In January 2002, Bobby Fischer spoke to a radio station in Reykjavik, Iceland. In this interview, he mainly talked about his opinion about his intention to return to chess – and under what circumstances. This is how he described his intentions:
-
Is there a chance that you will play chess again?
Only Fischer Random – I don't play the old chess any more. The old chess is dead, it's been played out.
-
What if you were offered ten million dollars to play a match against some chess champion?
I only play Fischer Random, period. I'm finished with the old chess, it's rotten to the core.
A few months later, the ChessBase new page published the following report:
Bobby Fischer has already introduced two important innovations that have received a larger or smaller degree of acceptance by the chess community. First came the "Fischer clock", which adds a small time increment after every move, thereby alleviating the brutal time trouble some players tend to get into. Then came "Fischer Random Chess", which scrambles the position of the pieces at the beginning of the game. This is designed to eliminate the very extensive openings preparation that is encountered in top-level chess today.
Now, Fischer has turned his sights on what he believes is an unbearable preponderance of tactics in chess. His declared intention is to return the game to its origins and not allow the strategic spirit to be destroyed by "cheapo shots constantly fired by younger players." To this end, he has submitted a rule modification, which FIDE is currently considering and will present to the delegates at its next general council meeting during the Dubai Grand Prix.
Fischer's proposal adds one rule to section 4.1-4.7 ("The act of moving the pieces") in FIDE's "Laws of chess". The new article 4.8 states that:
"After a player has registered a move by his opponent he may, as part of his next move, either execute a move in the form stipulated by the rules 4.1-4.7 given above; or instead he may execute the opponent's and his own previous moves in reverse order, replacing any captured pieces onto their original squares, and then execute an alternative move, in accordance with the rules 4.1-4.7 given above."
The new "Fischer move" (which is also referred to as a "retractor") does not change the original flavour of the game – in fact many believe it actually reflects it more completely than the rules practised in tournaments today. The new rule has been extensively tested in informal play, where the advantages of the system are immediately obvious. Games are no longer decided by simple tactical strokes, the outcome depends much more on a painstaking exploratory strategy of "trial and error". The only disadvantage is that games may sometimes last a little longer, especially when a number of Fischer moves are executed.
FIDE has stressed that a decision in Dubai to adopt the Fischer move rule would not mean that it would be immediately implemented in all tournaments organised or sanctioned by the world chess organisation. "We anticipate that it will take a number of years before the new rule is universally accepted," said a ranking FIDE official. "Until then, both forms of chess can coexist."
Many players are very enthusiastic about Fischer move games. "Retractor games remove the unnecessary tension of ruining your game with stupid blunders," said one leading grandmaster. "I can be much more daring in my choice of moves." But Judit Polgar, the world's strongest female player, disagrees. "I have my doubts about this new rule, maybe because I am not very good at it. I lost a retractor game in an important tournament once."
In the 24 hours after the "Fischer move" report was published, on April 1st 2002, the messages came in thick and fast. Many readers were quite upset by the idea of sanctioning takebacks in chess. We received a couple of hundred letters, some of which are quoted on this page. Many caught on, but an equal number were fooled. An Asian chess federation even convened a meeting and drafted a protest letter to FIDE. Subsequently, we published a warning:
Attention: It turns out that the above report on a new rule proposed by Bobby Fischer was a cruel hoax, perpetrated by an evil prankster in the ChessBase team. Apparently, he was practising a pagan ritual know as "April Fool". We apologise to the visitors who for who found the spurious article distressing, and thank everyone for the many letters we we received.
A couple of years later I discussed the prank with Bobby Fischer himself. At the time I had extensive telephone contact with the reclusive former World Champion, which I have described in this video interview. After initial outrage Bobby, upon reading the story, and the readers' feedback, could not suppress a loud guffaw. He said the thought the April Fool's joke was "pretty funny,"