Botvinnik - Petrosian 1963

Botvinnik - Petrosian

Mikhail Botvinnik

Botvinnik - Petrosian The

1963

World Chess Championship Match

New

In

Chess

2010

Contents

Foreword by Anatoly Karpov From the Editor

.

Without right of revenge

The Match

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

7

................................................... 8 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

...................................................... 13

From the match regulations . ........................................ 14 .

The Games . ...................................................... 15 Match table ...................................................... 16

GAME 123 March GAME 225 March

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .. . . 17 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

20

GAME 327-28 March ....................................... 23 GAME 4 30 March

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. ... ... . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

26

GAME 5 1 April. ........................................... 28 GAME 6 3 April. ........................................... 35 GAME 7 6-7 April

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 38 .

GAME 8 8 April. ........................................... 40 GAME 913-14 April .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 44 .

GAME 1015 April. ......................................... 48 GAME 1117 April.

.

.

GAME 1220-21 April GAME 1322 April.

.

.

GAME 1424-25 April

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

50 53 58 61

GAME 15 29-30 April ....................................... 66 GAME 161-2 May GAME 17 6 May .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

72 75

GAME 18 8-9 May ......................................... 78 GAME 1911-12 May

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.

. 80 .

GAME 2015 May .......................................... 84 GAME 2118 May .......................................... 87 GAME 2220 May .......................................... 88 Petrosian's view of the match

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

91

A symbolic game . ............................................... 103 .

5

Botvinnik - Petrosian Why did I lose the match?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Other Botvinnik-Petrosian games ..

.

.

.

.

.

.

The training match Botvinnik-Furrnan Game 1

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

107 109 123 124

Game 2 .................................................. 125 Game 3 .................................................. 126 Game 4 .................................................. 126 Game 5 .................................................. 127 Game 6 .................................................. 128 Game 7 .................................................. 129 Game 8 .................................................. 130

Mikhail Botvinnik's final notebook................................... 133

6

Foreword How quickly time flies ! Forty years ago, I, then a twelve-year old boy, was lucky enough to be a spectator at the world championship match between Botvinnik and Petrosian. In fact, I was not just a mere spectator, but was there in the capacity of a pupil at the famous Botvinnik school - we were attending a training session outside Mos­ cow, and visiting the games of the match itself was for us youngsters a remarkable inspiration for the future. Since I was already quite a strong player, a candidate master, my impressions of the match were not just those of a child (usually the strongest impressions of all ! ) , but also the reminiscences of someone who has given his life to chess. The match did not start in as exciting a fashion as Botvinnik's previous world championship matches with Tal. At first, there was a tough struggle, and although Botvinnik won the first game, Petrosian found within himself the strength to take the lead. Botvinnik only succeeded in equalizing the score in Game 1 4. The greater part of the match was already over, and the players had won two games each, with ten draws. However, levelling the score had cost Botvinnik too much energy (one must not forget that he was the older player by no less than 1 8 years ! ) . In several games of this phase of the match, especially with white, he obtained a positional advantage, but did not succeed in defeating Petrosian, with his unique and wily defensive tech­ nique. Botvinnik's reserves of strength were exhausted, and he had achieved no ad­ vantage in the match. Petrosian's style enabled him to hold the balance with mark­ edly less expenditure of energy. The 1 5 th game proved decisive, in which Petrosian won in subtle positional style. Like the true sportsman that he was , Botvinnik still tried to restore his position in the match, but lost two more games , after which the match was , in essence, over. The last few games were just a formality - Botvinnik was a realist and understood that he could not hope to save the match, and this explains the small number of moves played in the final three games. Subsequently, Botvinnik wrote that it was only possible to play 1 6 - 1 8 games at full strength in a world championship match. As to the question of why the rules specified 24 games , the only answer was 'Tradition ! ' . In his last years , The Patriarch understood this as 'a sign of respect to the players of the past' . Until now, there has never been a book in the Russian language with the games of this match annotated, and it is a pleasure to see this gap in our chess literature filled. President of the 'Mikhail Botvinnik Fund' Anatoly Karpov

7

Botvinnik - Petrosian

From the Ed itor Finding the means with which to publish this book has been even more difficult than usual in such cases. Our deepest thanks go to all those, without whose help the book would scarcely have seen the light of day: The governors ofVNIIZ (D. S . Savvaitov and Y. G. Shakarian) ; Sarkhis Pakhlian, Sergey Khaxarov, Daniel and Alexey Tkachenko, Nana Oganesian. Special thanks go to the son ofT. V. Petrosian, Vartan Tigranovich Petrosian.

A note on the Engl ish ed ition The English edition of this book contains a few editorial notes b y the translator, Steve Giddins (indicated with 'Translator's note' ) , as well as by the New In Chess ed­ itorial staff The latter have been indicated with ' Editors' note' .

8

Without right of revenge I never thought that I would end up putting together a book on this match. A couple of years ago, when this series of books on Botvinnik's world championship matches was already under way, it never entered my head. But despite his defeat, this match too, is part ofBotvinnik's chess heritage. It was a sunny May morning, during the 2 0 -minute break between lessons at a small town school in Byelorussia, when a boy I did not even know came up to me and exclaimed ' Oh, Botvinnik lost to Petrosian! ' . It was not the result itself which upset me, so much as the fact that this boy, who could not even pronounce the win­ ner's name properly, seemed to regard me as responsible for the defeat. . . When I told Botvinnik about this school episode many years later, he just said ' Don't worry about it! ' and smiled. I had the impression that he did not like to be reminded of this match loss, and it was a subject we hardly ever spoke about. However, when he occa­ sionally talked about the pre-match negotiations, and the story of Petrosian's sealed move in Game 5 , he did say that his nerves had been 'preyed upon' . Our venerable chess historian I . M. Linder recalls , after Botvinnk's victory over Tal in the return match of 1 9 6 1 , speaking to the winner in the corridors of the Moscow Central Chess Club. He asked who Botvinnik expected to meet as his opponent in 1 9 6 3 , and suggested that this was most likely to be Tal once again. 'Take a look at the games of Petrosian' , answered the five-time world champion. It is clear that Botvinnik already foresaw whom he would have to play against in the next cycle. However, even before this, Mikhail Moiseevich had expressed a very high opinion of the talent of his young rival. This is what he wrote in the article ' On the style of a chess player' , devoted to Petrosian's victory in the Soviet Championship of 1 9 5 9 : 'Petrosian's style reminds one of that of Capablanca, Flohr, and, maybe, Smyslov. What do these players have in common? Such players use their main asset, namely their superiority in positional understanding; consequently, they strive to obtain po­ sitions in which the elements of time and tactics are not of decisive importance, po­ sitions in which one can base one's play on a clear plan, leading inexorably to vic­ tory. With chess players of the Alekhine and Tal type, everything depends on dynam­ ics , and factors like time and combinational vision assume decisive importance. Naturally, though, players of this second type cannot achieve success without having a good positional feeling and technique, just as players in the first category have to be strong tacticians . . . It goes without saying that, if Petrosian were merely a special­ ist in positional play, and not a very fine tactician, he would never have been able to achieve such a convincing victory in Tbilisi ! ' More than 4 0 years have passed since the world title match between Mikhail Botvinnik and Tigran Petrosian. This encounter was the last such at the summit of the chess Olympus for the first Soviet world champion. 9

Botvinnik - Petrosian

The match is interesting for the fact that it featured two players who were signifi­ cantly apart in age (Petrosian was substantially the younger) . The book gives all the known tournament and training games between the two players. As is not hard to establish, the two players came into this match with a com­ pletely equal score. If one looks as the statistics of the match, one cannot help but be struck by the fact that the score was equal until the 1 5 th game, and it was only after his victory in this game that the scales turned in favour of Petrosian. Even then, it should be noted that the 1 6th game saw Botvinnik obtain the advantage, but the world champion did not make the most of his chances to equalize the score, after which tiredness began to tell on him. of course, it would be naive to think that the age difference was the sole reason for Petrosian's victory. A player of sharp tactical ability, he nevertheless turns to this aspect of his talent only when absolutely necessary. His style is clearly defensive, prophylactic , and hard for his opponents to fathom. It may be that it is precisely this appearance of passivity that caused Botvinnik the greatest problems. Petrosian very rarely loses , a precious quality in match play. Under FIDE rules , the right to a return match was withdrawn at the congress in Luxembourg back in 1 9 5 9 , but this rule only came into effect beginning with the 1 9 6 3 match. Botvinnik did not protest against this, although he considered it an un­ justifiable breach with long-established tradition. It is a strange thing how many great players have argued that the champion's right to a return match is unfair to the challenger, but having themselves become cham­ pion and then lost the title, they have suddenly remembered this ancient right - too late, however, for it had already been withdrawn. Another unusual feature of this match is that not one game began with the king's pawn. In my view, one of the reasons for Botvinnik's defeat was his poor realization of advantages - in a number of games in the first half of the match, having obtained a sizeable advantage in the opening, he could not 'put his opponent away' . This drains one 's strength, undermines one 's self-confidence, and generally shows inadequate sporting form. Boris Spassky, for example, expressed the opinion (based on his own observa­ tions) that Botvinnik did not understand Petrosian's style. Later, Spassky himself needed two matches, in 1 9 6 6 and 1 9 6 9 , in order to understand and solve the ' Petrosian problem ' . The last few games o f the match, which were short draws , merely served as an ac­ knowledgment of defeat by Botvinnik. Previously, there has not been a book about this match in the Russian language. Botvinnik, although he annotated seven games from the match, did not wish to pro­ duce such a book, whilst Petrosian, despite claiming to have annotated 1 7 - 1 8 of the games immediately after the match, sadly did not complete a book. Unfortunately,

10

Without rig ht of reveng e

all attempts to locate these annotations by Petrosian have failed, with the exception of a small number, which have appeared elsewhere in Russian-language books of Petrosian's games. In addition to the commentaries by the two players , in this book we have made use of annotations by some of their contemporaries, plus a new commentary by Garry Kasparov on Game 1 5 (taken from the third volume of his series My Great Pre­ decessors), whilst Vladimir Akopian has annotated a further five games, especially for this book. 1. U. Botvinnik,

Editor

11

The Match

13

From the match regu lations The match, and indeed the whole cycle, took place under the rules adopted by the FIDE Congress of 1 9 5 9 , although as far as the final match is concerned, these rules hardly differed from those applying previously. Once again, there would be up to 24 games , ending when one player reached 1 2 . 5 or 1 3 points. Once again, too, the World Champion needed only a draw to retain his title, whilst the challenger had to win the match to take the world championship. Each player had 2 . 5 hours for 40 moves. Adjourned sessions would last a maxi­ mum of 6 hours, at a time-control of 1 6 moves per hour. The player could postpone up to three playing days on grounds of illness, without any penalty. Any further postponements would cost him one point each (i.e. loss of the relevant game) . In analysing adjourned positions, each player was entitled to employ the assis­ tance of only one of his seconds. This second could be nominated at any time, but could only take up his duties two weeks after nomination. Spectators should note that no disturbance of the playing conditions (for example the lighting , use of flash photography, etc. - photographers please note ! ) was per­ mitted during play. The judges were equally strict with regard to noise. In extreme cases, if the noise reached an unacceptable level, play could be moved to a private room. The World Champion would receive a medal and a diploma from the world chess federation. The main difference from the rules used for previous contests was that, in the event of defeat, the World Champion would not have the right to a return match.

14

The Games

15

Match table til U

U

� e

�

�

�

0

0 z

Date

Opening

10-<

0

0 Z

1 0 IlQ

�

.... til

0

t!

�

Result

1

�

. ... til

0

�

0 IlQ

Match score

1

2 3 March

2

2 5 March

3

2 7 - 2 8 March

4

3 0 March

5

1 -2 April

6

3 April

7

6-7 April

8

8-9 April

9

1 3 - 1 4 April

1 0 1 5 April 11

1 7 April

1 2 20-2 1 April 1 3 2 2 - 2 3 April 1 4 24- 2 5 April 1 5 2 9-3 0 April 1 6 1 -2 May 1 7 6 May 1 8 8-9 May 1 9 1 1 - 1 2 May 20

1 5 May

21

1 8 May

2 2 2 0 May

16

Nimzo-Indian Defence IQueen's Gambit Accepted IQueen's Indian Defence En2lish Openin2 Griinfeld Indian Defence IQueen's Gambit Accepted En2lish Openin2 IQueen's Gambit Accepted Dutch Defence IQueen's Gambit Accepted IQueen's Gambit IQueen's Gambit IQueen's Indian Defence IQueen's Gambit Griinfeld Indian Defence Queen's Gambit Accepted Queen's Indian Defence Queen's Gambit Queen's Indian Defence Queen's Gambit Accepted En2lish Openin2 Oueen's Gambit Accepted

0 1/2

1

0

35

1 1/2

1 '12

'12

86

'12

'12

2

1

24

'12

'12

1 '12

48

0 1/2

1

2'12 2 1/2

2'12

'12

3

3

1 1/2

3

55

0 1/2

3'12

4 41/2

55

III

43

'12

'12 1/2

4 41/2

5 5 1/2

41

1/2 1/2

5

6

53

'12 1/2

5'12

6'12

54

1/2

'12

6

7

57

1

0

7

7

58

1 1/2

7 7 1/2

8 8 1/2

39

0 1/2 1/2

III

8

9

61

0

1

8

10

66

0

8

11

21

'12

1 1/2

8'12

1 1 '12

10

'12 1/2

9 9 1/2

12 1 2 1/2

40

27 52

54

10

1/2 '12

Game

GAME 1 2 3 March

Petrosian - Botvinnik Nimzo-Indian Defence Notes by M. Botvinnik. 1.

d2-d4

tLlgS-f6

2.

c2-c4

e7-e6

3.

tLlb1 -c3

i.fS-b4

4.

'ii'd 1 -c2

This continuation was popular in the 1 9 30s, but then went out of fashion. It offers White a guarantee against any sur­ prises, but it is hard for him to count on achieving anything real. 4.

...

d7-d5

5.

c4xd5

e6xd5

6.

i.c1 -g5

h7-h6

White decides that the best position for his knight will be f4. The rest of his plan then consists in developing the bishop to e2 , castling kingside and beginning the standard minority attack on the queenside. This is what happened in the game Reshevsky-Geller, 'Zurich Candi­ dates' 1 9 S 3 , when after 1 1 . . . .ifs White was able to carry out the aforemen­ tioned plan unhindered. However, Black's next move explains why theory considers that it is better to develop the knight to f3 .

11.

7.

i.g5xf6

If White wishes to avoid complications, this move is compulsory, for after 7 . .ih4 cS Black can attempt to seize the initia­ tive. This is well illustrated by the game Keres-Botvinnik, USSR Absolute Cham­ pionship, 1 94 1 . Now, however, piece exchanges are inevitable. 7.

...

'ii'dSxf6

S.

a2-a3

i.b4xc3+

9.

'ir'c2xc3

c7-c6

1 0.

e2-e3

0-0

11.

tLlg1 -e2

1

...

J:tfS-eSI

This simple move prevents the knight from moving to f4, and now the plan prepared by White, even before the game, turns out to be impossible to real­ ize. Perhaps this is the cause of Petrosian's uncertain play in the rest of the game? 1 2.

tLle2-g3

A natural decision - the knight needs to make way for the bishop! It is unlikely that 1 2 . tbc 1 was any better. 1 2.

...

g 7-g61

Only this energetic continuation, setting up the threat of . . . h6-hS -h4, can place White in a difficult situation. Any other move would allow him to complete his development unmolested. 17

Botvinnik - Petrosian

It must be concluded that the whole opening idea beginning with the move 1 1 . tt:le2 can scarcely be regarded with approval. 13.

f2-f3

This move only makes sense if White intends to castle queenside, in which case the pawn on f2 needs defending. Given that White later refrains (with ample reason ! ) from queenside cas­ tling, the move f2 -f3 turns out to be a waste of time, not to mention a weak­ ening. 13.

...

h6-h5

14.

�f1-e2

ltJbS-d7

16.

ltJg3-f1

17.

ltJf1-d2

ltJd7-fS

It is obvious that White must bring his king's rook into play, and no less obvious that Black should double his rooks on the central file. 17.

...

l:teS-e7

1S.

J:!.h1-e1

�cS-f5

19.

h2-h3

This move has only one point in its fa­ vour - White frees himself of the obli­ gation to calculate the consequences of the blow . . . h4-h3 at every move. But the positional drawbacks of the move are obvious - the square g3 is weakened and White loses the possibility of the advance g 2 -g4. 19.

...

l:taS-eS

20.

ltJd2-f1

ltJfS-e6

'ti'c3-d2 Sticking to waiting tactics , and not with­ out reason. If, for example, 2 1 . .id3 , then 2 1 . . . cS ! 2 2 . .ixfS cxd4 2 3 .exd4 'iYxfS H . .l:i.eS 'iYf4 2 S Jhei .l:i.c7 , and White has serious difficulties. 21.

Black does not hurry with the advance . . . hS -h4, all the while the white knight has the retreat square fl . However, in the event of 1 5 . 0 -0 there would immedi­ ately follow IS . . . h4 1 6 . tt:lh l 'tWgS (but not 1 6 . . . 'iYe 7 because of 1 7 .e4 dxe4 1 8 .fxe4 'tWxe4 1 9 . .ic4) and then, for example, 1 7 .e4 dxe4 1 8 .fxe4 .l:i.xe4 1 9 . .ic4 (or 1 9 . 'iYf3 tt:lf6) 1 9 . . . tt:lf6 2 0 . 'iYf3 .if5 with an obvious advantage for Black. Consequently, White decides to abandon castling and uses his king to defend the e3 pawn, whilst keeping the fl -square free for the knight. 15.

18

'it>e1-f2

h5-h4

21. ...

ltJe6-g7

I spent a long time looking at the move 2 1 . . . tt:lg S followed by a sacrifice on h3 . After the forced continuation 2 2 . �g 1 .ixh3 2 3 . gxh3 tt:lxh3 + the white king has three possible retreats.

Game 1

Analysis diagram

After 24.�h2 the game soon ends in mate: 2 4 . . Jhe3 2 S . ttJxe3 �f4 + 26. �h1 ttJf2+ 2 7 . � g l �g3 + 2 8 . �fl (or 28 .ttJg2 h3 2 9 . il.fl h2#) 2 8 . . . ttJh3 29 . il.d1 �g l + 3 0 . �e2 ttJf4#. After 24. 'iit>h1 �gS 2 S . 'it>h2 �g l + 26. �xh3 l:txe3 it was not easy to estab­ lish that, despite his two extra pieces , White is helpless - he has not a single satisfactory move. Finally, if 2 4 . 'it>g 2 , then 24 . . Jhe3 2S. �xh3 ( 2 S . ttJxe3 �gS +) 2 S . . .lhe2 . Even so, White can attempt to fend off the attack by means of 2 2 . �d1 (instead of 2 2 . �g 1 ) , although here too there would still follow 2 2 . . . il.xh3 , and after 23 .gxh3 ttJe4+ ! a possible line is 24.�g2 �gS + 2 S . �h2 ttJf2 2 6 . 'ii'd 2 (26.f4 �f6 , but not 26 .. .'iVfS 2 7 .il.g4) 26 . . Jhe3 2 7 .il.d 1 �f4+ 2 8 . �g2 ttJxd l 29Jhxd 1 �xf3 + 3 O . 'it>g 1 l:re2 3 Uhe2 l:rxe2 3 2 . �gS 'iYf2 + 3 3 . �h1 1:txb2 , and White must resign (this vari­ ation was pointed out by Y. Averbakh) . This would have been the logical con­ clusion of the game, and would graphi­ cally have illustrated the danger of such planless waiting moves as 1 3 .f3 and 1 9 .h3 . After the text, Black just has a positional advantage, and the game continues.

22.

J::.a 1 -d1

ltJg7-h5

23.

J:ld1 -c1

'tiVf6-d6

24.

J:lc1 -c3

ltJh5-g3

25.

Wf2-g 1

ltJg3-h5

26.

.ie2-d1

J:le7-e6

27.

'tiVd2-f2

'tiVd6-e7

Black has completed all the necessary preparations for an advance of his kingside pawns, without which the white king's fortress cannot be demolished. 28.

.id1 - b3

g6-95

29.

.i b3-d1

.if5-g6

30.

g2-g4

19

Botvinnik - Petrosian

It is highly interesting that, just at the moment when nothing was threatened, Petrosian, who has conducted the entire game with waiting tactics , suddenly and incorrectly launches into complications. Perhaps this decision was prompted by hopes , connected with the fact that his opponent was already in some time­ trouble? 30.

...

h4xg3

31.

tLlf1 xg3

tLlhS-f4

Evidently, White either overlooked or underestimated this move, after which resistance is short-lived. 32.

�f2-h2 'tWh2-d2

Of course, not 3 3 . dxcS on account of 3 3 . . . d4 and not 3 3 .l:hcs because of 3 3 . . . Ihe3 . 33.

...

34.

�d1-a4

38.

...

l::!.e6xe1

39.

f4xgS

�f6-e6

40.

f3-f4

l::!.e1-e2+

White resigns , since he remains a piece down. score: Botvinnik 1 Petrosian 0

GAME 22 5 March

Botvinnik - Petrosian Queen's Gambit Accepted Notes by T. Petrosian.

c6-cS

Also winning was 3 2 . . . ttJd3 . 33.

Otherwise 3 8 . . . iLxc2 and 3 9 . . . ttJd3 .

cS-c4

1.

d2-d4

d7-dS

2.

c2-c4

dSxc4

3.

tLlg1-f3

tLlg8-f6

4.

e2-e3

c7-cS

S.

�f1xc4

e7-e6

6.

0-0

a7-a6

7.

a2-a4

Merely provoking the advance of the b-pawn, which is in Black's favour. 34.

...

3S.

�a4-c2

b7- bS

Or 3 s . .ihbS l:tb 8 3 6 . �a4 ttJd3 . 3S .

...

tLlf4xh3+

36.

'ii;>g1-f1

�e7-f6

3 7.

'ii;> f1-g2

Botvinnik's favourite weapon, which,

37.

...

38.

e3xf4

20

tLlh3-f4 +

however, has not brought him great div­ idends. Therefore, although we devoted a fair bit of attention to this line in our preparations , it was also predictable that Botvinnik might also turn to more mod­ ern variations. In this, he would be able to utilize the services of his second Furman, a player who is extremely eru­ dite in opening theory, and always at the

Game 2

cutting edge, if not somewhat ahead of it, in terms of the latest developments in theory. The drawback of White's 7 th move is the hole created for a black piece on the square b4. Usually this piece is a knight, for which the b4-square can serve as a jumping-off point on the way to dS , or simply as a convenient observation post, from which it controls the blockading square in front of the isolated pawn, whilst at the same time somewhat ham­ pering the development of White's ini­ tiative on the kingside. 7. ...

