Michael Tal: Actually the best attacking player?

As a student of Chess, I'm always looking for new ways to improve my game. I consider myself to be an exciting, attack minded player so I researched some Chess players who share my style of play. I found that one name in particular kept coming up.

Tal, a Latvian player who played in the 50's or something. Wikipedia claims that he is the best attacking Chess player of all time. After watching some Kingscrusher videos on Tal, I found that like me he was very attack minded, and excelled in complicated positions. 

But then I started to get skeptical. Why should this man be considered the greatest attacking player of all time? Surely, Magnus Carlsen could attack as fearlessly, and effectively as Tal. However he understands that this reckless form of Chess would be damaging to his Elo rating. I believe that any higher rated player can attack like Tal, but chooses not to because it's not a highly effective style of play.

Please discuss, and share what makes one a great attacking player. 

An attacking player is one that attacks. A great attacking player is one that attacks better. Thank me later.

Whats so good/bad about Kingscrusher/Kingspatzer? I am looking for good chess youtubers.

Tal would sacrifice on intuition. It just felt right to him. Usually, it worked, sometimes not so much so. Like urk said, he was fearless. That's what made him so admirable. "There are sound sacrifices, and then there are mine," - Tal. Shirov and Shabalov are two players that really stand out as students of Tal. Shabalov never reached the same level as Shirov, who has also lost a lot of rating over the past 10 years, but both are very unique and creative players.

I certainly can't judge by analyzing the games myself, but the commentary I have heard and read leads me to think Tal was a scrapper who would do things to break up the opponent's strategy, give him more problems to solve and complicate matters and bounce on a tactical mistake. It earned him a world championship once, but Botvinnik came back and cleaned his clock.

I've got an alternative. it's called... a book. which you have to... read.

wow! i never knew!

ive read where he would sac occasionally just cos he was bored lol , chess does need livening up now and again

the person who understood his chess best though is his trainer Kavalek

and sadly their game i cant find on yt , but ive got it in a book

Isn't Kingcrusher a CM? Although nothing special he will still rek 95% of the players I think. That's alright I suppose.

Yes, 

I have no idea why Urk has no respect for the greatest YouTuber to ever live. 

The greatest player to never become GM? 

Michael Tal?

Go on... 

Well, i know that Michael is the English version of Mikhail, but i just had never heard him referred to as such.  Even the Wikipedia page you reference doesn't contain that variation.

It's like referring to Jose Raul Capablanca as Joe Ralph Capablanca, or to Paul Morphy as Paolo Morphy, or to Fyodor Dostoyevsky as Theodore Dostoyevsky.

Just sounds weird and unnecessary, is all.  Not sure what your intent was, if any.

Regardless, lets get back to the discussion. Where do you think he ranks in terms of attacking prowess compared to others in the world of Chessary? 

I'm not qualified to make such an assessment -- i plead ignorance on the subject.  

I was just passing through and the name struck me as odd.  But i'll continue following to hear what else is said.

Tal, Anderssen and Marshall for pure tactics. Kasparov, Alekhine, and Morphy when you consider the whole package.