Nicholas_Shannon80 wrote:
We all go a little mad sometimes...
Yes, they told me about you. Anyone else?
why is Fischer insane?
Sort:
Jul 12, 2016
0
#43
solskytz wrote:
<PesteBalcanica> Non sequitur much?
No, I'm not following you.
Jul 12, 2016
0
#44
Well, I for one think that men with legs look a lot better than men without legs.
Jul 12, 2016
0
#45
Please fix your grammar. It's not "is", it's "was". Thank you.
He's not. He's in Iceland and he's six feet underground.
Jul 12, 2016
0
#47
It wouldn't have helped, not even with ten legs. Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. Right? People are sick and tired of politicians in this country, self-made men my ass. Clans and its clowns is much more appropriate. We're pushing each other closer to the steering wheel of something resembling a giant car, which is heading towards a brick wall, and everyone's arguing over who will be the driver.
ChessOfPlayer wrote:
Areg37 wrote:
Fischer was never insane. They tried to make him look insane. He was in a perfectly good condition and nothing he said or did makes me think he was in any way mentally disturbed, much less insane.
He got fillings removed from his teeth so his opponents couldn't sense what he was thinking about.
And you perhaps might have also, if you were in Fischer's situation. Why do a lot of people keep thinking he was a piece of public property, just because he won the world championship? He could do anything he liked to do, he was a man. I agree with Areg37, the media was a circus after he did the impossible and defeated Spassky.
Just as a side note: fillings are not natural body material.
I think that Fischer had psychological issues due to the capitalist system. At those times the Soviet school systematically trained and educated dozens of great chess players. Whereas Soviet school pushed the limits, it was not designed to fuel one man's ambition as strong as the capitalist USA which I believe was the main driving force behind Fischer. Chess was a good sport and a good challenge for the others, whereas for Fischer, I think it became an obsession. You can easily see what the two systems offer in Fischer and Spassky. In communism, you get the chance to do some great things along with your comrades. In capitalism, you have the incentive to become one and the greatest and do things unimaginable by the others. Fischer may have pushed too far and I like to think that he withdrew from competitive chess to avoid further damage to himself (in that case, a perfect decision in my opinion).
Will I get muted for being political here? I don't think so, since the cold war promoted competitive chess and this is a historical fact. One may not agree with my view on the matter, but you must agree that the political conditions must have affected all players at that time especially Fischer and Spassky.
Jul 12, 2016
0
#50
pestebalcanica wrote:
Nicholas_Shannon80 wrote:
We all go a little mad sometimes...
Yes, they told me about you. Anyone else?
Just let me know if you want to use my shower.... 
Not insane, just a predisposition for paranoia, autism or shizophrenia. Like most people - You could tell by looking at him when he was an old fart. He would have gone down for good in insanity much earlier.
Jul 13, 2016
0
#53
Too much of anything is a sin. Fischer once said"I give 98% of my mental energy to chess." So his brain got overloaded with too much chess variations and he became crazy. Also, he was an arrogant ass. He deserved to become crazy.
Jul 13, 2016
0
#54
You know what's your problem, you've been calling for Fischer to describe all kind of people. For a patzer, an experienced chess player is not overloaded with too much opening theory if it's been doing all kind of things other than chess, but I can assure you that's not the case. The arrogant ass oftentimes referres to the guy who told you to screw you. It sometimes referres to the self-centered, narcissistic vain guy in your small community or percieved to be as such, fundamentally for showing his/her dedication for a game like chess while at the same time not being able to bring his teachings into practice, probably because he is unwilling to play or give everything he's got whilst playing that same game. Now, how's that related to Fischer escapes me.
Jul 13, 2016
0
#55
pestebalcanica wrote:
You know what's your problem, you've been calling for Fischer to describe all kind of people. For a patzer, an experienced chess player is not overloaded with too much opening theory if it's been doing all kind of things other than chess, but I can assure you that's not the case. The arrogant ass oftentimes referres to the guy who told you to screw you. It sometimes referres to the self-centered, narcissistic vain guy in your small community or percieved to be as such, fundamentally for showing his/her dedication for a game like chess while at the same time not being able to bring his teachings into practice, probably because he is unwilling to play or give everything he's got whilst playing that same game. Now, how's that related to Fischer escapes me.
With all due respect, the topic of this forum itself escapes you, sir!
Maybe he escaped after all
<PesteBalcanica> Non sequitur much?