Who was the all time best

Spassky didn' care if Fischer's gonna bring him money that much. He was just old fashioned gentleman. Claim that Fischer is the greatest because he brought more money to chessworld is ridicoulus. It doesn't have to do anything with how good he was. 

ok, i agree

You got a minute---I'll tell you the way it really was...

 Spassky was definitely concerned about the money. It was more money than he had ever dreamed of. It was $250,000 in prize money which would be a million dollars today. Spassky was a poor champion. he didnt make anything (reletively speaking) when he won the championship in 69'. Also, we must remember, the state would  let him have all the prize money---they didnt take a cut!  Look at it like this, with the money he won in 69' he bought a cheap Russian car. With the money he won (losing to Fischer in 72') he could buy a car lot!

If he had pulled up stakes and went back to Russia, after Fischers shenanigans, he would have left all that money in Iceland. Only FIDE could cancel a championship and they did not cancel. Spassky wanted that money. So therefore he stayed and played. He could go back to Russia and live higher on the hog than anybody---higher than Botvinnik, or Petrosian, or Smyslov, or Tal. Spassky wanted that money. He had a young pretty wife who wanted pretty things like all wives do. Before the match Spassky was earning $560 a month and living in a small flat. After the match Spassky rented a large flat in Moscow, bought a bright red volvo, and started travelling abroad several times a year and some say---started liking the good life more than chess. Spassky absolutely adored Fischer for giving him the life of RILEY.

I got to be shoveling off---see ya

ReasonableDoubt wrote:

Frankly, this is ridiculous.  Some people can't accept that the average man is not entirely selfish and money-oriented.  For Spassky, I'm almost completely sure that he knew that it was in the best interests of the game and the best interests of the two countries for the match to proceed.  Do you think Damiano, Philidor, Greco, and Lucena were "in it for the money"?  Spassky wanted to play a good match of chess, and he did.  These guys - Anand, Carlsen, etc.  They're not in it for the money, they're in it because they love the game.  They could all probably be successful poker players if they wanted, as they wouldn't have too much trouble with the strategy and the psychology of it.  Look at Carlsen for example, withdrawing from the WC cycle.  If he wanted money, all he would care about would be winning the championship to get the money.  He wants what he believes is best for chess so he's lobbying for the system to be changed.  I'm digressing here but my point is that Spassky definitely didn't care that much about the money.  To be honest, if a GM cares too much about the money when they play, they'll lose!  What the best players do is just focus on the chess and not care about what follows it, whether it's a title or money or whatever.  They play chess because they love it, not to get the next paycheck.  Obviously Spassky and all the other players don't mind the money, but I'm pretty sure that's not what it's all about to them.

 You say---To be honest, if a GM cares too much about the money when they play, they'll lose!

Really, Fischer cared about the money, he didn't lose. Kasparov cared about the money---he didn't lose. 

You say--- Do you think Damiano, Philidor, Greco, and Lucena were "in it for the money"?

  Well, Yes, Philidor was always broke and hungry---he definitely was in it for the money. When he died (like Steinitz) he didnt leave enough money to bury himself. Steinitz was in it for the money. When Lasker was destitute he always went back to chess---he was in it for the money. He always had hard money terms for his challengers---as did Capablanca,  and Alekhine. When Alekhine died he was bumming cigarettes from friends---yeah, he was looking for money!

The oldtimers you name ---Damiano, Greco, and Lucena are Greek to me. Dont know much about them. But I do know they made a lot of money playing chess in those times. I've read some of those guys were murdered. Maybe they were making too much money from the game of kings---and lost their family jewels!

 Bobby Fischer obviously loved the game and was always angry about the lack of money in chess. He said many times the worlds chess champion should be making as much money as Ali---and thats what he worked for---more money!

I think many of the famous players who came after Fischer---loved their fancy cars, and their lavish homes, and their beautiful wives. Do you think Karpov would have married a beautiful woman if he wasnt a millionaire? (get real)

Yes Chess players loved these things and felt deeply obligated to ---good old Bobby!

You didn't finish the quote---"I just want to play chess until i'm 29!!"

After Fischer made his millions in 92' he lived very well for the rest of his life. He travelled, he ate in the best restaurants, He consorted with pretty girls who were half his age. Like Spassky, Karpov, and Kasparov---he was living the high life. He was spending money like it was water and he was loving it.  And, he left quite a bit for friends and relatives to fight over when he went to live in that glorious chess club in the sky.

 As per Karpov--- I refer to Sex 101 ---Short, dull, funny looking guys with beautiful dolls draped all over them ---are rich!

This first sex lesson is free. If you require more it will cost you.

