Chess - Play & Learn


FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store


NY Times: World Title without Top GMS?

  • #41

    When we last saw Fischer it was 3 years ago.  Any person's skills would have diminished... which makes this debate even more impossible to call with any certainty.

  • #42

    Remember its not about the strongest tournament player, it's the strongest match player. Sure maybe you win 80% of the time against 2600 players, and the other guy wins 60% and draws the rest, but in a match up between you and him with time to prepare he could dominate you.

  • #43

    But this last candidates tournament had a terrible format, it was all about blitz, so it's not really a legitimate world championship match in my view. FIDE really failed badly.

  • #44
    trysts wrote:
    joeydvivre wrote:

    Second off, in more modern times, when Karpov got his title does anybody seriously believe that he could have beaten Fischer?  

    Fischer hadn't played any tournaments for three years, so by 1975, I think he seriously could have lost against Karpov. 



    Interestingly enough, he was preparing though.  The same person that created Fischer's "Big Red Book" of Spassky's games, also created a similar book for Fischer of Karpov's games.

  • #45
    joeydvivre wrote:

    Roger Maris wasn't even the home run king on his own team (that would be The Mick).

    Nope.  Mantle never held the single season home run record.  Ever...not even for a day.

    Man! no wonder poor Roger lost his hair.  I'd have bolted for St. Louis too had I played for a team whose fans had no appreciation for my accomplishments.

  • #46
    joeydvivre wrote:


    So what if Fischer hadn't played in a few years?  How long did Kamsky take off from playing chess and is he any worse now for it?  It's not like he forgot anything (Fischer remembered everything...).  I've taken years off from playing chess.  It takes a few weeks to get things back together but that's all.  It's not like running or something where you get fat..

    Actually, yes, Kamsky is worse. He is certainly past his peak. 

    It's interesting that people who continue to be apologists for Fisher never seem to bring up the fact that Fisher had every opportunity in the world to play a match with Karpov, and he declined. Why was that? More gamesmanship? Self-doubt, perhaps? Lina Grummett once said that FIsher told her, "I've been thinking... ('And then I knew it was all over' - Lina), I really don't want to risk losing my title". If Fisher wasn't certain he could defeat Karpov, why are others so sure that he could? 

  • #47

    LOL. Could you be any more condescending? But you're right. It's not possible to have any rational discussions wih you. 

  • #48

    Fischer was psychologically terrified of losing games and even worse when it came to losing his title. That being said he would probably have beaten Karpov.

or Join

Online Now