By the same contrast, Bobby could've gone toe to toe with Karpov, positionally and with the many attributes that were considered Garry's plusses. Idyllic memory, tactical n combinational ability. Stamina.
Really don't see how OTB Fischer would not be heads above these two Giants.
Only thing naysayers can absolutely say is that, "he just didn't play".
Aanand is greatest player of The world because he won against calersen most and his wining %is most!!!!
He won against Carlsen ... are you kidding? Magnus beat him badly twice in World Championships.
The world's best player today is almost certainly stronger than the best player of a generation ago - just as the latter was almost certainly stronger than the best of the previous generation. Each generation benefits from advances in theory, especially opening theory, and also has access to many more top level games to analyze. But today's masters have an advantage that goes well beyond that. They have access to chess engines much stronger than any GM that can be used to evaluate positions and new lines in openings. If we're going to compare masters of different eras, the only reasonable and fair way is to compare each master's results against the strongest masters of his time. If evaluated on that basis, Paul Morphy must be among the greatest ever. He absolutely dominated during his short career. Some will laugh and say that Morphy wouldn't be rated higher than 2000 or 2200 today. That's nonsense. It assumes that Morphy would arrive in the 21st Century via a time machine and would come with no knowledge of current chess theory. If Morphy had been born 20 or 25 years ago instead of 180, he would have access to the same knowledge and information as current masters. I think he would be among the strongest if not the strongest today.
Alpha Zero.
Can we put a block on any input from the Indian community to this discussion, thereby alleviating us of the tedium from the Vishy brigade.
Fischer may not have been the best, who really knows, but he did for chess something no-one else ever did. He called out and then destroyed the systemic cheating and corruption of tournaments by the Soviet teams. For this we owe the raving luny a massive debt.
He is the greatest, of course
OK, pretzel wins.
Aug. 24 2017, post 1437, I gave some different reasons why Bobby could be considered the greatest player. This question will never be answered to the satisfaction of everyone, just check out how many posts have been made but, I do think he could be considered the most FAMOUS player of all time.
Without engines: Bobby Fischer!!!!!!
Bobby Fischer the stongest? Who shall say? The most legendary? Without the shadow of a doubt.
No doubt, Capablanca is the best(computer said that)
Capablanca is definitely in the top 5 or 10. I'd put Fischer, Kasparov, Carlsen and Lasker ahead of him though.
I've not found one yet I'd let mind the kids
Unpopular opinion: the only reason Anand is brought up in the conversation is because of chess nationalism. The same phenomenon occurs with Fischer too, actually, but he has more chess accomplishments, enough to warrant being in a top 3-5 ever.
well we all agree that he beat both bent larsen and mark taimanov 6-0 right?
Yes, when Fischer was at his peak in 1971-1972, he was the GOAT. Nobody has ever matched his 1971 Candidates performance. Kasparov was the best for the longest period of time though (in the modern era). Carlsen plays like a computer. I don't think he'd be as great as Fischer or Kasparov without using a computer for his training. Lasker was incredible for the era that he played in (well before computers were even thought of). He totally dominated, during much of his lifetime (he was World Champion for 27 years, until he got older and Capablanca finally took the title from him).
Indeed.
It's all too cute to speculate how different generations would fare against a "modern" master of today. No, I'm not going to regurgitate the many reasons. Most have gone through that ad nauseom.
OTB play though, will always be the divine indicator of one's play. Whether it be blitz, classical Fischer's play has always shown to be on par with Kasparov. Limited sample sizes though there may be.