I bought the book in 1966 for about 1 dollar. In 1991 or '92, when I happened to be desperately broke, I sold most of my books to a used books store, New York Tournament book among others. I believe I got $7.00 for it.

I also like Keres's analyses. Fischer's "60 games", too.

Botvinnik's annotations strike me as somewhat dry, even stern(?), but still deep and instructive.

Also, Gligiric's work on '72 match is outstanding.

Just recently I had a chance to read Tal's "Life and games of M.Tal", and was quite impressed.

One intriguing thing. You may know something about it.

A few months ago, probably sometime late last year, I saw a post, most likely on Dr.Lasker'page, talking about his book on Petrograd, 1909. I've never read the book. According to the post, in the Preface to the book Lasker states something like "..the analysis in this book will be accurate..".

He then goes on to analyze/annotate all the games. I think there was a total of 171, or so, games.

Now, apparently, and I don't know how to verify this, only some 4-5 years ago somebody endeavored to subject Lakser's analysis to a scrutiny using the most advanced (at the time) computer engine. I don't remember which one it was.

After a long and thorough run through all of the games, the engine found a grand total of 9 "..minor mistakes.."! Actually they were not even mistakes. More like 9 "..slight improvements..".!

Of course, Dr'Lasker did the original work all by himself, no assistants, no engines, almost 100 years earlier. I find it fascinating, even mind boggling.

Apr-27-06

<offramp>: <When Lasker wrote the book on the 1909 St Petersburg tournament he started by saying, "This is a book in which the analysis is correct."

I recently got the Chessbase version of the book on the match, and Lasker's analysis has been tested by computer. The editors say:

"A small handful of cases do present themselves; instsnces in which the world champion failed to reach the high standard he set himself."

The editors then give 9 cases (there were 179 games) where Lasker was a bit off, mainly in sub-variations.

(I have a feeling that for these sub-variations Lasker may not have had the position set up on the board - you know what I mean.)

Another fantastic Lasker achievement!>

Apr-27-06

<<whatthefat>: <offramp: The editors then give 9 cases (there were 179 games) where Lasker was a bit off, mainly in sub-variations.> That's truly astounding for century-old analysis.>>

Apr-27-06

<<keypusher: <offramp> Some stupid questions -- is the chessbase version a cd? How much does it cost?>>

Apr-27-06

Aside from being a top level GM, an analyst/explorer, Gligoric also got a degree in journalism almost 60 years ago.

I bought it at the same bookseller i saw it at and could not find it when i went back a second time. I am sure it was priced at $10.00 a few weeks ago. this volume was priced at 12.50 and had an address label of its former owner(he had brought in over a dozen chessbooks and pamphlets)

I do not know if the book had been dragged off to the far corner of the store and only recently properly reshelved or if someone bought it then resold it to the same bookseller just a few weeks later---it must be the exact same book and not some other copy!!!

Resignation Trap posted this on the first page of kibitzing here...