Tuesday, October 12, 2010

The need to express

At UTP, Salleh from gilocatur posed me a question. He asked if I wanted our kids to answer back to us. He said that we Malaysians are not used to questioning Authorities.

Ok, let me try to answer that here. But before I do that let me rewind the tape a little. Do you remember the group session at the center? When I got the boys to talk, there was a lot of anger in the beginning and they had no place to express it. Remember the caveat? No violence, no destruction of private property. The end result was a reduction in tension.

I can see Salleh's concern. I'm sure its in the minds of many other people too. If you go to the chess blogs today, you will see many angry words. To me that is not necessarily a bad thing. Years of frustration is being expressed. Some like Jimmy, Peter, Ilham and me put our names to our statements. Some dare not but that is OK too.

And you know what? We are still here. To me that shows a new maturity in MCF. You can see it too if you can let go of your anger and fear.

Try to see it this way. Do you think it is easy for Hamid and Greg to stomach all these attacks? Valid or not. Do you see that the Greg we now have is stronger than the Greg we had 2 years ago? Did you see how he played at the Olympiad? Do you know why he is stronger now?

First GM will continue not to sponsor. Do you understand why? The mistakes have to be corrected or we cannot move on. But this is a chance for change. Maybe Greg is strong enough now to admit the mistakes. I dont know. But the chance is presented anyway.

The noise on the blogs is also good. We can see where the anger lies from what is said and what is avoided. Jimmy and Rationality know what I say is true. Just like the PICA official mentioned below know what I say is true. But they will not admit it. It is hard to admit it. They will not be angry if there is no truth to my arguments. Can you see that?

If they dont face their fears they will not grow. I am hoping that their passion for chess will give them that courage. If they can face their fears they will improve. Their minds will clear. Their chess will improve and they will offer solutions instead of just complaining.

But it is not easy for the adults. That is why I "admire" Ninja. He is still arguing. That means he is still trying. In counselling these people are the ones with the better chance. When they stop talking, the case is more serious. The spirit has died and there is almost no way to reach them now. I hope you can see that.

Now back to Salleh. It is much tougher for the adults. But with the children it can be different. With the kids it can be done this way.... If you have a question and if you have tried your best to answer those question with the known information, then you can come to me. With the kids you can say, your questions must be framed respectfully. I think that is what we all want. Respectful questions. The purpose of which is to learn. But we need to teach them this at a young age. To ask questions and to ask questions respectfully. So answering back and asking questions are 2 different things.

For the adults, there is too much anger; too much fear and frustration. So they do the only thing they know. Attack. But give them time. Soon the anger will abate, after enough venting. They are not yet used to expressing themselves. Most are still hiding in the dark. Dont be quick to condemn them. We normally hate what we see in ourselves. Give this some time. I believe we have the maturity in our chess community to weather this. After all we are in a mind sport and we are only raising our subconscious fears.

Thank you for the question Salleh. I hope I have answered you.

33 comments:

  1. Sometimes you get carried away.
    You ask if he had notice how Greg played at the Olympiad amongst others; implying he was a much stronger player now.
    Have you ever seen how Greg played or studied any of his games.
    Do you know Greg that much?

    ReplyDelete
  2. No. I said he showed courage in his game.

    ReplyDelete
  3. R,
    Questions we can handle.

    How about ACCUSATIONS? Especially baseless ones.

    i.e. some people accuses MCF practising corruption. But I am yet to see anyone coming forward to bring proof or to be witness..

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good question. If you have ever organised a tournament you will have a clue. Only the organiser will know what is going on. Everybody else will only see a small picture. Just like in fixed matches. The organiser will ensure that only his people will man key posts. And even they will only have a small picture. So the answer to your question is there will never be any proof. They are too smart for that. So dont waste your time trying to get proof. If you see little tell tale signs like a strange rating, no cross tables, etc. then just dont go to those tournaments. Ask them questions. If they dont give you straight answers then they are suspect. You are a chess player. So you know there are many ways to solve a problem. Use your creativity. At least now you know one variation that does not work. So dont repeat that mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  5. R,
    1stly, let me be frank that I am not accusing you;
    Terminator and some other pseudonyms (maybe the same person?) have been accusing you AGAIN AND AGAIN, of misappropriation of funds in PICA and $$ from Sponsors.

    Despite of your numerous straight answers, they are still not satisfied and will create more (baseless) accusations.

    1)What's your stand on this matter?
    2)Do we need this kind of people?
    3)What should we do when encountering these ppl?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Another good question. Very honestly it is very difficult to see the truth until you raise your own awareness. Some of the tell tale signs is that they will not show their face or provide evidence. We cant stop them either. So maybe their purpose on this earth is for the rest of us to develop our judgement. I have also mentioned before that if it was not for PICA attacking Mark, this blog would not have started. I suggest that you learn how to see through their lies. I will cover this partly in tomorrows posting.

