Saying no one likes Kasparov is a bold understatement. Also the top 3 greatest chess players of all time, Kasparov, Carlsen, and Fischer all had ego problems
During his active career, Kasparov did show unsportsmanlike behavior. However, away from active play, he is a lot more docile and well-mannered. He was a dominating player, but his ego got in the way of fair play at times. I think he was so strong that losing was unfathomable to him. That does not mean what he did was right, though.
@@matsu820 I think you'll find that Hitler was also docile and well-mannered when he was at home talking about football or whatever and not gassing millions of people. Kasparov has also taken a very aggressive stance for the Ukraine war, advocating for western intervention etc.
I encountered Kasparov briefly when he was doing a book signing. I said hello. He offered no response, made no eye contact, signed the book and that was it. He was doing the same with everyone. Got a really negative vibe about the guy. I've been around maybe 20 well known GMs, including Karpov, Yasser, Judit, de Firmian, Finegold, Yermolinsky, Short, Gawain Jones, Sam Shankland, Vishy, Magnus, Naka, Aronian. None of them had the snarl and intensity of Kasparov.
Kasparov is not perfect, but he is a GIANT in chess history. Youngest ever world champion, beating an all time great champion in Karpov who was still in his prime. Longest reign as the world #1 player defeating multiple, younger generations. Only Kramnik could withstand him, and Kramnik had to revolutionize the Berlin Defense (which was AlphaZero's answer to 1. e4) and gear his entire game to an anti-Kasparov style, crushing the Grunfeld and King's Indian Defense, and changing his style to completely dry out the position. I personally believe that Kramnik gearing his entire game to taking out Kasparov actually hurt his game because he didnt develop the attacking dynamism needed to rack up points vs weaker players. I think Kramnik himself came to this same conclusion because after he got crushed by Anand, who had been getting stronger by constantly pushing himself to play double-edged, dynamic positions with winning and losing chances for both sides, Kramnik shifted to a more dynamic and enterprising style, but it was too late and I think Kramnik wasnt able to reach the peak of his immense talent. But the fact that an all time great chess talent and a great world champion like Kramnik had to go to such lengths to beat Kasparov shows just how great Kaspaorov was. Beyond his playing career, Kasparov through the Botvinnik-Kasparov school trained the next generation of Russian greats including Kramnik! Kasparov recognized Kramnik's genius and pushed for him to be on the Russian Olympic team, and accepted full responsibility for putting an untested Kramnik ahead of several super GMs, and Kramnik crushed it completely validating Kasparov's judgment. Kasparov also did a huge amount of work with Magnus Carlsen after which Carlsen became immensely strong and was unbeatable. When you consider Kasparov's playing career and his influence in developing two future world champions, I think it's safe to say that Kasparov has made the greatest impact of anyone on the history of chess. Plus Kasparov has written several great books on his games and matches so that future generations can learn the workings of his genius brain, that's a legacy which will last for centuries. So yes, these actions highlighted by this video are not Kasparov's finest moments, but come on, it doesn't take away from his massive accomplishments and all that he has done for chess. I think it's safe to say that Kasparov has given more to chess than anyone, and this should he remembered when criticizing him.
Kasparov was never a good player. Most of it was just fake marketing and hype. At best, he never exceeded 2600 Elo, which would classify him as a mid-level GM.
It's really interesting because he seems very different nowadays. Perhaps he's gotten good at making himself look better, or maybe he's changed with his age? I don't like the man I see in this video, but I do like modern day Kasparov 😊
I have seen him do one of those FAQ type things like on vice or something. Like you have pros on of different topics to answer question. And he came across still having a giant ego.
Actually this ego problem is very common and actually rare, it happens bcs dah you are a world champion but it doesn't mean that he is a horrible person Even magnus and bobby fisher who are the 2 goat of chess with kasparov had a big ego specially with Bobby
Well, Kasparov is definitely not cold blood machine , he is emotional person, his chess career was near 30 year with ups and downs and a lot of questionable things could happen. If this video is a summary of his dark side during chess game - it is pretty good.
Kasparov has been doing this ever since he was a teenager and probably before that. I know of one game Andrianov-Kasparov, Baku 1978 when Garry was 15 years old. Anyone can look the game up online. Kasparov's last move in that game was 45...Rd3?? and after 46 RXd2! he resigned. What you can't tell just from the raw game score is that Garry picked up the rook and realized it was a blunder before releasing it and tried to move his king instead. White told him no you have to move the rook (which Garry did with an animated gesture of disgust and immediate resignation after 46 RXd2!).
Like lots of Chess players do these unprofessional stuff. Its your duty to call them out rather than being a pussy about it. This narator said Judith reputation would be tarnished and she would be black listed. Sounds like nonsense to me.
You made a lot of incorrect statements. I watched the interview with polgar . He did nt change his mind and he proved that he was right . Polgar asked him about women In chess and Kasparov told her that the rating diff between the genders at the elite level remains the same dispute double the participation rates of women in the last 50 years . Also no one ever banned women from playing chess stop with all that propaganda stuff.
Tbh the first one was arguably just physiologically warfare but the 2nd should be considered cheating considering that he knocked the pieces out of place, the 3rd was against Judit Polgar was outright cheating.
when you reach such a level of playing, the pressure gets more and more intense. being called the best player of all time didn't help the pressure at all. Other than him definitely being a bit arrogant and with a big ego, it was definitely also out of passion and maybe even a little fear of losing his spot. much love to the best player of all time
Was the result from the match with Polgar not corrected retroactively? In almost any other sport thats what happens when its found out that someone cheated and didn't actually win. Like how Lance Armstrong lost the medals when it turned out he never actually won those races.
Not just ego, but also a bad personality that was never taken care of. Add a lot of success to that equation and you get this kind of person. He's way better now ( as a person ). Some times, you just need time off in order to reflect on yourself.
I have read some of Mr. Kasparov's books and thought that they were interesting and well written. I seem to recall that he experienced some very rough, almost like war conditions in his native land. I am a long time intermediate recreational player - not rated and have never played in a tournament. But I know this, if I was playing somebody and they started hitting the table or clock really hard, rocking the pieces, etc., I would not tolerate it for even 10 seconds; that behavior would completely cease or fists would fly and or we would be rolling around on the ground right then and there,
So you would fight someone over the littlest things? Hitting the table out of anger I mean I would too, slamming the clock very hard in time pressure I do it all the time, rocking the pieces wdym?
I can only guess that these are words from someone who hasn't been in a real fight. Show class by being calm and collected, escepially when facing childish behaviour
In fairness, I think Kasparov has matured and mellowed over the years as demonstrated by his 2020 chat with Judith Polgar. In all his recent appearances, he comes across as quite a likeable character.
By 2020 engines had demonstrated that humans in general should stick to making babies and not play chess. It is easy to have humility when you are not on top.
by 2020 kasparov was 57! you really ought to do your maturing earlier than that! the thing he did in polgar's game is beyond anything. she had no chance to defend her claim, even tho the video we have now 100% proves she's right.
@@erikmarkus7467 Polgar and Kasparov are now friends so she has forgiven him. One of the sad things about the 21st century is the lack of grace. People must be allowed to stuff up and then be forgiven if they repent. We're all in the same boat at the end of the day.
You're mistaken. He always lies. He has betrayed many people such as his friends and his beloved woman. He abandoned his woman as soon as she told him she was pregnant and refused to acknowledge his daughter later.
Kasparov merely took advantage of a common weakness in many top tier players' game... the psychological aspect. Once he realized that many of his opponent's let his behavior get to them but were too passive to ever really call him out on it in any meaningful way, he simply added it to his already impressive skill set and continued to refine it along with the rest. Had enough fuss been made over it to lead to professional consequences, he would have toned it down (at least enough to avoid any consequences he considered too severe to be worth it.)
He smashed his clock so hard it knocked all the pieces off his board and the ones beside him. And stormed out when he was losing instead of resigning the game. Ah yes...truly a master of psychological warfare. 🙄
Sorry, is it in the spirit of Chess to joust intellectually or with brutish small minded force? If I truly wanted more savagery, competitive boxing would have suited better.
Poor sportsmanship-the director should have warned him that he would lose time on his clock if anything else happened. Also, in the game against Seirawan, a director should have warned Kasparov to move his pieces correctly, not to “screw them in”, and if he continued in this vein he would incur time penalties. If no compliance, he could be forfeited.@@Tyhar93
You got some points there , among all GM .. I also saw all his defeated matches ... He was quite angry and furious on himself..! .. Well , this teaches some valuable lessons to learn
Kasparov was one of the best players in the history of chess. This is consensus. To achieve that, he developed a killer instinct, so would do whatever needed to win. He wasn't likeable, but you can't rely on players to draw lines of acceptable behaviour. You got to penalize any misconduct. If he could get away with what you described, he just did it.
