[blind-chess] Annotated Game #123: Mikhail Botvinnik - Vitaly Chekhover, Moscow 1935
- From: "R Dinger" <rrdinger@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "chess" <blind-chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:34:02 -0800
Annotated Game #123:
Mikhail Botvinnik - Vitaly Chekhover, Moscow 1935
Adapted and Condensed from
Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
Contents:
++1. Mikhail Moiseyevich Botvinnik
++1.A Early years
++1.B Soviet champion
++1.C World title contender
++1.D World Champion
++1.E Team tournaments
++1.F Late career
++1.G Political controversies
++1.H Assessment
++1.H1 Playing strength and style
++1.H2 Influence on the game
++1.I Other achievements
++1.I1 Electrical engineering
++1.I2 Computer chess
++1.J Writings
++1.J1 Chess
++1.J2 Computers
++1.K Notable chess games
++1.L Tournament results
++1.L1 Match results
++2. Vitaly Chekhover
++2.A Composing career
++2.B Playing career
++2.C Bibliography
++3. Mikhail Botvinnik - Vitaly Chekhover, Moscow 1935
++1. Mikhail Moiseyevich Botvinnik
Mikhail Moiseyevich Botvinnik, Ph.D. (August 17 (August 4?) 1911 -
May 5, 1995) was a Soviet and Russian International Grandmaster and
three-time World Chess Champion. Working as an electrical engineer
and computer scientist at the same time, he was one of the very few
famous chess players who achieved distinction in another career
while playing top-class competitive chess. He also developed a
chess-playing algorithm that tried to "think" like a top human
player, but this approach has been superseded by a brute-force
search strategy that exploits the rapid increase in the calculation
speed of modern computers.
Botvinnik was the first world-class player to develop within the
Soviet Union (Alekhine was a top player before the Russian
Revolution), putting him under political pressure but also giving
him considerable influence within Soviet chess. From time to time
he was accused of using that influence to his own advantage, but
the evidence is unclear and some suggest he resisted attempts by
Soviet officials to intimidate some of his rivals.
Botvinnik also played a major role in the organization of chess,
making a significant contribution to the design of the World Chess
Championship system after World War II and becoming a leading
member of the coaching system that enabled the Soviet Union to
dominate top-class chess during that time. His famous pupils
include World Champions Anatoly Karpov, Garry Kasparov and Vladimir
Kramnik.
Playing top class chess for decades, being an eminent chess author,
one of the pioneers of computer chess, and a great chess teacher in
his late years, Botvinnik is widely regarded as the most
influential chess contributor in the 20th century.
++1.A Early years
Mikhail Moiseyevich Botvinnik was born on August 17, 1911, in what
was then Kuokkala in the Russian-controlled but autonomous Grand
Duchy of Finland, but is now the district of Repino in Saint
Petersburg. Although his parents were Jewish, his father was a
dental technician and his mother a dentist, which allowed the
family to live outside the Pale of Settlement to which most Jews in
the Russian Empire were restricted at the time. As a result,
Mikhail Botvinnik grew up in Saint Petersburg's Nevsky Prospekt.
His father forbade the speaking of Yiddish at home, and Mikhail and
his older brother Issy attended Soviet schools. Mikhail Botvinnik
later said, "I am a Jew by blood, Russian by culture, Soviet by
upbringing."
In 1920, his mother became ill and his father left the family, but
maintained contact with the children, even after his second
marriage, to a Russian woman. At about the same time, Mikhail
started reading newspapers, and became a committed Communist.
In autumn 1923, at the age of twelve, Mikhail Botvinnik was taught
chess by a school friend of his older brother, using a home-made
set, and instantly fell in love with the game. He finished in mid-
table in the school championship, sought advice from another of his
brother's friends, and concluded that for him it was better to
think out "concrete concepts" and then derive general principles
from these - and went on to beat his brother's friend quite easily.
In winter 1924, Botvinnik won his school's championship, and
exaggerated his age by three years in order to become a member of
the Petrograd Chess Assembly - to which the Assembly's President
turned a blind eye. Botvinnik won his first two tournaments
organized by the Assembly. Shortly afterwards, Nikolai Krylenko, a
chess fanatic and leading member of the Soviet legal system who
later organized Joseph Stalin's show trials, began building a huge
nation-wide chess organization, and the Assembly was replaced by a
club in the city's Palace of Labor.
To test the strength of Soviet chess masters, Krylenko organized
the Moscow 1925 chess tournament. On a rest day during the event,
world champion José Raúl Capablanca gave a simultaneous exhibition
in Leningrad. Botvinnik was selected as one of his opponents, and
won their game. In 1926, he reached the final stage of the
Leningrad championship. Later that year, he was selected for
Leningrad's team in a match against Stockholm, held in Sweden, and
scored +1 =1 against the future grandmaster Gösta Stoltz. On his
return, he entertained his schoolmates with a vivid account of the
rough sea journey back to Russia. Botvinnik was commissioned to
annotate two games from the match, and the fact that his analyses
were to be published made him aware of the need for objectivity. In
December 1926, he became a candidate member of his school's
Komsomol branch. Around this time his mother became concerned about
his poor physique, and as a result he started a program of daily
exercise, which he maintained for most of his life.
Botvinnik in 1927When Botvinnik finished the school curriculum, he
was below the minimum age for the entrance examinations for higher
education. While waiting, he qualified for his first USSR
Championship final stage in 1927 as the youngest player ever at
that time, tied for fifth place and won the title of National
Master. He wanted to study Electrical Technology at the Leningrad
Polytechnical Institute and passed the entrance examination;
however, there was a persistent excess of applications for this
course and the Prolestud, which controlled admissions, had a policy
of admitting only children of engineers and industrial workers.
After an appeal by a local chess official, he was admitted in 1928
to Leningrad University's Mathematics Department. In January 1929,
Botvinnik played for Leningrad in the student team chess
championship against Moscow. Leningrad won and the team manager,
who was also Deputy Chairman of the Prolestud, secured Botvinnik a
transfer to the Polytechnic's Electromechanical Department, where
he was one of only four students who entered straight from school.
As a result, he had to do a whole year's work in five months, and
failed one of the examinations. Early in the same year he placed
joint third in the semi-final stage of the USSR Championship, and
thus failed to reach the final stage.
His early progress was fairly rapid, mostly under the training of
Soviet Master and coach Abram Model, in Leningrad; Model taught
Botvinnik the Winawer Variation of the French Defence, then
regarded as inferior for Black, but which Model and Botvinnik
analyzed more deeply, and then played with great success.
He won the Leningrad Masters' tournament in 1930 with 6½/8,
following this up the next year by winning the Championship of
Leningrad by 2½ points over former Soviet champion Peter
Romanovsky.
His wife was a Russian named Gayane (Ganna) Davidovna, the daughter
of his algebra and geometry teacher. She was a student at the
Vaganova Academy of Russian Ballet in Leningrad and later, a
ballerina in the Bolshoi Theatre. They had one daughter named Olga,
born in 1941.
++1.B Soviet champion
In 1931, at the age of 20, Botvinnik won his first Soviet
Championship in Moscow, scoring 13½ out of 17. He commented that
the field was not very strong, as some of the pre-Revolution
masters were absent. In late summer 1931, he graduated with a
degree in Electrical Engineering, after completing a practical
assignment on temporary transmission lines at the Dnieper
Hydroelectric Station. He stayed on at the Leningrad Polytechnical
Institute to study for a Candidate's degree.
In 1933, he repeated his Soviet Championship win, in his home city
of Leningrad, with 14/19, describing the results as evidence that
Krylenko's plan to develop a new generation of Soviet masters had
borne fruit. He and other young masters successfully requested the
support of a senior Leningrad Communist Party official in arranging
contests involving both Soviet and foreign players, as there had
been none since the Moscow 1925 chess tournament. Soon afterwards,
Botvinnik was informed that Alexander Ilyin-Genevsky, one of the
older masters and a member of the Soviet embassy in Prague, had
arranged a match between Salo Flohr and himself, with his opponent
then regarded as one of the most credible contenders for Alexander
Alekhine's World Chess Championship title. The highest-level chess
officials in the Soviet Union opposed this on the grounds that
Botvinnik stood little chance against such a strong opponent, which
caused Krylenko to insist on the match, saying that "We have to
know our real strength."
Botvinnik used what he regarded as the first version of his method
of preparing for a contest, but fell two games behind by the end of
the first six, played in Moscow. However, aided by his old friend
Ragozin and coach Abram Model, he leveled the score in Leningrad
and the match was drawn. When describing the post-match party,
Botvinnik wrote that at the time he danced the foxtrot and
Charleston to a professional standard.
In his first tournament outside the USSR, the Hastings 1934-1935,
Botvinnik achieved only a tie for 5th-6th places, with 5/9. He
wrote that, in London after the tournament, Emanuel Lasker said his
arrival only two hours before the first round began was a serious
mistake and that he should have allowed ten days for
acclimatization. Botvinnik wrote that he did not make this mistake
again.
Botvinnik placed first equal with Flohr, ½ point ahead of Lasker
and one point ahead of José Raúl Capablanca, in Moscow's second
International Tournament, held in 1935. After consulting Capablanca
and Lasker, Krylenko proposed to award Botvinnik the title
grandmaster, but Botvinnik objected that "titles were not the
point." However, he accepted a free car and a 67% increase in his
postgraduate study grant, both provided by the People's
Commissariat of Heavy Industry.
Botvinnik vs Lasker in 1936He later reported to Krylenko that the
1935 tournament made it difficult to judge the strength of the top
Soviet players, as it included a mixture of top-class and weaker
players. Botvinnik advocated a double round-robin event featuring
the top five Soviet players and the five strongest non-Soviet
players available. Despite politicking over the Soviet choices,
both Krylenko and the Central Committee of the Komsomol quickly
authorised the tournament. This was played in Moscow in June
1936,and Botvinnik finished second, one point behind Capablanca and
2 ahead of Flohr. However, he took consolation from the fact the
Soviet Union's best had held their own against top-class
competition.
In early winter, 1936, Botvinnik was invited to play in a
tournament at Nottingham, England. Krylenko authorized his
participation and, to help Botvinnik play at his best, allowed
Botvinnik's wife to accompany him - a privilege rarely extended to
chess players at any time in Soviet history. Taking Lasker's
advice, Botvinnik arrived ten days before play started. Although
his Soviet rivals forecast disaster for him, he scored an
undefeated shared first place (+6 =8) with Capablanca, ½ point
ahead of current World Champion Max Euwe and rising American stars
Reuben Fine and Samuel Reshevsky, and 1 point ahead of ex-champion
Alexander Alekhine. This was the first tournament victory by a
Soviet master outside his own country. When the result reached
Russia, Krylenko drafted a letter to be sent in Botvinnik's name to
Stalin. On returning to Russia Botvinnik discovered he had been
awarded the "Mark of Honour".
Three weeks later, he began work on his dissertation for the
Candidate's degree, obtaining this in June 1937, after his
supervisor described the dissertation as "short and good", and the
first work in its field. As a result of his efforts, he missed the
1937 Soviet championship, won by Grigory Levenfish, who was then
nearly fifty. Later in 1937, Botvinnik drew a match of thirteen
games against Grigory Levenfish. Accounts differ about how the
match was arranged: Levenfish later wrote that Botvinnik challenged
him; while Botvinnik wrote that Krylenko, angered by Botvinnik's
absence from the tournament, ordered the match.
Botvinnik won further Soviet Championship titles in 1939, 1944,
1945, and 1952, bringing his total to six - a record he shares with
Mikhail Tal. In 1945 he dominated the tournament, scoring 15/17;
however in 1952 he tied with Mark Taimanov and won the play-off
match.
++1.C World title contender
In 1938, the world's top eight players met in the Netherlands to
compete in the AVRO tournament, whose winner was supposed to get a
title match with the World Champion, Alexander Alekhine. Botvinnik
placed third, behind Paul Keres and Reuben Fine. According to
Botvinnik, Alekhine was most interested in playing an opponent who
could raise the funds. After consulting the nearest available
Soviet officials, Botvinnik discreetly challenged Alekhine, who
promptly accepted, subject to conditions that would enable him to
acclimatize in Russia and get some high-quality competitive
practice a few months before the match. In Botvinnik's opinion,
Alekhine was partly motivated by the desire for a reconciliation
with the Soviet authorities, so that he could again visit his
homeland. The match, including funding, was authorised at the
highest Soviet political level in January 1939; however, a letter
of confirmation was only sent two months later - in Botvinnik's
opinion, because of opposition by his Soviet rivals, especially
those who had become prominent before the Russian Revolution - and
the outbreak of World War II prevented a World Championship match.
In spring 1939, Botvinnik won the USSR Championship, and his book
on the tournament described the approach to preparation which he
had been developing since 1933. One striking feature of this was
emphasis on opening preparation in order to gain a permanent
positional advantage in the middle game, rather than seeking
immediate tactical surprises that could only be used once.
Botvinnik took an early lead in the 1940 USSR Championship, but
faded badly in the later stages, eventually sharing fifth place. He
attributed this to the unaccustomed difficulty of concentrating in
a party-like atmosphere filled with noise and tobacco smoke.
Botvinnik wrote to a friendly official, commenting that the
champion was to be the winner of a match between Igor Bondarevsky
and Andor Lilienthal, who had tied for first place, but had no
achievements in international competition. The official's efforts
led to a tournament for the title of "Absolute Champion of the
USSR", whose official aim was to identify a Soviet challenger for
Alekhine's title. The contestants were the top six finishers in the
Soviet Championship - Bondarevsky, Lilienthal, Paul Keres (who had
recently become a Soviet citizen), future World Champion Vasily
Smyslov, Isaac Boleslavsky and Botvinnik - who were to play a
quadruple round robin. Botvinnik's preparation with his second,
Viacheslav Ragozin, included training matches in noisy, smoky rooms
and he slept in the playing room, without opening the window. He
won the tournament, 2½ points ahead of Keres and three ahead of
Smyslov; moreover, with plus scores in the "mini-matches" against
all his rivals.
In June 1941 Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Botvinnik's
wife Gayane, a ballerina, told him that her colleagues at the Kirov
Opera and Ballet Theatre were being evacuated to the city of
Perm,then known as Molotov in honour of Vyacheslav Molotov. The
family found an apartment there, and Botvinnik obtained a job with
the local electricity supply organization at the lowest pay rate
and on condition that he did no research, as he had only a
Candidate's degree. Botvinnik's only child, a daughter named Olya,
was born in Perm in April 1942.
In the evenings, Botvinnik wrote a book in which he annotated all
the games of the "Absolute Championship of the USSR", in order to
maintain his analytic skills in readiness for a match with
Alekhine. His work included wood-cutting for fuel, which left him
with insufficient energy for chess analysis. Botvinnik obtained
from Molotov an order that he should be given three days off normal
work in order to study chess.
In 1943, after a two-year lay-off from competitive chess, Botvinnik
won a tournament in Sverdlovsk, scoring 1½ out of 2 against each of
his competitors - who included Smyslov, Vladimir Makogonov,
Boleslavsky, and Ragozin. Chessbase regards this as one of the
fifty strongest tournaments between 1851 and 1986.
Shortly afterwards, Botvinnik was urged to return to Moscow by the
People's Commissar for Power Stations, an admirer and subsequent
good friend. On his return, Botvinnik suggested a match with Samuel
Reshevsky in order to strengthen his claim for a title match with
Alekhine, but this received no political support. In December 1943,
he won the Moscow Championship, ahead of Smyslov. At the same time,
opposition to his plan for a match with Alekhine re-surfaced, on
the grounds that Alekhine was a political enemy and the only proper
course was to demand that he be stripped of the title. The dispute
ended in Botvinnik's favor, and in the dismissal of a senior chess
official, one of those to have opposed Botvinnik's plan, who was
also a KGB colonel.
After Botvinnik won the 1944 and 1945 Soviet championships, most
top Soviet players supported his desire for a World Championship
match with Alekhine. However, the allegations that Alekhine had
written anti-Semitic articles while in Nazi-occupied France made it
difficult to host the match in the USSR. Botvinnik opened
negotiations with the British Chess Federation to host the match in
England, but these were cut short by Alekhine's death in 1946.
When the Second World War ended, Botvinnik won the first high-level
post-war tournament, at Groningen in 1946, with 14½ points from
nineteen games, ½ point ahead of former World Champion Max Euwe and
two ahead of Smyslov. He and Euwe both struggled in the last few
rounds, and Botvinnik had a narrow escape against Euwe, who he
acknowledged had always been a difficult opponent for him. This was
Botvinnik's first outright victory in a tournament outside the
Soviet Union.
Botvinnik also won the very strong Mikhail Chigorin Memorial
tournament held at Moscow 1947.
++1.D World Champion
Botvinnik strongly influenced the design of the system which would
be used for World Championship competition from 1948 to 1963.
Viktor Baturinsky wrote "Now came Botvinnik's turn to defend his
title in accordance with the new qualifying system which he himself
had outlined in 1946" (this statement referred to Botvinnik's 1951
title defense).
On the basis of his strong results during and just after World War
II, Botvinnik was one of five players to contest the 1948 World
Chess Championship, which was held at The Hague and Moscow. He won
the 1948 tournament convincingly, with a score of 14/20, three
points clear, becoming the sixth World Champion. While he was on
vacation in Riga after the tournament, an eleven-year old boy
called Mikhail Tal paid a visit, hoping to play a game against the
new champion. Tal was met by Botvinnik's wife, who said the
champion was asleep, and that she had made him take a rest from
chess.
Botvinnik then held the title, with two brief interruptions, for
the next fifteen years, during which he played seven world
championship matches. In 1951, he drew with David Bronstein over 24
games in Moscow, +5 -5 =14, keeping the world title, but it was a
struggle for Botvinnik, who won the second-last game and drew the
last in order to tie the match. In 1954, he drew with Vasily
Smyslov over 24 games at Moscow, +7 -7 =10, again retaining the
title. In 1957, he lost to Smyslov by 9-12½ in Moscow, but the
rules then in force allowed him a rematch without having to go
through the Candidates' Tournament, and in 1958 he won the rematch
in Moscow; Smyslov said his health was poor during the return
match. In 1960, Botvinnik was convincingly beaten 8½-12½ at Moscow
by Tal, now 23 years old, but again exercised his right to a
rematch in 1961, and won by 13-8 in Moscow. Commentators agreed
that Tal's play was weaker in the rematch, probably due to his
health, but also that Botvinnik's play was better than in the 1960
match, largely due to thorough preparation. Botvinnik changed his
style in the rematch, avoiding the tactical complications in which
Tal excelled and aiming for closed positions and endgames, where
Tal's technique was not outstanding. Finally, in 1963, he lost the
title to Tigran Petrosian, by 9-12 in Moscow. FIDE had by then
altered the rules, and he was not allowed a rematch. The rematch
rule had been nicknamed the "Botvinnik rule", because he twice
benefited from it.
Though ranking as formal World Champion, Botvinnik had a relatively
poor playing record in the early 1950s: he played no formal
competitive games after winning the 1948 match tournament until he
defended his title, then struggled to draw his 1951 championship
match with Bronstein, placed only fifth in the 1951 Soviet
Championship, and tied for third in the 1952 Géza Maróczy Memorial
tournament in Budapest; and he had also performed poorly in Soviet
training contests. Botvinnik did not play in the Soviet team that
won the 1952 Chess Olympiad in Helsinki: the players voted for the
line-up and placed Botvinnik on second board, with Keres on top
board; Botvinnik protested and refused to play. Keres' playing
record from 1950 to early 1952 had been outstanding.
Botvinnik won the 1952 Soviet Championship (joint first with Mark
Taimanov in the tournament, won the play-off match). He included
several wins from that tournament over the 1952 Soviet team members
in his book Botvinnik's Best Games 1947-1970, writing "these games
had a definite significance for me". In 1956, he tied for first
place with Smyslov in the 1956 Alexander Alekhine Memorial in
Moscow, despite a last-round loss to Keres.
++1.E Team tournaments
Botvinnik was selected for the Soviet Olympiad team from 1954 to
1964 inclusively, and helped his team to gold medal finishes each
of those six times. At Amsterdam 1954 he was on board one and won
the gold medal with 8?/11. Then at home for Moscow 1956, he was
again board one, and scored 9?/13 for the bronze medal. For Munich
1958, he scored 9/12 for the silver medal on board one. At Leipzig
1960, he played board two behind Mikhail Tal, having lost his title
to Tal earlier that year; But he won the board two gold medal with
10?/13. He was back on board one for Varna 1962, scored 8/12, but
failed to win a medal for the only time at an Olympiad. His final
Olympiad was Tel Aviv 1964, where he won the bronze with 9/12,
playing board 2 as he had lost his title to Petrosian. Overall, in
six Olympiads, he scored 54½/73 for an outstanding 74.6 percent.
Botvinnik also played twice for the USSR in the European Team
Championship. At Oberhausen 1961, he scored 6/9 for the gold medal
on board one. But at Hamburg 1965, he struggled on board two with
only 3½/8. Both times the Soviet Union won the team gold medals.
Botvinnik played one of the final events of his career at the
Russia (USSR) vs Rest of the World match in Belgrade 1970, scoring
2½/4 against Milan Matulovic, as the USSR narrowly triumphed.
++1.F Late career
After losing the world title for the final time, to Tigran
Petrosian in Moscow in 1963, Botvinnik withdrew from the following
World Championship cycle after FIDE declined, at its annual
congress in 1965, to grant a losing champion the automatic right to
a rematch. He remained involved with competitive chess, appearing
in several highly-rated tournaments and continuing to produce
memorable games.
He retired from competitive play in 1970, aged 59, preferring
instead to occupy himself with the development of computer chess
programs and to assist with the training of younger Soviet players,
earning him the nickname of "Patriarch of the Soviet Chess School"
(see below).
Botvinnik's autobiography, K Dostizheniyu Tseli, was published in
Russian in 1978, and in English translation as Achieving the Aim
(ISBN 0-08-024120-4) in 1981. A staunch Communist, he was
noticeably shaken by the collapse of the Soviet Union and lost some
of his standing in Russian chess during the Boris Yeltsin era.
In the 1980s Botvinnik proposed a computer program to manage the
Soviet economy, however his proposals did not receive significant
attention from the Soviet government.
During the last few years of his life he personally financed his
economic computer project that he hoped would be used to manage the
Russian economy.He kept actively working on the program until his
death and financing the work from the money he made for the
lectures and seminars he attended, despite prominent health
problems.
Botvinnik died of pancreatic cancer in 1995. According to his
daughter, Botvinnik remained active until the last few months of
his life, and continued to go to work until March, 1995 despite
blindness in one of his eyes (and extremely poor vision in the
other).
++1.G Political controversies
The Soviet Union regarded chess as a symbol of Communist
superiority, and hence the Soviet chess world was extremely
politicized. As Botvinnik was the first world-class player produced
by the Soviet Union, everything he said or did (or did not say or
do) had political repercussions, and there were rumors that Soviet
opponents were given hints that they should not beat him.
David Bronstein wrote that Boris Verlinsky had won the 1929 Soviet
Championship and was granted the first Soviet Grandmaster title for
this achievement, yet he was later stripped of it, when it was
thought more politically correct to make Botvinnik the first
official Soviet GM (as distinct from the-then nonexistent FIDE
grandmaster title).
Botvinnik wrote that before the last round of the 1935 Moscow
tournament Soviet Commissar of Justice Nikolai Krylenko, who was
also in charge of Soviet chess, proposed that Ilya Rabinovich
should deliberately lose to Botvinnik, to ensure that Botvinnik
took first place. Botvinnik refused, saying "... then I will myself
put a piece en prise and resign". The game was drawn, and Botvinnik
shared first place with Salo Flohr.
Botvinnik sent an effusive telegram of thanks to Joseph Stalin
after his victory at the great tournament in Nottingham in 1936.
Many years later he said that it had been written in Moscow and
that KGB agents told him to sign it.
Botvinnik played relatively poorly in the very strong 1940 Soviet
Championship, finishing in a tie for fifth/sixth places, with
11½/19, two full points behind Igor Bondarevsky and Andor
Lilienthal. With World War II under way by this time, and the
strong possibility of little or no chess for some time in the
future, Botvinnik seems to have prevailed upon the Soviet chess
leadership to hold another tournament "in order to clarify the
situation". This wound up being the 1941 Absolute Championship of
the USSR, which featured the top six finishers from the 1940 event,
playing each other four times. After a personal appeal to the
defence minister, Vyacheslav Molotov, Botvinnik was exempted from
war work for three days a week in order to concentrate on chess
preparations. He won this tournament convincingly, and thus
reclaimed his position as the USSR's top player. Bronstein claimed
that at the end of the 1946 Groningen tournament, a few months
after the death of reigning world champion Alexander Alekhine,
Botvinnik personally invited Samuel Reshevsky, Reuben Fine, Max
Euwe, Vasily Smyslov, and Paul Keres to join him in a tournament to
decide the new world champion, but other evidence suggests that
FIDE (the "governing body" of chess), had already proposed a World
Championship tournament before the Groningen tournament began, and
at this stage the Soviet Union was not a member and therefore took
no part in framing that proposal.
Since Keres lost his first four games against Botvinnik in the 1948
World Championship tournament, winning only in the final cycle
after the outcome of the tournament had been decided, suspicions
have sometimes been raised that Keres was forced to "throw" games
to allow Botvinnik to win the Championship. Chess historian Taylor
Kingston investigated all the available evidence and arguments, and
concluded that: Soviet chess officials gave Keres strong hints that
he should not hinder Botvinnik's attempt to win the World
Championship; Botvinnik only discovered this about half-way through
the tournament and protested so strongly that he angered Soviet
officials; Keres probably did not deliberately lose games to
Botvinnik or anyone else in the tournament.
Bronstein insinuated that Soviet officials pressured him to lose in
the 1951 world championship match so that Botvinnik would keep the
title, but comments by Botvinnik's second, Salo Flohr, and
Botvinnik's own annotations to the critical 23rd game indicate that
Botvinnik knew of no such plot.
In 1956, FIDE changed the world championship rules so that a
defeated champion would have the right to a return match. Yuri
Averbakh alleged that this was done at the urging of the two Soviet
representatives in FIDE, who were personal friends of Botvinnik.
Averbakh also claims that Botvinnik's friends were behind FIDE's
decision in 1956 to limit the number of players from the same
country that could compete in the Candidates Tournament, and that
this was to Botvinnik's advantage as it reduced the number of
Soviet players he might have to meet in the title match.
Botvinnik asked to be allowed to play in the 1956 Candidates
Tournament, as he wanted to use the event as part of his warm-up
for the next year's title match, but his request was refused.
Mikhail Tal's chronic kidney problems contributed to his defeat in
his 1961 return match with Botvinnik, and his doctors in Riga
advised that he should postpone the match for health reasons.
Averbakh claimed that Botvinnik would agree to a postponement only
if Tal was certified unfit by Moscow doctors, and that Tal then
decided to play.
While there is no doubt that Botvinnik sincerely believed in
Communism, he by no means submissively followed the party line. In
1954, he wrote an article about inciting socialist revolution in
western countries, aiming to spread Communism without a third world
war. And in 1960 Botvinnik wrote a letter to the Soviet Government
proposing economic reforms that were contrary to party policy.
In 1976 Soviet grandmasters were asked to sign a letter condemning
Viktor Korchnoi as a "traitor" after Korchnoi defected. Botvinnik
evaded this "request" by saying that he wanted to write his own
letter denouncing Korchnoi. By this time, however, his importance
had waned and officials would not give him this "privilege", so
Botvinnik's name did not appear on the group letter - an outcome
Botvinnik may have foreseen. Bronstein and Boris Spassky openly
refused to sign the letter.
++1.H Assessment
++1.H1 Playing strength and style
For more information see Comparing top chess players throughout
history Reuben Fine observed that Botvinnik was at or near the top
of the chess world for thirty years - from 1933, when he drew a
match against Flohr, to 1963, when he lost the world championship
for the final time, to Petrosian - "a feat equaled historically
only by Emanuel Lasker and Steinitz". The statistical rating system
used in Raymond Keene and Nathan Divinsky's book Warriors of the
Mind concludes that Botvinnik was the fourth strongest player of
all time: behind Garry Kasparov, Anatoly Karpov and Bobby Fischer
but ahead of José Raúl Capablanca, Lasker, Viktor Korchnoi, Boris
Spassky, Vasily Smyslov and Tigran Petrosian. The Chessmetrics
system is sensitive to the length of the periods being compared,
but places Botvinnik third in a comparison of players' best
individual years (1946 for Botvinnik) and sixth in a comparison of
fifteen-year periods (1935-1949 in Botvinnik's case). In 2005
Chessmetrics' creator Jeff Sonas wrote an article which examined
various ways of comparing the strength of "world number one"
players, some not based on Chessmetrics; and Botvinnik generally
emerged as one of the top six (the greatest exceptions were in
criteria related to tournament results). FIDE did not adopt the Elo
rating system until 1970, by which time Botvinnik's strength had
been declining for several years. According to unofficial
calculations by Árpád Elo, Botvinnik was the highest-rated player
from 1937 to 1954, peaking about 2730 in 1946.
This may seem surprising in the light of Botvinnik's results in the
1950s and early 1960s, when he failed to win a world championship
match outright (as reigning champion) and his tournament results
were patchy. But after the FIDE world championship cycle was
established in 1948, reigning champions had to play the strongest
contender every three years, and successful title defenses became
less common than in the pre-World War II years, when the
titleholder could select his challenger. Despite this, Botvinnik
held the world title for a longer period than any of his successors
except Garry Kasparov. Botvinnik also became world champion at the
relatively late age of 37, because World War II brought
international competition to a virtual halt for six years; and he
was 52 years old when he finally lost his title (only Wilhelm
Steinitz and Emanuel Lasker were older when they were defeated).
Botvinnik's best years were from 1935 to 1946; during that period
he dominated Soviet chess; and the USSR's 15-4½ win in the 1945
radio match against the USA proved that the USSR's top players were
considerably better than the USA's (who had dominated international
team competitions in the 1930s).
Botvinnik generally sought tense positions with chances for both
sides; hence his results were often better with the Black pieces as
he could avoid lines that were likely to produce draws. He had a
strong grasp of long-term strategy, and was often willing to accept
weaknesses that his opponent could not exploit in exchange for some
advantage that Botvinnik could exploit. He confessed that he was
relatively weak in tactical calculation, yet many of his games
feature sacrifices - often long-term positional sacrifices whose
purpose was not to force a quick win, but to improve his position
and undermine his opponent's. Botvinnik was also capable of all-out
sacrificial attacks when he thought the position justified it.
Botvinnik saw himself as a "universal player" (all-rounder), in
contrast to all-out tactical calculators like Mikhail Tal or purely
positional players like Tigran Petrosian. Reuben Fine considered
Botvinnik's collection of best games one of the three most
beautiful up to the mid-1950s (the other two were Alexander
Alekhine's and Akiba Rubinstein's).
Kasparov quotes Tigran Petrosian as saying, "There was a very
unpleasant feeling of inevitability. Once in a conversation with
Keres I mentioned this and even compared Botvinnik with a
bulldozer, which sweeps away everything in its path. Keres smiled
and said: 'But can you imagine what it was like to play him when he
was young?'"
++1.H2 Influence on the game
Botvinnik's example and teaching established the modern approach to
preparing for competitive chess: regular but moderate physical
exercise; analysing very thoroughly a relatively narrow repertoire
of openings; annotating one's own games, those of past great
players and those of competitors; publishing one's annotations so
that others can point out any errors; studying strong opponents to
discover their strengths and weaknesses; ruthless objectivity about
one's own strengths and weaknesses. Botvinnik also played many
short training matches against strong grandmasters including Salo
Flohr, Yuri Averbakh, Viacheslav Ragozin, and Semion Furman - in
noisy or smoky rooms if he thought he would have to face such
conditions in actual competition. Vladimir Kramnik said,
"Botvinnik's chess career was the way of a genius, although he was
not a genius", meaning that Botvinnik was brilliant at making the
best use of his talents.
Although Botvinnik did not use a wide range of openings, he made
major contributions to those he did use, for example: the Botvinnik
variation of the Semi-Slav Defense in the Queen's Gambit Declined,
the Kasparov/Botvinnik system in the Exchange Variation of the
Queen's Gambit Declined, the Caro-Kann Defence (both the Panov-
Botvinnik Attack for White and various approaches for Black), the
Winawer Variation of the French Defence, the Botvinnik System in
the English Opening. In his openings research Botvinnik did not aim
to produce tactical tricks that would only be effective once but
rather systems in which he aimed to understand typical positions
and their possibilities better than his rivals. His advice to his
pupils included "My theory of the openings fitted into one
notebook" and "You don't have to know that which everyone knows,
but it is important to know that which not everyone knows." In fact
he used different notebooks in different periods, and copied a few
analyses from one notebook to the next. The "Soviet School of
Chess" that dominated competition from 1945 to about 2000 followed
Botvinnik's approach to preparation and to openings research; and,
although Soviet players had their own preferred styles of play,
they adopted his combative approach and willingness to ignore
"classical" principles if doing so offered credible prospects of a
lasting advantage.
In 1963 Botvinnik founded his own school within the Soviet coaching
system, and its graduates include world champions Anatoly Karpov,
Garry Kasparov and Vladimir Kramnik, and other top-class players
such as Alexei Shirov, Vladimir Akopian and Jaan Ehlvest. Botvinnik
was not an infallible spotter of chess talent: although he said of
the 11-year old Kasparov, "The future of chess lies in the hands of
this young man", he said on first seeing Karpov, "The boy doesn't
have a clue about chess, and there's no future at all for him in
this profession." But Karpov recounts fondly his youthful memories
of the Botvinnik school and credits Botvinnik's training,
especially the homework he assigned, with a marked improvement in
his own play. Kasparov presents Botvinnik almost as a kind of
father figure, going some way towards balancing the common public
perception of Botvinnik as dour and aloof; and Kasparov inherited
Botvinnik's emphasis on preparation, research and innovation.
Botvinnik was still playing a major teaching role in his late 70s,
when Kramnik entered the school, and made a favorable impression on
his pupil.
++1.I Other achievements
++1.I1 Electrical engineer
ingEngineering was as much of a passion for Botvinnik as chess - at
Nottingham in 1936, where he had his first major tournament win
outside the USSR, he said "I wish I could do what he's done in
electrical engineering" (referring to Milan Vidmar, another
grandmaster). He was awarded the Order of the Badge of Honour for
his work on power stations in the Urals during World War II (while
he was also establishing himself as the world's strongest chess
player). He earned his doctorate in electrical engineering in
1951.] In 1956, he joined the Research Institute for Electrical
Energy as a senior research scientist.
