How to Swindle in Chess

A book review may be a primary source, opinion piece, summary review or scholarly review.
Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:52 pm

Not in the slightest absurd or disrespectful, Leonard. Luke McShane was until recently an amateur, so was Mestel even when winning three British Championships. I already made it clear that amateurs can be dangerous and talented, and as good as many "professionals", so really ... at the most this is about how you want to define the word "amateur"

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19349
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:57 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:01 pm
"Why would Larsen refer to him as "the Dutch master""
With perhaps the odd exception, weren't most of the opposition in the 1969 book amongst the top players of the era, or if not top players were nevertheless competing in top events? One was the Australian in an Interzonal whose name I fail to recall, who tried and failed to demonstrate that a simple and obvious plan against Larsen's Bishops Opening worked. That was 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 d5 .
Last edited by Roger de Coverly on Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nick Ivell
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Nick Ivell » Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:03 pm

Berger. Larsen gives ...d5 a question mark, but I'm not sure it's that bad.

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:20 pm

Nick Ivell wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:03 pm
Berger. Larsen gives ...d5 a question mark, but I'm not sure it's that bad.
As somebody who is familiar with that line as White, 4....d5?! is probably the most accurate annotation.

Slightly suspect, but far from an automatic loss. Have lost to it a couple of times myself (even if not because of the opening!)

As for TDvS, he took a draw with Polugayevsky in the 1966 Beverwijk (as it still was back then) event when he stood much better (the game's in the first ever Chess Informant) He could certainly play a bit, even if Donner got a few digs in about his ability (but of course few Dutch players escaped that, maybe only Euwe and Timman) And carried on playing at a decent level well into old age.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Leonard Barden
Posts: 1685
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:21 am

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Leonard Barden » Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:38 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:52 pm
Not in the slightest absurd or disrespectful, Leonard. Luke McShane was until recently an amateur, so was Mestel even when winning three British Championships. I already made it clear that amateurs can be dangerous and talented, and as good as many "professionals", so really ... at the most this is about how you want to define the word "amateur"
No, it is about how YOU defined amateur in your first post as an unnamed and by implication weak opponent outsmarted by the clever GM, and subsequently persisted with that, while trying to compliment yourself,
in your subsequent post, all the while failing to mention that you were actually referring to a named strong IM competing against Larsen in the GM section at Beverwijk.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8412
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by JustinHorton » Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:16 pm

Matt Mackenzie wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:20 pm
Nick Ivell wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:03 pm
Berger. Larsen gives ...d5 a question mark, but I'm not sure it's that bad.
As somebody who is familiar with that line as White, 4....d5?! is probably the most accurate annotation.
Isn't it move three in our line above? (Roger has 1...d5, by the way, which he may wish to amend.)
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:52 pm

Leonard Barden wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:38 pm
Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:52 pm
Not in the slightest absurd or disrespectful, Leonard. Luke McShane was until recently an amateur, so was Mestel even when winning three British Championships. I already made it clear that amateurs can be dangerous and talented, and as good as many "professionals", so really ... at the most this is about how you want to define the word "amateur"
No, it is about how YOU defined amateur in your first post as an unnamed and by implication weak opponent outsmarted by the clever GM, and subsequently persisted with that, while trying to compliment yourself,
in your subsequent post, all the while failing to mention that you were actually referring to a named strong IM competing against Larsen in the GM section at Beverwijk.
I'd forgotten his name, that's why i didn't mention it - and this was obvious, since I couldn't find the game. I did know that it was not one of the few professional of the age, so used the word amateur - apart from anyting else, it would help anyone who wanted to search for the game, who knew not to look at games against the elite at the time. Since I made it very clear that in my mind amateurs can be very strong players, I am a bit surprised by your reaction, and in more than one way.

Why didn't you just calmly add a note as to exactly how strong an amateur he was?

I think i will stop posting here untli after lockdown, probably that is better for everyone ...

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19349
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:42 pm

Nick Ivell wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:03 pm
Berger. Larsen
I looked Berger up. He was a Hungarian who left for Australia after 1956 having previous played in the Hungarian Championship. Not then as Larsen implies a novice from the back of beyond.

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: How to Swindle in Chess

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat Feb 06, 2021 6:06 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:16 pm
Matt Mackenzie wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:20 pm
Nick Ivell wrote:
Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:03 pm
Berger. Larsen gives ...d5 a question mark, but I'm not sure it's that bad.
As somebody who is familiar with that line as White, 4....d5?! is probably the most accurate annotation.
Isn't it move three in our line above? (Roger has 1...d5, by the way, which he may wish to amend.)
I think we are in reality talking about 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 d3 and then.....d5?! here.

(Larsen - Berger transposed to this more usual line after 5 Nf3 Nc6)
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Post Reply