Author: Nacho Bidnuz
Date: 22:02:59 04/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
I seriously question the statement that the GM title is inflated. Although I haven't heard any arguments that Kasparov, Kramnik, Anand and the rest of today's top ten or so players would do poorly against the best players of twenty or thirty years ago, many have said that today's "ordinary GM's" would have been nobodies in the old days. When I look around I see guys like Shaked, Norwood, and the rest of the under-2600 GM crowd who seem to be no worse than the average GM's of the old days such as Evans, Lombardy, Keene, etc. Maybe Fischer at his peak was good enough to beat God at HIS peak, but that doesn't mean that the number 200 player today isn't as good as or better than the number 80 player in Fischer's day. Sometimes I feel like I'm arguing with the sort of people who think Babe Ruth was the greatest simply because they were 16-year-old baseball fanst in 1927. Nacho
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.