The development of the bishop by means of 1 3 . . . b6 with the idea of 1 4 . . . .ib7 ap­ pears more active, but the modest text-move also has its merits. Within a couple of moves, the bishop can reach the long diagonal, whilst also attacking the a4 pawn, and the black pawns are slightly better placed on b7 and a6. 14.

tLJb1-d2

The knight strives for the square e4, but avoids the c3 -square en route, where he could be exchanged off 14 .

...

.td7-c6

15.

tLJd2-e4

tLJd5-f4

tLJbS-c6

16.

�e2-f3

�c6xe4

S.

'irVd1-e2

c5xd4

17.

'iYf3xe4

tLJf4-d5

9.

l::!. f1-d1

�fS-e7

The move 9 . . . d3 comes into consider­ ation, but this would change the charac­ ter of the position : there would no lon­ ger be an isolated pawn, something for which both sides are in fact striving. 10. e3xd4 11.

0-0

�c1-g5

Another pair of minor pieces have disap­ peared from the board, and again, both sides are happy with this outcome. I was satisfied with my position, since Black still controls the square dS , and White cannot create any serious threats on the kingside.

11....

tLJf6-d5

good move. After the exchange of dark-squared bishops , White's attacking chances are reduced, and the black knights achieve an effective deployment. A

12.

�g5xe7

tLJc6xe7

13.

tLJf3-e5

�cS-d7

But White too has no reason to complain - Black's position is solid, but somewhat passive, and by transferring his rook to the kingside via the third rank, Botvinnik is able to increase the pressure. 1S.

l::!.a1-a3

l::!.aS-cS

19.

l::!.a3-h3

tLJe7-g6

White must be careful, because he has no real attacking chances, whilst the black

21

Botvinnik - Petrosian

pieces are gradually freeing themselves. Consequently, whilst the second black knight is not in a position to replace his colleague, White seizes the moment to deprive Black of his main trump. 20.

�c4xd5

e6xd5

Taking with the queen would lead to an endgame with equal chances. But I thought that the time had come when it was possible to try to exploit the draw­ backs of White's position . . . 21.

�e4-f5

�d8-d6?

It was necessary to play 2 1 ...'ifa5 , at­ tacking the pawn on a4 and creating the unpleasant threat of 2 2 . . . 'ifd2 . Black did not need to fear the variation 2 2 . 'ifh5 h6 2 3 . tt:lxg6 fxg6 2 4 . �xg6 because of 2 4 . . . �d2 ! .

22.

1:th3- b3!

Black's inaccuracy has allowed White to seize the initiative again. The rook is ide­ ally placed on b3 . Naturally White does not fall into the simple trap prepared by his opponent: 2 2 . tt:lxf7 ? 'iff4. 22.

...

nc8-c7

23.

g2-g3

b7-b6?

The ending after B . . . tLlxe5 24.dxe5 'ti'e6 2 5 . 'ti'xe6 fxe6 did not appeal to me, nor did the line 2 3 . . . tLle7 24. 'iff4 f6 2 5 . tLld3 , so I reluctantly created a weak­ ness on b 6 .

22

24.

J:!.d1-e1

25.

�f5-f4

ttJg6-e7

Here this move is again strong, whereas other queen moves would have allowed Black good chances after 2 5 . . .f6 fol­ lowed by .. J:rc4. 25.

...

26.

ttJe5-d3

nc7-c2

Only two moves have been played since Black's ill-considered 2 3 . . . b 6 , and al­ ready the black position is under strong pressure. Exchanging queens loses a pawn, therefore Black must retreat. 26. ...

�d6-d8

27.

�f4-g5

ttJe7-c8

28.

'iVg5xd8

After this Black can breathe more easily, whereas 2 8 . 'ife5 ! with the idea of 2 9 .tLlf4 would have secured White a sig­ nificant advantage. I saw that this threat could be met by 2 8 . . . Uc 7 , but then after 2 9 J:re3 ( or 2 9 . �g2 ) it would not be easy for Black to defend. l:[f8xd8

28. 29.

a4-a5

30.

n b3- b8

b6xa5

This temporary sacrifice, followed by the rook penetration to the 8 th rank, looks very dangerous , but with his next move, Black easily forces a draw. 30.

...

nd8-f8!

31.

ne1-a1

ttJc8-e7

Game 3

32.

nbSxfS+

�gSxfS

33.

na1 xa5

nc2-d2

34. na5xaS

nd2xd3

35.

ttJe7-cS

naS-aS+

Draw.

score: Botvinnik 1 liz Petrosian liz

7.

ttJ b1-c3

Petrosian is true to himself and his cho­ sen plan. After 7 . 'iWc2 there would still be the chance to adopt more strategi­ cally complicated set-ups, whereas now the position is Simplified considerably. 7. ... S.

GAME 32 7 - 2 8 March

Petrosian - Botvinnik Queen's Indian Defence Notes by A. Kotov. In this game, the reader will not find dramatic turns, nor fierce attacks. Every­ thing proceeds quietly, perhaps too qui­ etly. Even so, the 'subtext', behind the outwardly simple moves , contains a great deal of tension. Petrosian lost the first game and defended skilfully in the second. Will he now level

ttJfS"e4

ttJc3xe4

The continuation 8 . 'iWc2 ttJxc3 9 . 'iWxc3 does not give White any advantage. S. ...

�b7xe4

ttJf3-e1

�e4xg2

10.

ttJe1xg2

d7-d5

11.

'iYd1-a4!

9.

the score? Will he head for a sharp strug­ gle, trying to draw even at all costs? 1.

d2-d4

ttJgS-fS

2.

ttJg1-f3

e7-eS

3.

g2-g3

So, it is to be a quiet Queen's Indian. No excited, fervent striving after revenge. 3. ...

b7- bS

4.

�cS-b7

�f1-g2

5.

c2-c4

�fS-e7

S.

0-0

0-0

An excellent move in all respects. White prevents the enemy knight coming to c 6 , and creates pressure on the queenside. Even so, the drawish tenden­ cies of the Queen's Indian should still predominate. 11. ...

c7-c5

12.

'iYdS-d7

�c1-e3

Now Black acquires 'hanging pawns' in the centre, which cause him a lot of worry. Play could have been equalized easily by 1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3 . ihd4 dxc4 1 4. 'iWxc4 'iWc8 . 13.

'iVa4xd7

ttJ bSxd7

14.

c4xd5

eSxd5

15.

ttJg2-f4

ttJd7-fS

1S.

d4xc5

bSxc5

23

Botvinnik - Petrosian

17.

l:ta1-c1

.i . I

17 .

...

dS-d4

In the long run, this move cannot be avoided. Botvinnik clarifies the central pawn formation, and then turns to a counterattack against White's pawn weaknesses. 1S.

�e3-d2

a7-aS

19.

tLlf4-d3

tLlfS-d7

20.

e2-e31

The correct plan, else the weak pawn on cS cannot be attacked.

23.

'it>g1-g2

h7-hS

24.

l:td1-d2

l:tbS-bS

2S.

tLld3-f4

tLld7-fS

2S.

'it>g2-f3

l:tfS- bS

27.

tLlf4-d3

tLlfS-d7

2S.

i.e3-f4

l:t bS-b7

29.

�f4-e3

f7-fS

It is hard to explain why Botvinnik pre­ ferred this move to the ' normal ' 2 9 . . . �f6 . Perhaps he wished to bring his king into play? In any events, Black now starts to experi­ ence difficulties. 30.

h2-h4

A new weakness, but which master

would allow h4-hS ? 31.

l:tc1-c4

tLld7- bS

32.

l:tc4-c2

cS-c4

This leads to the loss of a pawn, but after 3 2 . . . tL:ld7 3 3 .tL:lf4 the pawn on hS can­ not be defended. 33 .

�e3x bS

c4xd3 'it>gS-f7

20.

...

d4xe3

34.

l:tc2-cS+

21.

�d2xe3

l:taS- bS

3S.

�bS-d4

22.

l:tf1-d1

as-a41

Botvinnik answers the attack on the cS pawn with a counterattack against the b2-pawn. The position is about level, and for the time being, Petrosian's at­ tempts to disturb the balance in his own favour are unsuccessful. 24

hS-hS

In this critical position for Black, Botvinnik demonstrates great mastery. Not wishing passively to await develop­ ments, he energetically creates counter­ chances on the kingside. 3S.

...

g7-gSI

3S.

l:tcS-c4

l:t bS- b4

Game 3

3�

�c4xb4

�b7xb4

38.

.td4-c3

�b4-c4

39.

h4xg5

Otherwise the h4 pawn is lost. 39.

...

f6xg5

40.

�d2xd3

.te7-f6

41.

a2-a3

• • • • • • • •• • • • , · • • '. . . . . , �.� . --�. • • • • Petrosian made this move just before the adjournment, 'kindly' presenting his opponent with a difficult choice with the sealed move : a pure rook ending, or a rook and bishop ending. The answer came dIe following day. 41.

...

h5-h4

42.

g3xh4

.if6xc3

43.

�d3xc3

�c4xh4

44.

�c3-c5

�f7-f6

45.

�c5-b5

�h4-f4+

46.

�f3-e3

�f4-h4

47.

�b5-b4

�f6-e5

• • • • • • • • • • • • .t • • , • • • • • • • • • •

Now we see a fundamental point of Black's defence: he is not afraid of an exchange of rooks on h4, because the resulting pawn ending is a draw. Now there follows a series of waiting moves. 48.

�e3-d3

�e5-e6

49.

�b4-b5

�e6-f6

50.

�d3-e2

�h4-e4+

51.

�e2-f1

�e4-h4

52.

�f1-g2

�h4-g4+

53.

�g2-h2

�g4-h4+

54.

cJj>h2-g2

�h4-g4+

55.

cJj>g2-h3

�g4-h4+

56.

�h3-g3

�h4-d4

57.

�g3-f3

�d4-f4+

58.

�f3-e3

�f4-h4

59.

�b5-b8

�f6-e6

60.

�b8-e8+

�e6-f6

II .�. • • • • • • • • • • '. . . • • • • • • • •

•

61.

�e3-d2

A new attempt to realize his advantage. Petrosian exchanges the pawn on a4 for that on b 2 . However, now the paucity of the remaining material has its say. ...

cJj>f6-f7

62.

61.

�e8-e3

�h4-f4

63.

f2-f3

�f4-h4

64.

�d2-c3

�h4-h3

65.

cJj>c3-d4

�h3-h2

66.

b2-b4

a4xb3

67.

�e3xb3

�f7-e6

68.

�d4-c5

�e6-d7

69.

�c5-d5

�h2-e2 25

Bo t v i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

In Botvinnik's opinion, an inaccurate move. Simpler was the immediate 69 . . .'Jitc7 . 70.

a3-a4

83.

'l;;e7-f7

.l:l.e3-g3

84.

'l;;f7-e6

.l:l.g3-e3+

85.

'l;;e6-f5

.l:l.e3-g3

86.

f6-f7

.l:l.g3-f3+

Draw. score: Botvinnik 2 Petrosian 1

GAME 4 3 0 March Botvinnik - Petrosian English Opening

Notes by M. Botvinnik. White could cause his opponent more difficult problems by means of 7 0 . �b7 + . However, even then 7 0 . . . �c8 7 1 . �f7 �a2 7 2 .�c6 �b8 should lead to a draw.

1.

c2-c4

c7-c5

2.

tLlb1-c3

tLlb8-c6

This game shows that, if Black wishes to fianchetto his king's bishop, he should do so at once: 2 . . . g6 3 .tLlf3 �g 7 4.d4 cxd4 S .tLlxd4 and only now play S . . . tLlc6 .

70.

...

'l;;d7-c7

71.

a4-a5

.l:l.e2-a2

72.

.l:l.b3-b5

.l:l.a2-a4

3.

tLlg1-f3

73.

'l;;d5-e5

g5-g4

4.

e2-e3

74.

f3-f4

g4-g3

75.

.l:l.b5-b3

.l:l.a4xa5+

76.

'l;;e5-e6

.l:l.a5-a6+

77.

'l;;e6-e7

.l:l.a6-g6

• • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • •• .�. . � • • • • • • • • 78.

.l:l.b3-c3+

'l;;c7-b6

g7-g6

important subtlety! The threat of d2-d4-dS forces Black to take counter­ measures.

An

4.

...

tLlg8-f6

On 4 . . . �g 7 there would follow S .d4, and White can always advance d4-dS . This occurred in the game Botvinnik­ Polugaevsky (Moscow 1 9 6 7) .

7 9.

.l:l.c3-c1

g3-g2

80.

.l:l.c1-g1

cJ;>b6-c7

81.

f4-f5

.l:l.g6-g3

5.

d2-d4

c5xd4

82.

f5-f6

.l:l.g3-e3+

6.

e3xd4

d7-d5

26

Game 4

This pOSItIOn could arise from a well-known variation of the Caro-Kann, if Black played 6 . . . g 7 -g6 instead of the strongest move 6 . . . �c8 -g4.1 7.

c4xd5

S.

'ifd1-b3

ttJf6xd5

Practically forcing the exchange of knights , since the continuations 8 . . . ttJb6 9.dS or 8 . . . e6 9 .�gS and favourable for White. S. ...

9.

�f1-c41

e7-e6

Also possible was 9 . . . ttJdS 1 0 . �xdS e6 1 1 . ..txc6 + bxc 6 , but Petrosian chooses what is probably the better path. 10.

b2xc3

The result of the opening is that White has managed to win a tempo, as well as forcing the move . . . e7 -e6 , which weak­ ens the black position. 11.

�c1-a3

11....

.ig7-fS

ttJd5xc3

A cunning move, prepared in the quiet of my study. Black cannot play either 9 . . . ttJe4 1 0 . .txf7 + 'ot>d7 1 1 .'iVe6 + , nor 9 . . . .ig 7 1 0 . .ixf7 + 'ot>f8 I l .bxc3 ttJaS 1 2 . 'iVdS . 9. ...

attack for White. This trap, also prepared at home, was successfully dodged by Petrosian.

�fS-g7

If 1 0 . . . ttJaS , 1 1 . ..tb S + �d7 1 2 . 'iYa4 ttJc6 1 3 .dS ! ! exdS 1 4. 0 - 0 with a strong

This fairly well-known manoeuvre, which is the basis of Black's defensive plan, was underestimated by me in my preparation, and, quite frankly, I was surprised by the way in which Black avoided all the immediate danger. It was necessary to consider the situation carefully, and with this in mind, I re­ peated moves to gain time on the clock, but still failed to choose the best move. 12.

.ia3-c1

Tal played more strongly against Pohla ( 1 9 7 3 ) : 1 2 . 0 - 0 �xa3 1 3 . 'iYxa3 'ife7 1 4. �c l , and Black did not manage to liquidate the defects of his position. 12. 13.

�fS-g7 .ic4- b5

�cS-d7

Translator's note: Botvinnik is referring to the line 1.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.exdS cxdS 4.c4 tUf6 S.tUc3 tUc6 6.tUf3, and now 6 ...g6, rather than theory's preference 6...�g4.

27

Botvinnik - Petrosian

In the event of 1 3 ... 0-0 1 4.�xc6 bxc6 IS .�a3 .!:[e8 1 6.0-0 White's advantage is obvious. 14.

�c1-a3

15.

�a3xf8

�g7-f8

This exchange relieves White from the threat of ...ttJc6-aS , since there will be a queen check on b4. After 1 5 .0-0 ttJaS ! 1 6 .'ifa4 �xa3 1 7 .�xd 7 + 'iYxd 7 1 8 .'iYxa3 ttJc4 Black has nothing to fear. It is interesting to note that Black cannot equalize without the move 1 5 ...ttJaS , as proven in Andersson-Huguet, Las Palmas 1 9 7 3 : 1 3 ...�xa3 (without the move repetition) 1 4.'iVxa3 'iYe 7 IS .'iYb2 0-0 1 6.l:rfe l . 15.

...

we8xf8

16.

0-0

Wf8-g7

The opening surprise has not shaken my opponent's equanimity.

By incorrectly refraining from this varia­ tion, White allows his opponent full equality. 17.

...

b7-b6

18.

c3-c4

'i!Vd8-f6

19.

�b3-e3

nh8-e8

20.

tLlf3-e5

na8-d8

21.

na1-d1

'iVf6-e7

Here already, refraining from Simplifica­ tion by means of 2 2 .f4 f6 2 3 .ttJf3 'ifd6 would lead to a double-edged position. Therefore White wisely decides to force a draw. 22.

c4-c5

tLlc6xe5

Black must exchange on eS , in view of the threat ttJeS -c4-d6. 23.

'i!Ve3xe5+ 'iYe7-f6

24.

c5xb6

a7x b6

Draw.

score: Botvinnik 2 Y2 Petrosian 1 liz 17.

.ltb5-e2

The turning point. Despite his ingenious defence, Black would still have had to contend with further difficulties after the prosaic continuation 1 7 .�xc6 �xc6 1 8 .ttJeS 'iVdS 1 9.f3 ! ( 1 9 ...f6 2 0 .ttJxc 6 ) . Now the queen exchange o n b3 leads to a better endgame for White, whilst after the refusal of the exchange, the position of the enemy queen on b3 would be highly unpleasant for Black. 28

GAME 5 1 April

Petrosian - Botvinnik Griinfeld Indian Defence

Notes by T. Petrosian. Every chess player has games which he remembers especially well. One such for me is the fifth game of our match, and not only because it was my first victory

Game 5

over Botvinnik in official competitions. The game also saw a successful opening experiment, which overturned the ver­ dict of theory. 1.

c2-c4

g7-gS

2.

d2-d4

tiJgS-fS

3.

tiJ b1-c3

d7-d5

4.

tiJg1-f3

�fS-g7

5.

e2-e3

0-0

S.

�f1-e2

This modest move does not have a very good reputation. Opening books quote the game Sokolsky-Botvinnik (Lenin­ grad 1 9 3 8) as the model, demonstrating the best plan for Black, by which he ob­ tains an excellent position. However, the present example shows the fundamental weakness of many such opening books. Their authors do not seek new paths in well-known variations, they do not pay attention to the characteristic modern device of transplanting ideas from one opening to another, but simply dole out unjustified exclamation and question marks to extracts from old - of­ ten very old - games. On the basis of

2

such 'analyses' , they then announce cate­ gorical conclusions about the worth of this or that continuation. The variation 6 .�e2 is condemned by theory because of the system beginning with 6 . . . e 6 , as played by Botvinnik in the above-mentioned game. Many years have passed since that time. In the Griinfeld Defence, new ideas have been found and new lines worked out, which can appeal to the most varied chess tastes. V. Makagonov, for example, invented the system with 6 .b4, in which White tries to prevent the standard break . . . c7 -cS . But both practical and theoreti­ cal researches have shown that White's idea has serious drawbacks : the delay in development and the weakness of the long diagonal. Black can obtain a good game by either 6 . . .tiJe4 or 6 . . . b 6 . During my pre-match preparation, I de­ voted considerable attention to the Griinfeld Defence, realizing that it would play an important part in our match. One day, I had an idea : after 6 .�e2 , and the (to my mind) somewhat passive reply 6 . . . e 6 , why not take the game along the lines of the Makagonov System? After detailed discussions with my trainer, we came to the conclusion that we were onto something. This as­ sessment was confirmed during the world championship match itself, by the game Simagin-Osmanagic (Saraj evo 1 9 6 3 ) , in which White achieved excel­ lent chances. 2

Translator's note: this game continued 6.�e2 e6 7.0-0 b6 8.cxdS exdS 9.b4 c6 10.a4 J:te8 1 1.�a3 tLlbd7 12.bS cS 13.dxcS tLlxcs 14.tLld4 with advantage to White. Nowadays, the move 6...cS is considered the best equalizer.

29

Botvinnik - Petrosian

d5xc4

6. 7.

.ie2xc4

c7-c5

a.

d4-d5

e7-e6

If he wishes to obtain a more compli­ cated position, Black could play either 7 . . . ttJ fd 7 , taking the game into a Smyslov treatment of the Queen's Gam­ bit Accepted, or 8 . . . ttJe8 followed by . . . ttJe8 -d6 . I think that later in the match, Botvinnik would have chosen one of these continuations , but at this stage, he was happy to seek simplifica­ tions, especially when playing Black. 9.

d5xe6

White cannot maintain the pawn on dS , as after 9 . e4 exdS 1 0 . exdS the check 1 0 . . . .l:.e8 + is unpleasant. 9.

1:!Vdaxd1 +

10.

We1 xd1

ilcaxe6

11.

ii.c4xe6

f7xe6

But i t seems to m e that much depends on a player's mood. If there is the will to fight, then the position is full of life. In the absence of such will, even the sharp­ est position can quickly be dried up. To be quite honest, deep down I was not all that happy about this early simplifica­ tion. But what could I do? The opponent has his ideas too, and one must deal with them as one can. I should add that in the press, there ap­ peared stories to the effect that I had an­ nounced even at home beforehand that I would win this ending. of course, this is not true. To have said such a thing would have been immodest at best, and would have indicated a significant over­ estimation of my abilities and a corre­ sponding under-estimation of my oppo­ nent's. At this stage of the match, there were no grounds for such a feeling. All that actually happened was that, when we analysed this position in our prepa­ ration, I told Boleslavsky that the pros­ pect of this ending arising on the board should not be a reason to avoid the whole variation with 6 . �e2 .

It is said that some of the more impa­ tient members of the press corps were already starting to pack up, ready to go home. After all, those magical figures , the queens, have disappeared from the board, and how can there be any inter­ esting play after that . . . ? But in fact, the endgame which has arisen is very com­ plicated. True, it is hard to point to any definite advantage for either side, and it is quite likely that this endgame would end in another draw.

30

So how should one assess the position it­ self? White's paw.n structure presents a rather better appearance, thanks primar­ ily to the isolated black paw.n on e6 . of course, it is hard to imagine that White w.ill ever be able to create a serious threat to w.in this paw.n. But the weakness of an isolated paw.n is not only the danger of the paw.n itself becoming an object of at­ tack, but also that the square or squares in front of it can become stable outposts for the opponent's pieces. These consider­ ations justify one in considering White's position slightly the more pleasant. 12.

Wd1-e2

ttJ ba-c6

Game 5

If one were to remove all the knights from the board, then it is not hard to come to the conclusion that White's hopes of an advantage would soon be liq­ uidated. In reality, though, it is precisely the knight on e4 that will occupy an ideal position. For this reason, some commen­ tators recommended that Black should play 1 2 . . .t2Jd5 1 3 . t2Je4 t2Jd7 , although even here, 1 4. t2Jfg5 or 1 4 . .l:f.d 1 would re­ tain some initiative in White's hands. 13.

J:th1-d1

J:ta8-d8

One of several small inaccuracies , com­ mitted by my opponent in this game. Simpler was 1 3 . . . �f7 . 14.

