Who do you think is the best Chess player in recorded history?

What the title says, I think Fischer or Murphy. 

Reason: They both seem to revolutionize attacking.

Favorite games from the two:

Fischer

Murphy

Special Game

1) Kasparov
2) Fischer
3) Capablanca
http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PeakList.asp 

1. Fischer

2. Magnus 

3. Tal

4. Alekhine 

5. Karpov, Kramnik, Anand 

6. Gelfand, Shirov 

Who's Murphy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy%27s_law 

Viktor Korchnoi- ranked 85th in the world when he was 75yrs old.

Won a national championship when he was 80

https://www.chess.com/players/viktor-korchnoi

Kasparov is still the GOAT but Magnus is closely approaching (let's see how he does in November).

Right now: 1.) Kasparov 2.) Carlsen 3.) Fischer

It will probably end up:  1.) Carlsen 2.) Kasparov 3.) Fischer

1. Fischer

2. Kasparov
3. Capa
4. Magnus
5. Morphy

in straight up skill magnus is best but in how dominant and/or memorable they were it goes like this

Even though I enjoy more going over older, more classic games before the time when engines got good, I really think that modern players who have played, studied, and learned chess in the post engine era are much stronger.  I would put Magnus at 1 and Kasparov at 2. Call me crazy, but I would put maybe Anand at 3. Then Fischer.

Anyone in the computer era doesn't qualify (imo).

Neither does anyone who had access to the classical literature or a chess school (like Botvinnik).

So, for me it has to be players from before about 1900. Capablanca being the youngest of those players...Steintiz, Staunton, Morphy, and Lasker should be on the list.

YES

And this thread just made me realize how highly I regard Lasker as an all-time player.

That's my pick as #1

While that is an interesting list, I don't know how seriously I can take a list where Magnus isn't in the top 20 if the list is ordered by some measure of rating. I think he has been above 2800 for a decade.

http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PeakList.asp?Params=199510SSSSSWS000000000000111000000000000010100

10 more years to even qualify for this list then

But, yes every future World Champion will be deemed by many as the "best" ever.

Could Magnus beat Morphy? Morphy didn't even  have access to electricity.

It's almost impossible to compare players from 100+ years difference in time.

In any debate across eras, I always try to separate "best" from "greatest" if that makes sense. I think the best player is generally the one who is currently at the top (best player 50yrs ago<best player today<best player 50 yrs from now), so in that sense I would say Magnus.

On the other hand I think the distinction of "greatest" should go to the person who was most dominate against their peers, so in that sense I would say Morphy or Kasparov or perhaps Fischer.

I think trying to imagine a universe where older players are transported to today or today's players to yesterday is a fools errand, because you never know how the rest of the world would fair (i.e. maybe someone we don't even know about today would be an amazing and inventive player 150 years ago, or on the flip side, someone from the 1800s who never even played might see great success today).

Magnus is a Noob. End of Discussion.

paul charles morphy is my favorite player 🙂🙂

MagNoob i calls him. He's a bum.