lichess.org
Donate

Who is the G.O.A.T. in chess?

The GOAT? Only one player has dominated contemporary opponents better than Fischer, and would win a match against Carlsen close to 100-0. Plays chess better than anyone ever, and so far out of our league that we realise we don't even understand how to play. Alpha Zero of course!
Alireza easily. Magnus already struggles to touch him even though he's just a kid. He's still a high-schooler.
@doom12384

The article whose link you provide backs my assertion 100% i.e., that the "precision" of modern players is due to comprehensive analysis of positions with engines. It's not just the openings that they're analyzing. They're analyzing hypothetical middle game positions. The result of engine-assisted analysis is drier, less tactical positions where "precision" is easier to achieve. It's one thing to come up with the "correct" move in a Queen's Gambit middle game than, say, a crazy Benoni or King's Indian middle game and at top levels those wild openings are hardly ever played. The Queen's Gambit and Ruy Lopez are now extremely overplayed and, therefore, analyzed to death!!

So I repeat ... arm the players of the 1950s through 1980s with engines and they would be at the top in 2020. Indeed, the article whose link you provided said precisely what I'm saying. What you're saying is very close to saying that somehow after Kasparov's retirement the next generation suddenly had bigger chess "brains". Nonsense!! They have Stockfish or Houdini or Rybka or Leela at their side and they're analyzing a huge number of middle game position permutations. Their analysis is also getting easier because super-GMs are largely sticking to classical e4/e5 and d4/d5 openings, even guys like Hikaru who used to play the King's Indian all the time.

Super-GMs really ought to shock opponents in the opening to get out of their opponents' enormous , computer-enhanced, analytical database. Look at the recent game between Carlsen and Ding. Carlsen played the King's Indian ... which he NEVER does. Ding had a definite opening edge and then made a number of imprecisions and eventually lost. I truly believe that this is because the KID is the last thing Ding expected Magnus to play and so Ding was probably on his own after move 12 or 13 as opposed to being comfortable out to move 30. Does that game mean that Magnus suddenly got smarter? No, it's because Ding got dumber by virtue of being unprepared for Carlsen's choice.
@Eleuthero
I never said anything about whether Fischer and other players from the 1950s through 1980s would be at the top if they had access to engines. I am simply comparing their performance in their time with current players, and based on that, modern players are clearly stronger. There's no doubt that it's largely because modern masters have engines at their disposal, as well as knowledge gained from analyzing games played by the players from the mid to late 1900s.
Speculating as to whether Fischer would be at the top if he started at the same time as Carlsen is impossible. It's impossible to know if Carlsen would be stronger or weaker than Fischer because engines have fundamentally changed the way chess is played and analyzed.
Can't compare apples and oranges. What we can compare is player strength, and the outcome is obvious. The rest is just pointless speculation. Modern players don't just have the engine advantage, they also have additional decades of top level human, engine and correspondence games to look at and learn from. We can speculate and guess who "would" be stronger "if" we had a time machine all we want, but the facts are the facts, no guesswork required.
<Comment deleted by user>

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