- FIDE World Championship Knockout, 2004
1 game, 2004 - 00000 Canada
1 game, 1976 - 00000: WC qualification events
1 game, 1968 - aaa PROMOTED DRAFTS
1 game, 1954 - Alekhine-Bogoljubov 1929 ARCHIVE
|
A few days after Alexander Alekhine won the Capablanca - Alekhine World Championship Match (1927), both masters made a general agreement to play a rematch sometime within the next year, under the same rules as they had played the first match. Jose Raul Capablanca did not, however, issue a formal challenge at this time.<1> On February 10, 1928 Capablanca wrote FIDE president Alexander Rueb, explaining his ideas about future changes to the world chess championship. Capablanca recommended altering the playing times and reducing the number of games to 16. He also forwarded this letter to Alekhine.<2> Alekhine interpreted this as a wish to change the conditions for their planned rematch, and wrote Capablanca that he refused to play under any new conditions.<3> Capablanca answered publicly, explaining that he had been talking about future matches, not the match with Alekhine, which "he hoped to arrange... under precisely the same conditions as those which obtained at Buenos Aires."<4> In the meantime, on August 24, 1928 Efim Bogoljubov now challenged Alekhine to a world title match.<5> Alekhine accepted in principle, provided that Bogoljubov could "give the guarantees provided for under the rules of London of 1922," which included a guaranteed $10,000 purse.<6> On October 8, 1928 Capablanca now formally challenged Alekhine to a rematch.<6> Alekhine wrote Capablanca that he would give Bogoljubov until January 15, 1929 to "arrange for and give me the guarantees provided for under the rules of London of 1922... In case my match with Mr. Bogoljubov should take place.... I would then be ready to accept your challenge, after the end of that encounter."<6> In November 1928, American organizers offered Bradley Beach, New Jersey as a venue for an Alekhine-Capablanca rematch, but there exists no evidence that they ever raised the required $10,000 purse.<7> In January 1929, Alekhine announced that "The match with Bogoljubow interests me far more than the battle with Capablanca... Bogoljubow is a much more serious opponent."<8> In August 1929, when it became clear that Bogoljubov could not guarantee a $10,000 purse, Alekhine agreed to play him for a smaller amount.<9> Efim Dmitriyevich Bogoljubov was born April 14, 1889 in Stanislavitsk, near Kiev, Russian Empire (today Ukraine).<10> During the 1920s he posted a series of strong results. He drew the Alekhine - Bogoljubov (1921) match, and finished first over Alekhine at Bad Pistyan (1922). After sharing first with Alekhine and Geza Maroczy at Karlsbad (1923), he won both the USSR Championship (1924) and the USSR Championship (1925). At Moscow (1925) he finished first over Emanuel Lasker and reigning world champion Capablanca. Bogoljubov was also the FIDE champion, a title he had won twice in succession: Bogoljubov - Euwe: First FIDE Championship (1928) and Bogoljubov - Euwe: Second FIDE Championship (1928).<11> At Bad Kissingen (1928) he triumphed over a group of very strong masters, including Capablanca. Despite these substantial successes, Bogoljubov's play and results also suffered from inconsistency. The "Wiener Schachzeitung" noted that prior to the match, no one in the chess world had even the slightest doubt about Alekhine winning, except for Bogoljubov himself.<12> The match began September 6, 1929 under the following conditions: Alekhine would get $6,000 dollars win or lose, with any surplus going to Bogoljubov. A winner would be declared if he scored 15½ points with 6 wins from a maximum of 30 games.<9> Unlike the Capablanca - Alekhine World Championship Match (1927), which had been played in private, the Alekhine-Bogoljubov match would be played in public.<13> The organizers insisted on this, in order to raise money from ticket sales.<14> Only those cities that contributed to the purse would be allowed to host the match: Wiesbaden (games 1-8; 24-25), Heidelberg (games 9-11), Berlin (games 12-17), The Hague (games 18-19; 23), Rotterdam (game 20), and Amsterdam (games 21-22).<15> Emanuel Lasker served as arbiter in the Berlin games.<16> Alekhine won the <1st game>-<insert game link here> Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929, but Bogoljubov kept pace, evening the score 1-1 after a win in <game 4>-<insert game link here> Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929. The world champion won the <next game>-<insert game link here> Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929, and Bogoljubov came right back again to win <game 6>-<insert game link here> Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929, tying the score at 2-2. Alekhine attributed this loss to an "enforced exchange of queens" on move 15 which produced a position that "could not be defended against by accurate play."<17> Capablanca was not impressed, writing to Norbert Lederer "...can you imagine B. winning two games from me or Dr. L. so early?"<18> The world champion now began to draw away with two consecutive victories. Alekhine regarded his win with the black pieces in <game 8>-<insert game link here> Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 to be among his best, featuring an incisive mating combination beginning with 26...Ng3+!<19> The match was now interrupted by a scheduled two week break so that Alekhine could attend the 6th FIDE congress in Venice.<20> On resumption, Alekhine extended his lead to four games, but Bogoljubov clawed back to win games <13>-<insert game link here> Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 and <14>-<insert game link here> Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929. This would be the challenger's last real resistance. Alekhine now won five of the next eight games, putting the match well out of reach. The <final game>-<insert game link here> Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 proved a fitting example of the whole match, which featured exciting, but risky tactical chess throughout. The "Wiener Schachzeitung" commented that the games were played in "Wild West style," and that Alekhine had won by adapting himself to Bogoljubov's specialty, "the field of tactics."<12> After the match, the "Allgemeine Zeitung" asked Alekhine what he thought were the most significant aspects of the contest. The world champion addressed Emanuel Lasker's prediction that chess would eventually succumb to "draw death,"<21> explaining that the notion of "draw death in chess is senseless... that is the fault not of chess but the players concerned."<22> Asked to compare Capablanca and Bogoljubov, Alekhine reckoned that his most recent foe was "more dangerous, although it is much more difficult to win against Capablanca."<22> In an interview with a Düsseldorf newspaper, Bogoljubov maintained that "Now nobody has a chance to win a match with Alekhine." He went on to say that he "would not advise (Capablanca) to play a rematch, because after this new bout, his aura has completely darkened."<23> NOTES
1 "American Chess Bulletin" (March 1928), pp.45-47. Edward Winter, "Capablanca: a compendium of games, notes, articles, correspondence, illustrations and other rare materials on the Cuban chess genius José Raúl Capablanca, 1888-1942 (McFarland 1989), p.209; "American Chess Bulletin" (July-Aug 1928), p.108. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" pp.211-212 2 "American Chess Bulletin" (May 1928), pp.86-87. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca," pp.207-299 3 "American Chess Bulletin" (March 1928), pp.45-47. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.209 4 "American Chess Bulletin" (July-Aug 1928), p.108. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" pp.211-212 5 "American Chess Bulletin" (Sept-Oct 1928), p.133. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213 6 "American Chess Bulletin" (Dec 1928), pp. 174-175. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213 7 W. H. W., "Daily Mail" (16 Nov 1928), p.17. In Edward Winter, <Chess Note 8193> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... 8 "Deutsche Schachblätter" (1 Feb 1929), pp.35-37. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215 9 "Wiener Schachzeitung" (Aug 1929), p.253. In <ANNO / Österreichische Nationalbibliothek> http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a... 10 Jeremy Gaige, "Chess Personalia- A Biobibliography" (MacFarland 1987), p.44 11 The FIDE champion was not considered to be world champion. See Edward Winter, <"FIDE Championship (1928)"> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... 12 "Weltmeister Aljechin." "Wiener Schachzeitung" (Nov 1929), pp.337-338. In <ANNO / Österreichische Nationalbibliothek> http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a... 13 Edward Winter, <Chess Note 7567> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... 14 Leonard Skinner and Robert Verhoeven, "Alexander Alekhine's Chess Games, 1902-1946" (MacFarland 1998), p.364 15 Skinner and Verhoeven, pp.364-371
16 "Wiener Schachzeitung" (Oct 1929), pp.311-313. <ANNO / Österreichische Nationalbibliothek> http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a... 17 Edward Winter, <"Seven Alekhine Articles"> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... 18 "The Russell Collection" Item 1494. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.217 19 Alexander Alekhine, "My Best Games of Chess 1924-1937" (Harcourt, Brace and Company 1948), pp.59-60 20 <"Tidskrift för Schack"> (Nov-Dec 1929), p.263 http://www.schack.se/tfsarkiv/histo... 21 Emanuel Lasker, "Mein Wettkampf mit Capablanca" (1926 ed.), pp.32-33. In Edward Winter, <Chess Note 5437> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... 22 "Conversation with the world chess champion" "Allgemeine Zeitung." Reprinted in the "Aachener Anzeiger – Politisches Tageblatt" 30 Nov 1929. In Edward Winter, <Chess Note 7567> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... 23 Yuri Shaburov, <"Alexander Alekhine- The Undefeated Champion"> (The Voice 1992), p.43 (pagination from the online edition) http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=160451&... ###########################
"American Chess Bulletin" direct quote of a letter sent to them by Alekhine about a "match revanche" with Capablanca: "It is perfectly evident that the match in question, in order to justify its denomination- revanche- must be played on <<<absolutely the same conditions>>> as the first one- namely the rules elaborated by Capablanca himself in London, 1922." <"American Chess Bulletin" Feb. 1928, p. 29.In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" (McFarland 1989), p. 207> ==============
On February 10, 1928, Capablanca wrote a letter to FIDE president Alexander Rueb, explaining his views on future changes to the world chess championship.
Capablanca wanted to alter the playing times and reduce the number of games... Capablanca forwarded the letter to to Alekhine.
<"American Chess Bulletin" (May 1928), pp.86-87. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca," pp.207-299.> ===
In a letter to Capablanca dated February 29, 1928, Alekhine reminded Capablanca that on December 12, shortly after the Capablanca-Alekhine 1927 match, both agreed that a rematch should be played under exactly the same conditions as the first match.<"American Chess Bulletin" (March 1928), pp.45-47. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.209> ===
The July-August 1928 the "American Chess Bulletin" reported Capablanca's public reaction to Alekhine's letter: "Capablanca had written that letter (to Rueb), he said, not for the purpose of suggesting any new conditions for the return match, as to which he and his rival had had a thorough understanding before parting in Buenos Aires, but in order to outline his general ideas on the subject for the guidance of Dr. Rueb and his associates during the discussion of the world championship at the annual business meeting of the International Federation at The Hague later this month. Capablanca added that he hoped to arrange the match with Alekhine udner precisely the same conditions as those which obtained at Buenos Aires." <"American Chess Bulletin" (July-Aug 1928), p.108. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" pp.211-212> ===
A few days after he had won at Bad Kissingen on August 24, 1928, Bogoljubov challenged Alekhine to a world title match. <"American Chess Bulletin" (Sept-Oct 1928), p.133. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213> ===
Alekhine accepted in principle, provided that Bogoljubov could "give the guarantees provided for under the rules of London of 1922." <"American Chess Bulletin" (Dec 1928), pp. 174-175. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213> ===
On October 8, 1928, Capablanca formally challenged Alekhine to a rematch <"American Chess Bulletin" (Dec 1928), pp. 174-175. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213> ===
On October 12, 1928, Alekhine accepted Capablanca's challenge with conditions. Bogoljugov would be given until January 15, 1929 to "arrange for and give me the guarantees provided for under the rules of London of 1922. In case these guarantees should not be forthcoming, I would hold myself readdy... to accept your challenge on the exact basis of the regulations of London... In case my match with Mr. Bogoljubov should take place.... I would then be ready to accept your challenge, after the end of that encounter." <"American Chess Bulletin" (Dec 1928), pp. 174-175. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p.213> ===
Alekhine held Capablanca to the London Rules stipulation that the world champion "need not defend" his title "for a lower purse than $10,000 U.S. dollars."<"American Chess Bulletin" Sept-Oct 1922, p.150. In Winter, "Capablanca" p.188> Capablanca's inability to raise this purse became the main obstacle to a rematch. ===
<Capa's inability to raise the funds- Winter "Capablanca" the Cuban government cancelling their $5000 dollar purse pledge in 1929> ===
November 16, 1928
In 1928, American organizers offered Bradley Beach, N.J. as a venue for the rematch, but there exists no evidence that they ever raised the required $10,000 purse.<W.H.W.,"Daily Mail" 16 November 1928 p.17. In Edward Winter, Chessnote 8193,http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> ===
Alekhine announced that "The match with Bogoljubow interests me far more than the battle with Capablanca... Bogoljubow is a much more serious opponent."<"Deutsche Schachblatter" 1 Feb. 1929, pp.35-37. In Edward Winter, "Capablanca" p. 215> ===
when it became clear that Bogoljubov could not guarantee a $10,000 purse, Alekhine agreed to play him for a smaller amount.<"Wiener Schachzeitung" 29 Aug. 1929, p.253 > ##################
According to <Alekhine>, all of the games in this match were played in private, with no spectators. The games in <Alekhine's> next title match with <Bogoljubov> were played in public, before spectators. From an interview with <Alekhine> after his 1929 match with <Bogoljubov>: INTERVIEWER: ‘Are you satisfied overall with the course of the (1929 Bogoljubov) match?’ ALEKHINE: ‘Yes, the organization was quite good. There is just one thing that I should like to see changed. The games should not be played in public. Instead of a chessplayer, one becomes a performer. The impression given is that the public is more or less interested only in outward appearances, instead of focussing on the game. In this respect it was better in Buenos Aires, as we were not exposed to the eyes of spectators.' -Edward Winter, Chess Note 7567: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... #########################
"In a letter to the <<<American Chess Bulletin>>>...Dr. Alekhine... confirmed the report that he had agreed to meet Capablanca during 1929 in a return match, or, as he termed it, a 'match-revanche.'" <Alekhine: "It is perfectly evident that the match in question, in order to justify its denomination- revanche- must be played on <<<absolutely the same conditions>>> as the first one- namely the rules elaborated by Capablanca himself in London, 1922."> -"American Chess Bulletin" Feb. 1928, p. 29.
In Edward Winter, "Capablanca"
(McFarland 1989), p. 207
#####################
<Match is relocated to the netherlands and Dr. Rueb welcomes them on October 25 in the "National Schaakgebouw" in the Haag chess club (? <Schachheim>, "Heim" is home/asylum) where games 18, 19 and 23 were played. 20th game in the "Hotel Bristol" in Rotterdam. Games 21 and 23 in the "Militiesaal" in Amsterdam (the masters were welcomed there by Dr. M. Levenbock.Page 321 of the November 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung' And then, on page 326 (after the game scores):
The farewell address was given by Jhr. H. Strick van Lindschoten. Both masters departed for Wiesbaden on November 8 and 9. In a short summary of what happened in the Wiesbaden games, Alekhine's victory is reported. There follows a final report on pages 337-338 of the November 1929 'Neue Wiener Schachzeitung' which I will have a closer look at later. But it's mentioned that the public interest was not as great as could have been expected from WC match in Europe. And some remarks about Capablanca.> #######################
<Course of the Match> First 8 games played in Wiesbaden
##############################
<1st game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1-0> http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... -In <My Best Games Of Chess 1924-1937> p.54 ==============
-<Karpova>:
After 21.0-0
click for larger viewAlbert Becker comments: <Es erscheint unfaßbar, daß sich eine solche Stellung in einem Weltmeisterschaftskampfe ereignen kann! Schwarz kann sich überhaupt nicht rühren, er wird abgeschlachtet.> Source: Page 277 of the September 1929 'Wiener Schachzeitung' Translation: It appears inconceivable, that such a position can occur in a World Championship match! Black cannot move at all, he is being butchered. ################################
<2nd game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1/2> Alekhine:
"After the second and third games of my match with E.D. Bogoljubow had terminated in draws after lively encounters, the fourth game again brought a decision and that in favor of the challenger for my title, who thereby evened the score." -<http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> ################################
<3rd game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<4th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1-0> After 17...dxe5
click for larger viewAlekhine:
"(Bogoljubov) selected..." an "active continuation on his 17th move, which threatened to expose him to danger on his king’s wing. This menace became still more acute when he accepted my sacrifice of a pawn on the 21st move, and it is doubtful whether he could have withstood my attack if, for instance, on my 22nd move I had played knight to queen’s knight three.<??> Instead, I committed a fundamental oversight in this promising position which cost me two pawns, Bogoljubow attending to the rest of the game in keeping with the accepted procedure." -<http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...> ################################
<5th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1-0> -In <My Best Games Of Chess 1924-1937> p.57 ################################
<6th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1-0> ################################
<7th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1-0> ################################
<8th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <0-1> -In <My Best Games Of Chess 1924-1937> p.59 After the 8th game the match had a scheduled break so that Alekhine could attend the 6th FIDE congress in Venice. -<"Tidskrift för Schack" (Nov-Dec 1929), p.263> ################################
<9th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<10th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <0-1> ################################
<11th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<12th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <0-1> ################################
<13th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <0-1> ################################
<14th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1-0> ################################
<15th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<16th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <0-1> ################################
<17th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1-0> -In <My Best Games Of Chess 1924-1937> p.61 ################################
<18th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1-0> Alekhine:
"After two successive defeats Bogoljubow suddenly pulled himself together and produced a genuinely good game- one which admittedly will afford friends of chess much pleasure. The mere fact that for the first time in... our match... the king's pawn opening was adopted serves to give this game a special significance." -<"The Gambit" 1929, p.329. In Skinner and Verhoeven, p.369> Bogoljubov opened with 1.e4 in his remaining games with white. ################################
<19th game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1-0> ################################
<20th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<21st game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1-0> ################################
<22d game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <0-1> -In <My Best Games Of Chess 1924-1937> p.63 ################################
<23d game>
Alekhine vs Bogoljubov, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<24th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1/2> ################################
<25th game>
Bogoljubov vs Alekhine, 1929 <1/2>
|
|
3 games, 1929 - Bled Candidates Mirror
|
The 1959 Candidates Tournament was hosted by three cities in Yugoslavia. The first 14 rounds were played in Bled, rounds 15-21 in Zagreb, and rounds 22-28 in Belgrade. This event would select the next challenger to world champion Mikhail Botvinnik, who had just recaptured his title in the Smyslov - Botvinnik World Championship Rematch (1958). Mikhail Tal, Svetozar Gligorić, Pal Benko, Tigran Petrosian, Friðrik Ólafsson and Bobby Fischer qualified from the Portoroz Interzonal (1958). Vasily Smyslov and Paul Keres were seeded directly into the candidates tournament on the strength of their 1-2 finish in the previous Amsterdam Candidates (1956). Harry Golombek was arbiter, and the seconds were Bent Larsen (Fischer), Yuri Averbakh, joined later by Alexander Koblents (Tal), Vladas Mikenas (Keres), Isaac Boleslavsky (Petrosian), Aleksandar Matanovic (Gligorić), Klaus Darga and Ingi Randver Johannsson (Ólafsson), and Rudolf Maric (Benko).[1, 2 ] Bled/Zagreb/Belgrade 7 Sept - 29 Oct [3 ]
table[
1.Tal XXXX 0010 ==== 01=1 1111 1=11 111= 111= 20
2.Keres 1101 XXXX 0=== 1==0 0101 ==11 1110 1111 18.5
3.Petrosian ==== 1=== XXXX ==0= 11== 0==1 100= =11= 15.5
4.Smyslov 10=0 0==1 ==1= XXXX ==10 0=10 =1=1 =011 15
5.Fischer 0000 1010 00== ==01 XXXX 10=1 ==10 =1=1 12.5
6.Gligoric 0=00 ==00 1==0 1=01 01== XXXX ==10 =1== 12.5
7.Olafsson 000= 0001 011= =0=0 10=0 ==01 XXXX 00=1 10
8.Benko 000= 0000 =00= =100 =0=0 =0== 11=0 XXXX 8 ]table The players would meet each other four times, twice in Bled and once in both Zagreb and Belgrade. In Bled, the players stayed at the Grand Hotel Toplice, the site of Alexander Alekhine's historic triumph in Bled (1931). [4 ] Mikhail Tal had just had his appendix removed less than two weeks earlier, but FIDE insisted he make it in time for the tournament. According to Tal, "I was not much troubled by the effects of the operation, apart from in a purely mechanical sense; during a game I did not feel inclined to stroll about..."[5 ] This information may have come as a surprise to Harry Golombek, who commented after round 5 that "it is an impressive sight to see him (Tal) get up after he has made what he obviously thinks is a winning move and pace around the table like a man-eating tiger."[6 ] It may also have surprised Bobby Fischer, who complained after his first game with Tal that whenever he "rose from the board... he'd begin talking to the other Soviet players, and they enjoyed whispering about their or others' positions."[7 ] Pal Benko later revealed that due to his "demanding" job in a US brokerage firm, he "didn't prepare at all" for the event, although he reckoned "I did reasonably well."[8 ] He didn't. After the first cycle Tal, Paul Keres and Tigran Petrosian shared the lead. During the second cycle, shortly after the beginning of round 8, Golombek remarked to Fischer on how many Caro Kans the Soviets had been playing. Bobby replied "they are all just chicken; they just don't want to face B-QB4 against the Sicilian."[6 ] Tal emerged the hero of round 8 with his spectacular win over Vasily Smyslov. He won the brilliancy prize by crushing the ex-world champion with a series of sacrifices he later described as "pure improvisation": Tal vs Smyslov, 1959 [9 ] Such improvisation did not serve him as well in his round 10 encounter with co-leader Keres, who "seemed to enjoy taking all the material Tal was offering": Tal vs Keres, 1959. According to Golombek, "most onlookers thought (Tal) might well have resigned ten moves earlier.[10 ] Though Tal finished off the cycle with three straight wins, it was Keres who led by a half point when the players set off for Zagreb. Perhaps the biggest surprise in the first two cycles was the lackluster play of Smyslov, who trailed a full four points behind Keres. Golombek had noticed that in his round 11 game against Benko, "Smyslov seemed to be struggling, not only against his opponent, but against himself": Benko vs Smyslov, 1959 [11 ] Now it seemed it was Petrosian's turn to struggle. Though he finished the second cycle respectably close to the leaders, he too would fall back to join Smyslov in the middle of the table. According to his biographer Vik Vasiliev, "It was... the uncompromising vigor of... Tal and Keres... which troubled Petrosian... He began to reckon his chances of success as extremely small."[12 ] Petrosian's round 15 game can't have helped his spirits, though it became one of very few bright spots for Friðrik Ólafsson: Petrosian vs F Olafsson, 1959. Their adjourned game was finished on a balcony overlooking Zagreb's Republic Square, where a giant demonstration board had been erected: "A crowd of... 5,000 assembled to watch. Olafsson won to... great acclamations... When he tried to go back to the hotel... the crowd insisted on carrying him on their shoulders."[13 ] Tal led Keres by a point and a half as the final cycle began in the 2,000 seat Belgrade Trade Union House, with the rest of the field trailing far behind.[14 ] Smyslov's woes continued in round 22 when he blundered so badly against Tal that a Russian journalist actually sent in a report that Smyslov had won the game, and "later had to contact Moscow again by telephone and eat his words": Tal vs Smyslov, 1959. [14 ] Keres showed he was still full of fight in round 24 when he won the best game prize against Tal: Tal vs Keres, 1959. The hometown favorite, Yugoslavian grandmaster Gligorić, had played a disappointing tournament until he beat Smyslov in round 26 in just eighteen moves: Smyslov vs Gligoric, 1959. Needless to say, this created quite a stir. As Golombek later described the scene, "There came a full-throated roar from over 2,000 (spectators)... and it was quite impossible for the other players to continue their games. So I hurriedly asked Gligorić and Smyslov to vacate the stage at once."[15 ] With one round to go, Tal only needed a half point against Benko to win the tournament. Benko showed up wearing dark sunglasses, "fearing- or pretending to fear the hypnotic power of Tal's eyes."[16 ] Unfazed, Tal easily forced an early draw by perpetual check to emerge victorious over Keres and all the rest. He had earned the right to face Mikhail Botvinnik in the Botvinnik - Tal World Championship Match (1960). <Photos>
