Some things should never be brought into the open and someone just do not know when to keep silent. Remember the story of Pandora's Box. Once opened you can never fully restore it back to before.
Raymond, you knew fully well what actually happened but choosed to spin it to make your son sound like a hero. You consider that is not lying? The worse thing is you do not even realize you sacrificed Sumant in the process.
Read the latest post and see what Raymond really thinks - everyone of us is a moron. There are so many inconsistencies, half truths, spins and smoke screening in this single posting, I do not even know where to start to point them out.
Your son and another junior were caught cheating. Still you offered no apology but tried to justify it. Then you put on the spin to change into "courage" to come clean. Would Mark have the courage to admit it if the result was not questioned? Someone else could have become the National Junior champion instead of Lim Zhuo Ren.
The other stuff about Chin Seng and Zhuo Ren are smoke screens to distract everyone from the real issue. The rest of the spin and half-truths, readers will have to figure it out themselves.
Actually I am more disappointed with Sumant than anything else. I thought he had talent and was different from others. Sumant, you can still salvage your reputation by admitting your mistake and offering the chess community an apology.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Jimmy, you wrote, "The worse thing is you do not even realize you sacrificed Sumant in the process."
Seems like you still don't fully know how fgm works. What makes you think he doesn't realise the impact on Sumant when he wrote his piece? Go figure. To him, Sumant is just collateral damage to achieve the primary objective of making Mark to be a hero. Sumant's position was probably considered and concluded to be not important. Remember Jimmy, you must not underestimate your adversary.
hi Jimmy
1. excuse me to say that this time your opening & middle game is brilliantly played. but not the ending (last para)
2. Remember i hv raised to you about the unsportmanship act amongst the juniors? My observation is they may not even aware that they are at wrong.
3. Perhaps its time to discuss about this issue with other chess friends, but we shall discuss it in a general stmosphere and no name of any junior shall be mentioned.
4. i agree with your guest, naming will only bring damage to them.
5. the objective shall be create the awareness.
rgds
seng
Anonymous, rest assured that I consider all my words carefully. When I write that, I do not have any proof otherwise. Therefore I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I do not simply accuse like FGM.
Yeoh, again rest assured I choose what I say and my words carefully. Maybe you are not aware of the whole background. Dont you realize that everyone knows who and what happened by now? I'm not the one who named them, RS did that in an earlier post. Nobody can stick their head in the sand and pretend nothing happened now. I'm honestly just trying to help Sumant salvage something.
1. I mean need not to suggest Sumant/Mark to apologize.
2. The public discussion here is already a lesson, if not punishment, to them.
3. Knowing Sumant & his kind parents, I am sure there will be no recurrence.
4. we all make mistakes when we were young. forgive and look forward shall be healthy direction.
rgds,
seng
RS still had cheek to say that Mark save Sumant from embarassment for owning up. Sumant gave and gain nothing.
Sumant, if you have friends like that, ou don't need enemies.
Chin Seng,
1. Have to disagree with you. This will give closure to everyone and is the only correct course of action, otherwise will give the impression of arrogance.
3. Disagree, but no need to elaborate further.
4. Agree
All is good that FGM is rebutted for all his erroneous posts but this is getting to stretch on to forever.
Too much time is wasted on this guy and he seems happy to stir up more controversies and later blame everybody else as hate mongers and saboteurs.
I am beginning to think that is his intention all along.
One bit of fgm's version is bugging me. Why would Sumant beat Mark and then 2 minutes later offer to report an opposite result? (Remember, this is rapid play-off game where you more or less quickly report the result). If Sumant really wants to help Mark, he could have, say, blunder or not see the mate, then another blunder and just lose the game. After all, this is a rapid game and nobody would be the wiser.
It just doesn't make sense for Sumant to offer to report a reverse result under the circumstances.
I am beginning to suspect that Sumant agreed to the 'cheat result' under pressure from mark or raymond or both together. Seeing Raymond usual behavior whenever his son is playing, I expect him to have been hovering over the game right to the end, and after the game ended, be in the discussion, if not proposer, of the cheat result.
I'll have to disagree with the last poster. In all fairness, that is pure speculation with little basis. It would also border on thick-skinned insanity to go from asking for a point to talking about rejecting a point offer. A very highly unlikely scenario.
Look, this is nothing new. It is not really uncommon. I myself have witnessed and been a part of this sort of thing.
I can tell you with 90% certainty that Sumant only offered Mark the point out of guilt, and was trying to be nice. 'Standard practice' is to decline it and be honorable etc etc. Trust me, Sumant was not expecting Mark to accept the win. Of course he won't admit it, because it's like trying to have your cake and eat it too. But put yourself in his shoes and think for a moment. Also, look up 'keqi'. It doesn't apply to just the Chinese
Raymond seriously reminds me of Jose Mourinho. He is the "Special One". Minus all the Champions League trophies of course.
I disagree with Anon 12.43. Mark did not 'reject' Sumant's 'offer'. Mark was caught red-handed and did not really have a choice but own up. Something which Raymond spun again to say 'mark admitted to save Sumant the embarassment". Sumant had absolutely no reason at all to feel guilty for beating mark. Anyway, this is the first time where I hear of a case where the reported result is purposely reversed, which is too blatant to be 'standard practice' or not uncommon. Think again.
Anyhow, this is all speculation as is said. Among the parties involved, we only have Raymond's version which I know always have some spin in his or son's favour, or some untruth if not outright lie. It will be interesting to hear Sumant's version of events.
As i write this, I begin to suspect that Anon 12.43 is fgm still trying to promote his 'not uncommon' and 'standard practice' storyline. Initially, I was surprised to read "I myself have been a part...'. If it is fgm, then I won't be surprised as it may have happenned in bridge events.
I have been in chess a long time and I am 100% sure that this kind of blatant cheating is rare (in fact never heard of before until now). It borders on desperation or just plain stupidity or just plain arrogance assuming that officials are dumb.
Raymond Siew admitted both Mark Siew and Sumant conspired to cheat another player of a better placing and was detected doing so . They submitted the “result” to the arbiter but Greg spotted it and required that the real result be submitted. Now, even if this was “corrected”, I must say both players should be sanctioned and expelled from the tournament. Their misdeed must be recorded even though they admitted their fault, AFTER being found out. What if Greg did not spot the misdeed, would it then mean the result would have been manipulated, just like what RS always said happened in Perak. He said what happened there was wrong YET he treated the above case so ever so lightly. As the coach of both and parent of one, I cannot believe he was not aware of the issue BEFORE the result was submitted. Yet he condoned it!!! And to rub salt into the wound, he praised Mark, who happens to be his son. That is the person Raymond Siew is. Are these 2 players KIDs? Shows mind coach does not grow up although he grows old.
August 4, 2011 9:25 AM,
Are you retarded or do you just don't understand English? I never said Mark rejected Sumant's offer. I said Sumant offered a win to Mark out of sheer guilt, which is what some people do when they realise that they just stopped someone else from becoming champion.
Comprehension 101 please. And don't compare me to FGM, dickhead.
Raymond Siew, stop talking about how injustice was done to the Perak player and you and asking for MCF intervention. That has been going on for many months.Now you have done injustice to LZR and you say it was not important and even praised your son Mark who was the perpetuator. Shame on you. That is not only double standard, it is Raymond Siew's standard.Out of shame you offered to take in LZR and there was a fall-out between you. I call for MCF to take action on the NJ case as it was a MCF event
He has lost the moral high ground.
Trash talking IMs throwing game over phone ringing, accusing an IM trying to recover some expense to play in Olympaid,favouritism over Li Tian's sponsored trip ............ etc, etc.
But praise son when he was caught red hannded and when all he did was to reverse the score. The arbiter saw and he had to. Nothing courageous. And the embarrssment was more on Mark and not Sumant. By cheating , he will be champion but Sumant gain nothing. Don't say Mark save Sumant.
Did you realise what you condone was much worst than what you have condemed.
what was the result then? i assume it's 1-0 in favor of Sumant?
when such event occurs, i think both players shall be declared as lost?! 0-0
why put the blame on just 1 side?
the result was Sumant awarded the win.
Our stupid friend now demands that Jimmy to prove it over the table in a clean and fair competition.
Does he even know what clean and fair means?
And what is there for Jimmy to prove? To prove that he can beat Mark?
First , teach Mark to clean up his act.
With every posting, Raymond's blog makes less and less sense. I'm starting to think that he makes his postings by randomly typing any string of words that come to mind.
It is quite obvious that he did not think when he writes.
Started when Peter " bans" son from KL open.
Begins by telling how a good boy his son is. No one listens. Have to spice it up with how he nearly won National Junior. He was champion but had the heart of a champion.
However, he went too far by saying how proud he was when Mark decline a point from Sumant.
The rest is history. How stupid is that?
No suitable word in an earth-made language to describe that.
How about self-mate?
Probably right. But he don't play chess so may not know what it means.
Maybe a slip of his mind.
Raymond for MCF president!
The silence from Greg and Najib on the Mark Siew/Raymond Siew open cheating case is deafening.Both of you owe it to the chess community to offer your views.Are you afraid of RS attacking you on his nonsense blog?
Raymond Siew, the most important issue is to have discipline. China just sacked a triple gold medalist from their squad just for "hitting" an official. Her whole future just disappeared. What about cheaters? And their parents? They shoud face similar treatment here. Then we will see improved performance. So stop beating round the bush.Look at yourself first.
I came across this somewhere and I reproduce it ad verbatim ..
Blame is a pretty funny thing, when things don't go our way, it's someone else's fault. But when things go well, it's typically because we are brilliant and take full responsibility for our actions. Succeeding in life is to get beyond this petty sentiment. Empowerment comes in accountability, something that can only be decided by the individual. Humans spend inordinate amounts of time trying to get others to be accountable. But rarely look at the own personal flaws, leading to resentment and projected negativity, which is usually personal. This cycle continues and feeds itself. Justice, fairness and entitlement are slippery slopes. Putting our happiness on hold, for the future, until we get what we want, just the way we like. Wasted time. IMO. 10 people, 10 opinions. How do we form consensus? How do we differ, without resenting each other for our complex needs/wants. Need/want less. Become self sufficient and find your personal joy. Work towards it, instead of expecting it to show up at your door. At the end of the day you will have something to give, instead of need. Our true nature. In the hindsight of your life, you will be glad you did, because what you lived will be joy, happiness and love instead of resentment. Peace.
Post a Comment