Of course you could be right, but how could one know, one way or the other, what Spassky's motivations really were? Your point about his entry into the candidates is well taken, but he wasn't exactly one-and-done in those trips: He had an even score against his combined opponents in the 1974, 1977, and 1980 series, winning 3 matches, losing 2, and drawing, 1. I would think an unmotivated guy who got gifted into the Candidates series would get bounced out in short order.

Fischer thought world chess was crooked after Curacao , and his non participation had everything to do with this , and nothing to do with his assessment of his own strength. Anybody who knew Fischer in the 60's would tell you that he considered himself the best player in the world when he was 20. He put nobody ahead of himself.

His doubts were concerned with the political and organisational aspects of the chess world in the 60's , not his own playing strength.

You know as well as I that Fischer was romping away with that '67 interzonal.Had he stayed in it he would've finished at the top of the table. He was on 8.5 / 10 when he departed, 4 rounds not played. His chess was powerful and exuding creativity. If as you state Bent was actually leading at the time of his withdrawal, it's only because Fischer was playing catch up 4 games behind.

In retrospect, perhaps Fischer's only real threat on his title run was Korchnoi.

I always thought Karpov retained his focus for two good reasons: 1) The shadow of Fischer haunted world chess for 15 years after his disappearance. Karpov had to 'prove' he was worthy, and gobbled up tournament prizes like M&Ms.

Ofcourse I know that. I meant that at the time he withdrew he had 4 games on hold so to speak, which had not been played. I ony stated this because 'Petrosianic' challenged my belief that he withdrew whilst in the lead.

Hort and Gligoric were by this time 'meat' to Bobby. Geller and Larsen would've represented tougher tests I agree. It's pretty obvious to most though that Fischer would've won this tournament had he stayed involved.

@ HeMateMe

Fischer only got into the '72 cycle by virtue of Benko stepping aside. If this had not have happened he'd have not played in that either, and you would be saying that this was Boris fear too lol.

Fact is Fischer considered Tal and Petrosian the main threats in the first half of the 60's, and in the latter he withdrew from Sousse having disagreements with the organisers, nothing to do with Spassky.

Fischer penned some attention-grabbing articles in the first half of the 60's: "A Bust to the King's Gambit" (1961), "The Russians Have Fixed World Chess" (1962), and one I find relevant to this discussion, "The Ten Greatest Masters in History" (1964). Who were Bobby's ten picks?

Alexander Alekhine
Jose Raul Capablanca
Paul Morphy
Samuel Reshevsky
BORIS SPASSKY
Howard Staunton
Wilhelm Steinitz
MIKHAIL TAL
Seigbert Tarrasch
Mikhail Chigorin

Well obviously I think you're wrong,and we won't agree regarding this.

Fischer's self belief was enormous, he put nobody ahead of himself.Nobody.

What was a shock to him was the transparent collusion between the Soviets and their overwhelming influence on the political side of the chess world. That's what Fischer was up against and had to fight. Over the board he feared no one..

<Much as I admire and respect Spassky, you over estimate his impact upon Fischer's mind > In 1992 Fischer chose Spassky for a match, to be played in Croatia and Serbia. Fischer could have received more money and far more respect in the chess world for playing a more contemporary star, like Kasparov or Karpov. But, RJF returns to 1) the opponent in his greatest triumph, and 2) to give another beating to the only player he feared, as a younger man. And, he never played a serious match again.

In a way that's true, but he was deathly afraid of "accidents". That was why he quit US Championship play. The close call in 1962 and again in 1965 left him afraid that he might lose his title despite being the best player.

<What was a shock to him was the transparent collusion between the Soviets and their overwhelming influence on the political side of the chess world.>

Korchnoi was of the opinion that Fischer quietly recanted his charges against him and wasn't big enough to say so. At least he said that they never discussed it but always had good relations afterwards, which they shouldn't have had if Fischer really believed Korchnoi had thrown games to ensure a Fischer defeat.

As for the draws, Fischer wasn't afraid of them. Tal and Petrosian had drawn 4 limp games in 1959, and Fischer never said that if this happened again, he couldn't win. The meat of his charges was that Korchnoi had thrown games, but there were problems with that idea even at the time, and several key facts that Fischer left out of his article. There was no evidence of collusion presented. Riverbeast spent 6 months of his life trying to prove this, and failed to present a single piece of evidence other than the popular wisdom that "everybody knows it". What happened at the tournament was certainly a distasteful aspect of modern chess. The leaders drew with each other and focused on the weakies. Not pretty, but not all that unusual either (see the Needleman incident a few years ago for a really offensive example).

Ah come on ! Ofcourse there was evidence of collusion at Curacao, and ofcourse it's obvious that there were three players whose games whenever they met always terminated around move 20.Namely Geller, Keres, and Petrosian. This started happening right from the start, so nothing to do with the overall dynamics of the tournament.

As for Fischer and his ' deathly accidents' ?! lol He stopped playing in the US championships due to either lack of financial backing and prestige, or lack of competition. To imply he was scared of losing in the US championship is absurd, but does'nt surprise me in this place.

@HeMateMe

So you refer to RJF as a 'bad machine'? Ok!

Yuo seem to be confusing his extreme neurosis in his later life with his chess playing days, and lumping them all together. No doubt Fischer was a little e4ccentric in the 50's and 60's, but this was not the extreme paranoia and mental illness we witnessed much later. And many of these ' eccentricities' have explicitly improved chess for the modern GM.

There's evidence that the top players drew with each other and beat up on the weakies. But that's not what Fischer meant by collusion. If he had, he'd have blamed Tal for the 4 quick draws with Petrosian in 1959, which he didn't. You're confusing one objectionable thing with another objectionable thing.

<As for Fischer and his ' deathly accidents' ?! lol He stopped playing in the US championships due to either lack of financial backing and prestige, or lack of competition. To imply he was scared of losing in the US championship is absurd,>

Are you calling Fischer a liar? Or are you simply unaware of what he said on the matter, and didn't bother to do any research before forming your own opinion? I have read what he said on the matter, and it had nothing to do with the US Championship being too easy to bother playing in. Since the 1969 Championship was a Zonal, that would have been a really idiotic reason not to play in it.

You are quite wrong in interpreting everything Fischer demanded and wanted back then as fear. I'm pretty certain fear was the last thing on his mind regarding the domestic American chess scene. lol

As for Curacao, well mate, it's really right before your eyes, the writing is on the can so to speak ... if you can't or don't want to see that, so be it.