After eight games, Korchnoi was up by a point, with two adjourned games yet to be finished. He had a significant advantage in one of them, so it was possible Huebner was looking at a two-point deficit with six games remaining in this best-of-16 match.

Still, it seemed inappropriate of Huebner just to abandon the match....especially since he did the same thing with Petrosian in 1971 ! In that case, he was down by only one point with three games to go.

And I suppose that if all one can do is play chess, if chess is one's only skill, then it becomes over-important.

<RE: Korchnoi - Hübner Candidates Final Match (1980)>

<Tanbanus> has a nice writeup describing some of the ordeals Huebner faced at the time which led to his withdrawal.

Korchnoi - Hübner Candidates Final (1980)

By the way, what is the rationale behind ever having *any* overlapping games conducted in a head-to-head match? That strikes me as just plain wrong since only two players are involved.

And having two adjournments while starting a third game?! That cannot possibly lead to better chess being played.

<RE: Huebner's Academic Career>

Knowning Huebner has an academic career is easy, but finding out exactly what is his field of study is fairly difficult. Well, it was for me, but eventually I found the following:

<This German grandmaster was born in 1948. The son of a classical philologist, Hübner grew up in Cologne and did his PhD in classical philology (1973). Even when Hübner had made his international breakthrough, he (at first) remained a semi-professional and in addition to chess he continued to devote himself to his academic work on the deciphering of ancient papyri. Hübner, who is reputed for having mastered more than a dozen languages, [...]>

http://shop.chessbase.com/en/author...

<Hübner was in the lead with 3.5:2.5 when in the seventh game he blundered away a rook. This disaster apparently considerably disturbed Hübner's equilibrium and he resigned the match on the score of 3.5:4.5 (the adjourned games nine and ten were never completed).>

I haven't heard of a case like you're suggesting, though. Where a match was won in the normal course of events with games adjourned. But let's imagine that with Fischer-Taimanov:

Suppose the score is 5-0 for Fischer. Game 6 is adjourned. The match isn't over yet, so they play Game 7. Fischer wins that Game, making the score 6-0.

So, what happens to Game 6? Do they just forget about it? Or do they finish it? If they finish it and Fischer wins, then the score is 7-0 in a Best of 10 Match, which shouldn't be possible.

I was thinking about this a little more, and tried to have some fun by carrying out the idea to the extreme, arriving at this harebrained scheme:

Phase 1: Opening Match

Suppose the match had <N> games (take N=10 or 20). Each game is played to 20 moves then adjourned. All <N> games must be played.

Of course games can end before adjournment, and are immediately scored.

Phase 2: Middlegame Match

Now pick a game at random, play resumes at move 21 and adjourns at 40. Continue picking games from the opening phase pool till empty.

Again, all games that make it to move 40 are adjourned for the next phase.

Phase 3: Endgame Match

Same idea, resume play for moves 41 to 60, etc. Again, pick a game at random from the pool.

First to win 6 (or 10, or ... ??) is the winner.

Modifications to the idea is to allow a panel of judges to select the game to resume during each phase after the opening seeding.

Or go for decisive play. Have a engine pick best eval for one player, then the other, alternating.

So, he's went back to lollygag with a bunch of reeds, not a bunch of tweeds.>

The part about his academics is not 100% accurate.

In "Elements of an Autobiography" Huebner indirectly presents himself by inviting the reader to become acquainted with his thoughts on certain topics... (The) book contains 25 essays, which have developed according to Huebner over a period of 40 years. Some of these essays have already been published elsewhere, others are new.