chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

There is a clue unsolved right now on the Holiday Contest Clues Page!   [Official Contest Rules]
Please see this announcement for some updates.

  WCC Overview
 
  << previous HISTORY OF THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP next >>  
Fischer vs FIDE, 1975
Fischer forfeits.

After defeating Spassky in 1972, Bobby Fischer stopped playing serious chess, turning down several lucrative offers to play in public.

Fischer, circa 1971 In 1974, Fischer's challenger was decided: he was an emerging Russian chess superstar, Anatoly Karpov, who had defeated Korchnoi in the candidate's final to earn him the right to challenge Fischer.

In September, 1973, Fred Cramer, Vice President (Zone 5) of FIDE, proposed that the world championship match be decided on 10 wins, draws not counting. He also proposed that the champion retains his title if it were a 9-9 tie. This became known as the Cramer proposal. Fischer telegrammed FIDE informing them that they should adopt the Cramer proposal.[1]

Opponents of the proposal argued that the unlimited format is impractical, and that the 9-9 rule affords the champion too great of an advantage. Proponents claimed that the proposal would encourage exciting chess (because draws do not count) and that it more accurately determined the better player. Fischer argued the merits of the proposal in a 1974 letter to FIDE:

The first player to win ten games, draws not counting, with unlimited number of games wins the match. If the score is nine wins to nine wins, draws not counting, the champion retains title and the match is declared drawn with the money split equally. Versus the old system of the best of 24 games wins the match (12.5 points) and if 12-12 the match is drawn with the champion retaining the title and prize fund is split equally. Draws do count in this system.

The unlimited match favors the better player. This is the most important point, because in the limited game system the match outcome can turn on a very low number of wins, giving the weaker player a chance to "luck out." Also, in the limited game system the player who takes a game or two lead has an advantage out of all proportion. This creates an added element of chance. The player who wins the match should be the player who plays best over the long run, not the player who jumps off to an early lead.[2]

In June, 1974, the FIDE Congress in Nice approved the 10-win regulation and the elimination of draws from the scoring, but imposed a 36-game limit and rejected the 9-9 proposal. On June 27, 1974, Fischer sent a telegram from Pasadena, California to the FIDE Congress:
As I made clear in my telegram to the FIDE delegates, the match conditions I proposed were non-negotiable ... FIDE has decided against my participation in the 1975 World Chess Championship. I therefore resign my FIDE World Championship title.

In March, 1975, an extraordinary FIDE Congress was held in Bergen, Netherlands, and it was agreed to have an unlimited number of world championship games, but still refused the 9-9 rule (32 votes for it, and 35 votes against it). [3] Fischer, unwilling to budge, refused to defend his title.

In Karpov's memoirs he recounts how he was disappointed to not have a chance to become champion in the traditional manner:

I don't know how Fischer feels about it, but I consider it a huge loss that he and I never played our match. I felt like the child who has been promised a wonderful toy and has it offered to him but then, at the last moment, it's taken away.[4]

On April 3rd, 1975, Karpov was declared the 12th World Champion.

FOOTNOTES

  1. Robert James Fischer, by Bill Wall
    2 Bobby Fischer letter to FIDE, 1974
    3 Robert James Fischer, by Bill Wall
    4 Karpov on Karpov: Memoirs of a Chess World Champion, by Anatoly Karpov, Athenuem Press, 1992.

Sorry, no games at this time.
You may wish to visit the home page and try a different search.


TIP: You can make the above ads go away by registering a free account!

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 126 OF 126 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jun-18-18  Mazymetric: <harrylime> Korchnoi was a really strong dude. He had a plus score against almost all the top players of his time like, Tal, Spassky, Petrosian, Geller, Larsen and Stein. That's why Karpov had a hard time beating him.
Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: One interesting aspect of the Fischer Karpov proposed match is the prize fund. The Phillipines offered a 5 million prize fund. Milan, Italy offered a 426,000 prize fund.

The Soviet Chess Federation, on behalf of Karpov, accepted the Milan bid over the Phillipines bid. The Milan bid was, of course, much less than the Phillipines offer.

This is in keeping with the Soviet policy of keeping prize funds low so the Western players would have a harder time getting by, since they weren't subsidized by the state. This way they helped eliminated rivals from the West.

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <gezafan: One interesting aspect of the Fischer Karpov proposed match is the prize fund. The Phillipines offered a 5 million prize fund. Milan, Italy offered a 426,000 prize fund. ...>

prize fund(s) of a match with FIDE being in charge?

