Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Who is your favorite player?


  • 15 months ago · Quote · #21

    quadriple

    Me

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #22

    roscoepwavetrain

    petrosian: not flashy, low key, humble and refused to quit. 

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #23

    Fear_The_Knight

    Michail Tal. The man of combinatons and tactics.

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #24

    Veritas08

    magnus carlsen :) absolutely versatile 

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #25

    PROUD_TO_BE_GREEK

    Deep Blue computer lol

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #26

    markvlc

    Bobby Fischer

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #27

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    Hard to claim a favorite, though Capablanca has a cute playing style I like very much that makes studying his games very enjoyable. 

    Nakamura has a creative playing style and always seems to play for a win, so he's great too.  Kasparov, while great, has most of his games too hard to study, too many calculations to crunch through but is good for the exercise if nothing else.  Botvinnik had the best outlook on chess as he said it was a science and even posted his analysis for peer review by other GMs and also had a great personality. 

    I recall reading that he claimed that Smyslov wasn't a great player (right in front of him to a class) but said he's a phenominal analyst.  Sounds like good natured teasing rather than being mean to me. 

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #28

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    PROUD_TO_BE_GREEK wrote:

    Deep Blue computer lol

    Umm, Moor's Law, Deep Blue was the late 90s... I won't even bother this time... -_-

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #29

    Ziryab

    ScorpionPackAttack wrote:
    PROUD_TO_BE_GREEK wrote:

    Deep Blue computer lol

    Umm, Moor's Law, Deep Blue was the late 90s... I won't even bother this time... -_-

    Moore's.

    Deep Blue 1996

    Deeper Blue 1997

    Dismantled in 1997. IBM accomplished what they intended with chess and retired from the field (sorta like Michael de la Maza). Six years later, Kasparov was evenly matched against a laptop running a commercial version of Fritz.

    Now, Kramnik says that he won't know the truth in one of his own games until he consults with his silicon friend.

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #30

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    Thanks.  Is la Masa the guy with the book saying study nothing but tactics and said you don't need endgame skill if you drop pieces?  I strongly disagree with his tactic only approach as you have to know what to do if there aren't any tactics. 

    If I ever make FM I'd probably still play but would primarily want to reach it to be qualified to write books and coach. 

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #31

    Ziryab

    ScorpionPackAttack wrote:

    Thanks.  Is la Masa the guy with the book saying study nothing but tactics and said you don't need endgame skill if you drop pieces?  I strongly disagree with his tactic only approach as you have to know what to do if there aren't any tactics. 

    If I ever make FM I'd probably still play but would primarily want to reach it to be qualified to write books and coach. 

    Yep. Same guy.

    He also arrogantly attacked Jeremy Silman and other masters who write books on positional chess, accusing them of malpractice.

    De la Maza actually has a few solid ideas about developing visualization skills and tactical abilities. But, his own quitting of chess and the burnout evident in his most devoted followers should produce skepticism. He also was never as bad as he claims, as is evident in his provisional quick chess rating.

    Kasparov said some very harsh things about IBM when they refused a third match. They were ready to move on. 

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #32

    AlxMaster

    Houdini 3

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #33

    InsanePlayer99

    AlxMaster, I do agree with you that Houdini 3 is very good. However, I would say that my favorite player is Houdini 4.

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #34

    AlxMaster

    Houdini 2 is actually my favorite, it's the master of tactics against chessmaster 2000

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #35

    pps1

    bobby ficher is the strongest evreyone plays the same oppening as he did but i havent learned anything except trainning my calculation skills kasparov is number 2 strongest you will learn a lot from him and made chess a bigger deal to the world aron nimzoitch is no wear near strong as kasparov but i learnd a hundred diffrent things from him so he is number 1 kasparov 2 and nakaura 3 don even need to tell you why

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #36

    Ziryab

    My favorite player has long been Abu l-Hasan 'Ali Ibn Nafi. 

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #37

    WalangAlam

    Kramnik, I like his tactical attacking style and his endgame prowess too!

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #38

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    Ziryab wrote:
    ScorpionPackAttack wrote:

    Thanks.  Is la Masa the guy with the book saying study nothing but tactics and said you don't need endgame skill if you drop pieces?  I strongly disagree with his tactic only approach as you have to know what to do if there aren't any tactics. 

    If I ever make FM I'd probably still play but would primarily want to reach it to be qualified to write books and coach. 

    Yep. Same guy.

    He also arrogantly attacked Jeremy Silman and other masters who write books on positional chess, accusing them of malpractice.

    De la Maza actually has a few solid ideas about developing visualization skills and tactical abilities. But, his own quitting of chess and the burnout evident in his most devoted followers should produce skepticism. He also was never as bad as he claims, as is evident in his provisional quick chess rating.

    Kasparov said some very harsh things about IBM when they refused a third match. They were ready to move on. 

    Wow, accusing masters of malpractice for teaching positional chess?  So I guess Aagard and Heisman are hurting the aspiring chess player according to him.  When the objectively best move is positional of course it helps rather than hurts to have that particular knoweldge. 

    The last couple of decades were all about openings, this time it's all about tactics apparently. 

     

    Since one should focus on one topic for a month to automate the skill I'm doing his seven circle exercise but with endgames instead.  I've spent months on strategy/thinking process, and did some tactics here and there, time to fix any holes in my understanding to reach the next level. 


Back to Top

Post your reply: