From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: TO THE GM'S AT CHESS CHOW/CHESS LIFE
Date: 11 Dec 92 16:49:57 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Dec8.221054.9613@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, edd@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (ed.knowles) writes:
> In article <1992Dec8.102153.369@uoft02.utoledo.edu>, dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>> 
>> Oh, you diasagree with my pointing out that the GMs and their defenders are
>> avoiding the issues like crazy by putting up false ones?
>> 
>> Like yours?
>> 
>> DMC
>> 
> 
> I'm not clear on what issues I was avoiding. I felt I was stating my opinions
> and disagreeing with the opinions of Don and Darrell(DMC). I don't think
> the facts are in dispute.

IF you had been reading the post AND your memory was longer than 4 seconds, you
would be aware that this thread started when Mr. Wedding took dispute over the
great all-knowing chess masters who were bitching that Fischer had lost his
skill. He called for them to defend their statements. They have balked, and
people like YOU have kicked in totally unrelated issues under the assumption
they were somehow relevant to ANYTHING.

Comments like these below:

> 
>       Bobby Fischer has admitted anti-Jewish sentiments (not anti-Semetic,
>       as he states he has nothing against Arabs). I cannot excuse this de-
>       plorable attitude from the fact that he plays chess well. I do not
>       admire Bobby Fischer. Don can separate Fischer's attitudes from his
>       chess, and admires Bobby Fischer as a chessplayer. This has to do
>       with our individual philosophies, I think -- there's nothing to prove
>       or disprove.
> 
>       Bobby Fischer has insulted and tried to demean the best chessplayers
>       in the world. He has claimed that all the world championships since
>       1972 have been fixed and that Kasparov and Karpov are criminals and
>       poor chessplayers. I think that Fischer's statements are absurd. there's
>       no way to prove whether or not the World Championship matches were
>       fixed or not. I don't think they were. I think Kasparov and Karpov
>       are stronger than Fischer is now. I think Don feels that with a little
>       practice Fischer could once again beat the best. I feel that Fischer
>       has lost the objectivity that would make him a formidable opponent,
>       and that his disdain for the World Chess Organizations will prevent
>       him from competing in legal competitions anyway. I don't think even
>       Don disputes that Fischer is not close to the awesome strength he
>       displayed in 1971-1972. Then he lost only 2 games to Spassky, who
>       was then world champion and arguably one of the top 10 players in
>       the world. In 1992 he's lost 5 games to a Spassky rated 101 in the
>       world and not in the best of health. Granted, the conditions of the
>       match were unnatural (no adjournments, Fischer clock...). Again,
>       these are just my opinions. I could be wrong. Until Fischer plays
>       under "normal" conditions (which I don't think he ever will), there's
>       really no way to tell how strong he is compared to today's best.
> 
>       Don feels that Fischer is the rightful world champion. I do not.
>       The only World Championship title that Fischer ever held was the
>       FIDE World Championship. He did not defend that title, and that
>       organization stripped him of that title according to its rules.
>       Fischer can claim his own World Championship Title. But as far as
>       the FIDE title goes, Kasparov has been granted it and has defended
>       it. It is my opinion that Fischer is the worst world champion, because
>       he has never shown what he could do as world champion, and didn't play
>       all that much before becoming world champion. 
> 
> 
>       Don feels that the GMs in Chess Chow and Chess Life have been unfair
>       and subjective in their criticisms of Fischer and his games. I think
>       that for the most part, criticism of Fischer's character and behavior
>       has been severe. But I think that his behavior and attitude warrants
>       the strongest abhorance. I think that the analysis of the games has
>       covered a wide range from the bitter sarcasm of Dzindzichashvilli to
>       the mellow, logical evaluations of LLya Gurevich. Chess Life's coverage
>       has been interesting in that they've used sveral different annotators
>       -- John Fedorowicz, IIya Gurevich, Dzindzi, and Larry Evans. Chess
>       Chow had perhaps the strongest words about Fischer's character, but I
>       feel their look at the games were objective. All the annotators felt
>       that the match as a whole was of mediocre quality, but that there were
>       a few good games. Both Fischer and Spassky showed spots of brilliance,
>       but made a lot of mistakes. Spassky's mistakes tended to be tactical
>       while Fischer's tended to be strategic. Fischer had one incredibly
>       bad technical performance... probably fatigue. Don feels that the low
>       rating this match got from this array of grandmasters was a result of
>       jealousy and sour grapes. Although I would agree in at least one case
>       (Dzindzi's) that this was so, I believe that it's silly to dispute
>       the consensus and attack the integrity of all these grandmasters.Also,
>        I have my own eyes and mind. I even knew about the dubiousness of
>       6 Bg5? in the old-fashioned Benoni. When I  read this move (game 16
>       Fischer-Spassky) , I thought "what! does Spassky have a refutation?"
>       but NOOOOO.... Fischer played like I did back in '85 against some
>       1800 player -- Bxc3+ and it's all over. Spasky did play much better
>       than my class B opponent in '85, but it was still a miniature --34
>       moves. Spassky's Nf5+ in the last game looked like the type of sac
>       I've tried against Ginsberg in speed games (same result, too). I
>       can't fault Fischer's play too much, but some of his moves sure
>       looked funny, -- and then I read where the grandmasters thought they
>       looked funny too... and he did get into trouble. So I have to say
>       that I can't feel that a match where in the majority of games I could
>       pick out the mistakes and know who was going to win after the first
>        15-20 moves of the decisive games was a very high quality match.
>       In the latest Kasparov-Karpov match it took Deep Thought to find some
>       of the mistakes. Anyway, I don't know exactly what Don feels about
>       the match. Does he think they played superbly?? Well, I have a
>       different opinion, and I'm in good company. Nevertheless, I will
>       conceed that the games were entertaining for the most part, and that
>       the really gross mistakes were probably caused by fatigue or rustiness.
>       Fischer actually did show some opening surprises, but Spassky showed
>       little or no preparation. Fischer played better than Spassky.
> 
> 
>       Again... I am stating my opinions and where I disagree with another's
>       opinions. I don't see myself as dodging issues or ignoring facts.
>       What facts do you dispute? That Fischer isn't anti-Jewish? That 
>        he doesn't play like he used to? That the match wasn't a great match?
>       What?
> 
>       For the record, my opinions are:
> 
>       Fischer is a bigot and obnoxious individual.
>       Fischer is overated as a chess player... he's good, but there were and
>       are better...
> 
>       Fischer is the worst world champion. He has never defended his title
>       against a strong challenger and has never played competatively while
>       he had the title and was perhaps the least active player in international
>       competition ever to win the world championship in modern times 
>       ( Petrosian on ...).
> 
>       The match was mediocre. Fischer played strange strategy, Spassky played
>       poorly tactically.
> 
> 
>       Fischer is not the world champion. Kasparov is the world champion.
>       I don't think Fischer is or ever was as strong as Kasparov is today.
> 
>       I don't like Kasparov much either, but compared to Fischer, he's a
>        saint.
>                                            -Ed Knowles
> 
>       
>       
>> 
>> 
> 
>