On Nov 18, 5:00 pm, " wrote:

Also see: Did the Soviets Collude?: A Statistical Analysis of
Championship Chess 1940-64

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=905612

Taylor Kingston wrote:

Yes, a good article, adding some mathematical support to the
collusion thesis. It was very gratifying to see several ChessCafe.com
writers cited in it. Didn't see the supposedly seminal, scholar-
acclaimed Evans mentioned at all.

On Nov 18, 5:35 pm, artichoke wrote:

The paper is interesting but not conclusive. It says that if Soviets
colluded their clean sweep was a 75% probably event but if they did
not collude it was a 25% probably event. That isn't proof beyond a
reasonable doubt.

The paper is not intended as conclusive proof that there was
collusion. Its main point is to show, through probability models, that
collusion would in fact *_increase_* the Soviets' overall chance for
success. Some have thought otherwise; the paper deflates that argument.