| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Chess One
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
 |
|
<taylor.kingston@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6cae4872-89de-4489-aec2-e6e4efdab48a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 9:41 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
... and as Max Euwe was asked to explain when he
proposed Alekhine should rejoin the world chess community after WWII, he
responded:
"Humanity is the best revenge",
|
Phil, what is your source for that quote? If it is genuine, are you
sure it was Euwe who said it, and not Tartakower? It sounds very much
like what Hans Ree describes here, in connection with Tartakower:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hans35.txt
---------------------
I see that Ree speaks of Karpov thus: Of course Nikitin had underestimated
Karpov. What he did not
know was that permission for these negotiations had been granted
by an even higher authority, the Central Committee of the
Communist Party.
When Karpov came to hear of Nikitin's denunciation, he demanded
Nikitin to be fired. This happened. Nikitin was accused of
"immoral behaviour toward his prot,g," [[a reference to Kasparov]] and
demoted to the
humble function of trainer of the club Spartak.
I don't remember where I read the Euwe comment - which may not be even be
published at all? But I do remember it was Euwe.
Though please do be careful of your Soviets, including Nikitin. be very
careful of anything Soviet-era taken straight. Karpov does not better in the
above than he does in the Gulko material, which I think I should publish
soon. Interestingly Ray Keene smuggled out of Russia stuff [samizdat] on
refuseniks under the very noses of the KGB search-squads - since no one
could suspect what is evidently an eidetic memory.
I see that the report you citation mentions a similar sense - though rather
more acerbic, from...
"Arnold Denker reminisces ... " i preserve your copyright, people should
read for themselves - I wrote to Arnold about this - or, actually, he wrote
to me after I had mentioned post war London from my mother's experience
there, she who unlike Vera Menchik a few miles away, survived the blitz.
What he said was interesting about the sociology of the time and what anyone
actually cared for chess when they were still trying to care to feed
themselves and their families and stay alive. Anyway...
I do note your text has many "maybes" in it' such as "Maybe Tartakower was
more annoyed by the easy
unity of his colleagues, than forgiving Alekhine." and also "And maybe his
collection for the pennyless Alekhine".
This is thereby a self-admitted speculation on the part of the writer.
The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative safety of
London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked difference.
Phil Innes |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Chess One
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:14 am Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
<taylor.kingston@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:204c5b72-3743-4625-84c6-140cd5941786@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | **The net effect of someone who /has/ to write what others 'seem' to
think,
is that of someone incapable of the slightest shade in their own
thought -
and who is rather like the Kevin Cline [sic] character in A Fish Called
Wanda -
when presented with 2 options, he, panicked, asks what the middle one
was
again?
|
An interesting comparison, Phil. As usual, you fail to see how it
actually applies best to yourself. Kline's character Otto had serious
problems with reading comprehension.
**Not really, he actually had verbal comprehension, in the moments of his
confusions?
For example he believed the
central message of Buddhism was "every man for himself," a misreading
as bad as yours on the Alekhine articles.
**A typical Vaguer reference. Didn't you compose the
analysis :: <prediction> :: evaluation,
middle part yourself, a-la-Otto, which is to say you inserted the
<prediction> bit, which was not actually mentioned by anyone els; and on the
subject of Fischer's and graphology? As someone who can propose such a
specific which no one else mentioned at all, and who does not provide
specifics of others, can this be something to do with you? How come you
don't notice this reason for defaming other people.
Especially since you MUST feel strongly about it, since you have, as usual,
compared your correspondents with insane people, Hitler, etc.
Obviously you have no intention of admitting your faulty description
of the Pariser Zeitung articles,
**predictive sentence based on judgemental levels of an unexampled 'faulty'?
That is not pretty precise, it is pretty vague and pretty usual. You
describe yourself as what, 'pretty specific'? ;)
or no ability to recognize it.
** "it" ? You attempt a point but say "it" as though that compasses
something or other? Vaguer thou art! But why should that inhibit you from
not even addressing the same point as others, indeed, you declare them
insane!
I will
leave you and help-bot to argue further, if you like. I have at least
done my duty by rgc readers in correcting the misleading impression
you tried to give them.
** You say I misled 'them' [ROFL] rather than asked 'you' what you meant by
your statements? In suggesting readers here evaluate a text to their own
determination of what it means; did it seemed curious to them? Thank you
though for stopping by with your usual certainties and condemnations of
those who used to be your friends and who you do not understand the current
reservations to friendship thereupon.
**Many people here are like you are just because an issue is authoritatively
spoken of, and this suffices their curiosity, rather than what others
describe as method, science and those bananas. Chess players particularly
want to know what any line of thought result in.
** I resist the temptation to finish with a "Heil!" which would nominate
your certainties - I am resistant to that since it is especially evident
from the record of the C20th that it is a disastrous way to behave, when one
has one's own intelligence to guide one.
**That is ever the open offer from me. Otherwise I am sufficiently Celt to
claim both as ancient a language as any Hebrew, and equally of repression of
our cultures. Both Hebrew and Celt don't pop their corks because some
'authority' says so: Most authorities are the words of the victors from
their own perspectives - one might note it or suffer it, eventually, those
are the choices.
Phil Innes |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
help bot
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:53 am Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
On Aug 29, 2:17 am, thumbody <mas...@bleakhouse.com> wrote:
| Quote: | So your comment on someone who "puts you down" is a mealy-mouthed
"down-put" of your own? OK....
Oh! c'mon chaps. Let's lighten this dialogue up. Add some up-put
so-to-speak. - put put put. Grey skies will clear up!
|
But... what about global warming? If we
heat up like Venus, there will be nothing
bot gray skies (apart from the large ozone
hole above Antarctica).
| Quote: | Allways look on
the bright side of life! - put put..... put-put-put-put... put-put..
|
Pooht-pooht, or did you mean putt-putt?
| Quote: | See how easy it is? - Phil is clearly tired out from his morning swim
across lake Superior & back. Let the poor puppy rest up & recuperate..
|
Geography blunder: Vermont is nearer the
Atlantic (which is widening even as we type!).
| Quote: | Yes. The silly boy has got his dates all muddled-up as the ever vigilant
Taylor has been @ pains to point out. Yes, it's possible to have read
something somewhere without that 'thing' ever having been published -
put put..
|
Weird science. So, if Mr. Kingston has
one of his many "failures" in finding, it is
just assumed that a text cannot therefore
exist? What if I find it-- where are you
then, with your pseudo "science"?
| Quote: | Yes, yes yes - the phrase: "humanity is the best revenge" is redolent,
nay! - pregnant with schadenfreudian meaning & possibility..
|
Watched an oldie on the Neuremberg trials;
the leading man asked "what was it all about",
referring to WWII in general. The idea, I
suppose, was that "it" was all about "our"
vast moral superiority, and this point was
driven home at the finish (which was smooth,
but tart). No humanity there, just a peck of
"holier than thou", served up straight.
| Quote: | Consider the opprobrious scrutiny
|
Hang on while I fetch my dictionary...
Okay, "the: an article used an awful lot in
front of other English words". Hmm.
| Quote: | of each & every move Alekhine may have made
|
And don't forget to bash him for all those
moves he *didn't* actually make, but said
he did!
| Quote: | (beginning with his very own invention - the unbelievably radical &
innovative 1.nf3 - gasp!) had he indeed lived to attend the London
convenement..
|
Every patzer knows that 1. Nf3 was not
invented by Mr. Alekhine; it was first
popularized by Howard Staunton, and
because he won so often, it was later
adopted by those who could not handle
the tactics after 1. e4!!
| Quote: | The very real shame & humiliation to be visited on him by a 'vengeful
humanity' is nothing to be sniffed at - so I feel it's timely that an
inopportune sliver of donkey-meat or, as I myself was privy to hearken
unto - shhh!(pitted-olive, laced with cyanide, free-French death-squad,
forced down craw..) took away from the world the shambling vestiges of
that which could have been great..
