Who had the best opening, middle game and endgame ever?

Though Fischer included Spassky, and Tal. Both soviets, if I recall.

you said he didnt include any soviet.he included alekhine and chigorin too..he also included capablanca in his list.

he said about capa:

He had the totally undeserved reputation
     of being the greatest living endgame player. His trick was
     to keep his openings simple and then play with such brilliance
     that it was decided in the middle game before reaching the
     ending -- even though his opponent didn't always know it.
     His almost complete lack of book knowledge forced him to
     push harder to squeeze the utmost out of every position.

and he gave an example of his game with menchik.

Yeah, they weren't friends. That must be why Fischer visited Tal when he was in hospital. >.>

yes you are right, point to you. i never believe books again. what i ment was definetly before curacao, ok from now on i will never even if you are incorrect doubt you again.

Bobby Fischer...had a friend?

Larry Evans once said something like "I don't know if I was his friend or not, but if I wasn't his friend. he didn't have any."

GM Pal Benko compiled a list of "The Nine Greatest Endgame Players" for Andy Soltis' "Book of Chess Lists" (1984, 2002). Though the names are given numbered rankings, they are not in any particular order, says Soltis:

1. Rubinstein
2-3. Smyslov
2-3. Botvinnik
4. Maroczy
5. Reshevsky
6. Lasker
7. Reti
8-9. Fine
8-9. Averbakh

Kramnik had a longer unbeaten streak than Capa did, against tougher competition. So did Tal, for that matter.

Rubenstein was superlative at endgames.

NOT a mature move at all.

but he is still correct. thanks for your honesty mr pfren. see and thats what i like about fischer the honesty

but not to mention that larry evans was also a very smart talker and a very good self promoter. But yeah maybe bobby fischer didnt have any real friends, we can only speculate.

 So even a bit of analysis will prove this notion that a computer could evaluate all possible positions in a matter of minutes to be wrong. Let's assume your 1 billion operations/second. That's 10^9 (10 raised to the 9th). Now 2^64 is approximately 10^20 (ie., it's 10 ^ 64 log 2 ~ 10 ^(64 * .3010))
So now we have 10^20/10^9 = 10^11 seconds. Since there are approximately 35 million sec/year (3.5 *10^8), we have 10^11/3.5*10^8 years - roughly 300 years. Again, approximate but hardly minutes and more like several centuries of continous computing.

--Vic.

thank you very much

tetsuoshima look at this thread:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/fun-with-chess/meaning-of-names---in-chess?page=1

i think we better call you Frank 

lol thanks

Some people here are the reason why most people think chess players are boooooooooooooooooooooooring.......
I don't really care about Fishcer, he's just a conspiracist with a "insert awesome science word here" syndrome, the link about the analysis by different very strong chess engines is already posted and Fischer doesn't come close to Capa's.
 SmyslovFan 

where did i say Capa isnot a good player?

it is impossible to compare players of diffrent eras since they havenot played against eachother and we need to take into account many factors.and we may disagree about value of these factors.

capa simplified positions immediately.he was skillful in simple positions where he could find plans.positional play was his strong point and his best years he had no rival in understanding deep positional factors.

this is why he made fewer errors and blunders and is number1 in that list.

of course in such a list, kasparov or tal cant be in top since he was such a brilliant tactical player who usually took the game to complicated positions where board is full of pieces(he played complicated openings like sicilian defence) and it is very hard to find correct moves since you have to calculate a lot of variations and sometimes find moves that only machines are capable of finding.in kasparov play you cant rely on positional factors and say ok i have two bishops or my pawn structure is better my rooks have occupied this file and i m better in endgame in kasparov game concrete calculation and calculating complicated moves is necessary since board is full of pieces and general considerations isnot the most important factor but concrete calculations. where you need to always watch out for oponents tactical possibilites