dragon-wolf
♡ 15 ( +1 | -1 )
The Greatest Player of All Time Ok, tell me who you think the greatest player of all time is and why. Please give indepth reasons why you think whomever you choose is the greatest. Thanks.
John
More: Microsoft Chess
tulkos
♡ 70 ( +1 | -1 )
Mikhail Tal. Mikhail Tal was a brilliant chess player.He was not at his best throughout much of his life because of sickness.He went undefeated for two very long periods,playing against many strong players.Tal was an attacking genius at the board. His attacks often looked like sheer madness but later analysis would show that his intuition had been correct.
In March, 1960 Tal began his match with world champion Mikhail Botvinnik in Moscow. Tal won the match with a score of 6 wins, 13 draws, and 2 losses. He became the youngest world champion at age 23 up to that time. In 1985 Garry Kasparov beat his record by becoming world chess champion at 22 years, 210 days.
More: Chess
v_glorioso12
♡ 4 ( +1 | -1 )
but..... Ruslan Ponomariov beat him at 18 years.
More: Best Chess Moves
tulkos
♡ 60 ( +1 | -1 )
well, the chess world is really a mess right now.have you read yasser seirawans "a fresh start"?Heres what is said about yassers essay.
Yasser Seirawan proposes – A Fresh Start for chess
We've got to admit, the professional chess world is in a mess. Two world champions, two organisations (with many coming and going over the course of the years). No players' union, strange formats and time controls. So what can we do about it? A respected GM, America's Yasser Seirawan, has set out a detailed, concrete proposal for sorting out the chaos that has afflicted top-level chess.
More: Chess For Beginners
tulkos
♡ 8 ( +1 | -1 )
So i don't think that ponomariov really counts as being world champion.
More: Chess Against Computer
nottop
♡ 11 ( +1 | -1 )
greates chess player of all time Capablanca
Maybe Alekhine.
Maybe Morphy.
None of the current players.
Current players are inferior by far.
More: Free Chess Software
brunetti
♡ 5 ( +1 | -1 )
Fischer I wouldn't say Kasparov is "inferior by far" to anyone :)
Alex
More: Battle Chess Online
derolleole
♡ 52 ( +1 | -1 )
Don't forget... ... Dr. Emanuel Lasker !
Born 24.12.1868 in Barlinek, Poland - died 13.1.1941 in New York.
Studies maths and philosophy.
Worldchampion from 1894 (beating Steinitz +10 = 4 -5) till 1921 (losing it to Capablanca).
He maybe was the first great player, who looked at chess not only as competition between two minds, but between two characters as well.
"Hypnosis and smoke, and he's unbeatable" - that's what nearly all of his opponents said about him, who has possibly never been seen without a good cigar.
Kind regards
Ole
More: Chess Opening Theory
zdrak
♡ 44 ( +1 | -1 )
My Top 10 As not to insult anyone, in alphabetical order
Alekhin
Botvinnik
Capablanca
Fischer
Karpov
Kasparov
Laburdonnais
Lasker
Morphy
Tal
My top choice would be Alexander Alekhine, world champion 1927-1935 and again 1937-1946. He played amazingly creative chess, nothing standard, nothing like was ever seen before or after him.
"Alekhine's Best games of chess" (3 volumes) is a book I highly recommend
nottop
♡ 56 ( +1 | -1 )
best of all times Hard to argue with Zdrak's choices.
Unless you expand "best" to cover areas other than game-play.
Perhaps Purdy should be included because he was so brilliant with correspondence chess.
Perhaps Nimzovich should be included because of what he did for theory.
There was a Russian who created exquisite problems that reached to the deapest core of chess.
If best is regarded in an expansive way - maybe these three should be included. Could then take out Karpov, Kasparov and Fisher from the list.
thegreatpolgar
♡ 11 ( +1 | -1 )
One of the best if not the best chess attacker of all time Rashid Gibiatovich Nezmetdinov from Kazan (Russia)
brobishkin
♡ 30 ( +1 | -1 )
My VOTE... ALEKHINE by far was the most superior player for his time... FISCHER second... and KASPAROV third... Though his past failure to Kramnik throws up flags of his greatness... I do think that politics had a lot to do with the championship game...
There are many Masters of the game and I admire them all... But everyone has their fav's...
Bro...
frodan
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
Capablanca.... ..at his best threw the fear of God into all his opponents.He was very difficult to beat and for a long period of time carried an aura of invincibility defeating all comers with machine-like efficiency.
he takes my vote for best player.....
victord
♡ 15 ( +1 | -1 )
... I don't know enough to say who is BEST...but my favorite is Capablanca......I love his books and replaying his games the most,also A. Alekhine....great games to replay.
tulkos
♡ 25 ( +1 | -1 )
wrong! deep blue was a computer not a player,and since it didn't play tal,alekhine,botvinnik,or any of the other greats,and since kasparov was scared to play a good opening against him,and played badly during some of the games,your wrong.
__mda__
♡ 106 ( +1 | -1 )
An interesting webpage that attempts to answer this question can be found at www.chessmetrics.com
It's a fantastically detailed database of all great chessplayers dating back to around 1850.. it has graphs of the peaks of players, plus attempts to estimate who the best player was in a certain time period as well as best of all time. The page is run by Jeff Sonas, who by the way has developed his own rating system that successfully predicts the outcome of games more accurately than FIDE elo or the professional GM's system.
By the way, this topic didn't specify what was meant by "greatest player of all time".. does that mean, most dominant player, or the player with most chess ability? A super GM of today would almost definitely destroy masters of 100 years ago because of the huge volumes of opening theory and improved strategy..
Here's my list of "most dominant" players of all time:
1. Kasparov ( hard to argue with 10 super GM tournament wins in a row )
2. Capablanca
3. Lasker
4. Alekhine
5. Fischer
6. Karpov
7. Botvinnik
8. Tal
9. Spassky
10. Me ( just kidding )
__mda__
♡ 17 ( +1 | -1 )
whoops.. hmm.. silly me, I forgot about Morphy.. he's got to be high up on that list, since in the short time he played he was by far the best player in the world. Damn, that knocks me out of the top 10.
brobishkin
♡ 47 ( +1 | -1 )
Deep Blue... It is written in the book "Kasparov vs Deep Blue" that the only advantage Deep Blue had against Kasparov is that the computer didn't have to deal with fatigue... The game he walked out on (Game #7) was in the end analyzed a draw... It was a wonderful sacrifice Deep Blue made for position... But the fatigue overcame Kasparov...
It's hard to play someone when they say "Checkmate in 32 moves"... Do you play it out just to see if you can make it all 32?... Or do you just start another game?...
Bro...
__mda__
♡ 46 ( +1 | -1 )
Game #7? There were only 6 games in the last Deep Blue match. I think you might be referring to game #2, where Kasparov resigned in a position that was later analyzed to be a draw.
After this, Kasparov's composure was wrecked and the rest of the match was a huge struggle for him, eventually leading to his total collapse in game #6, where he made a terrible blunder and lost in less than 20 moves, and thus losing the match 3.5-2.5.
zdrak
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
By the way ... I'm surprised nobody mentioned Steinitz. Yes, I know, he's not even in my top-10, and as a PLAYER, he wasn't particularly great, but as a chess philosopher and theoretician he's probably #1.
His positional theories and the legacy of his games and teachings made the game of chess what it is today.
fiancaro
♡ 12 ( +1 | -1 )
what about young spassky? sure spassky got pounded by fischer, but even fischer called him one of the top 10 all-time *before* he became world champion. :)
gutschi
♡ 7 ( +1 | -1 )
As Austrian... the best player was clearly STEINITZ, the first world champion... :)
tulkos
♡ 83 ( +1 | -1 )
why has nobody mentioned Harry.N.Pillsbury?I put him as the top blindfold player ever.nobody has come near his performance as far as I know.he also had the most astounding memory.listen to what I read in"famous chess players"by peter lerner.
on one occasion pillsbury was given a memory test just before taking on 20 opponents simutaneuosly.He was shown the following list of long and unusual words:
antiphlogistine,periosteum,takadiastase,plasman, ambrosia,threlkeld,streptococcus,micrcoccus,
plasmodium,mississipi,freiheit,philadelphia,cincinatti,athletics,nowar,etchenburg,american,russian, philosophy,piet polgelters rost,salama gundi, oomisillecoosti,bangmamvate,schlechters nek, maninyama,theosophy,catechism,
and madjesoomalops.
pillsbury studied the list,defeated his 20 opponents,
and then repeated the words without a single mistake.to top it of,he reapeated the list backwards!
brunetti
♡ 18 ( +1 | -1 )
Word lists are nice things but have nothing to do with chess :)
Pillsbury's blindfold chess performances were surpassed by George Koltanowsky: his record of 34 games (+24=10) is undisputed.
Alex
the_opposition
♡ 11 ( +1 | -1 )
Deep Blue, Tulkos... ...was a computer that played chess. The question wasn't "Who was the greatest human to ever play chess?"
dragon-wolf
♡ 16 ( +1 | -1 )
Deep Blue Deep Blue lost to Kasparov. It was Deeper Blue that beat him. I was asking about human players only.
Peace and Love,
John
blindio
♡ 64 ( +1 | -1 )
Miguel Najdorf once played a 45-game blindfold simul. (so - more than Koltanowsky, apparently) including this game :-
[Event "Blindfold Simul Exhibition"]
[Site "Sao Paulo"]
[Date "1947"]
[White "Najdorf"]
[Black "Allies"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Nxd4 6. Qxd4 Nf6 7. b3 g6 8. Bb2 Bg7 9. g3 0-0 10. Bg2 Nd7 11. Qd2 a5 12. h4 Nc5 13. h5 Rb8 14. hxg6 fxg6 15. Bd5+ Ne6 16. Ne4 Bxb2 17. Qxb2 c6 18 Bxe6+ Bxe6 19. 0-0-0 Qb6 20. Rxh7 Kxh7 21. Rh1+ Kg8 22. Rh8+ Kf7 23. Qf6+ Ke8 24. Rxf8+ Kd7 25. Qg7+ Bf7 26. Qxf7 mate. [1-0]
During this game, played, don't forget, while 44 others were going on at the same time, he announced, and delivered, Mate in 6! Blindfold!
Not that I rate Najdorf as the greatest ever - but he has to be in the running as the greatest blindfold player.
vietnamese_girl_18
♡ 94 ( +1 | -1 )
The Informant publication, which I believe would likely only be read by serious chess players (or people who really, really WISH to be serious chess players!), conducted a poll of their readers on the 10 best players of all time. I'm going by memory (it's somewhere on the internet, but I'm too lazy to find it now because the address is strange), and here is the final selection in order of greatness:
1. Fischer
2. Kasparov
3. Alekhine
4. Capablanca (ok, these four I know are in the right order-- from here on, I'm not 100% sure of the order)
5. Botvinnik
6. Tal
7. Karpov
8. Lasker
9. Korchnoi
10. Anand
Now, I don't know how Anand got onto this list...
I guess the poll was conducted during his strong string of tournament victories, but I'm sure he would not make the list today.
Sarah Tran
p.s. if anyone has the internet address for the informant, please post it because I remember it had a decent biography of some of the players, for those who might be interested in the history of the game...
nageshjs
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
Kasparov was by far the best player of all time. In both performance and quality of chess, i feel he rates slightly better than Fischer. Fischer could have been the greatest, had he been more balanced in his chess career.
gamecubematt
♡ 7 ( +1 | -1 )
BOBBY FISCHER My best player is bobby fischer but Capablanca is a close second.
victord
♡ 22 ( +1 | -1 )
Sarah...........tovmauzer.. thanks for the site....good stuff. Another good site for those who would like to find a picture for there GK page is pastamanchesscartoons, I found it at FIDE. Lots of funny chess related pictures.
the_opposition
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 )
I still have the newspaper story in the Riverside Press Enterprise dated Monday, May 12, 1997. Kasparov lost to DEEP BLUE...I think the first time he beat Deep Thought but I may be mistaken.
the_opposition
♡ 13 ( +1 | -1 )
Mr Spock is a great player but he hasn't been born yet...not only that he's only half human... Does that eliminate him?! :-)
markarian
♡ 78 ( +1 | -1 )
?! once tal said to my father that my father should not stop playing chess. my father answered "no, i'll stop" and said that tal should also better stop playing chess, since if you are not physically and psychologically perfect you run the risk of destroying yourself by permanent chess tournaments. my father stopped playing chess at all after winning some regional tournaments when he was allowed to play at national tournaments, it was at the age of 20.
i believe my father could have been...
but maybe i am wrong. dont know, but i would like to know...and i will never know.
and dont think that live is funny when you know about your talent and you cannot live it.
and dont think it is funny to look into the heart of my father.
edmaster
♡ 28 ( +1 | -1 )
WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS ONE! THE GREATEST CHESSPLAYER OF ALL TIME IS ROBERT JAMES FISCHER #1.
