It really is interesting that we're up to more than 130 posts for a thread that began with delusional ravings.
I'm 5'6" tall and have a mightly 2 inch vertical leap; if I said that there was totally no way that I could be stopped from scoring by Yao Ming, who is 7'6" tall and a professional player, I hope NBA fans would just walk away shaking their heads rather than getting into an actual discussion about the probability of my beating him to the basket.
Hahaha. I was just about to post that I'm astonished at 130+ posts responding to this almost-certainly-fake churl.
It really is unwise to feed the trolls. They just...breed. And they create more and increasingly inane new threads. Which will eventually destroy our homes and our ways of life.
Just try reading the GAMEFAQs forums (no, don't). Or playing Halo 3 on Xbox LIVE with foul-mouthed racist whiskey-drinking ten year-olds. It's just...horrible.
To wit: Ignore stupid threads. Don't feed trolls. Unless they're REALLY awesome and hilarious, of course. Which nolaupt definitely is not.
Magnus Carlsen ?!?! BAH he's Rubbish
Of course someone could beat him, if he played queen odds!
Really? Trained by the best? What did Fischer rise again!?? When at his best nobody compares to Robert Fischer! Next was Capa, Kasp,, Anand, Karp,Tal, Lasker, Akiba Rubenstien, Alekhine, Morphy , Bronstein, Paul Keres --
I realize Fischer was world champion at one time -- but do you spastic Fischer lovers realize that there have been 15 some other world champions? You pick the first player you know about without any kind of comparison.
Can you name off the top of your head 3 of Kasparov's claims to chess fame? How can you compare then? How about a different world champion? You just run at the mouth about Fischer without knowing anything. Yes Fischer was arguably the best, but you obviously know very little about it.
Genius, I have a huge collection of chess books well over 900. I named those players as I know much about all of them. Likely you never heard of Akiba Rubenstein before I typed his name in my post. Nobody living or dead was a better endgame player.He was at least Laskers equal at one time but more likely his superior before going crazy.Lasker dodged playing him! I have studied well over 200 top players from Staunton to current top players today. How about Charoseuk? Know who he was , his ability? I have likely forgotten more about chess and famous players than you have ever known! Its my hobby. Feel free to challenge me to a standard or live game anytime and I will teach you more. That is providing you dont use a chess engine to cheat!I
I play here same as OTB playing while my opponents take advantage of correspondence rules/advantages that I DO NOT!
I play here without referencing any other aid than my own brain and memory from the books that I have studied for over 4 decades. -SIXGUNS
Hypothesis and conclusions without any facts.
A hypothesis requires logical thought. There is none of that here...
It's just a bunch of old people hating on the new kid on the block. Muhammed Ali went through the same. When you're on top, people want to bring you down. In the case of chess, it is the jealous spectators that ooze of this crap.
A 19 year old is coming up in the chess world. Anyone that doesn't like it can whine, moan and listen to their emo music because the fact of the matter is, you can't stop it. What's rediculous about it is that only the so-called fans have problems with it. Maybe they see chess as more than what it is - a game. Maybe they should take a walk in the fresh air...
True. I have no problem with whatever level he achieves. Carlson appears to be a new type of Capa . One that desires more wins and less draws than Capa did. I have no doubt but that bar any unforseen tragic happening he will become a chess legend while still breathing . Capa, Fischer , Alekhine , Tal, KASP, KARP, ANAND , KRAMNIK all will be in the same high group as will he be!-SIXGUNS
Yup! I CAN BEAT MAGNUS CARLSEN HERE ON CHESS.COM BUT 4DAT I NEED 2PRACTICE AT LEAST 10,000 TIMES. AND YES I CAN DO IT. EVERYTHNG'S POSSIBLE AND NONE IS UNBEATABLE!
I BELIEVE IN MYSELF-
(btw can anybody get ME Kasparov's laptop??) 
Carlson appears...
Stop right there! It's CarlsEn. He's Norwegian, not some Minnesota farm-boy!
Most authorities seem to agree that it was Capablanca who has never been equaled at the endgame.
Genius, I have a huge collection of chess books well over 900. I named those players as I know much about all of them. Likely you never heard of Akiba Rubenstein before I typed his name in my post. Nobody living or dead was a better endgame player.He was at least Laskers equal at one time but more likely his superior before going crazy.Lasker dodged playing him! I have studied well over 200 top players from Staunton to current top players today. How aboutCharoseuk ? Know who he was , his ability? I have likely forgotten more about chess and famous players than you have ever known! Its my hobby. Feel free to challenge me to a standard or live game anytime and I will teach you more. That is providing you dont use a chess engine to cheat!I
I play here same as OTB playing while my opponents take advantage of correspondence rules/advantages that I DO NOT!
I play here without referencing any other aid than my own brain and memory from the books that I have studied for over 4 decades. -SIXGUNS
Regardless of how many books you've collected I was contesting that Fischer was the greatest ever. I see you dropped that issue though, so maybe it was less of a belief than some harmless rabble rousing -- although I get really tired of hearing how Fischer/Morphy was obviously the best when objectively it too close of a call between 5-10 players across history.
Yeah, I've heard of Rubinstein, but then again so have most chess players. Actually Rotlewi - Rubinstein 1907 is about my favorite game of all time. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1119679
And while he was recognized for rook endgames I thought it was Capa who was known as best in endgames, although as chess books/players are your hobby I'm sure you know a lot about it -- as for myself, I just know the common knowledge things.
You're right, I've never heard of Charoseuk.
Never planned on playing turn based here -- if you want I'll play live chess. Obviously we both know how to be an arse on the forum 
, but I'm not interested in bullying during games and like to keep it respectful.
Most authorities seem to agree that it was Capablanca who has never been equaled at the endgame.
that is simply wrong. Capa was indeed a great endgame player. He was not Akiba's equal.-sixguns
No. The highest rated people here are national masters from what I've seen. Perhaps there are some grandmasters here, but Carleson is in the super grandmaster category and this makes him the elite of the elite in chess. You would have to play a very good game against a mistake filled on his part to be able to pull out a victory in standard time controls against him. This is assuming of course, that your'e rated 2600 to begin with.
Genius, I have a huge collection of chess books well over 900. I named those players as I know much about all of them. Likely you never heard of Akiba Rubenstein before I typed his name in my post. Nobody living or dead was a better endgame player.He was at least Laskers equal at one time but more likely his superior before going crazy.Lasker dodged playing him! I have studied well over 200 top players from Staunton to current top players today. How aboutCharoseuk ? Know who he was , his ability? I have likely forgotten more about chess and famous players than you have ever known! Its my hobby. Feel free to challenge me to a standard or live game anytime and I will teach you more. That is providing you dont use a chess engine to cheat!I
I play here same as OTB playing while my opponents take advantage of correspondence rules/advantages that I DO NOT!
I play here without referencing any other aid than my own brain and memory from the books that I have studied for over 4 decades. -SIXGUNS
Regardless of how many books you've collected I was contesting that Fischer was the greatest ever. I see you dropped that issue though, so maybe it was less of a belief than some harmless rabble rousing -- although I get really tired of hearing how Fischer/Morphy was obviously the best when objectively it too close of a call between 5-10 players across history.
Yeah, I've heard of Rubinstein, but then again so have most chess players. Actually Rotlewi - Rubinstein 1907 is about my favorite game of all time. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1119679
And while he was recognized for rook endgames I thought it was Capa who was known as best in endgames, although as chess books/players are your hobby I'm sure you know a lot about it -- as for myself, I just know the common knowledge things.
You're right, I've never heard of Charoseuk.
Never planned on playing turn based here -- if you want I'll play live chess. Obviously we both know how to be an arse on the forum , but I'm not interested in bullying during games and like to keep it respectful.
NO problem. always enjoy a good game. sent you a challenge. Not to worry my friend. When I play chess its all about the game.SIX
Lasker did dodge Capablanca after WWI, he knew he was unlikely to win and offered to resign the title to the Cuban, but in the end agreed to a match in sweltering Havana for the cash.
There is controversy even here. Capa writes:
For what follows it must be borne in mind that Dr Lasker had been in Havana twice, in previous years, giving exhibitions at the Havana Chess Club. Thus, it is only fair to assume that he knew the climate he was going to encounter. At any rate, it was not entirely unknown to him. In his letter of 11 April, page 21, after he lost the tenth game, Dr Lasker complains of the sun. The games were played at night, between 9-0 and 1-0; the sun had been down for over two hours when play started! If during the day the sun bothered him, all he had to do was to stay at home and rest and wait for the late afternoon and early evening to go out.
Again in his letter of 18 April, page 24, he complains of the sun, and this time of the heat also. He claims for that afternoon a temperature of 32° C. in the shade. What a wonderful imagination!
Such temperatures do not exist in Cuba except in midsummer, in August, the hottest month of the year. He claims 29° C. at night, with fresh north wind. Again absurd. When the north wind blows in Cuba at that time of the year at night the temperature cannot be more than 20° C., and the probabilities are that the temperature would be below 20° C. In such cases one feels chilly. I remember that on two occasions we had to close the windows because the air was too cool, yet he claims it was too hot. It might be well to state right here that far from being used to hot weather, as most people think, I cannot stand it. The only two summers I have spent in Cuba since 1904 caused me serious illness. I have spent most of my life in very cold climates, and while I enjoy cold weather, hot weather makes me ill. The truth is that we played under the most ideal conditions imaginable. We played at the Casino, which is situated next to the country club and about three-quarters of a mile from the beach. We had a separate room with windows in three sides and gardens at the back, where we often walked while the other was thinking. A waiter was put solely for our use. We could have anything quickly and free of charge. We played only at night one session of four hours, from 9-0 to 1-0. The weather was excellent, not for a man of the tropics only, but for a European as well. I refer the reader to the introduction to my book of the match written by Mr H. Cassel, a German by birth, who has lived all his life in Germany, England and the United States of America. But enough of this; as stated before, Dr Lasker had been twice before in Cuba, knew perfectly well what he was doing, and if he did not begin the match before he cannot blame anybody but himself. Had he abided by his own signature as per our agreement of August 1920, the match would have started on [sic] January 1921 If Dr Lasker wants an excuse for his defeat, he should look for it where the facts are not against him.
What? You consider Larsen in the period 1966-1970 "second tier"? On his day he was capable of beating just about anyone, among others, Fischer. He did a fine job against Spassky on Board 1 in the Great World Chess Match in 1970.
As concerns Carlsen...how he just seems to know where his pieces should go
Apparently Capablanca suffered from this "problem" as well.
SIXGUNS ~ Lasker didn't "dodge" a match with Rubenstein. Rubenstein was from poor stock, and had no wealthy patrons to pony up the minimum purse for a Championship match. The World Champ shouldn't have to risk his title for free. Lasker, in particular, tended to play chess when he needed money (which fortunately for us was regularly). Although he held Ph.D.s in Philosophy and Mathematics, was credited with first describing the basis for modern algebra, and was on several university faculties from time to time (and was present for several of the original Einstein-Bohr "discussions"), he had a knack for living beyond his means and investing in various enterprises which never seemed to prosper in the long run. Lasker did dodge Capablanca after WWI, he knew he was unlikely to win and offered to resign the title to the Cuban, but in the end agreed to a match in sweltering Havana for the cash.
Rubenstein may, nonetheless, have been the strongest player never to win the World Championship, although also Keres, Korchnoi, and Ivanchuk should be considered.
As concerns Carlsen, Kasparov has spoken of his appreciation of the lad's talent, how he just seems to know where his pieces should go, even though the reasons do not become apparent for many moves. GM Arun mentioned in a recent article here, after showing a Carlsen game, that "his opponents often never knew what hit them."
With all due respect to Fischer, he would have had his hands full with the likes of Karpov, Kasparov, Ivanchuk, Korchnoi (at his height in the late '70s), Kramnik, Anand, and Carlsen. While he defeated Spassky decisively in 1972, he had never beaten Boris before and lost as recently as the Seigen Olympiad in 1970. He clearly dominated Petrosian, had bested the aging Botvinnik and Keres, and owned the second tier of grandmasters of his day like Gligoric, Uhlmann, Stein, Larsen, Taimanov, and Unzicker, and kept most of the rising stars under control like Hort, Portisch, and Korchnoi, he never really demonstrated superiority over Geller or Tal.
Capablanca, for example, played over 1000 tournament games, losing only 33, including an eight-year stretch of active competition without a loss. Karpov won something like 130 GM tournaments in his career. Kasparov won half as many, but most of the strongest in history to that time. Could a sane and focused Fischer compete with these guys? We'll never know, but there is no reason based on the record to suppose he could.
Fischer's demolition of the world's best on the road to taking the Championship says he could. Apparent you and I been reading a different record of Robert James Fischer. Fischer was a Capa with an iron will to win every game. Capa's many draws are a negative on his great record.If both in thier prime contested a match I would without hesitation stake my life on Fischer winning.Same goes if he went against any other grandmaster-living or dead.
Also Capa was not equal to Akiba Rubenstein as an endgame artist.Perhaps even Fischer wasnt.-SIX
Benko offered up this list of Greatest Endgame Players for Soltis' 1984 Book of Chess Lists:
1. Rubinstein
2-3. Smyslov
2-3. Botvinnik
4. Maroczy
5. Reshevsky
6. Lasker
7. Reti
8-9. Fine
8-9. Averbakh
No Capablanca to be seen. I'd like to hear more from Benko on the list and some omissions.
Though numbered, the players are in no particular order.
thank you politicalmusic thats what im saying i know a couple of people on here can beat him
And why don't they play OTB and earn money?