Kasparov vs Karpov, 1984

[atrifix]

What I mean is that a lot of them will want to play through whatever ill health they have. Tal requested that his games even be played in the hospital. Of course the doctors refused that one.

[MicroBob]

by 'embarassingly poor format' I was referring to the single-elimination bracket thing they've done.

where if they are still tied after the initial longer games they go to some sudden-death deal where one of the players gets a minute less but gets draw odds or something ridiculous like that.

I mean, where do they come up ith such nonsense?

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
What I mean is that a lot of them will want to play through whatever ill health they have. Tal requested that his games even be played in the hospital. Of course the doctors refused that one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to mention Tal as well. All I seem to remember from Tal's book were constant health battles. Its been a while and I may be wrong.

[Dynasty]

I learned how to play chess by watching this match on PBS.

I was completely stunned and disapointed when it suddenly ended.

[MicroBob]

My area PBS wasn't even carrying it.

I was 13 and only got a newspaper account the following day which was really disappointing.

If it had been on TV in my area I would have been all over it (and probably taping every match).

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Without respect to what happened in this match, Karpov's weak health was well known, I think even by 1984.

[/ QUOTE ]I don't know what you mean by "weak health". Please provide some evidence to that effect. Anatoly Karpov's relatively smaller body and quiet personality hides an extremely tough, calculating and persistent chess player, who knew when to be tough and when to be cautious. (Remind you of anything, poker players? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) He's been a non-smoker all his life, suffered no serious illnesses and kept in as best a shape as he could throughout his chess career. His physical condition has always been excellent and played no small part in his superb tournament record throughout his reign as a world champion.

On the other hand, I already provided the testimonial of the person who is surely eminently qualified to speak about Anatoly Karpov's physical and mental health during the match, and especially in its later stage: Gary Kasparov, the opponent of Karpov in that match!

How can we seriously dispute his verdict ?

[ QUOTE ]
Longer matches were not [Karpov's] forte.

[/ QUOTE ]The 1984 championship match lasted 48 games and four months. The match between Viktor Korchnoi and Karpov in Baguio, Philippines lasted for 32 and games. Karpov showed absolutely no physical or mental deterioration due to the long duration of the match, or due to the controversies surrounding it.

With whom are you comparing Karpov's performance in a "long match", anyway ? Long matches were whose "forte" ? A match of 4-months duration is not something common at the top level.

[ QUOTE ]
Karpov was 33 and Kasparov was only 21. Obviously a longer match would favor Kasparov.

[/ QUOTE ]"Obviously"?! That's a 12-year difference. Viktor Korchnoi faced Karpov repeatedly in matches that were physically and psychologically much more exhausting (for both opponents) than anything that Karpov vs Kasparov subsequently offered. And Korchnoi was 20 years older than Karpov!

Ex-world champion Vassily Smyslov was a serious competitor in the candidates' matches well into old age. His ELO when he was 70 years old was a remarkable 2494.
We should respect the general rule about age difference but we also need to take into account the specifics of every person.

Anatoly Karpov's relatively smaller physique, introverted posture and quiet personality hide an extremely tough, calculating and persistent chess player, who knows when to be tough and when to be cautious. (Reminds you of anything, poker players? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) He was a non-smoker all his life, has followed very clean health regimen, suffered no serious illnesses and kept in as best a physical shape as he could throughout his chess career.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that chess is quite like poker, e.g., what is +EV for one player must be -EV for the other one.

[/ QUOTE ]Chess is a zero-sum game for the two persons competing over the board.

[ QUOTE ]
In this case both players and the rest of the chess world were unhappy with the decision.

[/ QUOTE ]If you are referring to decisions affecting the match, yes, we could have a decision whereby both chess players would benefit or lose. In the specific instance, I submitted the evidence why Karpov, rather than Kasparov was the losing party.

I repeat: Karpov was leading with 5-3 and needed only one win, to Kasparov's three, to win the match. Karpov's health was not an issue. (The Russians had asked formally for a break/postponement, and not an annulment.)Campomanes' decision, if any intervention was actually needed, should have been to introduce a break and postpone the match -- not annul it!

This is like a game of soccer whereby one team is leading by 5-0 and the losers start scoring three goals in the later stage of the match. There is an electricity blackout in the 75th minute and the referee stops the game. The rules correctly call for the game to re-start from where it stopped -- and not to be annulled altogether.

