Ilia Abramovich Kan was <Botvinnik's> second for this match, and here's something perhaps unexpected he got for his troubles...

Andrew Soltis:

<"Smyslov later said the game that gave him the greatest esthetic pleasure in his entire career was the 14th of the match. But Botvinnik later saw treachery, since in the 14th game Smyslov quickly innovated in an opening Botvinnik had never tried before. <<<He accused his second, Kan, of disclosing his opening preparation to the enemy camp.>>>

Even though Smyslov publicly denied this, Botvinnik never took back his accusation.">

Well since <Soltis> doesn't footnote or list his sources properly, we are forced to hunt for confirmation.

The following is hardly confirmation for <Soltis'> purple prose, but it hints strongly at the notion <Botvinnik> did suspect <Kan> had given away secret preparations in this game.

This is what <Smyslov> writes, from this position, Black to move:

click for larger view

And now,

<"11...exd4! A highly unpleasant <<<surprise>>>, leading to great tactical complications...">

click for larger view

<"...This continuation made such a strong impression on my opponent, that in his notes to this game Botvinnik wrote: <<<'It is surprising that Smyslov was able to make highly detailed preparations for a variation which I had never before adopted, except in training games...'>>>">

I suppose the rest of the passage might serve as something like a "public denial" by Smyslov that he was gifted with this analysis by somebody else.

Smyslov:
<"As we know, the move 9.Be3 had been played earlier, and so, <<<in my theoretical analysis>>> of this opening system, this move was also examined, along with 9.d5 and 9.h3. And I succeeded in discovering an improvement for the defence with 11...exd4! Such is the history of the innovation which brought me success in the present game.">

-Vasily Smyslov, "Smyslov's 125 Selected Games" Ken Neat transl. (Cadogen 1983), pp.86-87

############################

Here is <Botvinnik> speaking for himself about the nasty <11...exd4!> surprise:

<"My opponent played the last three moves (Botvinnik means moves 9-11) immediately, about which <<<I could not hide my surprise>>>. It is certainly rather surprising that Smyslov should have been so well prepared in all the subtleties of a variation that I had never played before, except in training games...">

-Mikhail Botvinnik, "Three World Chess Championship Matches: 1954, 1957, 1958" I.Y. Botvinnik, ed., Steve Giddins transl. (New in Chess 2009), p.55

The ellipses (...) are added by <Botvinnik>. In this context, they seem intended to connote something "implied but not said."

At <Nikolina gora> from 17 Oct. 1952 up until 13 Feb. 1954, on the eve of this match, <Botvinnik> played no fewer than 27 training games with <Kan>, so there can perhaps be little doubt "which training games" he is referring to here.

-Jan Timman, "Secret Matches: The Unknown Training Games of Mikhail Botvinnik" (Russell Enterprises Inc. 2000), pp.59-78

#####################

Of course, all of this is a very long way from stating that "<Botvinnik> accused <Kan> of giving away his opening preparation and he never recanted this statement, though <Smyslov> publicly denied it."

I have a feeling that there may indeed exist some more strongly worded and explicit accounts of <Botvinnik's> suspicions of <Kan>, perhaps in Russian chess journals, but that's just guessing, and it doesn't help us any here.

And again, the maddening thing about <Soltis> is that he does not footnote and list sources for his claims here. I really doubt <Soltis> just made all this up, but I don't like having to guess about it either.

<Vladimirov and the accusations by Kasparov>

Thank you both for giving me the sources so quickly!

Yes I see the parallel with the topic, except as <thomastonk> implied, we don't have a source at present to support the wording of <Soltis'> claims about the "Botvinnik-Kan-Smyslov-Game 14" affair.

At least with the <Kasparov> incident we can read directly what he actually said about <Vladimirov>.

<Months later, Kasparov won a rematch to officially become world champion, and subsequently won two more closely contested encounters with Karpov. Swirling around their chess wars were bizarre rumors that Karpov's seconds were sending him messages during the games in color-coded snacks and drinks and that the former world champion was getting through demanding games with the aid of amphetamines. During the third match, after losing several games where his opening novelties were easily outplayed by Karpov, Kasparov claimed that one of his most trusted trainers, Evgeny Vladimirov, who had been acting suspiciously in camp, was discovered copying the world champion's newest opening ideas into a notebook; Kasparov is convinced that Vladimirov was bribed by Karpov.>

from

<The Wrath of Kan>

Well I have yet to find any corroboration of Soltis' claim that <Botvinnik> directly accused Ilia Abramovich Kan of revealing his opening preparation to <Smyslov>.

But I did find this item-

Yuri Averbakh:

<"Before me, apart from Ragozin, it was I.A. Kan who had played training games with Botvinnik. And also at the dacha. He too, had to listen to the world champion's monologues, in the intervals of play.

<<<'You cannot imagine what a strange chap he is,'>>> Kan once told me, regarding Botvinnik. <<<'Once, we were discussing something quite peacefully, when suddenly, for no reason, he went into a sulk, stalked off into the woods, and very demonstratively refused to come to lunch!'>>>

Later, I risked asking Ilya Abramovich about this incident. He remarked sarcastically: <<<'Botvinnik thinks that he is world champion not only at chess, but in everything else. He- a totally ordinary person!'>>>>

-Yuri Averbakh "Centre-Stage and Behind the Scenes" Steve Giddins transl. (New in Chess 2011), p.102

####################

Here is stunning rare film footage of <Botvinnik's> response to <Kan>: