Talk:Milan Matulović

reliability of j'adoube source per BLP
I am concerned about the sourcing for the j'adoube incident. It is apparently just a comment section in a webpage. Let's find a better source for this. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 18:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This episode has been described in quite a number of chess books and magazines. Chess Life mentioned it several times in the late 1960s and early 1970s.  If anyone can easily get at those in a library, that'd be a place to start.  If memory serves, it can be found in a 1969 CL article by columnist Miro Radojcic with the title "Crazy, Man, Crazy."  I believe it's also in the Golombek encyclopedia referenced already in the article; I'll check my copy when I get home from work.  Since this is derogatory information, you're right that it should be carefully referenced.  However, I don't believe it is particularly "controversial," so no need to yank it immediately. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 23:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I got out my Chess Life mags, and for Feb 1968 through Dec 1969 Radojcic has a column every month except one, but none of them were titled "Crazy, Man, Crazy". Bubba73 (talk), 18:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Found it: Sept 1970, page 500! Bubba73 (talk), 19:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That article also serves as a reference for adjuorning lost positions.Bubba73 (talk), 19:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added another adjournment ref, and if anyone has Chess Review magazine circa 1968, Gligoric, in annotating the same game, makes nearly identical remarks to Levy's. There's also now a ref to MM's odd behavior in the Taimanov game.  We're starting to get this cleaned up. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 05:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The ones in the 1970 Chess Life are similar too. Bubba73 (talk), 01:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Bubba, if you have your 1970 Chess Lifes handy, you might also check for a reference there to support the "Botvinnik complex" mentioned in the article's first big paragraph. It's in there, in one of the articles reporting the Match of the Century, I can't remember who wrote it but possibly Radojcic again.  Several other pairing oddities are mentioned in the same article, for example having Uhlmann conveniently lined up as prey for Taimanov, who routinely beat him like a drum.  If you could document that one, I'd appreciate it -- I think I finally threw all my old CLs away last year, figuring that I'd never use them again... -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 04:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You must be older than I am! You have a very good memory for such an old guy. :-) The same article does talk about the Match of the Century, and it quotes Fischer as fearing "this guy may lose all four games to Botvinnik" - clearly a reference to the Botvinnik Complex, but doesn't use those words.  Somewhere I read that Botvinnik may have been moved down to play against him, because of it.


 * My first Chess Life is Feb 1968. They had been in my parent's attic until a few months ago.  Now they are in my attic.  My mother says "if you don't use an old magazine in six months, throw it out".  But I've used them three times for references lately!!  I'll look more specifically for Match of the Century - I remember seeing it. CL 1968-1970 are down from the attic at the moment.  Bubba73 (talk), 05:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, your first CL is older than mine (May 69). The thing I'm thinking of would be in one of the 1970 CLs, but not in the "Crazy, Man, Crazy" article.  The language was something about Botvinnik getting paired with Matulovic, "whose 'Botvinnik Complex' is well known," and also Taimanov with Uhlmann, "whom Taimanov used to beat as he liked."  Those phrases have stuck in my mind for a very long time.  The article was critical of the requirement for the World team to submit a board order ahead of time to the Soviets, giving them a chance to "play it cool" -- another phrase that stuck -- by setting up these favorable matchups.  The article might have been by Gligoric or Dimitrje Bjelica rather than Radojcic; I believe it included a big picture of a rather dorky-looking :-) Fischer talking to the author.  That should help you find it. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I realized that it was probably in a different issue. Just took me some time to look thruogh them and I found it, June 1970, page 297-301, in "The match of the Century" by Dragoslav Andric, on page 298 "Almost everyone in Belgrade was convinced, however, that the Russians had composed their team  according to the list Dr. Euwe had made public well before the opening. That is how - the supposition went on - some Russian grandmasters were put up against their all-time "victims".  That is how Taimanov got Uhlmann,whom he used to beat as he liked, and how Botvinnik got Matulovic, who had addmitted (and proved) his "Botvinnik complex".  Why else would Taimanov preceed Botvinnik? ...  Bubba73 (talk), 15:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * PS, I have to complement your memory again, remembering exact phrases from that far back. Bubba73 (talk), 16:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * But Mat pretty much held his own against Bot, 1.5 - 2.5. Bubba73 (talk), 16:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Some of this stuff could go in Russia (USSR) vs Rest of the World too. Bubba73 (talk), 17:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, the ref is now in the article; thanks for digging it up. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 23:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Kasparov, vol II, page 254 just says that they played on board 8, 2.5-1.5 for Botvinnik. Bubba73 (talk), 06:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This is great stuff. I really like the contemporary references.  Even though sometimes the lens of time can put events into sharper relief, often a lot of the detail is lost.  I also think it's important to record how those events were viewed by their participants and observers.  A lot of history is hard to understand if considered only from a modern standpoint. If you would add this material to USSR vs Rest of the World that would be outstanding.  Quale (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The CL article goes on to question why Keres was on tenth board and wondered if it had something to do with his opponent. It says that these questions were raised in the Belgrade newspapers and that the Russians responded with letters to the editors explaining how their team was chosen.  That is in the article too.  It justifies who was selected, but there is some leeway about which board they played on that isn't exactly explained.  Bubba73 (talk), 18:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I added two paragraphs to USSR vs Rest of the World, but part of it contains some redundancy that isn't needed. Bubba73 (talk), 01:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I added a reference for J'adoubovic, although this could still use another reference or two. A magazine reference contemporary with the incident as Bill suggests would be good.  This is an extremely well-known story, probably the biggest story at Sousse 1967 other than Fischer dropping out.  Unlike many such stories, it seems to be true and accurately reported.  The WP:BLP concerns are well-grounded, however, and this really needed a better reference.  The article as a whole is still largely unreferenced.  The only other ref given is Golombek, and Golombek has only a brief entry which does not support most of the claims in the article.  Quale (talk) 01:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

accuracy
Some of the reports of the retracted move may not be accurate. According to ChessBase and Chessgames.com, the only time he and Bilek played in 1967 was the Sousse, Tunisia interzonal. That game was a draw, not a win. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 20:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This does contradict the two sources that say that Matulović won the game, and Saidy & Lessing also get the year wrong. The Hooper & Whyld and Lombardy & Daniels accounts seem OK.  I don't have the Radojcic Chess Life issue in hand, but the brief quote in the article is OK.  This contradiction does deserve some explanation in the notes, or perhaps we should drop the inaccurate sources.  We would still have three sources, which should be adequate. Quale (talk) 04:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know for sure which ones are inaccurate - except that the ones that say he went on to win are probably wrong (contradicted by the game databases). They also differ in his opponent's reaction - at least one says that he did nothing and at least one says that he protested but to no avail.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 04:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's true, but I think those are the questionable sources again. It's pretty clear that Saidy & Lessing are wrong on at least the year, a basic fact.  This is the source that claims Bilek did not lodge a protest.  Fox & James is the source that implies that Bilek protested to the arbiter, but it doesn't explicitly say this in the quote we have in the article.  If this is the source for our claim "his opponent complained to the arbiter", then I would say that that claim is not supported as it's a questionable inference that makes a claim significantly stronger than what the source actually says.  That quote could also describe Bilek not lodging a complaint with the arbiter as he realized the arbiter had not seen the infraction so the protest would be futile.  Perhaps not coincidently, this is the only other source that claims that Matulović won.  The first Sousse 1967 crosstable I turned up in Google agrees that the Bilek game was drawn. Are there contradictions in Hooper & Whyld, Lombardy & Daniels, and Radojcic?  Those three look consistent to me.  Perhaps the problems are limited to Saidy & Lessing and Fox & James.  Quale (talk) 06:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know of problems with those sources. I've quoted all I have found in the footnotes.  There are probably more.  I'd like to have a more consistent picture - there is too much variability in what I've seen.  One of them even quoted Levy as saying that he did it twice in the same year to the same opponent.  I took that out as almost certainly wrong.  If two accounts had different locations that could cause one to think that it had happened twice with the same people in the same year.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 16:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Coaching the Yugoslav national team
The article claims "Matulović may be coaching the Yugoslav national team (as of 2007)." How is this possible? There was no Yugoslavia in 2007.... Quale (talk) 03:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)


 * That was added on Jan. 2, 2009 as an IP user's only edit. I'll take it out.  Suspicious, not definitive, unsourced.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 04:24, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I should have researched the source of the claim. Quale (talk) 06:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Did you know that there is now an easy way to find when such a change was made? Go to "view history", then click on "history revision search". I entered "may be coaching" and it comes up with "Insertion found between 12:37, 14 December 2008 and 11:41, 2 January 2009", so it was added 2 Jan 2009. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 15:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I didn't know that. I hope I remember to use it when the need arises. Quale (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that was added only recently. But it does help a lot when trying to find out who added something a while back.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 00:50, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Botvinnik vs Matulovic
In the Career section, 'a long history of poor results' against Botvinnik is noted. Prior to their meeting in USSR vs World, they had only played twice; while it is true that Botvinnik won both these encounters, this hardly seems a large enough body of results from which to draw any sort of inference, and I'm no statistician. Hushpuckena (talk) 06:28, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Assuming that you are right about there being only two previous games, I agree. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 12:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The quote about his "Botvinnik complex" comes from a primary source that says Matulovic himself had "admitted (and proved)" that he had it. Either some more research is needed here, and/or the text could be modified to reflect Matulovic's self-assessment rather than a "long history." -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 13:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, It seems like he realized that he had such a complex, and stated it. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 15:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)