Bobby Fischer vs Magnus Carlsen

Considering that he took on the whole dominant Soviet chess machine without much help and that his excellent tournament results against his peers showed a lot more wins than losses and he had very few draws, he was definitely one of the best ever. With Magnus and modern chess the world champion is now a computer program. GM's train against computers and learn from them. Could Bobby at his best defeat Magnus at his best in a 20 game match? That's a question with no known answer.

Computers have done a service to us in showing that even the best chess players can lose to a world-class championship computer program. It is a reality check to our egos and shows us that there is always room for improvement.

Considering that he took on the whole dominant Soviet chess machine without much help and that his excellent tournament results against his peers showed a lot more wins than losses and he had very few draws, he was definitely one of the best ever. With Magnus and modern chess the world champion is now a computer program. GM's train against computers and learn from them. Could Bobby at his best defeat Magnus at his best in a 20 game match? That's a question with no known answer.

Computers have done a service to us in showing that even the best chess players can lose to a world-class championship computer program. It is a reality check to our egos and shows us that there is always room for improvement.

Another well said staement. I hope that we can put this to rest. We can talk about any player we wish and yet still there will always be this written arguement/discussion without a definitive ending. OUR MINDS ARE THE COMPUTERS. Lets keep thinking in that direction! 

I just ran a computer simulation. Bobby beat Magnus 7 times with 13 draws. Magnus was better in more complex positions but kept taking the pawns in the opening and refusing to allow any tension. I will try another simulation but I think the result speaks for itself.

that was funny!

Done!, I have been educated and put to my place. I am far from the most educated on the subject but yet have a mind. I thank all who reply to this thread and I myself did learn many things outside of the joke. BTW I hope for a Happy Holiday to all for those that observe............Deano

I would believe Bobby would beat Magnus at the same age when Magnus was too young to have memorized all of Bobby's games. After he memorized and assimilated the techniques, Magnus would give Bobby a good fight when both were in their prime.

Thanks, cheers!

I think Magnus Carlsen is the incarnation of a chess computer. I think Bobby Fischer was the incarnation of chess itself. FIscher would have won at 15 and either won at 22 or drawn.

should be fischer.. do you think he'll not use computer to prepare himself? kasparov vs magnus would be more interesting battle..

Im surprised this thread is still going. So while looking at both ends of the spectrum here and some inbetween .......What if Bobby played Gary in this time with the computer age as it is ? But back to the last comment, Kasparov would probably take advantage of the tools at hand if he had grew up in this age. Today I think many players are just more trained by the tools of today's computers and such but deserve their respect. And on the other end of that stick I give higher respect to the thinkers with pencil and paper. Just a thought. You must admit that making a move from the mind does better define this game than by a Robot. At tournament play they do not have those tools, so atleast they are still using the mind. So where do we stand on this subject of today vs yesterday ?

Magnus Carlsen

Fischer. If fischer without computers managed to make the most ammount of moves rated higher by computer's analysis than carlsen does, i can't imagine how he'd do with resorting to have computer analysis handed to him without having to take all the effort.

Kasparov

"This is my last response on this thread..." Said twice by Embuna XD

It's hard to say which one of them was the best.

At age 26, Fischer's strength was ~3100 ELO. When Fischer played a series of games against Bent Larsen in 1971 his performance was 3060

(https://www.chess.com/article/view/bobby-fischer-biography).

Fischer would beat Carlsen at age 26, no doubt. However, he was mentally unstable so his performance changed drastically during the years.

"At age 26, Fischer's strength was ~3100 ELO"

Are you sure about that? Back then the World Champion was in the 2600s (and beat Fischer the following year). Even three years later, when Fischer was considerably stronger than in 1969 (and Spassky slightly weaker) an Elo difference of 500 points would mean that Fischer should have won the title match with something like 12.5-0.5 rather than 12.5-8.5

Perhaps he meant today's ELO, including presumed inflation.

Put them on an equal playing field as RJF would demand, and strip away all knowledge that Carlsen relies on for chess, which is attributed to RJF and then start the match. Magnus loses.

"Perhaps he meant today's ELO, including presumed inflation"

If we played with the idea that Fischer in the 1960s would have been 250 Elo stronger than Carlsen of today, the Fischer of 1972 must have been considerably more than 300 Elo stronger than Carlsen, not to mention 400 Elo stronger than Anand etc. If so, Fischer of 1972 should have beaten the best players of today with maybe 12.5-3.5 in a match, compared to the 12.5-8.5 he scored against Spassky. That implies a huge decline in playing strength over the decades and doesn't feel entirely believable.

I don't think the Fischer of 1972 would have beaten the Anand that scored 1-6 in two title matches against Carlsen. Chess has simply developed too much the last 40-50 years (especially with regards to opening theory) to make such fantasy matches fair to the older players.