Another conference gem

Recently found this gem while looking through old tournament conferences.  The original conference was over an hour long, but this part some might find interesting.  It's from the grand slam final back in 2012.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6g77y_4OQs

He's pretty much correct on all accounts, and being that it's from Carlsen I don't think there's much to dispute here.  :P

yeah i knew it Fischer was the best. Thanks fyyor

Carlsen chose Kasparov in the end though...

Thanks for posting. Carlsen's analysis is thoughtful and agrees with what many others have said.

Kasparov was better than Fischer and a notch below Anatoly Karpov.

What I find interesting about this is everyone says Kasparov is the best of all time but when you actually check the match score Kasparov had vs Karpov it was so damn close it can't be said with complete acceptance personally.  They were both head and shoulders above the rest during their reign.  Kasparov and Karpov played over a hundred match games for world titles and Kasparov just BARELY edged out Karpov by like 1 or 2 wins, out of HUNDREDS of games.  It's kind of crazy how close the Karpov Kasparov matches were.  Karpov doesn't get the credit he deserves I think sometimes. 

  That's because patzers don't understand the Karpovian style. Even though Kasparov has 2 wins more than Karpov, Karpov is much better player because he has twice as many tournament wins and he was not dependent on theory and home preparation the way Kasparov was.  In terms of skills Karpov is well above Kasparov.

but Carlsen said: if you look at chess strength of him compared to his competitors and players today Fischer is the strongest, but if you go for how long he was at the top you must take Kasparov

Thanks for sharing the video with us fyy0r, I loved it.

Carlsen loves them both!

He said Fischer was stronger than his contemporaries and Kasparov was the "best of all time."

Waffle, don't type that. Now Tetsuo isn't going to like Carlsen anymore.

I think present day's competitors are stronger. The strength of today's top 20 GMs would easily eclipse 1960-70 top 20 GMs.

What's funny to me is I think the Tetsuo of 50 years from now would be in love with Carlsen and hate whatever young contemporary player was winning at the time.

e.g. Tetsuo of the past would love Botvinnik and hate Kasparov.

"Carlsen is too young"

Yeah Tetsuo, but most world class players are very young.

"Carlsen is only 20 something"

yeah Tetsuo, but Fischer was 20 something when he was beating everyone and when he won the world championship.

"No way, Fischer was a brilliant bearded old man"

No Tetsuo, that was crazy Fischer, long since retired from chess.

Ofcourse, to say that they wouldn't is an insult and is the same as saying that chess hasn't progressed.  Every generation builds upon the previous generations.  The guys from the 1960-70's would easily eclipse the ones from the 1920-30's for example.  You can't take away anything from any generation, each player can be ranked relative to his peers of that time, because that's when it truly mattered.

That progress may come to an end if computer cheating kills top level chess.

The 1960s-'70s players might eclipse Capablanca, Alekhine et al but I don't think it'd be easy if it was even possible

I just read an academic paper that argued Houdini's playing strength at 20 ply is ~2860 and that Kramnik had an expected score of 40% against it in a recent tournament (not the Candidates tournament). 

If that is a realistic estimate, then perhaps there's still hope for humans against engines even now! Well, at least if we limit engines to anaylsing at 20 ply.

I don't believe I should change my opinion of who is best because of what Carlsen says.

If it was about a chess position, I would blindly follow Carlsen.

This is not a chess position, it is a subjective question about history and its players. Many people will disagree with Carlsen btw.

Anyways, it is interesting to hear his opinion. Thanks for sharing OP. I still think Fischer is #1 atm.

I think we should consult Yerselov. He would say Botnivik was the best.