For a complete catalogue of CADOGAN CHESS books (which includes the Pergamon
Chess and Maxwell Macmillan Chess lists) please write to:
Cadogan Books pIc, London House, Parkgate Road, London SWII 4NQ
Tel: (0171) 7381961 Fax: (0171) 924 5491
CADOGAN
citn \
LONDON, NEW YORK
UK/EUROPE/AUSTRALASIA/ ASIA/AFRICA
Distribution: Grantham Book Services Ltd, Isaac Newton Way, Alma Park
Industrial Estate, Grantham, Lincs NG31 9SD
Tel: (01476) 67421 Fax: (0 1476) 590223
USA/CANADA/LATIN AMERICA/JAPAN
Several books of my games have appeared in English in the past. Some of those games were
annotated by chess masters, while others used partly my own comments taken from previously
published games. For this book, however, I have personally selected ninety of my most note
worthy games (played over a period of over forty years) and I have provided them with new
annotations.
Mr. Yu. Metayev, Director of the Moscow Publishing House "Fizkultura i Sport", had been
trying for some time to talk me into writing a book like this for Soviet readers, but I just could
not bring myself to get down to it. It was Emanuel Strauss, my colleague in the electronic field,
who during our talks in Moscow persuaded me to write this book. I have included my impres
sions of the chess and human aspects of my opponents (if they are well-known players), as well
as typical episodes from tournament life.
My first appearance abroad was in England at Hastings (alas, I waS not very successful).
But my first great success was also in England, at Nottingham in 1936. Incidentally, the un
reaIize<j match for the World Championship between Alekhine and myself was also planned
to be held in England. In the subsequent years the number of my chess friends in England has
in no way diminished. I hope that by publishing this book no harm will be done to the popular
ity of a past chess player. His games and his comments should come to his defence!
Moscow
M. M. BOTVINNIK
E D I TOR'S NOTE
The remaining period of Botvinnik's career is covered i n another book by him, Selected Games
1967-1970 (Pergamon Press, 1981), in which he draws particular attention to the following
games:
No. 7 Botvinnik-Diez del Corral (Palma de Mallorca, 1967)
No.9 Gligoric-Botvinnik (Palma de Mallorca, 1967)
No.12 Botvinnik-Larsen (Palma de Mallorca, 1967)
No.14 Botvinnik-Larsen (Monte Carlo, 1968)
No.IS Benko-Botvinnik (Monte Carlo, 1968)
No.16Botvinnik-Portisch (Monte Carlo, 1968)
No.23 Botvinnik-Lombardy (Beverwijk, 1969)
No.28 Matanovic-Botvinnik (Belgrade, 1969)
No.34 Matulovic-Botvinnik (Match of the Century, Belgrade, 1970)
No.39. Botvinnik-Larsen (Leiden, 1970)
,i
CONTENTS
Selected Games
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 4
No. 5
No. 6
No. 7
No. 8
No. 9
No. 10
No. 11
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
No. 17
No. 18
No. 19
No. 20
No.21
No. 22
No.23
No. 24
No. 25
No.26
No. 27
No.28
No.29
No.30
No. 31
No. 32
No.33
No. 34
No. 35
No. 36
No. 37
No.38
No.39
No.40
No.41
Nadporozhsky-Botvinnik, 1925
Capablanca-Botvinnik, 1925
Botvinnik-Shebarshin, 1926
Rokhlin-Botvinnik, 1926. .
Botvinnik-Rabinovich, 1926
Botvinnik-Stoltz, 1926 . . .
Botvinnik-Grigoriev, 1927 .
Rabinovich-Botvinnik, 1927
Botvinnik-Yuriev, 1927/28 .
Ragozin-Botvinnik, 1930. .
Botvinnik-Batuyev, 1930/31
Yurgis-Botvinnik, 1931 . .
Botvinnik-Sorokin, 1931
.
Botvinnik-Ryurnin, 1931 . .
Chekhover-Botvinnik, 1932
Botvinnik-Alatortsev, 1932/33
Lisitsyn-Botvinnik, 1933
.
Rauzer-Botvinnik, 1933 . .
Botvinnik-F1ohr, 1933
Botvinnik-Belavenets, 1934 .
Botvinnik-Rabinovich, 1934 . .
Milner-Barry-Botvinnik, 1934/35
Botvinnik-Spielmann, 1935 .
Ryurnin-Botvinnik, 1935 . .
Botvinnik-Chekhover, 1935
Botvinnik-Lilienthal, 1936 .
Botvinnik-F lohr, 1936
Bogoljubow-Botvinnik, 1936
Botvinnik-Tartakower, 1936
Alekhine-Botvinnik, 1936 .
Botvinnik-Vidrnar, 1936 .
Botvinnik-Levenfish, 1937 .
Botvinnik-Chekhover, 1938
Botvinnik-Alekhine, 1938 .
Botvinnik-Capablanca, 1938
Tolush-Botvinnik, 1939 .
Kotov-Botvinnik, 1939 .
Ragozin-Botvinnik, 1940 .
Botvinnik-Levenfish, 1940
Panov-Botvinnik, 1940
.
Keres-Botvinnik, 1941 . .
1
3
5
9
12
15
17
19
22
24
28
30
32
35
38
40
43
46
49
51
53
57
60
61
64
67
70
74
76
78
80
83
86
89
92
96
99
102
104
106
109
vii
No.42
No. 43
No.44
No.45
No.46
No. 47
No.48
No.49
No.50
No. 51
No.52
No.53
No. 54
No.55
No.56
No.57
No.58
No.59
No. 60
No.61
No.62
No.63
No.64
No. 65
No. 66
No. 67
No.68
No. 69
No. 70
No. 71
No. 72
No.73
No.74
No. 75
No.76
No.77
No. 78
No.79
No. 80
No. 81
No. 82
No.83
No.84
No.85
No. 86
No. 87
No. 88
No.89
No. 90
Bondarevsky-Botvinnik, 1941 .
Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1941. . .
Makogonov-Botvinnik, 1943 .
Lyublinsky-Botvinnik, 1943/44
Veresov-Botvinnik, 1944
Botvinnik-Flohr, 1944
Tolush-Botvinnik, 1945 ..
Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1945
Denker-Botvinnik, 1945 . .
Botvinnik-Vidrnar, 1946 ..
Botvinnik-Euwe, 1946
Reshevsky-Botvinnik, 1946.
Keres-Botvinnik, 1947 .
Keres-Botvinnik, 1948 ..
Botvinnik-Keres, 1948 . .
Botvinnik-Euwe, 1948
Botvinnik-Bronstein, 1951
Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951
SzabO-Botvinnik, 1952. .
Troianescu-Botvinnik, 1952
Botvinnik-Geller, 1952
Suetin-Botvinnik, 1952
Botvinnik-Taimanov, 1953
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1954.
Botvinnik-Minev, 1954 .
Unzicker-Botvinnik, 1954
Kotov-Botvinnik, 1955
Botvinnik-Gligoric, 1956 .
Botvinnik-Najdorf, 1956
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1957.
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1958.
Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1958.
Uhlmann-Botvinnik, 1958
Tal-Botvinnik, 1960
Neukirch-Botvinnik, 1960
Botvinnik-Schmid, 1960 .
Botvinnik-Tal, 1961
Botvinnik-Tal, 1961
Botvinnik-Unzicker, 1961
Littlewood-Botvinnik, 1962
Botvinnik-Fischer, 1962 .
Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963
Botvinnik-Petrosian, 1963
Botvinnik-Donner, 1963 .
Aloni-Botvinnik, 1964
Trifunovic-Botvinnik, 1965 .
Gipslis-Botvinnik, 1965 .
Szab6-Botvinnik, 1966...
Botvinnik-Zuidema, 1966
Results
in
111
113
117
120
123
125
128
131
134
136
140
144
148
152
156
158
161
165
168
172
175
177
181
185
188
193
198
202
205
209
212
215
219
222
225
227
229
232
234
238
240
246
250
254
256
259
262
265
267
Team
Events
1923-1970
271
Index of Openings
277
Index of Opponents
278
viii
GA M E 1. RUY LO PEZ
K. Nadporozhsky
M.
Botvinnik
1 e4
2 Nf3
3 BbS
4 Ba4
S 0-0
6 c3
15 . . .
1 6 b3
17 Nf3
Qd7
c5
6
7 Qe2
8 BXc6
9 NXeS
10 d 4
0-0
Nd 7
Black for his caution.
NX e 4
NcS
dXc6
he wishes to exchange
1 1 f4
12 fxeS
13 Nd2
Credit is due to
17 . . .
18 Qe4
19 b3
20 Be3
21 Qf4
22 Rf2
23 Qg3
24 Qf4
QbS
b6
Qd7
BfS
Bd3
Qf5
Qg6
N x eS
Be6
13 .. .
14 NO
15 N X d 4
c5
cXd4
15 c Xd 4 is no better when
reply 15
. .
Black could
24 . . .
25 Qg3
Qe4
33 N X cS
34 e6
Otherwise
26 Re1
27 R X e3
28 Ne1
29 K X f2
Or 29 QXf2 c4.
29 . . .
30 c4
31 Nd3
Q X e3
BgS!
BXe3
BXf2+
to activate
fS!
R8d6
34
3Se7
. .
BbS
Bc6
RadS
. .
. f4+.
36 QeS
f4+
32 Ke3
. . .
25
34
RfdS
Rd4 !
on c5.
who
GA M E 2. QUEEN'S GAMBIT
J.
R. Capablanca M. Botvinnik
Simultaneous Display
Leningrad, 1925
1 d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
4 BgS
503
dS
06
Nf6
Nbd7
10 . . .
11 Nf3
8b4
6 cXdS
7 Qb3
0-0
11 . . .
12 Nd4
13 c6
Be6
Rac8
o X d5
c5
QaS
9 ...
10
N X f6
14 Q x c3
15 Bd3
16 Kc2
Q X al
b x c6
c5
28 Re2
29 e4
Rc6
Rc7
c4
30 Re3
31 ReXc3
32 RXc2
Rd8
Nb4
dxc4
Rb8+
Rd2
RXc2+
Rxc2+
NdS
c3
M. Botvinnik M. Shebarshin
10 cIS
11 a3
Semi-Final of Leningrad
Championship, 1 926
I d4
2 Nf3
3 c4
4 Nc3
5 e4
6 Be2
Nf6
g6
Bg7
d6
0-0
Nbd7
12 ReI
13 Bn
8 .,
Be3
.
Nf4
b6
.6
NbS
c5
NbS
Kb7
b6
Ndf6
Ng8
Bd7
bXc5
.5
Qe7
21 . . .
22 RbI
RfbS
. .
23 Rd
5
Nbf6
Ne8
24 Reb2
25 R x b2
26 Qd2
R x b2
f5
Qf6
36 Qb8
37 as
38 RbI
Qf7
e4
38...
Ng4
27 Ndl
28 QaS
29 BXe4
Ne7
fXe4
BfS
30 BxfS
I realised, of course, that in
the battle
Black has
a long
on the Q-side.
30 ...
31 Kg2
32 Qa6
is indisputable.
NXfS
Qf7
39 bXg4
40 fXe3
4186
42 Qb3
32 . . .
33 Qb7
then 42 '"
iug.
42 ...
Closing
the
Bb4!
b-fiIe
and
thus
defending
43 Qe2
44 Rn
4S Rf4
46 Kb3
Qg8
Rd8
Qe8
Qe5
Re7
3584
Bd2
Nf6
33 . ..
34 Nc3
N xe3+
B X c3
Rd7
46 . . .
6
Bel
Game 3
Bh4
47Ne2
48Rn
S9 ..
61 RdS
48 ...
49Ngl
60 RXfS
QXfS
Rd7
Kg6
gS
Kg6
62Nc3
63NXe4+
64Kgl
Kf6
Ke6
Bd4
65Kf3
Rf7+
66 Rf5
Rg7
67Ke2
White goes in for a rook ending, but it was
simpler to win the ending with knight against
bishop by 67 RfS Rf7 + 68 R Xf7 K Xf7 69 d1
Ke7 70 Nd6 K Xd7 71 Nb5.
so Qf2!
67 .. .
68NxeS+
51Ne2
52 Qf5+
53 Qf8
54 Qf6!
68 . ..
69 RXcS
70 Rf5
71 Rf7
72 Rxa7
73 Rc7+
Kb7
Qg7
Qg6
Qg7
54. ..
Bd2
5S QXd6
S6 Qc6
57 Qe6
S8 Qf5+
59 d6
Rg8
Rd7 55 QfS+
BXe3
Rc7
Re7
Qg6
BXeS
KXd6
Rg6
KeS
KXc4
During
76
Kc3
74.7
75Kf3
76 Rh7
77 RXh6
78Ke4
this,
of
Ra6
Ra4
Kc5
RXa7
78
Rg7 79 Ke5 Rg8 80 Re6 RfB
81 Rg6 Re8+ 82 Kf6 Re4 83 Kxg5 KdS
84 Rf6 Re8 85Kh6Ke5 86 g5 RhS+ 87Kg7
Rh3 88 g6 Rxg3 89 RflKe6 90Kh7Ke7
91 g7 Rh3+ 92 Kg8 Rh4 93 Re1+ Kd7
94 Kf7 Rf4+ 95 Kg6 Rg4+ 96 Kf6 Rg3
97 ReS Resigns
. .
Y. Rokhlin M. Botvinnik
13 Nd2!
14 Qf3
Nf6
e6
dS
Nbd7
c6
1 d4
2 NO
3c4
4Bg5
5 Nc3
6 Rei
NdS
14 Ml (14
' "
NXc3 15 Qg4).
(see also
Game 50).
14 ...
h6
6...
7Bh4
dxc4
Q.5
7...
8 e4
Here too 8 .
c5!
15BXdS
White is tempted into winning material.
Black.
9 e5
10BXc4
11 bxc3
12 Rc2
Ne4
15 ...
16 QXdS
17 QXb7
NXc3
0.3
eXdS
Be6!
0-0
his development.
18 0-0
19 Nb3
20Bg3
development.
12 ...
Nb6
RfeS
Q.4
36 . . .
37BXd2
38Be3
20...
21 Nal
RXd2
Be4
BXdS
c4!
21
22 Rd2
.
QaS
23 e6!
24 lIS
BXe6
BfS
Not 24
25 Rc2.
25BeS
26Bd4
27 Qc6
28 Qb7
29 Qe6
30 Qb7
f6
Rcb8
ReS
Rcb8
Re8
Bd6
39 f3
ing
moves,
Black
now
Rdl
41 Nc6
42Bd4
40
avoids a further
opposite
have been
reached
3SBe3
colour
which could
42...
43 ReI
44 Ne7
Rab8
34 Rei
Bd3
32 QXa7
33Bxa7
Bg6
31 Ne2
to the maxi
mum.
Bf7!
Rb2
Kb7
hS!
Qxa7
Rb2
Ra8
RaXa2
4S NdS
46 Ne3
36 Nd4!
h4
equality is re-established.
10
Game 4
reduced to passivity.
46
47 g3
White resigns
h3
up against players
of master strength. 1
8e4
49 Ral
50 Rei
51
fxg3
52 Bb6
Rdl
Kg8
g5!
gxf4
II
GA M E 5. QUEEN'S GA M BIT
M. Botvinnik
1.
Rabinovich
13 Bxb7
14(HI
d5
c6
Nf6
403
SNc3
6 Bd3
7 Bxc4
Since
the
exchange
QXb7
hS
14
cXd4
.6
Nbd7
dXc4
b5
8 Bd3
904
10 05
86
oS
recommendation)
10
... cXd4.
15 dS!
Ng4
11 BgS
15 ...
16 NXe5
17 dx06
unknown
to
modern
opening
12 Be4
NdXe5
NXeS
f6
Qb6
18 Q02
.19 Radl
Bb7
Be7
h4
After 19 .
12
c4 20 NdS
0-0-0 (20
. . NdJ
.
GameS
21
2S . . .
26 NdS+
20 f4
On 20 h3 Black would hardly have had
have led to the variation in the previous
27 Nc7+
28 N x aS
KXe6
20
K Xe7
K xeS
Rc6
b3
but Black's
by 29 a4! (threatening
White's attack.
29 '"
21 fxeS
22 Q xg2
23 K xg2
Q xgl +
bx g2
fxgS
30 a5
and
31 Nb6)
b Xa4 30 RaJ.
29 Rd7
Rd6
30 R x g7
30 Rxd6 Kxd6 31 a4 c4 32 as b4 did not
offer White winning chances. But now Black
gets connected passed pawns on the Q-side,
which save him from defeat.
30 . . .
31 Kg3
32 RXgS+
33 h4
24 Rn
I couId not resist the temptation to win
a piece, forgetting that "enough is as good
34 bS
3S Kg2
36 Kg3
37 Kgl
38 KgI
39 Kgl
4O Kg3
24 . .
.
25 RXe7+
Rh6
Rd2+
RXb2
Kd4
RXal
Ral
Ra2+
Ral
Ra2+
Ral+
Ral+
(25 ..
RXe6
13
draw.
Ral
40 . . .
c4
41 Nc7
Ke3
42Ne6+
c3
43 Nf4
RgI+
44 ReS
45 Ng2+
Kd3
Rhl
46 h6
Kd4
47 Nf4 +
48 Rc6
c2
Rh4
49 Kg2
Rhl
SO Kg3
Drawn.
summer
before
Endshpil,
14
Botvinnik
G. Stoltz
12 .,'
13 RXe7
0-0
b6
to worry,
in
certain
14BbS
circumstances,
14. .
.
8 Bel3
90-0
15
Bb7
Nbd7
Ne4
he
Qd5)
IS Qxf3
the
Qd6
16 Qe6!
6 . . . h6 7 BM
.,. Ra Xc8
(15 Rc6
10Bxe7
10 .
II eXd5
12Nxe4
eXf3
7 Rei
Bc8
dXe4
d5
e6
Nf6
Be7
Qxe7
exd5
16 .. .
17 Qxa8
Qb4
Ba6
24 Rd7
Qf6
25 h3
Black has no good move.
bS 26 e4 Kh7 27 eS Qb6 28 ReI h4
25
29 e6 fXe6 30 d x e6 N Xe6 :l1 R Xe6 and
soonBlack resigned.
. .
19
18 QXf8+
19Bxa6
20 Rxa7
21 Bc4
22Bb3
23 dS
N XfS
bS
QXb2
Ne6
h4
NelS
16
Match Leningrad-Moscow
Leningrad, 1 927
1 d4
2 c4
3Nf3
4g3
5 Bg2
6Bd2
7 Qxd2
8
9 Qc2
increased it by
Of course, 110t
b6
counting
Bb7
Bb4+
Bxd2+
O
d6
this
move),
because
after
Rf7
18Nb4
Nbd7
Qe7
eS
g6
19 dS
19 f4 was dangerous in view of 19 ...
eXd420 RXd4 dS.
19
20NXdS
. .
ing it.
<6
cXdS
BXdS
on
13 Rfel
Nc7!
17...
Nf6
e6
9 ...
10Nc3
11 e4
12 Radt
21 cXdS
pleasant.
Rdf8
14 b3
15 Qd2
16Bh3
17 Qb6
Nell
Rd8
f6
22 Rd2
After the natural 22 Rei Black had 22 ...
Nc5 (threatening
17
23
.. .
means of .. . a5.
2S NfS
26 B X fS
27 Qh6
22 ... a5 followed by
22
. .
23 eXfS
RXfS
Nf6
Kb8
fS
gxfS
Rxj5 29 R X d6 ) 29 Be6 +.
28 R X eS!
dXeS
29 d6
30 d xc7
31 QXf8 +
32 clI=Q
Qd8
Q X d2
Ng8
Resigns
24 QIIS
me in the team.
A few years later, Nikolai Dimitrlevlch
Grlgorlev (1 895-1938) and I became good
Qg6)
Qg4+
18
GA M E 8. DUTCH D E FENCE
1. Rabinovich M. Botvinnik
continued 9
eX d5
12
liquidated
Black's
c6
9 ...
10 Radl
II b3
12 Ne5!
3 g3
4 Bg2
5 Nc3
e3.
Nf6
Be7
Qb5
Nbd7
Ne4
not available
to
Black.
12
...
N Xc3
(15
. .
.
5...
0-0
6 Nf3
d5
7 0-0
R Qc2
c6
12 "
'
1958). After
8 Bg5 there might follow either the exchange
structure.
8 ...
9 Bf4
Nj!5
lJh4
13 ...
14 B13
Qe8
19
Ne4
Q08
Bxd7
Bb4
17 BXe4
18 Rhl
19 f3
RXf4!
22 .
Qg3!!
. .
23 N x e4
f X e4
QbS
Qg6
d X e4
R X d7
BeS
20 Kfl
The threat was 20 '" cXf3+. Now after
20 ... exf3 21 QXg6 hXg6 22 ReI fXe2+
White would have been a pawn down, but
he could still have defended his position
successfully.
20 ...
21 dXoS
21 ...
22 gXf4
25 03
26 Qf2
QXf3+
QXb1+
oS
27 K02
28f5
29 Kdl
30 06
Q b3
Qg4+
RfS
Qxf5
Game 8
21
GA M E 9. QUEEN'S GA M B IT
M . Botvinnik B. Yuriev
Championship of the
MetaIlurgists' Union
Leningrad, 1927-1928
1 114
Nf6
2 c4
e6
cIS
3 NfJ
4 Bg5
5 e3
Be7
6 Nc3
Nbd7
7 Bd3
a6
e6
as
a x b4
R x al
18 BfS!
If 1 8 . . . e x f4 or 18 . . . e4 White would
b6
19 Na4
Nb6
14 b X eS
e X d4
eS
13 Bf4
13
17 04)
9 b4
10 a3
11 a Xb4
12 Q X al
NXf4
f6
04)
8 eS
15 . . .
16 e x f4
better.
In
the variation
19
...
N x c5
b x eS
piece.
NbS
IS Qa7
20 c X b6
bishop on f4).
22
Game 9
Qxe7
25 b7
26 Nc5
24
h6 instead of
20
21 N Xd4
22 S
23 Ne6
26
BXfS
Bd7
Qc8
27 Qe2
Kf8
Of course, not 27 . . . R X b7 28 N X b7
Q x b7 29 Qe8 mate.
28 Qa6
29 Qa8
30 Q x b8
31 Ral
"
Rf7
N x b8 B xfI 3 1 K X f l .
23
'
BXfS
QbS
BXe6
23
Re7
Re8
R x bS
Resigus
Ragozin M . Botvinnik
Master Tournament
Leningrad, 1 930
l e4
2 Nf3
3 Jk4
4 d4
5
6 Rei
7 Nt3
. .
Rfe8) I S . . .
14 . . .
15 Bd4
eS
Nc6
Nf6
exd4
Nxe4
f4
15
' "
RfS
d5
16 g4
8 R Xe4+
9 N Xd4
10 Rf4
11 N X c6
12 N X dl
13 R X c4
14 Be3
Rg5
b5
18 . . .
Rg6
7 ...
16
17 f3
18 b4
d X c4
Be7
f5
Q X d1 +
b x c6
Bd6
bishops
via Bf4.
14
RXc6 was
1 9 Nc3 Ba6 20 R x c6
24
(20 Ra4
RdS
is not salis-
Game 10
factory because of 20 . . , R X d4 21 R X d4
Bc5 22 Rd1 Rd8; betrer perhaps wa"
20 NX dJ B x c4 21 Nc3 h Xg4 22fXg4 Be6
23 g5 Bf5 and Black has a favourable ending)
20 . . . R Xd4 21 R Xa6 Bc5 (21 . . . h xg4
is weaker in view of 22 Nb5 Rd2 23 NX d6
c X d6 24 ReI w ith a probable draw) 22
32 b4!
The doomed pawn at a4 is no danger to
White, and he now has a chance of creating
two connected passed pawns on the Q-side.
f2+
32 . . .
27 Kfl Rd2.
1 9 95
20 Nf2
21 Ne4
22 Rc3!
as
Re6
Ba6
33 Kd3
34 Nb3!
18
Rg6.
(22 N X d6 R X d6) 22 .
After
22
R Xc6
Rc4
By
sacrificing
the exchange,
3S Na5
36 KXd4
37 R x a4
he
since he
22
23 Rb3
24 <3
.
Bg7
RbbS
34 . . . B X d4 is bad, because of 35 N X d4
(not 35 KXd4? Rd8+ 36 Kc4 ax b3). For
g6
BXd4
Re8
Re3
Bb4
Bc4
B X b3
Bf8
25 a X b3
26 b4
27 Kfl
28 Ke2
BfB
a4
Ree8
c5
29 bXc5
30 Ra2
An
Reb8
Rb3
unnecessary move. I
have
31 Nd2
RbS
39 b6
40 cXb6
RX f3
cXb6
Rd8+
25
41 Kc4
47 Kc3
48 Kb4
49 Kc3
50 Nc6
Re3
43
44 Ra2
45 Kb4
50 ' "
44
51 Kb4
52 Ral
53 N X dS
Kxa4 f3
Re2
f2
f3
Rc8+
Or 54 b7 R Xal 55 b8
The game concluded
Re3+
Re4+
Forced. If 43 Kb3 R x a4
and Black wins.
Re3+
Re4
Rd8
Re1
Q Rbl + .
54
n
Q 55 Nc6+ Kg7 56 Ra7+ KfB
57 b7 Rb1+ 58 Kc5 Qf5+ 59 Kd6 Rd1+
60 Kc7 Qd7+ 61 Kb6 Rbi + 62 Kc5 R X b7
63 RaS+ Kg7,
.
Re1
Re4!
Game 10
evaluated games of other masters, we pre
pared together and battled together. Together
we also tried to solve organizational matters
connected with chess.
Slava's chess intuition was phenomenal,
and he often saw things which others did not
notice. He achieved a lot in his chess career,
27
M. Botvinnik A. Batuyev
Leningrad Championship,
1930-1931
I d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
4 Bg5
5 e3
6 Nf3
7 Bel3
d5
e6
Nf6
Be7
0-0
Nbd7
b4.
11 Bb3
,
12 Ne5
Nd7
NXe7
d x c4
c5
Nbd5
7 ...
8 BXc4
Nb6
10 . . .
14 . . .
15 Redl
16 Rael
cXd4
Nf6
b6
Bb7
28
Game 1 1
noeuvre . . . Ned5-f4xg2. At the same time
Black is tempted to utilize the seemingly safe
possibility of an immediate development of
his Queen's rook.
I should mention that for the time being
the combination 17 N X f7 R X f7 18 Qxe6
is refuted by 18 . . . Ned5, just because there
is no black rook yet on c8. If my opponent
had realised that, he would have found a
better plan of defence, namely 17 ' " Ned5
18 Ne4 Rc8. Having overlooked this finesse
Black obviously could not resist the chance
of developing his Queen's rook in order to'
improve his development.
