Sorry, I do not agree that he is the greatest player ever. He didn't have enough passion for chess. He was a natural chess genius, he never studied the game. I find his style instructive but not thrilling. I like combinative style, unexpected blows, though situations etc... I can't find those in Capablanca's games. Although, he has played some combinative games. Check out ''Capablanca-Mattison, Carslbad 1929''.In this game, Capa did nothing but just develop his pieces and that was enough for his opponent to resign. Brilliant finish.
....or check out'' Alekhine-Lasker Zurich 1934'' where Alekhine played his teacher. The point where Lasker resigned: I like unexpected blows like that. Big ideas, daring chess.
Also check out ''Capablanca-Alekhine Buenos, Aries 1927'' where Alekhine toyed Capablanca in terms of calculation skills.
I think Alekhine, Fischer and Kasparov can be a canditate for the greatest. Capablanca didn't have enough passion as those guys.
My choice would be Alekhine.
Chess enthusiasts constantly ponder who was the greatest chess player of all time. But, such a question is extremely difficult to answer and is like asking who was the greatest basketball player or baseball player of all time. Babe Ruth? Mickey Mantle? Which one? You could argue in both directions. It is rather more important to ask how each of the greats succeeded in seducing us. I agree with one of the latter posts in that Fischer, Kasparov and Alekhine could be thought of as the greatest players of all time by numbers. However, Fischer was not great for the same reasons as the others and vice versa. Fischer was great because of how he changed the game for the better. Not only was he one of the top five strongest players of all time, but he thought of us in his own eccentric way. That is the way Bobby loved us - in his own way and unknowingly. He was our Isaac Newton of Chess. Strange. Brilliant. Misunderstood. Mysterious. Kasparov was only brilliant, determined and intensely competitive. He was AWESOME and POWERFUL. He played as well or better than Fischer played. But, I say if Kasparov had played Fischer when Bobby was in his prime, it would have been the WAR of all WARS. I do not believe Kasparov could have beat the FISCHER of 1972. Alekhine was strange, a maniac! He was a drunk. All he loved to do is get drunk and play chess. He even played a simul drunk. He was a very brilliant chess player. And, by the numbers, yes, he WAS great indeed! But, out of all the players throughout time, I consider Paul Morphy to be the most amusing and delightful. He was a tiny fellow with a big chess mind. I saw his tombstone. Uneventful as it was, I was happy I did it. I believe Morphy could very well be considered the greatest chess player in history for the sheer beauty of his games. No one's games - not even Fischer's or Kasparov's - seem to have that simplicity of beauty that Morphy's games had within them. They were little gems that will forever be a delight to us all. Who was the greatest? I think many were the greatest for their times. But, considering the numbers and the evidence of mathematics, clearly Kasparov dominates them all. I am not fond of Kasparov though. He is not our American brother. I think our choice of who is the best depends on our likes and dislikes. For me, I am a romantic. I go with Paul Morphy, the little Creole warrior, the old American dream which once meant something more than our greed suggests today! 🙂 What a delight! This one's to you and the Fried Liver Attack, Paul!
p.s. Oh, Fischer is quoted as saying that Morphy - in a set match - could beat any of the players today. I truly believe it, too. Hail Morphy! King of Chess! Throws away all his pieces but two, and checkmate!
I must agree your precise comments. Morphy is maybe a chess genius but he was never a modern GM. Like Kasparov, Fischer or Alekhine. My point is more who is the greatest chess player. Who really studied the game and adored his life to it. Not natural geniuses like Capablanca or Morphy.
Morphy's games are just brilliant. He is maybe the smartest guy in chess history after Capablanca. I feel more like Morphy myself but Capa was a true chess genius.
Throws away all his pieces but two, and checkmate![/b]This is a quick friendly game (20 min) I played long time ago in my teenager times while studying Morphy's games. The victim is a friend of mine. There are lots of mistakes in the game but the finish is amusing.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Qxd4 c5 5.Qa4+ Bd7 6.Qb3 Qe7 7.Nc3 Bc6 8.Be3 b6 9.O-O-O Nf6 10.Nd5 Bxd5 11.exd5 a6 12.Qxb6 Ne4 13.Nd2 f5 14.Bc4 f4 15.Nxe4 fxe3 16.Rhe1 Qa7 17.Nxd6+ Kd7 18.Qb7+ Kxd6 19.Qc8 Nd7 20.Qc6+ Ke5 21.Qe6+ Kf4 22.fxe3+ Kg5 23.h4+ Kxh4 24.Rh1+ Kg5 25.g4 g6 26.Rh5+ gxh5 27.Qf5+ Kh4 28.Qxh5+ Kg3 29.Rg1+ Kf2 30.Qh2+ Kxe3 31.Qg3+ Kd4 32.Rd1+ Kxc4 33.Qb3# 1-0
Originally posted by NicotineManKeep strudying Morphy and tactics in general. You could have finished the game in 10 or more moves less.
This is a quick friendly game (20 min) I played long time ago in my teenager times while studying Morphy's games. The victim is a friend of mine. There are lots of mistakes in the game but the finish is amusing.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Qxd4 c5 5.Qa4+ Bd7 6.Qb3 Qe7 7.Nc3 Bc6 8.Be3 b6 9.O-O-O Nf6 10.Nd5 Bxd5 11.exd5 a6 12.Qxb6 Ne4 13.Nd2 f5 14. ...[text shortened]... h5+ gxh5 27.Qf5+ Kh4 28.Qxh5+ Kg3 29.Rg1+ Kf2 30.Qh2+ Kxe3 31.Qg3+ Kd4 32.Rd1+ Kxc4 33.Qb3# 1-0
Originally posted by Mephisto2I know I could have finished much earlier, it was a blitz game. Not a correspondence game. Actually some of the sacs are not sound. But as I said it is amusing as black eats too much and ends up in white's terrirtory😀
Keep strudying Morphy and tactics in general. You could have finished the game in 10 or more moves less.
The game is not brilliant or good or anything. It is just an entertaining memory of mine. I didnt send it as braggin' kinda thing. That is a stupid blitz match. All blitz games actually are.They show how good your instincts are, not how good you are😉
Thanks for the tips and again thanks for analyzing the game.
Mr. Nic
Indeed Alekhine was a genius.We know about his drinlkng problem;but stories said that he had played someone before in his drunk stage, and then some time later he faced again the same player;he would not only recognized that person, but also the game he played against him before>>
Incredible/
Originally posted by Nietzsche1844Moral of the story: If we want to have a memory as good as Alekhine, drink more beer😀
Indeed Alekhine was a genius.We know about his drinlkng problem;but stories said that he had played someone before in his drunk stage, and then some time later he faced again the same player;he would not only recognized that person, but also the game he played against him before>>
Incredible/
Re: Paul Morphy
Most people who are posting in this thread have probably already seen this game many times, but I think it's worth posting as it's one of the most instructive games ever played.
White: Paul Morphy
Black: Count Isouard and the Duke of Brunswick
Paris, 1858
Result: 1-0
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4 4. dxe5 Bxf3 5. Qxf3 dxe5 6. Bc4 Nf6 7. Qb3 Qe7 8. Nc3 c6 9. Bg5 b5 10. Nxb5 cxb5 11. Bxb5+ Nbd7 12. O-O-O Rd8 13. Rxd7 Rxd7 14. Rd1 Qe6 15. Bxd7+ Nxd7 16. Qb8+ Nxb8 17. Rd8#
The final position is a thing of beauty.
Originally posted by Natural ScienceI think the amazing thing is that this game was played in someone's box at the opera. Not the most ideal spot for a game. That Morphy had the presence of mind to create this thing of beauty at the opera is just incredible.
Re: Paul Morphy
Most people who are posting in this thread have probably already seen this game many times, but I think it's worth posting as it's one of the most instructive games ever played.
White: Paul Morphy
Black: Count Isouard and the Duke of Brunswick
Paris, 1858
Result: 1-0
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4 4. dxe5 Bxf3 5. Qxf3 dxe5 ...[text shortened]... sition is a thing of beauty.
[fen]1n1Rkb1r/p4ppp/4q3/4p1B1/4P3/8/PPP2PPP/2K5 b k - 0 17[/fen]
Morphy's game with the Count is a beautiful gem - timeless - proving him to be the Beethoven of chess! I especially like his games where he gives rook odds. I thought those games to be extremely delightful also. Just from studying Paul's games, you learn chess in its purest form. The incredible thing about Morphy's games? Well, try understanding some of Kasparov's games in their depths and complications like one understands a Morphy game of beauty? It's like Morphy just played solid principles and turned them into art. Just try this game on for size! It's my favorite! Morphy versus Rousseau!:
[Event "New Orleans"]
[Site "New Orleans"]
[Date "1849.??.??"]
[EventDate "1849.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "P Morphy"]
[Black "E Rousseau"]
[ECO "C39"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "34"]
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ng5 h6 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qxg4 Qf6 8.
Bc4+ Ke7 9. Nc3 c6 10. e5 Qxe5+ 11. Kd1 Kd8 12. Re1 Qc5 13. Bxg8 d5 14. Re8+
Kxe8 15. Qxc8+ Ke7 16. Nxd5+ Kd6 17. Qc7# 1-0 🙂