|
Which had *already been* great, you surely
mean.
| Quote: | Ho hum. put put put. Almost time to drop in on that bright young man
from Indiana. Find out how he's getting along with Mrs. Rybka & if
*she's* got any more info on crop circles. put put put..
|
Oh yes, the rural parts of Indiana must
have some of those. Living here in the
middle of urbania, I often forget that much
of the state consists of farms, with their
perplexed owners, wondering whether to
plant corn or soybeans or if proper crop-
rotation can somehow be swindled.
They say the newest version of Rybka
is about 3200 strength, which I expect
is quite good. But who can afford to
keep upgrading and acquiring all these
things, when the cost of bananas is so
high these days? Only those who win
lawsuits have that kind of money... .
-- help bot |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
thumbody
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:12 am Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
SBD wrote:
| Quote: |
On Aug 28, 6:38 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
**Another abstract absolutist, who /must/ put people down, a marked
behavioral pattern of anxious people whose simple understanding is
challenged by their address to even moderately complex issues.
Phil Innes
So your comment on someone who "puts you down" is a mealy-mouthed
"down-put" of your own? OK....
|
Oh! c'mon chaps. Let's lighten this dialogue up. Add some up-put
so-to-speak. - put put put. Grey skies will clear up! Allways look on
the bright side of life! - put put..... put-put-put-put... put-put..
See how easy it is? - Phil is clearly tired out from his morning swim
across lake Superior & back. Let the poor puppy rest up & recuperate..
Yes. The silly boy has got his dates all muddled-up as the ever vigilant
Taylor has been @ pains to point out. Yes, it's possible to have read
something somewhere without that 'thing' ever having been published -
put put..
Yes, yes yes - the phrase: "humanity is the best revenge" is redolent,
nay! - pregnant with schadenfreudian meaning & possibility..
Consider the opprobrious scrutiny of each & every move Alekhine may have
made (beginning with his very own invention - the unbelievably radical &
innovative 1.nf3 - gasp!) had he indeed lived to attend the London
convenement..
The very real shame & humiliation to be visited on him by a 'vengeful
humanity' is nothing to be sniffed at - so I feel it's timely that an
inopportune sliver of donkey-meat or, as I myself was privy to hearken
unto - shhh!(pitted-olive, laced with cyanide, free-French death-squad,
forced down craw..) took away from the world the shambling vestiges of
that which could have been great..
Ho hum. put put put. Almost time to drop in on that bright young man
from Indiana. Find out how he's getting along with Mrs. Rybka & if
*she's* got any more info on crop circles. put put put..
t. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
thumbody
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:50 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
thumbody wrote:
| Quote: |
SBD wrote:
On Aug 28, 6:38 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
**Another abstract absolutist, who /must/ put people down, a marked
behavioral pattern of anxious people whose simple understanding is
challenged by their address to even moderately complex issues.
Phil Innes
So your comment on someone who "puts you down" is a mealy-mouthed
"down-put" of your own? OK....
Oh! c'mon chaps. Let's lighten this dialogue up. Add some up-put
so-to-speak. - put put put. Grey skies will clear up! Allways look on
the bright side of life! - put put..... put-put-put-put... put-put..
See how easy it is? - Phil is clearly tired out from his morning swim
across lake Superior & back. Let the poor puppy rest up & recuperate..
Yes. The silly boy has got his dates all muddled-up as the ever vigilant
Taylor has been @ pains to point out. Yes, it's possible to have read
something somewhere without that 'thing' ever having been published -
put put..
Yes, yes yes - the phrase: "humanity is the best revenge" is redolent,
nay! - pregnant with schadenfreudian meaning & possibility..
Consider the opprobrious scrutiny of each & every move Alekhine may have
made (beginning with his very own invention - the unbelievably radical &
innovative 1.nf3 - gasp!) had he indeed lived to attend the London
convenement..
The very real shame & humiliation to be visited on him by a 'vengeful
humanity' is nothing to be sniffed at - so I feel it's timely that an
inopportune sliver of donkey-meat or, as I myself was privy to hearken
unto - shhh!(pitted-olive, laced with cyanide, free-French death-squad,
forced down craw..) took away from the world the shambling vestige of
that which could have been great..
Ho hum. put put put. Almost time to drop in on that bright young man
from Indiana. Find out how he's getting along with Mrs. Rybka & if
*she's* got any more info on crop circles. put put put..
t.
|
Fear not! - All who I see I will destroy if they meet not my
expectations..
thumbody!.. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
thumbody
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:06 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
Chess One wrote:
..
| Quote: | **I really don't know to what degree Alekhine adhered to what he wrote, and
I rather doubt that anyone can, except that they look at the text itself as
a starting point. Not seeing anything odd in it may disqualify many
commentators.
Phil Innes
|
Yeah! it moight Phil uh?..
Y'know, Phil, you sound increasingly like a ferkin pom whos' really
gettin' up 'illarie's nose. Y'gno'w. A real losing cunt fr' shropshire.
But I couldn't give a shite about you & your little Vermont run-arounds
- Zorro!..
t. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:48 pm Post subject: Re: James K. Polk (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriously) |
|
|
On Aug 29, 11:55 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: | taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:17cb6fa4-729b-432f-8250-214073377e8d@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 26, 1:12 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
Polk was from the south, eschewed any popularity whatever, and very
unusual
for a southern gent did /not/ think the expansion West should be
slave-based.
On what do you base that, Phil?
**O! No! ~ On what do I base what, Taylor?
|
Our Phil engages in his usual BS:
Phil: I say X is true.
TK: On what do you base that, Phil?
Phil: On what do I base what?
| Quote: | The more anti-slavery candidate in
the 1844 election was definitely Henry Clay, not Polk.
**Ah! ~ You should be glad I'm doing this for free - (stage 1) take another
look at the whole sentence, and see if you tell if I say Polk's attitude to
Western expansion was unusual in suggesting the West should be slave-based.
|
No, you said just the opposite, Phil. I quote:
"Polk was from the south, eschewed any popularity whatever, and very
unusual for a southern gent did /not/ think the expansion West should
be slave-based."
Even the emphasis -- "/not/" -- is yours. But, if you want to
pretend now that you did not say that, then there is no point in
further discussion. No suprise there, with you! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:41 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
On Aug 29, 2:08 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: | taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2860cce9-ed6e-4afb-b27e-ea04c9b033a4@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 3:51 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6cae4872-89de-4489-aec2-e6e4efdab48a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com....
On Aug 28, 9:41 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative safety of
London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked difference.
Phil Innes
So you can't name a source?
**
Certainly can't be bothering to look for 'a source' to satisfy someone who
can't say why it is important that Tartakover rather than Euwe said anything
at all, rather than the nature of the sentiment expressed.
|
So you don't think it's at all important to attribute a quote to the
person who actually said it? An interesting view. I guess our Phil
would accept these:
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." -- Jefferson Davis
"We hold these truths to be self-evident ..." -- Abraham Lincoln
"I was nearly an IM, with a rating of 2450" -- Neil Brennen
"It is not Spanish, it is Andean." -- Greg Kennedy
"I am not your boy." -- Barack Obama
| Quote: | I assume by this
current request [?] that Our Tinker Taylor /resents/ and challenges the
anecdote -
|
I question -- "challenge" is too strong a word -- the attribution to
Euwe. Ive never seen any such statement by him, but I have seen things
close to it by Tartakower. That leads me to think you may have them
confused -- and you are very often confused, Phil. But if you can cite
a credible source, I will accept the attribution.
| Quote: | but what is that to me?
|
Well, you might want to be seen here as being factually accurate for
once. But indeed, what is that to you? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chess One
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:55 pm Post subject: Re: James K. Polk (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriously) |
|
|
<taylor.kingston@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:17cb6fa4-729b-432f-8250-214073377e8d@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 26, 1:12 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Polk was from the south, eschewed any popularity whatever, and very
unusual
for a southern gent did /not/ think the expansion West should be
slave-based.
|
On what do you base that, Phil?
