MIKHAIL TAL VS MANGUS CARLSEN?
Sort:
fissionfowl
Jul 7, 2022
0
#61
Carlsen is amazing, but Tal is smart than him 50%? 😊
Jul 7, 2022
0
#64
Carlsen would play to draw, Tal would play to win. The result is obvious.
Jul 7, 2022
0
#65
Tal is one of my favorite players, but I think Carlsen would beat him in a match.
Give 'em time to prepare for each other, and I think Tal wins 6-5 in points (8 draws, one Carlsen win, two Tal wins).
I think Carlsen would would win.
Jul 7, 2022
0
#68
I would certainly prefer to see Tal win... Tal is the one who gave me a Morphy number of five... but my money would be on Carlsen.
It's hard to judge Tal's playing strength. His chess pre-1961 seems to have been based largely on semi-correct sacrifices and shrewd judgement, but people seemed to adapt to that. Tal shifted to a more universal style in his later years, like Spassky, but he didn't enjoy any major successes, probably because of his health issues.
Andrewtopia wrote:
It's hard to judge Tal's playing strength. His chess pre-1961 seems to have been based largely on semi-correct sacrifices and shrewd judgement, but people seemed to adapt to that. Tal shifted to a more universal style in his later years, like Spassky, but he didn't enjoy any major successes, probably because of his health issues.
It'd be a clash of times as much as a clash of grandmasters - the algorithm era vs. the era of intuition.
I think that 2022 Carlsen probably crushes 1960 Tal with a big score, but a 2022 Tal with good health vs. Carlsen is an unknown. On the other hand, I suspect Carlsen in 1960 probably would have succumbed to Tal.
Carlsen will see all of it.
There was this game vs. Giri (Bilbao 2016) where you could tell he can see 28-30 moves into the future.
So that's a Stockfish depth 56-60 for you at work (though slightly less accurate)
Tal's attacks are incredible but he will have to have a very lucky day.
Of course, both are great super GMs.
zone_chess hat geschrieben:
Carlsen will see all of it.
There was this game vs. Giri (Bilbao 2016) where you could tell he can see 28-30 moves into the future.
Tal's attacks are incredible but he will have to have a very lucky day.
Of course, both are great super GMs.
Yeah, but see, this is the problem with these debates, is Tal playing like he did in 1960 or like he would now and is Magnus playing like he's already digested all of Tal's games or like Tal never existed?
I mean, Morphy nowadays would only be about 1800, but no one would be 1800 nowadays without Morphy, y'know?
DrCheckevertim wrote:
I'm sure Tal could also attack, defend, prophylaxis, and many others.
tal has died. He will not be attacking or defending OR sacrificing any more
Guys do not be cheated By those stupid TOP 10 lists they propose !!
Relativity is the Key !
It means that everybody that comes later LOOKs stronger !
Today everybody is helped by a Chees-software that explains and points out everything !
Question is would Kasparov in year 1850
or CARLSEN in year 1850 have won against Paul Morphy ??
Do not be Ridiculous !
Paul Morphy would have won ........ Hands down !
Ask Carlsen or Kasparov ! .... THEY KNOW FULL WELL this !
By the Time Chess-softwares came into play Chess as a game had disappeared of course !
Fisher was the last champion ! [ meaning before the aid of Chess-softwares ]
After him we have robots !
TAL was one of the greatest ...... unique !
Can Carlsen conceive TAL's play without studying his games with the aid ofa chess-software ?? NO way sir !
he would not even be able to understand the reason behind TAL's moves !
Carlsen would be groping in the DARK !
Cut a long story short :
TOP 5 Greatest Chess- players of all time :
1 Paul Morphy [by far]
2-3) Mikail Tal or Bobby Fisher
4) Capablanca
5) Kasparov or Alekin
Nonsense ...... Paul Morphy is the GREATEST ..... HANDs Down !
REMEMBER without the aid of a Chess-software
Carlsen and Kasparov would take 50 years
to understand and analyze TAL's moves
or to CREATE Paul Morphy 's Strategy [ such a genius he was !! ]
Remember that what FISHER did All by himself .......
I mean He won the TITLE in 1972
it is equal to
winning 10 Titles ......if you are in the Russian TEAM WITH 10 GM helping you !!
or if your COACH is GARY KASPAROV ! [Carlsen]
Jan 10, 2023
0
#78
jo90ways wrote:
Question is would Kasparov in year 1850
or CARLSEN in year 1850 have won against Paul Morphy ??
You can also ask it in the other direction. Would Morphy born in 1990 be world champion today? The answer, of course, is no.
Each champion was a product of their time and unique circumstances.
llama36 wrote:
jo90ways wrote:
Question is would Kasparov in year 1850
or CARLSEN in year 1850 have won against Paul Morphy ??
You can also ask it in the other direction. Would Morphy born in 1990 be world champion today? The answer, of course, is no.
Each champion was a product of their time and unique circumstances.
Morphy created openinigs that have not been improved ..... even today !!!
If MORPHY had a software on his side ...... [ due to his superior skills ]
Sure as DEATH he would beat Stockfish and Deep-Blue combined !
He quit the game because he was way stronger than anybody else
Bird was one of the greatest players at that time 1870 .....
and he said that Morphy could win against anybody giving his opponents a pawn and the first move .....hands down !
I think the same !!
It is about relativity .....
It is simple ....
If you leave in AFRICA and play like KASPAROV .......
you are MUCH MUCH Better than him !
If you Play in AMERICA [in year 1970]
and win against SPASSKY & TAl and BOTIVNIK & KERES & BRONSTAIn and KORCHNOI
..... welll you are GOD disguised as Bobby-Fisher , baby !!
Jan 10, 2023
0
#80
zone_chess wrote:
Carlsen will see all of it.
There was this game vs. Giri (Bilbao 2016) where you could tell he can see 28-30 moves into the future.
So that's a Stockfish depth 56-60 for you at work (though slightly less accurate)
Tal's attacks are incredible but he will have to have a very lucky day.
Of course, both are great super GMs.
Can you link or post up the game?
And which points indicated to you he was seeing ~30 moves ahead? I'm just curious to see the same thing you saw.
Having said that I'd love to see Tal v Pangus. Tal had crazy flair.