Fischer world champion

Fischer World Champion! Translated by Piet Verhagen Max Euwe & Jan Timman Fischer World Champion! The Acclaimed Classic about the 1972 Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match Third Edition 2009 New in Chess Alkmaar © 2002 New In Chess Published by New In Chess, Alkmaar, The Netherlands www.newinchess.com Translation of the original 1972 Dutch edition De tweekamp Spasski-Fischer 1972 First English edition 2002 Second English edition 2003 Third English edition 2009 All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission from the publisher Cover design: Steven Boland Lay-out: Rudo Hartman Photo’s (including cover photo) courtesy of the Icelandic Chess Federation Production: Huib Roest ISBN 978-90-5691-263-5 Contents Our greatest knight – by Garry Kasparov A breathtaking model Preface What went before A tense prelude The Games A brief sketch of the course of the match Game Game Game Game Game Game Game Game Game Game 10 Photo Gallery Game 11 Game 12 Game 13 Game 14 Game 15 Game 16 Game 17 Game 18 Game 19 Game 20 Game 21 Index of openings Earlier Encounters Our greatest knight by Garry Kasparov There are few names in the history of sport that have transcended the earthly title of world champion and become legend Fewer still have achieved this while active, or while still living for that matter Bobby Fischer was a member of this select group He possessed an aura beyond chess and personality, beyond even his status as a symbol of Cold War confrontation The closest I ever came to Fischer (no, we never met) was writing extensively on his games and career several years ago The fourth volume of the My Great Predecessors series is dedicated to the stars of the West and it is dominated by Fischer, who is present on over half of its pages Working on it gave me a deep appreciation of the depth and quality of his contributions It is not unreasonable to wonder how an ancient board game launched a brash and largely unschooled American to such heights Obviously we must begin with Fischer’s unprecedented sporting successes, as well known as they may be First the prodigy – the youngest US champion and youngest Grandmaster ever Then the star, winning top events with record scores Finally the world champion, demolishing every foe in his path with impossible ease until taking the crown from Boris Spassky in Reykjavik in 1972 Then we come to Fischer’s uncompromising approach, which had an even greater impact on the chess world than his results Today we have books and databases full of his games, but the best annotations cannot transmit the pressure his opponents must have felt at the board Over and over in Fischer’s games you see the strongest players in the world crack, often making mistakes you wouldn’t believe them capable of making – against anyone but Fischer He would play down to bare kings, leaving his opponents slumped exhausted in their chairs as he offered to post-mortem with them Despite his short reign, he dominated his era to such a degree that it will always bear his name Contrary to popular belief – even in the chess world where anything more than a dozen years is ancient history – chess was not alien in Fischer’s birthplace America had hosted many important chess events, including the first official world championship match in 1886 Prior to World War II, the USA had won gold at four consecutive Olympiads Still, while America was hardly a chess wasteland when Fischer came of age, to reach such heights so quickly without any formal training required a gift from the gods I was under Fischer’s influence myself as a youth, if mostly indirectly My early coaches, including Alexander Shakarov, were quick to advocate Fischer’s repertoire and games Future Baku GM Elmar Magerramov, who was a fellow student of Privorotsky at the Pioneer Palace, modelled much of his repertoire on Fischer’s, from the Benoni to the Poisoned Pawn, and he shared his enthusiasms with me At Shakarov’s recommendation I took up Fischer’s Exchange Ruy Lopez Games like Fischer-Unzicker, Siegen 1970, were very impressive examples for an aspiring Grandmaster RL 8.14 – C69 Fischer-Unzicker Siegen Olympiad 1970 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 f6 6.d4 exd4 7.Nxd4 Ne7 8.Be3 Ng6 9.Nd2 Bd6 10.Nc4 0-0 11.Qd3 Ne5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.f4! Bd6 14.f5! Restricting the bishops a la the famous Lasker-Capablanca, St Petersburg 1914 Then the right exchanges, the e5 break, and as if by magic (with only a little help from his weary opponent), a winning endgame The logic and iron consistency of Fischer’s positional play were without equal I really began to study Fischer when in 1975 Botvinnik told me to work on the King’s Indian I played over the games from the 1961 Reshevsky-Fischer match, among others KI 1.2.3 – E90 Reshevsky-Fischer Los Angeles 1961 (11th match game) 1.c4 Nf6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 0-0 5.Be2 d6 6.Nf3 e5 7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.Ne1 Nd7 10.Nd3 f5 11.exf5 Here, in the main line of the King’s Indian, he recaptured on f5 with the knight, 11…Nxf5, giving up the e4 square to gain play with …Nd4 Fischer repeated this experiment against Gligoric a month later in Bled and they drew a spectacular game Active piece play – this attracted me more than the blocked centre after the usual …gxf5, f4, …e4 lines As much work as Fischer did in dozens of openings he was more focused on finding improvements in main lines than on sweeping new concepts His encyclopaedic knowledge famously included Russian sources he often knew better than his Soviet opponents SI 39.7.5 – B44 Fischer-Taimanov Vancouver 1971 (2nd match game) 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6 5.Nb5 d6 6.Bf4 e5 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Bg5 Qa5+ 9.Qd2 Nxe4 10.Qxa5 Nxa5 11.Be3 Kd7 In this position from his 1971 match against Taimanov he played a novelty, 12.N1c3!, in an important line of the Sicilian, his opponent’s specialty It turned out that this strong positional pawn sacrifice had been suggested in a 1969 monograph by my future trainer, Alexander Nikitin! Fischer’s legacy extends well beyond the 64 squares Throughout his career he was, in the excellent phrase of Spassky’s, ‘the honorary chairman of our trade union’ He believed our game and its players deserved far better treatment than it received, and he got results His demands, often criticized as outrageous at the time, led to better conditions and prizes for all Fischer’s disappearance in 1972 was a missed opportunity for the sport of chess, of course, and not just on the business side It’s fair to say that among all the hypothetical matches that could have been played but weren’t, Fischer-Karpov is number one on the wish list (Though I confess a sentimental choice for a rematch with Kramnik.) The unstoppable mental force of Fischer as the veteran against the leader of the new generation, the psychologically immovable object of Karpov I have taken some criticism for suggesting in my book on Fischer that Karpov had far better chances than were given him at the time, and that recognizing this may have contributed to Fischer’s default and departure Bobby would have been the favourite in 1975, without a doubt, but could he have watched Karpov’s devastation of Spassky in the Candidates semi-final without at least some trepidation? But let us not get too caught up in fantasy We can either thank Fischer for what he gave, or curse him for what he failed to give, and I much prefer the former Bobby Fischer created a global boom and single-handedly dragged chess into the professional era we live in today Chess has lost its greatest knight fails to an unexpected combination, viz 24…dxe4! 25.Rxc6 e3, and all at once the e-pawn becomes incredibly dangerous 26.Rxe6 is followed by 26…e2 27.Rb1 Rf8!, with the terrible threat of 28…Rf1+ 29.Rxf1 Be3+, and wins At first I thought that White had a stronger riposte in 26.Rf4, but subsequent investigation showed that White still does not come out well after 26…e2 27.Re4 e1Q+ 28.Rxe1 Bxe1 29.Rxe6 Rd8! White’s passed pawns are not strong enough, because his king is too far away After 30.Rd6 Rxd6 31.exd6 Kf7 the pawn block is swept away by Black Slightly better is 30.c6, but then Black continues coolly with 30…Kf7 31.c7 Rc8 32.Rc6 Ba5, and the c-pawn falls So Spassky had seen that he had to avoid this variation 24…exd5 25.Rd7 The position still seems critical for Black, but Fischer quickly dispels that illusion 25…Be3+ 26.Kh1 Bxd4 Capturing with the bishop improves the co-ordination of his minor pieces 27.e6 Be5! Fischer’s defending is extremely subtle Squares d6 and c7 are taken away from White, and at the same time the e-pawn is cut off for later capture 28.Rxd5 Re8 29.Re1 Rxe6 30.Rd6! A finesse without which Spassky would have had to fight for the draw 30…Kf7 The safest solution Only White would have winning chances after 30…Rxd6 31.cxd6 Kf8 32.Rc1 Nd8 33.Rc8 Ke8 34.Rc7 31.Rxc6 Rxc6 32.Rxe5 Kf6 33.Rd5 Ke6 34.Rh5 h6 35.Kh2 Ra6 36.c6 It was impossible to keep both queenside pawns, of course 36…Rxc6 37.Ra5 a6 38.Kg3 Kf6 39.Kf3 Rc3+ 40.Kf2 Rc2+ Draw score: Spassky Fischer 11 Game 20 August 29 White: Robert Fischer Black: Boris Spassky Sicilian Defence NIC key: SI 30.5 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 a6 8.0-0-0 Bd7 9.f4 Be7 10.Be2 Up to this point the game was identical to Game 18 Fischer deviates with the text, which has rarely been seen in practice and is nothing special 10…0-0 An excellent solution to the opening problem, plunging Fischer into thought for 17 minutes 11.Bf3 Many people wondered what Black’s answer to 11.Nb3 would have been There hardly seems to be a defence to the threat of 12.e5 dxe5 13.Bxf6, winning a bishop Euwe gave the answer to Mühring in their course on Dutch television: 11…Qb6! The cunningness of this move is that 12.e5? dxe5 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Qxd7(?) loses the queen after 14…Rad8 11…h6 12.Bh4 Leading to further simplification However, this could have been avoided neither with the sharp 12.h4 (12…Nxd4 13.Qxd4 Bc6) nor with 12.Bxf6 (12…Bxf6 13.Nxc6 Bxc6 14.Qxd6 Bxc3 15.Qxd8 Bxb2+ 12…Nxe4 One of the best-known types of liquidating combinations 13.Bxe7 The alternative 13.Nxe4 Bxh4 14.Nxd6 Qc7 is good for Black 13…Nxd2 14.Bxd8 Nxf3 15.Nxf3 Rfxd8 16.Rxd6 The air has been cleared The chances are roughly equal 16…Kf8 17.Rhd1 Ke7 18.Na4 Be8 19.Rxd8 Rxd8 20.Nc5 Rb8 One of the first interesting moments in this tedious game Both players had the