Best chess player ever

I think a better saying for Fischer would be " the greatest player" rather than the best. I dont think he was the best and great takes in other facts like popularity.

I do think Kasparov is jealous of Fischer's fame though.  Whenever a Fischer question is asked to him, he always talks about Karpov being the "new generation", and that Fischer wouldn't be able to handle Karpov.  given the fact that Kasparov himself ended up defeating Karpov, that by proxy would make him better than Fischer, which is what he wants everyone to think.  Given that though, Kasparov has always been enormously respectful of Fischer and that I give him alot of credit for, since he certainly didn't get any in return from Fischer.  His "My Great Predecessor's" book series is unequaled, and gives Fischer due respect.

That is actually not true.  Kasparov was fully supported by the Soviet state and was a product of Botvinnik's chess school.  (His last name was actually Weinstein before the name change.)  He likes to portray himself as an outsider but this is disingenuous at best.

I lost much of my respect for Kasparov due to his match with Kramnik and his tantrum concerning an early loss to Radjabov in which the latter was awarded the "brilliancy prize". 

Yes he was supported by the Soviet state, but not as world champion material initially.  Kasparov has said that the soviets told him they "don't need another world champion, they already have one, Karpov."  Although I do somewhat agree that he probably is being somewhat disingenuous to in turn promote himself, but most benefits of the matches they had did help Karpov.  Especially the first one that was cancelled when Kasparov started winning.

In the normal world such behaviour is called "generating publicity"

I haven't seen that video but from what I've read it seems to be true that Kasparov did release the knight for a fragment of a second. Not at all for as long a period as for example Carlsen has done the same thing against Gashimov and Aronian the last years without noticing it himself, but it has been much more talked about. So these types of incidents aren't exactly unheard of.

I guess many see it as if Kasparov was consciously cheating but it's quite possible that he thought he hadn't released the piece, just as Carlsen thought that he hadn't released the piece. In any case the position was a draw if Kasparov had played the first move, so the statements about the mistake being decisive are not true. I also find the statements concerning that the tournament director should have forfeited Kasparov strange. No one, Polgar included, complained during the game and it was finished in proper order, with scoresheets signed as a win for Kasparov. That TV had been filming the sequence was discovered later but that's another question.

I don't think one can consider it "proved" that "the Russians" conspired against Fischer, at least I've never read anything decisive on the matter. Maybe they did but it isn't proved by hearsay based on what players like Korchnoi and Karpov that weren't involved in the alleged conspiracies might have written about each other decades later. Kasparov's owing his legacy to Fischer, that Fischer's legacy is his games while Kasparov's is tainted and that it was easier for the latter because of computers etc sounds like often repeated opinions from the side that finds Fischer a much more sympathetic person than Kasparov (and I don't) :-)

Now this is what I call a takeback (at 0:10) by a player that may be involved in some future threads on this topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5QnEfVfKxw

Fable wrote---

"I don't think one can consider it "proved" that "the Russians" conspired against Fischer, at least I've never read anything decisive on the matter."

Mr fable---you dont read much do you. There is a litany in chess literature about Russians cheating. What---do you expect some one to read it to you like a mother? Stop talking like a fat head and brush up on your "Russian Cheating". There is not a shadow of a doubt the Russians would have sold their grandmother on the street---for another point in a chess tournament.

Deep Blue

It is proved without a doubt that Russian players conspired against Fischer.  Not only that, but they did it against Reshevsky beforehand too.  And even Capablanca.  They did it all the time when Russian majority in a tournament allowed it, so they could secure a Russian winner.  I think they even did it in Russian tournaments to promote certain players they wanted to be champions, like Botvinnik.  When Botvinnik found out that some of his competitors were "supposed" to lose, it made him mad.  Here's Korchnoi laughing about the Fischer thing years later:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-ROGnf3IVc

Bobby Fischer hands down... nobody else even close. He'd beat any chess player in history 12-9 in a match. He won 20, count them, 20 games in a row against the best players in the world. He then beat Spassky 12.5 - 7.5 (without the forfeit). Kasparov would be lucky to lose 12-8. Capablanca would be lucky to lose 12-9. Perhaps the only player who might beat Fischer in 1972? Fischer in 1992.

Let's try not to talk about Fischer 92, those were bad times for the chess world

I don't know just how proved those things are. If Russian players have conspired every time there has been a Russian majority in a tournament that means quite a lot of conspiring the last 75 years. There has of course been some conspiring between top players in many events, especially concerning short draws, not least in the Soviet Union, but I wonder if it has been as common as is often said. For example Fischer meant that every match between Kasparov and Karpov was prearranged move for move, and he said the same thing about Karpov-Korchnoi.

How about this Fablehaft---when Fischer made those statements about Kasparov and Karpov he was ill---nobody believed him.

When he made his accusations to fide after Curacao 1962---everybody believed him and the rules were changed.

In the one instance---everybody knew it was true. All the chess playing world knew it was true.

In the other instance---everybody laughed and felt sorry for Fischer.

Fabelhaft, do you think you can recognize a fact when you see it?

The Wikipedia page on the 1963 World Championship cycle states that the allegations about a drawing pact between some of the Soviet players "is often assumed to be correct." Fischer also stated at the same time that Korchnoi had been instructed to lose games to the other Soviet players, and few believe that was true.

It's often said that Petrosian and Geller were good friends that played against each other in Curacao in the same way they usually did. If you look at their games the years before Curacao they were generally drawn in 11, 16, 16, 17, 19, 20 moves etc. So it wasn't that surprising that this didn't change in the Candidates. If Fischer had been stronger in 1962 he could have benefitted from the alleged drawing pact since it ensured that the involved players couldn't get a plus against each other, but with a minus against both Petrosian and Geller he was just too far behind.

...Fisher would have gotten my vote, if he had accepted all challengers...instead, he refused to play Karpov...and he refused to play Kasparov...how could you be considered the best and run from your opponents? After mouthing off about women not belonging in chess, the then Women's WCC challenged him...you know what he did?...he refused the challenge of course...while others were willing to risk their rating and reputation against strong challengers, Fischer was not...

...Kasparov gets my vote...after becoming WCC his tournament record was "first or tied for first" for eight consecutive years...no one has come close to this feat...plus he played all that was placed in front of him...he took on all challengers to his crown and won...

...Fisher was a great player, but if Spasky was not foolish enough to conceed to his 110 silly requests...he may never have won his one and only WCC.

...longevity is the true litmus test...and that was Kasparov...Fischer's dominance was over only one year...

...a name that should get more mention is Karpov...he played Kasparov so many times, and was only just edged out...he too played all challengers that were placed before him, and made no excuses...

...this is course is only IMHO...

I vote for Fischer.

He beat the three Russians without losing a game, to play Boris Spassky and winning the World Championship.

Although Petrossian was Armenian and Keres was Estonian he alway refer to them as Russians.

Funny nobody has picked Spassky.

Well, he shut out Taimanov and the Dane Larsen but hardly the Armenian Petrosian since it was 2-2 after four games. But Karpov was no Taimanov (or even Spassky) and a match in 1975 would have been tough for Fischer.