JOSE RAUL CAPABLANCA (born Nov-19-1888, died Mar-08-1942, 53 years old) Cuba [what is this?] José Raúl Capablanca y Graupera was the third World Champion, reigning from 1921 until 1927. Renowned for the simplicity of his play, his legendary endgame prowess, accuracy, and the speed of his play, he earned the nickname of the "Human Chess Machine". Background Capablanca, the second son of a Spanish Army officer, was born in Havana. He learned to play at an early age by watching his father and defeated Cuban Champion Juan Corzo in an informal match in 1901 by 6.5-5.5 (+4 −3 =5), turning 13 years of age during the match. Despite this and despite taking 4th place in the first Cuban Championship in 1902, he did not focus on chess until 1908 when he left Columbia University where he had enrolled to study chemical engineering and play baseball. He did, however, join the Manhattan Chess Club in 1905, soon establishing his dominance in rapid chess. He won a rapid chess tournament in 1906 ahead of the World Champion Emanuel Lasker, and played many informal games against him. Within a year or two of dropping out of university and after playing simultaneous exhibitions in dozens of US cities, winning over 95% of his games, Capablanca had established himself as one of the top players in the world, especially after the Capablanca - Marshall (1909) New York match exhibition win 15-8 (+8 -1 =14). Tournaments Capablanca won the 1910 New York State Championship by defeating co-leader Charles Jaffe in a tiebreaker match. In 1911, he placed second in the National Tournament in New York, with 9½ out of 12, half a point behind Marshall, and half a point ahead of Jaffe and Oscar Chajes. There followed Capablanca's groundbreaking win at San Sebastian (1911) with 9½/14 (+6 -1 =7), ahead of Akiba Rubinstein and Milan Vidmar on 9, Marshall on 8.5, and other luminaries such as Carl Schlechter, Siegbert Tarrasch and Ossip Bernstein. Before the tournament, Aron Nimzowitsch protested the unknown Capablanca's involvement in the event, but the latter demonstrated his credentials by defeating Nimzowitsch in their game. Winning at San Sebastian was only the second time a player had won a major tournament at his first attempt since Harry Pillsbury 's triumph at Hastings in 1895, and it provided a powerful boost to his credibility to challenge for the world title. He did so, but the match did not take place for another 10 years. In early 1913, Capablanca won a tournament in New York with 11/13 (+10 -1 =2), half a point ahead of Marshall. Capablanca then finished second with 10/14 (+8 -2 =4), a half point behind Marshall in Havana, losing one of their individual games, rumour having it that he asked the mayor to clear the room so that no one would see him resign. Returning to New York, Capablanca won all thirteen games at the New York tournament of 1913, played at the Rice Chess Club. 1914 saw the <"tournament of champions"> played at St. Petersburg. Capablanca, with 13/18 (+10 -2 =6), came second behind Lasker and well ahead of Alexander Alekhine on 10, Tarrasch on 8.5 and Marshall on 8. After the outbreak of World War I, Capablanca stayed in New York and won tournaments held there in 1915 (13/14 (+12 -0 =2)), 1916 (14/17 (+12 -1 =4)) and 1918 (10.5/12 (+9 =3)). During the New York 1918 tournament, Marshall played his prepared Marshall Attack of the Ruy Lopez* against Capablanca, but Capablanca worked his way through the complications and won. Soon after the war, Capablanca crossed the Atlantic to decisively win the Hastings Victory Tournament 1919 with 10.5/11, a point ahead of Borislav Kostic. Capablanca did not play another tournament until 1922, the year after he won the title from Lasker. During his reign, he won London 1922 with 13/15 (no losses), 1.5 points ahead of Alekhine; placed second behind Lasker at New York 1924 (suffering his first loss in eight years – to Richard Reti – since his 1916 lost to Oscar Chajes); placed 3rd at Moscow in 1925 behind Efim Bogoljubov and Lasker respectively with +9 =9 -2; won at Lake Hopatcong (New York) 1926 with 6/8 (+4 =4), a point ahead of Abraham Kupchik and won at New York in 1927 with 14/20 (+10 -1 =9), 2.5 points clear of Alekhine, his last tournament before his title match with Alekhine. During the latter tournament, Capablanca, Alekhine, Rudolf Spielmann, Milan Vidmar, Nimzowitsch and Marshall played a quadruple round robin, wherein Capablanca