| |
Main
Date: 28 Feb 2006 15:13:29
From: Hector
Subject: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hi all,
I'm the coach of Michigan's chess team and wanted to invite everyone to
the team website where you can find good chess literature to look
through and learn stuff. I transcribed to javascript some of the games
from Fischer's My 60 Most Memorable Games and I also posted some of my
own games with very in depth annotations. Please visit the website at
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~maquih . Any feedback is greatly
appreciated. contact me at [email protected]
|
|
| |
Date: 05 Mar 2006 19:45:08
From: Nick
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hector wrote (to James):
> Hi James, you are right that the line is standard theory,
There's no evidence to show that Hector *previously* had
understood 'the (Sicilian Defence) line is standard theory'.
Here's how Hector described the first five moves:
"1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 d6? 5 c4 e5? ..."
*If* Hector had *really* understood that opening to be a part of
'standard theory', then why did he write "4...d6?" (bad move)?
> but if you allow me to justify my notes,
Why does Hector seem incapable of admitting error?
> my lesson is aimed at beginner level chess players
Oh, really? Here's how Hector described his 'lesson':
"I also posted some of my own games with
*very in depth annotations*."
--Hector Maquieira (28 February 2006)
Does Hector's description of "very in depth annotations"
sound like it's "aimed at beginning level chess players"?
> and I think that the line's advantages are completely
> useless to a 1500 and under level player.
Hector's statement (above) apparently implies that he can
understand "the line's advantages" while "a 1500 and under
level player" cannot understand those advantages.
According to the USCF website, Hector Maquieira
is rated 1346 USCF (his peak USCF rating).
*If* Hector can *really* understand chess at a
1500+ level, then why is he still rated 1346 USCF?
> The real point of the lesson was to show that my opponent
> played as if he had no idea whatsoever of the strategic
> considerations of the game, although you are right that
> he made tactical errors in the game.
> Of course, I'm not a strong player myself at all,
For once, Hector Maquieria (1346 USCF) is right.
> but I think that the principles I tried to explicate through
> that game were pretty sound, if at least for club level players.
Who does Hector consider to be 'club level players'?
I have the impression that all players rated under 2000 USCF
(USCF expert) are considered 'club level players' in the USA.
In the interest of clarity, I should say that I have nothing against
Hector Maquieira because he's a weak player or because he
imagines that he understands chess much better than he does.
I have taken exception, however, to Hector Maquieira's evident
insistence on violating copyright, which is illegal, and to some
disingenuous comments of his in this thread.
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 05 Mar 2006 19:06:59
From: Nick
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
James wrote:
> Hector wrote :
> > I'm the coach of Michigan's chess team
How did Hector Maquieira (1346 USCF) become
"the coach of Michigan's chess team"?
> > and wanted to invite everyone to the team website where you
> > can find good chess literature to look through and learn stuff.
Hector should see a lawyer and 'learn stuff' about copyright laws.
Hector should invite a University of Michigan administrator to
visit that website and observed that Hector has, without permission,
reproduced about ten percent of a copyrighted book.
> > I transcribed to javascript some of the games from
> > Fischer's My 60 Most Memorable Games
Bobby Fischer's "My 60 Memorable Games" (not "My 60
*Most* Memorable Games", as Hector wrote) is still under
copyright protection.
> > and I also posted some of my own games
> > with very in depth annotations.
Hector's self-described "very in depth annotations" are risible.
> > Please visit the website at http://www-personal.umich.edu/~maquih .
> > Any feedback is greatly appreciated. contact me at [email protected]
"Any feedback is greatly appreciated."
--Hector Maquieira
Oh, really?
David Richerby has taken the time and trouble to explain in
detail to Hector Maquieira why it's illegal for Hector to violate the
copyright of Fischer's "My Sixty Memorable Games".
Evidently, Hector does not appreciate that at all.
Earlier, I would have expected Hector to write something like:
1) "Thanks, Dave, for explaining to me that I'm doing something
illegal. I shall stop doing it as soon as possible."
Or perhaps even
2) "Dave, I am unconvinced that what I'm doing is illegal.
But I'm soon going to ask a University of Michigan lawyer
for a legal opinion about it and I'll respect that."
Instead, Hector Maquieira apparently has taken the position of
"I am unconvinced that what I'm doing is illegal until someone
with enough power compels me to stop doing it."
> Hi Hector,
> Well I just had a look at your site.
> It's always nice to see new material on the web.
Is it 'nice' to see illegal reproductions of copyrighted texts?
Violating copyright means stealing intellectual property.
> I had a look at one of your game [Strategic game 1].
> I quite disagree with your analysis of the first six moves.
> Even if this position is not extremely popular, it is a "standard"
> sicilian opening (the Lowenthal-Kalashnikov), and it's usually
> reached after a transposition:
> 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 d6 6.c4
> This opening is still played by top rated players
> (Anand 2757 - Ponoiov 2727, Linares ESP 2002 for example)
> and has a 53% result (not that bad).
> The standard continuation is 6...Be7 (but there are also Be6, a6, Nf6 or f5)
> 6...Bd7 on the contrary is a fatal (and mainly tactical) mistake
> that any chess program analyzes in less than one second...
> So, I am not that sure this game is the perfect example
> of a strategic win.
> James
Hector's game may be 'the perfect example of a strategic win'
only in the deluded mind of a player as weak as Hector.
--Nick
|
| | |
Date: 08 Mar 2006 11:09:24
From: James
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Nick wrote:
> Is it 'nice' to see illegal reproductions of copyrighted texts?
> Violating copyright means stealing intellectual property.
>
Even if I technically completely agree with David Richerby regarding
copyrighted material, I think that publishing parts of, or extracts of,
books on the web in HTML is somewhat in a twilight zone.
Some publishers such as O'Reilly for example, distribute most of their
books in paper and freely on the web. This is not as silly as it can
seem, as the web published book is a free publicity for the paper book.
Using the web/HTML book is a completely different way of reading a book,
and I often buy the book and use it on the web also. Reconstructing the
paper book from the web is almost impossible, or at least takes a large
amount of time.
I personnaly wrote a book a few years ago, use it for giving lessons to
my students, and they can consult it freely on the intranet of the
university (and many of them buy it, or borrow it from the university
library also). I would gladly put it on the extranet if I had the time
to convince my publisher to let me do so.
This is quite different in my opinion (and I may not be alone) from
illegally downloading films or music from the internet, because the CD
or the DVD you burn is (almost) identical to the one you could have
bought, which is there clearly piracy.
David Richerby mail was well written and clear enough to warn HM, the
rest is, according to me, a problem for his own conscience.
But this is only my personal opinion, I am a simple citizen, and neither
a judge nor a lawyer.
James
|
| | | |
Date: 08 Mar 2006 14:31:17
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
James <[email protected] > wrote:
> Nick wrote:
>> Is it 'nice' to see illegal reproductions of copyrighted texts?
>> Violating copyright means stealing intellectual property.
>
> Even if I technically completely agree with David Richerby regarding
> copyrighted material, I think that publishing parts of, or extracts
> of, books on the web in HTML is somewhat in a twilight zone.
Not really. It's illegal without the consent of the copyright owner.
If the copyright owner consents (as in your example of O'Reilly
putting most of their books on the web) then there's nothing wrong.
My personal belief is that putting a good non-fiction book on the web
will increase its sales. (This is why I was careful not to use the
argument that making parts of his book freely available deprives
Fischer of his rightful income. Apart from anything else, the book is
out of print so Fischer isn't making any money from it at the moment.
I'm not sure about fiction.) I have bought O'Reilly books after
browsing them on the web and bought a copy of Reinhard Diestel's
excellent Graph Theory text-book after happening across it on the web.
I find it much nicer to read a paper book than a web page but it's
useful to have the web page available to search or to browse when I
don't have access to the book. I would encourage all book publishers
to put all their books on the web but that is a decision that only
they can take: it is wrong for me, or anyone else, to take that
decision for them (yes, Google, that means you, too).
> This is quite different in my opinion (and I may not be alone) from
> illegally downloading films or music from the internet, because the CD
> or the DVD you burn is (almost) identical to the one you could have
> bought, which is there clearly piracy.
I agree that there is a qualitative difference between reading a book
online versus on paper and very little between viewing a pirated movie
and a legal DVD. This is an argument that says that publishers should
not be afraid to put their books on the web. It's not an argument
about copyright law, though. Copyright law doesn't say `You can only
distribute qualitatively different copies'; it just says `You can't
distribute copies.' For example, the movie industry is very sure that
sitting in a cinema with a camcorder and distributing the resulting
low-quality movie is copyright infringement.
> David Richerby mail was well written and clear enough to warn HM,
> the rest is, according to me, a problem for his own conscience.
That is largely my opinion, too, though there is also the potential
liability of the University of Michigan to take into account. Also, I
suspect that anyone who downloads those pages in the UK is breaking
English law but I'm not a lawyer so I've no idea if that's the correct
interpretation of the phrase `importing infringing copies'.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Frozen Addictive Spoon (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a piece of cutlery but you can never
put it down and it's frozen in a block
of ice!
|
| |
Date: 04 Mar 2006 21:03:48
From: Hector
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hi James, you are right that the line is standard theory, but if you
allow me to justify my notes, my lesson is aimed at beginner level
chess players and I think that the line's advantages are completely
useless to a 1500 and under level player. The real point of the lesson
was to show that my opponent played as if he had no idea whatsoever of
the strategic considerations of the game, although you are right that
he made tactical errors in the game. Of course, I'm not a strong player
myself at all, but I think that the principles I tried to explicate
through that game were pretty sound, if at least for club level players.
|
| |
Date: 04 Mar 2006 00:54:29
From: James
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hector wrote :
> Hi all,
>
> I'm the coach of Michigan's chess team and wanted to invite everyone to
>
> the team website where you can find good chess literature to look
> through and learn stuff. I transcribed to javascript some of the games
> from Fischer's My 60 Most Memorable Games and I also posted some of my
> own games with very in depth annotations. Please visit the website at
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~maquih . Any feedback is greatly
> appreciated. contact me at [email protected]
>
Hi Hector,
Well I just had a look at your site. It's always nice to see new
material on the web.
I had a look at one of your game [Strategic game 1]. I quite disagree
with your analysis of the first six moves. Even if this position is not
extremely popular, it is a "standard" sicilian opening (the
Lowenthal-Kalashnikov), and it's usually reached after a transposition:
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 d6 6.c4
This opening is still played by top rated players (Anand 2757 -
Ponoiov 2727, Linares ESP 2002 for example)
and has a 53% result (not that bad).
The standard continuation is 6...Be7 (but there are also Be6, a6, Nf6 or f5)
6...Bd7 on the contrary is a fatal (and mainly tactical) mistake that
any chess program analyzes in less than one second...
So, I am not that sure this game is the perfect example of a strategic
win...
James
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 23:49:20
From: Hector
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
I'm not sure that what I'm doing is illegal since I'm not simply
scanning pages of the book onto my website and I'm also only taking
parts of Bobby Fischer's analysis not the complete book, and of course
crediting Fischer for his work. I don't see how what I'm doing is any
worse than quoting his book, and the actual games are common knowledge,
plus I did throw pieces of my own analysis in when I found something
with the help of Fritz or I felt the need to explain something Fischer
didn't explain.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Mar 2006 09:54:11
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I am also not an American. I have no
personal interest in or strong feelings on this matter and am just
pointing out my opinion of what the law says about it.
Hector <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm not sure that what I'm doing is illegal since I'm not simply
> scanning pages of the book onto my website
That's a different issue. Both the content of the book (the words and
so on) and the typesetting are covered by copyright. So, for example,
I could publish a play by Shakespeare because the text is out of copy-
right. However, if somebody were to scan my book and put it on the
web, that would still be a breach of my copyright in the typesetting.
That isn't really relevant, here, as the text of Fischer's book is
still in copyright.
> and I'm also only taking parts of Bobby Fischer's analysis not the
> complete book
You're taking substantial fragments, though: approximately one tenth
of the book (six games out of sixty). If nine other people were to do
that, the whole book could be online.
> and of course crediting Fischer for his work.
Again, this isn't really relevant. Copyright is a control of
distribution of material; the right to be identified as the author of
a work is a separate issue (at least, in English and, I think, EU law;
I am aware of some significant differences between English and
American copyright law). As far as I'm aware, the only difference
that crediting the author makes here is that it demonstrates that you
weren't trying to pass Fischer's work off as your own, which would
probably be seen as more serious if the matter came to court.
As a minor aside, I seem to recall that the introductory notes to the
games were written by Larry Evans, not Fischer himself.
> I don't see how what I'm doing is any worse than quoting his book
There are limits on how much one can quote and still claim `fair
use'. Clearly, quoting a couple of sentences is OK; clearly, quoting
a couple of chapters isn't. I think you're quoting so much that it
counts as reproduction rather than quotation.
> and the actual games are common knowledge,
Yes but there can also be copyright in the compilation because
creative effort went into choosing which games would be included in
the book and which would not. It's possible that just publishing the
moves played in the sixty games would be a breach of copyright but I'm
not sure.
> plus I did throw pieces of my own analysis in when I found something
> with the help of Fritz or I felt the need to explain something Fischer
> didn't explain.
Commentary is fine but, the thing is, you don't need to quote all of
Fischer's analysis to make your clarifications. For example, if your
goal was just to clarify Fischer's analysis of his game against
Larsen, you could just quote the moves of the game (without Fischer's
analysis) and say something like, ``Fischer shows that 18... gxh5
leads to mate but doesn't mention 18... Nxh5 [etc.]. It is too
obvious for him but even Fritz has problems seeing this one.''
Dave.
--
David Richerby Surprise Evil Apple (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a tasty fruit but it's genuinely evil
and not like you'd expect!
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 19:32:30
From:
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Nice website, but the colours are a bit difficult to look at.
Mike
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 18:36:38
From: Nick
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hector wrote (apparently in response to David Richerby):
> Wow, actually, that is a really good point.
David Richerby has warned Hector that what Hector has done
with Bobby Fischer's copyrighted text from 'My 60 Memorable
Games' (the title is *not* 'My 60 *Most* Memorable Games',
as Hector wrote) is 'almost certainly' both illegal and against
Hector's university's policy.
> I'm really surprised at myself for not realizing this.
As far as I can tell, Hector still seems not to realize
the complete implications of David Richerby's point.
> I do own the book, although it seems unlikely to give me
> the right to post it on the web.
Owning a book which is still under copyright protection
does not grant an owner apart from the copyright holder
that legal right.
> I haven't received any warning of this yet so I'll keep them
> posted but thanks for the heads up.
1) Hector has been warned that what he's doing is illegal.
If Hector would care to dispute that, then he should
consult a lawyer who knows copyright laws.
2) Apparently, Hector does not intend to stop his illegal
activity, after having been warned about it, until someone
else's in a position to enforce compelling legal consequences
on account of it.
One may imagine Hector visiting a bookshop.
Owner: What are you doing with my books?
Hector: I'm just taking them home to read.
Owner: Don't you realize that you have to pay for them
before you can do that?
Hector: Wow, that's a really good point. Thanks for telling me.
But I think I'll wait to pay for them after a
judge tells me that I have to do that.
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 17:59:46
From: Nick
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hector wrote:
> Wow, actually, that is a really good point. I'm really surprised at
> myself for not realizing this. I do own the book, although it seems
> unlikely to give me the right to post it on the web.
The purchase of a book that's still protected by copyright does *not*
give the purchaser the legal right 'to post it(s contents) on the web',
perhaps apart from a brief excerpt for the purposes of review.
> I haven't received any warning of this yet so I'll keep them posted
> but thanks for the heads up.
Does Bobby Fischer's lawyer read rec.games.chess.analysis?
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 14:23:17
From:
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Nick wrote:
> Claus-J=FCrgen Heigl wrote:
> > David Richerby wrote:
> > > No he didn't. Every one of the games in that match where Short
> > > had white started 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6.
> > > There were some exhibition games played to fill up the time after the
> > > match was decided and some of those were with the king's gambit.
> >
> > thanks to pointing me to that. That will a lesson to me to check my
> > sources more thouroughly. The exhibition games were played with
> > openings drawn out of a hat.
>
> One should not believe everything that one finds in a chess database.
Amen. Databases can be wonderful tools, but in terms of historical
accuracy they can also be catastrophes. If I had a dollar for every
database mistake, whether year or venue of a game, identity of the
players, or accuracy of the moves, I could probably buy out Donald
Trump.
Unfortunately, this is likely to continue, as compilers emphasize
quantity over quality, and borrow freely from each other without
checking accuracy.
> A friend of mine once complained to me that a few of 'his' games
> in some chess database(s) were fictional. For example, he was
> 'credited' with a loss to a famous GM when, in fact, he has not
> yet played with that GM.
>
> Unfortunately, chess databases, like most history books, tend
> to reiterate the same factual errors again and again and again...
>=20
> --Nick
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 13:37:26
From: Nick
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Claus-J=FCrgen Heigl wrote:
> David Richerby wrote:
> > No he didn't. Every one of the games in that match where Short
> > had white started 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6.
> > There were some exhibition games played to fill up the time after the
> > match was decided and some of those were with the king's gambit.
>
> thanks to pointing me to that. That will a lesson to me to check my
> sources more thouroughly. The exhibition games were played with
> openings drawn out of a hat.
One should not believe everything that one finds in a chess database.
A friend of mine once complained to me that a few of 'his' games
in some chess database(s) were fictional. For example, he was
'credited' with a loss to a famous GM when, in fact, he has not
yet played with that GM.
Unfortunately, chess databases, like most history books, tend
to reiterate the same factual errors again and again and again...
--Nick
|
| |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 13:11:00
From: Hector
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Wow, actually, that is a really good point. I'm really surprised at
myself for not realizing this. I do own the book, although it seems
unlikely to give me the right to post it on the web. I haven't received
any warning of this yet so I'll keep them posted but thanks for the
heads up.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Mar 2006 03:05:17
From:
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
"Hector" <[email protected] > wrote:
> Wow, actually, that is a really good point. I'm really surprised at
> myself for not realizing this. I do own the book, although it seems
> unlikely to give me the right to post it on the web. I haven't received
> any warning of this yet so I'll keep them posted but thanks for the
> heads up.
So you encourage UM students to lie, cheat and steal, until they're caught.
--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled War on Terror Veterans and
their families:
http://saluteheroes.org/ & http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !
|
| |
Date: 01 Mar 2006 13:35:15
From: Nick
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
David Richerby wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?= <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Second: it is an urban legend that no Grandmaster ever played the King's
> > Gambit again under serious tournament conditions after Fischer's "bust".
> > Nigel Short played the King's Gambit vs Kasparov during their
> > World Championship match several times.
>
> No he didn't. Every one of the games in that match where Short
> had white started 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6.
> There were some exhibition games played to fill up the time after the
> match was decided and some of those were with the king's gambit.
In fact, during those exhibition games the match organisers *compelled*
Kasparov against his will to play some openings of their choice.
Short-Kasparov (1993), exhibition game with a preselected opening:
1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Bc4 Qh4+ 4 Kf1 b5
As far as I can recall, Kasparov was compelled to play
at least the first four moves of this opening.
5 Bxb5 Nf6 6 Nf3 Qh6 7 Nc3 g5 8 d4 Bb7 9 h4 Rg8 10 Kg1 gxh4
11 Rxh4 Qg6 12 Qe2 Nxe4 13 Rxf4 f5 14 Nh4 Qg3 15 Nxe4 1-0
Does anyone really believe that Kasparov made every move
in that game of his own free will?
--Nick
|
| | |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 12:01:44
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Nick <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby wrote:
>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?= <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Nigel Short played the King's Gambit vs Kasparov during their
>>> World Championship match several times.
>>
>> No he didn't. Every one of the games in that match where Short
>> had white started 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6.
>> There were some exhibition games played to fill up the time after the
>> match was decided and some of those were with the king's gambit.
>
> In fact, during those exhibition games the match organisers *compelled*
> Kasparov against his will to play some openings of their choice.
That is correct: the openings for some of the games were drawn from a
hat. I forgot to mention that; thanks for pointing it out.
> Short-Kasparov (1993), exhibition game with a preselected opening:
>
> 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Bc4 Qh4+ 4 Kf1 b5
>
> As far as I can recall, Kasparov was compelled to play
> at least the first four moves of this opening.
I believe it was exactly the first four. Kasparov was not a happy
bunny.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Frozen Nuclear Radio (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a radio that's made of atoms but it's
frozen in a block of ice!
|
| |
Date: 01 Mar 2006 13:19:32
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?=
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hector wrote:
> Hi all,
> Please visit the website at
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~maquih . Any feedback is greatly
> appreciated. contact me at [email protected]
Hello Hector,
very nice work. Just two reks from a first glance: the colour choice
is a bit odd. Dark blue links vs black background is very hard to see. I
had to highlight the links to see anything (I'm using Firefox).
Second: it is an urban legend that no Grandmaster ever played the King's
Gambit again under serious tournament conditions after Fischer's "bust".
Nigel Short played the King's Gambit vs Kasparov during their World
Championship match several times. How much more serious can you get?
There are also other top Grandmasters who use this opening against high
ranking opposition like Adams, Ivanchuk, J. Polgar, Morozevich, Grischuk
and more. Ok, Leko doesn't use it. ;-) No one of their opponents
including Kasparov and Karpov ever used Fischer's "bust" as a defense.
It looks like Fischer's analysis isn't in high regard with them.
It is also not true that Spassky who's win in the King's Gambit against
Fischer was the reason for Fischer to write the article never used it
again after the article appeared. Spassky used the King's Gambit
afterwards against Najdorf, Krogius, Bronstein and others. Last time he
used it was 2002 against Adamopoulos (2100 Elo, simul). It is all in the
databases.
What is true is that no one ever used the King's Gambit again versus
Fischer. But there were only 4 opportunities after the appearance of the
article where that could have happened. Of the players who faced Fischer
(Black) after 1. e4 e5 the only one who ever played the King's Gambit
before was Tal, and the only opportunity Tal used the King's Gambit was
in one simul game. It could be that Fischer didn't know that game.
Fischer never played 1...e5 again against someone who did play the
King's Gambit under serious conditions and resorted to the Sicilian
instead. So the full story is that no one ever used the King's Gambit
again versus Fischer because Fischer didn't let them.
Greetings
Claus-Juergen
|
| | |
Date: 01 Mar 2006 14:59:58
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?= <[email protected] > wrote:
> Second: it is an urban legend that no Grandmaster ever played the King's
> Gambit again under serious tournament conditions after Fischer's "bust".
> Nigel Short played the King's Gambit vs Kasparov during their World
> Championship match several times.
No he didn't. Every one of the games in that match where Short had
white started 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6. There
were some exhibition games played to fill up the time after the match
was decided and some of those were with the king's gambit.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Dangerous Puzzle (TM): it's like an
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ intriguing conundrum but it could
explode at any minute!
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Mar 2006 13:08:53
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus-J=FCrgen_Heigl?=
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
David Richerby wrote:
> No he didn't. Every one of the games in that match where Short had
> white started 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6. There
> were some exhibition games played to fill up the time after the match
> was decided and some of those were with the king's gambit.
Hello David,
thanks to pointing me to that. That will a lesson to me to check my
sources more thouroughly. The exhibition games were played with openings
drawn out of a hat.
Greetings
Claus-Juergen
|
| |
Date: 01 Mar 2006 10:13:29
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: U of Michigan Chess Coaching Website
|
Hector <[email protected] > wrote:
> I transcribed to javascript some of the games from Fischer's My 60
> Most Memorable Games and I also posted some of my own games with very
> in depth annotations. Please visit the website at
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~maquih .
Sorry to be a killjoy but you are aware that Fischer's analysis is
under copyright so posting it on the web without the copyright owner's
permission is almost certainly both illegal and against the
university's AUP?
Dave.
--
David Richerby Miniature Nuclear Painting (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a Renaissance masterpiece that's
made of atoms but you can hold in it
your hand!
|
|
