DRUG TESTING: STATE OF THE DEBATE

By Larry Parr

1. WHAT FIDE'S DRUG REGULATIONS SAY: At this point, the debate appears
over. Pro-drug testers such as John Fernandez and Jim Eade are no longer
prepared to address the substance of the regulations except with general
comments such as they are a "minimum" and "improved." That kind of thing.

If, earlier, Mr. Fernandez talked about testing being limited to a
single tournament, the world championship, or limited to a few tournaments
under Section "D" of the old code, he has ceased such talk. (Even his claim
about the old code limiting testing to Section "D" events, which numbered in
the many dozens (Seirawan) or, by my estimate, well over 100, was false. But
this earlier lie is now dated.)

None of the pro-drug testers have yet to deny the following: A.
Article 3.1 provides for testing of "any competitor" in "any FIDE Competiton"
(no exceptions made for children); B. Article 3.2 calls for
out-of-competition testing any time, any place, for any reason, stated or
unstated; no limits to the when-where-why are mentioned; C. Article 3.4
mentions testing of undefined "all other events," for which national
federations will be responsible and for which the federations must submit
results to FIDE; D. Article 6 includes punishments such as multi-year and
lifetime bans -- both effective career-enders.

The state of the debate is that Mr. Fernandez and others of his kind
will no longer address what the FIDE code says.

2. THE PROMISED BIG BUCKS BONANZA: John Fernandez claims that $2.2
million flows annually into chess worldwide because there is drug testing in
chess. He has a list of 42 nations receiving this amount.

The kid has nothing to say about his earlier claimed fact that
"most" national federations ("a majority of," by his definition) received
"significant" portions of their budgets from their respective NOCs because of
drug testing. GM Larry Evans and I claimed he lied through his teeth when
making this claim, and he remains resolutely silent on this one.

The kid himself admits that he cannot say how his claimed $2.2
million worldwide actually gets spent. Which is to say, to whom the pittance
goes. The kid has yet to submit information to show that this amount goes to
federations BECAUSE OF DRUG TESTING.

Those of us who oppose handing power to the politicians and who are
fighting against drug testing argue that the big bonanza is a big bust.
Indeed, there may not be a single federation that has gained funds from drug
testing that were not coming to the federation before. In any event, such a
pittance does not justify empowering politicians through a permanent
bureaucracy to destroy careers.

3. CHESS IN THE OLYMPICS: Not too long ago, John Fernandez falsely
told readers of this forum that the charter of the Winter Olympics had been
altered to permit bridge, chess and other games to compete. I denied the
claim, and the kid later admitted that the charter remains as before. Games
must be played on snow and ice.

The Winter Olympics debate was a fallback position for the pro-drug
testers, who had predicted chess would soon appear in the Summer Olympics.

Bottom line: John Fernandez no longer denies that the U. S. Olympic
Committee not only refuses to recognize chess as a sport worthy of the Olympic
Games, it refuses to recognize chess as a sport at all! There is also no
longer any predictions that the IOC will overrule its own president when it
comes to selecting games for inclusion in the Olympics.

So what's left? Chess has been in some regional games that are
affiliated but not part of the Olympics. These games include an event in SE
Asia, Africa and Latin America. One notes that the impact over here in SE Asia
on the federations is virtually nil. These minor games have the promotional
impact of a crushed pansie.

We who oppose drug testing argue that the revolution in promotion
through the Olympics would never have occurred even in the best-case scenario
of chess appearing betweenh bobsledding and curling in the Olympics. But this
view is irrelevant, since chess is not going to be in the Olympics at all.

4. FIDE'S INTENTIONS: The pro-drug testers will no longer address the
content of FIDE's actual drug code. The understood line is that one suffers
from paranoid delusions if one takes the code seriously. "It can't happen
here" is the tacit conclusion, which is expressed in the thought, "It hasn't
happened yet."

Those of us who oppose the FIDE power grab argue that the code itself
contains FIDE's intention, which is mandatory, random universal testing. We
note that President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, in a presidential circular letter,
called on FIDE to control ALL ASPECTS OF WORLD CHESS. We note that FIDE tried
to test the entire Olympiad in Istanbul and failed because it lacked the power
to enforce its writ.

5. THE DESTRUCTION OF CAREERS: A year and a half back, the pro-drug
testers argued that they had no intention of destroying the chess careers of
their betters. John Fernandez labelled such talk as a "slander," though on one
occasion right here on rgcp, the kid admitted that was indeed the bottom line.

