Almost world champions

With a world championship match fast approaching this might be a good time for this installment of the blog, about players who very nearly became World Champion but fell just short. For the upcoming match between champion Magnus Carlsen and challenger Ian Napomniachtchi, it's interesting that although I know of no one who believes Napomniachtchi is the stronger player, most titled players I've heard still think the challenger has a 35-40% chance of winning the match.

Historically, the player generally regarded as stronger rarely loses in matches for the world championship, and when it has happened (Alekhine over Capablanca in 1927; Kramnik over Kasparov in 2000) the new champion has usually proved himself worthy by superior play after attaining the title. The one exception was Max Euwe, who shockingly defeated Alekhine in 1935 but decisively lost a rematch two years later.

For the most part, players who have become World Champion did so because they were the best player at the time, even if their reign at the top was short. With the possible exception of Euwe, there really haven't been any World Champions who were not deserving of the title. There are a number of players who did not become champion but would have been worthy had they done so: Akiba Rubenstein, Paul Keres, David Bronstein, Victor Korchnoi, and arguably a few others.

What I wanted to write about were the championship matches where the challenger nearly won but did not, and never became champion. Keep in mind that I'm limiting this to the era of an "official" world championship dating from Steinitz defeating Zukertort in 1886. I'm also only talking about championships decided by match play, not by some of the tournaments FIDE used during the era of the split world championships from 1993-2006.

Carl Schlechter

Schlecter played a ten-game match against world champion Emanuel Lasker in 1910. After nine games Schlechter led 5-4 (Schlechter had won one game and the other eight games had been draws). Lasker won the last game to even the match on points 5-5. The match was drawn and Lasker retained the title.

There is some question as to what would have happened had the last game been drawn or even if Schlechter had won. There is a dispute over whether the match was supposed to be for the championship, and whether the rules of the match may have stipulated that the challenger had to win the match by two points in order to wrest away the title. In the end it's an academic exercise since Lasker won the last game and everyone accepted that in the event the match was drawn on points the champion would retain the title.

But let's assume that had the last game been drawn Schlechter would have been recognized as world champion. While Schlechter was one of the leading players of his day, it seems strange to think of him as world champion caliber, especially compared to many of his contemporaries. While many people still study the games of Akiba Rubenstein or Siegbert Tarrasch, you don't often hear anyone say, "you should check out Carl Schlechter's games, you'll learn a lot." World Chess Champion Carl Schlechter--it nearly happened.

David Bronstein

After a grueling qualifying process Bronstein faced Mikhail Botvinnik in a 24-game match for the world championship in 1951. After 22 games Bronstein led 11.5-10.5, but Botvinnik won the 23rd game and the 24th was drawn, producing a 12-12 drawn match. Again, the champion retained the title.

There were a number of Soviet players in that era who were about as good as Botvinnik, including Bronstein. Mikhail Tal and Vasily Smyslov managed to win the title from Botvinnik, only to lose it again in a mandatory rematch. Paul Keres was also at that level but never got a shot at the title.

Bronstein is primarily known today as the author of the tournament book Zurich 1953 (recent research indicates he may not have been), regarded as one of the best ever written. But he could have been world champion and would not have been out of place.

Victor Korchnoi

Korchnoi faced world Champion Anatoly Karpov twice in official world championship matches, in 1978 and 1981. He also faced him in a match for the right to face Bobby Fischer in 1975 when Fischer was still recognized as champion. Had Korchnoi won that match and Fischer refused to defend the title Korchnoi would have been declared champion instead of Karpov, so that match ended up being for the championship as well.

The closest Korchnoi came to beating Karpov was in 1978. The story of the 1978 match is enough for an article all its own and if you don't know anything about it you should look it up, but I won't go into all that in this blog post. The format was that the winner would be the first player to win six games; draws meant nothing. Karpov got off to an early 4-1 lead after 17 games and was on the brink of winning after 27 games, leading 5-2. Korchnoi then went on a tear and won three of the next four games to knot the match at 5-5 after 31 games. But Karpov won the 32nd game and the match, 6 wins to 5.

Korchnoi is considered possibly the strongest player ever not to attain the title of World Champion.

Peter Leko

The 2004 World Championship match saw champion Vladimir Kramnik face challenger Peter Leko. The run-up to the match had been controversial to begin with, as Garry Kasparov declined an invitation to participate in the Candidates Tournament in 2002 that determined the challenger. Kasparov, still the world's #1 ranked player, felt that he deserved a rematch with Kramnik based on his other tournament results. Leko won the tournament and the right to face Kramnik.

The match was 14 games. After 13 games Leko led with 2 wins to Kramnik's 1 with all other games drawn. With a draw in the final game Leko would have become world champion, but Kramnik won the last game and retained the title by drawing the match 7-7.

If Leko was to be compared to other almost-world champions he's more of a Carl Schlechter than a Victor Korchnoi. He was among the top players of his day, but no one believes he was ever the strongest player in the world and may not have even been in the top five or ten. And yet, like Schlechter, he was very nearly world champion.

Boris Gelfand

Gelfand faced world champion Viswanathan Anand in a 12-game match for the title in 2012. After 7 games Gelfand led 4-3 but Anand won the next game and after the 12 games the score was knotted at 6-6. Under the match format, the champion did not automatically retain the title in the event of a drawn match; instead a series of rapid games would be played. This gave Gelfand a second chance, but Anand won the series of four rapid games 2.5-1.5.

Sergey Karjakin

Another best-of-12 championship match was held in 2016 between champion Magnus Carlsen and challenger Sergey Karjakin. As with the Anand-Gelfand match four years earlier, the challenger actually scored the first win before the champion knotted the score and ended the "classical" portion of the match with the points level at 6-6. And as with the earlier match, rapid games were played to break the deadlock, and the champion won; Carlsen scored two wins and two draws in the four games.

Fabiano Caruana

The same format was used for the next world championship match held two years later in 2018. Carlsen was still champion and this time the challenger was world #2 ranked Fabiano Caruana. This time all 12 of the "classical" games were draws, the only time (to date) neither player has managed to win a game. The match again went to rapid games, where Carlsen won the first three games to take the match.

Conclusion

The increasing incidence of draws and the shorter length of modern matches mean that more and more world championship matches conclude the classical portion without a clear winner. Unlike the old days when the champion merely retained his title in the event of a drawn match, the challenger now gets a second chance in rapid games, and if those are also drawn perhaps in blitz play. While in my opinion this is an improvement it's still not ideal, since the title of World Champion should be decided by games at classical time controls rather than rapid or blitz games. I understand there are logistical problems with that, and you can end up with marathon matches where the title may be decided more by which player has more physical stamina than skill at chess, to say nothing of the fact that it's difficult to organize a spectator-friendly event when you don't know if the event will last three weeks or three months.

It's interesting to see how many players who otherwise are (or soon will be) largely forgotten came really close to immortality. Even a fairly weak player (by world champion standards, anyway) like Max Euwe will never be forgotten because he managed to become world champion for two years. The almost-world champions, by and large, will scarcely be mentioned in the annals of chess history. Bronstein and Korchnoi are the exceptions rather than the rule.