Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Who is the real GOAT (Greatest of All Time)?

Mikkhail Tal is the best player that has ever born guys, we ll know that

Mikkhail Tal is the best player that has ever born guys, we ll know that

Me. I never lost against any world champion.

Me. I never lost against any world champion.

@RuyLopez1000 said ^

Garry Kasparov.

This is an objective assessment cos 20 years no 1., 3 times defense against Karpov.

Fischer only cleanly best from 1970-1972. Wasn't dominant against Soviets in 60's.

Carlsen only no.1 for 16 years vs Kasparov 20 years. Carlsen also reduces Classical play to a minimum and quit World Championship to reduce chances of losing, which negatively impacts GOAT claim.

Top 4:

Kasparov
Carlsen
Karpov
Fischer

Karpov above Fischer cos longer time as no.1, longer longevity and more World Championships + almost equal record against Kasparov.

This is not objective. And how long someone is number 1 for has no bearing on their actual playing strength.

@RuyLopez1000 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/6AKcxlHN) > **Garry Kasparov.** > > This is an objective assessment cos 20 years no 1., 3 times defense against Karpov. > > Fischer only cleanly best from 1970-1972. Wasn't dominant against Soviets in 60's. > > Carlsen only no.1 for 16 years vs Kasparov 20 years. Carlsen also reduces Classical play to a minimum and quit World Championship to reduce chances of losing, which negatively impacts GOAT claim. > > Top 4: > > Kasparov > Carlsen > Karpov > Fischer > > Karpov above Fischer cos longer time as no.1, longer longevity and more World Championships + almost equal record against Kasparov. This is not objective. And how long someone is number 1 for has no bearing on their actual playing strength.

@TheDifferenceOfTier5

how long someone is number 1 for has no bearing on their actual playing strength.

We are talking about greatest not best at chess in terms of alignment to Stockfish

@TheDifferenceOfTier5 >how long someone is number 1 for has no bearing on their actual playing strength. We are talking about **greatest** not **best at chess in terms of alignment to Stockfish**

@RuyLopez1000 said ^

@TheDifferenceOfTier5

how long someone is number 1 for has no bearing on their actual playing strength.

We are talking about greatest not best at chess in terms of alignment to Stockfish

Even so, Carlsen dominated for many years, he is still #1, and he never even lost the world championship.
(and do you really think he would have lost to ding?)
You can't just act like there's no debate.

@RuyLopez1000 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/69ZYpNgx) > @TheDifferenceOfTier5 > > >how long someone is number 1 for has no bearing on their actual playing strength. > > We are talking about **greatest** not **best at chess in terms of alignment to Stockfish** Even so, Carlsen dominated for many years, he is still #1, and he never even lost the world championship. (and do you really think he would have lost to ding?) You can't just act like there's no debate.

@TheDifferenceOfTier5

Even so, Carlsen dominated for many years,

So did Kasparov and even longer. 💪

he is still #1, and

Kasparov was #1 even longer. 💪 Plus Carlsen barely plays classical chess and simply sits on his rating. 🥀

he never even lost the world championship.

You can't lose if you don't play 😂

(and do you really think he would have lost to ding?)

Giving an imaginary win to Carlsen lol. Classic fandom strat 😂 😂

You can't just act like there's no debate.

When did I act like there's no debate? I assessed Kasparov, Carlsen and Fischer's merits. If I thought there was no debate I wouldn't have bothered explaining why Kasparov was GOAT. 🧐

> > @TheDifferenceOfTier5 >Even so, Carlsen dominated for many years, So did Kasparov and even longer. 💪 >he is still #1, and Kasparov was #1 even longer. 💪 Plus Carlsen barely plays classical chess and simply sits on his rating. 🥀 >he never even lost the world championship. You can't lose if you don't play 😂 > (and do you really think he would have lost to ding?) Giving an imaginary win to Carlsen lol. Classic fandom strat 😂 😂 > You can't just act like there's no debate. When did I act like there's no debate? I assessed Kasparov, Carlsen and Fischer's merits. If I thought there was no debate I wouldn't have bothered explaining why Kasparov was GOAT. 🧐

@RuyLopez1000
Bro this is literally what I'm saying.
You can make arguments for either of them being the best, but neither of them is OBJECTIVELY best.

@RuyLopez1000 Bro this is literally what I'm saying. You can make arguments for either of them being the best, but neither of them is OBJECTIVELY best.

@TheDifferenceOfTier5 said ^

@RuyLopez1000
Bro this is literally what I'm saying.
You can make arguments for either of them being the best, but neither of them is OBJECTIVELY best.

We are talking about greatest not best.

The thread title: Who is the real GOAT (Greatest of All Time)?

The GOAT isn't subjective in this case.

Kasparov beats Carlsen on longevity, world championships.

Elo is not comparable as later players have more knowledge and Stockfish.

Rapid and Blitz is not comparable as they didn't have much rapid and blitz in the past and GOAT is generally seen through the lens of Classical.

@TheDifferenceOfTier5 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/JfQxyWRg) > @RuyLopez1000 > Bro this is literally what I'm saying. > You can make arguments for either of them being the best, but neither of them is OBJECTIVELY best. We are talking about **greatest** not best. The thread title: Who is the real GOAT (Greatest of All Time)? The GOAT isn't subjective in this case. Kasparov beats Carlsen on longevity, world championships. Elo is not comparable as later players have more knowledge and Stockfish. Rapid and Blitz is not comparable as they didn't have much rapid and blitz in the past and GOAT is generally seen through the lens of Classical.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.