What was the rating difference between Topalov when he was #1 & the #2 player? At the peak.
Fischer had the best 2 years in a row EVER!!! Prove me wrong.
Sort:
fabelhaft wrote:
Chess players and IQ is a subject in itself. Fischer famously objected to being called a chess genius and meant that he was an all around genius who happened to play chess. Kasparov would probably not express himself the same way, but when it comes to history and politics and computers etc I think he sees himself as quite bright, and maybe isn’t too far from Fischer’s self assessment.
Carlsen is a bit different in that respect and really knows his limitations: ”My father is considerably more intelligent than I am”. But when it comes to chess alone he was never humble. In an interview 3 1/2 years before winning the World Championship he said that he was clearly superior to Kasparov with regards to assessing positions and finding the necessary plan (while Kasparov was better at calculating and openings). He said he didn’t want to know his IQ and that the result might come as a nasty surprise, and that someone like GM Nunn was enormously more intelligent than him.
This is a very pertinent observation. IQ is a very crude measure, and says nothing about a person's general ability to 'fend for themselves'. Taking the estimate of Fischer's IQ as read, it's quite clear that he was completely unable to cope with life outside chess, and this is by no means uncommon in chess. There's a Swedish GM with a postgraduate degree in maths or physics, and he didn't even understand that you have to hang the washing up to dry. He just left in a heap on the bathroom floor. While Magnus Carlsen's father may be considerably more intelligent than Magnus, the young lad isn't doing badly for himself with lucrative modelling and sponsor contracts, investments, ownership of a chess site etc.
DukeOfHelsinki wrote:
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.
In this respect, Fischer wasn't really that different from many sports stars. As a Dane, I'm sure you're aware of the troubles of the footballer Nicklas Bendtner (while clearly not on the same level as Fischer's issues). The Swedish former tennis player and world #4, Robin Söderling, recently said that when he retired from professional tennis aged 31 he still had the mentality of a teenager. Up to that point his whole adolescent and adult life had been about tennis.
Aug 5, 2020
0
#86
quietheathen1st wrote:
The Fischer elo rating deal is really not that impressive when u know that he had been the highest rated since 64, and was never the strongest in the world until 71. Almost all the games that Fischer and spassky played before 72, Fischer had the higher rating and still lost or drew.
I would suggest Fischer was the strongest player in the world from the time he won the Stockholm Interzonal in 1962. His tournament record bears that out, even though he took two lengthly breaks from international competition. He came back with a vengeance both times - much stronger.
Once he'd entered the circle of the elite, Fischer basically had only one real tournament failure (Mar del Plata 1960) and one so-so showing (the Curação Candidates 1962). I tend to agree with JamieDelarosa. Fischer definitely was one of the world's strongest players, perhaps the strongest, for a considerable time. However, he may not have been psychologically ready.
Quoting a negative score against one individual is meaningless, especially given that Fischer and Spassky only played five games against each other before the WC match in 1972. Korchnoi had a massive plus score against Tal. It didn't make Korchnoi a better player than Tal for most of their careers.
Aug 6, 2020
0
#88
Vibhansh_Alok wrote:
he wrote it all here...i mean he didn't even made a draft somewhere else and copy that down here.
What would have happened if chess.com had crashed in the middle of typing??
Wait... how would you know that he did not make a draft?
Aug 6, 2020
0
#89
lol if it was me I'd just be typing it straight in. and then bothered to edit after I pressed "post"
Aug 6, 2020
0
#90
Itude wrote:
And having just watched a good film about him...he did it all virtually on his own.
If you are interested, well worth watching, if a bit sad.
It was real good. Thanks
I just watched the first 15 minutes of it, I'll watch the rest this weekend. It looks good.
“Fischer was the strongest player in the world from the time he won the Stockholm Interzonal in 1962”
“I tend to agree with JamieDelarosa. Fischer definitely was one of the world's strongest players, perhaps the strongest, for a considerable time“
No one would disagree about him being one of the strongest players for a considerable time. Then it’s another thing to claim that he was the best player in the world during the Candidates 1962 and all the way after that. I wonder what Spassky would have to do to ever be the best player in that case. It isn’t exactly just his score against Fischer, he for example scored 11-2 in wins in the Candidates 1968 and that against only opponents in the top 8.
Just looking at the results 1962-70, Fischer had a minus against the top players on the whole. He had even scores against Korchnoi, Keres and Larsen over 16 games, but then worse results against Petrosian, Geller and Spassky over rather many games +2-8=13. He only played Tal in Curaçao and scored +1 there (but then Tal scored a winless -7 against the top four).
Spassky did well in comparison, with a plus against all these opponents over the same years. +9 against Larsen, +5 against Geller, +4 against Tal, +2 not only against Fischer but also Petrosian and Keres, and +1 against Korchnoi (adding up to +25 against these opponents vs Fischer’s -5). He also won the World Championship. I’d say that if their results over these years were switched, few would question that Fischer was the strongest player in the world during the 1960s :-)
SpartanYoda wrote:
Hi @fabelhaft. But can you identify 2 years in a row that Spassky was better than Fischer? Please be specific with dates and results as I have. Thx 👍🏼
Well, Spassky himself was always rather humble, but still claimed that he was the best player in the world from 1964 to 1970. In the Candidates 1965 he scored 11-4 in wins against Keres, Geller and Tal. These three tough matches (in all 29 games) were played in just over six months.
Spassky meant that he was exhausted when he faced Petrosian after having had to play in all 98 games to qualify for the match, and he eventually lost it 11.5-12.5. The month after the match he played again, in Piatigorsky Cup, which he won ahead of Fischer (after beating him).
In the next cycle he scored 11-2 in wins in the Candidates, and also won the title match.
It was the World Championship cycle that mattered, even if Spassky did play a bunch of other events aside from these eight matches (over a hundred games just in them) 1965-69. He won his share of tournaments as well.
“look at everything Fischer accomplished (as I detailed in my post) between 1971-1972. I still don’t think Spassky‘a resume (incredible as it was) comes close to Bobby’s sheer dominance whether it’s 64-65 or 68-69. I guess we’ll agree to disagree“
Nothing to disagree about there, Fischer did better in 1971-72 than Spassky ever did. I don’t think Fischer was the best player in the world already from 1962 up until he retired though, if so he would have done better in his games against the top players during the 60s.
Aug 7, 2020
0
#96
i mean, if fischer's biggest accomplishment is beating larsen and taimanov 6-0, then i believe carauna did something similar (not the same thing tho) in 2014, while steinitz did it to blackburne (7-0). him beating larsen is more impressive then beating taimanov imo, but then again, larsen really didnt impress me in those games. him beating petrosian the way he did is more impressive tbh.
Aug 7, 2020
0
#97
i believe i mentioned that their play was nothing exceptional, didnt i? maybe u forgot to read that part. cuz, lets be honest here, that matters a little bit, right? someone mentioned spassky's candidate runs in 68 and 65. he played against people stronger than taimanov, and against people who fared better than larsen ever did.
quietheathen1st wrote:
i mean, if fischer's biggest accomplishment is beating larsen and taimanov 6-0, then i believe carauna did something similar (not the same thing tho) in 2014, while steinitz did it to blackburne (7-0). him beating larsen is more impressive then beating taimanov imo, but then again, larsen really didnt impress me in those games. him beating petrosian the way he did is more impressive tbh.
Spassky won his first three games against Larsen in their 1968 match, and had a winning position in the fourth, but he was both less great than Fischer and more lazy, and content with an even score over the rest of the match. It was enough to just win it and save some ammunition for later. Against Geller he won his first three games with white and drew all other games in the match.
ok
Aug 7, 2020
0
#100
fabelhaft wrote:
quietheathen1st wrote:
i mean, if fischer's biggest accomplishment is beating larsen and taimanov 6-0, then i believe carauna did something similar (not the same thing tho) in 2014, while steinitz did it to blackburne (7-0). him beating larsen is more impressive then beating taimanov imo, but then again, larsen really didnt impress me in those games. him beating petrosian the way he did is more impressive tbh.
Spassky won his first three games against Larsen in their 1968 match, and had a winning position in the fourth, but he was both less great than Fischer and more lazy, and content with an even score over the rest of the match. It was enough to just win it and save some ammunition for later. Against Geller he won his first three games with white and drew all other games in the match.
when was larsen at his prime? cuz he played until the 80s iirc
You are right. Capablanca, Kasparov and Carlsen also had years of dominance, but Capablanca had weaker opponents and played less games, while Kasparov and Carlsen didn't destroy their opponents in the way Fischer did in 1970-72