< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Oct-05-07|| ||Plato: < Sorry Plato, but Karpov said: 'I stick to my opinion that in 1975 no one will be able to beat Fischer'>|
We've been through that, <RookFile>. It's all there above. You keep "forgetting" to mention the date when that comment was made. There was no Karpov-Fischer match to speak of when he said that...
Karpov said it in 1973, before any of his Candidates Matches, and before he qualified to face Fischer in the first place. Your quote doesn't come close to validating your claim, since it wasn't even a prediction for the 75 match. I hate to spell it out over and over again, but you're so intent on twisting the facts, the quotes, and the arguments, that it is necessary to do so. Karpov never made the prediction you claimed he made. You lied. Again.
Moreover, in the same source that you got that quote from, it goes on to point out that his opinion changed and his confidence grew by the very next year, which was only natural, thanks to his wins over Polugaevsky, Spassky, and Korchnoi. It is in that same source that we find that after winning those Candidates Matches and actually qualifying for the WC match, he estimated that he had "good chances" against Fischer -- quite the opposite of your false claim.
Yes, try to focus.
<RookFile: Try to focus.>
I'm not the one who keeps changing the topic and avoiding all the main points. I'm also not the one who repeatedly fabricates "facts" in order to support his subjective opinion.
|Oct-05-07|| ||acirce: Painful to see this kind of stuff unfold time after time. <RookFile> and Fischer is like <PeerGynt> and Topalov.|
|Oct-05-07|| ||chancho: Me, I'm looking forward to the <Plato vs RookFile> chess rematch... :-)|
|Oct-05-07|| ||RookFile: In Plato's world, multiple quotes from Karpov that are negative about his chances, and the absence of a single quote from Karpov saying he would win is definite proof that Karpov was confident in his chances.|
|Oct-05-07|| ||Plato: <RookFile: In Plato's world, multiple quotes from Karpov that are negative about his chances, and the absence of a single quote from Karpov saying he would win is definite proof that Karpov was confident in his chances.>|
This is also not true, and you are diverting the topic once more. You claimed that Karpov predicted that he would lose to Fischer in 1975. You lied. He never made such a prediction. You are skirting the issue, but that's what is being discussed here.
The only relevant quote that we have so far, a quote that Karpov made prior to the proposed match but after qualifying for it, is that at the time he thought he had "good chances," in his own words, to defeat Fischer.
Not that this stopped you from inventing facts out of thin air and pretending that he predicted his own defeat.
<chancho> Fine with me! :-P
|Oct-05-07|| ||RookFile: It's clear enough from Karpov's quote that he's predicting that Fischer beats anybody.|
|Oct-05-07|| ||keypusher: <Plato> <rookfile> knows all this. By which I mean, he "knows all this" in the sense that he's been told it before. It's an open question whether <RookFile> ever really knows anything, in the sense that other people do. I suspect on his deathbed he will confidently assert that Karpov predicted Fischer would crush him in 1975.|
|Oct-06-07|| ||beatgiant: All,
Can the discussion of Fischer vs. Karpov please be continued where it belongs on Karpov-Fischer World Championship Match (1975)
This is a page about an individual game so it's reserved for discussion of this game.
|Oct-07-07|| ||Petrosianic: Rookfile's great mission in life is to whitewash Bobby's sins wherever they may be discussed.|
A possible compromise might be if a page could be created that was dedicated solely to the worshipful, reverential discussion of Fischer. A place where any negative comment, however innocuous or deserved, could be immediately deleted. The biggest Fischer fanboy available could be assigned to constantly moderate the page and delete any suggestions to the effect that Bobby was anything less than perfect (Rookfile himself may want to apply for that position).
If there only existed a place where these people could practice their religion free from prejudice or the intrusions of reality, maybe they wouldn't feel obligated to drag every other thread off topic whenever his name was mentioned.
|Oct-07-07|| ||Petrosianic: <Resignation Trap>: <Was this book published by Chess Informant, covering primarily the 1974 Candidates' Matches?>|
Robert Byrne also wrote a very good low-priced paperback on the 1974 Candidates. But he took a very different view:
<Even before the final Candidates match got underway, I made it clear to everyone in Moscow that Anatoly Karpov and Viktor Korchnoi were not fighting to become challenger but for the championship itself. -- page 1>
|Jan-17-08|| ||RookFile: <Petrosianic: Rookfile's great mission in life is to whitewash Bobby's sins wherever they may be discussed.>|
Try to focus, Petrosianic. On numerous occasions, I've pointed out that Fischer is to be condemned for his anti-semitic remarks, and took Reshevsky's side in the Reshevsky vs. Fischer match fiasco. As usual, there is a disconnect between reality, and your statement of reality.
|Jul-16-08|| ||wanabe2000: <RookFile> Reading through your posts I find myself agreeing with you on this game and the RJF site. Keep up the great work.|
|Feb-05-09|| ||suenteus po 147: This game was Karpov's first loss on his road to becoming challenger (and then champion) for the world crown. Although not quite as impressive as Petrosian's unbeaten streak on the road to the championship, I consider 25 consecutive games against top competition without a loss to be quite an impressive feat. Would it be fair to say that this, Karpov's first game of the match against former world champion Spassky, was plagued perhaps with a bit of nerves that led to Karpov's loss? While he doesn't play as nervously as Petrosian did in game 1 of the '63 WC, it looks quite even to me until well in the middlegame when Spassky gets those two connected passers on the queenside. Karpov dispatches then, but his play isn't as strong afterwards. Or maybe Spassky just wore him out?|
|Jun-08-09|| ||Kasparov Fan01: It's such a shame that Fischer didn't hang around to prove himself against Karpov :(|
|Jul-12-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Karpov didn't predict something like "I'd lose to Fischer"|
|Jul-26-09|| ||WiseWizard: Whats wrong with 10 fxe5 and 11 Nf5? In Botvinnik's book on Karpov's candidate matches before Fischer he says karpov didnt repeat this line until the 9th game just to avoid this position.|
|Oct-18-09|| ||HeMateMe: Is the ending that hopelss? R vs. Knight, only 4 pawns on the board, oppossing one anonther? For the world championship, seems that playing a few more moves and hoping for a mistake would be wise.|
|Oct-18-09|| ||tamar: <HeMateMe>
But h5 pawn is very weak, and cannot be supported with with g4, for example 64 Qxd4 Rxd4 65 Kf3 (65 Nf5 Rf4+) Rh4
click for larger view
what can White do while Black walks his King to g5?
|Apr-09-10|| ||thegoodanarchist: <suenteus po 147: it looks quite even to me until well in the middlegame when Spassky gets those two connected passers on the queenside. Karpov dispatches then, but his play isn't as strong afterwards.>|
Are you sure? It looks to me that Spassky traded the two passers for the Bishop.
|Apr-09-10|| ||Petrosianic: Actually, it looks like Karpov traded the Bishop for the two passers, but same difference. After 46. Qxa4, he loses either the Bishop or the Knight on f4. I don't think he had much choice, though, something was about to give. The exchange down ending with all the pawns on the kingside seems to have been the best hope to save it.|
|Apr-09-10|| ||thegoodanarchist: Yes, the best practical chance.|
|Jan-09-11|| ||Salaskan: "The worst happened: I caught a very bad cold. Before the beginning of the first game I did not feel too badly. My fever had subsided and my head had cleared. I chose a complicated line of play thinking I could handle any problems. Alas, I had overestimated my stamina. At the decisive moment my head began to spin.|
(...) Paradoxically, it was the very first game that sealed Spassky's fate in this match. He had hardly reckoned on the possibility of winning the match easily, but after his relatively easy win in the first game he had formed a premature impression of my play in general."
What would this decisive moment be? 16.Nb5 was an overconfident try at complication and Spassky stood better, but after some inaccuracies the position would've been equal with 28.Qh5+ defending b5 (+0.08). Karpov's Qf3+ looks like a simple blunder that gives black the connected passers and loses (-1.15), must have been due to a lack of concentration. Karpov's hypothesis that this became a psychological advantage is interesting though.
|Mar-27-12|| ||screwdriver: Oh, the days when Boris Spasky squished everyone like bugs.|
|Mar-27-12|| ||RookFile: Just playing over this game, I think Karpov for the most part turned in an excellent defensive effort. Couldn't believe it when he was able to get both queenside pawns of the board, and he had a fighting change at holding the exchange down ending with pawns on the same side of the board.|
|Dec-23-12|| ||Albanius: This game, the first of their 1974 match, was practically Spassky's last hurrah as a world championship contender. After this game, Karpov went 12-1 against Spassky (omitting draws) until Spassky won a game in 2006.|
After 18..d5! 19 c3 "trapping" the knight could be met by 19..dxe4 20 Be2 Nd3 21 Nxd3 exd3 22 Bxd3 exf4 23 Bd4 and W may be OK: Pa4 is en prise, and 23..a3 can be met by 24 Qc1
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·