Botvinnik - Volume 3 PDF

BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES
Volume 3: 1957 -1970

Mtkhatl Bolvinnik
Mikhail Botvinnik
BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES
Volume 3: 1957-1970
(Analytical & Critical Works)
Translated and Edited by Ken Neat
Olomouc 2001
Published in the Czech Republic in 2001 by

PUBLISHING HOUSE MORA VIAN CHESS
P.O. Box 101, 772 11 OLOMOUC 2
Czech Republic
This book is an authorised translation ofMM Botvinnik

Analiticheskie i kriticheskie raboty 1957-1970 (Moscow 1986)
English translation copyright Ken Neat 2001
Chess Agency CAISSA-90
All rights reserved

ISBN 80-7 1 89-405-2
Contents
From tournaments and matches - to understanding

the essence of the game ...
Selected Games 1957-1970

252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
26 1
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
27 1
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
28 1
282
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 5th match game

Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 1 1th match game
Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 957, 18th match game
Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 1 st match game
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 958, 2nd match game
Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 21st match game
Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1 958, 23rd match game
Botvinnik-Raizman, 1958
Citrone-Botvillllik, 1 958
Botvinnik-Pomar, 1 958
Botvinnik-Alexander, 1 958
Botvinnik-Duckstein, 1 958
Uhlmann-Botvinnik, 1958
Botvinnik-Donner, 1 958
Tal-Botvinnik, 1 960, 3rd match game
Tal-Botvinnik, 1 960, 5th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 960, 8th match game
Tal-Botvinnik, 1 960, 9th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 960, 20th match game
Tamburini-Botvinnik, 1960
Tarnows!Q-Botvinnik, 1960
Neikirch-Botvinnik, 1 960
Portisch-Botvinnik, 1 960
3
22
25
27
29
32
36
40
44
48
49
53
58
63
66
68
71
73
75
81
83
85
87
90
93
96
99
102
105
107
. 108
111
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
3 12
3 13
3 14
315
316
3 17
3 18
3 19
320
321
322
323
Botvinnik-Schmid, 1 960
Botvinnik-Paclunan, 1 960
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 961, 1st match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 961, 3rd match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 196 1 , 7th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 9th match game
Tal-Botvinnik, 1 96 1 , 1 0th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 1 1th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1 , 1 3th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 1 5th match game
Tal-Botvinnik, 1 96 1 , 18th match game
Botvinnik-Tal, 1 96 1, 2 1st match game
Botvinnik-Paclunan, 1 96 1
Botvinnik-Unzicker, 196 1
Botvinnik-Wade, 196 1/62
Littlewood-Botvinnik, 1 96 1/62
Robatsch-Botvinnik 196 1 /62
Botvinnik-Bisguier, 1 96 1 /62
Skold-Botvinnik, 1 962
Botvinnik-Lundin, 1 962
Botvinnik-Soderborg, 1 962
Unzicker-Botvinnik, 1962
Filip-Botvinnik, 1962
Botvinnik-Robatsch, 1 962
Botvinnik-Fischer, 1 962
Petrosian-Botvinnik, 1963, 1 st match game
Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963, 4th match game
Petrosian-Botvinnik, 1963, 1 3th match game
Krutikhin-Botvinnik, 1 963
Gipslis-Botvinnik, 1963
Taimanov-Botvinnik, 1 963
Kholmov-Botvinnik, 1 963
Botvinnik-Van Scheltinga, 1 963
Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1 964
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1964
Botvin,nlk-Stein, 1964
1 12
1 15
1 17
1 20
1 22
125
1 29
132
135
137
141
143
146
1 49
153
155
1 57
160
162
165
1 67
169
171
174
177
184
1 87
1 89
1 93
1 95
1 98
203
206
208
2 10
2 13
217
219
22 1
225
227
324
325
3 26
327
328
329
330
33 1
3 32
333
334
335
3 36
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
3 46
34 7
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
Botvinnik-Medina, 1 964
Letelier-Botvinnik, 1 964
Aloni-Botvinnik, 1 964
Yanofsky-Botvinnik, 1 964
Botvinnik-Gligoric, 1 964
Ciocaltea-Botvinnik, 1 964
Botvinnik-Larsen. 1965
Trifunovic-Botvinnik, 1 965
Botvinnik-Langeweg, 1965
Gipslis-Botvinnik, 1965
Botvinnik-Tolush, 1 965
Yudovich-Botvinnik, 1 966
LiberLon-Botvinnik, 1 966
Botvinnik-Szilagyi, 1966
Sz.abo-Botvinnik, 1966
Botvinnik-Pomar, 1 966
Botvinnik-Zuidem 1 966
Botvinnik-Robatsch, 1 965
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 966
Botvinnik-Keres, 1966
Spassky-Botvinnik, 1 966
Botvinnik-Balashov, 1 9666/67
Liberzon-Botvinnik, 1 967
Levit-Botvinnik, 1967
Botvinnik-Polugayevsky, 1 967
Taimanov-Botvinnik, 1 967
Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1 967
Botvinnik-Toran, 1 967
Medina-Botvinnik, 1967
Botvinnik-Diez del Corral, 1 967
Botvinnik-Bednarski, 1 967
Gligoric-Botvinnik, 1967
Botvinnik-Matulovic. 1 967
Donner-Botvinnik, 1967
Botvinnik-Larsen, 1 967
Botvinnik-Padevsky, 1968
Botvinnik-Larsen, 1968
Benko-Botvinnik, 1 968
Botvinnik-Portisch, 1 968
Botvinnik-Kholmov, 1969
230
232
234
238
240
245
247
250
253
257
259
262
264
266
269
27 1
273
275
279
28 1
285
287
29 1
294
297
299
302
305
308
311
3 13
3 15
3 19
32 1
324
.326
330
333
336
338
341
365 Ostojic-Botvinnik, 1969

36.6 Botvinnik-Ree, 1969
367 Botvinnik-Van Scheltinga, 1969

368 Medina-Botvinnik, 1969
369 Botvinnik-Lombardy, 1969
353
357
359
370 Ciric-Botvimtlk. 1969

371 Langeweg-Botvinnik, 1969
362
365
372 Botvinnik-Kavalek, 1969

373 Botvinnik-Kurajica, 1969
374 Matanovic-Botvinni 1969
368
372
377
375 Botvinnik-Ostojic, 1969

376 Matulovic-Botvinnik, 1969
380
383
377 Botvinnik-Suttles, 1969

378
379
380
381
344
348
351
387
Matulovic-Botvinnik, 1970
Botvinnik-Spassky, 1970
Botvinnik-Larsen, 1970
Spassky-Botvinnik, 1970
389
391
396
Training Games
Postscript
Tournament and Match Cross-tables
401
428
429
Summary of Tournament and Match Results (1957-1970)
457
Translator's Notes
459
Index of Openings
463
From tournaments and

matches - to understanding
the essence of the game ...
from my final competitive appearances.

This was a highly intense period. Over a
return match. The question was - should

this right be used?
Pressure was put on me - they tried
period of 14 years I played five matches
to persuade me to give up the return
Collected in this book are the games
for the World Championship, and I took
match. But the decision depended on
part in many international tournaments,
one thing alone: could I be confident
four Olympiads, and also other team
that I would be successful in a new
competitions.
encounter?
In parallel with this I continued my
After analysing the games from the
scientific work in the field of electrical
match I decided that 'a cat may look at a
engineering, and from 1960 in the field
king', and that it was possible to com
of cybernetics. I also directed a junior
pete with the new champion: The return
chess school, and a considerable amount

of time was taken up by writing.
It all began with a failure in a World
Championship match. The battle pro
ceeded with alternating successes, but
then I failed to withstand a difficult test,
and Vasily Smyslov brilliantly won the
match took place in the Spring of 1958.
I made complete use of my analytical

powers and was excellently prepared. It
was easy to prepare - the lost match had
given a wealth of preliminary infor
mation. The champion, moreover, was
over-optimistic, and also he had become
accustomed to searching only when
title of champion.
Possibly I underestimated my oppon
sitting at the chess
ent - much to my cost! In the period
board during a
game ...
By the 15th game I already had an
from 1953 to 1958 Smyslov did not

know any failures; this was the summit
advantage of four points, and this game
of his chess achievements. At the end of
was adjourned in a position that was

hopeless for White. It only remained for
the event I was aiming only to 'rid

myself of the match as soon as I could.
m to go off to my dacha for a night
It was no longer possible to save it, but

by the FIDE rules then in force a
time analysis - this procedure had

invariably proved successfhl. But the
defeated champion had the right to a
difference in the scores had its effect: I

7
stayed in Moscow, analysed super

ficially, and during the resumption
became rattled. Even so. when 1 was
considering my 55th move, there were
probably still hopes of winning.
I learned about this when the FIDE

Congress of 1959 abolished the right of
the champion to a return match (begin
ning in 1963). Although this decision
was against the interests of the chess
world, on egotistical grounds I did not
protest - how long can one go on fight
ing for the chess crown!
Two years passed and I faced a new
opponent in a match (Vasily Smyslov
had twice won the Candidates Tourna
ment, but on the third occasion he was
unsuccessful).
In the late 1950s Mikhail Tai stag
gered the chess world with a series of
brilliant tournament successes. He won
enormous popularity not only with his
competitive results, but also his except
ionally lively and clever play.
His first prizes in two USSR Cham-
pionships, the Interzonal Tournament
and the Candidates Tournament were
fully justified.
All this was crowned by Tai' s victory
in our 1960 match, which brought him
the title of World Champion, a result
which was fully expected by chess
enthusiasts. However, if one analyses
things from the creative viewpoint, our
match also gave a wealth of material for
studying the deficiencies in the young
champion's play. Even when it was not
in the spirit of the position, Tal would
aim for open play. He would go in for
difficult positions, merely in order to
obtain great mobility for his pieces,
when his unique ability to calculate
variations might tell, as well as... the
opponent's lack of time for thought.
Such a utilitarian approach . to chess
secured the achievement of his goal, but
Botvinnik
Smyslov
The resumption had taken a tense
course, but finally the queens had been
exchanged, and I breathed a sigh of
relief - a feeling which arises when the
time control has been reached. And so
here I decided that the right number of
moves had been made, and... I over
stepped the time limit!
Instead of being five points ahead, I
had to be content with three. My mood
was spoiled, of course, but the title of
champion was regained.
My colleagues (and not only they)
were unhappy about this. They realised
that in a match it was possible to defeat
the old champion but in a return match
the art of preparation might still tell ...
And behind my back a campaign to
abolish the return match was begun.
at a high price. It led to a prejudiced

style of play, to a narrowing of his
creative possibilities, and harboured the
possibility of future failures.
A year later, in the return match, I
was able to demonstrate that the creative
defects in the young Latvian ' s play were
more significant than his phenomenal
calculating ability. In the first match I
had been able to demonstrate this only
once - in the 9th game.
The return match was coming to an
end. To general surprise, the young
world champion, who everyone regard
ed as a genius, was losing. . . Towards
the end of the match some curious
things happened. Before the 20th game
the score was 1 1 Y2-7Y2. White had the
advantage, but after the first adjourn
ment I was able to analyse the position
better, and I could have gained equal
chances. But I made an incorrect move,
and Tal again achieved a winning
position. Then in a rook ending White
played insufficiently energetically, the
game was adjourned for a second time,
and again analysis was required.
I faced a second successive sleepless
night. For a few hours the position
seemed hopeless. The f5 and c6 pawns
are weak, and the passed a6 pawn is
powerful. But the thing that Black has to
fear most is the possibility of the white
king invading at b6 .. Even so, by
morning an unexpected tactical chance
was found: if White were to go in for a
natural variation, Black would be saved
by stalemate! And again the agonising
search continued: what if White were to
notice this stalemate? Finally, here too
drawing chances were found.
Botvinnik
Tai
I was in no doubt that my opponent
would have slept peacefully all night.
But Tal was Tal, and even at the board
he might have noticed this tactical trick
and chosen the correct, stronger contin
uation. In order to lull my opponent's
vigilance, when the game was resumed I
did not take with me my usual thennos
flask of coffee - to suggest that within a
few moves I would be resigning. And so
the game was resumed.
89
90
a2
a7
l:lb5
My analysis had shown that the

strongest continuation was to lure the
black rook to a6: 90 l:f8 %%.a5+ 9 1 b3
llxa6 92 llxf5 d7 93 l:t f6 J:l.a l 94 f5
.D.d l 95 'ittc3 l:c l + 96 <it>d2 :!fl 97 l:tt7+
'it>d8 98 'it>c3 l:tb 1 .
Even so, it would appear that here

too Black gains a draw, e.g. 99 f6 :n
1 00 'it>b4 'it>e8, or 99 <it>c2 llb4 100 d3
l:.b3+ 101 e2 :h3 102 f6 l:th4 103
<it>e3 l:.e4+ 104 @d3 : r4.
90
9
lla5+
91
92
@bJ
.D.f8
ci>b7
llb5+
95
96
It is important here to force White to

decide where .to take his king, since it is
on this that Black's further actions
depend. For example, if 93 c3 there
would have followed 93.. Jla5. in order
to attack the enemy king from the side
(93 ... xa7 94 l:.xf5 :as 95 :n+ <iti>a6
96 1lc7 or 95 ... <iti>b8 96 'iti>b4 :b5+ 97
a4 is bad for Black) 94 l:.xf5 rl;xa7 95
:n+ (95 l:tf6 <it.">b7 96 f5 :a3+)
95 ... <it>a6 96 l:tc7 l:a3+ 97 <t>b4 l:.a4+.
and the black king, and this is very
important, is not driven onto the eighth
4Ulk. White, however, continues playing
'more naturally'.
93
94
a4
llxf5
Af6
f5
'it>b7
l:lal+
First the king is driven away from the

queenside, so that there should be no
question of it invading at b6.
97
98
99
100
'it>b4
<it>cJ
<it>d2
<it>eJ
:bt+
Itel+
:n
xa7
llbl
And only here did Tal notice that

after 95 l:tf7+ 'iii>a6 96 :c7. as he was
intending to play,
there follows
96 ... .:tb4+! ! 97 xb4 - stalemate (see
Now the king is safely cut off along

the f-file, and Black can wait.
diagram).
There was no longer any way of

gaining winning chances, although
White could still hope for some mistake
by his tired opponent.
100
101
102
103
10
:.n+
<it>e2
dJ
<it>c7
<it>ds
:r4 .
l:lfJ+ .
104
d2
not for chess. Tasks, which people have

to try and solve every day and every
hour, are search problems. This applies
in particular to economics, where well
known mathematical efforts prove
ineffective.
Chess is a very complicated search
problem of great dimension (I happened
to read an article by a foreign ex"Pert on
cybeetics, abo1=1t the fact that chess is
more complicated than even economics
or politics). So if one could identify how
a master plays, and employ similar
methods in applied search problems,
this would be both a great theoretical,
and a practical achievement! This is the
problem to which I have devoted myself
since 1 964.
When I sensed that taking part in
competitions prevented me from wor
king successfully, I gave up tournament
play ( 1970). And when I realised that
my engineering work was also limiting
my successes in creating a chess com
puter program, I also gave up. directing
the laboratory ( 1 974 ).
What is the cru.x of the problem?
It is positional understanding. It is
this factor that distinguishes the play of
a master from the play of the existing
chess programs. And although, in
searching for a move, mathematicians
used computers that could perform on
average as many as 2 50 million oper
ations a second, due to the absence of
positional Wlderstanding the optimum
results were not achieved;
I set myself the objective of develop
ing a chess program which would act
like a chess master, i.e .. possessing
positional understanding. Most of the
cs
And a draw was agreed on the 12 1 st

move!
To celebrate (after the return match) I
played in the Christmas tournament in
Hastings. Here in 1934/35 I had made
my first appearance abroad, and .. .
failed! On this occasion I rehabilitated
myself, easily winning first prize.
But in the following match, against
Tigran Petrosian, I lost. And, it would
seem, justifiably - I had already lost
matches against both Smyslov, and
Tai.'.. Age has its effect. And there was
no longer any return match, thank God.
In style Tigran Petrosian was not like
other players. Only Flohr can be called
his predecessor, and possibly Karpov
Iris successor. What .unites them is a
subtle and original positional under
standing, and also a striving to achieve
success without undue risk. It was
always difficult to get at Petrosian's
pieces, so skilfully did he defend his
position. In the first half of the 1960s
Petrosian played exceptionally strongly,
but the features of his style reduced his
popularity among the broad mass of
players.
Before the match with Petrosian,
doubts arose: should I play, or not? I
had become fascinated by the problem
of the artificial chess player, and
matches for the World Championship
took a great deal of effort. And only a
year had passed after the loss of my title
when I began finding the essence of the
'mysterious' way that a chess master
searches for a move.
This problem is of exceptional
practical significance, and, of course,
11
experts regarded this as utopia. But the

years have passed, and the first results
have been obtained. The computer is
now capable (this has been tested on
several examples of various types) of
choosing, on the basis of positional
principles, 3-4 moves (out of 25-30),
which are worth considering. Evidently
the time is not far off when a computer
will play like a chess master.
On the basis of this research, . a
method of retrieviJ,1.g algorithms for sol
ving search problems was formalised.
Practical tasks began to be solved using
tliis method: the planning (with com
puter aid) of the repair of power station
equi ment d the load levelling of
electrical power system schedules.
But let us return to chess.
After I had opted out of the battle for
the World. Cham ionship, for the first
time since 1 948 I had time for events
that were not even indirectly associated
with official competitions for the
champion's title. A small tournament in
Amsterdam ( 1 963) was the first such
'free' event.
The 1 965 tournament in the small
Dutch town of Noordwijk was a happy
event in my career. Wonderful walks
across the deserted sandy North Sea
beaches, good playing conditions, and
tlie grandmaster's calculating apparatus
- his head - working excellently. Tiris
tournament was dedicated to the 70tl1
a.Ilniversary of the Leiden Chess Club . I
won first prize, and together with it I
received a certificate stating that I was
an honorary member of the Leiden
Chess Club.
And then came my final appear

ances... After 1 963 I sharply cut down
on my research work (in the field of
preparing for competitions).
From the creative standpoint I largely
had to live off my old (research) know
ledge. And I played quite successfully,
because I emp.loyed openings that I had
studied and prepared before 1 963 .
The USSR Spartakiad ( 1 967) was
quite a good training event before the
tmunament
in
Palma-de-Mallorc
which began at the end of November.
Unfortunately, as often happens, Smys
lov and I flew in late to Spain. Mean
while, it was obvious that, on account of
the difference between December in
Moscow and the Mediterranean, we
shoii.19- have arrived in good time. The
weather was Hot, we played in a stuffy
building and we had to live in a room
with the blinds drawn, in the semi
darkness, to make it a little cooler.
At the start I suffered a disaster.
Botvinnik
Damjanovic
12
In this position with an over

whelming adv_antage for Black (two
pawns up!) I contrived to lose. More
over, it cannot be said that I blundered
anything away. It was simply that with
every move I worsened my position.
Then I nevertheless adapted and
offered serious competition to Bent
Larsen, who in those years was enjoying
his best results. In the 14th round we
met. I had an overwhelming advantage
in the middlegame, missed at least five
winning continuations, but after an error
by Black I reached an ending where, on
the resumption (with Smyslov's help in
the analysis of the adjourned position) I
nevertheless won. There now seemed to
be real chances of catching the leader,
since we were separated by only half a
point, but a weak finish by me (draws
with Tatai and Calvo) led on the final
day of the tournament to Bent being
more fortunate and becoming the
winner.
A few months passed, and again
Smyslov and I set off. for an inter
national tou rnament, but whereas in
November we flew via Paris to Spain,
this time in April we flew to Monte
Carlo. There was roughly the same
group of players (only .instead of the
Spanish national masters, here they
were French), the same heat, and almost
the same results. I played two very
interesting games (with Portisch and
Benko), but on this occasion I was
unable to convert a winning position
against Larsen, and as a result he again
finished half a point ahead.
In January 1969, along with Keres
and Geller, I took part in tl1e main
tournament of the Beverwijk Festival,

which was being held for the 31st time.
I should like to say a few words about
these Dutch festivals. They are financed
by the Hoogoven metallurgical firm,
which then employed nearly 19,000
staff. Its products were largely exported,
including to the Soviet Union and the
USA.
Wo_rking in the administration of the
factory was an engineer by the name of
Rueb, the son of the late Alexandre
Rueb, the first President of the Inter
national Chess Federation (and, which is
less well known, a problem composer).
Rueb-junior was the director of the
festival committee (sometimes, and in
particular in 1969, the tournaments were
held in the neighbouring resort of Wijk
aanZee).
An interesting line-up had been
assembled in the main tournament.
Apart from the Soviet grandmasters,
particular mention should be made of
Lajos Portisch and Fridrik Olafsson.
The Soviet players firmly held the
lead. But our trio was closed on by
Portisch, who after a poor start had as
though acquired a second wind. A tense
situation arose when he won against
Keres.
Portisch became especially danger
ous, when he gained a winning position
in his game with me. After somehow
holding out until the time control, I
adjourned the game, but I did "riot even
bother to analyse it - the position was
hopeless. During the first adjournment
session the play became somewhat more
complicated, but prospects . remained
poor. After the secod adjournment
.13
'No, that too does not help' came the

unconsoling reply.
Analysis showed that Geller had
evaluated the position correctly. By
'normal' means it could not be saved,
but was there not some exceptional
possibility?
There was a knock at the door, and
Keres came in. It turned out that he too
had agreed a quick draw.
'Well, shall we have a look at your
position?'
And so we began analysing: I in bed,
on my pocket set, and Paul Petrovich
sitting at a table, on a big set...
We quickly established that only one
move could have been sealed.
session there was no time to analyse it

I had to eat quickly and again sit down
at the board: round 13 was beginning.
Portisch agreed a quick draw in his
next game and disappeared . Of course,
he had huni.ed off to analyse his end
game with me. There was nothing I
could do, and so I offered Benko a draw
- the game would be resumed within
five hours!
I was lying on my bed. Towards the
end of the tournament I had caught a
chill, and after the illness I still felt
weak. On my pocket set I tried to
establish the truth.
. .
;Botvinnik
73
.1\a2
73
74
75
'it>e4
e6
Now White must be forced

advance his e5 pawn. Therefore
to
li)c6
li)e7
Now the g5 pawn is lost, but Black

improves the position of his king:
'iti>c5
a5
<ifi>d6
<ifi>e5
75
76
77
78
79
'it>e5
6
'iti>xg5
.i.b3
Portisch
White is preparing zugzwang.
When Portisch was sealing his move,

it seemed to me that Black had every
chance of gaining a draw, but during
dinner Geller gave me some unpleasant
news: Black would lose due to zug
zwang.
'Excuse me', I tried to object, 'can't
the black king blockade the white
e-pawn?'
79
80
81
.i.al
.i.bJ!
a4
a3
Here we both fell silent and sank into

thought. Indeed, what can Black do? If
he moves his king, White will occupy
f6, and if the knight moves, the white
king will break through via g6 ...
'Paul Petrovich', I remarked timidly
'there is one drawn.position: if White's
14
king is at f7 and his pawn at g5, Black

can play .. . @e5-f5, and after g5-g6 give
check with his knight from e5, with a
draw . . . Only how can this be achieved?
Keres, an experienced study com
poser, immediately formulated the idea:
Only here did Portisch deviate:
83
g7
83
84
85
86
87
g5
<it>h6
.la2
<i;g7
But this
problems.
81
82
83
84
a2.
@g6
<t;n
thc6!
the7+!
thc6
87
88
caused any
thc6
'iit>f5
the7
<li>e5!
'IW5
thg6
'iW7
88 . ..l'Dc6 was also possible. Here the
players agreed a draw in view of the
variation 89 .i.b1 + xg5 90 .ltxg6 a2
9 1 e7 al 'if 92 e8'i' 'i'f6+.
As a result, Geller and I shared first
place, with Keres and Portisch half a
point behind.
This was my last successful tourna
ment. By this time I had come round to
the thought that it was time to give up
playing chess. And when I was visiting
my friends from the Leiden Chess Club
(the reader will no doubt remember that
in 1965, after the toumament in Noord
wijk, I was made an J1onorary member
of this club), and they suggested that in
g5
g6
longer
Or 87 g6 6 88 g7 tt:tl"5+.
Or 84 e7 ED.xe7 85 <Ji;xe7 <itf4 86 .i.e6
8.4
85
no
'IW5
the5+!
We laughed for some ten minutes - it

turned out to be a very simple and
elegant solution! When the game was
resumed, strictly speaking, nothing new
occurred: for the first l 0 moves both
players followed exactly the given
analysis.
It rarely happens that in analysis both
-players agree on the same 10-move
optimal variation, but it is even more
rare for their evaluations of it to be
different.
15
the Spring of 1970, to commemorate the
Fischer had again demanded that the
75th anniversary of their club, l should

play
friendly
match
with
match be staged with att!unlimited num
Bobby
ber of games, with which, as before, I
Fischer, I promptly asked:
could not agree. It has to be assumed

that the future World Champion was
'But are you sure that with the intrac

table grandmaster it will be possible to
find a common language?'
'Yes, yes', I heard in reply. 'We have
considered everything all the negotia
tions will be made through lawyers, and
everything will be fine.'
'Then it will be the last .event I will
seeking a pretext for avoiding the

match. Apparently already then it was
hard for Fischer to overcome that psy
chological barrier, which often preven
ted him from beginning an event.
At the end of this year, which had
take part in.'
to take part in an international tour
begun so successfully, I also happened
The negotiations proceeded favour
nament in Yugoslavia (for the first and

last time). It was an extremely poor
ably. First Fischer insisted that we

should play to six wins with an un
tournament for me. However I tried, I

could not force myself to put up a
restricted number of games; I suggested
genuine fight. It was evident that in my

sub-conscious the thought had taken
that the 'players should meet 16 times at the age of 59 I would be unable to
withstand a longer event. Finally the
root that within a few months I would
two sides reached a compromise: the
be giving up playing chess.

For a long time I lagged behind the
winner would be the player who scored
other participants, after suffering two
more points out of 18 games.
successive
I took with me several hundred of
defeats.
Then
slightly
Fischer's games and set off to the Black

Sea for two weeks to prepare for the
improved my affairs, only to lose again,

to Janosevic.
match. Fischer's games did not provide

any surprises with their strategic ideas.
Botvinnik
These were known to any experienced

player from old games (even before
Fischer). But the American grand
master's
tactical
resourcefulness,
his
energy in carrying out his plans. and his

striving for activity at the very first
opportunity were staggering.
In September I received from the
Leiden Chess Club's lawyer the formal
agreement to the match, which had to be
signed by the participants and organ
isers. However, soon the Dutch sent me
Janosevic
a letter, in which I was informed that
16
This defeat was especially unpleas

ant, both in terms of the play, and the
competitive consequences.
Although I am temporarily two
pawns up, it is obvious that I have to
fight for a draw - Black's position is so
cramped, and he has numerous weak
nesses. After a number of poor moves,
Black finally makes a good one,
removing his king from the eighth rank.
27
28
29
l:ttbt
.i.xb5
<it>h7!
b5
.D.xb5
32
33
34
:b7
:d7
lba7
34
35
36
37
i.g5
:ds+
:.xd6
i.f6
38
39
fxe3
e3!
Or 3 9 :xn e2 40 :xg7+ h6. 1
Or 2 9 xb5 i..xa6 30 J:txb8 .i.xc4 as in the game, Black sacrifices the

exchange in order to eliminate the
dangerous passed a-pawn.
29
30
38
But strangely enough, altb.ough this

move is undeniably pretty, .: it throws
away the win. Black cannot take the
bishop, since then he loses. his f7
bishop, and after it his pawns, one after
another. But for the first time since the
20th move (! ) Black gains an oppor
tunity to activate his king's bishop, and
this gives him sufficient counterplay.
39
40
.i.h6
l:laJ
White defends against the threat of
40 . . . i.xe3+ 4 1 @hi lifl mate. He is
also not afraid of 40 . . .tf8 in view of 4 1
l:ta8 ! (4 1 . . . .i.xd6? 4 2 l:th8 mate).
Another possible continuation - 40
J::lxf7+ @g8 41 i..gS ! @xf7 42 i.xh6
h5, which in fact later occurred in the
game, should also have led to a draw.
llxb5
.i.xa6
The aim is achieved, but at a high

price - the white rooks will operate very
strongly along the 7th and 8th ranks.
.tc4
31 :aS
.i.xd5
i.f7
34 a6 was simpler, when the d6

awn is immediately lost.
@g8
l!f5
h7
c4
Although Black has sufficient mater

ial compensation for the exchange, his
position is lost, since all his pawns are
isolated. It would have been simplest for
White to play his bishop to c3 (at the
4ame time it would be useful to place
the king on e2), and then a concerted
attack on the e5 pawn would have
decided the outcome.: :' .
Here I still had 1 5 minutes left for

my. last move before the time control,
but I made a mistake that had a psy
chological context. . The.: .point is that
Black as though buried himself alive ! If
17
I had only imagined that a drawing con

tinuation .existed, I would have found it:
40 ... c3! 4 1 l:txc3 i.c4! 42 l:ld7+ @gs 43
l:dl (the interposition of 43 h3 g3 or 43
g3 llf3 does not change anything)
43 .. J:txf6 44 l:xc4.txe3+ 45 @h l.td4
46 lk7 :n 47 :xf7 xf7 48 g3 <ifte6.
By placing his pawn at e4, Black
prevents the activation of the white
king, and the rook will be tied to the
defence of the h2 pawn. And if the h2
pawn is exchanged for the g4 pawn, a
draw is inevitable, since in the fol
lowing position (the maximum that
White can achieve) he has no hopes of
winning.
The sealed move. Since 42 :a3 c3,

as has already been established, leads to
a draw (during the break before the re
sumption, this also became clear to the
Yugoslav grandmaster), White makes
another attempt to convert his slight
positional advantage.
. 42 ltxf7+
<t>g8
. 43 .i.g5
In this way White obtains a superior
rook ending; Black cannot play
43 ... .i.xg5 44 llxf5 gxf5 (44...i.xe3 + 45
llf2), since after 45 ltg6+ he remains a
rook down.
43
<J;}xf7
44 xh6
:b5!
White is now forced to give back the
bishop; he does not achieve anything
with 45 l:d7+ 'iii>e6 46 :b7 c3 ! But he
tries to obtain as much as possible for
the piece!
45 <it>n!
A subtle move, which I under
estimated in my adjournment analysis.
After 45 l:c6 l:xh6 46 llxc4 l:h4l 47 g3
l:h8 48 J:.xg4 l:ta8 and 49... l:a2, or 45
.i.f8 :hs ! 46 lk6 <46 :d7+ xf8 4r7
lk7 c3) 46...l:txf8 47 l:txc4 :as
l:xg4 l:a2 Black would have gained a
draw without difficulty.
llxh6
45
46 g3
Here I calculated a lengthy variation:
46 ... c3! 47 l:tc6 e4! 48 :xc3 'iitf6 49
l:tc8 :h7 50 :8+ e5 51 l:f4 g5 52
l:xg4 5 53 h4 gxh4+ 54 l:txh4 l:tg7+
55 (or 55 'it?h3 :a7 56 g4+ <it>e5 57
l:h5+ <it>e6 58 g3 :f7 59 l:h3 <ii?e5)
55 .. .%la.7 56 llf4+ e5 57 g4 :a3 (but
not 57 ... :a2+ 58 g3 :a3 59 :5+
lt>e6 60 'itif4), but I was. unable to
However, let us return to the previous

diagram, where Black made a move that
demonstrated his low spirits.
lLg7
40
41 :a7
A comedy of errors! After 41 i.xg7
xg7 42 l:ta5!, in view of the threat of
43 e4 l:tf6 44 l:td7 l:.e6 45 l:aa7 l:tf6 46
l:te7 Black would have lost his e5 pawn
(in the event of 42 ... e4 his position is
also hopeless).
i.h6
41
18
neither player had won 6 games, the

player who was leading at that point
would be declared the winner. Fischer
also turned down this initiative.
Then, instead of a match, the Dutch
organisers decided to hold a tou rnament
of four grandmasters in four cycles,
which in fact took place in the Spring of
1970. However, before this event I also
took part in the so-called 'Match of the
Century'. In it a team from the Soviet
Union met a team from the rest of the
world.
This was an old idea. Although
earlier I had been opposed to it, now,
since I considered that the Soviet team
faced a difficult task, I decided to take
part. I learned to my surprise that I had
been assigned board eight in the team.
This was clearly unreasonable, since on
results (after all, the tou rnament in
Belgrade had been my only failure) I
should have been given board four (on
average my successes were superior to
at least four participants who played
higher than me).
Apparently, in the USSR Chess
Federation they were so confident of the
success of the Soviet team, that did not
consider my participation to be obliga
tory. But I held a different opinion, and
I considered myself obliged to play in
the match.
The Yugoslav Chess Union staged
the match on a grand scale, and it pro
voked enormous interest. Unfortunately,
my suppositions were justified. Between
our participants there was not that writy,
which is so necessary in a team compe
tition. The top boards of the Soviet team
suffered a fiasco. The mate was won
evaluate correctly the resulting position.

It appears that the e4 pawn is weak and
that the g4 pawn is very dangerous. But
in fact, if this variation is continued
slightly- 58 :f8 l:tb3 59 l:te8+ 'ittd5 60
g5 :a3 61 g6 I:ta7 ! , it can be seen that
Black must be able to save the ending.
After missing this opportwrity, the
ending is completely lost for Black,
since both his pawns are weak, and his
king is passive.
46
47
48
49
:c6
xc4
l!e4
llh8
:as
a3
etc.
Towards the end of the Belgrade

tournament I to some extent pulled
myself together, but even so I finished
only seventh - the worst result in my
entire chess career.
During the tournament the question
was again raised about a match between
me and Fischer. The Leiden Chess Club
returned once more to the problem of a
match with an wrrestricted number of
games. I suggested another compro
mise: the winner should be the first to
win six games, but if after 18 games
19
with a minimal advantage,' thanks to

those participants on whom they had not
been depending, the greatest contri
bution being made by Paul Keres, who
had only been assi ed the bottom
board.
.. .Leiden, April 1970. Apart from the
two Soviet participants, Spassky and
Botvinnik, also playing were Bent
Larsen and Jan Hein Donner. We lived
by the sea in Noordwijk and played in
Leiden. This decision of the organisers
was regrettable, since a car journey
before a game is something one can do
without. In addition, the tournament was
held in a damp, unheated school hall. I
was also hindered by being conscious of
the fact that this event was my last.
In the first cycle I suffered an
'accident' in my game with Larsen.
threat of 34 :as+ would have been

most simply eliminated by the energetic
33.. .g5! The f6 pawn is immune (34
'i'xf6+? "i'xf6 35 l::txf6 .t.xf2+ 36 h l
.i.d4, and in view of the threat of
37 l:.xh2 mate, White can resign), and
disaster on the f2 square is unavoidable.
But I decided to defend the back rank
without gaining a tempo.
Botvinnik
A move which I overlooked in time

trouble.
gn
.. .
'33
34
<.t>hl
11fd8
.i.xf2
34 ... l:xf2 was more energetic, and if

35 :xf2 :xn (35....txf2 leads to a
position that occurred in the game), then
White cannot play 36 'flxc7 on account
of 36 ... :txfl+ 37 <at>g2 1id2+ 38 @h3
'i'h6+ etc. This means that the queen
must modestly retreat, and Black's
attack continues.
Now the "initiative passes to White.
35
35
36
ltd3!
i.xd3
l:bd3
ltb2
A new mistake, due to the fact that I

again overlooked White's reply. Best in
the given position was the counter
threat 36 ... .i.d4, after which there would
have still have been all to play for.
37
38
39
40
41
11fxc7
'ffxb7
l:tcl
l:tc7
1!fd5
1!fg8
lla2
l:ta8
Jitb8
And White won.

Thus my last tournament ended in
failure. . . Some consolation was provid
ed by the fact that I was proclaimed an
honorary member of the Dutch Chess
Union.
Larsen
White has been completely out
played. He cannot defend his f2 pawn,
and as a result his second rank will inev
itably be exposed. The only counter-
20
Since that time a master's playing
This book concludes the publication
of my games, and it is possible to try
algoritl has in principle changed little.

All that has occurred is a-deepening and
and answer the question: what, strictly
speaking, was the contribution of the

author to chess, and what did he do that
others did not do?
This is not an easy question. But first
expanding of positional understanding,

and here in the 1930s to the 1950s
Soviet :qiasters made a weighty contri
bution to the theory and praxis of chess.
most
The art of preparing for competitions
the
became so refined, that a master, in the
history of chess. Chess achieved a high
quiet qf his study, unrestricted by time
slight
significant
digression,
that has
about
the
occurred
in
level when masters acquired a thorough
(not like during a game!), was able to
positional understanding.
It was then
find more complete evaluations of a
that they began to create games which
variety of chess positions. This also
made an artistic impression, even from
developed positional understanding and
the viewpoint of a strict appraiser. Paul
simultaneously led to good practical
Morphy was a pioneer of this positional
results.
trend; he acted intuitively and did not
It is this evidently, that constitutes
explain how he played chess. However,

he played only open games, as was
my contribution to chess. And the

reader, after studying the games in these
accepted in those days.
three volumes, will certainly be able to
Wilhelm Steinitz not only extended
understand why I was victorious (when
positional understanding to the closed
this happened). It was because I was
games, but he also explained how to act.
superior to my opponents in the under
After this masters began playing more
standing of positions of the most varied
strongly.
nature.
21
Selected Games
1957-1970
7
8
9
10
11
Game 252
Botvinnik-Smyslov
World Championship Match
Moscow 1957, 5th game
King's Indian Defence
1 c4
2 . lbcJ
J g3
4 .A.g2
5 d4
6 lbfJ
.i.g2
e3
d5
.i.xf3
lbc6
lbd7
e5
It would seem that, in order to exploit

the advantage of the two bishops, White
should aim to open up the position, but
in fact his lack of development rules out
this plan. For example, 1 1 0-0 exd4 12
exd4 tt'Jxd4 1 3 ..txb7 b8 14 ..tg2 ltJe5,
and Black has an excellent game.
By blocking the position, White
completes his development without
hindrance, and the d5 pawn will control
the light squares in the enemy camp.
li)f6
g6
.A.g7
0-0
d6
.i.g4
In the Griinfeld Defence this man

oeuvre is quite good, but here it is
dubious. Black achieves a comfortable
mobilisation of his forces, but the
absence of his light-square bishop may
tell. Black's early castling alo does not
go well with the exchange on f3, since
White's chances of attacking on the
kingside are improved.
Even so, at present the text move
occurs, along, of course, with the more
popular continuations 6 . . . tiJc6, 6 . . . c5,
6 . . . tt'Jbd7 and 6 . . . c6, which, incidentally,
was played in the next game.
.lxf3
11
lbe7
It is well known that in the Ki.Jig's

Indian Defence the activity of a knight
at e7 is limited. Therefore Petrosian was
correct in recommending 1 1 ... tiJcb8.
12
13
e4
h4!
f5
This
refutes
Black's
opening
strategy. Now the exchange in the
centre ( 13 . .. fxe4 14 tt'Jxe4) would
weaken still further the light squares in
his position. The threat of h4-h5xg6 is
also unpleasant - this is where Black's
castling is S\.tn to be premature.
Smyslov takes the correct decision
and restricts the mobility of White's
h3
I thought that this was the only way

to play, since after 7 0-0 'i'c8 Black's
idea would be justified. However, later
theory gave a new recommendation: 7
'ib3 1fc8 8 ti)es dxe5 9 .i.xb7.
22
18
19
20
queen's bishop, although now his knight

at e7 has altogether no future.
13
14
.ilh3
f4
l:tf6! .
.i.d2
.ll.xd2+
lL\6
White's advantage on the queenside

and control of the h3-c8 diagonal, to
gether with the weakness of the enemy
f3 pawn, should guarantee him a win.
Apparently played merely in order to

vacate the f8 square for the knight, but
in fact Black provokes his opponent into
the variation 1 5 .i.e6+ 'it>h8 1 6 h5 g5,
after which the possible exchange
sacrifice on e6 would have led to him
seizing the initiative.
15 1fe2
.i.h6
16
<i&?xd2
aJ
20
21
22
23
c6
ifdJ
l:tab1
l:thcl
lt\c7
l:tb8
a5
This merely leads to the creation of a

new weak pawn at a5. 23 . . . b6 was
somewhat better.
lDc5
Superficially played. Of course, it is

tempting to prevent the opponent from
castling, but iil the given case it is not
worth it. Black parts with his last chance
of gaining counterplay on the f-file,
wastes time on an unsuccessful knight
manoeuvre, and presents White with a
tempo for connecting his rooks. Is this
not too much? It was essential to play
16 . . . a5. although after 1 7 etJa4 Black has
a difficult position
24
b5
25
b6
c5
After 24 . . .cxb5 25 cxb5 b6 26 ltJa4

the a-file would have been under
White's control.
An essential move, otherwise Black
consolidates his position on the queen
side with . . . b7-b6.
25
lhe8
lt\g7
26 :el
2 7 l:Ie3
First the enemy heavy pieces. are tied
to the defence of the f3 pawn.
f3
b4
iffl
Only not 18 ii'd l because of 1 8 . . .
17
18
tt:\d3+ 1 9 'it>f1 .i.xd2 20 Wixd2 liJxb4.
23
27
1if8
28
29
l:tb5
lha4
It becomes clear that one of the two

pawns f3 or a5 - will be lost.
'ilfi
h5
kl.b8
'lfb3
lhdJ
:.et
9a4
c2
1b7
..i.xg4
45
46
47
48
49
ile7
:ff8
li)eS
1!i'b5
tiJb2
li)dl
1id8
tiJd7
li)f6
11fb5
a5
<li>d3
11fb2
l:tgt
1We7
'tlb7
lUi
ltlh5
In order to radically neutralise the

possible threat of . . . ttlxg3.
49
50
51
At just the right time. After 39 ...tLlef6

the exchange would have no longer
been so effective.
39
40
1!f a5!
Black had to reject the capture of the

b6 pawn, since after 44... 1Wxb6 45 'ifxb6
ttlxb6 46 ttle3 or 44 .. . tt:lxb6 45 ttle3 the
game would have gone into an ending
where he is bound to lose material.
b7
lhg8
lh1l6
ttJg4
Black has finally managed to block

the h3-c8 diagonal, but now this is
merely of 'academic' interest.
36
37
38
39
42
42
43
44
The piece sacrifice (3 2 ttlxc5 dxc5 3 3

'i'xe5 :es 34 d7 1%8) would have
merely led to a sharpening of the play,
for which, of course, White has no need.
32
33
34
35
a4
This manoeuvre was found in

analysis. Now if 42 ...'i'h7, in order to
attack the e4 pawn by . . . g6-g5, there
follows 43 'i'd.2. As for the b6 pawn, it
is invulnerable as will become
apparent.
29
30 11c3
31 lha5
32 lhb2
41
hxg4
li)f6
hxg5
'ird2
g5
11bf8
llf4
An attempt to complicate the play at

any cost. Alas! White pays no attention .
24
insufficiently well-prepared for them.

Since White must not allow ... lbe4, and
8 lLxi2 and 8 tbel are less forcing, his
next move is fairly obvious. .
lLlb4
.i.e6
In the event of 8 . .i.d7 both

Uhlmann's recommendation of9 f4, and
9 e4 are- possible.
.
9
10
52
53
c3
l:txg3
d5
cxd5
cxd5
.td7
lDxgJ
1ih2
But suppose the opponent does not

notice the 'threat' of 54 ... 'iixg3 55 fxg3
f2 ...
54
'tiel
Black resigns.
He noticed it!
Game 253
Black's position could be considered

quite satisfactory, were it not for the
energetic plan available to . White
involving the advance of his e-pawn.
However, first White establishes his
bishop at d4, exploiting the fact that this
important square cannot be controlled
by the black knights.
Botvinnik-Smyslov
1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
ti)cJ
gJ
.i.g2
d4
lDfJ
lDf6
g6
J..g7
0-0
d6
c6
11
12
13
0-0
lDa6
'iia5
lDc5
13 . . .:tfc8 came into consideration.
In Game 252 6 ... g4 was played.
.i.e3
.i.d4
l:tel
14
.itf5
e4
Thus,
White
has
successfully
advanced this central pawn. In order to
reduce somewhat the pressure of the
enemy pieces, Smysldv tries to simplify
the game.
7 . 'i'a5 or 7 ... a6 is more usual,

inunediately beginning preparations for
... b7-b5. Contintions such as the one
chosen here by Black have only one
point
the
opponent
may
be
. .
25
14
15
16
thxa4
b3
19
20
21
itla4
if xa4
White. naturally, avoids the exchange

of queens, since in an ending Black's
objective of gaining a draw would not
have been so difficult.
16
17
f4
e5
ifa3
21
22
23
dxe6
:act
fxe6
lif6
1i'h5
23 . . . 'i'xd4+ 24 itlxd4 would have led

to the loss of a pawn (24 . . . .i.a6 25
:c7). Now too Smyslov loses a pawn,
but at least he avoids the exchange of
queens, hoping to complicate the
situation in his opponent's time trouble.
.ilb5
itld7
White faces the dilemma of whether

or not to advance his e-pawn. After all,
this will involve a simplification of the
position.
24
lig5
With the threats of 25 .i.xb7 and 25

:c7. Black immediately gives up a
pawn, but he achieves the exchange of
bishops, after which he may be able to
e:\.-ploit the weakening of the white
king's position.
24
25
26
27
19
.i.xd4+
1lc5
White advantageously brings into

play his knight, which for 12 moves has
been id.le on the edge of the board. It
unexpectedly transpires that the ex
change of queens will involve loss of
material for Black.
Preparing a further pawn advance in

the centre. Here Black should definitely
have played 17 . . . l:.fc8, in order after 1 8
e 5 to retreat the latlght to e8. At d7 it
will be less well placed.
17
18
1i'xd4
itlf.J!
.i.xc6
lhc6
h4
.i.c6
bxc6
itlg4
It would have been safer, and hence

more sensible when short of time, to
choose 27 h3 . Then after 27 . . . ttJe5 28
l:!c3 the exchange of knights is in
evitable, and it would have been very
hard for Black to find counter-chances.
e6
Now, after the exchange of the "fl

pawn for the e6 or d5 pawn, White's
positional advantage will be obvious.
Smyslov had pinned his hopes on the
exchange of quens, but apparently he
had not antici ted his opponent's
clever reply.
27
28
tht7
h6
'it>h 7
Here White had at least two ways to

win. The most obvious was 29 itlxd6.
Now 29 . . . :ads is met by 30 'ii'xa7, and
29 . . . fl.fd8 by 30 1k7, while if 29 . . . 1i'a5,
i}a
26
then 30 !te2 (it was this move that I did

not find during my short think). Black is
forced to play 30 . . . exd6 (or 30 . . . l:lad8
3 .l lDb7 2), when there follows 3 1 :xd6
:ctfd8 (if 3 1 ...lDf'6 32 e7) 32 l:.d7+ :xd7
3 3 'i'xd7+ <it>h8 34 e7.
does nevertheless have one advantage it safeguards White against losing on

time.
31
32
11xa7+
exd6
<it>b8
Of course, not 3 2 . . . <it>g8 in view of 3 3

'i'f7+ <it>h8 34 e7.
33
1ld7
Or 33 'i'd4+ h7 34 e7 l!e8 3 5
'i'xd6. 'ib 5 3 6 li'e6 h5, and Black i s out
of danger.
33 . .
l1c3
Creating mating threats and forcing
White to conclude the game with
perpetual check.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
The second way begins prosaically:

29 :tc7 'ifa5 30 ee l , but here it did not
occur to me that if 30 . . . :fc8 White wins
by 3 1 lDg5+! After 30 . . . 'ii'xa2 3 1 :xe7
'i'h2+ White's king has to embark on a
lengthy journey (3 2 'Et>fl 'i'hl + 33 c:te2
'ilg2+ 34 <&t>e l 'i'xg3+ 35 <&t>d2 'i'g2+ 36
<t>c3 l:fc8+ 37 <it>b4). Of course, in time
trouble it was not easy to judge how
safe it was, and so I decided to prepare
this last variation, after first taking
control of the a5 square.
29
30
b4
:.xc8
Ganie 254
Botvinnik-Smyslov
Afoscow 1957, 1 1 th game
Grtinfeld Defence
l:.tac8
After 30 '11c3 l:txc6 3 1 'ifixc6 White's

winning chances are highly problematic:
with 3 1 . . . 'i'fS 32 ltJxd6 'l'd3 3 3 e4
'i'd4+ Black acquires real counterplay.
30
31
1'd8+
<ifi>h7
'it>h8
'ifd7+
ifd8+
'it>h7
ci>h8
ife7+
ifeS+
<it>h7
1ie7+
'it>h8
ci>h7
1fe8+
Draw agreed
1
2
3
4
5
6
f3
gJ
i.g2
c4
d4
cxd5
f6
g6
g7
c6
d5
...
cxd5
At that time this manoeuvre was

considered to be quite dangerous for
Black.
l:xc8
tbxd6
Alas, this sacrifice is too late and

now leads only to a draw. However, it
27
7
8
thcJ
the5
0-0
11
12
An. essential move. After 8 0-0 tDe4

9 'i'b3 tDc6 ! , as occurred (with a
transposition of moves) ten years later
in
the
game
Donner-Botvinnik
(No.3 58), Black equalises easily. In the
last round of the 1 93 5 international
tournament in Moscow, playing Black
against Ilya Rabinovich, I failed to find
this manoeuvre.
12 i.g5 or 12 .i.f4 was also possible.

White chooses a different plan. By
threatening to play ..i.a3, he forces Black
to advance . . . e7-e5, after which the
weakness of the c6 and d5 pawns, and
also the c5 and d4 squares, becomes
obvious. If after this White also sue.:
ceeds in playing e2-e4, his advantage
will be undisputed.
12
/l)c6
e5
White also has an advantage after

1 2 . . . c5 13 i.b2 cxd4 14 i.xd4 e6 1 5
l'.1c l .
In the 2 1 st game of the same match,

Smyslov played more accurately 8 . . . i.f5, and after 9 0-0 tl:\e4 the
position became equal
d7
tha4
bl
13
14
0-0
Jl.xe5
lle8
dxe5
.i.h6
In the event of 1 4 . . . i.xal 15 'ifxal

'ii'f6 16 'i'xf6 tiJxf6 17 i.xf8 <.t?xf8 1 8
:i c 1 White has the better ending.
15
16
17
The 'solid' 9 . . . e6 also came into

consideration. On the other hand, it can
not be recommended that Black should
try to simplify by 9 . . . tDxe5 10 dxe5
ltJg4 1 1 ltlxd5 ltJxe5 (completely bad is
l l . . .e6 12 tDf6+ ll'ixf6 13 'i'xd8 :.xd8
14 i.g5, Barcz.a-Trifunovic, 1 948),
when White gains the advantage by both
12 ifb3 , and 12 i.g5 lDc6 13 l:k l !
10
xc6
l:t.c8
1!fe7
Already 1 8 e4 is threatened.
i.d6
17
18 1fd4
By threatening mate, White seems to
win a pawn. but although Black has
only one defence, it is sufficient.
18
1ff6
Now if 1 9 1fxa7 there follows
19 . . . g5, and White loses his bishop.
i.f5
Itel
1!fd2
llfel
19
20
ifxf6
t[)c5
xf6
thd7
It was here that White could have

carried out the advance in the centre,
prepared long ago. After 2 1 e4 iDxc5
(2 1 . . . dxe4 22 liJxe4) 22 exf5 ltxe 1 + 23
:xe 1 gxf5 24 i.h3 the endgame is in
White 's favour. Why then didn't I play
this? I imagined that in the variation
bxc6
28
admitted that it is not so easy for Black

to achieve complete equality.
2 1 .. .ltJxc5 22 xf5 Black would reply

22 . . . tiJQ3 , and that White loses the
exchange!
.i.xc3+
a3
6 . . . i.e7 occurred and was analysed in

detail in Games 1 93, 1 96 and 2 1 9. The
last of these was played in my previous
match with Smyslov and ended badly
for him. And so he decided to readjust.
Returning to Game 2 1 9, I should
mention "that after 6 . . . !il.e7 7 ttJf4 d5 8
cxd5 .txfl 9 @xfl it was suggested that
it was unfavourable for Black to play
9 . . . ttJxd5 10 ttJcxd5 exd5 1 1 ilh5 c6 12
ttJe6 g6 1 3 'ii'e5 .i.f6 1 4 liJxd8+ .i.xe5
1 5 lfJxf7 when White wins a pawn.
However, in the game Hiibner-Tinunan
( 1 979) there followed 1 5 . . . rJ;xf7 1 6
dxe5 d7 17 f4 t[)c5 1 8 b 4 llJe4 1 9
.i.b2 c;lre6, and Black gained a great
positional advantage. It should be
mentioned that in the event of 1 8 .i.d2
llJe4 1 9 <ifi>e2 h5 20 ..i.e l ! e6 2 1 h4 !
@f5 22 @f3 followed by l:thgl and
g2-g4+ it would not have been easy for
Black to gain a draw.
7 tLlxcJ
d5
21
22
ltJxd7
e4
.ilxd7
Too late. After the exchange of

knights, Black's bishops have become
active.
22
23
.i.aJ
.i.g4
l:.cdl
Draw agreed
Gaine 255
Botvinnik-Smyslov
Nimzo-Indian Defence
1 c4
2 lllc3
3 d4
4 e3
5 . lhge2
ttJf6
e6
.i.b4
b6
.i.a6
A variation in which Black hopes to

compensate for the opponent's two
bishops by the comfortable mobilisation
of his forces. Even so, it has to be
b3
This move essentially signifies that

,' ! .
29
Now 1 4 . . . a6 is threatened.
White is giving up the opening battle,

which is transferred to tl1e iniddlegame,
where e will hope to exploit the
strength of his two bishops. However,
here other continuations too would not
have given anything real: 8 cxd5 .txfl 9
xfl exd5.. 8 b4 .i.xc4 9 .i.xc4 dxc4 10
'i'e2 a5 l 1 b5 4-Jd5, or 8 'i'f3 0-0 9 .te2
c5 IO dxc5 lbbd7 ,
8
9
0-0
14
.i.f3
15
16
f3
lhg5
This is the cause of all Black' s

misfortunes. The resulting position with
opposite-colour bishops will be advan
tageous to White, since his bishop is
more active than its opposite number.
14 . . . lba5 was advisable, when Black has
a comfortable position.
a4
This advance is perhaps slightly

premature. 9 i..e 2. as I played in the
15th game of the same match, is more
accurate.
9
10
.i.a3
c5
dxc4
11
bxc4
lbc6
Black is aumng to exploit the

weakness of the c-pawn, but. of course,
in the battle for the centre the d5 pawn
was playing a greater role than the white
b3 pawn, for which it is exchanged.
A subtle move. The loss of the c5
pawn would be temporary, since Black
would easily regain the sacrificed
material. by exploiting , his lead in
development. White, however, has a
satisfactory way of defending his central
pawn.
12
16
i..e2
..
a6
lhcJ
f5
This makes it easier for White to

advance d4-d5,
which
is more
dangerous for Black than the loss of the
c5 pawn. Therefore the immediate
16 . . .fS was more correct.
17
13
.t.xc6
It was more logical to castle

immediately, but it was very tempting to
shut the enemy knight out of the game.
.i.b7
lhb5
Smyslov quite rightly avoids the ex

change sacrifice. For example: 12 . . . cxd4
1 3 Jl.xf8 ifxf8 ( 1 3 . . @xf8 14 lDxd4) 1 4
exd4 :ds 1 5 'ib l lbe4 16 i..d 3, and
Black's initiative comes to a standstill.
Even so, tl1e manoeuvre with the retreat
of the bishop and . . . a7-a6 involves a
loss of time, thanks to which White is
able to complete his development.
.i.xc6!
The sacrifice would not have

achieved anything: l 7 . . ttJxf3+ 1 8 gxf3
. 'i'h4+ 1 9 'it>e2.
.
18
19
0-0
11fd3
1ff6
llfd8
Now White etablishes his pawns on

d5 and e4, restricting the mobility of the
lhe4
30
28
enemy pieces (in particular the bishop),

and also securing him control of the
centre and of the. long diagonal. At t11e
same time, Blacks passed pawns on the
queenside are easily blockaded.
1:'%:1, .,!
;fe1
,,,.,i.t;
;,
1fj%.
20
21
22
23
d5
e4
cxd5
.i.b2
1110&!
ife2
t'j)fi
exd5
.i.d7
t'i)e5
29
23 . . . b5 there
axb5 axb5 25
'i'c3 ) 26 'i'e2
white pawns
ll'ldl
lbf2
29
30
31
32
33
f4
axb5
.tcJ
<it>hl
l:[a2
?:.cal
:eS
l:c7
llb7
h5
Now the threat of an invasion on the

a-file is so unpleasant, that Black tries to
complicate t11e play somewhat by
sacrificing one of his passive pawns.
b5
c4
33
34
35
36
The threat of 27 llld3 could also have

been parried by 26 . . . 'i'd6, but then 27
Jc 1 , and 2 7 . . . ltJc4 is met by the
exchange sacrifice with a decisive
advantage.
27
fcl
This move and the following one

emphasise best of all the helplessness of
Black, who is completely deprived of
any counterplay.
Black
temporarily
keeps
his
blockading knight on its centralised
position, but subsequently it cannot be
maintained there, since he is unable to
defend the long diagonal.
25
26
l:tac8
IF9' ;.
fi$M
After the immediate

would have followed 24
ll'ia4 ll'ie5 (25 ... 'ii'd6 26
bxa4 27 f4, and the
become irresistible. 3
24
'li'd2
Black tries to retain both rooks; after

the exchange of one pair, White's
pressure on the knight at e5 would have
become even more intense. But even
this subtlety is unable to prevent the
further intensifying of the positional
pressure by the white pieces.
.txb4
.i.cJ
ll'ldl
b4
'ifb6
ife3
Let it be an endgame. After all, this

can no longer change anything!
axb5
31
36
37
38
39
40
41
:xd2
.i.d4
li)cJ
h4
l:ta8+
11xd2
liJd3
:eb8
h!b3
8b7
in 1936 I played this as Black against

Ragozin (see Training Games). Then
many years later in my previous match
with Smyslov (Game 228) I replied
9 . lhc6. On thi.s occasion, as in Game
229 (and even earlier in the 7th game of
my 1 954 match with Smyslov), Black
chooses an accurate move order.
.
This move was sealed but Black

resigned without resuming. What can
9
10
he do to oppose the inevitable advance

of the white d- and e-pawns?
A game in the style of Capablanca
himself. Of course it was pleasant to
play a game in tl1e style of the great
Cuban, especially against Smyslov!
ltg6
1'e3
In Game 229 White retreated his

queen to d2, which proved less success
ful.
10
11
lL\c6
.i.d2
In the afore-mentioned 7th

Smyslov played 1 1 dxc5, when
could have followed 1 1 . . 'i'a5
good prospects for Black. 1 1 .i.d2
to more interesting play.
Game 256
Smyslov-Botvinnik
"ftVorld Championship Match
.Moscow 1957, 18th game
11
game
there
.with
leads
lL\e7
French Defence
1
2
3
4
e4
d4
li)cJ
aJ
4
5
6
7
8
9
bxc3
Vg4
ifxg7
1ih6
ll)e2
e6
d5
t.b4
The favourable score the match for

my opponent (91h- 71h) influenced the
opening of this game. Smyslov avoids
the more complicated 4 e5 and chooses
a variation that is quite safe for White.
in which I still have to fight for equality.
.ixc3+
dxe4
lL\f6
l1.g8
c5
Black needs to resolve the problem

of the development of his queen's
bishop, and he vacates the c6 square for
it. Since from here it will defend the e4
pawn, White immediately attacks this
pawn, in order to try and frustrate his
opponent's plan.
This opening and the given specific

position were well known to me. Back
32
12 ' ltlg3
i.. d7
It transpires that Black 's central

pawn is invulnerable. After 1 3 tLixe4
lDxe4 14 'ii'xe4 llc6 he achieves an
excellent position. White decides to win
another pawn - at c5. This leads to the
tripling of his pawns, which somewhat
devalues his material advantage, but
even so. these pawns control important
squares.
13
14
15
dxc5
c4
.ll.e2
1lc7
.i.c6
ltJg4
19
This practically forces the e xchange

of White's king's bishop, after which
Black can consider himself to be out of
danger. The point is that after 16 'i'd4
:ds 17 'i'h8+ :gs the threats of
1 8 . . . ltJxf2,
18 . . . xd2.
or.
finally,
. . . e4-e3, are highly unpleasant. And
after 16 'W'c3 0--0--0 Black 's position is
perfectly sound.
16
17
18
.ixg4
h3
ltJxe4
l:txg4
g6
20
21
22
The capture of this pawn cannot be

delayed, since if Black were able to play
. . . f7-f5, he would obtain an easily
convertible pawn majority in the centre
and on the kingside. And at the same
time White's two extra pawns on the
queenside would not play any sig
nificant role. However, now the game
transposes by force into an ending with
opposite-colour
bishops
that
is
favourable to Black.
18
19
. .
'i'xd6!
The basic tactical subtlety of Black 's

entire plan. Perhaps White had only
reckoned with 1 9 . ..tiJ xd6 20 c xd6
'i'xd6, but then he would probably have
gained a winning position - 21 i.b4
'ilic7 22 0-0--0. Now, however, tlrings
reduce to an ending in which, despite
being a pawn down, Black's chances are
better. Smyslov immediately realised
this, and offered a draw, but the game
continued . . .
cxd6
.i.xeJ
l:gl
xeJ
.i.xg2
'ifild7
After 22 ... i.. xh3 23 %!xg6 hxg6

(23 . . . fxg6 24 0-0--0 d7 25 %:thl ) Black
would have lost all winning chances due
to the exchange of one pair of rooks.
23
h4
White avoids 23 c5 i.xh3 24 l:txg6

fxg6. since the passed h-pawn could
have caused him considerable trouble
(in this variation the e xchange of rooks
no longer eases his position).
ltlf5
lld6+
The only move. If 1 9 'ife2 Q:...0--0 ,

with the extremely c:langerous threats of
20 . . Jlxg2 and 20 .. ltJd4.
23
h5
Avoiding the capture oi1 d6, which

allows White to activate his pieces.
33
24
25
c5
llbt
:ag8
i.f3
after which the f2 pawn will become

hopelessly weak.
Therefore Smyslov decides himself
to advance his f-pawn,' thereby forcing
the opponent to switch to the calculation
of concrete variations A sensible
decision, considering that for the nine
moves to the time control Black had
very little time left.
White was threatening 26 l:xg2

l:.xg2 27 lbb7+, when it is he who has
winning chances. Now, after the
exchange of one black rook, the other
will be very active.
26
27
28
:xg6
'it>d2
d3
lbg6
e5
f6
32
29
i.d2
:g2
e3
.tel
llxc2
33
'it?d3
D.g2
Naturally, the g-file must not be

conceded .
After the immediat 29 . . . l:tg4 White

can reply '30 l:tb4.
30
31
f4
Black avoids continuations involving

the capture of the f-pawn, and chooses a
course such that the e- and f-files
remain blockaded, and the white rook
remains passive.
After 28 . . . f5 29 g5 there could not

be any question of an advantage for
Black. Now however, the potential
threat of . . . lilg4 forces White to take
urgent measures.
.tc6
e6
34
fxe5
f5
Thus White is again a pawn up, but

all of his pawns, arranged on dark
squares, are immobile.
35
36
White has readjusted. Not wishing to

return with his bishop to e3 he has put
his king on this square and his bishop on
c3 , which has its advantages. Now
. . . a7-a5 is not possible, and hence the
b4 square is. secured for his rook. But
the new position has its defects. There is
the very strong threat of . . . f6-f5-f4+,
ltb4
d4
i.e4+
36
ltg4
The lack of time has its effect. The

not so complicated continuation pointed
out by Stahlberg was stronger: 36 ... l:h2
34
37 .iel l:!h3, and White's position is

critical (38 !ta4 a6, or 3 8 a4 i.c6 etc.).
37
38
39
/Let
llb2
dJ
a5
.i.d5+
l:ta4
@e2
lld2
.i.xdJ
.i.b5
<&t>e6
49
50
51
.tb2
.i.al
i.d7
d5
.i.c8
52
i.ct !
Now Black has to reckon all the time

with the possibility of the enemy king
advancing further.
Winning the a3 paWll, which, it

would appear, should have led to the
win of the game.
40
41
46 llxd3
47 i.ct
48 <&t>e3
49 <it>f4
l:Xa3
Here the game was adjourned. 42

:txd5 or 42 d7 is threatened, and after
4 1 . . .i.c6 42 d7! .ixd7 43 l:td6+ <i;;e7 44
.i.d2 the initiative passes to White.
Therefore the sealed move is more or
less obvious.
41
42
43
.i.c4+
<&t>d7
cli>f2
lld4
During my home analysis I was

mitially afraid of 43 c6+ bxc6 44 l:tb2,
but then I established that 44 . . . ilb5 45
d2 (with the threat of 46 e6+)
45 . . . i.d3 or 45 . . . c5 leaves Black with
real winning chances.
Smyslov' s decision to exchange
rooks came as something of a surprise
to me, since I considered the ending
with opposite-colour bishops to be won:
Alas, things turned out to be much more
complicated . . .
43
44
45
iid2
i.g5
Now 52 . . . <it>xc5 is dangerous for

Black, e.g. 53 <it>g5 @d5 54 @xh5 @xe5
55 @gs <ittxd6 56 h5 iLe6 57 cM6 i.g8
58 'i;g7, and White wins.
.i.aJ
i.ct
.i.e6
.i.d7
<&t>d4
55
56
.taJ
i.b4
.le6
i.c8
Black's objective is to drive the

white bishop off the short c l -a3
diagonal, but such that during this time
the white king is unable to come to the
aid of its passed pawns.
Alas, in the game Black's king did
not in fact manage to advance any
further.
..i.b5
a4
With the unpleasant tl;rreat of 46 e6+

xe6 4 7 d7 i.xd7 48 .J:d6+ and 49
l:.xd7. But, as I have already said, the
exchange of rooks seemed to me to be
advantageous, and therefore my reply
was also obvious.
45
52
53
54
l:ld3
35
57 .i.aJ
58 . .i.b4
.li.e6
I found the paradoxical move

67 . . . 'itb3 ! , when I thought that Black
was winning: 68 <it>g5 @c4 69 .i.b2
@d5 !
The results of a lengthy analysis were
embodied in a study, which was
published in 1 958. Later Euwe and
Konstantinopolsky found an improve
ment for the defence, and it turned out
that the study was incorrect. 4
However, it is hard to say how the
play would have gone, if Black had
continued this way at the board.
On this diagonal the bishop is ideally

placed, fQ.fllling two functions: it con
trols the a3 square and simultaneously
defends the c5 pawn.
58
59
60
61
62
.taJ
.i.cl
i.aJ
i.cl
.i.d7
..t.c8
'it>d5
.i.d7
Here too 62 . . . 'it>xc5 is unavailing due

to 63 'it>g5 'it>d5, and then as indicated in
the note to White's 52nd move.
At the board I also examined
62 . . . .te6 63 .i.a3 i.c8 64 i.c l 'it>d4 65
i..a3 'it>d3 66 i.b2 <iiitc 2 67 i.d4 a3 68
lt.1g5 <it>d3 69 i.a l !, and White saves the
game.
Not finding any possibility of
strengthening my position, I offered a
draw, which was accepted.
It was annoying not to win this game,
in which. I had invested a number of
interesting ideas.
Returning to this ending a few
months later, in the position after 67
i.d4
Game 257
Smyslov-Botvinnik
World Championship Return Match
Afoscow 1958, 1st game
Caro-Kann Defence
1
2
e4
c6
lhcJ
My opponent made this move almost
without thinking. Some theoreticians
(perhaps not without justification) op
pose an early d2-d4, as easing Black's
defence.
2
3
tLlfJ
d5
.i.g4
In the 17th game of this return match

I played 3 . . . dxe4 (the continuation was
4 t'bxe4 tiJf6 5 tiJxf6+ gxf6 6 .i.c4 ),
which can hardly be recommended.
4
5
h3
1fxf3
.i.xfJ
Regarding 5 gxf3, see Game 2 74

(Tal-Botvinnik, 3rd match game, 1 960).
/if6
This move is perhaps more accurate

than 5 . . . e6, although then too the
36
1'.,]1c_vclopaedia* considers that Black
equalises .
6 d3
After 6 d4 dxe4 7 'i'e3, as, for
example, in the game Fischer-Keres
( 196 1) the play is more lively.
e6
6
7 .i.e2
This system of development is not
dangerous for Black. Stronger is 7 a3
(as in the 19th game of the return
match) or 7 .i.d2 followed by g2-g4, in
both cases with the fianchetto of
White's king's bishop (it is well known
that the immediate 7 g3 is advantage
ously answered by 7 . . . i..b4.
Therefore, during the game I natur
ally concluded that my opponent was
insufficiently well-prepared for the
Caro-Kann Defence.
ti)bd7
7
8 1Wg3
A 'harassing' move - White prevents
the obvious development of the black
bishop on the f8-a3 diagonal. but, on the
other hand, at g7 the bishop will also be
quite well placed.
8
g6
Jl. g7
9 0-0
10 .i.f4
I was expecting the more energetic,
in my view, 10 f4 , but White tries to
solve his problems with piece play
alone. This cannot prove successful, of
course. since Black's position is
sufficiently solid, and White's tactical
two-move threats are easily parried.
10 . . .
'i'b6
Of course, not 10 ... 0-0 on account of
1 1 .i.d6 l:.e8 12 e5, when Black has no
satisfactory reply.
0-0
1 1 liabl
12 il..c7
Continuing the same tactics, in the
hope that the opponent will move his
queen to the wrong square: 12 . . .'ib4 1 3
.i.d6 or 12 . . . 'i'a6 1 3 d4 !
Gligoric' s
recommendation also
came into consideration: 12 e5 tDe8 1 3
l:!fe l followed b y h3 -h4, but at that time
it was not known!
1fd4
12 .
13 li.f3
e5
Now the bishop at c7 is cut off from
its main forces, and White must
urgently move it to a safer place. The
exchange in the centre is not un
favourable for Black: if 14 exd5 he can
play either 14 . . . xd5, or 14 . . . cxdS (15
ltJb5 '11>4 16 c4 dxc4 17 tlld6 1Wc5).
Ilfe8
14 .i.d6
15 .i.aJ
On this occasion White creates a well
camouflaged trap: 1 6 ' exd5 cxd5 17
liJxd5! t!Dxd5 1 8 c3 (18 . . . 1ixd3 19
Here and subsequently this refers to

the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings,
published in Yugoslavia.
37
:lfd 1 r This variation could have

followed, for example, after 1 5 . . . a6.
Black, naturally, avoids this contin
uation.
19
dxe4
11.fdl
b3
W'b6
22
23
The natural reply. 18 li.d6 was

dubious on account of 1 8 . . . %le6 ( 1 9
:gd3 c 5 2 0 l:.bdl c4 2 1 tiJd5 lDxd5 2 2
xd5 lDf6 23 .:t5d2 .i.h6).
18
19
...
i.cl
'i'c7
ii.el
a4
b4
ti)e6
a6
Despite his great time trouble, White

acts logically: by preventing . . . b5-b4 he
ensures that he can play i.e2 and then
f2-f3 , after which his queen will be able
to return to the centre. However, b3 -b4
involves a weakening of his queenside
pawns.
b5
TI1e threat of . . . b5-b4 is highly

unpleasant. Incidentall, White already
had little time left on the clock!
17
18
dxe4
White imperceptibly makes a serious

error and ends up in a difficult position.
It was essential to play 16 lDxe4 ! lDxe4
1 7 .ixe4 with approximate equality. My
opponent evidently assumed that he had
nothing to fear, and on general grounds
he avoided simplifying the position.
16
..
20
21
22
15
' 16
Black incorrectly avoids 1 9 .b4 20

lDa4 lDxa4 2 1 bxa4 1i'c5, when to 22
.te3 there is the reply 22 . . . 'i'c4 ! with
an obvious advantage. However, he
preferred not to clarify the position, in
order to make things more difficult for
White, whose time trouble by this point
had intensified . . .
...
i.e2
.:ad8
1fe7
The e5 pawn is immune, since if 24

'i'xe5 the knight moves from f6, and the
knight at c3 is lost.
lDc5
24
axb5
It was hardly correct for White to

hurry with this exchange, since due to
the weakness of the b4 pawn, and the
The manoeuvre of the bishop to e3 is

inadvisable, since it will be badly placed
there. 1 9 i.b2 was preferable.
38
35
need to defend it, he has to concede the

open rook's file to Black.
24
25
26
l:txd8
.i.b6
axb5
:xd8
36
lta8
f3
'lfel
hla3
36
37
38
Of course not 28 tiJd I because of
28 . lhxe4.
. .
28
29
i.h6
Ji.fl
Another lost tempo and yet . . . one
less move to be made in time trouble!
29
30
31
.*.c5
.i.d3
cxd3
11ff3
lt:\xd3
llxd3
lld2
39
llfl
White also gives up a second pawn,

to gain at least some counterplay.
lbd4
11'e6
lDd7
39
40
41
e5
tElgJ
'it'xb4
ilc4
D.c2
The sealed move. The exchange of

rooks is unavoidable, and a prosaic
ending with a material advantage is
reached by force.
42
43
Now the exchange of White's dark

square bishop is unavoidable, and his
game becomes strategically "lost.
ii.xd4
f5
e6
l:.cl
fxe6
43 . . . l:.xfl+ 44 liJxfl .i.g5 45 fxg6

'i'xe6 46 gxh7+ <it>xh7 suggested itself,
but my second Grigory Goldberg rightly
pointed out that then White would gain
some chances with 47 liJg3 ! By control
ling the f5 square, the knight might yet
prove dangerous. Therefore it was
decided to take play into a queen
ending.
44 fxg6
l:xfl+
i1J0 : ti %
exd4
i.eJ+
tDe2
ltle5
bl
On this occasion Black too does not
disregard some two-move threats
(35 . . lhxf.3 and 35 lhxd3).
.
f4
39 e5 is easily parried by 39 . . 'i'd5.
.'{:.:>..:1
32
33
34
'lld6
White decides to give up a pawn.

Hardly any better was passive defence 36 'i'd l when Black, naturally, would
have continued the
attack with
36 . . . l2Jc4.
A pointless move. At b6 the bishop is

worse placed than at e3 .
26
27
28
"i'fl
35 . . . ltJxd3 36 cxd3 l:xd3was prema

ture on account of 3 7 ttJf4, but now
Black has renewed the attack on d3.
45
46
llxf1
1ff6
hxg6
b4
It is hard to find an antidote to the

advance of this pawn; The capture of the
g6 pawn would merely lead to the black
...
39
king slipping away to the queenside.

Also bad was 47 1Wd8+ @f7 48 'i'd7+
'iti>r6 49, ,'ifd8+ 'it>e5 50 'i'h8+ e4, and
nothing would be changed by 47 lDg3
g5 48 ft)h5 'ifcl+ 49 h2 Jlf4+.
Therefore White's next move is the
strongest.
55
1if6
1fd5
The queen must be centralised!
56
57
58
59
60
1ff3+
1id1+
1'e2+
1fa6+
1i'a7+
Cit>d4
ci;;e5
<ifld6
ci;;e7
ct>f6
And again there are no more checks.
61
62
1fh7
ci;;b l
1fe5+
b2
Only one more step needs to be

made, and the black king can .always
avoid possible checks.
White resi gn s .
Game 258
Botvinnik-Smyslov
47
h2
g5!
Even so the laright is WUlble to come

into play, . since if 48 lhg3 there follows
48 . . . J..f4. The exchange of minor pieces
is forced.
48
49
50
51
lDxeJ
11'xg5+
'ifxe3
1ie5
dxe3
1fc7+
'lfb8
bJ
4
5
. .
d4
c4
tLlcJ
lDf6
g6
J..g7
e4
f3
d6
The Samisch Variation is one of th:

most active continuations: Black has t
counter definite problems.
cs
g6
5
6
. .
.tel
0-0
a6
Smyslov quite often carried out the

flank attack involving . . . b7-b5, an idea
that also occurred in the games of other
players.
The checks would also come to an

end after 5 3 1i' g3 + <it?f5 .
53_
54 1ff8+
1
2
3
In the previous matches Smyslov was

content to employ the Griinfeld
Defence, but here he goes in for a more
complicated opening.
rbf7
White refrains from advancing his

pawns; in this case his king would
merely be exposed. But equally, his lone
queen is unable to stop Black's passed
pawns.
51
52
53

Moscow 1958, 2nd game
f5
<ifle4
7
40
.i.dJ'
lLlc6
The usual continuation here is 7 . . . c6

followed by . . . b7-b5, as, for example,
was played against me by Smyslov . in
the 6th game of the match (No.259) and
by Larsen (No.380). The move in the
game leads to more complicated play,
and would appear not to have occurred
previously.
tLlge2
Now Black has to do something

active. Waiting tactics will lead to an
obvious advantage for White.
10
tLla5
Smyslov decides to play his knight

from c6 to c4. It would hardly have
been any better to use the d7 knight for
this, e.g. 10 . . . b5 1 1 cxb5 axb5 12 b4
lbb6 13 ..ta2 ltJc4 ( 1 3 . . il.d7 14 'i'd3)
14 .i.xc4 bxc4 15 'i'a4.
llb8
11
.la2
b5
Essential: any other move would

have been answered by 1 2 b4, driving
back the enemy knight.
12
13
14
cxb5
b4
clxc4
axb5
lDc4
bxc4
a3
White falls into a slight psycholog

ical trap. He prevents 9 .t[)b4 10 ii.bl
b5 . Meanwhile, the exchange of the c6
knight for the d3 bishop is not
dangerous for White, and for Black it
involves a loss of time.
9 0-0 or 9 1fd2 was simpler.
However, the further course of the game
)\ shows that Black cam1ot extract any
1 gains from the weakening of the b3
..
Here White had to stop and think. He

would appear to have a clear advantage:
on the queenside he has a passed pawn,
whereas tl1e black c4 pawn is securely
blockaded. But Black' s two bishops are
a latent strength, which could be
revealed if he were able to play . . . e7e5xd4 followed by . . . ti)e5-d3 and . . . c7c5 . Then not a trace of White's
advai1tage would remain. And if (after
1 5 . . . e5) White chooses d4-d.5, there
square.
9
10
tLld7
il.bl
The bishop had to retreat, in order to

defend the d4 square (in view of the
threat of 10 . . . e5), and to a square from
where it will be . transferred to a
favourable post - a2.
41
follows another manoeuvre: . . . f7-f5-f4

followed by . . . g6-g5-g4 with a
dangerous att.ack for Black.
Finally I managed to find the correct
pl bnt I was careless in the way that I
carried it out
15
compensated by the weakness of the c4

pawn, and also by the fact that the game
is opened up, and the position of the
black king proves insecure:
0-0
I was sure that Black would play

l 5 . . . e5, and had prepared 16 b5, when
after 16 . . . exd4 17 lDxd4 ttJe5 1 8 'ifd2
he does not have 18 . . . c5. However, my
opponent finds a stronger continuation.
Therefore White should have played 15
b5 inunediately.
15
16
.d2
c6
ttlb6
Black, in tum, misses the strongest

move. and aft.er the exchange of the
dark-square bishops his position goes
sharply
downhill.
16 . . . 1le8
was
essential.
17
18
.i.h6
1rxh6
23
24
24 . . . ltf5 looks more subtle. Indeed,

after 25 tiJd4 .:es 26 'iff2 .i.b7 27 ltJc6
..txc6 28 dxc6 d5 Black would have
gained definite counterplay. However,
in the variation 25 it'd4 .ib7 26 ttJf4
(26 . . . g5 27 5 or 26 . . . 'i'f8 27 l:tfl)
the d5 pawn is defended. and the c4
pawn remains under attack.
25 1%.fl
And now, since the d5 pawn is
indirectly defended (25 . .. ttJxd5 26
Ve6+, or 25 . . . i.xd5 26 tDxdS lDxd5 27
'i'e6+), White prevents the activation of
the black rook.
.i.xh6
f6
A useful move., guaranteeing the

safety of the black king.
19
20
a4
I:tfbl
tl)a8
Now, when White's 'king's rook has

been diverted to the queenside, Black
tries to seize the initiative on the
opposite wing.
20
21
22
1fe3
fxe4
f5
fxe4
Cjjc7
22 . . . 'ifb6 was more circwnspect. for

the moment preventing White from
creating two connected passed pawns.
23
cxd5
.i.b7
exd5
25
26
'ii d7
11d4
26 'i'a7 was tempting, with the threat

of 27 l:txf8+, but White preferred a
simpler continuation.
d5 .
This move . seems to give Black

counterplay due to the weakness of the
white pawn at d5, but this is more than
26
27
42
dxe6
e6
ltlxe6
It is now too late for 27 'ifxe6 28

f4 'i'e5 . on account of 29 l:ad1, when
Black has everything 'hanging' .
...
33
34
11'xc4+
'ifxc6
d5
. l1d8
35
36
37
1ib6
1fd4
llfel
1le7
11fd6
Black could not leave the eighth rank

unguarded (34 .. Jxb4) in view of 3 5
ctJxd5.
In the end White allows . t'De6 and

the advance of the passed d-pawn, but
the white pawn proves to be quicker.
For the moment it is useful to reduce the
number of pieces on the board.
.
37
38
39
Ilxe5
b5
llde8
lixe5
lhe6
2 8 1ig4!
This is, of course, stronger than 28

'i'xc4 d5, when Black has some com
pensation for the sacrificed pawn.
2s
...
30
nadl
:res
Black goes in for all sorts of tactical

tricks, to try and eliminate the block
ading knight at c3 (as will be seen from
what follows) .
1!fg7
29 ltld4
This is simpler than 30 ttJxe6 'i'xc3 .
30
liJc7
Smyslov did not like the endgame

position arising after 30 . . . li:Jxd4 3 1
'iWxd4 'i'xd4+ 3 2 %!xd4 d5 3 3 b5 .
40 'lra7!
Avoiding a trap - 40 ltle4? l:txe4 4 1
'iixe4 'ifc5+.
In a difficult position Smyslov over

looks the loss of a pawn.
Or 40. . . !lhS 41 g3 (4 1 . . . li:Jf4 42

l:fl ).
41 ltJe4
When this sealed move was revealed,
Black resigned. The reason: 4 1 'i'f8
42 b6 ttJ!4 (or 42 . . . d8 43 b7 lDc6 44
'iib6) 43 b7 Jil.e8 44 b81i' lbb8 45 ltJgS .
31
32
1lf4
ltlc6
:es
40
.ixc6
The mutual pins after 3 2 li:Je6 3 3

'iYxc4 l:k8 34 l:.dq i are no danger to
White, and two pawns have already
been won.
...
d4
. . .
43
Game 259
Botvinnik-Smyslov
c4
The simplest way of avoiding the

Griinfeld Defence!
g6
Smyslov also played this in the 1 9th

game of our 1957 match. However, this
move has the drawback that White can
now transpose into the King's Indian
Defence.
ll.g7
2 e4!
3
4
d4
ltlc3
.i.e3
f3
8
9
10
11
.i.xc4
JlbJ
ttlxe4
b5
bxc4
d5
dxe4
d6
a6
Black was evidently not very happy

with the way the opening developed in
the 2nd game (No.258), and he does
everything possible to deviate from the
Samisch Variation. However, after
White's nei move it cannot be avoided.
5
6
.i.dJ
1id2
In a similar situatidn Sokolsky played

b2-b3, which is dubious in view of the
reply . . . c6-c5 . Modem theory recom
mends 8 e5 and then 9 f4, which leads
to a sharper game.
World Championship Return A1atch

A1oscow 1958, 6th game
7
8
A mistake, which was prepared . . . in

my home analysis ! There I established
that in the event of 1 1 fxe4 e5 1 2 dxe5
White did not achieve anything, and the
obvious move 12 CD:f3 ! , after which
White has a clear lead in development,
was not even considered. Now Black
has a reasonable game.
liJf6
c6
In the 2nd game Smyslov did not

play this. but preferred to develop his
,
queen's knight at c6. However it has to
be said that the set-up with . . . c7-c6,
. . . a7-a6 and . . . b7-b5 is more soundly
based. It can be mentioned, for example,
that this plan had occurred in games by
Taimanov, and also in the game
Sokolsky-Petrosian ( 1 957). And, as
already mentioned, Larsen played this
against me (No.380).
White basically follows Sokolsky' s
plan: he does not prevent . . . b7-b5xc4
followed by . . . d6-d5, but aims for tl1e
rapid development of hi pieces.
11
12
..
ltJe2
0-0
a5!
Well played.
13
0-0
Here castling is a Joss of time, which

hands Black the initiative. 1 3 tlJ2c3
CZJxe4 14 fXe4 .i.a6 1 5 0-0--0 was
logical, although . it would have led to
double-edged play. However, it is not so
44
easy to decide on such a continuation in

a match for the World Championship,
when you already have an advantage in
points . . .
13
14
15
i.c4
l:t.acl
a4
/t)bd7
l:tb8
Black's position is the more active.

The weakness of the d4 pawn and the d5
square are balanced by the similar
defects of the c6 pawn and the c5
square, but what compensation does
\Vhite have for the weakness of the b2
pawn and the e3 square? So that the e3
square should not be soon attacked,
White exchanges one pair of knights.
It is hard battling against such a
subtle positional player as Smyslov, but
subsequently I was able to surpass
myself
16
lDxf6+
.ltxf6!
17
18
19
lDcJ
i.e2
l:lfdl
lDb6
.ie6
The white knight is tied to the defence

of the a2 pawn, and a2a3 cannot be
played, since this wouid weaken the
light squares. There would follow
. . . i.e6-b3, when the d4 pawn would be
in danger, to say nothing about the
possibility of continuing the manoeuvre
with . . . .ib3-c4, fixing the weakness of
the light squares.
Therefore 19 . 'i'd7 ! and 20 . . . :fds,
intensifying the pressure, suggests itself,
after which White's position would
have remained difficult.
..
19
.i.g7
It really would have been better to

give the opponent the move with any
non-committal manoeuvre, than to re
treat the bishop to g7. White, of course,
could only dream of exchanging his
passive bishop for the opponent's active
dark-square bishop, and only this mis
take by Black allows this dream to be
realised! Incidentally, now the weakness
of the c5 square will be more sensitive.
It is curious that Smyslov made the
same mistake in a similar position in the
2nd game of the return match.
The remaining knight is needed on

the queenside.
20
21
i.h6
'ifxh6
.i.xh6
f6
22
23
ltd2
h4
.i.f7
Smyslov used the same method to

defend his castled position in the afore
mentioned game.
Preventing . . . g6-g5, just in case.
23
24
al!
W'd7
This move proves possible, since

24 . . . .i.c4 25 thxa4 i.xe2 26 thc5 'i'd5
2 7 1he2 'i'xd4+ 28 h 1 is clearly in
White's favour. After all, the black
Black _ has played very subtly, and

now his position is clearly preferable.
45
During the game I thought that after

30 . . . l:td6 (it was this move that was later
suggested by the commentators) 3 1
l:.dc2 e8 3 2 i.b5 or 3 I ..J:lb8 3 2 'ittf2
(32 . . . i.b3 33 :xc6) Black also had a
difficult position. However, analysis
showed the possibility of a defence in
the variation 30 . . . l:td6 3 1 ztdc2 e8 3 2
.ib5 by 32 . . . d7 ! 3 3 tiJxd5 tiJxd5 3 4
..txa4 tiJb6 ! 3 5 .i.b3 :xd4.
pawns are fixed on light-squares, the

same colour as the bishops, which is a
highly unpleasant indication for the
endgame.
As a result of 24 a3 ! the white knight
is freed from having to defend the a2
pawn, and the complex of weak squares
(b4, c5) and pawns (a4, c6, e7) is in jeo
pardy. All this is the direct consequence
of the unfortunate move 1 9 . . . Ji..g7.
24
25
26
i.fl
:fd8
11'e8
.i.d5
A natural continuation, since other

wise Black cannot consolidate his
position. 26 . . . J:td5, for example, was
hardly any stronger in view of 27 1if4,
with the unpleasant threat of 28 '&c7.
27
lDc5
'iff8
In the endgame, at least, Black will

easily be able to cover his weaknesses
on the e-file, but White too, true to his
match tactics, does not avoid a favour
able ending!
It was not so easy to decide on such
tactics for the match, since Smyslov is a
supreme expert in the field of the
endgame . . .
28
29
'ilxf8+
lDa6
31
32
33
The alternative 3 3 tiJb4 looks less

well-founded, since after 33 . . . e5 34 d5
rJJe7 (if 34 . . . ii.xd5 or 34 . . . lDxd5, then 3 5
..ib5 ! ) 3 5 i.b5 f5 Black, by retaining
control of the b3 square and blockading
the d5 pawn, would have had better
chances of a successful defence.
<ifi>xf8
Beginning pressure on the c6 pawn.
29
30
lDb4
1bc6
xc6
a5
:bc8
i.b3
In this way Black prevents the doub

ling of the white rooks on the c-file and
e:\.'J)loits the undefended rook at d2 to
create tactical threats. Even so this
counterplay is insufficient compensation
for the pawn that he sacrifices. But was
there anything better that he could have
done? .
33
.i.a2
For the moment 33 . . . e5 did not

achieve anything for Black: 34 tDxb3
axb3 3 5 l!d3 ! , and White, by gaining a
tempo for the defence of the d4 pawn,
retains the initiative. After 3 3 . . . ..i.d5
Black would have . altogether given up
his last counter-chance - advancing
46
40
41
42
. . . e7-e5. Now he could have hoped for

34 @f2 e5 3 5 e3 ttJd5+, but because
of White's knight manoeuvre the
situation becomes less favourable.
34
35
36
lDb7!
lDc5
llle4
:.xd4
tLlxf6
lDxh7
42
43
44
lDg5+
llle4
<it>e6
<il>d5
If now Black avoids the exchange, he

will be forced to play a prosaic ending
two pawns down, whereas after the
exchange White's material advantage is
reduced. Even so. it is possible that, had
Smyslov foreseen White' s 46th move,
he would have rejected the win of the
pawn. However. it is appropriate here to
once again remember Tarrasch' s saying:
in a bad position all moves are bad.
It is interesting to note the except
ional activity of White's king's knight,
which has made 15 moves following the
route g l -e2-c3 -e4-c5-a6-b4xc6-a5-b7c5-e4xf6xh7-g5-e4. In the end it peri
shes on the field of battle, but not with
out first securing victory for its army!
l:txd4
exd4
cl;e7
i.bt
44
45
With the unpleasant threat (for

example, after 40 ) of 40 . . . d3 4 1
lllg 5 (4 1 el lllc4) 4 1 . . .d2 42 e2
.td3+! And White still has to make one
more move in severe time trouble. This
is Black' s main "trump'.
40
.ie2
l:td5
e5
Black gives up a second pawn, but

diverts the knight further from the
centre and activates his d-pawn.
39
/i)d5
llleJ
Since the d4 pawn can no; longer

advance (the knight is left undefended),
this move is very useful.
With two threats - 37 ltJc3 and 37

CDxf6. Black exchanges rooks, in order
to remove the blockader of the passed
d-pawn that he now creates.
36
37
38
f2
.ta6!
Now the c4 square will be under

control even afteL . . . d4-d3, and as a
result Black's counterattack is repulsed.
47
fxe4+
i.xe4
'&t>xe4
g4!
This fearlully strong move was foWld

during analysis by my second Grigory
Goldberg. After 46 . . . d3 4 7 .i.f3+ <it>f'4
48 h5 gxh5 49 gxh5 d2 50 h6 the
h-pawn cannot be stopped.
h5
d5
46
4
47 h5
gxh5
<"bg5
48 gxh5
49 w
Black resigns, since the a4 and d4
pawns are doomed. A technically diffi

cult game!
Smyslov-Botvinnik
World Championship Return Afatch
Afoscow 1 958, 7th game
Sicilian Defence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e4
lLlfJ
d4
li)xd4
cJ
.i.e2 '
c5
lLlc6
cxd4
tLlf6
d6
g6
.t.eJ
Yefim Geller rightly considered that
this quiet continuation gives White no
advantage.
7
8
h4
10
hxg6
10
11
12
exd5
lDxd5
The afore-mentioned 5th game con

tinued 10 . . . hxg6 1 1 exd5 tLlxd5 12
t2Jxc6 bxc6 1 3 lLlxd5 if'xd5 14 'i'xd5
cxd5 . White, s advantage is so insig
nificant that, not expecting a repetition
of this variation, I somewhat casually
prepared for this game. But at the board
it became clear to me that 10 . . . hxg6 . 1 1
tLlxc6 bxc6 1 2 e5 favours White, e.g.
12 . . . t2Je4 1 3 ltlxe4 dxe4 14 i.d4 'i'as+
15 i.c3 'ifd5 16 ifc 1 . Therefore I had to
'change tune', in order to avoid a plan
that had most probably been prepared
by my opponent in the quiet of his
study.
Game 260
.i.g7
Smyslov repeats the opening from

the 5th game of the retum match, and
from what follows the reader will
understand what, in all probability, my
opponent was hoping for.
8
. ..
0-0
Stronger here is 8 . . . h5, as I played in
the ne1 odd-numbered game (No.26 1 ).
fxg6
li)xd5
The surprise effect operates. White

makes an error, after which he runs into
difficulties, whereas Black has an easy
game. Meanwhile, 1 2 i.c4! e6 13 t2Jxd5
exd5 14 .i.b3 liJxd4 1 5 .i.xd4 :es+ 16
<it>fl would . have definitely been in
White's favour!
12
48
'ifxd5
variation 1 9 l:lc l 1i'e6 20 b3 l:tf8 is also

in Black's favour.
How did I mi ss this possibility? What
Threatening by 1 5 'ilb3 W'xb3 16
told here was my old 'illness'"" """ weak
ltJxb3 to obtain a favourable ending, so
ness of combinative vision. During the
that Black has no choice
. game I considered the exchange sacri
thxd4
14
fice only after the preparatory exchange
15 cxd4
of queens, overlooking after 16 . l:xf3
This reply is also forced: after 1 5
17 'i'xc4 tl1e zwischenzug 17 l:xe3+ .
.itxd4 ltd8 it i s hard for White to find a
good response.
13
14
1fc4
.i.f3
c3
.
. . .
15
i.e6
Now 1 5 . . . :d8 16 Wcl ! 'i'xcl+ 17

xc 1 .i.xd4 18 i..xd4 Jlxd4 19 :c? was
not dangerous for White.
Here my opponent offered a draw,
but, in accordance with the rules then in
force, I asked him first to make a move
Game 261
Smyslov-Botvinnik
Moscow 1958. 9(h game
Sicilian Defence
16
11'b3
1 e4
2 tllf3
3 d4
4 l0xd4
5 c3
6 .i.e2
cs
lLlc6
cxd4
lLlf6
d6
6
7 .i.e3
8 h4
g6
JL g7
I think, nevertheless, that the

development of this bishop at c4 is more
promising for White.
Since analysis of the 5th and 7th

games (the latter No.260) had shown
that White could have gained a clear
advantage from the opening, Smyslov
aims to play this same variation again.
-
Black accepted the offer, and, as

soon transpired. incorrectly. From my
old friend Abram Model I learned that
by 16 . l:txf3 17 gxf3 'i'c6 1 8 'i'dl i.d5
1 9 :h3 'i'e6 Black would have won the
a2 pawn for the exchange. and then, by
creating a second passed pawn on the
queenside and a:ttacking the poorly
protected enemy king, he would have
gained excellent winning chances. The
. .
b5
Obligatory! 8 0--0 9 h5 d5 10 hxg6

proved to be not in Black's favour:
either the h-file or the a2-g8 diagonal is
opened.
. . .
9 f3
10 1id2
49
. 0-0
Of course, the. . , opponent's attack

could have been eli.minated by 1 3 . . . f5,
but then, thanks t hls control of c5,
White would have had an obvious
advantage on the queenside,' 'without any
counterplay for Black.
It would be interesting to test 1 0

tl)b3 .
. .io
..
d5
Black has no other active counter

play.
11
12
thxc6!
bxc6
e5
Now White's basic plan is revealed:

it is to play f3-f4, hindering the opening
of the centre, and then to make the bold
pawn thrust g2-g4, attacking Black's
castled position that has been weakened
by . . . h7-h5.
12
e8
After 1 2. . . txi7 13 f4 J6 Black would

have to reckon with the further advance
of the e-pawn. Therefore I chose an
apparently less active retreat. Besides,
in this case it is easier for Black to
calculate variations: the plan of counter
play against the centre by . . . f7-f6 is
obvious.
13
f4
. .
0-0-0
14
15
16
fxe5
g4
17
18
.i.xg4
hS
fxe5
.i.xe5
.i.xg4
Black accepts all the sacrifices, but in

the process he aims not to fall behind in
development, and for this reason he
takes the pawn with the bishop.
The e-pawn cannot be given up, since

even 13 .i.116 would have been met by
1 3 . .i.xe5 ! . 14 .i.xf8 'iti>xf'S with an easy
game for Black.
13
14
During the game this seemed to me

to be the most subtle and energetic
continuation, but in fact it allows Black
to seize the initiative. As for the
alternative 14 exf6 trucf6, it seemed
harmless for Black. A definitive
evaluation of the position can be given
only by a practical testing of the
variation 14 g4 ! hxg4 1 5 0--0-0 ; which
may prove favourable to White.
It is interesting that this recommen
dation, which I published soon after the
return match, was tested a quarter of a
century later in a correspondence game
Omelchenko-Heemsoth. There followed
15 . . . fxe5 16 fxe5 'iia5 17 hS i:xe5 18
hxg6 .i.xc3 19 l:hS+ ! .i.xhS (after
1 9 . . . <ii>xhS 20 .i.d4+, in view of the
inevitable 2 1 'i'h6+ it all ends in mate)
20 Wxa5, and White won.
After 14 g4 Black should probably
reply 14 . . . fxe5 1 5 fxe5 .txe5, with
unclear complications.
hxg4
g5!
Black must preserve at any cost the

white h-pawn, since_ n it will become
f6 .
50
22 Jbg4+ h8
This is where the h5 pwn comes in
useful !
the only pawn covering . . . the black

king! After . tmporarily strengthening in
1 his way his castled position and with
his control of the centre and also his
extra pawn, Black will laWlch a counter
offensive.
Now it appears that, in view of the
inevitable (immediately or later) . . .i.f4
Black will simplify the game, retaining
his material advantage.
19 .i. xg5
it'd6
23
. .
20
bl
Accurately played - Smyslov is in

his element. Of course, the immediate
23 l:tg6 was bad in view of 23 . .t.f4,
but now even after 23 . . . .tlab8 it is
possible to play 24 l:g6 ! After
24 . . . llxb2+ White does nof accept the
sacrifice (25 'iti>xb2? .i.xc3+ 26 1fxc3
l:tb8+), but wins by 25 tlra l ! Therefore
Black must gain control of g6.
ltg8
23
Now Black could have hoped for the
better endgame after the obvious 24
l:r.g6 .tlxg6 25 hxg6 r:i;;g7 26 llh l %lh8 27
:xhs xhs 2s 'i'h6+ <it>gs 29 'ilh7+
@fS, but here too Smyslov finds a
remarkable method of defence.
:h4
After lengthy reflection White finds a

plan that saves the game. First of all, it
transpires that he has no reason to fear
the exchange of the bishops and even
the queens. After 20 . . . .if4 2 1 .txf4
'i'xf4 22 1ixf4 (or even 22 :el )
22 :xf4 23 e2 l:a4 2 4 b 3 :xa2 2 5
bl :a6 26 1=txg4+ h7 27 l:tg5 or 27
dg l Black has no advantage. How
ever, this variation was not part of my
intentions. I was aiming to return the
extra pawn, but in the process to force
the advantageous exchange of bishop
for knight.
...
20
21
.i.xf6
24
:lb4!
White defends against the combined

attack on his king along the b-file and
the al-h8 diagonal (24 l:ab8 25 l:.b3 ),
the b2 square is securely defended, and
he obtains a good gam. It should not be
forgotten that the position of the black
...
ti)f6
1'xf6
51
king is less secure, and knight and

queen (after the exchange of rooks) are
nonnally more dangerous than bishop
and queen . . .
Therefore Black takes the logical
decision to exchange the minor pieces,
to spoil the opponent's queenside
pawns, as well as one pair of rooks, to
gain play on the b-file.
It is extremely doubtful whether the
alternative plan - 24 ... ltg3 25 2 ltg2
26 1ie3 - was more justified.
24
a5!
By creating the possibility of the

further advance . . . a5-a4, Black does not
allow the enemy rook to establish itself
at b3, and White will be forced to
concede the b-file.
25
ltb6
26
bxc3
.i.xc3
29
30
eJ
a3
ltg4
The immediate 30 'ifilb2 could have

been met by 30 . . . ltb4+.
l:e4
JO
31
1i'd3
32
lifi>b2
lteJ
33
34
d4
cxd4
'ffxd4
.e5
26 tLlxdS was tlrreatened, but this

merely hastens the implementation of
Black's plan.
Also after 3 1 . . . ifd6 32 b2 lta4 33

Ila 1 it is not apparent how Black can
strengthen his position.
The .match situation forced White to

avoid simplification if possible, which is
why he did not play 26 'iixc3 .
The threat of 3 3 :g 1 is unpleasant,

and Black forces the exchange . of
queens.
26
27
28
ltxb8
<i'at!
ltab8
' lbb8+
ci>g7
34 . . . e5 was simpler and stronger.
35 %1.gl+
t:Rf7
Here the king is safer than at c 1 . Now

Black's possession of the b-file no
l:th3
36 h6
longer gives him anything. White is
37 llg7+
6
J:lb4
threatening to play 29 :g1 with
38 J:lh7
counterplay, which Black prevents.
White now stands slightly more
28
llg8
actively, and Black goes for a repetition
This position, with its insecure kings of moves.
39 'iftcJ
and mutual pawn weaknesses, must be
considered roughly equal. Before ex
If 3 9 c3 there would have followed
changing queens it is dangerous for 39 . . . a4, while if 39 :th8 %Ixd4 40 h7
Black to advance his e7 pawn, as this 'l;g7.
J:lh3
39
would expose the seventh rank.
52
ilh4
40 'it?b2
Draw agreed:' A good game!
Game 262
Botvinnik-Smyslov

Reti Opening
1
2
c4
gJ
2
3
4
thfJ
bJ
11
1fc2
11
12
.i.c3
Following the example of Reti, here

White could have employed the
manoeuvre 1 1 l:kl-c2 followed:by Wal
(a2 has also been played, with the
same idea of allowing the queen into the
comer). But he decided to follow the
example of. . . Smyslov, perhaps a rather
naive psychological ploy. As a result,
Black handles the opening very
confidently!
/i)f6
.
White avoids 2 c3 , to give some

variety to the play. Without much
hesitation, Smyslov transposes into a
well-known variation of the Reti
c >pcning, since theory quite justifiably
considers it to be safe for Black.
.i.h7
c6!
d5
.i.f5
This was played by Emanuel Lasker
w i th Black against Reti back in 1924.
.i.g2
.i.b2
7 0-0
8 d3
5
e6
lhbd7
h6
i.e7
A similar plan (White intends b3-b4

or 'ib2) was carried out by Smyslov in
a game with Durasevic ( 1956), but there
the plan was fully justified, since Black
had developed his queen at b6 (instead
of 1 1 . . . .i.h7). Here, on the other hand,
Black has the possibility of advancing
his b-pawn and obtaining satisfactory
play. However, the other continuations
that have occurred (12 tLle5, 12 cxd5, 12
l::tadl, 1 2 J:acl) have also not achieved
anything significant for White.
In the afore-mentioned game the

hi s hop was developed at d6, but
subsequently it was shown that the

1 1 1 1dcfended bishop on this square
merely aids White's e2-e4. Therefore
fo r a long time now . Black has been
pl aying 8 .. .i.e7,
or
occasionally
x c5, to provoke 9 d4.
.
. . ..
9
10
bd2
a3
0-0
a5
Too direct. A more subtle contin

uation occurred in a game Panno
Karpov ( 1 973) - l'O ... .i.h7 1 1 b4 a5, and
B l m.:k seized the initiative.
12
b5?
It should be mentioned that in a game

with Hartoch ( 1970) Polugayevsky
53
played 12 . . . 'iibs , and after 1 3 ifb2 1 3 . . . li.d6, also achieving a satisfactory

position.
. 13
14
cxb5
b4
9b2
li)bJ!
17
18
19
axb4
llxal
i.e5
21
22
l:bct+
22
li)xcl
li)e8
A careless move, all the more

surprising for the fact that Black spent a.
long time considering it. Simple and
good was 22 . . . 'i'cS (or 22 . . . 'i'b7)
followed by . . . ttlf6-d7-b8-a6 (or c6). In
this case White's queen's bishop would
have been driven from e5 without any
weakening of Black's pawns, and the
pressure on the b4 pawn would have
intensified. Now, however, it is rather
White who will have some initiative.
Wc7
Black gains an important tempo by

threatening i5 . . . l:tfc8.
15
16
. 17
llc8
Essential, although it involves a

significant loss of time. If 2 1 .i.h3 , then
2 1 . . . 'i'b7 ! (with the threat of 22 . . . ttld7)
is highly unpleasan and since Black
controls the c-file, the b4 pawn will be
more difficult to defend.
cxb5
A serious error. By preventing . . . b5b4 in the most primitive way, White is

saddled with a weak pawn at b4 without
any compensation, and .the initiative
passes to Black. It is surprising that,
although I expressed this opinion long
ago, Psakhis, annotating a game of his
with Ubilava in lnformator No. 37,
attaches an exclamation mark to 14 b4
without any substantiation, and eval
uates the resulting position in favour of
White. This episode once again demon
strates that modem grandmasters are not
interested in games from the past. It is
also clear that chess information should
be created with the help of computer
technology.
Meanwhile, by continuing 14 i.d4
(in order to answer 14 . ..b4 with 15 a4 !)
and if 14 . . . ttJe8 - 1 5 i.h3, White would
possibly have retained some advantage.
14
20 . ifd2
21 l:lcl
li)b6
W'd7
The best way out. With the help of a

tactical trick, White forces his opponent
to clarify the position.
23
axb4
l:lxal
li)a4
li)d4!
This move proves possible in view of

the fact that 23 . . . f6 24 i.h3 is extremely
dangerous for Black. He should have
reconciled himself to the fact that it was
not possible 10 drive the bishop at e5
If 1 9 . .. i.xb4 White would not have

played 20 i.xf6, but 20 'i'd4 !, winning
a piece.
54
from its centralised position, and

played, for example, 23 . . . /Jc7, when all
would have turned out well. But
Smyslov is so canied away by the plan
of driving away the bishop by . . . il-f6,
that he undertakes artificial manoeuvres,
merely in order to achieve . . . a serious
weakening of his own position !
23
f8
Renewing the threat of 24 . . . f6.
Now
parried.
.i.hJ
25
26
lLldb3
.i.al!
. . . ti-f6
.i.g8
can no longer be
f6
26 .i.d4 was worse because of

26 . . . 'ifc7 ! The truth is that there are
dtfects in Black' s pawn formation.
After the inevitable d3 -d4 White's
control of c5 will be highly unpleasant
for Black on account of the weakness of
his e6 pawn, whereas the occupation of
c4 by a black knight is not dangerous
for White. Incidentally, when White
establishes a knight at c5, this will also
automatically solve the problem of the
defence of his b4 pawn.
.
d4
1fa7
lLld6
Many commentators criticised Black

for this move and suggested playing
27 . . . 1:Jb6. This recommendation would
not have changed the evaluation of the
position. As the reader already knows,
due to the. weakness of the e6 pawn and
the inevitable invasion of his knight at
c5, White stands better.
28
29
advtage. This knight move is prema

ture. I was afraid that 29 t'Dd3 would be
met by 29 . . . li'a6 !, but then 30 .i.c3
followed by .i.el would have retained
all the advantages of White's position.
24
26
27
t o rise to the occasion and lets slip his
'lfa2
lLlc5
29
30
.i.xc5
dxc5
Alas ! Initially White had been

intending to play 30 bxc5, but then he
had to reject this in view of 30 . . . 'i'a5 !
3 1 tDd2+ 3 2 g2 t'Dc4 (or
32 . . . tDe4) 33 t'Dd3 'ifd2, when the white
bishop at a l is in danger. But now
. . . e6-e5 is llllavoidable, and the game
becomes equal.
JO
e5
Over-hasty. Simpler was 30 ... 'i'fi!

(3 1 'i'c2 'ifb5 32 .ig2 e5), since the
black queen is already needed on the
kingside. Now White again seizes the
initiative.
31
t!lbl
The queen will take up an active

position at f5 .
lLlc4
31
After his error on move 1 4 White has

achieved much, but now he again fails
d4
It would have been more prudent to

refrain from opening the hl -a8 diagonal.
55
1fc7
32 1lf5
Of course, not 32 ... lllxc5 in view of
33 'if c8+ c3ilf7 3 4 bxc5 'ifxal 3 5 .i.e6+
<it>g6 36 We8+ with inevitable mate.
33
was still unfavourable in view of 3 9

.i.xc3 dxc3 40 'i'al c2. .4. 1. J1i'c l .
.
But this entire variation is an obvious
delusion. This became known to me a
few months after the game, when in
November of that year I was playing in
the Dutch town of Wageningen. In a
conversation with Lodewijk Prins, the
Dutch master told me that back on 1 7th
May he had published a newspaper
article entitled 'The height of chess
skill', in which he had given an analysis
of this highly interesting position.
d3
Bringing the last piece into play (not

counting the bishop at a l , which, like
the knight at a4, is firmly shut out of the
game). 33 'i'd7 'i'xd7 34 ..i.xd7 would
have been a mistake on account of
34 . . . lDa3 3 5 c6 e7.
33
.i.f7
3 3 . . .'i'c6 appears to be stronger, but

this could have become dangerous after
34 f4 (34 . . . t'De3 35 t'Dxe5 !).
34 1t'h7
Of course, the black king must not be
allowed to move to a safer position at g8
or h8.
34
.i.g8
In time trouble Black plays un

inventively, but it is already hard to
offer him any good advice. Also after
34 . . . 'ile7 White would have occupied
the long diagonal with his queen.
'it'e4!
35
Now the white queen breaks into the

enemy position.
35
36
37
11a8+
.i.g2
However,
first
it
should be
mentioned that 3 8 f4 is necessary, since
otherwise it is impossible to open up the
position of the enemy king and to bring
into play the bishop at a 1 . But at the
same time f2-f4 weakens the a7-g l
diagonal, and to exploit this Black
should have
immediately played
3 8 . . . t'Dc3 ! It transpires that, because of
the weakening of this diagonal, the
variation 3 9 fxe5 fxe5 (but not
3 9 . . . tlJxe5 40 tlJf4) 40 il.xc3 dxc3 4 1
1lfa l c2 42 'ii'c l i s completely harmless
for Black in view of 4L . .i.c6 (or
42 . . . 'i'd7) 43 .i.xc6 'ifxc6 44 ttJe 1 ife4.
.ll.f7
.i.e8
The h 1 -a8 diagonal is completely

under White's control !
37
@e7
37 . . . t'Dc3 is hopeless in view of 3 8
i.xc3 dxc3 3 9 11'al. -
38
f4!
I must confess to the readers that

initially I made a quite different com
ment on this move than the one that I
am now giving. I was sure that 38 . .. t'Dc3
56
II
And yet 3 8. f4 is not a mistake! Only,

after 3 8 . . . ltJc3 39 fxe5 fxe5 White must
exploit the latent pesibility 40 c6 ! !
40 ltld6 41 e3 (it is important to

retain this pawn) 41 e4 42 lDc5 1fxc6.
If 42 . . . ttJe2+, then 43 'it>fl d3 44
.i.xe4 ! ttJxe4 45 'i'b7 5, or 42 . .. ii.xc6 43
'i'g8.
43 1fa7+ <t>f6 44 h4 (44 . 'i'd5 45
<itih2) - in all variations Black is unable
to save the game.
In addition, I should add that this is
also the outcome of 40 . . . e4 41 'i'b7 d6
42 tlc5 .i.xc6 43 'ii'xc7+ 'it>xc7 44
the6+ and 45 lDxd4.
Thus 38 f4 was both necessary, and
sufficient, and 38 . . . tlc3 would not have
saved Black in view of the remarkable
plan involving 40 c6 ! ! , found by Prins.
..
. .
The point is that 'i'b7 is threatened,

when the queen at c7 is attacked, and it
will only be possible to defend it with
the king from d6 or d8, which entails
new problems. Prins gives the following
variations:
38
ltJe3
In great time trouble Black merely

accelerates his defeat; his threats prove
to be illusory.
39
40
40 ltlxe2+ 41 <i!i>f2 ltlc3 42 1!fb7

d6 43 .i.xc3 dxcJ 44 ltlc5 .i.xc6
If 44.: . i.g6, then not Prins' s 45 .i.e4
fxe5
1fe4
fxe5
thxg2
Black also stands quite badly after

40 . . . ltJc2 4 1 li)xe5 ttJxal 42 ltJg6+ 'it>d8
43 'i'h4+ <it>c8 44 liJe7+ 'it>b8 45 'i'e4.
..
c2 46 i.xg6 on account of the perpetual

check pointed out by Konstantinopolsky
(46 . . . c 1 'if 4 7 ltle4+ d5 48 ifxc7
'i'c2+ 49 @f3 'iid l +), but 45 ifxb5 !
'i'f7+ 46 .tD ! e4 47 l2Jxe4+ i.xe4 48
'i'c5+, or 44 . . . 'i'f7+ 45 e2 ! (but not
immediately 45 'it>e l c2 46 l2Je4+ e6
47 .i.h3+ 1if5 ! or even 47. . . d5 !)
45 ... 1i'h5+ 46 'it>el c2 47 ifb8+ 'it>e7 48
'iic7+ <ittf6 49 ifd8+, and things are bad
for Black.
45 .i.xc6 1fxc6 46 tlle4+ <sfi>d5 47

lllxc3+ d6 48 thxb5+ <bd5 49 iff7+! ,
and White wins.
57
Here the game was adjourned, and

White sealed his move.
41 llxe5
Game 263
Botvinnik-Smyslov
World ChampionshipReturn Match

Moscow 1958, Nth game
Less strong was 4 1 .i.xd4 .i.c6 42

'i'xe5+ 'i'xe5 43 tLlxe5 .i.d5 44 g5.
But now after 41 tl\xe5 ttJc3 42
Jlxc3 dxc3 43 <it>xg2 or 4 1 . ..CDe3 42
Jlxd4 CDd 1 43 ltJc4+ followed by CDd6
things are completely bad for Black.
Therefore no one was surprised at
Black's decision to curtail the struggle
and resign the game. It was only the fol
lowing circumstances that were strange.
When the second game of the match
was adjourned in a lost position for
Smyslov, he turned up for the reswnp
tion merely in order to see if the correct
move had been sealed. On this occasion
Smyslov acted differently, and, without
even seeing the sealed move, he
resigned the game.
Why did this happen? If it was
because Black's position appeared to
my opponent to be so hopeless, then
why did he have to announce his
resignation so late, that the arbiters,
organisers and the other participant with
his seconds had already set off to the
resumption in the chess club? Naturally,
they were all able to learn of Black's
decision, only when they arrived fo r the
resumption.
It seemed to the author of these lines
that all the persons associated with the
match were somewhat disappointed by
the fact that in the given situation the
World Champion restricted himself to a
telephone call, and did not consider it
necessary, like all the rest, to come to
the match venue.
English Opening
1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
c3
cxd5
g3
.i.g2
bxc3
llbl
c4
llf6
d5
llxd5
g6
llxc3
.i.g7
lld7
7
In this way the b7 pawn is indirectly
defended (8 .i.xb7 .i.xb7 9 l:txb7 l'Llb6),
but now the black knight is badly
placed.
This plan cannot give White any

advantage. In a later game from the
same match (No.264) I played 8 00
with the idea of subsequently creating a
pawn centre: d2-d4 and e2-e4.
0-0
8
.
lt)fJ
ltb8
Black should not have neglected the

possibility of 'J>reventing d2-d4 by
9 e5 .
...
58
10 0-0
1 1 :)d4
b6
e5
Sooner or iatq this has to be played,
so that White . should not have free
control of the centre.
12
13
.t.aJ
dxe5
18
l:td5
18
19
l:txe5
20
:dt
White had prepared in advance this

way of countering the. iinpleasant
18 . . . l:th5.
ile8
'ife6
i.xe5
Carelessly played. I was expectinf

,
when it is hard to imagine anything
better for White, but I overlooked my
opponent's more than convincing reply.
However, also after 13 ltJxe5 ltJxe5 14
dxe5 'i'dl 15 .fxdl i..f5 16 e4 .i.g4
I 7 f3 .i.e6 Black would have easily
equalised.
l 3 ltJxe5 14 ttJxe5 .ixe5. 15 .ic6
. . .
The conclusion of the manoeuvre

begun with 18 :d5. Now 20 'iVc6+ 2 1
l!d5 b 5 i s not dangerous for White,
since he advantageously replies 22 'i'e4
...
The e5 pawn will not run away, and

for the moment Black completes his
tkvelopment. The variation 14 'i'a4
1/ \xc5 1 5 xe5 i..xe5 16 l:fdl 'i'c8 is
not dangerous.for him.
14
15
16
17
11c2
ltfdl
xe5
.
@xg2
17
' lhe5
21
22
23
"flxe6
<it>CJ
i.f6
l:t.xe6
l:tc6
In an equal ending, Smyslov

endeavours to win a dangerous course.
Although White's queenside pawns are
slightly weak, the activity of his king
fully compensates for this defect.
lL'lxe5
'i'c8
.txg2
I f 1 7 ltJxg6 Black replies 17
1i'e4
White precisely aims for exchanges

(with an advantage of three points,
playing for a draw was psychologically
fully justified, since it was my opponent
who had to aim for a win).
.i.b7!
13
lle8
20
21
. . .
.ie4.
24
25
59
:ct ;
eJ
ild4
..tcs
26
..i.b2
26
27
28
<it;e2
h3
It transpires that in the event of

3 l . . .fxg4 32 hxg4 Blacks passed pawn
is easily blockaded,: wherea.s the white
pawns will avalanche, . forward. But
avoiding the exchange leads to
difficulties for Black, since it is White
who will choose a moment that is
convenient for him to exchange on f5 .
ltc5
31
Of course, with the bishops on the

board the black rook is somewhat
restricted, and it is easier for White to
defend his isolated pawns.
f5
@f7
Given the opportunity, White may be

able to make use of his pawn majority,
for which he prepares g3 -g4. Initially
Smyslov sensibly reckons with this
threat.
28
29
i..e7
33
:gt!
33
34
35
36
c2
gxf5
.i.xf6
38
CJ
:c6
Now the white rook breaks through

on the g-file.
a4
@dJ
il.cJ
It was now essential to play 32 . . . .tf6,

in order after the exchange of bishops to
retain the threat of . . . l:a5 .
Now the white pawns will be quite

safely defended, e.g. 29 . .lk5 30 d3
:as 3 1 llal i.f6 32 ..i.c3 ilxc3 3 3
<tixc3 'it>e6 3 4 b4.
29
30
32
h5
h4
:.d6+
.i.f6
g-f5
xf6
Or 36 . . . llxf6 3 7 ltg5, with a sig

nificant advantage to White.
l:c6
37 ltg8
38 @b3 seems stronger, so that the
c-pawn should not be pinned, but then
Black has the reply 38 . . . l:td().
38
a6!
But now, naturally, there is the threat

of 39 . . . b5.
39
40
41
klh8
g5
6
When I was sealing this move, I

realised that White stood better: Black's
king is tied to the defence of the weak
h4 pawn and is therefore more passive
than the white king. White can create a
passed pawn in the centre, where he has
a pawn majority, whereas it is hard for
Black to do this on U.ie queenside. As a
When you want without fail to win a

drawn position, it is easy imperceptibly
to make a bad move. Black assumed
that the reply 3 1 g4 was impossible,
since he would create a passed h-pawn,
but this was a delusion.
31
lih8
l:g8+
g4!
60
result of a painstaking analysis, I drew

up a very subtle positional plan, with
which I arrived for the resumption. Tiris
plan was so well-camouflaged, that it
was overlooked even by Smyslov, a
supreme specialist in the endgame and .
in positional play in general (although,
perhaps he was simply lazy in his
analysis?).
g5
41
42 d4
For the moment White has to avoid
. . . b6-b5, and it was less advisable to do
this by 42 <iitb4 on account of 42 . . . l:td6,
when the black rook may also cause
some problems. But now 42 ... :td6+ is
unfavourable for Black, since after 43
es the white king is too active.
:cs
42
.
But how can Black be forced to play

. . . a6-a5 ? This cannot be done by 43
l:.a8: there follows 43 . . . %:.aS . This
means that White must first occupy the
d-file, to prevent counterplay by Black
along this file, and the rook must go to
d4, so that the h4 pawn is attacked.
43 l:th7
g6
The correct reply was 43 ... l:tc6f, and
after 4 .:.d7 'ifiif6 45 l:d5 <ifi>e6 46 c3
:d6 Black forces the exchange of rooks, .
transposing into a drawn pawn ending.
But it turns out that Black has not yet
guessed his opponent's plan. As for the
pawn sacrifice offered, White, of
course, declines it (44 .:.xh4 l:a5).
44 l:td7 ,
6
1lc6
45 :ds
Black hurries to correct his mistake
and to play . . . e6 and . . . :d6, but he
does not succeed.
46 CJ
The king makes way for the rook,
46 . . . 'iSre6 is not now possible due to 47
l:ld4, and in the given situation the rook
exchange loses: 46 . . . lld6 47 ltxd6+
cxd6 48 'it>d4 'iti>e6 49 f3 @e7 50 'ittd5
ltd7 5 1 f4 a5 52 e4 with an easy win.
46
47
48
%td4
lld7
Jle6
g5
ltc6
49 b4
Now this is possible, since Black
cannot reply 49 ... .:.d6. It only remains
for White to transfer his rook to a8,
which will finally force . . . a6-a5.
49
6
50 :d4
Diverting the king to the flank. If
immediately 50 l:.d8, then . . . e5-e4 is
possible.
Now about my plan. Since all the

time White has to reckon with . . . b6-b5,
his main objective is to provoke
. . . a6-a5. If, for example, this move had
already been made, 43 f4+ g6 44
llxh4 would lead to a win. But for the
moment this is inadvisable in view of
the reply 44 . %la5 45 :b8 :xa4 46 l:c8
c5+! 47 d5 :a3 .
. .
61
50
'ifi>gS
51 l:d8
l:e6
Now it has all become clear to
Smyslov, ',and he, naturally, decides to
to avoid mistakes. It can happen, how

ever, that precisely at this moment a
reaction sets in after the tension of time
trouble and fatigue tells. Thus here this
led to a mistake: instead of 57 l:xa6
bxc4 58 l:tc6 c3+ 59 <Zi>bHii?xf2 60 l:xc3
followed by playing his rook at a3 and
try and complicate matters.
52
llc8
f4
If Black's rook were not on the e-file,
53 e4 would be possible, whereas now
advancing his passed a-pawn, White

decides to retain his c-pawn.
the exchange of pawns is forced.
53
54
55
56
exf4+
lbc7
lth7!
lth6
<li>xf4
57
58
59
:.e4
axb5
axb5
g2
When I played 57 axb5, I expected

that now there would follow 59 . . . xh3
60 cs g2 6 1 c6 h3 62 c7 :es 63 .:h6
h2 64 c6 hl 1li' 65 :txh l 'ilrxhl 66
d7, and Black would resign.
But now I saw something else; How
can White win after 59 . . . :e l ? If 60 c5
bl + 61 <itia6 xh3, he .does not
achieve anything with either 62 l:f4
:al+ 63 <iPb7 rlb l+ 64 'l;c7 llhl l ! (a
fantastic move) 65 c6 g2 , or 62 c6
.tial + 6 3 ;.b7 l:bl + 64 c8 'iftg2 65 f4
(or 65 c7 h3 66 <iii?d7 l'tdl+ 67 ltd6
l:.xd6+ and 8 . . .<ii?xf2) 65 . . . h3 66 l'tg6+
67 lnt.g 68 fs h2 69 f6 :n 10
J1g6+ ci>h4 71 c7 lfi>h5 72 l:g8 l:xf6.
56 . . . g2 57 l1xb6 xh3 58 llxa6

g2 59 as h3 60 :tg6+ 6 1 l:h6
<1tg2 62 a6 ltel 63 c 5 :al was analysed
by Averbakh. He showed that White
wins: 64 b5 :b l+ 65 q.,c6 h2 66 a7
D.al 67 b7 :b l+ 68 @as l:.cl 69 c6
h l 'i' (69 . . . l:xc6 70 ltxh2+ and 71 <lrb7)
70 l:xhl xhl 71 b7 :lb 1 + 72 lt>a6
lta l+ 73 b6 :lbl + 74 cs %:.c l + 75
q;,b4 :lb l+ 76 c3 :al 77 c7.
56
57
l:if6+
'iflxb5
b5
It would seem that, after reaching the

nex1 time control at move 56, there
should be more opportunity to think and
62
My opponent thought for a long time,

then, alas,. picked up his rook, but .
advanced it i:tlyas far as e2. From there
it can no tonger be played to hl (as in
the preceding variation), . which means
that it is all ends quickly. As often hap
pens, a mistake by one side provoked an
error in. reply by the other.
. .
59
60
61
c5
<iti>a6
Or 6 1 . . .<li>xh3 62 :f4.
62
63
<lib7
llb6
64
65
66
67
68
c6
bxc3
l:tbl
ll}f3
ll}xc3
.i.g7
d7
The strongest move (in Gune 263 I

played 8 c4). For the moment White
does not advance his c-pawn, so that
after . . . e7-e5 he has the possibility of
attacking Black's central pawn with
d2-d4.
:e2
:b2+
:a2+
lJ.b2+
Ac2
10
0-0
d4!
0-0
e5
If 63 . . Jhf2 then first 64 :b3 .
c7
xhJ
g2
lib2+
l:c2
1k6
llb6
f4
Black resigns
One of the deepest positional plans

that I found during the analysis of an
adjourned position.
Game 264
Since the further advance of the e5

pawn would be advantageous only to
White, Black will be forced to exchange
on d4, in order to release his knight at
d7 from its defensive duties. Now 1 1
.i.g5 is tbreatened, and so Black has
little choice.
Botvinnik-Smyslov
English Opening
1
2
3
4
5
c4
t2:\c3
cxd5
g3
lhf6
d5
'Dxd5
g6
.i. g2
When the previous _game from a
match, in which the players had the
same colours, . is exactly repeated, there
is heigbteed interest in the question of
who will be the first to deviate.

63
10
11
e4
c6
1ia5
The only possibility of counterplay.

With this demonstration on the queen
side, Black tries to force his opponent to
switch to defence. If 1 1 . . .b6 White
would advantageously
reply 1 2 .i.gS,
and then 'i'd2.
12
11'c2
cxd4
'
14 -*.d2
13.
remains tied to the defence of the b7

pawn. 18 e5 would have been wrong,
since by replying J8 . . . :t7 ! , Black
would have freed his queen's bishop,
and White would have been left with
nothing but weaknesses!
exd4
tClb6
This move is not bad, but 14 Jle3 !

was perhaps stronger and more subtle,
in order to answer 14 . . . i.e6 with 1 5 a4 !
( 1 5 . . . .t.c8 16 :al, or 15 . . .ttlxa4 16
:xb7 Db6 1 7 ifxc6), when Black has a
difficult position. Now, however, he
succeeds in exchanging queens, when
the worst for him is over.
l4
...
a4
Playing
for
complications
by
14 'abs would. have been inapprop
riate: after 15 a4 .lg4 16 l'.De5 .ixe5 17
dxe5 i.:f3 1 8 .if4 (or 18 a5 ttld7 19
i.xf3 'i'xf3 20 :xb7 ttJxe5 21 .tc3 )
White's position is preferable.
...
15
16
11xa4
l%fc1
/l)xa4
18
19
White needs to be careful. 1 6 :b4,

for example, suggests itslf. hoping for
16 . . . ttlb6 17 a4, but after 16 . . .bS Black
gets rid. of his weakness at b7, retains
his. knight at c4, and is . queenside
pawns begin advancing. Now 17 :b4 is
threatened.
16
17
fxe4
.i.f5
20
21
.ixf5
g4!
l:xf5
An important interposition. White

succeeds in driving the rook off the fifth
rank, and after this the a2-a4 advance
looks quite different.
f5
The correct decision: it is true that

subsequently Black reaches a difficult
ending, but he does manage to gain a
draw . . .
18
.ie3
White arrives at that very idea which
he did not find at the proper moment on
move 14. He waits for Black's bishop to
move from c8, and then plays a2-a4.
17
.i.xe4
The whole point is that after 20 .i.xf5

:xrs 2 1 a4 Black forces simplification
(2 1 . . . .i.xe5 22 dxe5 l:xe5 23 hb6
axb6 24 J:xb6 :e7) and can hope for a
draw. White however, finds a way of
gaining a dangerous initiative I should
merely add that it is doubtful whether
Black had anything else.
ttlb6
21
22
a4
.:ff8
l:ae8
The only way to defend the b7 pawn

was by 22 . . . .lxe5 23 dxe5 :ti, but then
after 24 .i.xb6 axb6 there would have
followed 25 J!tc4 :a6 26 f4, and the
thes!
TI1e only active possibility - White

takes control of n, and the bishop at c8
64
active placing of his pieces, White takes

measures to ensure that the black king
remains . on the back rank (incidentally,
after 28 llxf7 <t;xf7 29 ltc7+ it is also
possible to play 29 . . . ci>g8 30 %%xa7
l:.xe3 3 1 a6 l%.e6 and then . . . g6-g5, when
the white king is shut in on the king
side).
white pawns become extremely danger

ous. Therefore Black gives up a pawn,
but brings his1ast piece into play.
tnd5
23 .ias
" 24 :.l:xb7
25
26
fxe3
dxeS
lhxe3
.txe5
xe5
28
29
:xeJ
Itel+
a6
Jlcc7
An elegant solution.
another way to draw
pointed out in the
29 . . . llxc7 30 %txc7 l:te6
30
31
32
33
34
35
g2
'ifilg3
<ili>g2
gJ
h4
lbc7
After the game

was found as
previous note:
3 1 Iha? g5f
lteZ+
l:te3+
l:e2+
:tel+
l:bc7
Despite its apparent simplicity the

position is not without its subtleties.
After 27 :xa7 .:te4 ! 28 h3 l:xe3 29
itxc6 g5 White does not aclrieve any
thing - perpetual check is threatened.
But when I was considering my 2 1 st
move, I had prepared a different move.
ltfi! !
2 7 lbc6
A splendid defence, thanks to
which
Black prevents the doubling of rooks on
I he seventh rank. I have to admit
overlooked this move when
that I
I played 2 1
g4. The tempting 27, . .J:e4 would have

lost to 28 .b3 l:txe3 29 :cc7 l:xh3 30
nxa7 h4 31 g2 ! (3 1 . . . 1txg4+ 32
.JJh3 ).
But now, since after 28 ltxf7 xf7
n c7+ 6 30 l:xa7 llxe3 31 :xh7
lla3 32 :a7 'iti>g5 33 .lla6 :a2 Black's
material lo sses are . made up for by the
h6!
35
Here too tile white king is shut in on

the kingside.
h5
36 g5
D raw agreed, on White's proposal.
Smyslov saved the
e with truly
. i;: ,
virtuoso play !
gaib
.
65
Game 265
Smyslov-Botvinnik

Moscow 1958,
21st game
Sicilian Defence
1
2
4
5
e4
lllfJ
d4
tllxd4
ltlc3
c5
ltlc6
cxd4
tht'6
g6
When White needs to win without
fail, such tactics are justified. The

simplification and exchange of pieces
tllxc6
dxc6
10
such tactics back in 1 93 5 by Salo Flohr
e4 pawn, and, in addition, Black need

not fear the doubling of pawns on the
e-file since one of the doubled pawns
'i\>xd8
can always be exchanged.

10 f3 was correct.
Not only to attack the f7 pawn, but

also in order to prevent 8 . .i.e6. The
Encyclopaedia also recommends 8 i.f4.
10
. .
8
9
f4
positional mistake, since it weakens the
International Tournament
e5!
This reckless move is essentially a
in our game from the second Moscow
11xd8+
.i.c4
out of the game, whereas now the

development of the bishop at e6 cannot
be avoided.
Naturally, Black does not object to

the exchange of queens. I was taught
for example 6 i.c4.
9 .. i.e6 would have been an irre

parable mistake in view of 1 O .i.xe6
fxe6 1 1 e5, when the bishop at f8 is shut
would seem to favour White> but this

subsequently demands more accurate
play! Perhaps for this reason Smyslov
should have chosen a different move,
.i.e6!
As a result Black's fl is defended,

and the opening of the f-file cannot give
White anything.
ci>e8
a4
A natural, but apparently, inaccurate

move: it was hardly worth preventing
. . . b7-b5. It was more important to
11
12
.txe6
J:(f1
fxe6
Since the a7-gl diagonal is open,
prevent the activation of Black, s central
kingside castling is dubious ( 12 0-0
quently this continuation was analysed

in detail by Boleslavsky).
After the exchange .of bishops the
.i.c5+ 1 3 <it'h l t'.Dg4 14 h3 file3).
pawn by either 9 li.f'4, or 9 es (subse
12
In the game White's opening advan
.i.h6!
black king will occupy a secure position
at e7. Weaker was 12 . . .i.b4 1 3 fxe5
tage now disappears.
66
{,i)xe4 1 4 l:lf4 .li.xc3+ 15 bxc3 when the

white bishop becomes very active.
13 f5
After 13 :i:xe5 .i.xc l 1 4 .r:.xcl lDg4
1 he black knight would have occupied
a n excellent position at e5.
.i.xcl
13
14 :xct
<t>e7!
Now it would appear that White can
effectively gain an extra pawn, but this
can only be exploited in a pawn ending.
!tad8
exf5
Jbd8
%lxd8
1s b3
:gS..
b5 ;.
19 g3
1 9 tl'ig4 would seem to be more
.dangerous for White, but then he could
have responded actively: 20 tiJe4 exf5
(20 . . . ttlxh2 2 1 f6+ and 22 %th l) 2 1 Jlxf5
<li>e6 22 :Its.
xe6
20 fxe6
h4
21 :n
2 1 .. .l:.g4 22 ttJ<i l b5 would perhaps
have led to more interesting play.
:hs
22 gxh4
16
17
...
The weakening of the e4 pawn tells:

White cannot play 15 fxg6 hxg6 16 h3
i n view of 16 J lh4. After 15 fxe6
Xhd8 !, with the threat of 16 'at>xe6 and
1 7 . :d4, Black's initiative would have
grown. However, Smyslov finds a
snsible defence.
15 lldl!
In this way White gets ri d of his
weak e4 pawn. Black is obliged to
occupy the d-file but it is dubious to do
this inunediately: after 15 ... l:ad8 16
Zlxd8 :xd8 1 7 fxg6 ! hxg6 18 %tf3 lDg4
I 9 :g3 White would have gained a
pawn majority on .the kingside. There
fore he must fir$$. exhange on f5.
15
gxf5
. .
Here Smyslov offered a draw, and

after, in accordance with the rules then
in force, I had asked my opponent to
make a move he played:
23 li)dt
Now Black does not achieve any
thing with the natural 23 . . . lDg4 24 :g2
l%xh4 25 h3 ! 6 26 %lg7 (26 . . . l:xh3 27
lhb7), but by 23 . .. %lxh4 24 lDe3 l:h3 he
would have maintained some pressure.
However, here too White, of course, has
every chance of gaining a draw.
But how could Black reject the
opportunity to take his score to 12
...
. .
67
points, leaving himself with the task of

adding just half a point in the remaining
three gaJlles? And Black accepted the
offer without much hesitation.
Game 266

Moscow 1958. 23rd game
Reti Opening
q)fJ
gJ
b4
ltlf6
g6
It is well known that this opening,

which occurred back in the game Reti
Capablanca (1 924), and which caused a
sensation at the time, does not bring
White any particular gains. Smyslov
chose it at a decisive moment in the
match, hoping that the author of these
lines would have forgotten the above
game. However, my opponent was un
lucky: during the Return Match I made
a thorough study of 3 b4, in the hope of
employing it as White. It need hardly be
added that in the opening Black felt
quite confident!
3
4
5
..lb2
thaJ
.i.g2
0-0
c4
ltlc2
d3
e4
tle3
c7
lhbd7
e6
Smyslov considers himself obliged to

prevent . . . d6-d5, but perhaps there was
no need for this. Moreover, he
apparently wanted to sacrifice the b4
pawn, although the capture of this pawn
would probably have been not a bad
plan for Black. However, the conse
quences of the refusal of the sacrifice
also had to be envisaged!
12
13
14
.i.xg7
fxeJ
thg4
lhxeJ
ciixg7
b6
!llb7
The position has simplified, and the

doubled e4 and e3 pawns restrict
White's offensive possibilities; it is now
Black who has a positional advantage.
Reti developed his queen's knight at

d2. The move in the game has its point,
since .from a3 the knight can easily be
transferred to a strong position - at e3.
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
Smyslov-Botvinnik
1
2
3
then advanced his central pawn

( . . . e7-e5); the text move is, of course,
more circumspect.
15
..lg7
0-0
d6
c5
q)gS
This two-move threat (16 :xt7+ and

1 7 tllxe6+) is easily panied.
l:lae8
15
16
Capablanca first played . . . illbd7 and
68
a3
dS!
As is well known, doubled pawns are

bad not only because it is hard to attack
with the but also because they are
easy to attack. In the given case White
cannot exchange in the centre - then the
l!-file is opened.
17
bxc5
bxc5
Such an occurrence (and Black made

t h is move after 20 minutes' thought! ) is
one that could be seen only . . . in the last
ga me of a match! Black spent a long
t i me studying the variation 17 . .. ilxc5
I x d4 ! 'fle7 (18 . . . 'ifxc4 19 I:.c l and 20
tl:c7) 1 9 h4, and failed to notice that
w ith 1 9 . . . h6 he could have won the
i mportant central e4 pawn . . .
18
11i'b3
exd4
c5
20
21
22
lCif3
ltact
h6
e5
.i.c6
Even now White's position is dif

ficult: he can play only with his pieces,
his centre is fixed, and his d3 and c5
pawns are weak. Black' s position,
meanwhile, is without any defects.
Cleverly played. White wants to acti

va te his game somewhat, using the
t h reat of 1 9 exd5 exd5 20 cxd5 followed
hy d5-d6 (for example, after 20 . . . l:.xe3).
Therefore Black blocks the centre, after
w hich White's pawns in the centre and
his bishop become passive, an attack by
h i m on the king is not possible, and any
1.. 1 1dgame will favour Black.
18
19
20
If the black knight were at c5, block

ading White's c4 pawn, he would be in
a desperate position. Therefore the pawn
sacrifice is sensible, especially since its
. acceptance after 20 . . . tDxc5 2 1 :tac 1 (or
2 1 'i'c4) 2 1 . . .'i'eS 22 'ifb5 would allow
the white pieces to become active.
Black, naturally, avoids the opening of
the posjtion.
23
24
ltlh4
ifdl
llb8
1i'd8!
After playing his queen onto the

d8-h4 diagonal, Black can always parry
'i'g4 with . . . 'ifg5.
25
26
27
28
d4!
cxd4
28
69
li.hJ
ltlf3
1ic2
ltld2
thf6
1!fe7
:lb7
llc7!
Of course, not 28 . . . llfb8 because of

29 tDc4 ! 'i'xG5 30 tlJxe5. Now, how
ever, 29 l2Jc4.-. is not possible, and it is
inevitable that White will have prob
lems over the defence of his c5 pawn.
29
30
31
tJJo
ttlh7
:bs
g5
32
ttlxg5
hxg5
1i c4
l:f2
This exchange is also in Black's
favour, since one of White's few active
pieces disappears from the board.
32 . . . 'ii'xg5 would perhaps have been
stronger.
33
34
a4
.li.g4
Here White sealed his move; his

position is difficult, but on this occasion
Black did not repeat the mistake made
in the 1 5th game, when he took a light
hearted approach to the analysis of the
adjourned position. I worked almost
right through the night and for several
hours during the day - it was demon
strated that White's position was lost.
My second found the most crafty
move for White: 4 1 h3, in order to
exchange the bishops by .i.g4. How
ever, in this case Goldberg rightly
thought that Black would gain a
decisive attack on the king: 4 1 . . . .i.xh3
42 g4 l:lxc5 43 'i'xc5 ltxc5 44 l:lxc5
'i'f6 ! (threatening 45 . . . 'i'f4) 45 'i;h2
i.fl .
And after 4 1 'ib3 (4 1 'i'a6 :l.xc5 42
'i'xc8+ ltxc8) 4 1 . . (41 . . .l:txc5 42
'i'a3) 42 'i'c4 (if 42 'ib6 there follows
42 . . . i.xa4, while after 4 11i'a3 i.e6 !
and then . . . l:tb8-b3 White is helpless)
42 . . . ii'e6 ! (with the threat of 43 . . . 'i'xc4
44 lhc4 .i.e6) 43 ifxe6 .i.xe6 44 c6
<l;e7 45 :cs @d6 46 l:xa5 !txc6 47
:xc6+ %:txc6 48 .l:cl 49 .te2 g4!
50 l:ta6+ (with: the rooks on, ihe
i.e8
a5
A new weakness has appeared in

White's position - the a4 pawn.
35 .i.dl
On the one hand, White should not
have lifted his control of the d7 and c8
squares, since Black's bishop and rooks
become even more active, but, on the
other hand, 3 5 'iia6 l:a7 was by no
means any better. And what else could
White do?
35
36
l:lfc2
l:lbc8
Ad7!
Of course, there was no point in
Black exchanging two rooks for the

queen (36 . . . %lxc5). White now does not
have many moves: he has three pieces
tied to the defence of his c5 pawn.
37
38
39
40
i.e2
g2
'i;gt
i.dt
<ii?g8
'i;g7
'i;f8
'i;g8
The last move in time trouble. As

will be evident from the following com
ments, 40 ... 'ii'e6 ! would have immed
iately forced a won ending.
70
manoeuvre of thebishop to c6 and then

. . . fi-f5 is even wore quickly decisive)
50
:c6 (50, .. 'iti>c7 5 1 :a5) 5 1 l:xc6+
c,;?;xc6 52 <i1tel <it>b6 53 d2 ctia:s 54
..dl b4 55 .1'.c2 f5 White is unable to
save the bishop ending.
Therefore it came as a great surprise
when, 50 minutes before the game was
due to be resumed, the arbiter Harry
Golombek informed me by telephone
lhat Smyslov had offered a draw. Not
without some pressure from my friends
( in which I was 'reminded' of the
adjournment session of the 1 5th game) I
accepted the offer.
. . .
41
'i'b3
Draw agreed
With this
concluded.
the
Return
6 . . . a6 7 'i'xc4 c5 was essential, so as

not to carry out the advance of the
c-pawn in two stages.
7
8
9
'if xc4
..ie2
0-0
Jl..e7
0-0
Match
lDb6
9 c5 10 dxc5 would have led to

roughly the same situation as in the
game. After I O e5 ttlb6 1 1 exf6 lDxc4
12 -fx.e7 'i'xe7 1 3 .i.xc4 cxd4, on the
other hand, Black does not stand badly,
since 14 itJxd4 'i'c5 is wlfavourable for
White.
...
Game 267
Botvinnik-Raizman
Olympiad, Munich 1958
Queen's Gambit Accepted
1
2
3
4
5
c4
li)cJ
f3
d4
'i'a4+
lDf6
e6
d5
dxc4
After 5 e3 the normal variation is

reached, while 5 e4 leads to a more
complicated battle, but. since my
opponent was largely a tactical player, I
avoided this sharp continuation, pre
rcrring play in which positional errors
hy Black might accumulate.
.
5
6
e4
10
'i'bJ
c5
11
12
13
14
15
dxc5
ilg5
i.h4
l:Ifdl
tbb5
il..xc5
h6
JJ..e7
1fe8
1fc6
16
e5
lDfd5
It is hard to offer Black any good

advice, but now the position is opened,
and White, exploiting his lead in
development, seizes more space.
Otherwise 16 li:Jc7 cannot be

prevented, but here the queen soon
comes under attack.
bd7
c6
71
lla8
23 .*.c4 7
1fg5
24 &f)d4
There is nothing else with which to
defend the e6 pawn.
25 l:lxf8+
'i>xf8
26 l:tdl
g8
27 .ixe6+ <ii?b 7
Black's king has at last found safety,
but he is already one pawn down. Now
White avoids the win of a second pawn
(28 .i.xc8 l:.xc8 29 'i'xb7) on account of
29 . . Jk l .
2 8 .ib3
&f)g6
29 &jjtJ
1!f'e7
lla6
30 1ib5
31 bl
.i.e6
32 .i.xe6
1ixe6
If 32 . . . ltxe6, then 33 l:d7 'ife8 34
'i'xb7.
33 'ifxb7
llb6
34 111c7
&fjf4
The trouble for Black is that if
34 ... :xb2 White wins as follows: 35
::td7 'ifg8 36 lLld4 l:ld2 37 .tld8 1fa2 38
tLlxf5 8 . He has to play on two pawns
down.
llxd6
35 . lld6
36 1ixd6 ,
1ib3
17 .i.xe7!
17 l:tacl 'i'e8 18 i..xe7 iixe7 was
more favourable for Black, when his
knight would have remained on its
central post at d5.
17
&f)xe7
1le4
18 l:lact
1fg6
19 l:ld4
After 1 9 . . . 1!fxe2 20 l:tel Black would
have been forced to give up his queen
for rook and bishop but perhaps this
was not worse for him than the game
continuation.
20 li)xa7
A simple exchanging combination,
allowing the white pieces to invade the
enemy rear.
llxa7
20
llxa2
21 1fxb6
22 :ds
f5
The only possibility of avoiding
major loss of material.
If 22 ... lLlc6 there would have
followed 23 l:txf8+ <it>xf8 24 iic7 (24
l:Xc6 is weaker on account of
24 . . . :a 1 + 25 i..fl l:lxfl + 26 <it>xfl
iid3+ 27 <it>el We4+ 28 <it>d2 'i'xc6)
24 ... :as 25 :xc6 (25 . . . al+ 26 l:.c l).
72
opponent decided to see how I would

defend with Black.
3
4
5
tLlfJ
.i.f4
cxd5
tLlf6
White normally plays 5 t[)c3, but if

he had wanted, things could have
merely led to a transposition of moves.
5
6
37
Thus 6 t'.Dc3 would have led to a stan

dard position, whereas now Black also
gains the opportunity for a different
decision.
1fd2
White has a sufficient material ad

, antage, and so, naturally, he avoids
complications.
37
38
h2
lic6
e3
lDh5
lixh3+
g5
After 3 8. . . t[)g5 3 9 &Llxg5+ hxg5 40

'ii'xg5 White would have easily won the
ending, but now the position of the
black king is exposed.
39 1fd7+
<it>g8
40 'i'c8+
g7
41 liJd4
1ixb2
42 lixf5+
Black resigns. Mate is inevitable:
(42 . . . <it>g6 43 'i'e6+ <it>h5 44 lDg7+ <&t>h4

45 g3 mate).
I carried out a similar idea back in

1 952 against Tigran Petrosian (cf.
Volume 2, Training Games), and later in
1966 in the USSR Team Championship
in a game with Birbrager. In the latter
game e2-e3 had not yet been played,
and White could have retreated his
bishop to d2. Here he could have played
either 7 .i.g5, as Petrosian did, or 7
i.e5, provoking 7 . . . f6, which weakens
Black's position. But after the unpreten
tious retreat of the bislwp. to g3 Black
has no difficulties.
Game 268
Citrone-Botvinnik
Ovmpiad, Munich 1958
Slav Defence
1
2
3
d4
c4
cxd5
d5
c6
Usually I myself used to employ this

exchange. Therefore, most probably, my
73
' .." 8
il.gJ
hxgJ
lhxg3
g6
9
10
cl
e2
.i.g7
e6
11
12
13
0-0
:ct
a4
0-0
i..d 7
Sooner or later Black will have to

safeguard his kingside in this way.
In the middlegame this set-up allows
Black to open up the game by ad
vancing his pawn to e5, but before
completing his development this would
be premature.
Forcing a weakening of Black' s

position ( . . . b7-b6), which, however,
cannot be e']>loited. Because of his
mistake on move 7, White has no active
plan.
13
14
15
b3
c3
16
ll.\bl
1fb8
17
18
19
'ii'd 2
i.. b5
.i.xc6
ifb7
l:t.ec8
b6
l:e8
J.f8
.
i..b5
l:t.xc8
f6
23
24
l:txc8
1fxc8
25
d3
g5
26
27
28
a4
li'id2
fJ
29
lhb2
W'b7
1i'c3
Avoiding further simplification, but
if Black wishes he can always exchange
queens. For the moment he will con
tinue to strengthen his position. Nothing
would have been achieved by 24 . . . 'ifxc3
25 t'L\xc3, when the bishop at b5 is
attacked.
The queen is transferred to b 7, to

gain control of the a6 square. Otherwise
Black cannot begin operating with his
rooks on the c-file.
Further restricting the mobility of the

white pieces.
White plays for simplification, hop

ing that in the endgame it will be easier
for him to main the balance. The
position is indeed simplified, but it is in
the endgame .:that the two black bishops
will be particularly effective.
...
e5
lhc8
%tel
In the given situation this advance is

quite safe for Black, since the passive
placing of White' s pieces does not allow
him to mount an attack on the enemy
king.
After the weakening of the a3 and b4

squares in White's position, it makes
sense for Black to move his bishop onto
this diagonal.
19
20
21
22
The black king is the first to come

into play - a good omen for the coming
endgame.
In the ending .too White has no active
xc6
74
continuations, and all he can trust in is

.
passive play. -
35
e5!
Even further restricting and tying

down the enemy pieces.
29
30
31
d3
ltlb2
"1e7
'ifi>d8
1!fc7
1ixc7+
'it>f1
. .
et
ed3
38
ltl3b2
i.h5
bishops are attacking the helpless white

knights, neither of which can now
move.
<l;xc7
39
40
41
b5
Clearing the way for the approach of

Black's king to the white pawns on the
queenside. 34 ... .i.a3 is threatened, and
after 34 axb5 i.xb5+ 3 5 <ii?e l i.b4+ 36
@dl .i.fl White would also have lost a
pawn.
34
35
bxa4
e4
A picturesque position - Black's
Earlier, in view of Black's active

pieces and with the queens on, it would
have been dangerous for the white king
to move towards the centre.
33
ltldt
bxa4
But not 37 . . ..i.xa4 because of 38

ttJc3 .
The king has approached, and the

exchange of queens has become timely.
Subsequently the activity of the king on
the queenside will be decisive.
32
33
36
37
<i&>el
.lb4+
'it>ft
<i&>b6
f3
White resigns
Game 269
Botvinnik-Pomar
Olympiad, Munich
1958
Caro-Kann Defence
.i.a3
1
2
3
4
5
It was easy for Black to act - such

positions were played in masterly
fashion by Akiba Rubinstein.
75
c4
e4
exd5
d4
lhc3
c6
d5
cxd5
ltlf6
e6
ttlfJ
resulted from 1 1 h4 with the threat of 12

ltJxb6 t'.Llxb6 1 3 i.xh,7+, and if l l . . .f5
1 2 ltJg5, or l l . . .h6 1 2 fl.h3 .
!i.e7
Later, by the efforts of many grand

masters, in particular Tigran Petrosian,
it was shown that the simplest is
6 i.b4 (b.y analogy with the Nimzo
Indian Defence), when Black has a
comfortable game.
11
12
...
After 12 . .txc5 (Black loses immed

iately in the variation 12 . ltJxc5? 1 3
t2Jxc5 .ilxc5 1 4 .i.xh7+ 'it>xh7 1 5 liJg5+)
1 3 .i.xh7+ lttxh7 14 liJg5+ lttg 8 15
ltlxc5 White has good prospects of an
attack.
.
13
14
15
0-0
1O
b4
ltJa4
e4
ltlxd7
exf3
c6
cxd7
0-0
In
the
afore-mentioned
game
Sokolsky played 1 5 . . i..f6, after which
White
retained some
advantage.
Apparently for this reason Pomar
chooses a different way.
16 xf3
lLle5
il.d3
In the event of 8 b4 Black had the

reply 8 . . . t'.Lle4, but even so this was the
most logical continuation. 8 ilf4 also
came into consideration. Now, however,
Black gains the opportunity to under
mine the opponent' s pawn chain.
8
9
..
c5
A committing move. Perhaps White

should prefer 7 cxd5 exd5 (if 7 . . . tiJxd5 8
j/_d3) 8 i.b5+ .i.d7 9 .ixd7+ t'.Llbxd7 1 0
'itb3, when he has a slight, but enduring
advantage.
7
8
..
' . bxc5
e5
dxc5
17
1i'g3
17
18
1fxd3
Of course, not 17 i.xh7+ lttxh7 18

'i'b5+ lttg8 1 9 1fxe5 on account of
1 9 . i.f6.
b6
a5
liJfd7
lLlxdJ
.i.d6
With the prosaic threat of l 9 . .i.xh2+

( 1 9 . 'i'h.4 20 f4) 20 xh2 'i'h4+ 2 1
. .
..
lttg l 'i'xa4. However, several years later

in a correspondence game Sokolsky
Simagin the more interesting 1 8 . . . d4!
was played, with approximate equality.
19
i.aJ
19
20
21
22
.i.xd6
11fd1
ltlcJ1;
Tying the bishop at d6 to the defence

of the rook at f8.
11 ' b5
A continuation which was lrnown

from the gam Kopaev-Sokolsky
( 1.950). Complicated play would have
llb8
1fxd6
.le6
Naturally, the ..white knight should

occupy the d4 square, but for the
76
go in for the exchange of the queenside

pawns and to pin his hopes on the strong
position of his lalighi in comQination
with his active rooks.
At this point Pomar, evidently taking
account of his opponent's shortage of
time, offered a draw. But the game
continued . . .
moment White wants to consolidate his

queenside r;dvantage with a2-a4. It
stands to reason that Pomar prevents
this.
29
30
31
22
23
24
25
ltabt
l1b3
ttle2
28
ttld4
lta3
11re3
i.d7
i..xb5
1f a3
ltfc8
1lc5
Wc2
If 25 . . . d4 White could have replied

26 :b2.
If White's knight is able to take up a
dominating position in the centre with
material equal, and with him also
having a protected passed b5 pawn,
tltlngs will be hopeless for Black.
Therefore he takes the opportunity to
eliminate the a2 pawn, since 26 a4 loses
to 26 . . . .i.f5 ! Nevertheless White is
prepared to sacrifice a pawn
26
27
1fd2
lh:a5
bl
31
32
lta7
.li.e6
It is hard to suggest anything better.

For example, 32 ... :eds is not possible
9xa2
1i'c4
l:te8
on account of 3 3 :cl Wb4 34 'i'xb4

lixb4 3 5 l:xd7.
By skilfully manoeuvring, Black has

retained his material advantage. The
obvious 29 :c1 leads after 29 . i..d7 30
iid2 11b4 to. a worsening of White's
position (he also has to reckon with the
threat of 29. . . i..g4). Therefore he has to
.
i.. d 7
A serious mistake, as a result of

which White regains the .pawn and
invades by force with his rooks onto the
seventh rank. 3 L.:b7 3 2 :c 1 1id3 33
'lb4 .i.c6 etc. was correct.
33
34
35
llcl
11'xb4
lhxe6
11b4
:xb4
fxe6
llcc7
:h4
Black is forced to give up the g7

pawn.
36
77
Finding the only way of defending

the h-pawn.
37
38
39
40
41
lbg7+
h2
.D.ge7
f3
%lad7
'it>h8
litf8
lth6
sacrificing a pawn, . by answering

4 1 .. JUI6 with 42 g4 :xf3 .43 g2 1:.f8
44 !it>g3 followed by llg7+ and g4-g5,
but it soon transpired t with
43 lUu6 ! 44 %tg7+ 45 ltxh7 :r? !
Black can defend satisfactorily.
Closer to midnight I found something
approaching zugzwang, but my analysis
companions Keres, Kotov and Flohr
quickly dispelled all my illusions. When
it became clear that, with the four rooks
on the board, White could not achieve
anything real, positions with one pair of
rooks were studied. It was only around
four o'clock in the morning 1hat I finally
' suspected' that one of these positions
was won. An hour later everything had
become ' clear', and I was able to go off
to sleep, but a consultation with Flohr
was set for seven o'clock in the
morning . . . The analysis was approved,
and all that we had to decide was the
practical aspect: how to conduct the
resumption psychologically, in order to
win in the most certain way this point
that was so important for the team?
It was decided to divide the
resumption into three stages: 1) mark
time initially, so that the opponent
should gain the impression that no
winning plan had been found; 2) then
imperceptibly try to create a position of
fictitious zugzwang, and finally, if
nothing positive was achievect, then 3)
as if despairing of success, exchange
one pair of rooks and switch 'to the real
plan. Such tactics would cause Black
the maximum disorientation, and a
mistake on his part was probable.
When at ten o' clock the game was
resumed, the Spanish master (now
..
...
<ii>g8
It seemed to me that White had a

great advantage, but Black has good
defensive possibilities.
This last move was sealed at the

adjournment. The first impression is that
White should win easily: his rooks have
complete control of the seventh rank,
whereas Black's rooks are tied down.
One of them has to keep watch on the
h-file, guarding the h7 pawn, while the
other has to safeguard the king against
mate on the back rank. In addition the
e6 pawn is weak.
However, analysis showed that in the
event of passive defence by Black
( . . . l:f8-f6-f8-f6) it is not so easy for
White to strengthen his position. The
whole problem is that the white pawns
cannot advance . . It is true that as soon
as the analysis of, the adjourned position
began, Flohr . suggested immediately
78
grandmaster) had p.o suspicion, of

course, of our cunning plot He played
quickly and cqnfidently.
41
42
43
:tr6
ltg7+
l:lge7
<ith8
Thus a repetition of moves - the first

part of the plan - is carried out.
43
44
45
46
47
<ifi>g8
gl
l:lf8
l:lff6
llf8
f2
l:td8+
Ad6
With this move White imperceptibly

switches to the second part of his plan.
lUJ6
47
<it>f8
.48 ltb6
49
50
ltd7
l%a6
White would finally have had to. reveal

his hand and to switch to the main plan.
However, the talented Spaniard was
insufficiently experienced, d he sue. cumbed to the clever tactics devised by
two players, whose combined length of
service as grandmasters already exceed
ed half a century . . . Pomar thought for a
long time, but, ' lulled' by White's
unconvincing manoeuvres, he was
unable to overcome all the dangers.
50
51
52
53
:as+
ltxf8+
llxh7
53
54
f4
<ifi>e8
d4
55
56
:a7
'it>gJ
llf6
llf5
l:tb g6
:rs
xf8
Black can no longer save the game.
'&t>g8
The advance of this pawn forces

White in the end to release the black
king from the back rank.
Intending 57 .. Jid5.
57
58
59
60
Thus, White has managed to create a

position in which Black can no longer
routinely continue 50 :t'S in view of
5 1 l1xd5, and 50 ... lthg6 is also bad
because of 5 1 :as+. However, the
zugzwang is, alas, only apparent: by
continuing 50 . .l:t5 ! (pointed out by
Keres) Black wowp have maintained a
defensible position: After this reply
...
79
Ital
ltd2
e4
<l;e7
lld5
q.,d6
c5
Or 44 ... r!hg6 45 g4.

45 ll.g7+! (the g2 pawn has to be
defended) 45 h8 46 d4 l:l g8
(otherwise White strengthens with
impunity the position of his king) 47
lbg8+ xg8 48 <i&>eS llg6 49 g4 h5.
If 49 . . .l:Ch6, then 50 f4 llxh3 51
<it>xe6.
61 llc2+
<it>d6
Now Black,s counterplay with his
passed d-pawn is neutralised and White
can begin advancing his
kingside
pawns.
62
g4
l:ta5
The only active possibility, but now

Black loses another pawn.
63 lld2
<lre7
64
65
66
67
68
69
lixd4
ltd3
:eJ
g5+
cli>g4
50 l:te7
lla3
lla4+
CiW6
llal
I am sorry to say that during the

analysis I thought that 50 lla7 was also
good enough to wi but after the game
Tal found that in this case White does
not achieve anything in view of
50 . . . hxg4 5 1 hxg4 llg7 !
50 bxg4 51 hxg4.
'ifa>f7
This would evidently have been the

most convenient moment for Black to
tenninate his resistance.
69
70
71
72
73
h4
lle5
l%a5
hS
1:a4
xtb4
l%bl
ltgt+
The black king cannot avoid return

ing to the eighth rank, and then even
reducing the material deficit will do
nothing to help.
73
74
75
76
77
78
lta7+
<i;g6
e5
h5
e4
h6
h7
Black resigns
Despite the material equality and the

limited number of pieces, Black's
position is difficul. If 5 1. . .hS White
wins by 52 l:lxe6! l:Xe6+ 53 'ati>x d4
54 </;f7 ! ! d3 55 g5 d2 56 g6 dl W (Black
has obtained a new queen two moves
before White, but even this 4does not
save him) 57 g7+ h7 58 g8'1'+ h6
59 \ig6 mate.
However, there was also another
variation: 51 52 :h7 'itg8 53 llh5
But what would have happened if

Black had defended correctly? Let us
return to the adjourned position in order
to demonstrate the third stage of the
plan, which in fact remained 'off-stage,.
41 l:Z.tT6 42 gt ltf8 43 @fl ltff6

44 <la>e3 lif8.
'1tf7
80
54 g5 <ia>g8 55 f4 <lilg7 56 llhl ci>g8
57 :at 58 d6 .
case i n the King's fudian Defence, the

knight would be badly placed.
But not 58 . . . g7 59 <:/Je7 h7 60

rJ;n, which had seemed inevitable to me
during our night-time analysis.
59 :.a7 e8 (or 59 . . . <it>g8) and a
draw is nevertheless unavoidable !
It is probable that, if it had not been a
team event, White would have immed
iately gone into this ending1 but in an
Olympiad at a point when the tourna
ment situation was very tense, even a
chance opportunity could not be
neglected!
f3
It is doubtful whether 9;, exf5 was

stronger: 9 . . . gxf5 (of course, not
9 . . . i.xf5, as will be evident from the
further course of the game) 10 .i.h5+
@f'S, and it is not so easy for White to
find a good plan.
9
10
lif6
0-0
11fd2
Black should himself exchange on

e4, when the open f-file allows him to
hope for simplification.
11
exf5
Game 270
Botvinnik-Alexander
Olympiad, Munich 1958
1
2
3
4
5
g6
i.g7
d6
ltlc6
e5
d4
e4
c4
lDcJ
i.e3
Black simplifies the game, but this

involves a loss of time.
d5
This is more energetic than 6 tbge2 .
6
7
tDge2
11
If 7 . . il.g4 White could play either 8

f3 . forcing a problematic piece sacrifice
(8 . . . i..xf3 9 gxf3 ll)xf3+ 1 0 ct>f2 iff6 1 1
g3) or simply 8 'i'd2 Jtxe2 9 t'.bxe2
ttJxe2 10 i.xe2 tiJf6 1 1 f3 with a slight
advantage.
.i.xe2
..
i.:ds
A typical strategic mistake in the

King's Indian Defence. On no account
should the central base the e4 square
have been left under White's control.
l 1 .. .gxf5 was essential, retaining
chances of counterplay. Now, however,
White ' s plan is clear: an attack on the
kingside.
lid4
lLlxe2
12
13
f5
Practically forced: after 8 . . . ttJf6 the

advance . f7-f5 would have been
hindered, while at. .e7, as is usually the
g4
hJ
.*.d7
There is no reason to hurry . First

White must neutralise the advance
. .
81
. . . e5-e4, which would allow Black to

activate his bishop at g7.
. 13
22
23
24
25
a6
Alexander tries for activity on the

queenside, but here he has insufficient
forces to create any real threats.
14
0-0-0
h5
hxg6
'ifdJ
. .i.c8
..tf5
.txg6
b5
This essentially concludes the game,

e.g. 25 . 1i'f7 26 :xh7 .i.xe4 27 1Wxe4
Wxf3 28 'i'g6 iif7 29 ::th8+ ! , or
28 . . . 'i'xe3+ 29 <it>bl :n 30 l:dhl .
Black finds a clever reply, but even this
is no longer able to halt the nonnal
...development of events.
..
15
c5
Now Black cailllot avoid c5-c6

which will split his position into two
poorly connected parts.
15
16
17
18
19
ttle4
.i.dJ
c6
h4
b4
a5
'l'e7
.i.c8
..ta6
28
1fe4
l:txf3
bxg6
The simplest. By temporarily block

ing the bishop at g7 White takes play
into an endgame and when his rook
subsequently reaches f7, -it.- wi l all be
over.
28
flf7
.
ttlxf6+
g5
.i.e4
.i.xg6
1lxg6
'iftf8
Or 27 . . Jhe3 28 l:.dfl with inevitable
mate.
Black is hoping to weaken the

pressure on his position by exchanging
the light-square bishops, but White
exchanges knights and the vacated
central e4 square will be occupied by
his bishop.
20
21
22
25
26
27
.txf6
.i.g7
29
30
31
The position is blockaded, and in

view of the threat of h4-h5 Black must
urgently return his bishop to f5.
g6
11'xf5+
11df1r.
11f5
ltxf5
Now the rook penetrates by force

onto the seventh rank.
82
variation is of considerable significane

in the opening, and therefore his
prospects are better.
6
7
tiJfJ
al
7
8
d3
b4
tLlc6
White is annmg to play b2-b4 as

soon as possible.
31
32
33
34
-
lb.ft+
:n
<ia>c2
l:bfl+
'it?g8
:cs
e4
The bishop gains its freedom too late

when it can no longer be of any help.
35 b3
36 <ii>d l
37 @e2
38 i..a7
Black resigns: the
e7
0-0
Black has thought up an interesting
counter with the sacrifice of a pawn, and
therefore he does not prevent 9 b5. It
would have been more circumspect,
however, to eliminate this threat by
8 . . . a5, as was played against me in later
games by Flohr (Wageningen 1958) and
Portisch (No. 363).
f5
By continuing 1 O . . jlf6, Black

intends to obtain a perfectly good
position; of course. White has no reason
to reject the win of a pawn. The
alternative was 9 . . . a6.
.
.lc3
i..e5
Ac3
white king will

win the e4 pawn and then continue its
victorious advance.
Game 27 1
Botvinnik-Duckstein
Oympiad. Munich 1 958

English Opening
=------i
1
2
3
4
5
c4
lbc3
g3
cxd5
i.g2
e5
lbf6
d5
lbxd5
lDb6
10 b5
1 1 lDxe5
12 f4
This is essentially a variation of the

Sicilian Defence with reversed colours.
The extra tempo that. White has in this
Threatening
1 3 . . . .i.b3 .
83
both
lDd4
.i.f6
li.e6
1 3 . .. ltJb3,
and
13
14
llbl
fxe5
.i.xe5
f4!
18
Cleverly played. In the event of 1 5

i.xf4 l:l xf4 16 gxf4 'B.h4+ 1 7 <it>d2
1i'xf4+ 1 8 e3 Wf2+ 1 9 e2 'ifxg2 20
exd4 .i.d5 2 1 l:lgl 'ii'xh2 the position of
the white king would have given serious
cause for alarm. Therefore castling is
forced.
15
0-0
18
d4
20
21
22
ltb4
lle2
d5!
11fxc3
11c4
...
f3
.a2
1fa1
Another tactical subtlety. This move

proves possible, since due to the
position of his king at g8 Black cannot
take the pawn. And after the d4 pawn
has advanced, White has both an extra
pawn, and the better position.
exfJ
lbf3
19
19 'i'aS is also bad, if only because

of 20 .id2.
Black continues to 'tangle' with his

opponent, but in the end it is he who
becomes
entangled.
Simpler was
15 . . . fxg3 16 hxg3 (or 16 l:lxf8+ 'i'xf8
17 hxg3 Wc5) 16 . Jlxfl + 17 'i'xfl ttJd5
with some initiative for the pawn.
16
17
%le3!!
Titis move leads to a won position.

Now Black's queen's rook remains out
of play for some time, and his queen is
driven to a l .
xf3+
1f d4+
In a fit of emotion Duckstein im

perceptibly commits a decisive error.
Essential was 1 7 . . . l:lxf3 18 'i'xf3, and
only then 1 8 . . . 'ii'd4+. After the ex
change of rooks Black could have been
confident about the safety of his queen,
and his queen's rook would have
quickly come into play. In avoiding the
simplification Black overlooks White ' s
reply and ends up i n a hopeless position.
22
23
lld2
llad8
23 l:ld4 was weaker, since on this

square the rook would have come under
attack.
23
24
25
-*.b2
l:lxdl
.i.f5
'l'xdl+
The endgame is, of course, easily

won.
84
25
life8
25 ... c6 was S(ftheWhat better.
26 .i.fJ
Defending the rook at dl.
ttld7
26
ttlc5
27 e6
28 llf4
.i.g6
h5
29 h4
Or 29 . ttJd3 30 lixd3 i.xd3 3 1 l:.f7.
ttld3
30 lk4
31 -*.d4
3 1 l:txd3 .i.xd3 3 2 :xc7 was also
good enough for a win.
lie7
31
c5
32 l:tc3
33 bxc6
bxc6
34 lldxd3
Of course, 34 J:xc6 could also have
been played, but the forcing variation in
the game wins most simply.
.i.xd3
34
l:tee8
35 .i.c5
cxd5
36 :xd3
l:.d7
37 e7
38 .ixh5
3 8 :xd5 would have led to the same
result.
ltexe7
38
lbe7
39 Jl.xe7
40 llxd5
It is not often that one has to play an
ending with an extra piece and a pawn.
Black's aim of winning back at least a
pawn leads to mate.
lleJ
40
11.xaJ
41 <it1'2
cli>f8
42 i.g6
43 :e5
Black resigns
Game 272
Uhlmann-Botvinnik
Olympiad, Munich 1958 '
1 d4
e6
2 c4
ttlf6
3 ttlcJ
ii.b4
4 e3
b6
5 i.dJ
The variation employed by White as
though implies 5 t'.Dge2. Now the worst
for Black is already over.
5
i.b7
6 ttlf3
ttle4
7 0-0
. .
f5
7
Was it not possible to win a pawn?
After 7 ... ti)xc3 8 bxc3 .ixc3 9 :b 1
Black loses too much time and ceases to
control the centre, which is :fraught with
danger. 7 ... -*.xc3 8 bxc3 tt:lxc3 9 'ifc2
i.xf3 10 gxf3 'l'g5+ 1 1 'it>hl 'i'h5 12
l:tgl 'i'xf3+ 13 l:tg2 f5 is also risky, as
White has not only a draw ( 14 'i'xc3),
but also the possibility of an attack: 14
i.a3 ti)e4 15 :n l:t.g8 16 i.e2 'i'h3 1 7
f3 ti)f6 18 d5 (Keres-Spassky, 1 965).
__
85
the game is quite . sensible, but there was

no reason to avoid the exchange of
pawns on b6 .
1fc2
Here Svetozar Gligoric used to make

the pawn sacrifice 8 d5 . The acceptance
of ii involves some danger (e. g.
8 . ltJx:c3 9 bxc3 i..xc3 10 l:!bl Ji.f6 1 1
e4 0--0 1 2 l:e l fxe4 1 3 Jlxe4, as in a
game Gligoric-Hecht, 1 969), but it can
also be declined (say, by 8 . . . .i.xc3 9
bxc3 ltJc5).
. .
8
9
10
bxc3
l:tbl
i.. xd2
:b2
16
:at
/i)xd2
/i)d7
And now avoiding the capture on b6

is a serious mistake, allowing Black
unexpected tactical possibilities .
15
bxa5
.i.xc3
0-0
Otherwise 16 . . . ltJb6 and 17 . . . a4,

creating a securely defended passed
pawn.
White is threatening c4-c5, but Black

could have gained good counterplay by
immediately switching his king's rook
via f6 to the h-file. Incidentally, back in
1 924, playing against Abramovich, in a
Dutch Defence, I carried out a similar
victorious raid with my rook along the
route f8-f6-g6.
10
13
14
15
16
17
/i)b6
lba5
As the further course of the game
shows, it would have been better to
allow . . . a5-a4.
c5
This decision to block the c4 pawn

leads merely to a weakening of the b6
pawn, and White intensifies the
pressure.
11
a4
1ic7
Halting the further advance of the

rook's pawn by 1 1 . . . ttJc6 would have
allowed the possible 12 i..xe4 fxe4 1 3
'i'xe4.
d6
12 a5
After 12 . . . bxa5 White would soon
have won back the a5 pawn, and Black
would have been left with a weak pawn
at a7.
13
17
Ji.e4! !
Of course, Black avoids 17 . . .ltJxc4

1 8 .i.xc4 if xa5 1 9 ..ixe6-f!. and 20 xb7 '
but, by moving the b7 bishop out of the
line of fire and pinning the bishop at d3 ,
h e creates the irresistible threat o f taking
with the knight on c4.
ltJd2
Initially 1 3 tDel seemed very danger

ous, but after finding the variation
1 3 . . ltJd7 14 f3 ltJef6 1 5 d5 g6, I came
to the concliOn that Black's position
was defensible. The idea of the move in
.
18
19
86
.txe4 '
'ii'b J';f .
fxe4
corrections into this evaluation. Donner

knew about this, of ,.cose, but he
decided to test an idea of his own.
After 1 9 'i'xe4 ltlxc4 20 iYxe6+ Vif7

the fork remains in force, and Black
wins the exchange.
19
20
21
22
23
'Ifxc4
ifxe6+
:a2
1Wxe4
tDxc4
xa5
h8
'Ifc7
s
9
tDas
c5
In the notes to the afore-mntioned

game it was shown that 9 . . . c6 loses by
force after 10 b4.
In a hopeless position, such over

sights tend to happen.
23
d5
lDd2
...
ifti
White resigns
This game is not typical of the play

of Wolfgang Uhhnann (born 1 93 5). In
later years he was one of the world' s
leading grandmasters (he was a World
Championship Candidate in 1 97 1 ), and
he had a significant influence on the
development of chess in East Gennany.
His play is distinguished by great
energy, and he is especially dangerous
in attack and counterattack, as I myself
was to experience at the following
Olympiad, in Varna.
10
11
12
'i'c2
b3
.ilb2
13
bxc4
llb8
b5
bxc4
A necessary preparation for Black' s

nex1: move. He creates a pawn weakness
for his opponent at c4.
Game 273
Botvinnik-Donner
13
Wageningen 1 958
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
c4
tl)f3
tDf6
g6
i.g7
gJ
..tg2
0-0
ttlc3
d4
d6
a6
lDc6
0-0
..th6
This is Donner' s idea, which he had

already tried in practice. In order to
understand the charater of this game, it
should be borne in mind that it took
place in the last round, and only a win
would secure White victory in the
tournament. Therefore it has to be
acknowledged that Black's choice of
opening was psychologically subtle. He
has now created the threat of 14 . . . .txd2
and 1 5 . . . ttJxc4, and if J4 e3 he has the
unpleasant reply 1 4 . . . .ilf5 .
For a long time this variation was

considered safe for1Black, but the game
Botvinnik-Geller (No. 2 1 3 ) - introduced
87
White chooses the most active con

tinuation, although it also assists the
development of the opponent's counter
play.
14
16
17
f4
...
e5
15
16
ael
gxf4
exf4
l:le8
Subsequently, instead of this, Robert

Wade recommended 1 7 e3 !
17
14. i'Llcb 1 followed by .i.c3 also came

into consideration.
14
lLldl
J:Cb7
As soon as White transfers his bishop

to c3, Black's position deteriorates,
since tl1e basic defect of the entire
variation is revealed - the poor position
of the knight at a5 . Therefore Black was
obliged at any cost to continue playing
actively, and, as Boleslavsky rightly
pointed out, by first playing l 7 . . . ltJh5,
and only if 18 e3 - 18 . . . :b?. Then after
1 9 .i.c3 :be? 20 ii'a4 lDb7 Black
succeeds in gaining counterplay in the
centre and on the kingside.
If 14 . . . ttlg4 White would have par

ried the immediate threats by 15 ttldl .
18
.i.cJ
19
eJ
.i.d7
Here the threat of 1 9 ifa4 already

had to be parried.
Now that . . . .i.f5 is no longer a tlrreat
(the bishop has to guard the a4 square),
White need not hurry.
19
20
After the game I suggested that

16 . . . ttlh5 would have been the most
'
dangerous for White. forcing the reply
1 7 e3 . Eight years later this recommend
ation was tried by Petrosian in a game
with Portisc]\ but after 1 7 . . . :es 1 8
liJce4 ! .i.f5 1 9 .i.c3 White consolidated
his advantage, since the e4 square
remained under his control.
The whole point is that the correct
way for .Black to exploit this idea is a
different one: 17 . . . Jtg? 18 liJdl .ifs .
For example, the game Ree-Sax ( 197 6)
continued 19 .i.e4 .i.xe4 20 liJxe4 .i.xb2
2 1 ttJxb2-itet . with equal chances.
Donner, however, played differently.
l1h5
ltJf2
It only remains to play this lrnight to
d3 and everything will be ready for the
offensive.
20
21
22
.i.xg7
"ifcJ
22
23
.i.fJ
.*.g7
lhxg7
Here the queen successfully fulfils

those functions that were previously
carried out by the bishop, .and the
weakening of the f6 square assists the
development of White' s attack and the
advance of his central pawns. It is the
latter that Donner tries to prevent.
88
f5
A delay at the critical moment. White

wastes time on taking control of the h5
square. Meanwhile, in the event of 23
e4 fxe4 24 tt1fxe4 Black would have
been unable to defend simultaneously
his f6 and d6 squares. And if he replies
23 . lLJhS, then after 24 tiJd3 fxe4 25
t2Jxe4 J.f5 26 th'Cd6 l:txe 1 27 ltxe 1
'i'xd6 28 :es+ <1;;n 29 1i'h8 White's
threats are irresistible.
Now, however, Black is able to parry
the advance of the e-pawn, and the
worst for him is over.
.
His only chance is to exchange queens,

after which he will be able to switch his
pieces to the queenside am.d exploit
Black's numerous weaknesse (a6, b6,
c6 and d6).
Therefore
White
provocatively
moves his knight from d2 to fl , which
in the event of the exchange of queens
allows Black, and not White, to gain
temporary control of the b-file. But this,
as soon transpires, is of no significance.
23
24
25
tild3
fl
.i.c8
:n
25 e4 is no longer a danger for Black,

in view of the fact that, after the ex
change of pawns on e4, his knight at g7
could go via f5 to occupy the important
d4 square. As a result, for the moment it
is not clear how White can strengthen
his position.
25
26
27
lEifl
1i'a5
28
29
30
31
'l'xa5
ltc2
lid2
l:t.cJ!
lhxa5
llb7
lhe8
31
32
33
34
l:taJ
l[bl
thxbl
This reaction came immediately - the

bait has worked.
The start of the decisive manoeuvre.
b6
thb7
l:txbl+
lbb7
l:t.fe2
llef8
Black's only real fighting piece has

been exchanged, and the remainder are
quite incapable of any activity.
It cannot be ruled out that soon Black

will go onto the offensive with . . . g6-g5.
White resorts to a psychological trick.
34
35
89
&/jc7
&/jd2
36
37
38
<bf2
h4
1'.dl
38
39
40
llb3
:b6
cl;e1
h6
My opponent, like many other

players. thought that my ...main trump
was my ability to prepare. . In so doing,
they did not take ac(a;ount . of another,
possibly more important component of
my chess strength - positional under
standing. It was this that enabled me to
find good plans in original situations.
Now White is threatening to play his

bishop to c6 . To prevent this, Black is
forced to weaken the defence of his b7
and a6.
.i.d7
lla5
:as
5
6
An oversight in a hopeless position.
41
42
e6
d4
6 d3 followed by f3-f4 came into

consideration.
llxc5
dxc5
<"llf7
d6+
Black resigns
6
7
lld7
ilf4
In a small tournament every game is

worth its weight in gold. It was this one
that enabled me to win first prize.
Carelessly played, since as a result of

the subsequent manoeuvre . . . lhg8-f6-h5
Black gains a tempo. 7 J.e3 was
stronger.
Game 274
This assists the above manoeuvre,

and, in addition, here the bishop feels
safe, since a2-a3 and b2-b4 would make
it impossible for White to castle queen
side.
Tal-Botvinnik
ftVorld Championship Match
Moscow 1960, 3rd game
Caro-Kann Defence
1
2
3
4
5
e4
llc3
t[)fJ
h3
gxf3
h4
e5
J.b4
lbgf6
c6
d5
.i.g4
..txfJ
After 5 'i'xf3 White has some advan

tage, so that there is no point in
inventing such an artificial course.
Both in this, and in other games of
the match, such a method of playing by
Tai was aimed at creating an original
situation in the opening, in which the
first concern was not the correctness of
his conceptio but to force his oppon
ent to spend more time, time which
would be so needed . . . in time trouble.
Unexpectedly White changes plans.

If he had been intending to block the
90
advantage. Therefore Black chooses the

prosaic manoeuvre of his knight to a
strong post at f5 .
centre, he could have done this without

7 f4 He should have played 9 'i'd3.
.
9
10
.i.g5
tl'lh5
1ia5
15
16
Already in this match I was trying to

employ a strategy that was highly un
pleasant for Tal - to avoid the opening
of the position, after which his cal
culating skill would give him a big
advantage. It was for this reason that I
refrained from 10 . . f6.
However, I employed this method
insufficiently consistently. and, in
addition, my poor form prevented me
from utilising the benefits of this way of
combatting Tal.
..ad2
al
Jl..eJ
1t'b6
Jl..e7
g6
tl'la4
'ilfd8
tl'lg7
h6
The inevitable opening of the h-file

will be to Black's advantage, since the
weakness of the f-pawns becomes real.
17
18
.i.xh6
.i.f4
tl'lf5
nxh4
19
20
l:lxh4
tl'lxh4
If Black takes with one of his minor

pieces, it will be pinned on the h-file.
11
12
13
...
i.g5
0-0-0
Of course. not 1 3 . . . 'i'xb2 14 etJa4.
14
20
15
b5!
At the appropriate moment - now,

after White has castled - this thrust is
fully justified. In the event of 2 1 ctJc3
lLlb6 Black's attack is very strong. The
other possibility - taking the f3 pawn was inadvisable, since it would have
handed the initiative to the opponent.
Tai employs an idea that is typical of
his play: he aims to open the position at
any cost, in order to make the
calculation of variations harder for his
opponent.
W'd2
Tempting Black into 1 5 . . . .ixh4 1 6

Xtxh4 ii'xh4 17 Jl..g5 Vh2 1 8 1Wb4.
When you are playing Tai, it is waste of
time considering such variations. Even
if they are objectively unfavourable for
him subjectively they are to his
21
91
tLlc5
lhxc5
22
23
dxc5
.i.e2
ilxc5
il.e7
Thus, in a quiet position Black is a

pawn up, and the outcome of the game
would appear to be decided. Alas, this
was not the case: he still had 17 moves
to make before the control, and already
had little time left on the clock.
24
25
26
bl
l:thl
.tgJ
ilc7
0-0-0
tl)f5
27 h7
:f8
The invasion of the seventh rank by
the white rook is not dangerous. It has
merely created a threat, which would
have been most simply parried by
27 . . . .tc5, when if necessary the f7 pawn
can be protected by the rook from d7.
The move in the game is more
passive, although it does not yet spoil
anything.
28
29
ii.f4
.i.d3
30
lhh8
Here Black could have won by

3 1 . . .'iitb8 32 .ltx:f5 (32 .ixb5 ild8)
32 . . . 'i'hl + 33 a2 'i'xf3 34 .ie3 d4 (35
i.xd4 'i'd5+). Unfortunately, in time
trouble I missed 34 . . . d4 (it was later
pointed out by Petrosian).
True, Tal later tried to show that
White could nevertheless have gained a
draw, by playing 32 a4 (instead of 3 2
.txfS). I will not try to cast doubts on
the nwnerous and complicated varia
tions that he gives, but will mention that
Black can simply force the transition
into a favourable endgame: 32 . . . 1i'd8 3 3
ilxd8+ .i.xd8 34 axb5 ltld4 3 5 bxc6
tbxf3 , with the threats of 36 ... i.c7 and
36 . . . ltJd4.
1fd8
'lh8
The further course of the garne and

subsequent analyses confirmed that this
move is quite logical. It parries the
threat of 30 i.x:f5 gxf5 3 1 .i.h6 and
leads to simplification.
29 . . . g5 30 .i.h2 rlh8 was weaker in
view of 3 1 ..ixf5 exf5 32 'i'd3, when
White is out of danger.
31
Tai rightly pointed out in his

commentary that after 30 l:txf7 'i'e8 3 1
iVa5 'iixf7 . 3 2 ii'xa7 nh7 3 3 a4 .id8
Black would have parried all the threats,
while in the event of 3 1 xe7 White has
insufficient compensation for the
sacrificed exchange.
30
31
11'a5
l!fhl+
Now White has finally achieved his

aim: the position of the black king is
exposed, and things end in perpetual
check.
32
33
34
35
'1i>a2
11a6+
1fxc6
.txb5
Wxfl
ci>b8
'iWxf4
Already here White could haye

gained a draw - by 35 'ifxb5+ cj;c7 36
"i'xh8
92
10
ifa5+, but he tries to go fishing in

troubled waters.
35
36
37
'ife8+
1fc6+
1i'xe5
>b7
..
Tal's hopes of gaining an advantage in
this variation of the Caro-Kann Defence

were not realised.
In time trouble White might have

tried 37 .ta6+ 'it>xa6 38 'i'c6+ <it>a5 39
10
11
c3 ,
since here only one move 3 9 . . . 'i'e2 leads to a draw (40 'i'c7+
b5 41 'i'b7+).
37
..i.d6
game
Keres-Olafsson

Afoscow 1960, 5th game
suggested itself. with sufficient compen

sation for the sacrificed pawn.
11
12
13
Caro-Kann Defence
_______,
c6
d5
dxe4
.tf5
.i.g6
lhgh5
tllxh5
ll'lbd7
il'lxh5
It is easy to understand that Tal
considered this position to be in his
favour : after the natural reply 1 3 . . . 0-0
White would have gained chances of an
attack on the black king. But Black

finds another possibility.
More often this knight is played to f4

which, of course,
does not
change anything.
...
h4
e6
A subtle point of this variation is that
if 7 lDf4 is played immediately, and if
7 . . . ..t d6 - 8 h4. then after 8 . . . Vc7 the

position of the knight at f4 is insuffic
iently secure. Now. however, Black has
time to ensure a retreat for his bishop to
h7.
7
8
9
h6
f4
i. c4
( 1 961).
Although after 12 . . . fxe6 the opening

battle developed satisfactorily for Black,
.i.xd7 lbxd7
instead
12 . . . 0-0 13
Game 275
via h3,
. .
Tal-Botvinnik
e4
d4
lbc3
lbxe4
lhgJ
lhte2
.te3
11 i. xe6 is refuted by 1 1 . 0-0, e.g.

1 2 .i b3 .r!e8 1 3 i..e3 .txf4. After 1 1 c3
tDbd7 the sacrifice 1 2 .i xe6 was made
<it>b8
Draw agreed
in the
1
2
3
4
5
6
1ie2
In the 9th game (No.277) Tal played

1 0 0-0, which is also not dangerous for
Black. It can be definitely' stated that
.i.h7
lbf6
13
93
ll.g8!
Starting with the present game this

became . a standard way of defending
Black s' g7 in the given situation. Black
will castle queenside, where he has
nothing to fear, since White too can
only castle on that side.
14
15
g4
g5
20
ifc7
.i.g6
!tlgJ
i.xg5
21
22
23
23
24
1i'h6
ff Black had ex
ii.dJ
l:hd3
'ifxh6
.il.xd3
1lb6
:o
gxh6
Provoking . . . f7-f5, in order to gain

counterplay.
hxg5
f5
l:td6
llg4
24
25
26
27
lle1
c3
ltle2!
27
28
29
l:thl
l:tg3
tL\d5
l:td8
l:lxg3
30
31
fxg3
<ii>d2
lt g4
The only possibility. Black. of

course, must avoid the variation
27 :;m4 28 t2Jf4 c.fi>d7 29 ltJg6 :112 30
t2Jf8+ @e7 3 1 l:xf5 .
i.f4+
i.xf4
. . .
After 1 9 '.t>b 1 ii..xg5 20 hxg5 the g5

pawn would have been weak.
19
20
Otherwise there would have followed

. . . tiJd5-f4.
After 1 8 hxg5 Black would have had

a pleasant choice between 18 . . . i..xg3
and 18 ... :hs.
18
19
changed queens on:-e3., White's position

would have been preferable. Now,
however, after the practically inevitable
exchange on h6 the g-file is opened, and
White's weak f- and h-pawns cause him
considerable trouble.
Now 16 gxh6 is not possible in view

of l 6 . . . 'ii'a5+.
16 0-0-0
0-0--0
Now too the h6 pawn is indirectly
defended, since if 1 7 gxh6 gxh6 1 8
Jtxh6 there follows 1 8 . . . l:th8. The
knight at h5 proves to be out of play,
and White is obliged to improve its
position.
17
18
A necessary fineS.$P.
1i'xf4+
11t'e3
This improves White's pawn for

mation, but Black rejected 29 . . Jdg8 30
.:t.hg 1 , since he wanted to keep one pair
of rooks on the board.
1lg8
A loss of time. Black should have

immediately advanced his 'king to d6
and then played . . . b7-b6 and . . . c6-c5,
intensifying the pressure on the enemy
position. After the manoeuvre of . the
rook to e4 it will occupy a pretty, but
less active position, than at g8.
94
32
33
34
35
<it?el
l:l.el
cl
ci>d7
lie4
<it>d6
If my opponent had thought for a

little longer, he would undoubtedly have
seen the clanger awaiting him after the
natural reply 41 e4+. It was this that I
examined in the 17 minutes before I
sealed my move. but I did not find a
win. This is what could then have
happened:
.
In the knight ending too Black s

chances are better, but the exchange of
rooks eases White's defence.
35
36
37
@xel
'it>e2
38
39
40
41
cxd4
<li>d3
e2
a4
l:txel
c5
cxd4
42 'it>c4 b6!
It is very important to take control of

the c5 square. Both in his night-time
analysis before the resumption, and in
his detailed comments, Tai missed some
subtleties in the resulting position and
gave only the variation 42 . . . a5 43 b4
axb4 44 <li>xb4 liJf6 45 tiJf4 tbd5+ 46
liJxd5 xd5 47 c3 with a draw.
Meanwhile. by continuing 44 . . . d5
(instead of 44 . . . liJf6) Black would have
won: 45 a5 ( 45 @c3 b6) 45 . . . e3 46 c3
e4 47 @c4 (4 7 d5 <iPx.d5 48 ci>d3 @es
49 @xe3 lLJxg3 50 l"Dxg3 f4+ etc. 9)
47 . . . f3 48 d3 ltixg3 .
Therefore White must reply to
42 . . . as with 43 b3 ! 43 ...b6 44 b4 axb4
45 xb4 liJf6 46 <iti>b5, with sufficient
counter-chances in view of the weak
ness of the b6 pawn.
37 . . . c4 would have created greater

difficulties for White.
f6
h5
e5
A moment typical of Tai' s match

tactics. He played this quickly, merely
in order to force Black to seal his move,
in the hope that after five hours of play
it would not be easy to find the strongest
reply.
I personally do not like such
methods, and I prefer moves that are in
keeping with the logic of the position. I
th.ink that, from the practical viewpoint
too this is the soundest way.
95
7 . . . d6 8 e3 h6 9 .i.h4 g5 10 .i.g3 tiJh5

1 1 i.b5+ ( 1 1 . . . .td7 . 12 i.xd7+ 'i'xd7
1 3 l'he5), but now the . manoeuvre
. . . lDh5 is parried even more simply.
43 b4 a6 44 d5!
There is no other possibility.
44 <t>e5 45 as bxa5 46 bxa5 ti:)f6

47. lbf4 e3 48 <.t>dJ with a draw.
Also taking account of the fact that

Tai had not exchanged on e5, obviously
fearing the centralisation of the black
king, I sealed another move, thus mis
sing this chance, which unexpectedly
could have appeared after 4 1 . . .e4+ 42
rbc4 b6 or 42 . . . a5 .
Alas!
41
42
42
43
lDf6
dxe5+
<ltxe5
b4
Draw agreed
This would be the result after the

obvious variation 43 . . . lllli5 44 b5 f4 45
gxf4+ ltJxf4+ 46 etJxf4 xf4 47 <itd4
g4 48 a5 @xh4 49 a6 bxa6 50 bxa6
g3 5 1 c5 h5 52 -.tic6 h4 53 @b7 h3
54 xa7 etc.
9
10
8th game
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d4
c4
tlJf3
d5
cxd5
ll'lc3
i.g5
.i.e2
d6
a6
A dangerous symptom in the given

variation. The threat of . . . b7-b5 is
easily parried. and the weakness of the
b6 square may tell.
If Black is forced to make such a
move, it follows that his position is
difficult.
Botvinnik...:...Tai
World Championship Afatch
1 960,
lle8
Now the black knight can no longer

occupy h5, since it is controlled by the
queen (in the event of . . . h7-h6 and
. . . g6-g5), and later this duty will be
taken over by the king's bishop.
Game 276
A.foscorr1
e3
ll'ld2
ll'lf6
e6
c5
exd5
g6
11
a4
tLlbd7
1fc2
b6
.
Finally, after a change of inove order,
the position has become fully theor
etical, but things are no easier for Black
as a result the evaluation is clear White stands better.
12 0-0
1lc7
.i.g7
0-0
An insignificant finesse, since sooner
or later Black will be forced to play
. . . d7-d.6. Evidently Tai wanted to avoid
13
96
14
.i.f3
18
19
This caution is necessary. After 14 e4

ttlli:d
: 5 1 5 exd5 .i.xc3 16 ilxc3 %he2 it
would not have been easy for White to
demonstrate that the weakening of
Black's kingside is worth the sacrificed

pawn.
14
...
1ia2
W'd8
fS
It was essential to play l 9 . . .b5, in

order to bring the queenside pieces into
the game. At the same time, the advance
of the kingside pawns that Black under
takes is not in the spirit of the position.
c4
20
21
22
23
lt:\cJ
lLlc4
.i.e2
llJa4
23
24
25
gJ
f4
h8
h5
i.d4
26
ifaJ
:lb8
g5
g4
'ilf6
The white pieces have taken up the

standard positions typical of this
variation, brought into practice by
Averbakh. The opponent' s weaknesses
on the queenside are fixed, and it could
have been considered that the game was
essentially decided. However, as in
many other games of this match, my
uncertain play led to 'miracles' .
One gains the impression that Black
overlooked the loss of this pawn. Any
other move would have been better, e.g.
14 . . . .if5 1 5 e4 i.d7 followed by . . . ttJc8.
15
It was unfavourable for Black to take

en passant, since after 25 . . . gxf3 26 :xn
his king would have been in danger. But
now he loses any chance of an attack
against White's kingside.
.i.xf6
In order to win the pawn. White has

to exchange his good bishop. 15 a5
liJbd7 16 tiJa4 was dubious on account
of 16 . . . 'i'xa5 17 tCixc4 'i'c7 with the
threat of . . . b7-b5.
15
16
17
Now the
defended.
17
a5
llJce4
c4
26 . . . Jtxe3+ 27 tt:Jxe3 'ii'd4 was not

possible because of 28 @2.
Now White had an elementary win,
for which he should have gone into an
endgame: 27 exd4 'i'xd4+ (27 . . . l:xe2 28
'i'd3 :e4 29 .:.ae l ) 28 :fl Itxe2 29
Wc3 Wxc3 30 bxc3 l:t.xf2 3 1 @xf2.
Instead of this he makes a move that
has no particular point, which. however,
is typical of supem.cial play in time
trouble.
f
ilxf6
lld7
pawn
cannot
be
-*.e5
1 8 llxc4
After 1 8 lt:Jxc4 b5 1 9 axb6 ctJxb6

Black would have gained some compen
sation for the material deficit.
97
was made on purely practical grounds:

to ease the defence in severe time
trouble.
31
32
33
34
bxc3
l:lfel
:ct
11xc3
.i.b5
l\e4
Instead of this move, which could

have lost, with 34 :d4 ltlxc3 35 .id3
White would have retained his extra
pawn and winning chances.
27
ab6
Why leave the important c5 square

undefended?
27
h4
White's mistake could have been

exploited immediately by 27 . . . .ixb6 28
axb6 ttJcs. Instead, for the second time
Black allows his opponent the oppor
tmtity to force a win by exchanges (28
exd4), but White is 'consistent' . . .
28
l:tadl
.i.xb6
On the second occasion Tai does not

miss his chance.
29
axb6
30
gxh4
30
...
l\c5
Black can be content: his pieces have

finally come into play, there are numer
ous weaknesses in White's position, and
the extra pawn is of no significance.
A sensible decision: White avoids the
creation of a weak pawn at g3 .
i.d7
In the event of 30 . . .'i'xh4 White

could have replied 3 1 l:lfl or 3 1 1i'c3+
and 3 2 1'e l .
31
llbc8
34
Although Tai had thirteen minutes

remaining, he made this move instantly,
evidently reckoning that the most
important thing was not to allow the
opponent time to think. After 34 . . . :ec8 !
(not leaving the b7 pawn undefended)
Black would have won the exchange,
without allowing White any significant
compensation. Now, however, the pic
ture changes sharply.
35
36
37
tt.\a5
llxe2
lbcJ
Le2
tbxcJ
Of course, White 'voluntarily' gives

up the exchange, wjnning an important
tempo, since after 37 :ec2 (or 37 l:leel)
'lfcJ
White had only three minutes left for

ten moves, and the exchange of queens
98
37 . . . lDe2+ 3 8 l:xe2 .Ihcl+ his position

is hopeless.
37
J:lxc3
38
and so I sealed my move only after 30

minutes' thought.
41
lLlxb7
Now it is clear what Black's thought

less 34th move has cost him. Were the
b7 pawn defended here, it would be
time for White to resign.
38
Itexe3
In his commentary Tal suggests that

38 . :bs 39 ltJxd6 l:td3 40 ltlxf5 l:txd5
4 1 e4 :xrs 42 exf5 J:xb6 would have
led to a drawn ending. This seems
insufficiently convincing: after 43
White has a clear advantage.
In this variation Black should not
return the exchange (4 1 . . . l:t xf5), and
then, perhaps, he retains chances of
continuing the fight.
..
39
40
l:beJ
xd6
lt)f7+! !
The knight makes way for the

d-pawn with gain of tempo. Now after
4 1 ... <it>h7 42 d6 one of the pawns queens
immediately, while if 4 1 . . . r:i;;g7 (or
4 1 .. . g8) there follows 42 b7 l:b3 43
liJd8. Here 43 . . . a5 44 d6 a4 45 d7 a3 46
ltJe6+ or 43 . . . <it>fS 44 h5 e8 45 h6
.
<it>xd8 46 h7 is possible.
To complete the picture, it should be
pointed out that the seemingly tempting
4 1 b7 would even have lost: 4 1 . . J lb3
42 M+ <it>h7 ! 43 ltJd8 a5 44 d6 a4 45
d7 a3 46 ltJe6 a2.
Black resigns.
%ixe3
lld3
Game 277
Tal-Botvinnik
Caro-Kann Defence
1
2
3
4
5
6
e4
d4
tic3
tDxe4
tDg3
ltlle2
c6
d5
dxe4
.*.f5
.lg6
lhf6
The two players repeat the 5th game

of the match (No.275).
7
8
9
10
Here I had to seal my move. I was

able quite quickly to find the winning
plan, in which Black's king and rook are
unable to cope with White's knight and
three passed pawns. Even so, I decided
to check all the variations at the board,
h4
lhf4
.tc4
0-0
h6
.i.h7
e6
In the afore-mentioned game Tal

played 1 O 'i'e2 and did not gain any
advantage, but after h2-h4 kingside
.
castling also seem unjustified.
99
10
. .
ild6
these considerations did not occur to

either of the players during their home
preparations.
Now Black wants to castle, after

which the position of the white pawn at
-h4 would .give him an obvious advan
tage. Therefore, when I was preparing
for the game, I anticipated that Tai
would without hesitation sacrifice a
knight for two pawns, in addition
obtaining fine piece play.
10 . lDd5, the move recommended by
the Encyclopaedia. looks more risky.
13
14
/i)xe6
.i.xe6
14
15
16
il.xh7
f5
16
...
Ibh7
fxe6
ifc7
A natural move, but perhaps not the

strongest, after which there could have
followed 13 5 and then f2-f4, when
it is not so easy for Black to find an
acceptable plan. I should mention that
the attempt by White to play differently:
1 3 ttJh5 :tf8 14 c4 (instead of 1 4 f4)
14 . . . g6 1 5 llg3 liJbd7 16 c5 i.xg3 17
fxg3 liJd5 1 8 :le 1 0-0-0 would have led
to an inferior position for him.
Instead of the move in the game, it
would have been better to reply
1 2 . liJbd7, and only after 1 3 l:el ( 13
li)h5 <it>f'S)
1 3 . . 'i'c7, not fearing the
discovered check. It is amusing that
. .
tLlbd7
White, of course, could not allow his

opponent to castle queenside, and he
ex1racts the maximwn from the
opposition of rook and king - he
exchanges the light-square bishops, to
gain the f5 square for his knight.
..
11
12
:tel
.tg8+
g6!
A move, as it seems to me, in the
style of Capablanca. Black agrees to

material equality (a piece for three
pawns), but quickly completes the mob
ilisation of his forces, and his pieces
will be well coordinated. The following
variations looked less . convincing:
16 . . . Jth.2+ 1 1 @hl g6 t8 xh6+ llxh6
( 1 8 . g8 19 g3 gxf5 20 Ji.f4) 1 9 liJxh6
'i'f4 20 .l:.e3 (but not 20 g3 .ixg3 2 1
fxg3 'i'xg3) 20 . . 'ii'xh6 2 1 <it>xh2 'i'xh4+
22 @gl (22 . tlJg4 2 3 ilf3+ and 24
'i'g3).
1 00
..
. .
. 17 : . .i.xh6+
18 llxd6
.
<ai>g8
"i'xd6
After 1 8+l:t,di6 1 9 :e6 the storm

clouds would have been gathering over
the black king, e.g. 1 9 . . l:.xh4 20
10
Yd3 .
.
19
.i.g5
lite7
The exchange of rooks reduces the

attacking potential of the white pieces.
1 1 is significant in this position that for
the moment White does not have any
passed pawn. And if. with this aim, he
plays 20 lhe7 'ilxe7 2 1 h5, then Black
will have good chances both in the
endgame (2 1 .. .gxh5 22 'i'xh5 ltJxh5 23
.1.xe7 CDf4), and in attack (2 1 . . . rJ;;g7 22
hxg6 h8).
20
21
1id3
Wg3
rJ;;g7
A positional mistake, since in the

endgame, on account of his doubled g
pawns, White will have little chance of
saving the game. It would have been
better to try and maintain the position.
21
l:txel+
Incidentally, 2 1 . . . 'ii'xg3 22 :xe7+

\M'8 23 fx.g3 @xe7 is also possible, but
Black chooses a rather more cunning
continuation.
22
23
lhel
fxg3
c4
d5
cxd5
d6
27
28
29
30
:ct
:c7
.lxf6
lllg4
cxd5
ltldf6
This entire pawn breakthrough is

essentially a diversionary operation to
gain freedom for the white king.
ltfi
I:td7
<ttf7
White also has to part with his

bishop, in order to be able to advance
his kingside pawns.
30
31
32
1fxg3
<ai>f2
llxd7
llxf6
e6
Nothing is changed by 3 2 'ifi>f3 <ai>xd6 .
Although Black is a piece up (for

three pawns). White has a good bishop,
and if he should succeed in bringing his
king into play, the outcome will be
unclear.
23
24
25
26
27
32
33
34
35
36
'iti>f4
g4
@e4
rJ;;x d7
xd6
i;t>e6
lld5+
By playing 36 'it>g5 c3;Il 37 h5 White

would not have achieved anything on
the kingside, but after 3 7 . ltJb4 he
would have lost both of his queenside
pawns.
l:tf8!
Making it harder for the white king to

come into play, whereas White's control
of the e-file cannt. .achieve anything for
him.
101
36
37
' 38
39
<li>f4
e4
a3
ll'if6+
ll'id5+
llb4
The white pawns would have been

more diffi cult to attack after 3 9 a4, but
their loss could not have been avoided.
39
40
41
h5
h6
lic6
g5
Tal again hurries to make his 4 lst

move on the board, to force Black to
seal his move.
45
46
st?d6
d5
a5
xh6
47
48
49
50
51
52
<ifi>c4
<ifi>b5
b3
xa5
b4
CJ
lDct
lDdJ
ibcl
lDxbJ+
lDcl
52
53
54
c2
<it>dJ
<it>g6
ltle2
ltlct +
55
56
<itc2
d3
ttle2
tLlf4+
57
58
6
c4
g3
ltle2
White resigns
Since Black has time for this, by no

means urgent, capture, it means that on
the other side of the board his lmight is
successfully opposing the king.
A final attempt - White pursues the

knight. But such an operation normally
succeeds only in studies.
The reader already knows that for the

resumption I had very little time left
(less than 20 minutes), and now my flag
was already hanging. In such circwn
stances I never reject an opportunity to
repeat moves.
41
Here the time control was reached.
'it>f6
I spent a great deal of time consider
ing this move, but I sealed it, after

convincing myself that the raid by the
white king on the queenside did not
present any danger. Analysis, and then
the resumption of the game, confirmed
this.
42
43
@d5
'it>e6
g6
World Championship}.,fatch
Afoscow 1 960, 20th game
Or 43 <it>d6 ttJa5 44 c7 b5 45 b8
lbc4 46 <3lxa7 (46 b3 a5) 46 . . . tbxb2 47
a6 liJc4 48 'it>xb5 liJxa3+ etc.
43
44
a4
Game 278
Botvinnik-Tal
1
2
3
ll'ia5
lbb3
102
d4
c4
lDcJ
ttlf6
e6
il.b4
4
5
a3
bxc3
xc3+
lhe4
7
8
1ih6
g6
d6
At first sigtlt _this seems an unnatural

move, whiclthould be easy to refute,
but this impression is deceptive. The
knight thrust has some positional basis:
Black is aiming for . . . f7-f5, transposing
into a variation of the Dutch Defence
that is not Wlfavourable for him. It is
true that the knight will be forced to
retreat, which loses Black tempi, but if
White plays 'iic2, then this loss .of time
will to some degree be compensated.
In the previous games of the match
where this variation occurred, I did not
find the correct system of development.
Finally, in home analysis I was able to
do this, but at a time when the fate of
the match was already decided. Even so,
I thought it useful to check my con
clusions, reckoning that such an oppor
tunity might not present itself again.
If 8 ... lllxc3 there would have

followed 9 f3 with the threat of IO a4,
while if 8 . 'i'g5 9 3 and then f2-f3.
After a long ink Tai prefers to
continue his development.
Now there is a threat to the c3 pawn.

In the event of Black avoiding this main
idea (for example, after 6 ... 0-0) he
would have had to reckon with the
possible manoeuvre ..td3, llle2 and
f2-f3, forcing the knight at e4 to
abandon its central position without
provoking 'i'c2.
Of course, not 10 ... fxe4 1 1 fxe4

liJxe4 12 llJf3 when Black stands badly.
e3!
f5
'ifh5+
This is the point. If Black does not

want immediately to give up the right to
castle (7 ... c.t>f'8), he has to weaken his
dark squares, which may prove
especially sensitive in view of the
absence of the bishop covering these
squares. The play becomes more lively,
and Black has to give up ideas about the
c3 pawn.
103
9
10
10
lhf6
f3
e4
11
12
..tg5
i.d3
13
lhe2
e5
'iie7
llf8
The need for such moves indicates

that the opening has not gone in Black's
favour.
The natural choice, but not the best.
Tai rightly considers that 13 'i'h4 was
stronger, and Llien Black would not have
gained counterplay on the f-file (if
13 . . . 'i'f7 there would have followed 14
..th6).
13
iff7
The subtle point of this move is that

after 14 xf6 ifxf6 15 exf5 .i.xf5 16
i.xf5 gxf5 17 'i'xh7 ttJa6 18 'i'h5+
'i'xc4 1 8 'ifxh7 exd4 with compli

cations. There is no need to demonstrate
that this was advantageous to White.
Meanwhile, with 16 . . . h6 17 .td2 g5 18
'i'g3 tDc6 1 9 h3 tiJf6 Black could have
achieved a good game without any
complications.
@d7 ! Black has sufficient compensation

for the sacrificed pawn.
14
Wb4
This move is based on an oversight:

White was convinced that the opening
of the f-file was in his favour.
Meanwhile,. after 14 0-0 the opening
of the f-file would have become
impossible, and if 14 . . . thg8 1 5 'ii'b.4 f4
he could have begun play on the
opposite wing, e.g. 1 6 c5 'i'g7 1 7 cxd6
cxd6 1 8 'i'el h6 1 9 Sl.h4 g5 20 ii.fl, and
it transpires that the black king is
insecurely placed.
14
15
16
fxe4
..
1ff2+
17
18
19
<it>d2
.i.xh4
:hfl
19
20
21
l:lxf8+
<iti>xd3
22
lDgJ
'ilfxh4
lDf2
There is no point in giving up the

active dark-square bishop.
fxe4
llg4
Of course, not 16 . . . tiJf2 because of 1 7

0-0.
Here I checked once more the

variation 16 <t>d2 h6 1 7 .i.e3 g5 18 'i'g3
ltlxe3 19 <it>xe3 (but not 19 'i'xe3 1i'f2).
and realised to my regret that, when
considering my 14th move, I had
overlooked the clever 1 9 . . . 'i'f4+!
White is therefore forced to allow th
exchange of queens, and with opposite- .
colour bishops his advantage is slight.
lDxdJ
<it>xf8
.te6
A poor manoeuvre, after which it can
16
h3
Tai writes that if 16 :gl he was

intending to play 16 . lDfl 1 7 i.c2
.
be considered that the battle is over

After lDgl -f3 in the end Black would
have been forced to exchange pawns on
d4, and he would have had to overcome
considerable difficulties in order te
maintain the balance.
22
23
104
lDfl
ti)d7
a6
24 .i.f2
.
25 ' lDd2
@g7
lif8
Now the knight can reach f3 ,

however, not in two moves, a s indicated
earlier, but in four, and . White can no
longer achieve anything With this, since
his opponent has succeeded in
mobilising all his forces.
26
27
el
b6
lllf6
l:lbl
Draw agreed
Game 279
Olympiad, Leipzig 1960

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d4
c4
lll cJ
e4
f3
.i.e3
.i.dJ
lLlf6
g6
g7
d6
0-0
b6
a6
c5
Threatening to intensify the pressure

in the centre - 9 . . . liJc6.
d5
e6
10
11
12
exd5
lLlgJ
12
13
exd5
lllbd7
0-0
lle8
This allows Black to seize the

initiative. It was essential to play 13
.i.e2, preventing the following knight
thrust, then ttlce4 and Ji.f4.
1'd2
8 tllge2 c5 9 es is also played, after

which Black does not succeed in forcing
d4-d5.
lll ge2
White prepares a retreat for his bish

op (after 12 . . . tlle 5), but significantly
weakens his d4 square. This is wrong,
since the exchange of the lmight for his
bishop did not present any danger.
The variation beginning with 6 . . . b6

is usually associated with . . . c7-c5.
However, Black must be careful. For
example, the immediate 7 ... c5 loses
material after 8 e5 in view of the threat
of i.e4. The move in the game vacates
the a7 square for the rook, and in some
cases . . . b6-b5 will be possible.
10
Now after the exchange on d5 White

will have to recapture with the e-pa
and the opening of the central file is
unfavourable for him. This could have
been avoided by 1 O a4, in order to have
the possibility of playing 1 1 cxd5.
It should be added that after 10 dxe6
.i.xe6 Black also has no difficulties.
Tamburini-Botvinnik
13
lLlg4
Irrespective of whether White retains

his dark-square bishop, as in the game,
or chooses 14 fxg4 .:t.xe3, the advantage
. is already with Black..
105
14
15
16
i.g5
.i.f4
.i.e2
f6
/i)ge5
21
22
.i.fl
h5
h4
Routine play. As has already been

mentioned, White should not have
avoided the exchange of his d3 bishop.
16
f5!
Black has achieved a pawn formation

that is ideal for the given variation. In
addition his knight occupies an ex
cellent post at e5. whereas the e4 square
is unavailable to the white knights. It
only remains for Black to complete the
mobilisation of his forces before
lmnching a decisive offensive.
17
18
.i.g5
.i.h6
llfdl
abl
i.eJ
:a7
lbf7
This move is possible. since the d4

square is defended by a white rook
(2 1 ltJg4 22 fxg4 l:txe3 23 'i'xe3 .i.d4
24 xd4).
...
23
24
lbge2
f4
lbh5
An oversight, leading to the loss of a

piece. However, it is already doubtful
whether White's position can be
defended.
lDf6
il.h8
In view of the weakness of the d4

square. there is no point in Black
exchanging bishops.
19
20
21
The board is full of pieces, but Black

is successfully playing for domination.
Therefore it can be concluded that this
method of play was known even before
the appearance in the chess arena of
Anatoly Karpov. At the time of the
Olympiad in Leipzig, the future World
Champion was just nine years old.
24
xf4
25 .i.xf4
.i.d4+
White resigns: after 26 'iii>h l g5 he
loses a piece.
The opening variation that occurred
in this game used previously to be con
sidered favourable for White, Thanks to
the efforts of the young andmasters
Geller and Petrosian, a reassessment of
values occurred, and on this occasion I
was able to make use of their interesting
ideas.
106
in the game Evans-Dorfman ( 1978), he

would have retained a reasonable game.
Game 280
Tarnowski-Botvinnik
9
10
Olympia'1. Leipzig 1960
Catalan Opening
1
2
3
4
5
d4
g3
.tg2
c4
cxd5
5
6
7
8
lllcJ
lt:\f'J
0-0
.i.f4
h3
0--0
This move is of little use. Thanks to

the tempo presented to him, Black is the
- first to begin play in the centre.
it)f6
d5
i.f5
c6
10
11
12
cl
g4
'Lle4
l::tc8
Now the point of White's 10th move

becomes clear: he wants to maintain his
bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal, even at
the cost of weakening his kingside.
In this situation the exchange in the

centre practically cleprives White of any
opening adva..tage.
cxd5
lllc6
e6
J.e7
12
13
tDxe4
Jl.g6
ilxe4
In the event of 13 ... dxe4 14 tDe5 the

d4 pawn cannot be taken in view of the
loss of a piece: 14 . . . 'ii'xd4 15 tDxc6
'i'xdl 16 tDxe7+.. or 14 ... tiJxd4 15 J;.xc8
'i'xc8 16 'i'xd4 .
The reader will probably already

have noticed that the game has trans
posed into a well-known variation of the
Gliinfeld Defence with reversed
colours, and hence with an ex'tra tempo
for White. However, the drawback to
his position is the .fact that his king's
bishop is restricted by the pawn at d5,
whereas Black's king's bishop has more
of a future. If White had shown caution
here and played 9 tDh4, as, for example,
14
tiJe5
White aims straightforwardly for

simplification, hoping in this way to
gain a draw. However, he fails to take
account of certain subtleties in the
position.
107
14
tLlxe5
15
i.xe5
15
16
17
xg2
flb3
After tlie exchange 26 'i'xc4 dxc4

(26 ...bxc4 is also good) Black would
immediately have crted a decisive
pawn majority on the queep.side.
15 . .llxe4 was hardly any better, if

only because of 15 . . . tbc6 and 16 ... 6.
il.xg2
'Ifa5
b5!
26
27
28
Tlueatening 18 .. J:Ic4. White decides

to concede the c-file, after which
Black's advantage becomes obvious.
18
19
20
l:.xc8
a3
lldl
l:I.d2
eJ
i.gJ
f3
i.f2
'ildJ
a4!
1fxd3
b4
llxc8
l!Cc4
'lfb6
'ifc6
a5
cl
f6
3 3 l:ta8 i.e 1 he loses a piece.

A textbook game. Such an ending
could have been played in former times
by Capablanca or Rubinstein . . .
The first rank is also under Black's

control. With his domination of the pos
ition, he can permit himself the luxury
of spending a tempo on this prophyl
actic move. The blockaded white a- and
b-pawns will soon come under attack.
25
26
Forcing the exchange on b4, after

which the white rook will no longer be
able to return to the second rank.
28 ... !k2 was weaker on account of 29
b4!
The start of a manoeuvre, aimed at

securing complete control of the open
file and continuing the pawn offensive
on the queenside.
21
22
23
24
e4
l:t.xd3
.i.xb4
29 axb4
exd5
30 exd5
31 l:leJ
:.c2
White resigns. After 32 l:e8+ cJ;f7
Game 281
Neikirch-Botvinnik
Oympiad, Leipzig 1960
Sicilian Defence
1fc4
1
2
3
4
5
6
e4
tl)fJ
d4
tL'lxd4
lllc3
i.c4
c5
llc6
cxd4
tL'lf6
d6
This, the Sozin Variation, is still

popular, although its history dates back
to the 6th USSR Championship
(Odessa, 1929).
e6
Perhaps the soundest reply, although

the more risky 6 ... 'ib6 is also popular.
7
108
i.b3
The other common continuation here

is 7 .i.e3 i..e7 8 'i'e2 followed by
queenside castling, which usually leads
to mutual attacks on opposite wings.
But my game with Padevsky (No.246)
took a different course: 7 0--0 ..te7 8
..te3 0--0 9 ilb3 l'.Da5 10 f4, which may
be the strongest for White (but not for
Black, who instead of 7 . . , i..e7 should
have played 7 . . . a6, immediately creating
counterplay on the queenside).
. .
if necessary be exchanged for the

bishop.
9
10
11
And this is now a positional mistake .

Since the move does not give White any
tactical advantages, it plays into Black's
hands (it opens the a8-hl diagonal).
11
0-0
il.e7
<it?hl
lLle8
check for himself.
12
ktf3
12 fS is a move known to theory,

when instead of 9 hi White has
played 9 ..t.e3 . Here, however, such an
attack is unfavourable.
0-0
::r:,z:z
I;::;:
9
If l l . ..dxe5 1 2 fxe5 d7, then White

wins by 1 3 ktxf7, as the reader can
Nowadays 7 . . . a6 is more often

played. for reasons explained in the
previous note.
lLla5
b6
f4
e5
12
lLlxb3
After 12 . . . i..b7 1 3 :h3 Black would

have been unable either to exchange the
bishop, or to consolidate with . . . g7-g6,
since 1 3 . . t'Dxb3 would allow the inter
position of 14 'l'h5 (14 . . . h6 1 5 t2Jxb3),
and if 13 . . . g6 14 lDxe6 with a very
strong attack. By his timely' elimination
of the bishop, Black weakens the
pressure on the a2-g8 diagonal.
.
A loss of time. which is not in accor

dance with Sozin 's plan. White cannot
now count on an opening advantage. 9
.i.e3 was better. transposing into a
position from the afore-mentioned
Game 246.
Now the most convenient way for
Black to mobilise his forces is by
developing his bishop at b7, for which it
is very useful for him to place his
queen's knight at a5. From there it may
13
lt:\c6
13
14
15
tt:lxe7+
axbJ
1 3 axb3 i.b7 14 .1Ih3 g6 is also in

Black's favour. White is counting on the
opposite-colour bishops, but it is well
known that this factor favours the side
whose bishop is the more active.
1id7
1ixe7
f6!
An important move. Black exchanges

tl1e e5 pawn, and his seemingly passive
knight comes into play, coordinating
excellently with his bishop.
109
16
exd6
White wrongly decides against the

sacrifice of his e5 pawn. In this case his
bishop would be activated, whereas in
the game it remains blocked in by its
own pawn at f4.
16
17 :dJ
18 lia4
20
lla5
20
21
d6
21
22
ltxd6
20 l:ta l was more circumspect.
.fl.b7
2 1 ltJc5 .i.xg2+ would have led to

loss of material.
lDxd6
lDf5
lDxd6
Played not for an attack, of course,

but to transfer this rook to e l , i.e. for
defence.
22
l:d8!
With the deadly threat of 23 . . . 'i'c6.
1ffe8!
18
An imperceptible, but highly signifi
cant move. Now the bishop moves onto

the long diagonal, which was not
possible earlier because of l:Ld7.
19
tne4
Black would also have retained an

imposing positional advantage after 19
l:r.e4 .ilb7 . Now, however he also gains
a decisive attack since unfortunately
for White, his rooks remain un
connected.
19
b5!
The rook has to move off the fourth

rank, and it remains cut off from
White's remaining forces.
23
Wd2
23
24
'ifxd6
lhd6
'i'd8
25
1fxe6+
..
23 J:xd8 'i'xd8 24 'i'el (24 'i'xd8

l:xd8 25 .i.e3 l:td l + 26 ..tg l l:r.d2)
24 . . . Wd5 25 'i'e2 l:.d8 26 .ie3 would
have led to the same won ending for
Black as in the variation with 24 'i'xd8.
Begi nning with this move, Black

operates with two threats: mate on the
back rank and the capture of the un
protected rook. Soon thee threats will
be impossible to parry-siinultaneously.
Or 25 'i'd2 'i'xd2 26 .ixd2 r!d8,
which would have led to a position
examined earlier.
l lO
25
ltti
26
Wet
l:te7
7
8
The fate of the game is decided:

Black's pieces e; acting concertedly,
whereas Whites.are disunited.
0-0
.i.d2
Here too 8 a3 is better, in order to

answer 8 . . . i.d6 with 9 e4 1
8 ...
e1
It will be recalled that in Game 236
Black decided to retain his bishop, and
he immediately retreated it to d6. The
two moves are more or less equivalent.
'
White resigns.
The concluding position is interesting
for the fact that, although all Black's
pieces are on the edge of the board, they
are dominant. From the standpoint of
chess composition, the artistic effect
would be stronger, if the black bishop
were at a8, and the rook at e8.
Game 282
Portisch-Botvinnik
Oympiad, Leipzig 1960
Queen's Gambit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d4
c4
ltlf3
lDc3
eJ
i.d3
0-0
ltlf6
e6
d5
c6
ltlbd7
.i.b4
7 a3, as I played against Euwe
(No. 175), is more energetic.
/l)e5
9
10
11
12
13
cxd5
al
i.xc3
dxe5
Only after 9 'ife l , which leads to

more complicated play, does theory
consider (on the basis of a game Ivkov
Kolarov, 1957) that White can retain a
slight opening advantage. Now, how
ever, far-reaching simplification begins.
c5
exd5
.i.xc3
xe5
llie4
If 1 3 lbg4 there could have

followed 14 i.e2 (if there is nothing
better) 14 . . ltJxe5 1 5 'ifxd5 with an
obvious advantage to White. Now he is
forced to part with one of his bishops,
and he prefers to retain the more
promising one at c3 .
...
111
14
il.xe4
15
ht
dxe4
This move does nothing to improve

the placing of the white pieces, and
therefore it is a waste of time. The only
way to fight for the retention of the
initiative was by 1 5 'i'h5, controlling
the f5 square and intending f2-f4. If the
white pawns had been able to advance,
this could have caused Black some
problems.
15
1fa4
ltadl
18
19
20
exd6
ltdl
%hd6
11xd6
a5!
White, gaining a tempo by the attack

on the e4 pawn, wants to win the battle
for the open central file. However, he no
longer has control of the g4 square, and
the bishop will feel perfectly safe at f5.
16
17
:d6!
The final subtlety. After 20 'i'xaS

J:.d8 Black would have occupied the
d-file. Draw agreed.
Black exploits the time granted to

him, and brings his queen's rook into
play, in order to have the opportunity of
switching it to the kingside. After
1 5 . . . .i.fS 16 f4 ! the black bishop could
have become a target. However, now
too it would have been better for White
to play 16 f4, forcing 16 . . . exf3 .
16
18
At just the right time. White prevents

the switching of the enemy rook to the
kingside.
.i.f5
.:a6
Game 283
Botvinnik-Schmid
Olympiad, Leipzig 1960
d4
c5
2
3
4
d5
e4
ltlf3
d6
.g6
The young Lothar Schmid was noted

for being very enterprising, and he al
ways aimed for a. lively game. Thus here
Black endeavours to seize the
- initiative
from the very first move.
After c2-c4 (now or a little later) it is

harder for Black to create piece play,
1 12
but is this something that White should

avoid? After weighing up everything
'for' and 'against', I was tempted by the
possibility of obtaining some training in
a piece battle, which I would certainly
be faced with in a few months' time in
my World Championship return match
with Tai. Therefore the c2 pawn was left
in its place.
4
5
6
.i.e2
tLlc3
Black appears to have achieved

much, but the insecure position of his
king in the centre allows White to land a
spectacular counter-blow.
11
.i. g7
tLlf6
tLla6
Now (after 5 .te2) this move is pos

sible, since if White wanted to double
the enemy a-pawns, for this he would
not only have to exchange his bishop for
a knight, but it would also lose a tempo.
And the black knight will be excellently
placed at c7, supporting . . . b7-b5-b4 and
attacking the white d5 pawn, which
hinders e4-e5.
7
8
0-0
a4
tLlc7
a6
Fully in keeping with Schmid' s style.

By saving time on castling, he at once
begins active play on the queenside.
9
10
ttld2
ttlc4
e5!
My opponent had not been afraid of

this, thinking that after 1 1 . . .bxc4 12
exf6 .i.xf6 he was not threatened in any
way. But when he continued the
variation with 1 3 ilh6, he easily
established that Black's defences would
be disorganised. He had to go in for the
exchange in the centre, allowing the fur
ther activation of White' s king's knight.
11
12
axb5
dxe5
axb5
12 . . .llxb5 was more circumspect, not

allowing d5-d6 and d6xc7. But could
the obstinate Lothar be expected to
deviate from his intended plan?
13
14
l:txa8
lixe5
1fxa8
b4
Again (as after 10 . . . b5) it appears

that Black has achieved his goal
(indee where can the knight go to?).
il.d7
b5
15
d6!
And again White finds an elegant

reply, which unexpectedly changes the
1 13
evaluation of the position. First he left

his king's .lqiight en prise. and now he
does not 'move away his queen's
knight.'. . :
the simpler 23 'it'a4, when the black
king becomes easy boGty for the white
pieces.
15
bxc3
One cannot, of course, object to the

fact that the Encyclopaedia attaches a
question mark to this move, but in the
event of 1 5 . . . exd6 16 'i'xd6 bxc3 I
thought that I would win with 17 .i.f3
'i'c8 ( 1 7 . . . 'i'a6 1 8 ti)c6) 1 8 l/_Jxd7 ti)xd7
19 .tg5.
Later it was recommended that White
should fir.st follow a game Larsen-Szabo
( 197 1): 17 .1ixc7 0-0 18 li:)xd7 li:)xd7.
and then try by 1 9 b3 to exploit his
minimal advantage.
Without any evidence, it is hard to
agree with this re".'evaluation of the
position. I still consider that tl1e varia
tion given by me, ending with 19 il.g5,
is convincing enough.
. 16 . dxc7
l7 .i.f4
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
lic8
Now the c7 pawn is invulnerable.
17
18
lDxd7
cxb2
lDxd7
19
.i.b5
J.d4
20
21
22
cJ
cxd4
.txd7+
e5
exf4
1 8 . . . 1i'xd7 would also have been

answered by 19 .ib5.
White was threatening 20 'i'xd7+
'i'xd7 2 1 c8'if mate.
The simplest way to win.
22
23
'ilfe2+
'iixd7
Only here, when the position is now

absolutely won, can White be re
proached for the fact that he did not find
e5
<if;f8
<it>g8
f6
l:.bl
'&xc5
g7
lte8
:xb2
:bt
f3
gxf3
Wh3
W'c6
Black resigns
It was no accident that this game

appealed to Tal. He rated it highly, since
it was conducted in his style.
The Olympiad in Leipzig was the
only open training event for the par
ticipants in the coming match in the
Spring of 196 1 . After this it only
remained for them to prepare in the
quiet of their studies for the return
match, which by a FIPE decision of
1 959 was being held for . the last time.
1 14
This move too was not obligatory.

Now White advantageously places his
knight at h4 and prepares f2-f4, espec
ially as . . . g6-g5 is bad because of lDr5 .
Game 284
Botvinnik-Pachman
OlympifJld, Leipzig
1960
King' s Indian Attack
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
gl
tilf3
-*.g2
0-0
dJ
tilbd2
e4
9
10
11
d5
g6
-*.g7
e5
tlle7
tllb4
f4
f5
.i.e6
tild7
White provokes a weakening of the

g6 square and secures control of the
h3-c8 diagonal.
0-0
11
12
13
fxg6
-*.bJ
-*.f7
bxg6
tllc5
Black brings up this knight to the

defence of his kingside, at which the
enemy pieces are aimed.
14
15
16
A slight chance for White in this

King's Indian position with colours
reversed is provided not only by his
extra tempo, but also by the poor
position of the black knight at e7
(compare it, for example, with the
position from Game 201 Botvinnik
O'Kelly, where Black played . . . tiJf6
and . . . ttJc6, and . . . e7-e5 only later).
Even so, if Black had quietly played
7 . . . tiJbc6, it would not have been easy
for White to find a good plan. After
Black's next move this problem is
simplified.
7
8
a4
d4
f6
b4
tllc4
.i.xg5
lile6
tilg5
fxg5
It may appear that in this way Black

eases his defence. In reality, the position
with opposite-colour bishops that soon
arises is advantageous to White, since
Black's bishop is restricted and his
pawns are weakened.
17
f3
.lxc4
Otherwise the e5 _pawn cannot be

defended.
1 15
18
19
dxc4
..d2
i.f6
<:/;g7
25
And now White carries out a

manoeuvre which I first noticed in a
similar situation in a game of
Capablanca (playing his knight to d3 ).
20
thel !
After 2 0 ltlxg5 Axg5 2 1 'i'xg5 ltlc6

22 W'xd8 (22 'ii'd2 a5) 22 ...llaxd8 23
llab l Z!xfl + 24 xfl a5 (or 24 ... d3),
Black, despite being a pawn up, would
have quite good drawing chances. White
avoids this continuation, preferring to
maintain a positional advantage.
20
21
lhd3
a5
b6
White was threatening ttJc5-e6.

22
c5
In this way White retains a good

pawn formation.
22
23
l.c6
b5
cxb6
This preparatory action is essential:i

after 25 'ii'xb4 Black would have
regained his pawn (25 . . . !Le7).
25
26
27
28
29
1fc4
g2
.i.e6
30
31
32
ltxfl
ltxf8
1fd5
33
ii.g4
1ffxb4
cxb6
ite7
Ji.cs
1fd6
llxfl
The exchange of rooks does not ease
Black's position, but perhaps even
makes it worse, since his rear is
weakened.
l:tf8
1f xf8
h6
32 . . . d3 33 'i'xd3 'i'f2+ 34 h3
would not have given Black anything,
since the fl square is defended.
But here after 33 'i'xe5 in the new
situation 33 . . . d3 would have saved
Black.
33
1Wd6
Black is pinning his hopes on the

endgame. but they prove unjustified.
34
35
23
thb4
Black sacrifices a pawn, in order to

exchange knights, and with opposite
colour bishops to restrict the opponent's
initiative.
24
ltlxb4
axb4
1 16
<t>f3
1f xd6
@g7
.i.xd6
36
e2
36
37
38
39
<iit>d3
c4
<iifi> d5
The king immediately heads for the

queenside, o! course, and Black cannot
gain control of the d5 square, since in
this case he loses his g6 pawn.
i.b4
<iit>f6
.tel
.i.b4
Here and later Black commits an

inaccuracy, by allowing the white
bishop to penetrate without difficulty to
e8. He should have played 39 . . . .i.c3
(indirectly defending the e5 pawn), in
order after 40 il.d7 to have the reply
40 . . . <it>e7.
40
..id7
Grune 285
Botvinnik-Tal
Ttflorld Championship Return Match
Afoscow 1961, 1st game
i.el
40 . . . e7 was nevertheless better,

although after 4 1 c6 .i.a5 42 c7
(or 42 . . . i.b4 43 xb6 ! xd7 44 a5 c8
45 a6 @b8 46 a7+ a8 47 <it>a6, and
Black loses) 43 d8 White's bishop
would have reached e8, which, as will
be seen, would have ensured the win.
.
.l\cJ
41 i.e8
42
There could have followed 42 . . . .ta5

43 <J;c7 @g7 (or 43 . . . g4 44 i.d7 g5 45
.te6 'iii>h 5 46 i.c4 'iii>g5 4 7 .i.e2 'iii>h5 48
h3) 44 <iti>d6 6 45 i.xg6 ! (this is .
where the weakness of the g6 pawn
tells) 45 . . . @xg6 46 'itixe5 ..ic3 47 'itie6
g4 48 e5 .i.b4 49 <it>d7 <ttf7 50 e6+
5 1 a5, and the black bishop cannot sJop
the widely-separated passed pawns.
<iit>c6
White sealed this move, and Black
resigned without resuming.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
c4
lDcJ
d4
eJ
i.d3
a3
i.xc4
lDf6
e6
.i.b4
0-0
d5
dxc4
It is well known that 7 i.xh7+ 'iti>xh7

8 axb4 lDc6 does not give White any
advantage.
..i.d6
As was shown by my games with

Barcza (Budapest 1 952) and Furman
(Moscow 1955), after 7 . . . i.xc3+ 8 bxc3
c5 9 ilb2 White has a clear advantage.
lDfJ
8
9
.
lDb5
8 f4, which was tried in Game 346,

proves unsuccessful after the energetic
reply 8 . . . c5.
lDc6
A rather naive attempt to refute the

variation. Correct here is 9 b4, as played
in the 3rd game of the match (No.286).
1 17
Naturally, he chooses a more compli

cated continuation.
e5
The most active continuation.
10
lDxd6
16
10 dxe5, which occurred in the game

Ilivitsky-Lipnitsky ( 1 952), seems more
logical.
'ifxd6!
10
The right way! After 10 . . . cxd6 1 1

dxe5 ttJxe5 ( 1 1 . . .dxeS 1 2 'i'xd8 -'lxd8
1 3 ttJg5) 12 i.e2 White has the advan
tage. But now the exchange on e5,
which he cannot avoid. involves the loss
of castling and Of several tempi.
11
12
13
14
dxe5
@xdl
<it>e2
.i.d5
'ifxdl+
lDg4
lDcxe5
Played in order to hinder . . . b7-b6

possible.
14
15
.i.e4
if
17
18
19
20
c6
.i.e6
White is behind in development and,

despite the two bishops, his position is
clearly inferior. He could of course have
played for a draw: 16 t:Dxe5 l'.bxe5 1 7 f4
.i.c4+ 18 lt\d3+ 1 9 .xd3 .i.xd3 20
i..d 2, but in this variation he is
completely deprived of counterplay.
lDd2
llad8
White nevertheless has a pawn

majority in the 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 White in
view of the dangerous position of his
king in the centre.
Now, however, making use of the
respite afforded him, White completes
his development, and in the approaching
endgame the position of his king is
transformed from a negative factor into
a positive one.
h3
.i.c2
b3
.:d1
lDf6
lld7
ll.fd8
It only remains fo i.b2 to be played,

and Black will be in difficulties.
Therefore Tal is forced to exchange the
bishop at c2 . .
20
21
1 18
.i.xd3
thdJ
:xdJ
22
.i.b2
White, however, decided to exchange

both pairs of rooks, since he assumed
(not without reason) that in the ending
with knight against bishop his winning
chances would be considerable.
:Jd7
Of course, not 22 ... xb3, which

would have lost a piece, but the move in
the game also indicates that Black is
underestimating the gers of his
position. 22 ... cs was essential, activ
ating his queenside pawns and fixing the
weakness of the b3 pawn.
23
24
.i.xf6
b4
ttlb3
26
27
28
<!>et
ltacl
f3
b6
.t.e4
:xdl+
ttxdl +
30
..td5
The last chance was 30 ... .tfS, in

order to defend the c6 pawn from d7.
Now the knight breaks into Black's
position and begins wreaking havoc
there.
..tf5
..td3+
A temporary and insignificant

achievement. It is clear that the bishop
will soon be forced to retreat.
:xdl
xdl
And so, the planned exchange of

heary pieces has taken place.
gxf6
How the position has changed within

just a couple of moves! Black is 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.
24
25
28
29
30
31
lDd4
c5
32
33
bxc5
lDb5
bxc5
a6
3 2 e4 was threatened.
Or 33 ... as 34 ltJc3 ..i.c6 35 <it>d2. and.

the white king penetrates unhindered to
c4.
34
35
36
37
38
It is possible that 28 xd7 :!xd7 29

'it>e2 (but not 29 f3 iii view of 29 . . . :d3)
29 . . . .i.d3+ 30 <it>f3 was even stronger.
1 19
lDc7
lDe8
h4
ttld6
gJ
-*.c4
f5
@f8
.i.fl
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
39
40
41
was already at b3, thanks to the fact that

the bishop had reached c4 not in two
moves, but in one.
<tle7
lhxf5+ <tle6
e4
<ties
<it>d2
Black resigns
Game 286
Botvinnik-Tal
Moscow 1 961, 3rd game
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
c4
lhc3
d4
e3
li.d3
a3
.i.xc4
9
10
lElfJ
b4
e5
.i.g4
.i.b2
After 10 . . . a6 1 1 .i.e2 White would

have
retained
some
advantage
(Botvinnik-Hecht, Belgrade 1 969).
lhf6
e6
.i.b4
0-0
d5
dxc4
.i.d6
11
d5
In the 5th game I chose a more

logical continuation - 1 1 dxe5 thxe5 1 2
.i.e2, but here I was testing my pre
match preparations (incidentally, instead
of 1 1 . . . tDxe5, Konstantinopolsky re
commended 1 1 ....txe5 for Black).
It was no accident that Tai employed

this variation of the Nimzo-Indian
Defence against me. Black gives up his
pawn centre, aiming for piece play.
8
9
11
12
/i)c6
The simplest way of developing the

queen's bishop. Incidentally, White
does not achieve any advantage with
either 9 ltlb5 (as I played against Tai
earlier in the same match - No.285), or
9 i.b5. In order to appreciate how old
this variation is, it will be recalled that
this latter move (9 .i.b5) occurred back
in the game Capablanca-Ragozin (Mos
cow 1 936). Only, there the white queen
CD.e7
il.d7
h3
12 . . . i.h5 would have led to more

complicated play, but, since Tai guessed
that I was prepared for this variation, he
chooses a less obvious move. In addi
tion, Black is aiming to play his knight
to g6, and in this case the position of the
bishop at h5 will be unfavourable in
view of g2-g4.
13
lhg5
thg6
While the lmight was at e7, Black

could have safely made the prophylactic
1 20
move 1 3 . . . h6. Now, however, White

carries out a tactical operation, ex
changing the enemy light-square bishop
and gaining a significant positional
advantage..
14
15
lDe6
dxe6
An important move, restricting still

further the opponent's pieces. White can
easily defend the f4 square, and if Black
wants to transfer a knight to d4, which
has been left without pawn control, an
exchange on this square may merely
increase White's positional advantage.
fxe6
'ifi>h8
With the knight at e7, here the bishop

would have been able to move.
16
17
18
exd7
0-0
'ilfxd7
llf5
ifg4
ifc2
Black, of course, avoids the exchange

of queens, since in the endgame White's
advantage would be obvious.
20
_21 .
22
23
'ife2
1fg4
WeZ
e4
'W'f5
1fc2
11ff5
27
28
29
1fh5
1!fe2
lDeJ!
ltlg8
ltl6e7
..
lDg4!
lDh6
l'.Llxg4
hxg4
ltlc6
1fd7
:ad8
'ife8
lDh6
White now avoids the exchange of

knights on d5, since the exchange of the
same pieces on g4 is even more
favourable to him.
lDg8
For the same reason Black avoids

the exchange.
19
l:tadl
ifg4
g3
There is no way for Black to achieve

any activity. If, for example, 26 . . . c6 27
lbe3 lbf6, then 28 1i'f3 .
lDd5
By offering the exchange of knights,

White aims to gain control of the impor
tant squares d5, e4 and g4, which will
suppress the activity of the opponent's
pieces.
18
23
24
25
26
29
30
This is equivalent to suicide, since it

opens the h-file. 30 . . . ifb5 3 1 . g2 (3 1
'Dxe5 ifxh3) 3 1 . . .lLlc6 really would
have been better.
31
121
32
<i!?g2
33
-*.d5!
33
...
d4
34
35
.*.xd4
.i.c4!
exd4
ile7
The exchange of rooks would have

hindered White's attack on the enemy
king.
Tai was unable to refrain from this
'activity'. but the resulting opposite
colour bishops are in White's favour,
since Black has no way of opposing the
activity of the light-square bishop.
The afore-mentioned plan has been

carried out unhindered, and now with
every move the threats intensify.
41
g7
42
43
...
c5
36
37
b5
f4
.i.f6
d3
38
39
40
41
l:lxd3
i.xdJ
e5
:ht
l:txd3
.i.d4
g6
Game 287
Botvinnik-Tal
World Championship Return A1atch
Moscow 1 961, 7th game
Nimzo-lndian Defence
After this Black has some slight con

solation: two connected passed pawns,
but they are blockaded.
Black sacrifices a pawn, in order to
ex.change one pair of rooks.
b6
The sealed move. After 43 . . . 'ifd7

White wins by 44 'i'c6 'ii'xc6+ 45 bxc6
l'k8 46 e6, while if 43 . . . 'fie7 44 g5 l:tc8
(otherwise 45 'i'c6 and 46 'i'f6+ ! ) 45 f5
gxf5 46 l:txh7+ xh7 47 ii'h4+ rl;g7 48
1i'h6 mate. Black resigns .
The simplest. It only remains for

White to play i..d3 , f2-f4, l:thl and
e4-e5 .
35
'ife4
.i.c4
1
2
3
4
c4
CJ
d4
a3
f6
e6
i.b4
In the earlier games or the return

match I chose 4 e3 . Now I decided to
check what my opponent had prepared
in this variation, which had occurred
122
several times in the games from our

previous match.
4
5
..
bxcJ
i:.g5 h6 9 i.h4 xc4 10 .ixc4 dxc4 1 1

'i'a4+.
8
9
10
i.xcJ+
b6
Black avoids 5 . . . liJe4 6 e3 f5 7 'i'h5+

(No. 278). A good alternative is 5 . . . c5, as
played, for example, in Game 100 and
also a training game with Kan (see this
volume).
6
7
.i.xft
exd5
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
situati9n.
il.a6
f3
e4
xfl
i.g5
10
h6
The pawn exchange
10 . . .dxe4 1 1
fxe4 would have given White pre
dominance in the centre and the
possibility of conveniently developing
his pieces at f3.
Tai tries to complicate matters with a
pawn sacrifice ( 1 1 i.xf6 1i'xf6 - of
course, not l l . . .gxf6 - 12 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

This move can be considered a

positional mistake, since it allows White
to immediately get rid of his weak c4
pawn. I have to admit that already then I
knew that 7 . . . liJc6 gives Black a good
game, and after 8 .id3 t2Ja5 9 'i'e2 d6 !
followed by . . . 'i'd7-a4 (or c6) his
position is perfectly sound.
One gains the impression that, from
the standpoint of opening preparation,
my opponent had not made very fruitful
use of the ten months separating our
second match from the first.
1fa4+
d5
cxd5
11
c6
Avoiding the endgame, since after

l 1 . . . 'i'd7 1 2 'i'xd7+ liJbxd7 13 i.xf6 (or
1 3 i.h4 dxe4 14 e l ) 1 3 . liJxf6 14 e5
Another plan was carried out in the

game Alekhine-Eliskases ( 1 93 3/34) : 8
123
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.
12
J.h4
Of course, here too White avoids 12

i.xf6 'i'xf6 1 3 exd5 0-0.
dxe4
12
highly dubious decision. The

opening of lines in the centre merely
assists the development of White's
initiative.
13
:et
g5
This is now forced.
14
.tf2
The only move. In the event of the

routine 14 !atg3 Black's position would
not have been so bad after 14 . . . 'i'd5.
But now if 14 . . . 'ii'd5 there can follow 1 5
c4 (the d4 pawn is defended) 15 . . . "i'e6
16 'ifc2 (16 fxe4 tlJxe4 17 ifc2 f5 18 g4
is unconvmcmg on account of
1 8 . . . d8 ! 1 9 gxf5 Wxc4+ 20 'i'xc4
tlJd2+) and 17 fxe4 with a decisive
advantage for White.
This is the subtle point of the
manoeuvre, begun with 1 2 i..h4.
14
15
White aims as quickly as possible to

bring into play his last reserve, the rook
at h l . If now 1 7 . . . g4 1 8 fxe4, and g4
remains inaccessible to the black knight.
After 17 . . . l::tg8 (as should have been
played) 18 hxg5 hxg5 White's king's
rook is immediately activated. Black's
reply also allows the bishop to come
into play with decisive effect.
17
18
19
1!fe7
lLle2
...
'i'c2
b5
1ixa3
If 16 . . . e3, then 1 7 i.xe3 CLld5 1 8

.te l .
Convinced that the positional battle is
lost, Black tries at least to retain a
material adv{Ultage.
17
gxh4
ttlbd7
0-0-0
On the queenside too the king will

not find a quiet refuge, and loss of
material for Black becomes inevitable.
But not 1 5 fxe4 in view of 1 5 . . . tL1xe4

16 'ifc2 f5 17 g4 t'Dd7 1 8 gxf5 df6.
15
16
.i.xh4
ttlgJ
h4
1 24
20
tLlxe4
20 . . . ttJxe4 is not possible on account

of 2 1 'i'xe4 with two threats: 22 Wxc6+
and 22 ..i.xd8. Therefore Black offers a
piece sacrifice.
20
21
lthe8
White is not in a hurry to gain

material After 2 1 ctJxf6 J:.xe 1 + 22
ct>xel 'i'al + 23 'i'd l 'ili'xc3+ 24 <it>fl
ctJe5 some complications would have
arisen. It is more important to retain the
initiative.
21
22
23
24
fxe4
l:lal
ltxa7
ttlxe4+
f6
11fe7
'If xe4
1!f xe4
%la8+
llxe4
tLlb8
27 .igJ
28 11.hal
b7
30
31
32
33
b4
.id6
bxc3
<iiftb5
.i.c5+
lila4
Black resigns
From the character of the play, one

might imagine that it was Tal playing
White, and Botvinnik playing Black.

English Opening
1
2
3
c4
li)cJ
g3
lDf6
e5
c6
4
5
6
tLlfJ
lDd4
cxd5
e4
d5
1fb6
7
8
ihb3
-*.g2
cxd5
A well-known continuation of Keres.

Although White can hope for an open
ing advantage, the play becomes sharp,
which always suits Tai.
My opponent was in a fighting mood,
since in the preceding game of our
match he had won in good style.
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 ltJc2, which is more common
even now, although the continuation
chosen by me is sound enough.
llc8
Defending against the threat of 2 9

% Ua7+ b6 30 i.c7 mate.
29 , l:l8a7+
Gatne 288
Of course, not 26 . .. c7 27 li.g3+.
28
.i.xb8
Botvinnik-Tal
The exchange of queens does not

weaken White's attack.
25
26
30
Again threatening mate (3 1 l:t la6).

Black loses a piece.
b6
125
i.xc3+ 1 5 @fl .i.xd4, sine the queen is

won at too high a cosL
' 'ifxb4
14
.
15
.i.xf6
Of course, not 1 5 dxe4 tt:Jc6.
15
16
d3
.i.eJ
llld4
12
lLlc2!
a4
1fb4
al
No better was l l . . . 'ifxb2, to which

the simplest reply would have been 12
0-0.
An obvious refutation of the rook' s
pawn's swift advance.
12
13
ii.d4
The diagram demonstrates clearly the

failure of Black' s play.
16
17
avoids
14
:b l
.i.e6
l:lcl
17 'iic l , suggested by Bronstein,

would seem to be more logical, in order
to use the rook on the b-file (e. g.
l 7 . . . tt:Jc6 18 :b l 'fie7 19 dxe4 dxe4 20
tt:Jxe4, and the threat of 2 1 l:Xb7 can
hardly be parried). However, White
would have had to reckon with the
11
possible reply 1 7 . . . 'ifb2
At the same time, as will be seen
from what follows, the move in the
game by no means throws away the win.
17
18
19
'ilfxb2
b4
Only in this way can the 'would-be

attacker' queen be saved.
14 /i)xb4
Naturally, White
gxf6
a5
In view of Black's retarded develop

ment, he had no justification for wasting
two tempi on this and the further ad
vance of his pawn. Such an ' initiative'
can be parried without difficulty.
The correct plan of development was
demonstrated by Black in the game
Reshevsky-Keres ( 1 963): 8 . .. .i.f5 9 d3
i.b4 10 0-0 .i.xc3 1 1 bxc3 0-0 12 .i.e3
'i'c7, but the quiet play resulting after
8 . . . ..i.f5 evidently did not suit the World
Champion.
9
10
11
0-0
dxe4
lllxe4
lllc6
dxe4
After 1 9 tt:Jd5 'fid4 20 Cl1c7+ cJite7 2 1

t2Jxa8 (the outcome would also be
unclear after 2 1 :xc6 'i'xd l 22 lixe6+
1 26
23
a-pawn would have caused White con

siderable problems.
19
.i.xa2
The boldness of desperation Other

wise Black would simply have been a
pawn down and in a difficult position.
20 lhd6+
21
22
lhxb7
lhc5
24
25
26
22 .. J::tc 8 was completely bad in view

of 23 ifd6+ <iftg8 24 ttJe6 'i'b8 25
:xc8+ 'ifxc8 26 ltJf4, creating numer
ous threats (27 'i'xa3, 27 'ifxf6 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
'i'd6+ <i;g7 24 ltJe6+.
lha6
.i.b3!
ltlxb4
l:lfxdl
:at
.i.xdl
llxb4
lhe5
l:tb8
26
23
White cannot avoid the exchange of

queens.
The tempting 23 f4 ltJg4 24 e4 (or 24

tiJd7+ '3;;g7 25 ltJxb8 l:txb8 ! ) 24 ... ltJe3
2 5 'i'd6+ <:/;;g7 26 e5 did not hold any
great danger for Black, since instead of
24 . . . l'De3 he would reply 24 ... h5 ! White
takes the correct decision to go into an
endgame, where he has every chance of
winning, since the a3 pawn is doomed.
b2
Was it possible to make things more

difficult for White, by aiming to give up
the a3 pawn at the cost of the exchange
of minor pieces? In a rook ending the
conversion of a material advantage is
not easy when the pawns are all on one
wing. It turns out that White could have
avoided
such
simplification,
for
example 26 ... .:a4 27 f4 ltlc4 28 1:.d4
(but not 28 l:td7 ttJe3) 28 . . . 'it>g7 29 i.c6
:b4 30 i.e4 ! (threatening 3 1 :xa3)
30 . . . l:a4 3 1 i.c2 llb4 32 i.d3 l:tc8 33
l:txa3.
Therefore Black gives up the a3
pawn without a figh and the game
enters a purely technical phase, which,
however, lasts a further 45 moves. But
in such positions is it worth hurrying?
'l;g7
27 <:Ji;f1
28 lbaJ
l:tc8
1 27
29
.i.e4
lle8
A rather surprising move, especially

since it was apparently planned by Tai
in his home analysis. 43 . . .t'Llc4 would
have offered a more tenacious resist
ance.
If 29 . . . ltJc4 White would have won

by 30 l:k3 ! (30 ltld2+ 3 1 l:txd2).
. . .
30 l:la4
31 . .i.f5
32 l!b4
l:le7
ltc7
Forcing a weakening of the h-pawn.
32
33 l:t a4
34 h3
35 . .i.d3
44
The repetition of moves is explained
convenient strong-point other than e5 .

White, naturally, is aiming to reach the
time control, to avoid taking any com
mitting decisions before home analysis.
.i.e4
.i.d3
.i.e4
<it>el
45
46
47
48
49
50
ttlc4
ttle5
ttlc4
The incautious 39 .i.d3 would have
repeated three times, and so to a draw.
llad4
l:lld2
lld1
f4
lLle5
llc3
:ct+
l:tcJ
f5
l:t4d3
.i.g4
:b3
llcc2
lia2
<it>g6
ihd2
lhc4
ihd2
<it>f2
lle3
"1b3
The two extra pawns guarantee

White a win. He only needs to be
careful not to make a mistake, and for
this it is useful to gain time for thought.
led after 39 . . . ltle5 to the position being
39
40
41
42
43
ttlc4
gave up the pawn, Tai had in mind

44 . . . tlm+ 45 exf3 l:te3+ 46 l:lxfJ+
4 7 <it>g 1 l:t.xg3+ 48 lt>hl , but not without
reason he avoided it, since Black has no
compensation for the piece. Or perhaps
he hoped that I would be afraid of this
continuation?
by the fact that Black's knight has no
36
37
38
39
.i xf5
It can only be assumed that, when he
h6
%lc5
c4
e5
51
52
ttlc4
lte3
lie8
52 llb3 would have led to a repetition, allowing Black to claim a draw.
52
53
54
55
56
ttld2
c.t>f6
l:te5
Jlf5+
:Ie5
.i.h5
g6
c.t>t"6
llc3
. The next time control has been

reached, and White, after calm reflec
tion, can begin advancing his pawns,
without which he cannot get by.
57 h4
58 .to
59 JL d5
60 .i.f3
1 28
, llc4
.:cc2
lla4
.
hiaa2
61
62
:et
h5
l:!a4
J:l.c3
on the clock, and in addition, the

advance g3-g4-g5 can no longer be
avoided. These are more than sufficient
reasons for Black to curtail his
resistance.
Game 289
Tal-Botvinnik
Ulorld Championship Return Match
Afoscow 1961, 1 0th game
Caro-Kann Defence
The black rooks have finally left the

second rank, in order to hinder the
advance of the white pawns. But at the
same time this relieves the white pieces
of any concern about the e2 pawn.
63
64
65
66
67
.i.g2
l:r.dl
.i.d5
<it>el
.i.g2
:c2
%ta4
l1.d4
1bd4
<ii>f2
.i.e4
l:.f5+
lld5
@f3
ll:\bJ
lbxd4
tDe6
:b2
rl;g7
'i&>f6
Black resigns
Tai satisfied himself that White was

not intending to inake any error.
Besides, from the 73rd move the two
players had each gained an extra hour
e4
d4
e5
c6
d5
For many years this continuation was

considered to be harmless for Black.
White's next move reveals that it has
some positional basis.
3
4
lla3
The pin inevitably leads to the

exchange of one pair of rooks, which is
useful for the conversion of the material
advantage.
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
1
2
3
...
h4
.i.f5
h6
4 . . . h5, which looks more active, is

also often played, as, for example, in the
14th game of the Return Match.
However, the text move is quite logical.
Black wants to play . . . e7-e6, after
which he will be out of danger. There
fore it is not surprising that White
immediately takes vigorous action.
g4
Here Boleslavsky recommended the

quieter continuation 5 d3 .itxd3 6
'i'xd3 e6 7 h5.
...
.i.d7
After 5 . .Jth7 6 e6 fxe6 White would

have had a certain compensation for the
pawn, which was confirmed, in par
ticular, in the game Gufeld-Spiridonov
( 1 96 1) : 7 .td3 .ixd3 8 'i'xd3 'i'd6 9 f4.
.
1 29
h5
12
This too is useful, in order to prevent

. . . h6-h5. However, in the 1 8th game
(No. 293) 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.
12
6
7
8
9
c3
i..h3
9
10
...
libJ
1'b6
Usually Tai avoids the exchange of

queens, but here he changed his habit,
and wrongly so, since in the given
situation tl1e exchange favours Black.
10
11
iixb6
11
...
cxd4
After 1 1 cxd4 b4+ 12 tLlc3 liJxd4

1 3 'i'd 1 .i.c5 White would have lost a
pawn.
axb6
lla5
But now, of course. Black avoids the

win of a pawn ( 1 2 . . . tbb4 1 3 d2 l:xa2
1 4 I:txa2 ti:)xa2), since then the initiative
would have passed to the opponent.
Instead of this he rapidly advances his
b-pawn, imitating the plan that Capa
blanca demonstrated in his encounter
with Janowski ( 1 9 16). This game was
given by the third World Champion in
his book Afv Chess Career.
c5
llc6
e6
..ieJ
Inconsistent, to say the least. 9 f4 .
came into consideration. to place the
knight at f3, from where it would have
securely defended the central d4 pawn.
cxd4
lJ
14
lDcJ
.ifl
b5
b4
14 . . .t:Dc4 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.
15
llb5
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 fl for a short ti.me, but then
thought it best to return.
1 30
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.
16
ltlfJ
lbc4
Again rejecting, and not without

reason, the win of the a2 pawn
(16 . . . lt:\b3 17 !!bl lixa2), since it would
be hard to Black to bring his bishop at
f8 into play.
17 .i.xc4
18 lt:\d6
23
24
25
26
27
dxc4
.i.xd6
There was no point in sacrificing the

exchange (18 ... SLc6 19 xf7+ e8 20
lDxh8 i.x:f3 etc.), since in any case
Black's position is good enough.
19 exd6
20 lt:\e5
exd5
lbf6
d7
@e6
<bxd6
Here we can take stock: Black is a

pawn up and has the better position.
Tai' s subsequent clever attempts to
complicate the play are unable to
change the course of events.
.i.c6
White appears to be creating compli

cations, 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.
d5
.i.d4
d2
{fjf7
lt:\e5
20
il..xh l
21 lbxf7+ e8
22 li)xh8 .i.e4
There is the unpleasant threat of

23 . . . c3 24 a4 c3, which is not parried
by 23 it.d2 on account of 23 . . . c3 24
13 1
28 f3
29 g5
30 h6
31 {fjf7+
32 ltJxh6
.i.h7
hxg5
gxh6
@e6
ICigS
lbg4
34 liJe3
35 lig4
.i.f5
.i.g6
ilf5
36 ltJe3
37 lig4
.i.g6
<it>d6
3 3 l:te 1 + was threatened, when Black

loses a piece.
33
Now all Black's thoughts are aimed

at safely escaping from time trouble.
38 the5
.*.f5 .
quick draw. In so doing,. he quite

reasonably assumed that. .White would
not avoid the Exchaiig Variation of the
Slav Defence, but he failed: to appreciate
that it is not so easy for Black to gain a
draw even in this variation, if he does
not have a prepared plan of action.
4 cxd5
5 lf)tJ
6 .i.f4
cxd5
li)c6
.i.f5
Two experts on the Slav Defence,

Emanuel Lasker and Vasily Smyslov,
used to prefer 6 . e6, although in this
case too Black does not have an easy
game.
..
Black unhesitatingly gives up his g5

pawn, since the passed f3 pawn is not
dangerous. The outcome will be decided
by the breakthrough of his pawns on the
queenside, which White is unable to
avoid.
7 e3
e6
39 lDt;+ 'it?d7
40 thxg5 the7
thc6
. 41 f4
42 ti)fJ
<ii>d6
This last move was sealed by Black.
White resigned, without resuming the
game.
8 .i.b5
Game 290
Botvinnik-Tal
Moscow 1961, 1 1th game
Slav Defence
1 d4
2 c4
3 li)cJ
li)f6
c6
d5
A psychological mistake. After

losing the two preceding games, Tal
decided to take a breather and make a
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 1947 could I have
played this against Trifunovic in the
Chigorin Memorial Tournament, but I
refrained: the tournament situation was
such that I was quite ppy with a draw.
There I played 8 'ib3 .tb4 9 b5 0--0,
and the chances quickly became equal.
132
It should be added, only, that 8 .i.b5

is by no means a new move. A game in
which it o.ccurred was given in
Griinfeld's Taschenbuch der Eroff
nungen im Schach. There 8 . . . t'.Dd7 was
recommended, and if 9 ifa4 l:tc8, after
which Black's position is not worse,
since the acceptance of the sacrifice ( I O
i.xc6 xc6 1 1 'i'xa7 ii'.c8) i s not
without its dangers for White. All this
was established long ago, but I not
unreasonably thought that my opponents
would avoid the pawn sacrifice since
White was apparently ready to go in for
this variation.
This assumption proved justified . . .
8
.i.b4
'iia5
9 tiJe5
10 ..txc6+ bxc6
..txc3
11 0-0
'fixc3
12 bxcJ
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 . . . :cs did
not prove satisfactory in view of 13 c4
with the threat of c4-c5 (Game 340).
Now the exchange of queens is in

evitable, since if 1 3 . . . ..i.c2 there follows
14 J;lb l followed by 1 5 ::tb2 or 1 5
:b3 1 2 Because o f this, th e white rook
moves to the c-file with gain of tempo.
13
14 llfxcl
This leads to a further deterioration

of .Black ' s position. His main defensive
trump . is the centralised position of his
king. After removing it to the wing,
apart from anything else he will have to
reckon with the threat of ttJxc6. lLle7+
was
and lLlxf5. Therefore 14 . .
preferable.
.
tLlci.7
15 f3
16 lLlxc6
17 a4
h6
17
18 .i.d6
lDd7
lDb6
:res
Exploiting his spatial advantage,

White selects the a7 pawn as a target,
since it will not be easy for the black
bishop to come to its aid.
19 .i.c5
13 'lfcl!
'irxct
0-0
After Black has prepared to occupy

c4 with his knight, the threat of ttJe7+
and ltJxf5 has lost its strength, since
133
White would have problems over the

defence of his e3 pawn. However, for
the momenh 9 .. ltlc4 is unfavourable on
account of 20 e4 g6, and now either
2 1 exd5 exd5 22 l'De7+ and 23 ft.)xd5, or
simply 2 1 iJ.xa7. Black also has a
difficult game after 19 . . . t'.Llc8 20 lla3 !
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 will be
opposite-colour bishops.
.
19
20 ltlxa7
21 .i.xb6
i.dJ
rlxa7
l:ta6
Now White's plan becomes apparent:

to play e4-e5 and exchange on f6, after
which the advance of the f-. and g-pawns
will enable him to achieve his goal.
Although it is natural that Black

should want to blockade the passed
a-pawn, the rook is not well placed on
this square.
22 a5
23 lla3
e4
<&t>e3
:.ac3
g4
ct>f2
28
29 -h4
30 h5
llab8
lic6
32 hxg6+
33 :Jc2
<&t>xg6
fxe5
After this the white bishop also gains

the opportunity to participate in the play
on the kingside.
34 dxe5
%th8
35 lth2
l:tcc8
Of course, not 3 5 . . . h5 36 :chi .
36 @d2
iJ.b3
.J::t aa8
:eb8
r!c8
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
opponent's rear, or of creating another
passed pawn.
llbc8
g6
Passive waiting is not to Tal 's liking,

but the move played merely assists
White's intentions.
.i.c4
f6
This decision also cannot be

approved. The development of White's
initiative would have been hindered by
23 . . . f5 .
24
25
26
27
28
30 . . .
31 e5
But now the a-pawn will be able to

advance directly to a7 .
37
38
39
40
a6
a7
ltal
.i.e3
.i.c4
l:.h7
:as
It only remains to 'piay l:tb l -b8 or
l:tahl, but Black's next' move - his last
in time trouble . - 1e_qds to a different

outcome.
134
40
l:r.b7
41 l:!xh6+ 'lig7
; 42 l: ahl ktb2+
Black resigns
l l . . .cxd5 1 2 .ixd5 lDc6, which was

known from the game Boleslavsky
Najdorf ( 1 953). Alas, such a prosaic
decision does not suit Tai, and he plays
for complications, i.e. for the worsening
of his own position.
{.
11
12 i.b3
Game 291
Botvinnik-Tal
b5
ilb7

1
2
3
4
5
6
d4
c4
lDcJ
e4
f3
.ie3
lDf6
g6
.i.g7
d6
0-0
e5
Whereas after the I 0th game my

opponent was definitely aiming for a
draw, after his victory in the 1 2th game
he was in an aggressive mood, as
indicated by his choice of opening.
Taking this into account, White takes a
psychologically correct decision: he first
of all exchanges the queens.
13 0-0-0
If 1 3 l:.c 1, according to analysis by

Boleslavsky, Black gains the better
game with 1 3 . . . aS ! (avoiding traps such
as 1 3 . . . cxd5 14 :c7 l:td7 1 5 l:xb7. or
1 3 . . . d7 14 liJe2 cxd5 1 5 .ixd5 i.d5
16 l:k8+ i.f8 17 exd5). Therefore
White sets a more substantial trap - a
positional one.
7 dxe5
Of course, 7 d5 or 7 l2Jge2 leads to

more interesting play.
8 'ifxd8
9 lDd5
dxe5
l:txd8
13
White, naturally, avoids 9 ti:Jb5 lba6

1 0 l2Jxa7 lDb4 or 9 ftd l :xd l + 10
@xd l i.e6. which would have been in
Black's favour.
lDxd5
c6
If 9 . . . tDe8 the strongest is 10 0-0-0.
10 cxd5
11 ..tc4
c5
To my surprise, Tai, 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 13 . . . as ! 14 dxc6 lLlxc6 1 5
.:t.xd8+ l:xd8 1 6 l2Je2 a toughly equal
position would have been reached.
14 .i.c2
Inviting Black to choose the variation
135
White's plan was not difficult to find.

It was successfully implemented in a
similar osi_tion in a training game
Boleslavsky-Botvinnik
(Voronovo
1 952), and consisted in the preparation
of an attack on the black pawn chain by
b2-b3 and a2-a4. It is surprising that,
although White does not conceal his
intentions, my opponent essentially does
not even attempt to counter them.
14
15 ttle2
16 ltlc3
tl)d7
.i.f8
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 16 . . .b4 17
a4 c4 followed by ... ..ta6, leading to
unclear complications.
17 b3
18 il.d3
19 .i.e2
l:tac8
ltlb6
:l d6
Now the threat is parried: in the event

of 20 . . .b4 2 1 ttJbl c4 22 bxc4 ttJxc4+ 23
.i.xc4 :xc4 24 .tk l white breaks
through on the c-file.
20
21 llcl
22 a4
f5
ltf6
bxa4
Since after 22 . . . b4 23 ttJb l Black is

left with numerous weaknesses, he takes
another decision, also, however, a
painful one: he opens the b-file, which
will soon be occupied by White.
23 bxa4
White, of course, does not exchange

knights (23 tt:Jxa4 ttJxa4+ 24 bxa4),
since the black knight is badly placed.
23 . . .
a5
23 . . . c4 24 'tt>c2 b4 25 l:.b l .i.xc3

would not have changed anything, since
both 26 ..i.xb6 and 26 'it>xc3 xa4+ 27
c2 are good for White.
24 <iftc2
c4
.i.b4
25 ltbl
26 ltla2
Forcing Black to unblock the open file.
26
..ic5
27 .i.xc5 :.xc5
This move creates the concrete threat

of 20 . . . b4 2 1 lDb l c4 (the knight at b6 is
defended), but the rook at d6 is no
adornment to the position.
20 @b2
136
I saw that by 28 f4 I could gain a

material advantage, since it is hard for
Black to defend his minor pieces
(28 . . . fxe4 29 fxe5
30 d.2 .:Ixd.5+
3 1 @e3 etc.). But at this tense moment,
in the fifth hour of play' r did not want
to allow my opponent even the slightest
tactical counter-chances.
f2
28
29 l:tb2
Slightly more tenacious was 29 . . . fxe4

30 fxe4 (30 ttlxe4 JL.f5) 30 ... ..td7 3 1
:hb 1 .ixa4+ 3 2 tiJxa4 ttlxa4 3 3 l:tb8+
l:f8 (in the game on the 32nd move this
could not be played because of 3 3 f4).
Even so, after 3 4 d6 l:kc8 3 5 l:.xc8
l:xc8 36 l:tb7 there is no doubt that
White is winning.
30 l:t.hbl
ltti
l:l.xb7
'it>f6
l:tc8
37
38
39
40
41
d7
rld8
.lxc4 ltlc5
:n+ @g5
.tb5
fxe4
fxe4
Black resigns
Game 292
Botvinnik-Tal
..ixa4+
If 30 . . . ttlc8 there would now have

followed 3 1 f4 - a possibility which
would have been excluded by the
preparatory exchange 29 . . . fxe4 30 fae4.
1
2
3
4
5
6
ltlxa4
31 ltlxa4
32 l:tb8+
.:1b7+
d6
xb7+
11xh7
Or 3 6 . . . l:.c6 37 d7 lld6 3 8 hc4 ttlb6

39 l:If7+ g5 40 i.b5.
.i.c8
.i.d7
33
34
35
36
d4
c4
lhc3
e4
f3
lhf6
g6
.i.g7
d6
0-0
c6
..te3
Avoiding the exchange of queens
which occurred in the 13th game after
6 . .. e5 (No.29 1). The situation in the
return match obliged Tal to think only
in terms of winning.
32
'
g7
It is already known that if 32 . . .l:f8

there would.have followed 3 3 f4.
7 i.d3
e5
8 lhge2
exd4
Usually after 6 . . . c6 Black transposes

into the variation involving . . . a7-a6 and
. . . b7-b5. This was how Smyslov played
against me in the 8th game of our 1958
return match (No.259), as did Larsen in
Leiden ( 1970) - see No. 3 80.
This exchange can hardly be ap
proved, since White can advantageously
1 37
Only after his rook has left the comer

square does White make this move,
strengthening his c4 pawn, since now
the weakening of the al-h8 diagonal is
of no significance.
recapture with his bishop. 8 ...lLlbd7 was

better.
9
.i.xd4
14
15 ii.bl
c5
Black takes on too great obligations.

Such a plan would have chances of
success, if he could compensate for the
defects of his position in the centre with
piece pressure, but he has no such
prospects, in view of the fact that he is
behind in development. 9 ... tDbd7 I 0 0-0
lDe5 1 1 f4 tDxd3 1 2 'ifxd3 also cannot
be recommended for Black.
Subsequently this variation occurred
in the game Hiibner-Gligoric ( 1973 ),
and the Yugoslav grandmaster demon
strated the correct method of play for
Black: 9 . . . d5 10 cxd5 cxdS 1 1 e5 ttJfd7
12 f4 tDc6.
10
11
ilf2
0-0
tbc6
White ignores the threat to exchange

his bishop ( ...llc6-e5xd3), which would
merely be playing into his hands.
11
12 1id2
13 l:.ad1
14 bJ
ab8
llfd8
16 f4!
At this point, when the two sides

have completed their development,
White, 'as is his right', is the first to
begin active play. There is immediately
the prospect of an attack on f6 (f4-f5,
..ih4 etc.). In order to parry it, Black
decides on an exchanging operation, as
a result of which White gains the
advantage of the two bishops, and also a
very active position in the centre and on
the kingside.
It need hardly be said that the dis
appearance of the queens signifies the
wrecking of Tai' s plans, made in his
preparations for the game!
16
17
18
19
20
a6
i.e6
'lfa5
138
hJ
it)xel
:xd2
ll'igJ
.i.g4
i.xel
1ixd2
:eS
Naturally Black would have been

quite happf to exchange his d- and c
pawns for the . white e- and f-pawns (20
e5 dxe5 2 1 ..txc5). To avoid this, White
has to make a rather awkward move.
i..f8
The variation 20 . . hS 2 1 xd6 h4 22
li:Jhl ltJxe4 23 .i.xe4 I:txe4 24 ..i.xc5 (or
24 i.xh4) would have led to the loss of
a pawn therefore Black is forced to
spend a tempo defending his d6 pawn.
20
21 Itel
22 t[}fl
lie6
22
23 :de2
libe8
J.g7
At the first opportunity the knight

leaves the g3 square, since at the given
moment it is not needed for the defence
of the e4 pawn.
White's coming offensive

have been hindered by 23 . . . h.5 .
should
26 lDh2
t[}f8
All Black's efforts are concentrated
on occupying the d4 square. Meanwhile,
in such situations this manoeuvre does
not play any particular role, and it is
unable to prevent the development of
White' s initiative on the kingside (cf.,
for example, Game 87).
27 J.h4
2s .:n
lDe6
ll d7
A serious error, after which Black's

position becomes difficult to defend.
One can understand Tal not wanting to
restrict his most active piece, the bishop
at g7, but 28 . . .f6 was nevertheless
necessary. Then White would have had
a choice between 29 f5 liJed4 30 llef2
and 29 i..g3 f5, in both cases with
counterplay for Black.
Apparently my opponent evaluated
the position somewhat routinely, and
did not sense just how dangerous it was.
Later Tai said that he lost the return
match, not imaging that the former
champion would act so decisively.
29 g5
24 g4
White .not only restricts the space

available to the opponent's pieces, but
he also prepares the activation of his
own king.
24
lDd7
25 2'_.,... lt6e7
After this seemingly paradoxical

move shutting in the bishop at h4,
139
White forces the exchange of his

opponent's bishop at f6 after which it is
doubtful whether Black can save the
game.
29 . . .
h5
30 gxh6
31 lDg4
i.xb6
.i.g7
32
33
34
35
..i.xf6
lf)g7
lDh5
l:r.ed8
Preventing ttJg4 for one instant. After

29 . . . b5, which, incidentally, Black was
also free to play earlier. the develop
ment of events would not have changed.
After 3 1 . . . lbxf4+ 3 2 ltxf4 i.xf4 3 3
t'ill'6+ White would have won a piece.
lDf6+
-*.xf6
nd2
ll.cJ
40 f6
41 l:td5
42 bxc4
43 <it>f3
b5
bxc4
ltb7
:b4
44 .i.xb4
45 .i.xb5
46 exd5
lDxb4
lDxd5
gxh5
This exchange sacrifice also does not

save Black: White immediately takes
play into a won rook ending, rejecting a
material advantage.
47 .:bt
The last move in the game that

required accuracy!
Black has no useful moves, and he

can only passively await the outcome.
36
37
38
39
i.c2
i.dl
Jl.g4
f5
<l;e7
:c1
@es
White had only one more move to

make before the time control, and,
instead of 40 l::tdf2 with the threat of 4 1
fxg6, he was tempted into playing for
'suffocation'.
140
47
48 :b6
49 <it>f4
g8
<t>h7
50 <t>g5
51 <it'xh5
52 h4
llg8+
l:g3
%te3
How can Black hope to save an

endgame, in which he has had to spend
so many tempi on decentralising his
king?
52 . . . :c3 was no bettei; on account of

53 Itxd6 l:hc4 54 :ct? 'iti>g8 55 l:td8+
@h7 56
etc.
lle5+
f8
53 :xd6
54
55
56
57
58
g4
ct>f'4
el
%ba6
<t>d3
g6
i:tf5+
l:h5
llxh4
5
Checks to the white kiiig do not help,

since he hides from them at a4.
11h2
59 :Ic6
60 llxc5 %lxa2
61 l:tc7
xf6
ci>e5
62 lld7
63 lle7+
Black resigns. Naturally, he
could
not be satisfied with either 63 . . . 6 64
d6, or 63 . . . 'itd6 64 l:.xf7.
Game 293

Caro-Kann Defence
e4
d4
e5
h4
g4
cl
e6
lLle2
8
9
lLlaJ
8 ltJa3 would perhaps have been

safer, to prevent the black bishop from
reaching the fl -a6 diagonal.
..
.i.b5
But now this is simply unfavourable,

since it allows Black to force useful
exchanges. 9 .i.e3 should have been
played.
9
10 11fxe2
11 cxd4
12 bxa3
Tal-Botvinnik
1
2
l
4
5
6
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 con
tinued with the fact that now Black does
not experience any opening difficulties.
.i.xe2
cxd4
.i.xa3
c6
d5
.i.f5
h6
il.d7
In the 10th game Tai 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 prefers to
avoid this continuation.
6
7 .i.g2

c5
White aims to provoke . . . e7-e6 as

soon as possible, to rid him of his con
cerns about the g4 pawn. However, at
g2 the bishop has' no particular future.
14 1
A semi-open position has been

reached, in which the black knights will
be no weaker than White's bishops,
which are condemned to defending his
numerous weaknesses (a3 , c4, d4, g4).
12
lLlc6
13 .i.e3
14 'iWl
lia5+
14
lDge7
For the moment White avoids the

exchange of queens, hoping to develop
an attack.
Over the course of several moves
Black does not take the a3 pawn (and
White does not defend it) both players
rightly consider tliat it is more important
for them to complete their development.
15 l:t.bl
16 .i.bJ
l:tb8
16
17 Itdl
11a4
A loss of time. This square would be

better used for the rapid inclusion in the
play of the rook at h 1 .
knight to c4, or to exchange queens and

play a cheerless ending. In the latter
case the doubling of the enemy pawns
cannot provide any consolation, since in
the end the exchange of rooks on b6 will
be inevitable, and Black's pawns will
resume their normal form.
19
20
21
22
'if xa6
h5
l:tbl
<t>gJ
bxa6
<it>d7
ltb6
lDa5
23 :xb6
24 f4
axb6
li)c4
Let the move 22 . . .lhb8 remain in

reserve.
Of course. the d4 pawn had to be

defended, but not in such a passive way.
Therefore 1 7
d2 tiJa5 should have
been played, although this continuation
did not look very tempting for White.
'if
17
18 g2
'ilxaJ
Wa6!
25 ..i.cl
White tries to retain the two bishops,

which are his only consolation in this
position.
25
26
27
28
29
This sets White a difficult choice:

either to allow Black to transfer his
lldl
aJ
f5
ltxct
tDc6
li)b4
lDa2
tDxcl
So, White has also been deprived of

his last trump - the tWo bishops.
.. . b
29
5
<J;;e7
30 .:tat
142
37 l:cl
Just in case, Black moves his king off

the diagonal Qn which the enemy bishop
is operating.
31 <iti1'4
32 g5
33 <&ti>xg5
34 .*-xf5
37 a4 was stronger. Even so, after

37 . . . b4 3 8 i.:f3 liJd2 ! (but not 3 8 . . . tiJb6
39 a5, or 3 8 . . J:k7 39 :c l ! ) 39 i.xd5
%k3 40 .i.e4 (or 40 ktd l ltd3) 40 . . .b3 !
(weaker is 40 . . Jc4 4 1 e3 t2Jxe4 42
<iirxe4 b3 43 ltb 1 l:tb4 44 <itid5, when
White has drawing chances) White
would have been unable to combat the
passed. b-pawn.
:.cs
hxg5+
exf5
:c6
37 .
38 .i.f5
f6
In time trouble White makes an error,

leading to the loss of a second pawn,
but, generally speaking, in this position
the conversion of Black ' s material
advantage is not very difficult.
38
..
fxe5+
Weaker is 38 . . . t2Jxe5 39 llgl (39 l:te l

flc4).
What is there for White to do in this
position? The attempt to hold on with
35 l:c l is refuted by 3 5 . . . ttJxe5 36 :e l
f6+ 37 <iirf4 :c4, when he loses another
pawn. Therefore, having discovered the
only weakness in Black' s position - the
g7 pawn. Tal clears the file in order to
attack this pawn.
M4
The start of some mutual time trouble
errors, which, however, do not affect the
evaluation of the position. Here, for
example, the quickest way to win was
with 3 5 . . . lDb6 followed by the invasion
of the rook on the c-file. In trying to
force the opponent to block the g-:file
and simultaneously gain time, Black
allows some complications.
35
36 .i.g4
39 dxe5
40 l::td l
Or 40 :e l 6 (4 1 lhe5 J:tc4+).
40
41
lth6
llc6
Otherwise 3 7 i.f3 ltJb6 3 8 ltc 1 , and

White seizes the initiative.
lLlxe5
d6
D.c5
White resigns
.i.e4
Game 294
Botvinnik-Tal
Moscow 1 961, 21st game
King' s Indian Defence
1
2
d4
c4
lLlcJ
ltlf6
g6
ilg7
Before this game Tai was still the

World Champion, since I had only 1 2
points and my opponet still had theor
etical chances of drawing the match by
143
winning the remrurung four games.

Therefore he chose a complicated open
ing - a draw was of no interest to him at
all.
4 e4
5 f3
d6
llbd7
In avoiding simplificatio Tai

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 .i.eJ
7 llge2
e5
0-0
10
f5
a6 .
0-0-0
Played to control the b5 square for
counterplay with . . . b7-b5, and also to
free the queen from having to defend
the c7 pawn in view of a possible lbb5.
Even so, 10 ... llc5 is probably stronger
(Boleslavsky-Keres, 1 952).
11 'ifi>bl
lldf6
Black intensifies the pressure on the

central e4 pawn, and in view of the
threatened . . . b7-b5 White is practically
forced to exchange on f5 .
12 exf5
13 llg3
gxf5
13
'l'e8
Now B iack does not have a great

choice. If 1 3 . . . f4 14 liJxh5 fxe3 1 5
ltJxf6+ 'i'xf6, then White emphasises
his positional advantage by 16 'i'c2,
avoiding the double-edged play after 16
'ii'xe3 e4 ! 1 7 fxe4. The manoeuvre 16
'i'c2 (instead of 16 'i'xe3) was one that I
later carried out in a game with Medina
(No. 324). The exchange of knights on
g3 leads to the opening of the h-:file, and
that says everything.
d5
White accepts the challenge and goes

in for a complicated game. However,
there was no particular risk in this, since
Tai did not like closed positions. The
Encyclopaedia considers 8 'i'd2 to be
stronger.
8
9
..
lid2
.
llh5
White avoids the win of a pawn (9 g4

tt)f4 1 Q xf4 . exf4 1 1 ..txf4), which
after 1 1 . . . f5 12 exf5 gxf5 13 g5 would
have handed the initiative - to Black.
14
1 44
i.clJ!
xg3
21 :dbl
22 fhgs+
23 :h6
In the spirit of the position was the

pawn sacrifice l4 . . . e4 ( 1 5 ctJxh5 fol
lowed by fxe4) although it could hardly
give sufficient compensation, as Biack' s
pieces are not mobilised. )4 . . . f4 would
still have not given anything, while after
1 4 . . . Wfg6 1 5 liJxh5 'i'xh5 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.
15 hxg3
This is the whole point. White

controls the g6 square, which is of
decisive importance.
23
c5
ilg6
b5
18
19 klh4
'it>xg7
bxc4
fxg4
Even so, Black should not have given

up the b l -h7 diagonal without a fight.
After, for example, 23 . . . e4 24 gxf5
.i.xf5 25 fxe4 .th? he could still have
held the position. However, even in this
case White had the decisive contin
uation 24 fxe4 tt:lxg4 25 l:txd6.
A standard advance in the King's

Indian Defence, after which the . . . b7-b5
counterblow could have gained in
strength. However, White ' s offensive
develops more quickly.
16 i..h6
17 g4
18 ..txg7
1lg5
hxg5
Of course, it was tempting to ex

change the bishop defending the enemy
king, but the h6 square should not have
been given up without a fight. The pre
paratory 1 8 %th4 was more consistent.
.
24 fxg4!
Now White sacrifices a pawn (by

retreating his bishop), but on the other
hand his king will be completely safe.
However, the alternatives 19 . . . C'Dg8 20
gxf5 .ixf5 21 Itg4 and 19 . . . e4 20 gxf5
.ixf5 2 1 fxe4 were equally hopeless.
20 i.c2
the simplest. The pressure on the ffile will be irresistible.
24
25 lig6+
26 :n
27 llg7+
h6!
Cleverly played. Black covers the h6

square and forces the exchange of
queens, which, alas, can no longer halt
White' s attack. It becomes clear why
White should not have been in a hurry
to exchange the dark-square bishops (cf.
the note to White' s l th move).
.i.xg4
<!/e7
e8
<l;f7
Other replies were equally hopeless:

27 . . ':f7 28 l:xf7+ r:l;xi7 29 tt:le4, or
27 . . . d8 28 lhe4 (but not 28 l:xf6?
llxf6 29 l:g8+ and 30 ltxa8 on account
of 30 . . . l:.tfl+) 28 ... lhd7 29 J:ixf8+ thxf8
30 iDxd6.
145
28
lDe4
li:ld7
The white knight is immwie because

of 29 .i.a4+.
e4
c6
29 lihd6+ d8
30 lbf8+ iCixf8
31 . lCixc4 .i.d7
32 :n
'l;c7
33 d6+
Black resigned
Here
the game, and
with it the title of World Champion.
So, by transposition we have reached

a well-lrnown variation, which is gen
erally considered satisfactory for Black.
It may be remembered that it occurred
in two games from world championship
matches
(Botvinnik-Smyslov,
14th
game, 1954, and .Botvinnik-Tal, 6th
game, 1 960), and both ended in a win
for Black. Regarding 8 . . J:te8, see
Games 1 13 and 2 10.
Game 295
Botvinnik-Pachman
European Team Championship
Oberhausen 1961
1
2
3
4
5
6
iif3
g3
.i.g2
c4
thc3
d4
iif6
d6
e5
g6
ll.g7
Only this move transforms the game

from an English Opening into a King' s
Indian Defence.
6
7
0-0
iCibd7
0-0
h3
In Game 1 50 I played 9 b3 .
9
10 :et
1fb6
10
11 ihxd4
exd4
thg4
White avoids d4-d5 and maintains

the tension in the centre - a method that
was employed in this position by
Semion Furman.
10 . . . l:Ie8 was also possible.
After l 1 . ..l:te8 12 :e2 the lunge

12 . . . g4 can be countered well by 1 3
l'.:td2.
12 like2 ,
After 1 2 hxg4 ifxd4 Black has an

excellent game.
146
12 . . .
13 b3
psychological ones, at that time it was

the strongest!
In a
If 13 c5 White has the convenient
later
...
game Portisch-Gligoric
retreat 14 tt:Jc2, defenrung the rook at
( 1 964) the continuation 16 Cic3 'i'd8 17
al.
l:te2 We7
a5
lte8
14 i.eJ
15 :bt
1 8 f4 Cied7
19
.:tf2
also
proved advantageous to White.
16
ll'c7
Subsequently Black in fact fails to

find a good plan. The only question is
whether White will find one . . .
17
18
19
20
Steinitz
'ifc2
lDcJ
l:tbdl
ltlde2
long
ago
lDed7
lDf8
lDfe6
recommended
refraining from exchanges, when the

opponent has a cramped position.
20
21 1fd2
.i.f8
The plan involving f2-f4 appears to

At that time this position was little
known among the broad mass of regular
be the most logical. Reckoning that in

the given position there is no reason to
players, although it had already occur
hurry , for the moment White adopts
red in master games. Black is counting
waiting tactics.
on exploiting the strength of his piece

pressure on the centre, while White is
hoping in time to restrict the activity of
the black pieces.
16 llft!
This
paradoxical
move
was
em
ployed by Furman not long before the

present game, and it probably came as a
surprise to my opponent. White removes
his rook to a passive position. in order
to deprive Black of tactical chances
involving
an
attack by
one
of his
knights on the rook at e l . For example:

16 'i'c2 lDed3
17 .l:ted l Cib4 etc. It
cannot be asserted, of course, that 16
%tfl
are
is the only move, but if all factors

taken
irito
account,
including
147
21
22 i.b6
23 .ttfel
d7
g7
Of course, this is a weake1ung of the

position, but Black is preparing . . . lDe5f7. However. White himself retreats his
bishop thout any compulsion.
il.eJ
24
25 .i.f4
26 lhd4
27 'fic2
lhc5
l%d8
.*.d 7
27
28 .i.eJ
29 a3
lDge6
:eS
30
31 exf5
32 g4
The white pawns are very strong.

Black's scattered pieces and exposed
king make his position critical.
1'e5
It is clear that sooner or later Black
will have to return his extra knight, and
he intends to do this in an advantageous
way or to force simplification. How
ever, after the next move, which came
as a surprise to him, it transpires that he
should have returned the piece
immediately with 32 . . ltJxf5, since all
the same the knight at g7 is out of play.
32
Finally a concrete plan is contem

plated - White intends to drive away the
knight from c5 by a2-a3 and b3-b4.
gxf5
ltlg7
33 .i.d4!
Decisive. It soon becomes clear that

the exchange of one pair of rooks does
not ease Black's position, and a counter
sacrifice will no longer be possible.
lbel+
.i.c8
33
34 llxel
35 :dt
.f!e8
36 b4
37 axb4
axb4
lDa6
Black must strengthen his control of

f7, in view of the tlrreat of f5-f6-f7+.
f5
29
Black tries to free himself, but he

overlooks a tactical blow. However,
after 29 . . . l2Jxd4 30 xd4 it would also
have been bad to play 3 O . . . f5 because
of 3 1 b4 axb4 32 axb4 ltlxe4 3 3 ii.xe4 !
fxe4 34 ltlxe4.
30 lhxf5?
But now in the event of 30 b4 axb4

3 1 axb4 lLlxe4 or 30 exf5 ltlxd4 and
3 1 .. . .i.xf5 Black would have success
fully defended. At the same time, the
positional sacrifice of a piece made by
White does not leave Black any choice.
148
38
ltle4!
l:lxe4
39
.i.xe4
ltJxb4
to bring it out to f5 or even g4, whereas

7 . . . i..e7 is in any case necessary.
Othernrise the terrible threat of 39

0\f6+ cannot be parried.
40 'lfd2
41 cxd5
Or 40 . . . tiJa6 4 1 'i'g5.
42
.i.f3
8
9
d5
cxd5
Here Black was due to make a sealed

move. However, in view of his numer
ous weaknesses and the bad placing of
his pieces. together with the strong
white pawns on the kingside. further
resistance is pointless.
Therefore
resigned .
Black
ti:lcJ
.ieJ
il.e7
In the first half of this event, playing

White, Unzicker defeated me in
excellent style in a French Defence. In
order to take first place on the team
leaders' board, I was obliged to gain my
revenge. Hence the decision to avoid
well-known continuations and from the
very start to prevent the opponent from
using his opening knowledge.
9 dxc5 ii.xc5 I 0 i.g5 or I 0 lia4 is
usually played.
Game 296
Botvinnik-Unzicker
Oberhausen 1 961
Queen's Gambit
1
2
3
4
c4
ll)fJ
g3
.ig2
0-0
cxd5
d4
li)f6
e6
d5
c5
li)c6
exd5
7
An opening transformation typical of
modem tournament play. After the first
move the game was an English
Opening, then a Reti then it seemed to
I ransfonn into a Catalan but in the end
a Tarrasch Defence was reached, and
that means a Queen's Gambit.
i..e6
Black should not have been in a

hurry to develop this bishop. since in
some cases it might be more advisable
...
c4
My calculation proves correct. Now a

complicated battle ensues. and White
advantageously establishes his knight in
the centre of the board.
10 /l)e5
0-0
After 10 . . . 'ifc7 1 1 .i.f4 ilb6 White
could have begun an attack 12 e4.
11
li)xc4
A few decades earlier I had observed

one of Levenfish 's games, in which he
carried out such a combination. The
position is opened up, and the white
149
bishops prove more active than Black 's.

The alternative was 1 1 b3 .
11
12 d5
13 lllxd5
Black Wlderstandably aims for sim

plification, but this move !eads to the
loss of a pawn. After 16 . . . .i.e6 !
i..c 3
Wb6 he would have had a reasonable
chance of occupying the open file and
e>..i>loiting the weak d3 square.
dxc4
lixd5
.i.f6
Since 1 4 lixf6+ 'i'xf6 followed by

. . . l:tfd8 and . . . lDd4 is quite safe for
Black, White cannot prevent 14 . . . .ild4.
Ten years later another plan for Black,
1 3 . . J:k8 14 :c 1 b5, was tried by
Spassky in a game with Taimanov, but
with 1 4 'ifd2 followed by Itfd l White
could have gained a clear advantage. 1 4
ttlf4, a s suggested by Polugayevsky, i s
also good.
17 .i.xe4 ttlxd4
17 . . . 'iixd4.. then White has
If instead
a pleasant choice: 18 'i'xd4 xd4 1 9

xc4, or 18 .i.xc6 'i'xdl 1 9 llixd l bxc6
20 l::t.xc4. in both cases with an imposing
advantage.
14 :ct
i.d4
15 .txd4
..lxd5
lDe6
18 .:.xc4
Black retreats his knight and assumes

that after 1 9 .ixb7 l:tb8 he will be able
to regain the b2 pawn. However, my
opponent overlooked a tactical subtlety.
14 'I'd2 would also have been

answered by 1 4 . . . .i.d4, and if 1 5 lDf4
'i'b6 16 .t.xd4 lD.xd4 !
14 . . .
17
'l!!' ;.;:.y.:
A ;:r1; J;:
:
(::
..
;;,w.
;;;,'
/?,'
*
Of course. not 1 4 . . . .txb2 1 5 :xc4,

and White' s initiative increases.
}rtJ iJ:-W%-. JJ'f/,

:}PJ'
ffx%ffl!"'
: :),
JrtJ
:M.f(4,
,-, .-/.-..
..
Wr -'.;/N/
e
:;(.::'/,.' t
19 W'c2!
Defending the b2 pawn with gain of
tempo, after which one of the black
pawns - b7 or h7 - is lost.
16 e4!
17
19
20 .i.xb7
21 il.g2
Exchanges - 16 i..c5 .llxg2

'it>xg2
:es
l1xc4 1fxd 1 1 9 l:.xd 1 Ihe2 could in no way have satisfied White.
18
16 . . .
i.xe4
g6
llb8
When the opponent' has a queen and

knight, a fianchettoed bishop covers
best of all the approaches to the king's
position.
1 50
21 .
22. . bl
23 11e4
24 l:tel
1!ff6
tt:\d4
i!fd8
tt:\f5
25 l:tc6
26 l:tc2
'ifb2
29 .i.d5
The enemy rook must not be allowed

to go to e6.
29
30 .ic4
31 '9e4
In this situation it is unfavourable for

Black to win the queen for two rooks
(24 . l:le8?).
. .
1fb5+
'ifd7
A prophylactic move. Since the

bishop is no longer defending its king,
instead the long diagonal is covered by
the queen.
The place for this rook is at e2, about

which, however, I soon forgot!
l:ld6
31
32 J:ce2 lhd4
f5
33 l:e3
34 ll3e2 d4
35 :b2
Not agreeing to a draw . . .
'lfhJ+
35
36 1ig2
Va3
26 . . .
27 'i'e5
Intending to continue 28 ct.d5.
1i"b4
27
A natural move but 36 'it?gl was

preferable. In the game Black could
have developed an initiative by
36 . . . ii'h5, forcing, in view of the threat
of 37 tDfl , the reply 37 .i.e2.
,
...
28
'iff5
<irfl
The obsessive idea of transferring his

bishop to c4 leads White into difficult
ies. This was the reason for his last
move, since the immediate 28 i.d5
would
have been
answered
by
28 . l:txd5; He should have connected
his rooks with 28 %lce2, and after
28 lDd4 29 :e4 'i'd2 30 'i'f6 ! he
would have gained a virtually irres
istible attack, to say nothing of his
material advantage
.
36
. . .
28
ltb6
37 f4!
In this way White eliminates the

weakness of his f3 square and co
ordinates the actions of his pieces.
151
'itb.5
37
. 38 nf2
39 g4
After arranging his kingside pawns in

the most advantageous way, White takes
play into the endgame
it'a5
46
47 <it>xel
48 gxf5
Restricting the mobility of the black

knight, which at a propitious moment
might have gone via f5 to e3 .
39
40 f5
ttle6
ife4
ifeJ
lhel+
f5
48 g5 would have led to more com

plicated play, but, having little time for
thought, I chose a simpler continuation.
TI1is leads to an abrupt sharpening of

the play, which is fully justified, since
the white pieces are now well placed.
40
41
42
. .
48
gxf5
lldl
:sd4
The sealed move. I also considered

the combination 42 fxe6 1!xe4 43 exf7+
@f8 44 l:xd l :xg4, but 45 :e l is
parried by 45 . . . :gl +, and I was unable
to find a forced variation, leading to a
win.
42
'i'xel+
A clever move, which I overlooked

in my analysis during the brief dinner
break. However, it did not prove so
difficult to find a way to win. I was
expecting 42 . . . l:txel + 43 Wxel 'i'xe l+
44 xel gxf5 45 gxf5 ltJg5, when I was
intending to win as follows: 46 f6 h6 4
'iti>e2 l:.e4+ 48 d2 and then .i.d3.
43 'ii' xel
ltJf4
Nothing immediately can be done 44 :xf4? ltxf4+, or 44 ifxdl ? Ihdl

mate, but Black has no active moves,
and White is after all a pawn up!
44 fxg6
An essential exchange. Black was

threatening by 44 . . gxf5 45 gAf5 to give
White a weak pawn at f5 .
.
44
45 h4
46 Ac2
hxg6
g7
White has a minimal material advan

tage, the exchange of the f- and h-pawns
is inevitable, and with play on one wing,
as the experts teach, a knight is stronger
than a bishop. Also, it should not be
difficult to exchange the knight for the,
two remaining white pawns, and this
will lead to an ending with rook and
bishop against rook, which by no means
always reduces to Philidor s winning
position. However, let us see how
events develop.
49 ii.fl!
Vacating the c-file for the rook and

relieving it of the need to control the g2
square, to where the knight could have
gone.
49
152
@h6
50 llc5!
50
51
52
:a5
53
<bf2
<ifi>h5
'it>xh4
d7
Alas, Black has nothing else.

lhf5+
thg4
57 l:la6
57
58 .id5
59 .i.e4
'it>h5
the5
With the deadly threat of 58 :g6.
Black has achieved his aim, but only

apparently. The tragedy is that his king
is not only cut off from the queenside,
but may also be in danger.
Threatening 60 :as. Black has

several possible moves, but they all
merely worsen his position. For
example: 59 . . . @h4 60 11116 mate, or
59 . . . tt\f7 60 i.f3 + 'iti>h4 6 1 :as, or
59 . . . tt\g4 60 i.f3 .:tf7+ 6 1 <it>g3. As for
the rook, it has to guard the knight and
the pawn. It follows that mate or loss of
material is unavoidable, and so
'!J.e7
Trying, in tum, to cut off the white

king from the queenside, for where,
however, it is not aiming.
<it>f3
After 54 !tf7 55 i.c4 the black rook
would have been unable to defend
simultaneously the knight and the pawn.
tlJg6
54
56 @4
The rook ending after 56 . . .xc4 57

bxc4 would have been hopeless for
Black, while after 56 . . .ttJg6+ 57 fs his
knight would have been shut out of the
game.
Preventing . . . a7-a5-a4 and tempting

Black to exchange the kingside_ pawns
as quickly as possible.
. . .
Black
resigned.
55 il.c4
Grune 297
Botvinnik-Wade
Hastings 1961162
Ruy Lopez
e4
thf3
3 .i.b5
4 i.a4
5 .ixc6
1
2
Here it can now be guessed that

White is intending to encircle the enemy
king. For this it is important to take
control of the f7 square, after which the
white king can no longer be driven off
the f-file.
55
..
e5
thc6
a6
thf6
A continuation that was employed

many times by Flohr, and then also by
Kholmov. In recent years it has gained a
nwnber of other supporters.
tbe5+
5
dxc6
6 d3
6 0--0 or 6 lDc3 is equally good.
6 .
thd7

153
The most sensible way of defending

the e5 pawn.
. 7 lhbd2
f6
In the Exchange Variation of the Ruy

Lopez, this is usually played before
. . . liJf6. Here, however, for the moment
the e5 pawn is not threatened and
. . . f7-f6 weakens Black' s position.
7 . .. J.e7 or 7 . . . g6 was preferable.
8 0--0
.*.c5
It will not be possible to maintain the
bishop on this square, and hence White

gains a further tempo.
9 c3
10 d4
11 tLlbJ
exd4
b6
Black probably thought that White

would be forced to take on d4 with his
paw but his main concern is to hinder
the exchange of the opponent's doubled
pawn.
kingside, which will aid the develop

ment of his initiative .
llg6
Of course, not 12 . c5 (in the hope of
exchanging queens) because of 1 3 lDxc5
.i.xc5 14 'i'h5+.
12
..
13 .i.eJ
0-0
13 . . . c5 could now have been played,

but after 14 li:lf5 the c5 and g7 pawns
would have both been attacked.
14 11fc2
15 tLlf5
W'e7
The exchange on f5 is unavoidable

and White seemingly devalues some
what his pawn majority. But on the
other hand, for his other knight he
acquires an excellent strongpoint at e6.
15
16 exf5
.i.xf5
lDe5
Perhaps Black should have gone in

for 16 . . . i.xe3 1 7 fxg6 i.a7 1 8 gxh7+
h8, since in time the h7 pawn would
be lost, he would retain his active
bishop, and the white knight would no
longer be able to reach e6.
17 .i.xb6
18 ltd4
19 lDe6
12 tLlfxd4!
After 12 cxd4 .i.g4 Black would have

achieved a comfortable development.
Now. however, for the moment his
light-square bishop has no future,
whereas White has a clear pawn
majority in the centre and on the
1 54
cxb6
llti
19
20 :ret
llfc8
b5
20 . . tbd7 followed by
.
into consideration.
21
22
23
24
lleJ
l:tael
f4
%lh3
The position is such that, despite the
. . f8 came
Wear
material equality, White' s forces a
to be more numerous. Now he is threat

ening to take the c5 pawn, arid for the
c.ti>b8
.S:g8
tDg4
moment Black indirectly defends it.
31
32 11'g2
11'c6
1Fd7
After the exchange of queens Black
It is obvious that the black knight
would have similarly been llllable to
will have to retreat to h6, to weaken the
avoid soon losing material. He evidently
opponent' s pressure on the rook' s file.
thought that after the exchange of rooks
But this signifies that it will be shut out
he would gain some hopes of perpetual
of the game.
24
25
26
27
28
1fe2
g4
l:td3
fl
check.
liae8
lDh6
1id7
'ifc8
33
34
35
36
tDxc5 1if7
llxe8 :.xe8
lhe8+ 'ifxe8
'ife4
'i'd8
Now it is obvious that Black must

. . . g7-g6
avoid the exchange of queens - he is
threats to his king may arise along the
already one pawn down, and the loss of
g-file. It is curious that at fl the king
a second is inevitable.
White reckons that after
37 1id4
Ve7
38 tDe4
tDg8
39 g5
Black resigns
feels more safe than on the customary
hl square, since Black has in reserve

. . . c6-c5 followed by . . . 'i'c6.
28
29 h3
30 fxg6
31 l:leJ
c5
g6
hxg6
Grune 298
J.Littlewood-Botvinnik
Hastings 1 961162
Sicilian Defence
1
3
4
5
2
e4
ttlt3
d4
ttlxd4
tllcJ
c5
d6
cxd4
tllf6
g6
In the Dragon Variation Black carries

out
a plan that
was
introduced by
Reshevsky, in which the position of the

queen's knight is determined later.
155
6 .i.eJ
7 f3
8 .lc4
i.g7
a6
b5
begin play on the file that is then opened

on the queenside. Therefore Black
castles on the kingside.
i.b7
bd7
In order to create counterplay, Black

must push back both white knights, but
it must be done only in this order, since
after 1 5 . . . eS 16 llJc2 and the inevitable
1 7 ltJe3 White has a good game.
12
13 cxb3
14 i.h6
15 1lxb6
Sticking to the afore-mentioned plan.

Black (when White has already dev
eloped his bishop at c4) develops his
bishop at b7, and then plays his knight
from b8 via d7 to c5. .in order to
exchange White's king's bishop on b3 .
9 .lb3
10 il'd2
lDxbJ
0-0
i;xb6
b4!
16 e5
In keeping with his style of play

Littlewood goes in for great complica
tions and . . . loses. More cautious was 16
tlJce2 e5 1 7 ttJc2 a5 with a double
edged game.
16 . . .
lhd7
If 16 . . . dxe5 1 7 tDf5, and White wins

the queen.
17 h4
Now the immediate 1 1 .th6 is the

most unpleasant for Black and after
1 1 . . . xh6 1 2 1i'xh6 t2Jc5 1 3 0-0-0
llJxb3+ 14 cxb3 'i'b6 1 5 'iti>bl 0-0-0 1 6
b 4 I encountered certain difficulties i n a
game with Krutikhin (No. 3 15). The
attempt by Reshevsky in a game with
Bisguier ( 1 957) to avoid the exchange
of the dark-square bishops by 10 . . . h5
did not prove successful. White simply
replied by castling kingside.
11 0-0-0
12 <ii>b t
cs
Preparing after the exchange on b3 to

recapture with the c-pawn (Boles
lavsky' s well-known manoeuvre) and to
After 1 7 exd6 e5 or 1 7 . . . bxc3 White

would have lost substantial material
without any compensation. But now,
since the black knight is pushed back,
the opening of the h-file is unavoidable,
and it would seem that White is bound
to conclude the game with mate. How
ever, Black finds a way of returning his
knight to f6 and of parrying the threats
on the kingside.
17 . . .
18 h5
bxc3
dxe5
18 c2 + 19 <&tixc2 dxe5 would have

led to a transposition of moves, but
White could have changed the course of
events: 1 9 ttJxc2 g5 20 'i'xg5+ <ifi>h8 2 1
exd6, and for the piece he has three
pawns plus a positional advantage.
. . .
19 hxg6
1 56
26 llcl
1ixa2+
The simplest - an extra bishop is

sufficient.
27 1ixa2 lhxa2
28 %t.xd8 :xd8
White resigns
Game 299
Robatsch-Botvinnik
Hastings 1961162
French Defence
Other continuations too would not

have maintained the attack, e.g. 19 tiJc2
(with the threats of 20 hxg6 and 20
lhd7) 1 9. . . g5 20 'i'xg5+ h8 2 1 h6
ilg8 22 ii'f5 i'..c 8, or 19 bxc3 exd4 20
:txd4 'i'a5 21 :Ixd7 'i'f5+ 22 'it>al .i.c6.
19
..
lDf6
A move which was hard to foresee
when White began his cavalier attack

with 16 e5. Boleslavky's idea is a good
one, of course, but in the given situation
the absence of the pawn from c2 allows
Black to achieve the impossible (if 20
QJf5 or 20 tt:Je6 there follows 20 . . . c2+!
2 1 xc2 'i'c8+).
20 bxc3
21 gxh7+
exd4
21
22 xd4
23 9'e3
f8.
Cit>h8
1i'a5
lDd5
The attack would also have petered

out after 2 1 lhd4 'i'a5 22 :tf4 fxg6 23
klxf6 htxf6 24 ii'xh7+
1
2
3
4
5
6
e6
d5
i.b4
c5
.i.xcJ+
1fc7
Since lengthy tournament experience
has shown that after 6. . . t:De7 7 1"g4 it is
not easy for Black to equalise, I began

playing 6 . . . ii c7, in order to answer 7
ifg4 with 7 . . . f5. True, even in this case,
as shown, for example, by Game 1 8 1 ,
after 8 'i'g3 Black still ha s some
difficulties. But when on his ne:x1 move
White plays 7 ttJf3 , this leads to the
usual variations, in which Black feels
comparatively secure.
lhxc3+
1lad8
7 lhfJ
.*.d7
8 a4
9 .i.aJ
lic6
Regarding 7 . .. l:i'Je7, see Game 235.

Black prevents 8 i.d3 , on which there
could have followed 8 . . . c4 9 i..e2 .ta4,
and after castling long, his king will find
a secure shelter on the queenside.
Therefore White immediately advances
his rook's pawn.
Black has not only two extra pieces.

but also the initiative.
24 1fd2
25 al
e4
d4
lhc3
e5
a3
bxc3
The Encyclopaedia considers that 9

.i.d.3 is stronger.
1 57
13
14 ifh4
f5
ci;f7
;
The logic of this move is that Black s
king' s rook is more useful at h8 than at
f8. The threat of . . . g7-g5 becomes
highly unpleasant.
15 g4
White hopes to find salvation in

complications, and not without reason.
15
tLlc4
Driving back the dark-square bishop,

since the light-square bishop at d3 is
more valuable.
16 .tel
17 %!.et
b6
Here 9 . . .cxd4 10 cxd4 11f'a5+ can

hardly be recommended, since after 1 1
Wd2 'ii'xa4 12 ii'g5 Black ends up in a
difficult position, and after 1 l . . .ifxd2+
1 2 <t>xd2 White's chances in the end
game are clearly preferable.
l:tag8
g5
10 11fd2
In a similar situation in a 1943 game,

Tolush played against me 10 i.e2,
which, of course, is more advisable.
10
11 i.d3
tLlge7
h6
12 0-0
13 11rf4
tLlaS
If Black wants to castle kingside this

move is obligatory, since the g5 square
must be controlled.
This indirectly defends the a4 pawn

( 1 3 . . . .txa4? 14 dxc5), but allows an un
pleasant reply, after which the situation
changes in favour of Black - he
acquires good chances on the kingside.
White should have simply played 1 3
i.b2. However, Robatsch evidently
assumed that White's plan should
involve an attack on the black king.
Alas, now Black seizes the initiative.
18 1ih3
But this is a mistake. White should

definitely have opened up the position
by 1 8 'i'h5+ <it>f8 1 9 gxf5 . Then after
both 1 9 . . . xf5 20 i.xf5 exf5 2 1 e6
.i.e8 22 'ii'h 3, and 19 . . . exf5 20 e6 .te8
2 1 'i'h3 (2 1 . . . g4 22 .ixh6+) great com
plications arise. Now Black is able to
shut the kingside and then to occupy
himself with the weak a4 paWll.
15 8
18
19 1ig2
f4
tLla5
29 ttllr4
To carry out his plan, Black is forced

to move his knight from its strong post
at c4.
20 b4
21 .i.e2
22 h5
c4
1id8
30 /i)xe6
White voluntarily eliminates all

possibilities of activity on the kingside,
but this essentially does not change any
thing, since the opening of the h-file
would merely have been playing into
Black ' s hands.
9e8
22
23 <it>hl
24 ..tdt
25 li)gt
lt:Je7
By playing 27 . . . liJg8, in anticipation

of the knight sacrifice Black defended
his h6 pawn (to free his rook at h8 from
this task). Now the knight returns, to
defend the g6 square.
Although in this way White regains a
pawn, the simplification is hardly in his
favour: Black retains a solid material
advantage.
30
31 llxa4
'i'xe6
1if7
32
33
34
35
1if4
ltxf4
:hf8
/i)ec6
..txa4
1i'd7
<it>e8
Black nips in the bud any possible

advance of White 's kingside pawns, and
then he forces the exchange of queens.
It has now become clear that White

wants to make use of his last chance, a
piece sacrifice on f4, and so Black
removes his king in advance from the
danger zone.
f3
'i'xf4
'it>g2
<it>g3
26 li)bJ
27 'i'h2
28 .i.xf4
Possibly 28 t;Jxf4 gxf4 29 Xi.xf4 was

stronger, when it would have been
easier for White to advance his f-pawn.
28
\V
gxf4
Black begins what appears 'to be a

logical manoeuvre. He defends his a7
pawn, in order to restore the mobility to
his knight at a5. However, soon it trans
pires that this plan has to be abandoned.
Even so, the situation on _the board is
such that the four wasted tempi do not
change anything.
1 59
36 .i.e2
37 l:lbl
i1b7
A clever counter-chance. Now the

'natural' 37 . . . <t/e? 38 l:.b5 e6 would
be met by the spectacular 39 ltxd5 ! (and
if 3 9 . . . xd5 40 1'.xc4 with mate in the
centre of the board). Therefore Black's
knights have to retrace their steps.
37
38 l:tb5
39 ltaxa5
lllba5
llle7
44 l:tb6 was not possible in view of

44 . . . l:.4f7! 45 llxc6 l:.a7 46 l:b6 a3 . 47
l:ibl a2 48 :al <l;e7 followed. - by
. . . :b8-bl .
4;c7
44
lla7
45 :at
White resigns. After 46 l:.xa4 ttlb5

the c3 pawn cannot be defended, and his

entire position collapses.
White has no other possibility. He

cannot wait while Black consolidates
his forces and exploits his material
advantage.
39
40 l1b8+
41 l1b7+
bxa5
d7
'it>d8
42 l:lxa7
43 l:lb7
llc6
Game 300
Botvinnik-Bisguier
Hastings 1 961162
Reti Opening
4 1 .. .<it>e8 could have been met by 42

:bs+ c:l;f7 43 l::tb7 (but not 43 !1xf8+
<it>xf8 44 <ifi>xf4 because of 44 . . . a4 ).
Of course, the rook cannot leave the
seventh rank, but now Black activates
his a-pawn.
43
44 :bt
a4!
1 gJ
llltJ
.i.g2
4 0-0
5 c4
6 bJ
d5
ltlf6
e6
.i..e7
0-0
c6
7 .*.bl
b5
2
3
6 . . . c5 is more active.
6 . . . d4, see Game 230 .
Regarding
Such a manoeuvre makes sense when

there is a white pawn at d4, but in the
given situation it merely restricts
160
Black's
forces.
7 . . . l'Llbd7
was
more
natural, and after, for example, 8 'ii'c2
b6 9 tlJc3 i.b7 10 e4 dxe4 1 1 ti:Jxe4 c5

the
chances
are
equal
gain a material advantage. But here it is
already hard to offer him any good

advice.
(Botvinnik-
0 'Kelly, 1 962).
8 dJ
1i'c7
i.c6
16 . . . a5 was preferable. Then it would
A logical reply. White defends his c4
8
9 ltlbd2
1 0 1i'c2
11 e4
have been more difficult for White to

carry out the plan involving a2-a3 and
pawn and prepares e2-e4.
ilbd7
.i.b 7
llc8
the blockade of the queenside, and after

1 7 'i\b5 Black's queen' s bishop would
have been activated.
17 :lfel
18 a3
out this advance, he has nevertheless

achieved a slight advantage.
This may not be the strongest contin
'ifb6
e8
c5
11
12 e5
13 d4
uation, since even without it White can

always prevent the activation of the
black pawns,
Despite Black' s artificial play in the
by controlling the b4
square. But in this position, how many
14 bxc4 c5
players would have been able to reject
things would not have been so bad for
the possibility of blockading the queen
him.
But
he
13 . . . bxc4
g6
Here too 1 7 . . . as was probably better.
Since White has managed to carry
opening, after
15 c5
16 1id3
overlooks
curious
manoeuvre, involving a pawn sacrifice.
side ! In the given situation, the
fact that
Black has two connected passed pawns

is of no significance.
18
19 1ha3
20 i..c3
21 ilb3
22 ll.a5
bxaJ
lta8
i.d8
lCJg7
After the exchange of bishops the

white pieces will be free to occupy the
dark squares.
14 b4!
22
23 .ixd8
24 lLla5
25 l:.e2
26 lEiel
cxb4
White's king ' s laright is aiming for
Black allows his opponent a pro
tected
passed
pawn
at
c5,
ifb7
l:fxd8
1'c7
a6
the blockading square b4.
26
27 'i'cJ
which
seriously cramps his pieces, merely to
161
f5
27
38
39
40
41
b4
This attempt to gain counterplay

merely leads to Black returning his exira
pawn, and remaining even without that
slight consolation which he had for his
positional problems.
28 'ifxb4
29 1Wc3
30 :ea2
ltdb8
1!b5
30
31 ltlxc6
32 ii.fl
f6
Ylxc6
fxe5
As a rule, the superiority of a rook

over a knight is especially appreciable
in the endgame.
41
11fxd8
42 l:txd8 ltlb5
43 tLle5
'iti>g7
44 tLlc6
Black resigns. He loses
Now, in view of the inevitable .i.fl ,

Black is bound to lose material.
i.xb5
dxe5
1i'd3
ltxa6
1i'xa6
1ixb5
d4
'ihc5
%ha6
'I' xe5
another
pawn.
After the retreat of his rook, Black

would have lost not only the a6 pawn,
but also immediately the e6 pawn, and
this would have been even more serious
than the loss of the exchange.
33
34
35
36
37
1if6
ltl:f8
tLld6
tLldJ
1ic8+
lta8
'iid8
Game 301
Skold-Botvinnik
Stockholm 1962
Sicilian Defence
1 e4
2 ti)fJ
3 d4
It would appear that Black can still

resist, but with his next move White
pushes back the enemy pieces, and the
rest becomes clear.
c5
g6
Jl.g7
This move is perhaps more accurate

than 3 . cxd4, when not only 4 ltlxd4,
but also 4 1Wxd4 is possible.
162
..
4 tLlc3
5 lLlxd4
cx.ci4
d6
6 i..eJ
7 i..c4
In the given situation this natural

developing move is an error, which
Black immediately exploits. Rauzer's
move 7 f3 or else 7 i.e2 is correct.
.i.b5+
lt)xe3
lt b8
tlfb6
12
13 'ifxe3
14 .i.b3
. llf6
llg4
ct>f8
After Black's knight manoeuvre he is

forced to give up the right to castle, but
this is not dangerous.
15
'i'f3
White avoids going into a slightly
inferior ending, hoping to create some
threats thanks to the weakness of
Black's fl. It is hard to say which
decision is the more rational.
15
16
17
18
19
9 ifd2
If the bishop moves from e3 there

can follow 9 . . . 'ib6, while the active 9
i.g5, preventing 9 . . . 'ifb6 because of 10
i.xe7+, can be met, e.g., by 9 . . . h6 10
i.h4 g5 1 1 .i.g3 with a double-edged
game (Ljubojevic-Sosonko, 1 978).
9
10 .i.c4
g4
h4
l:tgl
0-0-0
.i.f6
h6
1fc5
g5
h5!
With a temporary pawn sacrifice

Black parries the opponent's threats and
regains the initiative.
a6
liJc6
20 gxh5
21 'iidJ
22 f4
g4
a5
22
23 1ixc3
.i.xc3
1 0 . . . tDxe3 was more accmate. Now

White could have avoided the exchange
of his bishop.
This leads to a favourable endgame

for Black, but White is already deprived
of any active possibilities.
White should have played 12 .i.d4,

and if 12 . . . .i.h6 13 'ii',d3 e5 14 .ic5, or
12 . . . tt:Je5 1 3 i.e2.
After 23 bxc3 a4 the position of the

white king would have looked very
dangerous.
11 liJxc6
12 hJ
bxc6
163
23
.24 bxc3
11xc3
f5
In this way Black securely defends

his passed pawn.
25 e5
26 c4!
d5
26
.i.e6!
cxd5
27 cxd5
28 i.xd5
29 J.xe6+ <i&>x;e6
For the moment Black is two pawns

down. and yet there is no longer any
doubt that he will win.
30 :d4
31 l:tc4
l:txh5
l:tb4
32 l:bb4
axb4
The exchange of one pair of rooks

nips in the bud the opponent's attempts
to create counterplay.
<it>d5
34
35 lldt+
36 l:td7
37 'it?e2
llxh4
<it>c5
Iih3+
The enemy king cannot, of course, be

allowed to go to e4.
A clever move, which does credit to

my opponent. It is not easy for Black to
find a reply.
The position is not a simple one, but

Black finds the correct plan. He is
prepared to give up material, to force a
rook ending in which he will inevitably
be able to create two connected passed
pawns.
33 'it>d2
34 <i!i?e3
l:tf3
The concluding stage of the plan,

begun by Black back on the 26th move.
l:bf4
38 :xe7
39 e3
40 <t>d3
lte4+
<it>d5
41 a3
42 e3
43 <it>e2
!td4+
f4+
bxa3
There is no defence against the

advance of Black's connected pawns.
Apart from anything else, Black is

now a pawn up.
44 l:!a7
xe5
45 .:xa3 fJ+
White resigns
A disregard for material loss for the

sake of positional gains in a rook ending
was demonstrated by capablanca in his
famous game with Tartakower (New
York 1 924).
1 64
to switch earlier than normal to the

consideration of tactical variations.
Grune 302
Botvinnik-Lundin
Stockholm 1962
English . Opening
1
2
3
4
5
c4
lDcJ
g3
cxd5
li.g2
l[}f3
a3
.ll.e6
..
now the white queen will be able to

_/
move to d2.
f5
This game too shows that it is

advisable for Black to prevent b2-b4 by
9 . a5, as Portisch played against me
(Game 363).
. .
10 b4
11 .i.d2
.i.f6
Ignoring the threat of 1 l . ..e4, when

there could have followed 1 2 dxe4 fxe4
1 3 ltlxe4 .i.xal 14 'i'xal with more than
sufficient compensation for the ex
change.
But if White had routinely played 1 1
i.b2, B lack would have advantageously
replied 1 1 . . . e4 12 dxe4 fxe4 1 3 ltld2 e3
14 fxe3 0-0.
0-0
lDc6
0-0
A successful attempt to defer castling
and to immediately make the pawn
advances a2-a3, d2-d3 and b2-b4 was
made in Game 27 1 . There White' s king
remained in the centre until the 1 5th
move.
7
8
d3
9 b4 was premature on account of

9 . . ltld4 with the threat of I O . .tb3 . Brit
e5
lDf6
d5
lDxd5
lDb6
Black was not yet forced to make this

move, and he could have played 5 . . . i.e6
(cf. , for example, Game 363), but
subsequently he would all the same
have had to either retreat the knight, or
exchange it for the knight on c3 .
. .
ll.e7
11
12 llcl
b8
13 b5
lDa5
If 12 . . .ltJd4 White could have played

13 ltJxd4 exd4 14 lDa4 ltJxa4 1 5 'i'xa4
with the initiative.
The knight is insecurely placed here,

but after 1 3 . . . ltld4 White also has a clear
advantage.
14 :.b1
Defending the b3 square. Now it

appears that Black's position is un
promising, but Lundin, a resourceful
tactician, finds an interesting possibility.
14
, White intends to advance his b-pawn,

saving time on d2-d3. This forces Black
e4
A clever attempt to gain counterplay.