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: < gezafan: One interesting aspect of the Fischer Karpov proposed match is the prize fund. The Phillipines offered a 5 million prize fund. Milan, Italy offered a 426,000 prize fund. The Soviet Chess Federation, on behalf of Karpov, accepted the Milan bid over the Phillipines bid. The Milan bid was, of course, much less than the Phillipines offer.

This is in keeping with the Soviet policy of keeping prize funds low so the Western players would have a harder time getting by, since they weren't subsidized by the state. >

<This way they helped eliminated rivals from the West.>

You read that last statement a lot, but as far as I can tell it's pure bilge. Prize funds for world championships were tiny as long as long as the championship was contested by two Soviets. But as soon as an American qualified, the prize fund went through the roof, and the Soviets couldn't do anything about it. And prize funds remained high after that.

The only non-Soviets who would had a decent chance of qualifying before Fischer were Reshevsky and Larsen. If they had qualified, the money would have been there for them too. Not as much as Fischer got, but more than they had ever seen from chess in their lives.

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: < john barleycorn: <gezafan: One interesting aspect of the Fischer Karpov proposed match is the prize fund. The Phillipines offered a 5 million prize fund. Milan, Italy offered a 426,000 prize fund. ...> prize fund(s) of a match with FIDE being in charge?>

Of course not. That would have required Fischer to communicate with Euwe after resigning the title, which is contrary to the laws of physics.

Have you found a library yet?

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: <keypusher: < gezafan: One interesting aspect of the Fischer Karpov proposed match is the prize fund. The Phillipines offered a 5 million prize fund. Milan, Italy offered a 426,000 prize fund. The Soviet Chess Federation, on behalf of Karpov, accepted the Milan bid over the Phillipines bid. The Milan bid was, of course, much less than the Phillipines offer.

This is in keeping with the Soviet policy of keeping prize funds low so the Western players would have a harder time getting by, since they weren't subsidized by the state. >

<This way they helped eliminated rivals from the West.>

You read that last statement a lot, but as far as I can tell it's pure bilge. Prize funds for world championships were tiny as long as long as the championship was contested by two Soviets. But as soon as an American qualified, the prize fund went through the roof, and the Soviets couldn't do anything about it. And prize funds remained high after that.

The only non-Soviets who would had a decent chance of qualifying before Fischer were Reshevsky and Larsen. If they had qualified, the money would have been there for them too. Not as much as Fischer got, but more than they had ever seen from chess in their lives.>

I knew this was coming. That someone would defend the Soviet Union. Someone always does.

I just gave you an example. The Soviets picked a bid that was millions of dollars lower in the proposed Fischer Karpov match.

Why limit the discussion to just World Championship matches? They did the same thing with other matches and tournaments.

Here's an interview with Spassky which mentions this Soviet policy.

GrandMaster Square >>> Interview with GM Spassky www.gmsquare.com/interviews/spassky.html

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: ...

Have you found a library yet?>

Not yet, how many have you found?

Here is what you wrote on the Fischer page:

< keypusher: <jbc >

Endgame or the Darrasch book. Which I donít have anymore.

And when you read that Fischer wrote Euwe after he resigned his title, what then? Will anything change?>

And now you said here: (regarding Fischer maintaining communication with Euwe):

<Of course not. That would have required Fischer to communicate with Euwe after resigning the title, which is contrary to the laws of physics. >

Well, make up your mind.

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <<The only non-Soviets who would had a decent chance of qualifying before Fischer were Reshevsky and Larsen. If they had qualified, the money would have been there for them too. Not as much as Fischer got, but more than they had ever seen from chess in their lives.>

I knew this was coming. That someone would defend the Soviet Union. Someone always does.>

I wasn't defending the USSR. I have no idea if they kept prizes low to discourage Westerners, though I doubt it. I suspect hoarding hard currency had more to do with it. My point is, if that was their goal, it didn't work.

<I just gave you an example. The Soviets picked a bid that was millions of dollars lower in the proposed Fischer Karpov match.>

It was also 426 times greater than any Soviet before Boris Spassky ever got in a world championship match, but that doesn't matter. If Bobby had managed to come up to scratch, I guarantee you the prize fund would have been $5 million, not $426,000, whether the match was played in the Philippines, Milan, or the Kuiper Belt.

<Why limit the discussion to just World Championship matches? They did the same thing with other matches and tournaments.>

They had nothing to do with prize funds on offer in Western countries, which (until the 70s) continued to be miniscule just like they had been since long before the Soviet Union came into existence.

<Spassky interview>

Your link doesn't work, but I'm familiar with the quote. Boris talks a lot of crap, I must say. But it doesn't matter what the Soviet policy was.

Jan-17-19  nok: <or the Kuiper Belt> Transportation at the players' expense, I presume.
Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: here we go again:

<In June, 1974, the FIDE Congress in Nice approved the 10-win regulation and the elimination of draws from the scoring, but imposed a 36-game limit and rejected the 9-9 proposal. On June 27, 1974, Fischer sent a telegram from Pasadena, California to the FIDE Congress:

As I made clear in my telegram to the FIDE delegates, the match conditions I proposed were non-negotiable ... FIDE has decided against my participation in the 1975 World Chess Championship. I therefore resign my FIDE World Championship title.

In March, 1975, an extraordinary FIDE Congress was held in Bergen, Netherlands, and it was agreed to have an unlimited number of world championship games, but still refused the 9-9 rule (32 votes for it, and 35 votes against it). [3] Fischer, unwilling to budge, refused to defend his title. >

After Fischer resigned the FIDE title in June 1974 how could he refuse to defend it in March 1975? Why would FIDE go on pretending it still could arrange a "title defence"? What were they smoking?

<[3] Fischer, unwilling to budge, refused to defend his title. >

Some evidence would be helpful.

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <After Fischer resigned the FIDE title in June 1974 how could he refuse to defend it in March 1975? Why would FIDE go on pretending it still could arrange a "title defence"? What were they smoking?>

Pages of the historical record, which they shredded lest one day you should read them. They needn't have worried.

<<[3] Fischer, unwilling to budge, refused to defend his title. >

Some evidence would be helpful.>

He didn't play chess for 20 years. That isn't good enough for you? Tell me, do you think the Vietnam War is still raging? Did the Berlin Wall <really> fall, in your opinion?

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: <After Fischer resigned the FIDE title in June 1974 how could he refuse to defend it in March 1975? Why would FIDE go on pretending it still could arrange a "title defence"? What were they smoking?>

Pages of the historical record, which they shredded lest one day you should read them. They needn't have worried.>

Come on, which of your "arguments" are you following now? Are you trying to confuse the issue or are you confused? Really, hard to tell.

<<<[3] Fischer, unwilling to budge, refused to defend his title. >

Some evidence would be helpful.>

He didn't play chess for 20 years. That isn't good enough for you?>>

Yeah, I know but thats besides the point as your whole utterances on the matter are.

Just tell me, after June 30, 1974 did Fischer communicate with FIDE or not?

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <<<<[3] Fischer, unwilling to budge, refused to defend his title. >

Some evidence would be helpful.>

He didn't play chess for 20 years. That isn't good enough for you?>>

<Yeah, I know but thats besides the point as your whole utterances on the matter are.>

Nonsense. If the question is <did Bobby refuse to defend his title>, then <he didn't play chess for 20 years> is very much on point. If there was a court proceeding (presumably <did RJF refuse to defend his title?> would come right after <did the sun rise in the East this morning?> in the docket), I'd be sure to put that into evidence.

<Just tell me, after June 30, 1974 did Fischer communicate with FIDE or not?>

I am sure he did, because I remember reading about it years ago, and <diademas> has a pretty specific account, which sounds plausible and I doubt he made up. It's not a big concern of mine. But watching you play Ahab chasing this itsy bitsy whale is much more fun than the work I should be doing.

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: ...

I am sure he did, because I remember reading about it years ago, and <diademas> has a pretty specific account, which sounds plausible and I doubt he made up. ...>

Well, I can't find anything on the internet which is amazing. Winter has nothing to say about this?

<Nonsense. If the question is <did Bobby refuse to defend his title>, then <he didn't play chess for 20 years> is very much on point.>

Now, this is not nonsense but just plain crap. stop your sophistry, will you?

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <<Nonsense. If the question is <did Bobby refuse to defend his title>, then <he didn't play chess for 20 years> is very much on point.>

Now, this is not nonsense but just plain crap. stop your sophistry, will you?>

Well, I'm happy to stop, since we're at an impasse, but...

1. He won the world chess title.

2. He refused to play chess against anyone for 20 years.

3. Therefore, he refused to defend the title.

If that's sophistry, then to hell with Socrates (not <Sokrates>).

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: ...

Well, I'm happy to stop, since we're at an impasse, but...

1. He won the world chess title.

2. He refused to play chess against anyone for 20 years.

3. Therefore, he refused to defend the title.

If that's sophistry, then to hell with Socrates (not <Sokrates>)>

Make it like this to be honest and have Socrates have his peace of mind:

1. He won the FIDE world chess title in 1972.

2. He resigned the FIDE title in June, 1974 and did not negotiate any title defense with FIDE after that

3. He did not play serious chess for 20 years

4. He did not refuse any FIDE "title" defenses as he resigned the FIDE "title" before.

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<john barleycorn> After Fischer resigned the FIDE title in June 1974 how could he refuse to defend it in March 1975? Why would FIDE go on pretending it still could arrange a "title defence"? What were they smoking?>

FIDE did not accept Fischer's resignation of his title, at least not officially, in June 1974. Since it was in FIDE's best interests (and the chess world's) to have Fischer defend his title in 1975 regardless of who the challenger was (Karpov was not yet known to be the challenger in June 1974), they continued to try to convince him to do so. Hence the various FIDE "extraordinary" assemblies in 1975 where they ruled on Fischer's 2 remaining "non-negotiable" match condition proposals, the unlimited length match with draws not counting and the 9-9 drawn match clause. They only agreed to the unlimited length match and not the 9-9 drawn match clause, but nobody knows what would have happened had they also agreed to the latter. Certainly Fischer would have benefited, at least financially, if the match had been held.

Would Fischer have refused to play the 1975 WCC match if FIDE agreed to all his match condition proposals because he had resigned his title in 1974? Again, we don't really know and can only speculate. But I don't think that FIDE was smoking anything powerful, I think that they were just trying to salvage a bad situation to the benefit of the chess world. But maybe I'm the one that's smoking something.

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <AylerKupp: ...

FIDE did not accept Fischer's resignation of his title, at least not officially, in June 1974. ...>

Come on, if Donald Trump quits his "job/position" today who will or can say "sorry, not accepted, you are still our man". That is why I asked "What were they smoking?". Fischer resigned his FIDE title no matter what FIDE accepted or made out of this. Fischer never needed anyone's approval.

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <jbc> There is just one sophist here, and it isn't me.

Obviously after he resigned the FIDE title in June 1974 Fischer continued to consider himself to still possess the title of world chess champion. If Fischer had kept playing, and beaten all comers, he could have enforced that claim, just like Kasparov was able to enforce his claim after bolting FIDE in 1993. But he didn't. He refused to defend his title.

If you're really having trouble getting this, just ask yourself: when did Bobby Fischer stop being the world chess champion, and why? And before you answer, ask yourself a second question: what would my answers be, if the conduct at issue was the same, but I was asking myself about Garry Kasparov?

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: <jbc> There is just one sophist here, and it isn't me.

Obviously after he resigned the FIDE title in June 1974 Fischer continued to consider himself to still possess the title of world chess champion ...>

you must be desperate. Fischer resigned the FIDE title and considered himself the best player in the world. Where is the contradiction?

<He refused to defend his title.>

Again, and very slowly so you get it:

F_i_s_c_h_e_r r_e_s_i_g_n_e_d t_h_e F_I_D_E t_i_t_l_e.

You cannot defend what you resigned.

Now, who is the sophist?

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <you must be desperate. Fischer resigned the FIDE title and considered himself the best player in the world. Where is the contradiction?>

There's only one desperate person here, and it -- sorry, I'll drop that.

He considered himself the chess champion of the world. Probably until the day he died.

Was he?

Until when?

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: ...

There's only one desperate person here, and it -- sorry, I'll drop that.

He considered himself the chess champion of the world. Probably until the day he died.

Was he?

Until when?>

Yeah, drop it. Whatever Fischer considered himself is his personal thing and you have not disproved any.

Now, kindly give the sources that there were negotiations between Fischer and FIDE after June 1974 about a "title" defense of a title Fischer resigned. If not just get stuffed.

Jan-17-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <john barleycorn: <keypusher: ... There's only one desperate person here, and it -- sorry, I'll drop that.

He considered himself the chess champion of the world. Probably until the day he died.

Was he?

Until when?>

Yeah, drop it. Whatever Fischer considered himself is his personal thing and you have not disproved any.>

Petulance and incoherence make a sad couple, don't you think?

<Now, kindly give the sources that there were negotiations between Fischer and FIDE after June 1974 about a "title" defense of a title Fischer resigned. If not just get stuffed.>

Already gave sources. Though as I warned you, I don't remember them very well.

Jan-17-19  john barleycorn: <keypusher: ...

Petulance and incoherence make a sad couple, don't you think?>

maybe, but here you we have only your incoherence that shines. andit shines brightly.

<Already gave sources. Though as I warned you, I don't remember them very well.>

Yeah, then why go into a discussion? and unfortunately, besides these sources must be very unique as e.g. I cannot find anything in Winter's chessnotes addressing this issue.

Jan-18-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: ***

My two dear friends arguing over a technical point.

This is a post from someone who was at the FIDE meeting in 1974 and voted on the matter.

Euwe is mentioned, regretting that Bobby would not even consult Euwe to the get match back on track after a $5 million offer came in from the Philippines.

https://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopi...

***

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 126)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 126 OF 126 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC