07 May 06
1 edit
Guess it depends on what you consider beeing good?
Are you counting point or judging the style or the originality?
You can't really compare them, can you.
Is it the best defender, attacker?
And most important: why do you want it to be a BEST player ever anyway?
No one is the best in anything - some have great style that's all.
So I'll say the best players ever are the ones who never refuse to play chess with anybody, no mater how good or bad they are, and any player who finds a way to share its passion for chess with someone who has never played before.
07 May 06
Originally posted by Jeebeing good = being able to win (whatever the style)
Guess it depends on what you consider beeing good?
Are you counting point or judging the style or the originality?
You can't really compare them, can you.
Is it the best defender, attacker?
And most important: why do you want it to be a BEST player ever anyway?
No one is the best in anything - some have great style that's all.
So I'll say the bes ...[text shortened]... ayer who finds a way to share its passion for chess with someone who has never played before.
yes , just counting point
elo is a way of comparing the strength of chess player,besides games
07 May 06
Originally posted by Sicilian SmaugIn that case I propose that Kasparov challenge Batman, Lieutenant Commander Data and or Lord Odin.
Who's to say there are not better chess players on other planets in this galaxy or a different galaxy. Maybe in a different universe if the 'multiverse' theory is correct.
