14983 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!
Completely off-topic , but I have to say it.
Suppose OP's topic would be : "Who was the nicest world-champion so far ?", then the selection of candidates would be smaller right ?.
Next , suppose you were ask to rate another quality of a player in this small group. Then you will come to a very interesting conclusion : The players with this quality seem to be in the vast majority.
Based on how their peers reacted to them, the two nicest world champions were Max Euwe and Vishy Anand. Max Euwe became one of the most respected presidents of FIDE. When Anand played Topalov, almost every elite player (for example, Kramnik, Carlsen, Kasparov) helped Anand to prepare. This was a rare case of the most liked candidate facing the most reviled candidate in recent memory.
Kramnik, Tal, and Smyslov deserve honourable mentions.
Anand in an interview kept criticizing Kasparov. Kasparov offered Boris Gelfand the chance to be a second against Anand in 2012, but it was declined.
Who cares about being nice if you are the best at what you do. - Einstein
I did a quick search and was able to find no references to Einstein saying that. Do you have a source?
Thanks JJBooy for keeping us honest! ;-)
Thanks for making that point. Highly doubtful Einstein would ever say something like that. I'd speculate that whoever said he did is a lying schmuck.
Listing evidence for being nice is different than just saying someone's nice because that's what you've heard. In 2010 Anand donated his gold medal to the charitable organisation "The Foundation" to be auctioned off for the benefit of underprivileged children.
Until someone has higher evidence than this, Anand is the nicest chess player in the world.
without knowing too much about Anand, that doesn't make someone nice. even mean guys can do something nice.
he may be a super nice person but the act alone doens't make someone nice.
nice is how you interact with other people.
In 1991, Kasparov donated his $1,000,000 World Championship trophy to the earthquake victims in Armenia. He had earlier donated his world championship winnings to the victims of the Chernobyl nuclear accident.
Sounds like Kasparov did 2 nice things. Therefore Kasparov has the lead. Kasparov #1 nicest and Anand #2. At least there is hard evidence for making the point.
He is not at the very top any more but Gregory Kaidenov is a really nice guy.
however there does not exist non-selfish good deeds.
the act of giving charity can make you sleep good at night.
IMO lots of the top chess players seem like nice people. Kasparov (with his accusations against IBM and comments about women) and Fischer had allot of attention and so made people sort of expect that chess players are maladjusted.
It is a relief that the current top players seem so ... normal.
Actually, IMO his IBM cheating accusations were reasonably well founded.
He complained that he couldn't see the machine play logs before the match but the team could see his games. This may seem unfair to some but it is not cheating.
Then based on my memory his other allegations involved him saying that the moves were too "human like." Bottom line he expected the supercomputer to play like his 1997 laptop and it didn't.
His behavior was really embarrassing. I don't think anyone in the chess community would put up with it if a top player accused another top player of cheating on such flimsy "evidence." But since the IBM team included people who were not top chess players Kasparov and certain chess media seemed to think it was ok to make such harsh accusations on such flimsy grounds. As if the people on the IBM team were not deserving of any respect or dignity.
Kasparov was the darling of allot of the chess media. They tended to defend him no matter how extreme.
My point is that both Fischer and Kasparov tended to get huge breaks from the chess world and so tended make the rest of the world view chess players as somewhat warped people.
Kramnik and Anand are really the first to have normal personalities. Interestingly they were often criticized by the warped chess media for not being "fighters."
Those are the statements that surely deserve merit. I too am flabbergasted how people can ever forget the extreme conditions that Fischer put forth and that the organizers and his competitors did to agree to, in order to get him to play.
And Kasparov's gem too is not remembered by anyone - when playing with a young Judith Polgar, he touched his Knight, but pulled back quickly. Then he moved his Queen. Per the rules, that are always very strictly followed by everyone, he should have played the Knight, irrespective of the result, which of course would have been his defeat at the hands of Judit.
But it did not stop there. When asked about it, he flatly denied he ever touched any piece that he did not play. Of course, young Judit was new, and behaved enough to not complain about it to the organizers. But had she gone ahead with it, Kasparov would have certainly been disqualified, because entire game was captured on video and it clearly showed that Kasparov lied - He had indeed touched the Knight, and yet played the Queen.
Never really heard of any other Chess player doing something like that. Even Topalov, who has accused, and been accused, of cheating never stooped to that level.
Regarding Judit Polgar:
"Before they first met in Spain a few years ago, Kasparov described her as a "circus puppet" and said that women chess players should stick to having children."
It's comments like this that the chess world would give top chess players a "free pass" on but would make the rest of the world think chess players were crude human beings.
Again IMO it was Kramnik and Anand who really started to change that image. IMO Kramnik had the most attacks because he actually beat Kasparov who so many in the chess world idolized. But Kramnik weathered the storm where he insisted Kasparov stick to the contract they both signed. And after Anand beat Kramnik he also did chess a good turn in that he is also quite clear that chess players should play the game as best they can and that does not mean they can be rude to others outside of chess. IMO both players have been great examples for future players.
Dr.Lenny Bongcloud M.D PhD esq
While I admire Anand and Kramnik, it is completely wrong to consider these two as the ones who "started" to change an image of chess players.
Max Euwe was one of the great gentlemen of the game, and a world champion. Vasily Smyslov was a consummate gentleman. Mikhail Tal's wit and generous spirit is legendary. Boris Spassky was very sporting throughout his career, sometimes to his obvious detriment.
Yes, poor sports have won the world championship. But not all world champions before Kramnik were poor sports.
As an aside, one of the really good guys has just set a benchmark that may never be equaled. Peter Svidler is now the seven-time champion of Russia!
Ehsan Ghaem-Maghami is a chess grandmaster from Iran .In 2009, he won a 20-game combined match (four classical, four rapid and twelve blitz games) against Anatoly Karpov, played with a special rule: play to mate or dead draw. The overall score was eight wins to Ghaem-Maghami, seven wins to Karpov, and five draws
"Q & A with Coach Heisman"
Who's better here?
by EDB123 120 seconds ago
12/13/2013 - Back Rank Power
by ge86 3 minutes ago
PROPOSAL: Separate Tournament Ratings
by shahhussainkcl 3 minutes ago
free forum coaching
by infinitebrainpower 5 minutes ago
Please recommend me a system
by TitanCG 7 minutes ago
Against 1. d4, do you play ... Nf6 or ... d5?
by capablanca2014 8 minutes ago
Games I play
by EDB123 9 minutes ago
What is it with all those people...
by Goatllama 12 minutes ago
1.e4 Nf6 2. e5 :-(
by EDB123 14 minutes ago
my immortal game
by infinitebrainpower 15 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!