Favorite GM to study?

It used to be Reshevsky and Botvinnik. These days I'm enjoying books contining the games of Nezhmetdinov and Bisguier.

 I'm currently reading his "Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953." Just finished a game where he explains the ideas behind the King's Indian nicely.

how do you chose? Tal, Nezhemetdinov, Spassky( tactical and attacking) Capa, Petrosian, Fischer(positional)and Hikaru Nakamura( handling of closed positions).

oh, and alekhine. and rubinstein.

I can throw up random names of GMs I like, but Silman's suggestion is more specific: a collection of games by one player.

These books take time, and I never finish them, but I have spent many productive hours with a few books of the sort Silman recommends (listed in order of purchase):

Gligoric's Best Games 1945-1970 (1972), purchased in 1977

Karpov's Collected Games, All 530 Available Encounters: 1961-1974 (1975), purchased in 1977

Kramnik: My Life and Games (2000), purchased in 2000

Svetozar Gligoric, I Play Against Pieces (2002), purchased in 2005

I have others, but have spent the most time with these four.

I love the wit in Paul Morphy's games. I'm an amateur classical-style player and have enjoyed reviewing his games.

Alekhine and Fischer are two whose games I go over quite a bit. I also look at Lasker and Botvinnik quite a bit and on my last vacation went through the Kmoch book on Rubinstein.

Modern players I really do not study as much though I like Jack Peters games quite  a bit and also Mark Ginsburg's as well.

 I like Rubinstein's games. Some of his combinations require an incredible depth of calculation.

I never look at games, but I might try it some day, (I even don't bother looking on my own games)

According to Dvoretsky you should either choose the player which your style resembles closest or the complete opposite. I think it's really not good to choose the opposite (neither does Josh Waitzkin, one of the things he really hated about his lessons with Dvoretsky was that he wanted him to try and think like Karpov all the time), as you don't want to be training yourself to go against your natural intuition...

The players that I study (and I study ALOT) are Karpov, Capablanca and Fischer. Their simple positional style are logical and easy to follow.

i don't think they are so easy....

Capablanca for the esthetics, Kasparov for the correctness, Tal for fun.

Capablanca and Fischer are the ones whose games "speak to me" the most.  I've also learned a lot from Morphy, which is funny, because I have a much less esteemed opinion of him than most people.

I like going over Tal's games too, but honestly I don't know that I gain tactics knowledge from them so much as a sense of bravado!

I, too, study "alot," as it is misspelled more than lose. A lot of the time I let it pass, but you used caps.

Allright, Ziryab, their is no need to be criticle of elamentry errers.

To error is human.

depends on what aspect of your game you wish to improve to me...

Nezhmetdinov, Kasparov, Shabalov and Tal for attack...Capa, Botvinik, Karpov and Kramnik for positional understanding. Alekhine and Spassky were universal (Alekhine leaned towrd complex positions with tactical undertones that explode at his command, Spasskys games just flow like water). Bronstein's 1953 Zurich is just amazing for studying how to think about positions...it all depends

no critacizm, just sayin that i study theze things

Tal,Kasparov,Lasker,Capa,Alekhine