Tal-Botvinnik (1960)

Cycle 1958-1960

Interzonal

The 4th Interzonal was organized in Portoroz, Yugoslavia in 1958. The young Soviet start Mikhail Tal won the event but had to battle until the end with the best Yugoslav player S. Gligoric.  The 15 years old Bobby Fischer made is debut on the international scene, fulfilling a norm for the title of Grandmaster and placing among the top six to be qualified for the Candidates tournament.

From the 4th of August till September 12 at the delightful seaside resort of Portoroz the fourth, and in many ways the most interesting. Interzonal Tournament was organized smoothly and with great competence by the Yugoslav Chess Federation. The utmost credit is due to the Slovenian Chess Federation which was the particular unit responsible for the organization of this historic event and there is no doubt that the players and all those who participated in or watched the tournament viil retain the most pleasant recollections of their stay on the Istrian peninsula and will always remember how brightly the sun shone down on the blue waters of the Adriatic.

There were twelve prizes —300,000, 225,000 200,000, 150,000, 120,000, 100,000, 80,000, 60000, 50,000, 40,000 and 30,000 dinars (the tourist rate for the dinar is 400 to the dollar or 1,120 to the pound) and another special ten prizes for such awards as the best endgame, the most effective combination and the best positional game. Non- prize-winners received 2,000 dinars for every point. The first six players qualified for next year’s Candidates’ Tournament and as such a qualification automatically brings with it the international grandmaster title two new grandmasters were added to the list—Benko and Fischer—three if one also reckons Olafsson though the Icelandic player received his title from the FIDE Congress which sat at Dubrovnik halfway through the tournament.

The average age of the competitors was barely thirty years; a twenty-one-year-old player won first prize and a fifteen-year-old player qualified for the Candidates. This was a great triumph for youth and a further proof that, as this century advances so the age at which one attains mastery at the game seems to lessen.

A hot pace was set from the very start by Grandmaster Pal who won his first two games against De Greiff and Szabo. Then, however, he was well held to a draw by the Czechoslovak grandmaster, Pachman, and in the fourth round, he met with his first (and as it was to prove his last) loss at the hands of grandmaster Matanovic. Meanwhile, the Soviet grandmaster, Petrosian, had been showing fine form and winning game after game with the result that he was in the lead by the time the fourth round was reached and he was to remain so placed for another eleven rounds.

Another favourite for first place, Grandmaster David Bronstein, was proving to be quite disappointing. He could not seem to get going but played in rather listless style. Who would have thought beforehand that Bronstein was going to draw his first ten games? Almost it seemed that there had been an interchange of personality between him and Petrosian. Even with his remarkable record of never having lost a game in an Interzonal he was far from being the force he had been, let us say, at Gothenburg in 1955,

With a series of wins in the ninth, tenth and eleventh rounds, however, Tal was rapidly overhauling Petrosian and by the time the sixteenth round was reached these two were level with 10% points. In the fifteenth round, Tal had been particularly severe in disposing of the Danish grandmaster, Bent Larsen, in the brief number of twenty-four moves. It was all the more surprising therefore when, in the very next round, Petrosian himself not with a defeat at the hands of Larsen. This was Petrosian’s first loss in four years

From now on Tal was in the sole lead and it very soon became clear that nothing was likely to shake his grip on the first prize. Probably the key game in this respect was his remarkable struggle with Panno in Round Seventeen. As a matter of fact, after some bewildering complications, the young Argentine grandmaster did have a winning position; but he got into time trouble, failed to find the best line and eventually lost the adjourned game. In Round Eighteen, too, Tal was under considerable pressure from Olafsson but just managed to save the draw. As always, fortune seemed to favor the strongest player. After a bye in the round nineteen, all he required was a couple of draws to make sure of first place.

This he achieved without much difficulty and thus gained first prize on his first appearance in an international tournament (if one excepts such events as the Students team tournaments). Coming after two successive victories in the Soviet Championship this places him amongst the very best players in the world. The secret of his success at Portoroz is to be found in his amazing zest and enthusiasm for the game. He plays every game to win and with an energy that is irresistible. Even after he had finished his round’s play he could be seen engaged in innumerable quick games against whichever opponent was available. One imagines that the young Tal and the young Alekhine had very much in common.

Gligoric’s second place vas also very well deserved and naturally enough extremely popular in his native Yugoslavia. As a matter of fact, had he won his last round game against Fischer he would have tied for first place? Tie chose in this game the same variation against the Sicilian Defense with which the Soviet players had their celebrated threefold win against the Argentine players at Gothenburg. But it would appear that young Bobby Fischer had been expecting just this variation and the report goes that he had been analyzing it for several hours with his second, Lombardy, the junior world champion. They must have analyzed to some effect as Fischer produced a much better line than the Gothenburg variation and obtained rather the better game so that Gligoric was quite relieved to get the draw.

