The December 2005 issue of Chess Life came in the mail yesterday, and one bit of information grabbed my attention in a powerful way.
Was it a brilliant opening idea, a great game, or a beautiful problem? Was it Jon Jacobs' latest contribution, or perhaps a book review? While some of the above did grab my attention, the correct answer is none of the above; rather, it was a trivia question from Jacobs Petition signatory GM Andy Soltis! Here was the question (from page 30):
FIDE, the world chess federation, has made exceptions to add certain players to compete in Interzonals, most famously Bobby Fischer in 1970. But whose request to be added to the 1956 Candidates tournament was veoted by one of the seeded players?
(a) Reuben Fine (b) Sammy Reshevsky (c) Max Euwe (d) Mikhail Botvinnik
A real poser, that one. Of course, it's not Botvinnik, as Botvinnik was the player the winner would go on to meet for the former's world championship title. The other three choices are interesting, though. Regarding Reshevsky, he, along with Bronstein and Keres, tied for second place in the 1953 Candidates' event, two points behind Smyslov. Moving forward to the next cycle, both Keres and Bronstein qualified for the 1956 Candidates by competing in the 1955 Interzonal in Gothenburg; neither received a free pass. Thus I can certainly see why they'd protest the idea that Reshevsky enjoy direct seeding into the Candidates, but what's not clear is how Reshevsky, who didn't even compete in the 1955 Interzonal, could make such a proposal with a straight face.
That leaves Fine and Euwe. Fine had retired from chess at his peak, forsaking the opportunity to play in the 1948 match-tournament for the World Championship. Maybe in 1956 he felt like he needed to scratch that final chess itch, to see if he could complete the climb to the summit. Euwe too is an interesting choice. He did not have to qualify for the 1953 Candidates event, so I can see his hoping for a second direct entry, and his prospective opponents thinking one free pass was enough.
So which is it, Euwe or Fine? Answer: Botvinnik! Incredibly, he wanted to use the event as part of his warm-up for the next year's title match. (Botvinnik's tournament appearances during his championship years were rare, as he spent most of his time between world championship matches working as an engineer.) The proposal beggars belief, for at least two reasons:
First, it would be semi-scandalous if he lost such an event: how would the player (or worse, players!) who came ahead of him not be viewed as the real world champion going into the match? (Conversely, if Botvinnik won, why should he have to bother with the match the next year?) And second, either Botvinnik was incredibly naive or he was, shall we say, ethically challenged in even proposing such an idea. To take just the obvious, worst-case scenario, there's the danger that he could "accidentally" lose to the opponent he'd rather face (e.g. Keres) while fighting his hardest against his main rival (Smyslov). The event was a double round-robin and Smyslov won by a point and a half against Keres, so the disaster suggested by this scenario would have been a real possibility.
To be fair, there may have been some provision in the proposal for his score not to count. Even so, his suggestion is odd and still unfair to his opponents, who are then faced with a lousy choice. Either they show up but don't try, making the game a farce (and of no training value for Botvinnik), or put forth a real effort - for no competitive gain - at the cost of time, energy, and theoretical ammunition.
So the idea is just nuts, but despite that - or more likely, because of it! - it's a pity for us, years later, that it didn't happen. It would have been one of the all-time greatest traffic accidents in chess history, no matter what happened.