++1.I2 Computer chess
In the 1950s Botvinnik became interested in computers, at first
mainly for playing chess but he later also co-authored reports on
the possible use of artificial intelligence in managing the Soviet
economy. Botvinnik's research on chess-playing programs
concentrated on "selective searches", which used general chess
principles to decide which moves were worth considering. This was
the only feasible approach for the primitive computers available in
the Soviet Union in the early 1960s, which were only capable of
searching three or four half-moves deep (i.e. A's move, B's move,
A's move, B's move) if they tried to examine every variation.
Botvinnik eventually developed an algorithm that was reasonably
good at finding the right move in difficult positions, but it often
missed the right move in simple positions, e.g. where it was
possible to checkmate in two moves. This "selective" approach
turned out to be a dead end, as computers were powerful enough by
the mid-1970s to perform a brute-force search (checking all
possible moves) several moves deep and today's vastly more powerful
computers do this well enough to compete against human world
champions. However, his PIONEER program contained a generalized
method of decision-making that, with a few adjustments, enabled it
to plan maintenance of power stations all over the USSR. On
September 7, 1991 Botvinnik was awarded an honorary degree in
mathematics of the University of Ferrara (Italy) for his work on
computer chess.
++1.J Writings
++1.J1 Chess
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1960). One hundred selected games. Courier
Dover. ISBN 0486206203.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1972). Cafferty, B.. ed. Botvinnik's best
games, 1947-1970. Batsford. ISBN 0713403578.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1973). Garry, S.. ed. Soviet chess
championship, 1941: Complete text of games with detailed
notes & an introduction. Dover Publications. ISBN
0486221849.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1973). World Championship: The Return
Match Botvinnik vs. Smyslov 1958. Chess Digest Magazine.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1973). Alekhine vs. Euwe return match
1937. Chess Digest.
* Matanovic, A.; Kazic, B., Yudovich, M., and Botvinnik, M.M.
(1974). Candidates' matches 1974. Centar Za Unapredivanje
Saha.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1978). Anatoly Karpov: His Road to the
World Championship. Elsevier. ISBN 0080211399.
* Botvinnik, M.M.; Estrin, Y. (1980). The Gruenfeld Defense.
Rhm Pr. ISBN 0890580170.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1981). Cafferty, B.. ed. Achieving the
Aim. Pergamon Press. ISBN 0080241204.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1981). Selected Games: 1967-1970.
Pergamon. ISBN 0080241239.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1982). Marfia, J.. ed. Fifteen Games and
Their Stories. Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, U.S.A: Chess
Enterprises. ISBN 0931462150.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1985). Botvinnik on the Endgame. Chess
Enterprises. ISBN 0931462436.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1996). Neat, K. and Stauss, E.. ed. Half
a Century of Chess. Cadogan Books. ISBN 1857441222.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (2000). Neat, K.. ed. Botvinnik's Best
Games Volume 1: 1925-1941. Moravian Chess. ISBN 807189317.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (2000). Neat, K.. ed. Botvinnik's Best
Games Volume 2: 1942-1956. Moravian Chess. ISBN 8071893706.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (2000). Neat, K.. ed. Botvinnik's Best
Games Volume 3: 1957-1970 - Analytical & Critical Works.
Moravian Chess. ISBN 8071894052.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (2002). Championship Chess: Match
Tournament for the Absolute Chess Championship of the USSR,
Leningrad-Moscow 1941. Hardinge Simpole. ISBN
9781843820123.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (2004). Match for the World Chess
Championship Mikhail Botvinnik-David Bronstein Moscow 1951.
Edition Olms. ISBN 3283004595.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (2004). Botvinnik, I.. ed. World
Championship Return Match: Botvinnik V. Tal, Moscow 1961.
Olms. ISBN 9783283004613.
++1.J2 Computers
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1970). Computers, Chess and Long-Range
Planning. Springer Verlag. ISBN 0387900128.
* Botvinnik, M.M. (1984). Computers in Chess: Solving Inexact
Search Problems. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0387908692.
++1.K Notable chess games
* Botvinnik vs Chekhover, Moscow 1935, Reti Opening, 1-0
* Botvinnik vs Capablanca, AVRO 1938, Nimzo-Indian Defense,
1-0 At first sight Botvinnik's opening play looks
unpromising, but he knew how his attack would develop.
* Keres vs Botvinnik, USSR Absolute Championship 1941, Nimzo-
Indian Defense, 0-1 Playing as Black, Botvinnik demolishes
a world title contender in 22 moves.
* Tolush vs Botvinnik, USSR Championship 1944, 0-1 Long-term
positional sacrifices.
* Denker vs Botvinnik, USA vs USSR radio match 1945, 0-1
Botvinnik uses the Botvinnik System in the Semi-Slav
Defense to bulldoze US champion Arnold Denker.
* Botvinnik vs Keres, Alekhine Memorial Tournament Moscow
1966, 1-0 Botvinnik shows his superior understanding of
closed positions, and when to open them.
* Botvinnik vs Portisch, Monaco 1968, 1-0 A fireworks display
starting with an exchange sacrifice on the c-file, a tactic
on which Botvinnik wrote the book.
++1.L Tournament results
1923 Leningrad 8 School championship - - - Botvinnik estimates
"about 10th out of 16".
