There are some questions that all of us chess players think about at some point or other. This week’s Chess Doctor submission is one of them, and I found answering it very challenging and intriguing.
“I have thought about this question a lot and wonder what you think. Who would be the winner of a match between Bobby Fischer and Magnus Carlsen?”
What an extraordinarily difficult question to answer, and what great fun to ponder it! There are so many different factors, it is mind boggling to imagine. With my answer I will attempt to encompass all possible scenarios, but it is possible I will forget something. This is nonetheless a very good topic for discussion. Feel free to correct me in the comments if you notice anything awry in my conclusions.
First of all, the questioner didn’t specify what time period the players would be from respectively. I’m going to assume present day Magnus vs. 1972 Bobby Fischer (when he was most certainly at his peak).
We must also consider in what year the match would be played. I believe that this could very possibly be the deciding factor. Let’s assume that time travel is a fact, and not fiction (maybe someday soon …) And let’s also assume that Fischer would agree to play the match at all. He had a very distinct personality, to put it one way. There would definitely be many arguments over petty things.
Forgetting all of the technical details, the year the match would be played is extremely important. If Fischer traveled to 2020 and played under the current format (best of 12 classical games) I believe he wouldn’t stand a chance. He was the greatest player ever when he became World Champion and he was vastly ahead of his time. But chess (especially opening theory) has advanced so far since then, and the advent of computers renders over-the-board opening analysis (a Fischer specialty) nearly useless. It wouldn’t be a complete wipeout, but I believe Carlsen would be the odds on favorite.
Respectively, if Carlsen traveled back to 1972, Fischer would almost certainly win the match. Back in those days it was very important that players thought for themselves in opening analysis (working out lines on a real board since there were literally no other options) and as mentioned Fischer was an expert in this area. He was a pioneer in the Najdorf Sicilian as black, the Ruy Lopez as white, and more openings.
On the other hand, it is true that Carlsen has come up with many original ideas in the opening, but most of them have been computer driven. Admittedly he didn’t become World Champion thanks to computer preparation alone; he is one of the best players to have ever lived, but computers are unquestionably a big factor and it would be interesting to see how he did without the electronic assistance.
Another point is that back then adjournments were still the rage. This could be a critical factor as well. One of Carlsen’s greatest skills is grinding out very drawish endgames and positions that are theoretically holdable but difficult over-the-board. But with adjournments his opponents could think for hours and come up with a drawing continuation, or (for the latter situation) simply consult an endgame book! In 1972 two of Carlsen’s greatest strengths today would be nearly invalid.
So, Carlsen wouldn’t be able to outlast Fischer in the struggle and his anti-computer openings (such as the London system) would be much less effective. To me all of this adds up to one thing: each player working on their home turf would without a doubt be the winner.
I hope you found this question as captivating as I did. Disagree or have other thoughts? Please let me know! Until next time feel free to submit your own question by hitting the button below. Thanks for reading as always.
Certainly an interesting question and close match-up. Assuming an even playing field, I would ultimately take Magnus’s uber-accurate calculation over Fischer’s intense drive. Both players won many games grinding down lesser opponents using their exceptional endgame abilities, but that would be unlikely to happen against the other. Magnus has admitted to being occasionally lazy which would be fatal against Fischer, but I don’t see Magnus giving less than 100% if there was a match.
Accordingly I would expect a number of hard fought draws to start, and then Magnus to win a game or two by Fischer pushing too hard and Magnus cooling defending. I expect Fischer would win at least one game since the pressure he applied would eventually catch Magnus in a single game, but ultimately his frustration at being unable to break Magnus would cause him to lose a few games by trying too hard to win (like Spassky-Fischer game 1). Carlson +3-1=8 over Fischer.
Interesting point! I hadn’t thought about how Fischer’s insatiable drive to win could cause him to go overboard in many cases. You may be right that Carlsen would win either way, but perhaps by a greater score in the present than the past. Taking this point into account, I think if they played in 1972 it would be very close, and it is extremely difficult to predict the eventual victor. Carlsen may still be a slight favorite, but certainly not by much.
Of course, this is all hypothetical, but it is interesting to think about 🙂