[ QUOTE ]
To postpone the match would have been terribly unfair to Kasparov. There had already been several timeouts in the match, and Kasparov had just won 3 games.

[/ QUOTE ] You erroneously asserted that Kasparov had won 3 games in a row. That is incorrect. Kasparov had won the last 2 games of the match, the 47th and the 48th. (Remember that Karpov came very close to winning game 41. Not bad for someone suffering from a "total breakdown".)

So why would it have been "terribly unfair" to Kasparov? He was trailing by 5-3. Kasparov himself stated quite clearly (before he reneged and started on a disinformation campaign, helped by the hack Raymond Keene) that he was quite happy to start playing Karpov again with 0-0, rather than trailing 5-3. I already provided Kasparov's quotes and the source.

Are we to dispute now Kasparov's statements on whether the decision to postpone the match was good for him or not?

[ QUOTE ]
Karpov's health was clearly deteriorating. He lost 22 pounds (around 15-20% of his body weight) during the match and had been hospitalised several times. If my memory is correct he was hospitalised at the time when Campomanes stopped the match.

[/ QUOTE ] That is incorrect, as I have explained many times already. There has been no "hospitalisation" of Karpov. There have been the usual and quite necessary time-outs for the players to recover mentally and physically, after a loss or during a weakening of abilities. But there was no "collapse". This is a myth created and perpetuated by the Campomanes camp and the Kasparov camp.

And Karpov lost 10 kgs (22 lbs) during the 4 months of the match (and not "rapidly" as had been asserted by supporters of the Campomanes' decision). Which did not represent "15-20% percent of his weight" however, since Karpov at the beginning weighted a little more than approximately 70 kgs.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with Kasparov there; by that measure, Philidor would have been the overwhelming favorite to beat Morphy and Fischer.

[/ QUOTE ] You disagree with Kasparov because you have mot understood what he said! He stated that one CANNOT in fact compare players across different eras. Therefore, your disagreement has no substance. Kasparov stated clearly that the only way to rate a master was to compare him with players of his era. And with that criterion, Kasparov asserted that Fischer, in view of his crushing predominance over all contemporaries, was probably the greatest champion ever.

[ QUOTE ]
I have not played or studied chess in some time, so it will be difficult for me to have a serious debate replete with sources.

[/ QUOTE ]Your OP in SMP gave me the opportunity to expand on a subject dear to me. Many thanks.

[Cyrus]

Game 41

In time trouble, Karpov plays 33.Rxd1 and misses 33.a6 that would have forced a win, ending the match with a 6-1 victory.

When a player brings forth such a winning position against his opponent and misses the win only on account of time trouble, we simply cannot say that he is suffering from a "complete breakdown".

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
If Kasparov himself was that angry when it was cancelled then this seems contrary to his statement that he only gave himself a 25-30% chance to win. If he really thought this then why would he be angry?

[/ QUOTE ]He was not angry. Far from it.

The contradictory positions adopted by Kasparov throughout the years are only due to chess politics and personality clashes. Nothing more.

Initially, Kasparov acknowledged, honestly enough, that the annulment benefited him rather than Karpov. He soon changed his tune, at the advice of his smelly entourage of chess crooks and hangers-on. Later on, he understood that by belittling his great opponent and the battles he waged with Karpov, he was also belittling himself - so he reverted to a position closer to the historical truth, as evidenced by his latest book My Great Predecessors.

Here is Kasparov describing the scenes in Moscow immediately after the announcement to annul the 1984 match :

[From Child Of Change, p. 135 :]
"There was a great deal of shuffling and noise in the audience at this news. The video tape shows my trainers and myself talking and laughing among ourselves."

So, the obvious question, as explicitly posed by Mr Winter, is : Why were Kasparov and his trainers laughing ?



[ QUOTE ]
Karpov was indeed truly relieved that he was able to cling to his title. ... I really doubt he believed he was a 70% favorite at that point. Wasn't he just looking terrible by the end of this thing? How on earth was he going to muster one more win against Kaspy?

[/ QUOTE ]I dealt with the whole extraordinary speculation and hyperbole about Karpov's "total collapse" elsewhere.

I will refer you, to be brief, to Kasparov's own opinion abt Karpov's state of mental and physical health. I already provided text and source.

[youtalkfunny]

I don't know anything about chess, but...

[ QUOTE ]
In this case both players and the rest of the chess world were unhappy with the decision. It seems the only one who was happy with it was Campomanes.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I'm a judge, and neither side likes my decision, I know I've made the right one.