The next two places were surprisingly occupied by Benko and Petrosian. Not that Petrosian’s equal third was at all astonishing. He had been expected to qualify, but it was Benkö’s result that caught all the prophets napping. Playing throughout the tournament with the utmost determination he never gave anything away, committed few blunders and produced chess that was worthy of qualified for the Candidates. In fact, had he won against Dr. Filip, as he should have done, he would even have come equal second.

Originally, there was allotted to this tournament only five places for the Candidates Tournament. But the FIDE President decided, in view of the strength of the Portoroz tournament, to give the sixth place and in consequence, a great fight raged until the very last moment of the last round as to who should occupy the remaining two qualifying places. No less than seven players were interested—Fischer, Olafsson, Averbach, Bronstein, Matanovic, Pachman and Szabo. For some time it looked as though a tie bet at least three of these was the likeliest outcome, and it looked as though Bronstein would indeed be ahead of the rest. For he was drawn against the outsider, Cardoso, in the last round. Surely he experienced grandmaster that he was, would be able to outmaneuver a player whose experience of international chess was limited in the extreme. And so it seemed likely to be for the first half of the game during which Bronstein was clearly winning. Then, however, there came an interruption of play. A storm burst over the head and the electric light temporarily failed. True, the light was soon restored, but the incident had a fatal effect on Bronstein’s concentration. In no time at all, he was the exchange down and had a hopeless game, which he duly resigned after seeing his opponent’s sealed move. This was Bronstein’s first loss in an Interzonal Tournament! It seems a pity that it should also have doomed him to miss the Candidates Tournament and that event will be all the poorer for the absence of one of the world’s greatest players.

Meanwhile, Fischer, having drawn with Gligoric, was pretty safe to qualify. The question was, who would accompany him? Averbach never looked likely to do more than draw with Filip, and Szabo also had nothing more against Panno and this meant that two candidates had fallen by the wayside.

With Pachman missing a golden opportunity to force a win against Sanguinetti, only Olafsson was left within reach of Fischer. For, though Matanovic did win against Larsen, this merely left him equal with Averbach, Bronstein, and company. Olafsson was paired against Be Greiff and for a long time looked none too comfortable. Indeed, their game was adjourned with, if anything, Be Greiff having the advantage. However, he sealed a weak move and the initiative at once passed to the Icelander’s hands. With a few powerful strokes, Olafsson destroyed the Colombian’s position and, to practically universal satisfaction, joined the precious group of qualifiers. For the last few years, this great young Icelander has been the fifteen-year-old Bobby Fischer, making his first appearance in an international event, should not only hold his own but even qualify for the Candidates’ Tour i is an achievement unparalleled in the history of the game. No player, not even Capablanca, managed to do as well as this at such a tender age. What Will happen to him in the Candidates’ Tournament next year is anybody’s guess, but I feel certain he will not die grace himself and will hold his own in even such august a company as that of the world champion.

At first, his play at Portoroz seemed a little tentative. He was, in fact, lucky to win against both Fuster and its fellow-countryman, Sherwin. But he proceeded from strength to strength as the tournament went on and in the end, it was the grandmasters who were playing a draw against him. Quite remarkably, his style I ready that of the mature grandmaster. He plays positional chess, combines where end when the combination is necessary but does not go out of his way to complications.

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Total
1 Tal,M xx ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 1 13.5
2 Gligoric,S ½ xx ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 13.0
3 Petrosian,T ½ ½ xx ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 1 1 1 ½ 1 12.5
4 Benko,P 0 ½ ½ xx ½ 1 ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 12.5
5 Olafsson,F ½ 1 ½ ½ xx 1 0 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 12.0
6 Fischer,R ½ ½ ½ 0 0 Xx ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 12.0
7 Bronstein,D ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ Xx ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 0 ½ 1 11.5
8 Averbakh,Y ½ ½ ½ 0 0 ½ ½ xx 1 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 11.5
9 Matanovic,A 1 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 xx 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 11.5
10 Szabo,L 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 0 xx ½ ½ 1 ½ 0 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 11.5
11 Pachman,L ½ 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ xx ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 11.5
12 Panno,O 0 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ xx ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ 11.0
13 Filip,M 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ xx ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 11.0
14 Sanguineti,R ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ Xx 1 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 ½ 10.0
15 Neikirkh,O ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 1 0 ½ 0 0 xx 0 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 9.5
16 Larsen,B 0 0 1 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 xx 1 1 ½ 0 1 8.5
17 Sherwin,J ½ 1 0 ½ 1 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 Xx 1 0 1 1 7.5
18 Rossetto,H 0 0 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 0 0 0 xx 1 ½ 1 7.0
19 Cardoso,Ro ½ 0 0 0 0 0 1 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 1 0 Xx 1 1 6.0
20 De Greiff,B 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 1 0 ½ 0 xx 0 4.5
21 Fuster,G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 1 xx 2.0

The Candidates’ Tournament

The Tournament was organized by the tree Yugoslav cities of  Bled, Zagreb, and  Belgrade.

