Canada's Greatest Chess Player of All Time?

[Graham Sorgard]

One reason I appreciate sites like this is for Canadian chess history. I had no idea Nickoloff was so highly regarded.

[Brad Thomson]

One reason I appreciate sites like this is for Canadian chess history. I had no idea Nickoloff was so highly regarded.

I do not recall all of the details, nor who it was that first told me, though it may have been Stephen Ball. If anyone can improve upon what I suggest, please do so. Nick was playing against Keres in a simul in Toronto and beat him. After it was over they began to analyze together and Nick started playing through from memory some of the games that were taking place in one of the Karpov-Kortchnoi matches at the time. Nick did the explaining and Keres watched and learned. Then Keres wrote a letter to the CFC opining that Canada had a prodigy on its hands whom with proper development had the talent to become the world champion of chess.

[Brad Thomson]

https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/ch...n-toronto-1975

[Larry Bevand]

One reason I appreciate sites like this is for Canadian chess history. I had no idea Nickoloff was so highly regarded.

Hi Graham,

The Chess'n Math Association (with the help of Brian Hartman and a financial contribution of a donor ) published a book written by our own Lawrence Day entitled "Nick's Best"

https://strategygames.ca/store/en/pr..._fulltext=nick

Selected Chess Games of Bryon Nickoloff
by Lawrence Day

Canada's eccentric International Master Bryon Nickoloff was a genius at opening preparation and endgame strategy. The main reason he never became a Grandmaster was habitual time trouble with the clock. He was simply addicted to the adrenaline of time scrambles. So this book will be very educational for students of openings and endgames, but a dramatic 'cautionary tale' regarding the time-consuming search for perfection in the middlegame."Nickoloff, with an IQ of 180, whizzed through school with no mark below 95. He was one of a select group of students picked for the city's short-lived experiment in advanced independent learning. At 15, he joined a chess club at a local YMCA. 'There were 500 people there and everyone was beating me, ' says Nickoloff. 'But six months later, 1 could beat them all. ' He became 'obsessed' with the game and would play six hours a day, study chess books and famous games for another 10 hours. ..."Dave Stonehouse, Toronto Star, November 13, 1988"...there is such a thing as chess talent. It manifests as a sort of premature intuition. The player just naturally sees the right moves in complex or bizarre positions, or feels when the turning point in the game is at hand. ...Two Canadians have impressed this columnist as being more talented than the rest. One is Kevin Spraggett of Montreal, who has gone on to become a Grandmaster ...The other is Bryon Nickoloff of Toronto ..."Jonathan Berry, Globe and Mail, June 3, 1989International Master Lawrence Day of Toronto is a former Canadian Champion and 13 time member of the national Olympic team. After graduating in 1971 with an honours degree in English literature from Carleton University in Ottawa, he relocated to Toronto where he thrived as a chess player, teacher and writer. For several years he was 'Resident Analyst' for Chess Canada (a commune that supported itself by producing the magazine). Later Day wrote for magazines Modern Chess Theory, En Passant, Inside Chess as well as authoring a syndicated column distributed by the Toronto Star. He is the author of two books published in England: The Grand Prix Attack (with Julian Hodgson) and The Big Clamp which later became a collector's item. Day's first tournament game with Bryon Nickoloff was in 1972; Day was the heavy favourite but it ended in a draw. Fifty tournament games later their score remained roughly balanced, the 'Nick' slightly better at 30-minute Active, Day slightly better at regulation time. Friends as well as rivals, they both loved chess!

Published by the Chess'n Math Association

June 2007
295 pp

Larry

[Hans Jung]

I can say that book was a labour of love and a must have.

I have 3 of Nick's Best. One that is personally autographed by Lawrence and that I will always treasure. One that I refer to. And one that I have loaned out.

[David Ottosen]

The only choices are Spraggett and Yanofsky, with a special mention for Suttles and his contribution to the understanding of chess.

As for Nickoloff - I always think it's easier to be the for some reason blocked and unrealized talent you can project to infinity; you never get brought down by the reality of trying and failing to achieve that infinity. This isn't exclusive to chess, and why people sometimes think Lemieux was better than Gretzky "if only he hadn't been injured...". Give Lemieux perfect health and he has a better career than he had, but I still doubt it lives up to Gretzky. Same for Nickoloff in comparison to Spraggett/Yanofsky.

[Brad Thomson]

This isn't exclusive to chess, and why people sometimes think Lemieux was better than Gretzky "if only he hadn't been injured...". Give Lemieux perfect health and he has a better career than he had, but I still doubt it lives up to Gretzky.

Neither Gretzky nor Lemieux came close to the greatness of Bobby Orr. Care to debate that Neil? :)

[Graham Sorgard]

Thanks Larry, ordered this morning.

