Taylor Kingston wrote:
I would guess you are referring to pages 343-345 of "Russians versus
Fischer (2nd edition, 2005), which has extensive comments on this move
by various Soviet players and officials: Botvinnik, Bondarevsky,
Krogius, Spassky himself, and Karpov. They contradict each other to a
great extent, and I see no reason to give more credence to any of them,
including Karpov, over Fischer himself or those close to him. Karpov's
analysis sounds more like an overly dramatic after-the-fact concoction
from a Hollywood screenwriter, or a TV psychologist trying to sound
omniscient, than anything that actually went through Fischer's mind
when deciding to play 29...Bxh2.
While I can't rule out Karpov's scenario, Occam's Razor inclines one
toward simpler explanations, like "Fischer miscalculated."

Well, William Ockham was a lazy nominalist. If he does know how to
solve a problem, he uses the lex parsimoniae. That's very dull.

Others have opinion and I tend to agree with Karpov. If Karpov were a
poker player, he could have been great one as well. Great poker players
tend to see the psychology behind everything. They like to paint a
story, ala Hollywood screenwriters, in order make a great decision on
the hand at play.

Nobody knows exactly what Fischer was thinking at that moment, however,
great poker players can tell, but not Ockham.