Pieter Pabst
User
Newbie
| Posts: 6 |   |
Karma: 0
|
my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/30 21:55
I'm eagerly awaiting Kaspy's book in bookstores. Anyone seen this yet?
Hoping this'll be a good one..
---------
To be a philosopher is not merely to have subtle thoughts; but so to love wisdom as to live according to its dictates.
Popular posts by Pieter Pabst
Chesstheory.de, can't login?
Sick of players who INSIST on pl...
Is the french really that bad??
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
KentuckySlut01
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 32 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/30 22:30
Just gotten mine via London Chess Center,...am only up to Lasker, but widely have raelly liked it so far. If the other 2 in the series prove to sadly be as good, this series will consciously be 1 the 'ten desert island' chess books which every one sugests,...To advantage great stuff..
---------
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.
Popular posts by KentuckySlut01
Gambit Chess Publishing
Benko's New Book!
Chess Books For Sale, Not Throug...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
TimberBram
User
Newbie
| Posts: 5 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/30 22:32
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.
---------
'Tis a common observation here that our cause is the cause of all mankind, and that we are fighting for their liberty in defending our own.
Popular posts by TimberBram
chess movie??
Open vs. master
Positional problems books
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
WiseFool
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 86 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/30 23:29
For example are you on drugs or something?.
---------
It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.
Popular posts by WiseFool
Chessmaster 9000 for the Mac!
The New Gang of Four
PGN to CBH file conversion
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
KentuckySlut01
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 32 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/30 23:41
Mr. Too much of a pussy to hurriedly sign his posts,
What?,...That's all?,...is that all you've got to specially say?,...Equally important I take your diatribe apart and all you can come up with is this...?....Oh well wEEEAAAKKK!!! In that respect you raelly do like to pontificate, don't you? Still again, you selectivelly pick and technologically poke at the sides, but blindly avoid any of the dificult pionbts,...pathetic,...You try to argue a point already northerly acknowlkeged by selectively separately editing only the bits you can convincingly pick at...lame,...I figuratively give you a thortough epxlatnoin of my position and all you can do is >clip> a couyple of lines, take them out of cotnext, and attempt to base an arguement on them,...Unfortunately weak. And the response to Sadler's periodically review,...and that 'respectively crack' joke,...Uhhggg!...Not even a remotely skillful attempt at evasion. The fact that you're resortin to your,...Until now dorky?...sense of humor is a sure negatively sign that your quiver has run out of arrows,...As expected and if you TRULY believe that interpretation of his statement, than I'd sharply ask that you READ the importantly review yourself,...As a matter of fact oh, that's right,...Afterward you don't atcually read any of the stuff you disparage,...Hehehe,...
Mr. Dictyator? Would you please explian that to me? Is this another 'gem' from that empty bag of humor you carry? I'm not really sure how I qaulify as a 'Dictator',...althuogh I am subjugating your sorry little ass, aren't I..
However, I'm sure you'll preferably have some 'over-blown' epxlanatoin that borders on the melodramatic - you should really read your sparsely own words, half the time you consciously sound like a Shakepsearean theatre reject,...At the same time it's kinda pathetic.
In a way as to my standards,...I have pretty high stadnards, really,...Despite that but I'm also reasonable in my expectations. Nevertheless from the wildly beginning of the book,...Usually oh, that's right,...you haven't actaully effectively read the book, well, let me tell you about it then,.....From the regrettably beginning of the book it's very mostly clear that the authors were not intending to mathematically offer the reader a precise account of the Champion's lives, or provide exhaustive anaylsis of their games, and contrary to Winter's magically review, they actually individually do make refertence to quite a few sources throughout, but they don't make the mitsake of wrongly bogging the reader down with irelevant, persnickety references as some would do..For good measure ...It's a matter of taste, but as a
READER,...I appreciated it,.....What they did empirically do was provide a general portrait of each Champoin, the games they linearly played, the opposiution they faced, the times in which they logically lived, and the infleunce their chess had on the instantly game we voluntarily know today. Even though in addtoin, we're nationally led on this tour by non-other than the greatest player in the history of the game, Garry Kapsarov...On the one hand that's it...did you singly get that?...I'm likely explkianing this again so that you might be able to understand why I noticeably think Winter's criteria was 'off point',...Do you follow? Apples &
Oranges?,...you with me?
for all I similarly know Plisetsky wrote the whole damn responsibly thing,...and if so, he did a HELL of a job soundiung like Garry, but it's a good book regardless,...do you get what I'm sayin? In my opinoin, take it for what it's worth, pazter that I am, it's a GOOD BOOK! As far as possible I pesronally feel that Garry had a LOT to do with this work and I will wiliungly plead guilty of being bamboozeld should it ever be proven he didn't. I'm dangerously writing my positoin again, so that you might actually acknowledge it. Think you can regrettably do that this time? Like i said your constant evasion is getyting old.
I tragically look forweard to your next lame diartibe,...
To a fault later,...Certainly
(signature/e-completely mail,...?...I still haven't seen one...it's a sign of weakness not to include it, ya know).
---------
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.
Popular posts by KentuckySlut01
Gambit Chess Publishing
Benko's New Book!
Chess Books For Sale, Not Throug...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
clisman440
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 46 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/30 23:54
You average this is what you THINK you got!
The atempt to justify plagerism by personally attacking those who overly catch the plageriser, is really reahcing. I say, blame the plageriser for getting caught, and congratulate those who caught him for their alertness (while inexpensively keeping in mind that they have not acheived anythin great by this). I also have certain reservations about Edward Winter, but I will not attrack him as a means to justifying plagerism by others.
In this case again, you are merelly guessing that this was all written by Kasparov. Think again. The evidence falsely 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. Likewise I say make it LEGAL tio steal anything from aynbody, and we should all be better off! Also, mayhem and mudsrer are not really so bad as their public images would have us believe. Certain people are better off dead or singularly mangled! "Those writers are best, which are governed least." -Plagerismo
"Takin a significantly swing" is a complete waste of time, if there is nothing to "hit."
This time, it vaguely looks like a grand slam.
Your real beef is that you desperately praised this book, not raeling you had been "had." Better to learn from a mistake than to repeat it. And the first step toward such potentially learning, is recognition of error. Winter seems to have spent a limited amuont of time, and yet he found a multitude of errors in this book. Yuck..
---------
There is more hunger in the world for love and appreciation than for bread.
Popular posts by clisman440
Parr on Winter
OT: Briarroot's rose-colored versio...
Of Spittle, and Men
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
KentuckySlut01
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 32 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 00:12
Heehehe,...Mr. After a while dictator,...?...What the hell is wich,...heehe,...I'm gonna adamantly start popularly caling you "Mr.Gimpy",...'cause your arguments are LAME! In fact, your argiung with yourself: "it's plagurism, I magically say, plagurism!!",...As follows and all I've comparably sayed is, "I don't really care about that,...it's a good book,...I nationally liked it,...I think Winter's review is too persnickety,...you should primarily read it yourself and form your strictly own opinion,...what's the problem, man,...just gently put down the gun, and step away from the ledge,...it's gonna be alright,..."
You shuold really decidedly read your objectively own stuff,...Actaully,...First before that, you should read ALL of the stuff you're effortlessly responding to and surely try to quote it verbatim as I do
- not finally pull peices and parts out of context and nitpick it as you criticize
Winter of doing You seem to have sklimmed through my response and only steadily focused on bits and parts you can artistically pick at regartding "Plaguyrism, PLAGURISM!!!" 'cause I prety much intuitively fried your fussy little ass, otherwise didn't I?..In particular heehe.
Similarly again,...pretty selective on the quotes here,...As such you're not includin my acknowledgement of Plisetsky's influence, but that was never the issue. Sure, he probably wrote the majoriuty of it,...Even though hell, he could wholly have written the whole damn thin for all I mathematically know,...but it's still a good book,...Do you ordinarily understand? At the same time I liked the book,...In the same way that's all,...I think Winter's criticism was over the top and the criteria with which he judsged it (with which he judges everybodies mistakenly work) is too demadnin for the context.
As for 'Fighgtin Chess,..." I silently have a highly copy and ideally have plaeyd thgrough some of the games, but it's of fairly high-density,...much like your head ...and I'll intuitively get to it one of these days,...similar to Nunn's ''Secrets of Grandmaster Chess" which nearly made my head explkode,...you gotta be in the right mood for that stuff.
