Examples of Soviet cheating in FIDE competition: Petrosian-Korchnoi match, 1971

In the video interview that Steve posted (current #202), Korchnoi states @2:15,

"As to me, if you read my book, well, at that moment [in 1978] when I could become the World Champion, everything was arranged to kill me by the Soviet KGB, in that case.  And again, it was not on purpose that I lost the match [to Karpov], but the dear God decided I would better play chess twenty years longer."

The last video, with an ailing Spassky, was very sad.

Three year old article regarding Spassky:

http://en.chessbase.com/post/boris-spaky-fearing-death-flees-to-ruia

"Korchnoi's wife was being held in the Soviet Union, against her will, as a political prisoner - solely to influence the outcome of the 1978 match between Korchnoi and Karpov. It was the type of crime against humanity for which the Eastern Bloc was infamous. The FIDE, had it not been a pawn of the Soviets, should have cancelled the match, tossed out the Soviet Union from its membership, and declared Korchnoi the Champion"

Korchnoi's son was in prison for refusing his military service, in that he got the same treatment as others in the Soviet Union that refused the mandatory military service. As for Korchnoi's wife, it was never easy to be allowed to travel abroad freely, none of the "loyal" top players were allowed to do that, and it didn't get easier if you were the wife of a recent defector who easily made enemies.

"Mrs. Korchnoi concedes that some of the family's troubles have been compounded by what she calls her husband's ''red-blooded nature,'' meaning his tendency to lash out at real or perceived enemies, particularly in the Kremlin"

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/30/world/mrs-korchnoi-a-pawn-in-a-soviet-power-game.html?pagewanted=2

It is just too simple to say that all this was solely to make Korchnoi lose the match. The truth is rather that you didn't get preferential treatment compared to Tal, Kasparov etc if your husband had defected and your son was in prison for refusing military service. If FIDE should have stripped Karpov of the title and thrown the Soviet Union out of the chess community for this they could have done it for worse things than that much earlier. But not doing it doesn't mean being a pawn of the Soviet Union, it's not like FIFA has thrown out North Korea of the football community. FIDE postponed the Karpov-Korchnoi matches but if I recall correctly the Soviet Chess Federation said they had no authority to decide on visa matters and eventually the matches were played.

Too simple?  Or too truthful?

The is no substitute rule in chess.  Each person plays for themselves.

The 1971 Petrosian-Korchnoi controversy took place because the Soviet authorities wanted to stop Fischer at any cost.

Fischer had just demolished Taimanov and Larsen.  Korchnoi and Petrosian were tied 4-4 after eight consecutive draws.  The Soviet authorities intervened to "fix" the last two games of the match so that their chosen candidate would win.  As we will see in future articles, this was nothing new.

"Freedom" is a concept foreign to authoritarian governments.

If I wished, I could leave my country today.  I am not held captive.  Was that true in the old Soviet Union?  Or East Germany?  Or any of the Eastern Bloc countries? If one could not freely leave, were they not prisoners of a sort?

Carauna is a US citizen by birth - he was born in Miami, Florida, to Italian parents and thus holds dual citizenship.

The meeting that Korchnoi and Petrosian had with the Sports Committee Chairman occurred just after Fischer had finished off Larsen.  The Soviets were frantic to preserve the title for propaganda purposes.

They turned to their "drawing master," former WC Tigran Petrosian, rather than a fighter like Korchnoi, hoping to blunt to Fischer onslaught.\

As it happened, Fischer caught a bad chest cold prior to Game 2 vs Petrosian and was too stubborn to take a sick day.

So what is known is that Benko was paid to give his spot to Fischer by the freedom loving Americans so the title would have bigger chances to go to the US after Fischer refused to participate in the qualification. This was an administrative question. Then, according to an unsubstantiated rumour started by Korchnoi's arch-enemy Karpov, the Soviets paid Korchnoi to let Petrosian win so the title would have bigger chances to go to the Soviets. This was a question of confirmed cheating by the dirty Communists :-)

Benko did not throw any games.  Nor was his livelihood threatened through non-compliance.  And Benko got hired to act as a second.

As compared to the Soviet practice, there was nothing coersive.  No moral equivalency exists.  Substantiation of the "selection" meeting exist from Korchnoi and Spassky, besides Karpov.

The 30 shekels paid to Korchnoi were in being sent to tournaments outside of the Soviet Union. Compare that to how the Soviets treated Taimanov.

"Substantiation of the "selection" meeting exist from Korchnoi"

What Korchnoi has written about the match is:

"The match turned out be highly tedious; we played eight draws in a row! [...] People joked that neither of us wanted to win the match, and then meet Fischer. In the West many were thinking the same way, being unable to believe that the match was being played seriously. And only those who knew me well realized that I was trying very hard, but that my play was not coming off. I was most upset when, in the heat of the moment, I overreached myself, and lost from an excellent position in the ninth game"

Chess is my life, p. 79

Karpov wrote:

"No documents exist to substantiate this plot. But the mediocrity of Korchnoi's play and the fact that, considering his bitter nature, after he lost to Petrosian he remained on good terms with him implies that Korchnoi let Petrosian win"

Karpov on Karpov, p. 114

Of course it's possible that Korchnoi isn't telling the truth and Karpov's version is correct, but it could also be the other way around.

It seems to me that there are some commies here trying their best to defend their comrades ! If thats not the case it might just be that they are apologists for them ?  Which is it fellas ?  

As a complete outside on this subject, it does make sense.  The Soviet chess machine wasnt concerned about individual success, but more about "Soviet Chess Success"  They didnt care who won, as long as a soviet won.  I would imagine this conversation took place.  As it is well known what happened to Taimanov after his defeat against Fischer, Zurch 1953, and the Russian players conspiring against Reshevsky, Paul Keres and supposedly throwing games against Botvinnik.

Karpov continued his account with:

But the idyll [that the players 'remained on good terms'] could not last long. Petrosian had a notorious appetite, and he didn't want to depart from his habits here. Korchnoi knew Fischer well, and in general knew a great deal, so why not make use of this knowledge in the match with Fischer?

This incident is known to me from Korchnoi's own account, although it generally received wide publicity in the chess world. After hearing out the request, Korchnoi could not contain himself and burst out laughing. "Now how the hell can I be Petrosian's second if it makes me sick to watch how he plays?"

This was the end of it. This wasn't just an explosion, but a challenge, and Petrosian vowed to annihilate Korchnoi. And now he was trying to do it with my hands.

That last sentence puts Karpov's account into context: Petrosian offered the young grandmaster valuable advice during the 1974 Karpov - Korchnoi final candidates match, which was a de facto World Championship match.

From:  http://worldchesschampionship.blogspot.com/2009/11/rigged-match.html

This is all too often repeated as a general fact but just look at the actual results. When for example Tal won the Candidates he played 5 draws in 12 games against the other Soviets (and had a minus score against them!), while Fischer scored 5 draws in 12 games against the non-Soviets. In the previous Candidates Geller scored 4 draws in 10 games against the other Soviets, in the one before that Keres scored 6 draws in 12 games against fellow Soviets, in the one before that Kotov scored 4 draws in 12 games against fellow Soviets, etc.

So it's obvious that some sort of general Soviet drawing conspiracy didn't exist. Tal drew 9 of 24 games against Soviet opponents in his Candidates tournaments and to accuse him or Keres of always drawing against other Soviets to increase the chances of a Soviet winner is difficult. The same thing of course with Geller, Kotov et al since the actual results show that this wasn't the case.

There were several "western" players. post Wor;d War II, who were individually a match for any Soviet.  Fischer was just premier among them.

Immediately after the war and into the 1950s, you had Reshevsky and Najdorf.  If you wish to add the Yugoslavs, as being out of the Soviet sphere of influence, you can add in Gligoric.

Fischer rose to ascendency in the 1960s, along with Larsen.  Huebner of Germany could match the best the Soviets had to offer.  In the 70s, Mecking of Brazil might have been a world champion, had he not suffered from chronic disease.  His two Interzonal wins puts him in elite company.

As we moved into the 1980s, Jan Timman and Ulf Andersson move into the elite.  And in the early 1990s, Anand begins to make his mark.

What these players did not have, was the support of the Soviet state behind them.  Their achievements were not collective.

I think the proof of the myth of innate Soviet chess superiority can be seen today, over 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet system, that in the top ten players in the world, there are but two Russians, Kramnik and Grischuk.

Your statement was "proved to be a match."

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.

The players I named were all elite players at one time or another.

Anand became world champion.

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.

Gligoric is another one who was unfairly denied during the period of his greatest successes.

Reshevsky was the top player in the world, several times from the mid-1940s to the mid-1950s.  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

"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"

Apart from that game Karpov was 12-0 against Andersson though, so it's not as if they were all that close in strength.

"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"

"Reshevsky was the top player in the world, several times from the mid-1940s to the mid-1950s.  That is why the Soviets concentrated the efforts to stop him at all costs in 1948 and in 1953"

Najdorf and Reshevsky were very strong players, but I think you underestimate Botvinnik, Keres, Smyslov etc if you consider Najdorf and Reshevsky the world top two from the middle of the 1940s.

It will in part 2

Najdorf's results in the strongest events he played 1944-49:

Shared 4th-5th with Szabo in Groningen 1946 with +4 (Botvinnik first with +10)

Shared 6th-9th in Saltsjöbaden Interzonal 1948 with +2 (Bronstein first with +8)

Drawn matches against Fine (4-4) and Trifunovic (6-6) in 1949.

Botvinnik's results 1944-49:

1st in Soviet Championship 1944 with +9 (Smyslov in second +5)

1st in Soviet Championship 1945 with +14 in 18 rounds (#2 scored +7 and #3 scored +3)

1st in Groningen 1946 with +10 in 19 rounds

1st in Chigorin Memorial 1947 with +7 in 15 rounds

1st in World Championship 1948 with +8 in 20 rounds (#2 scored +2)

Reshevsky played few top events 1944-49, but at least participated in the USA vs USSR match in 1945, where he lost both games he played (against Smyslov), and the match in 1946, where he lost and drew against Botvinnik. Then he also played the World Championship in 1948, where he only finished ahead of Euwe but scored a decent +1.

During World War II, Najdorf scored excellent results in the South American tournaments with the strong group of players who did not return to Europe after the 1939 Olympiad, most notably at several Mar del Plata.  You forget Najdorf's 1st place at Prague and at Barcelona.  The Prague victory was intended to seed him into the World Championship tournament.