1. Kasparov
2. Karpov
3. Fischer
4. Capablanca
5. Lasker
whos the strongest in history
Sort:
The Player whose games gives us the goose bumps- call it an emotional high-should be ranked as one of the greatest players. Even coldly logical plays still give us the feel of the blade of the sword cutting through the flesh and bones of the Beast called life's inadequacies and miseries. That is the satisfying power of this King of the Games. Hence the sole Criterion in deciding the Great Player should be the great emotional satisfaction his games give to one viewing them even from a distance of Time and Space. Let us not bother with who among the Great is the Greatest of them all.We ordinary humans should not indulge in the wasteful and meaningless pastime of the U.S.citizens,who are much interested in ranking of this sort.
jpd303 wrote:
Streptomicin wrote:
Why do yo do this. Just bump any of 12.368 topics about who is the best.
what is 12.368? whats a bump? sorry to take up your precious time, i know how busy you must be surfing a chess site n all... for those of you who answered, thanks neat answers. especially kiesh2 and openinggambit Anand is a great player as is magnus and kramnik but i think we need a little more time to assess their long term contributions to chess...Alekhine and Tal are certainly two of my favorite players to analyse their games but i dont think they were two of the strongest in history-top 15 for sure, maybe top 10 even, but not top 5 (personal opinion no offense) i dont really like going over Capa games, though amazing and sublime i like a little more excitement and drama if im going over a masters games. mmmmmm Tal
favorite square=E5 i try to control that square in alot of my games from both sides.
12.368 (or 12,368) is a number. You did go to school, did you?
Bump - is a term used when someone post in old topic so it would be visible to other posters as topic that had recent activity.
Point is, there is hundreds of topics like this, same as should people resign, why people go on vacation in tournaments, who is the best, what is the best opening, what religion is right...
If you are atention hungry, then it is OK. But does anyone here believe that you can compare Adolf Anderssen or Paul Morphy or Gioachino Greco with Topalov, Anand or Kramink??
That is like comparing Fifa world champion Uruguay 1930 vs Italy 2006! Or Chicago Bears 1933 vs Pitsburgh Steelers 2009! It can not be compared. They were all the best in their time. And you can not talk about who is the best. You can talk who's style you like most, but not who is the best.
H.N.Pillsbury was indeed an awsome player, chessmetrics gave him a peak rating of over 2800! sadly he was taken from us to early, like Morphy and Fischer, so we were denied some very beautiful games im sure...id put him in the top 20-anybody with an even score against Lasker should be recocnized as awsome...what about Tarrasch? top 20? Marshall? Ivanchuck? Reti? Rubenstein? Burgiser? Denker? chess has had so many great players from so many different generations and walks of life its hard to pin down all the greats in any kind of order...i stick by my top 5 though, i think theyre hard to refute....this is great! ive been playing on yahoo since 1997 and nobody talks chess in the chat rooms im glad i found this place! Andersseen was totally cool! his tactics and attacks are a wonder to behold sometimes but he addmitted that Morphy was far his superior after their match...if he played today id think he would be in the top 100 rated players, maybe even higher...imagine him vs Tal! wow fireworks like the 4th of july on a chessboard! Nimzowitsch is my favorite character from chess history, his games make me smile and laugh outloud sometimes! odd plans, odd mauvers, deep insight and outrageous behaviors make him a great study! Max Euwe was the strongest ammature player ever, unless you consider botvinik and lasker-who both had outstanding carrers outside of chess...Gulko is amazing, we missed his best years due to political exile and imprisonment, sad...Geller had Fischer's # right, i think he has a plus score against the great-mad-genius...Benko, well we got a gambit from him thats at best unclear...
Geller is one of few who had positive score vs Fischer. I can post some games with comments here if you would like.
Feb 21, 2009
0
#27
Here's my 2 cents:
1. Kasparov
2. Tal
3. Fischer
4. Morphy
5. Alekhine
Chess is art, not just a game;)
steveira wrote:
How does one rate "strongest" ? FIDE rating? Consistency? Comparison with peers or all-time? Lets decide on the criteria and then apply ratings the way they do for some sports like Tennis & Cricket. Btw my favourite square is Greenmarket in the middle of Cape Town!!
by strongest i mean the power of play, dominance over peers, longevity, creativity, mastery over the tree phases of the game (opening, midgame, endgame), and contribution to chess culture
Streptomicin wrote:
Geller is one of few who had positive score vs Fischer. I can post some games with comments here if you would like.
