ChessBanter - View Single Post

**Nick** · August 3rd 06, 09:26 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc

wrote:
A GOOD AND GREAT THING

I usually agree with Wlod, and I disagree with
Susan Polgar and Paul Truong about Sam Sloan's
election to the USCF Executive Board, which I hold to
be a good and great thing.

Having said that, I think Wlod's suggestion that
there is something odd in Paul Truong getting some
byline credit when working with Susan Polgar to be
wrongheaded. The arrangement is common enough in a
million different authorial endeavours around the world.

Further, if proper credit were not given to Mr.
Truong (proper credit is defined as that which the two
principals mutually and freely agree upon) then the
opposite charge would be levelled. Namely, that Mr.
Truong was ghosting Susan Polgar's work, and the
reading public was being misled. Moreover, the charge
about the reading public being misled would contain a
grain of truth if proper credit were not accorded to
Mr. Truong.

I see the credit accorded Mr. Truong for his
efforts to be an entirely normal arrangement.

It should be noted that *when* Paul Truong has made
no contribution to something written by Zsuzsa
(Susan) Polgar, he has received no byline credit for it.

For example, Paul Truong received no byline
credit for the book "Queen of the Kings Game"
by Zsuzsa Polgar and Jacob Shutzman.

As I have noted in earlier posts (e.g.
read the RGCM thread 'Nana Alexandria'),
"Queen of the Kings Game" contains some
false and offensive statements, particularly
about Nana Alexandria and Xie Jun.

In my view, Paul Truong should not be held
responsible for the contents of "Queen of
the Kings Game".

One final point: an absurd charge levelled in
the past was that Mr. Truong was exploiting Susan
Polgar by associating his name with hers. Ai, yi, yi.
If Papa and Mama Polgar and those three sisters don't
know their own minds and can't work out cost-benefits,
then no one on this Earth can do so.

Paul Truong is no one's fool, which is obvious
enough, and the Polgars are sharp-eyed folk if ever
sight were given to male and female. I assume in the
absence of hard evidence to the contrary that the
Polgar-Truong arrangement is one of mutual benefit.

I call that normal.

I have noted with disdain that some writers in RGC*
have made inappropriate comments about the personal
relationship between Zsuzsa Polgar and Paul Truong.
Those comments seem to reveal more about those
writers' prejudices than anything relevant about
Zsuzsa Polgar and Paul Truong.

In my view, Zsuzsa Polgar is a woman who's
completely capable of looking after the best
interests of herself and her family. She does
not need and I doubt that she appreciates
any strangers telling her how to manage her
personal relationship with Paul Truong.

--Nick

Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:
wrote:
http://www.chesscafe.com/polgar/polgar.htm

As far as I can tell from reading the column, Trollgar thinks Sloan is
unfit for the EB because Sloan 'attacked' Trollgar. In other words,
Trollgar can't think past themselves. Is there anyone in chess politics
that doesn't think the word "chess" starts with "i"?

With all respect and admiration for
Grandmaster Susan Polgar, how is it
that Paul Truong will not allow her
a single fart without claiming himself
a partial credit for his contribution?

Wlod