From THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans (page
80).

Not Keene On Testing

Never in history has any illegal substance enabled anyone to win a
single game of chess. Yet FIDE is now pushing for universal drug
testing on the pretext of getting chess into the Olympics, thus making
it eligible for government funding in many nations.

The Spanish Chess Federation, for example, receives about $320,000 a
year from the Council of Sports for testing 20 players at random. More
than 100 substances are banned, including excess levels of alcohol,
cannabis, and coffee.

Frankly, I can't think of a better way to drive people away from chess
than by compelling them to pee in a cup in order to compete in
tournaments.Branding chess as an athletic endeavor is ludicrous, and
the United States Olympic Committee had the good sense to reject this
hobby as a sport.

FIDE Goes Beserk

Although chess is unlikely ever to become an Olympic sport, that
doesn't stop the bureaucrats from imposing their silly regulations.
"FIDE has made its decision, and players who do not accept drug
testing will not be able to play chess," wrote Dr. Stephen Press, vice-
chairman of FIDE's medical commission.

"It almost made me cry, for I realize that from now on no kindred
soul, no young intellectual with any self-respect will ever
contemplate a career as a professional chess player," noted Dutch
grandmaster Hans Ree. "It is hard to say who are more despicable, the
FIDE bosses who invented this horror, the chess federations that saw
it happen but did nothing to prevent it, or those players who will
meekly submit to these senseless humiliations."

"The Olympics are for physical sports, not board games. Their motto is
'Faster, Stronger, Higher.'-not Cleverer," noted an outraged amateur.

"Certain drugs can significantly improve athletic performance, while
at the same time often harming the athletes who take them. No such
problem has been established in chess, and chess players are therefore
properly suspicious and even resentful when told they have to be drug
tested. I have no sympathy with the people who claim they are fighting
to get chess into the Olympics; and I have actual animus toward
officials who try to impose controls on chess with the excuse that the
Olympics requires drug testing."

Ray Keene, Britain's leading chess authority, argues that the real
agenda is to control the careers of players. Some excerpts from his
article in the Spectator:

· Performance enhancing drugs-steroids of the mind as it were-are not
and never have been a problem in chess.

· Although chess bureaucrats are enthusiastic about these new
regulations, players as a whole are neither ready nor willing to
submit to wholesale drug testing.

· FIDE's initiative is designed to extend bureaucratic control over
players who are inconveniently insubordinate rather than to stamp out
any real abuse in chess.

· Why do chess officials waste their time on this kind of nonsense
when it is clear that their constituencies have absolutely no interest
in it?

· This syndrome is absolutely rife in politics. I have seen it so many
times before. FIDE Delegates imperceptibly at first cease to represent
the views of their own country-instead they start to represent FIDE's
views to their country, thus becoming
a kind of fifth column! That is why nation states continually revolve
their ambassadors before they 'go native' in the quaint phraseology of
the British Foreign Office.

· The key is often insidious hospitality. Once the naive backwoods
chess politician starts rubbing shoulders with the FIDE bigwigs,
invitations to dinner start coming in, exclusive gatherings of top
people. It's not so much gifts and bribes as corruption by
association.

· We know what's best for Ivan and Ivan should shut up and take his
medicine. After all it's good for him and good for chess. Discipline-
that's what Ivan needs.

On Nov 6, 2:25 am, " wrote:
From THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans (page

80).

Not Keene On Testing

Never in history has any illegal substance enabled anyone to win a
single game of chess. Yet FIDE is now pushing for universal drug
testing on the pretext of getting chess into the Olympics, thus making
it eligible for government funding in many nations.

The Spanish Chess Federation, for example, receives about $320,000 a
year from the Council of Sports for testing 20 players at random. More
than 100 substances are banned, including excess levels of alcohol,
cannabis, and coffee.

Frankly, I can't think of a better way to drive people away from chess
than by compelling them to pee in a cup in order to compete in
tournaments.Branding chess as an athletic endeavor is ludicrous, and
the United States Olympic Committee had the good sense to reject this
hobby as a sport.

