Posted for Mikhail Korenman // Phil Innes

---
International Scholastic

Chess Convention



January 6 - 15, 2008 - Chicago



The International Scholastic Chess Convention discussion will be
during the following sections:



1. Chess at Schools

2. Chess in Education

3. Chess and Technology

4. Chess for Peace



Each participated chess club will be given an opportunity to
present at any one of the Forum's sessions for 15 minutes. In addition, the
Forum will build a special web site to link all the participants around the
World for future communications and chess activities




The vision of the initiative is to establish long-term
relationships between the young people around the globe by using chess as
the vehicle by which to promote mutual understanding of shared problems. In
addition, we expect these relationships to add to the students' general
educational knowledge as well as helping the participants to foster a better
understanding of their world.






The International Scholastic Chess Convention will be organized
by the International Educational and Cultural Services, Inc., a 501-c3
non-profit organization that established Chess for Peace program in 2005.
For more information please contact Dr. Mikhail Korenman, the event
organizer at or visit our web site www.intecsus.org







International Scholastic

Chess Tournament

The 1st FIDE-rated Open Scholastic

chess tournament in the US!



8 sections:

K - 12; K - 12 Under 1200;

K - 8; K - 8 Under 1000;

K - 5; K - 5 Under 900;

K - 3; K - 3 Under 800



Prizes: Trophies for at least top 25 players and teams in each
section.



Main Event rounds:
Friday: 7:00 pm
Saturday: 1:00 pm, 4:00 pm, 7:00 pm
Sunday: 1:00 pm & 4:00 pm

Monday: 10:00 pm









































The cost per participant, including 9-days lodging, all meals,
tours of Chicago area museums and chess clubs, is $800 per person (paid by
11/01/07), $850 (paid by 12/01/07), and $900 (after 12/01/07) per person.

On Jul 30, 4:09 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
4. Chess for Peace

.

St Kitts and Nevis is a little confused about "chess for peace" during
a state of war. Do you really mean that? NO PEACE until we play in the
World Chess Championship. I have got to use this line in my report.

Marcus Roberts
Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and Nevis to FIDE

On Jul 30, 5:09 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
Posted for Mikhail Korenman // Phil Innes

---
International Scholastic

Chess Convention

January 6 - 15, 2008 - Chicago

The International Scholastic Chess Convention discussion will be
during the following sections:

1. Chess at Schools

2. Chess in Education

3. Chess and Technology

4. Chess for Peace

I like chess, but slogans such as "Chess for Peace" disturb me -- I
don't want the game to be politicized or for chess advocates to make
unrealistic claims. Very few people think war is fun, and I distrust
self-declared "peace" movements. Reasonable people can differ over how
long U.S. troops should stay in Iraq, but what does chess have to do
with that question?

On Aug 1, 12:43 pm, Beliavsky wrote:

I like chess, but slogans such as "Chess for Peace" disturb me -- I
don't want the game to be politicized or for chess advocates to make
unrealistic claims. Very few people think war is fun, and I distrust
self-declared "peace" movements. Reasonable people can differ over how
long U.S. troops should stay in Iraq, but what does chess have to do
with that question?

It's the "chess as vehicle" argument, one that has always seemed
spurious to me, that chess makes you a better _______________ - and of
course you simply fill in the blank. I feel it cheapens chess, which
should be able to stand on its own two bishops....

On Jul 30, 5:17 pm, wrote:
On Jul 30, 4:09 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

4. Chess for Peace


St Kitts and Nevis is a little confused about "chess for peace" during
a state of war.


Our forces are a little tied up at the moment, but rest
assured that just as soon as we can free up a couple of
PT boats -- one for St Kitts and one for Nevis -- the war
will be over like that (snaps fingers). "When will 'you
people' ever learn to stop starting wars against your
vast superiors?", asks Larry Parr. "Where the heck is
St Kitts or this Nevis coconut island?", asked Admiral
Nemmitz. "Give a couple of our marines a fishing boat
and maybe a water cannon -- that should take care of
these arrogant little upstarts", stated the Secretary of
Defense.


-- hawk bot

"SBD" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 1, 12:43 pm, Beliavsky wrote:

I like chess, but slogans such as "Chess for Peace" disturb me -- I
don't want the game to be politicized or for chess advocates to make
unrealistic claims. Very few people think war is fun, and I distrust
self-declared "peace" movements. Reasonable people can differ over how
long U.S. troops should stay in Iraq, but what does chess have to do
with that question?

It's the "chess as vehicle" argument, one that has always seemed
spurious to me, that chess makes you a better _______________ - and of
course you simply fill in the blank. I feel it cheapens chess, which
should be able to stand on its own two bishops....

Okay, but if you can't engage in a ritual conflict, are you gentlemen
thinking that there is some means of avoiding actual ones?

