Top Contenders In History

Aizen89

If we could transport any chess players in history from their time to ours, in their prime, and give them 2 or 3 years to catch up on the times, who do you believe would be strong enough to make it in the top 10 in the world now?  Don't count anybody still alive.

My list:

Paul Morphy

Emanuel Lasker

Mikhail Botvinnik

Bobby Fischer

torrubirubi

Capablanca

torrubirubi

Mir Sultan Khan

Americu

Paul Morphy all day.

 

The talent that dude possessed was un-natural.

He was warming-up and then retired.

( Thank " God " he re-incarnated as JR Capablanca )....I think.

Yeah , the immortal Morphy.    ........grin.png

MonsieurKimchi

Sorry to bump and all, but Bobby Fischer would definitely have first spot on the list. Contenders for the second spot could be:

- Morphy

- Alekhine

- Capablanca

NikkiLikeChikki
Paul Morphy had never played against really good players growing up, had no access to modern theory, would blitz out most of his moves, and destroyed everyone that was any good. He only used his own brain and yet played with a very high accuracy. There is no modern analog so he would definitely be the most interesting case to study.
MonsieurKimchi
NikkiLikeChikki wrote:
Paul Morphy had never played against really good players growing up, had no access to modern theory, would blitz out most of his moves, and destroyed everyone that was any good. He only used his own brain and yet played with a very high accuracy. There is no modern analog so he would definitely be the most interesting case to study.

 

Reportedly, in an interview, Bobby Fischer stated that Morphy had the talent to beat any player in the modern chess era, were it for a greater opening knowledge.

LeeEuler

The top 3 seem pretty universally acknowledged in my mind: Fischer, Morphy, and Capablanca.

MonsieurKimchi
LeeEuler wrote:

The top 3 seem pretty universally acknowledged in my mind: Fischer, Morphy, and Capablanca.

 

Would you say in that order?

Snookslayer

"...in their prime, and give them 2 or 3 years to catch up on the times,"

 

Well if that's the context of the question, then the answer is Fischer by a mile.  He was already close to modern times so there wasn't much "catching up" to do.  Then Capablanca. And then a distant Morphy.

 

A better question is "who had more natural talent for the game?" I'd venture Capablanca, based on stories of him supposedly understanding the game at 4 y.o.  Though I've always thought that story was exaggerated... ever talk to a 4 y.o.?  They're all stupid as hell.  But still, 4, 5, 6 whatever, he apparently grasped the game very early on.  I've also read that chess engines show Capablanca's moves tended to be shockingly accurate.

destroyer8470

Me

Myself

and I