Euwe =BD =BD =BD =BD 0 1 * 0 3 6=BD 9=BD =A358
7 7
7 7 7/8 Lasker =BD 0 0 =BD =BD 0 1 * 2=BD 6 8=BD
7 7 ...
7 ...
_
Phil Innes wrote (Thu, 16 Nov 2006 02:52:54 GMT):
7 Although Louis is comprehension challenged, let me pass
7 over his message below which ignores any context
_
Phil Innes has ignored context in notes of mine. I do not
see him apologizing.
_
Phil Innes wrote (Thu, 16 Nov 2006 02:52:54 GMT):
7 to suggest that Lasker is placed last in this group, since
7 the cross-table reveals Flohr's score contains 2 wins while
7 Lasker had only 1 win. ...
_
The above list is not in order of "placement". If it were,
Capablanca and Botvinnik would have been at the top
with 10 points. They would have been followed by
Fine, Reshevsky, and Euwe, each with 9=BD points.
Then would have come Alekhine with 9 points, followed
by Flohr and Lasker, each with 8=BD points. After them,
would have come Vidmar, Tartakower, Bogolyubov,
Tylor, Alexander, Thomas, Winter (with Tartakower
and Bogolyubov tied) if Phil Innes had really presented
"the cross table for the tournament."
|