Bled http://www.joyofkosher.com/wp-conte... Grand Hotel Toplice 1960 http://www.sava-hotels-resorts.com/... Zagreb Republic Square http://www.kolekcionar.eu/photos/83... Belgrade Trade Union House http://buki81.files.wordpress.com/2... [ <Notes>
1 Harry Golombek, "4th Candidates' Tournament, 1959- Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade- September 7th - October 29th" Hardinge Simpole, 2009 (First published as BCM Quarterly No.3, 1960), p.vi 2 "Tidskrift för Schack" (Oct. 1959), p.229
3 "De Tijd De Maasbode" (Sept. 7, 1959), p.12
http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/view/i... "De waarheid" (Oct. 30, 1059), p.3
http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/view/i... 4 Golombek, p.1
5 Mikhail Tal, "The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal" (Cadogan 1997), p.117. 6 Golombek, p.77
7 Frank Brady, "Endgame" (Crown Publishers 2011), Chapter Five "The Gold War Gladiator." 8 Pal Benko and Jeremey Silman "Pal Benko- My Life, Games and Compositions" (Siles Press 2003), p.86 9 Tal, p.119
10 Golombek, p.98
11 Golombek, p.107
12 Vik L. Vasiliev, "Tigran Petrosian- His Life and Games" Michael Basman transl. (Batsford 1974), p.91 13 Golombek, pp.148-149
14 Golombek, p.218
15 Golombek, p.254
16 Golombek, p.272
Suggested readings could include: (1) Game Collection: WCC Index (Candidates Tournament 1959) by User: Resignation Trap , (2) http://chessreview.co.uk/tournament... ] ########################
<Cycle by Cycle Count> <Bled>
-<Cycle One> Petrosian/Keres/Tal 4.5, Gligoric 3.5, Fischer/Smyslov/Benko 3, Olafsson 1 -<Cycle Two> Keres 5.5, Tal 5, Gligoric 4.5, Petrosian 4, Smyslov 3, Fischer 2.5, Benko 2, Olafsson 1.5 TOTALS: Keres 10, Tal 9.5, Petrosian 8.5, Gligoric 8, Smyslov 6, Fischer 5.5, Benko 5, Olafsson 3.5 <Zagreb>
-<Cycle Three> Tal 6, Smyslov 5.5, Keres 4, Petrosian/Fischer 3, Olafsson/Gligoric 2.5, Benko 1.5 TOTALS: Tal 15.5, Keres 14, Petrosian/Smyslov 11.5, Gligoric 10.5, Fischer 8.5, Benko 6.5, Olafsson 6 <Belgrade>
-<Cycle Four> Tal/Keres 4.5, Petrosian/Olafsson/Fischer/Smyslov 4, Gligoric 2, Benko 1.5 FINAL TOTAL: Tal 20, Keres 18.5, Petrosian 15.5, Smyslov 15, Gligoric/Fischer 12.5, Olafsson 10, Benko 8 ###################################
<GOLOMBEK'S STORY> ===
-<Arbiter> Harry Golombek
-<Seconds> Larsen (Fischer), Averbakh, then later Koblents (Tal), Mikenas (Keres), Boleslavsky (Petrosian), Matanovic (Gligorić), Johannsen (Ólafsson), Rudolf Marić (Benko). p.vi ===
<Bled> Players stayed at the Grand Hotel Toplice and played in the Bled Casino. p.1 ===
Round Three <Benko-Fischer 1/2> Benko vs Fischer, 1959 Golombek: "This finish... came after resumption of pay and it should be observed that Fischer's over-night analysis was better than Benko's. As a matter of fact, it ws not exactly overnight as it appears that Fischer conceived the idea for the drawing line whilst lying in bed rather late in the morning." pp.27-28 ===
A day before round 5:
Golombek:
"The players had had a rest day on Sunday in which some of them went on an excursion up the nearby Julian Alps, but the intervening day of rest seemed to unsettle them rather than to provide any refreshment of energies." p.46 ===
Golombek on Tal:
"...it is an impressive sight to see him get up after he has made what he obviously thinks is a winning move and pace around the table like a man-eating tiger in search of fresh meat." p.77 ===
Shortly after the beginning of Round Eight:
Golombek on Fischer:
"Shortly after the beginning of play I remarked to Fischer about the high number of Caro-Kanns that had been played in the tournament; to which he replied, 'they are all chicken; they just don't want to face B-QB4 against the Sicilian.'" p.77 ===
Round Nine:
Golombek: "This round saw the meeting between the two experts at getting into time trouble, Benko and Olafsson..." p.89 ===
Round Ten: <Tal-Keres 0-1> Tal vs Keres, 1959 Golombek:
"Now came the meeting between the two leaders, and anybody who may have expected a quick formal draw must have been most agreeably disappointed since both players were obviously intent on some clear-cut decision. Tal was in his most dare-devil, not to say reckless, mood. Keres, on the other hand, treated the position with the utmost sang-froid and seemed to enjoy taking all the material Tal was offering. However, it must be said that, by the time Tal went in for a double piece sacrifice of more than dubious nature, the Latvian Grandmaster was already in the inferior position. Faced with a position in which the ordinary player would have resigned himself to losing a pawn and then hoped for counter-attacking chances, Tal promptly produced a sacrifice first of a Knight and then of a Bishop. This was as imaginative as it was unsound; for Tal had completely overlooked a simple Queen move that nullifed any attempts at attack. In fact, he continued to try to extract some attack from a hopeless position and most onlookers thought he might well have resigned about ten moves earlier." p.98 ===
Round Eleven: <Benko-Smyslov 1-0> Benko vs Smyslov, 1959 Golombek:
"About the Benko-Smyslov game one is compelled to exclaim, 'How are the mighty fallen'. Almost from the opening Smyslov seemed to be struggling, not only against his opponent, but against himself. Playing one against one is fair enough, but one against two is more than the human frame can stand. Smyslov lost a pawn in the later middlegame and though he fought on stubbornly enough for a very long time on adjournment game day it was always in a hopeless cause." p.107 ===
Round Twelve
"Just before the adjourned game session started there was a pleasant little ceremony at which a Yugoslav soap manufacturing firm named Merima presented each player with a box of toilet soap and other toilet requisites." ===
After Round Fourteen- Last round in Bled
"...Keres emerged with the slender lead of half a point over Tal and was awarded a special prize for the best result achieved at Bled, a prize which he received amidst great acclaim at a banquet held to celebrate the end of the Bled stretch of the tournament." p.139 ===
<Zagreb>
"...the players were conveyed by coach from Bled to Zagreb, that is from Slovenia to Croatia. On the way a stop was made at Ljubjana, the chief city of the first named republic, where the players were entertained to a reception by the government of Slovenia." "If the audiences had been surprisingly large at Bled, then they were still more impressive in their numbers at Zagreb where popular enthusiasm for chess is clearly very great indeed. The hall of play had some 700 seats, but all the tickets were sold well in advance and it was the custom for crowds to assemble outside the playing room at each session. One method of dealing with the problem was the demonstration of games as they were being played in the outer halls in Zagreb, whilst a similar process was used in the other Yugoslav towns that were in direct communication with Zagreb such as Ljubljana..." p.148 ===
-<Petrosian-Olafsson 0-1> Petrosian vs F Olafsson, 1959 "Adjourned games were held in a smaller room in a building that looked out on the chief square of Zagreb, the Republic Square. To compensate for the fact that there could be but few actual spectators of the play, demonstration boards were installed on an outside balcony and on this occasion a crowd of not fewer than 5,000 assembled to watch. Tram-cars slowed down as they approached the square, partly because the drivers wanted to see the game and partly because the passengers were also interested... this impediment to the flow of traffic proved too much for the police who forbade the demonstration of games in the square on subsequent days... Olaffson won to the great acclamations of the crowd who cried out for him to appear on the balcony rather as though he was a visiting royalty or distinguished foreign minister. When he tried to go back to the hotel, the younger members of the crowd insisted on carrying him on his shoulders." pp. 148-149 ===
Round Sixteen
"A crucial round as regards the lead. Tal... the only player to win in this round, went ahead of Keres in the lead, a position he was to retain right till the very end of the tournament." p.159 ===
Round Seventeen
-<Keres-Tal 0-1> Keres vs Tal, 1959 "In an interview at the end of the tournament Tal was asked what he regarded as the turning point of the event and he replied 'The game against Keres in Round 17'." P.169 ===
Round Nineteen
-<Petrosian-Tal 1/2> Petrosian vs Tal, 1959 "That Tal and Petrosian are very good friends away from the chess-board is an undoubted fact. They enjoy the same sort of jokes together and appear to have a great deal of mutual interests. This seems to have some inhibiting effect when they meet in a tournament. Neither player makes any real effort to attack the other and they indulge in the most shadowy of shadow-boxing over the board. This was emphatically the case in the nineteenth round and the early draw..." p.191 ===
<Belgrade>
Round Twenty-Two
"There was quite a considerable interval between the third and fourth tours of the tournament. After two days... the whole party... embarked on the seven-hour train journey from Zagreb to Belgrade. It having proved impossible to book seats on the international express that was stopping at Zagreb on its way to Belgrade, special instructions were issued from Belgrade by which a coach was attached to the train solely for the use of the chess players so that we all travelled in lordly fashion to our destination. "...the first round of the Belgrade part... commenced at...the... Trade Union House, before an audience of 2,000. Despite this being the biggest hall of its kind in Belgrade, it was regularly full throughout the seven rounds played in the Yugoslav capital and on a number of occasions police had to be called in to deal with and turn back the disappointed crowds that had failed to gain admission." p.218 ===
-<Tal-Smyslov 1-0> Tal vs Smyslov, 1959 In the "Tal-Smyslov game... Tal sacrificed a piece for an attack that certainly should not have been sufficient. All seemed over and I had left the scene to type out my report giving the result as Smyslov 1 Tal 0, when the assistant director of the tournament came over to me and said that Smyslov had resigned. In fact Smyslov's last move was a complete blunder thorwing away the game. I had to rewrite my report whilst the Russian journalist who had already informed Moscow that Tal had lost had to contact Moscow agian by telephone and eat his words." p.218 ===
Round Twenty-Four
-<Tal-Keres 0-1> Tal vs Keres, 1959 "Keres returned to his best form against Tal in this round and won a most difficult game that earned him the prize for the best game of the tournament... This win made the individual score between the two leaders Keres 3 and Tal 1- an impressive result for Keres but all the same it was now too late for him to have any significant chacne of overhauling Tal." p.237 ===
Round Twenty-Five
-<Petrosian-Keres 1/2> Petrosian vs Keres, 1959 Keres to Golombek: "One cannot always play for a win." p.247 ===
Round Twenty-Six
-<Smyslov-Gligoric 0-1> Smyslov vs Gligoric, 1959 "...the unfortunate Smyslov who chose to play the worst game of his career and achieve the dubious distinction of losing the shortest game on the tournament. Never can he have made so many errors in such a brief space and to all the assembled experts the game seemed very much the sort of tragedy one comes across in simultaneous displays. Not that the Yugoslav audience regarded it as a tragic moment. Here was the national idol, Gligoric, beating the ex-world champion and, wht is more, taking only 18 moves to achieve this. There came a full-throated roar from over 2,000 of them and it was quite impossible for teh other players to continue their games. So I hurriedly asked Gligoric and Smyslov to vacate the stage at once..." p.254 ===
Round Twenty-Eight
-<Tal-Benko 1/2> Tal vs Benko, 1959 "The situation when the last round commenced was that Tal needed only a draw to make sure of first place alone... Benko, fearing- or pretending to fear- the hypnotic power of Tal's eyes, turned up wearing dark sunglasses. The effect of these, however, seemed to be deleterious since, after refusing the offer of a draw on the eleventh move, Benko lost two pawns by an arrant blunder some five moves later... Tal was content to force a draw by perpetual check." p.272 ===
- Harry Golombek, "4th Candidates' Tournament, 1959- Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade- September 7th - October 29th" Hardinge Simpole, 2009 (First published as BCM Quarterly No.3, 1960), ######################
<AVERBAKH'S STORY> In the spring of 1959, I went to Riga, to begin preparing Tal for the Candidates' tournament. His manner of analysing was very unique. Whereas Botvinnik, in the first instance, tried to find the most expedient plan, the most rational arrangement of his forces, the Rigan looked instead for the most aggressive plan, leading to sharp play, rich with combinational possibilities. Whereas Botvinnik sought the rule, Tal sought the exception. The Candidates' tournament was due to take place that autumn. When there were only a few days to go before we were to leave, the news came fro Riga that Tal had appendicitis, and had undergone an operation to remove his appendix. Seeing him in Moscow, I was horrified- he was pale, and noticeably haggard. Only his eyes were the same- piercing and burning like fire. Koblents had been delayed in getting his travel doucments, so Misha and I went to Yugoslavia together. He had still not recovered fully from the operation, and I had to carry his suitcase for him. We had to develop our tactis at the start of the tournament, to suit his state of health. I suggested that in the first cycle... Tal should try to avoid adjournments. Even if he only scored 50%, that would be fine. The important thing was to conserve his strength fully at first. Before the tournament, each of the players and their seconds were asked by the newspaper "Borba" to place the participants in the order they expected them to finish. As Tal wrote in his book... <In the Flames of Attack>... he was surprised that nobody but I put him first. However, there was a simple explanation for this- after his operation, Tal just looked so weak, and all the others noticed this. To be honest, I also had doubts about his success, but I understood that, as his second, I was simply obliged to list him in first place. As we later saw, my prognosis was correct. The first two cycles of the event took place in the mountain resort of Bled, in the Alps, on the banks of the magical mountainside lake. The beautiful nature and fresh mountain air proved excellent medicine, and already after the first cycle, Tal was both feeling and looking much better than at the start. In addition, Koblents arrived, and after consulting, we agreed that Tal could now give it his all. Even so, after the second cycle it was Keres who was leading, with Misha half a point behind him. It was clear that the main battle for victory would be between these two. In the third cycle, Tal demnstrated complete superiority over his opponents. He scored six points out of seven, leading the second-placed Keres by one and a half points. The other competitors were far behind. It was surprising how everything was going for Tal, and in tactical fights, he easily outplayed his opponents. The only game he could have lost was against Smyslov. However, in his opponent's time-trouble, having a piece less, he sacrificed a rook to force perpetual check. The fourth and final cycle took place in Belgrade. In his game with Smyslov, Tal was again in trouble, and again had a piece less, but in time-trouble, he showed fantastic ingenuity and in tactical complications he even won. If someone had told me before the tournament, that in two games with the ex-world champion, and having a piece less in each, Tal would end up taking one and a half points, I would never have believed it. There were not only four rounds to go, and Tal led Keres by two and a half points. It seemed that first place was decided. The task just consisted of not losing this advantage. But here, we committed a mistake. Misha faced his last encounter with Keres, and he had White. It was decided that he should play quietly, maintain equality, and try most of all not to lose. This piece of advice did not suite Tal, but unfortunately Koblents and I only realised this later. The game Tal-Keres proceeded as a slow manoeuvring battle. Step by step, Keres gradually increased his positional advantage, and step by step, Misha gave ground. The game was adjourned. In our analysis, we tried to get everything we could out of the position, but we could not find a draw. On resumption, Tal defended desperately, but Keres played the ending faultlessly and scored an important victory, reducing his deficit by a point. Then it became clear to me that it was pointless to ask Tal to play quietly, and to interfere with his chosen path. What will be, will be! After another round, the penultimate, Tal was due to play Fischer. In this tournament Tal had already beaten the American three times. There could be no doubt that Fischer would try to restore some respectability to the score, and win at least one game, especially as he was White. And as you can understand, for the Rigan too, this game was of enormous significance. If he lost, Keres could catch him. In the process of preparing for the game, looking at the various very sharp Sicilian lines which Fischer usually played, we decided we would not duck the fight! Nobody had any doubts that the game would be very sharp, and that Tal would have to balance on the precipice. But I believed in tal's lucky star, and that in the end it would turn out right. However, watching the balancing act taking place was beyond me. I only came into the playing hall after three hours of play. Misha had a completely winning position, and Koblents and Mikenas, who was Keres' second, were sitting down, holding their hearts, with sedative tablets in their mouths! I must say as a witness, that the Candidates' Tournament was Tal's finest hour. Everything went right for him. Yes, he fell several times into difficult, even lost positions, but his ingenuity and unshakeable belief in himself enabled him to emerge unscathed. At the closing ceremony, in front of a thousand spectators, Tal announced that in the world championship match, his first move would be 1.e2-e4! Of course, this seemed a little childish, but he was only 23 at the time." -Yuri Averbakh, "Centre-Stage and Behind the Scenes: The Personal Memoir of a Soviet Chess Legend" (New in Chess 2011), pp.120-123 ##################################
<TAL'S STORY>
...had his appendix removed. FIDE insisted he make it to Yugoslavia in time for the tournament. This allowed 10 days for recovery before traveling. p.117
Tal:
"I was not much troubled by the effects of the operation, apart from in a purely mechanical sense; during a game I did not feel inclined to stroll about, and I was unable to walk quickly. I was able to devote myself to the battle..." p.117
Second cycle against Smyslov won "brilliancy prize"- Round 8: Tal vs Smyslov, 1959 <1-0> "...the attack... and the sacrifices in this game- which won the brilliancy prize- were pure improvisation." p.119
"After a further three wins in a row, it was clear after the end of the second cycle (Standings after 2d cycle: Keres 10, Tal 9.5, Petrosian 8.5, Gligoric 8, Smyslov 6, Fischer 5.5, Benko 5, Olaffson 3.5) that if nothing extraordinary happened then either Keres or I would be the winner. The tournament moved on to Zagreb, but before this, a lightning event was held in Bled. I succeeded in winning it..." p.119
<Round 16: Sunday 4th October 1959
Tal takes the lead for the first time. Gligoric stumbles in a complicated position against Tal. Benkö is unable to capitalise on his endgame advantage against Ólafsson. Petrosian and Fischer draw a complicated struggle that could have gone either way. Another complex struggle between Smyslov and Keres, and a draw is a fitting result.Tal - Gligoric, 1-0 Tal vs Gligoric, 1959> Tal:
"I am now prepared to admit that in the 3d and 4th cycles Petrosian and I did not really play. This was a negative reaction to the practically unanimous comments in the press after our game from the second cycle ( Tal vs Petrosian, 1959 ). We had played seriously but then read the following opinion, which was not exactly complimentary to us: 'Of course, Tal and Petrosian are friends; there is nothing one can do about it, all their games finish in a draw.' This angered us, and we decided: 'Right, we'll show them how to really draw without a fight!' Over our next game we spent a total of 5 minutes, not more." p.121
"I set ofF for the fourth cycle in Belgrade with a lead of 1.5 points.(Tal - 15½ Keres - 14 Petrosian, Smyslov - 11½ Gligoric - 10½
Fischer - 8½ Benkö - 6½ Ólafsson - 6) Taking into account the fact that in my two most important games, with Smyslov and Keres, I had White, I assumed that this lead should suffice." p.121
"I was leading by 2.5 points with five rounds to go (Tal - 17½
Keres - 15 Smyslov, Petrosian - 12½ Gligoric - 11 Fischer - 9 Ólafsson - 7½ Benkö - 7). I had only to draw with my closest pursuer Keres, who at that moment was already resigned to taking second place, and victory was in the bag. I realised this perfectly well, but as White nevertheless decided to attempt, if possible, to make the score in our individual match 2-2. Here I found out, for the first time in my life, that to play simultaeously for two results... is not possible. I began with the intention of playing a complicated positional five-hour game, but then a couple of times I had a certain change of heart, and Keres very keenly sensed this indecision on my part. From around move 15, he himself began playing for a win. From inertia I avoided exchanges on a couple of moves, and when I made up my mind to play only for a draw, it proved to be too late. This win gained for Keres the prize for the 'Best Game.' Two rounds later, the distance between us had narrowed to one point, and in the penultimate round I had to play the quite revitalised Fischer...( Fischer vs Tal, 1959 ) Aferwards I was told that Bobby had sworn in public to at least exact his revenge at the finish, so as to have the last word... Fischer was playing very keenly and accurately, while Keres, 'scenting blood', had as Black set himself to do everything he could to crush Gligoric....( Gligoric vs Keres, 1959 ) However, Fischer, not wishing to remain a pawn down for long, hastened to reestablish material equality, and in doing so lost part of his advantage. On the 18th move I was faced with a choice: I could either go into a slightly inferior ending, or else I could accept a piece sacrifice, thereby subjecting myself to a very strong attack.... p.122
...I chose the second path, and within three moves the following famous position was reached. After 21...Qxb8
click for larger viewIt is famous, because it was here that a widely-known psychological duel took place between us. Every player has his own habit: one will mirst make his move and then write it down, while another will do things the other way around.... Fischer first wrote down the move 22.Rae1!, without doubt the strongest, and wrote it not in his usual English notation but in European, almost Russian! Then he not very deftly pushed the scoresheet towards me. 'He's asking for an endorsement', I thought to myself, but how was I to react? To frown was impossible, if I smiled he would suspect 'trickery', and so I did the natural thing. I got up and began to calmly walk up and down the stage. I met Petrosian, made some joke to him, and he replied. The 15-year old Fischer, who was essentially still only a large child, sat with a confused expression on his face, looking first at the front row of the spectator where his second (Larsen) was sitting, and tehn at me. Then he wrote down another mofe: 22.Qc6+? ... I held on to my extra piece and adjourned the game in a won position. When I later asked Fischer why he hadn't played 22.Rae1, he replied: 'Well, you laughed at me when I wrote it down!' -<Tal won, then drew Benko in the final round to win the tournament> p.123
"In the third cycle, when we sat down at the board Benko, who had earlier suspected me of hypnotising him, took out of his pocket a pair of dark glasses and put them on. This 'innovation', like any that the opponent knows about beforehand, was met by a 'counter-stroke'. I had borrowed some enormous dark glasses from Petrosian, and following Benko I straight away put them on. Not only the spectators laughed, as well as the other participants and the controllers, but also Benko himself. Unlike me, however, he did not remove his glasses until as late as the twentieth move, by which time his position was already hopeless." p.124
Mikhail Tal, "The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal" Cadogan, 1997 ########################
<BENKO'S STORY> Benko had a job in the US in a brokerage firm.
Benko:
"I did reasonably well... in the Zagreb Candidates Tournament, though I didn't prepare at all. In fact, I was already working in teh U.S. before Zagreb and ws no longer able to pay much attention to chess. Who could? My job was very demanding- I had to rise at 6am every morning, fully concentrate on my duties, and also find teh time to study English." -p.86
"I arrived (in Zagreb) a week before the tournament started so I could get acclimatized. I didn't have an early reservation at the international hotel where the event was going to be held, so I found a smaller place to stay while waiting for everything to begin. This hotel officially cost $1.25 a day, but on the black market you could arrange a price of one dollar. -p.86
"I became acquainted with Fischer at... Portoroz... He was just a teenager at that time, a nice kid. Sometimes he would cry if he lost a game, and I quickly became fond of him, almost protective. Once I asked him what he wanted to be, and he said 'I want to be an international playboy, just like Benko!' p.87
Pal Benko and Jeremey Silman "Pal Benko- My Life, Games and Compositions" (Siles Press 2003) #####################
<FISCHER'S STORY> Brady:
"Bobby's second... Bent Larsen... criticized his charge... Larsen told Bobby 'Most people think you are unpleasant to play against.'...'You walk funny'... 'And you are ugly.' Bobby insisted that Larsen wasn't joking and that the insults 'hurt.' His self-esteem and confidence seemed to have slipped a notch." "Bobby... was livid at the seeming collusion: 'I will teach those dirty Russians a lesson they won't forget for a long time,' he wrote from the Hotel Toplice." "Tal's gestures and staring infuriated Fischer. He complained to the arbiter, but little was done... Whenever Tal rose from the board... he'd begin talking to the other Soviet players, and they enjoyed whispering about their or others' positions... Bobby couldn't understand why the chief arbiter didn't prevent this muttering..." Fisher's letter to the arbiter:
'After the game is completed, analysis by the opponents must be prohibited to avoid disturbing the other players. Upon completion of the game, the Referee must immediately remove the chess pieces form the table to prevent analysis. We recommend that the organization prepare a special room for post-mortem analysis. The room must be completely out of earshot of all the participants. -Robert J. Fischer, International Grandmaster
"Spectators, players, and journalists began asking how he could take two months off, September and October, during the school year to play in a tournament. Finally it was revealed: He'd dropped out of school." "Just before Bobby and Tal were to play a third time, Bobby approached... Koblentz... and said... 'If Tal doesn't behave himself, I am going to smash out all of his front teeth.'" (Bobby) "wrote: 'I am now in quite a good mood, and eating well. (Like) in Alic in Wonderland. Remember? The Red Queen cried before she got a piece of dirt in her eye. I am in a good mood before I win all of my games.'" "His pocket money was running low after he lost seven traveler's checks, and he was having trouble extracting more from his mother.." (Larsen) "kept discouraging him, telling him that he shouldn't expect to place higher than the bottom rank of those competing. When Larsen repeated this line publicly and it was published in the Belgrade newspaper 'Borba', Bobby was enraged and humiliated." Frank Brady "Endgame" (Crown Publishers 2011) Chapter Five "The Gold War Gladiator." ####################
<PETROSIAN'S STORY> "Petrosian travelled to the Candidates' tournament... with every intention of fighting for first place..." p.90 "It was precisely the uncompromising vigor of his rivals (Tal and Keres) which troubled Petrosian. He realized that one of teh two might not withstand the tension, but he could not suppose that this might happen to both. He began to reckon his chances of success as extremely small; and to act on the off-chance of success had never been a particular trait of Petrosian." p.91 Vik L. Vasiliev, "Tigran Petrosian- His Life and Games" Michael Basman transl. (Batsford 1974) #####################
<CHESS REVIEW'S STORY> After Round Fourteen
"Smyslov's dragging pace... is quite the surprise of the tournament." p.345 After Round Twenty-One
"...Bobby's three losses to Tahl and half-point in three games with Petrosyan are spoiling what might otherwise be a strong bid." p.345 "Chess Review" (Nov 1959),
#####################
TheFocus: <Nosnibor> <WCCEP> With regard to the 1959 Candidates dates, I can confirm that the event ran from 6 September until 31 October 1959.>
The last round was October 29. I have the Ragozin book in German and Russian; and the Golembek one in English. October 30 was put aside for adjournments, and the closing ceremony was on October 31. Golembek provides the dates for each round, but Ragozin does not. Tabanus: <Can anyone help us with a newspaper report on this event from October 1959, particularly on what day the final round was played?> Well by now you should all know where to look: http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/result...
1st round started 7 Sept., last round started 29 October (Keres-Olafsson was adjourned and finished 30 October). Nosnibor: official tournament book edited by Gligoric and Ragosin.The book is "Turnir Kandidata 1959" The opening ceremony was 6 September and the prizes were distributed on 31 October.Immediately after this on November 1st Tal won a rapid play tournament with 18.5 points from 21 games,ahead of Petrosian,Keres,Averbach,Boleslavsky,Gligoric,Sm-
yslov,Olafsson,Larsen et al
The results of the rapid play tournament I refered to are on the page following page 29.For some peculiar reason this page is not numbered and appears just before all of the biographies and photographs of all of the contestants.The next page that is actualy numbered is page 33 being the start of the first round results. ####################################
Suggested readings could include: (1) Game Collection: WCC Index (Candidates Tournament 1959) by User: Resignation Trap , (2) http://chessreview.co.uk/tournament... ###############
<Photos>
Photo Bled http://www.joyofkosher.com/wp-conte... Photo Grand Hotel Toplice c1960 http://www.sava-hotels-resorts.com/... ####################################
|
|
1 game, 1959 - Bronstein at the Budapest Candidates 1950
18 games, 1950 - Bronstein at the Saltsjöbaden Interzonal (1948)
19 games, 1948 - Corrections, and Bios and Intros I helped edit
Bios:
David Bronstein Vladimir Petrov Johann Jacob Loewenthal Nicolas Rossolimo Anatoly Ufimtsev Mikhail Mukhin Harijs Skuja Viktor Korchnoi Bios in progress:
Vasily Smyslov Tournament/Match intros:
Stockholm (1912) St. Petersburg Quadrangular (1913) London (1932) Kemeri (1937) Moscow (1947) Hastings (1948/49) Zuerich Candidates (1953) Hastings (1954/55) Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade Candidates (1959) Keres - Geller 2nd place Candidates Playoff (1962) Moscow (1963) Amsterdam Interzonal (1964) Spassky - Keres Candidates Quarterfinal (1965) Geller - Smyslov Candidates Quarterfinal (1965) Tal - Portisch Candidates Quarterfinal (1965) Tal - Larsen Candidates Semifinal (1965) Spassky - Tal Candidates Final (1965) Monte Carlo (1967) Tal - Gligoric Candidates Quarterfinal (1968) Korchnoi - Geller Candidates Quarterfinal (1971) Sukhumi (1972) Tournament/Match intros in progress:
Budapest (1896) Skopje (1967) Netanya (1968) Bucharest (1954) ############################
<Correction Slips pending> Game Collection: Hastings 1948/1949 William Winter did not play in this event. All of the games he is listed as playing here were actually played by William Arthur Winser. Source: Harry Golombek and W. Ritson Morry, "Hastings Chess Tournament 1948-49" En Passant Chess Publications, 1st Edition 1949 Correction slips for all 9 games submitted on Sept 29, 2014 <CORRECTED>
#############################
<April 4th, 2014>: Smyslov vs V Zak, 1938 Both the Event and the Site fields are incorrect. The Event field should read "1st Category Tournament" The Site field should read "Gorky"
SOURCES:
Rusbase http://al20102007.narod.ru/nat_tour... Vasily Smyslov, "Smyslov's 125 Selected Games" Ken Neat transl. (Cadogen 1983), p.xi ##############################
<May 9th, 2014> Tal vs J Visockis, 1954 This game was not played in Riga.
It was played in the <USSR Republics Junior Team Championship 1954>, held 9-23 August in Leningrad. Tal played 1st board for Latvia, scoring 7/9. Latvia finished 3d, behind RSFSR and Moscow, ahead of Leningrad, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Lithuania, Armenia and Estonia. Moves 21-41 of this game are given in Mikhail Tal, "The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal" (Cadogan 1997), p.30. Tal labels the game "USSR Youth Team Ch, Leningrad." The tournament can be found here at <Rusbase> http://al20102007.narod.ru/ch_urs/1... Here is the entire game score downloaded from that <Rusbase> page, which also lists the site as <Leningrad>: [Event "Ch URS (team) (juniors)"]
[Site "Leningrad (Russia)"]
[Date "1954.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tal Mikhail (LAT)"]
[Black "Visotskis"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E87"]
[WhiteElo "0"]
[BlackElo "0"]
[Annotator ""]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[Remark ""]
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 O-O 6.Be3 e5 7.d5 Ne8
8.Qd2 f5 9.O-O-O f4 10.Bf2 Nd7 11.Nge2 Nb6 12.Qd3 g5 13.Kb1 Bd7
14.Nc1 c5 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.c5 Nc8 17.cxd6 Nexd6 18.Bc5 Rf6 19.Be2
Qc7 20.Nb3 Be8 21.Nd5 cxd5 22.Qxd5+ Nf7 23.Qxa8 Bc6 24.Bb6 axb6
25.Rc1 Bxa8 26.Rxc7 Rc6 27.Rc1 Rxc7 28.Rxc7 Ncd6 29.Nd2 Bf8 30.Bc4
b5 31.Be6 Kg7 32.a4 Kf6 33.Bxf7 Nxf7 34.axb5 Bb4 35.Nc4 g4 36.Ra7
gxf3 37.gxf3 Bxe4+ 38.fxe4 Ng5 39.b6 Bc5 40.Ra6 Ne6 41.b7 1-0 ===
<CORRECTED>
######################################
<May 10, 2014>
Tal vs F Olafsson, 1957 This game is round 12 from the <Reykjavik Student Olympiad 1957>. "[bad player ID] is actually Fridrik Olafsson. Here is the game downloaded from <Olimbase> : [Event "4th StudWTCh final"]
[Site "Reykjavik ISL"]
[Date "1957.07.??"]
[Round "12"]
[White "Tal, Mikhail URS"]
[Black "Olafsson, Fridrik ISL"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C47"]
[EventDate "1957.07.11"]
[PlyCount "46"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 Bb4 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 O-O 8.
O-O d5 9.exd5 cxd5 10.Bg5 c6 11.Ne2 Bg4 12.c3 Be7 13.h3 Bxe2 14.Qxe2 Re8
15.Rfe1 Rb8 16.Rad1 h6 17.Bh4 g5 18.Bg3 Bd6 19.Qf3 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Bxg3 21.
Qxg3 Rxb2 22.Qe5 Kg7 23.Re3 c5 1/2-1/2
<CORRECTED>
##################################
<May 22, 2014>
The score of this game Tal vs Keres, 1964 should be <Tal vs Keres 1-0> The game was played at Tallinn, in the <USSR Clubs Team Championship Preliminary 1964>. Tal actually won this game. It should be <Tal vs Keres 1-0>. Sources for the correction:
Source 1:
Tal says,
"After Kislovodsk, the Team Championship of the country was held in two stages. In the semi-final in Tallinn, old friends and rivals of the 'Daugava' and "Kalyera" teams (at that time essentially the teams of Latvia and Estonia) battled for second place in the Final... In this match of rivals, I defeated Keres, the 'Daugava' team won, and we went forward into the Final which was held in Moscow." -Mikhail Tal, "The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal" (Cadogan 1997), p.247 ===
Source 2
According to <Hilary Thomas>, this game was "Adjudicated" as a win for Tal. <Thomas> also gives the correct site/event/date, and the same pgn as does the game on this page, so it's definitely this game he is talking about. -Hilary Thomas, "Complete Games of Mikhail Tal 1960-1966" (Arco 1979), pp.108-109 ===
Source 3
CD <Mikhail Tal - 8th World Champion>* by Alexander Khalifman et al gives also <1-0> ===
Source 4
Rusbase download: http://al20102007.narod.ru/team_ch/... [Event "Ch URS (team) (1/2 final)"]
[Site "Tallinn (Estonia)"]
[Date "1964.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tal Mihail (LAT)"]
[Black "Keres Paul (EST)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C92"]
[WhiteElo "0"]
[BlackElo "0"]
[Annotator ""]
[Source ""]
[Remark ""]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3
d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Nd7 10.d4 Bf6 11.a4 Bb7 12.axb5 axb5 13.Rxa8
Qxa8 14.d5 Na5 15.Bc2 Rb8 16.Na3 Ba6 17.b4 Nc4 18.Nxc4 bxc4 19.Ba4
Nb6 20.Bc6 Bb7 21.Bxb7 Qxb7 22.Be3 Ra8 23.Qe2 Qa6 24.Nd2 Na4
25.Nxc4 Nxc3 26.Qd3 Nb5 27.Na5 h6 28.Rc1 Rb8 29.Nc6 Ra8 30.Na5
Rb8 31.Qe2 Bd8 32.g3 Bf6 33.h4 Kh7 34.Kg2 Kg8 35.Qd3 Kf8 36.Qf1
Kg8 37.Qe2 Bd8 38.Qd3 Bf6 39.Qf1 h5 40.Ra1 Re8 41.Qc4 g6 42.Qe2 1-0 ===
Source 5
Olimpbase download: http://www.olimpbase.org/1964sc/196... [Event "4th Soviet Team Cup - prel"]
[Site "Tallinn URS"]
[Date "1964.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tals, Mihails"]
[Black "Keres, Paul"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C92"]
[EventDate "1964.??.??"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O
9.h3 Nd7 10.d4 Bf6 11.a4 Bb7 12.axb5 axb5 13.Rxa8 Qxa8 14.d5 Na5 15.Bc2
Rb8 16.Na3 Ba6 17.b4 Nc4 18.Nxc4 bxc4 19.Ba4 Nb6 20.Bc6 Bb7 21.Bxb7 Qxb7
22.Be3 Ra8 23.Qe2 Qa6 24.Nd2 Na4 25.Nxc4 Nxc3 26.Qd3 Nb5 27.Na5 h6 28.Rc1
Rb8 29.Nc6 Ra8 30.Na5 Rb8 31.Qe2 Bd8 32.g3 Bf6 33.h4 Kh7 34.Kg2 Kg8 35.Qd3
Kf8 36.Qf1 Kg8 37.Qe2 Bd8 38.Qd3 Bf6 39.Qf1 h5 40.Ra1 Re8 41.Qc4 g6 42.Qe2
1-0
<CORRECTED>
#######################
<May 23, 2014> Duplicate game score [bad chessgames.com link] This game is a duplicate of another game- this one here- Polugaevsky vs Tal, 1962 which features the correct move 14.Qe2. The duplicate gives the incorrect 14.Qc2.
Source for the correct move: Hilary Thomas, "Complete Games of Mikhail Tal 1960-1966" (Arco 1979), p.62 <CORRECTED>
###########################
May 30, 2014
Tal vs J Klavins, 1955 Incorrect opponent.
This game was played between <Tal> and <Janis Klavins>. In our database "Y. Kliavins" and "Y.Kliavinsh" are in fact Janis Klavins- Janis Klavins Source 1:
[Event "Ch URS (1/4 final)"]
[Site "Vilnius (Lithuania)"]
[Date "1955.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tal Mihail (LAT)"]
[Black "Kliavinsh Y (LAT)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D45"]
[WhiteElo "0"]
[BlackElo "0"]
[Annotator ""]
[Source ""]
[Remark ""]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 Bd6 7.Bd2 O-O 8.O-O-O c5 9.e4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Bc5 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 Bxd4 13.Rxd4 Qb6 14.Rd2 d4 15.Na4 Qa5 16.Rxd4 Qe1+ 17.Rd1 Qxe4 18.Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Bd3 Nec5 20.Nxc5 Nxc5 21.Bc2 b6 22.b4 Nb7 23.a3 e5 24.Be4 Rb8 25.Bg3 Re8 26.Bc6 Re7 27.Rhe1 f6 28.f4 Bg4 29.Rd4 exd4 30.Rxe7 Nd6 31.Rxa7 Nxc4 32.Bd5+ Kh8 33.f5 Rc8 34.Be6 d3 35.Bf4 Rd8 36.Bxc4 d2+ 37.Bxd2 Rc8 38.Be3 b5 39.Bc5 bxc4 40.Kc2 Bxf5+ 41.Kc3 Be6 42.a4 Rd8 43.Bd4 Bd5 44.b5 Bxg2 45.b6 Kg8 46.a5 g5 47.a6 f5 48.Rc7 f4 49.b7 1-0 Downloaded from Rusbase "Zonal Tournament of 23 Championship of USSR- Vilnius 1955- http://al20102007.narod.ru/ch_urs/1.... This is the only event Tal played in Vilnius in 1955, and if you look at the crosstable, Janis Klavins (Kliavinsh Y.) played the event, but Janis Klovans did not. ===
Source 2:
According to
Alexander Khalifman et al, "Mikhail Tal - 8th World Champion" (PC-CD), this game was indeed played in <Vilnius> against Janis Klavins (Y. Klianvish). ==================
Source 3:
According to
Hilary Thomas, "Complete Games of Mikhail Tal 1936-1959" (Batsford, 1980), p.55, This game was played in <Vilnius> against Janis Klavins (Kliavin). <CORRECTED>
##############################
May 30, 2014
J Klavins vs Tal, 1949 Incorrect opponent.
This game was played between <Tal> and <Janis Klavins>. In our database "Y. Kliavins" and "Y.Kliavinsh" are in fact Janis Klavins- Janis Klavins Source: -Hilary Thomas "Complete Games of Mikhail Tal 1936-1959" (Batsford 1980), p.3 See also this game where a similar mixup has taken place, and for which I already submitted a corrections slip: Tal vs J Klavins, 1955 <CORRECTED>
########################################
June 4, 2014
Taimanov vs V Liberzon, 1972 The site field is incorrect. This game was not played in <Tiblisi>. It was played in the <Sukhimi International 1972>: http://al20102007.narod.ru/it/1972/... PGN download from <Rusbase> http://al20102007.narod.ru/it/1972/... [Event "Sukhumi"]
[Site "Sukhumi"]
[Date "1972.09.04"]
[Round "15"]
[White "Taimanov, Mark E"]
[Black "Liberzon, Vladimir M"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D91"]
[WhiteElo "2590"]
[BlackElo "2540"]
[PlyCount "57"]
[EventDate "1972.??.??"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "2000.11.22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. Bg5 Ne4 6. cxd5 Nxg5 7. Nxg5 e6 8. Qd2 exd5 9. Qe3+ Kf8 10. Qf4 Bf6 11. h4 Kg7 12. e4 dxe4 13. O-O-O h6 14. Ngxe4 Be6 15. d5 Bf5 16. Nxf6 Qxf6 17. g4 Bd7 18. Qg3 Re8 19. g5 Qe5 20. gxh6+ Kxh6 21. f4 Qe3+ 22. Qxe3 Rxe3 23. h5 Na6 24. hxg6+ Kxg6 25. Bd3+ Kf6 26. d6 Bc6 27. Rh6+ Kg7 28. Rh7+ Kf6 29. Bc4 1-0 <CORRECTED>
################################
<correction slip sent July 18, 2014> Tal vs M Mukhin, 1972 <Tal's> opponent here was Mikhail Mukhin, not Evgeny Mukhin. Here is the tournament crosstable: http://al20102007.narod.ru/it/1972/... Pgn of this game downloaded from <Rusbase>, with opponent clearly marked <Mikhail Mukhin>: [Event "Sukhumi"]
[Site "Sukhumi"]
[Date "1972.08.30"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Tal, Mihail"]
[Black "Mukhin, Mikhail A"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A16"]
[WhiteElo "2625"]
[BlackElo "2420"]
[PlyCount "97"]
[EventDate "1972.??.??"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "2000.11.22"]
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. cxd5 Nxd5 4. g3 g6 5. Bg2 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Rb1 c6 8.
Nf3 O-O 9. O-O Nd7 10. Qc2 Qc7 11. d4 e5 12. Rd1 Re8 13. e4 b6 14. Qb3 c5 15.
d5 c4 16. Qa4 Bb7 17. Be3 a6 18. Qb4 b5 19. a4 Bf8 20. Qb2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Bxc5
22. axb5 axb5 23. Qxb5 Rab8 24. Qa4 Ra8 25. Qc2 Bc8 26. Nd2 Bd7 27. Ra1 Bg4 28.
Re1 Rxa1 29. Rxa1 Be2 30. Bf1 Bxf1 31. Kxf1 Bb6 32. Qa4 Rc8 33. Qb5 Rb8 34.
Qxc4 Qd7 35. Kg2 Rc8 36. Qd3 Qc7 37. Ra6 Qc5 38. Qe2 Bd8 39. c4 Kg7 40. Qg4 Rb8
41. Rc6 Qa7 42. Qf3 Qa1 43. Nb3 Qe1 44. Rd6 h5 45. h4 Be7 46. Rd7 Bf6 47. c5
Rb4 48. c6 Rc4 49. Qe3 1-0
<CORRECTED>
##############################
Nov 11, 2014
Tal vs B Gasic, 1966 The game ended after 24.Re5
The moves from 24...Rc3 to 28.Rg3 is analysis by Khalifman. Source: Alexander Khalifman, ed. "Mikhail Tal Games II" (Chess Stars 1995), p.126
|
|
1 game, 1953 - Games to submit
1 game, 1949 - Gligoric-Donner Training Match 1968
10 games, 1968 - Hastings 1948/1949
|
This was the fourth Hastings Christmas Congress since its post-war revival, and it looked to be one of the weaker editions.[1 ] The previous year's Hastings champion Laszlo Szabo, the only grandmaster strength invitee, withdrew before the start of the tournament due to illness.[2 ] The "Supplement to London and Midland Chess Bulletins" warned that the fabled Hastings Congress was in danger of becoming "just another chess tournament," because the organizers failed to supply a purse rich enough to attract any real stars. The city of Hastings managed to raise £250 to fund the event. The "Supplement" regarded this to be an inadequate sum. They pointed out that the publicity value to the city justified a more lucrative purse. They also criticized the organizers for failing to use their "personal influence" to woo foreign masters who might agree to play for a smaller prize.[3 ] Nonetheless, the Premier section still featured an intriguing mix of foreign and local masters. Hungarian born Imre König had resided in England since 1938, and thus proved a convenient choice to replace Szabó at the last minute.[3 ] His current form was anyone's guess. He hadn't competed since June 1946, when he lost both his games to Vasily Smyslov in the <USSR-Great Britain Radio Match>,[4 ] but he had previously managed a respectable fourth place in the strong London-B (1946) "victory tournament."[5 ] The Ukrainian born French champion Nicolas Rossolimo[6 ] had recently shared second with Pal Benko at <Bad Gastein 1948>, drawn a match with Savielly Tartakower, and beaten Israel Albert Horowitz in one of only two decisive games in the drawn <France-USA Radio Match 1948>.[7 ] Dutchman Jan Muhring had shared second with Henri Grob and G.A. Thomas at <Hastings 1947/1948>, behind Szabó.[8 ] The Estonian Paul Felix Schmidt had once been competitive with the likes of Klaus Junge and Paul Keres, but his post-war form was suspect. His only accomplishment in the past year had been to finish second at the minor <Leeuwarden 1948> tournament.[9 ] New Zealand champion Bob Wade had warmed up for Hastings by finishing second at a pair of autumn Dutch tournaments, <Baarn Major Group 1948> and <Hertogenbosch 1948>.[10 ] Of the local English hopes, G.A. Thomas and Baruch Wood looked to be the leading lights. Thomas had shared second in the previous Hastings Congress,[8 ] and both had shared second in the 1948 <British Championship>, behind Reginald Joseph Broadbent. [11 ] Perennial Scottish champion William Fairhurst had finished fifth at <Hastings 1947/1948>,[8 ] and most recently had drawn his game with Maurice Edward Goldstein in the <England-Australia Radio Match 1948>.[12 ] Sir Theodore Henry Tylor had enjoyed some prominence before World War Two, but his recent form was sporadic. He had only played twice since 1946, scoring +0 -1 =1 vs Ludek Pachman in the <Midlands Counties-Czechoslovakia Match 1947>[13 ]; and +1 -1 =0 vs Chris Vlagsma in the <England-Netherlands Match 1948>.[14 ] William Winser had the look of a rank outsider. He hadn't played since he finished sixth in the Premier Reserves B section of the previous year's Hastings Congress, three classes below the Premier tournament he now contested.[8 ] His presence might help explain the astonishment of the "Supplement to London and Midland Chess Bulletins" that Conel Hugh O'Donel Alexander had not been included: "We... must confess ourselves stupefied by the failure to invite Alexander, twice a prize-winner in this event, for he is still one of the greatest British masters..."[3 ] On December 30 the Mayor of Hastings hosted a civic reception in the Town Hall. Mr. Neill Cooper-Key, the Conservative M.P. for Hastings, made chess history by delivering the opening address in Esperanto.[15 ] Shortly after the ceremony, round one began in the seaside White Rock Pavilion.[1 ] Photo: [http://www.1066online.co.uk/hasting... ] After four rounds Rossolimo led, with Wood, König and Schmidt a half point back. Round five featured a sparkling rook sacrifice by Rossolimo that won him the tournament brilliancy prize: Rossolimo vs W J Muhring, 1949. [16 ] 29.Rg3xg7+!
click for larger viewAfter eight rounds, Rossolimo held sole first and needed only a draw to ensure victory. Consequently, in the final round he offered Wood a draw on move 6! Wood refused, and "played with praiseworthy enterprise..." getting "the better game from the opening...Thereafter it took all (Rossolimo's) skill to hold the game."-Rossolimo vs B H Wood, 1949 [17 ] Nicolas Rossolimo had become champion of the 24th Hastings Christmas Congress, followed closely by König in second and Murhing in third. Wood and Fairhurst proved best of the Englishmen, finishing shared fourth. Thomas might have been expected to do better, but tailenders Winser and Tylor clearly played to recent form. [bad player ID] won the Premier Reserves Major section, and Alan Phillips won the Premier Reserves A Section.[3 ] <Hastings, England 30 Dec 1948 - 8 Jan 1949>[18 ]
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 Pts.
1 Rossolimo * ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 1 6½
2 König ½ * ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 6
3 Muhring 0 ½ * ½ 0 1 1 1 ½ 1 5½
=4 Wood ½ 1 ½ * 1 0 0 ½ ½ 1 5
=4 Fairhurst 0 0 1 0 * ½ 1 1 1 ½ 5
5 Schmidt ½ ½ 0 1 ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ 4½
6 Thomas ½ 0 0 1 0 ½ * ½ ½ 1 4
7 Wade ½ 0 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ * 1 ½ 3½
8 Winser 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 * ½ 3
9 Tylor 0 0 0 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ * 2
]table
Harry Golombek was fulsome in his praise for Rossolimo's brilliancy prize game, explaining that "He tried a system of his own in the Giuoco Piano against Muhring and the Dutch Master wrongly allowed him to open up the game. By a neat little combination he won a pawn and then finished off his opponent by a brilliantly conducted kingside attack, culminating in a rook sacrifice."[19 ] He later added that all of Rossolimo's wins were "marked by a most pleasing and natural brilliance."[20 ] Muhring only found out he had won the 3rd prize after he had already returned to the Netherlands.[21 ] He and his last round opponent Paul Felix Schmidt had planned to play <Hoogovens 1948> in Beverwijk, which began the same day as the Hastings Congress finished. Consequently, they played their "last round" game on Sunday, January 2, the same day they also played their regularly scheduled round three games.[22 ] As it turned out, Muhring did not actually play at Beverwijk, but Schmidt did.[23 ] FIDE began awarding titles in 1950. By 1951 it had awarded the International Master title to all of the <Hastings 1948/1949> participants except Wood, Winser and Tylor. Rossolimo was the only contestant to subsequently garner the FIDE Grandmaster title, which he received in 1953.[24 ] [Notes
1 Britbase-"Hastings Premier PGN Downloads" http://www.saund.co.uk/britbase/has... 2 "Times" 31 Dec 1948, p.6
3 "Supplement to London and Midland Chess Bulletins" (Feb 1949). In Harry Golombek and William Ritson-Morry, "Hastings Chess Tournament 1948-49" (En Passant Chess Publications 1st Edition 1949), pp.1-3 4 Di Felice, "Chess Results 1941-1946" (McFarland 2008), p.266 5 Di Felice, "Chess Results 1947-1950" (McFarland 2008), p.315 6 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.163
7 Di Felice, "1947-1950" pp.105,106,199
8 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.95
9 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.148
10 Di Felice, "1947-1950" pp.105,141
11 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.150
12 Di Felice, 1"947-1950" p.206
13 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.89
14 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.209
15 "Evening Telegraph" (30 Dec 1948), p.1; "Hastings and St Leonards Observer" (1 Jan 1949), p.1 16 "The Games (with Annotations and Comments by Harry Golombek and William Ritson-Morry) ". In Harry Golombek and William Ritson-Morry, "Hastings Chess Tournament 1948-49" (En Passant Chess Publications 1st Edition 1949), pp.18-19 17 "The Games (with Annotations and Comments by Harry Golombek and William Ritson-Morry) " p.30 18 Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.214; "Times" 31 Dec 1948 - 10 Jan 1949 19 "Times" (5 Jan 1949), p.2
20 "Times" (10 Jan 1949), p.6
21 "Tijdschrift" (Feb 1949)
22 "The Games (with Annotations and Comments by Harry Golombek andWilliam Ritson-Morry), " p.28 23 Di Felice, "1947-1950" p.233
24 Jeremy Gaige, "Chess Personalia" (McFarland 1987), pp.113,221,293,362,424,454; "Tidskrift för Schack" (July 1950), p.208 Original collection Game Collection: Hastings 1948/49 by User: suenteus po 147;
Game dates and research by User: Paint My Dragon and User: Tabanus;
Introduction written and sourced by User: WCC Editing Project Further reading Game Collection: Hastings 1948/1949 ARCHIVE ]
|
|
45 games, 1948-1949 - Hastings 1948/1949 ARCHIVE
|
<"Supplement to London and Midland Chess Bulletins" (Feb 1949). In Harry Golombek and W. Ritson Morry, "Hastings Chess Tournament 1948-49" En Passant Chess Publications 1st Edition 1949> Golombek and Ritson Morry:
(p.1)
"The 24th annual international Xmas congress of the Hastings Chess Club was officially opened at 3:45 p.m. on Thursday December 30th, 1948 by Neil Cooper-Key Esq., M.P. for Hastings, supported by the Mayor and other important members of the municipality. The entry of 131 competitors was a good one, but as was the case last year the Premier section was by no means of the strength which distinguished it in the pre-war period. In 1934, for instance, we saw a triple tie between Sir Geo. Thomas, Flohr and Euwe with Capablanca and Botwinnik below them! In 1937 Reshevsky was the winner with Keres and Alexander in second place and Fine and Flohr just below. Indeed the list of winners: Yates, Kostich, Rubinstein, Euwe, Maroczy, Alekhine, Vidmar, Tartakower, Marshall, Takacs, Colle, Capablanca, Flohr, Thomas, Reshevsky, Szabo and Alexander is in itself an almost complete catalogue of the grandmasters of the past 20 years. These great chessplayers made Hasings and its chess congress world famous. Because of their presence a tradition was built and Hastings was never "just another chess tournament" such as it is now seriously in danger of becoming. Right from the start it was clear that the club's officers were keenly aware that the drop in standard was more than unfortunate, but they made it clear that finance was the only cause. Although the cost of everything has risen, the grant of 250 pounds which they receive from the Corporation towards the expenses of the tournament has not been increased, and they are accordingly unable to invite the same number of distinguished foreign players as of yore. The Mayor pointed out, on the other hand, that the town was having a struggle to make its budget balance and that chess tournaments were not the only activities which cost more. At the same time we feel that neither the town nor the club can completely escape criticism for the following reasons: I, The Mayor admitted that this congress is of great publicity value to a town which lives largely by advertising itself and thus attracting visitors. We know from the volume of cuttings received through our press cutting agency that the publicity this tournament brings Hastings in the world press could not (p.2) be bought in the form of advertisements for many times the 250 pound earmarked for the congress. 2. The club could in our opinion make better use of the help available from certain important chess figures who could use their personal influence with many foreign masters to secure their appearance on favourable terms. Again we know that two years ago a great opportunity to secure the attendance of Najdorf was missed only through failure ot act promptly when he offered to appear, and by the time it was decided to invite him he had been forced to accept other offers. We also must confess ourselves stupefied by the failure to invite Alexander, twice a prize-winner in this event, for he is still one of the greatest British masters and is always likely to beat the best although often the victim of his mercurial temperament. Nevertheless, fate was unkind to the organisers, for at the last moment the star performer, Szabo, fell ill and there was no tie to replace him by inviting another grandmaster. I. Konig was a good choice in the circumstances and fully justified his selection by playing very good chess to finish within a point of the victor. The French champion, N. Rossolimo was never seriously extended in his quest for honours. His chess is very enterprising and his opening play is original and full of ideas. This is the type of play which always attracts the gallery. It would have been interesting to see how he would have fared against Szabo, for he has not had the same range of experience in international tournaments as most continental masters. Muhring played some good games, but his form was patchy and he has not the consistency necessary for high honours in big tournaments. Paul Schmidt was a big disappointment. At one time he was thought to be more promising than Keres, but in this tournament his play was lifeless and he was always far too ready to agree to the draw. Of the British contingent, B.H. Wood undoubtedly maintained the position he gained as a result of the tie he made for second place in the British Championship. Although favoured to some extent by tournament luck and he is now a very dangerous opponent for anyone. Fairhurst also played very determined chess and showed that he is still a force in British chess. Siur George Thomas fought valiantly, but anno domini is now a big handicap for him and he was obviously very tired at the end. Tylor played better than his score suggests and onlyrequires practice to recover the place he occupied in British chess before the war. ---------
-<Final Tables> (pp.3-4) Premier Reserves (Major): [bad player ID] Premier Reserves (A): Alan Phillips Premier Reserves (B): M. Jacobson
Premier Reserves (C): E. Reifenberg Ernst Robert Reifenberg? ############################
Golombek and Ritson Morry on W J Muhring vs P Schmidt, 1949 "This game was played in advance on Sunday, January 2nd, in order to permit the players to get away early for the Beverwijk Tournament which was due to begin on January 8th." (p.28) Day of week calculator: http://www.calculatorcat.com/free_c... ####################
<Venue> White Rock Pavilion <Britbase Hastings Archive http://www.saund.co.uk/britbase/has...> #####################
http://www.saund.co.uk/britbase/has...
http://www.hastingschess.com/previo... http://www.endgame.nl/hastings.htm
###################
<Hastings 1948/1949> <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.214> Laszlo Szabo Groningen (1946) (13 Aug - 7 Sept) Game Collection: Hastings 1947/48 (29 Dec - 7 Jan) Saltsjobaden Interzonal (1948) (16 July - 14 August) Budapest Candidates (1950) born Mar-19-1917, Laszlo Szabo was born in Budapest. At the age of eighteen, he won the Hungarian Championship for the first of eight times. Before World War II, he worked in the foreign exchange department of a Budapest bank. During World War II, he was in a Hungarian Forced Labor unit where he was captured by the Russian army. He was a prisoner of war until after the end of World War II. Following the Second World War, he began to compete in major international events. In total, he represented Hungary at 11 Olympiads, playing first board on five occasions and delivering many medal-winning performances. In 1937, he took the team silver and individual silver medals, in 1952 an individual bronze, in 1956 a team bronze and in 1966, team bronze and individual silver. He was awarded the GM title in 1950 and took part in three of the Candidates' tournaments during the 1950's, finishing joint third in 1956. He continued to play in tournaments and promote chess in his country until his death in 1998. William Winser h Hungarian master title awarded 1934 <http://tortenelemsakk.gportal.hu/gi...> FIDE grandmaster title awarded 1950 <Gaige, p.415>> ===
Conel Hugh O'Donel Alexander Hastings (1937/38) Hastings (1946/47) (30 Dec - 8 Jan) 1st, over Savielly Tartakower, [bad player ID] and Daniel Abraham Yanofsky with +7 -1 =1. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.2> <Hastings 1947/1948> (29 Dec - 7 Jan) 7th, with +1 -3 =5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.295> <England-Australia Radio Match 1948> (17-18 July) 2nd board for England, with +0 -0 =1 vs Purdy. Match drawn 5-5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.206> <British Championship 1948> In London (31 Aug - 11 Sept) 7th, with +3 -3 =5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.150> <England-Netherlands Match 1948> IN London (11-12 Sept) 5th board for England, with +0 -0 =2 vs Cortlever. Match drawn 10-10. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.209> Conel Hugh O'Donel Alexander was born Apr-19-1909 in Cork, Republic of Ireland. Awarded the IM title in 1950 and the IMC title in 1970, he was British Champion in 1938 and 1956.
During the Second World War, he worked at Bletchley Park with Harry Golombek and Sir Philip Stuart Milner-Barry, deciphering German Enigma codes and later for the Foreign Office.
His best result was 2nd= at Hastings (1934/35) tied with Paul Keres after Samuel Reshevsky and ahead of Salomon Flohr and Reuben Fine.
