<Karpova>

Game Collection: WCC: Capablanca-Alekhine 1927

Thank you.

Like so much else with <Johnny Alekhine>, it's really hard sometimes to get at the facts. It doesn't help that he himself was so often an unreliable narrator, if not an habitual liar. Sometimes it seems that he would lie just the fun of it, as <crawfb5> suggested after I told him how he used to change the answers to the enormous numbers of interviews he did during his life-long chess tour of the world. <crawfb5> said that maybe he got so bored answering the same old questions day after day, week after week that he started changing the answers just to relieve the boredom.

Sometimes he would state versions of the "facts" that he had to have known were not true, such as when and where his mother died, in one instance. I have dozens and dozens of Alekhine interviews from the three <Fiala and Kalendovsky> volumes.

At any rate- it seems that we can leave the issue at hand alone, then?

So the paragraph as I have posted above can be let stand?

Game Collection: WCC: Karpov-Kasparov, 1985

and

<Chessical>

Excellent! I have put your names on those drafts now in the profile.

In Game 23, Karpov as Black and trailing by a point, had some advantage at the adjournment but made the decision to save his energy for the White pieces.

In the final game, Karpov, playing White, had to win to save his champion’s crown. Kasparov needed a win or a draw to become world champion whilst Karpov had to win. If he could tie the match at 12:12 he would retain his title.

Game 24 was to be “A superb fighting game, worthy of a world championship decider”. (Chess, vol 50, nos 963-4, December 1985, p.242.) Kasparov decided that preferred not to avoid a fight as his temperament was not to play passively for a draw. He also believed that Karpov would play aggressively. (p.405 “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”).

The concert hall was packed, with nearly 2,000 in the hall and another 800 or so behind steel barriers. Tickets were changing hands for ten times their face value. (Chess, vol 50, nos 963-4, December 1985, p.225.)

Karpov built up a promising attacking position, but crumpled in the face of a counter-attack in which Kasparov sacrificed two pawns in two successive moves. Karpov ran very short of time in a tactically complex position, and whilst both players made blunders his were the most serious. Kasparov thus became the thirtieth world chess champion.

Kasparov summed up the match thus, “Anatoly out up a grand fight. It affected me morally and physically… Karpov made the best even in unfavourable positions, exploiting every chance when positions were in his favour. He achieved outstanding performances…Towards the end of the match my confidence was slightly shaken by excitement and nervous stress; however, I managed to pull myself together for the final game. I realised that Karpov would have to do his upmost to win….In experience, I was behind Karpov but youth has an advantage; more surplus energy”. (Chess, vol 50, nos 963-4, December 1985, p.225.)

Campomanes stated that the quality of the second match “… justifies my decision to stop the other match. We should not have had these wonderful games if we had gone into 49, 50, 51 in February”. (Chess, vol 50, nos 963-4, December 1985, p.225.)

Karpov had a right of a re-match under the new one-off system. A little over a month after the end of this match on December 5th 1985 he chose to exercise it. (p.8 “Kasparov v Karpov 1986-87”).

Game 16 of which Kasparov “later for many years I regarded as my best creative achievement” (p.356 “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”).

Interviewed just after the match by the German newspaper “Welt in Sonntag, Kasparov said that he regarded this game as the “most beautiful” of the match and also “an important turning point. After this game I felt I could win the title, that I must win it. At the same time it became clear that Karpov felt the exact opposite”. Chess, vol 50, nos 965-6, Christmas 1985, p.278.)

Kasparov played his gambit, Karpov attempted to hold the pawn but the cost to his positon was too great. Kasparov was able to play his home preparation until move 19 (p.360 “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”) and then play on to victory with extreme accuracy and energy.

In Games 17 and 18 Karpov played cautiously reluctant to get into a tactical battle. In Game 19, Karpov once again was uncomfortable facing a 4 f3 Nimzo-Indian, had an inferior position and then lashed out fatally on the K-side.

Karpov did not crack although two games in arrears. He nursed a slight advantage in Game 20 and tried to win for 85 moves, enduring two sessions and just over 8½ hours play.

After this game Kasparov stated he was “trying to end the match as soon as possible” (Chess, vol 50, nos 965-6, Christmas 1985, p.278.)

“The atmosphere in the Soviet Union’s largest concert hall is acrid; amongst the 1,500 spectators and the tens of millions of Soviet chess fans outside, there are no neutrals… Thousands stand in rows six feet deep all around the cordoned off Mayakovsky Square (sic) before the start of each game. A ticket for a good seat costs 2½ roubles (£2.60) but on the black market they are changing hands at 15 roubles (£15.60) … The annual elections for the top posts of the USSR (chess) federation … should take place this week. But they have been postponed until the end of the present match. No one wants to cast a vote until they know who comes out on top in the war in the Tchaikovsky Hall … some of the Soviet Union’s leading political figures have become involved…” Dominic Lawson Financial Times, October19th 1985) quoted in Chess, vol 50, nos 961-2, November 1985, p.198.

<What happened at the Match?>

Kasparov has stated that the quality of this match was superior to that of the first. As in the first match, Karpov faded as it progressed. In the first 12 games he won twice and lost twice, in the second half of the match he lost three times and won only once.

“This match was totally different from the first because we were both now playing attacking chess. It was a really tough fight. Everything was very direct. We were not just playing for microscopic advantages. Each game was of great importance and each decided something. It would not be correct to pick out one and say ‘This was the decisive game’”. (Chess, vol 50, nos 965-6, Christmas 1985, p.278.)

Kasparov won the first game as white. He introduced an opening variation that had not previously featured in either of the player’s repertoires. Karpov responded hesitatingly thinking for fifty minutes on move five and then played inaccurately to lose. Kasparov had the advantage in the second, but Karpov played the endgame the more precisely to hold a draw after 65 moves.

Kasparov appeared to enjoy the most effective and innovative opening preparation. Using the 4 f3 Nimzo-Indian in this match, he won Games 1, 11, and 19. In game 12 and 16 he used an innovative pawn sacrifice in the Sicilian scoring 1½ from the two games as Black). Karpov’s team did not match the scope or effectiveness of his opponent in producing critical theoretical novelties in the opening.

Karpov took the lead with two successive wins (Games 4 and 5). In the fourth game, Karpov showed his strength in positional manoeuvring and won by building up an over-whelming K-side attack. Karpov played very accurately to equalise as Black in the next game and Kasparov became anxious and his play inaccurate. By the challenger losing the fifth game, the match was now 3-2 in Karpov's favour.

Kasparov equalised at three wins each in Game 11 with queen sacrifice after Karpov played an obvious but erroneous move “almost without thinking” (p.339 “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”).

In August 1985, and only three days before the start of the second match, the termination of its precursor was endorsed by FIDE’s AGM in Graz. They also ruled that in the case of a draw Karpov would remain champion, but if he lost he would be seeded directly into the Candidates Event at the quarter final stage (p.8, “Kasparov v Karpov 1986-87”).

The FIDE congress had created a system which would only to apply to the next cycle. This gave an appearance of partiality in favour of Karpov as he would significantly benefit from these innovations.

<Between the matches>

Both players had shown their strength in elite events between the matches. Karpov won in OHRA Crown Group, Amsterdam (July 15-265h, 1985) without a loss in a Category 14 competition.

Kasparov prepared with matches v Hubner in Hamberg, 27 May – 4 June 1985 (+3=3-0) (Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov, Part 1: 1973-1985, p.7)and Andersson in Belgrade 12 May – 20 June 1985 (+2=4-0) (Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov, Part 1: 1973-1985, p.7)

Kasparov then began training with his team in Zağulba Bağları a sea-side resort near Baku, Azerbaijan. “by September…I felt far more confident than a year earlier. I had become stronger and had more stamina, and my style of play was more balanced and universal. My store of opening ideas had been thoroughly replenished”. (p277, “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”).

<The conditions of the match>

The official prize for the match was 1.6 million Swiss francs (about £520,000) of which Kasparov should receive five-eights, and Karpov three-eights; but nobody believes that they will receive more than their 72,000 Russian roubles – about £75,000 or less in spending power for their last match”. (Chess, vol 50, nos 963-4, December 1985, p.226). In 2014, vales the match’s official purse would be approximately £1,500,000/$2,485,875.

The match’s arbiters were: A.Malchev (Bulgaria) and V.Mikenas (USSR) (p272, “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”). This had been the subject of contention between Kasparov and FIDE. Kasparov vociferously objected to FIDE’s first choice of Gligoric and Kinzel. They were the arbiters from the first match, and Kasparov believed that they had supported Camponmanes in the decision to abort the first match (p. 273, “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”). Karpov's seconds were I. Zaitsev and Y. Balashov. (p54).

Kasparov's trainer was Alexander Nikitin, who also served as chief second, assisted by Dorfman and G. Timoshenko, Vladimirov and Shakarov. (p.54 and p.277 “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”) states that the team was the same for the second match).

This match of 24 games and of 68 days duration commenced in Moscow on the Tuesday 3rd September 1985 and ended on Saturday 9th November, with the closing ceremony the next day.

At the start of the match, Karpov was 34 years, 3 months old and Kasparov was 22 years, 4 months old. They were the two dominant players of their time and would continue to be until the emergence of a new generation of players such in the early 1990s.

The match inherited a spirit of distrust and division. There were two points of considerable contention. These were: the manner in which the first match had been terminated, and secondly the new system which had just been brought in to decide the challenger for the world championship. The previous match had been terminated by FIDE president Campomanes who had explained his actions thus: (the match) “has exhausted the physical, if not the psychological resources, of not only of the participants but all those connected with the match…” (p254, “Kasparov v Karpov 1975-85”). A new world championship match in September 1986 would now take place with the scores at 0-0.

Camponmanes further stated that Karpov had wanted to continue he match and was well. Karpov, himself announced ” … we can, and do, want to continue the match. I do not agree with the decision to end it and start again from scratch. I think that Mr Kasparov will second this”. (Chess, vol 49, nos 943-4, February 1985, p.284.)

At the inconclusive end of the first match, Karpov was in the lead by 5-3 with 40 draws. He needed only one win to take the match, whilst Kasparov needed three more. Karpov, however, had last tasted victory in Game 27. In the next 21 games, he won none but lost three, the last two of which were in succession. So, at this point in the match, Karpov had only managed to win one game out of the previous 39. This has led to a debate as to whether Karpov had been so exhausted by the prolonged struggle that he would have physically or mentally collapsed. He had already come close to physical exhaustion in similar circumstances against Korchnoi – Karpov - Korchnoi Candidates Match (1974) . Then he had managed to hold on and win the match despite the crisis of two games being lost in succession cutting his lead down to a single point.

Kasparov considered that terminating the match had been both unfair and illegal, and that it had come about through the machinations of the president of FIDE Campomanes on the urging of the Soviet Chess Federation. To the evident embarrassment of the Soviet establishment, he had made his protests vigorously and directly to the world’s press and to Campomanes. Camponmanes stated that Karpov wanted to continue he match and was well. Karpov, himself announced ”…we can, and do, want to continue the match. I do not agree with the decision to end it and start again from scratch. I think that Mr Kasparov will second this”. (Chess, vol 49, nos 943-4, February 1985, p.284.)

Kasparov made it plain that he did not believe that Karpov truly wanted the match to continue “I became convinced that the decision to stop the match was carried out not so much because of any risk to the champions’ health, but rather in view of his psychological exhaustion, confusion and the fear of continuing”. (Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov, Part 1: 1973-1985, p.513)

In the end, however, the decision to terminate the match stood. The prestige of both FIDE and the Soviet Chess Federation was diminished. There was a powerful and vocal body of opinion outside of the Soviet Union who saw the decision as a dishonest fix. “FIDE has suffered a bad blow to its prestige if a world championship can be stopped on a pretext if the organisers don’t like the player who looks like winning”. (Chess, vol 49, nos 943-4, February 1985, p.285.)

<Chessical> Thank you so much sir!

You mean the 1985 match right?

I have entered your draft into the mirror here: Game Collection: WCC: Karpov-Kasparov, 1985

You'll need to pare that down to about 1/3 of the current word count. I suggest you can condense the account of the 1984 match in particular, since <Paint My Dragon> will have already covered that in Game Collection: WCC: Karpov-Kasparov 1984-85. I think just one sentence ought to suffice even for that. One or two maybe.

Great stuff though, and well sourced too.

I suggest you email me at jessicafischerqueen@yahoo.com

This is the best way to discuss further details about your draft. If you don't feel comfortable letting others know your email address, just create a new email account solely for the purposes of <cg.com> business. That is in fact my <cg.com> business address I just posted for you.

I'm moving to a new part of the city tomorrow so I may be hors de combat for a few days, just to let you know.

Best regards,

<Chessical>

Just to be a bit more precise on the word count-

This is the longest intro at the moment, coming in at 830 words: Botvinnik - Bronstein World Championship Match (1951).

I'd like to keep the drafts not much longer than this range- certainly under 1000 words. Your draft is 2,600 words.

<OhioWordCountFan>

Well I hear you, but we do need to keep these intros below the 1,000 word mark.

At least the game's afoot again. A fine outing by <Chessical> to say the least, and he's already done more edits. I'll be putting his new edit at the top of the mirror when I get back from my final day of work today. A "half day," appropriately enough.

Excellent intro!

<Paint My Dragon>

<Chessical> Fabulous!

Might you please resend that new draft? I can't find it in my mailbox.

<Chessical>

Excellent. I've got it now.

I'll post it in the mirror after work today, and also I will create the rest of the missing mirrors to make a full list in our profile.

We will thus keep track of who is writing what and avoid duplication of work.

<Chessical> Outstanding, thank you-

New drafts:

Game Collection: WCC: Kasparov - Karpov 1986