sssthepro wrote on 11/27/07 at 12:17:21:

Then, you must organize another poll. Keres was not a real challenger. It is true he participated at the 1948 tournament that had to decide about Alekhine's successor but I personnally consider this as a "better" candidates tournament than as a WCC match.

Ptero wrote on 02/23/07 at 06:13:16:



That is priceless.  It is one thing to insult children or young IMs but a fine GM is another matter. 

Viktor, Viktor, Viktor.... We will still miss him when he is gone.

Yes, that is a well-known clip by now.  Viktor, Viktor, Viktor. 

Sorry to change the subject briefly but did anyone else read or hear of Korchnoi's behavior towards Irina Krush in Gibraltar?  Not the first time Viktor the terrible has behaved like that and it won't be the last I suspect.      You have to scroll down a bit for that part of her report. 

http://beta.uschess.org/frontend/news_7_264.php

thibdb13 wrote on 02/21/07 at 06:56:15:


The 1929 match was played just after the Carlsbad tournament, Nimzo's finest achievement. Before Nimzo's results were not that impressive - only winning Berlin BSG, 1928. The San Remo 1930 and Bled 1931 tournament proved Alekhine's superiority without any doubt.
Along the same line one can argue, that after losing his title Capablanca did not prove to be the best of the rest: 2nd behind Bogo at Bad Kissingen 1928, 1st at Berlin Tageblatt 1928 (but Bogo was not there), shared 2nd at Carlsbad. Nobody could know, that Alekhine would crush Bogo in the 1929 match. Moreover - the first half of the match Bogo quite hold his own. I dare to say, that (sorry for all the Capa, Nimzo and Rubinstein fans) at the time negotiations began (end of 1928), Bogo deserved the 1929 match as least as much as the others. 
I did not know about that 1930 opportunity. Could you provide that link once again?
Still - we do not expect WCh's to defend their title every year - every three years is good enough. So if in 1929 Bogo was a good choice, who should it have been in 1932? Capa had retired.
I do not really sympathize with Alekhine for many reasons. But I think the well known reproaches of "he should have given Capa, Nimzo, Rubinstein a match" unjustified. Should he have played 4 matches in one year or something? My, Capa waited no less than 6 years before defending his title! But that's a fact the Capa fans systemetically ignore.

The problem is that Alekhine never gave a second chance to Capablanca and there was an opportunity for it in 1930 (see my link in another thread to a russian article). Nimzowich could also have been an interessing challenger but he was perhaps too old and, as Rubinstein, was not so good in raising money.

Keano wrote on 02/20/07 at 08:54:09:

I have no precise information about the arrangements of a Lasker-Rubinstein match but I could find some indications on the internet. Nearly all articles say that Lasker had very high financial expectations (e.g. Capablanca had to find 8000$ and to pay the travel and stay costs of Lasker). It seems Lasker was afraid of finishing as poor as Steinitz.
Nearly all articles say also that the match with Rubinstein could not be because of WW1.
It seems also that Lasker allways tried to find an opponent of which he was convinced he can beat him (Alekhine did the same but was less good in the choice of his opponents as Euwe demonstrated). And so, Lasker avoided a long time matches against Rubinstein and Capablanca.
About Rubinstein I could also find that Rubinstein was a sort of nerd before his time (no real social abilities, closed personnality, psychologically unstable) and so it was quite difficult for him to find fund raisers and to arrange a match.
For those who speak russian and french I have two interessant articles:
http://is.park.ru/doc.jsp?listno=2166834&listcd=2&listmd=12&listfile=pub&urn=602..., in russian and about the wcc matches that never did occur.
http://www.mjae.com/echecs-et-guerre-02.html, in french about what preceded the Capablanca-Lasker match and the atmosphere of that time.