Examples of Soviet cheating in FIDE competition: Petrosian-Korchnoi match, 1971 - Chess Forums - Page 5

JamieDelarosa · 2015-09-10T20:25:19-07:00

This account is from "Russians versus Fischer," by Dmitry Plisetsky and Sergey Voronkov http://www.amazon.com/Russians-versus-Fischer-Everyman-Chess/dp/1857443802/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441939595&sr=1-1&keywords=russians+versus+fischer

fissionfowl

Sep 12, 2015

0

#81

Reb wrote:

Kasparov failed to win a single game in a 16 game match against Kramnik , I cannot imagine Fischer failing to win a single game against anyone in a 16 game match .... ever . Fischer was clearly the best ever ..... period . Only your communist sympathies prevent you from seeing what is clear to others fabelhaft

I also understand that a teen Kasparov was not yet at his peak but Petrosian was clearly well beyond his peak and probably not as close to his peak as Kasparov was to his . Kasparov became WC in 85 , don't forget .

lol fabelhaft trounces you every time in this discussion, and you still just repeat the same stuff over and over that's already been refuted. Also it's only the score that matters: -2, hardly shameful for the only match loss in about 15 years (as has been mentioned several times of course).

NM TheOldReb

Sep 12, 2015

0

#82

fissionfowl wrote:

Reb wrote:

Kasparov failed to win a single game in a 16 game match against Kramnik , I cannot imagine Fischer failing to win a single game against anyone in a 16 game match .... ever . Fischer was clearly the best ever ..... period . Only your communist sympathies prevent you from seeing what is clear to others fabelhaft

I also understand that a teen Kasparov was not yet at his peak but Petrosian was clearly well beyond his peak and probably not as close to his peak as Kasparov was to his . Kasparov became WC in 85 , don't forget .

lol fabelhaft trounces you every time in this discussion, and you still just repeat the same stuff over and over that's already been refuted. Also it's only the score that matters: -2, hardly shameful for the only match loss in about 15 years (as has been mentioned several times of course).

If we were speaking of normal GMs or even world champions that didnt set themselves apart from the others ( world champions ) I would agree with this . However , when you are speaking of one of the names that always comes up in any GOAT conversation it is indeed a shameful loss !

JamieDelarosa

Sep 12, 2015

0

#83

caruanovich wrote:

I get the impression that the whole discussion is dominated by angry americans who until now have a hard time to swallow that the Soviets were better in chess. Except Fischer, no american master had ever a chance to win a match against the best, say 3 or 5, soviet GMs. So they belittle ability and talent of them and at the same time worship, idolize the same of their own masters.

You are wrong

Reshevsky, 1953 Zurich Candidates Tournament

9 Soviets, 3 Westerners, 1 Humgarian, 1 Yugoslav

Reshevsky finished =2-4

Reshevsky, 1948 World Championship Match-Tournament

3 Soviets, 2 Westerners

Reshevsky finished =3-4

Robert Byrne qualified for the Candidates matches from the 1973 Leningrad Interzonal. He lost to Spassky in the quarter-finals 0+ 3= 3-

JamieDelarosa

Sep 12, 2015

0

#84

RalphKane wrote:

Poor Spassky. 3 failed marriages and a thrashing by Bobby. Which was worse ?

2 thrashings by Bobby ;^)

NM TheOldReb

Sep 12, 2015

0

#85

Poor Spassky ? He was until Fischer made him rich ! No wonder Boris always liked Bobby , why wouldnt he ?

JamieDelarosa

Sep 12, 2015

0

#86

No, I am not joking.

Reshevsky played the top three Soviets 5-games each in 1948.

And he nearly qualified to play Botvinnik in 1953.

NM TheOldReb

Sep 12, 2015

0

#87

caruanovich wrote:

There were many years during the cold war, when most among the top ten were soviet players.

This should surprise noone given that only soviet players were supported by the state . Western players had to actually worry about making a living through means other than chess .

JamieDelarosa

Sep 12, 2015

0

#88

caruanovich wrote:

Then you made misprint you just said that reschevski played only draws and losses in those two tournaments.

But it does not matter. The general picture is, as I said it.

I am going to assume there is a language communication problem here. You wrote:

caruanovich wrote:

Except Fischer, no american master had ever a chance to win a match against the best, say 3 or 5, soviet GMs.

"... had a chance ..." I interpret as "had an opportunity".

If one played in such a match, like Byrne vs Spassky in 1974; or Reshevsky vs Botvinnik, Smyslov, and Keres in 1948; or Reshevsky in the Candidates tournment, one had an opportunity.

Reschevsky also had a three-way match in the 1968 Interzonal Play off, against Stein of the USSR and Hort of Czechoslovakia. Each player had a four-game match against the other two players.

Reshevy qualified to move on. Korchnoi (USSR) then defeated Reshevsky in the Candidates quarter-final match 5.5-2.5

RalphKane

Sep 13, 2015

0

#89

These soviets won not because they were better, but because Moscow kept detailed notes on all the major competition, so they could collectively strategize how to best beat them. Man v. sports machine.

RalphKane

Sep 13, 2015

0

#90

Let's see how much you know. I just challenged you. You have no clue what I have at home.

fissionfowl

Sep 13, 2015

0

#91

Reb wrote:

fissionfowl wrote:

Reb wrote:

Kasparov failed to win a single game in a 16 game match against Kramnik , I cannot imagine Fischer failing to win a single game against anyone in a 16 game match .... ever . Fischer was clearly the best ever ..... period . Only your communist sympathies prevent you from seeing what is clear to others fabelhaft

I also understand that a teen Kasparov was not yet at his peak but Petrosian was clearly well beyond his peak and probably not as close to his peak as Kasparov was to his . Kasparov became WC in 85 , don't forget .

lol fabelhaft trounces you every time in this discussion, and you still just repeat the same stuff over and over that's already been refuted. Also it's only the score that matters: -2, hardly shameful for the only match loss in about 15 years (as has been mentioned several times of course).

If we were speaking of normal GMs or even world champions that didnt set themselves apart from the others ( world champions ) I would agree with this . However , when you are speaking of one of the names that always comes up in any GOAT conversation it is indeed a shameful loss !

In any case it doesn't really matter when it was his only bad result in an entire career of match play. And taken as the only loss, -2 is still not shameful unless you consider any loss to be shameful... or -1 as being so much better.

NM TheOldReb

Sep 13, 2015

0

#92

@fowl You just dont seem to get it . Its not the score so much as the fact that he couldnt win a single game in 16 tries !

fissionfowl

Sep 13, 2015

0

#93

Reb wrote:

@fowl You just dont seem to get it . Its not the score so much as the fact that he couldnt win a single game in 16 tries !

Of course I get it. Anyone with a basic understanding of stats and logic knows that's not the important factor... While not winning a game he also limited Kramnik to only 2 wins. The loss was objectively no worse than if he'd lost 5 wins to 7.

JamieDelarosa

Sep 13, 2015

0

#94

I have an extensive library as well. I prefer tournament and match books, but I also have games collections of many master, including those of the top Soviets/Russians.

The Soviets had a long history of collusion and manipulation. It appears you condone that behavior, or at least you are an apologist for it.

I will be adding more articles about these issues.

batgirl

Sep 13, 2015

0

#95

Posting them in the forums is good for public interaction, but you might want to consider compiling the ones you post here in a blog where they will be all together.

There are no minds to be persuaded one way or the other here because no one seems open to to anything other than what they already believe.

batgirl

Sep 13, 2015

0

#96

caruanovich wrote:

I dont believe, I know.

My point.

JamieDelarosa

Sep 13, 2015

0

#97

caruanovich wrote:

First, manipulation is exaggerated. Second, it was the KGB that forced Soviet players to make easy draws among each other.

My experience with chess players from the former Soviet Union is very good. They are very respectful at the board, they discuss with you after the game, and in the dicussion they are objective. This is because chess is an art in Russia.

Unlike german and american chess players whom I met at the board. Most of them are ok, of course, but few can become very rude.

Well, you "hit the nail on the head". "... it was the KGB that forced Soviet players to make easy draws among each other."

That is accurate. The Soviets authorities saw chess as a propaganda tool. Success in chess was seen as symbolic of Marxist Socialist superiority. Hence, when it came to manipulating results in tournaments and matches, the ends justified the means.

I have no doubt that individual players from the former Soviet Union are nice people. Fischer actually got along well with many of them (indeed, when Tal fell ill in Curacao, Fischer was the only competitor to visit him in the hospital); it was the "Machine" that bothered him.

RalphKane

Sep 13, 2015

0

#98

If Caruanovich knows, then send me a 1 day per move challenge per your preference and I'll accept ☺

RalphKane

Sep 13, 2015

0

#99

I'm still a huge Ronald Reagan fan.

JamieDelarosa

Sep 13, 2015

0

#100

caruanovich wrote:

What I meant with exaggeration is that the winner of the cold war determines the history writings of the past. Sport was a propaganda tool for both sides. A blatant eample was the win of an olympic gold medal by the american ice hockey team. They won in a final against (the favorite) Russia. Then Reagan made a reception in the white house for them, praising them as the proof of american human qualities, and it was clearly meant that "our boys" were the better human beings than "the Russians"...

The use of Doping in sports is widespread, since the 70th, but the western media dont get tired to talk about doping in the GDR, in Soviet Union etc.

The USA college amateurs defeated the Soviet professionals in semi-finals. Instead, the USA defeated Finland in the Gold Medal game at Lake Placid, 1980.