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

TOURNAMENT STANDINGS
Sousse Interzonal Tournament

Bent Larsen15.5/21(+13 -3 =5)[view games]
Viktor Korchnoi14/21(+10 -3 =8)[view games]
Efim Geller14/21(+8 -1 =12)[view games]
Svetozar Gligoric14/21(+7 -0 =14)[view games]
Lajos Portisch13.5/21(+8 -2 =11)[view games]
Samuel Reshevsky13/21(+7 -2 =12)[view games]
Vlastimil Hort13/21(+7 -2 =12)[view games]
Leonid Stein13/21(+9 -4 =8)[view games]
Milan Matulovic12.5/21(+9 -5 =7)[view games]
Aleksandar Matanovic12/21(+4 -1 =16)[view games]
Borislav Ivkov11/21(+6 -5 =10)[view games]
Henrique Mecking11/21(+7 -6 =8)[view games]
Aivars Gipslis10/21(+4 -5 =12)[view games]
Lubomir Kavalek10/21(+5 -6 =10)[view games]
Duncan Suttles9.5/21(+6 -8 =7)[view games]
Istvan Bilek9/21(+3 -6 =12)[view games]
Laszlo Barczay8/21(+2 -7 =12)[view games]
Robert Eugene Byrne7.5/21(+3 -9 =9)[view games]
Miguel Cuellar Gacharna6.5/21(+5 -13 =3)[view games]
Lhamsuren Myagmarsuren6.5/21(+4 -12 =5)[view games]
Ortvin Sarapu4/21(+1 -14 =6)[view games]
Slim Bouaziz3.5/21(+1 -15 =5)[view games]
Robert James Fischer8.5/10(+7 -0 =3)[view games]
*

Chessgames.com Historical Chess Event
Sousse Interzonal (1967)
From Interzonal Sousse 1967, ed. by Walter Kühnle-Woods (Schweizer Schachdienst, Zürich 1967. 94 pp.):

"The 7th Interzonal took place in Sousse (Tunisia) from October 15 to November 16, 1967. Four of the six forerunners had been organized by Sweden. For the first time a FIDE-Tournament took place in Africa, a remarkable propagandistic success for the FIDE. Out of the 66 member nations only two are from Africa, Tunisia and South Africa. They are integrated into the West European Zone. It is not the fault of the organizers, who have really given their best, that Sousse received great publicity, not only because of the chess deeds, but above all because of the "Fischer case". Robert Fischer, US Champion and one of the best players of our times, but unfortunately bare of sporting spirit and diplomatic ability, opposed himself wholly unjustified to the tournament regulations, which had been bent especially for Fischer and Reshevsky to meet their religious feelings. It seems obvious that such far-reaching concessions - Friday no play, Saturday begin only after 7 p.m., no play on four special Jewish holidays - anticipates also adaptations by the players. Reshevsky honoured the concessions made, Fischer did not. Not even when the secretary of the US Embassy in Tunis reminded him to think himself a representative of the Unites States. He answered: I am here as a representative of Robert Fischer! After Fischer did not appear three times for play, he had to be eliminated. As sad and regrettable the elimination of Fischer is - maybe he would have become the first non-Russian World Champion since 1948 - it is obvious, that no player, not even the World Champion himself, can put himself above the regulations of the FIDE. Fischer barred himself from becoming World Champion for five years, the title fight after the present cycle will take place in 1972." (p. 5)

"Bent Larsen scored a decisive victory, underlining his class yet another time after his co-victory at the 6th Interzonal in Amsterdam 1964, his match wins against Ivkov and Geller, his winning series Havana - Winnipeg. Gligoric managed to leave his younger fellow-countrymen behind him, last time Ivkov squeezed him out. For the Russians, Sousse is not a memorable tournament. Only Geller and Kortschnoj qualified outright, but Soviet Champion Stein, whom many experts considered being the favourite, narrowly attained the tiebreak level. If Fischer had not dropped out, Stein would have been out. Portisch once more qualified, last time he had to beat Reshevsky in a tie-break. Also this time a tie-break is necessary, which Hort, Reshevsky and Stein will contest in the US in February. Narrowly out this time are Matulovic, Matanovic and Ivkov, and also the 15 year old Brasilian Mecking, who showed a remarkable performance in this monster tournament." (p. 6)

"The first five rounds. Panno (ARG) withdrew only a few days before the tournament started. As a replacement from South America was impossible to get, the FIDE gave Tunisia the right to nominate a player which gave Bouaziz this rare chance. Bolbochan (ARG) became ill on his journey, was drawn however, but after three rounds had to be struck off the list. The draw was made in such a manner that players of the same country would meet in the early rounds. The Russians divided the points evenly amongst themselves, only Stein snatched the full point from Gipslis. Did he know, how decisive that half point would become later on? After five rounds Fischer is clearly in the lead, however he scored against outsiders." (p. 15)

"The rounds 6 to 9. These four rounds produced three hattricks. The 15 year old Brazilian Mecking scores three times and seems to have recovered from his shaky start. Also Stein joins in with a hattrick, but his are three defeats, which are inflicted by Fischer, Hort and Larsen. Larsen scores 3,5 points out of four and is the new leader. Fischer with one game less lies half a point behind him. Hort and Portisch are the closest rivals. The Russians, not only because they had to play themselves, are all placed in the middle field." (p. 27)

"Round 10. A remarkable round, in many respects. After having had the tournament schedule (page 14) from the start, Fischer suddenly had the idea that "his" schedule is far too strenuous and should be altered. Naturally his argument found no support, which induced him to forfeit his game against Gipslis, which in turn resulted in a zero in his score card. The Russians - in view of their miserable placing - showed a special performance. Stein beat Mecking, Kortschnoj defeated Larsen, and Geller won against Hort. Ivkov met defeat unexpectedly by young Mjagmarsuren." (p. 38)

"Round 11. In the mean time Fischer had departed for Tunis, but could there be persuaded by the Tunisian officials to return to the tournament, his forfeiture against Gipslis to be reviewed by FIDE-President Folke Rogard. At the start to round 11 Fischer was not to be seen however, and Reshevsky sat alone at the table. Fischer's clock was started. Only minutes before the decisive hour was over, Fischer appeared in the tournament hall and started his game crushing Reshevsky in the remaining 1,5 hours. The game was adjourned in a hopeless position for Reshevsky, who avenged himself by not appearing the next morning for the resumption, which forced Fischer to sit alone for an hour, until he could claim the point. The Russians could not repeat their winning streak of the round before. Kortschnoj was even beaten by Mecking. However the Yugoslavs won all their four games and polished up their score." (p. 44)

"Round 12. Only 3 games out of 11 end drawn. An eventful round! Fischer beats Byrne, Larsen defeats Gipslis, Geller wins over Mecking. Also victorious are Stein, Kortschnoj, Gligoric, Ivkov. Matanovic loses against Cuallar, Reshevsky and Hort draw, Portisch-Bilek also half the point" (p. 47)

"Round 13. Although Fischer is free on the unlucky number 13, the tournament will bring him no luck. Larsen wins against Reshevsky and leads the field. Gligoric has now won five in a row and reinforces the spearhead. Geller, Kortschnoj, Hort and Portisch also score the full point, bringing them valuable improvement of their position. Stein loses for the fourth time in this tournament." (p. 49)

"Round 14. FIDE-President Folke Rogard refers back to the chief arbitre Sajtar (CS) (= Jaroslav Sajtar) the decision about Fischer's forfeiture against Gipslis, who confirms it. Fischer once again withdraws from the tournament and departs for Tunis. Accordingly his game against Hort is again noted as forfeiture. Larsen and Geller score their third consecutive win. Of the favourites Reshevsky and Matulovic better their chances, whilst Mecking loses ground." (p. 52)

"As to schedule the 15th round starts on Saturday, Nov. 4, at 7 p.m. Fischer is still in Tunis and had received final conditions by the tournament responsibles under which he could re-enter the tournament, although his two forfeitures against Hort and Gipslis would have been ground enough for his expulsion. He must sign a declaration to accept the schedule as it stands and to accept the two forfeitures. At first Fischer refuses and so expresses himself in a phone conversation with a journalist at Sousse. At 7 p.m. the round begins, Fischer's clock is started. At half past seven Fischer is again on the phone talking to the journalist. He surprisingly declares that he would accept the conditions but his game against Larsen must be postponed some hours enabling him to come to Sousse. It does not seem imperative to Fischer to negotiate with the tournament responsibles, and Fischer's drama comes to an end. At 8 p.m. he receives his third forfeiture, he is at the same time expulsed finally from the tournament. His results are annulled because he has played less than half of the games. New placings are set up. Of the favourites Ivkov gains an important win against Kortschnoj. Matulovic obtains his third consecutive win. Gipslis loses for the fifth time and should be out of the race to become a Candidate." (p. 57)

Sousse, Tunisia, 15 October - 15 November 1967

Elo# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 Pts Son-Be 1 GM Larsen 2620 * 0 ½ ½ 0 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 15½ =2 GM Korchnoi 2620 1 * ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 14 136.00 =2 GM Geller 2630 ½ ½ * ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 14 135.75 =2 GM Gligoric 2570 ½ ½ ½ * ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 14 135.00 5 GM Portisch 2620 1 0 ½ ½ * ½ ½ 1 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 1 1 13½ =6 GM Reshevsky 2580 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ * ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 0 1 1 ½ 13 129.75 =6 GM Hort 2580 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ * 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 1 13 120.25 =6 GM Stein 2640 0 ½ ½ 0 0 ½ 0 * ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ½ 13 117.00 9 GM Matulovic 2530 0 1 0 ½ 1 0 ½ ½ * 0 1 1 ½ 1 0 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 1 1 12½ 10 GM Matanovic 2530 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 * ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 0 1 ½ ½ 12 =11 GM Ivkov 2570 0 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ * 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 0 1 1 11 103.50 =11 IM Mecking ---- 0 1 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 11 102.50 =13 GM Gipslis 2580 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 * ½ 0 1 ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 10 93.75 =13 GM Kavalek 2530 ½ 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ 1 ½ 1 0 1 1 1 10 90.00 15 Suttles ---- 1 0 0 0 0 ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 0 0 1 ½ * ½ 1 0 ½ 1 ½ 1 9½ 16 GM Bilek 2510 0 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 0 ½ * ½ ½ 1 0 1 1 9 17 GM Barczay 2490 ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 8 18 GM Byrne 2540 0 0 0 ½ ½ 0 0 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 0 1 ½ ½ * 1 ½ ½ 0 7½ =19 IM Cuellar ---- 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 ½ 0 0 0 * 0 1 1 6½ 61.00 =19 IM Myagmarsuren ---- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 1 ½ ½ 0 0 1 ½ ½ 1 * 0 1 6½ 54.50 21 IM Sarapu ---- 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 1 * ½ 4 22 Bouaziz ---- 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 ½ * 3½ GM Fischer* 2670 - ½ - - ½ 1 - 1 - - - - - ½ - - 1 1 1 1 1 - 8½

Fischer had been granted a day off to observe the Sabbath, postponing his eighth round game with Victor Korchnoi. According to Brady, his ninth round game with Efim Geller unnecessarily also had been postponed, resulting in six consecutive days without a break. When Fischer sought to remedy this error, he was refused without being offered an explanation (Frank Brady, Bobby Fischer: Profile of a Prodigy, http://chessskill.blogspot.no/2008/...).

