|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 54 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jun-15-09
 | | chancho: The Donkey and Chandelier where mentioned in Frank Brady's book: Profile of a Prodigy.http://books.google.com/books?id=Ab... Someone who read that book, pretended to be Fischer, then wrote his firsthand 'Donkey' account in the hoax book.
The forger may have thought it was too risky not to mention the Donkey at all, as it would have aroused suspision for those who had read Brady's earlier work. Most of what is known regarding Fischer and the hoax book has been debunked.
The girl who "predicted" Fischer's death. Gee wiz, Fischer left the hospital refusing further treatment of any kind,(dialysis) so renal failure did him in. The bank correspondence that Mr Day said was evidence of the authenticity of the book, was already floating on the internet, and that was demonstrated. Fischer was never in need of money, (the reason for writing the book in the first place): that was debunked.
Einar Einarsson's e-mail, where he tells Labate of some photos sent to Ed Trice that magically appeared on the M61MG book cover. All the above is more than convincing enough (to me at least) to confirm that Fischer did not write the book. Even if the book did turn up some day, I for one, am not interested in acquiring it. I have too many chessbooks at it is, and quite frankly I don't want to buy any more of them. |
|
| Jun-15-09 | | robmtchl: St. EAT said "we are currently hosting a match with Karpov and Fischer" He also said he was in "direct communication with Fischer and helping Fischer to get the book published" as well as claoming to "pound out another 40 pages of MY61MG at night" then took some of those to Dan Heisman claiming they were "sent" to him by someone else. Heisman did bite and said he was suspisious of their origin. Heisman is one smart IM. |
|
| Jun-15-09 | | Riverbeast: <In my opinion the forgery theory is farfetched and unlikely.> Just one question, <IMlday> How much did they pay you? |
|
| Jun-15-09 | | MrMelad: <IMlday>
The Jeddy Trice merely was in the wrong place at the wrong time, he was pursuing control over the "force" while a mysterious copy of M61MG appeared to defy the laws of gravity, chess and logic.
After all it's not like Jeddy Trice is a known liar, who lied about being married, lied about his rating, lied about his career, achievements, business. And its not like he presumed to sell land on mars or develop some secret code in use with the FBI. You see, the detectives are all evil in aim to destroy the "force" itself and all Jeddy's. So what if Fischer deny? He was a raving lunatic (who wrote the best book BTW). So what if Yasser Sweirman said it was a bad joke its not like he ever met him, and so what if Einnar said the picture was a rip-off, Einnar is known to hate Jedys.IM Day, next time you watch another re-run of Star-Wars, think that it will take you less to scan the damn book. |
|
| Jun-15-09 | | MrMelad: <IMlday> You are so pathetic, referring again and again to a source only you have access to, it is laughable! I can see you in court reading evidence the court is not allowed to see. Any judge will throw you out of his court faster than you can say "Han Solo". |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | PinnedPiece: <MrMelad: <IMlday> You are so pathetic.....> Why so abusive? If you want to speak as an equal, from a position of respected authority, that ain't the way. How about this: Try <Jim Bartle>'s methods for a week (polite, but firm disagreement with solid points why), and if you're unsatisfied with the resulting tone of the discussion, then return to your mace/brass knuckles approach! (PP gets ready for <Travis Bickle>-type counter assault)
. |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | MrMelad: <PinnedPiece: Why so abusive?> I'm being honest. Sometimes the truth is hard to speak and even harder to hear. It is a fact that IM L.Day is quoting endlessly from his exclusive copy of M61MG in an effort to get people to buy the book. When you engage in a public discussion which purpose is to determine the truth, you act as a lawyer presenting his case to the court. Your evidence must be credible, your sources must be documented, your data should be presented in its completeness to the other side. One can't use his reputation to determine in cases outside of his professional jurisdiction. Many people see all this as common sense and furthermore it is obvious that Mr. L. Day concisely avoid addressing those issues because several people have pointed out that he is defying those principles without his response. It is easy to pretend to be stupid and to pretend not to understand such simple rules of public discussion, and I wouldn't mind it so much, unless Mr. L. Day used his reputation as an international master of chess to add to his Demagogy argument which might actually cause people to buy the book, and hence it is potentially criminal and also pathetically reflects on Mr. L. Day. Of course, if I was seriously interested in L. Day's opinion I wouldn't have addressed him with such assertive tone, but the only reasonable thing I want from Mr. L. Day is for him to scan the book, which is not copyrighted, in order to allow the authorities to determine for real who is behind the scam. It is evidence for what many people believe to be a serious crime and so L. Day refusal to provide it and his constant referring to it as if it was real (by addressing directly to passages in the book available only to him) is what the Jewish call Huzpa. |
|
Jun-16-09
| | chancho: An E-mail from Labate's site. http://www.labatechess.com/ed_trice... (still has not shut down) Subject: Re: WOW!!
