Who is the best player of all Time ?

It really depends on what metrics you use. If you are talking about simple capability at chess right now in the sense that if you could have taken every player at their best and brought them together to play, then Magnus wins hands down - it wouldn't even be close. But that's because he has access to chess engines etc.
If you are talking about how dominant the player was for his time, then it is very hard to know who would be between Morphy, Fischer, Kasparov and Magnus. I might even take Morphy.
However it is just the case that Morphy at his very best would be destroyed buy Magnus and I would go as far as to say that he might lose to anyone in the current top 20.

It really depends on what metrics you use. If you are talking about simple capability at chess right now in the sense that if you could have taken every player at their best and brought them together to play, then Magnus wins hands down - it wouldn't even be close. But that's because he has access to chess engines etc. If you are talking about how dominant the player was for his time, then it is very hard to know who would be between Morphy, Fischer, Kasparov and Magnus. I might even take Morphy. However it is just the case that Morphy at his very best would be destroyed buy Magnus and I would go as far as to say that he might lose to anyone in the current top 20.

drSabrotna

#22

Kasparov for now. Magnus is getting there.

Wayne Gretzky!

Definitely Capablanca.
Second is Fischer, then Kasparov.
Then come Lasker, Keres, Morphy, Tal, etc.

Definitely Capablanca. Second is Fischer, then Kasparov. Then come Lasker, Keres, Morphy, Tal, etc.

robscat

#25

as was said earlier in this topic, it depends which metric you use. in terms of pure knowledge, there's little doubt that magnus would have to be the best, but no world champion before kasparov, and indeed for much of his career, kasparov also, had no computers and online resources to use to aid preparation or training, with fischer being the last of the 'romantic' world champions. in terms of being above their peers, kasparov had his karpov, but there was no one else for a long time that could challenge those two, and kasparov, like fischer, eventually didn't defend his fide crown, so he could have been the only 6 time world champion, but we'll never know.
that said, there are 3 five-time world champions, and fischer is not one of them. they are magnus, kasparov, and the oft-forgotten anand, who has also done so much for human chess, especially in india. let's not forget that anand was the highest rated indian player for a lot of years, even after he stopped competing in the world championship events, and he's very much the unsung hero. he gets conveniently left out of these conversations quite often, but you don't get to be world champion 5 times for nothing, and you can't expect me to believe there was no talent between kasparov and magnus.
for me, the best of all time? no clear answer, but the player that's done the most for chess? vishy, hands down.

as was said earlier in this topic, it depends which metric you use. in terms of pure knowledge, there's little doubt that magnus would have to be the best, but no world champion before kasparov, and indeed for much of his career, kasparov also, had no computers and online resources to use to aid preparation or training, with fischer being the last of the 'romantic' world champions. in terms of being above their peers, kasparov had his karpov, but there was no one else for a long time that could challenge those two, and kasparov, like fischer, eventually didn't defend his fide crown, so he could have been the only 6 time world champion, but we'll never know. that said, there are 3 five-time world champions, and fischer is not one of them. they are magnus, kasparov, and the oft-forgotten anand, who has also done so much for human chess, especially in india. let's not forget that anand was the highest rated indian player for a lot of years, even after he stopped competing in the world championship events, and he's very much the unsung hero. he gets conveniently left out of these conversations quite often, but you don't get to be world champion 5 times for nothing, and you can't expect me to believe there was no talent between kasparov and magnus. for me, the best of all time? no clear answer, but the player that's done the most for chess? vishy, hands down.

Sequekama

#26

El mas talentoso jugador de todos los tiempos es Paul Morphy con un 77% de partidas ganadas, 12% empates 11% de derrotas. según algunas bases de datos.

Jack Nicklaus.

@Sequekama said in #26:

[The most talented player of all time is Paul Morphy with 77% wins, 12% draws, 11% losses. according to some databases.]
One issue that one might want to consider is whether or not such statistics are for his important matches against Harrwitz, Anderssen, etc. or include other casual games that happened to be published. Also perhaps of interest is the general state of chess in 1857-8.
"... It was due to [Morphy's] principles of development that he had, in most cases, at the outset a better development than his opponent. As soon, however, as these principles of Morphy's had become the common property of all chess players it was difficult to wrest an advantage in an open game. ... the next problem with which players were confronted ... was to discover principles upon which close positions could be dealt with. To have discovered such principles, deeper and more numerous as they were than those relating to development in open positions, is due to Steinitz. ..." - Richard Réti (1923)

@Sequekama said in #26: > [The most talented player of all time is Paul Morphy with 77% wins, 12% draws, 11% losses. according to some databases.] One issue that one might want to consider is whether or not such statistics are for his important matches against Harrwitz, Anderssen, etc. or include other casual games that happened to be published. Also perhaps of interest is the general state of chess in 1857-8. "... It was due to [Morphy's] principles of development that he had, in most cases, at the outset a better development than his opponent. As soon, however, as these principles of Morphy's had become the common property of all chess players it was difficult to wrest an advantage in an open game. ... the next problem with which players were confronted ... was to discover principles upon which close positions could be dealt with. To have discovered such principles, deeper and more numerous as they were than those relating to development in open positions, is due to Steinitz. ..." - Richard Réti (1923)

Anatoly Karpov

#23, also, a fine shoe and underwear salesman.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.