Some of the participants had good hope to become the next challenger to Botvinnik.
Smyslov: “ So far I played all the Candidates’ Tournaments, in this one there are two young players with who I never played Tal and Fischer, I think the fight will be very interesting. ”
Petrosian:“ I have played the last three and have now good experience of such contest. I believe the winner will be a player with such experience like Keres, Gligoric, Smyslov…however the length of such tournament may give some advance to a young competitor.”
Keres: “As the oldest participant I gave an advantage to…my opponents! In Yugoslavia, I will meet many players aggressive style and active play, no doubt the contest will be interesting.”

 

   

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
1 Tal M xxxx 0 0 1 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 1 1 ½ 20.0
2 Keres P 1 1 0 1 xxxx 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 0 1 0 1 ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 18.5
3 Petrosian T ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ xxxx ½ ½ 0 ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 1 0 0 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 15.5
4 Smyslov V 1 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ xxxx ½ ½ 1 0 0 ½ 1 0 ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 0 1 1 15.0
5 Fischer R 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 1 Xxxx 1 0 ½ ½ 0 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 12.5
6 Gligoric S 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 0 0 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 1 0 1 ½ ½ xxxx ½ ½ 1 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ 12.5
7 Olafsson F 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 1 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 1 xxxx 0 0 ½ 1 10.0
8 Benko P 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 1 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 0 xxxx 8.0

 

The final

All around the world the everyday press gave the detailed comments to this world championship match, which arouse excited interest in people who didn’t bother about the chess at all. In addition, this match fulfilled another important task, i.e. it led to further expansion of chess in the world. This event helped for the propaganda of chess more than any other event had done before.

Being only 23 years, old Tal became at the time the youngest challenger and then the youngest world champion in the whole history of chess. Before the fact that Dr. Lasker being only 26 years old could challenge Steinitz to play the World Championship match. At that time even, Lasker could not boast such achievements. In three years he reached to top with amazing results like the first place twice in the USSR Championships in 1957 and 1958; win the Interzonal Tournament in 1958; the best individual result in the Chess Olympiad in 1958; victory in Zurich Tournament in 1959 and finally in the Candidate’s tournament in 1959. When Botvinnik received the title of grandmaster as a result of his victory in Moscow 1935, Tal had not yet been born. The Challenger is a quarter of a century younger than the world title-holder. Tal, the chess player, shining with his surprising ideas and complicated combinations, unreachable tactics and whose brave way of playing which very often borders with the hazardous plan.

Against Botvinnik’s game of profound strategy, Tal natural aggressive play needed no remodeling. But more than that as Tal himself was quoted in a interview: “ I know I made what appeared to be a bad moves at times, but they served the purposed of making my opponent use up time why I made such move.”  

For few reason this World Championship Match was somehow much more interesting for the chess players. One of them was for the first time in the chess history both players never met beforehand at the board. The second the different style of both players and third the wish to have some change at the top of the chess world.

On March 15, 1960, thousand of chess lovers assembled front of the Puskhin Theatre in Moscow. The event was opened by the former world champion M Euwe as FIDE representative. G. Stahlberg was Chief Arbiter and H. Golombek his assistant.

Game 1

French Defense

Tal started this match perfectly with a first victory in the first game. Curiously Botvinnik decided to play a French when he had already a very bad score with it especially during world championship matches. The game followed the moves of Gligoric-Petrosian of 1959. Botvinnik then diverge and tried to catch the initiative with a daring pawn sacrifice. The Champion missed a critical 25. Qd1 and in time trouble was force to exchange his Rook for a Bishop. He resigned 6 moves later.

Game 2

Benoni

As expected Tal chose a sharp variation of this unusual defense ( in such contest) but avoid to complicate too much preferring to play cautiously. After 22…b6 and an offer of draw which was refused, Black had an unpleasant game however with a too passive play White could not concretize anything before the game was adjourned. When it resumed, Tal developed his piece on the King’s-side exchange a pair of Rooks and leveled the chance completely.

Game 3

Caro Kann- Defense

Going back to some satisfactory times (Smyslov in 1958), the Champion decided to open with the solid Caro-Kann defense. To force his opponent off the beaten theoretical track, Tal surprise everyone with his fifth move, deliberately doubling the f-Pawns. With good intuition Botvinnik decided to close the game to avoid the strength of the opposite Bishops. After 9. e5 Tal considered his position as…lost! The Champion declined not less than three offers of Pawns which could complicated the matters.  Tal only compensation was that Black’s King remained in the center  but was hard to exploit it without some help of his opponent.  Tal had to wait 27 moves before to activate his pieces. Then suddenly White Bishops showed their power. With the help of his Queen they invaded Black territory. After 36…Kb7 White played 37. Qc6 and offered draw which was agreed. Few years later, in his book Tal found that after 37. Ba6! White missed a wining game!