Black exploits the fact that the d3 pawn
1 65
has to defend the c4 square against the

invasion of the enemy knight.
15 . lDel
lhac4
With this temporary piece sacrifice

Black rids himself of his badly placed
knight, but ends up with a weak pawn in
the centre. 15 . . . exd3 would have been
dangerous for him on account of the
opening of the long diagonal and the
increased activity of White's king's
bishop.
16 dxc4
17 ltlxe4
ltlxc4
17
18 i.b4
19 il.xe4!
fxe4
e8
.i.h3
White is forced to return the piece,

but with favourable consequences, the
chief of which is the weakness of
Black's central pawn.
20 ifc2!
hoping, then 20 . . ifxdl 2 1 .:txdl .i.xg2
If 20 .i.g2, for which Black was

.
22 ttJxg2 i:.xe2 and the outcome is

unclear. The move played is a subtlety,
which Black did not anticipate. White
sacrifices the exchange, but his pieces
will dominate the board, which, in
combination with his kingside pawn

majority, decides the outcome.
20
21 <&ti?xfl
22 .i.xd6
23 .i.xh7
.i.Xrl
lDd6
1ixd6
Of course, one black pawn will be

unable to hold four enemy pawns on
this sector of the front, but even more
significant is the weakening of the
king's position, which is furthered by
the presence of opposite-colour bishops.
23
24 lDf3
25 .i.g6
26 <&ti?g2
l:ad8
11'e6
l:d5
:f8
Black's pieces have covered the

breaches in his king's fortress, but the
advance ofjust one white pawn destroys
the defence.
27 e4
28 lib4
%td6
28
29 .i.f5
30 llc4
31 e5
i.e7
1lh6
.i.d8
Threatening to win immediately by

29 e5 .txe5 30 :h4+.
1 66
Now there is no defence against

tt:lli4 .
31
32 b4
33 1Wc3
34 11.f4
Covering the
lld5
l::td2
@g8
f2 pawn and setting up
an ambush (35 .i.h7+ 'i'xh7 36 'i'c4+).
34
35
lld5
Black resigns
11f3
Initially 9 ilh6 looked tempting, but

after 9 . . .i.xh6 10 liJxf6+ White does
not achieve anything significant, as is
also the case after 9 tiJxf6+ .i.xf6 10
il.h6 ltJg8.
Game 303
Botvinnik-Soderborg
Stockholm 1962
English Opening
1
2
3
4
c4
ltlcJ
e4
g3
ltlf6
g6
e5
This arrangement of White's pawns

in the English Opening was first
employed by Nimzowitsch. I copied this
same idea from him and used it for
Black in the Closed Variation of the
Sicilian Defence (for example, Game
224 ). I also later played this way with
White, although in Game 306 Black
developed his king's knight at e7.
4
5 .lg2
6 ltlge2
7 dJ
8 lhd5
.i.g5
. 9
ltle7
ltlfg8
10 'l'd2
11 Ji.el
12 ltldc3
13 f4
b6
c6
ltlf6
ltld7
14 bJ
c5
15 Ilbl
16 0-0
17 lhb5
18 b4
llb8
.i.g4
lhc8
If 13 . . . ltJg4 there
followed 14 ..igl .
would
have
The stabilisation of the centre is to

the advantage of White, who has the
possibility of pawn breakthroughs on
both wings.
ltlc6
d6il.g7
il.e6
Black should not have been in a

hurry to make this move; now the
advance of the white knight to d5
acquires greater strength.
Now White further increases his lead

in development, but Black has nothing
better.
So, White switches to positive actio

and after the first blow there soon
follows a second .
18
167
b6
19 f5
.ilxe2
not so easy for White to ,take advantage

of this.
lDc6
A forced exchange, as otherwise the

position of the bishop at g4 may prove
insecure. But without this bishop the
light squares in Black's position are
weakened.
20 'ifxe2
28 il.g4
29 lDd5
lDd4
g5
30 .i.xd4
White happily exchanges his inactive

bishop; opposite-colour bishops nor
mally favour the active side.
21 f6
White sacrifices a pawn to gain the

opportunity for play on the h3-c8
diagonal and the half-open f-file.
Whether this compensation is sufficient
is for the moment an open question.
21
22
23
24
25
li.h3
lDc3
a3
'iid l
cxd4
lDxd5
32 cxd5
33 c2
a5
b5
34
35
36
37
38
1fxa5
lla8
:xa5
:xaJ
And this exchange is even more

advantageous to White: it opens the c
file. of which he seizes control, thanks
to the dominating position of his bishop
on the h3-c8 diagonal.
lDxf6
a6
lDe7
0--0
Hoping to weaken the opponent' s

pressure by exchanging the queens.
Threatening fia4 in some cases, and

simultaneously preparing l:b2-f2 .
25
26 l:.b2
27 l!bf2
30
31 1ia4
tDe8
'1:ic7
f6
27 . . . CiJe6 was not possible because of

28 l:.xf7 l'J.xf7 29 i.xe6 so Black
decides to strengthen his position still
further. Although his position is passive
and his light squares are weakened, it is
1f xa5
bxa5
lk7
.flfcl
b7
The final subtlety. Black was threat

ening to exchange on,e . pair of rooks by
3 8 . . . l:c3, but now this is met with 3 9
.&!a l followed by :aa7.
168
Generally speaking, in the King's

Indian Defence Black has to solve more
difficult problems, and from this stand
poin preference should be given to 4
c4. However, Unzicker, a staunch sup
porter of open games, did not want to go
into a closed opening.
4
f6
0-0
5 .i.e2
6 i.f4
6 0-0 or 6 h3 is more often played.
6
c6
7 d5
38
39 :cc7
Beginning some
checks.
40
41 <ifalel
42 d2
h5
:at+
so-called
'spite'
l%a2+
l+
lUa8
l:t a
Even such a massive sacrifice is

unable to save Black from being mated.
43 Jbg7+ f8
44 l:tbf7+ <it>e8
45 .i.d7+ @d8
46 :g8+
Black resigns. Mate is just
My opponent must probably have

overlooked my reply. There was no
point in freely allowing the advance of
Black's central pawn. However, another
development of events - 7 0-0 .i.g4 8
d5 lDb8 9 h3 i..xf3 1 O .ixf3 c6 1 1 'i'd2
also did not bring White any
advantage (Lehmann-0 'Kelly, 1 966).
7
-
e5
four
moves away: 46 . . . @c7 47 .i.c6+ b6
48 l:b7+ <t>a5 (48 . .. <&t>cs 49 l:xb5 mate)
49 l:txb5+ and 50 :xa8 mate.
Game 304
U
Ovmpiad, Varna 1962
Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence
nzicker-Botvinnik
1 e4
2 d4
3 Q)fJ
4 lDc3
g6
g7
d6
8 dxe6
8 i..g5 is more logical, since in the

game Black rids himself of any opening
difficulties.
8
9 0-0
169
.t.xe6
lle8
10 !tel
11 h3
h6
g5
minimal advantage,
ficient for a win.
19 .i.xd4
20 .i.xc6
White faces a choice: he has to re

treat his bishop either to h2, after which
it will be cut off from the queenside and
the central square d4, or to e3, but then
the attack on the c7 pawn is removed,
and Black can advantageously open the
centre.
12 J..e3
13 exd5
14 lLlxd5
15 c3
16 exdl
'lfxdl
llad8
a6
My opponent quite naturally relies on

the drawing character of endings with
opposite-colour bishops,
especially
since retreating the bishop would have
allowed Black to develop his initiative.
20
i.xc6
21 ltel
f5
22 f3
.i.b5
23 b4
b6
24 lhe8+
d5
lbxd5
11f xd5
Since Black's kingside is slightly

weakened, it is useful for him to
exchange queens:. in order to rule out the
possibility of an enemy attack.
although insuf
It cannot be said, of course, that the

manoeuvre begun with this move is
incorrect. Even so, it is excessively
direct, which creates the preconditions
for subsequent omissions. 24 f2
suggests itself.
24
25 a4
26 a5
:xe8
.i.c4
l:.e6
17 .i.b5
White is fully justified in aiming for

further simplification. The point is that
Black's bishops are slightly more active,
and their pressure on the queenside
pawns is appreciable.
17 . . .
18 lbd4
J.d5
.ixd4
Black goes in for an ending with

opposite-colour bishops, where he has a
The outcome is that the black pieces

are slightly more activ, although White
has not yet any reaso.n to be concerned.
But the following exchange on b6 must
be criticised, since it gives Black the
1 70
theoretical possibility of creating an

outside passed pawn.
27 axb6
28
cxb6
Nothing is achieved by 28 . . . :e2+ 29

g 1, when the b6 pawn is under attack.
29 !tel
30 <it>xet
l:Xet
a5
A slight surprise. Since after 3 1

.ixb6 a4 3 2 d2 i.fl Black could also
have created a passed pawn on the
kingside, White is forced to reject the
Greek gift.
31 bxa5
32 g3
33 d2
bxa5
a4
A significant inaccuracy. It would

have been better to restrain the pawn not
with the king, but with the bishop (3 3
i.c5). The magical drawing power of
opposite-colour bishops (and with equal
material ! ) apparently caused my oppon
ent to relax.
33
34 <iifilc2
a3
h5
f-pawns would also have guaranteed

Black a win, but probably the game
could still have been saved by the
manoeuvre i.b6-d8.
35
36
.i.e5
f4
3 6 i..f2 was no better on account of

36 . . . gxh4 37 gxh4 <iifile6 followed by
. . . cM5 and ... i.d5.
36
<&t>e6!
Gaining an important tempo for the

defence of the f4 pawn.
gxh4
37 J..c7
38 .i.xf4
Or 38 gxh4 5 etc.
h3
38 . . .
39 g4
h4!
The only way to win. The h-pawns,

although doubled. are strong. White will
have to give up his bishop for one of
them, and the other will queen.
40 i.h2
White resigns.
lte2
If 4 1 <i2tb3 there
follows 4 1 . . . .ixf3 42 it>xa3 i.xg4 43
@b4 'it>d5 44 c4+ 'it>e4 etc.
In this game my experienced oppon
ent played too passively, openly aiming
for a draw.
Game 305
Filip-Botvinnik
Ovmpiad, Varna 1962
Queen's Indian Defence
1 d4
2 c4
3 lDt3
4 e3
5 il..d3
35 h4
The losing move. After 3 5 f4 h4 36

gxh4 (36 ii.fl g4) 36 . . . gxf4 the two
f6
e6
b6
.i.b7
d5
It would appear . that the vanauon

chosen by White caimot bring him any
171
particular benefit, since, compared with

similar lines of the Slav Defence, Black
has the possibility of advancing his
pawn to c5 not in two moves. but in
one.
6 0-0
7 bl
8 ..tb2
9 tDe5
'flc7
11 . . .
12 ti:}cJ
tDe4
lbdf6
13 lbb5
14 lDxd6
'fle7
lbxd6
15 dxc5
16 .:act
17 ltfdl
bxc5
life4
a5
After 1 1 lDxd7 lDxd7 1 2 dxc5

!txh2+ 13 hl ..ie5 White would not
have achieved anything, but the move
played weakens the central e4 square
and allows Black to exploit this to gain
counterplay.
..i.d6
0-0
iDbd7
Although this lmight invasion must

be deemed premature, the. chances are
also equal after 9 lDc3 c5 1 0 cxd5 exd5
1 1 :c l 'ile7 1 2 Vi'e2 :ads (Petrosian
Polugayevsky. 1970),
10
11 f4
It stands to reason that Black does

not object to the exchange of the c3
knight for his d6 bishop, since this
makes it easier for him to control e4. A
year later I carried out a similar idea in a
game with Taimanov (No.3 17).
c5
In order to occupy the e4 square with

the other knight, and to drive back
White's centralised knight by . . . f7-f6.
10 11'e2
After 10 lL\xd7 lL\xd7 1 1 dxc5 l2Jxc5

the standard sacrifice of two bishops
would not even have given perpetual
check: 12 i.xh7+ xh7 1 3 'i'h5+ g8
14 ii..xg7 @xg7 1 5 'iig4+ h6 16 'i'h3+
g6 1 7 'i'g4+ 'i'g5.
A slightly different plan 10 lDd2
cxd4 1 1 exd4 lDe4 1 2 ttJdf3 lDxe5 1 3
dxe5 i.c5 14 iic 2 lDg5 15 l2Jxg5 iixg5
16 cxd5 h6 was tried in Vaganian
Polugayevsky (1976), and again Black
gained a satisfactory position.
18 lif3!
White recognises the imminent

danger and takes the correct decision to
exchange
his
fine-looking
but
1 72
ineffective knight for one of the black

knights. With this he weakens the
opponent' s pressure in the centre, which
became possible due to 1 1 f4. In this
respect it is interesting . to draw an
analogy with games 134 arid 1 49.
18
19 itld2
20 9xd2
lUd8
ltlxd2
dxc4
Now 2 1 'i'c3 f6 22 .i.xc4 suggests

itself, when White equalises without any
problems, and he has the prospect of
subsequently exploiting the half-open
c-file. The decision taken by Filip is
faulty, since Black is again able to
occupy the e4 square.
21 bxc4
22 ifc3
23 .ifl
24
25
26
27
llfb3
lhd8+
lldl
'iixdl
'lfc7
l:xd8
l:xdl
'iic6
Both white bishops are restricted, and

Black gradually intensifies the pressure.
After . 20 l:.xd2 dxc4 2 1 bxc4 (2 1

Axc4 l2Jxc4 22 bxc4 Ae4) 2 1 . . . .te4
Black would have retained a minimal
advantage.
20 . . .
which his advantage in the endgame

assumes real proportions.
28 .i.c3
29 h3
30 <3i>h2
a4
h6
lLld6
With the WleqUivocal threat of

3 1 . . .ti:)fS 32 1fd2 h5, when White will
no longer be able to play g2-g4 because
of . . . h4-f3 . Therefore White hurrie s
to play g2-g4, but in so doing he
weakens the position of his king.
31 g4
32 . 'iid3
.i.f3
<iilf7
ile4
t'6
33 g5
33 . . .
hxg5
lLle4
34 fxg5
Threatening 35 . . . 'W'c7+ 36 <itigl 'i'g3+.
35 'ittgl
White resigns. After 35 . . . tlJxg5
An oversight in a difficult position.
23
ltlb7!
Defending the a5 pawn and the

important d8 square. Black invites his
opponent to exchange the rooks. after
1 73
Black is a pawn up with the better

position.
13
Game 306
Botvinnik-Robatscb
'ifd7
Oympiad, Varna 1962

English Opening
1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
g3
i.g2
lElcJ
d3
e4
g6
Ji.g7
e5
lle7
0-0
I had already played this in Game

303 , in the notes to which I described
the origin of this plan. It is based on the
conviction that in the given situation the
weakening of the d4 square is of no
great significance.
6
7 llge2

d6
f5
Now 14 @h2 f4 15 gxf4 h6 would

have . led to complications, which White
preferred to avoid, and so he relieves the
situation somewhat.
Later I employed this active idea of

Robatsch in a game against Benko
(No.362). It would appear to be Black's
best plan.
8
0-0
In the afore-mentioned game I dev

eloped my queen's knight at c6, which
is perhaps more promising.
9 i.eJ
b3
11 ild2
10
llf6
llh5
llc6
Black's knight manoeuvres are not

very efficient. This set-up .could have
been achieved in three moves. whereas
he has spent five. In addition, White can
now play his knight to d5, where it will
hinder . . . f5-f4. However, for the mom
ent Black retains a defensible position.
12 lld5
13 . i.g5
i.e6
A dubious manoeuvre. since at g5 the

bishop is badly placed.
14
15
16
17
18
e.xf5
f4
@b2
.:ael
.tfJ
:ae8
<if;b8
lLld8
18
19
20
21
22
cxd5
llc3
.i.b4
1i'f2
i.xd5
li)f6
lt)f7
li)g8
lle7
gxf5
Because of Black's cramped position,

it is not easy for him to parry even such
a simple threat. If he retreats (18 . . . il)f6)
he loses the exchange ( 19 i.xf6 .i.xf6
20 .i.h5). Since 1 8 . . . .i.f7 seems too
passive, Black exchanges the centralised
knight at d5, which, however, weakens
somewhat the light squares in his
position.
Black sacrifices a pawn in the hope

of gaining some counterplay. His idea
would be justified irt the event of 23
'i'xa7 lDg6. but 23 xe7 and 24
'i'xa7
174
30
was possible. But White does not want
to part with his queen's bishop, and he
prefers to exchange his king's bishop.
lDe5
It becomes clear that Black has
achieved his goal: his pieces are active,

and the enemy king is exposed.
ltlg6
31 i.g3
32 'l'fJ
1fg5
33 i.f4
34 1ixf4
35 :gt
illxf4
1ih5
35
36 :1g5
37 11f3
38 l:tg2
39 e2
l:tf6
'tlb7
.i.b6
39
40
41
42
43
:!g8
:xg2+
ffg7+
'ifxd4
Jl..g7
Avoiding 32 . . . xd4 3 3 'i'h5+

followed by l:.xf5 13. Now White
prevents . . . f5-f4.
The alternative, 35 e 1, was not easy

to assess in time trouble.
23
24
25
26
27
.i.b5
.ixg6
11'xa7
gxf4
.i.xel
ltlg6
hxg6
exf4
:Ixel
The exchange of rooks will all the

same be necessary.
27 :!xel could also have been

answered by 27 . . . g5.
27
28 'Iffl
29 d4
30 1ixf4
l::t g6
g5
gxf4
'l'e7
l:tg2
<ifi>xg2
<it>fl
1ixf5
30 ..id2 came into consideration.
This position must be considered

drawn, for the main reason that both
175
king lack any pawn protection. Even so,

White makes some active attempts, in
which he is prepared to sacrifice
material, since he has the draw 'in
hand' .
44 g2
45 <ilt>g3
1id2+
1fxb2
46 ltle4
4 7 ltlg5
c6
e5+
48 11fxe5
49 'iifi'f3
il.xe5+
cxd5
53 ltle6
d3
54
55
56
57
d5
<it>h5
<it>h4
@xh3
All the same the pawn cannot be

saved, and now at least the white king
will have to move from its active
position.
45 . . . i.xc3 was not possible on

account of 46 'ifc8+, 47 ifxc7+ etc. 1 4
xd3
a4
lic5
lixb7
Black has managed to exchange

White's kingside pawns, and he hopes
to stop the passed a-pawn with his
bishop, without the help of his king.
Black is forced to go in for the ex

change of queens, since White' s queen
and knight have created irresistible
threats in full accordance with Capa
blanca' s rule, that queen and knight are
stronger than queen and bishop.
Logic suggests
inevitable. If 58
58 . . . j_c7 59 a6
succeeds in cutting
from the d5 pawn.
58 ltlc5
Now Black is a pawn up, but this is

only a temporary situation.
50 ltle6
51 f4
With a final threat: 59 a5 i.c7 60 a6

i.b6 6 1 d4, and the white king breaks
through.
h7
58 . .
59 <itrd4
White exploits his main trump: a

pawn ending will always be won for
him, thanks to his outside passed pawn.
51
52 @e4
d4
@h6
that a draw is
a5 there follows
.i.b6, and Black
off the white king
il.c7
g4
A curious mistake, giving the ending

a textbook character. After 59 . .ias the
bishop would have occupied the longer
a5-e l diagonal, from which it could . not
1 76
..
I have already mentioned many times

that success in chess is decided not only
by talent, but also other qualities,
including the character of a player. And
Fischer's character was always in
adequate, as the reader will probably
agree, after playing through our game.
In later years Fischer gained some
outstanding successes, but illness
apparently
tore him away from . chess,
.
which was very, very regrettable: the
chess world suffered a loss tliat was
very hard to bear.
be driven of(.; and then Black would

have approached with his king, easily
gaiping a draw. Now, however, White
immediately gains control of the critical
a5 square.
60 ltlb7!
61 'it>xd5
62 c6
63 ltld6+
64 ltlc8
Black resigns. The
f5
.il.b6
.i1..a7
@e.6
a-pawn queens
by force.
In this game grandmaster Robatsch
underestimated the dangers in an ending
with bishop against knight, just as
Unzicker did in Game 304 in an ending
with opposite-colour bishops. However,
it has to be admitted that my opponent
played more resourcefully here than he
did in Hastings (Game 299).
1 c4
2 d4
3 ltlc3
g6
lLlf6
d5
So, the Grtinfeld Defene. Interest

ingly, it was only in this game that I was
able to use some analysis that I had
prepared for the return match with
Smyslov ( 1 958).
4 ltlf3
5 ffbJ
Game 307
Botvinnik-Fischer
O(ympiad, Varna 1962
Grtinfeld Defence
This was my only meeting at the
chess board with Robert Fischer (born
1943). True, seven years later the
Leiden Chess Society held urgent dis
cussions with us about staging a training
match, but they were unsuccessful. Ten
years after the Olympiad in Bulgaria,
the young American won the title of .
World Champion, but already long
before this he enjoyed great popularity.
I think that tlris was assisted not so
much by his eccentric opinions and
actions, as by the lively, dynamic play
which he demonstrated in Iris games.
.i.g7
Fischer knew, of course, that I

employed the Ragozin Variation, which
begins with this move. Soon it also
transpires that the Smyslov Variation
suits us both.
5
6 1fxc4
7 e4
dxc4
.i.g4
0-0
It is this move that characterises the

Smyslov Variation - one of the most
original methods of piece play against a
pawn centre.
8 .i.eJ
9 e2
ltlfd7
It would seem to be more promising

for White to castle on the queenside,
than on the kingside (and also than to
refrain temporarily from castling), but
1 77
he chooses a more cautious plan. Later I

came to the conclusion that 9 'ib3
should be considered.
...
and I did not know this ! Now White

tries to seize the initiative.
14 d5
li)c6
But not 14 llJb5 on account of

14 . . . 'i'xc5 1 5 dxc5 4, and not 14 e5
1fxc5 15 dxc5 lbcl7 16 f4 g5.
Black too does not follow the recom

mendations of theory, which considers
that the fate of the queen's knight can be
determined later. and that for the
moment 9 . . . ltlb6 should be played.
10 :d1
11 1lc5
li)b6
11
12 h3
1ld6
.i.xf3
13
%tfd8
1lf6
16 . . .
17 e5
lhed7
The f-pawn is forced to advance, so

that it should not be under attack.
Of course, White could not be

satisfied with 17 "Wixc7 'i'xb2.
If 1 3 i.xf3 there would have

followed 1 3 . . . 'ifxc5 14 dxc5 liJc4 !
It was this position that I had

analysed in the Winter of 1958. True, in
Varna, Semion Furman later told me
that by playing 1 3 . .. e6 Black could
equalise, but during the game Fischer
15 . . .
16 f4
Of course, 1 5 f4 is bad for White on

account of 15 . . . ltJec4, e.g. 16 .i.xc4
'i'xc5 17 .txc5 ltJxc4 1 8 e5 lDxb2 1 9
:d4 f6.
After 1 2 d5 ltJe5 1 3 ltJb5 'i'xc5 14

i.xc5 Black would have eliminated the
threats by .. 14 . . . c6.
i2 . . .
13 gxf3
lt)eS
1 1 'i'd3 .i.xf3 1 2 gxf3 e5 13 d5 ltld4

leads only to an equal game.

14
15 li)b5
In my analysis I had examined two

continuations: 17 . . . 'i'h4 18 ila3 g5 19
l:d4, and 17 . . . ilf5 18 ilb4 a5 19 'i'd4
c5 20 dxc6 bxc6 2 1 .i.g4 c5 22 'i'xd7,
and I came to the c<;>nclusion that White
retains the advantag. Fischer, however,
found a third. possibility.
178
17
11xf4
A move, typical of Fischer's

energetic style. It is true that here too
White still has a good game, but the
surprlse shocked me. I was extremely
vexed by my poor analysis, and so sub
sequently I made several weak moves.
i.xf4
The point is that if 1 8 'ii'xb6 Black
could have continued 18 . . . 'i'e4 1 9 f3
'i'h4+ 20 .tf2 'i'b4+.
after 24 .i.c4 (with the intention of

continuing llel-e7) White would have
activated his pieces still further. Fischer
thought that he could have forced a
draw by playing 24 . . . ltle6 25 i.h2 tfJ.d4
(with the threat of 26 . . .ttJf6) 26 :bl
i.c3 27 %kl .ib2 etc. (here and sub
sequently, Fischer's opinions are cited
from the Russian edition of his book My
60 Memorable Games, Moscow 1 972).
However, it is not clear why White
should repeat moves, when instead of
25 i.h2 he can play 25 i.g3 (25 . .. ctJd4
26 :d1).
18
18
19 tfJ.xc7
20 d6
21 exd6
22 0-0
tfJ.xc5
lt.ac8
exd6
i.xb2
tfJ.bd7
23 ltd5
23
Now White controls the e5 square.
b6
24
25 lLlxe6
lLle6
25
26 :d3
27 lle3
fxe6
lbc5
e5
28
29
30
31
i.xe5
:xd6
:d7
thxd7
Black is a pawn up, but the white

pieces are very active. Black tries to
restrict their mobility by preparing
. . . e5, but he commits an inaccuracy.
Correct was 22 ... ttJcd7 23 i.f3 i.e5 24
i.xe5 ltlxe5 25 .ltxb7 llb8, when White
has only a minimal advantage.
White completely loses his head. He

assumed that the alternative 25 ..ih2
ltJd4 26 i.g2 lDf6 was even worse for
him, but Geller pointed out 26 l:txd4
i.xd4 27 l:.el, with which Wl.&_te retains
a good game. Here too Fischer did not
agree: he continued the variation by one
move - 27 . . . i.c5. But we too can
continue the variation - 28 ltld5.
Now, however, after the exchange of
the c7 knight, things reduce to a prosaic
endgame.
Before this move I was still hoping

for 27 . . . i.d4 28 :a3 e5 29 .ig5 l:txd6
30 i..e7 l:.d7 3 1 .i.g4, whereas now
Black eliminates White s passed pawn
without loss of time and obtains a won
ending.
24 .i.f3
A poor move, since there is nothing
for the bishop to do here. Meanwhile,
179
Jl.xe5
l1xe5
lle7
llxd7
3 8 . . . lle l , after which the white bishop is

unable to occupy the favourable c2
square (39 i.c2 llcl).
39 il.c2
40
cilf6
'iti>g5
41 <.t>gl
lhe4+
42 .i.xe4
lbe4
An endgame specialist of the class of

Capablanca or Smyslov would have
immediately transferred his king to d6,
defending the knight, after which the
advance of the queenside pawns would
have decided the outcome.
This is when the defects in the

character of my opponent began to tell.
Reckoning that the game was easily
won for him, he was angry with me for
playing on, and in his fervor, already
after the time control, he talces a rash
decision. By 4 1 . . .%:tb4 42 a3 :d4 43 f3
a5 Black could have created a zugzwang
position: White' s king has to guard the
h4 square, his rook - c4, and his bishop
- dl.
A s for the resulting rook ending, in
the last few moves Black has worsened
the position of his king, and this is of
great significance.
32 .i.g4
This move is wrong, since the rook
ending does not leave White with any
chances of saving the game. 3 2 l:ie 1
<ii>f8 33 i.d5 was stronger, when he is
still prepared for a prolonged resistance.
32
33 ltet
34 g2
l:lc7
White misses a chance to move his

bishop from its bad position by 3 4
i.e6+.
34
35 lteJ
36 ltf3+
thc5
%le7
36
37 llcJ
38 .i.dl
g7
l:e4
l::td4
36 f3 suggested itself. so as after

the exchange of rooks to occupy the
central d4 square with the king, and
place the bishop at c2 and the pawn at
f4. Alas, then the bishop would be lost 36 . . . h5 37 l:.xe7+ (37 ..ic8 %:tc7)
37 . . . @xe7 38 ..ic8 d8.
After this carelessness by my young

opponent I acquired some hopes of
saving the game. I was expecting
1 80
Although 42 moves had already been

made, play . continued. I was not in a
hurry to adjourn the game, since I
thought that, in such a position, further
play at the board gave more chances of
drawing than after home analysis. And
Fischer's entire behaviour expressed his
indignation at White continuing to resist
in this 'hopeless' position. .He clearly
wanted to demonstrate both to the
players in the Olympiad, and to the
spectators, that such a position did not
require any analysis. But let us see how
the game continued.
43
l:taJ
From what follows, if we look at the

next diagram, it is evident that the
immediate 43 lk7 was correct, not
fearing 43 . . . l:ta4. But, as the reader will
see, to find such a difficult decision at
the board was impossible. However,
Fischer too promptly pays the cost of
playing on without home analysis, mis
sing the winning continuation 43 . . .a5,
and if 44 :b3 :b4. The whole point is
that the pawn ending is hopeless for
White: 45 !txb4 axb4 46 f4+ 5 47
@f3 e6 48 e4 <it>d6 49 d4 b5. But
if he avoids the exchange, then the rook
ending too is won for Black.
43
44
l:tfJ
lle7
J:lc7
After 44 . . . <it>h6 and 45 . . . g7 White

would have had to seek other ways of
saving the game, and perhaps he would
have been altogether unable to find any.
45 a4
The time for play had expired, and

Fischer had to seal his move. After
dinner I began y night-time analysis,
one of the mosfprolonged in my career.
45 . . . llc4 did not concern me, on account

of the immediate 46 a5 bxa5 (or 46 . . . b5
47 J:tf7) 47 %If7 a6 48 h4+ 'ifi>h6 49 :d7
with a draw. 45 . . .<it>h6 46 %td3 :cs 47
h4 %:ta5 48 l:ld4 is also not dangerous for
white.
But what was White to do after
45 . . . :cs ? For a long time the future
appeared gloomy, until Geller found for
White a unique idea of counterplay.
When deep into the night he left me, it
only remained for me to work out the
details of this find.
45
l:r.c5
This means it was not in vain that we

spent so much time on this move.
46
l!ti
a5
It can be seen that, if the immediate

43 :tc7 :a4 had been played, basially
the same position would have arien.
But what is the secret of the analysis?
47 :xh7!!
' I overlooked this defence', Fischer

later wrote. There is nothing surprising
about this - after the game it transpired
that during the night my opponent had
slept soundly. In addition, the decision
to allow the opponent two connected
181
passed pawns looks extremely paradox

ical. It is base(:! . on the fact that, when
these pawns begin advancing, the b6
square is weakened. Then, using checks,
the black king will be forced away from
the g6 pawn and it will be won, when
White too will have two passed pawns
on the kingside.
47
48
51
52
A thematic variation, giving concrete

form to the previous note, would have
looked like this: 48 . <itf'6 49 l:tb7 l:.a5
50 g4 b5 5 1 f4 a6 5 2 Itb6+ <:/;fl 5 3
!tb7+ with a draw.
..
49
50
51
.n.n+
l:g7
es
flat
52
53
54
55
56
What can Black do now? We have al

ready seen that nothing worthwhile
comes of 5 1 . . . 6 52 b7. Had Fischer
made a thorough analysis of the ad
journed position, he would most prob
ably have reached this position and
chosen 5 1 . . . d4, the most unpleasant
move for White. However, he was
confident of winning, and had analysed
the ending light-heartedly.
b5
h5!
The surprising thing about this move

is that White does not pick up the
undefended g6 pawn, but temporarily
sacrifices another pawn himself. Fischer
admitted that he ioverlooked this reply
when he playe4 5 1 . . . b5 - a rare
instance for the future World Champion.
Incidentally, after this move I could
not restrain myself. and, going up to our
team captain Lev Abramov, I said to
him one word: praw' . Great was the
general astonistu:nent when later we
learned that at this point Fischer had
protested to the; deputy arbiter, that
'Botvinnik was being prompted during
the game' !
ltxa4
<it>f5
h4+
Towards morning I had found a

worthy reply to this move.
<li>g2
ltg5+
l:txb5
f4
llaJ+
gxh5
'ifi>d6
h4
<ifi>c6
The reader should not be surprised at

how long the play dragged on in this
theoretically drawn ending. There are
players who find it hard to adjust to a
tum of events that is unexpected for
them.
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
:bs
'ifi>h2
f5
ltb5
f6
:b6+
lta6
hJ+
a5
cl;c7
'3;d6
cl;e6
rM7
Here Black should have offered a

draw. After all, being a pa down, QY
the unwritten laws of sporting ethics I
182
could not be the initiator of peace

negotiations.
63
64
65
66
67
68
g6
a4
ltc6
l:ta6
l:r.c6
l:la6
@gt
.&tg6 + 'iit> a5 60 ltg5+ 'it>a4 61 l1g4+

a3.
Here 62 l:h4 b2 63 b7 blif 64 h8'1'
is inevitable. My evaluation of the

position was as follows: 'Black cannot
win, since his rook is restricted by his
king. ' Fischer continued the analysis:
l:t d3
a3
64 'ii b3+ 65 <it>e2 W'dl+ 66 e3 ltbl

.
Only here, with his face a white as a

sheet, did Fischer shake my hand, and
with tears in his eyes he left the hall.
However, our battle did not end at this
point. The main topic was the question
of whether or not 51 d4 would have
won.
After 52 l:lxg6 Black begins advan

cing his pawns: 52 b5 53 h5 b4 54 b6
.
b3.
54 . . . J::th l 55 <itrg2 :lh5 56 l:ta6 b3 57

l:txa7 l:.xh6 58 l:.b7 c4 59 <bf3 leads
to a theoretical draw.
Now White will pursue the enemy
king. Not wishing to allow the rook onto
the b-file, it will be forced to occupy an
unfavourable position:
55 l:tg4+ <it>c5 56 J:lg5+ c6
(56 . . . <it>b4 57 l%.g7 b2 5 8 h7 llhl 59

:Ixa7) 57 :g6+ b7 58 llg7+ .a6 59
183
and, after making the further moves 67

iff8+ a2, he concluded that 'White's
king will be without sher from the
coming avalanche of checks' . Here,
however, there are straight away two
mistakes. First of all, as I established,
after 68 1lc5 White can successfully
defend. This was later demonstrated in
detail by the Moscow master Anatoly
Kremenetsky
in
the
magazine
Shakhmaty v SSSR ( 1 977, No. 2). And
the 1 3-year-old Garry Kasparov (later to
be World Champion) found an elegant
way to draw in the diagram position: 67
l:tc4! bl+ 68-:cJ 11e1+ 69 d3 1ffl+

70 d2 (70 <t>e3? 1ib3+! ) 70 W'xf2+
71 d3.
..
This, it would seem, put an end to the

lengthy arguments involving our game.
They forced much racking of brains,
plan is to develop his bishop at e2,

castle kingside, and then begin the
standard pawn attack on the queenside.
Incidentally, this is what happened in
the game Reshevsky-Geller ( 1953),
where after l 1 . . ...i.f5 White carried out
this plan unhindered.
The course of events ex-plains, how
ever why theory considers it more
sensible to develop the knight at f3 .
both during the play, and especially in

analysis.
After exanfuring this game and the
associated eve"nts, the reader will prob
ably agree that Fischer' s human charac
ter did not match his great chess talent.
Game 308
Petrosian-Botvinnik
World Championship Afatch
Moscow 1 963, 1st game
1
2
3
d4
c4
lLicJ
'ii'c2
4
5
6
7
cxd5
..tg5
.i.xf6
lLif6
e6 .
i.b4
This continuation was popular in the

1 930s, but then it went out of fashion. It
guarantees White against any surprises.
but it is hard to expect any real achieve
ments from it.
If White wants to avoid compli

cations. this move is necessary, since
after 7 i.h4 c5 Black can try to seize the
initiative. This is well illustrated by
Game 1 14, Keres-Botvinnik ( 1 94 1).
Now, however, a further exchange of
minor pieces is unavoidable.
7
8
9
10
aJ
1fxc3
eJ
11 2
1fxf6
i.xcJ+
c6
0-0
White decides that the best square for

his knight will be f4 . His subsequent
lte8
11
d5
exd5
h6
This simple move prevents the knight

from going to f4, and now the plan,
which White had apparently outlined
before the game, proves impossible.
Was this the reason for Petrosian' s
subsequent uncertain play?
12
ltlgJ
The natural solution - the knight has

to make way for the bishop! It is doubt
ful whether 1 2 ltJcl would have been
any better.
12
g6!
Only this energetic move, creating

the threat of . . . h6-h5-h4, can cause
difficulties for White. .Anything else
would have left him free to complete his
development.
184
As a result, it has to be acknow

ledged that the entire opening idea,
involving 1 1 ll'le2, can hard:ly be
approved.
13 f3
This move could be understood, only
if White were intending to castle queen
side, since then the f2 pawn would have
to be safeguarded. But since White
subsequently avoids (quite reasonably! )
this possibility, f2-f3 proves to be a loss
of time, to say nothing of the fact that it
weakens his position.
13
14
...
.te2
h5
lDd7
Black is not in a hurry to play . . . h5h4, as long as the lrnight has a retreat
square at fl . But if 1 5 0-0 there would
have inunediately followed 15 . . . h4 16
tiJh l 'i'g5 (but not 16 . . . 1i'e7 because of
17 e4 dxe4 1 8 fxe4 'ifxe4 19 1Lc4) and
then, for example, 17 e4 . dxe4 18 f.xe4
Itxe4 1 9 c4 (or 19 'i'f3 CDf6) 19 . . . ltlf6
20 'i':f3 f5 with an obvious advantage.
Therefore White altogether gives up
the right to castle, defending the e3
pawn with his king and leaving fl free
for his lrnight.
15
16
17
@f2
tDfl
tDd2
17
18
19
l:hel
h3
h4
lt:)f8
It is obvious that White must bring

his king's rook into play. It is no less
obvious that Black should double his
rooks on the central file.
lle7
f5
This move has only one plus: White

is freed from the need to calculate every
time the variations with . . . h4-h3. But its
positional minuses are also obvious: the
g3 square is weakened, and the possi
bility of advancing g2-g4 is no longer
on tl1e agenda.
19
20
21
tLln
1'd2
kiae8
lDe6
Sticking, and not without reason, to

waiting tactics. If, for example, 2 1 i.d3,
then 2 1 . . . cS ! 22 .ixf5 cxd4 23 exd4
'i'xf5 24 .U.e5 'i'f4 25 .:tae l :c7, and
White has serious difficults.
21
I spent a
tDg7
long time considering

2 1 . . .iDgS followed by a piece sacrifice
185
on h3. After 22 <itigl xh3 23 gxh3

ctJxh3+ the white king has three
crucially different moves:
(a) 24 <itih2, when things most
probably end in mate: 24 . . . xe3 25
t:bxe3 'i'f4+ 26 'it>hl tbt2+ 27 @gl
'ilg3+ 28 @fl (or 28 ltJg2 h3 29 i..fl h2
mate) 28 ... tt:lli3 29 ..tdl ifgl+ 30 <itie2
liJf4 mate:
(b) 24 @hl 'illg5 25 @h2 'i'gl+ 26
'it>xh3 :!xe3, when it was not easy to
suspect that despite his two extra
pieces, White is helpless - he does not
have a single satisfactory move;
(c) 24 \tig2 lhe3 25 @xh3 (25 l2Jxe3
'iig5+) 25 ... :xe2.
True, White could have tried to parry
the attack by 22 ifdl (instead of 22
@gl), but then all the same there would
have followed 22 . . . il.xh3. and if 23
gxh3 t:De4+! There can follow 24 @g2
'i'g5+ 25 'it>h2 t:Df2 26 'i'd2 (26 f4 'i'f6,
but not 26 ... 'i'f5 27 iLg4) 26 ... l:lxe3 27
.ltdl 'i'f4+ 28 @g2 lbxdl 29 !%.axdl
'i'xf3+ 30 <t>gl l:e2 3 1 lhe2 .D.xe2 32
'ifg5 'i'f2+ 3 3 <t>h 1 lhb2. and White
would have to resign (variation by
Averbakh).
This would have been a logical
conclusion to the game, and would have
vividly demonstrated the danger of such
ill-founded waiting moves as 13 f3 and
19 h3.
Now, however, Black has merely
some positional advantage. and the
battle continues.
22 lladl
23 :ct
24 :c3
25 gt
26 .i.dt
tZ\h5
ild6
lbg3
tZ\h5
:e6
27
'i'e7
1if2
Black has completed all the neces

sary preparations for beginning the
advance of his kingside pawns - without
this White's fortress cannot be taken.
28
29
30
.i.b3
Jl.dt
g4
g5
.*.g6
It is very curious that, at precisely the

moment when White does not face any
immediate threats, Petrosian, who
throughout the game has stuck to
cautious tactics, tmexpectedly and in
correctly launches into complications.
Who knows. perhaps he was hoping
to exploit his opponent's imminent time
trouble?
30
31
li)xg3
hxgJ
lDf4
Apparently White overlooked or

underestimated this move, after which a
lengthy resistance is impossible.
32
'ii'h 2
33
1id2
c5
32 ...llJd3 would also have won.

Of course, not 33 . dxc5 d4, or 33
xc5 l:txe3 .
33
186
c4
34
i.a4
34
35
...
.i.c2
Merely provoking the advance of the

b-pawn, which is advantageous to
Black.
b5
Or 35 i.xb5 :bs 36 i.a4 liJd3 .
35
36
37
38
<t>t'l
g2
exf4
exd4
d5
7
8
cxd5
'ifb3
lhxd5
This position could have been

reached from a well-known variation of
the Caro-Kann Defence. if instead of the
strongest move . . . i.g4 Black had
played . . . g7-g6.
lBxb3+
'fff6
lBf4+
Practically forcing the exchange of

knights. since 8 . . . liJb6 9 d5 or 8 . . . e6 9
ii.gs is advantageous to White.
Otherwise 3 8 . . . i.xc2 and 39 . . . ltJd3.
lhel
38
39 fxg5
lie6
40 f4
lie2+
White resigns, as he loses a piece.
...
.i.c4
tLlxcJ
Grune 309
Botvinnik-Petrosian
English Opening
1
2
c5
c4
t;)cJ
lLJc6
This game shows that if Black wants
to fianchetto his king's bishop, he
should do this immediately: 2 . . . g6 3
tDf3 i..g7 4 d4 cxd4 5 lDxd4, and only
now play 5 . . . ltJc6.
3
4
lLJf3
el
A cunning move. prared in the

quiet of my study. Black cannot play
either 9 . . . lDe4 10 .ixfi+ @d7 1 1 'iie6+.
or 9 . . . i..g7 10 i.x:f7+ 1 1 bxc3 lDas
1 2 'i'd5.
g6
.
An important subtlety! The threat of

d2-d4-d5 forces Black to take cow1ter
measures.
lBf6
If 4 . . . i.. g7 there would have followed

5 d4, and White will. :always be able to
play d4-d5. This occurred in Game 349.
d4
cxd4
e6
9 . . .lDd5 10 i.xd5 e6 1 1 i.xc6+ bxc6

was also possible, but Petrosian prob
ably chose the right course.
10
bxcJ
i.g7
If 10 . . . l'.Da5, then 1 1 i.b5+ i.d7 1 2

1Wa 4 liJc6 1 3 d 5 ! ! exd5 1 4 0-0 with a
strong attack for White. This trap, also

found in home analysis, is successfully
avoided by Petrosian.
1 87
As a result of the opening battle,

White has provoked . . . e7-e6, weak
ening Black's position, and has also
gained a tempo.
11
.i.aJ
This exchange safeguards White

against the threat of
t'.1Ja5, since he
will have a queen check at b4. After 1 5
0-0 tDa5 1 6 'i'a4 .ixa3 1 7 .i.xd7+
'i'xd7 1 8 'i'xa3 lbc4 Black has nothing
to fear. It is interesting to note that with
out 1 5 . . . tDa5 Black cannot equalise: 1 2
.i.b5 Ad7 1 3 0-0 .i.xa3 14 'ifxa3 "fle7
1 5 'i'b2 0-0 16 .:tfe l (Andersson
Huguet, 1 973 ).
. . .
f8
15
xf8
16 0-0
<:J;;g7
The surprise in the opening has not
unsettled my opponent.
This quite well-known manoeuvre,

which forms the basis of Black's defen
sive plan. was one that I underestimated
during my preparations for the game,
and, frankly speaking, I was surprised
that Black was able to avoid the
itmnediate danger.
I needed time to gather my thoughts,
and with this aim White repeats moves,
but even so he does . not take the optimal
decision.
12 il.cl .
Tai played more strongly against

Pohla ( 1 973) : 12 0-0 i..xa3 1 3 'i'xa3
'i'e7 14 'i'c l , and Black was unable to
eliminate the defects of his position.
Sl.g7
12
13
.ii b5
i.. d 7
14
15
i.aJ
.ixf8
.i.f8
After 13 . . . 0-0 14 .i.xc6 bxc6 15 .ia3

:es 16 0-0 White has an obvious
advantage.
17 il.e2
The turning point. Despite his

resourceful defence in the opening,
Black would still have had to overcome
considerable difficulties in the event of
the prosaic 1 7 .i.xc6 i.xc6 1 8 lDe5 ifd5
19 f3 ! (1 9 . . . f6 20 lDxc6). Now the ex
change of queens on b3 leads to a better
ending for White, but if Black avoids
the exchange, the position of the white
queen at b2 will be highly unpleasant.
Unjustifiably avoiding tl:iis variation;
White allows his opponent to gain com
plete equality.
1 88
17
18
19
20
21
c4
'i'e3
li)e5
Jladl
b6
'iff6
:he8
:ad8
ile7
6
7
0-0
a4
7
8
'ife2
a6
Petrosian knew that in this variation

of the Queen's Gambit . Accepted I
preferred this move of Rubinstein. My
opponent was happy to go in for this
line, assuming that nothing new could
be devised here. Even so, it should be
said that 7 'i'e2 is more often played.
c6
iJ.e7
In the opinion of theory, 8 . cxd4 is

stronger, but after Petrosian had gained
reasonable play in the 6th game of the
match, he decided to repeat 8 .i.e7.
..
...
dxc5
Here the avoidance of simplification

by 22 f4 f6 2 3 tiJf3 ti'd6 would have led
to double-edged play. Therefore White
takes a wise decision - to force a draw.
lDxe5
22
c5
23
24
11xe5+ 'iff6
cxb6
axb6
Draw agreed
Black is obliged to exchange on e5,

in view of the threat of lbc4-d6.
Game 3 10
Botvinnik-Petrosian
A1oscow 1 963, 8th game
1
2
3
4
5
d4
c4
lt)f3
el
.i.xc4
d5
dxc4
tiJf6
e6
c5
.itxc5
Annotating my game with Keres

from the 194 1 Match-Tournament, I
pointed out than that if 9 dxc5 Black can
advantageously reply 9 . . . lLle4. Just in
case, Petrosian avoids this move, fear
ing some surprises, especially on the
principle of ' let well alone', since in the
afore-mentioned 6th game 9 . . . i..xc5
fully justified itself.
For my part, I did not fear 9 . . . lbe4,
for the reasons outlined in the notes to
189
all, Black is threatening to win the e5

pawn only with his knight, and his
centralised queen may become a target.
Game 1 6 1 , and although there was a

mistake in the analysis, the overall
evaluation remained accurate. The point
is that Polugayevsky would appear to be
right, in recommending that if 9 . . . CDe4
White should immediately play 1 0 ltJd4 !
tL\xc5 ( 1 0 . . . ltJxd4 1 1 exd4 'i'xd4 1 2
:ct1) 1 1 lDxc6 bxc6 1 2 4Jc3 .
10
li:)g4
e4
After 10 . . . 'i'c7 1 1 e5 ltJg4 1 2 .if4 f6

1 3 liJbd2 ! (but not 1 3 exf6 'i'xf4 1 4
i.xe6 i.xe6 1 5 1 5 'i'xe6+ @fK although
according to theory White can never
theless count on a draw) a position from
the game Botvinnik-Vilner (Leningrad
Championship, 1 930/3 1 ) is reached. A
possible continuation is 1 3 . . . ltJgxe5
(Vilner preferred first to play 1 3 . . . 0-0)
14 tL\e4 i..e7 (or 1 4 . . . ila7) 1 5 lDxe5
fxe5 ( 1 5 . . . ttJ.xe5 16 ac l ) 1 6 ilg3 0-0
1 7 'i'g4 with the initiative for White.
11
e5
Up till here we had repeated the

previous even-numbered game, where
after 1 1 i.f4 'i'f6 1 2 .tg3 lbge5 1 3
ltJxe5 tL\xe5 14 ltJd2 Black achieved
good play. I should mention that Tal
recommended playing 14 a2 0-0 15
ltJc3 . with the intention by <iifrh l and
f2-f4 of preparing an attack. However,
for the 8th game I had prepared a pawn
sacrifice, and I wanted to test it.
11
li:)d4
Since. White cannot reply 12 'i'e4 on

account of 12 . . . lDxf3+ 1 3 gxf3 lDxf2.
he is forced to exchange knights.
12
tixd4
13
lia3!
13
14
15
l::t xaJ
bJ
The simplest. While defending his

bishop. White creates numerous threats:
14 lDc2 and 14 h3. It can also be
considered that for the moment his
central pawn is immune: 13 . . . ltJxe5 14
i.e3 (14 l:d l 'i'g4) 1 4 ... 'i'd6 1 5 l:tfdl
'ilc7 16 i.xc5 1 6 ifxc5 1 7 i.b5+ axb5
18 :ac 1 ltJc4 1 9 ltJxb5 etc.
Here my opponent realised that he
had walked into a prepared variation. To
his credit, he chose a continuation
which, although dangerous, was the
most logical, depriving White of his
king's bishop.
1f xd4
This position had to be analysed in

detail before the game. of course, and I
came to the conclusion that previously it
had been incorrectly evaluated. After
.i.xaJ
tixe5
In search of something better than

this prosaic move, I thought for 45 min
utes. since I realised that the decision
taken in my preparatory :;malysis was
not ideal.
After the game it seemed to me that it
would have been better to play 1 5 :Cdl
1 90
White would have retained some advan

tage thanks to the poor position of the
enemy king. Now, however, the
advantage passes to Black.
'i'g4 ( 1 S . . . 'ifxc4 16 'ii'xeS 0--0 17 .i.h6

'ifg4 1 8 :Iad3 'i'g6 1 9 .i.xg7 f6 20 ..txf6
'ilxf6 2 1 .:1.g3+, or 18 . . .f6 19 'Wic7 'i'g6
20 i.xg7) 16 'i'c2 (but not 16 f3 'i'fS)
16 . . . tDxc4 ( 16 . . . ifxc4 17 :c3, 16 . . . i.d7
17 ..te2, or 16 . .. 0-0 17 ..te2 'i'fS 18
'i'c7) 1 7 l:tg3 'lbs 18 :gs 'i'h4 19
l:txg7 with the threat of 20 i.gS. Failing
to find these possibilities at the board, I
made the previously planned move (the
drawback to which is that the rook is
temporarily shut out of the game), after,
alas, wasting much time in thought.
There were also other recommend
ations. After l S dl 'i'g4 Aronin
suggested playing 16 'i'd2 0--0 17 .i.e2,
Keres mentioned
lS
..ia2, and
Matanovic - 15 !tc3 0-0 16 %Xdl. But
would this have given White a clear
advantage?
'ilc5
15
.
16
16
17
18
19
bxc4
.i.a3
l:td2
if)xc4
.i.d7
iff5
Hardly any better was 19 'i'd2 f6 (20

'ilb4 .0--0-0), but Polugayevsky con
sidered 19 'ilb2 to be stronger.
19
.i.c6
Black avoids queenside castling on

account of 20 i.e7 J:de8 2 1 i.d6, when
his king feels uncomfortable, and
parries the_ threat of 20 :cts.
20
:et
h5!
White's uncertain play has been

excellently e;...-ploited by Petrosian. With
the intention of finally safeguarding his
king by . . . f7-f6, he prevents a possible
g2-g4.
21 'i'e3
l:la2
Sensing that the fruits of my home

analysis had been wasted as in my
game with Fischer I begin playing
weakly. By continuing 16 ..tb2 ltJxc4
(or 16 . . . f6 1 7 'i'hs+ g6 18 'i'h6) 17
bxc4 i.d7 18 !tg3 0-0-0 19 l:xg7
191
21
f6
Since 2 I.. .i:th6 is risky in view of 22

I;ld5 (or perhaps even 22 'ib6 kig6 23
'i'c7 l:xg2+ 24 'it>fl l:tgl+ 1 7 25 xgl
'i'g5+ 26 <it>fl. when Black can only
simpler. when it is hard for Black to

strengthen his position.
hope for a draw), Petrosian prefers to

take play into an ending, where he will
have a ininimal advantage. Here I
offered a draw, but there was no reply,
and the game continued.
22
23
24
25
1ixe6+
l:txe6+
l:Ie7+
a5
The immediate
possible.
26
27
.i.d6
.:txe8
'If xe6
<3Jf7
lt>g6
ad8
25 .. J:the8
33
34
35
36
...
fJ
was
l:.he8
c.t>f2
Jl.b4
i.a3
i.d6
'ittf4
g4
.i.c4
.i.b5
l:ic3
40
lte3
:c4+
And now the highly important fourth

rank is in Black's possession.
lixe8
el+
l:tal
ltbl
:b3
l:tc3
36
37
38
After the g-pawn has advanced,

another pawn comes under threat.
39 :le4
.i.c6
111.is is the whole point: White has

not managed to play f2.
29
30
31
32
Ji.e6
All the same the c-pawn would have

had to advance, but now Black can
threaten the g2 pawn.
White incorrectly activates the black

rook. After 2 7 J:.e3 It.xe3 28 fxe3 :es
2 9 <t>f2 the draw would have been
obvious.
27
28
l:t.c2+
.i.d7
'iitg3
h4
c5
41
42
43
@gJ
il.c7
fxg4
44
ll.f4
a4
bxg4
.i.d7
Now White can no longer defend all

his weak pawns: one of them is lost. If
44 h5+, then 44 . . <:Jilf7.
.
Of course, not 44 . :xas, when there

would have followed 45 l::te7 J:.a3+ 46
i.e3 .i.c6 47 h5+ <itih7 48 h6.
..
33
:d4
White incorrectly concedes the
second rank. 3 3 c5 :a3 34 i.c7 was

1 92
45
l:lb3!!
Game 3 1 1
The obvious 45 h5 l:xa5 46 i.d6

i.e6 47 g5 xg5 48- :f3+ e8 49 .f:.e3
@d7 50 :Le5 l!af+ 5 1 @fl g4 52 :gs
would probably have lost to 52 . . Jlf3+
and 53 . . l:lf7.
The move played, which was found
in adjournment analysis, lures the black
bishop to c8, since from c6 it will not be
attacking the g4 pawn. And this is
sufficient for a draw.
Botvinnik-Petrosian
Moscow 1963, 1 0th gaine
Queen' s Gambit Accepted
45
46
g5 .
...
fxg5
Now the draw is obvious: after the

exchange of rooks, Black will not have
the two widely separated passed pawns
at a6 and f6, necessary for a win in the
ending with opposite-colour bishops.
47
48
49
50
51
52
hxg5
.i.eJ
:b6+
c6
lhc6
lk5+
d5
dxc4
ltlf6
e6
1i'e2
cxd4
After his lack of success in the

opening of the 8th game (No. 3 1 0.),
Petrosian avoids 8 . . . .ie7 and reverts to
the continuation that occurred in the 2nd
game.
lba5
@g6
<it>f5
bxc6
l:laJ
9
10
11
In the event of 52 llxc8 11.xe3+ Black

would have retained an advantage.
But if now 52 . . . e4, then 53 :xc8
l:xe3+ 54 <Jtg4, and a draw is inevitable
in view of the wealmess of the g7 pawn.
g6
52
53
54
55
d4
c4
tDf3
el
.i.xc4
c5
There has probably been no impor
tant event, other than the 1 963 World
Championship Match, in which the
given variation occurred so frequently,
although the course of the play showed
that in this opening too it is not so easy
for Black to equalise.
a6
6 0-0
ltlc6
7 a4
.i.c8
White rids himself of his weak pawn,

and threatens after 47 gxf6 gxf6 to
obtain a passed h-pawn.
46
1
2
3
4
5
%1.dl
exd4
lDcJ
il.e7
0-0
And here White deviates from the

afore-mentioned game ( 1 1 .i.g5).
11
"" ltlb4
1 1 . . . tiJd5 deserves preference, as my

opponent played in the 1 6th game of the
match (No.3 14).
Itc6+
h5
l:.a4+
<it>f4
<it>g3
Draw agreed
12
A game, typical of my play in the

match with Petrosian. Interesting ideas,
but unsuccessfully implemented.
.i\g5
A slight surprise, the true worth of

which was not immediately appreciated
by the future World Champion. Earlier I
had played 1 2 tiJe5 (see, (or example,
Game 44), when " with 12 . . . .i.d7,
193
suggested by Chekhover, Black could

have quickly equalised.
bishop has moved from c 1 and the d l

square is defended by the rook).
15
16
17
.i.xd5
l:Cxd5
tl\xg5
lDxd5
.i.xg5
h6
The only defence against the threat of

1 8 'i'd3.
18
19
11d2
l:bd7
hxg5
11f6
20
21
22
23
l:l.xb7
1la5
1i'b4
:ad8
:d6
%lfd8
l:td4
24
25
26
'l'b3
ifc2
1fc7
1 9 . . . 'ilib6 would not have saved the

pawn on account of 20 a5 1i'b3
(20 . ifbs 2 1 I;ld5) 2 1 :l.a3, when Black
has merely lost time.
. .
12
...
.i.d7
:n
The simplest way of defending is to
attack the white queen.
This leads in surprising fashion to the

loss of a pawn. 1 2 . . . t'hfdS was perhaps
stronger as Petrosian played against
Reshevsky in 1 970 (the continuation
was 1 3 tDxdS lDxd5 14 jLxe7 t'iJxe7 1 5
"i'e4 tDds 1 6 tDes t'fil6 17 Wf4 with
equal chances).
I need hardly tell the reader that this
entire variation and the following con
tinuation were prepared by me before
the game. Nevertheless, I made my next
move not without some hesitation, since
I foresaw that the conversion of the
extra
pawn
would
entail
great
difficulties.
13
d5
exd5
14
tDxd5
lDbxd5
In this way White removes his queen

from further attacks, but Black's pieces
are active and well coordinated.
This and the following exchanges are

forced.
If instead 14 . . . ti:)fxdS 15 jLxe7 t'iJxe7
16 lDe5 ltJbdS 17 .itxd5 lDxd5 1 8 :xd5,
then Black does not have Chekhover's
saving manoeuvre 18 . . . .ilg4 19 11'c4
1ixd5 20 'i'xd5 l:tad8 (in contrast to the
afore-mentioned Game 44 the white
Black cannot implement his threat of

26 .. Jxfl. ( 2 7 .Uxf2 :tcil+) because of 27
'iixd8+. Therefore he offers to go into a
194
double rook ending, where he has

grounds for hoping or a draw.
26
27
28
29
11'xf4
h4
:b4
30
31
32
33
gxf3
b3
'it>g2
:.b8+
1!ff4
gxf4
lt.c8
tJ
So, throughout the game White has

maintained the advantage that he gained
in the opening, but a draw would
appear
to be inevitable.
39
Black temporarily sacrifices a second

pawn, to break up White' s pawn chain
on the kingside and to hinder his
defence of f2 .
licc2
lib2
.U.d3
39
40
41
42
43
All the same the two extra pawns

cannot be held, and White makes an
attempt to activate his second rook.
'it>h7
f6
ltb7
:dxb3
11.el
llxb3
After 36 lia7 l!b4 37 l:ee7 l:lxa4 38
33
34
35
36
lle6
l:lxa6
g2
l:ta8
g5!
g6
:r4
:a4
a5
a6
Draw agreed
Game 3 12
Petrosian-Botvinnik
l:.xg7+ 'it>h6 Black would also have

retained every chance of securing a
draw.
36
37
38
'it>g3
By 39 l White could have tried to

activate his king, without prematurely
advancing his a-pawn. Now, however,
moving the king into the centre will
involve the loss of the f3 pawn. Alas,
this was the penultimate move in time
trouble!

Queen' s Indian Defence
xb3
l:lb4
l:lxh4
1
2
3
4
d4
c4
lDtJ
f6
e6
b6
gJ
In the following game (the 17th)

where the Queen' s Indian Defence
occurred,
Petrosian
avoided
the
fianchetto of his king's bishop.
'-.i.b7
i.g2
/Le7
0-0
0-0
lhe4
thc3
I have already written in my not'es to
4
5
6
7
Game 1 56, where I played 7 . . . d5 (as

also in Game 45), that when I was not
1 95
obliged to play for a win with Black, I

was more inclined to continue 7 . . . ttJe4 .
That was the case in my game with
Alekhine (No.96), who chose 8 'i'c2.
xe4
d5
.i.f6
9 exd5 10 cxd5 .i.f6 1 1 ltle l i.xg2

1 2 ltlxg2 c5 1 3 lLlr4 d6 is also not bad
for Black.
. . .
10
lDel
No better was 10 lDd4 .i.xg2 1 1

xg2 'ife7 1 2 ltlc2 d6.
10
ll.. xg2
exd5
1 1 xg2
This exchange could . also have been
delayed. After 1 1 . . .:es 1 2 lDr4 a5 1 3 e4
ctJa6 1 4 i:te 1 exd5 1 5 ctJxd5 ltlc5 16
lic2 c6 in the game Lilienthal
Taimanov ( 1 954) Black maintained the
balance.
12
cxd5
prospects
13
dxc6
14
1!fc2
15
l:t.dl
on
the
dxc6
ilxe4
White played more consistently in

the 3rd game of the match - .9 ttJe l , but
9 .i.f4 is also possible.
gammg
clear
queenside.
c5
Forcing te to take this pawn en

passant, as otherWise Black continues
. . . d7-d6, . . . ltld7 followed by . . . b5-b5,
If instead 14 'i'xd8 :xd8, then Black,

in contrast to White, easily mobilises his
forces.
c5
14

Possibly 15 'i'e4 would have been

more far-sighted, practically forcing
Black to reply 1 5 . . . ctJa6 (or 1 5 . . . ltld7).
Then his knight would have been unable
to reach c6 so easily.
1'e8
15
..
.
16
i..f4
White foresees that he will have to

play e2-e3 to defend the central d4
square, and so he develops his queen' s
bishop i n advance.
tbc6
16
17 .i.d6
Jl.e7
The tempting 17 . . . lDd4 did not
achieve anything because of 1 8 1hd4
(less good is 1 8 Wc4. i..e7) 1 8 . . . it.xd4
1 9 lDf4 followed. by.i.xf8.
.
18
e3
A forced move, although it weakens
1 96
immediately develops a dangerous

attack, . and he is always assured of a
draw. Therefore Petrosian tries to block
the long diagonal.
the light squares (in particular f3).

Generally speaking, White has not de
rived anything from his opening idea of
9 d5, and in addition Black's queenside
pawn majority is a significant factor.
18
19
20
21
llxe7
lDf4
ila4
After 2 1 CDd5 :xd5 22 J:lxd5 b4 23

'i'd2 ltlxd5 24 'i'xd5 .:.ds Black would
have seized control of the d-file, but it
would have been simpler for White to
begin exchanging rooks immediately.
22
:xd8+
1fxb5
g2
'it>gl
'if xd8
30
31
<it>gl
ild5
'iixe4
Vdt+
it'f3+
1fdl+
l:bd8
If 22 'i'e4 f5 23 'i'g2, then 23 . . .c4!

(securing a favourable post for the
knight at d3) with the threat of . . . g6-g5g4. After the immediate 23 . .. g5 24 tt:Jd5
'iff7 25 f4 White achieves a good game,
since he drives back the enemy knight.
22
23
24
25 .
26
27
28
This check and the following one are

to gain ti.me on the clock.
29 <itg2
1ff3+
li)eS
21
b5!
24
Black nevertheless gains control of

the a8-hl diagonal, but the exchange of
his b-pawn for the e-pawn reduces the
sharpness of the play in the coming
ending.
:ds
1ixe7
g6
%id1
e4
'1xd8
c4
It was dangerous for White to accept

the pawn sacrifice - 24 l!xd8+ 'i'xd8 25
'i'xa7, since after - 25 . . . g5 Black
11xd5
31
3 1 .. . 'ib l + 32 <iftg2 'i'xb2 33 'i'a8+

'3;g7 34 'i'xa7 would have left Black
with only very problematic winning
chances, however he continued 34 . . . 'lb5 or 34 ... h6. Therefore-he trans
poses into a _knit ending, counting on
the greater activity of:bis king.
197
32
tllxdS
tlld
33
34
35
b4
axbJ
b4
cxb3
f5
Since his king catulot go to e2

(because of . .. lDc 1 +), White seeks (and
finds) a way to draw by using his
queenside pawn.
35
36
b5
<Ji;f7
ltle5
b6
b7
ltlc7+
ltla6
'l&>e2
lhb4
43
44
45
46
dJ
'l&>c2
bJ
a4
a3
The saving move.
ltlb8
'l&>c7
'l&>xb7
<it>b6
Black tries iediately to penetrate

with his king into the white pawns. The
preparatory 46 . . . lDc6 would also not
have won.
If 36 . . . 4itte6, then 3 7 b6 !
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
a5
<it>e6
ltlc6
When I began my adjournment

analysis. I immediately discovered that
40 lDb6 ! would have quickly led to a
draw: 40 . . . 'it>e7 (40 . . . <it>d6 4 1 b8'i'+
lDxb8 42 lDc4+) 4 1 @e2 <it>d8 42 llld5
etc. However, this inaccuracy on the last
move before the time control does not
have serious consequences.
The impression is that White is
losing, since after the elimination of the
a-pawn his king will be too far from the
kingside. In fact, it is able to return just
in time.
47
48
49
50
51
xa3
'l&>b3
c2
d2
el
c5
'l&>d4
'l&>e4
@f3
White succeeds in defending every

thing. As often happens in a chess
game, one tempo is lacking either for a
win, or for a draw.
51
52
53
54
g2
h4
fJ
tl:\dJ
ltld7
<t>t'l
Draw agreed
An interesting game.
Game 3 13
Botvinnik-Petrosian
Queen's Gambit
1
2
3
40
d4
c4
lhcJ
d5
e6
, JJ..e7
This move was mentioned back in

the notes to Game 59. The point of it is
that Black tries to provoke tiJf3 before
d6
1 98
d4 square ( 1 0 dxc5) and allow the

opening of lines.
the development of tlJ.e bishop at g5. As

this and other games from the match
showed, this continuation is by no
means better than the usual 3 . . . tt:Jf6.
4
s
6
cxd5
Ar4
e3
g4
10
lDc6
exd5
c6
.i.f5
Essential. 6 . . . tt:Jf6 7 i.d3 leads to the

Exchange Variation of the Queen's
Gambit with the bishop at f4 instead of
g5, which is to White' s advantage.
This idea was first employed by me
in that Game 59. Then, in almost the
same position (instead of . . . i.e7, Black
had played . . . tt:Jd7) I played it in 1952
against Bronstein (see training games) .
1 1 @fl
When the rook has to remain on the
h-file, and queenside castling -is ruled
out, the king has to determine its own
fate.
.te6
The point is that after 7 . . . i.g6 8 h4

i.xh4 9 'i'b3 b6 10 tiJf3 1 8 i.e7 1 1 ctJe5
White has a clear advantage.
h3
In the preceding even-numbered

game (the 12th), I played 8 i.d3 . and 8
h3 is a step forward. but probably the
most energetic is 8 h4, which I chose in
Leiden ( 1 970) against Spassky (No.
379). It is interesting that, 15 years after
the tournament in Leiden, the plan with
8 h4 was used by Kasparov in the 2 1 st
game of his second match with Karpov.
8
9
iif6
..tdJ
The following counter by Black in

the centre would have been less favour
able for him after 9 ttJ:f3, which I em
ployed in the 18th game of the match.
9
10
lDtJ
c5
The position of White's king is not so

secure, that he can give up the central
11
12
@g2
0--0
cxd4
Now White is able to defend his out

post in the centre, and in this connection
Romanovsky with good reason recom
mended 1 2 . . . :es, with the idea of
transferring the knight from f6 to :f8.
1 2 ... l:.c8 has also been played.
13
tt1xd4
Since White' s king is now secure, he

need not concern himself that Black will
avoid the exchange of knights and try to
exploit the absence of the white pawn
from d4. And the exchange of knights is
to White's advantage: he inunediately
gains the possibility of gaining control
of e4 by the advance of his f-pawn,
when he will dominate in the centre.
13
1 99
llxd4
Four years later a game Geller

Spassky continued 1 3 . .i.d6 14 i.. xd6
'ifxd6 1 5 tbce2 .:res 16 .&te l .i.d7 17
i..b 1 , to White' s advantage.
18
..
14
exd4
ltld7
15
ilc2
lDf6
If Black had made use of this

opportunity to fight for the initiative 14 . . . ctJe4 15 ltJxe4 dxe4 16 .i.xe4 f5 ,
then after 17 gxf5 ..txf5 18 'i'd3 his
compensation for the material deficit
would have been insufficient.
Typical of Petrosian. He is afraid of
weakening his position by either . . . h7h6 or . . . g7-g6, and so he is not
concerned about losing two tempi, if he
considers the move to be the most
sensible in the given situation.
16
f3
Now White has a clear positional

advantage. It would have been rash to
be tempted by 16 g5 tllli5 17 xh7+
h8, since there is no way of contin
uing the attack, and the bishop at f4 and
the pawn at g5 are threatened. to say
nothing of the bishop at h7.
16
17
.*.e5
:cs
.i.d6
l%ael
It would again have been a mistake to

go chasing a pawn ( 1 8 Jtxf6 'i'xf6 1 9
i.xh7+ 'ii?h 8), since the initiative would
have passed to Black. The character of
the play, arising with the given pawn
formation after the exchange of the
dark-square bishops, was well known to
me from the game Levenfish-Kotov
( 1 1th USSR Championship, 1939),
which I annotated for the tournament
bulletin. In the endgame White will
have the advantage - his minor pieces
are more active than the opponent' s.
18
19
.i.xe5
l:txe5
It is only possible to take with the

rook, since after 1 9 dxe5 d4 20 exf6
ilxf6 Black wins back the piece,
gaining a positional advantage.
19
20
21
22
11f2 .
%te2
libel
g6
lDd7
b6
The double-edged 22 h4 would not

have been in the spirit of the position,
since White' s attacking prospects would
be unclear, whereas an endgame will
always be favourable for him.
22
23
lLlc4
i.xc4
Now there is exactly the same

material remaining on the board, as in
the afore-mentioned Levenfish-Kotov
game. In the event of 23 . . . dxc4 24 d5
i.d7 Black loses a pawn, so he has to
take on c4 with his rook, but then the d5
pawn will restrict the e;ictivity of his
bishop.
23
24
200
l:r.xc4
l1d2
lite8
25
26
1!e3
b3
a6
At ..any moment Black could have

increased the pressure on the d4 pawn,
so the rook must be driven away.
26
27
28
29
ltla4
itlb2
itld3
l:tc6
b6
a5
35
itld3
35
36
37
gxf6
1t'g5
This, of course, is to gain time on the

clock.
After the knight manoeuvre has

forced a slight weakening of the enemy
pawns, White returns it to the centre.
29
which is not now possible on account of

34 . . . .i.f5 35 gxf6 l:xf6 36 'l'e5 J:d6 37
e2, and in the end Black loses his d5
pawn.
34
i..f7 .
f6
Petrosian underestimates the dangers

arising in the endgame from the fact that
a white pawn will be at g5. It was
completely bad to accept the pawn
sacrifice: 37 . . . 'ii'xd4 38 ti.)eS . However,
Black could have defended tenaciously
with 3 7 . . . rl;g7 38 ttJf4 rJm, although
after 3 9 ri;g3 he has no useful moves.
38
30
.i.e6
'I' xf6
'l'xg5+
hxg5
h4
White prepares g4-g5. to weaken the

dark squares in the opponent 's position.
30
31
J..f7
l:txe8+
White is always ready to exchange

one pair of rooks. Black's counter
chances are reduced, but Iris weaknesses
remain.
Jl
32
33
34
'l'e3
g5
lbf4
.ixe8
Ji.f7
e6
White prevents the opponent's

intention of playing his bishop to f5 ,
20 1
38
a4
Black grows nervous, and makes

things easier for White-. The exchange
of a pair of pawns does not bring any
relief, whereas removing control from
the c5 square is irrational. Here it would
have been more advisable to stick to
waiting tactics.
39
bxa4
After 3 9 ltJe5 :c3 40 bxa4 l:r.a3 4 1

llb2 :xa4 4 2 l:txb6 l:txa2+ all the
queenside pawns are exchanged, which
eases Black's defence.
39
40
41
42
43
44
a5
li)c5
Clti>gJ
f4
e5
:lc4
bxa5
.t.f5
a4
a3
. .
llxd3
Axa3
xd5
c6
ltb2
llg2
l:lxg5+
h5
52
53
54
d5
d6
<it>d7
llg2
l:lc2+
After the forced exchanges, which

have led to White winning a pawn,
Black's only hopes, naturally, rest on
the advance of his passed pawn.
White's plan, begun with 3 3 g5, has

been logically completed. His king has
penetrated into the black position.
44
48
49
50
51
:b4
Or 44 . . . :c2 45 .:txc2 .i.xc2 46 ttJa6

3'.b3 47 lDb4 .i.c4 48 c2, and White
remains a pawn up.
54
45
lhd3
45
46
47
d6
ci>c6
Of course, with such an active king

White can go into the rook ending, and
the enemy rook must not be allowed to
go to b2.
If 47 . . . :as, then
immediately decisive.
l:lb5
<iJf7
.i.xd3
48
lDc5
h4
A mistake in Black' s adjournment

analysis, which leads ' to defeat. He
should have tried 54 . . . g5 55 l::ta5 <itn'6 56
d8 h4 57 d7 h3 , although after 58
:a6+ r:l;g7 59 l:te6 19 h2 60 l:.e l ci>f7 6 1
a4 White should nevertheless win.
.:n
55 f4
Here there was no longer any point in
playing 55 . . . g5, in view of 56 fxg5 <li>g6
57 r:l;d8 r:l;xg5 58 d7 'ittg4 59 :as h3 60
'itte7 etc.
is
202
56 cs
57 l:ta7+
Black resigns
promotes to a queen.
:xr4
the white pawn
tl1e bl-h7 diagonal. This, was conf

inned, in particular, by the subsequent
games Petrosian-Spassky ( 1 97 1 ), which
went 1 2 'i'e4 li.Jcb4 1 3 lDe5 :a7, and
Kuzmin-Suetin ( 1 976) - 1 2 h4 CDcb4 1 3
h5 h6.
Game 3 14
Botvinnik-Petrosian
. World Championship Match
1
2
d4
c4
d5
dxc4
After his failure in the 14th game,

Petrosian reverts to accepting the
Queen's Gambit instead of declining it.
3
4
5
6
7
lt\f3
eJ
-*.xc4
0-0
a4
lt\f6
e6
c5
a6
Exactly the same as in the 2n4 6th.

8th (No.3 10) and 10th (No.3 1 1) games
of the match.
7
8
.
1ie2
lLlc6
cxd4
12
13
8 . .. :il.e7 successfully passed the test

in the 6th game, but the opening of the
8th game went badly for Black.
l:[dl
ile7
exd4
lDc3
0-0
11
...
lDd5
14
15
16
17
18
19
An improvement compared with

l l . . .tiJb4, which occurred in the 10th
game. Now White can no longer aim for
d4-d5, and his subsequent plans involve
an attack on tl1e kingside, exploiting tl1e
absence of the knight from f6.
.i.d3
White considers that after . . . CDcb4 he

will be unable to tr.ansfer his bishop to
...
g6
Also after 14 . . . tDf6 1 5 ifh4 Black

would soon have been forced to weaken
the pawns covering his king.
And here the similarity ends with the

2nd game, where 1 1 i.g5 was played.
12
lhcb4
.*.d7
13 . . . qjf6, which occurred in the game

Gligoric-Korchnoi ( 1 965), also led t9
some advantage for White.
14 1We4
This is perhaps stronger than 14 ltJe5.
9 . .. 'Wic7 occurred in Games 1 16 and

161.
10
11
...
.i.bl
lhe5
1ff3
1ig3
h4
ltJf3!
i..f6
li.g7
.1\e8
ti)c6
White must avoid exchanges, in

order to maintain the tension.
19
..
f6
To take control of the g5 square,

Black is forced to weaken his e6 and g6
pawns.
203
30
ltJe5
lbxe5
31
32
33
dxe5
f3
:et
l:le8
:e2
lla2
34
Ji.gs
Now White acquires a dangerous

passed pawn, but if 30 . . . 'tfe6 there could
follow 3 1 lllxc6 'i'xc6 32 f3 :e2 33
%itbc 1 with a dgerous initiative.
20
lbxd5
22
hxg6
22
23
24
25
tl:ih4
11.xbl
It is advantageous for Black to keep

his rook on the second rank, but without
the support of the other pieces he is
unable to create any threats to the white
king, and at a2 the rook is as though out
of play.
As will be seen from what follows,
Black's position is critical. However, on
this occasion too, as in other games
from the match, I played uncertainly
and squandered my advantage.
exd5
If 20 . . . 'i'xd5 the reply 2 1 ..ta2 is

unpleasant, but now Black is deprived
of his strongpoint at d5, and White's
positional advantage becomes obvious.
21 h5
/1)e7
If 2 1 . . . g5 there could have followed
22 ti:Jxg5 xg5 23 'i'd3 .
This exchange eases Black' s defence.
and therefore it should not have been
hwried. but White was ab-eady thinking
about saving time before the control.
il.xg6
li.xbl
't!f d7
l:tfi
b3
25 . . . lllf5 could not be played
immediately because of 26 'iig4, but
now Black has prepared this move, and
it has to be parried.
f5
26 irfJ
27
28
flgJ
lbf3
tl:ic6
29
..fl.f4
lte4
e7
Black exploits his strong trump,
directing his rook to e4, where it will be
very well placed.
34 :tbc 1 , activating the rook,

suggests itself, e.g. 34 . . . .&te6 35 il.g5
(with the tlrreat of 36 .lti6) 35 . . . l:tg6,
and White decides matters with the
breakthrough 36 e6 l:lxe6 37 .i.f6 l:Xf6
(37 . . .ktxel+ 38 :xel) 38 :c7 f4 (or
38 . . . l:g6 39 irxg6 'i'xc7 40 l:te8 mate)
3 9 :es+ :tf8 40 :xf8+ 'ifilxf8 4 1
204
Vxf4+. In all .these variations what tells

.
is the absence of the rook at a2 from the
main baJ:tlefield.
34
35
3 5 :bd 1
played.
35
36
e8'i' :xg2+ with perpetual check), but I

still had to make my last move before
tl1e time control.
40
41
d4
.*.f6
Played through inertia. After 4 1 e7

Black still has nothing better than
perpetual check. Now, however, White
will have some work to do . . .
should first have been
ktbdl
iff7
ilg6
41
42
43
44
Forced: Black can no longer save his

d4 pawn and he merely aims to safe
guard his king.
37
38
1fxg6
llxg7
39
e6
1:cc2
ltgl
hxg6
@xg7
:del
e7+
'it>g3
l:.d2
<t>f8
'it>e8
d3
The storm clouds are gathering over

White's position, but in adjournment
analysis I managed to find the only
saving move.
It is hard to explain why I avoided

the natural 39 :xd4 lilc8 40 @h2 11cc2
4 1 _:tgL when White is a pawn up with
winning chances. Apparently in time
trouble the advance of the passed pawn
seemed to me to be a safe antidote
against the threat of . . . r!c8-c2. In fact
Black is handed an extra tempo for this
manoeuvre.
39 .
fies
If 47 :b l Black could now have

replied 47 . . . llh2.
Now I should have reconciled myself

to the inevitable dratV (40 e7 lkc2 4 1
Of course, not 47 .. ;d2 48 :b l . In the

event of 47 . . . l:xb3 48 11exd3 J:xd3 49
40
'it>h2
45 . . l:.e3 .
46 'it>f4
:ab2
The whole point is that the threat of

4 7 l:.h I has been created.
46
47
205
47
l:t dl
:xg2
l:lbd2
Ilxd3 a
outcome
6 5 1 <JJxe7 5 1
draw is the most probable

after both 49 . . . <itiixe7 50 ltb3
b6+, and 49 . . Jitb2 50 :d6
llxg6.
48
49
l:txd2
g5
50
<ifi>t'6
%lxd2
1%dl
Black could
even have
49 .. J:tg2+ 50 lt>f6 d2 5 1 ltd3.
10
ird2
11
i.h6
li:)bd7
lost:
But not 50 <it>xg6 in view of

50 . . . l:tgl + 5 1 6 d2 52 %k3 :tg6+ !
50
51
52
53
54
f4
lle4
l:lct
lld4
l1c6+
:cJ
ci>g5
'it>f6
Draw agreed
A step forward compared with Game
298, where after 1 1 0-0--0 Black

retained the option of castling kingside.
Now this would be dangerous. White
achieves nothing with 1 1 a4 bxa4
(Ostojic-Ivanovic, 1 972).
Game 3 15
Krutikhin-Botvinnik
USSR Spartakiad, .Moscolt1 1963
Sicilian Defence
1 e4
2 lt)f3
3 d4
4 ltlxd4
5 ltlc3
6 .i.e3
f3
.i.c4
.i.b3
.i.g7
a6
b5
i.b7
..
'l'xJt6
13
0-0-0
13
14
...
cxb3
.i.xh6
ltlc5
That same year there were also other

attempts to justify Black's set-up, but
none were successful. For example,
1 2 . . . b4 1 3 ti)a4 'i'a5 14 'ifd2 0-0 1 5 a3
'i'e5 1 6 axb4 d5 1 7 0-0-0 (Mazzoni0 'Kelly).
c5
d6
cxd4
ltlf6
g6
It will be remembered that this move

followed by 7 f3 is the plan introduced
into tournament play by Rauzer back in
1 936.
6
7
8
9
11
12
Black, for his part, sticks fully to the

development
plan
suggested
by
Reshevsky.
After 13 'i'g7 Black would have

successfully defended with 1 3 . J:tf8.
.
lDxb3+
Boleslavsky 's well-known idea. The

white king is more securely defended by
its pawns than after 14 axb3, when
Black still has chancei;. of opening the a
file. In addition, the c:-ftle, which in the
Sicilian Defence is usually used by
Black, may here also come in useful to
206
White. And for the moment Black' s

extra pawn in the centre i s of no
significance.
b4!
Preparing the manoeuvre of the

knight to a5, where it will occupy an
unpleasant position. Another, equally
effective idea was demonstrated by
Stein in a game with Veresov ( 1 963): 16
l:the 1 b8 17 tiJd5 lDxd5 1 8 exdS.
16
17
18
lhbJ
h4
<it>b8
1lhg8
21
22
g5
23
lhd5!
l:lf8
lhd7
l:c8
lha5
1i'f4
lk7
%1.gc8
A loss of a tempo. 20 . . . 8 should

have been played.
White energetically conducts the

offensive: after the forced exchange on
d5 Black will have considerable
problems due to the weakness of his c6
square.
23
24
25
26
exd5
'ife4
gxf6
.lxd5
lhe5
f5
Otl1erwise there would have followed

26 . f4, when the position of the knight
at e5 would be impregnable.
. .
Preventing the active 18 . . . g5 fol

lowed by .. Jg6 and . . . g5-g4. At the
same time White himself begins a pawn
offensive on the kingside.
18
19
20
g4
1i'b6
14
Or 14 . . . e5 1 5 ttJc2 'fl.e7 16 lDb4 (or

16 lDe3), and White's position is
preferable. Black has no choice, other
than to castle queenside.
0-0-0
15 'ifi>bl
16
21
Now, in view of the unequivocal

threat of 22 g5, the rook is forced to
return to the kingside to defend the f7
pawn.
26
27
11.hfl
laxf6
Up to here my opponent had played

excellently, but now he makes an error.
After 27 f4 tLlg4 28 l:the l 29 'i'd4
Black would have had to contend with
serious difficulties, since his knight
would not longer have been defending
207
the key e5 square. Now, however, I am

saved by a chance tactical opportunity.
c;t>as
27 .
2s ; - net
if White is agreeable to allowing the

Pirc defence, he should not p)ay his
bishop to c4 4 ltic3 is better.
.-
4
5
'lfe2
lDf6"
Or 5 e5 dxe5 6 ttJxe5 0-0 and Black

carries out the freeing advance . . . c7-c5.
c6
In order after e4-e5 to have the reply

. . . lD<l5. In some cases . . . li:)xe4 is also
possible ('ii xe4 d6-d5 ).
0-0
6 il.b3
7 0-0
7 i.g5 is perhaps more energetic, as
Matulovic played against me in 1 970
(No.378).
7
28
a5
lDxf3!
This is the whole point. The threat of

29 . . .ltJd2+ prevents White from first
exchanging on c7. All that remains is
that which occurred in the game . . .
29 lbfJ
Draw agreed, in view of the
variation 29 . . . J::txc l + 30 xcl 'i'g l + 3 1
<itd2 'i'g2+ 3 2 e3 'i'g l+ 3 3 @d3
'i'd l + 34 e3 'ifgl + with perpetual
check.
GaIUe 3 16
USSR Spartakiad, Moscow 1963

1
2
3
4
e4
d4
ttJfJ
ii.c4
a4
8
9
...
lDbd2
A committing move. 8 a3 or 8 c3 was

more cautious. The Encyclopaedia re
commends first playing 8 e5 liJd5 and
only then 9 a4.
Gipslis-Botvinnik
g6
.i.g7
d6
Black has . greater difficulties in the

King's Indian Defence (after 4 c4). But
il.g4
d5
Temporarily shutting the b3 bishop

out of the game. The e4-e5. advance is
now no Jonger dangerous for Black: his
queen's bishop has c...e into play.
208
complications in the centre, for which

he is prepared to give up a pawn.
10 e5
In principl 10 c3 should have been
preferred, although even then it is
doubtfui whether White can achieve any
advantage.
10
11
h3
14
15
16
tlfd7
lDxfJ
.i.g5
ilxf3
e6
13
'ifb6
prise.
Trusting. in the power of his two
bishops,
Gipslis decides to
initiate
16
17
.i.e7
17
18
19
20
i.d6
l:tb3
tlg5
cxd4
Of course, not 17 l:b3 because of

17 . . . 1i'c5 .
An energetic, but not altogether suc

cessful move. White should have taken
prophylactic measures against an attack
on his centre by . . . c6-c5 . Six years later
Matanovic tried to improve White's
play with 1 3 c4 (No.3 74), but also with
out success. To me 1 3 c3 seems to be
the most sensible move.
It transpires that, due to the need to

defend the b3 bishop, 14 c3 is not pos
sible, and the bishop, in tum, cannot
move because the b2 pawn is left en
c5
dxc4
White's initiative can:hot last for

long, since Black completes his devel
opment without any interference and
then sets his sights on the weak e5
pawn. .
1 1 e6 i.xe6 12 ltJg5 did not work

because of 1 2 . . . i.xd4.
11
12
13
l:.aJ
c4
.i.xc4
l:tc8
c6
b4
One gains the impression that White

has nevertheless gained some compen
sation for the pawn. In particular, he is
threatening to play 2 1 l'Dxe6, and 21
:D is also rather unpleasant.
20
Jlxc4!
However, this exchange sacrifice

enables Black to parry the imminent
tlrreats and to seize the key squares in
the centre.
209
21
22
1'xc4
.i.xe5
ltlxe5
White resigns
If 3 3 Itd6 or 3 3 %lb6, then 3 3 . . 'i'f3

followed by . . . !fil4 is decisive.
Gipslis has not yet lost hope in his

attacking p9ssi.b\litis, and he avoids the
.
exchange'fif queens (22 'i'c5), assuming

that it1 the . endgame he would only be
able to battle for a draw. But perhaps
this would have been the lesser evil.
....
22
23
24
25
' .
. . .
l:lf3
bidl
ltle4
Gruiie
..
:fl?
Taimanov-Botvinnik
.ilxe5
l:f8
i.g7
e5
1
2
3
d4
c4
ltlcJ
ltlf6
e6
i.b4
It may seem thoughtless to choose

this opening against Taimanov, one of
the connoisseurs of the Nimzo-Indian
Defence. But, on the other hand, if
something needs to be checked, the
examiner should be familiar with all the
details of the subject.
4
5
6
7
26
net
'ifc7
ltlf6+
ltxf6
lic4
h6
'ifd8
ild5
.i.xf6
ltld3
'ife4
There is no satisfactory
against the threat of 32 . . . !Df4.
32
1ic2
c5
b6
.ib7
7 .i.d2, as played in Game 3 56, is

weaker.
g4
After this serious weakening of the

kingside it is Black who will be
attacking. True, also after 26 :c 1 'i'c6
27 'i'xc6 bxc6 28 tllf6+ .i.xf6 29 .ttxf6
l:td8 the endgame would have been
hopeless for White.
26
21
28
29
30
31
e3
ltlf3
i.d3
0-0
rl;g7
defence
7
8
..
l2Ja4
.
0-0
'ife7
Here 8 . . . cxd4 is considered obliga

tory, to secure the retreat of the bishop
to e7. From this standpoint 8 . . . 'i'e7 may
have claims to originality. Even so, it
has to be admitted that in some games
of Keres a similar idea had already
occurred - at a5 the bishop will not be
so badly placed as it appears.
I should say that I prepared 8 . . . 'i'e7
for my match with Petrosian, but when
in the World Championship Match I
was unable to employ this weapon, I
was very happy to play it against an
2 10
acknowledged expert on the Nimzo

Indian Defence. Initially Taimanov was
on his guard, but even so he quite
quickly ..made the f9llowing moves
il.a5
. 9 a3
not understand his play so badly . . . '

'What do you mean', replied my oppon
ent to Petrosian, 'here there was the
unpleasant interposition. 12 . . .ixf3 .
Therefore the reader must agree that
Mark did indeed do well !
As regards other possibilities for
White, later tournament games and
researches by analysts (in particular
Taimanov) showed that IO ktb 1 is more
prom1smg for White, after which,
according to the Encyclopaedia, he
gains the advantage. It follows that
8 . . 'i'e7 is less strong than the well
tested 8 . . . cxd4.
Now (after 10 b3 ) a double-edged
situation has arisen: both the knight at
a4, and the bishop at a5, are on the edge
of the board. Of course, the bishop is
more actively placed, but it altogether
has no moves, whereas White can
always manoeuvre with his knight, and
in addition there is the unpleasant threat
of b3-b4 . Whether or not Black is able
to stay afloat will only later become
clear !
.
'
10
bJ
Well done, Mark! Taking account of

Petrosian's inclination for exchanges in
general, and in particular for those that
gave him the advantage of the two
bishops, in the diagram position I had
prepared for the variation 10 dxc5 bxc5
1 1 l2Jxc5 'i'xc5 12 b4. In this case there
would have followed 1 2 . . . i.xf3 ! 1 3
'i' xf'J ife5 14 bxa5 ilxal 1 5 'ii'a8 'i'c3
16 i.e2 l2Jc6 with the initiative for
Black.
Naturally, I was intrigued: had my
opponent seen this variation, or had he
unsuspectingly avoided the danger?
After the game we began analysing. I
kept silent, awaiting a comment by my
opponent. At this point Petrosian came
. up to our board, and immediately every
thing became clear. ' Why did you avoid
the variation 10 dxc5 bxc5 1 1 liJxc5 ?',
the World Champion asked Taimanov.
Aha', I thought, 'this means that I did
211
10
11
12
13
14
cxd5
.i.b2
1fe2
llacl
d5
exd5
lDbd7
lDe4
Jlc6!
The only possibility. Now 1 5 .i.b5

.i.xb5 16 'i'xb5 a6 17 'i'e2 c4 ( 1 8 b4
b5) looks dubious for White. Taimanov
agrees to exchange his knight at a4 for
the bishop at a5, after which White's
position is slightly better, but the psy
chological battle . has nevertheless been
won by Black, since White has not in
fact been able to exploit the unfortunate
position of the bishop at a5 .
15 lDc3
.t 6 .*.xc3
17 . .i.b2
i.xc3
a5
l:tfc8
24
lDg4
c4
.:
After the incorrect 1 7 . . . a4 18 dxc5 !

bxc5 1 9 b4 Black would have ended up
in a critical position.
18
lDe5
Excellently played. If now 18 . . . ltJxe5

19 dxe5, then the bishop at b2 is activ
ated, there follows f2-f.3 , driving . the
black knight to g5, and White's
initiative on the kingside becomes
dangerous.
18
19
l:tfdl
.i.b7!
lhdf6!
was able to achieve the same

arrangement of my knights in Game
305.
20
f3
There was no need for this weakening of the position.
20
21
22
23
a4
lic2
:dcl
lDd6
lk7
lDfe8
On this occasion Taimanov did not

guess my intention.
23
Although the c4 square is attacked

five times by White' s pieces and only
three times by Black's, this move
proves possible thanks to the variation
25 bxc4 dxc4 26 i..xc4+ .:xc4 ! 27 llxc4
i.a6. Even so, I decided on 24 . . . c4 only
after great hesitation: after 25;bxc4 dxc4
26 ltxc4 ! ltJxc4 27 :xc4 White would
have had definite compensation for the
exchange.
However, my opponent was so
dispirited by what had happened, that he
thought for a long time and then soon
made a totally bad move.
25
26
bxc4
Jle4
26
27
28
fxe4
l:xc4
28
29
30
ifxc4+
1!fe2
After this
hopeless.
dxc4
White's
position
is
li)xe4
1ixe4
As a result of this White loses a

piece. 28 h3 would have saved the
knight, but, of course; .not the game.
f6
2 12
llxc4
.i.d5
Game 3 1 8
Kholmov-Botvinnik
1
2
3
4
e4
d4
.ig5
.i.f4
ttlcJ
d6
ttlf6
g6
h6
This . move can be made without

fearing 5 iLx:f6, since after 5 . . . exf6
Black will follow up . . . f6-f5 with a
reasonable position.
30
31
32
33
dxe5
hJ
b5
fxe5
b4
1fxa4
.i.d4
1fh5
ltfl
lr.f4
1ff3
'i!fd7
b5
l:i)c7
i.f7
i.d5
ttle5
Now an endgame would probably be

won for Black even without the extra
piece - after all, he has two connected
passed pawns.
34
35
36
37
38
In order to 'persuade' the opponent

to resign, in such a position it is
sufficient to reach the time control.
39
40
41
1ie8
'l'b5
ttle6
1fxh4
'ifg6
:rs
White resigns
The Encyclopaedia considers that 5

.i.e3 is more promising, and that the
game continuation, as well as 5 .i.h4 (as
Unzicker played against me in the 1 956
Olympiad in Moscow), does not give
White any advantage.
5
6
...
h3
.i.g7
After 6 'i'd2 g5 7 .i.e3 ttJg4 or 7 .*.g3

CDhS White's queen's bishop would
have been exchanged, but perhaps this
would not have been so advantageous to
Black. Now, on the other hand, he is
able to strike on the flank.
6
7
c5
dxc5
7 d5 leads to more complicated play.
One of the few games where I went

in for a risky continuation in the
opening. I was curious to see how my
opponent would ract to my cunning
preparation.
My reckoning . proved accurate;
evidently I was an experienced and
quite good chess psychologist.
213
7
8
1fa5
9d2
Panying the threat of 8 . ttJxe4.

..
8
9
10
.i.eJ
.i.dJ
1fxc5
1Fa5
ttlc6
Black successfully completes the

development of his pieces, but the prob
lem with his position is that kingside
castling is ruled out.
not take any great effort by him to gain

a draw in the resulting level endgam.
11
12
ti)ge2
0-0
ttld7
ti)de5
By exchanging the opposing light

square bishop Black eases his defence.
13
f4
The attack on the h6 pawn can be

lifted, since after 13 . . . tiJxd3 14 cxd3 0---0
the move 15 f5 would be highly un
pleasant for Black.
13
14
15
16
ti)xd3
e6
.i.d7
cxdJ
llael
a3
White could have tried to complicate

the play by 16 f5, e.g. 16 . . . exf5 17 exf5
.i.xf5 1 8 lDd4, or 16 . 0--0--0 17 fxg6
fxg6 1 8 f7 . With his next move Black
excludes this possibility - true, at the
cost of exchanging his important bishop.
.
16
17
18
19
i..d4
tLlxd4
'!'f2
(jje7
.i.xd4+
ifb6
0-0-0
It can be considered that Black has
successfully overcome his opening

difficulties. In view of this, with his
next move White offers . the exchange of
queens, evidently assuming that it will
20
21
22
(jjf3
<&ti>xf2
l:cl
23
d4
11xf2+
@b8
f6!
Black' s minimal advantage is due to

the presence of his good bishop. Now he
wants to seize the initiative with . . . g6g5. Even so, in such a position it would
be hard to imagine that any winning
chances can be found, were it not for the
classic examples of this in the games of
Lasker, Capablanca and Rubinstein.
An incautious move, as a result of
which the e4 square (and later f5) are
weakened. It is true that for the moment
White prevents 23 . . . g5 in view of 24
fxg5 hxg5 25 e5, but with his next move
Black renews this threat.
23
24
l:r.hf8
h4
One gains the impression that as yet

my opponent is not at all concerned,
otherwise he would have refrained from
this new weakening. .
2 14
24
d5
Irrespective of White's reply, the f5
34
35
36
37
square will now be under Black' s

control. Kholmov decides to exchange
pawns in the centre, relying on the
subsequent simplification on the open e
file, but in the process the activity of the
black bishop increases.
gt
lDxgl
tDtJ
lt:\el!
The only defence

position.
37
38
lt:\g2
llxgl
.i.g4
(f)e7
in a
difficult
lt:\f5
h5
Otherwise
White
would
have
provoked further exchanges by 3 9 llle3 .
39
40
25
26
27
exd5
ltfel
g3
28
29
30
tLlh2
l:.c2
:ce2
.tcs
tDc6
!lff8
31
d2
g5
As a result of a lengthy manoeuvring

battle, Black has gained a slight but real
plus - an outside passed pawn. But he
has to reckon with the possible invasion
of his rear by the white rook. In
addition, White s chances of a draw are
improved by the small amount of
material remaining on the board.
lDg6
41 :dJ
Of course, not 30 . . . ltJxd4 3 1 !te8

l:tfd7 32 :xd8 l:xd8 33 :dl , when
White achieves his aim - the exchange
of the central pawns.
A similar pawn thrust occurred in
several of Capablanca' s games.
White cannot exchange on g5, and so
he is forced to allow the creation of new
weaknesses in his position.
lDtJ
gxf4
lt:\xh4
f5
exd5
%!ti
i.g4
Soon, by attacking the d4 pawn,

Black will finnly seize the initiative.
Then his bishop will be attacking the
defender of this pawn - the knight at f3 .
32
33
lDeJ
lt:\exd5
gxf4
.ng8
42
43
l%e3
:e6
h4
h3!
44
l:bg6
l:th8
This little combination, prepared in

adjoununent analysis, involves a tempo
rary piece sacrifice. which allows Black
to transpose into a superior rook ending.
215
45
tLle2
Weaker is 45 l:txg4 fxg4 (but not

45 . h2 46 htgl ) 46 g l g3.
..
45
46
47
llgl
..txe2
Jlg4
tLleJ
Perhaps 47 ltlf6 was preferable.
47
48
l:thl
h2
hJ!
It is this move, also found in adjourn

ment analysis and probably not antici
pated by my opponent, that gives Black
new chances. In view of the threats of
49 . . . l:tf3+ and 49 . . . i.f3 the exchange of
minor pieces is forced.
49
50
ltlxg4
g2
fxg4
r!f3
The tragedy for White is that his king

is a long way from the queenside, where
the final battle develops.
Black first of all eliminates the f4
pawn. It would have been wrong to play
50 . . . :b3 5 1 'it>xh2 l:txb2+ 52 g3.
51
52
53
54
55
lbh2
d5
'iii>gJ
l:tb7+
llh6+
lbf4
:d4
Jc7
b6
<ifi>c5
What can be said about this position?

White forces the enemy king to defend
its queenside pawns. Then the d- and g
pawns will inevitably be exchanged,
which leads to an ending with two
pawns against two on the same wing.
Does that mean a draw? Yes, provided
only that Black does not succeed in
exploiting his sole trump - the remote
ness of the enemy king from the main
battlefield. But how can he do this?
56
57
58
59
b6
b5
a6
b6
l:th7
llb6+
llh7
l:th6+
For the moment only White has

achieved anything. He has driven the
opponent' s king as far away as possible
from the d-pawn. Now the logical
continuation, complicating the play
somewhat, would have been 60 d6.
Then White would possibly have been
able to exchange his d-pawn for one of
Black ' s queenside pawns, or for the g
pawn, but with the black king on the
seventh rank, further away from the
white pawns.
60
llh7
But this, for the reasons indicated, is

wrong. As is apparent from the course
of the game, the immediate exchange of
the d- and g-pawns does not complicate
Black's task, but makes it easier.
60
61
62
lbd5
:d2
'itxg4
b4
If Black immediately threatens the

pawn, then after 62 . l::ta2? 63 b5+ <ltxb5
64 :lxa7 a draw is inevitabl. Therefore
the trajectory of the attack on the pawn
is more complicated.
.
2 16
Grigoriev' , by cutting off the ing along

the rank - 69 . . . l:.g3 70 l:t.hl a3.
62
l:lb2!
The first subtlety: 63 b5+ is not pos

sible, and the threat of 63 . . . l:tb3 forces
the white rook to abandon its active
position. There is no doubt that White
overlooked this quiet move, when he
played 60 l:th7.
63
:r.bJ
In the most simple of rook endings a

number of amazing secrets may be
concealed!
l:ta2!
Game 3 19
And immediately comes the second

subtlety: now White' s rook is tied to tl1e
defence of the a3 pawn, and for the
transference of his king to queenside tlle
third rank is blocked. Black's king, by
contrast is able to support tlle attack on
the white pawns.
64
65
66
@14
<it>e4
llb7
<ifi>b5
<it>a4
Botvinnik-Van Scheltinga
Amsterdam 1 963
English Opening
1
2
3
4
c4
ttJcJ
g3
ttJfJ
tiJf6
c5
e6
d5
cxd5
ttJxd5
6
7
i.g2
0-0
ttJc6
ttJxcJ
bxc3
i.e7
4 b6 5 .i.g2 .i.b7 is probably prefer

able - in this case a variation similar to
the Queen 's Indian Defence is reached.
. . .
White goes into a tlleoretically lost

ending, since there is nothing else
available to him.
:xa3
66
67 l:txa7+ xb4
b5
68 l:tb7
69 <ifi>d4
lla8
White resigns, since if 70 <Ji?d3 the
simplest is 70 . . . 'itrb3 . But, incidentally,

it was also possible to win a la
And now Black avoids the Tarrasch

Defence, which would have arisen after
5 . . . exd5 6 d4 .
This exchange is insufficiently

justified. 7 . . . i..e7 was more natural.
2 17
d4
10
e4
possibility that was available to my

opponent on the next mov. ,
17 lifet
0-0
White's forces are activated, and he

now creates a passed pawn on the d-file.
10
11
12
d5
.i.f4
12
13
...
exd5
14
9'c2
b6
ll'la5
exd5
..i.f6
Black prevents GtJe5-c6, since now if

14 ttJe5 there follows 14 . . . g5 .
14 'i'd3 is also good, as in a game
Hort-Zweig ( 1 967) .
.
g6
An excellent move. Black's queen's

bishop will take up a good position at
f5, and at the same time the h7 pawn is
covered. Of course, 1 4 . . . 'i!fxd5 was not
possible because of 1 5 tDe 1 .
15
16
:adl
'ifcl
ilf5
l!e8
1fd7
A useful move: it will not be easy to

blockade White's passed pawn.
14
17
The critical point. Black should have

played 17 . . . .i.e4 !
greatly hindering
White's actions: his knight at f3 would
have been pinned in view of the
possible exchange of the g2 bishop.
Perhaps the plan of creating a passed
d-pawn was not so strong after all.
Now, however, when Black has lost
an important tempo, White's attack
becomes irresistible.
18
tl)eS
18
19
20
d6!
..td5
In the afore-mentioned game Smejkal

won by 18 .l\e5 i..g7 19 .i.xg7 @xg7 20
ttJe5 'S'd6 21 'i'h6+ g8 22 'ii'f4 [L)b7
2 3 g4 etc.
'ila4
1%ad8
.ie6
Or 20 . %lf8 2 1 Jlh6 ilg7 22 ti:Jxf7

.:Ixf7 23 ..txf7+ @xf7 24 e7+.
l:tf8
21 d7
22 :le4
Gaining a tempo t-0. switch the rook to
the kingside.
.
It was only here that for a short time

the game Smejkal-Parma ( 1 973) took a
different course. Black played 16 . . . 'i'd7
first, and so he did not have the
218
22
23
24
..ih6
-*.xg7
4
5
i.g2
ll.e7
6
7
8
b3
i..b2
cxd5
b6
.ib7
lLlxd5
d4
c5
0-0
0-0
This opening, bordering on the Reti,
the Catalan and the Tarrasch Defence,
later became very popular.
;;:.j
:,if?
; '.
A t-: ... &
f
w.:/,.0
::.,,.
,
/f
c4
iig7
xg7
o/:f ';T "'!

,,,,,,,
8 . . exd5 would have led to a more

complicated situation, since piece ex
changes would have been less probable.
.
%:
t.
. .
:,:.',?1:
%.
25
lih4
25
26
l:ldd4
Simagin played more

strongly
against Smyslov ( 1 966) : 9 . . . tt:'ld7.
'"
t :i
. . ..
A subtlety that was probably under

estimated by my opponent. He was
apparently e:\.'Pecting the obvious 25
i..xe6, after which the f-file would be
opened and Black would acquire some
hopes of saving the game.
<iit>g8
Removing the rook from the attack

by the queen.
'if xa2
26
27 1lh6
Black resigned in view of inevitable
mate.
10
dxc5!
White exploits an opportunity to

force his opponent to move an already
developed piece. In addition. now Black
will no longer be able to offer the
exchange of bishops by . i.f6.
..
Game 3 20
Botvinnik-Donner
Amsterdam 1963
Reti
1
2
3
c4
lLlfJ
g3
Opening
lLlf6
e6
d5
10
.*.xc5
The position after White's 10th move

occurred back in 1 93 2 in a game Euwe
Van der Bosch. Black made the weaker
reply 1 0 . . . i.f6, and after 1 1 i..xf6 'i'xf6
12 tt:'lbd2 White had an undisputed
advantage.
11
219
lDbd2
lLld7
12
a3
queens: 18 . . 'ifxf3+ 19 t'filxf3 f8 20

ttJc6 :c7 21 c2 l:.ac8 22 l::tac 1 with
strong pressure.
By now Black has realised the
dangers of his _position, and with the
threat of 1 9 . . . ttJe5 20 'i'e4 f5 (2 1 'i'xe5
llJf4+) he tries to initiate complications.
lD5f6
Black' s misadventures begin with

this move. He was obliged to play
12 . . . a5, forestalling the positional threat
of b3-b4-b5 with the seizure of the c6
square. In this case he need not have
feared 1 3 e4, which would merely have
increased the activity of the black
pieces.
13
14
b4
lDd4!
JJ..e7
The exchange of the light-square

bishops, for which Black has been
openly aiming, turns out to be to
White's advantage, since it weakens the
c6 square, making it easier to him to
seize control of it.
14
15
'iitt xg2
il.xg2
ifc7
19
e4
19
20
b5!
lD5f6
a6
21
lDc6
.lf8
22
23
24
a4
axb5
:.xal
axb5
lbal
l:la8
25
ktdl!
In this way Black's counterplay is

nipped in the bud, while the weak c6
square in his position remains.
In the event of 20 . . . tiJeS 21 'i'e2,

Black would have had to reckon with
inevitably having to retreat his knight
after f2-f4.
Black apparently avoided the more
active 2 1 . . . i.c5, not wishing that his
bishop should subsequently come under
attack (tiJb3). But this is perhaps what
he should have played, since b3 is not
the best square for the white knight.
/?;:.?;
1.= f11 il/&tJ{ : f.:tkt

16
11fb3
An important manoeuvre. White will

alwavs be able to answer . . 'i'b7+ with
'i'D: when the endgame is in his favour.
.
16
17
18
ltfct
1ff3
llfc8
1fb7+
tDd5
Let us considei. a possible contin

uation in the event' of the exchange of
220
This move decides the game. On the

a-file the lone rook is no danger,
whereas on the d-file the white rook is
in close contact with its other pieces and
will play a leading role.
25
26
27
c4
e5
lbe8
c5
White can finally lift his control of

d5, since the square is inaccessible to
the enemy knight (27 . . . CiJc7? 28 l:.d7 !
tt:Jxd7 29 CiJe7+).
27
:cs
Black moves his rook from the same

diagonal as the enemy queen, but . . .
concedes the a-file for White to invade.
28
Ital
llc7
29
:a7
ifxa7
Alas. the reply 28 . . . !:ta8 is not

possible (29 l:xa8 'i'xa8 30 t'Lle7+).
The queen has to be given up
immediately, since after 29 . . . 'i'c8 30
ttJxb6 hardly anything can be gained for
it. However, here too the compensation
is clearly inadequate.
Jlxa7
30 li:)xa7
31 li:)xb6
Black resigns. The b5 pawn cannot
3
4
5
6
7
tLlc3
g3
.i.g2
e3
0-0
b3
e6
b6
..i.b7
ll.e7
d5
After 7 . . . 0-0 8 d4 cxd4 9 'i'xd4

according to the Encyclopaedia White
has an appreciable advantage.
With slight divergences, this opening
variation has already occurred in Game
320 and will be repeated in Game 3 59.
White's basic plan consists in fore
stalling . . . d5-d4. With the white pawn
at e3 this advance is unfavourable for
Black: after the exchange on d4 the e
file is opened, and in addition White
gains a queenside pawn majority.
In tum. White exchanges on d5 at a
point when Black will be forced to
recapture with his pawn, whereupon
White plays d7-d4. Then the defence of
the d5 pawn and the insufficiently active
bishop at b7 will become something of a
problem for Black.
8
0-0
be regained (if 3 1 . . .CiJc7 or 3 1 . . .l:tb7

there follows 32 'iic6), and it will soon
have the last word.
Game 321
Botvinnik-Petrosian
USSR Team Championship
Moscow 1 964
English Opening
1
2
c4
lt)f3
The Encyclopaedia
8 . .. lDe4. Therefore it
c5
f6
221
recommends
would have
possibly been more useful for White,

instead of castling, to play d2-d3 .
i..b 2
ttlc6
10
cxd5
exd5
11
d4
lies
12
13
l:tcl
i..h J
llc8
15
16
17
Now the position coincides exactly

with Game 359, where White played I O
d3 , which would seem t o b e more
accurate than the continuation in the
present game.
This allows White to carry out his
opening plan. A consultation game Bot
vinnik and Polugayevsky against Keres
and Prins (Holland
1 966)
went
1 0 . . . ltlxd5 1 1 ltlxd5 'i'xd5 1 2 d4 :ad8
1 3 t'De5 'i'd6 14 dxc5 ii'xc5, and Black
emerged from the opening with better
prospects of equalising.
l 1 . . .'i'd7 was hardly advisable. After
1 2 l:k l White gained a significant ad
vantage both in Geller-Van Scheltinga
( 1 969 which went 1 2 . . J:Ud8 1 3 dxc5
bxc5 14 4 liJe4 15 tiJd2, and in
Csom-Miles ( 1 977) : 1 2 . . . :tac8 1 3 tiJe5.
.J:.el
cxd4
it.f8
17
ifd3
l%e1
lLle5
g6
W'd8
A classic example of how to play

such positions is provided by the well
known game Reshevsky-Flohr ( 1 93 8).
14
.i.b4
if xe8
A committing decision. 1 7 . . . .i.xc3

followed by . . . lDe4 suggests itself. when
it would not be easy for White to
demonstrate that the two bishops are a
significant factor in this position. Now
White gains the opportunity to establish
his knight on the central e5 square.
18
19
20
Driving the rook off the c-file. since

1 3 . . . c7 loses the exchange: 14 tiJb5
(14 . . i!.c8 1 5 tiJxc7 i.xh3 1 6 liJxe8).
13
l.1.b8
exd4
l:txe8+
aJ
Black chooses a convenient moment

for this exchange, ensuring the safety of
his d5 and c5 pawns. White has to re
capture on d4 with his pawn, since 1 5
liJxd4 lDxd4 1 6 if xd4 ..tc5 1 7 'iih4 d4
18 :led l dxe3 1 9 l:xd8 exf2+ leads to
complications favourable to Black.
However, now White's prospects are
still better in view of the better placing
of his pieces.
20
21
f3
21
22
23
'fldl
.i.g7
Thus, White has already achieved

something: he has centralised his knight,
defended the important e4 square, and
occupied the open e-file. In addition
Black has difficulties in bringing his
rook into play.
222
l'Lla2
lpa5
a6
Threatening by 24 fi)b4 to shut the

knight at a5 out of the game.
23
24 .i.
lZ\c6
White agam wants to play 25 fi)b4 .

which would enable him to secure for a
long time the position of the lrnight at
e5 . Both now and later the exchange on
e5 would be clearly to his advantage.
24
25
26
27
'fld2
.i.b2
lllc l
1lc7
a5
1!i'd6
.i.c8
knight from e5, but as a result the e6

square is weakened and the position of
the bishop at g7 is worsened.
.i.fl
lllcd3
34
35
lllf4
f6.
Jld7
ltlf5
Now White wants to play 36 .tb4

and win the d5 pawn, and if 3 5 . . . tbc7 to
win the queen !
35
1ff8
35 . Jlf8 would have lost to 36 liJxd5

'i'xdS 37 %:txe8 (37 . . . xe8 3 8 CDxf6+).
. .
.*.e6
tfJe7
lDg4
.i.c3
With the threat of 35 .tb4.
Black finally drives away the annoy

ing bishop. White, of course, avoids the
exchange, rightly assuming that at e6
the black bishop will be not much more
actively placed than at b7.
28
29
32
33
34
36
37
38
39
40
tbxd5
.i.b4
l'De7
lbxf5
d5
h8
1if7
itled6
itlxf5
White achieves complete domination,

and in addition he is a pawn up.
40
lle8
41 lle4
h5
42 l'Df2
:;):}
30
b4!
This leads to tl1e seizure of c6

idea that was also used in Grune 320.
30
31
32
axb4
b5
an
tiff:
. axb4
lDe8
In view of the thfeat of tbb4-c6,

Black must immediately drive tl1e
223
42
g .i_
l:td8
This apparently natural move leads to

Black's inevitable defeat. In my analysis
of the adjourned position I considered

Black ' s best chance to be 42 . . . i..h6 with
the possible continuation 43 'ifd3 i.e3 ,
when 44 g4 cannot be played on
account of 44 . . . hxg4 45 fxg4 i.xb5 ! 46
:xe8+ 1i'xe8 47 'i'xb5 i..xf2 + 48 xf2
'i'e3+ 49 g2 h4+ with a draw, while
after 44 g2 i.c5 45 ..ixc5 bxc5 46
'i'c4, although White retains the advan
tage, there is still much play to come.
In his adjournment analysis the
World Champion apparently did not
take account of some nuances in the
position.
43
.i.c4
Now White achieves the advantageous advance of his d-pawn.
43
44
45
d6
l:el
c8
ifd7
..ib7
The d6 pawn is immune - in the
event of 45 . . . xd6 46 'i'xd6 'i'xd6 47
i.xd6 nxd6 48 lle8+ Black loses a
piece.
46
47
lDe4
lbe4
.ixe4
lDxd6
47 . . . i.f8 48 l:te6, and the passed pawn is

inunune (48 . . . ttJxd6 49 i..xd6 i.xd6 50
!lxd6 'i'xd6 5 1 'i'h6 mate).
48
.i.xd6
49
l'.Id4
.i.f8
Black noticed, of course, that after

48 . . . 'i'xd6 49 :es+ he would lose a
rook.
Also possible was 49 l:te6 h7 50
i.xf8 ! 'i'xd2 5 1 :e7+ 'it>h8 52 i.g7+
'it>h7 53 Si.xf6+ h6 54 i..g7+ 'it>h7 (or
54 . . . 'iti>g5 55 %le5 mate) 55 .i.c3+ etc.
49
'it>h7
50 .*.xf8
But not 50 i.e5 because of 50 . . . .i.c5 .
50
51
52
ll'xd4
ilxd4+
lhd4
i.fl
It only remains for White to transfer
his bishop to the gl -a7 diagonal.
52
53
54
55
i.. a3
cbf2
.i.b4
g5
lidl
c/i;g7
h4
This diversion' is not able to change

anyt11ing.
56
57
58
59
gxh4
Jil.el
g3
.i.f2
59
60
61
.tc4
f4
l:td4
xh4
lid4
The main obj ective has been ful

filled: now the rook will have to defend
the b6 pawn.
An oversighh:-but in a position where

there was nothing at all to do! e.g.
224
l:tdl
l:td6
Clearing the long diagonal for the

manoeuvre i.e2-f3-c6.
61
g6
fxg5
62 fxg5
Black resigns
10 f3
A dubious plan,
Game 3 22
against which
Smyslov finds a convincing reply. 10 d3
was simpler and better.
BotVirinik-Smyslov
Moscow 1964
English OpeniQg
1
2
3
c4
ltlc3
g3
lDf6
e5
.i.b4
4
5
.i.g2
a3
0-0
Probably the simplest way of equal

ising in this opening.
A waste of an important tempo. 5
ttJf3 (Game 3 3 3 ) or 5 e4 was preferable.
5
6
..
bxcJ
.i.xc3
e4!
An interesting idea. Smyslov carries

over this well-known idea from the
Sicilian Defence (for White) to the
English Opening (for Black). Now
White has to develop his king' s knight
on an unsuitable square. 6 . l:.e8 7 e4 c6
followed by . . . d7-d5 is also possible (as
recommended by Polugayevsky).
..
7
8
9
ltlbJ
0-0
ltlf4
l:te8
d6
b6
225
e3!
10
11
...
d3
11
12
13
1ie1
g4
13
14
15
h4
'ifg3
h6
ltlf8
ltlg6
16
17
18
lhhJ
h5
.i.bl
ltlh7
ltlb4
f5
By leaving the opponent with his

pawn on e3, White risks getting into
danger. After 1 1 dxe3 .ia6 Black would
have advantageously regained his pawn,
but even so this should evidently have
been preferred.
..i.b7
ltlbd7
White needs to gain counterplay at

any price. For this he transfers his queen
to the kingside, and with its support he
begins a pawn offensive there.
The black knights have not only set

up a secure defensive screen, but they
are also ready to launch a counterattack.
By skilfully manoeuvring with his

knights,. .:Black has pushed back the
opponent s pieces, and White's hopes of
an attack have been sharply curtailed.
Now Smyslov lands an energetic pawn
blow - a significant link is his plan for
developing his initiative.
19
-*.b2
1i'f6
The first point in the game when

Black can be criticised. He could have
retained the advantage with the active
1 9 . . . tbg5. Then in the event of 20 tL\f4
11b8 2 1 <it>h2 'i'f6 the white pieces are
extremely badly placed (only not
20 . . . 'i'f6 immediately because of 2 1
'i'xh4 lDxf3+ 22 .i.xf3 'ifxh4 23 .i.xb7,
and White has three minor pieces for the
queen).
White promptly makes use of the
respite afforded to him to seize the
initiative.
20
f4!
.i.xhl
In the new situation Black should

have considered sacrificing the ex
change (20 . . . fxg4 2 1 .i.xb7 gxh3 22
..txa8 l:txa8), since it would not have
been easy for White to show that his
material advantage is sufficient for a
win.
21
g5
This important intermediate move

was apparently overlooked by my
opponent when he played 1 9 . . . 'i'f6.
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
g6!
hxg6
1i'b6
l:xf5
l:[afl
:r6
thf8
1ig7
tllxg6
l:tf8
ifxh6
Black has managed to parry the

immediate threats to his king, but now
he faces a battle in an endgame a pawn
down.
30
31
32
11fe5
i.c6
ltf4
..
hxg5
fxg5
11xh4
White avoids the exchange of

queens, since his chances of an attack
have become very real.
23
24
24
White must not be allowed to bring

his queen's rook into play - then
Black's position would become hope
less. Therefore, with a subtle pawn sac
rifice, Smyslov mobilises all his forces
for the defence. If Black is allowed time
to play 25 . tDIB, it will no longer be
possible to exchange pawns on g6.
Therefore
this
must
be
done
immediately.
gxh6
lZ.xf6
.t.ct
lbf6
h7
The outcome is not so obvious after

32 l:tf7+ <it>xh6 3 3. l:.xc7 tbes (34 d4
ltlxc4 20), since the position of the white
king is not secur. Therefore White
gives preference to a' ,continuation by
226
which he finally eliminates the annoy

ing pawn at and brings his inactive
bishop into . play.
.
32
33
lt\g5+
33
34
35
.lxe3
llti
ci>xh6
h5
e8
l:t.b7+
'it>g4
:g8
In this way White protects his king

against any misadventures.
Hoping, apparently, to win a pawn

(at e2).
36
37
f2
An important subtlety. In the event of

37 . . . l::txe3 3 8 <it>xe3 <it?xg5 3 9 :xc7 and
40 l:r.xa7 White has a rook and three
pawns against two minor pieces (effect
ively an exchange advantage) and he
should win without particular difficulty.
37
38
39
CiJ.e6
lDd4
:g7+1 f4 41 l:tf7+ (cutting off the

enemy king from the main battlefield)
4 1 . . . <it>g4 42 ttJxc6 lbdl+ 43 <it>e l c3
44 'it>d2 (44 e4 lbxe4 ! ) 44 . . . ltJbl+ 45
<ittd l (less convincing is 45 c2 lbxa3+
46 <ii>b 2 ltlxc4+ 47 dxc4 :xe2+)
45 . . . lbc3+ 46 c2 ltlxe2 47 %lxc7 etc.
40
41
42
43
cxd4
d5
-*.d4
e4
44
.i.f6
llc8
.ta4
a6
c5
A comical oversight (in adjournment

analysis ! ) - true, in an already hopeless
position.
Black resigns: the threat of mate

cannot be parried, only deferred by one
move.
CiJ.e7
Cjjf5
CiJ.xd4
Game 323
Botvinnik-Stein
Black exchanges lmights, relying on

the drawing tendencies of opposite
colour bishops. The play would have
developed djfferently, but also with
advantage to White, after 3 9 . . . lbxe3 40
227

Moscow 1964
1
2
c4
c3
g6
.lg7
3
4
5
.,6
d4
e4
..i.eJ
f3
tt)f6
0--0
d6
b6
A year"before this game, in the USSR

Spartakiad, Stein chose against me the
line involving an inunediate attack on
the queenside: 6 . . . lDc6, 7 . . . a6, 8 . b8
and 9 . b5 . There Black gained a prom
ising position from the opening, and the
outcome was a draw. The 'change of
tune' can only be explained by a fear of
some preparation on my part.
7 i.dJ
.*.b7
7 . . . a6 followed by . . . c7-c5 was also
possible, but not immediately 7 . . . c5
because of 8 e5, when Black loses
material due to the threat of i.e4.
The drawback to 7 . . . i.b7 is that at an
appropriate moment White can play d4d5, and the queen' s bishop will have to
seek other diagonals to participate in the
play. True, in the present game White
did not exploit this possibility.
.
8
9
lDge2
0-0
After 12 . . . 1fxdl 13 l:tfxd l l'Lld4 14

i.a4 White' s position is preferable, but,
of course, there is still all to play for.
However, as it later transpires, Black
had planned a queen sacrifice. Therefore
it was more logical to refrain from' the
move in the game and to play 1 2 ... llX14
immediately, in order after 1 3 l2Jd5
lDxd5 14 i.xd8 :l'Lle3 etc. to carry out
the combination : in a more favourable
situation than adtually occurred, since
the h6 square would have remained
accessible to his king's bishop.
To be fair, it should be said that such
inaccuracies were not typical of Stein's
play.
Evidently, if Black had played
1 2 . . . liJd4 immediately, White would
have had to reply 1 3 i.d3 (declining the
win of the queen), thereby losing an
important tempo.
13
14
i.h4
ltld5
l1d4
c5
9 d5 or 9 .i.c2 is more accurate.
9
10
i.c2
ltlc6
And this is a mistake, throwing away

White's opening advantage. It was
essential to play 10 d5, not fearing
I O . . liJe5 and . . . lDxd3. Now Black
gives up the d5 square, but seizes con
trol of the no less important d4 square.
In the event of exchanges on the central
d4 and d5. squares, Black's bishops will
be better placed than White' s.
.
10
11
12
dxe5
.i.g5
e5
dxe5
h6
228
14
tt)xd5
A clever queen crifice, typical of

Stein's inventive style, which, however,
does not present any danger to White.
15 i.xd8
ltleJ
16
1fd3
l:axd8
17
18
'ifxe3
1fc3
li:)xc2
Black has nothilig else. If 16 . . . ll'ldxc2

1 7 .th4 lt)xa l 1 8 l:xa l, then the knight
at e3 is trapped, and after 1 7 . . . tiJxfl 1 8
'i'xc2 ll'le3 19 'i'd3 the same knight
perishes on the same square.
A very cautious move, .but by no

means the best. It was possible not fear
ing the invasion of the black rook at d2,
to play the queen to b3, leaving the c3
square free for the manoeuvre ll'lc3-d5.
18
19
ttlxal
21
22
23
h5
'ifa4
li)cJ
:d2
.i.c8
l:tdl!
The decisive move. After the ex

change. of rooks, Black's hopes of an
attack along the second rank will dis
appear; therefore he is forced to concede
the d-:file.
l:txal
23
24
lixb2
d5
.ia6
19
White' s inaccurate 1 8th move gave

Black a respite, which he should have
exploited for active play. 1 9 . . . f5 20 'i'c2
fxe4 2 1 fxe4 :n suggested itself, or
else 1 9 . . . l:d7 immediately, in both cases
followed by the doubling of rooks. The
move in the game again leads to a
difficult position for Black.
20
20
This attempt to bring the king's

bishop into play is too late. Perhaps
slightly better chances would have been
given by 20 . . . b5 2 1 tLlc3 bxc4 22 ifa4
(22 . . . l:.d6 23 :!:ldl).
'ifc2!
This reply, with the unpleasant threat

of 2 1 'i'a4 (or lDc3 ), was apparently
underestimated by Black.
24
.fl.e6
White was threatening to win by 25

'i'a3 %k2 26 ifb3 e2 27 . Therefore
Black could not reply 24 . . . a6. It is true
that now too White can win the enemy
rook for a knight and pawn (25 'i'a3
Axd5 26 ifxb2 .i.xc4), but it is more
advantageous to begin the destruction of
the enemy pawns.
229
25
26
27
9'xa7
exd5
d6
.i.xd5
b5
bxc4
28
29
d7
9xc5
c3
occurred in a similar position in the

game Spassky-Bronstein ( 1 956). How
ever, subsequently it was shown that
this sacrifice is not dangerous for White.
There was also another way: 29 d8'i'

c2 30 'i'xc5.
29
30
c2
(1...0. -0
licl
30 d8'i' would also have won, but, as

on the previous move, the chosen
continuation is the simplest.
30
31
32
33
ltd8
.i.f8
lhc2
:bs
ires
1!t'xb8
Black resigns
Game 3 24
Botvinnik-Medina
Now it turns out that Black cannot

advance his c-pawn, since his d6 pawn
will be en prise. And with the pawn at
c7 it is more difficult for him to gain
counterplay on the queenside with . . . a7a6 and . . . b7-b5 .
OZvmpiad, Tel Aviv 1964

1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
llc3
e4
d4
f3
il.eJ
lif6
g6
d6
.*.g7
0-0
e5
9
10
11
The flexibility of the King's Indian

Defence is vividly demonstrated by this
and the previous game. In No. 323 Black
initially played on the queenside, where
as here he is aiming to seize the initia
tive in the centre and on the kingside.
d5
lih5
According to the Encyclopaedia,

7 . . . c6 creates equal chances.
1id2
f5
8 'ib4+ leads to more complicated

and unclear play, intending if 9 g3 to
carry out the combination 9 . . . tbxg3 I 0
'i'f2 ltJxfl 1 1 'i'xh4 t2Jxe3, which
.i.d3
tl:\ge2
lLld7
lLldf6
a6
If l 1 . . .fxe4 White would not have

replied 12 fxe4 on account of 12 . . . l2Jg4,
but 12 t2Jxe4 tbxe4 13 i.xe4.
12
exf5
Another possibility is examined in

the Encyclopaedia by Lilienthal and
Florian: 12 b l , and if 12 . . . b5 1 3 cxb5
f.xe4 14 tbxe4 t2Jxe4 15 fxe4 lDf6 16
bxa6 tbg4 17 lDc3 , which also favours
White.
12
13
. . .
...
tl:\gJ .
gxf5
The same position was reached in the

final, 2 1 st game of the Botvinnik-Tal
230
It is possible that Black decided to

defer this sacrifice by one move, but
that he overlooked his opponent' s
cunning reply.
Return Match (No.294), the only differ

ence being that instead of 'it>b 1 White
has played .i..d3 , and this is probably in
his favour. In .view of the threat of 14
etJxf5, the subsequent development of
events is forced, and an 'evaluation of
them was given in the notes to White's
1 3th move in the afore-mentioned game.
13
14
15
16
ltlxh5
l\xf6+
11c2
f4
fxe3
V xf6
The e3 pawn does not present any

serious danger to White, and for the
moment he can pay no attention to it. Of
more significance is the possibility of
occupying e4 with his minor pieces and
of restricting Black's king's bishop.
16
17
lhe4!
17
18
...
bl
.i.f5
.i.xe4
19
.i.xe4
b6
20
21
l:tdel
11d3
.tf6
21
22
23
24
25
:xe3
:e2
'ii'cJ
1iet
25
26
gJ
Ignoring the threatened discovered

check, since after 1 7 . . . e2+ 18 J:.d2
'i'xh2 1 9 l:r.xh2 e l 'i'+ 20 J:tdl 'i'e3+ 2 1
'it>b 1 it i s doubtful whether the position
of the black king can be defended. And
. . . e5-e4 is no longer possible.
Black is obviously pinning his saving

hopes on the presence of opposite
colour bishops, but it has long been
known that they often increase the
chances of the attacking side.
11h6
Black can defend his e3 pawn by

. . . ..if6-g5, but for this he should have
moved his king in advance to h8, as will
subsequently become clear.
Now 2 1 . . . .i.g5 can no longer he

played on account of 22 h4 .i.f4 23 g3
(23 . . . ..txg3 24 :egl ), but if instead of
the pointless move 1 9 . . . b6 Black had
played 1 9 . . . h8, he would have re
tained the possibility of this defence.
For the reasons explained in the
previous note, it was essential to play
1 6 . . . e4 ! , after which the black bishop
would have come alive', and the a 1 -h8
could have become a base for potential
threats to the white king. As for the
conversion of White's material advan
tage - his extra pawn, this would have
entailed technical difficulties.
h8
il.g5
.i.f4
.:n
This completes the queen manoeuvre,

necessary for driving back the enemy
bishop.
23 1
g7
1'
.i.h6
27
h4
a5
J:g6
40 h6
41 .i.e4
Black resigns. If 4 1 . . J e6 (or 4 1 . . .
Such a move is the best admission of

the lack of any prospects for Black.
28
29
30
31
l:tgl
l:teg2
a3
g4
g8
'iff8
ltfg7
Only in this way should the kingside

pawns be advanced. The conceding of
the f4 square is no longer significant.
31
32
33
34
35
g5
:g4
1i'e2
.idJ
l:gg8) there would have followed 42

..txh7 ! 'it>xh7 43 g6+ g8 (43 . . . xh6
44 g7 and 45 h l +) 44 g7 etc.
International Master Medina was
quite a good tactician, but he lacked
subtle positional understanding.
i.f4
'l'c8
fid7
b8
c6
Game 325
Letelier-Botvinnik
O(vmpiad, Tel Aviv 1 964
. Black exploits the very first oppor

tunity to gain some counterplay with
this move. But in the process his pieces
are diverted away from the kingside,
which White promptly exploits.
36
37
38
39
dxc6
h5
.i.e4
'9xc6
l'r.bg8
1ffc5
llf8
3 9 . . :xg5 40 .i.xg8 'i'xg l + 4 1 l:txg 1
ltxgl + 42 a2 would also not have
saved the game, altl1ough the resistance
might have een prolonged a little.
.
i..d5
Slav Defence
1
2
3
4
5
d4
c4
ltlcJ
cxd5
fJ
f6
c6
d5
cxd5
c6
It was of no significance, of course,

that in a training game against Petrosian
(see Volume 2) I pl,ayed first . . . e7-e6
and . . . tiJc6 only on the 6th move, while
against me Citrone (No. 268) went 5
.i.f4 before ctJc3 .
J
232
.i.f4
castling (on either side) is . inadvisable.

In passing, the attack on the .b2 pawn is
renewed (it was dangerous ..to play
1 3 . 'i'xb2 inunediately because of 14
ltJb5).
e6
ti)b5
In Grune 268 White played 7 .i.g3

(there ltJc3 and . . . e7-e6 had not yet been
played). There it was also shown that
the attack on the queen, which in any
case is aiming for b6, is pointless, and
that 8 .1e5 should have been preferred.
8
9
..
1fb6
.i.h4
.i.g3
hxg3
13
:ct
b4
14
15
t;)g1
15
16
17
ti)a4
b5
18
.i.d3
g4
Intending to transfer the knight to f4.
a3
Indirectly defending the b2 pawn,

since 9 . . 'i'xb2 is not possible because
of 10 ltJa4.
9
10
11
12
14
A risky continuation, weakening the

queenside pawns.
h6
g5
ti)xg3
.i.g7
a5
11fd8
t'Je7
Black defends against the threat of 1 3

ltJxg5 and strengthens his control of e5 .
This is less natural than 13 .i.d3, as
Petrosian played. However after 1 3
.i.d3 'i'd8 14 ltJh.2 h 5 Black also
achieved a good game.
If 18 Wxg4 there would have

followed 18 . . . e5, forcing the opening of
the position, which is highly unpleasant
for White, since his king is still in the
centre. Now, however, this advance is
not so dangerous.
18
19
20
21
13
@fS!
The
king
occupies
its
most
favourable position in a situation where
dxe5
ti)e2
e5
.i.xe5
1fd6
h5
f1
Black declines the pawn sacrifice,
since after 2 1 . . .xa3 22 tL'lb6 :bs 23
ltxc8+ and 24 tiJd7+ he loses material.
233
22
23
24
1fb3
lldt
llf4
28 gxf4
1h:f4
The main defect of White's position
is the fact that his rook at hl is shut out
of the game. Therefore, so as not to
perish under the fire of an enemy attack,
he seeks salvation in an endgame.
b6
.i.b7
l:th6!
This rook manoeuvre with a king

that has given up the right to castle, was
one that I tried back in 1 944 in my game
with Kotov (No. 1 3 9), and subsequently
in the afore-mentioned training game
with Petrosian.
25
29
30
31
32
gl
The whole point is that the h5 pawn

is immune. 25 :xh5 loses immediately
to 25 . . . .i.xf4, while after 25 tiJxh5 d4
26 exd4 .i.xd4 Black's pieces are
dangerously trained on the enemy king.
The following variation, for example
was possible: 27 g l .ltxf2+ 28 <itixf2
'ii'd4+ 29 <t>fl tiJd5 and White has no
defence.
25
26
1t'e3
fxe3
.i.fl
liel
'ifxe3
l:tc2
tl)f5
lDgJ
cs
.ile2
It was again dangerous to take the

pawn - 26 tiJxh5 in view of 26 . . . d4 27
exd4 .i.xd4 28 lDf4 l:txhl + 29 xhl
.t.xf2 . But all the same tl1e opening of
the position is inevitable.
This knight manoeuvre decides the

outcome.
lDxfl
33 l:h2
llf6+
34 <t>xfl
White resigns. If 3 5 gl there
follows 3 5 . . . g3 , and after the rook

moves it is mate in a few moves.
Game 3 26
Aloni-Botvinnik
OZvmpiad, Tel Aviv 1964
26
27
exd4
d4
.i.xf4
This was my seventh and last Chess

Olympiad. After losing the match to
Petrosian, I, naturally played on board
two for the USSR team. Although all
234
Since White cannot castle immed

iately, this move, creating a threat to the
e4 pawn, suggests itself.
the points in a team are added together,

on board two the responsibility is less,
and some liberties can be taken. And
against Aloni I was able to play a jolly'
game with Black.
1
2
d4
c4
ltlf6
c5
3
4
5
6
d5
ltJcJ
e4
h3
g6
d6
i1..g7
10
11
12
13
flide5
White does not achieve anything with

1 3 'i'xd6, when there can follow
' 1 3 . tDxf3+ 14 gxf3 thd4 or 13 . . . ttJxc4
immediately.
0-0
e6
13
dxe5
1 3 . . . tDxe5 14 'i'xd6 ltJxc4 1 5 i.xc4

(or 15 'i'xc5 15 . . . 'i'xc5 16 ii.xc5 %tfc8)
15 . . . Jl.xc4 16 lUd 1 would have led to
less interesting play. I was very curious
to see how a player with such an
attacking style would try to create an
attack in such a 'reinforced concrete'
position.
14
la.ad 1
15
.i.d3
llid4
dxe6
After this exchange Black no longer

has any opening difficulties. He gains a
tempo for the development of his
queen' s bishop and quickly concludes
the mobilisation of his forces. 8 tl)f3
was essential.
8
9
0-0
ltJxe5
. .
This move is premature. Here 6 i..d3

is more consistent, but Aloni was never
strong in opening theory.
i.e3
thc6
ltld7!
The manoeuvre . . . tDf6-d7-e5 leads to

the elimination of the weak d6 pawn
and to the creation of an almost sym
metric position.
Black is obviously aiming for sharp

play, for which he chooses. one of the
most complicated Indian set-ups.
6
7
ifd2
i.e2
lbtJ
.i.xe6
1f a5
My reckoning is justified. White

avoids the quiet 1 5 lLJd5 with equal
235
play. Then 15 . . . 'ii'xa2? is not possible

on account of 16 i.xd4, followed by 1 7
a l 'i'b3 1 8 a3 . Instead of this Aloni
prepares the exchange of the dark
square bishops - 16 .ilh6 (the immed
iate 1 5 i.h6 was not possible in view of
1 5 . . . l!Llxe2+ 16 tLlxe2 'i'xd2 17 .ixd2
i..xc4).
It is hard to say whether my opponent
overlooked the loss of a pawn or
deliberately sacrificed it. It was most
probably the latter, since his subsequent
play is clever and energetic.
15
16
...
b4!
Threatening by a4-a5 either to win a

pawn, or to create a strong passed c
pawn. Black decides that the only thing
is to begin counterplay on the kingside.
21
22
23
...
exf5
a5
24
.tlb5
f5
i.xf5
bxa5
The last chance to win the game, a

chance based on psychology: suppose
that the opponent should wish to regain
one of the sacrificed pawns as soon as
possible?
.i.xhJ!
After 16 i.xd4 exd4 17 gxh3 dxc3

Black would have had both a material,
and a positional advantage.
White temporarily sacrifices a second
pawn, but seizes the initiative.
16
cxb4
16 . . .'i'xb4 1 7 l:lbl 'i'a5 18 l:.xb7 did

not appeal to me - the b-file would have
remained in White's possession.
17
tLld5
il.g4
It would appear that Black is merely

aiding the development of White's
initiative. Later I incorrectly concluded
that 1 7 . . . ild7 should have been played,
but I overlooked that then White would
have replied 1 8 a3 ! with a very active
game ( 1 8 . . . 'i'xa3 ? 1 9 .txd4 exd4 20
:a l 'i'b3 2 1 :ib l ).
Now, however, Black is able to parry
the threat of a2-a3 .
18
:!bl
'ifd8
Otherwise 19 a3 would have been

unpleasant.
19
20
21
i.xd4
llxb4
a4?
exd4
b6
And that is what happens - Aloni

does not find the strongest move 24
:b7 ! , after which Black could have
hardly hoped to win. After both
24 . . . xd3 25 'ilxd3 lif7 26 !txf7 <l;xn
27 'i'D+ 'it>g8 28 c5 !k8 29 c6, and
24 . . . 'ib4 25 g3 'i'g4 26 'iti>g2 ! with the
threat of 27 tl:Je7+ and 28 :ht White
would have been out of danger; more
over, Black himself would have had to
seek a way to draw.
Now Black can double rooks on the
f-file, which should deciqe the outcome.
24
25
236
'i'xd3
i.xd3
flh4
26
g3
This weakening . was not necessary

White decided to free his rook from
having to defend the. f2 pawn.
26
27
l:tel
'il'bl
lle4
This move is White's only chance the black queen has no good move (i(,
for example, 29. . . 'i'h3, then 30 ti:Je7+
<bh8 3 1 ctJxg6+ hxg6 32 lih4+). But it
is not obliged to move !
29
30
31
31
'iti>b8
'ifhJ+
d2!
This is the end - the d2 pawn is so
32
33
34
ifg4
A desperate attempt to change the

inevitable course of events. After 27
g2 l:lf7 ! (this is where the absence of
the white rook from b7 tells!) followed
by . . . llaf8 White's position would have
become hopeless.
27
28
29
The advance of the central pawn is a

bad sign for White. Meanwhile, it was
as a result of the move 2 1 . . . f5 that the
blockade of this pawn was lifted.
fxg3
hl
.&txg3+
1fxg3+
dJ!
This move, as the late grandmaster

Tolush liked to say, cuts off the infantry
from the tanks: the queen is temporarily
shut out of the game.
llle7+
1fe1
gl
strong, that no counter-threats by White

are able to help.
35
36
lllxg6+
1i'h4+
hxg6
The tragedy for White is that after 36

l::th4+ 'it>g8 ! the e6 square is defended
and he himself is mated.
36
<it>g8! .
White resigns, since 3 7 ifxh3 leads
to mate after 37 . . . d l 'i'+ 3 8 <iifi>h2 1!f2+

3 9 'iti>gJ 'ii'g l + 40 @h4 .if6+ 4 1 J:.g5
ifxg5 mate, while if 3 7 :lb l there
follows 37 . . . 'ib3 !
There is an amusing story associated
with this dynamic game. In 1 973 during
a tour of West Gennany I gave a lecture
in Seigen (where in 1 970 the Chess
Olympiad was held). I was invited io a
local computing centre. There the chess
players decided to test my memory and
they showed me a demonstration board
where the final position from this game
had been set up. I sensed that the
position was very familiar, but initially I
could not remember it.
There was a simple explanation for
this: against Aloni I was Black, but
when I had to look at the position from
White's side, it was only with difficulty
that I recognised it. A curious illus
tration of the peculiarity of a chess
player' s thiing.
237
mistake 7 d5. Things would have been

more difficult for )\T,hite after 1 1 exd5,
since Black woufd have gained the
opportunity to develop his bishop with
gain of tempo a_t f5:
Game 327
Y anofsky-Botvinnik
Oympiad, Tel Aviv 1964

1
2
3
4
5
e4
d4
ttlcJ
f4
ttlf3
d6
ttlf6
g6
i.g7
0-0
This position occurred later in the

game
Gipslis-Botvinnik
(No.334 ),
where White played the most energetic
move, 6 e5. The continuation employed
by Yanofsky is less dangerous for Black
(although it is reco1mnended by the
Encyclopaedia).
6
7
i.d3
d5
ttlc6
11
12
13
This merely aids the development of

White' s initiative, since he gains the
opportunity to undermine the centre by
. . . c7-c6. In my view 7 ..te3 is stronger,
and 7 e5 is also good.
7
8
...
...
aJ
14
15
16
17
ttlb4
9
10
11
11 xd3
ttJxd5
19
ttlxd3
cxd5
White no longer has his powerful

pawn centre, and in addition Black has
the advantage of the two bishops - such
are the consequences of the positional
l1e1
cJ
ii'dJ
'ifc2
llac8
a5
i.b5
a4
Depriving White's queenside pawns

of any mobility.
18 i..e3
1!f a6
c6
After 9 dxc6 bxc6 10 h3 ttJxd3 1 1

cxd3 Wb6+ Black has no difficulties
(Lancaster-Hartman 1 968).
ttlxd5
1'b6+
.i.d7
The b2 pawn is, of course, immune

( 1 3 . . . ..txb2 14 l1b l ) .
0-0
A game Mikenas-Etruk ( 1 968) went
8 ..ie2 a5, and White did not gain any
advantage.
8
9
1ixd5
'Wfi>hl
i.d4
Ah6
There is a noticeable similarity of

ideas employed by Black in this case
and in the game Bemstein-Botvinnik
(No. 160). The main difference is that
here the queens remain on the board
almost to the end, whereas there they
were soon exchanged.
238
20
9'f2
A tempting, buf incorrect paw:Q.

sacrifice. It is true that after 20 ttJg5 e5
2 1 .i.e3 .i.xg5 22 fxg5 .i.d3 White

would have lost a pawn without any
compensation, but if he had played 20
f5, there would still have been a lot of
play in prospect.
20
21
e5!
.txf4
This forced abandoning of the attack

is equivalent to capitulation.
28
29
30
31
lDxfJ
9b3
:gt
1'xf3
..tc6
ltt7
At least White is consistent. He

would not have achieved anything after
2 1 'i'h4 e5 followed by . . . f7-f6 .
31
.i.xfJ
This way, rather than 3 1 . . . 'i'e2, when

White still had an active possibility (3 2
tDg5).
f6!
21
A worthy reply! By advancing . . . e7e5, Black consolidates his advantage.
22
23
24
25
exf6
1ifh4
i.e3
l1xe3
e5
It.ti
i.xe3
:c4
In this way Black eliminates the f6

pawn, since if 26 'i'g5 there follows
26 J:tf4 .
l:txt'6
26 'i'h6
27 lbg5
:c7
Eliminating White ' s last hopes of a
successful attack on h7 in view of
possible counter-threats of mate, e.g. 28
&th3 ilc6 ! 29 llg l 'i'e2 (30 CDxh7
iixg2+ 3 1 l::txg2 :n mate).
28 :o
. .
239
32
33
gxf3
'ifg4
33
34
35
'l'xf3
.rldl
36
37
38
:txd6
c4
lid5
llxb2
11.bJ
ltxa3
40
lld7+
e6
'fid3
It was not possible to save the pawn:

33 :n e4.
After the passive defence of the pawn

(35 . . J:If6) it would all have been more
complicated (36 l:td5).
Temporarily White is now three

pawns down, and it is time to lower the
curtain.
<i;f7
39 l:td8+
lial+
41 llxb7
White resigns (his last hopes,
associated with time trouble, having

been dashed). ..
This was my second meeting with the
Canadian grandmaster, who in fact
received this title during the Olympiad.
In Groningen (1946) at a critical point
of the tournament I lost to him, although
in the first half of the game I had held
an obvious advantage.
Game 328
Botvinnik-Gligoric
Griinfeld Defence
lDf6
g6
d5
..i.g7
5
6
7
0-0
c5
.ig4
Of course. The resulting great com

plications are advantageous to Black,
since his opponent's lack of develop
ment is bound to tell, and also the
knight at g5 is badly placed.
10
f3
10
11
.i.gJ
Even now it was still possible to give

preference to the quieter 10 .i.e2.
Olympiad, Tel Avi\, 1964
1 d4
2 c4
3 lLJc3
4 ..i.f4
5 e3
already been played (without these

moves, tt:Jg5 or lbcl4 is not bad). White
also chose a poor continuation in Game
105 - 9 'iia4, removing an attack on the
central d5 pawn. The best would seem
to be 9 e2, but then 9 . . . CDe4 is
possible, when Black has active play for
the sacrificed pawn.
e5!
I simply mixed up the move order,

playing 5 e3 instead of 5 t2Jf3 , thereby
allowing my opponent to choose a
vriation, the advantages of which for
Black I had demonstrated nearly 30
years earlier in my games with Tolush
(No. 97) and Ragozin (No. l OS).
l:icl
dxc5
..te6
Against Tolush I employed the less
convincing 7 . . . 'ira5, but with Ragozin I
played the same way that Gligoric does
here.
8 lLJfJ
9 .li)gs
c6
I made this . move automatically.

forgetting at e2-e3 and . . . tbc6 hd
11
d4
All in the same energetic style. White

now thought it best to choose th
continuation with the exchange of
queens, so that the position of his king,
caught in the centre, should not be so
dangerous.
240
12 fxg4
13 1ixd8
dxc3
:rx:d8
The author.
The author.
Author lovely photograph.
First attempt as a typi st.
With G l i goric, 1 970.
Celebrating the 5 0th anniversary of the first U S S R Championship.
Botv i n n i k and Taimanov.
B otvinnik - S myslov, 1 966.
O ' Kel l y, Flohr and B otvi n n i k in Varna, 1 962
Before the match. B otvin n i k and Petrosian, 1 963.
At the 1 95 8 Olympiad.
The only game with Fischer, i n 1 962.
In the electrical engineering laboratory, 1 962 .
At the dacha, 1 96 3 .
I n the Mercedes M useum with Yakov Estrin, 1 97 8 .
Oberhausen, 1 96 1 .
Before a game with Alexander Tolush, 1 965 .
The 1 964 Olymp i ad . The match against Switzerland.
The author.
Autographs.
B otvi n ni k ' s famous chess school, 1 963 . On the right is the young Anatoly Karpov.
The chess school with the young Garry Kasparov, 1 97 5 .
At the 1 962 O l y mpiad.
The author, at home
The author
The author
The author
At the dacha, with the fami ly.
With FIDE Vice-President Il makunas, 1 96 1 .
With a group of amateur players from the Armed Services, Moscow.
Analysing with S mys lov.
B otvinnik and Tal .
The Belgrade Tournament of 1 969.
S i m ultaneous display in Brask.
The author.
After a game with Tol ush, 1 965 .
Caricature.
The USSR team - winners of the 1 95 8 O lympiad .
Lecture in the Polytechnic Museum.
Analysing on a pocket set.
B otvinnik - Petrosian, 1 963 .
During the 1 964 O l ympiad.
In the thermal waters of the Ri ver Paratunka (Camchatka), 1 968.
Duri ng the l ast tournament of the author ' s career, w i th Spassky, the i nterpreter and h i s wife.
The author.
The Chess S chool, 1 986.
B otvi n n i k and Euwe.
After a s i multaneous d isplay against the B ritish Junior Team.
14
l:xc3
A waste of precious time. Black
h6
have won by 23 . e6 (not

23 . . . %td2 24 ilfl) with the threat of
24 . . . htd2 25 .i.f2 liJd4.
could
For the moment White has a material

advantage, but how much worse his
pawn formation is than the opponent' s !

In addition Black's pieces are better
placed, and it is no surprise that soon he
24
25
Now
regains everything.
15
16
17
18
lt)f3
%let
J\e2
ltJd4
ltJe4
ltlxc5
e4
driving
ltJxd4
.i.xd4
.i.e3
.i.e5
..txf4
its
in
strong
.let
f4
.i.xf4
c5
It is essential to activate the bishop!
28
29
cation is his best way out of the current
exd4
b3
l:tdl
White at least succeeds

the bishop from
25
26
27
28
By giving up a second pawn, White
18
19
20
21
h4
l1b3
position.
at least achieves the exchange of

another pair of minor pieces simplifi
situation.
. .
lld2
l:c3
All the same the pawn cannot be

saved, and for the moment, exploiting
the fact that d2 is occupied by the black
rook, White brings his own rook into
play.
29
30
lba2
ltb2
l:txdl+
21
Of course,
@fl
not
2 1 . . . ltld3+.
This
knight must be exchanged for the bishop
31
at g3 . With the opposite-colour bishops
increase even in the endgame.

22
23
.i.xdl
.i.e2
l:ld8
a5
h5!
first
Probably the
then remaining, Black' s initiative will
good move made
by White in this long-suffering game.

Since after 32 hxg6 fxg6 Black's pawns
will
24 1
be
somewhat
devalued,
the
exchange on h5 is forced, enabling

White to get rid of his doubled pawn.
31
32
gxh5
33
g4
gxh5
</;g7
If 32 . . . f5 there could have followed

33 c6 bxc6 34 :xc6, and White's pieces
are activated.
Thus, White has managed to prevent
the coordination of the e- and f-pawns.
33
34
35
'it?g2
41
.*.g5
ltbl+
il.d2
In this way Black wins another pawn,

and it was, of course, hard to resist this
temptation. Meanwhile, at g5 the bishop
was ideally placed, in particular
eliminating the possible threat of g4-g5,
whereas its position at d2 subsequently
makes it hard for Black to convert his
material advantage.
36
37
38
39
40
Ac4
c6
:xc6
.:t.a6
which move I had sealed, and they

themselves replied: .'Of course, 4 1 g5 after all, it leads to a draw. ' It was
uncomfortable for me to admit that I
had taken a different decision. Incident
ally, in the course of the analysis it
transpired that the 'correct ' move 4 1 g5
would have lost, and that the move
sealed by me was the only possible
one . . .
<it>e4
The point is that, if the black rook

were to occupy d4, controlling the
important a4, d l and f4 squares, White's
position would become desperate.
In the adjournment analysis a number
of subtleties were discovered, and when
the game was resumed both players
acted quickly and confidently.
41
42
:eS+
e6
First Black must drive the enemy

rook from the sixth rank.
e3
bxc6
l:bb3
llb8
l:td8
43
l:ta8
The ending with opposite-colour

bishops after the exchange of rooks is
lost, due to the presence of the e6 pawn
(as will be evident from subsequent
comments).
43
44
45
<&t>e4
<!i>dJ
D.f6+
lif2
6
If Black penetrates with his king to

g5, at the same time establishing his
rook at f6, he will win easily by then
taking his king to f2 .
46
Here the game was adjourned. My
team colleagues and trainers asked me
242
l:th8
g7
An enforced return. After 46 . . . @g5

47 l:tg8+ ! 4 (47 . . .h4 48 g5 !) 48
l:lh8 Black would not have achieved
anything.
47
:aS
Now the exchange of rooks after

55 . . :es+ 56 fl .:e6 57 l:I.xf7 IU6+ 58
l:xf6 xf6 59 1-dl Cit>e5 60 h4J ! il.cl
(or 60 d4 6 1 g5 hxg5 62 h6 d3 21
63 .i.b5+) 61 .i.c2 1 ! <it>d4 62 g5 hxg5 63
h6 i..b2 64 h7 leads to a draw. The idea
of this manoeuvre (.idl-a4-c2) was
suggested by Geller it is possible only
because of the unfortunate position of
the bishop at d2.
If instead Black defends his ii pawn
- 55 . J:tf8, then 56 f3 f5 57 l1g7+ 6
(or 57 . . . <ifi>h4 58 gxf5 .:txf5+ 59 'it?e4 and
the black king is cut off) 58 :g6+ e5
59 g5 hxg5 60 l:txg5, and the passed h
pawn gives White some hopes of saving
the game.
However after prolonged reflection
Black took a different decision which
came as a surprise to me.
ll.f4
A little trick: after 48 :a6 l:tf6! 49

1:ta8 e6 the white king would b_e cut
off from the klligSide.
48
l:b8
l:t,f6
49
'it>e4
l:tc6
...
Black's first attempt to find a

wimring plan has not succeeded, and
Gligoric returns to the initial position.
Another subtlety: what if White were
to play 50 f4, and then by 50 . :c4+!
( 5 1 .i.xc4 e2+) Black were to advan
tageously transfer Iris rook to t11e fourth
rank?
. .
50
51
l:ta8
l:la7
<itf6
Only in this way can tl1e black king

be prevented from going to g5 Both 5 1
h8 g5 and 5 1 f4 llc4+! were bad
for White.
.
51
52
52
lte6+
ilb4
In my analysis I had thought that the

manoeuvre of the bishop to g5 was not
possible.
53
c.t>f3
Ae5
<li>f4
.id6
li..e7
.i.d6
The bishop has to be freed from

having to defend the a5 pawn.
54
55
56
In this position I was afraid qf

52 .. J:td6 53 e4 l:d8 ! !, when White is
in zugzwang (54 .i.c4 l:e8+ 55 .fl.e7
56 l:.xe7 or 54 l:tb7 l:ta8). His last
chance wou ld have been 54 .:ta6+ g5
55 lla7 !
,
'ifi>f3
<itf4
By repeating moves Black gains time

on the clock.
'iftg7!
57 f3
A new zugzwang position, which I
did not discover during my analysis. I
thought that to 57 . . . Ji...e7 I would be
able to reply 58 'it?f4, but now it is
White to move, and he has no useful
reply!
After thinking for some 20 minutes I
worked out one lengthy, seemingly
243
drawing variation. I distrusted it, but

since it led to a draw, how could I reject
it? So, I decided to allow the black
bishop to gS and to attack the fl pawn there was nothing else.
complicated ending. In this position, I

have to confess, I was hoping to save
the game: 69 . . . <i;O 76 Ji.di+ @f4 7 1
.i.c2 g4 7 2 e2 :xtis .7 3 f6 ! But after
the game the clever Geller nevertheless
found a win for Black: 69 . . . i.f6 ! ! 70
e2 .id4 7 1 <ittg5 72 'it>e2 Aa.7 73
i.c5 ! 74 e2 'it?xh5 75 f6 'it>gS 76
f7 4 !
11t t - -
58
.i.c4
=:%.;::
i..e7
M&
59
-*.e2
.ild6
This now seemed strange to me . . .

Surely Gligoric could see that he was
not prohibited from playing his bishop
to gS? As the reader will see, I was
superior to my opponent in subtlety of
analysis but Gligoric was a very
resourceful practical player.
60
61
.lc4
.le2
J.e7
<t1"6
Yes Black did not see 6 1 . . . ..igS ! 62

Jtc4 f8 ! ! 63 :txf7+ <ates 64 :rs (64
J:ta7 d8 is hopeless for White)
64 . . . J:lxfS+ 6S gxf5 <i;e7 66 .ib3 f6 67
.ic2 @es 68 e2 <itf4 (but not
68 . . . d4 because of 69 i.a4 'it>c3 70 f6,
with a theoretical draw, since the dark
square bishop plus h-pawn do not give a
win) 69 <i;fl !
However, it was not only Gligoric
who did not completely understand this
;(.;,.;,;
4/,
if3.@ Ji&. !ttf.$.
z WJt \01 m
Already threatening . . . 6-g5.
62
.i.b4
Another transparent trap - 63 l:Ia6+

J:te6 64 l:lxe6+ fxe6 ! 65 l2txe3 a4 would,
of course lead to an easy win for Black.
63
il.c4
l:e6
Again a two-move trap: 64 .i.xe6 e2

65 i.c4 (with the seemingly terrible
threat of 66 l::txf7 mate) 65 . . . .td6+, and
White must resign. But now Black loses
his f7 pawn. and the position becomes
drawish.
64 'it>f3
l::tc6
65
66
:xf7+
.ib5
e5
l:.c3
Here I saw perfectly well that by
playing 6 7 g5 ! hxg5 68 h6 e2 + (Black
has nothing else) 69 Ke l:h3 70 h7 I
could attain a dearly drawn position,
but fate intervened: 1 decided to play for
244
a win. This was ridiculous, of course,

but for the moment White still has a
:.:
draw.
67
68
69
70
l:.h7;
l'th8
:eS+
l:te6
.tf8
.i.g7
d4
This is already dangerous. The

simplest way to draw was 70 l:e4+ !
c5 7 1 i.. e2 i..d4 72 :te6.
70
...
l:tb3
Black misses the strongest contin

uation 70 . . . .i.eS ! with the threat of
7 1 . . . l:ic2. Now, however, with 7 1 .ta4 !
na3 72 Ji.di i.e5 (otherwise the e3
pawn is lost) 73 l:.xh6 White could have
attained the position that occurred in the
game, but with the significant difference
that the black rook would be passively
placed.
71
.i.e2
.i.e5!
simple reply 72 . . . :bs 73 <itiig2 f8 74

i.f3 , since in my calculations 1 made
two successive moves for Black
(72 . . J !b8 and 73 . . . llfS+).
Filled with horror, I began looking
for other possibilities, and I decided first
of all to drive the black king away from
the e3 pawn by :e8-d8+. but this time I
made two successive moves . . . for
White ..
72
:es
After this obvious mistake it is time

for White to resign. To be fair, it should
be mentioned that even after 72 l:.xh6
Flohr also pointed out the variation
72 . . J 1b7 ! ! 73 <it?g2 I!f7 74 .1i.f3 J:.a7 ! 75
:b6 a4 76 l::tb2 a3 77 l:ta2 .itf4, after
which it is doubtful whether White
could have defended successfully.
72
...
ltb6
72 . . . l:.b8 was simpler.
73
74
75
76
77
78
<it>g2
ltb2
.i.f6!
1
iic8
lta2
lic6
..tg5
e4
l:ic8
:rs
a4
White resigns
This sometimes happens, and not

only in chess: you pass through hun
dreds of dangers, but in the end you
stumble on easy ground . . .
In this fateful position. where for the

last move before the time control I had
only some 3-4 minutes left on the clock,
I was all set to take the h6 pawn, when I
suddenly imagined that after 72 :gxh6
Black would win . a .piece by . . . b8-f8f2+ . . . I was simply unable to notice the
245
Game 329
Ciocaltea-Botvinnik
O(vmpiad, Tel Aviv 1964
Caro-Kann Defence
1
2
e4
d4
c6
d5
3
4
lDcJ
tDxe4
opponent. 1 1 .i.e3 or 1 1 'i'f3 was

preferable.
dxe4
i.fS
After the 3rd game of the 1 958

Return Match (Smyslov-Botvinnik) it
was no secret that in the Caro-Karm
Defence
I
normally
chose
this
continuation.
5
6
7
8
9
lDgJ
h4
tDte2
lDf4
..lc4
11
l:lg8!
This relieves Bla6k of any difficulties

and allows him calmly to continue his
development. Since 1 960 . such a method
of defending g7 has become standard in
the given situation. Black, of course,
will castle queenside, but White too has
no other option.
.i.g6
h6
lDf6
.th7
e6
12
13
14
i.f4
lDxf4
11d2
14
15
0--0-0
.lxf4
lhbd7
In anticipation of Black's queenside

castling, the white queen should not
have remained on the d-file. 1 4 'i'f3 was
preferable.
This position occurred twice in my

first match with Tai ( 1 960). In the 5th
game (No.275) my opponent played 1 0
'i'e2, and in the 9th (No. 277) - 1 0 0-0.
The Romanian grandmaster (at that time
still a master) chooses another move to
free his queen from the defence of the
c2 pawn.
10
11
i.bJ
lDtb5
i..d6
A similar sortie (only, with the other

knight, which was nevertheless better)
was made by Tai in the 5th game of our
match. Therefore the antidote that I
found then also proves effective here it
should also have been known to my
1lc7
0-0-0
16 . . . c5 is now threatened, and White

is unable to prevent this attack on his
centre.
16
17
lDdJ
1if4
cs
White has nothing else; now he gets

an inferior ending with an isolated pawn
in the centre.
246
17
cxd4
18 'ifxd4
19 .. .iff4.
tDb6
If 1 9 'i'e3 , then 19 . . . tbg4 20 'iie2

etJxf2 ! (2 1 'if xf2 xd3 or 2 1 lLlxf2
'i1xg3 ).
19
20
1!fxc7+
27 . . . J::[h4 could also have been played

inunediately. but Black is aiming at a
more important pawn -:- b2.
28
.i. xd3
:xdJ
cxd3
<t>d2
28
llb4
Now 29 . . . a4 is threatened, and if 29

d4 there follows 29 . . . ttJg4+. In addition
my opponent had hardly any time left
on his clock.
The exchange of queens is faint

consolation for White.
20
21
22
23
e3
After 28 i.c4 Black would .have had

to be satisfied with the h-pawn.
<tJxc7
ltxd3
fld8
White resigns.
Game 3 30
Botvinnik-Larsen
Noordwijk 1965
Queen's Gambit
It is hard to believe that in such an

ending it is possible to win in just six
moves. To intensify the pressure in the
centre, Black transfers his knight from
b6 to c5, and his rook will occupy the
strongpoint at d4 .
23
24
25
26
1'c1+
l:kJ
e2
ttlbd7
b6
ttlc5
lld4
It transpires that White cannot defend

his h4 pawn (27 l:.c4 :xd3 28 ltxc5
xb3 or 28 . . J:xg3), which means that it
has to be advanced.
27
h5 ,:/
1
2
3
4
c4
ttlcJ
d4
cxd5
4
5
6
7
Ji.gs
eJ
ifc2
8
9
.i.dJ
ttlge2
e6
d5
ttlf6
White is happy to go in for the

Exchange Variation, which is by no
means so peaceful as it seemed to
theoreticians in the past.
exd5
c6
ll..e7
For not the first time I was not in a

hurry to develop my king's knight, in
order to decide this question later,
depending on circumstances.
7
0:...0
a5
247
ltlbd7
I employed the more usual 9 tt:Jf3 in

Game 342.
12
13
14
0-0
l:ladl
a6
b5
.t.n
This plan of playing the bishop to f2
is rather unpleasant for Black. I
employed this manoeuvre in the afore
mentioned game with Pilnik.
h6
Theory disapproves of this move, and

rightly so. The drawback to the pawn
advance is not only that it weakens tl1e
kingside, but also that Black drives t11e
bishop to a more favourable position.
However, even t11e approved 9 . . . :es
followed by . . . lDf8 does not give Black
an equal game, e . g. 10 0-0 liJf8 1 1
l::tab l (No.208).
10 .i.h4
:e8
10 . . . tbe8 too has been played, but
also without particular success.
11
f3
This plan, where White immediately

takes control of the e4 square, was one
that I first employed in 1 952 in games
with Pilnik (No.203) and soon after
wards with Keres (No.208). Thanks to
the fact that tl1e bishop is already at h4.
it can immediately be played to f2 for
the defence of the e3 pawn.
11
14
15
16
17
.i.f5
lLlg3
a3
lhb6
.i.f8
.i.b7
Black ' s avoidance of the exchange

demonstrates his desire to complicate
the game.
c5
The usual continuation. After f2-f3

has been played, Black can attack the d4
pawn without fearing the exchange on
c5, since then the a7-gl diagonal is
weakeneq.
c4
A risky step. Larsen was apparently

afraid that after the manoeuvre of the
bishop to f2. White could exchange on
c5, but this did not present a serious
danger to Black. Now, however, the
e3-e4-e5 advance is unavoidable, and
White gains good attacking chances on
tl1e kingside.
18
19
e4
ilh3
g6
There was no point in playing 1 9

.i.xg6 fxg6 2 0 e5 if only because of
_
20 . . . <Ji>h7.
248
19
a5
This was the idea of 17 . . . .ilb7. At the

given moment tl\e b5 pawn is immune,
since the knight at c3 has to defend the
e4 pawn, and Black is able to begin
counterplay on the queens.ide.
20
21
e5
li)ce2
21
22
f4
25
a."tb4
The exchange on b4. is now

necessary; White will need the afile.
25
axb4
b4
At present it is unfavourable for

White to exchange on b4, as Black can
exploit the opening of the rook' s file.
iDh7
26
li)xf5
26
27
28
i.xf5
ltlg3
To continue the attack involving the

advance of the f-pawn, White is pre
pared to sacrifice a piece.
22
Black, naturally, aims to weaken the

enemy pressure by exchanging bishops.
Ac6
Black avoids winning the a3 pawn,

fearing f4-f5 . However, this could also
have occurred now, even though he is
threatening to win the exchange. For
example, 23 f5 .i.a4 24 'ibl .i.xdl 25
fxg6 with a strong attack. However, I
came to the conclusion that after
24 . . . lt:Jg5 (instead of 24 . . .llxdl ) 25 xg6
(or 25 .i.g4 xd l ) 25 . . . ti:Jxh3+ 26 gxh3
'i'd7 Black's chances were better than
after the continuation in the game.
l:al
ifbt
.ia4
f5
Trying to hamper White's pawn

offensive.
29 il.xd7
30 1ig6+
xd7
1!fg7
31
32
'flc6
lhal
:xal
32
...
1i'f7
33
:a7
ltJxe5
30 . . .h8 was somewhat better.
After 32 "i'xd5+ 'ilf7 33 'i'xf7+

xfl the black pieces would have
become a little more active.
23
24
gxf5
1fe7
i.d7
To all appearances, Larsen had plan

ned a combination, which he in fact
carries out on the next move. The
oversight he makes in so doing is easily
explained by his severe time trouble.
249
3 3 .. J:le7 would also have lost quickly

to 34 :xd7 :xd7 3 5 e6, but 33 . . . tl:JbS
was more tenacious. However, after 34
.
'ib6 ttld7 (34 ... Wxf4 3 5 'i'g6+) 35
'i'a5 ! l:e7 (there is no other useful
move) 36 f5 (36 . . . tLl.xe5 37 dxe5. and
the white rook is defended by both
queen and bishop) even so Black cannot
avoid defeat.
34
dxe5
42
43
44
45
lhf5
<ifi>fl
lhe6
b5
.ci4
But not 45 tDxd4 because of

45 . . . l:.d5. After establishing his knight
at e4, White then drives the black knight
from e6, after which the game is
decided.
'if'e6
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
If 34 . . . 'ifxf4 White has not only 3 5

'i'xe8, but also 3 5 ilg6+ with mate next
move.
35 "Ifxe6+ :xe6
36
37
'ifile2
g3
d3
lhd6
l:lc6
cl
lhe4
rs
lhf6+
lCid5
e6
lla6
l:l.c7
'ifilh7
lhd8
h6
l:tb7
lhc6
Now if the knight retreats there

follows e6-e7 and e7-e81i'.
51
52
lhe5+
xd4
Black resigns
Game 3 3 1
Trifunovic-Botvinnik
Noordwijk 1965
The impression is that Black's two
connected passed pawns are just as
dangerous as White's. However, it soon
transpires that the decisive factor is the
inferior position of the black king.
38
39
40
41
bxc3
bxc3
.i.xc5
llal
lhcS
lhf8
.teJ
.tc5
1
2
3
4
d4
e4
lt)fJ
cJ
g6
Jl.g7
d6
Cautiously played. Usually White

chooses the variations with 4 ttlc3 or 4
c4 and 5 lL:ic3 . Trifunovic was quite well
placed in the tournament, and therefore
he did not object to a draw.
It only remains for White to bring his

king into play; he, naturally, ignores the
h6 pawn.
250
4
5
6
lhbd2
.lc4
0-0
lhf6
0-0
lhc6
es
dxe5
dxe5
8 ltJxe5 ;#as the easiest way to

equalise, buf ;I avoided simplification,
which with Trifunovic is especially
' dangerous' - it is always liable to result
in a draw.
. . .
him some compensation for his doubled

pawns.
llel
9 i.b5 was more active, and in the

event of 9 . .i.d7 White could have
achieved the desired exchanges: 10
i.xc6 .i.xc6 1 1 tbxe5 .txe4 12 ltJxe4
CDxe4.
. .
a6
Eliminating the possibility indicated

in the previous note.
10
11
a4
tDn
lDb5
'ii x dl
12
:xdl
.i.g4
Black had no grounds for avoiding

this exchange (now he advantageously
activates his queen's bishop).
13
14
15
gxf3
.i.xf4
$.xf3
tDf4
Too straightforwardly played. A post

for Black's queen's knight is vacated in
the centre, from where it will restrict
White's bishop, and the f4 pawn will
limit the freedom of the white knight.
For the moment there was no objection
to 15 <t>h2.
15
16
17
lDd2
exf4
ltab8
.i.e2
Now Black establishes his pawn at

b5, after which it will be hard for White
to approach the centralised black knight.
From this standpoint 1 7 a5 was prefer
able.
17
18
19
axb5
l:la6
19
20
ihbJ
b5
axb5
White drives the knight to where it is

itself aiming.
13
lDe5
b3
A move for which my opponent

should definitely be reproached. White
not only loses time, but also weakens
his h-pawn Meanwhile, after 13 lDe3
i.xf3 14 gxf3 the prospect of invading
with his knight at d5 would have given
. 25 1
20
b4
could have led to the exchange of

knights.
At a moment when the white knight

cannot reach c4 immediately, this ad
vance suggests itself. Now White is
forced to advance his c-pawn, which
activates the black bishop.
21
c4
llfd8
22
:ds
c6
23
24
25
llxd8+
f!b6
c5
l:lxd8
26
27
.D.xb4
ltld2
Black tempts his opponent with the

possibility of attacking the b4 pawn.
.f8
..
lta8
The b4 pawn is exchanged for the b2

pawn, which is clearly to Black's ad
vantage, since he will be able to activate
his rook.
.:!a2
%tb8+
lhc4
30
31
..
<it>g2
32
lL\xe5
l:tal+
l:lel
Now White can no longer reach an

ending with opposite-colour bishops.
White decides to retain his b2 pawn,

to avoid increasing the activity of the
enemy rook along the second rank.
.i.xc5
<l;g7
l:tb7
In chess too . it can happen that the

'better' is the enemy of the good. 2 30
tDxe5 .i.xe5 3 1 l::tb 7 suggests itself,
when if 3 1 . . .llxb2 3 2 l:txb2 i.xb2 the
opposite-colour bishops allow White to
strive for a draw, while after 3 1 . . . :a l+
3 2 'iitg2 l:.cl 33 b3 llc2 34 .ic4 .id4 3 5
llxf7+ h6 36 xf4 he even stands
better. In aiming to force Black to ex
change knights, so that the bishop
should go to c4 with gain of tempo,
White overlooks that it is his bishop that
he will have to give up for the knight.
The time has now come to exchange

a pair of rooks.
27
28
29
Ad4
29
30
After 32 i.fl tt:Jxf3 or 32 . . . xfl 3 3

'i&?xfl lDxc4 34 l:.b4 lDd2+ 35 @e2 .ic5
the outcome would not have been in
doubt.
32
33
lbe2
ltlxc6
After 33 CiJxf7 :xf2+ 34 h l <at>f6 it

would have been harder for Black to
convert his advantage.
33
34
35
36
So, White has SUl-eeded in attacking

the opponent 's centralised knight, which
bl
lL\d8
libs
llxf2+
.lxb2
<il>h6
Totally bad was 36 iiJx:f7+ h5,

when the black king will take part in the
attack on its opponent. If instead 36
J:.xf7 l:txf3 37 <ifrg2 :g3+ 38 'it?h2 l:te3,
then Black 's material advantage is
decisive.
252
52
h6
f3
White resigns
36
37 .. :b7
38 . l:tb5
<liJg7
<liJh6
f6
39
40
41
'l;g7
Botvinnik-Donner
.i.e5
Noordwijk 1965
Queen s Gambit
In this way Black has eliminated his

last problems - with time .pn the clock.
lDti+
b7
lDd8
Game 3 32
1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
f3
e3
cxd5
d4
lDf6
e6
d5
c5
exd5
thc6
So, by transposition of moves a

position from the Tarrasch Defence has
been reached.
7
42
lhe6+
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
lhg7+
lhe6+
%1.xh7
<liJg2
2
h4
49
50
51
h5
l:g7 : .
<i!i>gt
.i.e2
Before compensating for the loss of

the f3 pawn by the capture of the h7
pawn, White aims to drive the enemy
king to the other wing, but even this
does not help.
<liJe8
<i!i>d8
c8
%lxf3
:g3+
g5
:thJ
During my adjournment analysis I

established that this move is stronger
than 48 . . . g4, when there follows 49
l:.g7, and White easily gains a draw 23.
g4
flh2+
g3
cxd4
Quite a good method, employed

many years ago with reversed colours
by Alekhine. Now the white knight at
d4 will be no better placed than at f3 ,
and Black eliminates the potential
possibility of dxc5, which in some cases
would lead to White gaining a tempo.
8
253
lhxd4
.i.d6
0-0
10
b3
0--0
A sensible move, although b2-b3 has

also been: played after the preliminary
10 lbf3 a6. Then Black can immediately
develop his queen's bishop at g4.
10
a6
Of course, 10 ... 'i'c7 1 1 tlldb5 !

i.xh2+ 1 2 <iti>hl \ib8 cannot be recom
mended for Black, since after 1 3 f4 his
bishop ends up in difficulties. However,
Gufeld made an interest!ng suggestion 10 ... i.e5. in order after 1 1 .i.a3 to
equalise by 1 1 . . . tDxd4 12 xd4 i.d6.
11
12
13
14
15
.i.b2
llcl
.i.f3
1fxd4
'ii'd2
2 1 l::th l tllf5+ 22 'ittf4 - to try and

calculate such a position at 'the board is
more than dangerous.
On practical grounds White chooses
a quieter development of events.
:e8
.il.d7
lhxd4
.ie5
.i.g4
16
17
18
llfdl
gxf3
<iti>g2!
Jl.xfJ
11fd7
'i'f5
19
tDe2
.ixb2
20
21
'ifxb2
d4
l:tac8
1fe5
A vain attempt to build up an attack

on the king, which is irrunediately par
ried. However, even as the game goes,
Black achieves the exchange of bishops
and could later have exchanged rooks,
which would have given him hopes of a
draw in the endgame with queens and
knights. The point is that the weakness
of the d5 pawn is compensated by the
weakening of White's kingside. And
yet, as will be seen from what follows,
the move played is a loss of time.
If 19 . .'i'g6+ 20 t:Dg3 h5 2 1 i.xe5

lhe5, then 22 h4 or 22 <it>h l h4 23 t:De2,
and the laright reaches the central d4
square, securing White a positional
advantage.
.
A very cunning move, which forced

me to think. Indeed, it was not easy to
decide on 16 i..xg4 Jl.xh2+ 17 <it>xh2
ttJxg4+. After 1 8 <tigl 'i'h4 1 9 l:tfel
'ifh2+ 20 <iti>fl iihl+ 2 1 <iti>e2 'i'xg2 22
lbdl tiJh2 Black already has two pawns
for the piece ith a continuing attack,
while if 18.:: <iti>h3 'i'g5, then, for
example, 1 9 1id4 'i'h5+ 20 <it>g3 lDh6
Instead of this Black should have

returned his queen to d7. to exchange all
the rooks (cf. the note to Black's 1 8th
move). Now, however. even the ex
change of one pair of rooks would lead
to White seizing control of the open file.
22
23
:tc2!
.:.dct
lLJd7
l:l.b8
Best - at least the b7 pawn will be

defended.
24
ifc3!
The white queen ir transferred by the

shortest way to the kingside.
254
parried all the threats, and there is

nothing for White to do but await a
propitious moment.
24
25
lLJf8
1if6
it'c7
Without the queens Black would not

be able to hold out for long.
26
27
28
lLJe6
fxe6
ed8
ilg3
tDxe6
Ilc7
Establishing control of all the squares

on the seventh rank, so that White
should not be able to double rooks there.
29
h4
29 <t>hl h8 ! 30 :g l l:tg8 was

unclear, but 29 f4 ! (29 . d4 30 .l: lc5 d3
3 1 :lg5 g6 32 'i'h3 or 30 . . . h6 3 1 :es
with the tlueat of 32 xe6) followed by
30 'i'g5 would have led to highly
favourable rook ending. After the move
in the game the latent threat of ilh3 is
no longer there.
32
33
e5
A1c5
30 'i'g5 was essential. Black, of

course, avoids the obvious trap 30 . . . d4
3 1 exd4 exd4 32 llf5, and White loses
his advantage.
30
31
h5
h6
lid6!
The outcome is that Black has
255
d4
lbd4
Of course, not 33 ...exd4 in view of

34 :tf5.
34
35
1fg3
ltc4
:r4
Already White has to parry the threat

of . . . l:.f5-g5 (35 . . .l:tf5 36 l::t g4).
35
36
..
29
30
'i'g4
exd4
:xr4
:rs
exf4
Here Black offered a draw, but White

nevertheless decided to see what the
remaining moves to the time control
would bring.
37
38
'i'g4
llb7
b6
After 3 8 iig6 Vxg6+ 3 9 hxg6 :t"6

40 %k8+ :f8 White would have been
unable to go into the pawn ending, but
now he is threatening 3 9 it'g6.
38
Jlti
3 8 . <iith 7 was simpler. In the queen

ending, which Black decides to go into,
he encounters definite difficulties.
.
39
l;[xf7
@xf7
The king aims to approach closer to

the queenside, to stop the white pawns if
necessary.
45
46
47
a4
@e2
1fd5+
11h1+
h5
@h7
The king again has to move away

from the queenside, since after 4 7 . . . @t'8,
by exploiting the open position of the
enemy king it would easier for White to
queen his a-pawn.
48
How should the diagram position be
evaluated? It would seem to be time to
agree a draw .. After all, based on general
growids, Black even has the better pawn
structure. But if one 'digs' deeper into
the position, other arguments can be
found. For example, for his h5 pawn
White can win the enemy pawn at a6.
Then he has the chance of creating an
outside passed pawn. after which pawn
endings will be in his favour. As for the
blockaded pawns at f2, f3 and f4, they
defend the white king quite well against
checks and restrict the black queen.
Then even the appearance of a passed h
pawn will not prove so dangerous. In
short. White should play on.
40
41
42
43
44
1ifd7+
11fc8+
ifxa6
<ltfl
@g8
@h7
1!fg5+
..xh5
1!fd3+
Now Black cannot reply 44 . . . 'i'g6

because of 45 'ire4 ! 'ii'xe4 46 fxe4,
when White already has one passed
pawn (e) and will soon acquire another
(a), which will d.ecide the outcome.
44
<it>g8
256
"ifdl!
Exploiting the fact that Black cannot

exchange queens (his king would be
unable to stop the a-pawn), White drives
his queen to a passive position.
1i'h2
48
A positional error - the queen is bad

ly placed here. Any other move would
have given Black better chances. My
opponent did not fully appreciate how
dangerous his position was. He simply
made a move that defended the f4 pawn
and ensured the advance of the h-pawn.
49
b4
h4
And at the decisive moment Black

overlooks a clever trap.
50
ilfl !
Now the outcome is settled, since

50 . . . h3 5 1 a5 bxa5 52 bxa5 iig2 53 a6
leads to the loss of Black's last trump his h3 pawn. Hpever, there is no other
way of releasing the queen from impris
onment and my opponent decides on a
desperate step - to include the g-pawn
in the play.
7
8
bxc3
d3
e4!
tnc6
d6
Missing the last chance for . . . e5-e4.

In Botvinnik-Basman eflastings 1966
/67) after 8 . . . e4 9 l'Dd4 exd3 10 exd3
LDxd4 1 1 cxd4 d5, although White's
position
was
preferable,
Black's
resources were far from exhausted.
50
g5
bxa5
51 a5
g4
52 bxa5
53 a6
Black resigns. After 53 . . . g3 54 a7
g2 5 5 'ib 1 + and 56 a8'i' he can even

acquire a second queen, but he is mated
inuuediately. See what events are poss
ible in a seemingly drawn queen ending.
'
Game 333
Botvinnik-Langeweg
Hamburg 1965
English Opening
f6
e5
.i.b4
1
2
3
c4
4
5
i.g2
f'J
0-0
5
6
. .
0-0
:eS
..txcJ
tt)cJ
g3
In the notes to Game 3 22 it has

already been mentioned that this move
would seem to be the best reply.
In the afore-mentioned game White
played the weaker 5 a3 (losing a tempo),
but 5 e4 is also quite ppssible.
.
First 6 . . . e4 is goo ,:Black has no

,
reason to avoiq , lgical move, now
or subsequently. r
After stabilising the position in the

centre, White will now prepare f2-f4,
which further suggests itself for the
reason that Black's king's rook has
moved from f8.
9
Ci)e7
After 9 . . . il.g4 followed by the
exchange on f3 White also retains the
advantage, since he later advances f2-f4.
10
11
lhh4
lt)f5
lDg6
This move is part of the manoeuvre

lDf3-h4-f5 (and then perhaps to e3),
hindering . . . d6-d5 and ensuring the
advance of the f-pawn. The exchange
l l . . . .ixf5 12 exf5 is wtfavourable for
Black, since his b7 pap is left en prise.
Therefore he bfocks itf adaDce the long
diagonal.
:::
\
257
11
c6
12 Ir.bl
d5
12 . ..txrs 13 exf5 li:Je7 is still un
it is not possible to retain the material

advantage.
19
20
21
. .
favourable because of 14 Ibb7, but the

natural move in the game is also a
positional mistake. White gains the
opportunity to undouble his pawns, after
which the c3 pawn will take part in the
battle for the central squares.
13
14
cxd5
c4!
dxe4
dxe4
.ixf5
This guarantees Black against the

appearance of the enemy knight at d5 or
d6, but now White's king's bishop
comes into play.
16
17
18
exf5
i.xb7
xd8
l%d7
:cs
cxd5
Black has an unpleasant choice. If he

advances his d-pawn. f2-f4 will become
very strong and White will have the
possibility of playing .ta3 c4-c5 and
lbd6. The exchange chosen by my
opponent gives . White the d-file and
strongpoints at d5 and d6.
14
15
il.eJ
.i.fJ
g4
t'jje7
llb8
l:lexd8
White is temporarily a pawn up, but
Despite White's two good bishops, it

is not easy for him to strengthen his
position. First he must defend his f
pawn, with a kingside pawn offensive in
mind. In addition, when the c-file is
opened he will be able to gain control
of it.
21
22
23
24
25
l:tb8+
lhc8+
l:tcl
26
27
.i.e2
h3
lbc4
l'lc8
ti)xc8
ti)d6
e4
l'k5
Now the f5 pawn is defended by the
rook and g4-g5 is threatened; if 25 . . . .:ie7
White has the unpleasant reply 26 lk6.
h6
Played a la Capablanca' - taking

account of the opponent's lack of useful
moves, White patiently waits, in order
to embark on activity .in a more favour
able situation. The immediate aim of
both sides is the activation of the kings.
258
3
4
tZ)cJ
g6
f4
This is the most unpleasant contin

uation for Black.
..
.i.g7
tZ)tJ
0-0
It is well lmown that here and on the

next move . . . c7-c5 is premature.
5
6
e5
In Oaine 327 White played 6
i.d3 .
lLlfd7
I did not even have to compare the

virtues of this move with 6 . dxe5,
which I had to reject, since the captain
of the Moscow team had informed me
that I had to win this game.
..
27
28
29
g2
gJ
lDfe8
<t;f8
e7
One of the black pawns. a7 or e4, is

bound to be lost - this cannot be
prevented.
30
31
32
:a5
!te5+
i.b5
lDc8
c-.t>d8
It is more useful first to force

favourable simplification.
32
33 :xe7
34 ii.xe8
35 <ifilf4
36 i.c5
Black resigns: the
be defended,
threatened.
h4
The logical continuation. The open

ing of the h-file will be especially
dangerous for Black, since his king's
pawn defences will become less secure,
and also there are not so many pieces
defending his king.
l!e7
<l;xe7
'ifi>xe8
<ifild7
e4 pawn cannot
and 3 7 .i.f8 is also
Game 334
Gipslis-Botvinnik
USSR Trades Union Spartakiad
Moscow 1965
1 . e4
2- d4
d6 .
lLlf6
llb6
I played this so as not to allow the

white bishop o go to.c4, and to ve the
possibility after,. tbe xe on g6 of
recapturing with the fpawn, Theory is
259
probably correct in stating that 7 . c5 is

more energetic. Tiris opinion is based on
the game Padevsky-Matanovic ( 1 966),
which continued 8 h5 cxd4 9 'ti'xd4
d.xe5 1 0 1if2 e4 ! 1 1 ltJg5 lLlf6 1 2 hxg6
hxg6 13 1ih4 1"d4 ! (or 1 3 lLlcxe4 Ci)xe4
14 lixe4 'i'd4).
12
. .
8
9
10
11
h5
hxg6
.tel
lig5
fxe5
If 1 2 g4 exd4 13 lDa4, then Black

defends as follows: 1 3 . . . ..te6 ( 1 4 ctJxe6
'i'd5).
12
.
h5!
Black supports the position of his
bishop at f5 and simultaneously sets up
a barrier on the h-file. White, naturally,
cannot reconcile himself to this.
.
.i.g4
fxg6
dxe5
13
14
A critical point of the game. The

position is so complicated that it is hard
to express a definite opinion on it.
Subsequently an exclamation mark was
even (although temporarily) attached to
1 1 tllg5 in theoretical guides, but to me
it seemed that 1 1 fxe5 tllc6 1 2 .ie3 was
more dangerous for Black.
White's 'energetic' move has a
typical psychological chess context: he
thought that he had to act with the
utmost speed.
..
g4
.i.xg4
..
hxg4
While White was controlling the c4

square, he should have completed his
development: 14 ..te3 , then 'i'd2 and
0-0-0.
14
15
...
lie6
lbc6
Black ' s position appears hopeless,

but this is all merely a mirage.
15
1t'd7!
Sacrificing the exchange, Black com

pletes the mobilisation of his forces and
seizes the initiative: 16 lixf8 l:xf8 17
.i.xf5 'tlfxf5 . White, o f course, declines
such a 'gift'.
16
17
18
..txf5
lixg7
.i.eJ
llxf5
<;j;xg7
If first 18 i.h6+ <&t>g8 and now 1 9

.i.e3, then this makes things easier for
Black: 1 9 . . t:Dc4 20 'i'e2 ctJxe3 2 1
'i'xe3 'i'xd4, and White does not have a
queen check at h6.
.
18
19
11
..tf5
Black is obliged to retain this bishop

for the defence of his kingside. After
l l . . .i.xe2 1 2 1fxe2 tDc6 1 3 dxe5 tl:ld4
14 'ifd3 he would have had problems.
ltJc4
lixb2
'ife2
During the game I was afraid of the
afore-mentioned check ( l 9 . . . ll'lxe3 20
'i'xe3 ilxd4 2 1 'i'h6+), not noticing that
after 2 1 . <it>f7 22 1i'h7+ e6 23 11xg6+
Black replies 23 . . . @xe5 and remains a
pawn up with a safe position 24
260
. .
Therefore I was forced to take the b2

pawn, in order at any cost to prevent
White from castling queenside.
20
d5
This move is much more tempting

than 20 'i'b5, but . . . also hmch weaker.
After the queen sortie there could have
followed 20 . . . ltJxe5 2 1 'i'xb2 (2 1 dxe5?
'iixb5 22 ttlxb5 l:xe5) 2 1 . . .ttlc4 22
'ifxb7 ttlxe3 (22 . . . 'i'e6 23 lDe4) 23
'i'xa8 ttlxc2+ 24 @d2 'i'xd4+ 25 'ittxc2
.:t.fl+ 26 <it>b3 11b6+ 27 <itic4 ii'a6+, and
it all ends in perpetual check.
20
21
...
i.d4
:xe5
After 2 1 dxc6 iixc6 22 .i.d4 2 5

'if xhl + 23 d2 Black would have won
by 23 . . . 'i'h6+ (24 'itte l 1i'h4+), but now
his position seems critical.
21
...
ttlc4!
This seemingly impossible move

enables Black to bring his knight into
play, and with equal material (knight
and two pawns against a rook) to retain
a positional superiority.
22
23
i.xe5+
ith4
ttl6xe5
l:th8
26 1
It is essential to exchange a pair of

rooks, in order to ensure the safety of
the black king.
24
llxh8
But not 24 l:xc4 lDxc4 25 'i'xc4

because of 25 . . . :hl+.
24
25
26
.
'i'h2+
'i'f4
.
<i!i> xh8
cl;g7 .
This accelerates White's defeat,

although after 26 'ilg3 'iff5 27 0-0-0
'i'f6 28 l:thl b5 29 'i'h3 /jf7 Black's
king is safe, and the threat of . . . b5-b4 is
hard to parry.
26
27
28
lDdl
'ifd4
'If h3
1ig2
<i!i> g8
Even an attack with a queen and one

knight can be very dangerous; here
White has to defend against a queen and
two knights!
29 'lff2
\ihl+
11'e4+
30 <itie2
31 @ft
1i'hl+
32 <itie2
xd5
33 lDcJ
1t'd2+
White resigns
The need to defend the d4 pawn

hinders White's development and forces
him to reject the more natural 1 2 'ife2.
Game 3 3 5
Botvinnik-Tolush
Moscow v. Leningrad
Moscow 1 965
12
ll
1
2
3
4
5
c4
cJ
d4
el
ge2
.i.b7
liadl
ifil6
e6
.i.b4
c5
Now a variation that can be found in

all the opening guides is reached; it is
considered to lead to an equal game,
although this is perhaps a somewhat
premature conclusion.
...
d5
Black can consider 5 . . . cxd4 6 exd4

d5 7 c5 ttle4 8 .id2 ltJxd2 9 'i'xd2 b6
10 a3 .i.xc3 1 1 lDxc3 bxc5 12 dxc5 a5
with the positional threat of . . . a5-a4
(Averbakh-Panno, 1 95 8).
al
.i.xcJ+
6 . . . cxd4 7 axb4 dxc3 8 lLlxc3, which

occurred in my game with Najdorf
(No.247), favours White. After 6 . . . .i.a5
7 dxc5 dxc4 8 'ifxd8+ Black's chances
are also worse.
li:)xcJ
cxd4
Regarding 7 . . . b6, see Game 233.
exd4
The attempt by White to avoid the

creation of an isolated pawn by 8 'i'xd4
proved unjustified (Fine-Reshevsky,
195 1 ) .
dxc4
13
14
15
White was now threatening c4-c5.
9
10
11
12
.i.xc4
.i.eJ
0-0
1ld3
lDc6
0-0
b6
l:De7
When I played 1 3 :ad l , I reckoned

with the possibility of 1 3 . . . ttla5 1 4 i.a2
'i'c8, when I was intencling to choose 1 5
.i.g5 ! .i.a6 16 'i'h3 i..xfl 1 7 ..ib l with a
dangerous attack for the sacrificed ex
change. The game continuation is also
not altogether successful for Black,
since it ignores the positional threat of
.i.g5, enabling White to retain control of
the central d5 square.
Two other variations do not have the
drawbacks listed: 13 . . . 'i'd7 14 .i.g5
ltJd5 15 lDxd5 exd5, although after 16
i.a2 followed by ..tb 1 White neverthe
less retains the initiative, and, perhaps
the soundest - 1 3 . . . h6 followed by
. . . ttle7 or . . . lDd5.
.i.g5
f4!
li:)g6
This is why tbe king's rook had to

remain at fl ! WJU.te makes use of an
obvious way of developing his attack,
262
on the next move his rook would be

captured with a double check, but he
was no longer able to deviate from what
he had intended.
one which I employed back in 1 936 in

my game with Vidmar (No.84). He has
to hurry, before Black manages to play
. . . h7-h6.
h6
15
20
21
22
%bf8+
:n+
lllxb2
xf8
es
23
il.e6
lld8!
24
25
d5
l:.fi
Jlc8
25
26
27
28
29
dxe6
l:bg7
l:xa7
h3
But not 22 ... cJi;e7 because of 23 l:tf7+

cJi;d6 24 lDb5+ cJi;c6 2 5 l:tc7 mate.
The best defence: Black forces the
advance of the d-pawn (weakening it)
and brings his rook into play. Even so,
the invasion of the seventh rank by the
white rook is bound to decide matters.
16
f5!
This interposition refutes Black's

plan (16 ... hxgS 17 fxg6 clearly favours
White). Now not only the a2-f7
diagonal is opened, but also the f-file.
After 1 6 .i.xf6 'ifxf6 17 f5 'i'g5 the
prospects would have been more
favourable for Black than those that
await him in the game.
16
17
1s
li.xf6
:xrs
exf5
11fxf6
llJf4
Probably the losing move. After the

exchange of queens it is true that Black
avoids the threatened attack, but the
resulting ending is hopeless for him.
The best chance was 1 8 . . 'ifc6 ! , forcing
19 l:ld2 or eise 1 9 i.d5 11i'd7.
.
19
20
lixf6
tDxd3
:xf7
What can Black do? After 20 l:txf7

2 1 xd3 he remains a p_awn down. Only
here, apparently, did Tolush notice that
. . .
Jlxe6
:d6
llxe6
lDd3
llJf4
Black forces further simplification,

pinning his hopes on the drawing
potential of a rook ending with a small
number of pawns. If . 29 . . . l:tg6 (with the
threat of . . . t'.Df4), there would have
followed, as in the game, 30 .:ta4.
263
30
31
32
J:la4
&Dxe2
D.a7
tDe2+
ltxe2
It was hard to deny myself the

pleasure of again cutting off the king on
the back rank. After all, this is a no less
significant factor for achieving success
than an extra pawn.
32
33
Jib7
D.e6
Or 3 3 . . J:lb2 34 11h7 (but not "34 a4

because of 34 . . . ltb4 ). and White
acquires two connected passed pawns.
34
35
36
Cifi>f2
<li>gJ
l:lf6+
D.g6+
<it>g8
37
38
39
40
41
g3
g4
'ifn's
g6
<ifih5
l:r.c6
<bh8
:cs+
Jlc6+
f3
This makes things easier for White.
Black should have continued giving
checks while the pawn was still at g2.
41
Game 3 36
Yudovich-Botvinnik
Moscow Team Championship 1966
1
2
3
4
g8
264
e4
d4
lDcJ
f4
g6
d6
c6
There is perhaps no point in making

this move before the development of the
black knight at f6.
4
5
As soon as the g2 pawn has moved to

g3 . the white king is free to advance.
The sealed move.
Black resigned, without resuming.

The winning plan is not difficult: White
places his pawns at a4, g4 and h4, and
his rook at a7, after which there is no
defence against the threat of g4-g5
h6xg5, h4xg5 followed by l:la6 and
a4-a5.
JJ.g7
.i.eJ
It is already not easy for White to
find a sensible continuation. At any
event, in the ga91 he did not succeed in
,
so doing. Possi8l5 ttJf3 should have
been preferred, although then Black has
the quite favourable reply

after 6 e3 'ifb6 7 Wd2
ti::\d7 (but not. 8 . . . 'i'xb2
position is quite secure. 5
into consideration.
...
5 . . . g4, and
.txf3 8 gxf3
9 b l) his
a4 also came
lib6
In the game Kupreichik-Spassky

( 1 98 1 ) 5 . . . ttJd7 followed by a queenside
pawn offensive by Black led to equal
play.
:bl
Not too aesthetic, and it also denies

White the right to castle queenside, but
what else can be suggested?
Exploiting the fact that e4-e5 is ruled
out due to the bishop at e3 being un
defended, Black immediately makes a
pawn thrust in the centre, creating
strong points for his pieces.
...
8
9
10
11
gxf5
lhdf6
lhh6
Preparing a possible g2-g4.

11
Jid7
f5
Weaker is 6 . . . e5, when White

advantageously replies 7 ttJf3 . But now,
instead of this move, the bold 7 e5 dxe5
8 fxe5 i.xe5 9 tDf3 was better, when
White has sufficient compensation for
the sacrificed pawn - a lead in develop
ment and the initiative. The modest
continuation chosen by White deprives
him of any opening advantage.
lD d7 !
7 lDf3
Black successfully resolves his most
difficult problem - the development of
his queen' s knight. He directs it to f6,
and the king's knight, conceding this, its
customary position, successfully comes
into play via h6. In the new situation 8
es can no longer be approved (8 . . . dxe5
9 fxe5 t'.LJxe5 I 0 ttJxe5 i.xe5 1 1 tt:Ja4
'if a5+ ), but also the exchange on f5 will
merely assist Black's seizure of the e4
square.
exf5
.i.d3
1fe2
h3
12
13
0-0
lDg5
'ffc7
d5
14
.i.d2
'fid6
fa..1Jloiting the fact that White, in

making a seemingly active move, has
taken his laright to the side so that its
centralisation (at e5) is temporarily no
longer possible, Black sets about
occupying the e4 square.
14 . . . t:De4 would be
over-hasty
because of 1 5 ii'h5+. Therefore Black
parries this future threat, while for the
moment defending the e6 square.
15
16
h2
lhe4
lt)f3
An admission of his error on the 1 3th
move. Here 16 'i'h5+ is now pointless
in view of the reply 16 . . . 'i'g6.
265
16
17
18
.i.xe4
lDe5
'ifg6
fxe4
.i.xe5!
Black succeeds in establishing his
25
knight at f5, which practically decides

the outcome.
19
tLlf5
19
26
27
28
11f2
After this Black' s attack develops of

its own accord, but what was there for
White to do? The impression is that his
last chance was 20 g4 iDd4 2 1 'i'e3 (but
not 2 1 f5 'ilg7 22 f6 'i'f7) 2 1 . . .ttJf3 + 22
1:.xf3 , but the trouble is that after
22 . . . exf3 he cannot play either 23 f5
i.xf5 , or 23 'ifxf3 flxc2.
20
21
h5
28
29
30
31
32
l:.g8
hxg3+
d4
ti)xg3
'i' xc2
l:lxg7+ l:lxg7
White resigns
Liberzon-Botvinnik
h4
Moscow Team Championship 1966
Again threatening 23 . . . e3 (24 i.xe3

'i'g3+).
23
24
il.xg3
%%.b4
ltxg3
Game 3 37
Threatening to win a piece by 22 . . . e3 .
l:r.gt
e3
llag8
Now the attack comes from all sides:

vertically, diagonally and horizontally.
b4
21
ltJe2
'ii'fl
g4
After . . . d5-d4 it would all the same

have been impossible to defend the g
pawn, so White is not risking anything.
White 's counterplay is not only far

too late, but also essentially harmless.
22
..i xc6
The only result of the opponent's

pseudo-activity is that Black's bishop
has reached the necessary diagonal.
Now it only . remains to open this
diagonal and to double rooks.
dxe5
Now the f4 pawn will merely cramp

the white pieces, and so 1 9 fxe5 l'.Df5 20
'i'f2 h5 2 1 lLle2 would perhaps have
been slightly better.
20
bxc6
French Defence
.i.el
b5
1
2
266
e4
d4
e6
d5
lllc3
The threat of d4-d5 is averted, and

Black can consider himself to be out of
danger.
ttit6
1 1 lllxd4
l l . . . llfxd4 1 2 ifxd4 i.xd4 1 3 l:.xd4
..td7 was good enough for a draw, but
why not play on, if the position allows
this?
ti.Jf6
In this team competition I decided to

try a continuation that I had not
previously employed.
dxe4
.i.g5
lDxe4
i..e7
gxf6
.i.xf6
f5
llJfJ
Although 7 . b6 is certainly sounder,
4
5
6
7
liJc3
Correctly played. If 8 . c5 White

intends 9 d5.
.
8
9
ifd2
.i.f6
c5
Now 1 0 dxc5 or 10 d5 would suit

Black. In the latter case he would not
continue 1 0 . . . exdS on account of 1 1
liJxd5 .i.xb2 1 2 llb 1 i.g7 1 3 .i.b5+ and
14 0-0, but 10 . . . e5 followed by . . . e5-
e4.
However, after 10 .ib5+ White

would probably have caused his
opponent to regret his experiment.
Subsequently he can no longer hope to
retain an opening advantage.
cxd4
10 0-0-0
12
.i.b5
13
lllxf5!
i.d7
But now the exchange - 12 . . . i.xd4 would no longer work because of 1 3

i.xc6+ f bxc6 1 4 1i'xd4 'i'xd4 1 5 :t.xd4,
when White has an opportunity, after
establishing his knight on c5, of gaining
some advantage in the endgame.
the text move is condemned by theory,

perhaps without sufficient grounds.
An elegant piece sacrifice, but it

leads only to an equal game.
13
exf5
14 1'd6!
Only this quiet move confirms the
correctness of the sacrifice. Mention can
be made of Game 347, in which
Liberzon played in similar style.
14
Jle5
15
l::the1
There are many threats: 16 .i.xc6, 16

:xe5+ and even 16 f4; to parry them,
267
Black has to leave his bishop at d7 en
21
22
23
prise, but . . . not for long.
. 15
16
.
<it>bl!
'ifg5+
23
24
25
0-0-0
ifxc7+
1ic7
<i;xc7
li)e2
With one move White defends the

second rank (25 . . J:td2 26 'ifi>c l) and the
g-file (25 . . . g8 26 l::tg l).
Xtxe5
25
26
27
28
29
17
b8
1!fxc6
Since White is not intending to avoid

exchanging queens, it would have been
simpler to do this immediately.
White too has to find the only move.

He would have lost after both 16 'ii'd2
1Wxd2+ 17 l:txd2 0--0-0 18 .i.xc6 .i.f4,
and 16 J:td2 0-0--0 17 l:txe5 .i.e6.
16
17
.i.xc6
1fe5+
l:.gl
f3
xgl
b3
ltg8
htg4
:xgl+
'it>d6
<i;e5
i.e6
The whole point is that after

17 . tLlxe5 1 8 ttld5 Black is mated.
. .
18
1lc5
18
19
20
tbxdl
t'tlc3
And now the knight is pinned, and

White avoids major loss of material,
giving up only his extra pawn.
ltxdl+
d8
Although Black's kingside pawns are

badly placed. his active king, together
with the greater mobility of his bishop
compared with the knight in a position
where there are pawns on both wings,
give him at least equal chances.
Of course not 20 tLle3 (20 . . . 'i'xe3 2 1

'i'xe3 l:td l + 2 2 1i'c l :ixc l + 2 3 xc l
tDxe5).
20
21
Wfxg2
:et
The rook at e5 was not very suitably

placed for the CQming endgame also,
the back rank has to be defended.
268
30
31
32
33
@cl
.i.d5
<i;d2
b5
f4
a3
<i;dJ .
Draw agreed
14
Game 338
Amsterdam 1966
King's Indian Attack
1
2
3
g3
ltlfJ
i..g2
d5
c6
i.g4
A comfortable method of develop

ment. However, if Black exchanges his
bishop for the knight at f3, White' s
advantage of the two bishops may tell.
4
5
d3
b3
ll'ld7
.i.xfJ
14
15
.i.xf3
l:.ac8
c5
.tel
Now Black' s bishop will occupy a

passive position right to the end of the
game, and his weakness on the light
squares will become very acute.
5 . . . il.h5 leads to more complex play.
1fc2
Not the best ( 1 4 l::tb l was stronger),

since now Black could have replied
1 4 . . . a5 with the threat of 15 . . . axb4 16
cxb4 .td4, which would have restricted
somewhat the actions of. the white
pieces. . However, my opponent was
enticed by another, unsuccessful idea.
Botvinnik-Szilagyi
e5
ltle8
thd6
16
17
b5
tLlc4
18
i.g5!
6 . . . e6 7 liJd2 liJgf6 (7 . . . .id6 followed

by . . . t:[je7 is also possible. as in a game
Gufeld-Vasyukov, 1 972) would have
led to something resembling a Caro
Kann Defence.
7
8
ltld2
e4
lDgf6
dxe4
An essential exchange: in this way

Black restricts the activity of White's
king's bishop.
dxe4
.i.c5
Played in the spirit of the open

games. 9 . . . Jl.e7 was more circumspect.
10
11
0-0
c3
'ffe7
After this move Black s queenside

castling is ruled out because of 1 2 b4
i.b6 1 3 a4 etc. However, he should
have castled kingside only after first
playing 1 l . ..a5.
11
12
13
b4
a4
0-0
.i.b6
:rd8
1 3 . . . a5 woulditave led to difficulties

after 14 b*4. 4lX:a.'..fs .:ia3 .
269
Essentially the decisive move. Black

cannot reply 18 . . . 'ifxg5 because of 19
tLlxd6 c4 20 'it>g2, and if 20 . . . liJf6 21
liJxc8 ktd2 22 'i'c l (2 1 adl :bs 22
ttJxc4 is also possible) . If instead
1 8 . . . tiJf6, then 1 9 ttJe3 . Consequently,
he is forced to weaken the important a2g8 diagonal.
18
19
: . , ;: - f6
i.eJ.'" i :/ . lflxc4
. .
Submissively
(and
without
any
compensation) allowing the bishop onto

tl1e important diagonal. 1 9 . . h8 was
more tenacious.
.
20
21
22
23
.*.xc4+
as
l:lfdl
1f a2
b8
il.c7
thf8
lhd1+
After the exchange of rooks it will be

more difficult for Black to defend the g8
square, but the exchange could have
been avoided only by going totally onto
the defensive, which of course, would
have proved unsuccessful.
24
25
26
:lxdl
l:hd8
a6
iid8
.i.xd8
White waits. If 27 'iWq2 Black would

have defended by 27 . . . 'i'd7, but after
the obvious 27 iieZ (with the threat of
i.b3 and 'i'c4) he would have had to
play 27 . . . f:De6 . (28 .i.b3 lDc7 ! 29 'i'c4
'i'e8), when 28 g4 CiJc7 29 'i'c8 soon
concludes matters.
27
28
'ifd7
thg6
1ie2
Now White finally gains the oppor

tunity to transfer his queen onto the a2-
g8 diagonal, which leads to a rapid

finish, but 28 . . . ti.Je6 would not have
delayed the end for long.
29
30
31
.i.bJ
1ic4
1ff7
1Je7
h6
<it?b7
32
33
34
ii.c4
h4
'i'e8
lid6
'fidl
If 3 l . . .'i'xb5. then Black loses a

piece: 32 Vf8+ h7 33 'i'xd8 'i'xb3 34
ifxe7.
White frees his queen from having to

defend the a-pawn. In addition, in the
endgame the weakness of the a7 pawn
may tell.
White's position is of course won,
but it is still not so easy to find a
concrete way to win.
26
b6
34
After 26. .. i.b6 White wins inuned

iately by 27 'i'd2 ! (with the threat of
'i'd5-g8 mate).
27
<li>g2
35
270
f5
In time trouble Black hastens his

inevitable defeat (White was threatening
Jtf7. h4-h5 and .1Lg6+).
exf5
lixf5
36
i.g8+
Transposing into this variation of the
Black resigns: he is mated in two
Sicilian Defence is risky for White. 7

i.d2 and then 8 e3 was more circum
spect, and 7 g3 also had its.advantages.
7
moves.
Szabo--Botvinnik
Sicilian Defence
c4
lt)f3
d4
incomplete, this active play looks reck

less. But even without this move as was
shown
4 e3 is more accurate, when after
the
game
(Olympia4
Black plays
Alexander
1 954 ),
. . . lllli6 and
when
. . . f7-f5 his
position is secure. The whole point is

that instead of i..e2 White has played
favourable for Black.
cxd4
lhc6
lDxd4
lDc2
by
Botvinnik
4 . . lDf6 5 d4 the play develops similarly

to Grune 309. but in a version more
4
5
6
h4
With the mobilisation of the forces
c5
g6
.i.g7
iDcJ
.ltlh6
tage by 8 exf5 .ixf5 9 it)e3 tt:Th.6 1 0 g3

0-0 1 1 .ig2 1'd7 12 tiJxf5.
Amsterdam 1966
1
2
3
4
7 . . . f5 is less good; in the game Stein

Honfi ( 1968) White gained an advan
Game 339
tDc3 .
If his king.' s bishop were already
at e2, then 7 . . . tbb.6 would be refuted by

the well-known reply 8 g4 .
8
9
During
the
past
decades
this
manoeuvre, suggested by Rubinstein,
has undergone a reassessment.
h5
f5
fxe4
It is
generally considered undesirable to

retreat the knight, especially when the
bishop at g7 is not blocked. Therefore 6
e3 should have been preferred.
6
Here
or
d6
. .
on
tl1e
following
move
6 . . . i.xc3+ came into consideration, after

which it is hard to decide which are
more important tlle defects of White's
doubled pawns, or the weakness of
-
Black's dark squares and the fact tl1at he

no longer has the two bishops. In the
game
Taimanov-Kupreichik
10
( 1 974)
10 e4 d6 1 tDe3 b6
was reached
,,
e4
a balanced position
hxg6
A further error ( 1 9 thxe4
after 7 bxc3 'i'a5 8 .i.d2 ttJf6 9 f3 llJe5
was
correct) - the opning of the h-file is

useful only to lack.
27 1
The attacking
ii.xh?; .t.xh6'::: r1:hxg6 hxg6

. .
attempt 10
12 11'cl is refuted primarily by 12 . . .

.i.d2+, hen White loses the exchange.
10
11
1ixe4
hxg6
.if5
Black mobilises his queenside pieces

will all possible speed, in order after
castling queenside to take control of the
open rook's file.
12
/l)cJ
Black also retains the advantage after

12 lllg3 'i'd7 13 liJxf5 gxf5 (14 'ilh5+
00), whereas the tempting 12 . . . as+
1 3 .i.d2 'l'e5+ 14 .te2 'ilxb2 would
have allowed White to seize the
initiative: 15 xf5 lDxf5 16 llxh8+
.i.xh8 17 l:lb 1 .
12 . . .
'ilas
13
.i.d2
1le5+
15
'lra4
lhg4
18
lDcdl
18
19
20
11fa5
:ct
It would appear that the queen can be

pushed back by 18 .edl , but then
18 . . . .i.xc3 ! , while if . 1 8 lDxg4 there
follows 1 8 . . . 1Wxg4.
lid4
l:tbl
White would not have been helped at

all by 20 ii'xa7, which also does not
even threaten perpetual check.
20
21
lhe5
Wc7+
The threats of 2 1 . . . llld3 mate and

2 1 . . .iff3 (and then 22 . . . 'i'e2 mate) do
not leave White any other choice.
21
22
23
If 13 . . . 0-0--0 there is the unpleasant

reply 14 lLJci5 .
0-0-0
14 /ie3
llld5+
it)xf4
<l;xc7
'it>d7
g5
The exchange of rooks is un

avoidable (if 16 l:tgl 'i'h2), after which
the black rook reaches the first rank, and
the outcome is decided.
16
17
7. ..
,
.llxh8
1lb5
!txh8
'lff4
; , JJ:tf.:l;:"":<fi!(:}
t i
8 i
The queens have disappeared, but the

attack has not died away. After 24 i.c3
gxf4 25 .i.xd4 l2Jd3+ 26 <ltd2 xcl. 27
i..xg7 llxfl 28 'it>xcl e5 Black is
effectively a rook up.
White resigns.
{J/
. y.
;t i r tw1/'}1'. Y.
272
no means better. But there are also no

other expedient suggestions, so that
8 . . . .llb4 certainly has to e condemned.
Game 340
Botvindik-Pomar
Amsterdam 1 966
Slav Defence
1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
c6
d5
cxd5
lLlf6
ltlc6
i.f5
lLlcJ
cxd5
d4
lLlfJ
.lf4
At one time this symmetric way of

developing was considered to be the
most comfortable way to draw. Then
came a period when preference was
given to the more cautious. 6 . . . e6. Now
it can again be acknowledged that
6 . . . .if5 leads most simply to equality.
7
8
e3
.i\b5
e6
...
.tb4
i.xc6+
0-0
bxc3
bxc6
i.xc3
White can hope to gain a sufficient

advantage only by establishing his
knight at e5 then his extra development
tempo will tell.
8 . ..liJd7 .is undoubtedly stronger.
Black need not fear 9 'ifa4 in view of
9 . l:lc8. when the acceptance of the
sacrifice (10 i.xc6 l1xc6 1 1 'i'xa7) is
dangerous for White on account of
l l . 'i'c8.
1fa5
9 lLle5
. .
10
11
12
l:.c8
In the 1 1th game of our return match
( 196 1 ) Tai played 1 2 . . 'i'xc3, but after
13 'i'cl he had to go into an inferior
ending (No.290). The continuation
chosen by Pomar, although recom
mended by the experts in its time, is by
.
273
13
c4!
13
14
...
g4!
This pawn, after reaching c5, will be

highly unpleasant for Black, but it also
cannot be taken, since then he immed
iately loses the exchange. Evidently he
should have made the prophylactic
move 1 3 . . . h6.
0-0
White' s plan is simple: the pawn is

advanced to c5, and then by f2-f3
control is established over the e4 square,
the bishop at g is exchanged, and the
b-file is occupied. Black utilises the
only possibility of countering this plan.
14
15
.lg6
lLle4
Now the exchange on g6 has its dan
gers for White, since the black knight at
e4 and then at c4 will be impregnable.
16
11
cs
f3
d2
.:n
For the reason given in the previous
note, weaker is 1 7 1i'e 1 f6 18 tt'lxg6
hxg6 1 9 l:tf2 ltlc4.
17
18
19
20
li)xc4
.i.d6
e4
27 . . . 'i'xc3 28 ktxc3 lld7 29 l:ib3 , or an

irresistible attack on his king. Black
chooses the second way, since it would
appear to be less obvious. In addition,
for the moment the material balance is
restored and there are more pieces
remaining on the board, and hence there
is a greater possibility of something
unexpected.
li)c4
dxc4
l:lfe8
Here we can take stock: the c4 pawn

is cut off from its main forces and the
white bishop is cramping the actions of
the enemy rooks, whereas the black
bishop is shut out of the game, and an
attempt to activate it leads merely to the
opening of the f-file. Even so. my
opponent goes in for this continuation:
after all. he has to do something!
20
21
22
1ic2
fxe4
f5
fxe4
1fa3
23
24
l:tel
:g2
1i'b3
l:tcd8
An important interposition. The black

queen, so active just before, is now
seriously restricted.
28
It is possible that Black was now

intending to sacrifice the exchange. but
even this could no longer help.
l:tg3
1fxc4
11c3!
1ixa2
:g2
1fa6
Of course, not 28 . . . 'ifa4 because of

29 :.a1 1fbs 30 l:.b2.
A t)'pical example of how useless is

the activity of one piece.
25
26
27
27
28
'ifh6
'if d2
Pomar now faced an unpleasant

choice: a hopeless endgame after
29
h4
lld7
30
31
h5
rlal
il.f7
After 29 . . . h5 there could have

followed 30 1i'f3, if there is nothing
better, while if 29 . . . h6 30 h5 .th7 3 1 g5 .
The e4 pawn no longer needs to be
defended. and White exploits an oppor
tunity to drive back the enemy queen
even further.
274
31
11i'c8
32
1ff3!
Game 341
This move resolves any remaining

doubts.
32
33
Botvinnik-Zuidema
Amsterdam 1966
Grtinfeld Defence
Vd8
g5
1
2
3
4
5
lDf3
g3
.i.g2
0-0
c4
lDf6
g6
i.g7
0-0
d5
6
7
8
cxd5
d4
dxc5
lDxd5
cs
Had he wished. Black could still have

maintained the symmetry.
8 e4 is hardly stronger, but it leads to

more interesting play (cf. Game 170).
The advance of the kingside pawns

forces Black's capitulation.
33
34
h6
g6
e5
35
i.xe5
llb7
3 5 'i'f4 and 36 lie5 was threatened.

Or 35 .. Jhd4 36 .l:txa7 l:td7 37 :xd7
'Wxd7 38 'iWf6 ifdl + 39 'it>h2 'i'h5+ 40
@g3.
36
37
38
iff4
38
39
40
41
cxd5
l:ta7
c6
c7
lie7
i.d6
Black resigns
:n
d5
This breakthrough
attack.
8
9
c6
ti)a6
Theory gives preference to the

popular 9 ltJgS, but to me the move
played seems more thematic, since sub
sequently the black c-pawn may be both
a target. and a barrier to its own pieces.
9
10
lDbd2
bxc6
a5
i.b3
concludes
the
Mate is unavoidable (even if the

queen is given up).
Another. perhaps even more active
plan
for White consists in the rapid
275
transference of his pieces to the

queenside. For instance, 10 ttJci4 i.b7
1 1 lDa3 'i'b6 12 tl'lb3 llfd8 1 3 ii.d2 'Wic7
14 4Jc4.
10
'i'c7
A poor move in some cases White's

queen' s bishop will occupy f4 with gain
of tempo. 1 0 . . b8, while suffering
from the same drawback, would also
have had an advantage - an attack on
the b2 pawn. For example 1 1 lbc4 liJc5
with an equal game, in Boleslavsky' s
opinion.
Other possibilities were 10 . . 'i'b6 and
10 . . . li:Jc5 1 1 tiJc4 i.a6 12 lbfe5 'JJic7 1 3
tl.\xc6 i..xc4 (or 1 3 . . . e6) 1 4 .i.xdS il.xdS
15 'i'xd5 :res 16 'i'xc5 'i'xc6 17 'ifxc6
l:hc6, when Black has definite compen
sation for the sacrificed pawn.
.
11
17
e4
18
.i.f4
b6
Preventing (which could have fol

lowed after l 7., .tl)f6) 1 8 i.a5 I:txd l + 1 9
l:!xd 1 . when 1 9 . . . .txe4 fails to 2 0 1ixe4
'ifxa5 2 1 1ib7 26, while after 1 9 . . . 'i'c6
20 tiJd6 :lf8 2 1 e5 White' s initiative
increases.
1fc6
Black decides to give up the ex

change for a paw after which the
placing of his pieces is improved, he
occupies the centre, and the battle flares
up with renewed strength. The follow
ing line was unpromising: 18 . . l:.xdl +
1 9 l:txdl 'i'c6 20 liJd6 l:f8 2 1 ctJe5.
.
19
20
21
22
a3
Securing the position of the queen at

c2 and restricting the mobility of the
knight at a6.
11
If 16 . . . fS, then 17 e4 would have

been even more unpleasant.
d6
:xd6
1fxe4
tl)gS
:xd6
1fxe4
.txe4
If 22 l:.adl Black has the adequate

defence 22 . . l::tf8 .
.
22
c5
i.d5
Here the pawn becomes more active,

but it takes away another square from
the ill-fated knight at a6. However,
Black also does not escape from his
difficulties after l l . . . tt.Jc5 12 'i'c2 liJe6.
12
13
14
tl)c4
'li'c2
dl
.lb7
nac8
14 e4 was premature: 14 . . . tiJb6 1 5

.i.f4 li'd7 (or 1 5 . . . \ic6) 16 l:.ad l 'i'e6.
14
15
...
i.d2
rl.fd8
tl)b8
Black naturally tries to bring his

unfortunate knight into play, but now
White provokes a weakening of the d6
square.
16
i.h3
e6
Black has two active bishops, the

white rooks are separated, and at first
. sight it appears that White's position has
become critical.
276
23
A careless move, which makes it

harder to win. 34 i.a3+ should have
been played, to retain the bishop and
force the enemy king to retreat to f7.
lhxe6!
A continuation that White had to

have in mind when he played 17 e4. The
whole point is that the black knight at
b8 is left undefended. After the ex
change of one pair of rooks, the other
white rook invades the black position,
which is of great importance.
23
...
34
fxe6
Or 23 . . . .i.xe6 24 :xe6.
24 :xd5
25 .i.xc8
26 . .i.xb8
27 l:tbl!
exd5
tbxc8
i.. xb2
27
28
29
30
.i.xa3
c4
.i.f8
.i.d6
:xa7
:.a6
ffiff!2.
WP
l:i1e7
ct;n
<li>e6
.i.g7
'%\'.!{
d7!
35
36
37
.i.xe7
:a7+
.:c7
r;l;xe7
<it>f8
37
38
...
<it>e2
c3
38
39
40
<ia>d3
g4
Again 3 8 g4 should have been

played. Neither White nor Black had yet
appreciated all the subtleties of this
endgame. It is this that explains the
errors committed.
Now if necessary the white king can

stop the passed pawns, freeing the other
pieces from the need to do this.
30
31
32
33
The proximity of the time control has

its effect. The immediate g3-g4-g5 was
stronger. with a guaranteed win.
White must occupy the seventh rank

with his rook as soon as possible.
llb7
.i.e5
<ilifl
Black is threatening by 3 5 . . .tt:lc6 to

restrict the white pieces and to begin
advancing his passed pawns. Therefore
White is forced to exchange his bishop.
h6!
d4
%2/
lff.
{'.;i ;;{<if:/%.,:;,; ?. i
d @;jg_t:
.:?J;g
34
f4
f1t1l;:r,}''-B'fil
40
i.f6
Black misses the only saving chance,

which was 40 . gS, when after 4 1 f5 .i.f6
..
277
it would have been much more difficult

(if at all possible) for White to breach
the opponent's defences.
41
h4
c.fi>g8
Of course, not 4 1 .. . .ltxh4 42 xd4,

when the white king has freedom of
action.
42
43
e4
g5
hxg5
'ittd3
llc6
e4
.i.h8
@g8
h7
50
f5!
gxf5+
Or 50 . . . d3 5 1 <it>xd3 gxf5 52 g6+ <tlg7

53 xc3 .
51
xf5
i.g7
Again the pawns have to remain

where they are: 5 1 . ..d3 52 g6+ '1;;g7 5 3
:xc3.
52
lte8! !
This fantastic move leads to a new,

but more subtle zugzwang. After 52 . . .
.th8 53 g6+ <tig7 5 4 ilc8 Black is
bound to lose material. But the advance
of either of the pawns also leads to its
loss. The rook has to be on the e-file,
from where it can threaten both the
black king and the pawns.
52
By giving his opponent the move,

White forces the black bishop to occupy
the comer square . . Then the king is also
driven onto the rook's file. which allows
White to create mating threats.
.tk7+
l:r.c8+
Now the time for decisive action has

arrived.
.ll. g7
hxg5
This was an IBM tournament, which

later became a traditional Dutch festival.
Flohr and I were living in a motel by the
way out from Amsterdam to The Hague
(this building has now been demol
ished). Not far away was a modem
church, in front of which was an auto
mated bell resting on four columns. It
was in this church that we played. Since
the game was wrlinished, I also had to
analyse it in the 'tournament building',
since the dinner break was only short.
Apparently I was helped by God him
self: in some forty minutes I completed
one of the most subtle analyses in my
life.
If 43 . . . h5 I had prepared the follow
ing variation: 44 ltc6 fl 45 d3 i.h8
46 l:tc7+ gs 47 l:tc8+ 'lt>h7 48 :as
g7 49 l:.a6 i.h8 50 f5 gxf5 5 1 l::th6+
<&t>g8 52 xh5 il..g7 53 g6 etc. , while if
43 . . <it18 I would have played 44 l:c6
fl 45 h5 !
44
45
46
47
47
48
49
d3
If 52 . . . c2, then on the 54th move the

rook retreats to the second rank, instead
of the third.
278
53
54
g6+
l:[eJ '
'it>b6
.i.d4
Or 54 . . . e5 55 .:t.xe5 <Ji;g7 (otherwise

56 !:te7 and 57 l:th7 mate) 56 l:e7+ g8
57 6.
l:.ab 1 and a rapid pawn offensive on the

queenside. However, White decided to
make use of an old idea of Marshall,
which he employed in 1 925 against
Rubinstein in Moscow.
c2
55 llxd3
</iig7
56 ltb3+
57 l:b7+
Black resigns (he loses his c2 pawn).
But about half an hour later someone

suggested that the ending with the pawn
at g6 was drawn. I merely replied that I
had once seen Smyslov win such an
ending against Simagin. A little more
time passed, and everyone calmed
down. In an endgame book the way to
win was found.
Game 342
11
Botvinnik-Robatsch
Amsterdam 1965
Queen's Gambit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
c4
lt.Jc3
d4
cxd5
i.g5
e3
1ic2
tDf6
e6
d5
exd5
c6
Jle7
8
9
.i.dJ
lllf3
ttlbd7
12
0--0
It has long been known that 7 . . .tbe4

is unsatisfactory for Black because of 8
.i.xe7, when if 8 . . . 'fixe7 9 ctJxd5, or
8 . . . xe7 9 tbxe4.
In Game 3 30 White developed his

king's knight at ?.
9
10
11
0--0
:e8
ltJf8
ltael
The more usual plan involves 1 1
ll:le4
A later game Keene-Csom ( 1 97 1 )

went 1 l . . . g6 12 ltJe5 tbe6 13 .i.116 lt.Jg7
14 f3 .tf5 1 5 i.xg7 .i.xd3 16 ltlxd3
lxg7 1 7 'ii'f2 with quite good prospects
for White.
i.xe7
During the game I came to the

conclusion that the familiar idea of 1 2
1'.f4 f5 1 3 ltle5 followed b y f2-f3 would
not give White anything in view of the
reply 12 . . . .i.fS ! Therefore there was
nothing else, other than to play as in the
Marshall-Rubinstein game.
12
13
14
.txe4
lid2
9xe7
dxe4
Black faces a difficult choice.

Rubinstein played 14 . . . f5 and after 15 f3
exf3 16 tLJxf.3 i.e6 1 7 e4 fxe4 1 8 l::txe4
he ended up in a difficult position.
Robatsch thought for about a hour, but
chose a move that was hardly any better.
279
Black is unable to intensify the attack

on the d4 pawn, since his knight cannot
be .released from the pin.
22
14
fxe4
b6
For the moment the e4 pawn is

immune: 15 . . . .i.a6 is threatened, when
Black wins the exchange.
15
1!fa4
f5
But this is inconsistent. If Black was

intending to make this move, there was
no reason for him to weaken his queen
side by . . . b7-b6. Now 1 5 . . . b5 16 'i'a5
would not have improved his position,
but some practical chances were offered
by a pawn sacrifice: 1 5 . . . .i.b7 16 t2Jdxe4
c5.
16
f3
The capture of the c6 pawn was ruled

out by 16 . . . .i.a6.
16
17
/i)xfJ
exfJ
.i.b7
This move loses two tempi, since the

bishop has to guard the f5 pawn, as soon
becomes clear.
18
19
/i)eS
11'c2
1fe6
.i.c8
Black's hopes of easing his defence

somewhat after 23 tDxe4 'iid 5 are
refuted by a reply that comes as a
surprise to him.
23
23
e4
lidl
1i'b3
1i'd6
llle6
a5
Black can also, of course, not pay

any attention to the opponent' s threats,
but to what does this lead?
24 tDxe4
Black resigns. If 24 . . . 1i'd5 there
After 1 9 . . . g6 20 e4 Black's kingside

would have become irreparably weak.
20
21
22
IUi!
This activation of the rook im

mediately decides the outcome. After
23 . . . lDg5 White wins by 24 t2Jxe4, while
if 23 . . . ltJxd4 24 %lf8+ or 23 ... l:tf8 24
:lx:f8+ <2i>xf8 25 ttJxe4 'i'd5 26 'i'f3+.
Nothing is also changed by the attempt
to divert White from his attack: 23 . . . e3
24 ltJe4 'W'd5 25 'i'xe3 t2Jxd4 27 26 thf6+
gxf6 27 'i'g3+, and mate in two moves.
follows 25 I:txg7+ ! xg7 (25 . . . ltJxg7 26

tt:Jf6+) 26 1i'g3+ 27 :n + with
unavoidable mate.
280
This decisive is hard to approve.

Smyslov was probably ex1Jecting the
reply 9 gxf4, when there would have
followed 9 . . . d5 10 cxd5 ttJxd5 1 1 !Dxd5
'i'xd5 with a good position for Black.
However, White, of course, avoids this
thereby placing his
continuation,
opponent in a difficult position.
8 . . . tiJh5 came into consideration.
Game 343
Botvinnik-Smyslov
Moscow 1966
English Opening
1
2
3
4
c4
lLlcJ
gJ
i. g2
e5
d6
ll:lc6
ll:lf6
Usually in this opening (the Closed

Variation of the Sicilian Defence with
reversed colours) Black develops his
king' s knight at e7.
d3
g6
If 5 . . . i.e7 White could have contin

ued 6 :b l and then b2-b4, as I played
against Kostjoerin (Leipzig 1 960).
f4
White makes this move unusually

early which has a certain point. If he
first developed his king's knight at f3,
he would then have to waste a tempo to
revert to the chosen plan.
i.g7
6
0-0
7 lLlfJ
.i.xf4
.i.g4
Instead of this, 9 . .. d5 was hardly

suitable on account of 1 0 cxd5 lDxd5 1 1
tDxd5 Wxd5 1 2 'ii'd2 ! , when Black has
difficulties over the defence of his c7
pawn, e.g. 12 . . . iDd4 13 <it>hl !
However, 9 . . . h6 suggests itself.
10
1i'd2
l:te8
With the f-file half open it is risky to

move the rook from f8, since the f'7
pawn may come under attack.
11
:.aet
:.bs
Such a move is, of course, a waste of

a tempo, although it is made so that the
knight at c6 should not have to cover the
b7 pawn against a possible attack along
the long diagonal.
12
0-0
.ig5
Creating a highly unpleasant pin,

which it will not be easy to get rid of. If,
say, 12 . . . Wd7, then 13 .i.x:f6 .i.x:f6 14
lLlg5, and White sets up dangerous
pressure on the f-file. Therefore Black
decides to eliminate the knight at f3, so
that it will be unable threaten the f'7
pawn.
12
13
exf4
..
..fl.xfJ
i.xtJ
lLle5
The subtle point of Black's move is
that now he is controlling g4, and there
fore if 14 tiJd5 he can reply 14 . . . l:e6
( 1 5 i.g4 is not possible). Had he played
28 1
1 3 . . . CDd4. then after 14 tLldS the threat

of 1 5 i.rl6 i.xf6 16 tLlxf6+ 'I'xf6 17
i.c6 would have been highly un
pleasant.
14
1if4
.i.xh6
1ixh6
.i.xh6
c6
Gaining control of the d5 square,

freeing the rook from having to defend
the b7 pawn, and also threatening a
queen check at b6 - what more can be
ex-pected from one move?
17
18
<ifi>bl
1id2
b3
d4
e4
22
<ifi>gl
22
23
:e2
<tig7
1ih8
lieg4
9'b3
h6
The pressure on the f-file has become

so dangerous, that the attack on the
knight at f6 can be panied, only by
sacrificing a pawn. The simple 15 .i.g2
was threatened, and 14 . . . l:.e6 would
have been met by the decisive 15 .i.d5.
15
16
18
19
20
21
Covering in good time the rook at fl,

and also the g3 pa which would have
been lUlder attack after 22 . . . l:.h8. White
does not exchange his bishop for the
knight at g4, which would merely
strengthen the position of the other
knight on this square and deprive him of
his bishop - an important defensive
piece. But when the knight at f6 is
diverted to another square, this ex
change may prove useful.
%le6
Although it is not very pleasant,

White has to retreat his queen, allowing
18 . . . <itig7 followed by the activation of
the black pieces on the h-file. To begin
advancing his central pawns (and this is
White's only active chance) it is neces
sary that the queen should subsequently
defend the d3 square and the rook at e I .
282
lth8
Now it is not apparent how Black can

strengthen his attack on the king, and he
is still a pawn down. His attempt to win
the central e5 square for his knight leads
merely to simplification, after which
White's advantage becomes obvious.
23
24
25
dxc5
lDd5!
c5
dxc5
rook) 32 d6 White wins easily. His king

should be at gl, whereas in the game it
moves to g2, and the battle is greatly
prolonged.
By threatening to win the exchange

with 26 tDf4, White forces the exchange
of all the minor pieces.
25
26
.i.xg4!
tDxd5
A tactical subtlety, as a result of

which only the heavy pieces are left on
the board.
26
27
28
cxd5
1fc3+
28
29
d4
1fxc5
After 29 l::te7 ltf8 30 'i'xc5 @g8

White's second rank would have been
insufficiently well defended.
29
30
31
'if xd4+
1ixe2
<it>g8
:n
Stronger (as shown by Averbakh)
was 3 1 h4, when after 3 1 . . . l:.hS
(otherwise Black cannot activate his
g2
32
33
d6
\tel+
It was not yet too late to repeat the

position by 32 :n 'i'e2 and to make the
accurate move 3 3 h4, but the truth was
still not apparent to me.
1fxg4
:xe4
This is the whole point. 2S . . . @gS

loses immediately: 29 !txe4 Wxe4 30
:te 1 'ifd4+ (otherwise 3 1 :es+) 3 1
'i'xd4 cxd4 3 2 :es+ <j;g7 3 3 ltxh8
@xh8 3 4 d6. Therefore Black is forced
to block the check with his rook.
31
32
llh5
33
1i'e6!
A sbtle move, the strength of which

was underestimated by White when he
played 29 'i'xc5, and later when he was
considering 3 1 %tf2. Now he cannot play
34 d7 because of 34 . . . 11fd5+!, when he
loses his passed pawn. This is why the
white king should have been at g 1 ,
which would have been achieved by 3 1
h4.
Had Black sought salvation in a
queen ending, then after 33 . . . l:tf5
(instead of 33 . . . We6) 34 :xrs gxf5 3 5
d7 'i'e2+ 36 h3 'iibs+ 3 7 'i'h4 he
would have had to resign.
283
34
l:td2
1ifd7
35
36
37
38
gl
lk2
:.c7
1!ff4!
b6 .
<it>h7
'iff5
<&tg3, and the problem is solved very

easily.
Forcing the exchange of queen, since

38 . . . 'irb l + is hopeless in view of 3 9
:!c l .
After the exchange of queens White
gains a big material advantage in the
rook ending. The passed d-pawn
guarantees him a win.
38
39
40
41
gxf4
.:xa7
d7
<it>d8
43
Black wants to eliminate the possible

operation 44 d81ll+ <it>xd8 45 l:xf7, but
he leaves undefended the d6 square,
which his rook will be unable to control.
43 . . . J:ld2 was more tenacious.
44
<l;e4
l::th5
Black attacks the h-paw while

continuing to defend the fifth rank. If
44 . . . ltd2 there could have followed 45
h4.
lli'xf4
cilg7
ltd5
<it>t'6
45
46
a4
<l;e5
llxh2
Again the best. After 46 <i;d5 l:e2

Black could have continued to resist,
whereas now. in view of the threat of 4 7
<t1"6, he has to agree to tlle exchange of
his g7 pawn for the d7 pawn, i.e. go in
for tlle continuation that he avoided on
tlle 43rd move.
46
47
48
49
Here the game was adjourned. After
it was completed. Smyslov suggested
that 42 a4 was the simplest way to win
but White preferred to improve the
position of his king (in accordance with
Capablanca' s principles). I rejected 42
l:tb7 because of 42 . . . <it?f5, when the
black king is too active.
42 <it>f2
<lJe7
43 <i;f3
Best. After 43 <it>e3 f5 it would have
been hard for White to penetrate witl1
his king to h4. But if now 43 . . .f5 44
d8'if+
l:txti
<it>d6
'1;e7
xd8
%lb2
The white pieces dominate the board.

The loss of the b6 pawn is unavoidable,
284
e.g. 49 ... c8 50 @c6 <it>d8 5 1 !td7+

c8 52 l:td3 :f2 53 l:d4.
49
50
l:te7+
<i&>e8
<i!i>d8
Or 50 . . 5 1 l:te3 :f2 52 e4.

.
51
52
53
54
55
l:td2+
l:tb7
c6
114
l:.xb6
l!xf4
@e7
llb8+
a5
Black resigns
Game 344

Moscow 1966
English Opening
c4
lDcJ
ti:)f3
c5
In the event of 7 . . . d5 8 cxd5 ltJrg4+ 9

g2 1'f6 1 0 1ie2 (or 10 . . . lld3 1 1
h3 ttJgf2 1 2 'i'e3) 1 1 ifxf2 h3+ 12
g l ttJf3+ 1 3 'ifxf3 'i'xf3 14 i.xh3
White has three pieces and a pawn
against a queen, which constitutes a
clear material advantage.
In the game the play becomes
positional in charaeter. In this case the
two bishops and the possibility of
exploiting the half-open f-file make
White's position preferable. However,
Black still has adequate resources for
counterplay.
Botvinnik-Keres
1
2
3
e4
It is essential to forestall . . . d7-d5,

after which the position would be
opened and the white king's situation
could become dangerous.
lhf6
e5
8
9
d3
h3
d6
Since 3 g3 c6 was a favourite contin

uation of Keres, White decided to take a
different course.
3
4
lhc6
.i.c5
gJ
An interesting possibility, but it
would seem to lead to a difficult game
for Black. The well-tried 4-:-. d5 is
sounder.
.
lhxe5
A well-known exchanging combin

ation, which probably favours White.
i.xf2+
If Black simply plays 5 . . . tt:Jxe5 6 d4

'JI e7, then 7 dxe5 (but not 7 dxc5 tbf3
mate) 7 . . . ltJg4 (or 7 . . . 'flxe5 8 .ltg2) 8 e3
tt:Jxe5 9 Ag2 (9 . . lDxc4 10 'i'g4) with a
slight but tangible advantage to White.
.
xf2
ltlxe5
285
h5
A nervy move. Simpler was 9 . . . 04>,

as Uhhnann later played (against
G. Garcia in 1973), gaining a satis
factory position.
10
i.e2
ltlh7
11
'it>g2
It was dangerous to play 1 1 i.xh5
t'.Dg5 with an attack for Black.
h4
11
A dubious undertaking. It is true that
Black gains the g5 square for his knight,

but the h4 pawn will constantly need
defending, making it hard for him to

castle.
12
13
14
lDg5
.i.d 7
g4
i.e3
'i'd2
A routine move. With 1 4 'i'g l

followed by iff2 White could have
hmnediately switched his queen to an
active position, from where it would
have simultaneously
controlled
...
b4
lDe6
kingside, White takes measures to make
tDg5 because of 23 bxc5 dxc5 24 i.a4+

b5 25 xb5 (25 . . . tLlxb5 28 26 .ixb5+
'3;e7 27 .i.xg5).
a5
22 a4
A highly risky step. In the forth
it also impossible on the queenside.

b6
The acceptance
pawn
course,
sacrifice
of the
unfavourable
coming attack on the black king, the

open b-file will be used by White.
temporary
( 1 5 . . . cxb4)
was,
because
Jl.c6
Black was unable to carry out the

planned manoeuvre 2 1 . . . ..i.xdS 22 cxd5
Seeing as it is hard for Black to castle
15
@h2
21
three
important squares : d4. h4 and f7.
14
15
21
Preparing an attack with g4-g5 on the

black king stranded in the centre.
of
of
16
t'.Dd5. when White gains control of the
Perhaps things would have been a little

easier for Black after 22 . . . i.xd5 23 cxd5
central d4 square and easily wins back
tDg5.
23
24
his pawn.
16
17
18
An
:abl
l:thfl
@gt
unsuccessful
.i.c6
i.b7
ltX6
regrouping:
bxa5
lla7
bxa5
1ff2
Defending the weaknesses on the

kingside.
25
the
0-0
g5
The only move. If 25 . . . fxg5, then 26
knight was better placed at e5 than at
i.xd4 cxd4 (26 . . . ltJxd4 27 ..th5+ !) 27
d4.
19
20
lDd5
i.dl
lDcd4
f6
'i'f5 and White' s attack is irresistible.
26
Black intends to exchange bishop for

knight ( . .. .ixd5), and for this he secures
a base at g5 for his knight from e6.
g6
f5
Overlooking a veiled tactical blow by

the opponent. 26 . . . .ieS 27 'i'g2 f5 28
exf5 tbxf5 2 9 ife4 was more tenacious,
286
other than my opponent). However, on

that move I made a decisive oversight.
And so, from the sixth round of the
Team Championship, here is my en
counter with the challenger.
although even t11en Black's position was

probably lost.
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e4
d4
tt)cJ
tt)xe4
tt)gJ
h4
ltlf.l
c6
d5
dxe4
.i.f5
.i.g6
h6
In Games 275, 277 and 329 one can

follow the course of events when White
develops his king's knight at e2 (or h3).
Here 7 f4 is also played.
27 l:tb8!
Black resigns. After 27 . . . 'i'xb8 28
7
8
9
'i'xh4, mate is inevitable.
h5
.i.dJ
lild7
.i.h7
9 .i.c4 e6 10 'ife2 tiJgf6 leads to an

equal game.
Game 345
9
10
Spassky-Botvinnik
.Moscow 1966
Caro-Kann Defence
There are. of course, always two
participants in a match for the World
Championship: the champion, and the
challenger. One has been victorious in a
match, while the other has overcome all
the grandmasters in the qualifying com
petitions. It is the dream of every player
to meet them at the chess board, and this
is what happened with me in the USSR
Team Championship. I will give one of
these games. In the second, with World
Champion Petrosian (on the 1 1 th day of
uninterrupted battles. I had even more
grounds for winning {the way to win on
the 34th move was pointed out by none
.i.xd3
Vxd3
This variation of the Caro-Kann

Defence was a favourite weapon of
Spassky. Tastes differ, but does a con
tinuation deserve such attentio when
over a period of roughly 50 years only
two insignificant changes have occur
red? These are that they began
advancing the white pawn to h5 (instead
of leaving it at h4) and after queenside
castling they began placing the queen at
e2 before playing b l and c2-c4.
I forgot about this latter innovation
and carelessly played . . . gf6 too early
(instead of . . . 'i/c7). After this Black got
into difficulties, since White was able to
establish his knight on e5 .
However, this entire variation was
quite well known to me: back in 1 928 I
287
happened to be the commentator on a

game Grigoriev-Panov, where this same
opening occurred.
li)gf6
in
tt:Jc3 f6 1 9 exf6 i.xf6 2 0 'i'c4 Wb6 2 1

b 4 tLla6 2 2 ttJe4 h e eacountered definite
difficulties. This was :one . of the reasons
why I chose a different continuation. In
addition,
it involves a
cunning
positional idea.
16
f4
c5
17
c4
tllb4
18
i.. xb4
18
19
20
21
.U.xdl
lDe4
illd6+
Forcing events. White cannot allow

. . . c5-c4 (this manoeuvre in fact occur
red in the afore-mentioned Grigoriev
Panov game) .
11
i.. d 2
Here 1 1 .i.f4 has also been played,

but then 1 1 . . . 'i' a5+ 1 2 .id2 'JJkc 7 was
found, leading to the same position that
is reached in the game. Later White
tried to improve on this variation with
1 2 b4 'i'xb4+ 1 3 c3 'ib5 14 c4 ifa5+
15 ii.d2 'i'a6 16 0-0 (Velirnirovic-Hort,
1 97 1 ), but it is not clear whether his
positional advantage compensates for
the sacrificed pawn.
11
12
13
14
0-0-0
1fle2!
lDe5
'ffc7
0-0-0
e6
tDxe5
Events develop differently after

14 . . . ctJb6 ( 1 5 ..ta5 l:t.d5), as in a game
Romanishin-Bagirov ( 1 978), with quite
good play for Black.
15
dxe5
The simplest, . but perhaps not the

strongest continuation. After the black
pawn takes up position on b4, it will be
hard for White to find a comfortable
shelter for his king. For this reason, if
the queens are on Black will always
gain counterplay. 1 8 <t>b 1 should have
been preferred.
lDd5
1 5 . . . ttld7 would seem to be more

natural, but not long before our game,
Petrosian played this against Spassky,
and after 16 f4 i..e7 17 ltle4 ttlc5 1 8
l:txdl+
cxb4
i.e7
'ita>b8
At first sight White has an over

whelming advantage, but this hardly
accords with the truth. The c4 pawn is
288
Spassky played so quickly at this

poin that two obvious conclusions
suggest themselves: he judged the now
inevitable exchanges to be in White's
favour, and at the same time he was
afraid of giving the impression that he
had not seen Black's last move. These
factors probably prevented him from
considering the most sensible decision
and returning his knight to d6.
Now White has to play an endgame a
pawn down.
weak, and the position of the knight at

d6 is insufficiently secure.
22
xf7
22
23
24
25
lbd6
g3
'ifg4
If 22 g3 Black could have replied

22 . . . f6, while now his pieces are activ
ated as a result of the exchange of the ii
pawn for the f4 pawn.
Although White has simultaneously

attacked two pawns, both threats are
easily parried.
25
..
'ifd7
26
'ii?b t
Ji.gs
27
ltlb5
26 fixg7 is not now possible (26 . . .

i.g5+). In addition. Black is intending
to play 26 . . . 'ii'a4 and 27 . .. i.g5+.
28
29
30
ifxdl
<3i>xd1
llxdl
'ifxdl+
.i.e3!
31
32
'it>e2
b3
.i.cl
.i.b2
33
34
35
lbd6
0e4
g4
.i.xe5
'ii?c 7
35
36
37
'ii?d3
cxb5+
White has to be ultra-attentive. For

example, 3 1 b3 .if2 32 g4 JL.c5 33 <it>e2
a6 34 tiJd6 .txd6 35 exd6 b6 36 'it>d3
<3i>b7 37 'ii?d4 <it>c6 38 'ii?e5 'it>d7 would
have led to a lost pawn ending.
Of course, not 26 . . . l:tf2 because of 27

ilxg7 1Wa4 28 .:l.cl !
This move does not yet spoil
anything, but there was no need for it.
Now White loses his e5 pawn, but

Spassky' s intuition did not betray him,
and he has every reason to hope for a
draw.
After 35 ttJc5 .ltxg3 36 tDxe6+ <3i>d6

37 tlJxg7 White loses his knight:
37 . . . <it>e5 38 tDe8 29 <it>e6.
21
28
c2
nn
The rook cannot be taken because of

mate (28 xfl 'i'd3+).
'ii?c6
b5
Sooner or later this capture would

have been forced. Since White's king
could not leave d3 because the exchange
. . . b5xc4, b3xc4 would be unfavourable
for him, he was only able to move his
knight. But then Black, using zugzwang,
289
would reach the central e5 square with

his king.
37
<it>d5
If 37 . . . <itixb5 38 lDd2 <irc6. then 3 9
'ili>e4 ! and ' and White h3s created
an impregnable fortress. Therefore
Black pins his hopes only on the
activation of his king. As for the b5
pawn. for the moment it need not be
taken, since it is of no great importance.
38
e3 , and defend the b4 pawn. Then his

king will be able to head for e5.
41
42
43
44
ft)f.2
ft)g4
lt)f2
li)g4
.i.g5
.i.f4
.i.d6
45
46
47
48
49
b6
ttlxh6
lLif5
cii>e 2
li)b4
gxh6
e5
e4+
e5
<it>d4
The other defensive plan involved 44

ti:)e4. After 44 . . . .i.:f8 45 lDt"2 JJ..e7 46
lDe4 <it>e5 4 7 tt:)f2 lt>f5 48 <ili>c4 <ili>g5 49
ti:)d3 xh5 50 liJxb4 g5 5 1 a4 g4 52
d3 White would probably have gained
a draw, but 44 . . . .i.c7 45 iLlf2 JJ..b6 46
e4 <it>eS 47 liJd2 4 48 <it>c4 <it>e3 49
lDfl+ (or 49 b l .i.a5) 49 . . . <iire2 50
liJg3+ <it>f3 5 1 QJf1 .i.c7 ! would have
secured Black a win.
Therefore Spassky's decision to
exchange the kingside pawns is well
founded, even though it allows Black's
passed pawn to advance.
.i.c5
44
g5
After the game Spassky pointed out a

more convincing drawing possibility: 3 8
<it>e3 il..c7 3 9 f3 ! @d4 4 0 lDt"2 <it>c3 4 1
<it>e2 <it>b2 42 <ifi>d3
43 <it>c2, and
there is nowhere for Black to break
through!
However, it would seem that White' s
plan of exchanging the kiugside pawns
should also have led to a draw.
'iti>xa2
38
39
40
ltlxg5
ltle4
hxg5
.i.f4
.i.b6
There now begins a prolonged

manoeuvring battle witl1 tl1e bishop
against the knight. Black' s aim is to
move his bishop to squares from which
it can both prevent the knight check at
When the game was adjourned, I

analysed only the variations given in the
290
previous note. Therefore Black's later

play was not always consistent, but this
should hardly have affected the result.
50
f5+
51
h6
<"bd5
50 . . . <&ttc3 did not achieve anything

because of 5 1 lDg3 .
This move looks dubious. but how
can it be refuted? After. 5 i . . . e6 52
ttJg4 @f5 53 %6+ 'it>f4 54 &Df7 1l.e7 55
l!Dh6 the white knight cannot break free,
but there is also no way for Black to win
it !
51
52
53
54
55
56
g4
f2
lDdl
f2
lbg4
57
itlf2
58
59
60
61
ttlg4
ttlh2
lbn
lbd2
This position
reached once . . .
Titis position
occurred . . .
has
too
il..e7
.i.g5
<ii>d4
.i.cl
'iit>d5
.i.g5
already
.i.f6
has
been
62
ttlc4
62
63
<ittd t
<it?c3
Ji.d4
64
e2
e3
65
ttla5
Apparently only this ill-fated move

leads to defeat. Aft.er 62 lbfl <&ttc3 63
CDg3 b2 64 d 1 ! xa2 65 'it>c2 e3 66
lDe2 the b5 pawn would have saved
White, since Black does not have . . . a7a5-a4. But now the knighfat c4 will no
longer be able to return to e2, and the
game is decided.
Tlueatening 64 . . . d3 .
Black is intending . . . c2-blxa2.

If instead 65 tDxe3 .i.xe3 66 xe3,
then the pawn ending is hopeless for
White: 66 . . . 'it>b2 67 'it>d3 'it>xa2 68 'it>c4
'it>a3 .
already
65
66 ttlc6
67 ll\e5
68 lbd3
White resigns: the
inevitably queen.
.fi.d4
.i.c5
c.ird4
i.b6
<ii>b2
Ji.c5
'it>xa2
il..e7
b4 pawn will
Game 346
Botvinnik-Balashov
Hastings 1966167
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
c4
lDc3
d4
e3
i.d3
a3
i.xc4
lDf6
e6
.i.b4
0-0
d5
dxc4
.i.d6
This position occurred twice in the

World Championship Return Match of
29 1
196 1 (Games 285 and 286) There it

was mentioned that 7 . . . ilxc3+ is bad for
Black.
f4
After 8 ttJf3 lllc6 9 b4 e5 10 i..b 2

White's position is considered to be
slightly preferable. although Game 286
showed that Black can successfully
fight for equality. In the present game
White tries to test another possibility,
relying on the inexperience of his young
opponent., but this proves to be a
psychological miscalculation.
can hope for some advantage, since in

the endgame his king will be better
placed than the opponent's. But for the
moment the initiative is with Black.
11
12
tLlfJ
lhd8
.i.d7!
The threat of 13 . . . :cs is highly

unpleasant, and White must be attentive.
13
ii.d2
14
tLle5
%%.c8
The only way! After 1 4 i.d3 i.xe3

White would simply have lost a pawn.
14
c5!
Threatening 9 . . . cxd4 when Black

will be better mobilised. Therefore
White must not avoid the possible
exchange of queens.
9
10
dxc5
b4
i.xc5
10
11
.
'l'xd8
i..b6
A tempting. but risky move. The b4

bishop. c3 laright and e3 pawn are insuf
ficiently well defended which is subtly
exploited by Black. 10 f3 was correct.
This. strictly speaking is the idea of

the entire variation. Theoretically White
292
tllg4
This simplification eases White's de

fence. However, even after the strongest
continuation 14 . . . ..ie8 ! he would have
maintained the balance (in the only
possible way!): 1 5 'it>e2 ttJc6 16 ltJxc6
.i.xc6 17 :hg 1 i.xg2 1 8 .i.xe6 !
15
16
17
18
tllxg4
lDe5
ll\xd7
e2
:ixc4
llc7
tllxd7
It has become clear that Black's

initiative has petered out, and it would
have been simpler for him to accept the
inevitability of a draw.
18
tDt'6
: ct
19
20
.
21
l!hdl
Ael
lid8
!lcd7
t'.Dd5
22
23
t'.Dxd5
l:txd5
r!xd5
l:xd5
24
a4
Black would not have achieved any

thing with 2 1 ... lLlg4 on account of 22
1.lxd7 l:Ixd7 23 t'.LJa.4 ! , but' the exchange
of knights leads merely to a loss of time.
2 1 . . .l:txd l was the simplest.
23 . . . exd5 was more circwnspect, but

Black, naturally, did not want to give
himself an isolated pawn. It transpires
that White' s opening idea has in the end
proved successful - his king is more
active than the opponent's.
27
28
29
30
e4
b5
i.d2
lia8
lld7
i_e7
.i.d6
b6
Now Black is left with a weak pawn

at a7, which, with the bishops on the
board, makes the endgame hopeless for
him. In the rook ending after 30 . . . .i.c5
3 1 .te3 .i.xe3 3 2 ct>xe3 b6 3 3 axb6 axb6
34 l1b8 White also should have been
able to win, but more accurate play
would have been required than in the
bishop ending.
31
32
33
34
a6
.ic3
h3
llc8
i.c5
<li;e7
<Ji;d6
f6
24
An obvious move, but most probably

t he losing one; it was all due to a
tactical oversight. By 24 . . . l:.d7 25 a5
.W.c7 Black would have retained a
defensible positioD:- for the moment not
allowing the enemy rook into his rear.
25
26
bxa6 29 i..a 5) White's pressure would

have intensified
26
<MT
a5
l:lc8
.td8
Only here did Balashov notice that

after 26 . . . a6 27 b5 (27 . . . axb5 28 a6
293
34
lk7
An oversight in time trouble, but

defeat was already inevitable.
35
36
37
38
39
e5+
lig8
Jhg7+
klg8+
llh8
Cit>d7
f5
<it>d8
Ci&>d7
Jl.e7
Black tries to activate his rook, which

leads to the loss of his a7 pawn.
40
41
42
ltc2+
Ad4
lla2
@dJ
lla8
Black resigns
Game 347
Liberzon-Botvinnik
Nloscow Team Championship 1967
Sicilian Defence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e4
lhfJ
d4
lhxd4
tLlc3
.i.g5
1i'd2
c5
d6
cxd4
ltlf6
ltlc6
e6
h6
11
12
12
game of my match with Bronstein

( 195 1 ), but after a disaster against Keres
in the Alekhine Memorial Tournament
( 1 956) I again decided to test this
variation in a team match. This is all
described in more detail in the notes to
Game 1 84 (with Bronstein).
Axf6
gxf6
0-0-0
In 1 956 Larsen chose against me a
move that is less dangerous for Black 9 l:dl (No.243).
9
10
f4
.i.d7
In a game with me in 1 952, Suetin

developed his light-square bishop at c4
(No.2 1 5).
I first employed this move in the 6th
8
9
@bl
J..e2
a6
h5
In my game with Bondarevsky ( 1 9th

USSR Championship, 1 95 1 ) I tried to
manage without this move,
and
wrongly, since the white bishop should
not be allowed to go to h5. However. it
is quite possible to defer . . . h6-h5 until
White has played .i.e2.
'8'c7
Against Keres I chose 12 . . . 'i'b6, but

he retreated his knight - 1 3 ltlb3 , and
the queen turned out to be badly placed
at b6.
13
%lhfl
il.e7
The most accurate. In the event of

queenside castling it would have been
easier for Wnite to find a plan. In
particular, he has :f3-h3, attacking the
h-pawn.
Black's aim is for the moment not to
determine the position of his king, since,
for example, after the exchange of
queens his king may come in useful in
the centre.
14
15
16
llf3
!fxd4
ltlxd4
9'c5
1fd2
A situation that is normal in this

variation: Black offers the exchange of
queens. After all , his king is secure and
better placed, and the two bishops may
294
have. their say. For the same reasons,

White, naturally, avoids going into an
endgame.
16
17
lleJ
.i.c6
1la5
Now Black prepares to castle long.

which was unfavourable immediately
( 1 7 . 0-0-0 1 8 l2Jd5). However, White
skilfully prevents the enemy king from
moving to the queenside. Therefore
1 7 . . . h4 should possibly have been
considered.
18
19
ltd8
-*.c4
Planning at the appropriate moment

to attack the e6 pawn by f4-f5 . Black, of
course, takes prophylactic measures.
..
19
20
21
9'e2
.i.a2
22
f5
.i.d7
1lc8
A forced (sooner or later) retreat.

After 2 1 liJd5 exd5 22 exd5 f8 23
l:he7 Black would have won by
23 . . . ilg4.
21
f8
Somehow Black has just managed to
complete the development of his pieces.
Not without reason, White avoids 22
e5 fae5 (but not 22 . d5 23 f5) 23 fxe5
d5, after which his bishop at a2 is shut
out of tl1e game. The manoeuvre that he
has begun leads to the winning of the h5
pawn.
. .
22
23
1:1.hJ
W'e5
.i.d8!
After 23 . . h4 24 'ii'f2 Black would

have lost a pawn without any compen
sation. Now, however, the similarity of
the ideas in this game (although here the
queens are still on the board) with
No. 2 1 5 becomes apparent.
.
The same position has been reached

as in my game with Bronstein. More
over, White both times chose the same
move order, and it was only Black who
slightly varied his replies.
18
aJ!
This, it turns out, is what my

opponent had prepared. Bronstein
played 1 8 f3, allowing Black to castle
queenside, which is now ruled out after
1 8 . . . 0-0-0 1 9 b4 1Wb6 ( 1 9 . . . 'i'xa3 20
ttJd5 'iia4 2 1 l2Jb6+) 20 ttJd5 exd5 2 1
exd5 .1xd5 2 2 l:txe7 White has an
obvious advantage.
The Encyclopaedia thinks that 1 8 f5
should also be considered.
24
25
26
27
28
l;Ixb5
'i'xh5
1fh6+
fxe6
ifh7+
28
29
liJe2
xh5
.i.a5
c:J;;e7
fxe6
I think that 28 'ifg7+ <it>d8 29 ttJe2

would have caused Black more prob
lems, since 29 . . . 'i'xe4 leads to mate
after 30 'i'f8+.
295
d8
f5
34
The point of the manoeuvre begun

with 23 . . . .td8 ! ; 30 exf5 does not work
because of 30 . . . 1ixe2 . After 30 it:)g3 f4
3 1 ltJe2 i.c6 3 2 'i'g8+ 30 rJ;c7 the active
placing of Black's pieces compensates
for the lost material.
However, my opponent finds a clever
combination. which places Black on the
verge of defeat.
30
lLld4
34 . . . .tt.c7 seems forced, but then after

35 'i'g5+ Black has to part with his
bishop. But he has a possibility of
'selling' it more dearly.
34
i.xe6
llfl
fxe4
.i.xe6
ifxe6
1i'e8
36 . bxc3
Again the only defence. If 3 3 . . . e8

34 'ii'h5+, and White regains the piece,
while retaining all the advantages of his
position 32. 33 . . . 'ife7 is not possible: 34
f7 'iie8 3 5 'iih4+. and mates.
i.cJ!
Since 3 5 bxc3 loses the rook (3 5 . . .

ifb5+ and 36 . . . 'ifxfl), Black forces the
enemy queen to abandon the critical g7
square. Here the continuation of the
attack by 3 5 'ifxb7 does not achieve
anything after 35 . . . .i.d4 36 c3 i.xc3 !
(but not 36 . . . .i.c5 3 7 b4 i.e3 38 :n,
and Black is in zugzwang) 3 7 bxc3
I:txc3 . All the same. Black has at least
equal chances. and White has to restrict
himself to regaining the piece.
</;c7
35 1i g5+
35 . . . 'i'e7 was not possible due to 36
:tf8+, while if 35 . . . d7 White could
have replied, as in the game, 36 bxc3 .
There is no other move. After

30 . . . 'i'xe4 3 1 it:)xe6+ jLxe6 32 %.:.xd6+
Black would have had to resign,
whereas now he is threatening by . . . d6d5 to consolidate his position .
31 lLlxe6+! 31
Perfectly logical : the bishop covering
the black king is exchanged, and White
seizes control of the seventh rank and
creates mating tlueats.
31
32
33
1Vg7
b8
Despite being a pawn down, the

weakening of the enemy king' s position
gives Black sufficient counterplay.
296
37 1id5
38 :et
39 1Wd4
:c6
1fh8
any opening surprises, but, alas, he does

not succeed in this.
This leads immediately to a draw, but

after 39 Ihe4 Wxc3 40 ifd3 llb6+ or 39
'i'xe4 'i'xc3 40 'ile8+ ct/a7 4 1 'i'e3+
b6+ 42 c l 'i'h8 Black's chances
would have been no worse.
39
40
ltxe4
40
41
42
l:le8+
Jle7+
1H'xh2
Or 40 1Yxe4 lhc3.
3
4
5
6
7
it.gs
lbbd2
J.h4
.i.g3
8
9
e3
.i.e2
9
10
hxg3
Q)f6
d6
h6
g5
ll'lb5
This standard manoeuvre had already

occurred in a training game of mine
with Petrosian (cf. Volume 2), and also
in Games 268 and 325, but the first
main and exact predecessor was the
game Petrosiari-Botvinnik (1 9th USSR
Championship, 1 95 1 ).
In the resulting simple play, great
significance is acquired by the posit
ional subtleties, typical of this variation.
With these my opponent was probably
not familiar.
e6
A not altogether successful move. In

the
afore-mentioned
195 1
game
Petrosian developed his bishop at d3.
1ixg2
<t/c7
<iltb8
The only way! 42 . .. c8 would have

lost to 43 'i'h8+, and 42 . .. <it>d8 to 43
J;txb7.
ttlxg3
g4
<l/c7
l::te8+
Draw agreed
43
Game 348
Levit-Botvinnik
1
2
3
d4
g6
.i.g7
ttlf3
cJ
White deviates from the more com
plicated continuations, in order to avoid
297
This move suggests itself, although it

seems rather risky. By continuing now
1 1 ill g l ! h5 12 .i.d3 followed by ltle2

White would still have retained a
satisfactory position.
11
White is unable to find a clear plan,

and so he makes useful moves. For
Black it only remains to activate his
king's rook.
lhb4
After this 'natural' move White' s

king's knight is shut out o f the game,
and Black's chances (in both the
middlegame, and the endgame) become
preferable.
11
12
13
14
15
11c2
0-0-0
bl
.:ct
l:lh6
22
b5
lt:\c6
\ie7
.i.d7
a5
Black' s entire plan of development.,

including this move signalling the start
of an offensive against the enemy king,
also occurred then, in 1 95 1 . Black, of
course, does not intend to castle on the
queenside, where his king might come
under attack.
<ifi>t'8
16 .i.b5
Here the king feels quite safe, better
than after castling on either side. As for
Black' s king's rook, in time it will come
into play via h6 .
17
1'a4
lia7
18
c4
lLlb8
19
J.. xd7
1ixd7
Preventing b2-b4, just in case.

Black does not object to the
exchange of the light-square bishops.
A perfectly justified offer to
exchange queens: in the endgame Black
has clearly the better chances.
20
1fa3
<it?g8
21
22
tbe4
l:tbdl
a4
On prophylactic grounds Black

removes his king from the a3-f8
diagonal.
Here is the manoeuvre, predicted in

the note to Black's 16th move, and
typical of the plan chosen by him.
23
d5
24
lt:\cJ
25
26
lLlb5
dxe6
White is striving for the initiative and

wants to complicate the play, but the
main thing that this move does is to
activate Black's bishop. In his time,
Tarrasch. commenting on a similar
situation, concluded his note with the
words: 'mate on g2 (there Black had a
light-square bishop - M.B.) will be
inevitable'. Here too in the end a cat
astrophe awaits White on the b2 square.
'i'e8
23
lla5
Not fearing 25 b4, which would

weaken still further the a 1-h8 diagonal.
Now Black is intending to bring his
knight into play (in this case the a4
pawn must be defended).
298
tba6
fxe6
27
35
36
37
38
tLld4
My opponent evidently realised that

a fter 27 b4 l:txb5 ! 28 cxb5 'iixb5. his
position would become altogether
hopeless.
27
28
tLlb5
b6
d5
29
30
31
tLld4
tLle2
lLlf4
c5
lLlb4
:as
This breakthrough, activating Black' s

pieces, enables him to create a decisive
attack.
3 2 cxd5 exd5 3 3 ttJxd5 (or 3 3 lDf5)

would be advantageous to Black in view
of 33 . . ...e4+, and so he can unhurriedly
defend his back rank.
32
33
lLldJ
lhdJ
liel
f4
lhe4
i.d4
fif7
dxe4
e5!
Now the doubling of the black rooks

on the b-file is unavoidable.
39
40
fxe5
:b6
l:tet
l:.ab8
White resigns
Tarrasch was correct. But Black was

also correct, when he drove White's
king's knight to the edge of the board.
Right to the end of the game it remained
there as a static observer.
Game 349
lDxd3
b5
Botvinnik-Polugayevsky
USSR Spartakiad
lvloscow 1967
1
2
3
4
A little trick, consisting in the fact

t hat White cannot reply 34 cxd5 due to
the loss of his queen after 34 . . . b4. As a
result the b-file is finally opened.
34
35
:d2
e4
bxc4
If 3 5 'iixc5 the simplest is 3 5 . . . a3 ,

sweeping away the last obstacles on the
long diagonal, or else 35 . .. l1b8.
c4
lLlfJ
lLlc3
eJ
c5
tLlc6
g6
I first employed this variation in the

4th game of my World Championship
Match with Petrosian (No. 309). There
Black prevented the advance of the d
pawn to the fifth rank by 4 . . .tDf6 5 d4
cxd4 6 exd4 d5 (incidentally, this pos
ition can also be reached in the Caro
Kann Defence). In that game after 7
cxd5 tiJxd5 8 3 ltJxc3 9 Ac4 Black
had problems. 7 i..g5 lDe4 8 cxd5 ttJxc3
9 bxc3 'i'xd5 10 'i'b3 is also possible.
Polugayevsky decides not to prevent
the advance of White's central pawn,
and the game transposes into a King's
Indian Defence.
299
4
. 5
6
d4
.i.e2
.ig1
d6
In the given situation White' s king' s

bishop i s better placed at e2 than at g2.
6
7
d5
tLlf6
tLla5
7 lle5 8 CLlxe5 dxe5 9 e4 would

have promised White some advantage,
but moving the laright to the edge of the
board also has its negative points.
. ..
e4
It would seem that, compared with

the usual variations of the King' s Indian
Defence White has lost a tempo, since
he has advanced his e-pawn is two
moves instead of one. But how much
time will Black have to spend, for his
queen's knight to become a fighting
piece!
8
..
0-0
9 0-0
9 h3 also came into consideration,
not allowing the enemy bishop to go to
g4.
.
.i.g4
10 .i.e3
White is now intending to advantage
ously continue 1 1 tbd2. Therefore Black
must not forgo the opportunity to double
the white pawns although he pays for
this a high price- he has to part with his
light-square bishop.
il.xfJ
10
e5
11 gxf3
A natural move. After f3 -f4 Black
prevents the possibility of f4-f5, which
could have become a constituent part of
an attack on the kingside. Now,
however, White exchanges his doubled
pawn.
.
12
f4
12
13
14
.i.xf4
.i.dJ
16
bJ
16
17
18
<ii>g2
The alternative plan - 12 dxe6 fxe6

1 3 e5 or 1 3 f4 - would also have left
White with a slight advantage, but he
prefers to retain his central d5 pawn,
continuing to play for the exclusion of
Black's queen' s knight.
exf4
11'e7
tLld7
If 14 . . . tllli5 there would have

followed 1 5 d2 ( 1 5 . . . i.xc3 16 .i.xc3
tLlf4 17 hl with an obvious advantage
to White 33).
tLle5
15 :c1
White does not fear the exchange of
the lmight at es for his bishop at d3 the fewer the pieces on the board, the
greater the significance of one of them
being shut out of the game.
h5
a6
.i.b1
If Black really doesn't want to
eliminate the light-square bishop, how
can White deny himself the pleasure of
retaining it !
300
18
19
1le2
queenside merely frees White's hands in

the centre.
l:lab8
'i'd7
30
31
<irh2
tiJdJ
tid8
<"atrb8
3 1 .. .\Wc7
was
more
tenacious,
although it would . not have made any
fundamental difference.
20
.td2
With this move Wl1ite begins a

systematic preparation of e4-e5. All his
pieces, apart from his king. queen and
I i ght-square bishop, will be aimed at the
square that the pawn is striving to
occupy.
20
21
22
23
24
dl
f4
h3
f2
b5
tDb7
g4
lDf6
:.be8
32
33
Black is forced to give up any plans

or active play on the queenside, in order
Io try and prevent the breakthrough of
1 he enemy forces. From now on the
sights of both players will be mainly
I rained on the e5 square.
25
26
27
28
29
:eel
'ifo
:e2
ltfel
.tc2
32
l!e7
:res
h7
.t.d4
b4
This strategy can hardly be correct.

Nothing compelled Black to make this
advance, and the closing of the
301
e5
White has carried out the advance of

his central pawn, and his advantage
becomes decisive.
hl
1rc7
dxe5
Typical of Polugayevsky' s style. He

could still have stuck to waiting tactics
and not forced the play. Now Black is
bound to lose material.
34
35
fxe5
.l:xe5
35
36
ltxe5
.i.xe5
In 1 935, in a game against Lisitsyn in

the 2nd Moscow International Tourna
ment, I overlooked the possibility of
such a manoeuvre (while the game was
still in progress it was mentioned to me
by Capablanca himself). But here I
made use of Capa 's adVice.
lbe5
lixe5
37
i.f4
ktf5
38
39
i..xc7
i.. xd8
llxfJ
lleJ
40
41
42
43
44
<t>gl
.i.dl
ll)f2
fl
i.g5
lte2
:d2
ll:\f8
li)d7
:xa2
The resulting endgame is hopeless

for Black. However, his position also
crumbles after 37 . . . f6 38 i.xe5 fxe5 3 9
'i'e3 .
In this way Black at least penetrates

onto the second rank with his rook. If
instead 39 . . . .fixh3+ 40 g2 l:te3 4 1
h3, then 42 JJ..c7 followed by 43
lDxc5, and White wins easily.
ll:\dJ
i.e7
h4
el
.*.d6
ll:\b2!
50
51
52
53
54
55
l:tal
ll:\a4
ttle5
i.xe5
fxe5
lLlxc5
as
d2
a2+
<ite3
Black resigns
Game 3 50
Taimanov-Botvinnik
Black has a rook and two pawns

against two bishops, which nominally is
not so bad, but the weakness of the c5
pawn leaves him no saving chances.
45
46
47
48
49
50
This move, found in adjoununent

analysis, decides the game. In view of
the threat of 5 1 tia4 followed by 52
i.c7, the black rook has to leave the c5
pawn undefended.
USSR Spartakiad
A1oscow 1967
Grtinfeld Defence
g7
lla5
f6
1
2
3
4
<i;f7
d4
c4
lf)tJ
lLlbd2
d5
c6
lLlf6
White is aiming to deviate from the

well-trodden variations of the Queen' s
Gambit.
g7
What can Black do? He is forced to

admit that he has no useful moves.
g6
Now something resembling a Grtin

feld Defence arises. but in a situation
that is more favourable for White, since,
instead of being at c3, his queen's
knight is at d2. Therefore the realisation
of Makogonov' s idea, involving b2-b4,
promises White more than in the
conventional set-ups of this defence.
..tg7
5 e3
6 . .i.e2
7 0-0
8 b4
302
0-0
b6
The outcome is that the opening

battle has gone in White's favour.
.i.b7
The alternative 8 . . . c5 (Novotelnov

Fbralidze, 1 949) led to _complicated
play, and is also probably advantageous
l o White.
9
10
i.b2
lLlxe4
lLle4
This exchange is of no benefit to

White. The simplest was 10 c5
( 10 . . . bxc5 1 1 bxc5 t'Llxc5 1 2 dxc5
il.xb2 1 3 .tlb l ), after which it is not easy
for Black to find a successful plan.
10
11
dxe4
iLld2
But not 1 1 t'Llg5, which would have

been answei:ed by l l . . . c5. with favour
able prospects for Black.
11
12
13
c5
1ib3+
14
d5
f5
iLld7
<t>h8
An amusing oversight, as a result of

which White not only loses his advan
tage, but even immediately ends up in a
lost position.
14
cxd5
303
15
.txg7+
'it>xg7
Here my opponent now saw that his

planned combination - 16 c6 .i.xc6 1 7
'iic 3+ would not achieve anything after
17 . . . l:tf6. After this, instead of winning
a piece for two pawns, White would
simply be two pawns down. He had to
quickly adjust, in order to be just one
pawn down.
16
.i.b5
bxc5
17
18
19
20
bxc5
'i'cJ+
iLlbJ
:act
:cs
l:if6
g8
a6
21
.i.xd7!
Towards the end of this competition I

was feeling rather tired, and so I
avoided the more complicated 16 . . . liJf6
1 7 c6 c8, which would evidently have
been more consistent. As a result of
Black' s tendency to simplify, White
acquires certain equalising chances.
White' s knight will be clearly

stronger than tl1e black bishop, and this
gives him definite compensation for the
lost pawn.
21
22
:tfdl
11'xd7
llc6
23
lDa5
f4
Black . is already forced to fight for

the initiative since in some cases White
could have activated his rooks on the b
file. But now the game transposes into a
double rook ending with a minimal
advantage to Black.
24
25
exf4
lDxc6
After 25 . . . 'i'xc6
regains his pawn.
26
27
28
11fe5
11fxe4
lbd7
llxf4
Jlxc6
26
ife5
Even here it was still possible to

resist successfully with 3 1 l:r.d2. The
move played allows the exchange of the
weak e4 pawn for the important g2
pawn.
31
32
33
xet
lla4
%1.xel+
lk2
33 l:txe4 really was better, but my

opponent did not want to admit to the
inaccuracies committed.
White
33
34
35
dxe4
llfxc5
fxe3
h4
e3
llxg2
h5!
Now White has a limited choice: a

hopeless rook ending, in which after 36
l:xa6 l:.g4 Black creates two connected
passed pawns on the h- and g-files, or a
pawn ending, where it appears that all is
not yet clear . . .
36
ct>rt
So, the choice is made - the pawn

ending.
36
37
38
29
llxg4
'i&'g2
llg4
hxg4
II.et
A dubious move. It would appear to

lead to White ' s king approaching the
centre with gain of tempo, but in reality
the centralisation of the king weakens
the kingside pawns which inspires
Black with new hopes. After 29 lhc5
llxc5 30 g3 f7 3 1 l:td2 or 30 . . . :es 3 1
lla7 Black's winning chances would
have been microscopic.
29
30
31
<t>ft
lid4
. ltct
38
304
g5!
After 38 . . . f6 39 Ciftg3 5 40 e4+

Black would have been unable to count
on more than a draw: (40 . . . xe4 4 1
c.t;xg4 e5 4 2 g5 4 3 xg6 e4 44
h5 etc.).
39
Game 3 5 1
Botvinnik-Boleslavsky
USSR Spartakiad
Moscow 1967
English Opening
h5
1
2
3
4
If 3 9 hxg5 <it>g6, and Black wins

easily, while after 39 <it>g3 g6 40
\xg4 gxh4 4 1 @xh4 <it1'5 42 <it>g3 e4
43 <fi>f2 as White loses due to inevitable
1.ugzwang.
39
40
c1>g3
lDf6
e5
c6
d6
Regarding 4 . . . e4, see Game 288.
5
6
7
<l;g7
h7
c4
ltlc3
g3
ft)fJ
Of course, not 40 . . . 'it;h6 41 <it>xg4,

when it is not White, but Black, who is
i n zugzwang (4 1 . . . as 42 e4 a4 43 eS).
But now it is White who is in zug1.wang, and for the reason that the
doomed g4 pawn deprives the white
king of both important squares f3 and
h3.
.i.g2
0-0
d3
g6
.*.g7
41
42
<it>xg4
e4
<it>h6
This move was sealed by Wltite. The

result of the game is so obvious, that I
took the liberty of departing from the
usual norms of behaviour and immed
iately convinced my opponent that
further resistance was hopeless. The
point is that after 42 . . aS 43 a3 e6 44 a4
c5 4S <it>f5 xhS 46 xe5 g4 47 4
<hh4 48 e5 g3 49 f3 h3 50 e6 g2 5 1
c7 g l 'i' 5 2 e8if 'i'fl+ White loses his
queen, as I was 'taught' back in the 1 1th
game of my 1937 match with Grigmy
Levenfish.
.
White resigns.
The
variation
employed
by
Boleslavsky in the present game makes
it difficult for White to transpose into
the King's Indian Defence, since after 7
d4 e4 8 tiJd2 d5 Black's e4 pawn is
already defended. Even so, with 7 e4
followed by 8 d4 White could have
achieved this. But was it really advan
tageous to aim for the King's Indian, an
opening of which my opponent had
made such a subtle study? . . .
7
8
9
30S
.i.d2
1fcl
lDbd7
0-0
9 l:tbl , preparing b2-b4.

possible.
lie8
9
1. 0
knight at IB, and in addition Black is

behind in the development of his
queenside pieces.
is also
ihgS
13
A shrewd move. White provokes
14
15
. . . h7-h6, which, generally speaking.

weakens Black's position, and at the
given moment is simply not possible:
after 10 . . . h6 11 l2Jge4 the d6 and h6
pawns are simultaneously attacked. and
1 1 . . . lL\xe4 12 lL\xe4 d5 does not save
Black in view of 1 3 ti:)d6.
1.0
11
12
13
b4
cxd5
e4
16
ihfJ
dxe4
lldl
h6
dxe4
'ith7
This move begins a prolonged battle

for the open central file and the d5
square.
16
17
18
ttlf8
d5
cxd5
'ifb2
.i.eJ
i.d7
ile7
White 's pieces are better prepared for

tl1e occupation of d5, than Black's for
the manoeuvre of his laright to d4, and
also White's entire force is much more
active than the opponent's.
18
20
hJ
tiJd2
22
23
'iib3
::txd7
19
b6
.i.c6
fiad8
If 20 . . . ttJe6, then 2 1 ttJd5 CDxd5 22

exd5 e4 23 'ilfb3 is advantageous to
White.
ife6
21 ihc4
l:d7
This exchange is necessary, to retain

control of the d-file.
The only plan in this type of position.
It unexpectedly turns out that it is not
Black. but White who is playing the
King' s Indian Defence with reversed
colours. If now the black pawn adv
ances to d4, the position favours White,
as was demonstrated many times (with
reversed colours, and hence for Black ! )
by Boleslavsky, by Geller, and b y Tal.
Therefore my opponent exchanges
pawns in the centre, but then the white
knight at c3 proves more active than the
23
24
25
:dl
lld5
lL\8xd7
ll.f8
So, the central d5 square has been

occupied, whereas d4 is inaccessible to
the enemy pieces, and this gives White
an obvious positional advantage. Now
Black has to parry the threat of 26 li:Jc7.
306
25
26
:cs
.i.cl
Since the d4 square is completely

secure, White has an opportwrity to
I ransfer his bishop to a more active

position, from where it will threaten
Black's central pawn.
i.xc6 and 34 'i'd3+, or 3 3 'ifxe6 fxe6

34 .i.xc6 l::txc6 3 5 :xd7+).
31
26
27
28
lie8
lid6
i.b2
lixd6
Although, as a rule, exchanges in a

cramped position ease the defence, here
this exchange merely increases White 's
advantage, since it gives Black new
problems, associated with the dangerous
position of his king.
28
29
i.xd6
f4
White avoids a cunning trap, typical

of Boleslavsky 's resourceful style (29
0ixb6 lbxb6 30 1i'xe6 fxe6 3 1 .:xd6
11Jc4, with a material advantage for
Black), and he begins play on the
kingside, which was planned back on
Lhe 26th move.
29
il.f8
Of course, not 29 . exf4 30 gxf4
i.xd5 3 1 ifxdS, and Black's position
becomes desperate.
..
30
f5
1fe8
If 30 . . . gxfS 3 1 exf5 'i'xfS, then 32

t2Je3 and White wins (3 2 iie6 3 3
fxg6+
White also retains the advantage after

this, but 3 1 l:Ifl or even the preparatory
3 1 a3 was stronger still. When the
opponent is bound hand and foot, there
is no reason to force events.
31
32
33
fl
J:tf2
fxg6
i.g7
By this point it had transpired that,

for the victory of our team in the
competition. it was evidently sufficient
for me to gain a draw. This explains that
I had to retain an advantage, just in case,
but to avoid complicated continuations
which would involve some risk.
33
34
35
<ifi>h2
bxa5
<ifi>h8
a5
It was simpler to play 3 5 a3, main

taining control of c5 . White exchanges
on a5. to create a weak pawn in Black's
position. This pawn is won, but the
opponent acquires hopes of a draw.
. . .
307
35
36
i.a3
bxa5
il.xd5
37
1ixd5
37
...
lDb6
Peace was concluded on the directive

of the two team captains.
38
39
40
ifxa5
1ic3
11f xa3
lDc4
lDxa3
l:a8
Botvinnik-Toran
Draw agreed.
Exploiting the very first opportunity,

Boleslavsky takes play into an ending
with opposite-colour bishops.
Game 3 52
Palma de Mallorca 1967

Sicilian Defence
If now White were able to play his

bishop to d5, he would gain winning
chances. but Boleslavsky skilfully pre
vents this.
41
42
43
44
1id6
flc7
1ib7
\id5
44
45
46
47
1ib3
1fdt
lld2
lld8
llc8
ltb8
In a team competition, and especially

at the end of the last round, the
unwritten rules state that you cannot
take an independent decision: to agree a
draw or adjourn the game, in order in
analysis (if it is required) to seek a way
to play on. For the moment our captain
was considering this question . . .
l:d8
llb8
:ds
1
2
3
4
5
6
c4
e4
lDfJ
d4
lDxd4
thc3
g6
c5
lic6
cxd4
lDf6
lhxd4
At one time this exchange was con

sidered to be something of a revelation
in this seemingly thoroughly studied
variation. Persistent searches of forcing
continuations were made, to try to
demonstrate an advantage for White.
Fortunately, I did not remember all
these investigations, and I chose an out
wardly unpretentious variation, which
nevertheless guarantees White a slight
advantage. However, in our time it is
almost impossible to think up something
new at such an early stage of the game.
308
7
8
9
10
11xd4
.i.e3
i.e2
'i'd2
11
.i.xg4
mentioned game after 1 2 0--0 lic8 1 3 b3

b5 Spassky sacrificed the exchange - 14
CiJxb5 .i.xal 15 :x:al, but he lost his
opening advantage, and the game
quickly ended in a draw.
d6
.ig7
0-0
lhg4
Only after the toumamnt did I learn

that this position had already occurred
in the games Cardoso-Tai ( 1 958), Tal
Gurgenidze ( 1 959) and Tal-Ghitescu
( 1 960 ), the last being one that I should
have seen at the Leipzig Olympiad, but
somehow it did not draw my attention.
Black's other reply, 10 . . . .i.e6, was
employed against me by Matulovic in
the second round of the 'Match of the
Century' (Belgrade 1 970). After 1 1 f3
'ti'a5 12 tiJb5 'i'xd2+ 1 3 xd2 tDd7
White could have gained the better
ending with 14 CiJc7 l'tac8 1 5 lixe6 fxe6
1 6 :tabl followed by f3-f4.
In all the above games where Black
played 10 . . . lig4, White replied 1 1
.d4. which led to some complications.
By exchanging Black's knight, White
deprives his opponent of any counter
play. And again I was unaware that a
few months earlier this exchange had
occurred in the game Spassky-Petrosian
( 1 967). True, as the reader will see,
there the idea of the exchange was
completely different . . .
To be fair, I should mention that,
whereas is those years I was not familiar
with the latest findings, my opponent
was never strong in opening theory.
11
..
.i.xg4
Naturally, not l l . . .i.xc3 1 2 'i'xc3

,.txg4 because of 1 3 i.h6.
12
..td4
This is now essential since White

must retain his knight. In the afore-
12
i.e6
13
14
.i.xg7
0-0
'i!i?xg7
<it>g8
16
17
f4
llf3
f6
'itth8
Toran fails to find a good plan, but it

is hard to say whether Black has one in
this position. After, for example,
12 . . . i.xd4 13 'i'xd4 i.e6 14 0-0 'i'a5
1 5 l:fel .:tfe8 1 6 b3 (Keene-Schmid,
1 973) White's chances are better.
Of course, 14 . . . ..i.xc4 was not pos

sible due to 1 5 ifd4+, but 14 . . . f6 was
definitely stronger, not wasting time on
moving the king.
if as
15 b3
Here the king feels safer; it does not

have to fear either the opening of the g
file, or, in the event of tactical compli
cations, the capture by the knight of the
e7 pawn with check. However, in play
ing this Black admits that his 1 4th move
was inaccurate.
309
18
D.el
ktg8
Black, as after 23 :xc5 dxc5 24 lldl the

invasion of the rook is unavoidable.
:ac8
This too is not the best. 22 . . . J::t.c7 was

essential, in order after 23 e5 dxe5 24
fxe5 to reply 24 . . . f5, and if 25 :edl
:gc8, retaining, despite the passive pos
ition, chances of a successful defence.
If 19 f5 Black is ready to reply
1 9 . . i.f7 .
19
20
:dJ
lDd5
Strictly speaking, this is hardly the

best plan - in the endgame it will not be
easy for White to convert his positional
advantage. ut from the practical point
of view this decision was virtually
forced, if it is borne in mind that the
Soviet grandmasters had arrived late at
the tournament and that the present
game began less than 24 hours after our
plane touched down on the island of
Mallorca, so that there was no question
of acclimatisation and rest . . .
20
21
:xd2
llc6
22
'ifxd2
.txd5
23
24
25
e5
fxe5
dxe5
l:te6
A little psychological trick, which the

Spanish master did not see through. If
White had played 25 l::td7, and after
25 . . . l:tb8 26 ' Black would of
course have replied 26 . . . fS, when he
would still have been able to defend his
position. Therefore now too 25 . . .f5 was
the correct reply. But the point of the
trick is that the new position of the
white king seems unfortunate, and
Black decides to exploit this.
25
1:.f8
'
The threat of 26 exf6 is parried by
26 . . . :fxf6+, when White loses a rook.
But in fact this pseudo-active move
proves to be a waste of precious time.
26
22
l:lxd5
A somewhat unexpected, but quite

justified decision. After the standard 22
exd5 Black would have withstood with
out difficulty the pressure on the e7
pawn (22 . . . :tc7 23 :de2 ltg7 etc.). But
now White is threatening by e4-e5 to
advantageously open lines in the centre.
For example, 22 . . Jc5 is unsuitable for
3 10
J:ld7
In Games 3 16, 3 74 and 378 White

did not hurry with the development of
his queen's knight, and then brought it
out at d2. Naturally, there the opening
battle developed somewhat differently.
Now if 26 . . . :bs White gains a

decisive advantage by 27 exf6. There
fore Black has to accept the temporary
pawn sacrifice.
26
27
28
Cifi>e3
'it>e4
fxe5+
lib8
3
4
5
6
The active inclusion of the white

king in the play makes the outcome
obvious.
28
29
30
Cifi>d5
Jlxe5
xd6
'it>xd6
lld6+
exd6
J!Ld8+
6
7
In this way at least the black rook

breaks free . . .
33
34
'it>c7
'it>xb 7
g6
g7
c6
White has not played this variation in

the best way (to me it seems more
rational to develop the light-square
bishop at e2 rather than c4, as, for
example, Ciric played against me in
Beverwijk - Game 370). Now Black has
the chance of shutting the bishop at b3
out of the game by . . . d6-d5.
@g8
After 30 . . .I:ixe5+ 3 1 xe5 e8 32

@e6 the game would have concluded
even more quickly.
31
32
ltJfJ
ilc4
.i.b3
1ie2
0-0
lid2
r!xg2
The capture on a2 would not have

changed anything. The outcome is
decided by the white c-pawn.
l:txh2
35 c5
ltc2
36 c6
37 b4
Black resigns. In view of the threat
of 3 8 :Lc5 he has to give up his rook ilmnediately.
Game 353
Medina--Bot,1nnik
1
2
3
e4
d4
tDcJ
d6
ltJf6
And this allows Black to exchange

his queen' s bishop for the knight at f3
(in most variations of the Pirc-Ufimtsev
Defence this exchange is necessary)
with the gain of a tempo. If White had
decided not to prevent the exchange by
7 h3 (whicl\ however, is not especially
good for him). he should have castled
immediately. Apparently my opponent
311
17
was already intending to castle queen

side.
7
8
9
.i.g4
hJ
"i'xf3
li.xf3
e6
It is not possible to play . . . d6-d5, but

even the modest move of the e-pawn
makes the position of White's king's
bishop quite unpromising.
10
11
ii.gs
.i.h4
17
18
18
19
20
tLlbd7
0--0-0
Very risky ! Black is the first to begin
active play. Meanwhile, after . 1 2 0-0
White's position would not have given
cause for alarm.
12
13
14
ife2
f4
1ia5
b5
This move weakens White' s

which Black immediately exl>loits.
14
15
16
tDbl
tDd2
b4
d5
c5
e4,
ihxf6
dxc5
After 18 e5 ctJh5 1 9 \in c4 20 g4

lDxf4 ! White would have been left with
a broken position.
h6
Th.is move has the drawback that at

h4 the bishop will obstruct White' s
pawn offensive o n the kingside.
11
12
.i.xf6
The threat of 1 7 . . . c4 was highly

unpleasant, and it would still have been
on the agenda after 1 7 e5 ttlli5 . There
fore White simplifies the position, but
after this exchange Black's l<lng' s
bishop may become very dangerous.
lL\xe4
ifxe4
dxe4
lL\xe4
'ifxc5
It has become clear that, despite the

exchanges and the material equality,
White's game is already lost, since he
has nothing to counter the opponent's
pressure on the a 1 -h8 diagonal. All this,
incidentally, is repeated in the game
Matulovic-Botvinnik ('Match of the
Century', Belgrade 1 970 - No. 378).
Black' s plan also involved a tactical
subtlety, consisting of the fact that after
2 1 :ct? :ad8 22 l:Ihd l (or 22 l!xf7
:xn 23 'i'xe6, when Black has
23 . . . ilf5, if there is nothing better)
312
28
22 . . . xd7 23 xd7 'i'gl + 24 ld.dl

i.xb2+ he gains a material advantage.
My opponent noticed all this, but the
most surprising thing is that after 40
minutes' thought he did not in fact think
it possible to avoid this variation. The
point is, apparently, that Black' s main
tlueat, . . . 'i'e7-f6, is not so easy to parry.
21
22
23
24
l:td7
llhdl
lixd7
<t>d2
ltad8
:xd7
1f gl +
This is what White was apparently

pinning his hopes on. If now 24 . . . .txb2,
then 25 <it>e2 ! followed by l:d l, and
White is only a pawn down with a
comparatively satisfactory position.
24
<it>d3
1fe2
26
27
11'f3
29
30
31
32
iffl+
If 26 'ltd2, as already mentioned,

there would have followed 26 . . . .i.xb2.
a5
1fc6
e2
1
:.c7
'iixb2
1!1'e5+
h5
White decides to exchange rooks, but

this does not bring him any relie(. since
. the rook at f8 is not participating in the
attack.
32
33
34
35
'i'f2+
<t>e2
:cS
iff4+
.i.d4
it'e3+
<ii?d l
Alas, there is no choice . . .
But after this accurate move White's

losses are more considerable. After 25
c I 'i'fl + 26 <t>d2 .ixb2 he cannot
avoid being crushed.
25
26
1fb7
It only remains for Black to over

come some technical difficulties - he
has both a positional, and a material
advantage.
35
36
.i.cJ
lb:f8+
'ita>xf8
White resigns
In my game with Matulovic, which I

have already mentioned, in one of the
variations exactly the same mating
position occurred.
ifxf4
'iie5
Game 3 54
Botvinnik-Diez del Corral

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
c4
lbcJ
e4
d4
f3
il.e3
d5
tLlf6
g6
d6
.ll..g7
0-0
e5
t'Lle8
The more usual continuations are

7 . . . lllli5 (Nos.294 and 324), if Black, as
3 13
in this game, is aiming for counterplay

with . . . f7-f5, and 7. . . c6, when his plans
also include active play on the queen
side.
8
9
ild2
10
11
.i.d3
.i.c2
play with l l . . .fxe4 1 2 fxe4 lDf6 1 3 h3

lbhs 14 lDge2 'i'f6 15 <it>bl a5, but
White retained some advantage.
12
13
f5
a6
0-0-0
In beginning t11e manoeuvre of his
knight to c5, Black intends to intensify
the pressure on the e4 pawn. Therefore
White must immediately bring his
king's bishop into play, deploying it on
t11e b l -h7 diagonal.
ltlge2
exf5
.i.d7
This exchanging operation relies on

the fact that it is unfavourable for Black
to recapture with his bishop, since he
loses control of the central e4 square,
which will be occupied by the white
pieces.
13
14
c5
gxf5
h4?
Not only preventing 14 . . . 'i'h4, after

which it is not easy to defend the c4
pawn, but also aiming to disrupt the
opponent' s defences by the further
advance of the rook's pawn.
14
a4
This attempt to create counterplay

cannot be successful; it involves too
small a force, but Black cannot just
stand still !
15
16
11
h5
b3
a3
b5
a5
This and Black's nex1 move are

based on the conviction that his position
on the kingside is perfectly secure, and
that, wit11out losing time, he can prepare
active play against White' s queenside
castled position. Meanwhile, as the
game shows, there were insufficient
grounds for such complacency so that
he should have preferred l l . . .f4 12 .i.t2
g5, aiming to curb W11ite's initiative.
Nine years later, in a game with the
new World Champion Anatoly Karpov
( 1 976), Con:al tried to improve Black' s
In this situation Black can of course

make a temporary pawn sacrifice, but
even so he will be too late with his
3 14
counterattack. But it is doubtful whether

he had any other plan his decision is
forced.
17
h6!
Driving back the bishqp and, even

more important, depriving tl;ie knight of
the g7 square, from where it could have
defended the f5 pawn.
17
18
.
19
cxb5
lih5
ilh8
l:.b8
White is threatening to play 20 ltg5+

fl 2 1 i.xf5 . The attack on the f5 pawn
will now be intensified, in the end
leading to White gaining control of e4.
19
20
..
g4
i.xc5
lDe4
24
25
dxc5
lLlf6
lLlxc5
ltle6+
l:txb5
The advantage is most easily con

verted in the endgame.
25
i. xe6
26
dxe6
9'xd2+
27
28
29
30
lixd2
lDxf4
:l.xe5
:rs+
.J:te7
lib8
ltlxg4
lDf6
The tempting 26 . . . !:tdS would have

been met by 27 'i'b4+ :e7 28 :xe5.
Apart from Iris positional advantage,

White is two pawns up.
l:ee8
31 .id3
l:tf7
f4
20 . . . fxg4 would also give up control

of e4, but additional breaches would
appear in Black's defences.
21
22
having to play without his king's

bishop.
23 %lg5+
'i&>f8
c6
32
i.b5
33
34
35
36
37
i.xc6
l:tec8
llc2
</;e7
l:! g8
i.b5
<it>d8
l:tc7+
ftfi
Black resigns
Black has to give up another pawn, in

order to at least disentangle himself a
little.
Game 3 55
Botvinnik-Bednarski
Palma de Afallorca 1967
22 . . . i.xb5 would have been decisive
ly met by 23 l1g5+ f8 24 tLlxc5, and
22 . . . J:.xbS by 23 ltJ2c3 :a5 24 lDa4.
However, in such a position there is
more than one way to win. After all,
apart from Black's other problems, he is
1
2
3
d4
e4
c4
g6
i.g7
I avoided my opponent's tacit

invitation to go into the Pirc-Ufimtsev
Defence, which would have arisen after
3 15
As is usual in such set-ups, White

does not object to . . . f5-f4. Then the
pawn offensive by Black on the king
side ( . . . g6-g5, . . . h7-h5 and . . . g5-g4) is
a very remote prospect, whereas
White's attack on the queenside (b2-b3 ,
a2-a3 and b3-b4) is of more conse
quence. The exchange made by Black
allows White to seize control of the
central e4 square.
3 li1c3, since I did not object to playing

White in the King's Indian Defence.
3
4
5
6
lhc3
.i.e3
d5
d6
lhd7
e5
The game inevitably transposes into

an unfavourable version for Black of the
Samisch Variation. This is how they
played the King's Indian Defence
several decades earlier.
12
13
14
15
a5
Forced ! The usual continuation here,

. . . c7-c6 and . . . c6xd5, no longer works:
the d6 pawn is en prise.
.i.d3
The bishop is aiming for c2, where it

will occupy an ideal position, control
ling the important squares b3 , a4 and e4.
7
8
9
.i.c2
f3
tDc5
lhf6
Thus the Samisch Variation has been

reached by transposition.
9
10
11
12
1id2
lhge2
0-0-0
0-0
tDh5
f5
tDxe4
.i.xe4
lhc3
fxe4
lhxe4
.i.f5
6
Carelessly played. 1 5 . . . 'i'd7, with the

threat of 16 . . . lt1f6, was undoubtedly
more sluewd. In this case White would
not have achieved any real gains from
16 i.g5 i.f6 1 7 g4 .i.xg5 1 8 'ifxg5
.i.xe4 19 xe4 liJf4 20 et1f6+ :xr6 2 1
1i'xf6 'ifa4, when for the exchange
Black has the initiative.
16
.i.g5
White exchanges the enemy knight,

after which he is guaranteed control of
the central e4 square, and Black's king's
bishop remains passive.
16
17
18
19
.i.xf6
bl
iie2
'ifd7
i.xf6
'fle7
i.g5
This attempt to activate the dark

square bishop does not lead to anything,
since it is only able to control squares
that are of no great significance. White
has only one concern - not to allow it
onto the a7-g l diagonal. As regards his
subsequent plan, it begins with the
preparation of h2-h4, in order to further
restrict the dark-square bishop and
prepare the opening of the rook's file.
3 16
26
27
28
xh7
l:.hl+
g4
<it>xh7
<it>g8
Now Black is forced to exchange his

bishop, after which the knight gains for
ever the key e4 square. If the bishop re
treats (28 . . . .i.d?), then White's pressure
increases (29 'i'h6).
20
21
22
23
1flel
h4
1fe3
h5
hxg6
111g7
30
31
32
il.e7
l:.ti
Wf6
hxg6
Undoubtedly a mistake, leading to

Black's defeat. He definitely had to re
tain his h7 pawn; he should have played
24 . . . .txg6 (25 l:.h6 .txe4+ 26 tDxe4
Wf4), when he would still have retained
the space necessary for manoeuvring.
25
:b2
lixe4
11'b3
.i.xe4+
Wg7
Provoking new weaknesses on the

light squares.
After 23 . . . g5 the weakness of the

l ight squares in Black's position be
comes more marked.
24
28
29
30
:h7
b6
:rs
.i.d8
Black has ended up in a passive, but

apparently solid position. Naturally,
before the time control White does not
undertake anything active.
33
34
35
36
a3
11'c2
<&ti>a2
1Fh2
'tif7
1f g7
ci;f7
I avoided playing b2-b4 : the opening

of the position could have given Black
counterplay.
36
3 17
1ta4
l:thJ
<Ji>g8
37
38
39
1ihl
llh2
@bl
ltf4
:rs
The only constructive decision that I

took in time trouble was to take my king
to e2, where it is safe, and will also
defend the f3 pawn.
39
40
41
42
@c2
@d3
e2
ltf4
:rs
l:lf4
:rs
The plan for converting the positional

advantage had already been worked out
in the interval, of course, but for the
moment practical prudence required me
to accumulate time for thought, in order
to avoid getting into time trouble before
the next control.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
I[hJ
b3
lth6
lth2
1i'g2
1fh3
1rg2
11ht
D.h6
lif4
:rs
llf4
:rs
:.r4
:rs
D.f4
:rs
l::tf4
There is no point in waiting any

more. Everything is prepared for zugzwang.
52
g5!
This apparently risky move is de

cisive, since Black is unable to prevent
the activation of the white queen on the
h3-c8 diagonal.
52
53
54
55
56
:rs
1fh4
11t'gJ
1fg4
'ifh3
l:tf4
:rs
l:f5
Now the time has come for the

decisive manoeuvre. Black is forced to
move his bishop, which exposes his
back rank. Then by ltJg3 White either
wins the exchange, or, as occurred in
the game, wins the queen and several
pawns for rook and bishop.
56
JLe7
But not 56 . . . .i.xgS because of 57

gs l:xg5 58 'i'c8+ <l;f7 59 'i'd7+, 60
'i'd8+ and 6 1 'i'xg5, winning a rook.
57
tLlgJ
:xg5
If 57 . . . e4 58 ll'ixf5, and although

Black's queen penetrates into the white
position, it is only able to give a few
checks.
58
1ie6+
f8
If 58 . 1ff7 there follows 59 l:.h8+.

rJ;n
59 ifc8+
.
60
l:h8
60
61
62
1i'xh8
1lxb8
1lxg3
<ifi>f2
Black resigns
Threatening 61 'ife6 mate (60 . . . 'i'f6

6 1 'i'g8 mate).
If 62 . . . l::t g5 there follows 63 'i'c8,

and almost all the black pawns fall.
3 18
Championship (Hamburg 1 965), I very

much wanted to win. Therefore I
decided to continue for the moment the
mobilisation of my forces, in the hope
that possible subsequent inaccuracies by
White would enable me to decide on a
successful plan.
Game 356
Gligoric-Botvinnik
Palma de Mallotca 1967
Nin:izo-Indian Defence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d4
c4
ll'lc3
e3
..td3
ll'lf3
i..d2
ll'lf6
e6
_.i. b4
c5
b6
.ilb7
10
The strongest move is considered to

be 7 0--0 (cf. , for example, Game 3 17),
but Gligoric employs his favourite
manoeuvre, although here it looks
artificial (White provokes the exchange
of Black's king's bishop, without weak
ening his pawns).
7
8
9
a3
i.. xcJ
dxc5
Only later, when annotating this

game, did I learn that 10 0-0 would
have led to a position from the game
Gligoric-Smyslov, played earlier the
same year in Havana, in which after
1 0 tlJe4 1 1 i..xe4 i..xe4 12 ltld2 i..g6
Black's position was preferable.
. . .
10
bxc5
Although White' s forthcoming pawn

offensive on the queenside seems quite
threatening, Black is hoping for counter
play with his central pawn majority and
good queen's bishop.
0-0
i.. xc3
11
12
0-0
b4
ll'lbd7
The expected offensive begins.

However, this move was more or less
obligatory, in view of the possible
advance of the black .pawn to a5
.12
11c7
.
13 .J:.ct
lDe4
After completing the mobilisation of

his forces. Black embarks on active
play. If White replies 14 Jib2, then after
14 a5 1 5 b5 e5 both of his bishops will
be insufficiently active. Therefore
Gligoric decides to exchange his light
square bishop, so as not to allow . . . a7a5 and to gain time for switching his
other knight. to the queenside, which
appears very tempting.
. . .
d6
Perhaps the immediate 9 l2Je4 is the

simplest, but from my tournament
position, and after that terrible defeat
that I suffered in my game with
Svetozar in the European Team
...
3 19
14
15
.i.xe4
liJd2
-*.xe4
when the exchange sacrifice leads to an

obvious advantage for Black.
18
e5
Since the exchange 1 9 bxc5 dxc5

clearly does not come into White' s
plans (he i s intending to play b4-b5
followed by CDc6), his bishop is now
securely shut out of the game, and Black
can calmly develop his initiative on the
kingside.
19
20
/i)bJ
Exploiting the fact that 16 . . . cxb4 1 7

axb4 'i'xc4 i s not possible because o f 1 8
Ji.xg7.
16
17
18
lDa5
1fg4
22
23
IUdl
Ael
df8
.i.g6!
This is also what Smyslov played in

the afore-mentioned game. This non
standard retreat simultaneously ensures
Black's safety both on the kingside (the
g7 square! ) and on the queenside (the b l
square!). Here White should have dis
played the necessary caution and not
deprived his king of an important
defensive piece - his knight. But
Gligoric who was always consistent in
the implementation of his plans, here
too remains true to himself.
16
f5
f4
With the terrible threat of 2 1 . . .f3 .

lbf4
21 exf4
White seems to be quite alright: he is

not threatened in any way, on the
queenside he has the initiative, and the
opposite-colour bishops guarantee him a
secure position in the endgame.
15
b5
11e2
.n.ad8
/i)b6
23
/i)cS!
Effectively the decisive move. The

base of the pawn chain c5-d6-e5 (the d6
pawn) is securely defended, the black
queen is switched to the kingside, and
White does not succeed in bringing his
knight back to the defence of his king.
24
25
White is forced to remove his queen

from the d-file. If 18 b5 there could
have followed 1 8 . . . d5 1 9 tiJc6 /i)xc4 ! ,
320
/i)bJ
lLld2
1if7
e4
There is no satisfactory defence

against the threat of" 26 . . . Ji.h5. With an
exchange sacrifice . White tries to
complicate the play, but in vain. 26 f3

was preferable.
26
27
28
thn.
Wc2
llxdl
Game 357
Botvinnik-Matulovic
.1lb5
..lxdl
ltJe7

Bringing the knight into play in the

simplest way. The d6 pawn is immune,
since in the variation 29 l:lxd6 lDr5 30
.6td5 e3 ! 3 1 f3 ltJd4 White.'s position
cannot be defended.
29
30
31
i:tJf5
Vxf5
i:tJe3
ihxf5
l1xd6
1
2
3
4
5
d4
c4
d5
ltlc3
e4
lt)f6
c5
d6
g6
In my view, in this variation the

fianchetto of White's king's bishop is
less promising.
5
6
7
.i.g7
0-0
i.d3
h3
This modest move leads in fact to a

new and original variation, which I had
previously prepared in home analysis.
However, this was the first time I had
tried employing it. The next game on
this
same theme,
with
Kavalek
(No. 372), was played a year later.
31
7
8
9
10
e3
e6
exd5
:eS+
i:tJfJ
exd5
.*.eJ
Taking play into a prosaic endgame.
32
33
34
35
36
exf2+
ll8xf5
:xc4
b5
lla4
1f xf5
iLxf2
:d2
bJ
h4
In this way Black wins another pawn,

which is the quickest way of convincing
the Yugoslav grandmaster of the futility
of further resistance.
37 l:td8+ <it>h7 38 :d3 l:a5 39 llb3
,
c4 40 Ac3 lifxb5 41 lixc4 l:ha3 42

i.d4 a5 White resigns
"- ;. .. r
..'
32 1
() '< .
..
i:tJh5
It is doubtful whether 10 . . . l2Ja6 1 1 0-0

!Dc7 1 2 a4 ti::Ja6 1 3 :!c l ti::Jb4 14 ii.b l ,
which occurred in the games Balashov
Stein ( 1 97 l ) and Balashov-Suetin
( 1 972) is any stronger for Black. In the
first of these after 14 . . . a6 1 5 ilf4 Vlic7
16 ifd2 White had a clear advantage.
The sharp move 10 . . . b5 leads to
interesting complications, the simplest
reply apparently being 1 1 cxb5.
lLld7
11 0-0
It is doubtful whether the committing
1 1 . . .f5 was any better.
12
active enemy piece - the dark-square

bishop, which also deptjves the black
king of a reliable defender.
15
.
ti)dxf6
16
The exchange of all the rooks will

assist in reducing Black's activity, and
will also make it easier for White to find
the key to the enemy king's position. It
was no accident that I chose this method
of play, since I knew that Matulovic did
not like defending passive positions, and
I was hoping that imperceptible posit
ional errors by Black would accumulate.
i.g5
16
17
18
19
Black cannot tolerate this bishop

here.
12 .
f6
The most natural reply, but then the
f-pawn has to be advanced further, and
this restricts the bishop at c8 and weak
ens the black king's position.
.
13
.i.d2
.i.gS
ifxel
ifd2
:et
lixel+
i.d7
iff8
l::te8
Black has no right, of course, to leave

the open file in White's possession, and
no amount of counterplay on the queen
side could have compensated for this.
f5
20
21
22
23
White was threatening 14 g4.
14
ktel
i.f6
lbe8
a3
b4
bxc5
1ixe8
g7
b6
The open b-file does not present any

danger to White. Moreover, in some
cases his queen may be able to invade
the enemy position along this file.
23
24
gJ
bxc5
h6
24 . . . !De4 would not have achieved

anything for Black after 25 'i'b2.
25 'i'c2
1fic8
26 h2
15
27
28
.i.xf6
So, the persistent forays of White' s

bishop to g 5 have borne fruit. He has
succeeded in exchanging the most
3 22
'i'd2
ltlgt
<l;g7
White prepares f2-f4, which will

further restrict the black bishop, gain
control of e5, and, most important,
38
39
subsequently strengthen his attacking

possibilities when the g-pawn advances.
28
29
30
f4
<it>g2
1fe8
Cj)fJ
lLlh4
9'c2
I had altogether no active plan,. and he
tL\g8
was sure that before the time control

White would not even be looking for
one. This lack of vigilance led to Black
making a decisive mistake. Now the
white g-pawn gains the opportunity to
advance immediately, and the game
quickly comes to an end. However, in
any case White would have .retained the
advantage and all the same he would
have achieved the advance of his g
pawn, after first transferring his king to
the safer square a2.
'ii'b8
lLle7
Defending the b3 square and

i ntensifying the pressure on the bl-h7
l l iagonal.
33
34
35
36
lLle2
Cj)fJ
9'b2
In the three previous moves, and also

White's subsequent moves, one should
11ot seek any deep point. 111ese are
waiting tactics - when short of time for
I hought. And in general I had to display
caution. since towards the end of the
fifth hour of play the probability of mis
lakes by players of the older generation
increases.
36
37
lLlcJ
9a5
lDc8
lDe7
ti)c8
My opponent obviously thought that
The time has come to transfer the

white knight to an active position.
31
32
33
lLlh4
f2
40
41
g4
g5
l:f)e7
This move was tlllderestimated by

Black. He was thinking only about the
safety of his f5 pawn but forgot about
those threats arising from the insecure
position of his king.
41
42
lhe2
/:j)fg8
h5
After 42 . . . hxg5 43 fxg5 White would

have gained the f4 square for his knight.
Now Black does not fear 43 ti'h8 in
323
view of 43 . . . Wxa3, attacking the bishop

at d3 .
But after analysis during the dinner
break, it all ends quickly. The closed
nature of the position cannot save
Black.
43
44
45
46
@fl
ltJgJ
.i.e2
49 1rg7+
Black resigns (49.. . :e6 50 l2Jf8
mate).
Game 3 58
.i.c8
.lld 7
1i'a4
..ie8
Donner-Botvinnik
Palma de lt.,fal/orca 1967

Griinfeld Defence
'iit>f2
The sacrifice on g6 can no longer be
avoided (White is threatening 47 lbxg6
lbxg6 48 lbxh5, and if 47 . . . xg6 48
'i'h8 rj;i/ 49 lLJxh.5) the position of the
bishop at e8 changes little.
1
2
3
4
5
d4
c4
g3
.i.g2
cxd5
lhf6
g6
c6
d5
This seemingly unpretentious ex

change nevertheless requires Black to
defend accurately. Then he obtains an
equal game.
5
6
7
tifJ
cxd5
.i.g7
0-0
0-0
For 7 lLJc3 0-0 8 tLle5. cf. Game 254.
7
8
l2:\c3
Or 8 e5 ltlg4, and Black achieves

full equality.
47
ltlxg6
47
48
...
l2:\xh5
It was noticeable that this move came

as a surprise to my opponent. He has
little choice: 47 . . . xg6 48 'i'h8,
47 . . . lLixg6 48 liJxf5 , or . . .
lt\xd5
If 48 cxd.5 xg6, then Black would

have been threatening to exchange
queens, and also in some cases the f4
pawn would have been en prise. But
now the g7 square cannot be defended.
48
ti)de7
8
9
...
ifb3
l2:\c6
ltJe4
10
ltdt
ltla5
As was pointed out in Game 254, at

one time I was afraid of reaching this
position with Black. However, my fears
regarding the fate of the d5 pawn were
unfounded. It turns out that White
cannot take it with either his queen ( 10
'i'xd5 lbxc3), or his knight ( 10 lbxd5
..i.e6). Therefore 9 'iib3 loses its point
and is an opening mistake. The normal
continuation for White is 9 tbe5 e6 10
lDxc6 bxc6 1 1 ..tf4 r l I ltJa4.
324
Again Black need not be concemed

about the capture of the pawn - 1 1
'fixd5,. in view of l l . . . llJxc3 .
11
14
15
16
..
18
19
lDel
lixd2
1fxd2
lDxcJ
'ifxc3
Of course, the queen is badly placed

on the c-:file, but after 12 bxc3 the black
knight would have become firmly
established at c4.
12
13
14
Threatening 17 . i.:d3 - 1 8 .i.xf3

j,,xd4 .
1fb4
17 i.e3
Since White has managed to defend
against the immediate threats, and the
position is symmetric and the open c
file is a convenient springboard for the
exchange of the heavy pieces, Black
himself prefers to provoke an endgame,
on the grounds that he is "Qetter
mobilised and that White's queenside is
slightly weakened. It is also worth
remembering that I could not be too
aggressively inclined, since before this I
had won three games in a row.
1lb4
Curiously, my opponent had already

reached this position in games played
both with White, and with Black.
Against Barcza (1 958) he played 1 1 . . .
b6. and was unable to exploit White 's
mistake (9 'i'b3). Therefore, not long
before our game, he himself repeated it
with White against Filip, where it all
turned out well for White since with
l I . . .t2Jc6 Black immediately demon
strated his consent to a draw. On this
occasion, however, White does not get
away with his opening inaccuracy.
11
12
Vb6
lDc6
.*.e4
bJ
'i' d2
.if4
'ifel
.i.f5
llc8
20
21
Only here will the white queen feel

fairly secure.
e5
19
Black hurries to open up the position,

while the rook at al is not yet in play.
dxe5
l:.cl
.ixe5
lib4
Black consolidates his hold on the

c-file, but, unavoidably, he is forced to
concede the d-file.
325
22 l:txc8
23 .i.xe4
24 l:td7
l:lxc8
dxe4
anything specific. Even so, after gaining

the better of the opening;': I . have merely
managed to retain the more pleasant
position, which, however, must be
considered drawn. Well, - such things
happen.
Since the c 1 and c2 squares are

defended, White can pennit himself this
slight activity. Of course, he could not
take the pawn (24 i.xa7 :c l).
24
25
26
xc7
a3
:c7
iJ.. xc7
lhc2
lic6
i.e5
Restricting the white knight. Black ' s

advantage i s that after . . . f7-f5 his king
will occupy a favourable position in the
centre of the board.
28
f3
i.d2
a4
g2
37
lDb4?
e3+
White resigns
If in this game I did not exploit my

chances as well as possible, it should be
borne in mind that this round was held
on the island of Menorca, where the
enthusiastic chess fans forgot that for
the players the most important thing is
quietness during the game .
f5
The e4 pawn must be retained: it

restricts the activity of White ' s king and
knight.
29
30
31
32
fxe4
g4
hJ
<t>f2
Throughout the game my opponent
has skilfully defended, but here,
affected by shortage of time for thought,
he commits a vexing oversight and loses
a half point.
And now if 26 i.xa7 there would

have followed 26 . . . b6.
26
27
fxe4
..te5
/,je7
/,jd5
33
34
35
36
7
@e6
.i.d4+
a6
Game 3 59
Botvinnik-Larsen
Reti Opening
1
2
3
4
5
6
Even now when I analyse this game,
I find it hard to reproach myself for
c4
tfjtJ
g3
.ig2
0-0
b3
/,jf6
e6
d5
i..e7
0-0
c5
This is Black ' s most active plan.

6 . . . a5 has also been successfully
played. Long ago . (Levenfish-Bogol
jubow, 1 924) White even ended up with
326
the worse game after 7 .tb2 a4 8 d3 c6

4!bd2 CDa6 10 d4 a3 . Possibly, accord
ing to analysis by Euwe, the most effec1 i vc is 7 .i.b2 a4 8 bxa4 dxc4 9 CDe5 .
Regarding 6 . . . c6, see game 300, and
ror 6 . . . d4 - Grune 230.
lJ
i.b2
lbc6
It would be appropriate to mention

t hat this position occurred .long ago in
t he game Capablanca-Marshall (Mos
cow
1 925), where in reply to 7 . . . d4
t here followed 8 d3 CDc6 9 e4, although
t he modem view is that 8 e3 is correct.
eJ
b6
Black can also deploy his queen's

bishop differently: 8 ... .td7. In this case
for the moment his position does not
hold any promise of counterplay, but it
is sufficiently sound.
1 8 .i.e5) Black would have maintained a

defensible position.
.i.b7
9 . . ..i.a6 10 'iie2 llc8 has been played

against me on more than one occasion.
Against Bakulin ( 1967) I correctly con
tinued 1 1 thb5, whereas after 1 1 llfd l ,
as in my game with Van Scheltinga
( 1 966), by l l . . . d4 12 exd4 cxd4 1 3
tLlb5 43 Black could have gained suf
ficient counterplay.
10
d3
10
11
12
13
:ct
ife2
l:tfdl
If immediately 10 'iie 2 there could

have followed 10 . . . d4 1 1 exd4 cxd4 12
lbb5 d3 , and Black has a perfectly good
game. I also did not want to hurry with
IO cxd5 and 1 1 d4. since with 10 . . .
CDxd5 followed by . . . .tf6 Black would
have equalised.
lic8
J:lc7
ll.d7
lie8
The immediate 1 3 ... 'i'a8 and then

14 . . JHd8 was better.
14
15
cxd5
lbxd5
ti:)xd5
l:xd5
lbc3
It is doubtful whether the immediate

manoeuvre 9 ii'e2 .ii.b7 10 l:d l is
preferable. For example, in the game
Vaganian-Karpov ( 1 97 1 ) after 10 . . . 'iic7
1 1 tLlc3 ltad8 12 cxd5 ltlxd5 1 3 tLlxd5
)xd5 1 4 d4 cxd4 1 5 tLlxd4 tLlxd4 16
i.xd4, with 1 6 . . . :d7 (instead of
1 6 . . J id6, with the sequel 1 7 l:tdc l ! ii'd7
327
Here the rook is badly placed, which
White is immediately able to exploit.

1 5 . . . exd5 was sounder.
16
although there was also a combinative

solution: 2 1 lif6+! gxf6 i2 1Wg4+ h7
23 :d7 ! During the game I only had
time to consider 23 .i.e4+ f5 24 i.xf5+
exf5 25 ifxf5+ @g8, after which I
would have had to give perpetual check,
since if 26 'ii'f6 there follows 26 . . . lie5
27 i.xe5 1he5 . But after 23 :d7 ! :e7
(or 23 . . . i.e7 24 .i.e4+ 'it>h8 25 :xe7) 24
i.e4+ f5 25 .i.xf5+ exf5 26 'iixf5+ g8
27 'i'f6 Black is no longer saved by
27 . . . tl:Je5 on account of 28 i.xe5 laxe5
29 Vxt7+.
d4!
In the given situation the opening of

the position is in White's favour - his
bishops are more active than the
opponent 's.
16
1i a8
Now such strategy is fraught with
unpleasant tactical dangers. As in the
Vaganian-Karpov
afore-mentioned
game, the rook should have immediately
been retreated to the seventh rank.
llxdl +
17 dxc5
18
19
ktxdl
ti)g5!
19
20
l1e4
i.xc5
The possibility of this move, with the

threat of 20 'i'h5, and hence the need for
Black to immediately drive back the
knight, thereby weakening his king' s
position, demonstrates the faultiness of
my opponent' s strategy.
h6
.tf8
21
22
23
21
ltd7
Despite the fact that I was already

beginning to run short of time, I was
able to find quite a strong move,
f5
Larsen wants to parry the threat of 22

GDf6+, but it turns out that all the same
this could have been played: after
22 . . . gxf6 23 Wh5 e7 24 'ifg6+ Black
is not saved by either 24 ... .%lg7 25
:xg7+ 3 4 iixg7 26 ..ixc6 ..ixc6 27
.i.xf6 'if:IB 28 i.xg7 'iixg7 29 1Wxe6+
and 30 1Wxc6, or 24 . . . .i.g7 25 ..i.xc6
:xd7 26 .i.xd7 i.hl 27 .i.xe6+ h8 28
f3 .i.xf3 (28 . . . 'i'xf3 29 ile8+) 29 .txf6.
I did study another way to win - 22
1ih5 .:e7 23 :xe7 l:tJxe7 24 l:tJd6 !
i.xg2 25 Win+ 'it>h7 (25 . . . 'it>h8 26
tl:Je8), but due to shortage of time I
failed to win the winning continuation
26 i.xg7! i.xg7 27 ttJe8 Vxe8 28
ifxe8, when Black loses one of his
pieces.
l1d6
lixd6
.txd6
This is the decision of a practical

player, preferring in time trouble to aim
for a positional win, rather then combin
ative obscurity. After briefly examining
23 ];Ixg7+ 'it>fS, I did not like the fact
that after 24 1i'h5 l:e7 25 l::tg6 l:tJd8 the
black king would be able to escape to
328
30
31
32
33
t he queenside, and I failed to find the

quiet intermediate move 24 l;Ih7 !
xd8
'i'c2
11c7+
rM7
11fxd8
1fd5
Here White should have prevented

the switching of the queen onto the a6fl diagonal by 33 a4. However, in time
trouble the temptation to give checks
was too great.
33
34
23
24
25
:xd4
l:td7
lid4
.i.xg2
Ji.bl
26
f3
l:id8
27
l:txg7+
<ifte8
1fb8+
Even after the better 25 . . . .i.h l 26 f4

White should also win.
26 . . . e5 was Wlsatisfactorv
" because of
27 'i'c4+ 'iti>h7 28 'fic7 Ilg8 29 .i.xe5.
Studying the variation 27 'i'd l :xd7
28 xd7 'i'f8, I rightly judged that 29
ffxe6+ 'iif7 was insufficient for a win,
hut I missed the fact tliat by playing 29
't\Yxa7, then a2-a4 and b3-b4, White,
despite the loss of his bishop, would
then be able to exchange queens, and his
a-pawn would be unstoppable.
t'8
27
28
29
30
34
Another winning possibility was

offered by the cahn 30 .tc3 followed by
3 1 !lxh6, not fearing the invasion
30 . . . 'i'hl in view Of 3 1 nh8+ rt;e7 32
.i.b4+ d7 33 'i'd3+
'iti?d7?
. . .
'i'd5
ii'dl
llh7
@fl
:hs+
Larsen still had some 20 minutes left

on his clock, but because of his im
patient character he hurried his move
and . . . missed drawing chances which
after 34 1id8 could have arisen in the
ending, thanks to the opposite-colour
bishops.
35
36
37
'i'xa7+
1fa6+
!fc4+
c8
c7
Now White himself goes into the

endgame, but during this time he has
won another pawn.
329
37
38 bxc4
39 . i.d4
11xc4
'it?c6
h5
40
a4
Black can only move his king. and its

forced retreat allows White to create a
passed p awn.
40
41
42
43
44
c5
.ixc5
.1lb4
'3;c7
bxc5
<lt>c6
<lti>b6
g4!
g3
Monte Carlo 1968
Queen's Indian Defence
1
2
3
4
5
6
This breakthrough was immediately

pointed out by Smyslov during a brief
analysis before the resumption.
44
45
Game 360
Botvinnik-Padevsky
hxg4
e5
Now of course, Wlrite wins very

easily. But Black was powerless against
the threat of 46 fxg4 fxg4 47 e4
followed by e4-e5. Then the king goes
to f6 and the bishop to g3 . as a result of
which the e6 pawn is won.
46 . e4
fxe4
47 fxg4
Black resigns
It remains to add that some of the
combinations given in the notes which
remained 'off-stage', were pointed out
by Gligoric, Kotov and Flohr.
330
tt)fJ
c4
g3
g2
0-0
f6
e6
d5
!JJ..e7
0-0
d4
With 6 b3 it was still possible to

continue playing the Reti Opening, as,
for example, occurred in Game 359.
However, the Catalan Opening, a
position from which is reached after 6
d4. was an opening that I more rarely
employed, and this is also a factor of no
small importance against an inexper
ienced opponent. However, with this the
opening metamorphoses are not exhaus
ted, and soon the play moves onto lines
typical of the Queen's Indian Defence.
6
7
b3
7
8
.i.b2
libd7
7 'S'c2 is more often played.
b6
Ab7
cxd5
At just the right time. Since after

1> xd5 10 tt:lc3 or 9 . . . l2Jxd5 (in a
si milar situation this is what Donner
played against me - Game 320) 10
l.i)bd2 Black to some extent loses
control over the centre, he considers it
obligatory to take on d5 with the pawn.
I 'ut in this case the activity of his
queen' s bishop is reduced.
. . .
9
10
lDcJ
exd5
l:te8
It should be mentioned that the

i mmediate 1 0 . . . c5 would have allowed.
White after 1 1 dxc5 bxc5 1 2 tDh4 liJb6
( Konstantinopolsky-Belavenets, 1 937)
Io gain a solid advantage by 13 lD:f5 .
l lut after the systematic preparation of
t his advance - 10 . . . a6 1 1 l:k l .i.d6 12
d l:e8 1 3 lDe2 lbe4 1 4 'i'c2 c5
< Andersson-Matanovic, 1 976) Black's
chances are not worse.
1 1 li)e5
If White declines this opportunity, he
will not have any good prospects at all.
rhe point of the manoeuvre is that after
I 1 . lLlxe5 1 2 dxe5 t:De4 1 3 llixe4 dxe4
1 4 'i'c2 (as Euwe played in an
analogous situation against Capablanca,
AVRO Tournament 1938) Black gets
into difficulties.
11
...
f4
13
ttlxe4
13
14
15
e3
In view of the threatened exchange

1 3 . . . ttJxc3 1 4 .i.xc3, after which White
has a backward e2 pawn and a weak
point at e4, this decision is obligatory.
dxe4
ttlf6
a3
An essential move. White is aiming

to restrict the activity of Black's king's
bishop and in some cases to take control
of the c6 square by b3-b4-b5 .
15
16
17
18
1fe2
xd4
b4
c5
cxd4
1fe7
a5
Black must clarify the situation on
the queenside. By forcing b4-b5, he sub
sequently secures the c5 square for his
knight.
.i.d6
If 1 1 . . . .i.f'8 White could have

continued either 12 f4, or 12 l:k l lDxe5
1 3 dxe5 :xe5 1 4 lbb5 :!e7 1 5 .i.xf6
gxf6, and here in the 1 1th game of my
match with Bronstein ( 1 95 1 ) I could
have developed my initiative with 16 b4
followed by liJd4 and b4-b5 .
12
12
The sharper 1 2 . . . c5 occurred in the
game Larsen-Gulko ( 1 976).
19
b5
-*.xe5.
Since 19 .. xa3 20 .i.xb6 favours

White, this natural exchange enables
Black to defend his "b6 pawn and
simultaneously to rid himself of the
.
33 1
annoying knight at e5, which at a

propitious moment could have occupied
the key c6 square.
20 .*.xe5
Why does White avoid the natural
reply 20 fxe5 ? Because after, for
example, 20 . . . ltJd7 2 1 ifb.5 g6 22 'ifh6
ttJxe5 23 l:tf4 (23 .i.xe5? 'ifxe5 24
:xn? 'S'xal+) 23 . . .fS it is not apparent
how the attack can be continued. Now,
however, White retains some advantage,
although his hopes of a swift attack are
reduced to the minimwn.
20
ltJd7
tbc5
21 il.d4
ltld7
22 f5
A superficial move, which leads to a
rapid defeat. It was essential to play
22 . . . f6, when Black could have put up a
prolonged resistance. True, here too
White would have retained the advan
tage, since in the endgame his chances
are better. In particular, the position of
the knight at c5 is insufficiently secure.
after 23 . . .liJxf6 24 l:txf6 gxf6 25 'ifg4+

the picture does not change.
23
1fe6
24 'ifh5
White, of course, does not huny with
the capture of the g7 pawn, but intensifies the threats. Now if 24 . . . gxf6 there
follows 25 h3, while if 24 . . . lhxf6 25
l:Ixf6.
24
lhe5
25 l:lf5
The rook is transferred to an attack
ing position, and the knight is driven
from its key square, in order to expand
the scope of White's centralised bishop.
25
thg6
25 . . . g6 cannot be played because of
26 'ii'h6. and 25 ... ttJf3+ is also bad in
view of 26 .i.xf3 exf3 27 Wg5.
26 fxg7
Tirreatening mate in four moves.
Black's reply is of course unfortunate,
but one cannot help remembering
Tarrasch, who wrote that in a bad
position all moves are bad!
26
llad8
23 f6!
After 23 ... gxf6 White's advantage is
obvious: 24 'ifg4+. <&t>h8 (24 25
ifh4) 25 l:lxf6 lDxf6 26 'iig5, while
. . .
332
27
'ihh7'+
Bla:ck: resigns
Gmne 3 6 1
Botvinnik-Larsen
Monte Carlo 1968
1
2
c4
lllf3
lt)f6
. g6
In contrast to- our game in Mallorca

( No. 3 59) Larsen decides to fianchetto
his king's bishop.
3
4
5
6
g3
g2
0-0
CJ
llg7
0-0
d6
c6
Black
usually
plays
6 . . . tbbd7
followed by . . . e7-e5, or 6 . ..ttJc6, aiming
a fter d2-d4-d5 to play the laright to a5 .
Here and on the following move my
opponent is clearly aiming for a less
common and not so well-analysed
continuation.
d4
1!fa5
At one time 7 . . . a6 8 e4 b5 was

fashionable, but after 9 e5 liJe8 10 'ife2
White has a serious spatial advantage.
White gained an advantage by 8 d 5 'ib4

9 ttJd2 .i.d7 IO e4. I also did not know
that White usually prevented the bishop
move to g4 by playing 8 hJ. '. But even if
I had known, I would probably not have
changed my decision. Can Black really
solve his opening problems in such a
simple way (7 . . . 'ii'a 5)? Then his task
would always have been straight
forward!
-*.g4
It can be shown that 8 . . . 'i'h5 would

also have led to a difficult game for
Black after 9 e5 ! : 9 . . . tbe8 I O .i.g5,
9 . . . tbfd7 10 exd6 exd6 1 1 .i.f4, or
9 . . . dxe5 10 lt:Jxe5 (10 . . . ltJg4 1 1 ). 9
l:el e5 10 b3 i.g4 1 1 d5 and then 'i'd3
is also good for White.
9
10
hJ
.i.xf3
11
J..eJ
.t.xf3
lllfd7
Black intends, by playing 1 1 . . . c5,

either to gain control of d4 ( 12 dxc5
dxc5), or to win a pawn ( 12 d5 .i.xc3 ).
However, this plan is impracticable due
to the weak:Q.ess of the b7 pawn - the
absence of the light-square bishop tells.
e4
I have to admit that I had not seen the

game Ivkov-Larsen ( 1 965), in which
333
11
c5
During the game I thought that

1 1 . . . 'iib4 was stronger, since after 1 2
'i'd3 ( 1 2 'lb.3 ifxb3 1 3 axb3 tLla6)
1 2 . . . 'i'xb2 13 %tabl 'ii'a 3 14 .:xb7 tbb6
the white rook might end up in a
dangerous position. Just in case, I even
prepared the variation 12 .i.e2 W'xb2 1 3
tba4 'ili'a3 1 4 i.c l 'i'b4 1 5 .i.d2 with a
repetition of moves . . .
In fact after 1 2 'i'd3 li'xb2 1 3 l!ab l
1i'a3 14 .r:.xb7 tbb6 the white rook turns
out to be a troublesome prisoner: 1 5
.i.e2 ! (but not 15 l::txe7 .i.f6 1 6 :b7
'i'a6 17 e5 'i'xb7 1 8 exf6 ti:J8d7)
15 . . .'i'a6 ( 16 ti:Jd5 was threatened) 1 6
Ilc7 ! , and there i s no way of attacking
the rook.
12
dxc5
13
e5
Of course, I repeated moves merely

to gain time, since I already had in mind
the following decisiv continuation.
18
b4!
1 8 e6 fxe6 19 .ltg4 (19 tLlxe6 :xn)

1 9 . . . l:if6 would have been weaker.
Now however, the position is opened
up, and White - who has mobilised his
forces earlier - dominates the board.
18
l2Jxe5
dxc5
I should mention that in the game

Lengyel-Honfi ( 1 968) the other capture
12 . . . tt:Jxc5 also led to a difficult position
for Black: 1 3 e5 lDc6 14 exd6 l:tfd8 15
ti:Jd5.
13
'ilc7
After 1 3 . . . 'i'a6 14 ltJd5 .i.xe5 1 5

lbxe7+ @h8 1 6 'ifd 5 Black cannot
avoid loss of material.
14
15
liJd5
l2Jf4
ifd8
Again attacking the b7 pawn and

simultaneously threatening the un
pleasant e5;..e6 . Black has only one
defence.
15
16
17
liJd5
&Df4
ifb6
ifd8
irb6
19
.i.xc5
19
20
21
ifxf3
liJd5
A mistake, caused by an hallucin

ation. After 1 9 tbd5 'i'd8 20 iLxc5
tLlbc6 2 1 b5 ifa5 (or 2 1 . . .b6 22 i..a3
tt:Jxc4 23 bxc6 liJxa3 24 :cl 'i'd6 25 c7
with the threats of 26 tbxe7+ and 26
c6) 22 iLxe7 ti:Jxf3+ 23 'i'x:f3 tbxe7
24 &Dxe7+ h8 25 l:.acl White remains
a pawn up. But I decided to play an
even stronger move !
The b7 pawn can be defended only

by the queen, and this creates the pre
conditions for the further development
of White's initiative.
lDxfJ+
1fc6
l:te8
Here I noticed to my surprise that the
previously planned 22 Ji.xe7 i.. xal 23
lhal did not achieve anything in view
of 23 . . . tbd7, when the f6 square is
defended. I also had to reject 22 'i'e3
334
Jlxal 23 l:xal ttJd7 24 C/Jxe7+ .tixe7 25

.fl.xe7, when Black plays 25 . . . l!i)b6, if
there is nothing better. 22 li:Jxe7+ %he7
23 'irxc6 ttJxc6 is bad for Wlrite.
Meanwhile, I wrongly rjected the quiet
intensification of the pressure by 22
Hae l e6 23 'i'e2 tiJd7. I did not like 24
4'Je7+ J:.xe7 25 ii.xe7 l2Je5, but then 26
f4 was possible, when Black has
insufficient compensation for the lost
exchange.
Therefore I decided to go into a
better ending.
22
23
lladl
lDf6+
9l.f6
11xd7
25
26
27
28
il.d4
..txe5
if xe5
29
30
ltdl
c5
1tc8
'i!fc6!
This is what is most important for

Black: control simultaneously of d7 and
e8.
e6
The whole point is that after 23

t:De7+ Ihe7 Black can answer 24 :ct8+
with 24 . . . l:e8 (25 'i'xc6 li:Jxc6) .
23
24
25
In this position, where White's queen

is better placed, he has an ex1ra pawn on
the queenside, and it is his tum to move,
he cannot achieve either a material
advantage, or the so desirable invasion
of his rook on the seventh rank. For
example, 29 'ifd5 'i'c8 30 l:e l 1lc7.
31
32
lld6
ifd5
1fb5
1ixb4
33
34
l:ld7
@g2
Vet+
Again the only move. After 32 . . . lte8

33 :ct7 .li:te l + 34 rt>h2 White gives mat.
first!
..i.xf6
lDd7
Alas, this is only an exchanging

operation - the last lightning flash of the
departing thunderstorm . . .
1'xd7
e5
!bes
1Wxh3
34
'ife6!
Forcing the exchange of queens. as

after 35 'ii'xb7 .:es 36 c6 'iife4+ 37 @h2
l:e5 White would already have had to
think about how not to lose.
35
36
37
335
'ilfxe6
lhb7
lba7
fxe6
l:tc8
By playing 37 l:tb5 White could have

hoped to win if his king were able to
reach: e5, which in the given case is
ruled out.
37
38
White first moves his knight from c3 to .

a central position.
8
.0-0
When I played 7 . . . f5 I had thought to
delay my kingside castling until White
determined that his king would remain
on its own wing, but now I decided not
to fear queenside castling by the
opponent, since waiting tactics had their
drawbacks. It soon transpired that White
had quite different intentions.
llxc5
<it>b3
. In order to answer 3 8 . . . hS with 39

<it>h4, not allowing 39 . . . g5 .
:rs
38
39 f4
:d5
e5
40 . a4
41 a5
Draw agreed
Game 362
Benko-Botvinnik
c4
gJ
.i.g2
g6
i.g7
e5
It now turns out that White is playing

the Closed Variation of the Sicilian
Defence with an extra tempo.
4
5
ttJc3
e4
l'iJe7
d6
If now or on the ne,.,,_1 move Black

had played . . . c7-c5, this would have led
to an ahnost symmetric position with a
minimal advantage to White.
6
7
8
If 8 i.e3
replied 8 . . .
lDge2
d3
ttJd5 .
.i.eJ
i.e6
10
11
12
'W'd2
0-0
l:lael
9d7
IUi
Another plan was chosen by Csom

against Gulko ( 1 976): 12 l:tacl l:taf8 1 3
f3 <it>h8 14 b 3 l2Jg8 1 5 exf5 gxf5
( 1 5 . . . i.xfS 16 d4) 16 f4.
English Opening
1
2
3
Strictly speaking, Black already has a

lead in development over his opponent,
who has spent time on c2-c4 and liJd5.
In the game D .Byrne-Benko ( 1 966/67)
he did not exploit this factor, and after
9 . . . h6 1 0 'i'd2 g5 1 1 f:[jxe7+ l2Jxe7 1 2 f4
he conceded the initiative.
For example, 4 1 . . . exf4 42 gxf4, and

the black king hurries to the queenside.
Of course, there are also other ways to
draw.
Monte Carlo 1968
ttJbc6
f5
Black would probably have

d4 . (9 lDxd4 exd4 ), so
3 36
12
13
l:taf8
f4
In this position I outlined the

following plan, which is not without its
positional novelty and psychological
elements.
First Black exchanges pawns on e4
(White is forced to recaprure with the
pawn, so as not to let the enemy knight
in at f5), and then the light-square
bishops, in order to weaken the e4 pawn
and the position of the white king, and
finally he exchanges pawns on f4,
opening the e-:file for a frontal attack on
the e4 pawn (White will be forced to
recapture on f4 with the pawn, so as to
control the e5 square).
When the rook attacks the e4 pawn
from e8, White will probably play liJe2g3 , after which the black h-pawn will
advance, accentuating the weakness of
the e4 pawn and the open position of the
white king . . .
13
fxe4
The correctness of Black's plan was

indirectly confirmed in the game
Schmidt-Ribli
CD<i4 14 fxe5
dxe5 15 i.g5, and White has an appre
ciable advantage.
(1973): 13
. ..
14 dxe4
lhc8!
15
Ji.bl
By defending the c7 pawn with his .

rook. Black gains the opportunity to
exchange the light-square bishops.
16
17
18
19
c5
b4
xg2
gxf4
lDg3
. 19
h5
Now what is White to do? 20 h4

looks the most logical (securing the
position of the laright at g3 ), but then
the h4 pawn would need defending.
If 20 f5, then 20 h4 2 1 fxg6 (2 1 f6
i.118) 2 1 . . . hfl 22 :xfl hxg3 23 l:tf7
'ifg4 24 ltxg7+ 9;xg7 25 .th6+ g6,
and Black must win. But White also has
an intermediate move at his disposal,
driving away the knight from the central
squares d4 and e5.
. . .
20 b5
tfl6e7
Perhaps 20 llJd8 (defending f7)

would have been more circumspect.
Now great complications arise.
...
-*.xg2
exf4
:eS
21
The psychological part of the plan

also justifies itself: in defending the
pawn, White aims simultaneously to
cover his king's pOSition, but 1 9 llec3
was probably strom.:ger. However,
already at this point White had obvious

ly foreseen the resulting complications,
and he thought that the weakening of
the black king's pawn cover would be
bound to tell.
22
23
f5!
fxg6
h4
:xn
hxgJ
.:.xn
24 :n
If 24 .i.h6 Black has a good reply in
24 . . . We6, whereas now-:..24 . 1i'e6 would
be met by 25 .:xg7+ r/;xgJ 26 .i.d4+
3 37
..
g8 27 ltJf6+. If 24 . . .Vg4, then the
same _sacrifice is decisive: 25 lhg7+

xg7 26 ct4+ <ifiixg6 27 'iff6+ @h7 28
iff7+ 'ilg7 29 liJf6+ and mate in two
moves.
24
.i.e5!
By temporarily retaining his bishop,

Black beats off the attack.
25
.i.d4
31
lU6+
32
33
34
ci>f2
h7
Now the checks collie to an end - 32

:f7+ @gs 33 :g1+ ct>fs.
.i.xg3
cxd6
1l'd3+
xb5
9'xe8
White resigns
1fg4
Game 363
Botvinnik-Portisch
Monte Carlo 1968
English Opening
26
:f4
Of course, stronger was 26 .i.xe5

gxh2+ (26 . . . 1i'xe4+? 27 <ifilh3) 27 .i.g3 I
(27 xh2 'l'h5+ and 28 . . . 'iixg6+), but
en so after 27 . .. 1ixe4+ 28 2
'i'xg6 (if 28 . . . WfxdS or 28 . . . ltlxd5 there
. follows 29 'ilh6) 29 liJxe7+ l:Ixe7 ! 30
l:xe7 tfJx.e7 3 1 cxd6 ltlf5 32 ii'd5+ f8
White is a pawn down, and he has a
difficult task to draw.
26
1.ib5
Now, if White parries the threat of

27 . . . 'i'xh2+, the reply 27 . . . lixd5 will
put an end to his attack, and Black is
after all a piece up!
27
28
29
30
J.xe5
'it>f3
tLlf6+
+
In our day it is almost impossible to

win in the style of the old masters. For
this you need your opponent to be in the
wrong frame of mind and psychologic
ally not ready for a battle. Usually with
Lajos Portisch that is in fact what
happens - once or twice over the course
of a tournament. In particular, this told
duritlg the following old-fashioned
game.
1
2
3
4
5
c4
thcJ
gJ
cxd5
.i.g2
5
6
thfJ
e5
6
d5
tt:lxd5
In this variation of the Englisll

Opening White' s plan includes pressure
on the h l -a8 diagonal and along the
file . . . But which file - this depends on
Black: either the c-fi.le (if the knigh1
simply leaves d5), or the b-file (if the
knight on d5 will be exchanged for the!
knight at c3).
'lfxh2+
'ifxd2
g7
xg6
8
338
0-0
dJ
J.e6
tt:lc6
tLlb6
opening the c-file and in some cases of

occupying c5 with a minor piece.
Black, possibly again aiming for a
draw, exchanges lo:lights, 1osing a tempo
in development. Meanwhile, he had
available the energetic reply 1 1 . . . ttJdS:
This, for example, is what Mariotti later
played against Gheorghiu ( 1976), and
the variation 12 .i.c 5 b6 1 3 i.xe7
tlJdxe7. 14 b4 axb4 1 5 axb4 1!i'd6
enabled him almost to equalise.
If White is aiming for an immediate

fight, he can play 8 a4 or 8 d4 exd4 9
.
4.lb5 .
..
8
9
e7
a5
a3
11
12
13
14
In several games my opponents as

Black carried out the plan of castling
kingside and advancing . . . f7-f5, without
preventing b2-b4 (Nos. 2 7 1 and 302). In
Ulis case White gained a clear advan
tage. 9 . as was once played against me
(before this game) by Flohr, and our
game quickly ended in a draw. Portisch,
however, was wrong to imagine that I
was in a peaceful mood. When I played
Flohr, I was mainly concerned that my
opponent did not lose interest in the
.
tournament and would play as well as

possible in his subsequent games. But
on this occasion I was ready to try and
exploit the defects of Black's last move,
which weakens somewhat his queenside
pawn formation.
10
11
.i..e3
ll:\a4
0-0
White carries ou a typical man

oeuvre in such positions, with the aim of
11xa4
llfcl
llc2
ltlxa4
.i..d 5
lte8
.tf8
Black again displays a certain com

placency. It was also not possible to
oppose White's aim of doubling rooks
by the excessively active plan with a
pawn sacrifice: 14 . b5 15 W'xb5 :bs 16
'i'a4 ( 1 6 .i.b3 1 7 'l'xc6), since it is not
apparent how the white queen' s seem
ingly dangerous position can be ex
ploited. However, as was pointed out by
Smyslov immediately after the game,
Black could have successfuHy defended
with 1 4 . . . .i.d6, and if 1 5 'i'bs f:De7.
.
. . .
. 15
:act
lhb8
Black's desire to play 16 . . . c6, com

pletely suppressing White's activity on
the c-file, is understandable, but for the
moment he sacrifices the c7 pawn and
t11e consequences of this tactical oper
ation were not calculated by him with
sufficient accuracy. In the event of
1 5 . e4 (to which Black's preceding
move seemed to have been directed) 16
dxe4 .i.xe4 17 l:Id2 1i'f6 18 .i.f4 :acs
the immediate threats would have been
parried, although White would have
retained the initiative.
3 39
. .
16
lhc7
.t:.c6
be accepted: 1 8 <it>xfi 19 11fc4+ <ai>g6

20 9g4+ W 2 1 liJg5+, and Black has
to part with his queen, otherwise he is
mated.
h6
18
Defending the g5 square, but weak
ening the light squares still further.
tics
19 :b7 .
<ifi>h8
20 1Fc4+
Also after 20 . 1We6 2 1 tDxe5 Black
would have been unable to resist for
long.
...
..
Black continues his manoeuvre, ex

pecting that White will have to give up
rook for bishop ( 17 :7xc6 CD.xc6) after
which Black's slight material advantage
will be compensated by White's
positional tnunps. Alas, disillusionment
awaits Portisch.
. 17 lltxc6!
Of course, Black also took this
sacrifice into account, but he incorrectly
thought that the rook at c7 would
remain trapped and would also have to
be given up. But the bishop at c6 is no
longer there, and the b7 square remains
undefended! However, even this is not
the main thing. The rook sacrifice has
eliminated the enemy bishop, which was
covering the light squares in Black's
position.
17
bxc6
Black retains his b7 pawn, but this is
of no significance, since White is
already aiming at the other flank.
18 1lxf7!
Rarely almost in the opening is one
able to give up both rooks, one after the
other. True the second sacrifice cannot
21 tDb4!
Once again White can ignore the
threat to his rook - he is playing for
mate.
21
11xb7
<t>h7
22 lDg6+
23 .i.e4
With the threat of 24 /1Je7+ and 25
1t'g8 mate.
23
j\d6
24 li)xe5+ g6
Or 24.. . h8 25 ltJt7+ g8 26
liJxd6+.
25 .tg6+
g7
26 .*.xb6+!
Black . resigns
340
If 26 . . . <iifxh6 there would have

followed 271 1ih4+ i-J;g7 28 'i'h7+ 6
(28 .. . <tif8 29 'i'xb7) 29 ltJg4+ @e6
(29 . . . g5 30 1ffb5 mate) 30 'ii'xb7.
As I have already mentioned, the
Hungarian grandmaster \ised to suffer
lapses, when he would lose even to
weak masters. On this occasion the
' lucky recipient' was the author of these
lines. Even so, I hope that the kind
reader will not regard me as a weak
player.
8 cxd5 exd5 9 b4 c 5 10 dxc5 bxc5 1 1

bxc5 .txc5 12 0-0 'i'e7 13 .tb2.
i.xc4
c5
Game 3 64
Botvinnik-Kholmov
Now the exchange on c5 suggests

itself, leading also to the exchange of
queens, when for the coming endgame
White is better mobilised. However, I
had to decide: should I take on c5
immediately, or first castle? In the first
case White would gain time, since his
plan includes placing his king on e2 and
his king's rook on d l . Fearing some
counterplay by Black, associated with
the fact that the white king remains in
the centre, I preferred to castle, And I
was wrong!
Aloscow Team Championship, 1969
1
2
l
4
d4
el
li)f6
e6
ilb4
0-0
5
6
..i.d3
al
d5
JJ.e7
c4
lt)cJ
4 . . . c5 would have restricted White's

possibilities somewhat.
I would remind you that Tal played

6 . . . dxc4 7 .txc4 ..i.d6 against me
(Games 285 and 286) this was also
played by Balashov (Game 346).
lLifJ
Also possible is another favourable

plan, which was employed by Petrosian
in a game with Antoshin (1957) : 7 cxd5
exd5 8 b4 b6 9 ltJge2 c5 10 b5 a6 1 1 0-0
axb5 1 2 .txb5.
9
10
0-0
dxc5
li)c6
White could also have avoided the

exchange of queens, by 10 i.d3 . The
game Lipnitsky-Polyak ( 1 949) showed
that he retains the advantage after 10 . . .
cxd4 1 1 exd4 b6 1 2 b4 ..ib7 1 3 i.b2.
But why take risks in a team event?
dxc4
10
7 . . . b6 also comes into consideration.

However, in the game Mecking-Donner
( 1 97 1) White reUtjnect some advantage:
341
1ixd1
Black is obviously aiming for a draw.
11
12
%1xd1
b4
.i.xc5
ll.e7
13
.tb2
1 8 . . tt1e4 only seems more active, but

after 19 .td3 the rooks are exchanged,
and the knight has to abandon its
position in the centre.
.td7
19
.i.b5
White provokes the exchange of

rooks and preserves his dark-square
bishop from exchange (after 1 9 . . . .ilf6).
19
20
i.xcl
!ixcl+
lLlb6
White controls more space and has a

lead in development, but can this be
exploited? Up to a point, Kholmov dem
onstrates that Black has quite adequate
resources for maintaining the balance.
14
ltle4
Jlfd8
Black has no reason to fear 1 5 tiJxf6+

.i.xf6 16 .i.x:f6 gxf6, since all his
difficulties would be behind him. It
would have been simpler for him to play
14 . . . ltJxe4 1 5 l:.xd7 ctJd6! followed by
16 . . . :fd8, as my opponent pointed out
after the game.
15
At last the king can be brought into

play, and within ten moves it will
occupy a dominating position in the
centre of the board.
21
22
23
ltld6
. Only this continuation can promise

White some advantage.
15
a.c8
Of course, Kholmov prefers to retain

his dark-square bishop, which will
counter the activity of the bishop at b2.
16
17
'Dxc8
l1xd8+!
17
18
l:lcl
ttJxd8
ltld7
a6
ltlc6
g6
Black has no reason to fear the

exchange on c6, and the h7 pawn has to
be covered. so that the king can move
towards the centre.
24
25
26
.:axc8
White's plan is clear: to exchange all

the rooks. after which it will be possible
to activate his king.
<it>fl
.i.dJ
.i.e4
e2
d3
.i.b2
e8
ltld5
The whole point is that Black could

not continue his king march: if 26 . . . <&t>d7
there would have followed 27 .i.xc6+
and 28 t2Je5+, winning a pawn. Now
342
White has to exchange bishop for

knight, then also the central pawns, but
on the other hand a way is opened for
his king to advance.
.lxd5
e4
'it>xe4
'it>d5
27
28
29
30
exd5
dxe4+
d7
For Black it would be most advan

tageous to exchange the knights, and for
White - the bishops. As for the ex
change of the white bishop for the black
knight, it too can be considered to
favour White, but even so this is what
Black should have decided on (32 . . .
tLle7+). Strangely enoug Black ex
changes bishops, after which the proba
bility of zugzwang is greatly increased.
33
.tc5
ttle7+
Now this check is possible (bad is 34

!JLxe7 xe7, when the f2 pawn is en
prise), but this is no longer of signifi
cance, since the exchange of the white
bishop for one of the enemy pieces is
assured.
34
h5
30
Up to this point Black has defended

well, but here he plays imprudently. He
should have acted wit11out delay by
playing 30 .i.d8 ! , whea without ex
changing knights (3 1 ltJe5+), White
would be unable to maintain his king at
d5 (or e5) in view of the inevitable
3 l . . .ltJe7+. But in the bishop ending the
chance of putting the opponent in zug
zwang is minimal, and White would
probably have been unable to convert
his positional advantage.
. ..
31
34
il.g7!
il.f8
i.xc5
The reader already knows that it

would have been better to agree to the
exchange of the knight; 34 . . i.c7 should
have been played.
Now the e7 square is no longer ac

cessible to the black knight: if 3 1 . .. .i.d6
there would follow 32 i.f6, and the
white king remains on its central square.
31
32
'it>c4
After 34 e5 i.xc5 3 5 bxc5 the

situation would be more complicated
(due to the weakness of the c5 pawn),
and so White chooses a different way.
.i.d8
.fi.. b6
343
35
'it>xc5
c7
Defending the b6 square by 3 5 . . . tDc8

also had its drawbacks - the black
knight would become too passive.
36
itlg5
36
37
38
itlh7
h4
Forcing the advance, and hence the

weakening, of Black's kingside pawns.
f6
f5
Zugzwang is approaching. In the

event of 3 8 . . . b6+ 3 9 ct>d4 <it>d6 40 tDf8
etJc6+ 4 1 <;t>e3 tDe5 42 'it>f4 the g6 pawn
cannot be defended. Kholmov seeks
salvation in tactical complications.
38
39
.
li_)f8
f4
b6+
The best practical chance was

probably 39 . . . D 40 g3 tills 4 1 tDxg6
lDxg3. Although after 42 'it>d4 White
also comes out a pawn up. the technical
difficulties would be more significant.
My opponent underestimated White's
42nd move.
40
<ifi>d4
ttJf5+
41
e4
tLlxh4
40 . f3 41 g3 ctJf5+ is now too late, if

only because of 42 d3 !
..
4 1 . f3 again does not help in view of

42 <it>xf3 l'Dxh4+ 43 lt>g3 li:Jf5+ ( 43 . . . g5
44 ltJe6+) 44 f4
It would appear that Black has

nevertheless succeeded in creating some
counterplay, since it seems impossible
to prevent him from creating a passed
pawn on the queenside. White, however,
has prepared the necessary antidote.
46
lDe6+
<it>c6
Black's last hope is to attack White's

queenside pawns.
43
ttJ:d'4
g3
tLlxg6
ltlc4
'il?a4
<it>bJ
48
49
50
51
52
ltlxb6
'it>xa3
lLld5
<it>b3
f4
c4
ltlc7
<ii>xb4
ltlxa6+
Black resigns
<it>b5
When he played 39 . . . b6+ Black over

looked that if 43 . . . g5 White replies 44
g3 ! gxf4 45 gxh4 with a won pawn
ending. Therefore my opponent is
forced to readjust.
44
45
46
47
The situation is not changed by

47 . . . b5 48 lDe5 xa3 49 tDc6! or
47 . . . ct>bS 48 ttJb2.
. .
42
li)e5!
A manoeuvre, after which everything

becomes clear.
tLlf5
itlh6
344
Game 3 65
Ostojic-Botvinnik
Beverwijk 1969
French Defence
1
2
e4
d4
e6
d5
lhd2
e5
lDf6
lDfd7
f4
At present this variation is not as

popular as 5 i.d3, but even so it also
sets Black difficult problems.
5
6
cJ
lDdfJ
c5
c6
in a number of other games), 8 . . . h5 9

gxh5 :xh5 10 t'De2 tbb6 1 1 ltig3 lth8,
did not appeal to me, since I thought
that in certain circumstances Black
should have the possibility of initiating
immediate counterplay on the queenside
by . . . b5-b4.
9
10
it)e2
.i.h3
lt:'lb6
First 10 fi)g3 should have been

played, to prevent Black' s undennining
advance . . . h7-h5. This is what hap
pened later in the game Belyavsky
Bagirov ( 1 974): 10 ltJg3 a5 1 1 Ag2 b4
12 0-0 a4 13 a3 bxc3 14 bxc3 lDa5 1 5
lta2 ctJb3 16 f5 h6 17 hl.
10
11
12
gxh5
.i.g4
h5
!lxb5
llh8
Now there begins a battle for (and

against) f4-f5 .
Petrosian's idea. which he employed

against Cooper in the 16th Olympiad
( 1 964). The point is that White's king's
bishop will now be unable to reach the
b l -h7 diagonal at an early stage of the
game. However, the blocking of the
queenside allows White to gain a men
acing initiative on the kingside.
However, does Black have anything
better? If 7 . . . 'i'a5 the simplest is 8 f2.
g3
11e7
ffc2
g6
h4
After 1 5 <it>f2 lLlf5 White would have
lost the opportunity of advancing his
pawn to h4 without exchanging the
knight at f5, but after the exchange (as
occurred in the game) the pawn march
h2-h4-h5 is no longer dangerous for
Black.
b5
The continuatin .that occurred in the

afore-mentioned game of Petrosian (and
15
16
.i.xf5
16
...
11f5
1 6 'i'h2 was no better on account of

16 . . . ltJxh4 17 t:Dxh4 i..e 7.
g4!
The most energetic and logical reply.

lf 8 b3 Black can reply 8 . . . b5, and the
variation 9 a4 ttJas 1 O ltid2 b4 is quite
safe for him.
13
14
15
c4
gxf5!
Now Black's position on the kingside

is secure. He has sufficient space for
manoeuvring, while the white h-pawn is
not only blocking the . enemy forces, but
is also subsequently a target. The
345
picture would have been quite different

after 16 . . . exf5 17 h5, when White's
advantage is obvious.
17
25
l:tagl
l:tgh8
Parrying the threat of 26 l2Je4.
26
27
28
29
l1h3
l:tghl
l::t l h2
g2
c7
J:l8h7
'ilh8
ltlc8
tl'lg5
The knight 's position may look

menacing, but all its 'shots' are blanks.
17
18
19
20
exf6
'ife2
h5
f6
1f xf6
.i.d6
llh6!
The knight .embarks on a lengthy

journey; its ultimate destination is e4.
The h-pawn must be blockaded, since

it is restricting three of its own pieces:
queen, rook, and knight at g3 .
21
tl'lf3
White redirects his knight to another

square: where. however, it will be just
as harmlessly placed. Perhaps he should
have tried to maintain the status quo.
21
22
...
ll'le5
30
31
32
..i.e3
ltle7
.i.d7
White has returned his laright to its

former position, where it at least
prevents the opponent from tripling on
the h-file.
.i.d7
0-0-0
Here the king feels very much at
home. This is one of the subtle points of
Petrosian' s generally unsuccessful idea.
So, in this game too I castled late, but
I cannot especially boast about this, as
my opponent did not castle at all.
23
24
i.d2
ltlfJ
tl'lg5
:lg8
il.e8
346
32
33
34
35
lDfl
<ifiih l
l:th4
l:tg7
lDgS
l:Ie7
ll'lf6
From this point until the time control

White does not do anything, since he
has no such opportunity, and Black
waits for the end of time trouble.
36 lt2h3
37 lDgJ
38 . g2
<it>c8
1ff8
.i.c6
3 9 ltlxe6 1s not dangerous for Black

in view of 39 . . . 'i'g8.
hope of further strengthening his

position on the kingside.
His reckoning proves to be correct,
since White is condemned to passivity
with each move Black's advantage
increases.
46 lt)fl
il..e7
'i'g8
47 :!4h3
48 lig3
a5
39 1
It is not a bad thing also to 'frighten'
the opponent with the prospect of a
breakthrough on the queenside.
1f.e8
40 l:[b2
lhe4
41 1fe1
The invasion of the knight in the

centre has at last taken place. It is not
easy for White to tolerate the enemy
piece here, although had he done so he
would probably have been able to
prolong the resistance. But after the
following exchange the active white
knight is eliminated, while Black
acquires a passed pawn and his queen's
bishop gains in scope.
42 l15xe4
After 42 t2J3xe4 the h5 pawn would
have been in danger, but now White's
cover on the g-file disappears. It should
also be remembered that Black always
has active play on the queenside in
reseive.
dxe4
42
43 ife2
.i.d5
lib7
44 a3
i:'t g7
45 <st>f2
Black decides to defer . . . b5-b4 in the
White allows the invasion of the

black bishop at h4, after which the out
come is decided. But, on the other hand,
what could he do? After all, the un
pleasant invasion of the rook at g4 was
threatened.
48
:xg3
49 ltlxg3
1fd8
To defend the h4 square a second
time, White would have had to make
two moves in a row: 'i'e2-fl-h3 . . .
so 1ifl
.th4
51 'i'b3
lixh5
The further resistance does credit
only to the stubbornness of my
opponent.
52 e2
ilh8
53 lLlxf5
A desperation saCrifice.
347
53
. 54
.i.el
was carried out two years earlier by

Basman in a game against me in
Hastings, and folloWing his example
this method of play for Black became
firmly established in tournament play.
exf5
The immediate 54 iixf5+ 'ifd7 was

even wors-e.
54
55
56
57
1lxf5+
l:lxh8
.i.h4
il.f6
<J;c7
.i.xh8
1fd7
The simplest way to win.
58
59
1if8
<i;d2
ltld5
Since 7 d3 .i.xc3 8 bxc3 e4 leads to a

position from my game with Basman, in
which I did not gain any tangible
advantage, and my opponent, naturally,
was hoping for this continuation, I
decided to play differently.
1ig4+
e3+
As will be apparent later, this is a

useful pawn sacrifice.
11xh4
60 xeJ
61 'i'c5+
White resigns, without waiting for
the obvious reply 61 . . . Jl.c6. Then if 62

d5
there would have
followed
62 . . . 'i'g3+, 63 . . . 'i'd3+ and 64. . .'i'xd5
(this is why the enemy king had to be
enticed to e3 ), while after 62 ifa7+ <t>c8
63 'i'a6+ d7 64 'i'a7+ e6 there are
no more useful checks.
Game 366
Botvinnik-Ree
Beverwijk 1969
English Opening
1
2
3
c4
ttJcJ
g3
e5
ttlf6
.i.b4
4
5
6
.i.g2
ttJfJ
0-0
0-0
ite8
ttJc6
This variation, a
Vladimir Simagin, is
strongest one for Black.
favourite of
probably the
.i.c5
Inconsistent. As will be seen, Black

had decided to exchange on d5, and he
should have done this immediately
(7 . . . ti:Jxd5 8 cxd5 d4), when White
would not have had a convenient retreat
at d2 for his knight from f3 .
Another
interesting reply
was
7 . . . .i.f8, which was employed much
earlier (Portisch-Filip, 1 962). After 8 d3
h6 Black had a satisfactory position.
d3
Now Black goes in for the exchange

in a less favourable situation.
8
9
The most advisable here is 6 . . . e4 7

d4 c6 or first 7 ... .i.xc3 . This idea
348
cxd5
t2Jxd5
tiJd4
10
lhd2
White's pieces are temporarily com

pressed, like a spring, but soon it will
uncoil !
10
11
12
e3
lhc4
13
i.d2
17
18
19
'lrc2
ltcl
20
d4
f5
l:e7
1.b6
d6
lhf5
d7
Perhaps Benko played more subtly

against Gheorghiu ( 1 972): 12 . . .tDe7,
although after 1 3 .i.d2 c6 14 b4 .i.b6 1 5
dxc6 bxc6 16 b 5 he failed t o equalise.
A move which I deeided on only
Now the threat of 14 b4 i.b6 15 a4 is

unpleasant.
13
14
15
b4
a6
ll.a7
.fl.c8
lDa5
A difficult decision, but Black
was
afraid of playing his rook to b8, rightly

assuming that this might hinder the
defence of his backward c7 pawn.
16
l:lcl
17
.:cJ .
i0h6
Black is hoping to create counterplay

on the kingside. He has no other active
plan.
This direct presure on the c7 pawn
suggests itself.
after lengthy hesitation. 20 . . . exd4 2 1

exd4 i s unfavourable for Black
(2 1 . . . .i.xd4 22 :xc7), since the opening
of the game is to the advantage of the
better mobilised side. Of course, I also
considered 20. . . e4, shutting out of play
the bishop at g2. In this case, however,
Black would have been deprived of the
chances associated with . . . f5-f4, and
hence his bishops too would have
remained passive. In addition, . after
20 . . . e4 White could have immediately
intensified the pressure on the c7 pawn
by 2 1 a4 ! , with the threat of 22 l0c4
i.a7 23 a5.
20
g4
This is the most hannless reply, since

White exchanges his doubled pawn for
the good pawn at e5, without which the
f-pawn cannot advance, and he will be
free to intensify the pressure on the
weak c7 pawn.
349
21
dxe5
xe5
In the event of 2 1 . .. dxe5 Black would

have lost control of the c5 square, and
also the laright at e5 is needed to pre
vent the manoeuvre mentioned earlier:
a2-a4 and ltlc4.
22
c4
It is useful for White to exchange

knights: then the other side's lack of
development will become even more
marked.
22
23
%bc4
xc4
.i.d7
At last this bishop has gained the

opportllllity to remind one of its
existence but how will Black be able to
defend the c7 pawn?
24
25
a4
bxa5
a5
.t.c5
After 25 J..xa5 26 .i.xa5 l:txa5 27

:xc7 .?lxa4 (27 . . . .lxa4 28 %1c8) 28
:xb7 White is a pawn up with the better
position.
this the dark-square bishop becomes

very strong, Black's position proves to
be indefensible.
26
27
tfxc5
dxc5
c6
Of course. not 27 . . . i.xa4 because of

.
28 'i'c4 with the tltreats of 2 9 1!fxa4 and
29 d6+.
28
29
30
31
l:tbl
.lb4
l:tdl
d6
.i.e8
ltti
l:lc8
Now all the black pieces, apart from

the queen, are condemned to passivity,
and on its own the queen cannot do
anything.
31
32
33
34
. . .
hJ
<ifi>h2
l:ld2
.i.d7
h6
'ffg5
lle8
White spends a further three moves

destroying Black s last hopes of
counterplay.
35
36
37
f4
.i.d
.i.e5
Wf6
9e6
9b3
Now it appears that the worst for

Black is over, but . . .
26
%lxc5!
White's extra pawn allows him to

sacrifice the exchange, eliminating the
opponent's only active piece. Since after
3 50
Now White is again able to exchange

devalued doubled pawn for an
since after then playing . . . e6-e5 Black

can develop his queen' s bishop at g4.
9 b4!
An idea which, in reply t.o .8 . . .ltlc6, I
carried out in the 3rd game of the return
match with Tai (No.286). White uses
the tempo saved by not castling, .in order
to activate his queen's bishop as quickly
as possible.
Other continuations:
9 e4 e5
(Gligoric-Pachman, 1961) and 9 1Wc2 e5
(Van Scheltinga-Euwe, 1948), would
seem to give Black an equal game.
e5
9
10 .i.b
important enemy pawn, obtaining in the

process an outsi9e passed pawn on the
a-file.
38 l:tb2
1fxa4
39 lbb7
:as
11c2
40 Ji.cl
The time control was reached, and
there was no doubt that White would
seal the obvious 4 1 ifc4 with the threat
of 42 llxd7. Then the only 'defence'
would be 4 1 ...l:td8 (4 1 . . . 42
.i.xg7+), allowing the a-pawn to
advance. Therefore . . .
Black resigns.
Game 367
Botvinnik-Van Scheltin ga
Beverwijk 1 969
d4
tLlf6
e6
2 c4
3 lDcJ
.i.b4
0--0
4 e3
Tastes differ, it is true, but I, as a
rule, preferred to castle later with Black
in the Nimzo-Indian Defence.
d5
5 .i.dJ
6 a3
dxc4
7 .*.xc4
7 i.xh7+ is another possibility, but,
although it has been employed several
times, in this case Black can maintain
the balance.
7
.i.d6
tDf3
8 f4 does not promise White any

advantage (cf. Game 346).
8
t0bd7
The usual reply} lhc6 is stronger,

10
e4?
After this Black begins to have
difficulties. When White has not yet
castled kingside, this advance must be
approached with great caution. A simi
lar situation arises in the French
Defence when White prematurely plays
e4-e5. However, in this situation
10 . . exd4 1 1 Wxd4 is also favourable for
White - this is where the absence of the
knight from c6 tells. 10 . . a5 1 1 b5 exd4
12 ti)xd4 l'Db6 1 3 .i.e2 also cannot be
recommended for Blck. Therefore he
351
should have chosen a cautious move

(10 ... a6, or 10 ... c6, or even 10. . . 1ie7),
retaining a defensible position.
11
12
thd2
1'.e2
Also bad is 14 . . . ti:Jxc3 15 gxf6 li)xdl

16 fxe7 ll'lxb2 17 exf81i+, when White
has a material advantage sufficient for a
win.
thb6
iie7
15 fxe3
Of course, not 15 gxf6 'ifxf6 16
In this way Black appears to secure

his central pawn. But since White has
not yet castle in the battle against the
e4 pawn he can make use of an
unexpected resource.
dxe4 ( 1 6 fxe3 9h4+ 1 7 <ifi>fl .i.h3+ 18

'ifi>gl 1!i'g5+) 16 ... 1i'h4 with some
complications. Now, however, White is
simply a piece up.
15
li)d5
Since 1 5 . . . tiJe8 16 ctJdxe4 leaves

Black with no hopes of saving the game,
he tries to pour fuel on the fire.
16
17
li)xd5
Q:)xe4
1i'xg5
In order to win one game, one extra

piece is sufficient.
13
g4!
In view of the threat of 14 g5 (and if

13 ...h6 14 h4 and 15 gS), Black cannot
defend his central outpost. It may be
recalled that in a slightly different
situation (to eliminate the defence of the
h7 pawn) I canied out such a pawn
storm back in 1934 in a game with
Alatortsev (No.59). At that time this
move was virtually a revelation, where
as now it has almost become a standard
procedure .
. 13
...
14
g5
17
18
19
20
t[}xd6
0-0
20
21
22
23
:n
1fd3
e4
.i.fJ
1!fxd5
h8
1fxd6
It is only now that White needs to

castle.
thbd5
My opponent makes a desperate

attempt to confuse the play, but it is not
hard to find a way through this
'confusion' .
. thxeJ
352
Jl.h3
l:tae8
.b6
lle6
This is the most obvious way of

making it hard for White to develop his
kingside play. Now the advance of the
d-pawn is impossible, and that of the g
pawn is more difficult. This method was
well known earlier, but usually Black
first developed his king's knight at f6,
then (after castling) moved it, and only
after this played . . . f7-f5. By making
this advance immediately, he gains two
tempi.
The early advance of the f-pawn is an
idea that I also carried out in earlier
times, both with White (in the English
Opening), and with Black in the Closed
Variation of the Sicilian Defence (for
example, in the 1 3th game of my 19 54
match with Smyslov, No.223).
Black has a pawn for the piece, and

the moment there is no immediate
danger, and . so he considers himself
obliged to play on.
for
24
25
26
27
28
d5
<ilbt
1id4
:gt
<ifi>xg1
ii g6+
1fh4
f6
l:.xg1+
l:le8
29
30
31
32
ht
lle2
.i.xg4
b5
.i.g4
'i'xg4
Even if Black were allowed to switch

his rook directly via e5 to g5, it would
be an ' attack' without any threats.
'tle3
Finally White creates his first threat:
n i.xf6 (33 . . . gxf6 34 'i'h6+ 'it>gs 3 5
ng2) therefore, most probably, Black
resigned.
Grune 368
Medina-Botvinnik
Beverwijk 1969
Sicilian Defence
1
2
3
e4
lBc3
gJ
c5
lBc6
Theory considers that only by the

fianchetto of his king's bishop can
White hope for an opening advantage.
3
4
5
6
i.g2
d3
f4
g6
i.g7
d6
6 .i.e3 is also played, but without

particular success.
tl)f3
7
8
9
0-0
'i>ht
7 exf5 .ltxf5 can hardly be dangerous

for Black, and, as shown , by the game
Tarve-Pohla (Parnu 1971), 7 . . .gxf5 is
also possible: 8 'i'h.5+ <ifi>f8 9 'i'dl ttJf6
10 liJf3 <:J;f7 1 1 t2Jg5+ 'it>g6 12 h4 h5,
with a promising position for Black.
f5
353
ltlf6
0-0
'ii?b8
If White has vacated the g 1 square

for his queen's bishop, why should
Black not follow such a good example?
In the second edition of the Ency
clopaedia (in contrast to the first), this
plan is also recommended. As for
9 . . . J..d7 10 Ji.e3 ztb8 1 1 'i'e2 b5 12
J..g l b4 1 3 ti:Jdl ti:Je8 14 c3, which
occurred in the game Smyslov-Larsen
( 1958), then White's chances would
seem to be preferable.
10 il.eJ
.i.e6
1 1 1i'd2
For some reason the Encyclopaedia
ignores this natural continuation and
recommends playing 1 1 J.gl 'iid7 12
exf5, reckoning that after 12 ... .i.xf5 13
d4 White has the advantage. Tiris may
be so. But if Black replies 12 . . . gxf5,
then 13 d4 no longer leads to an advan
tage for White, as stated in Informator
No.25 (Rajcevic-Martinovic), since with
13 . . . .il.c4 1 4 l:te 1 cxd4 15 lDxd4 :ae8
Black achieves a good game.
ifd7
11
:ae8
12 .i.gl
b6
13 ltael
This advance is motivated by the
need to defend the c5 pawn in the event
of a possible e4-e5 .
14 b3
But this similar reply was not
induced by anything. and is at best a
waste of time.
14
..
g8
15 tLlh4
White is aiming for an attack, which,
however, is not easy to build up. The
direct 15 e5 dxe5 1 6 lDxe5 ltJxe5 1 7
f.xe5 would have been met by 17 . . . lDg4
(18 'i'f4 .i.h6).
ltlg4
15
A good position for the knight, since
h2-h3 would weaken the white king' s
position. Now B1ack gains the oppor
tunity to begin active play, by advan
cing his central pawns.
16 tLld5
In order not to remain out of play, the
knight aims to exchange itself for its
active opponent.
16
e6
17 ltleJ
tl)xe3
d5
18 .i.xe3
19 e5
Now the play becomes closed, and
since on the kingside Black has a solid
position, White subsequently cannot do
anything active. And at the same time
the bishops at g7 and g8 only seem
passive, but nothing will be able to
prevent them from switching to good
positions. Therefore White would have
done better to maintain the tension. in
the centre.
19
d4
In this way the weakness of the c3
square is fixed.
20 Af2
3 54
28
b5
White is relying on the closed nature

of the position, but in vain. It is now
that Black gains complete freedom for
manoeuvring. Therefore 28 bxc5 really
would have been better.
28
29
a4
lhe7
a6
Since the h 1 -a8 diagonal can always

be blocked by the laright at d5, this last
move by Black, emphasising the weak
ness of the white a- and b-pawns, is
perfectly possible.
20
30
31
32
g5!
For the present this is only a prophyl

uct ic measure against possible activity
by White on the kingside; by advancing
his pawn to g4, Black will guarantee
hi n iself against any unpleasantness.
However, this seizure of space also
n l lows Black at the necessary moment
lo himself begin energetic play on this
pm1 of the board.
21
c4
lhxc3
axb5
dxc3
axb5
ltld5
Of course, Black declines the gift

(32 . . . 'i'xd3) in view of 33 'i'b3 with the
threats of 34 :t'dl and 34 'i'xe6.
33
34
lhxd5
ltbt
exd5
: as
lhf3
After 2 1 fxg5 ttJxe5 the centre of the

hoa rd passes into the opponent's
possession.
21
22
lhgl
g4
ltc8
The switching of the forces to the

q11censide begins.
23
24
25
lhe2
Ilcl
ifdl
ltfd8
J.h6
The threat of 25 . . . ltJxe5 has to be

parried.
25
26
27
a3
b4
.i.f7
.i.e8
The only active possibility.
27
J..f8
What can be said about this position?

The passed e5 pawn is of no signifi
cance, since it will be blocked by the
light-square bishop. And at the same
time the black c- and d-pawns are shut
ting both of the white bishops out of the
game.
355
35
d4
Now Black obtains a passed pawn,

but White is hoping to bring his queen' s
bishop into play vi a b4.
35
36
11e2
47
ifxb4
48
49
50
l:lcl
11el
cbl
Now Black need no longer fear h2-h4

- the g3 pawn is en prise.
c4
:sa4
:aS
It was more logical to play 3 6 .i.el

immediately.
36
37
.i.el
.tf7
.fla4
Exploiting the opportunity offered,

for the moment Black prevents further
simplification.
38
39
40
41
.icJ
l:lfcl
lk2
gl
.i.e6
l:t.da8
.i.e7
g7
Both players realise that the action is

bound to spread to the h-file, and so it is
50
useful for the kings to leave it in good

time.
42
43
43
1i'e7
Here the queen is most active.
h4
1id2
.i.fl
h5
51
h4
White's position is becoming hope
gxh3 44 xh3 would have
less. His pieces are tied down, and are
inevitably led to an attack by Black on
unable simultaneously to defend both
the kingside. White continues to set his
the queenside and the kingside.
hopes on avoiding the opening of the

position.
43
44
g6
.:aJ
to
exchange
the
in view
55
hxg3
of the threat of
!!h2+
56
gl
second rank.
54
55
56
dark-square
inunediately makes itself felt.
llh8
I:txg3+ but in so doing he concedes the
c4 pawn arl.d the third rank, which
...
l:tcJ
54 . . . hxg3+
bishops, but in so doing he unblocks the
46
53
54
necessary
White straight away takes the oppor

tunity
:as
White defends this rank, which is
h4 (45 . . .gxh3 46 .i.xh5+).
Itcb2
.ib4
11cl
:c2
Trying to block the third rank.
f7
ll.e2
Creating the positional threat of 45
44
45
46
52
53
.i.xb4
hxg3
l:tb2
hxg3+
l:a2
h2+
Here the game was adjourned for the
second time. but it was not resumed. If
3 56
usually endeavours as soon as possible

to initiate an exchang of fire with
7 . . l'Llg4.
"i7 cJi?e3 the .s.imple 57 . . . 'i'a7 is possible,

nnd soon BIck wins the b5 pawn.
White resigns.
Game 369
Botvinnik-Lombardy
Beverwijk 1969
Sicilian Defence
1
2
3
c4
lbf3
e4
c5
g6
d4
lbxd4
.i.eJ
.ie2
d6 . :i;
0-0
.i.d7
Here 9 . . . t'Dg4 no longer works

because of 10 .i.xg4 i.xd4 ( 10 . . . .ixg4
1 1 tLlxc6) 1 1 .txc8.
This move signifies that White is

rejecting the English Opening in favour
o f the Sicilian Defence. It is tempting
1 hat this leads to the Maroczy Variation
( with c2-c4), which, in my view, sets
Black a number of difficult problems.
3
4
5
6
7
Here mention can be made of a

dubious experiment by Bronstein in a
game with Aronin (195 1): 8 . . .lLle8 9
'i'd2 f5 10 exf5 gxf5 1 1 f4 tiJc7 12 0-0-0
d6 1 3 .i.f3 with a clear advantage to
White.
10
'ild2
In recent times preference has more

often been given to 10 lt.c 1 .
10
lhxd4
Experience has shown that it is hard

for Black to manage without this
exchange, although he has often first
played . . . a7-a6 and . . . l:c8. At the given
moment the exchange allows the queen
to be brought out to a5, since White's
queen is unprotected and he does not
have the reply ttxl5.
Jlg7
cxd4
lbc6
lDf6
lbc3
11
.ixd4
1la5
Another method of play consists in

playing the bishop to c6 followed by
. . . a7-a5 and . . . l'Lld7.
12
0-0
1*
It is hard to call this move a mis e,

but nevertheless, in view of White's
obvious dominance in. the centre, Black -
ltfdl
lifc8
It is well known that if in similar

positions Black succeeds in advancing
. . . b7-b5 (after the preparatory . . . a7-a6),
he obtains a good game. Bearing in
mind my tournament position, I decided
to risk a possible draw in a slightly
better endgame, but on the other hand I
clearly disrupted my opponent's plans.
The following exchanges deprive
Black of any counterplay, which was
357
certainly not to the liking of my young

opponent.
20
21
22
23
Itel
.i.f1
ctfl
i.e8
iJ..f7
a6
lie.3!
23 . . . b5 has not yet been prepared,

since there follows 24 M, and White
uses a standard procedure for trans
ferring his rook for an attack on the h5
pawn.
23
This loss of another tempo merely
indicates that Black does not appreciate
the dangers of his position.
13
14
.i.xf6
thd5
24
25
26
.txf6
ifxd2
lhxf6+
g7!
After 15 . . . exf6 16 l:txd.2 l:!c6 17 l:tadl

Black would also have lost his d6 pawn,
but now he has a weak pawn at h5.
16
17
lhh5+
llxd2
llac5
l18c7
White has deployed his pieces in the

best way possible, and now he begins
the 'pursuit' of the h5 pawn - the
concluding stage of the plan, begun
after the opening with 14 llXI5.
Otherwise Black loses his d6 pawn.
15
a4
.i.e2
llg3+
gxh5
f6
For the moment the h5 pawn is im

mune: White's bishop has to defend the
c4 pawn. Therefore Black first of all
parries the threat of 1 8 e5, and 1 8 :d5
isnot dangerous: he can reply 18 . . . .i.e6.
18
19
b3
f4
lies
ltac8
Despite the transition into the end

game. Black still has only tl1e one active
plan consisting in the preparation of
. . . b7-b5 (for example. 1 9 . . . .i.e8 and
20 . . . l:.b8). Of course, this would not rid
him of all his difficulties: the h5 pawn
would remain :weak, and on the queen
side one pawn , would have to oppose
two enemy pawns. However, marking
time would be even worse.
<t>f8
26
After 26 . . . 'it>h6 27 l;t.b3 White would
have then played f4-f5 with the threat of
i.xh5 and g2-g4. And if Black replies to
the advance of the f-pawn with . . . 'it>g5,
then l!.dd3 underlins the danger of the
black king' s 'thoughtless behaviour' .
358
27 . . :lh3
Winning a second pawn (d6 or h7).
:1c6
33
34
35
36
ltxd6
ltdJ
:g4
.i.g8
<be7
:e5
J..ti
37
38
l::tg7
l:h7
h6
ltb6
The first and last attempt to create

counterplay: Black is ready to give up
t he exchange (2 b4 llxc4 29 i.xc4
J1xc4), after which his position is
a I right. But White continues attacking
1 hc h5 pawn.
The invasion of the seventh rank by

the rook is unavoidable.
30 . . .txh5 3 1 l:xh5 b5 was bad for

I Hack on account of 32 l:txh7 bxc4 3 3
Iih8+ ! g7 34 l:tclh3, when mate is
inevitable.
In .the vain hope of continuing the

resistance after 3 9 :xh6 :xe4. White,
however. can conclude matters with an
attack!
39 .i.g4
<t>f8
28
29
30
f5
lldd3
i.. xh5
l:tb6
l:tb4
. J..g8!
40 lid8+
i.e8
41 lah8+
Black resigned, without waiting for
the obvious finish: 42 .:!dxe8 (or 42

l:thxe8) 42 . . . :xe8 43 h5+.
The plan devised after the opening
proved justified: White was able to win
without any risk.
Game 370
Ciric-Botvinnik
Beverwijk 1969
But how can White now parry the

threat of 3 1 . . . b5, when Black's kingside
appears to be securely defended?
31
This imperceptible move solves the

problem. Now if 3 1 . . .b5 there follows
3 2 l:tg3 bxc4 3 3 l:thg4 ilf7 3 4 .i.xfl
xfl 35 g8 and 36 kt3g7 mate. There
fore Black is forced to forget about
counterplay' and to prepare an escape
for his king.
31
32
33
1
2
3
4
5
Jih4!
fxe6
J.. d l
e6
i.xe6
e4
d4
ltlfJ
ltlc3
ile2
g6
!i.. g7
d6
ltlf6
Regarding the development of the

light-square bishop at c4, see Games
353, 374 and 378.
5
..
0-0
.
0-0
.i.g4
The most natural development plan,

although here other continuations have
359
also been employed: 6 . . . lDfd7; 6 . . . c5;

6 . . . a6; 6 . . . e5; 6 . . . c6 etc.
7 .i.eJ
7 .i.g5 is perhaps stronger. That is
what Matulovic played against me in the
3rd round of the 'Match of the Century'
(Belgrade 1 970).
7
c6
10
11
.i.e2
11
12
dxe5
ltlb6
1 1 b3 was simpler.
e5
Aiming for simplification.
12
dxe5
Black has no reason to avoid the ex

change of queens, since he will have the
hope of establishing his knight on d4.
13
1ixd8
On this exchange White loses a

further tempo, but he was afraid that
after the more natural 1 3 :ad 1 there
would follow 1 3 . . We7, retaining the
queens.
.
13
l:laxd8
As will be seen from what follows, it

would perhaps have been better to take
on d8 with the king' s rook.
h3
8
9
.i.xf3
Now Black effectively gains a tempo

and must be able to achieve an equal
game. 8 'i'd2 is more consistent, 8 d5 is
also often played, but my opponent was
apparently thinking only of a draw, and
so he was in a hurry to force
simplification.
iLxfJ
tiJd7
Had Black too been aiming for a

peace agreement, he could have played
9 . . . e5, and after 10 dxe5 (of course, 1 0
d 5 i s more promising) 1 0 . . . dxe5 1 1 ltJe2
the chances are equal. Black, however,
prepares . . . e7-e5, so as to be able to
answer d4-d5 with . . . ctJd4.
10 1fd2
10 e2
circumspect.
e5
11
c3
was
14
ii.cs
This is the whole point. By forcing

the rook to occupy e8, White hopes to
continue advantageously with ..tb5, so
as not to let the enemy knight in at d4.
more
360
14 .
15 .i.b5
16 l!adt - : 1
:res
lle6
'drawing' bishops is now inevitable, this

is to White's advantage, and Black loses
his winning chances.
The manoeuvre of both bishops to

1 he fifth rank should logically have been
completed by the exchanges 16 .1'..xb6
axb6 1 7 .i.xc6 xc6.
lhd4
a6
lDa4
16
17
18
tDe2
..id3
19
20
21
.i.xd4
bJ
lhg3
22
J..c4?
22
23
...
f3
:.e7
h4
lDhl
ile2
l:tfel?
b5
.i.b6
Practically forcing the exchange of

l he bishop for the knight at- d4, since if
I 9 i.a3 there could have followed
1 9 . . i.f8. Now opposite-colour bishops
remain on the board, but this does not
prevent Black from increasing Iris
advantage.
.
exd4
lhc5
h5!
In order to defend his e4 pawn,

White will be forced to play f2-f3 ,
which leads to a further weakening of
his position.
26
27
<ltt'l
32
33
34
'it>gl
lDd3
lhgJ+
c5
l:hel +
35
36
37
lbel
bxc4
lhe5
c4
bxc4
:a7
axb5
:dd7
fxe4
tDxe4
In the event of 34 . . . ctJe2+ 35 fl

tLic3 White would have been satisfied
with the simplest solution: 36 .D.xe7
llxe7 37 :el .
Why drive away the knight which

was already out of play! It would have
been correct to defend the rook by
23 . . . :ld6, and then perhaps play . . .b7-b5
and . . . .:t.c6.
A clever trap, which Black failed to

see through in time.
i.xb5
lbeJ
:teel
fxe4
lLlf2
The possibility of this move, forcing

further exchanges, increases the likeli
hood of a draw.
A useful move, since in some cases

Black was already threatening to ex
change on d3 and then play . . J :k6.
24
25
26
28
29
30
31
32
The decision of a practical player:
that in time trouble I should in the first
.t.eJ+
f5
Here too it was essential to play

27 . . . lid6. Although the exchange of the
36 1
instance eliminate the opponent's out

side passed pawn.
38
39
40
l2Jxc4
l2Je5
litdl
l:.xa2
:xc2
ltJe2
On the last move before the time

control if was hard to refrain from
giving this check, which, besides,

cannot spoil anything.
41
42
43
<it>ft
'lt>gl
ltlxg6
3
4
lLlgJ+
ltlf5
lLlxh4
Even without this combination a

draw would have resulted, but this way
the game reaches a forced conclusion.
lLlxh4
44
lLlxg2
45 l:txd4
46 lle4
Draw agreed. If Black had been
wanting to 'torment' his opponent in the
ending with rook and knight against
rook, then after 46 . . . 6 47 <it>fl <ifrf5
48 :e2 he would have had to give up
such an idea.
Game 3 7 1
Langeweg-Botvinnik
Beverwijk 1969
English Opening
1
2
c4
g3
lLlf6
e5
c6
ltlf3
Now a well-known variatioll is

reached where, instead of ltlc3 , White
has played Ag2. The fact that in this
situation Black easily gains equality was
demonstrated many times by Keres. 4
d4 was essential, to answer 4 . . . e4 with
5 ltlc3 and then .i.g5. However, the
Encyclopaedia considers that Black's
position is also not worse after 4 d4
exd4 5 'ii'xd4 d5 .
<it>f7
4
5
6
44
.i.g2
White wrongly avoids the immediate

development of his queen's loright.
lLld4
cxd5
e4
d5
6 d3 looks more natmal, although in

the game Benko-Tai ( 1 962) after
6 . . . Ji.c5 7 lDb3 ii.b4+ 8 i.d2 .i.xd2+ 9
'i'xd2 dxc4 10 dxc4 'ile7 White did not
achieve anything significant.
6 ltlc3 cannot be recommended, in
view of the simple 6 . . . dxc4. After the
continuation chosen in the game, Black
obtains fine piece play.
6
7
tixd5
ltlc2
7 lLlb3 is no better, for example

7 . . . 'i'h5 8 h3 ifg6 9 ltJc3 ltJbd7 IO 1fc2
e3 (Larsen-Korchnoi, 1 973 ).
7
8
1fh5
h3
The enemy bishop cannot be allowed

to go to h3 ! Say, 8 tt:)c3 i.h3, and if 9
.i.xe4? lDxe4 I 0 ltJxe4 Ji.g2.
8
'ilg6
All the same, this retreat would have
.
had to be made after tbc3 . In addition,

this hinders White's d2-d3 . True, even
362
in the variation 8 i.d6 9 d3 exd3 10

'tixd3 i.c7 the position is roughly
equal.
.. .
15
9
b3
The correct idea. By exchanging the

dark-square bishops, White makes the
position of his king more secure; in the
variation from the previous note, from
c7 the bishop could have been used in
an attack. 9 t'Llc3 was also quite good, of
course in this case the play would have
been more complicated.
c5
d3
In this clever way White achieves his

aim but at a high price - the resulting
ending is clearly unfavourable for him.
15
16 lDe5
17 1fxd2
18 lDxg6
19 ibf4
exd3
d2+
:xd2
liad8
ibb4
The forcing variation continues.
20
21
22
a3
ibxc2
0-0
lDc2+
llxc2
For the moment Black prevents his

opponent from castling: 10 0-0 .i.xh3
(or 1 0 . . . 'i'xg3) 1 1 xh3 'i'xg3+ 1 2 Ji.g2
'1Jg4. As for the exchange of bishops, he
has no reason to obj ect to it.
10
11
12
13
lDbxa3
lDc4
ib2e3
13
14
1fc1
i.aJ
.i.xa3
0-0
:d8
It is still dangerous for White to

castle, and he prepares to eliminate
enemy No. I - the .central e4 pawn,
which restricts the activity of his bishop.
lDa6
.*-e6
363
White had this position in mind, of

course, when he played 14 We i , which
does credit to the resourcefulness and

foresight of my young opponent. More
over, he had to foresee that in this
position after 22 . . . .i.xb3 23 llfb l :c3
24 a4 White's chances are not worse.
22
dd2
This looks very powerful, but 22 .

@8, inunediately bringing up the king,
came into consideration.
..
23
24
li)xe6
l:tadt
fxe6
In order to answer 24 . . . .U.xe2 with 25

l:ld8+ and 26 l::tb 8.
24
25
@e7
e3
Now it becomes clear that for the

endgame Black's king is much better
placed than White's.
26
27
28
llxd2
%:tel
ktxd2
a2
llc4
28 a4 .ttb2 29 l::tc 3 would have led to

an even more passive position for
White.
28
29
l:r.b4
l:lxa3
b5
The b-pawn is more valuable than the

c-pawn.
30
31
.i.xc6
a6
.i.b7
'iiid6
It becomes clear that all White's
pieces (king, rook and bishop) are badly
placed.
32
g4
li)d5
Too hasty. The transition into the

rook ending increases White 's chances
of a successful resistance.
32 . . . h6 was simpler, when Black
maintains all "the advantages of his
position and the dangerous tlueat of
3 3 . . . c5 .
33
34
ll.xd5
:r4
exd5
For the first time in the game, White

obtains real counterplay. Since he is
intending to play 35 b4, Black must
accept the temporary pawn sacrifice.
34
35
36
llxbJ
It.ti
%bg7
a5
Now after the straightforward 36 . . . a4

37 :xh7 a3 3 8 l:l.a7 b4 39 g5 the g-pawn
becomes menacing.
In the time
scramble I was able to find a clever
possibility, although, of course, I would
not be telling the truth if I were to assert
that all the consequences had been
studied.
36
d4
In this way Black eliminates any

danger.
37
llxh7
My opponent no longer had the time

to work out the complicated situation,
and he makes a plausible, but erroneous
move. Now the black d-pawn promotes.
White should have accepted the
challenge: 3 7 exd4 l::t.xh3 3 8 g2 :h6
3 64
there was no reason to fear any

pleasant surprises.
39 :a7, after which Black' s chances of

success are highly problematic. Even so,
he could have tried 39 . . . d5 40 l:xa5
!tb6.
4
5
d5
e4
un
d6
lif6
By a transposition of moves, this

position was also reached in my game
with the Yugoslav grandmaster.
6
7
8
9
i.d3
h3
tf)fJ
exd5
0-0
e6
exd5
9 cxd5 was unfavourable because of

9 . . . b5 ! ( 10 .ilxb5 ltJxe4 1 1 lDxe4
'ii'a 5+).
9
10
Jie3
l:e8+
.i.h6
I should remind you that Matulovic

did not risk this continuation, played
10 . . . tDh5, and ended up in a passive
position. But Kavalek had plenty of
time for preparation, and he chose the
main variation.
37
d3
c/;c7
38 llh8
White resigns. After 39 h7+ c6
40 lth6+ c5 41 l:.h5+ c4 there are

no more checks, and that means that his
rook is too late in reaching the d-file.
Game 372
Botvinnik-Kavalek
Beverwijk 1969
1
2
3
c4
d4
lic3
g6
.i. g7
c5
Here it became clear to me that

Kavalek was familiar with my game
against Matulovic (No. 357), had found
some improvement in it for Black, and
was intending to use his innovation.
Since, as I mentioned in my notes to the
afore-mentioned game, this variation
had been thoroughly prepared by me,
11
0-0
..i.xe3
It is interesting that up to the last

move this had all occurred previously
(Kluger-Forintos, 1964 ). Therefore, how
ever, Black chose the less favourable
exchange sacrifice: 1 I . . .:xe3 12 fxe3
365
.i.xe3+ 1 3 <it>hl tt:lli 5 14 ife l , and

White' s advantage was obvious.
12
fxe3
1i'e7
Black does not risk taking the pawn:

after 12 . . .l:.xe3 13 'i'd2 ( 1 3 . . . :e7 1 4
tLlg5 tLle8 1 5 'i'f4 f6 16 .i.c2; 1 6 ltlge4
or 16 g4 is also possible) White gains
time and obtains a strong attack. Black's
idea is to provoke e3-e4, which restricts
somewhat the activity of the white
pieces, and then to gain control of e5,
establishing his knight there. Alas, the
half-open f-file proves to be of great
importance!
Another idea was tried by Polu
gayevsky, in a game with Gligoric in
1 975 : 12 . . . <it>g7 followed by . . . ltle8 and
. . . f7-f6, thereby neutralising the pressure
on the f-file.
13
14
e4
ifd2
moment. 14. . . <it>g7 would have met with

the same reply as in the game.
15 l:lf2
During my home analysis I had
prepared 1 5 .i.c2, but I decided to chose
a different move, not wishing to allow
the opponent counterplay after 1 5 . . . b5 .
15
16
17
18
19
lDbd7
lbe5
thxe5
ltafl
l:l xf7
1f xe5
lhd7
11'd4+
<it>hl
Of course, not 1 9 l:.7f2 because of
19 . . . tiJeS 20 l:tdl .i.xh3 !
A good plan was found by Gheorghiu

(against Andersson, 1 974). By playing
14 .:f2, he prevented 14 . . . liJe5 because
of 1 5 e5 ifxe5 16 'iff3 g7 17 l:afl .
14
A serious mistake. Black should have

delayed a little the carrying out of this
plan, and first defended his f7 pawn
( 1 5 . . . l:f8). Then he could have re
grouped with . . . ttle8 and . . . f7-f6
(roughly as Polugayevsky played - cf.
the note to Black's 1 2th move) . Then
Black would have retained a solid,
although rather passive position.
19
20
a6
This move is useful, to prevent White

from playing liJb5 at . an appropriate
the5
11ff4
White is threatening -to conclude the

game by 2 1 l:lf8+:;: Black had been
366
position of his king. However, he is not

long in returning the compliment.
plmming the defence 20 . . . i.fS, but only

1 1ow did he notice that after 2 1 ihb7
t/\xd3 22 'iih6 it is not possible to
defend the seventh rank. He has to cast
caution to the winds.
20
21
29
30
31
Ve5+
e6+
il.e2
<i!tg8
<i!th8
l:tf8
.i.xh3
J\e2
Although the material balance is

restored,. White has a decisive attack.
21
22
li.d7
1!ff6
Initially I wanted to play 22 l::tf6 with

t he threats of 23 lhd6 and 23 l:tdl (the
i nunediate 22 ltdl will not do, since
Black gives up his queen for two rooks).
Examining the reply 22 . . .c3lg7, I did not
l ike the fact that if 23 l:Idl there can
follow 23 . :f8 24 k!xd4 :xf6, when
Black continues resisting. But in the
event of 23 lixd6 l:f8 for some reason it
did not occur to me that I could reply 24
Hf6 with a decisive advantage. Thus I
l bought for some twenty minutes, and
did not make the best move.
..
22
23
24
25
1f xf7+
'l'xd7
'iffxd6
lt)xf7
'ii?h8
1Xf8
Simpler, as was rightly pointed out

by Kavalek, was 25 :n r!xf7 26 1i'xf7,
and Black himself is forced to go into
the endgame by 26 . . . ifg7.
25
26
27
28
i.xfl
ife5+
'ffe6+
l:h.il+
1ff2
<i&?g8
'it>b8
Black does not make use of a good

opportunity, which was to play 28 . . . g7
and then hide his king on the safe square
h6 . . Then White would have had
insufficient compensation for the open
It only remained to play 3 2 d6 ! , as

pointed out by 0 'Kelly, and within a
few moves it would all have been over.
I would have made this move, of course,
if in time trouble I had managed to see
that the 'terrible' threat of 32 . . J f4
could be parried as follows: 3 3 i.g4 !
(33 . . . 'i'h4+ 34 h3 llfl + 3 5 <i&?h2 'i'e l
36 'i'e5+ g8 37 Ae6+ 38 'ii'h8
mate, or 35 . . . 'i'f4+ 36 g3 'i'f2+ 37 .i.g2
'i'gl + 3 8 '&t>h3 :f2 39 ife5+ '&t>g8 40
'ii'd 5+ <3;;g7 4 1 e5 'i'c l 42 '&t>h2). But I
hastened to complete the bishop
manoeuvre. thinking that then there was
no way that the black rook would be
able to leave the eighth rank.
32
33
34
Js
1ie5+
.ltg4
i.b3
'&t>b2
'ifi>g8
1ih4+
'lfel+
.
.
:n
An unpleasant surprise. Now the
white king is threatened with mate,
367
while the black king amazigly slips out

of the encirclement.
<t>f8
36 ii.e6+
37
Game 373
Botvinnik-Kurajica
Belgrade 1969
1fb8+
Queen's Gambit
The variation 37 'i'd6+ <3Jg7 3 8

'ii'e7+ h8 (3 8 . . . 'it>h6 3 9 h3 'i'e3+ 35
40 g3 'i'f3 4 1 'iib4+), in which White
has to give perpetual check, was pointed
out by grandmaster Benko.
37
38
'3;e7
38
39
40
1Wh8+
1l'e5+
'itf6
<it>g5
b6
cxd5
4
5
6
ii.f4
el
Is it not possible to try and run away

with the king? For example: 4 1 h3
.D.h l + 42 @g4 'i'h4+ 43 fl+ 44
@e3 'i'f2+ 45 d3. But then
4 5 . . . 'ii'xg2 ! and White is again forced
to give perpetual check.
41
42
43
1fb8+
'it>g5
@h5
"l'd8+
1fh8+
Draw agreed
lbcJ
d5
e6
iJ..e7
exd5
c6
.i.d6
Previously only 6 . . . .if5 was played

here, and it would appear that 6 . . . i..d6
was first employed in the game
Gligoric-Portisch ( 1 967). It leads to
quieter play than that in the variation
6 . . . i.f5 7 g4 (cf. No. 3 1 3).
A good plan for White against
6 . . . ..td6 has not yet been found. In the
present game too he gained only a
minimal advantage, and yet, apart from
anything else, he has an extra tempo,
which Black has spent on playin_g
. . . i.f8-e7-d6.
d4
c4
White also has the possibility of 4 e4,

leading to open piece play.
'ifxh7+
Or 38 'i'g7+ <it>e8 !
1
2
3
4
.i.g3
The afore-mentioned game continued

7 .i.xd6 1i'xd6 8 1'.d3 lJe7 9 ti)f3 ti)d7
10 0-0 tbf6 1 1 'ifc2 0-0 1 2 %tab 1 g6 1 3
b4, and White's position was perhaps
only slightly more pleasant.
7
t;)e7
Instead of this Gligoric recommends
playing 7 . . . .i.f5 immediately, although it
seems to me that after 8 'S'b3 Black has
some problems over the defence of his
b7 pawn.
8 ttlf3
0-0
368
.i.dJ
.i.f5
This is the clever point of Black's

plan. After 10 xf5 lDxf5 the bishop at
d6 is defend and the attack on the b7
pawn ( 1 1 'i'b3) is easily parried.
13
14
h4
li)xd6
This advance of the rook' s pawn was

what White was intending when he
played 1 1 lDxd3. But the entire plan
requires too much time, and by straight
forwardly carrying it out, he ends up in
a difficult position.
14
15
16
h5
h6
lhd7
g5!
Reckless and flippant - a further loss

of time . .
.
16
17
18
10
ll.\e5
10
11
lDxd3
11
12
13
ilf3
.i.xd6
g4
1ie7
Ve6
0-0-0
The start of White's misadventures,

which continue for fully 10 moves! Of
course, I did not want to waste a tempo
on 10 Vic2 (in view of 10 . . . ..txd3 1 1
'ifxd3 ), but then Black would have been
unable to solve his main problem - what
to do with his bishop on d6? Exchang
ing on g3 is dangerous, since this opens
the h-file, and meanwhile White has a
clear plan: queenside castling and the
opening of the position by e3-e4.
18
.i.xd3
Of course, 1 1 ifxd3 was more cau

tious, although after 1 1 . . . i.xe5 12
.itxe5 lDd7 13 Jlg3 White' s advantage
is insignificant.
lt)f5
g6
Now, when the bishop at d6 is

defended by the. lmight, White has no
reason to defer this exchange.
Aae8
This is a mystery - what was Black

hoping for? After White's queenside
castling (and he had nothing better)
1 8 . . . lDe4 ! would have been especially
strong, since the reply :c 1 is not pos
sible. Black could also have carried out
this manoeuvre on the next move, but he
played it only when White was fully
ready to parry it!
369
19
20
1lg2
<iflbt
Now the initiative again passes to

White, and it is Black who begins to
experience difficult times.
2l
22
23
li)xe4
li)c5
dxc5
improved the placing of his pieces.
27
28
dxe4
ttlxc5
l:td8
The position has simplified, and to

White's clear advantage. Black's king is
insecure (th.is is when the h6 pawn
comes in useful), and his kingside
pawns are disunited. He must prevent
White from becoming active on the d
file for this reason 23 . . . 1i'c4 24 l:d7
1fg3
lld3
25
26
l:txdJ
l:ldl
exdJ
f6
1rxg4
Black assumed that the rook ending

after 28 . . . Wxc3 29 bxc3 l:!d8 30 c l
would be unfavourable for him. But
with the queens on the initiative remains
all the more finnly with White.
29
1fxd3
1ih5
Black is obliged to eliminate the h6

pawn, in order to safeguard his king.
Wxc5 25 rlhd l was dangerous for him.
24
11fe5+
ii'c3
30
31
32
1ld7
11xb7
'iii>c l
33
lld4!
'l'xh6
1i'g6+
1fe4
Probably best, but the resulting

passed pawn is exchanged for one of the
white pawns.
The black queen must be driven from

its central position. The main tlring in
this endgame is not material advantage,
26
1ic4
TI1e only move If 26 . . . 'i'e4 27 1i'd6 !

g8 28 :xd3 (28 . . . 'i'xg4 29 'i'f6), or
26 . . . :ds 27 l:txd3
(27 . . . 'i'e4
28
'i'e5+ ! ), and Black stands badly.
White, in is now forced to play
27 'i'e5+. After 27' ..:d2 'i'e4 ! (with the
threat of 28 . . . 1ifhTf) Black would have
but the placing of the pieces and the

active passed pawns. Therefore in the
end White must eliminate not the a7
pawn, but the one at c6 !
33
34
35
'iii>c 2
1le7
'i'hl+
ilf3
Here the queen is excellently placed;

Black cannot pfay 3 5 . . Wxf2+ because
of 36 l:d2 1!i'f5+ 37 e4 'i'c8 3 8 :d7.
370
35
36 ' !id2
37 dl
l:lg8
1'f5+
White aims to keep his king as close

possible to the kingside, so that in the
vent of the queens being exchanged his
king can stop the black h-pawn. He gets
:iway with this, since with his next few
moves Black gives some useless checks.
1 1 is not clear whether White could have
hoped to win, if BlacJc had played
n g4.
as
. . .
37
38
39
40
41
42
<it>el
<it>e2
<it>dJ
e4
<ifi>e2
Vg4+
ifgl+
1ig4+
1ff5+
iff4
42
43
44
45
46
47
:!d7
'it>el
'it>d2
<ifi>e2
l:td6
g4
'Iffl+
9hl+
111'h6+
1tg6
Black's last hope is to open up the

game with . . . g4-g3, but this leads to the
loss of a pawn.
47
48 fxg3
49 'it>el
50 <it>dl
51 <it>cl
g3
-.its+
W'hl+
1ig2+
W'g l+
Now White retreats his rook and

defends his c5 pawn.
52
53
54
55
lldl
<ifilbl
.:ct
ife6
\ie3+
1'f3
h5
Finally the c6 pawn is eliminated,

and this is bound to decide the outcome.
55
56
11fxc6
:xg3
h4
Black also fails to save the game by

56 . . . 'i'd3+ 57 <it?al 'i'd4 58 1fd5 ! l1gl
59 <iit>b l .
5 7 1'd5
In this position Black had to seal his

move, choosing between two options.
One of these was 42 . . . iig4+. In this case
after 43 'iiii>d3 'i'D+ 44 c4 l:tb8 ! (or
44 g4 45 <it>b4 ! ! and then :d7) 45
hid8+ J:!xd8 46 'i'xd8+ rbg7 4 7 1i'd7+
h6 48 'iixc6 ifxf2 49 'i'e6 ! \ixb2 50
'i'h3+ <it>g6 5 1 c6 White would have
obtained a won queep.Jending.
The other option Wid to be chosen . . .
...
371
g5
58
to this central square. In addition, the

following exchanging operation be
comes possible: . . . lDxe4; "ifxe4 d6-d5.
1i'c4!
The threat of advancing the c5 pawn

is irresitible.
58
...
ltg7
Or 58 . . . h3 59 c6 h2 60 c7 h i if
(60 ... ltgS 6 1 'i'xg8+) 6 1 c8'i'+ h7 62
11f7+.
59
60
c6
l:t.gl
lLg4
Against Gipslis (Game 3 16) I played

7 . a5 immediately, which is probably
slightly more accurate; but if Black is
aiming to play . . . d6-d5, then he prob
ably cannot get by without the move in
the game. It has to be assumed that the
afore-mentioned game had influenced
the choice of opening by Matanovic,
who had prepared, as it seemed to him,
an improvement for White.
It can also be said that other
continuations (7 . 'ifc7 8 e5 dxe5 9 dxe5
llJd5 10 llel tDa6 1 1 c3 ttlc5 1 2 .i.c2,
Tal-Gurgenidze, 1 972; 7 . . . d5 8 ttlbd2 b6
9 exd5 cxd5 10 l:te 1 e6 1 1 ltJe5, Gufeld
Planinc, 197 1 , and 7 . . .ltJa6 8 lld 1 c7 9
e5 l2Jfd5 10 llJbd2, Ciric-Hort, 1967) do
not solve Black's opening difficulties.
. .
l:lc7
:g7
60. . . l:cS 6 1 W'f7 would have led to

mate.
61
62
63
-*.b3
1i'hl+
lbg7
11fc1
1f xe4+
cli>at
Black resigns
..
Grune 3 74
Matanovic-Botvinnik
Belgrade 1969
1
2
3
e4
d4
tLlf3
g6
lL g7
d6
8
9
Now 4 c4 would have led to the

King' s Indian Defence, while for the
Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence the most typical
move is 4 tDc3 . Black has fewer diffi
culties after 4 .i.e2 (as Petrosian played
against Spassky in the 1 966 World
Championship Match) or after the move
chosen in the present game.
4
5
6
.i.c4
1fe2
0-0
lbbd2
a5
8 . . . d5 is premature in view of 9 c3
ltJbd7 10 e5 .
a4
lLlf6
0-0
c6
This reply pursues two aims: it

prepares . . . d6-d5, which restricts the
opponent' s light-square bishop, and it
defends the d5 square, so that if the
knight is attacked by e4-e5 it can move
My opponent, who was aiming to

reach a position ftdm Game 3 16, repeats
372
tl1e error made there, whereas he had an

excellent choice between the sound
continuations 9 c3 and 9 a3 .
9
10
d5
e5
The Encyclopaedia considers that

after 10 c3 White retains the advantage.
It is impossible to agree with this, if
only because of the reply 10 . . e6.
.
10
11
12
13
h3
lllxfJ
c4
lDfd7
.i.xfJ
e6
Here is the prepared improvement

(Gipslis played 1 3 i.g5, under
estimating the strength of the reply
1 3 . llib6). It is true that White succeeds
in preventing the attack on his centre by
. . . c6-c5, but at a high price: the weak
ness of the b4 square will inevitably tell.
1 3 c3 was more circumspect.
ii.gs
.fia2
16
17
18
19
lJ..e7
.i.d6
xa2
l:[fal
19
20
21
22
W'xc4
lLld2
.i.c5
23
gJ
l:tfe8
lLlxa2
W'bJ
After 1 9 l:ta3 'ii'xc4 2 0 ,'ifxc4 dxc4 2 1

t'Dd2 Black could have defended his
pawn by 2 1 . . . b5, whereas now this will
not be possible.
. .
13
14
15
The time had come to maintain the

balance with the exchange 1 6 cxd5. The
attempt to cramp Black's position (16
c5 'ifc7 1 7 Ji.e7) would. have encoun
tered a tactical refutation ( 17 . . . tbxe5 18
.i.xf8 tt:Jxf3+ 1 9 'i'xf3 :xf8 with ex
cellent compensation for the sacrificed
exchange). As for the game contin
uation, it leads to a slightly inferior
ending for White.
llla6
ifb6
1f xc4
dxc4
ltlb6
kta6
Gipslis was unable to make this

move, since the b2 pawn was not
defended.
15
lLlb4
White did White not regain his

pawn? Because in the variation 23
i.xb6 xb6 24 ll'lxc4 l:tb4 25 tLld6 (25
tt:lxa5 lta8) 25 . . . .tld8 26 l:l.dl .i.ffl Black
would
again have obtained
an
373
advantage. If instead 23 l:.c l , then

23 . . . .i.h6. Therefore White prepares if
necessary to block the c l -h6 diagonal
by l2-f4.
23
24
l:.cl
25
ltJe4
d8
.ilf8
24 . . . il.xe5 25 i.xb6 l:txb6 26 liJ,xc4

.ixd4 27 ttJxb6 ..txb6 would probably
have led to a draw.
This seems very active, but White
over-rates his chances. By playing 25
ctJf3 followed by 26 i.xb6 lhb6 2 7
:xc4 he would have almost completely
equalised.
25
<lJg7
So that subsequently White should

not be able to move away his knight
with gain of tempo (tiJf6+); my
opponent had overlooked this subtlety.
Black opportunely plays his rook to

an active position and consolidates his
material advantage.
28
29
30
liJd6
llxb7
l:c3
liJd7
lLlxe5
lDd3
31
32
ltJd6
xc4
llxc5
lLlb3
33
34
35
36
Iixd4
l:ta3
lle4
!tel!
lLlxd4
c5
ltb6
36
37
38
ltlxc5
l:tc4!
Black returns the compliment'. The

exchange of t11e c4 and c5 pawns merely
increases White' s defensive resources,
in view of the fact that the c6 pawn
becomes a target. A more complicated
and more promising position for Black
would have resulted from 30 . . . g5 !
In the double rook ending after

32 . . . l:txd6 33 :xc5 l;!d5 34 %tc2 White
would have also had real drawing
chances. in view of the weakness of
Black's queenside pawns.
In view of the threat of I:txc5 and

:xa5, Black is forced to advance his r
and e-pawns earlier than he would have
liked.
f5
llxb2
Subtly played. 3 8 . ttill 39 tt:Jxe6+

6 40 :c6 is not dangerous for White,
while if 38 . . . l:t.d2 there follows 3 9
:xd4 !
. .
26
<t>fl
And this is an oversight, leading to a

lost position. Both 26 tDd6 and 26
.i.xf8+ <it>xf8 2 7 tt:Jd6 would have been
better.
26
27
dxc5
.i.xc5
l:id4!
3 74
38
39
40
41
lld3
<&t>g2
f4!
41
...
e5
libl+
@6
Forcing a drawn ending.
e4
the c-file. But even so that subtle analyst

Geller found a draw for White: 5 1
e3 ! ! 'iit?g3 5 2 @e2 f4 5 3 fl ! @xh3 54
<iii>f2 @g4, and since Black will be
forced to advance his pawn to f4, after
the loss of the a4 pawn White will
succeed in reaching c l with his king!
White, however, chose the other
continuation, which he thought would
give him a draw.
43
White is a knight up, but Black will

regain it, both players having a choice
between a rook ending and a pawn
ending. First White has to take a
decision - should he play 43 l:td6+ or 43
l:td5 ? I had to make a thorough study of
both these continuations. So, let us first
look at 43 :ds.
With the rooks on, Black has no
winning chances, e.g. 43 . . . exd3 44 ktxa5
@e6 45 l:te5+ <it>d6 46 <t>f2 d2 (if
46 . . . l:tg l , then 47 l:.e3 36) 47 e2 l:tgl
48 xd2 l:txg3 49 l:e3 . This means that
he must go into the pawn ending:
43 . . . l:td2+ 44 ltxd3 45 l:xd3 exd3.
It may seem that Black's advantage
is enough for a win: 46 @f2 g5 ! (but not
46 . . . <iti>e6 47 <it>e3 <it>d6 48 'iit?xd3 d5 49
g4 ! fxg4 50 hxg4 h5 51 f5) 47 fxg5+
(here 4 7 <iti>e3 is now bad because of
47 . . . gxf4+ 48 gxf4 <it>e6 49 <it>xd3 <it>d5)
4 7 . . . <it>xg5 48 <aire3 h5 49 <airxd3 h4 50
gxh4+ <ittxh4.
Indeed, after 5 1 e2 <it>g3 52 h4 (or
52 <it>e3 f4+) 52 . . . <it>xh4 53 00 <it>g5
Black succeeds in g the a4 pawn
and in not allowing the enemy king onto
375
:d6+
The drawback to this move is that

now the black king will easily cross the
e-file, which may be highly significant.
43
44
...
l:ta6
e7
exd3
The alternative 44 . . . lld2+ 45 ti:Jf2 e3

46 l:txa5 l:txf2+ 47 gl did not bring
Black any benefit.
45
lba5
<i!i>d6
Now the natural 46 f2 loses

quickly: 46 . . . :g I ! (47 %:ta8 <:/iJc7 48
:a7+ <iti>c6 49 l:la6+ 'it>c5 50 :as+
'ittc4). Therefore White must urgently
place his rook behind the d-pawn, and
this means allowing the black king to
advance.
.
46
Jla8
c7
Played to gain time on the clock; the

immediate 46 . .. 'it>c5 was also possible.
47
48
49
:a5
.:aS
ct>f2
'it?c6
'it?c5
l:tal
A:r:i excellent post for the rook. From

here it can control its own pawn's
queening square (dl) and at the same
time restrain the advance of the enemy
passed, pawn. Not surprisingly White
takes urgent measures to force the
opponent' s rook to change its position.
Note that this could not be achieved by
50 <it>e3 because of 50 . . . l:.gl.
50
51
ltd8
'it?eJ
c4
Now however, this move is possible:

if 5 1 . . .llgl there follows 52 :!d4+.
TI1erefore Black is forced to drive the
white king to a less favourable position.
51
52
53
'it>t'2
<ifi>f3
:et+
l:te2+
l:e6
a5
l:tc8+
<ifa>cJ
<ii>d 2
This . position of the rook. is also

highly appropriate, since it cuts off the
enemy king and also stops the a-pawn.
54
55
Black must play carefully, not cutting

his king off from his . passed pawn. And
he safely avoids this trap.
After 55 . . . b3 the pride of Black' s
position - hi s d-pawn - would have
fallen: 56 a6 ! l:xa6 (56 ... d2 57 l:.d8
c2 58 a7) 57 'ii?e3 :Id6 58 <it>d2.
56
h4
After the game Matanovic suggested

that 56 J:lc7 would have led to a draw.
Indeed, the manoeuvre of the rook to al
is no longer possible (56 . . . :el 57 a6
l:tal 58 a7 with a draw), but there is
another way to win: 56 . . . h5 57 <it>f2 'iii>d l
58 f3 d2 59 <it>f2 :e2+! 60 <it>fl l:e3.
Now if 6 1 fl comes the manoeuvre
. . . l:e3-a3-al-cL while if 6 1 a6 l:txg3 62
a7 l::ta3 63 h4 64 <it>fl :a4 65 @g2
e2 66 l:.e7+ <it>d3 67 lld7+ lt>e3 etc.
llel !
56
An elegant and rapid way to win.
57
a6
l:tal
What can White do? 58 l:tc6 @el 59

.:t.e6+ <"Ji>fl 60 l:td6 (60 'ii?e 3? lle l +)
60 . . . d2 6 1 l:txd2 lta3+
leads to a very rare and possibly unique

instance of a rook mate along the rank
376
In the Samisch Variation, which the

play inevitably reaches, the position of
the knight at d7. is not the best.
with the black king to the rear of

White 's. And, what's more, at fl .
There is the sanie winning idea after
58 :as (58 . . . ei' . 5 9 a7 d2 60 l:te8+
@fl 6 1 l:td8 na3+ and mate nexi move).
In the game White decided to gain some
compensation by winning the h-pawn,
but he does not get as far as converting
his pawn majority on the kingside.
58
59
l:C7
g2
l:r.e7+
xh7
<it>el
e5
li)e7
7
8
..i.dJ
f3!
0-0
White takes advance measures aimed

at retaining a pawn at e4, which will
prevent the activation not only of
Black's king's knight, but also of both
his bishops. since he will be unable to
advance his e5 pawn.
l:txa6
dl
lt.a2+
<iirfl
The reader already knows that 62

litf'3 e 1 ! leads to White's defeat, due
to the threat of mate.
62
63
64
i.eJ
d5
Black is aiming to advance . . . f7-f5

as quickly and as comfortably as pos
sible, but the move in the game also has
a drawback: if White retains his central
e4 pawn, the knight at e7 will be
restricted.
Otherwise it all ends with the same

mate.
59
60
61
62
5
6
8
9
10
d2
bial
lk7
:ct
White resigns
thge2
'ifd2
f5
lhf6
Game 375
Botvinnik-Ostojic
Belgrade 1969
1
2
c4
e4
g6
This pawn arrangement is not Wl

favourable for White, both after 2 . . . e5,
and in the event of a transposition into
the Sicilian Defence (2 . . . c5), and
especially in the King's Indian Defence.
2
3
4
d4
thcJ
ilg7
d6
thd7
10
c6
Black's lot would not have been

eased by 10 . fxe4 1 1 fxe4 liJg4 12 .i.g5
ltJfl 1 3 0-0 ! but perhaps he should
have considered 10 a.6.
. .
...
11
377
h3
cxd5
12
cxd5
kingside. Therefore, he decided, Black's

plan was clear: a pawn offensive against
the white king, and the need, even if
only for a time, to safeguard his queen
side.
f4
Black could not wait: White was

already threatening g2-g4 ! with a highly
favourable situation. In particular. then
. . . f5-f4 would no longer have any point,
whereas now Black retains the future
possibility of a pawn offensive on the
kingside.
13
14
.i.f2
a4
a6
Due to the threat of an attack by the

opponent with . . . g6-g5, . . . h7-h5 and
. . . g5-g4, for the moment White does
not detennine the position of his king,
but develops his initiative on the queen
side. In view of the unpleasant threat of
1 5 a5. Black has no choice.
14
15
16
b4
b6
ltld7
lla2
'it>dl!
1s
19
20
<t>cl
@bl
21
22
23
:ct
.i.c2!
Ji.b3
:n
1ic7
1i'b7
Due to lack of manoeuvring space,

Black's pieces are congested, and it is
hard for him to mobilise his forces.
a5
In the event of 16 . . . bxa5 (here or
later) both 17 :xa5 and 1 7 bxa5 ll'ic5 18
..i.xc5 dxc5 19 l2Ja4 are equally good for
White. Therefore Black prefers to wait.
16
17
18
This move was certainly not taken

into account by my opponent (he was
deceived by White's last move).
Meanwhile, after Black had safeguarded
not only 'his". but also 'my' queenside,
the white king will feel completely safe
there, and artificial queenside castling
suggests itself. After this Black's
activity on the kingside loses its point.
ltlf8
.ii.d 7
ii.f6
b5
White's last move convinced my

opponent that I was intending to castle
The position of the bishop at b3 is

more promising, since later White will
try to open up the game not only on the
kingside, but also in the centre.
378
23
24
25
26
27 .
:ac2
lZ)dt
lZ)b2
lZ)dJ
memories remain. With every move the

white pieces gain more and more scope.
<3itg7
tbg8
i.d8
lZ)f6
32
33
34
35
Here the lrnight is excellently placed.

I f the opportunity presents itself. it can
be sacrificed either for two pawns
c liJxf4), in order to destroy the oppon
ent's pawn centre, or for one (CDc5).
creating two powerful passed pawns.
rxg3
f6
ltlb5
1ixg3
1lf g2
tbg3
lZ)e8
27
35
lLlxgJ
Thus the excursion of the black

knight to h5 merely leads to the ex
change of this important defensive
piece. However, 3 5 . ttJf4 would also
not have worked because of 36 CDxf4
exf4 (36 . Iixf4 37 lLlh5+) 37 liJe2,
when White acquires the important d4
square for his minor pieces. For
example: 37 . . . liJd7 38 liJd4 ltJe5 3 9
liJe6+ .i.xe6 4 0 dxe6 :c7 4 1 h 5 g 5 42
.i.d4 .
..
28
h4
28
29
30
ifdl
'Bgl
And so, after arranging all his pieces

in the best way possible, White begins
carrying out his main strategic plan,
which will rapidly prove successful.
h6
c8
36
37
White does not object to the ex

change of rooks; in the attack he will be
able to manage without them.
30
31
32
:xc2
g3
..
'l'xgJ
f4
:c7
Here it is, the long-awaited break

through, to which Black no longer has
any reply !
37
38
xc2
.i.c8
Of Black's math hope - that of

blocking the kingside pawns - only
379
i.xc2
lixc2
The white bishop is now aiming at

the g6 pawn.
38
exf4
39
40
<bb7
1!ie7
.i.d4+
1i'xf4
Here 4 c4 is more energetic, taking

play into the King's Iridian Defence.
But the tournament Sitation meant that
Matulovic only needed a . draw, and he
preferred a quiet variatiOn of the Pirc
Ufimtsev Defence.
4
5
6
7
41
42
e5
.itxe5
But not 42
42 . . . 'i'xb4+.
42
43
44
..tb2
h5
White waits for the natural . . . e7-e5,

in order to begin exchanging. But if he
is aiming for more complicated play, it
is more advisable to choose 7 d5 CDb8 8
h3 or 8 :e l .
lDxe5
because
of
Game 376
Belgrade 1969
lbc3
e5
dxe5
dxe5
1fxf4
lLlxf4
g8
hxg6
Black resigns
e4
d4
lLltJ
More dangerous was 8 . . . ltlxe5 9

tDxe5 dxe5 10 f4, when White has the
initiative. Now if 9 .i.b5 (or after 9
'i'xd8 :xd8 - 10 .itb5) Black defends
successfully with 9 . . lDd4.
li)d7
iff8
Matulovic-Botvinnik
1
2
3
4
7
8
dxe5
White completes the destruction of

the royal citadel, even the queens no
longer being needed for the conversion
of his advantage.
44
45
46
ltlf6
0--0
ltlc6
i.e2
0-0
h3
g6
J..g7
d6
1i'xd8
The initial cause of all White' s sub

sequent difficulties - primitive play for
a draw rarely proves successful! After 9
.ig5 ! .ie6 10 'i'c l followed by 1 1 l:.dl
White would have retained an opening
advantage.
9
10
11
12
J.. g5
:rd1
.ie3
llxd8
..te6
h6
It is hard to suggest anything better.

Both 1 2 ..th4 and 1 2 ..txf6 are dubious,
but now the initiative is with Black.
12
lbe8!
The position is almost symmetric, but

this 'almost' consists in the fact that
White cannot occupy the central d5
square with his lolight, whereas . . . l'Dd4
3 80
will certainly follow. All this is due to

the better position . of the king's bishop
. - !
at g7
.
13
14
15
lDd4
l!d7
l'.Del
J..fl
l'.De2
The aim of this manoeuvre is

obvious: after 16 i.xd4 exd4 17 tt:Jf4 to
obtain opposite-colour bishops. How
ever. this does not ease White's defence.
15
l:.ad8
Threatening 16 .. tbD+.
obliged to force events.
.
16
17
18
i.xd4
ll'lf4
lDxe6
White
is
exd4
H.e7
klxe6
And now the e4 pawn is attacked.

After 1 9 .i.d3 ll'ld6 20 f3 c5 2 1 b3 b5
the knight at e l would be out of play
and the black pawns would bec01ne
active. Therefore White immediately
plays . . .
19
f3
tid6
Another plan was 1 9 . . . l!b6 20 .:abl

(or 20 lt1d3) 20 . . . ti:Jd6 with quite good
prospects.
20
21
lhd3
llet
Also tempting was 2 1 . . . lLJc4 2 2 lbb4

(22 lhc5 t'De3 23 ttJxb7 l:tb8 24 trn5
xb2) 22 . . . ltJe3 23 ttld5 liJxd5 24 exd5
:xel 25 !txel l:!xd5 26 %:te8+ i.f8;
although Black would have won a
pawn, the position would have become
simplified, and the presence of opposite
colour bishops could have led to a draw.
l:te7
h5
It is interesting that in the game

Ciric-Botvimiik (No.370), where there
was the same opening, but a different
variation, after 23 f3 a position amaz
ingly similar to this one was reached.
Only the pieces were arranged slightly
differently but the character of the play
was the same . . .
22
22
23
24
hxg4
b3
hxg4
g5
A difficult decision, but 24 . . . lllc4

was already threatened.
24
381
g4
This leads to new difficulties: the

dark squares are weakened still further,
and the placing of the pawns at e4, f3
and g4 is fixed. The only good chance
was 22 g3 !
ll'lb5
25
lle2
i.e5
27
28
Ad2
.i.g2
a5
l:th7
37 . . . .i.f4 38 l:td3 would not have
introduced
position.
38
39
anythiifg new into the

-
.i.fl
ltixe5
<t>e7
This exchange consolidates Black's

positional pluses, brit White was almost
in zugzwang. Now at least his bishop is
activated.
Despite the apparent passivity of
White's position, Black has to reckon
with the possible manoeuvre of the
bishop to f5 followed by the creation of
a passed pawn by f3-f4.
i.d6
c6
Restricting the activity of White's

bishop on the long diagonal in the event
of f3-f4, e4-e5 etc.
29
<ifi>f8
36 . Dc4
37 . gl
Black is attentive. TI1e last active

possibility for White is to double rooks
on the h-file. Now he can gain the h2
square for his rook only at a very high
price - by exchanging knight for bishop,
i.e. by renouncing the opposite-colour
bishops!
tDc3
26 a4
a6
39
40
i.c4
fxe5
<li>d6
Now a possible minor piece ending

will be won for Black due to the weak
ness of the a5 pawn.
30
31
32
33
<ittf2
l1h1
l:.b5
l:lxh8
<lig7
f6
lab8
White hurries with this exchange but

in time it would all the same have been
inevitable.
33
34
35
1
lLlb2
citxb8
<lig7
.il.e5
41 <ii!i>g2
This move was sealed by White. In
the event of 4 1 l:.t2 (in order to take the
rook via fl to al for the defence of the
a5 pawn) Black would have won, by
first taking play into a rook ending
4 1 . . .d l 42 lld2 ttJe3 43 c3 tt:Jxc4 44
bxc4 c5 45 cxd4+ exd4 46 <it>f2 <i&>xc4
4 7 %:tc2+ b4 48 e2;and then into a
382
--
pawn ending 48 . l::th2 + 4.9 d3 .:xc2

50 xc2 c5 !
.
41
..
llh6
Hindering White's main counterplay,

involving playing his bishop to f5 and
advancing f3 -f4.
42
43
44
ii.f7
.i.e8
.td7
5
6
cs
@b4
lbb1
f4
<it>g1
.i.f5
d5
l:td3
ltlc6
liJce7
f3
If 7 11Jg3 then 7 . . . c5 is good for

Black. who can also consider 7 . . . c6.
Also bad is 45 l:le2 @c3 followed by

. . . li:Jd2.
45
46
47
. 48
By playing 6 . . . 11Jce7 Black avoids

simplification, although in the King's
Indian Defence at e7 the knight is re
stricted,. 6 . . . tiJd4 7 i.e3 would have led
to a position from the game Botvinnik
Alexander (No.270).
Or 44 f4 gxf4 45 .i.d7 ttJxe4 46 e2

tiJf6 47 .ilf5 :h4 48 g5 lth5 .
44
45
ttJge2
In this variation of the King's Indian

Defence it is simpler and probably.
better to play 5 d5.
7
8
tiJaJ
1Dxc2
gxf4
.i.e3
f5
ltJe3
This would have been a fully

appropriate moment to record the result
of the game.
49
50
51
Iih5
g5
lDxf5
g6
h.-f5
exf5
White resigns
If 52 :d2 there follows 52 . . . f3

(52 .:tf8 also wins). The game was
awarded a special prize by the Yugoslav
newspaper ' Sport'.
. . .
Game 377
Botvinnik-Suttles
Belgrade 1969
1
2
3
4
d4
e4
c4
lic3 . .
g6
ig7
d6
e5
.i.b6
Since White has already spent a

tempo moving his queen's bishop,
Black considers that he has the right to
offer with loss of tempo the exchange of
the dark-square bishops. The game is
simplified. and my opponent achieves a
satisfactory development. But this ex
change also has its drawbacks. If the
position is opened up, the position of the
black king after kingside castling may
383
prove not altogether secure. It is on this

that White builds his plans.
f5 pawn that Black obtains in an
analogous situation is advantageous to

him.
This is also the case .. in the present
game - the f4 pawn will control the e5
square and restrict the black pieces,

while White's knight will head for the
kingside via cl-b3-d4. Therefore Black
should have restricted himself to
18 . . . fxe4.
.i.xh6
White himself exchanges bishops, to
divert the enemy knight from its natural

position at f6.
9
10
11
11d2
g3
Preventing . . . f5-f4, aftr which it

would be no so easy to approach the
black king.
11
12
.*.g2
0-0
c6
On which side should White castle?

The play would have been sharper, of
course, after queenside castling, but for
competitive reasons I wanted to aim for
a win in this game without any risk. My
standing in the tournament was not
brilliant. and in such a situation every
point was highly important.
13
14
15
16
0--0
cxd5
<ifii>h l
ll.ael
cxd5
'ifb6+
.i.d7
18
19
20
Preparing f3-f4, in order to open the

position and activate the knights.
16
17
18
f4
lDct
21
22
since the white knight does not now

reach f4, whereas Black obtains a con
venient base for his pieces at f5.
However, all this is misleading. It is
sufficient to exchange the colours of the
pieces, and one is reminded of the
King's Indian Defence, where Geller
and Petrosian showed that the isolated
exf4
fxe4
lCif5
Black already has to parry the threat

of a check on the al-h8 diagonal. Now
if 2 1 'i'c3+ he replies 2 1 . . . 'i'd4.
</;;g7
l:tae8
A cunning move, provoking Black

into exchanging pawns on f4 and e4,
gxf4
lDxe4
lDb3
.i.hJ
:.cS
lCigJ+
After this unnecessary exchange

White will be able to occupy d4 with his
knight, and his pawns are repaired.
23
24
hxg3
iDd4!
..i.xhJ
ltfe8
If 24 . . . xfl 25 tbe6+, and White

wins easily, e.g. 25 . . . <it>hS 26 l'.LJxf8
i.b5 (26 . J:txf8 27 'i'c3+) 27 a4 xa4
28 b3 37, or 25 ... <&t>g8 26 tiJf6+ <it>h8 27
384
tlJd7.
26
l:.dJ
1ib4
Black could not delay in view of the

threat of 27 b3 followed by 28 Wb2,
but, instead of aiming for the exchange
of queens, 26 ... ili5 suggests itself,
forcing 27 tiJxf5+ gxf5 28 l:tb3 'ilc7 29
tt:Jc3 with a roughly equal position, and
White would have been punished for his
error on the 25th move.
1!fxd2
b3
l::tc7
:xd2
Ilde2
i.g4
If 29 . . J :ke7 there would have
followed 3 0 tt:Jxd6!
30 lteJ
.i.f5
This move too allows an unexpected
27
28
29
The previous variation should have

suggested to me that in the diagram
position it was not essential to waste
time moving the rook. But I spent a long
time seeking a way of developing my
knight stroke. Black should

defended his rook - 30 . . . i.d7.
attack, and did not find anything. Alas,

what told was my chronic illness - lack
of combinative vision. Meanwhile. the
have
problem would have been solved by 25
b3 ! ! This move is especially pretty,

since it is a quiet one (without any
attack) . And if Black accepts the
sacrifice - 25 . . . i.xfl (after 25 . l:txe4 26
xe4 i.xfl White wins easily: 27 tbe6+
g8 28 'ifb2 tbe5 29 l:tx5 dxe5 30
Vixe5 l:tc7 38 3 1 'fixc7 'fixc7 3 2 tiJxc7
Wf7 3 3 d6 @f6 34 lt>gl .i.h3 35 @fl),
then the ne:\.1 move is also a spectacular
one - 26 ifb2 ! Now after 26 . . . 'ltn'8 27
ltJe6+ Z!xe6 2 8 dxe6 (28 . 'iib4 29 'i'f6
lk7 30 exf7 'i'xel 3 1 'i'd8+ <l;xf7 32
ttJg5+, and mate is inevitable) Black
'
..
. .
would have to resign. However, the
combination was seen not by me, but by
the Bulgarian grandmaster Tringov.

who pointed it out immediately after the
game.
ltc4
25 :o
31
32
33
34
lixd6
lixf5+
lixe8
lbe8
ll\xd6
gxf5
lixe8
<&t>g6
Despite being a pawn up, it is not

easy for White to win, since the black
rook may become very active. First
Black must move his king off the
seventh rank, so that, when his rook also
385
leaves it, White will not be able to

attack the pawns with check. Also,
given the opportwri.ty the black king
would like t<rteach g4
.
. 35
Itel
Threatening to plac.e the rook at d2

behind the passed pawn.
35
36
37
g2
:e6+
38
ltd6
38
39
40
lth6
:m1+
There was also a win by 42 1hb7

l:.xa2 43 h4 l:lh2+ (43 . . . e6 44 i:tc7)
44 <it>g5 :g2 45 'it>xf5 .l:xg3 46 l:!xa7
J:txb3 47 <br6.
42
l:icl+
l:tdl
f7
If 37 ... 'it>h5 White would have won
by 38 hte7.
This diverts the black king towards
the queenside, and thereby makes it
easier for White to advance his king on
the kingside.
<l;e7
lbd5
ci>d6
41
hJ
42
'it>b4
lla5
b5
43
44
45
46
47
48
'it>g5
xf5
g4
a7
g5
JJ.a8
Jlxa2
a5
llaJ
c5
'it>b6
llxbJ
49
50
51
52
53
g6
<it>f'6
g7
l:tgJ
b4
b5
Of course, restoring material equality

does not give Black any chances of
saving the game; his passed pawns are
hopelessly
lagging
behind
the
opponent' s.
If 40 . . . <t>f'6(e6) 4 1 a4, then White

wins another pawn, whereas now if 4 1
a4 Black has the reply 4 1 . . . c6.
Black aims for activity on the queen
side, but White's threats on the kingside
are stronger.
Trying to avoid the variation given in

the previous note.
g811
l:bg8
.:lxg8
a4
Black resigns
Although I failed in a combinative

battle, I was nevertheless able to use my
customary weapon - technique in the
endgame - to gain a win.
Unfortunately, sometimes a master
learns after a game that in the heat of
the battle he missed an opportunity for a
combination, and was unable to unravel
its secret. Moreover, the prettier the
tactical operation that he failed to carry
out the more vexing his mistake. The
reader, however, will not feel any loss,
, since the aesthetic impression from the
missed combination is no less than if it
had been carried . out on the board. . It is
only for this reason that I have given the
above game.
386
Game 378
Matnlovic-Botvinnik
USSR v. Rest oftf:e World
Belgrade 1970
1
2
3
4
e4
d4
tl)fJ
i..c4
g6
.i.g7
d6
4 c4 would have led to the King's

I ndian Defence, but for the Pirc
U fimtsev Defence 4 tt:Jc3 is more
l ypical. After 4 Jlc4 I had already
t.:mployed several times a set-up
i nvolving creating a barrier on the a2-g8
diagonal ( . . . c7-c6 and . . . d6-d5). And
a l though my opponent was also no
novice in this variation, Black naturally
had no grounds for avoiding the custom
ary continuation. I have never been
afraid of mirages.
4
5
6
7
fie2
..tbJ
.i.g5
tDf6
c6
0-0
to try and refute Black's plan. He had

already successfully used this last move
against Hubner in Athens a year earlier.
White prevents . . . d6-d5, since now in
some variations the e7 pawn is pinned,
and it needs to be advanced to e6.
7
h6
This is the whole point ! In the afore
mentioned game Hilbner played 7 . . . e5
immediately, but this central counter is
best carried out after first driving back
the bishop to h4, where it is not
altogether well placed.
.i.b4
e5
Now Black has in mind counterplay

involving . . . ttlli5 -f4.
9
10
dxe5
l!Jbd2
dxe5
Threatening to take the e5 pawn,

which was not possible immediately
because of 10 . 'iVa5+.
1fc7
10
. .
11
12
lLlc4
J.gJ
h5
li)f4
The thematic 1 2 . . . i..g4 was not pos

sible here because of 1 3 i.xe5 i.xe5 14
liJcxe5 tiJf4 1 5 'i'd2 with a clear advan
tage to White.
Thus, after Gipslis (No.3 16) and

Matanovic (No. 374), Matulovic decided
3 87
13 .i.xf4
14 0-0-0
15 . : , es
exf4
..i. g4
It was not.possible for White to win a

pawn. After 15 h3 .i.xf3 16 'ifxf3 t2Jd7
17 lDd6 tLle5 18 'i'xf4 !lfd8 he would
have lost a piece (after any knight move,
even to f7, there follows 19 . etJd3 +,
while if 19 ifd2 .i.f8).
.
15
16
1fe4
ltld7
Itad8
For Black too there is no point in

going chasing a pawn - after 16 . il.x:f3
17 gxf3 tDxe5 18 li:)xe5 'ifxe5 19 Wxe5
.i.xe5 20 :d7 White has quite adequate
compensation.
..
17
18
1fxf4
1ixf3
It is obvious that Black has won the

strategic battle. He has already prepared
a pawn storm on the queenside, whereas
White essentially cannot do anything.
..txf3
b5
Black wants to regain the pawn,

without exchanging knights, so as not to
ease White's defence. But this does not
mean that White should aim for this
exchange in any situation. avoiding
more ex-pedient continuations.
19
20
21
llleJ
'ifgJ
a3
21
22
h7
lll g4
Aiming for the exchange of knights

instead of the active continuation 22 f4
and 2 3 .f5 . Here I realised that it might
be possible to carry out Black's strategic
plan: the bishop at b3 cannot hinder the
activity of the dark-square bishop.
22
23
24
25
lD:le5
1t'f3
libel
h5
i.xe5
<i;g7
.tf6
c3
ktxd8
g3
28
29
JO
31
..tc2
axb4
cxb4
c4
b4
axb4
ifb6
32
J:ldl
'lfxb4
Caution dictated 28 h3 . It is good

when pawns on squares of the colour of
the enemy bishop cramp it, but bad, as
in the given case, when they can be
come a target.
lllxe5
a5
With the threat of 22 f4 lild7 23

'i'xg6.
c5
hlxd8
26
27
28
The first of three errors made by me

in time trouble is not as yet so sig
nificant. Simpler was 3 1 . . . 'i'a7 3 2 b l
.:ta8 (3 2 . . . 'i'd4 33 'i'c3 'iixf2 34 'ife3
'i'xh2 39) 3 3 'i'a3 'i'xf2 (but not 3 3 . . .
'i'd4 because o f 34 d l 'i'e5 3 5 f4) 34
'i'e3 'ii'xh2 .
But this is already a serious mistake.
After 32 . . Jie8 ! White would have been
unable to avoid 33 'l'a3 'i'xf2, since 3 3
J:td7 'ii'xb4 3 4 'i'dS Itel+ leads to mate.
388
33 l:r.xd8
34 dl
35 1ld5
36 <ii?e2
If 4 1 'lt>dl .i.c3 ! , and mate is un

avoidable. The game mentioned in the
note to Black's 1 3th move concluded
with such a mating finish. What a
curious coincidence is possible after the
consistent implementation of similar
plans ! As I have already mentioned,
grandmaster Matulovic should have
known my game with Medina, but did
he lmow it?
'ii xb2+
li.xd8
'i'f6
My opponent also 1nisses a good

opportunity. He would have gained
better saving chances by playing 36 f4,
e.g. 36 . . .'i'a l+ 37 e2 .i.f6 3 8 1fxc4
'W'gl 39 i.b3 .
36
...
i.b6
41
42
43
Black avoids a trap: 36 . . . 'i'c3? 37

0.xg6 !
37
38
f4
9e4
1lc3
i..d4
'ifa>e2
dl
1!fgt+
'i'xh2+
'ilgl+
43 .. :i'xg3 could also have been

played, of course, but it was much more
pleasant to pick up the last white pawn,
while maintaining the threat of mate to
the enemy king.
Black could have won a second pawn

without any particular problems: 38 . . .
.0.gl 3 9 f5 (after the exchange of queens
by 39 'ife 5+ White loses) 39 . . . gxf5 40
'+Wxf5 'i'e3+ 4 1 <ifi>fl i.xh2.
'i'eJ+
44
45
<i&>e2
45
46
1fxg3
11'h7+
<ii?f8
White resigns
<ifi>f1
The reader already knows that if 45
dl there would follow 45 . . . .i.c3 .
Game 379
Botvinnik-Spassky
Leiden 1970
Queen's Gambit
However, here Matulovic misses his
l ast hopes of saving the game: 39 fl
'lia l + 40 g2 'i'g l+ 4 1 h3 iifl+ 42
'iig2, and he who commits the last
mistake usually loses!
39
40
41
f5
1f.tf5
<it>ft .-
gxf5
1ieJ+
1
2
3
c4
liX3
d4
e6
d5
ii..e7
Although the initiator of this dev

iation froin the usual move order of the
Orthodox Defence is Black, it is White
who gains more opportunities for
choosing non-standard ; continuations.
The present game is a typfoal example.
389
4
5
6
cxd5
.i.f4
e3
exd5
c6
.i.f5
g4
.i.e6
Finally I gave a laugh, and cheerfully

closed my pocket set. 'Have you found
it?', Alberic O'Kelly asked me (while I
had been working, he had tactfully kept
some distance away). I had indeed
found that if now White plays 8 h4, the
acceptance of the sacrifice is extremely
dangerous for Black: 8 . . . i.xh4 9 'ii'b3
b6 (9 . . . .itc8 10 e4) 10 ltlf3 !l..e7 1 1
i.xb8 l:.xb8 1 2 lDe5 l:tc8 ( 1 2 . . . i.d7 1 3
e4) 1 3 1Wa4 b5 1 4 'i'xa7. White played
differently, but also not badly, in the
game Vladimirov-Kaminsky ( 1 974): 1 1
l2Je5 lDf6 1 2 i.e2 'i'c8 1 3 :c l 'ib7 1 4
g5 .
And here, after an elapse of two and
a half years, an opportunity to employ
my innovation presented itself.
Regarding Portisch' s move 6 . . . .i.d6,

see No. 373 .
8
9
All this is theocy. Here White usually
played 8 h3 (No. 3 13 ), events developed
unhurriedly, and Black normally gained
roughly equal chances. But on this
occasion I went in for this position with
other intentions, behind which there is a
story.
At the tournament in Palma de
Mallorca in 1 967, several of the rounds
were held on the island of Menorca, and
immediately after their conclusion a
storm blew up. The airport was closed.
It was impossible to return to Mallorca,
and the competitors were idle for a full
twenty-four hours. I sat in the hotel
foyer and with the storm howling
outside I analysed the position shown in
the diagram, which I had avoided the
previous day in my game with Portisch
(which went 7 i.d3 i.g6, and soon the
players agreed a draw).
h4
h5
liJd7
ifb6
A poor move, since Black himself

hinders the development of his initiative
by . . . b7-b5 . However, after other moves
too, White retains the advantage. For
example, after the game we examined
two variations pointed out by Spassky.
After the immediate 9 . . . b5 White has a
wide choice of rational replies ( 1 0 i.h3
or 10 .i.e2 followed by i.f3 and l2Jge2 ),
while if Black first plays 9 . . . tlJgf6 IO f3
and now 10 . . . b5. then there follows 1 1
lbge2 ! lbb6 1 2 tile 1 lbc4 13 ctJd3 .
10
11
l:lbt
f3
lbgf6
b6
The unpleasant 12 g5 was already

threatened. But after this weakening of
his position, Black's king will be in
danger on whiche_ver side he castles.
12
il.d3
'i'a5
In a gaille Ftuman-Geller (1 975)

Black castled imrHediately, after which
3 90
carri es out a series of exchanges, and

the chances become completely equal.
17
a4
1 3 g5 would have been good, whereas

1 3 ge2 c5 14 @fl l:fe8 1 5 g2 ltac8
16 Viel lllli7 17 'i'f2 cxd4 1 8 exd4 i.d6
led to an unclear situation.
13
lhge2
b5
As a result Black has lost at least one

tempo, and is late with this advance.
Therefore White succeeds in taking
control of c5 .
14
15
it)cl!
b3
1fd8
0-0
A highly flippant move, after which

Black's position becomes critical.
c5!: .
.i.xf5
cxd4
9'b6
18
19
20
21
thct
ttlf5
i.xf5
exd4
22
23
24
25
.i.d6
tLle2
.i.xf4
'i'd2
tLlxf4
l:tfe8+
'ifi>fl
thb8
Draw agreed
Of White's former superiority, not a

trace remains. Black's position is per
fectly afe, and it was now I who had to
find a convenient moment to offer a
draw.
Game 3 80
Botvinnik-Larsen
Leiden 1970
16
it)e2
a5
Here I suffered from indecision. I

spent a long time considering the natural
continuation 17 lkl a4 1 8 c5 lbxc5
1 9 dxc5 ttJd7, but decided that there was
no point in sacrificing a pawn, since as
it was my position was good . . .
Meanwhile, immediately after the
game I discovered that after 20 Ab I !
(20 . . . l1Jxc5 2 1 nxc5 .i.xc5 22 1i'c2)
White would have obtained a winning
position.
17 . tLlg3
1
2
3
4
5
But now control of the c5 square

passes to Blak, 11 ope;ns up the centre,
c4
lLlcJ
d4
e4
g6
iLg7
d6
it)f6
f3
Against the move order chosen by
Black I normally used to choose the
Samisch Variation, since I considered
this reinforcement of the centre to be the
most unpleasant for my opponent.
5 ...
0-0
Black should not be in a hurry to
castle. If, say, the game had continued
5 . c6 6 Ae3 a6 7 Vd2 b5, then 8 0--0-0
would be dubious for White.
Black would . not have continued
8 . 'i'a5 9 e5 (9 b l tl'ibd7 IO i.116
391
..
.i.xh6 1 1 1fxh6 .i.b7 1 2 'i'd2 0-0-0 1 3

d5 b4 1 4 ltice2 cxd5 1 5 cxd5 'ib6, as
shown 1;>y the game Gheorghiu-Byme,
1 968, leds to equal play) 9 . . . dxe5 (if
9 . .. lDfd7 there follows 10 exd6 exd6 1 1
t2Je4, while if 9 . . . b4, then not 10 exf6
bxc3 1 1 fxg7 cxd2+ 1 2 i.xd.2 'i'xd2+
1 3 hlxd2 l:tg8 with equality, but 1 0 ttJb 1
dxe5 1 1 dxe5 , and the e5 pawn is
immune because of the mate at d8,
while if 1 1 . . . ll\:fd7 12 f4) 10 dxe5 liJfd7
1 1 f4 0-0 1 2 ttJf3 t2Jb6 1 3 'i'f2 llJ8d7 1 4
ltid4.
The correct reply is 8 . . . i.e6 ! ! , e.g. 9
i.h6 i.xh6 IO 1ixh6 'i'a5 ! ! 1 1 d5 ( 1 1
e5 b4 ! ) 1 l .. .iid7 1 2 b l b4 1 3 lt.Jce2
cxd5 1 4 cxd5 i.a4 1 5 c 1 li.Jbd7 1 6
l2Jd4 'ib6. or 9 e 5 dxe5 1 0 dxe5 'i'xd2+
1 1 :xd2 ttJfd7 1 2 f4 g5.
Of course, Bent could not have
known all these variations, which were
recorded in my notebook.
.i.eJ
i.dJ
8
9
10
0-0
In the present game Larsen ef

fectively refuted this move. the result of
good theoretical preparation. Therefore
White's subsequent searchings involved
IO ltc l, e.g. 1 0 . e5 1 1 d5 b4 12 ttJdl
c5 13 g4 h5 1 4 t'Df2 with the better
prospects (Petrosian-Gligoric, 1 972).
But when Black deliberately avoids
the plan employed by Larsen (as, for
instance. in the game Spassky-Penrose,
1 970, where in the diagram position
Black had not castled. but his bishop
stood at b7), White can quietly continue
1 0 0-0, since . . . :b8 no longer has any
point.
.
a6
The idea of playing . . . b7-b5 at an

early stage (instead of . . . e7-e5, which
previously was virtually standard) was
demonstrated
in
the
1 950s
by
Taimanov, Petrosian and Smyslov (the
latter. for example, in Game 259, where,
incidentally, for a long time he refrained
from castling).
c6
7 1!fd2
10
In view of Black's premature

castling, here White could have played
8 0-0-0. For example, 8 . . . b5 9 .i.h6
'ila5 (9 . . . i.e6 IO h4) IO h4 b4 1 1 lDb l
and then h4-h5 with an attack. However.
on this occasion I did not want a sharp
game, and I preferred the quiet
continuation 8 .id3 .
b5
bd7
ttlge2
...
:b8!
It will soon be apparent that the black

rook is best placed here. However,
1 0 . . . bxc4 1 1 il.xc4 lDb6 has also been
played, or even 1 1 . . .d5.
3 92
11
cxb5
1 1 JLh6 is also possible.
11
12
b4
.!
axb5
lhb6
Black is now threatening after

1 3 . . . i..e6 to seize control of c4 , and this
obliges White to take urgent measures.
13
14
15
a4
lixa4
lha4
bxa4
lixa4
.i.d7
The fact that all the time Black is

creating various annoying threats (now,
for example, 16 . . . cS) shows that he has
excellently
solved
his
opening
problems.
ii'b6
16 :a5
17
18
bl
lic3
11a2
11aJ
d5
21
22
e5
lia4
lid7
.i.f5
23
24
.i.xf5
ita6
gxf5
Consistently played. Black eliminates

a defender of the c4 square, and the
doubling of his pawns also suits him:
the black pawn at f5 will prevent a
possible pawn offensive by White on
the kingside.
l:tfc8
'ifd8
The queen has courteously made way

for the rook, and now it returns home,
so as to remove from the agenda
White' s pawn break d4-d5 (with gain of
tempo). How should the resulting
position be evaluated? On the one hand,
White has rather more space and the
open rook' s file, along which, however,
nothing significant can be achieved. On
the other hand, he constantly has to
wony about his b4 pawn. In general, as
it is customary to say, a position of
dynamic equilibrium'. has been reached.
19
20
The pluses and minuses of this

advance are obvious: the possible oc
cupation of c4, but the fact that the
bishop at g7 is shut out of play for a
long time. The latter is perhaps of more
significance.
24
l:tc7
Sharper was 24 . . .t:Db6 25 lDc5 (after

25 ttJxb6 Itxb6 White has no active
possibilities) 25 . . . lDc4 26 'i'd3 e6.
Larsen prefers to exchange knights on
c5 , but this worsens Black's position.
25 l:tct
Wes
.*.e6
393
26
27
28
29
:a5
i.d2
f4
lic5
e6
.i.f8
<it>h8
37
Now Black can no longer play his

knight to c4, since after 29 . . . lbb6 3 0
ltJa6 lbc4 3 1 1%xc4 dxc4 3 2 ltJxb8
(32 . . .'i'xb8 3 3 :as) he loses. But after
the exchange of knights, the white c5
pawn will restrict the enemy pieces.
29
37
38
39
lDxc5
dxc5!
It is probable that my opponent

underestimated this move. Now Black's
heavy pieces remain passive (the b-file
is blocked), the c6 pawn is weak, and in
an endgame the threat of b4-b5 with the
creation of a passed c-pawn will be
highly unpleasant.
30
31
32
33
11fd3
l:lcal
lta8
1fd8
1i'd7
Itcb7
It is useful to exchange one pair of

rooks, since this eliminates the potential
threat of an exchange sacrifice on b4,
after which all Black's pieces could
have become active.
'il'c8
33
34
35
36
l:txb8
liaJ
1fa4 .
. .
1ia8
1ia5
h6
l:tb8
Of course, it would have been tempt

ing to begin an attack on the somewhat
compromised position of the black king.
But I operated 'a la Capablanca ' and,
avoiding unclear complications, aimed
for the exchange of queens, after which
White will have a clear advantage in the
endgame.
39
40
30
lia3
With this move White as though

hints that he might switch his rook to
the kingside.
1i'xb8
@g8
1i'c7
. .
"iia6
ifc8
i.e7
Larsen was probably afraid that as a

result of adjournment analysis I would
nevertheless give preference to the
attack on the kingside. Therefore if 4 1
'i!fe2 he clearly wanted t o retain the
option of replying 4 1 . . . l:ta8. As for the
endgame. this evidently suited Black,
but 40 . . . 'ii'c 7 was objectively stronger.
41
1i'xc8+
ltxc8
Paradoxically, in a conversation with

Spassky, Larsen evaluated the endgame
as follows: 1 am probably slightly
better, and if my king can get into the
centre, I will look for winning chances' .
'iftf8
4 2 'itm
h5
43 w
Not wishing to allow g2-g4, Larsen
makes an incautious move, which
weakens his h-pawn and gives White
new chances.
White's positional advantage is
obvious: he controls more space, which
ensures him freedom to manoeuvre, the
black c- and h-pawn. need defending,
394
and the threat of b4-b5, creating a

passed c-paw is a very serious one.
Then there would have followed

53 . . . :as or 53 .. d4 54 i.d2 l:a8.
llc8
53 'it>fJ
.
54
e2
.*.d8
55
Aet
f6
Black was ahnost in zugzwang. If

54 . . . f6 there could have followed. 55
l:e7 fxe5 56 :xe6+. After the retreat of
the bishop, this advance becomes pos
sible, but the white h-pawn becomes
very mobile. Therefore 54 ... <it>g7 was
more circumspect.
44
<"Jre2!
c&>g7
45
46
47
48
.\let
%ta7
.tcJ
'iti>dJ
<iti> g6
.id8
h4
h3
Black is aiming to activate his bishop

or obtain another passed pawn, and in so
doing to rid himself of his doubled
pawns. But more significant is the fact
that now on the sixth rank he will have
another weak pawn at e6.
fxe5
56
Otherwise 45 l:h3. Now, to defend

his h-pawn, both Black's king, and his
bishop, must stay on the kingside.
Larsen was probably afraid of White

moving. his king to a4 and then playing
b4-b5. In the event of this he wanted to
gain some counterplay, and for this
reason he sacrifices a paw assuming
that the doubled h-pawns will be of little
value. Subsequent events, however, do
not confirm Black's hopes.
49
50
gxh3
'ifi>e2
57
.i.h4
Now White avoids the manoeuvre of

his king to the queenside, and tries to
exploit his passed h-pawns.
50
51
52
'it>fJ
<it?g2 ;
fxe5
Ac7
In addition it transpires that the black

king' s position has become less secure
after the opening of the seventh rank.
Black covers it, but with his lone rook
he cannot block two ranks.
.i.d8
.i.h4
l:td8
58
59
60
lla8
Ag8+
h4!
Thus the h-pawn finally advances. It

is immune: 60 . i.xh4? 6 1 l:lh8+.
..
.ih6
60 . . .
c:li>g6
61 llb8
62 .td2 was threatened.
62 b5+!
Again this pawn cannot be touched

(62 . . . 'ittxh5 63 i.d2), and as a result
Black's position is worsened catastroph
ically.
62
g7
Larsen aims to complicate matters,

provoking White into playing 53 :tc7.
3 95
.ig5
h5
63
.:ta8
To deny the enemy rook any scope.
63
64
lta6
73
74
75
.i.g
White sets his distant sights on the e6

pawn.
64
ltd8
:xe8
c6
l:tc8
Black resigns
The time for decisive action has
finally arrived.
65
b5!
This move leads to a win. Both sides

acquire three passed pawns (a rare
instance) but White's are further
advanced and therefore more dangerous.
Also, Black's pieces are badly placed.
65
66
lhe6
This ending was another one that I

conducted by the Capablanca method,
which was described in the notes to
Game 74.
This was the conclusion to the last
tournament game that I won in my chess
career.
cxb5
.let
Game 3 8 1
Spassky-Botvinnik
. 67 l:.g6+ was threatened.
67
68
69
70
b4
ltg6+
l:.d6
lid7+
Leiden 1970
d4
'ifrih7
.i.b2
<t>g8
Caro-Kann Defence
After 70. . . h6 71 .i.d2+ @xh5 72

l:d6 l::th8 73 c6 the passed c-pawn
would soon become a queen, since the
black rook is occupied in defending its
king against mate. But now too the
white pawns cannot be stopped.
71
72
e6
e7
1
2
3
4
e4
d4
lt\c3
ti)xe4
c6
d5
dxe4
i.f5
5
6
7
g3
fl
h4
.i.g6
lDd7
b6
This sound line served me well in my

return match against Smyslov in 1 958,
and I retained a liking for it.
.i.c3
lte8
3 96
Black successfully equalised in the

game Sax-Hort ( 1 979): 1 1 . . .ligf6 12
.lf4 'ifas+ 1 3 d2 1Wb5 14 'ilxb5 cxb5
1 5 a4 bxa4 16 l:lxa4 e6 17 b3 i-e7 1 8
<it>e2 a6.
b5
12
.i.f4
.i.d6
13
14
.i.xd6
ltle4
1fxd6
Bagirov recommends for Black

12 . . . 1fa5+ 1 3 :td2 'i'b6 14 0-0-0 .il.e7
1 5 lthhl lLlgf6 1 6 c4 4i'a6.
Formerly this advance was regarded

with some scepticism, but following
Gligoric's example the idea has once
again gained recognition. White pre
pares a favourable pawn situation for
the endgame.
In the 3rd game of the afore
mentioned return match White played
the immediate 8 i..d3 , which theory now
assesses as leading to an equal game.
8
9
10
.i.d3
11xd3
11
l:th4
Jl.h7
iaxd3
ifc7
Regarding 10 . . . ti.Jgf6, see Game 345

(between the same opponents).
Gligoric has persistently employed
this move, although it was apparently
first played in a game Keres-Bagirov
( 1 959). Chess fashion, however, is also
short-lived (although sometimes the old
unexpectedly returns), and the latest
word in opening theory is considered to
be the quiet move 1 1 .i.d2 followed by
queenside castling.
11
e6
14
.
1'b4+
An unfortunate check. 14 . . . 'i'e7 was,
of course. more circwnspect. After 1 5
0-0-0 gf6 1 6 lDxf6+ lLlxf6 Keres
gained an advantage in the afore
mentioned game: 17 e5 0-0-0 18
ilg3, but that same year, in the
Candidates Tournament in Yugoslavia,
Petrosian improved the defence against
Gligoric with 16 . . . gxf6. Therefore,
when in our game from the fourth cycle
(tl1is game was played in the second) I
played 14 . . . 'i'e7 against Spassky, this
quickly led to a draw: 1 5 0-0-0 ltlgf6
16 t'.Ded2 0--0-0 17 ltJc4 b8 18 g3
lDb6 19 'i'e2 ltlbd5 .
3 97
Further searches for White proceeded

in the - direction of 1 5 1i'a3 (apparently
suggested by Tolush), but after 1 5 . ." .
ifxa3 16 bxa3 '3ie7 17 :bl ::tb8 1 8 t'Dcs
ltlxc5 19 dxc5 as 20 l:a4 ctJf6 2 1 lh.a5
ltld7 Black has sufficient compensation
for his slight material deficit.
15
11c3
After 1 5 c3 Black would have had to

return his queen to e7, since 15 . . . "i'xb2
is dangerous in view of 16 CDd6+ and 1 7
l:b l .
15
1!fxc3+
Even now it was not too late to play

1 5 . . . We7.
16
17
bxcJ
c5!
rlJe7
lhgf6
18
19
l0xb7
lheS
%lhc8
too White's position would have rem

ained preferable. .
22
ltlxd7!
23
d5!
23
24
l:txd5
lllxd7
After 22 . . J:!xd7 White would cahnly

retain the advantage with 23 t2Jb3 .
Now White's material advantage is
reduced to the minimum, since the
presence of the c5 pawn . devalues the
doubled c-pawns, but the same c5 pawn
blocks the black pieces, and the
initiative again returns to the World
Champion. In view of the Wlpleasant
threat of 24 d6+, Black's reply is forced.
exd5
Or 17 . . . b6 1 8 ltJxd7 xd7 1 9 !Lle5+,

winning a pawn, while in the event of
17 . . .!LlxcS 18 dxc5 Black again loses
one of his pawns. Therefore he has to go
in for a sacrifice, so as to complete the
mobilisation of his forces.
1 9 lDc5 also came into consideration,

blocking the c6 pawn, which would
restrict Black' s rooks.
19
c5
It would appear that Black has gained

some initiative.
20
lha5
l:tc7
If 20 . . . cxd4, White would have

advantageously replied 2 1 tDec6+.
21
0-0-0
l!ac8
With a double threat (both 22 . . . cxd4

and 22 . . . c4 ), but Spassky skilfully
demonstrates the ineffectiveness of this
idea.
After 2 1 . . . lhiS the play would have
been more complicated, although then
24
f1Jb6
Trying to shut the knight at a5 out of

the game but perhaps this should have
been done bv 24 . . . c4. when after 25
.
.l:e4+ 26 :xc4 nc4 27 liJxc4 liJr6
28 :d4 !Llxh5 Black obtains a satis
factory ending.
25 l:.e5+
During the game it was hard to

decide on 25 . . . <;t>f6 26 l:.e3 c4, since the
position of the black king bomes
insecure. But as a result of this cautious
398
retreat, White succeeds in bringing his

unfortunate lrnight into play.
26 . lDl>3!
lhd4
:he4
l:tf5
llc5
ltJd7
Black Wlderestimated this reply when

he played 26 . c4. White is able to parry
the action of the black rooks along the
fifth rank and gain a clear advantage.
tl)xf5
g4
31
g6
f4
36
f5
36
37
...
g7
e6
A serious unpleasantness! For the

moment the knight is immune (36. ..
xh6 37 .tlxg6 mate).
lbf5
l:tc5
3 1 ctJd6 tDf6 32 .:t.xc4 :xc4 33

l2Jxc4 ltlxh5 would have let Black off
too cheaply. Now the very strong 32
tl'ld6 ttlf6 3 3 :d4 is threatened.
34
35
li)b7
The point of Black's plan! If now
White plays 36 g5, then 36 . . . liJxg5 37
fxg5 l:hg5 and the knight at h6 is lost,
and Black has every chance of drawing.
. .
29
30
31
fxg6
li)f6
hxg6
liJxh6
Of course, not 3 3 ... 'iti>g7 . because of

34 l:e7+.
c4
A difficult decision to take, since

now the white knight will occupy an
ideal post at d4. But Black needs to free
the fifth rank, so as to activate his rooks.
27
28
29
32
33
ltJf8
lie8
Now it is hard for Black to find a

useful continuation (of course, 37 . ttlli.7
is not possible because of 3 8 :gs+
<t>xll6 ? 39 :xg6 mate). In the time
scramble he decides on a move that
offers White a choice a good practical
device.
37
l:a5
..
The last tactical chance. White's

knight has successfully escaped from
the unfortWlate square as on the queen
side, but perhaps it will be possible to
exploit its poor position at h6? It is for
this that Black sacrifices a pawn.
38
ci>d2
Unexpectedly, the 'device' works.

This move would seem to throw away
399
the wi since in the rook ending White

is left with a weak pawn at fS .
During the game I thought that White
would win most easily by 3 8 'ittb2, and
if 3 8 . . . l:tb5+ 3 9 @a3 lt.a5+ (otherwise
Black ends up in zugzwang), then 40
'lt>b4 l:txa2 4 1 g5 with a material and a
positional advantage. Also dangerous
for Black was 3 8 f6+ xf6 3 9 l:xf8+
@g7 40 l:c8 6 41 l:xc4 l:xa2 42
l:te4 ! with a highly favourable rook
ending. In Spassky's opinio 3 8 fxg6
ltlxg6 39 li)f5+ 6 40 :e4 was also
quite good for White.
38
<iii>xh6
Now, when the a2 pawn will be won,

Black himself goes into the rook ending.
g7
39 1'xf8
40
41
42
l:tc8
gxf5
<t>e3
gxf5
:xa2
After 42 l:txc4 l:ta5 43 ltf4 f6

Black has every chance of drawing the
game.
42
43
44
45
e4
ltc6+
ltxc4
@16
ltxc2
52
..
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
a5
46
47
48
l:tc7+
l:lc6+
<iii>d 4
<it>f6
49
50
51
52
e5
d5
llc7+
lta7
l:le2+
l:lf2
f6
@f7
:n
The main thing for the weaker side is
the activity of his rook.
c4
c5
c6
@cs
a4
a3
l:ld2+
:c2+
It is good to drive the king to c7, and

only then advance the pawn to the
second rank.
<ilf7
Black easily gains a draw: he blocks

the fpawn with his king, and his passed
a-pawn counterbalances the enemy c
pawn.
:.a2
It is simplest for Black to retain his

own passed paw and not give White
any
practical
chances
involving
52 . l:xf5+ 53 \t?d6 and then 54 c4 .
lld2+
a2
l:lc2
lld2+
<it>d6
<it>c7
lta5
d7
It is not clear what White was hoping

for. After all, it is impossible to use the
rook simultaneously to defend the king
against checks, and to control the a l
square.
400
61
62
63
64
65
66
llc2
<it?c8
lld2
c7
l:tb2+
<iii>b 7
l:r.c2+
c6
IZ.d2+
d7
lle2+
<it?e8
Draw agreed
.
Training Games
Usually I asked Ragozin to stick to

the latest word of theory. Of course, I
never showed him before a game the
variation I had prepared, in order to test
the effect of surprise. However, my
friend possessed a very obstinate chess
character, and sometimes he would
avoid the theoretical recommendations,
which threw me into despair . . .
In the present game, thank God, it all
turned out well.
Ragozin-Botvinik
Zacherenye Sanatorium 1936
French Defence
1
2
3
4
5
e4
d4
tLlcJ
a3
bxc3
e6
d5
.i.b4
.i.xc3+
dxe4
It was not by accident that this open

ing variation was tested in a training
game.
In late 1 935, by employing this
variation, Alekhine with White won
against Euwe in the 3rd game of their
World Championship Match. It was
natural to exlJect that this continuation
might occur in tournament play. At that
time I was already systematically
playing the French Defence, and so
Ragozin and I decided to test this
position. Understandably, it was I who
defended Black's honour'.
6
7
8
1ig4
1ixg7
1!fh6
tLlf6
%!g8
c5
This position was subsequently

reached in many of my games (cf. , for
example, Nos.228 and 229).
ttle2
This is what Alekhine played against

Euwe; this move, accordjng to the state
of theory in 193 6 was considered the
strongest.
tLlc6
As was shown by my 1 954 match

with Smyslov, 9 . . . l:tg6 is preferable, for- .
cing White to determine in advance the
position of his queen. When we played
this training game, this was not yet
known.
10
.i.b2
The correct reply to 9 . .. tt:Jc6 - 10

dxc5, was found by Smyslov 18 years
40 1
later, during which ti.me I e,.nployed this

variation several times in tournaments
and matches. It is hard, therefore, to
reproach Ragozin for making a weaker
move, which has the aim of defending
the central pawn.
1 O ..tg5 leads to an equal game.
10
. .
.i.d7
Black prepares queenside castling. It

only remains for him to play 1 1 . . . llg6,
to free his queen from having to defend
the knight at f6, and his queen will be
able to leave the eighth rank.
11
:dl
This came as a complete surprise to

me. 1 1 h3 was probably better.
11
12
...
1fe3
%1.g6
1ia5
Preventing 1 3 ttJf4 in view of the

reply 1 3 . . . cxd4. White is forced to take
the c5 pawn - a possibility that he
rejected on the 10th move.
13
dxc5
0-0-0
first sight seems illogical. However, the

c5 pawn is cramping'. e bl3;ck queen; in
addition, White's f2: n.ow comes under

attack, and the play becomes forcing.
15
16
'ifxe4
ltd2
1fxc5
9b6
17
18
.i.cl
ifc4
f5
'ifbl
There is no way of defending the

bishop at b2, and White has to make a
non-aesthetic move.
During the game this seemed an
energetic move to me, since White can
defend his bishop only with his knight
or king. In reality, there is nothing for
the queen to do at b l . 1 8 . . . e5 or 18 . . .
ct>b8 should have been played, similar to
that which later occurred in the game.
19
lhe2
11fb6
It is one thing to make a mistake, but

another to persist with it (White was
now intending to play 20 'iib3, and he
might have been able to save himself in
the endgame).
20
21
lhf4
.i.dJ
llgg8
If 2 1 e6 there would, of course,

have followed 2 1 . . . l:lge8.
21
22
<i&>b8
ifb3
White is forced to move his queen

from c4, since after 22 0--0 ltJge5 and
23 . ttJf3+ he would have lost the
exchange.
..
22
23
.
:e2
1fc7
e5
Black is a pawn down, but he has a

considerable lead in development.
In view of the unavoidable . . . e5-e4,

White's position becomes hopeless.
Black exchanges his central e-pawn

for one of the tripled c-pawns, which at
24 /l)d5 is no better on account of

24 . . . fi'd6 with the.t:lueat of25 . . . ..te6.
14
lhg3
lhg4
402
24
lhe6
Jl.xe6
e4
lllce5
24
25 1i'xe6
26 : ii.b5
27 c4
27 . ifxc3+ was threatened, but this
..
27
tbxh2
28 lhh2
White resigned
in view
of
28 . . . lim+ 29 fl (29 gxf3 :g 1 mate)
29 . . . l:dl+ 30 :e l l:xel mate.
Ragozin-Botvinnik
Pushkin 1 941
French Defence
1
2
3
e4
d4
d2:
lilc6
exd5
...
cxd4
0-0
ltlbJ
Strictly speaking, the idea of this

move belongs to Capablanca, but in the
afore-mentioned game he first gave a
queen check at e7, which led to
difficulties for Black. Now, however, in
the event of 7 lDxd4 Ve7+ (Averbakh
Botvinnik,
Moscow
Championship
1943/44) it is not advantageous for
White to retreat 8 .i.e2, as played by
Keres.
Black
achieves
development.
Ji.d6
comfortable
8 xd4 can be met by 8 .i.xh2+ 9

xh2 Vb.4+ 10 gl 'i'xd4 with equal
chances (Geller-Ivkov, 1 969).
. . .
This insidious move leads to mate

(28 . . ef3+ is threatened) there is no
longer any defence.
lilgf3
exd5
.i.b5
In the late 1 93 0 s I became interested

in the Tarrasch Variation (3 liJd2),
especially after the well-lmown game
Keres-Capablanca ( 1 938), which was
won by White. In this context I decided
to check a new idea.
A familiar picture. All Black's pieces

are coordinated, whereas White' s are
scattered, and although at first sight the
white king in the centre feels safe, its
fate is sealed.
too does not save White.
4
5
6
e6
d5
c5
403
lllge7
liJbxd4
The Encyclopaedia considers this to

be the strongest continuation, but to me
it seems that 9 1Lxc6+ comes into
consideration. Then 9 . . . l2Jxc6 10 :e 1 +
li..e7 1 1 t2Jfxd4 0-0 12 .i.f4 l'bxd4 13
'i'xd4 leads t o a position favourable for
White
(Averbakh-Botvinnik,
1 9th
USSR Championship, 1 95 1 ), while
9 . . . bxc6 10 'i'xd4 0-0 1 1 .i.f4 lhf5 1 2
'i'd2 'i'b6 1 3 l2Jrd4 l:td8, in the opinion
of Matanovic, leads to an unclear
position.
h6
It is useful to prevent .i.g5-h4-g3 .
10
11
12
.i.e3
'ifd2
i.e2
0-0
.i.g4
Black ignored the bishop sortie to b5,

and this has born fruit. The bishop has
abandoned this post, and White has
therefore simply lost a tempo. It was
more logical to delay this manoeuvre a
little and to first play 12 l:fe l , when the
bishop could have retreated to fl .
12
:cS
13
14
15
J:adl
h3
lhxc6
.i.b8
.i.h5
White falls into the positional trap,

prepared by Black's 1 3th move. Before
the exchange on c6, . . . 1li'd6 was not a
threat, since White could have answered
it with ltJb5; now, however, this threat
becomes a real one. Ragozin apparently
assumed that it was not possible to play
1 5 . . . bxc6 in view of the weakening of
the a6 square, but this proved to be a
tactical oversight.
15
bxc6
16
g4
A decisive weakening of the castled

position. For the moment there was
nothing tenible threatening White, and
he could have calmly continued, for
example, 1 6 c5 .
16
17
.ia6
.i.g6
'ifd6
18
19
lUel
11e2
i.e4
lig6
20
<it>fl
%ke8
21
22
23
24
lDgl
gxf5
irg4
f5
lhh4
lhxf5
A simple refutation. White does not

have time to take the rook in view of
1 8 . . . .te4.
And now 20 i.xc8 is not possible

because of 20 . . . ltJh4.
So, White has not gained any
material advantage, and his king cannot
be defended.
f3
White resigns
There could have followed 24 . . .

.i.xf3 25 t'Dxf3 ltJxe3+, if there is
nothing better.
404
Botvinnik-Ragozin
10
11
12
Sosny ;$anqrorium 1945

Slav fence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d4
c4
lLJtJ
cxd5
ll:\c3
.tf4
eJ
'i'bJ
gxf3
l:lcl
l2Ja4
i.xf3
e6
l:tc8
Since his kingside castled position is

already compromised, White decides to
leave his king in the centre, in order to
gain time for the development of his
initiative.
d;;
c6
ll:\f6
cxd5
l2Jc6
i.f5
'ifb6
12
1fa5+
The retreat of the queen to d8 looks

too passive.
13
14
<ili?e2
.i.d3
.*.b4
With his king at e2, White cannot, of

course, part with this bishop. And in
addition, now it Wlexpectedly transpires
that it is hard for Black to defend his b7
pawn.
14
0-0
Black overlooks one tactical nuance.

14 .. . ttJh5 was better.
15
16
a3
11xb7
17
il.b5
fj,,e7
11xa4
Ragozin usually used to sense inI was intending to

employ a new move, and he always
a i med to forestall this! Here in reply to
7 . . . e6 I was planning to test the variation
i nvolving 8 .i.b5. as occurred 16 years
l ater in my games with Tai (No.290)
and then with Pomar (No.340). Even so,
the planned move is also possible in the
resulting situation.
1 uitively when
.ib5
.i.g4
A simple way of preventing the

attack on c6 by 9 ll:\e5, but this leads to
the loss of a tempo and it gives White
two good bishops. 'Il>:e Encyclopaedia
considers the lesser evil to be 8 ... e6, but
it is hard to agree with this.
This is the whole point If 17 . . . 1ib3

there follows 18 i.xc6, and the b2 pawn
is defended. Black prefers to give up the
405
exchange, hoping that the open position

of the white king will give him some
counterplay.
17
18
19
20
exd4
lbc8
J:r.hct
li)xd4+
1fxd4 40
1'xf4
The entire variation was forced for

both sides. Unfortunately for Black, he
is obliged to waste a tempo moving his
bishop.
20
.ld8
This leads to an endgame, in which

White wins easily. However, after
20 . . . .i.d6 2 1 l:txf8+ li.xf8 22 l:tc8 the
threat of 23 1i'b8 would have quickly
decided the outcome.
21
22
23
24
1fb8
'it'xf4
'ifi>f1
b4
White first invades with his rook into

the enemy position, and then plays his
bishop to c6; after a different move
order the activity of his rook would
have been restricted.
27
28
29
30
31
a4
llxf8+
rl;e7
ii.c7
lDxb4
d6
Forcing Black to block the c6 square,

where his knight might have been
advantageously placed.
31
32
33
34
35
lLlb5
t2Jxf4+
.i.b6
1ha7
:xn
l:txg7
'ifi>e2
xc6
b5
'ifi>xa5
lDd5
Since Black has been unable to make

use of his passed pawn, it means that the
endgame is hopeless for him.
White's main trump is his extra pawn

on the queenside.
24
25
26
a5
Ji.c6
l:xc7+
lid7+
35
36
37
38
39
40
d4
lt)<15
'ifi>xf8
lif4+
<li>b4
<ifi>d2
llxh7
'1t>c4
'1t>d5
b4
h5
cJ.ie5
llh8
Black resigns
Botvinnik-Ragozin
Bolshevo Sanatorium 1947
Queen's Gambit
1
2
3
4
5
6
27
l:tc8+
d4
ltlfJ
c4
ti)c3
cxd5
e3
d5
ltlf6
e6
c5
ltlxd5
cxd4
Before the Chigorin Memorial

Tournament we decided to check once
406
again the position that occurred in the

game Botvinnik-Alekhine (No.94) after
White s 1 0th move .. Although instead of
this last mQe the World Champion
played differently (6 . . . l'Dc6 ), this merely
leads to a ansposition of moves.
7
8
9
exd4
i..c4
0-0
10
et
and Black's bishop at c8), where White

played i.b5, but Black gained sufficient
counterplay.
ltlc6
e7
0--0
In Grune 1 33 Black played 9 . . . a6.
10 e3 (No. 1 32) is weaker. Against

Szabo (Groningen 1946) I carried out
the same plan as in the present game,
but without 10 J:te 1 .
Here Alekhine played 1 0 . . .b6 and
after 1 1 ltJxd5 he ended up in a difficult
position. All the commentators thought
that Black was obliged to exchange first
on c3 it is this advice that Ragozin
follows.
10
11
12
bxc3
Ad3
12
13
...
1!'c2
ltlxc3
b6
There is no longer anything for the

bishop to do at c4.
15
16
i.b7
A manoeuvre that was employed

back in the game Chekhover-Levenfish
( 1 934 ). If 1 3 . . . h6 White advantageously
plays 1 4 1ie2, threatening 1We4.
13
14
J.h6
1i'd2
l:tc8
.hlabl !
A necessary link in White s plan.

Now a possible attack on g2 ( .. ."i'd5)
can always be parried by l:b5 .
16
...
17
h4
.i.f6
This proves to be a loss of time;

16 . . . i.f8 was simpler.
g6
The pawn sacrifice 14 h4 .txh4 leads

to unclear consequences (Larsen
Unzicker, 1 968).
14
lle8
The same position was reached in the
afore-mentioned game with Szabo

(only, there Whit' s rook was still at fl ,
15
An important link in White 's plan. It

is useful to move the queen off the c
file, and also to take control of the g5
and h6 squares, preparing the advance
of the h-pawn. For the moment Black
leaves his queen at d8, hoping to
prevent h2-h4.
It transpires that after l 7 . i.xh4 18

tLlxM irxh4 1 9 i.g5 'i'g4 (19 . . 'i'bs 20
.ie2) 20 lle4 'i'f5 21 l:te5 1i'g4 22 .ie2
Black has to give up his queen for rook
and knight.
407
. .
17
18
1fd6
.*.f4
Preventing the opening up of the

position by 18 . e5, when there would
follow 1 9 .i.g3, and it is hard for Black
to escape from the pin.
. .
18
1ia3
18 . 'i':f8 was more cautious; the
..
counterattack against c3 comes too late.
19
20
h5
.i.e5
lDa5
1ie7
The queen has to return, since after

20 . . . .i.xe5 2 1 tDxe5 'i'xc3 22 iff4 it
would be hard for Black to defend.
21
22
23
.i.xf6
tLlg4
9xf6
l:ted8
'Wg7
24
25
26
hxg6
..g5
l:b5
hxg6
<ii>f8
lDc6
There is nothing better. If 23 . . . ilh4

24 'iff4, threatening to win the queen.
29
30
31
ttlxg8
1fe7
llbe5
xg8
i.c6
l1d7
32
33
34
1ih4
'8'f4
gJ
ifh8
1lg7
34
35
%ieg5
White' s queen sortie would not

appear to have achieved anything, since
now it is forced to leave the enemy
position. However, this is not so: Black
has been forced temporarily to block the
c-file.
The storm clouds are again gathering

over the position of the black king. To
be fair, I should mention that it was not
so difficult for White to find the correct
plan here: all he needed to do was copy
Lasker's play in his game with Capa
blanca (Moscow 1 935).
..td5
There is no defence against the threat

of 36 ..i.xg6.
35
l:Xc3
A vain attempt to parry the bishop

sacrifice.
36
.i.xg6
37
.i.xf7+!
l:lxg3
In a difficult position Ragozin de

fends coolly; the knight manoeuvre to
g8 saves Black from the immediate
threats.
27
28
lDf6
:eJ
Intending 29 l:lh3 .
28
lDe7
lhg8
408
.;
The subtle point is that after

37 :xf7 3 'i')fg3 (but not 38 .&txg7+
l:.gxg7) Biack does not have suffi cient
compensation for the queen.
. . .
37
38
39
li.xg7
l%.xg7
i.xe6+
Black resigns
Ragozin-Botvinnik
Nikolina gora 1951

efl_e_
nce
ch_D
Fr_
_
en_
__
1
2
3
4
5
6
e4
d4
tLlcJ
e5
aJ
'i'g4
e6
d5
.i.b4
c5
ii.as
6 b4 is a popular continuation, as, for

example, in the 9th game of the
Smyslov-Botvinnik World Champion
ship Match (1954). 6 i.d2 is also quite
good for White.
lj_)e7
were especially necessary - after all, for

three years I had not taken part in any
competitions. Again I had to turn to the
French Defence, since during that time
new ideas had appeared in practice.
In my game with Reshevsky from the
World Championship Match-Tourna
ment (No. 1 81) after 5 ... il.xc3+ 6 bxc3
'ilc7 7 1i'g4 f5 8 1i'g3 cxd4 9 cxd4 I
ended up in a difficult position. There
fore I decided to test a continuation
from an earlier game with the same
opponent (No . 1 66).
1fxg7
It is well known that 7 dxc5, as

Reshevsky played against me, is
stronger, arter which White retains an
opening advantage without any compli
cations. But on this occasion too
Ragozin went his own way.
7
l:tg8
8
9
'iixb7
b4
cxd4
dxc3
Black could have considered 9 . . . i.c7

10 liJb5 a6! (but not 10 . i.xe5 1 1 ttJf3
:i.h8 12 'i'd3 .i.f6 1 3 i.f4 ttJg6 14 l'iJc7+
<t>f8 1 5 i..g3 ttJc6 16 l'iJxa8 e5 17 'i'b5,
which does not give him an equal game)
1 1 ltJxd4 xe5 12 ti)gf3 1'c7, when for
the sacrificed pawn he has some
initiative.
..
10
bxa5
11
tl)fJ
/i)d7
10 . . .liJbc6 is worse on account of 1 1

tt:Jf3 (with the threat of 1 2 tiJg5)
l l . . .Wfc7 12 .llb5.
In 195 1, befqft.t We match for the

World Champior,.jp, ;training games
Another plan is to make rapid use of

the passed h-pawn: 1 1 f4 'i'xa5 12 tlJf3
liJf8 1 3 'i'd3 .i.d7 14 tl'lg5 :cs 15 I!b 1
b6 16 h4 (Gligoric-Dckstein, 1 955).
409
11
.1fc7
The exchange of the light-square

bishops is a positional mistake - the
black rooks gain freedom of movement.
In the 9th game of the World

Championship Match against Smyslov
( 1 954) I played 1 1 . . . tt:illJ , which is far
weaker, since instead of making a
further attack on the central e5 pawn
Black removes the only threat to it. I
have to admit that three years later
(during the game with Smyslov) I quite
simply forgot what I had played against
Ragozin - after all, I was in my 43rd
year, and at such an age a chess player' s
memory i s no longer faultless.
The move played has the advantage
of forcing White to take urgent
measures to defend his e5 pawn; more
over, 1 2 i.g5 is not possible on account
of 1 2 . . . l:txg5 1 3 tLlxg5 'i'xe5+.
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
.i.b5+
g3
tt'lfg6
hJ
l:lc4
lt:\gxe5
tt'lxe5
0-0-0
.i.eJ
ltJc6
It transpires that, as a result of the
unjustified exchange of bishops, White
is unable to defend his central pawn.
.i.f4
.i.d7
'tl'xd7
:g4!
15 . . . J::txg2 was dubious in view of 16

.i.g3 . Now, however, White is forced to
weaken his position by g2-g3 ; 16 Jlg3
is met by the unpleasant 16 . . . l:e4+,
while after 16 i..e 3 the reply 16 . . . :xg2
is now possible.
18
19
20
21
22
Subsequently Euwe recommended

this way for White to retain the
initiative: 12 i.b5 a6 (if 12 ... J%xg2, then
1 3 @fl and 14 :lgl) 1 3 .i.xd7+ i.xd7
14 0-0 d4 (14 . . . 'ii'c4 1 5 ttlg5) 15 ..i.g5
.i.c6 16 JJ..xe7 @xe7 17 'i'h.4+ <it>e8 1 8
tLlg5 11fxe5 1 9 f4.
12
i.. xd7+
1id3
0-0
lt:\xe5
1i'h7
.i.xa7
tt'lf8
White has regained his pawn, but at a

high price: his bishop is shut out of the
game for a long time, and the initiative
completely passes to Black. White's
main chance is to create a far-advanced
passed pawn.
410
22
23
24
25
lDtJ+
g2
llfel
lDd2
d4
f3
Black was threatening .2 5 . . . fid5+ or
25 . . . 'ifc6+.
25
26
27
28
29
1fxd7+
l:te5
l:tael
l:tb5
f5
xd7
<be7
:c6
After 29 .:I.xf5 d3 30 cxd3 c2 White

woulq have lost immediately, because
his rook would be unable to leave the e
file (3 1 J:c5 tDb3 32 xc6 bxc6 33 i.e3
llxd3 , or 3 1 i.c5+ 'it>d7 32 llf7+ 'it>c8).
29
30
d3
l:tcl
White would also not have been

saved by 30 l::t xb7+ 6 3 1 cxd3 (or 3 1
J:!c l ttJc4, transposing into a position
from the game) 3 1 . . .c2 32 .:I.c l l:txd3 33
:b2 ctJxf3 .
30
31
32
33
ltxb7+
cxd3
.?!bJ
ltJc4
6
lixd3
If 3 3 .if2 there would have followed

33 . . . c2, while if 33 :Ixc3 :xc3 34
i.d4+ e5 . 3 5 i.xc3 lle3+ and 36 . . J:hc3.
33
34
.
J.f2
lld2+
c2
A mistake, which could have led to a

draw. Black should have played
34 . . . ctJb2 with nwnerous threats (. . . ltJd l ,
. . . lD<l 3 and . . Jxf2+).
35
a6
35
36
37
llc3
f4
If 35 l:.c3 , then 35 . . . tDxas.
llxa6
lDxaJ
Adl
38 :txc2 41
In time trouble White fails to find 38
i..e3 , after which Black's pieces are tied
to defending one another, and no way of
strengthening the position is apparent.
But with the advantage of the exchange
Black has some winning chances,
despite the fact that all the pawns are on
one wing.
38
39
40
41
xc2
l:la4
llc4
lld3
Now Black doubles rooks on the

third rank, and the enemy pieces will be
condemned to passivity.
:ccJ
42 <ifi>f2
43
44
45
lle2
'it>f3
e7
ci>d6
g4
It would have been better to refrain

from this move, which weakens the f4
pawn. Now the black king must
immediately return to the kingside, in
order to succeed in reaching g6 (in the
event of the further advance of the white
pawns).
45
411
llxc2
:b2
.i.eJ
"1e7
46
. 47
48
49
ltel
:e2
Itel
l:te2
<i;f7
Botvinnik-Bronstein
:bJ
Voronovo 1952
Queen' s Gambit
lidc3
lic4
1
2
3
d4
c4
cxd5
d5
e6
A premature exchange, after which

Black quickly develops his queenside
pieces and gains equality.
Black has arranged his pieces in the

most advantageous way and is threat
ening by 50 . . . e5 5 1 fxe5 f4 to win a
piece. White decides to parry the threat
by exchanging pawns but after this he
no longer has any chance of saving the
game.
50
51
52
53
54
gxf5
lta2
lle2
Itel
h4
exf5
lte4
'iti>g6
h5
Preventing the further advance of the

black king (54 . . . <ittxh4 55 l:thl mate),
but now the h-pawn becomes a target.
54
55
56
57
l:lgl
l:tel
Ahl
57
. .
l:a4
.:aa3
lta2
Black was threatening ... l:a2-h2xh4.

Zugzwang.
ll'lc3
.i.f4
exd5
c6
il.f5
e3
ltld7
This is the whole point! If this bishop

reaches f5, it is obvious that White has
played this variation of the Queen's
Gambit inaccurately, having failed to
develop his king's bishop at d3 in time.
In view of what follows in the game,
it would evidently have been better to
play 6 . . . CDf6 or even 6 . . . .i.d6.
g4
Only in this way is it possible to

complicate the play. Since 7 . .. .i.g6 8 h4
does not look very attractive for Black,
his bishop has to retreat to e6, and the
move .i.d3 becomes possible.
As has already been mentioned, I
carried out a similar idea (g2-g4) back
in 1934 in a game with Alatortsev
(No.59), then 29 years later in several
games from my match with Petrosian
(for example, No. 3 1 3), and, finally,
against Spassky in 1 970 in Leiden
(No.379).
7
.i.e6
llc2
58 ....:ltgt
l:h2
. White resigns
3
4
5
.i.d3
g5
Riskily played. Black obviously

thought that White would be tied to the
defence of the g4 pawn. However, this
412
pawn is sacrificed for the sake of

seizing the initiative. 8 . . . ile7 was
preferable, when ;:i comparison with
Game 3 79 White has made the not very
useful move 8 i.d3 , but perhaps 8 . . . t'Db6
followed by . . . i..d6 was stronger.
.
i.gJ
1lfb6
White also has the initiative after

9 . . . ctJgf6 1 O h4. Correct was 9 . . h5 1 O
gxh5 i!Llgf6 with the intention of taking
the h5 pawn with the knight.
10 'ifc2
.i.xg4
If 10 . . . ttlgf6 there would have followed the same move as in the game.
.
11
12
13
h4
llxh4
ltlge2
gxh4
thgf6
A somewhat unexpected move. Of

course, White must first of all prepare
queenside castling, in order to connect
his rooks. Therefore 1 3 f3 suggested
itself, but I did not want to weaken my
pawn chain.
13
14
15
16
0--0-0
M
l:lh2
h5
.i.h6
i.g5
.i.f3
So, Black i s a pawn up, but his king's

position is insecure, and, as will be seen
from what follows, queenside castling
does not ease his task. In this con
nection, White's natural plan is to open
up the position with e3-e4. Now this
would lead to simplification, so he does
not hurry, but first plays his rook to the
e-file.
17 !tel
1fa5
17 . . . 0--0--0 seemed dangerous, for
example, because of 18 ttlgl ( 1 8 tiJb5
lie8) 1 8 . . . i.g4 1 9 f3 .ie6 20 i!tJh3 i.h6
2 1 e4. For the moment Black pins the
knight at c3 , and thereby forestalls
e3-e4.
18
19
.i.e4
In this way White defends his rook at

e 1 and forces through the advance of his
e-pawn. However, given correct play by
his opponent he would have had to
abandon the idea of a coordinated
advance of his pawns in the centre.
Therfore 1 9 f3 was more prudent.
19
20
21
413
ltlgl
f4
ifxd3
e4
.lxd3
il.h6
34
0-0--0
21
The losing move. After 2 1 . . .dxe4 22
l'Dxe4 f8! Black would have . main
tained a defensible position. Now,
however, the e- and f-pawns advance
very strongly.
.
22
23
24
e5
f5
e6
lDe8
.i.g5
Again opening the diagonal of the

dark-square bishop. It only remains to
include the g 1 knight in the attack.
24
25
26
27
iDfl
lDe5
J..h4
.i.xd8
iDxf7
exf7
35
llgl
1i'h3
li:)xe4
1!f d7
35
:gS
JJ..e7
36
37
f6
'9b.3
i.f8
37
38
39
40
41
e3
<i&>c2
c7
11 xd7+ <;i?xd7
llhh8
e2
<it>d2
Black resigns
3 5 . . . 'i'xd4 was not possible on ac

count of the prosaic reply 36 f8'i', when
all the critical squares (b2, d l and gl)
are defended, and after 36 . . . 'i'd3+ 37
l:lc2 Wfl + 3 8 %:tc 1 the counterattack
comes to an end.
The simplest.
is
fe4
l:xd8
iDxf7
White is already the exchange up, but

this is not the end of his gains.
30
31
32
33
A last attempt to create at least some

kind of counterplay.
lDdf6
.*.h6
ti)d6
Loss of material for Black

inevitable, e.g. 27 . . . J..g7 28 .:tg l .
27
28
29
30
1fxh5
J.g7
11fc7
Ji.f6
. dxe4
Kan-Botvinnik
Nikolina gora 1952
Slav Defence
1
2
4 14
d4
c4
d5
c6
3 ltlf3
4 lLlcJ
5 eJ
6 11c2
lhf6
e6
lLlbd7
.*.d6
In 1 943 Makogonov played 6 tLle5

against me {No. 1 27).
In those years I often played the Slav

Defence, and therefore I had to test the
continuation that occurred in the game
Najdorf-Kotov (1 950). There White
played 7 i.e2 followed by b2-b3, and
the resulting variation was judged to be
in his favour. I, however, wanted to test
a new plan for Black.
b3
I should remind the reader that 7

.itd2 can be found in No.2 16. where it
was also pointed out that after 7 e4 dxe4
8 ltixe4 thxe4 9 'ifxe4 e5 the game is
equal.
7
8
..
il.e2
0-0
1fe7
Playing against Reshevsky in 1 95 1,

Euwe tried to simplify the game
inunediately by 8 . . e5, but after 9 cxd5
iDxd5 1 O .ib2 White retained some
advantage.
.
0-0
dxc4
At that time I liked this variation, but

later I came to the conclusion that it is
more useful for Black to play 9 . . .b6.
From the routine positional view
point this exchange seems dubious: the
central d5 pawn is exchanged for the
flank b3 pawn. But with the help of
analysis and its testing in a training
game, a better judgement of the plan can
be made.
10
11
bxc4
.i.b2
e5
:eS
12
:aet
Soon it became lrnown that 12 l:tfe l

is preferable, vacating the fl square for
the (subsequent) manoeuvre M-d2-fl .
12
.i.c7!
It is this that constitutes Black's new

idea. In the Najdorf-Kotov game there
followed 12 . . . e4 1 3 ltJci2 ltJf8 1 4 f3 exf3
1 5 .txf3 with the better game for White.
But after the text move there is the
possible threat of . . . 'iid6.
Another advantage of 12 . . . .i.c7 is that
the advance e3-e4-e5 will not involve an
attack on Black's king's bishop.
White's next move takes control of
the d6 square.
13
14
15
16
c5
tLld2
f3
i.xf3
e4
tt)f8
exf3
tLlg4
17
18
.i.xg4
e4
.i.xg4
llad8
An essential move, giving Black the

advantage of the two bishops. If at the
time White had played 1 2 I;lfel (instead
of 1 2 ltae l ), he would now have been
able to reply 1 7 lDfl .
415
Bringing the queen's rook into play

with gain of tempo the advantage of
1 2 . . . il.c7 becomes obvious.
19
lLlb3
f6
20
21
h3
'iff2
..t.h5
b6
pieces are unable to come to the aid of

their king.
Preventing e4-e5 and tbe4-d6.
30
ttlct
Also after 30 'i'd2 Black would have

won by 30 . . . 'i'g6 (3 1 'it?h2 tbd3 ).
This attack on White s pawn chain

puts him in a critical position. With a
pawn sacrifice he tries to transpose into
a position with opposite-colour bishops,
but the play remains complicated, and
apart from his extra pawn Black also
gains an attack.
22
23
24
25
26
e5
ll:\e4
ll:\d6
cxd6
l:txe5
30
31
11'e3
"'xfl
gl
'ii'g6
1ib3+
A typical ' spite' check.
31
32
33
fxe5
ll:\e6
ii.xd6
11'xd6
h8
g4
.i.xg4
lLlxh3+
1!f g3
White resigns
Botvinnik-Averbakh
Nikolina gora 1956
26 dxe5 would have inunediately

given Black the d-file, but now he seizes
the f-file.
26
27
28
29
l:lf8
l:xfl+
l:tf8+
lLlf4
1
2
3
4
5
d4
c4
lDc3
eJ
.i.d3
ttlf6
e6
-*.b4
0-0
c5
6
7
8
a3
bxc3
e4
.i.xc3+
ttlc6
For 5 . . . d5 see Game 346
It transpires that White's kingside

cannot be defended: his rook and minor
4 16
The
usual
variation.
in
which,
lDxd6 17 exd6 'ii'c6 1 8 tt)f3 would have

led to unclear complications) 1 3 .ilb4 d6
14 Axh7+ <it?xh7 1 5 ilxd4 a5 16 .itc3 f6
17 1fh4+ @g8 and Black won quickly.
Of course, 1 6 .i.xd6 lhxd6 17 exd6
would have been better for White, but
Black has positional compensation for
his material deficit.
White's plan in the present game
consists in the rapid mobilisation of his
forces and an attack on Black's king
side, not a premature attac but one that
is well prepared.
according to theory, White can aspire to

retain an opening advantage, is 8 'De2.
However, I had long been interested in
this pawn sacrifice (8 e4 ), and I was
intending to try it in my forthcoming
match with Smyslov. However, in the
Alekhine Memorial Tournament ( 1956)
I was forestalled by Szabo; he employed
this idea and in fact against Smyslov.
8
9
cxd4
cxd4
tLlxd4
There is little justification in declin

ing the pawn sacrifice. In the game
Aronson-Aizenstadt ( 1961) after 9 . .. d5
l 0 cxd5 exd5 1 1 e5 ttJe4 White could
have consolidated his advantage by
playing 1 2 ttJe2.
10
e5
'ifa5+
11
<Ml
ltle8
In the Encyclopaedia I pointed out

that 1 0 . . . ttJe8 came into con.sideration.
Black has no other reply after
1 1 . . . 'ifxe5 12 .tb2 he loses a piece in
view of the double threat - 1 3 1Lxd4
'i'xd4 14 .i.xh7+ or 1 3 ctJf3 .
12
13
.i.b2
tLlfJ
ltlc6
f5
In this way it would appear that

Black has radically forestalled the
opponent' s attack, but in reality it trans
pires that it is easier for White to open
the g-file. Black must evidently seek
other ways of defending.
14
1fc2
In the first instance it is necessary to

keep control of the central square e5 .
14
15
16
liel
lhxe5
16
17
18
19
h3
g4
lhxc6
d6
dxe5
The 'work quota' has even been

over-fulfilled: not only has the attack on
the e5 square been parried, but White's
queen's bishop has also been activated,
which increases the importance of g2-g4
(the g7 square!).
The Szabo-Smyslov game continued

1 2 .td2 ii'd8 ( 1 2 . . . 'i'c7 1 3 .i.b4 d6 1 4
.txh7+ xh7 15 'i'xd4 a5 16 i.xd6
:.
lhf6
1ic5
tLle4
1fxc6
White can now regain the pawn, but

the weakness of the g7 square is so
obvious that another, more effective
solution suggests itself.
4 17
4
5
6
7
ltlxd4
lhcJ
.i.g5
1id2
tLlf6
d6
e6
a6
0-0-0
h6
Here I also employed 7 . ..h6 on many

occasions, the last time in Game 347.
20
11.gl!
This entire plan was not hard for me

to find - it was developed 25 years
earlier and carried out in a similar
situation in the game Botvimrik
Myasoedov (No. 3 1 ).
20
21
%1.eJ
I prepared this variation for my

match with Smyslov, expecting the
reply 9 .i.f4. Unfortunately, my prepar
ations proved to be in vain, since in the
2nd and 4th games of the match
Smyslov retreated his bishop to e3 - a
move which I had not even considered.
.i.f4
10
Ji.g3
.i.d7
lati
The decisive doubling of rooks on

the g-file is prepared. The reader will no
doubt already have noticed how well
placed the white king is at fl , even
though deprived of the right to castle.
21
22 gxf5
23 .i.xe4
24 'ifcJ
Black resigns. If
1ic5
exf5
fxe4
24 . . . 'i!le7
24 . . 'iff8 there follows 25 :eg3.
.
Averbakh-Botvinnik
Nikolina gora 1957
Sicilian Defence
1
2
3
e4
lLlfJ
d4
c5
ltlc6
cxd4
or
Later it became known that 10 tbxc6

.i.xc6 1 1 f3 'ifb6 1 2 .i.c4 secures White
an advantage. After the move in the
game Black obtains time for the
completion of his development.
10
i..e7
At present
the
Encyclopaedia
recommends first playing 10 . Jc8.
.
11
12
.i.e2
f4
0-0
ltlxd4
White' s pawn offensive on the

kingside can only be countered by a
418
natural plan of counterplay, involving

pressure on the central e4 pawn. For this
it is necessary to exchange knights.
13
14
1ixd4
.i.f3
Jl.c6
'ii a5
After this move White gains the
opPortunity to move his bishop from g3
with gain of tempo and clear the way for
the advance of his g-pawn. But Black
had no choice, since with the bishop at
g3 it would have been dangerous to
develop the queen at c7.
15
16
-*.et
h4
1fc7
b5
19
ltJgJ
d5
20
21
e5
.i.xe4
ltle4
21
22
...
'ifeJ
dxe4
22
23
24
.i.f2
l:Xdl
Forcing the following exchange of

pieces on e4 and the opening of the d
file, after which the poor position of
White' s queen and the fact that his
rooks are disconnected will tell. White's
next move is forced, since if 20 g5
Black can reply 20 . . . dxe4 (2 1 gxf6
.i.xf6), while if 20 exd5 .i.xd5, and the
position in the centre is opened.
The other way of exchanging (2 1
ltJxe4 dxe4) would have involved a loss
of tempo on the retreat of the bishop.
The opening of the d-file is important,
in that the exchange of the rooks
becomes inevitable, and with it White's
hopes of an attack disappear.
It is essential to prevent . . . e4-e3 .
ltfd8
:xdt +
Were it not for the advance of his

pawn to b4, Black would merely have
been able to watch while the opponent
developed his attack on the kingside.
While the white knight is making its
way from c3 to g3, Black succeeds in
intensifying the pressure on the a8-h 1
diagonal, and in particular in securing
control of d5 .
17
18
g4
lhe2
b4.
If 1 8 'i'xb4.. Black would have

advantageously continued 18 . . . d5 .
18
...
'i'b7
419
After 24 di .:cs (with the threat

of 25 . . . .i.c5 26 ifxc5 e3) it is doubtful
whether Black's attack could be parried.
Here it became clear to me that the

game was decideCt: si,:nce liQt long before
:
it Averbakh and l cMfI:.- in fact been
discussing the importance. of widely
separated passed pawns in :endings with
White ho:P,es to aintain the balance

in the endga:Qle;
but his 'bad' king and
I
the weakn.s- of. h.i far-advanced pawns
on the king$J.Qe inaf<e this an impossible
task.
24
.i.xh4
Forcing a favourable ending witl1

25
26
27
ti)xe4
JJ.. xb4
l:td8+
i.xe4!
:cs
27
28
. .
l::txd8
1fd5
27 l:td2 can be met by the simple

27 . . . .i.f3 (28 g5 h5), when White has
no chances of a successful defence.
il.xd8
JJ... e7
1ff2
J.xb4
'ifrd2
<it>b7
34
35
36
37
38
39
1fc4
JJ..c5
.1ld4
fle2
e3
f2
.i.g6
'tibl
1'b7
ifb4+
1'b1
.txc2
40
1'xa6
ifdl
The loss of a second pawn is

inevitable. The game was not resumed.
'i'c4
The natural continuation, although it

leads to the loss of a pawn. 30 c3 was
weaker because of 30 . . . bxc3 3 1 bxc3
.i.d5 etc.
30
31
32
1fc5
In view of the open position of the

white king, there is no point in Black
going in for the exchange of queens.
Threatening not only 29 . . . .i.xc2 (30

<&tixc2 'i'xd8), but also 29 . . i..f3 , winning the g4 pawn.
29
30
33
Of course, not 3 3 ... .i.xc2 in view of

34 'ires+ h7 35 Wfxc2+.
Botvinnik-Furman
Nikolina gora 1960
1f xa2
at+
1fxb2
Nimzo-lndian Defence
1
2
3
4
d4
c4
tf)cJ
a3
ti)f6
e6
.i.b4
Then this variation was fashionable,

and I decided to test it once again. Now,
however, not without reason theory
disapproves of 4 a3 .
4
5
bxcJ
.ixc3+
c5
The reader s already been able to

make the acqiiaintance -of 5 . . . t2Je4
(No. 278) and S.t.'.b6 .(No. 28 .:
6 o
tt)c6=
'7')
420
6 . . . d5 is the conventional reply. After

the move in the game White can create a
strong pawn centre; nevertheless the
main defect of his position - the weak
c4 pawn - gives Black counterplay.
7
8
e4
d6
.i.e3
Practically forcing the reply 8 . . . b6
however, all the same this move is
necessary for Black to mount an attack
on the c4 pawn.
8
9
10
i..dJ
tlle2
b6
0-0
10
A well-known manoeuvre (intro
duced by Capablanca and Reshevsky),

preventing
i..g5 .
However,
here
Lombardy successfully played 1 0 . . . .ia6,
and then . . . llc8, . . .ltJa5 and . . . 'ifd7-a4.
11
12
0-0
tllg3
tlla5
f5
Things have essentially reduced to a

position which occurred in the game
Botvinnik-Reshevsky (Moscow 1 948),
the only differsnce being that the e
pawn has advanced to e4 not in two
moves, but inunediately, and thus White
42 1
has gained a tempo. It can also be

mentioned that Black is not in a huny to
develop his bishop at a6 (as Reshevsky
played). In this case it would be harder
for him to make the blocking advance
. . . f7-f5.
13
exf5
13
14
tllb5
In order to weaken the pressure on

the c4 pawn, White aims to open up the
game.
exf5
It is necessary to prevent the advance

of the f5 pawn. Given the opportunity, it
may be possible to play the knight to d5
in addition subsequently Black will also
have to keep an eye on the e6 square.
The knight feels quite secure at h5,
since . . . ctJf6 can always be answered by
.ig5 .
14
15
16
1fe2
g4!
tllc7
i.a6
Had it not been for this move,

White s position would have become
difficult, since there is no other way of
countering Black's plan ( . . . 'l'd7,
. .. :aes and . . . Va4).
16 . . . fxg4 17 fxg4 would have led to

the opening of lines on the kingside, and
therefore Black is tied down by having
to look after his f5 pawn.
16
'iie8
Exploiting the fact that 1 7 .i.xf5 is

not possible due to 17 . . . l:xf5 .
17 :aet
18 d5
'llf7
At the last moment covering the c4

pawn.
18
19
llf4
l:tae8
lie5
After 19 . . . g6 20 gxf5 gxf5 2 1 hl

Black's kingside would have been in
danger. The exchange sacrifice con
ceived by Furman should have led to an
equal game.
20
21
22
23
gxf5
.i.xc4
'flxe3
ltJe6
ltJxc4
%be3
.i.xc4
ltJxd5
The decisive error. Black should

have played 23 . . . !te8, and after 24 'i'e4
i.xd5 25 'i'd3 .txe6 26 f.xe6 l:.xe6, with
two pawns for the. exchange, he stands
not worse.
24
25
11fe4
/l\xf8
.i.xfl
.i.hl
It was this position that Black was

counting on, when he made his 23rd
move. Indeed 26 . . . Xlxf5 is threatened,
after which he would have quite good
chances. 26 'i'e8 'iixe8 27 l:he8 <3;f7 28
!:ta8 .i.xf5 is also not dangerous for him,
since the white knight has no retreat.
Now after 26 lDxh7 Xlxf5 27 ltJg5
xe4 28 ttJxf7 <l;xf7 29 fxe4 tbxc3
White would have had to think about
how to make a draw. However, an un
pleasant surprise awaited Black.
26
llg6!
Alas! Now Black cannot play

26: . .hxg6 because of 27 fxg6, when he
loses his queen (27 . . . 'i'f8 28 iixd5+
leads to mate). And if 26 ... ..txfS then
27 'ifxd5 'i'xd5 28 lDe7+ and 29 tDxd5,
and White is a rook up.
The doomed f5 pawn plays the
leading role in the concluding attack.
26
27
ltJc7
f8
Nothing is changed by 27 . . . <l;h8.
ltJe7+
28 1ih4
Black resigns (28 . . . i.xf5 29 lDxf5
'i'xf5 30 'i'd8+).
Botvin'nik-Furman
Nikolina gora 1961
1
2
3
4
5
d4
c4
ltJcJ
el
li.e2 .:
f6
e6
i.b4
0-0
This move has its points: in some

variations of the Ninizo-Indian Defence
422
the bishop is better placed at e2 than at

d3 .
5
6
7
8
lhf3
a3
b4
d5
b6
..i.d6
out this same idea in a somewhat

different position, where it proved
unsuccessful.
It is doubtful whether White has any

other way of fighting for the initiative.
Now Black must make a choice between
counterplay involving . . . c7-c5, and the
continuation in the game.
8
9
dxc4
i.xc4
Now the position has become fully

theoreticai
since
the
distinction
between 5 .ie2 and 5 .i.d3 has been
erased.
9
10
11
0-0
i.b2
The initial cause of Black' s sub

sequent difficulties: it is not easy to
achieve equal chances in such a simple
way. The game Spassky-Tal ( 1 975) took
an interesting course: 1 1 . . .a5 1 2 b5 e5
1 3 a4 'ile7 14 h3 (14 l::te l i.b4 ! ?)
14 . . . l:ad8 15 'i'e2, and here, in Tal's
opinion, he should have eliminated
White's opening advantage by 1 5 . . . e4
1 6 tLlh2 %Ue8.
12
12
13
14
15
.lb7
l'.l)bd7
e5
ti)xd6
lDd2
b5
e4
cxd6
'ife7
Ensuring the possible activation of

the bishop on the a3-f8 diagonal.
l'.l)b5
The simplest plan: by exchanging the

d6 bishop White secures his kingside
and awaits a propitious moment to open
up the position and exploit the power of
his long-range bishops. The positional
threat of 1 3 tDxd6 cxd6 14 dxe5 cannot
be parried by defending the e5 pawn,
and therefore Black is forced to advance
it further. In the first game of the return
match with Tai (No.285) I tried to carry
423
15
16
...
11a4
:ac8
Tying down the opponent's pieces to

the defence of the a7 pawn. Subse
quently White exchanges rooks in order
to deprive Black of play on the c-file,
and continues aiming for the activation
of his minor pieces.
16
17
...
l:tfcl
llc7
Of course, not 17 'i'xa7 because of

1 7 . . . l:.a8.
17
18
.
i.fl
ilfc8
Finally threatening 1 9 'ifxa7.
18
19
20
21
l:txc7
.:tel
lhc7
.i.d5
lhc7
li)f8
1fxc7
26
ct>f8
26 . . . li:Jc7 27 a:4 . a6 was dubious
because of 28 a5 tfJd7 29 bxa6.
So, the first part of the plan has been

carried out - the rooks have been
exchanged.
22
23
c4
1fb4
e6
In view of the weakness of the d6

pawn, sooner or later Black will also
have to part with his second bishop.
27
28
{i;Je7
Finally the second bishop also comes

into play, as was envisaged 1 3 moves
earlier.
28
29
i.xc4
23
a4
.taJ+
d7
f3
Since it is wtfavourable for Black to

exchange on f3 (in this case White can
carry out a pawn offensive in the
centre), the f6 knight will subsequently
be tied to the defence of the e4 pawn. In
addition, White is preparing a march by
his king.
29
30
24
ifxc4
The only way! After 24 .i.xc4 d5 25

i.e2 'i'c2 or 25 .i.b3 etJg4 Black would
have gained counterplay. whereas in the
endgame he is condemned to passive
waiting.
24
25
26
.txc4
.i.a2
.i.f8
c7
g6
30 . . . tiJe6 was more prudent. The

weakening of the h6 square is to
White's advantage, although it was hard
to imagine that within 1 0 moves the
enemy king would end up on this
square.
31 <ifi>f2
e6
if xc4
d5
In such a situation it is useful to keep

the bishops as far away as possible from
the black knights. TI1e structure of the
resulting position resembles the 6th
game of the Flohr-Botvinnik match
( 1 93 3 ), which was excellently con
ducted by the Czech (at that time)
grandmaster. In the present game tl1e
advantage of the two bishops is even
more obvious.
424
32
33
<li>g3
ilh6
d7
The bishop is switched to the h2-b8

diagonal for a.ii attack on Black's main
weakness - his a7 pawn. He cannot get
rid of it, since if 3 3 . . . a6 there follows 34
ilf4. For the moment 34 fxe4 is
threatened.
33
34
35
36
.i.f4
fxe4
'it?h4
f5
tDe8
fxe4
41
ltlg3
42 <&txb7
'i!tf5
Or 42 . .. tLlfl 43 <it>xg6 ltlxe3 44 g4 !
etc.
The further advance of the king

cannot be prevented.
36
37
If 4 1 <it>xh7 there would have

followed 4 1 . . . tDf4, whereas now this
will be impossible because of 42 exf4
e3 43 .i.dl .
ltld6
fryi
37
38 . g5
39 h3
g5
...
44
g4
45 hxg4+
<&t>xg4
46 .ie6+
Black resigns. The d-pawn cannot be
prevented from queening.
xd6
'ifi>e6
Furman-Botvinnik
Gaining control of the g4 square in

advance, so that the black knight cannot
go there.
39
40
.i.xd5
<:iJg7
Pa
ng the threat of 44 l'fill , on
which there would now have followed
45 g4 mate.
.ixd6
Now White no longer needs the two

bishops. On the contrary in the resul
ting position the fewer the pieces, the
fewer the opportunities for counterplay.
43
44
Nikolina gora 1961

Sicilian Defence
thf6
1
2
3
4
5
6
h6
e4
tho
d4
lDxd4
c4
iLeJ
c5
lLlc6
cxd4
g6
.*.g7
ltlf6
This opening variation occurred in

the game Smyslov-Botvinnik
oscow
1 956). I wanted to test a system of
defence which was frequently employed
by
. Larsen and Petrosian.
7 iLlcJ
lt)g4
(M
8
9
40
41
.i.bJ .
thb5
1f xg4
'ifdl
tDxd4
lt)e6
This is where I deviated from the

afore-mentioned gam:e, in which 9 . . . e5
was played.
425
10
llcl
d6
11
il.d3
.i.d7
Another plan involves 10 . . .b6 .
A more accurate continuation was

demonstrated 1 3 years later by Petrosian
with Black against Portisch: 1 1 . . .0--0 12
0--0 a5 1 3 .i.b 1 .i.d7 1 4 f4 .i.c6 1 5 Vie2
b6 16 f5 lllc 5.
12
0-0
13
b4
.i.c6
The most energetic plan, which puts

Black in a difficult position. True,
energetic play sometimes has its draw
backs: in some case it allows the
opponent opportunities for counterplay.
.
0-0
..
.fl.bl
15
16
ttJa4
17
18
.i.b6
1i'd
. .
i.d7
l:tc8
11e8
Until this last move Furman had

played well and gained an obvious
advantage. 1 8 ..i.xa5 was possible, when
1 8 . . . i.xb5 does not work because of 1 9
lllb6 42, o r 1 8 . . . l:.a8 19 i.c3 , and Black
remains a pawn down.
But White decided that there was no
reason to hurry, and he apparently
wanted to gain a tempo: 18 . . . tLlf4 19
'i'd2 (19 . . . .ih6 20 .i.e3).
Here the natural continuation 1 3 . b6

led to an advantage for White in the
game Polugayevsky-Sakharov ( 1 972).
14
b5!
Black is in trouble. Now White could

have played 17 lllb 6 %k7 1 8 ttJd5,
forcing his opponent to give up the
exchange by 18 . . . :cs, or to play the
totally unattractive 1 8 . . . %lc8 1 9 i.b6
1i'e8 20 .i.xa5 .
But the move in the game also leads
to the win of a pawn.
12 . . . a5 (preventing b2-b4) was more

prudent, as Larsen played against
Portisch ( 1 968).
13
15
Of course, White avoids the opening

of the a-file and takes the opportunity to
cramp the opponent' s pieces.
a5
18
.i.h6
Now the worst for Black is over. If

1 9 J::tc 3 there follows 1 9 . . . tLlf4 with the
threat of 20 . . . tLle2+.
19
20
l:tc2
'ifxb7
20
21
22
23
24
lDb2
a6
1i'b7
'ifa6
lLlf4
The queen should have been retreated

to d l .
A familiar idea (cf. No. 82): as soon

as the white rook is unable to occupy
the a-file, this advance ( . . . a7-a5) gains
in strength. But here it involves a great
risk.
e6
l:xb8
l1a8
llb8
White is now agreeable to draw' but

this does not satisfy Black.
426
pieces have been diverted to the other

side of the board. After 25 g2 'i'd7
26 @h 1 l:a8 Black regains his piece,
maintaining a strong attack.
25
26
27
1i'xa5
l:ldl
l:ld3
.i.h3
fld7
lt:\e3!
28
29
fxe3
1'g4+
30
31
f4
e5
f3
e4
White resigns
Blocking the path of the rook which

was hurrying to the aid of its king.
24
lDxg2!
Tit for tat! Black's queenside has

been destroyed, but he embarks on the
destruction of his opponent's kingside,
exploiting the fact that five(! ) white
427
f5
<itf2
The advance of this pawn (with the
threat of opening the f-file) prevents the
white king from fleeing.
Postscript
Titis book concludes the publication of my games, played in the period from 1 925 to
1 970. Many of them have been annotated specially for the present edition, while the
remainder have been substantially revised.
In my analysis of the opening, the middlegame and the endgame, I have aimed to
convey to the reader the most important thing in chess - poitional understanding.
Sometimes it is founded on general principles, but at other times it is based on
accurate, concrete calculation.
I hope that these games will not only afford the reader aesthetic pleasure, but will
also provide instructional material.
428
Tournament and Match

Cross-Tables ( 1 957 1 970)
1957
Match for the World Championship with V. Smyslov,
Moscow
Result
0:1
1/2
1/2
0:1
1:0
1 :0
1/2
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1:0
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
0:1
1/2
1/2
1:0
1/2
1/2
429
1.0:0.0
1.5:0.5
2.0:1.0
2.0:2.0
2.0:3.0
3.0:3.0
3.5:3.5
4.5:3.5
5.0:4.0
5.5:4.5
6.0:5.0
7.0:5.0
7.0:6.0
7.5:6.5
8.0:7.0
8.5: 7.5
9.5:7.5
10.0:8.0
10.5:8.5
1 1.5:8.5
12.0:9.0
12.5:9.5
1 958
Return Match for the World Championship with V. Smj&lov,

Moscow
Result
0:1
1 :0
0:1
1/2
1 :0
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1:0
1:0
1/2
1:0
1:0
1/2
1/2
1:0
1:0
1/2
1/2
0: 1
1/2
430
1.0:0.0
2.0:0.0
3.0:0.0
3.5:0.5
3.5: 1.5
4.5: 1.5
5.0:2.0
5.5:2.5
6.0:3.0
6.5:3.5
6.5:4.5
7.5 :4.5
8.0:5.0
9.0:5.0
9.0:6.0
9.5:6.5
10.0:7.0
1 1.0:7.0
1 1.0:8.0
1 1.5:8.5
12.0:9.0
12.0: 10.0
12.5: 10.5
1 958
1 3th Olympiad, Munich

Preliminary Group
=ftn@t :llt@fil 1itHtI lUJlM j$l

l !jjfUJ jtmt i@m lIJjjjjjjf
2.5
4.o 4.o 3.s 4.o !lttlt.t1n
jt!'!!!'!
!'Wn!'!'!'!':::ss'!".'!'!:.::::.'!';'!'!:TltJjj]j!'!'!'!'@t!'!'!'!'t@mn
jjf.tB.1r===:=:; ==:=r=i1m o.
1.5
4.o 3.5 3.5 3 .5 llitstmr
2.0
2.5 4.o 3 .5 4.o l#lIHjj@j
jit&UU.61Hl@H1fi 1.5
3
.o 4.o jj#.J!.SjJlHl
.o 3 .o
jlifNiliifliilijI 1.s
1.
.5 4.o Uitllmt
lj#.@Uiii.fililtll 1.0
3 .5
atJ1lt
2.
iilil llMl: o.o
ljlflilt
o.o
M
@ilit.jljM
jlmf:=:-=:=:::]t1MfMl
jl$.Uliiffl
fi. ii
l llll: o.5
Final Group
3.5
3.5
2.5
2.5
jjJi
Jtl.B.1 l@ttltf
jJXil@ri.fii@litlt
l li.jti.MitiiHHlMll 2.0
llYfillfllMfiMll 2.0
3 .5
2.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1. 5
3.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.5 Hl!JIE
1.5 @11.il
2.5 dlill
mt&fijiji
2.0 2.0
43 1
I)):)!IiEIJ:It:rnm:Il)t:t:i:tfiitf:I@:):tet:aa.1%1&tlJ.itf:JI11Iti:t:t:J:t:MtEit::1Eit:J:i:[:irn:rnm
1st
Round
2nd Round
3 rd Round
4th Round
5th ound
6th Round
7th Round
8tb Round
Botvinnik - Donner
Diickstein - Botvinnik
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Raizmann
Walsh - Botvinnik
Botvinnik bye
Cintron - Botvinnik
The Netherlands
Austria
Bul2aria
Italy
Francia
Ireland
Danemark
Puerto-Rico
1/2
1:0
1-0
0-1
0-1
I[M)ffI1j)j\j)lM)]))))1{1)1M)j@)jij)1)j\jtmmmmmmjfifdi.i)1)1fi.ijf.lm1m)j)jj)jj1)1Il1)j)j)]1j)jtllj)j)j)tEjl])[j )1lIM)I[j[{m
1st Round
2nd Round
3 rd Round
4th Round
5th Round
6th Round
7th Round
8th Round
9th Round
10th Round
1 1 th Round
Botvinnik - Lombardy
Botvinnik - Unzicker
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik bye
Pachman - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Pomar
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Alexandrov
Uhlmann - Bot\innik
Botvinnik - Diickstein
Ne.ikirch - Bot\'innik
USA
West Germany
Bul2aria
Yu2oslavia
Czechoslovakia
Spain
Ar2entina
En2Iand
East Germany
Austria
Switzerland
1 958
International Tournament, Wageningen
432
1/2
1/2
1/2
1:0
1:0
0-1
1-0
0-1
1 959
2d USSR Spartakiad, Moscow

Preliminary Group
Final Group
1tf1tftt\1HtnJtllff11t:i.lin.ltiifiWmtJF::lii)lGfi.uliitt JftE11lJ@E1KtFf.\JiiiWlJI
01. Geller - Botvinnik
02. Botvinnik - Gur2enidze
03. Kholmov - Botvinnik
04. Botvinnik - Nezhmetdinov
05. Botvinnik - Alejandrovich
06. Spassky - Boninnik
07. NurmamedO\' - Botvinnik
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
0-1
433
1960
Match for the World Championship with M. Tai,
Moscow
,.
Result
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
0:1
1:0
1:0
0:1
1/2
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1:0
1/2
1:0
1/2
1/2
434
1.0:0.0
1.5:0.5
2.0: 1.0
2.5: 1.5
3.0:2.0
4.0:2.0
5.0:2.0
5.0:3.0
5.0:4.0
5.5:4.5
6.5:4.5
7.0:5.0
7.5:5.5
8.0:6.0
8.5:6.5
9.0:7.0
10.0: 7.0
10.5:7.5
1 1.5:7.5
12.0:8.0
12.5:8.5
1960
14th Olympiad, Leipzig

Preliminary Group
2.0 lm!llUJ
\lllUlM
ltlllM
Final Group
43 5
![l[JrntI!IlEI!il!I11IIIII]IItiittrnJtmlll.Mii.n{liiuit::IJ!lfl:ff!ItIIJ!Ititil[J\IIII1Et
1st Round
2nd Round
3rd Rouild' ,
4th Round""f"t!' --, .
5th ound
6th Round
7th Round
t
8 h Round
9th Round
Botvinnik - Kostjeorin
Aaron - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Donner
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik bye
Tamburini - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Eliskases
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Durao
Monaco
India
Netherlands
Phillippines
Austria
Italy
Ar2entina
Poland
Portu2al
'
'
1-0
0-1
1/2
0-1
1-0
1-0
t\i!t:IM!mJm!irnti!minimmmmmmmiiitmmI:1111um1u.11tIIi:1:1ttt:11jiIIIt:ti t:mm111mmi11tr
1t Round
2nd Round
3rd Round
4th Round
5th Round
6th Round
7th Round
8th Round
9t11 Round
10th Round
11 th Round
Ne.ikirch - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Ivkov
Botvinnik bye
Portisch - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Lombardy
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Schmid
Botvinnik - Pachman
Botvinnik bye
rimer - Botvinnik
Botvinnik bye
Bul2aria
Yu2oslavia
Netherlands
Hun2ar-v
USA
Ari?entina
FRG
CSSR
GDR
Romania
En2land
0-1
1/2
1/2
1/2
1-0
1-0
1/2
1 960
Match Moscow vs. Leningrad

Moscow
r11111mi111111rtmmmrnr1rrruwrwrnrnt1111m:lmnr1nrtn1rn1rm@mrnw1r:n:rnrnirdmMnummm1
1-0
Kortschnoi - Botvinnik
1/2
Botvinnik - Kortschnoi
436
1 96 1
Return Match for the World Championship with M. Tai,

Moscow
Result
1 :0
1 :0
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1 :0
1 :0
1:0
0:1
1:0
1 :0
1 :0
1/2
1:0
1/2
0:1
0:1
0:1
1/2
1 :0
437
1.0:0.0
1.0: 1.0
2.0:1.0
2.5:1.5
3.0:2.0
3.5:2.5
4.5:2.5
4.5:3.5
5.5:3.5
6.5:3.5
7.5:3.5
7.5:4.5
8.5:4.5
9 .0:5.0
10.0:5.0
10.5:5.5
10.5:6.5
1 1.5:6.5
1 1.5: 7.5
12.0:8.0
13.0:8.0
1 961
2d European Team Championship,

Oberhausen
01. Botvinnik - Perez Perez

02. Perez Perez - Botvinnik
0 3. Botvinnik - Unzicker
04. Unzicker - Botvinnik
05. Pachman - Botvinnik
06. Botvinnik - Pachman
0 7. Szabo - Boninnik
08. Botvinnik - Szabo
0 9 . Botvinnik - Gli2oric
1-0
1/2
1-0
1-0
1/2
l-0
0-1
1/2
1/2
1 96 1-62
Hastings
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
*
0
0
1
0
43 8
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
*
1 962
International Tournament,
Stockholm
15th
1 9 62
Olympiad, Varna
PRELIMINARY GROUP A
439
Final Group
3.5 .
3.0 :
2.0
2. 5
2. 5
2. 0
2. 0
2.5
3.5 :
2.5
3.0
2.5
1.5
2.0
3.5
1.0
IlitffIJJit:t:tt:l:t:1i:1:tlIIttfal.lfllil.Wiiil: @fiGIJJlltiffIIt:11::i:Jm1:1: 11:it:rnt:l

1st Round
2d Round
3m
Round
4th Round
5th ound
6 th Round
7th Round
8th Round
Uhlmann - Botvinnik
Botvinnik bye
Lundin - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - O'Kelly
Botvinnik - Pomar
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik bye
Kokkoris - Botvinnik
1st Round
2d Round
3 rd
Round
4th Round
5th Round
6th Round
7th Round
8th Round
9th Round
10th Round
nth Round .
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Fischer
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Padevsky
Unzicker - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Uhlmann
Botvinnik bye
Filip - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Donner
Botvinnik - Robatsch
East Germany
West Germany
Sweden
Belejum
Spain
Norway
Turkey
Greece
1-0
1/2
1/2
1-0
0-1
thlJIIt::1m11:: :l: :t: i: m1:trn11t::1:1t:tm*1mi:r-Jt1uiiWIIt:mmrn::mmtmm:tEIII:m:: :itmtmrni
440
Yugoslavia
Argentina
USA
1/2
Hungary
Bulgaria
West Germany
East Germ.any
Romania
1/2
0-1
1/2
Netherlands
0-1
1/2
Austria
1-0
Czechoslovakia
1 963
Match for the World Championship with T. Petrosian

Moscow
.,
Result
0: 1
1/2
1/2
112
1:0
1/2
1:0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
0:1
1 :0
1/2
1/2
1 :0
1 :0
1/2
1/2
1/2
44 1
- 0: 1
. :.
0,5: 1,5
1.0:2.0
1.5:2,5
2.5:2.5
3.0: 3.0
4.0:3.0
4.5: 3.5
5.0:4.0
5.5:4.5
6.0:5.0
6.5:5.5
7.0:6.0
7.0: 7.0
8.0: 7.0
8.5: 7.5
9.0:8.0
10.0:8.0
1 1.0:8.0
1 1.5:8.5
12.0: 9.0
12.5: 9.5
3rd
1 963
USSR Spartakiad
Moscow
Preliminary Group A
Final Group
J\lfIJI:Hfftif@UtmmmII@Immmutl.UliBiil!-tiiiJEtmmmIEMJ:lltIl@IWIMIIll
1st Round
2nd Round
r1 Round
4th Round
5th ound
Botvinnik bye
Krutikhin - Botvinnik
Gipslis - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Shofman
Danov - Botvinnik
Gcor2ia
Kirtzistan
Lettland
Moldavia
Tad.iistikan
1/2
0-1
1-0
0-1
:Ktrn:1mrn@1i1:J:m11m:1m1rnmnmm1ttt1m1u&11.u1i1mmr1rnrn1tJl:ff1rnirnttt1rnmmmrn11r
it
Round
2ne1 Round
3 ra Round
4th Round
5th Round
Kholmov - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Veresov
Taimanov - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Stein
Botvinnik - Buslaev
442
RSFRS
Belorussia
Leningrad
Ukraina
Georgia
0-1
1-0
0-1
1/2
1-0
1963
International Tou rnament

Amsterdam
1 964
Moscow Team Championship

Moscow
NiltttEJftftttlttttfltfflitJEtJMMMl@ttlllWtllfW@lWtl%tJ:tfltP8iiidtlfl tHHJJ
Botvinnik - Simacln
1/2
Botvinnik - Liberzon
1-0
1 964
Works Team Events,

Moscow
443
1 964
Moscow
ttfollftllJtMltHmmm1mmrntJtHfl@lttmmttJ{lfWHlflttltlltltttI tHBidlittm:lliM:@
01. Karpov - Botvinnik
1/2
02. Tai - Botvinnik
1/2
1/2
0 3. Geller - Botvinnik
0 4. Botvinnik - Petrosian
1-0
1-0
05 Botvinnik - Smyslov
1-0
Botvinnik - Stein
1 964
1 6th Olympiad, Tel Aviv
Preliminary Group A
ittmml l2lftlt :jarmmm =Jtttttr l l$.Mtttt l1filtrmm nttt11

4.o
4.o
4.o
irt!IM@l
4.o
4.o
lIUV.BKlttlllM
3 .o
3.o
t.5
2.5
llHlWJ
llZ!t'.aittMltltl o.5
1.5
2.5
llif=:--:: ==:=:=w=ii.iMM o.o
2.5
lifiUM1
2.5
J.o
2.5
111.Jittt
llleJUlilMmrmnmt o.o
2.5
2.s
jilli5Wl
l llSWki&iijil{l o.o
ili.Uit
o.o
n:at1w1
l:mittn1i
o.o
llZlflNll
#.S.tiiUtMfMUilt
II".'!"!'!'!!".".'!'!'!'!'!'!".'!'
!
444
Final Group
2.5
2.0
4.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
2.5
1.0
2.0
2.0
1 .0
1.5
2.0
2.0
0.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
0.5
1 .0
1.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.5
2.S
3.0
2.0
3.5
2.0
4.0
2.0
2.S
3.0
1.5
2.0
3.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
3.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.0
2.0
0.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
1.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
0.5
2.5
J:()
3J)
3.5
"3;5
3.0
1.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.5
2.0
3.0
2.5
3.0
1.5
2.5
3.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
3.0
1.5
2.5
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.5
1.S
2.5
0.5
3.0
1.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.5
jj'-jj
jf1.fj
}j
j,$.j
,j
11.#.t
jit..t
!ll@
!@t
jJJfj
1.5
1.5
IE::11I1: :R:]]JIII::If: : I:tm:@1:1mn1muu.ii.iiiIB.mi.fi: IIrn:n:::EJ:: ]l::]:t: :IIIf: : :i:j:j:j:fIItrn:

1st Round
2nd Round
3rd Round
4th Round
5th ound
6th Round
7tJJ Round
Botvinnik - Medina
Botvinnik bye
Kirby - Botiinnik
Botvinnik bye
Letellier - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Max
Botvinnik bye
1st Round
2nd Round
Jrc1 Round
4th Round
5th Round
6th Round
7th Round
8th Round
9th Round
10th Round
1 1 tb Round
12th Round
1 3th Round
Eliskases - Botvinnik
Aloni - Boninnik
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Bobotsov
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik - Gli2oric
Ciocaltea - Botvinnik
Botvinnik bye
Botvinnik bye
Yanowsky - Botvinnik
Sliwa - Botvinnik
: -::Botvinnik - Laslo
Botvinnik bye
Suain
1-0
S.A.R
0-1
Chile
Switzerland
0-1
1-0
:ttJ}:: : ::r: : :i:l:rn::1:wl:tMr11:::m:i:j:: :1J@t:: :Jt1m1u1raun::r:ti::i::: rntm:Itt1iti1t:i: :f:fIIE:: :j:tfftt:
445
Israel
1/2
0-1
Bulgaria
1/2
Yugoslavia
0-1
0-1
Argentina
Rumania
Canada
Poland..
0-1
1/2
1/2
1 965
International Tournament,
Noordwij k
1 965
Moscow Trades Unions Spartakiad

Moscow
lJ !MfurWifillffiiitW.ffiK1
fMM1@%'MtHlMJMJWiMJMHffrtiW!W1&filWMiiWMt%%'iltt#
Bohinnik
+2-1=1
1 965
,, Trud" Sports Society Team Events

Moscow
446
1 965
rd
3 European Team Championship
Hamburg
tHlfltHlltMlfllltlflttMlhdlWd.fil!lGitiiitrnitmH@@fi!Rfltlli@itHilH!hl.tiWiltW
1/2
0 1. Schmid - Botvinnik
1-0
02 Botvinnik - Schmid
1/2
03. Szabo - Botvinnik
0-1
04. Boninnik - Szabo
1-0
05. Gli2oric - Bomnnik
1/2
06. Boninnik - Gli2oric
0-1
07. Ciocaltea - Botvinnik
0-1
08. Boninnik - Lothar
1 965
USSR Trades Unions Spartakiad

Moscow
Jffi'WtijjiiiB.llW4!!1
*illW..&
' i1ifil@M'1@f
rmmwJMMlhlI@!lilll!WWtOOMl&@@At1MB&'Mfilt1mL
Botvinnik
447
+2-1=1
1 965
Match Moscow v. Leningrad

Moscow
nrnr:w11i1mr11ntwmtttttimm:w1u1rm1rm1mu111nmm1rnmmmmmmmwrnmmrm:mnltimu.rnr1@
0-1
Tolush - Botvinnik
1-0
Botvinnik vs. Tolush
Total
+2-0=0
1 966

Moscow
@m1mmWtu111.-mmn1mmmmmm:rmmmm::mrn1turrnm rt111R1n111n1wnFtJmmnrnrn
1/2
Liberzon - Botvinnik
1/2
Bronstein - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Smyslov
1/2
0-1
Yudovich - Botvinnik
1/2
Botvinnik - Petrosian
1 966
,,Trod" Sports Society Team Events,

Moscow
448
1 966
International Tourna ment,

Amsterdam
0
1
1
*
*
*
1 966

Moscow
iltFfFtHlitfrlfittfHWiillll.iliiiUJtQiat..1 EillJ%HJtfFWJltUtltltt llti.$.illtl

0-1
0 1. Botvinnik - Petrosian
02. Tai - Botvinnik
1-0
OJ. Yudovich - Botvinnik
0-1
1-0
04. Botvinnik - SmyslO'\'
05. Bierbrager - Botvinnik
0-1
06. Botvinnik - Keres
1-0
07. Lutiko'' - Botvinnik
0-1
08. Botvinnik - Geller
1/2
1/2
09. Botvinnik - Stein
449
1 966/67
Hastings
1 967
Works Team Events, .

Moscow
r1@fi@Nff1@%illM!MiW.iMk4Wt1\%WllilliMmmmwmrnUMMMMlf&&.1ill@msmoom
Botvinnik
+1-0=0
1967
Moscow Team Championship,

Moscow
ll'!l:l
a
J
r
!'!'!'l
'"i&
'l'!l!'!
;:=::1
'!1!'!'!
:='!1!'!'!
JjJ!'!':l!l
;m
-w!'!'.'!'
lm
Hl
Jt@l@t jJ@@H :jltm

t M tl@l :jIIlmr t::ttlt t!Hfll jllllt
1.0
9.5
s.o
1.0
9.s
10.s
l!lif.MU.iiMH:
6.5
1.0
9.5
12.5
jjJ.OiJ.tlilM lllUt
ilS.Ji:Jiamfij1t1@jJjl
jit.ilUtlt1Ml11
ljfifiiilfa
jiMil.Mlll@11M.
5.5
9.0
8.0
ics.==='.aidkltmttm
12.5
9.5
4.5 .
2.0
3.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
3.5
t.5
t.s
10.0
4.5
450
l rM!tit
j f.Sl!Mll
JiZ&mm
jjfii@nm
j}l1MM
Jtl.ltUf
l0J$jlll
Il&lftt
Ftlilfl
lMmwn-.i.f\Dimiijili.@111fF1F11FttRlfHl!HflJtt11FitJFtfFtF1tHtll\1
Botvinnik - Balmlin
Smyslov - B_otvinnik
Liberson .,. :Qfyinnik
PetrosiaJi,-:-,Sotvinnik
Botvinnik .,. Bronstein
Botvinnik ??
Botvinnik ??
-
4th
1-0
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1-0
1-0
1 967
USSR Spartakiad,
Moscow
Moscow's Team:
Petrosian, Botvirurik, Smyslov, Bronstein, Kholmov, Vasiukov, Liberson,

Dvoretsky, Kushnir, Konopleva, Rubcova
Prelimary Group
Final Group
-!'!'!'!'!'!';'?!'!'!'Jl!I!'
It:t:tl1JE mtt@tWHt : :ttfftlt::Hffl#Hll '=tHlWtm fl!Et:ttJJ:
l!Mai(ii@JltJJlll
ffRSIBStlJftHEtll
6.5
J .5
4.o
1.5
5.5
6.o
6.o
5.5
1.0
1.0
5.5
5.5
rnttlrMWi111Witltt
6.0
m111r=== -=-=-=-:1aE1trmrn:
2.5
5.s
1886.miM.if@Fi@It
4.5
5.5
::1J.SN==-=:Jtn11111111
4.o
45 1
5.5
\i.2W!\:)
flltiif
f\11$.\
::zartn
-!lU!F
::1r11
JlM0.i.ittdi:nmm1111t:tn1:11tFJll?fftlMtlffWI1lI1M1@tlFJ11FHlt1F@HIWUH11f
Muhitdinov - Botvinnik
0: 1
Botvinnik - Khanov
1-0
Levit - Botvinnik
0: 1
Botvinnik ... Polu2aevsky
1:0
Taimanov - Botvinnik
1-0
Botvinnik - Boleslavsky
1/2
1/2
Geller - Botvinnik
Botvinnik - Roman
0-1
Total:
+5-1=2
1 967
Palma de Mallorca
*
*
0
0
0
*
0
0
*
0
1
*
0
*
0
* 1 1
* * 1
* *
*
*
* *
* *
0 * 0
0 0 *
0 * *
1 * *
* 0 *
0 * *
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 * 0
* 0 *
0 0 0
0 0 0
1
*
*
*
*
*
1
1
*
1
*
0 1
*
*
0
0
*
*
*
*
1
0
0
0
0
0
*
1
1
1
*
1
o
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
o
*
*
*
*
1
*
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
*
0
0
*
*
*
0
0
*
*
1
1
*
452
1
1
*
1
*
*
1
1
*
*
1
0
0
0
*
0
0
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
*
1
0
*
*
0
*
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
*
o
*
1
1
1
*
*
*
*
0
*
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
*
*
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
*
1
1
1
*
1
*
1
1
*
1
1
*
1
*
*
1
*
1
o
*
*
*
1
*
0 0
0 0 1
1 0 0
1
*
1
1
1
*
1
*
*
o
1
o
1
1
1
o
l @lti:
1
i
1
1
*
1
*
*
*
1
o
*
0
1
1
*
:jfj$:
rJ!Uf
aitt1:
.:11.a:i
: tt.tl.l
::utu
]f$.:1t
:&1t:
:\&II%
JUfl
:I6$. ll
iari
::1i1. j
:1av.tm
:15.IIm
llSjfij
lSl@f
1 96 8
International To urnament
Monte Carlo
*
*
0 .
1
1
*
*
*
*
1
1
0
*
1 969

Moscow
lf.ifiiilMMlli@l@MitIHl\11
l1B.B.fi
fl S.kllJttltMl
t
llIIt
$.mi:itiiMil@l@MllI@lt@nNI
o.5:o.5
1.0:0.0
0.5 :0.5
453
j.itaiilit&Wllt1lM1lltt
temtiiilt
i
l
t 111Uit?itfM
lfi.SiB.1@tlUl1tlllllll
1 969
International Tou rnament

Beverwij k
0
*
0
*
454
1
1
1
1
1 9 69
Belgrade
0
*
0
*
0
*
1
1
1
*
*
*
0
0
*
*
1 970
Leiden
455
1
1
1
1
1
"*
1
1
1 970
Match USSR v. Rest of the World

Belgrade
*
0
*
0
*
0
1
*
*
1
*
!lSll.li ll&mm l!lf@l jll.tl
456
Tournament and Match

Results (1 957-1970)
Year
I+
Event
Match for the World Championship with

V.Smyslov, Moscow
Return Match fo r the World Championship with
1 958
V. Smyslov, Moscow
1 3th Olympiad, Munich
International Tournament, Wageningen
1 959
2nd USSR Spartakiad, Moscow
Match for the World Championship with M. Tai,
1 960
Moscow
1 4th Olympiad, Leipzig
Return Match for the World Championship with
1 96 1
M. Tai, Moscow
2nd European Team Championship, Oberhausen
1 96 1/62 International Tournament, Hastings
1 962
International Tournament, Stockholm
1 5th Olympiad, Varna
1 963
Match for the World Championship with
T.Petrosian, Moscow
3rd USSR Spartakiad, Moscow
International Tournament, Amsterdam
1 964
Works Team Events, Moscow
USSR Team Championship, Moscow
16th Olympiad, Tel Aviv
1 965
International Tournament, Noordwijk
'Trod' Sports Society Team Events, Moscow
3rd European Team Championship, Hamburg
USSR Trades Unions Spartakiad, Moscow
1 966
'Trud' Sports Society Team Events, Moscow
1 957
457
I Place
13
7
7
3
1
5
1
11
4
2
6
2
8
-
10
4
7
8
5
2
7
3
1
4
3
7
5
2
4
2
2
2
6
-
5
1
-
1
5
-
1
-
1
-
3
1
-
13
5
1
6
4
2
1
6
15
2
2
1
1
3
4
2
1
1
3
1
-
4
1
I
I
Year
Event
1966
Internati.onal Tournament, Amsterdam

USSR Team Championship, Moscow
1 966/67" International Tournament, Hastings
1 967
Works Team Events, Moscow
4th USSR Spartakiad, Moscow
International Tournament, Palma de Mallorca
1968
International Tournament, Monte Carlo
1969
International Tournament, Beverwijk
Moscow Trades Unions Spartaki.ad
International Tournament, Belgrade
1970
Match USSR v. Rest of the World, Belgrade
International Tournament, Leiden
458
S"
1
3
5
9
5
6
1
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
-
3
-
Place
I
I
4
2
7 II-III
8
II
9
I-II
2
7
VII
3
9 III-IV
Translator' s notes*
1
(p. 17)
After this White can gain the advantage by 4 1 l:.xg6+ xg6 ( 41 . . . h5 42

:h6+) 42 .i.xe5+ h5 43 .llc3 . But 39 . . .lhf6 is clearly better: 40 :xg7+
<Ji;xg7 4 1 lid7+ ltf7 42 l:d5 exf2+ 43 00 e4.
(p.27)
This allows 3 1 . . :'ilb5. 3 1 t2Jc4, with the same idea, is better, or else 3 1
'i'c4, e.g. 3 1 . . .:xd6 3 2 xd6 exd6 3 3 e7.
3 (p. 3 1)
Even so, White has to reckon with 27 ... 1fb6, when ... llb5 is threatened.
See Shakhmatnoe Tvorchestvo Botvinnika (Moscow 1 966) Vol.2 p.626.
(p. 36)
5 (p. 57)
There seems to be some misunderstanding here. After 45 'ib7 Black wins

by 45 . . . 'i'xb7 46 cxb7 d2 47 xe2 .ih5+, but 44 .i.xg7 or 44 .i.e5 looks
good enough to win.
(p. 59)
Black seems to be alright after 1 5 i.c6_ .i.h3 , e.g. 16 i.xeS 'i'xe8 17 :tel
.ic3 18 .ib2 i.xe l 19 'i'd4 i.xf2+ 20 <li>xf2 f6 2 1 'i'xf6 'i'f8.
(p.72)
23 'i'd6 'iif7 24 l:tc7 would have won immediately.
8 (p.72)
After 38 lill'5 Black has 38 . . . 'ifbl + 39 lth2 'i'xf5 40 ltxd2 'i'f4+, but 38
t2Je6 'i'xe6 39 .:xd2 wins.
But 51 fxg3 52 <atxg3 h5 53 @f3 'ittf5 54 lte3 <it>g4 55 ltd4 ltxh4 56

c!?c5 g3 57 b6 h4 58 xb7 h3 59 a6 h2 60 a7 is a theoretical draw.
(p. 95)
10
11
12
(p. 10 1) But then 20.. . lill'8 and if 2 1 ltxf6 'i'h7 when Black wins, as pointed out
by Tai, who suggests instead 20 if'f3 .
(p. 1 26) But then 18 t2Jxd5 looks very strong.
(p. 1 3 3 ) Black looks alright after 14 . . .lDe4 1 5 l:b2 ..ta4 16 f3 11i'xc l 17 :xcl t2Jd6.
Instead 14 f3 , denying the black knight the e4 square, looks stronger:
14 . . . tDh5 ( 1 4 . . . l:tbS 15 t2Jg6) 1 5 :n t2Jxr4 16 l:xc2 f6 ( 16 . . . lib4 17
tDxc6) 17 llxc3 ttJe2+ 18 ttJxcl 1 9 l!hxc6.
* A computer was used to help in checking the analysis.

459
13
14
15
(p. 1 75) In fact after 33 . . . g7 34 l:lxf5 Black appears to have a virtually forced
win: 34 . . . 'i'e3 3 5 h4 (3 5 .i.f2 :xrs; 3 5 tiJe2 :txf5 36 'i'xf5 'i'xe2+)
3 5 . . . 'ifgl + 36 h3 'i'hl+ 3 7 g4 (37 .th2 i..e 5) 37 . . . .i.f6 (threatening
3 . . . 1:.h8) 3 8 l:tf2 :hs 3 9 l:th2 (39 'iif5 tiJeS+) 3 9. . . 'i'gl 40 ttle2 'ii'e 3 4 1
'i'f5 :xh4+ 4 2 i..xh4 ttle5+.
(p. 1 76) After 46 . . .<t>h7 White cannot play 47 'i'xc7+ in view of 47 . . . i..g7.
(p. 1 90) 14 . . . ttld4 wins on the spot! Presumably the move order 13 i..xe6 .i.xe6 14
exf6 'ilxf4 etc. is intended.
1 6 (p. 1 90) The immediate 16 .i.b5+ looks more decisive: 16 . . . axb5 1 7 ttlxb5 'ifb6 1 8
.i.xc5 1i'xc5 1 9 lbc 1 .
1 7 (p. 1 9 1) 2 4. . . 1i'g5 looks stronger.
18
.
(p. 1 99) Tue tactical 10 l:xh4 'ifxh4 1 1 tZ:lxd5 also looks very strong.
1 9 (p.202) White has a clear win with 59 <:Ji;e7 ztd2 (or 59 ... h2 60 d8'i' :e2+ 6 1 :e6
l:xe6+ 62 xe6 hl'i' 63 'i'xg5+; 59 . . . e2+ 60 :e6; 59 .. .lk? 60 l:d6 h2
6 1 l:dl) 60 l:te6 h2 6 1 :e l .
20
21
22
23
(p.226) 34 . . . %:.g8+ is much stronger: Black wins after. 35 <tin lig2+ 36 <ii?g l
tixc4 3 7 lhc4 i.d5+.
(p.243 ) Mark Dvoretsky claims a win for Black by 62 . . . g4+ ! 63 xg4 (63 <it>e2
<ite4) 63 . . . .i.c3 ! (threatening 64 . . . e2 or 64 . . . <itd3) 64 i.b5 a4! 65 f3 a3
66 h7 @c5.
(p.252) A citation from Voltaire' s Dictionnaire Philosophique,
(p.253) After 49 . :f3 it is not altogether clear how White can stop the black
pawns.
. .
24 (p.260) It would seem that the author was right to be afraid of the check; after 24
l:h2 there is no good defence against 25 l:te2+.
25 (p.26 1) But it would seem that White could have drawn by 22 .i.h6+ 'iti>g8 23
'i'xe5 ifxh l + 24 lte2 'i'xh6 25 'ife6+ <i!rh8 26 'i'e5+ with perpetual
check, as 26 . . .'i'g7 loses to 27 l:th l + 'itg8 28 ..-e6+ ..-f7 29 l:h8+.
460
26
(p.276) 2 1 .. .'ifa6 seems an adequate reply.
27
(p.280) 25 . . JfB is a tougher defence.
28
(p.286) 25 . . liJgf3+ 26 g2 lbxd2 27 !ib8+ <i;;f7 28 :xd8 hihxdS 29 .i.xd2 l:ab8

leaves Black with a material advantage, but 25 J.xb5+ ltJxbS 26 :I.xb5
looks fine for White.
.
29
(p.289) White doesn't appear to lose his knight after 38 f3 ..i.h4 (3 8 . . . .i.f4 39
ltJe6) 3 9 <iti>g4 ..i.g5 40 ltJe8.
30
(p.296) But after 32 tiJd4 there appears to be no satisfactory defence to the threats
against e6 : 32 . . . .i.xe4 3 3 iif7.
31
(p.296) By 3 1 'iiil d5 32 'i'f8+ <iti>c7 33 \ic5+ <iti>b8 34 1i'xa5 White can win a
piece, although after 34 . . .'i'xh2 Black wins the g2 pawn, with .Perhaps
reasonable compensation.
32
(p.296) After 34 . . . <itid7 3 5 'i'xa5 .:txc2 36 <iti>xc2 ifc4+ Black regains his pawn,
but with 34 'W/g7 fie7 35 'i'g6+ <itid8 3 6 l::[f7 White can win the queen.
33
(p.300) Black can answer this with 17 . . . lbxc4. Therefore 17 1fif3 liJxd3 1 8 'i'xd3
seems better - cf. the note to White's 16th move!
34
(p. 328) 25 'i'xf6 :xd7 26 'ifxe6+ :Lf7 27 ild5 followed by 28 'i'g6+ and 29
'f!lxg7 mate is more incisive.
35 (p.368) Black has a forced win by 39 . . . g5 40 g3 l!f3 .

36
(p.375) 47 l:tel l:.xe l 48 xe l is even better, with a won pawn ending for White.
37
(p.3 84) 28 . . . 'fllxb3 29 ifd4+ liJe5 looks unclear. Therefore simply 27 lbe6 seems
better, with irresistible threats.
38 (p.3 85) It would appear that White has nothing better than perpetual check after
30 . . <it>f7 3 1 ttJg5+ (or 3 1 'i'g7+ @e8) 3 1 . . .g8.
.
39 (p.388) 34 . . . :d l +! is more immediately decisive.

40
(p.406) 1 8 .. Jk2+ was also possible: 19 l:txc2 (or 19 <t>fl l:txb2 20 ..i.xa4 l:.xb7)
19 . . . 'i'xc2+ 20 <ittfl 'i'xb2 21 'i'xe7 \ixb5+.
46 1
41
(p.4 1 1) 38 3xc2 is possible, when White is a clear pawn up.
42
(p.426) In fact this can be met by 1 9 ..ta4 20 lhxa4 l:a8, when Black regains the
piece.
. . .
462
Index of Openings . .
Open Games
Ruy Lopez. C77 - 297.
Semi-Open Games
Caro-Kann Defence. B U - 257, 274;
B 1 2 - 289, 293; B l 4 - 269; B 1 8 215, 277, 329; B l 9 - 345, 3 8 1 .
French Defence. COS - 365; C l I 337; C 1 5 - 256 ; C 18 - 299.
Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence.
B06 - 3 36,
378; B07 - 3 16, 3 1 8, 3 3 1 , 374; BOS
- 304, 353, 370, 376; B09 - 3 27,
334.
Sicilian Defence. B25 - 368; B34 265 ; B36 - 352; B37 - 3 39; B38 369; B63 - 347; B72 - 260, 26 1,
30 1 ; B75 - 298, 3 1 5; B88 - 281.
Closed Games
Catalan Opening. D l l - 280.
English Opening. Al4 - 32 1 ; A l 6 263, 264; A20 - 37 1 ; A2 1 - 306;
A22 - 322; A23 - 288; A24 - 303 ,
351; A2 6 - 343, 362: A29 - 27 1 ,
302, 33 3 , 344, 363 , 366; A3 5 - 309;
04 1 - 3 1 9.
Griinfeld Defence. D70 - 3 50; 075 3 4 1 ; D79 - 254, 358; 083 - 328;
098 - 307.
King's Indian Attack. A07 - 284, 338.
King' s Indian Defence. A42 - 270,
375, 377: A44 - 283 ; A48 - 348;
A56 - 3 26; A6 1 - 276; E6 1 - 349;
E62 - 252 253, 3 6 1 ; E66 - 273;
E69 - 295 ; E80 - 259; E81 - 258,
292, 3 80; E82 - 279, 323; E85 29 1 ; E87 - 294, 3 24, 3 54, 355; E90
- 3 57, 372.
Nimzo-Indian Defence.
E24 - 278,
27; E3 5 - 308; E42 - 3 3 5; E43 272, 3 1 7, 3 56; E45 - 255; E48 346; E5 1 - 285, 286, 364, 367.
Queen' s Gambit. D3 1 - 3 13, 373, 379;
D32 - 332; 034 - 296; 036 - 330,
342; D46 - 282.
Queen's Gambit Accepted. D24 - 267;
D27 - 3 10, 3 1 1 , 3 14.
Queen's Indian Defence. E l 4 - 305;
E 17 - 360 ; E I S - 3 1 2.
Reti Opening. A05 - 266; A12 - 262;
A14 - 300, 359; E l 7 - 320.
Slav Defence. D13 - 268, 325; D l 4 290, 340.
C77 etc. are Encyclopaedia ofChess Openings codes

Numbers refer to ga.:uies
463
Already published :
Mikhail Botvinnik : Botvinnik's Best Games Volume 1 1 925-1 941
Mikhail Botvinnik: Botvinnik's Best Games Volume 2 1 942-1 956
464
29 99 :
.

Botvinnik - Volume 3 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Botvinnik - Volume 3 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES

Volume 3: 1957 -1970

BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES

(Analytical & Critical Works)

Translated and Edited by Ken Neat

Published in the Czech Republic in 2001 by

This book is an authorised translation ofMM Botvinnik

Chess Agency CAISSA-90

All rights reserved

From tournaments and matches - to understanding

Selected Games 1957-1970

Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1 957, 5th match game

365 Ostojic-Botvinnik, 1969

367 Botvinnik-Van Scheltinga, 1969

370 Ciric-Botvimtlk. 1969

372 Botvinnik-Kavalek, 1969

375 Botvinnik-Ostojic, 1969

377 Botvinnik-Suttles, 1969

Summary of Tournament and Match Results (1957-1970)

From tournaments and

from my final competitive appearances.

return match. The question was - should

period of 14 years I played five matches

to persuade me to give up the return

Collected in this book are the games

for the World Championship, and I took

match. But the decision depended on

part in many international tournaments,

one thing alone: could I be confident

four Olympiads, and also other team

that I would be successful in a new

In parallel with this I continued my

After analysing the games from the

scientific work in the field of electrical

match I decided that 'a cat may look at a

engineering, and from 1960 in the field

king', and that it was possible to com

of cybernetics. I also directed a junior

pete with the new champion: The return

chess school, and a considerable amount

match took place in the Spring of 1958.

I made complete use of my analytical

sitting at the chess

ent - much to my cost! In the period

By the 15th game I already had an

from 1953 to 1958 Smyslov did not

advantage of four points, and this game

of his chess achievements. At the end of

was adjourned in a position that was

the event I was aiming only to 'rid

m to go off to my dacha for a night

It was no longer possible to save it, but

time analysis - this procedure had

defeated champion had the right to a

difference in the scores had its effect: I

stayed in Moscow, analysed super

I learned about this when the FIDE

at a high price. It led to a prejudiced

My analysis had shown that the

Even so, it would appear that here

It is important here to force White to

First the king is driven away from the

And only here did Tal notice that