"Prentice" Hit Letter
Larry Parr
However you must forgive Mr. Eddis, you see he is not an
American he answers to a Queen." -- Paul Powell, 3/1/95
Dusting off Kennedy
We note that Paul Powell resolutely refuses to back up his charge that GM
Maxim Dlugy is a crook, or who else besides Larry Evans was investigated by
the Pinkertons. We also note that his cohort Greg Kennedy came online
breathing smoke and fire about why the Friends of the USCF did not demand a
fingerprint dusting of the fraudulent "Prentice" hit letter. I then posted a
1993 interview that GM Evans conducted with Jerry Hanken calling precisely for
fingerprint dusting. At which point Mr. Kennedy, a self-described apostle of
reason, went into remission. So far he has not said peep about a policy board
that refused to ask the Pinkertons to perform the kind of fingerprint analysis
of the hit letter that the Friends demanded. Here's betting that Mr. Kennedy
will either drop the topic (so much for his attachment to the truth) or
announce that topic that he raised is not all that important anyway at this
late date. Something like that.
A Lunatic Analogy
The analogy by William Wright between the Electoral College and the USCF
electoral system is truly ludicrous. On occasion an individual elector may
cast a presidential vote for someone other than the candidate who carried his
state. In practical terms, however, electors vote overwhelmingly in accord
with the will of the people. The opponents in this federation of simple
democratic consent have offered every lunatic argument imaginable against the
right of adult dues-paying USCF members to cast ballots for candidates of
their choice. Many of these arguments, as I will note in a future post on
OMOV, contradict each other.
Who Wrote the Hit Letters?
Some of you asked to see the actual text of the anonymous letter sent to all
USCF voters signed by "Fred Prentice" (given later). I believe it represents
the distillation of the Old Guard mentality in this federation, and interested
readers may compare the quotation posted above by Paul Powell (a pal of Jerry
Hanken) with the content of this hate letter attacking Nigel Eddis, treasurer
of the Friends of the USCF.
[The following post was made by GM Larry Evans on the USAT computer network on
November 18, 1992 after the policy board voted to allocate $1,000 for the
Pinkerton Detective Agency to investigate him.]
Earlier this year two hate letters were sent out during the
policy board race between Donald Schultz vs. Nigel Eddis --
apparently both penned by the same person using different
pseudonymns, both purporting to endorse Don Schultz. The first
was mailed from San Luis Obispo, California, and the second
from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Messrs. Schultz and Eddis
promptly sent out disclaimers to the voting members.
In an interview that I conducted with Jerry Hanken last July
he again accused this writer, Larry Parr, Nigel Eddis, etc.,
etc., of plotting these two hit letters. When I reminded our
esteemed policy board member that he didn't have the slightest
evidence to back up this charge, he snapped, "I don't need any
evidence!" Yet from the moment these letters first appeared
various policy board members blamed them on the Friends of the
USCF, a lobbying group advocating one member one vote, of
which this writer is chairman.
But based on one sentence in the letter -- GRANDMASTERS
ALREADY GET ALL THE GLORY, AND THEIR GAMES ARE PUBLISHED
EVERYWHERE -- I suspected that Jerry Hanken was the culprit.
Why? Because he had used this identical phrase when complaining
to me and my wife at the 1989 National Open in Las Vegas that
he couldn't get more of his articles printed in Chess Life.
During the World Open in Philadelphia [July 1992] from where
the second hate letter was mailed Hanken asked Alex Dunne to
dig into the matter. Dunne then did an adverbial analysis of
both letters, apparently a standard literary tool, matching
them with past writings of the chief suspects. On the basis of
this analysis Dunne concluded that Jerry Hanken could not be
exonerated as a suspect. Hanken then blithely accused Dunne of
being in on the conspiracy!
In his post called "Arguments" (November 8, 1992) Dunne wrote:
"I did not state then, nor do I state now that Jerry Hanken
wrote, mailed, or in any way encouraged these letters. What I
did write, I stand by. It is my firm belief that Don Schultz,
Larry Evans, or Larry Parr DID NOT write these letters."
The Policy Board has ignored our recommendation of fingerprint
dusting in favor of its own "investigation" apparently based
upon who ordered those two sets of mailing labels for the 350
or so voting members. So far no information has been released,
yet it was clear from the start that the board intended to
whitewash its own members and, if possible, frame the Friends
of the USCF. Frame? Yes, it a strong word -- but that's
exactly what I believe our current crop of chess politicians
are capable of. You bet!
Further, in separate interviews board members Bill Goichberg
and Randall Hough announced IN ADVANCE that Hanken could not
possibly be guilty of penning these letters regardless of any
evidence adduced (such as his presence both in California and
Philadelphia on the very day the hit letters were postmarked.
So any "investigation" conducted by this board is clearly tainted.
New Evidence
There is some new evidence to shed light on the author(s) of
these scurrilous letters. We learned from reliable sources
that USCF Secretary Randall Hough was actually in or near San
Luis Obispo on Friday, June 26, 1992 -- the date on the letter
-- driving from Los Angeles to Berkeley for a friend's wedding
over the weekend of June 26-18.
This farfetched coincidence certainly places one of the chief
suspects in the spot from where the letter was mailed on the
date in question. Jerry Hanken, a close political ally of
Hough, stated if any of their fingerprints were found on this
letter or any other incriminating evidence "it would be
planted there by Evans and Parr." He added, "When it finally
comes out that you are Parr wrote those letters, you're going
to have to crawl away into a corner." However, we suggest that
Hanken and his cronies are the chief suspects.
*********************
The Phony Hit Letter
Fred F. Prentice
211A Harris Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
June 26, 1992
Dear Voting Member:
I am not a Delegate nor a Voting Member but only a reader of Chess Life who
was recently shown copies of campaign letters by a friend. I am going to much
expense to tell you what I think.
The race between Don Schultz and "Nigel Eddis," a man who may not be an
American citizen brings out into the open an attempt to take over USCF by
people who were not even born in this country. Don't get me wrong. There is
nothing wrong with being Jewish but I don't believe that ex-Russian Jews
should be running USCF. Why should Max Dlugy, Lev Alburt and Larry Parr be
running an American federation? Don Schultz IS an American.
Where Parr is concerned, Don Schultz exposed this unwanted person in a Don
Schultz Newsletter two years ago. He points out that Parr, a disgruntled,
fired employee, has no visible means of support but travels everywhere around
the world. How can Parr travel the globe (to south east Asia, Europe, around
this country)? Journalists don't make that much money. What is the realjob and
nationality of this Russian-speaking, ex-operative in South east Asia? How
does he always worm his way into Chess Life and impose himself on world
championship organizers?
"Nigel Eddis" discusses what he says are the issues, but the real issue is if
our Federation will remain in American hands.
Let's compare. "Eddis" does little but Schultz organizes tournaments and
represents America in FIDE. I have seen the USCF book about his successful
tournament in Fond du Lac. He works hard for chess, not for a takeover of OUR
Federation by people who ruined their own country and are now coming here by
the millions.
"Eddis" talks about making money in chess, but USCF should be a non-profit
organization like it has always been. These guys want hundreds of thousands of
members. They talk about a 800 number, but they don't care if the USCF catalog
fails to carry many books that other booksellers have. "Marketing" is all
these so-called professionals talk or care about. They don't care if USCF
books are good or bad but only that they sell.
Grandmasters already get all the glory, and their games are published
everywhere. What do we get? Very little, and now Eddis and Dlugy, with Parr
pulling their puppet strings, want to hand the store to Kasparov, a great
player but also another Russian telling us what to do with OUR federation.
They want to write in the magazine and hold office, while we get nothing.
Don Schultz isn't perfect, but he offers us an AMERICAN federation and in my
opinion strong personal credentials. I will take him, warts and all, over the
smoke being blown by the front man who calls himself "Nigel Eddis." I
challenge "Eddis" to answer one question: Are you still an English citizen?
Let's work for a strong U.S. Chess Federation.
Signed: Fred F. Prentice. [The name and address proved to be phony.]
--
Larry Parr
Paul Powell
: We note that Paul Powell resolutely refuses to back up his charge that GM
: Maxim Dlugy is a crook,
Parr seems to forget that the questioned expenses included duplicates.
I've answered this question and backed up a 1000 times, Parr you just
don't listen
: or who else besides Larry Evans was investigated by
: the Pinkertons.
In a recent post Parr asked for a simple yes or no to this question.
I gave you a "YES" to that there were others investigated.
I guess now you want to change your mind.
Parr why do you often use "We" in your post?
Why do you refer to me as the Delegate from Delaware?
Why do mail propaganda and hate letters to attempt to force the out come of
the elections?
R,
Paul Powell
Paul Powell
Why Parr wrote the "Hit Letter"
The first thing we should look for his motive.
Schultz was running away with the election.
Why upset the apple cart?
Now what is the purpose of the letter?
Who would want to vote for Schultz if he has the support of nuts like these.
Please forgive me for wasting ban width, but please read it again and ask
your self who gained by this letter being sent.
Not the OLD GUARD, not Schultz....
The EVIDENCE speaks!
: *********************
: The Phony Hit Letter
: June 26, 1992
: Dear Voting Member:
Prentice as in printer, Larry was this another of your pun's? God knows
you ChessLife pun index was at least a 99.8
R,
Paul Powell
Larry Parr
Larry Parr
Paul Powell
: If Paul Powell were sitting on the OJ jury, we daresay the
: defense would never have to worry about a conviction.
If Larry were sitting on the OJ jury, a reader who wishes to remain
anonymous would have supplied everything he needed to convict.
BTW, does Rosa Lopez belong to the Friends ....
R,
Paul Powell
Greg Kennedy
: The first thing we should look for [is Parr's] motive.
This is only circumstantial evidence/conjecture. I don't buy it.
: Now what is the purpose of the letter?
: Who would want to vote for Schultz if he has the support of nuts like these.
Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, eat only meat! You have been taking
propaganda lessons from the Friends, haven't you? ;-)
: Please forgive me for wasting ban width, but please read it again and ask
: your self who gained by this letter being sent.
Looks to me like nobody gained. But alot of money was squandered on
postage and printing. Leaving out all the anti-Soviet propaganda and
thrashings of Parr, Eddis, et. al., I think this letter could have been
made to fit on a postcard.
: Not the OLD GUARD, not Schultz....
My guess is that the writer actually thought he was helping to get
Schultz elected, rather than the allow horrid alternative.... :-)
: : *********************
: : The Phony Hit Letter
: : Fred F. Prentice
: : 211A Harris Street
: : San Luis Obispo, California 93401
: : June 26, 1992
: : Dear Voting Member:
: : I am not a Delegate nor a Voting Member but only a reader of Chess Life who
: : was recently shown copies of campaign letters by a friend. I am going to much
: : expense to tell you what I think.
Aha! You now know where to look, Lar': all readers of Chess Life who had
campaign-letter receiving friends are suspect! Except those who were
delegates or voting members. Pay particular attention to those who go by
the name of Fred Flintstone.... :-)
: : The race between Don Schultz and "Nigel Eddis," a man who may not be an
: : American citizen brings out into the open an attempt to take over USCF by
: : people who were not even born in this country. Don't get me wrong. There is
: : nothing wrong with being Jewish but I don't believe that ex-Russian Jews
: : should be running USCF. Why should Max Dlugy, Lev Alburt and Larry Parr be
: : running an American federation? Don Schultz IS an American.
: : Where Parr is concerned, Don Schultz exposed this unwanted person in a Don
: : Schultz Newsletter two years ago. He points out that Parr, a disgruntled,
: : fired employee, has no visible means of support but travels everywhere around
: : the world. How can Parr travel the globe (to south east Asia, Europe, around
: : this country)? Journalists don't make that much money. What is the realjob and
: : nationality of this Russian-speaking, ex-operative in South east Asia? How
: : does he always worm his way into Chess Life and impose himself on world
: : championship organizers?
: : "Nigel Eddis" discusses what he says are the issues, but the real issue is if
: : our Federation will remain in American hands.
"Prentice" places quotations around Nigel's name every time- does he
think this guy is an android or something?
: : Let's compare. "Eddis" does little but Schultz organizes tournaments and
: : represents America in FIDE. I have seen the USCF book about his successful
: : tournament in Fond du Lac. He works hard for chess, not for a takeover of OUR
: : Federation by people who ruined their own country and are now coming here by
: : the millions.
I too, have seen some of Schultz's chess work- good stuff. While our
state magazine is struggling just to print fuzzy B&W photos, Schultz
produced a sharp, full color booklet on the 1994 US Chess Championship.
: : "Eddis" talks about making money in chess, but USCF should be a non-profit
: : organization like it has always been. These guys want hundreds of thousands of
: : members. They talk about a 800 number, but they don't care if the USCF catalog
: : fails to carry many books that other booksellers have. "Marketing" is all
: : these so-called professionals talk or care about. They don't care if USCF
: : books are good or bad but only that they sell.
I suppose he is talking about Chess Digest here. They have the biggest
selection, which hardly seems right given USCF's advantage over them
because of their rating system and official status, along with Chess Life
magazine. A good point. The much balleyhooed "800" number has not changed
this, has it?
: : Grandmasters already get all the glory, and their games are published
: : everywhere. What do we get? Very little, and now Eddis and Dlugy, with Parr
: : pulling their puppet strings, want to hand the store to Kasparov, a great
: : player but also another Russian telling us what to do with OUR federation.
: : They want to write in the magazine and hold office, while we get nothing.
Not sure what he means by "we get nothing." Note that the Friends have
now turned against their former pal, Kasparov. "Be gone, damned
foreigners!", seems to be this guys main message. Perhaps he is a
disgruntled American Indian? ;-)
: : Don Schultz isn't perfect, but he offers us an AMERICAN federation and in my
: : opinion strong personal credentials. I will take him, warts and all, over the
: : smoke being blown by the front man who calls himself "Nigel Eddis." I
: : challenge "Eddis" to answer one question: Are you still an English citizen?
So, the quotes were for "front man." Following Prentice's "logic", I
hereby nominate O.J. for office: he is, by golly, an AMERICAN, and what's
more, he won't likely be leaving America any time soon.... ;-)
: : Let's work for a strong U.S. Chess Federation.
: : Signed: Fred F. Prentice. [The name and address proved to be phony.]
__________________________________________________________________________
This is not Parr's style of writing, nor would he have said what
"Prentice" did even if he were trying to do what you claim. Parr is far
more caustic, and cannot help but use rare words and titled sections-
even when he deliberately alters his style, as he has on occasion
right here on r.g.c. Further, he would most certainly have gone a bit
easier on himself than "Prentice" did.
Conclusion: there is but one member of the infamous Triad missing from
the above personal attacks upon "the Friends of the USCF". Why? How on
Earth could Fred Flintstone Prentice have forgotten the many exploits of
the five time U.S. Champion, or have neglected to slam him the way he did
all the others? There can be but one logical explanation, my dear Watson....
Just kidding, Lar'! What's all that smoke coming from your ears? :-)
Greg Kennedy
Greg Kennedy
: Despite all his efforts, Greg Kennedy has lurched into the truth. The PB could
: not be expected to investigate one of its own, which is why the Friends of the
: USCF initially called for an independent probe -- if there was to be a probe
: (which we opposed) -- by disinterested outside parties.
Good move. Considering the incredible bias shown by you, Evans, and
presumably also those PB members you have long harried with personal
attacks, this is the wisest course.
: As predicted, Mr. Kennedy has suddenly decided that the whole question of
: fingerprint dusting is not all that important anyway -- though he was the one
: who attacked the Friends for not requesting it. When it became clear we had
You can't stick to the truth, can you Lar'. I suggested you were wasting
your time on speculation and innuendo, when you should be focusing on
finding real evidence, like fingerprints. Only then did you stop for a
brief pause, to point out that you were foiled by the PB once again in
this matter. _Never_ did I suggest that you "request" the PB to do this at
their expense! A tongue-twisting lie, but Parr for the course.
: request it (and it was rejected by the board majority) he could only splutter
: that the PB had already spent enough money -- although the motion passed by
: them authorized a second thousand to follow up. After raising the topic, he
: now wants to drop it. Fine. We, too, are content to drop it and will conclude
Another whopper! You have brought this topic up yourself, so there is no
escaping this one, Lar'. I will drop it when you stop distorting my words
in your gross, disgusting way. It is up to you.
: *************
: EVANS: Fine, fine. Then let's have an independent investigation to get to the
: bottom of this [Prentice mailing].
Nothing to hide. Or else thinks he can't get caught.... ;-)
: HANKEN: Get to the bottom? The suspects, the criminals are now calling for an
: investigation? Anything that you call for, we know it would be okay. You know,
: I mean if you call for fingerprints, then we know there are no fingerprints
: because you used rubber gloves because you did it. And everybody knows it.
Detests Evans. Shows symptoms of paranoia. But then Evans' "interviews"
often provoke this response....
: EVANS: And what if your fingerprints or one of your stooges' is found on it?
: HANKEN: In the first place, I have no stooges. You're the one who has stooges.
: I mean you and Saponara...
: EVANS: But I'm asking you what if, what if one of your people's fingerprints
: is found on the letters? Then what, Jerry?
: HANKEN: I don't know what you're talking about.
: EVANS: What if your fingerprints...
: HANKEN: I don't know what you're talking about. You guys could do anything.
: EVANS: How could one get Randy Hough's fingerprints on a letter?
: HANKEN: Larry, Larry, you guys are capable of any illegal behavior.
: EVANS: [laughing] So, in other words, in other words, any evidence that turns
: up that incriminates you guys...
: HANKEN: If there were any evidence found, it would be planted by you and Parr.
Either he didn't do it, or he left no evidence. The same as Evans! :-)
: EVANS: I see.
: *****************
: So there you have it. Contrary to Mr. Kennedy's argument that the Old Guard
: opposed fingerprint dusting because of cost, Hanken states straight out that
: the world famous Friends crime lab could somehow transfer fingerprints from
: one surface (say, a drinking glass) to another surface (say, hundreds of
: envelopes and letters).
