I don't have time right now to reply to all of Keene's excuses, but
some of them are priceless.

I am truly grateful to
those who have pointed out typos -- it's a wonderful free proofreading
service.

Of course, unlike Keene, most authors tend to proofread their work
*BEFORE* it is published, not *AFTER*. I suppose that this was Keene's
attempt at reverse psychology or saracasm, but it fits with reality
more than he would like to admit.

How on earth do they know my motives for writing

Usually, one's motives can be seen by looking at one's actions. When a
person writes numerous instant books without the least concern for
quality of the analysis, spelling, history, or style--as long as they
come out as soon as possible--one can reasonably conclude that the
person is far more concerned with making a quick buck than with the
quality of the writings.

LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING HONESTLY... I felt a tremendous sense of fulfillment. A burst of energy. I doubt I could have written better notes for my book
than if I took 10 years.

Are you suggesting you had reached some sort of higher level of
consciousness, which allowed you to do in two weeks of part-time work
what requires months of care and attention from us lesser mortals?

3. Indeed, that was the official title of the match agreed by Campomanes
at the time as part of the sponsorship deal, ,justified by the fact
that the contest was an official part of the world championship cycle.
If you dont like it, please complain to campo and not to me.

Oh, I see: you were only following orders. Campomanes commands, Keene
must follow.

No, I'm complaining to you, Mr. Keene, because quite obviously it was
*not* a world championship match. Even if Campomanes--which you
notoriously despise--was dishonest enough to give the Kasparov-Korchnoi
match that "official" title, nothing forced you to follow suit and
repeat Campomanes' misleading title on the front cover. At most it
shows you are *both* at fault.

I am winning this debate hands down, if I must say so myself.

As, indeed, you must.

When I am wrong, I say so.

Really? Let's recall the time you called a Russian player a
"grandmaster" who didn't actually have the FIDE title. Your reply to
that criticism was to say that FIDE is not the only body to award
titles so he is, too, a grandmaster.

Or let's take the case of you calling "abyssimal" the tournament record
of Steinitz as world champion (I think--too tired to recall at the
moment if it wasn't another player) when he never played in tournaments
during that time. Your explanation was that this is a perfectly
accurate use of the word "abyssimal". Of course common sense (not to
mention the OED) disagree, but again the world is wrong, not Mr. Keene.


(Now that we have this cleared up, I suppose you wouldn't mind if I
said you have an "abyssimal record as an actor in pronographic films",
under the equally valid reasoning that, to my knowledge, you never
acted in any such films at all.)

What about you writing an illict book about the Karpov-Korchnoi match
and being severly criticized by Korchnoi for it? Oh, as usual, he was
totally wrong and misuderstood your pure and innocent actions. How
about plagiarizing four pages of John Donaldson's analysis and printing
it in one of your books? Oh wait--that was the typsetter's fault, of
course, who mistakenly his work as if it was yours because you had it
bundled together (strange how this sort of "unfortunate overshight"
*NEVER* happens to other authors.)

In fact, Mr. Keene, you have often been caught in the wrong, but when
you are, you almost invariably claim you didn't do anything wrong at
all. It's always an unfortunate misunderstanding of your pure
intentions.