Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too"

Traditional chess games and chess topics in general

Moderators: fern, Dan Honeycutt, Sam Hull

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
S.Taylor
Posts: 8386
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:25 am
Location: Jerusalem Israel

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by S.Taylor » Tue Dec 01, 2015 10:11 pm

Dann Corbit wrote:My hottest game of all time would be Tal verses Morphy.
Maybe not the most powerful and perfect chess in the world, but definitely the most scintillating.

Give me scintillation over perfection every time. Besides, scintillation I can understand. Comprehension of perfection eludes me.
Don't you think that both these players would now just trip over themselves, and simply not be able to be who they were able to be then, because what they do just wouldn't work today?
Or do you think that either of them would find great chess discoveries today also, if they were now in their prime?

Dann Corbit
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA
Contact:

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by Dann Corbit » Tue Dec 01, 2015 10:21 pm

S.Taylor wrote:
Dann Corbit wrote:My hottest game of all time would be Tal verses Morphy.
Maybe not the most powerful and perfect chess in the world, but definitely the most scintillating.

Give me scintillation over perfection every time. Besides, scintillation I can understand. Comprehension of perfection eludes me.
Don't you think that both these players would now just trip over themselves, and simply not be able to be who they were able to be then, because what they do just wouldn't work today?
Or do you think that either of them would find great chess discoveries today also, if they were now in their prime?
I believe it was Kasparov who called Morphy "the gifted of the gifted."
Both players were brilliant attackers. That would not change.
Furthermore, I think that if either spend a month studying up on modern chess theory, and then played Carlsen 100 games, both would win some of the games (though probably not very many because Carlsen is a chess beast).

I also think we would see more wins than the Komodo/Stockfish battle provided because the savage attacks would cause more wins and losses than positional Karpov/Botvinnik type games.

User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 5276
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA
Contact:

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by AdminX » Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:04 pm

Dann Corbit wrote:My hottest game of all time would be Tal verses Morphy.
Maybe not the most powerful and perfect chess in the world, but definitely the most scintillating.

Give me scintillation over perfection every time. Besides, scintillation I can understand. Comprehension of perfection eludes me.
There is one factor that gives a huge advantage.

History has taught Morphy zero about Tal, However history and taught Tal lots about Morphy. The same unfair advantage has to go to Carlsen as well. Quite unfortunate in my opinion.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers

Dann Corbit
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA
Contact:

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by Dann Corbit » Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:32 pm

As long as we are bringing them back from the dead for a friendly game, we may as well bring them up to speed on modern chess theory while they are at it.

I am guessing that they would be very engrossed by what has been gained over time and pick it up quickly.

Dirt
Posts: 2851
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:01 pm
Location: Irvine, CA, USA

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by Dirt » Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:07 am

Dann Corbit wrote:As long as we are bringing them back from the dead for a friendly game, we may as well bring them up to speed on modern chess theory while they are at it.

I am guessing that they would be very engrossed by what has been gained over time and pick it up quickly.
You could avoid their lack of modern opening preparation by having them play FRC. With just that change I no longer would be sure who would win.
Deasil is the right way to go.

S.Taylor
Posts: 8386
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:25 am
Location: Jerusalem Israel

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by S.Taylor » Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:48 am

I think there were other things that changed, also.

Dann Corbit
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA
Contact:

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by Dann Corbit » Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:09 am

S.Taylor wrote:I think there were other things that changed, also.
Or, at least, understanding of other things increased.

Would Morphy understand material imbalance? How about space? (Just guesses because I do not know how modern these ideas are).

Lots of things are really ancient, like understanding of pawn structure (Philodor) but other things are more recent.

User avatar
mhull
Posts: 12538
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas
Full name: Matthew Hull

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by mhull » Wed Dec 02, 2015 6:07 pm

Dann Corbit wrote:
S.Taylor wrote:I think there were other things that changed, also.
Or, at least, understanding of other things increased.

Would Morphy understand material imbalance? How about space? (Just guesses because I do not know how modern these ideas are).

Lots of things are really ancient, like understanding of pawn structure (Philodor) but other things are more recent.
If equalizing with FRC, we need Sultan Khan in the mix as well. Capablanca called him "a genius". And he was brilliant in the middle game.
Matthew Hull

S.Taylor
Posts: 8386
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:25 am
Location: Jerusalem Israel

Re: Carlsen: "I Would Beat Tal Easily, But Fischer Too&

Post by S.Taylor » Wed Dec 02, 2015 7:44 pm

Dann Corbit wrote:
S.Taylor wrote:I think there were other things that changed, also.
Or, at least, understanding of other things increased.

Would Morphy understand material imbalance? How about space? (Just guesses because I do not know how modern these ideas are).

Lots of things are really ancient, like understanding of pawn structure (Philodor) but other things are more recent.
And this is a big question, how our understanding has improved our chess vs the oldies if they were alive now.
But from the other perspective, could it be that morphy, and even tal and other earlier geniuses had insights which we do not have today, and would be able to rise above todays top chess and bring off some great brilliancies?
Or was all their greatness merely in what they understood back then with OUT having our systemized guidance. But nothing more?

Post Reply