Is it KL Open or KL Invitational?

Ref: Here.

Corruption isnt always about money. In fact it starts with a corruption of morals, values and soul first. It starts when you think you can play both Judge and Jury.

Organisers do have a right to eject players on valid grounds; if the player has a proven history of cheating for example. Lets take the case of the Malaysian Open. The banking-in details are given. The fee is paid and so a valid contract is established. So the organiser then has to give grounds for the ejection of any player. And the grounds cannot be I do not like the players trainer or parent.

In KL Open, Peter asks you to email him first so he can weed out people he does not like. Judge and Jury. No banking details are given and so no fee can be paid and no contract established. I therefore submit that this makes the tournament an invitational and not an open. If that is the case the name KL Open is misleading. I hope MCF will look into this case.

Let me give you an example. There was a girl called Ainaa Shafeenaz in Perak. A former State player. Her only fault was that she won the Presidency of her school chess club over the daughter of a PICA official. For that reason she was asked to leave a PICA tournament with the official citing organisers priviledge. That is not a valid reason. If we want our chess to progress this sort of corruption cannot be allowed anymore.

Call it KL invitational and the organisers can allow whoever they want. Then they will be within their rights.