IIRC no one was rated as high as 2785 (Fischer's peak) until the 1990s, almost 20 years after Fischer quit.
Fischer could have stayed champion a long time, but he was not a well person.
Why did Bobby Fischer Quit Chess
Sort:
Oct 9, 2021
0
#263
beginner7196 wrote:
Fischer quit chess because he did not want to go through another championship cycle of Russians teaming up to take him down.
That's not even interesting enough to correct. Try harder.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#264
llama47 wrote:
IIRC no one was rated as high as 1785 (Fischer's peak) until the 1990s, almost 20 years after Fischer quit.
Fischer could have stayed champion a long time, but he was not a well person.
FIDE Ratings are irrelevant. We can evaluate the play of former players with computer programs and Ken Regan's research has shown that Karpov and Kasparov were well above Fischer by the time they had their match even though Karpov never surpassed Fischer's rating perhaps due to his tendency to settle for draws.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#265
beginner7196 wrote:
llama47 wrote:
IIRC no one was rated as high as 1785 (Fischer's peak) until the 1990s, almost 20 years after Fischer quit.
Fischer could have stayed champion a long time, but he was not a well person.
FIDE Ratings are irrelevant. We can evaluate the play of former players with computer programs and Ken Regan's research has shown that Karpov and Kasparov were well above Fischer by the time they had their match even though Karpov never surpassed Fischer's rating perhaps due to his tendency to settle for draws.
Surpassing someone 10 years later doesn't mean much unless you assume Fischer wouldn't have been able to improve either.
And even without that, your logic implies Fischer would have had multiple successful title defenses.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#267
I'm not even a Fischer fan... I don't dislike him either, I mostly don't care.
... in fact my first chess "hero" was Karpov. I admired players like Ulf Andersson.
It's just I'm annoyed by bad arguments.
Ilama47 is a real troll, spassky was never considered as a great champion during his era and after, but Karpov is one of the top 5 of all time and soviet team weren’t stupid to not realize that. Then #282 compares it with preparation of spassky. Dude how you could do that? At least in trolling have some principles.
Fischer did best to keep himself as a mysterious champion and people rank him among top 5, while he never played against any other top player (Karpov played Kasparov and narrowly after changing rules lost). Fischer definitely shined in a short period of time but never got challenged by any other chess monster.
Brainchesscake. I suggest you to completely ignore this guy.
Fischer did best to keep himself as a mysterious champion and people rank him among top 5, while he never played against any other top player (Karpov played Kasparov and narrowly after changing rules lost). Fischer definitely shined in a short period of time but never got challenged by any other chess monster.
Brainchesscake. I suggest you to completely ignore this guy.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#269
llama47 wrote:
beginner7196 wrote:
llama47 wrote:
IIRC no one was rated as high as 1785 (Fischer's peak) until the 1990s, almost 20 years after Fischer quit.
Fischer could have stayed champion a long time, but he was not a well person.
FIDE Ratings are irrelevant. We can evaluate the play of former players with computer programs and Ken Regan's research has shown that Karpov and Kasparov were well above Fischer by the time they had their match even though Karpov never surpassed Fischer's rating perhaps due to his tendency to settle for draws.
Surpassing someone 10 years later doesn't mean much unless you assume Fischer wouldn't have been able to improve either.
And even without that, your logic implies Fischer would have had multiple successful title defenses.
Actually, Karpov was on par or had surpassed Fischer's '72 performance in 1974 according RYBKA 3 which is stronger than any human player in history. You are wrong again. Thank you for playing.
Evidence for my claim:
Oct 9, 2021
0
#270
beginner7196 wrote:
llama47 wrote:
beginner7196 wrote:
llama47 wrote:
IIRC no one was rated as high as 1785 (Fischer's peak) until the 1990s, almost 20 years after Fischer quit.
Fischer could have stayed champion a long time, but he was not a well person.
FIDE Ratings are irrelevant. We can evaluate the play of former players with computer programs and Ken Regan's research has shown that Karpov and Kasparov were well above Fischer by the time they had their match even though Karpov never surpassed Fischer's rating perhaps due to his tendency to settle for draws.
Surpassing someone 10 years later doesn't mean much unless you assume Fischer wouldn't have been able to improve either.
And even without that, your logic implies Fischer would have had multiple successful title defenses.
Actually, Karpov was on par or had surpassed Fischer's '72 performance in 1974 according RYBKA 3 which is stronger than any human player in history. You are wrong again. Thank you for playing.
Evidence for my claim:
At least this is good enough to sound reasonable to people who don't know any better. Good job.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#271
So the truth is Fischer hadn't played chess in years and knew he was going to go through hell against Karpov who just gone through three rounds in the candidates. This was compounded by the fact that Fischer did not have a strong team of GMs who could knock off the rust.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#272
goldenbeer wrote:
I suggest you to completely ignore [llama]
I suggest you to completely ignore [llama]
Threaten me with a good time.
-
-
Oct 9, 2021
0
#273
beginner7196 wrote:
So the truth is Fischer hadn't played chess in years and knew he was going to go through hell against Karpov who just gone through three rounds in the candidates. This was compounded by the fact that Fischer did not have a strong team of GMs who could knock off the rust.
Like you said, he didn't play at all... meaning he quit in 1972, not 1975.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#274
I will trust the analysis of super computers over FIDE ratings or a silly llama. Karpov was really damn good in 1974 while Fischer was out in California consuming Nazi literature.
By 1975, Karpov was young and releatively inexperienced but had already developed into a legitimate threat to challenge Fischer's title, so Bobby kept pushing constant demands on the organizers to eventually frustrate them so that he could be seen in the history books as the "good guy" who wanted to play but mean nasty old FIDE stole his chance at defending his crown. And it's astounding how many people believe Fischer's side of the story unironically. The Soviets, understandably, were preparing like hell to dethrone the American champion, which they had every right to do especially considering how chess was a political propaganda tool in their minds. Unfortunately for chess fans, Fischer took the easy way out. (And he was offered plenty of help but didn't accept any because he thought that he was the best player ever).
Oct 9, 2021
0
#276
beginner7196 wrote:
I will trust the analysis of super computers over FIDE ratings or a silly llama. Karpov was really damn good in 1974 while Fischer was out in California consuming Nazi literature.
I guess it takes consistency to raise your FIDE rating 🤷
llama47 wrote:
goldenbeer wrote:
I suggest you to completely ignore [llama]
I suggest you to completely ignore [llama]
Threaten me with a good time.
-
-
Lol
Oct 9, 2021
0
#279
brianchesscake wrote:
By 1975, Karpov was young and releatively inexperienced but had already developed into a legitimate threat to challenge Fischer's title, so Bobby kept pushing constant demands on the organizers to eventually frustrate them so that he could be seen in the history books as the "good guy" who wanted to play but mean nasty old FIDE stole his chance at defending his crown. And it's astounding how many people believe Fischer's side of the story unironically. The Soviets, understandably, were preparing like hell to dethrone the American champion, which they had every right to do especially considering how chess was a political propoganda tool in their minds. Unfortunately for chess fans, Fischer took the easy way out. (And he was offered plenty of help but didn't accept any because he thought that he was the best player ever).
He didn't "keep pushing demands" he had the 3, and the one they didn't accept required the challenger to win by 2 games... which I agree is a silly demand for Fischer to make.
Like I said, I'm not a Fischer fan, but I'm also not a fan of bad arguments. Fischer didn't make outrageous demands because Karpov was a legitimate threat. Sure Karpov was a threat, but like I said, Fischer made outrageous demands his entire career. Anyone who knows anything about Fischer would know it was just more of the same.
Ultimately I think Fischer decided to quit because he did not want to go into another championship match with a team full of average GMs vs Karpov who had former world champions and top trainers helping him. Therefore he pulled all kinds of shenanigans to get out of the match.
He pulled "shenanigans" his whole career. Karpov was young and inexperienced. Even Karpov admitted Fischer probably would have won if he'd played.
... not that it's worth correcting a troll, but I'm bored apparently.
Complete BS. Karpov is saying that just to be humble. Truth is the Soviets were training him specifically to win the match in '75, because they could not afford for Karpov to lose like Spassky had done before him. 2 Soviet champions losing to an American star was unthinkable in their minds.
1) The Soviets were training Spassky to specifically win the match in 1972, how'd that work out again? Fischer even spotted him 2 wins and still demolished Spassky.
2) If Fischer didn't have a chance against Karpov, then why were they so worried?
---
In the end, it doesn't matter how good Karpov was, because as I said, Fischer had a history of erratic behavior and of quitting chess. To say he quit because of Karpov is some simplistic post hoc fallacy.
Deep breaths, Mr. LLama. Fischer quit chess because he did not want to go through another championship cycle of Russians teaming up to take him down.