Best chess player ever
Sort:
@RJFWC He refused a match against Karpov and Kasparov so I refuse to call him the best.
Discussing Fischer gets kind of pointless when his fans make up all kinds of "facts" with no relation to the truth whatsoever. Fischer won "dozens of International events with the strongest fields ever assembled" ?! I really look forward to a list of them, and maybe a comparison with the strongest tournaments Kasparov won. :-)
The strongest tournaments Fischer played were Candidates 1959, Bled 1961, Candidates 1962 and Santa Monica 1966. He didn't win any of them but did win several slightly weaker tournaments. In none of his tournament wins was his opposition comparable world ranking wise to the opposition Kasparov faced in the say 20-30 strongest tournaments he won. Fischer would probably have been able to win tournaments against the strongest fields ever assembled the years around 1971 but that's not the same thing as actually winning dozens of such tournaments (like Kasparov did).
The only match Fischer played before 1971 was the one against Reshevsky that he forfeited with one game to go at 5.5-5-5, and then he never played a match again after 1972 (unless one counts the one in 1992). Fischer's match stats 1971-72 were of course amazing, but how he would have fared against someone like Karpov in 1975 is another matter. Karpov's match win against Spassky in 1974 was approximately as impressive as Fischer's in 1972.
lol FRIEND REQUEST ME!!!!!
im crazy!!!!
It's absurd to say that Fischer refused matches against anybody. It was never the players he "feared". It was the conditions of play that he could not allow to be rammed down his throat.
Kasparov is a cheater. It's a fact. You want to worship that clown, go ahead.
Karpov was a great player. Too bad he and Fischer didn't meet in '75, but if they did play, he'd be beaten worse than Spassky was.
As to his international tournament record, try this...
| Year | Tournament | W-D-L | Place |
| 1955 | US Junior Championship, Lincoln | 2-6-2 | 10th-20th |
| 1956 | US Amateur Championship, New Jersey | 3-2-1 | 21st |
| US Junior Championship, Philadelphia | 8-1-1 | 1st | |
| US Open, Oklahoma City | 5-7-0 | 4th-8th | |
| Canadian Open, Montreal | 6-2-2 | 8th-12th | |
| Rosenwald Memorial, New York City | 2-5-4 | 8th | |
| Eastern States Open, Washington, D.C. | 4-2-0 | 2nd-4th | |
| Manhattan C.C. Championship, (Semi final), N.Y.C. | 2-1-2 | 4th | |
| 1957 | Log Cabin Open, West Orange | 4-0-2 | 6th |
| Log Cabin 50-50, West Orange | 3-2-0 | ? | |
| New Western Open, Milwaukee | 5-2-1 | 7th | |
| US Junior, San Francisco | 8-1-0 | 1st | |
| US Open, Cleveland | 8-4-0 | 1st | |
| New Jersey Open, East Orange | 6-1-0 | 1st | |
| North Central Open, Milwaukee | 4-2-1 | 5th-11th | |
| US Championship, New York | 8-5-0 | 1st | |
| 1958 | Interzonal, Porotoz | 6-12-2 | 5th-6th |
| US Championship, New York | 6-5-0 | 1st | |
| 1959 | Mar del Plata | 8-4-2 | 3rd-4th |
| Santiago, Chile | 7-1-4 | 4th-7th | |
| Zurich | 8-5-2 | 3rd-4th | |
| Candidate's Tournament, Belgrade/Bled/Zagreb | 8-9-11 | 5th-6th | |
| US Championship, New York | 7-4-0 | 1st | |
| 1960 | Mar del Plata | 13-1-1 | 1st-2nd |
| Buenos Aires | 3-11-5 | 13th | |
| Reykjavik | 3-1-0 | 1st | |
| Leipzig Olympiad (First board) | 10-6-2 | - | |
| US Championship, New York | 7-4-0 | 1st | |
| 1961 | Bled | 8-11-0 | 2nd |
| 1962 | Interzonal, Stockholm | 13-9-0 | 1st |
| Candidate's Tournament, Curacao | 8-12-7 | 4th | |
| Varna Olympiad (First board) | 8-6-3 | - | |
| US Championship, New York | 6-4-1 | 1st | |
| 1963 | Western Open, Bay City | 7-1-0 | 1st |
| New York State Open, Poughkeepsie | 7-0-0 | 1st | |
| US Championship, New York | 11-0-0 | 1st | |
| 1965 | Capablanca Memorial, Havana | 12-6-3 | 2nd-4th |
| US Championship, New York | 8-1-2 | 1st | |
| 1966 | Piatigorsky Cup, Santa Monica | 7-8-3 | 2nd |
| Havana Olympiad (First board) | 14-2-1 | - | |
| US Championship, New York | 8-3-0 | 1st | |
| 1967 | Monaco | 6-2-1 | 1st |
| Skopje | 12-3-2 | 1st | |
| Interzonal, Sousse | 7-3-0 | Withdrew | |
| 1968 | Netanya | 10-3-0 | 1st |
| Vinkovci | 9-4-0 | 1st | |
| 1970 | USSR vs. the Rest of the World, Belgrade (Second board) | 2-2-0 | - |
| Rovinj/Zagreb | 10-6-1 | 1st | |
| Buenos Aires | 13-4-0 | 1st | |
| Siegen Olympiad (First board) | 8-4-1 | - | |
| Interzonal, Palma de Mallorca | 15-7-1 | 1st | |
| Year | Match | W-D-L | Place |
| 1957 | vs. Euwe, New York | 0-1-1 | lost |
| vs. Cardoso, New York | 5-2-1 | won | |
| 1958 | vs. Janosevic, Belgrade | 0-2-0 | drew |
| vs. Matulovic, Belgrade | 2-1-1 | won | |
| 1961 | vs. Reshevsky, New York/Los Angeles | 2-7-2 | drew |
| 1971 | vs. Taimanov, Vancouver (Candidates quarterfinal) | 6-0-0 | won |
| vs. Larsen, Denver (Candidates semifinal) | 6-0-0 | won | |
| vs. Petrosian, Buenos Aires (Candidates final) | 5-3-1 | won | |
| 1972 | vs. Spassky, Reykjavik (World Championship) | 7-11-3 | won |
| 1992 | vs. Spassky, Sveti Stefan-Belgrade (World Ch. Rematch) | 10-15-5 |
won |
RJFWC wrote:
Kasparov is a cheater. It's a fact. You want to worship that clown, go ahead.
And he is a cheater because...
And if the above is not enough...
Fischer was perhaps the best blitz player of all time, certainly in his time, most likely could even beat today's top computers in blitz, which no human has been capable of doing for over a decade now... also deigned traditional chess later in life for Fischer-random 960 (better test of true chess skill), elevated the game to levels undreamt of in prestige and renumeration through his refusal to compromise his standards, and finally, though being attacked and mugged procedurally by the international chess establishment mafia at that time (FIDE, the Soviet juggernaut, and others), simply powered through all difficulties and won the damn championship fair and square.
The fact that Spassky had a soft spot for Fischer personally speaks volumes.
He's a cheater because he cheats. Or don't you know that?
And the proof?
checkmateibeatu wrote:
RJFWC wrote:
Kasparov is a cheater. It's a fact. You want to worship that clown, go ahead.
And he is a cheater because...
i know one time was because he violated touch move rule against judit polgar.i dont really care for that rule.
i vote kasparov.
So Kasparov breaks a rule, denies doing so (arrogance, chutzpah) and his devotees no longer "care for that rule".
Exactly my point. Kasparov is a cheater. He's therefor worshipped by those who deny his failure of integrity. So they obviously blame the rule, not the cheater.
In a gentleman's game, those who cheat, are banned. Kasparov had too much arrogance to allow a loss to a woman in an official game, therefor, he cheated, then denied doing so. He's a cheat, and a liar.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Sooooooo... I guess checkmateibeatu thinks OJ must've been innocent until he robbed the suite in Vegas...
RJFWC wrote:
So Kasparov breaks a rule, denies doing so (arrogance, chutzpah) and his devotees no longer "care for that rule".
Exactly my point. Kasparov is a cheater. He's therefor worshipped by those who deny his failure of integrity. So they obviously blame the rule, not the cheater.
In a gentleman's game, those who cheat, are banned. Kasparov had too much arrogance to allow a loss to a woman in an official game, therefor, he cheated, then denied doing so. He's a cheat, and a liar.
You are committing many post hoc (ergo propter hoc) fallacies. i just never really cared for the touch move rule (though i do abide by it, i dont care if my opponent wants to change their move on their time.)
kasparov's hand left the piece for 1/4th of a second. sure he violated the rule of picking it back up again, but "Cognitive psychologist Robert Solso stated that that is too short of a time to make a conscious decision." Meaning it was more along the lines of a mistake in dexterity or something and he instinctivly picked it back up.more importantly, Polgar waited a whole day before complaining, which means that according to arbitrary rules that were imposed such as the touch move rule, the win is maintained(or kasparov could have seen it as that he didnt care). if i made an illegal move and it wasn't mentioned, and then later i checkmate the opponent for a different reason, i will most likely be awarded the win as usually you cannot contest after the checkmate/resignation is agreed upon. I think the fact that polgar didn't contest it right then and there and the later b****ed about it, suggests that she too is a sore loser. i don't think it can even be considered "cheating" because of how she responded and because of the "technicalities".
who said this is a gentleman's game? please, continue your snobbery while other people just have fun playing chess. i don't understand what your propensity is to bash moral shortcoming's of a chess player, when his games are what are relevant to judge here.
i dont worship him. i just like a lot of his games and on mere whimsy did i pick him. on other days, i might on whimsy pick fischer or tal or someother player.
[COMMENT DELETED]
RJFWC wrote:
For those who refuse to acknowledge (and we all know why) that Bobby Fischer was by far and away the greatest chess master of all time, here are a few revealing bits of data...
He never lost a match. Ever. A game maybe, a tournament not finished first, yes, but a match? Never.
He destroyed the field at a run of tournaments the likes we've never seen. Every US Open Championship he ever entered. Dozens of International events with the strongest fields ever assembled. Blowouts by the dozen.
He beat (unheard of) an incredible twenty straight opponents in top level World Championship Qualifying play running up to his Title Match with Spassky. 7 Straight Wins to cap off the phenomenal blowout of the Interzonal, followed up by WHITEWASH 6-0's against Taimanov and Larsen (geniuses at chess both), then a positional defensive hammering of Petrosian while Tigran attacked in a game like never before. Count 'em. TWENTY straight. He finished off Petrosian easily in the balance of the match.
When he took Boris Spassky (a phenomenally effective defensive player, basically the best for over a decade) to the cleaners in 1972, he completed his run of 39 wins in a 64 (!) game stretch against the top players in the world. By standards of any era, it was unsurpassed. (15 wins plus 8 draws in the Interzonal, 6-0 Taimanov, 6-0 Larsen, 5 wins a loss & 3 draws Petrosian, 7 wins 2 losses & 11 draws Spassky). That's 39 wins, 3 losses, and 22 draws. In other words, look at a chess board and imagine... every black square on the board, plus 7 white squares were wins... and the only losses were three white pawn squares in white.
By modern standards, it is unthinkable that anyone would be so far ahead, as to dare win 30% of their matches against the world's best.
Fischer's 1970-72 cycle? 61% wins, 34% draws, less than 5% losses.
Unheard of. Unparalleled. Unthinkable. Unbelievable. Ungodly.
Anyone else?
Agreed
Kasparov and Capablanca (in either order) are the top two. Period end of story.
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Kasparov and Capablanca (in either order) are the top two. Period end of story.
I was about to disagree with you and say that Alekhine is better, but since you said it's the end of the story, I guess your opinion is indisputable.
Need a comment from Trysts right about now.