Who is better Paul Morphy or Magnus Carlsen

Really?  You think he has more overall ability than Pistol Paul?  That just hurt my feelings.  Now I hate speculation.   

Which specific facts does it ignore?

I'm sure you are familiar with Reuben Fine's diagnosis of Morphy's psychological pathology... you've written an essay on it, haven't you?

http://www.edochess.ca/batgirl/Fine.html

Rimshot?

While comparing these chess titans, we should all keep rating inflation in mind. The rating system used is its own beautiful and complex economy. Each player who comes into the game introduces 1200 points into the economy. Each player who leaves takes a number of points equal to their rating out of the economy. Players who succeed tend to stick with the game, while those who fail repeatedly tend to leave the game after a short time. The player who joins, loses 25 games and quits ends up donating a portion of his 1200 points to the universal point pool before retiring with the 1000 or so points he had left. These points, like in any economy, gradually funnel themselves to those who are point-wealthy through natural exchange (the playing of rated games in this case). The wealthiest players are constantly amassing their point fortunes from the growing point pool, and these wealthiest players retire at a far slower rate than novice (or point-poor) players. So, while the rate of exchange is quite steep because of rating and K-value based weighting, points at the top do grow gradually over time. Because of this it is quite difficult to compare modern greats to historical greats through rating.

Reuben Fine's 1967 booklet, "Psychology of the Chess Player," based off his 11 years earlier article, "Psychoanalytic Observations on Chess and Chess Masters," claimed: "Morphy's breakdown revealed traits which had previously been sublimated in chess: memory regressed to a fixation on his childhood environment; visualization broke down into voyeurism, gratified by the opera, by staring at women's faces, and by another eccentric habit of arranging women's shoes in a semicircle in his room."  Which is all fine (or Fine?) except it's all nonsense because Fine didn't bother verifying anything upon which he based his so-called analysis.  The "shoes" thing originates in Morphy's niece, Regina's pamphlet, "Life of Paul Morphy in the Vieux Carré of New Orleans and Abroad" in which she wrote: "Morphy's room was always kept in perfect order, for he was very particular and neat, yet this room had a peculiar aspect and at once struck the visitor as such, for Morphy had a dozen or more pairs of shoes of all kinds which he insisted in keeping arranged in a semi-circle in the middle of the room, explaining with his sarcastic smile that in this way, he could at once lay his hands on the particular pair he desired to wear."  Regina didnt live with Morphy, was only 14 when Morphy died and was 56 when she published her pamphlet, so her testimony is tentative at best.  So, Fine's conjecture was based on  erroneous  data taken from an iffy source.  Morphy's paranoia was rather mild and, except for a couple possible incidents, mostly innocuous. According to his friend and close acquaintance, Léona Queyrouze, who, using the non de plume Constant Beauvais, wrote "First and Last Days of Paul Morphy" (she was 23 when Morphy died and was close enough to him that Morphy's mother gave her Paul's childhood chess board and set that was in his room when he died) a few years after Morphy died, recognized Morphy's peculiarities, but also how his great qualities far overshadowed them.

Morphy was a brilliant attacking player in a time before Steinitz introduced his new idea of playing positionally as opposed to an all out attack.  Morphy was quite talented given the era he played in and the tactics he used, but i don't think he'd stand much of a chance against any master of todays calibre, let alone Carlsen.  Much of the chess concepts a lot of us are using these days were developed after Morphys time.

And are the other allegations as poorly supported? His legal battles with his brother-in-law over conspiracy to destroy his clothes? His physical assault against Binder? His hostile reaction when his mother invited anyone into the house? His persecution mania?

I'm under the impression that the Maurian letters document this phase of his psychological breakdown pretty thoroughly.

Here's one example:

My dear Mr. Prèti:

     In a letter I received from you some days ago, you beg me to inform you if it is true that certain rumours about Paul Morphy are true that he may not be right mentally.
     I am sorry to have to reply to you that these rumours are only too well founded. I must hasten to add, however, that some of the American papers have greatly exaggerated the facts, especially when they represent his case as absolutely beyond help. Mr. Morphy thinks himself the object of the animosity of certain persons who, he claims, are trying to injure him and render his life intolerable to him by a regular system of calumnies and petty persecutions. There is no way of persuading him on this point, but on any other subject he is quite reasonable.
     The fixed idea which possesses him has led him on certain occasions to conduct himself in a somewhat extravagant manner, Thus, about two months ago he strove hard to provoke to a duel a gentleman whom he imagined to be one of his persecutors. Since then he seems more tranquil. and it has not been considered necessary to put him into an asylum, as some papers have said.
     All his friends hope that in time, with care and above all with a change in his mode of life, he will completely recover.
     As for the causes which have produced in Mr. Morphy this derangement of his faculties, it is difficult to assign them, and I do not know what the doctors think. I have reason to believe, however, that in their opinion chess has nothing to do with it.; for one of them, I am told, has recommended chess as a means of distraction and a change of thoughts. You know, that for ten or twelve years Mr. Morphy had completely abandoned chess, and that he never indulged in the game to excess.
For my part, without wishing to hazard an opinion on a question which is beyond me, I cannot help thinking that the sedentary life, devoid of distractions and amusements, which Mr. Morphy has led for some years, must have had a bad influence on his whole system.

                                                                             Agreez etc.
                                                                              Ch. A. Maurian

Morph might have also benefitted from today's psychotrophic drugs...

blueemu

There is no question that Morphy went insane, it's just that that reference to women's shoes is about as bogus as it comes.  There is a lot of misinformation out there about his insanity and it's causes, but it's all speculation--just like this thread.

That being said, I would remind the readers here that Morphy retired at age 14--he gave away his books and most sets--and only played occasional games when home from school and didn't play any one within 400 points of his strength until age 20.  To lose those years and still be the best--I think he had the most natural talent of any one, any time.

ha! I was continuing to read, hoping someone would write that, so I wouldn't have to. Thank you IMpfren. Now I don't have to read this thread anymore!!

That is like asking which step is better in a staircase the first step or the last. Each player is great,as to who would win, if it were a blitz game Morphy a tournament Carlsen

Exactly! They should have better things to do! Things like reading this entire thread and taking the time to post about its time-wasting lack of merit! Now that's a great thing to do!

If I had to choose between spending my time having a fun and fanciful conversation about great chess players or being a condescending jerk for no apparent reason, I know which I'd choose.

I agree.  If all Panayotis does is be negative all the time, he's gonna get gray in his beard SOON.

anymore opinions

brush your hair.  ( you know what i mean) 

I don't.I am akid here

Magnus Carlsen is the better player by far - he would have so much more training but if morphy lived today I dont know

Better than the past.

today Morphy would have lost because of the book moves used, as opposed to Morphys time, when chess was not rembering openings traps ect... Morphy was surely a surgeon. and my favorite player of all time.

I'm with you. How many of these threads can one forum generate?