I think La Bourdonnais deserved to be in the list. Wasn't he the first champion, as we would consider by modern standard : a player who won his supremacy over the board against valuable opponent(s)? Didn't he won the first true match in history (I mean against a strong opponent, with media coverage and with all games still enjoyable today)?
Topalov is No1 today http://chess.liverating.org But as you can see, our list contains undisputed and classical world champions (from 1886), and nobody from FIDE champions in split time (1993–2006.)
Aron Nimzowitsch — The father of hypermodern chess. The Bruce Lee of his time, questioning the old, classical ways and founding new, exciting ideas which can be seen in modern games today. Famous for his book 'My System' which includes his ideas of Over-protection and Prophylaxis. Richard Réti — Réti became the adopted father of hypermodern chess and had a purely hypermodern chess opening named after him. Réti also composed one of the most famous endgame studies — Dr. Karsten Müller, Grandmaster and endgame specialist, uses the Rèti endgame study as an example in his own teachings today. I realise they might not have won a world title but the concept of naming only world champions ignores the most influential chess players in chess history. To quote Yasser Seirawan: " Today, all top players make use of the ideas of Steinitz and Nimzovich. These two men can be classed as the greatest chess thinkers in the game's history. " — taken from Yasser's book, 'Winning Chess Strategies'. I hope the world champions concept is renewed with the concept that both world champions and the most influential figures in chess history can be named.
I think La Bourdonnais deserved to be in the list. Wasn't he the first champion, as we would consider by modern standard : a player who won his supremacy over the board against valuable opponent(s)? Didn't he won the first true match in history (I mean against a strong opponent, with media coverage and with all games still enjoyable today)?
Yes, you are right, but our selection from pre-1886 is subjective anyhow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship#History_of_the_world_chess_championship
What about Topalov?
Topalov is No1 today http://chess.liverating.org But as you can see, our list contains undisputed and classical world champions (from 1886), and nobody from FIDE champions in split time (1993–2006.)
What about Bronstein? He drew the match with Botvinnik, so he should've been at least 'co-champion'. Also he played a lot of computer chess.
Yes, and Leko drew with Kramnik after losing the last game :(
Yeah, but Leko definitely wasn't threatened by the KGB before his last game.
Aron Nimzowitsch — The father of hypermodern chess. The Bruce Lee of his time, questioning the old, classical ways and founding new, exciting ideas which can be seen in modern games today. Famous for his book 'My System' which includes his ideas of Over-protection and Prophylaxis. Richard Réti — Réti became the adopted father of hypermodern chess and had a purely hypermodern chess opening named after him. Réti also composed one of the most famous endgame studies — Dr. Karsten Müller, Grandmaster and endgame specialist, uses the Rèti endgame study as an example in his own teachings today. I realise they might not have won a world title but the concept of naming only world champions ignores the most influential chess players in chess history. To quote Yasser Seirawan: " Today, all top players make use of the ideas of Steinitz and Nimzovich. These two men can be classed as the greatest chess thinkers in the game's history. " — taken from Yasser's book, 'Winning Chess Strategies'. I hope the world champions concept is renewed with the concept that both world champions and the most influential figures in chess history can be named.