@@jackcarver1492 There probably are very few professional players in any sport or activity that haven't cheated at some time or another. People make mental errors because they are people. Cheating is like lying. Everyone does it from time to time. Not always intentionally, but it happens. In fact, psychologists will tell you that lying is a part of the mental process of maturing. It's human nature, as is cheating. And as far as cheating goes, this example is fairly lame when compared to people who have intentionally cheated by taking steroids or corking a bat. How many boxers have done a low blow? How many football players have held, or pushed a hand to a facemask, or pushed off as a receiver? Cheating happens in every sport by nearly every player, especially spur of the moment cheating. If Kasparov is an ass for one or two incidents of this, then so are the vast majority of players in most sports. Look at soccer. Talk about cheating. They've made falling to the ground an artform. As has some basketball players. SMH.
When one is young their passions and fire run deep. When we are older we mellow somewhat and learn respect for our opponents. We will still remain competitive and sorrow over our team's losses, but we will no longer want to crush the enemies. Perhaps the pressures are different for top level players, especially chess players, because one can't stand it when their intellect fails them. But to be certain, Mr. Kasparov was a brilliant chess player. If it matters, he has my respect.
Show me one #1 at anything who doesn't have an ego problem. The masses describes it as 'ego problem' because they don't understand that without it you cannot go boyond what everyone else does in order to become the nr.1
This completely changes my opinion about kasparov and it's a shame that he never took responsibility about his cheat and that no action was ever taken by the international federation. A true champion, an intelligent person, should compliment and encourage younger generation, he had nothing to prove, he would have been better acknowledging his opponent worth
Kasparov wasn't under FIDE at the time, he was the reigning world champion and had split the sport in 1993. Kramnik who later defeated Kasparov in 2002 won the unification match and came back to FIDE in the mid 2000s. Note the FIDE world champions that people do not talk about as much. Kasparov has said he regrets his actions splitting the sport. Also it seems Kasparov put himself under a lot of pressure because no world champion had lost to a computer or a woman (this was two things that were publicly known and said in the press at the time), likely he did not want to be the first. These three things sound strange to say, but I think he was operating under those pressures in the 90s. He never convisingly put away Karpov in their matches they were always close so his Elo was what Garry concentrated on to show how much stronger he was. I don't think they excuse him for behaviours. Just providing context for the time. Also I think Judit is a legend of the game. Enjoyed seeing her defeat Magnus in the park during the candidates where they played a Sicilian. Still impressed with Anand being so strong for so long and still in the top 10 for Elo.
For me. Socially I am amicable , easy going, and usually let others take the lead. In competition my performance suffers unless I let a ruthless and ego driven side of myself take charge. This has resulted in behavior I am not known for. Contemplating this I came to an understanding that for some competition will bring out both the best and worst of a person's traits. Competition is in someways a therapeutic experience allowing someone to exercise repressed aspects of their humanity in order to feel whole. Most of the time the bad traits are only momentarily displayed and then put back in their place. Conversely ones better traits are usually displayed in excelling performance and lasting friendships with opponents. Life is not as simple as a story written with care to deliver a moralistic message. People deal with the pressures of competition differently. If Casparov cared more for his sportsmanship and reputation vs his performance. Then maybe he also wouldn't have played nearly as well. For some winning or losing is very close to a life or death outcome. They put much more of themselves on the line which exposes themselves to humiliation they feel if they lose. That fear feeds their drive to win. They are different. I still admire Casparov.
You are saying that he cheated by moving his knight to a different square, but from the video it looks like he never took his hand off the knight! The move is not complete until the hand releases the piece! Where he puts the piece while still having it in his grip does not matter!
This video is extremely misleading. Kasparov isn’t disrespectful (for example he visited Bobby Fischer’s grave) and he definitely didn’t cheat?? He isn’t perfect, but he is definitely not what this video portrays him to be. This just seems like a quick view grab meant to mislead people who don’t know as much about chess.
I have massive respect for Kasparov but he let go of the piece and moved it somewhere else. Was it harmless? Probably. But still, that is technically a violation of the rules so it's objectively speaking cheating by definition, and you cannot argue otherwise.
from where did you get those rares videos? I am really impressed. I didn't know about those details with Radjabov. It was you who recorded their playing a game? please answer
I guess John McEnroe attics on tennis courts made him less of a player? Seriously nobody cares that Picasso treated his kids and wives horribly all we remember are his art works
Magnus ego isnt flamboyant like kasparovs. Its synical and cunning. Dude PURPOSELY GOES INTO LOSING POSITIONS just to equalize and merk in the endgame. I.e. his Magnus Carlsen gambit that levy showed on his channel.
Magnus does not have big ego. I am Norwegian, and people can mistake Scandinavian honesty and frankness as arrogance, but he is not vain at all. He is a very humble and easygoing person. Describing him like this is just ridiculous. I really dont know where this is coming from. Also, these gambits you mention are played in casual games online. You don't seem to be very familiar with chess if you think that this is evidence of something. Many other chess players play trolling gambits online in casual games that are meant for fun. Also, we are talking about elite sportsmen. A certain level of competitiveness and determination is necessary to reach the top.
This is a rather emotional analysis. If we look at different sports, people who could be considered GOATs in their respective sports (just a few examples: Brady, Schumacher, Hamilton, Djokovic, Jordan, hell, even Maradona) were all willing to commit controversial actions that were far from virtuous if that meant they had a better chance to win, and they could get away with it. These people aren't so great in spite of their "moral flaws", it's precisely one of the qualities that puts them above most. Whether you like it or not, it's always been like that for the most part. So yeah, this is just biased.
Well there should be a metric where you are just a POS even if you want to win so bad, these two things arent mutually excluse, just think about the boxer who removed his boxing pads to win, yeah he had the drive and wanted to win but he got his opponent in a life threatening situation. I dont think Kasparov fits into this though but Also great way to consider who is actually a pos is looking at their outside actions for example : Hamilton, who constantly puts himself above humans like telling people to use bikes to save the climate yet he travels on yachts. Now this is perfectly relating to your comment, do i have to like and obey his comments just because he is a goat at some arbitrary sport i have literally no connections to? Obviously not. Just because they are good at some sport it doesnt mean they arent even equal to humans and get a free pass from bad behaviour. Even though nowadays people do that.
I love chess but I never met so many unsocial misfits than when I played in a club and in tournaments. Victor Korchnoi had a horrible tantrum when Polgar beat him in a game.
total clickbait nonsense. Kasparov is a legend and I haven't seen many people speak bad about him. Also he has been openly defying Putin from the start contrary to most Russian players.
@@daarom3472 Have you even search about him or just looking his chess plays😃 if that is the case i feel sorru about you. Everyone knows he is barking dog
Anyone remember that game of Magnus vs Supi, where Supi beat him in 19 moves with a queen sac ? Look at Magnus's reaction, and watch Hikaru when he loses (I literally don't even care), big difference ?
All the players do that see magnus he is like kasparov and perhaps plus than him (excuse me for my english) magnus is studying from kasparov and he have a lot of clips that argue this 😊
bro, are you really this stupid?, if i, Kasparov and any other chess player that is uncomfortable speaking to other people that theyve just met, they probaly just walk away, especially if the one kasparov who is speaking is still a kid and he just lost the game, he need some time alone(probaly reviewing). what do you expect?. you, if you go to tournaments, do you speak to your opponent when the game is over?, especially if you have loss the game?
Kasparov was a sore loser what do you expect from him, in 2004 imagine being at the end of your career, out of your prime and regarded as the best chess player in history and a 13 year old International Master held you to a draw it will sure hit your ego. And walking away might be disrespectful but he did reach Magnus and coached him later on to help him improve at chess.
Probably the fact that one has to study/play an unforgiving game with no human interaction for 10 hours a day, every day, for most of his life has something to do with it.
Ah yes that evil Putin, the man who doesn't genitally mutilate and groom kids under the facade of "social justice/LGBT/tolerance" and instead doesn't let rabid fanatic lunatics chemically castrate sterilize and groom kids aka trans kids....that Monster!!!!. Why cant he be more like those "good guy" liberal/leftists western nations.....
I once visited a simultaneous match. I think it was in 1992: Kasparov against Germany. Four boards. One german player fell suddenly from the stage. It looked very scary. What did Kasparov? He was angry and protestet because he felt disturbed.
@@davidcopson5800 He didn't say that he doesn't like him. He just spoke facts most of the time.I don't think the fact that he is the most disrespectful gm for example. Yea he did exaggerate some things but there's no reason to hate him for that.
the nowadays Kasparov, who everybody knows now, seems to be more respectful, and as in the video is mention; he accepted he was wrong with women in chess, I guess, Kasparov was young and this game can arise the worst version of you because it's all about being focus, and the fear of do a single mistake can put you in a big preassure, some people can't handle well, of course, I don't want to justify his mistakes. I can't imagine how furious he would be when Magnus won against him when he still was a child
A ridiculous witch hunt. I personally know dozens of chess players who do these things on a regular basis, why pick on Kasparov. Many players at this level have tremendous egos, it's part of chess. Vladimir Kramnik says he accepted Garry's demeanour at the board because he was a brilliant player with a very expressive nature. Let me state, I love Kasparov's play and admire Garry as a player who has done so much for chess. So, you are completely wrong with your crass statement, "Why No One Likes Garry Kasparov". I really LIKE Garry Kasparov, and I won't be the only one. Why not make a video entitled 'Why No One Likes Vladimir Putin'. Are you brave enough? Garry would be!
I don't know in what world you live, but þere are certainly plenty of videos against Putin þat shit on him, Being Anti-Putin is noþing þat brings you bragging rights.
I dont think he acted this way because of his ego, I believe he just couldnt handle the stress of being number 1 for so long and felt immense pressure.
This video perfectly summarises my prejudices against Kasparov. Though one cannot deny he is among the greatest players ever, I'm starting to wonder if psychological chess was also part of Kasparov's game.
You don't need to wonder. Many top players have straight up said that it was a large part of his game. I think even Garry admitted that he tried to use psychological tricks against his opponents. Fischer did the same.
who told you that no one likes kasparov i realy like him he's my favorite player and i've learned alot from him after all he's one of the greatest all time .
Ok so there are a lot of things in this video that are pretty questionable to me. Sure, some of these criticisms are valid, but a number of them are pretty baseless. I mean, polgar clearly didnt have her reputation ruined after facing kasparov. And just in general, something like hitting the clock too hard, ok a player with a career this long, there are eventually going to be moments like that. However if he really did say all of that about polgar, then that is problematic.
@@uhoh2724 I mean the video serves as a direct criticism either way, so I think its pretty reasonable to address the actual criticisms, but that's fair I think at least some of them make sense
I mean a video like this is pretty unjustified with only 6 minutes duration. Most gotcha video is at least 30 minutes long and when you're talking about possibly the most influential chess player of all time 6 minutes cover absolutely nothing. Would've loved if this was at least an hour long video covering all the bases.
@@uhoh2724 What do you mean they make sense? Probably for people that dont like him, based on some valid and many questionable/baseless remarks. Also, just because someone dislikes someone does not mean they are free to make baseless criticisms towards that person.
you look at the board and not the players unless you yourself play against him and he slams his clock after every move. Then you would definitely not look at the board.
My problem with Kasparov is that I sometimes find him a little overrated, at least when talking the highest of standards. I am usually not a friend of weak era discussions because while strong or weak eras do exist (given how much luck is involved for an ATG to develop, it would be naive to think that some invisible hand manages all eras to be equally strong), it is almost always next to impossible to prove which era is strong or weak. In Kasparov’s case there are some strong indicators though that makes me sceptical (at least compared to the golden 60s): - His opponent in the candidates final for the 84 WC match was 63 years old Smyslov who became world champion in 1957 and hadn’t made much noise since then, i.e. the whole 60s and 70s. The opponent in the semi was 53 years old Kortchnoi who in his younger years couldn’t really break through in the 60s when tougher competition was around. - Once he became world champion there was nobody apart from Karpov for years. First Kortchnoi was number three, then we had freaking Timman for a short while, Sokolov appeared in the candidates final in 1987 after a strange match against Jussupov where he won three of the last four games in a row. There were guys like Miles and Hübner in the top ten and finally in 1993 he got Short, who, going by ELO was the weakest opponent until then who ever played a WC match. - he seemed to struggle with Spasski and Petrosjan. Has a 2-2 score against both of them. Considering that both were way past their prime when they played Kasparov and Tigran had the black pieces in all four games one can speculate that playing them in their prime would cause even more issues. Now we can say “What about Karpov?”. Sure, Kasparov beat him three times but it was always narrowly and Karpov is 11 years older than him. In their first match he was very lucky that they had this strange rule of “whoever wins 6 games first, Remis don’t count” in place. Karpov led 5-0, in any format involving a reasonable match length (like 24 how it was for most of chess WC matches) he would have beaten Kasparov and in a humiliating way. If he had been able to bounce back from that shock at all (I give him the benefit of the doubt as he was a fierce competitor) his next chance would have been Sevilla 87 which, if we assume (strong assumption admittedly) all things remain equal, ends in a draw and Kasparov wins the WC in 1990 at the earliest against a 39 year old Karpov. Nobody would consider Gary the better player, instead people would say he had to wait until Karpov was old. Well in the end, the format in 84 allowed him to play on time, forcing many remis and pushed organisers to end the match and restart it at 0-0 in 85 where he then won. It is pretty interesting how something so arbitrary like match length format at a given point in time can have such a strong impact on the history of a sport. What we have to give to him is that he was able to mostly fight off the next generation apart from Kramnik. However, here we have to keep in mind that he benefited from two fundamental changes in chess (coincidently he himself named his first biography “child of change”) which was a) the money you could earn in chess, at least in WC matches increased significantly b) the already existing aid from seconds was further boosted by the emergence of better engines, which other than before could be of real help for match preparation and boosted Kasparov’s advantage of having the best team of seconds even more. Don’t get me wrong, he is still one of the greatest of all times, but compared to Carlsen who plays during a time where next to everyone in the world has access to all kind of chess material and who nevertheless dominates at will I think Kasparov falls short.
You mention his scores vs Spassky and Petrosian, mention the 15-1 vs Korchnoin too bud, don't cherry pick statistics.. Karpov never beat Kasparov in a WCC match, and Karpov is considered in the top 4-5 greatest players ever with staggering tournament achievements only second to Kasparov. Chessmetrics did a big analysis of this in 2005. Of course the matches were close, Karpov was a monster! Fischer ran from the guy lol They also calculated Kasparov with 17 x 2820+ tournament performances, Lasker had 6, Karpov 4 and Fischer 2. Old man Karpov beat Anand in their 1998 match! Kasparov whooped Anand 23-8! Kasparov also has the longest reign as number 1, 20 years and 15 years World Champion. 6 times World Classical Champion! He won 15 tournaments in a row between 1981 to 1991 a record. Youngest ever World Champion at 22yrs. Won Linares 9 times. Won 10 super tourneys in a row upto Linares 2002. Beat Shirov, Adams, Bareev, Morozevich, Gelfand by 50-0! In decisive classical games, all world top 10 snd 2 were WCC challengers. With the Shirov match not happening after Alexei beat Kramnik in the candidates. Kasparov beat the Israeli Olmypic team 7-1! 4 x 2600 GMs in a classical simul, when has Carlsen even done anything like this? Not to mention all the computer matches he had, from 1989 deep thought, to beat Deep Blue in 1996 and losing 1997, drawing with x3d Fritz and Deep Junior in 2003. Carlsen never touched any computers, even the older ones.. Kasparov only had 108 losses over 1531 games compared to Carlsen's 237 losses over 1848 games...big difference in loss percentage....
@@dexio8601 50+ years old Kortchnoi he is supposed to dominate. Carlsen plays in a world where literally EVERYONE who has access to the internet (so basically the whole world) can access all the chess material ever written. Everyone can play against strong opponents in the internet or analyse with the computer. Kasparov grew up in a world where you needed books to study chess theory, where you had no computers to help you with analysis and if you were born in a country without chess history you would rarely play strong opponents growing up. The talent pool Magnus has to face is light years above Kasparov’s and he nevertheless dominates at will. To the extent that he doesn’t give a shit about the WC title and prefers poker.
Before the guy takes on Kasparov, he might learn how to pronounce his name correctly. It's not Casperov, like the friendly guess, but Kas-PAR-ov, accent on the second syllable.
Kasparov is the best and made history. He is immortalized. Period. We are all humans and make mistakes. The problem with people all over the world is that we want others to be perfect but in reality, no one is...
@@qdlaty23 under no circumstances I am endorsing bad behavior. What I am saying is that we all tend to criticize people for their bad behavior but we also make the same mistakes. Everybody did something in their lives that they regretted doing it. No one is a clean piece of paper my friend. We all made mistakes.
@@qdlaty23 like my father taught me… “it is never too late to change and become a better person…” He is a different man today. We should all appreciate that. The past serves us to remember the mistakes we made and what not to do moving forward. It is up to us to understand our faults and change. The most difficult thing is to stop lying to ourselves and accept that things need to be changed for the better. Like my mom always said: “blind is the one who see’s everything but fails to see himself for what he truly is…” Take care brother. Nice having this conversation with you.
Just false, or at least a matter of perspective. I think ppl who eat meat are grotesquely immoral, including myself. Should I not respect "great person" X if they eat meat? Does someone who unnecessarily participates in the torture and murder of countless being for pleasure deserve respect? I think religious people are complete lunatics, and I don't respect anyone who is religious, because they believe absurd things. Can I not respect a great chess player who is religious though? I can. Respect can be contained to a domain or it reach beyond that. I like when people have personalities, and aren't just always playing the game of perfect decorum. That means taking the bad with the good. Most of all, I just care about the chess of great chess players. I respect their chess. I don't need to respect attribute every attribute of theirs in order to respect their chess. It's just opinion, ofc, but I don't think you have a good one.
I agree you shouldn't let someone off the hook due to his name, but let's be fair here. How many games did Garry play in his career, and how many "incidents"? Who has not had a couple moments they are ashamed of in their lives?
Absolutely true, especially the incident with Radjabov, both of whom are from the same city - Baku, what a disgrace. Moreover, Kasparov went to the same chess school as Radjabov's father!
Calling that cheating is a bit much. He took his fingers off for a moment and the move should have been kept, but if his fingers hadn't come of for a split second then he could have done what he did with the knight. Cheating is a serious term when it comes to chess, making that kind of accusation is defamatory, you should choose your words more wisely here.
@@dhirensidhwani3473 In fact it doesn't technically go against the rules. If you move a piece incorrectly, for example moving your bishop to a square on the other side of a pawn, when that pawn should be blocking it and the other person doesn't say anything and then makes another move, that incorrect move stands. It is on the other person to call out the improper move before they move their own piece.
Imo there's a reason why he left USSR/Russia. People talk and think a lot about the end-result, but i can't even start to imagine the "outside" pure pressure of just trying to become the World Chess Champion during those decades! And never think that the surrounding environment/habitat in which anyone lives, at the end of the day, don't influence one's decisions and actions.
There are a couple of cases of Karpov making similar blunders, but Karpov always took his losses due to inattention like they were any other kind. Tal says that there are two types of chess players: the type that cannot play at their absolute best without evoking a sense of near hatred towards their opponents, and the type for whom doing so seems completely irrational. Kasparov (along with Fischer) is firmly in the former category, while Karpov (and Tal himself) are in the latter. I don't think it's much of a stretch that the first type are more likely to be constrained by what they can get away with.
Im really glad this video was made precisely because there are many people who like GK! Personally, I dont have strong feelings one way or the other. Ive disagreed with many of comments such as his recent opinion on Ding not really being world champion, but have very much agreed on many other comments over the yrs. Hes undeniably a great player and may have used some dirty tricks to bully his opponents, but cheating is a stretch in my view. Even the knight violation is questionably a tactic he did on purpose to psych her out into thinking he blundered his advantage. The fact is his hand never left the vicinity of the piece and he knew he had plausible deniability as his finger could've been grazing the piece still. Im of the opinion he knew damn well he was putting that knight on f8 and was being a jerk, but he made his moves from his own head and didnt cheat anyone in my opinion unless you mean he cheated them out of a game with a classy opponent. Lol, he was even a jerk to a young Carlsen when he drew that game. Id put him with the likes of a Bobby Fisher, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Floyd Mayweather, or even Serena Williams where their dominance was undeniable, but they werent necessarily ones to have a drink with before or after a competition!
Saying no one likes Kasparov is a bold understatement. Also the top 3 greatest chess players of all time, Kasparov, Carlsen, and Fischer all had ego problems
Come on bruh, Magnus is fine. For a goat he has just a slight ego, which is totally acceptable and he is overall likeble guy unlike Hikaru or Kasparov
Don't compare Magnus and Fisher to such Childish human
@@musicgonnahelpme search the hans nieman story more and you'll understand how magnus has a really big ego
@@___whateverr agreed
Yea but Magnus at least makes it funny
Polgar has far more patience then the general GM by giving Kasparov the time of day after that
Calling him "cheating" is a bold accusation.
It's literally true
During his active career, Kasparov did show unsportsmanlike behavior. However, away from active play, he is a lot more docile and well-mannered. He was a dominating player, but his ego got in the way of fair play at times. I think he was so strong that losing was unfathomable to him. That does not mean what he did was right, though.
He's more docile and well mannered because he's not competing... nor competitive at the highest level.
@@djo-dji6018 Captain obvious. You wouldn't be insinuating that we go and grab our pitchforks, huh?
@@matsu820 I think you'll find that Hitler was also docile and well-mannered when he was at home talking about football or whatever and not gassing millions of people. Kasparov has also taken a very aggressive stance for the Ukraine war, advocating for western intervention etc.
I encountered Kasparov briefly when he was doing a book signing. I said hello. He offered no response, made no eye contact, signed the book and that was it. He was doing the same with everyone. Got a really negative vibe about the guy. I've been around maybe 20 well known GMs, including Karpov, Yasser, Judit, de Firmian, Finegold, Yermolinsky, Short, Gawain Jones, Sam Shankland, Vishy, Magnus, Naka, Aronian. None of them had the snarl and intensity of Kasparov.
The dude is really a GM enjoyer
@@plunderersparadisewtf lol 🤣
Just sounds like he had his game face on. Or worried about getting assassinated.
Of all the GMs you've met, who was your fave to be around?
@@user-dh1yq5cz9v Judit or Ben Finegold
Kasparov is not perfect, but he is a GIANT in chess history. Youngest ever world champion, beating an all time great champion in Karpov who was still in his prime. Longest reign as the world #1 player defeating multiple, younger generations.
Only Kramnik could withstand him, and Kramnik had to revolutionize the Berlin Defense (which was AlphaZero's answer to 1. e4) and gear his entire game to an anti-Kasparov style, crushing the Grunfeld and King's Indian Defense, and changing his style to completely dry out the position. I personally believe that Kramnik gearing his entire game to taking out Kasparov actually hurt his game because he didnt develop the attacking dynamism needed to rack up points vs weaker players. I think Kramnik himself came to this same conclusion because after he got crushed by Anand, who had been getting stronger by constantly pushing himself to play double-edged, dynamic positions with winning and losing chances for both sides, Kramnik shifted to a more dynamic and enterprising style, but it was too late and I think Kramnik wasnt able to reach the peak of his immense talent.
But the fact that an all time great chess talent and a great world champion like Kramnik had to go to such lengths to beat Kasparov shows just how great Kaspaorov was.
Beyond his playing career, Kasparov through the Botvinnik-Kasparov school trained the next generation of Russian greats including Kramnik! Kasparov recognized Kramnik's genius and pushed for him to be on the Russian Olympic team, and accepted full responsibility for putting an untested Kramnik ahead of several super GMs, and Kramnik crushed it completely validating Kasparov's judgment.
Kasparov also did a huge amount of work with Magnus Carlsen after which Carlsen became immensely strong and was unbeatable.
When you consider Kasparov's playing career and his influence in developing two future world champions, I think it's safe to say that Kasparov has made the greatest impact of anyone on the history of chess.
Plus Kasparov has written several great books on his games and matches so that future generations can learn the workings of his genius brain, that's a legacy which will last for centuries.
So yes, these actions highlighted by this video are not Kasparov's finest moments, but come on, it doesn't take away from his massive accomplishments and all that he has done for chess.
I think it's safe to say that Kasparov has given more to chess than anyone, and this should he remembered when criticizing him.
This was beautifully written! Very good job and gets the point across very well!
@Jim Park Brilliantly said!
@@MayhemChess I totally agree with you.
The fact that he’s undeniably contributed a lot to chess doesn’t give him a licence to be a bully and asshole.
Kasparov was never a good player. Most of it was just fake marketing and hype. At best, he never exceeded 2600 Elo, which would classify him as a mid-level GM.
It's really interesting because he seems very different nowadays. Perhaps he's gotten good at making himself look better, or maybe he's changed with his age? I don't like the man I see in this video, but I do like modern day Kasparov 😊
With time people seem to change, I hope it's the same with Kasparov
Also the world championchip against karpov kasparov was a little respectful
Kasparov doesn't play on top level anymore, which is okay, but he is still arrogant, which is not okay.
I have seen him do one of those FAQ type things like on vice or something. Like you have pros on of different topics to answer question. And he came across still having a giant ego.
Actually this ego problem is very common and actually rare, it happens bcs dah you are a world champion but it doesn't mean that he is a horrible person
Even magnus and bobby fisher who are the 2 goat of chess with kasparov had a big ego specially with Bobby
Guys like Karpov, Ivanchuk, Caruana, Nepo, Ding, Gukesh and others are proof that you don t have to be a psychopath to be good at chess
Didn't ivanchuk fight a pillar?
@@professorcool2731 he s a madman, but not a psycho😂
@@CorneliuZeleaCodreanu9😂😂😂😂😂😂
Also Anand and Aronian
Yeah, when Karpov made a 3-year-old opponent cry he then went out of his way to cheer him up, it was so wholesome I can’t
Well, Kasparov is definitely not cold blood machine , he is emotional person, his chess career was near 30 year with ups and downs and a lot of questionable things could happen. If this video is a summary of his dark side during chess game - it is pretty good.
Kasparov has been doing this ever since he was a teenager and probably before that. I know of one game Andrianov-Kasparov, Baku 1978 when Garry was 15 years old. Anyone can look the game up online. Kasparov's last move in that game was 45...Rd3?? and after 46 RXd2! he resigned. What you can't tell just from the raw game score is that Garry picked up the rook and realized it was a blunder before releasing it and tried to move his king instead. White told him no you have to move the rook (which Garry did with an animated gesture of disgust and immediate resignation after 46 RXd2!).
So?
@@jblangcua2726he was a cheat
@@avijanpaul9367no proof and nope
@@GokuIRLWhich video are you watching mate?
Like lots of Chess players do these unprofessional stuff. Its your duty to call them out rather than being a pussy about it. This narator said Judith reputation would be tarnished and she would be black listed. Sounds like nonsense to me.
For a guy who makes a living pushing wood around a board, he really couldn't be bothered to do that in a dignified manner...
There can be tense emotions in chess especially at high level. Bobby Fischer even admitted that he enjoyed crushing the other guys ego.
and? he wasn't a baby like Kasparov who was so disrespectful to everyone.
You made a lot of incorrect statements. I watched the interview with polgar . He did nt change his mind and he proved that he was right . Polgar asked him about women In chess and Kasparov told her that the rating diff between the genders at the elite level remains the same dispute double the participation rates of women in the last 50 years . Also no one ever banned women from playing chess stop with all that propaganda stuff.
Kasparov is one of the greatest chess players.
And that is where all the great things about him end.
He's done some great things for charity
@@lukemarks3281 most rich people do for tax write offs
@@ieat10kittens94What a pessimist.
Your sense of what constitutes greatness needs a refresh. He's always spoken out against political constraints he disagreed with.
Tell me you dint know about kasparov without telling me you dint know about kasparov
Tbh the first one was arguably just physiologically warfare but the 2nd should be considered cheating considering that he knocked the pieces out of place, the 3rd was against Judit Polgar was outright cheating.
He should have been made to put the pieces back on his time.
Judit should have just quietly said to him, "Didn't you let go of that piece?" And if he said no, just let it go.
@@PaulSchober Lol, easy to say when you are not in the situation...
@@PaulSchoberwhy?
when you reach such a level of playing, the pressure gets more and more intense. being called the best player of all time didn't help the pressure at all. Other than him definitely being a bit arrogant and with a big ego, it was definitely also out of passion and maybe even a little fear of losing his spot. much love to the best player of all time
He did against Naka in blitz the same what he did against Polgar.
He does that all the time. It is in his nature.
Where?
Was the result from the match with Polgar not corrected retroactively? In almost any other sport thats what happens when its found out that someone cheated and didn't actually win. Like how Lance Armstrong lost the medals when it turned out he never actually won those races.
no
Not just ego, but also a bad personality that was never taken care of. Add a lot of success to that equation and you get this kind of person. He's way better now ( as a person ). Some times, you just need time off in order to reflect on yourself.
I have read some of Mr. Kasparov's books and thought that they were interesting and well written. I seem to recall that he experienced some very rough, almost like war conditions in his native land. I am a long time intermediate recreational player - not rated and have never played in a tournament. But I know this, if I was playing somebody and they started hitting the table or clock really hard, rocking the pieces, etc., I would not tolerate it for even 10 seconds; that behavior would completely cease or fists would fly and or we would be rolling around on the ground right then and there,
So you would fight someone over the littlest things? Hitting the table out of anger I mean I would too, slamming the clock very hard in time pressure I do it all the time, rocking the pieces wdym?
I can only guess that these are words from someone who hasn't been in a real fight. Show class by being calm and collected, escepially when facing childish behaviour
Yeah, have to agree with you. Personally, I just do like to find excuses to do someone a big favor of helping them wear their ass for a hat.
SPASSKY said that GK did not write his books
Reading is nice
In fairness, I think Kasparov has matured and mellowed over the years as demonstrated by his 2020 chat with Judith Polgar. In all his recent appearances, he comes across as quite a likeable character.
By 2020 engines had demonstrated that humans in general should stick to making babies and not play chess. It is easy to have humility when you are not on top.
by 2020 kasparov was 57!
you really ought to do your maturing earlier than that! the thing he did in polgar's game is beyond anything. she had no chance to defend her claim, even tho the video we have now 100% proves she's right.
@@erikmarkus7467 Polgar and Kasparov are now friends so she has forgiven him. One of the sad things about the 21st century is the lack of grace. People must be allowed to stuff up and then be forgiven if they repent. We're all in the same boat at the end of the day.
@@rodbenson5879 I'm not saying we need to go back and punish him. They moved on, fine. Fact remains that he has acted like a total douche.
You're mistaken. He always lies. He has betrayed many people such as his friends and his beloved woman. He abandoned his woman as soon as she told him she was pregnant and refused to acknowledge his daughter later.
Kasparov merely took advantage of a common weakness in many top tier players' game... the psychological aspect. Once he realized that many of his opponent's let his behavior get to them but were too passive to ever really call him out on it in any meaningful way, he simply added it to his already impressive skill set and continued to refine it along with the rest. Had enough fuss been made over it to lead to professional consequences, he would have toned it down (at least enough to avoid any consequences he considered too severe to be worth it.)
He smashed his clock so hard it knocked all the pieces off his board and the ones beside him. And stormed out when he was losing instead of resigning the game. Ah yes...truly a master of psychological warfare. 🙄
@@Tyhar93ah yes, btw how many world chess titles do you have?
@@plavitigar Sorry I didn't know having world chess titles was required in order to have an opinion 😂you sound goofy.
Sorry, is it in the spirit of Chess to joust intellectually or with brutish small minded force? If I truly wanted more savagery, competitive boxing would have suited better.
Poor sportsmanship-the director should have warned him that he would lose time on his clock if anything else happened. Also, in the game against Seirawan, a director should have warned Kasparov to move his pieces correctly, not to “screw them in”, and if he continued in this vein he would incur time penalties. If no compliance, he could be forfeited.@@Tyhar93
You got some points there , among all GM .. I also saw all his defeated matches ... He was quite angry and furious on himself..!
..
Well , this teaches some valuable lessons to learn
Bruh, "no one"? You're really mistaken...
Obviously it's hyperbole, but it's better for a UA-cam title. A lot more exaggerated titles out there.
@Eru I'd go beyond mistaken. I'd go with deluded.
Kasparov was one of the best players in the history of chess. This is consensus. To achieve that, he developed a killer instinct, so would do whatever needed to win. He wasn't likeable, but you can't rely on players to draw lines of acceptable behaviour. You got to penalize any misconduct. If he could get away with what you described, he just did it.
Being good in something doesn't make you less of an ass.
@@jackcarver1492 There probably are very few professional players in any sport or activity that haven't cheated at some time or another.
People make mental errors because they are people.
Cheating is like lying. Everyone does it from time to time. Not always intentionally, but it happens. In fact, psychologists will tell you that lying is a part of the mental process of maturing. It's human nature, as is cheating.
And as far as cheating goes, this example is fairly lame when compared to people who have intentionally cheated by taking steroids or corking a bat. How many boxers have done a low blow? How many football players have held, or pushed a hand to a facemask, or pushed off as a receiver? Cheating happens in every sport by nearly every player, especially spur of the moment cheating.
If Kasparov is an ass for one or two incidents of this, then so are the vast majority of players in most sports.
Look at soccer. Talk about cheating. They've made falling to the ground an artform. As has some basketball players. SMH.
@@darlenesmith5690 Dude, why the heck did you write a novella about cheating to me? What are you even talking about???
@@jackcarver1492 If that is a novella to you, I am not surprised that it went over your head.
Let me summarize: Everyone cheats. Deal.
@@darlenesmith5690 No1 was talking about cheating in the first place, now piss off.
Kasparov is a force of Nature and was at the top for 20 yrs....many put him above today's best GM's.
and?
@@tengu8560 Tal, is one of my chess heroes
When one is young their passions and fire run deep. When we are older we mellow somewhat and learn respect for our opponents. We will still remain competitive and sorrow over our team's losses, but we will no longer want to crush the enemies. Perhaps the pressures are different for top level players, especially chess players, because one can't stand it when their intellect fails them. But to be certain, Mr. Kasparov was a brilliant chess player. If it matters, he has my respect.
Show me one #1 at anything who doesn't have an ego problem. The masses describes it as 'ego problem' because they don't understand that without it you cannot go boyond what everyone else does in order to become the nr.1
This completely changes my opinion about kasparov and it's a shame that he never took responsibility about his cheat and that no action was ever taken by the international federation. A true champion, an intelligent person, should compliment and encourage younger generation, he had nothing to prove, he would have been better acknowledging his opponent worth
Kasparov wasn't under FIDE at the time, he was the reigning world champion and had split the sport in 1993. Kramnik who later defeated Kasparov in 2002 won the unification match and came back to FIDE in the mid 2000s. Note the FIDE world champions that people do not talk about as much. Kasparov has said he regrets his actions splitting the sport. Also it seems Kasparov put himself under a lot of pressure because no world champion had lost to a computer or a woman (this was two things that were publicly known and said in the press at the time), likely he did not want to be the first. These three things sound strange to say, but I think he was operating under those pressures in the 90s. He never convisingly put away Karpov in their matches they were always close so his Elo was what Garry concentrated on to show how much stronger he was. I don't think they excuse him for behaviours. Just providing context for the time.
Also I think Judit is a legend of the game. Enjoyed seeing her defeat Magnus in the park during the candidates where they played a Sicilian. Still impressed with Anand being so strong for so long and still in the top 10 for Elo.
@@gm2407 interesting. Thank you so much for taking the time to share this 👍
“There are tough players and nice guys, and I’m a tough player.” - R.J. Fischer
"I like to see 'em squirm" Bobby Fischer.
For me. Socially I am amicable , easy going, and usually let others take the lead. In competition my performance suffers unless I let a ruthless and ego driven side of myself take charge. This has resulted in behavior I am not known for. Contemplating this I came to an understanding that for some competition will bring out both the best and worst of a person's traits. Competition is in someways a therapeutic experience allowing someone to exercise repressed aspects of their humanity in order to feel whole. Most of the time the bad traits are only momentarily displayed and then put back in their place. Conversely ones better traits are usually displayed in excelling performance and lasting friendships with opponents. Life is not as simple as a story written with care to deliver a moralistic message. People deal with the pressures of competition differently. If Casparov cared more for his sportsmanship and reputation vs his performance. Then maybe he also wouldn't have played nearly as well. For some winning or losing is very close to a life or death outcome. They put much more of themselves on the line which exposes themselves to humiliation they feel if they lose. That fear feeds their drive to win. They are different. I still admire Casparov.
You are saying that he cheated by moving his knight to a different square, but from the video it looks like he never took his hand off the knight! The move is not complete until
the hand releases the piece! Where he puts the piece while still having it in his grip does not matter!
This video is extremely misleading. Kasparov isn’t disrespectful (for example he visited Bobby Fischer’s grave) and he definitely didn’t cheat?? He isn’t perfect, but he is definitely not what this video portrays him to be. This just seems like a quick view grab meant to mislead people who don’t know as much about chess.
He visited the grave of an antisemite and mysogynist?😄
@@bolobolognesewasnt he a jew
@@bolobolognesebut Kasparov is 1/2 Jewish so…who cares.
I have massive respect for Kasparov but he let go of the piece and moved it somewhere else. Was it harmless? Probably. But still, that is technically a violation of the rules so it's objectively speaking cheating by definition, and you cannot argue otherwise.
He literally accused Fischer of helping deepblue when he lost to deepblue. He's a crybaby loser and VERY disrespctful did the video lie anywhere?
I like Kasparov. I have always looked up to him. He as a brilliant technical player...and a bit emotional. Shows his dedication to the craft.
There's an old chess classic about the outrageous and hilarious antics of some of the greatest chessplayers, called, "Underhanded Chess."
4:00 That disbelief in the eyes of little Polgar.
Gary and magnus are the goats
Never have I ever heard anyone not like Garry
Well I met Garry playing chess games. He was a perfect gentleman and very friendly, some 25 years ago.
@@bernardm2528 I think that’s it. He seems a very intelligent gentleman, it’s just that his emotions get the better of him.
I still remember when Kasparov was 2 years old.
from where did you get those rares videos? I am really impressed. I didn't know about those details with Radjabov. It was you who recorded their playing a game? please answer
The most polite chess p[layer is Seirawan, for sure. Apparently, whenever someone says, "Could you tell me your name?" he always replies "Yes Sir!"
Anatoly karpov is up there ,
Maybe I should have said "he always replies, 'Yass Sir!'"@@MaskedEmperor18
lets not forget how emotional chess is
He may become emotional, that is human of course. He is not Stockfish.
I guess John McEnroe attics on tennis courts made him less of a player?
Seriously nobody cares that Picasso treated his kids and wives horribly all we remember are his art works
Magnus ego isnt flamboyant like kasparovs.
Its synical and cunning.
Dude PURPOSELY GOES INTO LOSING POSITIONS just to equalize and merk in the endgame.
I.e. his Magnus Carlsen gambit that levy showed on his channel.
Magnus does not have big ego. I am Norwegian, and people can mistake Scandinavian honesty and frankness as arrogance, but he is not vain at all. He is a very humble and easygoing person. Describing him like this is just ridiculous. I really dont know where this is coming from. Also, these gambits you mention are played in casual games online. You don't seem to be very familiar with chess if you think that this is evidence of something. Many other chess players play trolling gambits online in casual games that are meant for fun. Also, we are talking about elite sportsmen. A certain level of competitiveness and determination is necessary to reach the top.
@@keto0303 i didnt say he has a big ego. I said his ego is synical.
The word synical is not in the dictionary. Please define it.
@@erictimm2172 lol. Ur right its not. I was debating myself whether it started with an S or with a C. Its Cynical with a c. 🤣🤣
This is a rather emotional analysis. If we look at different sports, people who could be considered GOATs in their respective sports (just a few examples: Brady, Schumacher, Hamilton, Djokovic, Jordan, hell, even Maradona) were all willing to commit controversial actions that were far from virtuous if that meant they had a better chance to win, and they could get away with it. These people aren't so great in spite of their "moral flaws", it's precisely one of the qualities that puts them above most. Whether you like it or not, it's always been like that for the most part. So yeah, this is just biased.
Glad someone finally stated the obvious. You left out Ayrton Senna, and there are many others.
Well there should be a metric where you are just a POS even if you want to win so bad, these two things arent mutually excluse, just think about the boxer who removed his boxing pads to win, yeah he had the drive and wanted to win but he got his opponent in a life threatening situation. I dont think Kasparov fits into this though but
Also great way to consider who is actually a pos is looking at their outside actions for example : Hamilton, who constantly puts himself above humans like telling people to use bikes to save the climate yet he travels on yachts. Now this is perfectly relating to your comment, do i have to like and obey his comments just because he is a goat at some arbitrary sport i have literally no connections to? Obviously not. Just because they are good at some sport it doesnt mean they arent even equal to humans and get a free pass from bad behaviour. Even though nowadays people do that.
Right. GOATS hate losing more than they like winning. Their opponents are not their friends. They’re the hurdle blocking their legacy.
That fire made him great. Kasparov once said "Levon Aronian will never be World Champion - he smiles after he loses."
I love chess but I never met so many unsocial misfits than when I played in a club and in tournaments. Victor Korchnoi had a horrible tantrum when Polgar beat him in a game.
While I'm not sure how much I can agree with the premise, this is a very well-researched and well-edited video and I'm excited to see what's next!
total clickbait nonsense. Kasparov is a legend and I haven't seen many people speak bad about him. Also he has been openly defying Putin from the start contrary to most Russian players.
@@daarom3472 Have you even search about him or just looking his chess plays😃 if that is the case i feel sorru about you. Everyone knows he is barking dog
You're just being Nice
Anyone remember that game of Magnus vs Supi, where Supi beat him in 19 moves with a queen sac ?
Look at Magnus's reaction, and watch Hikaru when he loses (I literally don't even care), big difference ?
My age is 55 & I remember what you said about kasparov intimidating anand with his behavior was talked about then also
I think we’d all could have a highlight film of shameful actions that we regret through out our lives….
When Kasparov cannot win to Magnus Carlsen during their first encounter, he walks away immediately after the game was agreed to a draw.
All the players do that see magnus he is like kasparov and perhaps plus than him (excuse me for my english) magnus is studying from kasparov and he have a lot of clips that argue this 😊
bro, are you really this stupid?, if i, Kasparov and any other chess player that is uncomfortable speaking to other people that theyve just met, they probaly just walk away, especially if the one kasparov who is speaking is still a kid and he just lost the game, he need some time alone(probaly reviewing). what do you expect?. you, if you go to tournaments, do you speak to your opponent when the game is over?, especially if you have loss the game?
