fablehaft, do you really consider Euwe an untried challenger? Do you really call Kramnik an untried challenger? How do you define an untried challenger?
Perhaps when Kasparov says Karpov would have won in 75' he was just trying to convince himself that since he had beat Karpov and Karpov would have beaten Fischer---Voila---he was better than Fischer! I think Kasparov was trying to improve his place in chess history and also he was tired of seeing Fischer dominating him in most of the polls through the years.
Comparatively untried challengers, as I said, yes. Euwe had never been considered a serious candidate, and he had lost matches to Bogo (twice) and Capa. Alekhine had beaten Bogo (twice) and Capa clearly in matches and few thought he would lose against Euwe.
Kramnik was 25 and had played a few matches with quite bad results, very clear losses against Kamsky and Shirov as well as another loss against Gelfand. His results in World Championship cycles were bad but he was given a match without qualifying for it.
Kasparov has of course never said that Karpov would have won in 1975, but if he had thought something like that it is definitely possible that it could have been because he wanted to convince himself that he was better than Fischer. But then he did also play for decades after winning the title, so he did more than enough on the chess board after winning the title.
In 1935 Euwe had played in most of the big tournaments during the past 15 years. He had played many of the elite players in close matches. And the proof is in the pudding---when he played Alekhine for the title---he won! You can call him anything you want to but, untried is not a good description on Euwe.
Kramnik, at 12 yrs of age was selected by Botvinik to attend the Botvinik-Kasparov chess school. He won a gold medal in the 92 Olympiads as a 16 yr old. He was selected by Kasparov to be his second in the 95' World Championship.
In Jan 96' Kramnik became the number one rated player in the world. This was the first time since 85' that Kasparov was not rated number one. And of course the proof is in the pudding---when he played Kasparov for the title in 2000---Kasparov did not win a single game (this was only the second time in history that a World Champion had lost a match without winning a single game).
Untried challenger ? Fablehaft please tell me you are kidding. You can call Kramnik anything you want to but untried challenger aint going to cut it.
As I said few experts believed that Euwe would win in 1935 and that Kramnik would win in 2000, one can't just claim that "the proof is in the pudding" because they did in fact win. They were still huge underdogs, not only because they had failed to win their matches against much weaker opposition, but because they faced opponents that never lost another serious match except those in 1935 and 2000.
Bogoljubow had not only beaten Euwe twice in matches, but won top tournaments ahead of really strong fields more than once. He won Moscow 1925 ahead of Lasker and Capablanca, Bad Kissingen 1928 ahead of Capablanca and Rubinstein, still he is often seen as never deserving of being given a match.
Kramnik lost his qualification matches badly, and when the Shirov match fell through Anand was offered a match but declined, then it was eventually given to Kramnik instead. After his going 0-3 against Kamsky, 0-2 against Shirov and also losing 1-2 against Gelfand in his latest WC cycle matches few saw Kramnik as a favourite to beat Kasparov, who had a career score of at least 30-1 against the players Kramnik just scored 1-7 against.
The usual thing for a challenger has been to do well in important matches leading up to the title match. Euwe and Kramnik both lost all their most important matches before being given a title match. Compare that with someone I would not call a comparatively untried challenger, like Spassky. He won matches against Geller, Larsen and Korchnoi, +3 in all of them, before facing Petrosian in 1969. Before that he had won many important matches, already played a title match, and shared third in the Candidates as far back as in 1956. Spassky's challenger Fischer had also won matches with impressive scores and participated in Candidates many years earlier.
fablehaft, do you really consider Euwe an untried challenger? Do you really call Kramnik an untried challenger? How do you define an untried challenger?
Perhaps when Kasparov says Karpov would have won in 75' he was just trying to convince himself that since he had beat Karpov and Karpov would have beaten Fischer---Voila---he was better than Fischer! I think Kasparov was trying to improve his place in chess history and also he was tired of seeing Fischer dominating him in most of the polls through the years.
Comparatively untried challengers, as I said, yes. Euwe had never been considered a serious candidate, and he had lost matches to Bogo (twice) and Capa. Alekhine had beaten Bogo (twice) and Capa clearly in matches and few thought he would lose against Euwe.
Kramnik was 25 and had played a few matches with quite bad results, very clear losses against Kamsky and Shirov as well as another loss against Gelfand. His results in World Championship cycles were bad but he was given a match without qualifying for it.
Kasparov has of course never said that Karpov would have won in 1975, but if he had thought something like that it is definitely possible that it could have been because he wanted to convince himself that he was better than Fischer. But then he did also play for decades after winning the title, so he did more than enough on the chess board after winning the title.
In 1935 Euwe had played in most of the big tournaments during the past 15 years. He had played many of the elite players in close matches. And the proof is in the pudding---when he played Alekhine for the title---he won! You can call him anything you want to but, untried is not a good description on Euwe.
Kramnik, at 12 yrs of age was selected by Botvinik to attend the Botvinik-Kasparov chess school. He won a gold medal in the 92 Olympiads as a 16 yr old. He was selected by Kasparov to be his second in the 95' World Championship.
In Jan 96' Kramnik became the number one rated player in the world. This was the first time since 85' that Kasparov was not rated number one. And of course the proof is in the pudding---when he played Kasparov for the title in 2000---Kasparov did not win a single game (this was only the second time in history that a World Champion had lost a match without winning a single game).
Untried challenger ? Fablehaft please tell me you are kidding. You can call Kramnik anything you want to but untried challenger aint going to cut it.