AG> CB> He refused to defend his title when he was challenged.  And as with 
mos
AG>There was alot more to it than that. I was reading in a Chess book that
AG> KGB documents opened recently showed that there was a definate strategy,
AG>in trying to push him to forfiet his title in 1975
AG> they targeted Fischers
AG>Psycological weakeness, staying firm on points where he was least likely
AG>to concede and they were prepared to argue and argue
AG>until negociations collapsed. He saved them the trouble.
 One problem, AFAIK, was the wierd 'two-game' rule where the challenger
 had to win by two clear games (as the match between Spassky and Fischer
 in 1993 was played under). The argument was that if the challenger was
 beat the champion by 'only' one game then they hadn't shown that they
 were clearly the better player.
  I don't see why anyone would agree to such dodgy rules (unless like
  Spassky it was a chance to make quick money that wouldn't normally be
  available).
 Still, it's all very messy. That's politics for you though. A shame
 when it comes into sports and Fischer and to a much greater extent the
 Russians and Karpov have really sullied Chess' reputation with their
 antics.
        See ya,
                Dave
---
 * OLX 2.1 TD * "You know the way of command. Yes, the Wind Swords are ri
---------------