Fischer is indeed the GOAT.
Robert James Fischer vs José Raúl Capablanca
Sort:
black would win because as both are dead white would lose on time first
Apr 22, 2019
0
#24
Well... pity he ran away from Karpov and didn't prove he was greater huh? On what grounds can Anybody just declare RJF better than Kasparov?!
Would fancy him against Capablanca though.
Apr 22, 2019
0
#25
josecarlos33 wrote:
black would win because as both are dead white would lose on time first
No, it's a double forfeit. Both players lose.
FIDE rule 6.7.1
Apr 22, 2019
0
#26
Lion_XVI wrote:
On what grounds can Anybody just declare RJF better than Kasparov?!
The differential between Fischer and his peers, both in rating and in results.
When did Kasparov win Candidates Matches against super-GMs by 6-0, 6-0, etc?
blueemu escreveu:
josecarlos33 wrote:
black would win because as both are dead white would lose on time first
No, it's a double forfeit. Both players lose.
FIDE rule 6.7.1
oh sorry then they are equal
blueemu wrote:
Lion_XVI wrote:
On what grounds can Anybody just declare RJF better than Kasparov?!
The differential between Fischer and his peers, both in rating and in results.
When did Kasparov win Candidates Matches against super-GMs by 6-0, 6-0, etc?
I will host a Capablanca vs Fischer match as soon as my new flux capacitor triodes, which are needed for my time-travel DeLorean, arrive intact from ebay.com.
i think we should see their bodies the one that is less decomposed is the absolute GOAT
Apr 22, 2019
0
#30
IronIC_U wrote:
Actually, not googling it, just searching tired old memory banks, I think it was Lasker who delayed, delayed, etc the showdown so he wouldn’t have to face Capablanca.
Alekhine. He played two matches against Bogoljubov instead, who was in no way comparable to Capablanca.
Apr 22, 2019
0
#31
Kasparov was champion much longer, world no.1 much longer, higher rating, played better player... near 200 matches against Karpov?! Spasky is regarded as one of the weaker champions. Any objective, unbiased opinion puts Kaspy as the greatest.
Don't get me wrong... RJF would definitely be in the top 4 or 5, and no problem with people having the OPINION he was best... problem be when people just declare as fact. How many did he lose to tal again? In fact, if i remember right... he lose nearly 20% of his games.
Actual fact, some whiz kids did a CPU study of champions... and you know who came up as most accurate? Capablanca...
Apr 22, 2019
0
#32
And Capablanca had no super CPU engine either... never even studied openings apparently.
Apr 22, 2019
0
#33
MMTMIT wrote:
Who is better at chess?
Fischer invented clocks and new chess games, he even won the Cold War over a chessboard. then he defended his world title after 20 years, flipping fide the bird in the process. he was basically a one man slaughterhouse. it’s a bit unfair to ask Capa to compete with that.
Apr 22, 2019
0
#34
batgirl wrote:
varelse1 wrote:
Could Howard Staunton beat Susan Polgar at Chess960?
Discuss.
OK.
Staunton was one of the most prolific odds-givers of all time and not just standard odds such a Pawn&move but strange odds too. He was also quite successful at this form of chess. So, unusual starting positions just might be something he would have been good at. Of course we'll never know.
But on the other hand Susan Polgar is Susan Polgar, as Tal might have said.
Polgar would obliterate Staunton.
Just sayin'
Apr 22, 2019
0
#36
Polgar have engine though... maybe if Staunton had that he would defeat Carlsen huh? And remember prime Karpov was near unbeatable? What if Morphy had a Super engine huh? Prime Morphy v Kaspy... ready to rumble... but wait, that study said Capablanca was best... who lose to Alekhine... so maybe...
And that's why the argument is unwinnable... one can spin a case for most any champ being best. Give Greco and Philidor a decent engine and analysis...
Is a fun argument... but inconclusive.
Apr 23, 2019
0
#39
capablanca would be a 2600-2650 GM today. Very strong fundamentals and okayish openings, but super GM's today would never give him the time of day to get the positions he truly excelled at. Chess has evolved considerably, although the gap between now and Capablanca is different from capablanca to Fischer.
but the answer is Fischer regardless. Fischer was just as prodigious with a far superior work ethic and 50 years of material to build over.
but any grandmaster is good.