Because Fischer was simply a much better player.

Sure Fischers actions were part of the outcome. He lost a game by forfeit.

Many times, a move on the board can be made for its psychological impact.  For instance, if out of the blue some crazy N sacrifice is made, it may throw the opponent off his game psychologically even if it is not the strongest move on the board. 

Moves like this create major complications, and when you are up against a stronger opponent who makes one of these spectacular moves, it’s very easy to become nervous and miscalculate. 

There are a ton of other psychological tricks, I’m sure, but that is the first one that came to mind.

Paul wrote:

"The only psychology that applies uniquely to chess is in it's appliccation to a chess game as it can be to any other game. "

Please read before posting.  We've discussed this.

transpo tricks in chess is a good book which involves psychology of chess....eg going into a theortically worst variation through transposition because the opponent likely isn't comfortable in that type of position etc.  He doesn't go deep into psychology(that is probably the extent of it for the most part).  But, it is a good book if you are a strong player and can put in the work. 

Fischer said himself, "I don't believe in psychology. I believe in good moves".

Too often psychological ploys are mixed up with simply being an ass.

i'd say psycology is a big part of chess i've seen people offer a draw after a 10 minite think qite rightly refused then the other player who offered it capitulated in a huff draw offers of mine are aways refused so now i use it to my advantage were there r choices some bad but after the draw is refused they look at more ruthless incorect move leading to inexerble victory for me also if this trick back fires i am half point better

Well you have to admit that tricks and ploys are products of a working mind and as such they fall into the category of chess psychology. Right? I'd think so, but the main idea of chess psychology is probably not tricks and ploys. The main idea of chess psychology should probably be called something like figuring out how the chess player's mind operates / responds / reacts to chess and chess problems in the chess environment. This includes the chess player's interactions with other chess players, so any interaction between two chess players could be said to have a psychological element.

Tricks and ploys are probably a specific application of the mind/body energies that the chess player is dealing with. Other applications of the mind/body energies might be:

1. looking for patterns in chess, in your behavior, in the behavior of your opponent

2. learning from mistakes

3. applying knowledge for some kind of desired effect

4. focusing on certain chess books instead of others

5. perparing for a tournament

Stuff like that.

Ya, tricks are all part of the psychology of chess.

Stuff like repeating a position twice to make the opponent believe you're gonna give them threefold, then continuing with your attack.

Well, that simply isn't accurate then, is it?

All kinds of players play both 1.e4 and 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3. I have played a player twice OTB this season who opens Nf3, g3, d3, Bg2 - yet he is a very attacking player.

I think the kind of decisions made during the game, of which tricks fall into this category, are a hugely important part of psychology of chess. For example if I'm reasonably ahead in time, often I'll see if I can change the nature of the game to unbalance the opponent with little time who has to reorientate to a new scheme.

Or perhaps I'll play a mysterious move that doesn't really change anything but makes the opponent think.

Or I might avoid a queen exchange one move, and make it in very similar circumstances the next.

These seem to have greater practical implications then trying to figure out how your opponent plays because he's opened 1.d4...

Yes I have been working on developing and exploring this chess symbol idea based on how the pieces move because the traditional chess symbols and even the Staunton chess pieces say nothing to the mind immediately about how they move.

No, I'm not talking about figuring out your opponent to beat him.

I am talking about a perception of reality.

This is what we can learn about life and psychology from chess;

Not what psychology can teach us about chess.