finished undefeated, winning the mini-matches with each of his rivals, 2½ points ahead of second-placed Alekhine, and won the "best game" prize for a win over Spielmann. This result, plus the fact that Alekhine had never defeated him in a game, made him a strong favourite to retain his title in the upcoming match against Alekhine. However, Alekhine's superior preparation prevailed against Capablanca's native talent. After losing the title, Capablanca settled in Paris and engaged in a flurry of tournament competition aimed at improving his chances for a rematch with Alekhine. However the latter dodged him, refusing to finalise negotiations for a rematch, boycotting events that included Capablanca, and insisting that Capablanca not be invited to tournaments in which he participated. In 1928, Capablanca won at Budapest with 7/9 (+5 =4), a point ahead of Marshall, and at Berlin with 8.5/12 (+5 =7), 1.5 points ahead of Nimzowitsch; he also came second at Bad Kissingen with 7/11 (+4 -1 =6), after Bogoljubov. In 1929, Capablanca won at Ramsgate with 5.5/7 (+4 =3) ahead of Vera Menchik and Rubinstein, at Budapest with 10.5/13 (+8 =5), and at Barcelona with 13.5/14, two points clear of Savielly Tartakower he also came equal second with Spielmann and behind Nimzowitsch at Carlsbad with 14.5/21 (+10 -2 =9). He won at the 1929-30 Hastings tournament and came second at Hastings in 1930-31, behind Max Euwe, his only loss being to Sultan Khan. Several months later he won New York for the last time, this time with a score of 10/11 (+9 =2) ahead of Isaac Kashdan. Perhaps discouraged by his inability to secure a rematch with Alekhine, there followed a hiatus for over three years before he reentered the fray with a fourth placing at Hastings in 1934-35 with 5.5/9 (+4 -2 =3), behind Sir George Thomas, Euwe and Salomon Flohr but ahead of Mikhail Botvinnik and Andre Lilienthal. In 1935, he secured 4th place in Moscow with 12/19 (+7 -2 =10), a point behind Botvinnik and Flohr, and a half point behind the evergreen Lasker. Also in 1935, he came second at Margate with 7/9 (+6 -1 =2), half a point behind Samuel Reshevsky. 1936 was a very successful year, coming 2nd at Margate with 7/9 (+5 =4), a half point behind Flohr, but then he moved up a gear to take Moscow with 13/18 (+8 =10), a point ahead of Botvinnik who in turn was 2.5 points ahead of Flohr, and then came =1st with Botvinnik at the famous Nottingham tournament, with 10/14 (+7 -1 =6) ahead of Euwe, Reuben Fine and Reshevsky on 9.5, and Flohr and Lasker on 8.5. These latter two results were the only tournaments in which he finished ahead of Lasker, which enhanced his chances of challenging for the title, but a challenge to World Champion Euwe was out of the question until after the Euwe - Alekhine World Championship Rematch (1937) , which was won by Alekhine. In 1937, Capablanca came =3rd with Reshevsky at Semmering with 7.5/14 (+2 -1 =11) behind Paul Keres and Fine and in 1938 he won the Paris tournament with 8/10 (+6 =4) ahead of Nicolas Rossolimo. The worst result of his career occurred at the AVRO tournament which was played in several cities in the Netherlands in 1938, placing 7th out of 8 players with 6/14 (+2 -4 =8), the only time he ever had a negative score in a tournament. His health in this tournament was fragile as he had suffered severe hypertension, which affected his concentration towards the end of his games; he may have also suffered a slight stroke halfway through the tournament. Travelling between the numerous cities in which the tournament was played was also hard on the ageing master. In 1939 he played his last tournament at Margate, placing =2nd with Flohr on 6.5/9 (+4 =5) a point behind Keres. Shortly afterwards, he finished his playing career – albeit unknowingly - in a blaze of glory by winning gold with +7 =9 on board one for Cuba at the 8th Olympiad in Buenos Aires. Matches In addition to the informal match against Corzo in 1901 and the exhibition match against Marshall in 1909 (see above), Capablanca played a three-game match against Charles Jaffe in New York in 1912, winning two and drawing one, and won the first game of a match against Chajes before the latter withdrew from the match. In 1914, he defeated Ossip Bernstein 1.5-0.5, Tartakower by 1.5-0.5 and Andre Aurbach by 2-0. On his way to the 1914 tournament in St Petersburg, he played two-game matches against Richard Teichmann and Jacques Mieses in Berlin, winning all his games. Once he reached Saint Petersburg, he played similar matches against Alexander Alekhine, Eugene Znosko-Borovsky and Fyodor Duz-Khotimirsky, losing one game to Znosko-Borovsky and winning the rest. In 1919, Capablanca accepted a challenge to a match from Borislav Kostić who had come second at New York in 1918 without dropping a game. The match was to go to the first player to win eight games, but Kostić resigned from the match, played in Havana, after losing five straight games - Capablanca - Kostic (1919). In late 1931, just before his temporary retirement from top-level chess, Capablanca also won a match (+2 −0 =8) against Euwe - Capablanca - Euwe (1931). World Championship Capablanca's win at San Sebastian in 1911 provided the results and the impetus for Capablanca to negotiate with Lasker for a title match, but some of Lasker's conditions were unacceptable to Capablanca, especially one requiring the challenger to win by two points to take the title, while the advent of World War I delayed the match. In 1920, Lasker and Capablanca agreed to play the title match in 1921, but a few months later, the former was ready to surrender the title without a contest, saying, "You have earned the title not by the formality of a challenge, but by your brilliant mastery." A significant stake ($25,000, $13,000 guaranteed to Lasker) was raised that induced Lasker to play in Havana where Capablanca won the Lasker - Capablanca World Championship Match (1921) - without losing a game - after Lasker resigned from the match when trailing by 4 games, the first time a World Champion had lost his title without winning a game until the victory by Vladimir Kramnik in the Kasparov - Kramnik Classical World Championship Match (2000). From 1921 to 1923, Alekhine, Rubinstein and Nimzowitsch all challenged Capablanca, but only Alekhine could raise the money stipulated in the so-called "London Rules", which these players had signed in 1921. A group of Argentinean businessmen, backed by a guarantee from the president of Argentina, promised the funds for a World Championship match between Capablanca and Alekhine, and once the deadline for Nimzowitsch to lodge a deposit for a title match had passed, the title match was agreed to, beginning in September 1927. Capablanca lost the Capablanca - Alekhine World Championship Match (1927) at Buenos Aires in 1927 by +3 -6 =25 in the longest title match ever, until it was surpassed by the legendary Karpov - Kasparov World Championship Match (1984/85). The match lasted over ten weeks, taking place behind closed doors, thus precluding spectators and photographers. All but two of the 34 games opened with the Queen's Gambit Declined. Before Capablanca and Alekhine left Buenos Aires after the match, they agreed in principle to stage a rematch, with Alekhine essentially sticking with the conditions initially imposed by Capablanca. Despite on-again off-again negotiations over the next 13 years, the rematch never materialised, with Alekhine playing two title matches each against Bogolyubov and Euwe in the subsequent decade. While Capablanca and Alekhine were both representing their countries at the Buenos Aires Olympiad in 1939, an attempt was made by Augusto de Muro, the President of the Argentine Chess Federation, to arrange a World Championship match between the two. Alekhine declined, saying he was obliged to be available to defend his adopted homeland, France, as World War II had just broken out. A couple of days prior to this, Capablanca had declined to play when his Cuban team played France, headed by Alekhine, in the Olympiad. Simultaneous exhibitions Capablanca's legendary speed of play lent itself to the rigours of simultaneous play, and he achieved great success in his exhibitions. From December 1908 through February 1909, Capablanca toured the USA and in 10 exhibitions he won 168 games in a row before losing a game in Minneapolis; his final tally for that tour was 734 games, winning 96.7% (+703 =19 -12). In March and April 1911, Capablanca toured Europe for the first time, giving exhibitions in France and Germany scoring +234=33-19. Once completed, he proceeded to San Sebastian and his historic victory before again touring Europe via its cities of Rotterdam, Leiden, Middelburg, The Hague, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Hamburg, Berlin, Breslau, Allenstein, Prague, Budapest, Vienna, Stuttgart, Mannheim, Frankfurt, Paris, London and Birmingham at the end of which his tally was +532=66-54. After he received his job as a roving ambassador-at-large from the Cuban Foreign Office, Capablanca played a series of simuls in London, Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Riga, Moscow, Kyiv, and Vienna on his way to St Petersburg in 1914, tallying +769=91-86. In 1922, Capablanca gave a simultaneous exhibition in Cleveland against 103 opponents, the largest in history up to that time, winning 102 and drawing one – setting a record for the best winning percentage ever – 99.5% - in a large simultaneous exhibition. In 1925 Capablanca gave a simultaneous exhibition in Leningrad and won every game but one, a loss against 12-year-old Mikhail Botvinnik, whom he predicted would one day be champion. Capablanca still holds the record for the most games ever completed in simultaneous exhibitions, playing and completing 13545 games between 1901-1940.** Legacy, testimonials and life Soon after gaining the title, Capablanca married Gloria Simoni Betancourt in Havana. They had a son, José Raúl Jr., in 1923 and a daughter, Gloria, in 1925. His father died in 1923 and his mother in 1926. In 1937 he divorced Gloria and in 1938 married Olga Chagodayev, a Russian princess. Capablanca's famous "invincible" streak extended from February 10, 1916, when he lost to Oscar Chajes in the New York 1916 tournament, to March 21, 1924, when he lost to Richard Réti in the New York International tournament. During this time he played 63 games, winning 40 and drawing 23, including his successful title match against Lasker. Between 1914 and his World Championship match against Alekhine, Capablanca had only lost four games of the 158 match and tournament games he had played. In match, team match, and tournament play from 1909 to 1939 he scored +318=249-34. Only Spielmann held his own (+2 −2 =8) against Capablanca, apart from Keres who had a narrow plus score against him (+1 −0 =5) due to his win at the AVRO 1938 tournament, during which the ailing Capablanca turned 50, while Keres was 22. Capablanca played himself in Chess Fever http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0015673/, a short film shot by V. Pudovkin at the 1925 Moscow tournament. The film can be seen at http://video.google.com/videoplay?d.... On 7 March 1942, Capablanca collapsed at the Manhattan Chess Club and he was taken to Mount Sinai Hospital, where he died the next morning from "a cerebral haemorrhage provoked by hypertension". Emanuel Lasker had died in the same hospital the year before. Capablanca's body was given a public funeral in Havana's Colón Cemetery a week later, with President Batista taking personal charge of the funeral arrangements. Capablanca proposed a new chess variant, played on a 10x10 board or a 10x8 board. He introduced two new pieces. The chancellor had the combined moves of a rook and knight (the piece could move like a rook or a knight). The other piece was the archbishop which had the combined moves of a bishop and knight. Capablanca‘s style also heavily influenced the styles of later World Champions Botvinnik, Robert James Fischer and Anatoly Karpov. Botvinnik observed that Alekhine had received much schooling from Capablanca in positional play before their fight for the world title made them bitter enemies. While not a theoretician as such, he wrote several books including A Primer of Chess, Chess Fundamentals and My Chess Career. Alekhine: <…Capablanca was snatched from the chess world much too soon. With his death, we have lost a very great chess genius whose like we shall never see again.> Lasker: <I have known many chess players, but only one chess genius: Capablanca.> Notes Capablanca occasionally played consultation on the team consisting of Reti / Capablanca. Sources: Bill Wall's Chess Master Profiles - http://billwall.phpwebhosting.com/a...; Edward Winter's article A Question of Credibiity: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...; Chess Corner's article on Capablanca: http://www.chesscorner.com/worldcha... and <kingcrusher>'s online article at http://www.gtryfon.demon.co.uk/bcc/.... A list of books about Capablanca can be found at http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/.... * Ruy Lopez, Marshall (C89) ** http://www.fide.com/component/conte... Wikipedia article: José Raúl Capablanca Last updated: 2025-03-16 04:08:07

Try our new games table.

