quote:

---

>June 26, 2005 was the date of the 1st Annual RGCP Grudge Match. Eleven
>months afterwards, this historic matchup is still mentioned in RGCP.
>But how can we say it was the first, unless there is a 2nd also? Well,
>fear not.
>
>It is almost time for the 2nd Annual RGCP Grudge Match, but I am
>honestly uncertain about who should be the contenders this time.
>Everyone on here is so full of vile and spit against everyone else that
>it seems just about any two RGCPers would do.
>
>Well, as last time, I'll toss my money in this time to sponsor if we
>have some co-sponsors and we can find a pair of contenders and terms.
>Only this time, I'll double up and stake $1500 this time on the match
>if there are some co-sponsors that would agree to come up with another
>$750.
>
>So let's open the discussion. Which RGCPers would we like to see face
>off against each other OTB?
>
>I should also ask potential contenders, which of you would be willing
>to play in a two person match if you were nominated? (Now potential
>contestants, don't hold out hoping for me to double up again next year
>and kick in $3K for the 3rd Annual RGCP Grudge Match, because if I
>can't pull off this year's match, next year's match won't happen!)
>
>And as last time, I'll ask potential co-sponsors, which of you would be
>willing to put up some money for one of the few interesting and "real"
>things that ever happen on RGCP?
>

quote:

---

> On 18 Apr 2006 18:00:04 -0700, "Tyrone Slothrop"
> <lttyroneslothrop@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> RGCP Grudge Match ?
>
> I do not think it will be possible to come up with a RGCP Grudge match
> that works as well as the match did last year. I think you need the
> following elements:
>
> 1. Genuine animosity and indeed hatred.
>
> 2. The players must be strong enough so that the games will be
> interesting to watch. For example, nobody would pay to see the games
> by Neil Brennen, a 1500 player.
>
> 3. The players must be close enough in strength so that either side
> has a fair chance to win.
>
> A good match would have been Jim Eade vs. Tim Hanke. There was genuine
> animosity between them. Hanke used to accuse Eade of wanting to sleep
> or having already slept with his sister-in-law (as though this would
> have been a crime). Eade was a stronger player and would have been a
> heavy favorite, but Hanke was strong enough to have some chance to
> win.
>
> But, alas, neither player posts here any more. Hanke has done his
> patriotic duty by going off to Iraq where he fights in the war against
> the Freedom Fighters over there, whereas Eade has moved in with his
> sister-in-law full time and he gets the two sisters to have lesbian
> sex with each other just for his own entertainment while resting up
> from sex from one or the other of them in between.
>
> I could play with Taylor Kingston. However, this would hardly be fair.
> I would not want to take advantage of the fact that Kingston suffered
> from a horrible birth defect while his father was giving birth, which
> rendered Kingston unable to play chess and left him with a rare brain
> disease which compels him to search endlessly through immense volumes
> of published material searching for tiny spelling mistakes and
> typographical errors. Strangely, there is only one other chess player
> in the entire world that has that odd affliction. That is Edward
> Winter.
>
> The match between me and Bill Brock worked in part because, although
> Brock was 110-points higher rated, he gave me draw odds. Thus, to win
> a four game match I had only to win two games, whereas he needed two
> wins and a draw. I won two out of the first three and thereby won the
> match.
>
> A good match would be Sloan vs. Bauer. The problem is that Bauer is
> rated 366 points higher than me. This would seem to make him the
> prohibitive favorite. However, I feel that Bauer's rating is not real.
> He manipulated the rating system to get his rating over 2300 by
> playing a rated match against a friend. Also, he has not played a
> rated game in nine years since 1997. I feel that Bauer's true strength
> is not more than 2150, and probably even less than that.
> http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?10320372
>
> If I am right, then, in a four game match, I should win one game. My
> games are almost never draws, so any odds involving draws cannot be
> considered. However, a good match might be a three game match. The
> deal would be that I only have to score one win or two draws in the
> three games to win the match. This I think is a fair match. Bauer
> would still be the heavy favorite but, nevertheless, I think I can win
> it.
>
> Back to Eade: Eade once told me (when we were still on good terms)
> that he is incapable of producing children and therefore his wife has
> never been able to get pregnant. Gentleman that I am, I offered to
> impregnate his wife free of charge because I look a bit like Eade and
> I have the proven capability time and again to get a woman pregnant.
> However, Eade respectfully declined my generous offer.
>
> So, I propose to play a match against Eade. Same odds as Bauer, since
> Eade has about the same rating as Bauer. However, I do not want money
> from Eade. If I win, my winnings will go to charity. All I get as my
> prize for winning is to f Eade's wife (whom I have met, by the way.
> Not a bad looking broad.) Eade can throw in her sister too, as a
> bonus.
>
> Does that sound like a fair deal?
>
> Sam Sloan