25 Oct 07
Originally posted by Sam The ShamIt wouldn't surprise me if obtaining a copy would prove difficult. From the review, I'd guess that most copies were mercifully tossed in the trash or the nearest fireplace. 😵
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/worst.html
Sounds like it might be worth buying as a joke for someone at the club, brag it up and see what they say about it the next week. If they come back and say it was good, you know they failed the personality test.
26 Oct 07
1 edit
I recently bought a contender for the worst chess book ever from eBay - "Chess and how to play it" by B. Scriven.
Edward Winter mentions it here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter10.html
and here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter19.html
B. Scriven’s Chess and How to Play It, an egregious 1930s book which described the Anderssen-Kieseritzky Immortal Game as ‘a recent County Championship game’
Here, for instance, are two ‘rules’ from page 48:
‘If the king is checked, but “check” is not announced, the owner of the king need not attend to it. Though there is no rule on the subject, it is usual to announce “check” when the queen is affected.
If “check” is announced and the owner of the king proceeds to move the king, then realizes that there was no “check” he may take back the move. The same applies if any other piece is moved for the purpose.’
Page 62 has a game which ‘offers many features of special interest’ (such as the author’s presentation of an imaginary mate)
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by Fat Ladyplease, spare me how much money you wasted on that rubbish!
I recently bought a contender for the worst chess book ever from eBay - "Chess and how to play it" by B. Scriven.
Edward Winter mentions it here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter10.html
and here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter19.html
B. Scriven’s Chess and How to Play It, an egregious 1930s book which described the Anders ...[text shortened]... atures of special interest’ (such as the author’s presentation of an imaginary mate)
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by Fat LadyWOW. Sounds like a hysterical read. Any other tid-bits?
I recently bought a contender for the worst chess book ever from eBay - "Chess and how to play it" by B. Scriven.
Edward Winter mentions it here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter10.html
and here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter19.html
B. Scriven’s Chess and How to Play It, an egregious 1930s book which described the Anders ...[text shortened]... atures of special interest’ (such as the author’s presentation of an imaginary mate)
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by Sam The ShamThat is dire and Fat Ladys suggestion isn't much better.
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/worst.html
Sounds like it might be worth buying as a joke for someone at the club, brag it up and see what they say about it the next week. If they come back and say it was good, you know they failed the personality test.
No wonder we get some stupid ideas in the forums.
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by Fat LadyDare I ask why you purchased the book and and whether it was good value for money?
I recently bought a contender for the worst chess book ever from eBay - "Chess and how to play it" by B. Scriven.
Edward Winter mentions it here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter10.html
and here: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/winter19.html
B. Scriven’s Chess and How to Play It, an egregious 1930s book which described the Anders ...[text shortened]... atures of special interest’ (such as the author’s presentation of an imaginary mate)
I've bought a few turkeys over the years. These were opening books in dodgy lines (Sokolsky and St George), so whereas they may not be inherently bad chess books they served me no purpose as the topic was already dodgy (my own stupid fault!).
26 Oct 07
The most pointless book I own is called The Blackburne-Hartlaub Gambit by Claude Bloodgood.
The gambit is:
1.d4...e5
2.dxe5...d6!?
(!? is Bloodgood's own notation)
It has extensive analysis of practically every promising line for black. Unfortunately, white's strongest response; 3.e4 is given 2 whole pages of analysis based on either 3...dxe5, 4.Nc3 or 4.Qd4 and 3...Nd7.
Trouble is, after:
1.d4...e5
2.dxe5...d6!?
3.e4...dxe5
White has
4.Qxd8!...Kxd8
5.Nf3
and black has zero compensation.
black to move
What a waste of £10
:'(
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by SquelchbelchClaude Bloodgood writes interesting books. My favorite is "The Tactical Grob" which is worth getting if you fancy unsound lines.
The most pointless book I own is called The Blackburne-Hartlaub Gambit by Claude Bloodgood.
The gambit is:
[b]1.d4...e5
2.dxe5...d6!?
