EVANS CHESS LIFE COLUMN CANCELLED

By Larry Parr


New Chess Life editor Dan Lucas informed GM Larry
Evans that he would be cancelling the 5-time U.S. champion's
question-and-answer column in Chess Life. The final edition
of his column will appear in the May issue.


Editor Lucas said that he was acting based on
recommendations in Paul Hoffmann's lavish $50,000
redesign plans and, in any event, he or Mr. Hoffman
believed that the Q &A format "has played itself out."


Over the last many years, the two most popular
columns in Chess Life, as measured by reader surveys,
have been "Larry Evans on Chess" and Andy Soltis'
"Chess to Enjoy." Thousands of readers have
vouchsafed their opinion about what they enjoy in the
pages of CL. Evans and Soltis always were at the top.


The decision to cancel GM Evans' column comes,
quite frankly, as no surprise. That was always in the
cards, the moment the costly redesign was announced.
GM Soltis' column, which is seldom controversial given
its intent, will remain. The magazine cannot afford
to lose both of its most popular writers.


Editor Lucas' explanation that the Q &A format
"has played itself out" really will not do, though he
may honestly believe it.


Question and answer formats never play
themselves out in hobbyist magazines. There is no
doubt that after a decent interval -- or a not so
decent one, in any event -- the format will return.
The only issue is who has been selected by the
politicians to replace GM Evans who never spouts
the party line.


Unless the editor or the politicians behind him
reverse the decision, the readers of Chess Life will
be losing an authoritative, independent and literate
voice. GM Evans is unique among American GMs in that
he can deploy a high level of historical, chessic and
literary erudition to a wide range of questions.


Chess Life will also be losing, if the decision
about ditching Q &A is not a convenient
prevarication, a key conduit of interaction between
readers and magazine. One figures that the
politicians have in mind an ersatz solution in which
favored organizers will write rah-rah pieces to
replace direct input from ordinary players. If true,
the magazine will drive down membership totals as
readers toss away in boredom the single most tangible
benefit of membership that they receive.


Many contributors to this forum and many who
used to write letters to the editor stated that
"Evans" was the first thing they read each month --
either with interest or with outrage or with enjoyment.


Evans never leaves readers cold.


So, then, the politicians now wish to push GM
Evans out into the cold. Attempts have been made to
do so repeatedly in the past, and they have failed.


What may be different this time around is the attitude
of GM Evans himself. He fought in the past, but this
Old Lion is close to five years past the alloted
Biblical three score and 10, and he may decide to
undertake other projects. I don't know.


There is no doubt that the big-bucks Hoffmann
redesign puts the political class in a better position
than before when dealing with GM Evans. Past attempts
to fire the five-time champion foundered because they were prima
facie politically motivated. This time around, there is an
aura of mystery about what is happening and a patina -- no
doubt about it -- of deniability. The whole business reeks of
a corporate maneuver, and corporate maneuvers are usually more
effective in achieving aims than old-fashioned, out-in-the-open
political battling.


Larry Evans' monthly column was part of the
soul of Chess Life. Losing the column will sour many
readers, and one figures that as the magazine begins
to become ever-more official in its pronunciamentos
and as it takes on the tone of a Nolanland In Print,
many will begin to snooze and cancel memberships.


I hope that GM Evans charges up the mountain
one final time against the Federation political class,
but the odds will be against him. The Hoffmann
redesign is a wonderful blind, and one must also
respect Editor Lucas' decision which, at this point,
cannot be seen as a forced political move. Perhaps he
really believes that Q &A is old hat in a hobbyist
magazine or that losing an icon is a relatively small
matter or that damming up a conduit of reader
interaction with the magazine is not so very undesirable.


Who is really behind this move? My guess is Joel
Channing and his Floridian chum Don Schultz, who
once unsuccessfully sued GM Evans for $21 million.


There is no direct evidence at this point, as
there was in past times, of politicians twisting the
arm of the editor. When GM Evans decides what course
to take, he will have to reckon this circumstance into
his calculations.


The first place to start, I think, is with the
editor himself. I would counsel him to consult the
results of past reader surveys, and he needs to
understand that success will not come by creating a
Chess Life with less reader interaction than before.


