English Chess Forum

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Just to clarify - helpful if you are interested in the life of Mr Keene, rather less helpful if your interest is in current ECF matters which is what I thought this section of the forum was for.

Seems a fair point - maybe the thread should be elsewhere?

Tend to agree also that Mr Keene might be the only one able to confirm any continued existence of ECA and also the validity of his claim to be its Chairman; seems as though it could well be a true, if a trifle pointless, claim.

I fear that Justin reviewing the book on Anand-Carlsen would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

PeterFarr wrote: Tend to agree also that Mr Keene might be the only one able to confirm any continued existence of ECA and also the validity of his claim to be its Chairman; seems as though it could well be a true, if a trifle pointless, claim.

He might, although of course his word on the subject (or any other) is not necesssarily wholly reliable.

JustinHorton wrote:

PeterFarr wrote: Tend to agree also that Mr Keene might be the only one able to confirm any continued existence of ECA and also the validity of his claim to be its Chairman; seems as though it could well be a true, if a trifle pointless, claim.

He might, although of course his word on the subject (or any other) is not necesssarily wholly reliable.

Really? Are you sure you are not being too cynical?

Incidentally, the sub-editors from 'The Spectator' may also perhaps deserve a proof-reading mention, as the notes to the game Staunton-Horwitz on pages 11-18 of the book also appeared in that magazine, 1st December 2012. No doubt the ground-breaking stuff is elsewhere in the book.

PeterFarr wrote:Incidentally, the sub-editors from 'The Spectator' may also perhaps deserve a proof-reading mention, as the notes to the game Staunton-Horwitz on pages 11-18 of the book also appeared in that magazine, 1st December 2012. No doubt the ground-breaking stuff is elsewhere in the book.

Interesting game that, in the field of Ray Studies, as it recently appeared in the Times with entirely different notes. Any earlier sightings of either set of notes?

Well it's on chessgames.com, with noted by RDK, as a game of the day 29/1/2009, in a shorter form but recognizable as 'The Spectator' notes. I suppose that in itself might imply a derivation from an even earlier source.

PeterFarr wrote:Well it's on chessgames.com, with noted by RDK, as a game of the day 29/1/2009, in a shorter form but recognizable as 'The Spectator' notes. I suppose that in itself might imply a derivation from an even earlier source.

Indeed. But I'd rather know than suspect!

There has been no selective quotation of Andrew Zigmond's words; I simply listed three different statements of his, made on 5, 15 and 16 January, about the ECA's current status.

I have been discussing the ECA only, whereas Andrew Zigmond has used the thread to add more general comments on Raymond Keene and opinions on what it may or may not be helpful, whether tactically or strategically, to talk about here. I prefer a healthy open discussion of the ECA, past and present, leaving the chips to fall wherever they may.

One point is the ambiguity which existed from the very outset. Page 545 of the December 1987 British Chess Magazine reported:

"This body was variously described as a rival body, a breakaway organisation and a sort of complementary association concentrating on promotional aspects of the game, particularly international tournaments and TV.

We are told by Professor Kennaway, Chairman of the ECA , that he envisages the new body as rather like the Friends of Chess in the best tradition of the Slater sponsorship."

That standpoint of the ECA's first Chairman was contradicted yesterday by Andrew Zigmond when he wrote categorically: "the English Chess Association was founded by Raymond Keene in the late 1980s as a rival to the then British Chess Federation."

O.G. Urcan wrote:
We are told by Professor Kennaway, Chairman of the ECA , that he envisages the new body as rather like the Friends of Chess in the best tradition of the Slater sponsorship."

That standpoint of the ECA's first Chairman was contradicted yesterday by Andrew Zigmond when he wrote categorically: "the English Chess Association was founded by Raymond Keene in the late 1980s as a rival to the then British Chess Federation."

Andrew was surely correct to say so, as evidenced by your own earlier post in this thread, showing a page if a book by Keene listing the 'ECA' as the national chess association for England.

It is well known that Mr Keene left the BCF following a dispute which had roots going back to the 1985 Tunis Interzonal.

PeterFarr wrote:

O.G. Urcan wrote:
We are told by Professor Kennaway, Chairman of the ECA , that he envisages the new body as rather like the Friends of Chess in the best tradition of the Slater sponsorship."

That standpoint of the ECA's first Chairman was contradicted yesterday by Andrew Zigmond when he wrote categorically: "the English Chess Association was founded by Raymond Keene in the late 1980s as a rival to the then British Chess Federation."

Andrew was surely correct to say so, as evidenced by your own earlier post in this thread, showing a page if a book by Keene listing the 'ECA' as the national chess association for England.

It is well known that Mr Keene left the BCF following a dispute which had roots going back to the 1985 Tunis Interzonal.

I seem to remember that Raymond Keene was anxious to act as a second for Anthony Miles.

PeterFarr wrote:

O.G. Urcan wrote:
We are told by Professor Kennaway, Chairman of the ECA , that he envisages the new body as rather like the Friends of Chess in the best tradition of the Slater sponsorship."

That standpoint of the ECA's first Chairman was contradicted yesterday by Andrew Zigmond when he wrote categorically: "the English Chess Association was founded by Raymond Keene in the late 1980s as a rival to the then British Chess Federation."

Andrew was surely correct to say so, as evidenced by your own earlier post in this thread, showing a page if a book by Keene listing the 'ECA' as the national chess association for England.

It is well known that Mr Keene left the BCF following a dispute which had roots going back to the 1985 Tunis Interzonal.

It is important to recall that on 16 October 1987 Professor Kennaway wrote a fax to the Times which said:

"I was given to understand by Ray Keene that the idea of the ECA was to act in addition to and not in competition with the BCF. I accepted the designated office of Chairman on that understanding..."

Later in the fax, Professor Kennaway wrote:

"I have read this statement over to Ray Keene who confirms entirely my understanding of his intentions - I would hope that the BCF would not take his initiative as a competitive one..."

The full text can be read at http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/relief.html, a link given in my post of 17 December 2013 (which also showed the page from Raymond Keene's Pocket Book of Chess, published in 1988, which omitted mention of the BCF and gave instead contact details for the ECA).

O.G. Urcan wrote:

PeterFarr wrote:

O.G. Urcan wrote:
We are told by Professor Kennaway, Chairman of the ECA , that he envisages the new body as rather like the Friends of Chess in the best tradition of the Slater sponsorship."

That standpoint of the ECA's first Chairman was contradicted yesterday by Andrew Zigmond when he wrote categorically: "the English Chess Association was founded by Raymond Keene in the late 1980s as a rival to the then British Chess Federation."

Andrew was surely correct to say so, as evidenced by your own earlier post in this thread, showing a page if a book by Keene listing the 'ECA' as the national chess association for England.

It is well known that Mr Keene left the BCF following a dispute which had roots going back to the 1985 Tunis Interzonal.

It is important to recall that on 16 October 1987 Professor Kennaway wrote a fax to the Times which said:

"I was given to understand by Ray Keene that the idea of the ECA was to act in addition to and not in competition with the BCF. I accepted the designated office of Chairman on that understanding..."

Later in the fax, Professor Kennaway wrote:

"I have read this statement over to Ray Keene who confirms entirely my understanding of his intentions - I would hope that the BCF would not take his initiative as a competitive one..."

The full text can be read at http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/relief.html, a link given in my post of 17 December 2013 (which also showed the page from Raymond Keene's Pocket Book of Chess, published in 1988, which omitted mention of the BCF and gave instead contact details for the ECA).

The very same link to 'Chess Notes' contains the following extract from 'The Times', October 1987:

"Breakaway splits chess body

The British Chess Federation (BCF) is to be challenged by a new body aiming to popularize chess through television tournaments and sponsorship.

The English Chess Federation is being set up by Mr Raymond Keene, who last night resigned as publicity directory of the BCF and English Delegate to the International Chess Federation.

Mr Keene, who is chess correspondent of The Times, and also writes for The Spectator, said that his writing activities and his plans were not compatible with remaining a director of the BCF.

His resignation is the second shock to strike the quiet world of competition chess and it signals a major split in the close-knit community.

“I am not overjoyed with the BCF. I think they are old-fashioned”, Mr Keene said last night....."

Clear enough, surely? The newspaper of which Mr Keene is chess correspondent reports that the new organisation is a 'split' a 'breakaway' and a 'challenge'.

The references to a "split" and "breakaway" were in a Times report published on 14 October 1987, and it was precisely that report which Professor Kennaway described as inaccurate in his fax to the newspaper dated 16 October 1987 (sent, he said, after Raymond Keene had been consulted).

Shortly afterwards the Times published a very different report about the ECA:

"The association, working in addition to, and not in competition with, the existing British Chess Federation, will seek to increase popular interest in the game."

I have only a photocopy, but I believe this second report was published in (at least one edition of) the Times on 17 October 1987 because it was alongside an account of the third game in the Kasparov vs Karpov match, which was played on 16 October 1987:

Interesting. I still agree with Andrew, whatever back-tracking may have been done to keep people on board. Otherwise how to explain the book reference ignoring the BCF?

A kinder interpretation might be that it was still early days, and the aims hadn't yet been worked through.

O.G. Urcan wrote:There has been no selective quotation of Andrew Zigmond's words; I simply listed three different statements of his, made on 5, 15 and 16 January, about the ECA's current status.

I have been discussing the ECA only, whereas Andrew Zigmond has used the thread to add more general comments on Raymond Keene and opinions on what it may or may not be helpful, whether tactically or strategically, to talk about here. I prefer a healthy open discussion of the ECA, past and present, leaving the chips to fall wherever they may. (my italics - AZ)

One point is the ambiguity which existed from the very outset. Page 545 of the December 1987 British Chess Magazine reported:

"This body was variously described as a rival body, a breakaway organisation and a sort of complementary association concentrating on promotional aspects of the game, particularly international tournaments and TV.

We are told by Professor Kennaway, Chairman of the ECA , that he envisages the new body as rather like the Friends of Chess in the best tradition of the Slater sponsorship."

That standpoint of the ECA's first Chairman was contradicted yesterday by Andrew Zigmond when he wrote categorically: "the English Chess Association was founded by Raymond Keene in the late 1980s as a rival to the then British Chess Federation."

Mr Urcan

With respect you continue to either ignore or sidestep much of what I have been saying. I have attempted to advise you that this forum has been threatened with legal action due to comments made about Mr Keene and has led to the credibility of this forum being attacked elsewhere.

You say you want a `healthy open discussion of the ECA`. I fail to see exactly what there is to discuss now that your (reasonable) initial question has been answered and we are talking about events from over twenty years ago.

My main objection to this thread has not so much been its content but more its placing in the ECF matters section. This is not an ECF matter, it concerns historical matters and belongs under chess history. For that reason I shall highlight this thread again to the moderators.

Andrew Zigmond wrote: I have attempted to advise you that this forum has been threatened with legal action due to comments made about Mr Keene

Just for clarification, Andrew, can you draw our attention to precisely where this has occurred?

Andrew Zigmond wrote: and has led to the credibility of this forum being attacked elsewhere.

Who by, and why does this matter?