(!? is Bloodgood's own notation)
It has extensive analysis of practically every promising line for black. Unfortunately, white's strongest response; 3.e4 is given 2 whole pages of analysis based o ...[text shortened]... ]rnbk1bnr/ppp2ppp/8/4p3/4P3/5N2/PPP2PPP/RNB1KB1R b KQ - 0 5[/fen]
What a waste of £10
:'([/b]
I wouldn't play the line in the book you mention but after the exchange of Queens hasn't black achieved equality which is all he really wants from the opening, therefore the line is presumably OK.
26 Oct 07
4 edits
Originally posted by Dragon FireEquality in material, yes.
Claude Bloodgood writes interesting books. My favorite is "The Tactical Grob" which is worth getting if you fancy unsound lines.
I wouldn't play the line in the book you mention but after the exchange of Queens hasn't black achieved equality which is all he really wants from the opening, therefore the line is presumably OK.
But not in positional terms in my opinion, unless you fancy having your K in the middle shouting "I'm here! I'm here!" for most if not all the game.
As a for instance:
5...Nc6
6.Bc4...f6
7.0-0 is a 14-1 white-wash (pun intended) on chesslive.de
black to move
It's the blatant bias for lines that involve white playing sub-standard responses that made me regret getting the book.
130 pages of analysis & the strongest response gets 2 pages & the warning lights are going off.
The best openings books have strong defenses given to the gambit lines - here you could mistakenly believe that the Blackburne-Hartlaub gambit actually has good compensation for black in most lines.
The only possible use for the book (& the gambit) is as an occaisional blitz weapon where you pray white misses the 3.e4 line above.
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by Dragon FireInteresting story behind Mr Bloodgood:
Claude Bloodgood writes interesting books. My favorite is "The Tactical Grob" which is worth getting if you fancy unsound lines.
I wouldn't play the line in the book you mention but after the exchange of Queens hasn't black achieved equality which is all he really wants from the opening, therefore the line is presumably OK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Bloodgood
26 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by tapestryHe certainly was an interesting character. The story about how he inflated his own rating is not how I understood it - I thought he told the USCF about the inherent problems with running tournaments in a "closed" system, i.e. that the estimated ratings given to complete beginners would cause rating inflation for the stronger players, but that they did nothing about it.
Interesting story behind Mr Bloodgood:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Bloodgood
Edit. I found my source:
http://www.chessville.com/misc/History/PastPawns/LifeandLegendofClaudeFBloodgood.htm
http://www.chessville.com/misc/History/PastPawns/LifeandLegendofClaudeFBloodgoodII.htm
http://www.chessville.com/misc/History/PastPawns/LifeandLegendofClaudeFBloodgoodIII.htm
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by SquelchbelchWhy is that a waste?
The most pointless book I own is called The Blackburne-Hartlaub Gambit by Claude Bloodgood.
The gambit is:
[b]1.d4...e5
2.dxe5...d6!?
(!? is Bloodgood's own notation)
It has extensive analysis of practically every promising line for black. Unfortunately, white's strongest response; 3.e4 is given 2 whole pages of analysis based o ...[text shortened]... ]rnbk1bnr/ppp2ppp/8/4p3/4P3/5N2/PPP2PPP/RNB1KB1R b KQ - 0 5[/fen]
What a waste of £10
:'([/b]
It looks like an automatic draw for black after Nc6! (the ! is punctuation, not notation) GMs would love an automatic draw other than Petroff's Defence.
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by Squelchbelchwith queens off the board, it's not so horrible that the king's in the centre.
Equality in material, yes.
But not in positional terms in my opinion, unless you fancy having your K in the middle shouting "I'm here! I'm here!" for most if not all the game.
As a for instance:
[b]5...Nc6
6.Bc4...f6
7.0-0 is a 14-1 white-wash (pun intended) on chesslive.de
black to move
[fen]r1bk1bnr/ppp3pp/2n2p2/4p3/2B1P3/5N2/PPP2PPP/RNB2RK1 b - - 0 7[/fen]
[/b]