Soviet Cheating in FIDE Competition: Keres-Botvinnik, 1948, Pt 3

Except my conclusions about the FIDE system are supported with documentation.  You are free disagree and state your case.

You tell him Jamie!  :D

Which documentation?

Keres statement to Ken Whyld

Botvinnik's statement to the Dutch journalist

Insider statements to Kingston

Then we have a pattern of corruption that spanned 3 or more decades, beyond the events of 1948.

Doubts about the games raised by noted international masters and grandmasters.  I still have Pt 4 to publish.

Marignon, Jamie is not anti-Semite. I think her (entirely understandable) dislike of the Soviets causes her to judge unfairly some of the great Soviet players such as Karpov, but that's not the same thing.

All of them tell us the contrary. There was no agreement about game results before any of games started. None of them was arranged.

That Keres felt psychological pressure and was out of shape is a totally different story.

You interprete all witnesses with prejudice, that is all.

You are the HATER, something akin to Nazis, Racists and Antisemites.

Talking to you about history is a WASTE OF TIME.

Normally I would block a user for personal attacks, but I would like to hear Marignon's point of view, so long as he can keep his comments civil.  Calling people Nazis, racists, and antisemites because you disagree with them is not civil.

I have not stated that the games in 1948 were fixed.  I have stated that this is a suspicion that has lingered since that time.

I will state my own conclusions in Part 4.

"Kramnik unified the title with his match against Topalov in 2006"

Kramnik wanted to play a match outside FIDE which would just continue the split and his control of his "own" title, and when Topalov refused to do that the match fell through. After a while Kramnik had to accept that he only could get another title match by being forced to play a match organised by FIDE, and agreeing that this was a unification match, with the agreement that the winner would participate in the already scheduled tournament World Championship in 2007, and unconditionally recognise the winner as the World Champion. After beating Topalov Kramnik back pedalled on that and would now only recognise the winner in 2007 as World Champion if he got a title match against him. So saying that Kramnik unified the title is to have a rather rosy view on his actions. He was very reluctantly drawn into the unification.

Does anyone know Kramnik's career match record ?  I believe he has lost more matches than he has won ? 

Lost to Kamsky in 1994

Lost to Gelfand in 1994

Lost to Shirov in 1998

Lost to Adams in 1999

Beat Kasparov in 2000

Drew Leko in 2004

Beat Topolov in 2006

Lost to Anand in 2008

Drew Aronian in 2012

There may be more - I'm not sure

Yes, you didn't include his numerous match wins.

Here's a more complete listing:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1015331

By my count, he has won 10, lost 8, and drawn 1 match against humans. And yes, I count winning the tie break as winning the match.

Vremya sekond hend by Svetlana Alexievich is what everyone with an interest in the Soviet Union should read, if they are into chess or not. Still the only book of her I have read, but great choice for the Nobel Prize.

I guess I should have been more specific and said " serious matches " , which , for me anyway , would not include any matches played at any time control other than slow/standard .  Some exhibition matches are likely at blitz or rapid time controls . An " exhibition match " isnt normally a very serious match ,  are they ?  Let me ask whats on my mind , among world champions do any of them have a worse match ( serious only ) record than Kramnik ?  

Ha-ha-ha, Reb! Good observation!

Obviously Euve had a very poor match score, losing twice to Alekhine, to Capablanca, Reti, Bogoliubov and Keres

He won only one match vs Alekhive (but enough to be a champion) and Colle. Maybe some Dutch masters.

Sorry, Chess_is_my_Heaven, as I said, won't talk to you. Rabbis don't talk to skinheads.  

I have said that I thought Botvinnik was perhaps the strongest player in 1948.  However, if the agents of the State attempted to coerce one of the participants (Keres), I consider that to be cheating.

I started this series of articles with the Korchnoi-Petrosian fiasco of 1971, wherein Korchnoi was allegedly bribed to throw the match to Petrosian.

There is something odd, Euwe plays so bad he is at the bottom. But in Groningen 1946 Euwe stays a comfortable second and play very well in Groningen 1946. Score is 1st Botvinnik 14.5 ; 2nd Euwe 14 ; 3rd Smyslov 12.5 ; 4th Najdorf 11.5 . 

 Euwe play much better in that tournament than Smyslov, and two years later 1st Botvinnik ; 2nd Smyslov and 4th Euwe.

 Noticed Botvinnik is only half point ahead of Euwe in Groningen 1946, I think Euwe playing in Moscow effect him in a negative way and didn't do his best. It look like the Soviets players had a big advantage in Moscow compare to the non-Soviets.

As I told Mr DogOnTheRoad, I am waiting for a book I ordered to complete Part IV.

Rest in peace, Victor Korchnoi - a REAL world champion!

Spassky, a fellow emigre from the Soviet Union, stated that Korchnoi had all of the requisite elements to become world champion except one: Korchnoi had no chess talent!

Korchnoi was a world class fighter, and created many great fighting victories, but he lacked something that kept him from crossing that last hurdle.