[Larry Castle]

Neither Gretzky nor Lemieux came close to the greatness of Bobby Orr. Care to debate that Neil? :)

Hi Brad, I am not Neil but I must respond to your post. No one can deny the greatness of Bobby Orr. A simple visit to his Wiki page will tell you all you need to know. I would agree that he was the greatest defenseman of all time. However, his career was cut short by injuries and some of his records have been broken. Gretzky had a relatively injury free career and set records that will NEVER be broken. To say that Gretzky does not come close to Bobby Orr's greatness is well............lets just say I disagree. Peace.

[John Upper]

Is there a top computer engine that was produced by a Canadian? Because if yes, that engine gets my vote.

I wouldn't vote for an engine, but Naum was programmed by a Canadian. It hasn't been in development for years, but was Rybka-strength in the 2010's.

[John Upper]

Regarding GM Sambuev: He is a strong player with some notable achievements. I like his play and his games. But Canadian chess has a problem with his conduct during the 2017 Zonal playoff with IM Noritsyn. I left him out of my lists for this reason.

Then why don't you factor in Spraggett's decades of libel and slander against Canadian chess organizers?

[Brad Thomson]

Then why don't you factor in Spraggett's decades of libel and slander against Canadian chess organizers?

An excellent question.

[Brad Thomson]

To say that Gretzky does not come close to Bobby Orr's greatness is well............lets just say I disagree. Peace.

All right, Gretzky came close to Bobby Orr's greatness, but did not quite achieve it (in my opinion). I argue that Orr is the greatest of all time because Foster Hewitt saw everyone from the beginning to Bobby Orr and said Orr was the greatest he had ever seen, and I have seen everyone since Orr and he was the greatest I have ever seen. For what it is worth, on the Gretzky versus Lemieux debate, Lemieux does not come close to the greatness of Gretzky (here I go again).

[Neil Frarey]

Neither Gretzky nor Lemieux came close to the greatness of Bobby Orr. Care to debate that Neil? :)

No disrespect, but both Gretzky and Lemieux were supposed to score a lot of points ... that came with their positions. They were forwards ... that's their job, rack up points.

In that regard, Orr did their jobs. Orr won the scoring title.

Orr could 'see' the ice better than any forward. He could control the 'movement' of all the other players on the ice ... piece control ... better than anyone else. And this applied going in both directions ... as a defensive player and as a offensive player ... in BOTH the defensive zone and in the offensive zone better than anyone else.

By far ... the greatest hockey player of all time.

BTW, Orr was a defenseman ... he single-handedly redefined how a defenseman could play hockey.

Orr was a genius ... Gretzky & Lemieux ... not so much.

[Pargat Perrer]

No disrespect, but both Gretzky and Lemieux were supposed to score a lot of points ... that came with their positions. They were forwards ... that's their job, rack up points.

In that regard, Orr did their jobs. Orr won the scoring title.

Orr could 'see' the ice better than any forward. He could control the 'movement' of all the other players on the ice ... piece control ... better than anyone else. And this applied going in both directions ... as a defensive player and as a offensive player ... in BOTH the defensive zone and in the offensive zone better than anyone else.

By far ... the greatest hockey player of all time.

BTW, Orr was a defenseman ... he single-handedly redefined how a defenseman could play hockey.

Orr was a genius ... Gretzky & Lemieux ... not so much.

I wasn't born and raised in Canada, but since coming here a few decades ago, I did discover hockey and considered it the most exciting sport in the world. So I have watched many Youtube videos of hockey greats from the past, and even the many Canada-Russia matches and Canada-USA matches.

But I wanted to post about something I decided to create at a workplace many years ago, which is a hockey pool. But mine was different: for all skaters (i.e. not goalies), it included of course goals and assists and plus / minus. But... it also included, believe it or not, penalty minutes. A player earned a point in the pool for every 5 penalty minutes (rounded up, so if they had 12 penalty minutes, that is 2 points, 13 penalty minutes was worth 3 points).

The people in my pool told me my idea was the greatest innovation in hockey pools they had ever seen. Because players like Gretzky and Lemieux scored very high of course, but so did players like Glenn Anderson (underappreciated), Bryan Trottier (underappreciated), and even some players with huge penalty minutes like defenceman Chris Chelios. So if you drafted a fantasy roster, you included some tough players as well as the skilled ones. And in those days of hockey, tough players counted. They contributed a lot to a team's success. That's why Gretzky insisted Marty McSorley be traded to Los Angeles with him.

In today's hockey, it's all pretty much robotic. One player is much like another, they are all like robots, playing the same checking style. The truly skilled players like McDavid have some nice scoring stats, but nothing like they would have had in Gretzky's day. I actually can't watch today's hockey. Even the announcers sound bored.

And to be on topic, I think also that chess itself at the high levels has undergone the same process, so that it is really robotic now. There is very little originality. This Nepo guy that will play Carlsen may be the biggest break from the current mold so that could make their match interesting.