17
Rc8
18
19 Q X e6
.
RXf7
Qf8
21 Rxcl
Rxc1
NeelS
BaS
18 NXf7!
This standard sacrifice in this case con
29
g6
Q xf7
Resigns
GA M E 1 2. RETI OPENING
A . Yurgis M . Botvinnik
Team Championship
Leningrad, 1931
1 Nf3
1 c4
3 Nc3
4 g3
Nf6
eS
b6
Bb7
d5
NXd5
First 1 9
considering.
. .
Il Qel
13 Rael
b4!
21 a4
Nd4
Be7
0-0
B X d5
Bf6
Be7
was worth
8
9 Bbl
10 N x d5
1 1 d3
Nc6
Qd7
Rfd8
Ba6
20 Bal
e6
bS
Bb7
NbS!
24 . .
25 Qe2
26 Bbl
Nd7
Rc8
30
cXd4
ReS
f5
Game 12
27 b4
34 Rei
32
33 ReI
e2
. .
33
R X e2 8 X e2 34 R X d4 also loses
because of 34 . "
8e5.
33 . . .
34 Rexn
BXn
. .
Rdl + . If 34 K x fl
27 . , .
28 Bxe3
29 Qe3
Re3!
d X c3
BXd3
30 Rf2
34
Qd4
be
3S bXc4
36 Kgl
37 K X f2
pointed
31 Q x d4
32 Bn
Re4! !
R X d4
WbIte reslgus
.11
DeS
BXf2
b3
GA M E 1 3. QU EEN'S GAM B I T
M. Botvinnik N. Sorokin
12 Qe2
13 BM
14 Rfdl
Nf6
e6
Nbd7
Be7
0-0
c6
15 Bxe7
16 Rd2
17 Radl
17 . . .
a6
dXc4
eS
18 Ba2
19 e4
Otherwise 20 e5.
l l dXcs
There was also another way associated with
11 Qe2, in which White could have used his
advantage in development, operating on the
c and e-files (after 11 . . . cXd4 12 e x d4, see
Games 1 1 and 31).
. ,
QeS
11
Q xe7
Nb6
9 a4
10 BXc4
NbS
cIS
8 0-0
h6
Be7
BxeS
Nf6
.5
Game 13
28 ' "
29 Rcc7
30 RXf7
31 RXc7+
32 Bd5
20 Qe3
A fine positional decision-a credit to a 20year-old master. White not only forces the
exchange of queens (which strengthens hb
hold on the d-file and renders the defence
of Black's e5 pawn difficult), but also opens
up the f-file for a possible attack on f7.
20 . . .
21 fxe3
22 as
22
in
Rbc8
Rxc7
Kb8
bS
Qxe3
Bg4
Nc8
. . Nbd7 is no better
N xaS
33
Rf7
view of 23 h3
B X f3
23 Ret
23 ' "
33 b3!
34 Kg3
24 gXf3
25 NdS
Probably
25
. .
26
. .
26
"
the
Ne7
simplest
Nfxd5 26 B X d5
in
decision.
After
(if 26 eXd5,
then
view of 34 . "
34
3S Kb4
36 fxe4
37 KbS
38 b3
39 b4
40 Kg4
41 Ra7
42 Re7
43 Rc7
25 . . .
26 N X f6+
27 Rd7
Rd8
Nc6
gXf6
Rab8
28 Kf2
fS
fxe4
Rd6
Rf6
Rd6
Rb6
Rf6
Rb6
Rd6
Rf6
44 Ra7
Rb6
45 Rc7
Rf6
Rd6
46 Kb5
ed my final attack.
47 Bf7!
50 Rb7+
51 Rg7+
52 Bf7
Rf6
Kg8
Kb8
52 ' "
53 RXf7
54 Kg6
55 Rd7
48 Bg6
49 K X b6
A more stubborn defence is offered by
34
R X f7
Kg8
Nd2
Resigns
GA M E 1 4. QUEEN'S GAM B I T
M. Botvinnik N. Ryumin
advantage. If S . . . d X e4 9
N xe4 N X e4
10 B X e4 e xd4
dS
c6
Nf6
e6
9 cXd5
10 e X dS
c X dS
e x d4
5 ...
6
Nbd7
Bd6
7 Nbdl
e5
ll Ne4
.. .
8 e4
N X e4
. , . Nc5?
J2Nxj6+Q xj6 J3 Bg5) 12 Bg5 Bg4 1 3 Be2,
12 Bxe4
Nc5
More
precise was
1 2 . . . Nf6,
gaining
19 Be3
lO Qc4
Zl Rael
13 Bel
Bg4
After 13 . . . d3 14 B x d3 N x d3 IS Q X d3
Z1 . . .
II Qe4
14 Q X d4
15 gXf3
Nb6
Qd6
mobile, ensuring
a quick win.
BxfJ
Re8
23 4
Bg7
16 Rdl
17 BfS
18 Bb3
24 BoS
2S Be7
l6 d6
l7 d7
28 BXd7
29 Qe3
30 fx e3
31 Bc8
3l Rd8+
Rel
g6
Nd7
Qd8
Qe8
QbS
N x d7
Qb6
Q xe3
R x aZ
bS
Kb7
initiative.
36
Game 1 4
37
GA M E 1 5. QUEEN'S I N D I AN D E F ENCE
V. Chekhover M . Botvinnik
Leningrad Championship,
1 932
1 d4
2 c4
3 Nf3
4 g3
5 Bg2
6 0-0
7 Nc3
14 Bh3
Nf6
e6
b6
Bb7
Be7
0-0
dS
14 . . .
Ne4 stronger.
8 cXdS
9 Bf4
eXdS
IS Rfd1
g5-g4 is real.
..
16 Bg2
17 Bd2
18 Ne1!
Nd6
Ne8
c6
Nd6
18 . . .
19 e3
20 Nd3
21 Bel
13 . . .
gS
Nbd7
10 NbS
10 . . .
11 Ret
12 Nc3
13 Qc2
Nf7
difficulties.
9 ...
g6
fS
38
Bf6
Qe7
Ne4
Game 15
29 , . .
whole front.
21
22 Qb3
Ba6
Rac8
RfeS
30 Nc3
fXe424 Bb4.
RbS
23 Bb3
31 Qc2
32 Ne2
Rbc8
32 , . .
Qf7
23 . . .
33 Nf4
34 g Xf4
g4!
24 Bg2
25 Nf4
WbIte resigned.
NfS
Ne6
The
Championship
1932
is
Q xe6
BgS
as
Leningrad
to exchange knights.
26 N Xe6
27 Ne2
28 Qa3
29 Qb3
BXf4
Qh5
29 Nf4 B X f4 30 e x f4 Ba6 31 IJ
39
Master Tournament
Leningrad, 1 932-1933
1 d4
2 c4
3 Bd2
e6
Bb4 +
BXd2+
11 Qc2
4 Q Xd2
Nf6
11
Black has
advantage to White.
b6
6 e3
7 Nf3
12 Rac1
opment.
eXdS
easier.
ReS
9 Bd3
10
For the time
10 NeS,
in
being
Ng4
10
. . .
. .
Nbd7
40
cS
Bb7
S cXdS
dS
S Nc3
a6
. .
Game 1 6
13 Na4
14 Qe2
Rc8
c6
15 Bf5
21 e4!
21
22 d xe5
. .
15 . . .
16 Bh.l
17 Rfd l
Nxe5
fxe4
g6
Black.
Ra8
NbS
23 N X b6
24 e6
Ra7
nation.
24 . . .
After 24 . . ,
black pieces.
Ba8
Bc8
18 Qd3
18 . . .
19 Qb3
Nfd7
f5
25 N:<aS
20 Ne5!
Kg7
26 .7
If 26 . . .
KR3
naxe7
27 Qb6
41
Z7
28 Qd4
. .
e3.
Qd6
28 . . .
Z9 fXe3
e3
Rxe3
42
30 Rfl
31 QfZ
3Z Nb6
33 Qd4
34 Qc5
35 R X c5
36 Nd7
37 BXd7
R3e4
Qe7
Re2
Re4
Q X c5+
Rb4
NXd 7
Resigns
G. Lisitsyn M. Botvinnik
9 Kg3
10 Rfl
Master Tournament
Leningrad, 1933
10 . . .
1 NO
QXc4
fS
(kI
2 e4
initiative.
2 ...
3 NgS
4 d3
f x e4
Nf6
eS
5 dXe4
6 Bc4
7 Ne3
Bc5
Qe7
11 R X f6
Bb3
would have
14 N x f6 + g X f6 15 Qg6+ Kf8 16 Q x f6 +
Kd8 8 Ne6 + )
consolidated White's
7 ...
8 KXfl
g X f6
Bxfl+
QcS+
13 NXf7
43
Rf7
White could
no
longer play
13
Nd5
fx g5.
13
14 Qg4 +
.
23
Qxf7
. Kb8
Bc4
. . .
15 Nd5
16 Qh4
17 nh6
18 Q Xf6+
19 Nxf6
Na6
d6
n.6
Qxf6
Rg6 +
Rf6
25 Kg5
26 Kh5
Black
Re6 +
24 g4
Now,
for
Rf3
27 Be3
28 Kh4
19 ' "
20 Kh4
21 Kg!!
22 K x f6
28 . . .
29 a3
30 b3
Nc5
Nd7
N x f6
Re8
b6
Kg7
Bn
30 . . .
BbJ
31 g5
In the
32 g6
23 Rei
44
Game
17
34 Re3
35 Rg3
32 . . .
36 Kg5
hxg6
34 Rg3.
33 Bgl
Rf4 +
Rf8!
37 Rc3
Rfl
c5
45
V. Rauzer M . Botvinnik
c5
2 Nf3
Nc6
3 d4
c X d4
4 N X d4
Nf6
5 Nc3
d6
15 Rad
IS Qf2 was simpler.
e5
15 . . .
16 b3
6 Be2
16
BgS,
d5!
16 . . .
in this game.
7 Be3
8 Nb3
g6
Bg7
e4!
17 e X d5
9 f4
10
Regarding
ine (No.
Be6
30).
10
NaS
This was the first of my games to go all
11 N X a5
11
12 Bf3
Q xaS
Bc4
13 Rei
Rfd8
20 Qd3
21 Bf2
14 Qd2
Qc7
knight,
46
(but not 20
19 N x e4 B x dS
Ng3 Be3) 20
Qc6
22
. . B xg2.
Game 1 8
(2) 1 8
N X e4
N Xd5
19
Khl
21
N x e3
. .
De6
Ng4!
20
21 Bd4
Bd4+ 23 Khl
ing.
18 bX e4
f2 +
21 . . .
22 Kf1
tinuation.
19 c5
fXg2+ 24 K X g2 RXd5
eXf3
QaS
24 RXfl Q X d2.
22 . . .
23 Qe2
After
23 Qd3
Qa6+
B X d4 24 Q X a6 NXh2+
25 Ke2 fl = Q +
26 RXfl b x a6 White
if 23
Ne2 R X d5
Ne3 + .
23 . . .
24 R Xd4
20 Redl
in
But this is a mistake. Against the threat of
20
. .
to 20
(or
Ng4 2 1 Ne4 Q X dl 22 B X dl
25 Redl
26 Qd3
27 Re4
28 Re6
Qh4
ReS
f5
N X h2+
game is no better.
material.
Bxd4
Qf6!
Ng4
. .
Rad8 29 QbS
29 Ke2
White resigns
b6!
After 30 Rfl
Nxfl
Q X f4
31
KXfI
R X e6
48
M . Botvinnik S . Flohr
10
g6
After IO . . . e6 I I B X f6 Q X f6 12 QXd3
c6
dS
cxd5
Nf6
Nc6
11
12
. .
e Xf6
Qb6
13 Ne4 Qb6!
14 d6 Q X d4 15 NXd4 J5! 16 RJe1 JXe4
17 R X e4 Kd7) 13 . . . 0-{) 14 RXd3 Bf5 1 5
loses to 13 Rad l ! (weaker is
6 ...
13 Rfel+
d X c4
7 d5
8 Qd4
9 BXd3
10 Nf3!
Ne5
Nd3+
cXd3
14 Qb4
49
KdS
19 . . .
20 Nc4
Qf7
DeS
20 .
14
IS Qh5
g5
. .
Dd6
RfS
21 N X e5
22 Qg5+
rXeS
Qe7
g4
18 Nd2
(22 . . .
17 . . .
15 . . .
16 Q x f7
17 Q X b7
Qc7
23 Q xe5
24 R xeS
25 Rf1
Q xe5
DrS
Kd7
26 f3
b5
27 fXg4
28 h3
29 Ne4
Dxg4
b4
29
30 KXfl
31 Kel
R Xfl+
Rf8 +
Drs
Or 3 1 . . . Be2 32 Ng3.
32 g4
33 Re6
19 Qh6
50
Bg6
Resigns
GA M E 2 0. QU EEN'S GA M B I T
M. Botvinnik S. Belavenets
Moscow-Leningrad
Trade Unions Match
Leningrad, 1934
13 . . .
14 Qe2
d5
1 NO
2 c4
3 d4
4 e3
5 Bel3
6 Nc3
c6
Nf6
e6
Nbd7
15 f4!
d X c4
bS
a6
c5
6 ...
7 B X c4
8 Bd3
9 e4
10 e5
15 . . .
knew of the 1 0 d5
play.
16 Bel2
17 a3
10 . . .
cXd4
11 N X bS
N X e5
b4
12 N X e5
13
Bd6
Qd5
RaS
aXbS
17 . . .
51
BX.5
Otherwise (e.g. on
17 .
. . . b x a3
22 Rxj6gxj623 Qg7 Rf8 24Bb4 Re7 25 Rcl
Bb7 26 b X a3 Bc6 27 a4) 22 B x b4, or
18 fXeS
19 Qf3
Q X e5
20 Qg3
Ra7
19 . . .
21 RXf6
22 Qg7
23 BXb4
24 Rc1
2S ReS
QdS
52
gXf6
RfS
Re7
Bb7
Reslgos
GAM E 2 1 . QU EEN'S GA M B IT
M . Botvinnik 1. Rabinovich
Master Tournament
with the participation
of M. Euwe
Leningrad, 1934
tion.
13 . . .
Bd6
1 c4
2 d4
3 Nc3
c6
d5
Nf6
4 e3
e6
5 Nf3
Nbd7
6 Bd3
Be7
14 e4
slight advantage.
7 0-0
8 b3
0-0
8
9 Qe2
10 Rdl
1 1 Bb2
12 Rad
b6
Bb7
Qc7
Rad8
14 . .
.
An interesting situation. If 14 . . .
Bf4
more precise.
12 . . .
13 b3
d x e4
Qb8
enemy king.
15 N xe4
Of course,
53
not
Bf4
15 . . . Nxe4
due
to
16 N X f6 +
16
17 Rbi
.
N X f6
c5
18 d X c5
b X c5
1 8 . . . B X f3 19 Q X f3 b x c5 is premature,
. . . Be4 25 R x a7;
24 . . . Bc6 25 Re7; 24 ' " Be8 25 Rd8 gX/6
26 Rbdl Qb7 27 Rx/8 B x/8 28 Rd8 /5
29 Qh4 + BM 30 Re8 Qd7 31 Qd8) 25 Q xe6
K X h7 24 RXd7 g X f6 (24
19 Ne5
Qa8
B x g2 26 R X f7 + R x f7 27 QXf7+ Bg7
ending.
20 Ng4
21 Q X g4
N Xg4
Bb6
23 BO
24 RXd7
2S Rdl
26 BgS
In view
of 26 . . . Be4
23 BaJ), and
26 .
.
27 Q x gS
28 Qd2
22 Bf6
B X gS
b6
Be4
22 . . .
of the threat
Qe8
Q x d7
Qe7
Rd7
29 Qd7
3O f3
31 Rd2
Re8
Be2
Bbl
Game 1
43 f4!
32 Q x c7
33 a3!
R xc7
43 . . .
44 KXf4
4S BO
33 . . .
34 Rb2
35 b4
After 4S . . . B X c4 46 R c
2 Bd3 (46 . .
Kf8
c1 to the e-ille.
Now if 46 b6 + Bla ck continues his resis
tance with 46 . . . Kb8, but n ot 46 ...axb6
Ke7
Kd7
Kc7
RbS
46 Bc6
g5+
47 Kf3
Rf8
48 BcIS
4 9 Ke3
Rd8
Bc8
reply 4 1 .. . Ra7.
50 Ra2
51 Rd2
f6
Bb7
Re8+
41 as
. . . eS is t otally pointless.
41 . . .
42 Rd2
Bfl
40 a4
Rb7
Bg6
36 Kf2
37 Ke3
38 Be2
39 b5
exf4+
Re8
Be6
eS
Bf7
52 Kf2
S3 g4
54 RdJ
55 Re3
56 g Xf5
57 Kg2
55
Rd8
Bc8
Rf8
f5
R x f5+
57
58 b6+
59 a6
74 Bh5.
Bel7
a x b6
KbS
68 Re6
69 R X b6
Kd8 61 Rh7 R X d5 62 c X d5 B x d5 + 63
60 Re7
61 Bb7
Kc3
Re4
Ka7
Bc6+
70 Bfl
71 Kg2
72 Rg6
73 b4
74 Rg5
75 R X bS
76 Kgl
77 RdS+
K x a6
Rf4
Rf6
Ka5
66 Kg3
67 Re3
Kb4
Superfluous
Rf4
generosity.
More
Rf4
Resings
to be avoided.
6S Be2
Rf2+
62 Bxc6+
63 Be4
64 Be13
Rf4
bS
g4
Kd2
g3
Moscow.
(7J Kf6
56
GA M E 2 2. FRE N CH D E F E N C E
P. Milner-Barry M . Botvinnik
Hastings, 1934-1935
12
13 Nf3
14 Qel
f6
Nf5
l e4
2 d4
3 Nb3
4 e5
S 83
6 bXc3
7 Nf3
e6
cIS
Bb4
c5
Bxc3+
Ne7
7 ...
8 Be2
9 0-0
10 Rbi
A
poor
manoeuvre.
Nc6
Bd7
Qc7
14
10 a4 was worth
Nee7
Nxf5
little combination 17 B X h5 R X h5
bishop.
b5
IS Nb4
16 NXf5
17 Qf2
18 g4,
Rh3 19 g X f5 e x f5,
11 Nel
12 f4
17
18 Bd2
19 Rb4
Be8
QaS
57
19
20 Rfbl
21 Qel
.
Q X aJ
Qa6
32 b4
Not in this way I Although for the moment
it is hardly noticeable, the g3 pawn is ir
reparably weakened, and it turns out that
Black can easily attack it. On the other hand,
after 32 Qe2 I would have had to think
about how to convert my advantage, since
32 . . . Be8 is not possible because of 33 Q X
c4. Perhaps I would have had to return
my rook to h8, place my king at c8, then
defend the h5 pawn with the bishop from
e8, and only then play . . . Rg8 again.
21 . . .
22 Rat
b6
22 . . .
23 Df3
32 . . .
Qb7
Qe7
without weakening
Be6
25 Qat
KbS
Rb8!
pionship, Leningrad).
33 Qg2
26 g3
Qc7
Rh6
34 Rb4,
26 . . .
27 Ra2
28 Qel
29 RbI
30 Qf2
31 Bel
Qb7
ReS
Qf7
34 Kb2
35 Bd2
36 Rgl
37 Q X g3
Kb7
Ra8
Rbg8
Rb6
Rg6
R X g3
37 . . .
38 R X g3
39 Rat
40 Ragl
41 fXeS
58
Nxg3
Qf7
Rg8
fxeS
Qf5
Game 22
42 Bell
43 Rf3
44 Rf7+
Ba4
Qb7
Ka6
53 BXb5 Q x b5
White resigned
This game was perhaps the first of those
59
GA M E 2 3 . CA RO-KANN D EF EN C E
M . Botvinnik R. Spielmann
Moscow, 1935
l c4
2 e4
3 e x dS
c6
dS
c x dS
Nf6
Nc6
4 d4
S Nc3
6 BgS
Qb6
Q Xb2
7 c x dS
that
only
7 . . . N X d4
can
9 Na4
give
9 d X e6 Bc5 10 exf7+
material.
8 Ret!
(see diagram next column)
Rejfif considered only 8 Na4 Qb4+ 9 Bd2
Black
B X f3
continued
12 . . .
Qa3
8 ...
Q X a2
Bg4
10 Bc4
11 Nf3
12 gXf3
Nb4
60
GA M E 24. RU Y LOPEZ
N. Ryumin M . Botvinnik
11 c X d4
12 e5
Moscow, 1935
1 e4
2 ND
3 BbS
4 Ba4
5 0-0
6 Qe2
e5
Nc6
86
Nf6
Be'
Reti,
12
6 ...
bS
, Bb3
8 c3
9 d4
d6
0-0
earlier
in
Ne4
. .
BbS
prospects.
b4
14
15 as
R x f6
17 B x e4
dxe4
1 8 Q xe4
B x f3
equality.
10 Rdl
years
9. . .
seven
13 b3
14 84
for himself.
1970),
played
Stockholm.
Tournament
d5
15
Bg4
exd4
16 g4
61
Kb8
21 gXb6
llNd2
gXb6
Ne7
his worries.
16
17 Nh2
18 Be3
Bg6
. .
Bb4
23 Kbl
24 Rgl
2S Nbf3
U NO
Qe8
BbS
Rg8
18
fS
Black's attack
develops
rapidly.
26
Now
Bg3
the
threatened exchange
on
Qf7
Rg7
c6
Rag8
3O Rg2
g4,
. . .
27 Bdl
28 Rc1
29 Rc2
19 . . . f4 is threatened.
19 f4
Bf2 ! 27 B X f2
Nxd228 Q x d2 B x f3 is decisive.
BXf4
lO gS
b6
31 Qxa6
Of course, this move makes no impression,
62
Game 24
34 Kb1
3S Nxe3
36 KhZ
31
32 R x g2
33 Kxg2
.
Bxe3
Nf2+
Nxd1
WhIte resigns
RXg2
RXg 2
game.
Qg6 +
63
M . Botvinnik V. Chekhover
Moscow, 1935
1 Nf3
2 e4
3 b3
4 Bb2
5 e3
6 Be2
d5
e6
Nf6
Be7
e6
11
12 Nf3
12
13 Qc2
14 d4
15 NeS
16 Bd3
. .
Nbd7
a6
7
S Ne3
9 Nd4
b6
exd4
17 exd4
IS Qe2
19 Ndl
f3 by 9
would
have
been
Ra7
more
able
to
transfer unhindered
his
queen's
knight to g5.
20 Nf2
21 Nh3
9
10 b x e4
1 1 f4
Bb7
NfS
. .
oS
that
RdS
Ned7
However,
Qe7
Qb8
h6
d X c4
NeS
64
Game 25
B X e I 32 Qh8+ Kd7 33 Qg7+ Kc6 34
Q X f6+ Kc7 35 e6 etc.
26 Q X e6+
KhS
27 Qh3+
KgS
2S Bf5
NfS
h X g5
23 fXg5
NSd7
Be6+
N X e6
30
Q x e6+KhS
31
Qh3+KgS 32 R Xf6
24 N X n
24 . . .
KXn
25 g6+
KgS
6S
suggesting a new,
internationai two-round
of the tournament.
66
GA M E 2 6. RETI OP ENING
M . Botvinnik A . Lilienthal
12 b3
I3 f3
Moscow, 1936
1 Nf3
2 .:4
3 g3
4 Bg2
5 O-{l
6 d4
7 N Xd4
Nf6
b6
Bb7
c5
g6
cxd4
13 . . .
14 Rcl
15 Qd2
complex play.
BXg2
Bg7
of opening
variations.
16 Rfdl
17 Bxd4
became standard.
d6
O-{l
10 e4
11 Be3
NXd4
Better
9 Nc3
16 Rfd1 d5 1 7 cxd5 e x d5
18 N xc6 R x c6 19 Bg5.
RfdS
RacS
a6
. .
d5 is not pos
sible.
7
8 Kxg2
Qb7
18 a4
19 Nd5
Nc6
Ne8
Rc6
Qc8
19 . . . b5 20 c X b5 a x b5 21 a5 White ob
tains an outside passed pawn.
20 BXg7
because of 13 Rad l .
67
NXg7
25
26 R X c3
27 Rc7
. .
Of course, not 27
RXc3
b x a4
Qb5
Q X b3 28 N x e7+,
21 b4
A standard, but nevertheless unpleasant
manoeuvre for Black. The reply 21 . . . h5
may allow an attack by g3-g4, while if Black
gives up his control of h5, White can attack
by h4-h5.
21 . . .
22 Rc3
23 Qd4
23 b x a4
Re8
NbS
b5
23 ' "
28
29 Qf2
30 KXf2
Qe2+
Qxf2+
e6
0r 30 . . . Ra8 3 1 Rc8+.
31 Nb6
32 as
33 Rc8+
attack.
Now Black's apparent activity is immedi
ately suppressed; White obtains an outside
passed pawn and puts Black in a helpless
Nf6
RbS
24 c X bS
a X bS
After 24 . . . R X c3 25 N X c3 Black re
25 Rdcl
sive importance.
68
Game 26
strength.
69
GA M E 2 7. A L E K H I N E'S DE FENCE
M . Botvinnik S . Flohr
Moscow, 1936
l e4
2 e5
3 d4
4 Nf3
5 Be2
Nf6
Nd5
d6
Bg4
c6
e6
9
10 c4
H .
10 f5 N X e5 1 1 fX e6
in view of 1 2
e6.
. . . Kd7.
10
11 Be3
12 Nc3
13 Rf3
H .
NSb6
Be7
0-0
weaker move.
6 0-0
d X e5
13 . . .
14 Rdl
Bxe2
Nd7
c4 is also possible) 9 .
Qe8
Nd7
the
K-side
by
Now Black
7 N xe5
8 Q xe2
13 Rad1).
vantage.
14
15 b3
9 f4
70
Rd8
fS
Game 27
exchanged.
24 Qc1
Ne4
knight
for
the knight at c3 !
25 NeS
26 K X fl
27 Qe3
28 fXeS
Bf6
Qf7
Rfe8
NfS
Qc7
28 . . .
29 a4!
30 g3
31 Kg2
32 Qf3
33 cS!
Nbd7
Be7
the
break
KhI
Q/6)
25 . . . Bxd6 26 RXd6 R X d6 27 Q X d6
23
Rd7
Qd8
BgS
Qe7
QaS
ting
NXf2
Nd7
NxeS
21 . . .
