Korchnoi in 1978 was a B player!
Weak!!
According to the Chessmetrics website, in 1978 Viktor Korchnoi was the 2nd highest rated player on the planet, which doesn't account for any intergalactic grand masters we may not be aware of.
Interesting that Naka still thinks that a peak '72 Fischer equipped with modern engines and a few years to study theory is "probably on the same level" as Naka and the rest of his "can't qualify for the Candidates when we are such geniuses greater than the absolute best from a generation ago and equipped with 'puters and the most recent ECO". At least that is what I am reading in Naka's lines. Naka apparently wasn't impressed with Kasparov's middlegame skills either.
I think it's important to understand his comment in context of the question that was asked. The question was:
"How do you think Fischer would do against top players like yourself, Carlsen, or Kasparov?"
Clearly, when he says that "Fischer would almost certainly lose to us all," he's talking about the current crop of SuperGMs and not your regular, run-of-the-mill GMs.
Bronstein once said that Morphy could compete with the world's best given a little time to brush up with theory. But when someone asked Kasparov about this quote roughly a generation or so later, Kasparov responded something along the lines of "yes, that may have been true in the '50's ... that simply shows that the advances in theory in just 30 years quickly produces better chess players, and that was before computers were so strong!
Regarding Fischer specifically ... he beat 2 other strong GM's 6-0 and 6-0, then easily beat the previous 2 champions, and that was after relative inactivity... that just shows how weak and old those players were because that has never happened before or since... just shows how bad the competition was. Fischer is like de la Maza's, rapid success then quit. Spassky and Larsen were more than 5 years older than Fischer... Petrosian was practically senile and walking with a cane, something like in his early 40's when they played.
Fischer saw the writing on the wall and quit at the right time. He is considered a legend and always in this discussion even though we know that today's CM's would beat him with a comfortable but not demolishing margin.
Guys like Petrosian weren't that spent. There was an article (which i will look for ) in which the writer brought out the fact that Tigran Petrosian was still invincible in the 80's. When Kasparov was the rising star in Russia he got creamed by Petrosian thrice if not several times untill Spassky gave Kasparov some lessons on dealing with Petrosian that' show good he was. Korchnoi - lets go back to his world championship match with Karpov where he gave Karpov a run for his money. So the Petrosians and the Korchnois weren't as spent as we would like to believe.
If my memory serves me right, Taimanov is not in top 10 when Fischer beat him. Fischer himself told that that there many games against Larsen and Taimanov that are draws, but Taimanov and Larsen forced issues looking to win. Fischer himself told that Taimanov is not healthy during their match.
Viktor Korchnoi tied Robert James Fischer 2 to 2, with 4 draws.
Garry Kasparov beat Viktor Korchnoi 15 to 1, with 18 draws.
: Efim Geller beat Robert James Fischer 5 to 3, with 2 draws.
Anatoly Karpov beat Efim Geller 2 to 1, with 6 draws.
Anatoly Karpov beat Boris Spassky 14 to 2, with 23 draws.
29 pages, and counting.
Ruy Lopez, if he were still around, would be very happy that his opening still gets trotted out now and then.
Korchnoi in 1978 was a B player!
Weak!!
That boils my blood....
29 pages, and counting.
Yes, I didn't realize this thread was going to blow up like it has.
If Capa retired after beating Lasker, imagine the myth that will be attributed to Capa. It is well known that Capa does not work as hard compare to his fellow top players. Capa is seen partying prior to the match with Alekhine. You are ignoring what others told you here. Fischer has full USA support. If you think about it, Fischer's 6-0 against Taimanov is not really impressive as Fischer himself told many games are draw, but Taimanov tried to win them. Fischer himself told that Taimanov is not healthy during the match. Relative to the era, Steinitz's 7-0 against the world number 2 blackburne is more impressive. Fischer's match antics is also well known. It is disturbing to his opponents. and Spassky , by his own admission , is very lazy.According to his second, Krogius, Spassky played tennis and went sightseeing instead of preparing during the days immediately before the match. Karpov has stated that he had been brought in as a sparring partner for Spassky prior to the match, and that he and Spassky played only one offhand game. Other Soviet sources are on record, including Spassky himself, as to how cavalier Spassky was in preparing for the Fischer match.
Fischer struggles with Korchnoi.
Classical games: Robert James Fischer tied Viktor Korchnoi 2 to 2, with 4 draws.
Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Viktor Korchnoi 15 to 1, with 18 draws.
Classical games: Anatoly Karpov beat Boris Spassky 14 to 2, with 23 draws.
Classical games: Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian tied Garry Kasparov 2 to 2, with 1 draw.
Classical games: Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian tied Anatoly Karpov 1 to 1, with 12 draws.
Classical games: Robert James Fischer beat Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian 8 to 4, with 15 draws.
Classical games: Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian tied Garry Kasparov 2 to 2, with 1 draw.
Classical games: Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian tied Anatoly Karpov 1 to 1, with 12 draws.
Classical games: Robert James Fischer beat Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian 8 to 4, with 15 draws.
Classical games: Efim Geller beat Robert James Fischer 5 to 3, with 2 draws.
Classical games: Anatoly Karpov beat Efim Geller 2 to 1, with 6 draws.
Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Efim Geller 1 to 0, with 3 draws.
Classical games: Mikhail Tal beat Robert James Fischer 4 to 2, with 5 draws.
Classical games: Anatoly Karpov beat Mikhail Tal 1 to 0, with 19 draws.
Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Mikhail Tal 2 to 0, with 9 draws.
Who is the only player ever to win 20 straight games against GMs ? Who is the only player to ever win a candidates match by 100% , and he did it twice . Who is the only player ever to win a major tournament with 100% ?
Who is the only player ever to win 20 straight games against GMs ? Who is the only player to ever win a candidates match by 100% , and he did it twice . Who is the only player ever to win a major tournament with 100% ?
Such argument of using who is not actually good. By then I can also say, who is the only player who only lost once in 10 years? Who is the only player who defended his title for more than 20 years? And so on and so on.
Steinitz actually has 27 straight wins against his fellow masters of his era. I guess Steinitz>>>>> Fischer then.
Fischer himself told that many games against Taimanov and Larsen are draw, but Taimanov and Larsen tried to win draw positions. Fischer himself admitted that Taimanov is not healthy during their match.
People bring up so bad arguments against Fischer's chess power, that i can't explain them without believing they're totally biased against him :)
Viktor Korchnoi tied Robert James Fischer 2 to 2, with 4 draws.
Garry Kasparov beat Viktor Korchnoi 15 to 1, with 18 draws.
: Efim Geller beat Robert James Fischer 5 to 3, with 2 draws.
Anatoly Karpov beat Efim Geller 2 to 1, with 6 draws.
Anatoly Karpov beat Boris Spassky 14 to 2, with 23 draws.
The fact that G.M's like Korchnoi and Spssky were having double digit figures of draws against the young Kasparov and Karpov just show how much of chess they still had in them. The fact that Taimanov was unwell during the match does not mean that Fischer was not good enough to beat a healthy Taimanov as it is a case of the what could have beens and Spassky not training as much for the Fischer match. The one of Spassky not training as much for his match with Fischer was either a classical excuse or that Spassky had already resigned his title to the "on fire " Fischer so i guess he knew that training for that match was a waste of time as Fischer was going to sweep him away.
Chess fans and players alike have an interesting way of re writing history - with Lasker being champ for 27 years they say that he avoided opponents when they were still at their best, with Morphy they write that he used to play with "idiots", Karpov just found opponents that Fischer had demoralised and a vacant throne. Fischer played with sick and old G.M's. In one article in some paper it was written that when Kasparov lost to Kraminik he was going through a divorce or some marital problem which just took its toll on him. With Karpov there was talk about some parapsychologist in his match against Korchnoi, Capablanca faced Lasker when he was past his prime. I wonder what is going to be written about Carlsen. It seems world champions needed/ need to be aided by circumstances and not their prowess for them to rightfully take their crowns.
Chess fans and players alike have an interesting way of re writing history - with Lasker being champ for 27 years they say that he avoided opponents when they were still at their best, with Morphy they write that he used to play with "idiots", Karpov just found opponents that Fischer had demoralised and a vacant throne. Fischer played with sick and old G.M's. In one article in some paper it was written that when Kasparov lost to Kraminik he was going through a divorce or some marital problem which just took its toll on him. With Karpov there was talk about some parapsychologist in his match against Korchnoi, Capablanca faced Lasker when he was past his prime. I wonder what is going to be written about Carlsen. It seems world champions needed/ need to be aided by circumstances and not their prowess for them to rightfully take their crowns.
But Fischer himself told that Taimanov is not healthy during their match. And many of the games there are draw(as Fischer himself told) but Taimanov tried to win draw position.
But Fischer himself told that Taimanov is not healthy during their match. And many of the games there are draw(as Fischer himself told) but Taimanov tried to win draw position.
I am not saying that is not true = My assertion is that a healthy Taimanov would have still lost to Fischer but by a respectable margin however that is open to debate and it just goes on to show that Taimanov was not a weakling as some here allege because even when he was sick he put up a brave fight, Fischer himself admitted that the scoreline was not a true reflection of the fight on the board as their games were close dog fights. Taimanov brought everything to the table and there is no doubt that if he was well the fight would have been tighter. I think we must give credit where its due.
So yah Fischer creamed fromidable opponents. If he had been exposed to chessbase products guys like Nakamura would probably be rank amateurs when put next to Fischer.