1. Magnus Carlsen or Bobby Fischer
2. Garry Kasparov or Boris Spassky
3. A. Karpov or Jose Capablanca
4. Lasker or Morphy
5. Make One Up!
Because of advances in chess theory. Carlsen would probably anyone in history, maybe with the exception of Kasparov. That's not to say that he's more dominant over his contemporaries than anyone else in history (he isn't), or that I consider him the "greatest" player of all time (for now he's not in my top 5).
"Fischer's time period and Carlsen's time period are not that far apart. I still think Fischer would win"
I think 45 years is much in chess. Alekhine of 1927 would lose to Fischer of 1972 just like Steinitz of 1882 would lose to Alekhine of 1927. It's just the nature of development. But one can of course still consider Steinitz to be greater than Carlsen, I do that but maybe not in a year or two...
1. Magnus Carlsen or Bobby Fischer
2. Garry Kasparov or Boris Spassky
3. A. Karpov or Jose Capablanca
4. Lasker or Morphy
5. Make One Up!
Please see the other 234,095,476,672,500 posts on this subject.
https://www.chess.com/forum/search?keyword=Who+would+win
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
2. Garry Kasparov or Boris Spassky
3. A. Karpov or Jose Capablanca
4. Lasker or Morphy
5. Make One Up!