On May 6, 4:08 pm, wrote:

Even allowing, for the sake of argument, Bronstein's interpretation
of 1948-51, I don't see anything unethical in this. However, what the
Spanish writers seem to be implying, or believe that Bronstein is
implying, is that Botvinnik used his position and connections to gain
preferential access to others' games

This "interpretation" escapes me; I cannot read
Spanish,

Then you might be well advised to avoid commenting from ignorance.
Not that that has deterred you in the past.

As far as ignorance goes, one would be hard-
pressed to top the act of writing a letter praising
Larry Evans' biased speculations, and only then
researching the issue, then writing again to
register a flip-flop.


This "question" would seem to apply to *all* of
the Russian world champions; why then is Mr.
Botvinnik being singled out here?

It's quite simple. The link given in the original post deals with
Botvinnik, therefore my comments deal with Botvinnik.

That only explains why Mr. Botvinnik has been
singled out by Mr. Kingston in this particular
thread. My question was not that limited; in fact,
I asked why both TK *and* the Evans ratpackers
have decided to single out MB for their special
attentions, and that question obviously pertains
to a number of different threads, over a period of
some time. (I am "explaining" this, not for the
benefit of the dishonest poster TK, but for others
who may not be aware.)

The lack of an honest answer tells a revealing
tale, not unlike lipstick on one's collar... .


-- help bot