Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Old Chess Masters vs Computers

Author: Bob Durrett

Date: 18:29:06 10/27/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 27, 2002 at 21:18:51, Mike Byrne wrote:

<snip>

>Bottom line - Computers have raised the bar in terms of expectations from GM
>players - in general, I think top GMs of today are better than top GMs of
>yesteryear -- as today's top athlete's are better than yesteryear.  <snip>


The following is somewhat "far out," but:


Today's top athlete's are better than yesteryear???

I don't see how that could be unless we have selective breeding.  Are the top
athletes of today the products of matings of the top male and female athletes of
yesteryear?

Improved training methods and facilities couldn't count for that much.  Could
they?

Maybe the same applies to the top GMs?  No? . . . but why not? More complete
open and endgame theory?  Or what?  Which modern GM is as motivated and intense
as Fischer was at his prime?  Maybe it's the possibility of winning $700,000 for
just eight games?

WHY are the moderns better than their ancestors????  [Maybe they're not!]

Bob D.



This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.