Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

My list of Top 10 chess players


  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #141

    SmyslovFan

    I would have loved to see Anand-Kramnik II rather than Anand-Gelfand. I'm a huge Kramnik fan, but Anand was better than Kramnik in that match. And yeah, Anand destroyed Topalov. The score was close, but Topalov was outplayed through most of the match.A longer match would have seen Anand extend his lead.

    Should WC matches be longer? Yeah. But I don't know whether Kramnik could have come back even in a longer match. A rematch between the two would have been very interesting. They are very evenly matched.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #142

    JamieDelarosa

    World championship matches should be a minimum 6-wins, unlimited games.

    That is the best way to ensure the strongest player wins.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #143

    SmyslovFan

    Yeah, how did that work in 1984?

    Statisticians have actually done some serious work on the optimum number of games to determine the best player. It's 18-24 games. The work can be found in the archives of Chessbase.com.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #144

    DamonevicSmithlov

    Her's my carefully selected list:

    Uh, but it's top 16. Sorry.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #145

    varelse1

    Totally agree with smyslov on Anand-Gelfand. That was a total disappointment.

    But nobody to blame there but Carlsen, I guess. If he hadn't Fischered-out, he could have been competing for the title then.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #146

    DamonevicSmithlov

    Isn't it odd that all 3, Fischer, Kasparov, & Carlsen got so pizzed off at fide enough to tell em to fugg off? All 3 of them. But Carlsen got back into the next cycle.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #147

    fabelhaft

    "Totally agree with smyslov on Anand-Gelfand. That was a total disappointment. But nobody to blame there but Carlsen, I guess. If he hadn't Fischered-out"

    Unless one would want to blame FIDE for changing the rules mid cycle from Candidates match to knockout so Kirsan could get Kramnik et al free spots after they refused to participate in the qualification together with Carlsen and Aronian etc. Also, if Anand-Kramnik II was what one wanted, one could always blame Kramnik for not winning the qualification Gelfand won :-)

    At the same time Anand and Kramnik have played many World Championship qualifications in different formats from the early 1990s to the mid 2010s, World Championships in tournament, match and knockout formats, World Championships in speed chess etc, and Anand always did better than Kramnik. There are other rematches I'd rather see than that one myself.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #148

    JamieDelarosa

    The F.I.D.E. is corrupt.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #149

    SmyslovFan

    JamieDelarosa wrote:

    The F.I.D.E. is corrupt.

    Yes, but it is useful, and for all intents and purposes the only game in town. 

    FIFA's corrupt, but that doesn't make the World Cup illegitimate. Same with FIDE and the Chess World Championship. 

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #150

    fabelhaft

    "FIFA's corrupt, but that doesn't make the World Cup illegitimate. Same with FIDE and the Chess World Championship"

    But do you consider Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov etc to be the legitimate World Champions?

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #151

    JamieDelarosa

    Were those players crowned as a result of defeating the sitting world champion/world's best player in match play of sufficient length?

    I seem to recall, at that time, Kasparov was the King of the Hill.

    I also seem to recall many of the qualifying "matches" were ... two games ???

    "Paper" champions.

  • 2 weeks ago · Quote · #152

    varelse1

    DamonevicSmithlov wrote:

    Isn't it odd that all 3, Fischer, Kasparov, & Carlsen got so pizzed off at fide enough to tell em to fugg off? All 3 of them. But Carlsen got back into the next cycle.

    Karpov as well, back in 2000. Don't forget him.

  • 2 weeks ago · Quote · #153

    varelse1

    fabelhaft wrote:

    "FIFA's corrupt, but that doesn't make the World Cup illegitimate. Same with FIDE and the Chess World Championship"

     

    But do you consider Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov etc to be the legitimate World Champions?

    Good point. No.

    Ponomariov either, for that matter.

    Topolov on the other hand, maybe. Talented player there.

  • 2 weeks ago · Quote · #154

    SmyslovFan

    When FIDE's world champion played FIDE's official challenger for the title outside the auspices of FIDE, FIDE had a choice. It could recognise the match or try to create a shadow champion. It made a bad choice. The shadow champions never had legitimacy as long as the original champion was active and defended his title against strong opponents such as Anand and Kramnik. 

    As long as Kasparov was #1 in the World and actively defending his title in match play against top opponents, nobody else could legitimately claim to be world champion.

    Kasparov was World Champion, and that title was passed on to Kramnik. Once Kasparov was out of the picture, FIDE worked to reunite the title. Chess isn't boxing.

    FIDE currently has management of the title. 

    I have a feeling fabelhaft agrees with that.

  • 2 weeks ago · Quote · #155

    pdve

    1. Petrosian

    2.Capablanca

    3.Kramnik

    4.Steinitz

    5.Lasker

    6.Botvinnik

    7.Nimzovich

    8.Karpov

    9.Rubinstein

    10.Reshevsky

  • 2 weeks ago · Quote · #156

    Charetter115

    1. Capablanca
    2. Kasparov
    3. Fischer
    4. Krakmnik
    5. Alekhine
    6. Petrosian
    7. Carlsen
    8. Lasker
    9. Morphy
    10. Botvinnik 

  • 2 weeks ago · Quote · #157

    fabelhaft

    It always surprises me that so many of these lists have Kramnik in the top 5, ahead of Lasker, Karpov, Carlsen etc, and with Anand nowhere to be seen...

  • 13 days ago · Quote · #158

    varelse1

    fabelhaft wrote:

    It always surprises me that so many of these lists have Kramnik in the top 5, ahead of Lasker, Karpov, Carlsen etc, and with Anand nowhere to be seen...

    Yeah. I know what you mean. 

    But kramnik has really had a profound impact on chess. For openings, anyway.

    His contributions to the Berlin Defence, and the Bayonette Attack have turned much of opening theory on it's head over the last 18 years or so.

    Tbh, I can't remember even the great Kasparov having such a dramatic impact.

  • 13 days ago · Quote · #159

    varelse1

    JamieDelarosa wrote:

    World championship matches should be a minimum 6-wins, unlimited games.

    That is the best way to ensure the strongest player wins.

    Yuck.

    I remember that 1984 Karpov-Kasparov fiasco. That couldn't have good for chess.


Back to Top

Post your reply: