what do you think was morphy's rating

barnhagon escreveu:

fryedk wrote "... Lasker was somewhat weaker than Capablanca - Capa has a 55% score against Lasker.  So lets say Lasker is 2550.  Now Lasker was significantly better Steinitz - 16 wins and 8 losses, with 12 draws, for a 73% score. So lets put Steinitz at 2400.  Now Steinitz and Adolf Andersson played 22 times, with each winning 11. (no draws!).  But- Morphy dominated Andersson - Morphy has 12 wins to 3 losses, with 2 draws, for a 76% score. This puts Morhpy roughly on par with Lasker  - therefore, I estimate that Morphy was about 2550 Strength. "   

Comparisons like that are very suspect.  Lasker was not necessarily weaker than Capablanca if you take both at their peak or relative to their peers.  In 1921 when their match was played Capa was a bit stronger, but then he was 32 and Lasker 52.  Seven years earlier Lasker was a bit stronger than Capa, beating him to win the 1914 St. Petersburg tournament.  Lasker only once finished behind Capa in a tournament and that was near the end of his life. 

An old Chess Life mag article pointed out that Capablanca and Fischer played several of the same opponents,  11 or 12  I believe, and Capa's record was superior to Fischer's.  Capa likely would have played them when they were closer to their prime and he was past his. Fischer was probably not yet at his peak when he played them.  


Exactly, look at Lasker's results at Moscow 1935, when he was 65. Lasker finished ahead of Capablanca in several tournaments after he lost the World Championship in 1921 - specific head to head results are not very illuminating, and has to be said that Lasker actually wanted to resign his title in favour of Capablanca (and we have to remember that World War I basically had deprived Lasker, as a German, of his life's savings). What players like Lasker and Korchnoi show is their ability to develop their game as the game itself develops. Tarrasch, to compare with one of Lasker's contemporaries didn't show the same ability to adjust.