who is better Kasparov or Fischer? - Chess Forums - Page 6

Destroyer942

Sep 13, 2019

0

#101

Ok sorry I did come off a bit rude. I meant to say that the fact that Kasparov kept playing for a very long time, and even occasionally competes with top GMs today, is extremely impressive. Even if he did "lose to some GMs" or "got beaten to a pulp" in a recent match, it's becuase he plays despite his age. Fischer quit, so that doesn't make him impressive.

dannyhume

Sep 14, 2019

0

#102

Savage47 wrote:

dannyhume wrote:

Definitely Kasparov, not just because he is more modern, but also Fischer himself said so.

uh...no.

Bobby right up to his death was clowning Kasparov. I would really need to see some strong evidence he said that before I would even consider it might be true.

Here ya go ...

"I object to being called a chess genius because I consider myself to be an all around genius who just happens to play chess, which is rather different. A piece of garbage like Kasparov might be called a chess genius, but he's like an idiot savant. Outside of chess he knows nothing."

yuann

Sep 14, 2019

0

#103

I think Kasparov is better

Destroyer942

Sep 14, 2019

0

#104

dannyhume wrote:

Savage47 wrote:

dannyhume wrote:

Definitely Kasparov, not just because he is more modern, but also Fischer himself said so.

uh...no.

Bobby right up to his death was clowning Kasparov. I would really need to see some strong evidence he said that before I would even consider it might be true.

Here ya go ...

"I object to being called a chess genius because I consider myself to be an all around genius who just happens to play chess, which is rather different. A piece of garbage like Kasparov might be called a chess genius, but he's like an idiot savant. Outside of chess he knows nothing."

Lol Fischer seemed really salty in that quote.

Destroyer942

Sep 14, 2019

0

#105

yuann wrote:

I think Kasparov is better

Same

Destroyer942

Sep 14, 2019

0

#106

The question is who is better, Bobby Fischer or Fabiano Caruana.

varpunen54

Sep 15, 2019

0

#107

Fischer, the best chess player ever

Destroyer942

Sep 15, 2019

0

#108

I think Carauana is better

1993MichaelG

Sep 15, 2019

0

#109

Equally matched..

Destroyer942

Sep 15, 2019

0

#110

pfren wrote:

If Fischer had been born in the USSR he would be the undisputed champion of his gulag.

Racism is not a good way to compare chess players.

staples13

Sep 15, 2019

0

#111

Fischer by a wide margin, then Kasparov Morphy and Spassky

PoolPlayerToo

Sep 15, 2019

0

#112

pfren wrote:

If Fischer had been born in the USSR he would be the undisputed champion of his gulag.

Have to agree with this. I don't think his personality traits would have meshed at all with the establishment of the times, regardless of his skill level. He would have been viewed as too disruptive, not part of the program and shipped off to obscurity.

Colin20G

Sep 15, 2019

0

#113

These threads keep being made so I have a question: is any sensible comparison between top players of different eras even possible? They hadn't have access to the same information and training material when they build their playing skill and prepare for matches. Kasparov could know everything chess wise about Fischer, Fischer about Capablanca etc

Destroyer942

Sep 20, 2019

0

#114

Lol forget Kasparov, Fischer is worse then Caruana as well, and Caruana hasn't even been WC yet.

RichColorado

Sep 21, 2019

0

#115

.

LarrattGHP9

Sep 22, 2019

0

#116

Savage47 wrote:

fabelhaft wrote:

”If Fischer had been born in the USSR, with the soviet machine behind him, he might not have lost a game after 1960 and would still be wc today”

60 years without losing a single game, and still World Champion when 77 next year? :-)

I qualified that by saying "might"

But, regardless, Fischer beat an entire country, literally, by himself. Not, just any country but the country that dominated chess for nearly all of an entire century. No chess player. living or dead, can claim anything close to that. Now, imagine the unstoppable force AND the immovable object are on the same side. 77 doesn't seem that improbable does it?

What do you mean he beat an entite country? All the Russian GM anaylsis was only as good as Spassky's brain could comprehend, a Spassky with a 2-14 record against Karpov.

Fischer dominated the 70-72 cycle, but didnt play a single game as champion or bother to defend his title against Karpov an even stronger opponent than Spassky, a Karpov that beat Spassky 4-1 in the '74 candidates, and don't forget Fischer won the title at 29, Kasparov 22, Fischer took 12 years to beat Spassky.

Fischer was awesome but for a brief period, we really needed to see more, for him to take on Karpov, he chose not to.

Destroyer942

Sep 22, 2019

0

#117

Literally the only reason Fischer gets a ton of hype is because he was an American and a World Champion, something that hasn't happened since.

Destroyer942

Sep 22, 2019

0

#118

Savage47 wrote:

LarrattGHP9 wrote:

Savage47 wrote:

fabelhaft wrote:

”If Fischer had been born in the USSR, with the soviet machine behind him, he might not have lost a game after 1960 and would still be wc today”

60 years without losing a single game, and still World Champion when 77 next year? :-)

I qualified that by saying "might"

But, regardless, Fischer beat an entire country, literally, by himself. Not, just any country but the country that dominated chess for nearly all of an entire century. No chess player. living or dead, can claim anything close to that. Now, imagine the unstoppable force AND the immovable object are on the same side. 77 doesn't seem that improbable does it?

What do you mean he beat an entite country? All the Russian GM anaylsis was only as good as Spassky's brain could comprehend, a Spassky with a 2-14 record against Karpov.

Fischer dominated the 70-72 cycle, but didnt play a single game as champion or bother to defend his title against Karpov an even stronger opponent than Spassky, a Karpov that beat Spassky 4-1 in the '74 candidates, and don't forget Fischer won the title at 29, Kasparov 22, Fischer took 12 years to beat Spassky.

Fischer was awesome but for a brief period, we really needed to see more, for him to take on Karpov, he chose not to.

It doesn't take much brain capacity to memorize a few lines especially for a world champion. With the soviets having literally thousands of people working on analysis there's no way any one person could beat them over the long term. Besides, why does it have to just be Spassky? Fischer played other soviets. Also, don't forget the soviets colluded, threatened, bribed and controlled fide.

Spassky was a better player than Karpov but lost soviet support when he lost to Fischer. Likely he was forced to throw those games.

Fischer proved he was the best player in the world at age 29. Kasparov never proved that at any age.

You do understand what it means to be a world champion right? Btw Kasparov retained this title much longer then Fischer.

Pikelemi

Sep 22, 2019

0

#119

Carlsen!

Destroyer942

Sep 22, 2019

0

#120

tuna-the-kahuna wrote:

fischer obviously, this doesn’t even require thought, the question never needed to be asked.

Exactly, if you don't use any thought when answering you might even think it's Fischer.