9679 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Fisher is the best player of all time.
Kasparov himself was asked this question and considering his "arrogance" his answer says it all and he said "i don't know but I know the names of the 2 greatest players: Fisher and Kasparov."
Magnus Carlsen has said that "Fisher was a little better than Kasparov at his peak" though Kasparov held on to his peak for a greater time. (fisher left chess)
Taking inflation into consideration Fisher still has the highest rating ever.
The difference b/t the rating of Fisher's second best and Kasparov's second best, is greater in Fisher's case. (In Kasparov's case it being Anatoly Karpov whom he beat only 7 times more in some 178 classic games)
Fisher's personality type is the personality type with greatest intellect and strategic vision i.e INTJ whereas Kasparov is a very intelligent ESTJ. (but an ESTJ) (very intelligent STJ types are sometimes mistaken for NTJ types)
Fisher in a, lets say 50 game match with Kasparov, with both of them being at their peak might lose some 3-4 games initially with some equal number of draws and 1-2 wins.
Fisher being an exceptional tactician himself would adjust to Kasparov's play but Kasparov not being a relatively equal exceptional strategist (again " ""relatively"" equal exceptional strategist") would eventually lose the match.
One might argue that what about Karpov? He was very strategic and lost to kasparov.
Yes but Karpov was not an exceptional tactician unlike Fisher.
Fisher's play is one of the most complete and universal. Hence the trophy would go to Fisher.
'Magnus Carlsen has said that "Fisher was a little better than Kasparov at his peak'
Fischer because he was world champion.
greatest comment in chess.com's history.
How to conquer the colossal obstacles of learning openings
by Fiveofswords 6 minutes ago
I have engineered a new opening-any comments welcome
by Fiveofswords 9 minutes ago
Magnus Carlsen not using standard chess openings?
by TwoMove 12 minutes ago
The longest tournament at chess.com ?
by Brazil_World 16 minutes ago
fair play - lame aborting
by Tapani 17 minutes ago
Signs you're a bad chess player
by pogorelich 17 minutes ago
9/22/2014 - Mate in 2
by oldmanoldlady 25 minutes ago
default rating for Chess960
by garbo999 26 minutes ago
Ladies-Share Your Chess Sets Here...
by Kimbacal 28 minutes ago
Anyone collect Zagreb style chess sets
by Kimbacal 32 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!