Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

(If you register a free account you won't see all these ads!)
Robert James Fischer vs Boris Spassky
"Best by Protest" (game of the day Feb-20-2007)
Fischer - Spassky World Championship Match (1972), Reykjavik ISL, rd 6, Jul-23
Queen's Gambit Declined: Tartakower Defense. Exchange Variation (D59)  ·  1-0


Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 128 times; par: 61 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 55 more Fischer/Spassky games
sac: 38.Rxf6 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 29 OF 29 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jun-11-16  N.O.F. NAJDORF: I wonder why Fischer did not play 37 Rf7.

E.g. 37 Rf7 Rxf7

38 exf7 Qc8

39 Qxc7

Jun-11-16  DWINS: <N.O.F. NAJDORF: I wonder why Fischer did not play 37 Rf7.> This has been mentioned before quite a few times, and while it does win, Fischer's choice 37.Qe4 is considerably stronger. Stockfish 7 evaluates 37.Qe4 as 22.75, while 37.Rf7 is evaluated as 8.34
Jun-12-16  RookFile: I think Fischer knew he was winning and just wanted to make sure Spassky wouldn't have any counterplay at all.
Jun-12-16  ZonszeinP: I think this game is overrated!
Spassky was not even ready and played weakly in the opening (Wasn't even ready for an improvement invented by Geller.....his own "second"!!!!)
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <Petrosianic: <But with Fischer it was not always about the money. He believed that professional chess players should be better compensated for their efforts but apparently to him this meant <all> professional chess players, not just himself.>

Fischer wasn't greedy in the usual sense of the word. He didn't care about money for its purchasing power (at least not until after he'd been living on the streets for years and gotten sick of it). He cared about it as a Certificate of Status. "I got this much" means "I'm this important." >

A Fischer hater adds "mind-reading" to his skillset.

Jun-13-16  Howard: Arguably, this game has probably been a bit, indeed, overrated. For one thing, it didn't even make the top-five for the Informant for the second half of 1972.

It at least had some symbolic significance---it marked the first time that Fischer pulled ahead in the match !

Jun-13-16  ZonszeinP: I believe it was Spassky's first defeat ever with the Tartakower system
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <ZonszeinP>

Portisch vs Spassky, 1967

Jun-13-16  ZonszeinP: Thankyou
I read something at the time written by Gligoric (not sure) on Spassky losing this for the first time and believed it 100% Great game by Portisch
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: <Dragi: pure f.....g perfection.> I don't think it is perfect.
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <Howard: Arguably, this game has probably been a bit, indeed, overrated. For one thing, it didn't even make the top-five for the Informant for the second half of 1972.

It at least had some symbolic significance---it marked the first time that Fischer pulled ahead in the match !>

Supposedly, after he resigned, Spassky
clapped along with the audience.

...doubt there were many games where he did that.

Nov-05-16  SimplicityRichard: Fischer's Numero Uno positional masterpiece finalised by an elegant exchange sacrifice. Chess at its best this is. No wonder Spassky stood up and clapped.#
Nov-05-16  Howard: Oh, Spassky did indeed stand at the end of Game 6 in order to join in the applause. This was mentioned, in fact, in Chess World Championship 1972.

Not only that, the NYT ran a front-page article in November, 1981 about the conclusion of Karpov-Korchnoi 1981, and the story also mentioned that occurrence.

Nov-21-16  The Kings Domain: One can see why Spassky stood up and clapped. The sheer perfection of Fischer's moves is of a beauty unsurpassed in the game.
Dec-02-16  Grbasowski: Fischer, a bez e4!
Dec-02-16  Grbasowski: Why not 28.Rf7?!
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Grbasowski: Why not 28.Rf7?!>


Dec-02-16  Howard: Reuben Fine overlooks 28...Ng5 in that atrocious "book" he wrote about the match!
Dec-07-16  N.O.F. NAJDORF: According to Larry Evans, Fischer was more concerned about the extent to which he would be exploited by any agent who proposed a deal than interested in how much he himself would earn.

It was his paranoia that prevented him from capitalising on his success.

Dec-07-16  RookFile: Did Fine overlook 28...Ng5? That's incredible. When he knew what he was doing, he would have seen that in a speed game. Obviously, he was just trying to cash in with his book based upon his ability to market his past accomplishments.
Dec-19-17  Ulhumbrus: Why did Spassky lose? Tal or Fine can give this or that alternative to this or that move but can one suggest a reason for the loss?

To provide one answer to the question, consider what happens after Spassky replies to the thrust 20 e4 with 20...d4.

When White plays e5 and f5 Gligorich's comments suggest that White's moves are very strong as well as very simple and that Spassky can do little to stop the coming mating attack.

However if White has the plan of e5 and f5 does Black also not have the plan of ...c4?

One difference is that f5 attacks the black king whereas ...c4, if Black can arrage it at all, attacks merely the c file.

However that is not all.

When White plays e5 and f5 the advance of his king side pawns will normally expose him to a counter-attack. White will be more exposed to a black bishop which takes part in such a counter-attack than White will be exposed to a black knight which takes part in such a counter-attack.

White has however removed Black's bishop by the exchange 17 Nxe6.

We can say that by the exchange 17 Nxe6 White has reduced his exposure to Black's counterattack after White advances his king side pawns by e5 and f5.

Moreover White's bishop can contribute to the attack if it finds a good diagonal such as the diagonal a2-g8 or the diagonal b1-h7.

Spassky's advance 20...d4 concedes both of these fine diagonals to White's bishop.

This suggests that when Spassky played 20...d4? he did not understand that the meaning of the exchange of the exchange 17 Nxe6 was to make the pawn advance e5 and f5 less effectual for Black and more effectual for White.

This brings to mind a comment by Bent Larsen who said that in Reykjavik there were some wonderful games which the public remembered but that these were partly the result of Spassky playing nowhere near his best. I would guess presently that it would not be wise to assume that Spassky at his best would fail to foresee the consequences of the advance ...d4 following the exchange 17 Nxe6.

Jan-31-18  yurikvelo:


Mar-17-18  Justin796: Its..a very good game by an excellent chess godliness lol
Apr-06-18  beautyofchess: What an incredible masterpiece!
Apr-08-18  CowChewCud: I remember this game was in an intro book on Chess by Raymond Keene.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 29)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 29 OF 29 ·  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:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that 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 game 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, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
Rated 14
from 150 Best Chess Games billkimbro collection by billkimbro
Positional domination, crushing termination!
from MJCB favorite games by MJCB
Fischer as White - unviewed...
from Greatest Games of the Greatest Players by trumvirvel
from 125 Greatest Chess Games by ghardy1988
Game collection: QGD
by Pawn N Hand
by TexTeky
from PuReZHHa by Jaredfchess
An attack on the king comes out of nowhere.
from The 10 Greatest Games Of Bobby Fischer by FischerSpasskyGuy
Y. Seirawan Winning Chess Brilliancies Game 1
from games from books to studying different themes in by 5nizza
Grooten Chess Strategy For Club Players
by Cybernian
barb's favorite games 2
by barb
Reykjavik (m/6): Queen's Gambit Declined: Tartakower Defence
from World Championship Matches by atropos
Tobbe's favorite games
by Tobbe
doguhan2002's favorite games
by doguhan2002
a famous TMB
from 98_D58/D59_QGD_Tartakover-Makogonov-Band_(TMB) by whiteshark
loud's favorite games
by loud
Fişerden 1.Ç4 Ajaýyp gabaw
from Iň gowy küşt oýunlary by Allanur
Game collection: P H
by ipap
Roll over Beethoven
from lost in space's favorite games by lost in space
The most publicized game of all time
from morphyvsfischer's favorite games by morphyvsfischer
plus 328 more collections (not shown)

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2018, Chessgames Services LLC