< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 226 OF 226 ·
|Apr-16-14|| ||Petrosianic: <Around 1987-ish, they even got that well known chess organization, the US Congress to declare that Fischer was still world champion.>|
By the way, this rarely gets mentioned. I think most are embarrassed by it now, but it's true. In 1987, the Congress passed HR 545, recognizing Fischer as still being world champion.
|Apr-16-14|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: <In 1987, the Congress passed HR 545, recognizing Fischer as still being world champion.>|
I didn't know that. Glad to see them putting our tax dollars to such effective use.
|Apr-16-14|| ||Petrosianic: There's a mention of it on this page, and it was also reported in Chess Life at the time.|
|Apr-16-14|| ||Kinghunt: <Petrosianic> I think this story, as often as it's repeated, is apocryphal. If you search 'house resolution 545 1987', for example, you get this: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bi...|
If you include 'Fischer' in the search, the only results are chess websites. There does not appear to be any government record of such a resolution.
|Apr-26-14|| ||positionalgenius: Narrowing down just three players would be incredibly difficult, especially if one is trying to be objective. We can certainly assume that Kramnik and Anand belong in the discussion with all they've done. It's a shame Kasparov didn't play Anand when the former truly entered his prime. ( 2007-?)|
|Apr-26-14|| ||Lambda: Narrowing it down to two or four players would be difficult. But three players looks pretty easy to me, since there are precisely three players who dominated their eras for long periods of time, precisely three players with long strings of both tournament and world championship successes, and precisely three players who produced 2800+ Chessmetrics performances which don't even seem remarkable for them. Lasker, Karpov and Kasparov seem to be pretty clearly separated from everyone else to me.|
|May-06-14|| ||Mr 1100: I've been reading about some of the politics within the world of top-level professional chess, particularly during the Kasparov era...|
Leads me to the conclusion that the tournament format would be the fairest way to decide the world championship.
|May-06-14|| ||1971: <positionalgenius> I say Anand's prime is '04-'08.|
|May-06-14|| ||Rama: Well, they say over on Chessbase that FIDE has received NO BIDS for the championship. (The bidding deadline just passed.) |
Y ahora que?
|May-06-14|| ||Petrosianic: <Kinghunt>: <I think this story, as often as it's repeated, is apocryphal.>|
Well, I read it straight out of <Chess Life>. So if it's untrue, it's not apocryphal, it's shoddy reporting.
|May-06-14|| ||norami: < Rama> Not true - I submitted a bid. Guaranteed prize fund of ten thousand dollars, plus Magnus and Vishy could stay with me - one in the guest bedroom , the other on the living room couch. Also I would provide milk and cookies.|
|May-06-14|| ||Mr 1100: Just out of curiosity - what was the largest top-level round robin tournament within the last 30 years?|
|May-06-14|| ||Nerwal: <Just out of curiosity - what was the largest top-level round robin tournament within the last 30 years?>|
Not sure - but the GMA World Cup events in 1988-89 were RR tournaments with 16 to 18 players. Fields tend to become narrower with time.
Maybe we can also count the 1988 USSR championship, since it was really top-level at the time.
|May-06-14|| ||Petrosianic: Depends what you call top level. There was some monster tournament in Indonesia in the 80's. Something like a 30 player single round-robin. Was it top level? I don't remember, but it was the biggest round robin I've ever seen.|
|May-06-14|| ||Kinghunt: <Petrosianic: <Kinghunt>: <I think this story, as often as it's repeated, is apocryphal.>|
Well, I read it straight out of <Chess Life>. So if it's untrue, it's not apocryphal, it's shoddy reporting.>
To the contrary, that is the very definition of the word. <a·poc·ry·phal: of doubtful authenticity, although widely circulated as being true>
|May-06-14|| ||Petrosianic: Yes, but Chess Life reported it as a factual news story with no element of doubt. And they got it at the time from the people who got it passed. If it's not true, it's very shoddy reporting. Either they were lied to and didn't check it out, or they lied themselves.|
To me it seems more likely that the story is basically true, but wrong in some detail (maybe they got the resolution number wrong, maybe it wasn't a House Resolution at all, but something else, or so on. I heard that people were trying to do this before it happened. Then it was announced that it had been done. It doesn't seem likely to me that they tried and failed, then lied about it and claimed to have succeeded. People would have known.
|May-06-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Kinghunt,
"There does not appear to be any government record of such a resolution."
Is this what you are looking for.
It certainly made it to table.
"A joint resolution recognizing Bobby Fisher as the official World Chess Champion."
It was posted in 1986.
Wow! just tested that link and was told I've times out!!!
"Your Search Has Timed Out"
pasted link in another tab and it worked.
just grabbed and pasted what I could. (before I get timed out again)
46. H.J.RES.545 : A joint resolution recognizing Bobby Fisher as the official World Chess Champion.
Sponsor: Rep Pashayan, Charles, Jr. [CA-17] (introduced 2/27/1986) Cosponsors (None)
Committees: House Post Office and Civil Service; Senate Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 3/14/1986 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
|May-06-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Cannot get it back - Anybody getting any luck with the link.|
If not paste this into Google:
46. H.J.RES.545 : A joint resolution recognizing Bobby Fisher as the official World Chess Champion
top hit will take you to the page - look for item No.8.
|May-09-14|| ||Chessinfinite: If anyone is up for a fun trivia, then i have a question -|
" Out of all the players that ever contested for a Official World Title, 30 in total, what do the 3 players - Chigorin, Anand and Topalov have in common that the others, the rest 27, do not ? "
Nice if anyone can guess it, if not i can give a clue later..
|May-09-14|| ||Petrosianic: This isn't going to tie in to that old trolling argument that Tchigorin was world champion because Steinitz resigned his title right after beating Tchigorin the first time but before beating him the second time and the second match wasn't really a title match, et cetera, is it?|
|May-09-14|| ||Chessinfinite: <Petrosianic> Thanks for a response.|
No it does not have anything to do with that- actually the reason for the second Chigorin match can be ignored for this answer, which to be honest i was not aware of.
Please ignore that all title matches outside the chess arena- meaning political etc can be ignored. Steinitz and Chigorin played 2 world title matches for this questions. Thanks
|May-09-14|| ||Chessinfinite: Petrosianic, that was a nice hit, i think you may be quite close to the answer :)
You may also ignore FIDE KO matches such as Anand-Karpov , Anand - Shirov etc.|
I consider the PCA matches played between Kasparov, Short, Anand as legitimate for the official world title. Please ignore all rival matches played between Karpov - Timman, Karpov- Kamsky in the 90s. The last match Karpov played was his last match against Kasparov in 1990 for this question.
Clue: If you include The rival FIDE matches held during the 90s, then Karpov can also be added in that group of 3, it can be argued, though it gets complicated - Actually it is best to ignore all Karpov matches starting from the Timman match. Nice catch !
|May-09-14|| ||Petrosianic: Occasionally, I've heard people argue that Steinitz gave up the title, Tchigorin won it at New York 1889, and that Steinitz-Tchigorin 1892 wasn't a title match. The idea was that Tchigorin was Steinitz's successor despite losing the two matches to him.|
I've only heard this idea from 1 or 2 people, who pretended to have no idea that there was anything controversial about it, and seemed to think that everyone regarded it the same way, even though they had no sources for it (which is why I called it a trolling argument).
|May-09-14|| ||Chessinfinite: That is very strange about Chigorin and Steinitz. Without wanting to disclose too much for the moment, i will just say that for this question, Steinitz played 6 world title matches from 1886- 1896.|
|May-10-14|| ||Chessinfinite: The answer :)
"Those 3 are the only players who do not have a continuous world title cycle matches in all their title matches played - someone else played a world title match in between any two World title matches played ever played by Chigorin, Anand , Topalov. "
Between two of Chigorin's matches against Steinitz, there was a world championship match between Steinitz and Gunsberg in 1890, for Anand there was the match in 95 vs Kasparov and a long gap before 2008 match with Kramnik, for Topalov there was a match played in 2008 (Anand v Kramnik) between his two title matches in 2006 (vs Kramnik) and 2010 (vs Anand) . None of the other players had a 'break' in the middle of all of their matches played for world title, including of course those with just one match played !
Petrosianic almost got it, if the Gunsberg match was considered as a world title match and in view of the reasons, it is possible that it was missed ! Very close !
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 226 OF 226 ·