Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old July 10th 10, 12:48 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,536
Default One move out of book, and black loses in the Sicilian Poisoned Pawn

Bobby Fischer hated book for that reason. 19. Bxb7? is an "optically"
good move (looks good) but loses by force. Correct was giving up the
queen, with (amazingly) a roughly equal position.

RL


[Event "Ruhrgebiet-ch"]
[Site "Germany"]
[Date "1997.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Schwalen, Peter"]
[Black "Wegener, Olaf"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B97"]
[PlyCount "43"]
[EventDate "1997.??.??"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "7"]
[EventCountry "GER"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "2000.11.22"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4
Qb6 8. Qd2
Qxb2 9. Rb1 Qa3 10. Be2 Be7 11. O-O Nbd7 12. e5 dxe5 13. fxe5 Nxe5 14.
Bxf6
Bxf6 15. Rxf6 gxf6 16. Ne4 Qe7 17. Qf4 Nd7 18. Nd6+ Kd8 19. Rxb7 Bxb7
20. Nxb7+
Ke8 21. Nd6+ Kf8 (21... Kd8 22. Nc6+ Kc7 23. Nb5+ Kb6 24. Qc7+ Kc5 25.
Nxe7+
Kb4 26. Qc3+ Ka4 27. Qa3#) 22. Nc6 1-0
  #2   Report Post  
Old July 11th 10, 10:44 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,256
Default One move out of book, and black loses in the Sicilian PoisonedPawn

On Jul 9, 7:48*pm, raylopez99 wrote:

Bobby Fischer hated book for that reason. *


Yet another gaffe from the uninformed. Fischer was the best-booked
player of his time. He could memorize opening literature just from
sight-reading it, without having to play over the games on a board.
This had both its good and bad sides. Generally it was good, because
he could consume and mentally store opening theory at a rate and
capacity far beyond most of his opponents. But sometimes he came a
cropper by accepting an incorrect published evaluation uncritically.
  #3   Report Post  
Old July 12th 10, 12:11 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default One move out of book, and black loses in the Sicilian PoisonedPawn

On Jul 11, 5:44*pm, Taylor Kingston
wrote:
On Jul 9, 7:48*pm, raylopez99 wrote:



Bobby Fischer hated book for that reason. *


* Yet another gaffe from the uninformed. Fischer was the best-booked
player of his time. He could memorize opening literature just from
sight-reading it, without having to play over the games on a board.
This had both its good and bad sides. Generally it was good, because
he could consume and mentally store opening theory at a rate and
capacity far beyond most of his opponents. But sometimes he came a
cropper by accepting an incorrect published evaluation uncritically.


You're wrong. Booby hated the extent book preparation was required.
That's because it permitted better booked chessplayers to beat better
chess players. That's why he promoted Fischer Random.
  #4   Report Post  
Old July 12th 10, 01:18 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,256
Default One move out of book, and black loses in the Sicilian PoisonedPawn

On Jul 11, 7:11*pm, None wrote:
On Jul 11, 5:44*pm, Taylor Kingston
wrote:

On Jul 9, 7:48*pm, raylopez99 wrote:


Bobby Fischer hated book for that reason. *


* Yet another gaffe from the uninformed. Fischer was the best-booked
player of his time. He could memorize opening literature just from
sight-reading it, without having to play over the games on a board.
This had both its good and bad sides. Generally it was good, because
he could consume and mentally store opening theory at a rate and
capacity far beyond most of his opponents. But sometimes he came a
cropper by accepting an incorrect published evaluation uncritically.


You're wrong. Booby hated the extent book preparation was required.
That's because it permitted better booked chessplayers to beat better
chess players. That's why he promoted Fischer Random.


Sorry, Stan, but I still stand by my comment that Fischer was the
best-booked player of his time. If he hated it, he sure did a good job
of it.
  #5   Report Post  
Old July 12th 10, 01:20 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
sd sd is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 922
Default One move out of book, and black loses in the Sicilian PoisonedPawn

On Jul 11, 6:11*pm, None wrote:
On Jul 11, 5:44*pm, Taylor Kingston
wrote:

On Jul 9, 7:48*pm, raylopez99 wrote:


Bobby Fischer hated book for that reason. *


* Yet another gaffe from the uninformed. Fischer was the best-booked
player of his time. He could memorize opening literature just from
sight-reading it, without having to play over the games on a board.
This had both its good and bad sides. Generally it was good, because
he could consume and mentally store opening theory at a rate and
capacity far beyond most of his opponents. But sometimes he came a
cropper by accepting an incorrect published evaluation uncritically.


You're wrong. Booby hated the extent book preparation was required.
That's because it permitted better booked chessplayers to beat better
chess players. That's why he promoted Fischer Random.



Wouldn't you both be correct, depending on which portion of Fischer's
career you were discussing?



  #6   Report Post  
Old July 12th 10, 01:32 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2010
Posts: 311
Default One move out of book, and black loses in the Sicilian PoisonedPawn

On 12 July, 01:20, sd wrote:
On Jul 11, 6:11*pm, None wrote:



On Jul 11, 5:44*pm, Taylor Kingston
wrote:


On Jul 9, 7:48*pm, raylopez99 wrote:


Bobby Fischer hated book for that reason. *


* Yet another gaffe from the uninformed. Fischer was the best-booked
player of his time. He could memorize opening literature just from
sight-reading it, without having to play over the games on a board.
This had both its good and bad sides. Generally it was good, because
he could consume and mentally store opening theory at a rate and
capacity far beyond most of his opponents. But sometimes he came a
cropper by accepting an incorrect published evaluation uncritically.


You're wrong. Booby hated the extent book preparation was required.
That's because it permitted better booked chessplayers to beat better
chess players. That's why he promoted Fischer Random.


Wouldn't you both be correct, depending on which portion of Fischer's
career you were discussing?


That's affirm.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Jackal, Lebel & Kowalski anyone? ChessFire rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 33 March 6th 10 05:54 AM
New chess book: It's terrifying! Some Loser rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 30 March 26th 06 02:29 PM
New chess book: It's terrifying! Some Loser rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 28 March 26th 06 02:29 PM
New chess book: It's terrifying! Some Loser rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 54 March 26th 06 02:29 PM
Please check this out Richard rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 9 October 25th 05 05:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017