Bobby Fischer had $3 million (listen here) left out of approx $3.5 million of his winnings in 1992 when he died, not exactly "living the high life".  His 1972 earnings were gone, mostly thanks to the Worldwide Church of God donations he gave with a big smile on his face (and later regretted).  His book earnings ran dry, his 1972 winnings were gone, so he resurfaced in 1992 in order to get some cash to live on for the rest of his life.  The 1992 rematch he won, which gave him somewhere around $3.5 million, which he lived on until he died only using approx $500,000 of it. 

isnt this one of those "whos the bet player" threads? whats up with aruging whether or not top gms are in it for the money stuff? anyway imo the best in history are *drum roll* Kasparov, Fischer, Lasker, Morphy, Karpov, Botvinik, Capa, Steinitz, Alekhine, NImzowitsch, Reshevsky, Tal, Fine, Keres, Kramnik, Anand, Ivanchuck, Bronstein, Smyslov, Rubenstein, J.Polgar, Korchnoi...so many great players, so little space. personal top 5...1) Kasparov 2) FIscher 3) Capa 4) Lasker 5) Botvinik/Karpov

 Man oh man---I wish you guys who like to talk Fischer actually knew something about Fischer. There must be a hundred books on Fischer---perhaps that many dvds and radio interviews etc., etc.

Fischer said on interviews over the radio that he invested heavily in precious metals after he won the 3.5 million. He said "I spend a million and I make a million. he said in 2006 or 2007 that although he was spending money like it was going out of style---he still had as almost as much as he had in 92'.

I suggest you do better research before making these incorrect statements about Fischer.

karpov. kasparov. Petrosian.the best is Botvinnik.

I can't believe this is even debated.  The answer is Fischer.  How many goons did the man have to crush to make believers out of you? 

the question should be: who is the best chessplayer after bobby fischer?

That is the better question.

This generational discussion I dont really understand but I do see many mistakes.

Karpov was born in 1931??

Alekhine and Euwe were different generations? They were nine years apart. Surely one would consider them of the same generation.

Kasparov and Anand were born 6 years apart---got to be same generation.

Botvinnik and Euwe were ten years apart---same generation.

hey, someone else will have to finish correcting this post---I have a life.

 Fezzik, if you would get your facts straight---you wouldn't have to rationalize so much.

You may be correct on the precious metals part.  Although I doubt you listened to all the radio interviews in order to garner that knowledge.  Because I have, and the number of hours of mindless jew hating is tough to sift through when looking for chess related insight from the man.  It's a pity I have to side against Fischer with you, because he's one of my top 5 favorites, but someone must, because other greats don't get enough credit from you in my opinion.  

I side against Fischer when talking with raul72, because you are head over heels in love with him

I side with Fischer when talking with Fezzik, because he treats him like an ex husband

Funny how that works.

I don't take as gospel everything that came out of the later Fischer's mouth:

"I've got 300 million dollars in Switzerland. I got dough here in Hungary."

What he did, what he saved, what he spent...carry a bag of salt with you when listen to him.

http://www.heretical.com/miscella/fischer.html

Goldendog, I've never gone through those radio interviews---that is a big waste of time. Fischer is usually talking drivel. If you do, you have a lot of free time on your hands dont you amigo.

 When Fischer says he was spending a lot of money and was making a lot of money (on investments) it made sense. When he said I have almost as much money now as I did in 92---it made sense when you saw how much money he had when he died.

I dont believe him when he doesnt make sense---like the Bekins thing. Thats mostly hogwash. Goldendog, if you just knew a little bit about Fischer you would know when he is probably telling the truth and when he definitely talking bullshit.

I did listen to every one of the interviews.  Most of the originals spout the same paranoia that Fischer had for at least 35 years.  A few things he said made sense.  But no question, the man was deluded.  For example, if you listen to his last interview (done in Iceland), he claimed that the property seized by the storage facility was worth "hundreds of millions, maybe billions".   

The collection purchased by Rex and Jeanne Sinquefield and included " 320 books on chess; about 400 issues of chess-related periodicals; three sets of proofs for Fischer's 1969 book, "My 60 Memorable Games"; and a number of bound volumes detailing the match histories of several chess masters, including Spassky."  The collection sold for $61,000.  While that's a good sum of money, it's far from "hundreds of millions, maybe billions".    

Greatest revolutionizer/made-chess-more-economically-viabler ever = Fischer, who had lots of money and elevated chess financially for the future champs and other participants who wrote books. "The Russians" of then and since, if not grateful for Fischer's contributions, ought to be if they profited from his contributions.  raul72 is correct.

Greatest playah evah = Capablanca.  The only systematic attempt to evaluate champions players in terms of the quality of their play using a chess engine gives credence to this view. Pretty impressive considering his best playing days were 70-80 years before chess engines could beat world champs.