The final April 14th – June 19th 1969
Boris Vasilievich Spassky was on January 30th, 1937. Won the World Junior in 1955 and share third in the 22nd USSR Championship the same year. Qualified from the Interzonal he finishes also third in the Candidates’ tournament of 1956. Missed the next two cycle he came back as Challenger to play Petrosian in 1966.
During the firsts days chess experts were asked to give an opinion on both players:
M. Euwe.- I never cease to admire Spassky’s mastery. His strongest qualities are a spirit of enterprise, versatility, and a willingness to go in for the risks that are justified in such an emotional game as chess.
- Botvinnik.—Petrosian’s chief strength consists in the virtuosity with which he eliminates his opponent’s attacking possibilities. The World Champion possesses a remarkable talent for “spoiling” the trajectories of the enemy pieces. He does it artistically, without any effort, simply intuitively. To defeat Petrosian it is necessary to be excellently prepared from a theoretical point of view, to think out a complex of opening schemes that might place the World Champion in a difficult situation, to force him to calculate variations. Then the World Champion would have to expend much time and energy, and that would limit his resources for positional man.
Boris Spassky is now approaching his optimum strength. His style has become exceptionally universal and rational; he finds everything legible and clear. That does not mean that he has begun to play in a “dry” manner, that his games lack combinations and tactical ideas. As before, there are many of them, but Boris Vasilievich employs them only when it is necessary when the position itself demands them. Such poise promises the very greatest successes. - Smyslov.—The World Champion has penetrated deeper perhaps than anyone into these of positional maneuvering. He is finely sensitive to all the nuances of the struggle on the chess board.
Who will win: Petrosian or Spassky? It is hard to say. I wish to make just one remark. There is a Russian saying: “Repetition is the mother of understanding.” In 1954 I could not win the crown from Botvinnik, but three years later I succeeded in doing so. Why should not Spassky also do the same? He has every ground for achieving it. - Tal.—Petrosian possesses a remarkable capacity for perceiving his opponent’s possibilities in advance. This quality sometimes prevents him from winning, but then it often comes to his aid.
- Petrosian.—Spassky is a player who knows what he wants and understands how to go about getting it.
- Spassky.—It is hard for me to say how the match will end, but I am in an optimistic frame of mind. Petrosian is a remarkable player with enormous potentialities.
- Bronstein.— About the forthcoming Petrosian—Spassky match? Frankly speaking, I do not know. I would know if I had had the chance to meet one of them in a match myself.”
The rules for the match were the usual. Three games per week and the rate of play is 40 moves in 2 hours 30 minutes then 16 moves an hour thereafter. The chief referee was IGM A. O’Kelly from Belgium and his assistant was IGM M. Filip from Czechoslovakia. Finally, I. Boleslavsky was second of Petrosian and I. Bondarevsky the second of Spassky.
The match started on April 12th in the Moscow Variety Theatre.
Game 1
Sicilian Defense
For the first game, Petrosian surprised Spassky by planning a Sicilian. Spassky didn’t conduct the King’s side attack with efficiency and gave to Petrosian an adjourned position with a pawn up. The next day Spassky conduct the final according to the analyses of his second Bondarevsky. The draw was on the way when Spassky went wrong by letting Petrosian to sacrificed his knight to promote one remain pawn.
Game 2
Tarrasch Defense
Spassky decided to play safely. Despite the usual isolated Pawn, Petrosian could obtain no advantage and after 29 moves, following a double exchange of Rooks, offered a draw which was refused by Spassky. Black managed to take some advantage in a Queen endgame after a precise play the Champion secured the half point.
Game 3
Sicilian Defense
White opted for a deployment which is natural. But lead to nothing and soon reach an endgame with Bishops which was even from the beginning.
Game 4
Tarrasch Defense
The Champion deviated from game 2 after 14 moves but no improvement is achieved, on contrary when White avoid a drawish liquidation, his games started slipping became uncontrollable and very bad. Finally, it is mainly Petrosian who offered to Spassky the point by going wrong in the middle game and collapsing before the time control. After the game, Tal said: “In one game it is too difficult to play both for the win and draw simultaneously.
