Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

The Best Player Never to Become World Champion?


  • 16 months ago · Quote · #461

    Scottrf

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #462

    batgirl

    varelse1 wrote:

    Scottrf wrote:

    Did Morphy ever play a single chess professional?

     

    No. They were all married.

    Every SINGLE one!

    How could the single ones be married?

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #463

    Hi832

    john nunn

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #464

    batgirl

    Morphy was emphatically an amateur.  All contemporary sources that allude to Morphy's level of involvement in chess stress the fact that he wasn't so obsessed with the game and "that he never indulged in the game to excess."  Prior to his first tournament, Morphy was in school were he played only occasionally and against relatively weak players to whom he offered odds or played sans voir. At home his chess playing was restricted to Sunday afternoons. After school and the American Congress, he left almost immediately for Europe and faced his first really strong opponents.  During that year he played excessive chess as that was his reason for traveling so far, but other than that year, his chess was extremely limited. 

    The women's shoes reference is utter nonsense.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #465

    julianchang4701

    paul keres

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #466

    HoboKing

    Paul Morphy without a doubt...simply because the self proclaiming world champion at the time avoided playing him. However I also think Sammy Reshevsky should be added to the mix. The only Grandmaster in the Fischer era who was able to stand toe to toe with Bobby. Their match ended in a tied score....something no one else can claim against Bobby!

    David Bronstein, Paul Keres, maybe even Arthur Bisguier? Viktor Korchnoi, and possibly Boris Gulko since the political issues seem to have been a hurdle both men could not overcome. One last name to add to the mix might be Pal Benko. I wonder if certain events had been different in those days whether one of those great players might have become World Chess Champion. Just my humble opinions!

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #467

    batgirl

    Staunton was the self-proclaimed English champion, not world champion and the issue wasn't that he avoided Morphy, but that he wouldn't commit definitely to play him, in effect he strung him along, hoping he'd go away.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #468

    goldendog

     However I also think Sammy Reshevsky should be added to the mix. The only Grandmaster in the Fischer era who was able to stand toe to toe with Bobby. Their match ended in a tied score....something no one else can claim against Bobby!

     

    While Reshevsky was a very tough match player (he beat WC Botvinnik in a 4-game match), the age difference between Bobby and Sammy thwarts any meaningful head to head comparison--though I think Fischer has better credentials of course.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #469

    HoboKing

    While Reshevsky was a very tough match player (he beat WC Botvinnik in a 4-game match), the age difference between Bobby and Sammy thwarts any meaningful head to head comparison--though I think Fischer has better credentials of course.

    Not sure what you mean in regards to age difference. Or what that has to do with a players overall ability. Sammy was a prodigy much like Fischer. When I met him he was already in his 70's and still showing people he was an exceptional player. He consistently beat many top players in tournaments even very late in his career. Is it correct to say the younger Sammy was one of the best during his prime. 


  • 16 months ago · Quote · #470

    HoboKing

    In the late 1940's to mid 1950's Reshevsky was considered to be Botvinnik's main threat from "the west." Somewhere I read that the other GMs considered Sammy no worse than 3rd in the world around 1955. But the Russians were truly fixing world chess as Fine had noted and later Fischer of course.

    Also Sammy was not really a big student of the game. Many said he played more by natural ability than anything.....especially in the openings. Which I recall Sammy having stated he never studied openings. He refused to play on the Sabbath ( being Jewish) and that caused issues too. If he had the finances and time to spend on chess I really think he  had a real chance to take the title. These observations come from an interview with Sammy during a visit he made to Texas several years ago.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #472

    uspavani_lovac

    Dr. Vidmar and Albin Planinc

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #473

    uspavani_lovac

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 16 months ago · Quote · #474

    uspavani_lovac

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #475

    tazzzz

    me! :) a kid can dream rite!? lol...

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #476

    batgirl

    " Would his family and friends say that they were complicit in the corruption of a child? "

    His father and uncle were chess players.  His uncle especially encouraged him and even advertised (to no avail) for opponents with stakes. They didn't see it as corrpution at all.  Thinking about chess sans voir and training such as a professional would - which is the topic in discussion - aren't in the least similar.

    The contemporary accounts are from those who knew Paul best, such as Charles Maurian, his friend and school mate.  Also according to Maurian, Morphy only possessed 5 chess books and Morphy himself claimed he never read an instructional book that told him anything he didn't already know through reasoning.   Morphy had no need for a pocket set.  I've never researched it, but I can't recall having seen, or read about,  a pocket set from that era.

    One can believe whatever one wants to imagine, disregard what facts we know and create something that fits one's own ideas.  I'd rather put stock in things with some basis.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #477

    strngdrvnthng

    Game, set, and match to BatGirl : ) I capitalized your name out of respect :)

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #478

    maheshroks

    deep blue

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #479

    wiebelenstra

    Just counting the 3 years peak of the ELO points is not the correct solution for determining who was the best player ever not becoming worldchampion. Because there is an inflation of ELO points during the decades and centuries. So you first have to make a correction for the inflation to find the correct answer to that question. But Korchnoi is still a very good candidate, among others...

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #480

    perulrik

    Paul Keres - of course. but Bronstein, Rubinstein and Nimzowich are also fine candidates.


Back to Top

Post your reply: