And he was well ahead of his time. He wasn't just better than his contemporaries. He had a much greater understanding of the game.
would LOVE to see how Morphy would react to tofay's pawn tactics; would he become a pawn player or just use the idea against the pawn player to rip them apart even more? I think he was the most peerless chess player and the deepest 'seer'.
I nominate Morphy, he wasn't just good at attacking, he was also great at positional, but I liked how he waits to add as much pressure to a pined peice as possible before he takes to win more material and make his opponent uncomfortable.
I second the nomination for Morphy...
Capablanca!!. Very few players are unbeaten for 10 years😳😳
Really? 10 years? From 1916 to 1924? 10 years? How many games?
Capablanca was unbeaten for eight years, but he only played around 65 classical games during this period. Tal was unbeaten for one year between 1973 and 1974 and was unbeaten in 95 games!
Capablanca was unbeaten for eight years, but he only played around 65 classical games during this period. Tal was unbeaten for one year between 1973 and 1974 and was unbeaten in 95 games!
Fourteen of those games were a World Championship Match against the greatest World Champion ever.
I think the 8 year period for Capa included the ww1 period so...
There were hardly any tournaments going on not only during the war but the periods near that time.
The unbeaten record that Magnus has is the most impressive in my opinion. His AVERAGE opponents rating during that stretch was something like 2750 or so. The previous record holder was an IM I think and his average opponent was about 300 points lower. Clearly Magnus had the strongest competition by far of anyone in history.
Bobby Fischer was also in a complete class of his own. He WON all 12 games in the US championship, something no one else has done, and he also had ridiculous winning streaks elsewhere.
Fischer, unlike the other great players, didn't prove that he could withstand the tide of time and outwit younger players with better/variable tactics. He continuously made excuses(often ridiculous) and tried every trick he could to avoid having to face a young and upcoming Karpov in '75.
Fischer was undoubtedly a good chess player for his timeframe('70-'73). But being a contender for 'greatest chess master'? Not by a loooong shot imo.
I disagree with this. The ratings gap between Fischer end the next best player of his era is larger than that of any other world champion. He also didn't have the same resources and support that his Soviet counterparts enjoyed. Fischer has to be in the discussion for greatest of all time.
Capablanca was unbeaten for eight years, but he only played around 65 classical games during this period. Tal was unbeaten for one year between 1973 and 1974 and was unbeaten in 95 games!
Lasker was older then 50, Capa was in his prime, Lasker was not very motivated. Capa playing at home ...
Fourteen of those games were a World Championship Match against the greatest World Champion ever.
The unbeaten record that Magnus has is the most impressive in my opinion. His AVERAGE opponents rating during that stretch was something like 2750 or so. The previous record holder was an IM I think and his average opponent was about 300 points lower. Clearly Magnus had the strongest competition by far of anyone in history.
His aaverage opponents rating something like 2750, sources?
I averaged all the ratings from all his games over that span. I'll go look up something to link.
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1041276
Scroll down to where it says stats. This was after 118 games, I'm pretty sure he reached 125 games before he lost again. At 118 games the opponents average rating was at 2744, I think it went up over the next 7 games.
I would like to nominate Paul Morphy.
Capablanca's greatness stemmed from his natural ability to find the right plan in quiet positions. He rarely got into murky positions, and his ability to steer the game into won endgames before his opponent was even aware an endgame was possible helped him to beat all but a few players.
Depending on how we're defining "greatest" you can get several answers:
If we're defining greatest as in putting all the ATGs in a round robin and seeing who wins then I'd go with Magnus, no question.
If we're going with domination of their peers then it'd Morphy, Fischer or Kasparov, leaning more towards Kasparov because of his longevity compared to the other two.
If we're going by most talented then it'd be close between Morphy or Fischer, leaning more towards Morphy but it could go either way.
If we're going with legacy or impact of the game then it'd be Fischer, but I think a lot of his legacy has to do with the political situation of his time and the general american population.