12646 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!
i always wonderd about this question, but since kasparov is the most resent one he is probably more up to date with tactics and straergy
But like I said - Fischer would study to become more up-to-date and would have the edge over Kasparov.
But Fischer didn't like to study so much, before he died he said it was bad enough back when he was doing it and "now it's a joke". If you listen to what Fischer is saying, he is telling you that the reason he quit when he did is mainly because of the rapidly expanding opening theory that he had no interest in keeping up with anymore (on a world class level). That's why he invented Fischer Random.
That's the older Fischer who had lost interest in chess- when he was younger he would have prepared more than anyone.
Have not Spassky coached K&K? Tal refers to Spassky (and Botvinnik) as to god of arena, same do Kasparov. Further, both authors abhor Fisher (as person) and make strong critics on his games.
Kasparov vs fischer would be like morphy vs botvinik
Very different times and opening theory plus no engins for fischer!
Fischer was universal great tactics and posi. play.
Kasparov great calculation and tactics.
Kasparov doesnt have the positional awarness, intuition, deepnes(positional not tactical), and vision that fischer did.
Kaparovs tacticas were based more on calculation, while fischer on positional awarness. And in the end it is positional play which sees deeper and makes the difference. We will never know!!!
We will never know, Kaspy could calculate more but fischer was positionally more deep and aware.
Kaspys tactics are based mostly on calc while fischers on positional awarness, and in the end it is positional play which sees deeper and makes the difference.
Example of the to kinds of tactics are present in famous games of theres
Kasparov vs topalov 1999
Byrne vs Fischer 1963
Fischer tactical play was based on positional features over calculation, while Kaspys on calculation over PF.
so whats the conclusion?
Fischer or Kasparov?
Never heard of either one of them.
Kasparov was already World Champion when pc's still looked like this, so the "if Fisher had compooters" argument doesn't hold up too well
"Aaaa, it's like War Games!!!"
(And sadly, ICC still looks like that.)
Fischer or Kasparov?
Let me first say that many players where great, I could list my 5 greatest ones.
So the best is Fischer no doubt about it in my mind.
Thanks for your opinion Paul211,
i will skip every topic about Fischer vs Kasparov in the future
Has Fischer lost to a machine with 200 million moves per second?
For me Fischer number 1
It would be quite the clash of ideals. Kasparov, the last great product of the Soviet chess machine, vs. Fischer, the lone-wolf American. Fischer would probably be at an opening disadvantage since he almost exclusively played e4 as white but he would have the edge in the endgame...
In the end, I'm going with Fischer. He had an unparalleled devotion to chess... Imagine how frightening he would be if he had today's wealth of chess knowledge to study!
"What opening or any move that he invented? Zilch or niet"
Kasparov was always a great opening theoretician, as even Nakamura knows :-)
Fischer = THE GREATEST!!!
TheProfessor's true identity:
moot point: you can not compare talented players that are products of their time. The same argument can be made about Morphy, Capablanca , Alekhine , Lasker etc. Fischer had the largest gap between him and his nearest rival. if you compare results Kasparov had the best results over time. Highest rating,.. world championship. Tournament results etc...
The tragedy is what Fischer could have become if he continued to play.
What we really need to ask is who was the more arrogant of the two? I would just call it a draw in that case.
Now its Kasparov 'BECAUSE' Fischer already rested. Belated happy Birthday Bobby!
Paul Morphy is my vote. And I'm serious.
Hey! i'm a fan of Paul Morphy too.
18 Queens Problem
by ajax333221 a few minutes ago
what do play against 1.e4 d5
by Scottrf a few minutes ago
12/10/2013 - Easterwood-Williams 2004
by eccbaroda 3 minutes ago
Chess Troll for the Year!
by macer75 4 minutes ago
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
by Jaglavak 4 minutes ago
Where to find rules re tournaments
by Possies 5 minutes ago
chess opening which can help you improve
by chessbond001 5 minutes ago
by TwoMove 7 minutes ago
Why Russians are so good at chess.
by Ubik42 9 minutes ago
My "new" openings
by XXSilent_AssassinXX 10 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 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!