Gazette not making the right move getting rid of chess column

Wednesday, February 6, 2013
Text Size: A | A

Gazette not making the right move getting rid of chess column

I read with sadness Feb. 3 that the Sunday Gazette is discontinuing “Chess Corner.”

I was saddened not only with the loss of something I enjoyed, but witnessing the further effect of economic pressure in the diminution of the role of the printed media.

Like many people, I know how to play chess and play for fun, but have never played in a tournament and wouldn’t last long if I did. That’s why reading the column is fun and educational. I especially enjoy the problems, “White to move and win.” I’ll stare at it until I get a feel for the situation, then begin looking for the move.

After awhile, my eyes wander over the column and I’ll read a bit about the day’s featured game and what’s happening in the various tournaments, then go back to the puzzle, careful not to peek at the answer. I look forward to it every Sunday morning.

Bill Townsend’s final column featured a wonderful historical perspective of the Chess Corner, exactly 41 years old to the day! The Gazette should be proud of this singular continuing feature and its longevity, the only one like it in the Northeast.

Also, the featured game in the final column was a local one from January’s “Make the Right Move” tournament at Albany High School, featuring two of the many strong regional players. Mr. Townsend identifies one of life’s lessons hidden in this game and describes how tenacity wins the day; a more appropriate time for such an observation could not have been found.

The solution to the final column’s problem was wonderful. As “A last indulgence,” it features a situation from one of Mr. Townsend’s own games from 2004, where he was in serious trouble and in danger of losing on the very next move. I stared and thought about the situation, then thought some more, not realizing that I had solved it, but passed the solution over in favor of another gambit. It was a brilliant move in the game and a fitting one to end the Chess Corner.

I fear that in the tactics of the larger game of modern finance, the Gazette felt it had no choice, but to me it sadly has made the wrong move. In chess, once a move has been made you cannot take it back. I wonder if in economics the same rule holds true.

Paul Donahue


Women don’t need assault weapons for protection

It seems that the gun regulation debate is going to prevent any reasonable measures to aid in securing the safety of anyone not wishing to own a gun, or just to feel safe at school, the movies or maybe the mall.

Although I was unable to view the entire proceeding of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence, I did see several highlights. One thing seemed evident from the point of view of gun proponents such as [attorney] Gail Trotter and Sen. Lindsay Graham: We women really need assault weapons and large magazines to defend ourselves from all sorts of danger, such as home invasions.

I am not sure exactly what the Independent Women’s Forum is or why Ms. Trotter was present at this hearing, but, strangely, not one parent from the Sandy Hook massacre was.

In her follow-up appearance on “The Last Word” with Lawrence O’Donnell, she was unable to cite one actual instance where the type of weapon she described in her “what if” testimony to the Senate Committee was effective in saving a life or preventing an injury when used for defense by a woman.

Perhaps she could have cited Nancy Lanza, who apparently had several guns including a Bushmaster — a very scary gun — and lots of large magazines in her home. Oh, that’s right, she was killed by her own guns. And then the shooter, her son, went on to brutally murder 20 babies and six adults.

Marcia Sykes


Civilian limits on assault weapons are acceptable

Re gun: There is no logical reason for any civilian type to need a weapon that fires more than 10 rounds.

I was impressed by the combat veteran explanation of assault weapons and the gentleman who blamed President Clinton for trying to take them and calling them assault weapons [Jan. 31 letter].

As a Vietnam veteran [with] combat experience, [I know that] the term assault weapon came from the Viet Cong, as [the Soviets] provided them with AK 27s or 37s, but they called them assault weapons — designed to kill as many as possible with one burst.

They are not needed on our streets or even in our houses. I know the Second Amendment.

Herbert Thorne


Letters Policy

The Gazette wants your opinions on public issues.

There is no strict word limit, though letters under 200 words are preferred.

All letters are subject to editing for length, style and fairness, and we will run no more than one letter per month from the same writer.

Please include your signature, address and day phone for verification.

For information on how to send, see bottom of this page.

For more letters, visit our Web site:

Share story: print print email email facebook facebook reddit reddit


February 6, 2013
3:19 p.m.
wmarincic says...

Marcia Sykes, That Bushmaster AR-15 was in the trunk of the car and NOT used, so why are you talking about AR-15s and Sandy Hook? Those kids were killed by a handgun, why is there no new handgun regulations? I will tell you why, we have extremely strick handgun laws and it does absolutely nothing to stop the criminals. Most murders and shootings are by handgun, there are very few assult type weapon crimes ever committed. There have only been two in Schenectady in 29 years according to Bob Carney and only one death. So again, why are we regulating assult weapons?

February 6, 2013
3:59 p.m.
dan says...

Reminder- The primary weapon used in the [Sandy Hook] attack was a "Bushmaster AR-15 assault-type weapon," said Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance. And because a lot of people out there are trying to deceive the public by saying the Bushmaster was in the trunk of the car, CT police released another statement clarifying - . Please don't dishonor these kids by spreading lies for the sake of advancing your political agenda.

February 7, 2013
3:10 a.m.
janesjoys says...

Thanks Dan - I sometimes wonder why anyone bothers to try to set the record straight on anything with their letters. Aren't peole lucky that the 1st Amendment also allows them to pick and choose whatever they want to believe is truth.

February 7, 2013
7:15 a.m.
wmarincic says...

OK that is crap, I was home and watched the Police take the AR-15 out of the trunk of the car on live TV after he was dead. So unless there is more tghan one shooter it was impossible. Where are the lab reports?

February 7, 2013
7:19 a.m.
wmarincic says...

BTW your top link is almost 2 months old and it is from CNN and your bottom link is almost 1 month old. Where are the lab reports?

Log-in to post a comment.

columnists & blogs

Log into

Forgot Password?