@@narutonaruto1698 there is a thing called Google Translate
Kasparov was a sore loser what do you expect from him, in 2004 imagine being at the end of your career, out of your prime and regarded as the best chess player in history and a 13 year old International Master held you to a draw it will sure hit your ego.
And walking away might be disrespectful but he did reach Magnus and coached him later on to help him improve at chess.
We love Garry Kasparov so I don't understand what you are talking about
Well said.
Maybe watch the video slow goofy to know what he’s talking about
I like Vidit Kujrati he has a lot of Sportmanship.
Probably the fact that one has to study/play an unforgiving game with no human interaction for 10 hours a day, every day, for most of his life has something to do with it.
I thought Kasparov was a good guy..... Now I understand
He was but he got it like ficher but still the goat or atleast the 3 best ever
“There are tough players and nice guys, and I’m a tough player.” - R.J. Fischer
Love you, Kasparov!
First I've heard of this. Who openly said they did not like Kasparov, and why?
keep uploading...
good content, keep it up....
I respect brilliance far more when it is accompanied by humility.
This is the guy who was pointing out Putin and AI way before the public started paying attention.
But love this video. So well done.
Ah yes that evil Putin, the man who doesn't genitally mutilate and groom kids under the facade of "social justice/LGBT/tolerance" and instead doesn't let rabid fanatic lunatics chemically castrate sterilize and groom kids aka trans kids....that Monster!!!!. Why cant he be more like those "good guy" liberal/leftists western nations.....
Self-owned. Since Putin IS the good guy, and his fight againt satanic NATO IS justified, that makes Gary Kasparov even MORE evil 😆
I once visited a simultaneous match. I think it was in 1992: Kasparov against Germany. Four boards. One german player fell suddenly from the stage. It looked very scary. What did Kasparov? He was angry and protestet because he felt disturbed.
Where didju get this from? Dawg
Garry Kasparov is my idol I started chess cause him cause he is the best GM . The only who won a computer
The computer chess was just starting out in his time, so not that hard to beat a computer
@@niteshprabhu6791 Also, Magnus beat a stockfish cheater.
Well that's special,, I guess that computer aren't worth much now.😊
amazing content dude! keep it up!!!
Not rly
No. Prejudiced, biased content by someone who does not like Kasparov.
@@davidcopson5800 He didn't say that he doesn't like him. He just spoke facts most of the time.I don't think the fact that he is the most disrespectful gm for example. Yea he did exaggerate some things but there's no reason to hate him for that.
@@dragosn2637 who asked?
Garry is a real Champion and Legend. Sophisticated, eloquent, immense Knowledge and analytical skills beside the chessboard. The GOAT in my eyes.
the nowadays Kasparov, who everybody knows now, seems to be more respectful, and as in the video is mention; he accepted he was wrong with women in chess, I guess, Kasparov was young and this game can arise the worst version of you because it's all about being focus, and the fear of do a single mistake can put you in a big preassure, some people can't handle well, of course, I don't want to justify his mistakes. I can't imagine how furious he would be when Magnus won against him when he still was a child
A ridiculous witch hunt. I personally know dozens of chess players who do these things on a regular basis, why pick on Kasparov. Many players at this level have tremendous egos, it's part of chess. Vladimir Kramnik says he accepted Garry's demeanour at the board because he was a brilliant player with a very expressive nature. Let me state, I love Kasparov's play and admire Garry as a player who has done so much for chess. So, you are completely wrong with your crass statement, "Why No One Likes Garry Kasparov". I really LIKE Garry Kasparov, and I won't be the only one. Why not make a video entitled 'Why No One Likes Vladimir Putin'. Are you brave enough? Garry would be!
Ding Liren does not behave in this egotistical manner.
I don't know in what world you live, but þere are certainly plenty of videos against Putin þat shit on him,
Being Anti-Putin is noþing þat brings you bragging rights.
Weak take… just my opinion.
It's a massive L but he needs clout since the government welfare money isn't enough for him so he needs the extra buck 🤡
I dont think he acted this way because of his ego, I believe he just couldnt handle the stress of being number 1 for so long and felt immense pressure.
Kasparov is still the best in his prime days
This video perfectly summarises my prejudices against Kasparov. Though one cannot deny he is among the greatest players ever, I'm starting to wonder if psychological chess was also part of Kasparov's game.
It had always been part of his game.
You don't need to wonder. Many top players have straight up said that it was a large part of his game. I think even Garry admitted that he tried to use psychological tricks against his opponents. Fischer did the same.
That's what sets Magnus,Gary,Fischer etc.apart from players like Anand.They're proficient in mind games and psychological tricks.
who told you that no one likes kasparov i realy like him he's my favorite player and i've learned alot from him after all he's one of the greatest all time .
😂😂😂
By the way you speak I just Can assume you are 11 years old
Whats then first game ? Magnes vs who and when ?
I still like Kasparov. He also had the utmost respect for the genius of Bobby Fischer and even visited his grave.
Very underrated channel, keep up the grind! You make great videos❤❤
Ok so there are a lot of things in this video that are pretty questionable to me. Sure, some of these criticisms are valid, but a number of them are pretty baseless. I mean, polgar clearly didnt have her reputation ruined after facing kasparov. And just in general, something like hitting the clock too hard, ok a player with a career this long, there are eventually going to be moments like that. However if he really did say all of that about polgar, then that is problematic.
@@uhoh2724 I mean the video serves as a direct criticism either way, so I think its pretty reasonable to address the actual criticisms, but that's fair I think at least some of them make sense
I mean a video like this is pretty unjustified with only 6 minutes duration. Most gotcha video is at least 30 minutes long and when you're talking about possibly the most influential chess player of all time 6 minutes cover absolutely nothing. Would've loved if this was at least an hour long video covering all the bases.
I think that also the chanell hates gary😂
@@uhoh2724 What do you mean they make sense? Probably for people that dont like him, based on some valid and many questionable/baseless remarks. Also, just because someone dislikes someone does not mean they are free to make baseless criticisms towards that person.
Might not have had the best persona, but I look at the board not the players
This channel is great, Kasparov is great too
you look at the board and not the players unless you yourself play against him and he slams his clock after every move. Then you would definitely not look at the board.
Chess players generally have big egos, and that makes headaches for chess tournament arbiters and directors.
In fact, everyone loves Garry
I don’t
@@MK-oj6hd I meant excellent chess player
@@kevinwellwrought2024 You said “everyone” muppet..
My problem with Kasparov is that I sometimes find him a little overrated, at least when talking the highest of standards. I am usually not a friend of weak era discussions because while strong or weak eras do exist (given how much luck is involved for an ATG to develop, it would be naive to think that some invisible hand manages all eras to be equally strong), it is almost always next to impossible to prove which era is strong or weak.
In Kasparov’s case there are some strong indicators though that makes me sceptical (at least compared to the golden 60s):
- His opponent in the candidates final for the 84 WC match was 63 years old Smyslov who became world champion in 1957 and hadn’t made much noise since then, i.e. the whole 60s and 70s. The opponent in the semi was 53 years old Kortchnoi who in his younger years couldn’t really break through in the 60s when tougher competition was around.
- Once he became world champion there was nobody apart from Karpov for years. First Kortchnoi was number three, then we had freaking Timman for a short while, Sokolov appeared in the candidates final in 1987 after a strange match against Jussupov where he won three of the last four games in a row. There were guys like Miles and Hübner in the top ten and finally in 1993 he got Short, who, going by ELO was the weakest opponent until then who ever played a WC match.
- he seemed to struggle with Spasski and Petrosjan. Has a 2-2 score against both of them. Considering that both were way past their prime when they played Kasparov and Tigran had the black pieces in all four games one can speculate that playing them in their prime would cause even more issues.
Now we can say “What about Karpov?”. Sure, Kasparov beat him three times but it was always narrowly and Karpov is 11 years older than him. In their first match he was very lucky that they had this strange rule of “whoever wins 6 games first, Remis don’t count” in place. Karpov led 5-0, in any format involving a reasonable match length (like 24 how it was for most of chess WC matches) he would have beaten Kasparov and in a humiliating way. If he had been able to bounce back from that shock at all (I give him the benefit of the doubt as he was a fierce competitor) his next chance would have been Sevilla 87 which, if we assume (strong assumption admittedly) all things remain equal, ends in a draw and Kasparov wins the WC in 1990 at the earliest against a 39 year old Karpov. Nobody would consider Gary the better player, instead people would say he had to wait until Karpov was old. Well in the end, the format in 84 allowed him to play on time, forcing many remis and pushed organisers to end the match and restart it at 0-0 in 85 where he then won.
It is pretty interesting how something so arbitrary like match length format at a given point in time can have such a strong impact on the history of a sport.
What we have to give to him is that he was able to mostly fight off the next generation apart from Kramnik. However, here we have to keep in mind that he benefited from two fundamental changes in chess (coincidently he himself named his first biography “child of change”) which was a) the money you could earn in chess, at least in WC matches increased significantly b) the already existing aid from seconds was further boosted by the emergence of better engines, which other than before could be of real help for match preparation and boosted Kasparov’s advantage of having the best team of seconds even more.
Don’t get me wrong, he is still one of the greatest of all times, but compared to Carlsen who plays during a time where next to everyone in the world has access to all kind of chess material and who nevertheless dominates at will I think Kasparov falls short.
You mention his scores vs Spassky and Petrosian, mention the 15-1 vs Korchnoin too bud, don't cherry pick statistics..
Karpov never beat Kasparov in a WCC match, and Karpov is considered in the top 4-5 greatest players ever with staggering tournament achievements only second to Kasparov. Chessmetrics did a big analysis of this in 2005. Of course the matches were close, Karpov was a monster! Fischer ran from the guy lol
They also calculated Kasparov with 17 x 2820+ tournament performances, Lasker had 6, Karpov 4 and Fischer 2. Old man Karpov beat Anand in their 1998 match! Kasparov whooped Anand 23-8!
Kasparov also has the longest reign as number 1, 20 years and 15 years World Champion. 6 times World Classical Champion!
He won 15 tournaments in a row between 1981 to 1991 a record.
Youngest ever World Champion at 22yrs.
Won Linares 9 times.
Won 10 super tourneys in a row upto Linares 2002.
Beat Shirov, Adams, Bareev, Morozevich, Gelfand by 50-0! In decisive classical games, all world top 10 snd 2 were WCC challengers. With the Shirov match not happening after Alexei beat Kramnik in the candidates.
Kasparov beat the Israeli Olmypic team 7-1! 4 x 2600 GMs in a classical simul, when has Carlsen even done anything like this?
Not to mention all the computer matches he had, from 1989 deep thought, to beat Deep Blue in 1996 and losing 1997, drawing with x3d Fritz and Deep Junior in 2003. Carlsen never touched any computers, even the older ones..
Kasparov only had 108 losses over 1531 games compared to Carlsen's 237 losses over 1848 games...big difference in loss percentage....
@@dexio8601 50+ years old Kortchnoi he is supposed to dominate. Carlsen plays in a world where literally EVERYONE who has access to the internet (so basically the whole world) can access all the chess material ever written. Everyone can play against strong opponents in the internet or analyse with the computer. Kasparov grew up in a world where you needed books to study chess theory, where you had no computers to help you with analysis and if you were born in a country without chess history you would rarely play strong opponents growing up. The talent pool Magnus has to face is light years above Kasparov’s and he nevertheless dominates at will. To the extent that he doesn’t give a shit about the WC title and prefers poker.
@@dexio8601 garry is that you ? 😂
Great comment.
@@dexio8601 Great reply. Thanks, gentlemen.
In chess being nice is just an obstacle to success.
who says we hate him?
Before the guy takes on Kasparov, he might learn how to pronounce his name correctly. It's not Casperov, like the friendly guess, but Kas-PAR-ov, accent on the second syllable.
Indeed.
Kasparov is the best and made history. He is immortalized. Period. We are all humans and make mistakes. The problem with people all over the world is that we want others to be perfect but in reality, no one is...
Kasparov is a crook. Fischer exposed him
Seriously, he has the right to be a terrible, toxic, disrespectful person just because he's good at chess? How exactly does that work in your world?
@@qdlaty23 under no circumstances I am endorsing bad behavior. What I am saying is that we all tend to criticize people for their bad behavior but we also make the same mistakes. Everybody did something in their lives that they regretted doing it. No one is a clean piece of paper my friend. We all made mistakes.
@@alcamorim we definitely agree on that. I just don't think being an arrogant asshole over the course of a few decades counts as a mistake.
@@qdlaty23 like my father taught me… “it is never too late to change and become a better person…” He is a different man today. We should all appreciate that. The past serves us to remember the mistakes we made and what not to do moving forward. It is up to us to understand our faults and change. The most difficult thing is to stop lying to ourselves and accept that things need to be changed for the better. Like my mom always said: “blind is the one who see’s everything but fails to see himself for what he truly is…” Take care brother. Nice having this conversation with you.
I have looked at "sore loser" in the dictionary and I saw Kasparov picture. But hey, I still love Kaspy.
For my sanity… I’d rather end the video here! 😂
Chess is a game. No matter how good someone is at any game or sport or has contributed greatly to it, if he is a jerk he doesn't deserve any respect.
Just false, or at least a matter of perspective.
I think ppl who eat meat are grotesquely immoral, including myself. Should I not respect "great person" X if they eat meat? Does someone who unnecessarily participates in the torture and murder of countless being for pleasure deserve respect?
I think religious people are complete lunatics, and I don't respect anyone who is religious, because they believe absurd things. Can I not respect a great chess player who is religious though? I can. Respect can be contained to a domain or it reach beyond that.
I like when people have personalities, and aren't just always playing the game of perfect decorum. That means taking the bad with the good. Most of all, I just care about the chess of great chess players. I respect their chess. I don't need to respect attribute every attribute of theirs in order to respect their chess.
It's just opinion, ofc, but I don't think you have a good one.
I agree you shouldn't let someone off the hook due to his name, but let's be fair here. How many games did Garry play in his career, and how many "incidents"? Who has not had a couple moments they are ashamed of in their lives?
It's surprising that he didn't go full on Bobby Fischer.
Absolutely true, especially the incident with Radjabov, both of whom are from the same city - Baku, what a disgrace. Moreover, Kasparov went to the same chess school as Radjabov's father!
And both their great-great grandfathers participated in goat hunting on the shores of the Caspian Sea together.
@@zetristan4525 Jews don't hunt, they gather 😎
Still, he's the GOAT
Calling that cheating is a bit much. He took his fingers off for a moment and the move should have been kept, but if his fingers hadn't come of for a split second then he could have done what he did with the knight. Cheating is a serious term when it comes to chess, making that kind of accusation is defamatory, you should choose your words more wisely here.
It goes against the rules .....it's cheating🤷
Absolutely right. This video is vindictive trash.
@@dhirensidhwani3473 In fact it doesn't technically go against the rules. If you move a piece incorrectly, for example moving your bishop to a square on the other side of a pawn, when that pawn should be blocking it and the other person doesn't say anything and then makes another move, that incorrect move stands. It is on the other person to call out the improper move before they move their own piece.
@@LiamborninDC You see the problem?
Imo there's a reason why he left USSR/Russia. People talk and think a lot about the end-result, but i can't even start to imagine the "outside" pure pressure of just trying to become the World Chess Champion during those decades! And never think that the surrounding environment/habitat in which anyone lives, at the end of the day, don't influence one's decisions and actions.
Chess can have that effect on you. I remember another world champion before Kasparov who behaved the same way.
In my book, Kasparov is the GOAT like it or not.
Nobody cares what you like bro.
"bUt hE hAd bAd tEmPeR aNd oNcE mOvEd hIs kNiGhT bAcK!"
Yuck lmao
There are a couple of cases of Karpov making similar blunders, but Karpov always took his losses due to inattention like they were any other kind.
Tal says that there are two types of chess players: the type that cannot play at their absolute best without evoking a sense of near hatred towards their opponents, and the type for whom doing so seems completely irrational. Kasparov (along with Fischer) is firmly in the former category, while Karpov (and Tal himself) are in the latter. I don't think it's much of a stretch that the first type are more likely to be constrained by what they can get away with.
How does one even cheat in Chess? Surely he just outsmarted his opponent.
We cannot expect a russian pawn to have manners.
Im really glad this video was made precisely because there are many people who like GK! Personally, I dont have strong feelings one way or the other. Ive disagreed with many of comments such as his recent opinion on Ding not really being world champion, but have very much agreed on many other comments over the yrs. Hes undeniably a great player and may have used some dirty tricks to bully his opponents, but cheating is a stretch in my view. Even the knight violation is questionably a tactic he did on purpose to psych her out into thinking he blundered his advantage. The fact is his hand never left the vicinity of the piece and he knew he had plausible deniability as his finger could've been grazing the piece still. Im of the opinion he knew damn well he was putting that knight on f8 and was being a jerk, but he made his moves from his own head and didnt cheat anyone in my opinion unless you mean he cheated them out of a game with a classy opponent. Lol, he was even a jerk to a young Carlsen when he drew that game. Id put him with the likes of a Bobby Fisher, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Floyd Mayweather, or even Serena Williams where their dominance was undeniable, but they werent necessarily ones to have a drink with before or after a competition!
Fischer had some horrific demons, but by pretty much unanimous accounts he was a 100% gentleman at the board.