My list of Top 10 chess players


  • 6 months ago · Quote · #141

    DamonevicSmithlov

    Her's my carefully selected list:

    Uh, but it's top 16. Sorry.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #142

    varelse1

    Totally agree with smyslov on Anand-Gelfand. That was a total disappointment.

    But nobody to blame there but Carlsen, I guess. If he hadn't Fischered-out, he could have been competing for the title then.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #143

    DamonevicSmithlov

    Isn't it odd that all 3, Fischer, Kasparov, & Carlsen got so pizzed off at fide enough to tell em to fugg off? All 3 of them. But Carlsen got back into the next cycle.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #144

    fabelhaft

    "Totally agree with smyslov on Anand-Gelfand. That was a total disappointment. But nobody to blame there but Carlsen, I guess. If he hadn't Fischered-out"

    Unless one would want to blame FIDE for changing the rules mid cycle from Candidates match to knockout so Kirsan could get Kramnik et al free spots after they refused to participate in the qualification together with Carlsen and Aronian etc. Also, if Anand-Kramnik II was what one wanted, one could always blame Kramnik for not winning the qualification Gelfand won :-)

    At the same time Anand and Kramnik have played many World Championship qualifications in different formats from the early 1990s to the mid 2010s, World Championships in tournament, match and knockout formats, World Championships in speed chess etc, and Anand always did better than Kramnik. There are other rematches I'd rather see than that one myself.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #145

    JamieDelarosa

    The F.I.D.E. is corrupt.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #146

    SmyslovFan

    JamieDelarosa wrote:

    The F.I.D.E. is corrupt.

    Yes, but it is useful, and for all intents and purposes the only game in town. 

    FIFA's corrupt, but that doesn't make the World Cup illegitimate. Same with FIDE and the Chess World Championship. 

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #147

    fabelhaft

    "FIFA's corrupt, but that doesn't make the World Cup illegitimate. Same with FIDE and the Chess World Championship"

    But do you consider Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov etc to be the legitimate World Champions?

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #148

    JamieDelarosa

    Were those players crowned as a result of defeating the sitting world champion/world's best player in match play of sufficient length?

    I seem to recall, at that time, Kasparov was the King of the Hill.

    I also seem to recall many of the qualifying "matches" were ... two games ???

    "Paper" champions.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #149

    varelse1

    DamonevicSmithlov wrote:

    Isn't it odd that all 3, Fischer, Kasparov, & Carlsen got so pizzed off at fide enough to tell em to fugg off? All 3 of them. But Carlsen got back into the next cycle.

    Karpov as well, back in 2000. Don't forget him.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #150

    varelse1

    fabelhaft wrote:

    "FIFA's corrupt, but that doesn't make the World Cup illegitimate. Same with FIDE and the Chess World Championship"

     

    But do you consider Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov etc to be the legitimate World Champions?

    Good point. No.

    Ponomariov either, for that matter.

    Topolov on the other hand, maybe. Talented player there.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #151

    SmyslovFan

    When FIDE's world champion played FIDE's official challenger for the title outside the auspices of FIDE, FIDE had a choice. It could recognise the match or try to create a shadow champion. It made a bad choice. The shadow champions never had legitimacy as long as the original champion was active and defended his title against strong opponents such as Anand and Kramnik. 

    As long as Kasparov was #1 in the World and actively defending his title in match play against top opponents, nobody else could legitimately claim to be world champion.

    Kasparov was World Champion, and that title was passed on to Kramnik. Once Kasparov was out of the picture, FIDE worked to reunite the title. Chess isn't boxing.

    FIDE currently has management of the title. 

    I have a feeling fabelhaft agrees with that.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #152

    pdve

    1. Petrosian

    2.Capablanca

    3.Kramnik

    4.Steinitz

    5.Lasker

    6.Botvinnik

    7.Nimzovich

    8.Karpov

    9.Rubinstein

    10.Reshevsky

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #153

    Charetter115

    1. Capablanca
    2. Kasparov
    3. Fischer
    4. Krakmnik
    5. Alekhine
    6. Petrosian
    7. Carlsen
    8. Lasker
    9. Morphy
    10. Botvinnik 

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #154

    fabelhaft

    It always surprises me that so many of these lists have Kramnik in the top 5, ahead of Lasker, Karpov, Carlsen etc, and with Anand nowhere to be seen...

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #155

    varelse1

    fabelhaft wrote:

    It always surprises me that so many of these lists have Kramnik in the top 5, ahead of Lasker, Karpov, Carlsen etc, and with Anand nowhere to be seen...

    Yeah. I know what you mean. 

    But kramnik has really had a profound impact on chess. For openings, anyway.

    His contributions to the Berlin Defence, and the Bayonette Attack have turned much of opening theory on it's head over the last 18 years or so.

    Tbh, I can't remember even the great Kasparov having such a dramatic impact.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #156

    varelse1

    JamieDelarosa wrote:

    World championship matches should be a minimum 6-wins, unlimited games.

    That is the best way to ensure the strongest player wins.

    Yuck.

    I remember that 1984 Karpov-Kasparov fiasco. That couldn't have good for chess.


Back to Top

Post your reply: