Chess World Championship

[fnurt]

I used to be USCF 2100 back in high school although I really wasn't that good. The chess scene has changed so much in the last 20 years, it's like you can't throw a rock without hitting a Russian grandmaster you've never even heard of. Back in the day it was like Boris Gulko representing the entire population of the USSR.

As someone who hasn't followed chess at all in decades, I can't tell you how funny it is to see the same old stunts at the World Championship. It's like Korchnoi and Karpov all over again. Imagine if every single time Cal played Stanford the band ran on the field in the middle of the game.

There are very few things in this world, however, that are quite as idiotic as chess politics. I mean, Congress looks like a MENSA meeting compared to the petty issues and rivalries that divide the chess world. I do remember one year when I was a delegate to the annual USCF convention and we spent like 2 hours debating an utterly meaningless resolution to "declare" Bobby Fischer the world champion. If you told me that they still spend 2 hours debating that same resolution every year, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.

[Lori]

I think my best ever season converts to around 1950, which is bad enough.

I suspect I'd be more like 1800 now though.

Lori

[Lori]

Game 8 starts shortly

The link to Susan's blog will be the same as previously posted.

Lori

[Lori]

Just a quick note to say that this looks like being a good game (rook for two knights) in case anyone was wavering on watching or not.

Lori

[David Ottosen]

[ QUOTE ]
TimM, Dynasty and Curtains are among the best chess players on the site.


[/ QUOTE ]

Curtains is far and away the best player on the site. The best chess player who frequently plays poker as well is probably Grischuk - he's in the top 20 in the world and played in the EPT Monte Carlo main event.

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I've read many who believed that Fischer's move was indeed a 'blunder'. Your opinion may indeed be valid (not sure, I'm not very good) but certainly the idea that it was just a 'terrible blunder' isn't an uncommon one either.
Here's what wikipedia said about that game:

[ QUOTE ]
No one knows what went on in Fischer's mind when he blundered with 29... Bxh2?? (see algebraic chess notation) in this rather lifeless position. Every chess beginner learns that the rook pawn is poisoned for the Bishop. Could Fischer really have missed 30. g3 h5 31. Ke2 h4 32. Kf3 h3 33. Kg4 Bg1 34. Kxh3 Bxf2 35. Bd2, trapping the bishop? . Surprisingly, Fischer had good drawing chances with two pawns for the Bishop ... He resigned on move 56.

[/ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

What you quote is just one guy's opinion [on Wiki of all places?]. Deeper published research into the position showed that it was really more ...BxP?! with complications for both sides. Whoever edited the wiki is going with the 'popular' analysis rather than the more honest and correct one. Fischer was trying to maximize the pressure on Spasski from Game 1, and it ultimately worked. He won a similar game against Yefim Geller where he just kept moving the pieces around, trying to win a 'drawn' game, and finally doing so, and Geller was the only player with a winning record v him since 1965.

It was by no means the 'losing' move as any site will tell you, Fischer had two more drawing chances but just pushed too hard for the win. That is inarguable. It is laughable that anyone would think Fischer would miss a 4 move-forced combo to hang his bishop. I can't think of a single example post 1960 where he made any move that bad. Perhaps you can.

Saying this is his most 'famous move' is ludicrous, try his Queen Sac v D.Byrne or 18 ...NxG2 v Rob Byrne which led to resignation in 3, with GM Rossolimo calling it a won game for Byrne!
'Fischer’s 21-move win in round three against Robert Byrne, who had the nickname of “invincible” because of his super-solid play in those days, garnered the brilliancy prize. K. F. Kirby, the then editor of the South African Chess Quarterly, described his feelings about what many regard as the finest miniature in the long history of chess: “The Byrne game was quite fabulous, and I cannot call to mind anything to parallel it. After White’s eleventh move I should adjudicate his position as slightly superior, and at worst completely safe. To turn this into a mating position in eleven more moves is more witchcraft than chess!” Yet Byrne’s resignation in this game is arguably the best known element in the legend of this famed brilliancy.'

For a true ?? Blunder, see - 'The fifth game was another Nimzo-Indian, and Spassky continued his passive style of play. After some aimless wood-pushing, he got into the position in the diagram on the right. Perhaps his game was lost anyway, but he gifted it to Fischer on a platter with 27. Qc2?? Bxa4 0-1.'

I haven't played seriously in years so am not very good and nowhere near Greg or the other good players here. I did hang my Queen in a won game v Dmitry Schnieder, maybe I'll post that in POG.

[NajdorfDefense]

Here's Geller's blown endgame v Fischer from the 1970 IZ, Geller was leading the tourney at the time and would qualify for Candidates:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044663

By move 25, there were 3 v 4 pawns and only rooks on the board, Geller had offered a draw and Fischer turned him down. Soviet GMs at the tourney were quoted as saying, 'Why does Fischer not accept draws in such positions? Drawing for Russian players here is simply a matter of technique.'

At 65 there are just 2 rooks and 3 pawns left.
Geller then blunders on 67 and resigns a few moves later.

[NajdorfDefense]

Regarding move 29 in Game 1: Fischer was asked if he was trying to create winning chances by complicating a drawn position, and his reply was "Basically that's right. Yes".

However, after adjournment he told IM Lombardy he had also played too fast. So, the final decision is either 29...BxP? or 29...BxP?!, depending, as Black still had the draw before giving away the game.

[vanwely]

[ QUOTE ]
Im curious if any of the posters here have a decent rating?? I sure don't but curious about others...
Naj, Microbob, anyone???? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

29 Van Wely, Loek g NED 2676 15 1972

[David Ottosen]

[ QUOTE ]
29 Van Wely, Loek g NED 2676 15 1972

[/ QUOTE ]

Dont' you say in another thread (today!) that you have voted such and such way in US elections since 1976? Loek Van Wely is not a US citizen and would not be voting in US elections.