Fischer evidently
If we want to go by "who was ahead of their time" then I would have to say Philidor. He really was the first person to understand things like pawn structure instead of just sacrificing and attacking, about 100 years before Steinitz.
They were all the best players.. It's not reasonable to compare a world champion and his games from 1920 and 2012 for example.. Yes, the quality of their games were worse, but they didn't have this much information available like world champions today have.. You just can't compare that. Each of them were the best for their time period and that's it. In 20 years even today's GMs won't be geniuses anymore since chess will evolve even more. Alpha Zero for example teaches us that one of the most important things in chess is piece activity and centre control even at the cost of a pawn or two. Like in a real world there is something more important than materialistic stuff, something we are not fully aware of yet. That's only my opinion though..
I have two favorites really. Number one is Mikhail Tal, number two Rashid Nezhmetdinov.
No, I don't believe they were the strongest or most successful players ever even though they score very high in that regard as well. But for me they are the greatest for their creativity and the beauty they created on the board. Their attacking chess is a joy to watch. And it was not just some wild throwing pieces at the opponent and winning by luck as some people seem to think. The true beauty to me lies in the way they did prepare their attacks before the fireworks started. It is how harmoniously and active they placed their pieces. Truly inspiring to watch!
No, I don't believe they were the strongest or most successful players ever even though they score very high in that regard as well. But for me they are the greatest for their creativity and the beauty they created on the board. Their attacking chess is a joy to watch. And it was not just some wild throwing pieces at the opponent and winning by luck as some people seem to think. The true beauty to me lies in the way they did prepare their attacks before the fireworks started. It is how harmoniously and active they placed their pieces. Truly inspiring to watch!
<Comment deleted by user>
The person who created chess, I mean, we wouldn't have this game, because of that Prince. Or the people who developed Chaturanga I guess.
Well if I was being proper about this ;)
I'd say Fischer, as he was a prodigy, and inspired a lot of people.
Strength wise, it has to be Deep Blue ( just kidding ) - Um, Kasparov, as he played some of the best games ever.
Carlsen and Karpov aren't far behind.
( Note I am gading this based on a scale where 70+ or something is impossible for a human to get, only computers, and Kasparov got a very high score ) - I think !
:))
Well if I was being proper about this ;)
I'd say Fischer, as he was a prodigy, and inspired a lot of people.
Strength wise, it has to be Deep Blue ( just kidding ) - Um, Kasparov, as he played some of the best games ever.
Carlsen and Karpov aren't far behind.
( Note I am gading this based on a scale where 70+ or something is impossible for a human to get, only computers, and Kasparov got a very high score ) - I think !
:))
This is pretty clearly Morphy (not really all that close IMO).
Fischer himself would say Morphy... Not to mention that PM's ELO was estimated to be 350+ points higher than the second closest competitor at the time, Rousseau.
I think given the opportunity to train with modern-day theory, Morphy would handily be 2900+ FIDE.
(Second best is Capablanca, Magnus is third).
Fischer himself would say Morphy... Not to mention that PM's ELO was estimated to be 350+ points higher than the second closest competitor at the time, Rousseau.
I think given the opportunity to train with modern-day theory, Morphy would handily be 2900+ FIDE.
(Second best is Capablanca, Magnus is third).
Rachid Nejmetdinov
Magnus Carlsen.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.