Cycle 1987-1990
For this cycle, FIDE decided to increase the number of qualified from the zonals and from the interzonals. Fifty-two players were invited to compete into three tournaments in Zagreb, Szirak and Subotica. In each tournament the top three players qualified for the Candidates’ matches
Zagreb, August 1987.
The tournament was organized in a brand new hotel build in Zagreb. Korchnoi was the only one to be sure to qualify two rounds before the end. Ehlvest’s loss during the last round was without any concequence and if he had won to Baragar he could even finish first. The qualification of Seirawan was a surpise. In this tournament with Korchoi he was the most active player. Sadness for Nikolic who refused a last round’s draw from Torre and missed the qualification for just a half point.
| 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | Total | T/B | |||
| 01 | Korchnoi V | 2630 | Xx | = | 1 | 0 | = | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | 11.0 | |
| 02 | Ehlvest J | 2540 | = | xx | = | = | 1 | 1 | 0 | = | 1 | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | 0 | 10.0 | 80.75 |
| 03 | Seirawan Y | 2600 | 0 | = | xx | 1 | = | = | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10.0 | 73.50 |
| 04 | Nogueiras J | 2555 | 1 | = | 0 | xx | 1 | = | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | = | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9.5 | 71.00 |
| 05 | Nikolic P | 2620 | = | 0 | = | 0 | Xx | = | 0 | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 9.5 | 67.50 |
| 06 | Granda Zuniga J | 2525 | = | 0 | = | = | = | xx | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9.5 | 67.50 |
| 07 | Torre E | 2540 | 1 | 1 | 0 | = | 1 | = | xx | = | 0 | 1 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | 9.0 | |
| 08 | Polugaevsky L | 2595 | 0 | = | 1 | = | = | = | = | xx | = | = | 1 | = | = | = | 0 | = | 1 | 8.5 | 65.25 |
| 09 | Eingorn V | 2575 | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | 0 | = | 1 | = | xx | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | 61.25 |
| 10 | Grünfeld Y | 2545 | 0 | 1 | 0 | = | = | = | 0 | = | = | xx | 0 | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | 59.50 |
| 11 | Pinter J | 2575 | 0 | = | 0 | = | 0 | = | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | xx | 1 | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | 59.25 |
| 12 | Hulak K | 2495 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | xx | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 7.5 | |
| 13 | Inkiov V | 2485 | = | 0 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | 0 | = | 1 | = | xx | = | = | = | = | 7.0 | |
| 14 | Miles A | 2585 | = | 0 | 1 | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | = | = | = | 0 | = | Xx | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6.5 | |
| 15 | Barlov D | 2555 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 1 | xx | = | 1 | 6.0 | |
| 16 | Hickl J | 2455 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 1 | = | xx | 1 | 5.0 | |
| 17 | Baragar F | 2320 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | xx | 1.5 |
Szirak, June- July, 1987.
The tournament was organized in the city’s castle of Szirak located 90 kilometers from Budapest. A. Beliavsky, one of the favorite with U. Anderson and L. Ljubojevic, took a nice start being also unbeaten till the 12th round. However two defeats to V. Salov and L. Portisch combined with too many drawn forbidden him any hope to qualify
Surprisingly it was the Icelandic player J. Hjartarson who was in the lead till the last round. In a thriller finish he was joint by the former under 16 World Champion V. Salov who was awarded the first place because a better tie-break.
| 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | Total | T/B | |||
| 01 | Salov V | 2575 | xx | = | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | = | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12.5 | 97.25 |
| 02 | Hjartarson J | 2550 | = | xx | = | = | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12.5 | 96.50 |
| 03 | Portisch L | 2615 | = | = | Xx | = | 1 | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | = | 12.0 | 98.50 |
| 04 | Nunn J | 2585 | = | = | = | xx | = | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12.0 | 92.50 |
| 05 | Beliavsky A | 2630 | 0 | = | 0 | = | Xx | = | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11.0 | |
| 06 | Andersson U | 2600 | 0 | = | = | 1 | = | xx | = | 1 | = | = | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | 1 | 10.5 | |
| 07 | Ljubojevic L | 2625 | = | 0 | 1 | 0 | = | = | xx | = | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | 1 | 10.0 | |
| 08 | Christiansen L | 2575 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | xx | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 9.0 | |
| 09 | Benjamin J | 2575 | = | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | = | xx | 0 | = | = | 1 | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | 61.75 |
| 10 | Todorcevic M | 2475 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | 1 | xx | 1 | 0 | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | 59.75 |
| 11 | Marin M | 2475 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | = | 0 | xx | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | 7.5 | 52.75 |
| 12 | Velimirovic D | 2520 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | 1 | 0 | xx | 1 | = | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7.5 | 51.75 |
| 13 | Adorjan A | 2540 | 0 | 1 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | xx | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | 7.0 | 55.00 |
| 14 | Milos G | 2495 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | = | 0 | xx | = | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7.0 | 49.75 |
| 15 | Flear G | 2480 | 0 | 0 | = | 1 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | xx | = | 1 | 1 | 6.0 | |
| 16 | De la Villa J | 2485 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | 0 | 0 | = | 1 | = | 0 | = | xx | 0 | 1 | 5.5 | |
| 17 | Bouaziz S | 2370 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | xx | = | 4.5 | |
| 18 | Allan K | 2310 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | xx | 1.5 |
Playoff for the 3rd and the last place for the candidates’ matches.
Budapest, September, 1987.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Total | ||
| Portisch L | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | = | 4.0 | |
| Nunn J | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | = | 2.0 |
Subotica, June-July, 1987.
Without any favorite the tournament saw the triumphal rise of the British young players. Speelman was the leader of the first part of the tournament playing quietly and excelling especially in the endgame. Only Tal was able to stop him.
| 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | Total | T/B | ||||
| 01 | Sax G | 2570 | xx | 1 | = | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 10.5 | 74.25 | |
| 02 | Short N | 2615 | 0 | xx | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | 10.5 | 73.00 | |
| 03 | Speelman J | 2550 | = | = | Xx | 0 | 1 | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10.5 | 70.75 | |
| 04 | Tal M | 2605 | = | = | 1 | Xx | = | = | 1 | = | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10.0 | 72.50 | |
| 05 | Ribli Z | 2580 | = | 0 | 0 | = | xx | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10.0 | 63.25 | |
| 06 | Rodriguez A | 2495 | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | xx | = | = | = | 1 | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | ||
| 07 | Marjanovic S | 2505 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | = | xx | = | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | 8.0 | ||
| 08 | Smyslov V | 2550 | = | 0 | = | = | = | = | = | xx | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | = | 7.5 | 52.00 | |
| 09 | Chernin A | 2570 | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | = | 1 | = | xx | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7.5 | 51.00 | |
| 10 | Popovic P | 2540 | 1 | 0 | = | = | = | 0 | = | 1 | 0 | xx | 1 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 1 | 7.0 | ||
| 11 | Zapata A | 2505 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | xx | = | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | 6.5 | ||
| 12 | Ernst T | 2465 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | = | xx | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6.0 | ||
| 13 | Alburt L | 2575 | 0 | = | = | = | 0 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | xx | = | 0 | = | 5.5 | ||
| 14 | Xu Jun | 2495 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 1 | = | 0 | 0 | = | xx | 1 | = | 5.0 | ||
| 15 | Prasad D | 2425 | 0 | = | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | 1 | 0 | xx | = | 4.0 | ||
| 16 | Hamed A | 2310 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | = | = | xx | 3.0 | ||
| – | Kavalek L | 2560 | – | = | – | – | – | – | = | – | = | 0 | – | 1 | – | – | = | – | 3.0 |
Preliminary matches (I,1988)
St. John, Canada was the venue where all seven matches of the first stage for the candidate tournament were organized. A. Sokolov, J. Timman, R. Vaganian and A. Yusupov were automatically seeded from the 1985 Candidates matches and K. K. Spraggett was nominated by the organizing federation.
When A. Sokolov won the second game no one was ready to bet a dollar on the the local player, K. Spraggett, to come through. However a surprising victory in round five gave to him the right to play few tie-break games. A long marathon came out with great tension. In the 12th game, which was a five minutes blitz game, Sokolov missed an elementary fork King and Queen and lost the fatal game.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Total | |||||
| Spraggett K | = | 0 | = | = | 1 | = | = | = | = | = | = | 1 | 6.5 | ||||
| Sokolov A | = | 1 | = | = | 0 | = | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | 5.5 |
Very tactical contest played between the English and the American. Speelman playing often unorthodox chess surprise completely Yasser who could never enter into the match
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | ||
| Speelman J | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 4.0 | |
| Seirawan Y | = | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 1.0 |
Sax could easily draw the first game but he believed that his pseudo-attack was worst the continuation. Unfortunately for him his misjudgment cost him the full point. In the second game, clearly better, Sax played in zeitnot a weak King’s move, which made his position immediately collapsed. For the English the strategy was easy to forecast: draw followed by draw till the end.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | |
| Short N | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | 3.5 |
| Sax G | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | 1.5 |
St John, I-II, 1988.
Sax could easily draw the first game but he believed that his pseudo-attack was worst the continuation. Unfortunately for him his misjudgment cost him the full point. In the second game, clearly better, Sax played in zeitnot a weak King’s move, which made his position immediately collapsed. For the English the strategy was easy to forecast: draw followed by draw till the end.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | ||
| Short N | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | 3.5 | |
| Sax G | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | 1.5 |
St John, I-II, 1988.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | |
| Short N | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | 3.5 |
| Sax G | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | 1.5 |
St John, I-II, 1988.
Sax could easily draw the first game but he believed that his pseudo-attack was worst the continuation. Unfortunately for him his misjudgment cost him the full point. In the second game, clearly better, Sax played in zeitnot a weak King’s move, which made his position immediately collapsed. For the English the strategy was easy to forecast: draw followed by draw till the end.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | ||
| Short N | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | 3.5 | |
| Sax G | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | 1.5 |
St John, I-II, 1988.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Total | ||
| Salov V | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | 2.5 | |
| Timman J | = | = | = | = | = | 1 | 3.5 |
St John, I-II, 1988.
Portisch took advantage of a risky combination by Vaganian to grind out an endgame win in game three with a outside passed pawn. He then clung on with might and main force draws in the last three games.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Total | ||
| Portisch L | = | = | 1 | = | = | = | 3.5 | |
| Vaganian R | = | = | 0 | = | = | = | 2.5 |
St John, I-II, 1988.
Korchnoi has five decisive games out of eight. He was unable to resist the temptation to plunge into tactical which suited Hjartarson down to the ground.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Total | |||
| Hjartarson J | 1 | = | = | 1 | 0 | 0 | = | 1 | 4.5 | ||
| Korchnoi V | 0 | = | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | = | 0 | 3.5 |
Quarterfinal matches
London, VIII, 1988.
N. Short was the favorite by a short head but top GMs like B. Larsen or V. Korchnoi said that they thought Speelman would win. After a slow start and some problem in game two, Speelman killed the match by winning the two next games.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | ||
| Speelman J | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 3.5 | |
| Short N | = | = | 0 | 0 | = | 1.5 |
Seattle, I-II, 1989.
The match had a quite start but then things became clear very quickly. Karpov took the lead after game 2 with a neat exchange sacrifice and took a definitive advantage after a superb mating combination in game 3.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | ||
| Hjartarson J | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | 1.5 | |
| Karpov A | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | 3.5 |
Antwerp, I-II, 1989.
Timman in a come from-behind victory overcome L. Portisch 3,5-2,5 in a match sponsored by GMA and his chairman B. Kok. Portisch took the lead by winning game 3 and after could finish the job if he could win game 5 with White. After 18 moves it became clear that Timman’s somewhat surprising intention to steer the game into trouble waters had been highly successful. In fact his position was declared lost. On move 19, Portisch decided to invest an exchange to quench Timman’s ambition to achieve counterplay on the queenside. Suddenly playing too passively, White gradually let his advantage slip and after 31. b6 the stunned spectator were becoming aware that miracle had happen. After 47…Qh1 White resigned. Timman chose a setup with g3 against the Sicilian used by Portisch. The game was very tense and sharp but White’s position was always better. Black missed few draws probably because of the psychology chock from the day before. Finally after 64 moves Timman scored the final point and qualified for the semifinals. Historians said it was one of the most turnabouts in the history of the Candidates’.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Total | ||
| Portisch L | = | = | 1 | = | 0 | 0 | 2.5 | |
| Timman J | = | = | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | 3.5 |
Quebec, II, 1989.
With huge interest for the local player, Spraggett, it was natural that the match was organized in Quebec, Canada. Following a draw in the first game, Spraggett sized the lead in the second after a deeply exchange sacrifice. The Russian came back the next day showing superiority in a positional game. Coming then two quick draws in less than 30 moves, In game 6, Spraggett reached an advantageous endgame but could not concretize it mainly due to an accurate play of his opponent. The match was over with the score of 3-3 but $ 50,000 needed to be shared and a winner was required. Following a tense fight with another deadlock was reached after two tie break matches. In the last stage Yusupov showed a stronger nervous system and finally overcome the Canadian in sudden death play off.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Total | |
| Yusupov A | = | 0 | 1 | = | = | = | = | = | 1 | 5.0 |
| Spraggett K | = | 1 | 0 | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | 4.0 |
Semifinal matches
Pilkington Glass Company was the main sponsor of both semifinals hosted at the Sadler Wells Theater in London.
Timman cold claim a victory in game one when he was for some time tow pawns up. The same situation happen in game 3, Timman missed a forced win and finally to avoid a terrible blow he was obliged to take a perpetual check. After a couple of interesting draws, in game 7, Speelman surprised not only the spectators by level the score but also Timman by using a very old defense rarely played. In time trouble a dubious move of Queen made the Dutch position completely hopeless. Celebrations were very short. Timman’s experience came through in the final game. The Dutch showed great character playing at his best while Speelman’ nerve frayed.
London, X, 1989.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Total | |
| Timman J | = | 1 | = | = | = | = | 0 | 1 | 4.5 |
| Speelman J | = | 0 | = | = | = | = | 1 | 0 | 3.5 |
The second match was undecided. Both players were not at their best. Yusupov unusual very nervous spoiled often hard- earned advantages in the closing moment of the closing session. He came very close to win his first ever win over Karpov in game 2 but good defense from his opponent gave him a good escape. Karpov suffered again in game 3 but a horrible blunder from Yusupov gave him an unexpected lead. In game 5, in a horrible mutual time trouble Yusupov’s piece sacrifice paid cash a deserving victory. Yusupov spoiled another winning position in game 6. Finally in game 8 Yusupov found from of him the real Karpov. In a Queen’s Gambit he was completely crushed.
London, X, 1989.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Total | ||
| Yusupov A | = | = | 0 | = | 1 | = | = | 0 | 3.5 | |
| Karpov A | = | = | 1 | = | 0 | = | = | 1 | 4.5 |
Yusupov: “I think it was an interesting match in many ways. I was happy with my performance. I wanted to win, of course. I had very good chances to win the match. I play for very good level for maybe three and half hours of the game, but the last hour I had a tendency to lose concentration at some moment which, of course is very dangerous… And he made mistakes but they were not so serious. Maybe because he chose an overly safe way to play the position. Or maybe some miscalculation, but it is a different level of mistake. If Kasparov had to play once more Karpov I will bet on Kasparov. He is the strongest player is the world and has proved by his excellent results. In my opinion his level of chess is maybe the highest in the history. Karpov might be moe relaxed, because he has less to prove. I think that in some way he is the underdog, but it is psychologically a very nice situation…Another factor in favor of Karpov, I think Kasparov is too busy with activities outside of chess…
