Louis Blair wrote:
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!m73g2000cwd .googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Taylor Kingston"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc
Subject: Elo on Fischer's conditions vs. Karpov
Date: 8 Nov 2006 06:34:05 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 9
Message-ID: .com
References: . com
. com
. com
.com
.com
. com
. com

. com
.com
.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.180.245
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1162996450 7000 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2006
14:34:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:34:10 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: .com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0;
AT&T CSM6.0),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 netcache2 (NetCache NetApp/6.0.4)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=198.96.180.245;
posting-account=EiI5yw0AAACV86a5CGNajLjBxzUoGk-N



On Nov 8, 9:27 am, "Rob" wrote:
I believe Alekhines "creative" work ethic is unique in chess. He
developed not only a theory but also applied the theory to great effect.

To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Dr Blair,
Are you alright? I am becoming concerned. I will call the UNiversity
mathematics department and have someone check on you.

Louis Blair wrote:
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!m73g2000cwd .googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Taylor Kingston"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc
Subject: Elo on Fischer's conditions vs. Karpov
Date: 8 Nov 2006 06:34:05 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 9
Message-ID: .com
References: . com
. com
. com
.com
.com
. com
. com

. com
.com
.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.180.245
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1162996450 7000 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2006
14:34:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:34:10 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: .com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0;
AT&T CSM6.0),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 netcache2 (NetCache NetApp/6.0.4)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=198.96.180.245;
posting-account=EiI5yw0AAACV86a5CGNajLjBxzUoGk-N



On Nov 8, 9:27 am, "Rob" wrote:
I believe Alekhines "creative" work ethic is unique in chess. He
developed not only a theory but also applied the theory to great effect.



To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play. TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

Louis Blair wrote:
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!m73g2000cwd .googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Taylor Kingston"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc
Subject: Elo on Fischer's conditions vs. Karpov
Date: 8 Nov 2006 06:34:05 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 9
Message-ID: .com
References: . com
. com
. com
.com
.com
. com
. com

. com
.com
.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.180.245
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1162996450 7000 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2006
14:34:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:34:10 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: .com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0;
AT&T CSM6.0),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 netcache2 (NetCache NetApp/6.0.4)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=198.96.180.245;
posting-account=EiI5yw0AAACV86a5CGNajLjBxzUoGk-N



On Nov 8, 9:27 am, "Rob" wrote:
I believe Alekhines "creative" work ethic is unique in chess. He
developed not only a theory but also applied the theory to great effect.



To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play. TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

On Nov 8, 1:02 pm, "Rob" wrote:
From: "Taylor Kingston"
To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play.

As Phil Innes might say, this sounds rather vague. All chess players
try to counter their opponents' lines of play. Can you clarify? If his
"theory" was "very pronounced" it should be easy to describe.
The closest your description comes to sounding like anything definite
would be Nimzovitch's idea of prophylaxis, which was not at all
characteristic of Alekhine's style.

TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

Um, Rob, in case you didn't notice, it was TK who asked you what
Alekhine's "theory" was. So isn't it a bit silly to say "TK is much
better equipped to answer"? TK is asking _you_ to answer.

His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

I would not agree. Before and during Alekhine's time the work ethics
of Rubinstein, Spielmann, Réti, Grünfeld, Euwe, Botvinnik and Keres
were probably at least equally strong, and after him those of Fischer,
Geller, Korchnoi, Polugaevsky, Portisch, Karpov, Kasparov and others
were as good or better. And certainly several of them also showed
creative genius.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very much a fan of Alekhine's play, but I
don't see him as quite so special as you claim.

Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Nov 8, 1:02 pm, "Rob" wrote:
From: "Taylor Kingston"
To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play.




As Phil Innes might say, this sounds rather vague. All chess players
try to counter their opponents' lines of play. Can you clarify? If his
"theory" was "very pronounced" it should be easy to describe.
The closest your description comes to sounding like anything definite
would be Nimzovitch's idea of prophylaxis, which was not at all
characteristic of Alekhine's style.