He held Mikhail Botvinnik (+1, -1) in the 1946 Anglo-Soviet Radio Match and represented England on six Olympiad teams.
Alexander was also an author of note. He passed away in Cheltenham in 1974. ===
Nicolas Rossolimo <Hoogovens 1948> In Beverwijk (3-11 Jan) Shared 3rd, behind Prins and Scheltinga, with +3 -2 =4 <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.112> <Bad Gastein 1948> (25 May - 20 June) Shared 2nd with Benko, behind Lundin, with +12 -2 =5 <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.106> <French Championship 1948> In Paris (10-18 Sept) First <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.163> <Rossolimo-Tartakower Match 1948> In Paris. Drawn <Di Felice 1947-1950 p.199> <France-USA Radio Match 1948> (19 Dec). 3rd board for France vs. Horowitz, +1 -0 =0. One of only two decisive games. Match drawn 4--4 <Di Felice, p.105> Nicholas Rossolimo was born Feb-28-1910, in Kiev in the Ukraine. Awarded the IM title in 1950 and the GM title in 1953<Gaige, p.362> Rossolimo was the only entrant who would later earn the FIDE grandmaster title. He moved to Paris with his Russian mother in 1929. Whilst in France he finished 2nd behind Jose Raul Capablanca in 1938 in a tournament in Paris, won the French Championship in 1948, was Paris Champion 5 times and drew 2 matches in 1948 and 1949 with Savielly Tartakower. In 1953 he moved to the USA to be with his father and mother. He worked as a bellhop, a taxi driver, played the accordion and worked as a singer as well as running a chess studio to support himself. A multi-talented man, he spoke five languages and earned a brown belt in judo. He died of head injuries three days after accidentally falling down two flights of stairs in New York in 1975. ===
Imre Koenig <Round One> R G Wade vs I Koenig, 1948 <London B Section 1946> (14-26 Jan) Shared 4th, behind Euwe, Christoffel, and Denker, with +4 -2 =5. <Di Felice 1941-1946 p.266> <USSR-Great Britain Radio Match 1946> (19-22 June) 3rd board for Great Britain, +0 -2 =0 vs Smyslov. <Di Felice 1941-1946 p.315> FIDE IM title 1951 <Gaige, p.221> <Mechanics' Institute Chess Room Newsletter # 98> http://www.chessdryad.com/articles/...> Imre König was born Feb-09-1901 in Gyula, then part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. After the First World War he became a Yugoslav citizen and represented Yugoslavia in the Olympiads of 1931 and 1935. He also played in several tournaments in Vienna, coming 3rd in 1921, =3rd in 1925, =3rd in 1926 and 4th in 1931. He also came =2nd in Belgrade in 1937. In 1938 he emigrated to England and became a naturalized citizen in 1949. However, in 1953 he moved to the USA. He finished 2nd in the Hastings tournament of 1948-49. ===
Willem Jan Muhring http://www.schaaktalent.nl/databank... http://chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/Play... <Hastings 1947/1948> (29 Dec - 7 Jan) Shared 2nd with Grob and G.A. Thomas, behind Szabo, with +3 -1 =5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.95> <England-Nederlands Match 1948> In London (11-12 Sept) 6th board for Nederlands, +1 -1 =0 vs Gabriel Wood. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.209> (born Aug-17-1913, died 1999, 85 years old) Netherlands
Willem Jan (Pim) Mühring was awarded the FIDE International Master title in 1951.<Gaige, "Chess Personalia" p.293> ===
Paul Schmidt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_F...
Parnu (1937) <German Championship 1941> In Bad Oeynhausen (3-17 Aug) Shared 1st with Junge (later won the playoff match), with +7 -1 = 7. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.5> <Schmidt-Junge German Championship Playoff Match 1941> In Bromberg. Schmidt won +3 -0 =1. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.47> <Cracow 1941> (5-19 Oct) Shared 1st with Alekhine, over Bogoljubov, Junge an Lokvenc, with +8 -2 =1. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.23> <Salzburg 1942> (9-18 June) Shared 3rd with Junge, behind Alekhine and Keres, with +3 -3 =4. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.85> <Salzburg 1943> (9-18 June) 3rd, behind Alekhine and Keres, with +2 -3 =5. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.121> <German Championship 1943> In Vienna (15-29 Aug) 2nd, behind Josef Lokvenc, with +8 -0 =7. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.128> <Hamburg HSV 1946> (29 May - 13 June) Shared 2nd with Ahues, behind Wilfried Lange, with +8 -1 =6. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.256> <Kassel 1947> (18-26 May) 2nd to Bogoljubov, over Unzicker, Troeger, Endzelins, Bogatyrchuk, with +4 -1 =4. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.40> <Leeuwarden 1948> 2nd to Kramer, ahead of Van den Tol and Mulder Van Leens Dijkstra with 2/3. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.148> Paul Felix Schmidt was born Aug-20-1916 in Narva, Estonia. He was Estonian champion in 1936 and 1937, and he won the German Championship in 1941 (=Klaus Junge). Awarded the IM title in 1950.<TFS July 1950, p.208> In 1951 he earned a PhD in Science and went to live in the USA. He passed away in Allentown in 1984. ===
Robert Graham Wade http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Ze... <New Zealand Championship 1947/1948> In Dunedin (26 Dec 1947 - 3 Jan 1948) First. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.94> <Australia-New Zealand Radio Match 1948> (10-11 April) First board for New Zealand, +0 -0 =1 vs Purdy. Australia won 6.5 - 1.5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.206> <Baarn Major Group 1948> (16-24 Oct) Shared 2nd with Eduard Spanjaard, behind Golombek, ahead of Devos and Prins, with +3 -1 =5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.105> <Hertogenbosch 1948> (30-31 Oct) Shard 2nd with Jaije Kramer, behind Prins, ahead of Van Scheltinga, with +0 -0 =3. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.141> Robert Graham Wade was born on the 10th of April 1921 in Dunedin, New Zealand. Awarded the IM title in 1950<Gaige, 454> he was New Zealand Champion in 1943-44 (after a play-off), 1944-45 and 1947-48.
Looking for greater chess opportunities he went to Europe around 1949 and settled in England. He won the British Championship in 1952 and 1970 and was very active in British chess, training young players and being in charge of the Batsford Chess Library in London. ===
Baruch Harold Wood <Round Three> B H Wood vs I Koenig, 1949 <Baarn Group C 1947> (9-18 May) First, with +4 -1 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.11> <Midlands Counties-Czechoslovakia Match 1947> In Birmingham (17-19 June) 3rd board for Midlands Counties, with +0 -1 =1 vs Kottnauer. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.11> <Gijon 1947> (12-24 July) 5th, with +6 -2 =4. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.33> <British Championship 1947> In Harrowgate (11-22 Aug) 11th, with +3 -6 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.34> <Hoogovens 1948> In Berverwijk (3-11 Jan) Shared 6th, with +3 -4 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.112> <Budapest 1948> (2-22 May) 16th and last, behind Szabo, Gligoric, Foltys, Tartakower, Pachman, with +2 -12 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.123> <Gijon 1948> (13-27 July) 2nd, with +6 -1 =3. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.136> <Aviles 1948> (26 July - 1 Aug) 3rd, with +3 -1 =3 <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.104> <British Championship 1948> In London (31 Aug - 11 Sept) Shared 2nd with Golombek, Milner Barry, and Thomas, behind Broadbent with +6 -3 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.150> <Baarn Major Group 1948> (16-24 Oct) Shared 7th, with +3 -4 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.104> Baruch Harold Wood was born born Jul-13-1909 in Sheffield, England. Wood was founded CHESS magazine in 1935, and was its editor until 1988, when it was sold to Pergamon Press. He was also a correspondent for the Daily Telegraph, and the co-founder of the Sutton Coldfield Chess Club. Wood was also a FIDE arbiter.
Between 1938 and 1957, Wood won the championship of Warwickshire eight times. He won several semi-international events: Baarn 1947, Paignton 1954, Whitby 1963, Tórshavn 1967, and Jersey 1975. He was British Correspondence Champion in 1945. ===
William Albert Fairhurst <Round Two> W J Muhring vs W Fairhurst, 1948 London A (1946) (14-26 Jan) 10th, with +3 -6 =2. <Di Felice 1941-1946, p.266> <Hastings 1947/1948> (29 Dec - 7 Jan) 5th, behind Szabo, Grob, Muhring, and Thomas, with +1 -0 =8. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.95> <Scottish Championship 1948> In Edinburgh (26-31 March) Shared 1st with N.A. Perkins, with +7 -1 =1. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.132> <England-Australia Radio Match 1948> (17-18 July) 5th board for England, with +0 -0 =1 vs Maurice Goldstein. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.206> William Albert Fairhurst was born born Aug-21-1903 in Alderley Edge, Cheshire, England. He was awarded the IM title in 1951.<Gaige, p.113> In 1931 he went to live in Scotland and won the Scottish Championship the 11 times he competed; 1932, 1932-33, 1933-34, 1935-36, 1936-37, 1938, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949 and 1962. He also won the British Championship in 1937 and was unofficial Commonwealth Champion in 1950.
In international play at Scarborough 1927 he shared 2nd place with Fred Dewhirst Yates, beating 1st place getter Edgar Colle and Efim Bogoljubov whom he finished ahead of by a full point. He played for Scotland in the Olympiads of 1933, 1956, 1958, 1964, 1966 and 1968. In 1970 he was invited to play in the New Zealand Championship as a guest and liked the country so much he decided to retire there. He played for New Zealand in the 1974 Nice Olympiad and his last event was the New Zealand Championship in 1976. He passed away in Auckland in 1982. ===
George Alan Thomas Get this off his player page: Thomas vs R Douglas, 1995 <Hastings 1947/1948> (29 Dec - 7 Jan) Shared 2nd with Muhring and Grob, behind Szabo, with +3 -1 =5 <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.95> <British Championship 1948> In London (31 Aug - 11 Sept) Shared 2nd with Golombek, Milner Barry, and Baruch Wood, with +4 -1 =6. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.150> <England-Netherlands Match 1948> In London (11-12 Sept) 3rd board for England, with +2 -0 =0 vs Prins. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.209> Last competitive chess event:
<Netherlands-England Match 1949> In Utrecht (17-18 Sept) 3rd board for England, with +1 -1 =0 vs Haije Kramer. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.313> Sir George Alan Thomas was born on June 14, 1881 near Istanbul, Turkey. He learned chess from his mother, Lady Edith Thomas, who won one of the first women's tournaments held in Hastings in 1895.
In 1896, George Thomas defeated Emanuel Lasker at a simultaneous exhibition in England. He was the City of London Chess Club chess champion in 1911, and played in his first British chess championship in 1920, taking 2nd place. WIthout a doubt his greatest achievement was his tie for first place at Hastings (1934/35) with Max Euwe and Salomon Flohr, finshing ahead of and defeating both Jose Raul Capablanca and Mikhail Botvinnik. He continued to play at a high level in later years, wining the London chess championship in 1946 at age 65 before retiring from compettive chess four years later. In 1950 he was awarded the International Master title from FIDE.<Gaige, p.424> ===
William Arthur Winser <Hastings Premier Reserves B 1947/1949> (29 Dec - 7 Jan) 6th, with +4 -2 =2. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.95> (born Dec-09-1906, died Jun-12-1991, 84 years old) United Kingdom http://www.hastingschessclub.co.uk/... ===
Theodore Henry Tylor <Midlands Counties-Czechoslovakia Match 1947> In Birmingham (17-19 June) 1st board for Midlands Counties, with +0 -1 =1 vs Pachman. Czechoslovakia won 13.5 - 6.5. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.89> <England-Netherlands Match 1948> In London (11-12 Sept) 7th board for England, with +1 -1 =0 vs Chis Vlagsma. Match drawn 10-10. <Di Felice, 1947-1950 p.209> (Sir) Theodore Henry Tylor was born Apr-13-1900 in Bournville Birmingham, England. He was a tutor in Jurisprudence at Oxford University, a post he held for nearly 40 years. Although classed legally blind he represented England at the Hamburg Olympiad in 1930. He was British Correspondence Champion in 1932, 1933 and 1934 and is probably best known for competing in the Nottingham tournament of 1936. He passed away in Oxford in 1968. ##################
####################
23 games were decisive among these players, with Nicolas Rossolimo distinguishing himself by the final with clear first, finishing undefeated with +4. ################################
Rd 1 (report 31/12, played 30/12) - Winser-Thomas adj, Fairhurst Rossolimo 0-1, Wood-Muhring drawn, Schmidt-Tylor drawn, Wade-Konig adj. Rd 9 (report 10/1, played 9/1) - M-S 1-0, Th-F 0-1, Ty-K 0-1, Wi-Wa 0-1, R-Wo drawn. Sep-28-14
Premium Chessgames Member Paint My Dragon: <WCC> Success! - Rd2 played Dec 31, Rd3 on Jan 2, Rd4 on Jan 3, Rd5 on Jan 4, Rd6 on Jan 5, Rd7 on Jan 6, Rd8 on Jan 7.
All reports from Times, following day edition, except for Rd 6. Do you want any interesting snippets of info? Couldn't do full commentary as there is a huge amount ... but anything that jumps out? Or do you already have an article completed? Sep-28-14
Premium Chessgames Member Tabanus: Dates for Game Collection: Hastings 1948/1949:
Opening December 30 by E. M'Neill Cooper-Key, Conservative M. P. for Hastings. This was the first time any chess congress had been opened with a speech <in Esperanto> (Evening Telegraph 30 Dec 1948 p. 1) "This afternoon the Mayor is giving a civic reception in the Town Hall. Chess history was made at the opening ceremony, when the Borough Member, Mr. Neill Cooper-Key, welcomed the competitors in Esperanto" (Hastings and St Leonards Observer 1 Jan 1949 p. 1) Mainly from The Times:
Round 1 Dec 30
Round 2 Dec 31
Round 3 Jan 2
Round 4 Jan 3
Round 5 Jan 4
Round 6 Jan 5
Round 7 Jan 6
Round 8 Jan 7
Round 9 Jan 8
<Rd 9 (report 10/1, played 9/1)> The report of 10/1 says "Hastings, Jan. 9" which again says "played yesterday" (unlike the other rounds which were reported the same day) = Jan. 8. Nah,
"De Gooi- en Eemlander" has Rossolimo-Wood (in last round) on Saturday = Jan. 8: http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/view/i... http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/view/i... says Mühring-Schmidt was played on <Friday> (Jan. 7). ########################
Round 9 W J Muhring vs P Schmidt, 1949 played on Jan 7
<"De Tijd" 10 Jan 1949 p. 5 http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/view/i...> ###############################
Yes, Szabo was replaced by Konig, by then a resident of England (Times p.6, 30/12/48) as Szabo was told not to travel by his doctor due to illness (p.6, 31/12/48) The rest of the Times reports comprise mostly detailed commentary, but of the British contingent, he comments ... In the absence of Alexander, Broadbent and Golombek it was hoped that Thomas and Fairhurst would give a good account of themselves, as they had both played well last year (p.6, 30/12/48) Two Golombek rants about Rossolimo:
"He tried a system of his own in the Giuoco Piano against Muhring and the Dutch Master wrongly allowed him to open up the game. By a neat little combination he won a pawn and then finished off his opponent by a brilliantly conducted kingside attack, culminating in a rook sacrifice. This was the best game played so far in the tournament." (p.2, 5/1/49) "His success was well deserved, for he hardly ever had the inferior game and those that he won were marked by a most pleasing and natural brilliance." (p.6, 10/1/49) ###############################
a report by Muhring in the February 1949 issue of Tijdschrift, the magazine of the Dutch Chess Federation.
Muhring writes that he only learned that he had gained 3rd prize when he was back in the Netherlands. "I had played the last game in advance, because the intention was to participate in Beverwijk ...". The Hoogovens Tournament in Beverwijk started January 8. Ultimately Muhring didn't play there, but his last round opponent Schmidt and Wade did. ###############################
Yes, Szabo was replaced by Konig, by then a resident of England (Times p.6, 30/12/48) as Szabo was told not to travel by his doctor due to illness (p.6, 31/12/48) ###############################
|
|
1 game, 1948 - Hastings Index Updates
1 game, 1948 - Keres-Geller Candidates Playoff Match
|
Tigran V Petrosian had won Curacao Candidates (1962), with Paul Keres and Efim Geller sharing 2d-3d. Based on this result, both Keres and Geller would be seeded directly into the candidates event in the next WCC cycle, but their playoff for clear 2d had more than symbolic significance. Mikhail Botvinnik had not yet formally decided if he would defend his championship title. According to Petrosian, "This explained the hastily-arranged match between Keres and Geller... The match was needed to determine... the right to participate in a match for the world championship itself, if Botvinnik did not play."[1 ] Moscow 11-25 Aug 1962[2 ]
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Paul Keres ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 1 4.5/8
2 Efim Geller ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ 0 3.5/8
]table
Botvinnik did end up deciding to defend his title, but if he had not, Petrosian would have faced the winner of this playoff in a world championship match. The score was tied after seven games, and Keres needed to win the last, because Geller would be declared victor in a drawn match due his superior Sonneborn-Berger score.[3 ] Keres rose to the occasion in game eight, saccing a knight in a sharp kingside attack to destroy Geller in just 28 moves. Both Keres and Geller were duly seeded directly into the candidates matches in the next WCC cycle. At the Varna 1962 FIDE conference, it had been decided that in the post-1963 cycle the next WCC candidate would be decided in a series of matches, rather than in a tournament.[3 ] In the 1963-66 cycle, Keres lost his quarterfinal match to Spassky; Spassky - Keres Candidates Quarterfinal (1965). Geller won his quarterfinal match against Smyslov; Geller - Smyslov Candidates Quarterfinal (1965), but was eliminated in his semifinal match against Spassky; Spassky - Geller Candidates Semifinal (1965). [5 ] [Notes:
1. Igor Botvinnik, ed., Steve Giddens transl. "Botvinnik-Petrosian: The 1963 World Chess Championship Match" (New in Chess 2010), p.93 2. Round order and dates: Paul Keres, "Photographs and Games" (International Chess Enterprises 1997), pp.337-38 3 Paul Keres and John Nunn, "Paul Keres: The Quest For Perfection" (Batsford 1997), p.148 4. Yuri Averbakh, Steve Giddins transl. "Centre-Stage and Behind the Scenes- the Personal Memoir of a Soviet Chess Legend."(New in Chess 2011), p.114 5. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cand... Original collection by User: capybara: Game Collection: 1962 Candidates play-off match: Geller-Keres.
Valuable assistance for this introduction from User: Benzol, User: Tabanus, and User: Paint My Dragon ]
|
|
8 games, 1962 - Korchnoi - Geller Candidates Quarterfinal 1971
|
This Candidates Quarterfinal was held in Moscow.[1 ] The competition was held in order to select a challenger for Boris Spassky, the World Champion. Korchnoi qualified for the 10 game match from his appearance in the Spassky - Korchnoi Candidates Final (1968), and Geller from his shared 2nd-4th in the Palma de Mallorca Interzonal (1970). [2 ] Korchnoi's seconds were Viacheslav Osnos and Gennadi Sosonko, and Geller's second was Eduard Gufeld. [2,3] The arbiter was Vladas Mikenas. [4 ] <Moscow, USSR 13-31 May 1971>[5 ]
table[
Elo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pts
1 GM Korchnoi 2660 1 ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 5½
2 GM Geller 2630 0 ½ ½ 1 0 ½ 0 0 2½
]table
Match Photos: http://chessglum.com/phpBB3/downloa... http://porto-fr.odessa.ua/2005/25/p...
This was a clash of two elite Soviet Grandmasters, who had both previously been finalists at the Curacao Candidates (1962). Starting in 1952, they had played each other 22 times, with the score +7 -4 =11 in Korchnoi’s favour. They had last met at the Sousse Interzonal (1967). [6 ]
Recently, Korchnoi had won the USSR Championship (1970), his fourth and final Soviet title. He had also finished first at <Wijk ann Zee Hoogovens 1971>, over Tigran V Petrosian, Svetozar Gligoric and Borislav Ivkov. In his home, Korchnoi had played a secret practice match against the new Soviet star Anatoly Karpov, concentrating on playing the black pieces.[7 ]
Geller had come third at the <Moscow Victory Anniversary 1970> tournament,[8 ] and fourth at <10th Amsterdam IBM 1970>.[9 ] Both players represented the USSR at the <Siegen Olympiad 1970>. Korchnoi won the bronze medal on board 3 with 73.3% and Geller scored 58.3% on 2nd reserve board.[10 ] In Game 1, Korchnoi faced one of Geller's favourite weapons against 1.d4, but noted that he had "prepared to do battle against the King's Indian, of which Geller is so fond, and which I find equally pleasant to play against as White."[7 ] The game followed the topical King’s Indian Classical variation that featured so prominently in the Fischer - Taimanov Candidates Quarterfinal (1971). Geller produced an innovation, but in the ensuing complications he blundered on the 27th move, fatally opening the King-file for White.[11 ] Korchnoi surprised Geller in Game 2 with the Sicilian Dragon. He explained that "I decided to try the Dragon Variation... Geller is quite a good attacker, but he calculates variations badly- he wastes a lot of time, and often does not believe in himself. Therefore the risk seemed justified to me."[7 ] Korchnoi had only played the Dragon once before, winning against S Khodzhibekov at the <Tbilisi USSR Championship Semfinal 1956>.[12 ] Geller played imprecisely, much to the annoyance of his second Gufeld, who was an expert in this opening. Geller later admitted that he had not read Gufeld's book on the Dragon. Geller came close to losing, but Korchnoi missed a relatively simple win, leaving Geller with a better position but almost no time on his clock. The game was drawn.[13 ] Game 3, a well played positional King's Indian, was drawn after 34 moves.[13 ] Paul Keres called Game 4 "one of the most interesting... of the match."[13 ] Korchnoi again tried the Dragon, but Geller improved on the book line with 11.h3-h4.[7,13 ] From move 28 both players "got into desperate time trouble," but this time Geller won after Korchnoi blundered on move 37.[7,14 ] According to Robert Graham Wade and Les Blackstock, "After the 4th game which was very complicated with both players getting into acute time trouble Geller no longer wanted a sharp tactical struggle, whereas Korchnoi as planned continued to involve him in one."[1 ] Korchnoi considered Game 5 to be his best of the match.[14 ] This time Geller chose a QGD rather than a Kings Indian, but Korchnoi was ready. He had "prepared an interesting innovation in a well-known variation of the Queen's Gambit, which was quite often adopted by Geller."[7 ] Position after Korchnoi's 9.Bh4xf6
click for larger viewKeres was enthusiastic about Korchnoi's new move: "9.BxN! (an interesting idea. Usually White exchanges on KB3 immediately on the 7th move, if he decides to do so at all. The text has the idea of forcing the Bishop to QN2 first, where it does not stand very well)"[14 ] Korchnoi was later disappointed that his idea didn't "appear in the list of thirty innovations mentioned in the appropriate issue of 'Informator.'" After putting "strong pressure on the hanging enemy pawns," Korchnoi won in 26 moves.[15 ] Keres labeled this game "a terrible debacle" for Geller.[14 ] In Game 6, Korchnoi chose a Scheveningen Sicilian and "defended carefully" to draw in 26 moves.[14 ] Korchnoi noted that "I repulsed Geller's onslaught... though not without difficulty."[15 ] Game 7 featured another King’s Indian Defence, but this time Korchnoi employed his more usual <3.g3> (E60) treatment.[16 ] The adjourned position seemed equal, but Korchnoi was determined to find a win: "I attached great importance to the resumption of this game, and therefore the following day, for the first time in the history of matches for the World Championship, I asked for a postponement on the adjournment day!" Viacheslav Osnos suggested a line with a surprising piece sacrifice that "did not give a win, but Black" would be "forced to defend accurately." Geller now requested a further postponement, but his team did not consider the sacrificial line, which Korchnoi indeed played over the board:[17 ]
Nd4-f6+
click for larger viewGeller soon drifted into a hopeless position and lost on time.[18 ] Geller needed 2½ points from the next three games just to tie the score, so he was in a must win situation. In Game 8 he took the white pieces and built up a favourable position against Korchnoi's Scheveningen Sicilian. Keres described Korchnoi's play as "provocative," and noted that Geller's play became "hesitant," "irresolute" and "hard to recognise." He missed a very promising bishop sacrifice on move 27, and subsequently lost on time for the 3rd time in the match.[18 ] Victor Korchnoi had eliminated Efim Geller 5½ - 2½, advancing to the <Petrosian-Korchnoi Candidates Semifinal 1971>. After the match, Geller remarked that his defeat on time in Game 1 was unpleasant, as he was immediately in the position of having to catch up. Osnos and Sosonko reckoned that "Perhaps this factor affected Geller's play, which was laboured and with long periods of thought, in nearly all the remaining games of the match"[2 ] In his evaluation, Keres remarked that "I cannot avoid the impression that this match was decided less on the chess board than on the clock... in almost every game at least one of the contestants was in terrible time trouble... in the distribution of time Geller was clearly the worse in this match.”[13 ] [Notes
1 R.G. Wade and L.S. Blackstock, “Korchnoi's 400 Best Games” (Batsford 1978), p.179 2 Garry Kasparov, "On My Great Predecessors Part 5" (Everyman Chess 2006), p.68 3 Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.425 4 "Chess" vol 36, nos. 631-2 (August 1971), p.344 5 Rounds and game dates: "New York Times" (May 1971); "Omaha World Herald" (20 May 1971), p.10; "Omaha World Herald" (21 May 1971), p.34; "Greensboro Record" (27 May 1971), p.33; "Icelandic Visir" (1 June 1971), p.3 6 ChessBase “Big Database 2013"; Chessgames "Korchnoi-Geller" search "korchnoi-geller" 7 Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75 8 Di Felice,"Chess Results 1968-1970" p.308
9 Di Felice, p.257
10 "19th Chess Olympiad: Siegen 1970" http://www.olimpbase.org/1970/1970i... http://www.olimpbase.org/1970/1970u... R.D. Keene and D.N.L. Levy, "Siegen Chess Olympiad: September 5th to September 26th, 1970" (Chess for Modern Times 1970), p.214 11 Keres, pp.424-425
12 Rusbase "Semifinal of 24th Championship of USSR- Tbilisi 1956" http://al20102007.narod.ru/ch_urs/1... 13 Keres, p.424
14 Keres, p.426
15 Korchnoi, p.76
16 ChessBase “Big Database 2013"
17 Korchnoi, pp.76-77
18 Keres, p.427
Original games collection Game Collection: WCC Index (Korchnoi-Geller 1971) by : User: Hesam7.
Intro researched and written by User: Chessical. Additional research by User: crawfb5, User: Tabanus, and User: WCC Editing Project. ]
|
|
8 games, 1971 - Korchnoi - Geller Candidates Quarterfinal 1971 A
|
Larsen - Uhlmann Candidates Quarterfinal (1971) This Candidates quarterfinal was held in Moscow. <R.G. Wade and L.S. Blackstock, “Korchnoi's 400 Best Games” (Batsford 1978), p.179> Korchnoi qualified for the 10 game match from his appearance in the Spassky - Korchnoi Candidates Final (1968), and Geller from his shared 2nd-4th in the Palma de Mallorca Interzonal (1970). <Garry Kasparov, "On My Great Predecessors Part 5" (Everyman Chess 2006), p.68> Korchnoi's seconds were Viacheslav Osnos and Gennadi Sosonko, and Geller's second was Eduard Gufeld. <Garry Kasparov, "On My Great Predecessors Part 5" (Everyman Chess 2006), p.68>; <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.425> The arbiter was Vladas Mikenas. <"Chess" vol 36, nos. 631-2 (August 1971), p.344> <Moscow, USSR 13-31 May 1971>
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pts
1 Korchnoi 1 ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 5½
2 Geller 0 ½ ½ 1 0 ½ 0 0 2½
]table
This was a clash of two elite Soviet Grandmasters, who had both previously been finalists at the Curacao Candidates (1962). Starting in 1952, they had played each other 22 times, with the score +7 -4 =11 in Korchnoi’s favour. They had last met at the Sousse Interzonal (1967). <ChessBase “Big Database 2013”>; <Chessgames "Korchnoi-Geller" search "korchnoi-geller"> Recently, Korchnoi had won the USSR Championship (1970), his fourth and final Soviet title. He had also finished first at <Wijk ann Zee Hoogovens 1971>, over Tigran V Petrosian, Svetozar Gligoric and Borislav Ivkov. In his home, Korchnoi had played a secret practice match against the new Soviet star Anatoly Karpov, concentrating on playing the black pieces.<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75>
Geller had come third at the <Moscow Victory Anniversary 1970> tournament <Di Felice,"Chess Results 1968-1970" p.308>, and fourth at <10th Amsterdam IBM 1970>. <Di Felice,"Chess Results 1968-1970" p.257>. Both players represented the USSR at the <Siegen Olympiad 1970>. Korchnoi won the bronze medal on board 3 with 73.3% and Geller scored 58.3% on 2nd reserve board. <"19th Chess Olympiad: Siegen 1970" http://www.olimpbase.org/1970/1970i... http://www.olimpbase.org/1970/1970u...>; <R.D. Keene and D.N.L. Levy, "Siegen Chess Olympiad: September 5th to September 26th, 1970" (Chess for Modern Times 1970), p.214> In game 1, Korchnoi faced one of Geller's favourite weapons against 1.d4, but noted that he had "prepared to do battle against the King's Indian, of which Geller is so fond, and which I find equally pleasant to play against as White." <Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75> The game followed the topical King’s Indian Classical variation that featured so prominently in the Fischer - Taimanov Candidates Quarterfinal (1971). Geller produced an innovation, but in the ensuing complications he blundered on the 27th move, fatally opening the King-file for White. <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), pp.424-425> Korchnoi surprised Geller in game 2 with the Sicilian Dragon. He explained that "I decided to try the Dragon Variation... Geller is quite a good attacker, but he calculates variations badly- he wastes a lot of time, and often does not believe in himself. Therefore the risk seemed justified to me." <Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75> Korchnoi had only played the Dragon once before, winning against S Khodzhibekov at the <Tbilisi USSR Championship Semfinal 1956>.<Rusbase "Semifinal of 24th Championship of USSR- Tbilisi 1956" http://al20102007.narod.ru/ch_urs/1...> Geller played imprecisely, much to the annoyance of his second Gufeld, who was an expert in this opening. Geller later admitted that he had not read Gufeld's book on the Dragon. Geller came close to losing, but Korchnoi missed a relatively simple win, leaving Geller with a better position but almost no time on his clock. The game was drawn. <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.425> Game 3, a well played positional King's Indian, was drawn after 34 moves.<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.425> Keres called game 4 "one of the most interesting games of the match." <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.425> Korchnoi again tried the Dragon, but Geller improved on the book line with 11.h3-h4. <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.425>; <Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75> From move 28 both players "got into desperate time trouble," but this time Geller won after Korchnoi blundered on move 37.<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75>; <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.426> According to Wade and Blackstock, "After the 4th game which was very complicated with both players getting into acute time trouble Geller no longer wanted a sharp tactical struggle, whereas Korchnoi as planned continued to involve him in one." <R.G. Wade and L.S. Blackstock, "Korchnoi's 400 Best Games" (Batsford 1978), p.179> Korchnoi considered game 5 to be his best of the match.<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.426> This time Geller chose a QGD rather than a Kings Indian, but Korchnoi was ready. He had "prepared an interesting innovation in a well-known variation of the Queen's Gambit, which was quite often adopted by Geller."<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.75> Position after Korchnoi's 9.Bh4xf6
click for larger viewKeres was enthusiastic about Korchnoi's new move: "9.BxN! (an interestng idea. Usually White exchanges on KB3 immediately on the 7th move, if he decides to do so at all. The text has the idea of forcing the Bishop to QN2 first, where it does not stand very well)"<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.426> Korchnoi was later disappointed that his idea didn't "appear in the list of thirty innovations mentioned in the appropriate issue of 'Informator.'" After putting "strong pressure on the hanging enemy pawns," Korchnoi won in 26 moves.<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.76> Keres labeled this game "a terrible debacle" for Geller.<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.426> In game 6, Korchnoi chose a Scheveningen Sicilian and "defended carefully" to draw in 26 moves. <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.426> Korchnoi noted that "I repulsed Geller's onslaught... though not without difficulty."<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), p.76> Game 7 featured another King’s Indian Defence, but this time Korchnoi employed his more usual <3.g3> (E60) treatment.<ChessBase “Big Database 2013”> The adjourned position seemed equal, but Korchnoi was determined to find a win: "I attached great importance to the resumption of this game, and therefore the following day, for the first time in the history of matches for the World Championship, I asked for a postponement on the adjournment day!" His second Osnos suggested a line with a surprising piece sacrifice that "did not give a win, but Black" would be "forced to defend accurately." Geller now requested a further postponement, but his team did not consider the sacrificial line, which Korchnoi indeed played over the board:<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), pp.76-77> Nd4-f6+
click for larger viewGeller soon drifted into a hopeless position and lost on time.<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.427> Geller needed 2½ points from the next three games just to tie the score, so he was in a must win situation. In game 8 he took the white pieces and built up a favourable position against Korchnoi's Scheveningen Sicilian. Keres described Korchnoi's play as "provocative," and noted that Geller's play became "hesitant," "irresolute" and "hard to recognise." He missed a very promising bishop sacrifice on move 27, and subsequently lost on time for the 3rd time in the match.<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.427> Victor Korchnoi had eliminated Efim Geller 5½ - 2½, advancing to the <Petrosian-Korchnoi Candidates Semifinal 1971>. After the match, Geller remarked that his defeat on time in game 1 was unpleasant, as he was immediately in the position of having to catch up. Osnos and Sosonko reckoned that "Perhaps this factor affected Geller's play, which was laboured and with long periods of thought, in nearly all the remaining games of the match"<Garry Kasparov, "On My Great Predecessors Part 5" (Everyman Chess 2006), p.68> In his evaluation, Keres remarked that "I cannot avoid the impression that this match was decided less on the chess board than on the clock... in almost every game at least one of the contestants was in terrible time trouble... in the distribution of time Geller was clearly the worse in this match.” <Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), p.424> #####################
Game Collection: Wijk aan Zee Hoogovens 1971 #####################
-<Chess is My Life> Korchnoi:
(75) "In the first match I was due to meet Geller. The young grandmaster Karpov offered me his services, and we played a training match. The match was completely secret, especially since Karpov was a member of the same Sports Society as Geller. One can understand Karpov: he hoped to gain and, I think, gained a great deal of benefit from a match with me. We played at Karpov's home. I played five games with Black, and one as White. I would probably not have bothered to mention this training match, had it not been for the fact that, shortly before our Candidates' Final Match, Karpov sent to a British master for publication the games which he had won against me in this match. Before each game I told Karpov which opening I was going to play, so that he could prepare for it- at that time opening knowledge was not Karpov's strong point, and I wanted the games to be of full value from start to finish. Karpov led by 2-0 with one game drawn, but then relaxed somewhat, and I levelled the score. One of the games won by Karpov in the match- a French- was excellently played by him. In my match against Geller, whom I considered an outstanding theory specialist, and a bold fighter, with a fairly subtle positional understanding, I decided to adopt the Sicilian Defence as Black. In the first instance I decided to try the Dragon Variation, hitherto played with success by Sosonko. Geller is quite a good attacker, but he calculates variations badly- he wastes a lot of time, and often does not believe himself. Therefore the risk seemed justified to me. As White, on the other hand, I prepared to do battle against the King's Indian, of which Geller is so fond, and which I find equally pleasant to play against as White. At the same time I prepared an interesting innovation in a well-known variation of the Queen's Gambit, which was quite often adopted by Geller... (76)
########################
-<R.G. Wade and L.S. Blackstock, "Korchnoi's 400 Best Games" (Batsford 1978)> -<Garry Kasparov, "On My Great Predecessors Part 5" (Everyman Chess 2006), p.68> -<Paul Keres, "Korchnoi 5½ Geller 2½" "Chess Life and Review" (August 1971), pp.424-427> -<"19th Chess Olympiad: Siegen 1970" http://www.olimpbase.org/1970/1970i... http://www.olimpbase.org/1970/1970u...> -<Gino Di Felice, "Chess Results 1931-1935" (McFarland 2006)> -<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), pp.75-77> -<R.D. Keene and D.N.L. Levy, "Siegen Chess Olympiad: September 5th to September 26th, 1970" (Chess for Modern Times 1970), p.214> -<"Chess" vol 36, nos. 631-2 (August 1971), p.344> -<ChessBase “Big Database 2013”> -<Chessgames "Korchnoi-Geller" search "korchnoi-geller"> -<Rusbase "Semifinal of 24th Championship of USSR- Tbilisi 1956" http://al20102007.narod.ru/ch_urs/1...> -<"New York Times" (May 1971)> -<"Omaha World Herald" (20 May 1971), p.10> -<"Omaha World Herald" (21 May 1971), p.34> -<"Greensboro Record" (27 May 1971), p.33> -<"Icelandic Visir" (1 June 1971), p.3> Original games collection Game Collection: WCC Index (Korchnoi-Geller 1971) by : User: Hesam7.
Intro researched and written by User: Chessical. Additional research by User: crawfb5, User: Tabanus, and User: WCC Editing Project. #####################
Game dates:
crawfb5:
This is what I see from the NY Times:
1 -- 13 May
2 --
3 -- 17 May
4 -- 18 May
5 --
6 -- 24 May
7 -- 26 May
8 -- 31 May
-----------------
Tabanus:
Reuter report in Omaha World Herald 20 May p. 10: Game 4 <adjourned Wednesday night on the 43rd move>. So
Game 4 = May 19 (a Wednesday)
Reuter report in Omaha World Herald 21 May p. 34: <The fifth game is Saturday>:
Game 5 = May 22 (a Saturday)
Greensboro Record 27 May p. 33: <adjourned their seventh game Wednesday night>: Game 7 = May 26 (a Wednesday)
1 -- 13 May
2 --
3 -- 17 May
4 -- 19 May
5 -- 22 May
6 -- 24 May
7 -- 26 May
8 -- 31 May
Game 2 is reported in newspapers on Monday 17 May, I'd say 15 May is pretty certain. But the Icelandic Visir of 1 June p. 3 has that "Korchnoi won the 8th game yesterday", so I'd say
Game 8 = May 31
Conclusion:
1 -- 13 May
2 -- 15 May
3 -- 17 May
4 -- 19 May
5 -- 22 May
6 -- 24 May
7 -- 26 May
8 -- 31 May
#################
|
|
1 game, 1971 - Korchnoi - Petrosian Candidates Semifinal 1974
|
Petrosian qualified for this match from the Petrosian - Portisch Candidates Quarterfinal (1974), and Korchnoi qualified from the Korchnoi - Mecking Candidates Quarterfinal (1974). The other semifinal match was the Karpov - Spassky Candidates Semifinal (1974). In both matches victory would go to the player who first won 4 games, or who was in the lead after 20 games.<Harry Golombek in The Times 16 April 1974 p. 14, with no mention of what would happen in case of 10-10.> The matches were held in order to select a challenger for world champion Robert James Fischer. Semifinals 1974: If tied at 10-10, the outcome would be decided by the drawing of lots. Final: If tied at 12-12, then drawing of lots (Kazic p. 16). -<seconds> Viacheslav Osnos, Mikhail Tseitlin (Korchnoi) <Chess is My Life, p.100> <Odessa, Ukraine, 12-24 April 1974>
table[
Elo* 1 2 3 4 5 Pts
1 GM Korchnoi 2650 1 ½ 1 0 1 3½
2 GM Petrosian 2640 0 ½ 0 1 0 1½
]table
http://porto-fr.odessa.ua/2013/25/p...
################################
Korchnoi:
<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" Ken Neat, transl. (Arco, 1978)> (p.98) "Now in prospect was a match with Petrosian, who in an excrutiating struggle had beaten Portisch, an opponent whom he had always found difficult. On this occasion he had apparently exerted himself to the limit, which is in principle foreign to him. My match had also not been easy, but I sensed that on this occasion Petrosian was more exhausted than I was. I was well acquainted with his play, with his strengths and weaknesses; the trouble was that his weaknesses happened to coincide with my weaknesses, and his strengths with my strengths. But I reflected that I was stronger than him in a competitive sense, more of a fighter. I did not repeat my mistake of 1971. I flatly refused to play in Moscow, where I had been drawn to for that previous match. In his estate on the outskirts of Moscow, Petrosian lives like a prince, with all conceivable comforts, whereas I would have had to take refuge in a hotel, with the usual poor Soviet service. On our joint agreement, the match was arranged to be held in Odessa. The other match being played was between Spassky and Karpov. It was clear to me that at that time Spassky would be unable to win a match against Karpov, especially since Karpov- the rising star- enjoyed universal support, whereas Spassky was now a social misfit, and, in his own words, was forced during the match to adopt 'all-round defence'. Prior to the matches, Petrosian declared in the press that n his opinion the winner of the Candidates' cycle would be one of the other pair. Such hypocrisy provoked me into protesting, and I declared that the winner of our match would win the Candidates' cycle. My reasons for saying this were purely to do with chess. Both Petrosian and I were superior to Karpov in our understanding, and in particular our experience of the game, and, all other things being (p.99) equal, should have been able to beat him. In passing, I emphasized that, as regards erudition and knowledge of opening theory, I was superior to Karpov, Petrosian and Spassky taken together! I wasn't far from the truth, but at that time I had no idea what forces I would have to measure my knowledge against in the near future. It was expected that, on the pattern of my previous match with Petrosian, we would have to battle to the limit of twenty games. But things turned out differently. As was later revealed, Petrosian prepared for the match in collaboration with Karpov. But those openings, good for Karpov, proved not to suit Petrosian's style, since he is not inclined to go in for a fight from the first moves, nor to look from the very start for the best, and sometimes the only moves. The opening in the first game came as a surprise to me, but I played calmly, obtained slightly the better chances, and, most important, a fairly clear plan by which to strengthen my position. Petrosian became nervous, made several mistakes, came under an attack, and in the end did not manage to resign in time, and was mated. During this first game a dispute arose. In recent years Petrosian had acquired the terrible habit of twitching his legs under the table, usually beginning this about an hour before the time control. The playing conditions were good, but play took place in the centre of the stage in an old theatre, on a revolving circle, as I discovered later. While my clock was going and I was thinking over my next move, Petrosian would sit in his place and cause the table to shake all over. 'It's impossible to play like this; shall we sit at separate tables?' I said to him. This was probably a mistake on my part, and I should have directly notified the controller. But we were on friendly terms, and when it was my turn to move I didn't feel inclined to get up and go over to the controller. Petrosian stopped shaking the table, but after the game wrote a statement to the controller about my behaviour. (I found out about this later.) The second game ended in a draw after a tense, strategic struggle. It finished an hour before the end of the five-hour session, so that Petrosian did not have time to use his underground (or more precisely, 'undertable') weapon. In the third game Petrosian repeated the opening from the first game. This time I was prepared, being familiar not only with the system, but also with the manner in which Petrosian played it. Everything happened within the space of the first fifteen minutes. I sacrificed a pawn, set up (p.100) strong pressure, then won back the sacrificed material, and by exchanging queens went into an ending where I was now a pawn up. Without difficulty I broke the bemused Petrosian's resistance, and won this game too. Petrosian requested a postponement,so as to come to his senses a little. In the following game he played for a win in his usual style. In an almost symmetrical position, I did not succeed in equalizing,and Petrosian gained a big advantage. We both ran short of time, but here too he proved to be the stronger, and converted his advantage into a win. During the time scramble I found it difficult to sit at the table. Petrosian was rocking it, and causing it to shake by the rapid twitching of his leg. I went over to the controller to complain, but he merely shrugged his shoulders- what could he do to help? After the game I wrote a statement to the control team, to the effect that, despite repeated requests, Petrosian was continuing to behave in an unsporting manner,and was disturbing my play. At the same time I also pointed out the fact that there was a large group of Armenians in the hall, who were displying slogans, and shouting out encouragement to Petrosian, and I asked for something to be done about this too. In the fifth game Petrosian changed his opening scheme, but fortunately I was well prepared for this new variation. My second, Tsietlin, had predicted this very opening, and the positin after fifteen moves had already been reached on our board the day before the game. I gained a slight positional advantage. An hour before the end of play, with the time scramble approaching, Petrosian sat solidily at the board and, when it was my turn to move, began shaking the table. What was I to do? I had already used up all the accepted ways of curtailing his behaviour. I gained the impression... that if earlier Petrosian had been shaking the table subconsciously, by habit, he now realized how much this disturbed me, and with the connivance of the controller wanted to utilize his opportunity. 'Stop shaking the table, you're disturbing me', I said to him. Petrosian made out that he hadn't heard what I said. 'We're not in a bazaar' he replied. On seeing the commotion, the controller rushed up. 'Calm down, calm down,' he said. Petrosian seated himself more comfortably, and again began shaking the table. What was I to do? I was playing a match for the world championship, and I was in a trap! My clock (p.101) was going, and Petrosian would not allow me to play. Then I uttered the sacred and at the same time naive words: 'This is your last chance!' Petrosian caught this... On the other hand, I gained the chance to continue playing, under normal conditions. The position at that point was not yet won for me, but I played it excellently. I made several subtle moves, and took play into an ending with an extra pawn, and despite some serious time trouble, adjourned the game with a big material advantage. Petrosian did not turn up for the resumption. Instead, he wrote a statement demanding that the result of the match be annulled (I should remind the reader of the score- 3-1 with one game drawn), and that he should be awarded a win on the grounds that *I* was stopping *him* playing! It was an unusual situation. The match was being held under the auspices of FIDE, and no one, neither Brezhnev nor Euwe, could annul the result, never mind a FIDE congress. Petrosian utilized every possible opportunity. He phoned Euwe, but he was enjoying a safari in Africa. He sent a 290-word telegram to the Central Committee of the USSR Communist Party,the ruling Organ of the Soviet Union, and, in anticipation of a reply, forced me to take a postponement. The matter became an object of investigation byan arbitration committee under the chairmanship of the Mayor of Odessa; from Moscow came the Chairman of the All-Union Controller's Team, and from Leningrad they also sent an official representative of the Sports Organization to help. A meeting was arranged, to which we were both invited. Petrosian demanded an apology from me. Since, by speaking to my opponent during the game, I had broken one of the letters of the chess code, I said that I was prepared to apologize. "Apologize?' cried Petrosian, 'but who is going to return my lost points?' After some thought, he said: 'He spoke to me so loudly that people in the hall also heard; he should also apologize in public!' I was asked whether I was prepared to do this. It wasn't clear to me what was implied, whether I had to repent with a microphone in my hand, or whether to report on my behaviour to a newspaper. I said 'All right, I can apologize in public, but the question arises, to whom do I have to apologize. The fact is that Petrosian's appearances in the Soviet Union are invariably accompanied by demonstrations by persons of Armenian nationality, and what (p.102) interests me is, what part does Petrosian play in the organization of these mobs.' Petrosian almost choked with rage. 'That's all', he said. 'He has insulted me, he has insulted my people. I won't play against him any more.' That was indeed all. Petrosian wrote out a new statement, in which he accused me of chauvinism. It is unlikely, in making such a statement, that he remembered one important detail; my wife who, incidentally, was present at the match, is herself Armenian. I was persuaded to write a letter of apology to Petrosian. Faintheartedly, I agreed- but of course, this hd no effect. While awaiting the decision from the Central Committee, Petrosian lay in hospital, complaining about his kidneys, but refusing to be examined. When a negative reply arrived from Moscow, he came out of hospital and wrote a final statement, to the effect that he was resigning the match on health grounds. Afterwards, the top sports authorities attempted to reconcile us. The question arose as to whether we could participate in the same team in the coming Olympiad in Nice, or whether only one of us would play. Petrosian was gloomy, and only in the presence of the committee chairman did he manage to raise a conciliatory smile- just so that he wouldn't be thrown out of the USSR team. It was no longer the Odessa feud that was tormenting him. I had become for ever his sworn enemy, like Spassky and Fischer before me, for having beaten him. ############################
Alexander Galyas:
-<Alexander Galyas, "GROSS-SCANDAL" Originally published July 20 2013 in “Porto-Franco.” In "Sport Weekend Online- Shahmaty" 22 July 2013> http://sport-weekend.com/SHahmaty/2... Finally, they fell out when Korchnoi refused to go to Buenos Aires to help Petrosian in his match with Fischer. His refusal, he argued that it "is not always pleasant to look at passive play T. Petrosian, and even more so - bear responsibility for it." According to some sources, the failure Korchnoi sounded much more expressive: "When I see what disgusting and vile moves makes Petrosyan, I can not be his second." Place to play unanimously elected Ukrainian theater room, which seats more than 1,100 spectators. Black Sea Shipping Company allocated to accommodate the guests one of the best hotels in the city - between voyages base sailors from was on the doorstep to Arcadia - the favorite destinations of Odessa residents and visitors. Director of the hotel offered to settle the grandmasters in the "suites", one - on the second floor, the other - on the third. But this proposal was abandoned: these rooms were one above the other, so that in theory could be a situation where the "lower" participant could complain that the "upper" prevents him (loud knocking his feet, and so on. N.) Eventually settled GMs in different wings of one floor; Of course, in a completely non-equivalent Korchnoi has at his press conference was set up very aggressively, "It's hard to play chess with a man who does not do anything at the board, and does not make it demonstratively. I sometimes just unnerving ... But the defeat Petrosian match Fischer should affect the match with me negatively. And we played the last time in Moscow - "on the field" Petrosyan. Now a neutral field. So things have changed in my favor. " And then something happened that all shocked: Petrosyan received the mat. Even the Korchnoi to such an extent was stunned to submit to him the possibility that the opponent has warned: "Do you mate!" (So he had to give up). But Petrosian, who by that time had big problems with hearing (he wore hearing aids), did not react, so that Korchnoi had no choice but to complete the game as a decisive move. At Petrossian at the time had a habit at the end of the party, when increasing tension, shake a leg. He involuntarily touched the opponent's legs. In the first game Korchnoi limited to just the comments and then began to respond to "kick." Buffet went shaking and serious competition threatens to turn into a farce. Almost after each game GMs written statements to the judicial board, accusing rival in "unsportsmanlike conduct." The organizing committee for a long time puzzled how to get out of the situation, while E. Gorbachev offered to put under the table partition. But the match is already rolling down ...
The Jury of Appeal in session almost daily. The mayor of the city, who, as chairman of the committee was part of it, loudly cursing the day and hour when he gave consent to the match. In all the years of his work in the executive committee, he did not get as many calls of the Central Committee, as in those days. Each of the contestants were "above" their fans, they looked to for support (Petrosyan - in the Communist Party of Armenia, Korchnoi - the Leningrad Regional Party Committee), also had to take the rap from Odessa.
The end came on April 25 in the fifth game, which was played when the score was 2: 1 in favor of Korchnoi. "I got some advantage in the opening - describes grandmaster this episode. - Petrosyan again began shaking table. Now it seemed to me that he was doing it on purpose - prevent me from thinking about the course! "Do not shake the table, you are disturbing me," - I said. "Yes, we are not in the market", - he said. And continued their dirty work. And then I said sacramental phrase: "You catch your last chance!" This phrase was the most recent. More - until his death - we have not talked. "
The party had to be postponed, but Petrosyan doigryvanie not come. Score 3: 1 in favor of Korchnoi, who left to win enough to win only one game. Realizing that he did not have the slightest chance, T. Petrosyan wrote a letter demanding to cancel the match, as rival prevented him from playing. He sent a telegram to the enormous size of the CPSU, and then to Odessa literally rushed Euwe and Baturin. "Not to wash dirty linen in public," the sixth installment decided to move, persuaded Korchnoi take a timeout. Statement Petrosyan considered several hours. The conversation was in a raised voice. "Along the way I asked the question, - writes V. Korchnoi. - Speeches Petrosian in the USSR was accompanied by performances of Armenians, and I was wondering - what is the role itself Petrosyan in organizing these gatherings. ""Everything - cried Petrosyan. - He insulted me, he insulted my people. With him I do not play ... "Pending the decision of the CPSU Central Committee, he came down to the hospital ...". Anecdotally EPISODE
To find out how seriously ill former world champion, was sent to the regional hospital Peyhelya.
"When I walked into the room, - says Edward V. - then froze. It was not the present-day VIP ward, and most common, with 12 beds, 11 of which were empty, even without mattresses, one grid, and on the 12th lay Petrosyan. "Then the chief doctor, who was (I wonder whether by accident?) Armenian, led the visitor into his office and makes a pile of stones, which supposedly came from the kidneys to his patient.
Who witnessed these events Tukmakov convinced that the "disease" Petrosian was nothing more than a plausible excuse. "He quickly realized that he was prepared poorly and lost the match - said GM - and because he needed to focus on the conflict. Perhaps Petrosyan cherished the hope that in this way will be able to either move the match or continue it later in a more favorable environment for yourself. Incidentally, Korchnoi would never do that. And not just because he is a fighter by nature. Just Petrosian in their status in the Soviet hierarchy could afford it, and Korchnoi - no. "
But the hopes of former champion was not to be fulfilled. Apparently, from the Central Committee of the CPSU to his appeal came a negative response. And on May 2 in the newspaper "Evening Odessa" appeared a short message: "semi-final match ended with a score of 3: 1 in favor of Korchnoi. This is due to the refusal Petrossian continue the competition due to illness. This was officially announced to correspondents of press, radio and television chief referee of the match, the referee of the international category Krapil Boris. " ##################
Korchnoi:
"Petrosian had just recovered from a lung inflammation and was not in his best form. In fact I guessed right about Petrosian's openings. The day before each game I analysed them with my coach Viacheslav Osnos. We had predicted the pawn sac in the 3rd game, and the 5th game we had on our board up to the 15th move. Objectively P is better than me in the middle game, but this could not compensate for his opening play. When he overlooked the mate in the 1st game and I announced mate and he still saw nothing, then I understood he was exhausted." <Tidskrift för Schack June/July 1974 p. 130> ############################
Kazic: from <Mikhail Botvinnik, Alexander Matanovic and Bozidar Kazic, "Candidates' Matches 1974" Chess Informant 1st edition July 3, 1974> http://www.amazon.com/Candidates-Ma... Kazic:
Kazic: "A poll organized by a newspaper i Odessa questioned: how many draws? Some replied 16, others 18. Petrosian had before the match been bed-ridden by pneumonia. The match opened officially 11 April in the "October Revolution" Hall of the Ukrainian Music and Drama Theatre. Euwe had planned to watch K-S in Leningrad and arrive the next day for the opening of the match in Odessa, but he saw neither for Karpov unexpectedly postponed his first game and due to poor weather conditions the plane could not go to Odessa the next day." Kazic: "Chief arbiter was <Boris Krapil> of Moscow (IA since 1965) who certainly had no idea of the difficult task awaiting him. Before the match, 41 games since 1946, 7:4 to Petrosian with 30 draws." Kazic: "From the very beginning, Korchnoi volatilely set out on the attack. He played to win at any cost. This aggressiveness seemed to confuse his opponent." Kazic: "The end of the match in Odessa evolved under a certain veil of secrecy, according to some reporters. TASS's brief statement says nothing of what went on behind the scenes in the turbulent dispute which arose among the players. After the 5th round Petrosian and later Korchnoi asked for a time out. Both actually needed to gain in time and to have the possibility of reaching a compromise through negotiation." Kazic: ""The dispute began in the very first game", says Korchnoi. "Petrosian has a habit of tapping his feet during he game. The floor of the stage was poorly nailed, for this was an old theatre, and the tapping transmitted to the chess table. During the game I drew attention to this. In response to my directly approaching him duriing the game he lodged a written complaint with the referee". --- "Petrosian laughed at K's version of the story. In his opinion the dispute was a more serious matter. 'I could not imagine such a lack of consideration ... there were insults'" Kazic: "Immediately after the lightning war in Odessa, Korchnoi rushed to Leningrad where he arrived in time to see the last game of the match between Karpov and Spassky." <Bozidar Kazic wrote the chapter "Tempest on the Black Sea coast" (pp. 94-97) in the book "Candidates' Matches 1974" which was written by Mikhail Botvinnik, Aleksandar Matanovic, Bozidar Kazic and Mikhail M Yudovich Sr. (Centar za unapredivanje saha/US Chess Federation, Belgrade 1974). The four are listed as authors of the book, and Kazic as editor of it.> ##########################
Game 4 (scheduled Friday 19 Jan): postponed by Petrosian, Tass said he "pleaded indisposition" [<Augusta Chronicle 20 April 1974 p. 20> ] Game 5: Petrosian surrendered as soon as he saw the sealed move. 2<Kazic, p. 96> Game 6 (never played): postponed 26/4 because Korchnoi was unwell [<The Times 27 April 1974 p. 6> ]. Postponed again 29/4 because Petrosian was unwell [<The Times April 30 p. 18> ]. Petrosian withdrew 30/4 because of illness [<The Times 1 May 1974 p. 8> ] ###########################
Korchnoi:
Winning the Mecking, I went to Petrossian. He fought for the throne of Chess with Botvinnik, Spassky, but against me, being often unable to cope over the board, weaving wiles - dating back to 1960. Product age, causing the Soviet system, Petrosian, using their high chess position and with the support of a strong Armenian lobby in the ruling circles, was able to work miracles, suppressing his enemies (some of which I have spoken; looking ahead, one can not forget that he was the initiator of the infamous "letter" of the Soviet grandmasters, published in September 1976 years- shortly after my flight, see. p. 56). Our Candidates match was held in April in Odessa. Naturally, he was held in an atmosphere of great nervous tension. Hastily mounted to the top of the game platform on which we played was not a masterpiece of architectural art - he shook with every movement. And Petrosyan had a habit in moments of excitement shake legs under the table ... culminated in the 5th game. Twice during the deliberation of his turn, I turned to the enemy, urging him to calm down and give me a chance to think. Addressed first in a polite, and then, and harshly. This game I won. Score 3: 1 (with one draw) in my favor. Petrosyan stopped playing. He turned up on to be recognized as the winner of the match on the grounds that I broke the rules. There have been several meetings with high officials, including the mayor of Odessa. At the last meeting Petrosyan demanded that I publicly apologized for his unsportsmanlike conduct. And now, as I write these lines, I'm sure unsportsmanlike behaved exactly Petrosyan. But the pressure is then on I was serious, I quote further piece from his book "Chess - My Life" (where this story is set out in more detail): "They asked me if I would apologize publicly. It was not clear to me what this means: Do I have to repent with a microphone in his hand, or say about their behavior in the newspaper? I said, "Well, I apologize publicly, but in this context the question arises: to whom I apologize? The fact that the speech Petrosian in the Soviet Union accompanied by demonstrations of persons of Armenian origin, and I'm interested in the role played by himself Petrosyan in organizing these gatherings! "His throat Petrosian something bubbled. "Everything - he said - he insulted me, he insulted my people. With him I do not play ... " It was. Petrosian went to the hospital, but refused to be examined. And then, on the pretext of ill-health, and all passed the match. Recalls the chief judge of the match Boris Krapil: "The sixth game was rescheduled for April 29, but that morning it was announced that Petrosyan was urgently hospitalized with acute exacerbation of renal disease ... April 30 T.Petrosyan asked the panel of judges with a statement in which he pointed out that in view of the serious disease he could not continue the match ... In a conversation with me after the fight, he mentioned that the attack was for him a completely unexpected. Or maybe it was the first symptom of the fatal disease, which is so early (in 1984 godu.- Ed.) Interrupted his life "(" 64 »№ 15, 1990). <Viktor Korchnoi, "Antishahmaty. Scrapbook villain. Returning defector" p.11 (online edition) http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=120743&...> #####################
Korchnoi advanced to the Karpov - Korchnoi Candidates Final (1974). *FIDE Rating List July 1973.
1) Harry Golombek in The Times 16 April 1974 p. 14, with no mention of what would happen in case of 10-10. Original collections:Game Collection: WCC Index (Korchnoi-Petrosian 1974) by User: Hesam7 and Game Collection: 0 by User: Tabanus. Game dates are from Dutch and American newspapers and The Times.
|
|
5 games, 1974 - Korchnoi - Tal Candidates Semifinal 1968
|
Tal qualified by winning the Game Collection: Tal - Gligoric Candidates Quarterfinal 1968, and Korchnoi qualified by winning the Korchnoi - Reshevsky Candidates Quarterfinal (1968). -<Thomas>:
This again was the best of 10 games. Before the match Tal had won only once against Korchnoi (Curacao 1962), lost 8 times and drawn 11 games. The very close result marks a considerable psychological achievement on Tal's part. -<Hilary Thomas, "Complete Games of Mikhail Tal 1967-1973" (Batsford 1979), p.28> <Moscow, USSR 26 June - 14 July>[1,2 ]
table[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Pts.
Korchnoi, Viktor ½ ½ ½ 1 1 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 5½
Tal, Mikhail ½ ½ ½ 0 0 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 4½
]table
<Venue> "in the lecture hall of the Central House of the Soviet Army" <"Mikhail Tal Chapter 2- Matches, Tournaments, Rivals Part 2" In "Chess Library Encyclopedia" http://www.chesslibrary.ru/publ/ehn...> <Seconds>
Alexander Koblents (Tal) Semyon Furman and Viacheslav Osnos (Korchnoi) <Korchnoi "Chess is My Life" p.62> [Notes
1 Di Felice, "Chess Results 1968-1970," p.95
2 Rounds and dates from Alexander Khalifman, ed. "Mikhail Tal Games II 1963-1972" (Chess Stars 1995), pp.210-216 Original collection by User: Hesam7; introduction and game dates by User: WCC Editing Project ] ###########################
Korchnoi:
For the three months before that, in an interview with the weekly "64" I called Tal "big player template." In his defense, he was made editor of the "64" Petrosyan said. Article angry he hit me, saving Tal from my attacks. <Viktor Korchnoi, "Antishahmaty. Scrapbook villain. Returning defector" p.9 (online edition) http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=120743&...> ############################
<Korchnoi>:
-<Victor Korchnoi, "Chess is My Life" (Edition Olms 2004), pp.61-64> (p.61) I was now faced with the semi-final match against Tal to be played in Moscow. Prior to the match the psychological situation was rather strange. After all, I had won practically every game I had played against Tal, and even the colours had made no difference. I realized that, when playing against me in tournaments, Tal took risks, trying to get even with me for the indignities suffered, and that in a match he would be much more cautious, since it was the result of the match as a whole that was important, and not just individual games. During the short time available I prepared myself as well as possible theoretically, but psychologically, as it turned out, I was not ready for a serious struggle against him. At the start of the match Tal began playing closed openings against me, in which he is not a great expert. On the other hand, the character of the play was quieter, and no doubt he wanted first of all to draw several games, so as to gain self-confidence. In the very first game I rather (p.62) underestimated my opponent, and went into a very difficult pawn ending. It was amazing that Tal failed to win it. The second game quickly ended in a draw, Tal having confidently equalized. Then in the third game Tal caught me in a prepared variation. Though I thought over one move for 100 minutes (!), I nevertheless failed to find sufficient counterplay. My position started going downhill, especially since I was in time trouble right from the opening. But the miraculous occurred: Tal failed to find a winning continuation, and I was able to take play into a rook ending a pawn down. It was probably still lost, but Tal was too uncertain of his endgame technique to win such a position. Soon after the third game, as I later found out, Tal's personal doctor arrived in Moscow. Tal certainly has troubles with his health, but to have a personal doctor- such a thing just isn't done in the Soviet Union. At the start of the fourth game, Tal was a few minutes late, and, on greeting me, appeared somewhat embarrassed. I somehow associated this moment with the arrival of his doctor. Play began. In this game I adopted one of my prepared lines. Tal did not manage to resolve things at the board, in addition thought for twenty-five to thirty minutes over each move, and was soon in time trouble. His position was very difficult, but here I had a recurrence of my old weakness, and at the first opportunity won a pawn, thus losing, as it turned out, all my advantage. A draw seemed imminent, but in time trouble Tal blundered and lost. In the next game... Tal attempted to pull one back. He began with his favourite 1.e4. In a Ruy Lopez he was rather slow in organizing pressure on the black position; I managed to seize the initiative and won quickly. The match seemed to be decided. I held an imposing lead, and had the white pieces in the next game. I remembered that I could and should be pressing Tal in every game. I obtained an advantage in this game, but ran short of time, allowed my opponent the opportunity to seize the initiative by an exchange sacrifice, and lost. Incidentally, during the match I had two seconds: Furman and Osnos. Just before the sixth game Furman, who was a member of the Central Army Sports Club, was unexpectedly called away to Leningrad to take part in some insignificant team event. This incident disturbed me, but at the time I couldn't think of any real reason why anyone should want to damage my chances. The loss of that game, and the departure of my main helper- all (p.63) this put the match in jeopardy. I took the decision (perhaps incorrectly) to settle for draws in the remaining games- this decision was quite i accordance with my confused state of mind at that point. At the same time I took a further step. Tal's doctor was all the time in the hall, and never took his eyes off the board at which we were playing. More accurately, he did not disturb me, but all the time kept Tal in his field of vision. I suspected that Tal was taking drugs before the game. From the point of view of the FIDE rules, there was nothing illegal in this. It no doubt helped Tal, although it is known that drugs lower a person's will-power. In view of this, I thought that the doctor was exerting a visual influence on Tal during the game, and was reassuring him. I consider that this hypothesis of mine may well have a scientific basis. Without expressing my views, I wrote a letter to the control team, with the request that the doctor, who was sitting very close to the stage, should be moved back to the eighth row. The Tal camp- his assistants and he himself- were unhappy about the action I had taken, but the control team fulfilled my request. However, there is nothing unusual in this; matches for the World Championship with the participation of Fischer were, on his demand, conducted in the same way. In the seventh game I chose a dubious opening variation, and straight from the opening went into a difficult ending, where for the full five hours I had to struggle for a draw by finding the only saving moves. In the eighth game I held a positional advantage, but it too ended n a draw. Again in the ninth game I chose an unpretentious opening variation. I equalized, and even gained a slight advantage, which proved insufficient to win. There remained just one game, where i had White. Tal, of course, had toplay for a win, and he chose a sharp variation of the Dutch Defence. I was not at my best in that game. I gained an advantage, but avoided all complicated continuations, trying to simplify the position (in this lies the psychological vulnerability of a player who is aiming for a draw, especially if he is used to playing for a win). By move 25 I was already losing. In the time scramble Tal was insufficiently energetic, or rather he gave up a pawn without sufficient justification, and left me some drawing chances. In what was still a difficult position, I sealed a move which, as it later turned out, was not expected by Tal. True, he afterwards maintained that after the best sealed move he had no winning chances. On the other hand, I (p.64) made a thorough study of the position after the move actually sealed. The two opponents spent a sleepless night analysing, and the next day came the tense, nerve-racking resumption. I had, of course, been able to analyse the position more deeply. After three hours' play we agreed to a draw, and I thus went forward to the Final Candidates' Match. Immediately after the match, I gave an interview for the newspaper "Shakhmatnaya Moskva." Dissatisfied with my play, I also spoke disapprovingly of my opponent, calling him the 'great routine' player. There was some justification in me personally making such an assessment, especially since I had noticed the stereotyped natures of Tal's attacking play back in 1957. Tal had, and still has, many fans. His uncompromising style of play delights chess enthusiasts, and they are won over by his desire and ability to take risks and even bluff his way through. At the same time, Tal's skill in building up his game is inadequate, and is often based on routine assessments and routine methods. I consider the genuine masters of attack to be Alekhine, Keres and Spassky. #############################
<Korchnoi>:
"Viktor Korchnoi interview after the 1968 Korchnoi - Tal Candidates' match" -<"64" 24 July 1968> My impressions about Grandmaster Mikhail Tal were always clear enough, but only after our match I have finally witnessed his true chess make-up. First and foremost (it may even sound paradoxical for those with little knowledge of the game), Tal is a very patterned player. His strategic plans aren't too new or original. But, combining his patterns with enormous tactical talent, inexhaustible optimism and outstanding sportsman's qualities, Tal had much success in tournaments. In tournaments, but not in matches. Because in matches between two equal players, the arsenal of original strategic ideas provides decisive advantage.
This doesn't mean that it's easy to defeat Tal in a match. The Riga player's style is so dynamic and active, his determination is so strong, that his partners constantly remain under very high nervous pressure. In other words, Tal spares neither himself nor his opponent.
I knew that our match is going to be tough and exhausting, but I couldn't imagine exactly how much. I had to work very hard to win. I even think that it's easier to play a dozen matches with other grandmasters than to play one match with Tal.
The tactical pattern of our match was dictated by Tal. And I just had to adapt to his sudden maneuvers. There were three stages in our match:
Stage one: Tal holds his zone
It quickly became obvious that Tal wasn't feeling too confident in the first games. He avoided any skirmishes, played "coldly", as though inviting me to start complications. He chose openings that didn't allow him to get his trademark "Tal-ish" positions.
This tactic was almost successful. I thought that the "new Tal" that aimed only for a small opening advantage wasn't dangerous. Technical mistakes that I made in the games 1 and 3 could cost me dearly. But Tal seemingly didn't even think about winning at that moment. I think that's why he couldn't convert his advantage into victories.
In the game 4, Tal had finally understood that it's impossible to beat me with just positional play. He lost the fight in the opening, not getting any tactical opportunities in return. But this game showed my disadvantages as well: the old disease, pawn-eating, reared its head once again. <Game Four>
White to move 21.???
click for larger viewKorchnoi vs Tal, 1968 White's advantage is obvious. The simple 21. Nf4 with subsequent 22. Rad1 or 22. Rfd1 (depending on circumstances) didn't leave any hope for Black. But I couldn't resist the temptation to capture a pawn, and after 21. Bxa5? Rg6 22. Ng3 d4! 23. Qxg5 Rxg5 24. Bb6 Ra1 25. Rxa1 Tal could probably draw after 25... d3!, because White can't play 26. Ra8 due to 26... d2, and 26. Rd1 Rb5 27. Bd4 Nxd4 28. exd4 Rxb2 gave Black good counterplay.
Tal, nevertheless, didn't use this "gift" and played 25... dxe3?, which led to a hopeless position for Black after 26. Ra8 Ne7 27. fxe3 Rd5 28. b4.
So, after 4 games, I took the lead, and Tal hadn't showed his trademark playing style yet. He did it in the game 5.
Stage two: Tal's confidence grows
The defeat in game 4 made Tal change his strategy. In the game 5, he played 1. e2-e4 for the first time in our match. He was clearly playing to win, and it showed clearly in the next position: <Game Five>
White to move 27.???
click for larger viewTal vs Korchnoi, 1968 No doubt that any chess player would play 27. Bxf7 Qxf7 28. Qxc3 with a small advantage for White. Of course, Tal saw that too. But he was against simplifications, he wanted to create tactical complications, whatever the price, and so he played 27. Rec1.
His plan was along these lines: if Black replies with 27... Rc8, then the position after 28. Bxf7 Qxf7 29. Rxc3 Rxc3 30. Qxc3 is much better for him, because after the exchange of one Rook pair, it's easier for his pieces to invade the Black's camp.
And what if Black replied 27... b4? Tal prepared a devious trap: 28. a3 a5 29. axb4 axb4 30. Ra7 Ne2+ 31. Kh2 Qxc1 32. Qxe2 Qf4+ 33. g3 Rd2 (this seems to be the end for White, but...) 34. gxf4 Rxe2 35. Bxf7!, and White wins one of the two black Rooks.
Of course, not all Black's moves in this variant were forced. But other continuations also gave Tal the game he wanted.
Nevertheless, there are still spots on the sun! And Tal, this combinational wizard, sometimes makes tactical mistakes. After 27... b4 28. a3, he overlooked a simple refutation of his plan: 28... e4! 29. axb4 Rd3 30. Qe1 e3!, and White remained defenseless. After 31. Bc2 Rd2 32. fxe3 Ne2+ 33. Kh1 Ng3+ 34. Kg1 Re2 35. Qd1 Qb7 36. e4 R8xe4 White resigned.
Two defeats in a row could dishearten anyone but Tal. He came to the sixth game with a very concentrated and determined look.
I had a two-point advantage and, of course, could choose a more conservative tactic. But I played White, and the temptation of essentially finishing the match immediately was too great. If I won my third game, I more or less won the entire match.
I played this game very nervously and made a mistake in the following position: <Game Six>
White to move 18.???
click for larger viewKorchnoi vs Tal, 1968 White's advantage is clearly visible: not only because of the c7 pawn's weakness, but also because of Black Queen's very uncomfortable position. With 18. Rd1, I could present very serious problems to Tal. How were Black supposed to save their Queen after h2-h3, g3-g4 and Nc4-e5?
And so I gleefully decided to catch the Queen immediately: 18. h3?, giving Tal an opportunity to sacrifice an exchange 18... Rxd4! and seize the initiative.
Of course, I still shouldn't have lost after that, but I hadn't noticed the tide of psychological struggle turning.
The score was 3.5-2.5, and the match wasn't very comfortable anymore. Of course, I was still ahead, but could lose the advantage in any moment. The third, last stage of the match began.
Stage three. Tal is always Tal!
Yes, that's how the Riga grandmaster looked at the match's final stage: he was the true Tal, with all his advantages and disadvantages - brilliant, confident tactician and a hesitant "technician" who sometimes made unfathomable positional mistakes. <Game Seven>
White to move 20.???
click for larger viewTal vs Korchnoi, 1968 That's a position from game 7. Black's game is seemingly lost. Any player of Tal's class should have found a simple way to win: move the a- and b-pawns forward. Instead, Tal first exchanged his active rook: 20. Rxd7? Bxd7 21. Rd1 Be8, and then threw away his queenside advantage with 22. c5?, which destroyed any chances of success after 22... Kf8 23. f4 b6 24. cxb6 axb6.
Despite the occasional mistakes, Tal clearly had initiative at the match's finish. He played with colossal force, at his full strength, as in the years of his greatest sporting successes. I could only beat him off. During the struggle, I did have better chances at times (for instance, in games 8 and 9), but they didn't change the main battle's character.
The 10th game was the pinnacle of the match. If Tal won, it would have been impossible to predict the winner. I'm not sure if I could withstand the strain of further struggle.
Of course, I should have played for a draw in game 10. But I don't like and just can't specifically play for draw. Tal greatly exploited this disadvantage of mine. He got one of his favourite positions and devastated me utterly. 20 minutes before the time-out, my position was completely hopeless. <Game Ten>
Black to move 32...???
click for larger viewKorchnoi vs Tal, 1968 The simplest way for converting the advantage for Black was the maneuver Nh6-g8-f6, attacking the d5 pawn and threatening Nh5+. But this was a strategic solution, and that's why Tal, who strategizes only when he's forced to, preferred a tactical strike 32... g5? that ultimately achieved nothing. After 33. fxg5 Rg8 34. Kf2 Rxg5 35. bxc5 dxc5 36. Qxc5 White won a pawn and retained enough resources for defence. The danger of losing has passed.
Afterword
I did manage to defeat Tal. But the match's games didn't give me much creative satisfaction. I'm content only with some opening improvements I've used, for instance, in games 4 and 8. But I was plagued by technical flaws during the entire match. My technique is considered very good. Yes, in the last few years, I won many "bloodless" games. But against Tal, a very inventive and resourceful practician, simple technique is not enough, you need very sophisticated technique, which I failed to deliver. My only consolation is that Tal made even more technical mistakes than me.
The match against Tal was a tough test for me. The positive balance of our previous encounters put much more pressure on me than on Tal. I won't hide the fact that precisely because of that, I felt obliged to defeat the Riga player. Now, before the match against Spassky, I don't worry much. I undestand that Spassky is stronger than Tal and probably stronger than me, but that's why I'm going to play him less nervously. ############################
<Tal>:
-<Mikhail Tal, "The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal" (Cadogan 1997), pp.343-347> (p.343) I returned to Moscow, and exactly half an hour later Victor Korchnoi, who was to be my opponent in the Candidates Semi-final Match, flew in from Amsterdam, where he had beaten Reshevsky. In our match, the Leningrad Grandmaster was considered by chess correspondents to be the undisputed favourite. The score of our previous encounters appeared in the press, and it was recalled tht, in the last tournament where we had both participated (Wijk ann Zee), Korchnoi had finished 3 points ahead of me. I was confronted by the following problems: firstly, to make myself forget about our previous games, and secondly, to force myself to play as reservedly as possible, since Korchni is at his most dangerous in positions of a counter-attacking type, and feels less confident in situations where he himself has to take the initiative. Therefore we decided at the start of the match to give preference to 1.d4, since previously I had always opened with my king's pawn against him. <Game 1>
Tal vs Korchnoi, 1968 The very first game fully confirmed all our expectations. I began extra calmly, then came simplification, and straight from the opening the game went into an ending which I could not have lost if I had tried. Korchnoi could have gained (p.344) approximate equality, but he was completely discouraged by the way the game had gone, and made two anti-positional moves. A pawn ending was reached which was lost for him, although this still had to be proved. Game one- White to move 28.???
click for larger viewHere I wrongly made the mistake of not believing myself. At first I wrote down the winning move 28.e5, but then decided to work out all the variations to mate. To do this proved not at all easy. It was only several days later that a detailed analysis appeared, confirming tht, by avoiding many false paths, White could win by force. Being unable to find all this at the board, I rejected 28.e5, subsequently again played inaccurately, and Korchnoi found the only moves to force a draw. The most amusing thing is that I was not at all upset: the game had shown that the match tactics we had planned were quite correct. <Game 2>
Korchnoi vs Tal, 1968 In the second game I again avoided all the sharp conitnuations into which my opponent tried to provoke me, <Game 3>
Tal vs Korchnoi, 1968 and in the third game once again chose the quiet opening variation which had been psychologically so unpleasant for Korchnoi in the first game. Here, and this doesn't happen often, my opponent fell into a prepared opening trap, and I obtained a completely won position with an extra pawn. I allowed myself to relax a little, which you can't afford to do against Korchnoi, and first made my task more complicated, and then in time-trouble lost all my advantage. I realised that there was no cause for panic, and that this game would have played on Korchnoi's nerves no less than on mine, but my heart bgan to be tormented by doubts: one game I had not won, now a second. I was already somewhat softened up when I arrived for the next game. <Game Four>
Korchnoi vs Tal, 1968 Korchnoi very keenly sensed this, played the first part of the game very energetically, adpoting an interesting theoretical innovation and obtained a clearly (p.345) superior, if not winning position. In addition, I was also dispirited by the fact that over the first 15 moves I had spent a mass of time, and Korchnoi practically none. To avoid the worst I decided to get some play at the cost of a pawn, which, of course, Korchnoi should not have taken, but a recurrence of his old illness- a tendency to capture pawns of 'any quality'- almost allowed me to save the game. For the pawn Black's pieces came strongly into play, and only severe time-trouble 'led' me past a continuation which would have made Korchnoi fight for the draw. However, I blundered, lost a piece and the game. <Game Five>
Tal vs Korchnoi, 1968 My good intentions were immediately abandoned, and after a lengthy discussion with my second, I decided to return to my old ways, and play 1.e4, although it had previously been unsuccessful against Korchnoi. In reply to this, Korchnoi chose a quiet variation of the Ruy Lopez, which he had played only rarely, promising White an active and superior game. I did not play the best way, and Korchnoi practically equalised. Of course, if I had not been burdened by the thought of my loss in the fourth game, and the chances missed earlier, I would have gone in for the quiet position planned by Black, but my nervious decision, taken on the spot, gave Korchnoi the chance to shine with a typical counter-attack. Everything seemed to be settled. By tradition, the match against Korchnoi was lost, for I would never make up the difference of two points in the remaining five games, in three of which I would have Black, and <Game Six>
Korchnoi vs Tal, 1968 I went along quite calmly to the sixth game. Korchnoi evidently considered even three draws to be a luxury for me, and went all out to 'finish me off.' Indeed, he obtained the better position, while I was once again in time-trouble, and took my only chance: to sacrifice the exchange for a pawn. The position became considerably sharper, but Korchnoi was evidently unpreparted for such a change, and when the time control had been reached it was clear tht, despite being the exchange ahead, White was lost. The fate of the match once more hung in the balance, and Korchnoi's self-confidnce was markedly shaken. In the last games of the match he tended, uncharacteristically, to aim only for a draw. It became easier for me to play in such a situation, but not once was I able to realise any advantage I gained. <Game Ten>
Korchnoi vs Tal, 1968 I began the 10th game very calmly. A loss and a draw were equally worthless to me, but there could be no question of any unjustified risk. In the first half of the game Korchnoi played unsurely; in a Dutch Defence I seized the initiative, and gained a winning position. (Diagram on p.346) Black to move 32...???
click for larger viewBut here nerves came into the act. After all, in the event of a win, the psychological wind would be in my favour, and a sudden-death play-off would disturb Korchnoi's equilibrium. Intead of 32...Qg7 or 32...Qf8, followed by the knight manoeuver... Ng8-f6-e4, I sacrificed a pawn for an attack: 32...g5 33.fxg5 (p.346) Rg8 34.Kf2 Rxg5 35.bxc5 dxc5 36.Qxc5 Qh5 37.Qe7+ Rg7 38.Qf6 Rg6 39.Qe7+ Rg7 40.Qf6 Rf7. Here the game was adjourned in the following very sharp position. White to move 42.???
click for larger viewKorchnoi thought for a very long time, and when we arrived for the resumption, it turned out that he had sealed a move which we ha not analysed at all: 41.Qc3 (41.Qd4 was better). At the board I failed to find a very promising pawn sacrifice, whereupon Black's attack gradually died out, and before the second time control I was forced to agree to a repetition of moves. It was then that our little incident took place on the pages of the press, when Korchnoi declared me to be 'a highly routine player'. On the pages of the weekly 64, only just revived, the editor, Petrosian, spoke up for me, and I thus became the object of a creative discussion. JOURNALIST. But how did you yourself react to Korchnoi's declaration? (p.357) CHESS PLAYER. I didn't. I knew Victor, and I knew that he was capable of saying what he did not mean. However I found it amusing how he expressed his dissatisfaction, when a couple of months later I turned up as correspondent for 64 at his Final Candidates Match with Spassky. Evidently he assumed that, exploiting my official position, I would try to get even with him." ##########################
|
|
10 games, 1968 - Larsen - Tal 3rd place Candidates Playoff 1969
|
The winner of this match would earn the right to appear in the Palma de Mallorca Interzonal (1970). <Mikhail Tal, "The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal" p.349> <Eersel, Netherlands 10-23 March>[1,2 ] table[
Larsen, Bent = = 1 1 0 1 = 1 5.5
Tal, Mikhail = = 0 0 1 0 = 1 2.5
]table
[Notes
1 Di Felice, "Chess Results 1968-1970," p.227
2 Rounds and dates from Alexander Khalifman, ed. "Mikhail Tal Games II 1963-1972" (Chess Stars 1995), pp.239-243 Original collection by User: Hesam7; introduction and game dates by User: WCC Editing Project ]
|
|
8 games, 1969
|
Kibitzing
