why isn't the great Harry nelson Pillsbury considered one of the greatest chessplayers ever?

Answer 1

Very good question! He perhaps should be. If he had not contracted syphilis during the St. Petersburg tournament, odds are he would have been the most logical challenger for Em. Lasker's title in the late 1890s. Note not only his great performance in 1895, but his personal record against Lasker, and the quality of the games. It is probably because his play, as his very life, deteriorated before he reached his chess prime, and he did not get that match. But, even so, he tends to be undervalued in the history of chess.

Answer 2

Because nobody knows, or cares, who he is?