Perhaps Max Euwe said it best:
"Alekhine's perfect technique and combinative talent are so well known
that it is unnecessary to talk about them. His conduct of the endgame
was shining. Even so, I admire most how he finished the adjourned
games. I had to analyze them, too, so I know them well. When I think of
how my opponent created ingenious ideas and how he finished them in
unexpected ways, I have only the greatest admiration for Alekhine's
playing style"

TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

Um, Rob, in case you didn't notice, it was TK who asked you what
Alekhine's "theory" was. So isn't it a bit silly to say "TK is much
better equipped to answer"? TK is asking _you_ to answer.

Sorry,
I couldnt tell from Dr Blairs post that it wasn't he who was making the
statement.


His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

I would not agree. Before and during Alekhine's time the work ethics
of Rubinstein, Spielmann, Réti, Grünfeld, Euwe, Botvinnik and Keres
were probably at least equally strong, and after him those of Fischer,
Geller, Korchnoi, Polugaevsky, Portisch, Karpov, Kasparov and others
were as good or better. And certainly several of them also showed
creative genius.

Yes, But those players did not "create" as Alekhine did, in my
estimation. They were as the Romans.. well suited to apply ideas and
techniques already evidenced but not having the creative spark as the
Greeks.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very much a fan of Alekhine's play, but I
don't see him as quite so special as you claim.

Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Nov 8, 1:02 pm, "Rob" wrote:
From: "Taylor Kingston"
To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play.

As Phil Innes might say, this sounds rather vague. All chess players
try to counter their opponents' lines of play. Can you clarify? If his
"theory" was "very pronounced" it should be easy to describe.
The closest your description comes to sounding like anything definite
would be Nimzovitch's idea of prophylaxis, which was not at all
characteristic of Alekhine's style.

TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

Um, Rob, in case you didn't notice, it was TK who asked you what
Alekhine's "theory" was. So isn't it a bit silly to say "TK is much
better equipped to answer"? TK is asking _you_ to answer.

His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

I would not agree. Before and during Alekhine's time the work ethics
of Rubinstein, Spielmann, Réti, Grünfeld, Euwe, Botvinnik and Keres
were probably at least equally strong, and after him those of Fischer,
Geller, Korchnoi, Polugaevsky, Portisch, Karpov, Kasparov and others
were as good or better. And certainly several of them also showed
creative genius.

A note to the post previous,
Réti and Grünfeld were both "creators" but they never achieved the
OTB success of Alekhine.
Thats is why I think he holds a unique place as both an innovator and
as a competitor.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very much a fan of Alekhine's play, but I
don't see him as quite so special as you claim.

On Nov 8, 1:58 pm, "Rob" wrote:
Perhaps Max Euwe said it best:
"Alekhine's perfect technique and combinative talent are so well known
that it is unnecessary to talk about them. His conduct of the endgame
was shining. Even so, I admire most how he finished the adjourned
games. I had to analyze them, too, so I know them well. When I think of
how my opponent created ingenious ideas and how he finished them in
unexpected ways, I have only the greatest admiration for Alekhine's
playing style"

None of which has anything to do with "very pronounced theories about
lines of development especially as related in countering other
opponents lines of play." Euwe is just saying that Alekhine's accuracy,
tactical skill and endgame technique were excellent. This has nothing
to do with new "theories," whatever you meant by that and seem unable
to explain.

TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

Um, Rob, in case you didn't notice, it was TK who asked you what
Alekhine's "theory" was. So isn't it a bit silly to say "TK is much
better equipped to answer"? TK is asking _you_ to answer.

Sorry,
I couldnt tell from Dr Blairs post that it wasn't he who was making the
statement.

His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

I would not agree. Before and during Alekhine's time the work ethics
of Rubinstein, Spielmann, Réti, Grünfeld, Euwe, Botvinnik and Keres
were probably at least equally strong, and after him those of Fischer,
Geller, Korchnoi, Polugaevsky, Portisch, Karpov, Kasparov and others
were as good or better. And certainly several of them also showed
creative genius.

Yes, But those players did not "create" as Alekhine did, in my
estimation. They were as the Romans.. well suited to apply ideas and
techniques already evidenced but not having the creative spark as the
Greeks.

I suggest getting better grounded in chess history before making
blanket generalizations that underestimate some very great players.

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!i42g2000cwa .googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Taylor Kingston"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc
Subject: Elo on Fischer's conditions vs. Karpov
Date: 8 Nov 2006 10:29:15 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 38
Message-ID: . com
References: . com
. com
. com
.com
.com
. com
. com
.com
.com
om
.com
. com
.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.180.245
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1163010560 32700 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2006
18:29:20 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 18:29:20 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: .com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0;
AT&T CSM6.0),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 netcache2 (NetCache NetApp/6.0.4)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=198.96.180.245;
posting-account=EiI5yw0AAACV86a5CGNajLjBxzUoGk-N



On Nov 8, 1:02 pm, "Rob" wrote:
From: "Taylor Kingston"
To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play.

As Phil Innes might say, this sounds rather vague. All chess players
try to counter their opponents' lines of play. Can you clarify? If his
"theory" was "very pronounced" it should be easy to describe.
The closest your description comes to sounding like anything definite
would be Nimzovitch's idea of prophylaxis, which was not at all
characteristic of Alekhine's style.

TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

Um, Rob, in case you didn't notice, it was TK who asked you what
Alekhine's "theory" was. So isn't it a bit silly to say "TK is much
better equipped to answer"? TK is asking _you_ to answer.

His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

I would not agree. Before and during Alekhine's time the work ethics
of Rubinstein, Spielmann, R=E9ti, Gr=FCnfeld, Euwe, Botvinnik and Keres
were probably at least equally strong, and after him those of Fischer,
Geller, Korchnoi, Polugaevsky, Portisch, Karpov, Kasparov and others
were as good or better. And certainly several of them also showed
creative genius.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very much a fan of Alekhine's play, but I
don't see him as quite so special as you claim.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!f16g2000cwb .googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Rob"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc
Subject: Elo on Fischer's conditions vs. Karpov
Date: 8 Nov 2006 10:58:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 63
Message-ID: . com
References: . com
. com
. com
.com
.com
. com
. com
.com
.com
om
.com
. com
.com
. com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.154.222.222
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1163012293 29089 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2006
18:58:13 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 18:58:13 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: . com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1;
SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=72.154.222.222;
posting-account=D2Z83AwAAAA-ocdAPTiAARcZxhYxpR_f


Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Nov 8, 1:02 pm, "Rob" wrote:
From: "Taylor Kingston"
To what "theory" do you refer, Rob? And I would agree that Alekhine=
's
chess work ethic was exemplary, but it was hardly unique.

He had very pronounced theories about lines of development especially
as related in countering other opponents lines of play.




As Phil Innes might say, this sounds rather vague. All chess players
try to counter their opponents' lines of play. Can you clarify? If his
"theory" was "very pronounced" it should be easy to describe.
The closest your description comes to sounding like anything definite
would be Nimzovitch's idea of prophylaxis, which was not at all
characteristic of Alekhine's style.


Perhaps Max Euwe said it best:
"Alekhine's perfect technique and combinative talent are so well known
that it is unnecessary to talk about them. His conduct of the endgame
was shining. Even so, I admire most how he finished the adjourned
games. I had to analyze them, too, so I know them well. When I think of
how my opponent created ingenious ideas and how he finished them in
unexpected ways, I have only the greatest admiration for Alekhine's
playing style"

TK or Phil
Innes or Jerzy or Wlod are much better equiped to answer on the
specifics.

Um, Rob, in case you didn't notice, it was TK who asked you what
Alekhine's "theory" was. So isn't it a bit silly to say "TK is much
better equipped to answer"? TK is asking _you_ to answer.

Sorry,
I couldnt tell from Dr Blairs post that it wasn't he who was making the
statement.


His work ethic was unique in the total consumation. Others since have
mimiced this but none have combined both the work ethic and creative
genius as he did.

I would not agree. Before and during Alekhine's time the work ethics
of Rubinstein, Spielmann, R=E9ti, Gr=FCnfeld, Euwe, Botvinnik and Keres
were probably at least equally strong, and after him those of Fischer,
Geller, Korchnoi, Polugaevsky, Portisch, Karpov, Kasparov and others
were as good or better. And certainly several of them also showed
creative genius.

Yes, But those players did not "create" as Alekhine did, in my
estimation. They were as the Romans.. well suited to apply ideas and
techniques already evidenced but not having the creative spark as the
Greeks.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very much a fan of Alekhine's play, but I
don't see him as quite so special as you claim.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Dr Blair has either lost is mind or his news reader is defective.