Poor Parr. You are in another world.
If prints were found on one or two letters, then maybe they could have
been somehow tricked into handling these letters w/o realizing it. But if
they were on the letters and the labels- many of them, you would have the
smoking gun.
Personally, I think you guys are all making fools of yourselves by
blindly accusing each other, when it is very possible that the "Prentice"
letter was sent by a person just as described therein, except that the
name was phony. Paranoia , jealousy, and hatred- these have replaced
reason after years of fueding over control of the USCF. What we need is a
malicious dictator (like Kasparov) of USCF, to show you just how petty
and hateful you are acting, and how silly to bicker ovr such things when
you have no real evidence whatever on which to base your biased conclusions.
: Sorry, Logician Kennedy. No matter how much you defend your Old Guardistas
: they always double-cross you by inadvertently letting snippets of the truth
: slip out. Our explanation for their reticence to forage for fingerprints is
: the obvious and straightforward one: they dreaded finding any evidence that
: would inculpate a fellow PB member.
Your determination to interpret everything I write as an attack upon you,
and a defense of people whom I don't even know, suggests a complete lack
of reasoning. I hope you can afford to seek out the help you need to remedy
this.
Until then, may I suggest that you (and/or Evans) hire your own detective
agency at your own expense? Why would you rely upon a subcommittee of the
USCF PB to do this for you, if it is so important? And apparently it is,
to you and Evans. I will repeat: I am _for_, not against fingerprinting,
if you must investigate this matter. Under no circumstances should a
_committee_ be involved in the discovery of the truth, if it can be avioded!
I would have expected you to already know about committees, and how they
(don't) work. :-(
: What is left of the argument of Logician Kennedy, a self-described apostle of
: reason? His cohort Paul Powell called this writer "anal retentive" because of
: my annoying habit of quoting excerpts from the public record.
I am starting to lose track Lar'- which lie number are you up to now?
Powell called it anal-retentive to pursue a purely conjectured scenario
to the point of calling long-distance across the country to find out if
certain postmarks _could have been_ used on packages mailed from many miles
away from San Luis Obispo, for example, from I-5. The point is that no
matter what answer he got, there would remain no _real_ evidence, only
conjecture. If Powell called you anal-retentive regarding some other
matter- such as your above claim- then I have missed it. I'm betting that
you simply lied again. Hope I'm wrong.
: Would we sandbag? Are we really that sedulous?
I now happen to have installed a cdrom encyclopedia, and will report back
my findings (I had forgotten which rare word you had used). I only hope
there is an equivalent synonym with which to compare it....
For those who are interested: no. Larry doesn't sandbag. He really is
that weak a player. :-)
Greg Kennedy
DR. ROY SCHMIDT
: : : The Phony Hit Letter
: : : Fred F. Prentice
: : : 211A Harris Street
: : : San Luis Obispo, California 93401
[Letter and Greg's analysis deleted]
: This is not Parr's style of writing, nor would he have said what
[snip]
Wait! It just hit me! Who writes like this? Who has always maintained
this sort of attitude? Who would be in the area, have the time and
resources, and honestly believe he was doing something "right"? That's
right, the "F" stands for Fischer!!!
"First, eliminate the impossible. Then, whatever remains, no matter how
improbable, must be the truth!" -- With apologies to Sir A. C. Doyle
Roy
--
Roy Schmidt sch...@uxmail.ust.hk
Information & Systems Management Dept, School of Business and Management
The University of Science and Technology
Clearwater Bay, Sai Kung, HONG KONG
Greg Kennedy
Larry Parr wrote: :
: : Are we really that sedulous?
: I now happen to have installed a cdrom encyclopedia, and will report back
: my findings (I had forgotten which rare word you had used). I only hope
: there is an equivalent synonym with which to compare it....
I have completed the word search on my cdrom (Grolier's) encyclopedia,
and am back to report the results. This program contains a convenient
indexed word search function, which is extremely fast. The results were
as follows:
sedulously - not found
sedulous - not found
painstaking - 22 occurences, in 22 articles
diligent - 10 occurences, in 9 articles
sincere - 14 occurences, in 14 articles
Apparently then, the experts from a multitude of different fields of
knowledge preferred to use one of the above substitutes for Larry Parr's
rarity, without a single exception. This search included the entire
encyclopedia- text, captions, article titles, and so on. I had expected a
large difference in the number of occurences which would indicate the
fact that this was an uncommon word, but this would seem to indicate that
a better term is bizarre. (Which rhymes with Parr....)
Greg Kennedy