Why is Fischer considered the greatest chess player ever by so many?

Undoubtedly he was an amazing player who singlehandedly defied the soviets, but today we also have amazing players like Kasparov (who'se doing a similar thing) and Anand. Why are they so under rated?

Fischer was American, and he was nuts...

 

This leads to a great deal of mystique, especially among Americans. 

Of course he is a great player, but there are a few "poetic" attributes that he has as well. First off, his meteoric rise came to the nation's attention during an interesting time in American politics...similar to the 1980 U.S. defeat of the Russian hockey team (if you're not familiar with that, let's just say it caused quite a commotion), as well as his life story. His whole life is like a novel, and a life that was the first to be played out in front of a US audience in modern times. Morphy has an interesting story, but that was not the time of television and national media in the way it was years later. I'm sure if certain players from different times could trade places, there would be interesting results. That's my two cents on the matter.

I think few would still claim that Fischer was a better player than Kasparov.

I truely belive that Bobby Fischer would have become a chess legend even if he had not been an American or won the chess world championship against Russian players, the guy was simple way ahead of his time in to what chess is concerned, Fischer is rated 2780 which puts him at about 4th in the FIDE ratings list of nowdays even though the guy "stoped playing" in 1972 and had also quit chess for several years during the 60s, Fischer's playing style was so amazing that he was even famous among people who didn't like Americans so much back in the 60s and 70s, even Castro approached him during Havana olimpiad 1966 and shaked his hand after his performance there, at the time Fischer was nowhere close to becoming a chess world champion (the guy was simply a celebrity wherever he went)

I think most people's opinion is based on dominance. I think it's been established that you can't simply compare skill levels between players of different time periods, all you can do is look at how they dominated their contemporaries.

I think at least as many people consider Kasparov the greatest player of all time as those who favor Fischer, and perhaps many more. But few players have dominated chess in their own time period the way these two have.

I'm no chess historian, but I've read accounts that state Lasker was as dominant as Fischer, and perhaps more so.

But Fischer's dominance over his contemporaries is self-evident. 20 wins in a row over high quality (candidate worthy) opponents, including 6-0 matches over Taimanov and Larsen.

However, I think it needs to be said... he may have been the greatest player of all time (it's possible) but I don't think anybody should ever claim him to be the greatest World Champion of all time. No matter what the reason, he never defended his title.

Fischer's contributions to chess are very impressive, and I'm a fan. But he may very well have also been just as destructive to the development of chess as he was beneficial.

Fischer was a hero. He was an individual with personality. He was charismatic and stuck to his principles. He took on the entire Russian chess establishment by himself, and won! Furthermore, he did this at a time when, politically, this was a very good thing for an American to do. Adding to all this is the terms by which he left. He left in the same manner that he entered the chess world: Unforgiving and unflinching. He refused to play by the rules of FIDE and rode off into the sunset. He became immortal. And who took his place? A machine. A small unassuming man from the Urals, Anatoly Karpov played chess in a way much less accessible to the public. He developed and blockaded and only needed the smallest advantage to grind out technical wins. He was no hero. A generation of chess players that had been inspired by the success of Fischer began to romanticize their lost hero, calling him 'the true champion.' Decades later, some still cling to his legend.

Why is Fischer considered the greatest chess player ever by so many?

 

Your question presupposes that many consider Fischer the greatest player ever. I certainly wouldn't place myself in that camp. 

 

I think most people's opinion is based on dominance.

 

If that's the measure, I vote for Greco. +73 -0 =0 (100%) is really tough to match. If you doubt the fairness of his record, there's Morphy at +204 -27 =26 (84.4%).  Fischer's record is 'only' +439 -88 =250 (72.6%). 

I was going to add my 2 cents, but I can't improve on oginschile's  summation.

fischer was undoubtedly one of the greatest players of all time,like many genius types his behavior was and still is baffling at times. i would rank him in the top three of all time with kasparov and morphy. who belongs at #1...?? you could make a good case for any of the three and a few others as well

I think you have to ask someone other than Americans.  Americans are looking for heros or winners.  Think about this.  Americans love the NFL.  We love the superbowl and we root for our team.  Europe and Canada have football, but it is not even really a legitmate consideration because it is not American.  Likeforests has shown that Fisher's record was not the best, but many still even knowning that consider Fisher the best.  Another factor was that America and Russia have been competion for years.  And when you have someone who takes over a area that has been dominated for years and wins and strikes a victory in an area that everyone knows year after year after year will be won by someone other than an American.  When an American finally takes control.  It is easy to jump on the band wagon.  When I was a child I did not even know about chess and then Fisher won.  All of a sudden America and even those that did not know chess were talking about Fisher. 

"I think you have to ask someone other than Americans." 

Why??

 

  Are you saying there's no objective criteria?

 

"Likeforests has shown that Fisher's record was not the best"

 

    or no objective criteria, unless you think it supports a certain view?

 

But, no, likesforests didn't show that at all. He simply provided some data.

 

Greco's win ratio is based on manuscripts of complete games (rather than game fragments that were more common in his time) that he compiled and sold or gave to wealthy patrons. He may or may not have played those games, but he certainly didn't include games he lost. 

 

Morphy's percentage, also extracted from chessgames.com, first, doesn't include all his games, and second, includes games against untalented amateurs, blindfold games, odds-games, casual games, etc.  Fischer's probably contain some of these but  not anywhere near the degree Morphy's does.

 

Whether a person is American, Russian Indian or Chinese, only rational opinions that are backed by sufficient hard data or strong cirumstantial evidence, really carry weight. One's nationaliity is irrelevant.

 

"Why is Fischer considered the greatest chess player ever by so many?"

I don't consider that he was great chess player. He had great talent but he hadn't character of chess player. As I think he always was afraid to lose and that's why he didn't defend the title of the World's Champion. Example: he refused to play match with Botvinnik, because they had only one game before, where Fischer was sure he would win but Botvinnik made draw.

In my opinion the greatest chess player was Alekhine.

Why is Fischer considered the best ever by so many? He won two candidates matches wih 100% scores , he also won a major tournament (US Closed Championship) with 100%, he defeated the entire soviet system ALONE, and then he actually lost rating points by beating Boris Spassky for the world championship in 1972. He also has won 20 games in a row against all GM players!  What other player has done any of these things? After winning his first US Championship at age 14 he also won EVERY US tournament he played in after that except two. He won 4 games in a row against "Iron Tigran" a man who didnt lose 4 games a year usually. Kasparov only has an equal record against both Tigran Petrosian and Spassky..need I say more?  I do consider Fischer the best chess player ever.....

i like bobby fischer play.i remember i saw a movie about him when i was at a chess club:)

I believe when you get to a level of mastery such as that of Fisher and Kasparov, It's really like comparing the music of Beethoven and Bach. No one can say that Bach is the greatest composer to ever live, because there's Beethoven, and vise versa. The point is, no one stands out in chess history as being particularly more dominant in his time than any other, so we should appreciate  the beauty of their contributions to the game, as we appreciate the beauty of Beethoven's symphonies, because only a genius such as Beethoven could dare to say who the greatest composer of all time is.

"He had great talent but he hadn't character of chess player."

 

 Surely you're joking?

He also has won 20 games in a row against all GM players!                 right on!!

Um yah. He's also a little screwed in the head right now.

NM Reb is right. I love Anand, dislike Topalov etc etc,but for me,Fischer was the greatest. Nobody at present has his aura. Here, I speak strictly of chess and chess alone! Capa and Morphy were superb too. Perhaps in this computer and internet age, it is difficult to emulate Fischer's dramatic victory runs. Topalov can do it of course,and,don't we know how! And one more thing. Fischer made the whole world ( males mostly ) want to pick up a chessboard.