Game 5
Semi-Tarrasch Defense
The way that Spassky win the 5th and took the lead was very impressive. Spassky build a strong attack with full initiative, sacrificing a pawn to force the advance of his passed Queen’s pawn and concluding the game with a brilliant Queen sacrifice. Everything finished in 30 moves under a standing ovation.
Game 6
Queen’s Gambit Declined
Petrosian was not interested in going into struggle and complication. Theory helped Spassky to choose a drawish variation. The conclusion was foreseen long before the end of the game.
For 64, the Soviet GM V. Korchnoi, the world number 3, analyzed the fist six games:
“The forecasters can thus feel satisfied; the fans have not had their expectations frustrated, The first quarter of the match has passed in strenuous combat, abounding in surprises.
The seers foretold that this match would be bloodier than the last one. It is not hard to explain this absence of compromise. In 1966 Spassky conducted the whole of the first half of the match in a sort of contemplative style. Being sure of victory, he waited for events to develop in due course without his active participation.
The lessons of the first contest with the World Champion have not been in vain. This is time Spassky did battle from the very first moves showing his intention to occupy Petrosian with ceaseless work for the whole two months.
The match proceeds in an atmosphere of great tension, and therefore, of course, each game astonishes the experts. But against the general background, the first and fifth games look particularly strange. In the first, the challenger did not play with sufficient strength— first in the middle game, and then even on the resumption. In the fifth Petrosian’s play was beneath any criticism. In the opinion of grandmaster Taimanov, the World Champion could have drawn just four moves before he resigned, by continuing 26…Qd6.
The score is now in Spassky ‘s favor. But it is not only a matter of the score. There has so far been a certain general superiority on the side of the challenger, He looks, in my view, in better sporting form than his rival: he keeps up a tense fight until the end of the fifth hour and does not get into time trouble. An impression is formed that Spassky holds the thread of the match in his hands, now sharpening the struggle, now dampening its glow…”
Game 7
Slav defense
The players followed the Smyslov’s recommendation 13..fxg6 which deprived White of any promising action on the Kingside. After 25 moves a deadlock was reached and players agreed to draw.
Game 8
Queen’s Gambit Declined
Petrosian lost the 8th with White. After a promising position in the middle game, and pressed by the time Petrosian make a desperate bid to get some counter-play. Nothing came out except a losing battle. The Champion blundered grossly and loses the Exchange for a pawn. Black carefully secured its advantage and finished his opponent in 44 moves.
Game 9
Benoni-Defense
Petrosian decided to change his opening and played a usual Benoni system. A positional blunder on move 26th left Spassky on the way to a three points lead. However after a good defense Black minimized the White’s advantage, Spassky hesitated to carry out the final attack and let escape the Champion.
Game 10
Nimzo-Indian Defense
Petrosian took a break before the 10th game, which was a very good psychological move. Spassky, who was depressed by the failure to win the previous game, played a very floppy opening to be more or less lost after 16 moves. He had lost his confidence and touch and Petrosian received a new stimulus. Outplayed from the beginning, Spassky was unable to find any counter-play. After an early exchange of Queens, the Challenger was then forced to defend, a strategy which doesn’t suit to Spassky. After 20 moves it looks over. Petrosian gave no change and thirty-eight moves were enough to score his second victory.
Game 10
Game 11
Queen’s Indian Defense
Spassky started to play very weakly very early, landing after some twenty moves in a miserable position. Petrosian used his advantage with precision and placed a sacrifice which was similar the one happened in game 9. This combination happen on move 30 with Rc4! White can’t stand the pressure and the irresistible Black Pawns gave to the champion the full point.
Game 12
Tarrash Defense
This time the Tarrash defense has come more complicated than the one played in round 4. To have some fresh air, Spassky sacrificed his central isolated pawn but curiously, the Champion to cautious refused the gift and instead preferred to play the endgame with a little plus but find no way to concretize into a victory. The score is 6-6.
