He hit world headlines again after the 11 September 2001 attacks in the US.
In an interview to a radio station in the Philippines, he described the attacks as the "wonderful news".
quote:
He also had alienated many in his homeland by broadcasting anti-Semitic diatribes and expressing support for the 11 September 2001 attacks in New York.
Edited to conform to AnswerPool rules.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02
Exactly, Sher. When Fischer beat Boris Spassky for the world championship, he was hailed as an American hero. Not too much later, it became obvious that rationality was escaping him.
A reader's comment from the BBC site says it all:
He should be remembered for his wonderful 1972 victory over Spassky, rather than the sad and prolonged end-game of his personal life
Posts: 17283 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Exactly, Elexina. The man was mentally ill (inter alia, it must be a rare for the son of a Jewish mother to turn rabidly anti-semitic )
He was the Muhammad Ali of chess.All chess fans were entranced.In London we used to go down to a hotel, where the moves were screened live in the Spassky -Fischer match and make feeble attempts at guessing what the next move was and what he was planning! Nobody had seen anyone like him before. In the very first game against Spassky he was so keen for a win rather than a draw that he made quite a blunder and lost. Next game he refused to play, so he was then two nil down.At that level a lead of two clear points is 'impossible' to claw back. After that he won easily, as though he'd given the supposed strongest player in the world a head start, just to make the match interesting.Like Sonny Liston against Clay, the opponent looked utterly demoralised.
Surely Fischer was the greatest chess player who has ever lived.Analysing his games was a depressing process for those who ever thought they'd be any good at the game !No other player had all his qualities.He had the sublime simplicity of Capablanca (every move that Capablanca made looked obvious but its significance was never apparent until much later) but the aggression of Anderssen and the dry science of Botvinnik, as required.
He should be remembered for what he did as a chess player, not what he became as a man.
)
