It is understandable that other matters will come up. The first comment briefly made reference to the game.

I had a look at the game myself. It is poorly played. According to Soviet Chess by Soltis, it was played in the last round. Taimanov needed a full point to qualify.

Matulovic arrived 15 minutes late, spent several minutes glancing through the tournament bulletin…He took 64 minutes to play 41 moves-while Taimanov took 68 minutes. Korchnoi alleged that Taimanov bought a point from Matulovic for $400. As Soltis puts it, someone else  (the Soviets- !?) might have lavished that kind of money.

Korchnoi has strong prejudices.He is known to believe anything he wants. Here we need something more authentic.

I understand that the book, International Chess Tournament - Palma De Mallorca 1970 by Wade and Blackstock also confirms the conduct of Matulovic.Perhaps someone could tell us if it mentions allegation of bribery.

In retrospect I wonder if we are far from the original theme of this article. Perhaps we should focus on the game given here.

I just checked Taimanov-Matulovic, Palma de Mallorca IZ 1970. The game was an easily played win for Taimanov. White was better with pieces being traded off to a two rook ending (for each player). White had to win a pawn and the ending. Black offered no resistance.

chessbibliophile, Graham Clayton (the Mad Aussie) posted the following at chessville:

J'adoubovic:  At the 1967 Sousse Interzonal tournament, Yugoslav GM Milan Matulovic made a move that would immediately lose a piece.  He withdrew the move, and made another, claiming that he was merely adjusting the pieces on the board (J'adoube).  His opponent, Hungarian GM Istvan Bilek complained to the tournament director, but no action was taken. The game ended in a draw. After this incident, Matulovic was given the unflattering nickname of "J'adoubovic".

J'adoubovic Reprise:  This wasn't the only example of Matulovic "cheating".  At the 1970 Interzonal at Palma de Mallorca, Matulovic was to play Mark Taimanov in the final round, with the Russian GM needing to win the game to advance to the 1971 Candidates matches.  Playing Black, Matulovic arrived 20 minutes late, and then read the tournament bulletin before making his first move.  He moved slowly in the opening, but then played at "blitz" pace before resigning on the 42nd move.  He had used only 64 minutes on the clock.  Apparently he received $400 for this dubious display.

I knew about the first story at the time, but not the second. Another story from Sousse current in 1967 was that knowing how Matulovic behaved, one of the other players dressed as a woman and was attacked by him in the park. I did not hear how the touch move rule was enforced in that case.

 A reader wrote,“Taimanov's appearance was allegedly secured via a bribe to a Yugoslavian player to throw a game.”

Taimanov played with four Yugoslav players, Gligoric, Ivkov, Minic and Matulovic in the interzonal 1970. He lost to Ivkov and drew with Gligoric. He won two games against Minic and Matulovic. There is no sign of an unforced blunder in these games. May I know the source of this allegation and at least the score of the game?

Dozy wrote, "I think his form at that time is probably unprecedented." This could be true. His advantage over his contemporaries was greater than any player ever had, with the exception of Morphy. I am sure that will invite other opinions. It is fair to notice that Fischer was born in 1943, Taimanov in 1926, and Petrosian in 1929. The candidates matches discussed were in 1971. Many would expect the age differences to favor Fischer and the excuses to favor his opponents. At Petrosian's age in 1971, Karpov was slipping and Kasparov had retired.

J_adoubious, your name is one of my coffee house comments. You are correct that Petrosian managed only one win (with nine draws) against Korchnoi. Petrosian also had one win (with six draws) against Huebner in the previous match. Petrosian complained that when he did well he was Petrosian, but when Fischer did well, he (Petrosian) was not Petrosian. As for all those beaten by Fischer or anyone else, as I have long said, inferiority is complex.

"Only Iron Tigran offered any resistance in the Candidates' Matches (a win and three draws) but, if I recall correctly, Fischer won the last four in a row."

Petrosian probably benefitted from Fischer having a "heavy cold" (as described in written accounts of the match) that might have adversely affected his play causing his only loss in the candidates matches and some draws while he recuperated.  Recall that by this time Fischer finally had Petrosian's number as demonstrated at the USSR vs the Rest of the World match where he battered Petrosian with two wins and two draws in their four games.  With Tal not playing (and it would not have mattered if he had by this point) and finally dealing effectively with Geller (these two hold the only somewhat meaningful lifetime plus scores against Fischer both benefiting from many games with the young Fischer and far fewer with the mature Fischer.) and the French Winawer, Spassky, with a lifetime record of 3-0-2 vs Fischer, was the only credible obstacle to Fischer's final ascent apart from Fischer himself.  The record was 1-0-1/2-1/2-1/2-1-1-1-1.  Considering Petrosian's legendary toughness and Fischer's temporary indisposition this is effectively the equivalent of the prior two matches. Contrast it with Petrosian's one win and all draws match victory over Korchnoi on the way to the match with Fischer.  Some commentators note that Petrosian cracked after the 6th game when he lost using his special occasion opening as white that he had used to edge out Korchnoi.  Petrosian, for his part, blamed the organizer's catering to Fischer including the choice of venue for the result.

But Taimanov's result was more a function of psychology that chess.  Several positions that would normally have been drawn were lost due to unforced blunders on Taimanov's part.  (One commentator notes the poetic justice in the outcome, since Taimanov's appearance was allegedly secured via a bribe to a Yugoslavian player to throw a game.)  Larsen's result was more a matter of trying to make a fight of it even if it meant going down in flames as befits Larsen's sporting style.

Very clever play. 

Taimanov was pretty much underrated in the West and, although he lost 6-0 to Fischer, he shared the experience with Bent Larsen.  Only Iron Tigran offered any resistance in the Candidates' Matches (a win and three draws) but, if I recall correctly, Fischer won the last four in a row.  In the lead-up to 1972 Fischer was virtually unbeatable.  I think his form at that time is probably unprecedented.