FIDE Goes Beserk

Although chess is unlikely ever to become an Olympic sport, that
doesn't stop the bureaucrats from imposing their silly regulations.
"FIDE has made its decision, and players who do not accept drug
testing will not be able to play chess," wrote Dr. Stephen Press, vice-
chairman of FIDE's medical commission.

"It almost made me cry, for I realize that from now on no kindred
soul, no young intellectual with any self-respect will ever
contemplate a career as a professional chess player," noted Dutch
grandmaster Hans Ree. "It is hard to say who are more despicable, the
FIDE bosses who invented this horror, the chess federations that saw
it happen but did nothing to prevent it, or those players who will
meekly submit to these senseless humiliations."

"The Olympics are for physical sports, not board games. Their motto is
'Faster, Stronger, Higher.'-not Cleverer," noted an outraged amateur.

"Certain drugs can significantly improve athletic performance, while
at the same time often harming the athletes who take them. No such
problem has been established in chess, and chess players are therefore
properly suspicious and even resentful when told they have to be drug
tested. I have no sympathy with the people who claim they are fighting
to get chess into the Olympics; and I have actual animus toward
officials who try to impose controls on chess with the excuse that the
Olympics requires drug testing."

Ray Keene, Britain's leading chess authority, argues that the real
agenda is to control the careers of players. Some excerpts from his
article in the Spectator:

· Performance enhancing drugs-steroids of the mind as it were-are not
and never have been a problem in chess.

· Although chess bureaucrats are enthusiastic about these new
regulations, players as a whole are neither ready nor willing to
submit to wholesale drug testing.

· FIDE's initiative is designed to extend bureaucratic control over
players who are inconveniently insubordinate rather than to stamp out
any real abuse in chess.

· Why do chess officials waste their time on this kind of nonsense
when it is clear that their constituencies have absolutely no interest
in it?

· This syndrome is absolutely rife in politics. I have seen it so many
times before. FIDE Delegates imperceptibly at first cease to represent
the views of their own country-instead they start to represent FIDE's
views to their country, thus becoming
a kind of fifth column! That is why nation states continually revolve
their ambassadors before they 'go native' in the quaint phraseology of
the British Foreign Office.

· The key is often insidious hospitality. Once the naive backwoods
chess politician starts rubbing shoulders with the FIDE bigwigs,
invitations to dinner start coming in, exclusive gatherings of top
people. It's not so much gifts and bribes as corruption by
association.

· We know what's best for Ivan and Ivan should shut up and take his
medicine. After all it's good for him and good for chess. Discipline-
that's what Ivan needs.

Dear Larry,

I take ATENOLEL 50 mg twice per day. It is a beta blocker, and slows
my heart rate.
Please explain to me how I am supposed to, in the position of head of
state for chess
on St Kitts and Nevis, in a war with Kirsan over admission, and keep
my MEDICAL FILES PRIVATE?

The facts are I can "cheat" with this drug, but I see no advantage of
having my heart
beat slower. It might help combining caffeine with a beta blocker, but
the bottom line
is that Tim Redman and the FIDE medical committee admits that FIDE has
not decided
the exact list of "banned" drugs from chess.

I might add, I don't see the USA Fide Delegate ****ing in a cup, or
Kirsan ****ing in a cup???

Does anyone honestly believe that I have any legal recourse for the
privacy of my medical files?
How exactly am I supposed to maintain privacy, and honor the
soverignenty of a nation that I do
seem to respresnt in FIDE, in absense of anyone else.

Nobody can play chess in the World Chess Championship from St Kitts
and Nevis, becasue the only
player takes a banned drug....

Sincerely,

Marcus Roberts
Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and Nevis to FIDE

On Nov 6, 2:25 am, " wrote:


"It almost made me cry, for I realize that from now on no kindred
soul, no young intellectual with any self-respect will ever
contemplate a career as a professional chess player..."

