"help bot" wrote in message
oups.com...

David Kane wrote:

To make your case you have to provide evidence
that players of Fischer's calibre would have had
trouble drawing the position.


David Kane is sooooo lost here. In fact, my point was
not that Black cannot hold -- that is a "strawman". Building
men of straw and then knocking them down is generally
a waste of time, unless one gets his jollies in the process
itself (as Mr. Kane apparently does).

Obviously, to anyone who has paid attention that is, my
correction to the Evans quote was simply to point out the
lie where Evans tried very hard to pretend that White had
no advantage whatsoever.

What do you mean by "advantage"?

Many K+P vs. K games are theoretically drawn.
Not only that, they are practically drawn between
players of a certain skill level. Do you still say in that case
that the side with the pawn has an advantage?

I'll concede that if you give the same KP vs. P
position to a class of 6 year olds, the side
with the pawn will score a lot of wins. So
it might be reasonable to claim an "advantage"
in that group.

But for Evans to be wrong in this case, you have to
credibly argue that *Fischer* or other strong GMs
were likely to lose it. But of course you can't. Or are
you saying that Evans should have included a "scholastic
chess perspective" when discussing a game between
the world's top 2 players?

FWIW, computers that annihilate me from all kinds
of equal and inferior positions can only draw
against me from that one.