Page 1 of 4

Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:14 pm
by Sean Hewitt
From: Philip N
Sent: 11 October 2012 12:46
To: Sean Hewitt
Subject: FAO Sean Hewitt


Dear Mr Hewitt,

I, together with several other chess players I know, have just recently got wind of your forthcoming chess tournament in High Wycombe. We are of varying strengths and would be most interested in participating in both your FIDE Open and FIDE Challengers sections.

However, before we can confirm our entries, I am writing on behalf of all of us to request your confirmation of three crucial points that would otherwise prevent us from entering.

First, we expect absolutely no pairings with computers (I believe this practice has not been seen for at least 20 years or so).

Second, we expect absolutely no pairings with female players (I believe there are still some so-called tournaments that indulge in this perverse practice, something that may have a place in a circus, but not in organized sports events; men's and women's events, like all other singles sports, are always strictly segregated).

Third, some of us, myself included, have surnames originating abroad, and we naturally expect our names to be respected and not subject to the routine discourtesy that seems to be the norm in the UK ("Nizetic", for example, is absolutely not my name).

I realize that these points ought to be taken for granted, but we haev learned not make assumptions, as this frequently leads to shock!

Finally. one of us is a native of Gibraltar, but your form does not include it!

Thank you for your attention


Philip Nižetić

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:23 pm
by Adam Raoof
I would be interested in reading Sean's reply.... if it's printable.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:26 pm
by Bill Porter
I'd be even more interested to learn if Philip Nižetić actually exists.....

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:29 pm
by IM Jack Rudd
Bill Porter wrote:I'd be even more interested to learn if Philip Nižetić actually exists.....
Yes, he does.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:29 pm
by Adam Raoof
Bill Porter wrote:I'd be even more interested to learn if Philip Nižetić actually exists.....
Oh yes, in the past he's played in many of my events.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:30 pm
by IanDavis
You, at the least, delete the email address, and change the name, before posting

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:34 pm
by Sean Hewitt
IanDavis wrote:You, at the least, delete the email address, and change the name, before posting
Why? Do you think his request is reasonable?

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:35 pm
by IM Jack Rudd
I think his third request is reasonable. His other two... not so much.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:36 pm
by Sean Hewitt
Adam Raoof wrote:I would be interested in reading Sean's reply.... if it's printable.
I hope it makes you laugh!
From: [email protected]
Sent: 11 October 2012 18:58
To: Philip N
Subject: Re: FAO Sean Hewitt

Dear Mr Nižetić,

Thanks for your well thought out letter regarding High Wycombe. It would be great to have you playing.

I note that you are not currently an ECF member. You will first need to join the ECF http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=20558 before we can consider your entry.

Let me know your ECF membership number and then we can taken things from there.

Best wishes

Sean

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:40 pm
by Ray Sayers
As Blackadder put it: 'Sensible policies for a happier Britain!'. (Actually it was Prince George but you get my drift).

Deadpan mode.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:58 pm
by IanDavis
Sean Hewitt wrote:
IanDavis wrote:You, at the least, delete the email address, and change the name, before posting
Why? Do you think his request is reasonable?
For all I know he was taking the piss. That doesn't change the fact that it was a private email, and that there is no need to publish the name or email address. :D

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 12:11 am
by Roger de Coverly
IM Jack Rudd wrote:I think his third request is reasonable. His other two... not so much.
No pairings against computers is reasonable and standard practice. The otherwise excellent ECF grading site doesn't do characters from high numbers in the standard US/UK mapping, so request 3 is a difficult one. Perhaps Swiss Perfect can handle it.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 12:27 am
by David Gilbert
I am reminded of Tom Leher's individualist friend Henry, who he spelled it H-E-N-3-R-Y. The 3 was silent.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 8:15 am
by Sean Hewitt
IanDavis wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:
IanDavis wrote:You, at the least, delete the email address, and change the name, before posting
Why? Do you think his request is reasonable?
For all I know he was taking the ****. That doesn't change the fact that it was a private email, and that there is no need to publish the name or email address. :D
I thought that too, which is why I responded in the way that I did. His subsequent response convinced me otherwise.

Outrageous sexist comments such as this have no place in chess, or in society.

Re: Chess Players Requests

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 8:43 am
by Sean Hewitt
Paul Cooksey wrote:I really wouldn't want to defend those views. But without wishing to sound preachy - which I probably will - publishing a private email, regardless of the contents, is just wrong in most circumstancs. I'd be less willing to email Sean in the role as non-exec director of the ECF if I thought he might publish my mail.

Commenting on an outrageous attitude, while retaining anonymity, fine. But identifying him doesn't seem right.
I've never published an email before in my life, but these comments are so outrageous that, in my opinion, it is in the wider chess interest to publish this persons views. Annonymising them would just hides them away.

I wouldn't publish something just because I didn't agree with it. Hence correspondence between Roger Edwards and myself remains private.