Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match (1972)

HISTORY OF THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP

next >>

Fischer vs Spassky 1972
The Match of the Century

The name Bobby Fischer, at least to Americans, is synonymous with chess. A prodigy in the 50s, a world class player in the 60s, the 70s saw Fischer at his pinnacle. He earned the right to challenge Boris Spassky in a title run without comparison, defeating Mark Taimanov and Bent Larsen with perfect scores of 6-0, and ex-champion Petrosian 6½-2½. Now the stage was set, and the only thing standing between Fischer and Spassky was Fischer himself.

Fischer vs Spassky 1972
Fischer vs Spassky, 1972
The match was mired in political overtones, during the height of the Cold War. The Soviet chess system had a monopoly on the title since 1948, and the expectations on Spassky were enormous. While Fischer studied chess virtually in seclusion, Spassky had the full resources of the USSR. Victor Baturinsky, head of Soviet Chess Sports Committee, said: "Basically, the Soviet leadership and the powers that be in sport, were interested in just one issue: how to stop Fischer from becoming World Champion."¹

With the match set to begin in Reykjavik, Iceland, Fischer (who had not signed any documents confirming his participation) began to make a number of demands, including a percentage of television rights, a larger prize fund, and all manner of conditions covering everything from the lighting to the chair cushions. To satisfy Bobby's demands of a larger prize fund, British chess promoter James Slater donated a dazzling $125,000 to be added to the prize fund. Fischer still needed more convincing by Bill Lombardy (Fischer's last-minute choice as second), and one famously persuasive telephone call from Henry Kissinger. Mere hours before he would be forfeited, Fischer arrived in Iceland.

On July 11th, the "Match of the Century" had begun. Whether it was a blunder, or a passion to win at all costs, the first game saw Fischer uncharacteristically lose a simple drawn endgame. Game 2 was awarded to Spassky by forfeit when Fischer failed to appear in a dispute over the presence of cameras in the playing hall.

With the score 2-0 in Spassky's favor, Fischer refused to play unless TV cameras were removed from the playing hall. Only a last minute agreement by Spassky to play away from the cameras permitted the third game to be held. This turned out to be a huge psychological mistake by Spassky. In game 3, in a small room backstage, Fischer beat Spassky for the first time in his life. The games then returned to the main stage, but without cameras. Winning again in games 5, 6, 8, and 10 the Fischer juggernaut had become unstoppable.

On September 3, 1972, Robert James Fischer became the 11th World Chess Champion.

click on a game number to replay game 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Fischer 0 0 1 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1

Spassky 1 1 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 1 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0

FINAL SCORE: Fischer 12½; Spassky 8½
Reference: game collection WCC Index [Fischer-Spassky 1972]

NOTABLE GAMES [what is this?]

    · Game #6     Fischer vs Spassky, 1972     1-0
    · Game #13     Spassky vs Fischer, 1972     0-1
    · Game #5     Spassky vs Fischer, 1972     0-1

¹ Clash of the Titans, television documentary, BBC
²The Match of the Century, Wikipedia

page 1 of 1; 21 games

Game Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening
1. Spassky vs Fischer 1-0 56 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match E56 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Main line with 7...Nc6

2. Fischer vs Spassky 0-1 0 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match A00 Uncommon Opening

3. Spassky vs Fischer 0-1 41 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match A61 Benoni

4. Fischer vs Spassky ½-½ 45 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B88 Sicilian, Fischer-Sozin Attack

5. Spassky vs Fischer 0-1 27 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match E41 Nimzo-Indian

6. Fischer vs Spassky 1-0 41 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match D59 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tartakower

7. Spassky vs Fischer ½-½ 49 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B97 Sicilian, Najdorf

8. Fischer vs Spassky 1-0 37 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match A39 English, Symmetrical, Main line with d4

9. Spassky vs Fischer ½-½ 29 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match D41 Queen's Gambit Declined, Semi-Tarrasch

10. Fischer vs Spassky 1-0 56 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match C95 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Breyer

11. Spassky vs Fischer 1-0 31 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B97 Sicilian, Najdorf

12. Fischer vs Spassky ½-½ 55 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match D55 Queen's Gambit Declined

13. Spassky vs Fischer 0-1 74 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B04 Alekhine's Defense, Modern

14. Fischer vs Spassky ½-½ 40 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match D37 Queen's Gambit Declined

15. Spassky vs Fischer ½-½ 43 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B99 Sicilian, Najdorf, 7...Be7 Main line

16. Fischer vs Spassky ½-½ 60 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match C69 Ruy Lopez, Exchange, Gligoric Variation, 6.d4

17. Spassky vs Fischer ½-½ 45 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B09 Pirc, Austrian Attack

18. Fischer vs Spassky ½-½ 47 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B69 Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer Attack, 7...a6 Defense, 11.Bxf6

19. Spassky vs Fischer ½-½ 40 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B05 Alekhine's Defense, Modern

20. Fischer vs Spassky ½-½ 54 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B68 Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer Attack, 7...a6 Defense, 9...Be7

21. Spassky vs Fischer 0-1 41 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match B46 Sicilian, Taimanov Variation

page 1 of 1; 21 games

REFINE SEARCH: White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 9 · Later Kibitzing>
Jan-23-12		lamont: ... <diceman> ~ Re/ That Bxh2 <WAS> [sic] a patzer <blunder> as ascertained by <acirce> & yr/ riposte: <Which is why it probably wasnt.> GM Dr.Anthony Saidy clearly points out in the 2011 Fischer HBO special: "Fischer saw 7 moves ahead, but unfortunately he didnt see 8." --board graphics are then displayed to illustrate Dr. Saidy's analysis, that the flaw in Fischer's move did indeed lay some 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-ply deep !! ...Not ezzzackly Patzerland. Ergo... yr/ informed hunch, versus unthinking reflexive quick-draw Fischer-phobes --was wisely correct: it was NOT [sic] a patzer move. On the other hand... Spassky Match game13 move69 patzer Match game14 move27 patzer &cet. WON games: Fischer 7 Spassky 2 Who can pin the tail...??

Jan-23-12		lamont: <talisman> ~ Vot in the woirld iz IN the water at Dripping Springs [sic!!] that makes you go all high-burst into CAPITALS !!?? Better hope the Gummint dont start testing what IS a-dripping thar in TX. & if MittRickNewtRon get their way... aint gonna be a testing test-tube left. Thrive !!

Feb-20-12		JustAFish: lamont, I've always enjoyed your posts. Their syntactic originality reminds me of the poetry of e. e. cummings.

Apr-02-12		talisman: <lamont> sorry i missed your post. love it here. they did a documentary in Baton Rouge comparing Austin and Baton Rouge starting in 1962. same population, both state capitals, both state universities, Austin blossomed and sadly Baton Rouge is really gone and never coming back. it's sad because i really loved my hometown. up here it's like turning back the clock 60 years.

Apr-04-12		JohnDahl: <they did a documentary in Baton Rouge comparing Austin and Baton Rouge starting in 1962. same population, both state capitals, both state universities, Austin blossomed and sadly Baton Rouge is really gone and never coming back.> Latest (2010) census information (courtesy of Wikipedia, so it must be correct): Baton Rouge: 50% African-American Austin: 8% African-American

Apr-04-12		Jim Bartle: Talisman: But, but, but...LSU was national champion!! UTexas is nowhere. What else can matter?

Apr-06-12		King Death: < JohnDahl: <they did a documentary in Baton Rouge comparing Austin and Baton Rouge starting in 1962. same population, both state capitals, both state universities, Austin blossomed and sadly Baton Rouge is really gone and never coming back.> Latest (2010) census information (courtesy of Wikipedia, so it must be correct): Baton Rouge: 50% African-American Austin: 8% African-American> And what does this have to do with anything? Are you implying that because Baton Rouge is half black that it's going down the tubes? This kind of racist crap doesn't belong and I bet that if you went to Louisiana, you'd cower like a &^@!> if you had to face some of these people that you scorn.

Apr-06-12		JohnDahl: <Only one modern nation has had greater racial segregation than exists today in many American cities. That nation was South Africa in the years before the end of apartheid, says Douglas Massey, a professor of sociology and public affairs at Princeton University. Dr. Massey, who is scheduled to present a free public lecture at the University of Pittsburgh at noon tomorrow, said composite measurements of geographic segregation on a zero-to-100 scale show that South Africa in 1991 measured in the low 90s, while many American cities today rank in the high 70s to low 80s. The figures show that racial segregation is "still very much with us," he said. "In large metropolitan areas with large black populations, we still observe these large segregation patterns. [...] In general, he said, racial segregation in the United States has been stronger in the North than the South. That happened partly because Northern cities substituted racially based housing codes for the Jim Crow laws that made blacks second-class citizens in the South, he said. Many Northern cities had laws that restricted blacks to certain neighborhoods until the Supreme Court outlawed those ordinances in 1917. For several decades after that, the real estate industry steered whites and blacks to different neighborhoods. Today, those discriminatory policies have largely been abolished, Dr. Massey said, and housing handled by real estate professionals is actually less segregated than housing handled by amateurs, such as individual landlords. Those who say that racial segregation in America is largely the result of income differences are wrong, he said. Statistics show that the most affluent African-Americans are nearly as segregated from whites as lower-income African-Americans are, and surveys show that up to 20 percent of whites say their ideal neighborhood would contain no black residents.> Read more: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/0631... Perhaps the admins will rule that the Fischer-Spassky page isn't a suitable venue to discuss American history.