J:td1xd8

llf8xd8

15.

ttJf3-g5

lld8-e8

One must also reckon with the fact that there are bishops on the board. Thus , the move 1 5 . . . e5 would make the bishop on g7 , if not outright 'bad' , then at least 'not very good' . 16.

ttJg5-e4

ttJf6xe4

He should have preferred the immediate 1 6 . . . b6. Then after 1 7 . t2Jxf6 + ..txf6 IS.ttJe4 Black would have the choice be­ tween retreating the bishop to g7 or e 7 .

19.

...

ttJb4-d5

It is obvious that the variation 1 9 . . . t2Jxa2 20 . .l:f.a l t2Jb4 2 1..�. xb4 cxb4 n . .l:lxa7 �xb2 2 3 . .l:f.b 7 suits White, despite the paucity of material remaining on the board; White would retain some win­ ning chances, whilst the opponent would be condemned to a prolonged defence. 20.

a2-a4

l:te8-c8

21.

b2-b3

�g7-f8

Over the last few moves, Black's choices have been largely forced, and so cannot be bad. Even so, it seems to me that White has achieved rather more over the period. He has completed the mobiliza­ tion of his forces and improved the posi­ tion of his queenside pawns. Black, meanwhile, has come to the conclusion that the bishop belongs on the a3 -fS diagonal. 22.

J:tb1-c1

�f8-e7

The commentators were unanimous in their condemnation of this move. But af­ ter 2 2 . . . .l:lc7 2 3 . t2Jg 5 , it is not easy for Black to defend, whereas after the text, he could subsequently have achieved ap­ proximate equality.

17.

ttJc3xe4

b7-b6

18.

J:ta1-b1

ttJc6-b4

19.

�c1-d2

1 9.a4 was also possible; this would probably have transposed into the game.

• .:1 •.• i • • . i. i. • • • .ttJ. • • • 1

t::,

•

23.

b3-b4!

. :1. • .• .i • . i. i. • l �• • t::, .ttJ. . • • • t::, • • • Undoubtedly the best move, sharpening up a position which appears totally 31

Bo t v i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

calm. I decided on the move only after considerable thought. Of course, if Black had chosen the natural B . . .';itf7 , then 24.bxcS bxcS would have given him a passed pawn on cS - an isolated pawn, it is true, but at first sight quite an active one. However, the sample continuation 2 S .'Jr>d3 ttJb6 2 6 .aS c4+ 2 7 .Wd4 l:[d8 + 2 8 .Wc3 l::t d 3 + 2 9 . �c2 ttJdS 3 0 .l:tb l looked sufficiently convincing to per­ suade me to play the move. On the other hand, I did not at first manage to assess the position arising after B . . . c4. 23.

...

24.

b4-b5

c5-c4

Depriving Black of the possibility of supporting the passed pawn by means of . . . a7 -a6 and . . . b6-bS .

• .1 . • . • .i • .i.i• . � .�. . � . i .t2J . • • • • � . • • 24.

...

�e7-a3

25.

�d2-c3

26.

l:tc1 -c2

ttJd5xc3+

27.

l:tc2xc3

i.a3-b4

28.

l:tc3-c2

28.

...

'lttg8-f7

After this, Black will sooner or later lose the c-pawn, whereas he had several ways to obtain more or less satisfactory play. For example: A) 24 . . . �a3 2 S . l:tc2 c3 ! 2 6 .�xc3 �b4 2 7 . �d2 l:tc4 2 8 .�xb4 l:txe4 2 9 .�d6 l::t xa4, which was recom­ mended by Averbakh, and which I ex­ amined during the game. I was planning to continue the struggle with 3 0 .f3 ; B) 2 4. . . c 3 2 S .�xc3 l:tc4 (2S . . . �a3 2 6 . l:tc2 :c4 (Editors' note : 26 . . . �b4 32

transposes to line A) 2 7 . Wd3 l:txa4 2 8 .l:ta2 l:txe4 2 9 . l:txa3 ttJxc3 3 0 .l:txa7 :eS 3 1 .�xc3 l:txbS) 2 6 . �d3 l:txa4 2 7 .�d4 or 2 7 .�eS . In all of these variations White retains the advantage, albeit only a minimal one. Black instead did not wish to force the play. Probably Botvinnik had not yet seen the regrouping of the white pieces, which I had to find before playing the committal move B .b4. The bishop co­ mes to c3 , blockading the passed pawn, then the knight from d2 attacks the pawn. Then White plays g 3 , to take the f4 square away from the enemy knight, and then drives it away by advancing the e-pawn.

�f7-e7

More chances were offered by 2 8 . . . eS , trying to bring the king towards the dS-square more rapidly. In the event of 2 9 .ttJd2 c3 3 0 .ttJe4 �e6 3 1 .f3 the win­ ning line given by Tal is not entirely convincing : 3 1 . . .h6 3 2 .�d3 l::r d 8+ 3 3 .�c4 l:[d2 34.'�b3 l:txc2 3 S .�xc2 �dS 3 6 . �d3 c2 3 7 . �xc2 Wc4 3 8 .ttJd2+ �xd2 3 9 .'iitx d2 , and when Black takes the pawn on a4, the white

Game 5

king will come to c4 and the game will be decided by the passed pawns on the kingside. However, by retaining all pieces on the board, Black can still resist, for example: 3 1 .£'3 AaS 3 2 .'ifild3 l:.d8 + 3 3 .'ifilc4 l:.d2 34.�b3 l:.d3 . 29.

lLie4-d2

c4-c3

The rook endgame after 2 9 . . . Axd2 30.�xd2 .l:.d8 + (3 0 . . . 'ifild6 3 1 .'ifilc3 �cS 3 2 .l:.d2) 3 1 .�c3 l:.d l would allow Black to put up a stubborn resistance. 30.

lLid2-e4

�b4-a5

31 .

e2-d3

J:[cS-dS+

32.

�d3-c4

J:[dS-d 1

The spectacular 3 2 . . . l:.d2 is refuted by the prosaic reply 3 3 . �b3 . 33.

lLie4xc3

l:[d 1 -h 1 ?

Now Black's position is completely lost. It is interesting to note that I feared the exchange most of all, considering that the rook ending, although it does not look very good, actually offers Black the best chance of saving the game. 34.

lLic3-e41

35.

c4-d41

Of course, he cannot allow the rook onto the 7 th rank. 36.

g2-g3

The safest route to victory. Although only a few moves remained to the time control, I also had little time, and con­ sequently there was no sense in allow­ ing complications, in which everything would depend on exact calculation. Even so, in the event of 3 6 . g4 hS 3 7 .gS h4 or 3 7 .�eS hxg4 3 8 .ttJf6+ �e7 3 9 .ttJxg4 l:.hS + 4 0 .We4 White should win. 36 .

...

�a5-b4

Rushing to the aid of the king ! 37.

�d4-e5

J:[h2-h5+

3S.

�e5-f6

�b4-e7 +

39.

f6-g7

e6-e5

40.

J:[c2-c61

•

• ••

J:[h1 xh2

Limiting to the utmost the mobility of the black king.

White's centralized army presents a stark contrast to Black's scattered forces. The rook in the corner, and the bishop on the empty diagonal as-e l , both seem to have abandoned their monarch to its fate. 35.

...

e7-d7

40.

...

41 .

g7-f71

J:[h5-h 1

The sealed move, and the start of the shortest way of realizing the advantage. From the square e 7 , the bishop defends a number of important squares: d6, f6 , and gS . After 42.l:.e6, which Black cannot pre­ vent, the bishop will be forced to leave his post. 33

Botvinnik - Petrosian

41 .

...

l:th1 -a1

42.

l:tc6-e6

�e7-dS

Also bad are both 42 . . .�b4 43 JheS l:rxa4 44. ttJf6 + �d6 4 S J id S + �c7 4 6 . l:rd4 and 42 . . . �cS 4 3 . l:rxeS l:rxa4 44.ttJxcS + etc. 43.

l:te6-d6+

45 .

...

l:ta1 -d1

After 4S . . . l:rxa4 I was planning to con­ tinue 4 6 . ttJ g S . There is then the nice variation 46 . . . � b 7 4 7 . ttJ e 6 4 8 . ttJd 8 + �a8 49 J ;[c8 !

�b8

�d7-cS

After 43 . . . �c7 44.�e8 the unfortunate bishop is lost at once. 44.

�f7-eS

45.

l:td6-c6

�dS-c7

Analysis diagram

With the S O . ttJ c 6 .

unanswerable

threat

46.

tLJe4-g5

l:td1 -dS+

4 7.

�eS-f7

l:tdS-d7+

4S.

�f7-gS

1 -0

of

score: Botvinnik 2 Y2 Petrosian 2 liz

34

Game 6

GAME 6 3 April

10.

e3-e4

Botvinnik - Petrosian Queen's Gambit Accepted

It is hard for White to count on achiev­ ing anything without this advance.

Notes by V. Akopian.

In our day, this has become a standard manoeuvre in such positions, aiming to take control of the strategically impor­ tant square e5 .

10.

1.

d2-d4

d7-d5

2.

c2-c4

d5xc4

3.

tLlg1 -f3

4. e2-e3

...

tLlf6-g4

tLlgS-f6

11 .

�c1-f4

'ifdS-f6 1

e7-e6

1 2.

�f4-g3

tLlg4-e5

5.

�f1 xc4

c7-c5

6.

0-0

a7-a6

7.

a2-a4

Of course, not 1 2 . . . 0-0 because of the push 1 3 .e5 . 13.

tLlf3xe5

tLlc6xe5

Nowadays the move 7 .�b3 is in fashion, as was played, incidentally, in the 20th game. 7.

...

tLlbS-c6

S.

'ifd1 -e2

�fS-e7

Petrosian only played this move once more, in Game 8 . In all the remaining games, he continued 8 . . . cxd4. 9.

d4xc5

Modern theory and practice revolves al­ most exclusively around the move 9 J:rd 1 . 9.

...

�e7xc5

It is interesting that two years later (Zagreb 1 9 65) , Portisch, as Black against Petrosian himself, played 9 . . . tbe4 here, and after 1 0 J:td 1 'ifc 7 1 1 . b3 tbxc5 1 2 .�b2 0-0 1 3 .tbbd2 �d7 1 4.e4 l::t fd8 1 5 . 'if e3 .te8 equalized without any trouble.

Now, having secured control of the square e5 , Black solves all his opening problems. It is therefore not surprising that in the 8th game, Botvinnik played 1 l .e5 instead of 1 1 .�f4. 14.

tLlb1-d2

On 1 4.'ifh5 there is 1 4 . . . �d4, whilst after 1 4.tbc3 0-0 1 5 J:tfd l b6 Black has comfortable play. 14.

...

0-0

15.

l:[a1 -d1

b7-b6

But not 1 5 . . . �d7 1 6 . 'ifh5 ! and now both 1 6 . . . �d4 1 7 .�xe5 'ifxe5 1 8 .'ifxe5 �xe5 1 9 . tbf3 �xa4 2 0 .b3 , and 1 6 . . . tbxc4 1 7 .tbxc4 �xa4 1 8 .'ifxc5 �xd 1 1 9 .lhd 1 l:rac8 2 0 .�c7 ! are bad for Black. 16.

'ife2-h5 35

Bo t v i n n i k - P e t ro s i a n

The move 1 6 .ltJb3 is ineffective because of 1 6 . . . .ib4. and Black has no problems after 1 7 . .ixeS "'xeS I S .f4 "'c7 . 1 6.

...

tiJe5xc4

The move 1 6 . . . .id4 also looks reason­ able. but Petrosian evidently preferred to avoid the complications that could arise after 1 7 .b4 .ib7 I S . .ie2 . preferring a safer route. 1 7.

tiJd2xc4

a6-a5

Increasing the scope of the light­ squared bishop. On 1 7 . . . .ib7 . I S .aS ! is strong.

18.

tiJc4-e5

Leading to further simplifications and a completely quiet position. More inter­ esting was I S . .ieS . Now after I S . . .... g6 1 9 .'ifxg6 hxg6 2 0 . .id6 :leS (after 2 0 . . . .ixd6 2 1 . :lxd6 .ia6 2 2 . ltJxb6 .ixfl 1 3 .ltJxaS .ixg2 24.�xg2 rhaS 2 S .l:tb6 ! Black faces a tough struggle for a draw) 2 1 ..ixcS bxcS 2 2 .ltJb6 l::tb S 1 3 .l:td6 White has an unpleasant initia­ tive in the endgame. Correct therefore is 1 S . . .... e 7 . After 1 9 . .id6 .ixd6 2 0 . ltJxd6 eS (both 20 . . . .ia6 2 1 .l:tfe l l:tadS 2 2 .eS . and 2 0 . . . .id7 2 1 .b3 eS 2 2 . ltJc4! are unsatisfactory) 2 1 .l:tdS .ie6 2 2 .ltJfS (unfa­ vourable for White is 2 2 ....xeS f6 1 3 .ltJfS fxeS 24.ltJxe 7 + �f7 2 S .ltJc6 .ixdS 2 6 .exdS �f6) 36

Analysis d iagram

Black has a choice offour continuations : A) 2 2 . . . ... b4 ? 1 3 . ltJxg 7 .ixdS (23 . . . �xg 7 24 ....xeS + 'iit g S 2 S .... g S + with mate) 24.ltJfS f6 2 S .... g4+ �f7 2 6 . 'ifg 7 + �e6 2 7 .'ifc7 ! l:tgS ( 2 7 ... .ixe4 2 S .ltJg 7 + �dS 2 9 . l:td 1 + etc.) 2 S .ttJg7+ l:txg 7 2 9 .exdS + �xdS 3 0 ....xg 7 and Black stands badly; B) 22 . . .... c 7 ? ! 2 3 .ltJxg 7 with the ini­ tiative after both 1 3 . . . 'if;lxg 7 24.'ifg S + �hS 2 S ....f6+ � g S 2 6 . :lxeS l:tfdS 2 7 .f4 . and B . . . .ixdS 24. ltJfS f6 2 S .exdS ; C) 2 2 . . . ... f6 ! ? 1 3 .l:td6 (but not 2 3 .:lxeS g6 24.ltJh6+ �hS 2S .... gS "'xgS 2 6 ..l:txgS �g7 2 7 .ltJfS + �f6) 1 3 . . JHdS 24Jhb6 (worse is 24.l:tfd l g6 2 S ....h4 "'xh4 2 6 .ltJxh4 l:txd6 2 7 .l:txd6 l:tcS) 24 . . . l:tdbS 2 S .l:txbS+ l::t x bS 26 . ... e2 .ixfS ( 2 6 . . . :lb4 ! ?) 2 7 .exfS "'xfS 2 S . l:te l f6 2 9 .... c4+ �hS 30 .... c7 'ifcs 3 1 . ...xaS l:txb2 3 2 .l:td l l::tb S and a draw will soon result; D) 22 . . . .ixfS (the most solid) 13 ....xfS "'b4 24.l:txeS (or 24.l:tbS "'xa4 2 s .lhb6 'ifd4 2 6 J:tbS a4 ! ) 2 4 . . ....xa4 2 S J:tbS l:tfeS 2 6 . l:txb6 'ifxe4 with a draw. 18 .

...

'W'f6-e71

19.

l:[d1-d2

f7-f6

20.

tiJe5-d3

e6-e5

Game 6

After his bishop is shut out, White him­ self must demonstrate some caution , as indeed he does. 21.

ttJd3xc5

'*i'e 7xc5

22.

'*i'h5-d1

�c8-e6

23.

.!:tf1-e1

l:ta8-c8

24 .

h2-h3

'*i'c5-b4

25 .

.!:te1-e3

26 .

b2- b3

26 .

...

I:tc8-c4

.!:[c4-c6

If 26 . . . :!xe4, then 2 7 .:!xe4 'iVxe4 2 8 . l:rd6. 27.

'it>g1-h2

b6- b5

Draw.

score: Botvinnik 3 Petrosian 3

37

B o tv i n n i k

-

Petrosian

6-7 April Petrosian - Botvinnik English Opening

GAME 7

Notes by V. Akopian. This was a heavy defeat for Botvinnik, since thanks to a poorly played open­ ing, there was essentially no real fight - White qUickly obtained a winning position and duly converted his advan­ tage to victory without particular diffi­ culty. 1.

c2-c4

g7-g6

2.

ttJg1 -f3

�fS-g7

3.

ttJb1 -c3

e7-e5

4.

g2-g3

ttJgS-e7

5.

�f1 -g2

0-0

6.

d2-d4

e5xd4

7.

ttJf3xd4

ttJbS-c6

S.

ttJd4xc6

The apparent gain of tempo resulting from this move is illusory, but even after 1 0 . . . �e6 1 1 .b3 'ifd7 1 2 J:te 1 .l:.ab8 1 3 .l::t c 1 ttJeS 1 4.f4 ttJc6 l S .ttJdS ttJe7 1 6 .�c3 , or 1 0 . . . l::t e 8 1 1 .h3 ttJeS 1 2 .b3 c6 1 3 . .l:.c 1 'ifc7 1 4.�e3 �e6 l S .'ifd2 , as was played later, Black is not assured of equality. 11.

h2-h3

�g4-e6

1 2.

b2-b3

'it'dS-d7

13.

�g1 -h2

.l:!.aS-eS

1 4.

l:!.a 1 -c1

f7-f5

15.

ttJc3-d5

'ot>gS-hS

16.

�d2-e3

Black's position is extremely unpleasant. White has no difficulty in finding ways to improve the position of his pieces, whilst Black can hardly do anything use­ ful. It is therefore hardly surprising that he quickly falls into a lost position. S.

...

ttJe7xc6

In the static position that now results, White's chances are superior, mainly be­ cause of his control of the strategically important square dS . Consequently, the alternative capture 8 . . . bxc6 would have been a more dy­ namic choice. 9. 10. 38

0-0

d7-d6

�c1-d2

�cS-g4

16.

...

�e6-gS

17.

'it'd 1-d2

ttJc6-dS

1 S.

l:!.f1-d1

ttJdS-e6

1 9.

ttJd5-f4

Now the knight has left c6, Black has trouble defending his queenside. 1 9.

...

ttJe6xf4

20.

�e3xf4

'it'd7-c8

21 . h3-h4

This and the follOwing move are typical of Petrosian's thinking - before under-

Game

taking the decisive action, he improves the position of his pieces still further. 21 .

...

l:[eS-e7

22.

.ig2-f3

.igS-f7

27.

...

f5-f4

2S.

'ifa5-d2

.ieS-cS

29.

lId5-d3

.icS-b5

7

Here, probably, 22 . . . b6 should have been preferred, although even then it is not hard for White to increase the pres­ sure, for example by 2 3 . b4 or 23 .hS . 23.

'ii'd 2-a5

.if7-eS?

He could avoid immediate catastrophe only by 23 . . .'ifb 8 , when on 24.cS Black still has 24 . . . b6. The text move is com­ pletely incomprehensible, since White also wins after the simple 24.'ifxa7 , for example : 24 . . . �c6 2 S .�xc6 bxc6 26 .txd6. .

24.

c4-c5

dS-d5

Desperation or oversight? Whatever the answer, 24 . . . dxcS 2 s .'ifxcs would not have been significantly better.

25 .

Now Black wins back the exchange, but the resulting endgame, a pawn down, is also hopeless for him. 30.

l:[d3-d4

f4xg3+ .i.g7xd4

31 .

f2xg3

32.

'ifd2xd4+ 'ii'e 7-g7

33.

'ifd4xg7+ rJo>hSxg7

34.

l:[c1 -c2

.l:[fS-eS

35.

rJo>h2-g2

rJo>g 7-fS

3S.

'ito>g2-f2

3S .

...

.if4-dS

In practice, the end of the affair, al­ though the game continues for quite some time. 25 .

...

2S . .idSxe7 27.

'ifcS-d7 'ii'd 7xe7

l:[d 1 xd5

Probably Simplest of all was 2 7 .e3 , pre­ venting 2 7 . . .f4, and in the event of 27 . . . d4 2 8 . exd4 f4 2 9 .1Ifc3 White should win easily.

.ib5-cS

Somewhat more stubborn was 3 6 . . . �a6 , but this could still not influence the re­ sult of the game. The further course of the game requires no comment. 37.

.if3xcS

b7xcS

3S.

l:c2-c4

rJo>fS-e5 39

B o t v i nn i k - P e t r o s i a n

39.

J:.c4-a4

J:.eS-aS

40.

J:.a4-a6

�e5-d5

41 .

b3-b4

�d5-c4

42.

a2-a3

�c4-b5

43.

J:.a6-a5+

�b5-c4

44.

e l .l:.xe2+ 44.�xe2 tDxh2 45.�e3 �f6 46.�e4, but 4 1 . . . .l:.c l ! and his activity secures Black from any un­ pleasantness. 41 .

...

42.

l:te6-e3

87-8S

After 42 . .l:.e5 tDg4 43 . .l:.xc5 tDe3 44.�f2 tDxfl 4 5 . �e2 l::t a l 46.l::txh5 tDxh2 the draw is inevitable. 42.

...

ttJf6-g4

43.

l:te3-83

8S-84

But not the immediate 43 . . . tDxh2 44.�xh2 l::txfl 45 .l:ha5 g 6 46.a4! :f2+ 4 7 . �h3 .l:.a2 48 . .l:.xc5 .l:.xa4 49.�h4 or 46 . . J:ta l 47 .�h3 .l:.h 1 + 48 .rJr>g2 .I:. a 1 49.e6 3 7 .l::t g 7 'it>f6 3 8 .l1h7) 3 3 .'it>b3 etc. Even so, this was better for Black than the game continuation. It is rather symptomatic; once again, Botvinnik turns out not to be psychologically pre­ pared for a lengthy and gruelling de­ fence in a slightly worse ending. For him, a man of action, it was extremely difficult to play such passive, 'dull' tech­ nical positions.

:g 1 xg5

• ••• • I i i • • •• •i.i. i • • • • .8 • • 8 • �. · We have a familiar structure once again (see the note to Botvinnik's 2 1 st move) , but here Black has not even managed to give White a weakness on c3 , and his position is strategically lost. 26.

...

ttJb6-c4?

:d 1 -g 1 ?

...

Too late! 27.

Such a natural move that both players overlooked the bolt from the blue with 2 7 .fS ! ! (Konstantinopolsky) 2 7 . . . exfS 2 8 .exfS 1::txfS (28 . . . gxfS 2 9 .:dg l ! +-) 2 9 .l::t d 7+ 'it>h8 3 0 .�d4+ tbeS 3 1 .:xfS gxfS 3 2 .f4 with carnage. However, I sus­ pect that Petrosian would have found this idea, had he thought it was neces­ sary to look for it. . . 27.

...

:e8-g8

28.

