Too many people show little interest in the human side of chess. Its rich history and colorful characters gives the game an added dimension that no other sport can equal; yet very few players bother to read about it or ponder what the agonies and ecstasies of those that came before us have to teach in relation to the modern world and our personal lives.

This book shows us real people making real mistakes; just like we all do. Some stories are fascinating (the first story about Albert Pinkus, the Indiana Jones of Chess, is quite compelling), others are nothing but fluff.

The chapter on Fischer is pretty bland (it had to be included to justify the title of the book!); nothing new or illuminating about the great American chess genius comes to light. However, what worries me is not the odd, boring chapter or the multitude of low quality games, but rather a nagging feeling that much of the information may not be as factual as Mr. Denker wants us to believe.

First off, an often quoted story about Denker winning on time against Reshevsky at 1942 U.S. Championship only to be forfeited by the tournament director (who turned the clock around and thought that Denker's flag was the one that fell!) has never rung true (though perhaps it is). Who in their right mind would accept such an inane and illegal decision without going to court or, at the very least, creating some kind of stir within American chess circles? Did Arnold leave this information out or did something else happen that Denker doesn't want us to know about (conspiracy theory hounds will love this one!)? I would enjoy hearing from anyone with more information on this topic.

Most likely the facts are presented as remembered by Mr. Denker, from the viewpoint of Mr. Denker (how much input did Mr. Parr have on the stories and their flow?). He gives us opinions about everyone he comes into contact with (which I like), but continually makes himself out to be some really nice guy who would never bother another human being in any way (we all see ourselves as the "good guy," but this is a bit too much).

Having come into contact with Mr. Denker on several occasions, I have to admit that this "Saint Denker" version of reality is something I've missed out on. Since Arnold went out of his way to show us the "real" Pinkus and the "real" Kashdan and the "real" Fine (though these descriptions appear to me to be considerably watered down), why not treat us to the "real" Denker?

All in all, the book is well laid out, has nice print, is well written and is fun to read. This makes it worth every penny you pay for it. But Mr. Denker forgot that he was/is a colorful character himself (which is by no means bad), and by robbing us of the real life perspective of a man who is capable of displaying many kinds of moods (and by doing the same with Alekhine, Reshevsky, Fine and others) he also ends up robbing the reader.

YOU CAN FIND THIS BOOK AT