On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 14:55:15 +0200, "Jerzy" wrote:


At least Karpov played infinitely much more games as the world chess
champion than Fischer...
So his games contribution is much much greater.

Exactly. Karpov has nearly 3000 databased games with a majority played
at the elite level, Ficher just under 1000. The book is about
contributions to chess on the board, not publicity for chess and the
personal fame of the players. Everyone will be surprised by how much
attention Rubinstein, for example, receives in volume one.


More like Kasparov played Karpov in allot of games and he is going to
analyze all of his games Kasp vs Karp in the book ! heehee

Kaspy also forgot to mention the copy & paste command that was used to
write
the book

More I read about the book more I am convinced it`s a great book by a great
author.
I mean chess history, chess analyses and chess politics.
Well, my conclusion is : I must buy this book in the nearest future ! ( all
volumes

It's a great book, not a perfect one. It's one thing for a historian
to say that some of the analysis is from other sources but few of us
have ten thousand chess books and magazines to go through and none of
us would want to do that anyway. Bringing dozens of sources together
and adding Kasparov's overview and analysis to that is a wonderful
thing. There is extensive quoting and attribution throughout, which is
fascinating in and of itself because we get Kasparov's opinion on the
old analysis as well as the game.

The lack of an extensive bibliography is a major flaw and the English
is surprisingly bad in a few parts. The attributions are never going
to be complete enough for some critics, but if you put a footnote on
every single move the thing would be unreadable and it would add 30
pages to the book. There could be more attributions, but I think
having a better bibliography would be enough.

Saludos, Mig
http://www.chessninja.com

"Mig" wrote in message
...

There could be more attributions, but I think
having a better bibliography would be enough.

A better bib means more opportunity for people to cite the numerous
plagiarism reputed to be in the books!

"Gunny Bunny" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...



"Mig" wrote in message
...

There could be more attributions, but I think
having a better bibliography would be enough.

A better bib means more opportunity for people to cite the numerous
plagiarism reputed to be in the books!


"Gunny Bunny", write your own book where you will point out the alleged
plagiarism of Kasparov. Then I will write the book where I will point out
your accusations are groundless etc.

Regards,

Jerzy