Fischer - Taimanov 1971, annotated by Mikhail Tal

From the old 64 newspapers.

As a foreword: prognosis by Igor Bondarevsky, Boris Spassky's coach. Incredibly spot on,
both about Fischer and Korchnoi.

Many commentators and especially the public wait impatiently for the match between Robert
Fischer and Mark Taimanov. It's not only because the American grandmaster's name is
popular both at the West and in our country, but also because of various facts and anecdotes
that grow around his name. Besides, everyone wants to know how serious is Fischer's claim
for the world championship this time.

We often hear that Fischer has little match experience. But Taimanov has even less: the
Leningrad player had only one short match against Botvinnik in his career. So, other moments
seem more important. Fischer is much younger and goes forward creatively. He's able to fight
in every game, from the very beginning until the end, until the lonely kings - only a few
players are able to do that. Of our players, only Korchnoi plays like that. Others sometimes let
themselves rest at the distance, which can be beneficial though. But Fischer/Korchnoi-type
character has an important advantage: such players develop a very dangerous, fighting style as
they grow older. The partner doesn't get any rest - not for one game, not for one hour, not for
one move... And it's especially hard to withstand such style in a match, when sometimes
you're desperate for a "grandmaster's draw". That's why both Fischer and Korchnoi are so
dangerous both in tournaments and in matches. (The other thing is that, strategically speaking,
Petrosian and Spassky have their advantages in long matches, which are different from the
short ones. But that's another question.)

As a chess player, I see Fischer as a prominent grandmaster of a great practical strength, with
scientific understanding of the game. He consciously widens his opening repertoire, and used
his long hiatus from active playing wisely. He did his homework, that's for sure. It seems that
Fischer has carefully planned his further chess development. There are no tricks and no bluffs
in his playing - he's a chess player of a pure, crystal clear classical style. People sometimes
talk about Fischer's chess naivete, but Capablanca played in a similar style, and nobody ever
called Capablanca naive. Those talks are seemingly caused by anecdotes that surround
Fischer. The American grandmaster has a great endgame technique, and always plays until the
lonely kings, which is especially dangerous with such a strong technique.

Taimanov should have prepared a serious and well thought-out opening repertoire for the
match. The Leningrad player most probably didn't widen it, but he surely had to deepen his
schemes (especially in the Sicilian), because Fischer playes Sicilian incredibly strong as
White. Mark Evgenievich will have a very hard time in technical endgames: the opponent is
just stronger. I think that Taimanov's chances lie in creating unusual, unconventional
positions. When the fight gets tactical, when the course of play changes dramatically, when
there's no clear-cut plan, it's easier for Taimanov. There, he's not weaker than his opponent.

Game 1
It's not an opportune time for any prognoses after the first game, but the beginning of the
Fischer - Taimanov match, despite the Soviet grandmaster's loss, looks optimistic to me. The
distance is short, of course, and it's hard to win a lost point back, especially against Fischer,
but the game's character shows that the Leningrad grandmaster is in a fighting mood. I think
that he's trying to force his partner into a 'clinch', because the practice shows that the
American grandmaster is vulnerable in tactical fights.

Mark Taimanov vs. Robert Fischer

Candidates' Matches | Vancouver | Round 1 | 1971 | 0-1

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7

Taimanov often plays this variant for White, Fischer does so for Black. Both are happy...
9. Bd2
The Leningrad player used to play (9. Ne1,) (9. b4 and) (9. Nd2)
9... Ne8 10. Rc1 f5 11. exf5 gxf5 12. Ng5
A well-known, but still bold plan. By invading e6 with the Knight, White force the opponent
to exchange their light-squared Bishop. Of course, the lonely pawn will be eventually lost, but
while the opponent is concentrated on capturing it, White can develop their pieces
unhindered.
12... h6 13. Ne6 Bxe6 14. dxe6 Qc8 15. Qb3 c6
Black are defending d5 square and planning to play Ne8-c7xe6, capturing the pawn and
activating the Knight.
16. Bh5
The sacrifice (16. Nd5?!could be dangerous for Black, but... only in a blitz game. They could
easily defend with 16... cxd5 17. cxd5 Qb8)
16... Qxe6
As we know, the American grandmaster likes extra pawns. He's going for a forced variant that
gives him material advantage, but giving White pieces much space in the process. I think that
(16... Nc7 17. Bf7+ Kh7deserved some attention.)
17. Qxb7 Nf6 18. Be2 Rfb8 19. Qa6 Rxb2 20. Rfd1
White are planning to besiege a strong, but lightly-fortified Black's center.
20... e4!?
Trying to activate the pawn mass as soon as possible. But this gives White activity as well.
The position is very sharp. Fischer could play (20... Nd7, which is much less binding.)
21. Qa3
Worthy of consideration was (21. Bf4, after which Black can't immediately play 21... d5, and
after (21... Rb6, White can play both 22. Qa3and (22. Qa5)))
21... Rb7 22. Bf4
Forcing another pawn advance.
22... d5 23. cxd5 cxd5 24. Nb5 Ng6!
The threat of 25. Nc7 is very strong. Fischer cleverly parries it.
25. Nd4
This move seemed bad to me at first: White expose their flank very straightforwardly. I
wanted to offer (25. Qg3, still threatening 26. Nc7. But Fischer had an interesting tactical
opportunity: 25... Nh5! 26. Bxh5 Nxf4 27. Qxf4 Rxb5 28. Rc7 Qe5!, and it seems that the
threats to the Black King can be repelled. (Not (28... Be5 29. Bf7+! Qxf7 30. Qxe5)))
(25. Nc7 Qf7 26. Nxa8 Nxf4, and Black have an overwhelming position for the exchange,
because the White Knight is clearly out of play.)
25... Qd7 26. Qe3 Kh7 27. h3
A useful move.
27... Rf8
More careful is (27... a5, not allowing the Rook to invade the 7th rank.)
28. Ba6!
White clearly planned the subsequent exchange sacrifice.
28... Rb6 29. Rc7 Qa4
Now two pieces are hanging.
30. Rxg7+!
Without this Bishop, the King will be much less comfortable. (30. Be2 Ne8)
30... Kxg7 31. Bxh6+ Kf7 32. Be2 Rfb8 33. Nxf5
The first results: White got a pawn for the exchange, but that's beside the point. All their
pieces are positioned very well, especially the Knight. The Knight's position on a crucial f5
square makes this position favourable for White. Sadly, the next stage of the game wasn't
played too well by our grandmaster (perhaps he was in time trouble?)
33... Rb1 34. Rxb1
The first bad move. It wasn't necessary at all to allow the enemy Rook to seize the first rank.
White could play (34. Kh2!, and, since Black can't play 34... Rxd1 (34... Qd7With their King
defended, White could have played 35. g4, and it wouldn't be easy for Black to defend: after
the exchange at d1, the light-squared Bishop would take a comfortable position at b3. Still,
even the played move shouldn't have led to Taimanov's defeat.) 35. Bxd1 Qxd1? 36. Qxa7+)
34... Rxb1+ 35. Kh2 Qd7 36. Nd4
This unforced retreat gives the advantage to the opponent. White could play (36. Qg5, and
Black had nothing better than a forced draw: 36... Nh7 37. Qh5 Nf6etc.) (36. g4also wasn't
bad, but here, Black had some counterplay: 36... Qc7+ 37. Kg2 Qb6 38. Qc3 Rb2 39. Be3
Nf4+!)
36... Qd6+ 37. g3 Qb4!
Threatening 38... Qe1.
38. Nc6 Qb6 39. Nxa7
Better was (39. Nd4.)
39... Qxe3 40. Bxe3 Re1!
Now Black have an attack that can't be easily repelled. The game was adjourned. White
resigned without resuming the game.

