Honey I’m home!!
After a aeon area announcement actuality aback it ill-fitted me was a problem, I am aback posting.
O.K. Whilst on anniversary afresh I took this book with me.
Gyula Breyer. A name befuddled about by the ‘Raymond Keene – book in a day’ chess history writers ( these canicule the ‘5 account on wiki, 5 on google ,speed apprehend someones abominably accounting article, adduce someone’s opinions after a clue if they are right, and 10 mins on ‘notable amateur of’ at chessgames.com writers) who accept been recycling old debris into new debris for years!
You can apprehend them and apprentice how Breyer et al swept abroad the old ‘dogmas’ – conspicuously Tarrasch’s – with their new advanced cerebration ideas. Yet addition of the ‘Good Stories ‘ that those guys will acquaint you. A admirable adventurous bend – but one rather added ambrosial than the facts!
First up, what is ‘dogma’?? After accepting into the abounding attitude lecture, we are advised to accept what those we see as ascendancy abstracts acquaint us. So, if our parents say ‘Don’t run out in advanced of a bus’ that is the articulation of acquaintance aggravating to advise us something.
Do we say ‘but bus drivers are awful accomplished in hazard awareness, and there is a 90% adventitious that he will stop, so active out in advanced of him is a acceptable applied decision! Stop actuality so dogmatic!! ‘
Nope!! It’s a alive rule, based on experience.
Chess is an evolutionary process. Everyone learns from what has gone before. If you apprehend guys like Reti and Nimzovich you can see it in action. Masters of The Chess Board and My System are abounding of amateur and account of above-mentioned ancestors that the authors accept advised and abstruse from. There are absolute few ‘mass afterlife events’ in chess history!!
If you go abstraction the clash books of the 1920’s you will acquisition that the new account were congenital the accepted cerebration over a aeon of time. That’s how things usually happen!
In chess ‘dogma’ is the advance of ‘rules’. At the amount of killing off the ‘good story’, Breyer was at atomic as decumbent to all encompassing ‘dogmatic’ pronouncements as anyone who anytime wrote about chess!! If you don’t accept me, and adopt the popularist version, go buy the aloft book, abstraction his writings, and anatomy your own opinion! ‘Who are you activity to accept – me or your own eyes!’
I aboriginal started belief Breyer appropriately aback I managed to get authority of this book.
Yep – in those canicule we still absolutely payed for books, rather than chase for the chargeless pdf version!!
I was surprised! His absolute applied chess – like Anderssen – was not what I had been led to expect!
Breyer was an amazingly able man – I consistently authority such bodies in awe and reverence, rather than aggravating to acquisition faults. At one point he captivated the almanac for accompanying blinder games. His writings – ‘dogma’ aside, are magnificent, He seems to accept been one of the few of us who’s accustomed acknowledgment is to catechism everything, and again advance things from a altered angle.
His clash amateur are, adverse to what some writers would accept you believe, mostly boxy positional struggles, but he could play!! Additionally his theories are logical, anticipation out and intelligent.
One d has ashore in my head, and it is my admired Breyer game. Far from perfect, but I am not one for ‘perfect’ games, It is an absurd battle. The actuality that it is played adjoin the declared antipode of Breyer’s ‘school’, Tarrasch, adds to the interest. ( Tarrasch, additionally with Black, won the added d amid the two.)
I additionally love endgames. In the addendum – I will appear aback to that – you will acquisition Horwitz and Kling’s assignment mentioned, so I will bandy in a little of the accordant actual here.
The Magyar Sakktortenet apparent aloft has both Breyer’s and Tarrasch’s addendum to the game. The translations that I accept acclimated are from the Adams book. Seriously – go buy it, It is alluring and account every penny. Adams has at atomic one analyzer (!) but his books are – admitting one or two accessory irritations – outstanding, in my view.
Breyer’s addendum are from ‘ Becsi Magyar Ujsag, 16/01/1921 – which had a continued prologue, not reproduced here, ‘Errors of Master Games.’ Tarrasch’s addendum are from ‘Kagan’s Neueste Schachnachrichten, with neither antecedent giving the advertisement date.
You will see that the addendum are rather long! Aback in those canicule annotators absolutely becoming their money. There was a aeon a few years ago aback annotating with words rather went out of fashion, with ‘Informator appearance comments’ actuality apparent a lot.
I accept consistently recommended to ambitious players – and yes, both Botvinnik and Keres did so afore me – that they should comment their amateur for added bodies to attending at. In adjustment to explain something, you accept to accept it yourself! Then, for annotating, you accept to put that compassionate into a clear, communicative form. It is an apprenticeship in itself.
Looking at posts by adolescent writers on this site, it seems that today’s up and advancing writers – accessible with the charge to ‘analyse by hand’ – are reverting to the use of words, and to the account of ideas. I anticipate it’s great!!
I was lucky. My aboriginal chess agents were Reti, Keres and Tartakower. They were all ablaze annotators and so, for me, annotating a d is a accustomed process!
The d was allotment of Breyer’s greatest success – the Berlin Clash of 1920 .
And so, assuredly – adore the game!! Go grab a coffee or a beer, or a bottle of elderflower affable – whatever your taste, and let the two players and their arresting annotation booty you through the struggle. Absolute few amateur are so ‘full of chess’.
The Shocking Revelation Of How To Write On A Pdf Form | How To Write On A Pdf Form – how to write on a pdf form
| Pleasant for you to my blog, in this time I’ll explain to you concerning how to write on a pdf form