|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: drug, message, seirawan, testing, yasser |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| Ads |
|
#2
December 4th 03, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
In one of the predecessors to this thread I asked:
BTW wasn't Eade "fired" (an oversimplification) over drug testing? Wasn't Tanner more or less his replacement? This message from Seirawan more or less answers my question. Yes, drug testing was a major factor in Eade's resignation having been accepted. It's not easy for me, reading only RGCP, to figure out who the major players are and why the major decisions get made. But I suspected that Seirawan was pulling the strings, and I am glad that this has been clarified, even though I regret that all this dirty laundry had to be hung out for such a large audience (and that I may have had a hand in provoking it). I do not think there is anything sinister about a major donor like Seirawan controlling the selection of FIDE representatives. It's unthinkable that if someone is funding the U.S. Championship, and probably providing the lion's share for the Olympiad teams, he wouldn't have a major role in our relations with FIDE. Without taking sides, I would have to say that if firing Eade and replacing him with Tanner didn't work, I would have a hard time mustering enthusiasm for firing Tanner and/or Kelleher over the same issue. This is the "off with their heads" approach to personnel. I doubt that it would work any better for representatives to FIDE than it did for Executive Directors. I don't know what other approach would be effective, but perhaps someone closer to the issues can suggest something creative. Bruce Leverett "Tim Hanke" wrote in message news:IAvzb.296802$275.1019698@attbi_s53... -----Original Message----- From: Yasser Seirawan ] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 11:46 PM To: ' Subject: FW: Kelleher report on FIDE Congress Dear Tim, Hmm. It appears that I've had server problems. This message sent some time ago didn't make the rounds to those reading this thread. Would you please do me the favor of forwarding it to others? Thank you very much, Yasser -----Original Message----- From: Yasser Seirawan ] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 9:20 PM Subject: FW: Kelleher report on FIDE Congress Dear Chess Friends, Having read these many messages about drug-testing for chess players (professionals) I really had intended not to respond, however Mr. Eade's message below is so awful that it well and truly deserves refutation. [snip] 
|
|
#3
December 4th 03, 09:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
At 01:22 PM 12/4/2003 EST, Arnold Denker wrote:
Dear Yaz, Thank God for players like you who speak out for the good of the entire chess world and who understands it from the chessplayers point of view. If I am not mistaken there will come a day when you will be asked to head up the world federation. Your very old friend Arnold Denker Actually, Yasser Seirawan has been asked many times to head up the World Chess Federation. Such is his prestigue in the world of chess, that he can have that job any time he wants it. Once, when I posted on a newsgroup somewhere that Yasser should be the next President of FIDE, he replied in the pages of Inside Chess: "If nominated I shall not run. If elected I shall not serve." Still, we can always hope that the day will someday come when Yasser Seirawan will agree to take the job of President of FIDE. Sam Sloan
|
|
#4
December 4th 03, 11:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
I've imbedded my responses to Yasser's latest tirade. See below.
-----Original Message----- From: Yasser Seirawan ] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 9:20 PM Subject: FW: Kelleher report on FIDE Congress Dear Chess Friends, Having read these many messages about drug-testing for chess players (professionals) I really had intended not to respond, however Mr. Eade's message below is so awful that it well and truly deserves refutation. I wrote the truth, Yasser. You cannot refute it. Mr. Eade writes: "Hanke's juvenile posturing is as misplaced as it is boorish." This comes from a person who has used the "fu**" word against myself. Publicly. Yasser and I had a private e-mail exchange which we mutually assured one another would be kept confidential. He proceeded to mail our correspondence to a large distribution list requesting it to be further forwarded. I don't know what to do with people like that. Yasser has been described by GM Evans as "false to the bone," and I concur. I don't trust him. He habitually calls those who bring him to task for his actions "liars." Only when they lie, Yasser. Mr. Eade should not be the one to correct others! Mr. Eade was a complete embarrassment when he was the FIDE Continental President and time hasn't helped him grow-up. Not only was I NOT an embarrassment, I was effective. Of course, you were not at the meetings, so you can't possibly know. Mr. Eade writes: "I cannot speak about the last meeting, but I know for a fact that the FIDE representatives have faithfully carried out the delegate's directives in the past." This one turns the truth on its head. That is completely false. The delegates commended our performance. They would've condemned it, if what you are saying were true. You've got things completely backwards. Prior to the 2000 FIDE General Assembly meeting in Istanbul there was a Chess Life magazine, I think it was the September 2000 issue but cannot be sure as my magazines are in Seattle and I'm writing this message from memory from Amsterdam. In that issue the editor began by explaining that the policy at Chess Life was to give fair and balanced reporting of particular topics. A good start. However, in that issue there were THREE articles in favor of drug testing, ONE against. This is a typical mistake, one that Yasser has made numerous times. My article was pro-chess in the Olympics, not pro drug testing. Also there were numerous anti-drug testing pieces in Chess Life both before and after that issue. Sheesh! The first article in favor of drug testing was written by no less than the then USCF President Tim Redman! The second was an article by Mr. Eade entitled, "Why the USCF should test for drugs." That was not my title, and I was ****ed at the editor for using it. The article was not about that at all. Try reading it. In that article, Mr. Eade intones with breathless whispering how America should allow drug testing in order to, "go for the (IOC Olympic) gold." Now, you're just being a goof. One cannot whisper, at all, let alone breathlessly in an article. I don't think anyone needs to be ashamed to value a gold medal, Yasser. I point out that we've lost a generation of chess talent and stand to lose another. I argue that perhaps the prospect of representing their country while competing for a gold medal in the Olympics might keep some of the talent in the game. You ridicule that notion, but some of your colleagues do not. He also expressed his admiration for the many "good ideas" of FIDE President Kirsan Iljumzhinov including speeding up the game to the FIDE time control of 90 + 30. The very same time control that was recently roundly condemned by the top 200 players in the world. I have long advocated speeding up the game. Some of Iljumzhinov's ideas have been resisted and some, such as the knockout format, embraced. My perspective has always been that of an organizer, who has incurred many expenses trying to host norm tournaments in the US. Faster time controls, knockout events, etc., are appealing to me, because they make expenses manageable. The alternative is not classical chess. The alternative is no chess at all. Somehow, we've been managing about one norm tournament a year in SF for some time, but it is getting harder and harder. The third article was by the FIDE Medical Commission Chairman. A chiropractor who was paid by FIDE a six figure sum to command the post. All the articles were awful. One worse than the other. Unfortunately, the article against drug testing was written by someone I've never heard of and was, if possible, worse then the first three. In fact, it nearly made me sympathetic for drug testing. Somehow the writer brought in the Vietnam War, our drug culture and was utterly clueless about the real issues. Instead of having a writer like GM Benjamin, GM Evans (shudder), Bill Goichberg or myself write against drug testing, indeed, those who have actively lobbied against drug testing, Chess Life readers got this fellow. Good grief. I've been told many times, that my article was well written. I think you are hardly an objective critic. &n, GM Evans (shudder), Bill Goichberg or myself write against drug testing, indeed, those who have actively lobbied against drug testing, Chess Life readers got this fellow. Good grief. I've been told many times, that my article was well written. I think you are hardly an objective critic. To be clear, the administration of Tim Redman publicly stated that the USCF should support the FIDE position favoring drug. The then USCF Executive Director George Defies called the offensive drug testing, "...a necessary evil..." Therefore it was no surprise that in Istanbul 2000, the USCF Team favored FIDE's position supporting drug testing. That is not true. I was in Istanbul and I felt scandalized by the position of the USCF and ashamed of my federation and the role played by USCF's FIDE team. You were in Istanbul, but not at any of the meetings. Would you mind identifying the source of your incorrect information? I was there. I know what happened, and you are not telling the truth. The legacy of Eade, Doyle and Kelleher is that drug-testing occurred because of their INACTION. That is a LIE. And yes, there were a few federations, I believe three, including Holland, that voted against FIDE's drug policy. Presumably, these three delegates were laughed at by their FIDE colleagues, no doubt including our own. What vote are you talking about? You seem to be confused as to the facts. I think Yasser has become muddled as to dates and causes. The big issue in Istanbul, was FIDE Commerce not drug testing. The meeting where we were required to actively oppose drug testing was the next year in Greece. Yasser was not there. Mr. Eade writes: "The fact of the matter is the delegates commended our performance at the meeting in Cherry Hill. They are the final authority." This was yet a further embarrassment in a never ending stream of gaffes. Our FIDE Team was lauded for their bravery in fighting against drug testing. While in fact the opposite was true. (Doesn't anyone read Chess Life magazine?) Yasser, you've insulted me many times, now. I treated you with kid gloves and respect, until you started up with this sort of absolute bull****. I always represented the USCF honorably, and I've ALWAYS told the truth about my service and actions. You have it entirely wrong. What is the basis for your improper claim that the "opposite was true?" The FIDE Team lied about their actions in Istanbul. Complete and utter bull****. Don't blush, Yasser, you use that word too. Please produce a quote or anything material to substantiate that accusation. You're simply wrong. The USCF delegates believed the lies and everyone was commended. The delegates were informed honestly and factually. We had to endure all sorts of garbage, such as this latest nonsense from you. The lies never seem to stop. I was supposed to have received a gold watch, I was supposed to have won money in a blitz tournament as a payoff for my vote etc. All of these accusations were made by people who were not there, and did not know, like Yasser. It is a pity that our FIDE Team does NOT recognize the USCF delegates as the final authority. Again, you are writing absolute nonsense. We did recognize the delegates as the final authority. If they did, the FIDE Team would actively campaign against drug testing. We did. We did what can reasonably be expected of us to do. We lobbied individual delegates, attended and spoke up all relevant workshops, and each of us made a speech in front of the EB. We were all active, and the delegates ARE the ultimate authority and they commended our performance. Not because we lied to them. We told them the truth. We were virtually alone in our opposition to drug testing. I certainly don't recall anyone from Holland speaking about it. It has not done so and by the reading of this thread it obviously has no intention to do so in the future. Clearly, Tim Hanke is right. We need folks who will follow the mandates of the delegates, NOT a Team that is reluctant to do so. Watering down the punishments of a positive drug test and feeling proud of such an accomplishment is really hilarious. Simply put, our Team doesn't get it. Simply put, you have no idea what you're talking about. Should we have held our breaths until we turned blue? I asked you to run for FIDE President. You said no. Why don't you put up or shut up? It is a logical fallacy to say that our failure to persuade anyone to change their minds on this issue stems from a lack of trying. It is a logical fallacy to conclude that different people would get different results. The truth is that we did, do not, and probably never will get the votes. See, Yasser, that's the problem. Regarding our leadership and influence in FIDE. This is funny beyond words. A few years ago, I had a great exchange with FIDE Vice-President Mr. Doyle. He explained to me how he had "completely rewritten" FIDE's bylaws and "watches the finances like a hawk." After my laughter subsided, I had to send Mr. Doyle a reality check: FIDE doesn't follow its bylaws. Neither his carefully crafted work nor Robert's Rules of Order. Full stop. Furthermore, its spending would cause Enron officials embarrassment -- if not jail time. For example, at the 2002 FIDE Congress, Treasurer Jarrett complained of the spending of FIDE's Honorary Chairman Mr. Campomanes. Apparently, FIDE's Chairman had received reimbursement of $150,000 during the year to attend IOC meetings. Fair enough, USCF's dues to FIDE should be put to good work. The only problem is that Mr. Campomanes provided no receipts at all for his expenditures. Of course since Mr. Campomanes is the Honorable Chairman of FIDE he was taken at his word. Never mind that he is a convicted felon in his native Philippines for embezzlement which was described in the Philippine press as, "The mother of all accounting anomalies." He anxiously awaits his opportunity to clear his good name at appeal. In the meantime, he is a felon and remains FIDE's Honorary Chairman. It seems to me that Mr. Doyle's hawk like vigilance is, worthless. I'm quite certain that you are misrepresenting Doyle's remarks, but I'll tell you what really happened anyway. Doyle challenged these payments at one of the meetings. The reality is that they had already been paid, and there was little to be done except make a stink about it. You are absolutely correct that FIDE is poorly run. Scandals, such as the one you describe can and do occur. Much like the IOC, USOC and USCF, FIDE lacks the proper business controls. The USCF and FIDE rely on part time volunteers to make certain everything is on the up and up. It is a system that cries out to be abused. Perhaps, you could change things, if you would run for FIDE President? As a further reality check to the FIDE Vice-President it is reported by FIDE that its finances are so critical it has to move offices from (expensive) Switzerland to Greece. If Mr. Redman is correct and FIDE is preparing for a post-Iljumzhinov FIDE, then the Greek FIDE Deputy President Makropouloswill be ideally placed to keep FIDE's reins. I'll leave it to our FIDE team to genuflect in front of the future FIDE President. Sort of sounds like moving to Crossville, doesn't it? Mr. Eade writes: "The issue is not who represents the USCF in FIDE, and it would be foolish to replace them. The problem we have in FIDE is that the USCF (not its representatives) is weak." Sigh. How to refute this one? You cannot refute the truth. Once again, Mr. Eade is only one hundred percent wrong. It is ALL about leadership. Or more accurately expressed, our complete failure to lead. Gee, maybe if you ran for FIDE President, like I asked you to, we would have the leadership you write about. I have seen Doyle and Kelleher demonstrate leadership numerous times. What you fail to understand is that if someone has a majority of the votes locked up, they win. as I have written before, we cannot line up votes in advance (not due to lack of leadership, silly) We rely on floor fights, which sometimes works and sometimes does not. Even when it does work, such as with the case of the GM from Romania, they find some way around it. It is very difficult to make any change in an organization such as FIDE. It is one reason I decided not to continue trying. You and silly posers, such as Hanke, fail to understand that you can't just climb up on a table and shout and get your way. While it is true, that at this precise moment in time, the USCF faces very severe financial pressures, the USCF is and has been the envy of the great majority of national federations. The USCF Team in FIDE has been weak ever since our dear friend Fan Adams was forced to tender his resignation in protest in 1984. I believe the year was 1994. (Fan resigned due to the following incident: Mr. Campomanes illegally suspended the FIDE bylaws and put himself on the FIDE Presidential election ballot. Fan was ready to cast his ballot against Campomanes, but the USCF received a bribe and ORDERED Fan to cast his vote FOR Campomanes. Fan, respecting the authority of the USCF EB did as he was TOLD. Afterwards, FIDE President Campomanes gallantly commended Fan on changing his mind -- a commendation that our FIDE Team lives for. I agree with Yasser that Fan was very forceful and respected. Kelleher may not be another Fan, but he is respected, works hard and is sincere. He doesn't deserve the Yasser-spite. This last line above is another example of how petty and mean spirited Yasser can be. It has no basis in reality. Unfortunately, Fan didn't see things in the same light and resigned after the meeting.) The USCF has its own rating system, for the last 20 odd years has had approximately 5 million dollars in annual revenues, owns its own building, publishes a slick monthly magazine and has 90,000+ members. Most federations are well and truly destitute, possessing none of the many advantages enjoyed by the USCF. Most national federation delegates are chosen by their ability to afford the trip to a FIDE Congress themselves. It is common for federations to simply give their proxy vote to the Presidential Board members for voting. When viewed over the long term, I think it fair to say that the USCF may be the most financially successful of all national federations. The USCF was once well off, but is not any longer. It has been ailing for years, and will have to drastically change the way it does business. It is true that many nations are destitute. Is this some sort of news flash? It is irrelevant. We have no world championship contender (although we have in the past), we hold no FIDE events (although we have in the past) and contribute next to nothing to FIDE (they even had to dun us for our dues. Our players were almost left off of a ratings list, because of it. Yasser should stop living in the past and face reality. The USCF is very weak. We do take leadership positions in FIDE, and they want us to do more. The problem is not leadership, but the lack of resources to accomplish anything meaningful. Most FIDE delegates are astonished that the USCF has been so obsequies and genuflects at every moment before the FIDE high command. That is false, petty and absurd. It is precisely the LACK of leadership of the USCF's FIDE Team which is a collective USCF embarrassment. Yet our Team has consistently explained how they have managed to expand their "influence" within FIDE. Well at least they have provided us with a great deal of humor. Yet to be fair, our Team has certainly picked its battles carefully and has enjoyed an occasional minor victory. Bravo! Funny, but you weren't there, and don't know what you're talking about. Mr. Eade writes: "What is really silly about Tim's false bravado is that he has nothing at stake." I do not see Mr. Hanke's remarks as "false bravado." He has explained his point of view quite plainly and with harsh language. He should be more diplomatic but his anger is quite well-founded. He seems fed up with all the double-talk of our FIDE Team. Hanke is irresponsible. Your claims of "double-talk" are unfounded. You make assertions without evidence. You do not speak in terms of facts. You simply have decided that the facts would only confuse you, since you've already made up your mind. Mr. Eade is no more impressed by my "true bravado" when I divorced myself from FIDE even though my life's profession was at stake. That is not true. However, I did note that you did play in FIDE events after you divorced yourself. I also noticed that none of your colleagues joined you in divorcing FIDE despite you persistent public pleas for them to do so. Quite the contrary, I received further criticism from Mr. Eade for not working with our FIDE Team, which included himself. The fact that I could hardly "work" with those I knew to be dishonest didn't faze him one bit. How do you know that I am dishonest? I have never lied to you about anything at any time. I treated you with kid-gloves while you became ever more insulting. Finally, I had enough guff from you. We had a policy disagreement, which you turned into a personal one. I did ask you to run for FIDE President, and you turned me down. The USCF is facing many problems. The fact that it may actually be willing to address its relationship with FIDE with a critical eye at such a time is astonishing. Rubber stamping commendation has been the norm. Just to make sure the norm isn't violated, occasional state visits are made by FIDE leaders. They needn't have bothered. However, a little back-slapping to keep our Team in line is just good politics. You know, this is really sickening. I went to great trouble and expense to go to FIDE and see for myself what the deal was. The dynamic Yasser describes here simply does not exist. I read these same accusations when Fan and Arnold were our representatives, only it wasn't Yasser writing them then. While it causes me great anguish to say this, Mr. Parr is actually right. When FIDE high officials recover from the shock of a USCF ultimatum (when has that EVER occurred?) Why didn't Fan issue one, if it was the right thing to do? and realize that the world's most recognizable federation is about to split ranks the silliness of drug-testing for chess players will be repealed. We will certainly never know because I wager it will not happen. When in Bled 2002, the majority of the players refused drug testing, FIDE immediately blinked and announced the event would have voluntary drug testing only. When, during the Bled Olympiad, our friend GM Morozevich was asked to volunteer and provide a specimen, his rude answer -- a la Mr. Eade -- caused an immediate full scale retreat. The winning Russian Team wasn't bothered again! Geez, Yaz, I've heard you use the "F" word myself. Don't play Mister Dainty. I would not support a walk out, unless our players were aware of it and in support of it. The players need to get organized. That would be a step in the right direction. Pointing fingers and blaming others is childish. Mr. Eade writes: "As someone who has donated tens of thousands of dollars over the years to FIDE norm tournaments in the US, I believe I have the right to say that the USCF has an obligation to remain in FIDE." First of all let me give Mr. Eade a sincere and genuine thank you, thank you on behalf of myself and all chess players. Gee, the words Yasser and sincere don't go together. As Evans said, false to the bone. Your personal sponsorship is, sincerely, and deeply appreciated. There's that word, again. I too have donated money. In fact, by my accountant's reckoning over the last 20 years I've donated $750,000 USD to chess. Not including my time of course. Still, this sacrifice, given most willingly, doesn't mean that I should close by eyes and forgo rational thought. No one suggested any such thing. I spoke to a lot of our top players, yourself included and concluded that your policy did not represent the majority opinion. Organize the players and designate an official spokesperson. Stop whining about volunteers! I don't see why the USCF should support a policy which is completely ridiculous. The reality is that such a policy by FIDE only convinces me that should the political will exist in the chess world, a new World chess organization is inevitable. Is that a bad thing? Look, too many countries get too much money