They're practically all here in chessgames by the way.>

What do you look for in a game to guage talent? And how did you guess that one has more of it than the other?

Why not Reshevsky or Carlsen as the most talented player, for example? Again, I know it's your opinion but I'm just curious how you formed that opinion.

Carlsen on the other hand at certain points of his games with Anand, gave the me the impression that he was just waiting for Anand to do something. At times he did not seem to have a clear plan. He quickly got into time trouble apparently because he was not sure what he ought to do. You can replay the games yourself as they have just occurred. I am not taking anything away from Carlsen. In the 17 to 27 age bracket, he plays the strongest IMO. So one day he will probably become World Champion, unless a younger player with the abilities of a Capablanca or Anand comes along before he gets the Title.

I know that GMs don't often make useless moves. They are GMs precisely because all of them to a greater or lesser degree have the 'sight' plus superb calculative ability (but not as much as the 'super' GMs).

<Still, I don't get why you think Capablanca is more talented than Morphy.> I already told you, I got the impression by re-playing their games. Naturally, this impression cannot be quantified, which is apparently what you want me to do.

<Have you seen Karpov play aimlessly or without a clear plan?> What is your point here? Did you not just read my post that I regard Karpov as having the 'sight' too? If you want me to be specific, IMO Karpov has a stronger chess sight than Carlsen's, but weaker than Anand's.

<If not, why is he not more talented than Capa?> Again you are asking me to quantify my impressions. I just do not have the ability to do that.

btw, carlsen has played 61 classical games so far this year, anand has played 27, kramnik has played 20. most of the players carlsen has faced, have also had much more busy schedules than anand (and kramnik), so in addition to "level", it might also have something to do with energy.

Makes me wonder if Anand and Kramnik are on a completely different level than other 2750+ GMs.>

I wouldn't say Anand beat Carlsen "easily". Its more likely that Carlsen lost a lot of morale in the second game. Do you remember that game where Carlsen attacked and overpressed against Anand (was it Corus or Linares 2008?) while missing a key move that could've won him the game. Anand is just superb when calculating positions at blitz/rapid time controls. I bet Radjabov could match Carlsen in rapid/blitz time controls.

<Also,> I always wonder why Kramnik is regarded so high. I'll give Kramnik the credit that he is possibly one of the greatest match players in history. His extreme patience and solid defense is similar to "watching paint dry" for his opponents.

therefore it was a bit strange that he missed the best continuation after the spectacular nh6+!! against moro - he even thought for several minutes after kh8 nxf7+ kg8 had been played, but still only came up with ne4?! ...

http://ishare.rediff.com/filevideo-...