<I told you he was going to be difficult about all of this and that just because he says something one day doesn't mean he is going to stick to it in the end. I got him to change his mind about the pricing based on your input, and I got him to reconsider more than one of his stances based on things you and I had discussed over the phone.> <Now the person primarily responsible for these changes bows out of the process. What am I supposed to say to him? "The guy who talked you into lowering your reseller rates doesn't want any of your books?"> <Bobby is looking for commitments to buy the book so that he has money to survive. Now, we both know this is his own doing, but in the last few communications with him he has really come around. <<He invited me to a function at a private retreat house in Copenhagen>>>, <which is a place he was given free access to whenever he wants (although I am told it is not his) and I asked him if I could make a video diary of the trip, and he said "Well....I guess."> <I think Fischer is finally coming to terms with his own mortality and his return to publishing, though for different reasons, is clearly a sign he is trying to steer his own way through the fog in his mind. Fischer is his own worst enemy, and the fact that he has NOBODY to talk to anymore, and he must resort to transatlantic dialog with me, is again a further indication that his own solitude is no longer as appealing to him as it once was.> <Your 25% down on 500 books would be $1750, or $6860 for the 2,000 books, whichever. How are these terms "grossly unreasonable?" If they are so unreasonable, why then do I have emails back for go-aheads on 7,500 books so far?> <Fischer's offer stands. No doors will be opened after October 1. Those who buy from him now will have access to the only distribution channel for this book. I have all of the material. I paid 50% down to get the print run started. Even if Fischer pulls the plug tomorrow, I have the right to sell all 50,000 copies of the book since I paid for it and I have a signed Power of Attorney form from his lawyer authorizing me to proceed.> <I estimated to Bobby I would be able to pay him 25% on roughly 10,000 books on October 5, now I have a gap of about 2,500 (I am expecting a confirmation of another 500 this week.) He will find this discouraging.> <You should have told me you were not interested the moment you were in crisis. Now I have to find another buyer for about 2,000 books in the next 2 weeks.> The part where Fischer has a private retreat house in Copenhagen is weird as hell, since Denmark has an extradition treaty with the USA. I seriously doubt Fischer would have been moronic enough to go there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o... |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | robmtchl: <Ed Trice: Fischer's offer stands. No doors will be opened after October 1. Those who buy from him now will have access to the only distribution channel for this book. I have all of the material. I paid 50% down to get the print run started. Even if Fischer pulls the plug tomorrow, I have the right to sell all 50,000 copies of the book since I paid for it and I have a signed Power of Attorney form from his lawyer authorizing me to proceed.> So St EAT has 50k copies of the book he paid for? Assuning 10 dollars a book( and this is just a wild guess at the cost to print and bind a 750 page book) thats 500k dollars. 50% of that is 250k dollars. Where did someone that had to use other peoples money to go to Iceland come up with 250k dollars?
Show us a copy of the power of attorney. If that is posted wouldn't that go a long way to proving he wasn't lying? |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | GeauxCool: Weird, I found that video on youtube of all places. I don't know how long it's been up. But, man. Fischer walking with Trice and talking about <'the project'>. I would not have expected that. You can't really tell if its in Copenhagen, but this explains a whole heckuva lot: I think it's time for reconsideration, and maybe some of us should start penning our apologies to Ed Trice and his submissive sidekick, IM Lawrence Day. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HrS...
Does anyone know if the book is still available? |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | Jim Bartle: Ed Trice with a Power of Attorney in hand. More chilling than "Psycho." |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | PinnedPiece: <Mr. Melad: ...and I wouldn't mind it so much, unless Mr. L. Day used his reputation as an international master of chess to add to his Demagogy argument which might actually cause people to buy the book....> This has got to make IMlday think twice about your point of view, any why you get so disturbed by his posts. He needs to make it clear that his interest is purely for chess and Fischer's legacy to it, and not for some undisclosed motive involving finances. Well stated.
. |
|
Jun-16-09
| | chancho: <GeauxCool> Damn it! Rick Rolled again! :-)) |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | sharro: <IMlday: I have a problem with the detective's conclusion. They consulted Jabba the Hut and Guido the Assassin and they checked Han Solo's rap sheet with the Imperial Customs and Excise people.> Trice was caught lying about gothic chess tournaments and ripping off investors long before M61MG. It's not a question of the opinions of any jabba the huts. Just look at Trice's own claims on the redhotpawn message boards for proof. I think you are not interested in the truth, Mr Day, but instead in your agenda of promoting this book as real for some reason. |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | GeauxCool: <chancho> I don't think you clicked, but thanks anyway! |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | GeauxCool: I think that taunting and jeering at a Chessgames member by the use of that Star Wars analogy is absurd. <IM HandSolo> is not here to discuss what is true, he's here for another agenda. Perhaps he just likes to be dominated by Trice, and doesn't want that feeling to go away. Or perhaps <Mr.Melad> is right, but either way he's ruining his reputation in a very masochistic way. How can he pretend to trust Trice? We've all tried it that way, and it doesn't work. Here's just one example. Let's Play "Trust Trice":
<1. Trice established a direct line of communcation with Fischer.<Source: Chessgames.com - He asked for and received Fischer's bowling scores.> 2. He received the M61 manuscript, but doesn't know from whom it came.
<Source: GothicInventor:
"I will not deny that somebody contacted me about this, because that is exactly what happened.The question has always been: Who was it?"> 3. He concludes that the book is a fake.
<Source: Chessgames.com (this thread, previous pages).>> Do 1, 2, 3 make sense together if we trust Trice? In this manner they do: <Trice received a manuscript from an unknown party, asked Fischer if he wrote it and Fischer said NO I DID NOT WRITE IT. Trice then knew the manuscript was a fake<!>> So by trusting Trice, we don't even need to possess M61 to know that it's not Fischer's. |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | GeauxCool: Anecdotes. <IM HandSolo> dangles on two of them, but maybe he could have had three more: <From: "GothicChessInfo@aol.comThere are so many "Fischer rumors" that have spread since the days of the internet. I know most are false. Would you care to comment on these or have Bobby dispell them? Myth #1 .................?
Myth #2 ..................?
Myth #3 .................. ?
." Is any of this true?
Comments?
Thank you for your time Einer!
With my best regards,
Ed Trice> |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | GeauxCool: I went through the kibitzing search of CG and found that <IM HandSolo>'s position (in RED LETTERING) doesn't hold water: <1. The writing style is different in M61 than the writing style known to be used by Bobby Fischer. <It is idiotic to expect any writer to have the same style as he had forty years earlier.> 2. Authorship doesn't matter.
<With a little patience I'm sure it will all become clearer. And really, does it matter? Google "Who wrote Shakespeare?" and there's over 10,000 entries. In the long run of history it doesn't much affect one's enjoyment of the plays.> 3. Fischer was a lying when he said he didn't write it. <As a source Fischer's "inconsistency" is legendary.> 4. Refuses to send a copy to the "Hermit of Geneva" for critical analysis, maybe because he's too afraid that Trice might get in trouble.> |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | GeauxCool: That's it, I'm done with Chessgames.
I used to respect a man I thought had a most unusual style, and an incredible patience to convey his ideas. But he just toys with us, as if REASON doesn't matter. As if Fischer doesn't matter, the man who made Chess what it is today. I've just lost all respect for him, and there's nothing that can regain it. It's just gone. I never thought that I'd write that about any titled player, but there it is. The death of an archetype. Now he's just an old man that studied too much chess when he should have been concentrating on becoming a better person. Which is what I'm going to do. It's just too much for one lesbian to handle. Anyway, so long. Farewell. Auf weidersehen. Goodbye! |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | Jim Bartle: Better pay up those 6,379 chessbucks before you leave! |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | PinnedPiece: ...and then, GeauxCool pulled a <Lamont>: <Anyway, so long. Farewell. Auf weidersehen. Goodbye!> but later ....
. |
|
Jun-16-09
| | chancho: <GeauxCool> Hey, stick around! |
|
Jun-16-09
 | | IMlday: <PP> I certainly had no idea when I wrote my review that 5 months later no one else would have reviewed it. When I bought it I was clear that I wanted to review it. The people who sold it did not know whether the review would be positive or negative. At the time the zombie sock posse was adamant that anyone trying to buy it would just lose their money because there was no book. Having been proven wrong, they then sought some other reason to discourage readership. Over and over we heard variations on "Fischer denied he had anything to do with M61MG." If sockpuppet's repetitions created truth, then this would be true. However, by Mr E's own account, Fischer had the opportunity to publicly disavow the book but said nothing. There was no (in Ed L.'s adventuresome orthography) "DEATH BED DENIAL!!!" It follows the previous emphatic lie that the book did not exist. How many exposed lies does it take to wreck puppet's credibility? Why should I care what these 'people' think if they are either duplicitous or dunderheaded? |
|
Jun-16-09
| | IMlday: <GC> Re: Shakespeare: Edmond Malone's conclusion about the forged play was aided by both the audience and critics recognizing the play stunk. No parallel there. Also, faking a 200-year old manuscript leaves technical clues like ink type, vernacular expressions and so forth. That ruse was easy to expose compared to the issue of actual original authorship, whether aristocrat Edward de Vere used flamboyant commoner Shakespeare as a "front" to disguise his involvement or to maintain plausible deniability. In my opinion the engraving on the first folio looks remarkably like the portrait of Ed de Vere, but that's hardly conclusive. I have no problem admitting that I don't know. History is often unclear. The sentence you quote part of regarding the "presumed" is in the past tense because the subject was the commotion resulting from the eBay auction a year earlier. What's new in Feb. 2009 is that I have the book and could review it. The book is interesting while rehashing the Ed Trice as author theories while ignoring the book itself would be a disservice to my readers and, frankly, boring. There is limited space in a chess column, especially as Kamsky-Topalov was the main event. Obviously there is something fishy about the book as indicated by no publisher or editor named and no copyright claimed. I do not have to belabour the point. The sentence you quote part of regarding the "presumed" is in the past tense because the subject was the commotion resulting from the eBay auction a year earlier. What's new in Feb. 2009 is that I have the book and could review it. The book is interesting while rehashing Ed Trice as author theories while ignoring the book itself would be a disservice to my readers and, frankly, boring. There is limited space in a chess column, especially as Kamsky-Topalov was the main event. Obviously there is something fishy about the book as indicated by no publisher or editor named and no copyright claimed. I do not have to belabour the point. |
|
Jun-16-09
| | chancho: Mr Day, some people doubted the book existed, yes, but others said that if it ever appeared on the scene, that it was not written by Fischer. Larry Evans, was one, and Mig Greengard was the other. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 54 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
