| |
Main
Date: 22 Nov 2007 06:22:11
From: [email protected]
Subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
THE SEARCH FOR A SMOKING GUN
The search for an elusive smoking gun in the Botvinnik-Keres dispute
was covered extensively over the years ever since Larry Evans
rekindled the issue in THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES (Chess Life, October
1996, page 40) where he alluded to KGB files: "The answer to whether
the games were rigged exists not only in the KGB files but also in the
games themselves," he noted.
The issue evolved over the years in Evans On Chess. Apparently GM
Evans later came to doubt that a smoking gun would ever surface, as
indicated by the following item in Chess Life, ch 1997 (page 13):
THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES (Cont'd)
[Note: Last October's article on how Keres was forced to throw games
to Botvinnik in the 1948 World Championship generated many responses --
shock, disbelief, indignation, and relief that Keres finally received
justice.]
Despite a demand from Estonia, all the KGB files dealing with Keres
have still not been released. More investigative journalism is taking
place in the Baltic republics, but for some skeptics no evidence will
be enough. Even if a 'smoking gun' is found, somebody is sure to say:
'The files could have been forged. Why should we believe that the
secret service of a totalitarian regime can be a source of reliable
information?'
Our only answer is that the evidence exists in the games themselves.
As noted last October: 'Close analysis of these games leaves little
doubt that Keres was forced to take a dive.' The sad fact is that we
are dealing here with a political decision that was made in the
Kremlin far from the 64 squares.
Many letters from readers pro and con appeared in Chess Life,. Evans
On Chess (September 2001 page 14) awarded the Best Question to an item
submitted by Richard Laurie. Here is the Q&A in full, not just a
snipped sentence.
KERES-BOTVINNIK SCANDAL (CASE CLOSED!)
Richard Laurie, Erie, Pennsylvania
Q. In THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES (October 1996) you wrote: "Keres was
in trouble for having competed in Nazi-organized tournaments during
the war. The KGB wanted to execute Keres for treason, and his family
was also in peril. His case was examined at the highest level in the
Kremlin; they let him rejoin his family in Estonia, but the price of
his reprieve was to abandon his quest for the crown."
Euwe played a match against Bogoljubov at Carlsbad in 1941 under the
Nazis, so he was not "pure" either according to Pablo Moran in AGONY
OF A GENIUS. In researching this period, I also discovered that
Alekhine warned Keres not to return to Soviet-occupied Estonia.
Botvinnik became a true Soviet hero after he tied for first with
Capablanca at Nottingham 1936, and he was coddled by the Kremlin. The
British magazine Chess (July-Aug-Sept 1949 with follow up letters by
Pachman, Wade, and others) reported that Bogartyrchuk, who won the
USSR Championship in 1927, later was warned "by a Communist Propaganda
Dept. official in Kiev that his failure to participate regularly in
chess events and his excellent record against Botvinnik might be held
against him and be interpreted in a way that could be dangerous for
him."
A. Richard Laurie is author of KNIGHT OF THE ID, a fine play about the
last days of Alekhine in Lisbon 1946. His view is substantiated by THE
OXFORD COMPANION TO CHESS: "When the war in Europe ended Keres
returned home, but not before making a deal with Soviet authorities.
He would be 'forgiven' for playing in German tournaments i.e.,
collaborating with the enemy. In return Keres promised not to
interfere with Botvinnik's challenge to Alekhine."
Kenneth Whyld, the book's co-author, said Keres confided to him that
he was not directly ordered to lose but "was given a broader
instruction that if Botvinnik failed to become world champion, it must
not be the fault of Keres."
Translation: Keres' life hung by a thread and he was forbidden to
finish ahead of Soviet hero Botvinnik. While I was in London last year
for the Kasparov-Kramnik match, Polish IM Andrei Filipowicz, the chief
arbiter, told me it wasn't necessary for Stalin to issue a direct
order because Keres knew what was expected of him in a nation where
terror reigned supreme.
In a letter to the editor of KINGPIN (Spring 2000) Taylor Kingston
claimed I misrepresented his views about the Keres-Botvinnik
controversy. But his SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE (Chess Life, May 1998)
devotes six pagtes to the topic without reaching any conclusion
despite what Keres told Whyld and Botvinnik's startling admission in a
1991 interview that Stalin did intervene. Mr. Kingston, whose work I
generally admire, probably is unfamiliar with a syndicated newspaper
column I wrote in 1999 entitled AN OLD SCANDAL. Here is an excerpt:
CASE CLOSED
I analyzed all five games, sadly concluding Keres was probably
coerced. Alas, his dilemma was how to lose and make it look real. "Who
wouldn't throw games to save his own life and his family?" I asked,
reviving an old scandal.
Taylor Kingston, an amateur, wrote a laudatory letter to the editor of
CHESS LIFE: "Larry Evans' article The Tragedy of Paul Keres in October
1996 was one of the best pieces of historical writing you've ever run.
Evans' analysis of games in the 1948 World Championship makes a strong
case that Keres' failure was the result of coercion by Soviet
authorities. We should investigate further and find out the facts. We
could be on the verge of uncovering a major scandal in chess history."
Kingston later wrote an article disputing my theory, mostly ignoring
my critique of Keres' strange moves. This was like dismissing the
Zapruder film in the Kennedy assassination.
Recently THE MITROKHIN ARCHIVE: THE KGB IN EUROPE AND THE WEST by
Chris Andrews and Vasili Mitrokhin was based on documents smuggled out
of Russia. Page 728 reveals that in 1978 no less than 18 secret
service agents helped Anatoly Karpov retain his title against defector
Viktor Korchnoi! 'A book remains to be written about KGB involvement
in Soviet chess,' noted the authors.
Clearly the Soviets used dirty tricks in chess for decades. The truth
about Botvinnik and Keres may never be known, but until a smoking gun
is found in KGB files, I firmly believe the games themselves contain
the best evidence of a fix.
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2007 23:40:28
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
FEBRUARY 1985 CHESS LIFE (page 29)
<Crackpots never change. Parr is the same guy who suggested (back in
the pages of the Feb. '85 CHESS LIFE) that Kasparov was being forced
to lose his match with Karpov. > -- chessmad
"Chasmad," an apt self-inflicted monicker, appears
to be a chap from Florida who is afflicted. We treat him
gently because he appears here during periods of
recovery. In these moments he may chat up with the
chest of hares at the ides, though to be fair to
the man he is no worse than the rest of us until the
breaking point, which is when he requires medically
fruitful ministrations to trim the tread a trifle.
In addition to reading comprehension courses, he
apparently needs anger management classes.
Mr. Mad is among those few who still talk about
American Cold War rhetoric and he fails to realize
that everyone is now a kneejerk anti-Commie. The
winning side churns out the histories and news
stories. As Alexander Griboyedov wrote in Woe from
Wit, "I will tell such truth about you that lies will
be eclipsed."
And, well, the truth about the late Soviet
empire proved so grisly that nothing substantial ever
written by any of Chasmad's hated cold warriors was
materially exaggerated. Indeed, the highest estimates
of unnatural loss of life in the late USSR by the most
anti-communist writers ultimately proved lower than
demographer Murray Feshbach's final conclusions.
As Chasmad would have it, I asserted that the
games of KKI were fixed. Here again is what I actually
wrote, and readers will note that no such assertion
was/is made:
Editor's Note: Once again, ugly rumors surround a
Karpov title match. If, before, they centered on
Korchnoi's son being physically beaten in a Soviet
labor camp on the eve of the 1981 Merano match, this
time it is being said that the KGB has threatened
Kasparov's family should he defeat Karpov. The
controversy began on October 13, when Harry Golombek
wrote in The Times (London) that "an overwhelming
victory" by Karpov "would, like Hamlet's uncle's
offence, smell to heaven."
IM Jonathan Tisdall, our reporter in Moscow
vigorously rebuts Mr. Golombek's charges. However, for
a wide-range of opinion on the world championship
match, see "Is The Fix on in Moscow?"
As of press time in early December, Karpov leads
Kasparov 5-0 with 26 draws.
[email protected] wrote:
> OUR FRIEND CHARLES IS BACK
>
> Exhibiting his usual lack of reading comprehension.
>
> <Crackpots never change. Parr is the same guy who suggested (back in
> the pages of the Feb. '85 CHESS LIFE) that Kasparov was being forced
> to lose his match with Karpov. It was another example of "the bad
> commie beating the good commie, so of course the games must be
> fixed!"> -- chasmad
>
> CHESS LIFE, FEBRUARY 1985, page 29
>
> Editor's Note: [As of press time in early December, Karpov leads
> Kasparov 5-0 with 26 draws.] Once again, ugly rumors surround a Karpov
> title match. If, before, they centered on Korchnoi's son being
> physically beaten in a Soviet labor camp on the eve of the 1981 Merano
> match, this time it is being said that the KGB has threatened
> Kasparov's family should he defeat Karpov. The controversy began on
> October 13, when Harry Golombek wrote in The Times (London) that "an
> overwhelming victory" by Karpov "would, like Hamlet's uncle's offence,
> smell to heaven."
>
> IM Jonathan Tisdall, our reporter in Moscow vigorously rebuts Mr.
> Golombek's charges. However, for a wide-range of opinion on the world
> championship match, see "Is The Fix on in Moscow?"
>
>
> ***********************************************************************************
>
> Needless to say, I did not write what chasmad claimed I wrote and this
> diversion has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
>
> Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2007 14:10:51
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
WRONG AGAIN
<It became a "controversy" because you made it one. > -- chasmad
Chasmad lives up to his alias once again. We simply reported a story
that was hot at the time, unlike the current Chess Life that simply
ignores many controversies.
As reported in that same issue of Chess Life (page 31) Several major
newspapers in Western Europe have published reports that the Karpov-
Kasparov championship match is riggued. Harry Golombek, writing in The
Times [London] suggests that "Kasparov has been warned not to play
well and has been given to understand that the consequences for him
and his family would be disastrous if he did."
>The article was typical of a Cold War mentality that poisoned the pages of CHESS LIFE for years. Your flogging of the Keres-Botvinnik "controversy" is just another expression of this derangement.> --chessmad
The Keres-Botvinnik scandal is important to an understanding of chess
history and new facts are still unfolding.
chasmad wrote:
> On Dec 29, 3:13?am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> <snip evasions>
>
> > Needless to say, I did not write what chasmad claimed I wrote and this
> > diversion has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
> >
> How do I explain this in a way that's simple enough for even your
> feeble mind to comprehend? Let me try:
>
> The decision to examine the whole idiotic "Is the Fix on in Moscow?"
> issue in CHESS LIFE was yours (you WERE the editor, weren't you?).
> Instead of praising Karpov's accomplishment -- that of taking a big
> lead against a formidable opponent -- you took the opportunity to
> insult him, by implying that his victories were perhaps not fairly
> earned. It became a "controversy" because you made it one.
>
> The article was typical of a Cold War mentality that poisoned the
> pages of CHESS LIFE for years. Your flogging of the Keres-Botvinnik
> "controversy" is just another expression of this derangement.
>
> Mercifully, you were fired by the USCF. Maybe there is a God, after
> all.
>
> > Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
>
> Yes, you can slide back under your rock now.
>
> Charles
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2007 13:45:13
From: chasmad
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Dec 29, 3:13=A0am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
>
<snip evasions >
> Needless to say, I did not write what chasmad claimed I wrote and this
> diversion has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
>
How do I explain this in a way that's simple enough for even your
feeble mind to comprehend? Let me try:
The decision to examine the whole idiotic "Is the Fix on in Moscow?"
issue in CHESS LIFE was yours (you WERE the editor, weren't you?).
Instead of praising Karpov's accomplishment -- that of taking a big
lead against a formidable opponent -- you took the opportunity to
insult him, by implying that his victories were perhaps not fairly
earned. It became a "controversy" because you made it one.
The article was typical of a Cold War mentality that poisoned the
pages of CHESS LIFE for years. Your flogging of the Keres-Botvinnik
"controversy" is just another expression of this derangement.
Mercifully, you were fired by the USCF. Maybe there is a God, after
all.
> Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Yes, you can slide back under your rock now.
Charles
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2007 00:13:26
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
OUR FRIEND CHARLES IS BACK
Exhibiting his usual lack of reading comprehension.
<Crackpots never change. Parr is the same guy who suggested (back in
the pages of the Feb. '85 CHESS LIFE) that Kasparov was being forced
to lose his match with Karpov. It was another example of "the bad
commie beating the good commie, so of course the games must be
fixed!" > -- chasmad
CHESS LIFE, FEBRUARY 1985, page 29
Editor's Note: [As of press time in early December, Karpov leads
Kasparov 5-0 with 26 draws.] Once again, ugly rumors surround a Karpov
title match. If, before, they centered on Korchnoi's son being
physically beaten in a Soviet labor camp on the eve of the 1981 Merano
match, this time it is being said that the KGB has threatened
Kasparov's family should he defeat Karpov. The controversy began on
October 13, when Harry Golombek wrote in The Times (London) that "an
overwhelming victory" by Karpov "would, like Hamlet's uncle's offence,
smell to heaven."
IM Jonathan Tisdall, our reporter in Moscow vigorously rebuts Mr.
Golombek's charges. However, for a wide-range of opinion on the world
championship match, see "Is The Fix on in Moscow?"
***********************************************************************************
Needless to say, I did not write what chasmad claimed I wrote and this
diversion has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
|
| |
Date: 28 Dec 2007 18:23:28
From: chasmad
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 22, 9:22=A0am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> THE SEARCH FOR A SMOKING GUN
>
<snip pompous nonsense >
Crackpots never change. Parr is the same guy who suggested (back in
the pages of the Feb. '85 CHESS LIFE) that Kasparov was being forced
to lose his match with Karpov. It was another example of "the bad
commie beating the good commie, so of course the games must be fixed!"
Did you ever admit your mistake, dumbass?
Charles
|
| |
Date: 28 Dec 2007 08:41:31
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES (Chess Life, October 1996, page 40)
In a groundbreaking article that revived an old debate GM Larry Evans
wrote:
"The first major tournaments in Europe after the war were held in
London, Hastings and Groningen," recently reported CHESS magazine. "It
was unthinkable to hold them without Keres, but that is what happened
-- because Botvinnik did not want him to play."
Taylor Kingston was enraged when he found out the article in CHESS was
written by James Schroeder. He went ballistic and wrote letters to
CHESS and GM Evans chastising them for even quoting Schroeder.
In THE KERES-BOTVINNIK CASE: A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE (Chess Life, May
1998, page 49) Kingston arrived at no conclusion about whether Keres
was forced to lose to Botvinnik, and he took a whack at Schroeder
along the way.
The burden of proof is on the prosecution. Such principles apparently
are alien to James Schroeder, who in the 4/96 issue of the British
monthly CHESS espoused the most extreme view I have found on the Keres-
Botvinnik case. Schroeder, an American from Ohio, accuses Botvinnik of
doing "everything in his power to destroy Keres." His allegations
include: that Keres was barred by Botvinnik personally from postwar
tournaments such as Groningen 1946....This is at best speculation and
at worst rubbish. Schroeder's forays into chess history often exhibit
strong prejudice, and are rife with fallacies...."
Yet Keres' widow backs Schroeder's claim in NEW IN CHESS (#8, 2007,
page 82):
"About 15 years ago, when Botvinnik was still alive, the question
arose again of whether he had a hand in Keres' non-participation in
the extremely strong postwar tournament in Groningen in 1946. ia
Keres decisively refuted the contradictory opinion, that Botvinnik
possibly supported Keres' efforts to play in the tournament, saying
that it could only have been the other way around."
I plan on returning to the issue of Taylor Kingston's "confidential"
letters to playwright Richard Laurie urging him to retract an item he
submitted to Chess Life.
Yours, Larry Parr
[email protected] wrote:
> THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES
>
> The latest issue of NEW IN CHESS (#8, 2007) contains a rekable
> article by GM Genna Sosonko about Paul Keres that adds more fuel to
> the thesis advanced by GM Larry Evans in Chess Life (October 1996)
> that Keres was forced to take a dive against Botvinnik in the 1948
> World Championship. Some salient excerpts:
>
> "Playing in tournaments in Nazi-occupied Europe, Keres met Alekhine on
> several occasions. 'Do you think the Bolsheviks would dispose of me if
> I fell into their hands?' he once inquired of the world champion. 'You
> shouldn't even have any doubt' Alekhine replied, 'that they'd shorten
> you by a head.'"
>
> "The late David Bronstein recalled: 'In the 1948 match-tournament
> everything was done for Botvinnik, as it was known that he couldn't
> hold on for more than 15 consecutive games. It was simply a parody of
> a tournament -- with a two-week break between The Hague and Moscow. I
> asked Keres, 'Paul Petrovich, how could you allow such a thing back
> then?' He threw me such a look that I immediately stopped short --
> 'I'll take, take my question back.'"
>
> "During the championship of the Soviet Union in Leningrad in 1947 a
> group of players signed a collective letter in which Keres was branded
> 'a collaborator' and a 'fascist.' Botvinnik himself insisted that he
> was 'above all this nonsense,' adding that perhaps he did sign the
> collective letter from the grandmasters, but he never personally spoke
> out against the Estonian grandmaster and never plotted against him.'"
>
> "In his last years, when he was in Moscow, Keres telephoned Botvinnik
> and visited him at home. The reasons for their confrontations had
> evaporated, and Keres discovered another Botvinnik, one who was
> considerate and kind. In the late sixties, visiting him at his dacha,
> Keres reked: 'Botvinnik isn't such a bad person after all, he's
> nice, friendly.' ia Keres [his wife] sighed, 'He forgot everything.
> Paul forgot everything.'"
>
> "When he died, Ivonin, the deputy chairman of the USSR Sport
> Committee, responsible for chess, invited Yakov Neishtadt to see him.
> 'What material are you planning to publish about Keres?' he asked the
> editor-in-chief of 64. 'A detailed obituary, his best games,
> everything that such a great player deserves,' Neishtadt replied.
> 'That's very good, of course, but I would like you not to forget,' the
> bureaucrat said, looking him straight in the eye, 'that the death of
> Keres is, priily, a loss for Estonia, and not for the Soviet
> Union.'"
>
> "That was how Keres was viewed in Moscow throughout his whole career,
> and that was how the attitude towards him remained after his death,
> too. He was both their own, and a foreigner in a huge country that no
> longer exists, and the authorities never forgot that. He didn't forget
> it either."
>
> "The speaker of the Estonian parliament, Ene Ergma, said: 'Paul Keres
> didn't give in to ome of the main desires of all totalitarian systems
> -- to level society, to force all people to talk identically, and to
> dress identically, to suffer identically, and to lie identically. The
> elegant Keres in the grey period of Stalinism constantly reminded us
> here, in Estonia, of what we had lost and what we would definitely
> bring back one day."
>
>
>
> EZoto wrote:
> > Isn't it pretty clear-cut what really happened. Many russian
> > chessplayers who lived at that time and then came to america seem to
> > say the same thing or have had similiar stories. Bronsteins book "
> > The Sorcerer's Apprentice " takes a jab at Botvinnik when they took
> > the group photo before the WC match saying all good communists on the
> > right of Folke Rogard. Make it plain and simple: Botvinnik was not a
> > nice guy at all, but as some russian chessplayers told me you did what
> > you had to do to live.
> >
> > EZoto
|
| |
Date: 27 Dec 2007 17:47:23
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
THE TRAGEDY OF PAUL KERES
The latest issue of NEW IN CHESS (#8, 2007) contains a rekable
article by GM Genna Sosonko about Paul Keres that adds more fuel to
the thesis advanced by GM Larry Evans in Chess Life (October 1996)
that Keres was forced to take a dive against Botvinnik in the 1948
World Championship. Some salient excerpts:
"Playing in tournaments in Nazi-occupied Europe, Keres met Alekhine on
several occasions. 'Do you think the Bolsheviks would dispose of me if
I fell into their hands?' he once inquired of the world champion. 'You
shouldn't even have any doubt' Alekhine replied, 'that they'd shorten
you by a head.'"
"The late David Bronstein recalled: 'In the 1948 match-tournament
everything was done for Botvinnik, as it was known that he couldn't
hold on for more than 15 consecutive games. It was simply a parody of
a tournament -- with a two-week break between The Hague and Moscow. I
asked Keres, 'Paul Petrovich, how could you allow such a thing back
then?' He threw me such a look that I immediately stopped short --
'I'll take, take my question back.'"
"During the championship of the Soviet Union in Leningrad in 1947 a
group of players signed a collective letter in which Keres was branded
'a collaborator' and a 'fascist.' Botvinnik himself insisted that he
was 'above all this nonsense,' adding that perhaps he did sign the
collective letter from the grandmasters, but he never personally spoke
out against the Estonian grandmaster and never plotted against him.'"
"In his last years, when he was in Moscow, Keres telephoned Botvinnik
and visited him at home. The reasons for their confrontations had
evaporated, and Keres discovered another Botvinnik, one who was
considerate and kind. In the late sixties, visiting him at his dacha,
Keres reked: 'Botvinnik isn't such a bad person after all, he's
nice, friendly.' ia Keres [his wife] sighed, 'He forgot everything.
Paul forgot everything.'"
"When he died, Ivonin, the deputy chairman of the USSR Sport
Committee, responsible for chess, invited Yakov Neishtadt to see him.
'What material are you planning to publish about Keres?' he asked the
editor-in-chief of 64. 'A detailed obituary, his best games,
everything that such a great player deserves,' Neishtadt replied.
'That's very good, of course, but I would like you not to forget,' the
bureaucrat said, looking him straight in the eye, 'that the death of
Keres is, priily, a loss for Estonia, and not for the Soviet
Union.'"
"That was how Keres was viewed in Moscow throughout his whole career,
and that was how the attitude towards him remained after his death,
too. He was both their own, and a foreigner in a huge country that no
longer exists, and the authorities never forgot that. He didn't forget
it either."
"The speaker of the Estonian parliament, Ene Ergma, said: 'Paul Keres
didn't give in to ome of the main desires of all totalitarian systems
-- to level society, to force all people to talk identically, and to
dress identically, to suffer identically, and to lie identically. The
elegant Keres in the grey period of Stalinism constantly reminded us
here, in Estonia, of what we had lost and what we would definitely
bring back one day."
EZoto wrote:
> Isn't it pretty clear-cut what really happened. Many russian
> chessplayers who lived at that time and then came to america seem to
> say the same thing or have had similiar stories. Bronsteins book "
> The Sorcerer's Apprentice " takes a jab at Botvinnik when they took
> the group photo before the WC match saying all good communists on the
> right of Folke Rogard. Make it plain and simple: Botvinnik was not a
> nice guy at all, but as some russian chessplayers told me you did what
> you had to do to live.
