On May 5, 7:38 am, J=FCrgen R. <jurg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Yes, of course: The mistake is most likely due to loss
> of concentration, since the endgame is easily drawn and
> the game finished.
While that may well be true, the point is that
the lunatic-fringers have presented no substantive
evidence to sup****t their speculations.
> All these conspiracy theories are absurd: Chess
> players sometimes make mistakes, and occasionally
> grand masters make mistakes that beginners would
> avoid.
In fact, in analyzing the ending of this game I ran
across yet another position where the world's very
strongest chess player seemed quite clueless. (It
rendered a positive position score where the very
rules of chess indicated a drawn game.) I think
that was the very same program against which
then-world champion Kramnik overlooked a mate-in-
one.
> The idea that there wasn't enormous competition
> among the Soviet players is just as silly as to believe that the
> top players don't often agree to quick and easy
> draws.
If I were "king" and had ordered one of my "subjects"
to throw his game to me, and he then did to me what
GM Polugaevsky did to GM Karpov in that game, I
would have him hung; make an example out of him.
Mr. Karpov had White, and yet he spent much of the
game on the defensive, narrowly escaping being
"crushed like a chicken".
> Idiots like Parr will randomly choose arguments that
> suit their momentary purpose, e.g. one moment the Soviets
> are discriminating against Jewish players, the next
> moment they favor a Jewish player over an ethnic
> Russian.
In truth, Mr. Parr is but a mindless parrot, so when
he repeats the speculations of Larry Evans, one can
no more hold him responsible for their idiocy than
one could blame a fish for swimming. It is not a
parrot's job to carefully "review" his master's jabber,
but only to repeat it faithfully; that is what parrots do.
Sadly, in many cases Mr. Evans acts the parrot,
mindlessly repeating ridiculous speculations of
others; Raymond Keene for instance. One such
"story" has long been debunked by Edward Winter,
yet all the original mindless parrots have continued
their faithful jabbering, while the hack who invented
the lies has turned to radio silence... .
> Most likely the political potentates didn't
> pay any more attention to the silly squabbles among
> chess players in the USSR than they did in the USA
> or elsewhere.
According to one fellow who was anointed by
Larry Evans as an authority on such matters,
Vassily Smyslov was the preferred champion;
this was precisely the *opposite* of what Mr.
Evans had "predicted" he would say; even so,
the contradiction was ignored, just like all other
contradictions in the theories and speculations
of the imbecilic Evans ratpack. My view is that
the erroneous "prediction" was an example of
grotesque dishonesty, and that the lack of any
correction proves this to be correct.
> An extreme example of chess blindness is the game
> Huebner-Petrosian in the Biel Interzonal 1976. I
> actually watched this game live. Petrosian was
> totally lost when he makes a completely unexpected
> attacking move, after which H. has a simple mate
> in 3 or 4. But instead H. defends and makes an
> unbelievable sequence of blunders until he loses...
This reminds me of a famous game in which
Gary Kasparov launched one of his speculative
attacks, only to find himself down a Rook;
unfazed, GK continued the "attack", ultimately
winning despite his opponent being one of the
best players in the world (initials LL). Granted,
in that case, time-pressure probably played a
role.
-- help bot
|
