25 Oct 05
Alekhine no doubt was among the "Chess Immortals"
However, the fact that he never gave Capablanca a rematch will forever be a blot on his legacy.
I guess the same cannot be said about Kasparov as he and Karpov played over a 100!! games.
Something that reads simmilar to the current goings on with Kramnik and Vesselin Topalov I feel.
26 Oct 05
Originally posted by Nietzsche1844I know some about this issue since he is my favorite player. He prepared for his openings more than anybody but again Bobby Fischer says ''Many consider Alekhine a great opening theoretician, but I don't think he was. He played book lines, but didn't know them very well.He always felt his natural powers would get him out of any dilemma''
During his lifetime Alekhine was considered the greatest player in the openings,with an amazing memory.What is your opinion?
I play openings very well too thanks to MCO. But that doesnt make me a great opening player. My memory is maybe my biggest strength in my life. But I think memory comes into play when you play a middle game. For example: A very complicated position arises on the board and you know you have played this 10-15 years ago. Then you know how to proceed the game. That's memory. But memorizing opening line is pure MEMORIZATION. It will make you a very weak chess player.
Back to Alekhine; he was a tactician, a torturing attacker on the board. He was a modern GM familiar with all the openings. Botvinnik, on the other hand, studied the openings much more than everybody.
So, Alekhine in my opinion was a middle game player with unexpected blows. He would find one move, you are dead! But he played openings and endings very very very well.(But he didnt play endings as great as Capa).