Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

If Fischer would played Karpov for the World Champion, who would win?


  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #1741

    fabelhaft

    Korchnoi writes in his autobiography about how surprised he was that Geller had drawn a very short game against Keres, and asked him: "Who do you think you can beat by playing like this?!", getting the answer: "YOU!" :-)

    Petrosian of course drew very short games also against Fischer in Curacao, anyhow I think the draws had less to do with a Soviet conspiracy than with the three players that were in a class of their own in the event concentrating on beating the bottom half. Just like when for example Anand and Kramnik draw games very quickly and try harder to beat Svidler or Adams. Fischer was no threat after his very weak start, and as Geller implied, Korchnoi and Fischer were players to beat, not because of nationality.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #1742

    fabelhaft

    To me the research paper on Soviet collusion makes some fairly dubious assumptions. Most striking is perhaps having as a starting point in the statistical analysis that Tal and Korchnoi were involved in a 1962 pact:

    "We did assume that all the Soviets were colluding" in Curacao.

    Reshevsky is said to have had 27% chance to win a "fair" Candidates 1953, which sounds enormously high given a field with Smyslov, Keres, Petrosian, Bronstein, Najdorf, Geller etc. Keres and Bronstein are both given less than 5%.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #1743

    dargn

    It depends on the game and advantage.  You can not say anything at this stage.  This is not wrestling!

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #1744

    yureesystem

    We see a match between Fischer versus Karpov match in the future but substitute to Magnus Carlsen (Capablanca-Karpov ) to Wesley So (Fischer); Wesley style is so close to Fischer and Wesley play is solid and mature, twice he drew to Carlsen.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #1745

    najdorf96

    Indeed. Roughly comparing "conspiracy" to "collusion" back in those days were totally due to semantics. Connotations notwithstanding Im not surprised by fabel's thoughtful opinions many decades later


Back to Top

Post your reply: