My Wikipedia Biography of Norman Tweed Whitaker
Sam Sloan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Norman Tweed Whitaker (b. April 9, 1890 in Philadelphia - died May,
1975 in Georgia) was an International Master of chess. He graduated
with a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania but was soon
thereafter disbarred from the practice of law.
By 1913, Whitaker was one of the strongest chess players in the United
States. He was scheduled to play a match for the U.S. Chess
Championship with Frank Marshall but for reasons unknown did not show
up for the scheduled match.
In 1928, Whitaker played first board for the United States in the
World Chess Olympiad. He played for the 1928 World Amateur Chess
Championship but lost to Max Euwe.
Whitaker was arrested several times for petty crimes and swindles,
including putting slugs into parking meters. He often brought suit for
false arrest. In 1932, Whitaker became notorious during the Lindbergh
kidnapping. During the Lindbergh Kidnapping, a former FBI Agent named
Gaston B. Means concocted a scheme to swindle some money from a
wealthy heiress by claiming to be in contact with the kidnappers. The
heiress agreed to pay ransom money in the amount of $100,000. Means
used Whitaker as the bagman to pick up the money. Both were arrested.
When asked what had happened to the money, Whitaker replied, "I do not
know and I wish I did". Both Whitaker and Means were convicted.
Whitaker got out after only 18 months in jail, but was soon arrested
for another crime for which he served 14 years on Alcatraz.
After his release from prison, Whitaker once again became one of the
top chess players in America and one of the most active players in
America and Europe. He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York. The last years of his
life were spent driving around the country in his Volkswagen Beetle
playing in weak tournaments he could win in the South. In 1961, he was
involved in a serious automobile accident in Arkansas in which his
friend Glenn Hartleb was killed, but Whitaker still continued to
compete actively until his death in 1975.
Books
Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
365 AUSGEWAHLTE ENDSPIELE/365 SELECTED ENDINGS: Eines Fur Jeden Tag Im
Jahr/One For Each Day of the Year/Schach-Chess-Deutsch & English by
Norman T. Whitaker and Glenn E. Hartleb (1959)
External links
Official FBI Story about Norman T. Whitaker
The Chess Games of Norman Tweed Whitaker
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Tweed_Whitaker"
Categories: 1890 births | Chess players | U.S. chess players | 1975
deaths
Spam...@yahoo.com
Sam Sloan wrote:
> Norman Tweed Whitaker
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
>
> Norman Tweed Whitaker (b. April 9, 1890 in Philadelphia - died May,
> 1975 in Georgia) was an International Master of chess. He graduated
> with a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania but was soon
> thereafter disbarred from the practice of law.
>
> By 1913, Whitaker was one of the strongest chess players in the United
> States. He was scheduled
"Scheduled?" You make it sound like a side event at a Goichberg
tourney.
to play a match for the U.S. Chess
> Championship with Frank Marshall but for reasons unknown did not show
> up for the scheduled match.
Poor Frank waited an hour and Goich gave him the point?
> In 1928, Whitaker played first board for the United States in the
> World Chess Olympiad. He played for the 1928 World Amateur Chess
> Championship but lost to Max Euwe.
And Mattison. And Carls. And....
> Whitaker was arrested several times for petty crimes and swindles,
> including putting slugs into parking meters.
And child molestation. Why doesn't Sloan mention that?
He often brought suit for
> false arrest. In 1932, Whitaker became notorious during the Lindbergh
> kidnapping. During the Lindbergh Kidnapping, a former FBI Agent named
> Gaston B. Means concocted a scheme to swindle some money from a
> wealthy heiress by claiming to be in contact with the kidnappers. The
> heiress agreed to pay ransom money in the amount of $100,000. Means
> used Whitaker as the bagman to pick up the money. Both were arrested.
> When asked what had happened to the money, Whitaker replied, "I do not
> know and I wish I did". Both Whitaker and Means were convicted.
> Whitaker got out after only 18 months in jail, but was soon arrested
> for another crime for which he served 14 years on Alcatraz.
These would be the 14 years between 1935 and 1937?
> After his release from prison, Whitaker once again became one of the
> top chess players in America...
Reshevsky, Fine, Kashdan, Bisguier, Horowitz, Evans, WHITAKER?!?
and one of the most active players in
> America and Europe. He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
> Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York.
And was arrested for child molestation. Why doesn't Sloan mention that?
The last years of his
> life were spent driving around the country in his Volkswagen Beetle
> playing in weak tournaments he could win in the South. In 1961, he was
> involved in a serious automobile accident in Arkansas in which his
> friend Glenn Hartleb was killed, but Whitaker still continued to
> compete actively until his death in 1975.
>
> Books
> Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
> by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
A book Sloan has obviously not read.
parrt...@cs.com
> top chess players in America...
Reshevsky, Fine, Kashdan, Bisguier, Horowitz, Evans, WHITAKER?!? --
Neil Brennen
GM Larry Evans once told me Whitaker had such a big ego that he was
trying to arrange a title match with Max Euwe to fill the void left by
the death of Alekhine in 1946.
Sam Sloan
wrote:
>> After his release from prison, Whitaker once again became one of the
>> top chess players in America...
>
>Reshevsky, Fine, Kashdan, Bisguier, Horowitz, Evans, WHITAKER?!? --
>Neil Brennen
>
>GM Larry Evans once told me Whitaker had such a big ego that he was
>trying to arrange a title match with Max Euwe to fill the void left by
>the death of Alekhine in 1946.
>
Top is a relative term. Sam Sloan is one of the top chess players in
the United States because there are 20 million chess players in the
United States and Sam Sloan is in the top 5,000.
However, I can easily defend my statement that when Whitaker got out
of Alcatraz Prison he was once again one of the top chess players in
the United States.
Whitaker got out in 1947. The reason I remember this is that there was
a very important letter to the editor in Chess Life a few years ago.
The letter writer was one of the organizers to the 1947 US Open in
Corpus Cristi, Texas. He wrote that while the tournament was being
organized word was received from the President of the USCF that
Whitaker had just gotten out of Alcatraz and he was in the process of
driving his car from San Francisco to Corpus Christi, Texas to play in
the US Open Chess Championship. The president of the USCF instructed
the organizers of the US Open that this man was a criminal and
therefore he should not be allowed to play.
However, the organizers held a meeting and decided that if this man
has served 14 years on Alcatraz Island, then he has paid his debt to
society and therefore he should be allowed to play chess.
I am 100% certain that this was about the US Open in Corpus Cristi,
which was held in 1947
In 1947, Larry Evans was only 15 years old and Whitaker, who was rated
2420 by Elo, was still probably better. Even in 1960, a rating of 2420
was enough to put a player in the top 12 in the US and get him into
the US Closed Championship. In 1947, with the exception of Reshevsky,
Fine, Denker, Kashdan, Kupchik and Horowitz and perhaps one or two
others I doubt there was anybody better than Whitaker.
Another question is in about 1906 Whitaker played two matches with
Jackson Showalter, who was US Champion at the time. Showalter won.
Were these matches for the US Championship? Does anybody know?
Sam Sloan
Taylor Kingston
that Wikipedia's editors should remove it immediately. I have flagged
just a few that leaped out from a quick skim:
Sam Sloan wrote:
> Norman Tweed Whitaker
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
>
> Norman Tweed Whitaker (b. April 9, 1890 in Philadelphia - died May,
> 1975 in Georgia) was an International Master of chess. He graduated
> with a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania but was soon
> thereafter disbarred from the practice of law.
>
> By 1913, Whitaker was one of the strongest chess players in the United
> States.
1913? Very debatable. At New York 1913 he scored only 5½-7½,
sharing =8-9th with Tenewurzel, behind Capablanca, Marshall, Jaffe,
Janowski, Chajes, Stapfer and Kupchik, ahead of only the small fry
Kline, S. Rubinstein (*not* _the_ Rubinstein), Morrison, Liebenstein
and Zapoléon. In June 1916 he was dismantled by 56-year-old Jackson
Showalter +1 -6 =0. It's hard to put Whitaker in the US top 10 before,
say,1918.
> In 1928, Whitaker played first board for the United States in the
> World Chess Olympiad.
Whitaker never played on an Olympiad team. The 1928 US team was
Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor, Tholfsen and Hanauer.
> He played for the 1928 World Amateur Chess
> Championship but lost to Max Euwe.
It would be more accurate to say that Whitaker finished =4-6th, with
Golmayo and Treybal, scoring 9½-5½, behind Euwe (12-3), Przepiorka
(11-4) and Matisons (10-5). Whitaker lost 4 games, to Euwe, Przepiorka,
Matisons, and Carls.
> Whitaker was arrested several times for petty crimes and swindles,
> including putting slugs into parking meters.
Also twice for felony grand theft (auto), not to mention for sending
narcotics through the mail, and sexual molestation of a minor. Rather
more than "petty" crimes.
> In 1932, Whitaker became notorious during the Lindbergh
> kidnapping. During the Lindbergh Kidnapping, a former FBI Agent named
> Gaston B. Means concocted a scheme to swindle some money from a
> wealthy heiress by claiming to be in contact with the kidnappers. The
> heiress agreed to pay ransom money in the amount of $100,000.
$104,000 actually.
> Means
> used Whitaker as the bagman to pick up the money.
Whitaker's main role was to pose as one of the "gangsters" involved
in the kidnapping.
> Whitaker got out after only 18 months in jail, but was soon arrested
> for another crime for which he served 14 years on Alcatraz.
Whitaker never served 14 years in any prison for any one crime. I'm
not sure his total prison time amounted to 14 years in all. His stay in
Alcatraz lasted only from late 1935 to late December 1936 or early
January 1937.
> After his release from prison, Whitaker once again became one of the
> top chess players in America and one of the most active players in
> America and Europe.
Nonsense. He was a washed-up has-been trying to convince people he
was still good.
> He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
> Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York.
Where he showed that he was definitely way over the hill, scoring
6-13 (+4 -11 =4) to finish 16th of 20, 9 points behind winner Herman
Steiner, ahead of only the immortals Howard, Almgren, Suraci, and
Janes, and beating only other tail-enders. In 1951 his USCF rating was
only 2180.
> The last years of his
> life were spent driving around the country in his Volkswagen Beetle
> playing in weak tournaments he could win in the South.
Also in attempts to undermine the fledgling USCF and encourage racist
policies in US chess. Oh, and let's not forget his ongoing pedophilia
-- at age 68, he tried to persuade the parents of a 14-year-old girl
that she should marry him. They wisely refused.
He also sought out other has-beens who might help him get the IM
title. He managed to draw a short match with Saemisch in 1960, who
later hinted that he threw games to humor the "mad American."
> Books
> Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
> by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
Sam shows his customary depth of research, by citing a book he
obviously has not read.
Spam...@yahoo.com
Sam Sloan wrote:
> However, I can easily defend my statement that when Whitaker got out
> of Alcatraz Prison he was once again one of the top chess players in
> the United States.
>
> Whitaker got out in 1947.
No, 1937, as Dr. Hilbert's book will tell you. Whitaker served two
years.
> The reason I
This is what separates the Sloans and Innes' of the world from
historians. A historian is interested in what happened and why; a Sloan
or Innes wants to make sure we know they are in some way part of what
happened.
remember this is that there was
> a very important letter to the editor in Chess Life a few years ago.
> The letter writer was one of the organizers to the 1947 US Open in
> Corpus Cristi, Texas. He wrote that while the tournament was being
> organized word was received from the President of the USCF that
> Whitaker had just gotten out of Alcatraz and he was in the process of
> driving his car from San Francisco to Corpus Christi, Texas to play in
> the US Open Chess Championship. The president of the USCF instructed
> the organizers of the US Open that this man was a criminal and
> therefore he should not be allowed to play.
>
> However, the organizers held a meeting and decided that if this man
> has served 14 years on Alcatraz Island, then he has paid his debt to
> society and therefore he should be allowed to play chess.
Except he did not serve 14 years on the Rock.
> I am 100% certain that this was about the US Open in Corpus Cristi,
> which was held in 1947
>
> In 1947, Larry Evans was only 15 years old and Whitaker, who was rated
> 2420 by Elo,
Elo rated Whitaker three years before the USCF rating system was
introduced?
was still probably better. Even in 1960, a rating of 2420
> was enough to put a player in the top 12 in the US and get him into
> the US Closed Championship. In 1947, with the exception of Reshevsky,
> Fine, Denker, Kashdan, Kupchik and Horowitz and perhaps one or two
> others I doubt there was anybody better than Whitaker.
>
> Another question is in about 1906 Whitaker played two matches with
> Jackson Showalter, who was US Champion at the time. Showalter won.
> Were these matches for the US Championship? Does anybody know?
Sammy, between doses of lithium please explain to us why Showalter
would play a match against a 16 year old Philadelphia schoolboy. Also,
please explain why you strongarmed a copy of Dr. Hilbert's book from
him if you weren't going to read it.
Elton Jones
14-year-old girl
that she should marry him. They wisely refused.>
Sounds like he was Sam Sloan's mentor?
Taylor Kingston
So, Sam -- when may we expect those "immediate corrections" you are
supposedly famous for? Have you updated your Wikipedia entry to remove
the errors? I realize that would not leave much, but a man's gotta do
what a man's gotta do.
Spam...@yahoo.com
Taylor Kingston wrote:
> So, Sam -- when may we expect those "immediate corrections" you are
> supposedly famous for? Have you updated your Wikipedia entry to remove
> the errors? I realize that would not leave much, but a man's gotta do
> what a man's gotta do.
Taylor, the man is insane. His revision now claims that Whitaker spent
14 years on the Rock for some other crime.
Taylor Kingston
Spam...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Taylor, the man is insane. His revision now claims that Whitaker spent
> 14 years on the Rock for some other crime.
For the sake of the unwary, I put a warning label on the Wikipedia
entry, something like those on cigarettes and dangerous drugs.
David Richerby
``Reading this article while pregnant may harm your unborn child?''
Dave.
--
David Richerby Slimy Dangerous Spoon (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a piece of cutlery but it could
explode at any minute and it's covered
in goo!
Sam Sloan
<tkin...@chittenden.com> wrote:
>
> So, Sam -- when may we expect those "immediate corrections" you are
>supposedly famous for? Have you updated your Wikipedia entry to remove
>the errors? I realize that would not leave much, but a man's gotta do
>what a man's gotta do.
Taylor Kingston has to be the most amazing and arrogant assholes ever
to grace these groups. He has read exactly one book on the subject
which he otherwise knows nothing about, and with that information he
claims that he knows everything about the subject and that nobody else
knows anything.
There are two pictures of Sam Sloan in the book. They are on pages 211
and 246. I am the source for some of the material in the book. Taylor
Kingston probably never met Norman T. Whitaker and certainly knows
nothing about him.
The fact is that I can just leaf through the book and find numerous
errors. However, I am not going to do what Taylor Kingston does, which
go through a book by somebody he does not like, list a bunch of errors
which he claims exist in the book, and then spend the next decade over
and over again attacking the book for the trivial errors which he
found.
The book by John S. Hilbert is a great work. It is true that it
contains errors, but any book which is 481 pages long in small print
with each page filled with information is bound to contain errors.
Just to cite one example,. on page v. is a picture which the author
claims is a picture of Whitaker. However, Whitaker is not in the
picture.
>Taylor Kingston wrote:
>> There are so many errors in this, both of omission and commission,
>> that Wikipedia's editors should remove it immediately. I have flagged
>> just a few that leaped out from a quick skim:
One big advantage to Wikipedia is that if you disagree with what
somebody else posted there, you can correct it. However, Taylor
Kingston did not do that. Instead he used Wikipedia as a pedestal to
attack me. However, all of his corrections have since been removed by
a Wikipedia administrator.
>> Sam Sloan wrote:
>> > Norman Tweed Whitaker
>> > From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
>> >
>> > Norman Tweed Whitaker (b. April 9, 1890 in Philadelphia - died May,
>> > 1975 in Georgia) was an International Master of chess. He graduated
>> > with a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania but was soon
>> > thereafter disbarred from the practice of law.
In this paragraph I made two errors which Taylor Kingston did not
notice.
Actually, Whitaker did not die in Georgia, but he is buried there. He
died just across the state line in Phenix City, Alabama. Also, he got
his undergraduate degree from the University of Pennsylvania. His law
degree was from Georgetown University.
>> > By 1913, Whitaker was one of the strongest chess players in the United
>> > States.
Absolutely correct. I know this because I went through every issue on
American Chess Bulletin (1904-1963) in the Mechanics Institute Library
and there were many articles about Whitaker even earlier than 1913.
Of course, Taylor Kingston has never read American Chess Bulletin and
he thinks he knows everything because of the one book he has read.
>> 1913? Very debatable. At New York 1913 he scored only 5=BD-7=BD,
>> sharing =3D8-9th with Tenewurzel, behind Capablanca, Marshall, Jaffe,
>> Janowski, Chajes, Stapfer and Kupchik, ahead of only the small fry
>> Kline, S. Rubinstein (*not* _the_ Rubinstein), Morrison, Liebenstein
>> and Zapol=E9on. In June 1916 he was dismantled by 56-year-old Jackson
>> Showalter +1 -6 =3D0. It's hard to put Whitaker in the US top 10 before,
>> say,1918.
The fact that Whitaker played in a round robin tournament in 1913 with
Capablanca, Marshall, Jaffe, Janowski, Chajes and Kupchik, who were
six of the best players in the world at the time, should be enough to
tell you that Whitaker was one of the best players in the country, .
>> > In 1928, Whitaker played first board for the United States in the
>> > World Chess Olympiad.
Absolutely correct. Whitaker won the National Chess Championship in
1927, and therefore he was first board on the 1928 Olympiad team.
>> Whitaker never played on an Olympiad team. The 1928 US team was
>> Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor, Tholfsen and Hanauer.
Wrong. The 1928 US team was Whitaker, Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor,
Tholfsen and Hanauer.
Had Kingston read more than one book on the subject, he would have
known that there are six players on an Olympiad team. However, the
1928 event was in a different format from other Olympiads. In the
first place, it was not called an Olympiad, even though it has since
then been referred to as an Olympiad. Instead, it was called simply
the International Team Tournament.
The top player from each country played a round robin with the top
players from all the other countries. That is the reason why Whitaker
played in the same section with Euwe, who was clearly the best player
in Holland. The remaining players played in a more traditional team
format.
I agree that Kashdan and Steiner were eventually better than Whitaker,
but Whitaker was older than they were and perhaps for that reason he
was placed on top board.
>> > He played for the 1928 World Amateur Chess
>> > Championship but lost to Max Euwe.
>>
>> It would be more accurate to say that Whitaker finished =3D4-6th, with
>> Golmayo and Treybal, scoring 9=BD-5=BD, behind Euwe (12-3), Przepiorka
>> (11-4) and Matisons (10-5). Whitaker lost 4 games, to Euwe, Przepiorka,
>> Matisons, and Carls.
What I wrote is exactly correct. I wrote: "He played for the 1928
World Amateur Chess Championship but lost to Max Euwe." That is
entirely correct. Kingston wants me to add that Whitaker also lost to
Przepiorka, Matisons, and Carls. What would be the point to that?
Although they were the best players in their respective countries at
the time, they are unknown today.
>> > Whitaker was arrested several times for petty crimes and swindles,
>> > including putting slugs into parking meters.
>>
>> Also twice for felony grand theft (auto), not to mention for sending
>> narcotics through the mail, and sexual molestation of a minor. Rather
>> more than "petty" crimes.
As I understand it, Whitaker did not actually steal the cars, although
he helped others. I really do not know much about this, so I will
leave this one to Taylor Kingston who is more familiar with such
matters.
>> > In 1932, Whitaker became notorious during the Lindbergh
>> > kidnapping. During the Lindbergh Kidnapping, a former FBI Agent named
>> > Gaston B. Means concocted a scheme to swindle some money from a
>> > wealthy heiress by claiming to be in contact with the kidnappers. The
>> > heiress agreed to pay ransom money in the amount of $100,000.
