Boris Spassky (Any views)

I did admire the qualities Boris Spassky brought to the chess board. As a gentleman I wonder how long it would take before the unsettling events of the tournament would finally affect even Boris. The two dead flies found in his chair😵😵. The paranoia had to affect even him. The pure genius of Bobby was still something to behold. The weight of the Western world on his shoulders. With Boris having the finest chess minds in his corner. It was scripted to be one of the most entrancing tournaments ever at the time

”He only lost a big handful of games (7 or so) from his come-back in 1970 through to defeating Spassky at Reykjavik, and won nearly twice as many as he drew. He was just so much better than everyone else at the time”

It’s the wins that is the most impressive part of those stats. Not much wrong with only seven losses either, but that was after all in less than ten events. For example Carlsen has been undefeated in more than ten events in a row and has in all seven losses in his last 23 tournaments.

Interesting thread.

I heard somewhere that Bobby only really believed in winning and disliked draws. I wonder if he held on to positions a little longer when a draw appeared the end result. I think he won a game against Boris that was seen by analysts to be a technical draw. I'm curious at that level whether there is a courtesy regarding a technical draw or whether you continue hoping for a small advantage

In the documentary of the series between Bobby and Boris the Russians analysed one game at the break and surmised a possible draw but the game continued. I think that was the case

While there is probably some kind of etiquette about playing simple technical draws, people like Fischer, Karpov, and Carlsen win many endgames that lesser masters give up on, calling them "technical draws." When the better side has several different ways to try for a win, and the defender must continuously come up with "only" moves, calling it a "technical draw" seems pretty silly, even if the computer says 0.00. 

Spassky wasn’t exactly easy to beat either, in 1968 he played three Candidates matches against super elite opposition, plus Chess Olympiad and a long tournament (17 rounds) in Palma de Mallorca. He lost three games (27 wins and 27 draws). One loss each in the 4-1 wins against Korchnoi and Larsen in the Candidates matches, and one in Palma against Korchnoi. He had played more games the year before (a bit over 70), with three losses then as well. That’s six losses in around 130 games, which is rather close to Fischer’s stats in that respect. If one excludes the forfeited game against Spassky, Fischer had six losses in around 115 games 1970-72. But much more wins.

Maybe Spassky was most impressive in Candidates matches. He won all his Candidates matches in 1965 and 1968 very clearly, and that was against some opposition (Korchnoi, Tal, Geller x 2, Larsen, Keres). He won also his 7th Candidates match very clearly (3-0 in wins) before he took the lead against Karpov in 1974 before losing that one. But then he kept winning his Candidates matches also in 1977 against Hort and Portisch, after which he lost against Korchnoi.

https://www.chess.com/blog/Spektrowski/nikolai-krogius-quotpreparing-for-the-match-against-fischerquot-excerpts-from-boris-spasskys

A wonderful incite into the preparations by the Russians to meet Bobby in the world championships 1972 above

The sacking of Boris's coach who insisted on hard work and training with a new introverted by nature coach played a vital role in the moments when Spassky needed the discipline behind him which deserted him at times during the tournament. A fatal misjudgement maybe

In the world championships in 1972 between Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky there were games that were deemed “technical draws”” by the soviets. This intrigued me because Bobby didn’t believe in them often. I wonder if many games are still won despite players playing the recommended moves in analysis holding the view of a technical draw but still losing somehow. This would suggest maybe an unconventional move that would unnerve the player playing for a technical draw

Fischer was the strongest player in the world since Stockholm Interzonal in 1962 (Jan to Mar).

The Soviets were arrogant.

     Spassky is the much-more interesting player. Fischer stuck to the same few opening lines, which he constantly studied and improved his play. Spassky was as likely to use an opening variation that he had just seen in a magazine while riding a the train to the tournament and come up with a brilliancy OTB in a line he had never studied vs a top GM in an important tournament. The quality of the opposition that Spassky had to play against in big Soviet tournaments overshadows what Fischer had to face in American championships and many of his other tournaments where there were a few travelling Soviet GMs but most of the rest of the field were unlikely to be able to qualify for a USSR championship final.

     As a human being, Spassky as a well-liked multi-faceted individual is far more appealing than the mono-maniacal Fischer. Spassky said "Chess is like life" with its ups and downs, opportunities for inventiveness and enjoyment, comradery and self-discovery. Bobby said "Chess IS life", a measure of one's self-worth and an opportunity to dominate others. No wonder Spassky had an enjoyable retirement while Fischer was afraid to risk his only achievement by playing again and roamed the world incognito, a delusional paranoid.

     All this being said there is no doubt that Fischer was the better player in Iceland in 1972.

The contrast between the personalities of Bobby and Boris were stark. Yet they forged a kind of unique “friendship” . I think Bobby never forgot the sportsmanship offered by Boris in his famous win in game 6 .It was a moment for Bobby

i mean, spassky wasnt lol and he himself said that only in 71 was fischer maybe his superior. all years prior reflect spassky's superiority. in fact, tal actually also says that by 1970, in the world vs ussr, spassky is still the clearly stronger player. 

yeah spassky was a better person of the match, though i like fischer more in terms of games but as a chess player

but as a chess player i like spassky most and in the end they became a wonderful nice friendship

Spassky was a great player- great enough to beat anyone except Fischer without preparation by relying on his abilities in fighting chess alone. Who knows what would have happened if his preparation had been more diligent? But 'reality' in chess is what happens OTB and Fischer was both sharper at the time of the match and better prepared.

“”The sacking of Boris's coach who insisted on hard work and training with a new introverted by nature coach played a vital role in the moments when Spassky needed the discipline behind him which deserted him at times during the tournament.””

I wonder if this coach change and the lack of work effort was a contributing factor in his performance

Spassky had a wonderful natural talent but his old  coach believed in old fashioned preparation and hard work that Spassky was drilled in