This time Ross Lydall is the hack charged with the job of recycling whatever Tim Woolgar tells him, starting with the usual stuff about it being a new sport.
There's not much that's new about chessboxing these days and Lydall's article certainly isn't it. Well, perhaps it has something new to it, since it suggests that Marsh, by taking part in a chessboxing bout, is fighting to defend his unbeaten record in boxing.
What's that? A couple of paragraphs ago chessboxing was a new sport, yes? So an unbeaten record in one sport can be lost or defended in another?
Still, according to the clowns at the chessboxing circus, winning the bout made Marsh "undefeated world champion"
so there you go.
Marsh won, if anybody can really be said to "win" in a freak show, in nine rounds.That's not important, of course. What's important is that if somebody aged fifty-seven, who hasn't been inside a ring in around thirty years, fights again, then that's a freak show. If somebody aged fifty-seven steps into a ring and straight into a world title eliminator
then that's a freak show. And a freak show should be reported as such.
- - - - -
Meanwhile, to go with our query about Tony Buzan last Wednesday, here's one about Marsh. When Tim Woolgar, upon whose word I would not stake my life savings, makes the following claim -
- that "Terry was London chess champion at the age of 12", what is he referring to and what is the truth of the claim?
[Thanks to Martin Smith and Angus French]