Talk:List of chess world championship matches

1992 Fischer-Spassky: Although recognized by very few as a legitimate World Championship

I seem to remember a story about Congress passing whatever it is that Congress passes (a bill? an act? I don't know, I'm English) recognising this match as the "true" World Championship. Anybody have a source for that (or am I just imagining it?) --Camembert

1858 Morphy-Anderssen: Due to the modesty of the players, this match was not declared at the time for the "World Championship"

Nevertheless, it deserves inclusion in the list. 1) Because its consistent with the list, as the match between Steinitz and Anderssen was also not proclaimed for the World Championship. 2) Because Morphy was universally hailed as the best player in the world after this match, not because of the match, but because Morphy had clearly demonstrated his superiority over everyone else. As Anderssen was regarded by some as the world's best prior to Morphy, and because this match was the last match Morphy played, it should be seen as establishing Morphy as world champion. --ChessPlayer

Hi, I saw your comments in the Morphy talk page as well, and I must inform/remind you that it isn't wikipedia's business to interpret things or pass judgements. We just report what other people have said. If no one called Morphy-Anderssen a world championship, we don't either. Regardless of whether Morphy could have beaten all the world champions ever in a blindfold simul with odds of a queen and a rook. I don't want to remove it from the list, but the caveat should definitely be noted.

Plenty of people have called Morphy the world chess champion, especially when he was alive. This isn't an interpretation or an opinion, its fact, and Wikipedia should report it. The reason that Steinitz in 1886 felt free to proclaim his match against Zukertort for the "world championship" was that Morphy had just died in 1884. Today, there are books on the history of the world chess championship, and they don't begin with Steinitz. Its simply not true that Steinitz was the first world champion, and there are plenty of books and people that say he wasn't.

What IS true, is that the Steinitz-Zukertort match was the first match where one of the parties, Steinitz, made a big issue out of the fact that the winner was "world champion"; before that, the title was by general consensus, and that was something Steinitz was trying to influence, because a lot of people were calling players like Zuckertort "world champion". You have to understand the change in culture that was happening by the 1880's; before then it was considered quite vulgar to proclaim yourself anything; if you were a champion, you didn't stand on the rooftop and claim it, unless you wanted to be thought a lout. Steinitz did do that, and a lot of people did think him a lout for it, but times were also changing. ChessPlayer 03:56, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't see why Fischer-Spassky 1992 is in the list. At least Morphy has the excuse of being the best player of the time, but Fischer and Spassky were nothing of the sort in 1992. The match was more like a publicity/money-raising stunt for the aging Fischer coming out of hiding. Congress (which I presume is the United States Congress) passing a law is a totally inadequate reason, since that body has no authority or respect in chess matters. Arvindn 16:34, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Fischer-Spassky 1992 is in the list because Fischer defeated Spassky for the world championship in 1972, and no one has ever beaten him. Look, there is no God who has the right to bestow the title; the title is simply whatever people agree on. For awhile, people agreed that FIDE would hold championship matches; but Fischer refused to play by FIDE's rules; so who is to say that FIDE is God and has the power to just declare Fischer no longer champion? The point is especially noteworthy, now that FIDE is in ruins, and there is no agreement at all who is World Champion today. The situation today is more unclear than in 1858, when the world was of unanimous opinion, for all practical purposes, that Morphy was the world champion.

It would be nice and easy to write articles, if history was neat and things like who is world champion were just declared by some God-like authority; but that isn't how things are, and articles rightfully discuss all the ambiguities. Of course, there are some books and some people who don't like ambiguity, and they write things like "Steinitz was the first world champion". But many other authors do tell the more complex tales. ChessPlayer 04:18, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm about to make some slight changes; the Morphy-Anderssen match was one of a number of 'semi'-official world championship matches which conform to the modern pattern (well, up to about 1995 at least) - i.e. Staunton's three games. I think it's about time that each of these matches had a page of its own - especially Spassky-Fischer, there's so much material for that. I'll probably add some sort of context too. Mack