Magnus Carlsen 3004 USCF

Carlsen is yet to get the title.  

Bobby Fischer (bow your head in awe) in spite of his arrogance and pride, will always be talked about as one of the top 3 greatest of all time, maybe THE greatest since he defeated the Russian machine without the help of computers as today.  He still pulled down over $5 million in today's money for playing a few games in '92 and then, again, did the most brilliant thing by absconding with the money, not letting the greedy IRS get a penny of it.    Yeah, what a waste of life.  

WOW!!!! Very Cool!!!! Great.OUTSTANDING!!!!!!

True.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm not criticizing it.  I just don't relate to it.

To relate it more directly to the topic of the thread, he didn't need to pay that sort of money to make sure that Magnus played Chess.  Magnus was going to play Chess whether or not he did it in Saint Louis.  (I started to capitalize He  in that last sentence.  His reputation is getting the better of me.)  So would the other three.  

Does it really increase the reputation of Saint Louis or promote Chess to buy a super-tourney?

Maybe.  I hope it works.  I'm just not sure.  Magnus might be on track to be that Chess player that non-players have heard of, or better yet the player that inspires non-players to become players.  If so, then a couple of hundred grand in disposable income would be a good contribution to the future of the game, I suppose.

You know the old saying, money talks, don't you. Yes money will attract high caliber players. I would like to see more businesses and cities, getting more involved in this sport as well. If America offers higher cash prizes, they will come. Build it, and they will come.

This record won't last long. When was Fischer 11/11 US Championship record? Not so long ago, only some 50 years! That's not long.

It just means that Hikaru Nakamura needs to step his game up so that the chess world championship after this one will be Hikaru Nakamura VS Magnus Carlsen

I have nothing against Nakamura but I would be surprised if he ever makes it to the candidates let alone wins it.

Points?  Does the number 3599 and rising give a clue?  Now we just need to switch the points with the rating and wham, Carlsen will be at your door begging for advice.

I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you but Nakamura says the same about you, man.

lol

The Game of the Century was played in October 1956, Fischer stopped playing in July 1972, that is 15 years and 9 months later so that's a bit short of 20 years. But of course he wasn't the best player in the world those 15 years. Carlsen has been awarded the Chess Oscar for best player of the year the last four years and will probably get it for the fifth year in a row.

If Fischer was the best player in the world for more than five years is difficult to say. Chessmetrics have him as #1 for the first time in 1964, but most of 1965 and 1966 he's not #1. The Game of the Century was played in this event, and it wasn't until a few years later Fischer became a top player (his first Candidates was in 1959 when he shared 5th and the second was in 1962 when he finished fourth):

fabelhaft bla bla bla, yea like that means anything. as well all know the oscar means anything, even if carlsen was the best player, maybe he was, was is it good for if he isnt fischer????

What it is good for if he isn't Fischer? :-) Nothing for you I bet :-) But a player that quit chess in his 20s can hardly be that far ahead when it is longevity that is the topic. The first time Fischer reached top three at Chessmetrics was less than 9 years before he retired. Carlsen has been #1 for a while and will probably continue to be a top player for a while. As far as longevity is concerned he has a long way to go to be compared to players like Lasker and Botvinnik, but considerably less so compared to Fischer.

but its not about numbers, besides Lasker wasnt even if the entire time the best.

Its also about beauty about chess and everyone knows that Fischer would have easily been the number 1 for the next 10 years if he played on..

Its also about domination, Carlsens win in the candidates where nowhere near as convincing at Fischer.

besides Carlsens games are far less pretty.

But Carlsen wins, and makes his opponents look like beginners when he wins. That last match last week against Aronian made Aronian look like a 1200 player instead of a 2700+ player....

is that a joke? that would much rather fit fischer.

I dont know it maybe coincidence that players like svidler and ivanchuk who fear no1 both beat Carlsen...

that being said ofc Carlsen is world class maybe the best at the moment (who knows, even though Kramnik had the same score)

he is just not Fischer, thats all i wanted to say.

anyway i wish carlsen would make me look like 1200, i wonder if i would even reach 1000 if my opponents wont let me win.

lol

. . .