|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-19-05 | | geaux82: . <AlexanderMorphy> I agree, he was probably pretty good at chess, at least as good as Fidel Castro: F Terrazas vs F Castro, 1966
. |
|
Oct-19-05
 | | Eric Schiller: <geaux> But not as good as Che, who was reported to be a very good player and often played against Fidel. |
|
| Feb-10-06 | | itz2000: Black letted white win! there's no way someone would do 13..a5?!?!?! when there's a near-by threat of mate! c6 would have been solid and save him from mate!.
I'm not talking about the rest of the game! Though the finish of this game is probably by pressuring the black with an axe or something! ;) |
|
| Feb-10-06 | | TylerD: As I just pointed out on Karjakins page (where someone actually called Napoleon a "genius" chessplayer): Napoleon was NOT an especially strong player, even though he would very much have wanted to be... |
|
| Feb-10-06 | | radu stancu: Either 12...Qxe5 13.Rf5 Qxf5 14.exf5 Rg8 or 13...Qxe5 would have led to a totally won game by black as others already pointed out before me. Seeing 13...a5 I tend to side with those who say that black let Napoleon win on purpose. |
|
| Feb-10-06 | | Calli: <Texas Time Traveler> "... game was never played between Napoleon and Bertrand, but rather between H.A. Kennedy and the Rev. John Owen." Kennedy published this game in a humorous article, "Life of Augustus Fitzsnob, Esq.", Chess Monthly, July 1860. He probably did not expect his bit of fun to be taken so seriously. The Kennedy-Owen game was likely played in the 1857-1859 period. To reveal how game scores become corrupted, the game ended at move 13 where Kennedy wrote "And Napolean mates in five". Evidently, Kennedy was fond of his little game with Owen and having announced a mate in 5. None of the games assigned to Napoleon Bonaparte are authentic. |
|
| Feb-12-06 | | Whitehat1963: Are 9...cxb2 10. Bxf7, Kd8 and 12. Bxg8 really the best moves available. They look dubious at the very least, to me anyway. |
|
| Mar-12-06 | | blingice: This is a rather absurd game. That's really all I have to say. |
|
| Mar-22-06 | | danielpi: Agreed. I'm a huge Napoleon fan, but in a chess game even I would toast him. |
|
| Apr-15-06 | | Nikita Smirnov: I just need to say that i think if i play my best that i could beat mr. Napoleon Bonaparte I. |
|
| Sep-14-06 | | ValmonUni: chess has a great deal to do with psychology....
all these people that claim that they would have "toasted" napoleon, i think are just ringing their own bell. He might not have been a chess genius, but i think that even when encountered with a chess player better than himself, napoleon would still be able to intimidate them into bad moves and blunders. in short, i may be better than napoleon in chess... but i'd probably be pissing in my pants playing him. After all... he is napoleon. |
|
| Oct-29-06 | | Nikita Smirnov: Fantastic game by Napoleon. |
|
Oct-29-06
 | | knightfly: <danielpi>And I'm a huge Duke of Wellington fan who helped rid Europe of a despotic millitary dictator at Waterloo. |
|
| Oct-29-06 | | setebos: I wonder if the Duke played chess. |
|
| Oct-30-06 | | danielpi: <knightfly> Waterloo was pure luck. Had any number of accidents (totally outside either commander's control) happened differently, Napoleon would have won. And the world would have been better for it. Had Napoleon managed to conquer Europe, there wouldn't have been any Hitler (apart from the fact that Germany would have been part of France, Napoleon granted freedom of religion to all his citizens- and the rock-solid separation of church and state would have been a serious obstacle for any would-be Hitlers). Tort reform would be a nonissue (Napoleon's policies effectively discouraged frivolous lawsuits). Support for the arts and sciences would have been incomparably better than it is today. And taxation would have been far more just. No doubt Napoleon was a militaristic dictator. However, he was the philosopher-king described by Plato made real. He was the first truly liberal ruler. He was a product of the revolution. He created the first public school system. He eradicated corruption and nepotism from government. If you prefer Wellington- a truly minor historical figure, who was a mere patsy to the monarchic governments that preceded Napoleon- then that's your right. But perhaps you should keep in mind that the kings and queens that ruled Europe were no less despotic than Napoleon, and they were considerably less intelligent, effective, progressive, or just. I would count Napoleon's defeats among the greatest losses to the benefit of mankind. |
|
Oct-30-06
 | | Sneaky: danielpi! You must observe the first rule of history: in every war ever fought, throughout all of human history, the righteous side has ALWAYS prevailed and the loser was a scoundral at best (and a monster at worst!). This is a well established fact. Of course maybe this has something to do with the victors of the wars writing the subsequent history... ;-) |
|
| Oct-30-06 | | danielpi: <Sneaky> Alas. Yet, M. Bonaparte has done pretty well in spite of it. I read somewhere that 70 nations continue to use the Napoleonic Code as the basis for their governmental systems. I'm not sure if this includes Louisiana (not a "nation", obviously), since 70 seems awfully high if you're only counting sovereign nations. And clearly, the Code is modified as time goes by, but nonetheless, I'd count that as a pretty impressive legacy for the "losing side". And anyway, even his enemies (including Wellington) readily admitted that Napoleon was the greatest general that ever lived. Direct quotes are easy to find. Doubters are welcome to google for them. |
|
Oct-31-06
| | knightfly: <danielpi>Oh dear, I had no idea the French megalomaniac was revered so much in America. Over here in England he is seen as little more than early version of Hitler intent on European domination whereas Wellington is looked upon as one of our greatest historical figures who by the way he took his orders from an elected parliament and was not a monarchist patsy.
Anyway I'll end all this with a Wellington quote: "Nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won".
Hardly something the warmongering Napolean would have said. |
|
| Oct-31-06 | | whatthefat: <knightfly: Over here in England> Gee, there couldn't possibly be any bias in the history books could there... You give the impression of knowing nothing whatsoever about his contributions beyond the battlefield, to civics, education, politics, etc. etc. |
|
| Nov-01-06 | | danielpi: <knightfly> You do realize that you provide absolutely no facts to support your negative opinion of Napoleon. You do slip in insults like "megalomaniac" and "warmongering", which are hardly evidence of anything other than your own personal bias. As for the "warmongering"- it is true, Napoleon was a general. And, as a general, his business was war. Nonetheless, after his return from Elba, it was the monarchies of Europe that attacked him- not the other way around. Same with the Russians. And there are plenty of other examples, where Napoleon attempted to find diplomatic solutions before turning to war (or had war declared on him first). And let me ask, how is Napoleon, who established freedom of religion, separation of church and state, and equal rights for all ethnicities, even remotely similar to Hitler? Wellington, on the other hand, was ridiculously conservative, and his party was ousted for its resistance to liberal reforms. If I had to pick a proto-Hitler, it'd be Wellington over Napoleon. I must say that I do like the British. However, one of the things I like most is the British reputation for open-mindedness, liberal politics, and cosmopolitanism, and you're showing me just how "patriotic" the Brits can be. To quote one of my countrymen, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." <whatthefat> Thanks for pointing it out. |
|
| Nov-01-06 | | setebos: Napoleon was no doubt an enlightened despot. |
|
| Nov-01-06 | | tino72: <To quote one of my countrymen, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."> Are you sure? I thought it was Samuel Johnson - an Englishman. Or is it one of these quotes that a number of people lay claim to? P.S: Not everyone in the UK regards Napoleon as a prototype Hitler. That is, I agree, nonsense. P.P.S: On the other hand, it is just as ridiculous to compare Wellington to Hitler - he was not even the head of state - unlike Napoleon, who after all declared himself emperor! I do agree with you that Napoleon is clearly a more important figure than Wellington in modern history: he is up there as one of the giants of that period (together with Beethoven). |
|
| Nov-01-06 | | Stonewaller2: 1. If this game was played in 1814 it probably would have to have been played on Elba as Napoleon abdicated in the spring of that year and did not return to France until the Hundred Days in 1815. How the report of his winning one game of chess against his aide-de-camp-cum-factotum would have affected that campaign or his future reputation seems to me unclear. 2. The best summary of the British-influlenced portrait of Napoleon as Corsican Ogre is probably Paul Johnson's biography for Penguin Books (see http://www.amazon.com/Napoleon-Peng...). I wouldn't recommend that as the only book anyone reads on the man. It's more than a bit of a stretch to see in Bonaparte the prototype of Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, or to blame his admittedly overweaning ambitions or his rule of France and the Empire he created, enlightened and authoritarian by turns, for the coldblooded, dispassionate massacres carried out in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia or Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. To imply all that and also to imply that Napoleon was mostly lucky rather than brilliant as a military commander, as Johnson does, is more than contradictory. Against his Great Man in History argument many have argued convincingly that the historical and social forces at work in revolutionary France would inevitably have produced Napoleon or someone remarkably like him. Vive la France! Vive la liberte! |
|
Nov-01-06
 | | tpstar: White missed the stock tactic 6. Bxf7+! Kxf7 7. Qh5+ & 8. Qxc5 winning a Pawn while Black can't castle. The immediate 6. Qh5 works but is less good due to 6 ... Qe7 7. Bxf7+ Qxf7 8. Qxc5 and Black can still castle. <Calli> Thanks for the background information. |
|
Nov-03-06
| | knightfly: <danielpi>You are right of course. I was just being overly patriotic. Since your last msg I've delved into Napoleon's background and can now appreciate the many reforms he made which were indeed embraced by other countries. Also as pointed out by others he was in no way comparable to Hitler.
Whilst I am probably too much of patriotic Brit to be total fan of his you have at least opened my eyes and I now see things more objectively.
As for your Dr. Johnson quote, thanks. I quite like the idea of being called a scoundrel. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 11.fxe5