|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 75 OF 75 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Mar-08-08
 |
| brankat: Yes, Tal did show some western lifestyle inclinations. |
 |
| Mar-08-08 |
| hitman84: <western lifestyle>What do you mean ? |
 |
| Mar-08-08 |
| Jim Bartle: "ex-wife and girlfriend living with you under one roof" And look what it did to Bo's "career." |
 |
Mar-08-08
 |
| brankat: <hitman84> I had meant just what Jim Bartle pointed out. It's a modern form of "polygamy" :-) |
 |
Mar-08-08
 |
| talisman: <Jim Bartle> LOL. great post. how many of us are left who know BO?
<hitman84> western lifestyle according to bo belinsky = tina louise,ann margret,juliette prowse, mamie van duren..................
bo=28 wins
tal=1,171 wins and never sold used cars in Hawaii.
|
 |
Apr-10-08
 |
| brankat: No visitors here in more than a month! Probably due to the fact that too many people waste too much time on Carlsen site. And a few others. Sad. |
 |
Apr-10-08
 |
| achieve: Allow me to make up for some...
About M. Tal's CLASSIC 'Life and Games'
Eyal: <I picked up a copy of his games/autobiog book over the weekend - the one everyone says is among the best books ever, <The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal>>
Btw, I can highly recommend his book on the 1960 match with Botvinnik as well - I've been going over it lately and it's definitely the best match book I've read. I can't really put it better than Dvoretsky, so here's a quote of what he has to say about the book: <This is a wonderful book; in my view, one of the best in all of chess literature. Tal's annotations are quite genuine, and very detailed: each game receives several pages of entertaining text. Tal was an outstanding writer, with a lively, picturesque style. His comments never devolve – as so often happens these days, now that computers have gotten involved in analysis – into an endless rehash of variations. Quite the contrary: at every point in the game, Tal offers us his view of what is happening on the board – a positional assessment – and not a formalized one, either, but a lively, dynamic one. The most valuable characteristic of this book is the way it overflows with psychological observations and considerations. Psychology is a vital element of the chess struggle; yet it is portrayed in the pages of chess literature in either too primitive, or too formalistic and unconvincing a fashion. But here we can observe a believable psychological picture of a great match and each game of that match in particular, described by one of its main participants. An additional important element, and also rarely seen, is that the times after each move are noted.> Interestingly, when you check with an engine the detailed variations that he gives - especially in the sidelines - you can find quite a lot of tactical mistakes. Dvoretsky comments about that: <Note that all his errors were committed in his commentaries – in the game, such tactical errors on his part almost never occurred [...] Tal was a chessplayer with a clearly drawn intuitive bent to his thinking. In sharp positions, he almost unerringly sensed the proper direction in which to search, what prospects lay down this or the other path. In his head, a multitude of ideas whirled; he saw lengthy variations in a split-second, with many unexpected, spectacular points. He saw – but he did not accurately test them – they served only as guideposts, and inspired his chess forays. When the time came to make a final decision, and turn this or that previously noted idea into life, Tal would reexamine them, and as a rule, he found mistakes (from his own annotations, it follows that such episodes also occurred in the game we have just examined). Then, he would correct his plans, choosing the optimal path to his goal (which he usually found, since Tal's intuition rarely betrayed him). Understandably, many of these variations never saw daylight, since his opponent chose a different path. But they remained in his memory, and then were set down in Tal's annotations, without being further tested at the board, with all their shortcomings.> |
 |
Apr-11-08
 |
| brankat: <achieve> Thanks for this. I haven't read Tal's books yet. But I did read a lot of his articles, written mostly in the sixties when he the editor of a Chess magazine in his hometown, Riga. Yes, he was possessed of a considerable talent for literature, no doubt. I did read Botvinnik's work on the 1961 re-match though :-) |
 |
| Apr-24-08 |
| TheDude: I found some nice quotes by Mikhail Tal:
"You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one." And here is one about Bobby Fischer:
"It is difficult to play against Einstein's theory." (on his first loss to Fischer) |
 |
| Apr-24-08 |
| Petrosianic: <"It is difficult to play against Einstein's theory." (on his first loss to Fischer)> I've never understood this quote.
But I do like the one about "I've beaten Bobby so many times that gives me the right to sign for him." They were joking about that in Chess Life for a while. "How do I get an autographed picture of Bobby Fischer?" "Write to M. Tal, Shakmatny, Riga, USSR". Tal had another great quote that I don't have right now, but basically he said that commenting on the Soviet Championship was more fun than playing in it because you could just sit in the press room and say "So-and-so is a fish". Perhaps the best Tal quote is his response to the Soviet alcohol awareness program known as "State vs. Vodka". Tal's quip: "I'll play on the Vodka team." |
 |
Apr-24-08
 |
| talisman: <brankat> got to get the 60 match book and Life and Games.both great.Magic of M.Tal picks up where Life and Games leaves off. |
 |
May-11-08
 |
| whiteshark: Quote of the Day
<Mother, I have just become Ex-World Champion.> -- Tal (upon losing to Botvinnik)
(Don't worry, at least you didn't lose.) |
 |
May-11-08
 |
| hrvyklly: <brankat: I did read Botvinnik's work on the 1961 re-match though> I haven't, what's it like? Does Botvinnik mention Tal's illness? I've only got Tal's book on the 1960 match ;-) |
 |
May-11-08
 |
| who: <hrvyklly> Botvinnik does, and admits that he was a bit immature in the his demands of Tal if Tal wanted to delay the rematch. I don't have the book, but I did read it once upon a time. |
 |
May-11-08
 |
| brankat: <hrvyklly> <who> Actually it was Botvinnik who (together with the FIDE people) proposed that the match be delayed. But Tal responded with something like: "To postpone such an interesting match? No, we'll play, no matter what happens." I think, after winning the first match Tal underestimated Botvinnik's chances in the re-match. Aside from not being in good health, Tal's preparation for the match was inadequate. Botvinnik, on the other hand, during that one year, worked harder, and prepared better than he had ever before. The match proved it. <whiteshark> To become an ex-champ was no small feat. After all, at the time, onlt two players enjoyed the bragging right: Euwe and Smyslov, before Misha joined the exclusive club :-) |
 |
| May-11-08 |
| slomarko: why didn't Tal get a rematch same as Botvinnik? |
 |
May-11-08
 |
| talisman: <hrvyklly> one of the most interesting things about the 61 book is botvinnik's notebook, where he gives a detailed assessment of tal the person and style.botvinnik annotates his wins, others do his losses. |
 |
May-12-08
 |
| who: <brankat> I can track down the quote, but I think Botvinnik admits to belligerently insisting on a doctor's note before he would consider postponing. |
 |
May-13-08
 |
| hrvyklly: <talisman> Is this the same notebook in which Botvinnik said Fischer readily gives up bishop for knight in endings? :-) |
 |
May-13-08
 |
| brankat: <who> Welcome back to the site! It has been a while. I assume that Botvinnik, being as conscientious as he was, wanted to see the "proof" first. He then did propose the postponement of the match. I don't know about "..belligerently..". Tal later confirms it in an interview to Dimitrije Bjelica (a good friend of Tal's) after the match. |
 |
May-13-08
 |
| percyblakeney: <To become an ex-champ was no small feat> Lasker failed many times before finally succeeding, while Alekhine took to the bottle but still only succeeded with the smallest possible margin, and only for a short time. Fischer was so afraid of failing to do it that he had to quit to succeed. Kasparov failed many times and understandably avoided Shirov to give the match to Kramnik instead. Kramnik had to put the title at stake in a tournament to manage, when even forfeiting a game didn't help against Topalov. The players of later years are probably overrated since it is so much easier to become an ex-champ these days. FIDE will have title matches every second year, while Lasker had to go 11 years (twice) to get a chance. |
 |
May-13-08
 |
| percyblakeney: Longest reigns as ex-World Champion:
Smyslov 1958- = 50 years and counting
Euwe 1937-81 = 44 years
Spassky 1972- = 36 years and counting
Botvinnik 1957-58, 1960-61, 1963-95 = 34 years
Fischer 1975-2008 = 33 years
Tal 1961-92 = 31 years
Euwe was the only reigning ex-Champion alive between 1942 and 1957, 1975-81 there were seven of them. |
 |
| May-13-08 |
| slomarko: "reign" as ex-World Champion? what nonsense is that. |
 |
May-13-08
 |
| percyblakeney: Alekhine only had two years as ex-World Champion (1935-37), with strong company in Lasker and Capablanca. 2000-08 also had a strong group of ex-Champions in for example Kasparov, Fischer and Karpov. |
 |
May-14-08
 |
| brankat: <slomarko> Have You allowed the Carlsen page bunch to deprive You of Your sense of humour? :-) |
 |
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 75 OF 75 ·
Later Kibitzing > |