And yes, there are a lot of mediocre players who use today's tools to become only slightly less sh!tty. I'm one of them of course. We don't compare to the past greats at all. Big respect to players like Chigorin.
But todays top players are not like me. They use some of the tools I use, but they also deserve respect for their deep understanding.
As others have said, it depends more on when you started, not when you finish. Who cares if some world U10 champ who is an IM at 12 years old makes GM when he's 50. I similarly couldn't care less about some 19th century master who started in his 20s when both professional and international chess were nonexistent.
leiph18 you are completely wrong to state that international chess was "nonexistent" in the 19th century. International chess had been around for 100s of years before that. I'm pretty sure Morphy, Andersson, Steinitz, Staunton, Tarrasch and the other world champion chess players pre-20th century would take issue with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baden-Baden_1870_chess_tournament It's also very foolish to conflate professionalism in chess with quality. They have pretty much nothing to do with one another, I mean it's not like chess players are earning big bucks today or anything, not unless they're in the top 5 in the world.
I cannot understand your dismissal of the old masters you have, they had vastly more understanding of the game than most of the IMs around today. You realize that Chigorin contributed a lot to opening theory and chess itself? VASTLY more interesting to look at these masters, the guys who really understood chess on a deeper level and were able to do things without computers or huge amounts of books, than whoever's in the top ten today because they've been using chess position trainer for the past ten years.
1 player (or a handful) taking a boat to Europe, or traveling 100 miles in Europe, country to country, is hardly international chess. Today you compete against hundreds of thousands of individuals from 100+ countries.
Making money has nothing to do with skill in chess, of course. But being able to spend all day on chess because it is your profession means a lot in terms of the competition you'll face. In 1800s you compete against a dozen rich people with talent who can afford to study chess all day at their leisure. Today is very different. And when it's not only your pride, but your profession, I would imagine focus and attitude is increased. That's the difference I'm talking about.
I'm sorry, but Chigorin et al did not understand chess better than today's pros. Players like him were of course chess genius that would be competitive if they were born today, but there is no secret deeper level. If anything they understood less.