#2.MORPHY
#3.KASPAROV
#4.KARPOV
#5.CABALANCA OR ALEKHINE
ACCORDING TO THE MATHEMATICAL CHESS LIFELINES THAT THE MATHEMATICIAN NATHAN DIVINSKY HAS RESEARCHED TO DETERMINE THIS AND ARPAD ELO RATING CALCULATIONS TO DETERMINE THERE STRENGTHS!
brunetti
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
No! Those rankings are according to you, edmaster!
Divinsky's (even if questionable) are:
#1 Kasparov
#2 Karpov
#3 Fischer
#4 Botvinnik
#5 Capablanca
#6 Lasker
#7 Korchnoi
#8 Spassky
...
#18 Alekhine
Alex
edmaster
♡ 105 ( +1 | -1 )
YES!MR.BRUNETTI MR.FISCHER IS #3 EVEN TODAY!JUST THINK WHERE HE WOULD BE!IF FISCHER DEFENDED HIS TITLE IN 1975 KARPOV WOULD OF BEEN CRUSHED!THEN GOOD'OL
KASPAROV WOULD OF NOT HAD THE CHANCE AT THAT TIME TO BE CALLED THE YOUNGEST WORLD CHESS CHAMPION!FISCHER WOULD OF BEEN WORLD CHAMPION FOR DECADES!LETS SEE KARPOV WAS WORLD CHAMPION FROM 1975-1988!(13)YEARS!KASPAROV HAD PROBLEMS BEATING KARPOV!FISCHER WOULD OF BEATEN KARPOV SO FISCHER WOULD OF BEEN WORLD CHESS CHAMPION AT LEAST UNTIL KASPAROV CAME ON THE SCENE AND REMEMBER IT TOOK KASPAROV
(13)YEARS TO BEAT KARPOV!SO FROM MY RESEARCH MR.FISCHER WOULD OF BEATEN KASPAROV IN THE YEAR OF(1988)!AN MAYBE FISCHER WOULD KEEP HIS WORLD TITLE UNTIL THE YEAR(2010)OR UNTIL HE DIES AN STILL WORLD CHAMPION!
YOU CAN USE YOUR#1 RANKING ON GAMEKNOT TO GIVE YOUR OPN CONCLUSIONS SOME WEIGHT BUT IT DOES NOT HOLD!YOUR FUTURE DEMISE FROM EDMASTER OVER THE CHESSBOARD!
edmaster
♡ 105 ( +1 | -1 )
YES!MR.BRUNETTI MR.FISCHER IS #3 EVEN TODAY!JUST THINK WHERE HE WOULD BE!IF FISCHER DEFENDED HIS TITLE IN 1975 KARPOV WOULD OF BEEN CRUSHED!THEN GOOD'OL
KASPAROV WOULD OF NOT HAD THE CHANCE AT THAT TIME TO BE CALLED THE YOUNGEST WORLD CHESS CHAMPION!FISCHER WOULD OF BEEN WORLD CHAMPION FOR DECADES!LETS SEE KARPOV WAS WORLD CHAMPION FROM 1975-1988!(13)YEARS!KASPAROV HAD PROBLEMS BEATING KARPOV!FISCHER WOULD OF BEATEN KARPOV SO FISCHER WOULD OF BEEN WORLD CHESS CHAMPION AT LEAST UNTIL KASPAROV CAME ON THE SCENE AND REMEMBER IT TOOK KASPAROV
(13)YEARS TO BEAT KARPOV!SO FROM MY RESEARCH MR.FISCHER WOULD OF BEATEN KASPAROV IN THE YEAR OF(1988)!AN MAYBE FISCHER WOULD KEEP HIS WORLD TITLE UNTIL THE YEAR(2010)OR UNTIL HE DIES AN STILL WORLD CHAMPION!
YOU CAN USE YOUR#1 RANKING ON GAMEKNOT TO GIVE YOUR OPN CONCLUSIONS SOME WEIGHT BUT IT DOES NOT HOLD!YOUR FUTURE DEMISE FROM EDMASTER OVER THE CHESSBOARD!
edmaster
♡ 16 ( +1 | -1 )
AND! THERE IS SUSPICION THAT KARPOV AND KASPAROV AND TODAYS CHESS CHAMPIONS HAVE COLLUDED TOGETHER TO DETERMINE WHOI WOULD BE WORLD CHAMPION!
edmaster
♡ 16 ( +1 | -1 )
AND! THERE IS SUSPICION THAT KARPOV AND KASPAROV AND TODAYS CHESS CHAMPIONS HAVE COLLUDED TOGETHER TO DETERMINE WHOI WOULD BE WORLD CHAMPION!
tonlesu
♡ 35 ( +1 | -1 )
ED You had better go back and read your history books. Karpov lost the title to Kasparov in 1985 not 1988. Also you say if Fischer had played Karpov and won etc. etc. etc. If Fischer had married my uncle he would be my aunt or if Fischer had wings he could fly. If is a big word my friend,what about if Fischer had only shown a little backbone and defended his title.
edmaster
♡ 14 ( +1 | -1 )
KARPOV HAD PROBLEMS BEATING KORCHNOI
AND THE LONG MATCH BETWEEN KARPOV/KASPAROV WERE VERY FISHY!
THANK YOU!IT WAS 1985 PUSHED THE#8 KEY
calmrolfe
♡ 59 ( +1 | -1 )
Botvinnik I see that Botvinnik is placed at No4 on the list reproduced by Brunetti. There is no doubt that he was a fine player but his results are permanently tarnished as many of his matches were rigged by the Soviet Authorities. Even that fine chess player David Bronstein has now come clean and admitted that he was party to fixing results, mainly in an effort to prevent Sammy Reshevsky from winning Tournaments.
In view of this how can we be sure that Botvinnik's games were genuine contests. I think his name should be removed from the lists.
Kind regards,
Cal
brunetti
♡ 41 ( +1 | -1 )
O.K. Even not counting results against russians, that could have been adjusted, Botvinnik scored quite well against the remaining elite:
Lasker +1-0=3
Capablanca +1-1=5
Euwe +2-2=8
Fischer =1
Reshevsky +5-2=7
Flohr +5-2=22
Only to Fine he has an inferior score: +0-1=2
In the 6 Olympiads he played, scored +39-3=31.
In consideration of that, I think it was a world class player, despite possible pre-arranged matches.
Alex
tulkos
♡ 7 ( +1 | -1 )
you forgot one--- what about tal?he was the one that fought with botvinnik for the title!
agkvirtual
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
I think... 1. Kasparov
2. Fischer
3. Botvinnik
In endgame:
1.Capablanca
Calculation ability:
1.Fischer-Kasparov
Fast calculation:
1.Anand
Techniqual and positional strategy:
1.Botvinnik
Opening and middlegame(not included combinations)
1.Kasparov
Combination ability:
1.Fischer
kingofpawns
♡ 48 ( +1 | -1 )
Ok what about.... the role of chess programs in deciding the all time
great players? Kasparov may be the greatest all
time, but he also has the advantage of using chess
programs to analyze games and positions. He has
even stated that he has used moves in matches
that were discovered by (Fritz I think) a program.
So, with that in mind, would you be more inclined to
rank players like Fisher, Botvinnik, Capablanca, etc.
higher because they did not have the benefit of
computers?
dragon-wolf
♡ 18 ( +1 | -1 )
calmrolfe Your American paranoia amuses me. Botvinnik lost the world championship thrice. Perhaps they were also rigged.
McCarthyism is dead!
Ciao,
John
tonlesu
♡ 69 ( +1 | -1 )
Botvinnik Your right tulkos, he lost three times all to Russians. It was only when outsiders (particularly Americans) came close to a championship match that collusion became necessary. Fischer complained so vociferously in the early 60's that FIDE went to the candidates matches format instead of the tournament system. I'm wondering how many Soviet GMs have to come forward and admit collusion took place before some bozos will believe it. I'm also wondering how Calmwolf feels about his American paranoia. I'm also wondering when was the last time Dragonwolf opened a chess periodical and actually read something about chess.
calmrolfe
♡ 106 ( +1 | -1 )
American paranoia ? I am English...any paranoia I suffer from is English paranoia !!!
The statistics that Brunetti quote "Botvinnik +5-2=7" v Reshevsky don't necessarily tell the whole truth. The fact is that in Tournaments the leading Russians tended to agree quick draws against Botvinnik or contrived to lose important games against him. However, they fought like tigers against Reshevsky and by the time an exhausted Reshevshky came up against Botvinnik the odds had already shifted in favour of the Russian.
My understanding is that of the leading "Russians" only Paul Keres stood up against the system and played fairly against all opponents. It didn't do him much good as his chess career was then held back and he never did achieve the greatness his abilities had suggested he might.
tonlesu I hope you are well my friend, it is always good to read your postings as you have a keen insight into the history of chess. Good luck in your games.
Kind regards,
Cal
cairo
♡ 57 ( +1 | -1 )
Yes you can wonder LOL :-)) but you can also get some of the answers directly from the "horses mouth" by reading: Russian sillhouettes by Genna Sosonko. Marvelleous book, were Genna "lifting" the curtain, for a lot of interesting stuff, about the Russian players such as: Botvinnik, Polugayesky, Tal, Spassky. Bronstein etc. very recommendable.
And then "some" people don't have to guess or pretend they "know something" :-))
Best wishes
Cairo
NB! There is even a very interesting chapter about Capablanca!!
tonlesu
♡ 85 ( +1 | -1 )
Cal Still alive and kicking. Same thing happened to Fischer at the candidates tournament in 62', Russian players took easy draws against each other and really played all out against Fischer. A Russian may have won even if they had played fair. They were that strong. But with the collusion Fischer didn't have a prayer. There was even collusion when Fide went to the match format. All Fischer had to do was win each match to progress to the championship but Russia made sure the road was a rocky one. In the Petrosian-Korchnoi match the powers that be asked the participants which one could beat Fischer. Korchnoi didn't think he could but Petrosian did think he could beat Fischer. Korchnoi was paid off and lost to Petrosian. And so a confident Petrosian was sent off to play Bobby. And so it goes....
atrifix
♡ 114 ( +1 | -1 )
Of course This didn't make any difference, because Fischer demolished Petrosian :) It is somewhat amazing that Fischer even won the world championship in 1972, given everything that stood in his way (for example, at one point during the match Spassky was ordered by Moscow to come home and claim the title by default; Spassky, with considerable risk to himself, refused).
One thing people sometimes forget or don't pay enough attention to in these 'greatest player ever' lists is that chess technique continues to improve, and chess players continue to improve. Morphy may have made gross positional blunders in some of his games, but he was so far ahead of his contemporaries that this didn't matter. Kasparov, Anand, Kramnik, etc., all play more far more consisently than players did 100 or even 30 years ago, however, they're generally not as dominant of the overall chess population. Of course, this is inevitable given the nature of chess: sooner or later (probably later) it will be solved, and all chess players will be equal.
Atrifix
tonlesu
♡ 64 ( +1 | -1 )
Fischer Of course the soviet government ruled chess in Russia. Taimanov was stripped of his paycheck every month when he lost 6 zip to Fischer. Spassky had it so bad he left Russia a few years later and moved to France. Taimanov's stipend was restored after Larsen lost six straight to Fischer, perhaps it wasn't such a bad performance after all. My point is there isn't any paranoia here, there was in fact collusion to retain the championship that stretched over several decades.
Spassky decision to stay and play was probably the wisest thing he ever did. Fischer gave him a rematch in 92' that made Spassky a multi-millionaire.
kingofpawns
♡ 9 ( +1 | -1 )
My top 10... 1. Alekhine
2. Fischer
3. Kasparov
4. Capablanca
5. Botvinnik
6. Brunetti
7. Tal
8. Karpov
9. Sottile
10.Korchnoi
brunetti
♡ 14 ( +1 | -1 )
Who is Sottile? BTW you put my name below retired players, the only I can beat (by default, since they won't play me), and behind active players...
Alex
edmaster
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 )
AN ACCORDING CHESSMETRICS FISCHER IS THE STRONGEST GREATEST CHESSPLAYER THAT EVER LIVED!AN ALL CHESS MATHEMATICCAL CALCULATIONS PROVE IT!I KNOW IT!FISCHER KNOWS IT!ANY GOOD CHESSPLATER KNOWS IT!AN ANY GRANDMASTER KNOWS IT!
astinkyfart
♡ 11 ( +1 | -1 )
my 2 cents FISCHER IS GOOD I HAVE TO ADMIT BUT NOT EVEN FISCHER COULD CRUSH SKULLS LIKE EDMASTER
edmaster
♡ 16 ( +1 | -1 )
ANAND/PONOMARIOV QUICK MATCH. (6)GAME CHESS MATCH.(NOT EVEN A REAL MATCH.)
25 MINUTES PER GAME/ADD(10 SEC.)PER MOVE.
POMOMARIOV LOST BY(1)GAME.
SCORE:3.5-2.5
DOES NOT PROVE ANYTHING.
tonlesu
♡ 37 ( +1 | -1 )
edmaster You mean the unofficial five minute chess championship at Herceg Novi, Yugoslavia 1970 did not prove anything. Remember Fischer made the greatest speed players in the world look like chopped liver. And after the tournament was over he called off by memory all of the 22 games involving over 1000 moves---This does not prove anything?