< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
|Apr-06-12|| ||Jim Bartle: King Death: "And what does this have to do with anything?"|
Better get used to it, KD.
|Apr-14-12|| ||AVRO38: <Yes, Steinitz was an American champion. Even legally changed his name to William. I was quoting <Riverbeast> from Jan-18-08 who claimed Fischer was the only American WC.>|
Steinitz was the champion who became an American, not an American who became the champion.
Steinitz became champion in 1886 but he became a U.S. citizen in 1888.
Besides, anyone who thinks Morphy was not the Champion of the World simply because he didn't sign a contract to that effect, is smoking crack!
|Apr-23-12|| ||TheTamale: <AVRO38: Besides, anyone who thinks Morphy was not the Champion of the World simply because he didn't sign a contract to that effect, is smoking crack!>|
Incorrect. I am smoking crack, but I do not think that.
Oh wait, I'm assuming the converse of a true conditional statement is also true, which is not a logically supported assumption.
I apologize, you may be right. Carry on!
|Apr-23-12|| ||Petrosianic: Oh wait, I'm assuming the converse of a true conditional statement is also true, which is not a logically supported assumption.|
In simpler terms, this is known as The Fallacy of False Conversion. One of the mistakes youre making here is trying to convert an A statement.
But the larger mistake is arguing with Avro. He's just BSing you, conflating "world champion" with "best player in the world", and hoping to find a sucker to argue with. It sounds like you see the trick already. He does too, but you'll never get him to admit it.
|Jul-12-12|| ||Kinan: Nice interview with Averbakh about this match:
|Aug-15-12|| ||Cemoblanca: CLASH OF THE TITANS, BBC 1999
|Aug-15-12|| ||Cemoblanca: 36:25 - 37:20
Mr. Spassky was a true gentlemen & a very fine human being. I feel still so sorry for him. This part was very touching. I can only agree that: "C'est la vies" Mr. Spassky. Life goes on. All the best for you & yours! :0)
|Nov-17-12|| ||BobbyDigital80: Does anyone know if there's footage that exists from the 1972 World Championship match? I don't mean a few short clips that are sometimes shown in documentaries about Fischer. I mean the entire film footage or closed-circuit TV footage of the match (or at least a large portion of it). It must exist somewhere. Otherwise, how did anyone get a hold of the few brief clips we see in chess documentaries?|
|Feb-26-13|| ||tzar: Does anybody know why Fischer's elo dropped from 2785 to 2780 when he retired?. Did he lose points in his match with Spassky????????!!!|
|Feb-26-13|| ||TheFocus: <Did he lose points in his match with Spassky????????!!!>|
Yes, he did.
|Feb-26-13|| ||Eyal: <Did he lose points in his match with Spassky????????!!!>|
Yes, he did – because the rating difference between them was huge, 2785-2660; and bear in mind that Fischer's loss by forfeit in game 2 wasn't even rated. The Elo "prediction" for a 2785 player is to score 13.4/20 against a 2660 player, and Fischer scored 12.5 (in practical terms, the "expected" result would mean Fischer winning the match a game sooner). Actually, according to the FIDE rating calculator he should have lost 9 points, which presumably means 10 points back then since they were rounding to the nearest five Elo points, so I’m not even sure why it was only 5.
|Feb-27-13|| ||tzar: Wow, thanks. "Mr. Elo" has very little respect for historic victories!|
|Feb-27-13|| ||RookFile: Well, he treated every game and match the same. I think that's fair and reasonable.|
|Feb-27-13|| ||tzar: just joking, the method is quite good. It seems fair to have this "double system" in chess. In the one hand the glory of great victories and titles and in the other a systematic accurate rating.|
|Feb-27-13|| ||RookFile: In the end, people care about who is champ. Everything else is line noise.|
|Feb-28-13|| ||tzar: I am not so sure about that nowadays. It doesn't seem that Anand gets much glory out of his title, just visit Carlsen's page.|
|Mar-14-13|| ||Hesam7: Given the status of this match in chess history, I am surprised that there are only two books dedicated to it (Gligoric & Euwe-Timman).|
Personally I would welcome a book which analyzed the 20 games in great detail (say 10 page per game) combining the old literature with modern opening theory and extensive computer analysis.
|Mar-14-13|| ||Phony Benoni: <Hesam7> I'm not sure what you mean, since there were several "instant" books that came out soon after the match. I can think of Robert Byrne & Ivo Nei's "Both Sides of the Chessboard", a book by Larry Evans and Ken Smith which had a diagram and comment after every move (mostly trivial, of course); books by Fine, Reshevsky, Richard Roberts (a compilation of reports from the New York Times), and doubtless many others.|
However, if you're thinking of modern reappraisals of the match, particularly with deep computer and human analysis, that's another matter.
|Mar-14-13|| ||AylerKupp: A look at the current http://www.amazon.com/ offerings devoted exclusively to the 1972 match (there are some other books that contain information about the match but are not dedicated to it) shows the following:|
1. "Fischer/Spassky: The New York Times Report on the Chess Match of the Century" by Richard Roberts, Francis Wyndham, C.H. Alexander, and Bobby Fischer (Apr-1973), $110.23 new (hardcover), $75.43 (paperback). From $ 0.74 used (hardcover).
2. "Chess World Championship: Fischer vs. Spassky 1972" by Larry Evans and Ken Smith (Jul-1973), $59.90 new (paperback) paperback. From $15.00 used (paperback).
3. "Fischer World Champion! – The Acclaimed Classic About the 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Match" by Max Euwe and Jan Timman (May-2002), new $25.92 (paperback). Revised in 2008 and available new for $ 18.96 (paperback) and used from $10.87 (paperback)
4. "Fischer v. Spassky, Reykjavik, 1972" by C.H.O'D Alexander (Oct-1972), new $123.30 (hardcover), $93.06 (paperback) and used from $0.01 (paperback).
5. Fischer Vs. Spassky: World Chess Championship Match, 1972" by Svetozar Gligoric and Sam Sloan (Jan-1973), new $61.41 (paperback). From $ 0.01 used (paperback) and $18.00 used (hardcover). This book was updated in Oct-2012 to include the games in algebraic notation as an appendix and is available new for $19.95 (paperback) and used from $ 8.99 (paperback)
6. "Fischer Spassky" by Richard, et al Roberts (1972), used from $7.00 (paperback) or $0.75 (mass market paperback).
7. "Fischer v Spassky: World Chess Championship 1972" by Harry Golombek (Mar-1973), new $62.93 (hardcover), $8.38 (paperback).
8. "Fischer-Spassky Move by Move (Illustrated)" by Larry Evans (Jun-1973), used from $124.05 (hardcover), from $42.00 (paperback).
I was struck by (a) the high prices asked for some of the books, particularly the new books, (b) the ridiculous low prices by some of the used paperbacks; clearly the sellers want to collect the shipping fee, and (c) practically all books were written (Euwe/Timman excepted) were written shortly; those that were updated were done sloppily as evident by the reviews, and (d) all are in descriptive notation except for the Gligoric book which included an appendix with the games in algebraic notation.
So <Phony Benoni> is quite correct; no books in the market today are likely to contain a modern reappraisal of the match with deep computer and human analysis. This makes me think that such a book, if properly done and at a reasonable price, has the potential to sell a substantial number of copies, given the continued interest in Fischer (both good and bad!) as evidenced by the activity in his page on this site.
The reason I bring all this up is that I think we have the talent and expertise at this site to generate such a book as a collaborative effort. I have no experience in book writing but I'm sure that several on this site do; <Once> comes immediately to mind. I would envision someone with book writing and/or book publishing experience taking the lead, organizing a book outline, and then we can divide the various games between those participating to research, analyze, and comment. Plus chapters on the background of the match and an assessment of its aftermath.
If anyone is interested in taking the lead on such a project, let me know. I would be interested in participating and readily volunteer for a deep analysis of the moves in Game 2. :-)
|Mar-14-13|| ||TheFocus: Larsen did a book on the 1972 match. Reshevsky also (not the NY Times one). I have both.|
|Mar-14-13|| ||TheFocus: The best of all was Pachman's book.|
|Mar-14-13|| ||Benzol: "How Fischer Won" by Cecil John Seddon Purdy on this match I thought was quite good.|
|Mar-14-13|| ||TheFocus: <Benzol> I would easily place Purdy's in the top three of books written about 1972.|
|Mar-14-13|| ||TheFocus: On another note, I don't think Purdy ever wrote a bad book. One of the finest writers in chess literature.|
|Mar-14-13|| ||Benzol: <TheFocus> I understand that one book of his "The Return Of Alekhine" on the 1937 match later became a collectors piece. The writings of his that I have read I've always thought to be of a high quality.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·