tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post5612087106009734198..comments2023-12-28T02:11:22.501+00:00Comments on The Streatham & Brixton Chess Blog: Nigel Davies emailsTom Chivershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09850710685193416732noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-49386638655928265782008-06-05T03:19:00.000+01:002008-06-05T03:19:00.000+01:00Your Untamed Chigorin video was very good. Conside...Your Untamed Chigorin video was very good. Consider remaking it into a Chessbase DVD. Breutigam has a database on it already, and you could use some of the games to help bolster the adventurous and attacking ideas. I'm always anonymous on internet, so I don't expect an answer. Cheers!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-81557493292903004442008-05-14T22:17:00.000+01:002008-05-14T22:17:00.000+01:00Gentleman, you're going to have to excuse me now. ...Gentleman, you're going to have to excuse me now. We've probably reached the point of diminishing returns with this discussion and I should really devote my energies to my next book ;). Thankyou and goodnight.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-79106455685108154142008-05-14T21:41:00.000+01:002008-05-14T21:41:00.000+01:00I also have a copy of the book: one of five I own ...I also have a copy of the book: one of five I own on the Reti. For my money it ranks third of the five. (Better than Schiller - though what is not? - and Smith & Hall, not as good as Osnos or Dunnington.)ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-18319203024535110992008-05-14T20:41:00.000+01:002008-05-14T20:41:00.000+01:00Given that my Reti book has been generally well re...<I>Given that my Reti book has been generally well received would it really stick in your collective throats to say some things that are good about it? The best I saw was a grudging admission that maybe it wasn't the worst of its kind ....</I><BR/><BR/>I don't recall saying it wasn't the worst of it's kind - but I'm happy to confirm that it isn't.<BR/><BR/>No "grudging admission" from me either. I've made the point I'm about to make a couple of times before but I'll say it again as it seems to have been missed so far ...<BR/><BR/>My copy of the dynamic reti is very beaten up and dog eared. I saw a new copy for sale on the 4NCL book stall a month or two back and I couldn't believe how prestine it looked.<BR/><BR/>My copy looks a mess because it gets a lot of use. Compare this to the books I took to the BCM shop recently that look virtually new even though I've had them for years. They looked like this because they'd barely been opened.<BR/><BR/>None of this means I regret anything I've written about your book. None of this means I've changed my belief in that it could have been better.<BR/><BR/>In short, I'm writing about your book because there's much of it that's worth writing about.<BR/><BR/><BR/>As for this conspiracy stuff - truthfully you're really barking up the wrong tree. We disagree with each other a lot. I don't even agree with me much of the time.<BR/><BR/>This blog works, I think, because we allow ourselves to let each other get on with what we want to. No common voice - a plurality of views.<BR/><BR/>I must admit, though, I do like your Red Star Streatham label. We're not too far from Tooting either. Perhaps we should reform the Popular Front.<BR/><BR/>One more thing:-<BR/><BR/><I>Your site policy (as with so many similar sites) is probably what's led to this problem.</I><BR/><BR/>Perhaps not - given the person who wrote the original comment did so under their full name.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Anyway, once again, there is much I've said that's positive about your book (on here and elsewhere) and I'll continue to do so. That doesn't mean I'll stop pointing out the flaws (as I see them at least).Jonathan Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00293162543015231439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-27560471777078819642008-05-14T20:09:00.000+01:002008-05-14T20:09:00.000+01:00This is great, probably the most amusing set of co...This is great, probably the most amusing set of comments in a chess blog all year. In my couple of years playing chess I've noticed that in general the better the player, the bigger the ego. So am not surprised how over the top it has become, you're all commies out to get me, lol.Deanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00064456418674282162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-21117774806924118632008-05-14T18:58:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:58:00.000+01:00Try not to rave, Nigel.Now, as it happens, I expec...Try not to rave, Nigel.<BR/><BR/>Now, as it happens, I expect that people probably do have higher expectations of things they pay for than things they don't: but I don't think errors on this site are OK, nor have I said that I did. You're inventing arguments and motives all over the shop: you're not, I'm afraid, giving a very good account of yourself.<BR/><BR/>You say:<BR/><BR/><I>Books with a smaller audience are NECESSARILY going to carry more errors</I><BR/><BR/>Well, not necessarily. They run a greater risk, and yet it's curious how some publishing houses and some authors do much better than others. Could this be because they have higher standards and that they expect better of themselves?ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-80475736463624567022008-05-14T18:49:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:49:00.000+01:00EJH,I'm aware of your political leanings, but have...EJH,<BR/><BR/>I'm aware of your political leanings, but have you also considered the role that the market plays in book production? Books with a smaller audience are NECESSARILY going to carry more errors because of the same problems you mention with the site, ie they can't AFFORD to spend the time and money on being perfect.<BR/><BR/>Of course you are very forgiving when this concerns YOU, not at all so with openings books. The standards you appear to insist on would mean these books would not appear if they were somehow enforced. But there is a demand for them, warts and all.<BR/><BR/>Of course it makes me wonder why you seem able to ignore the double standard. I guess it must be your political leanings, this site is 'not for profit', huh whereas with stuff people pay for the greedy capitalists get richer?<BR/><BR/>At least this scotches the claim of political neutrality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-30619411420391336122008-05-14T18:40:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:40:00.000+01:00Look, not only can I not spell, I am only five foo...Look, not only can I not spell, I am only five foot four,bald, a lousey chess player and I cannot write a compound complex sentence. <BR/><BR/>I do however have a choice of several cars and would be very willing to convey johnathan b to Dover. Email me at thoughtport@yahoo.co.uk and I will sort a lift for you.<BR/><BR/>A report back to the blog from Dover on the day would be most welcome.<BR/><BR/>David Bentley.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-18556997027885108182008-05-14T18:37:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:37:00.000+01:00I was, in fact, going to do a post on this later i...I was, in fact, going to do a post on this later in the week, but I think I've said most of what I wished to say in this thread, so I'll write something else instead.<BR/><BR/>But one thing I wanted to say that I've <I>not</I> said yet is this: that no really good book, of any type in any field, was ever written by anybody who wasn't <I>trying</I> to write one. The answer to "will this do?" is always "no it won't".<BR/><BR/><I>Of course</I> one recognises that there are many different sorts of book, which serve different purposes and suit different audiences: yet nevertheless, unless there is a genuine and conscious pursuit of excellence, then what we will have instead is mediocrity and corner-cutting of various kinds. A grudging, let alone a hypersensitive attitude to criticism, will take the writer in the opposition direction to that pursuit of excellence.<BR/><BR/>There are some really good and instructive openings books: I think they're written under the same conditions as the ones (a far greater number) that just aren't good enough. They're read by the same audience and reviewed by the same people. But they're written by people who won't accept second best from themselves. Not because of anything that some blog thinks, or some magazine: but because of what <I>they</I> think about themselves.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-21893468599898127472008-05-14T18:35:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:35:00.000+01:00No, we're very glad when people point out errors: ...No, we're very glad when people point out errors: it enables us to put them right. Unfortunately, being an amateur blog, we can't afford copy-editors. The puzzling thing is that some professional publishing houses don't appear to be able to afford them either.<BR/><BR/>The books I wrote are anything but flawless: no book is, not even <I>Crime and Punishment</I> or <I>À La Recherche Du Temps Perdu</I>. However, the number and degree of flaws is rather greater in some books than in others. There are rather too many in most chess books for my liking: and yet, there are a few that manage to keep them to a minimum. Which means that more of the others ought to be able to do the same.<BR/><BR/>As for my real name, it is easily traceable: it just requires a little work and research, of the sort that the readers of chess books are enjoined to do by their authors.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-61491799613554000932008-05-14T18:21:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:21:00.000+01:00EJH,Well no doubt you've realised that there are f...EJH,<BR/><BR/>Well no doubt you've realised that there are flaws in every book on every subject once you dig deep enough. Or maybe you don't? This has certainly been my experience, and for me it has been particularly noticeable with chess books. This, btw, may be a function of my expertise rather than the quality of chess books in particular.<BR/><BR/>No doubt the two books you've written are perfect, which must make you the first author in history to be without sin. But this is something we'll never know because you won't provide your name. If you did I'd send a gratis copy to the most pedantic nitpicking bastard I could find and post the results. But it seems that the world must wait for this pleasure. <BR/><BR/>BTW, there are plenty of errors and indeed horrible English throughout this site. But not everyone sees it as being their duty/perverse pleasure from pointing these out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-62417987528133092032008-05-14T18:07:00.000+01:002008-05-14T18:07:00.000+01:00Oh, do me a favour. How many sales do you think yo...Oh, do me a favour. How many sales do you think you've lost as a result of some sceptical pieces about a book published several years ago?<BR/><BR/><I>Given that my Reti book has been generally well received would it really stick in your collective throats to say some things that are good about it? </I><BR/><BR/>Well, firstly, it's no job of a reviewer to say nice or nasty things about a book just because somebody else has. It's their job to say what they see. Secondly, in fact some positive things <I>were</I> said about the book. Thirdly, there's not really any collective throats involved. One of our team wrote these pieces: the others did not.<BR/><BR/>What possibly did happen is that the book was subjected to a degree of scrutiny that most chess books would, in fact, escape: reviews are generally quite superficial, as are the readings which precede them. But these books aren't necessarily <I>used</I> superficially: so perhaps we should pay them rather more attention, and rather more critical attention, than we have tended to do up to now.<BR/><BR/>You're probably not used to that: well, OK. Possibly you experience it as a process of nitpicking: that's your privilege. I've written books and I know that nobody likes an unfavourable review. And there's always <I>something</I> unfair in an unfavourable review.<BR/><BR/>But I think that the main outcome of such a process, <I>although there may be small unfairnesses involved</I> is that these books will improve in quality because they will be required to undergo more rigorous examination. It may well be that what has been accepted until today will no longer be accepted from tomorrow.<BR/><BR/>What will then happen is that people who write chess books will have to decide whether they want to write with greater rigour, or whether they want to do something else. And possibly, at the same time, readers will learn that if they <I>really</I> want to learn, then any book is only a starting point. But I reckon a better book would be a better starting point.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-3403622669394463032008-05-14T17:41:00.000+01:002008-05-14T17:41:00.000+01:00Tom, you're not a hatcheteer. And unless your real...Tom, you're not a hatcheteer. And unless your real name is in fact Theobold Chivornosep it seems you've used your real name throughout. I like and respect that.<BR/><BR/>EJH & others - you're clearly high enough rated to get something from these books and there's no problem with having informed market participants. But there's an issue of fairness here, especially when one doesn't provide one's real name.<BR/><BR/>Given that my Reti book has been generally well received would it really stick in your collective throats to say some things that are good about it? The best I saw was a grudging admission that maybe it wasn't the worst of its kind and that this wasn't necessarily a recommendation not to buy it. This was hidden amidst the accusations of plaigarism etc.<BR/><BR/>It looked to me like you were being nasty for the sake of it or perhaps for your own pseudonymic glory. Building your blog on the starved corpses of the poor authors etc etc etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-75520340150934064732008-05-14T16:15:00.000+01:002008-05-14T16:15:00.000+01:00Well, it's some years since I read Anna Karenina, ...Well, it's some years since I read <I>Anna Karenina</I>, but in fact I've said nothing, here or in any other place, to suggest that I think an opening guide should be of that weight (in any sense). I do however think that some books of this kind are - as is the case in any field - very much better than others, and it is therefore both worth saying so and exploring the reasons why.<BR/><BR/>Very clearly the market will ultimately decide, but it is my view that well-informed markets work better and have higher standards than poorly-informed ones, and therefore a more rigorous and demanding approach from reviewers can only be to the market's benefit. At the end of the day, if book-buyers think my standards (or indeed, the standards of the person who actually wrote the original piece) are too high then they will make decisions based on that outlook.<BR/><BR/>For what it is worth I think my current Elo grade is about 2163, though as I review all sorts of chess books (and did not review <I>The Dynamic Reti</I>) then the relevance of this largely escapes me.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-42152300085547889002008-05-14T16:12:00.000+01:002008-05-14T16:12:00.000+01:00Coincidentally, I'm currently reading "War and Pea...Coincidentally, I'm currently reading "War and Peace" in the new translation by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, if I've understood everything posted so far correctly, I don't believe that Nigel you consider me a 'hatcheteer'? Nonetheless fwiw I am 163 ECF although this is slightly misleading - I've had a good season and next year will be 185 or thereabouts.Tom Chivershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09850710685193416732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-64005965044936295672008-05-14T15:48:00.000+01:002008-05-14T15:48:00.000+01:00EJHAs we are 'talking' (despite my better judgemen...EJH<BR/><BR/>As we are 'talking' (despite my better judgement), perhaps you might divulge your grade and those of your co-hatcheteers?<BR/><BR/>One thing I will say is that opening books might not be particularly suitable for any of you, and you might be better off with something more basic. Certainly there seems to be a serious misunderstanding about how they should be used.<BR/><BR/>Despite being a many time author of these books I don't particularly like the genre, but they do serve a clear purpose for players of a certain level and above. If you read my Chess Cafe articles you'll see that I actually downplay the importance of the opening, especially for weaker players.