>>
>> $104,000 actually.
Not a big deal, especially since I was writing from memory, not
reading from a book.
>> > Means used Whitaker as the bagman to pick up the money.
>>
>> Whitaker's main role was to pose as one of the "gangsters" involved
>> in the kidnapping.
>>
>> > Whitaker got out after only 18 months in jail, but was soon arrested
>> > for another crime for which he served 14 years on Alcatraz.
>>
>> Whitaker never served 14 years in any prison for any one crime. I'm
>> not sure his total prison time amounted to 14 years in all.
Whitaker played no published games between 1931 and 1947. This tells
us that he was elsewhere during this period.
>>His stay in
>> Alcatraz lasted only from late 1935 to late December 1936 or early
>> January 1937.
I was quoting from a letter which was published in Chess Life magazine
in about 1999. The author wrote that Whitaker had served the time on
Alcatraz. On pages 301 and 302, Hilbert also says that the same writer
wrote that Whitaker had served the time on Alcatraz.
>> > After his release from prison, Whitaker once again became one of the
>> > top chess players in America and one of the most active players in
>> > America and Europe.
>>
>> Nonsense. He was a washed-up has-been trying to convince people he
>> was still good.
Whitaker got good scores in several US Opens after his release from
prison, a fact not noted in Hilbert's book, and since Kingston knows
nothing other than what is written in Hilbert's book, he does not know
about this.
>> > He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
>> > Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York.
>> Where he showed that he was definitely way over the hill, scoring
>> 6-13 (+4 -11 =3D4) to finish 16th of 20, 9 points behind winner Herman
>> Steiner, ahead of only the immortals Howard, Almgren, Suraci, and
>> Janes, and beating only other tail-enders.
The fact that Whitaker got into the US Closed Championship is enough
to show that he was one of the top players in the country, even though
he got a poor result in the tournament. Kingston's statement would be
like saying that because Bobby Fischer did poorly in Buenos Aires
1960, he was a weak player.
>>In 1951 his USCF rating was only 2180.
The USCF rating system was just getting off the ground and I do not
think this means much.
>> > The last years of his
>> > life were spent driving around the country in his Volkswagen Beetle
>> > playing in weak tournaments he could win in the South.
>>
>> Also in attempts to undermine the fledgling USCF and encourage racist
>> policies in US chess. Oh, and let's not forget his ongoing pedophilia
>> -- at age 68, he tried to persuade the parents of a 14-year-old girl
>> that she should marry him. They wisely refused.
As far as I know, this was not illegal.
>> He also sought out other has-beens who might help him get the IM
>> title. He managed to draw a short match with Saemisch in 1960, who
>> later hinted that he threw games to humor the "mad American."
Since Taylor Kingston does not know much about chess, he does not know
that by 1960 Fritz Saemisch was completely insane. Saemisch would get
invited to international tournaments where in every game he would play
only about ten moves and then sit transfixed for two hours until he
lost on time. Naturally, since Saemisch had the grandmaster title,
organizers would invite him so as to manufacture titles for others.
Obviously, Whitaker would contact Saemisch to get the international
title for himself. Whether Whitaker actually played Saemisch I do not
know, although Whitaker told me that he was trying to arrange a match
with Saemisch. One question left unanswered by Hilbert's book is
exactly how and when did Whitaker get the International Master title.
I have asked many FIDE officials this question, and nobody seems to
know.
>> > Books
>> > Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
>> > by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
>>
>> Sam shows his customary depth of research, by citing a book he
>> obviously has not read.
Not only have I read the book but I am one of the sources for the
book. What is really annoying is that I had to get the book out of
storage and take the time to write this in order to be able to respond
to the ridiculous claims made by Taylor Kingston.
Sam Sloan
Chess One
"Sam Sloan" <sl...@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:436cf20f....@ca.news.verio.net...
>>> > In 1928, Whitaker played first board for the United States in the
>>> > World Chess Olympiad.
>
> Absolutely correct. Whitaker won the National Chess Championship in
> 1927, and therefore he was first board on the 1928 Olympiad team.
>
>>> Whitaker never played on an Olympiad team. The 1928 US team was
>>> Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor, Tholfsen and Hanauer.
>
> Wrong. The 1928 US team was Whitaker, Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor,
> Tholfsen and Hanauer.
And US came 2nd overall in 1928, behind Hungary, third was Poland. I note
that it was not called the Olympiad officially until 1952 - and now we
retrofit that designation over the previous title as you note, which was:
International Team Championship.
The rules were rather slack at this time and BCF [for example] included an
Indian national [Sultan Khan] and later the New Zealander R. G. Wade ont
their team.
Generally each team had 6 players attending 4 boards.
This particular event, 1928 varied from the one the year before in London
[the first of 16 teams], in that only amateur players were allowed to
compete. This rule was unpopular and was rescinded before the next event,
the third 'Olympiad'.
USA places for successive years:
1927 - did not compete
1928 - 2nd
1930 - 6th
1931 - 1st
1933 - 1st
1935 - 1st
1937 - 1st
1939 - did not compete
> Had Kingston read more than one book on the subject, he would have
> known that there are six players on an Olympiad team. However, the
> 1928 event was in a different format from other Olympiads. In the
> first place, it was not called an Olympiad, even though it has since
> then been referred to as an Olympiad. Instead, it was called simply
> the International Team Tournament.
Yes. Anne Sunnucks is very clear on it. But its an honest, if misleading,
mistake, like saying that Euwe was a WCh candidate.
Phil Innes
Spam...@yahoo.com
Sam Sloan wrote:
I'm bored, so I'll just swat a few of Sloan's slow-pitch softballs.
> On 31 Oct 2005 05:39:27 -0800, "Taylor Kingston"
> <tkin...@chittenden.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > So, Sam -- when may we expect those "immediate corrections" you are
> >supposedly famous for? Have you updated your Wikipedia entry to remove
> >the errors? I realize that would not leave much, but a man's gotta do
> >what a man's gotta do.
>
> Taylor Kingston has to be the most amazing and arrogant assholes ever
> to grace these groups. He has read exactly one book on the subject
> which he otherwise knows nothing about, and with that information he
> claims that he knows everything about the subject and that nobody else
> knows anything.
>
> There are two pictures of Sam Sloan in the book. They are on pages 211
> and 246. I am the source for some of the material in the book.
Very little, as it turns out, aside from the photograph.
Taylor
> Kingston probably never met Norman T. Whitaker and certainly knows
> nothing about him.
>
> The fact is that I can just leaf through the book and find numerous
> errors.
Here come those slow pitches, folks.
However, I am not going to do what Taylor Kingston does, which
> go through a book by somebody he does not like, list a bunch of errors
> which he claims exist in the book, and then spend the next decade over
> and over again attacking the book for the trivial errors which he
> found.
>
> The book by John S. Hilbert is a great work. It is true that it
> contains errors, but any book which is 481 pages long in small print
> with each page filled with information is bound to contain errors.
>
> Just to cite one example,. on page v. is a picture which the author
> claims is a picture of Whitaker. However, Whitaker is not in the
> picture.
The 1931 tournament photo bears a striking likeness to Whitaker's other
photos.
> >Taylor Kingston wrote:
> >> There are so many errors in this, both of omission and commission,
> >> that Wikipedia's editors should remove it immediately. I have flagged
> >> just a few that leaped out from a quick skim:
>
> One big advantage to Wikipedia is that if you disagree with what
> somebody else posted there, you can correct it. However, Taylor
> Kingston did not do that. Instead he used Wikipedia as a pedestal to
> attack me. However, all of his corrections have since been removed by
> a Wikipedia administrator.
As has been pointed out elsewhere, Sloan is lying.
By that reasoning, Eric Moskow was one of the best players in the
world, since he played in a tournament with Susan Polgar!
Correct the false impression that Euwe was the only person who beat
him.
> Although they were the best players in their respective countries at
> the time, they are unknown today.
>
> >> > Whitaker was arrested several times for petty crimes and swindles,
> >> > including putting slugs into parking meters.
> >>
> >> Also twice for felony grand theft (auto), not to mention for sending
> >> narcotics through the mail, and sexual molestation of a minor. Rather
> >> more than "petty" crimes.
>
> As I understand it, Whitaker did not actually steal the cars, although
> he helped others.
Such as his family members. Dr. Hilbert devotes a great deal of ink to
this in Shady Side; I wonder why Sloan doesn't remember it?
I really do not know much about this, so I will
> leave this one to Taylor Kingston who is more familiar with such
> matters.
>
> >> > In 1932, Whitaker became notorious during the Lindbergh
> >> > kidnapping. During the Lindbergh Kidnapping, a former FBI Agent named
> >> > Gaston B. Means concocted a scheme to swindle some money from a
> >> > wealthy heiress by claiming to be in contact with the kidnappers. The
> >> > heiress agreed to pay ransom money in the amount of $100,000.
> >>
> >> $104,000 actually.
>
> Not a big deal, especially since I was writing from memory, not
> reading from a book.
Yes, and it pales beside the 14 years you cram between 1935 and 1937.
> >> > Means used Whitaker as the bagman to pick up the money.
> >>
> >> Whitaker's main role was to pose as one of the "gangsters" involved
> >> in the kidnapping.
> >>
> >> > Whitaker got out after only 18 months in jail, but was soon arrested
> >> > for another crime for which he served 14 years on Alcatraz.
> >>
> >> Whitaker never served 14 years in any prison for any one crime. I'm
> >> not sure his total prison time amounted to 14 years in all.
>
> Whitaker played no published games between 1931 and 1947. This tells
> us that he was elsewhere during this period.
LOL!
> >>His stay in
> >> Alcatraz lasted only from late 1935 to late December 1936 or early
> >> January 1937.
>
> I was quoting from a letter which was published in Chess Life magazine
> in about 1999. The author wrote that Whitaker had served the time on
> Alcatraz. On pages 301 and 302, Hilbert also says that the same writer
> wrote that Whitaker had served the time on Alcatraz.
LOL!
> >> > After his release from prison, Whitaker once again became one of the
> >> > top chess players in America and one of the most active players in
> >> > America and Europe.
> >>
> >> Nonsense. He was a washed-up has-been trying to convince people he
> >> was still good.
>
> Whitaker got good scores in several US Opens after his release from
> prison, a fact not noted in Hilbert's book, and since Kingston knows
> nothing other than what is written in Hilbert's book, he does not know
> about this.
>
> >> > He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
> >> > Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York.
>
> >> Where he showed that he was definitely way over the hill, scoring
> >> 6-13 (+4 -11 =3D4) to finish 16th of 20, 9 points behind winner Herman
> >> Steiner, ahead of only the immortals Howard, Almgren, Suraci, and
> >> Janes, and beating only other tail-enders.
>
> The fact that Whitaker got into the US Closed Championship is enough
> to show that he was one of the top players in the country, even though
> he got a poor result in the tournament.
No, it shows that he could travel to find a preliminary event he could
play in and win. The 1948 tournament had regional qualifiers. He could
have played in Philadelphia, for instance, but the field there was too
strong for him. Or is Sloan going to argue that Sven Almgren was one of
the top players in the US?
Kingston's statement would be
> like saying that because Bobby Fischer did poorly in Buenos Aires
> 1960, he was a weak player.
Analogies don't become you, Scammy.
John and I know, we think. Look for our second book on Whitaker in a
couple of years.
> >> > Books
> >> > Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
> >> > by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
> >>
> >> Sam shows his customary depth of research, by citing a book he
> >> obviously has not read.
>
> Not only have I read the book but I am one of the sources for the
> book. What is really annoying is that I had to get the book out of
> storage and take the time to write this in order to be able to respond
> to the ridiculous claims made by Taylor Kingston.
Now that you have the book, try reading it.
Taylor Kingston
> One big advantage to Wikipedia is that if you disagree with what
> somebody else posted there, you can correct it. However, Taylor
> Kingston did not do that.
No kidding? I guess then that the corrections I remember writing and
signing my name to were done by someone else named Taylor Kingston.
> Instead he used Wikipedia as a pedestal to
> attack me. However, all of his corrections have since been removed by
> a Wikipedia administrator.
Look again, Sam. My corrections have been incorporated into the
entry, replacing false information entered by you.
> The fact that Whitaker played in a round robin tournament in 1913 with
> Capablanca, Marshall, Jaffe, Janowski, Chajes and Kupchik, who were
> six of the best players in the world at the time, should be enough to
> tell you that Whitaker was one of the best players in the country, .
In 1913 Whitaker was not in the class of those six, and it's quite a
stretch to put Jaffe, Chajes and Kupchik among the "best in the world."
> Whitaker won the National Chess Championship in
> 1927, and therefore he was first board on the 1928 Olympiad team.
> The 1928 US team was Whitaker, Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor,
> Tholfsen and Hanauer.
Sam confuses the team Olympiad with the World Amateur Championship,
an individual tournament. Whitaker played in the latter, never in the
former.
> 1928 event was in a different format from other Olympiads. In the
> first place, it was not called an Olympiad, even though it has since
> then been referred to as an Olympiad. Instead, it was called simply
> the International Team Tournament.
Quite true (for once).
> The top player from each country played a round robin with the top
> players from all the other countries. That is the reason why Whitaker
> played in the same section with Euwe, who was clearly the best player
> in Holland. The remaining players played in a more traditional team
> format.
Thank you for confirming my point that Whitaker did not play on the
Olympiad team.
> What I wrote is exactly correct. I wrote: "He played for the 1928
> World Amateur Chess Championship but lost to Max Euwe." That is
> entirely correct.
It's very incomplete and gives a false impression. In describing a
tournament, one does not say that the 5th-place finisher lost to the
winner, one says he finished 5th.
> Kingston wants me to add that Whitaker also lost to
> Przepiorka, Matisons, and Carls. What would be the point to that?
> Although they were the best players in their respective countries at
> the time, they are unknown today.
Ah, that would explain why I did not know of them.
> >> > Whitaker was arrested several times for petty crimes and swindles,
> >> > including putting slugs into parking meters.
> >>
> >> Also twice for felony grand theft (auto), not to mention for sending
> >> narcotics through the mail, and sexual molestation of a minor. Rather
> >> more than "petty" crimes.
>
> As I understand it, Whitaker did not actually steal the cars, although
> he helped others.
Read "Shady Side" chapter 4. The 1921 theft of the Franklin Touring
Car was Whitaker's brainchild from start to finish. I believe he
personally used acid to burn off the ID number.
> >> > In 1932, Whitaker became notorious during the Lindbergh
> >> > kidnapping. During the Lindbergh Kidnapping, a former FBI Agent named
> >> > Gaston B. Means concocted a scheme to swindle some money from a
> >> > wealthy heiress by claiming to be in contact with the kidnappers. The
> >> > heiress agreed to pay ransom money in the amount of $100,000.
> >>
> >> $104,000 actually.
>
> Not a big deal, especially since I was writing from memory, not
> reading from a book.
It's not a big deal in a mere newgroup post, but it *_is_* a big deal
when put into an encyclopedia article. One does not write a reference
article, intended to inform others accurately, using only a memory
which has been shown over and over to be seriously flawed. One does
careful research.
> >> Whitaker never served 14 years in any prison for any one crime. I'm
> >> not sure his total prison time amounted to 14 years in all.
>
> Whitaker played no published games between 1931 and 1947. This tells
> us that he was elsewhere during this period.
And you think this proves he spent 14 years in Alcatraz??
> >>His stay in
> >> Alcatraz lasted only from late 1935 to late December 1936 or early
> >> January 1937.
>
> I was quoting from a letter which was published in Chess Life magazine
> in about 1999.
And Hilbert was reporting from Whitaker's actual prison records and
personal papers.
> The author wrote that Whitaker had served the time on
> Alcatraz. On pages 301 and 302, Hilbert also says that the same writer
> wrote that Whitaker had served the time on Alcatraz.
There is nothing about any 14 years in Alcatraz on those pages.
> Whitaker got good scores in several US Opens after his release from
> prison,
That hardly makes him one of America's top players of the time.
> >> > He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
> >> > Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York.
>
> >> Where he showed that he was definitely way over the hill, scoring
> >> 6-13 (+4 -11 =3D4) to finish 16th of 20, 9 points behind winner Herman
> >> Steiner, ahead of only the immortals Howard, Almgren, Suraci, and
> >> Janes, and beating only other tail-enders.
>
> The fact that Whitaker got into the US Closed Championship is enough
> to show that he was one of the top players in the country, even though
> he got a poor result in the tournament. Kingston's statement would be
> like saying that because Bobby Fischer did poorly in Buenos Aires
> 1960, he was a weak player.
Nonsense. Fischer never had another result remotely as bad as Buenos
Aires 1960 and went on to become world champion. Whitaker had no such
post-1948 success, never played in another US Championship after 1948,
with good reason.
> >>In 1951 his USCF rating was only 2180.
>
> The USCF rating system was just getting off the ground and I do not
> think this means much.
Dr. Elo's math says it does.
> >> Also in attempts to undermine the fledgling USCF and encourage racist
> >> policies in US chess. Oh, and let's not forget his ongoing pedophilia
> >> -- at age 68, he tried to persuade the parents of a 14-year-old girl
> >> that she should marry him. They wisely refused.
>
> As far as I know, this was not illegal.
When in 1950 he sexually molested a minor, it certainly was illegal.
His racism and pedophilic desires, while not illegal, do show his
character. I think this should be included in an encyclopedia entry.
> >> He also sought out other has-beens who might help him get the IM
> >> title. He managed to draw a short match with Saemisch in 1960, who
> >> later hinted that he threw games to humor the "mad American."
>
> Since Taylor Kingston does not know much about chess, he does not know
> that by 1960 Fritz Saemisch was completely insane.
Debatable. Eccentric and distracted, yes, but it's a stretch to say
insane, as a September 1968 article by Donner mades clear ('Old Chess
Player', reprinted in "The King" (NIC 1997) pages 91-93).
> Saemisch would get
> invited to international tournaments where in every game he would play
> only about ten moves and then sit transfixed for two hours until he
> lost on time. Naturally, since Saemisch had the grandmaster title,
> organizers would invite him so as to manufacture titles for others.
> Obviously, Whitaker would contact Saemisch to get the international
> title for himself.
Thank you for supporting my point about the dubious means Whitaker
used to get the IM title.
> >> > Books
> >> > Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
> >> > by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
> Not only have I read the book but I am one of the sources for the
> book. What is really annoying is that I had to get the book out of
> storage and take the time to write this in order to be able to respond
> to the ridiculous claims made by Taylor Kingston.
What an imposition! Sam wants to write a reference article about
Whitaker, and we have the gall to suggest that he consult the only
biography about him. Next, people will be expecting their ministers to
consult the Bible when they talk about Jesus. What's the world coming
to?!
Sam Sloan
<tkin...@chittenden.com> wrote:
>Sam Sloan wrote:
>> One big advantage to Wikipedia is that if you disagree with what
>> somebody else posted there, you can correct it. However, Taylor
>> Kingston did not do that.
>
> No kidding? I guess then that the corrections I remember writing and
>signing my name to were done by someone else named Taylor Kingston.
You posted as 69.171.206.182 . We know from your style and your
history of personal attacks that it was you. What you did was improper
and would get you banned if you were registered with Wikipedia, which
you are not.
>> Instead he used Wikipedia as a pedestal to
>> attack me. However, all of his corrections have since been removed by
>> a Wikipedia administrator.
>
> Look again, Sam. My corrections have been incorporated into the
>entry, replacing false information entered by you.
All he did was take the neutral position of eleminating everything
except those points on which we both agree, but in so doing he cut the
heart out of the article.
>> The fact that Whitaker played in a round robin tournament in 1913 with
>> Capablanca, Marshall, Jaffe, Janowski, Chajes and Kupchik, who were
>> six of the best players in the world at the time, should be enough to
>> tell you that Whitaker was one of the best players in the country, .
>
> In 1913 Whitaker was not in the class of those six, and it's quite a
>stretch to put Jaffe, Chajes and Kupchik among the "best in the world."
Kupchik certainly was among the best in the world until the 1940s and
by the standards on 1913 Chajes and Jaffe wrre both top level players.
Kupchik is rated 2480 by Elo, but he was clearly stronger. Chajes is
rated 2440 and Jaffe is rated 2430. All three of them defeated
Capablanca in tournament games.
>
>> Whitaker won the National Chess Championship in
>> 1927, and therefore he was first board on the 1928 Olympiad team.
>> The 1928 US team was Whitaker, Kashdan, H. Steiner, Factor,
>> Tholfsen and Hanauer.
>
> Sam confuses the team Olympiad with the World Amateur Championship,
>an individual tournament. Whitaker played in the latter, never in the
>former.
>
>> 1928 event was in a different format from other Olympiads. In the
>> first place, it was not called an Olympiad, even though it has since
>> then been referred to as an Olympiad. Instead, it was called simply
>> the International Team Tournament.
>
> Quite true (for once).
>
>> The top player from each country played a round robin with the top
>> players from all the other countries. That is the reason why Whitaker
>> played in the same section with Euwe, who was clearly the best player
>> in Holland. The remaining players played in a more traditional team
>> format.
>
> Thank you for confirming my point that Whitaker did not play on the
>Olympiad team.
Try to get this through your dim brain, stupid.
The 1928 World Amateur Championship and the 1928 International Team
Tournament were the same event, not two different events. They were
simply two different sections of the same tournament.
>> What I wrote is exactly correct. I wrote: "He played for the 1928
>> World Amateur Chess Championship but lost to Max Euwe." That is
>> entirely correct.
>
> It's very incomplete and gives a false impression. In describing a
>tournament, one does not say that the 5th-place finisher lost to the
>winner, one says he finished 5th.
It does not matter what "one" says. You should not purport to correct
something if it is not wrong.
Good. Then why do you not do so? You constantly lie, claiming that you
know things which you do not know.
>> >> Whitaker never served 14 years in any prison for any one crime. I'm
>> >> not sure his total prison time amounted to 14 years in all.
>>
>> Whitaker played no published games between 1931 and 1947. This tells
>> us that he was elsewhere during this period.
>
> And you think this proves he spent 14 years in Alcatraz??
>
>> >>His stay in
>> >> Alcatraz lasted only from late 1935 to late December 1936 or early
>> >> January 1937.
>>
>> I was quoting from a letter which was published in Chess Life magazine
>> in about 1999.
>
> And Hilbert was reporting from Whitaker's actual prison records and
>personal papers.
I do not know what Hilbert has, except that he has written that he has
a great volume of material. I doubt that he feels as certain of the
facts as you claim that he is.
>> The author wrote that Whitaker had served the time on
>> Alcatraz. On pages 301 and 302, Hilbert also says that the same writer
>> wrote that Whitaker had served the time on Alcatraz.
>
> There is nothing about any 14 years in Alcatraz on those pages.
Kindly tell me where exactly is the letter in Chess Life. I would like
to look it up, but I cannot remember what month and what year it was
published.
If you do not know exactly when it was published, then stop lying by
claiming that you do know.
>> Whitaker got good scores in several US Opens after his release from
>> prison,
>
> That hardly makes him one of America's top players of the time.
Why not?
>> >> > He played in many US Opens and in the 1948 U.S.
>> >> > Chess Championship in South Fallsburg, New York.
>>
>> >> Where he showed that he was definitely way over the hill, scoring
>> >> 6-13 (+4 -11 =3D4) to finish 16th of 20, 9 points behind winner Herman
>> >> Steiner, ahead of only the immortals Howard, Almgren, Suraci, and
>> >> Janes, and beating only other tail-enders.
>>
>> The fact that Whitaker got into the US Closed Championship is enough
>> to show that he was one of the top players in the country, even though
>> he got a poor result in the tournament. Kingston's statement would be
>> like saying that because Bobby Fischer did poorly in Buenos Aires
>> 1960, he was a weak player.
>
> Nonsense. Fischer never had another result remotely as bad as Buenos
>Aires 1960 and went on to become world champion. Whitaker had no such
>post-1948 success, never played in another US Championship after 1948,
>with good reason.
>
>> >>In 1951 his USCF rating was only 2180.
>>
>> The USCF rating system was just getting off the ground and I do not
>> think this means much.
>
> Dr. Elo's math says it does.
>
Here is the most amazing misstatement of all. Elo had nothing to do
with the 1951 USCF Rating list. Bill Byland did that, using the
Harkness System. Elo did not become involved with chess ratings until
1960.
>> >> Also in attempts to undermine the fledgling USCF and encourage racist
>> >> policies in US chess. Oh, and let's not forget his ongoing pedophilia
>> >> -- at age 68, he tried to persuade the parents of a 14-year-old girl
>> >> that she should marry him. They wisely refused.
>>
>> As far as I know, this was not illegal.
>
> When in 1950 he sexually molested a minor, it certainly was illegal.
>His racism and pedophilic desires, while not illegal, do show his
>character. I think this should be included in an encyclopedia entry.
It is still legal in some states for a 14 year old girl to marry with
her parents permission. I am not sure if these matters belong in
Wikipedia.
>> >> He also sought out other has-beens who might help him get the IM
>> >> title. He managed to draw a short match with Saemisch in 1960, who
>> >> later hinted that he threw games to humor the "mad American."
>>
>> Since Taylor Kingston does not know much about chess, he does not know
>> that by 1960 Fritz Saemisch was completely insane.
>
> Debatable. Eccentric and distracted, yes, but it's a stretch to say
>insane, as a September 1968 article by Donner mades clear ('Old Chess
>Player', reprinted in "The King" (NIC 1997) pages 91-93).
I have not read the article, so I can not comment. However, if you
look in old issues of Chess Informant you will see many international
events where Saemisch scored 0-9.
>> Saemisch would get
>> invited to international tournaments where in every game he would play
>> only about ten moves and then sit transfixed for two hours until he
>> lost on time. Naturally, since Saemisch had the grandmaster title,
>> organizers would invite him so as to manufacture titles for others.
>> Obviously, Whitaker would contact Saemisch to get the international
>> title for himself.
>
> Thank you for supporting my point about the dubious means Whitaker
>used to get the IM title.
Whitaker easily deserved the IM title by modern standards. Whitaker in
his prime was easily better than most IMs today.
>> >> > Books
>> >> > Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
>> >> > by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
>
>> Not only have I read the book but I am one of the sources for the
>> book. What is really annoying is that I had to get the book out of
>> storage and take the time to write this in order to be able to respond
>> to the ridiculous claims made by Taylor Kingston.
>
> What an imposition! Sam wants to write a reference article about
>Whitaker, and we have the gall to suggest that he consult the only
>biography about him. Next, people will be expecting their ministers to
>consult the Bible when they talk about Jesus. What's the world coming
>to?!
What is coming to that people such as myself who knew Whitaker unlike
you who did not know him feel we can write a short article about him.
I am really annoyed at myself for wasting a perfectly fine Saturday
responding to asinine attacks by Taylor Kingston.
Sam Sloan
Spam...@yahoo.com
Sam Sloan wrote:
(Snip idiotic nonsense from Sam Sloan)
> >> >> > Books
> >> >> > Shady side: The life and crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker, chessmaster
> >> >> > by John Samuel Hilbert (2000) ISBN 0939433575
> >
> >> Not only have I read the book but I am one of the sources for the
> >> book. What is really annoying is that I had to get the book out of
> >> storage and take the time to write this in order to be able to respond
> >> to the ridiculous claims made by Taylor Kingston.
> >
> > What an imposition! Sam wants to write a reference article about
> >Whitaker, and we have the gall to suggest that he consult the only
> >biography about him. Next, people will be expecting their ministers to
> >consult the Bible when they talk about Jesus. What's the world coming
> >to?!
>
> What is coming to that people such as myself who knew Whitaker unlike
> you who did not know him feel we can write a short article about him.
Sloan is increasingly reminding me of Franz Liebkind from The Producers
discussing Springtime for Hitler:
"Not many people know it, but the Fuhrer was a terrific
dancer....Hitler... there was a painter! He could paint an entire
apartment in ONE afternoon! TWO coats!"
parrt...@cs.com
<In 1947, Larry Evans was only 15 years old and Whitaker, who was
rated
2420 by Elo, was still probably better> -- Sam Sloan
Whitaker may have been better in 1947 but not by 1948. They played at
least three tournament games and Evans won all three: in the 1948 USA
Open and again at the 1948 Closed Championship (see below), then at the
1951 Open in Fort Worth, Texas.
Evans,L - Whitaker,N [D52]
USA-ch South Fallsburg, 1948
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.d4 d5 4.Nc3 e6 5.Bg5 Nbd7 6.e3 Qa5 7.Nd2 Bb4 8.Qc2
dxc4 9.Bxf6 Nxf6 10.Nxc4 Qc7 11.Bd3 0-0 12.a3 Be7 13.0-0 Bd7 14.b4 Rfd8
15.Rfc1 Be8 16.h3 h6 17.Qb3 b6 18.Be2 Rac8 19.Ra2 c5 20.dxc5 bxc5 21.b5
Nd5 22.Bf3 Rb8 23.a4 a6 24.Na3 Nb4 25.Raa1 Bf6 26.Rab1 Nd3 27.Rc2 Ne5
28.Be2 Bc6 29.Bf1 axb5 30.Ncxb5 Qe7 31.Rbc1 Bd5 32.Nc4 Ng6 33.Qa3 Nh4
34.Na5 Ra8 35.Nc4 Qb7 36.Ncd6 Qb8 37.Rxc5 Be7 38.Rc7 Nf5 39.Rxe7 Nxe7
40.Rc7 Nf5 41.Nxf7 Ra5 42.Nxd8 Rxb5 43.axb5 Qxc7 44.Nc6 Bxc6 45.Qc5 Qd6
46.Qxc6 Kf8 47.e4 Qxc6 48.bxc6 Nd6 49.c7 Ke7 50.Ba6 Kd7 51.c8Q+ Nxc8
52.Bxc8+ Kxc8 53.f4 Kc7 54.Kf2 Kd6 55.Ke3 Kc5 56.Kd3 g6 57.Kc3 h5 58.g3
Kd6 59.Kd4 h4 60.gxh4 e5+ 61.fxe5+ Ke6 62.h5 1-0
Sam Sloan
>BUT NOT BY 1948
>
> <In 1947, Larry Evans was only 15 years old and Whitaker, who was
>rated
>2420 by Elo, was still probably better> -- Sam Sloan
>
> Whitaker may have been better in 1947 but not by 1948. They played at
>least three tournament games and Evans won all three: in the 1948 USA
>Open and again at the 1948 Closed Championship (see below), then at the
>1951 Open in Fort Worth, Texas.
Yes. I was aware of that. That is why I was very careful to say that
Whitaker was still "probably" better in 1947.
I was aware that Larry Evans started relatively late but then improved
very rapidly.
Sam Sloan
Skeptic
>reading from a book.
Indeed so.
The criticism of Mr. Sloan's entry is divided into two: first, whether
he is making Whitaker look better than he was (describing him as a "top
player", not noting his coviction for child molestation, etc.), and,
second, factual mistakes (such as claiming he was 12 years in
Alcartraz.)
I have no issue with Mr. Sloan's choice of describing Whitaker as a
"top" player--that is, as he noted, a comparative term--or with not
noting Whitaker's child molestation (he did, after all, note he spent
time in jail and that he was a habitual criminal; must he quote every
sordid detail of his life in a Wikipedia article?). But the factual
mistakes are annoying.
Mr. Sloan obviously does know quite a bit about Whitaker, but he could
have saved himself most of the criticism in this thread by looking up
the details in John Hilbert's authorative book on Whitaker, "Shady
Side: The Life and Crimes of Norman Tweed Whitaker".
Sam Sloan
wrote:
The only person who has criticized me thus far is Taylor Kingston, who
criticizes and attacks everything I write. I am on the list of people
who are always attacked by Taylor Kingston. The others are Eric
Schiller, Raymond Keene, Larry Evans and Larry Parr.
While I agree that John Hilbert's work is authoritative, why do you
conclude that Hilbert knows more about Whitaker than I do? I played in
at least six chess tournaments in North Carolina in which Whitaker
also played and none of those tournaments are even mentioned in
Hilbert's book. I knew Norman Whitaker. John Hilbert did not.
It is unfortunate that so many people who knew Whitaker a lot better
than I did, such as Dr. Norman Hornstein, who both directed chess
tournaments in which Whitaker played and also conducted an annual
physical examination of Whitaker, are dead now and therefore could not
be interviewed by Dr. Hilbert. Incidentally, I just noticed that
Hornstein is not even mentioned in Hilbert's book. This is a big gap,
because Hornstein also published the Carolina Gambit, the state chess
magazine, which published lots of games by Whitaker, none of which are
in Hilbert's book. I am sure that Hornstein had a lot of Whitaker
material in his personal records.
Hilbert also does not cover Whitaker's chess playing career in Europe.
Every Summer, Whitaker went to Germany, bought a new Volkswagen, drove
it all over Europe playing in chess tournaments, imported it to the
US, drove it all over the US, and then sold it at a profit when the
time came for his next trip to Europe. Hilbert's book does not cover
this aspect of his life.
If I were Taylor Kingston or somebody of his ilk, I would criticize
Hilbert's book on these points. However, I do not do so because I
realize that Hilbert only had access to Whitaker's papers and could
only interview people who are still alive. Since Whitaker was born in
1890, very few people who knew him are still alive, and Dr. Hilbert
did the best he could possibly do with the limited material which he
had.
Sam Sloan
Spam...@yahoo.com
Sam Sloan wrote:
Folks, this is today's giggle. Read on for more Sloan nonsense.
Playing "at least six chess tournaments in North Carolina" in which
Whitaker also played means you "know" Whitaker? By that logic, if I
attend six World Opens I "know" many of the world's GMs. Hmm, this is
starting to sound like a formula for Innesian name-dropping.
> It is unfortunate that so many people who knew Whitaker a lot better
> than I did, such as Dr. Norman Hornstein, who both directed chess
> tournaments in which Whitaker played and also conducted an annual
> physical examination of Whitaker, are dead now and therefore could not
> be interviewed by Dr. Hilbert. Incidentally, I just noticed that
> Hornstein is not even mentioned in Hilbert's book.
And, of course, a bigraphy should include the names of EVERY person the
subject met.
This is a big gap,
> because Hornstein also published the Carolina Gambit, the state chess
> magazine, which published lots of games by Whitaker, none of which are
> in Hilbert's book.
Examples? For once you are able to make a contribution, rather than a
pollution, to chess history - why not publish those "new" Whitaker
games?
I am sure that Hornstein had a lot of Whitaker
> material in his personal records.
So should John have just published every scrap of paper in the crates?
> Hilbert also does not cover Whitaker's chess playing career in Europe.
> Every Summer, Whitaker went to Germany, bought a new Volkswagen, drove
> it all over Europe playing in chess tournaments, imported it to the
> US, drove it all over the US, and then sold it at a profit when the
> time came for his next trip to Europe. Hilbert's book does not cover
> this aspect of his life.
How (YAWN) exciting, a laundry list of minor tournaments.
> If I were Taylor Kingston or somebody of his ilk, I would criticize
> Hilbert's book on these points. However, I do not do so because I
> realize that Hilbert only had access to Whitaker's papers and could
> only interview people who are still alive. Since Whitaker was born in
> 1890, very few people who knew him are still alive, and Dr. Hilbert
> did the best he could possibly do with the limited material which he
> had.
I personally thought John did a great job with the enormous amount of
material he had.
parrt...@cs.com
Whitaker was still "probably" better in 1947. I was aware that Larry
Sloan
This is somewhat off-topic but the game that made Evans famous was
his victory over Yanofsky in the 1947 U.S. Open at Corpus Christi. A
year
earlier Yanofsky defeated Botvinnik at Groningen.
Taylor Kingston
Sam Sloan wrote:
> If I were Taylor Kingston or somebody of his ilk, I would criticize
> Hilbert's book on these points.
Ah, then that explains the terrible flogging I gave "Shady Side" in
my review:
Joshua Houk
news:436d33cd....@ca.news.verio.net:
> You posted as 69.171.206.182 . We know from your style and your
> history of personal attacks that it was you. What you did was improper
> and would get you banned if you were registered with Wikipedia, which
> you are not.
True. It'd be a similar offense to, say, creating a wikipedia entry to
campaign for a local election.
Sam Sloan
wrote:
He is complaining about my biography of Barry Popik, which I posted
yesterday, because Popik is running for election as Manhattan Borough
President on Tuesday.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Popik
I agree that Popik is somewhat marginal as a Wikipedia entry. However,
Popik is a rated chess master. He was a minor chess prodigy who became
a master at age 15. He lost to Sam Sloan in 1976 on his way to the
top. He is in the process of writing several books. A close case but I
feel that he is entitled to a Wikipedia entry.
Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan
<tkin...@chittenden.com> wrote:
You certainly did write your usual boring review. For example, you
provided a list of typographical errors, such as pointing out that
Hilbert wrote "fair" when he should have written "fare".
I now realize that your attack on by biography of Whitaker was really
a defense of your own review, for example you state here that Whitaker
did not become a top player until 1918, which is exactly what you
state in your review. However, I know that Whitaker was already a top
player by 1913, because I have read sources that you have not read.
You also make the same mistakes here and there. For example, you state
that the Elo Rating System started in 1951, whereas in reality it
started in 1960. Of course, I know this because I was there. I was a
delegate to the USCF Delegates Meeting at the 1960 US Open in St.
Louis, where the delegates voted to adopt the Elo System. I was the
sole delegate who voted against.
Sam Sloan
Joshua Houk
@ca.news.verio.net:
> He is complaining about my biography of Barry Popik, which I posted
> yesterday, because Popik is running for election as Manhattan Borough
> President on Tuesday.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Popik
>
> I agree that Popik is somewhat marginal as a Wikipedia entry. However,
> Popik is a rated chess master. He was a minor chess prodigy who became
> a master at age 15. He lost to Sam Sloan in 1976 on his way to the
> top. He is in the process of writing several books. A close case but I
> feel that he is entitled to a Wikipedia entry.
... a Wikipedia entry that - just coincidentally - is lifted almost word
for word from the bio on Popik's campaign website:
http://www.electbarrypopik.com/en/bio/
Compare your usenet post:
I don't think this will be kindly looked upon.
Taylor Kingston
Sam Sloan wrote:
> You also make the same mistakes here and there. For example, you state
> that the Elo Rating System started in 1951, whereas in reality it
> started in 1960.
Yes, I do make mistakes here and there. Yes, I actually knew it was
the Harkness system back in the 1950s, but carelessly wrote "Elo
rating" out of habit. I stand corrected on that.
So, Sam, now that you've acknowledged that USCF started using the Elo
system in 1960, how do you reconcile that with your contention that
USCF ratings are not Elo ratings? Have they changed systems recently?
David Ames
Sam Sloan wrote:
>
> Actually, Whitaker did not die in Georgia, but he is buried there. He
> died just across the state line in Phenix City, Alabama.
According to a story published in 1955 in a popular magazine (it may
have been Confidential) Phenix City was a wide-open sin city.
Considering what is known about Whitaker, it may be pertinent to
mention this.
[on a different matter ...]
>
> Not a big deal, especially since I was writing from memory, not
> reading from a book.
>
Remindes me of when Perry Mason objected to an expert witness
testifying from a book and then got him to testify on his personal
knowledge. Thank you, Sam, for testifying to your knowledge including
your personal conversations with Whitaker..
David Ames
sl...@ishipress.com
> Sam Sloan wrote:
> >
> > Actually, Whitaker did not die in Georgia, but he is buried there. He
> > died just across the state line in Phenix City, Alabama.
