0

Obviously NOT counting draws there are a lot eg Nepo lost 4-0 total to Magnus in the 2021 WCC so removing the draws, there's that.

In the 2019 WFRCC, which was indeed classical, Magnus Carlsen lost to Wesley So in 3 classical games in a row, COUNTING draws: Draw and then 3 losses (and then fast rapid which was draw and then 1 loss).

Did this ever happen in regular classical chess (that are 1v1 tournaments but including finals or tiebreakers of tournaments that aren't 1v1) - 3 losses in a row?

Let's see...

  1. 2006-2021 - None.
  2. FIDE: 1993-2004 - Oh just 2 Alexei Shirov vs Vishy Anand in 2000 but was it classical time controls? And there's Anatoly Karpov vs Gata Kamsky in 1993 - ok so WFRCC 2019 was the 1st time since either 2000 or 1993 that someone lost 3 classical games in a row in either WCC or WFRCC.
  3. Classical (PCA world championship i mean) : 1993-2004 - None.

And then before 1993...

Improve this question
6
  • 1
    why.. why is this a "bad" question so you have to downvote it..? explain downvotes instead of downvoting only. there's literally no difference of the quality of a post, if you downvote without epxlaining, or not downvoting. i.e nothing is gained.
    – William Martens
    Commented Jun 27, 2023 at 15:02
  • 1
    @WilliamMartens Downvotes serve an important purpose on SE even if they do not come with comments: they help filter out the best and worse questions and answers. There is no obligation to explain one's downvotes, and sometimes it is better not to do so because it would lead to pointless fights in the comment threads. [Note: I did not downvote this question.]
    – Federico Poloni
    Commented Jun 27, 2023 at 21:58
  • @FedericoPoloni Yes; thanks for the explanation! I just think especially for people who has no points or rep, just leaving a downvote is not the right thing; (without any explanation) because, it can also lead to others "looking down" on it "oh it's downvoted, maybe I should too, since it's bad (somehow)) it can also lead to unfair views. Note I do not say this to be picky, and I know you weren't the one that downvoted(hence why I also upvoted) because I think this is a good question. :)
    – William Martens
    Commented Jun 29, 2023 at 17:07
  • +1 By the way, thanks for responding and yes I agree they are of course helpful, as is the upvote. But, I would say downvotes is not always the way to go, if it's bad, if the user has no points; no reason to Only downvote. really advised is to give explanation, even if it's not "a must". it does pop up "care to elaborate why?"(I hope such a popup comes up)
    – William Martens
    Commented Jun 29, 2023 at 17:08
  • 2
    @WilliamMartens Note that this user's reputation is displayed artificially as 1 because they were suspended. They are not a new user, they have 92 questions and 71 answers, so I assume they know how the site works.
    – Federico Poloni
    Commented Jul 1, 2023 at 9:10

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

1930 - 1992:

  1. 1986 Garry Kasparov vs Anatoly Karpov
  2. 1961 Mikhail Botvinnik vs Mikhail Tal
  3. 1958 Mikhail Botvinnik vs Vasily Smyslov
  4. 1954 Mikhail Botvinnik vs Vasily Smyslov (again)
  5. 1937 Alexander Alekhine vs Max Euwe

1886 - 1929:

  1. 5 in a row 1910 Emanuel Lasker vs David Janowski
  2. 4 in a row https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1907
  3. 4 in a row https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1896%E2%80%931897
  4. 5 in a row https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1894
  5. 3 in a row twice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1889
  6. 4 in a row https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1886
Improve this answer
5
  • 1
    The 1889 match is a dud. The page you link say that Chigorin was challenger, yet it was Steinitz who chose Chigorin for the match that the Havana Club wanted to to host. And the WCh title had already been announced to be the object of the 1889 congress - the preliminary program had been published already in 1887. The page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship (in my opinion) has a better account of the Havana 1889, although there are still some errors: it was not for a challenger to Steinitz, it was for WCh.
    – user30536
    Commented Feb 12, 2023 at 15:32
  • @user30536 you mean it's actually not 3x in a row twice?
    – BCLC
    Commented Feb 13, 2023 at 12:08
  • Not sure why you ask -- I don't even refer to that. No, I mean it is not actually a world championship.
    – user30536
    Commented Feb 14, 2023 at 8:12
  • mikhail tal's stare is fierce/scary in my opinion.. no to add anything to the comment convo but; well it's something publicly discussed I see. even if there is a explanation to the other eye (which I suppose is a part of the scary parts) it's still; a bit scary :')
    – William Martens
    Commented Jun 29, 2023 at 20:48
  • chess.fandom.com/wiki/Mikhail_Tal
    – William Martens
    Commented Jun 29, 2023 at 20:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.