Kasparov vs. Capablanca by Goran Tomic


"Why did Kasparov talk about Capablanca with some underestimation?"


When you read about the best chess players in history, you could be
perplexed by Kasparov's evaluation of Capablanca. He said in the
interview conducted by Hannon Russell:

Hanon Russell: Let me ask you a question, where it▓s sort of the
reverse of Rubinstein, where you develop an appreciation for
Rubinstein, you say almost the opposite about Capablanca. On page 338
you say, ⌠Despite his staggering talent (or more probably,
because of it), his real contribution to the creation of modern chess
was inferior to that of Steinitz and Lasker.■

Garry Kasparov: "Absolutely. I think Capablanca has the least
efficiency in the game of chess. Probably the purest talent that was
never displayed in its┘ in big quantities. So maybe his
potential was realized, I don▓t know, I don▓t want to talk
about numbers (30-50%), but it was well below the mark. Sometimes you
can think that it▓s, maybe it▓s tragic that he was so
talented, so gifted he didn▓t have to work hard. So that▓s
why he missed big some opportunities to enlarge his contribution to
the game of chess."

Kasparov's evaluation you could compare with ELO historic chess
players' rating. You could read the text dedicated 100th anniversary
of Arpad Emre Elo.

Here is one part of that text:

Rating of Chessplayers Past and Present:

In 1978 Elo published a book entitled "The Rating of Chessplayers,
Past and Present" which contained the historical ratings of 476 chess
players. In this list Capablanca is the strongest player of all time,
rated at 2725, Paul Morphy ranks sixth at 2690. The ratings are
five-year peak averages.

So, do you believe in Elo's or Kasparov's evaluation? Do you believe
in the rating points or subjective opinion, never mind whom it
belongs? I would select the first.

Why did Kasparov talk about Capablanca with some underestimation?

Capablanca was opposite in relation towards chess if you compare him
and Kasparov. Tension in the Kasparov's face when he was playing, and
mops which disturbed his opponents (some of his opponents had to call
the arbiter to give a warn to Kasparov). Vladimir Kramnik said in
recently published interview: "When I play him (Kasparov), I promise
myself to never look at his face because he is a very talented actor."

Kasparov's relation to chess as a business is very well known.

Capablanca was known as a man with noble manners. Hans Kmoch wrote
1929 about Capablanca: "When he (Capablanca) was playing you can't see
any sign of tension, so it seems that chess couldn't be a job for him,
nor game, nothing that clean recreation."

Could anybody imagine that Capablanca retires the move, like Kasparov
in the game against Polgar? I'm sure that the answer is -nobody! Such
difference between two world chess champions in behalf Capablanca
could make some jealous which influenced in Kasparov's evaluation of
the Capablanca personality and his playing. Maybe that's the reason
why those books (My great Predecessors) still lie, undisturbed by
customers, on the bookshop shelves.

Aryeh Davidoff