Markovich wrote on 08/03/12 at 21:38:36:
Ignorance is no sin, that is true. But stubborn ignorance is a grave sin. Also, the ignorant should not make pretense of superior understanding. Instead of arguing, they should listen and learn. That's what I do when a much stronger player explains something. I hope I do, anyway.
The general perception of post members is that I am a weak player and theoretician because I play OTB poorly. Thus I should learn from the superior wisdom of post members. Here is a list of my accomplishments as a chess player. When you combine this post with the previous post can any of you argue with any conviction that your understanding of chess is superior to mine?
In 1995 I wrote a chess book called, “The Evans Gambit Revolution”. NM Ken Smith, Editor of Chess Digest was so impressed by my book that he devoted ½ the outside back cover of his Summer catalog and the entire inside back cover of his catalog to promoting my book; he devoted more advertising space to my book than the advertising space devoted to any World Champion including Bobby Fischer.
GM Andy Soltis said of my book, “A well-researched original analysis of an old opening.” He also gave me a favorable review to a book I wrote on the Two Knights’ Defense.
In Correspondence chess one year I reached the Semi-finals of the Golden Knights. I even defeated a Correspondence Master in 16 moves.
Twice I won the Best Question Contest, a column written by GM Larry Evans once where I came up with the innovation 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.O-O N and a second time for the Muzio Gambit.
I’ve had one of my innovations against a Correspondence Expert (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Qe2 Nc6 4.d4!? N) published in its entirety in Inside Chess, a magazine devoted to chess professionals.
My book Magic was called, “Amazing!” by ICM John Elburg. FM Alex Dunne who writes the Correspondence column for Chess Life said, “At first I was antagonistic towards Mr. Moody’s book but then he began to make sense.” At this point he endorsed my concept of universal positions.
The Editor of Chess Life had this to say about me, “We receive a steady stream of letters proposing rules changes, more than on any other subject. This one we almost dismissed right away until we saw the author’s name---when the idea comes from someone with a proven history of thinking of chess in a fresh way, it must be taken seriously. (Moody came up with a third new move in the King’s Gambit, a move that Kasparov called, “Perfectly playable.”)
GM Lev Alburt had this to say about Magic, “I’ve been consulting Richard Moody on various chess openings for about 25 years. Today, Richard is an unrelenting opening researcher, well skilled in using all tools of the trade---books, data bases, Fritz. His book is another proof that one doesn’t have to be a Master to make important discoveries. And making your own opening theory is one of the surest paths to success in chess.”
For the record, John Elburg not the most reliable chess witness. A man astounded by the chess writing ability of his dead dog.
Not keen to see any kicking of forum puppies, this post does appear to be inviting a drop-kick over a nearby wall.
That said, I agree with the first two sentences.
Saw a copy of the Magic book once. Cannot comment as to whether this is the worst chess book ever. Not seen all. But it is the worst I have ever seen.
Pages: 
C58: New try main line Two Knights Defense (Read 21168 times)
