Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Notices of deaths, death announcements and messages.
User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4166
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Jan 19, 2021 6:40 pm


Paul Cooksey
Posts: 792
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Paul Cooksey » Tue Jan 19, 2021 8:57 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 6:09 pm
Nigel has tweeted about Lubosh
The tone of which I found a bit weird. I'd be tempted to say if that is what Nigel says about someone he liked, what would he say about someone he didn't. But I think we already know.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 4256
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by David Sedgwick » Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:07 pm

Leonard Barden wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 12:56 pm
iSLINGTON OPEN 21-23 November 1969

1 Hans Ree 5.5/6
2-7 LUBOSH KAVALEK, David Levy, Leonard Barden, Max Fuller, George Botterill, Peter Lee 5/6.

The game Kavalek v Barden took place in round 4 or 5. We had both dropped half a point, so Lubosh needed a win to stay in contention for first. I was Black in a Richter-Rauser Sicilian where around move 10 he fell for a version of the cheapo Nxe4 winning a pawn due to Bxd8 Nxd2.

With bitter memories of previous occasions when I had had strong positions against GMs and messed up, I made Nxe4, offered a draw, then departed the board. Lubosh thought and chainsmoked for nearly an hour, then accepted my offer. In the post-mortem analysis it was clear that he had seen far more than me and that I would probably have perished in the complications.
John Saunders wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 1:19 pm
Leonard's draw with Lubosh...



I was very sad to hear the news of Lubosh's passing. Though I never met him in the flesh, I worked closely with him for 11 years whilst I was editor of BCM. He couldn't have been easier to get on with - he was unfailingly generous, down to earth and helpful. RIP.

Thanks to Leonard and John for their posts.

They told me something which I didn't know about Barden as well as about Kavalek. Until today, I was under the impression that Leonard hadn't played competitively between 1962 and 1972.

Simon Rogers
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2020 4:30 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Simon Rogers » Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:37 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 8:57 pm
Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 6:09 pm
Nigel has tweeted about Lubosh
The tone of which I found a bit weird. I'd be tempted to say if that is what Nigel says about someone he liked, what would he say about someone he didn't. But I think we already know.
Way before my time posting on the forum, I did notice Nigel post a nice reply on 3rd June 2015 when Mick reported the death of my teammate and close friend George Ellison.

Leonard Barden
Posts: 1685
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:21 am

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Leonard Barden » Tue Jan 19, 2021 10:49 pm

David Sedgwick wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:07 pm
I was under the impression that Leonard hadn't played competitively between 1962 and 1972.
I retired after Ilford 1964 when I finished a poor last in the England Olympiad team qualifier, returned at Hammersmith 1969 (equal 2nd behind Keene) and then played around 6-8 weekenders a year until 1972. My overall performance level between early 60s and early 70s dropped from around 225 to 215 BCF, so I wasn't encouraged to pursue the comeback further.

Chris Rice
Posts: 3151
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Chris Rice » Wed Jan 20, 2021 10:15 am

I remember reading Kavalek's notes to the Gufeld game in a book whose title I've forgotten. He said something along the lines that he felt really connected that day and knew before the game something amazing was going to happen.

Murray Chandler posted a nice tribute on social media:

"Sad news of the passing of my friend Lubosh, one of the top grandmasters in the world in the 1970s and 1980s. We met on many occasions at events around the world, starting with the Haifa Olympiad in 1976 where he played for the USA. He was on devastating form in the West German Open Championship we played together in Bochum 1981. As the cross-table shows he scored 12/15. In this photo from the event he is sitting, as Victor Ciocaltea (Romania) gets up from board. There is nice tribute with photos by Peter Doggers on https://www.chess.com/news/view/lubomir ... -1943-2021"

Image

Image

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2469
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Geoff Chandler » Thu Jan 21, 2021 4:00 pm

Chris Rice wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 10:15 am
I remember reading Kavalek's notes to the Gufeld game in a book whose title I've forgotten. He said something along the lines that he felt really connected that day and knew before the game something amazing was going to happen.
That book will probably be 'Learn from the Grandmasters' by RDK.

Gufeld (the loser) gives it under his section praising it to the roof (quite rightly so)
Kavalek mentions it in his section saying he experienced a strange feeling throughout the Gufeld game.

Paul Dupré
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Sutton, Surrey

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Paul Dupré » Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:35 pm

Kavalek was also one of Bobby Fischer's seconds in the World Chess Championship 1972.
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Nick Burrows
Posts: 1215
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Nick Burrows » Fri Jan 29, 2021 12:37 pm

John Upham wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 1:46 pm
I could be wrong but I think LK "left" the Short camp (during the 1993 match) following the second loss with Black against the 8.a4 Anti-Marshall. He did, however, spend much time with Milos Forman in the bar according to Dominic Lawson. Nigel then continued with Robert Hubner and Jon Speelman.

LK was NSs second for the first 3 or 4 games of the match therefore.
There is an interview with Lubosh from the early 2000's given by Fred Wilson on Perpetual Chess. It seems they had a line worked out against the 8.a4 Anti-Marshall, but Nigel played something different. He also states that he was Nigel's "trainer" for 3 years in total to this point.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sat Jan 30, 2021 5:21 pm

This is very sad, I enjoyed reading a lot of what he wrote, and it seems unlikely that Nigel Short would have made it to a match against Kasparov without his help. Needless to say, we are in no position to judge the rights and wrongs of their falling out right at the worst possible time in 1993.

