[Morphy's] contemporaries revolutionized openings and strategy.
SteamGear wrote: "... That was a double-blindfold game (and quite a game, too!). Morphy's play was near engine-perfect the entire game.
44.Qb7 was a thing of beauty."
The opening: 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d5
Yes, those were the opening moves played. The Paulsen Countergambit.
Sometimes called the Elephant Gambit?
[Morphy's] contemporaries revolutionized openings and strategy.
...
SteamGear wrote: "..."
...
... Batgirl wrote an interesting article about Paulsen and his impact on chess: https://www.chess.com/article/view/louis-paulsen
Know of any titled players who think that Paulsen had done much revolutionizing in 1857?
Know of any titled players who think that Paulsen had done much revolutionizing in 1857?
"Paulsen can be regarded as the founder of the modern approach to playing the opening.... His opening ideas taught not only his contemporaries, but many subsequent generations. Several lines he introduced even retain their relevance to the present day and have become tabiyas."
— GM Evgeny Sveshnikov, The Complete French Advance, 2017
Next question?
Know of any titled players who think that Paulsen had done much revolutionizing in 1857?
"Paulsen can be regarded as the founder of the modern approach to playing the opening.... His opening ideas taught not only his contemporaries, but many subsequent generations. Several lines he introduced even retain their relevance to the present day and have become tabiyas."
— GM Evgeny Sveshnikov, The Complete French Advance, 2017
Next question?
Where is there a reference to 1857?
What, specifically, is the significance of 1857—a date you introduced into the discussion?
SteamGear wrote: "What, specifically, is the significance of 1857—a date you introduced into the discussion?"
1857 is when Morphy faced Paulsen in the New York tournament.
[Morphy's] contemporaries revolutionized openings and strategy.
...
SteamGear wrote: "..."
...
... Batgirl wrote an interesting article about Paulsen and his impact on chess: https://www.chess.com/article/view/louis-paulsen
Know of any titled players who think that Paulsen had done much revolutionizing in 1857?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
DannyHume stated that Morphy's contemporaries revolutionized openings and strategy (which is a true statement).
He didn't specifically reference 1857 as the year in which such revolutions occurred.
Interestingly, such revolutions only occurred after Morphy made his impact on the chess world.
Also interestingly: such revolutionary ideas did not appear before Morphy made his impact on the chess world.
"(Morphy) revealed a thunderous blend of pragmatism, aggression and accurate calculation to the world . . . His play was the next, more mature stage in the development of chess." — GM Garry Kasparov, My Great Predecessors, Part 1
[Morphy's] contemporaries revolutionized openings and strategy.
...
SteamGear wrote: "..."
...
... Batgirl wrote an interesting article about Paulsen and his impact on chess: https://www.chess.com/article/view/louis-paulsen
Know of any titled players who think that Paulsen had done much revolutionizing in 1857?
SteamGear wrote: "DannyHume stated that Morphy's contemporaries revolutionized openings and strategy (which is a true statement). ..."
Seems to me that it is of some interest to think about the degree to which Morphy faced that revolutionizing when he played Paulsen in the 1857 New York tournament.
Update from the 2018#3 issue of New in Chess: "... Paulsen … was invited to play in the first American chess congress held in New York in 1857. ... it was only after New York that he began to study opening theory, of which he had been fully unaware while playing Morphy. …" - Hans Renette
... "(Morphy) revealed a thunderous blend of pragmatism, aggression and accurate calculation to the world . . . His play was the next, more mature stage in the development of chess." — GM Garry Kasparov, My Great Predecessors, Part 1
"... Morphy became to millions ... the greatest chess master of all time. But if we examine Morphy's record and games critically, we cannot justify such extravaganza. And we are compelled to speak of it as the Morphy myth. ... Even if the myth has been destroyed, Morphy remains one of the giants of chess history. ..." - GM Reuben Fine
"... if we examine Morphy's record and games critically, we cannot justify such extravaganza. And we are compelled to speak of it as the Morphy myth." - GM Reuben Fine
Kasparov did critically examine Morphy's record and games, and, from doing so, said the following things about Morphy:
"brilliant",
"super-genius",
"he had no equal in the world",
"Morphy's sound framework and his wide-ranging tactics already resemble the play of a modern grandmaster. To combat such a hurricane was simply impossible."
— GM Garry Kasparov, My Great Predecessors, Part 1
And what's more, he had style!
It is sad that he tried to leave chess behind but, if what I read is true, he was unable to have a normal life after his great success at the game.
... "(Morphy) revealed a thunderous blend of pragmatism, aggression and accurate calculation to the world . . . His play was the next, more mature stage in the development of chess." — GM Garry Kasparov, My Great Predecessors, Part 1
"... Morphy became to millions ... the greatest chess master of all time. But if we examine Morphy's record and games critically, we cannot justify such extravaganza. And we are compelled to speak of it as the Morphy myth. ... Even if the myth has been destroyed, Morphy remains one of the giants of chess history. ..." - GM Reuben Fine
XXX
SteamGear wrote: "Kasparov did critically examine Morphy's record and games, and, from doing so, said the following things about Morphy:
'brilliant',
'super-genius',
'he had no equal in the world',
'Morphy's sound framework and his wide-ranging tactics already resemble the play of a modern grandmaster. To combat such a hurricane was simply impossible.'
— GM Garry Kasparov, My Great Predecessors, Part 1"
XXX
Notice the past tense in the last Kasparov sentence and in the "no equal" sentence. Was Kasparov referring to the "next" stage in the development of chess or the last stage?
"... Even if the myth has been destroyed, Morphy remains one of the giants of chess history. ..." - GM Reuben Fine
Notice the past tense in the last Kasparov sentence and the "no equal" sentence.
Yes, because Kasparov was speaking of the long-deceased Morphy.
To use the present tense when referring to Morphy's 19th-century chess exploits would be an incorrect usage of tense.
And what's more, he had style!
It is sad that he tried to leave chess behind but, if what I read is true, he was unable to have a normal life after his great success at the game.
He certainly did have style. (I'm also of the belief that he had an eidetic memory, which would explain a lot about his chess dominance, and his word-for-word memorization of law books.)
And yes, after he abandoned chess, it seemed to haunt him. He wanted to move on to pursue other things, but the world wouldn't let him.
... You got Steinitz, ... in his decrepit old age putting up a strong match against a young Lasker, ...
Steinitz won five, lost ten, and drew four.