On May 4, 3:33 pm, wrote:

You then interpret this to mean "Es decir, Botvinnik controlaba toda
la información en el ajedrez ruso de la época y de forma privilegiada
según sus intereses." (That is to say, Botvinnik controlled all
Russian chess information during this period in a privileged manner to
serve his own interests.)
This is undoubtedly true to some extent, but I do not think that was
the only meaning of Bronstein's statement. There was, I think, also
genuine admiration for and acknowledgement of Botvinnik's deep study
of the openings, which was accomplished to a great extent by hard
work, not just by controlling information.


Is there any information on just how all this was
supposedly accomplished? I would imagine (but
have no way of knowing) that controlling ALL such
information was a daunting task, worthy of a small
army of men; apparently, Mr. Botvinnik was a real
"one-man army", in more ways than one.

The one thing which all these Botvinnik-bashers
cannot ever seem to do, is "fit" his powerful chess
moves into their biased accounts in a way that
makes any rational sense. For instance, the
dregs who maintain that all the other Soviet
players were "ordered" to throw their games, fail
to account for the fact that non-Soviets were also
losing to him at the very same time. When that
sort of heavy bias creeps in, logic and reason go
out the window.


-- help bot