Bobby Fischer - Don't defends his title vs Karpov

[nas1412]

Bobby was emotionally unstable. In '72 match he made already many requests fairly debatable. No cameras, the public increasingly farther from the stage where he played, and so on. In that time they granted him everything he asked, but for the 75's match will not be accepted more whims. I think if FIDE had accepted what Fischer request, he had continued with more and more request until them take out the title of world champion.

[kokoroc1]

first of all, bobby refused to play against spassky too! was he afraid? i don't dare to say that because i will sound insane! he lost one game for not turning up! after that, bobby went on to destroy spassky and made him look like an amateur chess player! ....bobby fischer turned chess into an art! beautiful and enjoyable! the chess game against donald bryne its like listening "for elise" of beethoven!......another fact for you: carlsen refused to take part in the championship circle! why?

[Dave54600]

Bobby Fischer knew things that standard people don't get to know, I think that is what drove him into becoming a recluse. That's why he didn't want the money or to be in the limelight. I personally believe Kasparov is the strongest player we have seen yet but that's probably just generational talk.

[kokoroc1]

bobby-karpov? i am sure that bobby has been laughing his head off with this question....karpov was lucky not to play against bobby! i don't see karpov winning even 1 game, or drawning 1 single game!.... bobby was an animal, a beast, a jaguar, a lion of chess! karpov for bobby was just a baby! ....bobby could have beaten karpov and kasparov together anytime, anywhere! he did beat a whole soviet empire, and i am sure he could have beaten karpov without his queen!

[babykevinxoxo]

@kokoroc1 How do you know Fischer would have won. He refuse to play.

[ALEKHINE1927]

Fischer could not handle the success and responsibility of being a World Champion. Also he feared losing and most likely would have lost to Karpov.

[babykevinxoxo]

@ALEKHINE1927 Fischer was dethroned any ways. I think If he would have lost to Karpov he would have gone more crazy sooner. Fischer knew draws had to count. If he would have not made the phoney draw demand the Games would have been played. Its too bad Fischer Vs Karpov would have been the best Chess in history forever in history.

[babykevinxoxo]

Fischer made a rediculous demand of not counting draws. You can't make that kind of demand. The 10 game request could have been taken.

[Sirb0b1]

Karpov ,also says in an interview here on you tube that Fischer was not afraid to play him, but had problems, so there you have it. End this witch hunt against Fischer. Slam him for his anti-semetic remarks if you wish, but dont call him a coward, history proves otherwise.

[Sirb0b1]

No one should say Fischer was scared to play Karpov. Infact Kasparov mentions in his book ' My Great predecessors vol 4' stating Fischer had met Karpov several times to arrange a match in the 1980s but they could not agree terms. He even signed a contract to play Karpov in a World title Match, but Karpov was unhappy with the billing for this match and refused to sign the contract, So please, check your facts, rather let your dislike of Fischer decide for you.

[babykevinxoxo]

@Sirb0b1 what was the billing agreement?

[kevinjrxoxo]

Fischer tried to change the rules of Chess which they can't do. They have to count draws. He was a absolute Jerk.

[Dave54600]

@kevinjrxoxo The rules have changed many times. Many moons ago your king could move like the queen and vice versa.

[Sirb0b1]

Karpov, peaked around 1978-84. At this time he was a much strong player, often reching the level of play performed by fischer, and would have been a more even match in 78. He would not have had enough in 1975 to beat Fischer, but he did have the whole of the Soviet might behind him for analysis purposes to help him. Fischer's, demands were fair, and all but one was accepted by F.i.d.e. which was the right of the Champion to retain his title if the match was drawn.

[miguelitoelhuevon]

en 1975 fischer hubiera aplastado a karpov y lo ubicaria como un jugador sin animo de lucha como spassky , taimanov , larsen y petrosian. los matches de candidatos ganados por karpov fueron dudosos , sobre todo el de korchnoi .

[guitarscores]

Fischer ... he wasnt cry-baby ... he greater than chess ...

[revdolaf]

(Cont'd) My own theory is that the hardest player for Fischer to beat would have been Mihail Tal during his second peak, as their styles were almost diametrically opposed; Fischer's search for ultimate truth on the chess board vs Tal's imaginative tactical complications, science vs art, or in Kasparov's words: 'right chess vs wrong chess'. In some ways, Fischer and Tal were like Steinitz and Lasker reborn!!

Peace n Love

[jasonrepa]

@revdolaf I agree. A match with Tal would have been a real test for Fischer, and Tal was one of the few players who wasn't intimidated by him.

[buzzbox2nd]

@revdolaf thats pretty well said

[revdolaf]

There is a seriously faulty logic kicking around in some of the comments here, when we assume that if A beats B and B beats C, A would also automatically beat C. In an ideal world, all the great champions would ofc be at their peak simultaneously and play each other in a round-robin tournament.....doesn't happen that way. Also, no one is strong in every area, even a Capablanca or a Fischer is beatable (to be cont'd)

[akira6666666]

fischer is the best chess player to ever play, and probably to have ever played the game... too bad he was mentally ill... people who say Karpov or Kasparov are better have never watched how fischer created and adapted....

[kasparov9]

@akira6666666 It all depends on how you define best? How would you put Fischer ahead of Kasparov? Kasparov dominated for 20 years, Fischer for 2 years.

[jasonrepa]

@kasparov9 "Kasparov dominated for 20 years, Fischer for 2 years".

That statement is a bit unfair, to be sure. Fischer dominated for more than 2 years. But your point that Kasparov's reign was significantly longer than Fischer's is valid.

However, there are other ways to look at it that favour Fischer, such as his unparallelled winning streak against world class players, His back to back shutouts against leading GM's in the candidates matches, and the fact that he did it alone without seconds

[buzzbox2nd]

@blackoil911(sludge)as for your bulldust comments you are entitled to your opinions disgusting as you are, one day,as you get older you may understand what people are saying about this great man,at the moment you are a lost cause and really have no concept of life .and the world itself, let alone making comment on someone that clearly is then and always will be a genius on and off the board, you have to decipher the truth and get you head out of your arse before you can even form an opinion

[maxhansendk]

The real experts on the topic: "Fischer vs Karpov 1975" almost all say that Fischer would have won such a match!!

Among the best persons to cast a verdict is Spassky! After all he met both men! And his opinion was that Karpov would have lost 1975, but problably would have won the next world championship match 1978.

[blackoil911]

@maxhansendk

stfu , fischer never won against Karpov'''

Karpov dominated chess a longer time than fischer

its just fischer was a american who manged to be a world champion against the soviets that gives him more publicity'' stop going to fantasy land'''Fischer fled after spassky '' thats it , much love to kasparov and karpov'''

[TexasRobert]

@maxhansendk You are thinking more than one move ahead, unlike these other folks! Karpov was an immature player in 1975, so, of course, he would have improved and learned from playing a match with Fischer, whether he won or not, making future title matches even tougher for his opponents. (Sorry, but Korchnoi was not on the same level as Fischer.) Then what would have happened against Kasparov in the 1980's if he was playing a truly battle-hardened Karpov at that time?

[Austinmp47]

I don't agree with Bobby Fischer's views but respect them but i would of loved to see this game and I the Fisher would of won a best of 7 possible but im not sure and i belive he should of defended his title but i can see why he didn't want to

[56richardcory]

The simple answer is the best ... Fischer didn't want to play and he didn't want to give the title back to his lifetime chess enemies, the Russians. By refusing to play, he claimed for the rest of his life that he still had the title (because he never lost it). When an athlete quits at the top of his game, that's how we remember him forever. He had his cake and ate it, too. Bravo!

[okrabay]

Karpov trained hard and Bobby didnt after he won. There is a good chance that he would have beat Bobby.

[thepunictrader]

I would have like to see Karpov vs Fischer, but live goes on

[Koroush51]

Anybody who says Fischer is better than a player he never played (AKA Kasparov) Is opinionated and an idiot.

There is no way to know so stop talking non-sense.

[henni1964]

Yes, I agree that Bobby is probably better than K&K. Karpov is a positional player, Kasparov a dynamic player but Bobby has a universal style. He can play everything equally well. Sooner or later he would find their Achilles' heel in a match, assuming that we could compare all three in their prime age. I guess that Bobby would not even need computer analysis to beat them. (He would not rely on these tin cans.)

[Apoic123]

hmm, i would have liked to see fischer vs kasparov , in my mind the two strongest chess players in the history of the game.

[Chag1n]

Omg man. So you think fischer was better than kasparov ? LOL..

[franknstein7]

@Chag1n , yes we think Fischer was way better than Kasparov.

[ChessArmyCommander]

I think Bobby would have beaten Karpov to defend his title. I also think he is the best of all time. Just think about what he accomplished WITHOUT the aid of computers and chess software in his rise to the top! And the way he crushed the competition in the U.S.. And finally, beating the Russians. If Fischer would have had all the training aids and access to information that Grandmasters have today, lookout! I bet he would kick everybody's butt even today.

[jasonrepa]

@ChessArmyCommander Possibly, but you are comparing apples to oranges.

[babystinky]

i have never ever seen anyone with that "Stare" from the Eyes that Bobby had. I don't think anyone in his prime could have beaten him in a series. Eventually Bobby is going to wear down his opponents, and I think we never saw him go into that "Extra" that he might have had if really challenged. I think he was the greatest chess mind ever.

[jasonrepa]

@babystinky Tal had a pretty formidable stare as well.

[manicir]

FISCHER RULES!!!

[buzzbox2nd]

i would none of you lot that speak ill of this guy wouldve had the guts to say any of this bulldust to his face, your comments are seriously so dissapointing learn your own history, your all so big and brave sprouting off on here about someone that cant defend himself , grow up and evaluate your own life before ridiculing Bobbys

[jargenlink]

Fisher alienated himself his attitude became filled with hate because he was mentally ill he was unable to over come this.But he was a chess genius.

[Toadspring]

Your name fits, stupido2306. Dirty jews? What the hell's wrong with you? Did a Jewish kid steal your lunch money when you were a kid or what? You're also wrong in your assumption that "bobby would have beaten karpov like a kid." With all the demands Fischer made, it's obvious even he realized Karpov might win. Of course, Fischer may have beaten Karpov, but we'll never know for sure because Bobby refused to play.

[stupido2306]

dirty jews dont mention what happened to another genius player Alekhine in 50s that he was assasinated by jew bolsheviks because he was perceived as a threat in a cold war. bobby was much bigger threat to the name of soviet union, because he alone beated whole russian chess school

[stupido2306]

another jew video, misrepresenting history thats what theyre good at - bobby would have beaten karpov like a kid.

Google for "chess legend plays the web" how bobby beated online best chess players like kids with scores 8-0. Bobby got tired of classic chess - he knew all the combinations, so he invented his own fischerandom chess, where you have exponentially more variations of play.dirty jews will do what it takes to make anyone who stands up against them to make him look like a nutcase. fvck em

[gabisubis]

He chickened out........It was not good and nice Boris Vassilievich anymore.If Karpov had been in Reykjavik,Fischer would never have become World Champion.Tolya would have flown home after two games and kept his title....as Spassky should have done

[buzzbox2nd]

Remember Einsteins words. GREAT MINDS HAVE ALWAYS ENCOUNTERED OPPOSITION/RESISTANCE FROM MEDIOCRE ONES

[sodayodadude1]

I'm getting suspicious...all the high IQ people seem to be always going crazy at some point. Maybe they just SEEM crazy to us regular people? Do they know something we don't?

[avp2gold]

@sodayodadude1 I agree. We, the stupid people, don't understand a genius so we call him crazy. He has "changed", "he could've lived any life," we say. We try to bring up the irony of his Jewish parents without Bobby there to defend himself in these interviews. Bobby can only get his message out through local radio shows.

Lies only become the truth if we believe it. Practically everyone apart of this documentary is Jewish. I would love to hear what Bobby that of this garbage.

[MindFilterExperience]

When I think about Bobby Fischer I always feel unsatisfied in a sence that his story was never told accurate enough to honor him. He was the greatest chess player who change the chess world.......I will forever remember the day I read of his passing. I remember shaking my head in shock....it was not right what happened to him. No one talks about Bobby Fischer as an american hero......in my opinion Bobby Fischer was something far greater than that, something far beyond our understanding.

