World Champions From Philidor To PDF

World Chess Network
About Us · Contact Us
Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ
Welcome
Membership
Events
Next »
Promotions
Site Pros
Top Players by Larry Parr
Chess News
Chess History
Is there a meaningful distinction
•The World Chess
between “the champion of the
Championship
and Champions: chess world” and “the chess
1747-2001 champion of the world”? The
+ The Kings of Chess: answer to this often unasked
question has, as we shall see,
A 21-Player Salute
important ramifications about who
· The Concept of the does or does not belong in the
"World Champion" pantheon of world chess
+ World Title Matches champions.
and Tournaments
The conventional, though by no
means universal, wisdom is that
the family tree of world title
holders is a mere sapling, dating Libro di giuocho di scacchi, an Italian version of Cessolis,
back only to 1886, when Wilhelm printed in Florence in 1493.
Steinitz defeated Johann
Zukertort in “the first official
match,” as the phrase goes, for the world chess championship. But in our “THE KINGS OF
CHESS: A 21-PLAYER SALUTE," we extend the world championship line back to the mid-
18th century and Andre Philidor, thereby adding seven champions to the 14 commonly or
officially recognized from Steinitz to the present-day kingpins.
Next »
ChessCentral - Chess Sets, Chess Software, Chess for Kids and much more!
World Chess Network™, Banter Chess™, Predict-A-Move™

© Copyright 2000 - 2005 All rights reserved. Master Games International Inc.
Privacy Policy ~ Policies and Guidelines
Login
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/introduction.php17/04/05 13:09:46
The Concept of the World Champion - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
« Previous « • » Next »
Events
Promotions
Site Pros
by Larry Parr
Top Players
Chess News
Chess History
One claim often heard is that before Steinitz and Zukertort each began to call himself
» The World Chess
the world chess champion at about the time of Paul Morphy’s death in 1884, the
Championship
concept of a world chess champion did not exist.
and Champions: 1747-
2001
Wrong. On April 14, 1859, during a banquet at the London Chess Club in honor of
+ The Kings of Chess: Paul Morphy, club president Augustus Mongredien proposed a toast to “the champion
A 21-Player Salute of the chess world.” When Morphy returned to the United States following his
triumphs in Europe, American chess fans in Boston and New York feted him as “the
• The Concept of the chess champion of the world.”
"World Champion"
+ World Title Matches
On both sides of the Atlantic, leading chess personalities stated that Morphy was
and Tournaments
either champion of the chess world or chess champion of the world. No one appeared Paul Charles Morphy
to be making even a casuistical distinction between the two claims. Indeed, the claim (b. 1837 - d. 1884)
made by Mongredien on behalf of Morphy might have been made in slightly altered World champion: 1858 to 1862
form for various players since the rise of modern chess in the late 15th century. From about 1475 to 1575, the leading
players of Spain (say, Francesch Vicent and Ruy Lopez) were the leading players of the chess world. From 1575 to about
1650, the leading players of Italy (say, Leonardo da Cutri and Alessandro Salvio) were the leading players of the chess
world.
Then came a hiatus. In the 100 years following the deaths of such leading Italian players as Pietro Carrera (1647) and
Giulio Polerio (1612), not to mention Salvio (c. 1640) and Gioacchino Greco (c. 1634), no player assumed a special
position. Perhaps chess masters fell out of fashion in polite parlors. Perhaps the royal courts of Europe ceased picking up
chessmen in favor of picking up the socio-economic pieces following the Thirty Years War (1618 - 1648), Europe’s most
destructive conflict until the 20th century.
Not until Andre Philidor (1726 - 1795) triumphed easily over

Phillip Stamma (+8 -1 =1) in 1747, following up this triumph
with the publication of his famous L’analyse du jeu des
Echecs (Analysis of the Game of Chess), was there a widely
recognized new champion of the chess world. Philidor
became the finest player of France, which became the
center of chess until nearly the mid - 19th century.
Before Philidor, chess records are too scanty to distinguish

among the leading masters of a given period. There is no
way to argue at length or even to enjoy a brief and rollicking
BS-session about the probable outcome of a match between
Greco and Salvio or da Cutri and Polerio. But Philidor? We
know that he was conceded a special status by nearly all
players of his time. He held in spades the kind of Philidor Playing Blindfold at Parsloe's
“exceptional position” that Jacob Loewenthal accorded Engraving from the Sporting Magazine, 1794
Wilhelm Steinitz more than a century later after the young Austrian triumphed at London 1872 and then later the same
year destroyed Zukertort (+7 -1 =4) in their lesser known first match. “Mr. Steinitz,” opined Loewenthal, “may be fairly
regarded as the present occupant of the exceptional position formerly held by Mr. Morphy.”
Note the implication in Loewenthal’s statement, a notion which was apparently not widely shared at the time, that
Morphy’s great feats of 1858 and 1859 had yielded by 1872 to the twin ministrations of ruthless time and another master’s
subsequent, if not equally enormous, successes. The concept that time undermines every throne, chessic and otherwise,
will be important when evaluating Bobby Fischer’s claim to have won the world championship in 1972 and to have
defended a meaningful title in his match with Boris Spassky in 1992.
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/conceptWorldChampion.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:10:16

The Concept of the World Champion - Chess History - World Chess Network
Wilhelm Steinitz
(b. 1836 - d. 1900): World champion: 1886 to 1894
Clearly, a case can be made for extending the title line back beyond Steinitz to Morphy and eventually to Philidor. To
include players earlier than Philidor runs up against a paucity of information about the relative strengths of various
masters, though there is no telling what future researches may yield.
Yet there are embarrassing intellectual problems with extending the title line back beyond 1886. Why, for example, would
not Zukertort figure as co-champion with Steinitz after his triumph at London in 1883? If Anderssen is to be considered
world champion after winning London 1851, should not Zukertort get the same honor after London 1883, especially since
Steinitz accepted him as an equal negotiating partner for their title match in 1886? And since we are here accepting
Steinitz as world champion from 1866, we would logically have to accept Zukertort as co-champion from 1883 to 1886,
especially since Steinitz claimed no pride of place over his opponent in their negotiations.
There is no answer to the above line of reasoning except to note that Stenitiz demolished Zukertort in their 1872 match
and that no one has hitherto come up with the argument given in the preceding paragraph. The conventional wisdom is
that Zukertort was never world champion and that Steinitz became the first world champion in 1886. We think that there is
enough minority authority to buck the conventional wisdom about 1886, but we quake at being the first to include
Zukertort among the world champions. The giggle factor is too daunting.
« Previous « • ˆ Top ˆ • » Next »
James H. Gelo’s magisterial 850-page work, Chess World Championships: All the Games, All with Diagrams,
1834-1998 (McFarland, 2000);
Edward Winter’s dated but still useful The World Champions (Pergamon, 1981);

Login
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/conceptWorldChampion.php (2 of 2)17/04/05 13:10:16

The Kings of Chess: A 21-Player Salute - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
« Previous « • » Next »
Events
Promotions
Site Pros
by Larry Parr
Top Players
Chess News
Chess History
» The World Chess
Championship “While I cannot deny the intellectual validity of making
and Champions: 1747- comparisons among the … world champions,” American GM
Arnold Denker has written, “I can state that it is more enlightening
2001
to argue about who is the strongest among these distinguished
• The Kings of Chess: chess minds than about who is the weakest.”
A 21-Player Salute
· Philidor 1747 - 1795 Just so. Our firmament of world champions includes those stars
· Deschapelles shining most brightly in the chessic sky — Bobby Fischer and
Garry Kasparov, Alexander Alekhine and Jose Capablanca,
1800 - 1821
Mikhail Botvinnik and Emanuel Lasker, Morphy and Steinitz —
· La Bourdonnais and those with far less Caissic candle power. In the royal portraits
1821 - 1840 of our 21 monarchs, which appear here in this section, we will Arnold Denker (far right)
noblesse oblige be celebrating the mighty deeds of the strong One of the strongest American masters during the
· Saint-Amant
rather than deprecating the lesser accomplishments of the 1940s
1840 - 1843
comparatively weak.
· Staunton
1843 - 1851
Here is our list of 21 masters who have, if only for a moment in some cases, prompted significant segments of the
· Anderssen chess community to recognize them as either champions of the chess world or world champions of chess:
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
Francois-Andre Danican PHILIDOR
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
· Steinitz 1886 - 1894
Alexandre Louis Honore Lebreton DESCHAPELLES
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 Louis Charles de la BOURDONNAIS

· Capablanca Pierre Charles Fournier de SAINT-AMANT
1921 - 1927
Howard STAUNTON
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935; Karl Ernst Adolf ANDERSSEN
1937 - 1946
Paul Charles MORPHY
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
Wilhelm STEINITZ
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957; Emanuel LASKER
1958 - 1960;
Jose Raul CAPABLANCA
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov 1957 - 1958 Alexander Alexandrovich ALEKHINE
· Tal 1960 - 1961 Machgielis (Max) EUWE
· Petrosian Mikhail Moiseyevich BOTVINNIK
1963 to 1969
Vasily Vasiliyevich SMYSLOV
+ Spassky 1969 - 1972
Mikhail Nekhemyevich TAL
· The Concept of the
"World Champion" Tigran Vartanovich PETROSIAN
+ World Title Matches Boris Vasilyevich SPASSKY
and Tournaments
Robert James FISCHER
Yevgenyevich KARPOV
Garry Kimovich KASPAROV
Alexander Valeryevich KHALIFMAN
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/WCNKings.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:11:29

Philidor 1747 - 1795 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Francois-André Danican Philidor
Engraved portrait by Bartolozzi
Site Pros
Top Players b. 1726 - d. 1795

World champion: 1747 to 1795
Chess News
Chess History For over 50 years, from an 18-year-old chess student who by 1744 had surpassed his
» The World Chess master to a 69-year-old refugee from the French Revolution living in London, Philidor
Championship dominated both chess play and chess writing. He offered draw odds (drawn games
and Champions: 1747- counting as losses) and took the Black pieces in every game of his match with Phillip
2001 Stamma in 1747, winning 8 - 2 (+8 -1 =1). His L’analyse du jeu des Echecs (1749)
went through more than 100 editions, four in the first year. Philidor was the first
» The Kings of Chess:
chess author to explain the strategy of the game as a whole, including such concepts
A 21-Player Salute
as blockade and positional sacrifice. His famous dictum that pawns are the very life
• Philidor or soul of chess was not, as some still assume, an argument for pawns being the sole
1747 - 1795 of chess or an argument for the supremacy of pawn play over piece play. Philidor
· Deschapelles was making an observation that pawns were important and that ignorance of proper
1800 - 1821 pawn formations was a major failing of early masters.
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840 No games remain from Philidor’s prime, the earliest recorded effort being a single
· Saint-Amant game from 1780 and most of the others from the last seven years of his life. Many of
1840 - 1843 these final battles were played at odds. For example:
· Staunton
1843 - 1851 George Atwood - Philidor
London, 1795
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858; Remove Black’s f-pawn, played at odds of pawn and two moves.
1862 - 1866
1. e4 … 7. Bd3 Nh6
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
2. d4 e6 8. Qb3 c4
· Steinitz 1886 - 1894 3. f4 d5 9. Qxb6 axb6
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 4. e5 c5 10. Bc2 b5
· Capablanca 5. c3 Nc6 11. b4 Bxb4
1921 - 1927 6. Nf3 Qb6
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/philidor.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:11:55

12. cxb4 Nxb4 19. fxg5 Rf2

13. Kd2 Nxc2 20. h4 b5
14. Kxc2 b4 21. h5 b3+
15. Bd2 Ra4 22. Kb2 b4
16. h3 Rf8 23. g6 hxg6
17. g4 Nf7 24. hxg6 Ba6
18. Ng5 Nxg5 25. Rh8+ Kd7 and Black won.
From a three-board blindfold simultaneous exhibition given by Philidor:
J. M. Bruhl - Philidor ECO: C23

London, 1783
1. e4 e5 13. f4 h5
2. Bc4 c6 14. c4 a6
3. Qe2 d6 15. cxd5 cxd5
4. c3 f5 16. Qf2 0-0
5. d3 Nf6 17. Ne2 b5
6. exf5 Bxf5 18. 0-0 Nb6
7. d4 e4 19. Ng3 g6
8. Bg5 d5 20. Rac1 Nc4
9. Bb3 Bd6 21. Nxf5 gxf5
10. Nd2 Nbd7 22. Qg3+ Qg7
11. h3 h6 23. Qxg7+ Kxg7
12. Be3 Qe7

24. Bxc4 bxc4 36. Rc7+ Kg6

25. g3 Rab8 37. gxh4 Nh5
26. b3 Ba3 38. Rd7 Nxf4
27. Rc2 cxb3 39. Bxf4 Rf3+
28. axb3 Rfc8 40. Kg2 Rxf4
29. Rxc8 Rxc8 41. Rxd5 Rf3
30. Ra1 Bb4 42. Rd8 Rd3
31. Rxa6 Rc3 43. d5 f4
32. Kf2 Rd3 44. d6 Rd2+
33. Ra2 Bxd2 45. Kf1 Kf7
34. Rxd2 Rxb3 46. h5 e3
35. Rc2 h4 47. h6 f3, White resigns.
A musical composer of contemporary fame, he excelled in comic opera, though his

seldom-performed music appears not to have withstood the test of time.
Next
George Allen, The Life of Philidor, musician and chess-player, H. Butler & Co., 1863; (facsimile edition,
1971);
Yakov Neishtadt, Nekoronovannye Chempiony (Uncrowned Champions), published in Moscow, 1975;
David Levy and Kevin O’Connell, Oxford Encyclopedia of Chess Games (Oxford University Press, 1981),
containing all 78 of Philidor’s surviving games and segments of games.

Login

Deschapelles 1800 - 1821 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros

Chess News
Chess History The coffee house world champion. This immortal of the Café de la Regence made his
» The World Chess reputation by beating many of the best for stakes and at odds. Perhaps the greatest
Championship games-man in history, he was the strongest whist player in France and inventor of
and Champions: 1747- the Deschapelles Coup. He fought in Napoleon’s army and was left for dead at the
2001 siege of Mainz, losing his right hand. Which meant that as a stickler for republican
principles, he conducted duels with his left hand, sporting a sabre-scar from eyebrow
to chin. He boasted about learning enough in three days to be the best at chess.
A 21-Player Salute
When a prospective opponent at La Regence said, “My religion forbids me to play for
· Philidor money,” Deschapelles responded, “Mine forbids me to be absurd.” Wrote an
1747 - 1795 interviewer of Deschapelles, “M. Deschapelles is the greatest chess player in France;
• Deschapelles M. Deschapelles is the greatest whist player in France; M. Deschapelles is the
1800 - 1821 greatest billiards player in France [using the stump of his right arm to push the cue];
· La Bourdonnais M. Deschapelles is the greatest pumpkin-grower in France; M. Deschapelles is the
1821 - 1840 greatest liar in France.” He was also the greatest character among the world chess
champions.
· Saint-Amant
1840 - 1843
In 1821 at St. Cloud near Paris, Deschapelles gave f-pawn and two moves in a series
· Staunton
of games against John Cochrane and his student, the rapidly rising Louis de la
1843 - 1851
Bourdonnais. He beat Cochrane +6 -0 =1 and lost to his pupil 1 - 6:
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858;
Cochrane - Deschapelles
1862 - 1866 St. Cloud, 1821
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
Remove Black’s f-pawn; played at odds of pawn and two movess.
· Steinitz
1. e4 … 13. Nxh4 Nxh4
1886 - 1894
2. d4 e6 14. Kf2 0-0
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
3. f4 d5 15. Kg3 Ng6
· Capablanca
4. e5 c5 16. b4 a5
1921 - 1927
5. c3 Nc6 17. Bd2 axb4
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935; 6. Nf3 cxd4 18. Bxb4 Nxb4
1937 - 1946 7. cxd4 Qb6 19. axb4 Qxb4
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 8. Nc3 Bd7 20. Rb1 Ra3+
· Botvinnik 9. a3 Nh6 21. Kh2 Qe7
1948 - 1957;
10. h3 Nf5 22. Rxb7 Qh4
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963 11. Ne2 Be7 23. Rxd7 Qf2+
· Smyslov 12. g4 Bh4+ 24. Bg2 Rxh3+
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/deschapelles.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:12:39

Deschapelles 1800 - 1821 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
25. Kxh3 Qh4 mate.
Deschapelles gave up chess soon after the St. Cloud contest, preferring to make
much larger sums playing whist. In 1836 he staged a brief comeback, drawing a
match with Saint-Amant, +1 -1 =1, while giving odds of pawn and two moves.
George Walker summed up the chess status of this fantastic Frenchman, “This big
chess player is the connecting link between the times of Philidor and our epoch.”
Previous Next
Yakov Neishtadt, Nekoronovannye Chempiony (Uncrowned Champions), published in Moscow, 1975;

David Hooper and Kenneth Whyld, The Oxford Companion to Chess (Oxford University Press, 2nd edition,
1996), with an interesting entry on Deschapelles;
David Levy and Kevin O’Connell, Oxford Encyclopedia of Chess Games (Oxford University Press, 1981),
containing seven surviving games of Deschapelles

Login
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/deschapelles.php (2 of 2)17/04/05 13:12:39

La Bourdonnais 1821 - 1840 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1795 - d. 1840
Top Players World champion: 1821 to 1840
Chess News
Student of and successor to Deschapelles. In a triangular
Chess History match contest played near Paris in 1821, La Bourdonnais
» The World Chess defeated John Cochrane seven-zip and beat Deschapelles 6 -
Championship 1, though the latter conceded odds of pawn and two moves.
and Champions: 1747- In 1834 La Bourdonnais scored +45 -27 = 13 in a series of
2001 six matches against English champion Alexander McDonnell.
This series of 84 games was the first chess event to be
followed by the general public via extensive newspaper
A 21-Player Salute
accounts. A book of the games was issued. In the press, the
· Philidor games were analyzed at length by masters; and the practice
1747 - 1795 began of modelling opening play on what occurred in actual A rare image of
· Deschapelles games. La Bourdonnais - a true fighter.
1800 - 1821
La Bourdonnais La Bourdonnais was a paladin of the romantic attack, a combinative brawler whose
•
1821 - 1840 better positional sense in the opening marked the difference between him and
· Saint-Amant McDonnell, his only rival for supremacy. One of the many colorful games from the
1840 - 1843 Grand Match: McDonnell - La Bourdonnais (London, 1834):
· Staunton
1843 - 1851 McDonnell - La Bourdonnais ECO: B32
London, 1834
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858; 1. e4 c5 20. Rac1 f5
1862 - 1866 2. Nf3 Nc6 21. Qc4+ Kh8
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 3. d4 cxd4 22. Ba4 Qh6
· Steinitz 4. Nxd4 e5 23. Bxe8 fxe4
1886 - 1894 5. Nxc6 bxc6 24. c6 exf3
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 6. Bc4 Nf6 25. Rc2 Qe3+
· Capablanca 7. Bg5 Be7 26. Kh1 Bc8
1921 - 1927 8. Qe2 d5 27. Bd7 f2
· Alekhine 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 28. Rf1 d3
1927 - 1935; 10. Bb3 0-0 29. Rc3 Bxd7
1937 - 1946
11. 0-0 a5 30. cxd7 e4
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 12. exd5 cxd5 31. Qc8 Bd8
· Botvinnik 13. Rd1 d4 32. Qc4 Qe1
1948 - 1957; 14. c4 Qb6 33. Rcc1 d2
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
15. Bc2 Bb7 34. Qc5 Rg8
16. Nd2 Rae8 35. Rcd1 e3
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958 17. Ne4 Bd8 36. Qc3 Qxd1
18. c5 Qc6 37. Rxd1 e2
· Tal 1960 - 1961
19. f3 Be7
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/bourdonnais.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:13:07

La Bourdonnais 1821 - 1840 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
38. White resigns.
For nearly 20 years, La Bourdonnais was the world’s most famous chess player. In
1824 Deschapelles himself proclaimed his one-time student as the new king of chess.
But La Bourdonnais’ score of 13 - 1 in 1821 against Cochrane and his teacher
indicated a clear superiority at this earlier date. He is the first player to create an
oeuvre of highly stylized games suggesting that chess is an art.
Previous Next
Yakov Neishtadt, NekoronovannyeChempiony (Uncrowned Champions), published in Moscow,1975;

1996);
David Levy and Kevin O’Connell, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Chess Games (Oxford University Press, 1981),
containing 127 of La Bourdonnais’ games.

Login
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/bourdonnais.php (2 of 2)17/04/05 13:13:07

Saint-Amant 1840 - 1843 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros

Chess News
Chess History Wine merchant and explorer, clerk and actor, Saint-
» The World Chess Amant was, arguably, the most representative of
Championship all married world champions. A regular at the Café
and Champions: 1747- de la Regence, he was often summoned home by
2001 his wife (the first known hen-pecking chess
widow), who would tap on the window with her
umbrella. By 1834, Saint-Amant was strong enough
A 21-Player Salute
to lead a Paris team that defeated the Westminster
· Philidor chess club in a correspondence match; and in 1836,
1747 - 1795 he defeated George Walker and W. Fraser in
· Deschapelles matches played in London. He was widely
1800 - 1821 recognized as the finest player in France after La
Bourdonnais’ death in 1840, winning a short stakes
· La Bourdonnais
match in 1843 against Howard Staunton, +3 -2 =1.
1821 - 1840
Pierre Charles Fournier de Saint-Amant Last
• Saint-Amant of the great nineteenth-century French
1840 - 1843
Saint-Amant’s match loss to Staunton later in 1843
masters.
(+6 -11 =4) was followed by the total eclipse of
· Staunton
French chess hegemony. (France would not have a
1843 - 1851
home-grown grandmaster for about 150 years!) In 1858 Saint-Amant lost the
· Anderssen following one-sided game in Paris to Paul Morphy:
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
Saint-Amant - Morphy ECO: C54
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 Paris, 1858
· Steinitz 1. e4 e5 10. 0-0 0-0
1886 - 1894
2. Nf3 Nc6 11. h3 Nf4
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
3. Bc4 Bc5 12. Kh2 Nxd4
· Capablanca 4. c3 Nf6 13. Nxd4 Qxd4
1921 - 1927
5. d4 exd4 14. Qc2 Qd6
· Alekhine 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 15. Kh1 Qh6
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946
7. Bd2 Bxd2+ 16. Qc3 Bf5
8. Nbxd2 d5 17. Kh2 Rad8
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
9. exd5 Nxd5 18. Rad1 Bxh3
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/saintAmant.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:13:47

19. gxh3 Rd3 21. Bxd3 Qd6+

20. Qxd3 Nxd3 22. f4 Qxd3, White resigns.
Staunton - Saint-Amant match.

Paris, 1843
Still, Saint-Amant was one of the great masters of his time as he demonstrates in the
following brilliancy from his lost match against Staunton:
Saint-Amant - Staunton Match ECO: D40

Paris, 1843
1. d4 e6 13. Re1 a6
2. c4 d5 14. Rc1 Rc8
3. e3 Nf6 15. Rc2 Rc7
4. Nc3 c5 16. Rce2 Qc8
5. Nf3 Nc6 17. h3 Nd8
6. a3 Be7 18. Qd2 b5
7. Bd3 0-0 19. b4 Ne6
8. 0-0 b6 20. Bf5 Ne4
9. b3 Bb7 21. Nxe4 dxe4
10. cxd5 exd5 22. d5 exf3
11. Bb2 cxd4 23. Rxe6 Qd8
12. exd4 Bd6

24. Bf6 gxf6 30. Qh5 Ke7

25. Rxd6 Kg7 31. d6+ Kxd6
26. Rxd8 Rxd8 32. Bxb7 Kc7
27. Be4 fxg2 33. Bxa6 Rc3
28. Qf4 Rc4 34. Qxb5, Black resigns.
29. Qg4+ Kf8
Previous Next
1996);
containing 85 of Saint-Amant’s games.

Login

Staunton 1843 - 1851 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1810 - d. 1874
Top Players
Chess News
Howard Staunton was “The English World Chess
Chess History Champion” as he is termed in the eponymous volume
» The World Chess by Raymond Keene and R. N. Coles. Staunton was also
Championship the only English world champion, winning the title in
and Champions: 1747- 1843 by defeating Saint-Amant +11 -6 =4. Moreover,
2001 most of Saint-Amant’s wins came in the second half of
the match when the issue was already effectively
decided after Staunton’s sizzling start of +8 -1 =1. In
A 21-Player Salute
1846 Staunton defeated Bernhard Horwitz (+14 -7 =3)
· Philidor and Daniel Harrwitz (+7) in games played without
1747 - 1795 odds. Staunton labored in chess as an organizer (of the
· Deschapelles first international tournament, London 1851), as a
1800 - 1821 lawgiver (publishing a proposed chess code and calling
for a “Constituent Assembly for Remodelling the Laws
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840
of Chess”), as a journalist (his column in the
Illustrated London News was the world’s most Howard Staunton
· Saint-Amant influential), as a teacher (his Chess Player’s Handbook One of the most important and
1840 - 1843 ran to over 20 editions) and as an original thinker (his controversial figures in the development
practice of delaying the occupation of the center with of modern chess.
• Staunton
1843 - 1851 pawns and of supporting an eventual strategic advance
· Anderssen with the help of fianchettoed bishops was a harbinger of hypermodernism). “Playing
1851 - 1858; over his games,” wrote Bobby Fischer, “I discover that they are completely modern.”
1862 - 1866
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 A game in point:

· Steinitz
1886 - 1894 Staunton - Horwitz ECO: A10
London, 1851
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
· Capablanca
1. c4 e6 7. e3 0-0
1921 - 1927 2. Nc3 f5 8. Nge2 Nc7
· Alekhine 3. g3 Nf6 9. 0-0 d5
1927 - 1935; 4. Bg2 c6 10. b3 Qe8
1937 - 1946 5. d3 Na6 11. Bb2 Qf7
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 6. a3 Be7 12. Rc1 Bd7
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/staunton.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:14:20

13. e4 fxe4 31. Qb3 b6

14. dxe4 Rad8 32. Ne4 bxc5
15. e5 Nfe8 33. Nf6+ Kh8
16. f4 dxc4 34. Qh3 Ne8
17. bxc4 Bc5+ 35. Ba1 Nxf6
18. Kh1 Be3 36. exf6 Kg8
19. Rb1 g6 37. Be5 Qb7
20. Qb3 Bc8 36. Qc3 Qxd1
21. Ne4 Bb6 37. Rxd1 e2
22. Rbd1 Na6 38. Be4 Qf7
23. Qc3 Rxd1 39. Ng1 Bd8
24. Rxd1 Nc5 40. g5 Bb7
25. Nd6 Qc7 41. Nf3 Re8
26. Qc2 Ng7 42. Bd6 Bxf6
27. g4 Qe7 43. gxf6 Qxf6
28. Bd4 Qc7 44. Ng5 Qg7
29. a4 Na6 45. Be5 Qe7
30. c5 Ba5 46. Bxg6, Black resigns.
Staunton is widely remembered as the man who ducked a match with Paul Morphy.
The truth is more complicated. Although Staunton misled Morphy about his
willingness to play a match, he probably did so with honest intentions. Like many
thousands of scholars before and after him, Staunton underestimated the task before
him, which in his case was his celebrated edition of Shakespeare with monthly
installments appearing from November 1857 to May 1860, and overestimated his
capacity for intellectual labor.
Wrote Staunton accurately enough, “The experience, however, of some weeks,

during which I have labored unceasingly, to the serious injury of my health, shows
that not only is it impracticable for me to save time [to play a match], but that by no
means short of giving up a great work on which I am engaged, subjecting the
publishers to the loss of thousands, and myself to an action for breach of contract,
could I obtain time even for the match itself. Such a sacrifice is, of course, out of all
question.”
All of which is not to say that Staunton could have offered meaningful resistance to
Morphy by 1858 or so. “From his performance in the Birmingham tournament where,
after defeating a weak player named Hughes in the first round,” writes British author
David Levy, “Staunton succumbed to Loewenthal in the second, we can justly assume
that in 1858 he was so far below his best form that an encounter with Morphy would

have been a massacre.”
Two snippets: 1. “Howard Staunton” is most likely not this great master’s real name,
which remains unknown; and 2. Staunton did not originate the design for chessmen
named after him, though he did advocate the design and, for a fee, permitted a
facsimile of his signature to be included with every “authentic” set.
Previous Next
David Levy, Howard Staunton (The Chess Player, 1975);

Raymond Keene and R. N. Coles, Howard Staunton: the English World Chess Champion (C. M. Quarterly, No.
17, 1975), containing a biography plus 75 games and 20 positions;
containing 520 of Staunton’s games.

Login

Anderssen 1851 - 1858; 1862 - 1866 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1818 - d. 1879
Top Players
World champion: 1851 to 1858; 1862 to 1866
Chess News
By winning the first international chess
Chess History tournament convincingly (London, 1851), Adolf
» The World Chess Anderssen also won nearly universal regard as
Championship the chess world’s supreme player. He became
and Champions: 1747- the first tournament specialist in chess history,
2001 compiling a record that kept him at the
tournament forefront until Vienna 1873, which
marked Wilhelm Steinitz’s coming of age as a
A 21-Player Salute
modern positional player. Anderssen’s record
· Philidor of 10 firsts, two seconds and two thirds in 16
1747 - 1795 events, including victories in the three greatest
· Deschapelles tournaments up through 1870 (London 1851,
1800 - 1821 London 1862, Baden-Baden 1870), was
definitively eclipsed only by Emanuel Lasker in
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840
the period following 1895. Anderssen never
had a minus score in a tournament, winning
Adolf Anderssen
· Saint-Amant seven first prizes in eight events from 1851 to A pleasant, mild-mannered German mathematics
1840 - 1843 1870. teacher who was the master of attack.
· Staunton
1843 - 1851 With irony typical of history, Anderssen is remembered more for his chess style and
• Anderssen match results than for being the first great tournament player.
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
In his early years this professor of mathematics and the German language was noted
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 for following his chess intuition. Few sacrifices, correct or incorrect, were too wild.
· Steinitz His “Immortal Game” against Lionel Kieseritzky, the most famous game in the 500-
1886 - 1894 year history of modern chess, cemented his reputation as a gambit-toting romantic
rather than the positionally conscious attacking player that he later became:
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
Anderssen - Kieseritzky (London, training game, 1851):
· Capablanca
1921 - 1927
Anderssen - Kieseritzky ECO: C33
· Alekhine London, 1851
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946 1. e4 e5 10. Rg1 cxb5
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 2. f4 exf4 11. g4 Nf6
3. Bc4 Qh4+ 12. h4 Qg6
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957; 4. Kf1 b5 13. h5 Qg5
1958 - 1960; 5. Bxb5 Nf6 14. Qf3 Ng8
1961 - 1963 6. Nf3 Qh6 15. Bxf4 Qf6
· Smyslov 7. d3 Nh5 16. Nc3 Bc5
1957 - 1958
8. Nh4 Qg5 17. Nd5 Qxb2
· Tal 1960 - 1961 9. Nf5 c6
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/anderssen.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:14:56

18. Bd6! Qxa1+ 21. Nxg7+ Kd8

19. Ke2 Bxg1 22. Qf6+ Nxf6 Be7, mate.
20. e5 Na6
“In this game,” wrote Steinitz, “there occurs almost a continuity of brilliancies, every
one of which bears the stamp of intuitive genius, that could have been little assisted
by calculations, as the combination-point arises only at the very end of the game.”
As a match player, Anderssen gained moderate plaudits for defeating Ignaz Kolisch
narrowly in 1861 and Johann Zukertort soundly in 1868, but he earned lasting fame
for his upset loss to Steinitz in 1866 (+6 -8) and his crushing undoing by Paul
Morphy in 1858 (+2 -7 =3). After Morphy’s retirement in 1859, Anderssen reasserted
his position as the greatest active player by scoring 12 -1 at London 1862.
No one can understand what a mighty man Anderssen was with the Evans Gambit
without playing over this masterpiece:
Anderssen - Zukertort ECO: C51

Barmen, 1869
1. e4 e5 15. Kh1 Bc7

2. Nf3 Nc6 16. Rac1 Rb8
3. Bc4 Bc5 17. Ng3 b5
4. b4 Bxb4 18. Nf5 b4
5. c3 Ba5 19. Rg1 Bb6
6. d4 exd4 20. g4 Ne5
7. 0-0 Bb6 21. Bxe5 dxe5
8. cxd4 d6 22. Rg3 Rf7
9. d5 Na5 23. g5 Bxf5
10. Bb2 Ne7 24. exf5 Qxd5
11. Bd3 0-0 25. gxf6 Rd8
12. Nc3 Ng6 26. Rcg1 Kh8
13. Ne2 c5 27. fxg7+ Kg8
14. Qd2 f6 28. Qh6 Qd6

29. Qxh7+ Kxh7 32. Rh3+ Kg8

30. f6+ Kg8 33. Rh8 mate.
31. Bh7+ Kxh7
Previous Next
Hermann von Gottschall, Adolf Anderssen (reprint edition, 1979), containing 787 games and biography;
Sid Pickard and Ron Burnett (eds.), The Chess Games of Adolph [sic] Anderssen (Pickard and Sons, 1996),
containing 897 games, a good attempt to find every known Anderssen game.

Login

Morphy 1858 - 1862 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1837 - d. 1884
Top Players
Chess News
The greatest player of the 19th century; the
Chess History first child prodigy in chess history; probably by
» The World Chess age 12 the best American player of his time;
Championship the Bobby Fischer of the 19th century in terms
and Champions: 1747- of personal celebrity; the first reasonable
2001 nominee for the title of greatest of all time. In
truth, Morphy was an American Caissic F-16 in
an era of European hot air chess balloons.
A 21-Player Salute
Imagine, then, the effect on the public
· Philidor imagination of a 12-year-old boy, without
1747 - 1795 experience against master competition,
· Deschapelles defeating a leading European grandmaster
1800 - 1821 (Jacob Loewenthal, by +2 -0 =1); imagine this
same boy entering his first and only
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840
tournament, which happens to be the 1857 U.
S. Championship, winning it easily; imagine Paul Morphy
· Saint-Amant further that this boy, who has played a total of First American world champion.
1840 - 1843 18 official games, sails for Europe, effortlessly
· Staunton defeating the leading masters of England and France, offering odds of pawn and
1843 - 1851 move in some cases; imagine that this boy, a mere year after playing his first formal
games, defeats world champion Adolf Anderssen, scoring 75 percent in a series of
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858;
match and training games; and imagine, finally, that a former world champion, Saint-
1862 - 1866 Amant, states publicly that Morphy could successfully offer a group of great masters
pawn and move and that a triumvirate of strong American players announces in 1886
• Morphy that the late Morphy could have given Wilhelm Steinitz pawn and move.
1858 - 1862
· Steinitz
1886 - 1894
Such was the partially true Morphy
myth. Such was the bombastic fallout
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 from a career that lasted about 16
· Capablanca months -- from late 1857 to early 1859.
1921 - 1927 Such was the pride of so many in his
great deeds. Such would be the sorrow
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935;
of so many in his estrangement from
1937 - 1946
chess and public engagements,
anticipating a similar path to be
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 followed a century hence by Bobby
· Botvinnik Fischer, a fellow countrymen and a
1948 - 1957; child prodigy and, arguably, the
1958 - 1960; greatest player of the 20th century.
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov Still worse for the prestige of Morphy’s

1957 - 1958 successors, subsequent chess results
Morphy (right) playing a social game with Louis Elkin in
· Tal 1960 - 1961 Philadelphia in 1859 shortly before he ended his chess career.
conspired in favor of the Morphy
legend. Anderssen slaughtered the field
· Petrosian at London 1862, losing only to John Owen, who finished third well ahead of Steinitz,
1963 to 1969
whom he also beat. The point here is that everyone knew that a few years earlier
+ Spassky Morphy had dismantled Anderssen and discombobulated Owen, +5 -0 =2, while
1969 - 1972 giving odds of pawn and move!! In 1914 Jose Capablanca luxuriated in a compliment
from Amos Burn that he played like Morphy. “The style of Morphy, they say,” wrote
Capablanca, “and if it is true that the goddess of fortune has endowed me with his
"World Champion"
talent, the result [of a match with Emanuel Lasker] will not be in doubt. The
+ World Title Matches magnificent American master had the most extraordinary brain that anybody has
and Tournaments ever had for chess. Technique, strategy, tactics, knowledge which is inconceivable for
us; all that was possessed by Morphy fifty-four years ago.”
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/morphy.php (1 of 4)17/04/05 13:15:34

Alexander Alekhine praised Morphy’s deep positional understanding, and Mikhail

Botvinnik averred that Morphy’s mastery of open positions was so vast that little new
has later been learned about such positions. Morphy’s technique in winning won
positions and drawing lost positions has also been praised, but his defining edge over
the competition was an understanding of the importance of time in chess. Morphy
seldom wasted a tempo, developing his pieces amazingly quickly. As with Anderssen,
Morphy’s most famous game was unofficial, a friendly affair played in a box at the
Paris Opera that demonstrated the young American’s facility for quick development
and slashing sacrificial attacks in open positions:
Morphy - Duke of Brunswick and Count Isouard ECO: C41

Paris, 1858
1. e4 e5 6. Bc4 Nf6
2. Nf3 d6 7. Qb3 Qe7
3. d4 Bg4 8. Nc3 c6
4. dxe5 Bxf3 9. Bg5 b5
5. Qxf3 dxe5
10. Nxb5 cxb5 14. Rd1 Qe6

11. Bxb5+ Nbd7 15. Bxd7+ Nxd7
12. 0-0-0 Rd8 16. Qb8+ Nxb8
13. Rxd7 Rxd7 17. Rd8, mate.
“A popularly held theory about Paul Morphy,” wrote Fischer, “is that if he returned to
the chess world today and played our best contemporary players, he would come out
the loser. Nothing is further from the truth. In a set match, Morphy would beat
anybody alive today.” Debatable, yes. But the true measure of Morphy’s greatness is
that this master, who was born the better part of two centuries ago, can still excite a
chess mind of Fischer’s level - not to mention the chess mind of Mikhail Tal, who
listed Morphy as one of his three favorite players along with Lasker and Alexander
Alekhine.
Here is Morphy’s win at age 12 over Loewenthal in an era before weekend Swisses,
books on theory and programmed learning:
Morphy - Loewenthal ECO: B21

New Orleans, 1850

1. e4 c5 12. Bxf6 Bxf6

2. f4 e6 13. Nxd5 Bxb2
3. Nf3 d5 14. Rb1 Bd4+
4. exd5 exd5 15. Kh1 Rb8
5. d4 Bg4 16. c3 Bc5
6. Be2 Bxf3 17. f5 Qh4
7. Bxf3 Nf6 18. g3 Qg5
8. 0-0 Be7 19. f6 Ne5
9. Be3 cxd4 20. fxg7 Rfd8
10. Bxd4 0-0 21. Be4 Qxg7
11. Nc3 Nc6
22. Qh5 Rd6 36. Rc7 Kg6

23. Bxh7+ Kf8 37. Kg2 f6
24. Be4 Rh6 38. Kf3 Nf5
25. Qf5 Qxg3 39. Be4 Kg5
26. Rb2 Re8 40. Bxf5 Kxf5
27. Nf6 Re6 41. h4 Kg6
28. Rg2 Qxg2+ 42. Rc6 Kh5
29. Bxg2 Rhxf6 43. Kg3 f5
30. Qxf6 Rxf6 44. Rf6 f4+
31. Rxf6 Ng4 45. Kxf4 Bf2
32. Rf5 b6 46. Ke4 Bc5
33. Bd5 Nh6 47. Rf5+ Kxh4
34. Rf6 Kg7 48. Rxc5 bxc5
35. Rc6 a5 49. Kd5, Black resigns.
Previous Next
David Lawson, Paul Morphy, the Pride and Sorrow of Chess (David McKay, 1976);
Philip Sergeant, Morphy’s Games of Chess (Dover, 1957);
Chris Ward, The Chess Genius of Paul Morphy (Simon & Schuster, 1997), containing all 415 known games of
Morphy;
Frances Parkinson Keyes, The Chess Players (Farrar, Straus & Cudahy, 1960), a well-known novel.

Steinitz 1886 - 1894 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1836 - d. 1900
Top Players
Chess News
Born in Prague, Czechoslovakia, during the
Chess History years of the Austro-Hungarian empire
» The World Chess when there was neither Czechoslovakia nor
Championship today’s Czech Republic, Wilhelm Steinitz
and Champions: 1747- eventually became William Steinitz, an
2001 American citizen and the second American
world champion. He defeated Johann
Zukertort in 1886, +10 -5 =5, in what is
A 21-Player Salute
often called “the first official match” for
· Philidor the world title. Unlike Paul Morphy, the
1747 - 1795 Heaven Born whose designer genes
· Deschapelles brought instant supremacy, Steinitz
1800 - 1821 achieved domination only after decades of
hard labor in the long shadow cast by his
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840
predecessor - first, as an also-ran in
tournaments and later as an original, if
· Saint-Amant ponderous thinker. The public viewed
1840 - 1843 Wilhelm Steinitz
Steinitz as a Central European plodder
· Staunton when compared with Morphy, an American
1843 - 1851 Greek god from the New World.
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858; As imposing as are Steinitz’s playing credentials, which included an unbroken string
1862 - 1866 of 24 match victories from 1862 until losing a world title match to Emanuel Lasker in
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
1894 (+5 -10 =4), the Austro-American is more celebrated these days as the founder
of a school of chess thinking. If, in 1866, Steinitz defeated Adolf Anderssen, +8 -6, in
• Steinitz a match that featured King’s Gambits by Steinitz and Evans Gambits by Anderssen
1886 - 1894
and King-side attacks by both, he introduced a new positional style of play at Vienna
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 1873, where he dominated and utterly befuddled the strongest field until that time,
· Capablanca finishing the tournament with 16 consecutive wins.
1921 - 1927
· Alekhine Steinitz taught that launching King-side attacks out of thin air was unsound in most
1927 - 1935; instances. Because a properly played game of chess ought to end in a drew, one
1937 - 1946 cannot expect to defeat an opponent by force majeure unless he has destroyed the
inherent positional equilibrium by committing errors, which one should try to induce
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
by applying pressure through artful positional maneuvers. Key Steinitzian precepts
· Botvinnik include the importance of accumulating small advantages, of using a Queen-side
1948 - 1957; pawn majority when able, of avoiding pawn weaknesses and holes by moving pawns
1958 - 1960; only to develop pieces and of exploiting the superior mobility of the two Bishops. He
1961 - 1963 believed in the soundness of cramped positions if he could anchor at least one pawn
· Smyslov at d5 or e5 and avoid pawn weaknesses. Lasker - Steinitz (Hastings, 1895) is an
1957 - 1958 extreme example of avoiding pawn weaknesses in the hope that a cramped position
· Tal 1960 - 1961
will eventually explode like a released spring:
· Petrosian
Lasker - Steinitz
1963 to 1969 ECO: C75
Hastings, 1895
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972

"World Champion"

and Tournaments
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/steinitz.php (1 of 4)17/04/05 13:16:20

1. e4 e5 10. Nf1 Qe8

2. Nf3 Nc6 11. Bc2 Kh8
3. Bb5 a6 12. Ng3 Bg4
4. Ba4 d6 13. d5 Nb8
5. 0-0 Ne7 14. h3 Bc8
6. c3 Bd7 15. Nf5 Bd8
7. d4 Ng6 16. g4 Ne7
8. Re1 Be7 17. Ng3 Ng8.
9. Nbd2 0-0
Against Mikhail Tchigorin in game four of their second title match, Steinitz was
willing to accept (and draw!) the following position:
Tchigorn-Steinitz ECO: C52

Havana, 1892
1. e4 e5 9. Qa4 Bb6
2. Nf3 Nc6 10. Bg5 Qd6
3. Bc4 Bc5 11. Na3 c6
4. b4 Bxb4 12. Rad1 Qb8
5. c3 Ba5 13. Bxe7 Kxe7
6. 0-0 Qf6 14. d6+ Kf8
7. d4 Nge7 15. Qb4 f6.
8. d5 Nd8
Against Joseph Henry Blackburne in their match of 1876, Steinitz scored seven-zip,
thanks in large part to defending as Black another optically difficult position after:
Blackburne-Steinitz ECO: C45

1876
1. e4 e5 5. Nb5 Bb4+
2. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bd2 Qxe4+
3. d4 exd4 7. Be2 Kd8.
4. Nxd4 Qh4
“Place the contents of the chess box in a hat,” Henry Bird wrote, “shake them up
vigorously, pour them on the board from a height of two feet - and you get the style
of Steinitz.”
From 1894 to 1899, in the five years

after Steinitz lost the title and as his
mental and physical health plummeted,
he played some 150 tournament games
compared with about 170 games in the
32 years from 1862 to 1894. In his prime
from about 1872 to 1886, he played less
than 100 tournament games. For long
periods during his career, Steinitz
eschewed tournament competition (from
1873 to 1882 and 1883 to 1894), and he
succeeded in winning outright only one
first-class tournament (Vienna, 1873).
Steinitz’s most productive tournament
period was during his decline, and this
fact in conjunction with relative
London 1873
inactivity during many of his best years,
Standing, from left to right, Baron Kolisch, Bernhard
Horwitz, William Norwood Potter, Johann Lowenthal, H.E. when he edited chess columns and, later,
Bird, Joseph Henry Blackburne and an unidentified amateur. his wonderful International Chess
Seated, Wilhelm Steinitz, H.F. Gastineau (a patron) and Magazine (1885 - 1891), has ever so
Cecil De Vere.
slightly depreciated his reputation as a
great master. Still, his total domination in match play (vs. Anderssen: +8 -6; vs.
Blackburne: 1863: +7 -1 =2; 1870: +5 -0 =1; 1876: 7-zip; vs. Isidor Gunsberg in
1890: +6 -4 =9; vs. Mikhail Tchigorin: 1889: +10 -6 =1; 1892: +10 -8 =5; vs.

Zukertort: 1872: +7 -1 =4; 1886: +10 -5 =5; etc.) left little doubt about who was the
uncommon dominator.
A brilliant game from Steinitz’s final period:
Steinitz - Lasker ECO: D35

St. Petersburg, 1895 - 96
1. d4 d5 8. Qc2 f5
2. c4 e6 9. Bc4 Nc6
3. Nc3 Nf6 10. a3 Bf6
4. Bf4 Be7 11. 0-0-0 Kh8
5. e3 0-0 12. f3 Qe7
6. c5 Ne4 13. Bg3 f4
7. Nxe4 dxe4
14. Qxe4 fxg3 23. g5 Bd8

15. hxg3 g6 24. Rh2 Rg6
16. Qxg6 Bd7 25. Qh5 R6g7
17. f4 Rf7 26. Rdh1 Qxh5
18. g4 Rg7 27. Rxh5 Rf8
19. Qh6 Rxg4 28. Rxh7+ Rxh7
20. Bd3 Rg7 29. Rxh7+ Kg8
21. Nf3 Qf7 30. Rxd7 Rf7
22. g4 Rag8 31. Bc4, Black resigns.

Steinitz during his match with Anderssen in 1866.
In 1874 Steinitz, while writing in the third person, made a claim to be the world
champion: “[P]robably little difference exists between several first-class players,
[but] Steinitz, who has not yet lost any set match on even terms, and who has come
out victorious in the last two international tournaments, London 1872 and Vienna
1873, could claim the title of champion.” But 20/20 historical hindsight suggests
1866, the year of Steinitz’s upset match victory over Anderssen, as the beginning of
his reign as champion of the chess world.
Previous Next
Kurt Landsberger, William Steinitz, Chess Champion: A Biography of the Bohemian Caesar (McFarland,
1995), the definitive biography;
Sid Pickard (ed.), Wilhelm Steinitz, First World Chess Champion (Pickard & Sons, 1995), containing 1,022
games, the most in any single volume.

Login

Lasker 1894 - 1921 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1868 - d. 1941
Top Players
Chess News
Supreme tactician and chess wise man, who believed
Chess History that the royal game is above all else a struggle. Emanuel
» The World Chess Lasker dominated both tournament and match play for
Championship about two decades from 1894 to 1914. After a series of
and Champions: 1747- match victories in 1889 and 1890 and further
2001 devastating victories in 1892 over Henry Bird (five-zip)
and Joseph Henry Blackburne (+6 -0 =4), Lasker went
to the United States, there annihilating a field of
A 21-Player Salute
America’s best, 13-zip, at New York 1893. The same
· Philidor year he also defeated U. S. champion Jackson Showalter,
1747 - 1795 +6 -2 =2. Such results led to a match with Wilhelm
· Deschapelles Steinitz, which Lasker won easily, +10 -5 =4.
1800 - 1821
· La Bourdonnais Lasker’s subsequent tournament results proved

1821 - 1840 overwhelming, eclipsing the standard set by Adolf
Anderssen in the 1860s and 1870s and, in turn, to be Emanuel Lasker (left)
· Saint-Amant
eclipsed by Alexander Alekhine from 1927 to 1935. After with his brother Berthold.
1840 - 1843
a good third at Hastings 1895, Lasker proceeded to win
· Staunton or share first prize in six of his seven subsequent major tournaments during his title
1843 - 1851 reign (St. Petersburg 1895-96, first by two points; Nuremberg 1896, lst; London
· Anderssen 1899, +18 -1 =7, 4 ½ points clear; Paris 1900, +14 -1 =1, two points clear;
1851 - 1858; Cambridge Springs 1904, 2nd-3rd; St. Petersburg 1909, +13 -2 =3, 1st-2nd; and St.
1862 - 1866 Petersburg 1914, 1st).
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
In match title play Lasker was still more successful. In 1896-97, he demolished
· Steinitz
Steinitz (+10 -2 =5) in a return match; in 1907 he routed Frank Marshall, the victor
1886 - 1894
at Cambridge Springs, +8 =7; in 1908 he roundly beat Siegbert Tarrasch, +8 -3 =5;
• Lasker 1894 - 1921 in 1909 he erased David Janowski, +7 -1 =2, in an exhibition match that would have
· Capablanca been called a title match if the scores had been reversed; in 1910, he drew with Carl
1921 - 1927 Schlechter, +1 -1 =8 and later the same year decapitated Janowski, +8 =3.
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935; In the nine top-flight tournaments of his title
1937 - 1946 incumbency, beginning with Hastings 1895
and extending through Berlin 1918, Lasker
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
scored +101 -17 =40 (121 - 37) for a 76.6
· Botvinnik percent point tally. In important matches
1948 - 1957; from 1892 to 1918, he scored +74 -14 =41
1958 - 1960; (94 ½ - 34 ½) for a 73.3 percent result. In
1961 - 1963 important tournament and match play,
· Smyslov during a period of 26 years, Lasker achieved
1957 - 1958 a winning point percentage of 75.1 from a
score of 215 ½ - 71 ½ (+175 -31 =81).
· Tal 1960 - 1961
· Petrosian
How did he do it? One fact, apparently never
1963 to 1969
remarked upon before, is that in Lasker’s
+ Spassky tournaments of his championship years, the
1969 - 1972 great man went undefeated only once (Berlin
1918, +3 -0 =3). Otherwise, he lost four
"World Champion"
games on one occasion (Hastings, 1895),
three games in two tournaments, two games
+ World Title Matches in two other events, and one game in three
and Tournaments separate tournaments. Of Lasker, it was said
that while he lost games, he never lost his
head. Which is to say, he expected to lose
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/lasker.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:17:00

The finalists at St. Petersburg, 1914 games given his style of seeking tactical
From left to right, Lasker, Alekhine, Capablanca,
complications relentlessly and of being
Marshall and Tarrasch.
willing to accommodate slightly inferior
positions. He knew that his superior tactical
ability and renowned endgame technique would usually bring victory in a contest
that was above all, as in the title of his eponymous 1907 philosophical work, a
Struggle between two wills.
In 1921, at age 53, Lasker lost his title to Jose Capablanca in a match that was never
close (-4 =10). For once in his long career, Lasker gave up the struggle, resigning the
match after losing the 10th, 11th and 14th games. Indeed, Lasker had earlier offered
to surrender the title to his young Cuban pursuer, agreeing to play only because of
the enormous $25,000 prize fund raised by Capablanca, a sum not exceeded in terms
of real dollars until, probably, the Kaprov - Korchnoi match of 1978 in the Philippines.
Lasker played in six tournaments after losing the title. Although much is made of the
66-year-old former champion securing third prize at Moscow 1935, a half-point
behind youngsters Mikhail Botvinnik and Salo Flohr, Lasker’s winning performance of
16 - 4 at New York 1924, ahead of Capablanca and Alexander Alekhine, set a
standard yet to be equalled. No 55-year-old in chess history has ever finished first in
a tournament ahead of his greatest contemporary rivals.
At Moscow 1936 (+3 -5 =10, 6th place)

and Nottingham 1936 (+6 -3 =5, 7th-
8th), Lasker’s age and declining health,
not to mention his status of being a
ruined Jewish refugee from Hitler’s
Germany, began to tell. Most tellingly,
Lasker scored -5 =5 against the top half
of the Moscow 1936 crosstable and not
much better against the leaders at
Nottingham, which would prove to be
his last tournament.
A herald of common sense in chess,

Lasker was unsuccessful in business and
no better than a child of his age in
politics. His unthinking pro-German New York 1924
Seated from left to right: Yates, Capablanca, Janowski,
patriotism during World War I and his Edward Lasker and Emanuel Lasker. Standing Marshall,
embarrassing and murky interlude in Tartakower, Maroczy, Alekhine, Réti and Bogoljubow.
Moscow from 1935 to 1937 suggest that
he was a wise man of chess rather than a man wise about the world.
Here is a typical Lasker game featuring an unremarkable opening, some provocative

thrusts in the early middlegame and perfect endgame technique:
Marshall - Lasker ECO: C65

New York, 1907
1. e4 e5 13. f3 fxe5
2. Nf3 Nc6 14. fxe4 d4
3. Bb5 Nf6 15. g3 Qf6
4. d4 exd4 16. Bxd4 exd4
5. 0-0 Be7 17. Rf1 Qxf1+
6. e5 Ne4 18. Qxf1 Rxf1+
7. Nxd4 0-0 19. Kxf1 Rb8
8. Nf5 d5 20. b3 Rb5
9. Bxc6 bxc6 21. c4 Rh5
10. Nxe7+ Qxe7 22. Kg1 c5
11. Re1 Qh4 23. Nd2 Kf7
12. Be3 f6

24. Rf1+ Ke7 38. Nd2+ Ke3

25. a3 Rh6 39. Nb1 f5
26. h4 Ra6 40. Nd2 h5
27. Ra1 Bg4 41. Nb1 Kf3
28. Kf2 Ke6 42. Nc3 Kxg3
29. Kg2 Ke5 43. Na4 f4
30. a4 Rf6 44. Nxc5 f3
31. Re1 d3 45. Ne4+ Kf4
32. Rf1 Kd4 46. Nd6 c5
33. Rxf6 gxf6 47. b4 cxb4
34. Kf2 c6 48. c5 b3
35. a5 a6 49. Nc4 Kg3
36. Nf1 Kxe4 50. Nd2 b2, White resigns.
37. Ke1 Be2
Previous Next
Reuben Fine and Fred Reinfeld, Lasker’s Greatest Chess Games, 1889 - 1914 (Dover, 1965), the well-
annotated cream of Lasker’s chess from his peak years;
Dr. J. Hannak, Emanuel Lasker: The Life of a Chess Master (Dover, 1991), still the standard biography which
needs to be superseded by a better work;
Kenneth Whyld, The Collected Games of Emanuel Lasker (1998), containing probably every known Lasker
game (1,390 of them);
Emanuel Lasker, Lasker’s Manual of Chess (Dover, 1976), a testament of Lasker’s views on chess.

Login

Capablanca 1921 - 1927 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1888 - d. 1942
Chess News
In the words of a chess-playing
Chess History classmate, Cuban-born Jose Capablanca
» The World Chess never “learnt to learn.” There was no
Championship necessity for him to do so, given his
and Champions: 1747- talent; but this failing also
2001 circumscribed the limits of his
achievements, which were confined
within that vast natural genius that was
A 21-Player Salute
never extended by unremitting
· Philidor intellectual labor. One curious result is
1747 - 1795 that Capablanca is the only modern
· Deschapelles world champion who is more
1800 - 1821 remembered for what he was than what
Jose Paul Capablanca
he did. Sixty years after Capa’s death and his second wife Olga Chagodaev
· La Bourdonnais
from a stroke at the Manhattan Chess
1821 - 1840
Club, his figuredom predominates. His epochal gift for chess, his fit form hopping
· Saint-Amant from a horse after a bracing ride at Havana’s tony Union Club, his hundreds of
1840 - 1843 tuxedoed, diamond-dusted nights on luxury liners spent playing the game of life
· Staunton (“But he was such a caballero!” trilled Capa’s second wife, a willowy Russian
1843 - 1851 strawberry blonde named Olga Chagodaev, whose face with its high cheekbones
resembled that of a very young, semi-Oriental Mae West.) - these are the snapshots
· Anderssen
that come to mind rather than any specific chess results. Capa’s friends were also
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
under the spell of his figuredom. Wrote Bernard Epstein, Capa’s roommate at
Columbia University: “He was of medium height, lean, but no padding needed for his
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 shoulders. And such pride in the posture of his head! You would know no one could
· Steinitz dingle-dangle that man. I can visualize him so clearly, with his dark hair and large
1886 - 1894 gray-green eyes. Believe me, when he took a stroll, in his black derby hat and
carrying a cane, no handsomer young gentleman ever graced Fifth Avenue.”
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
• Capablanca
1921 - 1927
One account from young “Cappie” has
him deducing the rules and object of
· Alekhine
chess at age four after observing a game
1927 - 1935;
won by his army-officer father against a
1937 - 1946
friend. He supposedly told his father
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 that the latter had moved a knight
· Botvinnik incorrectly. Father and son then played
1948 - 1957; their first game, which was won by
1958 - 1960; Joselito. Mikhail Botvinnik, employing
1961 - 1963 some fairly stratospheric standards,
called Capablanca the only chess genius
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
he had ever known. On another
occasion, he wrote, “I consider
· Tal 1960 - 1961 Capablanca as the greatest talent of all
· Petrosian time.” Alexander Alekhine handsomely,
1963 to 1969 perhaps also ruefully, acknowledged
that in no other player had he ever seen
+ Spassky
1969 - 1972
such “flabbergasting quickness of chess
Capablanca and his father.
comprehension.”
"World Champion"
The salient characteristic of Capablanca’s chess results, more pronounced even than
+ World Title Matches his numerous first prizes in tournaments, was the near absence of defeat. He made
and Tournaments fewer moves of the kind that lose chess games than any other grandmaster in
history. By one reckoning, the great Cuban’s loss percentage is given as 5.7 percent
based on a career tournament-match record of +318 -34 =251. However, if one
includes in Capa’s official record his games from club matches (+9 =1), exhibition
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/capablanca.php (1 of 5)17/04/05 13:17:43

games (+37 =4) and consultation games (+21 =9) against such opponents as Efim
Bogolyubov, Max Euwe, Aron Nimzovich et al., then the career total statistics read
+385 -34 =265. Of 684 games, his 34 losses amount to 4.97 percent. Either figure,
5.7 percent or 4.97 percent, represents the lowest percentage of losses achieved by
any player in modern competition. In 158 games played after he lost to Siegbert
Tarrasch at St. Petersburg 1914 through New York 1927, Capablanca suffered but
four defeats. He was regularly outplayed in only one of these games (Richard Reti -
Capablanca, New York 1924) - a loss that ended an unbeaten streak of 63 games.
Among international-level masters, only Alekhine won more than two games against
the Cuban, while in 44 games against Bogolyubov, Nimzovich, Ossip Bernstein,
Reuben Fine, Geza Maroczy, and Milan Vidmar, he never lost. He had a minus score
against only one great master (Paul Keres: -1 =5).
Capablanca burst on the world chess

scene in 1909 as an unknown who
utterly demolished Frank Marshall, +8 -1
=14, in a stakes match. The Cuban’s
only previous competitive experience
was the Cuban Championship of 1902.
Following the Marshall match,
Capablanca played in two local New
York tournaments. At the insistence of
Marshall, Capa was invited to San
Sebastian 1911 where he won a great
tournament on his first try, an honor
that he shares only with Harry Nelson
Pillsbury. His next international event
was St. Petersburg 1914 where he Capablanca and his father, 1909.
finished a half point behind the then
world champion, Emanuel Lasker. In 1919 he defeated Boris Kostic five-zip in a
match and took first at Hastings, +10 =1. The young Cuban’s entire international
career consisted of two matches (vs. Marshall and Kostic) and three tournaments
(San Sebastian, St. Petersburg, Hastings) when he sat down to play Emanuel Lasker
in Havana in 1921. Even so, Capa was the heavy favorite, and he won, +4 =10.
The new champion reached the pinnacle without ever having studied chess seriously.
Nor, after winning the crown, did he tax himself with the game, competing in only
four tournaments during his reign. He took first prizes at London 1922 and New York
1927, an elite event that he won by 2 ½ points ahead of Alekhine in second place.
Typically, the Cuban conceded numerous short draws rather than pressing to win by
a still larger margin. In 1927, to the universal astonishment of nearly everyone,
Capablanca lost the title to Alekhine, +3 -6 =25. “Perhaps the chief reason for his
defeat,” Alekhine later wrote, “was the overestimation of his own powers … and his
underestimation of mine.” Reti had also observed that while Capablanca looked every
inch a champion, it was Alekhine who was playing like one.
From 1928 to 1931, Capablanca played

in 10 tournaments, winning seven first
prizes, two clear seconds and a 2nd-3rd
with Rudolf Spielmann at Carlsbad 1929,
behind Nimzovich. He was trying
(unsuccessfully) to arrange a rematch
with Alekhine, staking his claim based
on tournament successes. From mid-
1931 to late 1934, Capa went into
retirement after beating a rising young
Max Euwe in 1931, +2 -0 =8. His return
at Hastings 1934-35 was less than
overwhelming, a fourth prize, followed
by another fourth prize at Moscow 1935
Capablanca, master of Speed Chess.
behind Salo Flohr and Botvinnik (joint
Margate, 1935
1st) and 66-year-old Lasker, an
undefeated third. But in 1936 Capablanca returned to form, winning a very strong
double-round robin in Moscow, undefeated and a full point ahead of Botvinnik. Then,
in the same year at Nottingham 1936, an unwell Capablanca nonetheless tied for
Botvinnik for first, ahead of Euwe, Fine, Samuel Reshevsky, Alekhine, Flohr, Lasker
and the like. At AVRO 1938, one of the strongest tournaments in chess history, he
started well and then suffered a minor stroke. A final score of +2 -4 =8 was the
single tournament failure of his career.
Along with Paul Morphy and Bobby Fischer, Capablanca possessed a lightning sight of
the board. What an Alekhine or a Botvinnik thought about, Capa frequently intuited.

His sublime sense of position meant eliminating bad possibilities without ever having
to analyze them. Capa often looked at only one or two candidate moves while lesser
grandmasters had to work through a half dozen possibilities. “The way he analyzed,
understood the position,” wrote Botvinnik, “in such things lay the enormous power of
Jose Raul Capablanca.” As for Capa’s own view of his play: “I always play carefully
and try to avoid unnecessary risks. I consider my method to be right as any
superfluous ‘daring’ runs counter to the essential character of chess, which is not a
gamble but a purely intellectual combat conducted in accordance with the exact rules
of logic.”
By all accounts, Capablanca remained supreme in lightning chess to the end. Reuben
Fine, regarded by many as the outstanding speed player of the 1940s, recalls that
Capablanca treated his opponents like children in fast games. The late Arthur Dake, a
speed chess phenomenon of the1930s who was easily besting Alekhine as early as
the Prague Olympiad of 1931, recollected an evening when fresh from a 12-0 victory
in a speed tournament that included the likes of Fine, Reshevsky, Al Horowitz, Arnold
Denker and virtually every other top American master, he challenged Capablanca.
Capa had just shown up, fresh from a diplomatic function, and faced down a cocky
Reuben Fine, who had blurted out that fast chess was for “young men” but who
would not play the Cuban for money even when offered odds. Dake wanted to play
and expected Horowitz, his closest friend, to back him. Instead, Horowitz grabbed
Dake’s sleeve and said, “No one plays Capa at lightning chess. I won’t back you.”
Many observers have argued that Capablanca, like Steinitz before him, was a piece
player. He eschewed tampering with his pawns except to facilitate development.
What Boris Spassky once said of Fischer’s chess at its peak - that the young American
played in a “straight line” - was also true of Capablanca’s. There was relatively little
dissembling or tacking to and fro, and his games in their elegant and seamless
simplicity were frequently called Mozartian. Said Botvinnik in one interview,
“Capablanca didn’t make separate moves - he was creating a chess picture. Nobody
could compare with him in this.”
Capablanca made winning appear not only effortless but, even more tellingly,
inevitable. A case in point:
Bogolyubov - Capablanca ECO: D05

New York, 1924
1. d4 Nf6 6. 0-0 Bd6

2. Nf3 d5 7. Bb2 0-0
3. e3 e6 8. Nbd2 Qe7
4. Bd3 c5 9. Ne5 cxd4
5. b3 Nc6 10. exd4 ...

10. ... Ba3 22. Ne5 Qa5

11. Bxa3 Qxa3 23. a4 Qb6
12. Ndf3 Bd7 24. Nd3 Qxb3
13. Nxc6 Bxc6 25. Nc5 Qb6
14. Qd2 Rac8 26. Rb2 Qa7
15. c3 a6 27. Qe1 b6
16. Ne5 Bb5 28. Nd3 Rc4
17. f3 Bxd3 29. Kg2 Ke5
18. Nxd3 Rc7 30. Nc5 Nb5
19. Rac1 Rfc8 31. Re2 Nxd4
32. cxd4 R8xc5, White
20. Rc2 Ne8
resigns.
21. Rfc1 Nd6
Another of those “inevitable” Capablanca wins:
Edgar Colle - Capablanca ECO: A47

Carlsbad, 1929
1. d4 Nf6 13. Qd1 Nc6

2. Nf3 b6 14. Rf3 g6
3. e3 Bb7 15. N2b3 Nxd4
4. Nbd2 e6 16. Nxd4 Bb7
5. Bd3 c5 17. Qe2 Bc5
6. 0-0 Nc6 18. Rh3 Qc6
7. c3 Be7 19. e5 Nd5
8. e4 cxd4 20. Qf2 Bxd4
9. Nxd4 0-0 21. cxd4 Rac8
10. Qe2 Ne5 22. Bd1 f6
11. Bc2 Qc8 23. Qh4 Rf7
12. f4 Ba6 24. Bf3 Qc4

25. Be3 Nxe3 30. Bxf5 exf5

26. Bxb7 Nf5 31. fxe5 Re7
27. Qe1 Rc7 32. Re3 Qxb2
28. Be4 Qxd4+ 33. e6 dxe6
29. Kh1 fxe5 34. Rxe6 Kf7, White resigns.
Previous Next
Edward Winter, Capablanca (McFarland, 1989), not so much a biography as an interesting collection of
Capablanca’s correspondence, articles, annotations, little-known games, etc.;
Rogelio Caparros, The Games of Jose Raul Capablanca (Chess Digest, 2nd edition, 1994), containing 1,206
games, the largest such collection;
Dale Brandreth and David Hooper, The Unknown Capablanca (R.H.M. Press, 1975), seldom published
simultaneous and exhibition games and the most complete statistical record available of the Cuban’s career;
Harry Golombek, Capablanca’s Hundred Best Games of Chess (G. Bell & Sons, 1947), still the best annotated
collection of Capa’s finest games.

Login

Euwe 1935 - 1937 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
(b. 1901 - d. 1981): World champion: 1935 - 1937
Top Players
Chess News Said Bobby Fischer after meeting Max

Euwe, “That man is too normal. There
Chess History
must be something wrong with him.”
» The World Chess The 12th figure on our list of world
Championship champions is the great and good man
and Champions: 1747- among chess kings - a 6’ 4” Dutchman
2001 who won the world amateur
» The Kings of Chess: championship at The Hague in 1928 and
who became an amateur world champion
A 21-Player Salute
by defeating Alexander Alekhine in
· Philidor 1935. He is the last player who scaled
1747 - 1795
the Everest of Chess in his spare time.
· Deschapelles Earning a mathematics doctorate in Max Euwe, Hastings 1949
1800 - 1821 1926, Dr. Euwe took up flying, boxing
· La Bourdonnais
and swimming. Marriage, too. He fathered three daughters and wept inconsolably
1821 - 1840 when one of them died relatively young. George Orwell ought to have been thinking
of him when he wrote: “The fact to which we have got to cling, as to a life-belt, is
· Saint-Amant
that it is possible to be a normal decent person and yet to be fully alive.”
1840 - 1843
· Staunton In chess Dr. Euwe is remembered as The Man Who Beat Alexander Alekhine, +9 -8
1843 - 1851
=13, for the world championship. The year was 1935. Dr. Euwe himself, though
· Anderssen aware of his myriad contributions to chess, did not balk at the description, once
1851 - 1858; remarking that no one could deny him the honor of having won a long match against
1862 - 1866 the greatest attacking player in chess history.
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
· Steinitz
Dr. Euwe first attracted wide attention in
1886 - 1894 1921, when he drew a match, +2 -2 =8,
with Geza Maroczy. He seemed a young
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 comer who would soon be a major title
· Capablanca contender. But the tempos expended on
1921 - 1927 work and love caused his chess
· Alekhine
development to lag. He competed in
1927 - 1935;
some 60 tournaments and played 20
1937 - 1946 matches during the 1920s, but these get-
togethers were small, local affairs. He
• Euwe 1935 - 1937 averaged only one strong tournament a
· Botvinnik year during the 1920s and did not garner
1948 - 1957; a major first prize until Hastings 1930-
1958 - 1960; 31, when he finished ahead of Jose
1961 - 1963 Capablanca. Dr. Euwe served his long
· Smyslov apprenticeship for the pantheon of great
Réti vs Euwe, Pistyan (Czechoslovakia), 1922.
1957 - 1958 masters by the novel means of losing
narrowly and occasionally drawing
· Tal 1960 - 1961
matches against famous opponents. These matches were typically played during
· Petrosian Christmas and Easter breaks. In 1926 - 27, he narrowly lost an exhibition match to
1963 to 1969 Alekhine, +2 -3 =5; in 1928 and 1929, he lost two 10- matches to Efim Bogolyubov
+ Spassky by a single point each; in 1931, he dropped a hard-fought match to Capablanca, -2
1969 - 1972 =8. When his tournament results began to improve -- second at Berne 1932 and
Zurich 1934 behind Alekhine both times and first equal at Hastings 1934-35 ahead of
· The Concept of the Capablanca and Mikhail Botvinnik -- he became a logical challenger to Alekhine in the
"World Champion" absence of a return match between Capa and Alekhine.
and Tournaments “Nothing infuriates me more,” wrote GM Arnold Denker, “than to hear Max Euwe
described as the ‘weakest of world champions’ … who made it to the top only
because of Alekhine’s alcoholism.” Indeed, the lifetime score between these two
titans was only narrowly in Alekhine’s favor, 44 - 38. As late as game 56 in their
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/euwe.php (1 of 5)17/04/05 13:18:20

lifetime competition, the score was dead even! Only when Alekhine won game seven
of the rematch in 1937 did he go ahead for keeps. (Dr. Euwe lost that match +4 -10
=11, though winning the five-game exhibition match that followed, +2 -1 =2.) The
two men were in approximately the same chess league.
Dr. Euwe was a tactical genius who

employed his gifts not to devise original
stratagems a la Alekhine but to enforce
general positional laws with the rigor of
a trained mathematician. Hans Kmoch
called him “logic personified, a genius of
law and order.” Alekhine wrote, “Does
the general public, do even our friends
the critics realize that Euwe virtually
never made an unsound combination?
He may, of course, occasionally fail to
take account … of an opponent’s
combination, but when he has the
initiative in a tactical operation his Flohr, Alekhine and Euwe
calculation is … impeccable.” at the A.V.R.O. tournament, 1938.
The 82-game Euwe-Alekhine series supports the above generalizations about Dr.
Euwe’s playing style. As Alekhine once noted, if Richard Reti was interested only in
the exceptions to positional rules, then Max Euwe believed “perhaps a little too
much” in their “immutability.” However, in the following game from their 1937
exhibition match, Dr. Euwe displays his style as a lawgiver so vigorously that thanks
to Alekhine’s stubborn resistance, the precise losing move still remains unclear:
Dr. Euwe - Alekhine ECO: D50

Exhibition Match, 1937
1. Nf3 Nf6 6. Nxd4 e5

2. c4 e6 7. Nf3 d4
3. Nc3 d5 8. Nd5 Nc6
4. d4 c5 9. e4 Be7
5. Bg5 cxd4 10. Bxf6 Bxf6

11. b4 0-0 27. Re4 Qh3

12. Bd3 a5 28. Rg4 Qxf3
13. a3 Be6 29. Rg3 Qe4
14. Rb1 axb4 30. Ra1 h6
15. axb4 Be7 31. b5 Ne7
16. 0-0 f6 32. c6 Rf8
17. Qc2 Kh8 33. Qb4 Re8
18. c5 Ra3 34. c7 Nd5
19. Bc4 f5 35. Qd6 Nf4
20. Nxe7 Qxe7 36. Qd8 Ne2+
21. Bd5 Rc3 37. Kf1 Nxg3+
22. Qd2 fxe4 38. hxg3 Qh1+
23. Bxe4 Bf5 39. Ke2 Qh5+
24. Bxf5 Rxf5 40. Kd2 Qf7
25. Rfe1 Rcxf3 41. Ke1, Black resigns.
26. gxf3 Qh4
Many of the Euwe-Alekhine affrays featured Dr. Euwe seeking to impose order while
his Russian opponent struggled to create tactical anarchy given the tiniest
opportunity:
Dr. Euwe - Alekhine ECO: A44

Radio Exhibition Game, 1934
1. d4 c5 13. Qxd3 Qc7

2. d5 e5 14. Nf5 0-0
3. e4 d6 15. Nxd6 Qxd6
4. Nc3 a6 16. 0-0 c4
5. a4 f5 17. Qxc4 Qb6+
6. f4 Nf6 18. Kh1 Qxb2
7. fxe5 dxe5 19. d6+ Kh8
8. exf5 Bxf5 20. Rfb1 Qxc2
9. Bg5 Bd6 21. Rxb7 Rac8
10. Nge2 Nbd7 22. Rc7 Rxc7
11. Ng3 Bg6 23. dxc7 Ne4
12. Bd3 Bxd3

24. c8=Q Nf2+ 26. gxh3 Qf2+, draw.

25. Kg1 Nh3+
Here the forces of chess Yin and Yang stayed in balance.
When Dr. Euwe succeeded in imposing positional law and order on the unruly
Alekhine, he often ended up defending a solid if uncomfortable position against a
fiery attack that would have incinerated lesser opponents. His win over Alekhine at
Amsterdam 1936, which was one of three tournaments in which Euwe finished ahead
of the great Russian during his brief period as champion, is an example of a chess
sheriff getting his man when he oversteps the law (36. h4?!, 42. Rc1?):
Alekhine - Euwe ECO: C49

Amsterdam, 1936
1. e4 e5 16. f3 h6
2. Nf3 Nc6 17. Nh3 Re6
3. Nc3 Nf6 18. Nf4 Nxf4
4. Bb5 Bb4 19. Bxf4 Bb6
5. 0-0 0-0 20. Rad1 Rae8
6. d3 d6 21. Kh1 d5
7. Ne2 Ne7 22. e5 Nh7
8. c3 Ba5 23. Nf5 f6
9. Ng3 c6 24. g4 fxe5
10. Ba4 Ng6 25. Bxe5 Nf6
11. d4 Re8 26. Qd3 Kh8
12. Bb3 exd4 27. Rg1 Bc7
13. cxd4 Be6 28. f4 Qf7
14. Ng5 Bxb3 29. Rdf1 ...
15. Qxb3 Qd7

29. ... Bxe5 45. Rc3 a5

30. fxe5 Ne4 46. Kf3 Kg6
31. g5 hxg5 47. Ra3 Kxg5
32. Nd6 Nf2+ 48. Rxa5 Kf5
33. Kg2 Nxd3 49. a4 g5
34. Nxf7+ Kg8 50. Ra8 Re4
35. Nxg5 Rg6 51. Rf8+ Ke5
36. h4 c5 52. Re8+ Kd4
37. dxc5 Rxe5 53. Rb8 c5
38. Kh3 Nxc5 54. b4 c4
39. Rc1 Rc6 55. a5 Re3+
40. Rge1 Ne4 56. Kf2 Ra3
41. Rxc6 bxc6 57. Rg8 c3
42. Rc1 Nxg5+ 58. Rxg5 Ra2+
43. hxg5 Re6 59. Kf3 c2
44. Kg4 Kf7 60. Rg1, and White resigns.
After Dr. Euwe lost the title, he still performed eminent chess labors as a player (in
1939-40, he narrowly lost a match to Paul Keres, +5 -6 =3; in 1946 he finished a
good second at Groningen, though later failing badly in the 1948 World
Championship match tournament), as a theorist (he edited Chess Archives for many
years, a fitting pursuit for someone who introduced the Scheveningen Variation of
the Sicilian Defense in 1923), as an author (he wrote more books than any other
world champion) and as a chess leader (he served as president of FIDE from 1970-
78).
As president of the International Chess Federation (FIDE) he visited more than 100
countries and brought in more than 30 new members. Some observers say that he
acted arbitrarily to keep Fischer-Spassky 1972 and Karpov-Korchnoi 1978 from
disintegrating. His motives were not self-serving, they say, but he established a
precedent for arbitrary behavior that opened the floodgates for FIDE violating its
own regulations as a matter of convenience.
Previous Next
Max Euwe, From My Games, 1920 - 1937 (Dover, 1975), beautifully annotated;
Max Euwe, Euwe I in the Weltgeschichte des Schachs series (Verlag Dr. E. Wildhagen, 1959).

Login

Botvinnik 1948 - 1957 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1911 - d. 1995
Top Players World champion: 1948 - 1957
Chess News
In 1948 Mikhail “Iron Mike” Botvinnik won The
Chess History Hague-Moscow world championship tournament
» The World Chess to fill the title vacancy left by the death of
Championship Alexander Alekhine in 1946. His three-point
and Champions: 1747- margin of victory over a field with Vasily
2001 Smyslov, Samuel Reshevsky, Paul Keres and Max
Euwe showed that Soviet chess leaders had
chosen the right man back in the 1930s to bring
A 21-Player Salute
the world title to the U.S.S.R. Both his chess and
· Philidor personal styles have been likened to Star Trek’s
1747 - 1795 Mr. Spock, who would have approved of
· Deschapelles Botvinnik’s statement that chess is the art that
1800 - 1821 complements the science of logic.
· La Bourdonnais Mikhail “Iron Mike” Botvinnik
1821 - 1840 Although Botvinnik received unheard of
competitive favors from the Soviet hierarchy (competitions were arranged to rectify
· Saint-Amant
less than spectacular earlier performances) and may have been the beneficiary of
1840 - 1843
thrown games by Keres in the 1948 title tournament, this dour and loyal “New Soviet
· Staunton Man” combined an impressive talent with a revolutionary training regime of
1843 - 1851 theoretical, physical and psychological preparation to produce the best tournament
· Anderssen record of the 1940s. He was not a dominant world champion in the mould of a Bobby
1851 - 1858; Fischer or an Alexander Alekhine, scoring only +36 -39 =82 in his seven title
1862 - 1866 matches. Moreover, in 1955 he lost a short match to Reshevsky, -1 =3, whom Fischer
once called the world’s best player from 1946 to 1956. Still, Botvinnik’s self-
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
description as primus inter pares is a reasonable estimation of his status while
· Steinitz champion.
1886 - 1894
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 By his own stratospheric standards, Botvinnik did not view himself as a chess genius.
· Capablanca And true enough, unlike Paul Morphy and Jose Capablanca, he did not emerge as a
1921 - 1927 chessboard Pallas Athene fully armed from the head of the chess goddess Caissa. He
first had to serve an apprenticeship in numerous Soviet competitions. In 1927 he
· Alekhine
came fifth in his first attempt at the Soviet Championship, which he would eventually
1927 - 1935;
win seven times. After several setbacks, he won his first important event in 1930,
1937 - 1946
taking first in the Leningrad Masters. By winning the Soviet title in 1931 and 1933, as
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 well as sharing first prize in two strong master events in Leningrad in 1932 and
Botvinnik 1933, Botvinnik became the Soviet chosen one.
•
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
A match was arranged with Salo Flohr in 1933, which ended in a draw, +2 -2 =8.
Botvinnik became famous overnight, and Nikolai Krylenko, Soviet chess boss who
· Smyslov
was executed by Stalin in 1938, wrote, “The Flohr-Botvinnik match … has shown that
1957 - 1958
in our standard of play we have caught up with bourgeois Europe.” In truth, not yet.
· Tal 1960 - 1961 Botvinnik was the only Soviet master of the mid-1930s who could compete reliably
· Petrosian against the best in the West, and his first international outing at Hastings 1934-35
1963 to 1969 found him a mere fifth equal among 10 competitors. Krylenko then organized
Moscow 1935 in which Botvinnik finished first equal with Flohr ahead of Emanuel
+ Spassky
Lasker and Capablanca, and Moscow 1936, a strong double round robin won by
1969 - 1972
Capablanca, a point ahead of Botvinnik, who was in turn 2 ½ points clear of Flohr in
· The Concept of the third. At Nottingham 1936, Botvinnik finished joint first with Capablanca, ahead of
"World Champion" everyone of stature (Alekhine, Euwe, Lasker, Reshevsky, Reuben Fine et al.).
and Tournaments The issue within the Soviet Union was who would be the anointed, financially backed
challenger to the amateur Euwe or the ageing Alekhine, one of whom would
obviously emerge as champion from their rematch in late 1937. When Grigory
Levenfish won the 1937 Soviet Championship, which came after a good 6th-7th place
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/botvinnik.php (1 of 6)17/04/05 13:19:04

finish at Moscow 1935, Botvinnik

demanded a match to settle the
question of Soviet top dog. Levenfish (b.
1889) was from the pre-Revolutionary
generation and had competed at the
great Carlsbad 1911 tournament, where
he finished 14th-16th. Botvinnik was an
enormous favorite, but the match was
drawn, +5 -5 =3. In the 1940 Soviet
Championship, Botvinnik finished 5th-
6th, scoring only 50 percent (+3 - 3 =3)
against the top half of the crosstable.
Botvinnik then prevailed upon Soviet
chess leaders to organize an “absolute
championship” of the USSR in 1941,
which he won by 2 ½ points over a
captive Keres, whose country had been
Levenfish vs Botvinnik annexed by the Soviets. “It is clear,”
1937 Soviet Championship
wrote Botvinnik afterwards, “who
should play Alekhine.”
Clear? Botvinnik’s international record included not a single undivided first prize.
Further, Keres and Fine had finished joint first, a point ahead of Botvinnik in third, at
AVRO 1938, an unofficial qualifier to play Alekhine for the title. The story goes that
Keres bought his life following World War II, after again falling into Soviet hands, by
agreeing to relinquish to Botvinnik his claim for playing a match with Alekhine.
The 1940s was the Botvinnik Decade: seven first prizes in seven tournaments (1941
Leningrad-Moscow USSR “absolute championship”; Sverdlovsk 1943; USSR
Championship 1944; USSR Championship 1945; Groningen 1946; Moscow 1947; and
The Hague-Moscow 1948).
From 1951 to 1963 Botvinnik played seven title matches, winning twice, drawing
twice and losing thrice. He did not win an undivided first prize in a major
international tournament during his title years, his best result being equal first with
Smyslov at Moscow 1956. Here is the record of his title matches:
Moscow 1956
Botvinnik - Bronstein 1951 +5 -5 =14 Drawn

Botvinnik - Smyslov 1954 +7 -7 =10 Drawn
Botvinnik - Smyslov 1957 +3 -6 =13 Lost
Botvinnik - Smyslov 1958 +7 -5 =11 Won
Botvinnik - Tal 1960 +2 -6 =13 Lost
Botvinnik - Tal 1961 +10 -5 =6 Won
Botvinnik - Petrosian 1963 +2 -5 =15 Lost
Botvinnik held the world title from 1948 through 1957 without winning a
championship match. His victories over Smyslov and Mikhail Tal were in revenge
matches, which also means that he never won a match while defending his title. Yet
his name unquestionably adorns the era from 1948 to 1963, partly the result of rules
favoring the sitting champion and partly because of his enormous contributions to
the art of chess. His One Hundred Selected Games, 1926 - 1946 edified two
generations of chess players, both East and West; and his articles on chess
preparation detailed the hard work necessary to attain excellence. He scored nearly
70 percent in his overall career total of +610 -139 =453 (a total of 1,202 games).
“Iron Mike” continued to compete in tournaments during the post-championship

years, scoring his best result at Wijk aan Zee 1969 with a shared first. At Palma de
Mallorca 1967 and Monte Carlo 1968, he finished just behind Bent Larsen. Clearly no
longer able to squelch the best in the West, Botvinnik retired from competitive chess
in 1970. He spent time on programming computers to play chess (in the 1980s these
efforts were swamped by the computer revolution in the West) and established the
world’s most famous chess school. His most successful students were Garry
Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov.
There is an outsized grandeur about Botvinnik’s 50 years in chess. His imposing

figure of severe mien - the chess worker who came to every match with a thermos

bottle and a dark suit - combines with an

oeuvre of heavy-duty chess
masterpieces to create an heroic vision
of power unleashed. The Botvinnik of,
say, 1955 would not have been out of
place in a socialist realist painting of
steelworkers or in Ostrovsky’s novel
How the Steel Was Tempered.
Botvinnik’s chess style reflected the

man. “Iron Mike” loved iron logic. He
divided the chess world into “research
players” such as himself and lesser
purely practical players, talented though
they might be. Rather than puttering
around trying to find one-shot TNs,
Reshevsky vs Botvinnik
Botvinnik devised opening systems that United States vs Soviet Union, Moscow, 1955
could sustain a career. He mastered the
Rubinstein Variation of the Nimzo-Indian Defense and the Winawer French as no one
else has. He also produced major theoretical work in the Anti-Meran Gambit, English
Opening and Gruenfeld Defense. His goal was to elaborate entire playing systems
from the opening through to the endgame, typically featuring a blocked center
leading to a complicated struggle with plenty of flank maneuvering.
In the following game Botvinnik steamrolls his opponent’s set-up right from the
opening into the ending, employing his patented g2-g4 idea to capture enormous
amounts of space:
Botvinnik - Smyslov ECO: E45

World Championship Match, 1954
1. d4 Nf6 6. a3 Be7
2. c4 e6 7. Nf4 d5
3. Nc3 Bb4 8. cxd5 Bxf1
4. e3 b6 9. Kxf1 exd5
5. Ne2 Ba6

10. g4 c6 21. Qxd5 cxd5

11. g5 Nfd7 22. Rc1 Na6
12. h4 Bd6 23. b4 h6
13. e4 dxe4 24. Rh3 Kh7
14. Nxe4 Bxf4 25. Rd3 Nf6
15. Bxf4 0-0 26. b5 Nc5
16. h5 Re8 27. Bxc5 bxc5
17. Nd6 Re6 28. Rxc5 Rb8
18. d5 Rxd6 29. a4 Rb7
19. Bxd6 Qxg5 30. Rdc3, Black resigns.
20. Qf3 Qxd5
White played 14 pawn moves, nearly half the moves of the game. Therein lies a
difference between Botvinnik and Capablanca, the premier piece player in modern
chess history. In the game given in the Capablanca section (Bogolyubov -
Capablanca, 32 moves), the Cuban played only seven pawn moves, a majority of
which were either to open lines for his pieces in the opening or to make captures.
The time is long overdue in this age of computers for a piece vs. pawn move analysis
of the games of the great masters.
And here Botvinnik metes out essentially the same treatment to Tal:
Botvinnik - Tal ECO: E24

1. c4 Nf6 6. f3 Ba6
2. Nc3 e6 7. e4 d5
3. d4 Bb4 8. cxd5 Bxf1
4. a3 Bxc3+ 9. Kxf1 exd5
5. bxc3 b6

10. Bg5 h6 22. fxe4 f6

11. Qa4+ c6 23. Ra1 Qe7
12. Bh4 dxe4 24. Rxa7 Qxe4
13. Re1 g5 25. Qxe4 Rxe4
14. Bf2 Qe7 26. Ra8+ Nb8
15. Ne2 b5 27. Bg3 Kb7
16. Qc2 Qxa3 28. Rha1 Rc8
17. h4 gxh4 29. R8a7+ Kb6
18. Bxh4 Nbd7 30. Bxb8 b4
19. Ng3 0-0-0 31. Bd6 bxc3
20. Nxe4 Rhe8 32. Bc5+ Kb5
21. Kf2 Nxe4+ 33. R1a4, Black resigns.
Most players have seen Botvinnik’s famous brilliancy against Capablanca at AVRO
1938. Here is a lesser known stunner that deserves to be much better known:
Botvinnik - Lajos Portisch (Monaco, 1968):
Botvinnik - Lajos Portisch ECO: A29

Monaco, 1968
1. c4 e5 9. a3 a5
2. Nc3 Nf6 10. Be3 0-0
3. g3 d5 11. Na4 Nxa4
4. cxd5 Nxd5 12. Qxa4 Bd5
5. Bg2 Be6 13. Rfc1 Re8
6. Nf3 Nc6 14. Rc2 Bf8
7. 0-0 Nb6 15. Rac1 Nb8
8. d3 Be7 16. Rxc7 Bc6
17. R1xc6 bxc6 22. Ng6+ Kh7

18. Rxf7 h6 23. Be4 Bd6
19. Rb7 Qc8 24. Nxe5+ g6
20. Qc4+ Kh8 25. Bxg6+ Kg7
21. Nh4 Qxb7 26. Bxh6+, Black resigns.
The masterpiece of Botvinnik’s maturity! Write GM Raymond Keene and Dr. Nathan

Divinsky about White’s bombshell on move 18, “What makes this sacrifice so
impressive (apart from the fact of its being completely unexpected) is the brilliant
explosion of combinative energy arising from quietly logical strategic play.”
Previous Next
Victor Baturinsky (compiler), Shakhmatnoe Tvorchestvo Botvinnika (The Chess Creativity of Botvinnik), three
volumes published in Moscow by the Physical Culture and Sport Press from 1965-68, containing 700 games,
the definitive work on Botvinnik’s career;
Mikhail Botvinnik, One Hundred Selected Games, 1926 - 1946 (Dover, 1981), a classic of objective chess, if
not political, analysis;
Mikhail Botvinnik, Achieving the Aim (Pergamon, 1981), an interesting biography that is not always morally
pretty reading;
Mikhail Botvinnik, Half a Century of Chess (Cadogan, 1996); Mikhail Botvinnik, Selected Games 1967 - 70
(Pergamon, 1981);
Bernard Cafferty, Botvinnik’s Best Games, 1947 - 1970 (Batsford, 1973).

Login

Smyslov 1957 - 1958 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1921 -
Chess News
No one has mentioned this strange fact before,
Chess History but Vasily Smyslov, Caissa’s gentle giant and
» The World Chess would-be opera singer whose 1979
Championship autobiography was titled In Search of Harmony,
and Champions: 1747- owes his distinguished chess career to hard
2001 work, natural talent and American chess angel
and investment banker Maurice Wertheim. For
Wertheim made possible the first USA - USSR
A 21-Player Salute
Radio Match of 1945, a double-round battle on 10
· Philidor boards. Few people recall that the United States,
1747 - 1795 radiant victor of four successive Olympiads
· Deschapelles during the 1930s, was an odds-on favorite to win
1800 - 1821 a match in which it was crucified, 4 ½ - 15 ½! In
Vasily Smyslov
about 72 hours, from September 1 to 4, 1945, the
· La Bourdonnais
Soviet Union established itself as the world’s
1821 - 1840
leading chess power. On the first three boards, the Soviets scored 5½ - ½, including
· Saint-Amant Smyslov’s two-zip win over Samuel Reshevsky. The Radio Match blowout legitimated
1840 - 1843 Soviet chess, which included Smyslov’s impressive results in the Soviet Union during
· Staunton World War II. Such legitimacy was crucial for Smyslov because based only on his
1843 - 1851 scanty international record before the1948 World Championship Tournament (12th-
13th at Leningrad-Moscow 1939, including a loss to Reshevsky; a distant third at
· Anderssen
Groningen 1946 behind Mikhail Botvinnik and Max Euwe; and a tie for 2nd-5th at
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
Warsaw 1947, two points behind Svetozar Gligoric), he would surely never have been
invited to play in the elite Hague-Moscow tournament for the world title.
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
· Steinitz Smyslov came from a chess-playing family. His father once won a tournament game
1886 - 1894 from Alexander Alekhine, and the son began playing at age six. Inspired by chess
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 visits to the Soviet Union in the mid-1930s by Emanuel Lasker and Jose Capablanca,
Smyslov took up the game in earnest, winning at age 16 the All-Union boys’
· Capablanca
championship of 1938. He followed up this success in the same year by tying for first
1921 - 1927
in the Moscow City Championship and found himself invited to play in the 1939
· Alekhine Leningrad-Moscow international where he finished tied near the bottom with an off-
1927 - 1935; form Paul Keres. No matter, because in the 1940 USSR Championship, he joined the
1937 - 1946 chess elite of his country by finishing third, 1 ½ points ahead of Mikhail Botvinnik,
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 who found himself in a tie for 5th-6th. After finishing third in the 1941 Soviet
“absolute championship,” behind Botvinnik and Keres, but ahead of three other top
· Botvinnik
Soviet players, Smyslov became the youngest Soviet grandmaster up until that time.
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
During the war years he won the 1942 Moscow Championship and finished second
1961 - 1963 behind Botvinnik in the 1944 USSR Championship.
• Smyslov
1957 - 1958 The above results, combined with
Smyslov’s mediocre international record
· Tal 1960 - 1961
and two-zip win over Reshevsky in the
· Petrosian 1945 Radio Match, were his credentials
1963 to 1969 for playing in the 1948 title tournament.
+ Spassky By finishing a clear second, he justified
1969 - 1972 his inclusion.

"World Champion"
From 1950 to 1958, Smyslov produced
the best chess results in the world while
+ World Title Matches also elaborating a serene positional style
and Tournaments in which he often played for better or
simply even endings, trusting in his
Smyslov vs Keres endgame technique to provide victory.
World Championship Tournment, The Hague, Moscow, 1948 His style has often been compared to
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/smyslov.php (1 of 5)17/04/05 13:19:43

Capablanca’s, though reaching an ending per se may have played a larger part in the
Russian’s thinking than in the Cuban’s.
Although Smyslov won the 1951 Tchigorin Memorial as well as Zagreb 1955 and
Moscow 1956 (1st= with Botvinnik), Smyslov’s greatest achievements were winning
two consecutive candidates’ tournaments, Neuhausen-Zurich 1953 and Amsterdam
1956, by two points and 1 ½ points, respectively. He climbed the Everest of
qualification twice, which led to three matches with Botvinnik. He drew the first
(1954), won the second (1957) and lost the third (1958), scoring +18 -17 =34 in
these three mini-wars as well as achieving a plus score in tournament play against
Botvinnik during the 1950s. Yet these titanic efforts yielded Smyslov the world title
for only a year, given the regulations of that period.
Smyslov’s competitive ambition was satisfied by winning the world title. He stated
publicly that he did not believe he could win the 1959 candidates tournament, and he
proved his view to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, finishing a gentleman’s fourth. He
was twice more a title candidate, qualifying from interzonals at Amsterdam 1964
(1st-4th) and Las Palmas 1982 (2nd). At age 61 he became the oldest ever
championship candidate. If in 1965, he was brutally eliminated from the cycle by
Efim Geller (losing wearily, -3 =5), in 1983 he won his quarter- and semi-final
matches against Robert Huebner (+1 -1 =12, decided by the spin of a roulette wheel)
and Zoltan Ribli (+3 -1 =7) to meet rising young Garry Kasparov in the finals in
1984 , where he lost -4 =9.
In the more than 40 years since Smyslov lost

the championship rematch, he has become
best known not for his writings and not for a
singleminded pursuit of the world title. He
became a tournament specialist (winning eight
successive tournaments in the mid-1960s;
taking one first and three shared firsts in
strong Moscow Central Chess Club
tournaments in 1959, 1960, 1961 and 1963;
and winning Havana 1965 ahead of Bobby
Fischer and Monte Carlo 1969, plus numerous
tournament victories in Cuba and Latin
America), travelling the planet and creating a
body of chess games noted for its subtle
artistry.
Botvinnik once claimed that in chess Smyslov

did everything well, though endings were the
latter’s special territory. Botvinnik ought to Smyslov - writer, world title holder and tournament
know. For his great rival won games from him specialist.
in every conceivable style, producing several miniatures or near miniatures as well as
numerous accurate endgames. Here are two examples of Smyslov drastically abusing
Botvinnik, followed by an ending of the kind that gave him the title in 1957:
Smyslov-Botvinnik ECO: C17

1. e4 e6 10. Qxh7 Nd7

2. d4 d5 11. Nf3 Nf8
3. Nc3 Bb4 12. Qd3 Qxa5
4. e5 c5 13. h4 Bd7
5. a3 Ba5 14. Ng5 Rc8
6. b4 cxd4 15. Nd4 Nf5
7. Qg4 Ne7 16. Rb1 Rc4
8. bxa5 dxc3 17. Nxf5 exf5
9. Qxg7 Rg8 18. Rxb7 Re4+

19. Qxe4 dxe4 23. Bf6 Rxg2

20. Rb8+ Bc8 24. h5 Ba6
21. Bb5+ Qxb5 25. h6, Black resigns.
22. Rxb5 Ne6
Smyslov-Botvinnik ECO: D99

1. d4 Nf6 11. d5 Ne5

2. c4 g6 12. Be2 Nxf3+
3. Nc3 d5 13. gxf3 Bh5
4. Nf3 Bg7 14. h4 Qd7
5. Qb3 dxc4 15. a4 a5
6. Qxc4 0-0 16. Nb5 Nc8
7. e4 Bg4 17. Bd4 Nd6
8. Be3 Nfd7 18. Bxg7 Kxg7
9. Rd1 Nb6 19. Nd4 Kg8
10. Qb3 Nc6 20. Rg1 Qh3

21. Qe3 c5 23. Qg5 c5

22. dxc6e.p. bxc6 24. Nc6, Black resigns.
Botvinnik-Smyslov ECO: D73

1. Nf3 Nf6 17. h4 Nc4

2. g3 g6 18. Bh3 Nd6
3. c4 c6 19. Kh2 a5
4. Bg2 Bg7 20. Rfe1 b5
5. Nc3 0-0 21. Nd1 b4
6. d4 d5 22. Nf2 Ba6
7. cxd5 cxd5 23. Qd1 Rfc8
8. Ne5 b6 24. Rxc8+ Rxc8
9. Bg5 Bb7 25. Bf1 Bxf1
10. Bxf6 Bxf6 26. Rxf1 Qc6
11. 0-0 e6 27. Nd3 Qc2+
12. f4 Bg7 28. Qxc2 Rxc2+
13. Rc1 f6 29. Rf2 Rxf2+
14. Nf3 Nc6 30. Nxf2 Nc4
15. e3 Qd7 31. Nd1 Kf7
16. Qe2 Na5

32. b3 Nd6 51. Kg2 Bg3+

33. Kg2 h5 52. Kf3 Bh4
34. Kh3 Ne4 53. Nc2 Kg1
35. g4 hxg4+ 54. Ke2 Kg2
36. Kxg4 f5+ 55. Na1 Be7
37. Kh3 Bf6 56. Nc2 Kg3
38.Ne1 Kg7 57. Ne1 Bd8
39.Nd3 Nc3 58. Nc2 Bf6
40. Nxc3 bxc3 59. a3 Be7
41. Ne1 Kh6 60. b4 a4
42. Nc2 Be7 61. Ne1 Bg5
43. Kg3 Kh5 62. Nc2 Bf6
44. Kf3 Kxh4 63. Kd3 Kf2
45. Ne1 g5 64. Na1 Bd8
46. fxg5 Kxg5 65. Nc2 Bg5
47. Nc2 Bd6 66. b5 Bd8
48. Ne1 Kh4 67. Nb4 Bb6
49. Nc2 Kh3 68. Nc2 Ba5
50. Na1 Kh2 69. Nb4 Ke1, White resigns.
Previous Next
Vasily Smyslov, My Best Games of Chess, 1935 - 1957 (Dover, 1972);

Vasily Smyslov, 125 Selected Games (Cadogan, 1994);
Vasily Smyslov, B poiskakh garmonii (In Search of Harmony), published in Moscow in 1979, an
autobiography.

Login

Tal 1960 - 1961 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1936 - d. 1992
Chess News
The chess story of Mikhail Tal is NOT about a
Chess History 23-year-old firebrand becoming the youngest
» The World Chess world champion until that time by defeating
Championship Mikhail Botvinnik in 1960, +6 -2 =13. The chess
and Champions: 1747- story of Mikhail Tal is NOT about stunning
2001 tournament results (for example, his 20 - 8
score at the great 1959 Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade
candidates tournament). The chess story of
A 21-Player Salute
Mikhail Tal, the combinational Wizard of Riga,
· Philidor is NOT even about the man’s oeuvre of
1747 - 1795 extraordinary King-side attacking games with
· Deschapelles attendant sacrifices (Viktor Korchnoi and
1800 - 1821 others have argued that Tal’s play, for all of its
genial fireworks, has a stereotyped quality to Mikhail Tal
· La Bourdonnais
it.). The chess story of Mikhail Tal IS about the Burning bright.
1821 - 1840
act itself of straining against the leash of
· Saint-Amant limited human imagination to create mammoth combinations on the chessboard.
1840 - 1843 During his games, Tal wished to go where no chess player had ever gone before,
· Staunton choosing the middlegame as his metier for creative expression. He burned energy
1843 - 1851 profligately. A chain-smoker and a heavy drinker, Tal pulsated nervous energy,
pacing like a caged tiger in between moves. And as a young man with those famous
· Anderssen
fierce, hooded eyes and that imposing hooked nose, he bulldozed all before him.
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
Until, that is, the return match with Botvinnik in 1961. “Iron Mike” sought closed
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
positions and endgames in a very successful effort (+10 -5 =6) to make chess
· Steinitz something other than ever-deeper plunges into unfathomable fantasy. “I realized
1886 - 1894 that you cannot tackle him if the pieces are mobile and active,” Botvinnik later
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 averred. “I played closed positions in which Tal could gain no advantage. Tal had no
positional understanding for closed games.” Said Botvinnik in an implicit admission
· Capablanca
of the Latvian’s enormous talent, “If Tal would learn to program himself properly,
1921 - 1927
then it would become impossible to play him.” Replied Tal laughingly many years
· Alekhine later, “Botvinnik’s right! When he says such things, then he’s right. Usually, I prefer
1927 - 1935; not to study chess but to play it. For me chess is more an art than a science. It’s been
1937 - 1946 said that Alekhine and I played similar chess, except that he studied more. Yes,
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 perhaps, but I have to say that he played, too.”
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957; Tal was without alibis. Suffering from kidney problems during
1958 - 1960; the second Botvinnik match, he was once asked whether he lost
1961 - 1963 because of poor health. “I think that I lost to him,” he
answered, “because he beat me! He was very well-prepared for
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
the second match. Botvinnik knew my play better than I knew
his.” After losing the title, Tal spent the remainder of his career
• Tal 1960 - 1961 making fitful attempts at programming himself “properly,”
· Petrosian widening his style to encompass positional play. But he never
1963 to 1969 fully succeeded. He never played another championship match
after losing the title at only age 24. Instead, he remained largely
+ Spassky
true to his sacrificial, combinative calling even when, towards
1969 - 1972
the end, the pieces no longer danced. In an important sense, his
· The Concept of the later competitive setbacks at the highest level were Caissa’s
"World Champion" gain, given the body of attractive games that he produced. He
was never prepared to become a drone to add 10 percent to his
and Tournaments point tally.
“The act itself of straining against the leash of limited human

imagination”? What does the phrase mean? It means trying to
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/tal.php (1 of 7)17/04/05 13:20:33

create more than the human mind can accommodate. It means

expending energy while classical opponents conserve energy. It
means making errors. It ultimately means sacrificing overall
performance results in pursuit of a romantic vision. Here is a
game from the high point of Tal’s Sturm und Drang period, a
game against his friend and trainer, Alexander Koblents:
Tal - Koblents ECO: B63

Training Game, 1958
1. e4 c5 9. Nb3 Qb6
2. Nf3 Nc6 10. f3 a6
3. d4 cxd4 11. g4 Rd8
4. Nxd4 Nf6 12. Be3 Qc7
5. Nc3 d6 13. h4 b5
6. Bg5 e6 14. g5 Nd7
7. Qd2 Be7 15. g6 ...
8. 0-0-0 0-0
Tal vs Botvinnik
World CHampionship
Match, 1961
at Golden Sands 1962, Tal-Dieter Mohrlock continued:
Tal-Dieter Mohrlock ECO: B63

Golden Sands 1962
15. … fxg6 24. Rh6 Kf7

16. h5 gxh5 25. Rh4 Qb6
17. Rxh5 Nf6 26. Nd1 Qc7
18. Rg5 Ne5 27. f4 h6
19. Qg2 Bf8 28. Rg6 Re8
20. Be2 Nc4 29. f5 e5
21. Bxc4 bxc4 30. Nc3 Qd8
22. Nd4 Rb8 31. Nc6, Black resigns
23. Rh1 Rb7
and from above the conclusion of the Tal - Koblents (Training Game, 1958):
15. ... hxg6 22. Qh8+ Ng8

16. h5 gxh5 23. Rh7 f5
17. Rxh5 Nf6 24. Bh6 Rd7
18. Rh1 d5 25. Bxb5 Rf7
19. e5 Nxe5 26. Rg1 Ra7
20. Bf4 Bd6 27. Nd4 Ng4
21. Qh2 Kf8 28. fxg4 Be5

29. Nc6 Bxc3 34. bxc3 d2+

30. Be3 d4 35. Kd1 Qxc6
31. Rgh1 Rd7 36. Rf6+ Rf7
32. Bg5 axb5 37. Qxg7+, Black resigns.
33. R1h6 d3
Undeniably impressive, both games. Yet one annotator of the Tal-Mohrlock game
wondered whether the attack would have gone so smoothly if defensive counter-
puncher and Tal nemesis, Viktor Korchnoi, had been playng Black. And, too, one
wonders what would have happened in Tal-Koblents if Korchnoi had kibitzed with the
move 22. … Ke7.
Mikhail Tal was not, surprising to say, a child prodigy. His moves of genius were not
exclusively products of nature; they were also works of nurture and personal
temperament. He started playing early, joining a chess group at age eight. But not
until age 13 was he taken up by the trainer Koblents. On his third attempt in 1953,
Tal won the Latvian championship, though he only finished second in the same event
in 1954 and 1955. People were talking more about the fire in his games than in his
early results. In the 1956 U.S.S.R. Championship, he finished 5th-7th.
Then the dam burst. He won the Soviet

championships of 1957 and 1958,
smashed the field of the 1958 Portoroz
Interzonal by 2 ½ points, took first at
Zurich 1959 and then won the Bled
candidates, which Harry Golombek
rightly called “the fieriest tournament”
ever. (But in this result, there ought to
have been a warning to Tal: he finished
last against his fellow Soviet
participants at Bled in their micro-
tournament among one another,
winning the overall candidates only
because of an astonishing 14 ½ - 1 ½
tally against the non-Soviets, who
comprised the bottom half of the table.)
The following year, as noted, he became
at age 23 the youngest titleholder up
until that time. In three years, he had
achieved three levels of eminence:
national champion, world championship
candidate, and world champion.

Interspersed among these titanic results

were appearances with Soviet student
teams in which his results and, above all
else, his games prompted excited talk.
Immediately following the loss of his
title, he rebounded with first prize at
Bled 1961 after an exciting race with 18-
year- old Robert Fischer, who in a
harbinger of themes to come defeated
Tal in their individual game and scored 3
½ - ½ overall against an elite Soviet
contingent.
In the three decades that followed, Tal

thrice seemed on the verge of
recovering his early form. He shared
first prize at the Amsterdam Interzonal
of 1964 and won two scintillating
candidates matches against Lajos
Portisch (5 ½ - 2 ½) and Bent Larsen (5
½ - 4 ½). The “old” Tal seemed to be
back, but in the finals, Boris Spassky
held like a rock with Black in the
Marshall Gambit of the Ruy Lopez,
grinding Tal down, +4 -1 =6. Against
Portisch, Tal showed what happens
when an in-form attacking genius meets
a highly talented hard worker:
Tal and Petrosian watching Spassky record his move.
Twenty-Fifth Soviet Championship, Riga, 1958
Tal-Portisch ECO: B10
Candidates Match, 1965
1. e4 c6 9. Qxe4 e6
2. Nc3 d5 10. 0-0 Be7
3. Nf3 dxe4 11. c3 Nf6
4. Nxe4 Bg4 12. Qh4 Nd5
5. h3 Bxf3 13. Qg4 Bf6
6. Qxf3 Nd7 14. Re1 Qb6
7. d4 Ngf6 15. c4 Nb4
8. Bd3 Nxe4

16. Rxe6+ fxe6 22. bxa7 Ke7

17. Qxe6+ Kf8 23. b4 Ra8
18. Bf4 Rd8 24. Re1+ Kd6
19. c5 Nxd3 25. b5 Rxa7
20. cxb6 Nxf4 26. Re6+ Kc7
21. Qg4 Nd5 27. Rxf6, Black resigns.
As a rule Tal did not play fancy openings or dangerous gambits. Like Morphy before
him, he strove for quick development of his pieces, using the opening as the
foundation for his future fireworks.
Seeded into the next candidates matches of 1968, Tal beat Svetozar Gligoric in the
quarterfinals but lost to Korchnoi in the semis, +1 -2 =7. Following the removal of a
kidney in 1969, he had a brief renaissance, which included shared first prize with
Keres at Tallinn 1971, another Soviet title in 1972 (+9 =12) and other unbeaten
results, but he failed badly at the 1973 Leningrad Interzonal. After a decade out of
the candidates matches, he stormed back from the chessic cold into the candidates
matches in 1979, the year in which he shared joint first with Anatoly Karpov in
Montreal’s “Tournament of Stars” and then won the Riga Interzonal crushingly (+11
=6), 2 ½ points ahead of the field. But his loss to Lev Polugaevsky in a 1980
quarterfinal match (-3 =5) was completely convincing. He was outbooked and
outplayed. At about this time, he went nearly 100 games without suffering a
tournament defeat but then failed to become a candidate in the 1982 cycle that led to
Garry Kasparov becoming the challenger. Subsequently, he won another 10 or so
prizes in top-flight international play, but he never again played in candidates
matches. A six-time Soviet champion (a record he shares with Botvinnik), he played
in about 55 notable tournaments, winning or sharing first and second prizes 80
percent of the time.
Late in his career, Tal did win another, albeit unofficial world championship: the 1988
World Blitz Championship in St. John, Canada. The 32-player field included Kasparov,
Karpov and numerous other greats. Pleasantly fortified with a few drinks, Tal played
nervelessly at age 51. “I did not take the tournament too seriously,” he later said. “I
walked around the pressroom, smoked a few cigarettes and sacrificed some pieces.”
Then he added, “I am waiting until next year when I can become a new ex-world
champion.”
Until the end, there were two Tals. The mature Tal certainly tried to channel his
attacking genius into more positional channels, but inside the older man there
remained the impish spirit of a 20-year-old who would play a sacrifice if it “looked
good.”
Against Robert Huebner, Tal was on his best aggressive positional behavior at the
famous “Tournament of the Stars”:
Tal-Huebner ECO: B19

Montreal, 1979
1. e4 c6 11. Bf4 Qa5+

2. d4 d5 12. Bd2 Qc7
3. Nd2 dxe4 13. 0-0-0 e6
4. Nxe4 Bf5 14. Ne4 0-0-0
5. Ng3 Bg6 15. g3 Nxe4
6. h4 h6 16. Qxe4 Nf6
7. Nf3 Nd7 17. Qe2 c5
8. h5 Bh7 18. dxc5 Bxc5
9. Bd3 Bxd3 19. Rh4 Kb8
10. Qxd3 Ngf6 20. Bf4 Bd6

21. Rxd6 Rxd6 32. Qc4 Qe8

22. Ne5 Ka8 33. Rg6 Rc8
23. Nc4 Ne8 34. Qa4 Qd8
24. Rg4 Qe7 35. Qe4 Nd6
25. Nxd6 Nxd6 36. Qd3 Qc7
26. Rxg7 Nf5 37. Bb4 Nb5
27. Rg4 Rd8 38. Rxf6 a5
28. Be5 f6 39. Bd6 Nxd6
29. Bc3 e5 40. Rxd6 e4
30. b3 a6 41. Qd2, Black resigns.
31. Kb2 Qe6
Against Andrei Sokolov, Tal uncorks one of his vintage unclear f7-sacrifices of the
kind that once caused him to say, “I thank those gods” - meaning those deities who
placed the middlegame before the ending:
Tal - Sokolov ECO: E04

Brussels, 1988
1. d4 Nf6 8. Na3 cxd4

2. c4 e6 9. Naxc4 Bc5
3. g3 d5 10. Qb3 0-0
4. Bg2 dxc4 11. Bf4 Qc8
5. Nf3 c5 12. Rfd1 Rd8
6. 0-0 Nc6 13. Rac1 Nd5
7. Ne5 Bd7

14. Nxf7 Kxf7 28. Bxh8 Bxa2

15. Ne5+ Nxe5 29. e3 a5
16. Bxe5 b6 30. Bxd4 Nxd4
17. Qf3+ Kg8 31. exd4 Bd6
18. Qg4 g6 32. d5 a4
19. Be4 Be8 33. Rc6 Bc5
20. b4 Nxb4 34. Rc1 Bd4
21. Bxa8 Qxa8 35. R6c4 Bxc4
22. Qxe6+ Bf7 36. Rxc4 b5
23. Qf6 Kf8 37. Rxd4 a3
24. Qh8+ Ke7 38. Rd1 b4
25. Bf6+ Kd7 39. Ra1 Kd6
26. Bxd8 Nc6 40. Kf1 Kxd5
27. Bf6 Qxh8 41. Ke2, Black resigns.
When all the historical dust has settled, Tal may finally be remembered as the
dynamo who re-inspired the chess world. So many chessplayers derived so much
pleasure from playing through his games that much of the chess world was
encouraged to search more deeply and to play more adventurously. The exciting
years of the 1950s and early 1960s when the Benoni, King’s Indian and Sicilian
Defense came of age were the years when the play of Tal and Bobby Fischer became
the images that so many tried to imitate.
Previous Next
Peter Clarke, Mikhail Tal’s Best Games of Chess: 1951 - 1960 (Bell & Sons, 1961), beautifully written,
authoritatively annotated, containing 50 games;
Bernard Cafferty, Tal’s 100 Best Games: 1961 - 1973 (Batsford, 1975);
Hilary Thomas, The Complete Games of Mikhail Tal (Batsford, 1979 and 1980), three volumes covering,
respectively, 1936-59, 1960-66 and 1967-73;
Mikhail Tal, The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal (Cadogan, 1997), an enchanting autobiography in which Tal
invents a journalist and interviews himself.

Login

Petrosian 1963 to 1969 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1929 - d. 1984
Chess News
Tigran Petrosian has been described by
Chess History Raymond Keene as the anti-hero among
» The World Chess world champions. One wit referred to
Championship him as The Last Inaction Hero, an Arnold
and Champions: 1747- Schwarzenegger in reverse. Petrosian
2001 himself once said famously,
"Grandmasters are not gladiators."
A 21-Player Salute
The Caucasian-born Petrosian of
· Philidor
Armenian parentage developed a chess
1747 - 1795
style based on prophylaxis or the
· Deschapelles anticipation of an opponent’s plans. His Tigran Petrosian
19th USSR Championship, 1951
1800 - 1821 goal was to nip the buds of danger, and
· La Bourdonnais Paul Keres once said that Petrosian was
1821 - 1840 a player who spent more time considering his opponent’s possibilities than his own.
With the initiative Petrosian often played like a python, squeezing and squeezing the
· Saint-Amant
victim until he was almost happy to resign. When the chances were balanced,
1840 - 1843
Petrosian was like a mongoose deflecting every thrust, though Larry Evans prefers
· Staunton the image of the Armenian as the ultimate chessic Tar Baby, who would take the best
1843 - 1851 shots of pretty-boy, if that is quite the phrase, universal players such as his title
· Anderssen opponents Mikhail Botvinnik and Boris Spassky and then enmesh them in viscous
1851 - 1858; maneuvers until like Brer Rabbit, they were move-bound.
1862 - 1866
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 Petrosian developed the exchange sacrifice into a much-feared defensive weapon
that destroyed the sweet attacking dreams of many a chess virgin. For example,
· Steinitz
Denmark’s Bent Larsen may already have been toting up a full point in his mind until
1886 - 1894
Petrosian’s 14th move:
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
· Capablanca Larsen-Petrosian ECO: C01

1921 - 1927 Havana Olympiad, 1966
· Alekhine 1. e4 e6 9. Ng3 Nbd7
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946
2. Nf3 d5 10. Nf5 Nf8
3. Nc3 Nf6 11. Nxd6 Qxd6
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
4. exd5 exd5 12. Ne5 N6d7
· Botvinnik
5. d4 c6 13. Bd2 f6
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960; 6. Bd3 Bd6 14. Qh5 Rxe5
1961 - 1963 7. 0-0 0-0 15. dxe5 fxe5
· Smyslov 8. Ne2 Re8 16. Rfe1 e4
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961
Petrosian Larsen failed to adjust to the loss of the initiative by shifting gears with, say, 16. f3
•
1963 to 1969 in the hope of eventually evaluating his small material advantage. White even went
+ Spassky on to lose.
1969 - 1972
Petrosian took to chess relatively late, becoming involved in a chess program at
about age 13. His first trainer introduced the boy to the works of Aron Nimzovich,
"World Champion"
and Petrosian early on adopted a style based on the inviolability of strategic canons.
+ World Title Matches Unlike other great masters, he never had a stormy youth. In 1946 he won the USSR
and Tournaments Junior Championship with the self-explanatory score of 14 - 1. But he progressed
slowly, finishing 16th and 12th-13th in, respectively, the Soviet championships of
1949 and 1950. Not until 1951 did he enter the top circles by tying with Efim Geller
for 2nd-3rd behind Paul Keres in the USSR Championship of that year, ahead of the
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/petrosian.php (1 of 8)17/04/05 13:21:18

likes of Botvinnik, David Bronstein and Vasily Smyslov. This result seeded him into
the 1952 Saltsjoebaden Interzonal where he again finished 2nd-3rd which advanced
him into the celebrated 1953 Neuhausen-Zurich candidates tournament. In a field of
15, he finished a respectable fifth (+6 -4 =8). By the mid-1950s Petrosian was one of
the world’s half-dozen top players.
Petrosian grew ever stronger throughout the 1950s. His results in four successive
Soviet championships, which led up to his victory in the 1962 Curacao candidates
tournament, were the best indicator of this ascent (1958: 2nd, +5 =12; 1959: 1st, +8
=11; 1960: 2nd, +10 -2 =7; 1961: 1st, +9 -1 =9). Although Petrosian’s overall record
in international tournaments was far from shattering (in some 40 strong
international events, he won more second prizes, 15, than firsts, 11), he did do well
in three events in the years before Curacao: Beverwijk 1960 (1st-2nd), Copenhagen
1960 (1st) and Zurich 1961 (2nd). His 3rd-5th at Bled 1961 was also a good result
given the strength of the tournament field.
Because of Petrosian’s tendency to play

draws, most observers have failed to
notice that he remained right near the
top of world chess, either as a title
candidate or as a sitting champion, for
nearly three decades. He was a title
candidate for a record eight times, not
to mention his two title matches in
which he met the winner of the 1964-65
and 1967-68 candidates cycles. In 1955
he finished fourth in the Gothenburg
Interzonal (+5 =15!) and 3rd-7th in the
1956 Amsterdam candidates; in 1958 he
finished 3rd-4th in the Portoroz
Milan Bobotsov, Bulgarian grandmaster vs Petrosian Interzonal and third at the 1959 Bled
Moscow Tournament, 1967 candidates; in 1962 he finished 2nd-3rd
at the Stockholm Interzonal and first at
the 1962 Curacao candidates; in 1971, he was seeded into the candidates matches,
getting past Robert Huebner (+1 -0 =6) and Viktor Korchnoi (+1 -0 =9) before losing
to Robert Fischer (+1 -5 =3); in 1974, he was again seeded into the candidates
matches by virtue of being a finalist in the previous cycle, upsetting Lajos Portisch,
an old nemesis, +3 -2 =8, but then losing to Korchnoi, +1 -3 =1; in 1976, he finished
2nd-4th in the Biel Interzonal and then lost a quarterfinal match the following year
to Korchnoi, +1 -2 =9; and in 1979, he finished 1st-3rd in the Rio de Janeiro
Interzonal, before losing to Korchnoi the following year in the quarterfinals, +0 -2
=7.
Petrosian’s victory at Curacao 1962 was marred by Fischer’s charges of cheating.

Indeed, the historical smoke has cleared, and we know that Geller, Keres and
Petrosian made a draw pact in the belief that Fischer was not yet so superior as to
overcome team play against him. This reckoning proved correct. But Petrosian’s
world title victory over Botvinnik in 1963, +5 -2 =15, was far from fixed. The score
was dead even after 14 games, and Petrosian had the satisfaction of prevailing with
his own weapons. Stated Botvinnik later, “It was really hard to play Tigran. The thing
is that he had a somewhat different understanding of positional play. He went deeper
into it than usual, and myself, a universal player, did not completely understand
Tigran’s way and depth of judgement, although I was judging all positions well.”
A sample of how Petrosian squeezed a largely in-form Botvinnik:
Petrosian - Botvinnik ECO: D94

1. c4 g6 10. Kxd1 Bxe6

2. d4 Nf6 11. Bxe6 fxe6
3. Nc3 d5 12. Ke2 Nc6
4. Nf3 Bg7 13. Rd1 Rad8
5. e3 0-0 14. Rxd8 Rxd8
6. Be2 dxc4 15. Ng5 Re8
7. Bxc4 c5 16. Nge4 Nxe4
8. d5 e6 17. Nxe4 b6
9. dxe6 Qxd1+

18. Rb1 Nb4 34. Ne4 Rxh2

19. Bd2 Nd5 35. Kd4 Kd7
20. a4 Rc8 36. g3 Bb4
21. b3 Bf8 37. Ke5 Rh5+
22. Rc1 Be7 38. Kf6 Be7+
23. b4 c4 39. Kg7 e5
24. b5 Kf7 40. Rc6 Rh1
25. Bc3 Ba3 41. Kf7 Ra1
26. Rc2 Nxc3+ 42. Re6 Bd8
27. Rxc3 Bb4 43. Rd6+ Kc8
28. Rc2 Ke7 44. Ke8 Bc7
29. Nd2 c3 45. Rc6 Rd1
30. Ne4 Ba5 46. Ng5 Rd8+
31. Kd3 Rd8+ 47. Kf7 Rd7+
32. Kc4 Rd1 48. Kg8, Black resigns.
33. Nxc3 Rh1
A game for thin-lipped connoisseurs of old and dry, if also very fine, wine.
As world champion, Petrosian seemed an unhappy man. His ambition, so it has often
been said, was to fulfill his wife’s ambitions. He had done so. Yet he enjoyed
relatively little respect. The chess public and a number of grandmasters berated his
style, though grudgingly conceding his strength. In seven important tournaments
during his incumbency, he never took clear first prize, dividing 1st-2nd with Keres at
Los Angeles 1963 and Buenos Aires 1964. In other events he was an also-ran,
plagued by draws and lethargy.
In 1966 Petrosian met popular

challenger Boris Spassky, who entered
the match a big favorite. Not only had
Spassky convincingly defeated Keres,
Geller and Mikhail Tal in candidates
matches, he had also played model
chess in a universal style. Spassky
seemed equally at home in the wilds of
the King’s Gambit and other open games
as in the thickets of the King’s Indian
and assorted closed positions. At a
strictly personal level, if not to the
manor born, Spassky was certainly to

the gracious manner born. In the match

Spassky achieved numerous promising
positions only to run into a record
number of exchange sacrifices and other
sophisticated holding maneuvers. He
thrashed about and found himself two
points down after 10 games. He evened
the score after game 19, but Petrosian
won the 20th and 22nd games to clinch
the title defense, +4 -3 =17. Petrosian’s
winning title defense was the first since
Alexander Alekhine defeated Efim
Bogolyubov in 1934. Except for his
meaningless win in game 23 after Spassky vs Petrosian
Petrosian had already retained his Second World Championship, 1969
crown, Spassky did not prevail in a
single game conducted in his accustomed flowing style. His wins in games 13 and 19
were grim, lengthy affairs played in the style of his opponent!
A sample of Petrosian’s coils and toils:
Spassky - Petrosian ECO: D03

1. d4 Nf6 13. b4 g5
2. Nf3 e6 14. Bg3 h5
3. Bg5 d5 15. h4 gxh4
4. Nbd2 Be7 16. Bf4 0-0-0
5. e3 Nbd7 17. a4 c4
6. Bd3 c5 18. Be2 a6
7. c3 b6 19. Kh1 Rdg8
8. 0-0 Bb7 20. Rg1 Rg4
9. Ne5 Nxe5 21. Qd2 Rhg8
10. dxe5 Nd7 22. a5 b5
11. Bf4 Qc7 23. Rad1 Bf8
12. Nf3 h6 24. Nh2 ...