Reason may yet will out. Though, to be sure,
power exercised by politicians rather than reason is
likely behind the decision.

GM Evans now has to decide "What's the Best Move?"

MESSAGE FROM ENGLAND

"I am surprised GM Evans lasted this long with that bunch in power.
I hope that he demands compensation after all these years -- he
certainly has a very good case." -- GM Raymond Keene

wrote in message
oups.com...
EVANS CHESS LIFE COLUMN CANCELLED

By Larry Parr


New Chess Life editor Dan Lucas informed GM Larry
Evans that he would be cancelling the 5-time U.S. champion's
question-and-answer column in Chess Life. The final edition
of his column will appear in the May issue.


Editor Lucas said that he was acting based on
recommendations in Paul Hoffmann's lavish $50,000
redesign plans and, in any event, he or Mr. Hoffman
believed that the Q &A format "has played itself out."

I was just about to ask if....

Over the last many years, the two most popular
columns in Chess Life, as measured by reader surveys,
have been "Larry Evans on Chess" and Andy Soltis'
"Chess to Enjoy." Thousands of readers have
vouchsafed their opinion about what they enjoy in the
pages of CL. Evans and Soltis always were at the top.

that comment was from a market survey or the usual...

The decision to cancel GM Evans' column comes,
quite frankly, as no surprise. That was always in the
cards, the moment the costly redesign was announced.
GM Soltis' column, which is seldom controversial given
its intent, will remain. The magazine cannot afford
to lose both of its most popular writers.


Editor Lucas' explanation that the Q &A format
"has played itself out" really will not do, though he
may honestly believe it.


Question and answer formats never play
themselves out in hobbyist magazines. There is no
doubt that after a decent interval -- or a not so
decent one, in any event -- the format will return.
The only issue is who has been selected by the
politicians to replace GM Evans who never spouts
the party line.


Unless the editor or the politicians behind him
reverse the decision, the readers of Chess Life will
be losing an authoritative, independent and literate
voice. GM Evans is unique among American GMs in that
he can deploy a high level of historical, chessic and
literary erudition to a wide range of questions.


Chess Life will also be losing, if the decision
about ditching Q &A is not a convenient
prevarication, a key conduit of interaction between
readers and magazine.

Yes - whether the Evans column is in fact a popular one, not that there is
reason to doubt it, any correspondent prepared in regular contact with
readership is a conduit for information. This is, I would have thought, more
valuable than the 3 word phrase, 'played itself out', which does not appear
to have /any/ objective basis.

Of course, it is within the power of USCF to do as it wishes with its
magazine, but entirely counterintuitive to what is often and otherwise an
"in-house communications vehicle", as Eric Johnson puts it, if it intended
to actually cater to what chess players want to read.

The sense that CL should not be bundled with membership [essentially the
rating system] has gained many adherents, and that if it is to have any
place at all, it should be given a few years to stand on its own feet, or be
scraped entirely. The mandatory inclusion of CL has the threshold of rated
play hovering around the $50 mark, in a period of radically reduced active
players of chess [only 10,500 adults have played a rated game in the past
year], can be seen as cause and effect.

One figures that the
politicians have in mind an ersatz solution in which
favored organizers will write rah-rah pieces to
replace direct input from ordinary players. If true,
the magazine will drive down membership totals as
readers toss away in boredom the single most tangible
benefit of membership that they receive.

About the only arguments left for bundling CL with membership were
authoritative chessic articles, and a Name or two. Many writers in these
newsgroups could write the rest, and besides, chess websites often provide
material as least as good as CL, every week rather than every month. If USCF
wanted the dynosaur option of having a 'flagship magazine', they can't both
do that and staff it with hampster writers.

Many contributors to this forum and many who
used to write letters to the editor stated that
"Evans" was the first thing they read each month --
either with interest or with outrage or with enjoyment.


Evans never leaves readers cold.

And that's what sells magazines - except of course this one is not for sale
anywhere, but at least there is something in it which gets your juices
flowing.

So, then, the politicians now wish to push GM
Evans out into the cold. Attempts have been made to
do so repeatedly in the past, and they have failed.


What may be different this time around is the attitude
of GM Evans himself. He fought in the past, but this
Old Lion is close to five years past the alloted
Biblical three score and 10, and he may decide to
undertake other projects. I don't know.

I don't know why he doesn't write a real memoir of his own - there are still
so many events which have only superficial coverage, as if seen only from
the outside. Recently I read a note by Evans that he would write about those
famous pictures with Che Guevara. What a scene! Unsure if Castro wasn't
hovering around too.

But the real advantage of having a strong player, more than that, a champion
player, comment on the chess scene, is that he can do it from the inside.
Its not Fischer walked here, did that, complained about the lights [an
outside view], it would be reporting on what is happening ont he inside of
the player, what the effect of pressure is like, of being in a match, and
highly visible, not one of a crowd, and the amount of preparation necessary
to move the first pawn. And what is happeneing btween moves?

Probably the best chess book I ever read was Diary of a Chessmaster. It even
made postal chess interesting - a subject I normally find so slooooooooow.
But the honesty of the player on what he saw /during/ the game made for a
superb book. This was a chess from the inside out approach and I think there
isn't enough of it.

Far too many chess books lament how many typo's appear in other people's
chess books, and negatively suggest what other people should have written,
while being unable to write that material themselves. I hope that Evans
would consider this sort of title as a prospect for much the same reasons
that people write him at CL. They don't want just anyone's opinion, they
want to hear from someone who has been there.

Its a pity that it is not simply a matter of providing a new venue for
Evans. I could probably find a sponsor for an on-line column in a blink. In
fact...

.... but that is not Larry Parr's lament here. It is the reduction of Chess
Life to a mere format which seems to be his objection. I agree with him that
that is not enough, certainly not for young players who don't pay much
attention to adults at all, but would stop awhile to listen to real
authority, since they know they need a Wise Uncle - its just so hard to find
one!

I will end my own comments here.

Cordially, Phil Innes

There is no doubt that the big-bucks Hoffmann
redesign puts the political class in a better position
than before when dealing with GM Evans. Past attempts
to fire the five-time champion foundered because they were prima
facie politically motivated. This time around, there is an
aura of mystery about what is happening and a patina -- no
doubt about it -- of deniability. The whole business reeks of
a corporate maneuver, and corporate maneuvers are usually more
effective in achieving aims than old-fashioned, out-in-the-open
political battling.


Larry Evans' monthly column was part of the
soul of Chess Life. Losing the column will sour many
readers, and one figures that as the magazine begins
to become ever-more official in its pronunciamentos
and as it takes on the tone of a Nolanland In Print,
many will begin to snooze and cancel memberships.


I hope that GM Evans charges up the mountain
one final time against the Federation political class,
but the odds will be against him. The Hoffmann
redesign is a wonderful blind, and one must also
respect Editor Lucas' decision which, at this point,
cannot be seen as a forced political move. Perhaps he
really believes that Q &A is old hat in a hobbyist
magazine or that losing an icon is a relatively small
matter or that damming up a conduit of reader
interaction with the magazine is not so very undesirable.


Who is really behind this move? My guess is Joel
Channing and his Floridian chum Don Schultz, who
once unsuccessfully sued GM Evans for $21 million.


There is no direct evidence at this point, as
there was in past times, of politicians twisting the
arm of the editor. When GM Evans decides what course
to take, he will have to reckon this circumstance into
his calculations.


The first place to start, I think, is with the
editor himself. I would counsel him to consult the
results of past reader surveys, and he needs to
understand that success will not come by creating a
Chess Life with less reader interaction than before.


Reason may yet will out. Though, to be sure,
power exercised by politicians rather than reason is
likely behind the decision.

GM Evans now has to decide "What's the Best Move?"

FORMER EDITOR KALEV PEHME SPEAKS UP

To all concerned:

Larry Evans was not very popular among a number of the USCF
establishment members while I was editor of Chess Life, and early-on it
was made clear to me that that was the case, including the vague
warning not to promote his material in any meaningful way. Of course, I
ignored the warning, because it didn't make editorial sense. I also
was told that I could not bring Bobby Fischer, an Evans contemporary,
into the magazine, and, of course, I ignored that as well, as it did
not make any editorial sense whatsoever. I guess you can have a circus
without elephants or clowns. The current editor of Chess Life, who is
not a professional editor, is a creature of a board member who is not
kindly disposed to Evans. I should note that the consultant on the
remaking of the magazine is also not a professional magazine designer
or strategic planner and is also tied to chess politicians who are
adverse to Evans.

