Who is the greatest chess player of all time ?? Bobby Fischer ??

"kasparov taking an age to win a game against karpov rules him out for me. 3 way tie between Capa, Tal and The Fish, with The Fish winning on tie break"

Well, after 12 years and 4 months of playing Spassky, Fischer had a +0-5=2 score and it wasn't easy for him to beat Karpov either :-)

Good joke!

GM Agdestein claimed that the biggest chesstalent ever was Michael Tal.  Tal didnt rule completely after he lost the WC title, because of health issues. Carlsen looks different, better physics and health. Both Carlsen and Karjakin are very fit. Maybe the modern superplayers generally exercises physically better. Tal and Fisher can be compared. Both had a superpeak, and maybe the highest. About ratinginflation. Tal rating peaked in 1980 at 2705, but I think he must have been stronger in 1960, when he took down Botvinnik in the WC match. Maybe he was above 2800 in 1960, compared to the ratinglevel of today.

Keep writing fiction. Fischer totally outplayed Tal. For example:

[Event "Bled"]
[Site "Bled YUG"]
[Date "1961.09.04"]
[EventDate "1961.09.03"]
[Round "2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Robert James Fischer"]
[Black "Mikhail Tal"]
[ECO "B47"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. g3 Nf6
7. Ndb5 Qb8 8. Bf4 Ne5 9. Be2 Bc5 10. Bxe5 Qxe5 11. f4 Qb8
12. e5 a6 13. exf6 axb5 14. fxg7 Rg8 15. Ne4 Be7 16. Qd4 Ra4
17. Nf6+ Bxf6 18. Qxf6 Qc7 19. O-O-O Rxa2 20. Kb1 Ra6 21. Bxb5
Rb6 22. Bd3 e5 23. fxe5 Rxf6 24. exf6 Qc5 25. Bxh7 Qg5
26. Bxg8 Qxf6 27. Rhf1 Qxg7 28. Bxf7+ Kd8 29. Be6 Qh6 30. Bxd7
Bxd7 31. Rf7 Qxh2 32. Rdxd7+ Ke8 33. Rde7+ Kd8 34. Rd7+ Kc8
35. Rc7+ Kd8 36. Rfd7+ Ke8 37. Rd1 b5 38. Rb7 Qh5 39. g4 Qh3
40. g5 Qf3 41. Re1+ Kf8 42. Rxb5 Kg7 43. Rb6 Qg3 44. Rd1 Qc7
45. Rdd6 Qc8 46. b3 Kh7 47. Ra6 1-0

the comebacks are so lame :(

for a Tal it s a waste that he did not take more care about his overall condition, maybe he would be even greater as years would go by.

There's no objective way to measure talent. Every good chess player today has studied with engines and online. Every good chess player from the time of Steinitz has studied world championship games. There's no way to separate out chess history and culture from the playing ability of the best players.

I guess only you can say that. In every generation, in every 10 yrs, every 5 yrs there has been players since Steinitz ( as you put it) that have stood out above the rest. 

Even,.today with the advent of chess engines, there are players (besides Carlsen) that have differentiated themselves , however minute between "objective" talents.

Or that he didn't quit immediately after winning the title. People would still be talking about him as the maybe greatest ever if he just had stopped playing after beating Botvinnik :-)

As time goes on and we're further removed from Fischer's glory days, more and more of his achievements are disputed, swept under the rug, or surpassed. 

But there's at least one thing detractors can't take away from him, which in the eyes of many make him the greatest player who ever lived: the ability to dominate his peers. Both Carlsen and Kasparov have broken his elo record, have won more tournaments, etc but their lead over the rest of the pack was never more than 70 and 80 rating points, respectively. Bobby's lead over Spassky and Larsen in 1972 was 125 points.

To put it in perspective, it is the difference between Kasparov and number 7 or Carlsen and number 12 at their respective peak performance. 

It doesn't matter that Kasparov's competitors in the 80s and 90s benefited from the more advanced theory, so did Kasparov. It doesn't matter that Carlsen's rivals can avail of gigantic game databases and use computers for training and analysis. So does Carlsen.

Each of these 3 greats have had the same tools, same knowledge, and developed in the same environment as their peers (in fact Fischer was at a disadvantage compared to the soviet contingent). Yet nobody was able to raise above the levels of his contemporaries to the extent Fischer did. 

"their lead over the rest of the pack was never more than 70 and 80 rating points, respectively. Bobby's lead over Spassky and Larsen in 1972 was 125 points"

Then it's another question how important such stats are when comparing players. Of course not to be ignored, but is for example Topalov greater than Anand and Kramnik because he had a bigger lead on the rating list?

Before retiring Fischer had a lead of more than 70 Elo on one rating list. Kasparov and Carlsen had bigger leads on many lists, and Kasparov had the misfortune of having Karpov as second on many lists. Karpov may be one of the three greatest ever, and for example on the January 1989 list Kasparov had 125 Elo down to #3.

Fischer had a bigger margin than 70 Elo once before retiring. Very impressive, of course, but better than Kasparov's distance for many years, or Carlsen's distance in today's competition? Difficult to compare, also with for example pre-Elo players like Steinitz (biggest distance to #2 ever according to Chessmetrics) and Lasker (biggest distance to #2 ever according to for example Kramnik).

rating system by beginning of 70s was not so developed and important like today, it was in dipers. nobody took care of it, like today. so this can not be compared.

this seems like a discussion that has no answer because everyone will have a subjective opinion.

Interesting that you managed to find the point and miss it simultaneously

People don't debate about what 2+2 equals. If there was a clear cut and dry answer to everything, the world would be very boring.

In the race for all time greatest Carlsen closed the gap defending the WC title again. The match wasnt brilliant only. It was a psyco-thriller where both players made mistakes. Karjakin defended with extreme skills and pushed Carlsen into a state of mind that was problematic. In the end Carlsen defeated the monsters inside himself and came back as a winner. Carlsen has been the king of endgame for years, but the supertalented Karjakin has evolved to equal skills and gave him a very close race.  Karjakin also had psycoissues. He was so scared of Carlsen that he forgot to pump enough poison into his attacking teeth.  

I'll think I skip this one....

No doubt, fischer

I think its to hard to say. but karpov won more top class tournaments then anyone. and was at the top of his game more years then any other chess player.

are you sure you don't mean Kasparov?