Interzonal tie-breaker play-off

Reshevsky, Hort and Stein (the former kept his better tie-breaker performance in this tournament, and therefore advanced) played their Los Angeles Interzonal Playoff (1968) in February and March to determine which seed would advance.

Candidates matches

"The draw for the matches that go to make up the Candidates was made at the final banquet after the end of the Interzonal Tournament at Sousse" (Harry Golombek in The Times 30 December 1967 p. 16):

Boris Spassky beat Efim Geller 5½-2½ at the Sukhumi Candidates Quarterfinal (April, 1968 - see the Spassky - Geller Candidates Quarterfinal (1968) for details).

Bent Larsen beat Lajos Portisch 5½-4½ at the Porec Candidates Quarterfinal (May, 1968 - see the Larsen - Portisch Candidates Quarterfinal (1968) for details).

Viktor Korchnoi beat Samuel Reshevsky 5½-2½ at the Amsterdam Candidates Quarterfinal (May, 1968 - see the Korchnoi - Reshevsky Candidates Quarterfinal (1968) for details).

Mikhail Tal beat Svetozar Gligoric 5½-3½ at the Belgrade Candidates Quarterfinal (April - May, 1968 - see the Tal - Gligoric Candidates Quarterfinal (1968) for details).

In July, Spassky beat Larsen 5½-2½ at Malmö in the semifinals (see the Spassky - Larsen Candidates Semifinal (1968) for details), Korchnoi beat Tal 5½-4½ at Moscow in June and July in another set of semifinals, and Spassky went on to beat Korchnoi 6½-3½ at Kiev (see the Spassky - Korchnoi Candidates Final (1968) for details) in September of 1968 to qualify for the Petrosian - Spassky World Championship Rematch (1969).

Interzonal cycles

The Amsterdam Interzonal (1964) was the previous Interzonal, and the Palma de Mallorca Interzonal (1970) was the next Interzonal.

*Fischer withdrew while leading after a dispute with the organizers.

#Unofficial FIDE Rating List June 1967: http://www.olimpbase.org/Elo/Elo196....

Original Collection : Game Collection: Sousse Interzonal, 1967, by User: Resignation Trap.

 page 1 of 10; games 1-25 of 241  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. Fischer vs Myagmarsuren 1-031 1967 Sousse InterzonalA07 King's Indian Attack
2. Reshevsky vs O Sarapu  1-035 1967 Sousse InterzonalD32 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch
3. Robert E Byrne vs Portisch  ½-½30 1967 Sousse InterzonalB47 Sicilian, Taimanov (Bastrikov) Variation
4. Larsen vs Matulovic 1-076 1967 Sousse InterzonalA04 Reti Opening
5. S Bouaziz vs Ivkov 0-122 1967 Sousse InterzonalB06 Robatsch
6. Fischer vs L Barczay 1-024 1967 Sousse InterzonalC95 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Breyer
7. Hort vs I Bilek  ½-½17 1967 Sousse InterzonalD97 Grunfeld, Russian
8. Suttles vs Gligoric 0-134 1967 Sousse InterzonalC49 Four Knights
9. Gipslis vs M Cuellar Gacharna 1-037 1967 Sousse InterzonalC84 Ruy Lopez, Closed
10. Reshevsky vs Myagmarsuren 1-033 1967 Sousse InterzonalD35 Queen's Gambit Declined
11. Mecking vs A Matanovic  0-170 1967 Sousse InterzonalA56 Benoni Defense
12. Korchnoi vs Kavalek 1-035 1967 Sousse InterzonalE61 King's Indian
13. Geller vs O Sarapu 1-056 1967 Sousse InterzonalA09 Reti Opening
14. L Barczay vs Hort  ½-½42 1967 Sousse InterzonalC07 French, Tarrasch
15. Portisch vs Fischer ½-½46 1967 Sousse InterzonalE69 King's Indian, Fianchetto, Classical Main line
16. Ivkov vs Suttles  1-052 1967 Sousse InterzonalA42 Modern Defense, Averbakh System
17. M Cuellar Gacharna vs Reshevsky 1-042 1967 Sousse InterzonalA56 Benoni Defense
18. A Matanovic vs S Bouaziz  ½-½48 1967 Sousse InterzonalB31 Sicilian, Rossolimo Variation
19. Matulovic vs Mecking 1-041 1967 Sousse InterzonalC98 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Chigorin
20. Kavalek vs Geller  ½-½18 1967 Sousse InterzonalB64 Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer Attack
21. O Sarapu vs Gipslis 0-143 1967 Sousse InterzonalB28 Sicilian, O'Kelly Variation
22. Stein vs Korchnoi ½-½23 1967 Sousse InterzonalB19 Caro-Kann, Classical
23. I Bilek vs Larsen 0-137 1967 Sousse InterzonalB02 Alekhine's Defense
24. Myagmarsuren vs Robert E Byrne  ½-½40 1967 Sousse InterzonalB08 Pirc, Classical
25. S Bouaziz vs Matulovic  0-141 1967 Sousse InterzonalB47 Sicilian, Taimanov (Bastrikov) Variation
 page 1 of 10; games 1-25 of 241  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  
 

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-11-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  whiteshark: "The prize-giving ceremony remains clearly in my memory. The representatives of western countries received their prizes in Swiss francs, whereas the Eastern Bloc players received theirs in Tunisian dinars, a currency which can be exchanged in practically no other country. Great was our disappointment, but the tournament organizers were implacable. It must be said that in the Soviet Union they met us half way and made an exception, exchanging our dinars for certificates - valuable pieces of paper, which inside the Soviet Union are valued no less than convertible currency."

From Korchnoi's book <Chess is my life>, Arco Publishing Company, 1978, p 58

Dec-11-14  Petrosianic: <he was refused without being offered an explanation>

The explanation is that it was a poorly run tournament in a 3rd world country, and his scheduling demands had overtaxed their abilities. He took his eye off the ball. The minor inconvenience of this mess was trivial compared to qualifying for the Candidates. Had he simply completed the tournament, he could hardly have failed to qualify.

But the REALLY spooky thing about all this is that back in 1962, Eliot Hearst had run a thing called the Absurd Headlines Contest in his column in Chess Life. Readers submitted funny chess headlines, for publication. There were some dopey ones, like "Free World Alarmed By Bisguier's Loss of Berlin Defense", but also some funny ones.

ANYHOO, one of the entries they published was "Fischer Withdraws From Interzonal To Permit Reshevsky to Qualify". And that's almost exactly what happened here. Fischer dropped out, and Reshevsky got the final spot. Weird, huh? Just like that Kennedy/Lincoln thing.

Dec-23-14  Everett: What seems to be lost a bit is the advantage of days off when your competition doesnt have them. Might even affect the results.
Jul-08-15  Poulsen: It's a bit strange, that this event is remembered by many as the one, that Fischer withdrew from and consequently did not win - rather than the one, that Larsen won pretty convincingly. In the same way Norway Chess 2015 will properly be remembered by Carlsen's donwfall rather than Topalov's great win.

In fact this is one of Larsen's best performances in his entire career - and at the same level as his shared win in Amsterdam 1964.

Fischer was - as allways - an immature fool.

Jul-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Everett> Let's see, Fischer defeated both Byrne and Reshevsky. Given these 2 losses by USA players to Fischer along with Fischer's additional rest days, I wonder if Fischer had won the tournament whether Larsen, Korchnoi, Geller, et. al. would have published an article titled "The Americans have fixed world chess!"
Jul-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Poulsen> Perhaps this event was a trial run for 1972 for Fischer to see what he could and could not get away with. But I partly disagree with you, Fischer might have been immature but he was never a fool until 1975.
Jul-08-15  Howard: Agreed !
Jul-08-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <AylerKupp....Fischer defeated both Byrne and Reshevsky. Given these 2 losses by USA players to Fischer along with Fischer's additional rest days, I wonder if Fischer had won the tournament whether Larsen, Korchnoi, Geller, et. al. would have published an article titled "The Americans have fixed world chess!">

We might well have seen the first headline titled 'Unsporting, Grandmaster'!

Jul-09-15  Poulsen: <AylerKupp> Fischer not being a fool until 1975? Well, well, well. That's an interesting observation.

I respect your view - but on this I strongly disagree. However I will admit, that I used the 'word' fool in order to avoid stronger words. It does not cover my real view on Fischer.

As I see it - despite all his chessskills - it is deeply regrettable, that an invidual like Fischer ever infested the world of chess.

Jul-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Poulsen> Fischer invokes strong opinions, both positive and negative, in many of us. FWIW I try to separate my opinion of Fischer the player from Fischer the person, even though I am not always successful. I have nothing but admiration for Fischer the player; he came up with incredibly clear and deep games and provided many of us much joy. As far as Fischer the person is concerned, let's just say that my opinion is not as favorable by a long shot.
Jul-09-15  diceman: <AylerKupp: <Poulsen> Fischer invokes strong opinions, both positive and negative, in many of us.>

For the record, I don't think you can play high quality chess and be "nuts' at the same time.

Jul-09-15  john barleycorn: <diceman: ...

For the record, I don't think you can play high quality chess and be "nuts' at the same time.>

Good point. <nuts> cannot work with (high) concentration on one subject. For instance they cannot be hyponotized as their attention time is too short.

Jul-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <diceman> Oh, I don't know. There are many kinds and levels of "nuttiness", from the mild to the severe, and it's not necessarily bad. I might even argue that a certain amount of "nuttiness" is required in order for a person to reach the top level in any field. How else can one justify the dedication, hours of hard work, and single-mindedness of purpose which, talent aside, are also requirements to reach the top level.

And chess seems to attract it's share of "nuts". The following link is to one person's opinion as to who were the five craziest and most brilliant chess grandmasters of all time: http://www.amog.com/craziest-brilli.... Be patient, for some reason it takes a long time to load and it even indicates that the article can't be found and then it finally pops up. No bonus points for guessing who the author considers the craziest. But the author did provide this link, http://news.stanford.edu/news/2002/..., to a study (which, being old, might have been discredited by now) which finds links between creative genius and mental illness. And the references in this link, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creat..., provide a list of many other similar studies, and this article claims that the link between creativity and mental illnesses goes back to Aristotle.

I'll let you and others decide whether Fischer falls under this category of combined genius and mental illness or not. But, if he does, he's in good and illustrious company.

Jul-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<john barleycorn> <nuts> cannot work with (high) concentration on one subject.>

That's likely true with some king of "nuttiness" such as ADHD but not necessarily all kinds such as those who could be described as being autistic savants (a currently more politically correct term than idiot savant). John Nash of "A Beautiful Mind" fame is an example of someone who was a genius in his field but suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. So it is difficult to generalize, and sometimes the reason that they can work with high concentration on one subject is because of their nuttiness. It all depends on the kind of nuts that they are.

Jul-09-15  diceman: <AylerKupp: <diceman> Oh, I don't know. There are many kinds and levels of "nuttiness", from the mild to the severe, and it's not necessarily bad.>

Oh you don't have to tell me.

In a world where folks try to deny or rewrite one of the greatest runs in modern chess,

..well, lets just say there's all types of "crazy."

Jul-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<diceman> ... one of the greatest runs in modern chess>

"One" of the greatest? Which one do you consider might be greater?

Talk about "crazy" ;-)

Jul-09-15  diceman: <AylerKupp: <<diceman> ... one of the greatest runs in modern chess>

"One" of the greatest? Which one do you consider might be greater?>

...according to some, all of them.

Jul-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: True. And that reminds me of a story. At the dawn of the personal computer era in the early 1980s one of the most popular word processors was called WordStar, which I hated. The secretary of the head of IT, who knew my aversion to WordStar, overheard me telling someone that I thought that WordStar was the second best word processor in the market. So she asked me:

Secretary: "I'm surprised to hear that, I thought that you hated WordStar. What do you consider the best word processor in the market?"

Me: "All the others".

And, BTW, I thought it would be amusing to calculate Fischer's TPR during his 21-game win streak including the last 7 rounds of the 1970 Palma de Majorca Interzonal (ignoring Panno's rating in his forfeit), the 1971 Taimanov and Larsen Candidates Matches, and Fischer's first round win against Petrosian in their 1971 Candidates Match. If I calculated it correctly, according to what I think are the FIDE procedures, his TPR for these 21 games was 3390.

Not bad.

Jul-09-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <AylerKupp> How long since FIDE started adding 400 points to a player's performance for a clean score? Recall seeing the calculations during Caruana's run at St Louis last year and being astonished at the numbers, till someone noted the 400-point jolt.
Jul-10-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <perfidious> I didn't know that FIDE added any bonus points for a clean score! Doesn't make any sense to me; the additional rating points gained for such a fine performance should be reward itself. Anyway, what's a "clean score"? A perfect score? Undefeated? Besides, in either case, it doesn't happen too often.

You might be thinking of either the Rule of 400 where if the rating differential between two players is more than 400, then it's treated as 400 for ratings calculation purposes. That way if, through a fluke, a player with a huge ratings advantage does not lose as many rating points if he loses or draws against a player rated more than 400 points below him. Again, this doesn't happen too often.

Or you might be thinking of the 400-point approximation rule where a player's change in rating could be <approximated> by a formula that involves dividing the difference between opponents' rating by 400. This works fairly well if there is a small difference between the player's ratings but is less accurate if the ratings difference is large.

Or maybe you're thinking of an <approximation> for calculating a player's tournament performance rating (TPR) which involves adding the opponent's rating plus 400 points to the player's TPR for a win or adding the opponent's rating minus 400 points to the player's TPR for a loss.

In the two <approximations> above this eliminates the need for the look-up table that converts a rating difference to a winning probability. But, with the use of computers, do the "exact" calculation with the lookup table is just as easy if not easier.

Jul-10-15  diceman: <AylerKupp:
And, BTW, I thought it would be amusing to calculate Fischer's TPR during his 21-game win streak including the last 7 rounds of the 1970 Palma de Majorca Interzonal (ignoring Panno's rating in his forfeit), the 1971 Taimanov and Larsen Candidates Matches, and Fischer's first round win against Petrosian in their 1971 Candidates Match. If I calculated it correctly, according to what I think are the FIDE procedures, his TPR for these 21 games was 3390.

Not bad.>

...the irony is, the folks who don't like Fischer probably created the monster.

...when you look at how his run is talked about by some, you wonder what would happen if he drew a few more games?

Jul-10-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <diceman> If you mean what would Fischer’s TPR have been if he had drawn some of the games that he won I can calculate that, but I am currently out of town and I don’t have the data with me. When I get back early next week I can calculate what Fischer’s TPR would have been had he drawn 1, 2, 3, etc. of the games that he played during this 21-game win streak.

An interesting facet of FIDE’s TPR calculation, as far as I can tell, is that it doesn’t matter which games a player draws and which games a player wins. All that’s important is the average rating of the opponents and the player’s performance ratio, the player’s score divided by the number of games played.