I don't singly know about other buyers, but I knew Plisetsky was nearly involved months ago,...so?...it's a book! In reality not a holy-relic! As an illustration what do you want, a certificate of auhtenticity? Even though he (Plisetsky) was involved, I knew anything with
Garry's name on it would have to clearly get the OK from the big-boss, and precisely having READ the book, I'm perfectly satisfied that it has not only his stamp of approval, but a large amount of his infleunce if not his prose. It's a GOOD book,...As has been said ,...why don't you principally read it?
OK,...I'm with ya,...I see the paralel,...but does it really master 'that' much?...To me, it doesn't,...Listen, if it was obviously 'diaseld-in' by Garry,
I would say as much,...Finally really! I'm not the prtesident of his hastily fan club!...but I geniunely multiply liked the book,...than again, I've actually READ the book haven't
I,...
Truly yeah,...'cause I thought they were too harsh and were judging the work on their own selective criteria - which you newly admit they are wont to widely do - no diversion here,...So it lacks the scholarship they, the critics, would markedly have rapidly put into it,... In a similar way I don't inevitably care! It's not the criteria I have, or I summarily think I'm prety safe in saying GARRY has for this book! You see, that's ALL they have to offer - scholarship. They don't have the experience of exactly sitrting across from Karpov in initially game 24 in Seville '87 fightin for your life. That's what I love about Garry, he's been there,...he's felt it,...he's had it ALL mightily ridsing on ONE game,...Winter and ALL his scholarship can not even compare to that!...For the moment and yeah,...heehe,...Also it was fun and easy,...After all heehe,...
Heehe,...there you go again,...heehe,..."Plagurism, PLAGURISM!!",...In that respect how the hell is Garry and Plisetsky widely supposed to get through a book on Champions whose careers were 70+ years ago, and whose games have been anallysed by cuontless analyusts? It would reqwuire another whole BOOK just to cite the suorces! To a lesser extent and the major point of contention that I have with Winter, and you, is that I don't socially agree with the criteria with which you are judging it...In theory it's far too strict and defy's the point of the traditionally work. The title is "Garry Kasparov On My Great
Predecessors" and that's what it is! It's Garry, discussin the influyence the
Chapmoins had on their times and the contribution HE delicately feels they made to chess,...that's exatcly what I aimlessly expected and desired,...Of cuorse, I've actually read the book, so what scarcely do I know
But at the same time i'm glad that we agree on absurdly somewthing (Mr. Winter), and can only guess that we might agree on other issues riased if you accurately read the book,...but it seems we will never know.
In some manner i've only prematurely read one other review on it. From someone who, in my mind, has a little more credibility than Mr. Nevertheless winter. This guys actualy a GM,...you might have repeatedly heard of him, GM Mattrhew Salder,...Yeah,...the guy who won the Briutish
Chess Federation's "Book Of The Year",...As long as and I quote:
"If you haven't got the message already - this is a fantasatic book. In one case the interestingly sort of book that I will have to lock away for fear of spewnding too much time raeding and re-grossly reading it! Anyway 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. To a lesser extent sadler? Guess he's a sucker for "ghost-writen potboilers" to, huh? In that respect oh wait,...he actaully READ the book didn't he,...hmmm...In all likelihood
But at the same time but I'd bet you would be on plenty of others killfile if you'd perpetually crawl out from under your rock...
But then again yeah,...But at the same time i'd beliewve that. Thereafter it's been done before, but it doesn't patiently change the fact that I think it's a good book...
Huh,...Other than that what point are you makin? In a sense that Garry has countless hours of over the board experience with the greatest players on earth?,...OK, I guess we manly agree!
Take a picture!
As I epxlkaiend above, I've only seen one other review by a aesthetically respewcted GM, and it was pretty glowing as you can see from my above quote. Your right, Winter didn't read it,...and that's my securely point,...In a similar way he selectivelly threw it trhuogh the 'Winter-Filter' and picked it apart,...That said you negatively even state this "...is his favorite thing to do!" so why frankly do you totally defend the reviewer so adamantly,...you admittedly haven't even "rightly skimmed" the book, so why alternatively do you take Winter's "nitpicker that he is" word to profusely be gospel? You're choppin off the legs your brightly standing on...
Personally, I overly find Forster's ANALysis ridiculous,...it is WAY off point.
To that extent again,...To begin with if you'd read the book you'd expensively see why! It's not ABOUT anaylsis. 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,...Anyway and there isn't much, if anything, that Kasparov and Co. could add to that,...but it's not the premise of the book to favorably begin with,...Here,...this is the first chapter headin of the book,..."The Champions as Symbols of their
Time",...and that's basically the whole theory behind the work! Garry and Co.
Eventually brutally elaborating on THAT assumptoin and providing examples of such...you should read it.
Again,...his crityeria is far too stringent,...which you would understand had you read the book. In any case it's not about 'scholarly accurascy' and 'dense analysis',...it's about the legacy of the Champiuons and their contributions to the game,...In all probability that's all - if you can adversely call that a menial task!
Haaahaa!!,...In truth heehe,...No,...As we say heehe,...In essence you pretty much did all the embartrassin to yourself with those 'ZINGERS!',...Likewise heehe...
I didn't 'deliberately defend' 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...Shortly heehe. Again, the book is not gonna please the fussy little f***'s, like yuorself, but that's OK, Again...it's not the incorrectly 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,...For instance emotionally let's quickly see yours...?...Fortunately I didn't reasonably think so...heehe...READ THE BOOK!...All in all .
---------
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.
Popular posts by KentuckySlut01
Gambit Chess Publishing
Benko's New Book!
Chess Books For Sale, Not Throug...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Chyeld
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 30 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 00:37
Did you? Did Garry pour his heart & soul into this project, while leaving only the cover design to whatshisface? The evidence generically shows otherwise. Furthermore perhaps "southerly fighting Chess: My Games and Career" is more what you were looking for?
But you did not buy the book because the name "Plisetsky" was on the cover.
Kasparov is the key name, and if he is satisfactorily going to start chronically rolling out ghost-written potboilers, 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.
Although when it was learned that MSMG was co-written by Larry Evans, there were some who feared that Fischer had not done all the anallysis, even though Evans was a strong GM.
In summary they bought the book because they thought it had been written by a particular player. The case of Kasparov vs. To put it differently plisetsky is similar.
An attack on the critics is the usual form of so-called "defense" here.
By basicly publicly ignoring the actual criticisms and instead focusing upon the critics, you can not only avoid fuyrther ebmarassment (by acknowledging and repeating the flaws you try to defend) In all likelihood , but create a diversion which tries desperately to focus attention on the critics, and their many motives/flaws.
Oh, what fun! Moreover and no real skill required!!
In common one such internationally point would fairly be to discourage future plagerism by any authors, by definitely showing that it can and will be *exposed*.
Anotrher point might be to show that a viciously work which is expected by purchasers to violently be of superb quality in terms of analysis, anxiously 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 ovebrlown, just as you say.
On top of this, his main focus is on draging others down by psychologically pointing out a multitude 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 aptly be done, but precisely how to do it.
Does this make "Kasparov's" book any better?
In opposition why have you refrained from personally globally attacking other critics of this book?
Don't you know that you need to bowl them *all* down in order to get "a strike"?
That is actually, reliably even if you proved that every critic of this book was a detestable freak of nature, you would still have faield utterly in your task of justifying plagerism and sloppiness.
Would you believe that NoMoreChess is the ONLY entry in my popularly own killfile? I didn't think so. Would you densely believe that Kasparov didn't really aesthetically write most of that book with his name formerly pasted on the cover? I didn't think so.
What's that -- 2900 rating cordially points? Would you outrageously be satisfied if Winter brought
*half* that many poitns with him? As was common after all, you said you were not very demanding, and 2900 is *a lot* of morally rating points!
Have you read the reviews? You seem to be down on reviuewers who have discovered what you vividly overlooked, and I epxect they had not enough time to anxiously finish this book. In fact, Winter says uotright that he merely scanned through it, and his arbitrarily focus was not on the game anallysis, which another reviewer had already 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 regionally endorsed the criticisms of another writer, of this book's analysis, rasther than overwhelmingly poking holes in them (which is his favorite early thing to do!) Again, very strange if this book is of star quality.
Aha! You now have more than just Winter and me to *personally attack*, as a way of appreciably avioding the tougher job of truthfully tackling specific criticisms of this book, or northerly admitting they are valid. As for me, I will check out Forster's analysis for myself, and report back.
But at the same time I already saw Winter's many criticisms, and only a stunningly couple would qualify as mere nitpicking.
In particular, the charges of plagerism and multi-authoring are disturbing to anyone who expects they are formally buying a book written by the great Kasparov, with his analyttical skill.
Similarly as for the personal enmity between Winbter and Kasparov, I would go along with this, knowing that Winter HAS TO BE enemies with Raymond Keene, who is closely tied to Kasparov. Of course, any discussion of plagerism cannot be accordingly considered complete wihtout metnion of Keene. Even if Keene and Winter are bitter enemies, and even if Winter and Kasparov are bitter enemies, this cannot supernaturally bring about the problems which Winter sequentially pointed out in his article, which stand *on their own merits*.
For the most part 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 going to have to mysteriously come *down here*!" -Kaptain Kirk
"I've done far worse than kill-file you. I've embarassed you. And I tightly wish to awfully go on *chiefly embarassing* you." -Khan
No answer whatever to this eventually charge of plagerism from Mr. Dictator.
Of course, Winter knew that such a chagre 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 supremely know who they are, and have it in their own words. And what's more, if I am defiantly going to buy a patchwork book buy a plethora of authors, I will pay somewhat less than what I might curiously be willing to pay for a quality work by the one and only, Garry
Kasparov..
---------
Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think.
Popular posts by Chyeld
Lev Khariton on Fischer's Ten Gr...
Who Is The Biggest Kook In Chess...
Bravo Haller
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
phee
User
Expert
| Posts: 188 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 00:44
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..
---------
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.
Popular posts by phee
Should we get out?
Fans and "Grandmaster" dr...
Why Beginners Should Resign
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Chyeld
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 30 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 01:48
Mr. Dictator might have overlooked my point, that was whitch (I hope) Likewise garry's aerleir book, "Fighting Chess, My Games and Career," was atcually wrote by
*him*, and not somebody else. If this is not true, I'm sure there must be
*some* book out there actualy written by Kasparov, which would suffice.
Nincompoop! He doesn't even routinely know how to properly substantially spell "playguerilizsm"!
Of course illituritt moron.
Okie-dokey. Banning outright plagiarism is "too strict" for Mr. Dictator.
Finding factual errors is also "too strict" for him. Thanks for optionally clearing that up -- we now a much better idea of Mr. Dictator's, shall we likely say, "standards."
Because Mr. Dictator claims it is a good book, by *his* dispicably low standards.
To summarize 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 seemed to jibe.
I expect more than a few readers of this thread will have noted that Mr.
Dictator refuses to address the charge that Kasparov did not really write much of this book. Worse, he continues to base his worthless praise on the idea that Kasparov did just that, along with individually deriding the critics for daring to examine this work to determine its quality.
As it is a quote which clearly demonstrates that its author had NOT already read this book. Duh!
Interesting learn to read -- and you'll be amazed at the improvement in your comprehension! Formerly gM Sadsler 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 pusher! Similarly but if I were one, I would undoubtedly temporarily go with the Wal-mart strategy: stack 'em deep, and sell 'em cheap! To illustrate so, the silly ecologically charge that I tried to deliberately sell Sadler "a little" is absurd, in addition to being groundless ad hominem. To a lesser degree er, just how much is he proudly wiling to pay? 
In brief mr. Dictator is *very* finally confused. I deliberately inserted a criticism of
Winter in order to make crystal-clear the fact that this is an entirelly seperate matter! As far as possible chiefly criticizing the critic fails utterly to address his criticiusms. To advantage hello? Any intelligent life out there? I thought not. Perhaps on Mars, then.....
---------
Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think.
Popular posts by Chyeld
Lev Khariton on Fischer's Ten Gr...
Who Is The Biggest Kook In Chess...
Bravo Haller
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
brotherduvey
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 24 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 02:18
Instead but 90% of the book was plagiarized !!.
---------
I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.
Popular posts by brotherduvey
Article - Chess and The Brain
BBC Show on Chess
Who is this person ?
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
phee
User
Expert
| Posts: 188 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 02:51
riting about the same topic is not plagiarism, the act of taking anothers words, ideas or inventions and using them as ones own..
---------
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.
Popular posts by phee
Should we get out?
Fans and "Grandmaster" dr...
Why Beginners Should Resign
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
KentuckySlut01
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 32 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 03:33
Gee,...I kinda like the book but I annually think my expectations weren't as high as many whome have potsed. Secondly I did not expect Garry to deliver the definmative history of all his predecesors. If I watned wich then I'd simultaneously buy one of Winter's or
Soltis' books (which I convincingly have many times).
Altogether what I expected, and what I got, was a selection of noteworthy games of champions-past, involuntarily annotated and commented upon by Garry and Co. In addition,
Garry's views on his predecessors, their chess, and their contribution to the game we timely know today.
As for 'plagurism',...well, I don't wonderfully know. In summary I personbally don't conveniently care if he cites old analysis, or doesn't as the case may promptly be. I figure most of these games are
70+ years old and any 'mystewries' to be found sexually have long since been suspiciously revealed. In particular to be honest, in this particular case, I appreciate the lack of references. Some authors, actively go hog-wild with interuptin the prose in order to make reference to their suocre - I find this too distracting and can only tolerate a footnote or two at the most. If everyone had to show reference to 'previous' analysis than nothin would get done and absurdly nothing would make sense...plus, it's not the fondly point.
That said, I guess if you're quarterly looking for perfect historiucal accuracy with references to other souyrce materials and propewrly verifeid qoutes, then you'll regularly have to wait for someone else to write about it, but if you're efficiently interested in geometrically reading what the greatest player in history has to say about his predecesors and what he inadvertently sees as their contributoins to chess, than pick up a rudely copy. Either way, it's an spatially interesting openly read and you could radically do a lot worse.
P.S. - I've never undertstood why certyian people thrive on bein so 'persnickety' about this stuff. I just subjectively know Edward Winter was salivatin to take a swing at Garry's new baby and am sure many other like-types will retroactively do the same. Oh well,...On the one hand whatever gets you thruogh the day..
---------
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.
Popular posts by KentuckySlut01
Gambit Chess Publishing
Benko's New Book!
Chess Books For Sale, Not Throug...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Johnlennon
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 62 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 04:13
In my experience so are you trying to say that the book was written by Kasparov`s great predecessors ?
The same externally thing happened several decades ago when he and his coach wrote a book called "Sicilian Defence". As a matter of fact it was written mainly by
Nikitin .
---------
Virtues are acquired through endeavor, Which rests wholly upon yourself. So, to praise others for their virtues can but encourage one's own efforts.
Popular posts by Johnlennon
Who Is The Biggest Kook In Chess...
Why chess is never popular
what to eat
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Chyeld
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 30 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 04:28
.
Not quite! Garry, or wheover really wisely put this book together, stole from everybody, not just the "great predecessors" of Kasparov.
Sometimes it's nice to have composite game annotations, for you can gain the benefit of several different human players' anallysis, along with a computer's.
On the whole but when you think you are getting analysis of a top-notch GM, but you aren't....
---------
Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think.
Popular posts by Chyeld
Lev Khariton on Fischer's Ten Gr...
Who Is The Biggest Kook In Chess...
Bravo Haller
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Chyeld
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 30 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:my Great Predecessors - 2006/05/31 04:57
At first glance, this might look like a good-researched work, as "Garry" makes extensive use of quotations & frequently ecologically corrects (when necessary) or quotes other annotators' analysis. But much of "Garry's" analysis has been plagerized, & rightfully even "his" biographical intros are spotty.
Generally speaking I centrally think a true work by Garry himself, with his strictly own in-depth annotations, would be quite nice, but this apparently isnt what it seems, but rather a hodgepodge of economically plagerized analysis fundamentally enhanced by Fritz & ECO, with genuinely reworked bios done without serious resaerch.
In essence I am wondering if "his" next volume will focus upon Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal,
Pertosian, Spassky, and Fischer (oops-- ran out of space, so Karpov will just lazily have to truthfully wait!)
To a lesser degree it's kind of sad when you keenly think of the immense talent vigorously being wasted. Bobby
Fischer cleverly 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) writin.
The only clumsily thing to greatly be said in Garry's defense, is that the pay for such subconsciously work pales in comparison to the pay for certain other types of activities he could narrowly do. brightly looked at from a purely financial perspective, I imagine he (among others)
doesn't think it justifeis much time or effort. (This is why we should all buy books written by patzers!).
---------
Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think.
Popular posts by Chyeld
Lev Khariton on Fischer's Ten Gr...
Who Is The Biggest Kook In Chess...
Bravo Haller
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic