The Chess Mind

By Dennis Monokroussos.
This is a blog for chess fans by a chess fan, one who loves the beauty of the game and wants to share it with those who are like-minded.
Yet the chess mind is not only a chess mind, and other topics, such as philosophy, may appear from time to time. All material copyrighted.
Sloan vs. Polgar & Truong: Correcting Misrepresentations

There's a nasty little brouhaha involving GM Susan Polgar and her husband, FM Paul Truong, on one side and Sam Sloan on the other. I've read a bit about this (this BCC post is a good place to start for those who want to go slogging through this mudhole), but have steadfastly avoided the temptation to comment about this. (The gist, in a sentence, is that Sloan accuses Polgar and/or Truong of writing inflammatory posts in his (Sloan's) name on various chess websites.)

Unfortunately, I discovered yesterday that Sam Sloan decided to drag me into this dispute by blatantly misrepresenting something I wrote on this blog a couple of years ago. Some of you may recall that I wrote a post (back on September 5, 2005) called "Go, Nona!". The post celebrated some recent accomplishments by and accolades for the former women's world champion, Nona Gaprindashvili, and en passant I took the opportunity to express a critical opinion of the sometime claim by Susan Polgar to be the first woman to earn the grandmaster title. (See the post for details.)

The result was a slew of comments, and then another big collection when I created a new post for the purpose of allowing still more reader feedback on the same topic. Almost all of them - all pro-Polgar - came from the same IP, as I detailed in a third post. Did I identify the person? NO. Here's what I wrote:

[M]y "many" respondents shared not only exceptionally similar viewpoints and ways of expressing them; it turns out, by a no doubt astonishing coincidence, that they share a common IP address as well. In short, all of the above are the same person, or at most, a very small group of people sharing the same computer or local network. It certainly isn't a collection of diverse, independent people from around the globe; rather, it's just a cheap stunt by (probably) one individual who misguidedly thinks this will improve Susan Polgar's reputation and help her cause.

That should be clear enough, but to my horror, Sam Sloan has written the following:

Dennis Monokroussos reports that Polgar and Truong have posted to his blog under 36 different fake names. He has banned all 36.

What???? In addition to the strange "reports", which makes it sound like something that just happened (as opposed to a series of two-year-old events), the claim that I single out and blame Polgar and Truong is absolutely, positively false. Sloan next gives the URL of the third Chess Mind post mentioned above (where I never offer any names for the culprit(s)), and then continues

This happened after Monokroussos posted an article entitled "Go, Nona!" in which he celebrated Nona Gaprindashvili as the first chess grandmaster.

Gaprindashvili would have had to play in St. Petersburg 1914 to receive that honor. Let's try this: she was the first woman to receive the grandmaster title.

The 36 fake posters replied that Nona Gaprindashvili was not a real grandmaster. Susan Polgar was. Monokroussos found it strange that all 36 posters that said that claimed to be in different parts of the world, yet they all had the same IP address. He reports, "overweening Polgarites in the past were all just this same person".

Again not quite right, though my rebuttals here concern minor points. First, there were more than 36 posters - that figure applies to the second post. Second, the quotation is from a comment of mine to the post - it wasn't part of my "report". As I stated in the quotation above (this post's fourth paragraph), it might have been one person, but it might have been several. I don't know.

In any event, returning to the most important point, I make no statement about the identity of the person in question. If, therefore, any of you know Mr. Sloan or post to his site please ask him to change his post to align it with the truth. Likewise, Mr. Sloan, if you're reading this, please make the proper corrections.

Blecch to the whole lousy situation.

Posted by Dennis Monokroussos on Monday October 15, 2007 at 7:25pm
Alex Herrera:
Oy Ve!
10.15.2007 9:00pm
likesforests (mail) (www):
I forwarded your message onto others. Although I suspect 95% of the chess world (me included!) is trying to ignore this whole Sloan vs Polgar debacle.
10.15.2007 10:55pm
M.Nieuweboer (mail):
Similar to Likesforests: why bother? I try to avoid anything that has to do with Mr.Sloan like the plague and I am not even American. I am sure the vast majority of your regular readers do the same.
10.15.2007 11:13pm
Richard Judy (mail):
Dealing with S. Sloan on the internet is like trying to help an injured rattlesnake......you want to do the right thing but end up with poisonous venom coursing through your veins. The best way to deal with individuals like him is to ignore him. If everyone did that he would be forced to see what he really is, not what others make him to be........R. Judy
10.16.2007 12:12am
Kenilworthian (mail) (www):
Did you preserve the IP address? Or, if you banned it, perhaps you can locate it somehow and publish it online. I did not see it printed in your commentary. I'm curious to know if someone could use it to verify whether Sloan may actually be correct.... It does sound very much like Truong's M.O.
10.16.2007 9:22am
Perseus (mail):
Great, I'm part of a group of 95%, I must be moving up in the world.

I've read mr. Sloan's shall we say rantings before. Like some politicians (including G.W. Bush actually but for him it's because of my too opposing political views), I just ignore him as if he were speaking Japanese.
10.16.2007 9:27am
Dennis Monokroussos:
Yes, I have it, but I'm not sure of the legality/morality of publishing it - especially if it's possible for a sophisticated hacker to hijack someone's IP address.
10.16.2007 9:29am
Dennis Monokroussos:
Hi Perseus,

Let's avoid political jabs against specific targets - the next thing you know some conservative will making passing cracks about liberals, and then the blog will descend into mayhem.
10.16.2007 9:36am
DG (mail) (www):
I regret that my original post is almost certainly the means by which Sloan became aware of your two year old posts. Yet, I only said that "All of this makes one wonder who might have been the culprit in that case." While there may be similarities in the two cases, it is quite a leap to suggest that Polgar/Truong were involved and it is, as you have pointed out, a gross misrepresentation to suggest that you identified them as such.

My apologies for any inconvenience that this has/will cause you.
10.16.2007 10:16am
Jon Jacobs (mail):
Although Sloan is the one who filed the initial lawsuit that brought this story to public attention (via the NY Times), Dennis distorted the landscape (unintentionally, no doubt) a bit by headlining and describing it exclusively as a "Sloan vs. the Polgars" dispute.

There are at least 3 other chess activists unconnected to Sloan who are interested parties, and who will probably have more impact than Sloan. One is an attorney who claims to have filed a separate, criminal complaint with authorities (I'm not sure in which state). He argued in favor of Sloan's candidacy but other than that has no connection, as far as I know. Another is a USCF volunteer Web administrator who claims to have uncovered the IP address evidence purportedly linking Truong to all the identity-theft posts, that's at the heart of the Sloan lawsuit and the whole brouhaha. And the third is Ray Gordon, a sleazy publisher who's been on the outskirts of chess for a long time (he's still active in the rgcp cesspool, for instance), but who seems to have no connection with Sloan beyond that they were both victimized by the same string of identity-theft posts.
10.16.2007 10:18am
Perseus (mail):
(Sorry Dennis, I agree)

I'm having a hard time understanding what mr. Sloan hopes to accomplish right now. To be elected to the board? After all this (and what is surely yet to come)? I really don't think so. As it appears to me right now, he is the one out there doing the damage to someone else's public image. That said, I do not doubt there are people out there that would like to hurt him by posting under his name. (By the way, it doesn't really help if he posts unregistered as well)
10.16.2007 11:28am
Post:
Mottershead Report at a Glance.
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/7853/guiltywe1.gif

Essence of Mottershead Report.
http://groups.google.com/group/
rec.games.chess.politics/msg/1bba2d23d8898ca6>

Download the Full Mottershead Report.
http://rapidshare.com/files/62649719/mottershead.zip.html
10.16.2007 7:03pm
Sam Sloan (mail) (www):
Dennis Monokroussos has called me to task for saying that he reported that Truong and Polgar had posted fake messages from 36 fake individuals to his web blog. Also, he says that the true number was more than 36. 36 was just the number of fake people who posted to his third blog on this subject.

http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1192490748.shtml

I admit that it is true. Dennis Monokroussos never said that it was Polgar and Truong who did it. He merely wrote that the person who did it was a "Polgarite".

[Comment abridged by the management.]
Sam Sloan
10.17.2007 5:47am
Dennis Monokroussos:
DG: Apology accepted, though I'm not sure it's necessary.

Jon Jacobs: Thanks for filling out the details.

Sam Sloan: I provided the links for those interested in checking out the controversy; I am not interested in having it continue here. The sole point of my post was to note that I did not claim, or even hint, that either Polgar or Truong comment-spammed my blog - as you have acknowledged. That the person was a "Polgarite" is hardly evidence, as she has many fans and supporters. If one or both of them is found guilty in your suit, I hope you can achieve suitable redress; if they're innocent, I hope their reputations will be restored. But that battle is for the courts, not my blog, and you're not welcome to write more comments like the one above (about to be edited) - not here.
10.17.2007 11:07am
Sam Sloan (mail) (www):
I would like to point out that in 1978, when Nona Gaprindashvili was awarded the GM title, the current requirement of three GM norms and a FIDE rating of 2500 was not yet in effect. The rule up until at least 1970 was ONE NORM in a 1A tournament of at least 16 players and ten grandmasters was enough to earn the GM title. The rating requirement of at least 2450 (not 2500) was introduced in around 1980. FIDE ratings did not even exist until 1970.

I have the FIDE rules for 1982 which state that the Woman's World Champion would be awarded the IM title only, not the GM Title. The GM Title then required two GM norms plus a rating of 2450.

You should try to find the rules in effect in 1978, when Nona Gaprindashvili was awarded the title. I am almost sure that there was no rating requirement back then. It was well known that Nona Gaprindashvili was awarded the GM title because of winning Lone Pine 1977 which was the strongest tournament held in the world that year. Maia Chiburdanidze was not awarded the GM title until 1987, which was 9 years after she had become Woman's World Champion, so being Woman's World Champion was of no relevance prior to that time.

Sam Sloan
10.17.2007 12:13pm
Stig:
Lone Pine the strongest tournament of 1977? I checked with Jeff Sonas' Chessmetrics, and he lists it as only the #42 strongest that year! This is also ridiculous, since Sonas seems to use average rating for all players, which biases his list in favor of closed elite tournaments. But clearly, Lone Pine pales in comparision with #1 USSR Ch (Leningrad) with Tal, Polugaevsky, Petrosian..., #2 Las Palmas wirh Karpov, Tal, Larsen, Timman, Browne..., or even #12 Ljubljana/Portoroz with Larsen, Hort, Tseshkovsky, Gligoric, Sax...

Probably Sloan meant to say Lone Pine was the strongest OPEN torunament of 1977, which appears correct.

Disclaimer: I do not intend by this post to denigrate Nona Gaprindashvili, her great tournament performance or her well-earned and awarded GM title, nor to compare her unfavorably to certain other female players.
10.17.2007 11:35pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?