Author: KarinsDad
Date: 13:55:53 03/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 05, 1999 at 02:47:05, Lawrence S. Tamarkin wrote: >Here I can't resist putting my own two cents in! BIG DEAL - Morphy had a period >like Tal where he totally crushed even Anderson & Lowanthall. But if you look >at the careers of these fine getleman, you will find that their careers were >signifcantly longer, and that their games (of which ultimately there were more >of), were of very high quality, had more of the (later called hypermodern), >concepts than morphy's overall, and that if there were no Morphy, these guys >would have been regonized far more deservedly by the average chess player (chess >book reader), today! Total agreement here with two exceptions. One is that it was a big deal. Morphy became the recognized first world champion and he won the championship match while he was ill. The second is that Morphy was like Fischer (and unlike Kasparov) in that he finally gets up the nerve to make a go of the championship (Staunton refusing to play him not withstanding), he does so, he is successful, and then he sort of goes over the deep end and plays little chess for the rest of his life. This is the main reason that he had a shorter career (and the main reason he has detractors like you, at least I assume you are a detractor from your big deal comment). As for Tal, he was still fairly dominant for years. He never made it back to the Chess Championship level once he lost it, but he played excellent chess for many years. For example, Tal was the youngest world champion until Kasparov. Tal also won the world blitz championship at the age of 51 (almost 30 years later). Tal's record for olympiad play is +59-2=32. Tal won or tied for first in the USSR championship 6 times (beating people like Keres, Bonstein, Petrosian) from 1957 to 1977, a 21 year period. He also came in second twice. In 1972-73, Tal went +47-0=39 in international play. You must remember that Tal played in the Russian school where the competition was (and is) drastically greater than it is in the US. So if you consider Tal to be a flash in the pan (I realize that you did not explicitly say that), you are mistaken (he was also plagued by kidney problems a good portion of his adult life). This applies to Morphy even moreso. While he played, he dominated both the US and European chess scenes. He was the Kasparov of his day and age. > >Another comparison springs to mind, How would you like to be someone like >Karpov. All your results are judged by the guy who proceeded you (who it is >true was incredibly good for a relatively short period of time), & then you play >really, really strong beautiful chess for the next 20 years, but your >detracter's (one of which is me, as I have never liked Karpov - I'm actually >surprised I'm defending him here!), often say you are an undeserving champion >because of the guy before you, a guy who won't even play against any other Human >under his own conditions - ANYWHERE! What a bummer!, What's that saying? - The >more things change, the more... Well, anyone who thinks that Karpov is an undeserving champion is just plain stupid. Granted, he hasn't been playing Kasparov for the title in the last 8 years, but he was beating Kasparov in 1984 (until it was called) and lost to him in a tied championship tournament in 1987. His overall score against Kasparov in World Chess Championship play is 71-73. He has been the closest competitor that Kasparov has ever had in World Chess Championship play. At his strongest, Karpov was probably the 3rd or 4th best player in the history of the game and he definitely has one of the longest winning streaks at or near the top (and at a period of history when there has been the largest number of excellent players). Although your analogy that Karpov was overshadowed by Kasparov is similar to how Andersen (and others) were overshadowed by Morphy is apt, you must admit that Kasparov did not dominate Karpov over the board anywhere near as well as Morphy did Andersen (in any of the Kasparov Karpov matches). KarinsDad :) :) PS. In your signature below, I have never been able to figure out if it is the software that is inkompetent or the addict. Please advise. :) > >mrslug - the inkompetent chess software addict! > > [snip]
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.