They've turned out to be a bit hawkish on Libya, though--perhaps what looked like wimpiness was that they simply wished to make a solid foundation on which to build d5 and especially c5.
The French are wimps.
Sort:
I'd go with Kasparov's view on chess over yours, actually.
uhohspaghettio wrote:
As ridiculous as this topic is, I actually saw Kasparov saying something similar in his book "Revolution in the 70s".
He said something about how the chess style reflected the public values and ideals at the time. What a load of nonsense.... they played a lot more gambits at first because their standard of playing wasn't as good and they didn't know much about defending or development. Then they found out a lot of these gambits really didn't work with proper defence. It had nothing to do with society.
WELL SAID !! The french defence is as formitable as any other !!
mateologist wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
As ridiculous as this topic is, I actually saw Kasparov saying something similar in his book "Revolution in the 70s".
He said something about how the chess style reflected the public values and ideals at the time. What a load of nonsense.... they played a lot more gambits at first because their standard of playing wasn't as good and they didn't know much about defending or development. Then they found out a lot of these gambits really didn't work with proper defence. It had nothing to do with society.
WELL SAID !! The french defence is as formitable as any other !!
I just found e6 funny.
Mar 18, 2011
0
#6
Hailie-Jade wrote:
I'd go with Kasparov's view on chess over yours, actually.
Actually that was kasparov's view of sociology.
i will not listen to Kasparov till he shaves his arms and offers me a rematch
Here_Is_Plenty wrote:
i will not listen to Kasparov till he shaves his arms and offers me a rematch
Bobby? Is that you?
As is evident of their e6 reply.