Could you beat Morphy if he gave you knight odds?

Sort:
eciruam
pawnwhacker wrote:

    Morphy could play chess while blindfolded.

    Anyone who can play a competent game of chess while blindfolded has my admiration.

    I would not be so bold as to say I could win against Morphy even if he were to give me a knight and play while blindfolded.

He wasn't actually blindfolded in the literal sense...he usually sat in a chair facing a wall with no chess board in front of him. If he was playing a "blindfold" simul, his opponents would be in another room with boards and pieces, and he wouldplay all the games in his head ! And usually win.

pawnwhacker

leiph18: "With your rating I think you should try playing blindfold, you may surprise yourself!"

   Every once in awhile, I recall playing chess while in a dream. The board and all the pieces are not abstract but exactly as I would see them while awake with opened eyes. No e4 or h7 or any such...the real board and real pieces.

   Could I do this while awake? I don't know. Maybe with a lot of practice. But I've never been interested in memorizing or visualizing at chess. I like to calculate. And that is plenty to deal with, all by itself. Smile

greenfreeze

can you beat a dead horse

patzermike

A sadonecroequiphiliac is someone with a perverse compulsion to beat dead horses.

greenfreeze wrote:

can you beat a dead horse

airantrobo

No

SilentKnighte5
leiph18 wrote:
batgirl wrote:
I_Am_Second wrote:
SilentKnighte5 wrote:

Simple question.

I could beat anyone dead, regardless of the odds. 

Fred Edge (in "The Exploits of Paul Morphy") wrote:

Throughout the first game, Harrwitz displayed the most rollicking contempt for his antagonist, and, at the conclusion, when Morphy resigned, he rose from his seat, stretched across the table, and taking the latter by the hand, he felt his pulse and declared to the crowd—" "Well, it is astonishing! His pulse does not beat any faster than if he had won the game."  Everybody was disgusted at such a contemptuous proceeding, but Morphy took it all as quietly as though it were a part of the match.

It's possible that Harrwitz thought he was already playing a near-dead opponent.

Wow, such contempt!

Morphy was a real gentleman.

Morphy whooped that ass though.

Pulpofeira

What about pushing daisies?

SilentKnighte5
Pulpofeira wrote:

What about pushing daisies?

Great question.

MickinMD

Based on GM Larry Kaufman who says he's around 2400 and the break-even point for N-odds is about 1800 with his students, I'd say that me, at 1840, would lose to Morphy and that feels right for me at the gut level: I'd give him a good game but would fail.

I don't have time to go through all the answers here to see if I'm duplicating an answer, but GM Larry Kaufman, famous for the study published long ago in USCF's Chess Life Magazine that proved the Q-R-B-N-P values are 9.75-5-3.25-3.25-1 and a Bishop Pair is a 0.5 P advantage (

https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-evaluation-of-material-imbalances-by-im-larry-kaufman

), made an interesting observation about Knight Odds that is at the bottom of this quora comment below that is from 2015 (

https://www.quora.com/In-chess-what-is-the-relationship-between-rating-difference-ELO-and-the-handicap-needed-for-an-even-game):

John Fernandez, 2133 FIDE

Answered Oct 11, 2015

There was a recent match between the computer Komodo and GM Petr Neuman, where the GM got 2-pawn odds. Human won with 4 points out of 6 games (+3 =2 -1). In the ChessBase article (Komodo 9 odds matches against GMs) there was a table showing various odds:

null
GM Larry Kaufman, though, points out an important thing about these Elo estimates:

[T]he Elo equivalent of a given handicap degrades as you go down the scale. A knight seems to be worth around a thousand points when the "weak" player is around IM level, but it drops as you go down. For example, I'm about 2400 and I've played tons of knight odds games with students, and I would put the break-even point (for untimed but reasonably quick games) with me at around 1800, so maybe a 600 value at this level. An 1800 can probably give knight odds to a 1400, a 1400 to an 1100, an 1100 to a 900, etc. This is pretty obviously the way it must work, because the weaker the players are, the more likely the weaker one is to blunder a piece or more. When you get down to the level of the average 8 year old player, knight odds is just a slight edge, maybe 50 points or so.

Bad_Dobby_Fischer
Eseles wrote:
SilentKnighte5 wrote:

I'm 99% sure I could.

the remaining 1% has the correct answer

LOL

SmyslovFan

@MickinMD, thanks for sharing that info! I vaguely remember seeing it before, but had forgotten the details. Kaufman's comments make sense to me, and is in general agreement with what was said three years ago. An 1800 may not be able to beat Morphy at Knight odds in a match, but a 2000 should be able to.

Heather_Stephens

Did someone say he had a shoe fetish? I might stand a chance. But otherwise, he'd destroy me.

More importantly, Germany 1 - 1 Sweden and lots of time left!

darkunorthodox88

comfortably so.

SmyslovFan

We may be comfortably numb, but we play chess, not baseball. We not only can see what pitch is being thrown, we can judge whether the reaction was good with near absolute certainty.

chessbased

we no fking mystical genius.

DetectiveRams

I would lose to stcokfish at knight odds because I am not a very comfortable positional player. I would give myself a high chance of winning, a medium chance of drawing and a low chance of losing given rook odds. I would give myself a 98% chance of winning given queen odds. 

AutisticCath

Yes. If you are about 1600, you can beat Morphy every day.

Pulpofeira

null

josephwix
2 Year’s ago
JayeshSinhaChess
[COMMENT DELETED]