In the run up to 1975, did Korchnoi beat Petrosian? In the later candidates, did he beat either Petrosian or Spassky?

Just look at how useful Larsen’s win at Palma 1970,
and Spassky’s win a Siegen 1970, were in the world championship cycle.

<They hold up Korchnoi as somebody that would have been competitive against Fischer in a match>

Classic “lawyer” tactics.
When Larsen goes 0-6, they say Korchoni would have been better.

Had Korchnoi gone 0-6, Larsen would have been better.

Seriously, make an effort.>

Korchnoi had his best result in 1978, drawing even with 5 wins apiece against Karpov in the World Championship match that year. But he went on to lose the very next game, and thus lost the match, at 5 to 6. Against Karpov who was very strong at the time but not quite at his peak

So a year earlier one must surmise that the Australian reporter was quite correct to say "Korchnoi, at 46, seems to be at the peak of his powers."

In that case, the result of the match between Fischer and Korchnoi in 1977, had it been played, would have been telling.

And <ughaibu> asks "In the run up to 1975, did Korchnoi beat Petrosian? In the later candidates, did he beat either Petrosian or Spassky?"

Both Petrosian and Spassky had already peaked years earlier, and began to decline in the 1970s. More accurately, Petrosian began to decline in the 1960s and Spassky round about 1971 or 72.

Certainly both were weaker in the time period you reference, when Korchnoi prevailed.

On the way to becoming World Champion, when Petrosian and Spassky were definitely stronger than they were in 1975, Fischer absolutely blitzed them both.

Fischer was accustomed to taking off years at a time, and coming back stronger than ever after the layoff from play.

Both were exceptional players.

Korchnoi's had much more match experience and had taken part in and won more matches than Fischer's 4.

He battled his way though qualifying matches to play (in effect) 3 world title matches. It was just his bad luck that he met Karpov in each one.

It could have been 4 world title matches, Korchnoi had been awarded a win by default in his 1983 candidates match v Kasparov because the Soviets would not let Kasparov fly to Pasadena. The match was his, FIDE awarded the match to him. All Korchnoi had to do was claim it. London offered to hold it, Kochnoi accepted and rest is history.

Anything is possible.

< In order to assess Korchnoi's chances in a match against Fischer you have to consider his results in the relevant period. >

Korchnoi's had much more match experience and had taken part in and won more matches than Fischer's 4.>

Fischer played more than 4 matches in his career, first of all.

Secondly, you really give the match edge to Korchnoi? Seriously?

Even if Korchnoi had played more matches than Fischer by 1997, he never played them as well as Fischer did!

If I have to choose between someone who played X number of matches and absolutely obliterated most of those opponents, or someone who played 2X matches and has an OK record in those matches, clearly the guy who destroys opponents is the better match player and he is my choice.

Sorry I was talking World Championship and candidates matches. Should have made that clear.

I thought I said the result would be close, not Korchnoi would win.

A lot does depend on when the match takes place. 1970-72 and Fischer was surpreme also Korchnoi though playing some rock solid chess and good chess (unlike Taimanov and 'no draws for me' Larsen) was pondering on a difficult and dangerous decision - defection. So Fischer.

1978. Korchnoi is a still Korchnoi winning his candidate matches and comes within one game of being World Champion. (same as 1974) but Bobby Fischer...

Ok, pick any 10 year period you want. Korchnoi wins a few appetizer matches, then loses against a tough guy. This somehow makes him a match for Fischer?>

I'm going to do five year periods, with some adjustments.

1955-60: Korchnoi
1960-65: Fischer
1965-70: Toss-up
1970-72: Fischer
1973-2008: Korchnoi (by forfeit)

More seriously, recently I read a post (which now I can't find) that said someone asked Korchnoi (during his match with Mecking in Augusta) what would happen if he played a match with Fischer. He said he'd lose 6 1/2 to 4 1/2.

It was 1974, so (i) it was still realistic to think Fischer would play again (ii) Korchnoi hadn't yet defected and dedicated his life to feuding with Karpov and the USSR. So, I'm inclined to take that as a serious evaluation. He didn't think he was Fischer's equal, obviously, but he thought he could give Fischer a tough match.

My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that if they'd met in the 1971 candidates the score would have been something like Fischer-Petrosian. Maybe even 6 1/2 - 3 1/2 if Korchnoi could have avoided collapsing at the end as Petrosian clearly did. But I don't see Korchnoi doing better than that.

Well, almost. He came within one game of tying that one, not one game of winning.

And if Korchnoi had tied the match....what then?

Karpov does not win the match automatically under tthe World Champion has draw odds rule. He was not yet World Champion.

In the 74 final it was five wins or who scored the most wins over 24 games. Karpov got 3-2 after 24 games.

Nor should we consider Korchnoi not crushing candidate opponents as a benchmark.

It was also impossible for Korchnoi to do a Fischer and win 6-0 In these candidates it was first to score 4 wins.

He was leading Petrosian 3 wins to 1 after 5 games when Petrosian resigned the match.

After 5 games in the Fischer - Petrosian match it tied at one win each. Then came the collapse.

I do recall that Korchnoi quote (not looked for it) and there is no doubt at all Korchnoi rated Fischer very highly. (though there is that quote about the Fischer clock and his only recent contribution to chess. Maybe said more in sadness than in any other context.)

I think in 1978 it would have been close. Perhaps going against Korchnoi is he might not have been able to build up the reported intense dislike he feels he needed to win critical matches.

Certainly two of the most extraordinary personalities ever to grace the game. It is a pity they met on relatively rare occasions.

I see others were mourning the fact these two never met in a match.

1973-2008: Korchnoi (by forfeit)>

Uh, the question was, if they played who would win?

And your answer is, Fischer wouldn't play? Do you realize that the question is not "Would Fischer play?"

And your answer is, Fischer wouldn't play? Do you realize that the question is not "Would Fischer play?">

It's kind of an impossible question, is it not? Fischer would NOT play if he didn't feel ready, and he didn't feel ready. If I said Korchnoi would win because Fischer wouldn't be prepared for the match, a) it wouldn't be a fair test, and b) you would rightly point out that he would not have played until he was.

At least, to say that Korchnoi understood Fischer's character isn't completely out of place.

Conclusion? Korchnoi was stronger than Fischer and would win a match.

I'm not too sure that is how the thinking is running - but I like the logic of it. I can see where you are coming from.

I'll jump in with...

Korchnoi has beaten both Karpov and Kasparov. Fischer never - so Korchnoi would win the match.

However Fischer beat Rueben Fine in a skittles game. Korchnoi never.

If it was skittles match Fischer would win!

I like this train of thought.

Rueben Fine has never beaten me so in theory I could beat Fischer and Korchnoi. (in a skittles match)

I'll leave it there with with me now convinced I'm skittles match champion of the world.

I'm off to tell my mum, she will be so proud of me.

-----

Next stop update my profile to tell the world I'm the son of the world champion.

All joking aside. This position. (Black to move.)

click for larger view

Anybody got a tip-top computer what does it suggest as the best move for Black. Please no analysis at all. Just what it considers is the best move for Black.

Stockfish 5 suggests "resigns" as Black's best move... If you want to play on, Qd1+ comes out as the best of a very bad bunch.