Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

cant blame it on anand


  • 5 years ago · Quote · #1

    rahul_theROCKSTAR

    the number of wins are decreasing because of more theory and better defensive techniques so what can anand do if he was born in this generation 

    maybe he could have defeated people the same way morphy didnt

    MAYBE ALL GREat PLAYERS WHERE THE BEST OF THERE TIME  

    or  you guys got any suggestions???????

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #2

    RainbowRising

    I dont even know what you are trying to say??

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #3

    TheGrobe

    I think he's trying to say that it's not Anand's fault that GM games tend to be so drawish.

    I'm just not sure why he's trying to say it.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #4

    rahul_theROCKSTAR

    what i am trying to say is that people say morphy or capablanca were better then anand Because they were dominant unlike anand BUT WITH DEFENSIVE TECHNIQUE at its best ,because  with advance in time defensive technique  becomes better

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #5

    SorryFugu

    In an era of drawish chess, you can become world champioin by eking out more wins, and suffering fewer losses than everybody else.  Do this every year, year in, year out, and you get to be considered the dominant player of the era.

    Anand isn't considered a tier below the great champions because of his W/L/D records.  He's considered a tier below them because for a large chunk of his prime, he was clearly a tier below Kasparov.

    He's still a great champion, just gets ruled out of "greatest of all time" talk because he clearly wasn't the greatest of his own.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #6

    TheGrobe

    rahul_theROCKSTAR wrote:

    what i am trying to say is that people say morphy or capablanca were better then anand Because they were dominant unlike anand BUT WITH DEFENSIVE TECHNIQUE at its best ,because with advance in time defensive technique becomes better


    Much more clear the second time around.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #7

    TheGrobe

    And that the cause is that play is not as sharp as it used to be with perenially advancing research and discoveries continually adding defensive resources to known theory.

    (By the way, isn't "known theory" a bit of an oxymoron?)

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #8

    raulthetiger

    hmmm ur correct


Back to Top

Post your reply: