bronsteinitz wrote:
Mauricio, i share your admiration fully.
Thank you!
Why Didn't Bobby Fischer Defend HIs World Title?
Sort:
Estragon wrote:
mauriciolopezsr wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
Karpov would have crushed Fischer if he had the chance.
U R dreaming kid!!! Fischer was 25 years ahead of any other player of his time. Petrosian was a hell of a lot more solid player than Karpov and Fischer DEMOLISHED him 6-1/2 - 21/2
Petrosian never in his career approached the strength Karpov already had achieved by 1974. Karpov's style was closer to Capablanca's than Petrosian's. The problem he would have presented Fischer was his refusal to create weaknesses, and his ability to focus on the slightest advantage to slowly increase its importance.
If Fischer wanted to show he could beat Karpov, he had only to accept one of the many lucrative offers tournament organizers sent him to play. He did not. Karpov didn't run and hide, he was out there in every major event.
U can speculate all You want why Fischer did NOT played Karpov, we'll never know the true answer to that question as He has passed away!
Again Karpov won tournaments where the majority of the players were Soviets sent there to make him look good! same scheme they had with the candidates tournaments! whatever you may say about Petrossian, He still holds the record of having the LESS NUMBER of lost games!! which clearly shows He was a lot tougher to beat than Karpov!
The strength of a Player is measured in terms of how far ahead he is from the Players of his time; for instance we have PELE the Soccer Player, He was so far ahead of the players of his time that He still holds the title of KING PELE despite the fact that we now have players more skilled and better than he was; however these players are only inches ahead of the other players of his time!!
By analogy we have Paul Morphy about 40 years ahead of any player of his time and Fischer ahead 25 years when compare to the other players of his time clearly the two greatest players ever!!
Again I won't argue that Kasparov have produced beautiful games and score impressive wins; however, he himself admits that were prepared lines analized with super computers well into the 30th move and beyond!! all He really has to do is remember the computer analysis; is that GENIOUS??? it sounds more like cheating to me!
I dont think he is a genius but i believe he is truly wise. The wisest of them all. Making use of the full capabilities of computers and pushing the machine to its limits. Thereby making it easy for him time wise and money wise. Pluse TALENT!. Amazing.
Sticking to the question : why did he not defend his title? I think he was obsessed with his divinity and the terms he could demand. He was also a maniac about which pieces, which table, which chair, etc...which is strange because hè enjoyed playing in the park. He knew no limits and wanted it all like hè dreamed it up, but reality is that hè flew to close to the sun, burned his wings and fell in à big black hole. As à person Karpov was certainly THE smarter one.
By the way, what is admirable in Kasparov is that hè leads à real life. In politics, business... And still some chess
bronsteinitz wrote:
Sticking to the question : why did he not defend his title? I think he was obsessed with his divinity and the terms he could demand. He was also a maniac about which pieces, which table, which chair, etc...which is strange because hè enjoyed playing in the park. He knew no limits and wanted it all like hè dreamed it up, but reality is that hè flew to close to the sun, burned his wings and fell in à big black hole. As à person Karpov was certainly THE smarter one.
He probaly want to get into his opponents head. Psychologically unbalancing them as a means of distracting their concentration to the game itself. I just wished he didnt had his tooth fillings removed coz it might lead to cavities and soon bad breath. And boy how stinking could that be a few inches aways from him at the board. Arrk.
Watch the documentary, Bobby Fishcer Against the World
He indeed had almost no more teeth in the end because they took out the fillings. How principled can you get...
Read endgame
Karpov was known for his physical frailty at that time. And almost collapsed to exhaustion in a marathon match agaisnt Korchnoi in the 1974 candidates. But there is another catch, nobody has beaten Spassky convingcingly in a match but Fischer. Then came a relatively unknown Karpov who did it only in 10 games. I really think Fischer was all played out already coz he has thrown everything at spassky during their match. Handicapped by the Russian "group think", having himself alone this time against a formidable opponent who is younger shorter and with a voice that could pass for an anime voice talent, "kame-wave!!!". He would be beaten.
DavyWilliams wrote:
Most lesser human beings are just jealous of Bobby, for how great he was. They have to pick away at his shortcomings. He was the greatest at chess that ever was and ever will be. Those that think otherwise, would indeed have to climb up on a tall stepladder just to kiss the pimple (his shortcomings) on his a$$. He had good reasons to not defend his title...reasons most can not comphrehend.
So if you don't like him, that just means that you are little girly-man loosers...
DavyWilliams wrote:
Most lesser human beings are just jealous of Bobby, for how great he was. They have to pick away at his shortcomings. He was the greatest at chess that ever was and ever will be. Those that think otherwise, would indeed have to climb up on a tall stepladder just to kiss the pimple (his shortcomings) on his a$$. He had good reasons to not defend his title...reasons most can not comphrehend.
I concur with your aphraisal of the situation; show me a player, any time any place that can even come close to 20 consecutive straight wins against Grand Masters! Show me a Player that put away two World Champion Challengers 6-0 in a row!!!
None of these guys can even come close to that accomplishment NOT even DEEP BLUE the super computer!!!
Yeah, so what if he was a Nazi lunatic? Big deal.
Why do you vilify Bobby Fischer sonny? You say in your profile ""My hero is Bobby Fischer, the greatest chessplayer in the world ever!!" It's non sequitur. Go clown on someone else's threads or have the cajones to start your own. If you reply to my reply here, that's further proof of that you're not playing with a full deck of cards. I rest my case.
Now back to the serious discussion.
Serious discussion?
Ha! You're even funnier than Mr. Clifton.
Davy Sir, a serious discussion is based on respect for all input, even that of a very knowledgeable mind in a clownesque outside. Is it forbidden to discuss that he once refused a fellow chess player GM the access to à taxi, until he swore that the holocaust was à lie? The GM was jewish.... I admire the guy, but he had à couple of weaknesses that belong to the package. You do not own a thread, even if you start it.
I think Fischer felt he wouldn't really prove much more than he had already, even if he won against Karpov. I think that he felt that it would only bolster the Soviet chess image, should he lose to Karpov. It would have made Fischer's original title seem like a fluke also, if he lost. More credit would have been given to all of Fischer's crazy demands and antics.
Having Karpov for his opponent, being a better "young" player than Spassky, Fischer concluded that Karpov probably had far more potential resilience , than Spassky. That constituted someone being much more on par with his resilience, that he himself had enjoyed against Spassky.
I think that Karpov was groomed to be Fischer's kryptonite. I think stylistically, Karpov's defensive, positional play, would have some what helped to neutralize Bobby's best strengths. I think Fischer realized this was the type of opponent to give him fits and he had far more to lose than he did to gain. I think the stresses that life and chess had already thrown at him, coupled with the newest mountain to climb, were enough to retire Fischer to reclusion.
After all, what was he going to say about why he didn't want to play, or what would he say after he lost? It was much easier to cut his loses ahead of time.
Most lesser human beings are just jealous of Bobby, for how great he was. They have to pick away at his shortcomings. He was the greatest at chess that ever was and ever will be. Those that think otherwise, would indeed have to climb up on a tall stepladder just to kiss the pimple (his shortcomings) on his a$$. He had good reasons to not defend his title...reasons most can not comphrehend.