|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 38 OF 38 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Mar-20-12
 | | brankat: <King Death> I think You are probably right. |
 |
| Mar-20-12 | | Everett: Bronstein is not consistent, but this does not mean he speaks nothing but falsehoods. FWIW Averbakh in his latest book says Smyslov was favored by the "authorities" in '53, so there is some corroboration. A few posts up, I gave some reasoning that makes Bronstein's account make sense. As far as '51 goes, Bronstein gave his best response in Sorcerer's Apprentice, and here I paraphrase: he felt pressure from various sources and it was his decision to succumb to them or not. Here is Bronstein at his most accountable and personally responsible. Further, he does not say what his ultimate decision was, but seeing just how sensitive he proved to be in coming years, it would be surprising if such pressure did not affect him negatively. Later on he also said "I made a mistake" by not choosing to win the '51 match. My simple take on this is that Bronstein was a troubled and conflicted soul in chess and in life. It is not surprising then that he would not get the highest prize. His opponents likely benefited from a stronger and more clear desire to be or stay WC. Bronstein seems to have too much doubt and mixed feelings to play chess at the very highest levels. After '58, this seemed to be the case. |
|
Mar-20-12
| | brankat: <Everett> There are some bits of insights into Bronstein's 1951 and 1953 experiences in these Y.Averbakh interviews. They do sound credible. Yuri Averbakh |
|
| Mar-20-12 | | Everett: Thanks <Brankat>. Those are the interviews that confirm my above views, such as <YA: Not completely. No, because I have known Bronstein so long. Sometimes, for instance, he may speak about his match with Botvinnik, and he says he did not want to win this match, or some such thing. He may not be truthful every time. I cannot say, or course, exactly how much, but what he says is not 100% true, about anything, really. This is my experience based on many contacts with him. Let us say, he cannot be 100% objective; this is the point.> and the bit later sees Averbakh also strongly believing that Smyslov was favored. Further,, It is also mentioned that Keres was told not to be responsible for Botvinnik losing in '48, according to Keres' biographer. This is confirmed by Botvinnik himself, though Botvinnik disagreed with the idea supposedly. Well, who knows, but I don't know if anyone here has ever competed at a high level, and if so whether there was ever "favorites" being played that you knew about at the time. Whether "orders" were followed or not, I imagine the head games did not help performance. Trash talk and such between competitors is one thing; when the organizers and arbitrators are involved, it is quite another. |
|
Mar-20-12
| | brankat: <Everett> <Trash talk and such between competitors is one thing; when the organizers and arbitrators are involved, it is quite another.> Exactly. Now, all these things happened (or else, didn't happen) in the past. More of a concern should be the issue of how much of the such has been happening recently, and even now. For instance since 1993 and on. |
|
Mar-20-12
| | brankat: "In the course of a couple of pages he manages to describe FIDE, its policies, and officers, as impotent, a laughing stock, serial incompetence, clownish, tawdry, hare-brained, out of touch, ridiculous, knuckle-headed, horrendous, incapable, isolated from reality, disastrous and disorganized!" -– Tony Miles (on Y.Seirawan's open letter to FIDE). |
|
| Mar-20-12 | | Everett: I have always enjoyed Seirawan's sensibilities too ;-) |
|
Mar-21-12
 | | HeMateMe: Bronstein's father had done time in the Soviet Gulag, probably for committing no crime at all. A lot of soviet prisoners of the Germans (those that survived) were then imprisoned by Stalin, on the grounds that they were corroborating with the enemy. Bronstein's father may have been one of those P.O.W.s. If there was any implied threat to send his father back, on some trumped up charge, it would have to have affected Bronstein's play. I think David Bronstein was already too famous to just "disappear" but many Gulag survivors were sent right back in. Bronstein had to know that his father would not survive another stay in the camps. |
|
| Apr-14-12 | | Everett: How great will it be to compare two great books on Zurich '53? http://www.amazon.com/Zurich-1953-C... |
|
| Jul-04-12 | | drnooo: Fischer once said that Reshevsky might have been the best in the world in the 50s.
Well, it might well have been ole Dave.
At least until Tal came along.
They were brothers under the skin.
Not sure when Bronstein had reached his peak, will leave that to others to decide but my guess is from 48 to around 56 and maybe a little later |
|
| Jul-04-12 | | King Death: <drnooo> Then there was the interview where Botvinnik said that Smyslov was the best player in the world in the 50s. In spite of <RookFile's> rants on other pages that Reshevsky was (in the face of any reason) I like Smyslov for that, 2 clear Candidates wins and a title make a man pretty damn tough. Bronstein was a great imaginative player and I like his style a lot but he didn't maintain that high level the way that Smyslov did. |
|
| Jul-04-12 | | Everett: <King Death> I agree from '56 on that is the case, but Zurich '53 is strange, and Bronstein missed a couple of wins while making Smyslov look silly in the beginning of the tournament. Smyslov vs Bronstein, 1953 If he had played 14..Ba3, the game would have gone down as one of the greatest ever miniatures.
