@ketchuplover
LoL a lot of "Top Players" making ridiculous blunders lately.
I'm pretty sure ole Frank Marshall was owned by Lasker? Tarrasch?
... maybe even a Reti or two... 🤔
@Nanomaster saidModern players have their predecessors to learn from, but not v.v. I doubt that native OTB ability has improved, though post-mortem analysis probably has (especially with AI assistance).
"The fact is if some some of these people who ridicule the play of past great players were born then, I assure you that Marshall would have knocked their teeth out."
- Cyrus Lakdawala, 2023
I dare say, if a modern player were transported back in time to the great tournament in New York 1924, without any knowledge of the games of Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, or Marshall, the top four scorers would be the same.
@moonbus said"Modern players have their predecessors to learn from..."
Modern players have their predecessors to learn from, but not v.v. I doubt that native OTB ability has improved, though post-mortem analysis probably has (especially with AI assistance).
I dare say, if a modern player were transported back in time to the great tournament in New York 1924, without any knowledge of the games of Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, or Marshall, the top four scorers would be the same.
I think that modern players have already learnt from their predecessors, if not directly, then indirectly.
I mean that there are some ideas and concepts that were unknown at one time, but nowadays, every chess player with an ELO rating starting from 2000 already knows these things.
For example, the concept of "blockade".
Forming new concepts, even understanding them, is difficult. It is much easier to apply these concepts if they are given in every modern chess book.
@Nanomaster saidMany players from the time of Lasker, Nimzovitsch, and Reti knew the principles, but may not have formulated them as separately as modern players do. Soviet players were literally drilled to go thru a mental check list at every move. It was ruthless but effective.
"Modern players have their predecessors to learn from..."
I think that modern players have already learnt from their predecessors, if not directly, then indirectly.
I mean that there are some ideas and concepts that were unknown at one time, but nowadays, every chess player with an ELO rating starting from 2000 already knows these things.
For example, the concept ...[text shortened]... s difficult. It is much easier to apply these concepts if they are given in every modern chess book.
I read thru Game Changer, the account of AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match. What struck me was that AlphaZero did not discover any principles not previously known; what it did however was often to combine them, for example by carrying out long range strategies by means of immediate tactical threats. This left Stockfish reeling from immediate threats and unable to mount any effective counter strategy.
@moonbus saidI cannot reply. The conversation has reached a dead end. Basically, that comment was completely out of context.
Many players from the time of Lasker, Nimzovitsch, and Reti knew the principles, but may not have formulated them as separately as modern players do. Soviet players were literally drilled to go thru a mental check list at every move. It was ruthless but effective.
I read thru Game Changer, the account of AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match. What struck me was that AlphaZero did ...[text shortened]... is left Stockfish reeling from immediate threats and unable to mount any effective counter strategy.
1 edit
@Nanomaster saidIn fact Moonbus told us something about the development of chess theory, so no it was compeltey in context.
I cannot reply. The conversation has reached a dead end. Basically, that comment was completely out of context.
I rephrase some theses, that have been brough forward to discuss:
* Chess ability has more to do with the player than with their time.
* Chess theory is constantly developing, but no human being is capable of holding all of it in thier brains
* Even with "known" theoretical endings sometimes even a master is not winning.
* Intuition in chess is poorly understood.
* Russian chess players were drilled to go through a checklist.
- This made them more effective than
. either their counterparts
. or than they would have been without the checklist.
* AI will add to chess theory.
* AI has as of now not developed a new principle, but found combinations of them that had yet evaded humans.
@Ponderable said@Ponderable,
In fact Moonbus told us something about the development of chess theory, so no it was compeltey in context.
I rephrase some theses, that have been brough forward to discuss:
* Chess ability has more to do with the player than with their time.
* Chess theory is constantly developing, but no human being is capable of holding all of it in thier brains
* Even with ...[text shortened]... as of now not developed a new principle, but found combinations of them that had yet evaded humans.
There are those who say if we are not care AI will take over the human race in years to come. Do you believe in that Theory???
-VR
@Ponderable saidSo, you decide what is in the context and what is not.
In fact Moonbus told us something about the development of chess theory, so no it was compeltey in context.
I rephrase some theses, that have been brough forward to discuss:
* Chess ability has more to do with the player than with their time.
* Chess theory is constantly developing, but no human being is capable of holding all of it in thier brains
* Even with ...[text shortened]... as of now not developed a new principle, but found combinations of them that had yet evaded humans.
Unfortunately, the discussion started from the quotation:
"The fact is if some some of these people who ridicule the play of past great players were born then, I assure you that Marshall would have knocked their teeth out."
- Cyrus Lakdawala, 2023
I also do not understand how all this wisdom is related to my comment, which was replied to by Moonbus. I think that he/she said something seemingly relevant, but actually ignored what I said and did not address the issue.
I am really trying to be polite. Trying hard.
@Nanomaster saidThis quotation originates from the following book:
"The fact is if some some of these people who ridicule the play of past great players were born then, I assure you that Marshall would have knocked their teeth out."
- Cyrus Lakdawala, 2023
Lakdawala, Cyrus
Opening Repertoire: Queen's Gambit Declined: Tarrasch
London: Glouchester, 2023
It is located in the "The Classics" section, immediately preceding Game 2.
Game 2 is the game
Marshall - Capablanca
23rd matchgame, New York 1909
which Capablanca won.
Lakdawala adds:
"It's a mistake to dismiss this next game by pointing out Marshall's sorry strategic understanding. It takes intelligence to view the game by 1909 standards and not by those of today's far more sophisticated grasp."
The game is below: