In my opinion the most beautiful game ever played: the end position is so complex and compelling, almost all of Geller's pieces are attacking while simultaneously being attacked. Geller's attack is subtle yet powerful; his defense hangs by a string yet his position is unassailable; his king has no legal squares to move to yet cannot be attacked.

Tal died in 1992. Unless the novelty used in the 10th game was kept secret for 3 years, then it must have been someone other than M.Tal.

Btw, and I don't quite remember this, didn't Geller work as one of Karpov's seconds/analysts sometime in the '80s, during the KK matches?

With chess players, it's usually the reverse. I'm hazy on the details, but I believe Tal conceived of the novelty back during his time working with Karpov, whose second he was for the 1981 WC match with Korchnoi.

Geller had PLUS scores against five world champions, which I think is a record. Of note is a resounding +4 -1 =7 owning of Botvinnik. Also, his lifetime record against Tal is a tie! So, he had plus scores against 5 WC's and tie against one WC.

Keres on the contrary was owned by Botvinnik +9 -3 =9. Keres had a winning records against Tal, though, while Geller as mentioned tied.

Although Keres had a narrow plus score against Geller, Geller had a plus score against Fischer, and Keres did not. Geller had a 59% winning record, Keres had a 70% record, but Geller played many more games well into his 70's, while Keres died at the young age of 58.

Geller and Keres both had similar narrow losing records against Spassky. Keres never beat Karpov, yet Geller did, overall +1 -2 =6 against Karpov, Keres drew their 2 games overall.

Geller drew 3 games and lost 1 game against Kasparov, Keres never played Kasparov.

He is one of the top players who ever lived.

Geller is one of the most underrated players of all time, easily belonging on everyone's list of best players to never be champion. But he hit The Big 4-0 in 1965. 1972 was a bit past his window of opportunity to be world champion.

He tied for second with Keres in the 1962 cadidates at Curacao, in a bid to play Botvinnik for the world title in 1963. Petrosian won said candidates in 1962 and went on to defeat Botvinnik and became world champion in 1963.

Barring Spassky, perhaps, I think Geller would have been fully capable of defeating anybody in a title match, between about 1956-1968, with a posible exception of Petrosian in '66.

The problem was to get there, to the threshold. Not only for Geller, but for some others, too.

A number of factors play a role:

--to stay in top competitive form for years

--to have an enormous will power, strong nerves, healthy dosage of self-confidence

--not allow anything to get in the way

--a bit of luck doesn't hurt either.

Good examples of the above were Smyslov's quest (1952-57), and Spassky's (1964-69).

I've always felt that it was much harder to become an official Challenger (after 1948), than to win the title match.

In most of the matches between 1951-1990 the victory could have gone either way. The exceptions being '59, '60, '63, '72, '81 and '85.

The other 11 matches were, more or less, wide open affairs. Any qualified Challenger would have had a good chance.

It is hard, perhaps impossible, to estimate P.Keres's chances in a title match.

He had more solid opportunities to get there than anybody else (1948-62), not counting '65. Second in the Candidates 4 times in a row!

Somehow he always came up short when it mattered the most. There was something lacking in his overall make-up. Not a lack of talent, knowledge and experience.

I'd say willpower, nerves, total determination. The Qualities necessary for a champion-like material.

here is just one of many reasons I like Geller. He was involved in the 1952 candidates cycle.....and the 1982 candidates cycle. 30 years of a quest for the World Championship!

He won 264 and drew 536.