11 Jan 09
Originally posted by KorchJust shows you the class of the guy - he could outplay players
I wonder why Matulovic did not play simple 15...Nf2+ taking exchange.[/b]
from inferiors positions.
" I wonder why Matulovic did not play simple 15...Nf2+ taking exchange?"
That is the Fischer presence I spoke about earlier.
Good players just wilted at the board and played inferior moves.
No computer can ever take that into it's considerations.
11 Jan 09
3 edits
Originally posted by greenpawn34Today any top GM would play 15...Nf2+ without doubts. And Fischer would be hammered.
Just shows you the class of the guy - he could outplay players
from inferiors positions.
" I wonder why Matulovic did not play simple 15...Nf2+ taking exchange?"
That is the Fischer presence I spoke about earlier.
Good players just wilted at the board and played inferior moves.
No computer can ever take that into it's considerations.
And for showing ability to outplay from inferior positions ("to show the class" ), you should get inferior positions first. And from modern GM`s point of view getting lost position after 10 moves are really low class. Especially playing White.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by KorchSpeculation Korch - not allowed.
Today any top GM would play 15...Nf2+ without doubts. And Fischer would be hammered.
I'm 3½ hours late for where I should be - I'm shaving,
eating my breakfast, posting and playing moves all the same time.
I'm off now and won't be back till very late - please don't start another row.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by greenpawn34If you have seen some top GM not winning such a positions in game with classical time control then let me know.
Speculation Korch - not allowed.
I'm 3½ hours late for where I should be - I'm shaving,
eating my breakfast, posting and playing moves all the same time.
I'm off now and won't be back till very late - please don't start another row.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by KorchDidn't the reigning World Champion a few years ago walk into a two move mate?
Today any top GM would play 15...Nf2+ without doubts. And Fischer would be hammered.
And for showing ability to outplay from inferior positions ("to show the class" ), you should get inferior positions first. And from modern GM`s point of view getting lost position after 10 moves are really low class. Especially playing White.
Your assertions are ridiculous.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by KorchYeah, no modern GM could possibly lose in 17 moves.
Here is another "masterpiece" of another top GM from 70ties - Bent Larsen, losing as White in 17th moves. Please find some modern top GM losing in such manner.
[pgn]
[Event "Beograd"]
[Site "Beograd"]
[Date "1970.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Bent Larsen"]
[Black "Boris Spassky"]
[ECO "A01"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo " ...[text shortened]... hxg3 14. Rg1 Rh1 15. Rxh1 g2 16. Rf1 Qh4+
17. Kd1 gxf1=Q+ 0-1
[/pgn]
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1018304&kpage=1
11 Jan 09
6 edits
Originally posted by no1marauder1) I`ve used words "modern top GM". I hope you see the difference?
Yeah, no modern GM could possibly lose in 17 moves.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1018304&kpage=1
2) Anand had Black, Larsen had White. In modern top GM chess its important difference.
3) In 1992 Anand was obviously lower in world chess hierarchy than Larsen in 1970.
4) In game you have given Black lost in blunder in 17th move (after 17...Nb6 Black are OK.) while games quoted by me mistakes leading to lost position were made in worse positions which were result of doubtful choice of opening line.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by KorchYou're an obvious idiot. Sure it's easier now to prepare openings with the tools that are available. That hardly means the players are "better" now. One can cherry pick games with blunders by top GMs NOW as well as 30 years ago as you either well know and are being dishonest or don't know and are being ignorant.
Was he in lost position after 10th move playing White? Your comparision is obvious nonsense.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by Korch1) Anand wasn't a modern top GM?;
1) I`ve used words "modern [b]top GM". I hope you see the difference?
2) Anand had Black, Larsen had White. In modern top GM chess its important difference.
3) In 1992 Anand was obviously lower in world chess hierarchy than Larsen in 1970.
4) In game you have given Black lost in blunder in 17th move (after 17...Nb6 Black are OK.) while games quoted by ...[text shortened]... t position were made in worse positions which were result of doubtful choice of opening line.[/b]
2) I haven't seen any stats that prove that White wins a higher percentage of GM games now then they did 30 or even 100 years ago. Please cite them if you have them;
3) Anand played for the World Championship within three years of that embarrassing loss; when did Larsen play for the title again?;
4) So Anand losing in 17 moves isn't as bad as Larsen losing in 17 moves?🙄
11 Jan 09
4 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderYou're an obvious idiot.
You're an obvious idiot. Sure it's easier now to prepare openings with the tools that are available. That hardly means the players are "better" now. One can cherry pick games with blunders by top GMs NOW as well as 30 years ago as you either well know and are being dishonest or don't know and are being ignorant.
So Mr.1500 OTB player has started personal attacks? The same player who have been send to "idiot" his OTB games asking to help with analysis?
Sure it's easier now to prepare openings with the tools that are available. That hardly means the players are "better" now.
For your notice - important part of chess strength is also chess knowledge. With modern chess knowledge I haven`t noticed any game in which top GM have managed to get in opening position in which to resign. The fastest defeats I remember had more than 20 moves and loser was Black.
One can cherry pick games with blunders by top GMs NOW as well as 30 years ago as you either well know and are being dishonest or don't know and are being ignorant.
You are allowed to pick blunders of modern top GMs. I may start to search games in which topGMs of past have made stupid (from modern GM point of view) mistakes. These games I have posted I knew before this thread. When we will start to search lets see who will find more.