Author: Telmo C. Escobar
Date: 21:56:18 08/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 2004 at 14:41:18, Roger Brown wrote:
>On August 12, 2004 at 12:54:13, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>> The game looks very positional and technical, maybe (at first look) a bit
>>>boring most of the time, just the impression most of Rubinstein's games gave.
>>
>>Bite your tongue!
>>
>> Albert
>>
>
>
>
>Hello Albert,
>
>Not boring, just devoid of the technicloured fireworks which abounded in the
>games of Tal and Alekhine to name two masters of attack.
>
>Rubinstein's claim to fame was a technique comparable to Capablanca, smooth,
>polished and very deadly.
>
>:-)
I quote from Nimzovich's book Carlsbad International Chess Tournament 1929:
"Let us suppose that Rubinstein has just played a very modest opening, without
any overt ambition, and in the ensuing middlegame, he stands no better than his
opponent. After a series of lengthy, uninteresting, and totally unexciting
maneuvers, an ending is reached, which also appears to offer Rubinstein no
winning chances. The ending is so dull and featureless, in fact, that the
spectators are beginning to ask themselves why the game was not called a draw
long ago. But then, suddenly, Rubinstein wins; and in retrospect, all of our
judgments concerning both the middlegame and the opening now appear to have been
superfitial and inaccurate: opening and middlegame alike were in Rubinstein's
favor. Profundity, indeed!"
"Another of Rubinstein's characteristic features is his dislike for
melodramatics. Empty rhetoric and pretentious moves alike shock him to the core!
{...}"
I tried to get some of this (deceiving) "boredom".
Telmo
>
>Later.
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.