From: mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel)
Subject: Re: Fischer's Strength
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:10:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.222450.21928@midway.uchicago.edu> hau4@midway.uchicago.ed
u writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.191145.29056@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> gzogbi@magnus.ac
s.ohio-state.edu (George C Zogbi-for NM Craig Stauffer) writes:
>>
>>For those of you who are deriding Fischer's play in his recent rematch
>>with Spassky, let me present a sample of "World Championship" caliber
>>play from the 1978 Karpov-Kortchnoi match. In game 5, after 54 moves,
>>the following position was reached with white to move.
> [diagram deleted to save space]
>>    In the game, Kortchnoi played 55. Be4?
>
>Mistakes happen in every WC match. But K-K '78 gave us several important TNs,
>most notably Karpov's (actually Zaitsev's) positional piece sac in the Open
>Ruy Lopez, and I think also some novelties in the French (I don't know how
>important they were, I don't know much about the French). There were several
>very interesting games and the overall quality was way above F-S II (although
>probably somewhat below F-S I).
>

Ahem!  The main beef about F-SII was the mistakes (blunders).  If
they "happen in every WC match", was F-SII normal in that
respect?  Incidentally, I agree that the opening play wasn't
the best (as if I know!), but this seems to be more Spassky's
fault than Fischer's.

>> which according to Keene made
>>many *amateurs* in the crowd gasp. White mates rather obviously with
>>55. Bf7+.  Note that this was the second day of play, after an
>>adjournment.
>
>Important info missing: how much time did Korchnoi have? This was 5 moves
>before the second time control, and Korchnoi is notorious for getting into
>time-trouble. In any case, adjournment is irrelevant: nobody could analyse
>15 moves ahead in a middlegame position.

Any master (and many players below that) could easily find the
forced mate in less than 20 seconds-at least up to the point
where Black loses his knight!  NM Stauffer has demonstrated this
to me time and time again in our speed games.  Certainly Korch
should have seen it, but he didn't.  Blunders happen.

>>    It is interesting to note the following facts about the recent F-S
>>match:  1. This was the strongest chess match played for 5 million
>>dollars :-).
>
>But also the weakest.  :-)
>
>>  2. Each game was worth $166,666.67.
>
>That's only one way of determining the monetary value of the games, and not
>a very plausible one. I'd say that half of the games (the draws) were, in the
>first approximation, worth zero. But then there could be some second-order
>corrections for the psychological effect of missed chances etc.
>
>>  3. Each move was worth
>>$3,639.01.
>
>Again oversimplified. Most moves decide nothing.

No kidding.

>>  I wonder if pressure
>>may have caused some mistakes??
>
>What f* pressure? Would YOU feel pressure if you were guaranteed $1,333,333.33
>for just playing until the end?

Yes, if winning (and it WAS reasonable that Spassky expected
to win) would give me nearly three times that amount.  Even if
it wouldn't I would *guess* that I would feel pressure.  Of course
I don't know for sure, but if anyone would like to put up the
proper purse-I'm ready for a match!

-mark

p.s.  Mr. Stauffer predicted the reply almost exactly.  Sometimes
      he's just amazing!  Then again, some times he's just a patz.
      I should be so lucky!
>
>    Sven
>
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess