Victim of His Own Success: The Tragedy of Bobby Fischer
By BRIAN M. CARNEY
January 22, 2008; Page D8
Wall Street Journal
In his day, he was the best chess player in the world, maybe the best the world had ever seen. For fans of the game, the tragedy is that his day passed all too quickly. And for the last 30-odd years of his life, Bobby Fischer was the chess world’s mad uncle, an embarrassment to be apologized for, belittled or ignored. He died last week at the evocative age of 64.
For most of the second half of his life, Fischer considered himself the undefeated world champion of chess. That he had been stripped of his title in 1975 for refusing to defend it against challenger Anatoly Karpov, that he had not played in a competitive tournament since before he won the championship against Boris Spassky in 1972 — those were mere details. Or worse, they were merely evidence that the forces arrayed against him had succeeded in driving him from the game — because the only way to beat him, he believed, was to cheat, or to keep him from playing at all.
…Chess players never gave up hoping that he would snap out of it, come back to the board and treat the world to more brilliant chess. Susan Polgar, the former women’s world chess champion, remarked to me that his death was a tragedy because we’d never have another game from Bobby Fischer. When it was pointed out that he’d barely played in 35 years, she said, “But hope was never lost.” Ms. Polgar had known Fischer from his time in Budapest in the 1990s, and she said that even then he was as genial personally as his views were “extreme” politically. She claimed to have been in talks with him even recently to negotiate his return to the game.
That was never likely. Having beaten Mr. Spassky in 1972, he had nothing left to prove — except that, just possibly, he was beatable after all. Over a chess board, unlike in political debate, you can be proved wrong. And unlike the pianist Mark Taimanov, Bobby Fischer had nothing to fall back on if he came up short in chess. It is hard not to detect a bit of cowardice in his retreat from the world and the chess board after 1972. The tragedy was that, at his best, he was as good as he thought himself to be.
Mr. Carney is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.
Here is a full story.
To say Bobby was cowardice is unbelievable.
That’s like saying a man that is missing a leg fears running a marathon.
Mental illness/paranoia was his major, dominating flaw. He feared no-one on the chessboard, least of all the russians. If anything, the russians feared him, and felt that Karpov would have been destroyed by Fischer in a match.
Don’t confuse facts with opinion.
Full article gives RJF’s record at Sousse 1967 as +7 =0 -0, which is of course wrong. It should read +7 =3 -0.
“He died last week at the evocative age of 64.”
I didn’t even realize that. Wow….. but, really, was there any other way??
“Full article gives RJF’s record at Sousse 1967 as +7 =0 -0, which is of course wrong. It should read +7 =3 -0.”
Actually, it should be +7-3=3. He lost three games on forfeit before withdrawing for good.
“To say Bobby was cowardice is unbelievable.”
Only if you live in denial. He won the title, and then never played again for 20 years, despite talking about it constantly and backing out at the last minute. He was afraid to risk his position. Face it. So afraid that he resigned his title 9 months early to get out of defending it. As you say, don’t confuse facts with opinion. There’s no evidence that Fischer was mad in 1974, when he resigned the title.
LOL at the idea of Bobby fearing nobody. Have you ever read anything about the Reykjavik match? His friends had to drag him kicking and screaming to the board. Fear of defeat was one of the major motivating factors of Fischer’s career. Whether the fear was rational or not isn’t the point. He still had it.
Fischer was afraid. He had become Zeus of chess, and everything to lose when facing a new superstrong player like Karpov.
For me Kapy the best ever. Nest for 20 years. And what results!
Here are Kasparovs decisive games score against some super-GMs.
Kasparov vs. Adams: 8-0
Anand: 15-3
Gelfand: 8-0
Kramnik: 4-5
Leko: 3-0
Polgar: 4-1
Shirov: 15-0
Topalov: 9-3
Fischer is truly the last great ‘original’ GM. He studied by himself and analysed by himself. Hence he is the ‘greatest’ GM who ever lived before the advent of computers. Now you have Topalov defeating Kramnik with a computer analysed novelty found by Cheparinov etc etc. Not the same at all. If computer’s did not exist ( overall it is a good thing that they do! ) the number of GM’s will be reduced by 70% and women GM’s by perhaps 95%.
Bobby is barely cold in the ground and the cowardly vultures already thirst for his blood. It really is sickening! What do simple minded patzers know what runs through a Champions mind. Susan printed the article and doesnt mention ( since she knew him), that Bobby was the most stubborn and principled man on the planet. They would not meet his demands so he wouldnt play. Truth be told, Fischer had more concern of a match vs Korchnoi, not the wonder boy Karpov.
“…the cowardly vultures already thirst for his blood.”
I hear it tastes like chicken.
So would your head on a pole.