HE COULDA BEEN A CONTENDAH
> Note to imbecilic "projectionists": my view is
> that chess is a horrible *waste* of the human
> intellect. As such, the weaker you may be
> (and I expect you are mediocre, at best), the
> better off you are, for you will be less likely to
> get sucked in and waste your pitiful lives away
> on a silly board game. -- Greg Kennedy
When you can't excel at something, put it down. By his own admission
the Indiana Kid coulda been a contendah if only he had lived in
Brooklyn like Bobby.
THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS by GM Larry Evans (page 292)
"Chess is as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as you can find
outside of an advertising agency," sneered novelist Raymond Chandler.
help bot wrote:
> On May 9, 2:02 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > It seems likely that this particular blather was a
> > > response to the innumerable attacks "on Karpov",
> > > but by others.
> >
> > Sorry, that sentence doesn't parse.
> >
> > > One of these others was of course,
> > > Gary Kasparov, who continued to belittle his
> > > adversary until he signed a contract forbidding it,
> > > not very long ago.
> >
> > 'these others'? Did you announce your own topic yet?
>
> Got issues with not always being parroted or
> your speculations not just being swallowed whole,
> every time? Then this is not the place for you, my
> friend; why not go to the USCF forum, and hire
> "moderators" to ****eld your speculations from
> sunlight?
>
>
> > What I wrote is that Karpov fessed up to things he did as world
champion,
> > that he later was not proud of, and that he is the first I know to
have done
> > this in writing.
>
> Indeed. And what I wrote is that I believe he
> wrote that /in response to/ the innumerable
> attacks on him. In sum, I don't buy it, any
> more than I "buy" the lies and fabrications of
> Mr. Karpov's nemesis, Gary "I never touched it"
> Kasparov. (At least, I don't think I touched it.
> Somebody else must have moved it! You can't
> prove anything. Top of the world, Ma!)
>
>
> > Fischer had no especial financial woes [laugh]
>
> Alas, the nearly-an-IM legend-in-his-own-mind
> Phil Innes has forgotten that Mr. Fischer -- who
> one poster asserted was likely a fine investor
> and manager of money -- was swindled out of
> much of his 1972 winnings... like a child.
>
> As I recall, Mr. Fischer desired a big house,
> built in the shape of a Rook. He wanted to be
> paid big money, like Muhammed Ali was. But
> he was too scared to write books, on account
> of everyone being out to get him, see?
>
>
> > As far as the public was concerned there was no Fischer-the-person,
there
> > was only the chess hero.
>
> You are talking about the mindless fans here
> in the USA. But there are others who read
> English... who were not so obsessed, or
> deluded about BF. In fact, David Levy wrote
> a book about Mr. Fischer, which, far from
> going over the top, was as they say on the
> Fox TV channel, /fair and balanced/.
>
> Some subjects upon which BF might have
> "safely" written were the Sicilian Defense, the
> "Roy" Lopez, and the endgame. None of
> these entail /personal/ issues, nor even hero
> wor****p. People would buy them because
> they believed BF to be a very strong chess
> analyst (think of GM Huebner or Fritz-- two
> powerful analysts who never made it to the
> pinnacle).
>
>
> > And when heroes don't compete any more for us, we
> > the public resent the fact, and want to punnish the Hero.
>
> Even so, it is possible for the "hero" to help
> promote chess -- and make lots of money from
> it -- by writing books and such without having
> to compete. (Think of how many Raymond
> Keene hack-jobs the world could have been
> saved! Eric Schiller could have been a taxi
> driver or something, and we would all have
> /real/ chess books to ****e over.)
>
>
> > The fate of abandoned-celebrity is to be treated just as you have done
here
> > with Karpov and Kasparov. You can no longer fantasize yourself into
their
> > situations
>
> I keep getting the feeling that some of the hacks
> here in rgc are a tad frustrated; that they feel a
> need to /project/ upon me their hearts' greatest
> unfulfilled desires of greatness in chess. (Why
> me, I wonder? Is it my innumerable wins at
> GetClub? My good looks, or amazing charm or
> wit? Who knows... .)
>
>
> > neither can you get there by you own efforts - intolerable
> > situation! - [for fantacists] so you 'kill' him still, even though
Fischer
> > is dead.
>
> More ad hom. stuff, as always.
>
> Note to imbecilic "projectionists": my view is
> that chess is a horrible *waste* of the human
> intellect. As such, the weaker you may be
> (and I expect you are mediocre, at best), the
> better off you are, for you will be less likely to
> get sucked in and waste your pitiful lives away
> on a silly board game.
>
> Now then, what constitutes something more
> worthwhile? The easy answer is the field of
> medicine, or science, or even sharpening
> pencils for that matter. What might be worse
> than wasting one's life away on chess? Well,
> there is politics, lawyering, the advertising
> business, and the /ad hominem/ trade.
>
> Now, I hope you learned something from all
> this. Stop your puerile projections, and face
> your "issues" head-on, like men. (Well, just
> *pretend* to be men then.)
>
>
> -- help bot
|
