I like those beautiful cuties, especially the one on the far left ^_^
Use CTRL + to make the picture bigger and notice they have pretty unintelligent looks on their faces. (yes, look at the FACES!, if you can take your eyes away from the other assets)'
And unintelligent women are by (my) definition always unattractive.
You hit the bullseye.
But Judith Polgar had Kasparov on the ropes at Linares in 1994. She was also a serious contender for the world championship in the 90s. If she traveled back in time she could beat Alekhine or maybe even Botvinnik for the world championship. I'm also fairly confident she'd even beat Spassky, but he's probably the most recent she'd beat in a set match.
Some time ago, in the 90s I think, van Oosterom, who gave us the Melodie Amber contests, also sponsored what was called "Ladies vs Veterans" or the "Dance" tournaments. While the contestants varied somewhat in the 10 actual tournaments, each of which was named after a different dance such as the polka and foxtrot, each one featured extremely stong senior male GMs playing against younger women masters. The total for the 10 tournaments was Ladies, 289.0 pts - Veterans, 299.0 pts.... pretty inconclusive.
Don't feel she could beat Botvinnik, because of playing style.
Same was probably said about Mikhail Tal :-D.
Don't feel she could beat Botvinnik, because of playing style.
Same was probably said about Mikhail Tal :-D.
Ladies, 289.0 pts - Veterans, 299.0 pts.... pretty inconclusive.
Hmm, they were veterans and not really competing anymore for many years. So the comparison with the discussion at hand is a bit crooked.
And you are not comparing Tal with Judith, are you? Completely different playing styles.
I know what you mean though. Tal beating Botvinnik was a surprise to many. I stand by my judgement that she probably couldn't beat Botvinnik at his best.
The veterans were also rated much higher in their prime than the ladies were currently rated.... so it was a form of handicap tournament. Still... it says something.
I'm not comparing Tal with Polgar, but simply showing that having a different style from a current WC doesn't preclude winning against him or, as in Tal's case, having a different style probably helped a lot.
The veterans were also rated much higher in their prime than the ladies were currently rated.... so it was a form of handicap tournament. Still... it says something.
I'm not comparing Tal with Polgar, but simply showing that having a different style from a current WC doesn't preclude winning against him or, as in Tal's case, having a different style probably helped a lot.
I got your point, i just don't think she could beat him because of HIS style of playing. It's all academic anyway. Let's agree to disagree 
And about the veterans. Their ratings where outdated since they almost didn't play anymore. But you don't have to convince me. Of course it says something. I already stated that what the guy said about 100-0 was utter nonsens.
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Now go to your cave and sleep.
You need the rest. your brain is obviously not firing on all cylinders.
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
She has taken on Carlsen before, and has both won and lost games against him.
Here is one of her wins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkWcUgD9Wbc
answer -all the men would become pawns!!
I got your point, i just don't think she could beat him because of HIS style of playing. It's all academic anyway. Let's agree to disagree
And about the veterans. Their ratings where outdated since they almost didn't play anymore. But you don't have to convince me. Of course it says something. I already stated that what the guy said about 100-0 was utter nonsens.
I don't necessarily disagree... I just think it's not out of the question ... academically.
Demonstrating that the idiot with the idiotic name "c_h_e_a_t_e_r " was spouting nonsense was all I was trying to show. However, I think with the men being players like Spassky, Portisch, Hort, Korchnoi, Smyslov, Taimanov, Bouwmeester and other greats, there was a certain air of drama in these tournaments. Portisch and Hort were in their 50s, Korchnoi and Hans Bouwmeester in there 60s, Smyslov and Taimanov in their late 60's-early 70s. So the age ranged from middle-age (not prehistoric) to true seniors.
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1708258
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
That wasn't by any chance their 1001th game?
I guess he's probably right, she probably wouldn't come away with one win.
Is that your best rebuttal to my assertion?
If you're looking to be Ms. Polgar's champion, I'm sure she's feeling pretty embarrassed right now.
Well, if you want a serious answer you should make some serious remarks.
But here we go.
At the top of her game she was a solid top 10 player in the world. So if you say she could never ever beat Carlsen in a 1000 games you are saying no top 10 player could ever beat carlsen and that's just utter nonsense.
In fact it just happened a few weeks ago. Twice. Accept it and get over it.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
And don't be a wise ass when you are talking about polgar, or any of them in fact. I've known the whole family for over 30 years now. even stayed at their place for some time.
So, i repeat. Go to your cave and sleep it off. You have no idea what you're talking about or who you are talking to.
Sleep well.
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
Hi, Pawnstogo.
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
That wasn't by any chance their 1001th game?
<chortle, snort, snort>
You're changing the goalposts because you've been made to look stupid.
Carlsen first became world number 1 on the 1st January 2010.
Quite an irony to accuse someone of disregarding facts, common sense and history.
"I've known the whole family for over 30 years now. even stayed at their place for some time."
Wow, really?
I'm not talking about a woman at the top of her game vs some washed up GM who's been out of the loop for decades.
Judit Polgar could play Magnus Carlsen 1000 times and she'd not come away with one win. I don't think there is a single person on this site..or anywhere in the world for that matter, who could logically debate me on that fact.
Pure supposition - not worthy of debate.
What would be interesting is, if the winner of the upcoming championship match would accept a challenge to a 12, 16, or 20 game match with one of the top women. I am sure some feminine product corporation, and a whole bunch a male chauvinists would help sponsor the match.
I like those beautiful cuties, especially the one on the far left ^_^
Use CTRL + to make the picture bigger and notice they have pretty unintelligent looks on their faces. (yes, look at the FACES!, if you can take your eyes away from the other assets)'
And unintelligent women are by (my) definition always unattractive.