@Pulpofeira
I didn't say 2200 players would destroy anyone. I said they'd have good chances. In the same way that a player rated 2200 has good chances against someome rated 2200 or just under.
GMs would destroy Morphy.
IMs would score heavily against Morphy.
2200 players would have good chances against Morphy.
I find your lack of precision ... disturbing.
@Reb - is that an indication of how fans would feel watching Morphy fail against at 2150? I guess so.
What about this?
@Reb - That's amazing. You asked if I thought I knew better than Fischer. I said I didn't but that I was more honest. And then you criticise me for thinking I know better than Fischer. It's almost as if you completely ignored what I said. Are you a bit ... you know ... simple? :) Bless your cotton socks. I didn't realise. Go play little man, you're not needed here. It's been nice trying to interact with you but I guess you're just not capable of the level of conversation needed in a forum.
I was joking about the picture. A 2150 might sometimes beat a Morphy. I think a 2200 is a better example, but I dropped the elo slightly for comic effect. Duh.
@Reb - That's amazing. You asked if I thought I knew better than Fischer. I said I didn't but that I was more honest. And then you criticise me for thinking I know better than Fischer. It's almost as if you completely ignored what I said. Are you a bit ... you know ... simple? :) Bless your cotton socks. I didn't realise. Go play little man, you're not needed here. It's been nice trying to interact with you but I guess you're just not capable of the level of conversation needed in a forum.
I dont take orders from you pal so go piss up a rope . Why should anyone listen to anything you have to say about chess anyway ? What chess credentials do you have ? Any ? If you do please do tell ... For people to listen to greats like Fischer and Botvinnik over some internet hack is both sensible and logical . Have you ever played any GMs or IMs in otb tournament chess ?
@Reb - That's amazing. You asked if I thought I knew better than Fischer. I said I didn't but that I was more honest. And then you criticise me for thinking I know better than Fischer. It's almost as if you completely ignored what I said. Are you a bit ... you know ... simple? :) Bless your cotton socks. I didn't realise. Go play little man, you're not needed here. It's been nice trying to interact with you but I guess you're just not capable of the level of conversation needed in a forum.
He's an NM so he's obviously not dumb but people have a tendency to vastly overestimate their heroes. In the comic book community you have people called fanboys who think their hero can defeat any other despite logic and evidence. Heck, I've met people who think Thor could beat Superman despite the fact that in an official DC-Marvel crossover Superman defeated him. Yes, some people's opinions contradict canonical sources sometimes, but facts and evidence trump opinions so that particular opinion is intrinsically incorrect.
Thor without his hammer ( mjolnir ) vs Superman would be a toss up , with it Superman has no chance ! 
Oggie! Flagships cannot be beaten in official crossovers, I told you! I've seen Spider-Man beating Superboy in another one!
'NM' isn't a Fide title. It's something made up by federations who are short on titled players. Also, you can be dumb and great at chess, so your reasoning is doubly flawed. You're right that Reb has got it wrong, thinking his Hero is always right. You tell him The GreatOogieBoogie. Glad you agree with me. Thanks for your support in making my argument.
Also Squirrel Girl defeated Galactus in one comic, so nah, canon is meaningless.
'NM' isn't a Fide title. It's something made up by federations who are short on titled players. Also, you can be dumb and great at chess, so your reasoning is doubly flawed. You're right that Reb has got it wrong, thinking his Hero is always right. You tell him The GreatOogieBoogie. Glad you agree with me. Thanks for your support in making my argument.
The US Chess federation certainly isnt short on FIDE titled players , we have a lot more than your national federation does ... LOL So , try some other lame excuse .
@Reb - what are you talking about. My point was that NM is not a Fide title. You've completely ignored that point in your reply. What's wrong with you? What excuse? Who is offering excuses? And what are the excuses for? Are you seeing the same posts as everyone else or are you posting in the wrong forum by mistake?
