jr wrote:

This is the quotation that Parr cited.

BOBBY'S MOST FAMOUS MOVE

In CHESS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 1972 GM Evans has this to
say about 29...Bxh2 in game one, which is probably Bobby's most
famous move.

A miscalculation which is not fatal in itself, although most players
attributed Fischer's loss to this capture of the "poisoned" pawn. Black
is not content to settle for a draw and he wants to keep winning
chances alive. Having demonstrated that the champion could not
achieve the vestige of an advantage with White, Fischer now seems
to be saying "you can't draw with me that easily!"

After 30 g3 GM Evans noted:

Spassky bolted upright in his chair. His first reaction must have
been that he overlooked something. "Fischer must see something
we don't," whispered a reverential fan. In the rear of the hall
Spassky's second, Soviet Grandmaster Ewfim Geller, was
smiling broadly from ear to ear.

Obviously, I was talking about Larry Parr's earlier quote;
the one where he said x, not y. (Help Bot)

What quote was that?

Where did Evans ever say that Bxh2 was anything but a miscalculation?


Thank you for *not* dishonestly snipping the quote I replied to,
the way spin-meister Larry Parr recently did.

Obviously, the part I was refering to was where GM Evans
stated flatly that Fischer was "not content to settle for a
draw" and "wants to keep winning chances alive". This,
simply translated, means that Evans is claiming Fischer
deliberately played the blunder Bxh2 as a means to his
desired end of "keeping winning chances alive". It is a
psychological "denial" of Fischer having blundered, as is
the commentary just above it, wherein GM Evans tried to
pretend that such a blunder is "not fatal". He reaffirms
this by placing the word poisoned in quotation marks, to
accentuate the (wrongheaded) idea that this move was
perfectly playable. He went on further to pretend that not
only did White have zero advantage, but that Black in fact
was not content to settle for a mere draw in such a
position! It just doesn't get any better than this.

In sum, a big slab of baloney is laid out before us, on a
plate. Pass the mustard, please.

Again, I don't blame Mr. Parr (or other cronies for that
matter) forcommiting such an error, as they simply aren't
strong enough chess players to realise what's going on in
that position. But GM Evans had no excuse. He knew
better, but still lied through his teeth when he claimed
that White was not better, that he had not achieved
even the "vestige of an advantage". It is one thing to
claim that Black can hold a draw with perfect defense,
but it is quite another to simply lie in such a baldfaced
manner, the way Evans did. This kind of bias has no
place in chess analysis, even if it might prove useful
for political propaganda.


-- help bot