wrote in message
ups.com...
WHAT DID KINGSTON WANT LAURIE TO RETRACT?
(confidentially, of course!)

Playwright Richard Laurie is a chess fan with no axe to grind. Here is
the item in Chess Life from Evans On Chess that Kingston tried to
persuade Laurie to retract in a series of emails Kingston marked
CONFIDENTIAL. Why the need for this topic, of public interest, to
remain confidential?

KERES & BOTVINNIK

Richard Laurie
Eric, Pennsylvania

Q. Finally, I don't know who Taylor Kingston is and I don't recall
much about his Chess Life article (in May 1998) except he denigrated
your ability to analyze five Keres-Botvinnik games to show that Keres
was coerced.

I am confused Larry. Just a few days ago Kingston himself said he did not
question Evans' judgment.

For a spat, I thought 9 years a long time to remember, but maybe it was a
big deal to him?

ON THE RECORD, Kingston also wrote me initially, as 'not for publication'
and 'private' which was hard to understand if the subject was ever Keres
Botvinnik, and only less so if it was Kingston contra mundam, at least
contra Laurie, Evans, and all else.

I am always appalled by those who meet a solid argument
with a personal attack -- like Edward Winter (who called you
"shameless") and Kingston (who called you "dishonest"). Either Keres
threw the games or he did not. Nothing else matters. The 1919 Black
Sox
Scandal in baseball was uncovered because experts like Christy
Mathewson circled suspicious plays. This is basically what you did in
"The Tragedy of Paul Keres" (October 1996) to reopen an old scandal.

LAURIE ANSWERS KINGSTON'S REQUEST TO RETRACT THIS ITEM

[Mr. Laurie authorized me to issue this statement on his behalf.]

"Mr. Kingston's memory is extremely faulty. He contacted me on the
Net, then wanted to send me materials to try and win me over to his
side of the argument -- that Evans was wrong. After that he said HE
WOULD LIKE TO KEEP OUR CORRESPONDENCE QUIET [emphasis mine] just
between us. It sounded a little shaky, but so far I saw nothing
wrong.

Neither did I. I wrote that of course you [Larry Parr] were a shameless
hussy, and such mediating phrases as a forced intermediatory can sensibly
come up with, but continued to inquire as if after some topical matter,
until Kingston could no longer catch my drift.

"Then he said he contacted the editor and asked if it would be okay
for him to say I had changed my mind.. That's when I jumped on him in
my last letter, that I had not changed my mind and agreed to look at
his materials only to see what he had to offer.. I found nothing
substantial there and I told him that as far as secrecy went, he
already violated that by jumping the gun and contacting the editor.

And such forced secrecy on any correspondent on a public and historic
circumstance, such as Soviet era chess, is itself rather weird - does it
oblige those who are acknowledged to know things not to mention the fact
that those who ask them, require their secrecy?

Enter the rat!

"Mr. Kingston e-mailed me about half a dozen times. While I never
showed Evans any of his material, I told him I did feel perfectly free
to show Evans my own responses. All anyone has to do is read
Kingston's article in Chess Life to see that he denigrated Evans'
ability to analyze by saying Nunn was the better player.

"Kingston wanted me to retract my printed view of the situation as it
appeared in Evans On Chess. He wanted me to say that I was wrong and,
therefore, Evans was wrong ..I even wrote the editor saying I had not
changed my mind, and that ended the matter.

"Finally, I am troubled by your bald assertion that you are not aware
of the battle between Evans and Winter. I am troubled because I have
known for months that Larry Evans contacted you in preparing his
rebuttal to Mr.Winter's remarks as printed in Chess Life, October
2001. Further, it is my understanding and has been for months, that
you told Evans you sided with Winter on the whole. Please clear up
this seeming contradiction." -- Richard Laurie

THIS LETTER FROM ONE LAWRENCE ZIMMERMAN WAS BANNED FROM CHESSCAFE IN
2001 AT THE HEIGHT OT THE EVANS-WINTER DISPUTE

And at the very time I asked Kingston [I still do not share his private
responses publicly - but be damned if this requires /my/ silence on the
issue! How come Chesscafe is practicing this ban on this subject?

Of course, I am not a liberty - or at least do have Taylor Kingston's
permission - to quote his own reply, since he /did/ offer one!

Mr. Kingston's six-page review of the evidence for Chess Life in May
1998 added nothing new to the debate and cited several Russian experts
who backed GM Evans.

Yes. And we have all said all this before, at very great length, and at
extroardianry length in private communications - mine alone must be 1,000
with Russians.

Since then a mountain of evidence has surfaced.
Botvinnik, for example, finally admitted that Stalin personally
intervened; and Keres told friends he was ordered to finish behind
Botvinnik. Can anyone who is intellectually honest still entertain
serious doubts?

Can any candid mind who assesses the situation even think this is unusual?

Yet, predictably, Mr. Winter endorses the claim that
there "isn't even a shred of actual evidence." And this is the guy --
I kid you not! -- that Mr. Kingston has anointed "to clean up the
mess and put chess history on a sound basis." I could go on and on.
Why bother? Nobody needs me to see through the slime.

As I understand Kingston's points, it rather depends on which message is
cited or quoted to determine if this is some matter of editorial policy at
both Chess Life and Chesscafe, or if it has to do with Soviet coercian.

While Kingston remains silent on linking his various communications and
achieving a [public] concinnity, whose point of view is he representing
other than his own and that of Edward Winter? Even Nunn will not say there
was no Soviet coercian, no general Soviet coercian, or that he understood
something more than Fritz could, the atmosphere of actually engaging that
system in direct experience - since he is of no age to have done so.

Phil Innes


KINGSTON TOOK NOT ONE BUT TWO MOVES BACK

Needless to add, Mr. Kingston retracted TWO letters that he wrote to
the editor of Chess Life praising GM Evans' article "The Tragedy of
Paul Keres."

Then Mr. Kingston changed his mind.

Then Mr. Kingston changed his mind again.

Finally, Mr. Kingston in a Further Review of the Evidence arrived at
the same conclusion as GM Evans about the Soviet fix in 1948: the
Commies did it.