On Apr 26, 6:32 pm, " wrote:

FIND THE QUOTE YOURSELF

Idiot. There is no such quote, which is why I pointed
out the fact that imbecile Larry Parr was misrepresenting
the facts.


David Kane falsely claimed the rematch clause is no advantage to
the champion.

What Mr. Kane did was point out one flaw in the
"reasoning" of the Evans ratpack. That particular flaw
was the mixing up and stirring in of ingredients which
did not belong in the recipe, for as we know, rematch
or no rematch, a title winner like say, Bobby Fischer,
is regarded as world champion even if he should go
on to lose any rematch, after the fact. For that matter,
he is regarded as a champion even if he ever afterward
plays like a complete duffer, losing every game; it's a
done deal.

When Larry Evans bought into the misbegotten idea
of bungled calculations, he erred. Ever since, his
apologists -- primarily Larry Parr -- have struggled to
avoid admitting that gaffe, just like all his many others.

Any rational approach cannot help bot note that even
before FIDE took over control of the world champion
title, rematches were common; hence, this is simply
the wrong issue. There must be plenty of issues where
FIDE itself initiated some idiocy or other, and those
would be the proper issues with which to bash the
disorganization. All this nonsense can be defended by
supporters (if indeed there are any left) by pointing to
the long *tradition* of a deposed champ getting a
rematch. (As we know, when it comes to traditions,
reason stands virtually no chance of winning.)


-- help bot