And I highly disagree with anyone saying Alekhine doesn't deserve to be in the conversation. In my.humble opinion, he was the most universal player before Fischer.
Who is the greatest chess player of all time ?? Bobby Fischer ??
Sort:
Soo technically, when Kasparov was with the GMA, then formed the PCA, trying to go against the FIDE, then finally reconciling with them it wasn't all for his own ambitions?
Especially when the USSR went down?
Hmm.
(On a side note: I will never forget Garry's mysterious take back vs Judit. Cool)
Nov 20, 2016
0
#906
najdorf, thanks for answering instead of Jeff 
I wish he wouldn't reconcile with FIDE...
"Kasparov? Care to elaborate?"
If that was about what Kasparov did for the future of chess, he wrote lots of great books, coached upcoming players, participated in lots of exhibitions after retiring from competitive chess, not to mention what he did while still playing. Defending the title many times, playing the strongest tournaments for decades, continuing with title matches when FIDE had knockout World Championships, etc.
Nov 21, 2016
0
#908
You shouldn't mention his playing, any professional player is normal to play. If Fischer stopped playing (at least for World Champion), I agree it was abnormal.
Nov 21, 2016
0
#909
he won the world championship, what else did a person with one goal have to achieve ?
najdorf96 wrote:
(On a side note: I will never forget Garry's mysterious take back vs Judit. Cool)
What happened between them?
the_chess_zebra wrote:
Wow, "kingofshedinjas", you REALLY are a French-hater!!! I can't believe you spewed such filth:
1. " For example, in World war One, France was conquered by their neighbor Germany. Did they learn their lesson? Of course not. A couple years later France was conquered again in World War 2. Who took them over? Not other then the same country Germany. It was up to the Amencans to save their French croissants from the Germans. "
- and -
2. " There are a lot of things that France has "stolen" but claimed to be their own. Such as the Mona Lisa, the French bulldog, French toast, French horn, French letters, French Fries, French press, French dressing, French manicure, French braid, etc. "
Here's some facts, "kingofshedinjas", to sober you up,
1. Pre-WWI Germany and Post-WWI Germany were not the same leadership and it could be argued not even the same country as Hitler annexed Austria.
2. Bonaparte conquered most of Europe, so your idea that winning or losing a war is an indicator for the shape of things to come is invalid.
3. I have never heard a French person speaking French refer to "French dressing", "French manicure", etc. These are terms in the English lanuage, which came about in different ways. To say that the French "stole" them is nonsense.
And don't try damage control by saying you were being sarcastic. What you wrote is rascist and it comes across as very rude. While I value freedom of speech, I'm not sure what you wrote would be in compliance with chess.com's TOS and forum rules.
this is obviously a troll
because being french is not a race.
you don't fill out French as "race" when you apply for a job.
you are either "White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, etc."
I don't know - as no one else seems to do - for sure who the greatest player of all time was/is, it partly depends on who you ask (ask a group of Americans and you'll probably get different answers than if you ask a group of Russians), but I'd suggest Kasparov ahead of Fischer for several reasons, including longevity at the very top of the game.
In one respect, anyway, I like Morphy better than virtually all subsequent players (including Fischer). Morphy is known to have had only a few chessbooks and he apparently didn't study the game much. Apparently, he hardly took the game that seriously, and was much more concerned with making a proper career for himself in law (Morphy was an incredibly talented student and had a great future ahead of him, it's very sad his practice didn't take off in the end, which it seems was largely down to his fame as a chessplayer, not because he was incompetent). Yet, he still blew away all serious international opposition of his day apart from Staunton, whom he never played. True, professional chess players didn't really exist at the time and chess wasn't considered by most as much different than gambling, but the fact remains that Morphy achieved his results mainly by natural genius. He didn't need to work hard to have his success.
Contrast him, with, say, Fischer, and they are almost like polar opposites. Fischer spent a large part of his life obsessing over a board game, studying it intensively and virtually to the detriment of all else (indeed, he hardly comes across as a well-balanced adult and seems to have done little in life apart from chess). Fischer lived and breathed chess, devoting his existence to it, whereas for Morphy it was apparently not much more than a pastime. Admittedly, Fischer faced stronger opposition in his era, but still I think this line of thinking holds some weight.
In this respect it seems Morphy outperformed the chess professionals who came after him (Capablanca was another one who apparently didn't need to study the game much).
Nov 22, 2016
0
#913
One prevailing argument here is that past players cannot (almost by definition) be better than current players because of advances in chess theory and computer training. That is of course a little self serving.
Funny thing is, some people claim Fischer is outdated by today's standards but at the same time put forward the likes of Capablanca and Alekhine, who played their last serious games more than a lifetime ago. Not to mention players who were active in the 19th century... Seems to me some folks would like to have it both ways.
And speaking of outdated players, same should apply to Karpov and even Kasparov. He became world champion 31 years ago, achieved his top rating 17 years ago, and hasn't played a serious stardard time control game in over a decade.
Nov 22, 2016
0
#914
alinfe, there's a difference between "greatest" and "best".
I would argue that Jesse Owens is one of the greatest sprinters of all time. But he would finish more than 10 yards behind the best sprinters today.
That's why, in another thread there are two lists: greatest and best chess players.
1. You are comparing the wrong thing.
2. It is not who is BETTER, it is the person who has more skill.
3. I don't discriminate, but I vote Kasparov
Technically, he was a world champion.
Nov 22, 2016
0
#917
I think Morphy was the most naturally talented player ever. All the above players had great players to learn from. Morphy, given enough time would have been tough to beat today. This was the opinion of Fischer.
"Morphy, given enough time would have been tough to beat today. This was the opinion of Fischer"
Fischer claimed that Morphy, as he was in the 1850s, would beat Tal, Botvinnik et al, and that is an opinion I find very strange coming from a player as strong as Fischer was.
SmyslovFan wrote:
alinfe, there's a difference between "greatest" and "best".
I would argue that Jesse Owens is one of the greatest sprinters of all time. But he would finish more than 10 yards behind the best sprinters today.
That's why, in another thread there are two lists: greatest and best chess players.
No, not "more than 10 yards". More like 5-7 yards. Owens ran a 10.3 in the 100 meter, vs the world record of about 9.58 by Usain Bolt (9.7 if you adjust for wind).
Heh. What stands out in these discussions is that most people forget that he was a chess theorist. A connoisseur. A great chess mind. Always searching for the truth on the chessboard. An artist. Can anyone say that about any other player after him?
Unrealistically, he strove to make better player conditions and demanded it. The World in 1972 could not see how chess would evolve into the sport it is today. But I would argue Bobby always believed this. Which is why I will always deem him the Greatest. The Muhummad Ali of chess. Cool
Yeah, but he didn't really care about the future of chess or the chess players who would follow him. His demands were selfish, obsessive-compulsive and all he really cared about was Bobby. I think that Kasparov actually did more for the future of chess than Fischer did.