Knowledge

How well would a chess grandmaster from 100 years ago do in a tournament held today?

Not well at all.

Timeless legends of chess history like Capablanca certainly deserve the legacy they left behind. The Cuban World Champion was infamous for his creativity in quiet positions, his sharp endgame tactics, and his utter dominance of his era.


So then, why is it that top players of today could crush guys like Capablanca so well? The answer’s simple: players today are born in a better time.

See, every top player today is born in the age of computers. In the chess world 40+ years ago, making moves was simply a matter of high-level guesswork. But today, a computer can tell you what the objectively best move is.

Today, the best players can simply memorize and prepare the top engine lines in a game in order to win. It’s less about creativity, and more about memorization. I think Bobby Fischer puts it well:

I hate chess [today]. It’s all about memorization, it’s all about pre-arrangement…creativity is lower down on the list. It’s ridiculous! It gets harder [over the years], you need more and more computers.

Just the last few years, chess has changed dramatically with all this computer stuff. If you analyze chess objectively, it’s been a lousy game.

Today’s era of chess is all about theories and preparation. At the top level, a win or loss can really come down to who memorized more lines.

So no, top players 100 years ago wouldn’t stand much of a chance today.


In the 1920s, the most dominant players were Capablanca, Alekhine and Rubinstein. These three legends had great chess understanding and were clearly ahead of their time.

Capablanca vs Alekhine

I don’t think most people give these players enough credit. Without the help of computers, they were able to come up with new, creative and strong ideas that have influenced generations of players. However, chess has undergone drastic changes in the last 100 years, so they would have to work hard to update their game in order to stay competitive in modern chess.

Hypothetically, if we were to bring these players to the modern day, providing them with powerful computers and a good coach to update them on modern developments, I think that they could easily break 2700 within a year, and probably even reach the top 10.

Related Posts

Why can’t the Earth just all be land?

Earth can be just all land, but we wouldn’t be here. It would be inhospitable to complex life. Surprisingly, though, there is a theory that a planet with…

How long does it take for uranium-235 to be safe?

U235 will never be safe for humans, it is a toxic heavy metal. It can cause damage to the brain, nervous system, kidneys, and other body organs if…

If you stood 100 meters from a nuclear weapon when it detonated, would you live long enough to realise what was happening?

One of the companies I worked for made test instruments that were used during nuclear tests, starting in the 1950s, to calculate device yields. Some of the instruments…

Why did NASA not see Atlas (the comet that is roughly 1/2 the size of the Sun that will come within 70 million miles of the Earth) before?

First, let’s get something out of the way: comet C/2019 Y4 (sometimes called ATLAS after the telescopes that found it) is not “half the size of the sun.” The comet’s…

What happens if you enter the Milky way galactic core?

The galactic core, i.e., the central bulge of the Milky Way, is a region very densely populated by stars. It is a dangerous place. Stars regularly get close…

Why can’t we make small atomic bombs?

I will give you a slightly different answer. “Small” atomic bombs are incredibly more dangerous than big ones. This is a 152-mm Russian nuclear artillery shell. The US…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *