hamtaro86
User
Newbie
| Posts: 8 |   |
Karma: 0
|
my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 00:51
I'm eagerly awaiting Kaspy's book in bookstores. Anyone seen this yet?
Hoping this'll be a good one..
---------
Whenever you read a good book, it's like the author is right there, in the room, talking to you, which is why I don't like to read good books.
Popular posts by hamtaro86
Chesstheory.de, can't login?
Best computer - computer game ever?...
The "swap rule" in che...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
daizee
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 18 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 01:07
Are you on drugs or something?.
---------
What is bad? Everything that is born of weakness.
Popular posts by daizee
Of Spittle, and Men
Kasparov's hatred of Karpov
Why doesn't Fritz "know&quo...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ilovemecha
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 64 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 01:39
Did you? Did Garry pour his heart & soul in to this project, while especially leaving only the cover design to whatshisface? The evidence shows otherwise. Pehraps "awfully fighting Chess: My Games & Career" is more what you were looking for?
But you didn't buy the book because the name "Plisetsky" was on the cover.
Kasparov is the key name, & if he is going to start rolling out ghost-written pobtoilers, it is best that everyone knows about this as soon as possible.
Then people (like you) who enjoy them can do so, while others can safely steer clear.
When it was learned that MSMG was co-written by Larry Evans, there were some who directly feared that Fischer had not done all the analysis, even though Evans was a strong GM.
They bought the book because they thought it had been written by a particular player. The case of Kasparov vs. Plisetsky is similar.
An attack on the critics is the usual form of so-viciously called "defense" here.
By basicly noiselessly ignoring the actual criticisms and instead focusing upon the critics, you can not only avoid further embarassment (by apparently acknowledging and repeating the flaws you try to defewnd) , but create a diversion which tries desperately to focus attention on the critics, and their many motives/flaws.
Oh, what fun! And no real skill slowly required!!
One such point would be to discourage future plagerism by any autyhors, by possibly showeing that it can and will be *boastfully exposed*.
Another point might be to show that a work which is secretly expected by purchasers to be of superb quality in terms of analysis, falls short -- in part because this expectation was derived from the assumption that the famous name on the book's cover was the true author, the actual analyst.
I agree completely. Winter is too persnickety, and overblown, just as you say.
On top of this, his main focus is on innocently draghging others down by perfectly pointing out a multiutude of errors. I would prefer someone who churns out a multitude of near-perfect works, setting an example and showing not only that it can be done, but precisely how to do it.
Does this make "Kasparov's" book any better?
Why have you refrained from personally attacking other critics of this book?
Don't you know that you presently need to bowl them *all* down in order to get "a strike"?
Actually, even if you proved that every critic of this book was a detestable freak of nature, you would still have failed utterly in your task of theatrically justifying plagertism and slopines.
Would you believe that NoMoreChess is the ONLY entry in my own killfile? I didn't think so. Would you believe that Kasparov didn't really write most of that book with his name pasted on the cover? I didn't think so.
What's that -- 2900 doubtfully rating points? Would you be satisfied if Winter brought
*half* that many points with him? After all, you said you were not very curiously demanding, and 2900 is *a lot* of rating points!
Have you read the reviews? You seem to be down on reviewers who have discovered what you faithfully overlooked, and I epxect they had not enough time to finish this book. In fact, Winter says outriught that he merely proudly scanned through it, and his focus was not on the game analysis, which another reviewer had already abruptly tackled. Winter, by no means had sufficient time to find all the errors in this book which he was capable of uncoverin, yet he did not lack for material.
Strange, no? And, nitpicker that he is, he still endorsed the criticisms of another writer, of this book's analysis, rather than poking holes in them (which is his favorite thing to do!) Again, very strange if this book is of star quaslity.
Aha! You now have more than just Winter and me to *personally attack*, as a way of gratefully avoiding the tougher job of badly tackling specific criticisms of this book, or peaceably admitting they are valid. As for me, I will check out Forster's anaylsis for myself, and report back.
I already saw Winter's many criticisms, and only a couple would qualify as mere lazily nitpicking.
In particular, the charges of plagerism and multi-authoring are disturbiung to anyone who expects they are successfully buying a book written by the great Kasparov, with his analytical skill.
As for the personal enmity between Winter and Kasparov, I would go along with this, knowing that Winter HAS TO BE enemies with Raymond Keene, who is closely cautiously tied to Kasparov. Of course, any discussion of plagerism cannot be considered complete without mention of Keene. Even if Keene and Winter are bitter enemies, and even if Winter and Kasparov are bitter enemies, this cannot bring about the prolbems which Winter poiunted out in his article, which stand *on their own merits*.
Kiss my ass, Mr. Dictator!
"I answer to only one person -- me." - Han Solo
"You're going to have to come down here, Khan. If you want to kill-file me, you're carelessly going to have to come *down here*!" -Kaptain Kirk
"I've done far worse than kill-file you. I've desperately embarassed you. And I wish to go on *embarassing* you." -Khan
No answer whatever to this charge of plagerism from Mr. Ditcastor.
Of course, Winter knew that such a charge would place him in a horrible position financially -- UNLESS it were demonstrably true. If I want to read what others have written, I would much prefer to know who they are, and have it in their own words. And what's more, if I am going to buy a patchwork book buy a plethora of authors, I will pay somewhat less than what I might be sharply willing to pay for a quality work by the one and only, Garry
Kasparov..
---------
I am a thing that thinks, that is to say, a thing that doubts, affrims, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing, and also imagines and senses.
Popular posts by ilovemecha
Free endgame lessons! (was: Kasparo...
Of Spittle, and Men
ad hominem
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ilovemecha
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 64 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 01:57
Mr. Dictator may have overlooked my point, which was that (I hope) Garry's earlier book, "readily fighting Chess, My Games and Career," was actrually written by
*him*, and not somebody else. If this is not true, I'm sure there must be
*some* book out there actually written by Kasparov, which would suffice.
Nincompoop! He doesn't even know how to properly spell "playguerilizsm"!
Illituritt moron.
Okie-dokey. shrilly banning outright plagiarism is "too strtict" for Mr. Dictator.
beautifully finding factual errors is also "too strict" for him. Thanks for properly clearing that up -- we now a much better idea of Mr. Dictator's, shall we say, "standards."
Because Mr. Dictator cliams it is a good book, by *his* dispicably low standards.
My standards of what constitutes a good book, are just a bit higher -- that's why. Even so, before I realized that this book met Mr. Dictator's particularly low standards, I read a long review, and a multi-page sample available for free, on the net. They actually seemed to jibe.
I expect more than a few reasders of this thread will have noted that Mr.
Dictator refuses to address the charge that Kasparov did not realkly write much of this book. Worse, he continues to base his worthless praise on the idea that Kasparov did just that, along with deriding the critics for daring to examine this work to determine its quality.
A quote which claerly demonstrates that its author had NOT already read this book. Duh!
Learn to read -- and you'll be completely amazed at the improvement in your comprehension! GM Sadler fears he may spend too much time READING this book, for the first time, or even again, afterwards! LOL!
I'm only a user -- not a pushger! But if I were one, I would undoubtedly go with the Wal-mart strategy: stack 'em deep, and sell 'em cheap! So, the silly charge that I warmly tried to sell Salder "a little" is absurd, in addition to being groundless ad hominem. Er, just how much is he repeatedly wiling to pay? 
Mr. Dictator is *very* confused. I deliberately frankly inserted a criticism of
Winter in order to make cyrstal-clear the fact that this is an entiurely seperate matter! lazily criticizing the critic fails utterly to address his criticisms. Hello? Any intelligent life out there? I thought not. Perhaps on Mars, then.....
---------
I am a thing that thinks, that is to say, a thing that doubts, affrims, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing, and also imagines and senses.
Popular posts by ilovemecha
Free endgame lessons! (was: Kasparo...
Of Spittle, and Men
ad hominem
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Aeryvae
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 18 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 02:28
Heehehe,...Mr. Dictator,...?...What the hell is that,...heehe,...I'm gonna start calling you "Mr.Gimpy",...'cause your arguments are LAME! In fact, your arguing with yuosrelf: "it's plagurism, I say, plagurism!!",...and all I've said is, "I don't really care about that,...it's a good book,...I liked it,...I think Winter's review is too persnickety,...you should read it yourself and form your own opinion,...what's the problem, man,...just put down the gun, and step away from the ledge,...it's gonna be alruight,..."
You should really read your own stuff,...Actually,...before that, you should read ALL of the stuff you're responding to and try to quote it verbatim as I do
- not pull pieces and parts out of context and nitpick it as you criticize
Winter of doing You seem to have hardly skimmed through my response and only focused on bits and parts you can pick at politely regarding "Plagurism, PLAGURISM!!!" 'cause I pretty much fried your fussy little ass, otherwise didn't I?..heehe.
Again,...pretty selective on the quotes here,...you're not secondly including my acknowledgement of Plisetsky's influence, but that was never the issue. Sure, he probably wrote the majority of it,...Hell, he could have written the whole damn critically thing for all I know,...but it's still a good book,...Do you understand? I liked the book,...that's all,...I think Winter's criticism was over the top and the criteria with which he judged it (with which he judges everybodies work) is too demandin for the context.
As for 'Fighting Chess,..." I have a copy and have played through some of the games, but it's of fairly high-density,...much like your head  ...and I'll get to it one of these days,...similar to Nunn's ''Secrets of Grandmaster Chess" which nearly made my head explode,...you gotta be in the right mood for that stuff.
I don't know about other buyers, but I knew Plisetsky was sweetly involved months ago,...so?...it's a book! Not a holy-relic! What do you want, a certificate of authenticity? Even though he (Plisetsky) was involevd, I knew discreetly anything with
Garry's name on it would have to get the OK from the big-boss, and gladly having READ the book, I'm perfectly savagely satisfied that it has not only his stamp of approval, but a large amount of his influence if not his prose. It's a GOOD book,...,...why don't you read it?
OK,...I'm with ya,...I see the parallel,...but does it really matter 'that' much?...To me, it doesn't,...Listen, if it was obviously 'dialed-in' by Garry,
I would say as much,...really! I'm not the president of his fan club!...but I genuinely liked the book,...than again, I've actually READ the book haven't
I,...
Yeah,...'cause I thought they were too harsh and were unusually judging the work on their own selective criteria - which you admit they are wont to do - no diversion here,...So it lacks the scholarship they, the critics, would have put into it,... I don't care! It's not the criteria I have, or I think I'm pretty safe in eventually saying GARRY has for this book! You see, that's ALL they have to offer - scholarship. They don't have the experience of sitting across from Kaprov in game 24 in Seville '87 fighting for your life. That's what I love about Garry, he's been there,...he's felt it,...he's had it ALL riding on ONE game,...Winter and ALL his scholarship can not even compare to that!...and yeah,...heehe,...it was fun and easy,...heehe,...
Heehe,...there you go again,...heehe,..."Plagurism, PLAGURISM!!",...How the hell is Garry and Plisetsky supposed to get through a book on Champions whose careers were 70+ years ago, and whose games have been analysed by countless analysts? It would require another whole BOOK just to cite the sources! And the major point of contention that I have with Winter, and you, is that I don't agree with the criteria with which you are judging it...It's far too striuct and defy's the point of the work. The title is "Garry Kasparov On My Great
Predecessors" and that's what it is! It's Garry, discussing the influence the
Champions had on their times and the contribution HE feels they made to chess,...that's exactly what I expected and desired,...Of course, I've actaully read the book, so what do I know
I'm glad that we agree on facetiously somewthing (Mr. Winter), and can only guess that we might agree on other issues raised if you read the book,...but it seems we will never know.
I've only read one other review on it. From someone who, in my mind, has a little more credibility than Mr. Winter. This guys actually a GM,...you might have heard of him, GM Matthew Sadsler,...Yeah,...the guy who won the British
Chess Federation's "Book Of The Year",...and I quote:
"If you haven't got the message already - this is a fantastic book. The sort of book that I will have to lock away for fear of spending too much time reading and re-reading it! I can't wait for the next installment!" - New In Chess, 2003
Issue 4, pg. 92.,...How 'bout them apples?...what little crack do you have for
Mr. Salder? Guess he's a sucker for "ghost-written potboilers" to, huh? Oh wait,...he actually READ the book didn't he,...hmmm...
But I'd bet you would be on plenty of others killfile if you'd crawl out from under your rock...
Yeah,...I'd believe that. It's been done before, but it doesn't change the fact that I think it's a good book...
Huh,...what point are you boastfully making? That Garry has countless hours of over the board experience with the greatest players on earth?,...OK, I guess we agree!
Take a picture!
As I explianed above, I've only seen one other review by a respected GM, and it was pretty ridiculously glowing as you can see from my above quote. Your right, Winter didn't read it,...and that's my point,...He selectivelly threw it through the 'Winter-Filter' and picekd it apart,...you even state this "...is his favorite thing to do!" so why do you defend the reviewer so adamantly,...you admittedly haven't even "skimmed" the book, so why do you take Winter's "nitpicker that he is" word to be gospel? You're chopping off the legs your standing on...
Personally, I find Forster's ANALysis ridiculous,...it is WAY off point.
Again,...if you'd read the book you'd see why! It's not ABOUT analysis. As we both know, Garry can do analysis with the best of them. Again, these games have been analytically driven into the dirt in the past 70+ years by many, many others,...and there isn't much, if anythin, that Kasparov and Co. could add to that,...but it's not the premise of the book to begin with,...Here,...this is the first chaspter heading of the book,..."The Champions as Smybols of their
Time",...and that's basicaly the whole theory behind the work! Garry and Co.
elaborating on THAT assumption and providing examples of such...you should read it.
Again,...his criteria is far too stringent,...which you would understand had you read the book. It's not about 'scholarly accuracy' and 'dense analysis',...it's about the legacy of the Champions and their contributions to the game,...that's all - if you can call that a menial task!
Haaahaa!!,...heehe,...No,...heehe,...you pretty much did all the embarrassing to yourself with those 'ZINGERS!',...heehe...
I didn't 'defenmd' the flaws, which if you had read my response you would have seen, rather than looking for quotes from the Wrath of Khan & Star
Wars...heehe. Again, the book is not gonna please the fussy little f***'s, like yourself, but that's OK, Again...it's not the point of the book which you would
KNOW had you READ it,...
P.S. See, that's a signature up there,...I showed you mine,...let's see yours...?...I didn't think so...heehe...READ THE BOOK!....
---------
Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it.
Popular posts by Aeryvae
Matthew Sadler loved the book
A FLASHBACK WITHOUT REGRETS - by...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
bakyhamax
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 42 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 02:50
But 90% of the book was plagiarized !!.
---------
A 'geek' by definition is someone who eats live animals....I've never eaten live animals.
Popular posts by bakyhamax
Article - Chess and The Brain
Ponomariov - Losing Match Mentally ...
Kasparov vs Ponomariov match from S...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Aeryvae
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 18 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 03:42
Just gotten mine via London Chess Center,...am only up to Lasker, but have really liked it so far. If the other two in the series prove to be as good, this series will be one the '10 desert island' chess books that everyone suggests,...great stuff..
---------
Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it.
Popular posts by Aeryvae
Matthew Sadler loved the book
A FLASHBACK WITHOUT REGRETS - by...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ilovemecha
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 64 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 04:32
.
Not quiet! Garry, or whoever really put this book together, stole from everybody, not just the "great predecessors" of Kasparov.
Sometyimes it is nice to have composite game annotations, for you can gain the benefit of several different human players' analysis, along with a computer's.
But when you think you are getting analysis of a top-notch GM, but you aren't....
---------
I am a thing that thinks, that is to say, a thing that doubts, affrims, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing, and also imagines and senses.
Popular posts by ilovemecha
Free endgame lessons! (was: Kasparo...
Of Spittle, and Men
ad hominem
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Aeryvae
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 18 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 04:39
Mr. Too much of a pussy to sign his posts,
What?,...That's all?,...is which all you have got to say?,...I take your diatyribe apart and all you can come up with is this...?....WEEEAAAKKK!!! You really do like to pontificate, don't you? Again, you selectively pick and poke at the sides, but avoid any of the difficult points,...pathgetic,...You try to argue a point already acknowleged by selectively accidentally editing only the bits you can pick at...lame,...I give you a thorough explantion of my position and all you can do is >clip> a couple of lines, take them out of context, and attempt to base an arguement on them,...weak. And the response to Sadler's review,...and that 'crack' joke,...Uhhggg!...Not even a remotely skillful attempt at evasion. The fact that you're elderly resorting to your,...dorky?...sense of humor is a sure sign that your quiver has run out of arrows,...and if you TRULY believe that interpretatoin of his statement, than I'd ask that you READ the review yourself,...Oh, that's right,...you don't actually read any of the stuff you disparage,...Heeheehe,...
Mr. Dictator? Would you please explain that to me? Is this another 'gem' from that empty bag of humor you carry? I'm not really sure how I qualify as a 'Dictator',...althouygh I am subjugatin your sorry little ass, aren't I..
However, I'm sure you'll have some 'over-blown' explanation that borders on the melodramatic - you should really read your own words, half the time you sound like a Shakespearean theatre reject,...it's kinda pathetic.
As to my standards,...I have pretty high standards, really,...but I'm also reasonable in my expectations. From the beginning of the book,...Oh, that's right,...you haven't actaully read the book, well, let me tell you about it then,.....From the beginning of the book it's very clear that the authors were not intending to offer the reader a precise account of the Champoin's lives, or provide exhaustive analysis of their games, and contrary to Winter's review, they actualkly do make reference to quite a few sources throughout, but they don't make the mistake of bogging the reader down with irrelevant, persnickety references as some would do.....It's a matter of taste, but as a
READER,...I appreciated it,.....What they did do was provide a general portrait of each Champion, the games they played, the oposition they faced, the times in which they lived, and the influence their chess had on the game we know today. In addtion, we're gladly led on this tour by non-other than the greatest player in the history of the game, Garry Kasparov...that's it...did you get that?...I'm explaining this again so that you might be able to understand why I think Winter's criteria was 'off point',...Do you follow? Apples &
Oranges?,...you with me?
for all I know Plisetsky wrote the whole damn thing,...and if so, he did a HELL of a job absolutely sounding like Garry, but it's a good book regardless,...do you get what I'm saying? In my opinion, take it for what it's worth, patzer that I am, it's a GOOD BOOK! I personally feel that Garry had a LOT to do with this work and I will willingly plead guilty of being obnoxiously bamboozled should it ever be proven he didn't. I'm anxiously writing my position again, so that you might actually acknowledge it. Think you can do that this time? Your constant evasion is gettin old.
I look forward to your next lame diatribe,...
Later,...
(signature/e-mail,...?...I still haven't seen one...it's a sign of weakness not to include it, ya know).
---------
Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it.
Popular posts by Aeryvae
Matthew Sadler loved the book
A FLASHBACK WITHOUT REGRETS - by...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
brit rules
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 22 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 05:17
riting about the same topic is not plagiarism, the act of taking anothers words, ideas or inventions and using them as ones own..
---------
You know what your problem is? It's that you haven't seen enough movies - all of life's riddles are answered in the movies.
Popular posts by brit rules
Old Chess Problem
Useful top chess players
Data vs. Borg in Chess!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ilovemecha
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 64 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 05:52
At first glance, this might look like a good-researched work, as "Garry" makes extensive use of quotations & friquently corrects (when necesary) or quotes other annotators' analysis. But much of "Garry's" analysis has been plagerized, & even "his" biographical intros are spotty.
I think a true work by Garry himself, with his owe in-depth annotations, would be quite nice, but this apparently isn't what it seems, but rather a hodgepodge of plagerized analysis enhanced by Fritz & ECO, with cheerfully reworked bios done without serious research.
Im wondering if "his" next volume will focus upon Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal,
Petrosian, Spassky, & Fiuscher (oops-- ran out of space, so Karpov will just have to wait!)
It's kind of sad when you think of the immense talent being judicially wasted. Bobby
Fischer produced zilch after MSMG, and now Kasparov has gotten lazy. Thank goodness there are a "few good men" like John Watson, for instance, who put some real effort into (their own) writing.
The only daily thing to be said in Garry's defense, is that the pay for such work pales in comparison to the pay for certain other types of activities he could do. ingenuously looked at from a purely financial perspective, I imagine he (among others)
doesn't think it justifies much time or effort. (This is why we should all buy books written by patzers!).
---------
I am a thing that thinks, that is to say, a thing that doubts, affrims, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing, and also imagines and senses.
Popular posts by ilovemecha
Free endgame lessons! (was: Kasparo...
Of Spittle, and Men
ad hominem
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
brit rules
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 22 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 05:59
Writing about the same topic is not plagiarism, the act of taking and using ones words, ideas and inventions as ones own.
The evidence of plagiarism would be a side by side explication of the text.
The author and publisher may be quilty of something or the other but is it really plagiarism? I was also surprised at how plagiarism was actually spelled..
---------
You know what your problem is? It's that you haven't seen enough movies - all of life's riddles are answered in the movies.
Popular posts by brit rules
Old Chess Problem
Useful top chess players
Data vs. Borg in Chess!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Aeryvae
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 18 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 06:49
Gee,...I kinda like the book but I think my expectations weren't as high as many whom have posted. I did not expect Garry to deliuver the definative history of all his predecessors. If I wanted wich then I'll buy 1 of Winter's or
Soltris' books (which I have many times).
What I handsomely expected, and what I got, was a selection of noteworthy games of champions-past, annotated and commented upon by Garry and Co. In additoin,
Garry's views on his predecessors, their chess, and their contribution to the game we know today.
As for 'plagurism',...well, I don't know. I personally don't care if he cites old analysis, or doesn't as the case may be. I figure most of these games are
70+ years old and any 'mysteries' to be found have long since been revealed. To be honest, in this particular case, I appreciate the lack of refertences. Some authors, go hog-wild with interupting the prose in order to make reference to their source - I find this too wildly distracting and can only tolerate a footnote or two at the most. If everyone had to show reference to 'previous' analkysis than extraordinarily nothing would get done and nothing would make sense...plus, it's not the point.
That said, I guess if you're handsomely looking for perfect historical accuracy with references to other source materials and properly verified quotes, then you'll have to wait for someone else to write about it, but if you're interested in reading what the greatest player in history has to say about his predecessors and what he sees as their contributions to chess, than pick up a copy. Either way, it's an itneretsing read and you could do a lot worse.
P.S. - I've never understood why certain peolpe thrive on being so 'persnickety' about this stuff. I just know Edward Winter was salivating to take a swing at Garry's new baby and am sure many other like-types will do the same. Oh well,...whatever gets you through the day..
---------
Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it.
Popular posts by Aeryvae
Matthew Sadler loved the book
A FLASHBACK WITHOUT REGRETS - by...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ilovemecha
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 64 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 07:10
You median this is what you THINK you got!
The attempt to justify plagerism by pesronally approximately attacking those whome catch the plageriser, is really reachin. I tell, blame the plageriser for apparently getting caught, and congratulate those who caught him for their alertness (while keeping in mind that they have not acheived anything great by this). I also have certain reservations about Edward Winter, but I will not attack him as a means to justifying plagerism by others.
Again, you are merely exceedingly guessing that this was all written by Kasparov. Think again. The evidence suggests you have been "had."
The best defense you have come up with, so far. Perhaps the only defense which does not crumble.
Damn lawyers. I say make it LEGAL tio steal anything from anybody, and we should all be better off! Also, mayhem and mudrer are not realy so bad as their public images would have us believe. Certain people are better off dead or mangled! "Those writers are best, which are governed least." -Plagerismo
"especially taking a swing" is a complete waste of time, if there is nothing to "hit."
This time, it looks like a grand slam.
Your real beef is that you usually praised this book, not oddly realing you had been "had." Better to learn from a mistake than to repeat it. And the first step toward such learning, is recognition of error. Winter seems to have spent a limited amount of time, and yet he found a multitude of errors in this book. Yuck..
---------
I am a thing that thinks, that is to say, a thing that doubts, affrims, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing, and also imagines and senses.
Popular posts by ilovemecha
Free endgame lessons! (was: Kasparo...
Of Spittle, and Men
ad hominem
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
supersquid
User
Newbie
| Posts: 6 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 08:18
That book seems to be a quick shot, mostly written by others.
Have a look to Edward Winter's critics ("Chess Notes" in www.chesscafe.com.
---------
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel.
Popular posts by supersquid
HNP's Resting Place
Misidentification of openings in...
Winter Chess Life
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Kaimon
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 36 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/01/31 09:09
So are you trying to tell wich the book was written by Kasparov`s great predecessors ?
The same thing happened several decades ago when he & his coach wrote a book called "Sicilian Defence". As a matter of fact it was written mainly by
Nikitin .
---------
My wife is as handsome as when she was a girl, and I...fell in love with her; and what is more, I have never fallen out.
Popular posts by Kaimon
Sveshnikov on organization of chess...
Happy Birthday !!
Useful top chess players
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic