Reposting some claims of no1moron and my questions/statements which he did ignore:
Top GMs of 30 years ago understood chess principles just as well as modern GMs do.
Really? Then please explain how it comes modern GMs considered Hedgehog and Sveshnikov as inferior, but modern GMs are not? Which of them are wrong?
Modern GMs are biased in their own favor. (talking about Kasparov and other GMs who have stated opinion that chess has been progressed during these years)
If you did read the book I`ve recommended then you would know that also GM`s of older generation (reaching their peak in 70ties) have admitted that there have been changed a lot in understanding of chess and opening theory.
Btw. Feel free to explain what will you consider as evidence?
No one is talking about openings. Engine match ups have nothing to do with openings. This is a complete non sequitur.
Do you think that knowledge of opening, quality of your opening play does not affect your chess strength??? Do you think that ability to evaluate of position does not affect your chess strength???
I assume you have seen the data comparing blunder percentage of World Champions. How do you account for the fact that a player who reached his zenith almost 100 years ago (Raul Capablanca) had a lower percentage of blunders than any WC since? He must have been a "weaker" player after all.
According to your logic only measure of chess strength is "blunder percentage".
So 7 of the top 12 rated players in the world as of January 2009 have played 6 Bg5 7 f4 in this decade, most in the last few years. Yet, according to Korch, hardly any GMs play this because of the vast improvements in opening theory which render this line obsolete. And this was not merely a tangential point, but a central one in his claim that the openings played by Fischer-Spassky in 1972 showed how "weak" they were.
Originally posted by Korch What about posting one Spassky`s win over Kasparov in 1983 to claim that in 70ties top GMs were not worse then modern GMs? 😀
P.S. I`m gonna sleep. Have a nice day and read more books about chess and good manners 😉
That game, played when Spassky was well past his prime, was a piece of evidence to refute your unsupported claim that Spassky was a "weaker" player.
Originally posted by Korch Reposting some claims of no1moron and my questions/statements which he did ignore:
[b]Top GMs of 30 years ago understood chess principles just as well as modern GMs do.
Really? Then please explain how it comes modern GMs considered Hedgehog and Sveshnikov as inferior, but modern GMs are not? Which of them are wrong?
Modern GMs are biased in the ...[text shortened]... all.
According to your logic only measure of chess strength is "blunder percentage".[/b]
All these points were addressed. Some are absolutely false categorizations of statements I made. Others are just grandiose assertions of yours without any objective evidence to support them.
*Disclaimer*: Posted under the influence of alcohol
I started reading this thread and got bored after about 6 pages. Skipped to the end and, lo - its still going on.
It strikes me that this is one of these arguements that will never be won, one way or the other. Its ranked up there with the "Who's the best guitar player ever", "Who's the best football player (soccer/american - you choose)", "Linux or Windows", "Vi or Emacs", etc, etc, etc.
At the end of the day, none of us will ever be right. We can all come up with arguements that support our position on both sides of the discussion, all of which are equally valid.
Anyway, that' just my tuppence worth. I'm going back to drinking rum, listening to my mp3's on shuffle and/or watching Rowan Atkinson on youtube.
Originally posted by BigMick *Disclaimer*: Posted under the influence of alcohol
I started reading this thread and got bored after about 6 pages. Skipped to the end and, lo - its still going on.
It strikes me that this is one of these arguements that will never be won, one way or the other. Its ranked up there with the "Who's the best guitar player ever", "Who's the best football ...[text shortened]... ng rum, listening to my mp3's on shuffle and/or watching Rowan Atkinson on youtube.
You have missed pages 7-16 - when sober go back and read them.
I hate being on shuffle - prefer to listen to my Beatles in order
of LP's.
Don't like Rum - always gives me terrible hangover.
Fischer-Spassky 1972 Fritz 11 analysis
15 Jan '09 00:29
Back to Top