Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Notices of deaths, death announcements and messages.
User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8400
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:58 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:52 am
So i stick by my "academic" perspective, and would be curious to hear what Nigel has to say
No
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:09 pm

well, but yes, if it is about his contractual arrangements with LK ...

User avatar
John Saunders
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:10 pm
Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Contact:

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by John Saunders » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:05 pm

As it happens, there is something in one of the articles* mentioning the intention to play the King's Gambit. Does that constitute "revealing opening preparation"? Yes, though no further detail is given. Would it have been enough to win a court case? Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm not willing to be drawn into speculation and I'm not defending anyone - simply pointing out that you have only the flimsiest grounds for attacking them.

The thing that sticks in my craw here is not so much the fact of your having described the behaviour of one recently deceased person as "appalling" (and sat in moral and ethical judgment on another living person) but that you have done so based largely on speculation, and gone on to present dimly remembered details in such a way as to mislead readers into thinking the worse of two much respected chess professionals. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion and voicing them may be OK in the pub but when set down in print for others to read, higher standards should apply. Had you included a few references to facts in your first post (e.g. "... in the first such article in June 1994 Kavalek revealed that they had planned to play the King's Gambit...") and been more upfront about your speculation as to whether a formal legal contract existed, then I might not have chosen to comment in the first place.

Summarising it from my personal perspective, Jonathan, it's when you speculate that you aggravate!

* I'm not in a position to make these available, no longer being anything to do with BCM. I'm not convinced doing so would add anything to the discussion.
Personal Twitter @johnchess
Personal Website https://www.saund.org.uk
Britbase https://www.britbase.info

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8400
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:12 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:09 pm
well, but yes, if it is about his contractual arrangements with LK ...
Well if he could confine himself to facts and answer questions about them directly and without belligerence, and how likely is that?

As an aside I very much doubt that quoting from a magazine piece published twenty-seven years ago would constitute any kind of legal problem.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:26 pm

"Had you included a few references to facts in your first post (e.g. "... in the first such article in June 1994 Kavalek revealed that they had planned to play the King's Gambit...") and been more upfront about your speculation as to whether a formal legal contract existed, then I might not have chosen to comment in the first place."

Ok, now I understand the friction a bit better. Perhaps I should have spelt it all out. I guess I assumed that many readers would have some memory of the fracas, since so many of us are of that sort of age. (Don't they?). Also it is an internet forum, and I have learnt to abbreviate my reasoning. Admittedly that too has its dangers...

I was appalled at the time, incidentally! Maybe wrongly so, but there it is. As to LK's memory,I said that I enjoyed his other writings. I don't think I have slighted his whole life by mentioning this one very public episode.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 4256
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by David Sedgwick » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:50 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:52 am
So I stick by my "academic" perspective, and would be curious to hear what Nigel has to say, and also anyone who specialises in breach of confidence, if the articles can be reprinted.
"You refer to Kavalek's detailed articles on working with me in both the BCM and Inside Chess. One may wonder what motivated him to publicly divulge as many opening secrets of mine as possible, without my permission, over a period of several months, if not sheer malice."

Nigel Short, ChessBase, 1st February 2005

The link to the source is https://en.chessbase.com/post/kavalek-t ... -not-dead-. This has already been given by Ian Thompson upthread.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8400
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:54 pm

(And indeed is linked to in the piece I linked to.)
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sun Jan 31, 2021 4:03 pm

Thanks both. I hadn't noticed, though the particular issue here is the contractual situation with LK, I'll check in a moment to see whether NS mentions that too.

Post Reply