From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: Exploding "Exploding the Myth"
Keywords: Fischer/Kasparov
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:57:39 GMT

In article <1en0dkINN7t9@centurion.ksu.ksu.edu> mmt@centurion.ksu.ksu.edu (Jason Derek Olson) writes:
>
>why can't you and people like you seperate bobby's chess from his personal life??

Don't count me among those. I separate Fischer and Fischer's chess. (And the
same for other players.)

>somehow forget some of the stuff that your World Champion has said in the past.
>For example: In an interview approximately one year ago in the best chess
>magazine in the U.S., Inside Chess, Kasparov said something to the effect of
>"women are inferior to men in all fields of life, and chess is no different." He
>went on to say that a woman would never be world champion of chess, ever.

I haven't read that particular interview, but I've read many others and I've
never seen him say that women are inferior in *all fields of life*. As of
chess abilities, it is still arguable. There is no evidence yet that women
can do as well in chess as men.

On the other hand, Kasparov is prone to gross exaggeration in his
statements, and I certainly don't praise him for that. But to compare that
to (Fischer's or whoever's) racism and love for racist regimes is perverse.

>lesser of two evils, that is Kasparov over Fischer. When Fischer condemns Jews
>and Russians he is condemning a relatively small segment of the world, whereas
>when Kasparov denounces and condemns women in chess and elsewhere, he is speaking
>about at least 2.7 billion people!!

Even if he said all you are accusing him of, your knowledge of English
must be very poor if you call that 'denounciation' and 'condemnation'.

> Interesting that you should whine about
>Fischer's comments and seem content with Kasparov's. In addition, Fischer,
>although he demands what appear to be excessive conditions before he will push a
>pawn, has cleaned up the chessworld almost singlehandedly. He irradicated the
>Pro-Soviet Candidates system of the past,

That is a myth. Neither was the system as pro-Soviet as Fischer claimed, nor
did it change significantly with Fischer's demands. FIDE is *still* pro-
Russian and Kasparov did much more to challenge FIDE than Fischer.

> and ensured that in any tournament he
>participated there would be the most conducive conditions for the best possible
>chess for all concerned.

I agree with that.

> If we look at Kasparov and what he has done for chess we
>see a drastically different picture.

No. YOU do - because you look at Fischer through pink glasses and at Kasparov 
through black glasses.

> Kasparov has singlehandedly split  the chess
>world, betrayed his followers (GMA) and left the chessworld in the lurch, in that
>he says he wants to make chess popular everywhere, but makes statements that kill
>any chance of this before even getting started. 

This is ridiculous. Kasparov did more for popularity of chess than any player
in history. He is to thank for the existence of numerous big-money tournaments.
He did not, in any way, 'betray' the GMA - check the facts before you accuse
him. And while some of his statements are ridiculously egoistic, he has also
often been accurate in his outspokenness and has contributed to honesty in
both chess and politics. And his moral standards and political principles are
truly admirable.

>and a number of innovations on known lines. If Kasparov is such a great player
>why hasn't he found any novelties lately.

A better question is, why don't you look at his games before asking a 
question that contains a false premise.

> I don't see Kasparov beating his
>fellow GM's by a margin of 6-0, twice no less!!

Well, he never had a chance to play a match with a player of Taimanov's
strength, but some of his tournament results are pretty damn close
to Fischer's 1970-71 'miracles'. You might check Kasparov's rating
for a start. How do you think he achieved it? By 'campaigning' for it?

>games/moves Fischer has played recently. In game 30 he finds a novelty on move 9
>in Kasparovs favorite defense!! Interesting don't you think??

Yes, but you forgot to mention that he got a bad position after that.

>Bobby will be back to par, an will begin to improve, after all the man has an
>I.Q. of 187.

Gimme a break. 
1) What does IQ have to do with chess?
2) It is not possible to measure such high IQ values, so that number must
be someone's sensationalistic invention.


	Sven