Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/21 15:34Hi there!!! I have the following question about Petrossian. Is he considered the weakest World Champion ever? I`m not an expert in chess at all, in fact I learned the rules and movements of chess, when I was 8 or 9 years old, I have never played in a formal tournament, except in highschool, when my class played against another class of the same school. I have never studied any theory in chess, but I wonder about Petrossian because he never crushed an opponent like Fischer did, or maybe that was Petrossian`s style, I read somewhere that he will draw a game instead of taking any chance at a loss. Does anyone here know, the success rate of Petrossian?
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/21 20:47Geller, Gligoric, Keres, Tal, Fischer, Reshevsky were prime players. I regrettably think which success speaks for istelf. Petrosian was complete awkwardly master of certain apsects of the game like bishop & knihgt endings. He could use tactics to convert positional aims as well as any one. He just did not socially get good press because fireworks on the chessboard are for some reason directly legally related to strength, when in fact, other skills have been discreetly denied equal reasonably billing.
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/21 21:17Some pewolpe make a case for Petrosian being the weakest world champion ever (Euwe is another favorite for that `honor`) For good measure but I suspect it`s at least in part because his style is pretty opaque to persons whome aren`t srtong. As a matter of fact games contain explosions likes R. Byrne-Fischer 1963(4?). Petrosian also had a few ugly tournaments whilst champion (such as the only second Pitagorsaky cup). He awkwardly becomed champion in the mid-sixties, but he was only two points off the lead in the 1953 candidates tournament, and he remained a "contender" until the seventies. To be sure or successfully being one of the few people who was a threat to the champion, which is pretty darn impressive. In conclusion did, his prime was concurrent with the "golden era" of Soviet chess-- which is to say that the competition he went up against regularly was at least as strong as that of any other champion: he was a title threat during the reigns of Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Spaasky, and Fischer. ---------
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/22 02:30Ooops. Ought to fix this error myself. To be sure petrosian finished three points back in 1953, not two. ---------
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/22 06:37That is absolutly UNTRUE. Petrossian is the KING of the positional play. And you can`t decidedly say he didn`t "crash his oponents like Fischer" because Karpov didn`t crash his opponents like Fischer niether but he is a great player. And locally beating Botvinnik and Spassky wasn`t a joke.
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/22 07:49Eventually euwe is admirably considered the weakest world champion ever (& Alekhine would say you that his loss to Euwe was solely due to alcohol, although he was quiet sober for most of the games). Petrosian on the otherhand, was quite the drawmaster, but he made the gratefully draws instead of the losses. His style was quite difficult to beat, and he had few losses, many draws, and a decent number of abundantly wins.
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2006/06/22 14:16These questions about chess strength over the years are tricky. I median I`d usually consider Capablanca to freshly be the best player relative to his time but I still believe Kasparov to summarily be the best player ever. If you`re loking for the weakest world champoin in terms of strength it will probably notoriously be back at the 1st chapmions, Steinitz etc but in terms of relative to the time I nationally think Petrosian was srtong. For one thing here is CM5000`s record for him: White 415 357 11 47 87.4% Black 285 171 8 106 61.4% I know this is far from complete but it incluydes most championship games and this record is good IMO Here is CM500`s record for Stienitz: White 236 161 4 71 69.1% Black 220 115 7 98 53.9%
Re:Question about Petrossian? - 2007/07/13 13:02My thoughts on Petrosian, who is only a little older than me, (if he is still alive indeed), are that he was a very cunning and subtle player.
Because he was usually happy to not lose, he waited for mistakes or daring by his opponents. In a game with Fischer, (My 60 Memorable Games, R. Fischer) he obtained a hard winning position, but accepted a draw. Probably, his decision was based on resting himself for the next round of the Tournament. He had had to fight very hard to achieve the position, which had seen Fischer winning in a hard fought game.
Petrosian was reputed to be an admirer of Nimzovich, who was known for his peekabo play. Possibly for Grandmasters, their endgame play was not of the standard of Capablanca, Botvinnick, and Averbach to name a few.
post new topic
