|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jul-19-20
 | | HeMateMe: I think if Fischer had played in the '67 Candidates matches he would have lost to Spassky in the final. Spassky was the world's best player, and went on to beat Petrosian and become world champion. Fischer doubted his ability to stop his biggest rival, a guy he has a <minus> lifetime percentage against. That's why Bob sat out another three year cycle. |
|
Jul-20-20
 | | AylerKupp: <<HeMateMe> I think if Fischer had played in the '67 Candidates matches he would have lost to Spassky in the final.> I'm not so sure. In the unofficial 1967 FIDE rating list (prepared by Dr. Elo so I suspect that they were as accurate as they could be) Spassky and Fischer were both rated at 2670 and co-ranked #1. And Fischer was playing great chess since the second half of the 1966 2nd Piatigorsky Cup tournament when, starting at the half-way mark in Round 9, he scored 6.0/7 and caught Spassky for the lead on Round 16. He then scored 14-2-1 in the 1966 Olympiad in Havana, 8-3-0 (1st place) in the 1966 US Chess Tournament in New York, 6-2-0 (1st place) in 1967 Monaco, 12-3-2 (1st place) in 1967 Skopje, and had scored 7-3-0 in the 1967 Interzonal at Sousse before he self-destructed. Had he not done so he probably would have finished high in the standings at Sousse very likely qualified for the Candidates Tournament. Results for Spassky in that period were harder to find. He was very busy that year but his results were uneven. He did very well at the 1966 2nd Piatigorsky Cup, 5-13-0 (1st place), 1966 Olympiad Havana, 4-9-0, 1967 USSR Championship Sochi 10.0/15 (1st-5th places), 1967 Winnipeg, 5.5/9 (3rd-4th places), and 1967 Beverwijk Hoogovens (11.0/15 (1st place). But his other results were not as outstanding; e.g. 1967 Moscow, +4=11-2 (6th-8th places),, 1967 Budapest, 2.5/4 (6th-9th). And there were several other events I was not able to find. So I would say that his results, while certainly not bad, may not have been up to the level of a WCC Challenger. So I would think that Fischer's chances would be no worse then 50/50 for finishing ahead of Spassky and becoming Petrosian's Challenger in 1969. |
|
| Jul-20-20 | | carpovius: <AylerKupp> Your comparative analysis of tournaments results is interesting but it doesn't look like a proof of 50/50 chances. By the end of sweet 60s Spassky was at his peak while Fisher still climbed. |
|
Jul-20-20
 | | harrylime: <<AylerKupp: <<harrylime> You don't get it >
Oh, I get it perfectly, and I have for a long time. But what I get has nothing to do with Fischer. I just like pulling your leg and showing you up on occasion by putting you in a position where the only thing you can think of saying to try to justify your inanities is repeating the same drivel over and over again. LOL, LOL, LOL, ...> >
I don't believe you.
YOU ARE A FISCHER HATER.
Play it on ere as you like ...
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz |
|
Jul-20-20
| | HeMateMe: < And Fischer was playing great chess..> He was also playing great chess when Spassky created a record of +2, -3=5 record against Fischer. What good is playing great tournament chess if you can't beat your main rival? In 1968 Spassky was at his peak and would become world champion the next year. He was not playing his best chess four years later in 1972, was no longer at his peak. That should be obvious. Spassky publicly admits becoming disillusioned with the game and representing the Soviet Union. In a very close match I would predict spassky winning by one point, had they played a 1968 Candidates match to challenge Petrosian. |
|
Jul-20-20
| | harrylime: <<HeMateMe: < And Fischer was playing great chess..> He was also playing great chess when Spassky created a record of +2, -3=5 record against Fischer. What good is playing great tournament chess if you can't beat your main rival?
In 1968 Spassky was at his peak and would become world champion the next year. He was not playing his best chess four years later in 1972, was no longer at his peak. That should be obvious. Spassky publicly admits becoming disillusioned with the game and representing the Soviet Union. In a very close match I would predict spassky winning by one point, had they played a 1968 Candidates match to challenge Petrosian.>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
lol lol lol lol lol
Play another song sam |
|
Jul-20-20
| | HeMateMe: what will happen first Harry?
1. England wins mens World Cup football
2. England has a mens' chess world champion?
3. John Lennon comes out of retirement for a Beatles reunion? |
|
Jul-20-20
| | harrylime: <<HeMateMe: what will happen first Harry?
1. England wins mens World Cup football
2. England has a mens' chess world champion?
3. John Lennon comes out of retirement for a Beatles reunion?> >Or Travis Bickle wakes Ooooooooooooop lol lol |
|
Aug-01-20
| | AylerKupp: <<harrylime> I don't believe you. > Why would I possibly care whether you believe me or not? You live in your own little world where reality doesn't count for anything. Enjoy it. <YOU ARE A FISCHER HATER.> Hate is too strong an emotion to waste on either Fischer or you. P.S. I think I struck a nerve. LOL !, LOL !!, LOL !!! |
|
| Aug-01-20 | | ewan14: "" Sixties ""
five encounters , Spassky victorious ; 1960 , 1966
1970
Fischer not there yet |
|
| Aug-01-20 | | ewan14: Limeball , Joseph Cotton rules |
|
| Aug-01-20 | | ewan14: HeMateMe - wrong ####ing flag ! |
|
Aug-01-20
| | AylerKupp: <<carpovius> Your comparative analysis of tournaments results is interesting but it doesn't look like a proof of 50/50 chances.> <Proof> is a hard thing to provide, as shown by many posters' attempts to <prove> that after 29...Bxh2 in Spassky vs Fischer, 1972 that either White had a definite win or Black had a definite draw after that move. Currently the <data> and <evidence> points to the latter after 29...Bxh2, while there is <proof> that after 39...f5 White has a definite win. So I didn't intend my comments as <proof>, just <data> and/or <evidence> to make my opinion seem more than just totally arbitrary. But my comment about 50/50 chances is still just my opinion and, like I said, I wasn't even sure of it. I'm glad that at least you thought that my comparative analysis of tournament results was interesting. And I do think you're right that at the end of the 1960s Spassky had probably reached his peak and Fischer was still climbing, and shortly thereafter there wasn't much doubt as to which one was the better player. That's what makes Fischer's early effective retirement at his peak from top-level chess such a tragedy for the game. Who knows how much higher he might have gone? |
|
| Apr-29-21 | | King.Arthur.Brazil: So much can be said about GELLER's play that is not directly related to FISCHER's game. As someone would know, Fischer gives scandals, irritates every time he can the opponent, and maybe one tactic he applied in this game could be "I don't accept a draw". So, you make your opponent get tired looking for I tied game where the only real thing that Fischer does, is to move his peaces waiting for some opponent mistake. This is his strategy: I'll play anything until my opponent commit some mistake. I guess this is not a 'good chess' but a psychopathic chess: I'll win anyway! Of course, for Geller that is a tied game which his is forced to play, therefore, in some moment he will fail, that imprecise move is fatal, and game over. That's what this game was about, im my opinion. |
|
| Apr-29-21 | | George Wallace: Fischer was the greatest of all time and dominated his peers in a way that no one else has done since then. Even today if you look at the live rating list, Fischer would be around #4 in the world - with a rating from 1972. There's a lot of America hate going around these days. People resent Fischer because he was an America and they resent America for being so great. It's an ugly mixture of pride and jealousy that stirs up this Fischer-Hate. Two chess players stand out more than any other in history: Paul Morphy and Bobby Fischer and they are both Americans. America number one baby! |
|
Apr-29-21
 | | saffuna: <So, you make your opponent get tired looking for I tied game where the only real thing that Fischer does, is to move his peaces waiting for some opponent mistake. This is his strategy: I'll play anything until my opponent commit some mistake.> That's a perfectly legitimate strategy. Force the opponent to make the best move again and again. I think it's what Carlsen used to do in seemingly even positions, and earned him quite a few wins. |
|
| Apr-29-21 | | King.Arthur.Brazil: About Fischer & Spassky, the world changed when Botvinnik finally left his crown. Perhaps the new Kings did not have the same level of strength as Botvinnik, so the depression resulting from finally becoming a world champion, and the following, the only expectation was to keep the crown. It is very hard, because you are not really so prepared to keep it for so long, as Botvinnik did in his time. The change was so great, that even Fischer felt deeply, and started to have excuses for not accepting to throw his crown against anyone. The same Fischer stopped to play US Open after he wan more than ten times. You can see that also, when Smyslov stops playing the boring and heavy Soviet championship (as he was obliged to do years before, thanks to the communist party), and participates in other international championships that were more interesting (about prizes, money, being a winner, having excuses to be abroad - away from Moscow, you can say that). You realize how difficult this pressure of being a champion is, when you see the same great champions as Karpov, Kasparov and others, not playing very well when trying to hold his own crown. Therefore, the modern chess world did not give the champions much time to reinforce their positions before being defeated by the new candidates. It was this pressure that made Tal and Smyslov lose the rematch against Botvinnik, and that Petrosian did not resist Spassky a second time, and that Keres never made it reach to the crown, because every time he tried, he failed before. In the past, Capablanca did not give Lasker a chance to regain the title, Alekhine fled a Capablanca "rematch". And so, the story points to the same phenomena: the fear of losing the crown, which is more harmful and heavier to the mind, than the dispute itself, especially when some (unexpected) defeat occurs during the match. |
|
| Apr-30-21 | | W Westerlund: "Fischer was the greatest of all time and dominated his peers in a way that no one else has done since then. " In Europe we laugh at this nonsense. Morphy was never world champion, he was indeed American, although his father also had Spanish nationality and his mother was French creole. You have to come from somewhere. Fischer's mother was a Jewish immigrant and a communist and his father was an Hungarian Jew and also a communist (if I'm not mistaken). As you all know, Fischer played zero games as WC. According to the Fischer church - psychosis, he was the greatest of all - more so than Steinitz, Lasker, Capablanca and all the rest. In the meantime, you have a lot of GMs there and if it is not enough Sinquefield will buy some more. The fact remains that Carlsen is WC and before him there were people like Anand, Kramnik, Kasparov and Karpov. Just keep repeating your stupidity. For the record: I know nobody who thinks that the US is so great. On the contrary, we all feel very lucky that we do not live there. |
|
| Apr-30-21 | | W Westerlund: And now I am leaving. I had enough of Harry Lime and company. Goodbye to you all. |
|
Apr-30-21
 | | MissScarlett: <And now I am leaving. I had enough of Harry Lime and company. Goodbye to you all.> Reported. |
|
May-16-21
 | | kingscrusher: This game reminds me of one of those Magnus Carlsen rook and pawn endgame wins vs Vishy Anand. Sometimes chess is a sport trying to just get the opponent to blunder under pressure and tiredness. |
|
| Oct-09-21 | | nummerzwei: Could Fischer have won the double rook endgame? Unlike a regular rook endgame, two pawns against one generally give great winning chances. For example, 58...g4 looks good for Black here. |
|
Oct-09-21
| | harrylime: <<kingscrusher: This game reminds me of one of those Magnus Carlsen rook and pawn endgame wins vs Vishy Anand. Sometimes chess is a sport trying to just get the opponent to blunder under pressure and tiredness.>> Only Bobby was doing it in the 1950's
lol lol lol
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz |
|
Oct-09-21
| | harrylime: <<nummerzwei: Could Fischer have won the double rook endgame?>> Fischer is the greatest. So the answer to this is a big fat YES |
|
Oct-09-21
| | harrylime: Always goes quiet
lol lol lol
Love this soite loike. Loike. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
