Read Garry Kasparov's book called, My Great Predecessors. The fourth volume deals mostly with Fischer. At the end of the book is a lengthy breakdown of how the Fischer vs Karpov match almost took place. It seems that even as late as 1977 Karpov was trying to get a match with Fischer to take place. It seems that Fischer may have not felt confident enough that he could dominate Karpov and just chose not to find out. On page 478 the details of the final meeting to finalize the match are given. Fischer had Campomanes insert in the match agreement a stipulation calling it "a match for the professional world championship". Karpov had previously made it clear he objected to the word professional and at the last minute Fischer insisted on that name for the match. In other words it was Fischer who wrecked the match. Another attempt was made by Karpov to have a match with Fischer in 1979 after defending his title in 1978 against the winner of the candidates event. It also fell through due to lack of interest from Fischer. Just food for thought. Either way the chess world was robbed of an epic match of two greats at the top of their game.
Fischer vs Karpov
Fischer already knew that he objected to that and insisted on it anyway.
I think the match would have been extremely close and could have gone either way. A lot would have depended on Fischer's preparation. Was he really ready to play in 75 having not played a single game since 72 ?
It is a shame the match never happened. It would have a Titanic struggle and certainly not tainted by any "Pre-arrangment" allegations.
Or you could just as easily say that Fischer insisted on adding (a word)...either way if he really wanted to play Karpov he would have...as great as he was, he also is the only world champion to never even defend it
What difference did the word "professional" make?
Agreed, it would have had a Capablanca vs Alekhine type of greatness to it...both players at their peak
Or you could just as easily say that Fischer insisted on adding (a word)...either way if he really wanted to play Karpov he would have...as great as he was, he also is the only world champion to never even defend it
Or you could just as easily say if Karpov wanted a shot at the title, he would have accepted the additional word.
The point is that Fischer knew it would stop the match from proceeding and insisted on it anyway.
This was in 1977, Karpov was already the world champion...He didnt need a shot at it. He was trying to give Fischer a chance to fight to take it back and at the same time prove he could beat Fischer.
I don't see how this one word stopped the match until i can understand what difference it makes.
Is it possible to use emulations?
I'll go for Bobby Fischer
Any way you look at it, Fischer had his chance to defend his crown but chose to walk away rather than take a chance on losing. He also had multiple opportunities to play a match with Karpov and prove he was the better player. I know all about Fischer's rating and results and I dont dispute his being at least in the top 3 greatest players ever. That being said though, he walked away voluntarily from chances to prove his dominance over the board in an actual match. Alekhine was accused of ducking a rematch with Capablanca, so why the problem with suggesting Fischer ducked a match with Karpov? Lasker was accused of ducking competition as well.
The problem is who's ducking whom? Though there is a truth, for everybody else, it depends on how they look at it.
Fischer also made much progress towards professional chess players being paid better than in the past. It is no secret that a big sticking point in the 1972 match with Spassky was the amount of the prize fund being increased. The Phillipines was offering a prize fund of 5 million dollars in 1975 for the Fischer vs Karpov match. So more money was not the problem.
Any way you look at it, Fischer had his chance to defend his crown but chose to walk away rather than take a chance on losing. He also had multiple opportunities to play a match with Karpov and prove he was the better player. I know all about Fischer's rating and results and I dont dispute his being at least in the top 3 greatest players ever. That being said though, he walked away voluntarily from chances to prove his dominance over the board in an actual match. Alekhine was accused of ducking a rematch with Capablanca, so why the problem with suggesting Fischer ducked a match with Karpov? Lasker was accused of ducking competition as well.
+1, People only care about Fischer more because he was American
It would be the champion who would have to duck a challenger. So Fischer was the champion and failed to defend against his rightful challenger. Then Karpov was the champion and he tried to arrange matches several times with Fischer only to have them implode. If Karpov was the champion and was trying to arrange matches with Fischer then how could Karpov be accused of ducking Fischer or anyone else for that matter. Karpov was a fighting champion if only to prove to chess players and fans that he was not just a paper champion. Another forum on this website states that Karpov was only 1/2 point behind Kasparov in their games played. If anything it's Karpov who should be mentioned more in the discussions of the top 3 or 5 of chess greats.
Sparsky and Dutch!? (Bonus for one who knows the reference)
I'm guessing it's a matter of ego. Fischer still saw himself as the WC, and Karpov wanted his title untainted.
More guessing: The word "professional" added to the title meant Fischer would retain his WC no matter the winner. Karpov would be the "professional" WC if he won, and had everything to lose if he lost.
Karpov may have neglected to note how much Fischer was able to improve over the last few years before the WC match with Spassky. I wonder what made him think he would win the return match if Fischer had stayed motivated to compete.
At Fischer's peak rating he was a monstrous 125 ahead of #2, and the only player rated over 2700. To my knowledge that's never been repeated (and likely never will).