"You forget Najdorf's 1st place at Prague and at Barcelona. The Prague victory was intended to seed him into the World Championship tournament"
Najdorf didn't have a single top 20 opponent in either Barcelona or Prague, so those events were much weaker than those listed, where several top players participated.
Najdorf did well in the Mar del Plata tournaments that usually were won by him or Ståhlberg during WW II, but no other top players participated and Ståhlberg was never close to World Champion level. Mar del Plata 1948 was the clearly strongest Mar del Plata event of the 1940s, and was won by Eliskases ahead of Ståhlberg and Medina Garcia, with Najdorf sharing fourth with Rossetto.
How do you determine "top 20"?
A good overview of the Prague 1946 tournament, and it's implication for the world championship, can be found here: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1030868
"How do you determine "top 20"?"
In that I go by the Chessmetrics ranking for simplicity's sake.
"A good overview of the Prague 1946 tournament, and it's implication for the world championship, can be found here: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1030868"
So who were the strongest players in that field apart from Najdorf? Stoltz and Trifunovic shared second and were never considered anywhere close to World Champion material.
Okay, ChessMetrics
At the end of 1946 the top-ranked players were: 1. Botvinnik, 2. Najdorf, 3. Euwe, 4. Keres, 5. Smyslov, 6. Szabo, 7. Bronstein, 8. Boleslavsky, 9. Stahlberg, 10. Kotov.
How can you discount Najdorf?
"How can you discount Najdorf?"
I don't discount him, I just disagree about him being consistently stronger than most or all the best Soviet players 1944-49. I don't think Euwe was top three in 1946 either, or Reshevsky outside the top ten. Chessmetrics has to be used with caution during and after war years when many top players were inactive, but the Prague and Barcelona fields were quite weak compared to the stronger tournaments around that time. One can just list the participants and compare.
As an example of how strange Chessmetrics can work in such times, Euwe was #69 in the beginning of 1946 and #3 less than a year later after one good result. The "truth" is probably rather that Euwe was somewhere around #15-20 in the world in the second half of the 1940s when he was closing in on his 50s. He also scored -12 in 20 rounds in the World Championship 1948.
Najdorf was one of the few top players to be very active during WW II and gained rating against comparatively weak opposition in South American events but was far from the best players in the stronger tournaments he played after the war. He was certainly top ten in the second half of the 1940s but not necessarily top 5. Botvinnik, Smyslov and Keres were all very strong, as was already Bronstein. Reshevsky was also very strong of course.
As an example of how strange Chessmetrics can work in such times, Euwe was #69 in the beginning of 1946 and #3 less than a year later after one good result. The "truth" is probably rather that Euwe was somewhere around #15-20 in the world in the second half of the 1940s when he was closing in on his 50s. He also scored -12 in 20 rounds in the World Championship 1948.
Najdorf was one of the few top players to be very active during WW II and gained rating against comparatively weak opposition in South American events but was far from the best players in the stronger tournaments he played after the war. He was certainly top ten in the second half of the 1940s but not necessarily top 5. Botvinnik, Smyslov and Keres were all very strong, as was already Bronstein. Reshevsky was also very strong of course.
You suggested ChessMetrics as the measurement tool.
In 1945, most of the Soviet players were an unknown entity. I think ChessMetrics retro-rankings were very fair to them.
The radio match result between the USA and USSR, in Sept 1945, came as quite a shock to much of the chess world. It was the Soviet Chess School's "calling card" after a multi-decade incubation.
Case in point, about international perceptions of the strength of Soviet Chess prior to WWII...
Let's look at the results of the 1939 Leningrad-Moscow International "training tournament". Flohr was an ex-pat Czech. Reshevsky was from the USA. Lilienthal was an ex-pat Hungarian. And Keres, of course, was Estonian (pre-annexation).
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=79442
| Salomon Flohr | 12/17 | (+8 -1 =8) | |
| Samuel Reshevsky | 10.5/17 | (+7 -3 =7) | |
| Andre Lilienthal | 10/17 | (+4 -1 =12) | |
| Vladimir Andreevich Makogonov | 10/17 | (+4 -1 =12) | |
| Grigory Levenfish | 10/17 | (+5 -2 =10) | |
| Viacheslav Ragozin | 10/17 | (+8 -5 =4) | |
| Ilya Leontievich Rabinovich | 9.5/17 | (+6 -4 =7) | |
| Sergey Vsevolodovich Belavenets | 9.5/17 | (+5 -3 =9) | |
| Vladimir Alatortsev | 9/17 | (+4 -3 =10) | |
| Ilia Abramovich Kan | 9/17 | (+5 -4 =8) | |
| Alexander Konstantinopolsky | 8.5/17 | (+5 -5 =7) | |
| Vasily Smyslov | 8/17 | (+4 -5 =8) | |
| Paul Keres | 8/17 | (+3 -4 =10) | |
| Viktor Arsentievich Goglidze | 7.5/17 | (+3 -5 =9) | |
| Alexander Kazimirovich Tolush | 7/17 | (+5 -8 =4) | |
| Peter Arsenievich Romanovsky | 6/17 | (+3 -8 =6) | |
| Igor Bondarevsky | 5/17 | (+2 -9 =6) | |
| Vasily Panov | 3.5/17 | (+0 -10 =7) |
|
"You suggested ChessMetrics as the measurement tool"
I said that it could be used for simplicity's sake to show that the tournament wins that allegedly made Najdorf consistently stronger than the best Soviet players weren't all that strong, not that it was reliable for all players in all situations. To instead list the field Najdorf faced in Barcelona 1946:
Guimard
Albareda
Lorens
Garcia
Perez
Galway
Torriente
Wood
Yanofsky
Cherta
Salamanca
Wade
Picurena
This and the Prague field are simply not comparable to the fields Najdorf faced in the strongest events he played in the 1940s, it isn't a question of one or two Chessmetrics rankings being debatable, it is a question of a huge difference in playing strength between this level of opposition and the tournaments Najdorf played against some of the best players these years, when he finished far from the top three in events won by players like Bronstein and Botvinnik.
Najdorf consistently ranked in the top two or three at the time.
One can speculate the Soviets feared him, and that is why they pulled out of the Prague tourament en mass.
They did not want him in the Championship Match-Tournament to upset their apple cart.
"Najdorf consistently ranked in the top two or three at the time"
You keep saying that, and that Reshevsky was the best player in the world much of the time, making both stronger than not only Botvinnik during the second half of the 1940s, but no basis for these "factual" declarations are given. If you would compare the results Najdorf scored in events where he faced no top players with those where he finished three points behind players like Bronstein and Botvinnik you might find that it is not so obvious that Najdorf was so consistently stronger than the Soviets. The same thing with Reshevsky being better than Botvinnik et al.
Consult ChessMetrics again.
As there was no international numerical rating system at the time, one can rely on "retro-ratings" and results.
Najdorf played these tournaments from 1939-1945 (after the 1939 Olympiad)
1945: Mar del Plata, 1st ahead of H Pilnik and G Stahlberg; Vena del Mar, 2nd behind Carlos Guimard; Buenos Aires, 1st ahead of Stahlberg, C Guimard, and J Bolbochan
1944: Mar del Plata =1-2 with Pilnik, ahead of P. Michel and Guimard; La Plata, 1st ahead of Stahlberg and Bolbochan
1943: Mar del Plata, 1st ahead of Stahlberg, Michel, H Rosetto, and Pilnik; Rosario, 1st ahead of M Czerniak
1942: Mar del Plata, 1st ahead of Pilnik and Stahlberg
1941: Mar del Plata, 2nd behind Stahlberg, ahead of E Eliskases, L Engels, and P Frydman; Buenos Aires (I), =1-2 with Stahlberg, ahead of Fryman, Michel, Guimard, and Plinik; Buenos Aires (III), 1st ahead of Czerniak, Michel and Pilnik
1940 (no tournament play)
1939: Buenos Aires, =1-2 with Keres, ahead of Stahberg and Czerniak
In 1946, Najdorf was =4-5 with Szabo at Groningen, behind Botvinnik, Euwe, and Smyslov. He defeated Botvinnik, drew with Smyslov, defeated Boleslavsky, drew with Flohr and Kotov. Anyone who thinks Najdorf was not on even terms with the Soviets is deluded.
"Anyone who thinks Najdorf was not on even terms with the Soviets is deluded"
"On even terms with the Soviets" is difficult to define compared to consistently stronger than them 1944-49. Najdorf finished far behind the top Soviets in the tournaments he played together with them in the second half of the 1940s.
That is what a landmark study showed a few years ago. In all Soviet competitions, the percentage of short, peaceful draws were much lower than in international play. They were not acting as a team, or promoting a State-chosen favorite.
"Anyone who thinks Najdorf was not on even terms with the Soviets is deluded"
"On even terms with the Soviets" is difficult to define compared to consistently stronger than them 1944-49. Najdorf finished far behind the top Soviets in the tournaments he played together with them in the second half of the 1940s.
Provided the Soviet chess-ethics (an oxymoron if there ever was one) allowed for throwing games and arranged draws, you really need to look at the head-to-head results with Najdorf, rather than the standings.
Petrosian was former world champion
Y are u saying that he need delibarate lost from Krochnoi.?
The Soviet Sports Committee hoped to select the player most likely to stop Fischer before Bobby got to Boris. They dictated the results of the final two games and compensated Korchnoi for his cooperation.
This is what really happened, Korchnoi smoked A brand of cigs that Petrosian was allergic to. Korky refused to stop smoking them and since Petrosian had been world champion for 6 years before Spassky his wants and needs were more important, That is why the Russian government decided to take his side and send Korchnoi off to 3 international tournaments with all expenses paid . They both lived in mansions and had maids, butlers and A limo driver named Tatania. Then Korky left the country and forgot his family because of A very potent brand of vodka. Now lets close the subject before this posting is turned into A book and then A movie. You all seem to know your history based on what someone wrote once . I wasn't there,you weren't there and all the players your talking about want to forget the whole thing. There must be close to 10,000 views on this topic so lets move on please. Have A great week !!
Your statement was "proved to be a match."
Thank you for confiming below what I said:
The Soviets jealously guarded their chess hegemony, never accepted match challenges outside of the FIDE framework, and used sheer numbers to try and smother outside competition.
Wrong, there were bilateral matches between teams in Europe many times.
Besides, matches for Wch can be only under hospicia of FIDE.
The players I named were all elite players at one time or another.
But not number one or two. :)
Anand became world champion.
Soviet Union break in 1991. :)
Ulf Anderson was ranked as high as #4, and here is a sterling victory over Karpov in 1975: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1019693
Timman won two Interzonals, was several times a candidate, making it to the candidate final match twice (losing once to Karpov and once to Short). After Kasparov bolted from the FIDE, Timman was re-matched with Karpov. He was rated as high as #3 several times from 1984-1988.
Mecking ranked as high as #3 in the world in 1976-77. Fischer considered playing a match against him. He was struck down by myasthenia gravis in 1979 (in his 20's, before he peaked) and left chess for over a decade.
Larsen was many times a candidate, and in 1970-72, he was rated as high as #3, behind Fischer and Spassky. Larsen notched victories against every world champion from Botvinnik to Karpov.
Najdorf was so good in the late-1940s, the Soviets conspired to keep him out of the 1948 championship tournament. He was consistently #2 or #3 in the world from 1944-1949, but neveer had the opportunity to play Botvinnik in a set match.
Proof?
Besides, during WW2 there were no matches for Wch, for understandable reasons.
Gligoric is another one who was unfairly denied during the period of his greatest successes.
Proof?
Reshevsky was the top player in the world, several times from the mid-1940s to the mid-1950s.
No. Firt of all, Soviets did not play much during WW2 at international tournaments. Where is the your proof that he was even once better than the reigning Wch's Botvinnik, Bronstein and Smyslov? Also Keres was better most of that time, just look at collection of games. DID YOU?
That is why the Soviets concentrated the efforts to stop him at all costs in 1948 and in 1953. I will blog more about that. Indeed, I have started with 1948, here: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/examples-of-soviet-cheating-in-fide-competition-keres-botvinnik-1948
The Soviet Union was not even a member of the FIDE until 1947. There is no reason that a title match could not be played outside of the FIDE framework.
Soviet chess tended to be highy insular prior to the end of World War 2. Botvinnik, however, was recognized as a rising star, especially after his 3rd place finish at AVRO 1938, behind Keres and Fine.
Team matches were not te subject of my post.