Apr-06-12		Joshka: <rapidcitychess> He was asked during one of his radio interviews (sorry do not recall which one) and he stated he was just trying to go for a win instead of a draw, basically.

Apr-06-12		Jim Bartle: King Death: "And what does this have to do with anything?" Better get used to it, KD.

Apr-14-12		AVRO38: <Yes, Steinitz was an American champion. Even legally changed his name to William. I was quoting <Riverbeast> from Jan-18-08 who claimed Fischer was the only American WC.> Steinitz was the champion who became an American, not an American who became the champion. Steinitz became champion in 1886 but he became a U.S. citizen in 1888. Besides, anyone who thinks Morphy was not the Champion of the World simply because he didn't sign a contract to that effect, is smoking crack!

Apr-23-12		TheTamale: <AVRO38: Besides, anyone who thinks Morphy was not the Champion of the World simply because he didn't sign a contract to that effect, is smoking crack!> Incorrect. I am smoking crack, but I do not think that. Oh wait, I'm assuming the converse of a true conditional statement is also true, which is not a logically supported assumption. I apologize, you may be right. Carry on!

Apr-23-12		Petrosianic: Oh wait, I'm assuming the converse of a true conditional statement is also true, which is not a logically supported assumption. In simpler terms, this is known as The Fallacy of False Conversion. One of the mistakes youre making here is trying to convert an A statement. But the larger mistake is arguing with Avro. He's just BSing you, conflating "world champion" with "best player in the world", and hoping to find a sucker to argue with. It sounds like you see the trick already. He does too, but you'll never get him to admit it.

Jul-12-12		Kinan: Nice interview with Averbakh about this match: http://www.whychess.org/en/node/2221

Aug-15-12		Cemoblanca: CLASH OF THE TITANS, BBC 1999 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N_W...

Aug-15-12		Cemoblanca: 36:25 - 37:20 Mr. Spassky was a true gentlemen & a very fine human being. I feel still so sorry for him. This part was very touching. I can only agree that: "C'est la vies" Mr. Spassky. Life goes on. All the best for you & yours! :0)

Nov-17-12		BobbyDigital80: Does anyone know if there's footage that exists from the 1972 World Championship match? I don't mean a few short clips that are sometimes shown in documentaries about Fischer. I mean the entire film footage or closed-circuit TV footage of the match (or at least a large portion of it). It must exist somewhere. Otherwise, how did anyone get a hold of the few brief clips we see in chess documentaries?

Feb-26-13		tzar: Does anybody know why Fischer's elo dropped from 2785 to 2780 when he retired?. Did he lose points in his match with Spassky????????!!!

Feb-26-13		TheFocus: <Did he lose points in his match with Spassky????????!!!> Yes, he did.

Feb-26-13		Eyal: <Did he lose points in his match with Spassky????????!!!> Yes, he did � because the rating difference between them was huge, 2785-2660; and bear in mind that Fischer's loss by forfeit in game 2 wasn't even rated. The Elo "prediction" for a 2785 player is to score 13.4/20 against a 2660 player, and Fischer scored 12.5 (in practical terms, the "expected" result would mean Fischer winning the match a game sooner). Actually, according to the FIDE rating calculator he should have lost 9 points, which presumably means 10 points back then since they were rounding to the nearest five Elo points, so I�m not even sure why it was only 5.

Feb-27-13		tzar: Wow, thanks. "Mr. Elo" has very little respect for historic victories!

Feb-27-13		RookFile: Well, he treated every game and match the same. I think that's fair and reasonable.

Feb-27-13		tzar: just joking, the method is quite good. It seems fair to have this "double system" in chess. In the one hand the glory of great victories and titles and in the other a systematic accurate rating.

Feb-27-13		RookFile: In the end, people care about who is champ. Everything else is line noise.

Feb-28-13		tzar: I am not so sure about that nowadays. It doesn't seem that Anand gets much glory out of his title, just visit Carlsen's page.

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 9)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 9 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!

If you already have an account, you should login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
No personal attacks against other users.
Nothing in violation of United States law.

See something which violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!