�c1 -c21

b7-b6

Konstantinopolsky 's idea , 2 8 . . . tbd6 29.f3 a6, followed by ... :d7 and ... tbf7 , is hardly any better. 29.

b2-b3

ttJc4-d6

29 . . . tbxe 3 + 3 0 . fxe3 would strengthen the pawn on f4. 30.

f2-f3

:f7-d7

31 .

:g5-g2

l:td7-d8

only

69

Bo tvinnik - Petrosian

beyond the machine. Incidentally, Fritz also points out the move 3 4.l:tg3 . 34.

3 2 . 82-841

It is interesting to see the way Petrosian methodically strengthens his position. For a start, he wishes to give Black an­ other weakness, on the queenside. After all, White has a bishop versus a knight, an additional advantage in the event of play taking place on both flanks, and furthermore, White's agile rooks can at­ tack the vulnerable black pawns. It is no less interesting to see what the computer wishes to do in this position; here one can get to see the stylistic dif­ ferences between various programs. The Hiarcs of around the year 2000, and the more modern Junior, both find 3 2 .a4! quite quickly, whereas Fritz stubbornly insists on playing the rook to the d-file. 32.

...

ttJd6-f7

33.

i.e3-c1 1

e6-e5

Understandably fearing 3 4.i.b2 ! and f4-f5 , Black rids himself of the weak e6 pawn, although the machine is not im­ pressed by this - within a few seconds, it announces the powerful retort: 34.

i.c1 -e31

'Iron Tigran' plays with iron logic! Meanwhile, the computer's reaction shows how far computers have advanced - at one time, such a pendulum ma­ noeuvre by the bishop would have been 70

...

e5xf4

According to Konstantinopolsky, more stubborn was 3 4 . . . c5 . Junior agrees, al­ though it does not change the general picture in the game (after, say 3 5 .aS) . One version of Fritz suggests 34 . . . a5 , af­ ter which a possible line is 3 5 .l:td2 ( 3 5 .l:tg3 ! ?) 35 . . . l:txd2+ 3 6.�xd2 l:td8+ 3 7 .�e2 with the threat of l:tc l -c6 (and if . . . c7 -c5 , Black will be killed by the queenside pawn weaknesses) . 35.

i.e3xf4

36.

l:lg2-d21

l:ldS-d7

An important move, once again found in

synchronization with the machine! The exchange of a pair of rooks is useful: now it will be easier to create the desired second weakness on the queenside. 36.

...

l:ld7xd2+

37.

�c2xd2

l:lgS-dS+

3S.

�d2-e2

c7-c5

39.

84-851

An accurate continuation of the plan. 39.

...

l:ldS-d7

40.

85xb6

87xb6

41 .

l:lg1 -81

�h7-g7

42.

l:l81 -861

The sealed move - also a 'machine move', forcing the black rook to occupy

Game

a passive position. The improvement in computer technique is astonishing, of course, but so is Petrosian's mathemati­ cal accuracy. It is the sort of logic that can be explained to a computer - all of White's moves fit into a single plan, which the machine can understand. After the resumption, there followed: 42.

...

l:ld7-b7

42 . . . bS ? 4 3 . ':'c6 . 43.

l:la6-a8

�g7-f6

44. l:la8-c8

Hiarcs chooses the dual 44.':'£'8 , and Fritz 44.':'g8 , but the key idea is one and the same, and the assessment identical. 44. ...

time solving this problem - variations with material gain are the hardest things for the computers of the 1 9 90s to turn down, and only after working through a forest of variations does the machine gradually settle on 4S .�e3 ! It hardly needs saying that the modern-day Junior and Fritz solve this riddle almost at once! ...

tLle5-d7

46.

l:lc8-c6+

�6-f7

47.

e4-e51

45.

'The try 43 . . . bS 44.':'c8 c4 does not save Black, because of 4S .b4! with the threat of e4-eS ' (Konstantinopolsky) . Or sim­ ply 4S .bxc4 bxc4 (4S . . . b4 46.�c l !) 46.':'xc4 etc.

15

Only Hiarcs wants to play 47 . .ic7 . 47.

...

tLld7-f8

48.

l:lc6-f6+

�f7-g7

49.

�e3-e4

b6-b5

50.

l:lf6-c6

�g7-f7

Or S O . . . c4 S I .bxc4 bxc4 S 2 .e 6 . 51 .

l:lc6xc5

tLlf7-e5

Or 44 . . . tl.e7 4S .':'b8 l:1e6 46 . .ic7 +- . And now we see the difference between the human player and the computer. . . at least, the computer of the last century!

After winning a pawn, Petrosian easily conducts the game to victory.

45.

�e2-e31

...

No hesitation! To the human, it is obvi­ ous that after the pawn grab 45 .heS + ..ti>xeS 46.':'c6 ? (46.'.ti>e3 !) Black gets counterplay - 46 . . . ..ti>d4! etc. But the older versions of Hiarcs spent a long

51 .

...

tLlf8-e6

52.

l:lc5-d5

�7-e7

53.

�f4-e3

l:lb7-b8

54.

l:ld5-d6

b5-b4

55.

l:ld6-a6

l:lb8-b5

56.

l:la6-a7+

�e7-e8

57.

f3-f4

�e8-f8

58.

f4-f5

Black reSigns. score: Botvinnik 7 Petrosian 8 71

Bo tvinnik - Petrosian

GAME 1 6 1 -2 May Botvinnik - Petrosian Queen 's Gambit Accepted

Notes by M. Botvinnik. 1.

d2-d4

d7-d5

2.

c2-c4

d5xc4

After his setback in Game 1 4, Petrosian abandons the Queen's Gambit Declined and returns to the accepted gambit. 3.

lLlg1 -f3

lLlgS-f6

4.

e2-e3

e7-e6

5.

i.f1 xc4

c7-c5

6.

0-0

a7-a6

7.

a2-a4

Thus far all as in Games 2 , 6 , 8 and 1 0 .

was seen in Game 1 0 . Now White can­ not hope to achieve the advance d4-dS and his further plans will instead be connected with an attack on the kingside, exploiting the absence of the knight from f6 . 1 2.

i.c4-d3

White realizes that, after . . . ltJc6-b4, he will no longer be able to transfer the king's bishop to the diagonal b I -h7 . This was shown in the later games Petrosian-Spassky, Alekhine Memorial 1 9 7 1 , which saw 1 2 .... e4 ltJcb4 1 3 .ltJeS l:!.a7 , and G.Kuzmin-Suetin, Sochi 1 9 7 0 , which went 1 2 .h4 ltJcb4 1 3 .hS h6.

7.

...

lLlbS-c6

1 2.

...

lLlc6-b4

S.

'ti'd1 -e2

c5xd4

1 3.

i.d3-b1

i.c8-d 7

The move 8 . . . .ie7 passed its test suc­ cessfully in Game 6 , but Black experi­ enced problems in Game 8 . 9.

l:f1 -d1

i.fS-e7

The reply 9 . . .... c7 was seen in the games Botvinnik-Keres (Leningrad, 1 94 1 ) and Botvinnik-Euwe (Groningen, 1 946) . 1 0.

e3xd4

11.

lLlb1 -c3

0-0

In Game 2 , White played 1 1 . .igS . 11.

...

lLlf6-d5

A strengthening of the variation com­ pared with the move 1 1 . . . ltJb4, which 72

The move 1 3 . . . ltJf6 , seen in a game Gligoric-Kortchnoi, Vrnj acka Banj a 1 9 6 5 , also led to some advantage for White. 1 4.

'ti'e2-e4

Stronger than 1 4.ltJeS . 1 4.

...

g7-g6

Also after 1 4 . . . ltJf6 I S . "'h4 Black would soon be forced to weaken the pawn pro­ tection around his king. 1 5.

lLlf3-e5

i.e7-f6

1 6.

'iVe4-f3

i.f6-g7

1 7.

'ti'f3-g3

i.d7-eS

1 S.

h2-h41

lLlb4-c6

Game

1 9.

tbe5-f31

It is important to avoid exchanges. so as to maintain the tension. 1 9.

...

f7-f6

In order to take control of the square gS . Black is forced to weaken the squares e6 and g6. 20.

tbc3xd5

e6xd5?

On 20 . . ....xdS ! ? the reply 2 1..�. a2 is un­ pleasant. but now Black loses the strongpoint on dS and White's posi­ tional advantage becomes obvious. 21 .

h4-h5

tbc6-e7

On 2 1 . . .gS there could already follow 2 2 .tbxgS fxgS 2 3 .... d3 . 22.

h5xg6

This exchange eases Black's defence. and consequently there was no need to hurry with it. but White was already thinking about saving on thinking time. in the run-up to the time control. 22.

...

�e8xg6

23.

tbf3-h4

�g6xb1 "d8-d7

24.

1:[a 1 xb1

25.

b2-b3

25 .

...

27.

"f3-g3

tbe7-c6

28.

tbh4-f3

1:[f7-e7

Black uses his main trump. directing his rook to the square e4. where it will oc­ cupy an extremely good position. 29.

�c1 -f4

1:[e7-e4

30.

tbf3-e5

tbc6Ke5

This gives White a dangerous passed pawn. but after 3 0 . . .... e6 there was the pOSSibility of 3 l .tbxc6 "'xc6 3 2 .f3 l:[e2 33 .l:[bc I with a threatening initiative.

He cannot play the immediate 2 5 . . . tbfS because of 2 6 .... g4. but now Black is preparing this move. and measures must be taken to prevent it. 26.

"g3-f3

f6-f5

1:[a8-e8

31 .

d4xe5

32.

f2-f3

1:[e4-e2

33.

1:[d 1 -e1

1:[e2-a2

It seems favourable for Black to keep the rook on the 7th rank. but without the support of its other pieces. it cannot cre­ ate threats against the white king. and the rook turns out to be out of play. As will become clear subsequently. Black's pOSition is critical. However. as in several other games of the match. I played uncertainly and squandered my advantage.

34. 1:[f8-f7

16

�f4-g5

Tempting is 34.l:rbc I . activating the rook. For example. 3 4 . . . l:[e6 3 S .�gS (with the threat of 3 6 .�f6) 3S . . . l:tg6. and now the breakthrough is decisive: 3 6 .e6 .l:he6 3 7 .�f6 l:rxf6 (3 7 . . . .I:lxe I + 3 8 . l:[xe I ) 3 8 .l:rc7 f4 (or 3 8 . . J:tg6 73

Botvinnik - Petrosian

3 9 .'ifxg6 'ifxc7 40 . .l:eS#) 39 . .l:eS + .l:f8 40 . .l:xfS + 'it>xfS 4 1 .'ifxf4+. In all of these variations, the absence of the black rook from the decisive theatre of operations is a key factor. 34.

...

35.

�g5-f6

d5-d4

It was also not bad to start with 3 S . .l:bd 1 . 35 .

...

'ifd7-f7

36.

J:[b1 -d1

'iff7-g6

A necessary decision; Black cannot save the pawn on d4 anyway, and just strives to secure his king position. 37.

'ifg3xg6

h7xg6

38.

.i.f6xg7

�g8xg7

4 1 .eS'" l:[xg2+ with perpetual check, but White still had to play the last move of the time control. 40.

...

41 .

J:[e1 -g1

J:[c8-c2

Played out of inertia. After 4 I .e7 Black would again have had nothing better than perpetual check, whereas now White has still has some work to do. . . 41 .

...

J:[c2-d2 '>tg7-f8

42.

J:[d 1 -e1

43.

e6-e 7 +

'>tf8-e8

44.

�h2-g3

d4-d3

The storm-clouds are gathering over the white position, but in home analysis , I managed to find the only saving move. 39.

e5-e6

It is hard to explain why I refrained from the natural continuation 3 9 . .l:xd4! .l:cS 40.'�h2 .l:cc2 4 1 ..l:g 1 with an extra pawn and good winni ng chances. It ap­ pears that in time-trouble, the advance of the passed pawn looked like a reliable answer to the threat of .l:eS-cS-c2 , but in reality, Black is merely presented with an extra tempo to carry out this manoeuvre. 39.

...

40.

�g1 -h2

J:[e8-c8

And now it was already time to settle for the inevitable draw, 4 0 . e 7 .l:cc2 ! 74

45.

J:[e1 -e3

46.

�g3-f4

J:[a2-b2

The whole point is that there is a threat of47 . .l:h 1 . 46.

...

47.

J:[g1 -d 1

J:[d2xg2

O n 47 . .l:h I Black could already reply 4 7 . . . .l:h2 . 47.

...

J:[b2-d2

Of course, not 47 . . . d2 because of 4S . .l:h l . In the event of 47 . . . .l:xb3 4S . .l:exd3 .l:xd3 49 . .l:xd3 the draw is equally likely after both 49 . . . �e7 S O . .l:b3 �f6 5 1 ..l:b6+ and 49 . . ..l:b2 50 . .l:d6 �e7 S l ..l:xg6.

Game

48.

l:td1 xd2

l:tg2xd2

3.

liJg1 -f3

b7-b6

49.

'if.?f4-g5

l:td2-d1

4.

e2-e3

.ic8-b7

5.

a2-a3

Black could even lose: 49 . . . l:.g2+ 50.f6 d2 5 1 .l:.d3 .

17

This modest move has brought Petrosian success on more than one occasion. Nei­ ther Smyslov (XXVIII USSR Champion­ ship, Moscow 1 96 1 ) , nor Keres (Zurich 1 96 1 ) managed to solve their opening problems. 5 5.

...

d7-d5

In the event of 5 . . . c5 6.tLlc3 there is an unpleasant threat of d4-d5 . 6.

50.

b2-b4

�g5-f6

But not 5 0.xg6 because of 5 0 . . . l:.g 1 + 5 1 .f6 d2 5 2 .l:.c3 l:.g6+ ! . 50.

...

f5-f4 l:td1 -c1

51 .

l:te3-e4

52.

l:te4-d4

l:tc1 -c6+

53.

'itf6-g5

l:tc6-c3

54.

'itg5-f6

Draw. score: Botvinnik 7 Y2 Petrosian 8 Y2

6 May Petrosian - Botvinnik GAME 1 7

Queen's Indian Defence

Notes by V. Kortchnoi.

5

1.

d2-d4

liJg8-f6

2.

c2-c4

e7-e6

A new idea. In his game with Smyslov,

Petrosian exchanged on d5 . Here, White tries to seize space on the queenside as quickly as possible. This plan has already proved its worth in several other open­ ings - one only has to think of the Griinfeld and Nirnzo-Indian Defences. 6.

...

d5xc4

Botvinnik hurries with this exchange, seemingly over-rating the threat of c4-c5 . In actual fact, after 6 . . . tLlbd7 7 .c5

Editors' note: In both games Kortchnoi mentions. White had played 4.llJc3 instead of 4.e3 . This also puts the comment after 6.b4 in another light. Keres in fact won the Zurich game, although he did experience some problems in the opening.

75

Bo t vinnik - Pe t rosian

as White can hardly hope to achieve even a minimal advantage. 7.

�f1 xc4

�fS-e7

He should have played 7 . . . �d6 , leaving the square e7 free for the queen , and preparing both . . . c7 -c5 and . . . e6-e5 . S.

ttJ b1-d2

9.

l:ta1 - b1

0-0

Petrosian tries to prevent the simplifying move . . . c7 -c5 . He is evidently dissatis­ fied with the small advantage available to White after 9 .�b2 c5 1 0 . dxc5 bxc5 l 1 . b5 a 6 . 9.

...

ttJ bS-d7

1 0.

0-0

l:taS-bS

1 1.

b4- b5

With this move, White assures himself a small positional advantage, thanks to his central pawn superiority and the bad position of the knight on d7 . The battle would have been more complex after 1 1 .�b2 or 1 1 .�e2 , with the intention of plaCing a knight on c4. 1 1 . ...

c7-c5

1 2.

b5xc6

�b7xc6

1 3.

a3-a4

76

13.

...

�dS-c7

The slow plan chosen by Black ends up leading him to the edge of defeat. The correct idea was to exchange one of the knights , so as to ensure the other a de­ cent square. For example, 1 3 . . . tLle4 1 4.�b2 tLlxd2 1 5 . tLlxd2 tLlf6 1 6 . tLlf3 �d6 with approximately equal chances. 1 4.

�c1 - b2

�c7-b7

1 5.

l:t b 1 -c1

a7-a6

Botvinnik consistently carries out his plan of creating a passed pawn on the queenside, but White 's superiority in the centre proves the more important factor. 1 6.

l:tf1 -e1

b6-b5

1 7.

a4 xb5

a6xb5

Game

17

With 1 7 . . . i.xbS , Black could achieve the exchange of one of the bishops: 1 8 .i.a2 i.e2 . Even so, White would retain some advantage, e.g. 1 9 . .l:txe2 'ifxb2 2 0 .ttJc4. 1 S.

�c4-d3

.l:l.fS-eS

The loss of an important tempo; better was 1 8 ... ttJb6, and if 1 9 .e4, then 1 9 ... ttJc4 with the exchange of one of the knights. 1 9.

e3-e4

ttJd7-b6

20.

'iVd1 -e2

ttJb6-a4

21 .

�b2-a 1

�c6-eS

22.

.l:l.c1 xeS

.l:l.bSxcS

23.

d4-d51

23 .

...

ttJf6-h5?1

None of the various alternatives offers Black a fully satisfactory defence. For ex­ ample: 23 . . . ttJc3 24.hc3 .l:.xc3 2 S .d6 i.d8 2 6 .eS ttJdS 27 ....e4 g6 2 8 .ttJd4, with a clear positional superiority for White. Or 2 3 . . . exdS H.eS (as Simagin correctly pointed out, 24.exdS ttJxdS 2 S .'ifeS is less convincing because of 2S . . .f6 26 .... e6+ i.f7 2 7 .i.xh 7 + 'itf8) H . . . ttJe4 2 S .ttJxe4 dxe4 2 6 .i.xe4 i.c6 2 7 .i.fS .l:.d8 2 8 .e6 with a strong attack.

27.

d5xe6?

Losing almost all his advantage. Un­ doubtedly stronger was 2 7 .eS ! and since Black cannot take on dS because of 2 8 .'iffS , White will advance the pawn to d6 on the follOwing move. Now Botvinnik manages to save the game with energetic play. 27.

...

f7xe6

2S.

e4-e5

�e7-b4

29.

.l:l.e1 -b1

A somewhat better choice was 2 9 . ': d 1 , and if 2 9 . . . i.g 6 , then 3 0 .'ife2 , reminding the opponent of his knight stuck on the edge of the board. 29.

...

�eS-g6

30.

ttJd2-e4

'iVb6-b7

31 .

f2-f3

�g6xe4

32.

'iVd3xe4

...

On 3 2 .fxe4 Black can probably draw by means of 3 2 . . . i.cS . 32.

...

'iVb 7xe4

33.

f3xe4

�b4-c5

34.

.l:l.b1 xb5

g7-g5

24.

g2-g3

ttJa4-c5

35.

..ti>g 1 -f1

�c5xd4

25.

ttJf3-d4

ttJc5xd3

36.

�a 1 xd4

.l:l.eS-c1 +

26.

'iVe2xd3

'iVb7-b6

37.

..ti>f1 -g2

g5-g41

3S.

�d4-e3

.l:l.c1 -c2+

39.

�g2-g 1

.l:l.c2-c4

On 26 . . . .l:.d8 Simagin points out the fol­ lowing variation: 27 .... 0 ttJf6 2 8 .dxe6 fxe6 2 9 .eS "'xO 3 0 .ttJ2xO , and White should win.

Draw score: Botvinnik 8 Petrosian 9 77

Bo tvinnik - Petrosian GAME 1 8 8-9 May Botvinnik - Petrosian Queen 's Gambit

Nores by V. Akopian. This is a difficult game for the annotator. Dictated by the match situation, both play­ ers went in for almost endless positional manoeuvring, both in the rniddlegame and endgame, and little scope remains for the exercise of imagination.

1 5.

...

g7-g6

Now a complex manoeuvring battle en­ sues, in the course of which both players try to locate vulnerable points in the op­ ponent's position.

1.

d2-d4

d7-d5

2.

c2-c4

e7-e6

3.

lbb1 -c3

�fS-e7

4.

c4xd5

e6xd5

1 6.

.l:[81 -c1

lbd7-b6

5.

�c1 -f4

c7-c6

1 7.

b2-b3

'fi'c8-d7

6.

e2-e3

�c8-f5

1 S.

lbc3-e2

lbd6-c8

7.

g2-g4

�f5-e6

S.

h2-h3

Nowadays, 8 .h4 ! ? is also played here. S.

...

9.

lbg1 -f3

lbgS-f6

In Game 1 4, Botvinnik chose 9 .�d3 , af­ ter which Petrosian replied 9 . . . cS . 9.

...

lbbS-d7

1 O.

�f1 -d3

lbd7-b6

11.

'ifd1 -c2

lbb6-c4

1 2.

�e1 -f1

Another continuation was 1 2 .bc4 dxc4 1 3 .e4, when Black's two bishops compen­ sate for his opponent's active piece play. 1 2.

...

lbc4-d6

1 3.

lbf3-d2

'ifdS-c8

1 4.

�f1 -g2

lbf6-d7

1 5.

f2-f3

Here White had the interesting possibility I S .�xh 7 . After I S . . . g6 1 6 .�xg6 fxg6 1 7 .�xd6 �xd6 1 8 ....xg6+ r:J;; e 7 1 9 .... g 7 + �f7 2 0 .e4 "'g8 2 1 . ...xg8 ':axg8 2 2 .eS �b4 2 3 .f4, the armada of white pawns looks imposing. 78

1 9.

82-84

87-85

20.

�f4-g3

�e7-d6

21 .

lbe2-f4

Here, it seems to me that White should have exchanged bishops - 2 1 .�xd6 with the possible continuation 2 1 . . . tLlxd6 22 ....cS tLlbc8 2 3 .tLlf4, or even 2 3 .e4. However, play would still proceed at a similar tempo. 21 .

...

lbc8-e 7

22.

lbd2-f1

h7-h5

23.

�d3-e2

Preparing the transfer of the knight to d3 . Another line worthy of attention was 2 3 .tLlxe6 "'xe6 24.�xd6 "'xd6 2 S .gS . 23.

...

h5-h4

24.

�g3-h2

g6-g5

25.

lbf4-d3

On 2S .tLlhS Botvinnik probably did not like the exchange sacrifice 2S . . . .:xhS 26.bd6 "'xd6 2 7 .gxhS tLlfS , but by 2 8 .':h2 ! followed, for example, by 28 . . . tLld7 29 .�d3 tLlh6 30.�h l , Black still has to demonstrate his compensation.

Game I B

34.

g1 -f2?

...

Instead of this dubious transfer of the king to the centre, where it does not feel terribly comfortable with so many pieces still on the board, the simple 34.exdS �xdS 3 S .b4 deserved attention, with some pressure in the endgame.

2S.

...

26.

'iVc2-d2

'iVd7-c7

White does not benefit from 2 6 .�xd6 'tWxd6 2 7 .tbcS 'tWc7 2 8 .b4 axb4 2 9 J 1b l tbd7 3 0 .tbxe6 fxe6 3 1 .ttxb4 eS , or al­ ternatively, 3 0 .ttxb4 tbxcs 3 1 . dxcS tbg6.

34.

...

eS-f7

3S.

f2-e3

J:l.hS-eS

36.

J:l.h2-d2

f7-g7

37.

e3-f2

dSxe4

3S.

f3xe4

ttJd7-fS

Whilst White wastes time on king ma­ noeuvres, Black manages to post his pieces favourably and seize the initia­ tive.

...

ttJb6-d7

39.

ttJd3-e1

27.

i.h2-g1

ttJe7-g6

40.

ttJe1 -g2

J:l.dS-d7

2S.

i.g 1 -h2

ttJg6-e7

41 .

i.d 1 -c2

i.e6-f71

42.

ttJf1 -e3

26.

More interesting was 28 . . .fS . 29.

i.e2-d 1

b7-b6

30.

g2-g1

f7-f6

By means of 3 0 . . .fS it was possible to prevent the following advance, but Petrosian evidently does not consider this necessary. 31 .

e3-e4

i.d6xh2+

Finally an exchange! 32.

'iVd2xh2

'iVc7xh2+

33.

J:l.h1 xh2

J:l.aS-dS

ttJfS-g6

Better was 42 .ttcd l . Now Black suc­ ceeds in blockading the white pawns in the centre and bringing them under se­ rious attack. The white position is start­ ing to slip downhill. 42.

...

c6-cSI

43.

d4-dS

ttJg6-eS

44.

J:l.c1 -f1

i.f7-g6

4S.

f2-e1

ttJe7-c8

46.

J:l.d2-f2

Or 4 6 . tbfs + �xfS 4 7 . lhfs tbd6 4B .ttff2 c4, and Black gradually advances. 46 .

...

47.

e1 -d2

J:l.d7-f7

Here 4 7 . tbfS + �xfS 4B .ttxfS fails to 4B . . . tbd6 49 . tt S f2 tbxe4 S O . �xe4 tbd3 + . 47.

...

ttJc8-d6

4S.

ttJe3-fS+

i.g6xfS

49.

e4xfS 79

B o tv i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

1 9 1 1 - 1 2 May Petrosian - Botvinnik Queen 's Indian Defence

GAME

Notes by V. Akopian.

49 .

...

c5-c41

The beginning of the end. Black directs his whole force against the white king, and the uncoordinated white pieces can­ not come to their monarch's aid. 50.

l:tf1 -b1

b6-b51

This is more incisive than the simple 5 0 . . . :c7 . 51 .

b3-b4

1.

c2-c4

ttJg8-f6 e7-e6

2.

ttJb1 -c3

3.

ttJg1 -f3

b7-b6

4.

g2-g3

�c8-b7

5.

�f1 -g2

�f8-e7

6.

0-0

0-0

7.

d2-d4

Nowadays 7 .l:te 1 is fashionable. 7.

...

8.

"d 1 -c2

ttJf6-e4

In the 3rd and 1 3th games, Petrosian continued 8 . ttJxe4. 8.

...

9.

'il'c2xc3

9.

...

ttJe4xc3

Neither 5 l .axb5 ttJxb5 5 2 .bxc4 ttJxc4+ 5 3 .�d3 ttJca3 54.l:te l :c8 nor 5 2 .:a l l:td7 5 3 .ttJe3 c3+ 54.�c l ttJd4 are any help. 51 .

..,

c4-c3+1

The decisive breakthrough. 52.

'Oti>d2xc3

l:tf7-c7+

53.

'Oti>c3-d2

ttJe5-c4+

54.

'iti>d2-d1

ttJc4-a3

55.

l:tb1 -b2

ttJd6-c4

56.

l:tb2-a2

a5xb4

57.

a4xb5

ttJa3xb5

58.

l:ta2-a6

ttJb5-c3+

Quicker was 5 8 . . . ttJb2 + 5 9 .�d2 ttJd4 with mate after 6 0 .ttJe3 l:txc2 + ! 6 1 .ttJxc2 tiJb3 # or a quick win follow­ ing 6 0 .�d l l:tc3 ! ' 59.

'iti>d 1 -c1

ttJc3xd5

60.

�c2-a4

l:te8-c8

61 .

ttJg2-e1

ttJd5-f4

Positional to the very end. White resigns. score: Botvinnik 8 Petrosian 1 0

80

f7-f5

The moves 9 . . . d6, 9 . . . c5 and 9 . . . �e4 have also been seen here. 1 0.

b2-b3

�e7-f6

11.

�c1 -b2

d 7-d6

1 2.

l:ta 1 -d 1

ttJb8-d7

In his match with Tal (Moscow 1 9 60) , Botvinnik played 1 2 . . . We7 here, and af­ ter 1 3 .ttJe l �xg2 1 4.ttJxg2 developed the knight to c6 - 1 4 . . . ttJc6 . 1 3.

ttJf3-e1

1 4.

ttJe1 xg2

�b7xg2

G am e

1 8.

...

19

d6xe5

Here, in my opinion, the position re­ quires the resolute 1 8 . . . gS L Instead, by playing rather passively, Black gradually falls into a difficult position. 1 9.

d4xe5

Here, too, he should probably prefer 1 9 . . . gS , although already it is less effec­ tive than before. 1 4.

...

i.f6-g5

A few months later, this position was reached in two games of the Piatigorsky Cup tournament in Los Angeles, and in both, Black continued 1 4 . . .'tWe8 . After 1 5 .'it' c 2 g 5 , Panno against Keres played 1 6 .dS with the subsequent moves 1 6 . . . �xb2 1 7 .dxe6 "'xe6 1 8 ....xb2 .l:.ae8 1 9 .e3 , whilst Petrosian himself chose 1 6.f4 against Najdorf There followed 1 6 . . .... g 6 1 7 .]::t fe 1 .l:.f7 1 8 .e4 fxe4 1 9 ....xe4 "'xe4 2 0 .]::txe4 .l:.e8 2 1 ..I:!.de 1 ]::t fe 7 2 2 .fxgS �xgS 2 3 .ttJf4 �xf4 24Jhf4 ttJf8 , and Black managed to hold this not especially pleasant endgame.

1 5.

'ii'c3-c2

i.g5-h6

1 6.

e2-e4

f5-f4

1 7.

tLJg2-e1

'ii'd 8-e7

The move 1 7 . . .... gS seems more active, preventing the following advance. 1 8.

e4-e5

20.

'ii'c 2-e2

'ii'e 7-g5

On 20 . . .... f7 there would also follow 2 1 .�g2 , but 2 0 . . . ttJcS is possible. 21 .

�g1 -g2

a 7-a5

22.

tLJe1 -f3

'ii'g 5-h5

23.

i.b2-a3

l:tf8-e8

If 2 3 . . . ':'f7 , then 24.'if e4, and the line 2 4 . . . g S 2 S .h3 g4 2 6 .hxg4 "'xg4 27 . .l:.h 1 is bad for Black. 24.

l:td1 -d4

tLJd7-b8

Here the knight is condemned to remain inactive for a long time, but even after 24 . . . ttJf8 2 s .llfd 1 llxd4 2 6 . .l:.xd4 it has few prospects. 25.

l:tf1 -d1

Stronger than 2 s Jhd8 l:hd8 26 . .l:.d 1 ':'xd 1 2 7 ....xd 1 "'e8 2 8 .g4, where, however, White also has the advantage. 25.

...

l:td8xd4

After 2 S . . . ttJc6 White has a pleasant choice between 2 6 .l::tx d 8 .l:.xd8 81

B o t v i n n i k - P e t ro s i an

2 7 JhdS + ttJxdS 2 S .... d3 "'eS 2 9 . .ic l and 2 6 J:td7 . 26.

1:[d1 xd4

f4xg3

27.

h2xg3

'ii' h 5-f7

Bad for Black is 2 7 . . . ttJc6 2 S J:td7 .l:.dS 29 .l:!.xc 7 . 28.

'ii'e 2-e4

g7-g6

• .1 • • • .'if i .i.i. � • • .� � . . . � • • ttJ �. . �. • • • •

� . 'iV

30.

Thus far. Petrosian has conducted the game in excellent style and has achieved an overwhelming position. but now the great importance of the game (by win­ ning. he would practically become the ninth World Champion) began to have its well-known effect. Consequently. the many subsequent inaccuracies are ex­ cusable. and only serve to prolong the game. Here. for example. White has the chance to end the game in his favour quickly by means of the move 29 ....h4! . when Black has a miserable choice between one of the four follow­ ing continuations : A) 2 9 . . .'.t>g 7 3 0 J:td l ! ; B) 2 9 . . .... g 7 3 0 .l:!.dS �f7 3 1 ..l:.cS ! ttJa6 3 2 .... d4; C) 29 . . . .ifS 3 0 .ttJgS .ie7 (3 0 . . .... g 7 3 1 ..ixfS) 3 1 .ttJxf7 .ixh4 3 2 .ttJh6+ �g7 3 3 .l:!.xh4; D) 2 9 . . . cS 3 0 .l:!.d6 l:!.fS 3 1 .... g4. 29.

82

'ii'e4-b7

�h6-g7

c4-c5

And here. the computer immediately points out the highly effective contin­ uation 3 0 .ttJgS ! "'fS 3 1 ..ie7 ! ! (but not 3 1 . f4 "'c2 + 3 v.i;> h 3 "'b l ) 3 1 . . .h6 (other moves are even worse : 3 1 . . .... xeS 3 2 J:te4 "'b2 3 3 .1he 6 ; 3 1 . . . .ixe S 3 2 . g 4 "' c 2 3 3 . ... f3 ; 3 1 . . . .l:.xe 7 3 2 .... xbS + .ifS 3 3 . rH4) 3 2 .g4! "'c2 (after 3 2 . . .... xeS 3 3 . ttJf3 "'e2 3 4 . 1:td2 the queen is suddenly lost. whilst 3 2 . . .... b 1 also loses be­ cause of 3 3 .ttJxe6 .ixeS 3 4 . ttJxc7 (not 34 .... dS l:he 7 3 S .... xeS ttJc6 3 6 .... f6 l:!.f7 ) 3 4 . . . l:!.xe 7 3 S . .l:. d S + � h 7 3 6 .... dS) 3 3 .ttJxe6 .ixeS 3 4 . ttJxc7 ! (again strongest; weaker is 3 4.l:!.dS .l:.xdS 3S . .ixdS "'e2 ! and Black wrig­ gles out unscathed) 34 . . . l:!.xe7 (or 3 4 . . . .ixd4 3 S .... d S + �h7 3 6 .... f7 + .ig 7 3 7 . ttJxeS "'e4+ 3 S . �g3 "'eS + 3 9 .�h3 "'c3 + 40.�g2 ttJd7 4 1 ..if6) 3 S .l:!.dS + �h7 (3 S . . . � g 7 3 6 .ttJe6+ �f7 3 7 .:fS +) 36 .... dS hS (3 6 ... l:!. g 7 3 7 . ... xeS ttJ c 6 3 S . ttJ e S ! l:H7 3 9 .... g 7 +) 3 7 . gS l:!.g7 3 S .... xeS "'fS 3 9 . ... xfS gxfS 4 0 . :xbS 1:txc 7 4 1 .l:!.xb 6 . winning. 30.

...

b6xc5

31 .

�a3xc5

ttlb8-d 7

32.

'ii' b7xc7

ttld7xe5

33.

'ii'c7xf7+

ttle5xf7

Game

19

If 3 3 . . . f5-f4

Returning the favour. By means of 5 3 . . . xg4 5 4 . l::t g 3 + f5 5 5 J l g 5 + a2-b3

l:teS-e3+

38.

e5-eS

f7xeS

S8.

'.t>b3-a2

l:te3-eS

39.

f5xeS

l:th8-c8

S9.

'.t>a2-b3

l:teS-e3+

70.

'.t>b3-a2

l:te3-e8

71.

'.t>a2-b3

'.t>c7-b8

�a7-f2

72.

ltJd2-b1

l:te8-e3+ l:te3-g3

Stronger is 3 9 . . . .in . and after 40 . .l:!.eh 1 .ie3 Black is somewhat better. 40.

1:[h2xhS

41.

l:te1-h1

'ifg3-g4

73.

ltJb1-c3

42.

l:thS-gS

'ifg4-f4

74.

l:th2-d2

1:[g3-g2

43.

l:tgS-g5

'iff4-dS

75.

l:td2xg2

l:tg5xg2

44.

'ifb1-f5

..tf2-e3

7S.

ltJb4-d3

l:tg2-h2

45.

'iff5xd5

'ifdSxd5!

4 S.

l:tg5xd5

..tb5-cS ..tcSxd5

4 7.

l:th1-h5

48.

l:th5xd5

l:tc7-e7

49.

l:td5-e5

..te3-hS

50.

1:[e5-e4

1:[c8-cS

77.

'.t>b3-c4

l:th2-d2

78.

a3-a4

'.t>b8-a7

79.

ltJc3-b5+

'.t>a7-bS

80. b2-b4

l:td2-c2+ l:tc2-g2

81.

'.t>c4-b3

82.

ltJb5-c3

1:[g2-g3

83.

'.t>b3-c4

l:tg3-g4 +

84.

'.t>c4-b3

l:tg4-g3

85.

'.t>b3-c4

51.

l:te4xa4

l:te7xeS

52.

1:[a4-e4

l:teS-fS

53.

'.t>a1-a2

'.t>b8-c7

54.

l:te4-e7+

'.t>c7-c8

85.

...

�g7xc3 '.t>bS-c7

55.

l:te7-e2

1:[cS-c2

8S.

a4-a5+

5S.

'.t>a2-b1

l:tc2-cS

8 7.

'.t>c4xc3

'.t>c7-cS

5 7.

ltJf3-d4

l:tcS-dS

88.

'.t>c3-c4

1:[g3-g4 +

58.

ltJd2-b3

..thS-g7

89.

'.t>c4-c3

'.t>cS-b5 l:tg4-c4 +

59.

'.t>b1-a2

l:tfS-f1

90.

ltJd3-c5

SO.

ltJd4-c2

l:tf1-f5

91.

'.t>c3-d3

l:tc4xb4

S1.

l:te2-g2

..tg7-fS

92.

ltJc5xb7

'.t>b5-cS

S2.

ltJc2-b4

'.t>c8-d7

93.

a5-aS

'.t>cS-d5

S3.

l:tg2-h2

'.t>d7-c7

94.

ltJb7-d8

l:tb4-d4+

S4.

ltJb4-c2

l:tf5-g5

95.

'.t>d3-e3

l:td4-e4 +

S5.

ltJb3-d2

1:[dS-eS

9 S.

'.t>e3-d3

l:te4-f4

SS.

ltJc2-b4

..tfS-g7

9 7.

as-a7

1:[f4-a4

1 10

O t her Bot vinnik - Pe t r osian g ames

9S.

ttJdS-f7

l:ta4xa7

99.

ttJf7-gS

l:ta7-a3+

Botvinnik - Petrosian Sicilian Defence Training game

100. 'it>d3-e2

July 1 9 5 2

Draw.

1.

e2-e4

c7-cS

2.

f2-f4

ttJgS-f6

Botvinnik - Petrosian Sicilian Defence

3.

d2-d3

d7-dS

Maroczy Memorial

4.

e4-eS

ttJf6-gS

Budapest. 2 9 March 1 9 5 2

S.

ttJg1-f3

ttJ bS-c6

6.

c2-c3

..Q.cS-g4

d7-d6

7.

h2-h3

�g4xf3

cSxd4

S.

'ii'd1 xf3

e7-e6

9.

'ii'f3-f2

h7-hS

�c1-e3

'ii'dS-b6

1 1.

'ii'f2-c2

hS-h4

..Q.fS-e7

12.

ttJ b1-d2

ttJgS-h6

0-0

0-0

13.

..Q.e3-f2

ttJh6-fS

f2-f4

ttJ bS-d7

14.

ttJd2-f3

..Q.fS-e7

10.

a2-a4

b7-b6

1S.

�f1-e2

l:thS-gS

11.

�e2-d3

..Q.cS-b7

16.

'ii'c2-d2

0-0-0

1.

e2-e4

c7-cS

2.

ttJg1-f3

3.

d2-d4

4.

ttJf3xd4

ttJgS-f6

S.

ttJ b1-c3

a7-a6

10.

6.

�f1-e2

e7-eS

7.

ttJd4- b3

S. 9.

1 2.

'ii'd1-e2

l:tfS-eS

1 7.

0-0

dS-d4

13.

f4xeS

ttJd7xeS

1S.

l:tf1-c1

'it>cS- bS

14.

�c1-f4

'ii'dS-c7

19.

l:ta1-b1

1S.

'it>g1-h1

ttJf6-d7

16.

ttJ b3-d4

g7-g6

17.

ttJd4-f3

..Q.e7-f6

1S.

ttJf3xeS

ttJd7xeS

19.

l:ta1-e1

�f6-g7

19.

...

g7-gS

20.

f4xgS

'ii' b6-c7

21.

'ii'd2-f4

l:tdS-dS

22.

b2- b4

ttJc6xeS

23.

c3xd4

ttJeSxf3+

24.

'ii'f4xf3

cS-c4

2S.

d3xc4

ttJfSxd4

26.

..Q.f2xd4

l:tdSxd4

20. h2-h3

'ii'c7-cS

21.

�f4-e3

'ii'cS- b4

22.

�e3-c1

,UeS-e7

Draw.

1 1 1

B o tv i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

27.

'ii'f3xf7

l:gSxg5

3.

ttJg1 -f3

d 7-d5

2S.

'ii'f7-f2

l:d4-d2

4.

ttJb1 -c3

c7-c6

5.

c4xd5

29.

l:c1 -d1

l:d2xa2

30.

.l:l.b1 -a1

l:a2xa 1

31 .

l:d1 xa 1

• .

•

•

.,. . • • • �. . . . . .� • ..t � • • • 31 .

...

a 7-a5

32.

�g1 -h 1

�e7xb4

33.

l:a 1 -d 1

'ii'c7-g3

Offering Black a choice between the ex­ change variation of the Queen's Gambit (S . . . exdS) or of the Slav Defence (S . . . cxdS) . Black prefers the latter. 5.

...

c6xd5

6.

�c1 -f4

ttJbS-c6

7.

e2-e3

ttJf6-h5

34. 'ii'f2xg3+ l:g5xg3 35.

�e2-f3

�bS-c7

36.

�h1 -g1

a5-a4 �b4-c5+

37.

l:d 1 -b1

3S.

'Oti>g1 -f1

b7-b6

39.

'Otf1 -e2

a4-a3

40.

'Ote2-d3

l:g3-g5

The idea of this move came to me at the board, and it is highly dubious, if White replies 8 .�eS ! . Surprisingly, both in the present game and in others, my oppo­ nents preferred �gS (driving the queen to a better square) or �g3 .

41 .

l:b1 -e1

'Otc7-d6

42.

�f3-e4

l:g5-e5

S.

..tf4-g5

43.

l:e1 -e2

�d6-e7

9.

a2-a3

h7-h6

44. l:e2-a2

�e7-f6

1 0.

..tg5-h4

g7-g5

45.

l:a2-a1

�6-g5

11.

..th4-g3

ttJh5xg3

46.

l:a1 -f1

�c5-d6

1 2.

h2xg3

�fS-g7

1 3.

..tf1 -d3

White resigns.

Petrosian - Botvinnik Queen 's Gambit Training game July 1 9 5 2

Notes by M. Botvinnik. 1. 2.

1 12

d2-d4 c2-c4

'ii'd S-b6

In the game Letelier-Botvinnik (Tel Aviv Olympiad 1 9 64) , White played 1 3 .l:tc l , which is less natural. Now Black retreats the queen, so as to prevent White trans­ ferring his knight to cS with tempo, and also to prepare the advance of the h-pawn.

ttJgS-f6

1 3.

...

'ii' b 6-dS

e7-e6

1 4.

ttJf3-h2

h6-h5

O t h e r B o t v i nn i k - P e t ro s i a n g a m e s

1 5.

l:ta1 -c1

1 6.

ttJc3-b5

1 6.

...

.ic8-d7

..te8-f81

Twelve years later, this same manoeuvre was also used in the aforementioned game against Letelier. White's position is not easy. He cannot play e3 -e4 because of the weakness of the d4 pawn, and castling kingside looks dangerous. Therefore he just waits. 1 7.

ttJh2-f1

g5-g4

Blockading White's pawns and shutting in his pieces. This device was also seen in the Letelier game. Theoretically, White can manoeuvre his knight to the square f4, but in practice, he never succeeds in doing so. 1 8.

ttJf1 -d2

e6-e5

An essential move, activating both black bishops; this is especially felt in the vari­ ation 1 9 . dxeS �xeS followed by . . . a7 -a6 and . . . dS -d4. 1 9.

'ti'd1 -b3

e5xd4

20.

ttJb5xd4

ttJc6xd4

21 .

e3xd4

'ifd8-e7+

22 .

..te1 -d1

In the event of 2 2.'.ti)fI , the white rook on h I would remain out of play, but af­ ter the removal of the d4 pawn, the white king is badly placed in the centre. 22.

...

23.

l:tc1 -c7

.ig 7xd4

Of course, not 2 3 ....xb7 on account of 23 . . . �a4+ , whereas now after 23 . . . �a4 there follows 24 ....xa4 "'xc7 2 S .'ifxd4 or 24Jhe7 �xb3 + 2 S .ttJxb3 �xe7 2 6 .ltJxd4. 23.

...

.id4-b6

24.

l:th1 -e1

'ife7-d6

25.

l:tc7xb7

l:th8-h61

With the king on f8 , this manoeuvre is typical. The threat is 26 . . .�xf2 27 . .l:.fI l:1f6 . The immediate 2 S . . . �xf2 was danger­ ous because of 2 6 . l:1fI �b6 2 7 .ttJe4 ! . However, 2 S . . . �c6 was also possible, for example 2 6 .ttJe4 'iYd8 (2 7 .'ifc3 l:1h6) . 26.

.id3-b5

.id 7-e6

The square f7 is defended, whilst f2 is attacked. 27.

f2-f4

28.

ttJd2xf3

l:ta8-c8

29.

ttJf3-e5

'ifd6-c5

g4xf3

• .1 . • l �• •,. [QJ • • • I. ., • .i , • • • • 'iV. • • . ts . • • � It • With the unambiguous threat of 3 0 . . . 'iYc l + . 30.

l:tb7xf7+

..tf8-g8 'ifc5-c1 +

31 .

l:tf7-f3

32.

'ifr>d1 -e2

l:tc8-c2+

33.

'ifr>e2-f1

'ifc1 -d2

White reSigns; on 3 4.�e2 (34 . .l:[e2 l:1c l +) there follows 34 .. .'ifd4, and there is no defence against mate on the square g l . 113

Botvinnik - Petrosian

Petrosian - Botvinnik Slav Defence

Botvinnik - Petrosian English Opening

XXII USSR Championship

USSR Team Championship

Moscow, 1 5 February 1 9 5 5

Moscow, 1 2 October 1 9 64

1.

c2-c4

c7-c6

1.

c2-c4

c7-cS

2.

ttJg1-f3

d7-dS

2.

ttJg1-f3

ttJgS-f6

3.

e2-e3

g7-g6

3.

ttJb1-c3

e7-e6

4.

ttJb1-c3

i.fS-g7

4.

g2-g3

b7-b6

S.

d2-d4

ttJgS-f6

S.

.tf1-g2

.tcS-b7

6.

.tf1 -d3

0-0

6.

0-0

.tfS-e7

7.

b2-b3

d7-dS

7.

0-0

.tcS-fS

S.

.td3xfS

g6xfS

9.

c4xdS

c6xdS

'ir'd1-b3

b7-b6

10.

In the event of 7 . . . 0-0 8 .d4 cxd4 9 . 'iYxd4 according to ECO, White has a clear advantage. S.

e2-e3

With only a small difference, this opening variation was seen in the

11.

ttJf3-eS

As Botvinnik pointed out, this tempting move is not the strongest. After 1 1 .�d2 ! ttJc6 1 2 . ttJeS l:tc8 1 3 . l:tac 1 White's ad­ vantage is indisputable. The subtle difference is that it is in White 's favour to induce the knight to move to c 6 , not to prevent it. 11.

...

e7-e6

12.

.tc1-d2

ttJf6-d7

1 3.

ttJeS-d3

ttJbS-c6

14.

ttJc3-e2

l:!.aS-cS

1S.

l:!.f1-c1

ttJd7-bS

1 6.

ttJe2-f4

'ir'dS-d7 f7-f6

17.

ttJf4-hS

1S.

l:!.c1 -c2

ttJc6-e7

19.

l:!.a1-c1

l:cSxc2

20.

l:!.c1xc2

l:!.fS-cS

1 14

game Botvinnik-Donner (Amsterdam 1 9 6 3 ) and was later repeated in the game Botvinnik- Larsen (Palma de Mallorca 1 9 6 7 ) . White 's basic plan consists in preventing the advance . . . dS -d4 . With the white pawn on e 3 , the advance is not good for Black - after the exchange on d4, the e-file is half-opened, and , in addition , White obtains a pawn majority on the queenside. White, in his turn, will exchange on dS at such a moment when Black must re­ capture with the pawn, and then White will play d2 -d4. After this, the defence of the pawn on dS and the insufficiently active bishop on b7 will cause Black fa­ miliar problems. S. ...

0-0

ECO recommends the knight jump 8 . . . ttJe4. Therefore, it may be that White, in his turn, would have done better to dispense with castling and play instead d2-d3 . draw.

9.

.tc1-b2

ttJbS-c6

O t h e r B o tv i nn i k - P e t ro s i a n g a mes

pawns on dS and cS . White must recap­ ture with the pawn; the line 1 S .tDxd4 tDxd4 1 6 .'ii' x d4 �cS 1 7 . 'ii' h 4 d4 1 8 .%:ted 1 dxe3 1 9 .%:txd8 exf2 + leads to complications which are not unfavour­ able for Black. However, White's chances now remain preferable, thanks to the superior positi­ on of his pieces. 1 5.

Now the position is the same as in Botvinnik-Larsen, where White played 1 0 .d3 , which appears more accurate than the continuation in the present game. 1 0.

c4xd5

d2-d4

l::tfS-eS

It is hardly good to play 1 1 . . .'ii'd 7 . After 1 2 .l:lc 1 White obtained a significant advantage in the game Geller-Van Scheltinga (Wijk aan Zee 1 9 69) , which continued 1 2 . . . %:tfd8 1 3 . dxcS bxcS 1 4.tDa4 tDe4 1 S .tDd2 , and also in the game Csom-Miles (Bad Lauterberg 1 9 7 7) : 1 2 .. J:tac8 1 3 .tDeS . 1 2.

l:la1 -c1

1 3.

�g2-h3

�e7-b4

1 6.

l:te1 xeS+ 'it'dSxeS

1 7.

a2-a3

17.

...

e6xd5

Now White realizes his plan. In a consultation game Botvinnik + Polugaevsky - Keres + Prins (Holland 1 9 6 6) , Black played 1 0 . . . tDxdS 1 1 .tDxdS 'ii'x dS 1 2 .d4 %:tad8 1 3 .tDeS 'ii' d 6 1 4.dxcS 'ii'x cs , and emerged with better chances of equalizing. 11.

e3xd4

l:taS-c8

Driving the rook off the c-file, since the reply 1 3 . . . %:tc7 leads to the loss of the exchange: 1 4.tDbS ( 1 4 . . . �c8 1 S .tDxc7 �xh3 1 6 .tDxe8) . 1 3.

...

l:tc8-bS

1 4.

l:tf1 -e1

c5xd4

Black seizes a convenient moment for this exchange, ensuring the safety of his

�b4-fS

A weighty decision. The continuation 1 7 . . . ..txc3 followed by . . . tDf6-e4 came into consideration. It would not be easy for White to show that the advantage of the two bishops is of real Significance in this position. Now White gets the op­ portunity to post his knight on the cen­ tral square eS . 1 S.

'iVd 1 -d3

g 7-g6

1 9.

l:tc1 -e1

'iVeS-dS

20.

ttJf3-e5

The classic example of how to handle such positions is the game Reshevsky­ Flohr (Holland AVRO 1 9 3 8) . 20.

...

21 .

f2-f3

i.fS-g7

Thus, White has achieved a certain something : he has centralized his knight, defended the important e41 15

B o tv i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

square, and seized the open e-file. In ad­ dition, Black experiences some prob­ lems bringing his rooks into play. 21 .

...

ttJc6-aS

22.

'ii'd 3-d 1

a7-a6

23.

ttJc3-a2

Threatening to shut the knight out of play by means of 24.ttJb4. 23.

...

24.

�b2-c3

ttJaS-c6

White again wants to play 2 S .ttJb4, which would allow him to secure the knight's position on eS for some time to come. Both now, and subsequently, the exchange on eS would be clearly in White's favour. 24.

...

'ii'd 8-c7

2S.

'ii'd 1 -d2

a6-aS

26.

�c3-b2

'ii'c 7-d6

27. ttJa2-c1

�b7-c8

Black finally drives away the annoying enemy bishop. White. of course, refrains from the exchange, correctly consider­ ing that the black bishop will not be any more active on e6 than on b7 . 28.

�h3-f1

�c8-e6

29.

ttJc1 -d3

ttJc6-e7

30.

...

aSxb4

31 .

a3xb4

ttJf6-e8

32.

b4-bS

In view of the threat of ttJd3 -b4-c6 , Black must immediately drive the knight from the square eS , but as a result, he weakens the square e6 and makes his bishop on g7 worse. 32.

...

f7-f6

33.

ttJeS-g4

�e6-d7

34. �b2-c3

With the threat of 3 S .i.b4. 34.

...

3S.

ttJd3-f4

ttJe7-fS

Now White wants to play 3 6 .�b4 and win the pawn on dS - or, in the event of 3 S . . . ttJc7 , the queen! 3S.

...

'ii'd 6-f8

The move 3 S . . . �f8 loses to 3 6 .ttJxdS 'it'xdS 3 7 Jhe8 (3 7 .. .l:he8 3 8 .ttJxf6+) . 36.

ttJf4xdS

�g8-h8

37.

�c3-b4

'ii'f8-f7

38.

ttJdS-e7

ttJe8-d6

39.

ttJe 7xfS

ttJd6xfS

40.

d4-dS

White has achieved total domination, and he has an extra pawn to boot. 40.

...

l:tb8-e8

41 .

l:te1 -e4

h7-hS

42.

ttJg4-f2

•

••• • • .i. .'iV I . ,. • t'3J . t'3J . � . , . fl . • • • •.::;: t'3J :;;. ' 1 • · . .� __

30.

b3-b41

This leads to the seizure of the square c6, an idea that was seen in the game Botvinnik-Donner. 1 16

42 .

...

l:te8-d8

O t h e r B o tv i nn i k - P e t ro s i a n g a m e s

This apparently natural retreat loses by force. When analysing the adjourned position. I considered Black's best chance to be the move 42 . . . .ih6 . with the possible continuation 43 .... d3 .ie3 . and now 44.g4 cannot be played because of 44 . . . hxg4 4S .fxg4 .ixbS 4 6 . l::t x eB + "'xeB 4 7 . ... xbS .ixf2 + 4B.�xf2 'ife3 + 49.�g2 tiJh4+ with a draw. whilst after 44.�g2 .ics 4S . .ixcS bxcS 46 ....c4. although White retains the advantage. he still has a hard struggle ahead of him. Evidently. the World Champion did not manage to penetrate the secrets of the positon in his home analysis. 43 .

example. 4 7 ... .ifB 4 B .l::t e 6. and the passed pawn is again untouchable (4B . . . tiJxd6 49 . .ixd6 .ixd6 s o Jhd6 "'xd6 5 1 . "'h6#) . 4S.

.ib4xdS

�g 7-fS

Black. of course. spotted that. in the event of 4B . . .... xd6 49 .l:.eB + . he loses a rook.

.if1 -c4

Now White favourably achieves the ad­ vance of the d -pawn. 43.

...

.id7-c8

44.

d5-dS

'iff7-d7

45.

l:[e4-e1

.ic8-b7

The d6-pawn is untouchable - after 4S . . . tiJxd6 46 ....xd6 "'xd6 47 . .ixd6 l::tx d6 4 B .l::t e B+ Black remains a piece down. 4S.

12Jf2-e4

47.

l:[e1 xe4

�b7xe4

49.

l:[e4-d4

Also possible was 49 . l:t e 6 �h7 so . .ixfB ! "'xd2 S l . l:[e 7 + �hB S2 . .ig 7 + �h7 S 3 . .ixf6 + �h6 S4 . .ig 7 + Wh7 (or S 4 . . .�gS S S J:teS#) 5 5 . .ic3 + etc. 49.

...

50.

.idSxfS

..ti>hS-h7

But not S O . .ieS because of 5 0 . . . �cS . 50.

...

'ifd7xd4+

51 .

'ifd2xd4

l:[dSxd4

52.

�c4-f1

White only needs to transfer his bishop to the g I -a7 diagonal. 52.

...

53.

.ifS-a3

l:[d4-d1

54.

..ti>g 1 -f2

�h7-g7

55.

.ia3-b4

h5-h4

gS-g5

This ' diversion' cannot change anything. 47.

...

12Jf5xdS

An oversight. but in a position where there is nothing to be done anyway. For

5S.

g3xh4

l:[d1 -d4

57.

.ib4-e1

l:[d4xh4

5S.

'if;>f2-g3

l:[h4-d4

59.

.ie1 -f2 1 17

Botvinnik - Petrosian

The main task is fulfilled - now the rook has to defend the pawn on b6. 59.

%:td4-d 1

60.

�f1 -c4

61 .

f3-f4

%:td1 -d6

Opening the long diagonal, for the ma­ noeuvre �c4-e2-f3 -c6. 61 .

...

�g7-g6

62.

f4xg5

f6xg5

Black resigns.

Botvinnik - Petrosian English Opening USSR team championship Moscow, S October 1 9 6 6

Thus, the meeting with the World Champion. This was already the elev­ enth day in a row that we played. The world seems to have a special ap­ proach to chess masters. Whilst we have now established a system, under which working people get two days off each week, and whilst everybody understands that footballers need a rest between games, chess players can work eleven days in a row without a break . . . After all, grandmasters just sit at the board and relax, don't they? What do they need days off for? Is it any wonder that, the day before, against Tal, with one move, I left en prise both a piece and a pawn? My opponent took . . . the pawn! A few moves later, Tal was offered two more pawns. These were accepted with­ out hesitation, and the game soon pro­ ceeded to its logical conclusion. In such a situation, when one thinks not about the best move, but simply about aVOiding a blunder, we had to play the final game . . . 1.

c2-c4

g 7-g6

2.

g2-g3

�fS-g7

1 18

3.

�f1 -g2

e7-e5

As is well known, the Simplest method for Black is to play 3 . . . cS 4.tLlc3 tLlc6 S .e3 e6 6 .tLlge2 tLlge 7 7 . d4 cxd4 8 . tLlxd4 dS , which, incidentally, was seen in this tournament, too. Petrosian in the present game was not happy with a draw (until a certain moment) , so he chose another continuation. 4.

ltJb1 -c3

d7-d6

5.

d2-d3

ltJgS-e7

6.

e2-e4

0-0

7.

ltJg1 -e2

ltJbS-c6

S.

0-0

f7-f5

This 'improvement' was prepared at home. Geller, in his game against me in the sixth round, refrained from this committal move. 9.

ltJc3-d5

This move is practically obligatory, if White wishes to develop his bishop to e3 . The immediate 9 .�e3 would allow Black favourably to answer 9 . . . tLld4. ...

�gS-hS

1 o.

9.

�c1 -e3

�cS-e6

11.

'ir'd 1 -d2

'ir'dS-d7

1 2.

lIa1 -e1

%:taS-eS

1 3.

f2-f4

The position is almost symmetrical, but the knight on dS is an ornament to the white position. Nonetheless, Black's po-

O t h e r B o t v i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n g a m es

sition would have been solid, had it not been for the hasty exchange on the fol­ lowing move. 1 3.

...

e5xf4

1 4.

liJe2xf4

i.e6-g8

1 5.

liJd5xe7

An unpleasant move for Black to face; in the event of I S . . .'iYxe7 (or I S . . . l:txe7) White can continue 1 6 .exfS with effect. Black must therefore deflect his knight from the d4 square. 1 5.

...

liJc6xe 7

1 6.

i.g2-h3

b7-b5

Another nervous move and a new wors­ ening of his position - the central play turns out to be in White's favour. The passive 1 6 . . .'it'd8 was better. 1 7.

b2-b3

c7-c5

Petrosian feels the positional threat, which is to exchange dark-squared bish­ ops, and so he covers the d4-square, but in the process, he under-estimates the strength of White's reply. 1 8.

d3-d4

'ir'd 7-c6

Since 1 8 . . . bxc4 1 9 . dxcS :d8 (or 1 9 . . . c3 2 o .'ifxd6) 2 0 J:td l can hardly be satisfactory for Black, he has to lose a tempo. 1 9.

c4xb5

'it'c6xb5

20.

d4xc5

d6xc5

21 .

J:te1 -c1

The tempting continuation, involving the exchange of light-squared bishops 2 1 .'ifd6 c4 2 2 .�d4 (or 2 2 . exfS tbxfS 2 3 .�xfS 'ifxfS 24.�d4 1:he l 2 S .l:txe l �xd4+ 2 6 .'ifxd4+ 'iff6) 2 2 . . . tbc8 ! 2 3 .�xg 7 + �xg 7 2 4 . 'ifd4+ 'ifeS 2 S .'ifxeS+ .J:I.xeS 2 6 .exfS .J:I.xe l 2 7 .l:he l gxfS does not yield White a Significant advantage. 21 .

...

J:[e8-d8

Petrosian is on the alert - he defends the square d6 , whereas 2 1 . . . l:tc8 loses to 2 2 .'ifd6 . 22.

'ir'd2-e21

...

The only move! Black must exchange queens, and the weak pawns on cS and a7 give White the advantage. 22.

...

'it'b5xe2

23.

liJf4xe2

c5-c4

Correctly played. By sacrificing this doomed pawn on the square c4, Black breaks up the enemy pawns on the queenside and activates his bishop on g8. 24.

b3xc4

24.

...

liJe7-c6

Black refrains from capturing the e4 pawn, out of general considerations (the bishop on h3 could support the passed c4 pawn) , but at the same time commits a tactical oversight. In the 1 19

B o t v i n n i k - P e t ro s i a n

meantime, it is precisely in the line 24 . . .fxe4 2 S .l:I.xfS l:I.xfS 2 6 .cS tLlc6 2 7 .�d7 tLleS 2 S .c6 tLlxd7 2 9 .cxd7 �e6 30 . .l:k7 .l:tdS 3 1.l:txa7 'it>gS ! (bad is 3 1 . . Jhd7 3 2..l::f. xd7 �xd7 because of 3 3 .�d4!) 3 2 .�d4 �h6 3 3 .tLlc3 l:.xd7 3 4.l:Lxd7 �xd7 3 S .tLlxe4 �f7 that Black could obtain real chances of sav­ ing a draw. At this critical moment, White has the chance, by means of 2 S . exfS ! gxfS ( 2 S . . . l:I.feS 2 6 .�gS l:I.xe2 2 7 .f6 �fS 2 S .f7 or 2 S . . . .l:r.deS 2 6 .�gS .l:txe2 2 7 .f6) 2 6 .tLlf4 to secure an extra pawn and the better position . . . Instead, out of 'practical' considerations , he de­ cided to change the move order, and played 25.

29.

c,t>g 1 -h1

30.

rlf1 -e1

e4-e3

Caution is needed, because of the far­ advanced pawn on e3 . Thus, in the event of 3 0 .cS e2 3 1 ..l:tfe l �e3 3 2 . .l:tc2 �c4 3 3 .�f3 (3 3 .l::tx c 4 .l:[d l ) 3 3 . . . .l:[d l 3 4 . .l:[xd l exd l tLl 3 S . �xd l �dS + 3 6 . .l:[g2 �xcS a draw is unavoidable. 30.

...

i.d4-c5

31 .

i.g2-f3

i.gS-e6

32.

c,t>h1 -g2

J:dS-d2+

33.

J:e1 -e2

i.e6-f5

i.e3-g5

expecting the variation 2 S . . . .l:[de S 26 .exfS l:I.xe2 2 7 .f6 etc. But, of course, by now Petrosian had noticed the dan­ ger, and played differently. 25.

...

f5xe4

An unexpected decision, and not a good one. In the event of 2S . . . .l:[bS ! 2 6. exfS gxfS 2 7 .l::rxfS .l:[feS ! Black would tempo­ rarily be two pawns down, but his nu­ merous threats would compensate for the material deficit. Many years ago, Capablanca wrote that if, in a normal position, the opponent had a pawn for the exchange, this might well lead to a draw, and that if one was a clear exchange ahead, the winning plan is usually to return the exchange, in or­ der to win a pawn. The reader will see from what follows just how right Capablanca was! 26.

i.g5xdS

rlfSxdS

27.

i.h3-g2

lbc6-d4

2S.

lbe2xd4

i.g7xd4+

1 20

The natural continuation 3 4.l:I.xd2 exd2 3 S .l:I.d l �e3 3 6 .�e2 (but not 3 6 .cS �c2 and . . . �xcS) 36 . . . �e4+ 3 7 .'it>h3 'it>g7 3s . .l:[fI is unlikely to win, because of the bad position of the white king. Therefore, White should prevent the move 3 4 . . . �d3 , so that the exchange on d2 will not be necessary. By means of 34 . .l:[e l (the continuation pointed out by Petrosian - after 34 . . . �d3 3 S . .l:[xd2 exd2 3 6 .l:I.eS or 3 6 .l:.eS + White stops the d2 pawn from behind , with his rook) 3 4 . . . .l:[dS 3S . .l:[xe3 ! �xe3 3 6 .l::txe 3 White achieves a winning endgame, with an extra pawn , in full accordance with Capablanca's advice. And after H .. J:td3 3 S .g4 �e6 3 6 .h3 the black pieces are driven from their active positions.

O t h e r B o t v i nn i k - P e t r o s i a n g a m es

White wins in interesting fashion after 3 4 . . . �b4 3 s .lhd2 �xd2 3 6 J:rh 1 �d3 3 7 .cS e 2 3 8 . �xe2 �xe2 3 9 .c 6 , and Black must give one of his bishops for the passed pawn. I decided to defend the square d3 against the entry of the enemy bishop in the most solid way. but in so doing. rather light-heartedly weakened the back rank. 34.

J:[c1-c3

1S.

tDc4-e5

tDd5-f6

19.

'ii'c1-f4

tDc6xe5

20.

tDf3xe5

J:[dS-d4

21.

�g2xb7

'ii'cSxb7

22.

'ii'f4-e3

%:teS-dS

23.

:Le1-e2

e7-e6

�f5-e4 1

This far from obvious move forces White to resign. since at a minimum he loses a piece : 3 s Jhe3 �xe3 3 6 Jhd2 �xf3 + 3 7 . Wxf3 �xd2 . In other variations . the black pawn queens. Thus . despite being so desperate to avoid blundering . I nevertheless found a way to do so!

Botvinnik - Petrosian King 's Indian Attack

Profsoyuz team championship Moscow, 24 January 1 9 6 6 1.

e2-e4

c7-c5

2.

tDg1-f3

d7-d6

24.

b2-b3

h7-h5

25.

J:[a1-e1

J:[dS-hS

26.

h3-h4

J:[hS-cS

27.

'ii'e3-g5

J:[cS-eS

Draw.

Petrosian - Botvinnik Slav Defence

Profsoyuz team championship Moscow, 2 5 April 1 9 6 7

3.

d2-d3

g7-g6

4.

g2-g3

�fS-g7

1.

c2-c4

c7-c6

5.

�f1-g2

tDgS-f6

2.

d2-d4

d7-d5

6.

0-0

0-0

3.

tDb1 -c3

tDgS-f6

7.

tDb1-d2

tDbS-c6

4.

tDg1-f3

e7-e6

S.

a2-a4

b7-b6

5.

e2-e3

tDbS-d7

9.

tDd2-c4

�cS-b7

6.

�f1-d3

�fS-e7

10.

�c1-d2

'ii'dS-c7

7.

0-0

d5xc4

11.

J:[f1-e1

%:taS-bS

S.

�d3xc4

b7-b5

12.

'ii'd1-c1

J:[fS-eS

9.

�c4-d3

b5-b4

10.

tDc3-e4

tDf6xe4

13.

�d2-f4

J:tbS-dS

14.

h2-h3

'ii'c7-c8

11.

�d3xe4

�c8-b7

15.

�f4-h6

d6-d5

12.

b2-b3

0-0

16.

e4xd5

tDf6xd5

1 3.

�c1-b2

tDd7-f6

17.

�h6xg7

�gSxg7

14.

�e4-d3

c6-c5 121

Botvinnik - Petrosian

1 5.

d4xc5

�e7xc5

1 6.

'ii'd 1 -e2

'ii'd 8-e7

1 22

1 7.

:a1 -c1

:a8-c8

1 8.

e3-e4

�c5-b6

1 9.

ltJf3-e5

ltJf6-d7

20.

ltJe5xd7

'iVe7xd 7

21 .

�d3-c4

'iVd7-e7

22.

'ii'e 2-g4

e6-e5

23.

:c1 -d1

:c8-d8

24.

"g4-f5

�b6-c7

25.

.l:[f1 -e1

�b7-c8

26.

"'f5-f3

�c8-e6

Draw.

Igor Botvinnik

The tra i n i ng match Botvi n n i k - Fu rman January - February 1963 As far as one can judge, the games of this training match are unknown to most readers within Russia. Whether they have been published abroad, goodness only knows. Cer­ tainly, in the two standard, multi-volume Russian works on Botvinnik's games, there are no training games from 1 9 6 3 . Furthermore, when preparing the complete English edition of Botvinnik's games, I managed to make use of a six-volume manuscript on Botvinnik's career, prepared by V. D. Baturinsky (the most complete collection of Botvinnik's games of which I am aware) , and this match was not there either. ' This can only be explained either by a deliberate piece of self-censorship by Botvinnik, or else by the fact that the match was simply forgotten about. These games were preserved in a notebook, which bore the characteristic title (for those days) of 'Delegate to the IV Plenum of the Central Soviet DSO "Trud" Profsoyuzov of the RSFSR, 1 0 - 1 1 December 1 9 5 9 , Moscow ' . I t i s well known that S . A. Furman worked a s a n openings consultant t o Botvinnik, in his world championship matches of 1 9 6 1 and 1 9 6 3 . This happened after Botvinnik was forced to manage without the help of his old comrade Grigory Goldberg. Mikhail Moiseevich told how, after his first match with Tal, he sensed Goldberg 's admiration for the young champion, but even so, in the summer of 1 9 6 0 , he sent his old comrade a letter (Goldberg was on holiday in the Crimea at the time) , with an invitation to be his second for the return match. He received a 9 -page reply, setting out numerous conditions necessary for him to have any hope of re­ venge, all of which, Botvinnik laughed, were impossible to fulfil ! And now it is time to dispose of one legend, which has made the rounds of the chess world. In the Russian book on Furman there is a story about Furman's time as

7

Translator 's note : As far as I can tell , these games have not been published anywhere outside Russia, either. In particular, they do not appear in the 2 0 0 6 volume

Censored! Botvinnik's secret games, edited b y Jan Timman. That book

aimed to give as complete a collection of Botvinnik' s training games as was possible , and included a number of games against Furman from 1 9 6 1 , but there are none from the year 1 9 6 3 .

1 23

Botvinnik - Petrosian

Botvinnik's second. It is claimed that Furman once advised Botvinnik to play for a draw in an adjourned game, but that Botvinnik did not agree and went on to lose the game, after which Furman was sent off to read a lecture to junior players of the Trud chess club, to get him out of the way. When I once drew Mikhail Moiseevich's atten­ tion to this episode, I received a brusque answer: 'In this match, as in the earlier ones, Furman was just an openings consultant, not a second, and I did not analyse adjourned positions with him ' . Any great man, in the course o f his life, will become the subject o f various leg­ ends and apocryphal stories. Often these stories go round for decades, despite hav­ ing no basis in fact. 1 4.

h3xg4

tLleSxg4

Furman - Botvinnik Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

1 S.

i.e3-f4

0-0-0

1 6.

f2-f3

tLlg4-eS

1 7.

g3-g4

i.e6xdS

24. 1 . 6 3

1 S.

e4xdS

tLlc6-e7

Game 1

1.

e2-e4

d7-d6

2.

d2-d4

tLlgS-f6

3.

tLlb1 -c3

g7-g6

4.

i.c1 -gS

i.fS-g 7

•

.-=. =-=-� .I. 'if •

• • • � .-�-:':":"

S.

'it'd 1 -d2

Why not S .eS ?

1 9.

'ifd2-aS

'it'cS-bS

20.

i.f1 -bS

c7-c6

21 .

dSxc6

b7xc6

22.

i.b5-a6

'ii'd 7-c7

23.

'it'aSxc7+ 'it'bSxc7

24.

J:1h1 -hS

J:1dS-bS

S.

...

h7-h6

2S.

i.f4-d2

tLle7-dS

6.

i.gS-e3

tLlf6-g4

26.

b2-b3

tLldS-b4

7.

i.e3-f4

tLlbS-c6

27.

i.d2xb4

J:1bSxb4

S.

h2-h3

e7-eS

2S.

J:1hS-fS

J:1hS-fS

9.

d4xeS

tLlg4xeS

29.

tLlg1 -e2

tLleS-g6

1 0.

i.f4-e3

�c8-e6

30.

l:1d 1 -h 1

tLlg6-e7

11.

tLlc3-dS

g6-gS

31 .

.I:I.fS-aS

d6-dS

1 2.

0-0-0

'ii'd S-d7

32.

c2-c3

J:1b4-bS

1 3.

g2-g3

gS-g4

33.

i.a6-d3

J:1bS-b7

1 24

T h e t ra i n i n g m a t c h B o t v i n n i k - F u rm a n

34.

tLle2-d4

�e7-d6

1 2.

�g2xf3

�e7-g5

35.

�e1 -e2

.!:lf8-b8

1 3.

tLlf1 -e3

d5-d4

36 .

.!:la5-a6

�d6-d 7

1 4.

tLle3-c4

�g5xe1

37.

.!:lh1 -e1

�g 7xd4

15 .

.!:la1 xe1

b7-b5

38.

e3xd4

l:!.b7-e7

1 6.

tLlc4-d2

e6-e5

39 .

.!:le1 -h1

l:!.b8-h8

1 7.

�f3-g2

e6-e5

40.

l:th1 -h5

f7-f6

1 8.

e2-e3

tLle8-d6

41 .

b3-b4

�d 7-e8

1 9.

e3xd4

e5xd4

42.

�e2-d2

�e8-f7

20.

.!:le1 -e6

"d8-e7

43 .

.!:la6-a5

�f7-g7

21 .

.!:le1 -e1

.!:lf8-e8

44.

.!:la5-e5

.!:le7-b7

22.

tLld2-b3

tLld7-b6

45.

a2-a3

.!:lh8-f8

23.

f2-f4

f7-f6

24.

�g2-f3

.!:le8xe6

25.

.!:le1 xe6

'ii'e 7-d7

26.

tLlb3-a5

26 .

...

'ii'd 7xh3

Times: 2hr 1 3 min. 1 hr 5 2 min.

Game 2

Botvinnik - Furman King 's Indian Attack 25. 1 .63

1.

g2-g3

d7-d5

2.

tLlg1 -f3

tLlg8-f6

3.

�f1 -g2

e7-e6

4.

0-0

�e8-g4

5.

d2-d3

tLlb8-d 7

6.

tLlb1 -d2

e7-e6

7.

e2-e4

�f8-e7

27.

.!:le6xd6

"h3xg3+

8.

'ii'd 1 -e2

0-0

28.

�f3-g2

'ii'g 3xf4

9.

h2-h3

�g4-h5

29.

tLla5-e6

�g8-f8

1 0.

.!:lf1 -e1

tLlf6-e8

30.

"e2-f1

'ii'f4-e3+

11.

tLld2-f1

11.

...

i.h5xf3

31 .

�g 1 -h2

.!:la8-e8

32.

�g2-h3

�f8-g8

33.

b2-b3

'ii'e 3-d2+

34.

�h2-g3

'ii'd 2-g5+

35.

'iii>g 3-h2

'ii'g 5-d2+

36.

'iii> h 2-g 1

'ii'd 2xa2

37.

�h3-e6+ �g8-f8

38.

tLle6xe5

"a2-d2

39.

tLle5-g4

'ifd2-g5

40.

"f1 -f5

'ii'g 5-e1 +

41 .

'itg1 -g2

cJ;>f8-e7

42.

e4-e5

.!:le8-f8 1 25

B o tv i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

43.

i.e6-d5

'ifc1 -c8

1 0.

...

b5-b4

44.

l:d6-e6+

'11i>e 7-dS

11.

tLJc3-d5

tLJf6xd5

45.

l:e6-d6+

'11i>d S-e7

46.

e5xf6+

Times: 2hr 0 7min. 1 hr 5 8min.

1 2.

e4xd5

i.c8-b7

1 3.

'ii'd 2xb4

i.b7xd5

1 4.

a4-a5

0-0

1 5.

'ii' b 4-d2

'ifdS-c7

1 6.

0-0

i.d5-c4

1 7.

i.e2xc4

'ii'c7xc4

1 S.

b2-b3

'ii'c4-c7

1 9.

c2-c4

l:aS-bS

20.

l:a 1 -b1

llbS-b7

21 .

'ii'd 2-a2

l:fS-bS

22.

'ifa2-a3

tLJd7-e5

23.

l:f1 -c1

'ii'c7-c5

24.

b3-b4

l:[b7xb4

25.

tLJd4-c6

tLJe5xc6

26.

i.e3xc5

l:b4xb1

Game 3

Furman - Botvinnik Sicilian Defence 2 7 . 1 .63

1.

e2-e4

2.

tLJg1 -f3

d7-d6

3.

d2-d4

c5xd4

4.

tLJf3xd4

tLJgS-f6

c7-c5

5.

tLJb1 -c3

g 7-g6

6.

i.c1 -e3

i.fS-g7

7.

f2-f3

a7-a6

S.

'ifd1 -d2

tLJbS-d7

9.

i.f1 -e2

b7-b5

1 0.

a2-a4

Times: 1 hr 44min. 1 hr 1 0min.

Game 4

Botvinnik - Furman King 's Indian Attack 28. 1 .63

1 26

1.

e2-e4

c7-c5

2.

tLJg1 -f3

tLJbS-c6

3.

c2-c3

e7-e6

4.

d2-d3

d 7-d5

5.

tLJb1 -d2

i.fS-d6

6.

g2-g3

tLJgS-e7

7.

i.f1 -g2

0-0

T h e t r a i n i n g m a t c h B o t v i n n i k - F u rm a n

S.

0-0

b7-b6

9.

.:tf1 -e1

�d6-c7

1 0.

a2-a3

�cS-a6

11.

�g2-f1

d5xe4

1 2.

tLld2xe4

-.dS-d7

Times: I hr 4 1 min. I hr 5 8min.

Game S

Furman - Botvinnik Queen's Gambit Accepted 1 3.

'ii'd 1 -a4

�a6xd3

1 4.

.:te1 -d1

c5-c4

1 5.

tLlf3-e1

'ii'd 7-d5

1.

d2-d4

d 7-d5

1 6.

tLle1 xd3

b6-b5

2.

c2-c4

d5xc4

3.

tLlg1 -f3

30. 1 .63

1 7.

tLld3-b4

b5xa4

1 S.

tLlb4xd5

e6xd5

1 9.

tLle4-c5

.:tfS-dS

3.

...

tLlgS-f6

20.

tLlc5xa4

.l:l.aS-bS

4.

e2-e3

�cS-g4

Take a look at 3 .e4.

21 .

�c1 -e3

�c7-e5

5.

h2-h3

�g4-h5

22.

�e3-c5

�e5-f6

6.

g2-g4

�h5-g6

23.

.:ta1 -b1

g 7-g6

7.

tLlf3-e5

tLlbS-d7

24.

.:td1 -d2

.:tbS-b5

S.

tLle5xg6

h7xg6

25.

b2-b4

a7-a5

9.

�f1 -g2

c7-c6

26.

.:tb1 -d1

a5xb4

1 0.

tLlb1 -d2

tLld7-b6

11.

'ii'd 1 -c2

e7-e6

1 2.

tLld2xc4

�fS-b4+

27.

a3xb4

.:tdS-aS

2S.

.:td2-a2

.:tb5-bS

29.

�f1 -g2

.:taS-a6

30.

�g2xd5

tLle7xd5

31 .

.l:l.d1 xd5

tLlc6-a7

32.

�c5xa7

.:ta6xa7

33.

.:td5-a5

.:ta7-c7

34.

g 1 -g2

gS-g7

35.

b4-b5

.l:l.c7-b7

36.

.l:[a2-b2

.:tbS-c8

37.

b5-b6

.:tcS-c6

3S.

.:ta5-c5

1 27

B o tv i n n i k - P e t r o s i a n

1 3.

'iti>e1 -e2

ttJb6xc4

34.

e2-f2

'iVe7-g5 ttJdS-f4

1 4.

'ifc2xc4

'iVdS-b6

3S.

�g2-f1

1 S.

:h1 -d1

a 7-aS

36.

d4-dS

ttJf4xdS

1 6.

:d 1 -d3

'ii' b 6-c7

37.

b2-b3

ttJdS-f4

1 7.

e3-e4

ttJf6-d7

3S.

b3-b4

aSxb4

1 S.

f2-f4

�b4-d6

39.

a3xb4

'ii'g SxfS

1 9.

:d3-f3

ttJd7-b6

40.

:d 1 -d4

g 7-gS

20.

'ii'c4-c2

0-0-0

41 .

h3-h4

'ii'f S-eS

21 .

�c1 -d2

�d6-b4

42.

:d4-c4

22.

�d2-e3

f7-fS

23.

a2-a3

�b4-d6

42 .

..

43.

:c4xc6+

�c8-b7 'ii'e S-d4+

,

24.

g4xfS

g6xfS

44.

:c6-c5

2S.

e4xfS

:hS-eS

4S.

:f3-e3

26.

fSxe6

:eSxe6

27.

f4-fS

:e6-e7

2S.

'ifi'e2-f1

:dS-eS

29.

�e3-gS

:e7-e2

b7-bS

Draw. Times: I hr 5 8min. I hr 5 8min.

Game 6

• . • :1 . • ., • , • • � • .� . • • • • .�.� 'iY • • • .t . • .�.

Botvinnik - Furman English Opening 3.2.63

1.

c2-c4

c7-c5 ttJbS-c6

2.

ttJb1 -c3

3.

ttJg1 -f3

g 7-g6

4.

e2-e3

ttJgS-f6

S.

d2-d4

cSxd4

6.

e3xd4

d7-dS

30.

'ii'c2xe2

:eSxe2

7. c4xdS

ttJf6xdS

31 .

'iti>f1 xe2

ttJb6-dS

S.

'ii'd 1 -b3

ttJdSxc3

32.

:a 1 -d1

�d6-e7

9.

�f1 -c4

e7-e6

33.

�gSxe7

'ii'c 7xe7+

b2xc3

ttJc6-aS

1 28

1 0.

T h e t r a i n i n g m a t c h B o t v i nn i k - F u rm a n

11.

i.c4-b5+

i.cS-d7

1 2.

'it'b3-a4

ttJa5-c6

'* •• , . i. . , . , .�. , . , . .�. • • 'if. • • .ttJ . • 8 8. • • l:l

Game 7

Furman - Botvinnik Veresov Opening 5.2.63

1.

d2-d4

ttJgS-f6

2.

ttJb1 -c3

d7-d5

3.

.ic1 -g5

c7-c6

4.

e2-e3

h7-h6

5.

.ig5-h4

.ic8-f5

6.

.ih4xf6

g7xf6

7.

i.f1 -d3

i.f5xd3

1 3.

d4-d5

e6xd5

S.

'it'd1 xd3

e7-e6

1 4.

0-0

.ifS-e7

9.

ttJg1 -e2

ttJbS-d7

1 5.

.ic1 -h6

'it'dS-a5

1 0.

f2-f3

.ifS-d6

1 6.

l:.f1 -e1

'it'aSxa4

11.

e3-e4

'ii'd S-c7

1 7.

.ib5xa4

a7-a6

1 2.

g2-g3

0-0-0

1 S.

.ia4xc6

b7xc6

1 3.

0-0-0

cj;>c8-bS

1 9.

l:.a1 -b1

i.d7-e6

1 4.

�c1 -b1

ttJd7-b6

20.

ttJf3-d4

c6-c5

1 5.

ttJe2-c1

h6-h5

21 .

ttJd4xe6

f7xe6

1 6.

ttJc1 -b3

h5-h4

22.

l:.e1 xe6

'11t eS-f7

1 7.

f3-f4

i.d6-b4

23.

l:.e6-b6

l:.hS-dS

1 S.

ttJc3-e2

d5xe4

24.

l:.b6-b7

cj;>f7-eS

1 9.

'it'd3xe4

..

25.

�g1 -f1

l:.dS-d7

26.

l:.b7xd7

cj;>eSxd7

27.

l:.b1 -b7+

'11td 7-e6

2S.

'11tf 1 -e2

l:.aS-dS

29.

i.h6-f4

l:.dS-d7

30.

l:.b7-b6+

'11t e6-fS

31 .

cj;>e2-f3

Times: 1 hr 2 0min. 1 hr 24min.

.

1 9.

...

f6-f5

20.

'it'e4-f3

'it'c7-d7

21 .

g3-g4

'it'd7-d5

22.

'it'f3xd5

ttJb6xdS

23.

g4-g5

i.b4-d6

24.

l:.d1 -f1

h4-h3

25.

ttJb3-c1

f7-f6 1 29

Bo t vinnik - Pet rosian

2S.

gSxfS

tLJdSxfS

1 1.

tLJb1 -d2

�cS-b7

27.

tLJe2-c3

tLJfS-dS

1 2.

tLJd2-f1

cSxb4

2S.

tLJc1 -d3

l:rhS-h4

1 3.

a3xb4

dS-dS

29.

tLJc3-e2

l:rdS-gS

1 4.

�c4-b3

a7-aS

30.

l:rf1-e1

l:rgS-g2

1 S.

b4-bS

tLJcS-a7

1 S.

c3-c4

dS-d4

1 7.

�c 1 -a3

l:rfS-eS

�

•

•

•

I ,. • • .' '. • • .�. , . � • • . ttJ . . , � � . ttJ • .i � . � . � . I;I

.i •

31.

c2-c4

tLJdSxf4

32.

tLJe2xf4

�dSxf4

33.

l:re1 xeS

�f4xh2

1 S.

c4-cS

tLJa7xbS

34.

J:[eS-eS+

c,t>bS-c7

1 9.

�b3xf7+

c,t>gSxf7

3S.

l:reS-e7+

c,t>c7-dS

20.

�d1 -b3+ 'It>f7-fS

3S.

l:rh1 -e 1

l:rh4-e4

21.

'iYb3xbS

�b7-aS

37.

l:re7xe4

fSxe4

22.

'iYbSxbS

�aSxd3

3S.

tLJd3-cS

�h2-g3

23.

'iYbS-b3

�d3xf1

Times : I h. S 7 min. I h. 3 2min.

24.

l:re1 xf1

tLJe7-cS

2S.

tLJf3-e1

'iYdS-fS

2S.

tLJe1-d3

'iYfS-eS

27.

'iYb3xeS

l:reSxeS

2S.

l:ra1-b1

'It>fS-eS

29.

l:rb1 -bS

�g7-fS

30.

f2-f4

�fS-dS

31.

l:rbS-b7

l:reS-e7

Game S

Botvinnik - Furman Sicilian Defence 6.2.63

1.

e2-e4

c7-cS

32.

l:rb7xe7+ �dSxe7

2.

tLJg1 -f3

tLJbS-cS

33.

l:rf1-b1

eSxf4 tLJcS-eS

3.

�f1 -bS

g 7-gS

34.

tLJd3xf4

4.

0-0

�fS-g7

3S.

tLJf4-dS

l:raS-cS

S.

l:rf1-e1

e7-eS

3S.

l:rb 1-b7

�e7-gS

S.

a2-a3

tLJgS-e7

37.

�a3-b2

tLJeS-cS d4-d3

7.

b2-b4

d7-dS

3S.

'It>g 1 -f1

S.

c2-c3

0-0

39.

l:rb7-h7

tLJcS-e7

9.

�bS-c4

h7-hS

40.

l:rh7-hS+

'It>eS-f7

d2-d3

b7-bS

41.

l:rhSxcS

tLJe7xcS

1 0.

13 0

T h e t r a i n i n g m a t c h B o t v i n n i k - F u rm a n

42.

i.b2-c3

�f7-e6

43.

h2-h4

i.g5-c1

44.

'It>f1 -e1

h6-h5

45.

�e1 -d1

i.c1 -h6

46.

i.c3-d2

Times: 2hr 09min. 1 hr 5 8min. It is curious that the dates and times taken are noted with great accuracy. yet the re­ sult is recorded for only one of the games.

131

Igor Botvinnik

M i khail Botvi nni k's fi nal notebook Of course , one can only be so categorical in relation to chess notes. When I faced the question of how best to preserve Botvinnik's legacy, as scattered about in var­ ious notebooks and j otters , the answer was obvious : we should publish that ma­ terial which would otherwise become unsuitable with the passage of time. So, we produced the books published by the Mikhail Botvinnik Fund . It is curious that in several of the notebooks , as well as chess note s , there are details of dates for car services , oil changes , and also the times of buses from Perkhushkovo to Nikolina Gora ! 8 Botvinnik never made any secret of his method of preparation. He willingly published his views on such an important instrument for the devel­ opment of a chess player. Admittedly, though, it must be emphasized that only a player with a taste for hard research work would be able to apply that same method. And whilst his further articles on this were published as far back as be­ fore the war, even as late as 1 9 9 4 , a series of articles appeared in the Spanish magazine Jaq u e , and also in the Russian j ournal 64 , summing up the results of further research 'on this theme ' . It was a characteristic of Botvinnik that he never forgot to point out the sources of his ideas , and his predecessors , a very valuable thing for the modern student. For ex­ ample, when in the mid- 1 9 8 0 s I had to defend my thesis at the higher school for trainers , on the subject of 'The system of preparation for competitions' , Botvinnik gave me this advice : ' Look at Alekhine's article in the English magazine Chess for 1 9 3 7 , in which he described his preparations for the return match with Euwe.' Botvinnik had the invaluable ability to pick up on something new, adapt it and bring it into his own arsenal. After the publication of the series of articles in 1 9 94, Botvinnik expressed the de­ sire to see these published as a separate pamphlet, and this was done by the Mikhail Botvinnik Fund in 1 9 9 6 . 'A method of preparing for competitions' was published in an edition of 1 , 0 0 0 copies, and is already completely sold out. Thus , there are a number of publications , from which one can learn of Botvinnik's preparation system, and use it for the development of a player.

8

Translator' s note : The latter was the location of Botvinnik's dacha , or summer house.

1 33

Bo t v i n n i k - P e t ro s i a n

Those who say that the method i s n o longer relevant i n these days o f the computer could not be more wrong. In fact, the computer Significantly speeds up the job of collecting and arranging the information, which always took up the lion's share of the time in the old days. Botvinnik promoted his method in two ways - by his personal example, and in his school for talented young players. A combination of great mastery with a rare degree of pedagogic talent allowed his method to go on being used (via his pupils) for many years after the end of his own playing career. His great authority, and the laconic manner of his discussions with his pupils, gave the Master's recommendations a unique character. Such aphorisms tend to re­ main with one forever, changing one 's view of chess. Here are a few of the observa­ tions made by Botvinnik during the meetings of his school in the second half of the 1 9 8 0s : • •

• • • • • • • •

• •

A superior pawn position i s a long-term advantage. Opposite-coloured bishops always favour the side whose bishop is more active, and are unfavourable to the side with the passive bishop. General considerations should be supported by concrete calculation. It is bad to refuse simple play - mistakes tend to result. If in the Maroczy Bind, Black manages to play . . . a6 and . . . b5 , then he is not worse. In order to study the Catalan System, one should look at the games ofSmyslov. There is a weak pawn on d5 , so why not occupy d4 with a knight? Why expose one 's king in a completely winning position? The opponent's pieces are scattered, so one should open the centre. It is better to play a technical ending with an extra pawn, than to sacrifice the exchange for an unclear position. Chess is not just a game of pieces , but also of people - psychology is important. It is necessary to play in tournaments where the opponents are just a little stron­ ger than oneself, else it is possible to collapse and suffer psychological trauma.

One particular point in Botvinnik's method is that the opening is of great impor­ tance. He himself prepared with this in mind, preferring systems where the connec­ tion between opening and middlegame could be worked out in advance, during analysis of the opening. In this respect, it is not unusual to see one and the same ba­ sic structure arise from different openings. Preparation of this type can really be called the preparation of opening systems. As an illustration of his method, we now present some of the contents of Botvinnik's final analysis notebook. The preparation started after the proposal of a match with Fischer, which in the end never took place. The work started in Pitsunda, during a training session with Boris Spassky. This notebook is dated September 1 9 6 9 . Although the first analysis bears the date of July, it is likely that the notes in 1 34

M i k h a i l B o tv i nn i k ' s fi n a l n o t e b o o k

the book were copied from separate sheets of paper on which the analysis had been written down, a typical habit of Botvinnik. This was confirmed by a recent discus­ sion with Yuri Balashov. Yuri Sergeevich said that Botvinnik allowed him to copy out analyses, after giving his word not to show them to anyone else. These analyses were on individual sheets of paper. 1 9 7 0 , the last year of Botvinnik's tournament career, was also the last year of systematic chess preparation, although, by his own admis­ sion, Botvinnik Significantly reduced the scope of his opening preparation after his match with Petrosian. On the leather cover of this notebook, which bears the name 'Vladimir' , written in Palekh style, there is a silhouette of a church. In all probability, Botvinnik obtained it during a joint visit to Vladimir and Suzdal, with Max Euwe! The analyses in this notebook have never been published before.

27.7.69

The only possibility; on 7 . . . a6 there fol­ lows 8 . tba3 and after

1 . Engl ish Opening (Olafsson) 1 .c4 e 6 2.g3 d 5 3 ..ig2 lDf6 4.lDf3 dxc4

7_b6 ab3 .ib7 9..ib2 .ie7 10.0-0 0-0

5.'ti'a4+

1 1 .ttJa3 a6 12.'ti'c2 'ti'c7 13.ttJc4 b5 14.ttJce5

Not 5 .tbe5 'fWd4 6.f4 �d6 7 .'fWa4+ �d7 .

ttJxe5 15..ixe5 .id6 1 6..ib2 h6 17J:fc1 �

5 ... lDbd7 6.'ti'xc4

Here dubious is 6.tbe5 a6 (but not 6 . . . c5 7 . tba3 ! a6 8 .tbaxc4 b5 9 .'fWa5) 7 . tbxd7 'fWxd7 (or 7 . . . �xd7 8 .'iYxc4 l:[b8 with obvious equality) 8 .'iYxc4 c5 . 6 ... c5 7.a41

9

2. Ki ng's I ndian with g3 (Geller)

1 . 1 2.69 1 .d4 lDf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 .ig7 4..ig2 d6 5.lDc3 0-0 6.lDf3 lDbd7 7.e4 e5 ao-o c6 9.h3 'ti'b6 10.1:;[e1 exd4 1 1 .ttJxd4 .l:!.e8 1 2.ttJa4 'ti'c7 1 3..if4 lDe5 14.'ti'c2 b6 1 5.b41

Translator's note : Vladimir and Suzdal are two ancient cities, particularly associated with the history of the Russian orthodox church. Palekh is a village in central Russia, famous for its icon paintings, lacquer boxes and other crafts.

135

B o t v i n n i k - P e t ro s i a n

So that after a7 -a6 there is always the re­ ply c4-cS . 1 5 ....i.b7 1 S.J:tad1 J:tadS 1 7.i.e31

If immediately 1 7 .cS , then 1 7 . . . bxcS 1 8 .bxcS dS and after f2-f4 ttJeS-d7 White can favourably play c4-cS , gain­ ing a pawn advantage in the centre.

1 0....ltJe4

1 0 . . ....xd l + l I.l: hd l ttJe4 1 2 .ttJxe4 (also possible is 1 2 .ttJge2) 1 2 . . .�xb2 1 3 .�b l �fS 1 4.�dS . 1 1 .ltJxe4 i.xb2 1 2.i.xf7 +11

3. King's Fianchetto

2 1 . 1 2.69 1 .d4 gS 2.e4 i.g7 3.c4 dS 4.ltJc3 e5

4. 2 . 7 0 1 .d4 ltJfS 2.c4 eS 3.ltJc3 i.b4 4.e3 c5 5.ltJe2 cxd4 S.exd4 d5 7.c5 ltJe4 S.i.d2 ltJxd2 9 .... xd2 bS 1 0.a3 i.xc3 1 1 .ltJxc3 bxc5 1 2.dxc5 a5

Or Ostojic's 4 . . . ttJd7 S .i.e3 eS 6 .dS ttJe7 7 .f3 fS 8 .g4! . 4. 2 . 7 0 Incorrect! Black plays f4, gS and hS . I played correctly in the game: 7 .�d3 , but after 7 . . . 0-0 - the rook has gone from h8 - I should have played 8.f3 fs 9 . g4! with advantage. 5.dxe51 dxe5 S.'ii'xdS+ ..ti>xdS 7.f41

Obligatory is 1 3 .b3 ! ! 0-0 1 4.l:tb 1 . 4. Nimzo-Indian Defence

28. 1 .70

5 . N imzo-I ndian Defence

1 .d4 ltJfS 2.c4 eS 3.ltJc3 i.b4 4.e3 0-0

4. 2 . 7 0

5.i.d3 d 5 S.a3 dxc4 7.i.xc4 i.dS S.b41

1 .d4 ltJfS 2.c4 eS 3.ltJc3 i.b4 4.e3 c5

e5 9.dxe5 i.xe5 1 0.i.b2

5.ltJe2 cxd4 S.exd4 0-0

Or 1 0 .�d2 �d6 ! ( 1 0 . . . ttJc6 1 1 .bS ttJaS 1 2 .�e 2 ! ) .

Here sensible is

1 36

7.a3 i.e 7 S.d5 exd5 9.cxd5 J:teS

M i k h a i l B o t v i n n i k ' s fi n a l n o t e b o o k

K

•••

K

i • • i . i . 1. • •i. • • . .�. tLl • . � . .jl . n • '

9 . . . �cS 1 0 .tbd4 ! . 1 0.i.e31 d 6 1 1 .ttJg3 ttJg4 1 2.i.d41 7. King's Indian Defence

5. 2.70 6. King's I ndian Defence

1 .d4 ttJf6 2.c4 g 6 3.ttJc3 i.g7 4.e4 d6

5.2.70

S.f3 0-0 6.i.e3 ttJc6 7.ttJge2 a6 8....d2

1 .d4 ttJf6 2.c4 g 6 3.ttJc3 i.g7 4.e4 d6

J:[b8 9.h4 hS

S.f3 c6 6.i.e3 a6 7....d2 bS 8.0-0-01

Better is 8...i.e6 . If 8 . . .'ifaS 9 .eS dxeS (9 . . . b4 1 0 .exf6 bxc3 1 1 .fxg7 cxd2+ 1 2 .hd2 'ifxd2+ 1 3 .l:.xd2 l:.g8 1 4.h4?) 1 0 .dxeS tbfd7 ( 1 0 . . . b4 1 1 .tba4 tbfd7 1 2 .tbb6) 1 1 .f4 White is better. So, 8 .i.e6 (8 . . . 0-0 9.�h6 'ifaS 1 0 .h4) 9.eS dxeS (9 . . . b4 1 0 .tbce2 ! or 9 . . . tbfd7 1 0 .exd6 exd6 1 1 .dS cxdS 1 2 .cxdS �fS 1 3 .�d4!) ..

9 . . . bS 1 0 .hS bxc4 1 1 .�h6 �xh6 1 2 .'ifxh6 l:.xb2 (or 1 2 . . . eS 1 3 . 0-0-0 tbxd4 1 4.hxg6 fxg6 1 S. tbxd4 exd4 1 6.�xc4+ �h8 1 7 .l:.xd4) 1 3 .0-0-0. 1 0.i.h6 i.xh6

1 O . . . bS 1 1 .�xg 7 �xg 7 1 2 . 0-0-0 bxc4 1 3 .tbg3 eS 1 4.dS tbd4 l S .�xc4 White is slightly better. 7.2.70 1 1 ....xh6 e5 1 2.d5 ttJd4 1 3.0-0-0 cS

1 0.dxeS 'it'xd2+ 1 1 .J:[xd2 ttJfd7 1 2.f4 g S

1 4.dxc6 ttJxe2+ 1 S.i.xe2 bxc6 1 6.g4

1 3.g3 gxf4 1 4.gxf4 f 6 1 S.exf6 ttJxf6

Or 1 6 .'ifd2 'ifb6 1 7 .tba4.

1 6.ttJf3=F

1 6 ..... b6 1 7.b3 137

B o tv i n n i k - P e t ros i a n

Maybe even stronger is 9 .�h6 ! and everything is as before, but the move h7 -h5 is ruled out.

6 .te31 •

All this is better for White. Ufimtsev

8. King's Indian Defence

Is this right?

8.2.70

2 . 4. 7 0 .

1 .d4 tt::lf6 2.c4 g 6 3.tt::lc3 .tg7 4.e4 d6

1 .e4 g6 2.d4 .tg7 3.tt::lc3 c6

5.f3 0-0 6 ..te3 c6 7.'iVd2 e5 8.d5 cxd5

Then

9.cxd5 tt::l a 6 1 0.0-0-0 .td7 1 1 .'it>b1

4.f4 d5 5.e5 h5 6.g3 �g4 7.tt::lf3 h4=

Play training game. 1 0. Caro-Kann Defence

20.2.70 9. Pirc-Ufimtsev

1 .e4 c6 2.d4 d 5 3.tt::lc3 dxe4 4.tt::lxe4

1 6.2.70

.tf5 5.tt::l g 3 .tg6 6.h4 h6 7.tt::lf3 tt::l d 7 8.h5

1 .e4 d 6 2.d4 g 6 3.tt::lc3 .tg7 4.14 tt::lf6

�h7 9 ..td3 �xd3 1 0."xd3 "c7 1 1 .�d2

4 . . . e6 5 .tLlf3 �g4 6.�e3 'ifb6 7 .'ifd2 or 4 . . . tLle6 5 .�e3 tLlf6 6 . tLlf3 0-0 7 .e5 .

e6

5.tt::lf3 0-0

5 . . . e5 6.dxe5 'ifa5 7 .�d3 ! 'ifxe5 8 .'ife2 and �e3 . 1 38

A) 1 2 ....e2 0-0-0 1 3 . 0-0 (or 1 3 . 0-0-0 - see below) 1 3 ... �d6 1 4.tLle4 tLlgf6 1 5 .tLlxd6+ 'ifxd6; B) 1 2 . 0-0-0

M i k h a i l B o tv i nn i k ' s fi n a l n o t e b o ok

B l ) 1 2 . . . tLlgf6 1 3 .'ife2 �d6 1 4.tLlfS �f4 I S .tLlxg 7 + �fS 1 6 .tLlxe6+ fxe6 1 7 .'ifxe6 (stronger is 1 7 .tLlh4 l::t g 8 and ?) 1 7 . . . l:teS I s .'iffS �xd2+ 1 9 .1hd2 l::th 7 ; B2) 1 2 . . . 0-0-0 and now: B 2 1 ) 1 3 .tLle4 tLlgf6 1 4. g 3 tLlxe4 I S .'ifxe4 �e7 1 6 .�b l l:the8 1 7 .c4 (or instead of 1 7 .c4 - 1 7 .l:the l �d6 ! ) 1 7 . . . cS I S .�f4 �d6 1 9 .tLleS l::t e 7 ! ( 1 9 . . .fS 2 0 . tLlf7 ! ) ; B22) 1 3 .'ife2 . So, 1 3 .'ife2 �d6 ! 1 4.tLle4 �f4.

8...lLlbd7

S . . . l::t e S 9.g3 e6 is also possible, since 1 0 . dxe6 �xe6 1 1 .'ifxb7 tLlbd7 1 2 .�g2 l::t b S gives Black a dangerous attack, for example : 1 3 .'ifxa7 �c4 1 4.�f3 tLldS I S .tLlxdS l::txe2 + 1 6 .�xe2 �xdS or 1 3 .'ifa6 tLlb6 1 4.b3 tLlfdS 1 5 . 0-0 tLlxc3 1 6 .tLlxc3 'ifxd4 or 1 3 .'ifc6 l:tcs and . . . �c4. 9.g3 lLlb6 1 0. .ig2 �f5 1 1 .0-0 'it'd7

1 1 . . .�d3 1 2 .d6 exd6 1 3 .�xb7 l::t b S 1 4.�g2 tLlbdS I S .'ifd l . 1 2.lLlf4

1 2 . .I:I.e l �d3 ! or 1 2 .a4 �h3 . 1 2 ....g51 1 3.lLlfe2 h6 1 1 . Caro-Kann Defence

25.2.70 1 .e4 c6 2.d4 d 5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 lLlf6 5.lLlc3

g6

6.'it'b3

.ig7

7.cxd5

0-0

8.lLlge2

Or S.�e2 tLlbd7 9 .�f3 (9.tLlh3 tLlb6 1 0 .tLlf4 'ifd6 ! I l .a4 l:tdS 1 2 .�f3 - 1 2 . . . gS 1 3 .aS gxf4 1 4.axb6 a6 I S .h3 �fS ; - or 1 2 . . . �g4 1 3 .�xg4 tLlxg4 1 4.aS ( 1 4.tLlbS 'iff6 1 5 . 0-0 .l:l.acS 1 6.�e3 gS) 14 ... �xd4 I S .axb6 �xf2 + 1 6 .�d l �xb6) . 9 . . . tLl b 6 1 0 . � g S ( 1 0 . tLl g e 2 �fS I l .tLlf4 g S 1 2 . tLlhS tLlxhS 1 3 .�xhS e6) 1 0 . . . �fS 1 1 . l::t d l tLleS 1 2 .tLlge2 tLld6 .

1 2. Exchange Slav

2S.2.70. 1 .d4 d 5 2.c4 c6 3.lLlf3 lLlf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.lLlc3 lLlc6 6.�f4 �f5 7.e3 e6 8.�b5

Or S .tLleS tLlxeS 9 .�xeS tLld7 = . 1 39

Botvinnik - Petrosian

8...lO d 7 1 9.'ii'a4

J:cSl

1 0.�xcS

J:xcS

Or I S .�c2 ? 0-0-0 ! ,

1 1 ....xa7 ...CS 1 2 ....a5 J:aS

1 5 ...lOxd3 1 S.lOc4 "'as

1 2 . . . b6 1 3 ....bS ! . 1 3 .... bS %:tb6 1 4 .... e2 �a3 I S .ttJd l �xb2.

1 6 . . . ttJxb2 1 7 . �xb2 "'c7 I B . ttJd6+ WfB 1 9 . 1:. c l "'d7 20 . .td4 ! a s 2 1 .... d2 a 4 2 2 . f4 g 6 2 3 . fs gxfS 24 . .tcS .

1 3 ......a81 1 4.lOe5 lOxe5 1 5.�xe5

1 7.'ii'x d3 0-0 1 8.b3 J:fd8 1 9.... h3

1 3.'iVc7

'if .

1 4. Reti (Polugaevskyl)

1 5.3.70 1 .c4 eS 2.g3 d 5 3.�g2 lOfS 4.lOf3 �e7 5.0-0 0-0 S.b3 bS 7.�b2 �b7 8.e3 c5 9 .... e2

And after 1 6 ....bB+ Black has nothing to show for his sacrificed pawn! 1 3. Slav (Meran)

2B.2.70 1 .d4 d 5 2.c4 cS 3.lOf3 lOfS 4.e3 eS 5.lOc3 lObd7 S .�d3 dxc4 7.�xc4 b5 8.�d3 �b7 9.e4 b4 1 0.lOa4 c5 1 1 .e5 lOd5 1 2.lOxc51

Also good for White is 1 2 .0-0 cxd4 1 3 .l:.e l g6 1 4.�gS 'ifaS I S .ttJxd4! (but not I S .ttJd2 �c6) . 1 2 ...�xc5 1 3.dxc5 "'a5 1 4.0-0 lOxc5 1 5.lOd21

1 40

A) 9 . . . ttJc6 1 0 .d3 ! So as to avoid 1 0 . ttJc3 ttJe4. 1 0 . . . l:kB I l .ttJc3 and then either ex­ change on dS , or, in the event of dxc4 bxc4, prepare d3 -d4 and d4-dS maybe double rooks on the d-file. Play e3 -e4 carefully, because of knight on c6. B) 9 ... ttJbd7 1 0 .d3 ! . Here the plan with e3 -e4 is not bad, but also tempting is a2 -a 4-aS (after dxc4 bxc4) . Find out from Lev why White can't play, after - 1 O . ttJc3 dxc4 1 1 . bxc4 ttJe4 1 2 . ttJxe4 .txe4 1 3 . d3 .tc6 1 4. l:.fd 1 "'c7 1 S .d4 .te4 - 1 6 .dS ? Apparently, because of 1 6 . . . exdS 1 7 .cxdS .tfS ! .

Mikhail B o tvinni k '5 final notebook

1 5. Tarrasch Defence

French Defence

l S.3.70

l S.2.70

1 .d4 d 5 2.c4 e6 3.tDC3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5

1 .e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tiJc3 dxe4 4.ttJxe4

5.ttJf3 ttJc6 6.g3 ttJf6 7..tg2 .te7 8.0-0

ttJd7 5.ttJf3 ttJgf6 6 ..tg5

0-0 9.i.g5 cxd4 1 0.ttJxd4 h6 1 1 .i.e3

6.ttJxf6+ ttJxf6

A) 1 1 . . .�g4 1 2 ."'a4 and .l:r.ad 1 ; B) 1 1 . . . .l:r.e8 1 2 . .l:r.c 1 �f8 1 3 .ttJxc6 ! bxc6 1 4. ttJa4 �d7 l S .�cS ± or 1 4 . . .... aS l S .b3 ! ± .

A) 7 .�gS cS 8 .�bS + �d7 9.�xd7+ 'ifxd7 1 0 .'ife2 ( 1 0 .�xf6 gxf6 1 1 .c3 cxd4 1 2 .ttJxd4 �cS 1 3 .'iff3 0-0-0 1 4.0-0-0 "'e7 l S .ttJb3 fS !) 1 0 ... cxd4 1 1 . 0 - 0 - 0 �cS 1 2 .... eS �e 7 (or 1 2 . . .... e7 1 3 .ttJxd4 0-0 1 4 . .l:r.de 1 .l:r.fe8) 1 3 .ttJxd4 1:c8 1 4.Wb 1 ( 1 4.f4 h6) 1 4 .. .l::t cS ; B) 7 .�d3 cS 8 . dxcS �xcS 9 .... e2 �d7 ! 1 0 .ttJeS �c6 B 1 ) 1 1 .�gS 'ifaS + 1 2 .c3 (or 1 2 .�d2 'ifc?) 1 2 . . . �xf2 + ; B2) 1 1 . ttJxc 6 bxc6 1 2 .0-0 0-0 1 3 .c3 ( 1 3 .�gS h6 1 4.�h4 'ifd4) 1 3 . . .... c7 1 4.�gS �e7 .

1 6. French Defence

26.8.69 1 .e4 e 6 2.d4 d 5 3.ttJc3 (d2) 3 ...dxe4 4.ttJxe4 ttJd7 5.ttJf3 ttJgf6 6.i.g5 c5 7.dxc5 .txc5 8."d3

8 .ttJd6+ r:J;; e 7 or 8 . ttJxcS "'as + . 8.....,c7 9.0-0-0 0-0

6 ....te7 1 7.ttJxf6+ .txf6 8."d2

1 0.ttJxf6+ ttJxf6 1 1 ."c4 ttJd5 1 2.i.d3 f5

Incorrect - 1 0.�xf6 ! ttJxf6 1 1 .ttJxf6+ gxf6 1 2 ....c4± .

8 .h4 cS ! ; 8 . �xf6 ttJxf6 9 . �c4 b 6 ! 1 0 . ttJeS ( 1 0 .�bS + �d7) 1 0 ... �b 7 1 1 .�b S + c 6 (also possible is 1 1 . . . '1f;>f8 ) 1 2 .�xc6+ ( 1 2 .ttJxc6 'ii' d S o r 1 2 .'ii' f3 cxb S ) 1 2 . . . �xc 6 1 3 . ttJxc6 'ii' d S 1 4.'ii' f3 'ifxf3 l S . gxf3 .l:r.c8 1 6 .ttJxa7 l:[xc2. 8...i.xg51

9.ttJxg5

ttJf6

1 0.i.e2

1 1 .0-0 b61 14 1

0-0

B o t v i nn i k - P e t r o s i a n

Petrosian against Fischer, 1 9 62 played weaker - 1 2 . . . �d7 (the moves l 1 .':d 1 'ifd6 were included) .

French Defence

1 9.3.70

8.�b5+

Or 8 .lLle5 .tb7 9 .�b5 + c6 1 0 .lLlxc6 ( 1 O . 'if£3 'if d5 1 1 . 'if xd5 lLlxd5 1 2 . �xc6 + �xc6 1 3 . lLlxc6 ':c8 1 4.lLlxa7 ':xc2) 1 0 . . ....d5 l 1 .c4 'it'xg2 1 2 .lLle5 + �d8 1 3 .l:tfl �b4+ 1 4.�e2 lLlg4.

1 .e4 e6 2.d4 d 5 3.tOc3 dxe4 4.tOxe4 tOd7

8...�d7

5.tOf3 tOgf6 6.tOxf6+ tOxf6 7id3 b6

1 1 .'iVxa6 'iVc8

1 42

9.�a6

�c8

10 ....e2

�xa6

Three fascinating clashes ° B OTVINNIK S Mo Y S L C ¥ -

With Botvinnik's legendary secret notebooks containing his entire opening preparation

Paperback .

288

pages

•

€ 28.95

•

available at your local (chess)bookseller or at newinchess.com