My desk and computers have so much on them that the real miracle is that I don't lose more stuff. In fact out of hundreds of newsletters and journals written over the years the only one I have made a hash of is #170 of Bob Long's Chess Views. Can't find the PDF, and accidentally wrote over the original file it was based on, #169.
If you have the PDF for #170 would you be kind and send a copy to me at: firstname.lastname@example.org ?
OTHER NEWS: SAVE BIG -- TWO WEEKS ONLY
I produce this newsletter Bob Long's Chess Views every couple weeks and charge $34.95 for it (16 issues). Does that seem like a lot to you?
I put a lot of time into those reviews and articles and it seems reasonable as I get other newsletters from various sources which run $40-$50 a month!
HOWEVER... I DO WANT TO SPREAD IT AROUND
and there are ways you can get the next EIGHT issues (#171 will be FREE if you act by January 22) for only $8.00 OR by getting the 2013 Red GOLD Card, which is $50 and has a pile of benefits with it.
Either way you can pay by PayPal to the above email address or send check, MO, CC info to:
1524 LeClaire St., Davenport, IA 52803.
Let me give you an example of what we don't do.
I don't run letters from crazy people like ChessBase does (in the interests of "fairness.) However it is possible that CB ran them to show what morons these type of people are who rush their ridiculous comments into print without checking ANY of the facts.
There has been a story going round about a Bulgarian (Croatian, somebody or another) named Ivanov who was "strip searched" (really? he took his shirt off!) The emails poured into ChessBase accusing them of "convicting" this guy in print when so far no proof/evidence has been found. These "liberal nutters" went on and on and seemed in the majority from what I read and they clearly don't read well. ChessBase just reported the story as it appeared in papers overseas--they never put in their own opinion.
Well, that doesn't stop whack jobs! Here's the part that gets your editor riled. Emails came in saying things like "What's to stop a player from having a really good tournament where he is a low-rated master and he just keeps beating grandmasters? I mean, it could happen!" Not likely, you'd have a better chance of winning ANY lottery.
When the live feed plug was pulled our Mr. Ivanov lost badly. In a court of law that kind of information, backed up by credible players and analysts (such as Lilov), is called "circumstantial evidence." Lilov analyzed the games and concluded that somehow they came to the player using an engine like Houdini--move for move. The first thing I thought of was a type of "Morse Code." Primitive yes? But it can still work. How? We don't yet know but not knowing doesn't mean it didn't happen. (Kramnik warned us about this a LONG time ago!)
If they want to stop this kind of thing why don't they just have the "live feed" not later, but, the next day? What on earth is the rush? They are daring the perps AND losing.
These "kiddies" who perpetrate this kind of thing are in it for two things: the money AND to show others they are smarter than any kind of restraints that could be imposed upon them.
Someone wrote in that he was an "expert" who had won a big prize by beating several good players some time back. That still isn't the same thing as Beating the Stuffing out of MUCH stronger players in game after game after game.
Our friend Julian Wan wrote in, as he often does, and mentioned the "sadness" of this kind of behavior in many sports. He is always the voice of reason while the whack jobs think of "near impossible things" as being possible. I have never been a fan of beheadings of any kind, but now I am beginning to think of exceptions... isn't that's how it always gets started?