1924 Leningrad - School championship 1st 5/6 +5 -1 =0
1924 Leningrad - non-category 1st 11/13 +11 -1 =1
1924 Leningrad - 2nd and 3rd Categories 1st 11/13 +11 -1 =1
1924 Leningrad - 2A Category - - - Tournament unfinished
1925 Leningrad - 2A and 1B Categories 1st 10/11 +10 -1 =0
1925 Leningrad - 1st Category 3rd 7/11 +7 -3 =1
1925 Leningrad - 1st Category - - - Tournament unfinished
1926 Leningrad - Leningrad Championship, Semi-finals 1st 11½ /
12 +11 -0 =1
1926 Leningrad - Leningrad Championship 2nd= 7/9 +6 -1 =2
1926 Leningrad - Northwest Provincial Championship, Semi-finals
tied 2nd 9/11 +8 -1 =2
1926 Leningrad - Northwest Provincial Championship 3rd 6/10 +4
-1 =5
1927 Leningrad - Tournament of "Six" 2nd 7/10 +6 -1 =3
1927 Moscow - 5th USSR Chess Championship tied 5th 12/20 +9 -4
=7
1928 Leningrad - Regional Metalworkers' Committee Championship
1st 8/11 +7 -1 =3
1929 Leningrad - Regional Committee of Educational Workers'
Championship 1st 11/14 +9 -0 =5
1929 Odessa - 6th USSR Chess Championship, Quarter-finals 1st
7/8 +6 -0 =2
1929 Odessa - 6th USSR Chess Championship, Semi-finals tied 3rd
2/5 +2 -2 =1
1930 Leningrad - Masters' Tournament 1st 6/8 +6 -1 =1
1931 Leningrad - Leningrad Championship 1st 14/17 +12 -1 =4
1931 Moscow - 7th USSR Chess Championship, Semi-finals 2nd 6/9
+6 -2 =1
1931 Moscow - 7th USSR Chess Championship 1st 13/17 +12 -2 =3
1932 Leningrad - Leningrad Championship 1st 10/11 +9 -0 =2
1932 Leningrad - Masters' Tournament in House of Scientists 1st
7/10 +6 -2 =2
1933 Leningrad - Masters' Tournament Tied 1st 10/13 +7 -0 =6
1933 Leningrad - 8th USSR Chess Championship 1st 14/19 +11 -2 =6
1934 Leningrad - Tournament including Euwe and Kmoch 1st 7/11 +5
-1 =5
1934 Hastings - Hastings International Chess Congress tied 5th
5/9 +3 -2 =4
1935 Moscow - 2nd International Tournament tied 1st 13/19 +9 -2
=8
1936 Moscow - 3rd International Tournament 2nd 12/18 +7 -1 =10
1936 Nottingham - International Tournament tied 1st 10/14 +6 -0
=8
1938 Leningrad - 11th USSR Chess Championship, Semi-finals 1st
14/17 +12 -1 =4
1938 Amsterdam, etc. - AVRO tournament 3rd 7/14 +3 -2 =9
1939 Leningrad - 11th USSR Chess Championship 1st 12/17 +8 -0 =9
1940 Moscow - 12th USSR Chess Championship tied 5th 11/19 +8 -4
=7
1941 Leningrad, Moscow - Absolute Chess Championship of the USSR
1st 13/20 +9 -2 =9
1943 Sverdlovsk - Masters' Tournament 1st 10/14 +7 -0 =7
1943 Moscow - Moscow Championship 1st 13/16 +12 -1 =3
1944 Moscow - 13th USSR Chess Championship 1st 12/16 +11 -2 =3
1945 Moscow - 14th USSR Chess Championship 1st 15/17 +13 -0 =4
1946 Groningen - International Tournament 1st 14/19 +13 -3 =3
1947 Moscow - Chigorin Memorial Tournament 1st 11/15 +8 -1 =6
1948 The Hague, Moscow - World Chess Championship Tournament 1st
14/20 +10 -2 =8
1951 Moscow - 19th USSR Chess Championship 5th 10/17 +6 -3 =8
1952 Budapest - Maroczy Jubilee tied 3rd 11/17 +7 -2 =8
1952 Moscow - 20th USSR Chess Championship tied 1st 13/19 +9 -1
=9 Defeated Taimanov in a play-off for first place.
1955 Moscow - 22nd USSR Chess Championship tied 3rd 11/19 +7 -3
=9
1956 Moscow - Alekhine Memorial tied 1st 11/15 +8 -1 =6
1958 Wageningen - International Tournament 1st 4/5 +3 -0 =2
1961-1962 Hastings - International Chess Congress (Premier) 1st 8/9
+7 -0 =2
1962 Stockholm - International Tournament 1st 8/9 +8 -0 =1
1965 Noordwijk - International Tournament 1st 6/7 +5 -0 =2
1966 Amsterdam - IBM Tournament 1st 7/9 +7 -1 =1
1966-1967 Hastings - International Chess Congress (Premier) 1st 6/9
+5 -1 =3
1967 Palma de Mallorca - International Tournament tied 2nd 12/17
+9 -1 =7
1968 Monte Carlo - International Tournament 2nd 9/13 +5 -0 =8
1969 Wijk aan Zee - Hoogovens (Grandmaster Section) tied 1st
10/15 +6 -0 =9
1969 Belgrade - International Tournament 7th 8/15 +5 -3 =7
1970 Leiden - Quadrangular Tournament tied 3rd 5/12 +1 -2 =9
Four players. Each opponent was played four times.
++1.L1 Match results
1933 Salo Flohr Tied Moscow, Leningrad 6 /12 +2 =8 -2 Challenge
1937 Grigory Levenfish Tied Moscow, Leningrad 6.5/13 +5 =3 -5
Challenge
1940 Viacheslav Ragozin Won Moscow, Leningrad 8/12 +5 =7 -0
Training
1951 David Bronstein Tied Moscow 12/24 +5 =14 -5 World title
1952 Mark Taimanov Won Moscow 3.5/6 +1 =5 -0 USSR Ch playoff
1954 Vasily Smyslov Tied Moscow 12/24 +7 =10 -7 World title
1957 Vasily Smyslov Lost Moscow 9/22 +3 =13 -6 World title
1958 Vasily Smyslov Won Moscow 12/23 +7 =11 -5 Rematch
1960 Mikhail Tal Lost Moscow 8/21 +2 =13 -6 World title
1961 Mikhail Tal Won Moscow 13/21 +10 =6 -5 Rematch
1963 Tigran Petrosian Lost Moscow 9/21 +2 =14 -5 World title
++2. Vitaly Chekhover
Vitaly Alexandrovich Chekhover (December 22, 1908 - February 11,
1965) was a Soviet chess player and chess composer. He was also a
pianist.
++2.A Composing career
In the beginning of his career as an endgame study composer,
Chekhover often revised traditional studies of other authors. He
strove to bring them into a more sparse and economical form, often
with fewer pieces - hence focusing on the actual problem itself,
rather than the position on the board. Later he found his own style
and composed a number of original, independent chess studies and
problems. Starting 1936, Chekhover published more than 160 endgame
studies. He is considered a prominent specialist on knight
endgames, and has written several books on the subject; either
alone, or with coauthors such as Russian grandmaster Yuri Averbakh.
Between 1947 and 1965 he participated in the Soviet Union
championship for chess composition. Chekhover twice received the
title Master of Sports of the USSR. In 1956 he was awarded the
title International Judge of Chess Compositions by FIDE, and
received the FIDE title International Master of Chess Compositions
in 1961.
++2.B Playing career
Chekover was also a very successful chess player, being awarded the
title of International Master in 1950 when the title was first
introduced. Tournament victories include victory in the Leningrad
City Chess Championship in 1937 (shared) and 1949. He won the
Uzbekistani Chess Championship in 1944.
A variation of the Sicilian Defence is named after him: 1. e4 c5 2.
Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Qxd4 (Sicilian Defense, Chekhover Variation).
++2.C Bibliography
* Chekhover, Vitaly; Averbakh, Yuri (1977). Comprehensive
Chess Endings: Knight Endings. Batsford. ISBN
978-0713405521.
* Chekhover, Vitaly; Averbakh, Yuri; Henkin, V. (1978).
Comprehensive Chess Endings: Queen v. Rook/Minor Piece
Endings. Batsford. ISBN 978-0713408669.
++3. Mikhail Botvinnik - Vitaly Chekhover, Moscow 1935
Moscow 1935, Round 16
White: Mikhail Botvinnik
Black: Vitaly Chekhover
Result: 1-0
ECO: A13 - English Opening, Agincourt Variation, King's Knight Variation
Notes by R.J. Macdonald
1. Nf3
(The game begins with the Reti Opening, but quickly moves to the English
Opening with white's next move.)
1. ... d5
2. c4
(Transposing into the English Opening.)
2. ... e6
(This is the Agincourt Variation, which more typically occurs after 1. c4 e6.)
3. b3 Nf6
(The King's Knight Variation. Black can reach full equality after 3. ... dxc4
4. bxc4 e5 5. Qa4+ Bd7 6. Qb3 Nc6 7. Bb2 f6 8. d3 Bd6 9. Nc3 Nge7.)
