Capablanca Was Snatched Too Early From The Chess World. With His Death We Have Lost A Great Chess Genius, The Like Of Whom We Will Never See Again.
During A Chess Competition A Chessmaster Should Be A Combination Of A Beast Of Prey And A Monk
The Fact That A Player Is Very Short Of Time Is To My Mind, As Little To Be Considered As An Excuse As, For Instance, The Statement Of The Law-breaker That He Was Drunk At The Time He Committed The Crime.
I Did Not Believe I Was Superior To Him. Perhaps The Chief Reason For His Defeat Was The Overestimation Of His Own Powers Arising Out Of His Overwhelming Victory In New York, 1927, And His Underestimation Of Mine.
That Which Steinitz Gave To The Theoretical Aspect Of The Game When He Was At His Best Is Very Remote To All Out Home-bred Chess Philosophers, But With His Views On Morphy, Whom He Tries To Discredit Completely, It Is Of Course Impossible To Agree.
The Retreat Of A Minor Piece To The Back Rank, Where It Cuts The Lines Of Communication Between The Rooks, Is Permissable Only In Exceptional Cases.
Young Players Expose Themselves To Grave Risks When They Blindly Imitate The Innovations Of Masters Without Themselves First Checking All The Details And Consequences Of These Innovations.
In My Opinion, A Master Is Morally Obliged To Seize Every Sort Of Opportunity And To Try To Solve The Problems Of The Position Without Fear Of Some Simplifications.
Oh! This Opponent, This Collaborator Against His Will, Whose Notion Of Beauty Always Differs From Yours And Whose Means (strength, Imagination, Technique) Are Often Too Limited To Help You Effectively! What Torment, To Have Your Thinking And Your Phantasy Tied Down By Another Person!
I Think That For The Highest Achievements Nowadays... Need To Have The Stable As A Rock Scientific Base. And Also Need To Own Modesty.
