|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 160 OF 160 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-14-25 | | stone free or die: Any <Edward Winter> article is worth a look, but I've gotten interested in his <Latest update> tagging of late... <Sally>'s link has this notice: <Latest update: 31 March 2025.> So it looks as if some recent info might have been added. I used <Wayback> to compare this latest version to the last archived version of the page: https://web.archive.org/web/2024121... It has the notice:
<Latest update: 3 January 2023.> Copying this archived version's text, and the current page's, and comparing I found this one difference (other than the <Latest update> notice, of course!): <Our article on My 60 Memorable Games is Fischer’s Fury.> https://www.chesshistory.com/winter... Really, if I was running the show, I might not even update the <Latest update> for that - the <Fischer's Fury> article being from 1999. It also has a recent update - but now I wonder - why two pages? Shouldn't the ~Evans "concluded it was a hoax." really go on the 61 page? The "Fischer's Fury" should strictly be about the algebraic version of the M60 version I think. . |
|
Apr-19-25
 | | saffuna: In a 1973 episode of "Columbo," the following position (from what I can see) was reached in a casual game (the night before their match) was reached between the Russian former champion (white) and the reigning champion (clearly based on Fischer).
click for larger viewIs this from an actual game, or was it invented for the show? White's win isn't all that difficult: 1. Qxb4 pxb4 2. Rxa8+ Bd8 3. Bxd5 Qxd5 4. Rx d8++. It looks invented to me. How could that black rook have gotten to d2? |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | Olavi: It's an actual game, well known - but of course it'll take a while for me to locate it... |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | Olavi: https://www.chesshistory.com/winter... |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | unferth: maybe I'm just being blind, but where is the win after 3 ... Qe8? 4 Bxd5+ Kf8 5 Rxe8+ Kxe8 and the b2 bishop is going to fall to a rook fork. looks to me like white is pretty well lost, if fact. what am I missing? |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | unferth: never mind, I found it. 4 Rxe8+ Bxe8 5 Bxd5+ Kf8 6 Nc4 keeps the bishop. white's still got a little work to do, though. |
|
Apr-19-25
| | saffuna: <olavi> Outstanding! Here is a clip (sort of):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzw...
At 11:15. |
|
Apr-19-25
| | saffuna: Here is the game: W Wolthuis vs C H Alexander, 1946 Black resigned after Qxb4.
I had the positiion wrong in my diagram. A black knight on d2 rather than a rook. Makes sense. |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | unferth: ah ... that makes things easier! |
|
Apr-19-25
| | saffuna: The board is shadowy in the video.
Lots of comments about "Columbo" at the original game. |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | unferth: was that the game they were supposedly playing on a restaurant tablecloth with salt shakers? don't think I've seen that since it first aired, but I remember thinking it strained credulity at the time. |
|
| Apr-19-25 | | stone free or die: <Although Clayton is one of the best chess players in the world, during his simultaneous exhibition, one of the people he is playing beats him after playing only two moves, a losing combination known as the "Fool's Mate" and notorious for being the fastest possible way for a player to be checkmated. This, presumably, is meant to demonstrate how much Columbo is unnerving him.> https://www.imdb.com/title/tt006990... |
|
Apr-20-25
| | saffuna: <unferth: was that the game they were supposedly playing on a restaurant tablecloth with salt shakers? don't think I've seen that since it first aired, but I remember thinking it strained credulity at the time.> No, it was totally realistic.
Clayton had sought out Dudek the night before the match, which apparently was a one-game world championship match. Clayton then collapsed after losing, and this being Columbo, decided he had to kill Dudek. |
|
May-01-25
 | | Sally Simpson: Yesterday I was reading Ree's book, 'My Chess' and he mentions the long walks and talks he had with Fischer during the Netanya (1968) tournament. He did ask Fischer about some of the antisemitic statements that he had apparently made a few uears ago. Fischer replied he had been stupid and in fact he was half Jewish.
Then today I saw the link to the 35 minute Amos Burke interview had surfaced.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzl...
I had seen it in full a number of years ago. Without the doubt the best interview by Fischer. "I thought of giving it up [Chess] but what else can I do...nothing. Right?" Lucid, entertaining, honest, especially about raising the profile of the game and bringing more money into the game. Larsen and Gligoric make some revealing comments as well. |
|
| May-02-25 | | stone free or die: (<Sally> you said Amos, elsewhere I mistakenly said Ed, but it's <James Burke> according to the youtube header) |
|
May-02-25
| | Sally Simpson: Yes James Burke. No idea where Amos came from. A mosquito? Yet another sign of how my brain is deteriorating? It's seen Burke, turned it into Burn because it's over loaded and leaking chess stuff and added Amos. |
|
| May-02-25 | | stone free or die: As a funny aside - there is an <Amos Burke> out there on the web: https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/wp... . |
|
| May-14-25 | | Petrosianic: <Joshka>: <IM Larry Day almost 2 decades ago, wrote a review of the book for a Canadian newspaper.> Garðar Sverrisson's book, <Yfir farinn veg með Bobby Fischer>, says this about it: SVERISSON: <‘Some time after he came home [from hospital] we became aware of a new book in circulation, My 61 Memorable Games, which was claimed to be by Bobby. The book supposedly contained the 60 games that he had selected and annotated in his book My 60 Memorable Games with the addition of one game from his match against Spassky in 1992. Every time he had discussed the possibility of re-issuing this book [My 60 Memorable Games] he had been opposed to my idea of publishing it with revised annotations by himself and others, which I was convinced would make the book even more valuable. To Bobby, it was more important that the original sources should be preserved in their original form. To meddle with the text of an already published book was so ridiculous to him that I doubt whether he would have agreed to correct even obvious spelling mistakes, if found. My 60 Memorable Games was no less dear to him than many of his victories in chess. He was therefore very sad when I brought him the news of that counterfeit publication, which, we discovered later, had been illustrated with the Icelandic flag and photographs taken for private use by Icelanders with whom he was no longer associated.’> |
|
May-31-25
 | | perfidious: Masses of footage on Fischer here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fer... |
|
Jun-20-25
| | perfidious: Jack Spence wrote a report on the 1955 US Junior championship, beginning on page 22 of the link below, with much coverage devoted to Fischer: http://nebraskachess.com/wp-content... |
|
Jun-25-25
 | | gezafan: Here's an interesting documentary about Fischer. At 1:17 it shows a spokesman saying that Fischer could be subjected to a 10 year prison sentence and the theft of the money he made in the 1992 match against Spassky because he played in Yugoslavia. This is absurd. https://youtu.be/pavYCzvg2fM |
|
| Aug-07-25 | | Petrosianic: A letter from an overseas fan, found in the July, 1961 issue of Chess Review: <QUERY
Your young champion, grandmaster R. J. Fischer, is a very remarkable chessplayer, but, away from the chessboard, is he a complete moron? Forgive the query; but, in an interview on our British radio, he said:a) Alekhine's games are "dull and un·original" ; b) Emanuel Lasker was "a weak player" ;
Yes, I know he is still very young, and I know that almost all grandmasters consider their own genius to exceed that of any other player, living or dead. Nevertheless, for anyone to express in public such ludicrous opinions about two of the greatest players of all time really does lead one to suspect that, apart from his brilliance in shifting the pieces around, he is a complete idiot. May I take this opportunity to say how much I enjoy CHESS REVIEW and how eagerly I look forward to its arrival. (MISS) CECILE CHAZALON
Hove, Sussex, England>
I like the way she butters up the magazine at the end. Good thing she didn't hear the "all women are weakies" comment! |
|
Aug-07-25
 | | HeMateMe: If Bob had given Knight odds to Judit polgar I would really have to put my money on Judit. |
|
| Aug-07-25 | | FM David H. Levin: <<Petrosianic>: [...snip...] Good thing she didn't hear the "all women are weakies" comment!> On the other hand, the remark would in a sense put women in a class with Lasker. 8^) |
|
| Aug-07-25 | | Petrosianic: <HeMateMe>: <If Bob had given Knight odds to Judit polgar I would really have to put my money on Judit.> Well, I'll take Fischer's comment in the context of the time he said it, meaning Nona existed, and Judit didn't. Even so, I don't believe any Senior Master can be beaten in a match at Knight odds. I'd like to see it put to the test, though. No humans can beat Stockfish even up any more? Okay, give the human Knight odds. Hans Niemann vs. Stockfish at Knight odds, and let's see where the chips fall. If Niemann wins, move down to a 2600 player, and keep going down until Stockfish wins. If Niemann Loses, move up. Carlsen vs. Stockfish at Knight odds. Odds chess was hugely popular in the 19th century, but has pretty much died out now. In the August 1982 Chess Life, Any Soltis described an odds tournament at the Marshall, played at what sound like extreme odds: Less than 200 Pt Diff: Higher rated gets White
200 Point Difference: Pawn and Move
400 Point Difference: Knight Odds
600 Point Difference: Rook Odds
Can a Master really give Rook odds to a 1600 player and still win? You wouldn't think so, but Soltis said that the odds giver only lost 1 game out of 40. Nobody wants to give odds these days, but Stockfish will do it if ordered to. Bring it on. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 160 OF 160 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
