If Fischer and Magnus Could Somehow Play a 100 Game Match, Predict The Result.


Outright skill level: Fischer 10:8 mostly due to his well known opening theory expertise. Slight edge in the middlegame but lacking somewhat in endgame play in my view. Knowledge is a debatable point, but Carlson has an adequate edge (10:8) I imagine they could talk for days about contemporary chess practices then & now. Idyllic memory vs prodigious memory: even steven imo. Many players have to recall variations, lines during a game in real time and I believe its relative. Intangibles: Even. They have both shown to be out of the box thinkers and have taken chances despite conventional wisdom would say to play otherwise. Whereas they both possess tremendous will and stamina, Magnus will often comeback from a dubious position fighting but more often than not just to lose or a dramatic draw as opposed to Bobby mostly stubbornly clinging to minute winning chance while disdaining the draw when it is in hand.


Sure.Easy for you to say while lying under that gorgeous sun and surfing until your heart's content.


Indeed2 I left out some other stuff on purpose namely because it's either been talked about for years or I'm simply depending on your guys's own opinions to discuss it further than me. Anyways, heh. I like Fischer 26-24 =50.😉


heh@magic~yeah my brother it is pretty cool😎


Lucky Dog!


If talent is the question, then Carlsen is probably better than Fischer, although not as much as Capablanca compared to Alekhine, and we know who won the 1927 match.

At his peak, Fischer was 125 Elo points above the second in the World, something like 2945 nowadays. He could still lose a game if caught in the opening by surprise, but that hardly happened even in an era when it was difficult to be up to date or to know it all. With today's access to information and engines, he'd practically be unbeatable. Simply put, he worked like no one before or ever since and knew how to translate all of it into results.

najdorf96 wrote:

Indeed. I've commented alot on Fischer vs Karpov, Kasparov etc or Who is the GOAT. Heh, as a RJF fan boy for over 30 years, Ive had to either defend or reiterate my position within the topic and context of numerous OPs hypothetical constructs. Hooboy! I realize many who are commenting never got to get to know Fischer's play as intimately as those of us who got started in chess in the aftermath of that particular era. Only through engine eyes do they do so and riding the wave of millennial, gen X, gen Z players currently. Yeah, Carlson has become the gold standard and deservedly so (as I often deemed him the Second Coming of Fischer going on for almost 8 years). But to say 70-30 for Magnus (seems to be the top consensus here) seems totally unrealistic even in this context! Whoa. Pump the breaks guys. Even with just taking the two as they are now in their primes; nevermind the means or era they became World Champions or being the "best", the ratio should be alot closer methinks.

I concur.

My " guess "  was 20-10 in favour of Magnus with 70 draws.

( of course . others have it 20-10 in Bobby's favour )

Not surprisingly.

But this is Magnus , the kid ( 13-years old ) who played old-man Kasparov

to a draw. Kasparov scratching and gurning like he was playing Deep Blue.

There is still the Karpov Question hanging in the air regarding Bobby.

If he trounced Anatoly THEN retired.......his GOAT credentialswould have gathered

more weight.

But....In the meantime , Magnus appears to be getting better/stronger.

Having said that.  If Magnus wins The Sinquefield Cup , against THIS level of

competition , well you would have to say the argument would favour Magnus.


I think it will come 6?-4? They are both good chess players but carlsen is the best!


Fischer would win any day

he is Chess legend 10000000000000grin.png


Ben Finegold is adamant about Fischer being the superior player.He makes a good case about it.


Carlsen has to resort to quick games to beat Caruana and Karjakin.

When he has destroyed top Grandmasters 6-0, and matches Fischers' performance against Spassky, he might be considered an equal

Fischer managed all of this despite the Russian Machine, his own mental health issues, no back up, and with having taken long periods off from playing.

There is no real comparism that can be made due to these complicating factors.

However, given a theoretical level playing field, Fischer for my money every time.

But, 6-0, 6-0 v two top GM's for Carlsen and I might have to re evaluate that.

magictwanger wrote:

Ben Finegold is adamant about Fischer being the superior player.He makes a good case about it.

Unfortunately, since he is in neither player's class, the point seems a bit moot.


lazy present champion v. obsessed genius; gee i dunno

modern musicians with beatboxes and loops and auto tune think their superior, too.

psychologically, it's a complete joke.

these kids today are too distracted to play effectively; Fischer in a whitewash


obsessed genius who became too obsessed to even play (Magnus by forfeit)


yeah, you're young; dislike.


Fischer 8-0.. then would leave out of disgust because the lights and cameras were too loud.... Magnus without a win, wins.


M= 12 F=5 D=83


Nope, I'm old, bonefroth.