London Classic Grand Tour

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Ben, you're always a good read, but even you can fall foul. E..g. from above "... tremendous site."

That spelling leaves you open to interpretation by the insertion of a possible missing "h". May I suggest that you revisit "site", drop the "e" and then insert "gh"

Rule number one in pedantry. Don't replace one spelling mistake (site) with another (sitgh)...

[Mike Truran]

Rule number two - don't misread things. John used "insert", not "add".

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Ah, but he didn't say where! (Rule three - stop digging!)

[John McKenna]

I did not think I'd need to, Chris.

Indeed, Ben has corrected himself correctly.

Dig this - as I believe you can - the original purpose of my post that you quoted, above, was semantic not pedantic.

If I had been trying to be the latter I would've also pointed out "spectater". (Apologies, Ben, my hand was forced.)

Just in case anyone is thinking of accusing me of pedantry, again, please note that I only mentioned it to make a debating point - not for the sake of pedantry.

Now if anyone wants to bring in a different charge - one of sophistry - I think you may have grounds.

But, let's not leave this thread hanging on a sour note...

There are those of us here - like Ben Edgell and David Robertson - who prefer all the thrills and spills of the Super Rapid and there are those, such as me, who prefer the mysteries of the Grand Tour.

To my mind the most important thing about the London Chess Classic is that it has something for everyone - players and spectators, alike.

(As does this forum, by the way, even if you may not like all that you read here.)

[Nick Grey]

An observation from the whole event - high heels on arbiters must make loads of noise.