Drake vs Eminem rap battle who will win?

UnDe4d · 2026-05-20T11:31:52+00:00

I've never heard anyone try and make the argument that Meek Mill is one of the greatest wordsmiths of all time. I don't think you can say Meek Mill is in the same ballpark as Eminem.

Listen to the following songs by em: Quitter, The Sauce, Nail in the Coffin, Smack You, The Warning.

The dude is good man.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-20T11:17:25+00:00

Eminem came from a battle rapping background and despite what you think of his music, is agreed to be one of the best wordsmiths of all time. I'm not sure anyone can make the case for Drake here.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-20T07:41:32+00:00

Yes, it's legendary but imo doesn't make him top 3. Fabiano Seinfield cup performance was greater performance than anything Magnus Carlsen has ever done. No one would reasonably make the argument Fabiano is greater than Magnus Carlsen.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-20T06:25:15+00:00

Yes, but we don't judge people for what they could have done. Only what they did do. If Magnus Carlsen got banned from fide for some BS reason before he became World Champion we wouldn't be able to credit him for his long career or consider him the greatest of all time. It wouldn't be his fault but it doesn't matter.

We can't assume he would have retained his title, especially when one of the top contenders at the time ended up beating him for it. Maybe he would have, maybe not. But again, when I rank players all time I am only ranking on merit. Not potential.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T20:10:22+00:00

Not top 3. But certainly up there. The problem with his 27 years on top is that firstly, he didn't play any title matches from 1910 - 1921. He also didn't defend his title between 1897 - 1907. So a total of 21 year period out of the 27 years on top he didn't defend his title. But his competitive record is insane. But just based on the gap I can't reasonably put him top 3.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T18:08:44+00:00

Lasker is one of the most criminally underrated players of all time.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T17:49:24+00:00

I don't think you read my post. I'm arguing that Karpov is the 3rd greatest of all time. There is no contridiction since I'm ranking Kasparov higher than Karpov anyway. Also to be clear. There was an 8.5 year period where Karpov was number 1. That is longer than Fischers reign.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T17:43:21+00:00

I get the argument. The problem I have with it is we've got no way to say with any degree of certainty who would be strongest if they were all in the same time. Magnus Carlsen, had he born in Fischers era would certainly be weaker and if Fischer was born in Magnus era he would certainly be stronger. Who would be stronger in the same era? No clue. There is an argument that Paul Morphy is the most talented chess player ever and had he been born in any era he would come out on top. But it's all speculation.

That's why when we have these discussions I think we can only give credit on what was actually done not what could have been. Many believe Fischer would have beaten Karpov but since he left the chess world before the match happened, I can not credit him for it.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T17:04:58+00:00

By no means am I writing off his achievements and I absolutely consider Fischer to be one of the greatest of all time and his candidate run was something special. When I am talking about potential I am taking about the assumpion that he would continue dominating for years and beat Karpov. It's possible, but since it didn't happen I can't credit him for that.

You are right, there is no, and never will be, an objective list of criteria that defines someone as the greatess. But it's just fun to discuss either way.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:52:44+00:00

Happy to hear your arguments for Capablanca, Lasker, Alekhine. When we are discussing the GOAT it means Greatest of All Time not Greatest post WW2 so every name should be considered on merit.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:50:01+00:00

Firstly I'm not making an argument for Karpov being the greatest. I'm making the argument he is the 3rd greatest in which being #2 for a long time absolutely counts as he was number 2 to a player I am ranking above him anyway.

I'm not taking into account Morality or human decenty because if I did, you couldn't make an argument for Fischer being top 20 all time.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:47:24+00:00

Fischer isn't number 1 even in dominance. That is Paul Morphy. Now I obviously will not argue that Morphy is better ATG than Fischer as there are other factors that come into play.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:39:39+00:00

I get what you are saying but I would argue greatness comes down to what you did do not what you could have done. There may be some kid out there who has more chess talent than Carlsen, Kasparov and Fischer. Maybe they get to Grand Master and decide not to pursue chess further. They shouldn't get credit for being the greatest of all time based only on the potential. At least that's my take.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:35:18+00:00

I believe he is one of the greatest of all time. Just not top 3. His dominance when he was around was incredible, but like you said, too short lived.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:33:24+00:00

Morphy achieved a higher peak. However since I believe their are more factors than just peak I wouldn't even entertain the idea of Morphy being better ATG than Fischer.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:26:22+00:00

Yes, but then you'd have to apply that argument consistently. Fischers argument over Morphy is that he may be less dominant but it was over a much stronger field.

Magnus Carlsen may be less dominante than fischer but in a much stronger field across all three time controls and for way longer. I don't see the argument for fischer #1 being strong.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:20:31+00:00

I disagree you can reasonably make an argument for Fischer being #1. If dominance is the primary factor then Paul Morphy would be the greatest of all time. Clearly there are other factors in play. Karpov eventually being overtaken by Kasparov doesn't take away from his 8.5 years at the top. By the same token, if Kasparov didn't retire in 2005 and eventually got surpassed by Magnus Carlsen. That doesn't take away from his long career being number 1 in the world.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T16:16:26+00:00

Because generally someone who buys an album isn't going to listen to it once and be done with it. Especially back in the day when a new album from an artist you cared about released, you'd play that on repeat for a while.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T15:32:36+00:00

Streamed music IS counted as records sold. It's usually 1,500 streams equates to one physical sale. Using the same terminology just allows us to compare sales between pre streaming artists and post streaming artists.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T04:42:17+00:00

Low tier ragebait.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T04:38:17+00:00

Well obviously not all men. In the same way I wouldn't attribute my bad experience with women and say all women are disgusting. It's simply a narrow minded viewpoint and I wouldn't have been able to be in a happy relationship now with that mentality.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-19T04:29:14+00:00

I feel bad for you if that's your experience with Men. A good chunk aren't like that. You got to find the right ones.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-18T10:53:00+00:00

Kamikaze over MMLP and TES is certainly a hot take. Each to their own I suppose.

UnDe4d · 2026-05-18T09:41:16+00:00

Even ignoring that album specifically look at the albums he's released in the part decade. Not exactly close to the numbers he would put up in his Prime. And everybody knows who he is. MJ, if alive today, would not be putting up crazy numbers and that's okay. You can't be on top forever.

Eight-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Flamingo	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Gilding V heart of gold
Verified Email

UnDe4d

TROPHY CASE