page 1 of 51; games 1-25 of 1,252  Game   Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening 1. R Iglesias vs Capablanca 0-1 38 1893 Odds game 000 Chess variants 2. Capablanca vs E Delmonte 1-0 18 1901 Match-series B21 Sicilian, 2.f4 and 2.d4 3. L Paredes vs Capablanca 0-1 45 1901 Match-series C44 King's Pawn Game 4. Capablanca vs E Corzo 1-0 35 1901 Match-series C67 Ruy Lopez 5. Capablanca vs A Fiol ½-½ 49 1901 Match-series C45 Scotch Game 6. J Corzo vs Capablanca 1-0 41 1901 Havana casual B01 Scandinavian 7. A Gavilan vs Capablanca 0-1 39 1901 Match-series C45 Scotch Game 8. A Ettlinger vs Capablanca 0-1 53 1901 Casual game C45 Scotch Game 9. Capablanca vs M Marceau 1-0 31 1901 Match-series C45 Scotch Game 10. M Sterling vs Capablanca ½-½ 50 1901 Havana C77 Ruy Lopez 11. Capablanca vs J A Blanco 1-0 49 1901 Match-series C45 Scotch Game 12. E Delmonte vs Capablanca 0-1 32 1901 Match-series D00 Queen's Pawn Game 13. Capablanca vs L Paredes 1-0 29 1901 Match-series C02 French, Advance 14. E Corzo vs Capablanca 1-0 32 1901 Match-series C11 French 15. Capablanca vs J Corzo 0-1 60 1901 Havana casual C45 Scotch Game 16. A Fiol vs Capablanca 0-1 36 1901 Havana C55 Two Knights Defense 17. Capablanca vs A Gavilan 1-0 77 1901 Match-series C01 French, Exchange 18. Capablanca vs M Sterling 1-0 30 1901 Havana C01 French, Exchange 19. Capablanca vs E Corzo 0-1 30 1901 Havana casual C40 King's Knight Opening 20. Capablanca vs E Corzo 1-0 42 1901 Havana casual C40 King's Knight Opening 21. J A Blanco vs Capablanca 0-1 77 1901 Havana C55 Two Knights Defense 22. Capablanca vs C Echevarria 1-0 49 1901 Simul, 8b C44 King's Pawn Game 23. Capablanca vs J Corzo 0-1 29 1901 Capablanca - Corzo C45 Scotch Game 24. J Corzo vs Capablanca 1-0 27 1901 Capablanca - Corzo C52 Evans Gambit 25. Capablanca vs J Corzo ½-½ 61 1901 Capablanca - Corzo A80 Dutch  page 1 of 51; games 1-25 of 1,252

REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Capablanca wins | Capablanca loses

< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 182 OF 264 ·  Later Kibitzing> Dec-17-09    whatthefat: <acirce> Thank you for clearing that up. <visayanbraindoctor: Look I know every chess player who has played blitz even just once (meaning every one) must find what Capa did unbelievable. My first reaction was: NO ONE BUT NO ONE CAN PLAY THAT FAST!> Why do you keep making this bizarre assertion? I for one have now explained repeatedly why I find it to be perfectly believable that a player in that era could have been head and shoulders above the others in blitz, for the simple reason that most players had very little experience in blitz. Dec-17-09    SatelliteDan: Why would Alekine use the phrase <amazing rapidity> unless it was time odds. Money odds would not connect to that statment. Money odds would only be good to see who won the most of X games. Dec-17-09    SatelliteDan: Further, the only way I think Capa would be able to be successful would be to actually checkmate his opponents under the time odds condition. Amazing if true. Dec-17-09    SatelliteDan: I would think his opponents agter awhile would try to move as fast as possible and hope to beat him on time. Dec-17-09    SatelliteDan: The key to this argument is the term "5 to 1 odds" What was blitz time control in those days? Dec-17-09    ughaibu: 10 seconds per move. Dec-17-09    keypusher: Two points about the Alekhine quote. 1. "St. Petersburg masters" might be local masters. Capablanca spent a lot of time in St. Petersburg in 1913-1914. 2. A book published in 1952 in the UK <The Pleasures of Chess, by "Assiac"> described 5-minute blitz with clocks as something new. Dec-17-09    Whitehat1963: <Suffice to say that Capablanca was an exceptional player under faster time controls. His speedy simultaneous exhibitions would lend further credence to the fact. Didn't he play much faster simuls than Alekhine? I think I've read that somewhere.> Can someone confirm, deny, or elaborate on this? Thanks. Dec-17-09    TheFocus: Well, I leave and a lively debate ensues. Many interesting posts friends. I will touch briefly on some things I saw here. Concerning clocks - yes, there were good clocks in those days, but rapid transit chess was the norm. 5-minute blitz became popular in the 1950's. Just read any magazine of those days and you will see that to be true. I would say that Capablanca never played 5-minute blitz games. Even the Junior Speed Chess Championship that Bobby Fischer played in in 1955 was ten seconds a move, hard as that is to believe. <As to <visayan's> theory that Capablanca used other parts of his brain.