You are right, Smyslov doesnt get much attention either. I think Smyslov is reputed to be one of the best rook ending players ever though......along with Capablanca and Rubenstein....
Reb: that is _excellent_ knowledge. I have his book, called "Rook Endings", co-authored with Levenfish. It's a red book, hardcover, and I think I picked it up at a used book store for under 5$. It is a fabulous book, well capable of turning half points into points and zeros into half-points.
I think there are several world champions that , imo, often are forgotten or dont receive their due, besides Euwe there is also Steinitz and Spassky that come to mind. Others ?
I didn't know Smyslov's name until I joined this site
. I think Spassky has the unfortunate place in history as being the guy who lost to Fischer in '72. Steinitz, maybe not so much as he dragged chess into the classical era and was the first champ. Other such "forgotten champions" could include Petrosian, as his style of play was never attractive to the amateur player. People seem to remember those who dominated for ages (e.g. Lasker, Alekhine, Bonivink, Kasparov), played in an exciting way (Capablanca, Tal, maybe Fischer) or have some other big thing that stands out (Steinitz the 1st champ, Fischer against the Soviets)
Well my impression is that Euwe kind of got lucky to win his title. That's probably why he's underrated. I don't know about Spassky, but I might have said Smyslov?
Yes,Smyslov is for sure forgotten (he was also only one year WWC)..But almost unknown for me are two FIDE world champions:Alexander Khalifman (1999-2000) and Rustam Kasimdzhanov (2004-2005).I don't know nothing about them,, i would appreciate any comments about these two champions..
The FIDE champs are often forgotten during the Kasparov era. I know nothing about them either, less than you aristeidis9 as I couldn't even have told you their names.
Smyslov's chess longevity was remarkable, he reached the Candidates' Final in 1984, losing only to Kasparov. He was three times older than Kasparov (63 against 21) by the time. He would play in tournaments until recently, but then his failing eyesight prevented him from participating. He still composes problems and studies, late in his eighties.
Smyslov and Levenfish's Rook Endings book: I had it but like so many it was mostly unread and unappreciated, even though I knew it to be an excellent book. Well, how many endgame books did I need if I hadn't read any of them. My much abbreviated chess shelf has just two.
Smyslov, even though he lost the title back to Botvinnik in just a year, was hardly considered weaker than him during that period of their three matches and into the 1960s. Smyslov was greatly respected by all, including Fischer. It's funny how some player's reps get neglected in the popular sense, but greats like Smyslov are given their due by those in the know, and those who listen up when those in the know speak.
Smyslov's chess longevity was remarkable, he reached the Candidates' Final in 1984, losing only to Kasparov. He was three times older than Kasparov (63 against 21) by the time. He would play in tournaments until recently, but then his failing eyesight prevented him from participating. He still composes problems and studies, late in his eighties.
Very interesting fact the one about Smyslov's age.Now i remembered,i have created a question at the endless quiz about the age difference between Kasparov and Smyslov.63 years old at 1984..Incredible!!!
The FIDE champs are often forgotten during the Kasparov era. I know nothing about them either, less than you aristeidis9 as I couldn't even have told you their names.
FIDE's relevance ended when Kasparov & Short split to form the PCA; the Euwe covenant is broken. Never since has their system produced anyone that was considered the "real" champion, or for that matter, even remembered. It remains to be seen if they can recapture that since Kramnik & Anand have "unified" the real title with the FIDE one, but I highly doubt it.
Well, there are other examples of players still actively playing well in their sixties: Szymon Winawer played in his last tournament at age 63; Joseph Henry Blackburne - at 72; Emanuel Lasker at 69; Efim Bogoljubow at 62; Savielly Tartakower at 67; Ossip Bernstein at 72; Efim Geller at 70; and Viktor Korchnoi still plays actively despite being almost 80. But Smyslov was perhaps the only one who actually seriously competed for World Championship at that age.
The FIDE champs are often forgotten during the Kasparov era. I know nothing about them either, less than you aristeidis9 as I couldn't even have told you their names.
FIDE's relevance ended when Kasparov & Short split to form the PCA; the Euwe covenant is broken. Never since has their system produced anyone that was considered the "real" champion, or for that matter, even remembered. It remains to be seen if they can recapture that since Kramnik & Anand have "unified" the real title with the FIDE one, but I highly doubt it.
Anand was considered the "real" champion after winning Mexico , because Kramnik played and recognized Anand himself, then Anand beating Kramnik in a match just put icing on the cake.
Because i am a little confused now:Who are considered as official world chess champions from 1993 to 2006?FIDE world champions (Karpov,Khalifman,Anand,Ponomariov etc) or Kasparov (1993-200) with Kramnik (2000-2006)?
Its hard to recognize "champions" that just disappear from the top right after becoming champion , like Pono and Khalifman and Khazim all did....
Its hard to recognize "champions" that just disappear from the top right after becoming champion , like Pono and Khalifman and Khazim all did....
True,that's why a lot of people (including me),don't know a lot (or don't know nothing) about Khalifman or Khazim.But who where considered as the official champions?I suppose FIDE champions (even if a lot of people would agree that Kasparov could beat Khalifman for a title match..)
Karpov resigned his FIDE title because he was angry at the new "knockout system" rules proposed by FIDE instead of Candidates cycle. So after him, there were Khalifman, Anand, Ponomariov, Topalov and Kasimdzhanov (can't remember the order).
During that time many consider Kasparov or Kramnik as the "real" champions and I dont believe anyone would argue that both of them werent better than Pono, Khalifman and Khazim .....
Because i am a little confused now:Who are considered as official world chess champions from 1993 to 2006?FIDE world champions (Karpov,Khalifman,Anand,Ponomariov etc) or Kasparov (1993-200) with Kramnik (2000-2006)?
Well, that's a matter of opinion, which is the problem. FIDE completely changed the "championship" procedure to a knockout-tournament format, at a time when the reigning champion wasn't even a member of their association. It's like the Avignon Papacy, a big sham. For that reason, not many people I know really regard FIDE as the custodian of the title any longer; we're back to where we were before World War II, when championship matches were ad-hoc, and largely the responsibility of the participants to arrange to their satisfaction.
You could argue that FIDE helps with that a bit. But say Topalov, for instance, became buddies with one of those Russian oligarchs and arranged a huge-stake match with Anand outside of the auspices of FIDE, and beat him... no one's going to dispute his claim as champion because he's the highest-rated/strongest player in the world, and he beat the reigning champion in a traditional match. That's how it's always been; History matters more than Ilyumzhinov's circus.
Karpov resigned his FIDE title because he was angry at the new "knockout system" rules proposed by FIDE instead of Candidates cycle. So after him, there were Khalifman, Anand, Ponomariov, Topalov and Kasimdzhanov (can't remember the order).
I was checking these facts,didn't knew about them..Yes,a knockout system of 2 games is a bit unfair..Karpov won 1998 FIDE world chess championship (he went straihgt to the finals and won against Anand 5-3),but at 1999 he had to qualify like other players. So Karpov refused to defend his title.At the 1998 FIDE WCC Garry Kasparov, Gata Kamsky, and Zsuzsa Polgar declined participation in advance..
Thank you Alex!
Botvinnik did have an electrical engineering degree, but while he was World Champion, his attention was largely devoted to chess, at least to my knowledge. After he withdrew from active play, he had a lab where he tried (largely unsuccessfully) to construct a chess computer.