Game 4

Nimzo-Indian Defense

The Champion used the Saemish variation which could lead to a sharp game but once more the Champion too cautious to launch some attack on the King’s-side refused the battle and the game proceeded along a positional channel. In ending a draw seemed inevitable after White missed 30.f4 with good chances to win. But in time trouble and with many more moves to accomplish, Botvinnik preferred to secure the half point than to lose everything.

Game 5

Caro Kann Defense

Tal as White used another usual line to counter Black ‘s plan. Surely not most active line to break this defense and White could not claim any advantage after 20 moves. Tal decided then to proceed with few exchanges which resulted in Botvinnik’s having the better position with an ending of a Knight and five Pawns for each. No further progress was made and logically both players agreed to share the point.

Game 6

King’s Indian Defense

The Champion stand well after the opening. Tal varied from the usual King’-side counter play and occupied the Queen-side with his pieces. At some strange after launching a counter-attack Tal sacrificed a Knight. Tal said :“ Suffice to say that all other moves are bad and the Knight sacrifice is maybe incorrect… but the Bishop on g7 became now very active and White has to taken in account all the sharp variations.” So a speculative sacrifice! Botvinnik succeed in having Queens exchanged but Black had two Pawns for the Knight and one reached the seventh rank, a position which was quickly won if he had play 28….Rxc3. Instead Black managed to reach an ending with an extra Pawn but with the help of the powerful two Bishops and precise play he converted it intoa full point. Tal 4 – Botvinnik 2

Game 7

Caro Kann,

Botvinnik adopted a line with led to a immediate exchange of Queens. Both players played quite fast the opening. When the game was leveled, Tal decided to animated the game by a tactical sacrifice of Knight. Too surprise the Champion reacted badly and reply with the wrong move 25…Bg6 when Bf5 was necessary. Tal made a real firework and once finished he was a Pawns and two Knights for the Rook. The winning ending was sharp but the Challenger played accurately and brilliantly and won.

Tal said: “ In any tournament an advantage of three points is  very difficult to overcome. But in a match it is another story. We were not completely satisfy with the first seven games, and that therefore it would be psychologically difficult to play the eight game: one hand, here was some kind of subconscious feeling that the result of the match was almost predetermined, and on the other hand, a tangible feeling that a long battle with Botvinnik was in store.”

Game 8

King’s Indian Defense

Botvinnik finally scores a full point. Tal blundered a Pawn in the opening with 14…c4? Then launched an immediate assault on the enemy’ s King. The scenario worked quite well and soon White discovered an unpleasant position with a lot of weaknesses. The position of the Champion became suddenly very critical but hopefully for him his opponent confused a Rook move with 34…Rbc8?, instead of 34…Rec8, which instead to win made him lost.

Game 9

Caro Kann Defense

Both players decided to re-examined the lines discussed already in game 5. On move 11, Tal sacrificed a Knight for two Pawns. Black was very precise in defense and tried to avoid simplification by exchanging everything he could. Tal mistaken move 21. Qg3 with an exchange of Queens on the wrong square and suddenly had to realize he position was failing apart. However entering into an endgame with a piece down for two Pawns (doubled), the  Challenger missed an hypothetic draw after he played 39. a3 instead of a4 which leave the Knight to pick up the last White’s hopes.

Tal said: “after the match it seems to me the losses in the eighth and nineth game worked out the best for a psychological point of view. When the score became 5-4 it had a sobering effect on me. A new struggle with equal chance began, at the same time, I had acquired newly found confidence I my abilities”.

Game 10

King’s Indian Defense

Tal follow a line patented by Gligoric. The Champion sacrificed a pawn but got good compensation for it. Black complicated the games which gave him always the upper hand. Black managed to reach the adjournment with an extra pawn but the Champion succeeded to activate his Rook and Knight and after a magnificent endgame play, he finally drew.

The best game so far according Tal.

Game 11

Reti Opening

For the first time in this match Tal chose to open with 1. Nf3. He said: “My problem of what opening to use for this game had nothing to do with any compulsion to obtain an opening advantage  but how to arrive at the most complicate position… so to create a position “full of problem.” Botvinnik tried to counter the opening with an King’s Fianchetto system but soon had to realize that after 8…Be6 his position was already difficult. Black defended brilliantly and it was not easy for White to break the fortress. Under time pressure Botvinnik missed the active move 31…Rd5 with a direct attack on the weak e-Pawn. Instead Black faced a strong attack on his King. Some simplicity after adjournment give a Queen’s ending with five pawns to three and an easy victory for the Latvian master.

Game 12

Queen’s gambit Declined

Botvinnik obtained some positional advantage however as customary Tal played very actively and created interesting complications. Tal refused a draw but missed the chance for a pretty Rook sacrifice. Botvinnik a Pawn up but with a difficult Queen and Pawn ending didn’t seal the best move 41. a4 instead of Kg2 which could give a very unpleasant position for Black. The players drew 30 moves later and Tal leaded by 7 to 5.

Game 13

Queen’s Indian Defense

Tal didn’t want to repeated some lines of the Nimzo-Indian and instead opened with some rare line of the Queen’s Indian which didn’t give anything . Queens were exchange as early than the 12th move and it was clear that the players will satisfy with a quick draw. After fifty minutes and 16 moves the deal was done.

Game 14

Nimzo-Indian Defense

The game was postponed for few days due to Tal’s illness. White didn’t get much from this opening especially after they developed their Knight on h3. After another early Queens exchange this time on move 10, White tried to reach a favorable ending but Black didn’t want to risk too much and decided to simply by exchanging Rook and Bishop. The position was leveled and the players agreed for another rapid draw this time in 22 moves.

Game 15

Caro-Kann Defense

The players are back to the theoretical discussion. White didn’t repeat the piece sacrifice of course and went for an normal pattern which gave his a slight plus. Black forced some exchanges but the endgame appeared to be better for White. The Champion started then to play at his best and didn’t give any change for Tal to find tactical move. The players agreed to draw the game however the position was still complicated but probably Tal was happy with this half point which moved him closed to the final victory.

Game 16

Nimzo-Indian Defense

The game followed the lines used in the 14th. Botvinnik improved considerably his play at the time and White delighted a good advantage. To avoid trouble Tal decided to exchange Rooks and minor pieces but could only prevent to stop the threats from the white’s Queen at the cost of a full Pawn. When the time factor start to rise, the Champion lost his serenity, a Pawn but also faced some dangerous threats. Once Black permitted the exchange of Queens it became difficult to concretize anything and logically both players agreed to draw.

Game 17

Caro-Kann Defense

The opening discussion went until the anti-positional 12. f4 which close the Bishop and gave to Black a very satisfactory position. With opposite castling, White decide naturally to launch something the Black’s fortress. With natural moves Black strength his position winning even a Pawn but in exchange Tal pressed badly the opponent’ s King. With both players in time trouble, Botvinnik blundered his position and under devastating attack resigned before the adjournment. Tal leaded by 10 to 7.

Game 18

Nimzo-Indian

Tal said: “ I was probably now, the irst time, that I felt the cherished 12,5 points were within reach. At the same time, I realized that quite waiting tactics in the last part of the match “were not for me” and I did not lose my nerve in the last games. Although I was making move mechanically sometimes good sometimes not, I was conducting my play based on sporting positions in the match. ”

Tal varied on the 7th move but the postio still gave good prospect for White in the center and in the King-side. The Champion was not sure about “what’s next and spent nearly one hour for the next 3 moves. Finally feeling fear Tal forced a exchange of Queens which ease the tension on the board. Tal rejected an offer of draw thinking he could build something with his Queen-side Pawns but Botvinnik quickly reversed the position and Tal had to be very careful not to lose the game. Once more time pressure was a key factor. With no time on his clock  the Champion had to limited his attack to the win a pawn but only a little chance of victory. After the adjournment Tal, sacrificed a Knight for two Pawns and Botvinnik, unlucky with Rook and Knight against Rook and Pawn offered a draw.

Game 19

Dutch Defense

Botvinnik logically tried to complicate the affair but Tal didn’t give any change for it, simplify the matter and led the Champion to take necessary risks. Using the time trouble of his opponent, Tal leveled the position and later pocketed an extra Pawn. The adjournment was hopeless for Botvinnik who resigned before to resume.

Game 20

Nimzo-Indian

Another sharp variation which gave to Botvinnik a interesting position. However the lack of precision allowed Tal to simply at extreme avoiding unnecessary complication. Botvinnik offered a draw on move 27 and Tal accepted it.

Game 21

Queens’ Indian Defense

Tal was not in mood for a long and difficult game, just a half point was enough for his happiness and to finish the match. Tal opened with 1.d4 for the first time and reached an well known theoretical position which was considered as flat and equal. Botvinnik offered a draw after 17 moves which gave Tal the match victory and also the title of 8th world champion.
After the game finished Tal declared: “I am happy over this victory won in a very difficult contest. Tension was high throughout the match, which, perhaps, explains why we both make mistakes. I am expecting a challenge to a return match and, when I receive it I shall be preparing for a new encounter with Botvinnik.”

 

Speaking of the Match between Botvinnik and Tal we should take into consideration the instantaneous decisions of the both players and the specific situation during the match.

The analysis of some games shows that at some definite playing stages, in the phase that we can call the strategic one, Botvinnik in most of the games achieved a comparatively clear superiority. In this first phase Botvinnik was leading in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, 17th and 18th games and as for Tal, he was superior only in the 1st, 11th, 15th and 19th, moreover his 11th and 15th games were slightly superior. On the other hand Botvinnik was a little bit lost and began to make many tactical mistakes.