[GMAhmedAdly]

Bobby fischer would smash everyone.

[ZviagintsevKrasenkov]

But the young Karpov scared him off...

[master030584]

the best is Gary Kasparov

[Flagdue]

Its difficult to say who was better since Fischer didn't play.

[mwGmeiner]

Fischer would have won

[Flagdue]

I believe that he probably would of won but we dont know because he didn't play.

[superduperaids357]

I don't watch this video two minutes ago.

[lancer89032]

Bobby Fisher was the greatest of them all!!!

[Kharlamov16]

The answer is simple - Karpov would have won. Fischer knew that it would be a very difficult match for him. Anatoly Karopv is one of the best chess players of all time. He was the only tough opposition for Garry Kasparov. I doubt that Fischer would have done well against the latter!

[Ruxistico]

well.. yea.. maybe... I don't think it's that simple though

[VikingII]

Karpov is incredibly powerful. If he focuses and trains hard he's like a Machine. He lost to Garry Twice when it came down to ONE game. He could have easily carried his title over a few more years.

[BatteredFruit]

Whatever the result may have been, Karpov was one of the strongest chessplayers of all times.

[lttinidor]

yeh ur ryt...BF may be the best but youll never know wats on the mind of karpov...

[john17972]

Fischer was a coward!

[moenibus]

indeed

[wfarnaby]

Fischer reminds me a lot of Akiba Rubinstein - a supreme chess genius who could defeat anybody, but brought down by mental issues.

[FORBAN2]

Good comparison.. Aaron Nimzowitch belongs to the same category of mad geniouses. Aljechine almost but not quite.

[PokerStuffer]

Different generations really but,Karpov admitted BF would have beat him at his peak,and Karpov beat Kasparov in '92,well past his(Karpov)peak-so BF would have won against both at his peak.Just sayin'

[FKing85]

Could you please post a link where Karpov admitted, BF would have beat him at his peak.

[FORBAN2]

I also read this somewhere.. In 1975 Karpow would not stand a chance against Fischer and probably in 1978 but in 1980 Karpow would have won.. Karpow said that had he played against Fischer three times,Kasparow would not have defated hin in the 80's since he would have been much stronger as a result of these three clashes with Fischer. I am a great fan of Karpow and believe he was as good as Fisher and Kasparow in their prime

[Pippin76]

Nonsense. Anyway, Karpov never said that - in fact he said he was unsure of the outcome of a 1975 match but "by 1978 I was a stronger player than Fischer".

[Kharlamov16]

Both Karpov and Kasparov would have crushed him!

[robmizer]

i don't think Karpov would have bet him yet becouse he wasnt at his best, but Kasparov could have with his eyes closed.

[Kharlamov16]

What???? For your information Kasparov didn't beat Karpov so easily. Besides, He was on the verge of losing to Karpov a few times. Karpov would have beaten Fischer and Fischer knew that. That's why he didn't accept that challenge.

[buzzbox2nd]

@Kharlamov16 that is completely wrong , if you knew exact history you wouldnt / shouldnt say that , you are seriously mistaken

[kevinjrxoxo]

@Kharlamov16 I don't completely agree with you. Fischer know that Karpov was better than Spassky so he chickened out knowing he might lose. He lost anyways because he didn't defend his title. Bobby's eago was so rediculous he was his own God.

[buzzbox2nd]

@Kharlamov16 thats ridiculous you obviously no nothing about Bobby and what he was doing in preparation for the 75 match, quit making stuff up that is clearly wrong

[driftingtheworld]

I am a kasparov fan and I don't like bobby but I don't think kasparov as great as he was would beat a MENTALLY focused, sane, normal fisher...

sorry.... it's close but bobby was a prodigy and his skill was hardly used and I dont care about ratings this that and the other...

[z3ziman]

Fischer is the only king that wouldn't be defeated.......

[Pippin76]

Yeah, wouldn't, not couldn't!

[HarryPowell7]

Fischer was a chess phenomenon.He lived and breathed for chess...imagine the devestation a young and hungry Fischer would cause today in the chess world with access to the net and a top computer....Karpov was no match for him in '75....later maybe...even then Fischer's games are better aesthetically...

[skewzme1]

Karpov be clearly wiped out totally out of the chess history if not and thank Fischer's refusal to play him. Karpov could hardly beat korchnoi for the championships which was almost an even match. Fischer will always be the KING, the rest be only the princes...

[dtpac]

I read someplace that Karpov admitted he would have lost to Bobby in 1975. That's pretty humble, and very realistic. Bobby could have been champ until 1987 or 1990. Age would have yielded to Kasparov. But Bobby was more brilliant than Kasparov. Only Capa and Rubinstein had the creative genius on a par with Bobby.

[francomartel]

I believe that Fischer knew that Kaspov could defeat him, is because of that he demanded many stuff. Three years away from the board could make a damage. If Fischer had played along those years, maybe he could defeat Karpov one time but not twice but Kasparov is another game, i don´t believe he could defeat him.

[examinfo]

Fischer was "pretty good" for a long time yes, but he was an elite player for only a short time maybe 5-6 years.Compare that to Kasparov's 20 years or Karpov`s 20 years. Fischer was probably the strongest player of all time,when compared to his distance from his peers.Kasparov was the greatest of all time,when you consider his achievements and distance from his peers. 1.Kasparov 2.Karpov 3.Capablanca 4.Alekhine 5.Fischer 6.Botvinnik 7.Lasker My opinion of course

[examinfo]

Fischer was the Mike Tyson of chess brilliant for a short time then fall apart

[strem727]

He was at the top for more than a short time. He was pretty good all thru the 60's too, and the Match Of The Century in which he defeated Byrne was at the end of the 50's...He had the 11-0 sweep of the US Championship with no draws in 1963, so he was pretty good for quite a long time.

[wcrimi3]

It's impossible to compare players of different periods because those that come later have the benefit of learning from those that came before them.

I think a player's level of dominance vs. his peers says more about his talent than a comparison of their actual games unless a specific period just happened to be very weak or strong.

So if you want to compare Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov I think you should look at their records at their peak and not their games.

[radjabov44]

I agree. Comparison of this type is almost, in essence, guesswork. No one can say with any certainty who would beat who in a match; Fischer or later world champions. A players spread between the next best and their performances (ratings) give us the only working data to compare their geniuses.

[harshvgaus]

the problem is fishcer at his peak was unpredictable, kasparov was good but fischer had x-factor that no one in chess has had except morphy and capablanca.

if fishcer was off form kasparov will smash him, but if he was in-form kasparov will limp to a loss in astonishment.

[jsnitc]

fischer would have got raped by kasparov who is the greatest of all times.karpov would have beaten fischer for sure..these anericans knows no one else than their people....by the way u guys r forgetting another great champion Alexander Alekhine

[BIGxVIET]

Bobby fischer is better then karpov and kasparov. just because he was crazy and didn't want to defend his title doesn't mean he will get raped. if you watch fischer games compared to the other two you would realized that. I am not american so I am not bias on this subject.

[Koroush51]

@BIGxVIET I AM American and I'm telling you that it is wrong to say

"Bobby fischer is better then karpov and kasparov." Because they never played. You have No Idea what will happen if they play together, so stop making guesses because you like one over the other.

[3sc0013]

everyone was after fischer cuz he was one of the greatest...anywayz its just chess get over it u fuckin nerds

[henni1964]

... If Fischer would have defended his title under these circumstances it would have been like providing only Anand todays Rybka 3 for opening preparation and analysis after abandonment at move 40 and locking up Kramnik a few months before and during the upcoming match without any computer or second aid. That is why Fischer demanded a change in the scoring. Just my 2c.

[henni1964]

Well, Anand is the current title holder, so my above comparison should be reverse of course.

[henni1964]

maddes111, chess has developed since the seventies, so we can't compare the relatively weak Karpov of 1975 with the one of 1985 or 1990 imho. In the period from 1972 to 1975 Karpov was much weaker than Fischer according to the international rating system. Take a look a chessmetrics.