In the first game, Taimanov mostly attacked, but in the second game, Fischer had both chess
and psychological initiative. We often hear that while the American grandmaster's opening
repertoire is huge, he's using only the tried-and-true moves, not adding anything to the theory.
This opinion is wrong, as proven in the

Game 2
Robert Fischer vs. Mark Taimanov
Candidates' Matches | Vancouver | Round 2 | 1971 | 1-0

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5 d6 6. Bf4

Fischer doesn't play 5. Nb5 too often, and he last used 6. Bf4 ten or so years ago. At the 1970
Mallorca Interzonal, Fischer used 6. c4 against Taimanov, but didn't get anything good out of
the opening.
6... e5 7. Be3 Nf6 8. Bg5
3 out of White's 8 first moves were made by the c1 Bishop, but this isn't a useless detour.
White are planning to seize the d5 square.
8... Qa5+
This move is considered the simplest reply. More interesting play can arise after (8...
Be6Some games ended very quickly after) (8... Qa5+ 9. Bd2 Qd8 10. Bg5 Qa5+ 11. Bd2
Qd8It's hard to say if Taimanov was ready for a draw in the second game or just wanted to
check the partner's intentions. Nevertheless, Fischer chooses a more principled continuation,
home-prepared, without a doubt.)
9. Qd2 Nxe4 10. Qxa5 Nxa5 11. Be3
Obviously bad is (11. Nc7+ Kd7 12. Nxa8 Nxg5)
11... Kd7
This position occurred many times. White usually won a pawn with 12. N(B)xa7, but Black's
dynamic center gave them a good counterplay. Fischer uses an interesting novelty.
12. N1c3!
I can't say if this pawn sacrifice is 100% correct. We'll have to wait for the judgement of
theoreticians (or even partners - the match still continues). But another thing is important. In
this position, Black have to defend thoroughly and for long time, and Taimanov loathes
passive playing since very early days.
12... Nxc3 13. Nxc3 Kd8
The King's position at d7 was good enough. Perhaps more precise was the immediate (13...
b6)
14. Nb5!
Now White have nothing against 14... d5: (14. Nb5 d5 15. Bxa7, and it's hard to counter the
threat 16. Bb6+ Kd7 17. Nc7: the King's position at d8 gives White an important tempo.)
14... Be6 15. O-O-O b6
(15... d5 16. Bxa7is still a threat)
16. f4!
Fischer doesn't hurry to win the pawn back. After (16. Nxd6 Bxd6 17. Rxd6+ Ke7 18. Rd1
Bc4Black deprived White of the two-bishop advantage and equalized easily. Now, Black have
nothing better than to exchange on f4:) (16. f4 e4 (16... f6 17. fxe5 fxe5 18. Nxd6, and the e5
pawn is very weak) 17. Nxd6 Bxd6 18. Rxd6+ Ke7 19. Rd4)
16... exf4 17. Bxf4 Nb7 18. Be2 Bd7
(18... Be7 19. Bf3)
19. Rd2!
White don't play it cheap.
19... Be7 20. Rhd1
Now White are threatening to capture the d6 pawn with an almost decisive attack: (20. Rhd1
g5 21. Bxd6 (21. Nxd6Why "almost"? Black could play)) (20. Rhd1 a6, and 21. Nxd6 (21.
Bxd6 Bg5!(much worse is (21... Bxb5 22. Bxe7+ Kxe7 23. Bxb5 axb5 24. Rd7+ Ke6 25.
Rxb7)) 21... Nxd6 22. Bxd6 Bg5is good for Black, since the d2 Rook is pinned. Taimanov
most probably didn't play this because of the simple) (20. Rhd1 a6 21. Nc3, weakening the
queenside. Still, there are no other good moves for Black, and so they decide to defend the d6
pawn, but also give the two-bishop advantage to their opponent.)
20... Bxb5 21. Bxb5 Kc7 22. Re2
The Rook's mission amond the d-file is complete.
22... Bf6 23. Rde1 Rac8
Black parry the threat 24. Re7+!
24. Bc4 Rhf8
I can imagine how much Taimanov loathes making such moves.
25. b4!
The American grandmaster plays such positions greatly.
25... a5 26. Bd5
Again threatening 27. Re7+.
26... Kb8 27. a3 Rfd8
There's no sense to hold on the f7 pawn.
28. Bxf7
Also good was (28. Re4 Bc3 29. R1e2. Still, White didn't have decisive advantage yet.)
28... Bc3!
Taimanov uses this breather.
29. Bd2 d5 30. Rd1 d4 31. Bxc3 Rxc3
I think that (31... dxc3was also good.)
32. Kb2 d3!
Black force new simplifications. White threatened 33. Rxd4.
33. Kxc3 dxe2 34. Re1
White capture this pawn, but Black get enough time to get their Knight into play.
34... Nd6 35. Bh5 Nb5+
The difficult defence took its toll on Taimanov, and when the worst was already over, he
sadly makes a mistake. After (35... Rc8+, Black maintained material balance both after 36.
Kb2 Nc4+ 37. Ka2 Ne3!and) (35... Rc8+ 36. Kb3 Nb5 37. c4 Nd4+ 38. Kc3 Nb5+)
36. Kb2 axb4 37. axb4 Rd4 38. c3 Rh4
Bad was (38... Rd2+ 39. Kb3 Rd3 40. Kc4)
39. Bxe2 Nd6 40. Rd1 Kc7 41. h3 Rf4 42. Rf1 Re4 43. Bd3 Re5 44. Rf2 h5 45. c4
The game was first adjourned at this point. Black are down a pawn, and the White Bishop is
much more active than the Knight. All this, plus Fischer's good endgame technique, should
have decided the game in White's favour. But Fischer seemed to think that he could win
effortlessly no matter what, and so, uncharacteristically for himself, didn't analyze the
position thoroughly. Taimanov, on the other hand, gave his all, sealing the move
45... Rg5
Limiting the White Rook's moves. The Rook ending (45... Re3 46. Kc3 Ne4+ 47. Kd4 Rxd3+
48. Kxe4is hopeless because of White King's active position.)
46. Kc3 Kd7 47. Ra2 Kc8 48. Kd4 Kc7
The Black King can't go to d7, because the c-pawn movement is much stronger after that.
White should have played (48... Kc7 49. Re2 Kd7 (49... Kd8 50. Re6 Kd7 51. Rg6, forcing
the Rook exchange) 50. c5. Black should have played 50... bxc5+ 51. bxc5 Nc8, but the
position would be impossible to hold. Another good move seems to be Averbakh's) (48... Kc7
49. h4 Rg4+ 50. Kd5 Rxh4 51. c5)
49. Ra7+
As a rule, the Rook's position on 7th rank is good, but there are some exceptions. 49... Kd8
50. c5After this move, Fischer seemed to have lost the win. Stronger was (50. Ra6or) (50.
Ra2, intending to reach the aforementioned variant.)
50... bxc5+ 51. bxc5 Ne8
The g2 pawn is hanging.
52. Ra2
White had more opportunities after (52. Be4 Nc7 53. Kc4)
52... Nc7 53. Bc4 Kd7
And now Black win back the pawn.
54. Rb2
Better was (54. Bb3)
54... Kc6 55. Bb3
(55. Rb6+ Kd7 was no better.)
55... Nb5+
Of course, not (55... Rxc5?? 56. Ba4+)
56. Ke3 Kxc5
White still have some advantage, but obviously not enough to win.
57. Kf4 Rg6 58. Bd1 h4 59. Kf5 Rh6 60. Kg5 Nd6 61. Bc2
It seems that Fischer's resilience is for nothing, but, as it turns out, the main events are ahead.
61... Nf7+ 62. Kg4 Ne5+ 63. Kf4 Kd4 64. Rb4+ Kc3 65. Rb5 Nf7 66. Rc5+ Kd4 67. Rf5
g5+
One of the possible ways. Black give up a pawn, but force further simplifications.
68. Kg4 Ne5+ 69. Kxg5 Rg6+ 70. Kxh4 Rxg2 71. Bd1 Rg8 72. Bg4 Ke4 73. Kg3
The game was adjourned again. Nobody doubted that there was a dead draw. However, before
the play-off, Taimanov convincingly lost game 3, so he wasn't in the best possible mood. Still,
his seconds are also to blame because they couldn't find several clearly drawish moves at
home. Black sealed a natural move
73... Rg7 74. Rf4+ Kd5 75. Ra4 Ng6
This doesn't lose, but much simpler was (75... Nxg4 76. hxg4 Ke6 77. Kh4 (77. Rf4 Rf7) 77...
Rg8! 78. Rf4 Ke5, and this is a theoretically drawn position.)
76. Ra6
(76. Ra5+ Kd6 77. Rg5 Ke7gave nothing.)
76... Ne5 77. Kf4 Rf7+ 78. Kg5 Rg7+ 79. Kf5 Rf7+ 80. Rf6
The last-ditch effort.
80... Rxf6+ 81. Kxf6 Ke4??
An impossible mistake. Black easily drew after (81... Nd3 82. h4 (82. Kf5 Kd6) 82... Nf4 83.
Kf5 Kd6!The Bishop is of the wrong colour. Another way to draw was) (81... Kd6 82. Be2
(82. Bc8 Nf3 83. Bb7 Nh4 84. Kg5 Ke7) 82... Nd7+ 83. Kf7 Ke5 84. h4 Nf6It seems that
Taimanov just overlooked the next move:)
82. Bc8,
and the White pawn queens easily now.
82... Kf4
(82... Nf3 83. Bb7+) (82... Nd3 83. Bf5+)
83. h4 Nf3
(83... Ng4+ 84. Kg7is also hopeless.)
84. h5 Ng5 85. Bf5
Zugzwang.
85... Nf3 86. h6 Ng5 87. Kg6 Nf3 88. h7 Ne5+ 89. Kf6 Black resigned.

