A Chess forum. ChessBanter

Go Back   Home » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

200 words:Much Ado About Nothing ('Predecessors')

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 10th 03, 02:36 AM
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a
Default 200 words:Much Ado About Nothing ('Predecessors')

I cannot but agree with Mr. J.Storm’s understanding of Garry’s literary
effort: ”Kasparov's new book is just another attempt to compete with
Fischer, who is and who remains hor concours. My Great Predecessors is not
and will never be My 60 Memorable Games. Kasparov should stick to what he,
as a great collective champion, does best, which is applying the fruits of
opening research supplied by a team approach, and leave high-class chess
writing to his betters”.

Why do people continue to say Fischer's book (which is out of print) is
superior to the newly released Kasparov book? Fischer's "My 60 Memorable
Games" pales in comparison to Alexi Shirov's "Fire On Board" which has
gobs of analysis that the Fischer book didn't have...I ought to know...I
read and studied that one years ago when descriptive notation was still
in vogue.

Shirov's book puts Fischer's My 60 Memorable Games to shame. This book
by Shirov is thick chock full of analysis. Plenty to swallow. Not so
with the Fischer book. (My opinion) The same is true about the Kramnik
book too. Not much analysis. And computerized or not, I love the
Kasparov book. I don't know about you, but I've NEVER read this kind of
depth of analysis on world champion games by past masters to this level
before. Did Fischer do that? Write up a history of chess champions up to
his time? No. Why not? We'll never know now, won't we?

Bottom line...Kasparov cowrote the book on world championship matches
and he fully admits he's getting help from the computer. Why should we
begrudge this? If he did the analysis all on his own, we'd never get
this tome released today. It would be forever before something like "My
Great Predecessors" would ever see the light of day. I'm glad we're
getting something like this now...it's a treasure chest for chess lovers
like me, who may not have had access to previous attempts to write
copious analysis about past championship matches with modern day
technology from chess software programs like Fritz, etc.

Maybe what critics are complaining about is that they can't tell which
of the analysis on the games is computer and which is Kasparov. Maybe
for the second edition Kasparov should consider having his personal
analysis color coded so this way insatiable critics can just focus on
his thoughts for that game in question. Perhaps that's his only flaw in
this otherwise fantastic effort in analyzing chess games by the past

Thank God I read some of Kasparov's views on the book...because he's
stated that at some point, in future editions...maybe he'll take OUT
some of the chess games and put more biography in the books...as if I'm
paying for the biography of the past masters and not the analysis of the
games themselves! I'm feeling greedy. I couldn't care less about an
index "verifying" the "sources" for the things that Kasparov mentions in
the book. I bought the book for it's analysis of the games included and
I'm not disappointed. It'll keep me occupied until December when Volume
2 is released.

I fully admit much of what Kasparov says in the book is debatable, but
clearly there was no other person alive today who could have had the
stature and respect to put something like My Great Predecessors out

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.