After the first part of the match, a journalist of Soviet Sports magazine asked few guests and officials about their views on the match so far.
Vladimir Antoshin—l don’t know about anyone else, but it has always seemed to me that Spassky’s task in this match is for a number of reasons more complex than his opponent’s. The first game affirmed my proposition. But in a paradoxical way such a start did Spassky a good service. He usually has a very hard time at the beginning of an event, but here defeat at the start completely took away his inhibitions.
But why Petrosian played with such uncertainty in the first third of the match that remains an enigma to me. Another such enigma is Spassky’s 6th move in the eleventh game, when he voluntarily doomed himself as White to a position without prospects.
Besides, there are not a few riddles still to come in this event. In particular, I do not exclude the possibility that the inexplicable slumps which we have observed in the play of both rivals will be repeated at the finish; in that case the match may end just as it proceeded in the first half—in a dramatic manner.
Yury Averbach—Before the start I allowed myself to predict that the match would produce great surprises. What precisely would they be? On that theme, I did not enlarge. But, as you see, there have been not a few surprises. Who, for example, could have supposed there would be such ebbing and flowing of the creative energy as we have witnessed from both participants in the first half of the struggle? Who could have thought that both would win two games running?
As it seems to me, the encounters get their special coloring from the fact that the challenger strives for open piece-play and the Champion for restraint of the opponent’s possibilities. It is the very clash of these two approaches to the game that determines the creative contours of the match.
No matter What happens later, it can already be said now that in spite of the surprises or thanks to them—take that as you like—the match is proceeding unusually dramatically, entertainingly and, without a doubt, rather more interestingly than the first duel between these rivals.
Miroslav Filip—I’ll put it briefly: the play is interesting, the play is sharp! There are many mistakes on both sides, but both the experts and the ordinary chess fans, knowing how difficult it is for the Champion and challenger, readily forgive them their errors. What astonishes me are the uncommonly wide choice of openings by Petrosian and Spassky’s upholding of the Tarrasch Defense as a matter of principle.
I am sure that it will be just the same in the second half—interesting play, sharp play!
Solo Flohr—Those days every grandmaster represents some paper or magazine, and there fore he is obliged to keep a benevolent neutrality. But, frankly speaking, I haven’t very much faith in the absolute neutrality of grandmasters. What is he to do? A grandmaster is also only human; he too has the right “to suffer,” though in a private capacity.
Let me admit then that I suffer for Spassky. All the same, in my chess soul I was sorry for Petrosian when he made a total of one point in five games. For such an outstanding player that is an entirely abnormal result. Again, I could not but be delighted by the endurance and courage with which he got through this unsuccessful phase of the match. These sentiments compel me to acknowledge that the battle of nerves in the first half of the event was won by Petrosian.
And let me now admit that I suffer for Petrosian. In this case I was sorry for Spassky for the wounds which he received in the tenth and eleventh games. A half-point in three meetings is, of course, also entirely abnormal for Spassky. The coming few days will show whether I shall be able to rejoice in the endurance and courage that will help Spassky get through his obstacle zone.
Yefim Geller—One gets the impression that nerves played the main role in the first half of the event. He who achieved success suddenly began to display caution and even indecisiveness. Only excessive caution can explain why Petrosian did not win the twelfth game.
I think that in the second half of the match success will go to him who, having gained an advantage in points, does not relax his efforts but tenaciously and bravely strives for his set objective.
Victor Korchnoi—l expected sensations in this match, but I confess I did not think there would be so many. At first the pressure from Spassky developed with amazing ease, and then came the answering advance of Petrosian. . . – It is astonishing not that one suddenly begins to play very well but that the other at that moment cannot offer real resistance.
The struggle will surely continue in just the same way—in waves. And he who is uplifted by the last wave will sooner also be the winner.
Alexander Kotov—The chess world cannot but rejoice at the fighting mood of the participants in the present match. After phases of mutual lack of success they have both, it seems to me, at last found good form and are fully intent on displaying in the second half of the event everything of which they are capable.
Nikolai Krogius—l have been present at many events—as a participant, trainer or simply spectator. And I can say with certainty that this is the most interesting event I have ever happened to see. Another thing is incontestable—not only in its sporting heat but also in the content of the games this match for the World Championship stands rather higher than previous ones.
André Lilienthal—l cannot but express admiration at the fighting spirit of the World Champion. Having got a “difficult position,” he displayed great courage and strength of will and emerged from the crisis with honor. As far as the challenger is concerned, he has not yet recovered following the severe blows he took. True, it is well known that Spassky is a real sportsman, possessing all the qualities necessary for a long event.
Albéric O’Kelly—l simply do not remember another match in which events have developed with such tension. The decisiveness is like that in the matches at the end of the last century.
The chess public, which fill the hail to the limit every day there is a game, have responded to it very attentively. I did not observe such enthusiasm during the last match, at which there was also no lack of fans.
Up to the ninth game it was naturally Spassky who left the better impression. But then Petrosian found himself. After the ninth game he played as calmly as after his defeat in the first game of the match with Botvinnik. In the twelfth game, apparently, Spassky, too, re covered himself. That is why it will not be surprising if the second half of the event proves still more interesting.
Vasily Smyslov—The interesting psychological basis of the match is what first of all draws the attention. The fluctuation in the creative mood of both participants gives the event a unique colouring. One also cannot avoid noting the greatly increased decisiveness. The rivals have studied each other well and have therefore at once gone in for hand-to-hand fighting.
Game 13
Petroff Defense
Spassky returned to 1. e4 and Petrosian innovated with the Petroff (named sometime the Russia opening), an opening which no one could recall Petrosian playing this opening before. Spassky decided not to force the matter. After the exchange of Queens, Black has no problem to hold any White initiative and a quiet draw resulted
Game 14
Queen’s Gambit Declined
Petrosian started very well this dramatic 14th game. As usual better in the middle game he couldn’t break Spassky’s defense. An approximately level end-game resulted when before the adjournment Spassky made a quickly and incredible final move…by advancing his King into a mating field! The bids for this game were clearly in favor of Petrosian, which was already playing with an exchange up. However probably to sure about the issue, he confused himself and couldn’t find the winning move 52. Ra8. An unlucky move which cost him the victory.
Game 15
Petroff Defense
Petrosian tried to improve his 13th game but none of the players was ready to take any risk. The game finished in two hours with the first grandmaster draw”.
Game 16
Tarrash Defense
The players kept their non aggressive tactic. Petrosian didn’t want to follow some complex lines as played by Geller in 1965 and decided to simplify the matter. The endgame didn’t give enough advantage and a peaceful draw was agreed.
Game 17
Sicilian defense
In the 17th Petrosian opened with the Sicilian opening. Everything went well until he lost ground after his 23rd move, scaring to play a more risk variation, which after the game the analyses showed that he had nothing to be afraid about it. After the adjournment Petrosian didn’t discover a satisfactory defense and resigned after being forced into Zugzwang. Spassky showed in this game great technique.
Game 18
Tarrasch Defense
Spassky improved his center play and limited White’s initiative. A draw looked not enough and Black liquidated the usual weakness and threat the opposite King. In time trouble, Petrosian escaped from a disaster. According to L. Polugaevsky 37…Rh5 could have been deadly. White kept the initiative but despite a better adjournment position, Spassky satisfied himself with a draw.
Game 19
Sicilian Defense
The 19th game was probably the decisive one in this match not only for a psychological reason but also by its brilliancy. The commentators were unanimous: Spassky played at his best level just like…a world champion. Most than probably Petrosian felt into the ‘before match preparations’ of Spassky. Spassky with the White launched his attack with speed and precision. After two sacrifices and 24 moves, everything was all over.
Game 20
Queen’s Gambit Declined
The ‘Tiger’ was not dead. Petrosian’ s task of scoring 3.5 points in the last five games made it essential to win immediately. The opening of this 20th game was similar to the 6th but Petrosian changed the plan and quickly paralyzed Black’s possibilities to get counterplay on the King-side. The final execution started just after the adjournment. Black could not defend his weaknesses and after a fine combination, Petrosian won brilliantly. Petrosian 9½- Spassky 10½.
Game 21
Ruy Lopez
Before the game, Petrosian was convinced that, like Botvinnik in 1951, he would level the score before the end. He chose the Spanish opening but the variation was rather suspicious. Spassky won a pawn and get control of the Queen-side, then Black couldn’t find anything else than to offer another Pawn for of a bit of freedom. The adjournment was hopeless and for the first time, Petrosian, despite two more games to play, felt that everything was soon over.
Game 22
Queen’s Gambit Declined
Spassky didn’t give chance to Petrosian to place his homework. He deviated first but gained no advantage from it. A liquidation leads to s dead draw with Bishops of opposite colors.
Game 23
Game 23
No short draw had decided Petrosian. The celebration can wait! The Champion had a better position than he had in game 19 but not enough to claim any decisive advantage. White wanted to close the debate as soon as possible and headed to liquidation on move 24. The game was adjourned but not resumed as White had no problem to annihilate any Black’s hopes.
After the match in an interview Spassky explained what was his strategy for the match:
’Maintain his fighting mood until the end, to play in a strict, classical manner and finally to try to play every game to a finish if possible with an adjournment session.
Boris Spassky became champion at the age of 32
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | Total | |
| Spassky B | 0 | = | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | 1 | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | = | = | = | 1 | = | 1 | 0 | 1 | = | = | 12.5 |
| Petrosian T | 1 | = | = | 0 | 0 | = | = | 0 | = | 1 | 1 | = | = | = | = | = | 0 | = | 0 | 1 | 0 | = | = | 10.5 |
Soviet Sport put some questions to Spassky and Petrosian. The new World Champion was the first to answer.
Q: Tell us something, please, about the games which from your point of view played an important role in the course of the match.”
A:I must warn you: everything that I say now will be involuntarily colored by the emotions of the match, which still continue to possess me. I ask you to bear this proviso in mind.
I wish to say at once that, however important certain individual games are in a sporting and psychological sense, it is nevertheless something else that is of decisive significance in such a prolonged competition; namely, the ability to maintain one’s fighting mood, to maintain the desire and willingness to fight to the last move of the last game. My preparation for the match looked to just such an aim. Of course, this does not prevent certain games— I will talk about them later—from in fact having a very noticeable influence on the course of the event.
I’ll begin with the first Game since events in it developed in a fantastic manner. At firs, I got an excellent position, then my advantage grew less and after that it even vanished altogether. Then knowing that I was stepping beyond the limits of what is permissible, drew the fire upon myself. Petrosian played well, and all the lame I had a draw after the resumption but suddenly it seemed to me there w a simpler route to the objective, and I lost.
I must say that this failure enabled me to shake off the letters which usually hinder mc at the start. The loss of the point did not dishearten me at all—that would perhaps happen again in two dozen encounters!
After the Fourth game and subsequently after the Eighth I realized that my opponent had on the practical level not yet, as compared with the previous match, shown his true powers. The advantage of two points, achieved after only eight games, far from reassured me; rather it disconcerted me and perhaps also put me slightly on my guard,
Intuition prompted me; something was bound to happen. Therefore, when I missed the win in the Ninth Game, despite the widely held opinion, I was not greatly affected. I did not at all consider as again many people thought, that winning this game virtually guaranteed me victory in the match. No, Petrosian had as yet spoken his last word.
Something else troubled me more then I suddenly displayed great nervous fatigue. I began this match too at too fast a tempo and over-expended my emotional reserves. And then these two extra points (which, of course, were not at all superfluous!) hung on me like a heavy weight.
