The Games of — Robert J. Fischer Edited by Robert G.Wade and Kev ‘Connell *Robert James Fischer, US champion at the age of fourteen, at twenty-eight became the highest-rated player in the history of chess. For, in qualifying as the 1972 Challenger to the world title, he achieved the unique feat of overwhelming three of the world’s top grandmasters by the fantastic score of 184 ~ 24 This volume records every serious game accessible to the editors (some previously unpublished) that Bobby Fischer has played since 1955, when as a boy of twelve his games began to appear in print. A large proportion of the 660 complete games included have notes on critical variations and twenty of Fischer's most important encounters have been annotated in depth by Bob Wade; these are supported by over 700 diagrams of key positions. The book also contains numerous tournament tables and records, as well as an index of total results against every opponent. But The Games of Robert J. Fischerismore than a complete work of reference to his North American, International, Olympiad and World Championship achievements. Bobby Fischer himself, both as a man and as a player, is brought vividly to life in the special articles contributed by international grandmasters Paul Keres and Arthur Bisguier, by former British champions Leonard Barden, Harry Golombek and Bob Wade and by openings expert Les Blackstock. As all these writers agree ~ and as the reader can see for himself — Fischer’s games provide the ablest, the most tense and the hardest-fought examples of contemporary chess. ‘The Games of Robert J. Fischer The Contributors: Leonard Barden —co-British champion 1954, Chess correspondent The Guardian. Arthur Bisguier — US champion and International grandmaster, lives in New York. LeslieBlackstock — openings expert, reg- ular contributor to Chessman Quarterly and The Chessplayer. Harry Golombek-British champion 1947, 1949 and 1955, Chess correspondent The Times and The Observer. Paul Keres — one of the World’s greatest grandmasters, still active. Lives in Tallinn, Estonia, USSR. The Editors: Robert Wade — twice British and thrice New Zealand champion, editor Con- temporary Chess Openings series. Kevin O’Connell - Essex county player and bulletin editor. OTHER RATSFORD CHESS BOOKS The World Chess Championship S. Gligorié, R. G. Wade Full match scores, with annotations and diagrams, of every post-war series, begin: ning with the 1948 tournament, together with an intimate portrait of each world champion by Yugoslav grandmaster Svetozar Gligorié Spassky’s 100 Best Games Bernard Cafferty Foreword by Leonard Barden Botvinnik’s Best Games 1947-1970 Mikhail Botvinnik Edited by Bernard Cafferty ‘The Battle of Chess Ideas Anthony Saidy Think Like a Grandmaster Alexander Kotov ‘Translated by Bernard Cafferty The jocket illustration is a callage of Fischer about to play Petyosian during the Match ofthe Century, Belgrade 1970, ‘and of position against Don Byrne in the Lessing J. Rosenwald Trophy Tournament 1936 say 0 7134 1364.02 Bobby Fischer, aged 14, in play at the Manhattan Chess Club, | New York, J ne 19574 Facing Mikhail Tal at the International Tournament at Zurich, 2 June 1959 3 (left) Fischer plays a quick game against Tigran Petrosian at Moscow's Central Chess Club, 30 June 1958, which he visited before going to the InterzonalUhlmann at the Leipzig Olympiad 1960; Mikhail 1 arden look—_~ Playing Filip, Stockholm 1962 Olympiad 1966igran Petrosian at Buenos Aires, Novemberts-18 At the Manhattan Chess Club Blitz Tourna- ment, August 1971The Games of Robert J. FischerGe Coy Ay SAAS Robert J. Fischer, 1965, and a facsimile of Fischer’s signature The Games of Robert J. Fischer Edited by Robert G. Wade, Kevin J. O’Connell With Contributions by Leonard Barden Arthur Bisguier L. S. Blackstock Harry Golombek Paul Keres B. T. Batsford Limited LondonFirst published 1972 © Robert G, Wade, 1972 Articles © B. T. Batsford Ltd, 1972 Printed and bound in Great Britain by C, Tinling & Co. Ltd., Warrington Road, Prescot, Lancashire for the publishers B. T. Batsford Ltd. 4 Fitzhardinge Street, London W1H 0AH ISBN 0 7134 0364 0 Contents List of Hlustrations Preface Acknowledgments Symbols Tournament and Match Record Fischer the Artist Harry Golombek Fischer’s Opening Repertoire and Contribution to Opening Theory L.S. Blackstock PART ONE: US CHAMPIONSHIPS AND NORTH AMERICAN TOURNAMENTS The Making of a Legend Arthur Bisguier US Championships: games (1-90) North American Tournaments: games (91-295) PART TWO! INTERNATIONAL TOURNAMENTS AND MATCHES Fischer’s International Record R. G. Wade International Tournaments and Matches: games (296-533) PART THREE: THE OLYMPIADS At the Olympiads R. G. Wade The Olympiads: games (534-598) PART FOUR: WORLD TITLE SERIES Bobby Fischer — from the Opposite Side of the Board Paul Keres From Portoroz to Petrosian Leonard Barden World Title Series (599-748) Appendix: Miscellancous Games Index of Openings Index of Opponents 43 51 92 159 163 283 289 321 331 347 431 438 442,The Illustrations nN Robert J. Fischer, 1965. From a sketch by Dago, Frontispiece Fischer’s score-sheet against Spassky, Siegen 1970 page 10 Between pages 224 and 225 Bobby Fischer, aged 14, in play at the Manhattan Chess Club, New York June 1957 Fischer plays a quick game against Tigran Petrosian at Moscow's Central Chess Club, 30 June 1958, which he visited before going to the Interzonal Facing Mikhail Tal at the International Tournament at Zurich, 2 June 1959 At Bled, Yugoslavia 1961 Playing Uhlmann at the Leipzig Olympiad 1960; Mikhail Tal and Leonard Barde look on Playing Filip, Stockholm 1962 Havana Olympiad 1966 Ready to play Petrosian during the Match of the Century, Belgrade 1970 In Argentina 1970 At Siegen 1970 Before play against Bent Larsen, July 1971 Talking to Journalists after the Larsen Match At the Manhattan Chess Club Blitz Tournament, August 1971 After his victory over Tigran Petrosian at Buenos Aires, November 1971 ’ Preface Fischer of the United States has become the highest-rated chess player in Ay of chess by overwhelming three of the world’s top grandmasters in 1971. During 1972 he is due to meet Boris Spassky of the Soviet Union in a 24-game decider for the ron se as all of Bobby Fischer’s serious games, accessible to the editors, dating from 1955 when, as a boy of 12, Bobby’s games first appeared in print. The basis of this work, the games, stems from a file, on Fischer's games, started by Kevin O Connell as a schoolboy. ee of Fischer’s important games, mostly recent, have been fully annotated by Bob Wade. A large number of the remaining games have notes on critical variations; a lot of these notes have been digested from many sources. (Prime sources are difficult to track down and often stem from post-mortems by the actual contestants.) Diagram ositions are liberally scattered throughout the text to aid readers in selecting games and Provrsing, . . . ‘When the move record of a known game has not been available this is clearly in- dicated in the text (where all the events are listed, often with tournament tables), in order to encourage future research. Included in the book are: 1 a general appreciation of Fischer’s achievements by Harry Golombek; 2 technical appreciation of Fischer’s particular skill in opening play by Les Blackstock; } 3 the story of Fischer’s growing up in New York and how he won all cight US championships that he played in, told by Arthur Bisguicr; : 4 how Fischer matured as a player from his Interzonal in 1958 up to his 1972 victory over Petrosian, traced by Paul Keres; .. 5 the serious journalist’s picture of Fischer's play in all world championship events from Portoroz 1958 by Leonard Barden; 6 an account of Fischer as a member of US team at the Olympiads of 1960, 1962, 1966 and 1970 by Bob Wade; 7 jottings on Fischer at other international events by Bob Wade; 8 the most detailed list of performances yet published; . 9 besides the usual opening and players’ indices, an index of total results against every player listed. ’s games commend themselves by being the most tense, the most exciting and the hardest-fought examples of contemporary chess. This fighting spirit is strongly cing the efforts of a new generation of players. The EditorsAcknowledgments The editors wish to acknowledge with thanks the following for their help in obtaining game scores and information: James B. Adams Gudmundur Armnlaugsson Christiaan M. Bijl Arthur B. Bisguier Dr Nathan Divinsky Dr Max Euwe Rodrigo Flores Franz W. J. Henneberke Ingi R. Johannsson Dr Erich W. Marchand Guthrie McClain Moe Moss Zandor Nilsson Dr Anthony F. Saidy Lothar Schmid James T. Schroeder Vladimir Sokolov Jack Spence Bozidar Kazic Gudmundur Thorarinsson Miss Pearle Mann Baruch H. Wood For game scores and background information reference has been made to: Chess Life, Chess Review, Informator(s), My 60 Memorable Games by R. J. Fischer (Simon & Schuster; Faber and Faber), Profile of a Prodigy by Frank Brady (Nicholas Kaye Ltd), Bobby Fischer’s Games of Chess by R. J. Fischer (Simon & Schuster; Museum Press), and many tournament books and magazines. The help in transcribing game scores or reading proofs by Leonard M. Pickett, Anthony K. Swift and Daniel Castello is much appreciated. ‘We should have liked to include some direct quotations from Fischer’s My 60 Memorable Games to show Fischer’s deep understanding of his own games but the details could not be negotiated during November/December 1971 as Mr Fischer was touring Argentina. Instead, we refer readers to this book at the end of the particular games. My thanks are due to Mr Robert Fischer for illustration no. 10 (R.G.W.). For the remainder of the photographs our grateful thanks are due to: Bertil Aberg for fig. 7; Associated Press Ltd for figs 2-4; G. Bailey for fig. 14; British Chess Magazine for fig. 8; Camera Press Ltd for figs 5 and 9; Dave Cornwell for fig. 13; Bert Hochberg for figs 15- 18; Keystone Press Agency Ltd for fig. 19; D. N. L. Levy for figs 11 and 12. Robert G. Wade January 1972 Kevin J. O’Connell Symbols 4 Check + Double Check + Some advantage for White Some advantage for Black ++ Clear