Author: Oliver Y.
Date: 16:25:40 02/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 1999 at 12:56:24, Peter Kasinski wrote: >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 I was thinking the same things as Mr. Ginat, and Sokolov's opinion is far more valuable than most of ours, according to playing strength. Spraggett said something along similar lines, and that the politics of ratings and invitations created some sort of exclusive club independent of ability. Do you know of opinions from other GMs on this topic? Please share them. Oliver Y.
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.