Here I wish to make a small digression. The rule whereby the Champion retains his title in the event of a level score puts the challenger at a disadvantage. That is so. At the sane time, this rule forces the Champion to overcome the temptation to play merely to maintain the score, to maintain equality. Such play, consciously dooming one to passivity is fatal everyone well understands that, but one does not always manage to force oneself when one has an advantage in points, to fight or the initiative as energetically as when such a reserve is not there.
I did not at once realize that the two points I had won would interfere with my progress. Otherwise, after the time-out taken by Petrosian alter the Ninth Game I too would have taken my own time-out and tried to master myself, to retune myself to my former fighting pitch. This was also demanded by the principle confirmed by my helpers, I. Bondarevsky and N. Krogius the principle above all, a fighting mood.
By his fine handling of the Tenth game and especially the Eleventh Petrosian levelled the score. The first half of the match ended in a tie, 6—6. If you recall that in the first match the score was 1—0 in Petrosian’ s favour, then I had every reason to be satisfied when after the Thirteenth game my depression came to an end and in the Fourteenth Game I had already fully restored my fighting spirit. Even the last move before the adjournment after which my King proved threatened I just spoke of the fact that I had begun to play freely.
Here you again have an illustration that I do not put great meaning upon individual games: having seen that my King bad unexpectedly been ‘flipped’, I was not distressed. Don’t count this as over-confidence or temerity but even ill had Lost this game I would not have been very sad—what was more important was that I bad again begun to feel a rise in my spirits.
All the same, there was one game, undoubtedly, which really decided a lot that was the Seventeenth. In this game the Champion, playing the black pieces, offered me a draw in a better position. Speaking generally, I doubt to have accepted this offer. But if your opponent, though be has the advantage, wants a draw, does it not suggest that he hasn’t very much faith in himself, that he professes the policy of playing to hold the balance I resolved to continue the struggle, and Petrosian, having refrained from the uncompromising then committed several mistakes and lost.
‘The Seventeenth Game gave me vary valuable psychological information. I realized that the Champion was continuing to avoid almost any risk. That meant that my striving to seize the initiative and to impose complicated, double-edged play was fully justified.
My opponent’s defeat in the Nineteenth Game, where he fell beneath a devastating attack, can be considered a case of bad luck. But perhaps Petrosian, because he did not expect that I would venture upon an uncompromising line of play when I had a point in reserve, did not guess’ right in his choice of opening?
It remains for me to talk about two other games. In the Twentieth Petrosian operated in his best style in the middle-game and deservedly gained a success. And again the loss did not distress me very much. Once more I was convinced that Petrosian was refraining from the slightest risk: if I hadn’t engaged in pointless man White wouldn’t have got any advantage whatsoever. Again and low for the last time in this match I understood that playing to hold the balance’ was fatal and unnatural to me. And, finally, I was once more convinced that the main thing that was indispensable to me in the play was a spirit of enterprise, of initiative. While my opponent continued to avoid violent measures, while he continued to play in the same slow, cautious manner as before, it meant that the solution of the problem depended on me myself.
‘The Twenty-first Game practically summed up the results of the match. At one moment Petrosian was simply obliged to take a centre pawn with a Bishop. He was obliged if only because the ocher way led to Inevitable destruction. But even at this moment he avoided a tact c solution. Was it not because it led to sharp, confused play
‘From all that has been said you can draw the conclusion that passive, cautious play ‘to hold the balance’ became one of the basic reasons for Petrosian’s defeat. Well, that is the case. And as World Champion, I shall try to extract for myself all the necessary lessons from this.’’
Q: Could you describe the character or your strategy in die match?
A: Briefly, it came to three points. The first you already know maintaining my fighting mood until the end. The second was to play in a strict, classical manner. Why Together with Bondarevsky and Krogius, came to the conclusion that the World Champion, for all his great positional mastery was not a player of a strict, classical profile, His style, directed towards limiting the opponent’s possibilities, is unique and, particularly in match play. Extraordinarily effective, it is not accidental that Petrosian is a phenomenal match player. All the same, his unsurpassed skill at man and tacking is sometimes dictated not only by the requirements of the position but rather by prophylactic tasks.
On the whole, our idea justified itself: in the Tarrasch Defence, for example, Petrosian was not able even once in live attempts to seize the isolated Queen’s pawn
And, finally, the third task was to try to play every game to a finish. If possible with an adjourned session and if I did not always accomplish this task, it is only because I myself, as was the case during the Fifteenth Game was feeling tired.’’
Q: What is your chess creed?
A: This is a very complicated question. It is customary to reckon that chess is a wonderful original mixture of a game, a science, and an art. Of these three components I would, for all that, give the game the chief role. It seems to me that chess, with all its philosophical depth, its aesthetic appeal, is first of all a game in the best sense of the word, a game in which are revealed your intellect, character, will.”
Q: A last and inevitable question: what are your plans?”
A: I cannot yet say anything definite. One thing I know for certain I shall try at all costs to free myself from, to clear myself of the rust of qualifying events, to shake off the negative emotions associated with them. I hope to play in a good tournament with a strong entry simply’ for pleasure and also to show what lam capable of both in the sporting and the purely creative sense.
I wish in passing to speak out about the system of qualifying events. After all the ‘improvements’ made by F I D.E. the system has become worse, in my opinion, than ever before. Of course, this problem is not simple and needs consideration, but I want to express beforehand my sincerest sympathy to the challenger who succeeds in breaking through all the trials and obstacles in his path. I am convinced that short matches are good only when they do not serve purposes of selection. In its present form the short match is the right road to nervous exhaustion.
Questions to Petrosian:
Q: What would you like to say about the course of the struggle in the match?”
A: Generally speaking, after a match one ought to go by the principle ‘let the loser keep quiet’. But since you have already asked me, I’ll answer; only I will try to be brief.
When I blundered away my Queen to Bronstein in the 1956 Candidates’ Tournament one experienced chess-player, so they say, remarked that this Queen would serve Bronstein badly. The unexpected gift which I received from Spassky in the first Game also did not bring any profit, since it demobilized me to a considerable extent.
The first crisis for me was in the Fourth and Fifth Games. The cause of my defeats in these games is clear to me, but I would like to remain silent about that. The end of the Fourth Game reminded me of the first Game of the match with Botvinnik, where I performed as if in a mist.
In the Fifth Game I fell into a line prepared at home. Experienced players are not usually distressed in such cases: what can you do? It’s bad luck. The one thing that worried me was that, having sensed a plot in time, I recklessly decided ‘to test’ the opponent. The second unfortunate event occurred in the Eighth Game, where I overlooked the loss of the exchange.
I think that anyone after such mishaps would have forgotten about all previous assess ments and rushed into battle. It was precisely that which I attempted to do in the Ninth Game. A miracle saved me. Believe me, at the bottom of my heart I at times almost regretted that; for if I had not been lucky, I could have breathed freely and a ‘gay life’ would have begun in the match.
The play-off of the Ninth Game brought on a psychological depression for Spassky, and as a result there was practically no real fight in the Tenth and Eleventh Games. After the score had been levelled the struggle continued with varying success, but then the fact that at the finish I lost three games running with the black pieces—the Seventeenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-first—played a fatal role. It remains an insoluble riddle to me what caused me to choose in the Nineteenth Game an opening variation which I had previously feared to employ even against masters.”
Q: Can you explain why you did not achieve victory in the play-off of the Fourteenth Game?”
A: I cannot, since otherwise I would doubtless have won that game. In my analysis at home I became convinced that the position was absolutely won, but during the game some inexplicable nervous collapse came on, and almost without thinking I took the Queen’s Knight’s pawn with the King, after which the win was gone in a flash.”
A: It will interest many whether you will attempt to recover your lost title?”
Q: That I do not know yet. Nearer to the beginning of the coming cycle of candidates’ matches I shall reach a decision. In any case, losing the match has not caused me to be disenchanted with chess at all; I shall play in tournaments, with one condition, it is true when I have overcome the physical and nervous exhaustion caused by this match. In a word, and in spite of it all chess!
Comments and ideas of Spassky were published in the Yugoslav daily Politika end of 1969: “Contrary to former holders of the supreme world title, Spassky thinks that the World Champion must play in the big tournaments of the world. In his time, Alekhine was the unchallenged Champion not only because he won the matches, but because he dominated the tournaments. Since the victorious match ago inst Petrosian, Spassky played in the match Soviet Union — Yugoslavia in Skopje and the tournament of Puerto Rico. He also took part actively at the FIDE Congress. He supported the idea of Dr. Max Euwe succeeding Folke Rogard as FIDE President. The Congress also has bearings on the World Champion and all the grandmasters. After his tournament at Palma de Majorca Spassky thinks of resting for three months. He then plays in Belgrade in the match Soviet Union against the Rest of the World. He might also ploy in the Peace Tournament at Zagreb.
Spassky considers Petrosian and Fischer to be the most dangerous opponents in the next world championship match. Petrosian has the most refined and mast dangerous tactics. He is most probably the mast talented chess player of the present times, but he has became lazy. Petrosian obtained everything he could get, now he must start anew. For many his style is uninteresting, but he knows much too much and he command a especially sensitive feeling For positions. He commences like a bomb, then be explodes. Nevertheless, Spassky queries the stamina of Petrosian for the next cycle of Candidates’ matches. If he succeeds in coming through to be the challenger, he would be extremely dangerous in the match.
Fischer is not that dangerous as Petrosian. Bobby is not a new Capablanca. He is a naive player, and also so in life. In September Spassky spent some time with Botvinnik in the Caucasus. They studied all the games of Fischer. Fischer’s ideas are clear cut. It is easy to detect them.
Spassky opinion said that Korchnoi is irrational. He plays all his games for a win – Korchnoi then thinks he is 25 years old, but he is 38. Such an attitude produces highlights but also downfalls. Korchnoi does not realize that enthusiasm to play and win a tournament is not enough to win tiring long events. After the game and the tournaments one should get away from chess completely. I learnt that lesson after my match with Tal in the 1965 cycle of the Candidates’ matches. I was completely exhausted. For instance, yesterday I should have won my game against Parma, today I try to forget that and look towards the future. Korchnoi cannot do so; emotions carry a heavy weight in him.
The journalist then asked Spassky about his opinion of other players, like Larsen and Smyslov. Larsen plays irregularly, his style is much too risky. Mast probably Smyslov is not capable anymore far big exploits. Success in chess is closely tied to the years of age, at least it may be said that the biggest triumphs in chess are made in the thirties. Petrosian is right when he is concerned with his age. Even with my 32 years I am not sure, whether l am not too old for the next match. I shall need at least five months of preparations far it.
Spassky does not believe that the legendary Tal will ever play again an important role. His life is much too exciting.
Spassky believes that the changes in the attitude towards chess are a reflection of the changes taking place in the world itself. Already Spielmann had predicted a devaluation of the international titles. In Alekhine’s times the title matches were much more valued, moneywise and glorywise, than in our times. There was a totally different approach to chess on the whole. The developments in chess today must be viewed with the eyes of today. This is the opinion of the World Champion Boris Spassky, whom the people of the Soviet Union like to call the Pushkin of chess, the reason being that his games carry a marked poetic element.”
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | Total | ||
| Spassky, B | 0 | ½ | ½ | 1 | 1 | ½ | ½ | 1 | ½ | 0 | 0 | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | 1 | ½ | 1 | 0 | 1 | ½ | ½ | 12.5 | |
| Petrosian, T | 1 | ½ | ½ | 0 | 0 | ½ | ½ | 0 | ½ | 1 | 1 | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | 0 | ½ | 0 | 1 | 0 | ½ | ½ | 10.5 |