Would a GM from the pre-engine era compete successfully against today's GMs?

️ A question for GMs, IMs and strong players:

Would a GM from the pre-engine era compete successfully against today's GMs?

Imagine taking a top GM from the pre-engine era and giving them access to modern training methods, databases and engines.

Would they be able to compete at today's elite level?

Or has modern chess developed so much that even the greatest players of the past would struggle against today's GMs?

I'd be very interested to hear the opinions of titled players, coaches and strong players on this.

It probably depends on style.
Lasker, Capablanca, Smyslov would probably succeed.
Alékhine, Tal, Fischer probably not.

@Elnur_Uktamov said ^

️ A question for GMs, IMs and strong players:

Would a GM from the pre-engine era compete successfully against today's GMs?

Imagine taking a top GM from the pre-engine era and giving them access to modern training methods, databases and engines.

Would they be able to compete at today's elite level?

Or has modern chess developed so much that even the greatest players of the past would st...

Would an apple picked a year ago taste as good as a freshly picked orange?

Besides not knowing modern opening lines, would their skill make them competitive in an equal middlegame?

"... I'm sure that, in 1985, plutonium is available in every corner drugstore, but, in 1955, it's a little hard to come by. ..."
It still seems to be a little hard to come by.

@tpr said ^

It probably depends on style.
Lasker, Capablanca, Smyslov would probably succeed.
Alékhine, Tal, Fischer probably not.

So you think that Lasker 'would probably succeed' at competing with regular 2600 GM's?

But that Fischer would 'probably not'.

Sound pretty unlikely.

That's an interesting point. I wouldn't say that Lasker or Fischer would automatically be able to compete with today's GMs.

What interests me more is how much modern training methods, databases and engines would change the outcome.

If you took Lasker or Fischer at their peak and gave them a few years to adapt to modern chess, do you think they could reach today's 2600–2700 level?

Or do you think the gap in modern opening preparation and computer-assisted training would simply be too large?

I'd be interested to hear what GMs and coaches think about this.

"I wouldn't say that Lasker or Fischer would automatically be able to compete with today's GMs"

• I think Lasker, Capablanca, Smyslov would, as their style did not depend on openings, with quiet lines.
  I think Alékhine, Tal, Fischer would not, as their style depended op openings, with sharp lines.