somebody knows, how to access the online live commentary? i thought last year there was some commentary and not only box analysis... has that changed or can i just not find the link?
Originally posted by tharkesh somebody knows, how to access the online live commentary? i thought last year there was some commentary and not only box analysis... has that changed or can i just not find the link?
Originally posted by tharkesh yes, i found that, too. but it only gives names and times of commenters.... thought there was some kind of pgn-view board with some annotated moves...
Originally posted by greenpawn34 The top 7 in this debate are usually:
Tarrasch, Rubinstein, Tartakower, Nimzovitch, Bronstien, Keres and Korchnoi.
There's something to be said for Schlechter. After all, Lasker only drew his match against him by... well... either it was pure luck or it was the psychological factor. In any case, Schlechter could and should have won that match, in which case Lasker would have had a job on his plate proving that he was, as he was, the greatest champion of all time.
That said, I personally would put Rubinstein top, but perhaps for sentimental reasons. Poor bastard.
I too am a Keres man. (though a slight nod towards Tarrasch, Rubinstein and Bronstein)
Bronstein had his chance and I guess we will never know what really happened
off the board in that 1951 match.
WWI saw off Rubinstein's chance (AS WWII possibly did the same to Keres.)
Tarrasch had the great misfortune to be born in the same era as Lasker.
Carlsen may appear in future lists if he gives up the game without returning
to the FIDE fold regarding WC qualification.
PS: Keres is the only player to appear on a national currency. The Estonian 5K note.
He also has an Estonian ship named after him. I believe that too is unique.
Originally posted by Shallow Blue There's something to be said for Schlechter. After all, Lasker only drew his match against him by... well... either it was pure luck or it was the psychological factor. In any case, Schlechter could and should have won that match, in which case Lasker would have had a job on his plate proving that he was, as he was, the greatest champion of all time.
...[text shortened]... sonally would put Rubinstein top, but perhaps for sentimental reasons. Poor bastard.
Richard
mentioning Schlecter, you should then mention his modern day equivalent Leko. Similar for many reasons!
But neither are the Stirling Moss of chess, that's for certain
masters of yesterday like Bronstein, Keres, Korchnoi, Larsen spring to my mind
Edit: too early to speak of modern masters not yet to become world champion
Tata Steel Chess Tournament .....
14 Jan '12 22:30
Back to Top