@yureesystem Carlsen's style may not be to your liking (or my mine), but he is a great player, and if you took away his database and engines, and sent him back to 1920, he could give Capablanca a great match. I can't say the same, for sure, for the rest of the top GMs, except maybe Anand.
Fischer, like it or not, would still be dominant over anybody.
Sort:
Franklin_Whitsell wrote:
Many of the past world champions were amazing for their time, but look at the games of their opponents. Yes, in many cases those people playing against them were playing their opponents who had their openings no better than a B class player. It is quite obvious the way grandmasters defend now days is superior in every single way. Many positions are now playable that were considered unplayable in the past even by said champions.
There is nothing in history to suggest the quality of opponents these players defeated was very good... you go through a game collection of the champions in the 60's or even prior to them and they are littered with games that make you laugh at how bad many of their world class opponents were. There certainly was not a wealth of quality opponents for the greatest champions of that time to demonstrate they had the ability to compete with anything a grandmaster would bring to the table today.
Of course you don't know a great player like GM Vladimir Simagin, he played incredible and high caliber level positionally, he is so praise and esteem that Bronstein and Botvinnik and rest of Soviet GMs hold him in high regard; Carlsen and the so call super GM s ( high 2700 to 2800) can't win positions that he can.
May 9, 2017
0
#44
what does/did Robert Fischer owe the world ? an apology for his racism i guess that would be nice
anything else ? no , he left us 960 without being asked , that was nice
my granny says in her prime she would have took his skull with ease btw
May 9, 2017
0
#45
Lets also not forget his insane post 911 rant where he said we got what we deserved. yea...no mental issue there.
Uncle_Bent wrote:
@yureesystem Carlsen's style may not be to your liking (or my mine), but he is a great player, and if you took away his database and engines, and sent him back to 1920, he could give Capablanca a great match. I can't say the same, for sure, for the rest of the top GMs, except maybe Anand.
Carlsen is missing wins that Soviet GMs of 2500 to 2600 elo could win, why should I admire such a player, he nothing like Fischer who did it on own. Carlsen had trainers and Kasparov to guide him and he still can't play a decent game; Magnus couldn't even beat Karjakin in a match on standard time control and had to go rapid time control.
May 9, 2017
0
#48
May 9, 2017
0
#49
Karjakin is a Soviet GM rated close to 2800.
If already Soviet GMs rated 2500 to 2600 are so much better than Carlsen, Karjakin should have had a field day.
May 9, 2017
0
#50
IMBacon wrote:
there is no doubt that he had issues, but top quality chess playing wasn't one of them. I don't care for Fischer as a person solely for his hating nature, but no one can realistically argue his chess strength wasn't on par with today's best players. they would give him trouble for sure and you should expect them to score a percentage of wins against him, but I'm still convinced a peak Fischer would be either champion or a close contender
Lets also not forget his insane post 911 rant where he said we got what we deserved. yea...no mental issue there.
solskytz wrote:
Karjakin is a Soviet GM rated close to 2800.
If already Soviet GMs rated 2500 to 2600 are so much better than Carlsen, Karjakin should have had a field day.
You miss the point of my argument, Soviet player like Simagin could squeeze a win today super GMs can't; today GMs are drawing game that should be won. What we need is Fischer or Kasparov type to demonstrate Carlsen follies, too safe and passive to win against real contender. All I can say remember Karpov before Kasparov, everyone wanted to copy Karpov's' style and opening, everyone was afraid to play the Sicilian, KID, and Gruenfeld until Kasparov beat Karpov.
May 9, 2017
0
#55
I love these arguments that are impossible to prove. Why don't we argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
May 9, 2017
0
#56
imsighked2 wrote:
I love these arguments that are impossible to prove. Why don't we argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
3
May 9, 2017
0
#57
I think it's pretty common when you get a bunch of guys together that share the same interest to compare eras. Me and the guys I grew up with do it for sports all the time. Would Ali still be champ? Would Kareem Abdul-Jabbar still dominate? Things like that. Just a friendly hypothetical chat.
May 10, 2017
0
#58
yureesystem wrote:
If Fischer played Karpov and won, Bobby would of been the first 2800 elo. Fischer was like Alekhine who carry his beloved pocket chess set and always studying chess; Carlsen play is sterile and boring, everyone wants to play like him and even amateurs and it leads to boring game, exchange and exchange and going to an endgame; the problem is most player suck at the endgame or can't play positionally. Bring Fischer back and he will dominate all the so call super GMs who are over rated, if the past Soviet GMs rated 2500 to 2600 can win games that these so call super GM can't, there is serious problem and deteriorating chess skills, I believe is all connect to rely engines.
If ifs were skiffs, we'd all float downstream. He went into seclusion, so he never proved he was better than the champions who came later.
May 10, 2017
0
#59
Carlsen isn't boring. He even drags out things like the Dutch Defense in tournaments -- and still wins.
If Fischer played Karpov and won, Bobby would of been the first 2800 elo. Fischer was like Alekhine who carry his beloved pocket chess set and always studying chess; Carlsen play is sterile and boring, everyone wants to play like him and even amateurs and it leads to boring game, exchange and exchange and going to an endgame; the problem is most player suck at the endgame or can't play positionally. Bring Fischer back and he will dominate all the so call super GMs who are over rated, if the past Soviet GMs rated 2500 to 2600 can win games that these so call super GM can't, there is serious problem and deteriorating chess skills, I believe is all connect to rely engines.