Petropolis, Brazil, VII-VIII, 1973.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | Total | |||
| 1 | Mecking,H | 2575 | Xx | = | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12.0 |
| 2 | Geller,E | 2585 | = | Xx | = | = | = | 1 | = | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11.5 |
| 3 | Polugaevsky,L | 2640 | = | = | xx | 1 | = | = | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11.5 |
| 4 | Portisch,L | 2645 | = | = | 0 | xx | = | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11.5 |
| 5 | Smyslov,V | 2600 | 0 | = | = | = | xx | 0 | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11.0 |
| 6 | Bronstein,D | 2585 | = | 0 | = | = | 1 | xx | 0 | = | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 0 | 10.5 |
| 7 | Hort,V | 2610 | = | = | = | = | 0 | 1 | xx | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 10.0 |
| 8 | Savon,V | 2570 | 0 | = | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | xx | = | 0 | 1 | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 9.0 |
| 9 | Ivkov,B | 2535 | = | = | = | 0 | = | = | 1 | = | xx | = | = | = | = | = | = | 1 | = | = | 9.0 |
| 10 | Ljubojevic,L | 2570 | = | 0 | = | = | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | = | xx | 0 | 1 | = | 0 | 1 | = | 1 | 1 | 9.0 |
| 11 | Reshevsky,S | 2565 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 1 | xx | 1 | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | 1 | 8.5 |
| 12 | Panno,O | 2580 | = | = | 1 | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | Xx | = | = | = | = | 1 | 1 | 8.0 |
| 13 | Keres,P | 2605 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | = | = | = | = | xx | = | = | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.0 |
| 14 | Gheorghiu,F | 2530 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | 1 | = | = | = | xx | 1 | = | = | 1 | 7.5 |
| 15 | Biyiasas,P | 2395 | = | 1 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | xx | = | 1 | 1 | 6.5 |
| 16 | Tan,L | 2365 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | = | 0 | = | = | xx | = | 0 | 3.0 |
| 17 | Hug,W | 2445 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | = | xx | = | 3.0 |
| 18 | Kagan,S | 2405 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | = | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | = | xx | 3.0 |
Portoroz playoff, IX, 1973.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | Total | ||||
| 1 | Portisch,L | 2650 | xxx | 1 1 = = | = 1 = = | 5.5 | |
| 2 | Polugaevsky,L | 2625 | 0 0 = = | xxx | 1 1 0 = | 3.5 | |
| 3 | Geller,E | 2605 | = 0 = = | 0 0 1 = | Xxx | 3.0 |
Karpov and Korchnoi were interviewed by the journalist from “Shakhmaty v SSSR” (“Chess in the USSR”)
Korchnoi V.
Q: What is the main reason of your success?
A: My preparation was unusual. Never before I paid such a lot of attention to my physical shape. I gave up smoking several months before the tourney, went in for sport regularly and followed my regime.
Q: Was it easier to play “at home”?
A: Of course. It is much more peasant to play when you feel the support of your fans. Still I took some measures to keep the most zealous fans away from the tournament.
Q: Which of your games are the most remarkable?
A: I managed to win several interesting games such as versus Larsen, Byrne, Taimanov and in the last round versus Hubner.
Q: What can you say about your rivals?
A: The strength of Karpov is increasing from tournament to tournament. The success of Byrne depends a lot on the unsuccessful performance of other favorites, especially Tal and Larsen.
Q: About Karpov:
A: “Karpov is improving with every tournament. In one of my lectures I said that in this cycle no one can win against Fischer. To do this Karpov has as yet insufficient experience and knowledge. Perhaps Anatoly Karpov believed me when he said to the journalists that this was ‘not his cycle’? Of course, Karpov’s intention to battle for the highest possible place in the Interzonal was a surprise to no one. His play in this tournament was more mature than earlier. Karpov is growing into a great tournament fighter, he is not afraid to take risks, and is capable of playing to win in every game. At the same time he is highly practical, and does not commit blunders. His play now resembles that of Spassky in his best years—he is composed in ever encounter, he plays each stage of the game equally well, without any obvious errors.”
Anatoly Karpov
“I gained satisfaction not only from my result in the Leningrad Interzonal Tournament, but also from the purely creative aspect of my play—a desirable combination for any player. I managed to go through the whole tournament without defeat, and played a number of good games, one of which was judged to be the best in the tournament. This was the game with Quinteros.”
Q: There is an impression that this victory was very easy for you.
A: Yes. I think this tournament was very successful for me. There were almost no nervous situations, except the game against Smejkal. But everything turned out alright. I’d like to note the great help during the tournament of coach GM Furman.
Q: What can you say about your rivals?
A: Korchnoi was especially strong in the second half of the tournament. The success of Byrne is the result of thorough preparation. I feel pity for Tal, he had to play with weak opponents in the first rounds and he tried to force the game but having understood that he won’t succeed he became nervous.
Q: Who of your rivals of the same age do you consider the most perspective?
A: Hubner. He is a subtle chess player. He has perfect opening repertoire and one can study something from him.
Q: What is your chess goal?
A: In such cases I answer that every good soldier dreams to become the general.
Petrosian, after the drawing of lots discovered he should play against Portisch, whom he never beat in the individual games. He said: “If I play bad, there will not be any difference whom to lose. If I play well, I will not be afraid even of Portisch.”
Portisch: “In the beginning I was not very pleased with the results of drawing of lots, but then I decided that everything what happend happend for good. As it is very difficult to win three games from Petrosian, it is not possible to win four games from him in semi-final or five in the final.”
Karpov (before drawing of lots): “I am ready to play with anybody, moreover I have no “uncomfortable” opponents as I did not play much with these Candidates. Certainly, even among the Candidates there are strong and weak GMs. On the one hand, it is not bad “to choose” a weaker opponent to gather match experience, on the other hand, a strong opponent makes you to work more intensively, which arouses interest of struggle and as a result new ideas appear.”
Polugaevsky: ” I can see an obvious superiority of our Soviet GMs in two matches: Spassky versus Byrne, and Korchnoi versus Mecking. The situation in the match Petrosian- Portisch is more complicated. I think Petrosian’s chances are better. It is difficult to say anything about my match. Karpov as got great successes for last years and I am glad that I am to play with him.”
Mecking: “Korchnoi is the perfect tactician. And while he is not young he keeps on using variants but his opening preparation is far from perfection.”
Byrne: “I consider Spassky one of the strongest opponent. That’s why the match with him suits me mostly from the chess prestige point of view.”
In September 1973, the FIDE Congress in Helsinki discussed the regulations for the World Title match. “In addition to documents concerning the agenda, a new proposal was submitted which the Central Committee had received from the United States Federation. It was decided to send this project to all federations with an invitation for them to make their comments on this and earlier distributed documents to the President of FIDE by February 1, 1974. A commission composed of representatives from the federations of Brazil, Hungary, the United States and the Soviet Union, plus the President of FIDE will edit the final draft regulations, while bearing in mind the comments made at the Helsinki Congress and those of the federations. The 1974 Congress will pass the decision on the regulations”.
On the eve of the Central Committee’s session, world champion Robert Fischer sent a telegram to the President of FIDE in which, among other things, he submitted his own proposal on the regulations for the World Title match, i.e, that the match be played for 10 won games, not counting draws, without limitation on the number of match games and that should the result be 9 wins to 9, the match he proclaimed a draw with the world champion retaining his title and the prize money shared equally between the champion and the challenger. Other details concerning the exhaustive regulations are contained in the documents submitted to the Congress by American representative and the FIDE Vice-President Fred Cramer.
The Soviet delegate pointed out that the American proposal had been seen only at the session of the Congress and Central Committee and not two months prior to the beginning of the session, as stipulated by the Statute. He also said that the new project calls for a revision of the decisions passed at the Congress in Vancouver.
Quarterfinal matches
Tal looked at the chance of each Candidate for 64:
Q: Three years ago before the start of the candidates’ matches Tigran Petrosian stated that the most difficult and important thing in these duels was to fit the keys to oneself Ta what extent, in your opinion, will this affect the present candidates, and how much will it affect the results of the matches?
A: ‘To know one’s self! in itself is very important. Then one can look on the development of the match struggle as if from the other side, with a much clearer perspective. Unfortunately, it is not possible to know oneself just as well as the opponent at times. I am completely convinced of that. That’s why it’s so important to try. It is easier far the older player to look back, review the events of his chess autobiography, and make some kinds of generalizations concerning his entire works.
On this level Karpov end Mecking find them selves in a somewhat weaker position, but, perhaps, it is not necessary far them to…
Q: What might compensate for this?
A: That today they play better than yesterday. But let’s return to self-knowledge. If Petrosian justifiably spoke of this before his ‘match with Hubner, who was little known to him at that time, then before the meeting with Portisch, who he knows very we these words are especially fitting. Moreover, if one brings to mind the score of their previous encounters
— it is not in favour of the Soviet Grandmaster
— it is quite clear that Petrosian’s main problem will be to know himself in the light of past encounters with Portisch . Well, it all started with the game in Bled in 1961. I saw it happen myself. Petrosian very interestingly conducted a complicated battle, obtaining the better position only to drop a piece in time trouble. After that I got the impression that Petrosian – an incredible thing! – sat down to play with Portisch with same kind of preconception about himself. Only so can you explains his loss to Portisch in the 1967 Moscow Grandmaster tournament, where Petrosian had a hopeless position on the twentieth move of a Slav Defence Exchange Variation. Such misfortune occasionally haunted Tigran Vartanovich with Gligoric also. But against the Yugoslav Grandmaster, Petrosian is able to recoup excellently. Such a task confronts him also with Portisch . This is not the easiest of problems, if one takes info account that Portisch excellent undoubted leader of the foreign contestants in the candidates’ matches — that is, if such a division exists. I suggest that the score in the games between them will in no way serve as a barometer before the Match in Majorca. Anyone who doubts that can lust look to the analogical matches Capablanca – Alekhine, Spassky — Fischer
Of course, Portisch has grown much stronger in recent years, but the difference between playing him with white or black is like the difference between night and day. In my match with him, with block I systematically varied lines and opening schemes, each time employing a system prepared for lust one game. The idea is based on not allowing Portisch to neglect his theoretical machine’ at full cycle. Well, with black Portisch clearly dislikes the move 1. e4 With this in mind, Korchnoi (I’m not talking for myself, because I play 1.e4 constantly) has started all of his recent games with Portisch by advancing the King’s pawn. What is more, he plays 1.e4 even more rarely than Petrosian. By the way, as far as I remember, Tigran Vartanovich, from about ten games in recent tournaments, all started ‘from the king ‘gave’ his opponent just one draw…
Of course, the problem is not just the first move. Portisch does not like it when his king the subject of concrete threats. In those situations he plays much less surely than in those where he has the initiative. He has a magnificent feel for the initiative. All in all,
Portisch belongs to that group of chessplayers which is not content to find a good move, but to invariably look far the best.
Q: What does, for example, Spassky perceive of himself?
A There’s a different situation. Undoubtedly, Byrne knows Spassky better than Spassky Byrne. They have played only one solitary draw, though it was interesting enough. It came to pass at the Alekhine Memorial, in 1971, when Byrne arrived in the role of — if it can be put this way — Fischer ‘locator’. Then in Reykjavik Byrne was on official correspondent for the ‘New York Times’ and, I think, unofficially, was by rights one of Fischer’s good friends, one of those with some sort of entry into the new world champion’s ‘Chess Kitchen’. The fruits of this sojourn became clear at the Interzonal Tournament in Leningrad, when Byrne considerably rebuilt his opening repertoire, especially with black.