    ReplyDelete
  7. One more thing. When your own awareness is raised they will automatically disappear. They can only exist in the dark where they can prey on the vulnerable. You dont need to do anymore than raise your own awareness. When they find their lies and deceit dont work anymore they have no more reason to exist. Do you think one of the reasons why they are so desperate now could be their modus operandi is being slowly exposed on this blog?

    ReplyDelete
  8. abdooss,

    The reason is simple. The witnesses still want to play chess in Malaysia.

    1. Who do you report to? The MACC? These so called "corruption" is more unethical than illegal. It is a form of rent-seeking. For example, buying RM10 chess sets for RM20. If you ask for the receipts, it is all there. You will notice that the accounts will never give you "Number of chess sets bought x RMXX per chess set". They just give you things like, "Chess Equipment" = RM3,000. While this may or may not be illegal, would it hurt to keep the public's mind at ease by publishing proper accounts? You can't prove that these things are illegal, but it is just shady business.

    2. If you alienate yourself from MCF or your state federation, you will never get selected anymore. That would mark the end of your chess future. That is why the national junior I talked about before, S, was not selected. His parents were always advocating for transparency. The MCF just passed him over, to teach you a lesson.

    3. What Raymond asks about boycotting is just not practical. How can you ask an ardent chess player to boycott chess? I think a true chess player will find that impossible. The hands will simply itch to play, despite all the junk that is happening in the background. Because if you pretend it is not there, you get to enjoy your chess.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ninja, you need to learn to speak for yourself. Try, I will go to fixed tournaments because my hands are too itchy and I cannot be principled. I can only talk.

    Dont speak for others.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I was not talking about fixed tournaments. I am talking about tournaments run by rent seekers. I have yet to play in a fixed tournament in my life. I suppose lucky me. Besides, any self-respecting player can smell a fixed pairing a mile away. It is easily detectable. Perhaps you can learn the pairing algorithm and not rely on the computer all the time. That way, you can immediately contest the "fixed pairing" on the spot. You don't have to feel that it is "fishy". You can ascertain its validity yourself.

    As for "fixed draws", that is very subjective. Not all short draws are fixed draws. That in itself is a separate argument.

    By the way, what do I gain by not playing? I am already not playing. Hmmm... interesting...

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't understand how you could tell that Greg showed courage in his game, when I am doubtful whether you even know the conditions for a threefold repetition.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If you have doubts, ask. Maybe you can also ask which game I am referring to? Try asking. Try asking the right questions and you will learn.

    ReplyDelete
  13. According to Raymond, two years ago, Greg was not so strong. After being attacked (by blogs and commentators) he became stronger. This is evidenced by his good show at the olympiad.

    Raymond just take two separate and infer them to be related to support his points and argument.

    Guys, this kind of logic is misleading at best and plain lies at worst.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I do not see how one could see courage in a person by looking at three games.
    Maybe I am not a mind coach. Which game and which move dis you see courage in him? Or are you saying that Greg showed courage in agreeing to play?

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is a funny thing. Some will see courage when they see a child fight despite a loss and some will only see the loss. Some will see courage when some one speaks out against an injustice and some will see a trouble maker. Some will see courage in Greg's game and some will not. Is it all that difficult to understand? Read the latest post if you can and a whole host of other postings here on the subject. Some will see a hero when they attack anonymously and some will see a coward. I guess it all depends on where you stand.

    ReplyDelete
  16. In the final round, Greg could win a queen. Since he had enough time, he thought longer and found a forced mate instead. This is the "courage" Raymond sees.

    But of course any normal chessplayer learns to look for better moves after finding a good one. There is no courage nor mind shit involved. But it is too technical for Raymond so he prefers to see it as 'courage'.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Some can see the cup half full and some will see it half empty. Some minds can learn and some cannot. Some like to build and others cannot. Those with courage will recognise it in others. Those who dont will not.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Are you saying that if one wins a positional loss game, it is down to courage and not his understanding of chess?
    From my experience, these`games are won becuase oponent lack of understanding to captitalise. If your oponent played accurately your courage cannot win.
    Courage has nothing to do with chess. Maybe if one is in better state of mind to better focus and concentrate on a particular moment, you can perform above your average rating.

    ReplyDelete
  19. You dont seem to understand much about chess. Go to NJ's questions.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This "courage" issue should not be over-debated. As Jimmy pointed out long ago, Greg's chess is simply, not that bad. Greg has been "in the hiding" from chess for a long long time, leading to the popular belief that he is a lousy chess player.

