BOTVINNIK

TAL
 .s'LJ 15

Match Table

(/) .::s:. .::s:.

,_ Q) c: c:
a.> >·· c: c:
0. Date Opening ..0 0
E�
· ::;
......
· ::; ......
::::::�_ 0 0
z 0 � ' CD
� .
.·."CD
41
1 15March Nimzo-lndian Defence Caro- 0 1 0 1
,,
.

2 17March Kann Defence 45 1 0 1 1

..
43 0 1 1 --· 2.
3 20-March Nimzo-lndian Defence

4 1 22March Caro-Kann Defence Nimzo-

41
7
Y2 Y2 1Y2
-
2%

5 24-25 March lndian Defence

3� Y2 %· 2 3

6 27March Caro-Kann Defence 25 Y2 Y2 _2% 3%

7 29March Nimzo-lndian Defence Caro- 33 012Y2 .4Y:2·- '

Kann Defence 29 103Y2 -- 4%'

8 31-March
·:
i" 73
0 -
1 "' 3%.,.
5Y2
9 7-8 April English Opening - .,

10 10 April '· Caro-Kann Defence 01 3% 6%·

42 .. ·• -�. .

11 12 April Slav Defence 42 0 ·13Ye7%

12 14 April ·French Defence 40 104%7Y2

41 01·4% 8Y2
13 17 April Kin�}'� Indian Defence
Caro-Kann Defence,, 33 Y2 Y2 5 9
14 19,April ' ,, "'

63 0- 1 5 � 10
15 21-22 Agril King's Indian Defence
1, Caro-Kann Defence - 90" Y2 Y2 5V2 10%
16 24-25 April
�
83 1 0 6% 10%.
17 29 April. ·
King's Indian Defence 41 0 1 6% 11Y2
18 4May Caro-Kann Defence -
75 1 0 7112 11Y2
19 5-6May King's Indian Defence
"'
_,
t21 % Y2 8 12
"
20 8-10May Caro-l(ann Defence
'.':
33 0 1 8 13
21 1� May King's Indian Defence
16 � GAME 1 BOTVINNIK- TAL

1 5th March 1 961 - Game 1 The most active continuation.

1 0 lt:Jxd6
Botvinnik Tal-
1 0 dxe5, which occurred in the game
Nimzo-l ndian Defence llivitsky-Lipnitsky (1 952), seems more logi
Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik cal.
10 . . . �xd6!
1 c4 tDf6
2 l2Jc3 e6 The right way! After 1 0 ...cxd6 1 1 dxe5
l2Jxe5 (11 ...dxe5 1 2 'iVxd8 .:xd8 13 l2Jg5)
3 d4 i..b4
12 i.e2 White has the advantage. But now
4 e3 0-0
the exchange on e5, which he cannot avoid,
5 i.d3 d5 involves the loss of castling and of several
6 a3 dxc4 tempi.
7 i.xc4 1 1 dxe5 'ii'xd1 +
1 2 �xd1 l2Jg4
It is well known that 7 i.xh7+ 'it>xh7 8 axb4
tDc6 does not give White any advantage. 1 3 �e2 l2Jcxe5
7 i.d6 14 �d5
As was shown by my games with Barcza Played in order to hinder ...b7-b6 if possi ble.
(Budapest 1 952) and Furman (Moscow 1 14 ... c6
955), after 7 ...i.xc3+ 8 bxc3 c5 9 i.b2 White 1 5 ..te4 i.e6
has a clear advantage.
White is behind in development and, de spite
8 l2Jf3
having the two bishops, his position is clearly
8 f4, which was tried in the game Botvinnik inferior. He could of course have played for a
Balashov (Hastings 1 966/67), proves un draw: 1 6 tDxe5 tDxe5 17 f4 i.c4+ 1 8 \!tf2
successful after the energetic reply 8 . . .c5. liJd3+ 1 9 i.xd3 �xd3 20 i.d2, but in this
8 l2Jc6 variation he is completely deprived of
9 tDbS counterplay. Naturally, he choos es a more
A rather na"ive attempt to refute the varia complicated continuation.
tion. Correct here is 9 b4.

8 8 8
7 7

6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2

a c e g c e g
a

9 e5 liJd2 !!adS
 GAME 1 BOTVINNIK - TAL
' " �- - � ;··:: -- -�-- · -:,_:_ =---- �---�_..:."":"::l:::-:::r-:-- �---- ::-- ==-.:__ _.__ -_:
ctJ 17

White nevertheless has a pawn majority in
itle centre, and in order to hinder its
exploitation, Black should definitely have
played 1 6... f5. Then in some cases he
would also have been threatening . . .f5-f4,
which would have been highly unpleasant for
How the position has changed within just a
couple of moves! Black has been left with
weak pawns, and the ending (with or without
the rooks) will be difficult for him. Now it
would perhaps have been best to try and
restrict the enemy knight by 24 ...�d5 .

White in view of the dangerous position of 24 ... i..fS

his king in the centre. 25 4:Jb3 �d3+
Now, however, making use of the respite
A temporary and insignificant achievement.
afforded him, White completes his develop
It is clear that the bishop will soon be forced
ment, and in the approaching endgame the
to retreat.
position of his king is transformed from a
26 �e1 b6
negative factor into a positive one.
27 !!ac1 �e4
17 h3 4:Jf6
1 8 i..c2 l:ld7 28 f3
1 9 b3 .:td8 It is possible that 28 k!xd7 �xd7 29 �e2 (but
20 .:td1 not 29 f3 in view of 29 . . .. l:d3) 29 ...i.d3+ 30
It only remains for i..b2 to be played, and Wf3 was even stronger. White, however,
Black will be in difficulties. Therefore Tal is decided to exchange both pairs of rooks, since
he assumed (not without reason) that in the
forced to exchange the bishop at c2.
ending with knight against bishop his winning
20 4:Jd3
21 �xd3 J:.xd3 chances would be considerable.
22 i.b2 l'13d7 28 l:txd1 +
29 .:.xd1 �xd1 +
Of course, not 22 ...ii.xb3, which would have
lost a piece, but the move in the game also 30 �xd1
indicates that Black is underestimating the And so, the planned exchange of heavy
dangers of his position. 22 ...c5 was essen pieces has taken place.
tial, activating his queenside pawns and
fixing the weakness of the b3 pawn.
23 �xf6 gxf6
24 b4

30 �dS
The last chance was 30 ....i.f5, in order to
defend the c6 pawn from d7. Now the knight
18 � GAME 2 TAL- BOTVINNIK

breaks into Black's position and begins 4 ltJxe4 .its

wreaking havoc there. 5 ltJg3 i..g6
31 ltJd4 c5 6 .tc4 e6
32 e4 was threatened. 7 ltJ1e2 lLlf6
32 bxc5 bxcS This move order occurred in the 17th game
33 ltJbS a6 of the previous match between the same
Or 33 ...as 34 ltJc3 i.c6 35 'it'd2, and the opponents. As became clear from the
white king penetrates unhindered to c4. experience of previous games, 7 ...i.d6 is
34 ltJc7 ..tc4 weaker in view of 8 h4 h6 9 ltJf4, and Black
35 t.Uea ts has to reply 9 . . .i.xf4 with an inferior game,
.

36 h4 since 9 . . i.h7 is unfavourable due to 1 0

�ta
.

ltJfh5.
37 ltJd6 .tf1
8 ltJt4 .i.d6
38 g3
9 o-o
All Black's pawns are isolated, and his
bishop is unable to defend them. Before
beginning the 'gathering of the harvest',
White places nearly all his pawns on dark
squares.
38 �e7
39 ltJxf5+ <&te6
40 e4 'it'es
41 <itd2
Black resigns.

1 7th March 1 961 - Game 2 Following the game Simagin-Fiohr, played in

a semi-final of the 28th USSR Champion
ship, White completes his development and
Tal Botvinnik
-
threatens a possible piece sacrifice on e6.
After 9 . .'it'c7 there can follow 1 0 "ii"f3, and
.

Caro-Kann Defence
if 1 0 . i.xc2 1 1 ltJfh5 with the initiative for
. .

Notes by Vasi/y Smys/ov

White.
9 tl:JdS
1 e4 c6 This is Botvinnik's idea. Black blocks in good
The theoretical dispute continues. As be time the dangerous diagonal with his knight.
fore, Botvinnik chooses solid defensive set
ups, one of which is the Caro-Kann De 1 0 ltJghS
fence. Would it not have been better to play 1 0
2 d4 dS ltJxg6 hxg6 11 h3 with the obvious intention
3 ltJc3 dxe4
of continuing 12 ltJe4 ? It would appear that
 GAM E 2 TAL - BOTVINNIK ctJ 1 9
�::.. �
-- .2_-_:o,...:;;_�_d-��,:;�,:...,____

the manoeuvre undertaken in the game does 20 c5

not promise White any benefit. 21 .:lcd1 \lWc7
10 0-0 22 dxc5 bxc5
11 iLb3 ctJd7 23 tLle4 ttJxe4
1 2 tLlxg6 hxg6 24 iVxe4 ctJf6
1 3 ctJg3 'i¥h4 25 'iVe2 :xd1
26 .:lxd1 lidS
27 :xdS+ 'iVxdS
8 8
2S i.c4!
7 7

6 6

5 5
8
4 4
7
3 3
6
2
5

4
a c e 9 3

The outcome of the opening is advanta

geous to Black. He has completed his
development and now he undertakes activi
ty on the kingside.
The opening of the central file has led to the
14 'i¥d3 :adS
disappearance of the rooks. True, White's
14. Jdj5f6 1 5 h3 c5 was preferable, chances in the resulting ending are prefera
carrying out unhindered the important . . .c6- ble, thanks to his pawn majority on the
c5 ad vance. queenside. But this advantage is largely
1 5 :e1 ctJ7f6 theoretical and can hardly be exploited if
16 h3 iLf4 Black defends accurately. The text move has
Black is aiming to exchange pieces. Appar the aim of playing the bishop to f1 , where it
ently Botvinnik is relying on his refined will cover the king against checks and also
endgame technique. assist the advance of the white pawns.
17 c3 b6
1 S 'fif3 iLxc1 2S ifbS
1 9 :axc1 iff4 29 'i¥d2 'i¥c7

20 \lWe2 30 iLf1 �fS

31 b4 cxb4
By avoiding the exchange of queens, Tal
32 cxb4 ctJd5!
strives to retain the tension. Black's position
has no obvious weaknesses, and therefore
in the given situation it is not easy to
complicate the play. (see next diagram)
20 � GAME 3 BOTVINNIK - TAL

Black a piece.
8 a6
7 40 bS axbS
41 a6
6

4
8

The knight has taken up a key position in the

centre, where it forestalls White's offensive
actions. If now 33 a4, then 33 ...1Vc3, and in
the event of the exchange of queens,
Black's knight and king will be able to
neutralise the white pawns.
33 a3 "Yi'c3
41 'ifas
34 "Yi'gS 'i¥'f6 The sealed move. On the resumption there
followed:
34 ... f6 35 Vi'xg6 'i¥xa3 was simpler. Now
42 a7 b4
White does not achieve anything with 36
43 �c4 f6
�b5 'iVc1 + 37 �h2 'iff4+ or 36 b5 'iVc5 37
h4 0Je7, and Black defends successfully. Black has no useful moves available. But
35 'iV g3 'Yi'f4 now the position of his king is significantly
36 'ik'd3 'ifc1 weakened.
37 a4 44 �bS b3

Tal resourcefully exploits a favourable op If 44 ...'i¥a3, then 45 iVc5 'ira1 + 46 <i£th2

�h7 47 i..c6 0Jc7 48 Vi'b6 etc.
portunity to activate his pawns. Black can
not take on b4 in view of the obvious mate. 45 'i¥a4
37 . . . �g8? Black resigns.
It is fundamentally incorrect to move the king
away from the main part of the battlefield.
Black could have held the posi-tion by 20th March 1 961 - Game 3
37 ...'ifc3 38 'ifa6 'fic7. Now 39 b5 fails to
39 ...0Jb4, while if 39 'Yi'b5 there follows
39 ...0Jc3 40 'ifa6 CiJd5 with a repetition of Botvinnik Tal
-

moves. Nimzo-lndian Defence

38 aS 'ii'e1 Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik

39 'ifd4!
The decisive breakthrough. White finally 1 c4 CiJf6
creates a passed pawn, which will cost 2 0Jc3 e6
 - : ,_- ----c_--=-_ �
GAME 3 BOTVINNIK - TAL
=====·-.-".='---':;'·
ttJ 21

3 d4 i.b4 In the 5th game I chose a more logical

4 e3
5 �d3
6 a3
7 i.d6
�xc4
It was no accident that Tal employed this
variation of the Nimzo-lndian Defence
against me. Black gives up his pawn centre,
aiming for piece play.
8 liJf3 ltJc6
9 b4
The simplest way of developing the queen's
bishop. Incidentally, White does not achieve
any advantage with either 9 liJbS (as I
played against Tal earlier in the first game of
the match), or 9 i.b5. In order to appreciate
how old this variation is, I should remind you
that this latter move (9 �b5) occurred back
in the game Capablanca-Ragozin (Moscow
1 936). Only, there the white queen was
already at b3, thanks to the fact that the
bishop had reached c4 not in two moves, but
in one.
0-0 continuation - 11 dxe5 ttJxe5 12 i.e2, but
d5 here I was testing my pre-match prepara
dxc4 tions (incidentally, instead of 11 ...ttJxe5,
Alexander Konstantinopolsky recommend
ed 1 1 . .. .-txeS for Black).
11 ltJe7
1 2 h3 �d7
12...�h5 would have led to more complicat
ed play, but, since Tal guessed that I was
prepared for this variation, he chooses a
less obvious move. In addition, Black is
aiming to play his knight to g6, and in this
case the position of the bishop at h5 will be
unsuitable in view of g2-g4.
1 3 ltJg5
Temporarily gaining control of the e4 square
and setting the opponent a simple trap. Tal,
however, was so convinced of the artless
ness of his opponent, that he promptly fell
into it.
13 ...
While the knight was at e7, Black could have
safely made the prophylactic move 1 3...h6.
Now, however, White carries out a tactical
operation, exchanging the enemy light-
square bishop and gaining a significant
positional advantage.
6
5

8
4
7
3
6
2
5
4

a c e 9
3
2
9 e5
10 .llb2. ..tg4
After 1 0...a6 1 1 ..te2 White would have
retained some advantage (Botvinnik-Hecht,
Belgrade 1 969). 14 ltJe6 fxe6
11 d5 1 5 dxe6 �h8
22 � GAME 3 BOTVINNIK- TAL

25 "i'e8
"ii"g4
With the knight at e7, here the bishop would
26 g3 ltJh6
have been able to move.
1 6 exd7 'iixd7 There is no way for Black to achieve any
1 1 o-o 'iff5 activity. If, for example, 26 ...c6 27ltJe3 ltJf6,
18 ltJd5 then 28 'O'f3.
By offering the exchange of knights, White 27 "ifhS tbg8
aims to gain control of the important squares 28 'i!fe2 tb6e7
d5, e4 and g4, which will suppress the 29 lt:Je3!
activity of the opponent's pieces. White now avoids the exchange of knights
18 ... ltJg8 on d5, since the exchange of the same
For the same reason, Black avoids the pieces on g4 is even more favourable for
exchange. him.
1 9 ifg4 'ifc2 29 . . . lt:Jh6
Black, of course, avoids the exchange of 30 tbg4! tbxg4
queens, since in the endgame White's This is equivalent to suicide, since it opens
advantage would be obvious. the h-file. 30 ...'ifh5 31 �g2 (31 tbxe5 'ii'xh3)
20 'iVe2 'iff5 31 ...tbc6 really would have been better.
21 'i:Yg4 'ifc2
22 'i'e2 iff5 31 hxg4 tbc6
23 e4 32 Wg2 i.e7

An important move, restricting still further the 33 .idS!

opponent's pieces. White can easily defend The exchange of rooks would have hin
the f4 square, and if Black wants to transfer dered White's attack on the enemy king.
a knight to d4, which has been left without 33 . . . tbd4
pawn control, an exchange on this square Tal was unable to refrain from this 'activity',
may merely increase White's posi tional but the resulting opposite-colour bishops are
advantage.
in White's favour, since Black has no way of
23 'i:Yd7 opposing the activity of the light square
24 l:tad1 l:tad8 bishop.
 GAME 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK ttJ 23

34 .txd4 exd4 22nd March 1 961 - Game 4

35 .i.c4!
The simplest. It only remains for White to
play .i.d3, f2-f4, �h1 and e4-e5. Tal Botvinnik
-

35 . . . c5
Caro-Kann Defence
After this Black has some slight consolation: Notes by Lev Aronin
two connected passed pawns, but they are
blockaded.
In the first three games of the match there
36 b5 ..tf6
37 f4 d3 had been a purposeful battle, characterised
by a mutual striving for victory. In these
Black sacrifices a pawn, in order to ex- games Botvinnik had managed to gain an
change one pair of rooks. advantage, and so it was quite natural to
38 .:txd3 :xd3 expect that the world champion would make
39 ii.xd3 i.d4 determined efforts to level the scores in this
40 e5 g6 game.
41 .i:.h1 1 e4 c6
It was not hard to guess that it would be a
Caro-Kann Defence: in this second match
both players continue to uphold the virtues of
this opening, Tal - for White, and Botvinnik -
for Black. The only thing that was impossible
to anticipate was precisely what new active
paths Tal would try to seek.
2 d4 d5
3 e5
This distinguishes the opening of this game
from other meetings between the same
players. The comparatively rare continua tion
3 e5 has, of course, been played many
times.
3 c5
The afore-mentioned plan has been carried
Botvinnik thought over this move for more
out unhindered, and now with every move
than ten minutes and, as we see, he avoided
the threats intensify.
the 'most theoretical' 3 ...i.f5. The reasons
41 1;g7 why a particular move was made or was not
42 'i'ie4 b6
made remain, up to a certain time, known
43 i.c4 only to the participants themselves. After the
The sealed move. After 43 ...'iid7 White wins conclusion of the match both grandmasters
by 44 li'c6 'i'xc6+ 45 bxc6 l::tc8 46 e6, while if will probably report on much that for the
43...'i'e7 44 g5 l:Ic8 (otherwise 45 'iic6 and moment cannot be fully dis closed.
46 1Wf6+) 45 f5 gxf5 46 l:ixh7+ �xh7 47
'iVh4+ �g7 48 1i'h6 mate. Black resigns. However, the move 3 ...c5, aiming for an
immediate attack on the white centre, has,
24 � GAME 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK
along with 3 ...i.f5, every right to exist.
Moreover, one can recall games where this
move led, in the end, to success for Black.
That is what happened, for example, in the
game Spassky-Kotov (22nd USSR Cham
pionship).
4 dxc5 e6
It is not hard to see that this position could
have arisen from the French Defence (1 e4
e6 2 d4 dS 3 es cS 4 dxc5) with, of course,
the significant difference that in the above
variation it is Black to move, whereas in the
present game it is White. Should it be
concluded from this, that such play a tempo
down is unacceptable for Black? No. The
point is that the early capture on cs in the
French Defence is rarely recommended, and
normally it leads to an easy game for Black.
4 e6
In the event of the natural 4 ...CZJc6 White
should not reply 5 CZJf3 on account of
5 ...�g4, but 5 i.b5!, after which it is not
easy for Black to regain the pawn.
5 CZJc3
The knight is developed at c3, rather than d2
as often happens in such positions, in order
to have the possibility of CZJc3-b5.
5 CZJc6
6 i.f4
For the moment White does not hurry with
the development of his g1 knight, intending if
6 ....txc5 to reply 7 'i¥g4, which is very
unpleasant for the opponent.
6 CZJge7
7 CLJf3 CZJg6
8 .ie3
A very unusual turn of events. In such
positions White usually retreats his bishop to
g3, intending h2-h4-h5. Tal, however,
seriously sharpens the play; he gives up his
central pawn (which always involves a
definite risk), retaining in return his cS pawn
and thereby creating a pawn majority on the
queenside. In addition, after Black captures
the eS pawn, White gains the opportunity to
quickly complete the mobilisation of his
forces. Thus we see that Tal chooses a
continuation which, while affording the op
ponent certain gains, at the same time
promises a sharpening of the play.
8 l.UgxeS
9 l.Uxe5 tt:JxeS
1 0 'ii'h5
A useful active move, putting the oppo
nent's kingside under fire.
10 ... CZJc6
1 1 0-0-0 �e7
Perhaps the immediate 1 1 ...g6 would have
been better here, and in reply, say, to 1 2
'i¥e2 (or 12 'i¥f3) - 1 2...Ag7. After 1 3 CLJb5
it is true that Black has to castle kingside
(but this is also not bad). In the mutual sharp
attacks on the flanks, that are possible in this
case, Black's chances look fully equiva lent.
In playing 11 ...i.e7, Botvinnik evidently
thought it advisable to retain control of the
d6 square (in the event of a possible
CLJbS), and to create a possible threat to
the cs pawn.
1 2 f4
Not only impeding the black pawns in the centre, but
also creating the threat of f4-f5.
 GAME 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK
ttJ 25
12 g6

1 3 'iVh6 �f8
14 �g5!

Again an interesting decision. It is true that

there is no longer any other acceptable
queen move, but it is obvious that all this
was planned by Tal beforehand. White goes
in for the removal of yet another of his
pawns from the centre, after which it soon
becomes even inevitable that Black will
create two connected passed pawns. In
return, however, White gains new possibili
ties.
14 ... 'i¥xg5 22 i.xd8
Would it not have been better to continue In the heat of the battle, almost without
developing with 1 4... �d7, leaving White thinking, the world champion snatches the
himself to decide what to do with his queen? rook. As shown by Botvinnik's subsequent
1 5 fxg5 play, which up to a point is impeccable, this
natural capture was a mistake, leading to a
Now the threat of tt:Jbs becomes very
decisive strategic advantage for Black.
serious, together with a possible c2-c4.
Meanwhile, by continuing 22 b5 ltJb8 23 a4
Therefore Botvinnik makes the following
e5 24 .l::re1 ! f6 25 g3! and then 26 Ag2
move, after which Black is practically forced
White could have set his opponent very
to sacrifice the exchange. However, as will
serious problems.
become clear from what follows, Tal should
22 <;t>xd8
not have been in too much of a hurry with
the winning of this exchange. 23 b5 ltJb8
15 h6 Now it is hard for the four white pawns on
16 tt:Ja4 i.d7 the queenside to make any progress,
17 �f4! a6 whereas the advance of Black's passed
pawns is irresistible.
Since . . .e6-e5, weakening the black pawns 24 �e2 f5
in the centre, is obviously unacceptable,
25 �f3
Botvinnik ensures the win of the g-pawn in
return for the exchange, which he is ready to It is hard to offer White any better advice. He
give up. All his calculations for the future are is aiming to clear lines on the queenside,
associated, of course, with the creation of since he has two rooks in reserve, but with
two connected passed pawns in the centre accurate play Botvinnik achieves a winning
- a factor which almost decides the out position.
come in his favour. 25 axb5
18 ltJb6 .l:d8 26 cxb5 ..ixb5
19 �c7 hxg5
27 ..txb7
20 c4 d4
28 a4
21 b4 �g7 After 28 ..tf3 the reply 28 . . .g4 would have
26 � GAME 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK

been immediately decisive, while if 28 i..a8,
then 28 . . .tt:Ja6.
28 . . . i..xa4
29 tt:Jxa4 �xb7
The position has simplified. The black king
has acquired the excellent square c6, the c5
pawn is sooner or later doomed, and the
black pawns are still enormously strong.
Despite the world champion's exceptional
mastery in creating complications and find
ing tactical resources, it seemed improbable
that White would be able to save the game.
30 �d2 tt:Jd7
Not only defending against 33 ...�f4+, but
also intending to advance the king.
33 . . . �as
But now after this move Black is no longer
winning. Meanwhile, by continuing 33 ....tc7,
he would still have had every justification for
counting on a win, since 34 �xd4, immedi
ately or after 34 :b6+ �xb6 35 cxb6+ �d6
36 <iitxd4, is not possible on account of
. . .l:.h4+.
34 �b6+! l'bxb6
35 cxb6+ �d7
Or 35 ...'it'b5 36 llc5+ and 37 llxe5, while if 35 ...<it>d6, then 36 b7 l:tb8 37l'bc5.

31 �b1 + �c6 2
32 �hc1 36 l'bc5+ �e7
37 :e1 lla3+
Of course, not 37 ...Wf6 on account of 38
b7 :b8 39 llxe5. 3
38 �c4 l:c3+
If immediately 38 ...lle3, then 39 �xe3 dxe3
40 <it>d3! is evidently sufficient for a draw.
39 �b5 l:le3
40 l:a1 ..txh2
41 I:la7+

8 8

6
Another interesting moment. The natural
move 32 ...�a8 suggests itself, and appar 5

ently it was in fact the most clear-cut way to 4

win. Indeed, 33l'bb6 is parried by 33 ...�a2+
3
and then 34 ...l'bxc5, while if 33 l:.b6+ Black
wins after 33 . . l'bxb6. 34 cxb6+ �d6 35 b7 2

l:ib8 36 :b1 i..f8 37 �d3 e5 38 l:.b6+ �c7 39

:xg6 :xb7, and if 40 l:xg5, then 40 . . .�b4 41 c d e g h
�xf5 �d6 and White loses his knight. 1

However, the move made by Botvinnik in the The game was adjourned in this position and
game is also good enough to win. Botvinnik sealed the move 41 ... �e8. The
32 ..tes king could not go to f6, since after 42 l:.h7
White would even win.
33 �d3
 GAME 5 BOTVINNIK - TAL tZJ 27

After 41 ...Wf8 the simplest is 42 ctJd7+ thoroughly analysed as the 'Four Knights
(42 ...�g7 43 g4!) with a draw. But after Game'. From this it follows that outward
41 ...�e8, the move sealed by Botvinnik, similarity and formal indications in an open
White forces a draw by 42 l:h7 ..tf4 43 ctJd7 ing cannot characterise its essence.
d3 44 ctJf6+ when he gives perpetual check. 6 dxc4
Therefore, without resuming the game, the 7 kxc4 i.d6
grandmasters agreed a draw. 8 tt:Jf3 tt:Jc6
9 b4 e5
1 0 .i.b2 i.g4

24th-25th March 1 961

GameS

Botvinnik - Tal
Ragozin Defence
Notes by Vyacheslav Ragozin

1 c4 ctJf6
2 tt:Jc3 e6
3 d4 i.b4 11 dxe5
4 e3 0-0 In the third game Botvinnik played 11 d5,
5 .i.d3 d5 but, despite the pleasant memories, he
employs a new continuation, avoiding any
Only now is the character of the opening
prepared surprise on the part of his oppo
determined. After the first move it could have
nent.
been said - 'English Opening', after the third -
11 tt:Jxe5
'Nimzo-lndian Defence', but now we see on
1 2 i.e2 'ile7
the board a Queen's Gambit with the
development of the bishop at b4, which in In view of Black's better development, it is
theory is recognised under the name of advantageous for him to maintain the piece
'Ragozin Defence'. I am forced to enter into a tension in the centre. White has not yet
defence of my own Defence, since in ·solved the problem of where to place his
numerous newspaper articles, and also in king. Therefore Botvinnik embarks on the
the special match bulletin (the first and third path of simplification.
games), for some reason the heading 1 3 ctJb5 �fd8
'Nimzo-lndian Defence' is given. I am sure 14 'ifc2 aS
that after the moves 1 e4 e5 2 ctJf3 tt:Jc6 3 1 5 tt:Jxd6 cxd6
.i.b5 ctJf6 4 tt:Jc3 it would not occur to
anyone to call this position a Ruy Lopez,
since in theory this continuation has been (see next diagram)
28 c;i;? GAME 5 BOTVINNIK - TAL

Although Black now has an isolated pawn, it Botvinnik has carried out his plan. Thanks to
is not a weakness, since it supports his a series of exchanges the battle is taking a
pieces in the centre. In addition, the open c quiet course. It appears that peace will soon
file secures him the initiative. be concluded.
16 'iVd1 23 l:tc2 l2Jed6
Avoiding a weakening of the kingside, since 24 l:d1 :dd8
if 1 6 0-0 there would have followed 1 There was no need for such caution - Black
6. . .�xf3. reinforces his back rank. Meanwhile, signifi
16 l:ac8 cantly stronger was 24 ....:dc7 with the threat
17 0-0 l2Je4 of ...l2Jxb2. If instead 25 :tdc1 , then 25 . .
1 8 etJd4 .l2Je8.
Botvinnik continues his plan of simplifying 25 etJb3 l2Jxb2
the position. New exchanges are inevitable. 25 ...etJb5 would also have led to an equal
Here Botvinnik declined his opponent's offer game.
of a draw, although the two sides' chances 26 :xb2 l2Jc4
are equal. 27 .:ta2 b6
18 ... i..xe2 28 �f1 f6
1 9 'i¥xe2 l2Jc4 29 a4 ttJes
The black knights occupy very favourable 30 b5 Itc3
positions. Now White's dangerous bishop, 31 etJd4 lias
situated on the long diagonal, is neutralised. 32 l!da1 aS
20 :ac1 d5 33 :ld1
21 'iVg4 �d7
22 'ii'xd7 .:xd7 White's only chance is an attack on the weak
dS pawn, but Black has sufficient
counterplay in view of the active placing of
his pieces. In addition, White's a4 pawn also
(see next diagram) needs defending.

(see next diagram)

 GAME 5 BOTVINNIK - TAL
� 29

a b c d e g h

33 .:ac8 The plans of the two sides are clear: White

The effect of time trouble, or an oversight? concentrates his efforts on the kingside,
Tal voluntarily gives up a pawn, although he whereas Black creates threats on the
could have fought to hold on to it and not queenside.
without success. For example: 33 ...ttJd3 34 48 l:te6+ �ta
ttJc6 �f7 35 :ad2 ttJb4 36 ttJxb4 axb4 37 49 l:td6 �e8
:xd5 .:txa4 with a probable draw. 50 .:e6+ �fa
34 ttJf5 .l:.8c7 51 �g3
35 :xd5 <it>f7
36 :d1 Preparing :e?, which was not possible
�e6
immediately on account of ...ct:Je5+.
37 ttJd4+ �f7
51 l:txa4
38 �e2 l:t7c4
White's task would have been more difficult
39 h3 l:.b4
after the preparatory 51 ...h5.
40 ttJc2 :bc4
52 l:te7 tt:Jcs
41 .:d2 53 :xh7 ttJe4+
The game was adjourned in this position. White has an 54 �h2
undisputed advantage, but Black has counterplay on the
queenside, and this leads to a sharp struggle.
The only quiet shelter. The play has become
41 sharper. Black has created counterplay, but
�e7
42 ttJd4 g6 his king's position is less secure than
White's.
43 l:td1
54 ctJd6
It is possible that 43 l:.a 1 would have been It is essential to prevent l:.b7.
stronger, with the same idea.
55 :h8+
43 ttJd7
44 ttJc6+ �ea With this move White releases the black king
and thereby loses his advantage. 55 ct:Je7
45 l:td6 :c2+
came into consideration (apparently 55 :d7
46 :xc2 :xc2+
would also have given winning chances).
47 �f3 :a2
55 �f7
 GAME 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK
30 �
56 .:bs lt:Jc4 70 h5 gxh5

57 .:tea 71 gxh5 lt:Jxe3

72 h6 .Ug2+
73 �h1 �g3
8 8
Draw.
7 7

6 6

5 5

3
27th March 1 961 Game 6-

2 2

a bcde h Tal Botvinnik

9 -

Caro-Kann Defence
ctJd2 Notes by Evgeny Sveshnikov

With the unpleasant threat of 58 ...lt:Jf1 + 59

�g1 lla1 . 1 e4 c6
58 g4 l!a2 2 d4 d5
59 lib8 lt:Je4 3 e5!? c5!?
60 l::txb6 .:txf2+
The alternative for Black is 3 ...i..f5!, to which
61 �g1 Botvinnik turned in the 1 9th game of the
The white king has ended up in the same match.
position as Black's a few moves ago. A draw 4 dxc5 e6
is now inevitable. After this opening duel between Tal and
61 J:tb2 Botvinnik, in later years Black more often
62 lt:Jxa5 lt:Jd2 played 4 ....�Jc6, in order after 5 lt:Jf3 to
63 lt:Jc6 develop his bishop at g4. But, of course,
White does not play 5 ctJf3?!, but 5 AbS!,
White hurries to play his knight to d4.
retaining the advantage, since it takes Black
63 lt:Jc4
a considerable time to regain the pawn.
64 .l:tb7+ <it>e6
In evaluating the opening stage of the game,
65 h4 it can be mentioned that the position after 4 .
The last chance! . .e6 is very similar to a variation of the
65 �d5 French Defence with 3 eS. The only
66 l:.d7+ �c5 difference is that even if White plays very
67 :d3 �xb5 simply - 5 ctJf3, 6 i..d3 and even 7 c3, all the
68 ttJd4+ Wc5
same he will have an extra tempo, and this is
of considerable importance in the open ing.
69 ctJf3 �e2 Therefore it can be concluded that the
Tal conducts the concluding part of the game variation 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 cS?! 4 dxcS
very confidently. e6?! can hardly be good for Black, and it is
 GAME 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK
no accident that the move 4 . . .e6 rarely
occurs nowadays, but even the superior
4 . . .ltJc6 does not give equality. It is not
surprising that later Botvinnik played 3 . . .
i.f5!.
5 'ii'g4!?
In the fourth game Tal, on encountering this
position for the first time, reacted with the
unfortunate 5 ltJc3, and after 5 . . .ltJc6 6 i..f4
ltJge7 7 liJf3 ltJg6 8 i.e3 ltJgxe5 9 ltJxe5 ltJxe5
1 0 �hS ltJc6 11 0-0-0 i.e? Black successfully
solved all his problems, taking play into an
endgame.
On this occasion the young champion brings
out his queen to an active position, after
which Black has problems with the
development of his kingside. Modern expe
rience suggests that 5 i.e3!? is also very
strong: 5 . . .ltJh6!? (probably Black's best
option) 6 c3 liJfS 7 i.d4 i.d7 8 ltJf3 ltJc6
9 i¥d2 f6 (9 ...a5 1 0 i.d3!? ltJh4 11 ltJxh4 �xh4
1 2 i.e2±) 1 0 b4 aS 1 1 exf6 gxf6 1 2 bS ltJcxd4 1
3 cxd4 eS 1 4 ltJc3 e4 1 5 ltJg 1 ! ?
(inferior is 1 5 g4?! ltJe7 1 6 ltJg1 i.xg4
1 7 �f4 f5 1 8 h3 i.hS 1 9 b6 with an un
clear game, Nijboer-Giek, Groningen 1 997)
1 5...i.h6 1 6 'it'd1 a4 1 7 b6 0-0 1 8 ltJge2
ltJe7 1 9 g3± .
5 ltJd7
It is remarkable that, purely on practical
grounds, Botvinnik ventured this variation
once more in the 8th game of the return
match, but by then Tal was fully prepared for
it: 5 ...ltJc6 6 liJf3 file? 7 i.b5 i.d7 8 i.xc6
fl/xc6 9 i.e3 ltJh6 1 0 i.xh6 gxh6 1 1 ltJbd2
'ii'xc5 1 2 c4 0-0-0 1 3 0-0 and White had a
clear advantage. For an objective evalua tion
of the position, Black's strongest reply 5
...hS! must be studied.
(see next diagram)
CtJ 31
Now White does not achieve anything with 6
1i'g3 h4 7 1Vg4 ltJh6 8 i.xh6 :xh6 9 liJf3
ltJd7 1 0 i.b5 �g6 1 1 'i'h3 a6 1 2 i.d3 l:h6
1 3 0-0 ltJxc5 1 4 liJbd2 i.d7 1 5 ltJb3 ltJxd3
1 6 cxd3 i.a4 17 'iVg4 i.b5 with chances for
both sides (Khalifman-Kachiani, Bayern 1
997), therefore 6 'i'f4!? i.xcs 7 i..d3 'ii'b6 8 c3!
(this is stronger than 8 ltJh3t) 8 ...as (inferior
is 8 ...g5!? 9 'i'xg5 i.xf2+ 1 0 �f1 i.xg1 11
l:txg1 ltJe7 12 ltJa3 �g8 (or 1 2...liJfS 1 3
i.xfS exfS 1 4 1Vg7! �f8 1 5 i.h6 ltJd7 1 6
l:te1± and there is nothing that Black can
move!) 1 3 'ifxhS i.d7 1 4 1Ve2! ltJg6 1 5 i.e3
Wile? 1 6 i.d4±) 9 liJh3 (9 liJd2t) 9 ...ltJe7
(9 ...ltJc6 1 0 0-0 liJh6 1 1 'iVgS �f8 12
'ifxh5±) 1 0 ltJd2t.
6 ltJf3
A natural move, yet 6 i.bS! was better,
making it difficult for Black to equalise the
material.
6 ltJe7
7 i.g5
Again White misses the chance to keep his
pawn after 7 i.b5!, and if 7 ...ltJf5 8 b4, while
if 7 ...ltJc6, then 8 i.e3 W/c7 9 'iig3± or 9
t2Jc3 ltJdxe5 1 0 ltJxe5 'iixeS 1 1 0-0-0 with
an attack.
7 h6
7 ...ltJxc5!? looks more natural.
8 i.xe7
The alternative was 8 i.e3!? liJfS 9 i.b5
32 � GAME 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK

lt:Jxe3 1 0 fxe3 'Wic7 1 1 0-0 .ixc5 1 2 'iixg7 1 2 lt:Jd4 .i.d7

13 h4 o-o-o
�xe3+ 1 3 'ii?h1 .l:it8 1 4 lt:Jc3 a6 1 5 .i.d3.
In any case Black's problems would have Of course, the black king slips away to the
been greater. queenside, but the immediate 1 3...l:Ic8 was
8 'Wixe7 also interesting.
9 lt:Jc3 'ii'xc5
1 4 l:Ih3 Wb8!
10 o-o-o a6!
Safety, above all!
1 5 f4
It was worth tying Black's forces to the
defence of the f7 pawn after 1 5 'iVt4!? �e8.
15 lieS
16 h5 �g8

Prophylaxis against Tal! Botvinnik sensed

intuitively that it was dangerous to take the
pawn, and variations confirm this: 1 0...
'iVxt2?! 11 lbb5 tt:Jxe5 12 'Wit4 lt:Jg6 1 3 lt:Jc7+
�e7 (1 3 ...Wd8 1 4 'i'xt7±) 1 4 lt:Jxd5+ exd5 1 5
'i¥c7+ Wf6 1 6 'ii'c3+�e7 (16...We6 1 7
� c4! with an attack) 1 7 'i¥c7+ with After this it is evident that Black has solved
perpetu al check. his opening problems, since it is not appar
ent how White can strengthen his position,
11 �b1
and the possession of the two bishops
1 1 'iVg3 is not in Tal's style.
means that Black need not tear any opening
11 lt:Jb6 of the game.
By defending the important d5 square and 17 ctJb3 'VJilc7
preparing to evacuate his king to the 18 �d3 ctJc4
queenside, Botvinnik skilfully continues his 1 9 i.xc4 i¥xc4
tactics of restraining the opponent's attack 20 lt:Jd4
ing possibilities.
The control of the blockading square d4
Again in the event of 1 1 ...'iVxt2 White's
initiative would have been sufficient com compensates tor Black's possession of the
pensation tor the pawn: 1 2 �d3 b5 1 3 l:.ht1 two bishops.
�b6 and now White has a choice between 20 .ie7
14 .i.g6 and 1 4 'i'h5!? l:Ia7 (14 ...b4 1 5 21 l:.hd3 'Wic7
lt:Jxd5 with an attack) 1 5 lt:Jh4. 22 'ii'e2 'ifb6
 GAME 7 BOTVINNIK - TAL 33
CiJ
23 'i'g4 'illc7 which had occurred several times in the

24 'ii'e2 games from our previous match.

4 ..5i.xc3+
5 bxc3 b6
8 8
Black avoids 5 ...ltJe4 6 e3 f5 7 1i'h5+
7
(Botvinnik-Tal, 20th match game, Moscow
1 960). A good alternative is 5 ...c5, as
6 played, for example, in the game Botvinnik
Budo (Leningrad 1 938) and the training
game Kan-Botvinnik (Nikolina gora 1 952). 4

6 f3 �a6
7 e4
2

A tacit offer of a draw.

24 'ii'b6
25 'i¥g4 'iic7
Draw.
The commentators unanimously judged this
game to be a brief respite after five rounds of
tense struggle. However, if in the opening
Tal had played 5 ltJf3 or 6 i.b5, Black's
problems would have been much more
difficult. 7 d5
This move can be considered a positional
mistake, since it allows White to immediate ly
29th March 1 961 - Game 7 get rid of his weak c4 pawn. I have to admit
that already then I knew that 7 ...ttJc6 gives
Black a good game, and after 8 i..d3 ttJa5 9
Botvinnik Tal
-
'i¥e2 d6! followed by ...'ii'd7-a4(or c6) his
position is perfectly sound.
Nimzo-lndian Defence
One gains the impression that, from the
Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik
standpoint of opening preparation, my op
ponent had not made very fruitful use of the
1 c4 ltJf6
ten months separating our second match
2 ltJc3 e6
from the first.
3 d4 �b4 8 cxd5
4 a3 Another plan was carried out in the game
In the earlier games of the return match I Alekhine-Eiiskases (1 933/34): 8 i..g5 h6 9
chose 4 e3. Now I decided to check what my i..h4 i..xc4 1 0..txc4 dxc4 11 'ii'a4+.
opponent had prepared in this variation, 8 �xf1
 4 � GAME 7
3
9 <i1t>xf1 exd5
1 0 �g5
A plan typical of such positions, which I
employed, for example, against Tal in the 4th
game of our first match, although in a
somewhat different situation.
10 . . . h6
The pawn exchange 1 0 ...dxe4 11 fxe4
would have given White predominance in the
centre and the possibility of convenient ly
developing his pieces at f3.
Tal tries to complicate matters with a pawn
sacrifice (11 �xf6 'ifxf6 - of course, not
11 ...gxf6 - 1 2 exd5 0-0, with a comfortable
game for Black). True to my match tactics, I
declined the pawn sacrifice, so as not to
concede the initiative to my opponent.
11 \i'a4+
a c e g
11 c6
Avoiding the endgame, since after 1 1 ...
'�d7 12 'ii'xd7+ tLlbxd7 1 3 �xf6 (or 1 3
.i.h4 dxe4 1 4 .:te1 ) 1 3...tLlxf6 1 4 e5
White's advantage is obvious. But the course
chosen by Black leads to a difficult
middlegame. Now the bishop can be
retained, and Black will have no time to think
about occupying c4 with one of his knights .
1 2 .th4
Of course, here too White avoids 1 2 �xf6 �xf6 1 3 exd5
o-o.
BOTVINNIK - TAL
12 ... dxe4
A highly dubious decision. The opening of
lines in the centre merely assists the
development of White's initiative.
13 �e1 g5
This is now forced.
14 i.f2
The only move. In the event of the routine 1
4 i.g3 Black's position would not have been
so bad after 1 4. . .'i¥d5. But now if 1 4...1i'd5
there can follow 1 5 c4 (the d4 pawn is
defended) 1 5. . .1i'e6 1 6 'i¥c2 (16 fxe4
tt:Jxe4 1 7 'i¥c2 f5 1 8 g4 is unconvincing on
account of 1 8.. /�i'd8! 1 9 gxf5 \i'xc4+ 20
'iixc4 lt:Jd2+) and 1 7 fxe4 with a decisive
advantage for White.
This is the subtle point of the manoeuvre,
begun with 12 i.h4.
14 .. . 'V/Jie7
1 5 tLle2
But not 1 5 fxe4 in view of 1 5. . .tt:Jxe4 1 6 'ii'c2
f5 1 7 g4 tLld7 1 8 gxf5 ctJdf6.
15 b5
16 'i¥c2 �xa3
If 1 6...e3, then 1 7 .i.xe3 lt:Jd5 1 8 �c1 .
Convinced that the positional battle is lost,
Black tries at least to retain a material
advantage.
1 7 h4
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
a c e g
 GAME 7 BOTVINNIK - TAL
ttJ 35

White aims as quickly as possible to bring 23 lla1 'Wie7

into play his last reserve, the rook at h1 . If 24 �xa7 'iYxe4
now 1 7...g4 1 8 fxe4, and g4 remains The exchange of queens does not weaken
inaccessible to the black knight. After White's attack.
17...�g8 (as should have been played) 1 8 25 'i¥xe4 llxe4
hxg5 hxg5 White's king's rook is immediate ly 26 .l:.a8+ ctJb8
activated. Black's reply also allows the
bishop to come into play with decisive effect. Of course, not 26 ...�c7 27 i..g3+.
27 i.g3 �b7
17 gxh4 28 �ha1
1 8 i..xh4 ttJbd7
1 9 ttJg3 0-0-0

On the queenside too the king will not find a

quiet refuge, and loss of material for Black
becomes inevitable.
20 tt:Jxe4

28 lieS
Defending against the threat of 29 l:1a7+
�b6 30 i.e? mate.
29 li8a7+ �b6
30 i..xb8
Again threatening mate (31 �1 a6). Black
20 ...tt:Jxe4 is not possible on account of 21 loses a piece.
'ii'xe4 with two threats: 22 �xc6+ and 22 30 b4
i.xd8. Therefore Black offers a piece sacri 31 i.d6 bxc3
fice. 32 i.c5+ �b5
20 . . . :he8 33 .:1a4
21 c;t>t2!
Black resigns.
White is not in a hurry to gain material. After
From the character of the play, one might
21 ttJxf6 �xe1 + 22 Wxe1 'iVa1 + 23 'ii'd1
imagine that it was Tal playing White, and
'iVxc3+ 24 �f1 ttJe5 some complications
Botvinnik playing Black.
would have arisen. It is more important to
retain the initiative.
21 tt:Jxe4+
22 fxe4 f6
36 \t> GAME 8 TAL - BOTVINNIK

31 st March 1 961 - Game 8 subsequent pawn storm on the kingside. The

immediate counter in the centre effec tively
takes the play into one of the varieties of the
Tal Botvinnik
- French Defence.
Caro-Kann Defence 4 dxc5 e6
Notes by Alexander Kotov 5 'ifg4

1 e4 c6
When annotating this game, I made this
move on the board and thought: how the fate
of this opening has changed! At one time the
Caro-Kann Defence was regarded as
unreliable, uninteresting and cowardly. It will
be remembered, for example, how much
criticism grandmaster Flohr had to endure
from the commentators, for the fact that he
invariably employed this opening 'where you
cannot squeeze out more than a draw'.

But in 1 958 Botvinnik employed this open

ing for the first time in his career in his return
After his experiment with 5 lt:Jc3 in the fourth
match with Smyslov. Its success, as is
game, Tal decided in favour of this queen
known, was stunning. Botvinnik gained
sortie. The idea of the move is correct -
several wins with the Caro-Kann and this old
White ties down the f8 bishop to the defence
defence immediately revived; now it is
of the g7 pawn and makes it hard for the
played in every tournament.
opponent to regain the c5 pawn.
2 d4 d5
5 lt:Jc6
3
In the sixth game Botvinnik played 5 ...lt:Jd7
This is how they tried to refute this opening
and gained a comfortable position. The
in the initial period of its existence. Then
development of the knight at c6 allows White
ways were suggested with 3 lt:Jc3, 3 exd5
to eliminate this important piece and to set
cxd5 4 c4, and finally 2 lt:Jc3 d5 3 lt:Jf3.
the opponent difficult problems, again
Supporters of the Caro-Kann Defence found
associated with the regaining of the c5 pawn.
adequate rejoinders against all these at
tempts. Before the return match Tal joked
6 lt:Jf3 'ifc7
that he had 'refuted' the Caro-Kann De 7 i.d7
�b5
fence. But perhaps this was not a joke, and
8 �xc6 'ii'xc6
the world champion considered the impetu
ous 3 e5 to be a dangerous continuation? 9 .i.e3
3 c5 The same direct strategy. Tal does not allow
At any event, for the third time Botvinnik his opponent to capture the c5 pawn
avoids the theoretical reply 3 ...i.f5. Possi bly immediately and forces him to carry out an
he was afraid of new ways of playing for additional operation in order to do this. If now
White, associated with 4 c4 or 4 lt:Je2 and a Botvinnik had played 9 ...lt:Je7, there
 GAME 8
could have followed 1 0 lt:Jbd2 lt:Jts 1 1
lt:Jb3 lt:Jxe3 1 2 fxe3 and White's position is
very active.
9 lt:Jh6
A move which has its pluses and minuses.
By ruining his kingside pawns, Botvinnik
allows his opponent many tactical thrusts
associated with the weakening of the d6 and
f6 squares. However, in return Black gains
two dangerous bishops, which - alas!
- in the present game are not in fact
destined to expand.
1 0 �xh6 gxh6
1 1 lt:Jbd2 'ifxc5
1 2 c4!
White displays an excellent understanding
of the position. Since it is dangerous to take
on c4 in view of the possible march by the
knight via e4 to f6 or d6, he gains the
opportunity to attack Black's central sup
ports. White may be able to take on d5, or
else advance his c-pawn further, cramping
the black pieces.
12 0-Q-0
Many grandmasters, analysing this game in
the press centre, recommended that Black
should nevertheless have taken on c4. They
had rothing to fear, they were not playing
the game themselves, and therefore the
TAL - BOTVINNIK l2J 37
_-- -----·;,-:-.·:- �--;:·: ··--·-:::
most daring decisions could be suggested.
From the practical point of view, even if the
capture on c4 was possible, it is hard to
condemn Botvinnik for the fact that he
avoided this seemingly risky move.
1 3 0-0 <it>bS
1 4 :td1
A move which was not easy to find. The
immediate concentration of White's forces on
the c-file suggests itself - 14 :fc1 . Tal carries
out a more profound plan: he places his
rooks on d1 and c1 , which enables him to
create the maximum dangerous pressure on
the entire enemy centre.
14 �b6
A tactical oversight. Botvinnik thought that
with 1 5...i.c5 he would be able to begin a
counterattack against the f2 square and
succeed in completing the mobilisation of
his pieces. However, Tal's reply deprives
Black of this hope. The immediate 1 4...i.e7
was correct, in order to begin counterplay
on the g-file as soon as possible.
1 5 'iVh4!
Preventing the development of the bishop
both at e7, and at c5 (in the latter case 1 6
lt:Jb3 is good). I n addition, at h4 the queen is
dangerously active, threatening to invade at
f6 and (if the bishop moves from f8) at h6.
15 a5
38 � GAME 8 TAL - BOTVINNIK

In games between Botvinnik and Tal one

feature is noticeable. The former world
champion tries to suppress the slightest
possibility of boundless complications, not
amenable to calculation. He carefully sup
presses every possible tactical thrust by Tal.
Thus here he securely prevents White's b2-
b4.
Even so, this move cannot be considered
good. 1 5.. Jic8 should have been played.
1 6 :ac1 �98
Black's position is difficult. He does not have
sufficient counterplay and his bishops occupy
extremely passive positions. In addition, all
White's plan is simple: relying on the strong
the time Black has to reckon with the
position of his knight at d4, he is aiming for a
weakness of his kingside pawns and to
rapid pawn offensive on the queenside.
defend them.
20 ... axb3
17 tLlb3!
21 axb3 'iVd8
Intending to play this knight to d4, and also
to advance the c4 pawn or capture on d5. Black hopes to ease his defence by ex
Botvinnik now faces a difficult choice. changing queens. However, even after the
Possibly it would have been better to prevent simplification of the position, the impetuous
the advance of the c5 pawn and play 1 Tal continues his fierce onslaught. Black's
7...�c8. In this case 1 8 cxd5 l:.xc1 1 9 position is already hopeless and soon the
tLlxc1 exd5 20 �xd5 is not dangerous for inevitable catastrophe ensues.
Black, since after 20 ...�c6 his bishops gain 22 'ifxd8 llxd8
scope and become extremely active. 23 b4 l:.g4

17 ... a4 24 b5 :c8

After this Black is condemned to lengthy 25 c6!

passivity and can only await the opponent's A highly unpleasant thrust. To take on c6
offensive. 1 7. . .dxc4 should have been means completely exposing the king. How
played. ever, after the retreat of the bishop Black's
1 8 c5! Wlic7 pieces are helpless.
1 9 tLlbd4 l:.c8 25 i..e8
20 b4 26 .:tc2 i.g7
There is no longer any defence. After 26 ...b6
White calmly builds up the pressure by
doubling rooks on the a-file. Botvinnik
(see next diagram) attempts somehow to complicate the play
and allows the world champion to conclude
the game with a spectacular stroke.
27 Zia1 �xeS
28 tLlxe5 l:.xd4
 GAME 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL � 39

4 ctJf3 e4
5 ctJd4 d5
6 cxd5 'iVb6
At that time this was almost an innovation. It
had been played not long before this match
by Mikenas against Taimanov (1 960). In
that game there followed 7 lt:Jc2, which is
more common even now, although the
continuation chosen by me is sound enough.
7 ctJb3 cxd5
8 jLg2

29 ctJd7+!
Black resigns. He has a dismal choice:
29 ...�c7 30 b6+ �dB 31 cxb7, or
29 ...�xd7 30 cxd7 :ds 31 �c8+! :xeS 32
:aS+!. In both cases a new white queen
appears on the board.
An excellent win by the world champion. His
play in the complicated middlegame posi tion
creates a strong impression.

8 a5
7th-8th April 1 961 - Game 9
In view of Black's retarded development, he
had no justification for wasting two tempi on
this and the further advance of his pawn.
Botvinnik - Tal
Such an 'initiative' can be parried without
English Opening difficulty.
Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik The correct plan of development was dem
onstrated in the game Reshevsky-Keres (1
1 c4 ctJf6 963): 8. ..�f5 9 d3 �b4 1 0 0-0 �xc3 11
2 CZJc3 e5 bxc3 o-o 1 2 jLe3 Wile?, but the quiet play
3 g3 c6 resulting after 8 ...i.f5 evidently did not suit
the world champion.
A well-known continuation of Keres. Al
9 d3 a4
though White can hope for an opening 1 0 �e3 iVb4
advantage, the play becomes sharp, which
11 ctJd4 a3
always suits Tal.
No better was 11 .. ."i5xb2, to which the simplest reply would
My opponent was in a fighting mood, since in be 1 2
the preceding game of our match he had o-o.

won in good style.

1 2 l2Jc2!
40 � GAME 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL

An obvious refutation of the rook's pawn's 17 ltJc6

swift advance. 1 8 dxe4 dxe4
12 ... 'iVxb2 1 9 ltJxe4
13 .i.d4 i.b4
After 1 9 lbd5 "i¥d4 20 lbc7+ �e7 21 lbxa8
Only in this way can the 'would-be-attacker' (the outcome would also be unclear after 21
queen be saved. l:Ixc6 'iixd1 22 :xe6+ fxe6 23 !:Ixd1 llhd8)
14 ltJxb4 21 ... '�xd1 22 kifxd1 ltxa8 23 i..xe4 i.xa2
Naturally, White avoids 14 l:.b1 .i.xc3+ 1 5 the passed a-pawn would have caused
'it>f1 .i.xd4, since the queen is won at too White considerable problems.
high a cost. 19 . . . .txa2
14 . . . 'iVxb4 The boldness of desperation. Otherwise
1 5 i.xt6 Black would simply have been a pawn down
and in a difficult position.
Of course, not 1 5 dxe4 ltJc6.
20 lbd6+ 'it>ts
gxt6 16 0-0
21 ltJxb7 ltJe5
22 lbc5 l:.b8

The diagram demonstrates clearly the fail

ure of Black's play.
16 . . . i.e6
1 7 l:tc1
17 'i¥c1, suggested by Bronstein, would
seem to be more logical, in order to use the
rook on the b-file (e.g. 1 7...ltJc6 1 8 kib1
ile7 1 9 dxe4 dxe4 20 ltJxe4, and the threat
of 21 :xb7 can hardly be parried). However,
White would have had to reckon with the
possible reply 17. . .�b2.
At the same time, as will be seen from what
follows, the move in the game by no means
throws away the win.
22 ...k!.c8 was completely bad in view of 23
'il'd6+ �g8 24 ltJe6 'ii'b8 25 :xc8+ 'iVxc8 26
lbf4, creating numerous threats (27 'ii'xa3,
27 'il'xf6 etc.). In a difficult position Tal finds
a clever chance. The main aim of the move
is not only to move the rook away from the
attack by the bishop, but also to defend the
queen in the variation 23 'iid6+ �g7 24
lbe6+.
23 lba6
The tempting 23 f4 lbg4 24 e4 (or 24 lbd7+
'it>g7 25 lbxb8 :xb8!) 24 ...lbe3 25 �d6+
�g7 26 e5 did not hold any great danger for
 GAME 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL ltJ 4 1

Black, since instead of 24 ...lt:Je3 he would 29 i.e4 .:e8

reply 24 ... h5!. White takes the correct If 29 .. .Ct:Jc4 White would have won by 30
decision to go into an endgame, where he �c3! (30 . . .li:Jd2+ 31 .:txd2).
has every chance of winning, since the a3 30 l:.a4 .:.e7
pawn is doomed. 31 ..tf5 lic7
23 . . . �b3! 32 l:.h4
White cannot avoid the exchange of queens.
Forcing a weakening of the h-pawn.
24 lt:Jxb4 i..xd1
32 h6
25 l:tfxd1 .:txb4
33 l:.a4 �c5
26 .:ta1
34 h3 tt:Jc4
35 ..td3 lt:Je5

The repetition of moves is explained by the

fact that Black's knight has no convenient
strong-point other than e5. White, naturally,
is aiming to reach the time control, to avoid
taking any committing decisions before
home analysis.
36 i.e4 lt:Jc4
37 i.d3 lt:Je5
38 i..e4 lt:Jc4
39 �e1
The incautious 39 i.d3 would have led after
39 ...lt:Je5 to the position being repeated
three times, and so to a draw.
26 l!b2 39 lt:Je5
Was it possible to make things more difficult 40 l:.ad4 l:tc3
for White, by aiming to give up the a3 pawn 41 l:.1d2 l:tc1+
at the cost of the exchange of minor pieces? 42 �d1 l:.c3
After all, in a rook ending the conversion of a 43 f4 f5
material advantage is not easy when the
pawns are all on one wing. It turns out that
White could have avoided such simplifica
tion, for example 26 ...�a4 27 f4 lt:Jc4 28
�d4 (but not 28 lid7 li:Je3) 28 ...�g7 29 i.c6
l:.b4 30 i..e4! (threatening 31 l:.xa3)
30 ...�a4 31 i.c2 l1b4 32 ..td3 .l:.c8 33 lixa3.
Therefore Black gives up the a3 pawn
without a fight, and the game enters a purely
technical phase, which, however, lasts a
further 45 moves. But in such positions is it
worth hurrying?
27 �f1 �g7
28 lixa3 l:tc8
42 � GAME 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL

A rather surprising move, especially since it 8 8

was apparently planned by Tal in his home

7 7
analysis. 43 ...lt:Jc4 would have offered a
more tenacious resistance. 6 6

44 i.xf5 lt:Jc4 5

It can only be assumed that, when he gave 4

up the pawn, Tal had in mind 44 ...ttJf3+ 45
3 3
exf3 Ite3+ 46 �f1 �xf3+ 47 �g1 l:txg3+ 48
� h1 , but not without reason he 2 2

avoided it, since Black has no compensation a b c d e g h

for the piece. Or perhaps he hoped that I
would be afraid of this continuation?
45 l:t4d3 ncc2
46 i.g4 l:ta2
The black rooks have finally left the second
47 :b3 �g6
rank, in order to hinder the advance of the
48 <itf2 ctJd2 white pawns. But at the same time this
49 l:te3 lt:Jc4 relieves the white pieces of any concern
50 �b3 ctJd2 about the e2 pawn.
63 .ig2
The two extra pawns guarantee White a win.
64 :d1 .:la3
He only needs to be careful not to make a
65 i..d5 .l:.a4
mistake, and for this it is useful to gain time
for thought. 66 �e1 :d4
51 .:le3 lt:Jc4 67 i.g2
52 :tea The pin inevitably leads to the exchange of
52 I:tb3 would have led to a repetition, one pair of rooks, which is useful for the
allowing Black to claim a draw. conversion of the material advantage.
52 ctJd2 67 ctJb3
53 l:te5 Wf6 68 :txd4 'tJxd4
54 l:tf5+ �g6 69 �f2 lt:le6
55 :te5 �f6 70 i.e4 .a:b2
56 �h5 l:tc3 71 lU5+ �g7
72 l:td5 �f6
The next time control has been reached, and
White, after calm reflection, can begin 73 �f3
advancing his pawns, without which he Black resigns.
cannot get by. Tal satisfied himself that White was not
57 h4 :c4 intending to make any error. Besides, from
58 i.f3 l:tcc2 the 73rd move the two players had each
59 �d5 .:la4 gained an extra hour on the clock, and in
60 i.f3 :aa2 addition, the advance g3-g4-g5 can no
61 ge1 .:a4 longer be avoided. These are more than
sufficient reasons for Black to curtail his
62 h5 �c3 resistance.
 GAME 1 0 TAL- BOTVINNIK ctJ 43

1 Oth April 1 961 - Game 1 0

Tal Botvinnik
-

Caro-Kann Defence
Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik

1 e4 c6
2 d4 d5
3 e5
For many years this continuation was a c e g h

considered to be harmless for Black. White's

next move reveals that it has some position 6 c5
al basis. 7 c3 li:)c6
3 i.f5 8 i.h3 e6
4 h4 h6
9 i.e3
4 ...h5, which looks more active, is also often
Inconsistent, to say the least. 9 f4 came into
played, as, for example, in the 1 4th game of
the return match. However, the text move is consideration, to place the knight at f3, from
quite logical. Black wants to play . . .e7-e6, where it would have securely defended the
after which he will be out of danger. central d4 pawn.
Therefore it is not surprising that White 9 \lib6
immediately takes vigorous action. 1 0 �b3
5 g4 Usually Tal avoids the exchange of queens,
Here Boleslavsky recommended the quieter but here he changed his habit, and wrongly
continuation 5 i.d3 i.xd3 6 'Vi'xd3 e6 7 h5. so, since in the given situation the exchange
5 i.d7 favours Black.
10 cxd4
After 5 ...i.h7 6 e6 fxe6 White would have
. . .

had a certain compensation for the pawn, 1 1 'i¥xb6

which was confirmed, in particular, in the
game Gufeld-Spiridonov (1961 ): 7 i.d3 i.xd3
8 'i¥xd3 'ii'd69f4.
6 h5
This too is useful, in order to prevent ...h6-h5.
However, in the 1 8th game Tal refrained
from this move, restricting himself to the
prophylactic 6 c3, while in the same year
Bronstein played 6 c4 against Portisch.
Now Black must not delay his attack on the
centre.
(see next diagram)
After 11 cxd4 .ib4+ 1 2 ctJc3 li:)xd4 1 3 'ii'd1
i..c5 White would have lost a pawn.
11 axb6
1 2 cxd4
(see next diagram)
12 li:)a5
But now, of course, Black avoids the win of
a pawn (12...li:)b4 1 3 �d2 Itxa2 14 Itxa2
li:)xa2), since then the initiative would have
passed to the opponent. Instead of this he
rapidly advances his b-pawn, imitating the
plan that Capablanca demonstrated in his
 GAME 1 0 TAL - BOTVINNIK
44 <t>
encounter with Janowski (1 91 6). This game
was given by the third World Champion in
his book My Chess Career.
1 3 tbc3 b5
14 i.f1 b4
1 4...tbc4 could also have been played, but
Black has no objection to the white knight
occupying an insecure position at b5 and
even penetrating to d6. All this will merely
assist the mobilisation of Black's forces.
1 5 tbb5 �d8
A rather rare occurrence, when by the 1 6th
move none of the kingside pieces of both
White, and Black, have left their initial
squares.
It is true that the white bishop left its post at
f1 for a short time, but then thought it best to
return.
8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
a c e g
16 tbf3 tbc4
Again rejecting, and not without reason, the
win of the a2 pawn (1 6 ...tbb3 17 l't.b1
:xa2), since it would be hard for Black to
bring his bishop at fB into play.
17 i.xc4 dxc4
1 8 tbd6 i.xd6
There was no point in sacrificing the
exchange (1 8 ...�c6 1 9 tbxf7+ �e8 20
tbxhB i..xf3 etc.), since in any case Black's
position is good enough.
19 exd6 �c6
20 tbes
White appears to be creating complications,
but in the end it all reduces to further
simplification, and this is merely playing into
Black's hands.
The white knight proves to be out of play in
Black's territory, and in general the world
champion's pieces become disunited.
20 i.xh1
21 CL\xt7 + �ea
22 tbxh8 ..ie4
There is the unpleasant threat of 23 . . .c3 24
a4 c3, which is not parried by 23 ..id2 on
account of 23 . . .c3 24 bxc3 b3. White is
therefore forced to give up a pawn, so that
his bishop can participate in the blocking of
Black's queenside pawns.
8 8
7 7
6 6
4 4
3 3
a c d e g h
 - --- ·--
GAME 1 1 BOTVINNIK - TAL ttJ 45

23 d5 exd5 through of his pawns on the queenside, which White is

24 i..d4 lDf6 unable to avoid.
25 �d2 <it>d7 39 'Df7+ �d7
26 lDf7 40 'Dxg5 'De7
�e6
41 f4 'Dc6
27 lDe5 �xd6
42 'Df3 <iiid6
Here we can take stock: Black is a pawn up
and has the better position. Tal's subse This last move was sealed by Black. White
quent clever attempts to complicate the play resigned, without resuming the game.
are unable to change the course of events.
28 f3 �h7
29 g5 hxg5
30 h6 gxh6
31 lDf7+ �e6
32 lDxh6 lDg8 1 2th April 1 961 - Game 11
33 �e1 + was threatened, when Black loses
a piece.
33 lDg4 i.f5
34 lDe3 �g6 Botvinnik Tal
-

35 lDg4 �f5 Slav Defence

Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik
Now all Black's thoughts are aimed at safely escaping
from time trouble.
36 'De3 �g6 1 d4 lLlf6
37 ltJg4 �d6 2 c4 c6
38 'Des ..tf5 3 l2Jc3 d5

A psychological mistake. After losing the two

preceding games, Tal apparently decid ed to
take a breather and make a quick draw. In so
8
doing, he quite reasonably assumed that
7 White would not avoid the Exchange
6
Variation of the Slav Defence, but he failed to
appreciate that it is not so easy for Black to
5
gain a draw even in this variation, if he does
4 not have a prepared plan of action.
3
4 cxd5 cxd5
2
5 lLlf3 ltJc6
6 �f4 i..f5

Two experts on the Slav Defence, Emanuel

Lasker and Vasily Smyslov, used to prefer
Black unhesitatingly gives up his g5 pawn, 6 ...e6, although in this case too Black does
since the, passed f3 pawn is not dangerous. not have an easy game.
The outcome will be decided by the break- 7 e3 e6
46 � GAME 11 BOTVINNIK - TAL

1 2 bxc3 'iWxc3
Black continues to stick to his direct drawing
tactics. However, it should be mentioned
that Pomar's attempt to improve Black's
play by 1 2...l:tc8 did not prove satisfactory
in view of 1 3 c4 with the threat of c4-c5
(Botvinnik-Pomar, Amsterdam 1 966).

8 .tb5
The system associated with this move was
one that I prepared back in 1 946, i.e. 15
years before the present game, but I had
never managed to employ it in practice.
Only late in 1 947 could I have played this
against Trifunovic in the Chigorin Memorial
Tournament, but I refrained: the tournament
situation was such that I was quite happy 1 3 'iWc1 !
with a draw. There I played 8 'ifb3 i.b4 9 Now the exchange of queens is inevitable,
.tbs 0-0, and the chances quickly became since if 1 3....i.c2 there follows 1 4 .:.b1
equal. followed by 15 :b2 or 1 5 l:tb3 5• Because of
It should be added, only, that 8 .tb5 is by no this, the white rook moves to the c-file with
means a new move. A game in which it gain of tempo.
occurred was given in Grunfeld's Taschen 13 ... �xc1
buch der Eroffnungen im Schach. There 14 :uxc1 o-o

8 ...ctJd7 was recommended, and if 9 "ii'a4 This leads to a further deterioration of

.:t.c8, after which Black's position is not Black's position. His main defensive trump
worse, since the acceptance of the sacrifice
is the centralised position of his king. After
(1 0 i..xc6 :xc6 1 1 'i'xa7 'iWc8) is not without
removing it to the wing, apart from anything
its dangers for White. All this was estab
else he will have to reckon with the threat of
lished long ago, but I not unreasonably
tt:Jxc6, ctJe7+ and lt:Jxf5. Therefore 1 4... lt:Jd7
thought that my opponents would avoid the
was preferable.
pawn sacrifice, since White was apparently
1 5 f3 h6
ready to go in for this variation.
1 6 tt:Jxc6 1Ife8
This assumption proved justified . . .
1 7 a4
8 ..tb4
Exploiting his spatial advantage, White
9 tt:Je5 �as
selects the a7 pawn as a target, since it will
1 0 .txc6+ bxc6
not be easy for the black bishop to come to
11 o-o ..txc3 its aid.
 GAME 11 BOTVINNIK - TAL
[tJ 47
17 t2Jd7 25 �f2 .MaaB

1 8 ..td6 CLJb6 26 �e3 :tebB

27 .Mac3 .Mea
28 g4

After strengthening the placing of his pieces

and pawns on the queenside and in the
centre, White intends to open up the game
on the kingside, in the hope of either
penetrating with his rooks into the oppo
nent's rear, or of creating another passed
pawn.
28 l:.abB
29 h4 l:.c6
30 h5

1 9 �c5
After Black has prepared to occupy c4 with
his knight, the threat of tbe7+ and ct:Jxf5 has
lost its strength, since White would have
problems over the defence of his e3 pawn.
However, for the moment 1 9...t2Jc4 is unfa
vourable on account of 20 e4 i.g6, and now
either 21 exd5 exd5 22 tbe7+ and 23 t2Jxd5,
or simply 21 i.xa7. Black also has a difficult
game after 1 9. . t2Jc8 20 l:ta3!. This means
.

that he has to agree to the loss of a pawn,

but at least he is able to give it up in such a
way as to provoke the exchange of knights.
Then the only minor pieces left on the board Now White's plan becomes apparent: to play
will be opposite-colour bishops. e4-e5 and exchange on f6, after which the
19 i.d3 advance of the f- and g-pawns will enable
20 t2Jxa7 �xa7 him to achieve his goal.
21 il.xb6 :as 30 .. . l:.bcB
Although it is natural that Black should want 31 e5 g6
to blockade the passed a-pawn, the rook is Passive waiting is not to Tal's liking, but the
not well placed on this square. move played merely assists White's inten
22 aS i.c4 tions.
23 :§:a3 f6 32 hxg6+ 'litxg6
This decision also cannot be approved. The 33 .l:3c2 fxe5
development of White's initiative would have After this the white bishop also gains the opportunity to
been hindered by 23 ...f5. participate in the play on the kingside.
24 e4 'fiif7
 GAME 1 2 TAL - BOTVINNIK
48 �
34 dxe5 �h8 sharp position White's chances are prefera

35 �h2 :cc8 ble.

Of course, not 35 ... h5 36 :ch1 . 7 'i1lg4
36 �d2 .i.b3 The more modest 7 lt:Jf3, as played by
But now the a-pawn will be able to advance Smyslov, cannot claim to refute the varia
tion, since the position is largely blocked,
directly to a7.
37 a6 the weakness of the dark squares in Black's
position is not so sensitive, and his counter
38 a7
play on the c-file gives him good counter
39 J:.a1 liaS chances.
40 i.e3 7 f5
It only remains to play :b1-b8 or l;Iah1, but
Black's next move - his last in time trouble
leads to a different outcome.
40 llb7
41 1Ixh6+ �g7
42 i:tah1 llb2+

Black resigns.

1 4th April 1 961 Game 1 2

-

Tal - Botvinnik
French Defence As mentioned above, 7 ...ltJe7 8 'iVxg7 :g8 9
Notes by Evgeny Sveshnikov 'li'xh7 is advantageous to White. This is how
the play can develop: 9 . . .cxd4 1 0 tt:Je2
lt:Jbc6 1 1 f4 i.d7 12 'iVd3 dxc3 1 3 lt:Jxc3!?
1 e4 e6
(1 3 i.e3!?; 13 l:.b1; 13 ifxc3; 1 3 lt:Jg3).
Botvinnik reverts to his favourite move,
8 �g3
although, if the 1 960 match is remembered,
it brought him considerable troubles. The alternative is 8 'ii'h5+ g6 9 'iY' d1 .
However, White has to be prepared to play
2 d4 d5
3 ltJc3 i.b4 the endgame after 8 ...'iVf7 9 'iVxf7 + �xf7 1
0 lt:Jf3. It was evidently because of this last
4 e5 c5
variation that Tal chose 8 'i¥g3.
5 a3 i..xc3+
8 lt:Je7
6 bxc3 Wic7
In the event of the preparatory exchange
The alternative is 6 ... Ct:Je7 7 'iVg4!. 8 ...cxd4 9 cxd4 fi:Je7 White can choose
Accord ing to Boleslavsky, the queen should between the simple 1 0 i..d2 0-0 1 1 .id3 b6
attack the weakened (by the absence of the 12 lt:Je2 ..ta6 1 3 fi:Jf4 'iVd7 and Keres's old
bishop) kingside. 7 ...ltJbc6 (after 7 ...0-0 8 recommendation 1 0 c3 0-Q 11 h4!? b6 1 2
i.d3! f5 9 exf6 lixf6 White stands slightly h5 lt:Jec6 1 3 h6 g6 1 4 ctJh3 i.a6 1 5 i.gS -
better) 8 'i¥xg7 :lg8 9 �xh7 and in this in both cases White stands slightly better.
 GAME 1 2
8 ....�:Jc6 comes into consideration, provok
ing 9 lt:Jf3, and only then 9 . . .cxd4 1 0 cxd4
lt:Jge7, after which White cannot play 1 1
'i'xg7 on account of 11 .. . l:lg8 1 2 'irxh7
lt:Jxd4!, and therefore he has to turn to
'trench warfare' with 11 i.d2 or 11 i.e2.
9 'i¥xg7!
In the fourteenth game of the 1 957 world
championship, Smyslov played against
Botvinnik the more modest 9 �d2 0-0 1 0
.td3 b6 11 ctJh3 ..ta6 12 ctJf4 'iVd7 1 3 h4
i..xd3 1 4 cxd3 l2Jbc6 1 5 .iie3. cxd4 1 6
cxd4 Itac8 17 h5 lt:Ja5 and Black achieved a
good position.
The move made by Tal must be deemed
more critical and, what is most important,
objectively stronger.
9 l:lg8
1 0 'iVxh7 cxd4
11 �d1 ! .i.d7
An amazing position! How to evaluate it?
What reference points should be used?
David Bronstein, annotating the 1 2th game,
devoted a whole page to the position,
without giving any specific variations. And
indeed, what variations can a person sug
gest? Nevertheless, variations appeared,
and not only a few years later, when dozens
of games had been played. Thus, by
TAL - BOTVINNIK LtJ 49
studying the experience of his predeces
sors, a person solves irrational positions. It is
another matter with the computer - for it all
positions are normal.
It is curious that this position (or more
precisely, this type of position) has played an
important role in my chess fate. In my
younger days, when I was a master, I played
3 l2Jc3! followed by 7 'ifg4! against the
French, but after capturing the g7 pawn I
suffered several painful defeats; the posi tion
did not lend itself to my home analysis and in
those years I was not yet able to work with
the games of masters. Therefore on practical
grounds I began playing 3 e5!?, since 3
li:Jd2?! contradicts opening princi ples.
It should be mentioned that by playing 1 1 ....
i.d7 Black tries to use the c-file and his
bishop at a4 for a counterattack on the
opponent's king. In the event of 11 ...dxc3?!
the centre is blocked, the position of White's
king is strengthened, and his pluses be come
more weighty.
1 2 'i¥h5+ �d8
A novelty. In the first game of the 1 960
match Botvinnik played 12...ll'lg6 1 3 �e2 d3
14 cxd3 j_a4+ 1 5 �e1 'iVxe5 16 .i.g5 �c6
17 d4 'i¥c7 1 8 h4 e5 1 9 Ith3 'ii'f7 20 dxe5
and in a complicated battle Tal went on to
win.
12...Wd8 was suggested by the commenta
tors, and the Riga grandmaster said that he
had been intending to reply 1 3 i.g5, but
there followed
1 3 �f3
Taking control of the central squares, where
as for the moment the dark-square bishop
covers the king. Later games showed that
also good is 1 3 l2Je2 Jia4 1 4 ll'lf4! 11Vxe5
1 5 'irf7 i.d7 1 6 i.d3 1i'd6 17 l:le1 e5 1 8 a4
i.e8 1 9 'i!Ye6 1Wxe6 20 �xe6+ �d7 21
lt:Jc5+ �c8 22 :xe5 tt:Jbc6 23 �e2 l:txg2 24
.iixf5+. �d8 25 tt:Jxb7+ Wc7 26 i.f4+ ll'le5
50 � GAME 12 TAL - BOTVINNIK

27 .:lxe5 l2Jxt5 28 .:le7+ \tc6 29 .l:.c7+ �b6

30 :b1 + �a6 31 l:c6+! (lvkov-Portisch, Bled
1 961 ). Black's problems became insol uble
after the incautious 1 3...�a4?!; strong er
was 1 3...dxc3, after which White has to
block the position with 14 f4 or sacrifice his
e5 pawn in a less favourable situation.
13 . . . 'ifxc3
Continuing the idea of using the bishop
before developing the b8 knight. After 1 3....
i.a4 White has the satisfactory reply 1 4 i.d2,
while if 1 3...i.e8 - 1 4 'iih6 l:tg6 1 5 'ilh7.

14 .:la2
The mistake was not long in coming. It is
One would like to position the rook more actively improbable that Botvinnik overlooked the
- 1 4 �b1 !? , but then 1 4....ta4! 1 5 lt:Je1 idea of 'i'xh8 and i.b2; it is more likely that he
l2Jbc6 16 l:xb7. Inferior is 1 6 f4?! :xg2! 17 l:tb2 was simply not afraid of going into an
(1 7 i.xg2? d3+) 17..J:Ixc2 1 8 endgame without the queens against Tal.
.:xc2 i..xc2+ 1 9 l2Jxc2 d3 20 l2Je1 'i¥b3+ Much stronger was 16 ...'iYa1 ! followed by
21 �d2 �c8�. the activation of the unemployed rook at a8.
14 l2Jbc6 White's task would not have been easy.
1 5 �b2 1 7 'ii'xhB!
The rook has nevertheless occupied the Forced and strong.
important file, even though with a loss of 17 ... l:.xh8
tempo. 1 8 i.b2 �xf3+
15 . . . �c7 Other moves are weaker, for example:
Botvinnik makes the natural move. Also 1 8... l2Jd8 1 9 ..txc3 i..xb5 20 i..a5+ b6 21
interesting was 1 5...'iha3 1 6 J:.xb7 'i¥a1 , �xb5 bxa5 22 h4±.
when it is not easy for White to develop his 1 9 gxf3 l2Jg6?
initiative.
1 6 :b5!?
8
Displaying 'concern' for the opponent's
queen. It is interesting that the analytical 7 7

programs Fritz 6, Hiarcs 7-32 and Junior 7

hardly consider this move, whereas the
commentators invariably accompanied it with
exclamation marks. One thing is clear: from
6 6
5 5
4 4

the purely psychological and practical point 3 3

of view it was not easy for Botvinnik to play
2 2
this position against Tal.
16 l:.h8? a b c d e 9

(see next diagram)

 GAME 1 2 TAL - BOTVINNIK ltJ 51

This move was universally condemned. Of

course, 1 9...gh4! was stronger, blocking the
h-pawn and defending the d4 pawn, where
as the weakness of the e5 pawn will not run
away. The chances of the two sides in this
endgame can be assessed as roughly equal.

This is my evaluation of the endgame after 1

9...l1h4!: the position is complicated and full of
life, but still far from being a technical endgame.
Of the formal indicators one can mention the
exchange advantage (for White), but for the
present it is not felt, since the white rooks are
inactive and the existence of serious pawn
weaknesses in White's position gives Black It is now evident that Black has no compen
counter-chances, for example: 20 �c1 tt:Jxe5 21 sation for the exchange.
�b3 f4. 24 �h6
20 h4! 25 i.e2 �e8
26 .l:d3 lt:Jf6
But after this strong move White's exchange
advantage is felt, and even strongly so. Here 26 ...�d6 would not have been much better.
is a variation confirming this: 20 ...�xh4 27 ..txd4 lt:Jxd4
21 .l:xh4 lt:Jxh4 22 f4 lt:Jg6 23 �c1 with the 28 :xd4 � xh5
idea of 24 :b3 and 25 �h3.
Ending up in a pin and allowing further exchanges, but
Therefore Black is forced to play differently. there might not be another opportunity to get rid of the
20 . . . lt:Jgxe5 h-pawn.
21 h5! 29 �d3 �h7
30 1:tdh3 .lt g6
Unexpectedly another factor has emerged -
31 l:txh7+ lt:Jxh7
the very strong passed h-pawn, which
enables clear preference to be given to 32 l:th6 lLlfS
White.
21 lt:Jf7
It is hard to condemn Black for this move,
since after 21 ...lt:Jxf3 22 �b3 lt:Jg5 23 f4
lt:Je4 24 �e1 his pawns cannot advance,
whereas it will be very difficult for him to stop
the h-pawn. Even so, knowing the further
course of the game, one can recom mend 21
...lt:Jxf3, although then 22 �c1 !? must be
verified for White, not allowing the
manoeuvre of the knight to e4.
22 f4 lt:Jd6
23 :b3 lt:Je4
24 �e1
52 � GAME 1 3 BOTVINNIK - TAL

Black's moves are forced. 1 7th April 1 961 Game 1 3

-

33 J:h8 ctJd7
34 1:tg8 i.f7
35 J:g7 i.e8 Botvinnik - Tal
36 :g,e7 Wd8 King's Indian Defence
37 J:xe6 i.f7 Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik
38 l:h6 �e7
39 .i.d3 i.e6 1 d4 ctJf6
40 l:Ih5 lbt6 2 c4 g6
3 lLlc3 .i.g7
41 llg5
4 e4 d6
Black resigns.
A deserved win for Tal! 5 f3 0-0
6 �e3 e5
Botvinnik's chief mistake, in my view, was
that the endgame arising after 1 9 gxf3 was Whereas after the 1 Oth game my opponent
a purely calculating one, which was clearly in was definitely aiming for a draw, after his
favour of the Riga grandmaster, and in victory in the 1 2th game he was in an
addition its objective evaluation was never aggressive mood, as indicated by his choice
theless in favour of White. But had Botvinnik of opening. Taking this into account, White
played 1 6. . . 'ifa1! instead of 1 6. . J�th8, takes a psychologically correct decision: he
the result of the game could have been first of all exchanges the queens.
differ ent. 7 dxe5
From the standpoint of opening theory, it is Of course, 7 d5 or 7 thge2 leads to more
important to answer the question: did White
interesting play.
have an advantage after 12...�d8 ?
7 dxe5
8 iVxd8 .:Ixd8
9 lLJd5
White, naturally, avoids 9 ctJb5 lLla6 1 0
thxa7 lLJb4 or 9 .l':.d1 l:xd1 + 1 0 <it>xd1 i.e6,
which would have been in Black's favour.
9 lhxd5
If 9 ...lbeB the strongest is 1 0 0-0-0.
1 0 cxd5 c6
1 1 �c4

Inviting Black to choose the variation 11

Was 1 3 liJf3 the strongest move? Perhaps 1 3
lLJe2 or 1 3 i..g5 would have been better?
...cxd5 1 2 .i.xd5 thc6, which was known
from the game Boleslavsky-Najdorf (1 953).
Alas, such a prosaic decision does not suit
Tal, and he plays for complications, i.e. for
the worsening of his own position.
11 b5
1 2 i.b3 i..b7
 BOTVINNIK
lZJ 53
f.«:-_-.:..::;--_ -, - _-. -.- ;- , ·:.
· --

--
��=- - ----

GAME 1 3 - TAL
16 lLlc3 a6

Perhaps the losing move. The bishop at b7

is shut out of play for a long time, and, more
important, White is able to carry out his idea
without hindrance. Black should have played
1 6...b4 1 7 l2Ja4 c4 followed by ...�a6,
leading to unclear complications.
1 7 b3 gac8
1 8 i..d3 lLlb6
1 9 .te2 l:.d6
This move creates the concrete threat of
20 ...b4 21 liJb1 c4 (the knight at b6 is
defended), but the rook at d6 is no adorn
13 o-o-o ment to the position.
If 1 3 .i:.c1, according to analysis by Bole
slavsky, Black gains the better game with 1
3. . .a5! (avoiding traps such as 1 3...cxd5
14 �c7 l:td7 1 5 :xb7, or 1 3...:td7 1 4 liJe2
cxd5 1 5 ..txd5 �xd5 1 6 l:.c8+ .tf8 1 7
exd5). Therefore White sets a more
substantial trap - a positional one.
13 c5 . . .

To my surprise, Tal makes the position a

closed one, which is not in keeping with his
style. Of course, he should not have left
White with a protected passed pawn and
restricted the possibilities of his queen's
bishop.
After 1 3...a5! 14 dxc6 lLlxc6 1 5 �xd8+
20 �b2
.Sxd8 1 6 lLle2 a roughly equal position
would have been reached. Now the threat is parried: in the event of
14 Ac2 20 ...b4 21 lLlb1 c4 22 bxc4 ttJxc4+ 23
.txc4 :txc4 24 :c1 White breaks through on
White's plan was not difficult to find. It was
the c-file.
successfully implemented in a similar posi
tion in a training game Boleslavsky-Botvin 20 fS
21 :tc1 :ts
nik (Voronovo 1 952), and consisted in the
preparation of an attack on the black pawn 22 a4 bxa4
chain by b2-b3 and a2-a4. It is surprising Since after 22 ...b4 23 lLlb1 Black is left with
that, although White does not conceal his numerous weaknesses, he takes another
intentions, my opponent essentially does not decision, also, however, a painful one: he
even attempt to counter them. opens the b-file, which will soon be occu
14 lLld7 pied by White.
1 5' lLle2 .tf8 23 bxa4
54 � GAME 1 3 BOTVINNIK - TAL

White, of course, does not exchange knights d6 �cc8 35 I;txc8 Itxc8 36 :b7 there is no
(23 ltJxa4 ltJxa4+ 24 bxa4), since the black doubt that White is winning.
knight is badly placed. 30 l:.hb1 i.xa4+
23 . . . aS If 30 ...tt:Jc8 there would now have followed
23 ...c4 24 \t>c2 i..b4 25 :b1 i..xc3 would not 31 f4 - a possibility which would have been
have changed anything, since both 26 i..xb6 excluded by the preparatory exchange
and 26 Wxc3 tt:Jxa4+ 27 �c2 are good for 29 . . .fxe4 30 fxe4.
White. 31 l2Jxa4 l2Jxa4
24 Wc2 c4 32 �b8+
25 :!b1 i..b4
26 tt:Ja2

Forcing Black to unblock the open file.

26 i..cS
27 i..xc5 :xes

32 �g7
It is already known that if 32 ...�f8 there
would have followed 33 f4.
33 J:I1 b7+ �f7
34 d6 �xb7
28 tt:Jc3 35 .l:Ixb7+ �f6
I saw that by 28 f4 I could gain a material 36 .l:Ixh7 :cs
advantage, since it is hard for Black to
defend his minor pieces (28 . . .fxe4 29 fxe5 Or 36 ...�c6 37 d7 �d6 38 i..xc4 ctJb6 39
l:tf2 30 �d2 1lxd5+ 31 �e3 etc.). But at this .l:If7+ �g5 40 .i.b5.
tense moment, in the fifth hour of play, I did 37 lidS
not want to allow my opponent even the 38 i.xc4 tt:Jcs
slightest tactical counter-chances. 39 .l:If7+ �g5
28 . . . i.c8 40 i.bS fxe4
29 l:tb2 i..d7 41 fxe4
Slightly more tenacious was 29 ...fxe4 30 Black resigns.
fxe4 (30 liJxe4 .i.f5) 30 ...i..d7 31 �hb1
i..xa4+ 32 tt:Jxa4 tt:Jxa4 33 klb8+ .l:If8 (in
the game on the 32nd move this could not be
played because of 33 f4). Even so, after 34
 GAME 1 4
1 9th April 1 961 Game 1 4
-
Tal Botvinnik
-
Caro-Kann Defence
Notes by Evgeny Sveshnikov
After encountering problems in the French
Defence in the 12th game, Botvinnik reverts
to the Caro-Kann Defence, although the
problems were largely psychological, rather
than theoretical.
1 e4 c6
2 d4 d5
3 e5 i.f5!
The plan with 3 ...c5?! 4 dxc5 e6?! has
already been analysed. Now the opening
struggle proceeds in the main direction.
4 h4!?
Tal is true to himself and does not seek new
paths, if only because in the 1 Oth game he
was able to obtain a promising, attacking
position.
It is curious to note how changeable opening
fashion is. In the 1 960s after the return
match White mainly played 4 h4, in the 1
980s - 4 tt:Jc3 e6 5 g4 i.g6 6 tt:Jge2, and in
the 1 990s - 4 c3 e6 5 .i.e3 (or 5 tt:Jf3
TAL - BOTVINNIK
qJ 55
tt:Je7 6 .i.e2) 5 ...'i¥b6 6 'i¥b3.
I will not be surprised if in the 21 st century
White again returns to 4 h4!?. Very much
depends on the leader, on whether he is able
to demonstrate new ideas, or refine and
systemise old ones. Opening theory largely
develops thanks to the main experts on a
particular opening. It is staggering that these
experts, who expend enormous ef forts on the
development of opening theory, do not receive
anything for this, since in our time new games
(and this means also ideas) immediately
become the property of all players (amateur or
professional) who have personal computers.
This is unjust!
Earlier, at least for a few months, while new
games reached the readers via magazines
and books, a novelty was known only to a
narrow circle of experts and it brought the
author payment for his creative labour in the
form of several points in tournaments!
4 h5!
After 4 ...h6 5 g4 it is far harder to equalise.
5 tt:Je2
The theory and praxis of the last 40 years also
suggest other ways of developing an opening
initiative: 5 c4!? dxc4 (or 5 ...e6 6 tt:Jc3 tt:Je7 7
.ig5 dxc4 8 i.xc4 tt:Jd7 9 tt:Jge2 tt:Jb6 1 0 i.b3
'iVd7 11 0-0 tt:Jed5 12 tt:Jg3 i.g6 1 3 tt:Jce4,
Spassky-Lobron, Hamburg 1 982) 6 �xc4 e6 7
tt:Jc3 tt:Jd7 8 tt:Jge2 tt:Jb6 9 �d3 tt:Jh6 1 0
.i.xh6 .i.xd3 11 'ii'xd3l:.xh6 12 0-0-0, Vasyukov-
Diugy, Moscow 1 989 - in both cases White
stands a little better.
5 e6
6 tt:Jg3
Unpromising for White is 6 'Llf4?! c5! 7 dxc5
i.xc5 8 tt:Jxh5?! �f8!, when Black's position
is even better, since almost all his pieces are
already in play.
(see next diagram)
56 � GAME 1 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK

1 0 dxc5 d4 1 1 ctJd2±) 10 'iVd2 'ii'xd2+ 11

t2Jxd2 cxd4 12 cxd5 exd5 1 3 i.b5+ t2Jd7 1
4 ctJf3± with the better endgame?
9 'i'xd5
1 0 t2Jc3
David Bronstein suggests 1 0 i.gS, but after
1 0. . .cxd4 it is not apparent how White can
develop his initiative, whereas his central
pawn is under a second attack.
10 'iVxd4

6 g6?
A serious mistake. Now Black's pawn
structure is impaired and the weakness of
his dark squares become appreciable. Much
stronger was 6 ...i.g6! and now 7 i.e2 (White
also does not achieve anything with 7 ltJc3
c5 8 dxc5 i.xc5 9 .i.d3 .i.xd3 1 0 cxd3 t2Jc6)
7 ...c5 8 c3 t2Jc6, or 7 i.d3 ..txd3 8 'iVxd3 c5
- in both cases with counterplay.
7 t2Jxf5 gxf5
7 ...exf5 would not have been bad, had it
been possible to manoeuvre the knight to 1 1 'i'f3!?
e6, but in practice it is very difficult to do this. Tal sacrifices another pawn. He is not
After the move in the game Black has a satisfied with the exchange of queens and
chronic weakness at h5. the transition into a better endgame after 11
8 c4 'iixd4cxd4 12 ctJb5, and if 12 ....ib4+, then 1
It is not in Tal's style to concern himself with 3 We2!?. But it was also possible to play
a measly little pawn, especially as after 8 i.e2 differently: 11 i.b5+ t2Jc6 1 2 i.xc6+ bxc6 1 3
c5 9 c3 cxd4 1 0 cxd4 t2Jc6 11 i.xh5 'iVb6 "i¥e2 and it is clear that for the extra doubled
Black has excellent counterplay. pawn White has excellent compensation.
8 c5!? 11 t2Jc6
If 8 .. t2Je7 9 lt:Jc3 dxc4 10 i.xc4 ctJdS 1 1
. 1 2 ..tb5 t2Jge7
i.e2 i.e? 1 2 g3 Black has no compensation Now White is unable to spoil the opponent's
for the pawn. pawns.
9 cxd5 1 3 i.g5
One can understand the desire of the young There is nothing else.
champion to bring his pieces into play as 13 �xe5+
quickly as possible, not concerning himself 1 4 �f1
with the loss of one or more pawns, but even
so, why not 9 i.g5 'iVa5+ (9 ...i.e7 (see next diagram)
 GAME 1 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK
lZJ 57
17 ... :adS

A solid move, taking control of the d5

square. But Black could have played
1 7....td2!? 1 S l:e2 �xc3 1 9 'i¥g5+ �d6
20 bxc3 'ik'd1 + 21 l:.e1 'ik'g422 'Wle3 (22 'iVf6
'iVfS+) 22 ...J:.hgS when his position is cer
tainly no worse.

14 i.h6
After 1 1 iVf3!? both White and Black have
made almost forced moves, but here Black
had a choice:
1 ) 1 4...iVc7 1 5 :d1 a6 and if now 1 6 :h3,
then 1 6. . .CZJg6 (or 1 6...i.g7; objectively
this variation is perhaps also not bad, but
Botvinnik could not voluntarily agree to it
against Tal); 1 8 �h3!
2) 1 4... 0-0-0 1 5 i.xc6 bxc6 and now 16 The last reserve comes into play!
i.xe7 i.xe7 1 7 'i¥xc6+ 'Wlc7 1 S ViaS+ 'iibS 18 ... 'ild2
leads to equality, but 1 6 :e1 'Wlc7 1 7 lih3 The c5 pawn cannot be retained in view of
still enables White to fight for the initiative. the threat of 1 9 l:d3. After 1 S...i..d2 White
1 5 l:.e1! iVd4 has the unpleasant 1 9 l:e4, and if 1 9. .
If 1 5...'i¥d6, then 1 6 lid1 is unpleasant, .i.xc3, then 20 iVg5+ 'i¥f6 21 'iVxc5+ �es 22
although after 1 6. . .�e5 it is unclear wheth l:.xc3±.
er White has anything more than a draw. 1 9 'i/xc5+ 'i'd6
20 \i'c4?!
1 6 .i.xe7
White has managed to regain the sacrificed
Inferior is 1 6 'i'xh5 i.xg5 1 7 'ifxg5 :gs or 1 pawns, but now he goes wrong, allowing the
7 ..0-0-0+.
. exchange of queens. After 20 \WitS! Black
16 ... �xe7 would still have been in difficulties, for
1 7 'iVxfS example: 20 ...ltJd4 21 'i/e4 'i'b6 22 l:.d3 f5
23 ftJd5+ �f7 (stronger is 23 ...l:Ixd5 24
Regaining one pawn; in addition Black has
i¥xd5 lidS 25 'i¥c4! CZJxb5 26 l:.xdS �xdS
problems with his king, and in a future
27 l:.xe6 CLJd6 2S WVc3 and White stands
endgame also with his h5 pawn. It is
only a little better) 24 'i¥xd4 i¥xd4 25 :xd4
interesting that Junior-7 evaluates the posi
l:.xd5 26 �xd5 exd5 27 l:.e5±.
tion as equal, whereas Fritz 6 and Hiarcs 7-
20 'tib4!
32 give preference to Black. I think that
Junior is much closer to the truth. (see next diagram)
58 � GAME 1 4 TAL - BOTVINNIK

Now 21 ttJd5+? l:lxd5 22 'iVxd5 'ii'xe1 + is Switching to tactics. Meanwhile, 26 b3! looks
not possible. Perhaps it was this that more solid, when after 26 . . .l:Ib4 27 l2Jg3,
escaped White's attention; now the ex 26 ..Jlb6 27 1la4, or 26 .....td2 27 1ld1 ,
change of queens is inevitable. White retains a slight advantage.
21 'ire2 \i'g4! Defending such an endgame against Tigran
22 i.xc6 'iVxe2+ Petrosian or Anatoly Karpov would have
23 l2Jxe2! been very difficult, but endgames without
queens were never Tal's forte.
Bronstein recommends 23 :xe2 bxc6 24 l:If3
26 ... l:lxb2
with the idea of 25 �f5, but 24 . . .i.g7
27 l2Jf5+ �f6
parries this threat and practically equalises.
After the move in the game the rook switches 27 ...�f8 is also possible.
from h3 to the a-file, the knight sets its sights 28 l2Jxh6 l:.dd2
on the h-pawn, and these factors, as well as Here it is, active counterplay!
the presence in Black's position of 29 �g1 l:Ixf2
weaknesses at a7 and c6 indicate a static 30 lif1 llxf1 +
advantage for White in the endgame. Black's 31 �xf1 �g7
only chance is to exploit dynamic factors, i.e.
32 �xa7 �xh6
to look for counterplay on the b- and d-files.
33 �xf7
23 ... bxc6 Draw.
24 .l:.a3 The position is completely equal.
If 24 .l:.b3 there follows 24 . . .. l:.b8 with
equality.
24 . . . .:td7
25 l:la6 1lb8!?
Only active play can save Black!
26 l2Jg3?!

(see next diagram)

 GAME 1 5 BOTVINNIK - TAL
==�=
LtJ 59

21 st April 1 961 Game 1 5-

9 c5
Black takes on too great obligations. Such a plan
would have chances of success, if he could
Botvinnik - Tal compensate for the defects of his position in the
centre with piece pressure, but he has no such
King's Indian Defence
prospects, in view of the fact that he is behind in
Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik
development. 9 ...lLJbd7 1 0 0-0 lLJeS 11 f4
l2Jxd3 12 'i:!Vxd3 also cannot be recommended
1 d4 lLJf6 for Black.
2 c4 g6 Subsequently this variation occurred in the
3 lLJc3 ..tg7 game HObner-Giigoric (1 973), and the
4 e4 d6 Yugoslav grandmaster demonstrated the
5 f3 0-0 correct method of play for Black: 9 ...dS 10
6 i..e3 c6 cxdS cxd5 11 e5 lLJfd7 1 2 f4 lLJc6.
1 0 ..t f2 lLJc6
Avoiding the exchange of queens which 1 1 0-0
occurred in the 1 3th game after 6 ...eS. The
situation in the return match obliged Tal to White ignores the threat to exchange his
think only in terms of winning. bishop ( ...lLJc6-e5xd3), which would merely
7 ..td3 e5 be playing into his hands.
11 a6
Usually after 6 . . .c6 Black transposes into
1 2 �d2 ..te6
the variation involving . . .a7-a6 and ... b7-
1 3 �ad1 'i¥a5
b5. This was how Smyslov played against
me in the 6th game of our 1 958 return 14 b3
match, as did Larsen in Leiden in 1 970. Only after his rook has left the corner square
8 lLJge2 exd4 does White make this move, strengthening
This exchange can hardly be approved, his c4 pawn, since now the weakening of the
since White can advantageously recapture a1 -h8 diagonal is of no significance.
with his bishop. 8 ...lLJbd7 was better. 14 gabS
9 i.xd4 1 5 �b1 l!fd8

8 8 8
7 7

6 6 6

5 5 5
5

4 4 4

3 3 3 3

2 2

� c e 9 h a c e 9 h
60 � GAME 1 5 BOTVINNIK - TAL

16 f4!
8 8
At this point, when the two sides have
7
completed their development, White, 'as is
his right', is the first to begin active play. 6

There is immediately the prospect of an 5

attack on f6 (f4-f5, i.h4 etc.). In order to parry 5
4 4
it, Black decides on an exchanging
operation, as a result of which White gains 3

the advantage of the two bishops, and also a 2

very active position in the centre and on the
kingside.
It need hardly be said that the
disappearance of the queens signifies the
wrecking of Tal's plans, made in his
24 g4
preparations for the game!
White not only restricts the space available
16 i.g4
to the opponent's pieces, but he also
17 h3 .i.xe2
prepares the activation of his own king.
1 8 t2Jxe2 'iixd2
24 tt:Jd7
1 9 �xd2 :e8 25 <it>g2 li6e7
20 tLlg3 26 ctJh2 ctJf8
Naturally, Black would have been quite All Black's efforts are concentrated on
happy to exchange his d- and c-pawns for occupying the d4 square. Meanwhile, in
the white e- and f-pawns (20 e5 dxe5 21 such situations this manoeuvre does not
..txc5). To avoid this, White has to make a play any particular role, and it is unable to
rather awkward move. prevent the development of White's initia tive
20 . . . .if8 on the kingside (cf., for example, Botvinnik-
The variation 20 ...h5 21 l:txd6 h4 22 ctJh1 Levenfish, 12th match game, Len ingrad 1
t2Jxe4 23 �xe4 l:.Xe4 24 i.xc5 (or 24 i.xh4) 937).
would have led to the loss of a pawn; 27 i..h4 tLle6
therefore Black is forced to spend a tempo 28 1If1 l:.d7
defending his d6 pawn. A serious error, after which Black's position
21 .:te1 :e6 becomes difficult to defend. One can under
22 ctJf1 stand Tal not wanting to restrict his most
At the first opportunity the knight leaves the g3 square, active piece, the bishop at g7, but 28 ...f6
since at the given moment it is not needed for the was nevertheless necessary. Then White
defence of the e4 pawn. would have had a choice between 29 f5
22 ... �be8 t2Jed4 30 l:.ef2 and 29 i.g3 f5, in both cases
23 :de2 �g7 with counterplay for Black.
White's coming offensive should have been Apparently my opponent evaluated the
hindered by 23 ...h5. position somewhat routinely, and did not
sense just how dangerous it was. Later Tal
said that he lost the return match, not
imaging that the former champion would act
so decisively.
 GAME 1 5 BOTVINNIK - TAL ctJ 61

!idf2 with the threat of 41 fxg6, he was

tempted into playing for 'suffocation'.
After this seemingly paradoxical move, 40 f6 b5
shutting in the bishop at h4, White forces the 41 !idS bxc4
exchange of the opponent's bishop at f6, 42 bxc4 .:tb7
after which it is doubtful whether Black can
43 �f3 �b4
save the game.
29 . . . h5 This exchange sacrifice also does not save
Preventing 'Llg4 for one instant. After 29 Black: White immediately takes play into a
...b5, which, incidentally, Black was also free won rook ending, rejecting a material ad
to play earlier, the development of events vantage.
would not have changed. 44 i.xb4 'Llxb4
45 ..txh5 'Llxd5
30 gxh6 i.xh6
31 'Llg4 i.g7 46 exd5 gxh5

After 31 ...'Llxf4+ 32 l:txf4 itxf4 33 'Llf6+

White would have won a piece.
32 'Llf6+ i.xf6
33 i.xf6 'Llg7
34 lid2 'Llh5
35 i.c3 lied8

(see next diagram)

Black has no useful moves, and he can only

passively await the outcome.
36 i.c2 Wf8
37 i.d1 �e7
38 i.g4 !ic7
39 ts �ea 47 �b1
White had only one more move to make The last move in the game that required
before the time control, and, instead of 40 accuracy!
62 � GAME 1 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK

47 �fa 24th-25th April 1 961

48 l:.b6 �g8
49 �f4
Game 1 6
�h7
How can Black hope to save an endgame, in which he
has had to spend so many tempi on decentralising his Tal Botvinnik
-

king?
Caro-Kann Defence
50 �g5 I:.g8+
51 l:.g3 Notes by Vasily Smys/ov
�xh5
52 h4 I:.e3
1 e4 c6
52 ...l:.c3 was no better on account of 53 2 d4 d5
l:txd6 I:.xc4 54 l:td7 �g8 55 i:ld8+ lt'h7 56
3 e5 .if5
IUS etc.
4 h4 c5
53 �xd6 .:te5+
54 �g4 �g6 In almost every game Botvinnik finds new
55 Wf4 I:.f5+ paths. In the previous games of the match
56 <;t>e3 l:.h5 the moves 4 ...h6 and 4 ...h5 were employed
57 flxa6 I:.xh4 here. Now Black decides to begin counter
play on the queenside without delay. How
58 �d3 c;t>t5
ever, this plan proves inadequate and leads
Checks to the white king do not help, since it to opening difficulties.
hides from them at a4. 5 dxc5 iVc7
59 l:tc6 fih2 6 lt:Jc3 lt:Jc6
60 l:.xc5 :xa2
61 l:.c7 �xf6
62 l:.d7 �e5
63 l:te7+

Black resigns. Naturally, he could not be

satisfied with either 63 ...c;t>f6 64 d6, or
63 ...�d6 64 �xf7.

Both sides are aiming for rapid develop

ment. Of course, if 6 .. .'Vi'xe5+ there would
have followed 7 it.e3 and then 8 lt:Jf3,
bringing out the pieces with gain of tempo.
1 tt:Jta :da
a lt:Jb5 'iWcs
9 lt:Jfd4
 GAME 1 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK ttJ 63

9 c3 also came into consideration, and if 9

...i.g4, then 1 0 'iVa4, or 9 .. a6 1 0 lt:Jbd4,
.
8
consolidating the material gain.
7
9
6
1 0 f3 .td7
5
1 1 tt:Jxc6 bxc6
4
1 2 lt:Jd4 iVbB
3
1 3 'Yi'e2 e6

8 8 a c e 9

6 6 21 .td6
5 5
It was hardly worth moving the bishop from
4 4
its good position. After 21 f4 :as 22 Wf2 and
3 3 23 .td3 it would have been difficult for Black
2 to complete the mobilisation of his forces.

21 Vi'b7
22 Q-0-0 :as
It was risky to accept the exchange sacri
fice: 22 ...tt:Jfs 23 .tcs Cbg3 24 'iif2 tt:Jxh1
Necessary in view of the threat of 1 4 e6.
25 'i'h4 .tea 26 i..d3 and White gains a
Now White cannot hold his extra pawn, but
strong attack.
with a simple manoeuvre he secures for
23 g4 aS
himself a clear positional advantage.
24 'ii'f2 axb4
14 lt:Jb3! i.xc5
25 cxb4 c5!
Of course, it is undesirable for Black to
exchange this bishop and leave himself
without a defender of the dark squares. But
how else can he complete his develop ment?
1 5 tt:Jxc5 'ifb4+
1 6 c3 'i'xc5
1 7 i.e3 'ifas
1 8 b4
1 8 'i¥f2 :laB 1 9 'iYg3 was perhaps a more
subtle continuation, aiming to provoke a
weakening of the kingside.
18 Wic7
1 9 .tcs tbe7
20 h5 h6 A subtle pawn sacrifice. In a difficult
 GAME 1 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK
64 � -
- ::::-:;.-,:_-- -�- ·-:--
- - ·-- ---
::-- ····-· .-:";.; - ·------ · - --"-·--'___!.:·__·:.:__:_-:._·:·__ -

situation Black resourcefully seeks ways of 37 'i¥e3 �e8

activating his game. Going into an endgame 38 'ti'd2 :c7
by 25 ...'i'a7 26 'i'xa7 �xa7 did not promise With limited time for thought before the
any relief in view of 27 <itb2 i.c8 28 l:tc1 etc.
control, both sides make waiting moves and
26 i..xe7 �xe7 do not undertake any active measures.
26 ...Vixb4 was inadequate in view of 27 39 f4 �d7
�d6 'i¥c3+ 28 'ii'Vi'xc2+ 29 �xc2 �a4+ 30 40 V&'e3 �dB
�b2 .i.xd1 31 .ib5+ �d8 32 �xd1 . But
now, at the cost of a pawn, Black gets rid of
White's 'terrible' dark-square bishop.
27 'i'xc5+ �e8
28 <iii>b2 .:tea
29 'i'd4 i.a4
30 llc1 .:txc1
31 �xc1 �d7
No benefit was gained by 31 ...V&'c6+ 32
<itd2 'ii'c2+ 33 c;t>e3, when the white king
escapes from the pursuit.
32 <itb2 .:ca
33 ii.d3

Here the game was adjourned and Tal sealed his next
move. White has managed to retain his extra pawn, but
it is not easy to exploit this advantage in view of the
possi ble activity of the black queen.
41 l:id1 �c8
42 'if d3 V&'b6
43 'i'd4 'iibS
44 'ife3 \t>b7
45 �d4 'ii'f1
46 a4 'iVg2+
47 .:d2 'iVf1
a b c d e 9 h
48 1lc2

33 i.bS! It transpires that without the exchange of

With every move Black consistently im rooks White cannot strengthen his position
proves his position. With the exchange of and begin advancing his queenside pawns.
bishops he increases his chances of a To carry this out he is forced to return the
successful defence in the ending with heavy pawn.
pieces. 48 l:txc2+
49 �xc2 'ii'g2+
34 l:.d1 Vias
35 a3 i.xd3 50 �b3 'ifxg4
36 .:txd3 cJ;e7
 GAME 1 6 TAL - BOTVINNIK
ttJ 65
51 a5 'ii'd1 +

52 \tb2 'it'f1
53 �b6+ �a a
54 'ii'c6+ �a7
55 �C7+ �a a
56 'iic8+ �a7
57 �C7+ �as

69 'ii'c3
This move by Tal was criticised and it was
suggested that 69 �b3 would have given
him winning chances, for example 69 ...�a6
70 c;itc3 'ii'c6+ 71 �b2 'ii'b5 72 <it>b3 <t>b7
73 �c3 'i'f1 74 'i¥d3 'i¥e1 + 75 \tb3 and the
white pieces break through into the oppo
nent's rear.
Meanwhile, instead of 73 ...'iff1 Black should play
73 ...1We2!, attacking the e5 and h5 pawns and making
58 f5!
the move 74 'iVd3 impossible, after which it is not
A subtle move. White tries to tempt his apparent how White can strengthen his position.
opponent with the f5 pawn, and in return to 69 �f1
win the d5 or f7 pawn (after 58 ...exf5), while 70 <it>a2 'iie2+
if the queen takes on f5, the white king hides 71 �b3 'ii'd1 +
from the checks.
72 ifc2 'ii'f1
Black takes the correct decision - to retain
73 cat>a2 'i¥b5
his e6 pawn and control the f1 -a6 diagonal
74 \ta3 'iff1
with his queen.
75 'i¥c3 'iVb1
58 'ife1
59 'ii'c8+ \ta7 76 a6+ �xa6
60 'iVc7+ �aa 77 'ii'c6+ �a7
61 �C8+ �a7 78 ifd7+ �b8
62 'i'c5+ �b7 79 'ii'xe6 'iia1+
63 'i¥b6+ ®a a 80 <it>b3 'ii'd1 +
64 'i'c6+ �a7 81 �b2 'ii'd4+
65 'ifc5+ �b7 82 �a2 'ifxb4
66 'i'd4 'i¥e2+ 83 'ii'g8+ �c7
67 �a3 'iib5 84 'fixg7+ ®dB
68 fxe6 fxe6
 66 GAME 1 7 BOTVINNIK - TAL
�
85 'iVf6+ Wlie7 2 e4 i.g7
86 'i¥f4 'i'e6 3 c4 d6
87 �b2 <it>e8 4 ttJc3 lDf6
88 ifa4+ �f7 5 f3
89 'iVf4+ �e8 Thus, by transposition of moves the familiar
90 Wc2 Samisch Variation has arisen.
Here the game was again adjourned. 5 ttJbd7
6 i..e3 0-0
7 i..d3
8
7 ltJh3 is of interest, in order subsequently to
place the bishop at e2 and the knight at f2. In
7
this case White would have had good
6 prospects of creating active play on the
5 kingside.
7 e5
4
8 ltJge2 ltJh5
3

a b c d e g h

90 Vias
Draw.

28th-29th April 1 961

Game 1 7

9 dxe5
Botvinnik Tal
-
9 'i¥d2 followed by queenside castling
King's Indian Defence suggests itself. With the move in the game,
Notes by Alexander Tolush which releases the tension in the centre,
White determines the position too soon. This
1 decision was apparently provoked by the fact
d4 g6
that for the moment the knight at h5 is
The absence of a well-studied and tested unable to take part in the battle for
opening repertoire forces Tal to employ possession of the d4 square.
various types of experiment, merely in order
9 dxe5
to take his opponent away from familiar 1 0 o-o c6
paths. But Botvinnik is a rather experienced
11 �d2 "V/Jie7
fighter, and so he heads directly for devel
opment schemes prepared beforehand. 1 2 l:ad1 ttJc5
 GAME 1 7 BOTVINNIK - TAL ttJ 67

1 3 ..tb1 ltJe6 Strong and pretty, although also forced. If

1 4 'ii'e1 i.f6 22 'iitg1 , then 22 . . .i.h4 23 ctJg3 �adB
The start of Black's subsequent troubles. and Black is excellently placed.
More consistent was 1 4...b6 followed by 1 22 . . . .i.g7
5.... i.b7 and 1 6...:ad8, aiming to establish 23 <it>g1
the knight on d4. Since White had decided to sacrifice the
The move in the game, and especially the exchange, he shouldn't have wasted time on
following one, merely help White to develop this move. 23 'ii'g2tt:Jc7 24 i..e4 tt:Jxd5 25
an offensive on the kingside with gain of cxd5 and 26 ltJg3 was more energetic, after
tempo. Therefore it is no wonder that Black which it would not have been easy for Black
soon ends up in a critical position. to parry the numerous threats.
1 5 <it>h1 ctJhf4 23 . . . l.bc7
Even now it was not to late for 1 5...b6, Black wants to capture the rook with his
preparing the plan given in the previous knight, retaining his light-square bishop,
note. which may prove a powerful piece in view of
tt:Jxe2 the weakening of the h1 -a8 diagonal.
17 ltJxe2 h5 24 ltJc3
The advisability of this pawn thrust is highly 24 :d6 came into consideration, to play for
dubious. It is obvious that the further control of the d-file. With material equal,
advance of the h-pawn will merely be to White would still have retained the better
White's advantage. chances.
1 8 'i'f2 b6 24 lt:Jxd5
The time lost by Black allows White to launch 25 cxd5 �adS
immediate activity on the kingside. 26 .i.e4 ..taB
1 9 f4! exf4 27 'ii'g3
20 gxf4 .i.b7
Of course, 20 ...i.xb2 is not possible on
account of 21 f5!.
21 e5 c5+
22 :ds!

27 b5
This leads to the loss of a pawn. Now White
gains more than sufficient compensation for
the sacrificed exchange.
68 � GAME 1 7 BOTVINNIK - TAL

28 'iVf2 'iVd7 34 i!.xf6

29 i.xc5 �feB 35 i.xg6 'i¥'g4
30 'ifg3 36 'i¥d3?
30 'ii'g2 or 30 b4 is more accurate. It should Apparently under the influence of time
be remembered that at this point both trouble White incorrectly assesses the sub
players were already short of time on the sequent events. By continuing 36 i.xe8 he
clock. Therefore their mistakes and inaccu would have set Black difficult problems,
racies during the next ten moves must be whereas after the move in the game the
put down to time trouble, which, as is known, picture changes sharply. The advantage
has ruined many a good game. passes to Black.
30 :ca 36 �g8
31 b4 �h8 37 i.e4 :ce8

32 'iVf3 38 i.f3

White misses the spectacular opportunity Better chances were offered by 38 i.d4,
32 e6 fxe6 33 'i¥'xg6 i!.xc3 34 �h 1 ! ! when whereas after the loss of the f-pawn White's
to avoid mate Black would have had to give position becomes lost.
up his queen: 34 ...'i'g7 35 iVxh5+ �g8 36 38 . . . 'i¥'xf4
l:Ig1 etc. 39 tt:Je2

32 a6 39 i!.xh5 fails to 39 ...iVxf1 + 40 �xf1 i!.xc3,

33 cJth1 when White has no defence against the
threats of 41 ...i..xd5+ or 41 ...l:te1 .
39 'i'h4
40 i!.f2 'i'g5

33 f5!
Black defends with great tenacity and
resourcefulness. With the move in the game
In this position the game was adjourned. Analysis
at the cost of another pawn he activates his showed that Black has good winning chances. However,
pieces, which soon brings success. on the resump tion the conversion of his material
34 exf6 advan tage took a long time. Here is how this happened:
Forced. If 34 i!.c2 Black had the strong reply
34 . . .i!.f8!.
 GAME 1 7 BOTVINNIK - TAL
tLJ 69
41 tt:'lg3 .l:Id8 58 tt:'le5 i.xg2

Black begins a systematic siege of the d5 59 tt:'lxd7 i.xh3

pawn, but first 41 ...h4 looked good. so lt:Jc5 i.ca
42 i.e3 61 �f2 �h7
Of course, not 42 tt:'lxh5 on account of 62 a4 bxa4
42 . . .J:.xd5!. 63 lt:Jxa4 i. f4
42 iVe5
Now White cannot avoid the loss of a piece.
43 �d1 lig4 64 <iiff3 h3
44 a3 65 i.g1 h2
If 44 i.xg4, then 44 . . .�xd5 and wins. 66 i.xh2 i.xh2
44 i.b7 67 <iite4 i.d7
45 i.b6 �d7
sa tt:'lc5 i.b5
46 i.e3 �h4
69 \t>d5 \t>g6
47 tt:'lf1 J:.c4
70 tt:'le4 �f5
48 .i.g2 :g7
71 ctJc3 i.f1
49 Vi'd2 h4
72 Wc5 i.e5
50 h3 �b2
73 ctJb1
51 Vi'xb2 i.xb2
52 ..tc5 lid7
53 tt:'le3 .l:Ic1
54 :xc1 i.xc1
55 i.d4+ �g8
56 tt:'lg4 i.g5
57 Wg1

a b c d e g h

73 We6
There was a quicker win by 73 ...i.d3 7 4
ctJd2 i.c3 75 ctJb3 We4 76 Wb6 i.xb4 77
ctJc5+ i.xc5+ 78 Wxc5 a5! when the pawn
cannot be prevented from queening.
74 ctJd2 ..td6+
75 Wb6 i.g2
76 ctJb3 .i.xb4
57 i.xd5
77 �xa6 i.f1+
By returning the exchange, Black gains an
78 �b6 �d6
easily won ending.
70 � GAME 1 8 TAL - BOTVINNIK

lt:Jas .i.c5+ 6 cs
80 'it>b7 i..e2 7 .i.g2
i..e3 White aims to provoke ...e7-e6 as soon as
81 lt:Jb3
82 lt:Ja5 �c5 possible, to rid him of his concerns about
i..f4+ the g4 pawn. However, at g2 the bishop has
83 �c7
no particular future.
White resigns. 7 e6

So, in the centre we have a pawn formation,

typical of a variation which was employed in
the 1 9th century by Steinitz, and in the 20th
century by Nimzowitsch. The analogy can be
continued with the fact that now Black does
not experience any opening difficul ties.

8 lt:Je2
8 lt:Ja3 would perhaps have been safer, to
prevent the black bishop from reaching the
f1-a6 diagonal.
8 i..bS
9 lt:Ja3
But now this is simply unfavourable, since it
allows Black to force useful exchanges. 9
.i.e3 should have been played.
9 i..xe2
1 0 'iVxe2 cxd4
3rd May 1 961 Game 1 8
11 cxd4 i..xa3
-

12 bxa3
Tal Botvinnik
-

Caro-Kann Defence
Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik

1 e4 c6
2 d4 d5
3 e5 i..fS
4 h4 h6
5 g4 i..d7
6 c3
In the 1 Oth game Tal played 6 h5, preventing
...h6-h5. But now he had evidently decided
that after 6 ...h5 he could well accept the
pawn sacrifice. For the same reason Black A semi-open position has been reached,
prefers to avoid this continuation. where the black knights will be no weaker
 GAME 1 8 TAL - BOTVINNIK ctJ 71

than White's bishops, which are condemned This sets White a difficult choice: either to
to defending his numerous weaknesses (a3, allow Black to transfer his knight to c4, or to
c4, d4, g4): exchange queens and play a cheerless
12 lt:Jc6 ending. In the latter case the doubling of the
1 3 i..e3 'iVa5+ enemy pawns cannot provide any consola
1 4 �f1 tion, since in the end the exchange of rooks
on b6 will be inevitable, and Black's pawns
For the moment White avoids the exchange will resume their normal form.
of queens, hoping to develop an attack. 1 9 'iVxa6 bxa6
14 ... lt:Jge7 20 h5 �d7
Over the course of several moves Black does 21 lib1 �b6
not take the a3 pawn (and White does not 22 �g3 lt:Ja5
defend it); both players rightly consider that it
Let the move 22 ..J:lhb8 remain in reserve.
is more important for them to complete their
23 �xb6 axb6
development.
24 f4 CDC4
1 5 .'S.b1 lib8
1 6 i..h3

A loss of time. This square would be better

used for the rapid inclusion in the play of the
rook at h1 .
16 ... 'V!Va4
1 7 .:.d1

Of course, the d4 pawn had to be defended,

but not in such a passive way. Therefore 1 7
'iVd2 lt:Ja5 should have been played, al
though this continuation did not look very
tempting for White.
17 'iVxa3
1 8 �g2 1i'a6!

25 i.c1
White tries to retain the two bishops, which
are his only consolation in this position.
25 lbc6
26 .'S.d1 lbb4
27 a3 lba2
28 f5 tt:Jxc1
29 :xc1

So, White has also been deprived of his last

trump - the two bishops.
29 b5
30 �a1 cJJe7
72 � GAME 1 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL

Just in case, Black moves his king off the diagonal on 38 .1f3 ltJd2! (but not 38 ...ltJb6 39 a5, or
which the enemy bishop is operating. 38 ...l:c7 39 l:tc1 !) 39 .1xd5 l:tc3 40 i.e4 (or
31 �f4 �c8 40 l:td1 I:td3) 40...b3! (weaker is 40 .. Jk4 41
32 g5 hxg5+ �e3 ltJxe4 42 �xe4 b3 43 �b1 �b4 44
33 �xg5 exf5 �d5, when White has drawing chances) White
34 .ixf5 l:tc6 would have been unable to combat the passed b-
pawn.
37 . . . f6
38 i.f5
B B
In time trouble White makes an error,
7 leading to the loss of a second pawn, but,
6 generally speaking, in this position the
conversion of Black's material advantage is
not very difficult.
4
38 . . . fxe5+
3 Weaker is 38 ...ltJxe5 39 �g1 (39 l:te1 l:tc4).
2 39 dxe5 ltJxe5
40 l:td1
Or 40 .:e1 �f6 (41 l:txe5 .:c4+).
40 ... �d6
41 i.e4 I:tc5
What is there for White to do in this position?
The attempt to hold on with 35 I:tc1 is White resigns.
refuted by 35 . . .ltJxe5 36 lle1 f6+ 37 �f4
l:tc4, when he loses another pawn.
Therefore, having discovered the only weak-
ness in Black's position - the g7 pawn, Tal
clears the file in order to attack this pawn.
35 �f4 l:th6
The start of some mutual time trouble errors,
which, however, do not affect the evaluation 5th-6th May 1 961 Game 1 9-

of the position. Here, for exam-ple, the

quickest way to win was with 35 ...ltJb6
followed by the invasion of the rook on the c- Botvinnik - Tal
file. In trying to force the opponent to block King's Indian Defence
the g-file and simultane ously gain time,
Notes by Yuri Razuvaev
Black allows some compli cations.

36 i.g4 �c6 1 d4 ltJf6

2 c4 d6
Otherwise 37 .i.f3 ltJb6 38 l:tc1, and White
3 ltJc3 g6
seizes the initiative.
4 e4 i..g7
37 l:tc1
5 f3 0-0
37 a4 was stronger. Even so, after 37 . . .b4
6 i.e3 a6
 GAME 1 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL tZJ 73

7 'iYd2 c6 For example: 13 cxb5 axb5 1 4 ctJd5 l:d7 15

8 i.d3 e5
9 dxe5
The unusual move order chosen by Black
apparently induced Botvinnik to try and
punish the opponent for his opening care
lessness. However, in my view this proves to
be a mirage. The routine 9 d5 was stronger,
retaining an opening initiative.
9 dxe5
1 0 tba4
.txf8 ..txf8 1 6 t2Jxf6+ 'ifxf6 and Black has
full compensation for the sacrificed ex
change. Such positions were unusually
interesting to analyse with Tal, but simply
impossible to defend at the board.
However, 12 a4!, recommended by interna
tional master Oleg Moiseev, came into
consideration, after which Black should
evidently continue 12. . .l:.b7 with a compli
cated game.
12 �e6
1 3 'il¥xd8
White's desire to stabilise the position is
understandable: the knight at b6 lacks
support and White is aiming for the end
game.
13 .. . l:.xd8
1 4 tbe2

Underestimating the danger. 1 4 a4 was

essential - the knight at b6 needs help.
14 l:.b7
1 5 c5

Now it is hard for me to affirm, but it is

possible that in his calculations Botvinnik
thought that 1 O ...lbbd7 was obligatory, and
then after 11 c5 White would have fixed
Black's queenside. However, Tal liked to
stun his opponents with seemingly impossi
ble moves.
10 ... b5!!
It is interesting that in our day the 'silicon
friend' is also disturbed at the sight of this
move.
1 1 lLlb6 l:.a7
1 2 i.c2
15 aS!
Now it transpires that if 1 2 ttJxc8 there
follows 12. . .ltd?! with a good game for This is the whole point! The c5 pawn is cut
Black. off from base and Black begins to encircle it.
And 12 i.c5 would have turned out to be an 1 6 �f2 i.f8
empty threat after the 'cold' reply 12. . .i..e6!. 17 lihd1
74 � GAME 1 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL

1 7 �b3 was bad, since after 1 7.... i.xb3 1 8

axb3 �d3 Black has a great advantage.
17 �xd1
1 8 .:txd1 tt:Jtd7
1 9 lZJxd7 lZJxd7
20 i.b1 .txcs
21 ..txcS lZJxcS
22 �c1

The culmination. Now after 28 ...b4 29 llJd5+

i.xd5 30 i.xd5 the game becomes almost
equal. Therefore Black's next move is forced.

28 bxa4
29 :a1 i.b3
30 lZJdS+ i.xd5
31 i.xd5 .l:.d7
A technical slip. Much stronger was 31 ...lZJb4
22 tt:Ja6! 32 ..te4 �e6 33 :xa4 l:ta7 34 �f4 lt:Jd5+ 35
i..xd5+ �xd5, when Black has every chance
Thanks to this clever move, Black retains his
of winning (pointed out by Tigran Petrosian).
extra pawn. White now faces a difficult and,
32 ..tc4 lZJb4
more important, unpromising defence. If 23
33 l1xa4 l:td4
l:.xc6 there would have followed 23 ...lZJb4
24 l:tc5 i.xa2 with advantage to Black. 34 ..ibS!

White defends resourcefully. Weaker was

23 f4 34 ..ib3 llJd5+ 35 We2 �xa4 36 ..txa4 �e6,
In a difficult position White persistently seeks when the win for Black is merely a question
the slightest opportunities for coun terplay, in of time.6

which he succeeds! �e6

23 exf4 35 J::txa5 lt:Jd5+
24 lZJxf4 cS 36 �f2 �xeS!
25 c;t>e3 Wf8
Tal rises to the occasion! The natural 36
26 eS ri;e7 ...l:td2+ would have led to a drawing
27 i.e4 :c7 impasse: 37 �f3 l:txb2 38 ..ic4!.
28 a4! 37 ..te2 �d6
38 .Sa6+ �d7
(see next diagram) 39 l:ta7+ lZJc7
 GAME 1 9 BOTVINNIK - TAL
. ..�

'. :. : -.;
l2J 75
40 b3 l:ld2 53 . . . Ilb4

41 \t>f3 f5 54 l:lf6
Again bad was 54 i.xf5 <it>d5 55 l:.f6 <it>e5 56
Ile6+ Wxf5 57 Ilxd6 :lxb3+, when Black is
bound to win.
54 <it>d5
55 l:.f8 ®e5
56 .:as 'Lle4!

An instructive moment. On encountering

technical difficulties, Tal finds an interesting
plan. First Black advances his kingside
pawns, fixing the white g-pawn. Then the
knight is played to d6, after which he creates
excellent preconditions for convert ing his
advantage.
42 h4 �c6 The start of the decisive offensive.
43 i.c4 h6! 57 l:.e8+ �d5
Black consistently strengthens his position. 58 l:ld8+ \t>e6
44 g3 .lid4 59 �f4 ctJd2+
45 ®f2 g5 60 We3
46 hxg5 hxg5
After the active 60 �g5 Tolush's suggestion
47 Ila2 g4
of 60 ...ctJf3+ 61 <it'g6 ctJd4 is good, but
48 J:la1 �b6 the sharp 61 ...f4 is perhaps even better.
49 .:Ie1 ctJb5 60 . . . 'Llxb3
50 l:e6+ ctJd6 61 lieS+
Thus, the construction has been achieved: White fails to save the game with 61 l:.c8
the black pieces coordinate excellently and l:lb5 (61 ...c4? 62 l:.xc4) 62 i.d3 Ila5 63 .tc4+
defend one another. Now the black king can �d7 followed by ...'Lld4.
advance and begin a decisive offensive. 61 �d7
51 \t>e3 \t>c7 62 l:le5 <it>d6
52 i.d3 �c6 63 Ilxf5 ctJd4
53 i.c2 64 l:f2
Forced, since the variation 53 i.xf5 �d5 54
lif6 �e5 would have led to a quick win for (see next diagram)
Black.
76 � GAME 20 TAL - BOTVINNIK

8 8

7 7

6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

2 2

64 lt:Jxc2+! Here White resigned. Black wins in the following

Although it is normally thought that in rook instructive way: 76 �xg4 c2 77 Wf4 l:.c3 78 �h8
endings the chances of a draw are in <it>d2 79 .lah1 c1 'iW 80 gxc1
creased, in the given instance this is the �xc1 81 g4 <it>d3 82 g5 �d4 83 Wf5 �d5
most clear-cut way to win. However, even 84 Wf6 Wd6 85 g6 :f1 + etc.
now Black has to demonstrate good tech
nique, since the win is achieved literally by
one move.
65 l:.xc2 Wd5 Sth-1 Oth May - Game 20
66 :h2 �e4+
67 �d2 c4
68 1i.h8 l:.d4+ Tal Botvinnik
-

69 �e3 :d3+ Caro-Kann Defence

70 Wf4 c3 Notes by Salo Flohr and Mikhail Botvinnik

71 J::tdB+
1 e4 c6
Here the following pretty variation was also
2 d4 d5
possible: 71 �xg4 c2 72 �d8+ �c4 73
l:tc8+ �b3 74 l:.xc2 �xc2 75 Wf4 �d1 76 3 e5 i..f5
g4 Wd3 77 g5 Wd4 78 �f5 Wd5 79 g6 �f1 4 h4
+ 80 �g5 �e6 and Black wins. Before the start of the return match Mikhail
71 �c4 Tal declared that he had found a refutation of
72 l:.c8+ Wb3 the Caro-Kann Defence. However, if one
73 l:.b8+ �a2 sums up the results of the nine Caro-Kanns
74 !:tea Wb2 in this event, they are quite satisfactory for
75 l:.b8+ �c1 Black: +2-2=5. Where then, one might ask, is
the 'refutation'?
After the match Tal told me that he had not
(see next diagram)
been joking when he spoke of a refutation. In
my opinion, many experts were wrong to
criticise Tal for the move 4 h4. This is by no
 GAME 20 TAL - BOTVINNIK LtJ 77

means a blank shot, but Tal's idea was, ...lt:Jf8 and .. tt:Jts, and Black has a sound
.

apparently, insufficiently well polished. position.

4 h6 13 o-o-o
5 lt:Je2 e6 1 3 ltJg1 should have been considered,
6 lt:Jg3 lt:Je7 since the knight stands better at f3 than at
7 lt:Jc3 ctJd7 e2.
13 ..ih6
Here Black has also played 7 .....ih7 8 �d3
14 Wb1 S!.xe3
i.xd3 9 cxd3 lt:Ja6 1 0 0-0 �d7 1 1 .te3 ltJfS
1 5 fxe3 lt:Jh6
12 ctJxfS exfS 1 3 a3 lt:Jc7 with an excellent
game. 1 6 e4 'Wie7
8 i.e3 i.h7
9 i.d3 i..xd3
1 0 cxd3

1 7 exd5?
A serious mistake: After this exchange the e6
square is vacated for the knight, and Black is
This entire system is rather harmless for
excellently placed. Tal realised this, of
Black. White has no chances of an attack.
course, but he thought that Black himself
With the position closed, Black can easily
would take on e4 and then by ...c6-c5 he
regroup, and White's idea is justified only
would be able to break up White's centre.
when Black hurries with ...c6-c5. But
However, after 1 7 lt:Jf4 it is unlikely that
Botvinnik, a subtle strategist, does not even
Botvinnik would have ventured 1 7. . .dxe4
think of making this advance.
18 dxe4 cS, since after 1 9 dS Black's
10 ... h5
position is worse.
Since now 11 lt:JxhS ltJfS 1 2 g3 cS! favours 17 exd5
Black, he succeeds in supporting his hS 1 8 'tWas lt:Jf8
pawn with ...g7-g6.
1 9 l:tdf1 lt:Je6
11 tt:Jce2 g6
20 l:tf3 'i'd8
1 2 'Yi'd2 lt:Jg8
21 'ifa4 'iib6
Botvinnik wants to exchange the dark square
22 �c1 lt:Jg4
bishops. The following way of devel oping
also came into consideration: 12...i.g7 23 lt:Jf1
 GAME 20 TAL - BOTVINNIK
78 �
30 �b3

�a7
8
31 'ii'd6 'iVb8
7

8
7

4
3

5
2
4
3

23 o-o

An unexpected decision. Botvinnik evident ly

decided to sharpen the play, aiming for a
win, otherwise he would have prepared
queenside castling. 23 ...a5 was not bad,
with the 'threat' of exchanging queens
by ...'iVb4.
24 l.Ue3 f5
25 g3
After 25 exf6 l.Uxe3 26 l:txe3 !Ixf6 Black
would have been excellently placed.
25 . . . l.Uh2
26 Ilf4
To the credit of both players, it should be
said that in almost any position they find
ways to sharpen the play. After all, 2-3
moves ago it was all completely 'quiet',
whereas now one grandmaster attacks a
rook, and the other happily gives it up.
Botvinnik is convinced that after, winning the
exchange, the white knights on f4 and g5 will
not be inferior to the black rooks. Therefore,
instead of 25 . . .l .Uh2 it would have been
better to make a more useful move, for
example 25 ...cifth7.
26 ... ltJg4
27 l.Ug2 l:tae8
Here too 27 ...a5 was more useful.
28 'ifa3 :11
29 :c3 a6
32 'ti'xb8
If Tal himself exchanges queens, this must
imply that he considered his position to be
won after the exchange. 32 ifb4 was also
worth considering.
32 ... .:xb8
33 :t1 ltJh2
Again 'pursuing' the repetition of moves after
34 l:tf4 ltJg4, but Tal is in no way satisfied
with a draw.
34 l:tc1 �e8
34 ...l.Uf3! was stronger, after which Tal had in
mind 35 l:txc6. But, as was shown by Gideon
Stahlberg, after this there follows 35 . . .l .Ud2+
36 citc2 l2Jxd4+! 37 ltJxd4 ltJxb3 and after 38
l:txg6+ �h7 White remains two exchanges down.
After 34 ...ltJf3 White would have had to reply
35 .:b4.
35 ltJgf4 ltJxt4
A typical time trouble move. 35 ...ltJf3 was
correct.
36 gxf4 l2Jg4
In severe time trouble Botvinnik feared (not
without reason) that after 36 ...liJf3 37 �c2
his knight at f3 would become entangled, and
he switches completely to defence. The
picture has sharply changed in Tal's favour.
 GAME 20 TAL - BOTVINNIK ltJ 79

37 �b6 �g7 should have played 45 �c1 ! and then taken

38 .i:.h1 on c5 with his rook.
Preventing ...g6-g5, just in case. The most convincing variation was given by
38 ctJh6 Botvinnik himself. This indicates how accu
39 ltJc3 �c7 rately he analysed the adjourned position.
40 ltJa4 ctJf7 The move played by Tal suggests that he did
41 <it>c2 ctJd8 not analyse the adjourned position
sufficiently deeply, assuming that any plan
42 �d2 ltJe6
would win. 45 ltJc5? effectively transforms a
won position into a drawn one.
Botvinnik showed that White would have
won by 45 l:.c1! l:.a8 46 ctJc5 ltJxc5 47 :xeS,
then a2-a4 and b4-b5.
But in the event of 45 .:c1 ! 1iie7 46 lt:Jcs
ltJxc5 White plays 47 bxc5!. The subtle point
is that now if 47 . . .:as there follows 48 !lg1
1iif749 e6+ and White invades on the g-file.

45 ... ltJxc5
46 bxcS l:ia8!
In his analysis Tal must have missed this
move. White thought that he would have
time to double rooks on the b-file and to
The sealed move. Who could have thought penetrate with his king to b6 and then to a7.
that this game would be the most prolonged Now this plan is not feasible in view of ...a6-
in the history of matches for the world a5.
championship and, which is most unexpect 47 <iittd2 <it>e6

ed, that it would end in a draw! An inaccuracy. The simplest was 47 ...�e7,
In this position a win for Tal was predicted, since the king is well placed at f7.
and a not very difficult one. The resumption 48 J:lg1 .:g7
would last 1 5-20 moves - those were the 49 �c3 �a7
general forecasts. 50 <it>b4 aS+
43 We3 l:id7 51 �a4
The rook must 'keep guard' on this square,
in order after 44 ctJc5 lt:Jxc5 45 dxc5 to
have the move 45 ... d4+, vacating the d5
square for the black pieces.
44 b4 �f7 (see next diagram)
45 ltJcS?

The fact that White has a won position - this

is clear. But what is the most accurate way
to convert the advantage? All the commen
tators were correct in stating that White
 GAME 20 TAL - BOTVINNIK
80 �
63 l::th1 J!txg6

8
64 :xh2 :g3

a b c e

:I aS?
This loses a pawn. It was correct to retreat
the king to f7.
52 .l:gb1 .l:a7 A new endgame begins. White is two pawns
53 �1 b5 up, but Botvinnik displays the utmost tenac
ity in defence, constantly setting Tal new
Here is the result of the black king's position
problems. 64 .. J'lg4 would have lost quickly
on e6. It is curious that in his analysis
to 65 llh6+ �d7 66 l:.h7+ �c8 67 e6 etc.
Botvinnik saw this possibility, but during the
65 .:th6+ Wd7
game he forgot about it.
66 :h7+ we a
53 ... .l:g8
54 a3 :tea 67 e6
Also unconvincing is 67 :f7 .:.xd3+ 68 Wb2
54 ...l:.ga8? was completely bad on account
�xd4, when Black should be able to save
of 55 .:b2 �b8 56 l:xc6+.
the game.
55 .a.xa5 :ea8
67 l:xd3+
56 .:xa7 �xa7 +
68 �b2 �e3
57 <it>b4 g5
69 e7
The only way. Here passive play would have 69 1'117 gives White nothing, in view of the
been inappropriate. march of the black king to a7.
58 hxg5 h4 69 �d7
59 a4 h3 70 e8'iV+ 'lit xeS
60 �a3 h2 71 :xb7 �d8
61 l:.b1 :as
62 g6

In the variation 62 :h1 :hs 63 Wb4 l:h4 64 (see next diagram)

�as Jlxf4 65 �b6 it is hard to demonstrate
a win for White. Therefore Tal exchanges
the g-pawn for the a-pawn.
62 . . . l:.g8
 GAME 20 TAL - BOTVINNIK
l2J 81

72 a5 90 a7
Here there was an interesting possibility: 72 My analysis showed that the strongest
.i:tf7 l:e4 73 �c3 :xf4 7 4 �b4 and the white continuation was to lure the black rook to a6:
king breaks through at b6. Or 72 l:.f7 .i:td3 73 90 :tB I:.a5+ 91 <it>b3 :xa6 92 .:xf5 �d7 93
a5 .:xd4 74 a6 and Black is lost. l:.f6 I:.a1 94 f5 :d1 95 �c3 ltc1+ 96 <it>d2
72 I:.e2+ I:.f1 97 :f7+ Wd8 98 'i!?c3 l:tb1.
73 �b3 I!e1 Even so, it would appear that here too Black
74 �b2 .:te2+ gains a draw, for example: 99 f6 _g[f1 1 00
75 �c3 l:.a2 �b4 �e8, or 99 �c2 l:tb4 1 00 Wd3 l:.b3+ 1
76 �b6 �c7 01 �e2 .l:.h3 1 02 f6 l':th4 1 03 �e3 l:.e4+ 1
04 �d3 lif4.
77 a6 :a1
90 :la5+
78 'i!?b2 :ta4
91 �b3 <it>b7
79 �b3 l:ta1
92 l:.f8 lib5+
80 .i:tb7+ �c8
81 J:!b6
White intends to last out to the 88th move,
adjourn the game and see at home in which
position it is most advantageous to ex
change his a-pawn for the f5 pawn, trying to
exploit his only winning chance.
81 �c7
82 l:.b7+ �c8
83 :a7 l:.b1+
84 'i!?c3 �a1
85 l::ta8+ �c7
86 c;t>b3 l:tb1+ a b c d e g h

87 Wc3 l:ta1
88 c;t>b3 l:b1+ It is important here to force White to decide
89 Wa2 :bs where to take his king, since it is on this that
82 � GAME 21 BOTVINNIK - TAL

Black's further actions depend. For exam ple,

if 93 �c3 there would have followed 93....
:t.a5, in order to attack the enemy king from
the side (93 ...<it?xa7 94 �xf5 I:tas 95
.l:f7+ <lt>a6 96 �c7 or 95 ...�b8 96 <it>b4
l:tb5+ 97 �a4 is bad for Black) 94 J:.xf5
<lt>xa7 95 .l:f7+ (95 .:f6 <lt>b7 96 f5 l:.a3+)
95 ...cit?a6 96 :c7 l:ta3+ 97 �b4 .:a4+ and
the black king, and this is very important, is
not driven onto the eighth rank. White,
however, continues playing more 'naturally'.
93 cit?a4 �xa7
94 J:xf5 l:tb1

And only here did Tal notice that after 95 :f7+

�a6 96 l:ic7, as he was intending to play,
there follows 96 ...l:.b4+!! 97 �xb4 -
stalemate.
8 8
7 7
6
5 5
4 4
Now the king is safely cut off along the f-file,
and Black can wait.
1 00 ...�c7 1 01 l:.f7+ �d8 1 02 'it>e2 .:t4 1 03
�d3 llf3+ 1 04 <itd2 �c8 1 05 <ite2 �f4 1 06
<it>e3 l:.f1 1 07 .:t8+ �d7 1 08 :t6 �c7 1 09
f:.f7+ <itd8 11 0 'it>e2 l:.f4 1 1 1 �d3 l:tf3+ 1 1 2
�c2 �c8 1 1 3 f6 �d8 1 1 4 lif8+ �c7 1 1 5
Wd2 'it>b7 1 1 6 �e2 l:tf4 1 1 7 �e3 l:tf1 11 8
.:.11 + �c8 1 1 9 cit?d2 l:tf3 1 20 �c2 Wd8 1
21 llf8+ �c7 Draw

3 3

2 2 1 2th May 1 961 Game 21 -

Botvinnik Tal
-

a b c d e 9 h King's Indian Defence

Notes by Mikhail Botvinnik
There was also no longer any way of gaining
winning chances, although White could still 1 d4 t2Jf6
hope for some mistake by his tired opponent. 2 c4 g6
3 t2Jc3 i..g7
95 l:tf6 �b7
Before this game Tal was still the World
96 f5 l:.a1+
Champion, since I only had 12 points and my
First the king is driven away from the queenside, so that opponent still had theoretical chances of
there should be no question of it invading at b6. drawing the match by winning the remaining
97 �b4 l:tb1+ four games. Therefore he chose a compli
98 'it>c3 l:.c1+ cated opening - a draw was of no interest to
99 �d2 .:t1 him at all.
1 00 �e3 4 e4 d6
5 t2Jbd7
 GAME 21
In avoiding simplification, Tal chooses a not
very successful variation. It should also be
mentioned that we had spent three days on
the previous game, in which for a long time
he had been hoping to win, and after I had
saved it he was, naturally, rather depressed.
6 .tea e5
7 l2Jge2 o-o
8 d5
White accepts the challenge and goes in for
a complicated game. However, there was no
particular risk in this, since Tal did not like
closed positions. The Encyclopaedia considers
8 'ird2 to be stronger.
8 ctJh5
9 'ifd2
White avoids the win of a pawn (9 g4 l2Jf4
10 l2Jxf4 exf4 11 .ixf4), which after 11 . . .f5
1 2 exf5 gxf5 1 3 g5 would have handed the
initiative to Black.
9 f5
1 0 o-o-o a6
Played to control the b5 square for counter
play with . . .b7-b5, and also to free the
queen from having to defend the c7 pawn in
view of a possible l2Jb5. Even so, 1 O ..
l2Jc5 is probably stronger (Boleslavsky-
Keres, 1 952).
1 1 �b1 l2Jdf6
Black intensifies the pressure on the central
e4 pawn, and in view of the threatened
BOTVINNIK - TAL ttJ 83
.. .b7-b5 White is practically forced to
exchange on f5.
1 2 exf5 gxf5
1 3 l2Jg3
Now Black does not have a great choice. If
13 ...f4 14 l2Jxh5 fxe3 1 5 ct:Jxf6+ 'iixf6, then
White emphasises his positional advantage
by 16 'i¥c2, avoiding the double-edged play
after 1 6 'i¥xe3 e4! 1 7 fxe4. The manoeuvre
1 6 'iic2 (instead of 1 6 'i'xe3) was one that I
later carried out in the game Botvinnik
Medina (Tel Aviv 1 964). The exchange of
knights on g3 leads to the opening of the h
file, and that says everything.
13 'i'e8
14 .id3! l2Jxg3
In the spirit of the position was the pawn
sacrifice 14...e4 (1 5 l2Jxh5 followed by
fxe4), although it could hardly give sufficient
compensation, as Black's pieces are not
mobilised. 1 4...f4 would still have not
achieved anything, while after 1 4...'ii'g615
l2Jxh5 'iixh5 1 6 h3 the unpleasant g2-g4
cannot be avoided. Even so, it is hard to
agree with Black's decision. In the game
. White's attack becomes virtually irresistible.
1 5 hxg3 c5
A standard advance in the King's Indian
Defence, after which the . . .b7-b5 counter
blow could have gained in strength. Howev
er, White's offensive develops more quickly.
 GAME 21 BOTVINNIK - TAL
84 �
1 6 i.h6 'iVg6

1 7 g4 bS
1 8 i.xg7
Of course, it was tempting to exchange the
bishop defending the enemy king, but the h6
square should not have been given up
without a fight. The preparatory 1 8 l:h4 was
more consistent.
18 ... <iitxg7
1 9 l:h4 bxc4
Now White sacrifices a pawn (by retreating
his bishop), but on the other hand his king
will be completely safe. However, the alter
natives 1 9.. .t�Jg8 20 gxf5 i.xf5 21 l:.g4 Position after 23 ... fxg4
and 1 9...e4 20 gxf5 i.xf5 21 fxe4 were
equally hopeless. Other replies were equally hopeless: 27 ...�f7
20 .i.c2 h6! 28 l:xf7+ <iitxf7 tt:Je4,29 or 27 ...�d8 28
Cleverly played. Black covers the h6 square ltJe4 (but not 28 �xf6? �xf6 29 �g8+ and
and forces the exchange of queens, which, 30 �xa8 on account of 30 .. l:f1 +) 28
.

alas, can no longer halt White's attack. It ...ctJd7 29 �xf8+ ltJxf8 30 tt:Jxd6.
becomes clear why White should not have 28 tt:Je4 ctJd7
been in a hurry to exchange the dark-square The white knight is immune because of 29
bishops (cf. the note to White's 1 8th move). i.a4+.
21 l:dh1 'ii'gS 29 tt:Jxd6+ <iitd8
22 �xg5+ hxg5 30 l:xf8+ ltJxf8
23 �h6 31 tt:Jxc4 i.d7
This is the whole point. White controls the g6 32 J:tf7 <iitc7
square, which is of decisive importance. 33 d6+
23 . . . fxg4
Even so, Black should not have given up the
b1-h7 diagonal without a fight. After, for
example, 23 ...e4 24 gxf5 i.xf5 25 fxe4 i.h7
he could still have held the position. Howev
er, even in this case White had the decisive
continuation 24 fxe4 tt:Jxg4 25 �xd6.

(see next diagram)

24 fxg4!
The simplest. The pressure on the f-file will
be irresistible.
24 .i.xg4
25 l:g6+ �f7
26 �f1 �e7 Here Black resigned the game, and with it
27 �g7+ �e8 the title of World Champion.

Tra n s l at o r ' s N ot e s *
1
(Game 4, note to 32 �hc1 , p.26)
White can save his knight by 42 l:U7 +
�c6 (or 42 . . .�b8 43 11d7) 43
l::ta7�b5 44 l2Jb2.
2 (Game 4, note to 35 ...<itfd7, p.26)
Black can play 37 ...�f4 38 l!c2 �d5 with
a winning advantage.
3 (Game 4, note to 37 ...l::ta3+, p.26)
After 38 b7 better is 38 ...:a3+ (instead of
38 .. .'=:b8). However, 38 ctJd7+ (instead
of 38 b7) wins instantly.
4 (Game 7, note to 5 ...b6, p.33)
There is some confusion here. I think that
the games the author is referring to are
Botvinnik-Kan (11th USSR Champion
ship. Leningrad 1 939) and the training
game Botvinnik-Furman (Nikolina gora 1
960).
5 (Game 1 1 . note to 1 3 'irc1 !, p.46)
Black looks aJright after 1 4...4Je4 1 5 l::tb2
.la4 1 6 f3 "iixc1 1 7 �xc1 ctJd6. Instead
14 f3. denying the black knight the e4
square. looks stronger: 1 4...ctJh5 (14 ... !:b8
1 5 -2.g6) 1 5 :.t2 l2Jxt4 1 6 :xc2 f6
( 1 6 :� 1 7 -2:xc6) 1 7 �xc3 4Je2+ 1 8
..
�f2 Gc1 1 9 .!;\xc6.
6
(GBJTl€ 1 9. note to 34 �b5!, p.74)
After 34 .i.b3 Black can simply play
34 _'!:' d3+ and 35 . .:.Xb3.
.. . .
7
(First Notebook, Meran, p.91)
Instead of 23.. . "0"a3 there is 23 ...
'�xd2+ 24 itxd2 hxgS 25 �xd6 l2Je4+.
* A computer was used to help in checking the analysis.
ltJ 1 25
8 (First Notebook, .i.c4 Variation, p.92) This
doesn't make sense. Perhaps 1 8...
ext5, intending ...b5-b4 and ...lt:Je4 is
intended?
9 (First Notebook, French, p.97)
1 5. . .�d7 loses outright to 1 6 i..b5+
.i.xb5 1 7 'ii'f7.
1 0
(First Notebook, Sicilian Dragon, p.1 02)
There appears to be a move missing for
each side here - perhaps 1 8 .S:d1 'iVe6 ?
11 (Second Notebook, Nimzo-lndian, p.1 03)
Instead of 1 3 lbh5=, 1 3 lbg6 appears to
win.
12 (Second Notebook, Variation with 4 e3
b6, p. 1 04)
This note does not make sense. Perhaps the following
was intended: 5 ...cxd4 6 exd4 d5 7 c5 lbe4 8 .i.d2
ctJxd2 9 'iVxd2
b6 1 0 a3 �xc3 1 1 ttJxc3 bxc5 1 2 dxc5 aS
1 3 tLla4! lbd7 (or 1 3...0-0 1 4 �c1 ) 1 4
'ifc3! 0-0 1 5 b4. Later a note appeared:
look at 1 3 i.b5+ i..d7, Averbakh-Panno.
13 (Second Notebook, Samisch c6 variation,
p.1 09)
1 6 �c5 can be met by 1 6. . . '1Wh4, but 1 6
e6 looks very strong.
14 (Second Notebook, Variation with g3,
p. 111)
After 22 l::txd5Black wins with 22 ...�xh3 23
'ifxa8 �b1 + 24 �h2 i..xg2 25 <i!lxg2 'i!Ve4+.
I think that 20 'i'e8+ (instead of 20 l::td1)
20 ...�g7 21 l::tc1 is better for White.
1 26 � TRANSLATOR'S NOTES

15 (Second Notebook, Variation with g3 and 18 (Second Notebook, French Defence, p.114) It
l2Jc6-a5, p. 1 11) would seem that White can avoid the
21 ...'i¥xg5 should at least be considered, perpetual attack on his queen by 16 'ir'f 6,
e.g. 22 "filc7 �e5 23 .:ic1 d5. e.g. 1 6. . .'iVd8 17 lDg5 l:g6 1 8 lDf7.

16 (Second Notebook, Slav Defence, p.11 3) 19 (Second Notebook, French Defence,

1 7.. .lt)as looks clearly better, and if 1 8 p.114)
'iixe6 'ik'c4+. As on p.97, 1 5...Wd7 loses to 1 6 i.b5+
i.xb5 17 1i'f7.
17 (Second Notebook, From Taimanov, p.114)
Why not keep the knight defended by 1
6...'ii'g6 ?