I dont know!
Magnus carlsen v bobby fischer who would win? Reason your answer
Sort:
def bobby fisher he used his incredible IQ of 180 and amazing logic as in for carlsen he plays with a lot of memorization and ability but overall bobby fisher would win because hes such a natural and a creative phenon, i will give to bobby fisher simply because he is very creative and most of the time magnus uses memory over creativenes and ingenuity.
22 year old Carlsen vs 70 year old Fischer (if alive), Carlsen all the way!
Carlsen, because he was born in the computer era.
400yearsofoppression wrote:
Fischer lived in the computer era as well.
I bet I probably could've beaten Houdini in 1972...
oh wait they didn't even have houdini ^^
400yearsofoppression wrote:
There were even more powerful computers and technology in the 1960s than today. Especially when compared to the practical accomplishments of the technology in the 60s (
so you're saying that technology gets worse? I wonder if cavemen had holographs and laser guns
I doubt the game would finish. Bobby would struggle to crack the defense of Carlsen and then probably leave in a huff. Media and fide would be rushing after him while Carlsen just smiled his cheesy grin. Playing a person rated 2872 is very different to 2660.
400yearsofoppression wrote:
There were even more powerful computers and technology in the 1960s than today. Especially when compared to the practical accomplishments of the technology in the 60s (
The most powerful computer of the 1960s has less processing power than the processor that runs a smartphone today...
Tal1949 wrote:
I doubt the game would finish. Bobby would struggle to crack the defense of Carlsen and then probably leave in a huff. Media and fide would be rushing after him while Carlsen just smiled his cheesy grin. Playing a person rated 2872 is very different to 2660.
That's 40 years of ratings inflation. Let's give Fischer the 120 point gap he had on Spassky back then...eliminate Carlsen's rating, so take Aronian's #2 rating + 120...call it 2930 rating for Fischer today ;)...
Dec 23, 2013
0
#11
The answer is not clear! I think Fischer is more gifted than Carlsen, but he would be lagging 40 years of chess experience, computers, etc.
No one dominated chess like Fischer did in 1972...
Ratings from 40 years ago are not comparable.
Ratings are inflated.
Fischer was relatively stronger to his opposition than Carlsen is right now!
Having all that said, Carlsen would win the match if by some chance the Bobby of 1972 met Carlsen of 2013. But that is an unfair comparison since you are comparing people from differnt eras.
It is like comparing Ben Hogan or Nicklaus to Tiger Woods...
You can't compare players of different generations, because the next generation always gets the benefit of knowing more.
If todays Carlsen plays against 60's or 70's Fischer, there is no doubt Carlsen will win 10/10. Simply because today's generation knows more and more theory, and the mistakes committed by the old masters are now learnt and understood and such mistakes would never be done by today's top players. Whether it is opening theory or endgame theory or the knowledge of middlegame plans, everything is more refined and near perfect for today's players.
If you are asking who is the strongest, then it's definitely Carlsen. But, if you are asking who is the greatest chess player, then that's another thing.
No offense but this is a dumb question. It is impossible to even guess the outcome. As many have stated they live(ed) in different times.
Mersaphe wrote:
Fischer because Fischer would never play a woman like Carlsen is in this photo. It is scientifically proven that playing chess against women makes you weaker
btw Polgar is looking fine!!
Then it's definitely Carlsen, because even being weaker than his actual strength, he has touched 2872, much ahead of his competitors. Moreover, he beat today's world champion 6.5-3.5 out of 10 games.
While in 1972, Fischer against Spassky in the First 11 games(omitting game-2 which was a forfeit in favour of Spassky) scored the same 6.5-3.5 and that too by loosing two games(omitting game-2).
Hence, Carlsen being weaker, has scored the same against a stronger World Champion(Anand is no doubt stronger than Spassky).
The_Cosmologist wrote:
Mersaphe wrote:
Fischer because Fischer would never play a woman like Carlsen is in this photo. It is scientifically proven that playing chess against women makes you weaker
btw Polgar is looking fine!!
Then it's definitely Carlsen, because even being weaker than his actual strength, he has touched 2872, much ahead of his competitors. Moreover, he beat today's world champion 6.5-3.5 out of 10 games.
While in 1972, Fischer against Spassky in the First 11 games(omitting game-2 which was a forfeit in favour of Spassky) scored the same 6.5-3.5 and that too by loosing two games(omitting game-2).
Hence, Carlsen being weaker, has scored the same against a stronger World Champion(Anand is no doubt stronger than Spassky).
I have no idea what kind of logic you are using!!!! just read again by yourself if it makes any sense!
Carlsen would mope the floor with Fisher unless Fisher is given couple of years to prepare and play in modern top tournaments plus good health. Then it becomes really hard to guess because Fisher is really tenacious. Anyway it would be a great match thats never going to happen...
Dec 23, 2013
0
#16
Take Fischer at his prime and hand him a laptop, Chessbase, Fritz and one of the top chess engines(be it Houdini, Komodo or even Stockfish), some endtable discs and 2 or 3 years to work with it? Fischer wins in my opinion. Probably handily. Pluck him out of 1972 completely unprepared? He wouldn't do well. Though it might be closer than we think... He might not know modern theory, but he'd know old school. Probably a lot of stuff Magnus has never seen before over the board... Fischer knew a LOT about chess. Old openings found in some obscure book... Fischer could throw some curve balls at Magnus and then we'd see if he can hit that figurative curve.... Still I doubt it would be enough under those circumstances.
Man, what would a computered up Fischer look like? Scary thought.
Bobby Fischer would attack Carlsen, and draw the endgames Carslen throws at him
Dec 24, 2013
0
#18
If it was based on talent only then Bobby Fischer would probably win.
Take away Carlsens ability to study with computers and only allow him to study with chess books from the early 1970s the odds are that Bobby Fischer would win by a small margin. The ability to study with today's computers is one of the biggest factors for today's high ratings.
Just for the record I like Carlsen over Fischer...
Spiritbro77 wrote:
Take Fischer at his prime and hand him a laptop, Chessbase, Fritz and one of the top chess engines(be it Houdini, Komodo or even Stockfish), some endtable discs and 2 or 3 years to work with it? Fischer wins in my opinion. Probably handily. Pluck him out of 1972 completely unprepared? He wouldn't do well. Though it might be closer than we think... He might not know modern theory, but he'd know old school. Probably a lot of stuff Magnus has never seen before over the board... Fischer knew a LOT about chess. Old openings found in some obscure book... Fischer could throw some curve balls at Magnus and then we'd see if he can hit that figurative curve.... Still I doubt it would be enough under those circumstances.
Man, what would a computered up Fischer look like? Scary thought.
if you could do that, it would be a pretty easy win for fischer IMO. but you can't so fischer would probably lose.
Who would win between these two, the mozart of chess magnus carlsen at his peak level or the deadly games man bobby fischer at his peak level (1972 fischer)... honestly speaking who would win and why?