Bobby Fischer Lacked Creativity ?....How Dare I !

Guess who is this Player?  

Looks like Bobby, to me.

yureesystem: "Online chess has made available to players all over the world, there is more chess information; I am against is  computer chess programs, this has kill chess. Today a non-title player can argue with GMs and say "but My Computer Chess program rated 3200 give this evaluation and you are wrong Mr.GM rated 2560 elo. It make a player lazy and relying on computer program analysis and evaluation..."

Yes, yes...I've already said this exact same thing. In the past, it typically took a highly ranked, titled chess player to write the analysis (nowadays, of course, there are video clips). Today, anyone can be critical of high level games because of computer analysis. As I said we are in the best of times and the worst of times ...

IT WAS the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us...

A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens

   btw, I couldn't find the quote that I had mentioned where Bobby said something like "Where is the art in that?" It's out there somewhere. I remember it. I can't quite recall the context, but I suspect that it was in regard to what we are faced with these days...mechanical but precise chess.

   I don't like it either. That Bobby was quite an artist.

For Lala:

   Who is this man?

....not a bohemian.

Which is exactly the point I'm trying to make. BF saw himself as a scientist. Makes sense to me. He certainly was not an artist. His calculations were logical and sound....and good. Like a computer....an artless brute force silicon-based brain tower. Not artistic. Not bohemian. Not a sunset soul. 

And he seemed so risk-averse. He musta been someone who was easily frightened. Great artists are bold and full of risk and revel in an unbridled future filled with uncertainty. BF was the polar opposite. His creativity was a little below the equator. But that's okay. He made up for it with the rest of his skill set.

Hey....you can't be Mr. Everything. And he was a fresh example.   

When players wins their games by tactics, then that should send the chess intelligencia a very red signal. Do you see this signal ?....or are you too blind to objectively assess....due to someone ushering you n2 this game over 40 years ago.

Join me. It's a beautiful life when you drop the power struggle and let things just 'happen'. You're only frustrating yourself when you think you're in control. 

What? Check this one out for Beatnik/Bohemian:

p.s: Why is that lady laughing?!

"He was someone who seemed easily frightened. "

   Lala, Bobby was not "frightened". Slander him all you like but the boy and the man had plenty of chutzpah (aka "balls"). He rose to the pinnacle of chess and won against the Soviet machine.

   You are confused. Admit it. Nor do I defend some of his neurotic antics or verbalizations. Crude, off-the-wall, infantile...yes. But frightened? You must be joking. Give it up.

   The thing is, he was like "a dog with a bone". Once he got hold of it, he didn't want to give it up. See?

   So, you lose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUJxMUduawg

Don't you get it ? They say he spoke his mind. He knew what he loved and hated....and he said it ! And I love that part.

All I'm saying is his chess-playing was way too science-based and not artistic enuf. He didn't seem to care about chess beauty....he...cared...about...winning. Just winning. That sux.

YKW ?....you're not plugging n2 my...4get it. I'm out. Good nite Harvey.

Fischer was a troglodyte

(#854) Just because someone plays objectively and correctly does NOT make them cold and synical.  For example, Petrosian is considered to be a very safe player; making him very difficult to beat, however I would argue he was one of the greatest artists the game had ever seen. Calculating is not artistic. When he sacrificed a piece against you, you know you're already lost. Again, cold riskless calculating He sees exactly what you want to do and preempts it before you even see it yourself, now that's beauty. No, that's a brain surgeon. A wannabe mind reading fortune teller.

Also, I'm not sure how you can try and argue he is a coward AND only cares about winning.  Playing for the win in many situations (especially at GM level) is risky if there isn't one, yet Bobby never played for a draw. Oh sure !....he talked that way. I don't believe he was that stoopit, do you ? I think you're confusing confidence with a self-proclaimed uncompromist....which was phony talk. 

Lola , the more you speak about Bobby and chess the more stupid you look !  Chess players who avoid risk do NOT play lines like the poisoned pawn najdorf and the kings indian !  Shhheeesh ! 

Okay....just in case some of you haven't seen the ray of light. Many of our most creative players in chess today and yesterday ?....well, you've never even heard of !

Mikhail Tal, who was vastly creative, just happened to hold the World Championship also. Which I find such an incredible accomplishment. Winning was just his cherry on top.

Some of you bozos are placing winning above creativity....and yet you can't discern the difference between the two ! You approach chess w/ the "I must win to be successful" attitude. I'm sorry....but that's not successful chess to the artist.

Are you implying that a computer playing chess is artistic because it wins all the time ? If so ?....you are nuts in your head ! That's as anti-bohemian as one can find for an example. Meaning, emulating a computer is copy-catting it and that doesn't register w/ me. And BTW, some women are as guilty of this brute-force basic as men....as are adolescents.

Ask yourself right now. Did BF portray and carry himself and act as a bohemian ? An artist ? Or did he proclaim himself a scientist ? (could one be both ?....yes !....but, very few and certainly not him....)

So, why would you expect him to play like one ?

Some of you have proven to me that you cannot see it. You are simply incapable. I've sat here and tried to explain until this face in the mirror has turned the color purple. Do you know how frustrated I feel right now ?

Your focus on winning has blinded you. You will not achieve higher capacities 'cuz you're not looking at the game correctly. IOW's, you do not have it in you to sacrifice that piece with 15% speculation. It's not in your character and you remain at the level you are. You see ?....it's not your analytical acumen....it's your persona. You're just not built to advance anymore.

You're game is stuck without art.....why don't you try discovering it ?

Ask yourself....why do you feel this is the hottest topic in chess right now ?

Reb....I seldom go to the big chess tournaments. But when I do, I try and stop and say hello to the few names I remember. I have met two of my "friends" here on chess.com - and they're wonderful. Online people are "'acquintances" until I meet them in person. It's just how I do it.

And BTW, you'll know me when you see me. I dress bohemienne.

And I wanna go to Las Vegas this weekend....but, I won't be making it.

If you go, best of luck my luv.

Let this thread die.

Lola , Spassky addressed the subject that is dear to you !  He said big money has ruined the game !  He said back when the WC only netted a few thousand bucks players played more creatively and wanted to produce beauty/art in their games that would outlive them , games that would be marveled at by generations to come , longer after their death !  Then the cash stakes got bigger and more players became concerned with paying the bills and qualifying for the next big closed event and all that creativity crap went out the window !  He has a point .... I confess ! Just recall that when Boris beat Petrosian for the WC in 69 he got less than $5,000 . as his prize !  Hell .... class players win more than that these days !  

Do you have articles or quotes from BS ? I would like to read them.

And creative chess isn't crap Reb ! That is, unless you're one of them too.

It's real & it's important & it has its place in this game - I believe that. If its only place is in blitz and non-titled long games ?....then fine. I'll take that (altho' I'm kinda forced 'cuz our top players seem to play so scared these days....and that would include BF....)

Oh Oh Oh !....I can't test out my opponent. He might counterstrike my sacrifice & then win & then bruise my ego....oh no !....can't do that....I'm too afraid....(....wow, I never knew a touche could hurt so much....)

Do you know why I know this ?....'cuz when I play unrated games against players 1700 and up ?....many try to dissipate my attack w/ a forced Q trade, ruin the beauty & complexity of the game by trading down, and so on & so on.

So, noone's gonna tell me that this type of play happens only at the top level. Skardeekats are right here in unrated games on chess.com !

It's disgusting....

Lala, the more I read your comical postings, the more I am convinced that you are the late, great spoofmeister of yesterday...Haywood. Yeah, and he was also a 1500 blitz whiz.

Oh, fill it with a twinkie....

....and let's try to not let the creativity of this game go the way of Hostess........

Lola , Spassky said this as a guest of honor at a Lisbon Open some 15 years ago .... I was present and heard him . I dont know if its written anywhere but what he said made sense to me and seems logical .  Money and govt ruins everything it touches ... just look at the corruption involved in FIFA for example .... it seems more money just means more corruption . Players today play " safer " than their counterparts from the 60s and 70s because they worry more about paying the bills ... back then even if they won it wasnt much anyway ...