**O! No! ~ On what do I base what, Taylor?
The more anti-slavery candidate in
the 1844 election was definitely Henry Clay, not Polk.
**Ah! ~ You should be glad I'm doing this for free - (stage 1) take another
look at the whole sentence, and see if you tell if I say Polk's attitude to
Western expansion was unusual in suggesting the West should be slave-based.
**Now (Stage 2), did I use the word 'unusual' or 'unique'?
** (Stage 3). Did I say 'more than others'?
The Whigs had
the slogan "Vote for Clay and peace and freedom. Vote for Polk and
slavery and war."
Polk strongly favored the annexation of Texas, which was coveted by
slave-holding interests, and slavery in fact became legal there. Slave-
holders' support of Polk is reflected in the 1844 electoral vote. Polk
carried Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi. Missouri,
South Carolina, and Virginia, i.e. 8 of the 12 slave states then
existing. The Mexican-American War was very much about the expansion
of slavery.
**Polk owned slaves in the East and did not suggest nor attempt to change
Eastern sea-baord culture - no doubt that is why he gained the confidence of
8 slave states. There may have been aspiration from those states to make
slave states in the South-West, but AFAIK not by anything Polk said or did.
**Slavery already existed in the West - first Spanish, then the new Mexican
independent state upheld it, but oldest of all were the native traditions.
Of particular import were the Navajo's attitudes especially in the time of
Narbonna, which were considerably more liberal than those in the east,
slaves gradually becoming fully adopted citizens of the tribes.
**Ideas of slavery were rather superceded by 'the roaring apostle' of
Manifest Destiny, Senator Thomas Hart Benton - and Polk's war [for Polk] was
pure and simple, a massive land-grab.
| Quote: | He wanted one term, got it, achieved pretty much everything he
wanted in that term,
|
Yes, whatever one's opinion of his policies, one must admit he
carried them out very effectively. He added more territory to the USA
than any other president, even Jefferson. Pretty much everything west
of the Rockies, plus Texas. Reduced tariffs and created an independent
Federal Treasury.
**It is interesting to compare 2 records of changing American attitudes to
the West - Blood and Thunder by Hampton Sides which covers approx 1840-1870,
and the earlier records of Lewis and Clarke. Essentially, nothing much
happened apres-Lewis - events waiting on the railroad and the telegraph.
**Radically different were the urgent actions of Pres. Polk, and his agents;
the glory-hound Fremont, steady Kierny, plus the somewhat ridiculous
Stockton, who not only grabbed the entire south west, they even scared off
the other main rival, the British, whose Oregon base and powerful men-o-war
overlooked that lovely port of San Fransciso, or should I say Yerba Buena?
Plus inflicted a new border on Mexico.
Phil Innes |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chess One
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:08 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
<taylor.kingston@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2860cce9-ed6e-4afb-b27e-ea04c9b033a4@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 3:51 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: | taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6cae4872-89de-4489-aec2-e6e4efdab48a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 9:41 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative safety of
London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked difference.
Phil Innes
|
So you can't name a source?
**
Certainly can't be bothering to look for 'a source' to satisfy someone who
can't say why it is important that Tartakover rather than Euwe said anything
at all, rather than the nature of the sentiment expressed. I assume by this
current request [?] that Our Tinker Taylor /resents/ and challenges the
anecdote - but what is that to me?
When Tinker Taylor messed with Soviet-era materials he asked me for
information, and at considerable expense of time and effort with hard-won
contacts, I provided him it, and on receiving that material, Our Tinker
Taylor did nothing - in fact, he did far more than nothing! He pretended it
/was/ nothing. A pity some would say, especially those nothing persons
ploughed under that regime.
To anyone who does have a care for such stuff I simply don't remember the
source - I don't remember it being Arnold, though we did talk a whole bunch
about the post-war era - he seemed to have been in London then [but I never
found out why, in the services or news reporting? Maybe Larry Parr knows?]
Phil Innes |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chess One
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:30 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
<taylor.kingston@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8b099e82-491c-48c2-abac-ee8b6bdd6aed@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 3:51 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: | taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6cae4872-89de-4489-aec2-e6e4efdab48a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 9:41 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
... and as Max Euwe was asked to explain when he
proposed Alekhine should rejoin the world chess community after WWII, he
responded:
"Humanity is the best revenge",
Phil, what is your source for that quote? If it is genuine, are you
sure it was Euwe who said it, and not Tartakower? It sounds very much
like what Hans Ree describes here, in connection with Tartakower:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hans35.txt
I don't remember where I read the Euwe comment - which may not be even be
published at all?
|
If it was never published at all, how could you have read it?
**Because someone wrote me about it. How else could I have read it? What is
unpublished about chess is more than all the chess books together. Some
2,000 e-mails from very strong Russians sources on their perspectives on
chess and Soviet-era shenanigans are almost entirely unpublished, eg. This
is literally 'non-authoritative', which means that such people have not put
their comments in books acting as authors.
**But rather than proceed with Tinker-Taylor's inquiry [is it?] I want to
know why he wants to know - because when he did get an entree, he ignored it
on serious business - that being repression of refuseniks - in other words,
Jewish chess players.
| Quote: | But I do remember it was Euwe.
|
It seems like something Euwe's biographer Münninghoff would have
reported, had Euwe said it. But I don't see it there. However, there
is this:
"The World Champion was in an awful state when, on the eve of
Christmas tournament of Hastings 1945/46, he was roundly condemned:
because of his behavior during the war, neither the Russians, nor the
Americans, **** nor Euwe ****, nor anyone at all, was prepared to play
against him." -- "Max Euwe: The Biography" (NIC 2001) p.247 (emphasis
added)
**But the W Ch invite came in early 46, no? Not Christmas 1945.
This rather indicates that Euwe was not in a mood to let Alekhine
back into organized chess, and does not exactly fit a stance of
"humanity is the best revenge."
**Alekhine was detested with more or less reason by those who had been
brutalised in a world war. I don't know the import of who said what, but do
not intend to give up my memory to someone who cannot own his own interest
in the affair - to wit, of what import would resolving this issue have to
Taylor Kingston?
| Quote: | The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative safety of
London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked difference.
|
"Occupied Europe"? Occupied by whom?
**Nazi's mate! They took over the whole of contintental Europe during WW II.
You just said Euwe's statement
was made *_after_* WW II, when Holland was no longer occupied by any
hostile power.
**ROFL! ~ God Taylor! your comprehension is abysmal. I said that if
Tartakower made the statement it would be of less force than Euwe. That's
because Euwe was in occupied Europe, and Tartakower was in London!
**If you want to continue this 'conversation' can you please STOP your
idiotic 'interpretations' of plain sentences, since you always screw
yourself by doing so - in this instance the 3rd OTTO- thing you observe of
the 2 items I mention is a <when> issue. Now, what can it matter when anyone
said what, when I mention the WHERE of the commentators as being the
significant factor? Why would you want to know /when/ they said what when
the importance is their experience of occupation or lack of it?
**That you chose to confound your introduction of the 'when' with what I
wrote is some matter ofyour own deviant comprehension ability - and in one
day, you can't resist repeating this theme of your own, not based on what
others wrote, 3 times [thus far].
**Obviously anyone suffering occupation who says something human about his
perceived oppressor, has greater force than from those not occupied.
Obviously? Yes, I think its as plain as day.
Phil Innes
Phil Innes |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
help bot
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:39 am Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
taylor.kings...@comcast.net wrote:
| Quote: | So you can't name a source?
|
An odd question, considering that Dr. IMnes
already named his source. I think some folks
just can't do memory "recall".
| Quote: | Certainly can't be bothering to look for 'a source' to satisfy someone who
can't say why it is important that Tartakover rather than Euwe said anything
at all, rather than the nature of the sentiment expressed.
So you don't think it's at all important to attribute a quote to the
person who actually said it? An interesting view. I guess our Phil
would accept these:
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." -- Jefferson Davis
|
This is house-building 101.
| Quote: | "We hold these truths to be self-evident ..." -- Abraham Lincoln
|
Then why even bother discussing them?
| Quote: | "I was nearly an IM, with a rating of 2450" -- Neil Brennen
|
Implausible, as that is precisely the same
rating and title Dr. IMnes once had.
| Quote: | "It is not Spanish, it is Andean." -- Greg Kennedy
|
You must be talking about the chess
openings (i.e. the Spanish is 1. e4 e5,
2. Nf3 Nc6, 3. Bb5).
| Quote: | "I am not your boy." -- Barack Obama
|
The term "boy" is a huge no-no; PIC.
| Quote: | I assume by this
current request [?] that Our Tinker Taylor /resents/ and challenges the
anecdote -
I question -- "challenge" is too strong a word -- the attribution to
Euwe. Ive never seen any such statement by him, but I have seen things
close to it by Tartakower. That leads me to think you may have them
confused -- and you are very often confused, Phil. But if you can cite
a credible source, I will accept the attribution.
but what is that to me?
Well, you might want to be seen here as being factually accurate for
once. But indeed, what is that to you?
|
Much ado about nothing; the story was
that Mr. Euwe chaired the committee, but
it was of course Mr. Tartakower who took
up a collection for poor old Mr. Alekhine
and who gets the credit/blame for any
high-falutin' quotation.
The funny thing about this stuff is that
supposedly, any "war crime" committed
by evil Nazis was defensible if and only
if "we", the victors, had committed the
same type of "war crime" and admitted
to it publicly. What an odd arbiter... .
No-- I'm not going to point out once
again our grave disappointment after
having been promised a deep discussion
of WWII but then getting nada, zippo,
zilch-amundo. Suffice it to say that I am
ordering "The World at War" on 8-track
tape-- er, no, make that VHS, this week.
Next, I will watch "In Harm's Way" or
maybe "It Came From Outer Space".
-- help bot |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:05 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
On Aug 29, 2:30 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: | taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8b099e82-491c-48c2-abac-ee8b6bdd6aed@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 3:51 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
I don't remember where I read the Euwe comment - which may not be even be
published at all?
If it was never published at all, how could you have read it?
** Because someone wrote me about it.
|
"Someone"? Tut, tut, Phil -- very vague.
| Quote: | **Because someone wrote me about it.
|
Ah, then it is hearsay.
| Quote: | But I do remember it was Euwe.
It seems like something Euwe's biographer Münninghoff would have
reported, had Euwe said it. But I don't see it there. However, there
is this:
"The World Champion was in an awful state when, on the eve of
Christmas tournament of Hastings 1945/46, he was roundly condemned:
because of his behavior during the war, neither the Russians, nor the
Americans, **** nor Euwe ****, nor anyone at all, was prepared to play
against him." -- "Max Euwe: The Biography" (NIC 2001) p.247 (emphasis
added)
**But the W Ch invite came in early 46, no? Not Christmas 1945.
|
Yes, Skinner & Verhoeven say Alekhine got a telegram from the BCF
about Botvinnik's challenge "15 days before his death," which would be
around 8 March 1946. So now you are saying Euwe said "Humanity is the
best revenge" in connection with this?
| Quote: | The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative safety of
London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked difference.
"Occupied Europe"? Occupied by whom?
**Nazi's mate! They took over the whole of contintental Europe during WW II.
|
How much of Europe were they occupying in March 1946? Last I heard,
Germany surrendered in May 1945, almost a year earlier.
| Quote: | You just said Euwe's statement
was made *_after_* WW II, when Holland was no longer occupied by any
hostile power.
**ROFL! ~ God Taylor! your comprehension is abysmal. I said that if
Tartakower made the statement it would be of less force than Euwe. That's
because Euwe was in occupied Europe, and Tartakower was in London!
|
Well, we have a definite conundrum then, Phil. If Euwe said this in
connection with Botvinnik's challenge to Alekhine, or at the same time
as Tartakower made the statements I referred to (January 1946), Euwe
simply could not have said it in Nazi-occupied Europe. If Euwe said
this while in Nazi-occupied Europe, it could not have been in
conection with Botvinnik's challenge, or at the same time as
Tartakower's statements.
| Quote: | **If you want to continue this 'conversation' can you please STOP your
idiotic 'interpretations' of plain sentences,
|
I'll remember that, in the unlikely event that you write a plain
sentence.
| Quote: | Why would you want to know /when/ they said what when
|
Because I'm a history buff, Phil. A student of history always wants
to know "When?" Also because I enjoy pointing out how sloppy and
uninformed you are.
| Quote: | the importance is their experience of occupation or lack of it?
|
But the plain fact is that the time element was introduced by you. I
quote:
"The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative
safety of London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked
difference."
You are clearly locating both men in time as well as geography.
As for Euwe's alleged statement carrying more force, wherever,
whenever, and if ever it was actually said, that's as may be. I would
say that Tartakower's willingness to forgive the anti-Semite Alekhine
carries *_considerable_* force, in view of the fact that Tartakower's
parents were killed in a pogrom. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
The Historian
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:26 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
On Aug 30, 10:05 am, taylor.kings...@comcast.net wrote:
| Quote: | As for Euwe's alleged statement carrying more force, wherever,
whenever, and if ever it was actually said, that's as may be. I would
say that Tartakower's willingness to forgive the anti-Semite Alekhine
carries *_considerable_* force, in view of the fact that Tartakower's
parents were killed in a pogrom.
|
Didn't Alekhine suggest Tartakower as an opponent for a training match
prior to meeting Botvinnik? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
The Historian
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:28 pm Post subject: Re: Alekhine's Death (was: K. Taylor on Everything, Seriousl |
|
|
On Aug 29, 1:41 pm, taylor.kings...@comcast.net wrote:
| Quote: | On Aug 29, 2:08 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2860cce9-ed6e-4afb-b27e-ea04c9b033a4@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 3:51 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
taylor.kings...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6cae4872-89de-4489-aec2-e6e4efdab48a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 28, 9:41 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@comcast.net> wrote:
The force of Tartakower issuing this sentiment from the relative safety of
London compared with Euwe's in occupied Europe is a marked difference.
Phil Innes
So you can't name a source?
**
Certainly can't be bothering to look for 'a source' to satisfy someone who
can't say why it is important that Tartakover rather than Euwe said anything
at all, rather than the nature of the sentiment expressed.
So you don't think it's at all important to attribute a quote to the
person who actually said it? An interesting view. I guess our Phil
would accept these:
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." -- Jefferson Davis
"We hold these truths to be self-evident ..." -- Abraham Lincoln
"I was nearly an IM, with a rating of 2450" -- Neil Brennen
|
Taylor, please leave me out of your never-ending flame war with P
Innes.
| Quote: | "It is not Spanish, it is Andean." -- Greg Kennedy
"I am not your boy." -- Barack Obama
I assume by this
current request [?] that Our Tinker Taylor /resents/ and challenges the
anecdote -
I question -- "challenge" is too strong a word -- the attribution to
Euwe. Ive never seen any such statement by him, but I have seen things
close to it by Tartakower. That leads me to think you may have them
confused -- and you are very often confused, Phil. But if you can cite
a credible source, I will accept the attribution.
but what is that to me?
Well, you might want to be seen here as being factually accurate for
once. But indeed, what is that to you?
|
Yes, why ruin his reputation for perpetual falsehood? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
