Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Best chess player ever.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #61


    wow sometimes capablanca reminds me a tiny bit of fischer

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #62


    you know the part when people say, well its not hard to figur out what he wants to do but you cant stop it. awesome games, thanks chessman

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #63


    There's a Spassky interview where he says Capablanca was a genius in part because he rarely ever made tactical mistakes. Here are some quotes:

    " I believe that the real grandmaster of the super class has to follow the logical course from the beginning to the end of a game. It is necessary to work out all the right tactical decisions which justify your ideas. Sometimes I am too lazy to do this properly, and that is a very, very bad attitude for a grandmaster. I do not believe that Capablanca, Alekhine or Lasker had this particular problem."

     "Probably there have been two pure geniuses in chess; Morphy and Capablanca. Tal is also a genius as a tactician, but because he makes a lot of unsound sacrifices this is not pure genius; Morphy and Capablanca hardly ever made tactical mistakes. Perhaps Rubinstein was also a genius of positional chess, and his playing style was also very pure; but he was a bad tactician."

    (Interesting that the way he distinsguishes between Capablanca and Rubinstein is tactical abilty.)


  • 18 months ago · Quote · #64


    TetsuoShima wrote:

    wow sometimes capablanca reminds me a tiny bit of fischer

    No wonder Fischer named him one of the best chess players ever! :)

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #65


    TetsuoShima wrote:

    you know the part when people say, well its not hard to figur out what he wants to do but you cant stop it. awesome games, thanks chessman

    You're welcome.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #66


    The Backyard Professor. 

    Easily outclasses any of the people mentioned so far.  He is in semi-retirement at the moment, but will resume his quest for the WC shortly.  That is, if Carlsen or Anand can find the courage to play him.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #67


    vladimir kramnik

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #68


    fabelhaft wrote:
    ihateparadox wrote:

    Spassky and Geller were very dominant during the 1960's

    Geller was never dominant or the strongest player in the world.

    You must not him very well.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #69


    Paul Morphy, without a doubt, gets my vote. 

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #70


    There are many factors at play here; time period disadvantages, attractiveness of style over practicality, pioneers of theory...but my vote might have to go to Carlsen, who is in many ways an improved version of Fischer.  Both have (had) similar styles, but Carlsen is better all around.  My "favorite" chess player will always be Mikhail Tal, for his sheer love of the game and combinative brilliance, but Carlsen would likely beat him in a match.  If Capa had the advantages of computer study, he could give Carlsen a run for his money, but Carlsen is young yet.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #71


    People refer to ratings as if there were only one way to rate players. Different rating scales exist and may be better than FIDE'S.  


    For example what if draws were not counted in the ratings?  Should a high level player be penalized because someone slightly lower rated did not make any mistakes?

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #72


    Every player has his good and bad sides. So I think there shouldn't really be a best player ever. Every players have got a shameless blunders in one of his games.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #73


    The problem with Morphy is that the players he met were way weaker than him.

    I remember an interview in a recent tournament, where someone (I don't know who) was talking about the young Kramnik. He was, at this time very interested by Morphy and in these pre-computer/database times, this was not so easy to find games from a player.

    So this person provided Kramnik with a copy of a book about Morphy's best games. A few weeks after, Kramnik gave back the book saying:" Morphy's opponents... they were so weak !"

    We will probably never be able to assess how strong Morphy really was.

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #74


    But he was good, that's for sure!

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #75



  • 11 months ago · Quote · #76



  • 11 months ago · Quote · #77



  • 11 months ago · Quote · #78


    Definitely Capablanca, he lost only under 40 games in his life time and to me that is remarkable! That make him the best player of all time.

Back to Top

Post your reply: