If all Chess World Champions were simultaneously alive?

@ThunderClap said in #10:
> In their prime isn;t the ONLY way of Looking at it ... Take for example V Smyslov former World Chess Champion who Played in The Candidates (AGAIN) at AGE 62 @Clearchesser

Lo. Did I make another sub par topic? Lets base it off their accuracy. Magnus is fortunate to be surrounded by perfect A.I.s to teach him. Unless you know something more accurate.

@Clearchesser If they were all alive at the same time doesn't say what time it is or period or year heh' hehe' . Picture it 1924 all avive at the same time ALL Playing in NY 1924 !

2023 A.D as Magnus Carlsen leaves as WC. We had WWs and global problems. There might have been more or less Chessplayers depending on circumstances. None if we all die. There is no way to know the result of a deceased player. Mere guesses that can never be proven.

The problem I have with this type of hypothetical questions is that it's usually undefined what it means if "Aljechin lived today", for example.

Do we teleport him to the present time at the eve of his match with Magnus Carlsen? One week before? Then of course he will loose against Magnus Carlsen, who trained his entire career with engine support, while Aljechine still comes to grips with what dark magic this is.

On the other hand, if we teleported Aljechin as an infant, the playing field in terms of chess theory and engine support is equal, but that person will not be the historical Aljechine anymore, but a person with Aljechine's genes who grows up in modern time (and who may not even be interested in becoming a professional chess player and learning by heart all those deep computer lines).

@Panagrellus said in #24:
> The problem I have with this type of hypothetical questions is that it's usually undefined what it means if "Aljechin lived today", for example.
>
> Do we teleport him to the present time at the eve of his match with Magnus Carlsen? One week before? Then of course he will loose against Magnus Carlsen, who trained his entire career with engine support, while Aljechine still comes to grips with what dark magic this is.
>
> On the other hand, if we teleported Aljechin as an infant, the playing field in terms of chess theory and engine support is equal, but that person will not be the historical Aljechine anymore, but a person with Aljechine's genes who grows up in modern time (and who may not even be interested in becoming a professional chess player and learning by heart all those deep computer lines).

Lol. How vague are trying to be here? Your attempt to derail this thread is too late.

@ThunderClap said in #22:
If they were all alive at the same time doesn't say what time it is or period or year heh' hehe' . Picture it 1924 all alive at the same time ALL Playing in NY 1924 !

Emanuel Lasker is often overlooked when noting the best chess players. He kicked butt in this tourney! - :]

New York 1924 was an elite chess tournament held in the Alamac Hotel in New York City from March 16 to April 18, 1924. It was organized by the Manhattan Chess Club. The competitors included world champion José Raúl Capablanca and his predecessor Emanuel Lasker. Nine other top players from Europe and America were also invited. Emanuel Lasker met Alexander Alekhine, Efim Bogoljubow, Géza Maróczy, Richard Réti, Savielly Tartakower and Fred Yates in Hamburg. They steamed with the SS Cleveland on February 28, 1924, and joined Capablanca, Frank Marshall, Dawid Janowski and Edward Lasker in New York. The tournament was played as a double round robin, with each player meeting every other one twice. Emanuel Lasker won $1500 for first prize, plus generous payment for travel expenses. Capablanca won $1000, compensation for expenses, and an extra payment.

Results
The final results and standings:

# Player 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Total
1 Emanuel Lasker (Germany) xx ½0 1½ ½1 11 11 11 ½1 ½1 ½1 11 16
2 José Raúl Capablanca (Cuba) ½1 xx ½½ ½½ 01 ½1 11 11 1½ ½1 ½1 14½
3 Alexander Alekhine (Soviet Union) 0½ ½½ xx ½½ 10 1½ ½½ ½½ 11 ½½ 11 12
4 Frank Marshall (United States) ½0 ½½ ½½ xx ½1 0½ 01 ½0 ½1 1½ 11 11
5 Richard Réti (Czechoslovakia) 00 10 01 ½0 xx ½½ 01 11 10 10 11 10½
6 Géza Maróczy (Hungary) 00 ½0 0½ 1½ ½½ xx 01 ½½ 11 ½1 10 10
7 Efim Bogoljubow (Soviet Union) 00 00 ½½ 10 10 10 xx 01 11 ½1 01 9½
8 Savielly Tartakower (Poland) ½0 00 ½½ ½1 00 ½½ 10 xx 10 ½0 ½1 8
9 Fred Yates (England) ½0 0½ 00 ½0 01 00 00 01 xx 11 ½1 7
10 Edward Lasker (United States) ½0 ½0 ½½ 0½ 01 ½0 ½0 ½1 00 xx 0½ 6½
11 Dawid Janowski (France) 00 ½0 00 00 00 01 10 ½0 ½0 1½ xx 5

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_1924_chess_tournament#

In terms of absolute strength, I think it's something like:

1. Carlsen
2. Kasparov
3. Kramnik
4. Capablanca
5. Anand
6-7. Topalov / winner of Ding or Nepomniachi
8-9. Fischer / Karpov
10. Alekhine
11-12. Spassky / Botvinnik
13-14. Petrosian / Tal

Then the rest are in no particular order.

Keep in mind that Caruana, Karjakin, Leko at their peaks would also be on this list (Caruana at Kramnik's level, and the other two at Topalov's level) except that none of them have (yet) become world champion. I think a lot of people like to over-romanticize certain players, like Fischer because of how *relatively* dominant he was. Similarly with Kasparov (except he was clearly also dominant in absolute value). Fischer looks really strong when compared to Spassky, or Petrosian, but he ran away from Karpov, and never faced players like Anand, MVL, or Wesley So. Fischer would also have a very hard time with modern theory as he himself compained about. Can you imagine Fischer being forced to actually use a computer to study?

I remember someone (Sonas?) did some analysis of the objective quality of actual game moves that concluded that Capablanca played unusually accurate moves. So yes, Capablanca was out-prepared by Alekhine (just as Kasparov was out-prepared by Kramnik, and again, Kramnik was out-prepared by Anand) but I think there is little doubt that if he were granted a rematch, he would have given Alekhine a much more serious run for his money.

Saying that *anyone* can challenge Carlsen in any setting (except Hikaru in bullet or blitz) is just absurd. His game 6 against Nepo is utterly mind-blowing. How any chess-playing entity could even *conceive* of how to play that end game, still blows my mind. Aside from the fact that he found something worth playing for, when the table-bases were saying it was a dead draw. His pretty little mate-in-3 against Karjakin in their WC in the tie breaks was also something I wouldn't think a mortal human would ever even try much less execute to perfection.

id like to see greco lose like he used to win

In this thought experiment, you would also need to give players an adjustment period to catch up on theory.

@Mennonite
@Clearchesser

Exactly. This was my point in #25. If you just hypothetically bring the old masters into the present, they will lose to about any Super-GM, because they will be outplayed by today's players' computer preparation and theoretical knowledge.

But if you give them a couple of months time to adjust and work with computers and stuff, they are not really the historical players anymore, so the question becomes a bit pointless imo.