That's exactly right! Drug testing works in the NFL because the higher
end paychecks are millions of dollars per year. In Chess, nobody makes
anywhere that kind of money compared to true professional sports
ATHLETES.

We are in a situation where a computer can beat any human, and the
world
chess association is planned to combine Kirsan's personal desires to
become
President of Russia with domination of the entire world of chess. This
is about
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, and his lust to rule Russia, not chess. If Kirsan
had the money,
he would certainly drug test you or I for writing this if we appeared
in his corrupt
Russian Republic.

We are nothing more than virtual citizens of Kalmykia, and pawns in
Ilyumzhinov
desires to govern Russia, and almost certainly start a nuclear war
with the USA.

The FIDE Delegates themselves fear Ilyumzhinov; most of them would be
silenced if they did not agree with the party line.

I wonder if Kirsan has plans to take over Russia, for himself? I bet
Kirsan could not pass
a drug test, and he secretly videotapes people ****ing so he can
arouse himself.

Marcus Roberts

wrote:

Never in history has any illegal substance enabled anyone to win a
single game of chess.

Wow. It appears that Larry Evans has developed a God
complex. He now believes he "knows" everything under the
sun, including events (or nonevents) before he was even born.
This is not looking good.


Yet FIDE is now pushing for universal drug
testing on the pretext of getting chess into the Olympics, thus making
it eligible for government funding in many nations.

The Spanish Chess Federation, for example, receives about $320,000 a
year from the Council of Sports for testing 20 players at random. More
than 100 substances are banned, including excess levels of alcohol,
cannabis, and coffee.

Many of the players I have known would strenuously
object to testing for cannabis, but testing for this or
for alcohol makes no sense, as those are not mental
performance-enhancement drugs at all -- just the
opposite. I would note that LE deliberately chose
these three examples, while craftily avoiding any
mention of substances like cocaine, for instance;
think about why he would do that.


Frankly, I can't think of a better way to drive people away from chess
than by compelling them to pee in a cup in order to compete in
tournaments.

How about high entry fees, in conjunction with small
prizes? That works /very well/ in my area, driving
away countless players who would otherwise have
entered tourneys.

As for the USCF, they appear to have recently allowed
chess ratings to drift lower over time, and this does not
exactly engender greater tournament participation. Try
to imagine that (almost) everyone is getting weaker at
chess: what effect would this have on participation?
Even those who study cannot seem to "improve" much,
judging by what I have seen lately. Many players are
sitting on a rating floor, watching the tide roll away --
as in a famous song.


Ray Keene, Britain's leading chess authority, argues that the real
agenda is to control the careers of players. Some excerpts from his
article in the Spectator:

· Performance enhancing drugs-steroids of the mind as it were-are not
and never have been a problem in chess.

This statement seems to have been transmuted -- and
grotesquely distorted -- by Larry Evans, above.


· Although chess bureaucrats are enthusiastic about these new
regulations, players as a whole are neither ready nor willing to
submit to wholesale drug testing.

· FIDE's initiative is designed to extend bureaucratic control over
players who are inconveniently insubordinate rather than to stamp out
any real abuse in chess.

False dichotomy. Already a third possibility was
presented: that of trying to get easy money out of
the Olympics. In view of FIDE's long history of
greed over principle, there is simply no need to
postulate any other motive here; it is redundant,
and appears here unsupported by facts.

Much of what Ray Keene said makes sense, but
neither he nor Larry Parr-Evans has given any
substance here to back the accusation of FIDE
attempting to do anything other than get chess
into the Olympics /for the money/.


-- help bot

"help bot" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:

Never in history has any illegal substance enabled anyone to win a
single game of chess.

...

Frankly, I can't think of a better way to drive people away from chess
than by compelling them to pee in a cup in order to compete in
tournaments.

**I can. Advertise actual factors which are offensive in chess.

How about high entry fees, in conjunction with small
prizes? That works /very well/ in my area, driving
away countless players who would otherwise have
entered tourneys.

**How about spending money on background checks for chess officials instead
of on durg testing?

....

