On 05 Oct 2003 06:28:51 GMT, (LeModernCaveman)
wrote:

I say it's a tossup between Euwe and Smyslov.

This is not a tossup at all. Smyslov was likely the strongest player
in the world when he won the World Championship. Other contenders were
Reshevsky, Keres and Botvinnik. It would be nice if someone would go
back and calculate the ratiungs for those players, since there was no
rating system back then.

Elo's list is helpful but does not really apply, because it only
calculates five-year peaks, not ratings at a particular point in time.

http://www.samsloan.com/eloslist.htm

Euwe was never anywhere close to being the strongest player in the
world. He might have been in the top ten. Alekhine was so far ahead
and winning the match so easily that he started drinking and lost
several games in a row because he was drunk.

Sam Sloan

I'd have to say Morozevich

Oops, I mean Khalifman

Staunton was the weakest. Then Euwe.

EZoto

In article m,
says...

Staunton was the weakest. Then Euwe.

EZoto

I can't say where Euwe ranks next to the other world champions, but he
co-authored one of my favorite chess books - "Chess Master vs Chess
Amateur". I used to play through the games in the book with my
children. I played the role of the amateur, they played the master and
got to trounce me.

Marty

I think Botvinnik was the weakest "Champion" but probably the strongest
challenger..Botvinnik never won a Match as World Champion..

Etj718 wrote:
I think Botvinnik was the weakest "Champion" but probably the strongest
challenger..Botvinnik never won a Match as World Champion..
Neither did Fischer. Nor has Kramnik.

John

EZoto wrote in message ws.com...
Staunton was the weakest. Then Euwe.

EZoto

Staunton was not an official world champion was he? BTW, he was
stonger than many players give him credit and way ahead of his time
with his treatment of the opening especially his pioneering use of the
fianchetto:

"Staunton was the most profound opening analyst of all time.He was
more theorist than player but none the less he was the strongest
player of his day." -Bobby Fischer

I would agree with a previous poster and say that Khalifman is most
probably the weakest world chess champion if the FIDE KO championship
is included.

Scorsi

"John Macnab" wrote in message
news:gn5gb.29833$pl3.26328@pd7tw3no...
Etj718 wrote:
I think Botvinnik was the weakest "Champion" but probably the strongest
challenger..Botvinnik never won a Match as World Champion..
Neither did Fischer. Nor has Kramnik.


Kramnik hasn`t had an opportunity so far to play a match ;-)

BTW As far as the weakest WCC is concerned I believe there is no correct
answer to this question simply because the WCCs are the strongest players of
their time and comparing them through the time will be always subjective. In
other words we cannot compare the ultimate strength of e.g. Capablanka and
Tal cause they lived in other eras.


Regards,
Jerzy

In article ,
(Etj718) writes:
I think Botvinnik was the weakest "Champion" but probably the strongest
challenger..Botvinnik never won a Match as World Champion..

However, he did at least draw a match as WC, which is more than
can be said for Euwe, Smyslov, Tal, Spassky, Fischer & the post-Kasparovs.
--
J.E.H.Shaw [Ewart Shaw] ick TEL: +44 2476 523069
Department of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/statsdept http://www.ewartshaw.co.uk
3 ((4&({*.(=+/))++/=3@([:,/0&,^i.3)@|:"2^:2))&.@]^i.@[) #:3 6 2