advantage for White + Clear advantage for Black + White has won position > Black has won position = Balanced position ! Good move "Excellent move 2 Interesting move ?! Doubtful move ? Inferior move 2? Losing move (s) Sealed moved 1-0 Black resigned $4 Draw agreed 0-1 White resigned W or Bat the side of each diagram indicates which side is to move. In the text a number in brackets refers to the relevant diagram number. The numbering begins with ‘1’ in each of the four parts.XIX.Schach ( ve Finalarppe [74] eecatncraeaserese RUNGE Olympiade ee teneeeentennenn TERE, Wei8: Sais iLife a ne, Schwere: tse her ne — Nation: wu LLSSR Nation: 1 Fischer’s score-sheet against Spassky, Siegen 1970 TOURNAMENT AND MATCH RECORD 1951 Max Pavey simultaneous 1955 Brooklyn CC Ch. 3.5 US Amateur Ch. ~ score US Junior Ch. 10-20 US Junior Speed Ch. 3 Washington Square Park 15-60 44-3} 1956 Greater New York City Ch. 5-7 5-2 Log Cabin 50-50 Manhattan CC ‘A’ Reserve 1 Metropolitan League / * US Amateur Ch. 21 US Junior Ch. 1 US Junior Speed Ch. 2 41 US Open Ch. 48 Canadian Open Ch. 8-12 Rosenwald Trophy 8 Eastern States Open 2-4 54-14 1957 Manhattan CC }~final 4 Log Cabin Open 6 Log Cabin 50-50 Metropolitan League * Euwe Match Lost New Western Open 7 US Junior Ch. 1 US Junior Speed Ch. 1 US Open Ch. 1 Benninson Match Won 34-1} Cardoso Match Won New Jersey State Open 1 North Central Open 6 US Championship 1957/8 1 1958 Janosevic Match Drew Matulovic Match Won Interzonal, Portoroz 5-6 US Championship 1958/9 1 1959 Mar del Plata 34 Santiago 47 Zurich 34 Candidates, Bled/Zagreb/Belgrade 5-6 US Championship 1959/60 1 1960 Mar del Plata 12 Buenos Aires 13 Reykjavik 1 Olympiad, Leipzig Bd 1 wh SuMoMmuwthy Naw ow pf o R CwWNwWATADWADAANOCAeHAADY ry On ms BR PNRPONOF vinn PNR DAPrPP LOU EUNE NUN DY ee Nm RRO OrPrrPOONnh NO oO - NOMPORPNANONMKOOR Cr12 Tournament and Match Record 1960 Mar del Plata—cont. + = Darga, Exhibition Won 1 0 US Championship 1960/61 1 7 4 1961 Reshevsky Match Drew 2 7 Bled 2 8 11 BBC Consultation * 0 1 1962 Interzonal, Stockholm 1 13 9 Larsen, Exhibition Won 1 0 Candidates, Curacao 4 8 12 Sliwa, USA v Poland Won 1 0 Olympiad, Varna Bd 1 8 6 US Championship 1962/63 1 6 4 1963 Western Open 1 7 1 New York State Open 1 7 0 US Championship 1963/64 1 11 0 1964 Simultaneous Tour * - =— 1965 Capablanca Memorial, Havana 2-4 12 6 US Championship 1965/66 1 8 1 1966 Piatigorsky Cup, Santa Monica 2 7 8 Olympiad, Havana Bdt 14 2 US Championship 1966/67 1 8 3 1967 Monaco 1 6 2 Skopje 1 12 3 Interzonal, Sousse Withdrew 7 3 1968 Nathanya 1 10 3 Vinkovei 1 9 4 1969 Metropolitan League * 1 0 1970 USSR v Rest, Petrosian Bd 2 2 2 Herceg Novi 5-Minute 1 17 4 Rovinj/Zagreb 1 10 6 Buenos Aires 1 13 4 Olympiad, Siegen Bd1 8 4 Andersson, Exhibition Won 1 0 Interzonal, Palma 1 15 7 1971 Candidates }-final, Taimanov Won 6 0 Candidates }-final, Larsen Won 6 0 Candidates final, Petrosian Won 5 3 409 223 (US Junior Speed Ch’s and the Herceg Novi 5-minute results are not included in the totals.) I ecorevoncoocooenosd | ~ SBreocrororrPccocCoOOncDornuUunw FISCHER THE ARTIST Harry Golombek In dealing with great chess geniuses it is advisable and even necessary to view them on as broad a perspective as possible and in one way the advent of Bobby Fischer is no new phenomenon. In fact for the last hundred and fifty years the history of chess has been composed to a large extent of descents by geniuses from the New World on to the Old. One has only to mention the names of Paul Morphy, of Harry Nelson Pillsbury and of José Raoul Capablanca, to realise to what extent and in what way chess has been created and revivified by a transatlantic impetus. It is as though every now and again when Europe is experiencing a sort of stagnation either in the domain of chess theory or that of practice (possibly even of both), along comes a bright new force from America to liven up matters and even to act as a catalyst to set things in motion again. So the process itself is not new; and yet, just asa study of the games of these three great players shows many essential differences in each case, so a study of the games in this book demonstrates the unique quality of Bobby Fischer as a player. But let me make this quite plain. 1am not saying that his play has been entirely uninfluenced by those that have gone before him. No player starts off from, as it were, a vacuum and every one of us, from the veriest tyro to the super- lative grandmaster, is part of a continuous and unbroken chain in the development of chess throughout the ages. In my own study of his games I have become more and more convinced of the strong influence that Capablanca has exerted on the fashioning of Bobby Fischer’s style of play. This must be the cause of the strong resemblance in the long, clear, yet deep line of strategy that runs through the mass of their games. I have written elsewhere {in my book on Capablanca’s games) of the apparent simplicity of Capablanca’s style which conceals a great deal of art. The same could well be said of most of the games of Bobby Fischer. He himself has acknowledged this influence and I remember some years ago in a recorded interview between him and Leonard Barden that was14 Fischer the Artist broadcast on a chess programme of the BBC how he said he had read and appreciated my book on Capablanca, thereby at once gratifying me as an author and confirming my already mentioned belief in the effect Capablanca had had on Fischer. Naturally, since Fischer is possessed of an enquiring chess mind that likes to probe and think for itself; there is much more to his style of play than a mere automatic imitation of Capablanca. He is for one thing far more earnest in his pursuit of the ultimate chess truth than Capablanca ever was. Nor, it has to be admitted, is he so peaceably minded (some people have even gone so far as to use the word lazy in this respect) as the great Cuban was. It has never even occurred to Bobby Fischer that he could or should play for a draw, with, it seems, the possible exception of the early stages in his recent match with Petrosian when he was suffering from a heavy cold. This uncompromising attitude is part of the reason for the crushing manner in which his amazing successes have been achieved. His latest opponents indeed have been utterly consumed in a kind of stupendous holocaust that proves beyond measure the recent vast upsurge in strength of the Brooklyn genius. Merely from this angle alone, his arrival on the chess scene had, has and will continue to have colossal importance. Truc, there already have been quite a number of players who have achieved immense successes by brilliant and/or daring tactics and strategy. Two that readily come to mind are Tal and Larsen. For them too the peaceful draw is anathema. But, and it still has to be said despite their world importance as players, to both of them there always attaches some stigma of unsoundness. The chess world wonders and ex- claims at their brilliant achievements, whilst saying at the same time ‘the brilliancies of Tal are magnificent—but are they always really sound’? or ‘Larsen obtains the most striking tournament results— but the means he uses to accomplish them are always daring and appear more like foolhardiness when tried against the very tip-top opposition’. Thus these two great players, though successful on a grand scale, have had few followers amongst the judicious-minded and can hardly be said to have created a new school. With Fischer, however, the most conservative of chess-players has to acknowledge the soundness of his approach to the game. It is a classical style if ever Fischer the Artist there was one—a style to be imitated if possible and in any case to be admired and set up as an example for the young chess aspirant for mastership. But one can and must go further. Recently, that is to say in the last dozen years, a school of play has arisen that for want of a better phrase one might term the negative school. Players of this type attempt nothing positive; their chief aim is to frustrate the opponent and instead of creating ideas and formulating manoeuvres to carry out these ideas, their planning is entirely devoted to that of a spoiling campaign. It was in this fashion, for example, that Petrosian beat Botvinnik in their world championship match in 1963 and indeed Petrosian must be regarded as the pioneer and chief practitioner of the negative school. Under his influence and impressed by his example quite a number of young players have adopted negative policies, some with success and others with a lack of it in accordance with their abilities. Once of the great drawbacks of this negative approach is that its users tend to regard the end as justifying the means. They are not at all concerned with the creation of beautiful games but have as their sole objective the acquisition of points. Of course they do not shun the beautiful but then neither do they seck it out with any great energy. It is an enormous relief to those of us who love chess to find that this attitude is not only non-existent in Fischer’s make-up but posi- tively repulsive to him. He appreciates beauty in chess and cherishes it like a true artist. All Fischer’s games, as the reader will discover for himself from this volume, bear the stamp of an aesthetic approach towards chess. Like Morphy, like Alekhine and like Capablanca too, he is at his best when pursuing a beautiful idea to its logical conclu- sion. It is in the harmonious development of an attack and the long, clear, yet possibly complicated and certainly planned strategy that we recognise the true Fischer game. His outstanding success with such methods is not only a tribute to and proof of his own genius, but also, what is perhaps still more important, evidence of what have always believed—that the game of chess is neither a sport nor a science, but really an art. In writing about Fischer one tends to forget that his career is still in its early stages, so much has he achieved already in a comparatively 1516 Fischer the Artist brief span of time. I once observed that he was the strongest fifteen- year-old player in the history of the game and indeed at that age he was already of genuine grandmaster strength. It seemed to me then that he was stronger positionally than he was tactically, and this is always a sign of great potentialities. The tactical master may or may not develop into a great player, the positional one always does. For reasons that are inherent in the above argument it would not be right to call Fischer a brilliant player. This may perhaps puzzle the layman or the less advanced player who wrongly look upon the great chess-masters, on Morphy or Fischer for instance, as mere pur- veyors of brilliancies. Naturally, the really great player, being a universal chess genius, will produce brilliant ideas and brilliant games. But he will produce them only so far as they fit in with the nature of the position.We all know those players who are constantly and strenuously striving for brilliancies, to put it in its lowest terms, play for mate and mate alone. They are the reverse of universal and never occupy more than a minor niche in the hall of fame. Let me emphasize again that I do not mean that Fischer is either incapable of great brilliancy or that he has not produced brilliant games—one look at the celebrated brilliancy he won against Robert Byrne is enough to dispel this false impression, and it could be paralleled by many a beautiful game of Fischer’s. But for me, and I suspect for Fischer himself, the games that he has played that possess the greatest worth are those in which a logical strategy is duly worked out and brought to a triumphant conclusion, irrespective as to whether brilliance is involved or not. The materialistic philosophy of many of our modern masters, the kind that count the points and let the credit go, to misquote Omar Khayam, is—and I hope will be—shaken by Fischer’s example. So, though this has been gaining popularity recently, partly, as I have already indicated, through the influence of Petrosian, and also partly through that of the Yugoslav school, it should be swept away by the results of the more recent events in which Fischer has been entirely successful and yet has maintained the high aesthetic tradition of the world figures that preceded him. The contrast is very marked. I well remember that at the Sousse Interzonal of some four years back he played only ten games in the event, withdrawing from it at approximately the halfway stage. Yet, Fischer the Artist 17 a study of all the games played at that Interzonal shows beyond all cavil that Fischer’s were the best. And not only were they the best but they were also the most publishable in that it was a pleasure to play through cach and every one of them. The same applies to every tournament in which he takes part and here again the reader can judge for himself from the contents of this book. It is important in this aspect to consider Fischer not only as a strategist but also as a technician. For, just as there are players who are most competent in dealing with problems of technique but who lack the driving force of original creativity, so there are some who pro- duce a profusion of ideas but are unable to put them into accurate and successful practice. Happily, Fischer’s technique in all three phases of the game, the opening, the middle-game and the ending, cannot be faulted. His opening repertoire is somewhat limited in scope (as, for that matter, was Capablanca’s). As White he is a King’s pawn player and has concentrated his attention on that great stand-by beloved of all King’s pawn players—the Ruy Lopez. As Black he plays the Sicilian Defence against the King’s pawn and the King’s Indian against the Queen’s. These three openings he plays, and, I believe, has studied with such assiduity, that already the books of opening theory have become en- tiched with Fischer variations. Here once more the parallel with Capablanca is acute. Capa’s contributions to opening theory were great, despite, or perhaps even because of, his limited repertoire, and when the sum comes to be made of Fischer's contributions in this field I doubt whether they will be less, As the reader will observe, he also plays the Griinfeld Defence; but this can only be effected when White plays N-QB3 on the third move and so he does not get so many opportunities of playing what I suspect is a favourite defence inasmuch as it is a counter-attack based on a fine strategic idea. Another aspect of Fischer’s play that can scarcely be over- estimated lies in that field which Alekhine once termed the most difficult of all to master—that is, the transition period between the respective phases of the game, between the opening and middle- game and between the middle-game and the ending. Both these hazardous and ticklish feats he accomplishes to perfection as becomes a great master. It is in the middle-game that his native genius flowers to the full.18 Fischer the Artist In the openings, as I have already indicated, his scope is limited, albeit practically perfect within the limits he has set himself; whilst in the endings, a field in which lengthy experience is required before anything