Lol, way to bring the desperado argument, Reb
Fischer vs. Kasparov
Sort:
Reb wrote:
Well, one thing is certain, Fischer never took a move back in a serious game (cheating) and Kasparov did and then he even denied it with the whole incident caught on video.
That has been brought up many times, but if that was cheating Carlsen is a much bigger cheater. If I recall correctly Kasparov's hand left the piece for such a small fragment of a second that it was hard to see it even on stills from the video, and he said that he didn't think his hand ever left the piece. There's no reason to assume that he was lying, especially not since it only happened once in his more than 30 active years. Carlsen did it several times before turning 20, and in those cases it was much more obvious, and still he couldn't believe he had done it.
Kasparov may have won more titles, but fischer's style of play never fails to amaze me.
batgirl wrote:
"The consensus is that Capablanca used a computer"
I've always supected as much. Even his name sounds like a computer progam.
Seldom laughed so much
echecs06 wrote:
Once again, I note that FisCher and Kasparov are both able to trigger passionate debates. I found exciting that all the above posters have great argument to favor their champion. I happen to like both of them. My preference, though, goes to FisCher for his immense contribution to the world of chess. He was very creative , and no one can deny what he did to the game of chess in the US, first, and in the rest of the world. Apples and oranges? Today FranceFootball is opening a debate on who, between Pelé and Messi, is the greatest player. Same thing, different eras, different mentality, different means...I enjoy your debate, guys, for the historical material you are presenting.
I have never understood why so many seem to spell his name wrong ? It's especially irritating when one claims to be a fan of his and is American to boot.
Mar 8, 2011
0
#207
From his username I suspect that he may actually, like me, be transplanted eurotrash 
Fezzik wrote:
Reb, is that really your argument for who is the better player? In the immortal words of ESPN sports commentators,
C'mon, man!
If Kasparov were as great as his fans claim he would have no trouble winning 20 ( or more ) games in a row against GMs. I also had the satisfaction of hearing Kasparov, in person, in Lisbon during a press conference answer a question as to who was the greatest ever and he said that the only way to compare champions from different eras was by how much they dominated their peers. He added, that by this measure Fischer was clearly the best. Nuff said
It's kind of like Frankenstein vs. The Creature form the Black Lagoon, or the Three Stooges vs. The Little Rascals...the only way to know for sure is to just wait for them to make a movie about it.
Three Stooges vs. Little Rascals?! Seriously? That's more like asking who's a better chess player, Kasparov or bigpoison?
The Little Rascals weren't fit to hold Moe's hat.
Reb wrote:
I also had the satisfaction of hearing Kasparov, in person, in Lisbon during a press conference answer a question as to who was the greatest ever and he said that the only way to compare champions from different eras was by how much they dominated their peers. He added, that by this measure Fischer was clearly the best. Nuff said
Fischer twice made lists of the ten greatest players ever, and he wasn't on any of them, but that doesn't prove that he isn't one of the ten greatest players ever. Kramnik said that Lasker was the most dominant World Champion ever, Anand ranks Kasparov first, while Kasparov has said many things that can be interepreted in even more ways. What one can't do is pick one single Kasparov quote as proof of anything.
Fezzik wrote:
Fabel, Kramnik also ranks Kasparov as the greatest player of all time in that same interview you referred to.
The top players have said so many contradictory things on the subject that one can't use any quotes of theirs to prove anything, I guess. My own opinion is that Lasker is underestimated while Fischer is overestimated, but maybe that's just me. If the latter didn't have 1971-72 his career achievements would be far below those of Spassky. Then in 1971-72 he was just as amazing as Kasparov and Lasker at their best. But to me he would have had to keep that up for at least ten years more to be compared to Lasker and Kasparov, both were the best player in the world for more than 20 years and that's just a different level as I see it.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Fezzik wrote:
fabelhaft wrote:
Fezzik wrote:
Fabel, Kramnik also ranks Kasparov as the greatest player of all time in that same interview you referred to.
The top players have said so many contradictory things on the subject that one can't use any quotes of theirs to prove anything, I guess. ...
How's this: show us where Anand, Kramnik, or any of the other current top ten players (even Nakamura) stated that they thought Fischer was the greatest chess player of all time.
If you decide to use the famous Kramnik interview to suggest that he thought Fischer was the best, you will have to take the comments out of context. Here's the link to the entire fascinating interview:
http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=61
I'm in no way suggesting that Kramnik or any other current top player as far as I know suggest that Fischer was the best, and Kramnik certainly didn't say anything like that in his interview (and I haven't said that he did either).
What I think is that what this or that player says isn't proof of anything. Kramnik said that Lasker's gap in 1894 was the biggest ever, but he didn't consider Lasker the greatest player ever. He may be right or wrong on both accounts, but to me looking at the actual results is better than trying to find appropriate quotes.
I wonder who is better?
Fischer prepared like an amateur and played like a maestro. Having said that Kasparov is more physically threatening looking than Fischer ever was....so if its be afraid of offending a dead and weedy guy or a big burly ape who could rip my head off.....I will vote for Kasparov.
Fezzik wrote:
fabelhaft wrote:
Fezzik wrote:
Fabel, Kramnik also ranks Kasparov as the greatest player of all time in that same interview you referred to.
The top players have said so many contradictory things on the subject that one can't use any quotes of theirs to prove anything, I guess. ...
How's this: show us where Anand, Kramnik, or any of the other current top ten players (even Nakamura) stated that they thought Fischer was the greatest chess player of all time.
If you decide to use the famous Kramnik interview to suggest that he thought Fischer was the best, you will have to take the comments out of context. Here's the link to the entire fascinating interview:
http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=61
I don't see any claim in fabelhaft's post implying that Kramnik thought Fischer was greater than Kasparov. Has the post been edited?
my pal just pointed out that Fischer never cheated at chess yet Kasparov was caught on camera doing just that
Well, one thing is certain, Fischer never took a move back in a serious game (cheating) and Kasparov did and then he even denied it with the whole incident caught on video.