|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 129 OF 129 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
May-06-21
 | | perfidious: <keypusher> is obviously using the term 'Communist' with heavy irony here, though Botvinnik, as few others did, personified Soviet Man in all outward behaviour. |
|
May-06-21
 | | keypusher: <Viking707: keypusher: the term "communist" is inappropriate. > It's irritating to get a post like this after I wrote <* I'm using the term "Communist" loosely, obviously.>. <I have no idea what the political ideologies of Botvinnik, Smyslov or Tal were>. If you have <no idea> about a topic, don't post about it. Botvinnik really was a Communist, apparently to the extent of criticizing the CPSU when he thought it wasn't being communist enough. According to Kramnik he maintained his belief in communism even after the USSR collapsed. Smyslov was, I understand, a Christian. I have a hard time seeing Tal subscribing to any doctrine, sacred or profane, but he seems to have been happy and even eager to help Spassky against Fischer (see <Russians vs. Fischer>, p. 315) and, later, Karpov against Korchnoi. Whatever that's worth. But <Joshka>, to whom I was responding, was obviously applying "Communist" indiscriminately to the Soviet Union and everyone in it. Hence my usage of the term. |
|
May-06-21
 | | Joshka: <Viking707> Is that chess bookstore on Newbury St. about a block or two from Mass Ave. still open?? I never realized folks wrote books on chess until I stumbled into that bookstore way back in 1978 while the Karpov-Korchnoi Match was taking place!! thanks in advance!! |
|
May-06-21
| | perfidious: <joshie>, the bookstore closed soon after your visit. I got there the following year and that was all. |
|
May-06-21
| | Joshka: <keypusher> Yes , I've read that Smyslov was a Christian as well, so that cancels him out of the Communist Party. Karpov is a devout Communist, accepted the "Order of Lenin" but also enjoys the riches of Capitalism as a millionaire;-) Tal and Kasparov I'm not quite sure about, although I think I read that Garry's mother was a devout Christian she recently has passed on. Fischer belonged to a fundamentalist Christian sect back in the late 60's early 70's. Didn't Spassky renounce his Communist upbringing? |
|
May-06-21
 | | harrylime: Fischer would have killed Karpov in 75. |
|
May-06-21
 | | Diademas: <harrylime: Fischer would have killed Karpov in 75.> I guess he was crazy enough. Maybe for the best that he didn't show up. |
|
May-06-21
 | | saffuna: Maybe, maybe Karpov was too young and inexperienced in 1975. But even Kasparov never "killed" Karpov. His victory in every match was about as narrow as could be. |
|
May-06-21
| | harrylime: <<Diademas: <harrylime: Fischer would have killed Karpov in 75.>
I guess he was crazy enough. Maybe for the best that he didn't show up.>> Over the 64 squares NUMPTIE |
|
May-06-21
| | harrylime: <<saffuna: Maybe, maybe Karpov was too young and inexperienced in 1975.
But even Kasparov never "killed" Karpov. His victory in every match was about as narrow as could be.>> Yes. Nice point. Very true. |
|
May-06-21
| | perfidious: Even Karpov rated his own chances as no better than being a 3-2 dog in 1975. Karpov was a born match player, and it took everything Kasparov had, and who made himself into an outstanding one, to overcome his great adversary. |
|
| May-06-21 | | Petrosianic: <harry david chapman> <Fischer would have killed Karpov in 75.> Nice choice of words, Killer. |
|
| May-06-21 | | Petrosianic: <keypusher>: <Yes, I think you're right that there was no rematch clause in 1975, but Karpov got one in 1978. IIRC Ed Edmondson backed Karpov's request for a rematch clause because he was trying to get Karpov's help to get Fischer to play again. But that is a very vague recollection.> What happened is that Karpov didn't want to play an Unlimited match. He wanted to go back to Best of 24. Edmondson and the USCF very much wanted to try the Unlimited Match, a) because it was Fischer's proposal, and b) because a lot of people back then really believed that it would reduce the number of draws (the 1978 and 1984 matches killed that idea and the Unlimited Match, but that was later). So, Edmondson went to Karpov and agreed on a compromise whereby Karpov would play an Unlimited Match in exchange for USCF's support for a rematch clause. |
|
| May-06-21 | | Petrosianic: Incidentally, before the Rematch Clause was reinstated, there was another forgotten rule that was intended to give the champion a slight advantage: Namely that the Champion gets White in Game 1. That way, if the match ends, say, 6-5 with with 22 draws, then the champion will have had one extra White. An advantage, but a very minimal one. But that rule was tossed out when the rematch clause was reinstated, and Korchnoi had White in Game 1 of the 1978 match. |
|
May-06-21
| | harrylime: <<perfidious: Even Karpov rated his own chances as no better than being a 3-2 dog in 1975.
Karpov was a born match player, and it took everything Kasparov had, and who made himself into an outstanding one, to overcome his great adversary.>> Fischer is/was just a better player than Karpov. Play thru Karpov's games and itza chore ... it's hard work lol lol lol Play thru Fischer's games is a delight ... and is a journey into the heart of chess .. The karpov v Korchnoi match in 1978 was just embarrassing .. Korchnoi missed a mate in four in one game Fischer is simply a better chess player than Karpov. |
|
May-06-21
| | perfidious: It became clear why unlimited matches did not suit Karpov: he only survived the 1978 tilt with Korchnoi after blowing a three-game lead, then beating the spots off Viktor Lvovich three years on when the latter clearly had little chance, then got ground down physically and mentally in the first go-round with Kasparov. |
|
May-07-21
| | harrylime: I think people have difficulty just accepting Robert Fischer was/is a better chess player than Anatoly Karpov. |
|
May-07-21
 | | WorstPlayerEver: Weird, Fischer never played chess with Karpov. |
|
| May-07-21 | | optimal play: <perfidious: Karpov was a born match player> <perfidious: It became clear why unlimited matches did not suit Karpov> How can someone be a "born match player" yet not be suited to unlimited matches? Someone who is a "born match player" is presumably suited to any kind of match under any kind of conditions, otherwise it is erroneous to describe him as a "born match player". |
|
May-07-21
 | | Dionysius1: <harrylime> Are you confusing "more entertaining" with "better"? |
|
| May-07-21 | | Petrosianic: <harry david chapman> <I think people have difficulty just accepting Robert Fischer was/is a better chess player than Anatoly Karpov.> That's partly because of you, Killer. If you'd just switch from blindly worshiping Fischer to blindly worshiping Karpov, Fischer would get a lot of new support. But then you don't want that, because you've admitted that you actually hate the real Fischer. |
|
| May-07-21 | | Petrosianic: <beatgiant: My understanding of the facts: Fischer could have defended the title in 1975 under the same conditions as Petrosian (1965, 1968) and Spassky (1972).> Probably. The 1971 FIDE Congress in Vancouver had voted to make the 1975 match go to 10 wins. But then they capped it at 36 games. There seems to have been some confusion on this, as some of Fischer's own people, like Fred Cramer, thought this was still basically Fischer's rules. But this is the one and only point that Charles Kalme was right about. 10 Wins No Limit is a totally different match format than 10 Wins, 36 games max. The first format has a Wins <requirement>. The second has no requirement at all, only a Wins <option>. In theory the match could still go +0=0=36. <He also could have played in 1975 under the conditions "unlimited number of games, first to win 10" that he demanded, but without the 9-9 tie clause.> Correct, but not right away. As I say, in 1971, FIDE voted to make the 1975 match go to 10 wins. In June 1974 they voted to limit it to 36 games. At that point, Fischer immediately resigned his title, without making any effort to fight further. (Mind you, with a 36 game limit, Fischer would still have retained the title on an 18-18 tie, so he could have had draw odds or an Unlimited Match, but not both). Ed Edmondson kept negotiating behind the scenes, though. In early 1975 Ed got FIDE to agree to take away the 36 Game limit and make it an Unlimited Match again, but without a 9-9 tie clause. Fischer still refused to play. <I think (but am not sure) that there was no rematch clause, which was why there was no attempt to organize one in 1976.> Completely correct.
<Also, Fischer was seeded into the 1977 Candidates matches but declined to participate. His spot was given to Spassky.> Also correct. In those days the Candidates had 8 players, consisting of 6 interzonal qualifiers and two seeds. The seeds were the loser of the world championship match (Fischer), and the loser of the candidates final (Korchnoi). When Fischer dropped out, the alternates were the losers from the 1974 Candidates semifinals. These were Petrosian and Spassky. Petrosian had already qualified, so it went to Spassky. If Spassky had declined, it would have gone to Robert Byrne, simply because he was the ONLY other player from the 1974 Candidates that wasn't involved in the 1977 candidates (Mecking, Polugaevsky, and Portisch had also already qualified). |
|
May-07-21
| | Joshka: The person who really should know all the ins and outs of what conditions were allowed for 1978 is <Raymond Keene> with regards to Petrosian and the others. He was heavily involved in FIDE proceedings, and wrote many books on the World Chess Championships! That's the authority to whom we need to address some of these questions. |
|
| May-07-21 | | Petrosianic: <The person who really should know all the ins and outs of what conditions were allowed for 1978 is <Raymond Keene> with regards to Petrosian and the others.> Keene doesn't disagree with anything I just said. It's all public knowledge, as printed in Chess Life & Review. If you think he does, or should disagree on something or other, point him this way. But he won't. |
|
May-08-21
| | WorstPlayerEver: https://www.imago-images.com/st/007...
https://www.theguardian.com/artandd... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 129 OF 129 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
