Morphy the Terrible
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
It's not falling for it if you know he's a troll, feeding him can be fun.
Morphy's natural talents would be more than sufficient for him to vanquish the best twentieth century players
R. J. Fisher
But of course I got to believe our resident genius, mr. Yereslov, and not that untalented woodpusher, who became world champion by accident.
Fear_itself, I find your pic quite offensive. I am considering reporting it.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#65
Whoa there.
Paul Morphy had very little theory to work with. It is very harsh to say that Lasker and Steinitz were better. They learnt from Morphy. Alekhine learnt from Lasker. So on and so forth.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#66
Don't to want to feed the troll here really, but I have a question for ya. How strong was the opponents Morphy has faced ?
You can immediately recognise a troll thread by the frequency of new post, for instance this thread has more than 70 replies within 24 hour, whereas a normal thread would get 10 at most. Its being fuled by a symbiosis of the troll itself and the feeders of the troll wether intentionally or not. The troll gets what it wants (attention) and the troll feeders get what they want (entertainment). Thus they form a symbiosis where both parties get what they want, sort of like show business and gossip magazines/talk shows. Quite facinating. I think its a phenomena that deserves further study .
@Timmy62: nice insight. I think it's a mix though of the troll feeders seeking entertainment and them succumbing to somebody is wrong on the internet.
mr. yereslov is entitled to stick his two cents into chess.coms on-going chess debates. Those that think his voice should not be heard,or responded to---I say.who died and left u in charge ? You don't agree ,fine.Maybe u like to show him some info. that might change his mind,.---fine. Silence those who we disagree w/ you.....come on! My own chess thoughts on MORPHY , great talent w/ a flair for beautiful combinations.
sapientdust wrote:
@Timmy62: nice insight. I think it's a mix though of the troll feeders seeking entertainment and them succumbing to somebody is wrong on the internet.
lol:)
Oct 30, 2012
0
#72
Pfren, please see post number 58.
Fischer was wrong. And he was wrong because in part because of his patriotism at the time he wrote it. Remember his list of the top ten players in history, and who he left off that list!
When Fischer stuck to what happened at the chess board, he was one of the most objective and insightful observers of the game. But the instant he looked up, he saw conspiracies and fantoms.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#73
SmyslovFan wrote:
Pfren, please see post number 58.
Fischer was wrong. And he was wrong because in part because of his patriotism at the time he wrote it. Remember his list of the top ten players in history, and who he left off that list!
When Fischer stuck to what happened at the chess board, he was one of the most objective and insightful observers of the game. But the instant he looked up, he saw conspiracies and fantoms.
At least he knew how to spell "phantom."
Oct 30, 2012
0
#74
This close to Halloween, I preferred the archaic spelling of the word. You may also wish to correct my spelling of "preferred".
SmyslovFan wrote:
Yereslov may be a troll, but his point that by today's standards Morphy is not a great player is valid.
Morphy was the greatest player of his generation by a country mile, but he was terribly weak in the endgame, even by the standards of his day.
Kenneth Regan, using computers and statistical models, calculated Morphy's playing strength at 2344 based on his 55 most important games.
I still marvel at Morphy's fantastic attacking games and his contributions to chess both as art and science. But he really does not rate, in an absolute sense, as a special player by today's standards.
Below is a link to Regan's paper which explains both the relative ratings and the methodology he used to reach those ratings.
I read this paper and its pretty interesting, acording to it this are the strongest players of the 20th century:
1. Kasparov
2. Capablanca
3. Fisher
They had the best ratings in the past century, i think its acurate
sapientdust wrote:
@Timmy62: nice insight. I think it's a mix though of the troll feeders seeking entertainment and them succumbing to somebody is wrong on the internet.
omigosh, it's me talking about people stopping smoking.
But I don't care if they smoke.
Just why did so many non-smokers come, though? Well, who knows. You won't have Richard Nixon to kick around anymore.
Mainly because he's dead. Either that or he's rolling in his grave.
So Yereslov, critic of great men being bestowed with what is rightfully theirs, inventer of "NEW" chess systems never seen before (by people who have never looked at a book), and decider of the best defenses available. If nobody likes his apples, why is everyone here?
If I write a post and title a losing game by Bobby Fischer, and title the article, Bobby Fischer is a Fake... will I, too, get near a hundred hits?
If so...I am not doing it.
I tried to explain to a new person here what all the compartments lead to from the green bar on everyone's page. I came to "FORUMS" and really didn't know what to say.
What IS the FORUMS?
Do we get our rocks there, or should we bring our own?
What IS the FORUMS? I will explain this secret for you if you just listen. I will answer your question with a question:
We must all congregate together by the many mediums of comunication. When the fibers of the fiberoptic cables of the internet merge with the fibers of our very being a transformation occurs within ourselves. We must let go of ancient traditions and transcend our physical and mental limitations to survive in this cut throat realm. Those who do become stronger and in time become one. This one is "FORUMS".
Together we must fuse our mind's eye with this mythic beast through love and life. We can overcome the sensations. We can rule this realm. I know this is frightening information but you must accept it. In time you will fully understand.
I remember when I first learned it. I fought it with all my might. Even with all of my resistance I was powerless against it. That is it's strength. The more you fight it the stronger it gets. I eventually surrendered myself to it and I was finally released from it's hatred and I willingly let it consume me. Even now my fight against it scars me. I wake up screaming every night. Don't make the same mistake I did. Open yourself to its all consuming jaws.
There are rocks available here but bring your own. You will need many.
The Annunaki told me all about that. They also wanted to drop a word on Comet Elenin.
Yereslov has disappeared and yet the forum goes on! Thanks for the laughs, friend.
But all the trolling and humour aside, I wonder sometimes about the degree to which Yereslov's basic approach really is something we fall into as chess players, only to feel scandalized if it makes a Paul Morphy seem "weak" in some sense. To what extent was Morphy's strength owed in part to his human insight into the nature of his opponents? If you can properly figure what your opponent will actually do in a situation, then a computer-model "best" move may not be the best move at all! Computers rely on this to make up for something that Morphy had...a human ability to think creatively, to anticipate, to deceive, to make something beautiful.
I would love to see a passionate player like Morphy be able to win World Championships again. Maybe we're destroying all the future Morphys out there ourselves...maybe Fischer was right that the soul is gone out of chess...maybe the goofy troll yereslov upsets us because he makes us feel guilty about what we've all done to the game we love...
Too heavy?