The story behind the variant, by Yakov Estrin

I would like to discuss the history of the opening of the 2nd game in Vancouver.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5

This fashionable move is more than 100 years old! It was first used in the match between
Steinitz and Anderssen.
5... d6 6. Bf4 e5
Now everyone knows that this is the only good move. But earlier, Black would play
(successfully enough) (6... Ne5. Fischer says in 'My 60 Memorable Games' that after the
tempting 7. Qd4, Black have 7... a6!, and White can't play 8. Nxd6+ Bxd6 9. Bxe5due to 9...
Qa5+. But the late grandmaster V. Simagin showed that after) (6... Ne5 7. N1a3! a6 8. Bxe5
dxe5 9. Qxd8+ Kxd8 10. O-O-O+ Bd7 11. Nc4!or) (6... Ne5 7. N1a3 Nf6 8. Qd4! a6 9. O-O-
O axb5 10. Bxe5White have an obvious advantage.)
7. Be3 Nf6 8. Bg5!
Earlier, White would play (8. N1c3 a6 9. Na3 b5 10. Nd5 Nxd5 11. exd5 Ne7 12. c4 Nf5!with
a good counterplay for Black. The move Bg5 was innovated by me back in 1960, and I must
admit that many people looked at it rather ironically. The only things I heard that of 8 moves
made by White, 2 are made with the g1 Knight, and 3 more with the c1 Bishop. You just do
not play openings that way! Let's note that, compared to the fashionable 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6
3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bf4 ed 8. Bg5 White have just lost an
important tempo (their b1 Knight isn't developed yet). Still, Black's development advantage is
only temporary, while the weakness of d5 square and d6 pawn is chronic. I've been
championing this variant, sometimes suffering bad losses with it. Grandmaster David
Bronstein supported me by successfully using it against Polugaevsky in the 31st USSR
Championship (Leningrad 1963). Robert Fischer also gave this variant much consideration,
using it against Najdorf at Santa Monica 1966, and then thoroughly analyzing it in the
aforementioned book. The American watches the Soviet theoreticians' research intently and
plays through almost any games that are interesting opening-wise, especially in his "own"
variants. It was clear that Fischer would gladly play this variant against Taimanov.)
8... Qa5+
(8... a6and) (8... Be6are also possible, but this is outside the scope of this article.)
9. Qd2 Nxe4 10. Qxa5 Nxa5 11. Be3 Kd7
Perhaps the best move. In the game Bagirov - Boleslavsky (Burevestnik Society team
championship, Kharkov, 1963) Black played (11... Kd8 12. f3 Nf6 13. Bxa7 Nd5 14. N1a3
Be6, and now, instead of 15. O-O-O?, White could play (15. c4! Nb4 16. Bb6+ Kd7 17. Nc7,
winning an exchange.))
12. N1c3!
In the game against Liberzon (Moscow 1963), I played (12. f3 Nf6 13. Nxa7 d5 14. c3 d4 15.
cxd4 Nd5 16. Nxc8 Kxc8 17. Bd2 Nb3 18. Bc4 Nxa1 19. Bxd5 Nc2+ 20. Kf2 Nxd4 21.
Bxf7led to a roughly equal position. In the post-mortem analysis, we came to a conclusion
that 12. N1c3 gave an active position for the pawn. Later, 12. N1c3 was published in
Alexander Nikitin's monography 'Sicilian Defence' (p. 50), and so Fischer surely knew it.
Though Fischer doesn't analyze this move in his book... After)
12... Nxc3 13. Nxc3
White indeed got initiative and eventually won, though it wasn't the opening that won the
game for them.

Game 3 was played on the next day. It seems that its result had a strong impact on the second
game's result as well.

Mark Taimanov vs. Robert Fischer

Candidates' Match | Vancouver | Round 3 | 1971 | 0-1

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Bd2
The theoretical duel continues in Vancouver.
9... Ne8 10. Rc1 f5 11. Qb3
An improvement over the first game, where Taimanov played (11. exf5 gxf5 12. Ng5, and
seemingly strong enough. Who knows, perhaps it was because of this move Geller refrained
from playing King's Indian in the 5th game against Korchnoi?!)
11... b6
Black are preventing c4-c5 once and for all, but weaken the light squares in their camp. More
cautious was (11... Kh8)
12. exf5 gxf5 13. Ng5 Nf6
(13... h6 14. Ne6 Bxe6 15. dxe6 Qc8 16. c5! bxc5 17. Nb5with a good position for the pawn.
Fischer's move also doesn't solve all Black's problems.)
14. f4 h6
(14... e4was objectively stronger, but then White had an advantage in the quiet game. I think
that Fischer overlooked White's 19th move when he went for the forced variant in the actual
game.)
15. fxe5 dxe5 16. c5!
The discovered check is quite threatening. After (16. c5 hxg5 17. d6+ Kh8 18. dxe7 Qxe7 19.
cxb6 axb6, both 20. Bxg5and (20. Nb5don't look too good for Black.)) (16. c5 Kh8 17.
d6!also doesn't help.)
16... Nfxd5 17. Nxd5 Nxd5 18. cxb6 axb6 19. Rc6!
A brilliant move, refuting Black's plan - they can't strengthen the centralized Knight's
position. (19. Rc6 hxg5is impossible due to 20. Bc4 Kh8 21. Bxd5 f4 (21... g4) 22. Rc3!,
threatening both Bxa8 and Rh3+. Black have only one move.)
19... Kh8 20. Nf3
Taimanov thought for an hour on this move, but, as it often happens, prolonged thinking
didn't do any good. It's unclear why White didn't play the more obvious (20. Qh3!The threat
21. Rxh6+ can be parried either with 20... Rf6or (20... Nf6, but White could have either light-
squared) (20... Rf6 21. Bc4or dark-squared) (20... Nf6 21. Bc3Bishop join the attack. Best for
Black was 21... Bd7! (21... Qe7 22. Nf3 Ng4 23. Nh4!) 22. Ne6 Bxe6 23. Rxe6 Qd7. But even
then, after 24. Rxe5(less convincing is (24. Qxf5 Nh7!White's advantage is clear:) 24... Ng4
25. Rd1 Qf7 26. Red5The unfortunate move gives Fischer an opportunity to easily repel the
attack and keep the material. We can say almost for sure that 20. Nf3 cost Taimanov 1.5
points.))
20... Bb7 21. Rg6 Nf4!
Now the Black King is completely safe.
22. Bxf4 exf4 23. Rd1 Qe7 24. Re6 Qc5+ 25. Kf1 Rfd8
After exchanging a pair of Rooks, the weakness of the 1st rank will be especially glaring.
26. Rxd8+ Rxd8 27. Qa4 Qc1+ 28. Kf2 Bf8 29. b4
Black were threatening 29... Bc5+.
29... Be4 30. Re8
Trying to sharpen the game with a Queen sacrifice, which proves unsuccessful. Not much
better was (30. Qb5; Black had the interesting variant 30... Qe3+ 31. Ke1 (31. Kf1 Rd1+! 32.
Bxd1 Bd3+ 33. Be2 Qc1+) 31... Qc3+ 32. Kf2 Bxb4 33. Re8+ Rxe8 34. Qxe8+ Kh7, and
Black win.)
30... Bc6 31. Qxc6
(31. Rxd8 Bxa4 32. Rxf8+ Kg7is equally hopeless for White.)
31... Qxc6 32. Rxd8 Qf6 33. Rc8 Qe7 34. Kf1 Kh7
After the Bishop joins the game, Black get a strong attack. The rest is simple.
35. Nd4 Bg7 36. Nb5
(36. Nxf5 Qd7(not (36... Qe6 37. Bd3))
36... Be5 37. a3 Qd7 38. Ra8 f3! 39. gxf3 Bxh2 40. Kg2 Qg7+!
The most convincing.
41. Kxh2 Qe5+ White resigned without resuming the game (it was adjourned at this point).

Game 4

Robert Fischer vs. Mark Taimanov

Candidates' Match | Vancouver | Round 4 | 1971 | 1-0
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Qc7 5. Nc3
Fischer gets the game on the well-beaten path. Theory recommends (5. Nb5or) (5. c4here.)
5... e6 6. g3 a6 7. Bg2 Nf6 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Qxd4 Bc5 10. Bf4 d6
The Queen exchange (10... Bxd4 11. Bxc7is considered better for White.)
11. Qd2 h6
Another possible move was (11... Nd7)
12. Rad1 e5 13. Be3 Bg4
After (13... Bxe3 14. fxe3! Black lose a pawn: 14... Ke7? 15. Rxf6)
14. Bxc5 dxc5
Closing the c-file: (14... Qxc5 15. Qxd6)
15. f3 Be6 16. f4 Rd8
Black keep their King in the center for too long. Better was (16... O-O, and after 17.
f5(perhaps Taimanov feared this move), there's either 17... Rad8 18. Qe3 Bc8 19. Nd5 Nxd5
20. exd5 f6with a slightly passive, but solid position, or) (16... O-O 17. f5 Bc4 18. Rfe1 b5
19. b3 b4! 20. bxc4 bxc3 21. Qxc3 Rfd8, and White's extra pawn doesn't do much good, and
their Bishop is passive.)
17. Nd5 Bxd5 18. exd5 e4
White threatened 19. d6 and 20. fxe5, and (18... exf4 19. Rfe1+was outright suicidal. Now
Black don't fear 19. d6 due to 19... Qc6, saving the important pawn.)
19. Rfe1! Rxd5 20. Rxe4+ Kd8 21. Qe2
A Queen sacrifice did nothing good: (21. Qxd5+ Nxd5 22. Rxd5+ Kc8 23. Ree5 Kb8! 24.
Rxc5 Qb6)
21... Rxd1+ 22. Qxd1+ Qd7
More complications arose after (22... Kc8, though after 23. Re5 Rd8 24. Qf3White are better.)
23. Qxd7+ Kxd7 24. Re5
The ending is good for White, because in open positions Bishop is more active than Knight.
24... b6 25. Bf1 a5 26. Bc4 Rf8 27. Kg2 Kd6 28. Kf3 Nd7 29. Re3 Nb8
Black are facing long and gruelling defence.
30. Rd3+ Kc7 31. c3 Nc6 32. Re3 Kd6 33. a4
Seizing the weak b5 square that could be useful later, either for the Bishop or King.
33... Ne7 34. h3 Nc6 35. h4
Perhaps White didn't like (35. g4 g5)
35... h5
Black are trying to set up a fortress at the kingside, but they're forced to put their pawns to the
squares of the opponent's Bishop.
36. Rd3+ Kc7 37. Rd5 f5 38. Rd2 Rf6 39. Re2 Kd7
Taimanov prevents Rook's invasion.
40. Re3 g6 41. Bb5
The game was adjourned here.
41... Rd6 (the sealed move)
42. Ke2 Kd8 43. Rd3 Kc7 44. Rxd6 Kxd6 45. Kd3 Ne7 46. Be8 Kd5 47. Bf7+ Kd6 48. Kc4
Kc6 49. Be8+ Kb7 50. Kb5 Nc8 51. Bc6+ Kc7 52. Bd5 Ne7 53. Bf7 Kb7 54. Bb3 Ka7 55.
Bd1 Kb7 56. Bf3+ Kc7 57. Ka6 Ng8 58. Bd5 Ne7 59. Bc4 Nc6 60. Bf7 Ne7 61. Be8 Kd8
62. Bxg6 Nxg6 63. Kxb6 Kd7 64. Kxc5 Ne7 65. b4 axb4 66. cxb4 Nc8 67. a5 Nd6 68. b5
Ne4+ 69. Kb6 Kc8 70. Kc6 Kb8 71. b6 Black resigned.

Taimanov's four straight losses deprived him from any winning chances against Fischer. All
subsequent games decided only the losing margin - it was a question of prestige, or
something. To tip the balance, at least, the Leningrad player needed to win the fifth game. The
American could settle for a draw, but he never avoids a good fight. And the next game was
indeed very intense.

Game 5

Mark Taimanov vs. Robert Fischer

Candidates' Match | Vancouver | Round 5 | 1971 | 0-1

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5
Taimanov seemingly had nothing against another King's Indian. Fischer, seemingly, had
something against it.
4. Bg5 Ne4 5. Bh4
Taimanov's patented move. Despite the latest tournaments (including the USSR
Championship) showing good opportunities for Black in this variant, Taimanov still defends
his point of view, and, judging at least by this game's opening, he has his reasons.
5... Nxc3 6. bxc3 dxc4
Fischer played this move against Mecking in Buenos Aires. Taimanov knew that, of course,
and prepared an interesting reply.
7. e3
This is obviously stronger than (7. Qa4+ (Mikenas - Tukmakov, USSR Championship, Riga))
7... Be6 8. Rb1 b6 9. Be2!
Up till now, the partners followed the aforementioned Mecking - Fischer game. The Brazilian
master played 8. Nf3 Bg7 9. Be2, and Black got a great position. Taimanov's move is much
trickier. After (9. Be2 Bg7 White can play 10. Bf3 c6 11. Ne2with subsequent Nf4. To
prevent Nf4, Fischer makes a pretty unaesthetical move. I must add that Black can't play) (9.
Be2 c5due to 10. Bf3, and Black have to give up an exchange, because 10... Bd5 11. Qa4+
Nc6 12. Qxc6+ loses immediately. (12. e4))
9... Bh6
Now Black don't fear the aforementioned variant: after (9... Bh6 10. Bf3 c6 11. Ne2they can
easily play 11... O-O 12. Nf4 Bxf4or (12... Bc8, threatening 13... g5. Nevertheless, Black will
eventually have to spend a tempo to return the Bishop to the usual position.))
10. Nf3 c6 11. Ne5 Bg7
Trying to hold the pawn (11... b5, could have led to a lot of trouble after 12. Bf3 Qb6 13. d5!)
12. f4
White aren't rushing to restore the material balance; 12... Bxe5 is too dangerous for Black.
12... Bd5
Preparing to get the Knight into play. Also good was (12... O-O)
13. O-O Nd7 14. Nxc4 O-O
The opening was a bit better for White: they have an active and solid pawn center. If they
could play e3-e4, their advantage would be even greater, but it's impossible yet.
15. a4
Threatening 16. Nd2 (White couldn't play that before because the a2 pawn was undefended).
Black's reply is forced.
15... c5 16. Ne5
After Black moved their c-pawn, the e-pawn movement becomes very sharp due to
weakening of the d4 square. White change their plan. After (16. Ne5 Nf6, good for them is
17. c4 Bb7 18. d5. The subsequent march of the a-pawn is also not bad.)
16... Nxe5 17. dxe5
A good move. White manage to win the battle for the opened line.
17... f6
Solving the e7 pawn troubles, characteristic for this variant.
18. Rb2! Be6
White threatened to win a piece with 19. Rd2.
19. Rd2 Qc7
We have a tempo game. As soon as Black get a Rook to d8, their problems will be solved. But
Taimanov's next move shows that it's not simple for Black to actually place the Rook there.
20. Bg4!
Now, both (20. Bg4 Bxg4 21. Qxg4 Rad8 (21... fxe5 22. Qe6+ Kh8 23. Rd7) 22. Rfd1 Rxd2
23. Qe6+! Kh8 24. Rxd2 Rd8 25. exf6! exf6 26. Bxf6and) (20. Bg4 f5 21. Bf3, with Bg7 out
of play, is bad for Black. The American grandmaster puts up a good defence.)
20... Qc8! 21. Bf3
In this situation, the Bishop exchange only made it easier for Black.
21... Rb8 22. Qe2 Rd8 23. Rfd1 Rxd2 24. Qxd2
I think that (24. Rxd2 was more dangerous: 24... Qe8 (24... Qc7 25. exf6 exf6 26. Qd1) 25.
Qa6 fxe5 26. Qxa7 exf4 27. Bc6! Qc8 28. Bxe7)
24... Qe8 25. exf6 exf6 26. Qd6
White seemed to put much hope into the Queen invasion. But Fischer manages to repel this
attack as well.
26... Rc8!
White threatened 27. Qc7. Black don't fear (26... Rc8 27. Bb7 Bf8! 28. Qd2 Rb8)
27. a5 Bf8 28. Qd2 Be7
Black again intend to place a Rook at d8. The second Rook exchange deprives White of any
hope of substantial advantage.
29. Bd5
Taimanov finds a new attacking resource. I'll have to say that both partners had a great game
until the very end.
29... Qf7 30. Bxe6 Qxe6 31. Qd7 Kf7
Black can't let the White Rook to get to the 7th rank. (31... Qxe3+? 32. Bf2lost, obviously.)
32. Qxa7 bxa5 33. e4
White are ready to part with a central pawn to open the e-file.
33... Qc6
The immediate (33... Qxe4lost to 34. Re1 Ra8 35. Qc7)
34. Rd7
Black threatened 34... Ra8.
34... Qxe4 35. h3
The White King also needs defence.
35... a4
Black are trying to divert White's attacking pieces with the a-pawn moves. Their position is
still very dangerous. They can't play (35... Ra8 36. Rxe7+, and after) (35... Ke8, there's a
simple 36. Rd1, threatening both 37. Qd7+ and 37. Re1.)
36. Bf2
Attacking the c5 pawn. (36. Bf2 a3 37. Bxc5 Rxc5 38. Qxc5 a2 39. Qa7 Qe1+ 40. Kh2 a1=Q
41. Rxe7+)
36... Kf8 37. c4 a3!
Again, bad was (37... Ra8 38. Qc7, and it's very hard to repel the threat 39. Rxe7. The
immediate (38. Rxe7is impossible due to 38... Qb1+))
38. Qxa3 Ra8
More solid than (38... Qxf4, which was possible nevertheless.)
39. Qb2 Ke8 40. Qb5 Kf8 41. Rd1
White don't want to draw. Objectively speaking, their advantage is negligible. The exchange
sacrifice wasn't dangerous for Black: (41. Rxe7? Kxe7 42. Bxc5+ Kf7)
41... Qxf4
The game was adjourned in this position. One may have thought that this game would end in
a draw. But the play-off again brought an unpleasant surprise.
42. Bxc5 (the sealed move)
42... Bxc5+ 43. Qxc5+ Kg7 44. Rf1
The passed c-pawn isn't too important: White have to constantly watch their King's position.
Perhaps (44. Qd5 was a bit better.)
44... Qe4
Much more active than (44... Qe5: Black will have to play very precisely in the Rook ending.
The Black Queen is very active now. Also, Fischer placed an easy trap, and Taimanov
suddenly bought it.)
45. Qc7+ Kh6 46. Rxf6??
Incredible! Did White think that their opponent just blundered a pawn in the analysis?
46... Qd4+ 47. Rf2 Ra1+ White resigned.

Game 6

Robert Fischer vs. Mark Taimanov

Candidates' Match | Vancouver | Round 6 | 1971 | 1-0

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5 d6 6. Bf4 e5 7. Be3 Nf6 8. Bg5 Be6 9.
N1c3 a6 10. Bxf6 gxf6 11. Na3 Nd4 12. Nc4 f5 13. exf5 Nxf5 14. Bd3 Rc8 15. Bxf5 Rxc4
16. Bxe6 fxe6 17. Qe2 Rd4 18. O-O Qg5 19. Rad1 Qf5 20. Rxd4 exd4 21. Ne4 Be7? 22.
Rd1 Qe5 23. Qd3 Rf8 24. Qxd4 Qxd4 25. Rxd4 d5 26. Nc3 Bc5 27. Rd2 Rf4 28. g3 Rc4
29. Ne2 Ra4 30. a3 Kd7 31. Kg2 b5 32. c3 a5 33. Nd4 b4 34. Nb3 Bb6 35. axb4 axb4 36.
c4 Kc6 37. c5 Bc7 38. Nd4+ Kd7 39. f4 e5 40. c6+ Kc8 41. Nb5 Ra2 42. f5 Bd8 43. Rxd5
The game was adjourned, and Black resigned without resuming.

The story behind the variant, by Yakov Estrin

In 64, No 22, I covered the opening from the second Fischer - Taimanov game, when after 1.
e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5 d6 6. Bf4 e5 7. Be3 Nf6 8. Bg5 Black played
8... Qa5+. Now let's look how the game goes when Black prefer other continuations: 8... a6
and 8... Be6 (like in the 6th game).

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5 d6 6. Bf4 e5 7. Be3 Nf6 8. Bg5 a6 9. Bxf6
gxf6 10. N5c3 f5 Black have to play this move as quickly as possible, because they must not
let the opponent block the crucial d5 and f5 squares. 11. Qh5! This strong move was first
played by David Bronstein. His game against Polugaevsky (31st USSR Championship)
continued 11... Nd4 (11... Bg7 This move, developed by master A. Cherepkov, also leads to
hard times for Black. 12. Bc4 (12. Nd2 Another good move: 12... O-O 13. exf5 (Alexander
Nikitin in his 'Sicilian Defence' monography also considers 13. O-O-O Nd4 14. Bd3 fxe4 15.
Ndxe4 Bf5? Question mark by me (Obviously stronger is15... h6! 16. Bc4 Bf5 17. Bd5 Rc8!
18. g4 Bxe4 19. Bxe4 Rxc3! 20. bxc3 Ne2+ 21. Kd2 Nf4, and White had to defend (Estrin -
Magergut, Leningrad 1964)) 16. Ng5 Bxd3 17. Rxd3, with advantage for White.) 13... Nd4
14. Bd3 d5 15. f6! e4 16. Ndxe4 Bf5 17. fxg7 Re8 18. O-O-O dxe4 19. Bc4, with advantage
for White.) 12... O-O 13. exf5 Nd4 14. Bd3 Re8(Estrin - Cherepkov, Leningrad 1963), and
now the American grandmaster recommends 15. Be4! d5 16. Nxd5 Bxf5 17. Bxf5 Qxd5 18.
Nc3 Qxg2? 19. Be4 Nxc2+ 20. Ke2 Nd4+ 21. Ke3, winning.) 12. Bc4 Qc7 13. Nd2! Nxc2+
14. Ke2 Nxa1, and the prosaic 15. Rxa1! gave White a decisive advantage. This move is
recommended by Fischer in his book 'My 60 Memorable Games'.

Fischer vs. Taimanov

Opening analysis | 1971

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5 d6 6. Bf4 e5 7. Be3 Nf6 8. Bg5 Be6
Interestingly, Nikitin marks this move with an exclamation mark, while Fischer - with a
question mark.
9. N1c3 a6 10. Bxf6 gxf6 11. Na3
Analyzing this position, Fischer shows the variants: 11... Nd4 (11... b5 12. Nd5!) (11... Be7
12. Bc4!) (11... f5? 12. Bc4 Bxc4 13. Nxc4 fxe4 14. Nxe4 d5 15. Qxd5!) (11... Qb6Another
variant, not covered by Fischer. 12. Nc4 Qd4(Schmid - Matulovic, 16th Chess Olympiad,
1964). Of course, bad is (12... Bxc4 13. Bxc4 Qxb2 14. Nd5with obvious advantage for
White. After) 13. Qxd4 (The immediate13. Ne3 Bh6 14. Qf3!or) (13. Qe2 b5 14. Ne3 b4 15.
Rd1 Qc5 16. Ncd5 Nd4 17. Qc4!led to White's advantage.) 13... Nxd4 14. Ne3 f5 ((also good
is14... Bh6) White achieved nothing.))
12. Nc4
Nikitin considers 12... f5, move developed by G. Borisenko, as the only way to equalize for
Black. The Fischer - Taimanov game continued: (12... Rc8 13. Ne3 Bh6 14. Bd3 Rg8 15.
Qh5, with White having the initiative.)
13. exf5 Nxf5 14. Bd3 Rc8 15. Bxf5 Rxc4
After (15... Bxf5 16. Ne3 Be6Fischer would have obviously played 17. Qh5!, retaining the
advantage, rather than (17. Ncd5?, recommended by Nikitin.))
16. Bxe6 fxe6 This position first occurred 10 years ago in my game against G. Borisenko in
the 5th USSR Correspondence Championship (1961-62). Here I played (16... fxe6 17. Qf3(the
check at h5 only helps Black), and after 17... Qe7 18. O-O-O Rf4 19. Qh3!White got good
chances. Fischer also didn't make the check, but preferred to castle short.)
17. Qe2 Rd4 18. O-O Qg5 19. Rad1 Qf5
After (19... Rxd1 20. Rxd1 Rg8 21. g3White's advantage is also obvious.)
20. Rxd4 exd4 21. Ne4 Be7 22. Rd1 Qe5 (22... e5 23. Rxd4!) 23. Qd3, and White won a
pawn and then the game.

Without a doubt, the variant that was played at the highest level will attract the attention of
chess players and will be subject to further practical examination at various tournaments.

As an afterword.

Mikhail Beilin about the Fischer - Taimanov match

Robert Fischer again demonstrated the qualities of an indomitable fighter who strives to win
every game. He's very active and very accurate at the same time. Taimanov's will to fight was
literally crushed. After the Interzonal, some critics were too happy to find Fischer's mistakes,
saying that in the earlier years, there were fewer of them... Complete precision in chess is
impossible. And the fight is not easy even for the greatest chess players. Complete precision
and drawing death are spectres of the past. Fischer's strength is obvious, he's on a roll.
In 1967, Fischer said that he wasn't going to play at Sousse - the prizes were too small. He
started the tournament successfully, and then just quit. Before the Sousse tournament, I wrote,
"At this time (1972), Fischer will be 29 years old. And he will be a grandmaster for 14 years.
Didn't Fischer plan his ultimate fight for the 1972?

I think that it's one of Fischer's strategical maneuvers, perhaps even more deep and subtle than
it might seem". Literaturnaya Gazeta, No. 3, 1967.

This speculation was based on a memory: Alekhine prepared for a world championship match
against Capablanca when Lasker was still a world champion. He calculated a move ahead, if
you will. And avoided playing Capablanca in tournaments. Why? Alekhine gave a clear
answer: he played weaker than Capablanca then, but was sure that eventually he would be
playing stronger.

Viktor Korchnoi about the Fischer - Taimanov match

I thought that Taimanov would put up more resistance to Fischer.

The Canadian match impressed me mightily. Taimanov looked good in the openings, but
chess isn't just an openings game. You know, for some reason I think that Taimanov...
underestimated Fischer. How can you underestimate a player with such colossal successes?!
Anyway, Taimanov wasn't ready to face such a mighty opponent. Perhaps some articles in our
press are to blame, that showed Fischer in a wrong light. He deserves utmost respect both as a
grandmaster and a man who's completely dedicated to chess and, by the way, very humble in
life, despite some of his antics. In the match against Fischer - and I'm sure that he would
defeat Larsen, even though there'll be a real war on the board - Petrosian or I would face a
very, very difficult challenge. Now, after the match against Taimanov, nobody can say that
Fischer is only a tournament player. He's a chess fighter of exceptional strength. And we all
should remember that.

Boris Spassky about the Fischer - Taimanov match

The American grandmaster attracts much interest from the entire world now. He won the US
championship aged 13, shows extra class results in the last 7 years, and now he's on the finish
line of the world championship cycle. The specialists think that Fischer will most probably
become the world championship candidate. I think that Fischer represents a great chess
strength. A great grandmaster with a clear, precise style. In the last years, he'd became much
more mature, serious, solid, stopped giving too many interviews. Fischer is a true chess
fanatic. I have a sympathy towards him. I think that 64 shouldn't have published A. Golubev's
articles 'Subjectively about Fischer'.

Before the match with Fischer, Taimanov had to solve a lot of serious troubles. Taimanov was
the first Soviet grandmaster to play a match with Fischer. Taimanov's chances were in good
opening preparation and readiness for a harsh, no-nonsense struggle. It's hard to play against
Fischer - he puts up difficult problems. We also have to consider the age difference (Fischer is
28, while Taimanov is 45). The American grandmaster has his vulnerabilities, even though
there aren't many of them. He likes when his opponents sacrifice material to him. Also, he
becomes flustered when he doesn't see a clear strategic plan.
Taimanov's playing in games 1 and 3 was too impulsive and nervous. He couldn't play a
single game consistently strong. After losing the third game, when Taimanov could play Qh3
and pose more difficult problems for Fischer, everything was over. But such moves require
concentration, willpower and iron nerves.

The score is frightening, to be frank. I discussed Fischer's chances before the start, but only
Botvinnik (and Taimanov himself) was optimistic: "if Taimanov manages to put up a lot of
work, choose the right way..." Other grandmasters, including me, predicted that Fischer would
win. But nobody expected a 6-0 score.

Looking forward to 1972, I would like to play Fischer for the world championship. Do I fear
him? Like Korchnoi, I fear myself most. Lasker said that the man is responsible for his work,
not for its results, and he was right. I feel good enough, I have new ideas and am ready to
grow. But in what form will I be, how good will be the decisive games - no chess player can
say that for sure. Speaking of the possible match against Fischer, I'm in a good mood. The
very thought of such an interesting competition causes much enthusiasm.