Best chess player ever

;)

Gotham chess for me (ik magnus and hikaru are much stronger but still)

guys, something happened to Doves-Creek

all his comments are gone and it says that he doesn't exist

its true that you can close your account but this is different

Pelé, hands down. Maradona and Messi are second and third.

PS: Ops, just saw it was about the best chess players. Who cares about those?

No doubt it's the Norwegian

you mean magnus?

it's me

this is what happens when someone says "it's me", the forum dies

Magnus is the best ever.
But he has modern advantages.
I'm thinking there'll be future players who will be better.
There has been much debate in the past as to who would be best if time machines could bring the greats forward to now and give them time to adapt to the information age and new resources available to players.
Such debates might happen concerning other sports too.

Capablanca and Tal were great talents. And Morphy.
They maybe would beat everybody if brought forward.
Some would say or have said 'No. Computer analysis of the games of previous greats indicates they played at a lower level.' And embellish it with 'numbers don't lie and computers don't either'.
I think that's suspect. But I don't claim to know.

How would Karpov and Kasparov do if brought forward from their primes to play Magnus?
Nobody will ever know.
My guess: they'd be rivals like Nadal-Federer-Djokovic in tennis were.
Fischer? He'd contend too? Except ... he'd go crazy instead.
Morphy also went crazy - so you'd have to time the 'portal' properly.

Reverse time travel is one of the craziest ideas.
Lots of movie money made on it.
Forward time travel? Happens all the time.

If we engage in time travel and bring players of the past forward with the resources of today’s players, Giulio Cesare Polerio would certainly be near the top.

Who else would we like to bring forward?
Archimedes?
How about Plato? Yes.
But not Socrates. Guy doesn't wash.
-----------------
gotta keep it 'chess'. Right.
Okay. Lucena. Ruy Lopez.
Both lived in Spain about the time that Colombo discovered America.
(yes - anglicization Columbus)
But Luis Lucena and R. Lopez (wow - 63 million people with that surname)
aren't considered 'best ever'.
Nor is Francois Philidor.
Got to move all the way up to Morphy before you start getting 'up there'.
Why?
Because until you had things like telephone and telegraph and electric lighting and modern schooling and things like that - communications and information services just weren't good enough to lead to a much higher level of play for larger 'population bases' of players to produce the greats.
Up until electric lighting - most people couldn't even read. Right?

No.1 Garry Kasparov

No.2 Magnus Carlsen

No.3 Bobby Fischer

Fischer was afraid to play Karpov.
Karpov had a problem. Kasparov was around.
With no Kasparov there - Karpov would have become the best of all time.
Karpov. Most underestimated player.
There's others. Keres. Botvinnik. Lasker? The computers have him as 'weak' but frankly I don't 'see it'.

Gioachino Greco

Ercole del Rio

You can link the greats of different eras somewhat.
Because different generations of players played each other a bit.
Happens in other sports too.

Magnus is still only 34.
He could still be the best player in the world ten years from now.
The world's best golfers often continue to be near the top well into their forties.
Even over 50 some of them are still world class.
Tennis players are usually done well before 40.
The knees go. Or the elbow. whatever.
30 is ancient for boxers apparently. 
Point: there'll be a new best chess player in the world by 2040 probably.
Will he be better than Magnus? Or Magnus is getting too old?
Could be unknown.
But count on it - whoever the best player is in 2040 he will probably have looked at reams of computer analysis of the mistakes of Magnus and other greats - before Mr. Future is even 10 years old.

garten.
kindergarten. Not garden.