Originally posted by no1marauderI'll let you sleep, you're not listening anyway...
It's very tiresome to hear the same thing over and over again. I really don't see what was wrong with the system in place from the early 1960's to the 1990's; the Champion had to defend every three years and there seemed to be quality contenders available every cycle. Fischer got his shot; Karpov and Kasparov were the dominant players in the 1980's ...[text shortened]... n such a great advantage; the title changed regularly under the system. So what was the problem?