Tal started this match perfectly with a first victory in the first game. Curiously Botvinnik decided to play a French when he had already a very bad score with it especially during world championship matches. Botvinnik missed a critical 25. Qd1 and resigned 6 moves later.  The second point Tal got it on game 6 after he sacrificed a Knight on move 21 to get his piece back on move 30 and win the game 10 moves later. Incredibly Botvinnik lost the next game he missed completely a small combination on move 25 with let him with a exchange down and a losing game. With a lead of 3 points,  Tal was probably too confident and lost… the next two games. Tal managed to increase again his lead after winning the 11th after another decisive sacrifice on move 45. From this point and to avoid a remake of the first part of the tournament Tal decided to take no risk anymore and wait for Botvinnik’s mistake. Tactic, which paid cash, he won another 2 games and the match with the score of 12.5-8.5.

In a chess game Tal is not looking for the process that, according to some very strict scientific laws, will bring defeat to the opponent. Moreover, he builds his strategy out of exact profound knowledge of the chess laws or out of the definite calculations of the combinations.  He strives to put his opponent in front of complicated problems. In this respect Tal seems to be one of the greatest and the only one disciple of Lasker for the time being. In the process of the game, he takes into consideration not only the position of his opponent but also the opponent’s physical abilities. Besides all these features, Tal is also a very bright tactician who knows how to surprise his opponents with original ideas. He can be characterized as a very optimistic chess player with an inexorable aspiration for victory.

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Total
Tal M 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 0 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ 12.5
Botvinnik M 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 0 1 1 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ 8.5

 

 

On the 9th of May a press-conference of the World Championship Match took place in the USSR Central Chess Club.

The conference was opened by the Chairman of the USSR Chess Federation International Master Alatortsev. He congratulated the grandmaster from Riga with winning the World Champion’s title.

Michail Tal answered the various questions of grandmasters, masters, representatives of the Soviet and foreign press.

“I can confess, said Tal, that the match was very difficult. It was not easy to win. I had to spend a lot of sleepless nights with my second Koblenets analyzing the postponed matches. But I got a real pleasure having met the outstanding chess player Botvinnik, whose high class of playing is well-known.

How was I preparing for the match? I can reveal this ‘secret’ now. I did not pay much attention to openings, as to my mind they are not very important. While studying Botvinnik’s games, we tried to find the most vulnerable places. It was extremely difficult. We studied chess literature, read the newest achievements of Soviet and foreign chess players.

One of the stages of preparation was participation in the International Tournament in Riga, where my attention was paid mostly to defense. After it I did not play any game. It helped to keep the chess ‘appetite’. 

In almost every round with Botvinnik I spent little time for openings, trying to keep my head fresh in the second half of the round”.

As for the estimation of some rounds, the World Champion underlined that Botvinnik played very masterly in the 9th round. Tal said his best round was the 19th. The World Champion also noted the 12th round for the variety of conception.

Answering the question about his nearest plans, Tal said that after a two-month rest he will start the preparation to the 14th Chess Olympiad in Leipzig. Maybe he will comment all the rounds of the match and the challengers’ tournament.

Once back home in Riga, M. Tal was welcomed as a national hero. Thousand of chess fans were waiting to congratulate the new World Champion.  The following interview was publish in Sharmatny:
“Q: When did you realty feel confident enough to challenge the world title?

A: I never set myself exactly this target. Even without it playing with strong opponents gives a very great artistic satisfaction. It is natural, however, that in any contest you try to do your best. And so I reached the decisive match without ever thinking about it.

Q: How did you prepare for this match?

A: Alexander Koblenz, my coach, and I devoted on,- main attention to the analysis of games played by Botvinnik, against whom I had never played before, and also to studying the latest styles in openings, in the Soviet Union and in other countries. I also did physical training as it Was necessary to stand the competition against the best player in the world.

Q: Were you sure of winning before the match begun?

4: Of course not. Botvinnik’s skill is quite well known, but it is also self-evident that I would not have left Riga for Moscow if I had not believed in winning.

Q: Which of the games of this match do you consider your best game and which do you think is the best game of your op patient? Which of the games was the most interesting?

A: Of the games I won I like the 19th game best. Botvinnik’s defense in the 9th game was splendid. I think the most interesting, though it may also he the least faultless, was the 12th.

Q: What advice can you give to the chess players, and to those who are beginners?

A; The most important thing for every good chess player is to seek his own style in chess. To do so, one has to make a thorough study of the chess legacy and digest it critically. In this respect the study of chess is similar to literary re search and literary art.

Q: Do your regard chess as recreation or as mental work?

A: This depends on the way you play. To have a good game of chess with a pal in your leisure hours is recreation, but participation in chess tournaments is work and quite strenuous, too.

Q: What part does chess play in your life?

A: A big part, certainly, but the amount of time I devote to chess varies, in any case, a player, particularly one who participates in tournaments, has to have regular training to maintain good form.

Q: How do you feel after the tension of the recent eight weeks?

A: Most likely I ant very tired, but so far I don’t feel it.

Q: What are your plans and your most cherished dreams?

A: I had one cherished dream, but happily it has come true.

In the Canadian Chess Chat, former World Champion M. Euwe tried to find some reasons why Botvinnik lost to Tal: “Suppose we make a list of the various things a chess player must know, starting with openings, and suppose we continue the list with the skills a chess player must have, such as the ability to exploit the pressure against weak Pawns, the ability to carry out the minority attack, etc. Now let us establish two columns to the right of the list, the list headed Botvinnik, the second headed Tal. Suppose we now grade each player as to his ability in each item on the list on a basis of 0-10. We might give Botvinnik an 8 in Ruy Lopez, which would indicate that he is a connoisseur of that opening, we might give him a 9 in Caro-Kann, which would mean that he is excellent in that opening we might grade him 6 in the French Defense, a & for his ability to carry out the minority attack, a 6 for is handling of complicated positions, a 7 for his combinative power, etc. Continuing down the list, we would get a complete pattern of Botvinnik’s capacities. Suppose we now returned to the head of the list and graded Tal in each item. When we compared the grades of each player, it would strike us that most of them, perhaps three-fourths of them, would be in favur of Botvinnik. This explains rather clearly, the many forecasts which appeared in favor of Botvinnik before the match.

 Even though Botvinnik lost the match, a regarding of the two masters today would give a approximately the same favorable comparison for Botvinnik. How can this be possible? Doesn’t the player with the superior skill win the game?

To give an explanation of this apparently paradoxical statement we must realize that a chess game is not merely a comparison of the abilities of each side in the various aspects of the game. It is a struggle not only to excel in those special areas but also to bring the game into the field in which the player is most adept. If I know that my opponent is an expert in the Sicilian, it is very easy for me to avoid this strong side of my opponent by not playing 1. e4 as White and by answering this 1.e4  by 1…e6 or by any move other than 1…c5. Quite another problem is how to avoid the opponent’s specialty if he is strong in combinations. Certainly, it sometimes occurs in a chess game that there is a free choice between simplification and complication, but this is not always the case. If I consistently have to avoid complications because of my opponent’s skill in this respect, it entails a serious handicap, because the question is not only ” is the move good or bad?” but also “does the move lead to complications?”  Thus it can happen that I may prefer a mediocre but simple move to an excellent but complicated continuation. Still another factor to be considered is that I can make twenty very strong strategical moves and one bad tactical move may spoil the whole position. The point is that superiority in the tactical sphere counts much more than any other skill.

The first fundamental question therefore is: “Is Tal superior to Botvinnik as far as tactics are concerned?”

We must first of all realize that Botvinnik, throughout his brilliant chess career, has excelled both in the strategical and tactical fields. Many of Botvinnik”s famous games against equal opponents such as Smyslov and Keres have been decided in favor of ex-world champion through beautiful, sharply calculated decisive combinations.  It was hard therefore for most of the prognosticators to admit Tal’s superior skill in tactics. The combinations which Tal had shown so far were attractive, but they seldom could stand exact analysis. It seemed obvious that Botvinnik would be able to refute his rivals’ unsound combinations, and Tal would have no chance at all. But the experts had underrated Tal’s ability or rather overrated Botvinnik’s. As a matter of fact, Tal’s combinations in this match were just like his previous ones- beautiful but incorrect. However, Botvinnik was not able to show the unsoundness of the combinations. Was this skill on Tal’s part or weakness on the part of Botvinnik? Both. It is certainly to Tal’s credit that he can play such complicate and tricky combinations that not even Botvinnik is able to disentangle them.

Botvinnik’s failure at the critical stage of the game may be explained to some extent by his absence from big chess events these pass few years. If Botvinnik should decide to demand a return match and if he should be able to make up for his lag in practice by competing in strong master tournaments, the situation could become different. As we know, Botvinnik will play in the Argentina tournament with several of the best players in the world. This practice may be very useful to him, and will certainly facilitate his tactical improvement. But the big drawback in his match with Tal was not that Botvinnik did not see the combinations but that he did not see them quickly enough. He regularly got into time trouble, and then blunders were inevitable. Surely, grandmaster practice will accelerate his thinking processes. But will it accelerate them sufficiently? I doubt it. The speed of playing is not only a question of practice; it is also chiefly a question of age. I have seen Capablanca at the age  of 25 or 30 playing with amazing ease, generally in half the time required  by his strong opponents. I have also seen Capablanca play in the AVRO tournament at the age of 50, and at that time he was always struggling against time. But we won’t be too pessimistic. If Botvinnik eliminates his present handicap in the tactical aspects of the game, the problem will still be: ” How good is Tal in other aspects of chess?” True, we have already considered this question when grading the two champions by stating that Botvinnik’s marks exceeded those of his rival. However, I have the impression that Tal’s capacities in several respects have been underrated for the simple reason that they were based on a small number of games. Tal is still a very young player, and consequently he did not supply much data for judgment and still less for statistics. None of us thought very much of Tal’s talent for strategy. Tal was the brutal adventurer, not the great general making his balanced, well-considered decisions. Still, this dynamic Tal gave a superb performance in the field of strategy by beating Botvinnik in the 11th and 19th games of the match. This is an all-important factor to take into consideration when attempting to prognosticate the result of a return match between these two players.

Let us now review the recent match as to the types of losses. Botvinnik was beaten tactically in the 1st, 6th and 17th games. Of these, only the first win was fully deserved by Tal. Botvinnik, not yet convinced of Tal ‘s phenomenal  power in wild positions chose a risky variation of the French Defense and thus played into his opponent’s hand. The 6th game Botvinnik could have one, but the win was not obvious, for all the masters and grandmasters present in Moscow also overlooked the winning maneuver (it was Kmoch who suggested the correct continuation). The 17th game Botvinnik could have won very easily. He had a won position when at the 40th move he made a blunder which cost him the game and accordingly made a difference of two points in the final score. Botvinnik did not lose all the tactical battles either. He drew a few, and he won the 8th game after Tal had missed the opportunity to save – and probably win – a completely compromised game. Most of the positional battles were slightly in favour of Botvinnik, but he couldn’t win a single one of them. On the other hand, Tal, as already mentioned, succeeded in attaining two fine strategical wins, one in the 11th game, one in the 19th game. The endgame is probably the only sphere of chess technique in which Botvinnik’s superiority was unquestionable. Still, Tal did not lose more than one endgame, a stubborn but hopeless struggle of three Pawns against a Knight, and he showed remarkable skill in drawing slightly inferior endings.

So far, we have spoken about the purely technical side of the game. Besides his technical qualities, Tal is great as a fighter. A loss cannot break him. He always retains the same cheerfulness whether he wins or losses. Moreover, he is, notwithstanding his youth, a great psychologist. He knows where to hit his opponent, how to overwhelm him, he knows which moves are the most impressive, he has learned how to hide his own real purpose.

All in all, our new world champion is an all-around powerful champion. It will not be easy to take away from him his well-deserved honor.”

Grandmaster V. Panov in the Soviet press: “Each world champion is not only the strongest of leading players. He is also an innovator in both theory and practice of the ancient and ever young pas time of chess. Without this knack of introducing novelties, Mikhail Tal would not have succeeded in winning the chess crow”. He is a pupil and a typical representative of the Soviet chess school whose vivid combinational style reminds us of our great fellow countrymen, Tchigorin and Alekhine. Tal has added a new feature to modern chess and that is conviction in the need of taking big risks. It seemed as though Tal was too bold in many games against Botvinnik, a Soviet chess classic, who has made valuable contributions to world chess. There sprang up on the chessboard puzzling situations with mutual weak points and chances. The outcome of the struggle was decided by Tal’s swift thinking. He spent half as much time as his opponent in pondering over moves. The Riga Grandmaster’s resourcefulness, tactical ingenuity and faith in himself and his success — all this also played a decisive part. We involuntarily recall the following conclusion drawn by Mikhail Tchigorin after 40 tense years of chess playing and writing: “Do you know wherein the secret of success lies? It is not to be afraid of anything you must not be afraid of those famous weaknesses which are shouted at every corner! Carry on in your own way without fear!”

This was how Tal conducted himself in the match which has just ended. In the person of the new world champion, we hail the resurgence of Tchigorin’s daring, fervent and resolute style of play enriched with all the achievements of the Soviet chess theory.

The new chess king will have to with stand the pressure of many dangerous Soviet and foreign rivals. I talents continue to develop as borne out notably in the latest match in which Botvinnik dis played more profound knowledge of strategy and of theory of openings than Tal. But Tal’s youth, the magnitude of his talents, his great will to win and ability in training himself serve as an earnest that the banner of the Soviet chess school and the world chess crown are in reliable hands.”

Golombek, arbiter and journalist concluded: “Though one may attribute part of his bad form to the effect Tal’s style of play still there remains a residue of truth in the assertion that Botvinnik was well below is normal form. It remains to find the reason for this lack of form. At forty-eight though over twice his opponent’s age Botvinnik is far from an old man; and, physically he seems quite fit. I believe the reason to lie in a chronic lack of practice. For many years now Botvinnik has kept away from the turmoil of international tournaments. The result is that he had to play himself (or try to play himself) into form in the matches themselves. Hence his poor results in practically every match. For Tal the match marks a definite improvement as a player—not so much for the point of view of either originally or combinational genius. Both of these he showed on and off during the match, but not to the extent he had done in previous tournaments. But he was improving visibly in his judgment as regards endings and certain closer forms of middle- game during the match and at the end he was playing the sort of chess that Botvinnik himself likes to play.”