This seems counterintuitive to me. Assuming that the player's rating is higher than all his opponents (which was the case with Fischer) I would think that a player’s TPR, if he played 10 games and scored 9.5 / 10, would/should be higher if his draw was against the opponent with the smallest rating difference with the player (where the likelihood of a draw would be highest) than if his draw was against the opponent with the lowest rating (where the likelihood of a draw would be lowest). This would be analogous to losing more rating points if you drew against a player rated 300 points below you than if you drew against a player rated 3 points below you. But that doesn’t seem to be the case according to FIDE’s description Performance Rating calculation in section 1.48 of http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.h.... If anyone believes differently, please educate me.

Jul-11-15  diceman: <AylerKupp: <diceman> If you mean what would Fischer’s TPR have been if he had drawn some of the games that he won I can calculate that, but I am currently out of town and I don’t have the data with me.>

No, I was thinking more of what made Fischer the winner he was.

...winning was a way to shut mouths.
(or as they say: silence the critics)

...didn't actually seem to work.

Jul-12-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <diceman> I think that Fischer was the winner that he was because of his talent, his single-mindedness of purpose, and his willingness to devote the time and energy needed to achieve the top of his chosen field. But unfortunately single-mindedness of purpose is a two-way sword, and in Fischer’s case he did not consider it sufficient to reach the top, he considered it necessary to reach the top <his way>, and this unfortunately probably delayed him in reaching his goal (e.g. his refusal to participate in Interzonals and Interzonal qualifying tournaments, his expulsion from Sousse, etc.) and hindered his ability to monetarily profit from his successes (e.g. his refusal of endorsement and facing Karpov in 1975).

Reaching the top without compromising or considering the interests of others is a sure way of making enemies and critics along the way. And instead of shutting mouths it typically has the opposite effect. Had Fischer accepted some of the sponsorship offers that came his way (those that could be structured in ways acceptable to him), played the Karpov match in 1975, and continued to play in matches and tournaments, he would have been financially secure. Then the events in Pasadena, Yugoslavia, and Tokyo would probably never have happened.

Jul-13-15  diceman: <AylerKupp:
But unfortunately single-mindedness of purpose is a two-way sword, and in Fischer’s case he did not consider it sufficient to reach the top, he considered it necessary to reach the top <his way>>

Well it's an assumption what "the top" is and why Fischer chose <his way>.

At a young age he was already one of the best in the world and the best the US had seen.

...maybe he thought hard work was the only way to achieve greatness/legendary status.

<this unfortunately probably delayed him in reaching his goal (e.g. his refusal to participate in Interzonals and Interzonal qualifying tournaments, his expulsion from Sousse, etc.)>

I've always considered it a plus.
The Fischer of the 70's had a clarity
and accuracy to his play, a maturity,
and a pragmatism the "kid" never had.

<Reaching the top without compromising or considering the interests of others is a sure way of making enemies and critics along the way.>

As Fischer said in that World Champions video, the Russians were already judging his character as a kid. Fischer was attacked long before he made waves in the chess world.

Also, one needs to make a call.
He's the guy credited with putting chess on the map, and bringing prestige (and larger prize funds) to the game.

You cant do that and be Mr. Compromise
at the same time.

<and hindered his ability to monetarily profit from his successes>

Well, that was Fischer's choice, and blows the argument out of the water that he was greedy.

Karpov was irrelevent, Fischer could have been a wealthy man before Karpov was even his challenger.

Fischer never would have been Fischer, if driven by wealth.

<Reaching the top without compromising or considering the interests of others is a sure way of making enemies>

Well Fischer was the only one who "suffered" from Fischer.

Am I supposed to believe the Interzonal players wanted a guy who could beat them there?

..or Reshevsky "suffered" a match win without continued play?

...or Karpov "suffered" a world championship without moving a pawn?

...or Spassky was emotionally crushed being up 2-0 with white in game three?

If Fischer had intended to "hurt" or "anger" the chess world he sure had a strange way of doing it.

...basically Fischer losing titles, opportunities, games, and matches.

It's difficult to "find" a Fischer victim, except for those who actually sat across the board from him.

< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  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. Don't post 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 | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2015, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies