ok actually taimanov should have been enough to know you were joking, yes you are right.. taimanov had playable game against Fischer i suppose, but still that doesnt mean Fischer is not the supremo in openings.
Who had the best opening, middle game and endgame ever?
Sort:
Ok then i change my wording. He was the strongest middlegameplayer and in my opinion also the strongest in the opening.
The best openings player was probabley ernst Grunfeld
Max Euwe would probabley fit into the middle game
and there are so many for the endgame
Magnus could fit into all but the opening
i also would say Fischer belongs to the strongest middlegame player. Fischer had even a won endgame against botvinnik from the middle game and then blundered to a draw.
And yes Fischer was remarkably an all rounder, and its remarkable that as a dutch you name euwe and not alekhine. I like the dutch, but in my honest opinion you cant name euwe and leave out alekhine, in my weak opinion euwe was nowere near the class of alekhine.
Personally, I think Capablanca's endgame was the best. Middle game' I believe, is Carleson's. The opening, I'm not sure about.
to be very honest i find your middlegame players very random hoynk. i wont believe anyone of those was stronger then Fischer in the middlegame.
and didnt Fischer crush Portisch in the middlegame buy the way? i thikn he also crushed smyslov in the middlegame but i might remember it incorrectly.
Feb 13, 2013
0
#48
If you're gonna mention Sveshnikov and Najdorf, you should also mention Igor Zaitsev and Kurt Richter (and perhaps Polugaevsky and Ljubojevic). Richter's attempt to prove that 1.e4 was winning led to some amazing opening discoveries in the Sicilian and the French. Zaitsev revolutionized play in the Spanish and other openings.
Of course, whenever I think of the French Defense, I think of Aron Nimzovich.
Akiba Rubinstein invented the main white response to the Queen's Gambit Tarrasch, one of the most important ideas against the Nimzo-Indian, and of course the main line of the Two Knights Defense, among other opening accomplishments.
i think when you take the strongest endgame players i thikn its difficult to say he was better or he. Also maybe there are even stronger endgame players, but we never heard of them because they never survived the middlegame
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
Just an opinon, Fischer...Carlsen...Fine.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Feb 13, 2013
0
#55
eddysallin ha scritto:
Just an opinon, Fischer...Carlsen...Fine.
Fine...Not my choice, but an interesting one :-)
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
fissionfowl wrote:
The Chess Computer programs have already surpassed the human mind; there is no living human capable of defeating the most advanced a sofisticated computer chess software. As to needing talent; Kasparov scored impressive victories against Anad & Kramnik spending less than 10 minutes in the first 25 moves and both of these games were played out with computer to the end, so basically he was just replaying games He had analized with the greatest computer software of our time, what is the merit on that?!
I can guarantee that in any endeavour if one lets another entity do most of their work for them, they won't get anywhere. They can be assisted sure, but the real bulk of the work has to come from the individual.
EDIT: Manufactured pop stars aside.
nah i argued that the bookup site said dzinzihashvilli was karpovs and kasparovs trainer and that ron henley if i remember correctly, once said that Dzindzihashvilli was sitting in new york watching kasparov as his second. But then i realized he is an Im and his previous post wer also pretty logical so i guess its a waste of time to argue and he is probably right.
He has not left a lasting mark in opening theory?? man now i know you are trolling...sorry smyslov i totally missed that in your text and only saw it the second time, when i read it again.