>
> EZoto
|
| |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 17:19:18
From: help bot
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 24, 1:44 am, EZoto <[email protected] > wrote:
> > Apart from any interpretations of the evidence, there
> >remains the problem that no matter how poorly any
> >of the other contenders may have played in a given
> >game or event, the standard of GM Botvinnik's own
> >play was exceedingly high. (In fact, I am reminded
> >of the games of Bobby Fischer /after/ he already had
> >published his MSMG book but before 1992). The
> >Commie-conspiracy theorists have no rational
> >explanation for this peculiar fact, which is carefully
> >avoided at all cost.
>
> > -- help bot
>
> I'm not denying the fact that Botvinnik was not a strong player.
That is no "fact", but rather a delusion.
In a nutshell, as each other great player peaked, GM
Botvinnik traded the title back and forth with him, right
up until his rematch clause was taken away by FIDE.
His long record of superb results ranges from the time
of GMs Capablanca and Alekhine, all the way up to GM
Fischer.
> He was a tremendously strong player
Make up your mind, man. You just said he was not
a strong player; you can't have it both ways. ; >D
> but he used bullying tactics in
> politics to get what he wanted also. Botvinnik reminds me of Karpov
> in that sense. In the first K-K match he is up 5-0 and clearly he is
> the stronger player but his match strategy backfires on him and Karpov
> uses his political strength to get out of the match even though he was
> up 5-3.
Nonsense. What the sinister GM Karpov wanted was a
long break in the match, not its cancellation with his
hard-earned lead /vaporized/ by FIDE on a whim.
Trying to fit that freak action into some conspiracy
makes no sense (but then, that has never stopped the
lunatic fringe before). It looks as though the FIDE
president went CYOA, not wanting to become the
target of criticism -- but failed miserably in that regard.
> Well it rebounded on him in the second match and the rest is
> history.
The second match saw a much tougher GK, as he
had been "taking lessons" from the best (or, as some
might say, the second-best, if you count GM Fischer).
: >D
> Some of it may never be known exactly but it is obvious that
> those who had the power in politics used it for their own means, and
> Botvinnik was no exception.
Certainly, it appears you are very selective in your
singling out just two such players. In my experience,
the abuse of power is not so peculiarly focused, and
it is therefore necessary to eradicate the conflict of
interest aspect in its entirety. The same idea applies
more widely to politics, not merely to chess. The list
of champions who have manipulated the system is
rather long; my idea is this: the very possibility should
be removed; call it prophylaxis; call it "my system", or
even "overprotection".
-- hyper bot
|
| |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 17:00:38
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 24, 7:38 pm, "Chess One" <[email protected] > wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:d354fd73-ee9f-43d9-9c9f-d846d256d5d6@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans (page 292)
>
> > The chess scene in New York was vibrant because so many masters
> > couldn't find jobs. The 1930s were America's glory days, our
> > international teams won gold
> > medals four times running. Yet players were penniless and people held
> > them
> > in low esteem. "Chess is as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as
> > you can
> > find outside of an advertising agency," sneered novelist Raymond
> > Chandler.
>
> It is indeed fascinating, and not progressed from the age of Morphy in the=
> US, or Buckle or Staunton in the UK. I recently found these references fro=
m
> another age, circa Dickens's time, to affirm where gentlemen where at -
> feminists even! Buckle was detested by the establishment since he dared
> question them - just question, and his important works not published in
> England in his time.
>
> Henry Thomas Buckle was an early English chess genius, at the time of
> Staunton. Many readers will know his contribution to chess, but he had
> other, wide-ranging sympathies in what we today call 'the humanities.'
>
> The Parrot at Chessville has reported on Buckle before, but there are alwa=
ys
> new things to learn, including this:
>
> "On ch 19 1858 he gave a lecture to "an overflowing and
> enthusiastic audience" on "The Influence of Women on the Progress of
> Knowledge" - at the Royal Institution, speaking for an hour and forty
> minutes without once referring to his few notes. The lecture - acclaimed -=
> was republished for Fraser's Magazine for April 1858."
>
> Like Morphy after him, Buckle found victory at chess a rather minor affai=
r,
> seeing chess as a pastime, not an occupation. He deplored slow play and th=
e
> lack of time controls. He considered his study of civilization, history an=
d
> sociology far more important and resented taking time away from his studie=
s
> "and never afterwards took part in a public match" after defeating Anderss=
en
> and L=F6wenthal.
>
> Buckle had a photographic memory, a working knowledge of nineteen language=
s
> and a fluency in seven. He rid himself of half his library of 22,000 books=
> because he knew their content and didn't require them. His knowledge of
> history was encyclopedic. He was a very simple man. He ate only bread and
> fruit "to keep clear the brain" during the days when he performed his
> research. His only real extravagance was good cigars and his library.
>
> His great opus was the History of Civilization in England, later divided
> into two volumes: History of Civilization Volume I (1857) and Volume II
> (1861). In 1872, The Miscellaneous and Posthumous Works of Henry Thomas
> Buckle was published.
>
> Further reading of Buckle's chessic and other achievements are herehttp://=
snow.prohosting.com/~batgrrl/Buckle.html
Further, and more in-depth, reading on Buckle will be found in Dr.
John Hilbert's lengthy essay "Buckle: A Life, With Chess" in
Quarterly for Chess History #10.
|
| |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 08:51:09
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 24, 12:34 am, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 17:30:46 -0800 (PST), help bot
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 10:53 am, Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> So, whadya think of Francis Parkinson Keyes' "The Chess Players"?
> > Seriously, I have so many chess books that I can hardly locate
> >them all; this title sounds vaguely familiar,
>
> Not a chess book per se. It's a fictional treatment of Morphy's life
> -- so it has some Civil War stuff. I read it in high school.
I've found it surprisingly good. I'd not expected it to have much
insight into Morphy or chess, but she does create a more 'human'
Morphy than, say, Lawson does. (Lawson's biography is the best we
have, and it's very good, but there's a sense that the author thought
his subject was made of ble.)
|
| |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 07:25:37
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans (page 292)
The chess scene in New York was vibrant because so many masters
couldn't find jobs. The 1930s were America's glory days, our
international teams won gold
medals four times running. Yet players were penniless and people held
them
in low esteem. "Chess is as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as
you can
find outside of an advertising agency," sneered novelist Raymond
Chandler.
In 1944 Arnie [Denker] captured the USA Championship and gave
exhibitions at military bases. After the war, when the USSR crushed
the USA in a 1945 radio match, he lamented, "Chess requires you full-
time, but it doesn't assure you anywhere near an adequate income. The
sooner we realize this, the sooner America will regain its prestige as
the leading chess nation."
Arnie had to go into business to support his family, then retired to
Florida with a bundle and financed scholastic chess. "Passing the
torch on to the next generation was his great passion. It was his
life, after his family," said one of his sons.
Chess One wrote:
> "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:9a28426a-b21e-4af7-a8f4-d0be56a6b836@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia?
>
> To be on topic:
>
> Did Secret Agent Morphy provide the political intelligence for it, for which
> side!? In fact, while his spying activities seem to me like they were
> 'smudged' during his brief involvement - do we know very much what he was
> engaged in, and was he formally 'finished' with it rather than move to the
> back of the stage?
>
> > Or may be
> > Cornwall's failure at Yorktown?
>
> We came unprepared, the Redruth Reds couldn't get used to the (a) humidity
> (b) cheerleaders, both of which had a similar effect. Also the Americans
> cheated by throwing the ball /forwards/ and the referees were obviously on
> the take, since not one of them seemed to notice. The shock weapon of the
> rucking scrum did succeed fairly well, since 2,500 lbs of moving forwards
> are almost impossible to stop, and 7 tries were scored and converted this
> way.
>
> > This discussion never gets anywhere.
>
> What the discussion underpins is why USA is isolated in the chess world.
>
> Before WW11 in team play they took 4 golds from 4 tries, re-entering the
> scene from about 1950 onwards they faced the concerted effort of an entire
> super-power with professional players against whoever had survived the war
> and living in NY City.
>
> > It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
>
> But Sloan was a board member! And here you got not only a super-state's
> involvement at the political level, but a Fide which is forever-East. Sloan
> is more a caricature of a politician, since he lacks the wherewithal to
> dissemble to very high degree, and makes too much incidental noise around
> his main theme. Real chess politicos are more accomplished.
>
> This conversation is only ostensibly about the chess scene half a century
> ago, what has changed? Therefore, is there some value in knowing our chess
> history, since otherwise we are not only doomed to repeat it, but it may
> never have changed!
>
> Phil Innes
|
| | |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 19:38:01
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:d354fd73-ee9f-43d9-9c9f-d846d256d5d6@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans (page 292)
>
>
> The chess scene in New York was vibrant because so many masters
> couldn't find jobs. The 1930s were America's glory days, our
> international teams won gold
> medals four times running. Yet players were penniless and people held
> them
> in low esteem. "Chess is as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as
> you can
> find outside of an advertising agency," sneered novelist Raymond
> Chandler.
It is indeed fascinating, and not progressed from the age of Morphy in the
US, or Buckle or Staunton in the UK. I recently found these references from
another age, circa Dickens's time, to affirm where gentlemen where at -
feminists even! Buckle was detested by the establishment since he dared
question them - just question, and his important works not published in
England in his time.
Henry Thomas Buckle was an early English chess genius, at the time of
Staunton. Many readers will know his contribution to chess, but he had
other, wide-ranging sympathies in what we today call 'the humanities.'
The Parrot at Chessville has reported on Buckle before, but there are always
new things to learn, including this:
"On ch 19 1858 he gave a lecture to "an overflowing and
enthusiastic audience" on "The Influence of Women on the Progress of
Knowledge" - at the Royal Institution, speaking for an hour and forty
minutes without once referring to his few notes. The lecture - acclaimed -
was republished for Fraser's Magazine for April 1858."
Like Morphy after him, Buckle found victory at chess a rather minor affair,
seeing chess as a pastime, not an occupation. He deplored slow play and the
lack of time controls. He considered his study of civilization, history and
sociology far more important and resented taking time away from his studies
"and never afterwards took part in a public match" after defeating Anderssen
and L�wenthal.
Buckle had a photographic memory, a working knowledge of nineteen languages
and a fluency in seven. He rid himself of half his library of 22,000 books
because he knew their content and didn't require them. His knowledge of
history was encyclopedic. He was a very simple man. He ate only bread and
fruit "to keep clear the brain" during the days when he performed his
research. His only real extravagance was good cigars and his library.
His great opus was the History of Civilization in England, later divided
into two volumes: History of Civilization Volume I (1857) and Volume II
(1861). In 1872, The Miscellaneous and Posthumous Works of Henry Thomas
Buckle was published.
Further reading of Buckle's chessic and other achievements are here
http://snow.prohosting.com/~batgrrl/Buckle.html
> In 1944 Arnie [Denker] captured the USA Championship and gave
> exhibitions at military bases. After the war, when the USSR crushed
> the USA in a 1945 radio match, he lamented, "Chess requires you full-
> time, but it doesn't assure you anywhere near an adequate income. The
> sooner we realize this, the sooner America will regain its prestige as
> the leading chess nation."
yes, and the TV program we put on was the first between the nations since
1947, as if the cold-war continued. In some respects it was as it ever was,
and everyone engaged, no matter how philanthropic or generous, paid some
cost for presumming to heal such a massive rift between super-powers.
> Arnie had to go into business to support his family, then retired to
> Florida with a bundle and financed scholastic chess. "Passing the
> torch on to the next generation was his great passion. It was his
> life, after his family," said one of his sons.
The principal: perpetuation. He wrote to me privately, unknown to whom else.
This man was always as straight as a die. I never wrote with someone of his
station who equalled him in this respect.
Phil
>
> Chess One wrote:
>> "Rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:9a28426a-b21e-4af7-a8f4-d0be56a6b836@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> > Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia?
>>
>> To be on topic:
>>
>> Did Secret Agent Morphy provide the political intelligence for it, for
>> which
>> side!? In fact, while his spying activities seem to me like they were
>> 'smudged' during his brief involvement - do we know very much what he was
>> engaged in, and was he formally 'finished' with it rather than move to
>> the
>> back of the stage?
>>
>> > Or may be
>> > Cornwall's failure at Yorktown?
>>
>> We came unprepared, the Redruth Reds couldn't get used to the (a)
>> humidity
>> (b) cheerleaders, both of which had a similar effect. Also the Americans
>> cheated by throwing the ball /forwards/ and the referees were obviously
>> on
>> the take, since not one of them seemed to notice. The shock weapon of the
>> rucking scrum did succeed fairly well, since 2,500 lbs of moving forwards
>> are almost impossible to stop, and 7 tries were scored and converted this
>> way.
>>
>> > This discussion never gets anywhere.
>>
>> What the discussion underpins is why USA is isolated in the chess world.
>>
>> Before WW11 in team play they took 4 golds from 4 tries, re-entering the
>> scene from about 1950 onwards they faced the concerted effort of an
>> entire
>> super-power with professional players against whoever had survived the
>> war
>> and living in NY City.
>>
>> > It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
>>
>> But Sloan was a board member! And here you got not only a super-state's
>> involvement at the political level, but a Fide which is forever-East.
>> Sloan
>> is more a caricature of a politician, since he lacks the wherewithal to
>> dissemble to very high degree, and makes too much incidental noise around
>> his main theme. Real chess politicos are more accomplished.
>>
>> This conversation is only ostensibly about the chess scene half a century
>> ago, what has changed? Therefore, is there some value in knowing our
>> chess
>> history, since otherwise we are not only doomed to repeat it, but it may
>> never have changed!
>>
>> Phil Innes
|
| |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 05:57:08
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 24, 1:44 am, EZoto <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Botvinnik reminds me of Karpov
> in that sense. In the first K-K match he is up 5-0 and clearly he is
> the stronger player but his match strategy backfires on him and Karpov
> uses his political strength to get out of the match even though he was
> up 5-3.
That's been the Kasparov party line for years, but I wouldn't bet
the ranch on it. Cancelling the match may have been more Kasparov's
idea than Karpov's. A more balanced treatment of the matter can be
read here:
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/termination.html
> Well it rebounded on him in the second match and the rest is
> history. Some of it may never be known exactly but it is obvious that
> those who had the power in politics used it for their own means, and
> Botvinnik was no exception.
I would agree that Botvinnik knew how to use his political
connections, for example in arranging the special 1941 "Absolute
Championship" after he flopped in the 1940 USSR Ch. Also in getting
FIDE to change its rules to limit the number of Soviet Candidates, and
to allow a defeated champion a rematch. Whether he used his clout
against Keres post -WWII or in 1948 is unclear, though he is on record
as denying it.
|
| |
Date: 23 Nov 2007 22:28:20
From: help bot
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 24, 12:34 am, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> >> So, whadya think of Francis Parkinson Keyes' "The Chess Players"?
> > Seriously, I have so many chess books that I can hardly locate
> >them all; this title sounds vaguely familiar,
>
> Not a chess book per se. It's a fictional treatment of Morphy's life
> -- so it has some Civil War stuff.
Ah, fiction. Does it include the story about "women's
shoes", or any of the modern suspense thrillers by Larry
Evans? Recently, I was asked to go see a movie titled
"Love in the Time of Cholera", and had a quick look at
that disease at Wikipedia; I learned that were it not for
the pandemic spread of that disease, many things would
not be as they are today. The same idea could be
considered as to the Civil War, if some important battle
or other was lost due to a chess addiction.
> I read it in high school.
That was then, this is now.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 08:42:10
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 22:28:20 -0800 (PST), help bot
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Nov 24, 12:34 am, Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> So, whadya think of Francis Parkinson Keyes' "The Chess Players"?
>> > Seriously, I have so many chess books that I can hardly locate
>> >them all; this title sounds vaguely familiar,
>> Not a chess book per se. It's a fictional treatment of Morphy's life
>> -- so it has some Civil War stuff.
> Ah, fiction. Does it include the story about "women's
>shoes",
Not as I remember, but it comes up with an explanation for Morphy's
madness -- he found the love of his life beaten to death.
>> I read it in high school.
> That was then, this is now.
If now is what you want, we should be looking for connections between
chess and Iraq.
|
| |
Date: 23 Nov 2007 22:10:44
From: help bot
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 22, 10:06 am, EZoto <[email protected] > wrote:
> Isn't it pretty clear-cut what really happened.
No; a large number of writers have somehow managed
to confuse the facts relating to this issue.
> Many russian
> chessplayers who lived at that time and then came to america seem to
> say the same thing
Commonality: all disliked the status quo, and thus
all can be expected to write badly of it. But one needs
to consider other perspectives to achieve any balance.
> or have had similiar stories. Bronsteins book "
> The Sorcerer's Apprentice " takes a jab at Botvinnik when they took
> the group photo before the WC match saying all good communists on the
> right of Folke Rogard.
Mr. Bronstien has admitted his own complicity in the
fixing of games, so why he is afforded the status of
soothsayer escapes me. The same can be said of
Mr. Botvinnik, for he too has admitted complicity in
the fixing of games (casting himself as the victim).
> Make it plain and simple: Botvinnik was not a
> nice guy at all, but as some russian chessplayers
> told me you did what you had to do to live.
The real issue is not who was a "nice guy", and who
was not. A (very) few have attempted to research the
facts, in order to determine if games were thrown and
if therefore, the world championship title was not
properly earned. Quite a few have jumbled their facts,
or even invented "facts" to suit an agenda, while
deliberately ignoring -- and omitting -- facts and
interpretations which don't suit a whim. And then
there are those whose work overlaps, falling short of
objectivity yet at least making some effort in that
direction.
Apart from any interpretations of the evidence, there
remains the problem that no matter how poorly any
of the other contenders may have played in a given
game or event, the standard of GM Botvinnik's own
play was exceedingly high. (In fact, I am reminded
of the games of Bobby Fischer /after/ he already had
published his MSMG book but before 1992). The
Commie-conspiracy theorists have no rational
explanation for this peculiar fact, which is carefully
avoided at all cost.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 06:44:38
From: EZoto
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
> Apart from any interpretations of the evidence, there
>remains the problem that no matter how poorly any
>of the other contenders may have played in a given
>game or event, the standard of GM Botvinnik's own
>play was exceedingly high. (In fact, I am reminded
>of the games of Bobby Fischer /after/ he already had
>published his MSMG book but before 1992). The
>Commie-conspiracy theorists have no rational
>explanation for this peculiar fact, which is carefully
>avoided at all cost.
>
>
> -- help bot
I'm not denying the fact that Botvinnik was not a strong player. He
was a tremendously strong player, but he used bullying tactics in
politics to get what he wanted also. Botvinnik reminds me of Karpov
in that sense. In the first K-K match he is up 5-0 and clearly he is
the stronger player but his match strategy backfires on him and Karpov
uses his political strength to get out of the match even though he was
up 5-3. Well it rebounded on him in the second match and the rest is
history. Some of it may never be known exactly but it is obvious that
those who had the power in politics used it for their own means, and
Botvinnik was no exception.
EZoto
|
| |
Date: 23 Nov 2007 17:30:46
From: help bot
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 23, 10:53 am, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> >> >Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
> >> >Cornwall's failure at Yorktown? This discussion never gets anywhere.
> >> >It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
> >> I was going to say, "because this is a chess group". But then,,
> >> that's never stopped any of us, myself included, before.
> > Chess and the American Civil War are not mutually
> >exclusive topics, so maybe "Lee's campaign" can be
> >worked in somehow.
>
> So, whadya think of Francis Parkinson Keyes' "The Chess Players"?
A bit dated (for example, in the line 1. h4 a5, 2. g3 Na6, Keyes
failed to even consider 3. Bh3!?!, giving only the orthodox 3. Nh3
move -- equal, per a hit in the Innes/Hyatt middlegame tablebases).
Seriously, I have so many chess books that I can hardly locate
them all; this title sounds vaguely familiar, but I was priily
referring to an incident where one fellow supposedly delayed a
crucial action, due to his involvement in a chess game at the time.
One writer claimed this may have swayed the outcome of an
important battle.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 23 Nov 2007 21:34:02
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 17:30:46 -0800 (PST), help bot
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Nov 23, 10:53 am, Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
>> So, whadya think of Francis Parkinson Keyes' "The Chess Players"?
> Seriously, I have so many chess books that I can hardly locate
>them all; this title sounds vaguely familiar,
Not a chess book per se. It's a fictional treatment of Morphy's life
-- so it has some Civil War stuff. I read it in high school.
|
| |
Date: 23 Nov 2007 00:44:36
From: help bot
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 22, 3:19 pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:30:10 -0800 (PST), Rob <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
> >Cornwall's failure at Yorktown? This discussion never gets anywhere.
> >It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
>
> I was going to say, "because this is a chess group". But then,,
> that's never stopped any of us, myself included, before.
Chess and the American Civil War are not mutually
exclusive topics, so maybe "Lee's campaign" can be
worked in somehow.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 23 Nov 2007 07:53:37
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:44:36 -0800 (PST), help bot
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Nov 22, 3:19 pm, Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:30:10 -0800 (PST), Rob <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
>> >Cornwall's failure at Yorktown? This discussion never gets anywhere.
>> >It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
>> I was going to say, "because this is a chess group". But then,,
>> that's never stopped any of us, myself included, before.
> Chess and the American Civil War are not mutually
>exclusive topics, so maybe "Lee's campaign" can be
>worked in somehow.
So, whadya think of Francis Parkinson Keyes' "The Chess Players"?
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 20:41:31
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 22, 11:33 pm, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Nov 22, 10:10 pm, The Historian <[email protected]>
> wrote:> On Nov 22, 12:30 pm, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
> > > Cornwall's failure at Yorktown?
>
> > There's only one failure from Cornwall on this newsgroup. Has Innes
> > been to Yorktown? But perhaps you meant to type "Cornwallis."
>
> > This discussion never gets anywhere.
>
> > > It' as productive as listening to Sloan .- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Yes, I ment to say Cornwallis. Thanks!
> Thats what I get for trying to cook a ham and a turkey for
> Thanksgiving ...
Did Philsy fit into the oven whole, or did you need to de-bone him
first?
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 20:33:27
From: Rob
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 22, 10:10 pm, The Historian <[email protected] >
wrote:
> On Nov 22, 12:30 pm, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
> > Cornwall's failure at Yorktown?
>
> There's only one failure from Cornwall on this newsgroup. Has Innes
> been to Yorktown? But perhaps you meant to type "Cornwallis."
>
> This discussion never gets anywhere.
>
>
>
> > It' as productive as listening to Sloan .- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, I ment to say Cornwallis. Thanks!
Thats what I get for trying to cook a ham and a turkey for
Thanksgiving and trying to think clearly about anything other than
food!
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 20:10:50
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 22, 12:30 pm, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
> Cornwall's failure at Yorktown?
There's only one failure from Cornwall on this newsgroup. Has Innes
been to Yorktown? But perhaps you meant to type "Cornwallis."
This discussion never gets anywhere.
> It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 12:39:35
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 22, 3:27 pm, Offramp <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2:22 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>
> > Taylor Kingston, an amateur, wrote a laudatory letter to the editor of
> > CHESS LIFE: "Larry Evans' article The Tragedy of Paul Keres in October
> > 1996 was one of the best pieces of historical writing you've ever run.
> > Evans' analysis of games in the 1948 World Championship makes a strong
> > case that Keres' failure was the result of coercion by Soviet
> > authorities. We should investigate further and find out the facts. We
> > could be on the verge of uncovering a major scandal in chess history."
> ....
> > Kingston later wrote an article disputing my theory, mostly ignoring
> > my critique of Keres' strange moves. This was like dismissing the
> > Zapruder film in the Kennedy assassination.
>
> Look, let's have everything here... You've made a start - an
> undisputed start - now cut and paste all the other items you mention:
>
> 1: The laudatory letter to the editor of CHESS LIFE.
That's what Parr posted above. He and Evans keep doing that even
though they know I changed my mind long ago.
> 2: TK's later article, "Kingston later wrote an article disputing my
> theory..."
If I had a dollar for every time I've posted these links, I'd be
rich, but here goes again:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kb1.txt
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kb2.txt
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles165.pdf
> By the way, are people allowed to change their minds? I used to
> idolise Fischer up until I was about 25. I now think he is a twat. Is
> that allowed?
It certainly is.
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 12:27:05
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 22, 2:22 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
...
> Taylor Kingston, an amateur, wrote a laudatory letter to the editor of
> CHESS LIFE: "Larry Evans' article The Tragedy of Paul Keres in October
> 1996 was one of the best pieces of historical writing you've ever run.
> Evans' analysis of games in the 1948 World Championship makes a strong
> case that Keres' failure was the result of coercion by Soviet
> authorities. We should investigate further and find out the facts. We
> could be on the verge of uncovering a major scandal in chess history."
....
> Kingston later wrote an article disputing my theory, mostly ignoring
> my critique of Keres' strange moves. This was like dismissing the
> Zapruder film in the Kennedy assassination.
Look, let's have everything here... You've made a start - an
undisputed start - now cut and paste all the other items you mention:
1: The laudatory letter to the editor of CHESS LIFE.
2: TK's later article, "Kingston later wrote an article disputing my
theory..."
By the way, are people allowed to change their minds? I used to
idolise Fischer up until I was about 25. I now think he is a twat. Is
that allowed?
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 09:30:10
From: Rob
Subject: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
Cornwall's failure at Yorktown? This discussion never gets anywhere.
It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
|
| | |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 10:02:01
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
"Rob" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:9a28426a-b21e-4af7-a8f4-d0be56a6b836@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia?
To be on topic:
Did Secret Agent Morphy provide the political intelligence for it, for which
side!? In fact, while his spying activities seem to me like they were
'smudged' during his brief involvement - do we know very much what he was
engaged in, and was he formally 'finished' with it rather than move to the
back of the stage?
> Or may be
> Cornwall's failure at Yorktown?
We came unprepared, the Redruth Reds couldn't get used to the (a) humidity
(b) cheerleaders, both of which had a similar effect. Also the Americans
cheated by throwing the ball /forwards/ and the referees were obviously on
the take, since not one of them seemed to notice. The shock weapon of the
rucking scrum did succeed fairly well, since 2,500 lbs of moving forwards
are almost impossible to stop, and 7 tries were scored and converted this
way.
> This discussion never gets anywhere.
What the discussion underpins is why USA is isolated in the chess world.
Before WW11 in team play they took 4 golds from 4 tries, re-entering the
scene from about 1950 onwards they faced the concerted effort of an entire
super-power with professional players against whoever had survived the war
and living in NY City.
> It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
But Sloan was a board member! And here you got not only a super-state's
involvement at the political level, but a Fide which is forever-East. Sloan
is more a caricature of a politician, since he lacks the wherewithal to
dissemble to very high degree, and makes too much incidental noise around
his main theme. Real chess politicos are more accomplished.
This conversation is only ostensibly about the chess scene half a century
ago, what has changed? Therefore, is there some value in knowing our chess
history, since otherwise we are not only doomed to repeat it, but it may
never have changed!
Phil Innes
|
| | |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 12:19:04
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:30:10 -0800 (PST), Rob <[email protected] >
wrote:
>Why not discuss Lee's campaign in Northern Virginia? Or may be
>Cornwall's failure at Yorktown? This discussion never gets anywhere.
>It' as productive as listening to Sloan .
I was going to say, "because this is a chess group". But then,,
that's never stopped any of us, myself included, before.
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 07:42:28
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
On Nov 22, 9:22 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
>
From EVANS ON CHESS, Chess Life, September 2000:
> In a letter to the editor of KINGPIN (Spring 2000) Taylor Kingston
> claimed I misrepresented his views about the Keres-Botvinnik
> controversy. But his SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE (Chess Life, May 1998)
> devotes six pagtes to the topic without reaching any conclusion
> DESPITE what Keres told Whyld and Botvinnik's startling admission in a
> 1991 interview that Stalin did intervene.
(emphasis added)
Evans, like his buddy Larry Parr, suffers from frequent time
trouble. By this I mean not 5 minutes to make 20 moves, but rather
mixing up dates, and even confusing past and future. The key point
here is Evans saying that in May 1998, I reached no conclusion
"DESPITE what Keres told Whyld and Botvinnik's startling admission."
As I pointed out here:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles165.pdf
the Evans scenario is a chronological impossibility. The relevant
passage:
"By saying 'despite' Evans alleges that in 1998 I overlooked or
dismissed important evidence. Yet in 1998 this evidence was unknown to
me. Furthermore, it was also unknown to Evans. The Botvinnik interview
was not published in English until 10 December 1999. Whyld never
allowed publication of his 1962 secret until 11 June 2000. I have
corroboration of the dates and facts from Pam, Krabb=E9, and Whyld
themselves. Evans' 'despite' gambit is the low trick of a dirty
politician, not the act of a responsible historian/journalist."
The actual chronology is this:
October 1996: Chess Life publishes Evans' article "The Tragedy of
Paul Keres." It mentions neither Whyld's nor Botvinnik's statements.
May 1998: Chess Life publishes Kingston's article "The Keres-
Botvinnik Case: A Survey of the Evidence." It mentions neither Whyld's
nor Botvinnik's statements.
December 1999: The Botvinnik interview, heretofore buried in a Dutch
magazine not devoted to chess, appears in English for the first time
on Tim Krabbe's web-site.
June 2000: Whyld finally reveals for the first time his 1962
conversation with Keres, a secret he had never published until then.
September 2000: Evans faults Kingston for failing to include the
Whyld and Botvinnik statements in his 1998 article. Evans fails to
mention that Evans too failed to include them in 1996.
> Mr. Kingston, whose work I generally admire,
Apparently Evans' admiration does not prevent him from stooping to
very clumsy mendacity.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Nov 2007 18:27:54
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 25, 12:07 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> TODAY'S GIGGLE
>
> >Keyes as "accurate history?!?" Thanks for today's giggle.> -- The Historian
>
> The historical settings in Frances Parkinson
> Keyes' novels are indeed accurate in the sense of
> conforming to the period. When discussing a novel
> or work of literature, one does not speak of faithful
> inventions as historical inaccuracies.
>
> Yours, Larry Parr
Understood, Larry. I've borrowed detail from fiction for a historical
article myself - see my use of a paragraph from an Emerson Bennett
novel in my "The Champion of the North." This is following Barbara
Tuchman's practice, as she'd outlined in one of the essays in
Practicing History.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Nov 2007 09:07:10
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
TODAY'S GIGGLE
>Keyes as "accurate history?!?" Thanks for today's giggle.> -- The Historian
The historical settings in Frances Parkinson
Keyes' novels are indeed accurate in the sense of
conforming to the period. When discussing a novel
or work of literature, one does not speak of faithful
inventions as historical inaccuracies.
Yours, Larry Parr
The Historian wrote:
> On Nov 25, 3:50 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > FRANCES PARKINSON KEYES
> >
> > >I've found it surprisingly good. I'd not expected it to have much insight into Morphy or chess, but she does create a more 'human' Morphy than, say, Lawson does. (Lawson's biography is the best we have, and it's very good, but there's a sense that
> >
> > the author thought his subject was made of ble.)> The Historian
> >
> > Sigh.
> >
> > That Neil Brennen would even compare a David Lawson with
> > a genial novelist such as Frances (not Francis, of course)
> > Parkinson Keyes speaks volumes -- ah, so to speak.
> >
> > The Chess Players is a novel about its subject
> > title, and we see a brilliant woman writer digging and
> > delving far more deeply into the likely personae of
> > people than any purely chess writer will ever do.
>
> Agreed. Which is why I posted on the subject. But, to put it mildly,
> there's a degree of speculation and invention of 'facts' involved that
> a chess historian should shy away from.
>
> > For those interested in learning about Keyes, read
> > Honor Bright or that exceptional work, "Steamboat Gothic."
> >
> > Keyes was a leading novelist of the 1940s and
> > 1950s, as well as a Catholic convert. What is
> > particularly compelling about her work is that she
> > examines the plight of characters whom she places in a
> > framework, most today would call it a straitjacket, of
> > traditional Christian morality. Her characters are
> > seen to suffer or meet very demanding challenges
> > because they try to live up to standards
> > stratospheric. She is a telling, sympathetic, yet
> > demanding writer.
> >
> > David Lawson? Well, really, to be surprised
> > that Keyes is so insightful, more so than a chess
> > writer, is to be expected when written by a chess type.
>
> You do know Lawson's book is a biography, not a novel, don't you,
> Larry? You do know Keyes is a work of fiction? Lawson, as a
> biographer, probably didn't feel up to the task of inventing a
> murdered lover for Morphy, or giving him an amusing encounter with a
> riverboat chess hustler, as Keyes did.
>
> > Chess was essentially nuthin' to Frances
> > Parkinson Keyes. People, accurate history and locale,
> > and fine style were everything.
>
> Keyes as "accurate history?!?" Thanks for today's giggle.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Nov 2007 04:20:39
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 25, 3:50 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> FRANCES PARKINSON KEYES
>
> >I've found it surprisingly good. I'd not expected it to have much insight into Morphy or chess, but she does create a more 'human' Morphy than, say, Lawson does. (Lawson's biography is the best we have, and it's very good, but there's a sense that
>
> the author thought his subject was made of ble.)> The Historian
>
> Sigh.
>
> That Neil Brennen would even compare a David Lawson with
> a genial novelist such as Frances (not Francis, of course)
> Parkinson Keyes speaks volumes -- ah, so to speak.
>
> The Chess Players is a novel about its subject
> title, and we see a brilliant woman writer digging and
> delving far more deeply into the likely personae of
> people than any purely chess writer will ever do.
Agreed. Which is why I posted on the subject. But, to put it mildly,
there's a degree of speculation and invention of 'facts' involved that
a chess historian should shy away from.
> For those interested in learning about Keyes, read
> Honor Bright or that exceptional work, "Steamboat Gothic."
>
> Keyes was a leading novelist of the 1940s and
> 1950s, as well as a Catholic convert. What is
> particularly compelling about her work is that she
> examines the plight of characters whom she places in a
> framework, most today would call it a straitjacket, of
> traditional Christian morality. Her characters are
> seen to suffer or meet very demanding challenges
> because they try to live up to standards
> stratospheric. She is a telling, sympathetic, yet
> demanding writer.
>
> David Lawson? Well, really, to be surprised
> that Keyes is so insightful, more so than a chess
> writer, is to be expected when written by a chess type.
You do know Lawson's book is a biography, not a novel, don't you,
Larry? You do know Keyes is a work of fiction? Lawson, as a
biographer, probably didn't feel up to the task of inventing a
murdered lover for Morphy, or giving him an amusing encounter with a
riverboat chess hustler, as Keyes did.
> Chess was essentially nuthin' to Frances
> Parkinson Keyes. People, accurate history and locale,
> and fine style were everything.
Keyes as "accurate history?!?" Thanks for today's giggle.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Nov 2007 00:50:26
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
FRANCES PARKINSON KEYES
>I've found it surprisingly good. I'd not expected it to have much insight into Morphy or chess, but she does create a more 'human' Morphy than, say, Lawson does. (Lawson's biography is the best we have, and it's very good, but there's a sense that
the author thought his subject was made of ble.) > The Historian
Sigh.
That Neil Brennen would even compare a David Lawson with
a genial novelist such as Frances (not Francis, of course)
Parkinson Keyes speaks volumes -- ah, so to speak.
The Chess Players is a novel about its subject
title, and we see a brilliant woman writer digging and
delving far more deeply into the likely personae of
people than any purely chess writer will ever do.
For those interested in learning about Keyes, read
Honor Bright or that exceptional work, "Steamboat Gothic."
Keyes was a leading novelist of the 1940s and
1950s, as well as a Catholic convert. What is
particularly compelling about her work is that she
examines the plight of characters whom she places in a
framework, most today would call it a straitjacket, of
traditional Christian morality. Her characters are
seen to suffer or meet very demanding challenges
because they try to live up to standards
stratospheric. She is a telling, sympathetic, yet
demanding writer.
David Lawson? Well, really, to be surprised
that Keyes is so insightful, more so than a chess
writer, is to be expected when written by a chess type.
Chess was essentially nuthin' to Frances
Parkinson Keyes. People, accurate history and locale,
and fine style were everything.
Yours, Larry Parr
|
| | |
Date: 24 Nov 2007 17:41:52
From: help bot
Subject: Re: most often visited and boring subject: The Keres-Botvinnik
|
On Nov 24, 11:42 am, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> > Ah, fiction. Does it include the story about "women's
> >shoes",
>
> Not as I remember, but it comes up with an explanation for Morphy's
> madness -- he found the love of his life beaten to death.
Ah, that will suffice as substitute; an uncritical
adoption of the madness theory equates to the
mindless repetitions of another.
> >> I read it in high school.
> > That was then, this is now.
> If now is what you want, we should be looking for connections between
> chess and Iraq.
It's a book; I read it in high school. This just
goes to show that some schools don't have their
priorities straight. BTW, there is no significant
connection between cheap oil and chess, except
that plastic chess pieces are made from petroleum
products. I have read that the cost of light, sweet
(relatively speaking) crude production from that
region is amazingly inexpensive, as compared to
the stuff we drill here or up in Canada. But I have
also been informed that most of what we use is the
yucky, foul-tasting heavy oil. Personally, I prefer
maple syrup or Mrs. Butterworth's.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 22 Nov 2007 15:06:08
From: EZoto
Subject: Re: The Keres-Botvinnik controversy
|
Isn't it pretty clear-cut what really happened. Many russian
chessplayers who lived at that time and then came to america seem to
say the same thing or have had similiar stories. Bronsteins book "
The Sorcerer's Apprentice " takes a jab at Botvinnik when they took
the group photo before the WC match saying all good communists on the
right of Folke Rogard. Make it plain and simple: Botvinnik was not a
nice guy at all, but as some russian chessplayers told me you did what
you had to do to live.
EZoto
|
|