22 Qd2
23 Nf3
frees
which
18
19 Rfd3
20 Nf3
21 Ne5
bishop,
16 Nd3
17 Bfl
18 Nel
White's
Nf6
first plan.
71
33
34 Nbl
3S Na3
36 Nc4
37 Nd6
as
Qf8
Bd8
Be7
RbS
44 Re3
45 Qc4
Kf7
45 . . .
b5
46 Qc2
R X d6
38 RbI
. . b X a4 was rather
(38 NXb7
R X b7 39 Q x c6 BbB 40 Q X e6+), but, as I
more tenacious.
Qd8
a x b4
BXd6
49 . . .
50 d7
QaS
Re8
c X b4
Kg8
Res
51 Qd6
As G. Goldberg demonstrated, more ener
getic was 5 1 R Xe6 g5 52 Qd6 followed by
53 Re7.
(43 RXb7 R X b7
51 . . .
52 Q Xe6+
53 Qe8
44 R x b7 Q x a4).
43 . . .
cS +
probably have
table.
41 exd6
42 Rdb3
43 Qe2
would
47 c Xd6
48 Kh3
49 Qc7+
38
37 b4
40 RXb4
Qa8
h6
Kb7
b3
while on 53
72
Game 27
S6 R X b3
57 b6
54 Q X a8
R x a8
Here it is : 55 Re8? b2 56 R X a8 b l = Q
57
SS a x bS
RXd7
Kd3
Kc6
63
Kc4
Kd6
RdS
73
64 Rd5 +
E . Bogoljubow M . Botvinnik
Nottingham, 1936
1 d4
2 Nf3
(10 Qe2
Nc6 1J RdJ).
Nf6
10 . . .
b6
11 Rcl
Ne4
Nd7
12 Qe2
3 e3
In those days Bogoljubow did not know
3...
c5
4 e4
Bb7
5 Nc3
sible.
13 Rfdl
5 d5 b5
ReS
f5
cXd4
6 e Xd4
e6
7 Bd3
8 0-0
Be7
0-0
14 Bf4
All the time Bogoljubow makes natural
9 b3
14
gS!
9 ...
10 Be3
15 Be5
dS
74
Game 28
24 QXd1
25 Qc2
Rd8
Bd2
e3).
arguments
and
disagreements.
15
16 Net
17 BXe4
18 dXeS
g4
N xeS
dXe4
Qe7
19 NbS
20 Rd7
QxeS
Bg5
Bh6 23 Qd7
Qdl
22
Bg7.
21 Red1
22 R X a7
Bc6
to the fact.
Red8
"Was 1"
23 h4
23
RXd1
75
M . Botvinnik S. Tartakower
Nottingham, 1936
1 NO
2 c4
Nf6
d6
3d 4
4 g3
5 Bg2
13 Nd2
Nbd7
e5
Be7
6
7 Nc3
c6
14 f4
15 g X f4
S .4
10 Be3
11 ReI
gXf4
Kg7
gS
16 fxe5
17 c5
Qc 7
ReS
NfS
h6
d y eS
17
IS NXd5
19 Nc4
2O Nd6
76
cXd5
Qc6
Ng6
Be6
Game 29
21 R X f6. Therefore
Saviely
Grigorievich Tartakower (1 887-1 954) was
21 Nxe7
Or
N x e7
Cartier.
winning a piece.
22 RXf6
23 Qh5
KXf6
Ng6
championship.
Nf51
White on move
24
25 Q X h6
26 Rdl
27 Qg5+
28 R X d8
29 R X g8
30 Qg7
Rg8
B x a2
Rad8
Ke6
f6
Nf4
Resigns
Clearly
they considered
that,
while
77
GA M E 3 0. S IC I L I A N DEFENCE
A. Alekhine M . Botvinnik
Nottingham, 1936
1 e4
l Nf3
3 d4
4 N xd4
5 Nc3
6 Bel
c5
d6
c X d4
Nf6
g6
10 . . .
11 f5
12 eXd5
d5
Be8
Nb4
Bg7
Nc6
Be6
0-0
13 d6
A clever idea. White tries to weaken the
f6 square, so as after g4-g5 and f5-f6 to
imprison the black bishop. Later I analysed
another continuation : 13 fXg6 h X g6 14 Bf3
B x g4 15 B x g4 N x g4 16 Q x g4 B x c3 +
1 7 b x c3 Nxc2+ 1 8 Kf2 N x al 1 9 R xal
Q X d5 20 Rdl Qe5, and Black stands better.
After 20 Bd4 Qf5 + Black also has at least an
equal game ; the three connected passed
pawns give White difficult problems
(21 Q X/5 gxJ5 22 Rg1 + Kh7 23 Rg7 + Kh6
achieves nothing).
Here, of course, I had to think. I rejected
13 . . . e x d6 because of 14 g5, though it was
later shown that in that case 14 . . . B X f5
leads to an unclear position (as does 14 03
Game 30
pelled to give up the important h2 pawrt.
13
. _ _
15 Rfl
16 BXb4
Q X d6
17 B x g4
18 Rf2
19 Rf1
20 M
Qg3+
Qg1+
Qg3+
14 lIeS
Q X h2
N x g4
Qf4
20
Qgl +
_ .
Drawn
79
GA M E 3 1 . QUE E N'S GA M B IT
M . Botvinnik M . Vidmar
Nottingham, 1936
This was my first encounte r at the board
with one ofthe world's strongest grandmasters
during the twenties and thirties. My second
and last encounter with him took place ten
years later, after the war, at Groningen.
MUan Vidmar (1885-1962) was a distinctive
figure in the chess world. He did not study
chess much, but he was a remarkably strong
practical player and he frequently carried out
brilliant attacks on the king. On the other
hand, many chess players, including Russians,
learned the game from his books (by pro
fession he was an outstanding electrical
engineer, specia1izing in transformers).
A short, chubby man, Vidmar was always
on friendly terms with his professional chess
playing colleagues; his title of Professor was
no obstacle to this. He was universally liked
and respected, and when in 1948 F.LD.E.
organized for the first time the world cham
pionship, all the participants in the match
tournament agreed to Milan Vidmar's can
didature as chief arbiter.
1 c4
2 NfJ
3 d4
4 Nc3
5 Bg5
6 e3
7 Bel,
7 ...
8 0-0
c5
8
g eXd4
10 BXc4
. , .
c X d4
dXc4
Nb6
11 Bb3
12 Qd3
Bd7
NbdS
06
d5
Nf6
Be7
0-0
Nbd7
13 Ne5
14 Radl
Bc6
Game 31
This leads to an immediate loss, since the
rook at cS is left without adequate defence.
But 1 9 . . . Rc7 cannot be considered any
better, since after 20 Rdfl Black cannot
save the game, as demonstrated by Panov :
20 . . . Nb6 21 Qh4 (threatening the rook
sacrifice at f6) 2 1 . . . Nbd5 22 Nxf7 R x f7
23 B xd5 N Xd5 24 R x f7 B X g5 25 Q X g5 ! ,
or 20 . . . a6 21 N X f7 R x f7 22 B x d5
N x d5 23 R X f7 B x g5 24 Qe6 !
Nb4
DdS
20 NXf7
NhXdS
Or 20 . . . K x fl 2 1 B X d5+.
21 BXf6
BXf6
11 4
22 R X f6 B x f6 23 QxcS + .
R X f7
22 R XdS
23 Rd6
24 Rd7
Qc6
Qe8
Resigns
Re8
e X fS
19 . . .
Qd6
SI
national
Manchester
Guardian, Alekhine declared that Botvinnik
pion.
82
1 c4
2 Nc3
3 g3
4 Bg2
5 e3
6 Nge2
(1889-1961).
Nc6
g6
Bg7
d6
reversed,
against
Alexander
(at
eS
6 ...
Bc6
7 d4!
BXc4
follows 8 N X d4 B x d4 9 e x d4 B X c4
10 Qa4 d5 1 1 b3 Ba6 12 N x d5.
8 dS
NbS
game.
9 Qa4 +
10 N X bS
bS
BXbS
11 Q X b5 +
12 e4
Nd7
2O f4
21 fS
22 Rf2
Ne7
0-0
Rb8
cS
en
passant,
22 . . .
23 Qdl
Of course
cient.
Kh8
RbdS
the exchange 23
...
g X f5
N X c6
NcS
24 fXg6
2S Qg4
26 Bft
h x g6
Ne7
dS
game.
18 Qd2
19 Racl
QaS
f6
16 d X c6
17 Be3
20 . . .
12 . . .
13 0-0
14 Nc3
15 Qe2
The
Ne6
Ned4
27 N X dS
28 e X dS
29 BcS
N X dS
NfS
29 . . .
84
Bh6
Game 32
30 M
36 Qf5 +
37 Qh5
38 QfS+
39 Qh5
31 Q x g6 R X f8 3 2 R X fS Be3 + 3 3 Kg2
Q Xd5 + 34 Kh3.
30 . . .
31 Q x g6
32 RXf5
If 32 . . .
Qa3
Q Xc1
Bg5
Kh8
Kh7
33 h4
34 QhS +
35 R X f6
Kh8
Kh7
Rg8
Bh6
Kh7
".
85
M . Botvinnik V. Chekhover
1 1 th USSR Championship
Semi-Final
Leningrad, 1 938
8 ...
9 0-0
10 b X c3
Of course,
h6
c5
Nf6
e6
Bb4
0-0
d6
Qe7
12 . . .
Bg4
to
13 . . . B x e2
14
RXe2
e xd4
13 B x f6
of the b7 pawn.
13 . . .
14 Qe4
7 Be2
8 Qc2
of
pin
because
appearances.
6 e3
10 Q x c3
10
11 Bh4
12 Rael
5 Bg5
Bxc3
10 . . . Ne4.
1 d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
4 NO
not
ReS
Q X f6
BXf3
e5
(15 . . . Qd8
16 dXc5 dXc5 17 Rd1) 16 f4 BfS 17 fxe5,
86
Game 33
15 BXf3
16 d xc5
Nc6
26 Rd6.
23 .
24 Rd7
. ,
16 . . .
17 Rdl
18 Rd5
d X c5
Rad8
b6
Nd8 20 Qa4)
QbS
Rd8
25 Q X e5
26 Q X bS
27 Be4
(19 . . .
20 d6 QXd6 2 1 Q X b7 White
Nxc4
R X bS
27 ; . .
cramped.
19 Rfdl
20 h3
21 RXd5
NaS
RXd5
28 Bd5
29 e4
22 Qa4.
Qe7
loses after 22
.,
N X c4 ?
a pawn.
22 Bg4
Rf8
as
a7 pawn
when
the
21 . . .
Na3
30 c4
Qb7
31 c X b5
32 e5
33 f4
b5
N X b5
a4
Nd4
34 Kf2
35 g3
36 gXf4
Or 36 . "
Kg7 37 e6.
37 Ke3
38 f5
39 Rc7
4O e6
23 Bf5!
87
g5
gXf4
Ne6
c4
Nc5
Nd3
fxe6
rXc6,
and Black
exception, insisting on
10,000 Dollars in
finished in
Nothing
88
GA M E 3 4. QU E EN'S GA M B IT
M . Botvinnik A. Alekhine
AVRO Tournament
Amsterdam, 1938
1 Nf3
2 d4
3 c4
4 Nc3
dS
Nf6
e6
cS
10
Accepted.
5 cXdS
6 e3
7 &4
N x dS
Nc6
..
it was
N X c3 1 1 b X c3
b6, as frequently
..
. .
11 N x dS
12 BbS
7 '"
8 e x d4
9 0-0
10 Re1
b6
cXd4
Be7
0-0
e X dS
Bel7
. . Na5,
13 Qa4
...
15 Qxa7
queen's bishop.
89
NbS
15 . . , Bb4
with the
14 Bf4
15 Q X bS
16 Qa4
23 Kfi
24 Rc8+
25 Rc3
B X b5
a6
Rf7
RfS
16
17 BXd6
18 Rael
decides to
Bd6
Q X d6
the
g5
h5
25
26 Nel
. . .
pawns from
importance.
18
remove his
Ra7
advantage after 26
'"
h6 27 Nc2 Kf7
19 Qe2
27 h4
. . .
weakening
Re7
20 RXe7
21 Qc7
22 RXc7
of
Black's
pawn
chain.
On
Qxe7
Q x c7
f6
27 . . .
28 Rc7
29 Nf3
90
Nd7
Rf7
g4
Game 34
30 Net
31 Nd3
f5
f4
32 f3
33 gXf3
34 a4
35 Re6
36 Kf2
37 b3
38 Ke2
posal.
32 Nb4.
g X fJ
as
h-pawn, but
Kf8
Ke7
Rf5
Kd8
NbS
41 Rg7+
42 Nc6
43 Ne7+
44 N X dS
45 Rg5
Ke8
Rf6
KbS
Rd6
Nb4
39 Rg6
4O Ne5
Ke7
Na6
46 NXb4
47 R X hS
If 47
a X b4
Rc6
. . R x d4 then 48 Rf5.
48 Rb5
49 RXb4
50 RbS
Ke7
Rb6
50 . . .
51 Kd3
RXh4
91
M . Botvinnik J . R . Capab1anca
AVRO Tournament
Holland, 1938
6 b X c3
7 <Xd5
After 7 ' "
of development is obvious.
8 Bd3
9 Ne2
9 . .
10
11 B x a6
U Bb2
U ...
13 a4
13 . . .
d5
Rf.8
14 Qd3
. . c5,
4 . . . b6, or 4 . . . 0-0.
5 a3
Qd7
Nf6
.6
Bb4
b6
Ba6
N X a6
1 d4
2 <4
3 Nc3
4 e3
1934,
<5
e x d5
c4
BXc3+
92
Game 35
21 . . .
22 4
23 exf6
Nb8
15 Qc2
16 Rae1
board.
23 . . .
24 fS
2S Rxe1
16 . . .
Nc6
16 . . . Nh5,
17 h3 f5 1 8 Bcl Nc6 1 9
f3
Na5 20 g4 fXg4
NaS
17 Ng3
NXf6
RXe1
ReS
g6
fS
18 f3
19 e4
20 eS
Nb3
Q X a4
Nd7
26 Re6
26 . .
21 Qf2
RXe6
K X f6 28 fXg6+ K x g6 (28 . .
, Ke7 29
Qf7+ Kd8 30 g7) 29 Qf5+ Kg7 30 Nh5+
27 fXe6
28 Qf4
Kg7
Qcl +
sive attack.
33 Kf2 Qd2+
34
Kg3 Qxc3+
28
29 Qo5
.
32 QgS+
33 QXf6+
Qe8
Qe7
Kf8
Kg8
zugzwang? After 29
34 e7
Before I decided to make this move I was
worried for a while, since quite by accident
I noticed Capablanca talking to Euwe, and
by a gesture he indicated that all was not yet
clear.
30 Ba3!
40 Kg4
34 . . .
3S Kf2
36 Kg3
37 Kb4
38 K X hS
39 Kb4
4O g4
41 Kh5
30 . . .
31 NbS+
Qcl+
Qc2+
Qd3+
Qe4+
Qe2+
Qe4+
Qel+
Resigns
Q X a3
gXbS
Game 35
Chess,
Capablanca.
Alekhine agreed in principle to a match
95
A. Tolush M. Botvinnik
Nf6
g6
d5
Bg7
9 ...
10 Be7
5 ...
6 Rei
0-0
10 . . .
11 NXdS
6 ...
7 d xe5
NXd5
Q X e7
e5
Qa5
8 e x d5
9 Qd2
Rd8
During the game I saw another move9 Bc4, and could not find a satisfactory con
tinuation, which was later confirmed by
analyses. However, Tolush found his own
"improvement", typical of his style of play.
Aleksandr Kazlmirovieb Tolush ( 1 9 1 0-1969)
was a distinctive chess player. He did not
have a very good understanding of positional
11 . . .
R Xd5!
12 Q x dS
96
Be6
Game 36
Weaker is
12
Be6,
Nc6
13 Qd2
14 Bd3
14
Rdl
14 , , ' B x c3
Re2.
Rd8 15 Rd3)
23 Qbl
24 R X a2
14 . . ,
IS Qcl
16 Rd2
Rd8
QaS+
RdS!
Rxbl+
NeS
, R xc3 19 b x c3 B x c3
21 Ke2,
28 Ke2
29 Bd3
30 Rxd3
Rxc3
RaJ
QbS+
N x d3
as
31 Rbdl
provoke exchanges,
21 . . .
22 Qb2
26 Bd3
27 BXbl
R X cS
B X c3
19 b X c3
20 Qb2
21 QbS
QaS+
Ral
2S Rd2
17 Ne2
18 Nc3
24
Bxa2
Qc4
Qc3
QcS
32 Kf3
33 Rd7
34 Ra7
bS
b4
36 RdaS
The a-pawn cannot be captured due to
36
36
37 g3
passed pawns.
34 . . .
35 Rd8+
84
Kg7
. . Qc6 + .
a3
Qb5
38
. . .
GA M E 37. R AG O Z I N DE FENC E
A. Kotov M . Botvinnik
7 83
8 Q x c3
1 1 th USSR Championship
Leningrad, 1939
ipg
and
the hullabaloo
BXc3+
surrounding it
8 ...
9 b3
Bd7
play.
9 .. .
10 Bd3
losing a tempo.
10
ll NdZ
. .
84
11 . .
U O-O
of success.
1 d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
4 Qc2
5 Nf3
6 e3
as
Nf6
e6
Bb4
Nc6
Re8
d5
0-0
99
12 . . .
13 d X e5
oS
N X e5
19 f4
20 Rfdl
attack.
a x b3
20 . . .
15 N Xb3
16 Qc2
N04
Nd6
16 . . .
Qg6
14 . . .
Bh3 20/4)
. .
13 .
14 Bb2
(19
21 Qd3
22 Qc3
Bf5
22 . . .
Be4
N X c4
17 Bxc4
18 Q x c4
d X c4
(23QXg7 +
Qg5!
developing attack.
100
Game 37
23 Rd2
Qd3
24
Bc6
Nf5
31
32 Rel
Weaker was 24
view of 26 Nc5.
25 Be5
How else can White defend against 25 . , .
Be4 26 Qc3 Nh4, and also not give up his
e-pawn?
f6
25 . .
RXe3
26 BX.7
32 . . .
33 QXel
34 Kbl
29 Qfl
3O Nd4
h5
30 . . .
N X d4
RXel
R X a3
Ra8
Re4
35 Re2
36 b3
37 Qf2
Kh7
Re8
31 BXd4
37 .
38 Q X gZ
White resigns
. .
101
QXgZ+
Rxe2
V . Ragozin M. Botvinnik
8th Match Game
Leningrad, 1940
Nf6
1 d4
2 c4
g6
3 Nc3
d5
4 Bf4
Bg7
5 e3
6 Ret
7 dxc5
0-0
c5
Be6
11 b X c3
Qa5
14
B X c4
Q X b5
Nc6
BoIS
13 Bb6
Qb5
9
10 Be2
13
12 Nd4
9 Qa4
d X c4
ization of my forces.
8 Nf3
to win
14 0-0
15 Nf3
Ne4
ReS
e5
followed by 1 1 . . . B X b2, or 10 c X d5 N X c3
15 . . .
16 Qb5
Q X a2.
NXc5
b6
10 . . .
BXc3+
Game 38
23 eXd4
24 Qc2
17 Rfdl
17
18 Qbl
19 Bg5
Nb3
advantage.
a6
bS
Qd7!
24 . . .
25 Q X c1
26 Qe3
27 b4
28 Bb6
29 Kh2
3O Bg4
31 c X b4
32 Rc1
33 f3
34 fXe4
35 d5
N Xc1
Ra2
Qc6
f6
Rea8
Rb2
b4
c3
c2
Rbi
B x e4
R Xd7 B X b l 22 Rd5
B X e4
(22 Rc7 Be4)
' "
have played
the variation
19 . . . f6 20 B X f6 Q X f6
or
Qd6+
Q xb4
KXhl
Qel +
42 Kh2 Q X h4 + and
43 . . , Q X h6.
37 . . .
38 d6
39 QXc1
40 d7
e4
a X bS
Kh8
RXc1
Qd4
Bc6
22 . . .
Q X d5
20 a4
21 a x b5
22 Nd4
...
B X c2 37 Be6 + )
35 . . .
36 Bf4
37 Be6+
. .
(36
35 . . . B X d5 36 Qe7 Bn 37 BO White's
R X c2
N X d4
practice by Capabianca.
103
M. Botvinnik G. Levenfish
Nf6
3 Nf3
Nc6
4 d4
e X d4
e5
5 NXd4
Bb4
6 BgS
b6
7 Bb4
BXc3+
Qe7
13 f4!
14 Kf2
for Black.
8 bxc3
Ne5
g e3
Ng6
10 Bg3
1 1 Qc2
12 h x g3
Nc4
15 eS!
d X c5
16 Bh5+
Nd7
NXg3
d6
17 NXc6;
The
game with
16
...
Kd8
17 Radl
cXd4
Nenarokov continued :
18 R X d4 + Bd7 19 B X d7 N X d7 20 Rhdl
Kc8 21 RXd7 Q X d7 22 R x d7 K x d7
104
Game 39
20 .
21 gS
22 Be2
23 Ng4
24 Nf6
24
. . RoB
23 Qd? + Kb8
Q X fS 25 Qe8.
Qf6
g6
17 NfS
18 Radl
a6
Qe6
Nh6
Ke7
Qc6
25 Rh7
knight
from
its
dominant post.
2S
26 e4
BfS
Be6
Rf8
27 fS
. .
21 Ng5).
Resigns
2O g4
105
V. Panov
M . Botvinnik
c5
Nc6
d5
5 ...
6 c3
7 Nfl
9 exd5
10 g3
Bd6
Nge7
10 . . .
11 Ng2
12 Qb3
f5
f4
Ng6
Be6
13 NXf4
If at once 13 Q X b? then after 13 . . . Na5
14 Qa6 Be8 15 Qb5 Bd? 16 Qa6 Rf6 White
loses his queen. By exchanging the enemy
black-squared bishop, White can capture
the b? pawn.
13 . . .
14 B X f4
15 g X f4
16 Q Xb7
e X d5
e6
Although Vasily Nikolayevicb Panov (19061973) was later the author of a book on
openings, at that time he was not a great
specialist on opening theory. That is why in
the game with me he tries to depart from
known variations. It should be added that
nowadays this opening (the King's Indian
Attack with the fianchetto of the king's
bishop) is well known.
2 ...
3 Nf3
4 Nbd2
5 Be2
NXf4
BXf4
RXf4
16
1 7 Qa6
. .
106
NaS
Game 40
23
R Xg4
. . .
24 Ne2
17 . . .
BeS!
24 . . .
" . Rb8.
18 QbS
19 Ngl
An
Bg4
apparently routine
be decisive.
25
26 Kbl
Nb7
22 Q Xa8+.
Nd6!
'"
and 23
Qxal + .
22 Qb2
23 BX g4
finds
Q x c5
28 f3
a4
Re7
26 . . .
27 Nd4
as
20 b4
21 b X c5
but the
20 . . .
move,
Qc7
Re8!
Black's
positional ad-
107
28
29 Rhe1
Rh4
. .
35 Kc2
36 e XdS
37 Rfl +
38 Ne6
39 Kd1
4O Ke2
41 Ke3
Wblte resigns
29 . . .
30 Re8 +
Rb7
Kn
30 . . . N xe8?
31
Na3+
Qb1+
Qb2+
Q x c3
. . . K X f8 ?
because
of
USSR Championship.
refutation.
31 . . .
32 Re1 +
Ke8
31 Rf8 + I
Not now
K x fS
NbS
Ke7
32 . . .
Re4!
prise that
R X b2+
Qb6+
108
P. Keres M . Botvinnik
1 d4
2 e4
3 Ne3
4 Qe2
Match-Tournament
for the Title of Absolute
USSR Champion
Leningrad, 1941
and,
starting
in
Bad
8 0-0-0
Kotov
Bxe3
Belavenets
gS
10 Bg3
exd4
against
1940)
(Moscow,
e X dS
h6
eS
5 exdS
6 BgS
7 Bb4
USSR
Nf6
e6
Bb4
dS
17 . . .
18 Kat
Nxe4
(}...O
game.
11 Q X d4
12 Qa4
Nc6
19 Rdl
12
13 e3
BfS
13 f3 Qb6
13 . . .
14 Bel3
19 . . .
ReS
20 Q x bS
21 Qd3
22 Kbl
WhIte resigns
14 . . .
Qd7
IS Kbl
16 R X d3
17 e4
b5
Nd4
Nc2 +
Nb4
B X d3+
QfS
1 10
Bondarevsky M . Botvinnik
5 ..
6
,
Match-Tournament
for the Title of Absolute
USSR Champion
Leningrad, 1941
1 04
2 d4
3 05
06
d5
7 &3
c X d4
Bc5
c5
Nc6
7 .. .
8 Nbd2
Ng07
Ng6
Bb6
Bel7
III
f6
16 Bh4
Black now carries out his general plan.
12 . . .
13 Qd3
13 . . ,
16 . . .
17 Q X h7
18 e x f6
h x g6
18 . . .
19 b X gS
20 g X f6
21 Bd6
22 Nh4
23 Kh2
Kf7
gS
R X h7
gXf6
e5
K X f6
Re8
Rg8
23 . . .
24 Re2
25 Rd2
Bf5
d3
25 . . .
26 f4
27 Bxe5+
28 fxe5+
29 R"
d x c2
Be3
N Xe5
Ke7
29 . . .
Qg8!
Qh7
c1=Q
V. Smyslov M. Botvinnik
Match-Tournament
for the Title of
Absolute USSR Champion
Moscow, 1941
Vaslly Vasllyevicb Smyslov (born in 1921)
was the seventh World Champion in the
history of chess. His outlook on chess very
much resembles that of Capablanca. Like
the Cuban, his main weapon is a move
searching algorithm in an original position.
Also like Capablanca, he always realized the
power of his method, and consequently
"he had something of a disregard for re
search in the field of" opening theory. But
again, like the third World Champion,
Smyslov is a great master of the endgame.
For five years, between 1953 and 1958,
he was unbeatable. At that time Smyslov
invariably scored wins thanks to his admir
able skill in positional play and his excellence
in the endgame phase. He fully displayed his
qualities during our second match in 1957,
when Smyslov became World Champion.
We have played together about a hundred
games. Of course, when we were competing
our relations may have been strained, but as
it often happens between real friends, we
harboured no ill feelings for each other.
I remember with pleasure, for example, our
trips to Palma de Majorca in 1967 and to
Monte Carlo in 1968.
Mter the 1940 USSR Championship
Smyslov joined the ranks of the strongest
1 e4
2 NO
3 BbS
4 Ba4
S d3
eS
Nc6
86
Nf6
S '"
6 c3
7
8 Ret
9 Be2
d6
Be7
bS
dS
10 . . .
ll d Xe4
d xe4
Be6
12 b3
White prepares 13 Ng5, which was not
immediately advantageous due to 12 . . . Bg4.
1 13
12 . . .
13 Nb2
b6
13
14 Ng4
15 Qe2
.
Nh7
Bg5
15 . . .
16 Ne3
16
17 Nf3
. .
Rfd8
Bxe3
18 Q xe3
20 Qf3
22 Ng3
23 Nf5
24 g4
Rd7
21 Nfl
Smyslov has found a way to get to f5.
Black has to play very carefully.
Nh7
Rad8
Qf6
.
25 Qg3
24
. .
Ne7
Bc4
26 f3
NfS
Qe7
19 Nhl
21
Qd6
26 . . .
27 Bb3
Bd3
eS
Game 43
left the K-side, where White's situation be
gins to give cause for alarm.
35 . . .
36 gxf5
37 Qg4
c4
Ng5
30 h4
30
31 a4
Ne6
b4
N X f5
Kb7
37 . . .
38 Rgl
gXh4
Nf4
38 . . .
hS
39 QgS
40 R xg5
If now 33 B X f4 eXf4 White parts with
his "good" bishop, and he cannot take the
f4 pawn as his b2 pawn is not defended.
Apart from that there is the threat of the
combination 33 . . . N X fS 34 g X f5 B X e4
35 fXe4 R X d l 36 RaX d l R X d l 37 R x d l
Ne2 + . Therefore White prefers to wait, and
parries the tactical threat.
33 KbI
34 b5
3S Bc5
g5
as
Qxg5
f6
41 Rgl
Nb3
42 ReI
43 Ra2!
RgS
Bbl
44 Ral
45 Ra2
46 b4
Bd3
55 BXd4
56 a6
e X d4
56 "
RX b6!
Nf4
48 Be3
49 a5
50 RaJ
a X b4
b3
57 RXb6
SO . . .
51 Ba4
b2
c3
d3
58 Rgl
59 RXf6
d2
Rc7
63 a7).
60 Rfg6
52 Rb3
53 BbS
54 R X b5
Ne2
BXb5
Nd4
60 . . .
White resigns
dl = Q
1 16
GA M E 4 4. QU EEN'S GA M BI T
V. Makogonov M . Botvinnik
8 4
9 c X cIS
Sverdlovsk, 1943
1 d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
cIS
e6
c6
10 . . .
1 1 Be2
N6
Nbd7
e X cIS
10 Bd3
4 e3
5 NO
6 NeS
Bb4
Nc5
11
12 g3
Qb4 +
to the great
6 ...
7 dXeS
NXe5
Nd7
12
Qb3
13 Kf2
B X c3
19 . . .
14 bxc3
15 BXfS
16 g4!
BfS
Q X fS
20 c4
A brilliant move. It might appear that this
is merely a further weaking of the position.
No White lures the black queen to e4 (which
is
21 hxg4
22 Q X bl
19 Qf3 QXf3+
16 . . .
17 Ba3
18 Kf3
23 Rdl
24 cXdS
2S Rcl+
26 Qh4
27 fS
Ne4 +
fXeS
cXdS
KbS
Re8
Qf7
28 Rc2
29 Bb2
18 . . .
19 b3
R Xbl
(l.+O
Qe6
b X g4+
f6!
g6
bS
29
30 Ke2
. .
1 18
86
Game 44
Ka7 32 Rc8 R X f5 + !
R xe5 31
Qd8+
30 . . . gX!SJ that
his attack is the more effective (31 B X e5+
R X e5 32 Qd8+ Ka7 33 Re8).
30 " ,
Ka7
31 Qh2
32 fXg6
33 Qg2
34 Bxe5
Qf6
Q Xg6
Rf8
inventiveness.
This tournament was held during the di.ffi
at Stalingrad. In those days a chess contest
was a rare event. I was playing in a tourna
ment for the firsttime since 1941, and, natural
ly, I was worried: had 1 lost my chess strength
Rf2+
N xfl
b6
KbS
34 " ,
35 Q Xfl
36 Bd4+
37 Re7+
Ka8 38 K x f2 Q x g4
39 B X b6.
38 BeS
39 Bf4
N X g4
NeS!
1 19
GAM E 4 5. RU Y LOPEZ
V. Lyublinsky M . Botvinnik
16 Rfdl
17 Nel
Championship of Moscow,
1943-1 944
1 e4
2 Nf3
3 BbS
4 Ba4
S B xc6
eS
Nc6
a6
Nf6
bXc6
18 Nd3
19 f3
20 c4!
d6
Nd7
d xeS
21 Qd2!
White has excel\ently exploited Black's
faulty strategy-the diversion of his knight
from control of d4. Now, in view of the
compensation.
Bd6
0-0
RbS
21 ' "
22 Q X d3
23 Ne2
24 Nc3
1 4 e x fS e4.
12 b3
13 Be3
14 c3
15 Qc2
13 . . .
Ne6
followed
Ne6,
Nf4
Ba6
cS
Nc5
. . .
12 . . .
18
9 0-0
10 Ne2
11 Ng3
6 Nc3
7 d4
8 d x eS
NcS
Ne6
B X fS
N Xd3
RedS
c6
Re8
g6
as
Qe7
24 . . .
2S Qc2
120
Be7
Game 45
32 Bn
33 g4
g5
although
to
permit
33 . . . g4
33 . . .
34 BXg3
35 Rf2
36 Rfd2
37 Bn
38 Rd3
39 Khl
40 Rgl
41 Qe2
42 Qdl
25
Rd4!
positional
advantage
will
R Xg4
tell
analysis
45 Q x g4
Qfl +
c X d4
28 Bn
29 Rfl
3O Bg3
31 Radl
eS
g4. White's
43 Be3
44 Q X f3
45 BXg5
46 BXd8
47 Bb6
f5
Bd7
48 B x eS
49 Rdl
SO b3
51 b4
52 Bd6
S3 b X aS
White resigns
Q X d3
27 N Xd4
46 Qgl
Bc8
that
Qb5
42 . . .
26 . . .
showed
his e-pawn.
26 Ne2
Qf7
31
Bd8
after 42 Be l g4 43 fXg4 B X g4 44 R X g4
Kh7
My adjournment
fXg3
Bb3
b5
b4
Rf8
Rf4
An
instructive
Black's
faulty
Q X f3 +
R X f3
R Xd3
Re3
R xe4
Re2
Bg4
BXb3
Bf5
d3
h3
game
both
because
strategy
(the
unfortunate
of
f4
121
fice.
by two points.
122
1 d4
2 <4
3 Nc3
4 Q<2
S cXdS
6 Nf3
10 . . .
11 Q X <3
12 Qe3+
prospects.
12 . . .
13 NeS
14 g4
6 ...
7 Bg5
8 Bxf6
c5
b6
good game.
Q x f6
8 ...
9 a3
both
Be6
Nc6
after
B X c3
c4!
BaS
. . . B X c3+). Now
BXc3+
14 N X c4 d X c4 15 d5 0-0-0.
14
1 1 Q X c3
O-O-O!
15 f4
tage : 10 . . . c x b4
15 . . .
Rhe8
Threatening 16 . . . B X g4.
16 Qf3
17 e3
10 0-0-0
123
Qe7
21 ' "
1 8 Q X d5
N Xe5
19 dxe5
21
22 RXc3
23 Kc2
24 BXf3
B X f5
17 . . .
25 Nh4
26 Rxc7+
NaS!
27 Kd2
28 Ret+
29 Rc3
30 b Xc3
31 Ng2
32 Ne3
33 b4
34 bS
3S g x bS
36 c4
37 BXb7
18 Bg2
19 Ng6
20 Kbl
6
Qc7
38 Be4
39 Kc3
4O Kd2
41 dS
42 K x e3
43 &2
44 Bf5
45 &2
20 . . .
21 Ret
c3!
Nc4
Nd2+
NXf3
Bf7
R X e3
K X c7
Rde8
Kb6
RXc3
g6
Kc7
Kd6
Rh8
g XbS
Be6
d X c4
Rb8
Rb2+
Rb3+
R X a3
Rxe3
BXdS
KcS
as
Bc6
Wbite resigns
In
1 24
M. Botvinnik S. Flohr
lS Bd3
d5
d4
Nc6
16 Qd2
17 DfS
18 Rafl
19 Rb4
4 e xd4
S Nxd4
6 Nc3
7 d3
8 Be3
9 Be2
10 0-0
11 KIll
Bg4
NXd4
Q x d4
c6
eS
Qd8
Nf6
Be7
BbS
Qc7
Bg6
played
against
Mikenas
the
. . .
B15,
11 . . .
12 f4
0-0
12 . . .
e x f4
13 RXf4
14 d4
Be6
19 . . .
20 Bf4
21 Dxg6
Qd7
125
Rfe8
Qd8
fxg6
22 Rb3
23 a3
24 Rd3
Black
provokes
Qd7
Rad8
Qe6!
d4-d5,
39 . .
40 a X b4
Q X b4
Rd6
then
securely
(41 d6 Rf8
40
. . . Kg8
is weak) Black,
25 dS
26 cXdS
cXdS
Qa6
Kg8
Kf7
41 Kf2
42 K.3
43 Rfi + !
27 Rdl
Bd6
28 b3
b6
29 B X d6
QXd6
3O Re3
White needs to exchange one pair of rooks,
so as to reduce Black's counter-chances
of piece pressure.
30
31 QXe3
32 Qd3
33 ReI
.
34 Kgl
RXe3
a6
NbS
Ng3 +
Rf8
35 Qe3
and it should have been done at once while
Black's king was still on g8.
.
Kb7
NXe4
RfS
player Corncroft).
39 Qb4
White must exchange queens as soon as
possible.
43 . . .
Rf6?
44 R X f6+
g X f6
45 g4!
38 Rdl
46 Kc4 Rb6
35 . .
36 Ne4
37 Qxe4
Game 47
45
46 b4
Ke7
55 KgS
Kg7
Kd6
56 Kf5
Kb6
47 Ke4
b6
57 Ke5
K X bS
58 KdS
KgS
59 Kc6
Kf5
. .
48 bS
White's plan is now clear.
48
49 gxbS
g x bS
as
SO Kf5
White could also have won by 50 b Xa5
6O K x b6
Ke6
61 KeS
Kd7
62 K X b4
Kc6
63 KaS
Kb7
64 Kb5
Ka7
6S Kc6
Ka6
b X a5 51 b3 Kc5 52 Kf5 K X dS 53 K X f6
66 b4
Ka7
67 bS
Kb8
68 Kb6
Resigns
SO
a x b4
5 1 K X f6
K X dS
52 Kg6
Ke6
53 K X b6
Kf6
d-pawn
54 b3
Kf7
paradoxical.
127
was
"distant"
looks
somewhat
A. Tolush M . Botvinnik
10Be2
Black now wins a pawn without hindrance.
More dangerous was
e6
d5
1 04
2 d4
3 Nc3
4 .5
S a3
6 bXc3
7 Nf3
8 Bd2
of
Bb4
. , . g6,
1945),
c5
BXc3+
Ne7
QaS
register
certain
Nb6
Nxa4
' "
c4.
12 . . .
13 NXg6
1 4 ReI
15 Bf)
16 Qf3
c4
9 84
It would have been risky to allow 9 . . .
Qa4, although instead of the move played
an immediate attack on the K-side was
possible : 9 Ng5 h6 10 Nh3 Nd7 (or
10
..
17 Rebl
Ng6
hXg6
Bd7
bS
RbS
9 ...
Bronstein-Saigin,
can
12 Nb4
1 0th move).
h2-h4,
White
11 0-4
Ng6) 1 1 Nf4 g6
then
when
10 ' "
8 ...
1 1 Nh3
10 Ng5 h6
Qc7
Nd7
rejoinder.
128
Game 48
18 Bcl
19 Sa3
as
exchange of queens.
19 . . .
27 Re3
Rf4
28 Be2
29 Bf3
Qb4
b4
Rb6!
30 Q X b4
20 Qg3
21 Bd6
Qd8
21
RXd6!
to exchange queens.
30 . . .
R X b4
31 g3
22 eX d6
Bc6
23 b3
Kd7
Consequently
White
would
have
That
26 Qg3
Qb4
Qf6
Rb8
32 cXb4
a X b4
33 Rbi
Rb8
Rb7
34 b4
plan.
24 Rei
2S Qe5
31 . . .
Rh4
35 Kh2
129
K X d6
37
38 Rdl
39 M
40 Kg2
,
Nc3
37 Ral
Ral
gS
NbS
Ra7
1 30
GA M E 49. RU Y L OPEZ
M. Botvinnik I. Boleslavsky
14th USSR Championship
Moscow, 1945
Isaac Efrcmovlch Boleslav.ky ( 1 919-1977)
11 . . .
12 Bh4
b6
Qe8
ment
in
Budapest.
Unfortunately,
13 .
short
eS
Nc6
86
Nf6
d6
Bd7
g6
13 Be2
14 Ne3
15 d X eS
1 e4
2 NfJ
3 BbS
4 Ba4
S 0-0
6 03
7 d4
Ne7
Black's
K-side attack.
IS
9 Re1
10 Nfl
11 BgS
NbS
8 Nbd2
15 Nd5).
Bg7
0-0
1 6 Bg3
131
d x eS
possible
N X g3
Rd8
Nc8
16
17 h X g3
18 Qe2
27 cS!
