I personally asked Karpov, Spassky and Kasparov about the 1975 Fischer – Karpov matchup.
All three said that they felt Fischer may have had an edge in 1975. However, all three also agreed that Karpov would have defeated Fischer in a rematch.
Do you agree with their opinions?
When Bobby was motivated, he was on a league of his own. The question is how motivated was Bobby in 1975 especially when he disappeard from chess between 1972-1975.
We will never know the answer! I think the chess world lost out on two matches that never took place:
1. Fischer – Karpov 1975
2. Kasparov – Kramnik rematch
It is also too bad that I never had a second match against Xie Jun in 1999. This is the kind of things that must be changed for the best interest of chess.
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Do you agree with their opinions?
Yes.
A match Fischer-Karpov would have made Karpov an even greater player then he already was. When Kasparov came around, it was unfortunately too late for Karpov to reach his full potention.
Too bad Kasparov is such a sore loser as he showed in 1997 and again in 2000 by ducking Shirov.
I agree. Fischer would have one the first match, with Karpov coming back stronger and being more prepared for Kasparov.
That being said, Karpov is still my Chess Idol!!
Susan, you’ve had more contact with Fischer than most readers of this blog, so you probably have a clearer assessment of his ability than almost anyone. I think he was at least as dominant in the early 70’s as Kasparov was through the 90’s, and if he’d stayed in practice and out of difficulty with organizers, he could have kept the world championship well into the 1980’s. But I’m just a fan, I’ve never met the guy and I’m not a strong player.
There’s a story in Seirawan’s book about the 1992 Fischer-Spassky match that amazes me. Maybe someone remembers the details better than I do. But basically, Seirawan and some other GM were analyzing a position from some other player’s game, believing that White was winning and looking at variation after variation to find the exact winning line. Fischer came over without having seen the position before, and said after a few seconds “you guys are nuts, White is busted”. Fischer then made some move on the board for Black, but Seirawan and the other guy showed that it didn’t work. Fischer then tried another move, which also didn’t work. Fischer then said “OK, let me think about this”, thought for 30 seconds or so, and then came up with an amazing maneuver that showed that White really was busted. Of course in a real game he would have thought of and rejected the non-working moves instead of playing them on the board, before playing the good move.
I took that as a demonstration that Fischer’s reflexive instincts, even in 1992, were sharper than the analytical skills of these two other GM’s, and picked up nuances from the position that were subtle that even he himself needed considerable thought to turn into concrete moves. So I think Fischer was just out of this world.
alas, we will never know-the world was robbed, never to see the most exciting player of modern times(Bobby) joust with another chess giant, Mr Karpov. the Karpov-Kasparov match was a bore. get Peabody and Sherman, and we will jump in the WayBack machine and find out for ourselves. The big threes assessment was probably correst.
Fischer was never really away from chess. He had an amazing memory and could recite games played from the library in his head. GM Larry Christiansen said when he met Bobby in California Fischer was talking brilliantly about The Najdorf and Larry was impressed when they were riding in the car from the restraunt that Bobby had memorized every street in Pasadena lol. Another time when Bobby was still living in Pasadena in the early 1990’s a lady he stayed with said Bobby would play out current games at the kitchen table “snapping pieces off the board saying aloud no this is wrong”! Fischer would then ask the woman, what do you think about this move? She replied laughingly what do I know about it, and Bob replied “every opinion helps” hahaha assuming everyone devoured chess. Once at the same tournament Fischer on a trip to the mens room stopped at a GM friends board for only a few minutes, about 6 months later he asked this GM whose name eludes me, if he had won that game. The GM said he had won but didnt remember the position. He was amazed when Bobby set the position up and the move he recommended was economically better than what he had actually played! So after saying all this I dont think it would have taken that long for Bobby to get into chess shape in 1975. He would have won but what I dont understand is why everyone counts him out in a rematch? Maybe because Fischer would have lost interest.
TFK
Now the reality of the Russians not agreeing to play Fischer but wanting to run away with the title without playing is coming home to roost. Karpov is now seeing that he made a big mistake in taking Fischers title on politics. he should have played Fischer. even if he lost. then play again and again until he might win. Only then would Karpov have a legacy.
But now Karpov walked off with Fischer’s title and then he played Korchnoi while the Russians held Korchnoi’s family hostage. a disgrace. Karpov has no legacy.
How anyone can say that Karpov is his hero is beyond me. I have no respect for Karpov. NONE at all.
Fischer in 75′ as well as Fischer in any rematch. After losing to Fischer in 75′ I believe Karpov would have been shaken from Fischers psychological game that he would have fell from being a contender and someone else would have taken over the chase.
With all due respect, I think some of these Fischer stories could have been exeggarations or myths. Sure, he was amazing, and possibly the best player ever, but still a human, not God.
Anyway, I think the cancellation of the Fischer-Karpov match was the biggest tragedy in the history of chess. Chess lost out immeasurably because of that.
