In article .com,
help bot wrote:

Mr. Mitchell has made a serious error here in
equating game commentary after the fact with
what a player may have been thinking at the
time.

All of these games have been annotated --
often after looking at notations by others -- by
such players as GM Tal. This in no way means
that if, say, GM Kortchnoi said move x was
better and then GM Tal wrote in his book that
move x was better (since he agreed), that at
the time the game was played GM Tal *saw*
that move x was better, but deliberately chose
to play a stupid move instead!

Is "Mr. Mitchell" supposed to be me?

In all of the cases I cited, it's clear that Tal is talking about what
he saw during the game, not about his after-the-fact analysis.

Tal does quite a bit of this in his books. He'll give notes from
after-the-fact analysis, but he tends to focus much more than most
players on what he saw, when, and what his motivations were for playing.

So, nice try, but you're actually completely wrong here.

-Ron