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

"Deep Blue Vs Stockfish would be interesting to see"

Deep Blue was good for its day and around 2700-2750 level. But Stockfish is many hundred Elo stronger.

https://www.quora.com/What-was-Deep-Blues-Elo-rating

http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/rating_list_all.html

Well, Fischer is the most known name in chess, that's for sure.

Those programs are not "chess players". They are chess-playing programs. See the difference?

In 'Murca at least. I'm sure there are bigger names in Russia

Again, a mix of irony and straw men.

The fact that humanity as a whole seem to better itself over time does not exclude the possibility that once in a while certain individuals are so exceptional that they stay head and shoulders not only above their peers, but above their successors as well (for some time at least).

At his peak, Fischer was 125 Elo points above #2. Today, that's the gap between Carlsen and #32. After he retired, nobody in the world had a rating above 2700 for 3 years (1973, 1976, 1977), and his record 2785 rating stood for almost 2 decades (17 years to be precise). Even today, almost 45 years after his retirement, a player boasting Fischer's peak rating would be placed #6 or #7. Whether you believe in rating inflation or not, these facts are indisputable and speak for themselves. 

Add to that his victory margins at the 1970 Interzonal, candidates matches and world championship, and it would seem that Fischer at the very least earned the right to be shortlisted among those worthy of being labelled "ahead of their time". 

Those of us that were in our 20's by the time Fischer played for the World Championship had gone through nuclear air raid drills when we were little kids - some getting so scared they peed their pants while "ducking and covering," had lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis, and were learning friends or relatives had been killed in Vietnam and were likely to be drafted when we complete high school or college.

The Cold War was just starting to recede from it's heights and the Soviet chessplayers were known to pre-arrange ties in round-robin tournaments to keep non-Soviets out of the championship cycle - Fischer's and others objections were why it was changed to knockout matches.

So when Bobby Fischer went up against Spassky, to Americans this was truly St. George vs The Dragon, Superman vs Lex Luthor, and your favorite football team vs all others all rolled into one!

Even though his behavior was an embarrassment to us. he represented too much not to be idolized.  His incredible candidates matches victories and his 0-2 start in the Championship Match, only to soon get back to being invincible, so wowed everyone that, to this day, it's hard for those who lived through the 1972 match to imagine anyone better than Fischer as a chess player.

Of course, his awful behavior and hate messages and the fact he really stabbed American Chess in the back by not helping promote it after he won the title - becoming a recluse - are things that occurred AWAY from the board.  So his play is still admired.

The big thing in his favor as greatest is how far above any other player he was.  It's like Babe Ruth's 60 home runs in 1927: it was more than most other teams' total home runs!

Those numbers tells two stories, or maybe a mix of them.

1:  Fisher was more dominating at his top than Magnus is.

2:  The level for the average top ten is higher in the Magnus era.

If Fischer was teleported from his best days until current time he probably would have huge problems with top en the first year, but would adapt after a while, and maybe play at Magnuslevel.

 Because 1) They've gotten a hell lot more accurate and 2) ALL THE GODDAMN DRAWS

Guys guys guys...once the computers became stronger than humans, we entered a new era.  The new era is forever separated from the old era.    It's like baseball records in the pre and post deadball eras...really a differently game.  Because having computers to analyze openings and positions changes everything (and unfortunately takes creativity out and makes memorization more and more important)

 yea... its sad that computers have taken over chess. fischer said this in iceland before his death, and for once, his mentally insane self said something kinda right. Chess isnt a good game (i disagree with this part) because you have computers doing everything. He said chess was bad because there was so much theory that it wasn't about creativity anymore. he said chess was bad even when he played but he didnt realize because he was too obsessed with winning. And yea, what he said is kinda true. Carlson has a huge advantage getting Stockfish to tell him what the best lines are in any given position. 

just wanna clarify that these are in order of entertaining chess styles,  but NOT the best players

Indeed. Technically, I wasn't comparing Bruce Lee to Bobby Fischer as far as contributions, personality, or as individuals. 

  Simply as a "brand". That for whatever reason, they are always in the conversation when talking about G.O.A.T.  There will always be naysayers, pundits saying this or that to underscore their greatness. 

Bobby Fischer considered Paul Morphy as the greatest chess player of all time

This was Bobby Fischer being a provocateur. He chose an American over other more obvious choices. It's an impossible question to answer who was the greatest genius in chess history. But as Max Euwe and just about every other student of chess history has pointed out, chess has progressed over time. Chess players learn from the past and improve on it. As a group, today's chess players are the best in history. 

Kasparov and Carlsen are the two best players by rating, but Kasparov maintained that mark of excellence longer than Carlsen. For now, I believe that Kasparov is the best player ever, but I expect Carlsen to eclipse his mark at some point (not just the highest rating, which Carlsen has already achieved, but consistently best as well). 

"Lasker ... didn't understand positional chess." - another Fischer quote from around the same time as his Morphy comments.

Extended discussions of Morphy have been written in books by GM Franco, GM Beim, GM Ward, GM Marin, GM Bo Hansen, GM McDonald, Garry Kasparov (with Dmitry Plisetsky), and GM Gormally. Anyone see any of them express the view that we should accept Fischer's conclusion about Morphy? There seems to be general agreement that Morphy was, as GM Fine put it, one of the giants of chess history, but that is a long way from saying that he was the greatest player of all time.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/who-was-the-best-world-chess-champion-in-history
"... Morphy became to millions ... the greatest chess master of all time. But if we examine Morphy's record and games critically, we cannot justify such extravaganza. And we are compelled to speak of it as the Morphy myth. ... [Of the 55 tournament and match games, few] can by any stretch be called brilliant. ... He could combine as well as anybody, but he also knew under what circumstances combinations were possible - and in that respect he was twenty years ahead of his time. ... [Morphy's] real abilities were hardly able to be tested. ... We do not see sustained masterpieces; rather flashes of genius. The titanic struggles of the kind we see today [Morphy] could not produce because he lacked the opposition. ... Anderssen could attack brilliantly but had an inadequate understanding of its positional basis. Morphy knew not only how to attack but also when - and that is why he won. ... Even if the myth has been destroyed, Morphy remains one of the giants of chess history. ..." - GM Reuben Fine
It is perhaps worthwhile to keep in mind that, in 1858, the chess world was so amazingly primitive that players still thought tournaments were a pretty neat idea.

Sorry but Kasparov fans can't have it both ways. If Fischer is outdated by today's standards, then Kasparov too is a player of the past. 

There's a new generation of players who have reached master (and in some cases GM) level which weren't even born when Kasparov was still world champion. Not to mention he hasn't played a serious standard time control game in over a decade. Sometimes it's easy to get carried away and still believe we're in the early 2000s. But the crown changed hands (or in this case, heads) 3 times since then.

1st of all bobby fischers knowledge of fortresses could never be equaled by anyone. And jesus would smoke all of us. 3rd sun tsu.., and maia chiaburdanidze smoked kasparov by using his style against him which is very impressive..... Lets not forget how alexandra kosteniuk won the u.s.open against the worlds best.... Nobody will ever have the knowledge of fortresses like bobby fischer did, probly not ever.

Heh every turtle knows that I am the best player ever.

Maybe Karjakin is Fishers equal in fortressbuilding? He saved a fabulous draw aaginst Carlsen ing the WC match.