Anonymous Im not saying Fischer is God but what I stated is true. I have done extensive research on Bobby. I heard about Fischer memorizing the streets in California from an audio segment from a chess site with GM Larry Christiansen who met Bobby in California in the mid 1970’s. The Master whose board he glanced at for a few seconds in a tournament and months later had a better move was Frank Brady. For more on this subject there is an article on this called ‘The Mind of Bobby Fischer’ along with many other intersting articles at http://www.chessmaniac.com/Bobby_Fischer/Bobby_Fischer_Articles.shtm Fischer also played GM Peter Biyiasas blitz chess in the early 90’s. Bobby beat GM Biyiasas 17 games straight before Peter called it quits! Peter later said “The games werent interesting, it wasnt as if I was making bad moves, I was losing and didnt know why.” He also later went on to say that Bobby doesnt think before he moves in blitz LOL!!
TFK
Sorry I cut short the web site on Fischer articles. Here is the site address. http://www.chessmaniac.com/Bobby_Fischer/Bobby_Fischer_Articles.shtm
TFK
for some reason the whole site keeps getting cut short here is the rest of the site address after Bobby_Fischer/ after that comes Bobby_Fischer_Articles.shtm
if you still cant get the whole address try google that where I got it.
TFK
If only we had a championship history of every four years like Fifa. How would this list look like?
Sorry Susan all this Fischer Karpov talk made me forget your comment about not playing a 2nd match with XIE JUN. I think the reason was you had just given birth to your child and FIDE wouldnt give you enough time to prepare for the match. That was despicable on FIDE’s part not to give The World Champion enough time to prepare. Also terrible for the millions of chess fans. I dont understand why these chess organizations ruin chess prosperity by deliberatley sabotaging matches and in the case of the USCF deliberatley ruining the U.S. Womens chances for Gold in the Olympiad!
TFK
Fischer was afraid of Karpov, so the looney took a Greta Garbo to maintain his reputation. Karpov was without nerves, and would have beaten the maniac easily. Karpov later proved he was stronger than anyone in history.
(1) The most amazing thing about this blog is not the answer, but the question — who else but Susan would be able to talk person-to-person to all 3 of these great champions about an issue like this?
(2) Who would have won? As much as a fan as I was of Fischer (yes, as a teenager, I had pictures of him on my wall), his 3-year layoff from chess would have given Karpov an edge. After Fischer’s last layoff, it took him a while to return to form (check his ratings history). That would have given too much of a head start to Karpov in my humble opinion. And please, let’s not take anything away from Karpov’s ability–with today’s technology, we can go through dozens of his games in an hour, and I have — he played astounding and instructive chess. Is it just me, or does anyone else who has studied his games marvel at how he always seems to come up with a last-minute move that saves the game? For me, the real question is, who would have won a rematch if Karpov had won the 1975 match? — JF
1. Fischer 12-10
2. Fischer 17-5
3. Polgar 14-8
Chess history would have definitely been enrichened had Fischer continued to play. While it is fascinating to debate whether Fischer or Karpov would have won in 1975 ultimately we can never know for sure. Compelling debates can be made for each side but chess match results don’t alway match the rhetoric of the prognostications.
Fischer was a great talent who CHOSE to cut short his chess career. He made the decision to cease playing following the Spassky ’72 match. On the other hand, I do believe that FIDE did you (Susan) an incredible injustice in the Xie Jun situation. FIDE should provide reasonable accomodation for a Champion otherwise titles become a hollow mockery.
Anything less than a perfect score would have been a disappointment for Bobby’s fans. Karpov could have made a perfect score with Kasparov, too, so same goes for him. Both were great masters of chess, reached the top. Fischer failed, as he never passed on all his chess secrets, while Karpov shared his with all.
It’s notable that, since 1992, Fischer has refused to play what he calls the “old chess.” I think that if he had continued to play, we’d see that his instincts have decayed with age, just as they have with anyone.
I’m not enough of an expert to tell, but those who’ve analyzed the 1992 rematch say that the quality of Fischer’s chess had gone way down.
Although,I have no respect for Fischer Personally,I believe He was,without doubt the greatest chess player of modern times.including Karpov,and Kasparov.
h8aa!
bublee hu? oar hu ez bublee felisur?
ez heez humzkoold ur knaught?
“I’m not enough of an expert to tell, but those who’ve analyzed the 1992 rematch say that the quality of Fischer’s chess had gone way down.”
Another great myth. Fischer in 1992 blew away anybody’s expectations. Maybe he wasn’t as sharp as in 1972 but you could certainly make the argument from that match that he still had potential to be world champion, which is pretty incredible for somebody who hadn’t played in 20 years.
“Another great myth. Fischer in 1992 blew away anybody’s expectations. Maybe he wasn’t as sharp as in 1972 but you could certainly make the argument from that match that he still had potential to be world champion, which is pretty incredible for somebody who hadn’t played in 20 years.”
You are right, Fischer blew in 1992… it was sort of sad watching an all-time great playing old chess. I agree with you though, he had the potential to be world champion… in the senior division though.
In response to an anonymous commenter talking not-so-intelligent things:
1. Remembering streets is completely irrelevant to chess.
2. All serious GM’s know thousands of games by heart. I remember Kasparov saying he knows around ten thousand. This is not anything special.
3. Frank Brady is a very weak chess player rated at <2000, not even a FIDE master as you said. It’s just natural that GM can suggest a much better move without much thinking. This is also not anything special.
4. Peter Biyiasas is also a mediocre player rated at 2450. It’s not a big deal for a super GM to beat him.
1. No, it isn’t.
2. True.
3. Not the point of the anecdote.
4. Not the point of the anecdote.
Maybe you should work on your reading comp before insulting others’ intelligence.