What if you gave Capablanca Fritz?

I see a lot of talk in forums and people writing back variations of correct moves ect.  And they are written so quickly and so correctly I cannot help but assume a program helped. 

Which leads me to a question.  Todays top players have the most sophisticated computer programs to help teach them and hone their skills, openings, tactics, strategies, ect.  Kasparov was know to have guarded his computer with his life, almost never letting anyone see his personal database.  He was of course arguably the greatest player ever, but would he have been without a computer?

I know it is an impossible question to answer, and all any of us can do is specualte.  But it is worth considering how good would some of the greats been had they had access to the same programs of today?  Especially players who worked hard on the game.

How good would Fischer have been?  Wow!

Dr. Lasker?

Alekhine?

Or a photographic mind like Pillsbury or Morphy?

Capablanca probably wouldn't have taken the time to train with one.

I guess part of me wishes the chess program was never created as it creates a temptation for people to stop thinking for themselves...Especially when the respond to Posts.

It's natural evolution. And is the reason why players like Morphy or Capablanca would probably get whitewashed if they were to play a match against the likes of Kasparov.

Like any sport, advanced training methods and technological advances are developed to make athletes perform better.

In Tennis, they stopped using wooden rackets in favour of some form of super light-weight alloy. Do you think John McEnroe playing in the 1970's using a wooden racket could even compete with the likes of Federer or Sampras, with all the new rackets we have today? Of course he couldn't. Does that make him any less talented? Of course not.

Which is why we cannot compare players from different eras.

Look at the swimsuits the swimmers were wearing at the Olympics in Beijing this year, all made with some special fabric designed to shed tenths of seconds off their times.

In Hockey, wooden sticks are almost obsolete.

etc.  The list can go on and on.  Why should chess be any different?

capa don't need fritz hes still a monster imo

It's more then just technology, in BOTH tennis and chess.

It's the thought that goes into it, the depth of study, yes even in tennis, things like training techniques, opening theory, serve techniques, and other tennis/chess stuff.

It is interesting you asked what if specifically Capablanca had had Fritz, because Capablanca is the player whose moves have been found to most closely match that of strong computer engines. Statistically, no one played more like a chess computer than Capablanca, and presciently enough, he was sometimes called, "the chess machine" by his contemporaries.

I think great chess talents like Capa, Lasker, Fischer, etc.  would have dominated with computers just as they did without them. I don't think Anand has the best chess computer, or Topalov, or Carlsen... I think they all use computers to research novelties and tighten up their games but at the end of the day they all have access to similar tools and it's fair -- the best player wins.  

I do think strong chess engines are changing chess dramatically though... a talented young chess player can start training pretty much from Day 1 with a GM level chess partner available for consultation 24hrs a day! Amazing. Between the internet and chess software -- talent can develop faster and more reliably than ever before. Everyone can research their pet lines, everyone can analyze their games accurately. This is a great time for playing chess and studying chess and appreciating chess -- although it is also hard not to feel that the computers have stolen some glory and mystery from the game.