|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-20-11 | | hottyboy90: What was Fischer thinking? I would have played on......hehehahaha =) |
 |
| Mar-21-11 | | fab4: Fischer had so conquered perfection by 1972 that he could even lose a game without making any mistakes. |
|
| Mar-21-11 | | hottyboy90: I wonder what the result would have been had Fischer played this game? |
|
| Mar-21-11 | | fab4: Hmmm.. 1-0 |
|
| Mar-21-11 | | hottyboy90: Lets not forget Spassky didn't start to lose his marbles until the 3rd game began so it would have been very interesting to revisit 72 and get them to play that game, who knows if Spassky had properly won the 2nd game instead of Fischer not showing up then Fischer would have been the one on the backfoot mentally, I wish they could really invent a time machine and do it now! |
|
Apr-24-11
 | | hedgeh0g: <hottyboy90> Even if you could go back in time, do you really think you could get Fischer to play that game? He'd probably complain about the humidity being suboptimal and the clock being made of oak instead of pine. |
|
| Aug-27-11 | | Psihadal: Some of the comments here are pretty amusing haha |
|
Dec-16-11
 | | kevin86: Fischer was still looking for his lost bishop from the first game! |
|
| Mar-24-12 | | I play the Fred: A few comments about this quick smash by black:
1) I need to learn to resign sooner; from this same final position I have played on and on, sometimes 40 or more moves deep, to no avail. 2) Clearly Spassky learned something from his two matches with Petrosian. In the final position, White has no fewer than <twenty> moves at his disposal, and yet most of them promise nothing. Sixteen are pawn moves, but <every single one> weakens his pawn structure. His knights are free to move, but they strike at nothing. 3) As for Fischer, the evolution of his style is unmistakable here, showing in this game the form he showed THROUGHOUT the <Fischer-Karpov> match. 4) I hope <notyetagm> provides some analysis here. |
|
| Jun-11-12 | | hottyboy90: Good answer hedgehOg.I got a chuckle out of that. |
|
| Jun-16-12 | | mojonera: This game was rated by Chessmetrics |
|
| Jun-16-12 | | diceman: This game shows how sophisticated Fischer was.
He uses the same opening played in the 49th game of
the Karpov/Kasparov 1984 match.
(the match was stopped after game 48)
However, thinking 12 years ahead of his time,
caused Fischer to lose time on his clock,
eventually losing on time. |
|
| Jun-16-12 | | RookFile: <This game was rated by Chessmetrics> Not surprising. |
|
| Jul-13-12 | | offramp: This game was scheduled for the 13th July 1972. Fischer didn't turn up, as we know. Spassky had a lot to put up with in this match but the 2-0 start he had, for very little effort, looks to me like adequate compensation for all the psyching-out he went through. Spassky wanted to play with cameras and definitely with an audience. When the match was resumed in game 3 Spassky vs Fischer, 1972 there was neither. Spassky in fact could have insisted on both - and what would have happened then? Obviously Fischer would have gone home and Spassky would have remained champion. And the figures would have backed him up! 2-0 up in the match, having won the only game played against an opponent whose life score against him was lost 5, drew 2! The world of only-recently-partially-aware chess pundits would certainly have seen Spassky as a worthy champion. So why did Spassky continue? I am sure it wasn't for the money. I believe the Politburo exchanged all foreign winnings for roubles and then taxed the lot. I think it was that Spassky genuinely believed he could beat Fischer and like a really great player he wanted to show it. Great players never back down from a challenge - they grasp the opportunity to prove that they are the best! |
|
Aug-14-12
 | | Cemoblanca: There is a move in chess when the best move is not to move. ;0) |
|
| Feb-08-13 | | Everett: <So why did Spassky continue? I am sure it wasn't for the money. I believe the Politburo exchanged all foreign winnings for roubles and then taxed the lot. I think it was that Spassky genuinely believed he could beat Fischer and like a really great player he wanted to show it. Great players never back down from a challenge - they grasp the opportunity to prove that they are the best!> This doesn't really match how Spassky felt about the bring WC. He seemed to really dislike it. Perhaps he played on because he wanted out. |
|
| Feb-08-13 | | RookFile: From Spassky's point of view, he had never lost to Fischer, and had already won the only game in the match they had played so far. Nothing was going to change, right? |
|
Feb-08-13
 | | harrylime: Spassky played on because the Fischer phenomena had become just too imposing and impossible to ignore or walk away from. A western movie analogy is the hottest gunslinger ever walking into town challenging the sheriff who's in possession of everything.. The Sheriff can ignore the hitman who's rode into his territory, or he can face him off and fight. If he chooses to just ignore and walk away well the whole town is watching and his reputation will be irredeemably tarnished.. So just like infront of a Cobra,and the watching world, he is mesmerised into fighting... |
|
| Feb-08-13 | | Everett: <RookFile: From Spassky's point of view, he had never lost to Fischer, and had already won the only game in the match they had played so far. Nothing was going to change, right?> It's one view, but each of us is more than a simple summary of one idea or belief. |
|
Feb-09-13
 | | morfishine: I don't see what the big deal is: This is a standard dual zugzwang position resulting in a simultaneous pure stalemate. Greco explained all this 385 years ago |
|
| Feb-09-13 | | ounos: With Fischer's pieces stuck on the back row, defeat was inevitable (and it is surprising he survived as long as he did, honestly). One should also highlight Spassky's excellent positional play which rendered the usually formidable bishops of Fischer to ineffective bystanders, for the larger part of the game. |
|
| Mar-26-13 | | engineerX: White did not even have a chance to complete his development. |
|
| Mar-26-13 | | tacticalmonster: The GREATEST sacrifice of all time! Spassky was so amazed at the depth of this sacrifice ( Fischer sacrificed all 16 pieces ) that he went on to lose game 3,5,6,8 and 10! |
|
Mar-27-13
 | | HeMateMe: It was a cell phone forfeit. Bob got a call at his jail cell, in Tokyo. |
|
Mar-27-13
| | harrylime: In Effect Bobby gave Boris a two game start just like his Romantic era heroes did in the 19th c and he still won the match with ease. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
