< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2152 OF 2152 ·
|Mar-24-17|| ||Joshka: <TheFocus> Of course, and when you listen to all the interviews starting in around 1998 or 1999, Bobby's demeanor is at times like a raving lunatic!!......but instead of empathy from the so called professional chess community of his peers, he got mocked, ridiculed, ect. You KNOW darn well he entrusted his private and personal belongings with a person whom he must have been so sure would be reliable, and when he found out this guy was like Judas, his anger and venom spewed out and he was in full frontal attack mode!
I personally believe Bobby buried his title in a twenty year "on principal" attitude, and he fell very hard for the young gal who arranged his comeback in 1992. They had that falling out, the State Department had charges against him, and thus his 'chess reset" was AGAIN in limbo, and he became ever so bitter once again. THEN, on top of that he loses all his personal private memorabilia....you can take a man's profession and monetary belongings from him, but when you mess with his self worth and pride, you tear up his soul and rip it into thousands of pieces, what has a man got left?
Bobby wasn't perfect by a long shot, but good golly, his country used him, and when he was no longer useful they chewed him up and spit him out.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||Joshka: <PhilFeeley> The last time I had communications with Bobby's long time confidant, GM Quinteros, he verified the fact I was sure he had game scores from all the simultaneous exhibitions Bobby gave right after the Petrosian Match in 1971. He said he'd have a book come out , but that was some 3 or 4 years ago I believe. Miguel was the one who set up all those exhibitions!!! Bobby talked about these in his radio interviews, hundreds, and hundreds, of games!! Think there are many folks who are hanging on to many valuable items and just waiting till more time passes before they get released.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||PhilFeeley: <Joshka> Then there's all those games he played with the Polgars. I wonder if he kept any of those gamescores.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||TheFocus: I wonder what the Polgars had to say about any game scores? And did they keep any?|
|Mar-24-17|| ||HeMateMe: susan polgar has said she did "ok" in her blitz matches against Fischer, but is sworn to secrecy. I'm guessing she can remember some of the games, all of the moves played, but is respecting Fischer's desire for privacy.|
I think Judit was world top 30 at the time and could probably hold her own against Fischer. It would be nice if they would let the public see one or two games.
|Mar-24-17|| ||TheFocus: I would like to see some of those games.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||SatelliteDan: I figure Fischer's 2785 rating in 1972 would be appx 2940 today.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||HeMateMe: put a message in her website of CG forum. Fischer is long gone, what harm can it do to talk a little about his chess, with a new game or two?|
|Mar-24-17|| ||TheFocus: Go ahead. You know her better than I do.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||TheFocus: I'm still trying to get an interview with Lisa Lane.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||fedalio: <TheFocus> what is the status of your book? (Hopefully I recall correctly you were writing one on Bobby?)|
|Mar-24-17|| ||TheFocus: <fedalio> Thank you for asking.|
I quit my job two weeks ago to write full-time. I am currently setting in motion my travels for research. I will post on the Biographer's Bistro when I am working in libraries such as the one in Cleveland, Ohio.
The Fischer book should be out within two years, hopefully by the end of 2018 so it can come out in the tenth year after his death. Work should go faster now that I can devote all my time to it.
|Mar-24-17|| ||saffuna: Good luck, <focus>. Enjoy the whole process of doing the book, don't fixate only on the final result.|
And ...lots of diagrams! I'll be reading it on my Kindle, with no chess set or computer program available.
|Mar-24-17|| ||TheFocus: Thank you, <saffuna>!! Good advice from someone who has been there.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||saffuna: May I make one more suggestion?
When the manuscript is completed only 70-80% of the work is done. The design/layout is extremely important for the reader, don't neglect it.
Also, respect the reader's intelligence. If you make a point once you might repeat it once more, but don't repeat it over and over thinking the reader may have forgotten. It slows down and irritates the reader. The (overall) good writer David Halberstam, for example, sometimes makes the same point about twenty times, and drives me nuts.
Sorry if I'm telling you things you already know.
|Mar-24-17|| ||Caissanist: Susan has been mostly charitable when talking about Fischer, Judit not so much, and I doubt that there is any significant trove of games between them. This is what she had to say about him after his death:|
<“At first it was very exciting to meet a hero, but after you got to know him personally, he was not a person you would like to know. He was already mentally ill and tiring to be with. Fischer Random Chess was his thing at the time (1993, after the match with Spassky in St. Stefan). He spoke obsessively about the Russians cheating and anti-Jews. And he never wanted to play chess with me.”>
|Mar-24-17|| ||ughaibu: Joshka, you are seriously sick, please put yourself under care.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||Petrosianic: <TheFocus: I would probably be traumatized if I lost all my possessions.>|
Would you try to have someone killed?
|Mar-24-17|| ||HeMateMe: <Caissanist> Probably because judit could beat him, at that point in time. An unlikable house guest, I think.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||Petrosianic: <Caissanist: Susan has been mostly charitable when talking about Fischer,>|
Yes and no. Susan has revealed that she played games against Fischer and won some and expressed great happiness with her score, while refusing to reveal the results because she didn't want to embarrass Fischer.
So, how charitable is that? She's claiming to have done really well against him under the guise of saying nothing at all. To say nothing would have meant really saying nothing. Not confirming that she'd played, not confirming that she'd won, and giving no hints about how well you did. Basically she's bragging about her results against Fischer in a plausibly deniable way. If you want to brag, go ahead, but don't pretend that you're not.
|Mar-24-17|| ||Joshka: <PhilFeeley> Well all those games with Susan, as she has pointed out many many times, are Fischer random. She herself has made comments about how the games are not too much in favor of Bobby. Of course this is not verbatim, it's just the idea that I took from her comments. It makes sense, she would not want to be the one who discloses games, in which Bobby is embarrassed, IMHO.|
|Mar-24-17|| ||Joshka: <TheFocus> Rene Chun would be another author/writer I'd interview to ad input. Chun was working on the "Cradle to Grave " bio at one time. Lane is an excellent choice as well!!|
|Mar-24-17|| ||The Boomerang: ": Fischer is in a tier above KARPY....
Fischer is unique ...
Karpov is just another product of the Soviet industrialized chess machine .."
Yeah you could tell with the 4-1 drubbing of Spassky by Karov in 1974 compared to Fischers 1972 7-2 score.
A tier above indeed...
|Mar-24-17|| ||fedalio: <philfeeley> <Joshua> Not sure Polgar says anything, it is usually Paul "fought off a pack of sharks" Truong speaking.|
|Mar-25-17|| ||Joshka: The comments from Susan were in person many years ago at the US Open, Florida 2004. She of course was VERY careful how she responded to my quires, but I believe she left a little inference that supports what I wrote previously on the subject.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2152 OF 2152 ·