|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > April 2005 > Fischer vs. Kasparov
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Fischer vs. Kasparov
|
|
| Eustace 2005-04-12, 6:01 pm |
| Chess
Barden on chess
Leonard Barden
Saturday April 2, 2005
The Guardian
More than 30 years ago a sponsor wanted to invite Bobby Fischer to
London. The then world champion was already reclusive, the sponsor's
business was shoes, the budget a mere £25,000. The proposal was a
two-game match against the then British champion Bill Hartston, plus a
harmless-sounding simul against 10 youngsters.
For the sponsor's consultant, me, the simul was the incentive, an
ambush. We were at the start of the "English chess explosion" and the
supposed raw kids were teenagers who included seven future grandmasters.
We got as far as a transatlantic haggle with Fischer's attorney, Bobby
listening in. Of course he turned it down but the sponsor got front-page
media coverage at zero cost - well, save a small fee to the consultant.
A few days ago the newly retired Garry Kasparov said that, of course, he
was still the best and could easily crush Anand, Kramnik, Leko et al. On
his recent arrival in Reykjavik Fischer said he didn't play "the old
chess" any more, only Fischerandom, but, if he did, he would still be
the best. Of course.
It emerged that during his eight-month stay in a Japanese detention
centre Fischer played several games with a Burmese guard who almost got
a draw. So what chance for Fischer v Kasparov, the racist of Reykjavik v
the beast of Baku? The two all-time greats have never met, let alone
played a game.
There could be an incentive soon. Next week a Philadelphia grand jury is
likely to indict Fischer for tax evasion and money laundering. The last
charge, based on Fischer's payments to US lawyers who helped him fight
deportation, is the key. It could trigger the new US Patriot Act
enabling the IRS to acquire details of, and perhaps freeze, Fischer's
Swiss bank account. So Fischer could be free but broke, needing another
large payday for his old age.
Kasparov v Fischer would be a historic event to rival Fischer v Spassky
1972 and Kasparov v IBM Deep Blue 1997. Outside chess, think Woods v
Nicklaus, Tyson v Louis, Beckham v Beckenbauer. It would also be a
mismatch, a 42-year-old in his prime against an ageing and mentally
disturbed 62-year-old. But Fischer showed in 1992 against Spassky that
he can still bite, if only fitfully.
So I would bring back an old concept, a match at odds. Let them play six
games normal chess, six Fischerandom, rapid or blitz rather than
five-hour sessions, and give Fischer four games start to make it
competitive. It is a slim chance, probably a dream, but if it came off
it would be instant history. More likely, it would publicise the sponsor
at virtually zero cost. But please don't forget the small fee to the
consultant.
| |
| Adrian MacNair 2005-04-12, 6:01 pm |
| "Eustace" <emf@nospam.email.com> wrote in message
news:d34uud0rfs@enews1.newsguy.com...
quote:
> It emerged that during his eight-month stay in a Japanese detention
> centre Fischer played several games with a Burmese guard who almost got
> a draw. So what chance for Fischer v Kasparov, the racist of Reykjavik v
> the beast of Baku? The two all-time greats have never met, let alone
> played a game.
You sound like you want to see the match, but then make Bobby seem like a
decrepit has-been with reference to almost drawing some nobody. This isn't
as uncommon as it may seem. Kasparov has drawn players in simuls.
|
| |
|
|