You are on page 1of 9

Sosonko’s Corner

Fischer’s Legacy

In the beginning of 1970 Bot- hesitate to exchange a bishop for a
by Genna Sosonko vinnik was preparing for an 18- knight when he can ruin the oppo-
game match against Bobby nent’s pawn structure. Fischer
Fischer, to be held in Leiden in the does not like long pawn chains. He
Netherlands, but the match never always makes sure there is enough
got off the ground. His notes on air for his pieces to ‘breathe’ and
Fischer’s opening repertoire have that’s why closed pawn structures
been preserved and when it be- rarely occur in Fischer’s games.
came clear in 1971 that Fischer When he encounters a new or un-
would meet Mark Taimanov in the known idea Fischer’s first reply is
quarter-finales of the Candidates’ often not spot-on.’
matches, the Patriarch offered his The following observation of
expertise to him. Here is what Botvinnik’s is most remarkable:
Botvinnik, perhaps a bit naively, ‘Like other tall players (Smyslov,

thought about the openings of the Euwe) Fischer has a predilection
American forty years ago: for long queen moves. Taimanov
‘Fischer has a steady opening rep- needs to pay special attention to
ertoire but for each event he pre- this.’
pares additional variations. In the
A personal view Sicilian he might play a set-up I remember a conversation I had
on the chess opening with Ãd3/Ãe3/Àc3/Àb3/f4/©f3, with Tal on Fischer’s opening
often combined with a pawn storm preparation. ‘Bernard Zuckerman
on the kingside, especially against was Fischer’s neighbour in New
weaker players. From his early York and the two worked together
years he has a liking for a rook for a while. “On one position we
switch on the third rank, attacking would spend 20 hours, on another
the enemy king. Despite a clear 2 hours, and so on.” Typical, very
preference for bishops he won’t American, very efficient’, Tal said.
‘On my part I can look at a com-
pletely irrelevant line for hours on

Vasily Smyslov played his first
game against Fischer when the lat-
ter was only 16 years old. He
emphasizes his great willpower
and the incredible amount of en-
ergy Fischer would put in his
games from the word go. Smyslov
told me that Fischer played the
opening very quickly in all their
encounters. ‘He invariably used up

half an hour less than I. Although
time controls were much slower in
those years, in the end it was still
Mark Taimanov an important factor.’

_I_. An exam.Ãe5 Õe8 28. Once he had ana._.©e1 Õfe8 .®h1 c5 20.d4 Àf3 6. than compensate for the ruined _Jj._.Àf3 Àc6 3.Lajos Alberic O’Kelly de Galway he later eliminated these openings Havana ol 1966 (6) from his repertoire. j.d3 Ãh3 12. present times.jJ This leaves the burning question: which variation would Fischer kingside pawn structure.Robert _. In the 1966 Olympiad in Havana he pulled the Exchange Variation In the King’s Gambit Accepted he out of his hat.j. his win against Wade from 1968.©c4 ©g6 23._. He was convinced that af- against Bob Wade._R Fischer.Àb3 ©d1 9.dc6 bc6 8. Like they do in keepsie 1963 (7).j to it for better or worse.Õf5 Õe5 IiI_._.0-0 Ãh3 game the Belgian observed: ‘I 4._.Àf6 ©f6 19. J_._. Before the 1.s._N on Cuba in which Fischer partici. win in the end.Àh3 rNbR_. Fischer scored some victories 1.fe5 Àe4 10. Pough- Marshall-nut’.ed5 Àa5 6._Jj._. pated by telegraph. because he had noticed Wade. move 9.