Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Fischer or Kasparov. Who's the best?


  • 21 months ago · Quote · #261

    LesChats

    I_Am_Fear wrote:

    People ,people ,people cmon maaaaaaaaaaaaan !!! The question isnt who would win.The question is who had more talent??? BOBBY FISCHER!!!! Heres why. Bobby did have the MIGHTY russian machine helping him play chess..Kasparov has like 20 guys on his team who helped make him the chess player he was including the years in the Botvinik school of chess.Bobby trained alone barely giving interviews..Bobby even impressed Kasparov in Kasparovs own words.The bottom line is that Fischer was a natural born chess legend.Kasparov was a russian product developed by the russian school of chess.Kasparovs early games if compared to Bobbys were drawish and mechanical.At 14 Alexander Kotov A RUSSIAN named one of Bobbys games The game of the century!!! Bobby said morphy was best because in his time he had no preddesecors to draw off of. But the best was Capablanca reported never to have read 1 chess book.Bobby was self taught and instructed.Kasparov cant even beat the best today anymore and noone really stands out the best is Anand??? hehehehehe Laughable compared to bobbys genius anand is just another chess computer whiz..In fact if all the players were assembled at the top today they all almost draw or there is only a marginal difference in the outcome of the games.Anand only wins by a game or 2 over carlsen leko svidler bla bla bla..None can come close to bobby he is " The Secretariat of chess"

     

    Your opinion is highly biased by the fact that you are American.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #263

    vmgreece

    fischer 100%. One man fight against the whole USSR

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #264

    GreedyPawnGrabber

    No one is better than Anatoly Karpov.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #266

    waffllemaster

    Best movie / inspirational story?  Probably Fischer.

    Best chess player... probably not Fischer.  One of the best, sure.  But notice Fischer didn't win even one game as world champion.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #267

    Scottrf

    And in every sport I know, they say it's harder to keep the title than win it.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #268

    josephcow55

    I like Kasparov better because Fischer had the title for 1 year and Kasparov had it for something like 15 years. Fischer quit after he won his championship, which really is a shame. They both weren't happy with FIDE and Kasparov created the PCA. In a game of chess with both players at the height of their career, a draw would happen. I like Kasparov more because of what he did off the chessboard.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #269

    peruh

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 16 months ago · Quote · #270

    peruh

    During all time, the best are Murphey, Capablanca, Alekhine, Botvinnik and Kasparov.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #271

    ryanvmay

    Who was better: Stallone or van Damme?

    There's only one word and the word is CHUCK!!!

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #272

    sven00100

    It would be interesting to see what players of that era could have done with today's resources.  Honestly, I'm in for Fischer, but it's not grounded in much.  Still, I want to see how Carlsen progresses; he's a very unorthodox player. . . He needs more time to prove himself consistently, but it is already clear he's a powerful player, and one of the world's best.

    Huzzah! 

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #273

    klfay1

    ryanvmay wrote:

    Who was better: Stallone or van Damme?

    There's only one word and the word is CHUCK!!!

     

    Chuck is also a force over the board.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #274

    idreesarif

    Kasrarov

    Karpov

    Fischer

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #275

    buri

    Both Fischer and Kasparov had a natural talent for the game. However, Kasaprov had an entire country to aid him while Fischer had nothing. I can only imagine what a genius like Fischer could have done if he had the same support.

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #276

    coltpython

    buri wrote:

    Both Fischer and Kasparov had a natural talent for the game. However, Kasaprov had an entire country to aid him while Fischer had nothing. I can only imagine what a genius like Fischer could have done if he had the same support.

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #277

    richie_and_oprah

    fischer went and hid after one world championship and what had he contributed to chess during the interegnum ?

    kasparov battled for 25+ years and basically took on all comers

    its really not close except to the fischerphiles/ignoratti

     

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #278

    richie_and_oprah

    buri wrote:

    Both Fischer and Kasparov had a natural talent for the game. However, Kasaprov had an entire country to aid him while Fischer had nothing. I can only imagine what a genius like Fischer could have done if he had the same support.

    fischer had support

    gms lombardy and evans were his seconds and in addition he had serious cultural support  ... when he came back to the states and started appearing on talk shows it became obvious he was a bit unprepared for the social obligations and public appearances and then going into hiding caused all his support to evaporate 

     

  • 8 months ago · Quote · #279

    sven00100

    richie_and_oprah wrote:

    fischer went and hid after one world championship and what had he contributed to chess during the interegnum ?

    kasparov battled for 25+ years and basically took on all comers

    its really not close except to the fischerphiles/ignoratti

     

    That seems pretty reductive to me.  Playing more, publicly does not in any way imply skill.  Is there more evidence to support Kasparov's ability?  Perhaps.  Is there better evidence, which suggests Kasparov's superiority?  Doubtful.  It is certainly opinion, which is why the question gets asked.  


Back to Top

Post your reply: