On Feb 21, 9:11 am, "Chess One" wrote:

No, it means he would have refused to play,
on account of his FEAR of being knocked out.

Ha! having taken a dig at GK, Its now Fischer's turn, the same Fischer who
took on the World's strongest players.

Er, um... it seems to me that *every* world
champion does that sort of thing, as a matter
of necessity. You see, the title is usually
won by playing the world's strongest players.
(What's with the Bobby Fischer obsession?)


I have [laugh] never seen anyone play
chess with the black pieces like Fischer who didn't seem to give a damn
about making draws

Try studying the history of chess then. Dr.
Lasker played to win as Black, as did Paul
Morphy, Mikhail Tal, Gary Kasparov, and
gawd knows how many others; you would
of course have realized that, were you not
so *obsessed* with just one famous player!


- but I see you draw different conclusions from his
lifetime's play from everyone else.

When "everyone" is thinking the same
way, no one is truly thinking. This is, I
expect, one of the founding principles of
the Evans ratpack: not thinking.


That of course doesn't mean you are wrong.

Of course not. Generally speaking, what
makes me "wrong" in the sense you mean is
that I report facts you can't handle, psycho-
logically. For instance, in the 1972 world
championship cycle, certain things were not
exactly kosher; *one* example is the way in
which BF qualified. Had all these oddities
happened to have resulted in a Russian
victory, we all know the inevitable result
would be that the western press would have
cried foul. But since "we" won, any such
complaints must be kept -- you know -- hush,
hush.


Seriously, you might consier sticking to writing about what you can engage
others in as exploration of a topic

The truth is, it is neigh well impossible to
do that sort of thing with the nearly-IMnes
creature; it is, after all, a vile beast which
is a mind-slave to the Evans ratpack; which
is unable to communicate in plain English
when the going gets tough; which is so
obsessed with connecting itself to others
of famous name that it cannot even write its
own opinions, but instead it must pretend
as though it were a sort of conduit for greater
beings -- gods, to its mind -- whose whims
are the only substance in which it can swim.

The beast has no intellect, no thoughtful
touchstone with which to connect; it is a
vacuous creature, and we, the human folk,
ought to be ashamed for reveling in its
torture, its misery, for poking and prodding
the beast to watch how it reacts.

In a recent news story, three boys were
attacked by a tiger in a zoo; it turns out
that they had been harrying the creature,
and it jumped its protective moat and gave
them what for. I felt *no* sympathy; yet I
am no innocent here; I too am guilty of a
somewhat similar crime; it's a character
flaw, I admit.

Help me to stop, by ceasing your own
pathetic behavior: the mindless parroting
of others, the name-droppings ala a flock
of pigeons, the pretense and "putting on
airs", as Mark Twain called it. Write like
a human being, and do it in real English
so you can be understood. Think for
yourself for a change, and stop being a
mindless parrot, possessed by others.
Who knows-- you might like it!


-- help bot