Some of the men from those countries considered themselves German. Many of the others did not like Russians, for various reasons. I imagine that some were psychopaths, or guys that wanted money.

<Tout le monde a ses raisons.>>

It was a surprise to me when I first saw it because I was laboring under the illusion that White was still winning. Now I can see that he's got almost no winning chances. The pawns either won't be able to advance, or in the worst case for Black, he'll be able to give up a Knight for them and reach a drawn ending.

I think White's last chance to win is 30. Nc2, protecting the Bishop. After 31. Nf3, Black gets two pieces for Rook and Pawns, which looks good for White, but isn't really. But after Nc2, Black's Kingside pawns are going to fall while Black picks up the a pawn, and this should win.

I don't know how true this is. Korchnoi was a time trouble addict to begin with. Who's to know for sure, but.. still. It doesn't sound that convincing to me.

<Analytic power and positional insight vary very much for different Grandmasters. Smyslov and Petrosian never liked to analyze complex positions very much, Tal obviously does it very well and Korchnoi's whole play is based on analysis. If you are Smyslov or Petrosian then you have such positional understanding that you can avoid many complications and dangers and the need for so much analysis. Analytical power improves very much with practice; you learn to find what is critical in a position, what is worth analysing - you see which pieces are active, where the weak points are. When you don't know what to analyse, you sit there for a long time, picking variations almost at random. Tal and Korchnoi were probably born with a greater gift for analysis than I was and I was born with a greater gift than Smyslov and Petrosian; and in positional insight it is the other way round. Korchnoi is fantastic at calculating complex variations, especially when he is hard pressed; but he must analyze because his judgment when he doesn't calculate is very bad - he has to get through a lot of variations before he knows what's happening. Of course many things that worry the ordinary player are not problems at all for a Grandmaster; but in the difficult positions Spassky has said "Korchnoi is always wrong". Maybe a strong point of Fischer is that he is good both at analysis and in judgment - though Tal can calculate better and possibly Korchnoi also.'>

That I think was also the point in Spassky's joke about Korchnoi:

<[Spassky] began to list Korchnoi's many qualities: ...Killer Instinct (nobody can even compare with Victor's 'gift') ...Phenomenal capacity to work (both on the board and off the board) ...Iron nerves (even with seconds left on the clock) ...Ability to Calculate (maybe only Fischer was better in this department) ...Tenacity and perseverance in Defense (unmatched by anyone) ...The ability to counterattack (unrivaled in chess history) ...Impeccable Technique (Flawless, even better than Capa's) ...Capacity to concentrate (unreal)
...Impervious to distractions during the game
...Brilliant understanding of strategy
...Superb tactian (only a few in history an compare with Victor) ...Possessing the most profound opening preparation of any GM of his generation ...Subtle Psychologist
...Super-human will to win (matched only by Fischer) ...Deep knowledge of all of his adversaries
...Enormous energy and self-discipline

Then Boris stopped, and just looked at me, begging for me to ask the question that needed to be asked....

I asked: 'But, Boris, what does Victor lack to become world champion?'

Boris' answer floored me: