Can Doubling Pawns Ever Backfire?

It appears that none of the people responding to this has ever read their Nimzowitsch. 

Doubled pawns are usually weak, especially when advancing. But doubled pawns can often be excellent defenders, Also, doubled pawns in the center can be a real advantage. 

Modern chess players are much less rule dependent than players from the last century. The English school, especially as embodied by Nigel Short, has embraced doubled pawns, isolated pawns, and other structural "weaknesses" if the position has enough dynamic play to counter those structural problems. In the last 20 years, everything has become much more concrete. If doubled pawns can't be exploited, they are not considered weak.

In other words, it all depends on the concrete position whether doubled pawns are a strength or a weakness.

That was spot-on man! That Nimzowitsch guy was a real idiot, wasn't he?

That was a joke. You can be banned for sandbagging.

In theory yes, but in practice the answer is: No.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044229

For those who bother to check this game, it was a famous Fischer loss to Kholmov. There were doubled pawns from move 18-20. That's it. It's hardly a game that springs to mind when thinking of whether doubled pawns are good or not.

The game wasn't decided by doubled pawns, it was decided by a great shot by Kholmov on move 19. 

Bobby Fisher was 12 years-old in that game and not a GM and it wasn't really a game decided by doubled pawns since they were undoubled in a couple moves.

But there are well-know times when doubled pawns word in favor of the player with them, as in the Winawer Variation of the French Defense where Black's moves a B to b4, pinning White's c3-N, and White usually works on developing toward a K-side attack and allows ....Bxc3 and bxc3, doubling White's c-Pawns and leaving an isolated Pawn on a2 or a3.

In 1965 ?

http://www.chessgames.com/player/robert_james_fischer.html

I just want to mention the tournament name... Potato open?

TROLL ALERT