I can say Gary Kasparov cause if im not mistaken he defeated several chess engines and got the highest rating in the history of chess .....
Who is the best player of all time?
Sort:
Paul Morphy -- IMO the founder of modern chess
Garry Kasparov -- a machine (if all the past and current great chess players in their prime from the past were gathered for a tournament, he would win)
Bobby Fischer -- top 3 definitely, but too naive in his viewings of chess (and life) IMHO
Mikhail Tal -- most exciting and beautiful games (as Kramnik has said, "analyzing Tal's games is like glimpsing what God would look like" or something like that)
Capablanca -- very classical player, essential for the development of modern endgames
Lasker -- 2nd only to Tal on my personal favorites list
Alekhine -- possibly the greatest "calculator" of all time (liked to boast of the points in the game in which he had calculated 20+ moves into the future), but once again IMHO viewed chess as too much as a science and not enough an art
Steinitz is underrated or at least underappreciated here. As Morphy showed the way for us in open positions, Steinitz showed us how to play the closed positions. A greater show of "profundity" some have said. The champions and great players for several decades were either Steinitz or the neo-Steinitzians (Lasker, Tarrasch, Pillsbury, Schlechter). Until Rubinstein and Capablanca show up (just before and after 1910, respectively) the School of Steinitz ruled. Not bad. Not sure which "school" to place Zukertort, and not sure if it makes a difference. Head to head with Steinitz he lost.
Steinitz's record of wins/losses may seem less impressive than those who followed him, and his historical peak elo wasn't superlative the way Lasker's or Capa's was, but his positional spadework is what we all are using in every game. Or hope to be using.
I think Rubinstein and Capa would be called Classicists btw. Right?
Dec 28, 2008
0
#45
My favorite is Capablanca, one of the most natural talet players in chess history.
Dec 28, 2008
0
#46
To me I think Capa is the best, then again that is just me saying that.
To me the best is Adolf Anderssen because his kind of game.. his main is the combination of the pieces...
killer_instinct_2406 wrote:
is searching for bobby fischer a book or something?
its a book and a film, i read the book, its all about him a 14ish boy, his private chess coach, yes i know, his father, chess playing in U,S.A , other players etc. very little actually about playing chess. OK, but i wouldn't read it again or pay to see the film.
I would say either Kasparov or Fischer. Maybe Fischer gets the edge because of his overall impact on the game in history. Interesting how Karpov rarely comes up in these discussions. In all of their battles, Kasparov holds something like a plus 2 score against him. I think Karpov's style probably wasn't exciting enough to become as popular as the others, but he was a great champion.
Freddie_Sugden wrote:
i will tell you how kasparov is a copycat...he didnt nessecarily have his own right of way! in 20-30 years time he will be remembered as the one who won the most games or had the highest elo but not for such a thing as great calculation or engame skills for example...
this is because he just absorbed all the ideas from his great and more original predecessors who came up with the ideas in the first place! i would do the same if i was in his position and from it he has become the most successful chess player in history (money and chess) but can you say he invented or used great innotivness - i would much prefer to look through a Fischer game then i would a Kasparov game! kasparov only had the highest ever elo because over the years elos have naturally inflated! i mean it is a joke that Peter Leko for example has a higher elo than someone like Fischer or Capablanca ever did haha...that makes me laugh
i would say that that makes him the best player by far if he did that because if he was able to analyse all of his predecessors asnd come up with everything that they did and put it into his game then that is efeectively going to make one SUPERPLAYER pretty much.... that is what everyone tries to do pretty much. instead of trying to find out something new he just put everthing that players before him have done which is all of the hard work done for him
Borack wrote:
Lamplighter wrote:
Of all chessplayers who ever lived, one name always standout as synonymous to chess. Bobby Fischer.
More like being synonymous as being a premodonna and a fruitcake...but he was good in his prime...
sorry fischer fans but i got 2 agree. he was a great chess player, but not so great of a person.
Fischer was great but ended his career prematurely. Makes it hard to say he was the greatest. His final year of competitive chess was amazing. Maybe that was the best year ever for any chess player.
I would say tal or kasparov. Clearly Kasparov has a stake in being the GREATEST EVER, but Tal obviously was more concerned with the beautiful side of chess. Tal, if he could be systematic.
CAPABLANCA!!
Dec 28, 2008
0
#55
It would be awesome to have all the worlds greats ever in one tournament, yes..
But essentially, we had that. It can be shown that both Karpov and Kasparov were the most dominant players for very long stretches of time. If they hadn't lived together, we would be wondering how awesome it would be if karpov had ever played kasparov..
Turns out he did, and their personal record is something like +19 = 127 - 17 in favor of Garry..
Freddie_Sugden wrote:
hcdez i can definitly see where you are coming from!
Sorry.. I did not get? 
May you explain me better that comment?
Morphy. He played 150 years ago and he played like Kasparov plays now. Fisher was a genius, like Tal or Alekhine. But they were not players of the future. Morphy was.
ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
bob the builder
IBM's Big Blue... ZZZZZzzzzz......
are you sure about that????... how many world championships have been won by big blue
Good question...
Allow me to ask another: How many losses has Big Blue ever suffered?
heheh