The Best Chess Players Over Time (Estimated By Accuracy)

Take a journey through the history of chess and see the best chess players over time. The X-axis represents the year and Y-axis represents Elo estimated by accuracy as calculated by Chess.com/analysis.

This visual representation allows you to see when players like Bobby Fisher, Garry Kasparov, Magnus Carlsen, and Jose Capablanca performed across history.

Data and Methodology:

Follow us here 😀 :
✅ Sign up for FREE online play:
💜 Check us out on Twitch:
📸 Follow us on Instagram:
📱 Like us on Facebook:
💙 Follow us on Twitter:

#chess #bestchessplayers #bobbyfischer

500 Comments

  1. I'm not sure the method here is valid. The computers must be evaluating the openings, not just middlegame and endgame play being used, and that lowers the rating evaluation. Jude Acers estimated Lasker's middlegame play to reach the 2900s. And there is no way Morphy was 2300 and 2400. Fischer said that his play was the most accurate of any grandmaster in history. I do think though in terms of middlegame play this method would indeed work. They need to develop some statistical method which delineates the opening from the middlegame and then we would see the truth. My theory is that the chart would look like this:

    Morphy
    Fischer
    Capablanca
    Kasparov
    Alekhine
    Carlsen
    Kramnik
    Anand

  2. They really should've started back in Philidor's time. He is one player who should always be included in any chess GOAT discussion but almost never is.

  3. Even though Carlsen has the highest peak, in my opinion Kasparov is the best of all time, mainly for being able to remain on top for so many years.

  4. But the thing is I love Tal's gameplay's more than anyone on this card

  5. Then to know what would have happened if Fisher really liked chess lol

  6. 3:33 it says Bobby went to 2909 but the highest is by carlsen in recent years which is less that 2900 right?
    Edit: just saw the pinned comment, I understood

  7. I,LL put this to rest, those how try to take away from fisher cause they don't see between the line, fisher would of won vs Karpov but Karpov refused fishers terms, besides that Fisher would easily beat kasparov. G. Kasparov Games don't exist it is easy to see how the games where prearranged, anyway the accuracy should be based by originality and totally by the mind, and not by assistant of computers, players today would struggle with out cpu assistants. If cpu engines where not around the top players of today would not be it would be others, its all about memorization, that goes for any thing now days, if today's engines where around fisher time he would just dominate more easier. So that being said magnus can't claim he is the Greatest of all time, it would be false and just his vanity getting in the way of a ego that he should not have. Bobby Fisher is the greatest of all time and the best ever. I can always back this up. Magnus can only be the goat of the new age of chess by cpu assistants. Thats it. He would never logically be the greatest ever that goes to Bobby fisher. Think about it

  8. how are boris gelfand, anand, kramnik and aronian better than magnus in 2016 when he was the only dude 2850+ at the time

  9. No doubt . Bobby Fischer ‼️
    He had no top -notch engines to analyse gis and other games , no online chess, no team with high payed expert to improve him . He had only a old worn out chess book and his BRILLIANT mind ‼️❤️

  10. Could not find Leonid Stein on the list.Think he was number 3 in the world when he died.

  11. and if you look at the bottom bottom, even downwards, a little more below, ah yes here i am

  12. You say best,
    i say most interesting and for me such are Mikhail Tal, Fischer,Petrosian, Kasparov

  13. wow 😁 who needs history books. hyper learning.

  14. Vishy ❤. Player's Peak obviously matters, but for how much time can you be at peak or around the peak matters too, and i don't know anyone better than vishy at that.. (Okay carlsen is number 1 since a decade now, but I'd be curious to see how well he fares in his 40s and 50s)

  15. Put Paul Morphy in the mix today with the computer and he would fare well as would some of the past greats, including Capablanca and Steinitz.

  16. The final table has to be seen in terms of the fact that the highest in the table were able to use computers as part of their game preparation. Something not available to Bobby Fischer or Capablanca.

  17. Wow Adolf Anderson traveled all over the place. Never quite made it to the top tho

  18. 👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿

  19. for me vishwanathan anand is the goat he totally changes the game

  20. This is fake. Carlsen is at least 10 tears on top rating

  21. The 1920s were stacked. I bet that was a cool time for chess enthusiasts. 😎

  22. Had Pillsbury not contracted syphilis he would've been a real force to be reckoned with.

  23. Could have Super Grandmaster Mugnus Carlsen BEST all the former world chess champions (chess poineers) without all his advantages on technology including their wisdom, in the same era?

  24. Fisher's curve is insane with no ai no enginees he was so far ahead of everyone .. today we have higher elo players like magnus ding firouzja but all of them train using engines. Im glad an surprised that Tal the magician can surpass him for a short time in his prime.

  25. I felt so sad when Pillsbury and Morphy suddenly terminated.

  26. Last chart looks wrong: I see no Botvinnik in 1966 and his line never crossed 2700… Just one of strange results of this otherwise entertaining good work.

  27. 2900???😂😂😂
    Could anyone reach to 2900 elo at all????

  28. Ladies and Gentleman, I couldn't get a second of sleep before knowing the song name, because like some of you I recognized the sound from somewhere. But I couldn't wrap my head around, so I went through my playlist consisting of almost 3000 songs and started clicking random song with titles I would remember directly. Aaaand… at some point… Puff! → Unicorn Heads – Song of Mirrors

  29. Were is Mecking?(PT: Cadê o Mequinho?)

  30. This is a pretty bad method.
    If I play against 800s, I'll have a nearly perfect game every time.
    Does that make me 2900?
    Clearly not.

    Relative strengths matter- better opposition forces mistakes, weak opposition allows "brilliant" games.
    Fisher was NOT 2900. Ever.

  31. My take away…..late 1870's post-Morph era – I'm pretty competitive on the world stage.

  32. Fischer was on a level no one will ever match. He's the single greatest athlete in history in my opinion.

  33. Fischer is the best chess player of all time. He did not have access to a chess engine to show him stronger lines, everything was pure creativity and imagination in his mind. Engines have sadly changed the game.

  34. I love how fishers curve grew infinitely at his end of his era

  35. Something weird happens to Fischer's stats: as soon as he goes inactive, his rating plummets to like 1050ish before he disappears off the top of the chart…. Clearly this has nothing to do with his actual rating and is a strange artifact of this model… Perhaps all players are being calculated in terms of the current top player, and since Fischer was not playing the algorithm is counting him as having negative accuracy relative to the remaining active players?
    Not critical, but a weird side effect of this algorithm, or how it's visualization?
    Any thoughts?

  36. Where is Rashid Nezhmetdinov?? :s boooo!! fake.

  37. Morphy was far ahead of his time and Capablanca was clearly stronger than anyone until Fischer by these charts. Magnus is tops. I was surprised to see Kramnik finish 2nd above Kasparov at 3rd. Anand 4th and Fischer 5th.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.