Bobby Fischer takes on all comers - in cyberspace
Ivan P.
xml&sSheet=/news/2001/09/09/ixhome.html
Ivan P.
By Andrew Allerson, Chief Reporter
(Filed: 09/09/2001)
BOBBY FISCHER, who became world chess champion in 1972 by triumphing in the
most famous match ever played, and who then retired to a hermit-like
existence of total obscurity, has been discovered playing the game
anonymously on the internet against fellow Grandmasters.
The disclosure that Fischer has emerged from a virtual 30-year self-imposed
exile is made today in The Sunday Telegraph Review by Nigel Short, the
British Grandmaster who in 1993 was the official challenger to Garry
Kasparov.
Short says that he has played nearly 50 speed chess games against Fischer
during the past year.
"I am 99 per cent sure that I have been playing against the chess legend.
It's tremendously exciting," said Short. He has overwhelming evidence that
the man who beat him comfortably is the same man who defeated Boris Spassky,
the Russian world champion, in an epic battle of the "superpowers" in
Reykjavik in 1972.
Afterwards Fischer disappeared from the public eye until 1992, when he
briefly returned to play Spassky again for a 20th anniversary re-match in
the-then pariah state of Serbia. Fischer won a prize of more than £2
million, playing brilliant chess, before disappearing again, hotly pursued
by the US Government, which had indicted him for breaking the UN embargo of
Serbia.
Short had been told by a Greek Grandmaster last year that Fischer, now 58,
had been playing anonymously on the internet, but was sceptical. Short,
however, eventually arranged to play the anonymous opponent and during their
games began "chatting" with him over the internet.
In October last year, in the first of their four confrontations, Short lost
8-0. Short is one of the world's best speed chess players, and in 1995 drew
a series of speed chess games 6-6 against Kasparov, the then world champion.
Short says: "In my opinion Fischer is a much stronger speed chess player
than Kasparov, which is incredible when one considers that at 58 he is
virtually a geriatric in terms of the modern game."
The final "proof" that Short was playing Fischer in cyberspace came when the
Briton asked: "Do you know Armando Acevedo?" - an obscure Mexican player.
The response was immediate: "Siegen 1970." Fischer had played Acevedo in the
Siegen Chess Olympiad of 1970. "The guy was obviously trying to tell me
something," said Short.
Short initially intended to keep his games a secret, but decided to disclose
them as rumours are spreading in the chess world of Fischer's apparent
re-emergence. Fischer is believed to be living in Japan.
Short fears that today's disclosure means he will never play Fischer again.
But their games will live with him. "To me, they are what an undiscovered
Mozart symphony would be to a music lover," he said.
Previous story: Studio threatens to bleed Dracula theme park dry
External links
The Bobby Fischer [unofficial] Home Page
The Amazing Bobby Fischer
Armando Acevedo [in Spanish]
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2001. Terms & Conditions of reading.
Commercial information. Privacy Policy.
Greg Kennedy
> during the past year.
>
> "I am 99 per cent sure that I have been playing against the chess legend.
> It's tremendously exciting," said Short. He has overwhelming evidence that
> the man who beat him comfortably is the same man who defeated Boris
Spassky,
> the Russian world champion, in an epic battle of the "superpowers" in
> Reykjavik in 1972.
Okay, lemmehaveit!
> Short had been told by a Greek Grandmaster last year that Fischer, now 58,
> had been playing anonymously on the internet, but was sceptical. Short,
> however, eventually arranged to play the anonymous opponent and during
their
> games began "chatting" with him over the internet.
Chatting "during the games"- hmm. Skittles...
> In October last year, in the first of their four confrontations, Short
lost
> 8-0. Short is one of the world's best speed chess players, and in 1995
drew
> a series of speed chess games 6-6 against Kasparov, the then world
champion.
Chatting with the computer's operator? That's okay, but
rather time consuming. Tick, tick.
> Short says: "In my opinion Fischer is a much stronger speed chess player
> than Kasparov, which is incredible when one considers that at 58 he is
> virtually a geriatric in terms of the modern game."
Tal finished ahead of Kasparov (as did others) in a huge
blitz event in 1993 at St. John, Canada. He was pretty old
at the time, and the event included most of the world's top
"contenders," not counting Bobby, of course.
> The final "proof" that Short was playing Fischer in cyberspace came when
the
> Briton asked: "Do you know Armando Acevedo?" - an obscure Mexican player.
> The response was immediate: "Siegen 1970." Fischer had played Acevedo in
the
> Siegen Chess Olympiad of 1970. "The guy was obviously trying to tell me
> something," said Short.
So the operator was Acevedo- but which _program_ was
Short losing to- Fritz or Chessmaster? ;-)
> Short fears that today's disclosure means he will never play Fischer
again.
"Again?" How can you have another Nutterbutter peanutbutter
sandwich cookie, when you haven't had any, yet? ;-)
Obviously it wasn't Fischer. He would never have stopped
after winning only eight blitz games. Further, he would have
insisted on a match of the first to win ten, draws not counting.
You also said he "takes on all comers." Fibber.
John Saunders
Ivan P. <no.e...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:8dBm7.54445$v%4.47...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Bobby Fischer takes on all comers - in cyberspace
> By Andrew Allerson, Chief Reporter
> (Filed: 09/09/2001)
>
the
> Briton asked: "Do you know Armando Acevedo?" - an obscure Mexican player.
> The response was immediate: "Siegen 1970." Fischer had played Acevedo in
the
> Siegen Chess Olympiad of 1970. "The guy was obviously trying to tell me
> something," said Short.
>
The paper copy of the newspaper has a more extensive report on this, which
unfortunately does not seem to be available online.
Short's account seems quite convincing but surely he could have come up with
a better 'check question' than the one about Acevedo. Fischer's games appear
on virtually every chess database (online or otherwise) and it only takes a
few seconds to search them (quoting 'Acevedo' and 'Fischer') to find the
answer 'Siegen 1970'.
John Saunders
Paul Onstad
It looks also as if Acevedo (assuming the same "Armando") plays a lot on
IECC & IECG (and on-line blitz?). Odd question for Short to ask but maybe he
did with a wink?
My own personal opinion is that Short was playing SundayGirl.
-Paul
Staunton
> The paper copy of the newspaper has a more extensive report on this, which
> unfortunately does not seem to be available online.
I'll type this up later.
>
> Short's account seems quite convincing but surely he could have come up
with
> a better 'check question' than the one about Acevedo. Fischer's games
appear
> on virtually every chess database (online or otherwise) and it only takes
a
> few seconds to search them (quoting 'Acevedo' and 'Fischer') to find the
> answer 'Siegen 1970'.
>
How's the wife?
CCCollective
By Andrew Allerson, Chief Reporter
(Filed: 09/09/2001)
Adam
:-)
Maybe that guest who played 1f3 and 2Kf2 and beat me on ICC was... nah....
adam
CCCollective <ChessBoa[nospam]@SoftHome.net> wrote in message
news:gjLm7.53890$w75.22...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/09/nchess09.xm
l&sSheet=/news/2001/09/09/ixhome.html
______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Binaries.net = SPEED+RETENTION+COMPLETION = http://www.binaries.net
crot...@dtc.net
Short before, but the opponent I was playing said he was Nigel Short.
Naturally, I believe everything he said.
I have also played Einstein, Napoleon, and Capablanca. Alekhine
wanted to play me too, but I told him I didn't like his attitude.
Staunton
of my schoolmates shared my love - it was a pleasure reserved for my father,
my uncle, a couple of family friends and myself. Bobby Fischer changed all
that. His match against the Russia World Champion, Boris Spassky, in
Reykjavik that summer brought chess onto the front pages of newspapers
everywhere.
For the world at large this was a symbolic clash between the two superpowers
at the height of the Cold War. Of course, all that meant nothing to me.
Instead it was the validation of the game I loved, proof that chess could
legitimately lead to fame and fortune. From that moment - the moment I knew
it was possible - I decided that I would become a professional chess-player.
Fischer's fame rose to still greater heights after he won the match - the
lone American taking on the might of the entire Soviet chess establishment,
who, he said, had "fixed world chess". His fame was perhaps all the greater
because of eccentricity. He failed to show up for the second game of the
match with Spassky because he decided that he did not want to play in front
of television cameras, which thereafter bowed to his wishes and failed to
record this historic event.
Fischer's terror of the modern media was perhaps one reason why the
newly-crowned world chess champion, following his awesomely easy victory
over the hitherto rock-solid Spassky, simply disappeared for 20 years. No
one even knew of his whereabouts, although most conjecture centred on
Hungary, where, it was alleged, he had found - for the first time in his
life - a girlfriend. Then, in 1992, lured by a prize fund of $5 million,
Fischer suddenly emerged to play a 20th anniversary return match with
Spassky in the then pariah state of Serbia.
Having been warned by the US Government that he was violating the UN embargo
of Serbia - a fact about which he would have cared less than nothing -
Fischer was promptly indicted by a federal grand jury on the day he walked
off with his $3.35 million prize for winning the match. Well, of course, he
won: his play, to the astonishment of many, considering his 20-year absence
from the game, was at times incandescently brilliant.
And then he disappeared again - and once more, no one seems to know exactly,
or even roughly, where he is. I don't know either. And yet I have been
speaking to him. And I have been playing chess matches against him. At least
I'm about 99% sure I have. If that sounds mysterious, let me explain.
Even when I am not playing in official chess tournaments I am so hopeless an
addict that I like to play or talk with my fellow Grandmasters. Thanks to
the glory of cyberspace, one pleasant way to encounter them and while away
the hours is at the Internet Chess Club, or ICC. There I can play
three-minute games, or "blitz", as it is known in the chess world, against
opponents from anywhere around the world, or simply chat if I am not in the
mood for a game.
Last year I was chatting at my favourite cyber haunt with the young Greek
Grandmaster Ioannis Papaioannou when he told me, in great excitement, an
improbable tale of playing blitz against Bobby Fischer at the Internet Chess
Club. I could not help but burst into laughter, much as I would have done
had my friend claimed to have seen the Loch Ness Monster. The idea that
Fischer would miraculously challenge a relatively obscure Greek player to a
few dozen friendly games, furthermore for no fee, was really too much to
believe. Nevertheless, there was something in Ioannis' earnestness which
planted a small seed of belief in my mind. After all, on the internet the
notoriously reclusive Fischer could play chess, yet still remain invisible,
untraceable.
I thought nothing of it until a few weeks later when I was logged on to the
ICC one evening. I was approached by a man claiming to be an intermediary
who asked me if I was prepared to play against a guest, who, he assured me,
was a very strong chess player but who wished to preserve his anonymity. He
was out to dinner at that time, but perhaps we could play at a pre-arranged
time later? He would use a code word so that I would know for sure that this
was the right man.
I thought that this "intermediary" was almost certainly a fraud or a
time-waster (the internet is full of them) but, on the off-chance, of
meeting the Loch Ness Monster of world chess, I agreed. The appointed hour
for the challenge came... and went. I hung around for another hour or so,
but there was no sign of Fischer, or anyone else for that matter.
I forgot about the incident until some months later. I had just returned
from the Chess Olympiad in Istanbul last October and idly logged onto the
ICC in the evening. Suddenly I was approached by a guest using the
pre-arranged code word. My heart jumped. Could this be Bobby Fischer? Before
we started he suprised me by requesting me to log off, and then log on again
as a guest.
There were two purposes to that: one was that we would both be anonymous.
When I enter the ICC under my real name there is an automatic announcement
of my arrival to everyone else present. Should anyone wish to watch my games
(there are usually dozens and occasionally hundreds of people doing this)
they can thus do so easily. But the second and equally significant point is
that the games would not be recorded by the system, as they are
automatically when I appear as Grandmaster N.D. Short. I did as he
requested, and the games began.
The time limit was three minutes per player, per game. My unseen opponent
began with some highly irregular, if not totally absurd opening moves -
shifting all his pawns forward one square. These were moves that that no
Grandmaster would ever play. I immediately felt that I was the victim of an
elaborate practical joke. But then I became aware of something else.
From this deliberately unpromising position emerged moves of extraordinary
power. In this first game I was totally crushed. I took a little more care
in the second game, but met with the same result. His openings became even
more cocky - 1....f6 followed by 2...Kf7 and 3...Ke6, exposing his own king
to immediate assault - was one of his bizarre and unprecedented gambits. It
was as if he was deliberately trying to handicap himself. However, I was
beaten again.
After eight games and eight losses I apologised for my poor performance and
left. I suggested we play again the following evening when I would be less
exhausted. The next day we met on schedule. I was less tired and and played
better, even winning a couple of games, but nevertheless my final result was
still decidedly negative.
My opponent moved with breathtaking speed. He typed extremely quickly too,
for we chatted incessantly throughout these encounters. Often when I ran
short of time he added seconds to my clock so that he could beat me on the
position instead of on time. Of all my many hundreds of ICC opponents -
including some of the world's leading Grandmasters - no one had ever done
that before or since. He was polite, funny, and clearly an American., to
judge from his spelling and pattern of conversation. He was also obviously
very familiar in a gossipy way with the major figures in the chess world of
the 1960s -Fischer's period of greatest activity.
However, some doubt remained in my mind: how did I know that this was not a
hoaxer using a computer? Just possibly a fantastically strong computer
program could play blitz chess at that strength. Well, I cannot be 100 per
cent certain, but his play simply did not resemble that of any program I
know of. And, anyway, computers don't make deliberate mistakes.
I wanted to test my antagonist further so I thought of a number of tricky
questions as we gossiped. For example, I asked him: "Do you know Armando
Acevedo?" Senor Acevedo is an obscure Mexican player, not remotely of
Grandmaster strength. My opponent's reply came instantly, if cryptically:
"Siegen 1970".
Now if you look in the tournament book of the Siegen Chess Olympiad of 1970
you will find that Bobby Fischer played a certain Armando Acevedo in a
preliminary round. He was obviously trying to tell me something.
I never confronted my opponent with the question, "Am I playing Bobby
Fischer?" I did ask him, however, who was the strongest blitz chess-player
he had ever played. His response was, "If I am who you think I am, I would
answer Mikhail Tal." Tal, the brilliant Latvian former world chess champion,
gave Fischer a number of painful beatings when the two played each other in
the late 1950s.
I described my experiences to the man who knows Fischer as well as anyone -
his old foe, Boris Spassky - when I met up with the Russian in Zurich
earlier this year. Boris considered it highly probable that I had come up
against the elusive genius. When I said that, contrary to popular
perception, he didn't sound mad, at all, Boris replied "Of course he isn't."
I played the man I believe to be Bobby Fischer on a couple of further
occasions - a total of 50 games, the last time in May - never getting
remotely close to scoring 50 per cent. By comparison, I scored 50 per cent
(six points from 12 games) the last time I faced Garry Kasparov at blitz
chess, in France in 1995.
Fischer is in my opinion, therefore, a much stronger speed chess player than
Kasparov, which is incredible when one considers that at 58 he is virtually
a geriatric in terms of the modern professional chess game. Still, Fischer
was a prodigy of youth - he became US chess champion in 1957 at 14 - so he
is clearly a genius which transcends normal biology.
I was going to keep this story a secret, but it has become obvious that
Fischer's activity on the ICC is slowly becoming known. (The English
Grandmaster Jim Plaskett has told me that he, too, has played Fischer on the
ICC. Jim also found that his opponent played fantastically weak openings in
order to create a level playing field, or rather chess board. Alas, Jim,
like me, was crushed like a beetle.) It was only a matter of time before
someone else published something.
I have discovered three or four others with a similar story to tell -
although the reliability of some people's evidence is complicated by the
fact that, according to one of the ICC's administrators, there are at least
three Fischer hoaxers (two amateurs using computers and one Grandmaster).
It would be wonderful to publish one of my games against Fischer. To me they
are what an undiscovered Mozart symphony would be to a music lover.
Unfortunately, I have no record of any of them and, even if I did, it would
be a breach of etiquette to publish them. Fischer would doubtless be furious
if they appeared.
Sadly, I have probably already scuppered my chances of ever playing him
again with these modest disclosures. I hope not. It was an honour and the
greatest pleasure to spend a few hours with Robert James Fischer - even if
we never actually shook hands.
John Macnab
ability in speed chess. Presumably, this is because it is a test of rapid
recognition, and fatique is usually not a factor.
Curiouser and curiouser....
John
"Ivan P." <no.e...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:H7Bm7.54375$v%4.47...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/09/nchess09.
> xml&sSheet=/news/2001/09/09/ixhome.html
>
>
drovar
"Adam" <adam...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3b9b8...@corp-goliath.newsgroups.com...
> Well bugger me. I thought it was all a load of b*ll*cks but now I believe
it
> :-)
> Maybe that guest who played 1f3 and 2Kf2 and beat me on ICC was... nah....
> adam
>
People are actually playing that on ICC. I played someone today who did
that. I got a much better position and won material but my attention
wandered and I lost. It definitely wasn't Fischer ;-)
Joseph Wojcik
Helicopter Man
<DoYouWantYourHouseBuz...@ItsATerribleSituation.nu> wrote
in message news:9ngd5a$6sko2$1...@ID-22086.news.dfncis.de...
> It's a good bet that he is playing chess on the internet, as well as other
> online activities and interests, and has various online handles
(nicknames,
> pennames, aliases). I imagine many of us have met him here & there, indeed
I
> suspect that I've received email from him.
> --
> --HM
Of course he is playing online chess. Im sure he plays a few hours daily
just like all the other chess addicts. I dont think he ever stated he gave
up playing the game...i can't think of a single reason why he would not be
playing alot on the internet.
Michael J Fitch
((( SNIP )))
> Obviously it wasn't Fischer.
HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS GREG?
ARE YOU CALLING SHORT A LIAR?
WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT FOR HIM TO LIE?
ARE YOU USING THOSES PSYCHIC POWERS AGAIN ?
((( SNIP,KENNEDY DROPPING )))
CCCollective
"Joseph Wojcik" <gork...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8NQm7.4040$uf3.1...@typhoon1.gnilink.net...
> Of course he is playing online chess. Im sure he plays a few hours daily
> just like all the other chess addicts. I dont think he ever stated he
gave
> up playing the game...
Actually, he did say he has given up 'old chess' for Fischer Randomizer
chess in his recent radio broadcasts.
> i can't think of a single reason why he would not be
> playing alot on the internet.
Of course, Fischer says things and then does something else :)
Staunton
> newly-crowned world chess champion, following his awesomely easy victory
> over the hitherto rock-solid Spassky, simply disappeared for 20 years. No
> one even knew of his whereabouts, although most conjecture centred on
> Hungary, where, it was alleged, he had found - for the first time in his
> life - a girlfriend. Then, in 1992, lured by a prize fund of $5 million,
> Fischer suddenly emerged to play a 20th anniversary return match with
> Spassky in the then pariah state of Serbia.
Nigel is confused. Fischer lived in the States up until the 1992 match and
in Hungary from mid-1993. His girlfriend (Zita Rajcsnayi) turned out not to
be his girlfriend either. I once read an article - why didn't I keep it?- in
which she related how she turned down Fischer's proposal of marriage,
telling him that she loved another. It seems he didn't take the news too
well, for he was sort of shouting, how can you prefer this nobody to me?
I understand the lucky fellow was FM Zoltan Simonyi, who, as it happens, had
been involved in the organisation of the 1992 match.
>
> Having been warned by the US Government that he was violating the UN
embargo
> of Serbia - a fact about which he would have cared less than nothing -
On page 232 of No Regrets (Seirawan, Stefanovic) we read:
Journalists registered a flying visit to Game 25 by Lord David Owen, a
co-president of the Geneva conference on Yugoslavia. Lord Owen came to talk
over a possible solution of the Yugoslav crisis with politicians in
Belgrade, but couldn't help spending a part of his precious time on Fischer
and Sspassky. During his visit he admitted he was a great chess fan. He knew
Nigel Short and often played chess with his family.
Did this Geneva conference have anything to do with the UN, one wonders.
> Fischer was promptly indicted by a federal grand jury on the day he walked
> off with his $3.35 million prize for winning the match. Well, of course,
he
> won: his play, to the astonishment of many, considering his 20-year
absence
> from the game, was at times incandescently brilliant.
>
Remember, Kasparov had the temerity to intimate that Game1 was fixed.
> And then he disappeared again - and once more, no one seems to know
>exactly, or even roughly, where he is.
I can look into this more closely, but the recent spate of Fischer
'sightings' seems to coincide with Fischer's presence in the Philippines (if
that, in fact, is where he is).
> I thought that this "intermediary" was almost certainly a fraud or a
> time-waster (the internet is full of them) but, on the off-chance, of
> meeting the Loch Ness Monster of world chess, I agreed. The appointed hour
> for the challenge came... and went. I hung around for another hour or so,
> but there was no sign of Fischer, or anyone else for that matter.
Curious. Such behaviour argues in favour of Fischer and against the hoax.
> The time limit was three minutes per player, per game.
Of course, computer cheating at this speed would require two, possibly
three, skilled operatives. Even then...
>
> After eight games and eight losses I apologised for my poor performance
and
> left. I suggested we play again the following evening when I would be less
> exhausted. The next day we met on schedule. I was less tired and and
played
> better, even winning a couple of games, but nevertheless my final result
was
> still decidedly negative.
>
>He was polite, funny, and clearly an American
Well, this rules out everybody on this newsgroup, for a start.
>
> However, some doubt remained in my mind: how did I know that this was not
a
> hoaxer using a computer? Just possibly a fantastically strong computer
> program could play blitz chess at that strength. Well, I cannot be 100 per
> cent certain, but his play simply did not resemble that of any program I
> know of. And, anyway, computers don't make deliberate mistakes.
>
> I wanted to test my antagonist further so I thought of a number of tricky
> questions as we gossiped. For example, I asked him: "Do you know Armando
> Acevedo?" Senor Acevedo is an obscure Mexican player, not remotely of
> Grandmaster strength. My opponent's reply came instantly, if cryptically:
> "Siegen 1970".
>
Remarkable.
>
> I described my experiences to the man who knows Fischer as well as
>anyone -
> his old foe, Boris Spassky - when I met up with the Russian in Zurich
> earlier this year. Boris considered it highly probable that I had come up
> against the elusive genius. When I said that, contrary to popular
> perception, he didn't sound mad, at all, Boris replied "Of course he
>isn't."
Heresy, heresy!
> I played the man I believe to be Bobby Fischer on a couple of further
> occasions - a total of 50 games, the last time in May - never getting
> remotely close to scoring 50 per cent. By comparison, I scored 50 per cent
> (six points from 12 games) the last time I faced Garry Kasparov at blitz
> chess, in France in 1995.
Maybe these were skittles games played during some French League match.
>
> Fischer is in my opinion, therefore, a much stronger speed chess player
>than Kasparov
Heresy, heresy!
>
> I was going to keep this story a secret, but it has become obvious that
> Fischer's activity on the ICC is slowly becoming known. (The English
> Grandmaster Jim Plaskett has told me that he, too, has played Fischer on
>the ICC.
I append an earlier post of mine to the end of this one.
> Jim also found that his opponent played fantastically weak openings in
> order to create a level playing field, or rather chess board. Alas, Jim,
> like me, was crushed like a beetle.) It was only a matter of time before
> someone else published something.
>
Nigel's rush to be the first into print is rather touching.
> It would be wonderful to publish one of my games against Fischer. To me
>they are what an undiscovered Mozart symphony would be to a music lover.
>
At 3 0?! The Greco-English GM is indulging in hyperbole, methinks.
> Unfortunately, I have no record of any of them and, even if I did, it
>would be a breach of etiquette to publish them. Fischer would doubtless be
>furious if they appeared.
>
By what right? Our 'shadowy anonymous' friend never swore anybody to
secrecy, did he? On the other hand, the fact that Fischer selected Short
from hundreds of possible GMs may have implied that he was considered
trustworthy.
It may also be noteworthy (although admittedly a small sample) that
Fischer's choices are all Gentiles.
> >> There was a suggestion that the article is from Chesscafe, but I
> >>cannot find it on the search engine @ http://www.chesscafe.com
> >
> >Yes, this article appeared at the Chesscafe, in a short-lived section
> >whose name eludes me. At the time, I'm pretty sure I followed the link
up.
>
> Thanks for the confirmation. Speaking to the Icelandic opponent of the
> mystery GM would be helpful.
>
> Also to GM Fressinet, who seems to be saying that he reached the
conclusion
> himself (without any specific disclosure by the opponent) that he was
> playing Bobby. http://www.sportechecs.com/article/article.php?IdArticle=43
>
I was chatting earlier with Gentleman Jim Plaskett (Parsfial) on ICC
about this. I think I'm free to relate that our mystery guest beat
Plaskett 14-0 with 1 draw. Apparently, he/it crushed Short 8-0. All
these games were 3 0 , I believe.
Short believes that it is Fischer. Plaskett doesn't, he thinks it must
be a GM working with a computer (as the play is not routinely
computer-like). But what computer it could be, he doesn't know. He
called the whole thing 'astounding'. The subject was discussed a little
at the recent 4NCL event; both Rowson and McShane doubt that it's
Fischer.
Two other clues - Plaskett knows quite a lot about Fischer, and
mentioned Elizabeth Targ (Fischer's niece - Joan, Bobby's sister was
married to Russell Targ) - our guest appeared not to know the name.
Hardly conclusive though if Fischer is playing games. He also said that
Fischer is in Japan. I knew that Fischer was there, but he may now be
back in Hungary.
Bhalchandra Thatte
It will be useful to all who wish to pretend to be Bobby as well as
those who would actually like to play and beat as black against
someone playing 1.f3.
Bhalchandra Thatte
"drovar" <dro...@alltel.net> wrote in message news:<9ngdnq$dvq$1...@iac5.navix.net>...
Briarroot
>
> I think it is now time to develop a serious opening theory for 1.f3.
> It will be useful to all who wish to pretend to be Bobby as well as
> those who would actually like to play and beat as black against
> someone playing 1.f3
Heheheh! What does this thread say to those who feel chess
is being strangled by those huge databases of opening lines?
Brian Gordon
Check out the editorial review _by the author_ of "Bobby Fischer
Teaches Chess" at amazon.com.... Also, notice the date it was
posted... I always enjoyed seeing that, but it could be so easily
faked.
ofergneezy
[snip]
> Short initially intended to keep his games a secret, but decided to
> disclose them as rumours are spreading in the chess world of Fischer's
> apparent re-emergence. Fischer is believed to be living in Japan.
If this last sentence is true, then I believe he would be extraditable
to the U.S. where he is wanted on several charges including tax
evasion. I don't think Fischer would let that happen, so I doubt he's
there. But otherwise, an excellent report.
Paul Wiener
<snip>
> I wanted to test my antagonist further so I thought of a number of tricky
> questions as we gossiped.
You might have asked him, "Who is the strongest rapids player you know
of ever to be hustled in blitz at the Manhattan Chess Club?". Fisher
dropped some money to Asa Hoffman one night, way back when, after the
weekly rapids tournament. Hoffman's livelyhood depended on his knowing
what odds he could give or take from any player; and he did a good job
at getting Fisher to overextend himself. If I recall correctly, Fisher
was giving Hoffman 20-to-1 one odds in money and some major clock
advantage as well. After about a dozen games, Fisher had already lost
3 times and had to quit. In addition to myself, there were a good
number of witnesses.
Would "the real" Fisher admit to this, even anonymously as a third
person? I don't know, but it's provocative and might have drawn a
revealing response. An imposter would probabaly have no knowledge of
the incident.
<snip>
> I never confronted my opponent with the question, "Am I playing Bobby
> Fischer?" I did ask him, however, who was the strongest blitz chess-player
> he had ever played. His response was, "If I am who you think I am, I would
> answer Mikhail Tal."
Hmm, if he was who you thought he was, he might have replied, "Bernard
Zuckerman." Zuckerman, a "mere "USCF senior master," surpassed himself
at blitz even more than did Fisher (which is not to say that he was
better than Fisher--just that the gap between his own normal skill and
his speed skill was greater than Fisher's). Over the years, Zuckerman
won a good number of speed games against Fisher.
<snip>
> Fischer is in my opinion, therefore, a much stronger speed chess player than
> Kasparov, which is incredible when one considers that at 58 he is virtually
> a geriatric in terms of the modern professional chess game.
The degree to which Fisher was a giant in speed chess surpassed even
his superiority over his contemporaries at tournament play. It is thus
not surprising that even at his current age, he should be stronger
than Kasparov at blitz. It doesn't mean that Fisher would best
Kasparov at normal chess though.
<snip>
> It would be wonderful to publish one of my games against Fischer. To me they
> are what an undiscovered Mozart symphony would be to a music lover.
>
> Unfortunately, I have no record of any of them and, even if I did, it would
> be a breach of etiquette to publish them. Fischer would doubtless be furious
> if they appeared.
I won't comment on the etiquette question, but it surprises me that a
GM couldn't reconstruct at least a few of those games shortly after
they were played. Given how meaningful the event seems to have been
for you, I'm astounded that you didn't sit down right after each
session and record as many of the games as you could. Could it be that
you're just denying that there's a written record to avoid being
pressured into publishing the scores? Please don't take this in a
hostile or critical way. Even if you're holding back, your motive seem
to be pure.
gargle
at least as far as his match with Chess 4.6 or 7 (the then-WC Northwestern U
program) played in '78. Short did win the match, I believe (I think it was
five-minute) by something like 6.5-3.5, but this was one game he lost.
Roman M. Parparov
>> I never confronted my opponent with the question, "Am I playing Bobby
>> Fischer?" I did ask him, however, who was the strongest blitz chess-player
>> he had ever played. His response was, "If I am who you think I am, I would
>> answer Mikhail Tal."
> Hmm, if he was who you thought he was, he might have replied, "Bernard
> Zuckerman." Zuckerman, a "mere "USCF senior master," surpassed himself
> at blitz even more than did Fisher (which is not to say that he was
> better than Fisher--just that the gap between his own normal skill and
> his speed skill was greater than Fisher's). Over the years, Zuckerman
> won a good number of speed games against Fisher.
> <snip>
It was posted there a while ago, that at an Olympiad Bobby actually beat
all of the top Soviet guys Tal included, but then Russians produced
Stein and Stein showed his superiority over Fischer. This fact is not
well-known, so an imposer could miss it. Then, Tal was the winner of
the world blitz event in Vancouver, when both Karpov and Kasparov were at
their prime, so it was an easy choice.
Other point, that when people claim "fantastic win" over Spassky, let us
remember that Spassky after dropping out of the cycle in 1983 only
diminished and already at 1990 was looking like a player who lost most of
his interest in chess. He's been ELO 2555 since then. His results at
"Veterans vs. Ladies" are very characteristic. A match Karpov-Spassky
in 1992 would go like +10-1=5 (Spassky has a particular problem with
Karpov, though) and Kasparov-Spassky would end +10-0=10
Leave the chess Elvis alone :)
--
Roman M. Parparov - NASA EOSDIS project node at TAU technical manager.
Email: ro...@empire.tau.ac.il
Phone/Fax: +972-(0)3-6405205 (work), +972-(0)54-629-884 (home)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The economy depends about as much on economists as the weather does on
weather forecasters.
-- Jean-Paul Kauffmann
ross nickel
you. If you feel it wrong to publish your games now,you could wait
until a later time,such as after his death.
uli...@earthlink.net (Paul Wiener) wrote in message
news:<f131202e.01090...@posting.google.com>...
Sam Sloan
wrote:
Fischer's offenses to the extent that they exist at all are
non-extradictable.
He is charged with violating an executive order of President George
Bush. That is not an offense, much less an extradictable one.
Fischer has not been charged with any income tax violations. Even if
he were, that would not be extradictable.
Sam Sloan
Andy Platt
mysterious Internet Fischer is a computer." I wonder if they *know* for
sure!
Andy.
--
I'm not really here - it's just your warped imagination.
"CCCollective" <ChessBoa[nospam]@SoftHome.net> wrote in message
news:gjLm7.53890$w75.22...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/09/nchess09.xm
Remco Gerlich
> enter mailstore-1 and your game will be instantaneously e-mailed to
> you. If you feel it wrong to publish your games now,you could wait
> until a later time,such as after his death.
You and Paul talk like you think "Staunton" played Fischer, but he's just
quoting Short, from some newspaper. Not very useful giving advice to him in
this thread (though I'm sure some wellknown people lurk here - for some
reason...)
--
Remco Gerlich
Paul Onstad
>
> "Staunton" wrote
> > Unfortunately, I have no record of any of them and, even if I did, it would
> > be a breach of etiquette to publish them. Fischer would doubtless be furious
> > if they appeared.
>
> I won't comment on the etiquette question, but it surprises me that a
> GM couldn't reconstruct at least a few of those games shortly after
> they were played. Given how meaningful the event seems to have been
> for you, I'm astounded that you didn't sit down right after each
> session and record as many of the games as you could. Could it be that
> you're just denying that there's a written record to avoid being
> pressured into publishing the scores? Please don't take this in a
> hostile or critical way. Even if you're holding back, your motive seem
> to be pure.
Especially since guests on ICC have the option of saving scores, just like
anyone else.
If I played Fischer, I'd save the score.
-Paul
Sam Sloan
wrote:
I personally believe that this is not by Fischer. Here is what it
says:
Editorial Reviews
The author, Bobby Fischer , February 24, 1999
Meant for beginners
When I originally wrote this book, I intended it
to be for the beginning chess player, regardless of age. The longevity
of its availability has proven that it indeed can raise the level of
initial play, and can train you to have a "chess eye". Enjoy!
Sam Sloan
wrote:
>You might have asked him, "Who is the strongest rapids player you know
>of ever to be hustled in blitz at the Manhattan Chess Club?". Fisher
>dropped some money to Asa Hoffman one night, way back when, after the
>weekly rapids tournament. Hoffman's livelyhood depended on his knowing
>what odds he could give or take from any player; and he did a good job
>at getting Fisher to overextend himself. If I recall correctly, Fisher
>was giving Hoffman 20-to-1 one odds in money and some major clock
>advantage as well. After about a dozen games, Fisher had already lost
>3 times and had to quit. In addition to myself, there were a good
>number of witnesses.
This is not quite what happened.
It did not happen at the Manhattan Chess Club. It took place at the
Flea House, the Chess and Checker Club of New York, which was on 42nd
Street near 7th Avenue.
Bobby Fischer gave Asa Hoffmann 20-1 odds. Hoffmann was rated 2377 at
the time. Hoffmann played the Evans Gambit and won the first game on
an opening trap which is now in all the books.
Fischer then won 19 games in a row.
Hoffmann then quit Fischer a dollar ahead.
I was not personally present but several of my friends, including Fred
Wilson and Marshall Leon Zukov, saw this.
Sam Sloan
li...@ork.net
It says that there's a new area of opeing theory that needs developing for
the databases.
Z
>
>>
> Tal finished ahead of Kasparov (as did others) in a huge
>blitz event in 1993 at St. John, Canada. He was pretty old
>at the time, and the event included most of the world's top
>"contenders," not counting Bobby, of course.
Yes, he was pretty old at the time...so old in fact he was dead.
Phx000
most convincing evidence to me. Although it could be a supergrandmaster other
than Fischer I suppose. Such a grandmaster would conceivably memorized/ know
all or most of Fischer's published games and opponents, esp. if he were a huge
fan of Fischer's.
I think it probably is Fischer, but there's still some room for doubt.
ofergneezy
> Fischer's offenses to the extent that they exist at all are
> non-extradictable.
>
> He is charged with violating an executive order of President George
> Bush. That is not an offense, much less an extradictable one.
>
If indeed all he did was violate an order of that Neo-Nazi
baby-killing scumbag, then he should be considered a national hero.
ofergneezy
I doubt it too. It's just like the usual pap written by house hacks to
push books. This stuff is often churned out with the author's name on
it with his permission.
Phantym
> Obviously it wasn't Fischer. He would never have stopped
> after winning only eight blitz games. Further, he would have
> insisted on a match of the first to win ten, draws not counting.
Have you seen the openings employed by this machine you think is playing
Short?
How often does Fritz play f3, Kf2, Ke3 as its first 3 moves?
Phantym
with
> a better 'check question' than the one about Acevedo. Fischer's games
appear
> on virtually every chess database (online or otherwise) and it only takes
a
> few seconds to search them (quoting 'Acevedo' and 'Fischer') to find the
> answer 'Siegen 1970'.
>
> John Saunders
I think half the point is that Fischer was trying to let Short know
something with his response...note that the question said nothing about
Fischer, etc.
Akorps666
The trolls are loose again. The interesting
thing is that apparently they have suckered
a legitimate newspaper reporter into
believing their crap. But I guess the papers
like the story, as it makes good headlines
even if it isn't true.
Its kind of an internet comedy. Obviously
you can make an opening book so the
chess engine, whatever it is, can snap off
that crappy f3,Kf2 bullshit opening until
the opponent deviates from that book.
Then with some of the souped up engines
it wouldn't be surprising to see them beat
GMs at 1-0 time controls. The damned
computers make their damned moves so
fast I can't even *SEE* them, when I
observe their games. A human needs at
least a split second to *SEE* the damned
position at least, before moving, even if
he is a super-GM.
Fischer would never play that crap, its
ridiculous. His openings were so polished
and immaculate, I can't believe he would
even be capable of playing a crappy
opening. Fischer was the maestro of
deep opening preparation in his day.
Romm is right, it is probably just marketing
that keeps the story going.
Oh, and this other crap about a 2400
played beating Capa. I can't say for sure,
as my best rating was around 2390, and
that was in postal, but from my ignorant
perspective any 2400 playing vs Capablanca
would be like a kindergarden student
being dissected by a master surgeon.
Maybe I am just too stupid to play good
chess, but every time I go over a Capa
game I feel like I am being transported
into the realm of the Chess Gods, some
kind of chess paradise or Elysian Fields.
That certainly doesn't happen when I look
at a 2400's games.
Actually, how many 2400 players could
play a rook ending like Capa-Tartakower
that is in many books. Play a game like
that and maybe I will become a believer.
That game was my model that I used in
the best game I ever played OTB, at least
the highest rated player I beat. No, I ain't
going to tell you who it was, so don't ask.
I don't want to embarass him :-)
Only a computer would play that f3 crap,
by the way. No GM would do that, maybe
at the IM level, but show me a GM that
admits to playing that crap at top level.
rermove 666 to send email
Roman M. Parparov
> Actually, how many 2400 players could
> play a rook ending like Capa-Tartakower
> that is in many books. Play a game like
> that and maybe I will become a believer.
> That game was my model that I used in
> the best game I ever played OTB, at least
> the highest rated player I beat. No, I ain't
> going to tell you who it was, so don't ask.
> I don't want to embarass him :-)
I wonder how computer would play that ending as White... I don't
think he'd be able to get the position right.. :)
Joshua B. Lilly
> blitz event in 1993 at St. John, Canada. He was pretty old
> at the time, and the event included most of the world's top
> "contenders," not counting Bobby, of course.
Someone this past weekend told me chess was for dead people, but I don`t
think this is what she meant!!
(To clarify, Mikhail Tal died in 1992, so it would be very hard for him to
play in a blitz event in 1993. Maybe in 1994, but not so recently after
death.)
Joshua B. Lilly
"Greg Kennedy" <gm...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sWCm7.7030$5r.5...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Paul Onstad
>
> >How often does Fritz play f3, Kf2, Ke3 as its first 3 moves?
>
> The trolls are loose again. The interesting
> thing is that apparently they have suckered
> a legitimate newspaper reporter into
> believing their crap. But I guess the papers
> like the story, as it makes good headlines
> even if it isn't true.
Yes, when it comes to chess, they'll take anything that makes a good story.
I got a kick out of this CNN blurb concerning the upcoming Kramnik - Fritz
match:
"Deep Fritz has been built from scratch by an
independent group of computer and chess specialists,
led by Dutch programmer Frans Morsch, after IBM decided
not to continue the Deep Blue project. DEEP FRITZ HAS PREVIOUSLY
BEATEN DEEP BLUE, KASPAROV AND WORLD CHESS FEDERATION CHAMPION
VISHWANATHAN ANAND <my emphasis>."
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/ptech/08/02/chess.battle.idg/index.html
See that last sentence? Fritz played and beat Deep Blue?? These corporate
journalists will do anything to massage their net worth. They expect a
payoff when the match is held.
Short making his report does lend credibility but we shouldn't assume GMs
have some magical ability to avoid hoaxes denied the rest of us. If many GMs
were similarly convinced, it might be a different story.
"Fischer on the Internet" is about as difficult to fake as crop circles.
-Paul
ps: a 13 year old kid can get his chess computer to play f3, either by
whittling down an opening book or playing it manually
Jan Th. R.
news:3b9cb269$1...@vienna7.his.com...
> Chessbase have it on their news page saying, "Sorry, Nige, we believe the
> mysterious Internet Fischer is a computer." I wonder if they *know* for
> sure!
Since when did computers chat like Short describes?
--
Jan Th.
Peter van der Hoog
speedchess at such a level? I don't believe it.
Chess_Fighter
> 58 years old, out of real practice for 30 years, and playing
> speedchess at such a level? I don't believe it.
Some may disagree...but I think chess is like riding a bike. Once you
are good at the game, the skills stick with you for the rest of your
life.
Jason Lee
coming together for the rapture (the return of Jesus Christ). I have
been joking about Michael Jordan's return as one sign and the Chicago
Cubs winning a series as another sign. However, now I truly believe
that times are changing and there's not much time left before this
comfortable world as we know will become a world of chaos, then
shortly our Lord and Saviour will appear.
Of course this sounds ridiculous and I would be crazy to believe
whole-heartedly that Bobby Fischer's return would have anything to do
with the last days. But, somehow whenever I think of the last days I
always envisioned God raising up great people, and aside from a
religious figure, the person I most envisioned was none other than
Bobby Fischer. He is a military mastermind!!!
I know quite a bit of people from Israel, and a close friend's brother
is a second leutenant in the army (he's been there 18 years so far).
I have seen people who can lead and who are ready for war. Still, I
feel Bobby Fischer is far more than a chess player. He is a tactical
genius. His playing style is unprecidented. To Bobby the pieces are
alive, each one utilizing a specific duty to its maximum, and all
pieces working together. I feel that Bobby Fischer has already taught
us a lot about life, to not look for frivilous victories or continue
in redundant patterns, but look forward to an extremely wide array of
options. Bobby Fischer has shown on the chessboard that there is much
more to life than meets the eye, with patience, perserverance, and
persistance. Situations that seemed to be hopeless for some, Bobby
Fischer has drastically changed into victory.
From reading the letter from Nibel. Bobby Fischer (as I assumed he
would) has gotten better. I hear now he has been moving his pawns at
the beginning of the game. My interpretation is that he has been
mastering the art of defense by creating a heavy attack from the
start. Chess is war. Fischer's seemingly new style gives me the
impression that I shouldn't be too reserved. I have to take risks, in
chess and in life.
Bobby Fischer is obviously a special person with an insight deeper
than many will ever comprehend. He didn't get this way through simple
review of chess positions, he learned what was more important, an
insight, an ability to look far ahead, and he concentrates on the
principle which I told to almost anyone to whom I taught to and that
is to always "LOOK FOR YOUR BEST MOVE!!!!"
I think about Bobby's life story and can only imagine what was going
on in his personal life. But I (and I'm sure Bobby also) believe that
the manner in which you conduct your personal life will show in
everything else you do.
His character is that of someone who has a lot of concern on matters
of importance, not so much on games (even though he is the world's
greatest).
p.s. I wote about the rapture because my Pastor has been fervently
preaching about these being the last days for the past seven years (at
least). He said nobody knows the exact time, but according to the
Bible, the world was created around 4,000 B.C. Moses led the people
of Israel to the promised land in 2,000 B.C. Then we all know what
happened 2,000 years later at around 0 A.D. Now we are in 2,000 A.D.
God had his people (the children of Israel) scattered abroad and then
gathered together at a given time (Jews had no country for over 2,000
years and suddenly got Israel just after WWII in 1948) The five
nations who were supposed to rise up against Israel have already waged
several wars. In the last days knowledge will be increased. There
are too many prophecies to name, but anyone who undermines the
symbolic meaning of what happened Sep. 11, 01 is blind to what's going
on. Things happened really fast the last century, but in this
millenium things are going to be happening a lot faster. This is a
very general statement, but take heed to use time nowadays as
constructive as possible.
PJDBAD
>millenium things are going to be happening a lot faster. This is a
>very general statement, but take heed to use time nowadays as
>constructive as possible.
>
Ok! the message is still the same. Live each day and play each chess game as
if it were your last. I just hope I'm not judged according to my chess rating.
Think of all the poor souls who've never had a chance to play chess or those
people of good intentions who lived before the invention of the game.
Briarroot
>
> My reply to Fischer's return to me marks one more piece of the puzzle
ROTFLMAO!
Arkeltoi
>speedchess at such a level? I don't believe it.
Neither does Spassky, I'll bet.
Michael Oberly
>Bobby Fischer is obviously a special person with an insight deeper
>than many will ever comprehend. He didn't get this way through simple
>review of chess positions, he learned what was more important, an
>insight, an ability to look far ahead, and he concentrates on the
>principle which I told to almost anyone to whom I taught to and that
>is to always "LOOK FOR YOUR BEST MOVE!!!!"
>
>I think about Bobby's life story and can only imagine what was going
>on in his personal life. But I (and I'm sure Bobby also) believe that
>the manner in which you conduct your personal life will show in
>everything else you do.
>His character is that of someone who has a lot of concern on matters
>of importance, not so much on games (even though he is the world's
>greatest).
>
LMAO!
--
Mike Oberly * Rain can't wet me,
when I have my poui in my hand. *
* Rain can't wet me,
I advancing on the foe like a roaring lion!*
Soca/Calypso fan?Check out http://www.iere.com/thebarn
Paul Onstad
> ** Sadly, I fear the publicity has been counterproductive (no "sightings"
> nowadays), as could have been predicted. I apologize for my role in this.
> If it is "Bobby", I think his conduct shows he wants to be left alone with
> his beloved chess, played without the attendant fanfare and journalistic
> atrocities, and the chess world should try as hard as possible to respect
> his wishes. For this reason, this is probably my last word on the saga, and
> I will not be publishing the games. That is now my firm decision.
Thank you for providing another of your excellent proofs.
> Over and out.
See you next week.
-Paul
adchin
> Sadly, I have probably already scuppered my chances of ever playing him
> again with these modest disclosures. I hope not. It was an honour and the
> greatest pleasure to spend a few hours with Robert James Fischer - even if
> we never actually shook hands.
>
Not really. If he enjoyed your company and strength of play, he'd
probably call you up another time.