Does anybody still care about chess?
By David Edmonds
BBC
27 November 2014 Last updated at 20:48 ET
In the summer of 1972, newspaper editors were not short of headlines.
Henry Kissinger was trotting around the globe as the US sought to extricate itself from Vietnam.
The Ugandan Asians were in flight, expelled by the mad, bad President of Uganda, Idi Amin.
Sectarian riots had broken out in Northern Ireland; Chile appeared to be heading towards anarchy.
And there was a burglary at the Watergate complex in Washington DC – the repercussions of which would soon bring down the president.
So there was no dearth of news.
Yet, holding an almost daily place on the front pages was a chess match in the tiny Icelandic capital of Reykjavik.
Never before or since has chess captured the world’s imagination in quite this way.
It became known as “The Game of the Century”.
At stake was the world crown.Mesmerising personality
The two players were the Soviet champion Boris Spassky and the challenger Bobby Fischer.
Fischer’s strident demands nearly torpedoed the contest and the fascination the match aroused owed much to his troubled, mesmerising personality.
Although in 1972 the US and the USSR were in a period of detente, Fischer was able to frame the match as the Cold War in microcosm.
He was a solitary American taking on the previously invincible Soviet chess machine.
Spassky-Fischer matches were followed around the world
The Soviets had dominated chess since World War Two: For them chess was a tool in a wider propaganda war.
Over four decades later, and the world chess championship is again front page news.
At least it is in Norway.
That the Norwegians are gripped by this contest is understandable.
The current world champion is 23-year-old Norwegian Magnus Carlsen.
He has just beaten the previous champion the Indian Vishy Anand – who, at 44, is probably past his peak.
Carlsen captured the crown from Anand only last year.
But while Carlsen’s fortunes are followed in Norway by chess players and non-chess players alike, he is a less familiar figure outside the country.
Coverage of his retention of the world title was scant in the British media, and it hardly helped that the denouement came on the same day that Lewis Hamilton’s secured the Formula One world drivers’ championship.
In a recent episode of a British game show, Pointless, fewer people recognized his name than that of the 1972 champion – Bobby Fischer.
This raises a puzzle. Why has the public profile of chess declined?
Full article here: http://www.bbc.com
We need to promote Nakamura. He’s the most charismatic GM in the world.
Maybe ir the champ were no a boring player
hello,
chess is on the rise in countries which have glory days ahead of them ( india, china etc) not behind them (uk). That chess is not front page in a country where a ‘living on welfare’ citizen(queen) and their family garner headlines. Moreover what that ‘small island’ thinks of chess – the big boys dont care. live with it. The ‘small island’ barely missed becoming smaller by a few votes – not for long. Live with it.
I have a large number of chess books (well, about 18 I think). But I have not bought a single one since they started omitting P-K4 and just did the soulless letters. If you look at chess in Britain you will see that the numbers playing plummeted coincidentally with that change.
Go on, tell me that does not mean causation, I need reminding of that because I am a government statistician. It was a contributory factor. A big one.
Did it actually decline or did circumstance cause an unusual spike in 1972? You had USA vs USSR during the cold war, with Fischer’s unheard of candidates run, and Fischer confidently and bluntly verbally attacking the Soviet chess machine. Also, Fischer was somewhat charismatic and no champion since him really is at all. Not saying that’s a bad thing: today’s players seem much more sane and level-headed than Fischer. But Fischer knew how to work the press and give the media material, and the USA-USSR scenario was the perfect media venue for that. I think the game’s popularity now is great, I think circumstance simply created an anomaly of a public interest spike in 1972.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I think this article has special relevance for the UK. After Jim Slater provided finance for the Spassky-Fischer match to continue, chess in the UK flourished as never before. In the Olympiads of 1984 and 1986, England came second to the USSR by one point and a half point respectively — and won the match against the USSR. I suspect that the finance and endowments have disappeared, leaving England perched precariously in the upper middle world ranking. Enthusiasm for chess has sadly declined.
I think chess is a beautiful game. A battle of the minds that creates a mentally stimulating ballet of the minds.
Some of the reason for the decline in intrest is because chess does not deliver the same type of rapid activities that are seen in many modern video games.
The are no zombies to shoot. No ear shattering sound effects. No blinding visuals.
Chess is similar to art. A person either enjoys the beauty of the battle or they don’t.
UK has a track record of belittling thins which they are not top dogs. They were once a chess super power. Now nope. It is the only country which belittles IPL which puts millions and millions of dollars in players pockets. They cry the grapes are sour and in coming days the cry is gonna be more widespread as they lose/lost their top billing. UK likes like Pein, Keene, Short always caused trouble and they have been sidelined. There are some exceptions though like Nunn, Speelman etc but they are a minority.
Game of the Century was in 1956! Sloppy journalism. Also, Fischer did not turn the match into a Cold War microcosm. The napalm bombing Americans needed a lift because the world was turning against them.
Popularity = Interesting players + Exciting games + Historical significance + Accessibility
Interesting players = charisma + controversy + talent + rivalry
Historical significance = Potential to establish new records or dynasties or break long-standing existing records or dynasties
My opinion is that Carlsen, while an outstanding player, is slightly overrated by chess fans in the charisma category. To the rest of the world, he is a moderately interesting, moderately good-looking talent, not on par with Tom Brady.
The biggest drawback, of course, is accessibility of the game. Huge strides have been made in conveying the game to viewers with computer technology, graphics, and great commentary from some great GMs. But as much as I love the game, I don’t ever seeing it reach the broad appeal of other more easily understood sports / games.
The historical significance of Fischer / Spassky will probably never be repeated. The dominance of the USSR in chess was virtually uncontested, and the Cold War added fuel to the fire. So it is expecting too much for that kind of interest to recur.
I beg to o disagree. Chess, through great new websites like Chess24 has made the sport more watchable and interesting. Strong GMs and IMs like Svidler, Trent, Rensch has improved its appeal.
I seriously think that we need players like Nakamura who plays exciting chess. Most of the players are geeks, afraid to look bad or lose. We need more blitz tourneys. The previous World Rapid and Blitz tourneys and Nakamura-Aronian blitz matches were fun to watch! I watched the 4.5 hour video on Youtube from start to finish! the played bullet on Chess.com myself.
This is my honest opinion.
-doo-