Yesterday, Jim Eade described the NCAA regime as a model for chess and
exhorted all of us to GET REAL. Players, coaches, schools (federations) may be
banned; so it must be in chess. Those who don't obey, don't play.

Good. It took a lot of battling finally to get these people to spell
out their bottom line.

Those of us who oppose giving chess politicians the power to destroy
careers stated that such was the bottom line all along. Mr. Eade has confirmed
what was not, in truth, a secret. Casto "Totie" Abundo and others of his ilk
will have the power to ban whomever they designate.

6. OUR FIDE "TEAM" AND FULFILLING DELEGATES' RESOLUTION No. 64: Jim
Eade states that our "team" fought hard against drug testing and that the cause
was hopeless. The team did all it could within "reason." This claim is then
backed up by assuring us that it was great working with a wonderful "team" and
that Mr. Eade was there, and we were not.

Those of us who oppose giving the politicians power to destroy careers
respond as follows:

A. The Delegates called on our FIDE "team" to "actively campaign" against
drug testing "at any chess tournament or match";

B. In two years, our "team" did not make a single mailing to the FIDE
nations explaining the USCF position; nor did our "team" seek permission to
make such a mailing, though such permission was hardly needed;

C. In two years, our "team" did not send a single mailing to a single
Internet outlet, let alone hit all of the major Internet sites; nor did our
"team" seek permission to make such a mailing, though such permission was
hardly needed;

D. In two years, our "team" did not produce a single position paper;
nor did our "team" seek permission to write such a paper, though such
permission was hardly needed;

E. In two years, our "team" did not produce a single one-paper written
handout for FIDE Congress politicians or anyone else, stating the USCF's
official positon; nor did our "team" seek permission to write this one-page
handout, though such permission was hardly needed;

F. In two years, our "team" did not hold a single press conference or
Net conference, explaining to the chess world the official USCF position; nor
did our "team" seek permisson to hold such a conference, though such permission
was hardly needed;

G. In two years, our "team" did not hold a single conference or
symposium to organize against drug testing; nor did our "team" seek permission
to hold such caucuses, though such permission was hardly needed.

The pro-drug testers state that our "team" did all it could. Those
of us against this attack on social freedom argue that our "team" failed to
fulfill the Delegate mandate "to actively campaign" against drug testing, given
any reasonable understanding of what an active or even lazy campaign entails.
We argue that the "team" evidently torpedoed the official USCF position.

So Larry, whatdya think about using steroids in Baseball?

Think all those fifty home run seasons since 1965 were on the up and up?

I don't know about you, but I'm sick and tired of cheating human beings.

Tom Klem

"Parrthenon" wrote in message
...
DRUG TESTING: STATE OF THE DEBATE

By Larry Parr

1. WHAT FIDE'S DRUG REGULATIONS SAY: At this point, the debate
appears
over. Pro-drug testers such as John Fernandez and Jim Eade are no longer
prepared to address the substance of the regulations except with general
comments such as they are a "minimum" and "improved." That kind of thing.

If, earlier, Mr. Fernandez talked about testing being limited to a
single tournament, the world championship, or limited to a few tournaments
under Section "D" of the old code, he has ceased such talk. (Even his
claim
about the old code limiting testing to Section "D" events, which numbered
in
the many dozens (Seirawan) or, by my estimate, well over 100, was false.
But
this earlier lie is now dated.)

None of the pro-drug testers have yet to deny the following: A.
Article 3.1 provides for testing of "any competitor" in "any FIDE
Competiton"
(no exceptions made for children); B. Article 3.2 calls for
out-of-competition testing any time, any place, for any reason, stated or
unstated; no limits to the when-where-why are mentioned; C. Article 3.4
mentions testing of undefined "all other events," for which national
federations will be responsible and for which the federations must submit
results to FIDE; D. Article 6 includes punishments such as multi-year
and
lifetime bans -- both effective career-enders.

The state of the debate is that Mr. Fernandez and others of his
kind
will no longer address what the FIDE code says.

2. THE PROMISED BIG BUCKS BONANZA: John Fernandez claims that $2.2
million flows annually into chess worldwide because there is drug testing
in
chess. He has a list of 42 nations receiving this amount.

The kid has nothing to say about his earlier claimed fact that
"most" national federations ("a majority of," by his definition) received
"significant" portions of their budgets from their respective NOCs because
of
drug testing. GM Larry Evans and I claimed he lied through his teeth when
making this claim, and he remains resolutely silent on this one.

The kid himself admits that he cannot say how his claimed $2.2
million worldwide actually gets spent. Which is to say, to whom the
pittance
goes. The kid has yet to submit information to show that this amount goes
to
federations BECAUSE OF DRUG TESTING.

Those of us who oppose handing power to the politicians and
who are
fighting against drug testing argue that the big bonanza is a big bust.
Indeed, there may not be a single federation that has gained funds from
drug
testing that were not coming to the federation before. In any event, such
a
pittance does not justify empowering politicians through a permanent
bureaucracy to destroy careers.

3. CHESS IN THE OLYMPICS: Not too long ago, John Fernandez
falsely
told readers of this forum that the charter of the Winter Olympics had
been
altered to permit bridge, chess and other games to compete. I denied the
claim, and the kid later admitted that the charter remains as before.
Games
must be played on snow and ice.

The Winter Olympics debate was a fallback position for the
pro-drug
testers, who had predicted chess would soon appear in the Summer Olympics.

Bottom line: John Fernandez no longer denies that the U. S.
Olympic
Committee not only refuses to recognize chess as a sport worthy of the
Olympic
Games, it refuses to recognize chess as a sport at all! There is also no
longer any predictions that the IOC will overrule its own president when
it
comes to selecting games for inclusion in the Olympics.

So what's left? Chess has been in some regional games that are
affiliated but not part of the Olympics. These games include an event in
SE
Asia, Africa and Latin America. One notes that the impact over here in SE
Asia
on the federations is virtually nil. These minor games have the
promotional
impact of a crushed pansie.

We who oppose drug testing argue that the revolution in
promotion
through the Olympics would never have occurred even in the best-case
scenario
of chess appearing betweenh bobsledding and curling in the Olympics. But
this
view is irrelevant, since chess is not going to be in the Olympics at all.

4. FIDE'S INTENTIONS: The pro-drug testers will no longer
address the
content of FIDE's actual drug code. The understood line is that one
suffers
from paranoid delusions if one takes the code seriously. "It can't happen
here" is the tacit conclusion, which is expressed in the thought, "It
hasn't
happened yet."

Those of us who oppose the FIDE power grab argue that the code
itself
contains FIDE's intention, which is mandatory, random universal testing.
We
note that President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, in a presidential circular letter,
called on FIDE to control ALL ASPECTS OF WORLD CHESS. We note that FIDE
tried
to test the entire Olympiad in Istanbul and failed because it lacked the
power
to enforce its writ.

5. THE DESTRUCTION OF CAREERS: A year and a half back, the
pro-drug
testers argued that they had no intention of destroying the chess careers
of
their betters. John Fernandez labelled such talk as a "slander," though
on one
occasion right here on rgcp, the kid admitted that was indeed the bottom
line.

Yesterday, Jim Eade described the NCAA regime as a model for chess
and
exhorted all of us to GET REAL. Players, coaches, schools (federations)
may be
banned; so it must be in chess. Those who don't obey, don't play.

Good. It took a lot of battling finally to get these people to
spell
out their bottom line.

Those of us who oppose giving chess politicians the power to
destroy
careers stated that such was the bottom line all along. Mr. Eade has
confirmed
what was not, in truth, a secret. Casto "Totie" Abundo and others of his
ilk
will have the power to ban whomever they designate.

6. OUR FIDE "TEAM" AND FULFILLING DELEGATES' RESOLUTION No. 64:
Jim
Eade states that our "team" fought hard against drug testing and that the
cause
was hopeless. The team did all it could within "reason." This claim is
then
backed up by assuring us that it was great working with a wonderful "team"
and
that Mr. Eade was there, and we were not.