opportunity to exchange rooks, but neither of them took it 20…Rxd1+ 21.Kxd1 Nd8 certainly came into consideration here 21.Rd3 a5 Preparing to advance the b-pawn 22.Rb3 b5 Spassky is playing for a win After 22…b6 White could have forced a draw with 23.Na6 Rb7 24.Nc5 23.a3 a4 Spassky doesn’t care that his pawns are fixed on squares of his bishop’s colour He will this again later Any winning prospects he may have are rendered more difficult though 24.Rc3 Rd8 25.Nd3 f6 26.Rc5 Rb8 27.Rc3 g5 28.g3 Kd6 28…b4 was premature because of 29.Rc4 29.Nc5 Aiming to drive back the black king with Nc5-e4+ The only way to prevent this, 29…Kd5, yields nothing tangible after 30.b4! 29…g4 See the note to Black’s 23rd move 30.Ne4+ Ke7 31.Ne1 Rd8 32.Nd3 Rd4 Risky was 32…Nd4 33.Rc7+ Rd7 34.Rc8, with the threat of 35.Nxf6 33.Nef2 h5 34.Rc5 Rd5 Nothing could happen to White after 35.Rxd5, of course, in view of the fixed pawn formation Oddly enough, Fischer thinks better of it 35.Rc3 Nd4 36.Rc7+ Rd7 More or less forcing the rook exchange The consequences of 36…Kd8 37.Rg7, followed by 38.Ne4, would not be bad for White 37.Rxd7+ Bxd7 38.Ne1 Black has managed to get a lot of squares under control, but there are no points to attack in the white position, since all except one of White’s pawns are on dark squares 38…e5 Spassky rightly believes that his bishop would be slightly better placed on f5 that on c6 39.fxe5 fxe5 40.Kd2 Bf5 41.Nd1 Also moving all his pieces to dark squares 41…Kd6 42.Ne3 Be6 43.Kd3 Bf7 44.Kc3 Kc6 45.Kd3 Kc5 46.Ke4 Now Spassky’s intentions are becoming clear If White inadvertently plays 46.Kc3, he would reply 46…e4, followed by 47…Nf3, when the e-pawn can recapture on f3 Naturally, Fischer will not allow that to happen 46…Kd6 47.Kd3 Bg6+ 48.Kc3 Kc5 49.Nd3+ Kd6 50.Ne1 Kc6 51.Kd2 Kc5 ‘After 51…e4 52.Nf1! Nf3+ 53.Nxf3 exf3 54.c3 Kc5 55.Ke3 White just holds the draw (55… Kc4 56.Nd2+) With the king on c5 Black would win in this line!’ – Enklaar 52.Nd3+ Kd6 53.Ne1 Ne6 54.Kc3 Nd4 Draw score: Spassky 8½ Fischer 11½ Game 21 August 31 White: Boris Spassky Black: Robert Fischer Sicilian Defence NIC key: SI 39.13 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 For the first time in his life Fischer deviates from his favourite 2…d6 He appears to be well up on the text as well 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 The so-called Kan variation 5.Nc3 Nc6 This leads the game into Taimanov Variation territory 5…Qc7 was the alternative 6.Be3 Nf6 Usually 6…Qc7 is played first Fischer plays the text with a specific purpose in mind 7.Bd3 White could have tried to exploit this move order with 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.e5 After 8…Nd5 9.Nxd5 Black has two ways of recapturing: 9…cxd5 10.Bd4 or 9…exd5 10.Bd3 In both cases White has chances of an advantage 7…d5 Boleslavsky’s text-book frowns on this move, but it appears to be fairly playable 8.exd5 exd5 The theory only considers 8…Nxd5, after which White gets the advantage with 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Bd4 9.0-0 Furman suggests 9.Qe2 Be7 10.f3, which gives White a more flexible set-up He can castle to either side and the f2 square is available for his queen 9…Bd6 Now Black’s plans are becoming clear He is playing for active piece play in the way championed by Tarrasch This is remarkable, since Fischer normally likes playing against the isolated pawn 10.Nxc6 Now the game in fact transposes to the old main line of the Scotch Game, which promises little for White Whether 10.h3 is more promising