And another one...

an excerpt from Chess Piece of Mr. Bobby Ang...

GAME-FIXING?

All this recent talk about “networking”, game-fixing, is distressing, not because they are true, but because someone is obviously trying to advance his own agenda, trying to bring down his chess rivals, and use well-meaning people to do it.

Let me quote some commentary by an informed chess observer, Mr. Herky del Mundo:

“The current controversy of game-fixing in local chess tournaments appears to be a shocking news, not because its anything new but it involves the cream of the crop, current as well as future, of Philippine chess.

”Ironically, the timing of identifying the suspects raises more questions than the scandal itself. It was totally inappropriate since the most prominent suspects are currently representing the country in Vietnam and are not in the country to defend themselves.

”There is no doubt that the resurgence of the young players has been the envy of the old guards, and anything to bring them down would be a sufficient vengeance. Since both the young and the veterans are competing against each other as well as with foreign players in the Asian Zonal, the scandal is bound to affect the performance of the young players.

”The charge that befalls these named players is "networking" or game fixing of several games so that a desired outcome would be determined. Their participation allegedly allows them to partake of the winner's prize money.

”The only problem with the situation is that it took so long before this was exposed to the limelight, that it has become suspect.

”With the advent of so-called "networking," why would the federation be suddenly indignant when wrong practices have largely gone unpunished in the past? If the current NCFP leadership review the alleged ‘networking’ scam it might as well put itself and its players under the microscope. How many alleged improprieties have blown over in the federation while insufficient accounting should suffice for prosecution?

”Has the federation also been irresponsible for revealing the names in the "networking" controversy which obviously would distract its representatives to the zonals. This is not just any tournament. This is the road to big money in chess. Everyone one should know what is at stake. It is the path towards becoming a world champion.

”Isn't the premature announcement of the suspect's names tilting the balance in favor of those participants not implicated in the scandal as well as foreign players? Some of the alleged suspects are excellent players who can make their run for the zonal -- likely candidates to the world championships if they succeed. Something that talent and not networking will catapult them to the championship.

”Now, they have the burden of achieving their individual successes with the scandal hovering over their heads. The investigations, if it has any merit, should at the very least be held privately so as not to influence the outcome of the games.

”Is the expose a real case of indignity or were there other motives? It is a widely-held belief in local chess circles that corruption in chess tournament is common practice since some players will give up their game to assure themselves of income. It has happened in the past, at present, and will in the future as long as the players do not sense any form of moral leadership from the federation.

”The federation professed to provide this leadership after the scandal broke. But can one exact moral standards to a community where the federation for the most part has not led a good example? Would we say that the practice in the past of dropping games in favor of a potential candidate for an international title justifiable? Is this any less abhorring than selling a game for money?

”Do I see any denial on this practice? Are some of the titled players so confident of their ability that they feel they deserve their victory despite participating in a locally-held international tournament designed for their success?

“The problem with local chess is nobody cares about ethics when it comes to titles or money. When a player does not have a chance for the money pot, he would be too willing to give up his game for some form of consideration or ‘balato’. This is easily justified because in some cases any type of winning might mean the next meal.

”Somewhat in their mind the practice is totally acceptable. For the offender, it just means that he is losing the game, and does not really look farther on how it would affect the outcome of other games. Prizes in the form of cash are so desired because it will be easy to divide it among willing players.

”It will be total irony if we are not able to produce any Filipino zonal candidates because of this scandal and the bickering it involves. Stiff competition among players have polarized them into groups and the alleged networking, whether true or not, might just be a consequence of these differences.

”Even if the charges are not proven, it would have done the harm already. The premature announcement of names and trial by publicity would only setback not only these rising stars but also in effect the future of Philippine chess.”


* * * * *

I will not deny that there are incidents of players who no longer have a chance at qualification or a big prize throw their games and share in whatever prize their partner-in-crime gets. But to claim that there is a networking scheme where people throw games to one another to get a desired result is to assume an organized group is pulling the strings, calling the shots. This is ridiculous.

And then to announce the names of the suspects while they are smack in the middle of zonal competition, then it becomes obvious why these issues are coming out. Pay particular attention to the 3rd paragraph of the above commentary, and there you may see a hint of who the people are behind this.

I have said my piece, and this is the last comment you will hear from me about this “networking”.

......