Those of us who oppose giving the politicians power to destroy
careers
respond as follows:

A. The Delegates called on our FIDE "team" to "actively campaign"
against
drug testing "at any chess tournament or match";

B. In two years, our "team" did not make a single mailing to the
FIDE
nations explaining the USCF position; nor did our "team" seek permission
to
make such a mailing, though such permission was hardly needed;

C. In two years, our "team" did not send a single mailing to a
single
Internet outlet, let alone hit all of the major Internet sites; nor did
our
"team" seek permission to make such a mailing, though such permission was
hardly needed;

D. In two years, our "team" did not produce a single position
paper;
nor did our "team" seek permission to write such a paper, though such
permission was hardly needed;

E. In two years, our "team" did not produce a single one-paper
written
handout for FIDE Congress politicians or anyone else, stating the USCF's
official positon; nor did our "team" seek permission to write this
one-page
handout, though such permission was hardly needed;

F. In two years, our "team" did not hold a single press conference
or
Net conference, explaining to the chess world the official USCF position;
nor
did our "team" seek permisson to hold such a conference, though such
permission
was hardly needed;

G. In two years, our "team" did not hold a single conference or
symposium to organize against drug testing; nor did our "team" seek
permission
to hold such caucuses, though such permission was hardly needed.

The pro-drug testers state that our "team" did all it could.
Those
of us against this attack on social freedom argue that our "team" failed
to
fulfill the Delegate mandate "to actively campaign" against drug testing,
given
any reasonable understanding of what an active or even lazy campaign
entails.
We argue that the "team" evidently torpedoed the official USCF position.

Larry Parr wrote:

1. WHAT FIDE'S DRUG REGULATIONS SAY:

He doesn't even get that they're WADA's regulations now, not FIDE's, and that
FIDE doesn't have the control over them. But he never really cared about what
was actually happening anyway.

Pro-drug testers such as John Fernandez

I'm anti drug testing. So is Eade. Nice try though.

2. THE PROMISED BIG BUCKS BONANZA:

Promised, and delivered.

John Fernandez claims that $2.2
million flows annually into chess worldwide because there is drug testing in
chess.

No, I've never claimed that. At least $2.2M flows into chess worldwide because
we are IOC recognized and because at least 95 NOCs recognize their National
Chess Federations. Drug testing is sometimes a part of it, sometimes it isn't.
($800K+ goes to countries with NO drug testing, for example.)

The kid has yet to submit information to show that this amount goes to
federations BECAUSE OF DRUG TESTING.

Of course I haven't submitted such information - because it doesn't exist! The
money doesn't go in because of drug testing, it's just one of many IOC and NOC
regulations, but it's not the main thrust of the Olympic movement. They also
have rules about how many women you have in governance. We could say $2.2M went
to chess because it let women in as politicians?

3. CHESS IN THE OLYMPICS

Chess is a medal sport one level below the Summer and Winter Games. It is a
recognized sport. Almost 100 NOCs agree. Chess IS in the Olympics.

4. FIDE'S INTENTIONS:

To keep their delegates happy by increasing NOC support.

5. THE DESTRUCTION OF CAREERS:

Never happened. Still waiting.

6. OUR FIDE "TEAM" AND FULFILLING DELEGATES' RESOLUTION No. 64:

Did a good job. Kudos to them.

John Fernandez

TRUE LIES

By Larry Parr

The kid has routinely offered false information on these subjects:

1. The FIDE drug code (until he ceased to address the subject at all); 2. Wild
claims about drugs that will improve chess (eventually, he ended up arguing
that Ritalin was his wonder drug); 3. Wildly inflated claims about money coming
into chess because of drug testing (his current figure, which he cannot link to
drug testing per se, is $2.2 million for the entire world); 4. False reports on
the Winter Olympics (the charter as been amended, or so he claimed); 5. False
reports that national chess federations would not be required to engage in drug
testing; 6. False statement from claimed but
non-existent dozens of Olympic insiders that chess was not being dropped from
the Beijing Olympics. -- Larry Parr

You claim they're false. Those on the inside who actually know things know
that they are true. -- John Fernandez

As I have noted repeatedly, THE KID WILL WRITE ANYTHING.

JOHN FERNANDEZ'S TRUE LIES

By Larry Parr

Writes John Fernandez below, "You claim they're false. Those on the
inside who actually know things know that they are true."

I make six claims in what follows. Mr. Fernandez has now told all of
you on rgcp that "those on the inside" know they are false.

One notices that our kid still OSTENTATIOUSLY refuses to address the
actual substance of the FIDE drug code, which has become a subject he no longer
can handle.

Still, the kid has now made a new claim. The six points below are
true. Let's look at them, one by one with my new comments in multiple
brackets:

The kid has routinely offered false information on these subjects:

1. The FIDE drug code (until he ceased to address the subject at all);

[[[[[The kid told all of you that FIDE could only test in a handful of
tournaments under Section "D." Yasser Seirawan noted that this claim was
manifestly false-- that there are many dozens of such events under Section "D."
I counted over a hundred. Still, this false claim by the kid has been
superseded.

Thus far, the kid has not denied that the new code provides for testing
of "any competitor" in "any FIDE Competition" (Art. 3.1); for out of
competition testing without any limits on why, when and where (Art. 3.2); for
national federations testing "all other events" and sending results to FIDE
(Art. 3.4); and for career-ending multi-year and lifetime bans (Art. 6).

Will the kid deny the above, or is it the case that more of his insider
sources, which don't exist, tell him the code does not say what it says?]]]]]

2. Wild claims about drugs that will improve chess (eventually, he ended up
arguing that Ritalin was his wonder drug);

[[[[[The kid tells us that his insider sources says ... well, what?
That he was making wild claims and ended up with Ritalin? We don't know. We
only know he has these insiders, you see, telling him that there are some
substances which are apparently being kept secret that can turn you into a
killer-diller of a player. Perhaps the kid's insiders are waiting to market
the substances themselves!]]]]]

3. Wildly inflated claims about money coming into chess because of drug
testing (his current figure, which he cannot link to drug testing per se, is
$2.2 million for the entire world);

[[[[[[The kid consciously lied to the FIDE Advisory Committee that he
had a list showing that "most" federationS ("a majority of," by his own
definition) received "significant" funding from their respective national
Olympic committees.

Okay, then, where is his majority? Where is the link between drug testing
and even his paltry pittance of $2.2 million for the entire world?

I guess it's all a secret. The kid has insider sources showing that a
majority of countries are getting lots of money from their national Olympic
committees. He just can show us the numbers because they are ... what? Top
secret? Unknown? Ah, non-existent?]]]]]

4. False reports on the Winter Olympics (the charter as been amended, or so
he claimed);

[[[[[[VERY IMPORTANT. New lie, new lie!!

Is the kid now saying that the Winter Olympics HAVE amended the charter to
permit games such as chess and bridge? Is he telling us that his insiders --
all of those secret sources with whom he is forever "working the phones" --
have told him the public document of the Winter Olympics charter has been
amended as he earlier falsely claimed?

The kid can now show us he did not spread false information simply by
presenting to us the amended charter?

Sorry, sorry. It's secret. More of this insider stuff -- meant only
for the chairman of the USOC, the president of the IOC and our kid.

Laughable.]]]]]]

5. False reports that national chess federations would not be required to
engage in drug testing;

[[[[[Right here on rgcp, on repeated occasions, our kid has stated
that national chess federatons would not be required to engage in drug testing.
Hah.

Article 3.4 of the FIDE Code reads: "At all other events (Except
where doping control is carried out under the rules of another sporting body)
the NCF conducting the controls or in whose territory an event is held shall be
responsible for conducting doping control and shall inform and report the
results to the FIDE Medical Commission."

And what are "all other events"? They may be ANY TOURNAMENT IN THE
WORLD -- no restrictions are made. There is no word that limits FIDE's writ.
The only limits are the resistance offered and FIDE's current weakness.

Still, the kid has this insider information, you see, that the code
does not say what it says.

ONCE AGAIN, I AM WILLING TO WORK MY WAY THROUGH THE CODE ARTICLE BY ARTICLE
WITH OUR KID.

The kid, however, has ceased to address the code. Too embarrassing.
Instead he keeps screeching, wada, wada, wada.]]]]]

6. False statement from claimed but non-existent dozens of Olympic insiders
that chess was not being dropped from the Beijing Olympics.

[[[[[So, then, the kid is now telling us that chess, after all, will indeed be
in the Beijing Olympics?

On the eve of an announcement that chess would not be appearing in the
Olympics, the kid viciously lied to the FIDE Advisory Committee that he had
some three dozen insider Olympic sources telling him that GM Seirawan's report
was false that chess had been dropped. He spoke of "working the phones" with
his many insider sources.

WHAT A WHOPPER!

Then, the next day, the ax fell. Everyone suddenly noticed that the
kid had, ah, LIED. Even his allies on the committee would not state whether
they believed the kid had three dozen (oh, perhaps 30 sources on Tuesday and 42
on Thursday, but usually about three dozen, don't you know) insider sources
telling him that chess was still under consideration for the Olympics within a
few hours of chess actually being dropped.

Bad luck for our kid. If chess had been dropped a month or so later,
no one might have noticed his conscienceless lies.