4. Bb2 Be7
(The Whimpey Variation would continue with 4. ... c5 5. e3.)
5. e3 0-0
6. Be2 c6
7. 0-0 Nbd7
8. Nc3 a6
9. Nd4
(Among the options here are (a) 9. Qc2 Nc5 10. d4 Nce4 11. Bd3 Nxc3 12. Bxc3 h6
13. Nd2 b6 14. e4 dxe4 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Bb7 17. Rad1 Qc7 18. f4 f5 19.
Bd3 Bd6 20. Qf2 c5 21. Be2 cxd4 22. Bxd4 Rad8 23. Bxb6 Qc6 1-0, as in the game
F. Boi (1622) - C. Troiani (1619), Laconi 2006; (b) 9. d4 b5 10. Qc2 b4 11. Na4
Ne4 12. Ne5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 f5 14. cxd5 cxd5 15. f3 Ng5 16. Bd4 Bd7 17. Nb6 Rb8
18. Nxd7 Qxd7 19. Bxa6 Ra8 20. Qe2 Qc6 21. Bb5 Qb7 22. Rac1 Rfc8 23. Ba4 h6
1/2-1/2 in 64 moves, as in the game V. Turikov (2353) - V. Znamensky (2353), St
Petersburg 2005; and (c) 9. Rc1 b5 10. cxd5 cxd5 11. Qc2 Bb7 12. d3 Rc8 13. Qd2
Bb4 14. a3 Bd6 15. b4 Qe7 16. Rfd1 Rfd8 17. e4 dxe4 18. dxe4 Ne5 19. Qe3 Nfg4
20. Qb6 Nxf3+ 21. Bxf3 Bxh2+ 22. Kf1 Ne5 23. Rxd8+ Rxd8 0-1, as in the game D.
Shi (1534) - D. Zhang (2101), Calgary 2009. However, 9. Qc2 b5 seems to give
white a slight advantage.)
9. ... dxc4
(9. ... g6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Nf3 leads to equality.)
10. bxc4
(White has a slight edge.)
10. ... Nc5
(10. ... c5 11. Nf3 would leave white slightly ahead.)
11. f4 Qc7
12. Nf3
(12. Na4 Ncd7 with a slight advantage for white.)
12. ... Rd8
(12. ... b5 13. a3 leaves white with a slight advantage.)
13. Qc2
(13. Na4 Ncd7 14. Qc2 b6 is slightly better for white.)
13. ... Ncd7
(13. ... b5 14. a3 gives white a slight advantage.)
14. d4
(14. Ne4 Nxe4 15. Qxe4 Bf6 gives white a solid advantage.)
14. ... c5
(14. ... b5 15. Bd3 offers equal chances.)
15. Ne5
(15. d5 exd5 16. Ng5 Nb6 17. Nxd5 Nbxd5 18. cxd5 h6 (18. ... Rxd5? 19. Bxf6
Bxf6 20. Qxh7+ Kf8 21. Rab1 is very strong for white) 19. Bxf6 hxg5 gives white
a solid advantage.)
15. ... b6
(15. ... cxd4 16. exd4 b5 17. cxb5 axb5 18. Rfc1 offers equal chances.)
16. Bd3
(16. Rf3 cxd4 17. exd4 Bb7 gives white a slight edge.)
16. ... cxd4
17. exd4 Bb7
18. Qe2 Nf8
(White has a very active position. 18. .. Nb8 19. Ne4 Bxe4 20. Bxe4 Nxe4 21.
Qxe4 gives white a slight advantage.)
19. Nd1
(19. Rad1 Rab8 is slightly better for white.)
19. ... Ra7
(White has an active position. 19. ... Ng6 20. Ne3 gives white a slight
advantage.)
20. Nf2 Qb8
(20. ... N8d7 21. Rac1 leaves white slightly ahead.)
21. Nh3
(Better is 21. f5, leaving white with a solid advantage.)
Key Move Diagram:
1q1r1nk1/
rb2bppp/
pp2pn2/
4N3/
2PP1P2/
3B3N/
PB2Q1PP/
R4RK1
Position after white's 21st move.
21. ... h6?
(A better try is 21. ... N6d7!?, though white still has a solid advantage.)
22. Ng5
(White's position is now very strong.)
22. ... hxg5
23. fxg5
Key Move Diagram:
1q1r1nk1/
rb2bpp1/
pp2pn2/
4N1P1/
2PP4/
3B4/
PB2Q1PP/
R4RK1
Position after white's 23rd move.
23. ... N8d7?
(23. ... N6h7 24. Nxf7 Nxg5 is also very strong for white.)
24. Nxf7 Kxf7
25. g6+
(25. gxf6 Nxf6 26. Qh5+ Kg8 27. Rxf6 Bxf6 28. Bg6 gives white a very strong
advantage.)
Key Move Diagram:
1q1r4/
rb1nbkp1/
pp2pnP1/
8/
2PP4/
3B4/
PB2Q1PP/
R4RK1
Position after white's 25th move.
25. ... Kg8??
(25. ... Kf8 26. Qxe6 Ne5 would still leave white with a very strong position.)
26. Qxe6+
(White now has a decisive advantage.)
26. ... Kh8
27. Qh3+
(27. Qxe7 Re8 28. Qb4 Bxg2 would give black a solid advantage.)
27. ... Kg8
28. Bf5 Nf8
29. Be6+ Nxe6
30. Qxe6+ Kh8
31. Qh3+
(31. Qxe7?? Bxg2 with a discovered attack: b7, a7-e7. 32. Qa3 Bxf1 33. Rxf1 Qc8
is very strong for black.)
31. ... Kg8
Key Move Diagram:
1q1r2k1/
rb2b1p1/
pp3nP1/
8/
2PP4/
7Q/
PB4PP/
R4RK1
Position after black's 31st move.
32. Rxf6!
(Double attack: b6/g8.)
32. ... Bxf6
(If 32. ... Bxf6 33. Qe6+ with a Double attack; or if 32. ... gxf6 33. Qh7+
with a Mate attack.)
33. Qh7+ Kf8
34. Re1 Be5
(34. ... Bxd4+ is not to be advocated because of the following mating
combination: 35. Bxd4 Qxh2+ 36. Qxh2 Be4 37. Rxe4 Kg8 38. Qh7+ Kf8 39. Qh8#.)
35. Qh8+ Ke7
36. Qxg7+ Kd6
(36. ... Ke6 doesn't change anything after 37. Qf7+ Kd6 38. Ba3+ Kc6 39. d5+
Rxd5 40. Qxd5+ Kc7 41. Qxe5+ Kc6 42. Qd5+ Kc7 43. Re7+ Kc8 44. Qd7#.)
37. Qxe5+ Kd7
38. Qf5+ Kc6
39. d5+ Kc5
40. Ba3+ Kxc4
41. Qe4+ Kc3
42. Bb4+ Kb2
43. Qb1#
(43. Qe2# is also possible.)
1-0
Other related posts:
- » [blind-chess] Annotated Game #123: Mikhail Botvinnik - Vitaly Chekhover, Moscow 1935 - R Dinger
