This is indeed a very broad topic, depending on your definition of an offensively focused chess player, often called a tactician, but I was interested in the question in my title. Who can be called the greatest attacker of all time in chess? I suppose it depends upon your criteria when it comes to tactically oriented players. Some may say Kasparov due to pure dominance and accuracy; some may say Tal because his moves were just too good to be true. Whatever the criteria, I wanted to hear all of your opinions on this.
Nezhmetdinov was a fantastic attacker (and he beat many world class players including world champions).
Wow, you're right! I just found a fascinating game in which he defeated the Magician himself:http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1102235
Something good has come already from this thread :)
Two more of his famous games.
Tal, Alekhine, Anderssen, Kasparov, Morphy.
My top 5 attacking players all time.
I haven't studied many master games but going through Masters of the chessboard I have to say I really liked Both Paul morphy and Adolph Andersen. Whether they are or not I think is irrelevent. Now if I had to pick a favorite player, probably...Well I am not sure.
Tal for the wildest, most aggressive
Petrosian for the accuracy and sacrifice, while playing stiffling defense
Fischer for intimidation and the will to aggressively play for the win
Capablanca for simplicity and visualization of how to seize a victory
Petrosian and Capablanca were hardly attacking players...(in my opinion)
I think I agree with abiogenesis23.
If your plan of attack was to play good defensive and establish good position first, in order to have a good attack...I'd say that makes you a good attacker...the question wasn't who was the most aggressive or relentless....it was who was most effective.... Capablanca is considered one of the most error free players ever....sounds like he was continually moving forward with near flawless attacks to me....he didn't lose muc
Petrosian was a tactician, who was known for accurate sacs, like rooks for bishop pairs and was even compared to Tal by Russian master....it just so happened that in his set up for attack....he often employed a prophylactic position, resulting in a crushing positional attack, giving way to unthwartable tactics.....sounds like a damn good methodical attacker to....besides, anyone who says a world chess champion isn't a good attacker and among the greatest ever, perhaps needs to reevaluate who really has what skills.....
Of course all world champions are great attackers and tactical players but to say that Petrosian more known for technique, defense and endgame play is the equal of Tal in combinations and tactics would not be accurate. If I said Tal who as a world champion also was a great defensive player and endgame player this would be accurate not not compared to Petrosian. Who was the all round better player between the two I would go with Petrosian but not having the tactical, attacking or combination ability the equal of Tal. Tal and Alekhine about a toss here.
Shirov is my choice. He is a better attacker than Tal. In Tal's peak, very few GMs have excellent defense technique. Shirov shows his attacking prowess to the best defensive GM's (excluding Kasparov and Karpov).
I think it is Gata Kamsky's Dad who is the greatest attacker.
I can't disagree with you Gata :)