Originally posted by vivifyDo you mean in the last round of the Candidates in 1971? Kasparov was only eight then, so you've got to make Fischer the favourite.
Who would've won, if Kasparov could've played Fischer in '70's? In other words, what if Fischer's last match before playing Spassky was Kasparov? Would've Fischer's momentum have been too much, or would Bobby have fallen against the great one?
If you mean Kasparov at his peak transported back to 1971, then I think the 1984 Kasparov would probably have been beaten by Fischer, but from 1985 onwards I'd take Kasparov every time.
Originally posted by Fat LadyWould be a match to watch. Throw in a Tal, a Botvinnik, and young Magnus and I'd miss work to watch it.
If you mean Kasparov at his peak transported back to 1971, then I think the 1984 Kasparov would probably have been beaten by Fischer, but from 1985 onwards I'd take Kasparov every time.
So the plan is to have this Kasparov, Botvinnik, Carlsen, Tal clone to appear
in 1971 and play him.
Reckon Fisher would win easily. The clone would get all confused.
Tal would be wanting to sac something on every move.
Botvinnik would be saying no.
Kasparov would agree with both players at the same time.
And...Carlsen?
As the non-Russian be would be shoved into the background only having his say
when it came to what fashionable clothes he/they/it should be wearing.
Fischer 6-0 (you cannot change history. It would be 6-0 no matter who you merged.)
But in this case the loser would be very smartly dressed.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Don't underestimate Fischer's ability to believe that they are all out to get him, that would have to have some effect on his performance.
So the plan is to have this Kasparov, Botvinnik, Carlsen, Tal clone to appear
in 1971 and play him.
Reckon Fisher would win easily. The clone would get all confused.
Tal would be wanting to sac something on every move.
Botvinnik would be saying no.
Kasparov would agree with both players at the same time.
And...Carlsen?
As the non-Russian be ...[text shortened]... uld be 6-0 no matter who you merged.)
But in this case the loser would be very smartly dressed.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by greenpawn34You're all wrong.
So the plan is to have this Kasparov, Botvinnik, Carlsen, Tal clone to appear in 1971 and play him.
Reckon Fisher would win easily. The clone would get all confused.
It is chess dogma that Morphy would win, every time, because Morphy was the Best Attacker Evaaarrrrr!!!!!!
*sigh*
Richard
Yup!
Four of them out to get him all in the same body.
Reckon you are that would upset him.
But since Fishcer was Morphy and Capablanca with flashes of Alekhine, Tarrasch
and Lasker all making an appearance at any give time. Then I'll still go with Fischer.
(perhaps if you added Geller to the clone it might turn it. The clone would win a few.
6½ - 2½ to Bobby as in the Petrosian match.)
Originally posted by greenpawn34Of course, Steinitz and Alekhine would have to commentate. Will would be drunk and Alex would be jumping on table.
Yup!
Four of them out to get him all in the same body.
Reckon you are that would upset him.
But since Fishcer was Morphy and Capablanca with flashes of Alekhine, Tarrasch
and Lasker all making an appearance at any give time. Then I'll still go with Fischer.
(perhaps if you added Geller to the clone it might turn it. The clone would win a few.
6½ - 2½ to Bobby as in the Petrosian match.)
Nabakov to write the tournament book.
Originally posted by vivifyIs the question really -- Who has the best Chess mind between Fischer and Kasparov? That would just be a guess. However, to know for sure and be fair they must be born at the same time. So we are never going to know the answer.
Who would've won, if Kasparov could've played Fischer in '70's? In other words, what if Fischer's last match before playing Spassky was Kasparov? Would've Fischer's momentum have been too much, or would Bobby have fallen against the great one?
Originally posted by RJHindsThe question is just Kasparov at his prime, vs. Fischer at his prime, which (for Fischer) is the year he first beat Spassky.
Is the question really -- Who has the best Chess mind between Fischer and Kasparov? That would just be a guess. However, to know for sure and be fair they must be born at the same time. So we are never going to know the answer.
Originally posted by vivifyIt would be just a guess, but I would place my bet on Kasparov due to his access to more developed theory and practice. In speed chess, I would favor Fischer.
The question is just Kasparov at his prime, vs. Fischer at his prime, which (for Fischer) is the year he first beat Spassky.
P.S. The first unofficial "Speed Chess Championship of the World" (or World Blitz Championship) was held in Herceg Novi on April 8, 1970. This was shortly after the first USSR versus the rest of the world match (in Belgrade), in which ten of these players also competed. Eleven Grandmasters and one International Master played a double round-robin tournament. Bobby Fischer won first place, with a score of 19 points out of a possible 22. Fischer scored seventeen wins, four draws, and one loss (to Korchnoi).Mikhail Tal was a distant second, 4½ points behind. Fischer won both games against each of Tal, Tigran Petrosian, and Vassily Smyslov; all of whom are past World Champions.
The only ways to judge who is the greatest player of all time is to see how superior he was over his contempories and by how much chess understanding advanced during his time at the top. To judge solely on playing strength is ridiculous as chess understanding evolves so quickly, eg I very much doubt Capablanca could win a single game against any of the current top 20 playing as he did in the 1920s. Morphy was very strong in the early years of the game but the player pool was tiny then, Fischer was very strong but lets not forget he had never defeated Spassky in a single game pre 1972 (some opponents like Larsen say, were never even super GM strength to quote Bronstein), Kasparov obviously super strong but he had an huge edge from being the first world champion of the computer generation which was a massive advantage in gaining opening edges from home preparation but his thinking over the board/chess understanding was in no way superior to Karpov.... a sentiment shared by many including say Nakamura.
In conclusion I would suggest the most complete OTB thinker combined with the greatest understanding of chess knowledge of that time is either is either Morphy of the 1850s, Fischer in the early 1970s, Karpov during the early 1980s or Kasparov during the mid 1990s. Nobody else is in the running