English Chess Forum

@ the 0310 mark, I saw in the commentary on day one of The New in Chess Classic, Carlsen ranked the following world champions accordingly:

Genius - Capablanca
Entertainment - Tal
Influence - Kasparov
Sanity - Anand

This seems like a curious mix between personable and professional qualities. What else would you add to that short list?

On the second day his account of Fischer (as world champion) was:

Genius - 7
Entertainment - 8
Influence - 9
Sanity - 4

I agree it is quite a curios exercise, but I think it is hard to argue with the first list. An interesting question would be what epithet would be applied to Carlsen himself? I would suggest that 'business' might be appropriate. I don't say that in a negative way, because I think Carlsen has done a huge amount for chess, but I wonder what Magnus would make of that?

As for Fischer, I think it is very difficult to say anything sensible about him, because it all revolves around him being American. Had he been a Russian Workd Champion, what lasting influence would he have had on the game? I would suggest not a lot.

I think we can certainly say that Fischer was a genius.

He did it all alone! Think of the help that the Soviets received from their colleagues and the state. What help did Fischer get? Bits and pieces from Lombardy and Evans; not much more.

But discussion of RJF is difficult because he was such a sick man.

I still think his influence on the game would have been massive, had his nationality been different.

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 9:14 am

I think we can certainly say that Fischer was a genius.

Why is Fischer more of a genius than Alekhine, Botvinnik or Karpov?

We have the Alekhine opening, you can play in the style of Botvinnik. Can I play the Fischer opening or play in the style of Fischer?

You can play in the style of Fischer, and get closer to it than me, Matthew!

The 3 champions you mention also had a touch of genius, no question. I don't quite put them in the same bracket as Fischer, though I regard Karpov as objectively the stronger player, who could easily have won the match that never was in 1975.

Euwe, for example? I don't regard him as a genius, though he was one of the strongest players in the world for many years.

Matthew Turner wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 10:24 am

[ Can I play the Fischer opening or play in the style of Fischer?

You can indeed.

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 e6 6 Bc4 is the Fischer-Sozin Attack (B86).

Matthew Turner wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 10:24 am

We have the Alekhine opening, you can play in the style of Botvinnik. Can I play the Fischer opening or play in the style of Fischer?

My impression is that Fischer contributed far more to, say, 6.Bc4 in the Open Sicilian than Alekhine ever did to 1...Nf6 against 1.e4.

I think Fischer's road to the World Championship is what sticks out the most compared to other World Champions: dominant match victories over Taimanov, Larsen & Petrosian - I don't think there's a clear parallel?

Thomas Rendle wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am

I think Fischer's road to the World Championship is what sticks out the most compared to other World Champions: dominant match victories over Taimanov, Larsen & Petrosian - I don't think there's a clear parallel?

I would agree with you here, the only parallel I could think of was Salov

Here is chess.com's take on dominant players

https://www.chess.com/blog/Spektrowski/ ... 16-version

Thomas Rendle wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am

I think Fischer's road to the World Championship is what sticks out the most compared to other World Champions: dominant match victories over Taimanov, Larsen & Petrosian - I don't think there's a clear parallel?

Although if we look at Fischer's record as World Champion...

I think of Fischer's career as comprised of 3 phases.

Up to 1962: the young genius. He played a lot and became one of the best players in the world.

1963 to 1969: he played less and studied more. Probably due to this study, he was improving all the time.

1970 to 1972: peak Fischer. He was the best player in the world by some margin.

The rematch with Spassky? I discount this completely. An entertaining match between two superannuated old warriors.

Matthew Turner wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:29 am

Thomas Rendle wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am

I think Fischer's road to the World Championship is what sticks out the most compared to other World Champions: dominant match victories over Taimanov, Larsen & Petrosian - I don't think there's a clear parallel?

I would agree with you here, the only parallel I could think of was Salov

Here is chess.com's take on dominant players

https://www.chess.com/blog/Spektrowski/ ... 16-version

Eh?

Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:47 am

Matthew Turner wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:29 am

Thomas Rendle wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am

I think Fischer's road to the World Championship is what sticks out the most compared to other World Champions: dominant match victories over Taimanov, Larsen & Petrosian - I don't think there's a clear parallel?

I would agree with you here, the only parallel I could think of was Salov

Here is chess.com's take on dominant players

https://www.chess.com/blog/Spektrowski/ ... 16-version

Eh?

Salov - Khalifman Candidates 1994. It is difficult to explain, but the player who is behind just wants the match to be over.

I think it was Lasker who said he had known many chess players, but only one chess genius: Capablanca.

He wasn't a bad judge.

Carlsen's assessment of Karpov was:

Genius -8
Entertainment -6
Influence -8
Sanity -7