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

¡Que no es fruta, coooooño!

Jajajaja, ¿que vienes de fiesta a estas horas? Pues mira, busca Carmen Miranda Frutas en Google y sorpresa sorpresa. 

Hey! Glad to see you again! Seriously, I'm going to work just now. Yes, you're right, but there are no fruits in Jamie's pic! She's struggling with this misunderstanding since she joined the site.

Yessss!

Not at all analogous!  Fischer resigned the FIDE title before a match was even arranged.

Fischer had played his opening move in the game (c4! as I recall).  Panno came to the playing site and resigned the game before time expired.  It was a rated game.

(corrected move)

Unbelievable! You have a job! in Spain!!! Amazing!! 

Geez. Jamie +1.

Fabel keeps coming up with adjacents with no real tangent, methinks.

In an hypothetical scenario, most ( like fabel) refer to surprising unrealistic accounts or their own substantiated opinions. If fantasy was an big deal, then, why can't these people believe that if Fischer had defended his title (successfully) vs Karpov, he would've beaten Kasparov...in fact, Fischer would've been #1 for more years than Garry.

But alw

But alas, these "realistic" posters couldn't conceive of such things because this forum is all about half-truths, bravado, and hate. Cool.

I'm fine with anyone seeing it as if Fischer won 20 games in a row against all GMs, even if for example Jamie said that he doesn't, but that's not the main point. It is why number of games won in a row would be the best measure of greatness, and, if it is, why it is only used to support Fischer when others won more games in a row.

Also the "negative" arguments (i.e. Lasker lost a match when he was 52, Kasparov failed in his 8th match, so Fischer was greater than them) doesn't convince me. To me Lasker and Kasparov are better evaluated by looking not only at their one bad result after decades of excellent results. By quitting in his 20s Fischer didn't add to his greatness by avoiding a bad result in the distant future, he just stopped adding to his greatness while Lasker and Kasparov didn't.

I have never even come with any opinion about how a hypothetical match between Karpov and Fischer would have finished. It's impossible to say. What would have happened if Fischer hadn't quit chess in 1972 is difficult to say, but if he hadn't quit then he wouldn't have been the same Fischer as the one he was, so it's a bit like speculating about another person.

Fisher, Karpov, Kasparov who cares? The next generation punk will remember only one name Houdini.

Yes, and they will mistake it as the name of a chess program, just as they think 'Big Brother' is a TV show.

• 14 hours ago·Quote·#1199

  JamieDelarosa wrote:

  ¿Coño? ¡Travieso! Plumas y flores, querida.
•  
•  
•  
•  Oh Jaime, you have class and great sense of humor!!!

Fischer plays a world championship match in 1975 against Karpov, Bobby wins. 

Fischer with his powerful rating 2785 to Karpov low 2710. Duh!  The player with the highest rating wins. Fischer would of beat Karpov in 1975, Bobby would of been the first 2800. Again Fischer playing Kasparov in 1984 for world champion, now think hard, Fischer massive 2840 to Kasparov puny 2720, not hard to figure who is going to win in 1984.  

Remember back in 1975 Fischer and Karpov were the only two player to reach 2700 level. After beating Karpov, Fischer would of been 2800. It took a long time for player to reach 2800 and Kasparov being the first player to achieve it.

This discussion has become pointless.....which is better, green or blue! ok, let us start the new pointless discussion.

You know when it gets pointless when you have people insulting each other over it.

You can't argue love, you can't argue likes, you can't argue beliefs....it is pointless. And a hypothetical discussion like this one is all about belief. I believe one thing, you believe the other.

Fine to disagree, as long as we respect each other. If we are going to discuss a point, let us do it with dignity.

Good day to everyone! Enjoy the chess!

Just to explain.  My avatar is an image of Carmen Miranda, the famous Brazilian singer, dancer, and actress from the 1930s to the 1950s.  She died before I was born.  (Perhaps I am her reincarnation!)

I use her avatar for the color and the humor.  I wish I could wear such colorful headdresses and dresses!!  She did wear a fruit hat in at least one film.

Fabel~but isn't this the whole point of this forum? To speculate, analyze, hypothesize who would've won in 1975? I dare say, my friend, to refuse ta give an simple answer (and some elaboration on your opinion) and going off tangent, some of it credible on it's face, makes me think you just like sitting on the fence. Yelling at passersby.

Well, don't mind it if some of us-who've probably studied Fischer's, Karpov's, Kasparov's, Lasker's games more times than they can count-disregard any disparaging remarks of either player you've made. Since, I for one, has made my assessments based on ability, brilliance, talent and not just on achievements or records made.

If the match had taken place Fischer would have lost ,thats not to say Karpov  was stronger ,but Fischer was already a candidate for the asylum and he knew it! His best games were behind him ,it was the cult of personality and his personal genius that makes him the legendary figure he is today and also because he was an American and the Yanks will grab a hold of anything that reinforces their belief they are the God sanctioned beneficiarys of the Almightys benificence, I approve of Fischers stance when he declared himself an enemy of the USA ,he was never going to lick the ass of anyone and kowtow to their bidding

Again, moot point.

If Fischer had played Karpov in 75, it woulda went to (at the latest) game 7, when Fischer would have flipped over the table, and stormed out. 

Karpov wins.

You know, a Google search on "Bobby Fischer flips over table" yields nothing but other threads where you have made this same baseless assertion about an action Fischer never took ;)...just saying.