English Chess Forum

worth a peek ...

http://larsgrahn.blogspot.com/2009/08/n ... right.html

For the record, Ray has responded as part of this thread on Chess Vibes

http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/upcom ... /#comments

I have never met him. My reaction to that post:

What an arrogant plonker.

you wonder why he needed caps if he was a bit short sighted, and couldn't have just put some glasses on

I know RK is disliked by a lot of people but to be honest he has never
done me any harm. I don't mind him at all.

Chess needs it's goodies and it's baddies.
It would awfully dull without them.

(and don't forget, in his day he was not a bad chess player - quite good infact).

And fancy that photgrapher chappie storing a gripe like that for over 25 years.

I think I'll go to his site, lift some pictures and make t-shirts out of them.

You can read all about it in 2034.

Just in case you were starting to like IGMRDKOBE :

http://www.anusha.com/levykeen.htm

http://www.anusha.com/levyletr.htm

What horrible background music.

I just didn't like how he said that this was a pioneering idea, and everyone who disagreed was wrong. Then, just for good measure, he threw in a few mildly derogatory terms to describe them. Rather than explaining why he felt the charge was necessary, he just (gave the impression) of insulting the people who disagreed with him.

Geoff Chandler wrote:Chess needs its goodies and i's baddies.
It would awfully dull without them.

This is true up to a point, but I think the idea of "baddies" is that eventually they're supposed to be caught and made to face the music....

Geoff Chandler wrote:
Chess needs it's goodies and it's baddies.
It would awfully dull without them.

Would that also include Brian Ratcliffe Eley and John Walker?

I'm sure their victims might have a view on this.

My Ayrshire cousins are prepared to swear on their Presbyterian bibles that everyone in Bernicia is an Englishman. Half of me wants to agree with them, the other half is repelled.

Geoff Chandler wrote:I know RK is disliked by a lot of people but to be honest he has never
done me any harm. I don't mind him at all.

Dinna fash yersel laddie, Pol Pot hasn't harmed you either.

Geoff Chandler wrote: Chess needs it's goodies and it's baddies.
It would awfully dull without them.

But one doesn't need to put in a good word for the baddies. Actually, RD Kobe has, occasionally, been helpful to others. Often for a reason.

Geoff Chandler wrote: (and don't forget, in his day he was not a bad chess player - quite good infact).

Something not disputed by his more perceptive critics.

Geoff Chandler wrote: And fancy that photgrapher chappie storing a gripe like that for over 25 years.

Lots of chess players have good memories. I can remember things even further back than a generation. It does not follow that one has an obsession. This "photgrapher chappie" provides one example, there are others.

Chess baddies of course meant naught naughty within the chess world.

Comparing RK with Pol Pot and Eley ('ve never heard of the other guy) is a bit stiff.

I've seen people getting quite rabid when you mention Keene's name as if
he was indeed a Pol Pot.

I find some of his 'alleged' antics quite amusing and a welcome break from
the normal chess fare.

I don't know all the details behind these anti RK tales so remain open-minded.

As I said, he has done nothing to me so I shrug the shoulders and move on.

Geoff Chandler wrote: Comparing RK with Pol Pot and Eley ('ve never heard of the other guy) ...

Then perhaps you should look him up.

Geoff Chandler wrote: I've seen people getting quite rabid when you mention Keene's name as if
he was indeed a Pol Pot.

I'll take it through for you, but slowly. What I was doing was arguing reductio ad absurdum.

You wrote, if you can remember that far back: "I know RK is disliked by a lot of people but to be honest he has never done me any harm. I don't mind him at all."

To suggest that not to mind someone because the alleged harm has been inflicted upon others is, as a universal principle, preposterous. I deliberately chose an extreme instance (reductio ad absurdum) to illustrate just how ludicrous your position was. Nowhere did I compare RD Kobe to Pol Pot. Can you provide points of comparison?

Geoff Chandler wrote: I don't know all the details behind these anti RK tales so remain open-minded.

If you don't know much about RD Kobe, then I'd suggest that silence would be a better option. Unlike you, I do know people who have had dealings with him.

Geoff Chandler wrote:As I said, he has done nothing to me so I shrug the shoulders and move on.

Moving on would be a good idea for you. Particularly given that all you do is misrepresent.

Geoff Chandler wrote:
I've never heard of the other guy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/apr/0 ... on.schools

and

http://archive.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/ ... 44263.html

Alex Holowczak wrote:What horrible background music.

I just didn't like how he said that this was a pioneering idea, and everyone who disagreed was wrong. Then, just for good measure, he threw in a few mildly derogatory terms to describe them. Rather than explaining why he felt the charge was necessary, he just (gave the impression) of insulting the people who disagreed with him.

The daily reports on the Staunton Memorial website - this year and last year's events - regularly describe people who express any form of criticism, however mild or warranted, as "termites".


As ever I find myself thinking "they've put together such a great tournament ... it's a shame they have to go and do [whatever]"

If you don't know much about RD Kobe, then I'd suggest that silence would be a better option. Unlike you, I do know people who have had dealings with him.

Mr Spivack, If you can't respond to a fairly innocent post in a more temperate, less obnoxious manner, then I'd suggest that silence would be a better option.

I have little doubt that the generally high level of distaste for Keene which has been displayed over the years in magazines and chess forums is based on real grievances, but bringing the likes of Eley and Walker into the debate as some sort of comparison is a bit much.