Who won the chess match???????

If we saw a chess player at a tourney kicking a$$ on a pool table against other chess players, would we think he might be a pool champion?

Maybe the other chess players would:o
 
whitewolf said:
I will second the motion. Kasparov had the use of computer chess to hone his skills. Fischer was the true genius, probably more so than any of the greatest chess players in the history of chess.
Click to expand...

umm Kasparov won the world championship in 85 if i remember correctly, and he should have won it in 84. The point is that computers were not strong enough for anyone to hone any kind of skill on chess at that time. Besides up until 1997, any serious chess player knew how to beat the computer fairly handily. All you had to do was play closed positions, and the computer could not act in a manner that sufficiently countered this strategy.

Fischer was good but I wouldn't have been surprised if Karpov beat him in 75. Fischer never defended his world title after he won it, and he held the title for a number of years. Kasparov won every tournament he entered for a ten year period, he is the Efren Reyes of Pool, the Roger Federer of Tennis and the Michael Jordan of Basket Ball.

regards
 
jsp said:
Interesting discussion. How does one go about determining/calculating a chess player's rating?
Click to expand...

What happened when I got my rating is that I was assigned a provisional rating when I entered my first tournament. After that each match affected my rating (it was round robin) and by the end of the tournament I had an official rating. You gain or lose points depending on whether you win or lose. How many points depends on the rating of the player. If you win against a stronger player you get far more points than if you win against a weaker player. If lose against a weaker player you lose a lot of points, however if your defeat is against a player far stronger than you than it will barely affect your rating.

I was explained this almost ten years ago when I got my first rating, so if I am way off in the explanation forgive me. But if you are interested in getting a rating I sure you play online and get it. I don't play any chess online because of a crappy internet connection. Another method is buying one of the Chessmaster games, which will calculate your rating after a while.

regards
 
You guys might like "Bobby Fischer Goes To War", a book about the 1972 match between him and Boris Spassky. Bobby certainly had some issues.

I honestly think Karpov might have given him all the trouble he could handle. Fischer had a losing record to Geller at that point in time; he wasn't unbeatable. Spassky didn't seem to train properly for the match and with Fischers' opening preparation being so in-depth, Boris was in trouble. If Bobby played Karpov, with Geller helping Karpov, the outcome might of been different.

You think Earl complains? Bobby complained about every single thing about how the match was set up. He was a phenomenal player but not defending your title is really weak.

Kasparov is probably the greatest ever but Paul Morphy and Jose Capablanca were also two of the greatest natural talents ever.
 
whitewolf said:
Fischer did not defend his title because the Chess Federation refused to accept Bobby's score keeping system during tournament play. Fischer wanted to reward those who showed aggressive play. He could not stand the scoring system where a player could get one game ahead and play for draws the remaining games and declare victory.

Hopefully this answers your question if you had one as to why Fischer dissapeared from the chess community. Plus the US was after him for income tax evasion and he had to lay low everywhere he went.

Bobby was indeed the best chess player ever, considering that he played in an era where the whole world was competing. I still appreciate Morphy, Lasker, Alekhine (sp?), Steinitz, and many others who contributed so much to chess through their creativity.
Click to expand...

I knew why Fischer dropped out, but he asked the ridiculous. A 12 game match where draws don't count? I can not even begin to imagine how long that would have taken. The Kasparov-Karpov match of 1984 proved this point seeing as they only played a 6 game match and it had to stop, for health reasons. Supposedly anyways. But I do see Fischers point, that the current system only requires the champion to draw the games, as the tie game goes to the champ. But even so resigning the world championship because FIDE would not give in to his latest demands. To me it seems like a way to dodge Karpov. Years later he still claimed that he was the true World Champ.

Though it would be kind of cool if they could get an exhibition game between Kasparov and Fischer. It wouldn't prove anything since neither of them play competively anymore, but it would still be cool.

Regards
 
After ranting about how much the US deserved the 9-11 attack and how evil we are, I really hope nobody gives Bobby another nickel for playing chess. Greatest ever? Probably.

One of the most egotistical jerks in history? Probably. There's a part in "Bobby Fischer Goes To War" where it says he was such a pain in the ass when he was younger, his mom had to move out and get a new place. 1000's of stories of him being a arrogant clown.
 
And some of you guys complain about Earl :D.

Imagine Bobby as a pool player, "the felt's too blue" "Now the Felt isn't blue enough" "Theres too many fans in the audience" "someone thought about moving" "My opponent just played a shot opposite handed, that's insulting to my abilities"

regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top