His result was the only true sensation of either Interzonal tournament: Mecking’s success has been predicted by someone. One might say, of course, that in Leningrad Byrne was unable to beat any of the tournament favourites, but on the whole he played surely and strongly. No, Byrne is definitely not a lucky member of the candidates! Nevertheless, the result of his match with Spassky, in my opinion, is predetermined. I have played beside Boris all year, and have carefully followed the metamorphosis of his sporting form. In the Tallinn tournament Spassky still did not ‘look himself’, as in the USSR team tournament. At Bath, in the European Championship, he was playing much more surely a first board. Then, in the Chigorin Memorial at Sochi, Spassky realized some sort of underlying ease, without effort, and played a few magnificent games. Then, as he was in the National championship, I had not seen that Spassky in a long time. That was the ‘old’ Spassky. He willingly went in far open positions, trying for on exchange of punches.
As a proof, the majority of his wins in the championship were in The Sicilian Defence. From this one gets the impression that in the openings, Spassky was not in the least ‘afraid’, and consequently went in far the variations in which he believed. Taking into consideration that Byrne is a ‘Sicilian’, this tactic gains special meaning. It is true that the American also plays the French Defence, but Spassky has always played against that successfully.
Against the King’s Indian Defence, which is Byrne’s main armament against 1 d4,
Spassky has almost a 130 percent score with the Saemisch variation. Therefore, even leaving out the part about the rating difference, I foresee in this match another ‘opening incompatibility. These two matches are meetings between chess players of about the same generation. The formal difference between 45 and 35 years and between 35 and 25 years is one and the same, but in substance completely different. This means that in the two other matches, players from different (or almost different) generations are meeting.
It is difficult for me to talk about the Korchnoi — Mecking match. I know one of the contestants well enough, but the other one — not at all! At the some time, I haven’t played more games with Korchnoi than with the rest of the candidates, except Mecking, who I haven’t played once.
That Korchnoi plays Mecking in the quarter— final is both good and bad for him. If is good because Korchnoi is better than Mecking in many stages — the opening, strategy, etc. Of course, Mecking is growing, perhaps ‘by the hour! In accordance with how he played his games in the Interzonal tournament, it is apparent that he works a lot. But that is not enough to come up to Korchnoi.
All this is good for Korchnoi. But the bad is that Mecking is young. Viktor is harmed by a known prejudice against young players.
In one of the interviews, published in my name, it was stated that I had supposedly said that Karpov would without fail be the World Champion’s opponent. It is not quite like that. I somehow said that in the future, after some time, the young players, to which group Karpov and I belong, would get good chances to play, and, possibly, defeat Bobby Fischer. That’s all. This does not mean that Karpov is now the unique favourite. I think that all the candidates’ matches are almost identical in the strength of their participants, and to predict the outcome of each match beforehand is difficult. I think that my match with Korchnoi will demand from me all my physical and moral strength. Korchnoi is an exceptional chessplayer. Over the past eight years he has invariably been in the top three in the world, in my opinion. This chessplayer is very dangerous with the black pieces, just as with white. At present, Korchnoi can beat anyone in the world. It will be necessary for me to use the maximum force in order to beat him. By nature I am an optimist, and I foresee a happy result to the first match.
About the match in Moscow, I equally sympathize with both of the contestants, whom count as coevals. Polugaevsky – by growth -we played our first game 18 years ago. Karpov – by our recent joint appearance at the World Festival of Youth in Berlin, where felt young for the first time in years In this match, in spite of the brilliant tournament successes of Karpov, (and they really are brilliant) each side’s chances seem to me unclear. Here all will depend on the theoretical duel, on who will be able to lead the match into his channel, and on the nerve conditions at the time of the match. With the new rules — to three wins — I, for example, utterly cannot imagine how one should play when the opponent has ‘+2’ ”
Q: How do you think the winning of the first decision will affect the outcome of the match?
