@@johnboylan3832 The offended loser Instragram girls above age of twelve still use it. I havent heard person twelve or younger use the term hater tho, so where did you hear elementary school kid use the term hater?
I remember in my youth I was always playing my friend who was lot better then me. One day I almost managed win him when he en passant me. As a new player I didn't know this rule so I accused him to made this rule up so he didn't lose. I was mad as I find out this rule really exist. 😂
@@Fricasso79hes right though. At lower levels creativity is still a thing and its fun because nobody knows theory or memorized games. At higher levels it just becomes and endless grind of memorization and theory, turning you into a computer. Its not a fun game anymore at that point
I had a friend who was some kind of youth chess champion, and he told me he would often lead with a particularly bad move, because it completely threw off his opponents. They all knew it was a bad move because all the books said it was a bad move, so they didn’t bother memorizing anything past that point or even WHY it was a bad move. He had a lot of success doing that. He was similarly disillusioned with chess and always said it came down to who could memorize the most.
It's a ridiculous 1 dimensional game, complicated, but unlike life, it has no unexpected or new variables. The man is right...otherwise all great chess masters would be running the world.
Yep. I played chess fairly competitively til my late teens. What Fischer describes is the exact reason I quit. It's really not fun anymore when it's 95% memorization 5% skill. The game should be about intellect/cleverness not memorization.
I was President of my Chess Club in high school and went on into amateur competitions. I rose up high. Secret: I was lousy at strategy but really good at memorizing all the classic moves and theory. I love this guy you describe, his opening gambit!! He was absolutely correct. I haven’t played chess in 40years and I’ll never own another board.
It's alive my friend and although initially it appeared computers where pushing chess in this direction it's now the opposite. Computers showed us that if you're creative enough you can play any opening! Long live the Plow and Bong Cloud!
@@edgarramos1499you can’t win with bong cloud competitively. And whatever known opening you play competitively, you need to extensively memorize the theory
I don’t think he was right about chess, only about the opening. The middle and endgames of chess are still exciting and require creative thinking. I do like Fischer random but the original version is still great and will be for years to come
Okay so I understand what he’s saying. He’s practically saying “chess theory ruined the authenticity of itself. These computers perfecting chess has taken away from our ability to discover new plays, since theory is now a thing. It isn’t ‘the smartest player wins’ now it’s ‘those who memorize the most theory wins the most’” that’s his whole point and I totally agree
Pretty every game nowadays is played like that. Creativity is barely encouraged now, it all comes down to who memorizes the most stuff and reacts the fastest
@@TensorWavethat's the point, chess was supposed to be fun where you make mistake and laugh about it without all the theories and what not, but today it becomes so competitive that it make players anxious to play because of lack of theory and basic knowledge concept to play. Basically it pressure you to play.
@@davemayer6128 chess was never played as a fun game that was not supposed to be competitive. We had tictactoe for that. I bet you never competed for anything in life
@@trdestruction6678so I would say, it’s hard come up with new strategies, when today with the help of computers tells you every possible position and how to counter it. Crazy to think about actually
@@DarthLore00 he often had bizarre reactions and behavior leading people to believe he was paranoid (not just as a buzz word, but properly paranoid) He has repeatedly voiced -extreme antisemitic views and he admired hitler, - misogynistic views (women shouldn’t play chess) - anti-american views (he applauded the attacks of 9/11) He was exiled from the us and had to roam around the world for a few years until he found residence in iceland (there was an arrest warrant out for him) So yeah that’s why people say he ‘went crazy’, not this rather tame videoclip where he says nothing special.
That's how every single competitive game ends up. Creativity is removed, the game is solved and all that's left to do is to memorize the best possible plays and their counters and counters to counters and become as quick as possible. It's a boring grind at it's most potent.
Yea, I feel the same has happened with poker. It's all about the perfectly balance play, and adjusting to people's mistakes. The charm of the game is gone for me.
i mean yes he is correct. Chess was meant to be a strategy game right in the moment but now its all theory and memorization. Yes you can get unique positions but you can memorize how to play in certain positions that are similar. I think there would be a lot less GMs and IMs if computers weren't around. And I'd be rated all the way back to 500 elo😂 Im 1600 now but computers have helped me alot to analyze and learn off of
@@diewahrheitistseltensimpel9195 well lets say the number of chess players were the same at that time but there was computers, there would be a lot more gms don’t you think? And I’m pretty sure the ratio of gms to chess players is still higher than before.
I’m surprised how many people don’t seem to recognize who this is and what he has accomplished. Bobby Fischer was the only man to beat the computers and beat the greatest Russian chest player of all time. He was the undefeated champion of his time. Nothing short of the GOAT of chess.
@@jacuzz1158 And yet every video show the GMs and other chess players around the globe recognize him as one of the best and would like to have played against him or learned from him. Many beginners and non-players know his name around the world when they get into history and other "famous" players come later when they begin to learn more about the game. Also, Internet searching on "famous" chess players", he is in every return. So he is the most famous globally, not just in the Americas. That doesn't make him the most popular globally, which is a different statement.
@@groshomme3528 None of those people are more famous globally. They might be more popular among the current players but very casual players and folks who don't follow Chess have a better chance of hearing about the legend of Bobby.
@@idocare6538 bobby fischer is absolutely the most well known chess player in america, absolutely, but in the world? id have to say it goes to kasparov, but thats my latvian bias, lol
Lol, what do you think he was right about? you think jews made up the holocaust as a money making endevour and a tool for world domination? Bobby had an undiagnosed paranoia disorder for years and he was tortured his whole life by it. Get a phycatrist and who knows, maybe unlike bobby you can get over this obstacle and live a happy life.
Bobby dedicated his entire mind to chess from around 12 or 13 until he was 29 and became World Champion. If he was awake, he was thinking and analyzing chess positions in his mind and/or on his chessboard. Every moment of his life.
He was not insane. He was a creative genius but with some psychological disturbance and the people who understand modern chess know what exactly he is talking about.
he was a genius who went insane. a lot of great chess players in the past did, its not an insult to him but he definitely was insane by the end of his life.
I always thought it was funny when "ai" would win in chess. I always thought it would be more interesting if they simply programmed the rules and not the strategies.
You are entitled to disagree, fischer wasnt a neo nazi, he only stated facts about certain people, if you want to label him with words to group him with bad people again you are entitled to have an opinion @zurigheid
for those confused, and correct me if i am wrong but Fischer Random is Chess960 in which the entire back rank is randomized however the bishop pair must be on alternating colors as per usual. It is literally the same as regular chess but there is no way/need to memorize opening theory and it more so relies on straightforward tactics as well as live game strategy. In layman's it has all the "positives" of chess without any of the "drawbacks".
Actually, chess 960 or fischer random is less theoretical, but it is still so in a certain way, since it keeps theoretical things such as activity development and other things about chess, what fischer is saying is that this mode was created to promote creativity and the real essence of chess, because it loses emotion because everything is theoretical and everything is from memory, you always reach the same positions, the same endings, the same everything, on the other hand you saw the games from before and you saw a certain innovating in the openings, even though there are profiles like this, there is still no player this creative
@nghiale2765 as Bobby said, these days chess is about how many people work for you. Magnus doesn't spend ANY time researching openings, 5 other people do it for him and he pays them for it. That's how he and many other people keep up with the modern opening theory
@@dd-vl1kx a lot of "book moves" you see today are in part thanks to his stupidly creative traps. Other masters leaved strong defenses, solid opening or genius tactics, but Tal added surprise to that period of chess. (And obviously, almost everyone from that time would get crushed in modern "top levels", we live in another world)
so true. I have never seen a video where someone ask magnus about a position and he cannot recall that game. He almost remember every game and each move.
What he's saying is 100% true. I'm over 2000 ELO and the way I got there was just memorizing openings and basically playing like stockfish the first 10-12 moves. It's also why Magnus can completely shut down GMs with some Ware, Kadas, Bongcloud opening (a2-a4, h2-h4, e2-e4 --> Ke1-e2) shenanigans. Because the pros haven't memorized/studied these lines.
This is why I quit competitive chess a long time ago. Memorization isn't fun. The game should be about strategy/cleverness like it was originally intended. To me it's absolutely insane that Chess federations everywhere still have standard chess as the de facto version being played in tournaments when something like chess960 (or fischer random whatever you wanna call it) is better in every way.
just don't memorize it then. im fairly good at strategy and positioning but lousy in memorization and i dont give a fuck. i just play and see if i can win. if the other guy wants to memorize, so be it @@EB-bl6cc
Those who can't be criticized, those who are the real masters of Americans those who control the world and kill native Arabs trying to steal their land.
@@Johnnyrocks34meta is a term that people who play video games often use to define the peak or most effective way to play. Devs are developers as in game developers. The original commenter was comparing Bobby Fischer’s critique of chess’s “meta” to what people who play video games normally say when game developers alter the game in a way that affects the “meta.” It is very funny :)
@@Joker-no1fzomg people need to stop looking at blatant misogyny and calling it "based." Might have been a more normal belief at the time (not really) but it's really cringy to say this shit. You sound like you're 13 years old.
