If Fischer would played Karpov for the World Champion, who would win?

Fischer 1967 through 1972, games played:

1967 Monaco 1st 6w-2d-0l

1967 Slopje 1st 12w-3d-2l

1967 Sousse 7w-3d-0l (Interzonal - withdrew while leading)

1968 Nathanaya 1st 10w-3d-0l

1968 Vincovci 1st 9w-4d-0l

1970 Petrosian 2w-2d-0l (USSR vs World)

1970 Rovinj/Zagreb 1st 10w-6d-1l

1970 Buenos Aires 1st 13w-4d-0l

1970 Siegen Olympiad 8w-4d-1l

1970 Palma 1st 15w-7d-1l (Interzonal)

1971 Taimanov 6w-0d-0l (quarter final candidate match)

1971 Larsen 6w-0d-0l (semi final match)

1971 Petrosian 5w-3d-1l (final match)

1972 Spassky 7w-11d-2l (championship)

I count 176 games during that time, which included about 18 months of no serious games in 1968-1970.

46 games??? Such silliness and so easily refuted.  Hahahaha

62 minutes ago · Quote · #997

JamieDelarosa

Botvinnik might make the top 100 today, nothing better.

He had to manipulate the system to his advantage to even retain the title. He lost it 3 separate times.  Who else did that?  Exactly.

Funny how Botvinnik's rematches always featured an opponent who was in poor health.  I'm sure he had nothing to do with that. Quite possibly the biggest cheater from a country of cheaters.

Fischer was the highest rated player from 1963 through 1972.  That is 9 years of play, and even with rating inflation, it was many more years before his rating record was surpassed.

I don't for a second doubt that Kasparov is among the very few elite players of all time.  I just believe Fischer was the primus inter pares.

You are of the Kasparov era.  You don't know Fischer.  You would have preferred Mantle over Ruth; Ronaldo over Pele; Jackson Pollack over Auguste Renoir.  It's understandable.

Here is what Kasparov wrote about Fischer:

"Despite his short stay at the top there is little to debate about the chess of Bobby Fischer. He changed the game in a way that hadn't been seen since the late 19th century. The gap between Mr. Fischer and his contemporaries was the largest ever. He singlehandedly revitalized a game that had been stagnating under the control of the Communists of the Soviet sports hierarchy.

When Bobby Fischer rocketed to the top of the chess world in the early 1970s he was a fine wine in a flawed vessel. His contributions to the game, both at the board and from a commercial perspective, were nothing short of a revolution in the chess world. At the same time, his brittle and abusive character showed cracks that deepened with his every step toward the highest title.

Today, it is hard to imagine the sensation of Mr. Fischer's success when he wrested the world championship away from Boris Spassky in Reykjavik, Iceland, in 1972. In the middle of the Cold War, the Brooklyn-raised iconoclast took the crown from the well-oiled Soviet machine that had dominated the chess world for decades. And this after he barely showed up for the match at all, and then lost the first game and forfeited the second!"

http://en.chessbase.com/post/game-of-life-kasparov-on-fischer-in-full

No, that would have been 9 years of play. I see you suffer with lack of education in basic math. And with lack of knowledge about chess history too: first official rating list was introduced in 1970.

Indeed Jamie. +1

(For your unwavering search for the truths amid the many half/rumored/unsubstaniated "truths" surrounding Fischer.

Thanks for the correction! ;^)

However, I prefaced my comment earlier by referencing the retro-rating work done by Prof. Arpad Elo.

Alas, PB is right about the math but I do agree with you, Jamie, about your basic point. Also, though the "official" list began in 1970, again I'm in total agreement with the premise that Robert J. Fischer was the Best Player during the time.

Heh. Seems as though in this conversation about Fischer & Karpov, some people are amite perturbed with the exclusion of Garry Kasparov.

Pretty funny. Guess those fanboys should start their (or in this case, 'his' own) thread. Duh.

I guess, to humor those that say that Kaspy is better than Bobby...sure! That Garry's opponents could (probably) beat Fischer's opponents... of course! I can dig that. But ta say Kasparov was THE Most dominating player during the 22 yrs? Which time period, Hijo are you including? 1985-2007? Puleez dude. Elaborate more instead of exaggerating.

I'm sorry but there is no way players like Tal walk over players in Kasparov's timeframe if they would walk over Fischer as you suggest hijodeluna. In 1988 Tal was #7 in the world, at age 51(!), and won the world blitz championship that year ahead of both Kasparov and Karpov. Another fun fact, in 1992 Tal left the hospital he was staying at (he was terminally ill) to participate in the Moscow Blitz tournament which he beat Kasparov ( the only defeat Kasparov suffered that tournament, and at 55! Tal finished 3rd place behind Kasparov and Bareev.). He died a month later. Right before his death Tal was still beating the worlds best players. Claiming Fischer would have been no match for the players of Kasparov timeframe is nothing short of ignorance.

"Fischer was the highest rated player from 1963 through 1972. That is 9 years of play"

According to what rating lists was he supposed to have been the highest rated player from 1963 to 1972? There were a couple of unofficial Elo lists in the 1960s, and one of them had Spassky and Fischer as shared first.

Fischer was certainly the highest rated player on the FIDE rating lists of 1973, 1974 and 1975 though, even if he didn't play. This was before FIDE introduced the rule about a year's inactivity making you drop from the list.

Fischer was probably the best player in the world 1970-72, but for the period 1964-69 Spassky's achievements were much more impressive. While Fischer played a few weak events like Netanya 1968 (without opponents ranked in the top 100) Spassky won a bunch of Candidates matches and the year after that the title match. Even if his "test" Elo only was the same as Fischer's on the 1967 list, his results not only against Fischer but in World Championship cycles over the following years make it difficult to rank Fischer ahead of Spassky in 1968-69.

11 hours ago·Quote·#1010

hijodeluna

Fischer opponents were very strong, let name a few, Geller, Korchnoi, Gligoric, Stein, Ulhmann. Hort, Matulovic, Spassky, Petrosian (the opponent Kasparov could not beat without the help from Spassky), Bronstein, Smyslov, Keres, Larsen, Euwe, Reshevsky and Tal.

Tal was always a tough opponent for him.

0-4 in the candidates? Ouch.

Well blueemu, Fischer was always going against a team of Soviet GMs, especially against Tal's game in Bled 1961.

<As Roman Dzindzichashvilli points out in his video, "A Tribute to Bobby Fischer" a team of top Soviet GMs he was on had analyzed this position very carefully and missed the move Fischer found OTB: the counter-intuitive 9.Be2!!>

That is true genius, without the help of a team of GMs, Fischer 9.Be2! otb. I like to add, Fischer perfect technique in the endgame.  Fischer refute Tal and a team of Soviet GMs in Paulsen variation, unlike Kasparov who need help from Spassky.

According to the chessgames.com database Tal vs. Fischer:  Tal 4 wins, Fischer 2 wins, 5 draws in classic time controls.  Tal beat Fischer twice as often.  Now I will use ardent Fischerphile logic and conclude opposite: Fischer was twice as good as Tal.  Now everyone happy.  :o) 

@ Yureesystem : Yup... that's one of the reasons that Fischer-the-chessplayer is one of my heroes (Fischer-the-person was a jerk, unfortunately).

They should have done a video of Fischer singing "I did it MY waaaay..."

Poor old fishy, everyone gangs up on him for opening his mouth and letting a hurricane out!