1. SubscriberMarinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    tbc
    Joined
    18 Feb '04
    Moves
    61659
    20 Dec '13 13:46
    I have recently been on something of a Capablanca binge. How it took me so long to discover the brilliance of this player i have no idea. Anyway, i have discovered that some kind soul on chessgames has actually added notes to all the games from the 1922 London Tournament. I highly recommend this page, i have a feeling i might just end up playing through every game. Capablanca is just invincible in this tournament +11 -0 =4, WHAT a performance!!

    Enjoy..

    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=79242
  2. Joined
    21 Feb '06
    Moves
    6830
    20 Dec '13 14:434 edits
    Originally posted by Marinkatomb
    Capablanca is just invincible in this tournament
    But so was my favourite player, Alekhine!

    Capablanca was superb at beating weaker players and I think that was the main difference between the two in this tournament. Alekhine took risks and played double-edged chess, and that resulted in him drawing the odd game against second rate players. Here is one example from this tournament:
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1012119

    In Capa's game against the same opponent, he was gifted a free pawn early on and cruised to victory:
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1093019

    I can't help thinking that Capablanca would be much less successful if he was transported to nowadays as even bog standard 2400 rated Grandmasters have excellent technique and Capa would get precious few easy points just by wobbling his pieces around and waiting for his opponents to blunder.
  3. SubscriberMarinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    tbc
    Joined
    18 Feb '04
    Moves
    61659
    20 Dec '13 15:01
    Originally posted by Fat Lady

    I can't help thinking that Capablanca would be much less successful if he was transported to nowadays as even bog standard 2400 rated Grandmasters have excellent technique and Capa would get precious few easy points just by wobbling his pieces around and waiting for his opponents to blunder.
    But isn't that exactly what Carlsen does? Exchange down into a level end game and out play his opponent. There are marked similarities between the two. Capablanca can only play the position his opponent creates, it's very hard to say what his true strength would be given opportunities to play stronger opposition. Don't get me wrong, i'm not about to knock Alekhine, i enjoy playing though his games too. It just strikes me that Capablanca/Carlsen are both excellent at allowing their opponents enough rope to hang themselves with. Instead of forcing the issue, they invite their opponents to force the issue while setting up neat refutations. Gelfand also, he is brilliant at this sort of refutational chess.
  4. Joined
    21 Feb '06
    Moves
    6830
    20 Dec '13 16:38
    Capa often seemed to exchange down to a won endgame without his opponent realising what was happening until it was too late.

    I can't work out what Carlsen does yet. It looks like he's swapping off to a drawn position, but then he wins the drawn position! Perhaps he just understands endings much better than anyone else around at the moment.

    It's not that he's necessarily playing the "best" moves (according to the very strong chess programs), it's more that he makes the narrow path of accurate moves that his opponents have to stay on in order to obtain a draw so narrow that most of them fall off before they reach the destination.

    I find Carlsen's games fascinating to watch, but I don't think I learn anything useful from them because I don't have a fraction of the skill needed to play like that.

    The same with Capa really. When I play sensible chess, putting my pieces on good squares and waiting for my opponents to blunder, then anyone with any ability will start thrashing around madly when they see that they are heading for a losing ending and turn it all messy and tactical.
  5. Joined
    14 Dec '07
    Moves
    3763
    20 Dec '13 16:42
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    But so was my favourite player, Alekhine!

    Capablanca was superb at beating weaker players and I think that was the main difference between the two in this tournament. Alekhine took risks and played double-edged chess, and that resulted in him drawing the odd game against second rate players. Here is one example from this tournament:
    http://www.chessgame ...[text shortened]... ous few easy points just by wobbling his pieces around and waiting for his opponents to blunder.
    Capa probably wouldn't fare well today, but I would say his study habits would be his undoing rather than players being better. By all accounts, he hated to study. You can't be a grandmaster today without spending thousands of hours on memorization.
Back to Top