< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Nov-15-10|| ||parisattack: Very classy guy as I have previously noted. As a high school kid I remember the joy of seeing each new issue of Chess Review!|
|Nov-15-10|| ||Diagonale du Fou: I cherish the memory of the hours I spent in the early and mid 70s playing over games from his Treasury of Chess compilation.|
|Nov-15-10|| ||Pawn and Two: Al Horowitz did especially well in his olympiad appearances. In the 1930's the U.S team won 4 of these events,(1931, 1933, 1935 & 1937). Horowitz played in three of these olympiads.|
At the Prague Olympiad in 1931, Horowitz played board 4, and he scored +6 =6 -1 for a 69.2% score. He placed 4th for board 4 results. Kashdan, Marshall & Dake were on the top boards for the U.S. team, with Herman Steiner as reserve.
At the Warsaw Olympiad in 1935, Horowitz was the reserve player, with Fine, Marshall, Kupchik & Dake on boards 1-4.
Horowitz's record was +10 =4 -1, for an 80% score, and first place as reserve player.
Horowitz substituted twice for Fine (+1 =1); seven times for Marshall (+5 =1 -1); five times for Kupchik (+3 =2); and once for Dake (+1).
At the Stockholm Olympiad in 1937, Horowitz was again the reserve player. Reshevsky, Fine, Kashdan, and Marshall were on boards 1-4.
Horowitz's score was +11 =4, for an 86.7% score, and first place as reserve player.
Horowitz substituted twice for Reshevsky (+2); three times for Fine (+1 =2); twice for Kashdan (+2); and eight times for Marshall (+6 =2).
At Dubrovik in 1950, The U.S. team placed 4th. Reshevsky, Steiner, Horowitz, and Shainswit were on boards 1-4. George Kramer and Larry Evans were the two reserves. Evans scored 90% (+8 =2), for a first place reserve finish.
At Dubrovnik, Horowitz scored +2 =5 -1, for a score of 56.3%, and a 5th place finish on board 3.
Horowitz's total for the 4 olympiads was +29 =19 -3, for a winning percentage of 75.5%.
|Nov-11-11|| ||squaresquat: "Point Count" Chess is very good.
Current writers eagerly sample the way Horowitz instructed.
|Nov-15-11|| ||WannaBe: Happy birthday, Israel!|
|Nov-15-11|| ||brankat: R.I.P. Mr.Horowitz.|
|Nov-15-11|| ||talisman: happy birthday and R.I.P. and thanks!|
|Nov-15-11|| ||HeMateMe: Wasn't there also a Horowitz who wrote books on Bridge tactics? Same guy?|
|Nov-15-11|| ||nok: Not too shabby at the piano, I heard.|
|Nov-25-11|| ||squaresquat: The title was "Point Count Chess"|
|Nov-25-11|| ||Phony Benoni: "Point Count Chess" was co-written by Horowiz and Geoffrey Mott-Smith, the latter being the bridge expert. It advocated assigning points to strategical and tactical features as an aid to evaluation of the position.|
The book was really an excellent introduction to strategical play, but the point count apparatus was awkward and the book was not taken seriously as a result.
|Dec-04-11|| ||squaresquat: idea of using a point count in chess the way it's used in |
a point count in chess the way it's used in bridge. Who came up with that? There's no system that's an automatic Master Maker. That's Watson's point in his books on strategy.Principals don't hold up.You have to see it yourself. Moskalenko shrinks the Horowitz list of about a score plus and minus points
to five 'touchstones' which can be plus or minus depending on the position.Is that a better try?
For me to get better, I need a way to produce ideas. Comes to that place where you come to a problem you can't solve. There's got to be something better than just throwing a bomb.
|Dec-04-11|| ||AnalyzeThis: Play the natural move, Capablanca says.|
|Dec-05-11|| ||squaresquat: In complicated positions there are no natural moves.|
|Dec-06-11|| ||wordfunph: <Phony Benoni: The book was really an excellent introduction to strategical play, but the point count apparatus was awkward and the book was not taken seriously as a result.>|
|Jan-11-12|| ||wordfunph: "The penguin is mightier than the swordfish."
- IM Israel Albert Horowitz (when pinning an opponent's piece)
|Oct-14-12|| ||Conrad93: A relative of Vladimir Horowitz?|
|Nov-15-12|| ||parisattack: Happy Birthday, Al!
Thanks for the wonderful memories I have of your great chess magazine, Chess Review. The hours I spent with each issue were pure joy to this (then) young fellow. I still pull a volume now-and-then, take a walk down Memory Lane.
|Nov-15-12|| ||TheFocus: <parisattack> YOU were young once?|
I believe it though. I still run into Korean Mama-sans that talk fondly of the youthful Paris that stole so many hearts of the ladies of Waikiki and Kalakaua Avenue.
I can't even begin to fill your shoes.
|Nov-15-12|| ||TheFocus: My last post was number 6464.
If I was giving a simultaneous exhibition that would be 101 boards with 808 White Pawns. And my area code is 808.
That's it. I'm done for the day. It's Beer-thirty o'clock here anyway.
Cheers! Hang on hang-over! I'm on my way. Don't drink without me.
|Nov-16-12|| ||parisattack: <TheFocus: <parisattack> YOU were young once?
I believe it though. I still run into Korean Mama-sans that talk fondly of the youthful Paris that stole so many hearts of the ladies of Waikiki and Kalakaua Avenue.|
I can't even begin to fill your shoes.>
LOL! Yessir, those were the days... Butterfly, Broadway, Green Castle, Misty II. Of course the lust of my life, Angie the Lotion Lady. Speak, memory!
Good thing you don't play Go - the magic number would be 361361.
|Apr-18-13|| ||SeanAzarin: I still have several excellent chess books by I. A. Horowitz. Incredibly instructional.|
|Jun-15-13|| ||PhilFeeley: I first learned chess seriously from his "Chess Made Simple". Unfortunately, the title is a lie: chess is not simple, as amply illustrated in the book.|
|Jun-15-13|| ||RookFile: Depends upon what your goals are. If you want to be champ, it's hard. If you want to be an expert, it's doable.|
|Sep-26-14|| ||Phony Benoni: Al Horowitz, describing the beginning of his 1938 match with Isaac Kashdan ("Chess Review", November 1938, p.256):|
<"The peculiar feature of the match to date, (at least to this observer), has been the inability of White to win a single game. In some quarters, this would be accepted as verification of the theory that having White is a disadvantage. Our readers are doubtless familiar with the basic reason underlying this theory--that White having the first move, will probably make the first blunder. We mention this merely in passing.">
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·