If you count all his results in 1970 as well, 3:1 against Petrosian in the USSR v ROW match, the Siegen Olympiad (10/13), Buenos Aires (15/17), Rovinj/Zagreb (13/17) etc. you get an even more convincing picture of his total domination during those three years. He played over 150 competitive games (if we include the blitz and rapidplay tournaments) and lost fewer than 10 and drew about 35 or so, and won the rest. He was quite simply phenomenal in this period. No wonder Korchnoi said 'No one can beat him.'
Fischer had the best 2 years in a row EVER!!! Prove me wrong.
Sort:
Yes Fischer is a genius in chess,
but he has never grown up as a man.
(My Opinion)
Fischer beats everyone, but he never grew up.
His mind, like one who has never been to the world; his soul, although filtered with the moisture of chess, still never capable to learn how to speak properly. His games, spetacular and beautiful, but him, as a human being, never cares about how others feel.
Jul 30, 2020
0
#26
DukeOfHelsinki wrote:
Yes Fischer is a genius in chess,
but he has never grown up as a man.
(My Opinion)
There is no doubt he had a troubled life, starting when he was a child. Chess was his only anchor.
A mentally disabled chess giant.
RichardKY wrote:
if you could stop putting thumbsup that ill be appreciated lol
Jul 30, 2020
0
#29
mercatorproject wrote:
If I recall, a player called Mednis beat him. A very short book was published later in Fisher's career was published entitled something like. "How to beat Bobby Fischer". The secret seemed to be to wait for him to make a mistake. But, he never seemed to make the same mistake twice,
Fischer was, along with Capablanca, extraordinarily accurate.
I have that book. Edmar Mednis, a Latvian-American was an IM when her wrote the book in 1974. It was an attempt to capitalize on Fischer's fame. Mednis was awarded the GM title in 1980. He was a close friend of fellow New Yorker, GM Robert Byrne.
Jul 30, 2020
0
#30
DukeOfHelsinki wrote:
A mentally disabled chess giant.
Not "mentally disabled." He reportedly had an IQ of 180 (genius). I would say emotionally disturbed is more accurate. Some think he had Aspergers.
Yes, emotionally disturbed.
ON TILT
good article
Interesting, but why a forum and not a blog post?
Good point
Jul 31, 2020
0
#36
SpartanYoda wrote:
I made sure to include Kasparov and Carlsen because being world champion is one thing, but how much better you are than your contemporaries should also be part of the equation in the eternal debate of the “greatest”...
I mean, then capablanca, Lasker, steinitz and alekhine all surpasses him here then
Jul 31, 2020
0
#37
fissionfowl wrote:
He reportedly had an IQ of 180.
Evidence?
The source of the information is Fischer's biographer, Frank Brady, who reported that while Bobby was still a student at Erasmus High School, NYC, aged 15, he sat for a Stanford-Binet test. This would gave been circa 1958.
Some online sources report a range from 180 to 187.
In an article by Brady, reported at BobbyFischer.net, Brady gives more details
I think it was Kasparov that said something like the best player or greatest world champion was the player who had the greatest distance between #1 & #2.
So umm....... do the math.
Jul 31, 2020
0
#39
That would likely be Fischer, who had an Elo advantage over #2 Spassky of about 120 points
Damonevic-Smithlov wrote:
I think it was Kasparov that said something like the best player or greatest world champion was the player who had the greatest distance between #1 & #2.
So umm....... do the math.
Kasparov didn’t say that :-). But if he had said that, I guess Philidor or Morphy would have good cases to be the greatest ever. Unless one uses the Chessmetrics system, then it would be Steinitz. However, this way of ranking the greatest players ever are for some reason never applied on other players than Fischer. :-) In that case Topalov would be greater than Anand and Kramnik.
What Kasparov did say was that there are many ways to rank the greatest players, one of them being distance to #2 at one point in time. And if one used that criteria, Fischer might be #1. If one uses criteria like World Championship titles, time as #1, top events won, etc, others would have better cases.
Not only is Yoda correct, consider that every time Fischer left competitive chess for a time, he came back even stronger!