yes i would love to see fischer getting beat! no, im not seeking attention, im inspiring logical debate and creative discorse. ive never had access to an open forum of actually knowledgable chess players before...this is awsome! some of my friends wouldnt understand concepts like a weak dark square complex if i showed them on a board and read the definition from Silman's reassess your chess...im like a kid in a candy store man!
anyway i do believe that we can compare players from different time periods by viewing the technical and artistic virtuosity of thier games over the course of thier career. Steintz had the most consecutive wins at 28 (my memory is fuzzy corect me any time im wrong) but does that compare to Fischers unbeaten candidates tournament like 6wins 0 losses to three of the grestest players of that time period? what about Capa's 8 year of streak without a loss? I think these feats can be measured against each other in a fashion that allows for subjective interpretation, and objective measurements like Chessmetrics retro-rating system...
say anything as long as it is positive, fun, informative, opinionated, ridiculous, absurd whatever...for example: a6 the little square that could, by Nadjorf Scillian...or PAUL KERES IS GOD! I wouldnt dissagree with that......anything but negative...i dont want to read old conversations i want to HAVE a conversation...
anyway geller vs fischer...does he whip him good? i hope so...
sorry im long winded but i havent got to say these things for 12 years, ill get it out of my system soon...
rvsakhadeo wrote:
The Player whose games gives us the goose bumps- call it an emotional high-should be ranked as one of the greatest players. Even coldly logical plays still give us the feel of the blade of the sword cutting through the flesh and bones of the Beast called life's inadequacies and miseries. That is the satisfying power of this King of the Games. Hence the sole Criterion in deciding the Great Player should be the great emotional satisfaction his games give to one viewing them even from a distance of Time and Space. Let us not bother with who among the Great is the Greatest of them all.We ordinary humans should not indulge in the wasteful and meaningless pastime of the U.S.citizens,who are much interested in ranking of this sort.
rvsakhadeo dude well said and I'm totally with ya till here
'Let us not bother with who among the Great is the Greatest of them all.We ordinary humans should not indulge in the wasteful and meaningless pastime of the U.S.citizens,who are much interested in ranking of this sort."
come one, why not talk about it!? share your opinion on your favorites and why!? invite your friends have them post, everyone!
Feb 21, 2009
0
#31
Winter had done an interesting summary of the whole Nimzowitch/smoking/threat/exectuion bit that's worth reading.
My choices were partly tongue-in-cheek, partly serious. If we could believe everythng said about Deschapelles, he would most assuredly be among the greater game-players in history. But my main point was that each great player can only be judged within his own time. James Mason I chose only because Pyotr Romanovsky deemed him to be the greatest player but who squandered his talent on alcohol. Steinitz simply dominated his time, but additionally was a teacher, a writer who revolutionized the game.
kasparov
Feb 21, 2009
0
#33
1 Robert J Fischer- I don't think anyone could beat him in his prime
2 Emanuel Lasker- a very bright man, incredible mind, and a pal of Albert Einstein.
3 Gary Kasparov- many think he was number one. Perhaps he was. It is difficult to compare generations. They must be compared per the context of their times and that is how I arrived at this but of course, not being that great a player myself, perhaps others will judge better than I.
4 Alexander Alekhine- so many beautiful combinations and such a will to win. At his best, he was incredible.
5 Jose R Capablanca- he needs the least explanation. His play was so beautifully pristine.
and then there is a mass of really excellent players, champions and near but never became champions including Akiba Rubinstein, Mikhail Tal, Bronstein, Smyslov, Spaasky, Botwinnik, Karpov, Anand, others...
Dear jpd303,
I see that my comment about US citizens has drawn blood!No offence meant,all in good fun! Here are my choices,not necessarily in descending or ascending order.
1 Tal
2 Morphy
3 Kasparov
4 Fischer
5 Alekhine
6 Capablanca
7 Torre
8 Kolisch
9 Anand
10 Sultan Khan
Dear jpd303, Ignatz Kolisch was a Viennese Stock Broker in the 19th Century.A few games I have seen of his in i) Lasker's 1001 Games ii) Another book on Chess Strategy title of which I cannot recall immediately have impressed me.Try googling since I have no links available.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1019086 i hope that works i found him on chessgames.com...this is Ignatz Kolisch beating Adolf Anderssen in a typical romantic kings gambit! interesting choice my friend
Dear jpd303,
If at all you want grading then I place Tal,Morphy and Kasparov in joint first place. We can add Fischer also there. In joint second place we can have Capablanka,Alekhine and Anand.In joint third place,we can have Torre,Sultan Khan,Karpov,Petrossian,Smyslov,Botvinnik,Shirov,Topalov,Kolisch et al.
when going through this,i noticed that Kasparov appears on most people's lists(if not on all)he surely should be the greatest.