like perfection is reached, he is not yet, Ibelieve, at the full height of his powers—that will come later. But his middle-game play always bears the stamp of a rich and original imagination. He seems to need the full orchestra of the pieces before he can compose a symphony ofa game. The reader will find many a harmonious and beautiful example in this book. Here, too, there is nothing negative; the play abounds in positive ideas executed in vigorous yet elegant style. It is curious to observe that in this he shows hardly any trace of the influence of the great US masters who directly preceded him—I am thinking of Fine and Reshevsky whose play possessed a wonderful vigour but was not exactly infused with elegance. No, the American influence here goes back further, possibly as far as to Pillsbury or even to Morphy. Naturally, most of the ideas are genuinely original Fischer, and for me they constitute as yet his most valuable contribution to the game of chess. If the reader requires evidence of this let him consider not only the earlier brilliancy already mentioned against Robert Byrne but his later one against the same opponent. By now these are justly famous and as far as I know the chief conceptions in these games have not occurred before but are native wood-notes of the purest form. Fischer’s stature as the leading player of the Western world is beyond question; possibly by the time this book appears it may be even higher—that of the world champion himself. But one question that repeatedly comes up merits discussion here. I was present at Palma de Mallorca during the latter stages of the Interzonal there in December 1970. On the weekend of the last round I was seated in the lounge of the Jaime I hotel where most of the players were staying, and the FIDE president, Prof Euwe, himself an ex-world champion and as shrewd a judge of chess strength as could be found either nowadays or in the past, was seated by my side. We were discussing Fischer’s phenomenal feat in winning first place at the Interzonal with some points to spare, and Euwe said it seemed to him that by now Fischer had attained the calibre of the strongest player in the history of the game. ‘Possibly Morphy’, he said, implying Fischer the Artist 19 that the other great American had been deprived of the opportunity of demonstrating his true worth through lack of opposition. This assessment, made by someone who ought to know, is impressive. It means that not only does he consider Fischer to be superior to the great ones of our day—to Spassky, Petrosian and Tal —but also greater than those of my youth, Botvinnik and, before him, Capablanca and Alekhine. Finally, too, there is the implication that he is a stronger player even than Emanuel Lasker ever was. How much of this is due to the impressions of the moment and how much is a considered judgment? I find it difficult to believe that anyone who met both Lasker and Alekhine at their best, who played matches against both Alekhine and Capablanca and had many a hard fight with Botvinnik, could fail to entertain a true appreciation of their powers, so I must acknowledge that in the opinion of a great contemporary of these great players Fischer was the strongest. For myself, having been brought up, as it were, in the shadow of these great names, it is difficult for me to shake off a feeling of awe at their powers. I have never had the privilege of playing against Fischer as I have had of playing Capablanca, Alckhine and Botvinnik, not to mention Tal and Spassky in contemporary time. But, like everybody else who has had to study the great players of our own era, I am familiar with Fischer’s games, and, whilst I cannot go so far as Prof Euwe in his forthright and unequivocal estimate of him, I will agree that in Fischer there lies the potentiality of proving himself the greatest chess-player the world has ever known in all the fifteen hundred years that the game has been in existence. My reasons for this caution are simply and quite manifestly that his career is not yet at an end and that indeed by normal considerations, insofar as the word normal can be used in this context, his career is not yet half over. His contributions to the game have as yet been most marked in the middle~game sphere. A number of the games in this book are clearly destined to make the anthologies, and still more one hopes, will flow from his creative genius in the years to come. From those openings he plays books of theory have already taken a quantity of variations some of which should eventually prove to be standard. No doubt in the course of time, as his repertoire widens, as it inevitably must, opening theory will be enriched to a still greater extent.20 Fischer the Artist To sum up, Bobby Fischer is a very great player indeed who has already bestowed upon the chess world a wealth of beautiful games. His advent has endowed the chess scene with fresh colour and his successes in the tournament and match world have given it a piquant flavour of rivalry that has been lacking for many a year. The chess enthusiast might well have said in the days when Alekhine, Capa- blanca, Nimzowitsch and Bogoljubow first made their international appearance, “Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive’; he can repeat those words now during the heyday of Fischer’s prime. FISCHER’S OPENING REPERTOIRE AND HIS CONTRIBUTION TO OPENING THEORY L. S. Blackstock As Fischer’s philosophy of chess demands that he should try to win each time he sits down at the board, his openings are necessarily geared to creating positions of dynamic imbalance, and of sufficient strategical and tactical complexity, in which his understanding of the game and his native ability can be exploited to the utmost. This parti- cularly involves the adoption of sharp defensive systems with Black in which the second player has active counterchances and White has no speedy route to a stone-cold draw, but naturally does not imply the use of dubious gambits from the Romantic Era. With White, on the other hand, adherence to the classical rules of development and emphasis on ‘natural’ activity are noteworthy features of Fischer’s opening systems. Despite an intimate knowledge of the opening systems of the nineteenth century, on which he has published some important theoretical work, Fischer’s openings are essentially modern in out- look and have occasionally been so sensitive to the latest nuances of tournament practice that established theory has changed almost daily. Earlier in his career he was strongly criticised for the rigidity of his opening repertoire which was reckoned to render him vulnerable to prepared opening analysis, though his alert home- analysis has always tended to invalidate such criticism. Probably the real targets of attack were the dogmatic outbursts on openings of his earlier years when his youthful optimism demanded a search for universal truth in chess, i.e. as there has to be a best move in every position there can only be one viable defence to every opening (in Fischer’s case, King’s Indian Defence, Sicilian Defence, Najdorf Variation). Now that Fischer has modified this attitude to embrace a wider range of opening systems in his repertoire, his interest as a player has increased greatly, theory is enormously enriched by his own contri- butions and by those who follow the trends he inevitably sets, and22 Fischer's Opening Repertoire furthermore, an important practical consideration, his opponents are no longer certain of being confronted with an expected vari- ation. FISCHER AS WHITE It is exceptionally rare for Fischer to open with any move other than 1 P-K4, though he has recently tried other first moves. Several years ago he showed his contempt for 1 P-Q4 in print and has never yet played it in a tournament game, but it is no longer inconceivable that he will. Ruy Lopez 1 P-K4 P-K4 2 N-KB3 N-QB3 3 B-N5 The Ruy Lopez is Fischer’s main weapon as White in Open Games, as with other leading grandmasters, though he has chosen other openings on a few notable occasions. Closed 3... P-QR3 4B-R4N-B3 50-0 B-K2 6R-K1 P-QN4 7B-N3 P-Q3 8 P-B3 0-0 9 P-KR3(1) eye ww use e tf at A Ot ED he an DR NR aa Of 8 Baw 2 ue S ‘YE ia The starting-point for the Closed Ruy Lopez and a position with which Fischer has had great experience. 9...N-QR4 10 B-B2 P-B4 11 P-Q4 Q-B2 12 QN-Q2 N-B3 13Px BP PxP 14N-B1 R-Q1 15Q-K2N-KR4 16P-QR4R-N1 17PxP PxP 18P-KN3 (18 P-KN4 N-B5 19BxNPxB 20P-K5 B-N2) 18...P-N3(48...BxP? 19 N-N5!) 19 P-R4! Fischer's Opening Repertoire Fischer’s improvement on 19 K-R2 B-K3 20 N-K3 P-B5 21 R- QIURxR 22 QxR R-Q1 Bronstein-Reshevsky, Ziirich 1953. 19...B-K3 20 N-K3 P-B5 21 N-N5 BxN 22 PxBN-R4 23 N-N4 BxN 24 QxBN-N6 25 BxNPxB 26 B-K34 Fischer- Bliskases, Mar del Plata 1960. Against Breyer’s 9... N-N1 (from diagram) Fischer has taken up Simagin’s 10 P-Q4 QN-Q2 11 N-R4 and made it his own, e.g. 11...PxP 12 PxP N-N3 13 N-KB3! P-B4 (or 13... P-Q4 14 P-K5 N-K5 15 QN-Q2 NxN 16 BxN-+ Fischer—Barczay, Sousse 1967) 14 B~KB4! B-N2 15 PxP PxP 16 QxQBxQ 17 B-Q6 R-K1 18 Bx QBPN/N3-Q2 19B-Q44. Fischer-Robatsch, Vinkovei 1968. After 9...N-Q2 10 P-Q4 B-B3 11 P-QR4 N-R4 12 B-B2 N-N3 13 P-QN4 N4-B5 14 P-R5 N-Q2 Fischer found an impor- tant improvement on 15 N-R3 of Geller-Portisch, Wijk aan Zee 1969 after which Black can equalise with 15...NxN 16 BxN P_B3!; Fischer-Matanovic, Vinkovci 1968, continued 15 B-N3 PxP 16PxP P-B4 17 B-B4! (17 NPxP N2xP 18 BxN PxB 19 P-K5 PxP 20 PxN P-K5!) 17...PxNP 18 QN-Q2 P-Q4 19PxPNxP 20 B-Q6NxB 21 QxN+. The above two games are remarkable in that Fischer finds the original and effective development of the QB on KB4—almost un- heard of in the Ruy Lopez. Open In 1968 Fischer introduced a strong line against a variation of the Open Defence which Larsen had becn practising successfully. 5...NxP (instead of 5... B-K2) 6 P-Q4 P-QN4 7 B-N3 P-Q4 8 PP (Also worthy of consideration is 8 Nx PNx N 9 Px N P-QB3 10 B-K3! B-K2 11 N-Q2 NxN 12 QxN 0-0 13 Q-B3 B-N2 Fischer-Addison, US Ch. 1966-67, and now 14 B-B5 is advanta- geous to White) 8... B-K3 9 Q-K2 B-K2 10 R-QI 0-011 P-B4 NPx P 12 Bx P Q-Q2!?