Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:40:43 01/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 1999 at 14:22:20, Jeroen Noomen wrote: > >someone overlooks something and >>hangs a pawn, but after it is taken, there turns out to be a winning attack, >>was that oversight brilliant or sloppy? That was my only point here. >> >>Kasparov loves that kind of move. As do we all. I'm only saying that many >>times, such 'brilliant' moves turn out to be absolute lemons, once the defense >>is found. Can someone find such OTB? Maybe or maybe not. In the actual game? >>No of course, as Kasparov won. What about playing that against a computer? It >>might have turned out even better for him. Or it might have lost if the machine >>played Rhe8 and that is good enough to hold on. >> >>Everyone knows my opinion of 'Kasparov, the man'. I still respect and admire >>'Kasparov, the chessplayer' however. And this was only about 'the chessplayer' >>and the move he played... was it good, bad, or just legal? > > >Robert, > >You must be the only one in the world who does NOT love this game. Why should >I bother then!? I have the impression you just don't like Kasparov.... > >Jeroen You are correct. I despise 'kasparov the man' for the absolutely pitiful behavior after the last Deep Blue match. However, I have long admired "Kasparov the chess player" for his swashbuckling style of play. But that has _nothing_ to do with this. Look at my original post. Someone posted that they thought they had found a refutation to the 'brilliant move Rxd4'... I only remarked that I had seen this same oversight the day before in _another_ game... nothing ugly... nothing disparaging... just a true comment about a real game. Never said Kasparov couldn't play chess. Never called Rxd4 a 'blunder'. That was hyperbole from someone else following up my original rather simplistic comment..
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.