And Gothenburg '55, the qualifier for the candidates in '56, saw Bronstein literally destroy the competition. But in '56, not only Smyslov, but Petrosian also was becoming an absolute beast. Petrosian outplayed Bronstein in both their games, gaining an easy draw as Black and famously blundering his Q in a crushing position. As far as Smyslov/Bronstein head to head, I feel this game shows Smyslov at his very best, where Smyslov had to play a perfect game to win. It is annotated in OMGP II
Smyslov vs Bronstein, 1956
As far as Smyslov being the best of the 50's, I give him only a few years. And after the maturation of Petrosian and Spassky, both Bronstein's and Smyslov's days were numbered. And even Petro and Spassky had to wait for Tal to cool his jets. And this is ignoring Keres, Reshevsky, and Geller. |
|
Jul-04-12
 | | talisman: KGB in Zurich in 53: "do you really think we are here to watch chess?" |
|
Aug-06-12
 | | Joshka: I know there must be a book about the 1951 match with Botvinnik, or maybe a few? Any suggestions? thanks in advance |
|
Oct-01-12
 | | Conrad93: 200 Open Games is a little disappointing.
I expected more commentary.
He's obviously a great writer, but he could have mentioned a bit more about each game. |
|
Oct-14-12
| | Conrad93: Magnus Carlsen gets thousands of replies, but a genius like Bronstein gets only 36? This is pathetic. |
|
Oct-14-12
 | | Gypsy: <Joshka: I know there must be a book about the 1951 match with Botvinnik, or maybe a few? Any suggestions? thanks in advance > Search for Vainstein (or some variation of this name) and 'Chess Improviser David Bronstein'. Vainstein was Bronstein's seccond of sorts and (ghost) co-author of some of Bronstein's writing. 'Chess Improviser' is a book about the 1951 match. (Vainstein apparently also wrote an insightful book on Tarrasch and perhaps other stuff.) |
|
Oct-14-12
 | | parisattack: World Chess Championship: 1951 by William Winter and R.G. Wade. I believe the Brits have reprinted this as paperback - but you can still find nice hardback/dust jacket copies for $30-$40 on Ebay & ABE from time-to-time. Wade also did the 1963 match which remains one of my ATF chess books. Golombek did 1948, 1957 and 1958. |
|
Oct-15-12
 | | TheFocus: <parisattack>< World Chess Championship: 1951 by William Winter and R.G. Wade.> I have this book. In paperback, though. Very good book. |
|
Oct-15-12
 | | Eggman: <<Petrosian outplayed Bronstein in both their games, gaining an easy draw as Black and famously blundering his Q in a crushing position.>> Blundering counts. It's no good saying "so-and-so was the best except he blundered." Infrequency of blunders is one of the things that separates a World Champion from the pretenders. |
|
| Oct-16-12 | | Everett: <Eggman: <<Petrosian outplayed Bronstein in both their games, gaining an easy draw as Black and famously blundering his Q in a crushing position.>> Blundering counts. It's no good saying "so-and-so was the best except he blundered." Infrequency of blunders is one of the things that separates a World Champion from the pretenders.> Of course, I'm not saying otherwise. I, a Bronstein fan, am merely noting that there is evidence that Bronstein was on a slow decline compared to the rise of Petrosian, Spassky, Tal, etc., by the late 50's, and indicated the flow of his games with Petrosian as examples of this. Petrosian did outplay Bronstein in these games. The result is only part of the picture. |
|
Nov-20-12
 | | Cemoblanca: BEFORE THE FIRST MOVE
The position you see in the diagram is like an empty canvas standing on an easel. If you have any aptitude, talent or, no less important, desire, then boldly take up your brush and paints, decide upon the necessary colour and embark upon your creative work. But how should one begin? I cannot say what feelings artists experience at that moment, but, whenever I have to start a game with an 'empty' chess board in front of me, I cannot stop thinking that today, right now, I have the very fortunate possibility of playing the most beautiful, the most fighting, and the most profound game since the time of my birth and since long before it. ~ David Bronstein :) |
|
Apr-02-13
 | | Gottschalk: In chess as in life,
fortune smiles once.
David Bronstein
Game132(Petrosian 1x0 Gligoric)of this book Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953. |
|
Apr-05-13
| | Gottschalk: Don't cry, my boy!
They not permited me to be a world champion,
but I don't cried.
David Bronstein
to a desolate Bobby Fischer, crying hunched over the tableboard,
after the draw with Botvinnik |
|
| Apr-05-13 | | BUNA: Was Bronstein even in Varna in 1962? At least he wasn't part of the team (Botvinnik, Petrosian, Spassky, Keres, Geller, Tal). And Fischer had already left the board when a smiling Botvinnik was still shaking hands. :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3TM... |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 38 OF 38 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
 |
|
