/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10872630
69420

>>10872630
If he had been born in modern times he'd be some loser /pol/tard that nobody would ever hear of

>>10872630
He'd probably go beyond 3000 ELO rating.
I think he could beat Carlsen.

I highly doubt that. Magnus is on another level, even though he's a faggot

>>10872963
yeah lel you're a lot smarter than a chess grandmaster

>>10872630
Did you know Fischer used to play pinball to relax? I wonder when the last time he played pinball was. The technology and design of pinball has advanced a lot since this photo was taken, and advanced a lot again since he died. RIP

I dont think so. Carlsen's navigation of chaos and dynamism on the board is better than anyone's throughout time imo. Doesnt matter though AI just experienced a paradigm shift

>>10873004
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

Definitely a candidate for #1. 2900 no doubt.
One of the most naturally talented players of all time with Morphy and Capablanca.

If they were playing now, with access to all the tools available these days, the only one I see beating Magnus consistently in the end game is Capablanca.

>>10873175
having a chance of beating Magnus consistently**

>>10872630
fischer was playing computer moves at a time when computer analysis didn't exist
that's more impressive then all the autistic memorizing going on now

>>10873179
What do you mean by autistic memorizing? If you're talking about opening theory, then that hasn't changed all that much since Fischer's time.

>>10873186
it goes beyond opening theory tard

>>10873190
You think players memorize the middle game?

>>10873195

Speak for yourself anon, but that's how I win half of my duels

>>10873195
that's not how it works, you do memorize however computer lines from certain positions that are bound to occur

>>10872630
There is a mathematician - Jeff Sonas - who has specialized in chess rating analysis. He calculated "historic elos" of several players. According to him:
Fischers peak elo was 2895 in 1971:
See here:
http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=199510SSSSS3S038178000000111000000000000010100

>>10872630
I think it's fairest to compare players dominance in their time, in any sport. Fischer was simply the most dominant player in history for his 5 year peak (1967-1972). He was 120 points above 2nd place Boris Spassky (2785, 2660) and he could have doubltess broken the 2800 barrier while no one else had ever even broken the 2700 barrier.
Magnus, as good as he is, just has not shown this level of dominance. In order to do he would need to around 2940 in elo, which he is currently 60 points from.
Fischer was also the most obsessed chess player ever, and with modern technology, he'd study 24/7 and would surpass Carlsen somewhat easily in my opinion. This is the man who taught himself Russian to read footnotes in old abandoned chess books. Just imagine what he would do with Stockfish and constant practice against GMs online (Lichess.org >>>> Chess.com btw).
I've studied his games, and used engines to analyze his play. At his peak, he was damn near perfect.

>>10873232
kasparov was 2800+ for 24 years
absolute alpha
http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=1840AASSSSS3S062926000000111000000000000010100

>>10873236
>Lichess.org >>>> Chess.com
why what's the difference?

>>10873239
Yes, I think he (kasparov) is the best player in history*, maybe magnus beats him - we will know when magnus retires.

* look at this chart:
http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/MonthlyLists.asp?Params=1840AASSSSS3S062926000000111000000000000010100
Fischer might have highest peak rating, but kasparovs dominance over such a long time period is astonishing.

>>10873250
Kasparov is no doubt the greater player. That dominance for 20 years is unheard of. Carlsen here would need to continue doing what he's doing for 15 years to almost match Kasparov.
But I still think Fischer was the better player at his peak.

>>10873261
agree

>>10873243
Lichess has more free features and no ads

>>10872630
3500, given how brainlets today are aroudn 2800

>>10873232
where is alpha AI?

>>10873286
what features?

>>10873335
Not him. Both platforms are very good!
I think there are slightly more users on lichess. The code base of lichess is open source. I think, lichess has more "learning and exercises"-stuff. Exploring your statistics on lichess with "chess insights" is super cool. On lichess, you can play many different versions of chess like "atomic chess", "king of the hill", etc.
chess.com is imho more creative, they try to come up with new stuff, like "puzzle rush" or 4-player chess. You can form "teams" on chess.com.
I like both, but prefer lichess.

Chess is gay

>>10873374
this, desu

>>10873374
So it's a suitable hobby for you.

YO YO WHO HOMOSEX HERE

PARTYHOMO IS IN THE HOUSE TONIGGGHT
DO DE NIGGER BYEBYE

SEXY HOMO MAGIC
(GAY SHIT GAY SHIT GAY SHIT)

What are your ratings?
1100 on Lichess and feeling good

>>10873630
I'm 2k in bullet, 1800 in blitz, and 1700 in classical

I don't know how to make good moves but I'm fast

>>10872747
nice

>>10873044
Interesting

>>10873226
>>10873211
>t. 900 elo larpers

>>10872963
ESL?

>>10872630
how is this related to science or math at all you fucking shill faggot

>>10875350
If IQ test threads are allowed, chess threads are allowed

>>10873645
I'm 1300 bullet 1500 blitz and 1800 classical...wtf is wrong with my brain

>>10875363
>two wrongs make a right

>>10872963

Based


>>10873003

>Beyond 3000 ELO

Ahahahahahahahaha

Brainlet detected

>>10873268
>>10873261

No Mikhail Tal was better

>>10875350
>how is this related to science or math at all you fucking shill faggot
See >>10873232 . Rating formulas can be interesting from the mathematical point of view - it is applied mathematics. Prediction, inflation adjustement, (in)transitivity,...
Sonas wrote some articles on chessbase.com which might be interesting, for example:
https://en.chessbase.com/post/sonas-overall-review-of-the-fide-rating-system-220813
https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-sonas-rating-formula-better-than-elo

>>10875545
yes chess elo can be mathematical but no one is fucking talking about chess elo math. this thread is a shitfest of cocksucking over whos the best chess player and that anon just happened to have math to back up his claim, math is not the central point of the post.

>>10875859
have sex

>>10876165
I'm underage and you're being reported to the FBI

>>10872630
To me, it seems Carlsen can't be beaten by Fischer. I understand both players have neurotic problems, but Fischer's are worse. Carlsen seems to be not only an intuitive player, but very self-aware. I can imagine only a monk-like person defeating Carlsen in his prime

>>10873003
>>10873003
Fischer is easily the single most overrated chess player in history. Carlsen would wipe the floor with him, just like he does everyone else.

>>10875380

Tal played more fun but he only won world championship one time.

>>10876482

it's impossible to tell. We're talking completely different skill sets. We will never know how good Carlsen would have been without a computer ,or how good Fisher would have been with a computer.

It's just a guessing game.

>>10875350