Author: Peter Kasinski
Date: 09:56:24 02/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 1999 at 10:42:45, Michael Ginat wrote: >On February 26, 1999 at 01:18:09, Charles Unruh wrote: > >>On February 25, 1999 at 14:35:20, pavesyles wrote: >> >>>Too bad Kasparov wont ever play Bobby in a game of shuffle chess because i have >>>a funny feeling hw might not win and forget about Karpov . Anyway i would like >>>to see this shuffle chess take off how about you guys out there who are sick of >>>playing people who do nothing but memorise openings and ther traps >> >> >>Fischer had a fine universal style of play, being very-very strong in all >>aspects of the game. Kasparov also has a universal style, but he has a far >>stronger tactical ability than Fischer ever had. Fischer in his day was >>probably a better end game player than kasp. If fischer was still in his prime >>he might hold a draw in a shuffle match with Kasp. It though is quite >>illusionary however to imagine that anyone can play with the world top 5 or 10 >>players after laying of top rank level chess for 20+ years. > >Is there evidence that Kasparov is really tactically stronger than Fischer? It >seems that Kasparov wins most of his games by opening preparation and he openly >admits how proud he is when he wins a game through preparation. If I'm not >mistaken Sokolov in New in Chess wrote that Kasparov would not be significantly >stronger than other super GM's without his openings edge. This may have been Sokolov's reaction to Gary's comments about him being a "gifted amateur" in a well publicized interview. I think we would all be best advised not to draw too many conclusions from these expert opinions. PK >If that's true and assuming both players were in their prime I doubt Kasparov >would have a chance in a shuffle chess match. Please reread "My 60 Memorable >Games" and tell me Fischer was not as strong as Kasparov in tactics. If you look >at most of Kasparov's famous wins they may look as good but then you find out >the game was prepared mostly at home - at home K has a few strong grandmasters >and extensive computer support, constantly checking his opening repertoire and >ideas. Fischer got to the same or higher level with practically no help, no >computers, no soviet teachers such as Botwinnik or Furman. >Trust me, you don't beat Taimanov, Larsen, Petrosian and then Spassky the way he >did unless you're monster tactically. > >regards, > >Michael Ginat
This page took 0 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.