based on Olympic recognition. You will never change their minds. So, why not use this issue to organize the players. Every serious sport has a player's union. Three volunteers from the US can't change the world, but a player's union could. In the meantime, we await with bated breath for the next FIDE scandal to break. By my watch June 04 is the due date. Despite your petty accusations, I am hardly a FIDE apologist. Bill and I would take turns cheering each other up when we grew despondent over our ability to effect change. It is, as I wrote, a scandal waiting to happen with part time volunteers at the controls. If a better organization emerged, I would be all for it! I just believe in trying to make the one that actually exists better until a better one comes along. I know that Mr. Redman and Mr. Fernandez have recently jumped on the bogeyman drug of Ritalin (spelling?) as the potential scourge of the chess world. Citing it as the need to perform drug testing. (Mr. Eade thought amphetamines -- speed -- could do the trick noting his college experiences during final exams week.) Apparently this miracle drug, Ritalin, is used (primarily?) to control hyperactive children. It is supposed to have a marvelous calming effect. (Presumably on children but also their parents.) As 95% of all the prescriptions for this wonder drug are written in the USA, perhaps 95% of drug testing for chess players can be limited to the USA? Instead of EXEMPTING children as the writers of this thread are so eager to do, it seems these little tykes could be breaking all the rules of good sportspersons. Let us humiliate them NOW so that they won't be banned for LIFE later! In the meantime, without scientific proof that a chess playing pill WITH negative side effects can be proven to increase a chess players rating, why not plainly state the obvious: There is no drug problem in chess and testing for a none existent problem is stupid. Your simple assertions are not facts. I for one would do away with the testing requirements, if I had a magic wand. I am not pro-drug testing. I am pro-chess in the Olympics (Central American, African, and Asian games already to name a few) and pro-new money into chess. Olympic recognition has resulted in NOC contributions that are a significant source of new money in chess. That's a good thing. Let me join with Mr. Hanke in saying to those who play along to get along, please pay your USCF dues, go away and sin no more. Sincerely, Yasser Yasser, I have no desire to argue with you endlessly. You've impugned my honor many times now. It gives me no joy to call attention to your two-faced, - smile while you're plotting against him - style. I don't respect you. You don't respect me. Let's leave it at that. Otherwise, we'll end up with carpal tunnel syndrome due to pointless fighting. James Eade Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
|
|
#5
December 4th 03, 11:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
In one of the predecessors to this thread I asked: BTW wasn't Eade "fired" (an oversimplification) over drug testing? Wasn't Tanner more or less his replacement? This message from Seirawan more or less answers my question. Yes, drug testing was a major factor in Eade's resignation having been accepted. It's not easy for me, reading only RGCP, to figure out who the major players are and why the major decisions get made. But I suspected that Seirawan was pulling the strings, and I am glad that this has been clarified, even though I regret that all this dirty laundry had to be hung out for such a large audience (and that I may have had a hand in provoking it). I don't think you've come to the right conclusion Bruce. If it was Yasser's doing, Kelleher would've been "fired" too. Schultz likes Kelleher though. You may have noticed in all of Scam Sloan's attacks he would mention Doyle and me, but not Bill. It was pretty clear what was going on. Yasser went off after we refused to go along with his no-confidence motion in St. Paul. He's been writing crap like this for some time, but he never bothers to check the facts. He gets dates wrong, meetings wrong and basically says things took place that did not, and says things didn't happen that did. I was there. He wasn't. I do not think there is anything sinister about a major donor like Seirawan controlling the selection of FIDE representatives. It's unthinkable that if someone is funding the U.S. Championship, and probably providing the lion's share for the Olympiad teams, he wouldn't have a major role in our relations with FIDE. Yasser has plenty of influence, but Schultz had the votes on that board. Without taking sides, I would have to say that if firing Eade and replacing him with Tanner didn't work, I would have a hard time mustering enthusiasm for firing Tanner and/or Kelleher over the same issue. This is the "off with their heads" approach to personnel. I doubt that it would work any better for representatives to FIDE than it did for Executive Directors. I don't know what other approach would be effective, but perhaps someone closer to the issues can suggest something creative. Bruce Leverett It was a personal thing between Don and me and it had nothing to do with drug testing. You've come to an inaccurate conclusion. I do agree with you that replacing Tanner and Kelleher would serve no purpose. The simple fact is that the US does not have the votes and cannot get them. If we walk out from FIDE, FIDE will recognize another organization and the players will play for that one. There is only one way I can see for progress to take place: The players need to organize and bargain collectively. Blaming two or three volunteers for an inability to change world opinion in FIDE is childish and unproductive. It is even worse then just casting blame and finger pointing, however. They lie, and say we didn't even try. Sheesh. If the players cannot unite on this issue, they will never unite. They will forever be blaming others for their lot in life. James Eade Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
