Do u think Magnus Carlsen the best player of all time?

As far as I know, [@]ChessPriyome was not assigned the authority to state with absolute certainty what a phrase implies, nor were they selected as the authority on common sense.

The hair-splitting semantics and acrobats chess players go through to avoid admitting that they are wrong, is next level.

@IamNOTamod said ^

As far as I know, it is not established in a dictionary, or by an expert, that "all time" does not include future possibilities.

This would be wrong, and easy to disprove your poor assumption:

Merriam Webster Dictionary:
G.O.A.T.

: the greatest of all time : the most accomplished and successful individual in the history of a particular sport or category of performance or activity

History is the study of past human events, societies, and actions through the collection and analysis of evidence.
All-time = throughout recorded history up to now

Thanks for playing.

no each =8 tw 5p

personally I'd say at least prime Magnus Carlsen is the best of all time, because of his many impressive feats like a 125 undefeated streak, and a peak rating of 2882. Lets not also forget that he dominated in every single time control too, he was almost 3000 (2986) at his FIDE blitz peak, and 123 points over #2 Levon Aronian. Then again Magnus played in the era of computers, vastly different from Kasparov's time period, but new resources means better players, so if we're talking about pure chess skill, Magnus is likely the best because he had more resources.

@plmw said ^

Carlsen is great but a bit overrated, in my opinion.
He was able to use ratings inflation to get over 2800.
His style was always kind of ugly to me (play for an equal middlegame then win endgames).
If he had played Anand at his peak (instead of a 43 year old Anand), I doubt he would become champion.
Then he acted like a coward and resigned the title because he recognized he was declining.
He also ...

Personally, I don't believe he resigned from the crown because of cowardice. I don't think you understand the amount of preparation and stress that goes into preparing for a World Championship match. And of course maybe Magnus would have a more difficult time beating Vishy at his peak, but the end of almost every World Championship reign occurred when the player's skills start declining, like Kramnik defeating Kasparov 15 years after his reign, where Kasparov was definitely not in his prime. And a style of play does not determine a player's greatness, to some, it's a beautiful style, to others its boring and mundane, but that does not take away from any of his accomplishments.

@ChessPriyome

I had no idea that the Merriam-Webster Dictionary was the universal, official source of all English knowledge. Despite having taught the language to high-schoolers for fifteen years, it seems that I am ignorant of many aspects of it.

By the way, it just occurred to me that it seems that it would be wiser to account for literal-but-implicit meanings when defining a phrase. Never mind.

I am going to gently extricate myself from this situation, and press that "unsubscribe" button.

@TanmayYash said ^

i think he his.

yes, i do

He is still World No. 1 after all...doesn’t that make him the best player? Especially now that the world has uncovered more chess theory that even the best players of old didn’t have.