|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 35 OF 112 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-03-06
 | | Sneaky: Kasparov and Karpov have such a tight record that it's hard to place one in a different class than the other. Is it not true that their lifetime record against one another was only a single game apart after the first so-many-hundred games they played? If one is great, they both are great. With that in mind, it becomes difficult to say that Fischer is the 2nd best. The easy solution to this conundrum: just admit it, Fischer is the best! |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | KingG: <Sneaky> Your reasoning was perfect until the last sentence. :-) |
|
Jan-03-06
| | Sneaky: No, that's where my logic becomes impeccable! Kasparov and Karpov are gods... and Fischer is Zeus! Anyhow, Eric was asked for his opinion, he gave it, leave it at that. It's not a subject that can be solved by debate--the proof being the 20,000 pages of debate on this site which, to date, have gotten us nowhere. ;-) |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | veigaman: Kasparov and karpov was a marvelous rivalry, the score between them is very tight, perphas the difference was that kasparov always won the crucial game to define sth. I think Karpov failed a little bit in his physicall conditions. |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | KingG: <Sneaky> I'm not debating his right to put Fischer as the second best player of all time, i'm just surprised that he considers there to be a big gap between Fischer and Karpov, but he puts Kasparov ahead of Fischer. That would imply that there is an even bigger gap between Kasparov and Karpov, which doesn't seem to be the case to me. |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | Jim Bartle: Good point, veigaman. According to this database, Kasparov has a score of 51.5% against Karpov. Short of total dominance, but it's undeniable that after the 0-5 start in '84 Kasparov did win the crucial games. |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | ughaibu: For an example of the level of rubbish alleged (and apparently believed by some) about Karpov, see Karpov vs Yudasin, 1988 |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | Akavall: <ughaibu> How can somebody fall for that? The quote makes absolutely no sense! |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | setebos: I do not see why the Soviet authorities would object to
Botvinnik being WC on account of his jewish blood given the prominent role of jews in the Bolshevik revolution. K Marx was a german jew. |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | ughaibu: So they wouldn't have objected to a German world champion either. |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | setebos: Of course not,since they didnt object to a Latvian (Tal) or Armenian (Petrosian) |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | ughaibu: And neither would they object to an Estonian. |
|
Jan-03-06
 | | WannaBe: Phew... Wow... I am staying off this page for the next few days!! |
|
| Jan-03-06 | | ughaibu: Apart from the Kasparov game there are also rumours associated with Karpov vs Tal, 1979. I imagine in both cases we are enjoying the sour grapes of lunatic Tal fans. |
|
Jan-03-06
 | | Eric Schiller: <wannabe>I'm tempted to do the same :-)
Most of these issues will never be settled, they'll provide fodder for barroomn talk and Kib. Cafe posts forever. Tal was my hero growing up, and I was honored to get to know him. He was of tremendous help to me at Reykjavik 1986, where he did post-mortems on almost all my games. He was one of the most pleasant GMs to be around. He just loved chess, and didn't care who played a game, as long as it was interesting. He was loved and respected by just about everyone, and even a strong GM like Seirawan gave up his seat at a post-mortem of his own game, so that Tal could sit and analyze it. |
|
| Jan-06-06 | | schnarre: <Eric Schiller> It's fortunate you had the chance to get to know Tal. Cherish those memories! |
|
Jan-06-06
| | Eric Schiller: <schnarre> I do, and also Najdorf, one of the most entertaining players ever. But Tal was more of a chess hero to me than Fischer, and a much greater influence on my approach to the game. It's too bad there is no video of all the great Tal post-mortems and analysis sessions. But Tal would probably be unhappy with modern chess and all of its reliance on computer analysis. |
|
| Jan-09-06 | | schnarre: <Eric Schiller> Could one argue that relying so much on computer analysis results in disregarding one's own perspective? |
|
Jan-09-06
| | Eric Schiller: <schnarre> Yes, except in "Advance" chess where humans can override the decisions. |
|
| Jan-09-06 | | Larsker: <20,000 pages of debate on this site which, to date, have gotten us nowhere. ;-)> Well, some of it is mighty entertaining at times. |
|
Jan-09-06
| | Eric Schiller: I've just put up a collection of Awesome moves from 1900-25, part of the contents of my book Awesome Chess Moves. The CG database was missing a bunch of them, so I've sent the games (with notes) to CG, and that explains the years missing in the current collection. Enjoy these games, which IMHO contain the best move each year from 1900-25. I'll do the rest of the century when I get some time, a promissory note is hereby issued. But probably not until after the Gibraltar tournament ends. |
|
| Jan-10-06 | | Averageguy: <Eric Schiller> Did you dubb the variation 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Qb6 the "Edinburgh Variation"? |
|
Jan-10-06
| | Eric Schiller: <averageguy>Yes, I developed most of the analysis in Edinburgh in 1985. |
|
| Jan-10-06 | | Gypsy: <...a collection of Awesome moves ...> Thx. Inspirational stuff. |
|
| Jan-11-06 | | schnarre: <Eric Schiller> Keep up the good work!!! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 35 OF 112 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