24. … Nxe5 34. f3 Bc8

25. Nxg4 hxg4 35. Qb1 g3
26. e4 Bd6 36. Re1 h3
27. Qe3 Nd7 37. Bf1 Rh8
28. Bxd6 Qxd6 38. gxh3 Bxh3
29. Rd4 e5 39. Kg1 Bxf1
30. Rd2 f5 40. Kxf1 e4
31. exd5 f4 41. Qd1 Ng4
32. Qe4 Nf6 42. fxg4 f3
33. Qf5+ Kb8 43. Rg2 fxg2+, White
resigns.
When Petrosian and Spassky met again in 1969, the latter justified his status as pre-
match favorite by +6 -4 =13. But Spassky’s victory was far from easy with the match
being tied after 16 games. When Petrosian won a positionally crunching game 20 to
pull within a point of Spassky, he appeared about to salvage his title with a drawn
match. But the second time around, he could not contain Spassky’s attacking game
on several occasions. His win in game 11 featured yet another of his exchange
sacrifices, and some observers believe that Petrosian’s punishment of Spassky’s
smallest miscues of aggression was the genesis of the latter’s later caution.
More of Petrosian’s coils and toils:
Spassky - Petrosian ECO: E12

1. d4 Nf6 16. Qc2 Rfc8

2. c4 e6 17. Bb2 c6
3. Nf3 b6 18. bxc6 Bxc6
4. a3 Bb7 19. Qb3 Qd7
5. Nc3 d5 20. Ra1 b5
6. e3 Nbd7 21. a5 Bb7
7. cxd5 exd5 22. Ne5 Qd8
8. Be2 Bd6 23. Rfd1 Qh4
9. b4 0-0 24. g3 Qe7
10. 0-0 a6 25. f3 Ng5
11. Qb3 Qe7 26. h4 Ne6
12. Rb1 Ne4 27. f4 f6
13. a4 Ndf6 28. Nf3 Nd8
14. b5 Nxc3 29. Kf2 Nf7
15. Qxc3 Ne4 30. Nd2 ...

30. … Rc4 44. Rg1 Qg4

31. Qd3 Re8 45. Kg2 Qf3+
32. Bf3 Bb4 46. Kh2 Qxe3
33. Ba3 Bxa3 47. f5 Qc5
34. Rxa3 Nd6 48. Rf1 b4
35. Re1 f5 49. f6 b3
36. Raa1 Ne4+ 50. Rcf2 c2
37. Bxe4 fxe4 51. Qc1 e3
38. Qb1 Qd7 52. f7+ Kf8
39. Ra2 Rec8 53. Rf5 b2
40. Nxc4 dxc4 54. Qxb2 c1=Q
41. d5 Bxd5 55. Qxg7+
42. Rd1 c3 56. Rg5+ and White resigns.
43. Rc2 Qh3
In his post-title years, Petrosian remained a championship candidate for another

decade. Interestingly, his results in international tournaments improved as he
opened up his style just a bit. In 23 tournaments from 1969 to 1980, he won or
shared eight first and nine second prizes, most notably first equal at San Antonio
1972, Amsterdam 1973, Las Palmas 1973 and 1978, Rio de Janeiro 1979 (an
interzonal), Yerevan 1980 and outright firsts at Tallinn 1979 and Bar 1980. His
second prize at Milan 1975, sharing honors with Anatoly Karpov and Ljubomir
Ljubojevic just behind Portisch, was also noteworthy. As already noted, he shared
second prize at the 1976 Biel Interzonal. In 1981 he finished second at Tilburg, a
category 15 event.
Petrosian once described his past games as “old friends,” with whom he enjoyed
becoming reacquainted now and then. Here is a true Petrosian game from his classic
period as a Python, which must have been a dear old friend, a game that reminds one
of Fischer’s observation that Petrosian could beat you with a maneuver before you
knew what was happening:
Petrosian-Wolfgang Unzicker ECO: D30

Hamburg, 1960

1. d4 Nf6 14. Nc1 a5

2. Nf3 e6 15. Nb3 Ba6
3. Bg5 d5 16. Bxa6 Rxa6
4. c4 c6 17. Qd3 Ra7
5. Qc2 Be7 18. Rfc1 Nd6
6. e3 0-0 19. Bxd6 Bxd6
7. Nc3 h6 20. Rc6 Nb8
8. Bf4 Nbd7 21. Rc2 Nd7
9. cxd5 cxd5 22. Rac1 Nb6
10. Bd3 a6 23. Qb5 Nc4
11. 0-0 b5 24. Nfd2 Nxd2
12. a4 b4 25. Rxd2 Qa8
13. Na2 Ne8 26. Rdc2 Rd8
27. Rc6 g6 42. Qxg4 Qe7

28. g3 Kg7 43. h5 Qf6
29. Kf1 Kg8 44. Ka2 Kg7
30. h4 h5 45. hxg6 Qxg6
31. R1c2 Kh7 46. Qh4 Be7
32. Ke1 Kg8 47. Qf2 Kf8
33. Kd1 Kh7 48. Nd2 Rb7
34. Kc1 Kg8 49. Nb3 Ra7
35. Kb1 Kh7 50. Qh2 Bf6
36. Qe2 Qb7 51. Rc8 Rad7
37. Rc1 Kg7 52. Nc5 b3+
38. Qb5 Qa8 53. Kxb3 Rd6.
39. f4 Kh7 54. f5 Rb6+
40. Qe2 Qb7 55. Ka2, Black resigns.
41. g4 hxg4
Shortly after Petrosian’s death in 1984, Arthur Bisguier wrote a moving tribute to the
great Armenian. Mention was made of Petrosian’s enormous talent, which Larsen has
also extolled. But Bisguier’s real theme was the obloquy his subject had to endure
and the courage he had to summon in the service of his unique chess vision of hyper-
prophylaxis. Bisguier told of how in one of their games, Petrosian made a move
foreign to his safe style and could only make a draw. Bisguier asked his opponent

about the uncharacteristic aggression, and Petrosian rolled his eyes in the direction
of some sneering colleagues.
If one considers heroism as something more than courageous grand theatrics,

perhaps Petrosian was not the anti-hero that he seemed to be. “Heroism, the
Caucasian mountaineers say,” wrote George Kennan, Sr. when quoting Petrosian’s
countrymen, “is endurance for one moment more.”
Previous Next
Eduard Shekhtman, The Games of Tigran Petrosian (Pergamon, 1991), nearly the complete Petrosian oeuvre
in two volumes;
Peter Clarke, Petrosian’s Best Games, 1946 - 1963 (G. Bell & Sons, 1963), a well-written work with a
carefully culled selection of Petrosian’s games;
Eduard Wildhagen, T. Petrosjan 350 Partien in the Weltgeschichte des Schachs series (Verlag Dr. E.
Wildhagen, 1963);
Viktor Vasiliev, Tigran Petrosian: His Life and Games (Batsford, 1974), containing 50 games and a fairly
detailed biography.

Login

Spassky 1969 - 1972 - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Previous Next
Events
by Larry Parr
Promotions
Site Pros
b. 1937 -
Top Players World champion: 1969 - 1972
Chess News
“The Noblest Russian of them all” is the in-
Chess History phrase these days for describing Boris Spassky.
» The World Chess He was smart and strong enough to become
Championship world chess champion, making him a good
and Champions: 1747- winner who merited respect. And he was still
2001 smarter and stronger to lose gracefully, making
him an even better loser, who retains our
respect.
A 21-Player Salute
· Philidor
When Spassky joined some 1,500 spectators in
1747 - 1795
applauding Bobby Fischer’s Mozartian victory
· Deschapelles over him in game six of their 1972 world
1800 - 1821 championship match in Reykjavik, Iceland, the
· La Bourdonnais only person surprised by this unaffected gesture
1821 - 1840 was the man whom he was applauding, Fischer
himself, who exclaimed wonderingly, “Did you
· Saint-Amant
see that? That was class.”
1840 - 1843
· Staunton
“That” was also brilliant - a move deeper than Boris Spassky
1843 - 1851
any ever made by Fischer. “Deeper,” “The Noblest Russian of them all”
· Anderssen paradoxically, because there was no calculation
1851 - 1858; behind the move. “Deeper,” personally, because the moving of Spassky’s hands in
1862 - 1866 applause was not a maneuver. He was the nice guy who finished first by coming
· Morphy 1858 - 1862 second in the most celebrated chess competition in the 1,500-year history of the
royal game.
· Steinitz
1886 - 1894
Boris Spassky was born in Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) in 1937, the second of
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
three children. He and his family were among the lucky evacuees before the Nazis
· Capablanca encircled St. Petersburg (Viktor Korchnoi would bury his parents there), spending
1921 - 1927 World War II in the Kirov region of the Urals where he learned the moves of chess at
· Alekhine
age five. Showing talent straight off, he entered the chess section of the Leningrad
1927 - 1935; Palace of Young Pioneers in the autumn of 1946, where he worked five hours a day
1937 - 1946 on the game with the trainer, Vladimir Zak.
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
On more than one occasion, Spassky has said that
· Botvinnik youth programs were the single redeeming feature
1948 - 1957;
of the Soviet state. In the Young Pioneers he found
1958 - 1960;
a warm home away from a cold hovel where his
1961 - 1963
divorced mother struggled to support her family
· Smyslov amid conditions of general starvation. This child
1957 - 1958 prodigy - along with Garry Kasparov and Gata
· Tal 1960 - 1961 Kamsky, one of only three to emerge from the
famed Soviet chess machine - became a member of
· Petrosian
what is in the West a subculture and what was in
1963 to 1969
the Soviet Union the ueber culture.
• Spassky
1969 - 1972
In 1948 Spassky finished fifth in the Leningrad
· A Handy Trainer
junior championship, which made him a first-
· I, Chess Claudius category player, and in 1951 he finished second in
· Peace vs Pieces the Russian junior championship, which made him
a candidate master. Then, in 1952 at the age of 15,
· The Concept of the he came second in the Leningrad Championship,
"World Champion" catching the eye of an impressed Mikhail
Botvinnik, who praised highly both his practical
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/spassky.php (1 of 7)17/04/05 13:21:52

+ World Title Matches result and the quality of his games. Botvinnik
and Tournaments probably played a role in Spassky, a mere 16-year-
old who had yet to compete in even a semi-finals
of a Soviet championship, being sent to play in the
1953 Bucharest international, where he tallied 12 -
7. He finished tied for 4th - 6th behind Alexander
Tolush with 14 points, Tigran Petrosian at 13 and
Vasily Smyslov with 12 ½. In addition to getting
his international master title with this result, he
also hit a home run in his first time at bat by
winning this watershed game in the first round of
his first international tournament:
Boris Spassky - Vasily Smyslov ECO: E

Bucharest, 1953
1. d4 Nf6 9. Bb5 0-0

2. c4 e6 10. Ne2 Ne5
3. Nc3 Bb4 11.0-0 Ng6
4. Bg5 ... 12. Bg3 Nh5
13. Bd3 Nxg3
From the beginning of his
14. Nxg3 Ne5
career in international
Spassky in his youth. chess, Spassky loved this 15. Be2 Bxc3
long move by the Queen’s 16. bxc3 Qh4
Bishop - what one German 17. f4 Ng4
writer called his 18. Bxg4 Bxg4
“Lieblingsvariante” in the
19. Qa4 Bc8
Nimzo-Indian. He later
played this aggressive sally 20. e4 Qg4
with such success in his 21. Qc2 h5
matches and in several 22. Rf2 b5
tournament games that it is 23. e5 h4
now called the Spassky
24. Nf1 Bf5
Variation.
25. Qd2 dxe5
4. … h6 26. fxe5 Bg6
5. Bh4 c5 27. Re1 h3
6. d5 exd5 28. d6 Be4
7. cxd5 d6 29. Ne3 Qe6
8. e3 Nbd7 30. Rf4 Bxg2

31. Nf5 Rfe8 33. Nxg7! Rxd6

Played in lieu of 33. … Kxg7
34. Rg3+ Kf8
35. Rxf7+!
32. Re3 Rad8? 34. Nxe6, Black resigns A
great way to begin a chess
career!
One of the chess books that most wants writing is a work about the influence of
teachers and seconds on great players. Siegbert Tarrasch learned his chess lessons
from the writings and games of Wilhelm Steinitz, while Mikhail Tchigorin looked to
the romantics for inspiration. Both Akiba Rubinstein and Alexander Alekhine were
classical players in the Tarrasch mold. Others such as Emanuel Lasker, Jose
Capablanca and Bobby Fischer were sui generis, cut from cloth that they themselves
wove.
Among the great post-WWII Soviet

grandmasters, Tigran Petrosian came
under the influence of Archil Ebralidze,
for whom the Father, Son and Holy
Ghost of chess were Aron Nimzovich,
Capablanca and the Caro-Kann Defense.
Ebralidze soon had Petrosian reading
Nimzovich’s Chess Praxis, and a
celebrated genius of strategic chess was
born. Spassky’s first trainer, Vladimir
Zak, yielded in 1952 to chess caveman
Alexander Tolush, who had once
defeated Botvinnik by venturing the
Spassky vs Petrosian
Center Game. He showed Spassky that World Championship Match, 1969
chess was not merely an exercise in
strategy but was also filled with, in Spassky’s words, “attack, sacrifice, creative
ideas.”
During the 1950s and early 1960s, Spassky became a knight of the King’s Gambit,
playing numerous remarkable games, which earned what one writer described as
“ecstatic” praise from Bobby Fischer. Here, for example, is Spassky’s “Bonded win”
over David Bronstein, which is so named because a Russian master spy was shown
making the move, 15. Nd6!!?, in the film, From Russia with Love:
Boris Spassky - David Bronstein ECO: C36

Leningrad, 1960
1. e4 e5 8. 0-0 h6
2. f4 exf4 9. Ne4 Nxd5
3. Nf3 d5 10. c4 Ne3
4. exd5 Bd6 11. Bxe3 fxe3
5. Nc3 Ne7 12. c5 Be7
6. d4 0-0 13. Bc2! Re8
7. Bd3 Nd7 14. Qd3 e2

15. Nd6!!? Bronstein overlooks what

follows. He had to try 15. …
Spassky leaves a Rook en Bxd6, which leads to an
prise with check while also unclear position after 16.
threatening checkmate and 16. Qh7+ Kf8
a Knight sacrifice on f7. But
17. cxd6 exf1=Q+
how good is the move,
really? Ilya Kan once 18. Rxf1 cxd6
remarked that a Rubinstein 19. Qh8+ Ke7
or a Capablanca would have 20. Re1+ Ne5
continued with 15. Rf2, 21. Qxg7 Rg8
securing a positional
22. Qxh6 Qb6
advantage.)
23. Kh1 Be6
15. … Nf8? 24. dxe5 d5
16. Nxf7!! exf1=Q+ 20. N3e5 Qe7

17. Rxf1 Bf5 21. Bb3 Bxe5
18. Qxf5 Qd7 22. Nxe5+ Kh7
19. Qf4 Bf6 23. Qe4+, Black resigns
Although Spassky respected Tolush’s fighting profundity, he needed more than a

trainer. Given his inconsistent results in the late 1950s and early 1960s, he needed a
new lease on chess life. And a friend. Perhaps, too, a surrogate father. “I had no one
to turn to at this time,” he later said, “except my mother.”
And so, Spassky turned to Igor Bondarevsky, who became his trainer in 1961.
Bondarevsky, who won the 1940 Soviet Championship, broadened Spassky’s style,
disciplined his play and provided emotional support. He was the catalyst that ignited
Spassky’s spectacular drive toward the world championship. About which, more
anon.
Spassky’s chess story followed an interesting, if typical script. Having been noticed
by Botvinnik and having then done well at Bucharest 1953, the 16-year-old comer
appeared poised to sweep all before him. He tied for 3rd - 6th in the 1955 Soviet
Championship, equalling the scores of Botvinnik and Petrosian and, in the process,
qualifying for the Gothenburg interzonal. He then won the 1955 World Junior
Championship. At Gothenburg 1955, he tied for 7th - 9th (+7 -5 =8) which was just
good enough to scrape into the Amsterdam candidates tournament of 1956. Only 18
years old, Spassky was a grandmaster and a candidate for the world chess
championship.

At Amsterdam, Spassky did very well, though no better than that, by scoring +3 -2
=13 and tying for 3rd - 7th with Efim Geller, Laszlo Szabo, Bronstein and Petrosian.
He finished two points behind the winner Smyslov, but only a half-point below Paul
Keres in second place. Surely, here was a 19-year-old with a good chance to become
the youngest-ever world champion in the next title cycle - a possibility that seemed
far from farfetched after he tied for 1st - 3rd in the 1956 Soviet Championship. But
then came ….
Nothing. Nine years — 1956 to 1965 - would separate Spassky’s first and second
appearances in candidates competitions. What went wrong?
What went wrong is what went right. Chess is arguably the ultimate sport or art of
the double-edged sword. Spassky’s strengths were his weaknesses. He played
brilliantly against the best but could lose to the less than best. His results were
littered with fine play against the top half of tournament tables and too many defeats
against the bottom half. Some of his very best games - including the From Russia
with Love bite of Bronstein — were played in tournaments in which his final score
was modest.
Two tournaments, the Soviet

championships of 1958 in Riga and 1961
in Moscow, were mini-Waterloos for
Spassky. Both events were interzonal
qualifiers for, respectively, Portoroz
1958 and Stockholm 1962; and both
times Spassky failed to make the cut.
Like Napoleon at Waterloo and in
Russia, Spassky began his two major
career disasters well. In Riga he led the
field after 13 rounds and then lost to a
lesser light. He was still set to make the
trip to Portoroz, building up a winning
position against Tal, but he then missed
a win and later tossed away a draw. In
Moscow the collapse was Napoleonic in
scope, except that it was Spassky who
scorched his own earth. Leading after
eight rounds and virtually assured of a
qualifying position after 17 rounds,
Spassky tore up his ticket to Stockholm
by losing his final two games.
Among horse handicappers, Spassky

would have been touted as a sprinter
rather than a stayer - a fast starter and
a slow finisher. But that weakness was
obvious to everyone. The real issue was
Spassky, Tal and Petrosian
25th Soviet Championship, Riga, 1958 why there were mixed results from one
tournament to another. Why so many
good starts, so many good games against the greats, and why so many poor ends, so
many dreary losses against the less than great? After all, sandwiched between his
failures in the Soviet championships of 1958 and 1961 were radiant successes.
Spassky eviscerated his opponents at the Riga international of 1959, scoring 11 ½ -
1 ½, finishing 2 ½ points in front of Tal. At Mar del Plata 1960, he and Bobby Fischer
were a two-player stampede, trampling the field into the Argentine pampas, each
scoring 13 ½ - 1 ½. Another great Spassky result during this period was a tie for first
with Smyslov and Bronstein at Moscow 1959, a super-GM tournament.
Clearly, Spassky had world-title talent. Clearly, too, his chess style, though unusually
active, was universal. Unlike Tal, Spassky seldom imposed his personality on
positions. When he wished to play positionally, he adopted openings congenial with
this desire. When he thought the moment ripe for blazing tactics, he let loose with
the King’s Gambit. Bobby Fischer once placed the early Spassky among the 10
greatest masters in chess history, writing that he “sacrifices with complete abandon”
and noting that when a pawn down, he conducted many attacks with the serenity of
someone a pawn up. In truth, Spassky rarely played speculative sacrifices. Bent
Larsen said that the difference between the sacrificial particularist Tal and the
sacrificial universalist Spassky was that when the former pitched a piece, one might
usefully fight on, whereas when the latter donated material, one might as well begin
preparing for the next round.

Here are two more early Spassky games - the first an example of the young Russian
sacrificing with something approaching “complete abandon” and the second a sample
of sacrificing with complete calculation:
Boris Spassky - Vladas Mikenas ECO: D08

Riga, 1959
1. d4 d5 6. f5! Nxe5
2. c4 e5 7. Nf3 Bb4+
3. dxe5 d4 8. Nbd2 Nc6
4. e4 Nc6 9. Bd3 g4
5. f4 g5
Chess has its nits and wits.

One writer called this line
the Fischer Defense to the
Albin-King’s Gambit.
10. 0-0!!? 12. e5! Nxe5

13. Re1 f6
Paul Keres wrote wryly that
Spassky was playing the 14. c5 Be7
Muzio Gambit, an opening 15. Nxe5 fxe5
that the latter frequently 16. Rxe5 Nf6
essays in simultaneous and 17. Bg5 0-0
clocked exhibitions.
18. Qb3+ Kh8
10. … gxf3 19. Rae1 Bxc5
11. Nxf3 Bd6!? 20. Rxc5 Qd6
21. Rce5 Ng4
Another test of the sacrifice
22. Bf4 Bd7
would be 11. … f6.
12. a3 Bd6 23. Bg3 Bc6?
13. b4. 24. R5e4, Black resigns
Boris Spassky - Lothar Schmid ECO: A43

Varna Olympiad, 1962

1. d4 c5 13. e5 dxe5
2. d5 d6 14. Bxe5 b4
3. e4 g6 15. Bxf6 Bxf6
4. Nf3 Bg7 16. Ne4! Bg7
5. Be2 Nf6 17. Nxc5 Bxb2
6. Nc3 Na6 18. Rad1 Bf5?!
7. 0-0 Nc7
The correct move is:
8. Re1 0-0
18. … Bg7.
9. a4 a6
10. Bg5 h6 19. Qxh6 Bg7
11. Bf4 Bd7 20. Qh4 Qd6
12. Qd2 b5 21. Ng5 Rfe8
22. Bd3!! Qxc5 24. Be6!, Black resigns

23. Bxf5 Nxd5
Genius + Universal Style = Interzonal Qualification. But this equation did not balance
for Spassky. To be sure, Spassky had personal difficulties - with his trainer Tolush
and with his first wife. “We were like bishops of opposite color,” he said after they
were divorced in 1961. But the core problem was why Spassky fell off the pace
during key chess competitions. He once spoke of craving creativity in his chess,
which did not mix well with a work regime that never exceeded five to six hours a
day - though it did fit well with his frank self-analysis as a dreamy guy without gobs
of the get-go. His favorite description of himself is that of a lazy Russian bear with
the large, strong hands of a torpid peasant. The bit about the hands is ironic because
the verdict on Spassky by 1961 was that he needed hand-holding by another trainer
and some polishing of his style so as to use his limited energy more efficiently.
Continue...

Login

Spassky - A Handy Trainer - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Previous Next
by Larry Parr Page Two
b. 1937 -
World champion: 1969 - 1972
Grandmaster Bondarevsky, as already mentioned, did the hand-holding and helped

with the buffing. His account of Spassky’s revival in B. Spassky Storms Olympus (B.
Spasskij shturmuet Olimp: Kaluga, 1966) stressed the effort to combine Spassky’s
genial tactical sharpness with unremitting positional discipline. There followed five
excellent results that vaulted him into the candidates matches. In late 1961, he won
the Soviet Championship for the first time by gutsily overcoming a late-round loss to
Leonid Shamkovich, demonstrating a new toughness in adversity. Then, in the Soviet
Championship played in Leningrad in late 1963, which was a qualifier for an elite
zonal tournament, Spassky had a bump-free ride, +5 =14, to tie for 1st - 3rd.
To reach the candidates matches, Spassky had to clear two remaining high hurdles,
which he did rather paradoxically by playing sound, low-jump chess. He won the
fearsome double round robin 1964 Moscow zonal, +4 -2 =6, ahead of Leonid Stein,
Bronstein, Korchnoi, Geller and the like. Then at Amsterdam 1964, a 23-round
interzonal, he tied for 1st- 4th, scoring +13 -2 =8. Following this qualification for the
first-ever cycle of candidates matches, he turned in an undefeated 13 - 4 at Belgrade
1964 to finish 1 ½ points clear of a field that included Korchnoi, Larsen et al.
Outstanding, occasionally undefeated, tournament triumphs had for the first time
become a norm for Spassky.
On the eve of the 1965 candidates matches, Spassky was feared for his fearlessness
and respected for a new-found solidity. His opening preparation was no longer an
object of attention because of occasional gambit speculations but because of deep
research in mainstream variations. At the chess board he replaced Keres as Caissa’s
consummate poker-face, typically sitting sideways at the table with legs crossed,
cigarette in right hand, head held back and eyebrows arched. He gave an impression
of slightly bored detachment.
The luck of the draw went against Spassky for the 1965 candidates matches. He
would have no easy opponents, instead having to overcome the cream of the Soviet
grandmasteriat.
Spassky’s first opponent was Paul Keres, and the know-it-all scribblers were right for
once when they wrote that the winner of this quarterfinal would likely go all the
way. Keres was in fine form, winning the most brilliant game of a match that was not
decided until the 10th and final game. Yet Spassky prevailed, +4 -2 =4, thanks to
extremely exact play in several Ruys and a refurbishing job for White in the
Leningrad or, as it later became known, the Spassky Variation of the Nimzo-Indian.
His second opponent was Geller, who enjoyed a plus score against Spassky before
their match. Once again, Spassky’s opponent was in form. The difference - +3 -0 =5
in Spassky’s favor - proved to be Geller’s inability to hold as Black in the Ruy Lopez
and Spassky’s use of a smooth-flowing Tarrasch Defense in the Queen’s Gambit to
neutralize the enemy’s serve with White. Spassky’s third opponent was Tal, who like
Keres, won the most brilliant game of the match when he took the lead in game two.
This finals match is remembered for Spassky popularizing the Marshall Variation of
the Ruy by drawing three times with the Black pieces and for the happenstance that
Black won four of the five decisive games. After eight games the battle was tied, +1 -
1 =6, whereupon Spassky won the last three games. Crunch time came in game nine,
when Tal’s nerve broke. Seven years earlier at the key moment in the 1958 Soviet
Championship and zonal, Spassky had been the one to collapse against Tal. The
difference was Spassky’s superior physical and emotional conditioning, not to
mention his development of a nearly universal style. He seemed to do everything
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/spassky2.php (1 of 8)17/04/05 13:22:29

well, combining sober positional judgment with fearlessness in attack.
In three candidates matches, Spassky lost only once with Black, while losing twice as
White because of overly frisky play. In most games as the second player, he held
quite easily, demonstrating an impressive solidity and some path-breaking opening
preparation. Overall, his scores with Black and White were identical on the plus side.
As White he scored +6 -2 =6, and as Black he tallied +5 -1 =9. His play seemed to be
in perfect balance, and he became a hot favorite to defeat Petrosian in their
upcoming title match in 1966.
Spassky, the handsomest hunk of chess humanity since Jose Capablanca, looked like
a world champion. Still better, against Keres, Geller and Tal, he appeared to play like
one. The single cavil was that twice or thrice over three matches, this irresistible
force played a bit - well - playfully and fell behind at the beginning of his matches
with Keres and Tal, though he proved able to recoup against his less patient
opponents. Spassky’s bad luck or, more accurately, ill fate was having to face
Petrosian. For in the entire chess universe there is nothing more patient than an
immovable object.
Petrosian - a short, swarthy Armenian with a Nixonesque five o’clock shadow - had
one of the lowest centers of chess gravity ever known. His match strategy was to
squat on the world title much as an amateur wrestler spreads his arms and legs on a
mat and challenges his opponent to dislodge him. After six draws opening the match,
Spassky lost patience and undertook some pawn thrusts in game seven that would
not have passed the Capablanca Positional Purity Test. He lost. In game 10 he rushed
in once again and had the carpet yanked from beneath him.
Two points down at the end of 10 games, Spassky won games 13 and 19 to equalize.
But photographs taken following game 19 showed Spassky with a blue chin line
devoid of flesh, looking unshaven and more unkempt than his famously inelegant
opponent. The effort to catch up had clearly been immense. Just as Botvinnik had
flailed at Petrosian in 1963 and then run out of wind, so Spassky did the same in
1966. Petrosian suddenly rebounded by winning games 20 and 22 to retain his title
by reaching 12 points in the 24-game match. Spassky won game 23 to narrow the
final losing margin, +3 -4 =17.
When Botvinnik analyzed his

match loss to Petrosian, he
described how the Armenian
conserved his strength like a
mongoose, doing just enough
along the way to stay even.
Keres said that Petrosian spent
more time considering an
opponent’s moves than his own,
thereby further honing an
already uncanny sense of
danger. The message to Spassky
was that if he wished to budge
Spassky vs Botvinnik
Petrosian in a second match, he Annual Soviet Team Championships, 1966
would have to create uncertainty
without permitting the Armenian Iron Pants any winning chances. As a practical
matter, Spassky would have to win as Black, which he had been unable to do in the
24 games of their first match.
Between 1966 and 1969, Spassky grew stronger. Not only did he finish an
undefeated first, +5 =13, at Santa Monica 1966, a half-point ahead of Bobby Fischer,
but he also turned in an undefeated first (+7 =8) at Beverwijk 1967 and an
undefeated 1st-2nd (+5 =10) at Sochi the same year. Spassky had ascended to a
level of positional and tactical control reached by such other great masters as
Alekhine and Capablanca, Petrosian and Fischer - a career phase when a rare defeat
is nearly always the result of overreaching rather than being outplayed. The
following win against Fischer was conducted with the supreme confidence of a great
master at or near his peak - a cutting-edge opening, a flawless middlegame and an
ending smoother than a summer’s sea, though conducted in the face of stormy
opposition:
Boris Spassky - Bobby Fischer ECO: D87

Santa Monica, 1966

1. d4 Nf6 13. f4 Na5

2. c4 g6 14. Bd3 f5
3. Nc3 d5 15. Rd1 b6
4. cxd5 Nxd5 16. Qf2 cxd4
5. e4 Nxc3 17. Bxd4 Bxd4?
6. bxc3 Bg7 Possibly the losing move.
The position appears equal
7. Bc4 c5
after:
8. Ne2 Nc6
9. Be3 0-0 17. … Bb7.
10. 0-0 Qc7 18. cxd4 Bb7
11. Rc1 Rd8 19. Ng3 Qf7
12. Qe1 e6
20. d5! fxe4 36. Ke2 Ne5

21. dxe6 Qxe6 37. Ke3 Kf6
22. f5! Qf7 38. Kf4 Nf7
23. Bxe4 Rxd1 39. Ke3 g5
24. Rxd1 Rf8 Played at the cost of giving
25. Bb1 Qf6 White a passed h-pawn.
26. Qc2! Kh8 40. h5 Nh6
27. fxg6 hxg6 41. Kd3 Ke6
28. Qd2! Kg7 42. Ba8 Kd6
29. Rf1 Qe7 43. Kc4 g4
30. Qd4+ Rf6 44. a4 Ng8
31. Ne4 Bxe4 45. a5 Nh6
32. Bxe4 Qc5 46. Be4 g3
33. Qxc5 Rxf1+ 47. Kb5 Ng8
34. Kxf1 bxc5 48. Bb1 Nh6
49. Ka6 Kc6
35. h4!
By fixing Black’s g-pawn and 50. Ba2, Black resigns
making it a target, White
achieves a winning endgame.
35. … Nc4

Welcome Against Alexey Suetin, the future world champion played the kind of sacrificial attack
that only perfect foresight permits:
Membership
Boris Spassky - Alexey Suetin
Events ECO: B48
Moscow, 1967
Promotions
1. e4 c5 10. 0-0 Bxc3
Site Pros 2. Nf3 Nc6 11. bxc3 d6
3. Nc3 e6 12. Rf3 e5
Top Players
4. d4 cxd4 13. f5 d5
Chess News 5. Nxd4 Qc7 14. Rg3! Kh8
Chess History 6. Be3 a6 15. exd5 Ne7!
» The World Chess
7. Nb3 Nf6 16. Bc5 Nfxd5
Championship 8. f4 Bb4?! 17. Qg4 Rg8
and Champions: 1747- 18. Rh3 Nf6
2001 This Bishop belongs on the
Kingside for defense. A 19. Qg5 Ned5
» The Kings of Chess: tougher-minded idea is 8. … 20. Rf1 b6
A 21-Player Salute d6.
· Philidor 9. Bd3 0-0
1747 - 1795 An interesting alternative to
· Deschapelles this committal move is 9. …
1800 - 1821 Na5.
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840
· Saint-Amant
1840 - 1843
· Staunton
1843 - 1851
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
· Morphy
1858 - 1862
· Steinitz
1886 - 1894
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
· Capablanca
1921 - 1927
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961 21. Be4!! Bb7 42. Re1 Rc8

· Petrosian 22. Bxd5 Bxd5 43. b4 a5
1963 to 1969 23. Be7!! Qc6 44. Rxe2 axb4
» Spassky 24. Rh6! Ne4 45. Rexe6+ fxe6
1969 - 1972 25. Rxc6 Nxg5 46. Be5!
26. Rd6 Bxb3
• A Handy Trainer White overcomes the final
27. axb3 Ne4
· I, Chess Claudius obstacle beautifully. The
Black has survived the worst emerging Rook-and-pawn
· Peace vs Pieces
threats, and White has still a ending will be easily won.
· Philidor
battle to win.
vs Stamma 46. … h5
London, 1747
28. Rxb6 Nxc3 47. Rxe6+ Kf7
· La Bourdonnais
29. f6 Rge8 48. Rb6 hxg4
vs McDonnell
London, 1834 30. fxg7+ Kxg7 49. hxg4 Ke7
31. Rb7 Ne2+ 50. Bxh8 Rxh8

· Saint-Amant 32. Kh1 Nf4 51. Rxb4 Ke6

vs Staunton
33. g3 Ng6 52. Rc4 Kd5
London, 1843
34. Bd6 Nh8 53. Rc1 Rg8
· Staunton vs Saint-
35. c4 Kg6 54. Kg3 Kc6
Amant Paris, 1843
36. g4 Re6 55. Kf4 Rf8+
· Staunton
vs Horwitz
37. c5 Kg5 56. Ke5 Rg8
London, 1846 38. h3 e4 57. Kf5 Rf8+
· London 1851 39. Kg2 e3 58. Ke6 Rg8
40. Bf4+ Kg6 59. Rg1, Black resigns
· Morphy
vs Anderssen 41. Rb6! e2
Paris, 1858
· London 1862
· Steinitz
vs Anderssen
In the candidates matches of 1968, Spassky was in even more devastating form than
London, 1866
in 1965. His victories over Geller (+3 =5), Larsen (+4 -1 =3) and Korchnoi in the
· Steinitz finals (+4 -1 =5) were still more lopsided that the one-sided scores suggest. Spassky
vs Zukertort jumped out to a three-zip lead against Larsen, drew game four and gave the
London, 1872 impression of falling asleep in game five, which was his only loss. Versus Korchnoi,
· London 1883 he led 3 ½ - 1 ½ before losing game six - a loss in which he offered and then muffed
one of the most brilliant piece sacs of the 1960s:
Korchnoi - Spassky ECO: D31

Candidates Matches, 1968, Game Six
1. d4 d5 8. f3 Na6
2. c4 e6 9. e4 Nb4
3. Nc3 Be7 10. Qb3 Be6
4. cxd5 exd5 11. e5 Nd7
5. Bf4 c6 12. a3 a5!!
6. Qc2 g6 13. axb4 axb4
7. 0-0-0 Nf6 14. Nb1 c5, etc.
The point was that Spassky had all of the dynamic ideas. Take, for example,
Spassky’s pushy, tactically alert play in game seven:
Boris Spassky - Viktor Korchnoi ECO: E83

Kiev, 1968
1. d4 Nf6 20. h5 dxc5

2. c4 g6 21. hxg6 hxg6
3. Nc3 Bg7 22. Qe6 Rd8
4. e4 d6 23. Rxd8 Qxd8
5. f3 0-0 24. Rd1 Qe7
6. Be3 Nc6 25. Qxc6 Nc7
7. Nge2 a6
26. Qb6 Kg7?
8. Nc1 e5
9. d5 Nd4 Black should have tried to
10. Nb3 Nxb3 make counterplay with 26 …
c4.
11. Qxb3 c5
12. dxc6 e.p. bxc6 27. Nd5 Qe6
13. 0-0-0 Be6 28. Bxc5 Bxc5
14. Qa3 Ne8 29. Qxc5 Nb5
15. h4 f6 30. Qe3 Qc6+
16. c5 Rf7 31. Kb1 Nd4
17. Qa4 Qc7 32. Rc1 Qb5
18. Bc4 Bxc4 33. Nc7 Qe2
19. Qxc4 Bf8

34. Ne6+ Kh7 35. Qh6+!!, Black resigns
Against Geller in game six of their match, Spassky played a brutally direct attack - an
attack, in truth, that had all the refinement and power of a sledgehammer smashing
a finger:
Boris Spassky - Efim Geller ECO: B25

Sukhumi, 1968
1. e4 c5
2. Nc3 d6 16. g4 Qa8?!
3. g3 Nc6 Spassky’s intentions in the
4. Bg2 g6 Closed Sicilian are no more
5. d3 Bg7 subtle than the offense of
Vince Lombardi’s Green Bay
6. f4 Nf6
Packers. Geller knows what
7. Nf3 0-0 is coming, just as the
8. 0-0 Rb8 opponents of the Packers
9. h3 b5 knew what was coming. But
he cannot stop it, just as
10. a3 a5
they could not. The issue is
11. Be3 b4 no more complicated than
12. axb4 axb4 who will get there fustest
13. Ne2 Bb7 with the mostest: Black on
the Queenside or White on
14. b3 ... the Kingside. Black could
have improved his chances
Earlier in this match, White with 16. … Nd7.
tried 14. Qd2 successfully.
The point behind the text
move is to adopt the plan of 17. Qe1 Qa6
moving the Queen to e1 and
h4. 18. Qf2 Na7?
14. … Ra8 This counterplay is too slow.

Alexander Kotov suggested
15. Rc1 Ra2 18. … c4 as an alternative,
while others have
pronounced 18. … Nd7 as
the last chance to keep
fighting. In defense of
Geller, only hindsight is 20 -
20. Black certainly still
appears to be in the game.

19. f5 Nb5
20. fxg6 hxg6
21. Ng5 Na3
22. Qh4 Rc8
23. Rxf6!! exf6 27. Nxc1 Kxf7

24. Qh7+ Kf8 28. Qxg7+ Ke8
25. Nxf7!! Rxc2 29. g5 f5
Black gets overrun after 25. 30. Qxg6+ Kd7
… Kxf7 26. Bh6 Rg8 27. Nf4 31. Qf7+ Kc6
26. Bh6 Rxc1+ 32. exf5+, Black resigns
In 1969, on his second try for the world title, Boris Spassky beat Tigran Petrosian
through force majeure, backing him up against the chess wall until the champion’s
systems against 1. e4 collapsed. After losing in game one, Spassky notched victories
in games four and eight as Black, thanks to energetic play with the Tarrasch Defense.
These two wins, taken together with a famous win in game five involving a Queen
sacrifice, gave Spassky a two-point lead after nine games, +3 -1 =5. If Spassky had
failed to win as Black in 1969, as he did in 1966, then Petrosian would ultimately
have kept his title on a tie, +4 -4 =16. In the actual match, Petrosian evened the
score with wins in games 10 and 11. After 16 games, the match stood tied at 8 - 8
(+3 -3 =10). But if in 1966 Spassky was the player who pooped out after playing
catch-up ball, then in 1969 Petrosian found himself without a good answer to 1. e4
by game 17. In quick succession he lost as Black in games 17, 19 and 21 - two
Sicilians and a Ruy Lopez - while answering with a fine win as White in game 20.
After draws in games 22 and 23, Spassky became world champion, 12 ½ - 10 ½ (+6 -
4 =13).
The games from the two Spassky - Petrosian gladiatorial contests suggest that
Petrosian won in 1966 because he did a Cassius Clay rope-a-dope job on Spassky,
who became arm weary from pounding his short sword against the little Armenian’s
shield, while Spassky won in 1969 because he beat down Petrosian, who finally
stumbled and fell backwards after repeated blows on that same shield. The key
difference in 1969 was that Spassky came prepared as Black with the active Tarrasch
Defense to the Queen’s Gambit and did not permit Petrosian to dictate the tempo of
the match with a long series of initial draws. In each match Petrosian won four
games, setting Spassky the task of breaching that number, which he managed to do
the second time around.

The final verdict on the well-played Spassky -

Petrosian matches, in which the former had an
overall plus of +9 -8 =30, is that each match had
a winner rather than a loser. In 1966, Petrosian
controlled the match tempo, doing what he
wanted to do; in 1969, Spassky ruthlessly
battered down his opponent, doing what he had
to do.
Continue...
Spassky vs Petrosian

Login

Spassky - Peace vs Pieces - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Previous Next
by Larry Parr Page Three
b. 1937 -
Spassky was a happy man scaling the Everest of Chess. “My best time was when I
was moving to become champion,” he said. Even the defeat against Petrosian in
1966 had the effect of prolonging an exciting challenge rather than crushing a
questing ambition.
An ambition? Spassky, as already mentioned, has often likened himself to a lazy

Russian bear, describing his large hands as those of a simple, strong, stolid muzhik.
Yet this self-deprecation does not account for the evident drive that he had to reach
the top, though it does explain perfectly his divided emotions about being champion
and the limits of his ultimate ambitions. For having perched himself upon the peak,
he was unwilling to endure further storms of heroic exertion to stay there. He
discovered that opponents played more strongly against him because as world
champion he was, by definition, the choicest of all chess scalps. He became dismayed
when fans continued to expect supreme results befitting his exalted station. Later he
averred feelingly, “I don’t want ever to be champion again.”
Spassky has described his championship years from 1969 to 1972 as the unhappiest
of his adult life. “In my country, at that time,” he once said, “being a champion of
chess was like being a King. At that time I was a King … and when you are King you
feel a lot of responsibility … but there is nobody there to help you.” Desolate, indeed,
can be the head that wears the crown - and no one appeared more morose at public
chess meetings in the ex-Soviet Union than the Spassky pictured in old chess
magazines. As he sat on stage after stage at get-togethers celebrating such
tournament wins as Leiden 1970 (+2 =10) and Amsterdam 1970 (+8 =7) or his
psychologically important brilliancy against Bobby Fischer at the Siegen Olympiad of
the same year, he understood that the fulsome praise could turn into snarling
attacks if the world chess title were to pass westward during his watch.
And, too, there were the unpleasant politics. Spassky despised the Communist Party,
which a post-Soviet court would rule to have been a criminal conspiracy. As he said
to one American audience, “Politics, I dislike them. They would come to me and say,
‘Comrade Spassky: sign a petition for the defense of Angela Davis!’ and I would
Welcome
reply, ‘No, no, no.’ I had to get rid of the Soviet Chess Federation because I could not
change my nature.”
Membership
“Could not change my nature”? Even the nurture Spassky received in the old Soviet
Events
Union could not crimp his expansive sporting spirit. Fischer said that Spassky was
Promotions one of the few “real” Soviet chess “fighters.” The American was perceptive. Spassky
was indeed a true fighter, which is the only reason why Fischer - Spassky 1972
Site Pros finally flew. For in the dramatic early days of this most famous of chess jousts - at a
moment in mid-July 1972, when Moscow ordered Spassky to walk away with a 2 - 0
Top Players
forfeit win - he refused to leave Reykjavik, remaining to play the fateful, fatal third
Chess News game.
The year leading up to Fischer - Spassky 1972 was filled with extraordinary chess
drama. In three candidates matches played in 1971, Fischer scored 18 ½ - 2 ½ or
nearly 90 percent against super-GMs Bent Larsen and Tigran Petrosian and world
title candidate GM Mark Taimanov. One calculation in the days before rating inflation
put Fischer’s performance at 2939 for these matches. Against Larsen he played chess
at a 3060 clip. His score of 9 ½ - 3 ½ in two matches against the unbeatable
Petrosian embarrassed stalwart Fischer Haters. His performance in the Herceg Novi

Chess History world blitz championship in April 1970, where he scored 19 - 3 to finish 4 ½ points
clear of the strongest speed field ever assembled, and his evisceration of a strong
» The World Chess
Championship
contingent in the Manhattan Chess Club Blitz Tournament in August 1971, where he
and Champions: 1747- scored an extraordinary 21 ½ - ½ - well, these two results with a combined score of
40 ½ - 3 ½ led to a lot of head scratching.
2001

Tal called Fischer “the greatest genius to have descended from the chessic sky.”
A 21-Player Salute Period. Others said that the American chess he-man was running up simul-style
· Philidor scores against the likes of Bronstein, Korchnoi, Larsen, Petrosian, Smyslov, Tal and
1747 - 1795 so on. One wit recollected Hans Kmoch’s congratulations to Larry Evans for winning
· Deschapelles
the 1963-64 U. S. Championship with a score of 7 ½ - 3 ½ and his further
1800 - 1821 felicitations to Fischer, who scored 11 - 0 in the same tournament, for winning the
“exhibition.” Suddenly, Bobby was punishing all players - including the giants of the
· La Bourdonnais international arena - as he would amateurs on exhibition tours.
1821 - 1840
· Saint-Amant All players, that is, except Boris Spassky. The Soviets hoped that they had a
1840 - 1843
champion with a sound, thoroughly universal style - a player who could defeat
· Staunton Fischer. Spassky’s pre-match score against Fischer was +3 =2, including a relatively
1843 - 1851 fresh win from the 1970 Siegen Olympiad. Perhaps Fischer would prove to be
· Anderssen
another Larsen - a player who could cannibalize his lessers to achieve impressive
1851 - 1858; triumphs in mixed tournaments but who could not stand up to an opponent setting
1862 - 1866 problems on every move over an extended number of games.
· Morphy
1858 - 1862
· Steinitz After many hilarious misadventures, Fischer arrived in Reykjavik almost as if by

1886 - 1894 accident. Spassky, the man whom he would play, resembled the victim of an
· Lasker 1894 - 1921 accident. Having put on weight over the past two years, Spassky could be glimpsed
chain-smoking and chain-circling match headquarters at the Hotel Loftleidir. The
· Capablanca
agony of his anxiety - would Fischer end up in Reykjavik or go to Kalamazoo? - was
1921 - 1927
culminating in a tobacco-frenzy of despair. Like the refugees in Casablanca, he was
· Alekhine waiting. And waiting. And waiting.
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946
Fischer arrived. The match started. Two knights - one sans reproche, the other
· Euwe 1935 - 1937 errant - charged each other, lances raised. “[Bobby] was an individual,” Spassky
· Botvinnik later said, “and so was I. Today, these players have coaches, physicians, cooks,
1948 - 1957; psychologists, parapsychologists. The championship has become a fight between two
1958 - 1960; big collective farms.” The result of the collision between these two gallants - a
1961 - 1963 collision that symbolized for many the clash between American individualism and
Soviet collectivism - was that Spassky lay unhorsed in the dust. Fischer won by the
· Smyslov
lopsided score of 12 ½ - 7 ½ (+7 -2 =11) in games actually played.
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961

To his credit, Spassky preferred the dust to dishonest victory. The key moment of the
· Petrosian match came before game three when Fischer demanded to play in a private room
1963 to 1969 with neither cameras nor audience. The Soviet government, as noted, ordered
» Spassky Spassky home. Spassky stayed and played. The game itself was the most celebrated
1969 - 1972
Benoni Defense of the 1970s:
· A Handy Trainer
Boris Spassky - Bobby Fischer ECO: A77
• I, Chess Claudius Reykjavik, 1972
· Peace vs Pieces 1. d4 Nf6 19. a4 b6

· Philidor vs Stamma 2. c4 e6 20. Rfe1 a6
London, 1747 3. Nf3 c5
21. Re2 b5
· La Bourdonnais 4. d5 exd5
vs McDonnell 5. cxd5 d6 Black has a Queenside pawn
London, 1834 roller, and White has
6. Nc3 g6
· Saint-Amant Kingside weaknesses.
7. Nd2 Nbd7
vs Staunton
London, 1843 8. e4 Bg7 22. Rae1 Qg6!
9. Be2 0-0 23. b3 Re7
Amant Paris, 1843 10. 0-0 Re8 24. Qd3 Rb8
· Staunton 11. Qc2 25. axb5 axb5
vs Horwitz 26. b4 c4
London, 1846 Spassky could have kept the 27. Qd2 Rbe8
lid on the position with 11.
· London 1851 28. Re3 h5
a4.
· Morphy 29. R3e2 Kh7
vs Anderssen 11. … Nh5!? 30. Re3 Kg8
Paris, 1858 31. R3e2 Bxc3
Fischer sacrifices his pawn

· London 1862 structure for active play with 32. Qxc3 Rxe4
the two Bishops — an
· Steinitz 33. Rxe4 Rxe4
vs Anderssen
aggressive, edgy positional
idea typical of his style. 34. Rxe4 Qxe4
London, 1866
35. Bh6 Qg6
· Steinitz 12. Bxh5 gxh5 36. Bc1 Qb1!
vs Zukertort
London, 1872
13. Nc4 Ne5 37. Kf1 Bf5
14. Ne3 Qh4! 38. Ke2 Qe4+
· London 1883
15. Bd2 39. Qe3 Qc2+
40. Qd2 Qb3
White can battle for the
initiative with the much 41. Qd4?
better 15. f3.
White wilts. Much more
15. … Ng4! stubborn is 41. Ke1.
16. Nxg4 hxg4 41. … Bd3+

17. Bf4 Qf6 White resigns
18. g3?
White weakens the light

squares, committing what is
probably a fatal positional
error. Better is 18. Bg3.
18. … Bd7
“Back in the USSR,” to borrow the title of a Beatles song, people did not know how
lucky they were. Said Soviet GM Yuri Averbakh, “At home they don’t understand.
They think it means there’s something wrong with our culture.”
The first line of Soviet defense was to charge that electronic emissions or exotic
exudations were attacking Spassky. Following game 17, Efim Geller asked that the
playing site, including Fischer’s famous fancy chair, be inspected. Icelandic police
found two unexplained dead flies, which led one deranged American Maoist writer to
demand autopsies. Some were amazed that Geller did not so demand. The second
line of defense emerged immediately following the match. At the Moscow State
University chess club, Geller delivered one of the most preposterous and, perhaps,
personally humiliating lectures in chess history, suggesting only half-facetiously that
Spassky must have been the victim of an imperialist intelligence operation. No other
explanation sufficed for how a single American could humble the Soviet School of
Chess. The final line of defense was to blame Spassky, who was accused by a
specially convened investigating commission of neglecting Soviet training methods.
Political fallout fell on him, and he was forbidden from playing abroad.
Spassky himself eschewed the gobbledygook. This no-alibi guy stated, “When I
played Bobby Fischer, my opponent fought against organizations - the television
producers and the match organizers. But he never fought against me personally. I
lost to Bobby before the match because he was already stronger than I. He won
normally.” That’s all.
Continue...

Login

Spassky - I, Chess Cladius - Kings of Chess - Chess History - World Chess Network
Previous
by Larry Parr Page Four
b. 1937 -
Spassky may have lost the chess war and quite a few pieces to Fischer, but he won
the peace. Freed from the burden of defending a title that ultimately meant little to
him, Spassky became a congenial performer on the chess after-dinner circuit, while
Fischer descended into his own personal heck. Fischer’s heckdom, however, is the
subject for another time.
In the 28 years since he lost the world title, Boris Spassky has probably given more
lectures than he has played tournament and match games. A gifted mimic who will
answer virtually any question tossed at him and who has gained lasting fame as
Fischer’s quondam opponent, he demands and gets good money for visiting chess
clubs, conducting simuls and, most of all, for just being himself. There are more
pictures of Spassky standing before audiences of chess enthusiasts, who are rocking
backwards in their chairs with delighted laughter, than there are of him sitting at a
chessboard. He can act the clown while maintaining a dignified reserve - a gift
unique among the humorless lot in the chess world.
Over the board, Spassky slipped from being a special player to being a great player.
Which meant that tournament successes continued but not match victories against
determined opposition. He won the extremely strong 1973 Soviet Championship (+7
-1 =9), a point ahead of Anatoly Karpov, Gennady Kuzmin, Korchnoi and Petrosian,
thereby confirming not only his own continuing strength but the extraordinary
power of the man who dismantled him the year before in Reykjavik. Other
tournament successes in the post-title years included first equal with Karpov at
Bugojno 1978 and outright first ahead of Karpov at Linares 1983, a victory that
brought some essentially meaningless retaliation from Soviet authorities for daring
to upstage their champion. He also finished first at Montilla 1978 and shared first
with Alexander Beliavsky at Baden 1980.
As former world champion, Spassky was seeded into the 1974 candidates matches.
He played impressively, +3 =3, against Robert Byrne to advance from the
quarterfinals. But in the semi-finals against Karpov, he collapsed after taking an
early lead. The final score: +1 -4 =6. At the time, excuses were made for Spassky.
His second marriage was rocky, and he was in distinctly bad odor with the Soviet
authorities. But although he reached the finals three years later in the next set of
candidates matches in 1977 and 1978, his play showed an obvious decline from a
decade earlier. He struggled to defeat Vlastimil Hort, +2 -1 =13, in the quarterfinals;
and he looked like losing against Hungary’s Lajos Portisch in the semis, trailing by a
point after eight games. He rallied for three wins in the final seven games to finish
with +4 -2 =9. In a wild finals against Korchnoi, he showed none of the positionally
disciplined attacking chess of their first match in 1968, losing by three points (+4 -7
=7). His last candidates match to date was against Portisch in 1980, a dreary drawn
result, +1 -1 =12. Portisch went through because of a typically artificial FIDE tie-
breaking system.
Spassky’s personal match and tournament results against Portisch tell a lot about
his descent from the extra-class to the front rank. A player of genius, Spassky began
his competition against Portisch, a master of high talent, by completely outclassing
the hard-working Hungarian. In the Leningrad-Budapest match of 1961, he not only
beat Portisch, 3 ½ - ½, but he also abused him by making his three wins look easy.
Here is a dynamically magnificent game that shows the gap:

Lajos Portisch - Boris Spassky (Budapest, 1961):
Lajos Portisch - Boris Spassky ECO: C64

Budapest, 1961
1. e4 e5 21. c4 f5
2. Nf3 Nc6 22. c5 e4
3. Bb5 Bc5 23. Qb3 g4
4. 0-0 Nd4 24. Nc4 f4!
5. Nxd4 Bxd4 25. Bxe4 Rce8
6. c3 Bb6 26. Qd3 g3
7. d4 c6 27. hxg3 fxg3
8. Ba4 d6 28. fxg3 Qg4
9. Na3 Nf6 29. Re1 h5
10. Bc2 Be6 30. c6 Bc8
11. Bg5 h6 31. cxb7 Bd7
12. Bxf6 Qxf6 32. b5 h4
13. d5 Bd7 33. b6 hxg3!
14. Nc4 Bc7 34. bxc7+ Kxc7
15. Qd3 cxd5 35. Nd2 Qh4
16. exd5 g5 36. Kf1 Qf4+
17. a4 0-0-0 37. Qf3
18. b4 Kb8
… Bg4!!, White resigns
19. Rfb1 Rc8
20. Nd2 Qg7
The vanquished in the above game became the ultimate workhorse, stretching his
talent as far as it would go. Portisch’s win against Tal at Oberhausen 1961 was a
case in point - a massive piece of opening preparation in the French that was
decisive in itself. It was the kind of game that Spassky seldom won and, most likely,
did not enjoy winning when he did.
Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, Portisch labored unremittingly, gaining a

reputation as Caissa’s ultimate anal retentive - the Herr Sitzfleisch of Chess. In 1965
he could not keep pace with Tal in a quarterfinal candidates match, +1 -4 =3,
because he still could not keep a lid on the tactics. Just as Tal pitched pieces at
Portisch during their chess riot of a draw in the 1964 Amsterdam Interzonal, so he
sacrificed material repeatedly in their match. Against Bent Larsen in the 1968
candidates quarterfinals, Portisch did better, though he lost narrowly, +2 -3 =5,
because he could not quite stanch the flow of tactics. A decade later, he had
toughened. He thrashed Larsen, +5 -2 =3, in their 1977 candidates quarterfinal,
refuting his opponent’s uninspired inspirations in businesslike fashion. In the
semifinals, as mentioned above, he lost to Spassky by two points, but he led the
match after eight games and appeared at that point to have overcome the talent
deficit thanks to superior preparation. Yet in the end, Spassky prevailed with some
heavy duty Kingside attacks. Only by 1980, after 20 years of steady, unspectactular
improvement, could Portisch contain, if not defeat, Spassky in their quarterfinal
Welcome candidates match. The 7 -7 final score would have been an unimaginable result
between the two young men who met in that Leningrad-Budapest match played,
Membership quite literally, a chess life earlier.
Events
“I am playing very professional chess just now,” Boris Spassky said in a 1986
Promotions speech, “and I don’t like my play much. I need romantic release.” Which did not
mean, as Spassky hastily told his audience, that he planned to play more
Site Pros romantically.
Top Players
Quite the opposite, in fact. During the past 15 years, Spassky has earned the
Chess News reputation of being a peacenik among grandmasters. One writer described his
tournament play as being “littered with the debris of numerous colorless draws.”
Spassky himself said, “In general, I’ve lost my motivation. I am now rather
peaceful.” True enough. Yet when this great, hibernating Russian bear is awakened
or, for whatever reason, feels that he ought to win, then his chess claws can rip out
flesh. When Garry Kasparov became frisky, Spassky scored +2 =2 in four games.
When Spassky needed a win to stay in contention at the 1985 Montpellier candidates
tournament (he missed qualifying by a half point), he came out roaring with his old
favorite, the King’s Gambit:

Chess History Boris Spassky - Yasser Seirawan ECO: C34

Montpellier, 1985
» The World Chess
Championship 1. e4 e5
and Champions: 1747- 7. h4 Qe7?
2. f4 exf4
2001
3. Nf3 Ne7 Spassky obviously judged
4. d4 d5 Seirawan, one of the great
A 21-Player Salute
5. Nc3 dxe4 positional players of this era, as
· Philidor
6. Nxe4 Ng6 being ripe for the golden oldie of
1747 - 1795 gambits. “Yasser likes to play
· Deschapelles comfortable positions,” Spassky
1800 - 1821 once said, “but chess is not
always very comfortable.”
· La Bourdonnais
1821 - 1840
· Saint-Amant
1840 - 1843
· Staunton
1843 - 1851
· Anderssen
1851 - 1858;
1862 - 1866
· Morphy 1858 - 1862
· Steinitz
1886 - 1894
· Lasker 1894 - 1921
· Capablanca
1921 - 1927
· Alekhine
1927 - 1935;
1937 - 1946
· Euwe 1935 - 1937
· Botvinnik
1948 - 1957;
1958 - 1960;
1961 - 1963
· Smyslov
1957 - 1958
· Tal 1960 - 1961
· Petrosian
1963 to 1969
8. Kf2! 17. Qxc6 Rxd4
» Spassky
18. Rae1! Rxf4
1969 - 1972 In eight moves White has a
19. Qb5+ Ka8
· A Handy Trainer
winning position using an
old-fashioned opening 20. Qc6+ Kb8
· I, Chess Claudius against one of the most in- 21. Rxe7 Bxe7
• Peace vs Pieces fashion grandmasters. 22. Rd1 Rf6
23. Nd7+ Bxd7
· Philidor vs Stamma 8. … Bg4
London, 1747 24. Qxd7 Rd8
· La Bourdonnais 9. h5 Nh4 25. Qb5+ Kc8
vs McDonnell 10. Bxf4 Nc6 26. Rxd8+ Bxd8
London, 1834 11. Bb5 0-0-0 27. Qa4 g5
· Saint-Amant 12. Bxc6 bxc6 28. Qxa7 Rf4
vs Staunton
13. Qd3 Nxf3 29. Qa6+ Kb8
London, 1843
14. gxf3 Bf5 30. Qd3 Be7
15. Qa6+ Kb8 31. Qxh7 g4
Amant Paris, 1843
16. Nc5 Bc8 32. Kg3, Black resigns
· Staunton
vs Horwitz
London, 1846
· London 1851
· Morphy
vs Anderssen
Paris, 1858
On September 2, 1992 - on the Yugoslav resort island of Sveti Stefan just off the
· London 1862 coast of Montenegro - Boris Spassky returned to chess center stage for the first time
in 20 years. He played and lost a 49-move Ruy Lopez, which was game one of

· Steinitz Fischer - Spassky II - a curious affair that was billed by the Serbian sponsors as a
vs Anderssen rematch for the real world championship.
London, 1866
· Steinitz In that first game, Fischer looked great. In several subsequent losses, however, he
vs Zukertort would play less like his old self and more like an old man. Spassky, on the other
London, 1872 hand, belied his 2560 pre-match rating and No. 101 ranking among the world’s
· London 1883 masters. For the first time in nearly a decade, he played fighting, uncompromising
chess. Spassky gushed with evident delight, "Bobby pulls me out of oblivion. He
makes me fight. It's a miracle." Fischer ultimately prevailed, +10 -5 =15, though
Spassky led after game six, +2 -1 =3.
Fischer - Spassky II was a match that resonated with historical and political echoes.
For 20 years, Fischer had demanded a title match with the victor being the first to
win 10 games and with the champion keeping the title on a 9 - 9 tie, draws not
counting. Suddenly, the winds of war raking the remnants of the former Yugoslavia
created the conditions for such a match. Suddenly, Fischer agreed to give Spassky
the long-promised rematch. Suddenly, the two old rivals were playing chess for $5
million. Suddenly, Fischer, but not Spassky, became a “criminal.”
Yet it takes two to tango and two to tangle in a chess game. Even the Fischer King in
his solipsistic self-absorption never argued that a contest between him and himself
would constitute a legitimate title match. He needed an opponent, and he chose
Spassky. Yet public obloquy for playing a match a mere 110 kilometers from the
Bosnia of horror and gore fell only on Fischer.
Spassky escaped condemnation for two reasons. First, he broke no law when
agreeing to play for big bucks, whereas at the press conference opening the match,
Fischer spat on a U. S. Treasury Department “Order to Provide Information and
Cease and Desist Activities.” (Most members of the media never questioned whether
such an order is constitutionally valid law.) Secondly, a lot of people understood that
Spassky and Fischer were chess artists each trying to paint the Mona Lisa while
grabbing at the other’s brush - and a lot of people were willing to accept the idea
that just as Rembrandt was not a criminal for painting the portraits of princes fine
and foul, so Spassky and Fischer were not criminals for creating art, though they
were helping, in effect, to break the U.S.-led commercial blockade of the rump Red
regime in Belgrade. The difference in the treatment that the two men received came
down to their mouths.
Spassky kept his mouth shut, except to talk a bit of chess. He seconded Fischer’s
charge that Kasparov and Karpov had fixed their match games, citing the admittedly
strange conclusion of game 19 in the Lyon leg of KK - V in 1990. Fischer, on the
other hand, committed semanticide. When asked about his being an anti-Communist,
he responded with a sneer, “Soviet Communism is basically a mask for Bolshevism
which is a mask for Judaism.” When asked about being an anti-Semite, he answered
with the perennial pat idiocy, “I’m definitely not anti-Arab, OK?” He claimed to have
been blacklisted by world Jewry for 20 years, and he undoubtedly still wanted to
ride Jews out of the chess world on a rail. “Yeh,” he said to Ralph Ginzburg in the
famous Harper’s article of January 1962, “there are too many Jews in chess. They
seemed to have taken away the class of the game.”
And so, in a New York Times editorial of September 2, 1992, Fischer became an
object of moral scorn, whereas Spassky was referred to almost affectionately as the
American’s “old rival.” Intoned the Times: “Think of Bosnia overrun by Serbian-
backed militias. Then think of the chess genius Bobby Fischer violating United
Nations sanctions, and decency itself, to play a chess match for profit in Serbia
against his old rival Boris Spassky.” Think, also, continued the Times, whether the
time had come to punish this “eccentric,” “reclusive” and “ardent purveyor of anti-
Semitic dogma”: “[E]ccentrics, too, are subject to the law. If Mr. Fischer plays, it is
only right to make him pay.”
Somehow, though, this play-and-pay punishment idea was not quite so “right” if
applied to Spassky. At least, no one — not even some hydrophobic New York
magazine writers — suggested imprisoning the Russo-Jewish Spassky.
Chess people also got into the Bobby bashing. The scoffers luxuriated in Fischer’s
bad play from games two to six. They slavered about the match being nothing more
than a bout between two ancient lungers who were tossing roundhouse punches
while stumbling hideously around the chess ring. Kasparov hissed contemptuously
about a battle between a couple of old men and exulted, “The legend of the best
player of chess has been destroyed.” However, this obituary — so obviously dripping
with envy — was premature, given a recent important poll of chess opinion putting

Fischer ahead of Kasparov as the player of the millennium. Spassky indirectly

bolstered Fischer’s reputation by narrowly losing a match, 4 ½ - 5 ½, to young
super-GM Judith Polgar, shortly following his heavier defeat against Bobby.
Fischer - Spassky II, though widely accepted as a match for one version of the world
chess title, was a letdown. Which is because Bobby, all 60 extra pounds of him, let
us down. He played better than initially admitted, and he played better than anybody
else would have after a 20-year layoff. But this bearded, bloated, bejowled alte-
cocker was not the beardless, bony, boyish cock-of-the-walk who slammed the chess
door behind him 20 years earlier. He was the flattest of all flat tires: a punctured
myth.
Wrote one Chess Life reader about Fischer and, by extension, Fischer - Spassky II,
“Fischer is back! It’s an event we have all eagerly awaited for 20 years. And now
that he’s back, I already wish he would go away again.”
Speaking of going away, Spassky got away from Yugoslavia grazed rather than
scathed by the media bullets. He left that country with his $1.6 million loser’s swag
and resumed the sleepy, Volga-like flow of his life.
That life or, more precisely, how Spassky has lived it, is why he lived down the
embarrassment of playing chess in a pariah state. He had accumulated moral capital.
Naturally friendly, always polite, Spassky was popular. Even the way he left the
Soviet Union during the dark days of the Brezhnev regime and attached himself to
France during the mid-1970s bespoke a pacific disposition. He resided in France but
continued to play in Olympiads for the Soviet Union. His was a slow-moving
disengagement that he described as political castling or exchanging one life for
another en passant. He spoke about his peaceable disposition. “Viktor Korchnoi is
different - he’s a man of system …. He’s a fighter and a defector. I am not. I stayed
in France because I wanted to have peace with everyone - with the Soviet Union,
China, England.”
The art in Spassky’s elegant chess conceptions seemed to be complemented by the

artfulness of his elegant life. We chess people admired Spassky for having
integrated personality with lifestyle, a rare accomplishment among our number. This
cool, classical European intellectual led a cool, classical life. Married since 1975 to a
French diplomat, he said on one occasion, “I live in a beautiful French home with my
wife, a beautiful French lady.” This image — the chess grandmaster as gentleman,
parfaitement gentil — reflects faithfully what Boris Spassky happens to be.
The Cary Grant of the 64 Squares.
Previous
Boris Spassky, Spassky in the Weltgeschichte des Schachs series (Verlag Dr. E. Wildhagen, 1972);
Bernard Cafferty, Spassky’s 100 Best Games (Batsford, 1972), well-annotated games and a decent
biography.

Login

World Title Matches and Tournaments - Chess History - World Chess Network
Welcome
Membership
Events
« Previous «
Promotions
Site Pros
Top Players by Larry Parr
Chess News
Chess History
The concept of a world chess championship extends back beyond the match in 1886 between
» The World Chess
Wilhelm Steinitz and Johann Zukertort, a battle that Steinitz won, +10 -5 =5. References to Paul
Championship
Morphy as a world chess champion or as the champion of the chess world were numerous in
and Champions: 1747-
the late 1850s and early 1860s. Steinitz himself spoke of being “champion” in the early 1870s.
2001
+ The Kings of Chess: What follows is an annotated list of matches and tournaments that have been interpreted by
A 21-Player Salute chess scholars as having something to do with determining who was world chess champion at
a given moment. In the case of, say, the match between Alexander Alekhine and Jose
Capablanca in 1927, chess writers are unanimous in considering the match to be for the world
"World Champion"
chess championship. In the case of, say, the second match between Howard Staunton and
• World Title Matches Pierre Saint-Amant in 1843, only those chess writers who extend the title line back further than
and Tournaments Steinitz-Zukertort 1886 would include this event as being for the world title.
· Philidor vs Stamma
London, 1747 Here, then, is our list of the world title canon with the match winner listed first:
· La Bourdonnais
vs McDonnell
Andre PHILIDOR vs Phillip Stamma
London, 1834
London, 1747: +8 -1 =1
· Saint-Amant
vs Staunton Louis Charles de La BOURDONNAIS vs Alexander McDonnell
London, 1843 London, 1834: +45 -27 =13, in a series of six matches
Pierre Saint-Amant vs Howard Staunton
Amant Paris, 1843
London, 1843: +3 -2 =1
· Staunton
vs Horwitz Howard Staunton vs Pierre Saint-Amant
London, 1846 Paris, 1843: +11 -6 =4
· London 1851
Howard Staunton vs Bernhard Horwitz
· Morphy
London, 1846: +14 -7 =3
vs Anderssen
Paris, 1858 LONDON 1851
· London 1862
Paul Morphy vs Adolf Anderssen
· Steinitz Paris, 1858: +7 -2 =2
vs Anderssen
London, 1866 LONDON 1862
· Steinitz Wilhelm Steinitz vs Adolf Anderssen
vs Zukertort
London, 1866: +8 -6
London, 1872
· London 1883 Wilhelm Steinitz vs Johann Zukertort
London, 1872: +7 -1 =4
LONDON 1883
Wilhelm Steinitz vs Johann Zukertort

New York, St. Louis, New Orleans, 1886: +10 -5 =5
Wilhelm Steinitz vs Mikhail Tchigorin

Havana, 1889: +10 -6 =1
Wilhelm Steinitz vs Isidor Gunsberg

New York, 1890-91: +6 -4 =9
Wilhelm Steinitz vs Mikhail Tchigorin

Havana, 1892: +10 -8 =5
http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/matchesAndTournaments.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:34:04

Emanuel Lasker vs Wilhelm Steinitz

New York, Philadelphia, Montreal, 1894: +10 -5 =4
Emanuel Lasker vs Wilhelm Steinitz

Moscow, 1896-97: +10 -2 =5
Emanuel Lasker vs Frank Marshall

New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, Chicago, Memphis, New York,
1907: +8 =7
Emanuel Lasker vs Siegbert Tarrasch

Duesseldorf, Munich, 1908: +8 -3 =5
Emanuel Lasker vs David Janowski

Paris, 1909: +7 -1 =2
Emanuel Lasker vs Carl Schlechter

Vienna, Berlin, 1910: +1 -1 =8
Emanuel Lasker vs David Janowski

Berlin, 1910: +8 -0 =3
Jose Capablanca vs Emanuel Lasker

Havana, 1921: +4 -0 =10
Alexander Alekhine vs Jose Capablanca

Buenos Aires, 1927: +6 -3 =25
Alexander Alekhine vs Efim Bogolyubov

Several cities in Germany and The Netherlands, 1929: +11 -5 =9
Alexander Alekhine vs Efim Bogolyubov

Several cities in Germany, 1934: +8 -3 =15
Max Euwe vs Alexander Alekhine

Played in 13 cities in The Netherlands, 1935: +9 -8 =13
Alexander Alekhine vs Max Euwe

Played in several cities in The Netherlands, 1937: +10 -4 =11 or, including
games from the “exhibition match,” +11 -6 =13
THE HAGUE - MOSCOW, 1948

Mikhail Botvinnik vs David Bronstein
Moscow, 1951: +5 -5 =14
Mikhail Botvinnik vs Vasily Smyslov

Moscow, 1954: +7 -7 =10
Vasily Smyslov vs Mikhail Botvinnik

Moscow, 1957: +6 -3 =13
Mikhail Botvinnik vs Vasily Smyslov

Moscow, 1958: +7 -5 =11
Mikhail Tal vs Mikhail Botvinnik

Moscow, 1960: +6 -2 =13
Mikhail Botvinnik vs Mikhail Tal

Moscow, 1961: +10 -5 =6
Tigran Petrosian vs Mikhail Botvinnik

Moscow, 1963: +5 -2 =15
Tigran Petrosian vs Boris Spassky

Moscow, 1966: +4 -3 =17
Boris Spassky vs Tigran Petrosian

Moscow, 1969: +6 -4 =13
Robert Fischer vs Boris Spassky

Reykjavik, 1972: +7 -3 [one win by forfeit] =11
Anatoly Karpov vs Viktor Korchnoi

Moscow, 1974: +3 -2 =19

Baguio, The Philippines, 1978: +6 -5 =21

Merano, Italy, 1981: +6 -2 = 10
Anatoly Karpov vs Garry Kasparov

Moscow, 1984 - 85: +5 -3 =40

Garry Kasparov vs Anatoly Karpov

Moscow, 1985: +5 -3 =16

London and Leningrad [St. Petersburg], 1986: +5 -4 =15

Seville, Spain 1987: +4 -4 =16

New York City and Lyon, 1990: +4 -3 =17
Robert “Bobby” Fischer vs Boris Spassky

Sveti Stefan and Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 1992: +10 -5 =15
Garry Kasparov vs Nigel Short

London, 1993: +6 -1 =13
Anatoly Karpov vs Jan Timman

Zwolle, Arnhem, Amsterdam and Djakarta, 1993: +6 -2 =13
Garry Kasparov vs Viswanthan Anand

New York, 1995: +4 -1 =13
Anatoly Karpov vs Gata Kamsky

Elista, Kalmykia, 1996: +6 -3 =9
Anatoly Karpov vs Viswanathan Anand

Lausanne, Switzerland, 1998: +4 -2 =2, including two wins by Karpov in a
speed chess playoff
Alexander Khalifman vs Vladimir Akopian

Las Vegas, Nevada, 1999: +2 -1 =3
Vladimir Kramnik vs Garry Kasparov

London, October 2000: +2 -0 =13
Viswanathan Anand vs Alexei Shirov

Tehran, December 2000: +3 -0 =1
« Previous «

Login

World Champions From Philidor To PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

World Champions From Philidor To PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

World Chess Network

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

Top Players by Larry Parr

World Chess Network™, Banter Chess™, Predict-A-Move™

Privacy Policy ~ Policies and Guidelines

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

Not until Andre Philidor (1726 - 1795) triumphed easily over

Before Philidor, chess records are too scanty to distinguish

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/conceptWorldChampion.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:10:16

« Previous « • ˆ Top ˆ • » Next »

World Chess Network™, Banter Chess™, Predict-A-Move™

Privacy Policy ~ Policies and Guidelines

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/conceptWorldChampion.php (2 of 2)17/04/05 13:10:16

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

· Lasker 1894 - 1921 Louis Charles de la BOURDONNAIS

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/WCNKings.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:11:29

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

Top Players b. 1726 - d. 1795

· Euwe 1935 - 1937

· Tal 1960 - 1961

· The Concept of the

+ World Title Matches

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/philidor.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:11:55

12. cxb4 Nxb4 19. fxg5 Rf2

From a three-board blindfold simultaneous exhibition given by Philidor:

J. M. Bruhl - Philidor ECO: C23

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/philidor.php (2 of 3)17/04/05 13:11:55

24. Bxc4 bxc4 36. Rc7+ Kg6

A musical composer of contemporary fame, he excelled in comic opera, though his

World Chess Network™, Banter Chess™, Predict-A-Move™

Privacy Policy ~ Policies and Guidelines

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/philidor.php (3 of 3)17/04/05 13:11:55

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

Top Players b. 1780 - d. 1847

· Tal 1960 - 1961

· The Concept of the

+ World Title Matches

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/deschapelles.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:12:39

25. Kxh3 Qh4 mate.

Yakov Neishtadt, Nekoronovannye Chempiony (Uncrowned Champions), published in Moscow, 1975;

World Chess Network™, Banter Chess™, Predict-A-Move™

Privacy Policy ~ Policies and Guidelines

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/deschapelles.php (2 of 2)17/04/05 13:12:39

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

· The Concept of the

+ World Title Matches

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/bourdonnais.php (1 of 2)17/04/05 13:13:07

38. White resigns.

Yakov Neishtadt, NekoronovannyeChempiony (Uncrowned Champions), published in Moscow,1975;

World Chess Network™, Banter Chess™, Predict-A-Move™

Privacy Policy ~ Policies and Guidelines

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/bourdonnais.php (2 of 2)17/04/05 13:13:07

Retrieve Password · Update My Account · FAQ

Top Players b. 1800 - d. 1872

· Tal 1960 - 1961

· The Concept of the

+ World Title Matches

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/saintAmant.php (1 of 3)17/04/05 13:13:47

19. gxh3 Rd3 21. Bxd3 Qd6+

Staunton - Saint-Amant match.

Saint-Amant - Staunton Match ECO: D40

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessHistory/salute/kings/saintAmant.php (2 of 3)17/04/05 13:13:47

24. Bf6 gxf6 30. Qh5 Ke7