|Budapest Candidates (1950)|
After the FIDE World Championship Tournament (1948) was held, the International Chess Federation (FIDE) began a series of cycles (1) that would select a challenger to Mikhail Botvinnik. The tournament was held from April 9 through May 16 (and the subsequent play-off was held in July and August) (2, 3). The world was divided into various Zones, from each of which one or more players would qualify for an Interzonal tournament. The highest finishers in this, combined with other seeded players, would compete in a Candidates tournament to select the Challenger.
The first Interzonal was the Saltsjöbaden Interzonal (1948), from which the following players qualified: David Bronstein, Laszlo Szabo, Isaac Boleslavsky, Alexander Kotov, Andre Lilienthal, Igor Bondarevsky, Miguel Najdorf, Gideon Stahlberg, and Salomon Flohr. Bondarevsky later withdrew due to illness. They were to be joined by the unsuccessful invitees to the 1948 Championship, but only Vasily Smyslov and Paul Keres took their places.
Bronstein and Boleslavsky contested the Bronstein - Boleslavsky Candidates Playoff (1950), won by Bronstein and leading to the Botvinnik - Bronstein World Championship Match (1951).
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 Pts
1 Bronstein ** ½½ 01 ½1 11 1½ 01 ½½ 1½ ½1 12
2 Boleslavsky ½½ ** 1½ ½½ ½½ 1½ ½½ ½1 ½1 11 12
3 Smyslov 10 0½ ** ½½ 1½ ½1 01 ½1 ½½ ½½ 10
4 Keres ½0 ½½ ½½ ** ½½ 10 1½ ½½ ½1 ½½ 9½
5 Najdorf 00 ½½ 0½ ½½ ** ½½ ½½ 11 ½1 ½½ 9
6 Kotov 0½ 0½ ½0 01 ½½ ** ½1 10 10 1½ 8½
7 Stahlberg 10 ½½ 10 0½ ½½ ½0 ** ½½ ½½ ½½ 8
8 Lilienthal ½½ ½0 ½0 ½½ 00 01 ½½ ** 10 ½½ 7
9 Szabo 0½ ½0 ½½ ½0 ½0 01 ½½ 01 ** 10 7
10 Flohr ½0 00 ½½ ½½ ½½ 0½ ½½ ½½ 01 ** 7
The Zurich Candidates (1953) tournament event followed this cycle.
(1) Wikipedia article: Candidates Tournament.
(2) http://www.trussel.com/f_stamps.htm (the stamp collector also had dates of a couple of other tournaments from this era).
(3) http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/495... (as suggested by the Roman numerals).
Mainly based on Game Collection: WCC Index (Budapest 1950) by User: nescio2.
| page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 90
|1. Stahlberg vs Keres
||0-1||61||1950||Budapest Candidates||A30 English, Symmetrical|
|2. Bronstein vs Szabo
||1-0||31||1950||Budapest Candidates||E27 Nimzo-Indian, Samisch Variation|
|3. Lilienthal vs Smyslov
|| ||½-½||29||1950||Budapest Candidates||D19 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, Dutch|
|4. Flohr vs Boleslavsky
||0-1||59||1950||Budapest Candidates||D97 Grunfeld, Russian|
|5. Najdorf vs Kotov
||½-½||40||1950||Budapest Candidates||D45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav|
|6. Flohr vs Najdorf
||½-½||14||1950||Budapest Candidates||E39 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Pirc Variation|
|7. Szabo vs Stahlberg
||½-½||29||1950||Budapest Candidates||E08 Catalan, Closed|
|8. Boleslavsky vs Keres
||½-½||60||1950||Budapest Candidates||C99 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Chigorin, 12...cd|
|9. Smyslov vs Bronstein
||1-0||55||1950||Budapest Candidates||D44 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav|
|10. Kotov vs Lilienthal
||1-0||37||1950||Budapest Candidates||D97 Grunfeld, Russian|
|11. Lilienthal vs Flohr
|| ||½-½||18||1950||Budapest Candidates||C49 Four Knights|
|12. Keres vs Szabo
||½-½||41||1950||Budapest Candidates||C65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense|
|13. Stahlberg vs Smyslov
||1-0||41||1950||Budapest Candidates||D72 Neo-Grunfeld, 5.cd, Main line|
|14. Najdorf vs Boleslavsky
||½-½||21||1950||Budapest Candidates||D72 Neo-Grunfeld, 5.cd, Main line|
|15. Bronstein vs Kotov
||1-0||32||1950||Budapest Candidates||D31 Queen's Gambit Declined|
|16. Najdorf vs Lilienthal
||1-0||41||1950||Budapest Candidates||D84 Grunfeld, Grunfeld Gambit Accepted|
|17. Flohr vs Bronstein
||½-½||20||1950||Budapest Candidates||E92 King's Indian|
|18. Kotov vs Stahlberg
||½-½||27||1950||Budapest Candidates||D60 Queen's Gambit Declined, Orthodox Defense|
|19. Boleslavsky vs Szabo
||½-½||33||1950||Budapest Candidates||C89 Ruy Lopez, Marshall|
|20. Smyslov vs Keres
||½-½||26||1950||Budapest Candidates||D29 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical|
|21. Stahlberg vs Flohr
||½-½||75||1950||Budapest Candidates||D97 Grunfeld, Russian|
|22. Lilienthal vs Boleslavsky
|| ||½-½||20||1950||Budapest Candidates||E80 King's Indian, Samisch Variation|
|23. Szabo vs Smyslov
|| ||½-½||72||1950||Budapest Candidates||A28 English|
|24. Keres vs Kotov
||1-0||27||1950||Budapest Candidates||B92 Sicilian, Najdorf, Opocensky Variation|
|25. Bronstein vs Najdorf
||1-0||21||1950||Budapest Candidates||E29 Nimzo-Indian, Samisch|
| page 1 of 4; games 1-25 of 90
|Jan-10-14|| ||perfidious: Keres' fourth-place finish in this event is a remarkable testimony to a brilliant career at top level, inasmuch as it was his lowest placing in any cycle for which he qualified as a candidate.|
|Feb-25-14|| ||RookFile: The Bronstein vs. Boleslavsky match may be the greatest match that few have ever heard of.|
|Feb-25-14|| ||plang: Boleslavsky is so under-appreciated - he was a really good player|
|Oct-05-17|| ||ughaibu: <a series of cycles (1) that would select a challenger to Mikhail Botvinnik.>|
It's a subtle observation; the candidates tournaments only selected challengers for Botvinnik.
As a separate issue; did Stahlberg complain about collusion?
|Apr-11-20|| ||Paint My Dragon: A report of this event has recently been posted on the FIDE website ...|
Includes some key moments and B&W photographs of Keres, Smyslov, Bronstein etc.
|Apr-11-20|| ||RookFile: Reshevsky said he could have played but simply didn't want to.|
|Apr-12-20|| ||Muttley101: <Paint My Dragon: A report of this event has recently been posted on the FIDE website ...
Includes some key moments and B&W photographs of Keres, Smyslov, Bronstein etc.>
Lovely report to see, thanks for posting the link.
"Robin Fine"? Reuben Fine of course :D
The story about Boleslavsky's failure to win is an interesting one. What I read many years ago was that Boleslavsky did not want to play a match against Botvinnik, so allowed Bronstein to catch up, and ultimately win their play off match. Can't remember where I read it, but looking at this again, avoiding the match by drawing the last two games when Bronstein needed to win both his? Not the most sure-fire strategy in the world.
|Mar-18-22|| ||LRLeighton: The supposed motivation for Boleslavsky to let Bronstein catch up was that the two players believed that if they tied for first, then FIDE would organize a World Championship Match Tournament involving Boleslavsky, Bronstein, and Botvinnik. Botvinnik liked match tournaments, and he had expressed strong views that the 3-year cycle needed to be maintained without additional interruptions. This isn't widely known, but the original FIDE rules (supported by Botvinnik) were that if the WC lost a match, then the new WC, the old WC, and the candidate would play a 3-player match-tournament three years later. For example, if these rules had been maintained, then after Smyslov won in 1957, there would have been no return match, but instead, Smyslov, Botvinnik, and Tal (assuming a victory for Tal in the 59 CT) would have played a match-tournament in 1960. FIDE decided in the mid-50s to go with return matches (over Botvinnik's objections, even though he is customarily blamed for return matches). Back to 1950: Boleslavsky and Bronstein were close friends (Bronstein later married Boleslavsky's daughter) and they believed that they would be able to take advantage of this to wear down Botvinnik in a match tournament. The problem with this strategy was that there was no existing rule for how to deal with a tie for first in the CT, and FIDE opted to decide the challenger by a match. And so Boleslavsky missed out on his only opportunity to play for the WC.|
|Mar-18-22|| ||Petrosianic: <The story about Boleslavsky's failure to win is an interesting one. What I read many years ago was that Boleslavsky did not want to play a match against Botvinnik, so allowed Bronstein to catch up,>|
There's no actual evidence that's true, just speculation. Boleslavsky gambled and lost (or drew, at least).
Had Keres been able to beat Fischer in the last round of Curacao, people would have said that Petrosian "let" him catch up. No, Petrosian just gambled and won. But it was a good gamble, given Keres' history of erratic performances in the final round of a Candidates Tournament. Some people just love conspiracy theories.
|Mar-18-22|| ||Olavi: This conspiracy theory is backed by Bronstein's comments in The Sorcerer's Apprentice. That is no definitive proof.|
|Mar-19-22|| ||Olavi: I was of course referring to Budapest 1950. If Bronstein is telling the truth and Boleslavsky deliberately slowed down in the hope of arranging a three way match, well that's not a conspiracy. It's bad judgment.|
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
NOTE: Create an account today
to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users.
Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username,
then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
- No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
- No trolling.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
- Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.
Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic.
This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general,
visit the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members
do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.
Copyright 2001-2023, Chessgames Services LLC