|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 254 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-31-03 | | uponthehill: I know, but Korchnoi writes so in his book titled "Antichess" about Spassky: "We started the match as friends, we ended it like enemies (...) I cannot forgive him that he changed that match into polygon for Russians, in which they were experimenting against me" [match in 1968] But he also writes that Spassky was always anti-totalitarian and despite that event, he do not feel any resentment against him. |
|
| Jul-31-03 | | PVS: Korchnoi played angry against people, every match opponent he ever had ended up his enemy. His first Candidates match with Spassky in 1968 ruptured the friendship. He is a very disagreeable man and Spassky was always well liked by the majority of chessplayers. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | tud: Karpov was not very much loved. First mistake, we was champion after Fischer. Second mistake he didn't have any problems to beat Korchnoi (his physical constitution was not great after game 24, that's right, but Korchnoi never had a lead against him). Third mistake, he was the only real countercandidate Kasparov, a true genius, ever had. Give me a break with Kramnik. Fourth mistake, he was not communist, he was not pro or anti-something, he was pro-Karpov, like Alekhine, Fischer and so many. Years will pass to create supergames like in Karpov-Kasparov matches. And the fact Kasparov hates him so much and writes about him the biggest chapter says everything. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | Sylvester: I thought Karpov was a big time commie. It wasn't just that he followed Fischer, but he refused to play him, so he stole the title. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | ksadler: <Sylvester> Ole Red,White, and Blue Bobby was the one who refused to play Karpov, not the other way around. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | Sylvester: < ksadler> You can dispute that, but I am saying one of the reasons he was not popular was he did not win the title. Everyone thought Fischer was better in 1975. I heard Fischer wanted to play a match to 10 wins and Karpov refused and the Russians ran to Fide and rigged a vote to steal the title. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | tud: Karpov said yes to Fischer's rules. It's Euwe who said no, this time (after helping so much against Spasski), and took Fischer's title. Karpov tried to contact Fischer using Marcos, the phillipenese president for a match. And Karpov was as commie as Kasparov, Smislov, Tal etc. He refused to condamn Korchnoi and basically became the first chess millionaire. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | Grooveboy: Karpov said on one of his videos that he was ready to sign the contract for their 1975 match, but that Fischer wanted the term "Professional" to be in title of World Champion. The Russians would not allow Karpov to play under this term, so they suggested other alternatives that would still make it 100% clear what the title represented. Fischer would not budge on this, and so no contract was signed. Whether or not you choose to believe Karpov's explanation is up to you. I really enjoy lookng at his games, and I think he is the 3rd greatest player all-time (1st being Kasparov, 2nd being Fischer). |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | tud: Between the real strong players I noticed the Queen Gambit, Ruy Lopez comes often. Look to Karpov - Kasparov and Alekhine - Capablanca. They don't fool too much with other openings because the smallest advantage results in a crash. |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | tud: Karpov vs Dorfman, 1976 and
Karpov vs Huebner, 1982 and
Karpov vs Korchnoi, 1974 and
Karpov vs Kasparov, 1984 This is the kind of stuff which explains Karpov. He is also together with Capablanca and Fischer in endgames virtuosity. And Korchnoi. |
|
| Aug-22-03 | | aulero: During a interview to introduce his recent book Kasparov said: "In Volume Three I argue that Karpov had a very good chance to beat Fischer in 75. I would even consider Karpov the favorite in 75. He was more flexible, he was from a new generation. Karpov's chess was multifaceted. Fischer would have had a very hard time, and I think Fischer knew that. I doubt Fischer would have avoided a match with Korchnoi and Spassky. Fischer was watching. Karpov beat Spassky in a more convincing way than Fischer did in 1972. Spassky played better against Karpov in 1974 than against Fischer in 1972, and he lost 7-4!". |
|
| Aug-22-03 | | PinkPanther: <Whether or not you choose to believe Karpov's explanation is up to you. I really enjoy lookng at his games, and I think he is the 3rd greatest player all-time (1st being Kasparov, 2nd being Fischer).> That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. But then again, if you list Kasparov as the number one player of all time then I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you have Karpov as number 3. Do you honestly think that those two (especially Karpov) outrank Morphy, Capablanca, Alekhine, Lasker, Steinitz? |
|
| Aug-22-03 | | tud: There is an interesting site www.chessmetrics.com. Some things are forced (like Fischer is #1 in a long and inactive period) but you will see Karpov #1 or #2 for more than 20 years AFTER WAR when chess is in a real explosion, not played every other year, here and there. Chess was big time competition and Karpov/Kasparov were #1, #2 between 1974-2000. It's the way I compare. I think Capablanca and Alekhine were better. For me, definitely Karpov is in the first five. Capablanca (because he never took a break between 1911-1940),Kasparov, Fischer (because he did it alone against the soviet chess machine), Alekhine (on the fourth place because he avoided Capablanca), and Karpov because in a period of big time competition and tournaments he spent 10 years alone and bored as #1. Never Botvinnik, Smislov, Spasski, Tal or Petrosian had this situation. Then he spent another 10 as alone and bored #2 behind the best chess player ever. Early years, with little tournaments here and there are harder to quantify. This is an opinion. |
|
| Aug-22-03 | | PVS: Karpov had a tremendous tournament record; people forget how impressive it was because Team Kasparov eclipsed it. There is some question as to the authenticity of Karpov's record. Soviet players were under orders not to beat him and most complied. Tal had to let him finish equal first in Montreal 1979. I read somewhere that Spassky's winning ahead of Karpov in Linares 1983 was the reason that he no longer played under the Soviet flag. |
|
| Aug-22-03 | | Shadout Mapes: The main declining factor in my respect for Karpov is that he's the world champ who's had the most help from other people. |
|
| Aug-22-03 | | tud: I don't really believe Tal, his friend, would have had a different faith than Spasski, Polugaevski or Korchnoi in a direct match. Karpov was a crystal clear #2 long after the communism got kicked out of Russia. |
|
| Aug-23-03 | | refutor: cite facts...where did you read that "tal had to let him finish equal first in montreal 1979"...prove it |
|
| Aug-23-03 | | siimens: well, from the book '1999' by J.Ehlvest: 'win against Karpov was a brave thing to do that time, Igor Ivanov [2 wins against Karpov in database from 1979] did that and took that 'investment' to the West, Tal didn't risk it in Montreal'
[Ivanov's been living in USA since] |
|
| Aug-23-03 | | tud: The game with Ivanov is duplicated. Geller, Taimanov, Beliavski and Balashov have also victories against Karpov and they stayed in Russia. It was difficult to play Karpov. When he lost the title he had to confront the whole army of good soviet players, Ivanchuk, Sokolov, Kamski. He did OK. You know what ? The commies had problems to let someone from outside to win, like Fischer or Korchnoi. For the rest they did not care so much. Their main pride was to to see the title disputed between them like in Kasparov - Karpov. |
|
| Aug-25-03 | | Grooveboy: <That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. But then again, if you list Kasparov as the number one player of all time then I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you have Karpov as number 3. Do you honestly think that those two (especially Karpov) outrank Morphy, Capablanca, Alekhine, Lasker, Steinitz?> I am not making my comments flippantly. First, I think it's impossible to really compare players of different generations - the game has changed so much even in the last 20 years! I mean no disrespect to the great players of the past. I am a HUGE fan of both Capablanca and Alekhine. But Kasparov has been the dominant force in the game for more the 20 years now! Here's my argument against the earlier players:
Morphy - Incredible player, but his W-L ratio is marred by the fact that most players he played were very weak (excluding Anderssen, of course). And he quit chess, didn't he? Capablanca - The only thing keeping Capa from the top of the list is the fact that he was lazy. Alekhine - Probably the greatest attacker ever, but his bad drinking habit made his game deteriorate (Eg. Losing to Euwe in 1935) Lasker - Hugely dominant in the early 1900's, but didn't play a WC match from 1910 - 1921, and then lost the first match he played after that (against Capa). Look at the recent dominant players. There level of defence, opening prep, and the fact that they have all of the info of historical players to learn from has to make them the "better" chess players. It is impossible to say if someone like Capa was around today, and had all the resources at his disposal, if he would be no. 1 or not. |
|
| Aug-25-03 | | Agueci: Who do you guys think is the better, Karpov OR Kasparov? To me, Kasparov, despite losing to Karpov in the recent blitz match they had in New York, or was it NY? Anyway, I think Kasparov has outdone Karpov, and its a matter that Kasparov has the killer instinct to win more than Karpov. Thats my oponion. Your thoughts? |
|
| Sep-01-03 | | Tecumseh: http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet... An irreverent website set up when this great champion was suing FIDE in 1998. It is good for one cheap laugh. |
|
| Sep-01-03 | | Benjamin Lau: <Tecumseh>
Lol, nice site. :-) Do you know any that lampoon the rest of the chess players? |
|
| Sep-27-03 | | Tecumseh: Karpov is still the most successful tournament player in history. I believe he's won about 150 first prizes in his career, you can quibble about one or two but that is still an impressive record. Had he played all his world championship matches under the best of 24 games format I believe he would have been world champion until 1990, maybe longer. Spassky cited him as the strongest player he ever faced after he lost a candidates match to him in 1974 and Korchnoi described getting squashed by him in 1981 as a good result ' so unbelievable was Karpov's superiority'. People criticise him for politiking, I tend to view him as a good company man. He didn't wreck the world championship system unlike some and he was always willing to play. The quality of his matches with Kasparov is very,very high. I think he is too often overlooked as one of the best of all time. |
|
| Sep-28-03 | | popski: A. K.: After being world champion several times, fighting for the title of champion of Russia does not appeal to me. A. K.: It is better to create new healthy organization than to nurse the old and sick one (FIDE). http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 254 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
