Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 13th 06, 12:24 AM posted to alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,558
Default Parr on Winter on "The Termination"

On 12 Mar 2006 07:51:01 -0800, "Taylor Kingston"
wrote:


help bot wrote:
No, EW's article does not do the purported issue, that is, the
stopping of the match, justice. EW focuses too narowly on what Keene
and Kasparov have written, while skirting the issue of what really
happenned with self-proclaimed agnosticism. EW finds weaknesses and
errors in the various accounts given by these two with regard to the
match, and revels in recounting them.


You point out what is both a strength and weakness in Winter's
approach to this subject. Most journalists have tended to give Kasparov
a free pass -- even when he's plainly wrong, or contradicts himself, or
makes baseless accusations, it often goes unquestioned. Winter, on the
other hand, is not afraid to call it bull when GK speaks bull, and so
sometimes catches things other writers miss.
On the other hand, Winter, as far as I know, has confined his
research mostly to published sources, e.g. Kasparov's book, Keene's
columns, Campomanes' press statements, etc. That is not enough to get
to the heart of an affair where so much went on behind closed doors.
For that you need inside sources and contacts. I don't think Winter has
those -- at least not to the extent required to get to the bottom of
the Termination. His approach would be about the only feasible one if
the subject was an event from 100 years ago, but not when all the
principal parties are still alive.
Still, I think Winter's article serves a useful purpose. Best case,
it would inspire some ambitious investigator who *does* have the
necessary contacts to pursue the matter in real depth.


Taylor Kingston speaks bull, as usual.

There is no incident in the entire history of chess that has more
written about it than the stopping of the first Karpov - Kasparov
Match.

AP Reporter David Goodman alone wrote dozens of articles about this,
which were pub;lished in the world press.

Nobody gives Kasparov a "free pass". Kasparov is the most criticized
personality in the world of chess.

Edward Winter (aka Taylor Kingston) gives his attention to Kasparov's
book and Keene's columns for one simple reason. Winter is obsessed
with Keene. Almost everything Winter writes is either a direct or an
indirect attack on Keene. It is true that Keene was a central
character in the Kasparov-Karpov match and any discussion of the match
would have to include a mention of Keene but to write an entire book
about Keene is ridiculous.

Also, nothing about the match went on behind closed doors. The much
disputed events of the match were neveretheless not secret. I know
things about the stopping of the match which have never been
published, and I was not even there. For that matter, Keene was not
there either. He was in London.

Sam Sloan



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Waiting for Hoffman [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 38 May 23rd 06 03:09 PM
Waiting for Hoffman [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 38 May 23rd 06 03:09 PM
Edward G. Winter from Wikipedia Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 71 March 10th 06 11:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017