Rape Charges Against Chess Teacher

 

First is was Robert M. Snyder and now it's a guy in Columbus, Ohio. According to the Columbus Dispatch a 61-year old chess coach was charged with rape and gross sexual imposition when a 4-year-old girl told her father that the suspect had touched her improperly on April 7 at her Lewis Center preschool. The perpetrator taught chess in an after-school enrichment program and contracted directly with parents. The president of Prep Academy issued a statement saying, “A thorough background check on the accused individual found no cause for concern.”

Protect Your Child From a Predator
How to Protect Your Child From Predators
Understanding and Protecting Your Children From Child Molesters and Predators (an 11-page PDF booklet)
WikiHow Article: How to Identify a Pedophile

Here are some helpful books:

Pissants Who Refuse To Resign

 

     Pissant - slang for an insignificant or contemptible person or thing. Yesterday I was whiling away some time playing online and was mildly annoyed to have met a couple of opponents who refused to resign dead lost positions and two who simply abandoned the game. 

     I really don't understand this, but guess some people won't resign because they don't like losing and/or they have extremely fragile egos and prefer this childish behavior to manning up and admitting defeat. 

     Then last night I witnessed on television the appalling display by our president and his followers and wondered how to explain their behavior. 

     At some point we decided to drive over to the Arby's drive-thru to pick up a couple of salads. On the way home we decided we should have picked up a couple of soft drinks and so stopped at a beverage drive-thru. 

     There was a tow tuck sitting in the lane with its lights flashing and it was blocking the exit. We witnessed a screaming, vulgar name calling confrontation between the white tow truck drive and a black customer in which they were threatening to kill each other. We could not leave because we were blocked in by cars arriving behind us. 

     When the black guy finally got in his car and backed out, the tow truck driver was screaming at others whose cars were blocked not to let the guy leave. Fortunately, when the black guy left it unblocked things and made it possible for several cars to back out because the tow truck was still blocking the exit. 

     As we were all leaving the tow truck driver stood in the parking lot and in a fit of rage continued screaming at everyone. It reminded us of the behavior of the people that we saw on television. 

     It also reminded us of what the Apostle Paul wrote in the Bible in Second Timothy when he said, "...men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, without love of good...traitorous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure..." Even if you are not a believer, that description pretty much describes what we are seeing. 

     It seems that some people, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, will, no matter what the cost, go to any lengths to protect their beliefs and self-image. 

     It is called grandiose narcissism when feelings of superiority or dominance struggle to accept or even comprehend defeat. Apparently that is something many people cannot do. For such people defeat threatens their inflated self-worth and they avoid personal responsibility by attributing their defeats to other people's shortcomings.  

     In the 1950s, psychologist Leon Festinger published When Prophecy Fails in which he documented the actions of a cult called The Seekers who believed in an imminent apocalypse on a set date. 

     When the apocalypse did not occur, The Seekers did not question their beliefs, but provided alternative explanations. Festinger called this cognitive dissonance. Simply put, cognitive dissonance is a discrepancy between what a person believes and what actually happens. 

     People suffering from cognitive dissonance often reduce their distress by doubling down on their beliefs and denying evidence in order to protect their self-image. Their reluctance to admit defeat, even when all is hopelessly lost, may simply be because they are unable to accept that they have lost. In fact, some are incapable of even comprehending it! 

     There is evidence to suggest there are two main forms of narcissism: grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism. The latter is characterized by neuroticism, feelings of shame and introversion. 

     Grandiose narcissism is characterized by denial of defeat. These people are likely to exhibit grandiosity, aggression and dominance over others. 

     According to researchers from Pennsylvania State University, this type of narcissism is associated with overt self-enhancement, denial of weaknesses, intimidating demands of entitlement and devaluation of people that threaten their self-esteem. Such people are described as having high self-esteem and inflated self-worth, competitive, dominant and having an inflated self-image regarding their skills, abilities and attributes. Defeat deflates their self-worth. 

     Instead of accepting personal responsibility for defeat these people blame others because they cannot recognize or acknowledge that they are at fault for their own failure. Their denial of weaknesses and devaluation of others results in a lack of comprehension that it’s even possible for them to lose. 

