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

Do submarines still have a big advantage over ships in war, or can ships find them and launch smart guided torpedoes from a safe distance?

During the time I served, if you asked a submariner what kind of ships did the Navy have, they would usually reply: submarines and targets. During one particular…

Is it better to inflate the tires a little more than recommended?

Will it make the tires last much longer? Why was I told this? Will it also make your tires more prone to blowing up if they are older…

Why do PCs gradually get slower with usage?

There’s 4 main reason for this, but only 2 of them are genuinely noticeable unless it’s a severe case of the latter reasons. Here are they by rank…

Do submarines hit things in the water?

Yes they do. There have been reports of submarines hitting whales, surface ships, and other submarines. Here’s a photo of the Los Angeles class USS San Francisco after…

Can U.S. aircraft carriers get bigger? Say 75 percent or two times bigger and than they are today as well as require less manpower to operate them? What are the pros and cons of this?

Can they? As in, is it theoretically possible with current engineering? Sure. Should they is another matter, and the answer to that is definitely no. If you look at the…

Why do some aircraft like the TU-95 and B-52 outlast newer planes? What features make them so adaptable over the years?

Just because they are big. Let me explain. Nowadays, the role of a strategic bomber is obsolete, as these big flying clunks are really easy prey for modern…