Karpov won more tournaments than anyone, and barely came up short vs Kasparov
Steinitz is the father of positional chess, was super dominant until Lasker came along.
Spassky is thought of as the loser of the match of the century, but he beat Petrosian to become WC, and is better role model than Fischer.
Eliskases had an equal score against Capa and Fischer, plus score vs. Euwe, etc., yet nobody seems to know who he is/was. Also Boris Gulko, though he's (justifiably) pretty well known.
Amos Burn was pretty good too, and Spielmann as well, and neither really was entirely as one dimensional as their reputation (Burns as a plodding defender, Spielmann as a crazed attacker) might suggest.
Ratmir Kholmov was also a fantastically strong player in an era with simply too many other fantastically strong Soviets:
I vote for Yusupov. Never heard of him until i bought his book. He was three in the world for years behind The great Kasparov, and karpov. Fischer was not underrated...Some people consider him the greatest, that is not underrated. I've heard of Euwe, but don't know much about him. Rubinstein was not underrated. Never heard of Eliskases or Kholmov, so they may be underrated
I vote for Yusupov. Never heard of him until i bought his book. He was three in the world for years behind The great Kasparov, and karpov. Fischer was not underrated...Some people consider him the greatest, that is not underrated. I've heard of Euwe, but don't know much about him. Rubinstein was not underrated. Never heard of Eliskases or Kholmov, so they may be underrated
are you sure you that you havent mistaken him for beliavsky?? i might be wrong though
Outstanding piece placement and tactics.
If anything I'd say Fischer is a bit overrated.
no fischer is totally underrated, everyone says he is overrated. why would he say he is not so strong anyway, also shirov also had nice to look at games (only i watched very few so i dont know his style).
Just because he chooses such a nice and clear style doest make him inferior to anyone. Its like saiyng Monet or Rembrandt didnt have the class of picasso, because they obviously didnt know how to draw crazy style.
I feel Korchnoi was deadly...but social circumstances...fleeing the Soviet Union...leaving his family,trainers and etc...really was too monumental of an obstacle...he was ranked 4th in the world one time I believe....
I like the vote for Simagin, who was a great endgame specialist and trainer.
When I think of players who are traditionally underrated or ignored in lists of great players, I think of Isaac Boleslavsky. He was one of the greatest players the Soviet Union produced, but had the misfortune of reaching his prime at about the same time as World War II. He beat Nezhmetdinov (2 wins and 4 draws), had plus scores against Tal (2 wins, 3 draws) Korchnoi (4 wins, 4 draws, and a loss), Petrosian, Smyslov, and other top players.
Boleslavsky contributed to the Soviet revolution in chess that saw the rise of dynamic openings such as the Sicilian and the King's Indian, and yet he is barely remembered today.
even though i know nothing about him, i would say chebanenko.
no but seriously most underrated player, it can only be either taimanov or NN
Nah i definetly go for NN as the most underrated player
jarilkonen that was one pretty game of mikhailnishin??
Boris spassky
i just like love the game of mikhail because even his gm opponent wouldnt have thought about the sacrifice. it might be completly incorrect but i still find it somewhat awesome. the other game is probably nice too i just need a while to understand it.
I am going with karpov, because despite the fact that he and Kasparov were seperated by a razor thin margin of games, the question always seems to be "Who was the greatest, Kasparov or Fischer?", and in reality I think if you put Kasparov as #1 (as I would), Karpov has a much stronger claim to the #2 spot. There simply isnt enough daylight betweeen the 2 of them to slip Fischer in between, IMO.
Off course, the most underrated player ever will never be known. Even not in this thread. It is his or her fate.
But if I have to guess, then would it be someone who is looked upon with some disdain, because he plays apparently absurdly bad chess. Yet he has achieved a high rating, implying he is actually a very good player. His excentricity is so much, that he is most of the time judged as a 'could be good player, yet had to play always those strange systems'. I am talking about the best advocate of the creepy crawler opening 1. h3 d5 2. a3 e5. Playing that and then still able to beat strong players.
My vote goes to Michael Basman.
I am going with karpov, because despite the fact that he and Kasparov were seperated by a razor thin margin of games, the question always seems to be "Who was the greatest, Kasparov or Fischer?", and in reality I think if you put Kasparov as #1 (as I would), Karpov has a much stronger claim to the #2 spot. There simply isnt enough daylight betweeen the 2 of them to slip Fischer in between, IMO.
well i think there could be no doubt that Fischer was better then Karpov. Its hard to tell if Fischer or Kasparov was better, but for me it will be Fischer. Maybe if Karpov would bore Fischer to death, then he might would win because Fischer would drop dead.
I vote for Yusupov. Never heard of him until i bought his book. He was three in the world for years behind The great Kasparov, and karpov. Fischer was not underrated...Some people consider him the greatest, that is not underrated. I've heard of Euwe, but don't know much about him. Rubinstein was not underrated. Never heard of Eliskases or Kholmov, so they may be underrated
are you sure you that you havent mistaken him for beliavsky?? i might be wrong though
I'm sure. I have build up your chess by Artur Yusupov...interesting thing is he won the Boleslavsky medal from FIDE as the best instructional books in the world. Never heard of Boleslavsky until then, but there are many GM's i have never heard of, I'm no expert on players.
If anything I'd say Fischer is a bit overrated.