| Taylor Kingston 2006-11-19, 8:43 pm |
|
On Nov 13, 9:25 pm, "Chess One" <inn...@verizon.net> wrote:
quote:
> XXXX off kingston! YOU first cut my first reference to nottingham, then y=
ou
quote:
> ignore YOUR 'correction' to hastings
Charming language. As to who said what when about Nottingham and
Hastings, I have dealt with that in another thread.
quote:
> Kinsgston below kindly notices that lasker did come 8th, when he said he
> never did!
Inaccurate again, Phil. I said Lasker never came *_sole 8th_*. At
Nottingham he finished =3D7-8th, a minor but definite difference.
quote:
> but all along he knew he lied, since he now knows that there were
> 15 players, or is this recent knowledge? He did call me all sorts of names
> before he knew this fact!
Phil, I have known for at least 20 years, maybe 30, how many players
there were at Nottingham 1936. In my chess library are hundreds of
books, at least a dozen of which have a full crosstable for that event.
When it comes to that sort of archival data, I have a great many
sources at my fingertips -- literally thousands of tournament
crosstables.
I'm like the sports stat freak who can tell you how many times the
Red Sox's second-string catcher struck out in 1923, what percentage of
his passes did Sid Luckman complete in 1940, who won the NBA rebounding
title in 1954. If you're going to challenge me on a date or a chess
result, you had better know what you're talking about. I'm not saying
this to brag -- it's simply a fact.
quote:
> but again it is my fault for not listing all the players!
It certainly *_is_* your fault to say that Lasker came *_last_* at
Nottingham 1936. =3D7-8th is definitely *_not_* last in a field of 15. No
one said it but you, so who else's fault can it be?
quote:
> and sure, he
> didn't come last of all - but last after all these people who Kingston
> reported he had dealt with previously so as to have championed over them -
> lasker was bust in 1936 and hadn't played seriously for a dozen years
You're really on a roll here, aren't you, Phil? Just prior to
Nottingham 1936, Lasker had played in top-level tournaments in 1934
(Zurich), 1935 (Moscow), and 1936 (Moscow). Those are all well under "a
dozen years" from 1936. In fact the difference between the end of
Moscow 1936 and the start of Nottingham 1936 was only 2 months and 2
days (8 June - 10 August).
quote:
> kingston's shit-arse posting XXXXs up everything - not only is he massive=
ly
quote:
> wrong -
You see, Phil, this is one reason I think you need therapy. You are
obviously "massively wrong" in almost every detail of Lasker's career
circa 1936-36, yet you refuse to see it, and try to blame others.
You're like the marching soldier who thinks everyone is out of step
except him.
It's no crime to make an historical error, but to continue to defend
an error when it's clearly exposed, and to try to blame your error on
others, is not rational. It's even sad. At least it makes me sad to see
an otherwise intelligent man acting like a child.
quote:
> but when he is referred to it he has the XXXXing gall to complain
> that others haven't listed everything to his satisfaction!
>
> this mocking twit won't even say out straight if he thinks authors could
> have a say about the books which were banned by the site he worked for!
>
> he has cocked up every single consideration about lasker, and finishes his
> lamentable message by again blaming me for it, when i wrote over and over
> that i am not trying to do the guy brown, just not turn him into the
> superman of the late twenties or thirties who confronted the hypermoderns=
as
quote:
> alekhine did, when lasker had all but retired in 1925. that is a further
> massive misunderstanding of who did what in the time, retailed here witho=
ut
quote:
> a blush
>
> this is what kingston does in private, but there, the gloves are off! his
> own understanding of anything is massively obscured by his ego which is
> propped up by the likes of the idiot brennan
>
> neither of them should write about chess at all, they demand to be taken
> seriously, more seriously than their own attention to understanding the g=
ame
quote:
> or its history or is due this poxy revisionism, full of indecent
> propositions about other people, and either hero worship or hate
>
> phil innes
>
> "Taylor Kingston" <tkings...@chittenden.com> wrote in messagenews:1163458=
411.621692.321260@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> On Nov 13, 4:28 pm, "Chess One" <inn...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
as[vbcol=seagreen]
o, it is not. Here is what you posted on 11 November 2005, 4:36 PM:[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> "what is this contention that Kingston has? He negatively protrayed
> the
> emigree Russian Alekhine, who was WORLD CHAMPION and //dominated// the
> Euro
> scene 1923-39, to effect this report, but also CUT my notice that
> Lasker
> came 8th at Hastings in 1935 ..."
>
besides spelling her name three[vbcol=seagreen]
> different ways.
>
>
n, this is the post to[vbcol=seagreen]
> which I referred, which was posted on 11/11, not the 11/12 date of the
> above:
>
> "what is this contention that Kingston has? He negatively protrayed
> the
> emigree Russian Alekhine, who was WORLD CHAMPION and //dominated// the
> Euro
> scene 1923-39, to effect this report, but also CUT my notice that
> LASKER CAME 8TH AT HASTINGS IN 1935 ..." (emphasis added).
>
> If you meant Nottingham 1936, you should not have written "Hastings
> in 1935," and then defended your error so vehemently.
> But now even when you talk about the tournament you really meant, you
> still get it all wrong. You wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
ot[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
a few important points:[vbcol=seagreen]
> (A) This crosstable pertains to Nottingham 1936, *_not_* Hastings
> 1935.
> (B) You present only about half of it. Nottingham 1936 had a field of
> 15, not 8. You have completely omitted Vidmar, Tartakower, Bogolyubov,
> Tylor, Alexander, Thomas, and Winter.
> (C) Lasker did not finish last. He had a plus score, 8=BD-5=BD, only
> 1=BD points behind the winners. It is impossible to finish last in any
> tournament with a plus score.
> (D) Lasker finished =3D7-8th, tied withFlohr, not 8th. To say "8th"
> means sole 8th.
> (E) =3D7th at Nottingham 1936, with a score of +6 -3 =3D5, was pretty
> damn good, especially for a man of 67. Ahead of him were:
>
> the reigning world champion
> two former world champions
> two future world champion
> America's two best players, both world title contenders
>
> They were on average 36 years younger, ranging from 20 to 46 years
> younger.
> I don't know why you seem so eager to make Lasker look bad, but
> you're doing a very poor job of it, and to call your research
> "slipshod" would be far too complimentary.- Hide quoted text -- Show quot=
ed text -
|