< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
|Apr-30-15|| ||1d410: No one at the time could take down Botvinnik. He won half of his games!|
|Sep-29-16|| ||tpstar: KINGSTON ON EVANS
"Chess Life" November 2001, Volume 56, Number 10, Page 635 (7):
"Larry Evans' competence and honesty as a journalist have come increasingly under fire recently. Now with the 9/2001 'Chess Life' he compounds his sins. I refer to his comments about me on page 14 - crude attempts to mislead CL readers. A full rebuttal to his falsehoods and distortions could take several pages; I reply here to his worst offenses."
"The dispute between Evans and myself stems from my article 'The Keres-Botvinnik Case' (CL, 5/1998), which was in part a critique of his 'Tragedy of Paul Keres' (CL, 10/1996). Now in the 9/2001 CL Evans writes: 'But [Kingston] devotes six pages to the topic without reaching any conclusion despite what Keres told Whyld and Botvinnik's startling admission in a 1991 interview that Stalin did intervene.'"
"Shameless deception! By saying 'despite' Evans implies that I ignored important evidence in 1998. What he does not say is that these things were then unknown to both him and me. The Botvinnik interview lay buried in a non-chess Dutch magazine, virtually unknown to the wider world, until it was translated into English and posted on Tim Krabbe's website on 10 December, 1999. This is verified by Krabbe himself (e-mail to me, 12/12/99). Whyld's conversation with Keres was in 1962, but was not made public until 11 June, 2000 (again by Krabbe), as Whyld himself told me (e-mail, 8/11/01)."
"Evans further states: 'In a letter to the editor of 'Kingpin' (Spring 2000) Taylor Kingston claimed I misrepresented his views about the Keres-Botvinnik controversy.' Again, false and misleading. Evans misrepresented my opinion of his article, knowing since 1998 that I no longer endorse it. His spokesman Larry Parr has finally admitted that Evans' 'Kingpin' note was morally wrong (rgcp newsgroup, 8/25/2001)."
"In passing, I note Evans' claim (CL 10/2001, p. 7) that Parr has 'refuted' Winter on rgcp. Nonsense - delegating Parr to defend Evans against Winter has proven to be like delegating Al Capone to defend against charges of bootlegging."
"Evans has the right to disagree with me, but no right to misrepresent me, especially to the entire USCF membership. His column is becoming an embarrassment to USCF."
|Jan-24-17|| ||plang: I see that Keres book on the tournament is being released by New in Chess.|
I was wondering if anyone was familiar with both the Euwe and the Keres books and could recommend which one they like better
|Mar-04-17|| ||zanzibar: <CG> please update EventDate to be the Date of R1, i.e. 1948.03.02, for all the games in the tournament.|
|Mar-05-17|| ||zanzibar: Hans Ree, writing in the Forward of the reissued Euwe tb, relates the Euwe confiscated notes story as follows:|
<A curious incident, not mentioned in this book but later described by Euwe, happened at the Polish-Russian border, when the players and their entourage were on their way to Moscow for the second part of the tournament. Soviet custom officials were intrigued by the strange hieroglyphic-looking notes in Euwe’s luggage that in fact constituted his opening repertoire. What should they do?
Making a phone call to Moscow, obviously, where it was decided that Euwe’s notes should be confiscated, checked at leisure in Moscow, and eventually given back. It was a scenario for one of Reuben Fine’s nightmares. Perhaps the safety of the foreign players would be assured, but not that of their notes.
But Botvinnik intervened and phoned Moscow himself. After many hours of waiting it was decided that Euwe could keep his notes, provided that he signed a declaration that nothing in it would be detrimental to the Soviet state. To Botvinnik, Euwe joked that in any event, his analyses were either aimed at Reshevsky, or bad and useless. All is well that ends well.
So it looks as if the authorities were in possession of the notes for several notes before returning them at Botvinnik's request.
A nice story for Botvinnik's bequest (given the criticism so-oft directed his way).
|Mar-05-17|| ||zanzibar: Botvinnik indicates that Kere's also wrote a tournament book. I wonder if it's available somewhere online?|
My Russian needs some work.
|Mar-05-17|| ||Paarhufer: <z: My Russian needs some work.>|
Keres wrote "Maailmameistri-turnir Haag-Moskva 1948" (Tallinn, 1949).
Okay, there is an Russiian edition, too: Матч-турнир на первенство мира по шахматам, Гаага-Москва, 1948 (Таллин 1950).
And here you can find a new edition with additions by Botvinnik: http://webchess.ru/ebook/100.html
|Mar-08-17|| ||zanzibar: Thank you <Paarhufer> for that information. |
I was hoping to find the 1950 edition with Keres' pure notes.
I also found that link you cite, and indeed, it is very useful.
(One has to be extra careful with some of those "other" Russian chess - that seem to bait their hooks with chess books a lot.)
For the record:
<Матч-турнир на первенство мира по шахматам, Гаага-Москва, 1948 (Таллин 1950) >
google translates into:
<Match-tournament for the World Chess Championship, The Hague-Moscow, 1948 (Tallinn, 1950)>
I'm still looking for it, and will report back if I find anything.
BTW- The Russian wiki page has more stamps than the English version:
|Mar-13-17|| ||keypusher: I posted some of Keres' notes (from the recently published English translation of his book) along with computer annotations to this (in)famous ending: Keres vs Botvinnik, 1948|
|Mar-21-17|| ||plang: <zanzibar: Botvinnik indicates that Kere's also wrote a tournament book. I wonder if it's available somewhere online?|
My Russian needs some work.>
An english translation of Keres book has just been published by New in Chess. I am hoping it will be available on Amazon soon.
|Apr-05-17|| ||Sally Simpson: From the introduction above.
"Botvinnik reportedly announced that he would not play in the Netherlands. He was angry about a Dutch news report that suggested his fellow Russians might collude to help him win the title."
However in CHESS November 1946.(page 63 - cover story).
It reads that the original claim which upset Botvinnik came from a Dutch newspaper about possible fellow Russians collaborating prior to and regarding the Groningen (1946) tournament and not the 1948 World Championship event.
(It appears all these game fixing rumours can be traced back to a bored Dutch Hack with column inches to fill.)
|Apr-05-17|| ||tamar: <An english translation of Keres book has just been published by New in Chess. I am hoping it will be available on Amazon soon.>|
I will just wait for my free version once keypusher copies it all here:)
|Apr-05-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi tamar,
Is this the Keres Book of this tournament?
|Apr-05-17|| ||keypusher: <Sally> Yes. <tamar> You are going to wait a long time, my friend. :-) That is not a small book.|
I should have thought harder about the copyright issue, I guess, crazy as current copyright law is (Keres has been dead for more than 40 years). Obviously when I did the Tarrasch book it wasn't an issue -- I got that book off the internet, since it had entered the public domain long ago.
I strongly recommend the Keres book, and I'm very glad I got it, though it is pricey.
|Apr-05-17|| ||keypusher: <I should have thought harder about the copyright issue, I guess, crazy as current copyright law is (Keres has been dead for more than 40 years).>|
This, of course, is an absurd thing to say. Copyright law <is> crazy, but there is nothing crazy about wanting copyright protection on a translation you just published, especially if it is the first edition in English. Lord knows I couldn't have done much with the Estonian or Russian versions, even if I could have found them.
I've thought of one way to assuage my guilt -- I could get you a copy, <tamar>. I think that would more than make it up to the publisher, and I've been grateful for your posts on the Keres-Botvinnik games and dozens if not hundreds of other games over the years. If you would like a copy, please post your address in my forum, and I'll delete it afterwards.
|Apr-05-17|| ||tamar: Ever since I read "The Art of the Middle Game", I look for Keres writings. |
BTW I recently discovered that this is online, and I am rereading "The Art of Analysis" http://educacion-holistica.org/note...
|Apr-06-17|| ||keypusher: <tamar> so is that a yes?|
|Jan-15-18|| ||GT3RS: My man Botvinik had an easy ride. Didn't have to face Euwe due to his strong influence. Of course this doesn't prevent him from being one of the weakest champions in history. Haha|
|Jan-15-18|| ||perfidious: <tamar>, excellent book--got to read it as a young player and it made a strong impression.|
|Jun-03-18|| ||OrangeTulip: So Euwe had an off-tournament. But what about the contrast to the tournament of Groningen in which he scored only 1/2 point behind the winner Botwinnik?
Was it he pressure? Or the stronger opponents?
|Aug-05-18|| ||1d410: cuz Smyslov and Keres were competent players|
|Nov-06-18|| ||PJs Studio: My balls no Russian official told an Estonian Jew (who’s homeland had recently been occupied by Stalinists, multiple times!) “Maybe tings go bit smoother if chess games go somewhat baddly for comrad Paul? Da?”|
Corruption was rampant in those days... no way did some Stalinist not take it upon himself to say something even if Stalin did not. And why would Botvinnik have gotten so angry at Russian officials had Keres not been prompted anyway?!
Keres was twice the player Botvinnik was and thrice the man! Possibly the greatest to never hold the title - with my favorite Victor Kortchnoi being a very, very close second.
|Nov-06-18|| ||keypusher: <Keres was twice the player Botvinnik was>|
Sorry, that's just wishful thinking, PJ.
|Nov-06-18|| ||perfidious: Reading Taylor Kingston and his polemic on ethics in journalism is vastly amusing, given his own practices.|
|Nov-09-18|| ||PJs Studio: You’re right Keypusher. I was exaggerating. My apologies. Keres was a very decent and kind man. I also think a better player than Botvinnik in ‘48. But that’s just my opinion.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·