    What Raymond is trying to point out is that, when it was crunch time, Greg dug deep and found it in him to play what Raymond thinks is good chess. Greg did not just play because he was called upon to play, with no heed for the results. He played and tried hard for the win, which supposedly counts for more than the spineless fish that Raymond thinks I am labeling Greg. Greg did not just play and surrendered his fate as the "token MCF official" that everyone thinks he is (or actually is). In other words, he made the best of the whole situation. He fought for his honor because deep down, he knew that his selection was undeserved. He had more at stake than anyone in the team. Imagine if he had lost all 3 games. All hell would break loose. But he did not cower and played chess like a mouse. I am sure that he could have just played for a passive draw, and be contented with the fact that "at least he didn't lose".

    I will give him that. In fact, that is THE LEAST he could do, after all the money we spent on him.

    I suppose if you choose to always see things from this kind of angle, NOTHING in life is bad. I find it ludicrous that we can give people concession after concession, saying things like, "at least he showed courage". This is akin to praising the naked emperor that "at least he dared to walk naked amongst his people".

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yes, I don't understand how courage can win games. Maybe you can explain if I am positionaly loss, how can I harness my courage to win. This should be the most important lesson to all chess lovers.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous, no need to be coy about this. Courage is not a game-winner. We all know that. Please read my comment above. Greg could have just played for a draw like a chicken, but he didn't. He went for the win, just like any other chess player would. This part, I agree with Raymond.

    However, what I don't agree with, is praising him for it. The stupidity of the scenario which led to needing Greg to play in the first place is the problem. If he had any real courage, release a public statement why the reserve board was not given to any other player, but to Greg. That is courage.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I just want to make a point that one should not write sweeping statements. Saying Greg was much stronger now that he was two year ago and that he now show courage in his game. I just want to know how he conclude that.

    ReplyDelete
  24. So much noise, character assasination. Now its Greg that you dont like, Ninja. Anonymous, you say you are a chess player and you still cant work this out. All the facts are here. Just try to think instead of asking others to do it for you. You think you are smart and contributing to chess. You still cannot see that you are the problem. And until you do and admit that to yourself and then try hard to change, I suggest you try not to do harm by spreading your poison. That would be a courageous act in my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Raymond,

    Only you are the one who thinks I am criticizing Greg. You need to control your uncanny habit of joining too many dots too fast. Why can't you get it into your head that none of what I say is personal? Greg's display of courage as you call it is noteworthy.

    I have in fact pointed out that he did the best he could in that given scenario. He could have played for a chicken draw, which he did not. That shows he is a true chess player. I also pointed out that he fought hard and for his honor. Please learn how to read, as you have advised others to do so as well.

    I just don't think he deserves the praise that you so willingly lavish upon him. He did what any other chess player would have done. Like I said, you are praising the naked emperor for his courage to appear naked in front of his people.

    mtheory and Anonymous,

    Every chess observer is entitled to his/her own opinion. Even beginners can comment on chess. This is even more common in football. How often do we hear people complain and criticize and make ludicrous claims about football players. E.g. Cristiano Ronaldo is the best, Cristiano Ronaldo is a girl, Lionel Messi is the god of football etc. I mean, why would you take a beginner's observation on the matter so seriously?

    Winning an argument on the technicalities of chess against a beginner is like beating a 4 year-old in a 100 meter race. Nothing to be proud of there. If a 4 year-old cannot run fast, you should not be questioning him about it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. My problem is that he has somehow worked himself as if he is an authority. People get mislead by what he is writing

    ReplyDelete
  27. Raymond,I write becuase of the way you attack Greg.The way it is written implied that Greg used to be without courage and weak. Now that he is is stronger, he should admit that he was wrong about you or (your project). Am i right? You should ask Greg if what you have written about him is fair?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Everyone has the fantasy to become an authority on something. I am sure you will not listen to some coffee shop guy about what he knows about football.

    Have faith in the chess folk. They know a fraud when they see one. This case is clear and simple enough. By over-contesting the point, you are in danger of legitimizing it.

    As for the other points, sometimes there is some merit in it, but most times, it is just mind jargon that apparently makes him look smarter than he is. So, we just break it down into simple words, and learn from what we can, and expose the rest so that they do not mislead our friends in the chess scene.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Generally i love to read Raymond's article and his ideas. He seems like a very wise and open mind but unfortunately after people starts to commend or criticize his ideas, he suddenly turn to a most narrow minded people who can't admit his inaccuracies or mistake.

    How come Raymond?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Do you really need an answer or just being sarcastic?

    ReplyDelete