> What makes you think this concept is new? It has been stated by psychiatrists, psychologists and brain doctors to describe the way certain people's brains are used. Some people have great skills with numbers, with writing, with solving puzzles, architecture, photography, you name it. What is to say that their brains are not hard-wired for excellence in their chosen field, that they do not use other parts of their brains? It is just how their brain is chemically made up. We are still learning how the brain is made up and how it works. So, nothing new there. And, leaving Alekhine aside, the European masters knew of Capablanca's skill at blitz chess in 1911 at San Sebastian. Just read how Capablanca trumped them there (in My Chess Career, I believe). And Capablanca said that those games were played for stakes also. Nimzowitsch was his first victim. Dec-17-09    scrambler: The following is an interesting account given by Capablanca on Rubinstein's observation of his skill at fast chess. <Below is our translation of an article by Capablanca published on pages 3-5 of Capablanca-Magazine, 25 April 1912 Rubinstein, who, at the chess board, is the glory of Russia, was born in £ódŸ in 1882, and is thus 30 years old. He is extremely astute and a profound student of the game; it is related that he studies for two or three hours every morning; he is a great admirer of Morphy, whose games he probably knows by heart. He is very observant and when, in San Sebastián in 1911, I was amusing myself playing fast games against Dr Bernstein, his compatriot, he always came to watch the contest, often making the observation that I possessed tactical ability superior to anyone else’s. This is clear proof of the great Russian expert’s modesty.> So Capablanca was clearly calculating deeper and faster at fast games than his opponents...that Rubinstein aways came around to watch is interesting, perhaps he never saw anything like it himself. Another account although I can't find the the original soucre <San Sebastian, Spain in 1911. It was one of the strongest tournaments of the time. All of the world's leading players except world champion Emanuel Lasker were in attendance. At the beginning of the tournament Ossip Bernstein and Aaron Nimzowitsch objected to Capablanca's presence because he had not won a major tournament. But after Capablanca won his first round game against Bernstein, capturing the tournament's brilliancy prize, Bernstein quickly acknowledged Capablanca's talent and said that he wouldn't be surprised if Capablanca won the tournament. Nimzowitsch took offense when Capablanca made a comment while watching one of his blitz games, and remarked that unproven players should hold their tongue in the presence of their betters. Capablanca quickly challenged Nimzowitsch to a series of fast games, which he won "with ridiculous ease." The assembled masters soon concluded that Capablanca had no equal at fast chess, a distinction which was to remain his until virtually the end of his life.> This came up on the Morphy page once, I don't know if visayanbraindoctor remembers, I was of the original opinion that the odds referred to time odds not money, but could well be. My original take that it was time odds was because in the the late 1890's and early 1900's they used chess clocks that resembled the popular wooden Jerger chess clocks, I had one of these in the late 80's and they took a beating at blitz, the early clocks look just as tough so it's possible. Old Jerger like clocks. http://www.chess-theory.com/encprd0... Dec-17-09    TheFocus: I still have my Jerger. A fine clock. Dec-17-09    visayanbraindoctor: <TheFocus: nothing new there.> I am not sure what you are trying to imply but of course I know this occurs to a limited extent. I see lots of hemiplegic or paresthetic patients partially recover a little all the time; and one hypothesis is that previously unused adjacent parts of the brain were recruited into serving the impaired function. This is why I came to that hypothesis in the first place; that perhaps the young Capablanca managed to recruit other parts of his brain not normally used in chess-playing when he was faced with the moving chess pieces on a chess board in his effort to comprehend the game as a 4 year old child whose brain was still quite plastic. There is a caveat here: An area of the brain that is normally wired to do a certain certain function does not normally carry out other unrelated functions. So the areas related to speech comprehension (Wernicke's) and verbalization (Brocka's) are not expected to do analytical planning. What is fascinating is if Capa managed to recruit some of the speech areas into chess-playing; and if not these areas, other areas not normally used in analytical planning. I do not claim absolute truth; I am hypothesizing. As what properly should happen when one hypothesizes, I proposed experiments to test the hypothesis. <scrambler> Yeah thanks for the reminder. At any rate, 5-minute blitz can definitely be played in the old clocks. You and your opponent just make sure you don't slam it so hard that it falls over the table.(",) Thanks for the link. Dec-17-09    visayanbraindoctor: <SatelliteDan: Why would Alekine use the phrase <amazing rapidity> unless it was time odds. Money odds would not connect to that statment. Money odds would only be good to see who won the most of X games.> You got my point. Alekhine was clearly talking about time-odds. One, he spoke about the rapidity of Capa's play. Two, he described what he saw as unimaginable; certainly winning money at 5 to 1 odds is quite imaginable and happens all the time. AAA would not talk about it in his flabbergasted way if it were merely money-odds. <whatthefat: Why do you keep making this bizarre assertion?> Are you also talking about Alekhine? Clearly he was talking about something so bizarre that it defied his beliefs and imagination.(",) <SatelliteDan> Now granted that it was a rapid transit format, with Capa having 10 seconds and his opponent 50 seconds, such a condition would still tend to validate my assertion that Capa was thinking 5 times faster than his opponents. Dec-17-09    CruyffTurn: <scrambler: So Capablanca was clearly calculating deeper and faster at fast games than his opponents...that Rubinstein aways came around to watch is interesting, perhaps he never saw anything like it himself.> That makes sense: Capablanca learnt the game when he was 4(?) years old. Rubinstein was almost a grown man when he learned the game - 18 or 19 years old I think (sorry if I'm inaccurate here). It doesn't surprise me one bit that Capablanca would grasp the position much faster than Akiba, although I think both were of roughly the same strength, #1 and #2, in 1914. Dec-17-09    whatthefat: <visayan: <whatthefat: Why do you keep making this bizarre assertion?> Are you also talking about Alekhine? Clearly he was talking about something so bizarre that it defied his beliefs and imagination.(",)> Alekhine did not go on to witness the explosion of blitz chess on the internet. If he had, he would realise that a little practice in quick chess goes a long way, and even a very strong player can be completely thrashed by someone who has developed their quick game skills, case in point being Nakamura. Besides, your point was that this was such an unbelievable happening that nobody in existence could even believe it without proof that it had happened. I say piffle - I for one find it perfectly believable, and no less believable than any number of other chess feats performed by others. Here are some examples of events that I would actually find impossible to believe: 1. Capablanca beat every opponent in less than 15 moves. 2. Capablanca scored a perfect score in a double round robin at standard time controls against all other top players of the era. 3. Capablanca defeated 10 other masters in a simul where each move he had 2 seconds to play all moves on all boards. Capablanca winning most of his games against a group of leading masters who likely had very little experience at short time controls is impressive, but hardly unbelievable. If anything, I think Carlsen white-wash of places 2-5 in the recent blitz world championship is far more impressive. Dec-17-09    visayanbraindoctor: <whatthefat> If I find in Alekhine's tone someone who has seen something that defies his imagination, what I find believable from your tone is that you are pissed off. Too bad because you are we are not going to be able to talk in a constructive manner. No offense intended. Dec-17-09    CruyffTurn: <whatthefat: Here are some examples of events that I would actually find impossible to believe: 1. Capablanca beat every opponent in less than 15 moves> I think that's a completely valid statement <visa...>, I too find it impossible to believe. Answer his points, rather than being evasive. And I'm not pissed off ;-) Dec-17-09    visayanbraindoctor: Sure <CruyffTurn>, but it's you who I shall answer not him. My policy in CG.com discussions is that I stop communicating with any one who starts showing signs of getting too aggravated. What <whatthefat> listed are indeed unbelievable things, but that is beside the point of the discussion. If I had a mind, I could list a dozen unbelievable things too pertaining to chess. The point is very simple: Capablanca was doing things that from Alekhine's point of view was unbelievable. Therefore, he was talking about time-odds not money odds. This inference has to be accepted first before any further discussion can ensue; otherwise we just keep on eternally debating whether or not it was time-odds vs money odds. So clearly, if AAA found what Capa was doing unbelievable, then why imply that AAA was lying by saying that we ourselves would find what Capa did as perfectly believable? That is what AAA saw, and he said so himself in about as forthright manner as he could that he found it unbelievable. Another point. I for one do not believe that proficiency at blitz can be taught. Naka is often said to be someone who has trained himself to be good at blitz; but I BELIEVE HE IS GOOD AT BLITZ BECAUSE OF HIS NATURAL TALENT, not because of training. Now we can debate this endlessly again, but I stand by this. I have seen too many chess players who spend weeks playing blitz all the time, and still stink at it. (Meaning I could still beat them in a jiffy in blitz although I hardly play it myself.) Dec-17-09    CruyffTurn: <visayanbraindoctor> Okay, I sort of see what you're saying. I, too(?), think Alekhine was exaggerating/lying/writing nonsense purely for dramatic effect. But he was still lying (in my humble opinion) about a few things... for dramatic effect. I agree with the pair of you in a way: It *is* unbelievable to me how good Capablanca was at chess in general, let alone rapid play, and back in the day he had to find a way to emphasise this. Alekhine's emphasis is just a little out of date nowadays. Dec-17-09    CruyffTurn: <visayanbraindoctor: I BELIEVE HE IS GOOD AT BLITZ BECAUSE OF HIS NATURAL TALENT, not because of training.> You don't have to shout, I can read. I think it's pretty obvious he's good at bullet and blitz chess through his talent *and* practice - a different thing to training. Dec-17-09    whatthefat: <visayan: If I find in Alekhine's tone someone who has seen something that defies his imagination, what I find believable from your tone is that you are pissed off> It seems you're as bad at reading my tone as Alekhine's. I'm not "pissed off", just flabbergasted by your blind insistence on your theory of Capablanca Godliness, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. <The point is very simple: Capablanca was doing things that from Alekhine's point of view was unbelievable.> <That is what AAA saw, and he said so himself in about as forthright manner as he could that he found it unbelievable.> Good for Alekhine. I disagree for reasons I've now given three times but you've each time failed to even address. There are some other quotes of Alekhine about Capablanca that you don't seem to take as gospel. <Therefore, he was talking about time-odds not money odds.> No, this has already been refuted. <Another point. I for one do not believe that proficiency at blitz can be taught.> Are you kidding? Just from my own experience, if I take a break from blitz for a few months my playing strength drops around 400 rating points. How can you possibly on the one hand claim to have any sort of background in neuroscience, and then on the other hand claim that there is a task one cannot be trained in. By your logic, Nakamura was a 3500 rated bullet player the first time he learned the rules of chess, because training cannot have affected his proficiency at short time controls. Dec-17-09    visayanbraindoctor: <CruyffTurn> On my part, I do not think Alekhine was lying. AAA could really not imagine such a thing, and had to believe because he saw it for himself. Neither do I think was Lasker or Fine when they spoke about Capa's talent for quick or fast games. Take this famous quote from Lasker: <Young man, you play remarkable chess! You never make a mistake! – Emanuel Lasker (after losing most of the games in a 10 game rapid transit match against a very young Capablanca)> It's even shorter than Alekhine's narration, but it is said in the same spirit. Lasker could not imagine how fast a human being could play chess and still play it strongly, until Capablanca demonstrated it in front of his eyes. Then Lasker had to believe. As I said, whatever Capablanca was doing must have seemed inhumanly good to Lasker and Alekhine if they said in effect that they they would not have believed it except that they saw it for themselves. Capa was of course just a human being. My hypothesis is as above; he had developed additional brain circuitry for chess-playing as a 4 year old kid; at a time when such a thing is still possible before our brain's circuitry more or less gets fixed at the age of 5. I have to run for work now. Dec-17-09    visayanbraindoctor: Hey <whatthefat>, before I run to work, and you get more personal, why don't you read up first? Check out the alleged functions of out frontal lobes, Wernicke's, Broca's areas. What is myelin and why is it important and at what age is the myelinization of our CNS completed? What is PET scan? What is 'plasticity' in Neuro? What are synapses? What are neuronal cell bodies? Where are our 'skills' located, in the neuronal cell bodies or in our synapses? It is not me who does not know what he is talking about; but from the way you are talking, it's probably you. Dec-17-09    whatthefat: <visayan: On my part, I do not think Alekhine was lying> Nobody ever said he was lying, this is a straw man. <Lasker could not imagine how fast a human being could play chess and still play it strongly, until Capablanca demonstrated it in front of his eyes> That's not what he said at all, you're putting words in his mouth. <As I said, whatever Capablanca was doing must have seemed inhumanly good to Lasker and Alekhine if they said in effect that they they would not have believed it except that they saw it for themselves. > <Inhumanly> good now? Your hyperbole knows no bounds! By the way, here is the conversation where <Calli> dispels the time control myth: Sergey Karjakin Dec-17-09    whatthefat: <visayan> I actually do research in neuroscience. Try not speaking down to me. Every question you just posed is utterly trivial. Jump to page #   (enter # from 1 to 264) search thread:    < Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 182 OF 264 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines: No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members. Nothing in violation of United States law. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members. No trolling. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times. See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator. NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific player only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC