|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 29 OF 29 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| May-20-09 |
| returnoftheking: <"When the idea of "elitism" became current, there arose Botvinnik. He is still convinced of this "select" role, convinced that it was to everyone's benefit that he was pampered by the government.> Nice quotes kama..
Still a bit funny that "elitism" is supposed to represent life and developments in the era of communism though. |
 |
May-20-09
 |
| kamalakanta: <returnoftheking: <"When the idea of "elitism" became current, there arose Botvinnik. He is still convinced of this "select" role, convinced that it was to everyone's benefit that he was pampered by the government.> <Nice quotes kama..
Still a bit funny that "elitism" is supposed to represent life and developments in the era of communism though.> I guess in any system an "elite" appears...I don't like politics, though, so I'll stop there. Later on tonight I will post a Kasparov quote about Botvinnik's attitude in this context... |
|
| May-20-09 |
| returnoftheking: If you don't like politics you should keep Kasparov out of it:-) |
|
May-21-09
|
| kamalakanta: True, maybe...
I was talking about Kasparov the chess player, not the politician. |
|
| May-21-09 |
| MaxxLange: Wasn't Leninism the idea that a kind of revolutionary vanguard from the intelligentsia could hurry up the Revolution? That of course constitutes an "elite". A Botvinnik is one consequence of that idea. His role in society was to demonstrate the intellectual possibilities of Soviet people, and their superiority over the West, through chess. He adopted "scientific" methods of chess training for this task, which of course influenced his outlook on the entire game. |
|
May-22-09
|
| kamalakanta: Bronstein was not the only player which the Soviet authorities treated badly while favoring Botvinnik... "The conditions of the Levenfish-Botvinnik match for the title of USSR Champion (Moscow/Leningrad 1937) mimicked those of the unforgettable Capablanca-Alekhine encounter: the winner would be the first to win six games, draws not counting, and with a scoe of 5-5 the champion, i.e. Levenfish, would retain his title." The match ended 5-5, so Levenfish retained his title. "It stands to reason that the national champion had every right to appear in a major foreign tournament; such an event was planned in 1938 in Holland." The Soviet Federation decided, against all logic, to send Botvinnik... "There is nothing surprising about this violation of the competitive principle: the Kremlin needed only one leader of Soviet chess, who, besides, had to be young and "correct". And Botvinnik quite sincerely believed that he was the chosen one."
-Kasparov in "My Great Predecessors, Part II, page 121. |
|
| May-22-09 |
| AnalyzeThis: <keypusher: As a Nimzowitsch disciple I hated Tarrasch, but once I began reading his work for myself -- especially his tournament and match books -- I realized I liked Tarrasch too! > Come join us. Leave the dark side. |
|
May-29-09
 |
| Marmot PFL: Levenfish was too old, and anyway if he got out he might have done a Korchnoi. |
|
Jun-12-09
|
| kamalakanta: <Marmot PFL: Levenfish was too old, and anyway if he got out he might have done a Korchnoi.> But it was dishonorable not to send him to an international tournament. After all, Botvinnik did not beat him in this match! This really took the wind out of his sails.... |
|
Jun-13-09
 |
| Open Defence: I think Bronstein deserves a bigger bio |
|
Jun-13-09
|
| kamalakanta: <Open Defence: I think Bronstein deserves a bigger bio> I agree. I could not believe when I saw how small his bio is...seems like he is destined to be always insulted, even after death! |
|
Jun-14-09
|
| Open Defence: <kamalakanta> maybe we should draft one and urge <Benzol> to update it my chess books are all packed in boxes from my relocation so it will be a couple of days at least until I unpack |
|
Jul-01-09
|
| kamalakanta: <Open Defence>
Hi! Sorry I have not responded. Been busy with a few projects. Will write something in the next few days. |
|
| Jul-02-09 |
| mack: <The most powerful weapon in Chess is to have the next move.> Stanley Matthews would echo this in the early nineties, opining that the most important players on the pitch are those without the ball. |
|
Jul-03-09
 |
| whiteshark: Quote of the Day
" The quality of a game lays in how much originality, fighting spirit, beauty the player brings--not technique. " -- Bronstein |
|
| Jul-03-09 |
| returnoftheking: Maybe to Bronstein..But by that standard yesterday's game Carslen-Jako was dull and boring. And Capa would have played a lot of low quality games.. |
|
Jul-03-09
 |
| acirce: Bronstein said a lot of silly things. Of course he has the right to a personal opinion but the <quality> of a game is independent of your own tastes IMO. |
|
Jul-03-09
|
| acirce: Well, thinking about it, I wouldn't call this "silly". But I definitely disagree. |
|
Jul-03-09
 |
| Nimzonick: I just looked at Bronstein's game against Deep Blue, 1996. The 72 year old managed a draw, only one year before he died, in one of the most amazing chess games I've ever seen. Trust me, if you're reading this, watch that game. |
|
| Jul-03-09 |
| ughaibu: I guess you mean this game: Bronstein vs Deep Blue, 1996 |
|
Jul-31-09
|
| whiteshark: <Nimzonick: ...The 72 year old managed a draw, only one year before he died,...> Actually it has been <10> years. But you never know it beforehand. :D |
|
| Aug-31-09 |
| Everett: I have the original Sorcerer's Apprentice (SA), and would very much like to know what the extra 15 games are in the newest version. Also, "Secret Notes" had some annotations of 40 games. I was wondering if there is any crossover between those games and SA. Thank you all for your help. |
|
Oct-29-09
 |
| fred lennox: If i had to pick the most intimate god of chess im sure to pick bronstein. Why didn't he win the champion is speculative. Since speculation is not illegal and a Bronstein passion, i will do so. That Bronstein was inferior t o Botvinnik when playiing the matchis out. Even Kasparav who, if anything would be bias to his great mentor, wrote that Bronstein was the stronger player. One excuse for Bronstein is he was not comfortable by the politics or nonsense surrounding the WC title. There may be truth to this, i suspect there is, but i believe it goes deeper. After all Smylsov and Petrosian would be no less so, nor Tal for that matter. No, i believe there a inherent quality to Bronstein's nature that fascinates but also hinders him - he became bored too easily. More elaborate, compare him to Leonardo, one who shows as much initiative and imagination as any man i know of. Leonardo too become bored all too easily. Options were more intriguing than decisions, the journey was more beguiling then the destination. Leonardo was one the greatest of sketchers but in murals he had problems. Once he decided on what to do, once it became a matter of technique he became bored. So he experimented hoping to speed up the process with resulting disaster. Bronstein, in my opinion, had as much gift for the initiative and imagination as any. In the progress of the wc match one can feel his lack of interest increasing.
Botvinnik won mainly the games that were adjourned and lost mainly the ones that weren't. bronstein apparently found adjourn games boring. The last game was dull for a dramatic game. Botvinnik you might say, out bored him. It can boil down to killer instinct. What was lacking is the tenacious spirit in dull positions as found in Reshevsky. Otherwise he'd be as great as they come. |
|
Oct-29-09
 |
| parisattack: <fred lennox:>
Thoughtful comments. Chess is a lot of things to a lot of people - and priorities differ; one can love the game in many ways! That said, the goal is to win - and winning the WC seems to take a rounded effort...Alekhine adopted to Capablanca; Tal to Bovinnik, etc. Luck and timing do not hurt either, of course. Those passionate about one type of love tend to get left out of the WC - like Bronstein (and perhaps like Nimzovitch although qua chess Bronstein probably a stronger candidate). An interesting take on Bronstein is in the new Chess Secrets: The Giants of Power Play. I'd never thought of Bronstein as a power player - but the author makes a decent case, I think. |
|
| Nov-05-09 |
| Everett: Trickster figures do not make good kings. They play the edges and push the boundaries of what is possible. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 29 OF 29 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