<BR/><BR/>Openings books are basically learning aids rather than any kind of 'literature', and the decision to buy one of them is made on whether or not a player judges them to be useful enough to offset the price. This is, of course, a personal decision and the market will decide what 'deserves' to exist.<BR/><BR/>This, then, is the first problem with your hatcheteering. For whatever reason you seem to want to compare openings books to the collected works of Tolstoy. In fact they're more a kind of lightweight study aid produced at a particular price for a highly specialised audience.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-36942208787570772902008-05-14T15:13:00.000+01:002008-05-14T15:13:00.000+01:00Actually I was also thinking of the missing apostr...Actually I was also thinking of the missing apostrophe. But he doesn't seem to have been too oppressed by the experience.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-69990762989596654012008-05-14T15:09:00.000+01:002008-05-14T15:09:00.000+01:00Just as I thought I was getting to the truth.Poor ...Just as I thought I was getting to the truth.<BR/><BR/>Poor David Bentley, spelling 'Dover Grammar School' wrong. You soon put him in his place (number 7).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-20026526386170169922008-05-14T15:02:00.000+01:002008-05-14T15:02:00.000+01:00Talking of "direct pressure of dissenters", Nigel,...Talking of "direct pressure of dissenters", Nigel, I think we may need to ask you to keep a little closer on-topic. If you would be so kind.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-86741380455832043052008-05-14T14:56:00.000+01:002008-05-14T14:56:00.000+01:00To stary ... I mean stray even further off topic, ...To stary ... I mean stray even further off topic, here are Irving Janis's symptoms of "groupthink":<BR/><BR/>1. The illusion of invulnerability.<BR/>2. Belief in the inherent morality of the group.<BR/>3. Collective rationalization.<BR/>4. Outgroup stereotypes.<BR/>5. Self-censorship.<BR/>6. The illuision of unanimity.<BR/>7. Direct pressure on dissenters.<BR/>8. Self-appointed mindguards.<BR/><BR/>Yes, one of the nitpicking bastards spelt 'straying' wrong in a post just above.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-56743445396158548072008-05-14T14:32:00.000+01:002008-05-14T14:32:00.000+01:00...and we'd have got away with it if it weren't fo......and we'd have got away with it if it weren't for you meddling GMs...ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-39615857978408375282008-05-14T14:18:00.000+01:002008-05-14T14:18:00.000+01:00This doesn't rule out the possibility that 'ejh' a...This doesn't rule out the possibility that 'ejh' and friends are running their own little crusade.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-59579462326870833592008-05-14T14:17:00.000+01:002008-05-14T14:17:00.000+01:00I think you may be starying a little far off-topic...I think you may be starying a little far off-topic here, Nigel, as well as, perhaps, inventing motives for people because you don't like the ones they have.<BR/><BR/>I'm a writer, Nigel, on a small scale, anyway. I've written a couple of books and I've been written articles for a variety of magazines for a period, on and off, of nearly twenty years: recently these have often been reviews of chess books (indeed, I am some distance late for a deadline for several reviews - apologies to my editor, should he be reading). I also possess a reasonably large library, both chess books and others. I am additionally a qualified librarian and a bookseller: I therefore have an interest in books of various kinds.<BR/><BR/>I believe that the standard of chess books is insufficiently high - by quite some way - and that this is unlikely to be remedied unless the public is more demanding than it is now. If this occurs, then hopefully those authors who wish to raise their game will be rewarded for doing so. Those authors who produce less impressive work, and who resent being told that this is so, will probably not.<BR/><BR/>I would hope that wrters will aim for a higher standard of accuracy than is evident from Nigel's last-but-one posting, in which, apart from some degree of political paranoia, he claims I have an alias that I plainly do not, and he claims that I selected his book to criticise, when I was not, in fact, the author of the original piece.ejhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582272075999298935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-18652093964590528072008-05-14T14:10:00.000+01:002008-05-14T14:10:00.000+01:00Nigel ~ I'm sure ejh will correct me if I'm wrong,...Nigel ~ I'm sure ejh will correct me if I'm wrong, but Leninology is a site run by Richard Seymour who posts under the alias Lenin, and ejh is an occasional poster there who posts as ejh there, and not as you wrote as Lenin, who is somebody else.<BR/><BR/>The club and the blog are politically neutral, and this is not a place for political discussion; it's a chess blog. This does not that mean that members of the club or writers for the blog are not politically involved elsewhere, though.Tom Chivershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09850710685193416732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-19969296559538422362008-05-14T14:05:00.000+01:002008-05-14T14:05:00.000+01:00"ejh does not go by the name lenin elsewhere on th..."ejh does not go by the name lenin elsewhere on the internet"<BR/><BR/>Yeah right, politically neutral. Under his profile his blogs include 'Lenin's Tomb'. You can find it here.<BR/><BR/>http://snipurl.com/28sox [www_blogger_com] <BR/><BR/>http://leninology.blogspot.com/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com