SwimmerBill escreveu:
Morphy.
Very good!
In your opinion, who is the greatest player of all time?
Sort:
KKOSKKG wrote:
without discussion karpov, the only player that would still not be deciphered by engines 1
If it is without discussion, how come he didn't win any of the five matches he played against Kasparov...
Probably Bobby, but we will never know how he would've preformed against kasparov, karpov, etc so its hard to say
I think the greatest player is the one with the best combination of these: longevity as #1, number of top events won, number of title matches won. So to me Kasparov and Lasker are in a league of their own, with Carlsen third and Karpov fourth.
GMMike15 wrote:
Probably Bobby, but we will never know how he would've preformed against kasparov, karpov, etc so its hard to say
Fischer's performance from 1970 to 1972 was the most dominant we've ever seen. He won the Interzonal by 3 1/2 points, annihilated his opponents in the Candidates' matches, and beat Spassky easily. He was rated 125 points ahead of #2 rated Spassky, 2785 to 2660. It was a disaster for the chess world that he was so mentally unstable and fragile psychologically. It's a sad historical "what could have been."
May 18, 2020
0
#27
fishface2 wrote:
GMMike15 wrote:
Probably Bobby, but we will never know how he would've preformed against kasparov, karpov, etc so its hard to say
Fischer's performance from 1970 to 1972 was the most dominant we've ever seen. He won the Interzonal by 3 1/2 points, annihilated his opponents in the Candidates' matches, and beat Spassky easily. He was rated 125 points ahead of #2 rated Spassky, 2785 to 2660. It was a disaster for the chess world that he was so mentally unstable and fragile psychologically. It's a sad historical "what could have been."
easily was more like when steinitz played lasker. he did not beat spassky easily, otherwise, that many draws and 40+ moves for more or less every game wouldnt be needed. actually, i read fischer himself speak the matches and how hard they were. if i find it, ill post it here.
There is no opinion. It was Fischer, the end.
fabelhaft escreveu:
KKOSKKG wrote:
without discussion karpov, the only player that would still not be deciphered by engines 1
If it is without discussion, how come he didn't win any of the five matches he played against Kasparov...
Yeah, kk
GMMike15 escreveu:
Probably Bobby, but we will never know how he would've preformed against kasparov, karpov, etc so its hard to say
fabelhaft escreveu:
I think the greatest player is the one with the best combination of these: longevity as #1, number of top events won, number of title matches won. So to me Kasparov and Lasker are in a league of their own, with Carlsen third and Karpov fourth.
fishface2 escreveu:
GMMike15 wrote:
Probably Bobby, but we will never know how he would've preformed against kasparov, karpov, etc so its hard to say
Fischer's performance from 1970 to 1972 was the most dominant we've ever seen. He won the Interzonal by 3 1/2 points, annihilated his opponents in the Candidates' matches, and beat Spassky easily. He was rated 125 points ahead of #2 rated Spassky, 2785 to 2660. It was a disaster for the chess world that he was so mentally unstable and fragile psychologically. It's a sad historical "what could have been."
Exactly what I think, I sometimes hate Fischer! kkk
quietheathen1st escreveu:
fishface2 wrote:
GMMike15 wrote:
Probably Bobby, but we will never know how he would've preformed against kasparov, karpov, etc so its hard to say
Fischer's performance from 1970 to 1972 was the most dominant we've ever seen. He won the Interzonal by 3 1/2 points, annihilated his opponents in the Candidates' matches, and beat Spassky easily. He was rated 125 points ahead of #2 rated Spassky, 2785 to 2660. It was a disaster for the chess world that he was so mentally unstable and fragile psychologically. It's a sad historical "what could have been."
easily was more like when steinitz played lasker. he did not beat spassky easily, otherwise, that many draws and 40+ moves for more or less every game wouldnt be needed. actually, i read fischer himself speak the matches and how hard they were. if i find it, ill post it here.
Did not quite understand!
The great Borislav Ivanov.
May 23, 2020
0
#36
Carlsen's probably the man, but it's impossible to compare players from different time periods. Imagine if Bobby was a young man now, and as driven to play chess as he was back in the day - and with engines to practice against - he would be something to behold. Same could be said about Morphy - and others.
Whoever thinks that RJF dominated his era's competition in such an emphatic way (sometimes scoring 100% against the world's elite) because "his opening theory was much better then the others", is either trolling, or he has never analysed a RJF game seiously.
pfren escreveu:
Whoever thinks that RJF dominated his era's competition in such an emphatic way (sometimes scoring 100% against the world's elite) because "his opening theory was much better then the others", is either trolling, or he has never analysed a RJF game seiously.
IpswichMatt escreveu:
Carlsen's probably the man, but it's impossible to compare players from different time periods. Imagine if Bobby was a young man now, and as driven to play chess as he was back in the day - and with engines to practice against - he would be something to behold. Same could be said about Morphy - and others.
Very good, time does not answer that question!
Morphy.