English Chess Forum

How many of these have there been? Just immediately I can only think of Reshevsky and Grischuk, but there must have been others, surely?

(For the purposes of this discussion let's restrict the definition of "world class" to players who have competed in a Candidates Tournament, allowing whatever criteria you may prefer when referring to the pre-Botvinnik era.)

I'm sure the clocks used to complain about Korchnoi, but he may have been just below the addiction threshold?

Also was he as prone to time-trouble earlier on his his career as he was when he played his world championship matches? (I don't know the answer to that question.)

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:57 pm

How many of these have there been? Just immediately I can only think of Reshevsky and Grischuk, but there must have been others, surely?

In the adjournment era, didn't every player have this style to some extent? Fischer perhaps not. They would have a long think once they had left the comfort zone of known openings and perhaps leave themselves just minutes to get from move 25/30 to move 40. Once at move 40. they may only have had to find one more move before the game was paused for analysis.

In British chess, Louis De Veauce was one of the more extreme examples. I only played him once, but I found it difficult. You have long periods of boredom during the early middle game when you wonder what on earth he is thinking about, followed by facing a Jack Rudd style speed monster from about move 20.

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:57 pm

How many of these have there been? Just immediately I can only think of Reshevsky and Grischuk, but there must have been others, surely?

(For the purposes of this discussion let's restrict the definition of "world class" to players who have competed in a Candidates Tournament, allowing whatever criteria you may prefer when referring to the pre-Botvinnik era.)

How do you define what an time-trouble addict is? Is there a percent of games with time-trouble they have to reach before being defined as such?

You use your judgement.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 31, 2018 5:26 pm

You have long periods of boredom during the early middle game when you wonder what on earth he is thinking about, followed by facing a Jack Rudd style speed monster from about move 20.

Maybe that was a deliberate tactic; bore you into making a mistake?

I think you need to be able to define what something is before you go forming opinions about whether players are of a certain type. Can you define what time-trouble is, where the threshold lies and to what extent the complexity of the position comes into play? I've seen many instances where a 2700+ player had very little time indeed but had complete control of the position and didn't make a single error. If there is nothing troubling about the clock position for the person pressing it, particularly because it helped achieve a won/almost winning position, isn't time trouble just a misnomer in such circumstances?

As I said, use your judgement.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 31, 2018 5:26 pm

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:57 pm

How many of these have there been? Just immediately I can only think of Reshevsky and Grischuk, but there must have been others, surely?

In the adjournment era, didn't every player have this style to some extent? Fischer perhaps not.

Well also Karpov, who notoriously never got into time trouble in his prime. Or Anand, for that matter. But I think we can at least try and distinguish between normal practice and regular, perhaps pathological attachment to an extreme version of that practice - after all, if this were not possible then Reshevsky would not have had the reputation that he did.

Yuri Averbakh, possibly?

Nobody has mentioned Walter Browne, who was notorious for having to play moves 25 to 40 in less than a minute.

Maybe not quite "world class" but maybe the most (in)famous GM "zeitnot" addict of all was Samisch.

(and as with many of this type, he was an excellent blitz/lightning player)

Oh, that's a good shout. Chessmetrics has him down as being world number ten at his best so not too far away even if not quite Reshevsky/Grischuk level. (Averbakh's best was eighth, as it goes.)

Bronstein was famous for epic thinks, often on the first move. I presume it follows that he got into time trouble?