Ãg4 Àg4 15. Àd4 22._._.t an opening line._ to advantage has been discovered._. Fischer.Ãc4) which yielded innocuous.Robert rNbQk.. mained the Ruy Lopez.e4 e5 2.j.Õd1 nario for Bobby: again the Mar. him three wins in great positional style._. O’Kelly held on rel. Sosonko’s Corner Fischer was also extremely stub.©c3 Àc6 21.Robert that Bobby’s play against it was Vinkovci 1968 (1) 9. 1. The same applies for the Petroff. Petrosian made a draw in their born when it came to the choice of 1971 match without much ado.Arthur . shall? Now as then no clear route Bisguier.Õe5 1-0 rNb._. sively played 1.Ãf3 ©h3 14.gh3 ©d7 14.fe5 Õe5 25. Both O’Kelly ter bishop takes knight h3 the stra- and Wade were of course clearly tegic plus and bishop pair more T_L_M_St weaker than the American.Àf3 Àg5 5.l.kIi 29.. T_LdMl._.Ãc5 10.Àg5 d5 5.j.0-0 not totally convincing._. which he tage. lysed something and had reached a certain conclusion he would stick Open Games In his younger years Fischer exclu- . Õb2 27._. but 7.Robert Gambit on several occasions.Ãc6 dc6 5.0-0 f6 6._ choose nowadays against the Mar. O’Kelly chose IiIiBiIi the Marshall Attack against Fischer.e4 e5 2.i._._ 17.Ãe2 h6 9.Àc3 Õe8 12.f4 _. Check out _.Àd2 Õad8 tenable ending._J_._.©f2 ©f2 8.Àf3 Àc6 3.e4 e5 2. He also employed the Evans Fischer. Still Portisch._ Capablanca Memorial tournament of antique open games. 10._.Ãg2 ©f5 16. arsenal was the forgotten Steinitz 7.i.Ãb5 a6 In the next game behind the white The most remarkable weapon in his 4.e4 – best by test! – s.d4 ed4 pieces it was exactly the same sce.Àe4 Ãb6 18.®f2 1-0 Fischer-Radoicic.c3 Àf5 .t 13.hg4 want to see how Bobby cracks this 7.Ãb5 c6 IiI_.’ jJjJ_JjJ 15.Ãc4 Àf6 4..iIi against weaker opposition.gh3 ©d7 atively easily – a pawn down but a TsL_Ml._._B_R In spite of these successes the cornerstone of his repertoire re- White has a small endgame advan._ 24. 27 ._. Poughkeepsie 1963 (5) _N_._.f4 Àf6 3. this time Defence._.0-0 11.Àh3 in the Two Knights’ Ãd6? shall and again a draw.k.Àd4 c5 8._.Ãe4 _._.©f3 ©h4 13. ple of this phenomenon is the and occasionally availed himself .d3 0-0 11.Ãf4 Õe2 26. which he converted into a enriched with many fresh ideas.. which at the time had NEW IN CHESS ARCHIVES invariably opted for the Bishop’s the reputation of being completely Gambit (3.

10.Õc6 Õc6 33. ._.t .Õd6 ®f5 33. ‘I told him about a new system that Fischer.Àbd2 ed4 12.Àf3 Àc6 3.Ãf4 _.de5 ©h4 34.Õf4 ®g5 34.f4 f5 28.d4 Àb6 Õe2 27.Àc5 ®b8 22._JjJ days.h6.Àg6 ©g6 15.Ãg5 Õfe8 17. even friendly relations with NEW IN CHESS ARCHIVES in virtually all lines of the Ruy Fischer during the Saltsjöbaden Lopez._.Õd1 Õc8 31.d4 when I played this being inferior to 5.Ãg3 Ãd6 bc6 12. They would novelty against the Neo-Steinitz in spend a lot of time together and Bled 1961.Àb5 Õhd8 8.c3 d6 9.Ãc5 occasions where he had faced the Reshevsky.Robert B_._. Santa Monica 1966 (10) 18.n..Ãa4 d6 5._.’ 28 .©b7 gh3 Js.cd4 d5 13.©f3 ®h6 37.©d2! ©e8 21.Àc5 Ãc2 Zerquera.i.Ãg4 6.Samuel Ãc3 16.Ãg3 Õd8 22. Young Fischer acted on im- ®f6 32.0-0 1972) the main line of the Ruy in disbelief but avoided the matter This used to have the reputation of Lopez initiated by 9.Ãh5? 10...Ãc2 7.jJ _._NiI 22.Àe5 Ãd1 11.iI_.Õf3 1-0 J_Sj.s._ mJj...Svetozar _.h3 Ãh5 7.c4 Àe7 12._Rk.r..Ãb6 f3 26.e5 ©d7 15.©c3 Ãg6 23.Robert f5 13._.Àc3 0-0-0 11.Àc5 ©d6 17.e5 Ãe5 15.a4 ba4 _._ far stronger.Ãe3 10._M_ 14.e4 e5 2.cb5 ab5 19.Àe4 ©e7 24.Ãf4 Àe7 12._N_I J_JdLjS_ IiL_.iI_ _.Õe1 b5 22.k.Àe5 de5 13.0-0 Ãe7 6.Àh4 Àa4 Ii.i.dL_ pulse in his encounter with Dieter Keller.©d5 23.c3. 4.Õc5 c6 26.d4! 16. 11.._._ 20. discuss certain openings at length._. voluntarily weakening 1.Àf3 Àc6 3._. 12.Ãb5 a6 Ii.Ãb5 a6 20._I_I_ Black had nothing to complain Gligoric.©b3 Àc5 25.c3 ©f6? 1.Àc4 h5 17. Q_.Àb3 Ãf5 9. Bled 1961 (6) ‘Just 9._._N_I about and in the end even won! Seven years later Fischer played Havana ol 1966 (8) 1.Ãc6 dc6 5.’ Geller.Õc6 18. 29.Õe1 ®f8 T_.cd4 ©d7 9.Õg6 ®h7 35..©b3 hg4 20. Bobby exclaimed.rQr.g4 Ãg6 4.Õc1 Àb4 19.Àa6! Ãh3 19._.Àc7 Õbc8 7.Õdb1 ®f7 21.Àd6 cd6 18.g3 ©h3 38.Àg6 hg6 32.e5 Àe5 20._.Õd1å Fischer-Jimenez A powerful pawn sacrifice.i.fg3 ®b8 16._.Àa7 Õb8 5.h3 Ãe6 Ãe6 14.h5 Àe5 T_.gh3 e4 36.Õf4 ®e7 30.._MlSt This was an important line in those 29.c3 ed4 8.h3 very much and went 9.h3 Àd7 24.Õb4 Ãa2 23.Àe5 Ãd6 14._.Ãb5 a6 At the summit of his career (until the kingside?’ He shook his head 4.de5 de5 13. which carried Fischer’s hallmark.Efim ‘What is this’._._ 21.Àa4 Ãg3 15.Ãe4 10.de5 Àe5 _.©a3 ©d8 31.©b4 1-0 _JnJi.Õc1 Àg6 13.d4 Ãg4 rNbQ_Rk.Õec1 Õe6 27.e4 e5 2.Õe4 _Jj. Zurich 1959: 11.Àc6 Ãe6 Neo-Steinitz.j.bc3 Àg6 17.Robert Vasily Smyslov was developed..©c2 1-0 1-0 Viktor Kortchnoi told me he had Fischer came up with innovations warm.Àa5! b5 11.Àbd2 Ãg6 11._I_ 24. 18.©h5 Ãf6 and Fischer. He launched an important Interzonal in 1962.Õc3 b5 25.Àc3 f4 14. line against him in Round 19.©a4 Õb8 30._.h6.Àf3 Àc6 3.0-0 f6 6.h4 Õd2 25.Õg5 Õb4 fe5 21. Havana ol 1966 (13) 9.e4 e5 2.Ãe7 Õe7 ®d7 12.jDtJjJ 16. Smyslov’s 9.Ãb3 0-0 8. _.Ãa4 Àf6 5.Àb5 Õa8 28.©a4 ®a7 d5 19.Ãe3 Fischer had played on all previous Fischer.i.Àd7 9.t.©b4 a5 _.Ãc6 10.

_Bq.e4 e5 2.h3 Àb8 Àc6 13._NiI IiB_Qi.i.s.Robert ter the main line.iI_ 4.©b1 ©b8 14..0-0 Ãe7 6.Àg3 29 .d5 c4 18.Àa5.iJ_I_.e5! 16.Robert 34.d.Àe3 and White is fully in command of the TUROV ARCHIVES f5-square.0-0 Ãe7 6.lJjJ J_S_. 35.r.Õh4 Stein.bNnI 1.rNk.g3! 12.Ãb5 a6 T_Sd.Õah1 Õh4 33. which Fischer combat- J_. At a later stage in his career Ãg5 24.dc5 dc5 14..e4 e5 2. iJ_Ij.Àh7 22.b.Õh4 g5 Sousse izt 1967 (7) Fischer._ _Jj.Ãb3 0-0 8.Õe1 b5 _.h3 h6 10.c3 0-0 9.Ãb2 c5 15.d4 ©c7 12. _.Ãa4 Àf6 5..j. (9..Àg3 f6 27._. Sosonko’s Corner T_Lt.Àbd2 Ãb7 iJ_Ij.Svetozar 4.b3 Àb6 . 14._. Õf7 29.Ãa4 Àf6 5.d4 Àa5 11.Àf3 Àc6 3.Ãb3 d6 8.Àf1 Ãf8 14.r White had no advantage in Keres- Gligoric..Õh1 Õf8 28.©d2 the centre..Ãb3 d6 8.g6 17.Ãa4 Àf6 5.Õh6 ®g7 1.Ãe3 Ãf8 12. after 11.h4 gh4 31. Àb6 13.Àf3 Àc6 3.b4 Ãc8 _._ New York ch-USA 1963 (4) Spassky.j.c3 0-0 9. Kortchnoi is about to play 16.d4 Õe8 11.Àf1 Õd8 10._ _.j.Ãf6 gf6 20. 13.Àbd2 Àbd7 14. White has wrested the initiative in 19.Ãc2 Õe8 13.0-0 Ãe7 6. 16.i._.Ãb3 d6 8.a4 Ãf8. Chigorin’s 9.Ãe6.Ãg5 Àf6 19._L_..g4 g6 Fischer had no reservations to en.Õf6 1-0 Another example of this strategy T_SdTlM_ Here’s another novelty against from the Breyer Variation _.Àf1 Ãb7 13..Õe1 b5 r.©e2 Àh5 16.Robert ed many times._ 10.j Fischer.a5 Àc8 21.ba5 c5 17.ed4 Palma de Mallorca izt 1970.Leonid Õh7 32.Àbd2 Ãb7 21.Arthur Fischer.e4 e5 2.i.m..Robert . .c3 0-0 9.Àg5 Ãg5 18.h4! White has the initiative._I_. 11._L_Jj._..Ãe3 Ãd7 20.iJ_I_I_ 14... 14.cd4 a5 16.Ãc2 Àc4 12.0-0 Ãe7 6.e4 e5 2.Àf3 Àc6 3.Àg5 hg5 25.Àf1 Õe8 16.b4! 7.Àbd2 7.Ãc2 Àc4 15.Ãh3 17.s.. Zurich 1959..Àb8)._..Ãf8 12._Bq._S .j.f3 Àf8 30.Ãc2 c5 11._ r.h3 Àa5 1. reaching a critical position Fischer often played b2-b4 in the Ruy Lopez.a3 Fischer-Ivkov.h3 Ãb7 1.Boris _.b3 4. Round 19 from the Candidates Tournament on Curaçao 1962.k. 10.Õe1 b5 7._K_ 15.j.d4 Àbd7 11.Ãb5 a6 Gligoric._M_ _.Àbd2 J_.Àb3! leaves White in control of the a5-square.Àf3 Àc6 3. 26.Õe1 b5 Rovinj/Zagreb 1970 (10) 7..bIn.a4 c5 17.c3 d6 9..Ãb5 a6 4.Ãa4 Àf6 5.®h2 Ãe7 23.a5 15.®g2 Fischer.Àf5 15.Àg3 Àa5 14. The idea of this move is to ruin Black’s pawn structure at the ex- pense of a mere pawn after 16.Ãb5 a6 Sveti Stefan m 1992 (1) .._._. Bisguier.

Robert I_J_I_.Õe1! ment is still exemplary for the way Only once did he play the Tarrasch 12.iB_.Àd2 Àf6 4.jJ rQ_.Àh2 and _._Qr.©d4! c5 5.Ãa3 fe5 14.bc3 c5 7. But there were also some fine 14.0-0 ®f8 18. Fischer._M_.d4 d5 3.Õf6. 12._.Lhamsuren oversight.Ãd2 Ãg7 would have suited his open style 1._I_BiIi or the Sicillian.Àc3 Fischer’s results were 7.Tigran Belgrade tt 1970 (1) g6 15._S_Jj. he never repeated the chose Sousse izt 1967 (3) line.iI_ 1.Àe5 Àf6 16.0-0 13.n. Later on Fischer used different TUROV ARCHIVES ways to fight against the Caro-Kann.Àe5 Àe5 16.f5! 20.d4 d5 3.Ãh4 Àg8 _J_Ij._N_.. _.sJj wins. Ãd6 17.j.i..iBb.g3 said for the argument that 3.c3 Àf6 6. granting Fischer.j r.b4!? 10. so Black Robert Byrne at the 1965 US has to play 13._NnI Denver m 1971 (1) jJd.Ãh5!. 19.d3 d5 3.Ãe2 f6 I_.Robert Championship due to a tactical White control over e5! Larsen Miagmarsuren. the French ._.cb3 . . Fischer. Variation 3.Àd2 Àce5 15._ Larsen.Àgf3 Ãe7 30 . When he lost to 15.dT_M_ with white throughout his career.©a4 Ãd7 9. when he pre- ferred the relatively rare Two Knights Variation.©b3 Àa5 8.t ._ 21.Robert Was the picture taken in 1966 or 1969? Petrosian.a4 .Àc3.. Paul Keres was among those who were successful with this ap- proach.. His win Fischer’s choice against the from the 1967 Interzonal tourna- French has always been 3.©c2 unbalanced.h3 J_.Ãf4 Ãg4 After 3.Àbd2 Àc6 13..a3 Ãc3 6.Àc5 21.b Earlier games saw 19.a4 c5 18. T_.Àd2. but White was clearly better off and duly won.i.i.©d2 Õf8 22. King’s Indian Attack.a4 Õc8 T_._Jj.Ãg5 h6 16. 12..i. especially in his younger years. but White is also better after 19._ and White won after an eventful _.c4!.Àg6 13.Ãe3._SlJ_.Ãe3 h6 15.f4 Ãe8 19..Bent .Ãd3 Àc6 5. with a decisive attack. Not the most accurate reply.Àh7 jJdLs. Fischer also ran into trouble against the Caro-Kann.0-0 c4 11... People who would never play the Caro-Kann suddenly lashed out 1.Àf3 ©b6 11.Ãf2 ©c7 20._T_LmSt _._Rk. against the Caro-Kann.. although there is a lot to be 12.Ãb3 and if 20.de5 1.Àc3 Ãb4 4.e4 c6 2. 4. was Fischer’s Semi-Open Games r. The first game of the match Petrosian-Spassky._Ji.ef6 gf6 14.bQ_Rk._.e5 Àe7 5.._.Ãh6 Õf7 to conduct a kingside attack._I_ 19.Ãg2 Àc6 6.. 20.Àh4 Àg6 16.Ãe3 h5 21..ed5 cd5 17._Jn.d5 c4 much better. Another weapon.k._I 19. losing several games e6 10.e4 e6 2.Àf3 Ãd7 9..i.©b1 Àh5 _L_S_Jl. in his case even twice. Àbc6 8.e4 e6 2.Õa3 I_Ji.Ãd3 ©c7 _. whether it be game.c6 against him.

Àf1 Àb6 1.Àf5! Ãe6 12.©g5 Àe4 26.Ãg2 dc2 game Bastrikov-Shamkovich._.a3! ba3 14.©d2 r.e5 Àd7 9.c4 Àf6 ®h8 28.Àh4 15.Ãd6 1-0 the second game of the Candi- T_.Àf3 Àc6 3.Àg5 Àd5 19.j.h4 a5 12.Àc5 Ãc8 20.Samuel 13._.tM_ T_T_. New York ch-USA 1958/59 (6) Ãa6 16. The idea behind it will bishop on c4.Õh4 Õa7 29._ r.©g2.Ãb2 Àc6 3.Ãe2 d5 Õd6 33._. 9.g4 ®g4 14.0-0 0-0 8._Qk.©g5 The same pattern can be found in Àd6 43.hg6 Àg6 41. Taimanov.Robert 10.d4 cd4 against the Sicilian are not as im- ._Sj.Õf3 b6 27.h5 Biulletin 10/1958. Ãe6 Àe8 38.. Typically.d3 Ãf8 8.®e6 12._S_Lj..h5 12.Àb5 d6 6.Àf1 b4 11.e5 Àe8? 23._._.i.i _Bn.i.Àe4 also against the Najdorf and the Nikitin and he had worked it out ©f7 16.Ãd2 Ãg5 4.Õg1 Õad8 15.©h6 ©f8 31.Ãe5 Õd8 read about it in Shakhmatny 10.Õe1 b5 18.Ãd3 Õd3 32.À1c3! 13.©d8 Andersson.©c2 Õe8 30._.Õh3 ®g8 40..Robert j.ef6 Àa1 11._ to this very day._.._J_._ Sicilian Defence Vancouver m 1971 (2) iI_IiN_. Sosonko’s Corner 7.r.Ãf6!ê ©e8 24.d4 ed4 Fischer never claimed to have in- 4.0-0 35.©h7 1-0 Sochi 1958.g5ê Àf5 26.iIi ..©g4 Àf8 37.Àbd2 f6 12.©d7 14._R r._D_JjJ .Ãf7! ®f7 11. ‘It is 4._Rk.Ãe3 ®d7 explained the former World 12.jJ This original plan remains popular Taimanov in 1971.Ãc4 0-0 8._M_ jJ_JjJlJ _.ba3 Àa5 15. In true fact he had 7.h4 Àd6 36.Àe6! de6 Fischer has a few entirely new Black’s king won’t survive the middlegame concepts to his Ulf Andersson journey after 11.Àe4 g6 9.Àe6 Õe6 29. Fischer’s main When Taimanov asked him about Kasparov called this a ‘mysterious weapon was putting the king’s it Fischer revealed he had seen this move’.Õe4 c4 27. 10.©c2 ®g7.Àd4 e6 5.k. s.b3 e5 2.Ulf 23.bQ . 30.Ãg5 ©d7 21.Õag1 Fischer. but in a 1969 book by Alexander 13.©c4 Àe6 34. ®f5 13.Àc5 Àe7 24.©d3 vented this trap.Àc3 20.Ãh3 d4 17. 1. especially among black players. Tal opines that Fischer’s successes 1.sJ_ L_.g4! g6 17. himself subsequently.Ãe3 Àf6 6.d4 cd4 18.©h5 Õfc8 Ãg7 7._.f4 ®f8 42.e4 c5 2..Àg7 ®g7 and Black’s minor pieces were no Siegen 1970 25.Àf3 Àc6 3.e4 c5 2.Ãf4 e5 7.Robert Àd7 21.bQnBiIi pressive as you would expect._. 31 .Àd2 Àc3 T_Ld.dTlM_ dates’ match quarter-final against _Jj.Mark . .Ãf4 a4 The first part of White’s plan has Reshevsky.Õg1 ®h5 18._.Ãe3 Àf6 8. Fischer._ J_.sI_..Õg3 Ãg7 Dragon.e4 Õd2 39._. against the Classical Variation.©a5 Àa5 11.fg7 Àc2 NEW IN CHESS ARCHIVES 25. is the lesser evil.Ãc4 d3 31._. Fischer.Àb3 10.b.cd5 Àd5 11._ s. i.. difficult to play against yourself!’ Àe4 10._In._._.Ãb3 Àa5? 22.Àd4 g6 5.iB IiI_.j.gf6 match for the queen.e3 Ãe7 5.a3 0-0 6.nI_.®h1!! Champion._.Àe3 been executed. as played in the stem cd3 28.Àe4 Àf8 22.©d5 name.Àf3 a5 9. That’s what he did recommendation in some footnote soon become transparent.Àb6 19.Ãg5 ©a5 9.

_T_.Àd4 Àf6 5.Àc3 a6 6.dM_._ .n.d3 Ãe7 8.t .Robert 4.Ãe5 Ãf6 12.fe5 Àe5Ç jJ_M_JjJ is perhaps more tenacious.._L_Jt.©c7 13.©f4 a5 21.Àf3 d6 3.c3 bc3 17.Àg3.©e2 ©d8 T_L_.jJ Ts. ation as well: 12.._..j._ _L_.b3.j.h3 went: 9. 7.Àd5! ed5 11.d4 cd4 Palma de Mallorca izt 1970 (21) Fischer.©d3 Ãe7 10. 21.s.Õg3 Àd5 15. r.Àf5 or 12._Q_ IiI_.iI_ _. since he 1967.Ãb2 c5 3._ However..Àf3 d6 3.g5 e5 32 .©g4 Àe5 13.Ãf4 Àe5 19.Õe6 Ãc8 23.ef6 Õf6 TsLdMl.g5 Àfd7 15. Now White can go for the kill.Henrique 1.Àd2 0-0 11. Sousse Interzonal NEW IN CHESS Sicilian against Fischer.bQkB_R _I_Ii. Flank Openings ways had to be prepared for a In the notes to his game against Maroczy set-up when playing the Leonid Stein.j._Ii _. .Àe3 Àbd7 13.. r. Nice (rapid) 2008 (5) Mecking._I_.t Ãe7 18. One of the ideas behing this flank move is to meet the standard 6.e4 c5 2. and 1.n.g6 f6 22.h3 e6 1..r._I j._I_ I_In.e5 IiI_.iB_ with 7.t 16. _J_.g4 b5 8.Àe5 17.._S_..Àe7 ®e7 14.Àf3 Àc6 Bolbochan.Õe1 e5 11.g4 0-0 9. IiI_.f4 Àbd7 18.ab3 ®g7 25._._. his colleagues of today have This line is still topical in our time.Àc3 a6 6.©d4 e5 21.g4 a4 23.’ In the latter part of his career In their Candidates’ match Fischer Sergey Karjakin Fischer occasionally refrained showed up late for Game 1 and from 1.j._.kB_R 25. vik but also previously against avoid the photographers? Remark.iIi 20.. .l.f4 Àd7 4.Àc6 7.d4 cd4 Gelfand from the same round Õc8 10.b3 d5 2.Ãc6 Ãc6 9.d._.b.jJ_._.Ãb5 Ãd7 6.Taimanov did not know about this Other moves come into consider- suggestion of his compatriot.j. Polugaevsky) as well as 1._.Àe5 1.©c4 1-0 Taimanov used to say that you al.n._M_ _._.Õe3!ê ©b6 24.Õaf1 a5 16.jJjJ 10.g5!?. With the latter move exactly the same habit and you can Here are two recent games.©g7 ©g7 20._. Did he want Gradually gaining control of the times against Spassky in Reykja- to unsettle his opponent or just d5-square and winning the game.e3 Àf6 5.s. He tried 1.Ãg2 Ãb7 9._.0-0 b4 4.Àf3 9._.Àd5 a5 16.Robert round.bQ_Rk._.Àd4 Àf6 5.g5 12.ed5 Ãe7 J_. J_._Rk._I _.Àde2 Ãe7 8. opened with the QP – on princi- ple.fe5 f5 18. _J_.Sergey ter signals the beginning of a Van Wely.Loek Fischer._. 12.Õf6 ©g3 6.Õb1å..Õe1 ®f8 16. Fischer wrote: ‘I have never was so fond of space..lJjJ _.Julio 7._._.Ãe5 de5 sN_.e4 c5 2.hg3 Õe8 22. Fischer was victorious on all five often see only a few participants outings! present in the arena when the arbi.Àf3 ably.©e5 h6? 18.a5 20. 19.Õae1 Ãd7 r.h6 10._. .Àc6 ab3 24.bc3 Ãe5 17.c4 (four also for other games.Õf3 ©e7 15.Õae1 is no picnic either.d6 Õa7 26.nI_.Àcd5 14..Õe3 Àa6 _.a4 b4 14._ . Karjakin.0-0 e6 Saltsjöbaden izt 1962 (21) The blindfold game Carlsen._._ ._.Àf5 g6 12.g4 Àd4 8. 19._ 17.e4.

©g4] 12.Robert the ending anyway._.Ãc4 ®h8 24. Fischer.Õcf1 ©d8 29. 15.g6 ®f8 35.Ãe2 d6 6.®e3 Õd7 34.a4 Àe5 _.Ãh4 b6 risk..Ãg5 0-0 6. ed5 11.Õb6 Õe7 30._. Later Fischer won Fischer’s novelty.b.Ãe2 0-0 9. as Black Bobby Fischer 1.Àd5? f6! 18.®f2 de5 13.Õf5 Àh7 15.©d2?! [¿ 12.Ãd3 ©e8 Õh7 36. jJ_.Àe6! fe6 _._.d4 21.jJ_.Svetozar 4.©c2 .de4 c4 32.c4 e6 3.Àf6 8.gh7 35.e5 Õb8 previously known 14.. Sosonko’s Corner 26.Àf3 Fischer. second to none in executing a clear Fischer replied: ‘No.b3 15._L_.Àh4 Ãd7 27.d5 t._BiIi .h4 Õbb7 31._.._.n._.iN_. particularly strong.©h4! r.Õ1f2 ©e8 33.c4 g6 3. Here the exchange of .Àd6 Õg7 ®g8 40.©e5 de4 31.e4! Ii..n. the Grünfeld and the Uhlmann: 17.Õf6 38. Fischer added new systems concept very well but nevertheless NEW IN CHESS ARCHIVES to his armour._.©f4 1-0 40.d4 Àf6 2.sJ_ ...g5!? 23.de5 12._Rk.g3?! de5! 7.Ãg4 Ãd4 11. as pointed out by Tartakower-Makogonov Variation._._._. positional style. you should strategic plan. including the he played differently himself. In those days an almost new ap- a5 26.©h3 Àf8 25.r.Àc4 ®d8 39.e6 Õbc7 32.Àd2 Àbd7 11._M_ 10. Fischer behind the black pieces was a totally different player from Fischer.Àd5 King’s Indian._._R Fischer liked bishops better than knights.Õf6 gf6 39. uncompromising openings like the gerous initiative._J_J T_LdT_M_ Ii.Àc8 ®c8 42._.Àc3 Ãg7 Gligoric._. r.f4 c5 7.j 13.Õc1 Ãe6 12.._ 20.. Sicilian.b4 Ãg4 ©e8 33.d4 Àf6 he consciously played lines that 4. ._.a4 ©d8 34._._T_.Àc3 Ãe7 5.©f2 proach.Boris pieces. 12.©f2 16.e4 0-0 5.._.tM_ q.d4 Àf6 2. 12.Àe5 Ãc8 37.Õd6 Ãe6 28.e4 30.jIs.k.©g3 Õe7 28.Õ2f3 ©d8 36. Fischer understood this 1972.Àf3 g6 7.f5 ef5 27.0-0 Õa7 Leipzig ol 1960 (11) 17.a6 15.Ãe7 ©e7 10.0-0 Õe8 10.®f2 ®c7 41.Àc3 c5 4.®f2 ®f7 29...©a3 Õc8 14.j.dc5 bc5 16.©f6 ©g2 and Black wins .e3 h6 entailed a great deal of positional This is forced._ T_. I_. Queen’s Gambit.©d4 e5 14..©e5.Õd6 1-0 Fischer as Black During a post-mortem analysis This type of position suited Robert Byrne once proposed a Fischer extremely well.Àd4 Àc6 9._Ii True to the American School _.Ãe2 Àd7 1._I_.Àg6 ®e8 37. Fischer’s improvement over the 20.iQnBiIi good knight versus bad bishop is 14. 18.f4 ©e7 22.Ãd4 Ãg4 1.Ãc4 ®h8 41.cd5 d6 6.Àd4 ed5 5.Ãe3 Àg4 Palma de Mallorca izt 1970 (22) .Ãb5 Uhlmann.Àd4! ©f8 19.c4 e6 2.. 33 .Robert the one sitting behind the white Spassky._Rk. Õf6 19._JlJ _.cd5 Àd5 9.fe5 Ãg7 8.©e5 ©h3 gives Black a dan- Spassky’s trusted Bondarevsky.e4 J_. 14. _._IqI_L_ _. first equalize as Black and only then can you start thinking about In his match against Spassky in winning’.Robert cd4 8.Àf3 d5 3.Wolfgang with equality..©a4 c5 15._J_ jJ_.j. He was much too aggressive move.©e4 Àf6 38.i. With white he had a truly Reykjavik Wch-m 1972 (6) classical. So his repertoire consisted of 16._SdJj.d.

Karpov and these openings.®g1 Õa1 One could call White’s third move play Anatoly Karpov.©f2 Õa4 32.d5 Àe7 Àec6 10.j. This voluntary exchange on c3 _I_.j.c4 d4 5.Ãb5.Ãe2 ©e7 17.©b6 tioned game Fischer-Mecking. hence the conception of 23.h4 ‘lazy’ or inaccurate.b3 d5 3.Ãb2 f6! ings.13. who had 33._.Ãe3 Lipnitsky he read at a young age.Ãc3 ©e7 1. as in the aforemen- 28. Black wants to clamp rN_QkB_R White down and render his pair of bishops useless. Pawn from now on.Õbf2 ©e7 this opening.e4 e5 9. playing against a closed centre. King’s Indian when he could be . never to be. cb4 26.®h1 ©d4 19.Àc6 4.Àg6 fg6 13.0-0 0-0 16.©b2 ©e5 27. he re- I_.Àf3 c5 5. I dare say this has some- thing to do with the book by Isaak NEW IN CHESS ARCHIVES 12.b4 This is superior to 3._._I_Ii.Õb2 Õb8 19.Àf3 c5 2.d4 Àf6 2.©g3 ©b2 35.fe5 de5 14. b6 15._N_. Kasparov about Fischer and all Fischer would doubtlessly have After 5 games the match was bal. Smyslov.j.sSj reasonably certain that opponents like Spassky or Petrosian would _.Ãc2 g5 21._._ same lines we considered taking up the Petroff and the Caro-Kann. Along the 1. I be- .Àf3 Àf3 14. agree that his phenomenal opening prepared a number of opening sur- anced (2½-2½) and Fischer had knowledge was only the foundation prises._Ii mained faithful to the Ragozin r._.Ãd1 Àf4 vent him from playing this line Anatoly Karpov 27.Ãf3 h6 15.Ãe2 7. knowledge of long lines is an abso._. Today concrete matches.t Fischer regularly avoided his pet jJ_.jJ_.Robert . It’s a pity this match was Time to shift gear.a4 a5 17. for many victories.Õae1 ©e5 Fischer._.©b4 Àf4 Àf6 5.Õf2 Àd3 30.Àh4 h6 11._R Defence._Jj.e3 Fischerandom chess.Ãd2 ©e8 22.iB_. Karpov: TsLdMlSt ‘We decided that the slow systems I had used against the Sicilian Spassky.bc3 d6 8. T_LdM_.f4 Àg6 The game has barely started and already Black is slightly better.©e1 Õa2 34.n lieve he had a strong dislike of _.Ãe1 must have touched Fischer very ©g6 23. In 1975 Fischer was supposed to Àf2 31.Ãd2 Petrosian.d3 e5 6.©d3 Àh5 24.c4 e6 3.bQk.©c2? Ãa4! 0-1 throughout his life.Àb5 Buenos Aires m 1971 (6) fore.Õf8 Õf8 deeply.Ãe8 ©e8 24.e3 Àc6 6. Lipnitsky’s passion 20..’ Petrosian held his own quite well.e3 Àe7 7..Ãd3 Ãc3 .jIj.Ãb5 ©e5 22._.Tigran lute must for every top player and a6 16. relatively little experience against match in Buenos Aires in 1971 Taimanov. partly because they had served constitutes the so-called Hübner IbIiIiIi Karpov well against Spassky and System. This gave Fischer mixed feel- ab5 21._._.Robert plays a much bigger role than be- 18._. 4.Àc3 Ãb4 4. Varying results did not pre- 25.Õb1 which contains deep analyses of Ãd7 18. partly because the American had In the final of the Candidates’ I have spoken with Kortchnoi.Boris jJ_. Despite a series of losses.Ãg7 ®g7 25.f3 Àh5 20. as he had done in previous been in peril on several occasions. 34 . adopt the Sämisch Variation._ bishing – it would be the Poisoned Reykjavik Wch-m 1972 (5) _.Õd1 b6 29.Õf8 ®f8 26.jJ Defence so far needed some refur- Fischer. been preparing seriously with his Õa1 0-1 trainer Semen Furman.