Bobby vs Paul ?
Sort:
Take your pick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Murphy
Personally, I think he's referring to the ballet dancer, you know how those dancers can weave on a chess board :P
I always liked Ringo the best
May 8, 2008
0
#5
I think you mean Paul Morphy,
anyways i dont know, i think Bobby would win because Morphy's game will be a little old fashoned, plus i think bobby has a lot more material available for study. thatss just my guess, morphy was a great player though
Bobby who?
I haven't heard of someone in chess go by the one name "Bobby". I've heard of Bobby Fischer but his real name was Robert Fischer.
Bobby vs a Ballet Dancer... tough call
May 8, 2008
0
#7
Max Harmonist (1864-1907) was a chess master/ballet dancer. I don't think he ever danced with Paul Murphy, though I could be mistaken. He did, however take first place in Hamburg 1885 and Berlin 1887.
Harmonist, playing black and winning against Isidor Gunsberg in the Italian Game:
Robert James Fischer would beat Morphy in 20 moves.Maybe they already played in heaven.
batgirl wrote: Who's Paul Murphy?
One wrong vowel and they treat you like an idiut.
Thank you, Batgirl!
I appreciate the defence...Max Harmonist!
Cheers, from Canada!
riez1974....AKA - cat woman!!!
Darthstapler8 wrote: Fischer himself said no one alive could beat Morphy in a match. I assume that includes himself
hmm so seeing as they are both now dead. i wonder weher that still applies. fischer would win hands down in my opinion. would have more that morphy hadnt combatted. it also depends on when in their careers. im assuming peaks
hmm so seeing as they are both now dead. i wonder weher that still applies. fischer would win hands down in my opinion. would have more that morphy hadnt combatted. it also depends on when in their careers. im assuming peaks
I believe Fischer would challenge Morphy using his invention 'Fischerandom Chess' to be fair since by the time of Fischer era a lot of improvements in the openings have already been developed and tested. Fischerandom will settle the issue of who's the better chess player - i would still go for Fischer because he'd been up against the very tough players of the Soviet chess machine.
May 13, 2008
0
#13
What an interesting topic for speculation. Both men were brilliant chess players, best in their era. Fischer had such a will to win along with his chess genius, although he was in awe of Morphy-who Fischer himself thought no one alive could beat him in a match. I don't know who would win in their prime. Objectively, I think Fischer, but I would be in Morphy's corner.
Bobby Fischer said that No One Alive Could Beat Paul Morphy In A Match. I'm a Fischer fan, a Morphy fan. Surely enough, no one alive could even invite a dead Paul Morphy in a match (joke). Paul Morphy is a brilliant attacking player, although he's from the Age of Romanticism (Adolf Anderssen era - The Immortal Game, The Evergreen), his style and ideas are also somewhat HyperModern - and that's why (most probably) Fischer admired Morphy a lot. For Fischer (let me describe it this way) Morphy is like having invented the microscope during the Stone Age. Paul Morphy is way ahead of his contemporaries in chess. No one alive? In a match? Then I would like to see him face Anatoly Karpov instead, Karpov is an airtight defensive genius. It'll be like an immovable force being hit by the unstoppable force. Fischer's admiration of Morphy doesn't mean that he's gonna lose against Sir Paul (not McCartney). As Kasparov puts it about Nigel Short's chances in the 1993 PCA WCC: 'absolutely no chance, no chance at all.'
May 13, 2008
0
#15
"Paul Morphy is a brilliant attacking player, although he's from the Age of Romanticism (Adolf Anderssen era - The Immortal Game, The Evergreen), his style and ideas are also somewhat HyperModern."
Morphy, a (somewhat) hypermodernist??
How do you define hypermoderism and how does Morphy fit in?
I'm waiting for someone to get really ticked off at this thread and say something really dumb like "YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY EQUATE TWO PEOPLE FROM TWO DIFFERENT ERAS, IT'S MATHEMATICALLY AND METAPHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!"
Or even "We'll never know will we?"
Fact is, they did play. And I know the result.
You too can know the results, for a paltry $50 to my paypal account, I will let you know the final score of the match.
YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY EQUATE TWO PEOPLE FROM TWO DIFFERENT ERAS, IT'S MATHEMATICALLY AND METAPHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE! So we'll never now will we?
That ones for you orginschile...
The classical idea of controlling the center is by occupying them with pawns like e4 and d4 for White, and in which Black tries to equalise for the e5 and d5 squares. The hypermodern openings' idea is based on attacking the center from the wings. Paul Morphy would usually start his games with 1.e4 - but he had other games where he used the Nimzowitsch-Larsen Attack which is a hypermodern opening.
The idea of hypermodernism is to attack the center with distant pieces thus inviting the opponent to occupy the center with pawns which will become the objects of attack. This idea became prominent in the 1920's, popularised by Nimzowitsch, Reti, Tartakower, Breyer.
In 1922, Richard Reti published Modern Ideas in Chess, an examination of the evolution of chess thinking from the time of Paul Morphy through the beginning of the hypermodern school.
Example of Classical Openings are: French, Ruy Lopez, Guioco Piano, Four Knights, Philidor, Center Game, Vienna.
Example of Hypermodern Openings are: Reti, KID, Queen's Indian, Nimzo-Indian (Nimzowitsch), Gruenfeld, Bogo-Indian (Bogoljubow), Old Indian, Catalan, Pirc, Nimzowitsch-Larsen Attack, Alekhine's Defense.
May 15, 2008
0
#19
"Paul Morphy would usually start his games with 1.e4 - but he had other games where he used the Nimzowitsch-Larsen Attack which is a hypermodern opening."
I would be highly interested in seeing a game by Morphy where he doesn't open with 1.e4 as White or in which he employed a Queenside fianchetto in either offense or defense. Can you show one such as you described?
Hello!
I have read about Paul Murphy, read about, Bobby Fisher...
In a phantom bet, who do you think would win? Would if be a draw, a five day long match?
Please share your thoughts...
Cheers! red sox nation