It would be more fun to post and vote on our top 5 favorite endgame positions of all time.

Stigma wrote on 10/29/10 at 19:42:06:

If anything I think it's a pre for modern players. Finding your way without having analyzed it at home is more difficult that remembering an analysis found out with the help of seconds.

trw wrote on 10/29/10 at 17:43:04:


Yes, for the first part of his career he was. But Dink Heckler already confirmed that lack of adjournments these days played a part in his excluding Kramnik.

I still think that's a bad argument. Analysis (with seconds) is simply not the same thing as playing under time constraint with only your own skills and knowledge to rely on. Actually, if we allow endgame analysis in, probably the top 5 endgame players are recent corr. top players! Since Andersson is the only corr. player on the list we're supposed to be mainly evaluating play, not analysis.

The javelin analogy is perfect. In both cases it's a rule change that may affect objective results (shorter throws; endgame play further from perfection). In javelin throw Jan Zelezny is rightly considered the greatest ever, even though Uwe Hohn's world record under the 'old' model was 6 meters longer. 
 
It's not Anand or Kramnik's fault that adjournments are a thing of the past. You can't exclude people a priori from a fair ranking.

Dink Heckler wrote on 10/29/10 at 13:39:44:

No, in my case Spielmann if I used your argument.

Dink Heckler wrote on 10/29/10 at 13:04:26:


so we are also evaluating the group efforts many of these adjournments were? 

I think I once read an interview with a oldtime GM who claimed that the endgame knowledge of contemporary GM's was better then in the days of adjournments because in those days you could wing it until adjournment and look the ending up and research after the adjournment.

Stigma wrote on 10/29/10 at 12:16:44:

Well, such problems of definition are inherent to such polls. As someone else above noted, the big question is: What separates the best from the rest? Where does an endgame start? Do we factor in liquidating into a good ending? Do we take into account the time factor? Are we after objective correctness or is practical play included? All these points change the result.

By the way: I'm not voting since I'm too weak an endgame player myself to do anyone on this list justice.

Talking about "best" player is always kind of a popularity contest.

Talking about most instructive endgames would result in less ranting. 

Writing this by admitting that there are hints to some endgames in this topic.