| |
Main
Date: 15 Sep 2007 22:14:26
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Fischer vs Karpov
|
1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
likely have won?
2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was more
likely to win?
P
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Sep 2007 16:23:42
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 20, 8:19 am, Mihai Suba <gms...@gmail.com > wrote:
> 1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
> likely have won?
Bobby Fischer did not have a championship, as far as
I know; it was FIDE which held the cycle leading to the
title of world champion, and that was the same cycle in
which GM Fischer competed and won the title. The
wording comes across as leading up to a psychological
denial.
> 2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was
> more
> likely to win?
>
> 1. Karpov
> 2.Fischer
If you try to quantify their results, it appears that the numbers
are on GM Fischer's side, for GM Karpov did not approach the
2780 level until much later, aided by his match results against
tournament "killer" Gary Kasparov, who fed him rating points in
their matches with one another.
What did GM Fischer do between 1972 and 1975? Fall victim
to a scam which relieved him of most of his prize money? Get
arrested by the Pasadena Police Department? Swell up his
ego by doing the TV talk show circuit? Or just study chess?
I don't know, exactly.
In the movie series "Rocky", the point is made that some
champions become complacent, while their challengers have
what was termed "the eye of the tiger" -- a burning hunger for
the title, for recognition, for victory.
In the latest issue of Chess Life, some key games were
analyzed by GM Suzan Polgar and Paul Truong; these were
from the 1972 match between BF and GM Spassky, and they
gave lots and lots of GM Fischer's moves an exclam, while at
the same time holding back for equally impressive moves by
GM Spassky (for instance, his N-d5 versus the reply ...Bg5).
In one case a Rybka move is casually trotted out as superior,
but is it really? Or is there just a tendency to pick at moves
by the match's eventual loser? At a somewhat later point in
the game, Q-d2 is praised to the heavens, but what if GM
Fischer had chosen another move? I have zero doubt the
exclams would prevail anyway.
Once again, there is simply a stunning lack of objectivity
regarding this matter, or any matter involving GM Fischer,
from what I have seen. Even a separate article in this same
issue, by another author, *deliberately* misconstrued the facts
to favor the American hero; Al Lawrence recounted the events
leading up to the 1972 match in detail, but one detail was not-
so-cleverly omitted: the fact that GM Fischer did not go and
would not go based on Henry Kissenger's "patriotic" plea; to
the contrary, accounts by others state clearly that he only
changed his mind after a British financier intervened, offering
to *double the prize money*. Money, not patriotism, was the
prime motivator; Al Lawrence is not *that* stupid as to have
simply forgotten this crucial detail.
In sum, I wouldn't trust anybodies opinion on this matter,
because all of you (yes, every last one) are loony as a bird
when it comes to Bobby Fischer! One day, after we are all
dead, they may look back and give GM Fischer's Bxh2 a
question mark and say: "a miscalculation; the Bishop does
not escape". Until then, I am keeping my distance to avoid
contamination; you people all need to be quarantined, kept
sedated, and watched very closely. ; >D
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 20 Sep 2007 13:19:11
From: Mihai Suba
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
likely have won?
2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was
more
likely to win?
1. Karpov
2.Fischer
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 20:45:56
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 16, 2:40 pm, "Arfur Million" <arfur_mill...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> > Fischer without question. What I've never understoon is how easily
> > Fischer beat Kortchnoij
In a blitz game?
> > yet after Fischer leaves the scene Kortchnoij
> > is challenging world champions?
He claimed it was from eating porridge (to strengthen
his constitution), but I think maybe he was studying
and playing chess, the same as with everybody else.
> > Doesn't seem like there was much left
> > after Fischer resigned. I did like Kortchnoij in that milk commercial.
>
> Kortchnoij was a rather difficult opponent for Fischer - I believe their
> scores were more or less equal. Kortschnoij was soos challenging world
> champions in the 60's, for example losing to Spassky in 1968. Karpov would
> probably have won in 1975, which is probably why Fischer didn't want to play
> him.
In 1975 GM Fischer had very little to gain, and a whole
lot to lose. The hype surrounding his victory over the
Soviet Union (a surprise attack, tunneling through to
the Kremlin from New York and boy was it hot in some
parts of the earth's mantle!), his winning the space race,
and singlehandedly busting the King's Gambit was
perhaps overblown just a tad. Still, in 1975 BF had not
yet begun to weaken much, for he was still young and
thus it is just as silly to insist that GM Karpov would
have beaten him as it would be to insist on the reverse.
I don't think GM Spassky was in his best form in the
1972 match, for he allowed off the board antics to muck
up his usually stellar play. IMO, such tactics render
the result meaningless, just as when an opponent flips
the clock forward or back while you are away from the
board; sure, the result is official and prize money goes
where it goes, but insofar as chess skill is concerned,
these things are most definitely not a part of it at all,
but a part of cheating skill. The level of the opponent's
play is dragged downward, instead of elevating one's
own level of play, which is the ideal.
In 1975 GM Karpov was very strong, even if we dismiss
the training games he claims to have won against GM
Spassky in 1972. But then, so was Bobby Fischer. In
terms of questions of match psychology, it boils down to
whether or not the officials will fairly administer the stated
rules, or if they will cater to one player in order to save
face, save the organizers financially, etc. In 1972 they
tossed the rules out the window, and the match became
a sort of circus in which GM Fischer's "crazy demands"
were balanced against "saving the match". It is an open
question whether he could get away with that a second
time in a row.
Perhaps the ideal challenger for GM Fischer would have
been Gary Kasparov, for his bold style would have clashed
with the more materialistic style of BF, but they were too
far separated in time. As we saw, GM Fischer's style was
particularly effective against that of GMs Taimanov and
Larsen, but had utterly failed against GM Spassky up 'til
1972. He also had difficulties against certain openings,
but as far as I know GM Karpov did not play any of them.
OTOH, GM Karpov did exceptionally well against some
openings played by GM Fischer, like the Sicilian, for
instance.
It is truly sad that most Americans seem completely
unable to get over this and move on with chess life; it's
like watching a dumb animal hopelessly stuck in the
mud (except that you can throw a rope around the beast
and try to pull it out with your jeep). Even when a good
number of ex-Soviets move to the USA and play *for us*
they are resented for hogging all the glory and much of
the prize money to boot. It boils down to this: chess is
not really "big" here, the way football and basketball are.
Paul Morphy and Bobby Fischer were flukes, anomalies.
Get over it.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:19:23
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 16, 5:27 am, Eliyahu <SilvermountZ...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 16, 7:14 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> > 1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
> > likely have won?
>
> > 2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was more
> > likely to win?
>
> > P
>
> Bs'd
>
> Fischer.
>
> E.
++ Because Karpov was not ready in 1975 or because Fischer was just
the better player technically, would have mentally played with Karpov
or what?
P
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:17:39
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 16, 3:15 am, Offramp <alaneobr...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 16, 6:14 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> > 1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
> > likely have won?
>
> > 2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was more
> > likely to win?
>
> Karpov.
++ Why do you say Karpov? What is your reasoning?
P
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 15:05:21
From: Petrovitch
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
Fischer without question. What I've never understoon is how easily
Fischer beat Kortchnoij yet after Fischer leaves the scene Kortchnoij
is challenging world champions? Doesn't seem like there was much left
after Fischer resigned. I did like Kortchnoij in that milk commercial.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 01:42:16
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
Petrovitch <kennthompson@gmail.com > wrote:
> What I've never understoon is how easily Fischer beat Kortchnoij yet
> after Fischer leaves the scene Kortchnoij is challenging world
> champions?
When would that have been? chessgames.com indicates a +2-2=4 record
at standard time controls.
> Doesn't seem like there was much left after Fischer resigned.
Seems like you have your facts in a muddle to me.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Transparent Gnome (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ smiling garden ornament but you can
see right through it!
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 19:40:09
From: Arfur Million
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
"Petrovitch" <kennthompson@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1189955121.531248.27240@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> Fischer without question. What I've never understoon is how easily
> Fischer beat Kortchnoij yet after Fischer leaves the scene Kortchnoij
> is challenging world champions? Doesn't seem like there was much left
> after Fischer resigned. I did like Kortchnoij in that milk commercial.
>
Kortchnoij was a rather difficult opponent for Fischer - I believe their
scores were more or less equal. Kortschnoij was soos challenging world
champions in the 60's, for example losing to Spassky in 1968. Karpov would
probably have won in 1975, which is probably why Fischer didn't want to play
him.
Regards,
Arfur
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:29:03
From: Eliyahu
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 16, 12:15 pm, Offramp <alaneobr...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 16, 6:14 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> > 1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
> > likely have won?
>
> > 2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was more
> > likely to win?
>
> Karpov.
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:27:22
From: Eliyahu
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 16, 7:14 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
> 1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
> likely have won?
>
> 2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was more
> likely to win?
>
> P
Bs'd
Fischer.
E.
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 10:15:11
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: Fischer vs Karpov
|
On Sep 16, 6:14 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
> 1. In 1975, had they played for Fischer's championship, who would
> likely have won?
>
> 2, Playing their best chess (never a certainty), in 1975, who was more
> likely to win?
Karpov.
|
|
