From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: TO THE GM'S AT CHESS CHOW/CHESS LI
Date: 15 Dec 92 01:54:37 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec14.202309.3575@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, edd@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (ed.knowles) writes:
> In article <1992Dec12.193455.462@uoft02.utoledo.edu>, dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>> > those rules must be abided by to legitimately claim the title of
>> > World Champion.  Fischer did not abide by those rules, therefore he
>> > can't claim the title.
>> 
>> But he HAS the title. Go recheck your logic and compare it with reality.
>> Unless, of course, you wish to decalre him not your 'second-rate-players-
>> association-non-champion', which of course you are entitled to do.
> 
> Fischer  does not have the title. Kasparov has the title. Fischer gave up
> his world championship title because he did not want to defend it under
> FIDE's rules. FIDE did not really recognize his giving up of the title but
> later stripped him of the title when he refused to defend it. Since then

So Fischer was their champion EVEN though he wanted nothing to do with them? He
told them has wasn't going to play by their rules and they could go ______
themselves and he quit. And they said, "Nope, you will stay champion until
WE decide you are no longer champion."?

And you listen to what these Bozos have to say?

Christ, even the Mafia lets you quit if you are willing to kill someone.


> 
> Fischer was officially world champion from 1972-1975. During his reign
> he won no tournaments, no matches, no games. From 1975-1985 Karpov was
> world champion. During that time he tied for first or won first outright
> in almost every single tournament he played. He defended his title three
> times and achieved the highest rating of active grandasters. From 1985
> til now Kasparov has been world champion. He has achieved the highest
> rating ever, has won most of the tournaments he has played in and has
> defended his title on every occasion he was supposed too. Do you really
> think Fischer deserves to be recognized as world champion??

Well, one of YOUR co-defenders of the GMs would say that Kasparov is NOT the
World Champion because he has not played EVERYBODY who plays chess.

(That wasn't you who said there was no best basketball team, was it?)

> 
>> > 
>> >>Besides, what do any of these opinions have to do with the GMs defending their
>> >>claims against Fischer?
>> >>
> 
> They have nothing to do with the GMs defending their claims against Fischer.
> A different thread entirely... I agree with Don, in that I would like to hear
> the GMs address the effect of the playing conditions on the play. I can't 
> speak for the GMs and IMs since I'm not one of them. Their criticisms seem
> reasonable to me, but it's true that they haven't addressed the issues of the
> Fischer clock, no adjournments and no "teams". Would the Kasparov-Karpov
> games have been of poorer quality had they been played under the FS-II condi-
> tions? I think it's obvious they would have. So what qualities of play have
> lead IMs and GMs to conclude that Fischer is of greatly diminished strength?
> 
> Pretending for a moment that I am a GM (send your donations and this fantasy
> can become a reality), I would say that I can excuse errors in the latter
> part of the game to fatigue and lack of adjournament analysis, but more than
> a few errors were made early in the game (and remember, the Fischer clock
> virtually eliminates serious time pressure). Spassky's health can be an ex-
> cuse for most of his errors in this stage of the game, but what of Fischer?

My opinion is perhaps a bit more pragmatic, and comes from studying the art of
litigation. One of the best rules in trial tactics is to barely win, because if
you win by a lot, you have taken more chances than you needed to. If you took
to many chances, you courted danger.
 
Perhaps Fischer didn't go for the same moves the GMs would prefer because he
saw potential threats they didn't. Perhaps he knew his opponent and 'felt' like
avoiding certain situations. Who can say. All that matters in Chess is that you
won. 

But, the GMs feel that you have to do so while using the same plays they would
have used. PHHBBBT!

DMC