Capablanca talked about this too. Just 10 or 15 years ago highscoolers reaching 1600 was a big deal. Now it's common for middle schoolers to reach that rating. Blitz is for now the only mainstream variation that requires some creativity.
When a game like chess exits for so long and never has any changes at some point there is 1 clearly optimal way and why is that becouse Chess went from a game to a sport and the ultimat messurment in the eyes of peopl for intelegents . If you give peopl money for winning peopl want to win
complete opposite. over the last few decades chess at the top level or even intermideate/advanced levels is simply a game of who knows the theory better. look at the last few world championship matches, it isn't as much about creativity as who studies harder e.g. world champion conterders train with months of theory and prep
@@oscarnicholson not here to argue whether you're right or wrong, but isn't that the exact same opinion OP has? I'm confused on why you claim it's the "complete opposite."
No he’s not, chess can be played creatively up to 2000+. He’s was the world champion ofc at his level strategic thinking + long term planning will trump creativity. Anand has stated that chess is even more creative then ever before. If we’re going to use appeal to authority’s then technically Anand is right.
correct answer is partially right, people do sometimes recreate already played games for over half the whole game, but it’s still a great game without overly used theory
@@gabrielsykes4125how is chess more creative? we're literally copying pre-existing games, the games that the actually creative chess players played, and it's known as chess theory. chess isn't about chess any more, chess is about studying now. you're not good at chess if you don't look up a theory, read up on it, and just REMEMBER it.
His thought process is the same lixe John McCarthy when he said that standardizing the Common Lisp programming language effectively froze its evolution.
I suppose that's what made Magnus Carlsen so dominant. Everyone can get good positions in chess by memorizing all the lines to play such that actual skill is unnecessary, but the endgame is where Carlsen shines and where most top level GM games are decided; once the game transitions to the endgame and they're out of their preparation, few people can play accurate moves time after time.
Magnus is so dominant because he has a more universal opening repertoire. He doesnt stick to the same two or three openings. Some GMs create chessable courses on particular openings so what d9 you do? Research those openings for those players. You can't do that with Magnus because he's happy to play a lot of things and he's often the first one that can force a position out of known theory
thats such a funnily wrong statement to make, the endgame is just as memorisation based as the opening, you think they win endgames by thinking? no. grandmasters memorise patterns, lots of patterns. every single situation of an endgame, each side has what pieces, what are the structures of the pawns, and who is winning, how and why in each of the positions. the endgame has alot of thought to it, but is by far the most memorisation-heavy part of chess IMO even more than the opening, because in the opening you just learn the moves and the ideas. in the endgame theres less pieces, and because theres less pieces, you are expected to have everything memorised and planned out. if you give a random endgame position to a gm, lots of times they can immediately tell you whos winning or if its drawn, no thinking, no calculation, pure memorisation. and you say magnus carlsen gets an edge through skill, but memorisation is by far magnus's best trait, and its also why hes good at endgames
am 1750 with literally no theories no openings prepared but am stuck there for long time and i agree with fischer i don't wanna go that road of facing people based on memorization and preparation i just play for fun
Chess was an official subject on my first school, still grateful for that and still use it to this day, not just by playing chess now and then, but it provided me with the right mindset to understand the workings of the world in general ♥️
Grandmasters today will play lines up to 20 moves of a game and finally leave their memorisation by move 21. We're getting to a point where parts of the middlegame (the most complex part) is getting memorised
d***heads care more about winning. That's the loser mentality, win, win, win. That's why they memorise. Their brains are incapable of original intricate thinking.
I think theory on middlegame aren't that alot, just little bit, one inaccurate move could changes everything, even just little differ that give a thousand variations
Which is why fischer chess is even more valid today than ever before. People today arent playing the game as it was olayed for hundred of years . If there's one thing I've learned about humans this we can take absolutely anything that is enjoyable and obsess over it to the point it is no longer fun. Chess has hit that point. If it wasn't there already by the seventies and eighties just from the thousands of years and people writing things down, computers have taken it to a new level. To get back to the spirit of the game, fischer random is the way.
@@asiamies9153not a single intermediate or even “advanced” player (whatever “advanced” but not titled would even mean?) on the planet is memorizing multiple lines 10+ moves deep. If anyone
@@asiamies9153 you can improve your rating by memorization at any level, but you absolutely don't have to do so if you don't want to. A GM would crush any intermediate/advanced player even with an opening such as bongcloud, hence you can theoretically be very strong without any opening knowledge
What, Jews? I heard that the 'loving jews' stock is at a pretty all time low since 1939 buddy, mainly self-inflicted ofc given the genocidal campaign that's still ongoing in Palestine. 😊
He's 100% correct, they more i am learning about chess the more it feels like its learning algorithm and theory. At some point it starts to get boring so i have to learn a new opening
Literally anyone can, and the vast majority of people do (hence the astonishing number of very vocal idiots online making completely unfounded statements such as the one you have here)
This Grand Master at the game knew that the game had been optimized to the point of the death of creativity. He loved the game so much he was trying to save ot by changing it. As it deserves. The game itself isn't challenging, the method of competition is.... Because you have to memorize what others before you have done.
True, old school chess is much more fun and enjoyable. Before the players started remembering the best engine move and all the games looks the same now.
For context:-bobby was talking about a game played by garry Kasparov which was mostly prearranged.THAT happened in the late 1980s.Things have changed quite a lot since then.fischer was angry about the introduction of computers in the chess tournaments and thought that they would destroy the chess game itself.(which as we know 30 years later,never actually happened) nowadays, computers are ONLY used for analysis and for checking possibilities for a move.
its so refreshing to hear a "pro level gamer", so to speak, talk like this. Loving a competitive game often means seeing the cracks and flaws of its design.
Very true. Being honest about what the core of a game is, separating it from ego/pride as a player, is difficult when you love competing in that thing. So to separate himself, notice what he didn't like, AND make the only other recognized like board set up of chess is pretty fkn remarkable tbh lol
I remember this interview in the airplane. I think it was just when he got the refugee status in Iceland, flying from Japan. It was his last interview if i recall well.
@@Magplar he called out jews and got jewed for it, he is a great man great chess player. but had his whole carreer ruined by saying jews rule the world, and the jews proved the point that they dont rule the world by ruining his carreer
@Magplar he's Bobby fisher considered to be the greatest Chessmaster ever. He was know to be eccentric but a genus at chess. Dude did some crazy shit in his life
That guy is Bobby Fisher; he is near universally considered the greatest chess player to ever live. What he's talking about in this video is how, thanks to chess computers, modern chess has effectively become little more than a game of memorizing sequences and countering them in turn. He's saying that there's essentially no "skill gap" in chess anymore because every possible sequence of moves and responses has been mapped out by pro teams. There's no longer any more creative plays to be made. That thing he brings up "Fischer random" is a chess variant he created with randomized starting positions. This prevents the excessive reliance on sequence memorization and brings the game back to a game of creative plays to outsmart your opponent.
regardless of the other comment, those two statements can exist side by side. they do not contradict each other at all. stop pretending it means what you think it means, and go by it's literal meaning.
@@musical_lolu4811 what you’re really gonna pretend people are out there playing fischer randoms? have you ever seen regular people in classrooms or bars or parks playing fischer randoms? ever? get real…
@@fuhq6731Of course... every engine and chess website has a section on Chess960 (Fisher Random). Maybe not as popular as regular chess, but there will always be players there. I never cared much about it because I never tried it. I thought it was even more complicated and you have to remember even more. I never thought "this is the version where you DON'T have to do this"... After this video, I actually think this will be my favorite chess variant. Because I like the game, but I'm bad at memorizing/the sport.
This makes me tead up a little, seeing how bobbys passion turned to a side he completely disagreed with, making it a complete other thing than it was before. It's just this nostalgic sadness, the longing for the game he once played
He was well ahead of his time. 960 was a great idea, which is becoming more and more relevant. Next year already there is a classical 960 round robin with the absolute top players.
😂I HIGHLY disagree. Chess is not all about memorization, surely, you'll need theories in the openings but after the opening part, you have to think in the middle game and endgame by your own. It has been always like that with the exception of some games. Take the currently on- going candidates for example. GMs are leaving theories just after 7-8 moves. That pragg game was so creative, that opening was NEVER played before.
Yes, many of the games can be decided by a single move or a sequence of moves. People just memorize the theories and engine moves. I have played against people who have memorized opening traps and they quit if the game leaves theory. Others just use an engine behind the screen.
This only applies for top players. I’m around 2000 FIDE (inactive currently due to studying for finals) and most people up to 2300, at least here in Sweden, barely do that much theory apart from the well known lines. Also, at that level, your chess intuition basically guides you towards the right moves. It’s so sad seeing these 1300s online elo players thinking they know it all start spewing nonsense because they can’t improve, and blame losses on ”not knowing theory”…
I'd love to have Fischer interviewed about Carlsen's latest developments. Carlsen has started using very unusual openings to throw people out of theory very early, and it's working for him.
