Hikaru’s Hot Takes on the Ten Best Chess Players of All Time

Hikaru reviews chess.com’s list of the ten best chess players of all time:

🍪 Upgrade your chess game at chess.com by getting your premium membership here: – you’ll be supporting the channel and learning endgames like a champ!

🎁 Or you can give the gift of chess. Gift someone you know and love a membership to chess.com or troll your favorite lichess fanatic by subbing them – try it – it’s fun!

📎 Clip Channel:
More GMHikaru:

💪 I’m partnered with GFuel and to support me and the community, visit #GFuelPartner USE CODE HIKARU #ad
► Find Me: Watch my live shows on Twitch ➡️
Play chess on Chess.com ➡️
Support/Tip/Donate to the channel ➡️

🌟 Socials 🌟 Follow me on Twitter ➡️
Follow me in Pictures ➡️
Join our Discord ➡️
to stay in contact and join our community
Become a fan on Facebook ➡️
Join our Reddit for the MEMES and to make it to Reddit React Videos ➡️

🎥 Edit and 🎨 Thumbnail by: Daily Dose of Chess
👌Channel Management – Team Hikaru
📧 Business inquiries only: [email protected]

#gmhikaru #chess #kasparov

60 Comments

  1. I think that Anand is over Kramnik for sure. Let's not forget that Kramnik lost a match against Shirov, but Kasparov decided that it was better to play the match against Kramnik, because Shirov was not interesting for the sponsors.

  2. When Hikaru says Tal is not a top 10 player, one has to wonder what planet we are on !!! A totally unreasonable assessment I would suggest. It's not just the results, it's also the ability to play in such a style as others cannot play as well. Hence, in a certain style, you are the best in the world, and maybe the best ever. Each world champion had something special pertaining to each one. Tal would beat Hikaru today. Larsen and Geller should also be considered in these lists.

  3. Saying if Morphy was rougly 400 ahead of everyone is the same thing as if Magnus was 3100 is nonsense. The better you are, the harder it gets to get better. At their times, there was still a lot of room for improvement in areas where players actually improved as time went by and it was relatively "easy". And also at some point you also push to the limit of how good a human can actually be.

  4. Morphy definitely belongs in the top 10. He was lightyears ahead of his competition.

  5. I think you're confused. You need to describe the criteria you're using to rate world champions. If we go by dominance Morphy should be #1, Fischer #2, Kasparov #3, Carlsen #4, Capablanca or Lasker #5 and then the rest.

  6. Vishy not in top 10,this list is a joke then,he literally won everything in chess and even so at the later stages of his career,at one point he was untouchable in Rapid and Blitz,in Classical he remained top 10,top 5,even 1 or 2 at times,5× wc, champion in every format, first gm of a country,inspired billions,created a heritage,even if you aren't Indian,you can't overlook his resume, Better than most of them,he is a true winner in every sense.

  7. Vishy definitely deserves to be in the Top 10 imo.

  8. To me Capablanca stands out because he doesn’t come from USA, India or soviets where chess is more common.

  9. petrosian, Fischer, tal, Spassky,polugaesky, Kasparov, karpov, kramnik, anand, carlsen

  10. Wow. I've been pronouncing Alekhine as "Aleck-hind" for 40 years. So weird to hear it pronounced "Ali-eck-en".

  11. Kasparov
    Carlsen
    Fischer
    Capablanca
    Morphy
    Kramnik
    Anand
    Karpov
    Lasker
    Spassky

  12. Nah, Hans Niemann is top 10 players. The chess speaks for itself

  13. Why is Bobby Fischer not in the the thumbnail?

  14. Hikaru may be right on his own, but without explaining the wins of an illiterate chess master from India, who defeated the best in world of his time, hikaru's analysis is flawed. How can he ignore Mir Sultan Khan, who defeated likes of Capablanca?

  15. more impressive to come from nothing like vishy; the russian system was a bit of a sausage factory

  16. What will the top 10 list look like 10 or 15 years form now.

  17. I agree with the assessment of Morphy, we can only judge players by how good they were compared to their competition.
    There was a significant amount of separation between Morphy and Fischer from their contemporaries. So I consider them the two greatest.

  18. It's against all odds that no one in chat was asking why GothamChess wasn't in the list…

  19. This list was very very obviously created by a prejudiced person. Just reading the description provided for Anand compared to others makes it painfully obvious. While everyone else's lists almost entirely their accomplishments and if there arent enough of those, their subjective strengths in playstyle, half of anand's is about who he lost to. Kinda disgraceful article to be honest.

  20. How has the writer of this article not heard of xqc

  21. An article written by a hack, who barely scraped by in their career and/OR the article is written with direct special interest, either business or personal relationship considerations, as priority instead of objectivity. One final possibility; standard of measurement is a bizarre one and the author possibly struggled, and maybe the stats alone or some other method of measurement we aren't made aware of led to this outcome. My question? Who's not on list, to include honorary mentions, isn't on this list at all but should be? Any neglected person's that stand as obvious shoeins?

  22. Morphy should be in the top 5. I agree that he was much better than his contemporaries. The same goes for Fischer. Karpov is too high, Tal and Alekhine are too low. My favorite is Capa who had one of the best win/loss record of all GMs.

  23. Mikhail Tal is definitely TOP 10 what are you talking about Hikaru???

  24. Capablanca is at the level of the best in history, whoever you choose. But he was waiting ten years to be able to beat the world champion (Lasker) and even a few more for the rematch that never came with Alekhine.

    No other player has terrified world champions as much as he has (when he didn't have the crown in his possession).

  25. hot takes huh? Not so hot if you come out saying that everyone but Anand and Morphy should be on there.

  26. bobby fischer said that morphy was the most talented and accurate chess player who ever lived. morphy should be ranked much higher than just "honorable mention". kasparov is a great chess player and likely the best russian chess player ever, but there's just no way he's better than fischer, and he might not be better than carlsen.

  27. I'm a little surprised my name wasn't mentioned.

  28. 3:00 While he were ahead of his peers there simply were much fewer players.

  29. 1 Kasparov
    2 Carlsen
    3 Fischer
    4 Capablanca
    5 Murphy
    6 Karpov
    7 Lasker
    8 Botvinnik
    9 Anand
    10 Alekhine or Kramnik or Tal

  30. Let's see, top players today pretty much memorize the same theory and simple endgame positions. As soon as they step away from that, the inaccuracies happen in the middle game. I'm gonna go with the best person being from a different era than today, that's for sure. GMs today – "I dont remember what I was supposed to play here" Right, because you just memorized lines and didnt work out much of anything otb lol

  31. Hikaru just wants Magnus to pipe him and rearrange his guts.

  32. Anand not in Top 10 and Kramnik in Top 7 is just wrong.

  33. Re Petrosian, not a fan of the 1966 championship with the pawn storm game and the Qh8+ double exchange sacrifice game? As was pointed out afterward, if petrosian was willing to play boring Petroff's in games 17 and 19 instead of Sicilian, he might have held the title. Fischer was 8-4, but it was 3-3 before the candidate match when Fischer was unstoppable. Maybe not top 10, but HN is a bit dismissive.

  34. I love seeing videos like this, where the person is discussing something interesting, while all the twitch idiots are spamming BS. Streaming culture 🤦‍♂

  35. I love Morphy's games, and I get the logic of him being so far ahead of his peers, but are we ignoring the fact that players weren't as good at that time in history? Theory wasn't even close to where it is today, and neither was the competition. I see his theorized ELO is 2638 from a few different sources. That's really high but not necessarily top ten.

  36. The article had a bad opening, lots of blunders

  37. Wait, was Vishy an honorable mention? Tell me I misheard that.

  38. Me Watching with captions for more entertainment…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.