if he can win against her

[navi tasan]

A says: Yesterday, Tom played chess with Jane and won once. He lost four times.
B replies:
1) Jane is an international master. If he can win against her, he is a good player.
2) Jane is an international master. If he won against her, he is a good player.
3) Jane is an international master. If he won against her, even if it was only once, he is a good player.
4) Jane is an international master. If he won against her once, he is a good player.
5) Jane is an international master. If he wins against her, he is a good player.

Which of the sentences 1-5 are acceptable in this context?

 

[jutfrank]

They're all 'acceptable'. Is that really your question?

You can also say it like this:

Jane's an international master, so if he can beat her, he must be a very good player.

 

[navi tasan]

Thank you very much, Jutfrank,

Yes, that was my question. I was very doubtful about '5'. 'Wins' seems to me to imply that they play with each other at least occasionally. All we know is that they played against each other once.

My problem with '2' is that it is misleading.

I don't like '1' that much either. He can beat her sometimes, but he definitely isn't better than her.

I can see that '1' or '2' might be used, but I find them misleading. ('2' a lot more than '1', which is not misleading after all).

Gratefully,
Navi

 

[Tarheel]

2. Jane is an international master. If he won against her, he's a good player.

I don't think that's misleading. It doesn't say he beats her regularly. (He doesn't.) But he's good enough to beat her, so that says something about his skill level.