now i say he is not the best
It depends on the point of view. If you're saying his crazy engine preparations and current world No. 1. Then he is.
But if you compare to others who don't have engines or that kind of study, it might not be so clear
Not to mention that the future may behold stronger people
Carlsen was dethroned by gukesh. but even though high rating, Kasparov and others are better play
(and also sportsmanship)
Yes probably
"Carlsen was dethroned by gukesh"
He 'lost' his title to Ding who lost it to Gukesh.
@tpr said [^](/forum/redirect/post/nB7MGHdi)
> Kasparov was more dominant over his peers and for a longer time.
> Carlsen only drew his classical world championship matches against Karjakin and Caruana, and he could have lost both matches: Karjakin missed a draw in the one game he lost and Caruana missed a forced checkmate.
> Carlsen is more like a first among equals.
Well you're right but Caruana missed mate in 48.
"Caruana missed mate in 48"
* Caruana had a forced transition to KBN vs. K. Checkmating KBN vs. K is elementary.
@TanmayYash said [^](/forum/redirect/post/XHYOpNfX)
> i think he his.
career and quality wise yes , peak for peak , no
No... perhaps Kasparov?
@TheDifferenceOfTier5 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/SDeMFCuL)
> > Kasparov was more dominant over his peers and for a longer time.
> > Carlsen only drew his classical world championship matches against Karjakin and Caruana, and he could have lost both matches: Karjakin missed a draw in the one game he lost and Caruana missed a forced checkmate.
> > Carlsen is more like a first among equals.
>
> Well you're right but Caruan...
That's a bit harsh... mate in FORTY-EIGHT?