Smyslov_Fan wrote on 04/12/10 at 16:52:47:


There were a good half-dozen or so Frenches in their 1974 ("de facto WC") match, though.  Korchnoi took on the IQP in the Tarrasch -- a line also favoured by Uhlmann and to this day Yusupov -- and drew every time.

Mortal Games wrote on 04/12/10 at 14:45:13:


Winning a WCh-match is not a matter of opinion, it's a fact. Neither the games nor the players have ever been chosen at random. The question if Rubinstein would have been strong enough to beat Lasker in a match say in 1912 is a matter of opinion. The fact that Kasparov did not manage to win one single game against Kramnik says a lot about the latter.
In it's core you are writing plain nonsense.

Or I could nominate my old friend Bart Smit (ELO 1600) as the greatest player of the French ever. He never got the chance to play for the title either, but played his favourite opening exclusively against 1.e4.

I really don't think you need any excuse to put Botvinnik ahead of Korchnoi in strength terms Multiple world champion for one thing! 

I do think you want Petrosian on the list too though. He was incredibly strong too of course and really did play some unique things in the French. Those weird mirror image KID style Winavers for instance. (b6, Bf8, Bb7, Nc6, o-o-o etc.).

mangler wrote on 04/11/10 at 17:24:13:



You make a good point about the ELO system starting in the middle of his career.  Thanks for pointing that out.   

But the fact remains that I find 354 rated games for Uhlmann on the Black side of the French, with a performance rating of 2459.  Quite a bit below, say, Korchnoi's performance rating on the Black side of the French over the same period.   

As for Uhlmann's results against the strongest players, if I sort by White rating, the first screen I get has 38 games, in which Uhlmann has 18 losses, 18 draws, and 2 wins for a performance rating of 2436.

Yes, ok, prior to the rating system, he beat Fischer (who in 1960 was still some ways away from the player he would become) and he has wins against the strong GMs you mention, but his record with the French against the top players -- even in that earlier period --doesn't appear to be any better or worse than his normal standard of play.   

So, overall, Uhlmann wasn't as strong as Botvinnik, Korchnoi or  Petrosian (three of the greatest ever) and Uhlmann's record in the French seems to be on par with his normal standard.  I may be doing something wrong, but he doesn't appear to be a 2500 who played the French like a 2700, he appears to be a 2500 who played the French like a 2500.   

Uhlmann's a great player and a great French player, but, if you're ranking the players based on strength of play alone, I just don't see ranking him above Botvinnik or  Korchnoi.  But if you're ranking based on other factors, then OK, you can make a better case for Uhlmann.

I need only 2 votes:

1. Botvinnik
2. Korchnoi

In my database, Botvinnik scores 65% from the Black side of the French.  Korchnoi scores 60% with a performance rating close to 2600 (which is more akin to 2700 today).   

Uhlmann deserves credit for playing the French often and popularizing it in his book, but if the idea is to pick the strongest French players, he doesn't make the cut.  His performance rating in the French is in the high 2400s and, at least according to my database, he never beat a player rated above 2600 from the Black side of the French. 

*bump*

Perhaps we could have a renewed vote since there are quite a few newer members.

I'll probably update the poll later.

Yes. There is nothing more entertaining than useless facts. So my hero played the French relatively more often than Alekhine and almost as often as Nimzovitsj ....

Thanks Mtel for your thoughts!

For everyone reading page two for the first time and wonders what the I-IV are about, please read the first post.  It's not too late to vote!