Lessons from the lost No.1s

The FIDE Elo rating system began in 1971. Elo did a bit of study trying to work the ratings backwards, but the chief scholar in this regard is Jeff Sonas http://chessmetrics.com/cm/. Jeff devised his own rating system, however -- using an 'absentee' penalty for periods of non-playing. This leads to odd-looking results like Lasker's repeated plummets and recoveries here:


Anyhow, whatever the merits of his system, it has yielded some intriguing results, including a month-by-month tracking of who is the world No.1-rated player. Apart from the world champions, you can see above that Zukertort and Korchnoi both broke the surface at some point, and there are other non-champions in the lists.

Anyhow, with nothing much better to do, I thought I would pull together some instructive games from each player who hadn't yet had the 'Lessons from...' treatment.

    The name of Kieseritzky is known as to most as the loser of one of Anderssen's brilliancies, and to players of gambits -- he gave his name to the main variation of the King's Gambit and the Boden-Kieseritsky Gambit. He defeated everyone at some point, did well in matches and enjoyed more than one period at the top of the ChessMetrics league table. He also makes an early bid for the largest collection of names.
    [Event "London"]
    [Site "London"]
    [Date "1851.06.14"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "?"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Adolf Anderssen"]
    [Black "Lionel Adalbert Bagration Felix Kieseritzky"]
    [ECO "C51"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "66"]
    1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Bd6 6.O-O Qe7 7.d4
    Nf6 8.Bg5 O-O 9.Nh4 exd4 10.Nd2 Qe5 11.Ndf3 Qc5 12.Bxf6 gxf6
    13.Nf5 Bf4 14.N3xd4 Nxd4 15.cxd4 Qxc4 16.Qg4+ Bg5 17.Rac1 Qb4
    18.f4 d5 19.fxg5 Qxd4+ 20.Kh1 Bxf5 21.Rxf5 Qxe4 22.Rf4 f5
    23.Qh4 Qd3 24.Rcf1 Rae8 25.Rxf5 Re4 26.Qf2 Rfe8 27.Rxf7 Qxf1+
    28.Qxf1 Re1 29.Rf8+ Kg7 30.Rf7+ Kg6 31.Rf6+ Kh5 32.g4+ Kxg4
    33.Rf4+ Kh5 0-1
    von der Lasa
    One of the Berlin 'Pleiades' (including Paul von Bilguer, Ludwig Bledow, Wilhelm Hanstein, Bernhard Horwitz, Carl Mayet and Carl Schorn). No slouch in the name department, von der Lasa was a player of the first rank but never played a formal match or tournament. Yet in series of casual games he outscored Staunton twice and apparently Anderssen too. Not sure ChessMetrics should be including casual games.
    [Event "Breslau"]
    [Site "Breslau"]
    [Date "1845.??.??"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "?"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Baron Tassilo von Heydebrand und der Lasa"]
    [Black "Adolf Anderssen"]
    [ECO "C44"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "41"]
    1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Nf3 Qf6 5.O-O d6 6.c3 d3 7.Bg5
    Qg6 8.Bxd3 Bg4 9.Nbd2 Be7 10.Bf4 Nh6 11.Qb3 Bxf3 12.Nxf3 Rb8
    13.Rae1 Qh5 14.Nd4 O-O 15.Bxh6 Qxh6 16.f4 Bf6 17.Nf5 Qh5
    18.Rf3 Ne7 19.Rh3 Qg4 20.Nh6+ gxh6 21.Rg3 1-0
    Remembered often as Morphy's first match victim in Europe, Harrwitz was certainly a worthy candidate for a match, even if Morphy made short work of him. The opening he used to defeat Morphy in their first game still bears his name.
    [Event "Morphy - Harrwitz"]
    [Site "Paris FRA"]
    [Date "1858.09.07"]
    [EventDate "1858.09.??"]
    [Round "1"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Daniel Harrwitz"]
    [Black "Paul Morphy"]
    [ECO "D35"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "109"]
    1.d4 {Notes by J. Lowenthal. Herr Harrwitz, when first player,
    almost invariably adopts this mode of opening the game. It is
    one with every variation of which he is thoroughly familiar,
    and in no match of importance has he ever failed of using it.}
    e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bf4 {Mr. Morphy agrees with us in the
    opinion, that at this stage the text move is the most forcible
    one that can be selected ; indeed, he says he found it so
    strong. that in his after games with Harrwitz he proferred
    meeting d4 with f5, in place of exposing himself to this
    attack.} a6 5.e3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.a3 cxd4 8.exd4 dxc4 9.Bxc4 b5
    10.Bd3 Bb7 11.O-O Be7 12.Be5 O-O 13.Qe2 Nd5 14.Bg3 {Very well
    played for it not only obviates the capture of the Bishop and
    the subsequent posting of the King's Knight at f4, but also
    prevents the advance of the f-pawn.} Kh8 { Mr. Morphy
    considers that he lost the game by this move, and that if he
    had played Bf6 instead, the game would have been even.}
    15.Rfe1 Bf6 { The following variation will show that Black
    could not have thrown up the f-pawn as he had intended,
    15...f5 16 Qxe6 Nxc3 17 bxc3 f4 18 Qe4 g6 19 Bxf4 with a won
    game.} 16.Qe4 g6 17.Nxd5 Qxd5 18.Qxd5 exd5 19.Ne5 Rad8 20.Nxc6
    Bxc6 21.Rac1 Rc8 22.Bd6 Rg8 23.Be5 Kg7 {It is a singular fact,
    that in the earlier stages of every contest upon which
    Mr. Murphy has entered, he has played very much below his real
    force. This game presents none of those brilliant moves and
    remarkable combinations that so eminently abound in his
    general play, and at this point be selects a move which
    actually gives the victory to his opponent. The Bishop should
    have now been captured, and the game thereby would have been
    rendered an even one.} 24.f4 Bd7 25.Kf2 h6 26.Ke3 Rxc1 27.Rxc1
    Rc8 28.Rc5 Bxe5 29.fxe5 Be6 { If Black had exchanged Rooks,
    with the view of breaking up his adversary's centre Pawns, the
    White King would have been posted at d4, and victory secured.}
    30.a4 bxa4 31.Bxa6 Rb8 32.Rb5 Rd8 33.Rb6 Ra8 34.Kd2 Bc8
    35.Bxc8 Rxc8 36.Rb5 Ra8 37.Rxd5 a3 38.bxa3 Rxa3 39.Rc5 Kf8
    40.Ke2 Ke7 41.d5 Kd7 42.Rc6 h5 43.Rf6 Ke7 44.d6 Ke8 45.e6 fxe6
    46.Rxe6+ Kf7 47.d7 Ra8 48.Rd6 Ke7 49.Rxg6 Kxd7 50.Rg5 Rh8
    51.Kf3 Ke6 52.Kg3 h4 53.Kg4 h3 54.g3 Kf6 55.Rh5 1-0
    An Italian player who rarely left his country, I think he crept to the top in the late 1850s by a big score in matches, but it's not clear.
    [Event "Steinitz - Dubois"]
    [Site "London ENG"]
    [Date "1862.??.??"]
    [EventDate "1862.09.??"]
    [Round "4"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Wilhelm Steinitz"]
    [Black "Serafino Dubois"]
    [ECO "C51"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "40"]
    1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bb6 5. b5 Na5 6. Nxe5 Nh6
    7. d4 d6 8. Bxh6 dxe5 9. Bxg7 Qg5 10. Bxh8 Nxc4 11. O-O Bg4
    12. Bf6 Qg6 13. Qd3 Qxf6 14. Qxc4 O-O-O 15. dxe5 Qxe5 16. Na3
    Be6 17. Qe2 Qc3 18. Qf3 Qxf3 19. gxf3 Bc5 20. Nb1 Bh3 0-1
    Stereotyped as the first great master of defence, he was also a fine attacking player. And of course, to win the game, eventually the defender must become the attacker.
    [Event "Bristol"]
    [Site "Bristol ENG"]
    [Date "1861.09.14"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "1.3"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Ignatz von Kolisch"]
    [Black "Louis Paulsen"]
    [ECO "C51"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "56"]
    1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 Bc5 6. O-O d6
    7. d4 exd4 8. cxd4 Bb6 9. d5 Na5 10. Bb2 Ne7 11. Bd3 O-O
    12. Nc3 Ng6 13. Ne2 c5 14. Qd2 f6 15. Kh1 Bd7 16. Rac1 a6
    17. Ne1 Bb5 18. f4 c4 19. Bb1 c3 20. Rxc3 Nc4 21. Qc1 Rc8
    22. Bd3 Be3 23. Qc2 Nd2 24. Rg1 Rxc3 25. Qxc3 Qb6 26. Bc1 Bxg1
    27. Nxg1 Bxd3 28. Nxd3 Nxe4 {analysis: 29. Qb2 Qxb2 30. Bxb2
    Nxf4 31. Nxf4 Nf2#} 0-1
    Suhle's brief appearance among the No.1s seems to arise from his demolition of his fellow Berliner, Paul Hirschfield, in a match, at a time when other top players were relatively inactive.
    [Event "Breslau (Poland)"]
    [Site "Breslau (Poland)"]
    [Date "1859.??.??"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "?"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Adolf Anderssen"]
    [Black "Berthold Suhle"]
    [ECO "C59"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "50"]
    1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6
    7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Qd4 11.f4 Bc5 12.Rf1 Bb6
    13.c3 Qd8 14.d4 exd3 15.Bxd3 O-O 16.Qe2 Re8 17.h3 Nd7 18.Nd2
    Bc7 19.b4 Nb7 20.Ndf3 Nd6 21.Be3 Nb6 22.Rd1 Nd5 23.Bc4 Nf5
    24.Kf2 Nfxe3 25.Qxe3 Bb6 0-1
    von Kolisch
    von Kolisch abandoned chess for the pursuit of money, at which he turned out to be equally adept.
    [Event "Paris"]
    [Site "Paris FRA"]
    [Date "1867.06.13"]
    [EventDate "1867.06.04"]
    [Round "?"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Wilhelm Steinitz"]
    [Black "Ignatz von Kolisch"]
    [ECO "C38"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "82"]
    1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.O-O d6 6.d4 h6 7.g3 g4
    8.Ne1 f3 9.c3 Ne7 10.h3 h5 11.Nxf3 gxf3 12.Qxf3 Bxh3 13.Qxf7+
    Kd7 14.Qxg7 Bxf1 15.Bxf1 Qg8 16.Bh3+ Kd8 17.Qxg8+ Rxg8 18.Bf4
    Nd7 19.Na3 Nf6 20.Be6 Rg6 21.Re1 h4 22.e5 Nh5 23.exd6 Nxf4
    24.dxe7+ Ke8 25.Bf5 Rxg3+ 26.Kh1 Nd5 27.Nb5 a6 28.Be4 axb5
    29.Bxd5 c6 30.Bg2 Rg7 31.d5 Rxe7 32.Rf1 cxd5 33.Bxd5 Rd8 34.c4
    bxc4 35.Bxc4 Rd2 36.b4 Re4 37.Bf7+ Ke7 38.Bb3 Ree2 39.Ra1 Rh2+
    40.Kg1 Rdg2+ 41.Kf1 h3 0-1
    Another Berliner, his great achievement was a storming performance at Dundee.
    [Event "Dundee Congress"]
    [Site "Dundee SCO"]
    [Date "1867.09.07"]
    [EventDate "1867.09.04"]
    [Round "4"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Gustav Richard Neumann"]
    [Black "Joseph Henry Blackburne"]
    [ECO "C41"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "123"]
    1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 exd4 4. Qxd4 Bd7 5. Bg5 f6 6. Bh4 Nc6
    7. Qd2 Nge7 8. Nc3 Ng6 9. Bc4 Bg4 10. Bg3 Bxf3 11. gxf3 Nge5
    12. Be2 Be7 13. f4 Nf7 14. f5 O-O 15. h4 a6 16. Nd5 Re8
    17. Nf4 Bf8 18. Ne6 Qd7 19. O-O-O Ncd8 20. Bc4 b5 21. Bd5 c6
    22. Nxd8 Raxd8 23. Be6 Qc7 24. Bf4 Kh8 25. Rh3 Ne5 26. h5 h6
    27. Rg1 Kh7 28. Rhg3 a5 29. Bxe5 dxe5 30. Qe2 Qd6 31. Rg6 b4
    32. f4 Rxe6 33. fxe6 Qxe6 34. Qg4 Qxg4 35. R6xg4 exf4 36. Rxf4
    Bc5 37. Re1 Bd4 38. Rf3 c5 39. c3 Be5 40. Rd1 Rxd1+ 41. Kxd1
    g6 42. hxg6+ Kxg6 43. cxb4 axb4 44. a4 Bxb2 45. a5 c4 46. a6
    Bd4 47. Rf5 b3 48. Rb5 h5 49. Rb7 Kg5 50. a7 Bxa7 51. Rxa7 Kf4
    52. Rc7 Ke5 53. Kd2 b2 54. Kc2 c3 55. Rc8 Kxe4 56. Rh8 h4
    57. Rxh4+ Kf3 58. Rh5 Kg4 59. Rb5 f5 60. Kxc3 Kf4 61. Kd2 Kg3
    62. Ke1 { Deutsche Schachzeitung 1868, p. 13; The Chess World
    1867/68, p. 294} 1-0
    Zukertort contested the World Championship more than once, at great cost to his health. His own 'Immortal' is a real gem:
    [Event "London"]
    [Site "London ENG"]
    [Date "1883.05.05"]
    [EventDate "1883.04.26"]
    [Round "6.1"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Johannes Zukertort"]
    [Black "Joseph Henry Blackburne"]
    [ECO "A13"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "65"]
    1. c4 e6 2. e3 Nf6 3. Nf3 b6 4. Be2 Bb7 5. O-O d5 6. d4 Bd6
    7. Nc3 O-O 8. b3 Nbd7 9. Bb2 Qe7 10. Nb5 Ne4 11. Nxd6 cxd6
    12. Nd2 Ndf6 13. f3 Nxd2 14. Qxd2 dxc4 15. Bxc4 d5 16. Bd3
    Rfc8 17. Rae1 Rc7 18. e4 Rac8 19. e5 Ne8 20. f4 g6 21. Re3 f5
    22. exf6 Nxf6 23. f5 Ne4 24. Bxe4 dxe4 25. fxg6 Rc2 26. gxh7+
    Kh8 27. d5+ e5 28. Qb4 R8c5 29. Rf8+ Kxh7 30. Qxe4+ Kg7
    31. Bxe5+ Kxf8 32. Bg7+ Kg8 33. Qxe7 1-0
    Gunsberg's reign at the top of the lists was just one month! But no fluke -- he contested a close match with Steinitz in 1890, losing 4-6. Steinitz' famous stubbornness in accepting the gambit pawn and hanging on for dear life may have made the score a little generous.
    [Event "Steinitz - Gunsberg World Championship Match"]
    [Site "New York, NY USA"]
    [Date "1891.01.05"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "12"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Isidor Gunsberg"]
    [Black "Wilhelm Steinitz"]
    [ECO "C52"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "47"]
    1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.O-O Qf6 7.d4
    Nh6 8.Bg5 Qd6 9.d5 Nd8 10.Qa4 Bb6 11.Na3 c6 12.Be2 Bc7 13.Nc4
    Qf8 14.d6 Bxd6 15.Nb6 Rb8 16.Qxa7 Ng4 17.Nh4 Ne6 18.Bxg4 Nxg5
    19.Nf5 Ne6 20.Rfd1 Bc7 21.Na8 Rxa8 22.Qxa8 Kd8 23.Rxd7+ Kxd7
    24.Rd1+ 1-0
    Pillsbury's name is more familiar than many on this list, and he has given his name to opening variations. His dazzling triumph at Hastings in 1895 make him the next great American conqueror; his short life the next tragedy.
    [Event "Hastings"]
    [Site "Hastings ENG"]
    [Date "1895.09.02"]
    [EventDate "1895.08.05"]
    [Round "21"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Harry Nelson Pillsbury"]
    [Black "Isidor Gunsberg"]
    [ECO "D10"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "79"]
    1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bd3 O-O 7.Ne5
    dxc4 8.Bxc4 Nd5 9.f4 Be6 10.Qb3 b5 11.Bxd5 Bxd5 12.Nxd5 Qxd5
    13.Qxd5 cxd5 14.Nd3 Nd7 15.Bd2 Rfc8 16.Ke2 e6 17.Rhc1 Bf8
    18.Rxc8 Rxc8 19.Rc1 Rxc1 20.Bxc1 Bd6 21.Bd2 Kf8 22.Bb4 Ke7
    23.Bc5 a6 24.b4 f6 25.g4 Bxc5 26.bxc5 Nb8 27.f5 g5 28.Nb4 a5
    29.c6 Kd6 30.fxe6 Nxc6 31.Nxc6 Kxc6 32.e4 dxe4 33.d5+ Kd6
    34.Ke3 b4 35.Kxe4 a4 36.Kd4 h5 37.gxh5 a3 38.Kc4 f5 39.h6 f4
    40.h7 1-0
    Maròczy played chess at the top level at the turn of the century, took some time off, then returned as strong as ever. He edged out Pillsbury at Monte Carlo in 1902.
    [Event "Monte Carlo"]
    [Site "Monte Carlo MNC"]
    [Date "1902.02.03"]
    [EventDate "1902.??.??"]
    [Round "1"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Geza Maroczy"]
    [Black "Harry Nelson Pillsbury"]
    [ECO "C42"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "65"]
    1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Be7 7.O-O
    Nc6 8.Re1 Bg4 9.c3 f5 10.c4 O-O 11.cxd5 Qxd5 12.Nc3 Nxc3
    13.bxc3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Qxf3 15.gxf3 Bd6 16.Rb1 Rab8 17.Rb5 f4
    18.Be4 a6 19.Rb1 Rfe8 20.Bd2 Kf7 21.Bd5+ Kf6 22.Rxe8 Rxe8
    23.Rxb7 Ne7 24.Be4 Nf5 25.Ra7 Rb8 26.Rxa6 g5 27.c4 Rb6 28.Rxb6
    cxb6 29.Bc3 Nh4 30.h3 h5 31.c5 bxc5 32.dxc5+ Be5 33.c6 1-0
    The burly Bogo is often regarded as being a punchbag and figleaf while Alekhin was ducking Capablanca's challenge. We'll never know what would have happened if Capa had ever come up with the same amount of prize money he demanded from Alekhin (following the stock market crash, this was a big ask), but while Bogoljubow wasn't a match for Alekhin, he was no pushover, and had a couple of months at the top of the Chessmetrics lists. His legacy is strongly defended in a couple of recent books by Bogdanovich.
    [Event "Kiel"]
    [Site "Kiel GER"]
    [Date "1921.02.??"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "3"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Richard Reti"]
    [Black "Efim Bogoljubov"]
    [ECO "D07"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "70"]
    1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.e3 e5 4.dxe5 d4 5.exd4 Qxd4 6.Qxd4 Nxd4
    7.Bd3 Bg4 8.f3 Be6 9.Be3 O-O-O 10.Bxd4 Rxd4 11.Ke2 Ne7 12.Nd2
    Ng6 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.b3 Bf5 15.a3 Be7 16.Ra2 g5 17.Ke1 Rhd8
    18.Ne2 Rd3 19.Ng3 Bg6 20.b4 Re3+ 21.Kf2 Rxe5 22.Re1 Rxe1
    23.Kxe1 Bd3 24.Nge4 Rd4 25.c5 f5 26.Nf2 Bb5 27.Nf1 Bf6 28.Rd2
    Rc4 29.Nd1 Rc1 30.Kf2 f4 31.g3 Bc3 32.Nxc3 Rxc3 33.Ra2 Bc4
    34.Ra1 Rc2+ 35.Kg1 Bd5 0-1
    Fine gave up chess for psychoanalysis -- 'a loss for chess and at best a draw for psychoanalysis', someone quipped. The war years interfered with his career but he could beat anybody on the day and had a plus score against Botvinnik:
    [Event "AVRO"]
    [Site "The Netherlands"]
    [Date "1938.11.06"]
    [EventDate "1938.11.06"]
    [Round "1"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "Reuben Fine"]
    [Black "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
    [ECO "C17"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "61"]
    1.e4 { Notes by Reuben Fine. *** Before this tournament I was
    known as a d4 player, hence my first move must have come as
    somewhat of a surprise to Botvinnik. } e6 {Botvinnik does not
    vary. Against e4 he almost invariably played the French,
    sometimes he tried the Sicilian.} 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5
    5.dxc5 {This is the prepared move. Unlike Euwe, I make it a
    rule not to anatlyze such lines too profoundly before the game
    because it is most essential to be able to meet whatever
    surprises come up over the board and not everything can be
    forseen.} Ne7 6.Nf3 Nbc6 7.Bd3 d4 {Accepts the
    complications. On 7...Bxc5 8.O-O, White's game is freer.} 8.a3
    Ba5 9.b4 Nxb4 10.axb4 Bxb4 11.Bb5+ {Another possibility was
    O-O, but the move played was part of the prepared variation.}
    Nc6 {? The fatal error. Necessary was 11...Bd7} 12.Bxc6+ bxc6
    13.Ra4 Bxc3+ 14.Bd2 {Suddenly Black discovers that he is
    lost. The Bishop is hopelessly shut in, and it is only a
    question of time before White's superior development make
    itself felt.} f6 {Desperately trying to free the bishop.}
    15.O-O O-O 16.Bxc3 dxc3 17.Qe1 a5 18.Qxc3 Ba6 19.Rfa1 Bb5
    20.Rd4 {! Black was hoping for 20.Rxa5 which would bring some
    freedom to the Black pieces.} Qe7 21.Rd6 a4 {To tie the rook
    down.} 22.Qe3 {! Threatens to win a pawn, but not in an
    obvious way.} Ra7 23.Nd2 {! The point: the poor Bishop will be
    driven away.} a3 {The pawn goes anyhow.} 24.c4 Ba4 25.exf6
    Qxf6 26.Rxa3 Re8 27.h3 {After this quiet move, Black might as
    well resign.} Raa8 28.Nf3 Qb2 29.Ne5 Qb1+ 30.Kh2 Qf5 31.Qg3
    {Too many threats. Black can't guard the 7th rank.--Fine
    (Black does not have a single move, and Rf3 is threatened. A
    combination of a splendid strategic idea with tactical
    subtleties.--Botvinnik)} 1-0
    The 'co-World Champion' and possibly the world's grumpiest loser was the author of some fine and charming books, in which it is straightforward and a pleasure to find instructive moments. This is a bravura attacking game:
    [Event "Gothenburg Interzonal"]
    [Site "Gothenburg SWE"]
    [Date "1955.08.25"]
    [EventDate "1955.08.15"]
    [Round "7"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [White "David Bronstein"]
    [Black "Paul Keres"]
    [ECO "E41"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "77"]
    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 5. Bd3 b6 6. Ne2 Bb7
    7. O-O cxd4 8. exd4 O-O 9. d5 h6 10. Bc2 Na6 11. Nb5 exd5
    12. a3 Be7 13. Ng3 dxc4 14. Bxh6 gxh6 15. Qd2 Nh7 16. Qxh6 f5
    17. Nxf5 Rxf5 18. Bxf5 Nf8 19. Rad1 Bg5 20. Qh5 Qf6 21. Nd6
    Bc6 22. Qg4 Kh8 23. Be4 Bh6 24. Bxc6 dxc6 25. Qxc4 Nc5 26. b4
    Nce6 27. Qxc6 Rb8 28. Ne4 Qg6 29. Rd6 Bg7 30. f4 Qg4 31. h3
    Qe2 32. Ng3 Qe3+ 33. Kh2 Nd4 34. Qd5 Re8 35. Nh5 Ne2 36. Nxg7
    Qg3+ 37. Kh1 Nxf4 38. Qf3 Ne2 39. Rh6+ 1-0
    Reshevsky is notable for his early promise and his longevity in the top ranks of chess, despite his amateur status in the modern era (he was an accountant). However, some of his best years coincided with war, and he never was able to break through to be a challenger in the 1950s -- possibly because of collusion between Soviet players at Zurich 1953, at about which time he tops the Chessmetrics rating list. He qualified for the Candidates' for the last and sixth time in 1967.
    [Event "FIDE World Championship Tournament"]
    [Site "The Hague NED / Moscow URS"]
    [Date "1948.04.18"]
    [EventDate "?"]
    [Round "14"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [White "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
    [Black "Samuel Reshevsky"]
    [ECO "E29"]
    [WhiteElo "?"]
    [BlackElo "?"]
    [PlyCount "83"]
    1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Nc6 7.Bd3
    O-O 8.Ne2 b6 9.e4 Ne8 10.Be3 d6 11.O-O Na5 12.Ng3 Ba6 13.Qe2
    Qd7 14.f4 f5 15.Rae1 g6 16.Rd1 Qf7 17.e5 Rc8 18.Rfe1 dxe5
    19.dxe5 Ng7 20.Nf1 Rfd8 21.Bf2 Nh5 22.Bg3 Qe8 23.Ne3 Qa4
    24.Qa2 Nxg3 25.hxg3 h5 26.Be2 Kf7 27.Kf2 Qb3 28.Qxb3 Nxb3
    29.Bd3 Ke7 30.Ke2 Na5 31.Rd2 Rc7 32.g4 Rcd7 33.gxf5 gxf5
    34.Red1 h4 35.Ke1 Nb3 36.Nd5+ exd5 37.Bxf5 Nxd2 38.Rxd2 dxc4
    39.Bxd7 Rxd7 40.Rf2 Ke6 41.Rf3 Rd3 42.Ke2 0-1