On Nov 22, 9:22 am, " wrote:

From EVANS ON CHESS, Chess Life, September 2000:

In a letter to the editor of KINGPIN (Spring 2000) Taylor Kingston
claimed I misrepresented his views about the Keres-Botvinnik
controversy. But his SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE (Chess Life, May 1998)
devotes six pagtes to the topic without reaching any conclusion
DESPITE what Keres told Whyld and Botvinnik's startling admission in a
1991 interview that Stalin did intervene.
(emphasis added)

Evans, like his buddy Larry Parr, suffers from frequent time
trouble. By this I mean not 5 minutes to make 20 moves, but rather
mixing up dates, and even confusing past and future. The key point
here is Evans saying that in May 1998, I reached no conclusion
"DESPITE what Keres told Whyld and Botvinnik's startling admission."
As I pointed out he

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles165.pdf

the Evans scenario is a chronological impossibility. The relevant
passage:

"By saying 'despite' Evans alleges that in 1998 I overlooked or
dismissed important evidence. Yet in 1998 this evidence was unknown to
me. Furthermore, it was also unknown to Evans. The Botvinnik interview
was not published in English until 10 December 1999. Whyld never
allowed publication of his 1962 secret until 11 June 2000. I have
corroboration of the dates and facts from Pam, Krabbé, and Whyld
themselves. Evans' 'despite' gambit is the low trick of a dirty
politician, not the act of a responsible historian/journalist."

The actual chronology is this:

October 1996: Chess Life publishes Evans' article "The Tragedy of
Paul Keres." It mentions neither Whyld's nor Botvinnik's statements.

May 1998: Chess Life publishes Kingston's article "The Keres-
Botvinnik Case: A Survey of the Evidence." It mentions neither Whyld's
nor Botvinnik's statements.

December 1999: The Botvinnik interview, heretofore buried in a Dutch
magazine not devoted to chess, appears in English for the first time
on Tim Krabbe's web-site.

June 2000: Whyld finally reveals for the first time his 1962
conversation with Keres, a secret he had never published until then.

September 2000: Evans faults Kingston for failing to include the
Whyld and Botvinnik statements in his 1998 article. Evans fails to
mention that Evans too failed to include them in 1996.

Mr. Kingston, whose work I generally admire,

Apparently Evans' admiration does not prevent him from stooping to
very clumsy mendacity.