· FIDE's initiative is designed to extend bureaucratic control over
players who are inconveniently insubordinate rather than to stamp out
any real abuse in chess.

False dichotomy. Already a third possibility was
presented: that of trying to get easy money out of
the Olympics. In view of FIDE's long history of
greed over principle, there is simply no need to
postulate any other motive here; it is redundant,
and appears here unsupported by facts.

**The Rule is that Money follows Power. Fide is an organisation in name, yet
its orientation to chess as is its president to its own 100% democracy
one-party state. In other words, it is in a monopoly position without being
in a representative position.

Much of what Ray Keene said makes sense, but
neither he nor Larry Parr-Evans has given any
substance here to back the accusation of FIDE
attempting to do anything other than get chess
into the Olympics /for the money/.

**Multi-millionairres do not need to generate money as much as ciruclate
money, as a means to /exhibit/ their power. That is the pathology of your
Plutocrat.

Phil Innes
The People's Paradise,
Vermont

-- help bot

On Nov 6, 7:50 am, "Chess One" wrote:

Frankly, I can't think of a better way to drive people away from chess
than by compelling them to pee in a cup in order to compete in
tournaments.

**I can. Advertise actual factors which are offensive in chess.

Cheating; I find it very offensive.

Thus far, inconsideration -- as in talking and making
noise while others are still playing -- has not bothered
me much; maybe that's because I am usually winning
though.


How about high entry fees, in conjunction with small
prizes? That works /very well/ in my area, driving
away countless players who would otherwise have
entered tourneys.

**How about spending money on background checks for chess officials instead
of on durg testing?

Whose money? Certainly not *my* money.

BTW, such tests may be able to pinpoint many past
offenders, but they are no good when it comes to /new/
crazies, nor do they detect the smart ones, who of
course have not been caught before. (I am reminded
of certain detective shows on TV; the criminals make
mistake after mistake, but only after such errors have
accumulated into a sizable mass do the police manage
to stumble across the solution. Consider the Charles
Manson case, for instance.)


**The Rule is that Money follows Power.

Please find Power and tell him to meet me at
midnight in the alley behind Bugaloo's Sports Bar.
I'll be lying in wait for the next guy who walks past
after him (don't try to tell me he never carries Cash,
Diamonds or Gold).


Fide is an organisation in name, yet
its orientation to chess as is its president to its own 100% democracy
one-party state.

Yeah -- whatever that means.


In other words, it is in a monopoly position without being
in a representative position.

Nobody complained when forces inside the USCF
managed to manipulate FIDE into accepting BF,
although he did not even qualify. But when someone
else gets a hand in, the groans never cease.

Even today, the FIDE Web site proclaims as Mr.
Campomanes' great achievement, the spread of
chess to third world countries; but because this
came at the expense of things not going "our" way,
the moaning about it persists. (It's rather like the
behavior of a child who does not get his own way
/all the time/.)


**Multi-millionairres do not need to generate money as much as ciruclate
money, as a means to /exhibit/ their power. That is the pathology of your
Plutocrat.

Speaking of pathos, the idea that FIDE or its evil
minions belong to me, is beyond all reason.


The People's Paradise,
Vermont

So we were told in the last presidential election, by
Howard Dean. I believe he claimed that everyone in
Vermont had perfect health (care), a job, a nice
house, nice clothes, a loyal dog, and above-average
children. It sounded so good I was going to vote for
him and then move there, but something went awry... .


-- help bot

"help bot" wrote in message
ups.com...
**How about spending money on background checks for chess officials
instead
of on durg testing?

Whose money? Certainly not *my* money.

whose money is spent on drug tests? will your money be spent averting
offense to kids? that seems to be the choice to those who actually spend
money on chess events

BTW, such tests may be able to pinpoint many past
offenders, but they are no good when it comes to /new/
crazies, nor do they detect the smart ones, who of
course have not been caught before.

yes - this is true, and new opportunities have arisen via the net for
stalking, several examples in chess - yet what screening does is eliminate
those who would cause offense based on their known behavior - and screening
is continuous, so that it [poorly, for sure] balances the need for privacy
in modern life, to likely gross offence to someone else's life

this subject is particualrly difficult for americans, no?

