Tuesday, April 22, 2014

How to annotate a chess game, you morons

with International Master Colin Crouch
(renowned author of many Everyman books).

I Gurevich v C Crouch, Hastings 1992/3

You morons aren't going to understand anything about this game.

1. e4 g6

Standing on the shoulders of giants. Though anybody is a giant compared to termites like you.

2. d4 Bg7
3. Nc3 d6
4. Be2

I could try and explain the subtleties of this move-order to you, but why don't you stop wasting my time and look it up instead?

4 ... Nf6
5. Nf3 O-O
6. O-O Bg4
7. h3

A strong player might grasp that this move is not the best. But you do not have the intelligence.

7... Bxf3
8. Bxf3 e5

I suppose I shall have to provide a diagram, though any IM or GM would be able to follow the game without one.

9. dxe5 dxe5
10. Bg5 Qe8

Is Black OK here? Or can White increase his slight edge further?

Why should I tell the likes of you, termite brains?

11. Nd5 Nxd5
12. Qd5 Nc6
13. c3 Kh8

Stronger players than yourselves would grasp Black's idea without needing it explained to them.

14. Rfd1 f6
15. Be3 Rd8
16. Qb3 b6

Can you see how Black is taking over? No, of course you can't, since you are idiots with no understanding of what's happening on this board or any other.

17. Qc4 Rf7

Must I really explain the strength of this manoeuvre? Can you not work it out for yourselves, peabrains?

18. b4 Rfd7

Can you see it now? Black is taking over. If 19. Qxc6 then Black takes twice on d1 and wins the queen. If you didn't see this, isn't that because you're morons?

Enough. What kind of gradings do you people have anyway?

You can work out the rest yourselves. Good bye, clowns!

19. Rxd7 1-0


John Cox said...

You've lost me, Justin. Is this some sort of parody of CC's style? If so, it's prevalent in some book of his I haven't read (quite possible, to be sure).

Jonathan B said...

For example

ejh said...

Or click on the big blue bits at the top of the posting

Tom Chivers said...

We really need to produce a user's guide to the internet for chess players.

Anonymous said...

Nice one. I don't know what astonished me more - the original exchange on the EC Forum (which I hadn't seen until I clicked your hyper-link), or the virtual absence of any reaction. I feel Geoffrey's treatment was rather harsh.


Anonymous said...

The irony of Crouch's haughty attitude is that his 2009 book Modern Chess Move by Move is virtually unreadable, even if you're above his hallowed rating threshold. It seemed the writer could not tell the difference between squares, so it will often say in the analysis Nc4, when it means Nb4 etc. When the wrongly notated move is legal( eg a rook move) no chance of picking it up.

Jonathan B said...

Could that be printing and proof reading failures Anonymous? Not really the author’s fault, if so.

As for the absence of reaction on the EC Forum - I think that might have been because it wasn’t a surprise.

Anonymous said...

"Could that be printing and proof reading failures Anonymous? Not really the author’s fault, if so."

This is quite likely. That way a lot of mistakes and plagiarism is also introduced into Keene's books/articles.

W. S. Church-Hill

Jonathan B said...

What nonsense Mr Madeup Name.

ejh said...

(Anybody looking on the post for comments they made last night may have accidentally posted them to the wrong piece. As we do not have the facility to transfer them, you'll have to try again.)