Another conference gem

this article was interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_top_chess_players_throughout_history

i know ur big fan of bobby but u have to accept the truth

Most of the top players learned chess over the board....

Estragon wrote:

Oh, please!  The Fischer vs Karpov vs Kasparov debate is NOT like the Morphy vs Botvinnink debate.  Obviously comparing players whose careers and lives didn't overlap is an exercise in opinion.

But Fischer didn't die in 1972.  Karpov was quite active, as were Korchnoi, Portisch, Hort, Tal, and other very strong players.  Fischer was only 40 when Kasparov played Karpov the first match. Ivanchuk, Sokolov, Yusopov, Shirov, and Gelfand were coming up.

Now, even if you believe Fischer was correct in refusing to defend his title due to FIDE rules, nothing prevented him from playing matches on his own, for which the sponsorship was ready and waiting.  Nothing stopped him from playing in tournaments - organizers were bending over backwards to meet his demands. 

The ONLY reason Fischer never played the great players who followed him was because he CHOSE not to play them.  None of the new generation, nor Korchnoi or Tal, played a limited schedule, they were all active all over the world.

After beating everyone so badly for a good while, would you feel you had anything to prove ? Or the same hunger, after feeling like you couldn't go any higher, or get any better comparatively ? Perhaps Fischer felt that way...

I'm afraid that Fischer's retirement from competitive chess had more to do with his mental health issues than with "having nothing more to prove". His gradually increasing paranoia and misanthropism should be obvious to anyone who followed his radio interviews.

He remains, in my view, one of the greatest chess players who ever lived... but a badly flawed human being.

Eseles wrote:

nameno1had wrote:

… Karpov is also a far more likable person IMO.

i never thought of Karpov as "likable person"  

a story from Ivanchuk on Karpov:

"I recall Karpov getting extremely angry with me when I was his partner in Belote [game with cards], and I made some mistakes. (Laughs) He was beside himself with anger, which really amazed me: I was playing for fun and didn’t treat the game so seriously. ... At that time, as a 17-year-old, I was sure that someone who was able to play chess well must, a priori, be a wonderful person who’s positive in every way. And conversely – if someone had negative qualities then he’d never be able to play chess well. Well, Karpov disabused me of that idea, making it very clear that those are absolutely different things, that personal and professional qualities have nothing in common."

I'll take that with a grain of salt. I'll admit I don't know everything about Karpov, but having said that, I still have heard far more and far worse than that, about Kasparov. Kasparov would have bragged first about how could win on his own, why his team should still win and why his opponent's were worse. He probably would have been a sore loser too, just like after some of his matches in chess.

Karpov is still far more likable....

well i never knew i was a misanthropist till i looked it up.

Even though chessplayers here are real awesome showing stuff for free giving advise and all that stuff.

or he could have just have nothing to prove anymore!!! 

people who label others badly flawed human beings, or who say someone sucks as a person, are most likely those who have no concept of how flawed every human being is...

anyone who thinks they are perfect or someone they know is, obviously needs to get out more or stop paying so much attention to themselves....

Rather than getting bogged down in amateur psychoanalytics, why not just read a transcript of one of the interviews, and judge for yourself?

http://www.heretical.com/miscella/fischer.html

i wasnt disagreeing that fischer had problems, i just get tired of imperfect people putting him down for his imperfections....as if they are so qualified to pass judgement...

So we're supposed to pretend that Fischer was a well-balanced individual?

Count me out.

I greatly admire Fischer as a chess player. But only as a chess player.

yeah sure, i think Kasparov could be a major... dhead at times... too

i still like him more than Karpov

i had just happened to read that Ivancuk interview recently

http://www.chessintranslation.com/2011/04/vassily-ivanchuk-im-a-very-ambitious-person/

here's how it continues right after the part i posted

"While from Kasparov I learned, in moments of stress, to allow myself quickly to explode and then calm down just as quickly i.e. that quality which is absolutely inherent to him. It’s important in particularly stressful periods not to keep your emotions inside."

[the question was: "You’ve played Karpov and Kasparov. What sticks in your mind from spending time with those outstanding chess players?"]

blueemu wrote:

nameno1had wrote:

i wasnt disagreeing that fischer had problems, i just get tired of imperfect people putting him down for his imperfections....as if they are so qualified to pass judgement...

So we're supposed to pretend that Fischer was a well-balanced individual?

Count me out.

I greatly admire Fischer as a chess player. But only as a chess player.

not at all, but when someone has a birth defect, should you stare in public, point and make it the center of attention in your conversations for all to see, so that the shame of their imperfection drowns them ? ....

This is like comparing manny pacquiao to mohammed ali or comparing royce gracie to anderson silva, or for those WWE fans out there, comparing hulk hogan to john cena...

Not sure that I would class rabid antisemitism as a birth defect. More of a character flaw. Which is exactly what I called it in the first place.

blueemu wrote:

Not sure that I would class rabid antisemitism as a birth defect. More of a character flaw. Which is exactly what I called it in the first place.

do you more easily forgive an african american who despises causians, than a caucasian american who hates blacks ? it isnt that i condone racism in any form, but an abused or mentally ill persons warped perceptions are more easily excused than someone like hitler, who just thought he was better than, wanted to exploit and exterminate...i get really tired of people trying to compare fischer to the likes of hitler...

bobby had ties to the jewish community, he had more reason to despise them or their ways. if you never walked a mile in bobbys shoes, what right do you have to treat him like you experienced his life and would have chosen any better ? all too often, we judge the actions of others with warped perceptions, we compare them to other and catergorize them the same, when they could be completely different. we also only look at our perception of the damage and dont even consider the cause of or the intent of the person...

every screwed up person i have known is either mentally ill, been abused, or admittedly evil, for their selfish pleasure....considering fischer wasnt even remotely close to the latter, it is easy to look past his obvious flaws, for obvious reasons....

Fischer was delusional but also completely honest at the same time.  He said what he meant and never intentionally lied.  I'm also pretty certain that Fischer became sort of an alcoholic later on in life, something which no one really talks about (or knows about)

Well, no one except you, that is, obviously you were hiding out in his wine cellar counting empty bottles.

Well he was either an alcoholic or he just liked to drink alot.  I'll let you decide which.