Capablanca died relatively young, but he was well past his prime and losing games to the upcoming generation. Toward the end Capablanca was constantly in time trouble and his famous intuition constantly failed him. His lack of opening preparation was also starting to tell.
Who was the all time best
Sort:
That was because he had high blood pressyre head aches,Dannyhume said Capablanca was the best because he was cuban haha, that would be true if he was a cigar .
Capablanca's Cubanicity is independent of his chess genius. Nonetheless, he is Cuban.
It seems to me Capablanca was less about memorization and he lost in later years because other masters could meticulously plan their opening to give them enough advantage so they would not to screw it up in the middlegame.
Yet, I also hear that in the '30's (well after he lost his championship) he easily crushed other GM's in blitz (including Fine, Reshevsky?). I wonder if he'd dominate chess960 or other variants for the same reason.
That's why I think he is the greatest. He is Cuban.
dont forget about Paul Morphy he was like the best
If Fischer, Alekhine, Botvinnik, and Kasparov some how combined their talent into a single gene and implanted it into a newborn.....then my vote goes for the mutated genius Ale-vin-er-ov...I'm not saying....I'm just saying....
In all seriousness....for all time best...my vote goes to Alekhine.
Alekhine took Capablanca to school so to speak.Not taking away from Capablanca even Lasker avoided Capablanca for yrs then Lasker was beaten & dethroned most easily .Alekhine was no doubt the best chessplayer ever .. and Danny ...( pause for dramatic effect ...he was Russian
Alekhine did win the championship and he is Russian, but he certainly isn't Cuban like Capablanca. Also, Alekhine Skywalker has an all-time negative score against Capablanca, and it certainly doesn't hurt to rest on one's laurels after winning 3 more games than his opponent out of 49 total and then refusing a rematch till death did them part...makes me wish Euwe did the same to him so that we could be arguing today that Euwe is the best ever for beating Alekhine who beat Capablanca.
Alekhine won the rematch with Euwe & recaptured the world title,although I say Euwe was highly underated & was one of the all time greats in chess his name should be mentioned when people talk about the great chess players in history.
im not so sure but i think it could be anand or carlsen- but hey im not 100 percent sure could be true or not
I think it,s to early yet to tell how the two will place.Anand really impresses me excellent player .
No doubt he is Kasparov.
Kasparov , is good but against Lasker,or Alekhine I don,t know.
[COMMENT DELETED]
How good is the young kid Carlson ( not sure of the correct spelling ) I have seen his photo with Kasparov recently.Also I think Vishy has all the makings of one if not the greatest chess player ever.Only time will tell but what a great start already.Annand might be the man .
Thanks for the updates on these players,I myself think Annand is just as good as Kasparov in his prime.Time in these cases will tell us for sure.Regards soldierpiper
I'm very impressed by Carlsen, it's worth mentioning that he has won almost every top tournament the last years. Nanjing and London a couple of times in a row, Wijk twice as well, Bazna, and many others. He also reached 2826 and has been #1 on 6 of the 8 latest rating list, and he just turned 20. If he can stay interested he could become one of the greatest chess players ever, if he isn't that already. Carlsen's results 2008-10 can probably only be beaten by 15-20 players or something like that in the history of the game, if even that many.
Apr 3, 2011
0
#98
Annand, Carlsen and Kasparov are great but Bobby is one step ahead in chess history
Fischer had a couple of great years, but to me it isn't enough to beat Taimanov, Larsen, Petrosian and Spassky to then retire to be compared with players like Lasker and Kasparov. Carlsen has a long way to go before he can be mentioned in the same sentence as such players, but for someone that often is described as not ready yet, with potential but needing time etc, he has had very good results. He must have won a dozen top tournaments since Anand last won one, and Anand is a legendary player. Even Kasparov at his best rarely won as many tournaments, with such a big margin, as Carlsen has done frequently as a teenager.
We can't compare anyone or anything anymore. The new will always beat the old and the new will do it at a younger age. So then it should come down to who'd win if given the same material to work with simultaneously, most talented. Paul or Jose. Maybe Emanuel given that he was also a mathematician and played a lot of Go instead of just being a full-time chesser.
Capablanca