>
> According to a story published in 1955 in a popular magazine (it may
> have been Confidential) Phenix City was a wide-open sin city.
> Considering what is known about Whitaker, it may be pertinent to
> mention this.
Yes. I was thinking about exactly the same thing. There was a TV
documentary about this too.
In Phenix City Alabama, there were vans driving around with prositutes
inside. The vans would pick up male customers on the street. Once
inside, the men would have sex with the girls and then would be let
off, after they paid of course. This was done quite openly and
everybody in the town knew about it. They even showed pictures of the
vans and the girls inside.
Sam Sloan
parrt...@cs.com
I have not seen John Hilbert's work on Norman
Whitaker but sight unseen, based strictly on
descriptions, one has difficulty imagining anyone else
will write another book on the subject to match it or,
for that matter, another book on the subject at all.
For the record, I was the first to see Whitaker's
FBI file and managed to get it declassified AFTER
Arnold Denker and I went to press with our book, which
included a pretty fair chapter on Whitaker, including
a good story from Kurt Rattman about Whitaker trying
to cheat him out of some books. We corrected some
errors about his life in the first edition of the
Oxford Companion. I helped to pave the way for John
Hilbert., who got the file zip-quickly after requesting it.
My first request took years!
I think Sam wrote from memory about Whitaker as
an understood first draft and then has gone a long way
to correcting his errors. One notes he acknowledged
the mistakes and has gone about correcting them.
One notes that NM Taylor Kingston, the 1800-rated
player who told us he was ELO 2300+ will not
answer whether he were Xylothist, defending himself by
using a false name. One notes that the man will not
acknowledge the, ah, "mistake" he made about his rating.
I will take a Sam Sloan any day, who goes about
correcting his errors which he published under his own
name rather than hiding under an assumed one, to a guy
who cannot take the intellectual heat and posts
defenses of himself under assumed monickers. What an
ego that man must have! Moreover, NM Kingston must --
simply must -- regard such behavior as essentially
praiseworthy. Or, as he has recently put it, using
false names is his way of wearing gloves to avoid
the noxious elements here.
Louis Blair
> ... One notes that [Taylor Kingston] will not
> acknowledge the, ah, "mistake" he made about
> his rating.
>_
> I will take a Sam Sloan any day, who goes about
> correcting his errors ...
_
"[Taylor Kingston] did not hype his strength
in book reviews at the Cafe. Or, at least, in
the several reviews I read over the years."
- Larry Parr (23 Sep 2005 23:18:31 -0700)
_
Will we ever see a Sam Sloan correction to this
statement?
_
"In his book reviews attacking Eric Schiller,
Raymond Keene, Larry Evans and Larry Parr,
Taylor Kingston claimed to be a 2300+ Elo
rated player." - Sam Sloan (Fri, 23 Sep 2005
08:00:14 GMT)
_
How would Larry Parr classify it? Would he call it
an "incomplete thought"?
_
Will we ever see a correction from Larry Parr
for this statement?
_
"The latest Louie Blair variation is he did not
know about my repeated statement that Mike
Murray reproduced what I wrote without material
difference." - Larry Parr (19 Oct 2005
18:35:36 -0700)
_
"This is false. Larry Parr should apologize
promptly." - Louis Blair (19 Oct 2005
18:53:08 -0700)
_
What about a correction from Larry Parr on
this incident?
_
"Louis Blair's essential dishonesty has been to
quote statements by this writer in which he left
out the 'as' or 'like' words referring to similes."
- Larry Parr (14 Jun 2005 09:00:03 -0700)
_
Of course, Larry Parr gave no evidence at all.
_
On 14 Jun 2005 12:46:41 -0700, I pointed out that
I had not contributed any quotes to the discussion
that involved 'as' or 'like' words.
_
Larry Parr came back with:
_
"So, then, Louie Blair did indeed post some
'names' that I allegedly called that included
as 'as' and 'like' similes.
_
That's called dishonest." - Larry Parr
(14 Jun 2005 20:07:48 -0700)
_
Still "without a shred of evidence" and still wrong.
Louis Blair
> ... One notes that [Taylor Kingston] will not
> acknowledge the, ah, "mistake" he made about
> his rating.
>_
> I will take a Sam Sloan any day, who goes about
> correcting his errors ...
Taylor Kingston
Sam Sloan wrote:
> >> One big advantage to Wikipedia is that if you disagree with what
> >> somebody else posted there, you can correct it. However, Taylor
> >> Kingston did not do that.
> >> attack me. However, all of his corrections have since been removed by
> >> a Wikipedia administrator.
> >
> > Look again, Sam. My corrections have been incorporated into the
> >entry, replacing false information entered by you.
>
> All he did was take the neutral position of eleminating everything
> except those points on which we both agree, but in so doing he cut the
> heart out of the article.
Nonsense, Sam, as anyone can see by checking the article's history.
The administrator replaced your errors with my corrections, drawn from
Hilbert's book. You have amended the article many times since then, but
my corrections are still in place -- apparently even you have decided
they belong. Or in your alternate reality, do you now think that you
wrote them?
Sam Sloan
<tkin...@chittenden.com> wrote:
Not true. I just wanted to avoid a fight or an argument. I wrote that
Whitaker had become a top played by 1913. You insist that he did not
become a top player until 1918. What is the point of fighting over
that one?
However, I did take out your statement that Whitaker had committed
several "major" crimes. A major crime is murder, rape or kidnapping.
Sending morphine, a legal drug, through the mail is not a major crime,
and perhaps not a crime at all. Also, according to the book, there is
considerable doubtas to whether Whitaker was really guilty of the
child molestation charge, as the girl had spent time in juvenile
detention.
I now realize that Fplay is not an administrator. He just joined a few
days ago. He had been correcting all of my Wikipedia articles. I think
I know who he is. He was banned previously under another name, but I
have no objection to his changes.
Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan
and me deserve love and affection even if we have to pay $45. Perhaps
Parr can show me where I can find love for $15?
Taylor Kingston
Sam Sloan wrote:
> However, I did take out your statement that Whitaker had committed
> several "major" crimes. A major crime is murder, rape or kidnapping.
If you ever own a fine car such as Whitaker stole, and work for years
to pay for it, you may not consider the crime so minor when it's
stolen. Also, most victims of sexual molestation do not consider the
offense minor.
My point was that you had mentioned only Whitaker's petty offenses,
like using slugs for coins. He was guilty of much worse.
I thought it especially despicable that his 1928 honeymoon was paid
for with money he conned from another woman, whom he had wooed at the
same time he was making his wedding plans, then callously dumped after
she gave him what she thought was a loan (see "Shady Side" pages
101-102). I don't think he ever was legally prosecuted on this, but he
may be burning in hell for it.
> Sending morphine, a legal drug, through the mail is not a major crime,
> and perhaps not a crime at all.
Ah, then that's why he was sentenced to federal prison for 18 months,
because it was no crime. I'm sure many drug-pushers would favor that
view. And last I checked, my local drugstore did not sell morphine over
the counter.
Sam Sloan
<tkin...@chittenden.com> wrote:
The diference is that although the USCF delegates authorized the use
of the Elo System in 1960 (I think it was a while before they actually
started using it), it was still the USCF office that was doing the
calculations, not Professor Elo.
However, the FIDE Ratings were actually done by Professor Elo himself,
and that is why they are called Elo Ratings.
Sam Sloan
Taylor Kingston
Sam Sloan wrote:
> > So, Sam, now that you've acknowledged that USCF started using the Elo
> >system in 1960, how do you reconcile that with your contention that
> >USCF ratings are not Elo ratings? Have they changed systems recently?
> >
> The diference is that although the USCF delegates authorized the use
> of the Elo System in 1960 (I think it was a while before they actually
> started using it), it was still the USCF office that was doing the
> calculations, not Professor Elo.
> However, the FIDE Ratings were actually done by Professor Elo himself,
> and that is why they are called Elo Ratings.
Wow, this is amazing! I never looked at it this way. So then all
those cars I see with "Ford" on them are not really Fords, because
Henry Ford did not build them with his own hands. And when NASA uses
Newtonian physics to plot missile trajectories, it's not really
Newtonian physics, because it's not Isaac Newton who does the
calculations. And heck, there must not be any Darwinian evolution going
on any more, because Darwin bought the farm decades ago.
Hey, and what about all those teachers who claim to be using the
Socratic Method? Or Aristotelian logic? Those guys died thousands of
years ago!
And think how this applies to chess! All those people who thought
they were playing the Najdorf Sicilian -- hah! It's not a Najdorf
Sicilian unless Miguel Najdorf plays it!
Thanks, Sam. Observing your thought processes is like watching a
walrus try to climb a tree.
Matt Nemmers
news:1131402055.5...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
LMFAO.....
Kingston butchers Sloan once again.
parrt...@cs.com
>Ah, then that's why he was sentenced to federal
prison for 18 months, because it was no crime. I'm
sure many drug-pushers would favor that view. And
last I checked, my local drugstore did not sell morphine
over the counter.> -- Taylor Kingston
Sam was likely distinguishing between illegality
and crime. In the late Soviet Union, all kinds of
things were illegal, but they were not criminal in the
normative sense. So, too, sending drugs through the
mail or selling drugs is business, not criminality.
What Whitaker did may have been against a law,
but it was hardly criminal. Opium dens existed quite
legally and non-criminally in Puritan Salem, and most
of the laws we have against "drugs" are from the
so-called Progressive Era, which also gave us
Prohibition, which made it "criminal" to have a drink,
for Pete's sake. What Whitaker did was no more
"criminal" than selling fortified wine or making your
own moonshine to 'scape the revenuers.
Unlike NM Taylor Kingston, I don't hold with the idea that the
state determines what is "criminal." Norms, natural
law, do that. The state may determine what is legal
or illegal. In English common law there is jury
nullification which addresses exactly the distinction.
I agree that stealing an expensive or cheap car
is a felony -- and a serious one. Depriving another
of his property is an attack on that person's
pocketbook and his human spirit.
