On Aug 17, 7:49 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

"Beliavsky" wrote in message

On Aug 1, 7:55 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

Okay, but if you can't engage in a ritual conflict, are you gentlemen
thinking that there is some means of avoiding actual ones?

While the first writer above is understood - nevertheless, Konrad Lorenz
[and Garry Kasparov, recently] stated that aggression is good, if there
are
[cultural] channels for it.

Kasparov challenged Americans this way. Lorenz challenged Freud.

These are not cheap arguments of convenience, and while I respect your
demurrers as a right, the fact of aggression and conflict is the serious
topic, and these are not so easily dismissed as we all witness.

Phil Innes

I doubt that the ritual conflicts of sports reduce the incidents of
real aggression. Could one assert with a straight face that
international soccer matches make people of different countries more
peacably inclined towards each other? Soccer hooliganism is too well-
known.

But the hooligans are not engaged in sport, but in proxy activity. The
players themselves do not hate each other, eh? Though they contest fiercely,
there is comraderie at the end.

Tournament chess is a mental fight, and at the chess board Kasparov,
Karpov, and other greats were not nice guys.

"Nice?". Who cares for nice, this is not a 'nice' subject, its a compelling
one. And of that, what do you actually know of these two players?

Phil Innes


Well, for one thing, he knows that for years they kept him
out of the top spot in the world rankings, making him suffer
way down at #3. Can you really blame him for holding a
grudge? I mean, this is like when GM Evans was kicking
butt, only to have that young whippersnapper Bobby Fischer
come along and steal his thunder. Or when Dr. Sir Howard
Staunton, Esqr. was telling everyone and his brother just
how great he was, when all of a sudden a teensy punk from
America sailed over to pop his over-puffed ego balloon.


What I found interesting was the notion that a "chess for
peace" tourney is automatically supposed to relate to the
current war in Iraq, specifically, as opposed to peace in
general. Apparently, it is interpreted as a political jab at
the Bush administration, not as advocating "peace".


Another thing I find interesting is the statement that this
scholastic event will be FIDE rated. Wow. Is it really
possible to have FIDE ratings for games in which illegal
moves and illegal positions are commonplace? And won't
these ratings be, um, a bit lower than other FIDE ratings?


-- help bot