On Nov 11, 9:02 am, " wrote:
"Shoddy research, selective bias, flawed logic -- the Evans article
is a travesty of historiograhy. That's why it has been ignored by
scholars. It's just not worth their time." -- Taylor Kingston on this
forum (11/10/07)
That's a far cry from what this gent wrote in his initial letter to
the editor of Chess Life after reading THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES by GM
Larry Evans:
"Larry Evans' article The Tragedy of Pal Keres in your October 1996
issue was one of the best pieces of chess historical writing you've
ever run. Evans's analysis of games from the 1948 world championship
makes a strong case that Keres' failure, and Botvinnik's consequent
success, were the result of coercion by Soviet
authorities.
Once I saw you start this thread, Larry, I knew it would be only a
matter of days before you trotted out that dead horse of a letter, to
flog it yet again. RGC veterans know that this is just one of your
standard dodges, but for those new to the group, let me (for the
unpteenth time) set the record straight, by quoting from Winter's "The
Facts About Larry Evans" (
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/evans.html
), which in turn quotes me:
Page 60 of the Autumn 1999 Kingpin carried a brief reply from Evans.
Although, in reality, he replied to virtually nothing, he did dispute
Watson's description of Taylor Kingston as a critic of Evans' claims
(claims made, wrote Watson, without 'even a shred of actual evidence')
that Keres was forced to throw his games to Botvinnik in the 1948
world championship event. In his 'reply' Evans triumphantly quoted a
supportive letter from Kingston which had been published in his August
1997 Chess Life column. A devastating blow? Yes, but against Evans.
That became manifest when the Spring 2000 issue of Kingpin (page 64)
published this response from Taylor Kingston:
'I did indeed write the letter Evans quotes, but that was before I
researched and analyzed his article in detail. On deeper examination I
found his logic and evidence to be highly questionable. I made this
quite clear, both publicly in my article "Keres and Botvinnik: A
Survey of the Evidence" (CL 5/98) and privately in letters to Evans
himself. For Evans to say or even imply that I now support him, is
amazingly, grossly dishonest.'
'Amazingly, grossly dishonest.' Somehow such words keep coming back in
any discerning scrutiny of Evans' writings. In 2000 Yasser Seirawan
published on his Inside Chess website a strongly-worded open letter
'Enough is Enough' which called on the FIDE President to resign. In a
follow-up article (also on-line at Inside Chess) Seirawan reviewed the
reaction, including that of the 'long time rabid critic of FIDE, GM
Evans'. After pointing out how Evans had misrepresented his open
letter, Seirawan concluded: 'Experienced Evans-watchers know that it
is the kind of untruth and distortion that is endemic in him.'
*** end Chess Notes excerpt ***
Then, of course, we have Larry Parr's *_own_* censure of Evans for
flaunting my letter even *_after_* he knew I had repudiated it. As
Parr posted here on 25 August 2001:
The unpleasant truth is that GM Evans is guilty of something worse
than dishonesty ...GM Evans' transgression is to have misrepresented
Mr. Kingston's position out of polemical incompetence. Moreover, this
incompetence cannot be excused ...Incompetence can be more morally
odious, when it is utterly inexcusable, than conventional forms of
dishonesty ... GM Evans' high-handed supposition only compounds his
earlier "dishonesty of inexcusable incompetence." He shattered the
rules of honest controversy. He ought never to have made this
assumption, which was all the worse to do, because IT SERVED HIS
POLEMICAL PURPOSES OF THE MOMENT.
*** He was obliged - no strike that, *_absolutely required as a matter
of honor_* - to contact Mr. Kingston before using the man's initial
letter of praise for his "The Tragedy of Paul Keres." *** (emphasis
added)
*** end Parr excerpt ***
Once again it is demonstrated, exceptionally clearly in this case,
that with Parr ethical sentiments, such as those expressed above, are
mere chance aberrations.