Probably Kasparov as we know him but retaining the skills he possessed in his prime (yes I know that's realistically impossible but humour me if you will).
@IamNOTamod said [^](/forum/redirect/post/9yehH1Un)
> Probably Kasparov as we know him but retaining the skills he possessed in his prime (yes I know that's realistically impossible but humour me if you will).
Ok I'll humour you. ***counts down from five***
*But now I've finished humouring you* 😉
**It is impossible**
That is why we have to assess by accomplishment relative to their time.
And I think that Kasparov's longevity makes him GOAT.
SOAT (Strongest Of All Time) is Carlsen. (Most accurate player).
@TheDifferenceOfTier5
> The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943. No Stockfish necessary. And once again you are talking about only openings.
**Kasparov played the Scheveningen against Karpov in the 1985 World Championship!**
He would be ***stunned*** to hear from TheDifferenceOfTier5 that Keres refuted his opening in 1943!
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179 (One of Kasparov's greatest games!)
> And yes, I am saying that. Can you provide an example of an engine "expanding our knowledge" in a non-opening related way?
Kasparov talked about it:
>"**Kasparov:** The heavy use of computer analysis has pushed the game itself in new directions. The machine doesn’t care about style or patterns or hundreds of years of established theory. It counts up the values of the chess pieces, analyzes a few billion moves, and counts them up again. (A computer translates each piece and each positional factor into a value in order to reduce the game to numbers it can crunch.)
>It is entirely free of prejudice and doctrine and this has contributed to the development of players who are almost as free of dogma as the machines with which they train. Increasingly, a move isn’t good or bad because it looks that way or because it hasn’t been done that way before. It’s simply good if it works and bad if it doesn’t. Although we still require a strong measure of intuition and logic to play well, humans today are starting to play more like computers."
https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/kasparov-on-the-human-and-the-machine-2010-07-05
@RuyLopez1000
If he did it was most likely through a transposition. against the normal move order 6.g4 is close to a refutation.
@TheDifferenceOfTier5 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/3Y2AEXIt)
>>> The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943. No Stockfish necessary. And once again you are talking about only openings.
>>
>>Kasparov played the Scheveningen against Karpov in the 1985 World Championship!
>>
>>He would be stunned to hear from TheDifferenceOfTier5 that Keres refuted his opening in 1943!
>>
>>https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179 (One of Kasparov's greatest games!)
>
>@RuyLopez1000
> If he did it was most likely through a transposition. against the normal move order 6.g4 is close to a refutation.
What are you talking about? **Kasparov played the Scheveningen**. That is the opening which the game is listed as **ECO code B84.**
**Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen. Classical Variation**
Look at the link:
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179
Karpov vs Kasparov, one of the most famous games of all time.
Read the Wikipedia article if you don't understand what the Scheveningen is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence,_Scheveningen_Variation
**Once again your claim 'The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943.' is ***nonsense***.**
>Wikipedia: "The line became popular in the 1920s. It has been advocated by many distinguished grandmasters, such as Garry Kasparov. "
@RuyLopez1000 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/Oty2m55N)
> >>> The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943. No Stockfish necessary. And once again you are talking about only openings.
> >>
> >>Kasparov played the Scheveningen against Karpov in the 1985 World Championship!
> >>
> >>He would be stunned to hear from TheDifferenceOfTier5 that Keres refuted his opening in 1943!
> >>
> >>https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179 (One of Kasparov's greatest games!)
> >
> >@RuyLopez1000
> > If he did it was most likely through a transposition. against the normal move order 6.g4 is close to a refutation.
>
> What are you talking about? **Kasparov played the Scheveningen**. That is the opening which the game is listed as **ECO code B84.**
>
> **Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen. Classical Variation**
>
> Look at the link:
> https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179
>
> Karpov vs Kasparov, one of the most famous games of all time.
>
> Read the Wikipedia article if you don't understand what the Scheveningen is.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence,_Scheveningen_Variation
>
> **Once again your claim 'The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943.' is ***nonsense***.**
>
> >Wikipedia: "The line became popular in the 1920s. It has been advocated by many distinguished grandmasters, such as Garry Kasparov. "
HE LITERALLY PLAYED IT BY WAY OF A TRANSPOSITION. He played the Najdorf and only later transposed to the Scheveningen.
Why?
Maybe because in the normal Scheveningen, White can play 6.g4?
@TheDifferenceOfTier5 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/gBYoEg96)
> > >>> The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943. No Stockfish necessary. And once again you are talking about only openings.
> > >>
> > >>Kasparov played the Scheveningen against Karpov in the 1985 World Championship!
> > >>
> > >>He would be stunned to hear from TheDifferenceOfTier5 that Keres refuted his opening in 1943!
> > >>
> > >>https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179 (One of Kasparov's greatest games!)
> > >
> > >@RuyLopez1000
> > > If he did it was most likely through a transposition. against the normal move order 6.g4 is close to a refutation.
> >
> > What are you talking about? **Kasparov played the Scheveningen**. That is the opening which the game is listed as **ECO code B84.**
> >
> > **Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen. Classical Variation**
> >
> > Look at the link:
> > https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067179
> >
> > Karpov vs Kasparov, one of the most famous games of all time.
> >
> > Read the Wikipedia article if you don't understand what the Scheveningen is.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence,_Scheveningen_Variation
> >
> > **Once again your claim 'The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943.' is ***nonsense***.**
> >
> > >Wikipedia: "The line became popular in the 1920s. It has been advocated by many distinguished grandmasters, such as Garry Kasparov. "
>
> HE LITERALLY PLAYED IT BY WAY OF A TRANSPOSITION. He played the Najdorf and only later transposed to the Scheveningen.
Saying that 'The Scheveningen was basically refuted by Keres in 1943.' isn't right. Keres put pressure on The Scheveningen without a6, **but it is still the Scheveningen if you play a6 first.**
That's why the ECO Code lists the game as **Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen. Classical Variation**
As Wikipedia states: **and then play 6...e6, transposing into the Scheveningen.**
Saying that Keres refuted the Scheveningen isn't accurate.
Keres put pressure the on the Scheveningen without 5.a6. (Stockfish says +0.5 after 6.g4 which isn't refuting the opening, it just means White gets a large edge).
bobby fischer is the best
~20 hours ago, this discussion struck an iceberg.
Kasparov for now. If Magnus plays classical and wins another title he surpasses. Or if Magnus wins a few more titles in Freestyle and Blitz. I believe Kasparov had better competition. So I think you can't just compare wins and titles. I'm sure everyone is playing more accurately today but chess is still psychological and competition matters playing 4 or 6 tough opponents in tournaments. I'm sure plenty will cry out excuses for Magnus with stats. They are close. If Magnus didn't drop out of title contention he might be unanimous already, but he did quit for the classical title. Freestyle clearly shows talent. A few titles there and he is the Goat. Just not yet.
Fischer quit after 1 title. Sorry, but assumptions don't count. If the Soviets didn't cheat he probably would have 1 earlier title. If he kept playing he probably could have won 2 more. Hard to say. His mental condition was not good. And I do blame half of that on the Soviets bc I believe they (KGB) intentionally did things to screw with him.
Eventually it will likely finish:: Magnus, Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer. Most talented definitely Fischer then maybe Tal or Kasparov.. Bigger question is for number 3 or 4.
There is a difference between earned achievement and pure raw talent.