Missing schoolgirl found in France

"I expect she only ran off because she didn't want to have to join the ECF compulsory membership scheme". (Photo: John Saunders)

Thousands face England flood misery

"Of course, if Noah had consulted me initially, I would have told him to run a cruise, rather than cluttering his ark up with all those animals. By the way, did I mention that I recently returned from a cruise myself?"

Banana skins

As Tim Krabbe once wrote on his wonderful Open Chess Diary, "Chess, like banana peels, like flower pots falling from windows, has the power to make men laugh". Sometimes one just cannot help it. This was yesterday's game Gelfand-Wang Hao, from the ongoing London FIDE GP at Simpsons:

In this drawn rook ending, the Chinese super-GM played the wonderful move 55...Kh7??, and had to resign after 56.Kf7, forcing mate! To his credit, he actually laughed after Gelfand had played his final move.

The spectators must have p*ssed themselves. Oh no, they couldn't - there aren't any spectators!  

I would be honoured...

Paul Buswell has posted the following notice on the Egregious Forum:

Nomination for Honours
The Department for Culture Media & Sport is looking to increase the number and quality of nominations from grassroots organisations for the New Year and Birthday Honours rounds. There is a new form that can be used for these nominations
http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/ho ... fault.aspx
Do encourage any organisations or individuals you know to nominate someone who has made a difference to their communities.

(Source: local voluntary sector circular)

Naturally, one hesitates to put oneself forward for such things, but I feel I should make it known that, should anyone wish to nominate me for an honour, for services to termite eradication, I would be willing to accept the nomination.

Not for myself, naturally, but for The Cause.

Termitewatch 39 - Fliptop flips his lid

Whoever it was that advised us always to expect the worst of people, in order to ensure we are never disappointed, must have been an experienced ECF-watcher. Even by their standards, I was stunned to read the post below, which appeared on the Egregious Forum earlier today:

I have been giving some thought as to how the election requirements of the Procedural Bye Laws would need to be reworded to enable Stuart Conquest to be a candidate at next month's AGM. This would be possible if the text read:

Quote:

12.6 Each candidate for a Post must be either: 
(a) a retiring Director, the FIDE Delegate or a Chairman of a Standing Committee seeking re-election to the same Post; or 
(b) a nominee of the Board for a Post; or 
(c) a person proposed with the level of support of the Requisitionists in Article 1.1; or
(d) a person proposed by GM Raymond Keene OBE.

12.7 The names of all candidates duly nominated to the Secretary received by him not later than 37 days before the Annual General Meeting shall appear on the Agenda, indicating the Post for which they are nominated and where applicable the name of their proposers. PROVIDED THAT this requirement shall not apply to candidates falling under paragraph 12.6(d)

Unfortunately, the time limits prescribed by the Articles mean that such a wording, even if it were acceptable to Council, cannot apply to the October 2012 elections. 

This appallingly facetious piece of childishness was posted by John Philpott, who proudly styles himself "Chairman of the ECF Governance Committee and ECF Company Secretary". The man responsible for ensuring that appropriate standards of corporate governance are observed by the governing body of British chess should be saying nothing at all on such a matter, and observing a dignified neutrality in the choice of President. Instead, he reveals himself to be party to the group of Keene-hating termites, obsessed by the fact that Ray Keene happens to be supporting Stuart Conquest's candidacy for the post of ECF President.

As well as grossly inappropriate to his position (a position to which Fliptop also aspires to re-election, incidentally!), the comment is also extremely insulting to Stuart Conquest himself, by implying that he is somehow the creature of Ray Keene, when of course he is his own man. The point is surely that Stuart is a candidate for unity, a well-known grandmaster, successful tournament director, and greatly respected and liked in just about every quarter of chess. If the ECF constitution cannot be stretched to accommodate such a candidate, that is the Egregious mob's misfortune.

Stuart Conquest deserves an apology from Fliptop. The rest of British chess deserves the little cretin's resignation from his current posts within the federation, and if he is unwilling to supply it, he should be unceremoniously booted out, without delay.

Giving Fliptop the bum's rush would have one other advantage, of course - it would free up his time, to enable him to devote 100% of his attention to the non-arrangement of postal chess tournaments.

Is a Conquest on the horizon?