will have to be investigated As Karpov indicates, White has the choice between a set-up with Bd3-e2-f3 or one with Nc3-e2, c2-c3 and Be3-f4 The latter variation would seem preferable, because in the former the black counter-manoeuvre Nc6-e5-c4 becomes feasible 10…bxc6 11.Bd4 Directed against the threat of 11…Ng4 With 11.Bg5 White could have actually transposed to the Scotch That would not have made much of a difference compared to the text, as White will exchange on f6 anyway 11…0-0 12.Qf3 Be6 12…Ng4 was dubious in view of 13.g3! (13.h3 is not met by 13…Nh2? 14.Qh5 g6 15.Qh6, but by 13…Qh4, e.g 14.Rfe1 Nh2 15.Qe3 Bxh3!) The tactical possibilities 13…Ne5 14.Bxe5 Bxe5 15.Bxh7+ and 13…c5 14.Qxd5 cxd4 15.Ne4 Bxg3 16.Qxa8 Bxh2+ 17.Kh1 are then not sufficient for Black (even though this latter line is not entirely clear) 13.Rfe1 Preventing 13…Ng4 once and for all 13…c5 14.Bxf6 The alternative was 14.Be5, which Spassky possibly had in mind, considering his previous move The continuation would then be 14…Ng4 (playing for the win of a pawn with 14… Bxe5 15.Rxe5 Qb8 16.Rae1 Qxb2 is punished by 17.Rb1 Qa3 18.Nxd5) 15.Bxd6 Qxd6 16.Qg3 Qxg3 17.hxg3 c4 (17…d4 18.Ne2) 18.Be2, and Black is slightly better 14…Qxf6 15.Qxf6 gxf6 A typical position has arisen Black has the bishop pair and central domination, which compensates for his incoherent pawn structure Black’s prospects should be assessed as slightly better 16.Rad1 Rfd8 Directed against the threat of 17.Be4 Gligoric’s comment on this position: ‘White certainly didn’t plan to play this when he made his first move.’ 17.Be2 Increasing the pressure on the centre The prophylactic 17.Na4, as suggested by Karpov, came into consideration Then Black cannot continue 17…c4 18.Be2 Bf5 because of 19.Nb6 So he has to play 18…Rab8 instead 17…Rab8 18.b3 c4 Threatening 19…Bb4 This cannot be prevented with 19.Na4, since after 19…Bf5 White has no defence 19.Nxd5 An exchange sacrifice, which is sufficient for a draw 19…Bxd5 20.Rxd5 Bxh2+ 21.Kxh2 Rxd5 22.Bxc4 Rd2 23.Bxa6 White is playing for two connected passed pawns At the same time he abandons the foothold on d3 for his bishop After 23.Re2 Rxe2 24.Bxe2 a5 25.a3, followed by 26.Bd3 White would be hardly be in danger of losing Perhaps Spassky was still nursing the hope that he had winning chances 23…Rxc2 24.Re2 Rxe2 25.Bxe2 Rd8 At first sight it would seem that Black is winning a pawn, but as it turns out, it is not quite as bad as that 26.a4 Rd2 27.Bc4 Ra2 Black has no time to grab the f-pawn: 27…Rxf2 28.a5 Ra2 29.a6, and the white pawns have become unstoppable With the text, Fischer follows much the same principle as in Game 10 To put it in general terms: If one side has a rook against a bishop plus two connected passed pawns, and if the king is on the other wing, unable to support his pawns, then the rook belongs behind the pawns, in order to inhibit their advance as much as possible 28.Kg3 Kf8 29.Kf3 White could already have constructed a fortress with 29.f4, followed by 30.Kf3 and 31.g3 Black can never create a passed pawn and his king has no way to penetrate 29…Ke7 30.g4? You really gets the impression that Spassky is at his wits’ end He must have seen that after 30.Kg3, followed by 31.f4, there is nothing left for either side to play for The text gives Black a host of new possibilities 30…f5 Obvious and strong; Black forces the creation of a passed pawn 31.gxf5 f6 32.Bg8 h6 33.Kg3 Kd6 34.Kf3 Once again an error that exhibits indifference White could easily have prevented the black king from penetrating for now After, for instance, 34.f4 Kc5 35.Be6 Kd4 White can set out to win the f6 pawn with 36.Kg4 (36…Rh2 37.Kg3) The position should still be drawn 34…Ra1! Forcing the white king back to the second rank in view of the threat of 35…Rg1, after which the passed h-pawn would have free passage Now the black king can get through to f4 or g4, which should have guaranteed victory 35.Kg2 Ke5 36.Be6 Kf4 37.Bd7 This was Spassky’s aim He is threatening to advance the b-pawn This plan doesn’t hold water, however 37…Rb1 38.Be6 Rb2 39.Bc4 Ra2 It now turns out that in this way White always loses a tempo, which enables Black to advance his passed h-pawn Less good was 39…Kxf5, as White could then make his pawns a lot more dangerous with 40.a5 40.Be6 h5? Fischer is also suffering from indifference First 40…Kg4 and then 41…h5 would have secured a fairly easy win 41.Bd7? Spassky, who had managed to seal the strongest move with every adjournment throughout the match, now bungles it in an incredible way If he had immersed himself in the position, he would undoubtedly have sealed 41.Kh3 After 41…Rxf2 (or 41…Kg5 42.f3) 42.b4! (I first thought that 42.a5 held the draw, but Black just manages to win with 42…Ra2 43.a6 Kg5! 44.Bc4 Ra3! 45.Kg2 Kxf5 46.b4 Ke5, and the black king is just in time to stop the queenside pawns, after which Black’s own pawns will decide) 42…Rb2 43.b5, when neither 43…Rb4 44.Kh4 nor 43…Kg5 44.Bd7 give Black any chance of winning Instead, Spassky resigned without resuming play Fischer was the new World Champion Later investigation taught me that my judgement about the final position was incorrect Firstly, it should be pointed out that the line that Spassky himself gives in Schacharchiv, viz 41.Kh3 Rxf2 42.Bc4 Ra2 43.Be6, does not lead to a draw because of the continuation given by endgame composer J van Reek: 43…Rb2! 44.Bc4 Kxf5 45.a5 Ke4 46.a6 f5, and the white pawns are not dangerous enough This line was published in Schaakbulletin 62 In the same issue L Pliester and J van Beek attempted to refute my variation Their line runs 41.Kh3 Rxf2 42.b4 Rb2 43.b5 Rb4 44.Kh4 Rxa4 45.Kxh5 Rb4 46.Bd7 Ke5 47.Kg6 Kd6 48.Bc6 Ke7 49.Kh5 Rf4 50.Kg6 Rg4+ 51.Kh6 Kd6 52.Be8 Rg5, and now White has the following possibilities: 1) 53.Bg6 The most obvious move, and in fact the only one discussed by Pliester and Van Beek However, by so desperately clinging onto his f-pawn, White cannot avoid losing his b-pawn After 53…Ke7, followed by 54…Rg2 and 55…Rb2, Black gets a technically won ending by force; 2) 53.b6 The correct plan, but the wrong execution White is prepared to abandon his f-pawn in order to advance his b-pawn to b7 But Black replies 53…Rg8, and so collects the b-pawn after all; 3) 53.Kh7! Only thus can White reach the safe haven of the draw Now he is really threatening 54.b6, so Black has nothing better than 53…Rxf5 After the sequence 54.Kg6 Ke5 56.b6 Rg5+ 57.Kf7 Rg2 57.b7 Rb2 58.Bc6 f5 59.Ke7 White is just in time to support his b-pawn However, all these variations turn out to be irrelevant – in spite of their theoretical interest in themselves – since Black can secure the win, as Karsten Müller has shown in New in Chess Magazine 2002/1, with the subtle 42…Kg5! (instead of 42…Rb2) White will then be unable to maintain both passed pawns, e.g 43.b5 Rf3+ 44.Kg2 Ra3, or 43.Bd7 Rf4!, winning final score: Spassky 8½ Fischer 12½ Index of Openings (numbers refer to games) Alekhine’s Defence 13, 19 Benoni English Opening Nimzo-Indian Defence 1, Pirc Defence 17 Queen’s Gambit 6, 9, 12, 14 Ruy Lopez 10, 16 Sicilian Defence 4, 7, 11, 15, 18, 20, 21 Fischer was White in the even numbered games Earlier Encounters Before 1972, Spassky and Fischer had met five times over the board, Spassky scoring out of King’s Gambit KG 1.4 Boris Spassky Robert Fischer Mar del Plata 1960 (2) 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 Bg7 9.Nc3 Nxc3 10.bxc3 c5 11.Be2 cxd4 12.0-0 Nc6 13.Bxg4 0-0 14.Bxc8 Rxc8 15.Qg4 f5 [15…Kh8] 16.Qg3 dxc3 17.Rae1 Kh8 18.Kh1? Rg8 19.Bxd6 Bf8 20.Be5+ Nxe5 21.Qxe5+ Rg7 22.Rxf5 Qxh4+ 23.Kg1 23…Qg4? [18.Bxd6] 18… [23…Qg3! ] 24.Rf2 Be7 25.Re4 Qg5 26.Qd4 Rf8? [26…Bf8!] 27.Re5! Rd8 28.Qe4 Qh4 29.Rf4 1-0 Grünfeld Indian GI 5.12 Boris Spassky Robert Fischer Santa Monica 1966 (8) 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 Nc6 9.Be3 0-0 10.0-0 Qc7 11.Rc1 Rd8 12.Qe1 e6 13.f4 Na5 14.Bd3 f5 15.Rd1 b6 16.Qf2 cxd4 17.Bxd4 Bxd4 18.cxd4 Bb7 19.Ng3 Qf7 [19…Qg7!] 20.d5! 20…fxe4 21.dxe6 Qxe6 22.f5 Qf7 23.Bxe4 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Rf8 25.Bb1 Qf6 26.Qc2 Kh8 27.fxg6 hxg6 28.Qd2 Kg7 29.Rf1 Qe7 30.Qd4+ Rf6 31.Ne4 Bxe4 32.Bxe4 Qc5 33.Qxc5 Rxf1+ [33…bxc5] 34.Kxf1 bxc5 35.h4 Nc4 36.Ke2 Ne5 37.Ke3 Kf6 38.Kf4 Nf7 39.Ke3 g5 40.h5 Nh6 41.Kd3 Ke6 42.Ba8 Kd6 43.Kc4 g4 44.a4 Ng8 45.a5 Nh6 46.Be4 g3 47.Kb5 Ng8 48.Bb1 Nh6 49.Ka6 Kc6 50.Ba2 1-0 Ruy Lopez RL 17.4 Robert Fischer Boris Spassky Santa Monica 1966 (17) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.g3 Nf6 13.d4 Bd6 14.Re1 Bg4 15.Qd3 c5 16.dxc5 Bxc5 17.Qxd8 Raxd8 18.Bf4 h6 19.Na3 g5 20.Be3 Bxe3 21.Rxe3 Rd2 22.Nc2 Re8 23.Rxe8+ Nxe8 24.Ne3 Bf3 25.Bc2 Nd6 26.b3 Kf8 27.a4 Ne4 28.Bxe4 Bxe4 29.axb5 axb5 30.b4 Rb2 31.g4 Kg7 32.Kf1 Kf6 33.Ra5 Rb1+ 34.Ke2 Rb2+ 35.Kf1 ½-½ Ruy Lopez RL 22.1 Robert Fischer Boris Spassky Havana olympiad final 1966 (1) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d6 9.h3 h6 10.d4 Re8 11.Nbd2 Bf8 12.Nf1 Bd7 13.Ng3 Na5 14.Bc2 c5 15.b3 cxd4 16.cxd4 Nc6 17.Bb2 g6 18.Qd2 Bg7 19.Rad1 Qb6 20.Nf1 Rad8 21.Ne3 Qb8 22.Bb1 Qb7 23.Rc1 Kh7 24.a3 Bc8 25.Bc3 Bd7 26.Qb2 Qb8 27.b4 Kg8 28.Rcd1 Nh7 29.Ba2 Ng5 30.Nxg5 hxg5 31.dxe5 dxe5 32.Nd5 Ne7 33.Nxe7+ Rxe7 34.Qd2 Bf6 35.Qd6 Kg7 36.Qxa6? [36.Re3±] Rc8 37.Rd6 Rxc3 38.Rxf6 Be6! 39.Rxe6 fxe6 40.Rd1 Qb7? [40…Qf8! ] 41.Qxb7 Rxb7 42.Bxe6 Rxa3 43.Kh2 Ra4 44.Rb1 Rc7 45.f3 Ra6 46.Bb3 Ra3 47.Rb2 Ra1 48.Kg3 Kf6 49.Kg4 Rc3 50.Bd5 Raa3 51.h4 gxh4 52.Kxh4 Ra1 53.Rd2 Raa3 54.Kg4 Rd3 55.Re2 Rac3 56.Ra2 Ra3 57.Rb2 ½-½ Grünfeld Indian GI 5.12 Boris Spassky Robert Fischer Siegen olympiad final 1970 (6) 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 Nc6 9.Be3 0-0 10.0-0 Qc7 11.Rc1 Rd8 12.h3 b6 13.f4 e6 14.Qe1 Na5 15.Bd3 f5 16.g4 fxe4 17.Bxe4 Bb7 18.Ng3 Nc4 19.Bxb7 Qxb7 20.Bf2 Qc6 21.Qe2 cxd4 22.cxd4 b5 23.Ne4 Bxd4 24.Ng5 Bxf2+ 25.Rxf2 Rd6 26.Re1 Qb6 27.Ne4 Rd4 28.Nf6+ Kh8 29.Qxe6 Rd6 30.Qe4 30…Rf8? [30…Rad8=] 31.g5 Rd2 32.Rf1 Qc7? [32…Rxf2 33.Rxf2 Qe3 34.Qxe3 33.Rxd2 Nxd2 34.Qd4 Rd8 35.Nd5+ Kg8 36.Rf2 Nc4 37.Re2 Rd6 38.Re8+ Kf7 39.Rf8+ Nxe3 35.Rd2 Kg7±] 1-0 .. .Fischer World Champion! Translated by Piet Verhagen Max Euwe & Jan Timman Fischer World Champion! The Acclaimed Classic about the 1972 Fischer- Spassky World Championship Match... contradictions were gleaned from other newspapers ‘The World Champion, relaxed and healthy.’ ‘Spassky looked pale and tired.’ ‘The World Champion, punctual as always, played his move and left... to find out whether it allowed for the world championship match to take place at two different playing venues There were sufficient precedents of world championship matches having been played