Fischer, like it or not, would still be dominant over anybody.

Sort:
president_max

Kirsan will soon report a Fischer sighting.

ChessBooster

yo must be crazy to be so good at any field, not just chess !

how much exellent engineers you guys know,, how much good traders you know, how much extraordinary computer programmers, how much good just taxi drivers, football players, professors .... and we can bet that among these people are some of them really crazy, just this "crazyness" iz expressed on different ways, and these guys are unknown to wide comunity, not like fischer, every word he told run all around the globe, and above mentioned guys are unknown and maybe telling worse things on a daily basis, more worse than bobby would, and these are still alive and well accepted in our comunities...

think problem with fischer was, he was too famous person in global views, and i do not think he was so crazy at all, think he was only a regular person who wanted his privacy nothing more, but since he could not establish it in this kind of world, so he went extreme as time was going on...only problem he was not able to manage with these things properly.

 

manualarjona

Keep posting! We're writing a book about Fischer in our own way. 

SAGM001

Lol

imsighked2
[COMMENT DELETED]
fewlio
LeeTaylor85 wrote:
You see all these post about Bobby Fischer, and alot of them you see people saying that opening theory has changed too much and that if Fischer at his "peak" came to the present that he wouldn't be able to compete with the top 10. I call bull crap. The thing about Fischer was that he prepared like nobody's business. His play was more accurate than anybody, his skills in the endgame are unsurpassed. Fischer wasn't scared of Karpov in 75, he made World Champion, which was all that he wanted to begin with. He had nothing left to prove, so when FIDE refused his demands he opted not to play, based on principles and wanting better conditions for players. Fischer kept up with professional chess throughout the rest of his life, studied it passionately, and still played strong GM's regularly outside of tournament play. To try and say that 71 or 72 was his peak is ridiculous. He kept his strength and his edge, but chose not to play professionally for personal reasons. He would have destroyed Kasparov over and over.

 

amen brother!

imsighked2
Paul_Northcott wrote:
imsighked2 wrote:

What the hell!? Children are on this site!

who are you talking to?

Someone posted porn some really twisted porn. It was removed (Thankfully).

imsighked2
imsighked2 wrote:
Paul_Northcott wrote:
imsighked2 wrote:

What the hell!? Children are on this site!

who are you talking to?

Someone posted some really twisted porn. It was removed (Thankfully).

 

imsighked2

I hope so. It was only up briefly.

manualarjona

I think I know who this person was, it's a troll, obsessed by faeces....

manualarjona

Well, I blocked this person, let me see

manualarjona

Name was japanise_schoolgirl

manualarjona

Troll ...has closed his account. Just like I expected.

Amplepawn
LeeTaylor85 wrote:
You see all these post about Bobby Fischer, and alot of them you see people saying that opening theory has changed too much and that if Fischer at his "peak" came to the present that he wouldn't be able to compete with the top 10. I call bull crap. The thing about Fischer was that he prepared like nobody's business. His play was more accurate than anybody, his skills in the endgame are unsurpassed. Fischer wasn't scared of Karpov in 75, he made World Champion, which was all that he wanted to begin with. He had nothing left to prove, so when FIDE refused his demands he opted not to play, based on principles and wanting better conditions for players. Fischer kept up with professional chess throughout the rest of his life, studied it passionately, and still played strong GM's regularly outside of tournament play. To try and say that 71 or 72 was his peak is ridiculous. He kept his strength and his edge, but chose not to play professionally for personal reasons. He would have destroyed Kasparov over and over
 
 
I believe Paul Morphy would be on top aswell , even though he had a funny way of playing kings gambit.. The only change with todays chess is the study resources that are easily accessible to kids these days are phenomenal . 
     yassier seirawn vs emanual lasker who wins?
manualarjona

Well, all has been said now....Enough of Fischer.

DrChesspain
LeeTaylor85 wrote:

his mental issues have no bearing on his ability to play chess. that is irrelevant

LOL