I am reliably informed that Grandmaster Stuart Conquest, one of the most popular figures in British chess, has expressed an interest in becoming the new President of the Egregious Chess Federation. I have no idea what could have prompted this outburst of masochism on Stuart's part, but he would be the perfect President. It seems to me that when the dust and smoke has cleared, the most damaging and long-lasting legacy of the Dear Leader's reign is likely to be the manner in which he has widened the split between the top English players (almost all of whom supported de Mooi, for the very good reason that he put money in their pockets) and the so-called "grass roots", the ordinary club players, most of whom resent having to fund professional chess. Stuart would be the ideal person to heal that division, as he is himself a top player (British Champion in 2008, for example), but at the same time, very approachable and personable with ordinary chess fans.

Given that the other choice for President is that well-known serial alumnus, Roger J Edwards, a man who was recently described to me by one leading English GM as "the one who wants to abolish international chess" (he doesn't, of course, but that is apparently how he is perceived by the GMs), it would seem self-evident that Stuart is the better choice. Edwards would, I fear, perpetuate the divide between the rating haves and have-nots of English chess, whereas Stuart would have an excellent chance of healing the division.

In fact,choosing Stuart is a no-brainer. Unfortunately, no brains is exactly the chief characteristic of the body that has to choose, namely the ECF Council. And herein lies the real trouble. Insofar as I understand the machinations of the ECF's Byzantine constitution, the deadline for nominations for this year's AGM has already passed, so a modicum of constitutional creativity may be needed to get Stuart up to the starting gate.

It goes without saying that only a bunch of idiots would allow such a heaven-sent candidate to slip through their fingers, merely because of bureaucratic hurdles. On the other hand, as E L Mencken didn't quite say, "nobody ever went broke through under-estimating the intelligence of the ECF".

Watch this space.

Car park skeleton find "probably Richard III"

"Of course, if Richard III had consulted me initially, I would have told him never to exchange his kingdom for a horse - he should have insisted on the bishop pair".

60 years and counting - the solution

Y Afek, 1st Pr, Israeli Ring Tourney 1975

White to play and win

1. b7 Bc5!
The toughest defence. 1... Re6 2. Nc7, and 1... Rc6 2. b8=N+ both lose at once, as does 1... Ra6+ 2. Ba7.
2. Bxc5!
2.b8=Q? fails to 2...Ra6+ 3. Kb7 Rb6+, whilst the tempting under-promotion 2. b8=N+ is also inadequate, because after  Kc8 3. Bxc5 d4 the ending is a draw.
2... Rh8+ 3. Ka7 Kc6 4. Bd4!
4. Nd6 Kxc5 5. Nc8 Rh7 draws.
4... Rh7
4... Rf8 5. Ka6 wins)

and now the beautiful final point:  5. Bg7!! Rxg7 6. Nd4+ and Black must lose his rook to a knight fork, or else put his king on the 7th rank, allowing the pawn to queen!

Termitewatch 38 - A Luddite writes

Following the appearance of my blog entry on Monday, detailing the curious case of Roger Edwards' appearance among the alumni on his old school websites, the Forum's most verbose termite, "Sir" Roger de Coverley, snorted:

You then get a notorious blogger raising issues about wiki entries. I would not have fingered the notorious blogger as much of a computer hacker, so persons unknown must have done the technical legwork on his behalf.

Today, his fellow Forumite, Christopher Kreuzer, replied to the old fool, pointing out how easy it is to check details on Wiki entries:

I'm a bit surprised by this part of what you said. It's not at all difficult to look at what happened here, and requires precisely zero technical legwork. It made me wonder if you know how wikis work? 

And what was Sir Roger's response?  Far from thanking Mr Kreuzer for the information provided, our favourite knight of the realm gruffly admits:

You know this, I didn't.

In other words, by his own admission, he goes round casting aspersions on other people and their technical ability, without himself having the faintest idea of what the technical process involves! A leading termite, talking through his gluteus maximus - who'd have thought it?

Still, I suppose we should be thankful for small mercies - at least he didn't blame his ignorance on the fact that he has to spend so much time studying the details of the ECF compulsory membership scheme...

