David Kane wrote:

The editor received numerous letters blasting his decision to fire GM
Evans.

Parr continues to repeat this lie. GM Larry Evans continues
to write for the USCF, only now his boring and factually
inaccurate answers appear in Chess Life for Kids. The
crime is the same - only the victims have changed.

You're funny.

Here is some of the recent output of GM Evans writing
for the USCF: (Questions are from the readers. Answers are from
GM Evans himself. Source: Chess Life for Kids Dec. 2006)

"Q. I have never been rated. How can I get a rating?

A. [Evans]You must compete in an official USCF tournament
to be assigned a number of based on your performance..."

A number of...what? Rating points?


This is, of course, false. There are half a dozen ratings that
would likely answer a reader's questions about how
good he is, some of which he could obtain more easily
than the method Evans suggests. Moreover, the
target reader for the magazine, scholastic
players, might be 7 years old. Possibly the very worst
advice for such a player would be to seek out a non
kid-friendly USCF tournament where everyone will
outrate him by 1000 points. Not only would he *not*
learn much about his strength, he'd likely
have a horrible time in the process.

True. However, there are USCF-rated tournaments
just for kids.

Later in the answer, Evans plugs one of his Cardoza books
and repeats a paragraph from it.

Hmm. So his royalties may be higher on *Cardoza*
books, eh? :D

"Q. I'm an avid player but not very good. I've long been
interested in signficantly improving my ability, but how
does one go about finding a reputable instructor? They
aren't exactly listed in the Yellow Pages. What's the going
rate for chess lessons?

A. [Evans] Good teachers charge anywhere from $25
to $100 for a lesson. The best way to find one is at
your local chess club. Or phone the USCF and ask
if they know of someone in your area. ..."

Another barrage of innacurracy

*inaccuracy* :D

and bad advice.
Possibly the scholastic player's "local chess club"
(which he attends at school) consists of his fellow
1st graders and one instructor - who might not be
counted on to give impartial answers being himself
an instructor. The suggestion to call an office
worker 2000 miles away to learn about local
chess coaches, most with little or no connection
to Tennessee, is not helpful.

Good point. The folks at the USCF might be able to
steer someone to a local TD, who in turn might be able
to give some useful advice, maybe.

"Q. We know that White has the advantage of the first move.
Just how big of an advantage is it?

A. [Evans]The first move gives White the initiative. It can be compared
to having the serve in tennis. A summary of results by color
of 6000 games in 45 tournaments from 1851 ot 1932 shows that
White won 38%, Black won 31% and 31% were drawn. Over the
years it has been increasingly harder to win with Black, but somewhat
easier to draw.

The better player will win with either color - it just takes longer
with Black. ..."

It is noteworthy that Evans refers to statistics covering
the period 1851-1932, ignoring the last 74 years of chess
and reminding us all of his distance from the modern game.

Oh, baloney. GM Evans is up-to-date all the way up to
about 1972. Then he peters out rather quickly.

His claim that the "better player" will win with either color is
not supported by the evidence. Kasparov won 35% of
his games as Black. Who were these "equal-or-better-
than-Kasparov" players in the other 65% of his games?

What GM Evans meant was that the *much* better player
will likely win, regardless of color. Just as in tennis, where
having the serve will hardly save you from Rod Laver's....
Oops, I'm beginning to show tell-tale signs not unlike those
demonstrated by GM Evans.

IMO, what is really needed is a person who is very patient,
and with a strong desire to be helpful. These are not the
qualities we see in GM Evans -- or most GMs, for that matter.
Yet they are the ones considered most qualified for the job.
I suspect there is another factor at work here; namely, the
desire to "support" chess GMs financially. The very young
ones get grant money, while the older ones who can no
longer compete, get newspaper or magazine columns to
supplement their book royalties. And that's the way it is.

-- help bot