Above all else, the kid let down his own allies, so little respect did
he evidently have for them! I know that GM Evans would feel very badly if he
told an untruth that let me down -- and vice-versa. The kid, alas, has no such
compunctions.]]]]]

You claim they're false. Those on the inside who actually know things know
that they are true. -- John Fernandez

As I have noted repeatedly, THE KID WILL WRITE ANYTHING.

KID SAYS HE WILL DISCUSS?

By Larry Parr

When you start discussing the WADA regulations (which ARE FIDE's regs), then
perhaps we'll discuss. -- John Fernandez


The kid wants to discuss the WADA regulations which are the FIDE
regulations, but he won't discuss the FIDE regulations which are the WADA
regulations.

Wunnerful, wunnerful -- as Lawrence Welk used to say.

Okay, then, Art. 3.1 of the FIDE Code calls for testing of "any
competitor" in "any FIDE Competition."

Does the kid deny it?

Okay, then, Art. 3.2 of the FIDE Code calls for out of competition
testing at any time, any place for any reason, stated or unstated. There are
no limits on why, when and where.

Does the kid deny it?

Okay, then, Art. 3.4 of the FIDE Code calls for testing of "all other
events" (unspecified) by national federations, which will be responsible for
reporting to FIDE.

Does the kid deny it?

Okay, then, Art. 6 of the FIDE Code calls for multi-year and lifetime
bans for refusing to take drug tests.

Does the kid deny it?

Or will the kid only discuss the WADA code which is the FIDE code which
is, however, the WADA code IF the WADA code is the FIDE code!

Laughable.

INTERESTING EADE-THINK

By Larry Parr

Jim Eade writes, "There is certainly no reason to test 100% of the
participants, if you can get the desired reuslt by testing fewer."

Does anyone catch the point here? Mr. Eade hopes you don't.

The guy speaks of a "desired result." What could that be? He hopes
you will let him chop logic and imply there is a drug problem in chess.

For the record, in the entire history of chess involving countless
millions of games, no one has claimed the outcome of a game was affected
because of drug ingestion. No complaint has ever been made; no verdict has
ever been laid down.

We are also back to IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE.

Jim Eade and John "take my urine, please" Fernandez, will not discuss
the FIDE drug code. Period. It is too embarrassing because, in truth, it
calls for universal, random drug testing in all tournaments -- if the phrase
"all other events" has any meaning (see Article 3.4).

So, now, we are being told to GET REAL, DUDES, by John Fernandez. I
love that kind of smarmy locker-room talk because it always encases lies.

The pro-drug testers have given up on discussing what FIDE intends to do
with its all-embracing regulations and instead argue that we should stop
worrying, and think and talk happy. Sheeesh, etc.

Mr. Eade speaks of a "reasoned view." Right. The reasoned view is: 1.
There is no known substance that improves chess play; 2. There is no claimed
drug problem in chess; 3. Those who wish to build a bureaucracy to test for a
non-problem are trying to create a problem that does not exist.

Finally, Mr. Eade returns to his hardy, traditional lie. He builds a
strawman that we stated universal drug testing is just around the corner.
Everyone here on rgcp knows that GM Larry Evans and this writer have repeatedly
stated that FIDE is weak and cannot enforce its writ just yet.

That is why the time is ripe for the battle now.

MORE PARANOID DELUSIONS

By Larry Parr

Jim Eade is busily identifying more paranoid delusions, which include
the actual provisions of the FIDE drug code, which he is no longer prepared
even to mention, let alone discuss.

Now, then, Jim Eade has adopted a traditional lie. He claims that this
writer and GM Evans were shouting that universal drug testing was just around
the corner, whereas we both have been scrupulously careful to note that
although FIDE claims the right to test every tournament on earth, it is far
from being able to enforce its writ.

The new drug code, which can be found in Annex 46a of the papers of the
last FIDE Congress, states that "any competitor" in "any FIDE Competition"
(Art. 3.1) may be tested. It states in Art. 3.2 that out of competition has no
limits in terms of when, where and why -- it may be any time, any where, for
any reason, stated or unstated. It states in Art. 3.4 that "all other events"
may be tested by national federations which "shall be responsible" for
reporting results to FIDE. It states in Art. 6 that players may be banned for
years or life if they refuse to be drug tested.

Against the actual code and FIDE's attempt to test thousands of
players in Istanbul and kids in youth tournaments, the pro-drug testers respond
that universal testing is not here. IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE. So stop worrying,
talk happy, think happy. Sheeesh.

These guys just won't talk about what the FIDE drug code actually says
because they find it too embarrassing. Too damaging.

That is the state of the debate.

GET REAL: DON'T READ FIDE'S REAL REGULATIONS

By Larry Parr

In what follows Honest John Fernandez wants to discuss what can be drug
tested without referring to the FIDE drug regs themeselves, which the kid seems
to find so inconvenient.

How inconvenient? He cannot actually address them, instead snipping
all mention of what they contain. He's a a doozy.

Still, the kid does let more of his thinking ooze out inadvertently.
He talks about this job he has which has drug-testing requirements, and he
talks about governments that have laws.
Indeed.

This is the kind of stuff this kid wishes to inflict on chess which,
lest we forget, has no drug problem. Such is how he wants to promote chess in
America: if you play in a tournament, you will have the same obligations as at
your workplace. The promise of yet more social control will certainly get a lot
of people to come to tournaments, all right. That's promotion -- with a
vengeance.

See below for my further comments in multiple brackets.

MINIMUM GUIDELINES

By Larry Parr

John Fernandez, our kid, states below that FIDE's drug regulations "are
currently at WADA's minimum guidelines."

Probably right. At any moment, those regulations, which are already
Draconian, can be stiffened.

[[[[[Mr. Fernandez]]]]]

Yeah, but we can't operate under this situation.

[[[[[Parr]]]]

What "situation"? The kid seems to admit the FIDE regulations are Draconian
but states -- truthfully enough -- we can't be sure what they will be like in
the future. So, IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE. Let's not discuss the regulations.
Let's just figure it won't happen. That's the state of the kid's argument.

Why? Because Honest John understands that the moment he starts talking
about lifetime bans (he would have to defend them) testing of any competitor in
any FIDE event (he would have to support it) testing in "all other events" as
mentioned in Article 3.4 (he would have to say okay, that's WADA)
out-of-competition testing and the like, then he is finished here.

So, Honest John is fighting the battle on a line right before the
regulations themselves, which he will not discuss. He wants you to believe we
should just overlook what the regs say and figure everything will come out
happy-like.]]]]]


[[[[[Mr. Fernandez]]]]]

The laws of the land are nice now, but they can be stiffened. Does that mean
we need to overthrow the government because they can do this? The things I have
to do in my workplace could be stiffened too. Should I look for another job?

[[[[[Parr]]]]

Ever so revealing. The kid is comparing a hobby with workplace and
government regulations. He is saying that if you want to keep your chess job,
be prepared to crawl. The social controls in the workplace should be visited
upon chess tournaments.

[[[[[Mr. Fernandez]]]]]

In short, not only is the thinking paranoid, but it leads us to a philosophical
death trap---instead of dealing with what IS, we deal with what COULD BE.

[[[[[Parr]]]]

What IS isthat the FIDE regs call for testing of "any competitor" in "any
FIDE Competition" (Art. 3.1); for out of competition testing any time, any
place, for any reason, stated or unstated (Art. 3.2); for testing in "all other
events" by the national federations which "shall be responsible" for reporting
results to FIDE (Art. 3.4); and for career-ending multi-year and lifetime bans
(Art. 6).

Honest John is trying to talk about what IS without reference to what
IS -- the actual FIDE drug code. That's our kid.]]]]]

[[[[[Mr. Fernandez]]]]]

Could the drug tests become "universal" and "testing kindergarten kids"?
Let's assume they can. In that case, it's obvious what we should do. Of course,
the drug tests could become even more lax, with no tests! Could happen. Which
will? Either, both, neither? I don't know. I clearly don't have my copy of
Gray's Sports Almanac on me.

[[[[[Parr]]]

Rational people look at documents. Honest John and Jim Eade cannot discuss
the new FIDE drug regulations because these indicate very clearly what is
intended. Instead, in his phony-baloney Mr. Fernandez says, well, it could go
this way or that way. Well, yes, true enough. Yet this argument amounts to
asking you to ignore what the drug regs actually say in the hope all will turn
out happy-like.

The kid hopes you will buy the argument that all possibilities are
equally open even though the drug regs mandater universal, random testing by
FIDE and national chess federations.

You know: Talk happy. Think happy. Sheeesh.

Pro-drug testers such as John Fernandez


If anyone wants to know whether Larry Parr is a liar, just refer them to the
above quote. He KNOWS it isn't true.

James Eade
Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.