(I am reminded
of certain detective shows on TV; the criminals make
mistake after mistake, but only after such errors have
accumulated into a sizable mass do the police manage
to stumble across the solution. Consider the Charles
Manson case, for instance.)

****ing children is no tv show episode, comrade

and tv a very uncertain guide to the mores of our times, sometimes indeed,
it seems to celebrate female stalking, especially

[you ever notice this?]

**The Rule is that Money follows Power.

Please find Power and tell him to meet me at
midnight in the alley behind Bugaloo's Sports Bar.
I'll be lying in wait for the next guy who walks past
after him (don't try to tell me he never carries Cash,
Diamonds or Gold).


Fide is an organisation in name, yet
its orientation to chess as is its president to its own 100% democracy
one-party state.

Yeah -- whatever that means.

Fide is only its president's aura - and if you suppose yourself to address
either offenses to kids, or the joys of the one-party state, be so kind as
to inform yourself before venturing an opinion, rather than goofy
abstractions about things which you lack the balls to look at

This subject is not net-chat. It is measured in blood

If you have no pain, don't tell me what 'nobody did', since you don't care
more than they [didn't]


Phil Innes


In other words, it is in a monopoly position without being
in a representative position.

Nobody complained when forces inside the USCF
managed to manipulate FIDE into accepting BF,
although he did not even qualify. But when someone
else gets a hand in, the groans never cease.

Even today, the FIDE Web site proclaims as Mr.
Campomanes' great achievement, the spread of
chess to third world countries; but because this
came at the expense of things not going "our" way,
the moaning about it persists. (It's rather like the
behavior of a child who does not get his own way
/all the time/.)


**Multi-millionairres do not need to generate money as much as ciruclate
money, as a means to /exhibit/ their power. That is the pathology of your
Plutocrat.

Speaking of pathos, the idea that FIDE or its evil
minions belong to me, is beyond all reason.


The People's Paradise,
Vermont

So we were told in the last presidential election, by
Howard Dean. I believe he claimed that everyone in
Vermont had perfect health (care), a job, a nice
house, nice clothes, a loyal dog, and above-average
children. It sounded so good I was going to vote for
him and then move there, but something went awry... .


-- help bot

On Nov 6, 6:35 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

**How about spending money on background checks for chess officials
instead of on durg testing?

Whose money? Certainly not *my* money.

whose money is spent on drug tests? will your money be spent averting
offense to kids? that seems to be the choice to those who actually spend
money on chess events

Nice, um, dodge.

Like so many sleazy politicians these days, you refuse
to answer where the money you want to spend will come
from. How about a deal? If you can't manage the guts to
specify *whose* money you are spending, just propose
doing nothing, since that doesn't cost any money. You'll
at least get the Libertarian vote.


BTW, such tests may be able to pinpoint many past
offenders, but they are no good when it comes to /new/
crazies, nor do they detect the smart ones, who of
course have not been caught before.

yes - this is true, and new opportunities have arisen via the net for
stalking, several examples in chess - yet what screening does is eliminate
those who would cause offense based on their known behavior - and screening
is continuous, so that it [poorly, for sure] balances the need for privacy
in modern life, to likely gross offence to someone else's life

When you write "cause offense", it sounds very much
like an attack on SS. But many, if not most, of the kids
involved in chess fall outside his target area, and by
extension, the target areas of others like him.

What worries me is that, like a disinfectant that is
claimed to eliminate 99% of germs, you are missing
the ones which are the most dangerous of all. Even
so, this is not a bad idea, but it is /not sufficient/ to
get the whole job done.


this subject is particualrly difficult for americans, no?

(I am reminded
of certain detective shows on TV; the criminals make
mistake after mistake, but only after such errors have
accumulated into a sizable mass do the police manage
to stumble across the solution. Consider the Charles
Manson case, for instance.)

