On Mar 13, 5:50 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I never call any chess player "weak" for the simple reason that chess
> strength is relative. A 1400 player is "strong" compared to the vast
> majority of non-tournament chess players. I think I have read or heard
> that a 1600 rated chess player knows more about chess than the holder
> of most PhD degrees know about his respective field.
LOL! IMO, a typical 1600 player may know
several opening moves by rote, but it is
precisely his *lack* of depth of knowledge
which makes him an easy mark for really
good players (whoever they are).
OTOH, I keep reading about how some
Harvard-educated "geniuses" nearly brought
down our entire economic system, because
they basically gambled with leveraged
monies; a few of the writers who describe
those events seem to me to be far more
intelligent than other folks who are described
as Ivy-league school graduates.
> On the other hand, a 2550 rated chess player would be a "weak"
> grandmaster when compared to Kasparov.
>
> However, I believe that any rated expert and most class A and B
> players would be strong enough to look at the position on my website
> at:http://www.samsloan.com/keres-bo.htm
> and realize that the moves Keres played that just gave away the game
> were so weak that it must have been a dump.
Rather than selectively choosing which
games to examine, /looking for/ the throwing
of games, how about we agree to a more
objective approach? We can set standards,
program them into a computer, and then abide
by its purely objective findings, okay? We can
start with a few games played by Mr. Sloan;
how many will be determined to have been
thrown on purpose, by our chosen standards?
> Also, the final game, the game that Keres won, was an obvious dump
> too. At that point, Botvinnik had clenched first place. Keres needed
> to win to tie for third with Reshevsky. That last game was so poorly
> played that it looks like two drunk 1600 players bashing each other.
And yet, there are plenty of games in which
two GMs have made stupid mistakes; just
fairly recently, world champion Kramnik
walked into a mate-in-one with plenty of time
on his clock. It's hard to top that.
-- help bot
|
