15865 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Indeed. Its easy to overlook Capa's natural talent. Though Im an Carlsen fan I have said many timed Capa would beat him in a match. I am of the absolute opinion as Magnus is not conventional in assessing positions that Jose could actually, through experience alone, outplay him.
I hate carleson
"Though Im an Carlsen fan I have said many timed Capa would beat him in a match. I am of the absolute opinion as Magnus is not conventional in assessing positions that Jose could actually, through experience alone, outplay him"
Kasparov was asked if the top players today are better than him and Karpov, and he said that every generation is better than the previous one, that's just how it is. Capablanca lost to Alekhine in the 1920s, and could just not compete with the best players nine decades later, chess has changed much too much the last century.
Chess hasn't changed, the rules are still the same. Of course young star Kasparov beat 60-years old Smyslov, but it doesn't imply his generation understood chess overall better than Smyslov's. Karpov would probably lose a match vs Carlsen today, but Karpov's level in 80's is unsurpassed by today's top players. The same Capablanca, his level in years 1918-22 is way above today's top.
Tal-Capablanca would have been a fun match. If Tal was healthy, I'd prefer Tal. His ability to create irrational positions and find wins confounded Botvinnik in 1960. He showed repeatedly that his endgame technique was truly world class.
I believe that Tal would defeat Capa in a match, and more decisively than Alekhine did. As Kasparov pointed out, Capa did not respond well to Alekhine's fighting spirit and dynamism. Capa's legendary technique abandoned him in that match. It wasn't because Capa was suddenly somehow weaker, it was because technique really gets tested when a player is tired. And Alekhine tired out Capa.
As great as Tal was, Fischer was better. As great as Fischer was, Kasparov was better. As great as Kasparov was, and is, Carlsen is already better.
Utter nonsense. Carlsen is a patzer compared to the great communist masters Karpov and Kasparov.
Yes, nobody has ever achieved higher level than the Soviet Communist masters Smyslov, Karpov and Kasparov.
I say Carlsen because Capablanca is dead.
Botvinnik praise Capablanca:Capablanca‘s style also heavily influenced the styles of later World Champions Botvinnik, Robert James Fischer and Anatoly Karpov. Botvinnik observed that Alekhine had received much schooling from Capablanca in positional play, before their fight for the world title made them bitter enemies. ( I would include Carlsen too.)
Here is Keres trying to beat Capablanca but fail; Capablanca was 51 years old to Keres 23 years, a battle of genius chess and generation gap.
Capablanca makes chess look easy; he takes second place in Margate 1939, not bad for a 51 years genius.
TOURNAMENT STANDINGSMargate Tournament
They were amateurs back then. Capablanca couldn't even beat George Thomas who was a badminton player.
Here Capablanca destroy a young pup and he is licking his wounds. Capablanca makes winning so easy even at 51 years old.
Mikenas was a strong GM-strength Baltic player (later awarded the FIDE GM title post WW2), who has beaten several World Champions and near-World Champions, and was much respected in the Soviet school of chess. Yet Capablanca in this demolition makes him look almost like a newbie.
Just a reminder: 51 years old is NOT ancient. Most chess players reach their prime around age 30 and maintain their skill with minimal decline until nearly 60.
Here is world champion candidate and Capablanca makes him look a like fool; when Capa is in trouble he can so easily.
Perhaps Najdorf can answer this. This is what he wrote in 1969 about this game:
"Vain and proud as I was, I thought I had 'made it' as a chessplayer because I had a chance to do battle with an acknowledged chess genius. Under the sway of my emotions, I came out with my prepared opening; Capablanca meanwhile was totally relaxed. Two very pretty women were following his actions as if mesmerized. Without ever taking his eyes off them for long, he built up a commanding initiative. My position went steadily downhill, and the most galling thing for me was the sense of being disdained and made a fool of. In my desperation I tried reminding myself: 'Being beaten by Capablanca isn't a calamity. It's an honor just to have sat opposite him at a chessboard.' Yet I couldn't shake off the feeling of humiliation. 'To hell with chess,' I thought. 'I'm going to devote myself to other things. I'm going to invent a <new> game.' With my head spinning, I set a trap, and Capablanca, true to his usual practice, made his reply without thinking for very long. Luckily for me it was an oversight, and he was soon forced to give up some material. Immediately he offered a draw. I refused."
When Najdorf declined the Cuban's offer with only one minute left on his clock for 17 moves, the word spread like wildfire among the spectators: "That man's mad or a genius!" ("Nowadays we know that he's both!"- Max Euwe )
As a result of some further errors the game ended in a draw after all. At the time, Najdorf thought: "It's a triumph to draw with Capablanca of all players, but I'm damned if I don't owe it to those two women who've been devouring him with their eyes."
Just compare Carlsen endings and Capas endings and you'll find answer...
Capablanca and Carlsen is basically the same; Capablanca has better nerves than Carlsen and will give Capablanca better chances to win a match.
Well, no, I would say Carlsen has better nerves than Capablanca, and everyone. He's like a Karpov/Capablanca but has the supercharged will to win of a Fischer. That's what makes him so exceptional.
I think minimal is probably stretching it... chess is a demanding game. I basically agree with this point in that it's probably vastly overestimated how much age affects you, people can still be very sharp in their 50s, but I think it will still have a definite effect.
Are you and GreedyPawnEater the same person? What's with making statements like this without providing anything to back up your claim? Capablanca has better nerves than Carlsen? How do you know? How do you know what Carlsen's nerves are?
by titust a few minutes ago
What do you say one move from mating your opponent!
by fischerman_bob a few minutes ago
If Capablanca played Carlsen for the world champion match, who would win?
by Arawn_of_Annuvin a few minutes ago
Does chess exist??
by Catrina-Volokitten 3 minutes ago
by 1NaturalDisaster 5 minutes ago
why is ruy lopez considered the strongest
by lolurspammed 10 minutes ago
Checkmate with rook and king
by EvgeniyZh 10 minutes ago
7/28/2015 - A Delicate Process
by Senior-Lazarus_Long 13 minutes ago
100 awkward moments in a game of chess
by egoole 18 minutes ago
Hurt/Heal World Top 10
by Monarch1066 23 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!