< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 51 OF 51 ·
|Sep-07-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> Splendid. Congrats to you and <Chessical> for finding some good info. If I can find anything else I'll add it in the next day or two and then try to draft something up later in the week.|
|Sep-08-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> Take your time, this is not easy.|
Btw you can also add Yuri Razuvaev as Karpov's second (next after main second Furman). During the olympiad here, Karpov opened an exhibition in my museum called "Chess on Stamps". I somewhat inappropriately approached him and asked, "who were your seconds in 1974?" At first he thought I was a journalist and referred me to a press conference. But seeing I was an employee at the museum he friendly replied: "Furman and Razuvaev against Polugaevsky, and Furman and Balashov against Spassky".
|Sep-08-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> Brilliant to have it confirmed by the man himself. I saw it in that document linked above, but always good to have it from the horse's mouth - is that an expression in Norway? Anyway - I think we can treat it as a fact!|
Yes, Furman was Karpov's long term mentor/coach. I recently read a remark from Furman that the young Karpov, when he won the World Junior, saw it as his responsibility to the millions of Russians to bring the title back, as Spassky had been the last Soviet winner, some fourteen years previously.
Funny, I had never made that connection before, but Karpov effectively had to rescue Spassky's title twice!
|Sep-08-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: Some other passages/extracts for consideration (Tolya-Polu quarter final 1974) – |
<And so, at twenty-two, Anatoly Karpov bacame a candidate for the world chess championship. Before preparing for his quarter-final match with Polugaevsky he played in two extremely strong tournaments, The Soviet Championship (second, behind Spassky) and the international event that was being held for the first time in Madrid after years of being known as the traditional Palma de Mallorca tournament. In Madrid he finished first, as expected, and along with his other prizes he won the ‘Chess Oscar’, a trophy awarded annually by election of the International Chess Journalists Association.>
<The draw for the Candidates’ matches was not an easy one for Karpov. He had to play Polugaevsky in the first round, Spassky in the second (presuming that they both won) and then the winner of the Petrosian-Korchnoi-Mecking-Portisch half of the draw. Polugaevsky had been playing well for the previous year or so and many pundits thought that Karpov may have a tough task. But he viewed the problem in a different way. “For me it is very bad to play Polugaevsky in the first match because if I win I still have to play Spassky and if I lose it is terrible. It would be much better to play someone stronger in the first round. If I played Spassky first and I won then I would have a free road to the World Championship match.”>
<The match with Polugaevsky was just about as easy as Karpov had expected. He was completely out of form for the first three games (colourless draws) but when he came to life … Bang! Bang! Bang! Games four, six and eight were wins with the white pieces and the match was over.>
Levy, in ‘Karpov’s Collected Games’ (Hale, 1975) pp. 27-28.
In respect of competitiveness, <Polugaevsky is the one [candidate] who appears in the least favourable light – he is insufficiently shrewd as a competitor, and for this reason matches are probably more difficult for him than tournaments, while elimination events are particularly unpleasant for him, since it is here that one has to display these competitive qualities …>
<The majority of grandmasters supported the older participant, being rather suspicious as regards the younger one. This was a good sign. When in the twenties and thirties I was overcoming the resistence of the older generation of Soviet masters, the picture was the same.>
Botvinnik, in ‘Anatoly Karpov: his road to the WC’ (Pergamon, 1978) p. viii and p. xii respectively.
|Sep-08-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> Never heard that expression! :) |
Regarding his seconds in the Spassky match, Kasparov' Predecessors vol. 5 p. 249 has this: "On this occasion Karpov was helped by Furman and Razuvaev (there was no Balashov: Spassky had turned to him for help, not knowing that he was in the opponent's team, and Yuri decided to observe neutrality)."
|Sep-08-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> Straight from the horse's mouth = direct from the original source.|
What about "Never look a gift horse in the mouth"?
|Sep-08-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> Nope. The only one I can remember right now is something like|
"When the manger is empty, the horses bite" (each other).
|Sep-08-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: Not heard that one. Nor the one about nails to boil soup, which I failed to grasp the meaning of!|
Never look a gift horse in the mouth = if it's free, don't be too choosy.
The meaning/derivation comes from the horse trading markets of old, where it was common practice to check the condition of a horse's teeth in order to gauge it's state of health.
|Sep-16-14|| ||Tabanus: H W Birkmyre Gifford --> Henry William.|
|Sep-17-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> I'm curious who you are going to believe regarding Karpov's seconds against Spassky? Razuvaev's claim is backed by Kasparov, but appears to be at odds with what Karpov told you. Or have I misread it?|
Incidentally, I have just started drafting Karp-Polu 74 (hope to finish it soon).
In the meantime, if you agree, could you change <If 8-8 ... etc> to
<If tied at 8-8, the match would be decided by the drawing of lots.> ?
As has been said before, there is no concrete right or wrong way to say it, but I think this would be the wording I'd expect to see in a chess book.
If you could also add your 'Mikenas was arbiter' note, sourced as , then the factual intro stuff should be practically complete - all else can be added below with new sources starting at .
Thanks - just trying to tidy things so I don't get lost with source numbers, but let me know if there are any problems with what I suggest.
|Sep-17-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> Done! The two sentences are yet incomplete (too tired now) but it's ready for continuation.|
I'm happy that you are making progress. Not sure what to think about Razuvaev, but that was in the Spassky match (not vs Polu). Perhaps Balashov helped Karpov without telling Spassky or others. Against Polu we can safely put Furman and Razuvaev.
|Sep-17-14|| ||Tabanus: I put "If tied at 8-8, the match<es> would be decided by the drawing of lots."|
Not sure how it flows, don't be afraid of suggesting improvements.
|Sep-17-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> You have a good instinct for detecting where improvements might be needed! I had not read the whole paragraph properly and I think you quite rightly refer to the massive overuse of 'match/matches'. One or two other phrases might also benefit from flowing more smoothly.|
How about ...
<Anatoly Karpov had progressed from the Leningrad Interzonal (1973) and Lev Polugaevsky from the Petropolis Interzonal (1973) and Portoroz Interzonal Playoff (1973). Three other matches, to be held in parallel, were the Spassky - Byrne Candidates Quarterfinal (1974), Petrosian - Portisch Candidates Quarterfinal (1974) and Korchnoi - Mecking Candidates Quarterfinal (1974). Each contest would be played to a maximum of 16 games; the first player to three wins advancing to the next stage. If tied at 8-8, the outcome of a match would be decided by the drawing of lots.1 The Candidates matches were held in order to select a challenger for Robert James Fischer, the World Champion.> ?
|Sep-18-14|| ||Tabanus: <Paint My Dragon> Anything you say sir!|
I pasted in your text and planned to leave it unchanged. But I could not resist and made a few changes. How is it now?
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> I like it!|
Just found out that Polugaevsky only turned pro in 1973. What a shocker!
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> First draft of the remainder of Karpov-Polugaevsky 1974 Candidates QF. |
Limiting the size has meant zero space for detailed commentary. One idea is to refer the reader to the detailed Yudovich commentary as 'recommended reading'. See what you think - I personally think the match is well summed up with the comments of the experts and players without any 'blow by blow account'.
<Karpov was seconded by his long term coach and mentor GM Semyon Furman; also by GM Yuri Razuvaev. Polugaevsky worked closely with GM Isaak Boleslavsky in the early 1970s  and was assisted by IM (later GM) Vladimir Bagirov. 
Anatoly Karpov arrived on the chess scene with precision timing. Still smarting from the defeat of Spassky by Fischer, the Soviets were anxious to find someone from the younger generation who could be a serious contender for the chess throne. Karpov had been a star pupil at Botvinnik’s chess school, had won the World Junior title convincingly in 1969, and had gained his grandmaster title while still in his teens (not usual in those days). He had recorded two major tournament wins early in his career – at Moscow and Hastings, late in 1971.
Polugaevsky had been a prolific winner of tournaments during the 1960s and shared first place in three consecutive USSR Championships. By the 1970s, he was regarded as one of the world’s best ten players,  despite only becoming a chess professional in 1973, after his win at the Petropolis play-off. He had previously balanced chess with a career as an engineer. 
Prior to the Candidates matches, Karpov had played two extremely strong events, the Soviet Championship (second behind Spassky) and Madrid, where he finished first and among other prizes was awarded the ‘Chess Oscar’, voted for annually by the International Chess Journalists Association. Polugaevsky’s form had also been good and many thought that Karpov’s task would be difficult.  In assessing the match prospects, Mikhail Yudovich expected a very close contest, and reported a greater sympathy for Karpov among the audience.  Botvinnik claimed that the majority of grandmasters supported Polugaevsky, being suspicious of the younger man. This mirrored the famous patriarch’s own experience as a young player and struck him as a good omen for Karpov.  As for Polugaevsky’s hopes, Botvinnik doubted that he was sufficiently shrewd as a competitor, a quality necessary in match play and in particular, elimination events. . Spassky regarded him as a solid calculator who was less inclined to trust his intuition than would be the case with Karpov.
Karpov and Polugaevsky had met only twice before in classical tournament play. The games, from the 39th and 41st Soviet Championships were both uneventful draws. At five minute blitz, Karpov had recorded two wins over his opponent in a 1972 tournament. 
Botvinnik described how the match unfolded – “The start of the match was difficult; the first three games were drawn. At first Karpov did not appreciate where his opponent’s weaknesses were … Polugaevsky is strong when he knows what is to be done. When, on the other hand, the plan is not clear and the game drags out, Polugaevsky is weaker. After the fourth game, Karpov gained in confidence, and the match concluded after 8 games with the score of 3:0”. 
It appeared that Polugaevsky was not psychologically equipped to play the match, and lost his belief. In his own words - “Now, with the benefit of hindsight, I see very clearly the errors I made in preparing for the match. I devoted too much time to purely chess work and did not concentrate sufficiently on the need for correct psychological preparation”. According to Karpov, this was particularly so after games four and five – “It was the natural serenity of my behaviour that overwhelmed Polugaevsky … I was so calm and playing so easily”.  Nor was Karpov afraid to confront Polugaevsky’s own choice of openings and variations, a facet of the match which made Polugaevsky’s loss all the more painful.  Karpov was undoubtedly the winner of the theoretical duel, playing a variation of the Nimzo-Indian with Black and drawing each time, while meeting the Sicilian Najdorf with 6. Be2 as White, and winning three games out of four.  The latter prompted Polugaevsky to lament that “Karpov is just as dangerous with 6.Be2 as Fischer is with 6.Bc4”. >
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: refs:
< http://www6.chessclub.com/finger/Ra.... This was confirmed by Karpov in a conversation with the author of this report.
 Sicilian Love, Polugaevsky et al., (NIC, 1995), p.35
 Chess Life & Review, "The Karpov-Polugaevsky Match" Spassky, May 1974, p.315
 The Guinness Book Of Chess Grandmasters, Hartston (Guinness publ., 1996) p.160
 The Oxford Companion to Chess, Hooper & Whyld (Oxford, 1984), p.259
 Karpov’s Collected Games, Levy (Hale, 1975), p.27
 Anatoly Karpov: His Road to the World Championship’, Botvinnik (Pergamon, 1978) p. xii
 Anatoly Karpov: His Road to the World Championship’, Botvinnik (Pergamon, 1978) p. viii
 My Great Predecessors Vol. 5, Kasparov (Everyman, 2006), pp.239-240
 My Great Predecessors Vol. 5, Kasparov (Everyman, 2006), p.236
 CHESS, Ed. BH Wood (March 1974), p. 187
 Sicilian Love, Polugaevsky et al., (NIC, 1995), p.41>
|Sep-18-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> Wow :)
I will paste it in soon, then do some technicalities like making links (also in footnotes, give me some time!), and we take it from there!
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus> No rush. Only one sentence I'm not fond of after a quick re-read ...|
After (13), near the end, I'd prefer
<Karpov's mastery of the theoretical duel was emphatic, playing a variation of ...>
By the way, do you think that the July 1973 ratings are the most correct to use? - I just wondered if the January 1974 set were published before or during the match - they show Karpov at 2700 and Polu at 2630.
|Sep-18-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> I'll have a nap first and do some more this evening! The January 1974 list does not exist according to http://www.olimpbase.org/ (click on Elo lists). I've looked for it elsewhere but could not find it.|
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: <Tabanus>
Elo lists - Crikey, I'd never noticed those holes in Olimpbase's Elo records before.
I think my MS Notepad file was issued by FIDE around the time that they started showing ratings back to year 2000 on the player cards, as it conveniently includes all years up to 2000. Maybe it was the wrong format for Olimpbase to extract from (I can't say I've ever seen anything else on a Notepad file, ever!).
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: Aaah, forget that. Looking more closely, they are labelled as 1974/01 on my file, but appear to have the same data as the 1974/05 list elsewhere! Probably, they were intended to be January, but got delayed and issued late, and some people continued to regard them as notionally January.|
So the May '73 figures are definitely correct for the report, I would say.
|Sep-18-14|| ||Tabanus: <PMD> I'm done for today! And will look at it again tomorrow at work on my "wide" screen there. (And of course after your next comments.)|
1) I joined two sections together (two times). The sections will be only half as "thick" on the new wide computer screens. Let me know if you disagree and I will change it back.
2) I used Karpova's footnoting method because there has to be a space between a link and a footnote.
3) I slightly altered the text 2-3 places, can you spot it?
4) I'm impressed! This will be fine.
|Sep-18-14|| ||Paint My Dragon: Yes, those changes seem fine. Feel free to bring it fully in line with your normal format/style - it was always my intention just to provide a framework for further editing.|
One more suggestion of my own - second sentence should probably start -
Three <more> matches were held in parallel ...
|Sep-19-14|| ||Tabanus: <Paint My Dragon> Yes. And I made a few other minor changes and believe I'm done. Can you please read through one more time? If OK, I will present it in the Bistro. Please consider if you want it up for review there first or up for voting immediately!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 51 OF 51 ·
Advertise on Chessgames.com