Only way Morpy could beat Anand

Much have been said about how would genius from the past,like Morphy,Capablanca or even Fisher stand,if they played against today super GM player.Obviously,with tons of theory,computers  ,etc.,that todays players have on they disposal,old masters would most likely be crushed.But,how about chess 960? It requirs mostly pure talent and tactical skills.In my opinion,old genius would steele be able to upset Carlsen &co.What do you guys think?

technology makes chess today not same as b4

I think I'll repent my sins when God sends me e-mail.

What, you haven't seen the email "Hello, this is God.  I know what you did last week.  Repent for your sins and send money to this address or you will go to hell"

or something like that

If the Morphy of years ago, played a Super GM of today, I think today's GM would win.  It's just not a level playing field.  It might be a different story if you caught Morphy up on theory, and game him all the same resources that any GM today would have.

The whole point of this was that they should play Chess960, avoiding theory battles like we get nowadays. A large proportion of top level chess games today are decided beforehand, in front of a computer oracle. 960 neatly sidesteps most of these advantages, and would mostly level the playing field. Only deeper insights gained over time would remain. It would be interesting - you'd have to give Morphy a couple of weeks to acclimatise to the different way of playing, but he was such a natural player that I'm sure he'd have no trouble in competing at all.

In any case, if such a thing were possible, I think there would be a lot more excitement around the fact that we'd cracked the problem of time travel than in a game of chess.

I think that even chess theory in middlegame and endgame has changed

Great post,thanx man.You seem to be only one,who understood what i wanted to say.

@AnthonyCG...you made good point.Well,i am not saying it would be easy,but in 960 he would have mush more chance,than in classical chess.Posts saying that his genius alone would be enough to play equaly with todays masters are silly.That of course doesnt nesesery mean that today players are greater in general principals,but evolution is evolution.Both Jesse Owens and Usain Bolt are great athlets,but Bolt runs today...

If you're proposing playing the old masters in their day, then you may not have at your disposal the tons of yet to be discovered theories, computers, etc.

If, on the other hand, you bring the old masters to today, then they must be given access to the same theories, computers, etc. at our disposal.

I think, then, that the old masters would be the new masters.

chess 960 is an abomination, an afront to itself.

I mean if the old players played with what they knew than,and new with what they know today.Of course,an uneven contest.But if,for instance Capablanca,would be born 70 years later,with his talent and with all the computers...that would be different story.

chess theory can change. The point is who can WIN.

I agree.Once the pieces are shuffled over the board,anything is possible.