Hello.

I recently read something on Wikipedia that Bobby Fischer allegedly said about Kasparov. The comment was: "Anyone who prepares matches in advance and, especially, who plays contractual games, is a liar and a dealer. I just call Kasparov a criminal."

Could anyone explain further what he exactly meant with his..eh, criticism? What did he mean with "preparing matches"? Isn't every form of practicing a way of preparing matches? And what does Fischer mean with playing "contractual"?

Thanks in advance for all helpful comments :-)

I believe he was alleging that Kasparov fixed his matches (with Karpov, if not others) in advance.  Thus Karpov was also presumably in collusion with this.  All of course part of Fischer being a grade-A freakin' first-class nut.

Not to lend credence to Fischer's claims against Kasparov and Karpov specifically, but more than a few chess players from the years during Fischer's rise in prominence reported suspected match fixing between Russian players. There was some admittance of this from David Bronstein and others. I don't recall the other specific names, but I do remember reading that some of the players who had defected to the US had also mentioned this was a given practice.

Whether there is any truth in the statements or not is irrelevant though, Fischer should not be speculating on something like that since there was no hard evidence.  Such speculation from one of the top players has a very negative effect on the game.

Despite the above I am hardly surprised that Fischer said this, he has said a lot of things that make him look like an arrogant idiot.  Without question one of the best players of all time but without question one of the biggest idiots of all time too.

---

Eh? What an odd thing to say. Just because Fischer had some definite mental problems does not mean that everything he said was completely unfounded, especially in the world of chess. More than a few players had concerns about Soviet chess matches, before Fischer was even known to the chess world.

I guess you would say that what Bronstein and Korchnoi had to say about the Soviet government pressuring chess players to perform a certain way was also irrelevant.

It's probably true that the Soviets colluded to a certain extent (in candidates tournaments, for example).  Unfortunately though, by his typically grievous overstatements Fischer only weakens any point he might have made in this regard.

Apparently no GMs Fischer showed his "proof" of Kasp-Karp collusion is on record as agreeing with him. Anand was interviewed recently and said that Fischer tried to show him proof of collusion (in this case Karp-Korch) but he was not convinced.

More Fischer paranoia and irreality.

It's not really such a big deal anymore. Back then, success on a world stage was success for a way of life. By having the Russian system crank out world champ after world champ, it validated their way of life to themselves. That is one reason why Fischers success came as such a slap in the face. Even Kasparov has made mention to the systems importance even over the individual, in his book Fighting Chess, when talking about the aborted and restarted Karpov match. We have changed more to an individual battle than an ideological battle in current chess. Today we have to worry about GM conspiring with computers via the urinals ; )

When people talk about Soviet system of chess, I wonder what people like Keres think about that ! as a matter of fact being in one of the Soviet system is not necessarily a good thing and definitely not an advantage over your rivals [Keres and many others were reported to throw away their games or face detention and worse, so that a Russian (not soviet) player emerged ahead..] I am saying reported because no one has hard evidence to it to prove/disprove anything. Fischer had his reasons to be so paranoid, especially since the CIA and FBI were hounding him wherever he went.

Of course that paranoia went beyond control and we saw what happened to him after the seventies.

I am just surprised people are still trying to rehash irrelevant things that may or may not have happened.

It wasn't a system designed for the individual.

Everyone has a reason to be paranoid... there are other people out there, and people are just one step away from basic primitive nature, and can't be trusted.

Couldn't it also be a critisism of modern chess in general? Contractual chess, as in players playing by the book, and rarely making deviant moves untill late in games? Most lines in modern chess are prepared, not in the sense of cheating, but in the sense of practice of main chess lines. Fischer might have had a problem with chess becoming less artistic, and more calculated and "dull". He was after all an artist himself..

the russians have admittede since , that they DID colude together, and made quick draws against each other to save themselves for fischer to make sure he didnt win tournys....i have read these admissions in several books and also korchnoi admitted on video.

this obviously will have made fischer paranoid of the behaviour of other russian players, and so his behaviour/worries aren't as silly as they might first seem.

---

Sorry but this is rubbish, if an allegation as serious as this is even remotely unfounded then it shouldn't be expressed at all.  The only way to make a statement completely justified is if it's content has been proven true by hard evidence, such that it would stand up in a court of competent jurisdiction proving the defendant guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

For these reasons it's irrelevant whether the allegations were true, the point is that they were not proven to be true and therefore Fischer should have kept his mouth closed about it.  Allegations of this nature spark the wrong kind of media attention towards chess and really puts a bitter taste in the mouth of all chess players.  Why would you want that to happen based on the unfounded, yet influential opinion of one arrogant, yet incredibly talented and deluded Bobby Fischer?

Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

---

I remember Korchnoi admitted to some collusion at one point.

Granted, by the time Fischer made the comment about Kasparov, Kasparov was already much better than Fischer.

Fischer needs to get locked in an insalsolim. He blows things out of proportion. And he has something extremely wrong with his head.

What's an insalsolim? If it's something like a cemetery then you're dead on.

There is plenty of evidence, both anecdotal and the actual OTB play itself, to support the argument that the Soviet chess machine "fixed" games in order that "their" strongest player remained protected and moved forward in high level tournaments.  We also have to remember the times: the height of the cold war etc......... but ...... even given some sort of collusion on the part of the Soviet players (which I'm guessing made some, if not all of them gag) - so what!!

Could you imagine a player such as Capablanca running from his opponents??

Fischer spent far too much of his time pulling and spouting what can only be considered bat%$#@ crazy stunts, demands, and accusations?

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/fishben.txt

(You da man Pal)

I think Fischer was a deeply disturbed genius who developed an overwhelming sense of fear - Having achieved his heart's desire he then feared he may lose it.

That's why he disappeared.