In the first reference link, it shows Peter's desire to take the mantle from Dato Tan. And in the second he talks about his disappointment with Malaysian Open. Lets talk about the second reference first.
It seems to me that if the KL Open did not immediately follow the Malaysian Open, Peter would have had very very few players. I am not sure if Peter is even aware of the opinions about him from organisers and National Associations in the region. He rides on the coat tail of the Malaysian Open and then he attacks it's success.
So the story is out in the open and from Peter's own mouth. But isn't there something wrong with the story? Doesn't MCF belong to it's members? What about the player's say, the parent's say, the other trainers and coaches; the other academies? Don't we have a say?
The final piece of the puzzle. Now we can have a clearer picture of what has been happening to Malaysian chess. When FGM first came into the scene, I explained to many friends that we have no interest in the struggle for the Presidency. That is up to the members. All we want to see is that when we put up a proposal, we do not want it rejected for political reasons. That our proposals will be adjudicated purely on it's merit.
If we see that we will continue to invest our efforts, our contacts and our resources.
And so we started out with the Asean initiative and then followed it up with the Thematics. Both projects are towards the betterment of our players and helped to relieve the load of the parents. But both these initiatives were attacked with lies and slander.
FGM then tried to support our junior players by sponsoring their training to SEA games selection. And that lead to the attack on Zhuo Ren and Sumant. When Mark did well at National Junior and NAG, he too was attacked.
So that is the result of the politics in our chess community. The struggle for the Presidency. But why attack us? FGM has already said we have zero interest in that struggle. I guess it could be because they either do not believe me or they are seriously worried about our stance for an independent and professional MCF. Or both. This combined with the fact that they have no ideas on how to bring Malaysia to the next level means they have to tear down instead of building our future.
Let the members decide. Give them back their rights. Peter, focus on Roshan. He is your best player at the moment and if you help him succeed, it will say more about you than anything else can. As far as KL Open is concerned, it's not very convincing. Choose a date where you can stand on your own without using Hamid's contacts and work. If you then succeed, we may say that you deserve a chance to lead us.
But then again maybe not. There are other factors to consider after all. There is your lack of emotional intelligence, the fact that you think our minds are messy but cannot see that yours could be messier. That you think we are lowly when you do not have the nerve to play a real competition anymore.
For me, I want a leader who can think, has courage, have ideas, is independent and respect the contribution of its members. Who do you think you are to think you can insult the entire chess community and then say you want to lead us?
For the politics to "stop" we need to have the officials elected from the membership. At least then the non performers can be voted out. But that's another story.
Don't you think it's a little dumb to declare your intention this way Peter? Do you think we may want a leader with your little capacity to strategise or reason?