While the first writer above is understood - nevertheless, Konrad Lorenz
[and Garry Kasparov, recently] stated that aggression is good, if there are
[cultural] channels for it.

Kasparov challenged Americans this way. Lorenz challenged Freud.

These are not cheap arguments of convenience, and while I respect your
demurrers as a right, the fact of aggression and conflict is the serious
topic, and these are not so easily dismissed as we all witness.

Phil Innes

On Aug 1, 7:55 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

Okay, but if you can't engage in a ritual conflict, are you gentlemen
thinking that there is some means of avoiding actual ones?

While the first writer above is understood - nevertheless, Konrad Lorenz
[and Garry Kasparov, recently] stated that aggression is good, if there are
[cultural] channels for it.

Kasparov challenged Americans this way. Lorenz challenged Freud.

These are not cheap arguments of convenience, and while I respect your
demurrers as a right, the fact of aggression and conflict is the serious
topic, and these are not so easily dismissed as we all witness.

Phil Innes

I doubt that the ritual conflicts of sports reduce the incidents of
real aggression. Could one assert with a straight face that
international soccer matches make people of different countries more
peacably inclined towards each other? Soccer hooliganism is too well-
known.

Tournament chess is a mental fight, and at the chess board Kasparov,
Karpov, and other greats were not nice guys.

"Beliavsky" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 1, 7:55 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

Okay, but if you can't engage in a ritual conflict, are you gentlemen
thinking that there is some means of avoiding actual ones?

While the first writer above is understood - nevertheless, Konrad Lorenz
[and Garry Kasparov, recently] stated that aggression is good, if there
are
[cultural] channels for it.

Kasparov challenged Americans this way. Lorenz challenged Freud.

These are not cheap arguments of convenience, and while I respect your
demurrers as a right, the fact of aggression and conflict is the serious
topic, and these are not so easily dismissed as we all witness.

Phil Innes

I doubt that the ritual conflicts of sports reduce the incidents of
real aggression. Could one assert with a straight face that
international soccer matches make people of different countries more
peacably inclined towards each other? Soccer hooliganism is too well-
known.

But the hooligans are not engaged in sport, but in proxy activity. The
players themselves do not hate each other, eh? Though they contest fiercely,
there is comraderie at the end.

Tournament chess is a mental fight, and at the chess board Kasparov,
Karpov, and other greats were not nice guys.

"Nice?". Who cares for nice, this is not a 'nice' subject, its a compelling
one. And of that, what do you actually know of these two players?

Phil Innes

On Aug 17, 7:49 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

"Beliavsky" wrote in message

On Aug 1, 7:55 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

Okay, but if you can't engage in a ritual conflict, are you gentlemen
thinking that there is some means of avoiding actual ones?

While the first writer above is understood - nevertheless, Konrad Lorenz
[and Garry Kasparov, recently] stated that aggression is good, if there
are
[cultural] channels for it.

Kasparov challenged Americans this way. Lorenz challenged Freud.

These are not cheap arguments of convenience, and while I respect your
demurrers as a right, the fact of aggression and conflict is the serious
topic, and these are not so easily dismissed as we all witness.

Phil Innes

I doubt that the ritual conflicts of sports reduce the incidents of
real aggression. Could one assert with a straight face that
international soccer matches make people of different countries more
peacably inclined towards each other? Soccer hooliganism is too well-
known.

But the hooligans are not engaged in sport, but in proxy activity. The
players themselves do not hate each other, eh? Though they contest fiercely,
there is comraderie at the end.

Tournament chess is a mental fight, and at the chess board Kasparov,
Karpov, and other greats were not nice guys.

"Nice?". Who cares for nice, this is not a 'nice' subject, its a compelling
one. And of that, what do you actually know of these two players?

Phil Innes


Well, for one thing, he knows that for years they kept him
out of the top spot in the world rankings, making him suffer
way down at #3. Can you really blame him for holding a
grudge? I mean, this is like when GM Evans was kicking
butt, only to have that young whippersnapper Bobby Fischer
come along and steal his thunder. Or when Dr. Sir Howard
Staunton, Esqr. was telling everyone and his brother just
how great he was, when all of a sudden a teensy punk from
America sailed over to pop his over-puffed ego balloon.


What I found interesting was the notion that a "chess for
peace" tourney is automatically supposed to relate to the
current war in Iraq, specifically, as opposed to peace in
general. Apparently, it is interpreted as a political jab at
the Bush administration, not as advocating "peace".


Another thing I find interesting is the statement that this
scholastic event will be FIDE rated. Wow. Is it really
possible to have FIDE ratings for games in which illegal
moves and illegal positions are commonplace? And won't
these ratings be, um, a bit lower than other FIDE ratings?


-- help bot