|
|
#6
December 5th 03, 12:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
"Sam Sloan" wrote in message ... At 01:22 PM 12/4/2003 EST, Arnold Denker wrote: Dear Yaz, Thank God for players like you who speak out for the good of the entire chess world and who understands it from the chessplayers point of view. If I am not mistaken there will come a day when you will be asked to head up the world federation. Your very old friend Arnold Denker Actually, Yasser Seirawan has been asked many times to head up the World Chess Federation. Such is his prestigue in the world of chess, that he can have that job any time he wants it. Once, when I posted on a newsgroup somewhere that Yasser should be the next President of FIDE, he replied in the pages of Inside Chess: "If nominated I shall not run. If elected I shall not serve." Still, we can always hope that the day will someday come when Yasser Ay Sam. Some other person replied to a post I made with the same "If nominated I shall not run. If elected I shall not serve" quotation, on the basis that it was not an honorable position to occupy, or that it would be inevitably corrupted by the establishment. So strange that you and I, such well known rascals, should notice such things.  Cordially, Phil Sam Sloan
|
|
#7
December 5th 03, 07:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
JIM EADE IS CORRECT By Larry Parr Jim Eade is correct to assert that drug testing per se had little to do with his being fired. He was canned because a board majority wanted to get rid of him. Don Schultz had a lot to do with putting together that majority, and he is to be praised for this work in this instance. Mr. Eade refers to GM Seirawan getting his facts wrong. I pointed out a single date typo or lapsus (1984 instead of 1994). Otherwise, nearly all of what Seirawan wrote in his long message got the story right. When he was unclear about something, he said so. In other postings Mr. Eade is still referring to a Delegates' resolution praising the "team" as a way of trying to save face. Most of you understand that the resolution passed by the Delegates was a way to grease the skids for Mr. Eade's departure. In effect, they said, "don't let the door kick you on the way out!"A traditional Federation practice is to give a vote of confidence to those who will soon be gone and to thank those who are being canned. Most of you understand that the key battle at the Delegates meeting was a resolution introduced by Mr. Eade's main allies that would have made it much less difficult for the Executive Board to fire him. That motion could not muster the votes, and Mr. Eade got a sop. If he had not then resigned, he would have been fired.
|
|
#8
December 6th 03, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
|
|
#9
December 7th 03, 08:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message from Yasser Seirawan about drug testing
(Sam Sloan) wrote in message ...
On 4 Dec 2003 09:45:32 -0800, (Bruce Leverett) wrote: In one of the predecessors to this thread I asked: BTW wasn't Eade "fired" (an oversimplification) over drug testing? Wasn't Tanner more or less his replacement? This message from Seirawan more or less answers my question. Yes, drug testing was a major factor in Eade's resignation having been accepted. It's not easy for me, reading only RGCP, to figure out who the major players are and why the major decisions get made. But I suspected that Seirawan was pulling the strings, and I am glad that this has been clarified, even though I regret that all this dirty laundry had to be hung out for such a large audience (and that I may have had a hand in provoking it). I do not think there is anything sinister about a major donor like Seirawan controlling the selection of FIDE representatives. It's unthinkable that if someone is funding the U.S. Championship, and probably providing the lion's share for the Olympiad teams, he wouldn't have a major role in our relations with FIDE. You have it completely wrong. Yasser Seirawan does not attand USCF delegate's meetings nor does he attend executive board meetings. I have never heard his name even mentioned as exapressing an opinion about USCF politics. Yasser had nothing to do with the decision either to hire or to fire Jim Eade. OK Sam. Suppose you were on the Board, and Mr. Heavy Hitter posted an unambiguous, scathing denunciation of one of the representatives to FIDE, and then you had a chance to accept or reject the guy's resignation. Which way would you go? I may as well ask you this, because you have been known to run for the Board from time to time. Bruce
|