Frankly, Larry Evans is a pillar of the US chess, whether for good or
ill does not matter or whether he is a good or bad guy. He bridges
several generations of chess life in this country, and has been an
important dissenting voice with respect to how chess is run in this
country and throughout the world. His column is most popular with the
readership, and its format, Q&A, is not only appropriate for the
magazine, but essential. Chess players require answers to questions.
Evans, Andy Soltis, and Lev Alburt provide answers. In fact, almost all
the columnists in respond to questions that are given them and generate
editorial matter to meet questions offered them. It is phony to say
that the Q&A format has played itself out. It is just a plain editorial
lie. If that were the case, then all of the columnists and many of the
articles would have to be killed.

If there is any columnist who ought to be cut-back, it is, of course,
Susan Polgar, who is overpaid and received her column through a
badly-constructed deal with a former executive director, who also had
no right to impose her on the magazine. When I cut her column, I
pointed out that her alleged contract is "at will" contract that
cannot stand up in any court of law, and I was willing to hold out
against her given the circumstances. I restored her as part of an
overall compromise to bring some peace to the USCF at the time.
Editorially, her column is inferior to the Evans column. To keep a
parvenu like the totally self-absorbed Polgar while jettisoning one of
the most important figures of American-chess history and journalism in
this country is a bit strained. But, then, Polgar is very popular with
many influential chess politicians, especially the scholastic fascists,
and Evans is not.

Basically, the problem with Chess Life is that it has to be run like a
magazine, not a mouth-piece for any factions. When I ran the magazine
that was my entire purpose-run it like a magazine. I therefore
instituted numerous reforms to make the magazine both profitable and
efficiently produced. One makes editorial choices based on what is good
for the magazine and the readers, not what is good for this or that
group of fanatics who have political axes to grind. Of course, to run
Chess Life as a magazine is supposed to be run, professionally, without
political favor to anyone, was anathema to the usual gang, especially
the fascist scholastic faction that uses the USCF to make vast hordes
of money, while giving relatively nothing back to the organization.
Now, the magazine is no longer professionally run, and Evans has run
his course with those who control the magazine.

I frankly have found my run with the USCF to have done one thing,
which I cannot forgive. I have come to despise chess, even though
throughout my entire life I have loved the game. Part of the reason
that I learned to love the game were the books and articles written by
Larry Evans, which I read as a young teen when I was president of my
school's chess club and when we played tournaments against other
schools. My experience with the USCF's politicians have made me feel
pain every time I look at a chess board, when I should be feeling the
joy that I felt when I first read Evans's books. For that, I can't
forgive the USCF, and I wish Larry Evans all the best for the future.

Best regards,

Kalev Pehme

http://www.myspace.com/21146994

http://blog.myspace.com/21146994

wrote in message
oups.com...
FORMER EDITOR KALEV PEHME SPEAKS UP

To all concerned:

If there is any columnist who ought to be cut-back, it is, of course,
Susan Polgar, who is overpaid and received her column through a
badly-constructed deal with a former executive director, who also had
no right to impose her on the magazine. When I cut her column, I
pointed out that her alleged contract is "at will" contract that
cannot stand up in any court of law, and I was willing to hold out
against her given the circumstances. I restored her as part of an
overall compromise to bring some peace to the USCF at the time.
Editorially, her column is inferior to the Evans column. To keep a
parvenu like the totally self-absorbed Polgar while jettisoning one of
the most important figures of American-chess history and journalism in
this country is a bit strained. But, then, Polgar is very popular with
many influential chess politicians, especially the scholastic fascists,
and Evans is not.

---------

In a message dated 3/21/2006 9:56:33 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

I myself am not a prude. I prefer to judge people by their merits .
I do not know Kalev at all. I have heard much about his ability and
judgement. When I saw the "myspace" link at the bottom of his post I
decided to look at his blog to find out more about the man. A
cursary look told me all I needed to know about him. I do not know
GM Evans. I enjoyed his column. I do know Susan Polgar and I also
enjoy her column and her advocation of chess. After looking at
Kalev's website I can say that having him as an advocate probably
hurts more than it helps.
Rob

another writer added:

I did not even bother to read his rant until you responded. This
_http://www.myspace.com/21146994_ (http://www.myspace.com/21146994) is
quite telling.
Thanks! Now, I finally understand why he behave the way he did a few
years ago.
Which other chess person does he remind you of?

Gentlemen, all that is notable, but quite beside the major point. In my
previous note I wrote of the Importance of a Good Uncle as role model, and
not just another some other commentator-type, but someone who by their
/performance/ proved their value. I cited Larry Evans as a perennial good
role model for males.

By exactly the same token, I read with dismay that Mr. Pehme thought Susan
Polgar's column of less worth compared to others and should be eliminated.
As another grandmaster who, by virtue of her performance, has proved they
know how it is and what it takes, and even at multiple world championship
levels, I suggest the value of a model for girls and young women, and even
not so young women! is as evident as it is for men.

Unfortunately Mr. Pehme's comments did not address the fact that only 7% of
players in the USA are female [in Eastern Europe and China they are 40+%],
and positive role models play an enormous part in the motivations of young
people and in the persistence in any task. If USCF has this sort of
participatory membership it would be in much better shape!

I shall not refer to Mr. Pehme's editorially sanctioned and infamous
Budapest article - which actually caused a Chicago woman organiser for USCF
to quit - beyond also adding that it is equally infamous that men should
speak for women's issues, or, in this miserable case, ignore fully half the
population.

Phil Innes

Well, at 75 maybe its time for the ol GM to hang it up. Maybe the
next to go will be Key Crackers,... to be replaced with Georgia
Crackers. Lucas is from Georgia, you see. Georgia Crackers could
feature games by Georgia cracker types rated no higher than 1400..
complete with an abundance of "!!!" moves in the fashion of typical
state chess eyecandy editors. We'd get some games between the likes of
Doofus Munroe and Rufus Turnipseed, section III of the Georgia Dirt
Road Open.

Old Haasie

stop it randy,

phil

wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, at 75 maybe its time for the ol GM to hang it up. Maybe the
next to go will be Key Crackers,... to be replaced with Georgia
Crackers. Lucas is from Georgia, you see. Georgia Crackers could
feature games by Georgia cracker types rated no higher than 1400..
complete with an abundance of "!!!" moves in the fashion of typical
state chess eyecandy editors. We'd get some games between the likes of
Doofus Munroe and Rufus Turnipseed, section III of the Georgia Dirt
Road Open.

Old Haasie

Like Wayne Praeder I always turned to Evans first, and so did my
chess friends.

The board's new lackey followed his marching orders by firing a Hall
of Famer and Gold Medalist who devoted his life to chess, proving that
even a pawn can checkmate a king.

Do these people have no shame?

On 21 Mar 2006 11:58:40 -0800, "jr" wrote:

Like Wayne Praeder I always turned to Evans first, and so did my
chess friends.

The board's new lackey followed his marching orders by firing a Hall
of Famer and Gold Medalist who devoted his life to chess, proving that
even a pawn can checkmate a king.

Do these people have no shame?

I've always looked forward to Evans' column.

Maybe they'll start a new column on celebrity chess and Famous Fish.
Or more games and interviews with class D and E players, and lotsa
children's pics.

BTW, is our new editor the guy that's rated 1562? For that matter, is
the redesign consultant the Class A player or someone else?

I quit the USCF several years ago because I was sick and tired of all
the infighting, and the lack of any benefits for membership. I thought
the magazine was lousy, and I thought the bizarre ramblings of GM Evans
were a poor part of the mag. I think dropping his column is a good
idea, and basically the magazine should focus mostly on annotations by
strong players of recent games from top events.

Whenever this issue comes up I see everyone citing the notion that GM
Evans columns are very popular with the readers, but amongst the 15 or
so people I know who have an opinion, I think it is clear they all
think it is rubbish.

But, hey, I'm out of the USCF, playing on the internet and occasionally
in Canada, so it isn't my problem any more.