****ing children is no tv show episode, comrade

On second thought, I think offensive types /should/
be rounded up and thrown into the clinker. I am
definitely going to vote for this, no matter what the cost.


Once these scum are rounded up and disposed of, then
we can worry about what to do about the ones who got
away.


-- help bot

"help bot" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Nov 6, 6:35 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

**How about spending money on background checks for chess officials
instead of on durg testing?

Whose money? Certainly not *my* money.

whose money is spent on drug tests? will your money be spent averting
offense to kids? that seems to be the choice to those who actually spend
money on chess events

Nice, um, dodge.

Like so many sleazy politicians these days, you refuse

Kennedy. I already replied. When I ask you, you duck. That's okay, but its
also /tilt/ and game over.

What I answered is that those who care will pay. If you start your posts
with such personal diffidence, I do not wish to continue the subject with
you - because I have no wish nor need to compel you to my opinion, and also
because you cannot state your own.

Phil Innes


to answer where the money you want to spend will come
from. How about a deal? If you can't manage the guts to
specify *whose* money you are spending, just propose
doing nothing, since that doesn't cost any money. You'll
at least get the Libertarian vote.


BTW, such tests may be able to pinpoint many past
offenders, but they are no good when it comes to /new/
crazies, nor do they detect the smart ones, who of
course have not been caught before.

yes - this is true, and new opportunities have arisen via the net for
stalking, several examples in chess - yet what screening does is
eliminate
those who would cause offense based on their known behavior - and
screening
is continuous, so that it [poorly, for sure] balances the need for
privacy
in modern life, to likely gross offence to someone else's life

When you write "cause offense", it sounds very much
like an attack on SS. But many, if not most, of the kids
involved in chess fall outside his target area, and by
extension, the target areas of others like him.

What worries me is that, like a disinfectant that is
claimed to eliminate 99% of germs, you are missing
the ones which are the most dangerous of all. Even
so, this is not a bad idea, but it is /not sufficient/ to
get the whole job done.


this subject is particualrly difficult for americans, no?

(I am reminded
of certain detective shows on TV; the criminals make
mistake after mistake, but only after such errors have
accumulated into a sizable mass do the police manage
to stumble across the solution. Consider the Charles
Manson case, for instance.)

****ing children is no tv show episode, comrade

On second thought, I think offensive types /should/
be rounded up and thrown into the clinker. I am
definitely going to vote for this, no matter what the cost.


Once these scum are rounded up and disposed of, then
we can worry about what to do about the ones who got
away.


-- help bot

On Nov 7, 7:19 am, "Chess One" wrote:

**How about spending money on background checks for chess officials
instead of on durg testing?

Whose money? Certainly not *my* money.

whose money is spent on drug tests? will your money be spent averting
offense to kids? that seems to be the choice to those who actually spend
money on chess events

Nice, um, dodge.

Like so many sleazy politicians these days, you refuse

Kennedy. I already replied. When I ask you, you duck. That's okay, but its
also /tilt/ and game over.

What I answered is that those who care will pay.

Nice switcharoo. You duck, then dodge, then
proclaim that you "already answered" the direct
question.

This rings familiar, now that I think about it. Many
others have complained before about precisely the
same sort of behavior from nearly-an-IM before.


If you start your posts with such personal diffidence,

Idiot, heal thyself! There is nobody in rgc who is more
guilty of your complaint than the ratpackers themselves,
so this comes off as *titanic hypocrisy*.

If you are truly against "personal diffidence", then by
golly show it with your actions, not words.


I do not wish to continue the subject with
you - because I have no wish nor need to compel you to my opinion, and also
because you cannot state your own.

My opinion is merely that your interest in this
subject is a pretense; it always comes up when
you find yourself under attack by a multitude
for not writing about chess issues, right after you
have just attacked others for the same offense.
In sum, it is a self-defense mechanism, not a
true interest on your part. The subject fades
into darkness until the next volley finds you in
a spot of trouble, needing a convenient tool.


-- help bot