A: It will not be so important only in the Byrne—Spassky match. In the other matches, I think the first win will have great significance. It will play a particular psychological role between Petrosian and Portisch. If one wins, the tradition continues. If the other wins, tradition is broken, and the flywheel may easily start spinning in the other direction
Q: Do you think that there will only be Soviet Grandmasters in the semi—finals?
A: There ore good chances of that, though Portisch is on excellent chessplayer.
Augusta, I-II 1974.
Viktor Korchnoi believes that he has chances to play the World Champion next year. In the discussion with Kazic published in Politika after the end of the duel with Mecking, Korchnoi said that “his semi final match with Petrosian will be very hard. The winner of this match will be Fischers’ opponent.”
“I played poorly, but Mecking even worse.” When the last match game in Augusta finished, Korchnoi took a long walk around the hotel, breathing the fresh air, relaxing from the strain exacted by the decisive match game.
At the same time Mecking returned to his hotel room, depressed that in the fatal thirteenth game he buried all his dreams. He didn’t admit anyone, not even the Brazilian journalists and trainers. There was a Do not disturb sign on his door. However some time later in an interview to the Voice of America he said he had committed several psychological errors…“I could have played all the game for a draw but played for a win. I refused draws, thinking that I had to win!”
All in the two minutes of the last game where Mecking had to make 12 moves, but failed to succeed . . . Mecking sadly deserted the scene; although that very day he had hoped to create a turning point in the match. After his victory in the previous game he received many telegrams from Brazil, in which he was hailed as a hero.
Korchnoi told that Mecking has grown considerably as a chess player. He works very hard, has learned a great deal, and has matured as a player. But be has no ideas of his own. He takes them all from others; from Fischer, from Petrosian, from Spassky and from me. The impression is created that Korchnoi does not like Mecking’s play, although his opponent compelled him to worry a bit.
“I know that Mecking won the Interzonal Tournament. This is incomprehensible to me. Frankly speaking, in the Soviet Union there are fifteen gifted young Masters who are in no way weaker than Mecking Korchnoi continued. He especially criticized Mecking’s play in the seventh game where the Brazilian lost, despite an extra pawn.’’ Korchnoi stated that such a thing should not happen with a genuine Grandmaster. “He threatened to show me!”
Apparently Korchnoi was angered by some of Mecking’ s pronouncements, especially the accusation that Korchnoi received analysis of the ad games from Moscow.
In an interview before the match, Mecking threatened to “show” me that in the chess world there are few as select as he. I don’t censure anyone for self-confidence. But one might have expected a young grandmaster to show more tact in his relations to a chess player who has achieved victory in many tournaments and matches. Besides that, I am almost twice as old as him, he added.
“Victor the Terrible”, nick name given by journalists for his constant playing for the win, said: “the Augusta match was heavy enough, and that the nervous strain was very great. Mecking became nervous himself and created a nervous atmosphere about the match. But I didn’t complain about his behavior. It didn’t bother me, it had no influence on my play.”
Korchnoi does not hide the fact that it would hove been easier for him to play against Portisch than Petrosian.
“For me Petrosian is a tougher opponent. The balance in our previous encounters is 7:4 for him, with about 20 draws. Besides that, Petrosian has beaten me in the more important games, whereas I won the less meaningful encounters. “I believe that the winner of the Petrosian — Korchnoi match will play Fischer.”
Q: What, in your opinion, of the four semi finalists, has the greatest chance against Fischer?
A: I think that my match with him would be the most interesting. I believe I know the openings better than Spassky, Karpov and Petrosian.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | Total | |
| Korchnoi V | = | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | = | = | = | = | 0 | 1 | 7.5 |
| Mecking H | = | = | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | = | = | = | = | 1 | 0 | 5.5 |
After the match, Tal said: “Experience triumphed over youth but th brazilian’s game promise a great deal oin the future as testified to by several games he played at a hight level, especially his convincing victory in the 12th game.”