Originally posted by Fat LadyThis is an interesting discussion. Most games, even at GM level, are ultimately decided by tactical oversights, although of course such blunders are more likely to occur when under postional pressure. Strong players at correspondence chess should, if they have sufficient time to devote to the games they are playing, be able to virtually eliminate tactical blunders and so will be able to reach an objectively much higher standard of play compared to OTB. I know in the old days (i.e. before the development of computer programs and engines) of fairly average OTB IMs reaching the world correspondence top ten.
I disagree. I think that quite a lot of GMs and IMs could play nearly as well as Kasparov if they had more time to think about their moves. Besides, can you imagine how much effort they would put into their games against Kasparov! If I was playing him in a correspondence game I'd probably take a month off work and study the game for 12 hours a day.
I would have little or no chance against a Kasparov or Kramnik OTB but would certainly not rule out the possibility of holding a draw at correspondence. In my experience of playing against and analyzing with titled players, the main difference between say an average IM and a strong GM is the latter's ability to analyze more deeply and accurately concrete tactical variations.
To play someone like Kasparov or Anand (or in the old days, a Fischer or a Tal) is incredibly intimidating, since you know they can see so much further than you can. You then find yourself avoiding some of the critical lines which you really ought objectively to be playing. When playing correspondence, you tend to lose that fear if you know you have enough time to analyze a critical position deeply, not to mention the advantage of being able to move the pieces around!
Perhaps in a way CC makes things a lil boring by removing the human error element due to time pressure being absent. I was reading on chessbase how in the old postal days opponents could even write the moves wrongly and agonise over the correct moves.
The gap between top players (pros) and CC amateurs is narrowed off course by the research methods available. Even a 1500 player can churn the opening moves that Kramnik or Topalov can play. Just like the engine vs engine battles in the PlayChess engine room, the game is decided by who gets a favourable opening. However I would expect to see a CC player crushed by a GM in the ending just like the winning strategy of the Freestyle players.