Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 03 Aug '06 16:49
    Is the strongest ever player now officially an engine/supercomputer as opposed to Kasparov? and if so what is it?
  2. Subscriber Marinkatombonline
    wotagr8game
    03 Aug '06 16:50
    Hydra chess computer looks pretty sh;t hot, but kasparov never played it. Who knows. Computers don't count though.
  3. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    03 Aug '06 16:54
    Originally posted by mazziewag
    Is the strongest ever player now officially an engine/supercomputer as opposed to Kasparov? and if so what is it?
    Kasparovs final rating was 2812.

    He has now been over taken by Topalov whose current rating is 2813.

    I am not sure where Kasparovs rating peaked nor that of Fisher!
  4. 03 Aug '06 17:06
    Kasparov's highest ever rating was 2851:
    http://www.fide.com/ratings/id.phtml?event=4100018
  5. 03 Aug '06 17:36
    Originally posted by mazziewag
    Is the strongest ever player now officially an engine/supercomputer as opposed to Kasparov? and if so what is it?
    Some might not even consider computers to be players, they are, after all, only computers.
  6. 03 Aug '06 18:06
    Originally posted by mazziewag
    Is the strongest ever player now officially an engine/supercomputer as opposed to Kasparov? and if so what is it?
    Officially, there isn't one.
  7. 03 Aug '06 18:19
    According to the makers of Hydra, they say that it is over 3000 ELO. Of course, they can say whatever they want, and 1 short match against a grandmaster means nothing.
  8. Donation ketchuplover
    G.O.A.T.
    03 Aug '06 21:16
    I say Paul Morphy is the strongest player ever
  9. 03 Aug '06 21:39
    Ofcourse when one is talking about strength it is not just a function of one game or one brief period of genius. It depends on how consistently a player perfomed against strong opposition and there is no doubt that Kasparov more than anybody dominated the game in this respect.
    For god's sake it took a year after he quit for him to be overtaken!!!
  10. 03 Aug '06 22:16
    I think the strongest player ever would be the one who dominated his contempories the most.

    According to the chessmetrics site, Steinitz enjoyed the biggest rating gap between himself and the second best player. However I find this difficult to believe, and I think it was Fischer, as he proved himself to be considerably better than any other player in the world for roughly three years up to 1972.

    If there was a tournament between the best players in history at their peaks, I think Kasparov would win. However I don't think he was ever as clearly better than his rivals as Fischer was, simply because his rivals (e.g. Karpov, Anand) were some of the best players ever themselves!
  11. 03 Aug '06 22:29 / 1 edit
    I should imagine, If there ever was this magical tournament where all these historical GMs game back to life and played at their peaks, I'm confident the modern players would come out on top.

    simply because - with the age of computers, and huge advances in opening theory, they would be better prepared....


    EDIT: - as for the best player ever, I would place money on it being an obscure unknown player, perhaps short-lived....etc.
  12. 03 Aug '06 23:19 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    I think the strongest player ever would be the one who dominated his contempories the most.

    According to the chessmetrics site, Steinitz enjoyed the biggest rating gap between himself and the second best player. However I find this difficult to believe, and I think it was Fischer, as he proved himself to be considerably better than any other player in th , simply because his rivals (e.g. Karpov, Anand) were some of the best players ever themselves!
    i agree that fischer was the overall best chess player when world champ, but thought i should mention that i heard geller in his games with fischer has a plus score against him.
  13. Standard member leestatic
    Hristos voskrese
    03 Aug '06 23:38
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    I think the strongest player ever would be the one who dominated his contempories the most.

    According to the chessmetrics site, Steinitz enjoyed the biggest rating gap between himself and the second best player. However I find this difficult to believe, and I think it was Fischer, as he proved himself to be considerably better than any other player in th ...[text shortened]... , simply because his rivals (e.g. Karpov, Anand) were some of the best players ever themselves!
    My money would go on Lasker undisputed champion for 27 years, a reign no other player has even approached.
  14. 03 Aug '06 23:50 / 1 edit
    I believe Tal had a plus score against Fischer too, mostly due to the 4-0 drubbing he handed to a 16 year old Fischer in the 1959 candidates tournament.

    Edit: I was wrong, I've just checked and they ended up tied at four wins apiece with five draws.
  15. 03 Aug '06 23:54
    Originally posted by leestatic
    My money would go on Lasker undisputed champion for 27 years, a reign no other player has even approached.
    True, but Lasker wasn't exactly an active champion. I think Kasparov's tenure as Champion was more impressive.