How bad were the old "GM's" really - Chess Forums - Page 14

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#261

FM Rumo75 wrote:

yureesystem hat geschrieben:

Jaime, one my favor grandmaster is Pillsbury and he did no have the same tools today GMs computer aid, games data base, and trainers to become one the top player; he just pure chess genius and would beat Lasker in a match.

I agree with you that Pillsbury's play in this game is strong and pleasant to the eye. But it seems to me that Gunsberg made it rather easy for him. Gunsberg's opening/middlegame play is terrible. Playing a flawless game of chess is quite doable if the opponent makes so many positional concessions.

And I mean no disrespect by that. The old masters had to create every bit of knowledge that we take for granted today.

I think Pillsbury was playing for a draw but change his mind when Chigorin won last round game and Pillsbury outplay Gunsburg in the endgame.

We can say the same thing about today GMs, how is it possible for Carlsen to win draw positions from strong GMs; Anand chokes a draw in their first match on the fifth game and like above rook and pawn endgame Vishy could use similar technique to draw. A 2200 online player ( wannabe master insist it was a draw and i had to point out that Smyslov drew with two pawns down in that similar rook and pawn endgame.

I am not referring to you FM Rumo in this endgame but the dumb players who think they understand chess but don't.

Harley-Rebel

Aug 10, 2015

0

#262

yuree probably even thinks he knows my ELO rating! :)

he sees me rollin', he trollin'.

TheGreatOogieBoogie

Aug 10, 2015

0

#263

Reb wrote:

The old GMs were so bad that they would easily crush anyone in this thread !

Not Rumo, he's an FM meaning he at least has a playing strength of 2300 with a real rating. He'd score big in many of the early 20th century tournaments considering that John Nunn determined that Vidmar had an approximate strength of 2000.

Harley-Rebel

Aug 10, 2015

0

#264

Rumo should at least be fair and give knight odds.

TheGreatOogieBoogie

Aug 10, 2015

0

#265

yureesystem wrote:

How many Andersson's games did you play over? Andersson played weak players and very strong masters. Do you know who is Kolisch? So don't give me your grabbage, you don't know a thing about chess.Show me some of your analysis before run your mouth.

Okay Harley-Rebel, give me your analysis in how to draw or win the above rook and pawn endgame, if you think you understand chess.

That ending isn't hard to draw if you can recall the Vancura position's schematics.

TheGreatOogieBoogie

Aug 10, 2015

0

#266

Harley-Rebel wrote:

Rumo should at least be fair and give knight odds.

Even pawn and move would be quite a stretch, but should reasonably defeat those like Bogoljubov and Vidmar, but would still be challenged by Reti, Nimzowitsch, Lasker, and Alekhine. He'd still be capable of defeating them in some games and some estimates put them at IM strength. Though none of Morphy's opposition and very little of Lasker's was of IM strength.

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#267

TomHaegin wrote:

LOL, the level of expertise on this thread is in parts astonishing. How about getting his name correct, as a start?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Anderssen

Let start with your chess knowledge, you claim to know so much about chess.

It is white to move and win.

What is white winning move? And who are the players? If you can solve this you have good calculation skills. You have to be like FM Rumo level to solve this problem.

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#268

@TheGreatOogieBoogie, don't give any clues, it meant for them solve it. I can give them much more difficult endgame but let start with some simple ones. Beside not so simple, even GMs make mistakes in this endgame.

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#269

Harley-Rebel wrote:

yuree probably even thinks he knows my ELO rating! :)

he sees me rollin', he trollin'.

So what is your otb rating? I bet my is higher than yours.

TheGreatOogieBoogie

Aug 10, 2015

0

#270

The first thing I think of when I see the above position is the convergence of forces on c5 if the Nc3 weren't there. A very unclear position, black owns the light squares seems to dominate the c-file and the darksquared bishop slices across the board nicely coordinating with those pawns and also has the bishop pair watching the sensitive f1-a6 diagonal. Superficially black seems better, but the sensitive c5 point may give white some hope. If 1.Nxd5 then 1...Qxd5 2.Rxc5,Rxc5 3.Qxc5,Qxc5 4.Rxc5 leads to a winning endgame an exchange up. However, 1...Rxc2 complicates things, 2.Nxf6+,Kf7 3.Rxc2,Qxc2 4.Be5,Qc5 is better for black as I'm down the exchange and and am forced to get queens off the board due to the fork. Then again white does have a superior pawn structure, maybe fortress with knight and bishop? 4.Qd6,Kxf6 5.Be5+,Kf7 due to the h-pawn and bishop the king is forced back further with 6.Qd7+,Kf8 7.Bd6+,Kg8 can't see well here. 8.Qxe6+,Kg7 9.h6+ since queen defends pawn 9...Kh8 10.Be5#

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#271

@TheGreatOogieBoogie, it is not correct. I don't have time but tommorrow I explain it, it is much deeper move and beautiful.

Harley-Rebel

Aug 10, 2015

0

#272

yuree, you're sick and you should get help. it's only a little brat would say "I bet my rating is higher than yours". just totally mental, man. I'm rated over 2000 so now you just say you're higher than that.

didibrian

Aug 10, 2015

0

#273

Yuree, it would be a lot better if you stopped acting childish and writing in a grammatically wrong way

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#274

A good try by TheGreatOogiesBoogie but not correct.

JamieDelarosa

Aug 10, 2015

0

#275

Harley-Rebel wrote:

thats about as clueless as Jamie's posts.

Can Harley-Rebel speak when PremiumDuck is drinking a glass of water?

Harley-Rebel

Aug 10, 2015

0

#276

Is there anybody you think is not a sockpuppet besides yourself, cool clean Jamie ?

PremiumDuck has written about the playing standard of 18th and 19th century masters. Then pfren, JamieDelarosa and yureesystem start throwing their weight around with childish attacks. pure class!

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#277

Harley-Rebel wrote:

yuree, you're sick and you should get help. it's only a little brat would say "I bet my rating is higher than yours". just totally mental, man. I'm rated over 2000 so now you just say you're higher than that.

You are what 2001 FIDE, well my current rating is 2011 uscf and my highest is 2110 uscf. You check on USCF to verify it. You did not give one piece of analysis to prove you are at 2000 FIDE. If enter in a FIDE tournament my rating still be in the 2000 elo, I wonder if it the same with you. Start your analysis with above position big mouth.

AKAL1

Aug 10, 2015

0

#278

Would you like to enlighten me on what the initial arguments were and how anything in the last hundred posts relates to them directly?

Harley-Rebel

Aug 10, 2015

0

#279

No I'm much higher than that yuree, but I'm not interesting in such a silly debate. I don't need to check anything. I find it difficult to drop to the level of yours and Jamie's conversation. It's depressing.

yureesystem

Aug 10, 2015

0

#280

@ HarleyRebel, if you were more polite we can have decent discussion, remember it was you who attack me first. I ask you nice give me some analysis on above position, it is from an old game. Even 2000 player can learn from past masters, the accuracy played from above position is astonishing.