Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kasparov simply did not deserve to be playing again..

Author: Terry McCracken

Date: 20:38:43 11/13/03

Go up one level in this thread


On November 13, 2003 at 22:18:00, steven blincoe wrote:

>
>What a noble purpose! It seems to me that in itself earns him the right
>>to sit in that chair aside from his obvious gift for the game.
>
>
>whatever Kasparov has done for chess has nothing to do with nobility
>it has to do with money..his money
>whatever he could make for himself regardless of the consequences
>not that that there is anything wrong with making money from his ability but
>noble?
>
>was taking back the knight move against Judit ..noble?
>the entire Grandmaster's  association fiasco ..noble?
>his getting  back into bed with the the president of Fide(a murderer)noble?
>his berating of the brilliany prize judges (after awarding the brilliancy prize
>to a game he lost)noble?
>his accusing the Deep Blue team of cheating(a view he still holds to this
>day)..noble??
>his demanding to start a game over during a recent simul (because the player was
>rated higher then the maximum rating for the simul participants)..noble?
>
>i can go on and on...
>
>i dont even think Kasparov himself would consider himself to be a noble person

Yes you could, I'm sure!

But you haven't included any of his great achievments, and the list is very
long!

BTW no one becomes as _great_ as Kasparov, if they didn't _love_ the game!

Yes money plays a role, it does for _all_ GM's and IM's but to be the best,
money alone can't get you there, that's a fact!

Is your "Weeds" and "Thorns" analysis noble?

No, it's not!



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.