Next Question..

Which WC used to put women's shoes in a circle and dance around
them??

Dave

That would be Morphy, the oddball.

Correct!! How come you haven't emailed me Bennet??

Dave

Morphy was never an official WC, although he probably should have
been...

True...my 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??

Dave

Reshevsky?

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. 🙂
-ww-

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.

Dave

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]
-ww-

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.

Dave

"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
formula).

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.)

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.

Dave

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.

Colin,

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.

Euwe, for instance?