Fischer's 60 the Faber and Faber Edition

Picked up Fischer's 60 today in a 2nd hand shop 'Used but Mint' as they say.

It's the old Faber & Faber edition in descriptive notation.
Also got 'Tal's Life and Games' (algebraic) both £1.00.

Going to drop the Fischer Book on ebay.

I will use the phrase:

"60 games chosen by Bobby Fischer..."

If you bid for it and win - email me via ebay saying you are an RHP
member and I'll send it post free.

Should have it on ebay by the weekend. Going to kick it off for £5.00.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Picked up Fischer's 60 today in a 2nd hand shop 'Used but Mint' as they say.

It's the old Faber & Faber edition in descriptive notation.
Also got 'Tal's Life and Games' (algebraic) both £1.00.

Going to drop the Fischer Book on ebay.

I will use the phrase:

"60 games chosen by Bobby Fischer..."

If you bid for it and win - email me via eba ...[text shortened]... t post free.

Should have it on ebay by the weekend. Going to kick it off for £5.00.

That include us American scum?

-GIN

To anywhere in the World - including my American cousins.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Should have it on ebay by the weekend. Going to kick it off for £5.00.

If you start the auction at £4.99 you'll pay 10p less in eBay insertion fees.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
If you start the auction at £4.99 you'll pay 10p less in eBay insertion fees.

Good thinking Tubby Tart - I'll do that.

Greenpawn,

Is the Faber and Faber edition a good one? Maybe I'll throw in a bid. I'm confused with all the different editions of this book that are out there...some say certain editions modified Bobby's text, etc....

Do you have any light to shed on this?

It is the original Faber & Faber before Batsford got their hands on it.

Unmolested by the clammy fingers of finance.

The book that all over books are judged by.

It is 2nd hand but in very very good condition.

Posr Free to RHP (my work will pay).

...and in descriptive notation

Originally posted by BailieDonaldson
...and in descriptive notation

...and in descriptive notation

Originally posted by BailieDonaldson
...and in descriptive notation

Reading descriptive notation puts hair on your chest. 😛

Originally posted by Mad Rook
Reading descriptive notation puts hair on your chest. 😛

...and turns it gray.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
...and turns it gray.

😀

Dunno... i think being able to read Descriptive and Algabraic somehow strangely adds to chess vision. Playing through master games that are annotated in descriptive really flexes some focus on key squares...the way the notation flips helps instill the "equilibrium" concept that Saveilley Tartakower teaches as being "all important"

Trying to catch the control of key squares is harder with weaker vision and I think Descriptive adds to it. I analyse and annotate in Algabraic because its correct. Its like the smart perfect woman, that always works. Descriptive is like the lass in the bar that "gets around" somehow she's not as desirable...maybe not even as pretty... but she'll teach you things the others just can't 🙂

-GIN

If you place Fischer's 60 between Fighting Chess
and John Nunn's Best Games and leave it overnight.

In the morning Fischer's 60 will have turned into algebraic.

I made a mistake doing it and now my Fighting Chess
has turned into descriptive.

Will put the book on ebay hopefully tonight - with scanned picture.

Originally posted by Nowakowski
Dunno... i think being able to read Descriptive and Algabraic somehow strangely adds to chess vision. Playing through master games that are annotated in descriptive really flexes some focus on key squares...the way the notation flips helps instill the "equilibrium" concept that Saveilley Tartakower teaches as being "all important"

Trying to catch the aybe not even as pretty... but she'll teach you things the others just can't 🙂

-GIN

i think you are correct, infact i have been studying a little book written in descriptive notation and the concepts are so much easier to visualise for a patzer king like me. for example it states and i quote

'the development of bishops to Bishop 4 appeals less and less to a player after he reaches championship class. Here follows examples of different kind of 'biffs', that a bishop may be exposed to on King Bishop 4....',

is it not excellent!, king bishop 4, so much more comprehensive and easier to visualize than f4?

if its good enough for the king then its good enough for me, i will now no longer refer to algebraic notation, but try to lead a renaissance in descriptive notation!