English Chess Forum

Since deciding to stand for the post of ECF President, has Dominic Lawson made any statements about his association (past, present or future) with Raymond Keene?

Many thanks.

Olimpiu G. Urcan

It's a good question and one that I and others have asked. Of course there will never be an answer. We might make inferences from the recently disclosed fact that the ECF has been trying to organise some form of sponsorship with the Times that the Board ultimately doesn't care much about the Keene association (the notion that there isn't one quite beggars belief). Unfortunately they are mostly too young or were quite uninvolved with English chess back in the days when Keene was more influential, and they appear to be uninterested in asking questions about the past.

"Unfortunately they are mostly too young or were quite uninvolved with English chess back in the days when Keene was more influential, and they appear to be uninterested in asking questions about the past."

A good point, and not just in this specific case. Santayana said, "Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

People should be aware of history to help make informed decisions.

Kevin Thurlow wrote: Santayana said, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

And Kurt Vonnegut said "I've got news for Mr Santayana. We are condemned to repeat the past, no matter what. That's what it is to be alive".

Two tweets by Raymond Keene early last month: In view of Raymond Keene's conduct (examples one, two, three and four), it may seem obvious that Dominic Lawson should be asked about their association.

Have any officials or journalists asked him yet?

Many thanks.

Olimpiu G. Urcan

2. Sponsorship negotiations with The Times and Sunday Times newspapers through Ray Keene. Given the circumstances in which he left the BCF and his subsequent activities I was shocked to discover Board members were in discussion with Mr. Keene over a sponsorship deal. The view of fellow Directors is that a deal would be justified so long as the benefits to the ECF outweigh any anticipated loss of reputation. I was told Mr. Keene would have no involvement in anything which might transpire.

Be nice to know a little more on the involvement mentioned by Angus French in his report.

As shown in the AGM thread, Dominic Lawson was asked a question about Raymond Keene at yesterday's meeting:

O.G. Urcan wrote:As shown in the AGM thread, Dominic Lawson was asked a question about Raymond Keene at yesterday's meeting:

reyes.JPG

Will you be monitoring DLs progress over his time in office? A monthly report would be most welcome.

Ah sure Ray is only a bit of a chancer by the sounds of it

sure its only a crime if you get caught


I corresponded with him once and found him quite affable and humourus . He gave me some very sound and humourus advice on a law of chess at the time. (From memory he suggested that I should write down my moves in Gaelic as Ireland are a member of FIDE and that it would be a perfectly ligitimate thing to do!)

I DO notate in Welsh. What is humourus about it?

It has been said by Geoff before, Chess needs its baddies and with a reputation as insanely bad as his, I think RDK is pretty harmless these days. The plagiarism allegations are so numerous, even the Penguin himself doesn’t even bother to come up with a decent excuse anymore - I’m sure at this late stage he is just seeing what he can get away with, he plainly couldn’t care less.

The time to worry about Keene was in the 80’s, when he actually had real power and influence, and some very questionable strokes were pulled, but the wench is long dead!

Jon Mahony wrote:I think RDK is pretty harmless these days. <snip>

The time to worry about Keene was in the 80’s when he actually had real power and influence <snip>

Though the Times column and 'correspondent' moniker does give him a platform, and some influence, especially in terms of media coverage. I'm thinking, for instance, of how the 't-shirt-gate' saga really went viral after RDK ran his piece on it. Would it have got such a level of coverage without that? Journalism is so pared-down these days that many media outlets simply copy 'tasty' stories that other outlets have run, and the Times still carries at least a bit of that old reputation of 'the paper of record'.