WHO IS THE GREATEST CHESS PLAYER OF ALL TIME? Defend your answer...

Paul Morphy was a genius of his time and he flashed thru his life in no time and left little of his genius to expand on. To me Emanuel Lasker is still the only world champion who bridged between the old and the new generation of today and his methods of play are still not well known~ Paul Keres in his sacrificing schemes gave us some insight into Laskers play but overall he trounced his opponents handily ~~Todays experts and the players from the Russian school have dominated chess for a long time and they have earned it by delving into chess as no other nation has until and up to the last twenty five years where they keep putting player after player into the master class in competition for the world title. As for all the other world title competitors they havent had the school and know how that the Russians have.Think about all the Masters that have been up for the world title and the opponents against them is a small club of individuals who have honed their chess skills by whatever means to stay within this club for various reasons. But for my two cents Lasker still is my choice as the person who was the greatest chess player of all time.

Sometimes i just think people who love bobby fisher are idiots, stupid and should be ashamed! looking thru his games the guy was just a normal player just lyk any normal GM of today mayb IM. Even karpov was way better than him but he kept openin his stinky mouth that he was the best.. If he couldnt match karpov what about the genius himself mr garry kasparov. If u dont believ me, ask the wanna be carlsen who was destroyed in 2004 by d way looking at kasparov's play... u can easily tell that he was only toying with the kid in those matches he was not serious at all.. So that being said get over the jealous habit and accept kasparov is the greatest! SUCKERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is there a doctor in the house?

vishvanathan anand

Bobby is dead out of common decency you should respect his memory. For 50 years the Russian World Chess Champion enjoyed a whole array of prerrogatives; all these were unilaterally cancelled IMMEDIATELY after Bobby took the crown from the Spasky. Bobby had the right to stand for principle as he always did his whole life! As for Karpov make no mistake he would have not even lasted 20 games with Fischer at the time Bobby was invinsible! Note that I don't think He is the greatest champion of all time; that honor goes to another American: Paul Morphy

You are a jerk! everybody has the right to have his opinion this is a free country, you have expressed yours and we respect it; out of elementary courtesy you should the same and just agree to disagree. If you are upset about something why don't youkick your dog or kick yourself!?

I would say Paul Morphy because the strenght between him and his contemporaries was stronger than any other champion in history. He was simply at a higher level. Now granted, that is probably because of the time he lived BUT he was instrumental in chess making leaps and bounds during that time. Without Morphys tremendous attacking acumen we would probably not have Steiniz's incredibly defense and so on. Morphy started it all though!

Amen!! I could NOT have said it better myself!

Well Done!!

Of all players to date, NO ONE was far above the other masters like Paul was, it was NOT even match; He simply did like Julius Cesar: "vini, vidi, vinci"

the egg came first, dinosaurs laid eggs, and existed a looooong time before chickens.

Bobby Fischer was the greatest player. Elo wise, he was a leap ahead of the other top 9 players and his playing career ended in 1972.

Why should I bother respecting his memory? he didn't give anybody any respect and made openly racist statements.  Respect? not a chance, as a human being he was scum.  The only 'principle' he ever had was selfishness.  I guess cowardice was one of his principles... as he was too scared to face Karpov.  Fischer was NOT at his height of his strength as he hadn't played for a couple years.  Face it.. he was SCARED and used any excuse to avoid a match. Greatest? you only think so because you are american.

He is respected by other chess-players (for his chess) and certainly not only American ones.

Not a month nor year goes by without a prominent sportsman or politician being disgraced or scandalised in some fashion. This does not detract from their prior (decent) accomplishments.

Easy it is to be young, self-righteous and judgemental when life has not tested you.

aka lance armstrong

In defense of someone yet to be born, I submit to you one main compelling reason the one yet to be born could very well be the best of all time.

First, each subsequent generation has produced its own champion. Most in addition to their hard work and talent stood on the shoulders of those who were the greatest before them, studying their games and gleaning from their instruction.

Next, with the advancement in technology, someone yet to be born will have all the advantages of the past and current greats plus the benefits of being born in a time when using computers and databases is already firmly entrenched in the chess learning culture. 

Finally, the one yet to be born will be able to learn from all of the best of the current greats in addition to the masters and champions the current greats learned from as well. This definitive advantage is one not available to anyone currently dead or alive. So logically, it stands to reason the best of all time is not yet among us except in anticipation of their arrival and is one yet to be born.

That sounds like The Lone Wanderer in Fallout.

I agree with the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, and I would add that this happens in every endeavor.

As far as one yet to be born, I don't think that's what this is about.

Wrong again AH!! I am NOT American, I am from Nicaragua!

I guess a JERK like you is above common ethics and decency; so You go ahead insulting those that are dead and can't answer you back!!

This forum is about Ches NOT personalities or characters, the Man was a great Chess players and that is what it matters; as to Karpov, they even had to change the rules of the Championship as He could NOT put away Kasparov & the match went on forever in endless draws! and You dare to think He was going to kick Bobby's A..?!

Again jerk, if you are African American and have a comple because of it; grow up Jerk; your people has been FREE for over 150 years, it is time to stop crying!!!

I didn't read the thread but from a human perspective I would say Fischer was the best.

That's because he prepared ALONE, with a book and a chessboard, exactly like every one of us.

Russian champions had whole teams of theoreticians, state support, and a much higher popular recognition that surely fueled their motivation.

No human has ever been so dominant as Capablanca, who was such a good positional player that for years he was thought to be unbeatable. However, he still wouldn't be able to beat Houdini 3

Paul Morphy was more dominant for a short period, Steinitz and Lasker were more dominant for longer periods, Fischer was the most dominant player in the history of the game for about 3 years, and then Kasparov was the most dominant player  since Fischer, and for the longest period since Lasker. 

Capablanca's vaunted unbeaten streak was effectively over the course of five tournaments. Far more impressively, he defeated the defending champion, Emanuel Lasker, 2-0 during that unbeaten streak. Only Kramnik blanked a defending champion in a world championship match.

Capablanca is definitely great. but his dominance was never as clear-cut as his legend suggests. Marshall (Havana, 1913), Bogoljubov (Moscow 1925 and Bad Kissingen, 1928), Nimzovich (Carlsbad, 1929), and Lasker (St. Petersburg 1914 and New York 1924 and Moscow 1925 (2nd, where Capa finished 3rd), among others) all won major tournaments over Capablanca while the Cuban was at the height of his powers.  And Alekhin fairly convincingly defeated Capablanca in his first title defense in 1927. 

The fact that Capablanca didn't win every tournament is not a mark against him. However, he entered in few tournaments. If he really was as dominant as his legend proclaims, he should have done even better than he did! 

Again, I recognise that Capablanca was one of the all-time greats of chess. But let's not exaggerate how dominant he was.