Only Chess
27 May 04
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by SirLoseALotSuppose we inverted the argument on its head and asked, "What if we gave each of these greats the opportunity to know everything we know about chess today?"
Yeah,Morphy up there too.
Oh well,it's impossible to compare players from different era's.They were all great 🙂
I think Kasparov would beat Morphy and Capablanca hands down - simply because I don't believe the latter two had the patience to buckle down and put in the workrate that Kaspy did. Fischer might be a close call - but in a one-on-one match, I'd back Fischer to be the one to break down (mentally) first.
08 Dec 04
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerOr, what if we could arrange to have Kasparov et al born long ago and play Morphy etc then? No computer databases etc.-level the playing field but from the other perspective.
Suppose we inverted the argument on its head and asked, "What if we gave each of these greats the opportunity to know everything we know about chess today?"
I think Kasparov would beat Morphy and Capablanca hands down - s ...[text shortened]... h, I'd back Fischer to be the one to break down (mentally) first.
There is a site somewhere on the internet (can't find it now) that tries very hard to compare players from different eras; I think its number one turns out to be Capa. I don't agree or disagree; there's a strong case for a few players to be made "the greatest"
Edit: Oops, you made a similar point with the desert island.
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by lucifershammerWe cannot know,they were all children of their time,you know.It's impossible to say what a Capa,born in 1980,would be capable of.Maybe he wouldn't even play chess at all!
Suppose we inverted the argument on its head and asked, "What if we gave each of these greats the opportunity to know everything we know about chess today?"
I think Kasparov would beat Morphy and Capablanca hands down - simply because I don't believe the latter two had the patience to buckle down and put in the workrate that Kaspy did. Fi ...[text shortened]... all - but in a one-on-one match, I'd back Fischer to be the one to break down (mentally) first.
09 Dec 04
Originally posted by KneverKnightFischer has displayed mental instability, but I wonder what would have happened if he'd been born in Russia. With the Soviet infrastructure behind him it's easy to imagine him reigning as champion for 20 years. I don't think Karpov was a better player than Fischer, but with tons of government support and all material needs taken care of, it's much easier to settle down and play good chess.
Or, what if we could arrange to have Kasparov et al born long ago and play Morphy etc then? No computer databases etc.-level the playing field but from the other perspective.
There is a site somewhere on the internet (can't find it now) that tries very hard to compare players from different eras; I think its number one turns out to be Capa. I don't a ...[text shortened]... layers to be made "the greatest"
Edit: Oops, you made a similar point with the desert island.
So I think you have to ask if Fischer started out crazy, or if his one man against the Soviet Chess Machine crusade MADE him crazy.
Maybe a little of both.