Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Even I know about Morphy and Fischer's Queen sacrifices. And I'm sure there are many dozens of others almost as well known and considered brilliant or hard to find, in the last hundred years. So i'm wondering whether the best computers have been asked their opinion of those moves. And wondering whether, if they picked a different one, it meant that the human's move wasn't so smart after all (as opposed to out thinking even the super computers).
One of the most well thought of books in chess history is by Bobby Fischer, called "My 60 Memorable Games". In 1995, it was re-edited with substantial amounts of computer analysis, much of which showed that Fischer had made errors or misjudgements. However, by and large, the majority showed that he simply played extremely well. (David - the story of this re-issue and the controversy that occurred would probably be of interest if you wanted to read about it, especially from the perspective of an author and publisher -
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/fischer.html)
Kasparov's series "My Great Predecessors" did similarly, where he wrote 100-150 page profiles on all the previous world champions. The results were about what you'd expect - as the years went on, the computers found fewer and fewer mistakes.