When you play Bobby, it is not a question if you win or lose. It is a question if you survive.
When I played Bobby Fischer, my opponent fought against organizations - the television producers and the match organizers. But he never fought against me personally. I lost to Bobby before the match because he was already stronger than I. He won normally.
Bobby Fischer has an enormous knowledge of chess and his familiarity with the chess literature of the USSR is immense.
Nowadays young people have great choice of occupations, hobbies, etc, so chess is experiencing difficulties because of the high competition. Now it's hard to make living in chess, so our profession does attract young people.
The place of chess in the society is closely related to the attitude of young people towards our game.
For example, computer defends well, but for humans its is harder to defend than attack, particularly with the modern time control.
In my country, at that time, being a champion of chess was like being a King. At that time I was a King - and when you are King you feel a lot of responsibility, but there is nobody there to help you.
On the other hand, chess is a mass sport now and for chess organisers shorter time control is obviously more attractive. But I think that this control does not suit World Championship matches.
Time control directly influences the quality of play.
I try to help developing junior chess. When I lived in USSR, I got a lot of free help from very good coaches - now I am trying to repay that debt.
We can compare classical chess and rapid chess with theatre and cinema - some actors don't like the latter and prefer to work in the theatre.
I think that the World Champion should try to defend the quality of play more than anyone else.
When I am in form, my style is a little bit stubborn, almost brutal. Sometimes I feel a great spirit of fight which drives me on.
Nowadays the dynamic element is more important in chess - players more often sacrifice material to obtain dynamic compensation.