Forums

Fischer had no gamesmanship

Sort:
SWED420BLAZEIT
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
fuzzbug wrote:

Just when I was starting to think the OP intelligent...

Don't act so arrogant, do you have a rebuttal? 

a rebuttal lol? you don't even make an argument you just state claims as if they were facts. That's no way worthy of a rebuttal.. it's fallacious and highly idiotic. 

bobfcrusader
[COMMENT DELETED]
Senior-Lazarus_Long
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:

I have recently began studying the 1972 World Championship in order to improve my chess. 

I found something shocking that happened during the event. Fischer forfeited game 2, giving Spassky a 2-0 edge. After forfeiting, Fischer turned the match around and ended up winning. Fischer used unethical manipulation to beat Spassky. He broke him down psychologically. Fischer wasn't a more skilled chess player, but a more skilled manipulator. His forfeit in the second game affected Spassky's game, who was used to playing with gentlemen, not cowards who rely on psychological warfare to win. If psychology wasn't a factor in the match, Spassky would have wiped the floor clean with him. Fischer's legacy is one of psychological manipulation, not of chess brilliancy. 

 

In 1972 Fischer was head and shoulders above anyone else in the World.To Spassky's credit,after game 2 he was ordered to return to the USSR and he would have retained the championship by Fischer's forfeiture,instead Spassky created an accomidation that allowed the match to continue.

  

Senior-Lazarus_Long

Right,it was part of the international jewish conspiracy against him.But with Nixon's chair and a small room off to the side of the stage,he was able to overcome their machinations.

livat01
[COMMENT DELETED]
livat01
[COMMENT DELETED]
MickinMD
robertjames_perez wrote:

No way! I think Fischer thought that World Championship does not accept  non-Russians.

Bobby didn't just "think" that. The Candidates Matches were set up as round-robins through the early 60's to keep the non-Soviets out.  The Soviet Grandmasters would play easy, pre-arranged ties with each other and then, rested, do their best against non-Soviet players.

Fischer's complaints about that were the main reason that the format was changed to knockout-matches among the candidates.

MickinMD
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:If psychology wasn't a factor in the match, Spassky would have wiped the floor clean with him. Fischer's legacy is one of psychological manipulation, not of chess brilliancy. 

 

What evidence do you have of that?  As others have noted, Fischer had just wiped out the other candidates - including the 1963-66 World Champ Petrosian.  Spassky was, at the time, considered a "first among equals" World Champ.  Fischer was expected to win easily.

Of course, Fischer was a jerk and acted that way, putting a stain on the match, but if everything else was equal on would have predicted a that Bobby would have easily whipped Spassky.  Note that three years later, Karpov was on top and Spassky was fading with even the aging Korchnoi surpassing him.

livat01
[COMMENT DELETED]
livat01
[COMMENT DELETED]
Rat1960

Explain Game 1 Move 29. ... Bxh2

Rule 21: "All taking of still photographs and any disturbance of the players during play is forbidden without the express permission of both players. The only filming, video taping or televising allowed will be that which is exclusively and officially arranged by the organisers."
(The Icelandic Chess Federation)

Urban legend is that a picture was taken of Fischer while he pondered move 29. Game 1.
Certainly unauthorised photographs were taken during Game 1.
I am not sure Mr. Spassky could have returned to Russia claiming a default win.

Those who claim it was psychological plan are just as crazy as Fischer was.

#40 @micky1943 - I don't want to go quite that far, but yeah.



TheCherusker
stuzzicadenti wrote:

I am convinced that it was not only Fischer but also his team (/federation) that supported all this psychological warfare. The match and world champion title was a high stakes political battle and the United States was backing Fischer and in fact often dictating to him what actions to take. He became a pawn in their game, so to speak.


Untruer words were never written.

The USCF did not support Fischer's so-called psychological warfare, because there was none.  That kind of terminology only exists because the press called it that in order to sensationalize the event. Fischer's main problem were the cameras. None of his complaints were EVER directed at Spassky, only the organizers, and only at the very beginning of the match. Spassky himself acknowledged that after the match, admitting that Fischer's complaints never bothered him. He also said that during the match he had to act upset, because HIS government dictated that to him. There are plenty of interviews with Spassky after his defection to the West. No longer under the influence of his dictatorial government, he was finally able to speak freely and truthfully about Fischer and the match.

The US government never dictated him to do anything - nobody could dictate anything to Bobby, you should know at least that much about him. The extent of the government's involvement in the match was a ten minute phone conversation between Fischer and Kissinger, wherein Kissinger tried to talk Fischer into playing the match, since it was in danger of being cancelled.

I suggest you study up on the great man before commenting on him. At the very least, get your facts right.

livat01
[COMMENT DELETED]
VladimirHerceg91
micky1943 wrote:

The OP is a very weak player, with an epic ignorance of chess history, chess strategy, and chess theory. He trumpets his ignorance here through an amazing collection on inane, ignorant threads

I wish I knew you said this before adding you as a friend. This hurts, hurts a lot. 

The chess.com forums are for intellectual chess discussion, and for new players like me to learn about the game. Not for bullying. If you don't have the patience for "very weak players" like myself, then don't comment on the threads. 

robertjames_perez
MickinMD wrote:
robertjames_perez wrote:

No way! I think Fischer thought that World Championship does not accept  non-Russians.

Bobby didn't just "think" that. The Candidates Matches were set up as round-robins through the early 60's to keep the non-Soviets out.  The Soviet Grandmasters would play easy, pre-arranged ties with each other and then, rested, do their best against non-Soviet players.

Fischer's complaints about that were the main reason that the format was changed to knockout-matches among the candidates.

I know that, you don't have to say so.

FrightenedGiant

VladimirHerceg91 wrote:

I have recently began studying the 1972 World Championship in order to improve my chess. 

I found something shocking that happened during the event. Fischer forfeited game 2, giving Spassky a 2-0 edge. After forfeiting, Fischer turned the match around and ended up winning. Fischer used unethical manipulation to beat Spassky. He broke him down psychologically. Fischer wasn't a more skilled chess player, but a more skilled manipulator. His forfeit in the second game affected Spassky's game, who was used to playing with gentlemen, not cowards who rely on psychological warfare to win. If psychology wasn't a factor in the match, Spassky would have wiped the floor clean with him. Fischer's legacy is one of psychological manipulation, not of chess brilliancy. 

 

I like drinking coffee sometimes

returnofthesonof

Just when you think everything has been said about Fischer...

or wished

PromisingPawns

The same way you managed to be a 2100 rapid with 1400 blitz.

RichColorado

Try reading this . . .

https://www.chess.com/article/view/fischer-vs-spassky-world-chess-championship-1972

RichColorado