We Love Our Sponsors
Shout Box

Newest Members
Kennyboy, ChessIndia, IsauroLongo, WOWO, AdrainRose
2478 Registered Users
Forum Stats
2478 Members
10 Forums
2492 Topics
71181 Posts

Max Online: 351 @ 11/12/12 04:51 PM
Topic Options
#156818 - 09/25/10 03:13 PM Zurich 1953
Sam Hardwick, IV Moderator Offline
Math police

Registered: 11/27/03
Loc: Helsinki, Finland
I was thinking about buying Bronstein's book of the tournament, and happened to come across two surprising comments on the Internet. Firstly, an Amazon reviewer wrote:

Quote:
Bronstein, however, when asked about it noted that while he was responsible for the analysis, the text was largely written by someone named Vainstein. Mentioning that his feelings toward the Zurich tournament were mostly negative, he gave the impression that his estimate of the merits of this book were not quite so high as that of the reviewers.


Secondly, someone on chesspupil.com quoted a Spanish newspaper called ABC as having said

Quote:
However, just recently a new book has seen the light: "Secret notes", which David Bronstein co-wrote with Sergey Voronkov and only wanted it to be published after his death.

[...]

In the book, Bronstein also talks about how the Zurich 1953 candidates tournament was "fixed". He says that it was the most embarrasing moment of his chess career, (a tournament on which he wrote a memmorable book). There were 8 soviet GMs and US GM Samuel Reshevsky. The KGB monitored the event and instructed the players to arrange "rest draws" or even losses against the "chosen winner" (Smyslov) when the American GM was near the lead.
To avoid suspicions, the players even "prepared" the games before they were played.
A KGB agent even asked David: "Do you really think you've come here to play chess".
David Bronstein confesses that he never in his life did he forget the shame that he felt. "We were all puppets"...


Does anyone have thoughts on how these claims impact the historical record of the tournament and of the famous book?
_________________________
A straight line exists between me and the good thing. I have found the line and its direction is known to me.

Top
#156819 - 09/25/10 03:31 PM Re: Zurich 1953 [Re: Sam Hardwick, IV]
Guy Kerr Offline
Ninja

Registered: 01/14/03
Loc: A trailer park in Quebec
I haven't carefully looked at the book for years, but when I was resuming chess as an adult (mid-'90s), I really loved it.

FWIW, I've read somewhere that Najdorf (iirc) wrote a tournament book on Zurich 1953 that was strongly preferable to Bronstein's. Didn't follow up, though...

Regarding historical legacy, I don't think the "fix" claims seriously affect things, because similar allegations have been made for many events of that era. A lot of Soviet-era Candidate-type events must be viewed with a jaundiced eye, so to speak.

I don't have a problem with Vainshtein authoring a lot of the analysis. Over the years, that's been an issue with *many* books authored by top-name GMs. "The Chigorin Defense according to Morozevich" (mostly authored by V. Barsky) comes to mind, and some of the books in Kasparov's "Predecessors" series.

Top
#156834 - 09/27/10 12:35 PM Re: Zurich 1953 [Re: Guy Kerr]
Guy Kerr Offline
Ninja

Registered: 01/14/03
Loc: A trailer park in Quebec
Tangentially related (I already posted it elsewhere, but it deserves attention):

http://www.chessvibes.com/reviews/review-the-kgb-plays-chess/



Edited by Guy Kerr (09/27/10 12:35 PM)

Top


Who's Online
2 registered (littlefish, 1 invisible), 34 Guests
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Featured Member
Registered: 02/20/08
Latest Posts
This is so hard
by South Coast Kevin
05/17/13 04:08 AM
Can top level chess be without controversy?
by South Coast Kevin
05/17/13 03:57 AM
The Young Magnus Carlsen
by Mentat Advisor
05/11/13 10:40 AM
US Championship Underway
by supergrobi
05/05/13 05:37 PM