This appears to be portent of things to come for The Times of London.When I joined the professional ranks in the middle of the twenties the situation with regard to chess reporting could only be described as disgraceful. It is hardly believable that a paper like The Times, which justly prides itself as being represented by the best available
talent in all forms of human activity, should hand over its chess, both in the main paper and the subsidiary supplements, to a man to whom any first class chess player could give a rook. Yet it is absolutely true. This man, Tinsley by name, was the son of a minor professional who represented the paper fairly satisfactorily in the beginning of the century. When he died of a sudden stroke his son went to The Times office with the news, and offered to carry on for a week or so until a successor could be appointed.
He carried on for nearly thirty years! Uncouth and almost uneducated, he made The Times reports a laughing stock all over the chess playing world, but, by a mixture of bluff and bluster, maintained his position until his own death in 1936. ln the eyes of the powers-that-be at The Times anything seemed to be good enough for chess players. I shall have more to say about Mr. Tinsley and his goings-on in a later chapter.
Do this seem familiar?
-
- Posts: 7230
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Do this seem familiar?
William Winter wrote in his 1955 memoir:
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 1865
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
- Location: All Of Them
Re: Do this seem familiar?
Why would that be - is the new chess editor a player of ill repute?
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.