Norman Whitaker has to be called a bad man. In
The Bobby Fischer I Knew and Other Stories, Arnold
Denker and I wrote, "At some point Norman slipped from
being a colorful high-roller to being an off-color and
failed old man, though as with most bad hats, Norman
possessed even in his salad days an enormous capacity
for self-pity. Thus, shortly after being sentenced in
the Lindbergh case, he sent a 'personal and
confidential' letter, dated September 19, 1933, to
Arthur Garfield Hays of the American Civil Liberties
Union. 'The Whitakers,' he wrote, 'reached this
country in 1666. I am the last of the line, and ...
I am bitter indeed at the unfairness in the U.S.
Courts as I daily languish in my 5' x 7' cell in a
filthy jail. My business, my reputation, and my
family have all been ruined through the cruelties done me."
Arnold and I continued: "And the cruelties
Norman did to the innocent? Well, he just could not
think in such terms, remaining a notorious trimmer --
on one occasion in old age, he memorized an eye chart
in advance to keep his driver's license -- until the
very end, which came in May 1975. Suffering from
emphysema, Norman died broke and alone, closing out
his days drearily at the Cobb Memorial Hospital in a
place called Phoenix City, Alabama."
Norman was not a major or serious criminal. He
was scum. There is a distinction here, too.
ELO RATINGS
<However, the FIDE Ratings were actually done by
Professor Elo himself, and that is why they are called Elo Ratings.
Wow, this is amazing! I never looked at it this
way. So then all those cars I see with "Ford" on
them are not really Fords, because Henry Ford
did not build them with his own hands.> -- Taylor Kingston
Sam Sloan made the distinction between ratings
calculated by Professor Elo and those by the USCF
office. In terms of the precise system used, it may
indeed be a valid distinction for the two are not
identical. Secondly, Sam was speaking in common
parlance, employing Elo to mean what Elo did.
I think that NM Taylor Kingston, the man who
claimed to be 2300+ ELO while actually having a
rating of 1800+ probably has the better of this
argument and that the USCF can be held to have
employed the Elo system. Still, Sam's side of the
argument carries weight; and technically speaking, to
the extent that the FIDE and USCF employment of Elo's
system differed, we may say that Sam is correct.
We note that Sam is making an argument --
whatever its ultimate validity may be -- that is
serious and subtle, whereas NM Kingston tries to ride
roughshod over it with prancing analogies that are in
a couple of instances inapt.
Meanwhile, NM Kingston still has proven unable to
square his ELO 1800+ USCF as he himself would have it
with his ELO 2300+.
Sam Sloan
<mattn...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>LMFAO.....
>
>Kingston butchers Sloan once again.
I wonder why you keep writing about subjects you know nothing about.
I am completely right on this subject. Kingston is completely wrong.
Kingston is just trying to justify his lie that he had a 2300+ Elo
Rating.
Sam Sloan
Skeptic
> While I agree that John Hilbert's work is authoritative, why do you
> conclude that Hilbert knows more about Whitaker than I do? I played in
> at least six chess tournaments in North Carolina in which Whitaker
> also played and none of those tournaments are even mentioned in
> Hilbert's book. I knew Norman Whitaker. John Hilbert did not.
True, but that hardly proves you know more about him. Hilbert dedicated
years of his life to researching Whitaker; that is usually more
significant than playing in a few tournaments where he was also present
and even occassionally talking to him. otherwise, anybody who played a
few simul games with Capablanca and chatted with him occassionally in
the Manhattan chess club would be more qualified to write a biography
of Capa than, say, Edward Winter and Dale Brandeth (sp?), both of which
had taken years to write biographies of the man.
I just noticed that
> Hornstein is not even mentioned in Hilbert's book. This is a big gap,
> because Hornstein also published the Carolina Gambit, the state chess
> magazine, which published lots of games by Whitaker, none of which are
> in Hilbert's book. I am sure that Hornstein had a lot of Whitaker
> material in his personal records.
If you have in your possession--or know how to get--many games of
Whitaker from that source that are not in Hilbert's book, I suggest you
either publish them, or, if you do not have the time or inclination to
do so, contact Hilbert and tell him about these games and ask him to
add them to a second edition of his book. I am quite sure that he would
thank you and, if he publishes them, give you full credit for finding
them.
> Hilbert also does not cover Whitaker's chess playing career in Europe.
> Every Summer, Whitaker went to Germany, bought a new Volkswagen, drove
> it all over Europe playing in chess tournaments, imported it to the
> US, drove it all over the US, and then sold it at a profit when the
> time came for his next trip to Europe. Hilbert's book does not cover
> this aspect of his life.
>
IIRC, Hilbert DOES mention the "Volkswagen episode" in his book,
although I do not recall if he says it was a regular occurence or a
one-off. If you were an eyewitness to this, I suggest--again--you
contact Hilbert or publish it yourself. The problem is that Whitaker
was quite capable of doing such a thing on a "one-off" basis and then
bragging to everybody he did it regularly and "screwed the system". So
I suggest you have proof (i.e., you actually saw those Volkswagens
every year, instead of just Whitaker telling you he did it.) Same goes
for Whitaker's european career.
> If I were Taylor Kingston or somebody of his ilk, I would criticize
> Hilbert's book on these points. However, I do not do so because I
> realize that Hilbert only had access to Whitaker's papers and could
> only interview people who are still alive.
First, of course, just because someone is dead doesn't mean you cannot
learn about what they thought of Whitaker from their files or
letters--Hilbert naturally mentions many letters and opinions of
Whitaker (mostly negative) by his contemporaries, from Walter Penn
Shipley on, the vast majority of them surely dead by now.
I've read Mr. Kingston's review of "Shady Side", and he praises the
book highly while noting a few minor issues that (in Kingston's views)
move the book from "Excellent" down to "Very Good"--not exactly
scathing or unfair criticism. He does not, it goes without saying,
criticize Hilbert for not interviewing the dead.
Did Hilbrt interview you? If he didn't, you might want to contact him
on this matter and tell him you have information about Whitaker he
might be interested in. I'm sure he would thank you.
Sam Sloan
wrote:
>Sam Sloan =D7=9B=D7=AA=D7=91:
>> While I agree that John Hilbert's work is authoritative, why do you
>> conclude that Hilbert knows more about Whitaker than I do? I played in
>> at least six chess tournaments in North Carolina in which Whitaker
>> also played and none of those tournaments are even mentioned in
>> Hilbert's book. I knew Norman Whitaker. John Hilbert did not.
>
>True, but that hardly proves you know more about him. Hilbert dedicated
>years of his life to researching Whitaker; that is usually more
>significant than playing in a few tournaments where he was also present
>and even occassionally talking to him. otherwise, anybody who played a
>few simul games with Capablanca and chatted with him occassionally in
>the Manhattan chess club would be more qualified to write a biography
>of Capa than, say, Edward Winter and Dale Brandeth (sp?), both of which
>had taken years to write biographies of the man.
I am certain that if I had personally known Capablanca, I would know a
lot of things about him that modern biographers do not know.
>
>>I just noticed that
>> Hornstein is not even mentioned in Hilbert's book. This is a big gap,
>> because Hornstein also published the Carolina Gambit, the state chess
>> magazine, which published lots of games by Whitaker, none of which are
>> in Hilbert's book. I am sure that Hornstein had a lot of Whitaker
>> material in his personal records.
>
>If you have in your possession--or know how to get--many games of
>Whitaker from that source that are not in Hilbert's book, I suggest you
>either publish them, or, if you do not have the time or inclination to
>do so, contact Hilbert and tell him about these games and ask him to
>add them to a second edition of his book. I am quite sure that he would
>thank you and, if he publishes them, give you full credit for finding
>them.
I contacted Hilbert about this exact subject. He said that he had not
been able to obtain back issues of the Carolina Gambit as they are not
in the White Collection.
I would have sent him mine, except that my brother Creighton had all
of my possessions and all of my mother's possessions thrown in a
grabage dump in 1994.
>
>> Hilbert also does not cover Whitaker's chess playing career in Europe.
>> Every Summer, Whitaker went to Germany, bought a new Volkswagen, drove
>> it all over Europe playing in chess tournaments, imported it to the
>> US, drove it all over the US, and then sold it at a profit when the
>> time came for his next trip to Europe. Hilbert's book does not cover
>> this aspect of his life.
>>
>
>IIRC, Hilbert DOES mention the "Volkswagen episode" in his book,
>although I do not recall if he says it was a regular occurence or a
>one-off. If you were an eyewitness to this, I suggest--again--you
>contact Hilbert or publish it yourself. The problem is that Whitaker
>was quite capable of doing such a thing on a "one-off" basis and then
>bragging to everybody he did it regularly and "screwed the system". So
>I suggest you have proof (i.e., you actually saw those Volkswagens
>every year, instead of just Whitaker telling you he did it.) Same goes
>for Whitaker's european career.
I have not seen any reference in Hilbert's book to Whitaker's travels
in Europe or any tournaments he played in there.
>> If I were Taylor Kingston or somebody of his ilk, I would criticize
>> Hilbert's book on these points. However, I do not do so because I
>> realize that Hilbert only had access to Whitaker's papers and could
>> only interview people who are still alive.
>
>
>First, of course, just because someone is dead doesn't mean you cannot
>learn about what they thought of Whitaker from their files or
>letters--Hilbert naturally mentions many letters and opinions of
>Whitaker (mostly negative) by his contemporaries, from Walter Penn
>Shipley on, the vast majority of them surely dead by now.
>
>I've read Mr. Kingston's review of "Shady Side", and he praises the
>book highly while noting a few minor issues that (in Kingston's views)
>move the book from "Excellent" down to "Very Good"--not exactly
>scathing or unfair criticism. He does not, it goes without saying,
>criticize Hilbert for not interviewing the dead.
It seems obvious that you are Taylor Kingston or somebody closely
affiliated with him.
>Did Hilbrt interview you? If he didn't, you might want to contact him
>on this matter and tell him you have information about Whitaker he
>might be interested in. I'm sure he would thank you.
Of course Hilbert contacted me when he was working on the book. That
is why a picture my mother took is on page 211 of the book.
Sam Sloan