And in 1975 nobody could use the computer power of today. But Karpov had the best top players in the world at his disposal while Fischer had refused the analysis of Larsen in the 1972 match.

[maddes111]

i disagree karpow was much stronger as fishers former opponents!he was afraid to lost the world championship and that's the reson because he quit professional chess. especial in the endgame karpow was the strongest chessplayer at that time. kasparow mentioned as well that karpow was to strong for fisher.

[henni1964]

In 1972 Fischer had not only to fight against Spassky himself but also against the complete russian chess elite in the backround. He had to rival the analysis of several ex-world-champions. To survive this unequal kind of competition can be compared to reaching the top of the Mount Everest without using an oxygen mask. I guess Fischer knew, to face Karpov under this conditions again would be beyond his physical capabilities. Kasparov had to play against Deep Blue under resembling conditions ...

[henni1964]

and got crushed.

[Hej413]

I think that many americans like to call Fischer "the best ever" because they don't like the idea of the russians being better. A true chess-fan (regardless of nationality) can see through this. Fischer was brilliant - everybody knows this - and it is indeed very sad that he never got to defend his title against Karpov (who is one of my personal favorites). My guess is that if we could take Fischer (when he was on top of his game) and put him against Kasparov - the odds would favor Kasparov.

[unclemeat2u]

I think Fischer was not a 'pussy', I just think he was already coming unhinged mentally, even before the interzonals, probably. I think it was his phenomenal genius that allowed him to win the championship, but for many reasons his psychological state had deteriorated too much. I think that's pretty much it. It's too bad he didn't want or couldn't get help with that somehow.

[bngfng]

Fisher is probably the biggest whore in chess ever. Somebody... just give him some money. What a pussy. Kasparov would rape Fisher easily.

[xboxjexzo]

First off you putz they're talking about KARPOV, not kasparov. Secondly when you say that Kasparov(or karpov), would 'rape' fischer I hope you mean in football or drinking or ANYTHING other than chess because otherwise you'd just be plain stupid.

[barcareal69]

kasparov and karpov where world champions for so many decades without having 170 demands to play a game, and even more than that, to start the game with a one point advantage.. fischer is actually so loved by the americans because of what it represented and the fact that he beat a russian in the time of the cold-war, but to all of them I ask how is it possible for a normal human being , to be happy for the 9/11 terrorist attacks and say that the jews all lied abouth the holocaust ?????!!!!!!!!

[barcareal69]

fischer is overated, he was really scared to play chess after he won against spassky and even that win was due to the fact that fischer mentally disturbed spassky with his embarrassing demands. if spassky wouldn't have been a real gentlemen and accepted al of fischers demands he would of surely won, as he had before, against fischer. Fichser was in fact a spoilet brat and he can't even stand a comparison with kasparov who was the world number one for more than 25 years, because that's real magic

[vibovitold]

"he would have won" :))))) well perhaps Fischer would have defeated Karpov just as well, but only what ACTUALLY happens, matters :)) nobody ordered Spassky to go on, on the contrary: the authorities tried to persuade him to go home(and retain the title without the fight). it was undeniably very sportmanslike of him, but also he himself has never questioned Fisher's win... by resorting to your logic "I would've won if...", he would sound immature to say the least.

[vibovitold]

also read what, for example, Kramnik or Kasparov have to say about Fischer - sorry but let's agree their opinion on the subject carries more weight that barcareal69's :)

[barcareal69]

vibovitold you are absolutely right! As you have so excellently stated :" only what ACTUALLY happens, matters ". so the fact that fischer was world number one for only 3 years 1972 -- 1975 while karpov was for 10 years 1975-1985 and kasparov was for 15 1985-2000 , is what ACTUALLY matters. Oh and about Kramnik or Kasparov opinions and the fact that they carry more weight then my opinion, I think that is very obvious and you didn't have to be ironical about it.

[barcareal69]

Also if you ask any world champion about former world champions they will always have humbling and praiseful words about them because they truly deserve them. And finally, so that we are totally clear, I believe fischer was a fabulous chess player and one of the best players ever, but after players like kasparov, karpov or kramnic who really stood the test of time! That is my opinion and I don't know why people like vibovitold can't have their owns without getting ironical and personal!!!

[vibovitold]

i was sarcastic indeed, but i didn't mean to offend you personally - i'm sorry in case if i did, however, your calling Fischer "a spoilt brat" didn't indicate that you are a thin-skinned type ;) (irony again, i can't help it!) Fischer burnt out quickly, but your opinion that dismissed him as not even being in the same league as later world champions was obviously exaggerated, one doesn't have to be Kramnik to see that

[vibovitold]

perhaps you are annoyed by Fischer's countless worshippers who see him as god (there's lots of them on the internet, the majority never having seen a chessboard probably ;) and that's why you choose the opposite of the legend over a more balanced view. just my guess

[barcareal69]

well I have to say that that's a pretty good guess,but auxiliary to that, I think that another part that 'clouded my judgment':) was the way he acted as a human being and his sportsmanship. Other than that he was surely a titanic player, a chess genius and for that he has all my consideration. cheers!

[vibovitold]

i was somewhat fascinated by his person & from what i've read, it's quite clear to me that he was a bit autistic - maybe Asperger syndrome or sth like that. he exhibited many traits: great memory, lack of empathy, poor social skills, obsessive (but narrow) interests, lack of sense of humour (he didn't get dry humour; that is, whenever it wasn't hinted). listen to bizarre radio interview less than 3yrs before death watch?v=bm4uGECVyBE - when old man sings the song at the end I can't hate him :)

[NereiusBlas]

For me, only Kasparov can match the Great Bobby Fisher.. Yet, Kasparov wont win against Fisher. I'll gave Kasparov 1 over Fisher 3.. Karpov? 0..

[maxhansendk]

Karpov would have been no match to Fischer!

Than, later, in a match against Kasparov (Karpov - Kasparov) Kasparov was humiliated with a 5-0 score!!!!

Against a man most considered inferior to Fischer!

I think deep down in his heart Kasparov knew he was a weaker player than Fischer. And he will always be regarded as that!

The only rival to Fischer in my eyes is Capablanca!

Capablanca enjoyed life and was lazy. Still he was an amazing player!

So for me: 1-2 Fischer Capablanca!

[maxhansendk]

I´m a chessplayer myself since 1973. I´ve played against the best grandmasters in my country and have done well.

However, since there is very little money in chess I chose a "normal career."

No chessplayer in his right mind would give Karpov even the slightest chanse!!

Karpov would have been crushed!! His low risk approach would have given zero wins against Fischer!

Remember Tigran Petrosian? Safety player who had absolutely no chance against Fischer!

Karpov would have lost as well.

[vibovitold]

"No chessplayer in his right mind would give Karpov even the slightest chanse!!"

"What do you think, did Karpov have a chance?

- He did. I think that Fischer had the better chances but Karpov had his trump card too."

from an interview with Vladimir Kramnik (FIDE's number 1 now). Kramnik is not in his right mind?

[furrer08]

Karpov had good chances, because he could turn the game postitional.

[Athalxoz]

@maxhansendk

What does this mean " remember Tigran Petrosian ???" Tigran was one of his fearsome opponents...

[jasonrepa]

@maxhansendk If you've played against Grandmasters, surely you have a national or FIDE rating. What is it?

I think you're a bullshitter who has never even said hi to a Grandmaster, let alone played any games with them. Prove me wrong. Show us a game of yours where you played a Grandmaster. How about even a game against an IM or FM. How about any games against anyone at all?

[TexasRobert]

@maxhansendk These really silly comments about Karpov. Karpov has an unusually high number of wins as white. He is not a low-risk player. He just doesn't try to win a game from the opening, but rather exploits his better understanding and talent to win at later stages of the game.

All we really know for sure about Fischer vs. Karpov is that Fischer dodged the match and chose an easier path--this can't be denied.

