|
Main
Date: 04 Oct 2008 11:55:56
From: Offramp
Subject: "Coasting home with draws". An analysis of the last 10 games in the
|
"The victory should preferably be by means of a player obtaining wins instead of simply defensively forcing draw after draw," wrote someone on this newsgroup. Did that happen? If it did, who was the beneficiary? These are the last 10 games of all the WC matched played between 1948 and 1975, when the rules were changed. Fischer wanted them changed to first to 10 wins, FIDE opted for first to 6 wins. 1951 Botvinnik - Bronstein = = 0 = 1 = 0 0 1 = 1954 Botvinnik - Smyslov 0 0 = = = 1 = = 1 = 1958 Botvinnik - Smyslov 0 1 = = 0 1 = = 1 = 1957 Smyslov - Botvinnik 1 = = = 0 = = 0 = = 1960 Tal - Botvinnik = = = = = 1 = 1 = = 1961 Botvinnik - Tal 0 1 = 1 = 0 1 0 = 1 1963 Petrosian - Botvinnik = 0 1 = = 1 1 = = = 1966 Petrosian - Spassky = = = = 1 0 = 0 1 = 1969 Spassky - Petrosian = = = 1 = 1 0 1 = = 1972 Fischer - Spassky = 0 = = = = = = = 0 The two worst offenders were Tal and .... Bobby Fischer!
|
|
|
Date: 06 Oct 2008 10:07:49
From:
Subject: Re: "Coasting home with draws". An analysis of the last 10 games
|
On Oct 6, 12:13=A0pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote: > On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] > wrote: > > >> =A0Botvinnik =A0was a great champion , he won and lost and won it back > >> again.. > > =A0Actually Botvinnik's record in World Championship matches was not > >very impressive. > > Beating Tal and Smyslov, drawing Bronstein in matches seems pretty > impressive to me. "Beating" Smyslov? Botvinnik actually had an overall losing score in his three matches with Smyslov. I consider Botvinnik one of the least impressive of world champions, in terms of what he actually did during his reign. > > In his eight matches 1951-1963 he had an overall > >minus score: 77-80. By the time he won the title, 1948, he was already > >past his prime. Without the tie-match advantage and rematch right his > >reign as world champion would probably have been rather brief. More > >important than his chess skill in prolonging his rein was his =A0use of > >political connections to get FIDE rules that favored him. > > =A0After Botvinnik nearly lost the 1951 and 1954 matches, he got FIDE > >to institute a right-of-rematch clause, which he used to regain the > >title from Smyslov in 1958 and from Tal in 1961. FIDE revoked the > >rematch clause effective 1963, which really ticked Botvinnik off. > > While not denying Botvinnik's political maneuvering to maintain the > rematch clause, he still had to *win* each rematch to get the title > back, and in the return matches, he was on the wrong side of the tie > rule. Both Smyslov and Tal were sick at the time of the rematches. With Tal, at least, Botvinnik took full advantage of this, refusing to allow a postponement of the 1961 match. > Botvinnik was less active than his competitors, and it appears he used > the first matches both to play himself into form and to gain a deeper > understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of his opponents. I'm more impressed by a world champion who actually *_plays_*, rather than one who sits on his laurels and uses every advantage incumency grants, plus any others he can persuade FIDE to give him. Botvinnik did not win a single match as world champion, and in tournament play in the 1950s he was largely eclipsed by Keres, Smyslov, and/or Tal. Among world champions up to that time, I'd say only Euwe had a less impressive reign.
|
|
Date: 06 Oct 2008 08:28:51
From:
Subject: Re: "Coasting home with draws". An analysis of the last 10 games
|
On Oct 4, 4:56=A0pm, [email protected] (SAT W-7) wrote: > Thanks =A0, that was interesting .. > > =A0Botvinnik =A0was a great champion , he won and lost and won it back > again.. Actually Botvinnik's record in World Championship matches was not very impressive. In his eight matches 1951-1963 he had an overall minus score: 77-80. By the time he won the title, 1948, he was already past his prime. Without the tie-match advantage and rematch right his reign as world champion would probably have been rather brief. More important than his chess skill in prolonging his rein was his use of political connections to get FIDE rules that favored him. > I was looking at the years and did they hold the championship one year > apart or am i reading your chart =A0the right way ? After Botvinnik nearly lost the 1951 and 1954 matches, he got FIDE to institute a right-of-rematch clause, which he used to regain the title from Smyslov in 1958 and from Tal in 1961. FIDE revoked the rematch clause effective 1963, which really ticked Botvinnik off.
|
| |
Date: 06 Oct 2008 09:13:07
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: "Coasting home with draws". An analysis of the last 10 games in...
|
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote: >> �Botvinnik �was a great champion , he won and lost and won it back >> again.. > Actually Botvinnik's record in World Championship matches was not >very impressive. Beating Tal and Smyslov, drawing Bronstein in matches seems pretty impressive to me. > In his eight matches 1951-1963 he had an overall >minus score: 77-80. By the time he won the title, 1948, he was already >past his prime. Without the tie-match advantage and rematch right his >reign as world champion would probably have been rather brief. More >important than his chess skill in prolonging his rein was his use of >political connections to get FIDE rules that favored him. > After Botvinnik nearly lost the 1951 and 1954 matches, he got FIDE >to institute a right-of-rematch clause, which he used to regain the >title from Smyslov in 1958 and from Tal in 1961. FIDE revoked the >rematch clause effective 1963, which really ticked Botvinnik off. While not denying Botvinnik's political maneuvering to maintain the rematch clause, he still had to *win* each rematch to get the title back, and in the return matches, he was on the wrong side of the tie rule. Botvinnik was less active than his competitors, and it appears he used the first matches both to play himself into form and to gain a deeper understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of his opponents.
|
|
Date: 06 Oct 2008 08:04:27
From: zdrakec
Subject: Re: "Coasting home with draws". An analysis of the last 10 games
|
On Oct 4, 3:56=A0pm, [email protected] (SAT W-7) wrote: > Thanks =A0, that was interesting .. > > =A0Botvinnik =A0was a great champion , he won and lost and won it back > again.. > > I was looking at the years and did they hold the championship one year > apart or am i reading your chart =A0the right way ? > > You have I957 , I958 Botvinnik had the right to a rematch the following year, in case of his defeat. Thus after losing to Smyslov in 1957, he won his rematch in 1958; and after losing to Tal in 1960, he won his rematch in 1961. The rematch rule was dropped, I believe, by 1963, hence we did not get Petrosian-Botvinnik 1964. It did re-appear in time for the Karpov- Kasparov match, hence after Kasparov won in 1985 we had Kasparov- Karpov 1986. Cheers, zdrakec
|
|
Date: 04 Oct 2008 13:56:52
From: SAT W-7
Subject: Re: "Coasting home with
|
Thanks , that was interesting .. Botvinnik was a great champion , he won and lost and won it back again.. I was looking at the years and did they hold the championship one year apart or am i reading your chart the right way ? You have I957 , I958
|
|