So you only recognize fide titles ? I could get my CM title then ... its a fide title and I am qualified for it , but why bother ? It won't help me in any way . But do tell me why anyone should listen to you over a Fischer ( or any GM for that matter ) on matters concerning chess ?
I think Chyss has a point that some of Fischer's pronouncements, at least young Fischer, can be taken with a grain of salt. His statement that Morphy could beat any living GM in a set match was silly. And his description of Lasker as a clever coffee-house player was absurd. According to Evans Fischer later recanted his low opinion of Lasker. In response to universal GM criticism of his putdowns of Lasker, Fischer decided to restudy Lasker's games and changed his tune. In fact his restudy of Lasker gave him some inspiration to study the Ruy exchange variation and add it to his opening arsenal.
Reb wrote:
I believe a lot of what Fischer said concerning chess , yes . If you do not then its you who are naieve , not me . Do you have such a warped sense of your own ability/chess knowledge that you think you know better than greats such as Fischer ? Fischer is far from being the only chess great that heaped praise on Morphy btw ...
The only reason you should ever listen to anyone is that they are telling the truth. The quotation is the last refuge of the knave.
So you only recognize fide titles ? I could get my CM title then ... its a fide title and I am qualified for it , but why bother ? It won't help me in any way . But do tell me why anyone should listen to you over a Fischer ( or any GM for that matter ) on matters concerning chess ?
I think that everyone deserves to be listened to. Many in this thread need the ear of a trained professional who can evaluate the peculiar delusions afflicting them.
Fortune has smiled on me again. Instead of listening the the mad ravings of lunatics, I'm off to a tournament where there is one IM, one FM, and a thick pack of players in the 1900-2100 range.
2.5 should be good enough to win an under 1700 prize, which will likely go to an underrated youth. I may sack a piece against a 1700 just to show that he will have difficulty being a piece up against an 1870.
If I finish with a plus score, maybe I'll rejoin the 1900+ pack where I had been the past three years.
'NM' isn't a Fide title. It's something made up by federations who are short on titled players. Also, you can be dumb and great at chess, so your reasoning is doubly flawed. You're right that Reb has got it wrong, thinking his Hero is always right. You tell him The GreatOogieBoogie. Glad you agree with me. Thanks for your support in making my argument.
To be fair though even accounting for USCF inflation an NM is 100 points lower than a FIDE CM (CM = 2200 FIDE, NM = 2200 USCF) which is still quite strong. That's assuming you're 2200 (bare minimum for NM) but there are 2300 USCF NM's (about equal with 2200 FIDE CMs)
Chess is a mental game so intelligence is necessary. A weakling can't win a powerlifting contest and a fatty can't obtain a respectable marathon time.
You're welcome. Morphy was indeed a great player and would likely make Super GM with enough coaching but Morphy as he was is probably around 2300 according to Kenneth Regan. That's still an amazing playing strength for those days given that chess training and theory wasn't nearly as developed as it is today. You have kids coached since a very young age and even many of them don't make a 2300 playing strength with modern training materials so 2300 strength in the 19th century was something special.
It's said that if you don't read My System you'd have a serious gap in your chess understanding, and Morphy would count, can't read a book published long after you die.
To be fair though even accounting for USCF inflation an NM is 100 points lower than a FIDE CM (CM = 2200 FIDE, NM = 2200 USCF) which is still quite strong.
Twenty years ago, this 100 point gap was commonly ub=nderstood to be accurate. I don't think the stats today support it, however.
The USCF's efforts to fund itself from the pockets of chess parents has deflated ratings a bit.
There's was some discussion a few years ago at http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/chess/YaBB.pl?num=1205850860. Unlike most of what transpires here at chess.com, evidence was presented in that discussion.
I believe a lot of what Fischer said concerning chess , yes . If you do not then its you who are naieve , not me . Do you have such a warped sense of your own ability/chess knowledge that you think you know better than greats such as Fischer ? Fischer is far from being the only chess great that heaped praise on Morphy btw ...