Antonio_Montana wrote:
I still think that Magnus Carlsen looks like a cockaroach man.
Here judge for yourself..
you are not marrying him are you?
Magnus Carlsen 3004 USCF
Sort:
TetsuoShima wrote:
look at the people critizising fischer usually people who write worse books than the old nimzovich or capablanca or reti. Its funny how those pathetic people think they have the authority to critizise him.
I mean i dont know how someone who wants to make a living by selling trash really thinks he has the right to critizise fischer. whatever Fischer was or not was i find those guys much more pathetic
-What the hell are you talking about? I'm not calling you or clms_chess a schizophrenic. I'm saying that the anti-semetic things that Fischer said after he retired and went 'insane' were probably the result of minor schizophrenia, and that Bobby Fischer never truly thought such horrible things. You need to read my sentence more carefully, you misinterpreted it, and I can't fault you for that. I am by no means trash talking anyone here. I loved Fischer, and I love analyzing his games.
Xirehzin wrote:
TetsuoShima wrote:
look at the people critizising fischer usually people who write worse books than the old nimzovich or capablanca or reti. Its funny how those pathetic people think they have the authority to critizise him.
I mean i dont know how someone who wants to make a living by selling trash really thinks he has the right to critizise fischer. whatever Fischer was or not was i find those guys much more pathetic
-What the hell are you talking about? I'm not calling you or clms_chess a schizophrenic. I'm saying that the anti-semetic things that Fischer said after he retired and went 'insane' were probably the result of minor schizophrenia, and that Bobby Fischer never truly thought such horrible things. You need to read my sentence more carefully, you misinterpreted it, and I can't fault you for that. I am by no means trash talking anyone here. I loved Fischer, and I love analyzing his games.
no the point is that he is a grown man and can say whatever he personally believes in. I think it is just unfair to tread him like a child and just say all he said was nonsense. because he was a grown man and a world champion and is entitled to whatever he thought. If we like it or not.
Hi.
discoweasel wrote:
Hi.
Nice. Someone had to step in and deflect the wayward vitriol flying around. We start with Carlsen. I do my humble best to troll the thread only to be surpassed by all the sincere idiots who would rather talk about Fischer. With 3 noble keystrokes, you have achieved a sublime level of expression of indifference to all their nonsense. Sir, I salute you.
Sep 21, 2013
0
#107
Savage wrote:
ProfessorProfesesen wrote:
Savage wrote:
I didn't say he's "nothing"; you just pulled that out of your ass, you patzer retard.
lol ... ass experts... love it
Er... OK. You didn't really need to provide further confirmation that you're a retard, but I guess you felt compelled.
a retard and an ass expert...someone is going for the hattrick!
Sep 21, 2013
0
#108
Here_Is_Plenty wrote:
discoweasel wrote:
Hi.
Nice. Someone had to step in and deflect the wayward vitriol flying around. We start with Carlsen. I do my noble best to troll the thread only to be surpassed by all the sincere idiots who would rather talk about Fischer. With 3 noble keystrokes, you have achieved a sublime level of expression of indifference to all their nonsense. Sir, I salute you.
LOL!
dang funny
+100
Jion_Wansu wrote:
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....
I bet you didn't follow the game live. Aronian almost had eaten Carlsen alive. But suddenly he was stuck by taking a4 pawn.
Well, it's GM's game, so it is beyond my comprehension. I would be a GM myself, if I could handle it.
But Carlsen had all the luck (and skill, I would a fool if I say he doesn't). He escaped Nakamura and Aronian. Things would be different, but the fact was he did.
Well, you can say the same about Fischer. Only Fischer did it more elegantly than Carlsen. He just didn't escape from some games, but he found the right move at the right time to overthrew his opponents. How many time do you see Carlsen do it?
Carlsen's games are nowhere near Tal, let alone Fischer.
In terms of techniques Fischer surpassed Carlsen by miles.
Wow! Popular thread...
In July 1971, Bobby Fischer defeated Bent Larsen with a perfect 6-0 score in the Candidates semi-final in Denver, Colorado. His performance rating was 3060.
Sep 21, 2013
0
#112
I said Carlsen was the greatest. Many disagree. So, rather than argue about something so difficult to resolve, why not argue about the score of the November match with Anand ?
My prediction: Carlsen 6.5 Anand 4.5
However, based on his St Louis actions, it might just be 7-4. This is not a precise science.
If you say Carlsen is over rated, then what is YOUR prediction ?
If Carlsen's games are supposed to be lower objective quality than Fischer's because the latter won a match against Larsen 6-0 one could just as well claim that his games are lower quality than Steinitz because he won a match against Blackburne 7-0. But such comparisons are difficult to make without turning it into "I like Player A more than Player B, so the games of Player A are higher quality".
One can always look at engine studies like the one below, even if i don't think they necessarily say all that much. It should also be kept in mind that the players of today have shorter time controls and no adjournments. Still, Carlsen's play in the Candidates, where his TPR was below his average over the last years, compared favourably with the play of the past World Champions:
Sep 22, 2013
0
#114
good post fabel ! Carlsen 6.5 Anand 4.5
so Carlsen wins at 22, 7 years younger than Bobby.
fabelhaft wrote:
If Carlsen's games are supposed to be lower objective quality than Fischer's because the latter won a match against Larsen 6-0 one could just as well claim that his games are lower quality than Steinitz because he won a match against Blackburne 7-0. But such comparisons are difficult to make without turning it into "I like Player A more than Player B, so the games of Player A are higher quality".
One can always look at engine studies like the one below, even if i don't think they necessarily say all that much. It should also be kept in mind that the players of today have shorter time controls and no adjournments. Still, Carlsen's play in the Candidates, where his TPR was below his average over the last years, compared favourably with the play of the past World Champions:
http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211/PostId/4009400/the-quality-of-play-at-the-candidates-090413.aspx
Also the tiny difference that Fischer played really imaginative chess and no1 doubted that.
Sep 22, 2013
0
#116
First off, to me, Bobby Fischer will always be the Greatest. But even i have to acknowledge...Magnus is an absolute talent, not seen for many many years since Bobby. He will definitely become one of the Greats, but until he wins the Crown (or when he does) and what does in the future, we really can't say he is THE GREATEST. Obviously he has the potential, but 'potential' does not equate 'accomplishments' (surpassing that of Fischer, that is). Thank u
Antonio_Montana wrote:
ProfessorProfesesen wrote:
Antonio_Montana wrote:
you are not marrying him are you?
I still think that Magnus Carlsen looks like a cockaroach man.
Here judge for yourself..
Hey man, you don't have to get personal.
No one said anything about marrying a cockaroach. That's just wrong for you to pull that kind of accusation out from your pants.
I'm talking about a genuine cockaroach here and you have to bring marriage into it? Damn man, this whole marriage thing is going to far. Look, I think that you guys can do whatever you want to okay? Why you got to make me out to be the bad guy?
You and all the other socksuckers out there can accuse people of things as much as you like, but me.. all I'm interested in is the world man, and everything in it.
So don't point your finger in my direction unless you're willing to back it up on the chess board. I'll stomp your little roach motel into the ground and take out the whole cockaroach convention.
Like I said before, people have the right to judge for themselves.. this is a free country man and it should be free of cockaroaches.
Firstly, Cockroaches not Cockaroaches. Secondly, what have you got against same sex marriage? Or same insect marriage, either. Thirdly, "free country" - this is Cuba we are talking about, right? Fourthly, how was he getting personal? Fifthly, since I have started and can't stop, People have the right to judge for themselves? What if we don't have the fancy white wig or the gavel? Or even a Lawmaster and Lawgiver from Judge Dredd? Sixthly, Are you using Cock(a)roach as an insult? Given that they are arguably the most dominant, capable and resilient species on the planet, maybe they deserve your respect, sir.
Yours scuttlingly, Cockroach_Is_Plenty
Cockroaches crawl on the floor from desk to desk. Sounds like Magnus.
Antonio_Montana wrote:
Spoken like a true cockaroach.
Of course, I am persuaded by your sharp insight and logical argument. It might be best, though, for the sake of the other less-enlightened viewers of the thread if you dumbed it down a little so they could follow the reasoning.
Sep 22, 2013
0
#120
Antonio_Montana wrote:
Here_Is_Plenty wrote:
Antonio_Montana wrote:
ProfessorProfesesen wrote:
Antonio_Montana wrote:
you are not marrying him are you?
I still think that Magnus Carlsen looks like a cockaroach man.
Here judge for yourself..
stop your ranting and raving...wannabe scarface...couldn 't you have chosen a better alter ego????? Shakespeare? Mozart? Riemann?? Franz Kafka?
I didn't say he's "nothing"; you just pulled that out of your ass, you patzer retard.
lol ... ass experts... love it