(2)—Larsen’s idea. 13 N-B3 NxN 14 Px N P-B3 15 Px P Bx P. Now 16 N-N5 BxN 17 Bx B P-R3 18 B-K3 N-K4 19 B-N3 Q-Q3 had been played pteviously and thought to be satisfactory for Black (though this 2324 Fischer's Opening Repertoire verdict has altered in the last couple of years). Fischer found 16 B-KNS5! with the following variations: a) 16...N-R4 17 Qx B+ QxQ 18 Bx QP with a winning end- game, Fischer-Ree, Nathanya 1968. b) 16... Bx P 17 QR-B1 B-B3 18 B-N3! N-Q1 19BxBRxB 20 Q-B2 and White has strong pressure. c) 16... K-R1 17 BxB RxB 18 N-N5 B-N1 19 BxRP winning a pawn, as 19... P-R3 20 N-B3 Rx B?! fails to 21 Qx R N-Q5 22 N-KS! Steinitz deferred Against the Stcinitz Deferred Fischer used an interesting idea in his game with Ciocaltea at Varna 1962. 1 P-K4 P-K4 2 N-KB3 N-QB3 3 B-N5 P-QR3 4 B-R4 P-Q3 5 P-B3 (Also 5 0-0 B-N5 6 P-KR3 B-R4 7 P-B3 and Fischer refuted Geller’s 7... Q-B3? at Bled 1961 with 8 P-KN4! B-N3 9 P-Q4! BxP 10 QN-Q2 B-N3 11 BxN+ PxB 12 PxP PxP 13 NxP!) 5...B-Q2 6 P-Q4 KN-K2 7 B-N3 P-R3(3) w Wi Fischer’s Opening Repertoire Instead of the usual 8 QN-Q2, 8 B-K3 or 8 N-R4, Fischer played 8 Q-K2 N-N3 9 Q-B4 Q-B3 10 P-Q5 P-N4 11 Q-K2 N-R4 12 B-Q1 B-K2 13 P-KN3 0-0?! 14 P-KR4! with a strong attack. Exchange variation At the 1966 Havana Olympiad Fischer won three games with the Exchange Variation (1 P-K4 P-K4 2 N-KB3 N-QB3 3 B-N5 P-QR3 4BxN QPxB 5 0-0(4), after which this almost forgotten line became the height of fashion. The variation still remains a dangerous weapon in Fischer’s armoury as no-one can be sure when it is due to be unleashed again. 4 B 5... P-B3 (Invariably played by Fischer’s opponents; 5... B-KN5 6 P-KR3 P-KR4 7 P-Q3 Q-B3 has a better reputation as a safe equaliscr.) 6 P-Q4 and now: al) 6... B-KN5 7 P-B3 PxP 8 PxP Q-Q2 9 P-KR3 B-K3 (or 9...B-R4 10 N-K5 BxQ 11 NxQKxN 12 RxB R-K1 13 P-B3 with a great advantage, Fischer—Jimenez, Havana 1966) 10 N-B3 0-0-0 11 B-B4 N-K2 12 R-B1 and Black has no compensa- tion for his lack of central control, Fischer-Gligoric, Havana 1966. a2) However, after 6... B-KN5 7 P-B3 when7... B-Q3 8 B-K3 N-K2 9 QN-Q2 Q-Q2 was found to be more comfortable for Black, Fischer reverted to (6... B-KN5) 7 Px P QxQ 8RxQPxP (If8...BxN9PxB PxP, then 10 B-K3! B-Q3 11 N-Q2 N-K2 12 N-B4 0-0-0 13 R-Q3}, Fischer-Rubinetti, Buenos Aires 1970, is a great improvement on the older 10 P-KB4 N-B3 11 PxP NxP 12 B-K3 B-B4 Lee-Gligoric, Hastings 1965-66.) 9 R-Q3! against 2526 Fischer's Opening Repertoire Smyslov at Monte Carlo 1967 and got the better ending after 9. . . BxN 10 Rx B N-B3 11 N-B3 B-N5 (11... P-R3 is a better try) 12 B-N5 Bx N 13 Px B R-KB1 (or 13...0-0 14 Bx N PxB 15 R-Q1 QR-Q1 16 KR-Q3+ Kagan-Kostro, Siegen 1970) 14 Bx N RxB15RxR PxR 16 R-Q1. b) 6... PxP 7 NxP N-K2 (After 7... P-QB4 8 N-N3 QxQ 9 Rx Q B-Q3, Fischer—Portisch, Havana 1966 continued 10 N-R5! P-QN4 11P-QB4! N-K2 12 B-K3 P-B4 13 N-B3 P-B5 14P-K5 an improvement on 10 B-K3 of Ciocaltea-Gligoric, Hamburg 1965.) 8 B-K3 (8 N-QB3 N-N3 9 P-B4 P-QB4 10 N-B3 QxQ 11 Rx Q B-N5, Hort-Portisch, Skopje 1968, is quite comfortable for Black.) 8... N-N3 9 N-Q2! (More accurate than the previously played 9 N-QB3) 9... B-Q3 10 N-B4 0-0 11 Q-Q3! N-K4 12NxNBxN 13 P-KB4 B-Q3 14 P-B5 with a distinct positional advantage for White, Fischer-Unzicker, Siegen 1970. Two Knights’ Defence 1 P-K4 P-K4 2 N-KB3 N-QB3 3 B-B4 N-B3 4 N-N5 P-Q4 5 Px P N-QR4 6 B-N5+ P-B3 7PxP PxP 8 B-K2 P-KR3 (5). In the New York state Open Ch. 1963 Fischer, in his games against Bisguier and Radoicic, revived an old move of Steinitz, 9 N-KR3!? 5 Y TERE, TARE Ty w |S i SSes iE ke as \“ ee REL OS wo vs BOR Ie White allows his K-side pawns to be devalued but gains the coveted bishop-pair which assures him good chances. Fischer-Bisguier continued 9... B-QB4 100-0 0-0 11 P-Q3 BXN (or 11...N-Q4 12 N-B3—also good is 12 P-B4 N-K2 13 K-R1 Steinitz-Chigorin 1891-12... NxN 13 PxN Q-RS5 14 K-R1 BxN 15 PxBQxRP 16 B-B3 and White retained the \ NY W wy 4 Fischer’s Opening Repertoire 27 bishop-pait into the ending Platonov-Geller, USSR Ch. 1969) 12 PxB Q-Q2 13 B-B3! QxRP 14 N-Q2 QR-Q1 15 B-N2 Q-B4 and now Fischer gives 16 Q-B3 as slightly favourable to White. King’s Gambit Fischer’s adoption of the King’s Gambit in three tournament games caused a sensation, particularly as after his loss with the black pieces to Spassky at Mar del Plata 1960, he published a ‘refutation’ of this old opening beginning 1 P-K4 P-K4 2 P-KB4 PxP 3 N-KB3 P-Q3! Fischer has preferred the Bishop’s Gambit 1 P-K4 P-K4 2 P-KB4 PxP(2...N-KB3 3PxPNxP 4N-KB3 N-N4 5 P-Q4NxN+ 6 QxN Q-R5-+ 7Q-B2QxQ+ 8KxQN-B3 9P-B3 P-Q3 led to no advantage for White in Fischer-Wade, Vinkovci 1968.) 3 B-B4(6) It would be interesting to know what Fischer has found against the theoretically favoured 3... . P-Q4!, as neither Evans in the 1963-64 US Ch. with 3...Q-R5+ 4 K-B1 P-Q3 5 N-QB3 B-K3 6 Q-K2 P-QB3 7 N-B3 Q-K2 8 P-Q4 BxB 9 QxB P-KN4 10 P-K5 P-Q4 11 Q-Q3, nor Minic at Vinkovci 1968 with 3... N-K2 4 N-QB3 P-QB3 5 N-B3 P-Q4 6 B-N3! PxP 7 NxP achieved a satisfactory equality. French Defence A recurring point of interest has been Fischer's struggle against the