On Nov 9, 11:00 am, "Chess One" wrote:
"Taylor Kingston" wrote in message

On Nov 7, 8:43 am, SBD wrote:
On Nov 7, 6:03 am, " wrote:

That issue has been rehashed ad infinitum and most scholars now agree
with Larry Evans's analysis of the games in his groundbreaking article
THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES (Chess Life, October 1996).

Can a list of these agreeing scholars be produced?

As we expected, Parr has failed to name a single one. As far as I
know, none exist. Meanwhile, here's a scholar who definitely does
*not* agee with Evans:

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/evans.html

This is in fact true.

Though unfortunately for Mr. Kingston's favorite it is entirely inconclusive
since, like himself, he disagrees with GM Evans on every subject.

It would be more accurate to say that Evans makes frequent
unsupported assertions, commits frequent factual errors, and is
disinclined to correct them, thus contrasting with Winter on all three
counts.

Actually, Phil, Winter has said complimentary things about Evans now
and then. A sample:

"In some ways Larry Evans' journalism is of a superior quality ...
The trouble is that although his best is very good, Evans is not very
often at it." -- Chess Notes #322, 1983

"... Larry Evans, normally one of the sanest and acutest of
commentators." -- CN #1143, 1986

Admittedly, positive references are few, and seem to have ceased
after 1986, but there was a time when Winter had at least a modicum of
respect for Evans. I suspect that vanished circa 1987, perhaps partly
as a result of Evans' meltdown over Quesada-Prins (see above link) and
other matters he wrote about to Winter in the middle of that year (see
CN #1457, 1987).