[buzzbox2nd]

@TexasRobert bobby didnt "dodge" anything if you believe that you must also believe in the tooth fairy

[blackoil911]

@buzzbox2nd

yo Texas'' dont listen to this dumb bitch'''

Bobby fischer was possesive''' thats why he didnt have any women'''

he clearly changed and made dirty ass rules to his advantage''' and if he didnt like the rules why did he play in the first place?? against spassky''

its makes more sense now that this documentary is made Poor fischer had issues :(

[armbar]

needless to say, Kasparov has a vested in his own legend which is dependant on declaring Karpov a "new generation" player who would have a good chance of beating Fischer. His defeat of Karpov would not be nearly as imposing if he agreed that Karpov would have lost to Fischer in 75

[MILUTO06]

he did the right thing ran away from the best karpov

[yutubinin]

el mas grande de todos los tiempos karajo!!!

[gologram]

Your standpoint characterizes you as a man of limited consience because you dare explain Fischer's motives without any legal grounds to do so.First,the fact remains the fact-it was FISCHER who rejected the challenge.

[gologram]

As to the explanations of WHY he did so,I can tell you for sure that reason N1 was him wanting to get " a champion's advantage" over Karpov.

By Fischer's conditions,Karpov needed to score 10 wins against him to win the title but Fischer needed just 9 scores to keep the title.

It is a very big advantage for the profiting side.

I play chess around 1 sport class myself so I know what the talk about is.

[coolcruise]

fischer would have raped karpov in 75....and would have stayed world champ til the mid 80s...

[gologram]

Probably I would rape you at playing chess.

[lassebroman57]

Where in Pasadena did Bobby live ? What street what house. Any pictures ?

[dan020350]

bobby was a philosopher king

[brewpat]

The man was brilliantly insane. It is amazing how in one aspect of life someone can be amazing and yet in SO many others aspects is consumed by mental illness.

[nlsnbebang]

FISHER IS A DUMB. GO FIGHT VS FRITZ 10

[FischerFan]

For all the demands he made, I really think that, deep down, Fischer had no intention of defending his title. He wanted to retire as champion.

He would have kept making demands until FIDE inevitably rejected one of them. He has always been a man of extreme depth and complexity. He knew exactly what he was going to do the moment he won the title.

His retirement from the game was remorseful; for there were probably many great games still to be played.

[roswell1965]

Problem is, he didn't retire. He resigned his title.

[gologram]

Kasparov wrote in his epic book 'my great predecessors' that Fischer looked at Karpov's games and got scared. I play some chess too on around 1 sport class level and think the same.

[HarryPowell7]

Kasparov only sees Fischer as a rival to his place in chess history..So inevitably his opinions will be,and are,tainted.Enjoy your chess,and play through Karpov's and Fischer's games and compare...And then you will see why Fischer will be seen by chess history as the greater player...

[gologram]

I've already done that and I still state that Karpov was a way stronger.Kasparov supported his view with the thourough analisys of both Fischer's and Karpov's games so his opinion is not superficial.The history adds much in favour of Karpov- eventually it was Fischer,not Karpov, who rejected to take up the challenge.But I agree Fischer is ONE of the greatest chessplayers of all times.

[HarryPowell7]

""way stronger"? and " history adds much in favour of Karpov "?? are statements which cannot be supported by any objective analysis..The first is simply ridiculous...any strong chess player will tell you so...The latter is just mystifying...Fischer rejected the challenge because he was Fischer...Not because of Karpov..

[gologram]

Also your superficial statement about Kasparov analysis is worth of no more than smiling at it.Interests often contradict but that doesn't mean that one should always be so mean.Kasparov's analysis is a work of art.One needn't possess great wits to enjoy it.Computers and other grandmasters support his opinion.

[brokencasket]

He would've beat Karpov too......

[Oppp2]

karpov would have won. fischer had never played anyone like karpov.

[HarryPowell7]

Fischer would've been too good for Karpov in 1975...Anyone who has played through the games of both players would know this..Fischer gave,and brought more to chess than Karpov;History will judge him as the greater player..and I suspect Anatoly knows this deep down...

[HarryPowell7]

er,one more thing..lol...have you not come across Tal ? or Botvinnik ? or Smyslov? or Petrosian? Spassky ? Korchnoi? Bronstein? Go study chess histoy and then form an opinion..

[C4Toalla]

Yes , I agree, why didn't he at least grab some of the money, while it was there...