     The simple fact is that when something happens that goes against their beliefs, some people reduce the mental distress by any means possible. Further, researchers in Australia found that refusing to apologize after doing something wrong allowed the perpetrator to keep their self-esteem intact. 

     Regarding Donald Trump, one researcher stated that if his denial of the election loss is a product of grandiose narcissism and cognitive dissonance, don’t hold your breath waiting for an apology or a graceful concession speech. 

    Likewise, if you are beating somebody in an online game and they happen to be suffering from grandiose narcissism and cognitive dissonance don't expect them to resign and don't be surprised if just for spite they sneak off into cyberspace and make you wait for their time to expire.

Jeremy Silman Explains An Intriguing Game

     My copy of Jeremy Silman's How To Reassess You Chess was purchased when it came out in 1993. That was back when malls had bookstores and one of the stores I frequented actually had a nice supply of chess books. Unfortunately Silman's widely acclaimed book came out too late to do me any good because by the time it appeared I was an old dog and was not interested in learning any new tricks. 

     While thumbing through the book the other day I was intrigued by one of the positions and without Silman's clear explanations a number of his moves are hard to understand. 

     Let's take a look at the game which appeared in the chapter on preventing counterplay. Silman's opponent was National Master Zaki Harari and the game was played in a tournament in memory of Charles Bagby (1903-1973). 

 

     Bagby, a native of Charleston, South Carolina, was a San Francisco lawyer and National Master whose victories included the Mechanics' Institute Chess Club championship in 1923, the Northern California Championship in 1949 and 1950 and the California championship in 1958. A member of the Mechanics’ Institute since 1938, he was elected to the Board of Trustees in 1940, and served longer than any Trustee in the history of the Institute.

Zaki Harari - Jeremy Silman

Result: 0-1

Site: San Francisco

Date: 1976

K-Indian Attack

[...] 1.e4 ♘f6 2.d3 e5 3.♘f3 ♘c6 4.g3 ♗c5 5.♗g2 O-O 6.O-O d5 7.♘bd2

7.exd5 ♘xd5 8.c3 ♗g4 9.h3 ♗h5 10.♘bd2 ♖e8 11.a4 a5 12.♕b3 is equal. Zvjaginsev,V (2662)-Bartel,M (2625)/Moscow 2016

7.♕e2 ♖e8 8.h3 h6 9.♔h2 ♗e6 10.♘bd2 ♕d7 11.♘b3 favors black. Burrows,B (2092)-Costello,A (2163)/Costa Mesa 2017

7...dxe4 Best as now black is slightly better.

7...♖e8 8.exd5 ♘xd5 9.♘e4 ♗f8 10.♗d2 ♗g4 with equality. Brankov,K (1904)-Janev,T (2297)/Plovdiv 2009

8.dxe4 ♗e6 9.c3 Black can meet 9.Ng5 with 9...Bg4 9...a5 10.♕e2 ♘d7 11.♘c4 f6 Silman explains: now that the center is firm he can concentrate on creating targets on the Q-side.

11...b5 Chasing the N away does not fit in with black's plan and after 12.♘e3 ♖b8 Safe and solid is 12...Bxe3 13.♖d1 b4 14.cxb4 ♖xb4 15.b3 ♖xe4 introduces unclear complications after 16.♘xe5 ♘d4 with equal chances.

12.♘e3 a4 Very good! Silman: If white leaves the P on a2 it will always be in need of defense. However, if he moves it to a3 then the b3-square will fall into black's hands. 13.♖d1 ♘a5 14.♘f5 ♖f7 Having made real gains on the Q-side, I now patiently shore up my K-side, knowing that if white's K-side attack fails, the game is mine. Silman. 15.♗h3 As Silman pointed out, if white wants to place the B on h3 then it was better to play 15 h4 first so it could join the attack by an eventual h4-h5-h6.

15.h4 and after 6 minutes Komodo comes up with 15...♕e8 16.h5 ♘b6 17.♘3h4 ♖d7 18.♖xd7 ♕xd7 19.♗e3 ♗xe3 20.♘xe3 ♘ac4 21.♖d1 ♕f7 22.♘ef5 with equal chances.

15...♕e8 Getting the queen off the d-file and giving the B on e6 some support. Silman. This move with its simple explanation is the kind of move that often escapes amateurs who think every move has to be part of a tatical sequences or a long winded strategic plan.

15...♗xf5 eliminating the well placed N would be bad on account of 16.♗xf5 ♗d6 17.b4 axb3 18.axb3 ♘f8 The threat was Be6 19.b4 ♘c6 20.♗e3 and black has been beaten back on the Q-side which is where he plans to operate.

16.♘3h4 ♘f8 17.♗f1 White didn't play the attack with the necessary finesse and now he's reacheda dead end. Silman. 17...♔h8 18.♕f3 ♖d7 Everything is safe, so now black turns his attention to the open d-file. SIlman 19.♖xd7 ♕xd7 20.♘e3 This P offer is not correct, but even after the best move black would be better.

20.♗e3 ♗xe3 21.♘xe3 (21.♕xe3 is met strongly by 21...♘c4) 21...♕d2 22.♕e2 ♕xe2 23.♗xe2 ♘d7 24.♘d5 ♗xd5 25.exd5 ♘b6 26.c4 g6 black's position is preferable.

20...♖d8 Silman wrote that he was moving quickly here because he knew exactly what he wanted to accomplish adding that he missed the strong 20...Bxa2. Still, after 20..Rd8 he felt that he was strategically winning with a risk-free position, and even knowing that 20...Bxa2 was playable he stil prefers 20...Rd8

20...♗xa2 21.♖xa2 ♘b3 and there is no way to protect the B. After 22.♘d5 ♘xc1 23.♖a1 ♘b3 24.♖d1 ♕f7 25.♗c4 Black is better, but white has a more active position than he gets in the game.

21.♘hf5 c6 Taking away d5 from the N. 22.h4 ♕f7 After endless preparation, black finally targets a2 and white is completely lost according to Silman. Komodo puts his advantage a one P. However, in a Shootout using Stockfish white scored +0 -0 =5 after 23.h5. 23.♘g4

23.h5 h6 24.♘g2 ♘h7 25.♘gh4 ♘g5 26.♗xg5 hxg5 27.♘g6+ ♔h7 28.♔g2 b5 29.♖d1 ♖xd1 30.♕xd1 ♕e8 31.♗e2 ♗xa2 32.♗g4 ♗e6 33.♕h1 ♗f8 34.♕h3 ♘c4 35.♘fe7 ♗xg4 36.♕xg4 ♗xe7 37.♕e6 ♘d6 38.♘xe7 ♘f7 39.♕f5+ ♔h8 40.♕e6 draw

23...♘d7 24.♗h3 After this his position quickly deriorates even further.

24.♗e3 was relatively best. 24...♗xe3 25.♘gxe3 ♘c5 26.h5 ♗xa2 and now white can complicate the issue with 27.♘xg7 ♔xg7 28.h6+ ♔f8 29.♖xa2 ♘ab3 (29...♕xa2 loses to 30.♕xf6+ ♔e8 31.♘f5 ♕e6 32.♘g7+) 30.♕f5 Black is better, but white can still put up some resistance.

24...♗f8 Before undertaking final action Silman takes the precaution of protecting f6 and g7 just to make sure white to reduced to complete helplessness. 25.♗e3 ♗xa2 The culmination of the strategy initiated by 12...a4 26.h5 White prepares one final assault against the black. Silman

26.b3 With a P in the bank, all black has to do is protect his pieces and make sure he can never use the d-file. Silman

26...♗b3 27.h6 g6 28.♘g7 b5 One of many winning moves. Though 28...Bxg7 is fine, Silman decided to retain his dark-square B. 29.♔g2 ♘b7 Black intends to exchange Ns knowing that his material and positional advantages guarantees him an easy technical win. Silman

29...♘c4 was also very strong. 30.♗c1 ♘c5 31.♗g5 ♗e7 32.♔h2 (32.♗xf6 ♖d3 33.♕e2 ♗xf6) 32...♖d3 is crushing.

30.♖e1 ♘d6 31.♔h2 At this point it doesn't really matter what white plays! 31...♘e8

31...f5 was stronger, but Silman elected not to allow any complication. 32.exf5 ♗d5 33.♕e2 gxf5 and the N has no retreat.

32.♘xe8 ♖xe8 33.♖e2 A blunder, but the game is lost in any case 33...♗d1 The rest of the moves are unkown, but white soon resigned.

Powered by Aquarium

Bowel Problems and Cell Phones

Cheating scandal: player disqualified for cell phone use

      German GM Falko Bindrich was forfeited for refusing to allow the arbiter to examine the phone he had with him during multiple toilet visits during a recent Bundesliga round. The rules permit the arbiter to check in case of justified suspicion. Bindrich had a smart phone with him while visiting the toilet and when confronted, refused to show it to the arbiter, as is mandated by the tournament rules.

      According to his statement Bindrich was apparently plagued with gastro-intestinal distress which caused him to have to hit the porcelain pretty hard during his game and complained he was singled out from among the other contestants for being the leading “toilet-goer.”
       It’s important to emphasize he was not disqualified because of cell phone fraud, but because of his refusal to allow his phone to be inspected.  Bindrich’s reasons for refusal to allow inspection seem rather flimsy, though.  The reasons he gave were: 1) he saw an inspection as an invasion of his privacy. 2) the phone contained “very private pictures and messages.” 3) it contained sensitive business data which he needed to protect. 4) releasing this sensitive business data would cost him his job and important relationships. Bindrich admitted he does have a chess app on his phone, but as per the rules, his phone was always switched off.
       He added, “from a human perspective, how far have we come? Stalking and spying, eavesdropping on the toilet. The referee listened for my bowel movement, and Sebastian Siebrecht even lay down on the toilet floor.”
       I’m not sure what to make of all this.  If his game against his opponent did not show up on the chess app, then there would have been no problem.  All he had to do was turn the thing on and show the arbiter his chess app…problem solved. In any case, Bindrich knew the rules going in…if you have a cell phone it is subject to inspection and if he felt that strongly about protecting his privacy then he should not have been carrying it in the tournament room. 
       I have to wonder about the pictures.  I have pictures on my cell phone, too.  Let’s see, there are photos of my nephew at a school function, my cat and a raccoon that wandered into the backyard.  Nothing so private they would be embarrassing.
       As to sensitive business data, was the arbiter even remotely interested in industrial espionage? Would he know what he was looking at if he saw it? Would he be able to remember it all or, for that matter, even know who such sensitive business data should be delivered to in order to make a profit or get Bindrich fired?
       Seriously, I doubt the arbiter had any intentions of performing a sophisticated and thorough examination of Bindrich’s cell phone. It was more a matter of, “Just turn the thing on and show me the chess app.  If your current game isn’t in it, then it’s no problem.” Bindrich was rightly disqualified because he refused to hand over his phone to the arbiter and so contravened the rules of the event. His refusal, of course, is not proof of illegal use. What it comes down to is that the arbiter had what is known in the US as probable cause and Bindrich, who knew the rules, was obligated to comply with the request. Now I am wondering if his games from the event will be subjected to computer analysis and if they are, what will the findings be.
       If Bindrich did not want to leave his cell phone in his hotel room, a simple solution would have been take an Imodium and avoid all those trips to the toilet.

QGD Chigorin Defense, a Bad B and the Minority Attack

     These were factors in this online G30 game played on Instant Chess. One of the most misunderstood pieces is the Bishop. Which piece is it better to have, Knights or Bishops? The answer is, of course, it depends. As a general rule, Bishops are good in open games while Knights are better in closed games, but not always. Then there is the ‘good’ Bishop vs. ‘bad’ Bishop concept. In the middle game, a player with only one bishop should generally place his pawns on squares of the color opposite the Bishop. A Bishop which is impeded by its own Pawns is referred to as a bad bishop, unless of course it is outside its own Pawn chain. Then again, even if the bad bishop is passively placed, it may serve a useful defensive function; GM Mihai Suba wrote "Bad bishops protect good pawns."
     In this game I played an old favorite against the Queen’s Gambit, The Chigorin Defense. As John W. Collins said of it, it is chancy, unorthodox and probably better than its reputation because it develops with a direct effect on the center. Indeed, Black usually gets good piece play, but he often has to be prepared to exchange a B for a N, but Chigorin had no prejudices against making such an exchange.
     With the Chigorin Black ignores fight for the d5-square and plays for a counterattack against the d4-pawn and seeks to play ...e7-e5. White's most reliable reaction is to cover the e5-square. I mention the Minority Attack which white failed to play here. Good explanations of this strategy can be found at Chess Café and Exeter Chess Club. As it was, white’s passive play allowed me to gradually get control of the center and his bad B ultimately resulted in his downfall.

Georg Kieninger, Eiserner Schorsch

    In 1949 the most famous person in the country was probably Bob Hope, the English-born American comedian, actor, entertainer and producer whose career spanned nearly 80 years in vaudeville, radio, television and USO (a charitable organization in serving the active duty military) tours. Next to him was probably the comedian Milton Berle whose childish slapstick “comedy” was not so funny.

    The notable book that year was 1984 by George Orwell and a pound of bacon was 49 cents ($6.49 today). Life expectancy in the US was 65.2 for men and 70.7 for women. 

    Over in Germany in 1949, the occupying powers in both East and West Germany replaced their military governors with civilian leaders and the occupations ended officially in the mid-1950s. 

    Germany was divided into East and West and each side had its own distinct pop culture. In East Germany the government tried to limit the influence of Western entertainment on young people and the State Commission for the Arts tried to protect German cultural values from what was considered American decadence. In West Germany life was influenced by American culture, German design traditions and the political climate of the Cold War. 

    From June 19th to July 2nd there was an international tournament held in Oldenburg, a city in what was then West Germany, that was played at the at Astoria-Haus Renaissance Hotel. 

    Some of the players ultimately made their way to other countries. Sarapu ended up in New Zealand, while Zemgalis, Rossolimo and Tautviasis eventually found their way to the United States. 

    Zemgalis was awarded the Honorary GM title in 2003. He lived in Seattle, Washington. Tautviasis ended up in Chicago were he was a prominent force in mid-West chess. Rossolimo was a New York Cuty cab driver and owned a chess studio in Greenwich Village.

    Oldenburg was the best result ever for Elmars Zemgalis. Today's game is a snappy win by Georg Kieninger (June 5,1902 - January 25, 1975). He was born in Munich and passed away in – \Dusseldorf. He was awarded the IM title in 1950. 

 

    The cigar smoker, Kieninger was nicknamed "Eiserner Schorsch" (Iron Georgie) because of his fighting style. He won the German Championship in 1937, 1940 and 1947. The Kieninger Trap in the Budapest Gambit is embedded in the game score. Herbert Heinicke (1905-1988) was a German master and he was awarded the IM title in 1953. He was active mostly during the 1930s and for a while after WW II.

 

[Event "Oldenburg"] [Site "Oldenburg GER"] [Date "1949.06.29"] [Round "?"] [White "Georg Kieninger"] [Black "Herbert Heinicke"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B91"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "71"] [EventDate "1949.06.19"] {] B80: Sicilian } 1. e4 (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. Bf4 Nc6 5. Nf3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 Qe7 7. a3 Ngxe5 8. axb4 Nd3# {The Kieninget Trap.}) 1... c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. g3 e6 7. Bg2 Qc7 8. O-O Bd7 9. Re1 Nc6 10. Nce2 {This move leaves theory. Normal is 10.Nxc6, but 10.Nb3 and 10.Be3 and 10.Bg5 have also been played.} Be7 11. c3 O-O 12. h3 Rab8 13. Be3 Na5 14. b3 b5 15. Rc1 Rfd8 16. g4 Be8 {This move, clearing the way to play ...d5, requires excessive maneuvering and allows white to seize the initiative.} (16... h6 {was called for.} 17. f4 d5 {is equal.}) 17. g5 Nd7 18. Ng3 Nb6 19. Qg4 Nc6 (19... d5 { is out of the question because of} 20. Nh5 Nd7 21. exd5 exd5 22. Bf4 Bd6 23. Bxd6 Qxd6 24. Nf5 Qb6 25. Nfxg7 {and white is winning.}) 20. f4 d5 {This was bad last move and it's bad this move. His nest try was 20...e5 though even then white has a promising attack.} 21. Nh5 Kh8 22. Qh4 Bd7 23. Nxc6 Bxc6 24. Nxg7 {[%mdl 512] Eiserner Schorsch finds the most elegant way of finishing the game.} Kxg7 25. Qh6+ {Even better than the menacing 25.Bd4 because it confines the K to the corner. Kieninger finishes the game with perfection.} Kg8 26. Bd4 f6 27. gxf6 Bd6 28. Qg5+ Kf8 29. e5 Ba3 30. Rb1 Qf7 31. f5 Bd7 32. b4 {The threat is Bc5+} Nc4 33. Bc5+ Ke8 34. Bf3 h6 35. Qxh6 {Threatening mate with Qh8+.} Qg8+ 36. Kh2 {Black resigned} 1-0

Larsen at Wageningen 1957

     Bent Larsen, Fighting Chess With The Great Dane, is a followup to his Larsen's Selected Games of Chess 1948-69 and both books are classics by one of the greatest fighting players of modern chess. 
     Larsen was a candidate for the World Championship four times and became one of the most successful tournament players of his time. His uncompromising style and unorthodox play made him one of the most popular players of his day. An example of his play can be seen in the following game against Troianescu.
     Octavio Troianescu (February 4, 1916 - November 8, 1980) was a Romanian IM who was born in Chernivtsi which is today in western Ukraine. From the mid-1940s to the end of the 1970s he was one of the top Romanian players, winning the national championship nine times. In 1956 and 1960 he took part in the Olympiads and he finished 9th in the zonal tournament in Wageningen. 
     In 1957 one of the zonals was played in Dublin and you can visit the Irish Chess Union website to see photos from the event. For a complete list of all the zonal tournaments see Mark Weeks site. 
     In other 1957 chess news, Smyslov defeated Botvinnik to win the world championship, Fischer won the US Championship ahead of Reshevsky. A strong double round international tournament was held in Dallas, Texas and Reshevsky and Gligoric tied for first ahead of Szabo and Larsen. The field was rounded out by Larsen, Yanofsky, Olafsson, Najdorf and Evans. Bronstein had been invited, but he had visa problems and couldn't play. There was also a side match between local star Kenneth Smith and Pal Benko; it was no contest as Benko won 5.5-1.5.

  
     In the European Team Championship the Soviets won ahead of Yugoslavia and Hungary. The first Women's Olympiad took place in Emmen in Holland and the Soviet Union edged Romania on tiebreaks. Nine countries were represented.
     In world headline Russia tested its first ICBM missile and more importantly launched Sputnik, the first earth-orbiting satellite. It orbited for three weeks before its batteries died, then for two more months before falling back into the atmosphere. I remember the great excitement as people around the world were anxious to hear its radio signals: beep, beep, beep. It doesn't sound like a big deal today, but that wasn't the case in 1957! The Sputnik rocket booster also reached Earth orbit and was visible from the ground at night, while the small but highly polished sphere, barely visible, was more difficult to follow optically. There were even parties to try to spot it and catch a glimpse of the tiny light gliding across the sky. 

     Also that year in Little Rock, Arkansas the high school was integrated and President Eisenhower sent troops in to quell mob and protect the students after hard line segregationist Governor Orval Faubus defied a federal order. He served as Governor from 1955 to 1967 and tried but failed to get reelected in 1970, 1974 and 1986. In his last run he was defeated by future President Bill Clinton.
     At the Wageningen (in The Netherlands) Zonal, Larsen tied for 3rd–4th with Donner and as there were only three spots open for the Interzonal at Portoroz in 1958 they had a playoff at The Hague and Larsen won decisively 3-1. 
     Portoroz was a 21-player tournament with the top six players qualifying for the Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade Candidates tournament in 1959, but no more than four players from any one country could advance. The tournament was won by Tal with Gligoric second followed by Benko and Petrosian then Fischer and Olafsson who were the qualifiers. Former World Champion David Bronstein tied for places 7-11 with Averbakh, Matanovic, Sabo and Pachman and missed qualifying by half a point. Bronstein lost only one game, to 19th place finisher Rodolfo Tan Cardoso. 
     When he got to Portoroz in 1958 Larsen struck a snag and only finished 16th out of 21. After some ups and downs in tournament play after that he modified his style and began playing risky and unusual openings in some of his games and his results improved. 
     Larsen was known his highly imaginative play and he was willing to try unorthodox ideas and take risks. In Great Chess Upsets, Reshevsky wrote, "He is a firm believer in the value of surprise. Consequently, he often resorts to dubious variations in various openings. He also likes to complicate positions even though it may involve considerable risk. He has a great deal of confidence in his game and fears no one. His unique style has proven extremely effective against relatively weak opponents but has not been too successful against top-notchers.”