However, ancient history though it is, it did seem appalling to me that LK sought to reveal Nigel's opening preparations in the BCM shortly afterwards (had it been ten years later, that might have been different); and I thought that this reflected rather badly on Murray Chandler, then Editor of BCM, too. I suppose I mean that it was ethically wrong, though legally too, I expect that Nigel could have sought an injunction to restrain publication through breach of confidence, or could have sued after publication, had he wanted a legal battle at that time.

User avatar
John Saunders
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:10 pm
Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Contact:

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by John Saunders » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:14 am

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sat Jan 30, 2021 5:21 pm
... it did seem appalling to me that LK sought to reveal Nigel's opening preparations in the BCM shortly afterwards (had it been ten years later, that might have been different); and I thought that this reflected rather badly on Murray Chandler, then Editor of BCM, too.
It might have been "appalling", were the facts as you state them here. But they are not, as you would have discovered had you bothered to check. Dare I ask - have you ever read the articles in question? Or troubled to find out precisely when they were published before you hit upon the phrase "shortly afterwards" in the above paragraph? The first Kavalek article in BCM was published in June 1994, some seven or eight months after the Short-Kasparov match finished. It's also a bit strong to say that the articles "sought to reveal Nigel's opening preparations". As regards the chess content of these articles, they consisted of Kavalek's assessment of Kasparov's strengths and weaknesses, some of his general advice to Short during the Candidates' matches, plus light annotations of the Kasparov match games, concentrating on what was actually played. All very much after the event, and, browsing the articles, it is difficult to find anything specifically revelatory or detailed that Nigel might have hoped to use in his future play.

So, given the above facts, your advice would still be to sue? I should stick to academic law, Jonathan...
Personal Twitter @johnchess
Personal Website https://www.saund.org.uk
Britbase https://www.britbase.info

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:52 am

You'll be happy to know, John, that I long since decided to stick to academia. And I was not advising Nigel to travel back to the mid 1990s to sue. But -

Why are you challenging me on "shortly afterwards"?? The match was played in autumn 1993 and the publications appeared in summer 1994 - are you saying that eight or nine months is a long gap? Especially in the early 1990s, with no internet to speed things along?

If you or someone else could republish the articles, we'd all be very interested. I remember being struck by the revelation that Nigel prepared the Kings Gambit for the match v kasparov - and he ended up playing it against other opponents "not so long after" the publications of Kavalek. Only Nigel can tell us what other observations of Kavalek in these articles might have given useful information to his future opponents.

Besides which, I would imagine, but don't know, that Nigel would have inserted a clause restraining LK from all public commentary regarding their preparations for a certain period of time, which, I would then feel confident in guessing, would have spanned more than eight months.

So i stick by my "academic" perspective, and would be curious to hear what Nigel has to say, and also anyone who specialises in breach of confidence, if the articles can be reprinted.

User avatar
John Saunders
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:10 pm
Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Contact:

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by John Saunders » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:15 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:52 am

Besides which, I would imagine, but don't know, that Nigel would have inserted a clause restraining LK from all public commentary regarding their preparations for a certain period of time, which, I would then feel confident in guessing, would have spanned more than eight months.
"Confident in guessing" is very much your style, isn't it!

"Shortly afterwards" in your first post is a woolly phrase which gives the game away - that you hadn't bothered to check. Readers might have been misled into thinking it meant Lubosh had revealed secrets before the match had even ended. And now you go on to tell us your reasoning was based on further speculation about a non-disclosure clause in a contract which may or may not have existed. You're just making it up as you go along - a career in tabloid journalism suggests itself.
Personal Twitter @johnchess
Personal Website https://www.saund.org.uk
Britbase https://www.britbase.info

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19348
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:16 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:52 am
Especially in the early 1990s, with no internet to speed things along?
It wasn't exactly "no internet". TWIC was started in 1994 and there had been on-line discussion of the 1993 match whilst it was in progress.

The affair created a row about the selection of the England team for the 1994 Olympiad. Kasparov had made his peace with Campomanes by getting the Olympiad arranged in Moscow at short notice and the return of Gary and Nigel to FIDE events had been part of the deal. The England team had already been selected. David Norwood offered to stand down, but Murray was non-playing captain. Nigel wanted Murray replaced. He didn't get his way, but he did play in Moscow where England finished fourth.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Lubomir (Lubosh) Kavalek (Czech: Lubomír Kaválek, August 9, 1943 - January 18, 2021)

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:30 pm

"confident in guessing" - oh be sensible now, of course I don't know the contractual arrangements between LK and Nigel. But Nigel had a practicising lawyer on his team and it would be remarkable if there were no such clause, frankly.

I was well aware that Kavalek's articles appeared in 1994, I skim read them at the time and that is why i remember full well the Kings Gambit revelation. You offer no comment on that part of my post, i notice, and I am astonished that you are instead trying to find something in my "shortly afterwards" phrase.

You rightly say that i have no particular knowledge of all the facts, but the appearances are there for all to see and you seem to have no specially known facts of your own with which to defend the publications. But OK, the forum can judge the confidentiality angle for itself to some extent, if we could see the material again.

Post Reply