Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Posers and Puzzles

Posers and Puzzles

  1. Standard member Schliemann
    The Diplomat
    27 Oct '02 20:27
    Which WC used to put women's shoes in a circle and dance around

  2. Donation bbarr
    Chief Justice
    27 Oct '02 20:43
    That would be Morphy, the oddball.

  3. Standard member Schliemann
    The Diplomat
    27 Oct '02 20:58
    Correct!! How come you haven't emailed me Bennet??

  4. 27 Oct '02 23:23
    Morphy was never an official WC, although he probably should have
  5. Standard member Schliemann
    The Diplomat
    27 Oct '02 23:28 mistake.

    Speaking of world champions...we all know Rubenstein, Keres,
    Bronstein, and Nimzo should have been...but which Americans also
    earned the right either to play or be WC but never happened??

  6. 27 Oct '02 23:42
  7. 28 Oct '02 01:19
    Marshall and Reshevsky both had shots. Reshevsky's was not at his
    prime and that is worthy of note (he was stronger in the 40s I think).
    Reuben Fine could make a case as he was also strong in the 40s and
    world conditions did not permit. But the secret candidate is - Pal
    Benko. That's right - Pal Benko - who gave up his spot in the
    interzonals to Fischer who actually won the WC. To be fair, I will also
    say that Benko had been in izt's twice before but, of course, that is
    not the point.
  8. Standard member Schliemann
    The Diplomat
    28 Oct '02 01:39
    Well out of the bunch..Pillsbury, Marshall, Reshevsky, Fine, and benko
    I think you are correct.

    Fine and Fischer are the best natural born American players ever...the
    others were good.

    I met Pal Benko in Charlotte Douglas airport one day with his wife...he
    is the nicest "classic" grandmaster I have ever met.

  9. 28 Oct '02 02:04
    Benko has always had the reputation of being a gentleman. BTW,
    Father Lombardy was pretty strong at that particular time as well.
    But who does the US have today as "natural born" Americans who
    could really compete on the international level? Benjamin? Wolff?
    Christiansen? De Firmian?
    [This is said without intended offense to the many naturalized citizens
    of the US of A]
  10. Standard member Schliemann
    The Diplomat
    28 Oct '02 02:26
    You are correct...we have none...Joel who I have also met is no where
    near the strength of the top boys (and gals if you add Judit)

    USA has never taken chess seriously...that is why SAT scores are down
    and our children are on a lower learning level than other countries.

    I could go on for hours about all of this.

    Reuben Fine was actually (besides Bobby) the best "natural born"
    American ever...and he gave it up before his time.

  11. Donation Acolyte
    Now With Added BA
    28 Oct '02 13:38
    "USA has never taken chess seriously...that is why SAT scores are down and our children are
    on a lower learning level than other countries."

    Not entirely sure about this... are you saying that people would write better English (that's
    part of SAT, right? I'm British so I wouldn't know) if only they'd been more strongly
    encouraged to play chess as children?

    The thing about maths and science is they both have a fundamental logic and structure to
    them (maths logic is slightly different to science logic). If you don't grasp this logic, you can
    still do some maths and science, so your lack of understanding can go undiagnosed; but it's a
    constant struggle and you seem to be faced with learning reams of unconnected information.
    So, for example, if someone's having trouble with solving quadratic equations, it could be
    because they haven't learnt how to yet, or, more seriously, because they never really got the
    hang of algebraic manipulation, or, even more seriously, because they didn't realise that
    algebraic manipulation is exactly what they need to do (say if it is disguised in the form of a

    It saddens me that so many people fall off the ladder in these subjects because they missed a
    crucial step, and after that teachers and pupils are only treating the symptoms unless they go
    back to the step that was missed.

    The ability to think logically in the general sense is innate in humans (otherwise we would be
    creatures of instinct alone), but it is something that you need to practise regularly and from
    an early age if you want to be any good at it. This, in my opinion, is the most important
    aspect of education after the social aspect.

    What was I trying to say? Oh yes, chess. I only played chess very occasionally until my last
    few months at school. Would I have been better at maths if I had played more chess? Who
    knows. But my maths ability certainly wasn't dependent on it. I don't think I'm denigrating
    chess by saying that maths is more important.

    Colin (who should be DOING some maths at this point rather than just talking about it.)
  12. Standard member Schliemann
    The Diplomat
    28 Oct '02 13:53
    All I am saying is that chess enhances the mind in the area of
    deductive reasoning...and in turn children who play chess do have
    higher scores in math and science.

    A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

  13. Donation Acolyte
    Now With Added BA
    28 Oct '02 14:44
    Maybe they play chess because they enjoy it... they enjoy chess because they're good at it...
    they're good at it because they are good at the kind of reasoning required. The logic of chess
    is very different to that of maths, so you'll find plenty of strong chess players, and not just
    the highly intuitive ones, who found maths difficult. Some might even be terrible at maths.

    It would also be good if everyone played Go, Contract Bridge, Diplomacy or any of various
    other games considered to be the ultimate battle of wits by their proponents. But I still think
    maths beats all of them. If you get tired of beating everyone at chess, try a maths problem;
    the harder it is, the more you'll learn by doing it.
  14. 28 Oct '02 18:23

    Just wanted to mention, for what it's worth, that there are see, to have
    been adisproportionate number of "classic" GMs that were
    mathematicians or professors. I can't think of any off the top of my
    head, though.
  15. 28 Oct '02 18:48
    Euwe, for instance?