1. Domincan Republic
    Joined
    19 Apr '06
    Moves
    4546
    07 Nov '06 04:15
    I think that if we compara a player with his strongest opponents at the time it will be clear, capablanca won most games he played, and his personal record against his rivals is a winner:

    (Capablanca derrotó a Marshall +20 -2 =28, a Lasker +6 -2 =16, a Alekhine +9 -7 =33), a excepción de Spielmann que consiguió su nivel (+2 -2 =8). De los más grandes jugadores, solamente Keres tuvo un estrecho margen a su favor (+1 -0 =5), triunfo que ocurrió cuando Capablanca tenía 50 años, en el declive de su carrera. Su puntaje Elo ha sido calculado en 2725.

    http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Ra%C3%BAl_Capablanca

    It means capablanca defeated Marshall, Lasker, Alekhine, exept for Spielman who has his level, and keres that has a margin at his favor. and below his elo rating.
  2. Joined
    21 Feb '06
    Moves
    6830
    07 Nov '06 21:06
    Originally posted by Superman
    http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3455

    "Garry Kasparov in his set of books My Great Predecessors when commenting Capablanca's games speculates that Capablanca occasionally did not even bother to calculate deep tactical variations. The Cuban simply preferred to play moves that were clear and positionally so strongly justified that calculation of variations was simply not necessary."
    I was thinking about this on the way home from work and I realised that all this study shows is that Capablanca and Kramnik are the World Champions who play most like Crafty.

    What would be really interesting is if someone could modify Crafty so that it's moves matched, say, Steinitz, with the same degree of accuracy.

    If this could be done with all the World Champions then you could play them against each other to see which style was the most effective.
  3. Donationketchuplover
    Isolated Pawn
    Wisconsin USA
    Joined
    09 Dec '01
    Moves
    71111
    07 Nov '06 23:21
    Morphy gave knight odds against a top U.S. player and won. case closed.
  4. Joined
    21 Feb '06
    Moves
    6830
    08 Nov '06 00:09
    Originally posted by ketchuplover
    Morphy gave knight odds against a top U.S. player and won. case closed.
    But what did "a top U.S. player" mean in those days? There were loads of strong chess players in Europe in the 1850s, but I can't think of any Americans apart from Morphy.

    I would imagine that the second best player in America would have been about 2200 strength, reasonably talented but very little theoretical knowledge and uncomfortable in positional games or ones where he was defending against an attack.

    Do you have a name for this top U.S. player than Morphy gave knight odds to?
  5. SubscriberHelder Octavio Borges
    Luso-brasileiro
    Cajamar, SP
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    71653
    08 Nov '06 00:58
    The best chess player of all times was François André Danican Philidor (XVIII century).
  6. Domincan Republic
    Joined
    19 Apr '06
    Moves
    4546
    08 Nov '06 19:39
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    I was thinking about this on the way home from work and I realised that all this study shows is that Capablanca and Kramnik are the World Champions who play most like Crafty.

    What would be really interesting is if someone could modify Crafty so that it's moves matched, say, Steinitz, with the same degree of accuracy.

    If this could be done with all the ...[text shortened]... hampions then you could play them against each other to see which style was the most effective.
    I realy dont know Crafty, but as I can see they took into consideration a lot of factors, and if this program is good enough to find the best move in a given situation, I supouse this can also be veryfied by an expert, and it means that Capablanca and Kramnik are the ones who picked the best moves on the given situations.

    Of course, this makes them hard to beat because when you make the best move, against an agresive player, then he won't have much place to agresiveness, and it works the same for positional players, so I belive that is why Kramnik won against Topalov, who is an agresive player himself(besides all blunders he made).

    I would like to see the outcome when Kramnik and Fritz finish their match.
  7. Joined
    14 Jul '06
    Moves
    20541
    09 Nov '06 08:25
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    But what did "a top U.S. player" mean in those days? There were loads of strong chess players in Europe in the 1850s, but I can't think of any Americans apart from Morphy.

    I would imagine that the second best player in America would have been about 2200 strength, reasonably talented but very little theoretical knowledge and uncomfortable in positional ga ...[text shortened]... st an attack.

    Do you have a name for this top U.S. player than Morphy gave knight odds to?
    You can only beat what's in front of you... or everyone over the other side of the Atlantic as well, as Morphy did 😉
  8. Joined
    15 Jul '06
    Moves
    1598
    09 Nov '06 08:34
    The version of crafty they used would never find the best move in most positions since it was only searching 12ply meaning that if crafty was analysing let's say a tal game where tal sacrificed his queen for mate in 9 the stupid beast would never see the mate and it would say that tal's brilliant move was a huge blunder.
  9. Joined
    21 Feb '06
    Moves
    6830
    09 Nov '06 10:121 edit
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    You can only beat what's in front of you... or everyone over the other side of the Atlantic as well, as Morphy did 😉
    Someone was suggesting that Morphy was the player who was the strongest in a particular time frame by the widest margin.

    I said that although Morphy was streets ahead of everyone in America, his margin of superiority over the best of the European players wasn't nearly so great.

    Fischer played at a time when there were many more excellent players, and everyone had access to the games of the players from previous eras and also fairly up-to-date games and analysis of recent games.

    Despite this Fischer managed to be completely dominant for a short time just before his 1972 World Championship match and at that time I think he was the player with the widest margin ahead of the number 2 in the world of any player in the history of chess.
  10. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Quarantined World
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    87415
    09 Nov '06 10:39
    Originally posted by omulcusobolani
    The version of crafty they used would never find the best move in most positions since it was only searching 12ply meaning that if crafty was analysing let's say a tal game where tal sacrificed his queen for mate in 9 the stupid beast would never see the mate and it would say that tal's brilliant move was a huge blunder.
    Yes, but they assume that by a process of averaging that their system will tend to give the players the right scores. The problem with the method is that it assumes that there's always one best move, and that if Crafty's second choice move is close (say first choice +0.5 second choice +0.45) then the move is hard to find and so they give it a higher weighting. The problem is that these are the cases most susceptible to error, which they then magnify by by taking them more seriously than the results that are likely to be right...
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree