A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 5th 17, 08:04 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
EJAY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 475
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

I have always wondered why Smyslov (and Tal for that matter) were not granted re matches as defeated World Champions?
  #2  
Old May 6th 17, 09:19 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Offramp
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,152
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

On Friday, 5 May 2017 20:04:28 UTC+1, EJAY wrote:
I have always wondered why Smyslov (and Tal for that matter) were not granted re matches as defeated World Champions?


I agree it was very unfair. Perhaps FIDÉ thought that it might start a chain of WC matches. I.e. match-rematch-rematch-rematch ... and the whole 3-year cycle idea would have been disrupted.

Only two people gained from the rematch rule: Botvinnik (twice) and Karpov. Karpov did not win his rematch.

If the rematch rule had been in existence 1966 to 1977 (which it wasn't), would Fischer have been able to ask for a rematch in 1976?
  #3  
Old May 16th 17, 12:43 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
The Horny Goat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

On Sun, 14 May 2017 16:55:08 +0200 (CEST), Eugene Delmar's Ghost
wrote:

I have always wondered why Smyslov (and Tal for that matter) were not granted re matches as defeated World Champions?


Because Botvinnik was a favorite of the Communist Party and they
had an investment in keeping him as the long reigning World
Champion.


True - but then you know there's a dysfunctional system when no world
championship candidate between Bogolyubov and Spassky loses a match.

Sure there was WW2 in between but that's 33 years! (1933 - 1966)
  #4  
Old May 16th 17, 03:43 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Offramp
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,152
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 00:44:04 UTC+1, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Sun, 14 May 2017 16:55:08 +0200 (CEST), Eugene Delmar's Ghost
wrote:

I have always wondered why Smyslov (and Tal for that matter) were not granted re matches as defeated World Champions?


Because Botvinnik was a favorite of the Communist Party and they
had an investment in keeping him as the long reigning World
Champion.


True - but then you know there's a dysfunctional system when no world
championship candidate between Bogolyubov and Spassky loses a match.

Sure there was WW2 in between but that's 33 years! (1933 - 1966)


Well said. You taught that idiot a lesson.
  #5  
Old May 26th 17, 10:53 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
William Hyde
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 381
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 3:04:28 PM UTC-4, EJAY wrote:
I have always wondered why Smyslov (and Tal for that matter) were not granted re matches as defeated World Champions?


The tradition that a defeated champion is entitled to a rematch goes back to the 1800s, and is not confined to chess. The idea being that one win over the champion is not enough to establish a clear superiority. Which probably makes more sense in something like boxing than in chess with its (then) lengthy world championship matches.

But if the champion wins the match, there is no re-rematch unless circumstances change. As the original challenger didn't hold on to the title, it was thought to be time to give someone else a shot.

In the days when the title was the personal property of the champion the latter could not be forced to give a rematch, so it happened only twice, with Lasker-Steinitz and Alekhine-Euwe. It was definitely not a must.

Lasker did not want a rematch after losing to Capablanca. Alekhine was determined to avoid giving Capablanca a rematch, and some sources say Capa wasn't that interested in one, so there was a lot of posturing.

Under Fide championship matches occurred every three years, and the rematch idea made (in my opinion, anyway) little sense. It was pulled (from Botvinnik let us note) before the 1963 match. A vestige of it remained as the defeated champion was seeded into the next Candidates. But so is the defeated challenger, so it's at least fair in that sense. For no sane reason, it was brought back in Karpov's day.

William Hyde
  #6  
Old May 27th 17, 06:56 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Offramp
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,152
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

On Friday, 26 May 2017 22:53:42 UTC+1, William Hyde wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 3:04:28 PM UTC-4, EJAY wrote:
I have always wondered why Smyslov (and Tal for that matter) were not granted re matches as defeated World Champions?


The tradition that a defeated champion is entitled to a rematch goes back to the 1800s, and is not confined to chess. The idea being that one win over the champion is not enough to establish a clear superiority. Which probably makes more sense in something like boxing than in chess with its (then) lengthy world championship matches.

But if the champion wins the match, there is no re-rematch unless circumstances change. As the original challenger didn't hold on to the title, it was thought to be time to give someone else a shot.

In the days when the title was the personal property of the champion the latter could not be forced to give a rematch, so it happened only twice, with Lasker-Steinitz and Alekhine-Euwe. It was definitely not a must.

Lasker did not want a rematch after losing to Capablanca. Alekhine was determined to avoid giving Capablanca a rematch, and some sources say Capa wasn't that interested in one, so there was a lot of posturing.

Under Fide championship matches occurred every three years, and the rematch idea made (in my opinion, anyway) little sense. It was pulled (from Botvinnik let us note) before the 1963 match. A vestige of it remained as the defeated champion was seeded into the next Candidates. But so is the defeated challenger, so it's at least fair in that sense. For no sane reason, it was brought back in Karpov's day.

William Hyde


That's a good post.

In 1972 chess was booming, but there was no WC match for 6 years. I think FIDÉ may have bought back rematches to increase the number of those matches. In the end Karpov did get one rematch, in 1986.
When Kasparov and Short played in 1993 I do not know of there was a rematch clause. It's possible that Kasparov didn't even think of one, knowing tha the match was going to be easy.
  #7  
Old May 27th 17, 07:52 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

Wm Hyde wrote

"In the days when the title was the personal property of the champion the latter could not be forced to give a rematch, so it happened only twice, with Lasker-Steinitz and Alekhine-Euwe. It was definitely not a must. "

It is interesting that post WWII it was Euwe who proposed that Alekhine should be re-admitted to the world championship title, against the wishes of the international community. And upon Alekhine's death Euwe declined the title [based on his showing at Groningen 1946] and made a 5 player play-off.

In terms of the current conversation in this thread I thought this was an item of interest from WIKI and which saw a definitive divide between work titleist and ownership of that title:—

From 1970 (at age 69) until 1978, he [EUWE] was president of the FIDE. As president, Euwe usually did what he considered morally right rather than what was politically expedient. On several occasions this brought him into conflict with the USSR Chess Federation, which thought it had the right to dominate matters because it contributed a very large share of FIDE's budget and Soviet players dominated the world rankings – in effect they treated chess as an extension of the Cold War. These conflicts included:

The events leading up to Bobby Fischer's participation in the World Chess Championship 1972 match against Boris Spassky, which led to Fischer's becoming the first non-Soviet champion since World War II. Euwe thought it important for the health and reputation of the game that Fischer should have the opportunity to challenge for the title as soon as possible and interpreted the rules very flexibly to enable Fischer to play in the 1970 Interzonal Tournament, which he won by a commanding score.

Phil Innes
  #8  
Old May 27th 17, 07:54 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question


It is interesting that post WWII it was Euwe who proposed that Alekhine should be re-admitted to the world championship title, against the wishes of the international community.


I missed mentioning Ewe's comment on being asked why.

"Let my humanity be my revenge," he said.

Phil Innes
  #9  
Old June 1st 17, 05:02 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
EJAY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 475
Default Smyslov Botvinnik rematch question

That is the best explanation I have heard. Thank you for the post.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Greatest old man champion is? Botvinnik? Steinitz? Lasker?Smyslov? Korchnoi? Anand?! raylopez99 rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 7 July 16th 10 06:40 AM
A Capa Smyslov Connection sd rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 17 July 15th 10 04:10 AM
Gregory Alexander's Latest "Confidential Information" Smear Brian Lafferty rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 28 February 15th 08 03:57 AM
Mikhail Botvinnik - Vassily Smyslov Someon rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 0 August 2nd 07 09:56 PM
Mikhail Botvinnik - Vassily Smyslov Someon rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 August 2nd 07 09:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.