3. The greatest chess players in history?
The answer depends on the criteria one uses. If the criterion is the ability to play world class chess for the longest period of time, Lasker would be it. He was playing at peak form from 1890 age 22 (when he began a remarkable run of match victories over Bird, Mieses, Blackburne, and Showalter, and culminating in his two massacres of Steinitz) until 1925 at age 57 (when he nearly won Moscow after winning New York 1924). Kasparov (high plateau from 1980 to 2005) and Karpov (high plateau from 1972 to 1996) would follow.
If the criterion is play at their very peak, for various reasons too long to elaborate on, I believe that Karpov was probably stronger than Lasker and Alekhine, and was definitely stronger than Steinitz, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Kramnik, Anand, and Ding. And was equal to Carlsen. The peak Capablanca, Fischer, Kasparov, and Carlsen\Karpov in order were stronger than any of the other World champions, with the possible exceptions of Lasker and Alekhine.
By the way, Alekhine has always struck me as an anomaly. He was the last Russian Empire Champion and the first Soviet Champion. At times he played quite poorly. Most of the time he played spectacular tactical chess excellently. At the same time, he was an excellent endgame player, squeezing wins in dry endgame positions regularly.
Once in his life, he played better than the post-peak Capablanca in the WC match of 1927, who in my opinion was already suffering badly from hypertension; but still this particular Alekhine was good enough to beat most, maybe all, titleholders in history. At the end of his career in the 1940s, Alekhine was beating masters that were active post WW2.
If the criterion is matches, Capablanca would be it. Prime Capa from 1916 through 1922 never made a losing error, even in the most bizarre complications. You can’t beat a player in a match if he doesn’t make a losing error. At the most all you can do is draw the match, with all games drawn. Prime Capablanca would beat or at least draw any opponent in a World Championship match.
If the criterion is quick games (rapid or blitz), Capablanca would be it. See my posts in his match with Corzo for more details.
Capa also played a lot of two game matches early in his career against strong opponents, and won them. He would have no trouble winning the World Cup, which is composed of 2-game classical time control matches followed by quick games tie breaks if the classical games match end in a tie.
In a play-off World Championship match with quicker time controls, prime Capablanca would beat anyone. AFAIK Capa won ALL quick game tournaments and matches he played in except one in which he placed second. (To be continued)/PN
