"Skeptic" wrote in message
oups.com...
I'm glad to see that Mr. Parr, at long last, admits the obvious:
Keene's books are of low quality. The only remaining issue is whether
he has some excuse--e.g., there's a market for it. Obviously, Mr. Parr
thinks making a quick buck is more imprtant than making sure one's
books are free of errors.

just state that most of the works written by the
famous GM are hack jobs. Which is nonsense on its face.

Oh really? Let us look at, say, Keene's latest ten books and see what
the critics said about them.

you don't want to do that. i have remarkable evidence that many reviewers
don't even read the books they review - really!

if you think ray keene is being tough on you, adorjan and timman are beasts!
and they can prove it - they have a hilarious collection of reviews which
never penetrated past the introduction, and sometimes not past the back
cover - at least taylor kingston has read some of the book he comments on,
if not actually the difficult to understand chess moves

It's true that not all of Keene's books are "instant books", but
unfrotunately one cannot turn off "hacking mode" at will. When one is

but one isn't! one cannot even write one's name, so one's opinion matters
nothing much to those who can, since many ones hide from shame [admitted,
some are merely paranoid], and other one's are injured, or competitors, or
both, or worse.

used to writing insta-books using inaccurate cut-and-paste methods,
this method of "writing" infects one's non-instant books as well.

really? one is a writer of books? is one admitting this tendency from one's
experience or from one's speculation on how it must be?

will one want to whine on when they wread the book, and what it was to one
when actually playing chess?

phil innes