i spout no nonsense but i definetly need to get away from forums because people just seem to love stuff that doesnt reflect the truth, just because they want to discuss for ever. I think people are very lonely, i dont know why i fall for the same trap again and again
who do you think is the best chess player ever?
Sort:
No nonsense? Fischer wasn't a real rascist because he didn't hate all Jews? I rest my case. And not lonely, just tired of the outpourings of your obsessive mancrush for Bobby Fischer.
strngdrvnthng wrote:
No nonsense? Fischer wasn't a real rascist because he didn't hate all Jews? I rest my case. And not lonely, just tired of the outpourings of your obsessive mancrush for Bobby Fischer.
to me you sound like a very lonely ma. Anyway feel free to ignore me
You know nothing about me.
strngdrvnthng wrote:
You know nothing about me.
but do you know yourself??
Better than you.
Well i am a die hard Fischer fan and IMO i believe he was the greatest to ever play the game . I don't care if he was a racist or if he was considered insane the only thing i am basing my opinion on is his chess and that is all. I do feel anyone has a right to your opinion and if you think it is Kasparov fine he is a great player without a doubt but for me it will always be Fischer. The question was who do you think is the greatest player ever so there will always be Fischer fans as well as those for Kasparov, Capablanca Morphy etc. there will never be an end to this.
I'm a fan of Fischer's chess too. He is arguably the greatest chessplayer ever but so is Kasparov, Karpov, Tal, Capablanca, Alekhine etc. When Fischer was in his prime I would argue with an old guy that I played with from time to time. He said Capablanca, I said Fischer. Now, I think Kasparov had a deeper understanding of the game than Fischer, but that could not be so if it were not for the contributions that Fischer made to world chess. You have the right to disagree, you might be correct, you might be mistaken, we may both be mistaken, and Capablanca might be the greatest player of all time. If you're going to have an objective opinion, however, you have to take into account and recognise a players weaknesses as well as their strengths.
I believe Fischer was a true genius of the game, but I really don't think he deserves the same recognition,(regardless of what he had achieved early on in the game, or indeed by the end,) as Kasparov or Karpov. What's that famous saying? oh yes, " those who can do, those who can't teach"!!!!! He may have been a little old for Kasparov when he came along, but he had the chance in 1975, to play another truly great player, 'fight or flight', well unfortunately for us chess lovers we all know what he did.. Thanks...
And those who can't teach become administrators : ) I agree, Fischer's actions speak for themselves. After 1972 however, he did not one thing that he said he would thus cheating Karpov and the whole chess world of the potential for even more magnificent chess.
Burn : )
Gifls?
strngdrvnthng wrote:
I'm a fan of Fischer's chess too. He is arguably the greatest chessplayer ever but so is Kasparov, Karpov, Tal, Capablanca, Alekhine etc. When Fischer was in his prime I would argue with an old guy that I played with from time to time. He said Capablanca, I said Fischer. Now, I think Kasparov had a deeper understanding of the game than Fischer, but that could not be so if it were not for the contributions that Fischer made to world chess. You have the right to disagree, you might be correct, you might be mistaken, we may both be mistaken, and Capablanca might be the greatest player of all time. If you're going to have an objective opinion, however, you have to take into account and recognise a players weaknesses as well as their strengths.
I agree There will always be people that choose a particular player as the greatest ever be it Fischer Kasparov Tal or whomever that is fine everyone is entitled to their opinion. I say it is Fischer but i have no ill feelings for anyone that disagrees with me and chooses any other player, to each his own.
: )
Salamiboy51 wrote:
Gifls like ice cream.
Bees make honey : )
this is my little brother's post.
micky_rooster wrote:
I believe Fischer was a true genius of the game, but I really don't think he deserves the same recognition,(regardless of what he had achieved early on in the game, or indeed by the end,) as Kasparov or Karpov. What's that famous saying? oh yes, " those who can do, those who can't teach"!!!!! He may have been a little old for Kasparov when he came along, but he had the chance in 1975, to play another truly great player, 'fight or flight', well unfortunately for us chess lovers we all know what he did.. Thanks...
so you put just the quantity over the quality of Fischer.
Are you kidding, they were not even in the same league as Fischer.
Its my last post but its really hilarious, how you can say they are better than Fischer.
Its not his fault that no1 at their time existed that had Fischer quality to beat them. Even though Ivanchuk might have pocketed them all if his nerves were better.
Fischer outclassed Karpov and Kasparov, there is not even a point to argue about it, thats why i leave it that way now.
Your argument is like saying Madonna was greater than Mozart because she had more hits. This example is really fitting because FIscher was a Mozart and Karpov and Kasparov were more like Madonna.
Ofc they were great and its really a respectable achievment, but how can you compare that to Fischer???
If Fischer was as supremely sure that he could beat all comers as you are, he would have done just that. When he beat Spassky in 1992, he beat the 100th ranked chessplayer at the time. That hardly makes Fischer number one.
lol!!! you dont believe that yourself do you?? i think you just want to agitate.