"Of course, Jimmy Wales would never have been able to afford to start Wikipedia, if he''d had to pay £12 to join the compulsory ECF membership scheme." (Photo: John Saunders)

60 and counting

From the latest issue of The Problemist comes a lovely article, by my friend Yochanan Afek, devoted to the first 60 years of his endgame study composing career (Yochanan turned 60 earlier this year!). I have featured one or two of my favourite Afek studies on this blog before, but here is another beauty. Solution tomorrow:

Y Afek 1st Prize, Israeli Ring Tourney, 1975

White to play and win

Refreshing honesty

Following the appalling interview they did with the Dear Departed Leader a few weeks ago, the Yorkshire chess lot have now done one with Roger Edwards, who faces what is looking like an increasingly close battle with "None of the Above", to become the new ECF President. I only got a few lines down, when I came across the following:

[I attended] "Harrogate Grammar School and Haberdashers’ Aske’s Hatcham Boys’ School as it was then called and I am proud to note that I am included in the list of alumni on each of these schools’ Wikipedia sites."

I was more than a little stunned that these two fine educational establishments should be so bereft of significant alumni as to resort to including an obscure chess arbiter on their Wikipedia page. Visiting the Harrogate GS page, I duly discovered Mr Edwards's name, sitting at the bottom of their list of nine Old Harrogatian nonentities. The penultimate entry reads:

Tony Lecomber - senior British National Party member and convicted criminal.

Such refreshing honesty - I cannot help feeling that, if I were running for office, I might have been rather less keen than Mr Edwards to draw the electorate's attention to this unfortunate piece of information!

The Haberdashers Wiki page actually does include several well-known names amongst their alumni (Barnes Wallis, Fiona Bruce, Scott Parker, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Steve Harley, etc), which makes Mr Edwards' appearance there look even more out of place.

Naturally, given the open editing system used by Wikipedia, I got to wondering who might have been responsible for posting the information about Mr Edwards on the relevant Wiki pages. Interestingly, the Harrogate GS entry was made on 11 August, and the Haberdashers one later the same day, both using the same computer/ internet connection, as identified by the IP address number. The person concerned (or at least, his/her IP address) has never made any other Wikipedia entry, other than three posts - one on each of the two school sites, and one edit three days later, to add the all-important "J" between "Roger" and "Edwards".

Looking up the IP address, I see that it belongs to someone with a Sky internet connection, who lives somewhere in Stoke-on-Trent - coincidentally, the same city where Roger J Edwards lives!

"You are so much more adorable than None of the Above!" (photo: en.wikipedia.org)

Treachery with a smile on its face?

It is a tragic tale, of a once-powerful and much-loved leader, who had fallen on hard times, lost ground in the popularity stakes, and was even challenged by an upstart pretender. Bloodied but unbowed, the leader determined to fight on, confident of facing down the critics and securing re-election.

But then, during one terrible night, the leader is visited, one by one, by close friends and allies. Each repeats the same depressing story - "I personally will always support you if you decide to run again, but I don't believe you can win, and you risk humiliation". Gradually, it becomes clear that people on whom the leader had always counted were not going lend their support.  Dismayed and scarcely believing the scale of the treachery involved, the leader was finally forced to accept reality - the election could not be won. Fighting back tears, the leader issued a brief resignation announcement, and departed into history.

Yes, of course, I am talking about Margaret Thatcher's resignation on 28 November 1990. Why, who did you think I was referring to?

Prince Harry attacked at Afghan base

"I expect the Taliban were upset that he is not in the ECF compulsory membership scheme". (Photo: John Saunders)

Endgame puzzle - the solution

I left you with this position, White to play:

The position comes from the game Lerner - Dorfman, USSR Championship 1980. The late Konstantin Lerner found the only winning move, which is 71.Rf2!!

The reason it wins is best explained by looking at why the obvious alternative fails. After 71. Kb7?, Black draws by employing the well-known technique of "shoulder-charging", to keep the white king at bay: 71...Kf6! 72. Kc6 Ke5! The white king is unable to get back to help stop the pawn. The position is drawn after  73. Kc5 g4 74. Kc4 Ke4 75. Kc3 g3 76. Rh8 g2 77. Rg8 Kf3 78. Kd2 Kf2, etc.

Once one has seen that, the logic of Lerner's move becomes clear. 71.Rf2!! stops the black king from shoulder-charging the enemy king away, and the white monarch is thus able to return in time to help stop the pawn, even though White's first move looks as though it loses a tempo. The game ended  71... Kh6 72. Kb7 g4 73. Kc6 Kg5 74. Kd5 g3 75. Rf8 Kg4 76. Ke4 1-0

The solution is simple enough once one sees it, but it takes a fine endgame player to find such an idea over the board. Lerner was a very fine endgame player, as shown in the article by Yochanan Afek in the September issue of Chess (Britain's leading chess magazine), which presents a number of instructive endings by the late Grandmaster, who spent his last years in Israel.

Both the article and the whole issue of the magazine (John Saunders' last as Editor) are excellent, and I recommend them.

Endgame puzzle

From the September issue of Chess, Britain's leading chess magazine, comes a nice little endgame puzzle.

It is White to play. What is the only winning move, and why does it win? Answer tomorrow.

Facebook boss laments share price drop

"Of course, if Mark Zuckerberg had consulted me initially, his share price would have dropped by far more than 50% by now".

PNG - Plainly No Good

Following the demise of the Dear Leader, the only contested election at the forthcoming AGM of the Egregious Chess Federation is for the post of FIDE Delegate. Nigel Short, the incumbent, is being challenged for the post by one Rupert Jones.

Now before proceeding any further, I should make a few things clear:

1. I am not, and never will be, a member of the ECF, and really don't care what happens to the vile bunch of protection racketeers.

2. I do not believe the ECF should be a member of FIDE; rather, we should have organised a breakaway by the Western democracies and formed a new organisation.

3. I have never met or had any contact with Rupert Jones, and know nothing about him, other than what I have read in the chess press recently.

Having stated these things, though, it seems very clear to me that Rupert Jones is about as suitable for the role of ECF FIDE Delegate as Joey Barton is for a job as an Anger Management Consultant.

The first thing I know about Rupert Jones is that he is registered with, and plays for, Papua New Guinea. Apparently, he was born there, which perhaps explains it. On the other hand, I am told that he has also been registered for, and represented, Botswana in the past, which is perhaps harder to account for. If I were not such a trusting soul, always looking for the good in people, I might even suspect him of having an unhealthy determination to get to each Olympiad, no matter which country he has to represent, in order to do so. Is the Bermuda Party really that good?

You may say that it doesn't matter - just because he plays for another federation, that doesn't mean he can't represent England in FIDE's corridors of power. Maybe, although I am far from convinced. But there is another, far greater problem with Mr Jones. He is also a FIDE insider. Specifically, he is Secretary of FIDE's "Development Commission".  That is the body charged with doling out money to Third World countries, "to develop chess" in those countries. Naturally, the more generous the Commission is in "developing chess" in such countries, the more likely those countries are to support the incumbent FIDE President, so it is a key position as far as Ill-Lunatic is concerned. I think it safe to say that he would not wish to see the Commission fall into the hands of anyone he did not trust as a loyal supporter of himself.

It is very clear that, if elected as the ECF's FIDE Delegate, Jones would face a huge conflict of interest. England is hardly the sort of country which could ever expect to be a significant recipient of the Development Commission's largesse, even at the best of times. As it is, with our popularity within FIDE being on a par with that of a bacon sandwich at a Barmitzvah, it is very clear that a man whose job is to secure money for Third World countries is going to have interests diametrically opposed to those of the ECF. He cannot possibly represent us at FIDE.

As I said above, I don't think we should be in FIDE at all, but if we are to remain so, there is only one possible reason - to work towards the removal of Ill-Lunatic at the next election in 2014. I really cannot imagine Mr Jones pursuing that goal. Keeping Nigel Short in place is the best way to do so. Furthermore, he has clearly done an excellent job at the latest FIDE Congress - even Lara and Alex have publicly heaped praise on him for his performance, and they can hardly be regarded as fully-paid-up members of the Nigel Short Fan Club. Despite the furore over the CAS court case, and despite Nigel's occasionally less than filigree diplomatic skills, he is enormously respected around the world of chess, and is currently by far the best man to be representing the ECF within FIDE.

I am sure that the powers that be within FIDE would love to see Nigel replaced. But even for the numpties who make up most of Council, it would be a spectacular own goal to remove him now. He should be left in place until the 2014 elections. If at that point, the latest attempt to oust Ill-Lunatic has failed, Nigel can be voted out, if need be - in fact, I understand he will stand down voluntarily, if that happens. But for God's sake, give the boy a chance. It is our only hope of getting rid of the Space Traveller.

And as for Mr Jones, I'm afraid he is just PNG - plainly no good.

Stop Press: is the nightmare over?

Sources close to the Dear Leader have told me within the last hour that he has resigned as ECF President. I am still seeking confirmation of this.

Could the nightmare be over for English chess?

PS. 17.25pm

A second source, close to the ECF Board, has now confirmed that he is in receipt of an e-mail from de Mooi, to the Board, confirming his resignation.

Lufthansa cabin staff begin 24 hour strike

"I expect they are refusing to take passengers who aren't in the ECF compulsory membership scheme. I said this would happen!" (photo: John Saunders)

A tough job, but someone has to do it...

Last week, a heart-warming and inspiring message appeared on the Dear Leader's Twitter page:

I didn't really want to go but 6-9 September I'll be in Istanbul fighting for the rights of English chess players, arbiters and officials.

As a wizened old cynic, I have to confess that for some inexplicable reason, my first thought was of the opening line of the late Peter Cook's famous spoof Harold MacMillan radio broadcast. He has the then Prime Minister, who had just returned from a whistlestop tour to meet Messrs Krushchev, Kennedy et al, address the nation with the immortal words: "Now, as you know, I have recently been travelling round the world, on your behalf (and at your expense...)".

But no sooner had this unworthy thought entered my head than I banished it, with the admonition "Get thee behind me, Satan!". After all, the Dear Leader himself assured us, in his Yorkshire Chess.com interview, that apart from "a token sum" from his ECF Presidential budget, he was paying the rest of his expenses himself. How lucky we are to have such a hero, fighting for our interests, in far-flung corners of the world, I thought.

Others are less generous in their attitude. The Bedlam Brigade, for example, were so unkind as to raise the question earlier this week, of exactly how much this "token sum" amounts to. We still await the answer, of course. But however much it is costing us, the important thing is that CJ is going to Istanbul, against his will, to fight for us and for that we must be eternally grateful. When I think of the enormity of his personal sacrifice, I am quite overcome.

Or, at least I would be, were it not for the tweet he issued earlier this evening:

"I'm going on a fabulous holiday to Istanbul tomorrow... "

Shome mishtake, shurely? 

Browne on the rampage

A previous blog entry discussed Walter Browne's recently-published autobiography and game collection. Another fine example of his fearsome attacking style is the following game, which does not appear in Megabase. Anyone who wishes to learn more about White's attacking chances in typical IQP positions should study the game carefully.

You couldn't make it up....

According to this report, Kirsan Illyumzhinov's latest idea is to arrange a chess tournament between robots, to be held on the planet Mars. "He is ready to suggest this to NASA, with whom he is due to meet in the near future".

If past FIDE practice is anything to go by, a week before it's due to take place, it will be switched to Pluto...

"Of course, if the Martian Planetary Council had consulted me initially, they could have hosted the 2013 British Championship".

To stand or not to stand...

Following his blatantly electioneering interview with Yorkshire Chess the other week, The Dear Leader has gone one further, and published his re-election manifesto. It is quite the most extraordinary document I have ever seen.

To start with, it appears not on the ECF website, but on his personal blog. But that is a minor matter. The most remarkable part is the preamble. Having claimed that he welcomes any challenge, he then adds that

I’m hoping to be allowed to continue as I currently have a lot lined up for the 100th British Chess Championships next year and I feel it would be a great shame if this historic event was not as spectacular as it could be.

Already perhaps, a jarring note - "elect me or I will make sure the 100th British is not as good as it would have been without me". But perhaps he isn't really threatening the English chess community - just clumsy wording? We'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one and move on.

But then he ups the ante:

However, I’ve faced a lot of criticism and attacks over the past year (although as many people have pointed out, no actual proof of any wrongdoing or intent has ever been provided) and I have remained resolutely silent. I made an error of judgement for which I apologised for (sic) but the behaviour I have been faced with has been scurrilous, offensive, accusatory and at times even worthy of police complaint.

"Worthy of police complaint"? The only thing of that nature that I am aware of were the accusations, made in the national press, that British Championship arbiters were homophobic. These are the accusations which the Press Complaints Commission subsequently found to be an accurate report by the Sunday Times, of the substance of what the Dear Leader himself told their reporter, even if he had not used the actual word "homophobic".

But then comes the really good bit. De Mooi goes on to say the following:

I feel I will have to address these points publicly and have a file of written evidence which although I am loathe (sic) to make public, I feel I am left with little choice. It is very sad when hard working volunteers are not allowed to continue with their work due to a vocal minority. Both parties may consider themselves to have been wronged and have a case but I was willing to hold up my hands and move on. I cannot tolerate what is seen to be bullying, very offensive language and threats and unfortunately if it has to be a public legal matter, so be it. I will never be afraid to fight for what I believe to be right.

Hmmm. Even under the arcane ECF constitution, I am not sure how "a vocal minority" of people can prevent an official continuing with their work. If the Dear Leader is prevented from continuing his work as President after October, it will be because a majority, vocal or otherwise, of Council have voted against him. Last time I checked the dictionary, that was called democracy.

And as for being ready to "hold up my hands and move on", only a few months ago, an ECF non-executive director made a determined effort to bring together de Mooi and his henchman, "Odious" Adam Raoof, on the one hand, and Alex and Lara on the other, for a face-to-face, clear the air meeting. Alex and Lara agreed. de Mooi and Raoof both imposed a totally unreasonable pre-condition (the identical one, incidentally), which led to the meeting never taking place, and Raoof later admitted he had never had any intention of attending such a meeting.

But the Dear Leader has not finished yet. Hell hath no fury like a Z-list celebrity scorned, it seems. He goes on to issue still more dire threats:

I am so sad it has come to this but I have been abused long enough. While I may be constrained by confidentiality in my post, if I choose to leave or am voted out, I will be able to bow to public pressure and reveal everything that has really happened, along with corroborating written evidence. 

This must surely be the finest piece of electioneering ever. Put in plain language, it reads "Either re-elect me, or I will publicly trash the reputation of your game, by revealing all manner of confidential matters". It sounds like an offer we can't refuse. And this is one CJ promise that we can take seriously - as he showed in the hours immediately after T-Shirtgate, he is nothing if not skilled at whipping up press campaigns.

The other thing which struck me about this paragraph was his novel interpretation of the duties of Board confidentiality. Apparently, once out of office, he considers himself free to reveal confidential information, acquired whilst he was in office! I can't think why David Shayler didn't try that argument. No doubt the ECF's pro bono legal adviser will be considering the matter as we speak...

"Some people make you an offer you can't refuse. Get over it!" (picture: weeklydrop.com)

After this squalid attempt at blackmail, he then goes on to reveal his true lack of self-awareness, by ending his preamble with the breathtaking claim:

I feel I am the best person to lead the English Chess Federation and it is for the sake of the game I and so many people love that I am prepared to sacrifice my time, money and energy. I was elected to be completely open and transparent and from now on, I will be just that.

If he is the best person to lead English chess, God help us! And the last sentence appears to admit that he has not been open and transparent thus far...

All in all, it is the most astounding electoral communication I have ever seen. As one well-known figure in British chess commented to me in an e-mail yesterday, "In any normal democratic process, you'd have to say his statement was, at the very least, electoral suicide...But in the mad, amoral world of chess you can never be sure!" 

Indeed you can't, although on this occasion, my sources suggest that support for the man is draining away very rapidly, even among his fellow Board members. Indeed, one of the strange things about the timing of his publishing the above tantrum is that he also appears to be preparing the ground for a face-saving withdrawal from the election itself! Informed sources tell me that he has recently been sounding out the level of support (or otherwise) that he can expect, and that he may well pull out of the election, if he thinks he cannot win.

In addition, his blog and Twitter posts have recently been boasting about new acting roles. On August 29, he tweeted that

"Good news - I'm employed until July 2013. Bad news - no time for anything else. Do I give up stuff I care about to concentrate on my career?"

And then yesterday, he added another Tweet:

"Wow! I've just been offered a fantastic 6 month job abroad in 2013! If I take it, I'll have to give up everything I do in the UK. Dilemma!"

It is hard to reconcile these tweets with his claim that he wants to go on and lead British chess for another year, so one assumes that he is preparing the way for a face-saving withdrawal. If so, will he then implement his dire threats and spill the beans about the inside dealings at the Egregious lot? And will he really turn to M'learned friends, as hinted at in his references to "a public legal document"? It remains to be seen, but as David Robertson put it on the Forum, "batten down the hatches for a bumpy ride". Another English chess observer pointed out that de Mooi claims to be an actor and "actors like to make grand exits!".

Indeed, the blog heading where his latest rant appears has a masthead which reads "I am an actor. Apparently". Of that, I fear there can be little doubt.