|
Main
Date: 25 May 2008 09:18:17
From: Chess One
Subject: Garry's views on chess, now and then
|
'Chess organisers made wrong moves' By M. Satya Narayan, Senior Reporter Published: May 25, 2008, 00:11 Abu Dhabi: Garry Kasparov said that chess failed to cash in on the famous rivalry between him and Anatoly Karpov in the '80s and '90s of the last century to catapult it into a modern and professional sport. "Great rivalries help push sport like the [Mohammad] Ali-Foreman [George] duel in boxing and the [Bjorn] Borg-McEnroe [John] one in tennis. Likewise, there was a momentum in chess during the '80s but the game's organisers failed to use it to spread the game's popularity," Kasparov told Gulf News on the sidelines of a lecture assignment. "The Fischer-Spassky rivalry presented another chance but unfortunately nothing happened. Today, chess is in a much worse situation as the other sports have all progressed and left this sport far behind," said the man who was rated world number one for almost two decades. Wish Vishy the best Vladimir Kramnik, who deposed Kasparov in 2000, is back to challenge current world champion Viswanathan Anand later this October. On the clash, Kasparov said: "Kramnik is a difficult player and is very solid. He never loses and will prove to be a difficult rival to Anand." Kasparov, who defeated Anand to keep the World Championship title in 1995, said: "I am happy Vishy won the world championship. He always deserved to win it. I will be happy if he keeps it after his match with Kramnik for he deserves it." Source: GulfNews.com
|
|
|
Date: 27 May 2008 15:40:14
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Garry's views on chess, now and then
|
On May 27, 1:05 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote: > I agree to some extent that Chess wastes a lot of precious time. It > should not be played more than once daily. > > One game a day is enough if you play a lot more than its really > wasting your time. Today every where its lots of competition so when > your chess improves you face a lot of competition. > > One should try 1 year if you progress then its OK. Else you should > leve Chess and do something to earn money. > > I am interested in Chess only because my Chess Program may earn me a > little money. Elkse I only play once in a week. I do not read opening > books Ah, then you will never be very good at the game. You need to devote many hours to "mastering" (chuckle) the openings, like the grandmasters do. > and other stuffs as I just play it for fun and to improve my > brain cells by giving them Chess Excercise. > > Chess is just an Excercise for your mind to keep fit. True. It does have that one redeeming quality. And if not taken too seriously, it can be fun; but I don't recall having any "fun" paying chess since I stopped playing blitz, a long time ago. -- help bot
|
|
Date: 27 May 2008 10:05:44
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Garry's views on chess, now and then
|
> > Can you suggest how more people be attracted towards Chess? > > =A0 I probably could, but... chess is a waste of human > intelligence. =A0That's why I'm writing up the solution > to all of mankind's problems instead (it's taking a > me a very, very long time-- sorry). =A0;>D I agree to some extent that Chess wastes a lot of precious time. It should not be played more than once daily. One game a day is enough if you play a lot more than its really wasting your time. Today every where its lots of competition so when your chess improves you face a lot of competition. One should try 1 year if you progress then its OK. Else you should leve Chess and do something to earn money. I am interested in Chess only because my Chess Program may earn me a little money. Elkse I only play once in a week. I do not read opening books and other stuffs as I just play it for fun and to improve my brain cells by giving them Chess Excercise. Chess is just an Excercise for your mind to keep fit. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
Date: 27 May 2008 01:49:07
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Garry's views on chess, now and then
|
On May 27, 3:00 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote: > Tell me how to create Chess awareness among people. > > Write a nice Article which I will post at GetClub So that people get > aware how to play Chess. > > Can you suggest how more people be attracted towards Chess? I probably could, but... chess is a waste of human intelligence. That's why I'm writing up the solution to all of mankind's problems instead (it's taking a me a very, very long time-- sorry). ; >D Chess is not a particularly /fun/ game. Weak players lose and don't know why, while stronger ones obsess over in-depth study and memorization of opening variations, only to fail to truly understand them in the end. Maybe in that respect, bug-house is a superior (albeit a four-player) game. Many of the complaints we see emanate from the relatively few top-ranked players of the world, and unsurprisingly, focus on them not getting as much money as they would like. Here in rgc we quite frequently see attempts to create a variant of the game or scoring thereof to redress the issue of professional players drawing one another by agreement, or even prearrangement. When this is done by people we dislike it is called cheating; yet when you remove the Cold War propaganda the issue remains, and apologists will appear to transfer the blame *away* from the players... . My suggestion is not to attract people to chess, but to REPEL them. Try to steer people into /constructive/ activities, and only teach chess to your hated enemies, to destroy them; get them to squander all their time on a silly board game. Convince your enemies that all they want to do, ever, is play chess. -- help bot
|
|
Date: 27 May 2008 00:00:21
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Garry's views on chess, now and then
|
Tell me how to create Chess awareness among people. Write a nice Article which I will post at GetClub So that people get aware how to play Chess. Can you suggest how more people be attracted towards Chess? Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
Date: 25 May 2008 22:47:24
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Garry's views on chess, now and then
|
I think GK misrepresented the situation with his comparison of chess -- a board game -- to "sports", like tennis or boxing. A tennis match can be interesting to the casual spectator, who can easily follow the ball, note the lines and runs at a ball which cannot be reached, etc. But in order to get anything out of watching a chess game, you need to be able to visualize what is going on; you need to know the rules, how all the various pieces move, and even discern whose turn it is-- which is not always obvious. Believe it or not, a lot of Americans do not know how to play chess! They can recognize a chess set as such, and they are familiar with certain terms, such as match, game, and checkmate, but they do not know how the pieces move and *require* a commentator to explain who is winning and why. This is not like boxing, where anyone can see that the reason one man is losing is that he keeps getting hit-- in the gut, then in the head. Mr. Kasparov stated that "nothing happened" when the alleged rivalry between GMs Spassky and Fischer came to a head; but this is another misrepresentation, probably designed to dismiss the Big One in favor of his own, very real rivalry with AK. A self-promoting lie, like so many others we have seen over the years. In fact, USCF membership increased dramatically as a result of BF's ascendancy to the throne, and even the mainstream media went bonkers for a little while over chess. Reading the title of this thread, I was expecting a recounting of GK's dramatically changing views over time; instead we just got a broad swipe at chess politicians. All I can say is this: does GK really believe that chess players have already forgotten his own failed attempts in this area? His childish handling of the GMA's election of Jan Timman instead of him, resulting in total collapse-- thanks to GK himself? Wow. I know we sub-2800 mere mortals are weak... but not THAT weak. -- help bot
|
|