|
|
Larry Tapper wrote:
quote:
> Sam Sloan:
>
> knew that the games were fixed ever since he became a strong player in
> the early 1950s because of the numerous suspicious moves in these
> games. Unfortunately, Taylor Kingston is such a weak player that he
> cannot understand these simple and obvious points.
>
> This is a good example of Sam Sloan's nearly total imperviousness to
> criticism or evidence. He apparently still thinks it's "obvious" to any
> strong player that Keres-Botvinnik games were fixed, in spite of the
> fact that numerous posters have pointed out that there are GM-strength
> players on both sides of this issue.
>
> The Keres-Botvinnik analysis Sam has posted on his own website is
> trash, because it uncritically endorses the theory that the more
> strategically bad the moves are, the more likely the fix.
>
> Evans' original analysis was (not surprisingly) much better --- he
> acknowledged that a skillful fix was likely to involve subtle errors
> designed to avoid immediate detection, by the likes of Sam Sloan for
> example.
>
> This point sailed right over Sloan's head, and apparently continues to
> do so. For example Sam writes:
>
> "The drawing technique is simple. White leaves his rook on the fourth
> rank. Eventually, to make progress, Black must advance his pawn to g4.
> White then must immediately move his rook to the eighth rank and start
> checking from behind. The Black king cannot escape the checks and the
> game is a draw."
>
> "What did Keres do? He made a move that even a 1600 player would be
> embarrassed to make. He retreated his rook back to d3, allowing
> Botvinnik to seize the fourth rank with 53. ... Rf4."
>
> So if Evans is right about the proper way to fix a chess game, then
> Sloan's comments do not make sense. A world-class GM does not throw a
> game by making "a move that even a 1600 player would be embarrassed to
> make".
Let me first say that I personally lack the skill required to make that
judgement about throwing a game. What I do have is an understanding of
human nature. If you were being forced to "lose" on threat of death,
would you not find some way to let the rest of the world know? WOuld
you not send a clear message to your peers?
I believe that is likely the case.
Rob
(Natrol Free)
quote:
> My own opinion is that game analysis alone could never provide
> conclusive evidence of a fix, because a sufficiently ingenious and
> paranoid analyst could take _any_ game with decisive errors and make a
> case for something fishy going on..
>
> Larry T.
>
> (USCF 2300 if that matters)
|
|