On Nov 16, 12:03 am, " wrote:
LAURIE'S '''CONFUSED MIND"
"All you have proven is that Mr. Laurie has definite deficiencies in
reading comprehension and factual reporting." -- Taylor Kinglston
I presented a civil letter from playwright Richard
Laurie written to NMnot Taylor Kingston. (There may
be more coming.) It was dated 2002 ...
Now, then, to the issue at hand. The letter is
probative, if not determinative, evidence that NMnot
Kingston denied knowledge of a dispute between GM
Larry Evans and Eddie Winter ...
For those who understand weighting of evidence
either in a courtroom or, for that matter, in writing
history, the Laurie claim carries more weight than the
Kingston denial. Readers must decide whom to
believe: an outsider and produced playwright, who at
the time was largely uninvolved in chess disputes and
who commands an understanding of nuance and the
English language; or our NMnot Kingston ...
Our Larry has a very strange idea of how a courtroom works. Larry
seems to think that if Person A claims that Person B shot Person C,
the court will decide B's guilt or innocence based on various abstract
qualities, such as A's "understanding of nuance." Perhaps this is how
it's done where our Larry lives, in Malaysia.
In America, however, we want proof. A court will require evidence
that (1) Person C actually was shot, and (2) Person B actually did it.
In this case, Parr doesn't even get past step 1.
It's relevant to point out that the public record shows I was quite
aware of the Evans-Winter feud well before 2002. Readers will find my
review of Winter's book "Kings, Commoners and Knaves he
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kck.txt
This book was published in 1999, and read and reviewed by me in
1999. In the review, we find such passages as these:
"Chief among Winter's currently active knaves are, not surprisingly,
Raymond Keene and Eric Schiller ... Others reprised from [Winter's
previous book "Chess Explorations"] for new offenses include *** LARRY
EVANS ***, Jonathan Speelman, Nathan Divinsky, Andy Soltis, Dimitrije
Bjelica ..." (emphasis added)
At one point in the review I quote a Winter assessment of LE's work:
"Larry Evans' column in Chess Life continues to be unspeakable."
So it would have been ridiculous of me to claim ignorance of the
Winter-Evans feud in 2002, when I was already on record as knowing of
it in 1999. The plain fact is that I never pretended ignorance of the
Winter-Evans feud in 2002, to Richard Laurie or anyone else. But of
course our Larry will never admit this.
Mr. Laurie's statement regarding whether our
NMnot impugned GM Evans' analytical ability was
couched in conditionals and spoke of what seemed to be
the case and what was implied.
Oh no, Larry, he spoke quite directly. In the March 2002 Chess Life,
page 14, Laurie wrote to Evans:
"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 ..."
Please point out the "conditionals" in the above sentence, Larry.
In passing, I would also note Laurie's statement "I don't recall
much about his Chess Life article." Our Larry seems to think that
Laurie's memory is as reliable as a video-camera. By Laurie's own
admission, it is not.
I agree with Mr.
Laurie that the implication can be found in what NM
Kingston wrote, and the adjudication here will be made
by forum readers.
Our Larry is fond of finding these special "implications." If the
record provides no evidence for the smear he wants to make, he simply
decides the record means what he wants it to mean. Thus when I call
Evans' analysis "valid," our Larry decides that "vallid" actually
means "bad." On another occasion, our Larry decided that "doubt" can
mean "support." And of course when Parr's favorite Sam Sloan said
"Japanese girls want to be f---ed by a n--ger," this was not racism or
vulgarity; it only meant poor Sam was bored.
Parr-ese makes Newspeak look like the King's English, and his
notions of "evidence" would make a Vishinsky blush. There is not a
hole deep enough to encompass how low he really is.