Most of these names are all amazing because they were ahead of there time, they made tactics previously unknown, known. So kasparov may have been better the Fischer but if fischer would have been born later and things that are commonly known now he could have improved to an even higher level.....so it is very difficult to determine the best but i vote for Fischer and Kaspy!!!!!
Originally posted by JokerFiveBecause of JokerFive's posting.
Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.
Originally posted by mazziewag
AND WHY IS THE SCRIPT GOING WAAAAAAAAY OFF TO TEH RIGHT?
Don't do that!
Originally posted by JokerFiveAlekhine beat him.
Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capabl ...[text shortened]... ca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.Capablanca.
Everybody knows that.
Originally posted by jonzzzzFischer is the greatest match player who ever lived. Kasparov is the greatest overall chess player who ever lived. Although, I don't think Kaspy would have lasted in Blitz against a 1972 Fischer. That's not fact. Just oppinion.
I think Kasprov was better then Bobby Fisher and had a little more attack.
Alexander Alekhine gets my vote. His extraordinary tactical vision really was something to behold.
I think if he'd been around today there would be nobody to touch him.
Of course he was also involved in what is universlly recognised as one of the most beautiful games of chess ever played.
Reti- Alekhine, Baden Baden 1925.
If you have access to chessbase check it out. Even better if you can get hold of an annotated copy as the later moves are beyond the reasoning of mere mortals.
Whos better
Schumacher or Senna?
Pele or Ronadiniho? (excuse spelling)
Bannister or Christie?
I could go on.
You cannot compare different generations. They have tools that previous generations did not have. We all get better at everything. Am I more intelligent that the man who invented the wheel.
I know infinitely (almost) more than him yet if I lived in his time would I have discovered a wheel?
Originally posted by Dragon Firewhen we think of chess : what is the "wheel"? - and who discovered it?
Whos better
Schumacher or Senna?
Pele or Ronadiniho? (excuse spelling)
Bannister or Christie?
I could go on.
You cannot compare different generations. They have tools that previous generations did not have. We all get better at everything. Am I more intelligent that the man who invented the wheel.
I know infinitely (almost) more than him yet if I lived in his time would I have discovered a wheel?
i think fischer was important in that he awakened contemporary americans to the game, but other than that i see little other than short term brilliance, lunacy and refusing to play.
kaspy was the hugely dominant giant of our era - but not very helpful to those around him ... he just won and won.
I think that coordinating a standard chess set was vital (: staunton and cook) - absolutely important.
Reti and Nimzowitsch introduced some new ideas which were explained to, and adopted by, all players since.
hmmmm.
In terms of contribution to the world of chess, bobby and gary are not the winners that they were on the board. Without them the world of chess would be little different.
Without Stauton, Cook, Reti and Nimzowitsch things would be different for you and me.
When you think of some of the old greats and their contribution to chess.
Philidor, Alekhine, Steinitz, Marshall, Nimzowitsch (the list goes on) and the contributions they made compared with Fisher and Kasparov it is difficult to conceive of Kasparov as being the best player ever.
Certainly his game may be sounder than all the aforementioned but they were exploring new ground in a way modern chess players do not and laid the foundations of many openings that Kasparov has played and improved upon but what totally new opening has Kasparov given us.
If Kasparov had no books or computers to refer to, if he did not have his grandmaster seconds, if he played chess part time and he did not have the wealth of historical knowledge would Kasparov have beaten Nimzowitsch? (for example)