Paul Morphy vs Bobby Fischer: Who would win?

Bobby Fischer admitted that Paul Morphy was the most talented player who ever lived, but Fischer had knowledge that Morphy didn't and took chess way more seriously than Morphy ever did - I believe he even said something along the lines of chess being a waste of time! 

Anyway this simulation of a game between them is incredibly complicated!

My money would be on Bobby Fischer. Paul was brilliant, he would have probably adapted to modern methods. He would have been a tough opponent.

If both were allowed to study modern games, still Fischer by a large margin.

Fischer in 1971: rated 2895
http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=199510SSSSS3S038178000000111000000000008910100 
Morphy in 1895: rated 2743
http://www.chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=199510SSSSS3S088959000000111000000000019610100 

If morphy was given access to modern knowledge and given time to prepare then morphy would definitely win, but if they were just thrown into a match fischer would win because of his superior knowledge rather than just play ability

Fischer admitted that Paul Morphy had more talent than any other player, including himself! 

This is a pretty nice win by Fischer against Morphy - https://youtu.be/TCLDGXZ5JJc

Hansen Niemann

If it's about talent Fischer would win 

I've played through games by both players and assuming both players have access to the same books on theory and the same opportunity, I honestly think it would be really close. Morphy was a beast for his time, as was Fischer.

Fischer because his will to win was phenomenal.

It would be a draw!  It would be a draw at chess. It would also be a draw at crazy madman syndrome. 

However, Morphy participated in the longest chess game ever played, it took over 15 total hours to complete Morphy's 56 move win! This let to the introduction of time controls in competitive chess.  After experimenting  with gongs and hourglasses, a decade later the chess clock was introduced.  Fischer, on the other hand,  invented the increment clock a.k.a the Fischer clock. Fischer also invented Fischer Random, a.k.a. Chess 960, or 9LX.  Therefore, Fischer wins the match of innovation 2 to 1. 

Ditka.

In my personal opinion, Paul Morphy. Considering that Mr. Morphy played at such a short span, dominated his opponents raging from casual to serious games. Mr. Morphy for his time played at a considerably quick pace and a modern approach; having a mix of positional yet tactical style that favored the romantic era aesthetic of dashing attacks and brilliant sacrificial play that balanced the attack and defense. Compared to his peers either lacked these ideas or were simply outplayed by Mr. Morphy. Morphy from what is known learned chess from observing games played similar to Capablanca, and afterwards demonstrated a supreme understanding of the game against various individuals who were decent in there own right, however was tested against a real master being Loewenthal who lost his first match and second match by a considerable margin. After this, it seems that Morphy focus on his studies until graduating and finding himself with free time due to lacking the legal age for the field he was studying.

Chess to him was merely recreational and a pass time only pressured slightly by his uncle Alonzo Morphy to participate in further serious pursuit such as the First American Congress and his European visit. Morphy seems to display the ability to adapt, for example against Harrwitz, it seems that his style was characteristic of positional chess winning him 2 wins in the opening games, however not winning or drawing afterwards simply due to Morphy adapting than outplaying him (similar to Capablanca vs Corzo).

After conquering the chess world basically, he gradually retired like nothing happened. Overall, Morphy presents unparalleled talent that encompassed an understanding the game regardless of proper chess knowledge, in comparison to his opponents who studied the game with full focus and pursuit. Other than talented, he was a genius.

If Mr. Morphy were to take chess with serious vigor as Mr. Fisher, out of the two, Morphy's talent would shine through as simply he was ahead of his time and any other era he would be in.

fischer.

Borislav Ivanov.

Considering that Morphy died in 1884, the fact that he could still play at a 2743 level in 1895 makes him the most remarkable chess player ever.

let 1st talk about chess in general because that is the the topic we are talking abot.

primarily chess is a game of brain intelect .

though on a given day a very high rated player can lose to a much lower rank player thats happens with all great players. they all lose sometimes they dont have 100percentage win.

morphy was not undefeatable e id lose many games aganist his opponent so was fischer he lost matches . chess is like that even a great player cant win all his matches how much good he may abe as player. he himself cant guarantee he will wi all the matches against his opponents.

i beleive a less talented player can win gainst strong player if he memorises lot of books and if he goes to lots of past chess games. he wil definately will win gainst amuch better player then himself. gain he has to devote lot of time for it. and it will take many years of him to master all this. if he has the patience to do so.

still agreat player of chess u can unerstand him by study his games and see genius behind the moves he makes on the board. in spite of all the theory and tactics there are something u cant learn n chess through books and c omputers its like u are born with it.

u study the moves made by by mr morphy u will understadn those moves were pure genius and can never be learn by books and computers only aby a sharp brain who understands chess better then others players.

if u go through the games fischer uw il also find genius moves but not to that level that morphy play his moves were completely his moves they had nohing related to the books of his times thats why his oponent who also has studied the same books that they play were never able to match his brilliancy other wise there there would not be a such huge diffeence beetween morphy and his oponents.

morphy lost interest iin chess becaus e he could not find a worthy opponet againt him that is thing the primary he nevr wanted o play competetive chess

more on this letr

Morphy never considered chess as anything more than an interesting hobby, and quit playing competitively because he had his "real" law business to attend to.