19 Radl
c6
2O Rd2
become a reality.
Qe7
Nb6
20 .
21 Redl
. .
b5, preventing
31
Or 29 .
.
Be6
squared
. . f5 23 e X f5 g X f5 24 Rxd7
bishops,
RXdl +
BgS
Ne7 30 Rd6.
hxgS
31 . . .
32 Qb7
33 Qd7
34 Qd6
3S Ng4
23 Bb3
Threatening a complete exchange on d8
Ne7
ReS
KfS
Q X b4
3S . . .
36 Q XeS
R X d2
B X b3
Qe6
Bf6
30 N X d l
QXb7
23 . . .
24 Q Xd2
2S a X b3
26 c4
30 N X gS
31 Q xa6
29
29 Q x b7
Nel-d3-c5).
After 22
or
33 Ng4.
22 b4
Ne3,
Nc8
Q X b3
27 . . .
28 Qd7
Ra8
Game 49
36
37 Rd7
Qb3
Ng8
43 . . .
44 Qd6
38 Qd6+
Better was 38 Kh2.
38 . . .
Kg7
44 . . .
45 Qd4+
46 c6
39 Qd4+
When short of time, one usually makes the
recommended, with two threats :
40
40 Q x g6 +
R X f7 + . However, G.
' "
Qbl
Kh7
Kg7
on 46
' "
Rh8.
Black resigns
Ravinsky
This
' "
39
40 Nf6+
41 Q X f6
42 Kh2
Championship was
something of
Kh7
NXf6
Kg8
RfS
43 Q Xc6!
133
GA M E 5 0. QUEEN'S GAM B I T
A. Denker M. Botvinnik
11 eXf6
12 Be2
Bb7
Qb6
d5
e6
c6
Nf6
5 ...
13
dXc4
play.
b5
6 e4
7 e5
8 Bb4
9 N XgS
10 BXgS
h6
g5
b x g5
Nbd7
13 . . .
14 84
10
. .
11 eX/6 Bb7)
14 . . .
b4
the initiative.
134
Game 50
15 Ne4
16 Qbl
c5
is of decisive importance.
20 Qcl
his king
is
placed !):
21 . .
16 . . . c3
16
Qc7
17 Ng3
If 17 h4 (as in the Ragozin game), the attack
Bc5 +.
20 . .
.
17 . . .
c X d4
21 Khl
18 Bxc4
Qc6
&5+
Qd6
as
well as simply
22 . . . Q X g3.
of his king.
22 Qf4
19 f3
d3!!
WhIte resigns
135
RXb2+
Rb8+
Rxb4+
Qf4
13 Bg2
14 f3
International Tournament
Groningen, 1 946
Bc6
1 d4
2 Nf3
3 c4
4 g3
5 Qa4+
dS
Nf6
06
d x c4
Qd7
14
15 a3
16 04
17 NaS
18 K03
Nd7
NdS
N5b6
Bb5 +
0-0-0
Qc6
Q X c4
Bb4+
6 Q x c4
7 Nbd2
8 N Xc4
9 Bd2
10 Nfxd2
21 Bn
22 NXc6
23 a4
Nc6
Bxc6
BeS
12 . . .
Bd7
BXd2+
Nc6
Nb4
NbS
10 . . .
11 03
12 K02
19 Rhcl
20 b3
Na8
Bd7
Game S l
31 b5!
32 BXbS
33 Rc7
25 86
26 b4
b6
e x bS
Kb8
27 Re3
either 3S
R Xc8+
RXc8 36
N X bS
or
34 . . , BXa6
35 NXa7 Bb7 36 Nb5) 35 R X d7 B X d7
tage.
34 N x bS Rd7! (weaker is
27 . . .
28 Rael
c6
f6
36 Nxa7 K X a7 37 Rc7 + K x a6 38 R X d7
This
Nb l-a3
prepares
White
34 Rb7 +
the
29 . . .
3O Na3
allows
to
strengthen
his
29 Nbl
manoeuvre
ReS
33 . . .
The
N X b5
Ka8
Bd7
30 . . .
Ne7
35 RXd7!
R X cl
36 N X b5
Rbc8
parry the
38 Rb7+ Ka8
40 Rb8+) 39 Nc7 + .
137
39 Na7+ and
37 R X g7
38 R X a7 +
h6
38 . . .
39 Rb7 +
40 Ra7+
41 Rb7 +
42 g4
KbS
Ka8
KbS
Ka8
42 . . .
43 d5
44 Ra7+
45 Rb7 +
46 R X h6
e5
RlcS
KbS
Ka8
RbS
49 Nd6+
SO NeS
51 NXf6
52 Kfl
53 h4
54 Nh5
55 gS
56 h X g5
57 Nf6
K x a7
Kb6
Rc3+
Rc7
Rn
Kc7
hXg5
Rb7
Rh2+
S8 Kg3
59 Kgl
60 g6
RhI
Rh8
Resigns
138
Game 5 1
139
M . Botvinnik M . Euwe
International Tournament
Groningen, 1946
1 d4
2 Nf3
Nf6
3 04
d x c4
4 e3
e6
cS
a6
5 Bxc4
6 0-0
7 a4
dS
replied 9 . . . B Xc5.
9 ...
10 Nc3
n b3
.
12 Bb2
. .
Bd7
Rac8
7 ...
8 Qe2
Qc7
0-0
Nc6
Be7
plan
Match
9 RdJ
earlier.
13 dS
14 N X dS
15 BXd5
N Xc6 bXc6
(12 . . . Qxc6 13 Bb5 axb5 14 aXb5 R x al
15 b Xc6 R Xbl 16 b4 RXb4 17 Ba3) 13 b4
Nd7 (13 . . . Ne4 14 Bb2 O-() 15 Bd] Nf6
16 Nd2 Rb8 17 Nc4 with a positional advan
tage) 14 Bb2 ()..{) 15 Nd2 B X b4 16 Qg4 Ne5
1941
e X dS
N X d5
Bg4
16 . . .
17 BX c6
Bb5
Game 52
Bc2
(24
..
20
Q x c6
Qe8
22 B x g7.
22 Rf1
A move typical of Euwe's inventive style.
Now he would have answered 19 g4 with
19 . . . Bf6, when 20 Rd5 is most simply met
by 20 . . . b5.
19 RdS
BXdl
R X d7
Qd8
21 RXh5
17 .
18 Ne5
26 Qe5 f6 2 7 Qe6 + .
g6
Rd8
Rdl
23 Rh3
24 g4
25 KXfI
RXfI+
b5
aXb5
f6
26 axb5
27 Qf4
28 e4
29 Kgl
Qdl+
Bd6
20 Na7
30 Qf3
31 RXf3
32 Bxc5
33 Rc3
A passive
R x d8) 21
Much stronger
was
Radl
move.
Q X f3 +
Be5
fxeS
141
Q-side).
33 . . .
34 Kf3
35 Ke3
36 f4
ReS
Kf7
Ke6
36 . , .
exf4 +
e4
b x e4
37 K X f4
38 b X e4
39 b4
KeS
42 Re2!
Compelling the enemy pawn to advance.
42 . . .
e3
43 Kd3
h6
39 . . .
40
e5 Kd5 41
Re3 c3
a draw.
40 g5
hS
5 1 Kf6 h3 52 g6 h2 53 g7 h i = Q 54 g8 = Q + .
142
Game 52
ending.
43
44 Ke3
Rd8+
. .
1 948
World
Championship
Match
44
45 R X c3
46 Kf3
47 Rc6
Rd4
RXe4+
R X h4
. . KG 48 Rc5 +
47
48 Ke3
49 Kf3
50 Rf6 +
. 51 RXg6+
. .
Rf4+
Re4+
Kf5
K x g5
Drawn
from an incurable
have
been
World
form of time-trouble
Championship
since
half of the
participants
Match-Tournament in 1 948.
President of FIDE
143
s . Reshevsky M . Botvinnik
11
12 Bd2
Match USSR-USA
Moscow, 1 946
e6
1 d4
2 e4
3 Nc3
4 eS
S a3
d5
Bb4
cS
BaS
6 Qg4
7 d XcS
8 b X c3
9 Q Xg7
QaS
Q XcS
13 Nf3
14 Bxf3
N X f3 +
eS
IS BhS
Ne7
B X c3+
Nd7
9
10 Q X h7
11 Be2
. .
Rg8
N x eS
IS . . .
13 Q x e5).
BrS!
144
Game 53
pawn will be worth nothing, and his king
has nowhere to go.
16 BXf7+
No better was 16 QXf7 + Kd7 17 Qf6 (the
threat was 17 . . . RiJj8) 1 7 . . . R x g2.
16 . . .
17 Qb6
28 RXb7
Kd7
28 . ,
29 Kb3
.
Nd6
17
IS RO
R X gZ
Qb6
axb6
20 . . .
21 Kb2
22 Be3
23 BXe6+
24 BXb6
25 Rgl
RX a3
Ra4
Be6
KXe6
RX h2
27 Rh7
Rh6
Rg6
Nf5
d Xc4 +
Ke7
36 KaS
25 . . .
RaS
RbS
Kd7
Ke6
Rb7
26 Rg7
29 . . .
30 Rc7
31 Rc6
32 Rc7+
33 Rc6
145
37 R X e4
Kd7
Re6
RbS
Ke8
RdS
Nb5+
N X e7
Rc4
Kd7
Rf6
45 BaS
46 RbS
47 Rd8+
48 Rd2
"
49 Ra2
There is little choice. On 49 Re2 the en
circlement would have been tightened : 49 . . .
Rd5 50 Bb4+ Kd7.
49 . . .
50 Rb2
51 Bb6
43
Rd4!!
Kd7
ReS
Game 53
51 ' "
52 Rb4
53 Rb2
54 Ra2
55 Ka6
56 Be3
57 KaS
58 Ka6
59 rXe3
Rxc3
Ke6
Rdd3
Rd7+
Rb3
Rd6+
Rd8
RXe3
While resigns
A tense match and a tense game. But both
its opening stage and the ending are worth
studying.
Everything was agreed. A MatchTourna
ment for the World Championship was to
begin in February, 1948 in The Hague. And
in December, 1 947 in Moscow the Chigorin
Memorial Tournament for players from Slav
countries was nearing its end. This was the
147
P . Keres M . Botvinnik
10 Bf4
11 Ne5
e6
fS
3 g3
4 Bg2
S (k)
6 c4
7 Nc3
Black's
Nbd2.
7
task
is
7 ...
8 RbI
more
11 . . ,
12 ReI
13 Qd3
Nf6
Be7
(k)
dS
Nc6
Bel7
ReS
Nh5
difficult
after
14 Bd2
IS N x c6
co
Bel6
IS . . ,
16 Qf3
9 c XdS
16 . . .
17 Qd3
"
8.)( c6
Qe8
Nf6
148
18 a3
Rc7
19 BgS
. .
h6.
Game 54
25
26 Rfel
.
equality.
19
Ng4
27 f3
As long as the e4 square is not covered,
to h5 or e4.
20 Qd2
21 Bf4
Nf6
27 . . .
White has thus obtained an equal game,
even more simply than by exchanging bishop
Qd7
Q X d6
28 Bf!
29 BXc4
30 Kf2
R X c4
Ne8
23
24 gXf4
Bc4
for knight.
21
22 B X d6
23 Qf4
Bb5
Kg8
30 . . . Rc2.
QXf4
Rfc8
30
. . .
31 Ke2
32 Kd3
Nd6
b5
32 . . .
b4
25 e3
(35 . .
149
bxa3
Ra4
N x c8
R Xa3
46 Kc2
47 e xf5 +
Kf7
39 Rb4
Rat
RaJ
Ral
40 Kd3
41 Kc2
47
KXf5
Rf2+
49 Kb3
48 RXg7
Nd6
38 RbI
Re3 +
RXf3
49 . . .
SO Ka4
51 Rf7+
52 RfS
53 NbS
Rb2+
RXh2
Kg6
Nd6
Nf5
42 . . .
55 Ne8
56 Rf6+
57 Rf7
58 R X b7+
59 Rd7
6O Nc7
ReI !
Nc4
Kg6
150
N X d4
Kb5
Nf5
Kg4
K X f4
Game 54
The difficulty in winning this ending is that
Black has to prevent the sacrifice of the
knight for the two pawns. There is such a
threat now (61 N;<d5+ or 61 Nxe6 +). It
was, therefore, more rational to play 60 . . . d4
at once.
60
61 Kh4
liZ Kb3
63 Kb4
64 KaS
65 Kb6
66 Na6
67 Nc5
68 Nd3
Ke5
Rc2
Nd4+
Rc4 +
Nf5
d4
Nd6
Kd5
oS
Rc6 +
Nc4+
Rb6+
NbZ+
Nc4+
RbS
K06
NbZ+
Nc4 +
Rbi
Kf5
151
GA M E 5 5. ENGL I S H OPE N I NG
P. Keres M . Botvinnik
Match-Tournament
for the WorId Championship
The Hague, 1948
7 . ..
e6
tIS
d4
S bS
This is hard to understand. The obvious
plan was to increase the pressure on the
g2-b7 diagonal by attacking along the b-fiIe.
After 5 b x c5 Bxc5 6 Ba3 White's initiative
would have been quite unpleasant.
S ...
6 d3
7 e4
9 .. .
10
11 f3
c5
eS
Bd6
Qc7
Nb6
Bg4
Be6
Bg4
Nd7
g6
Game 55
IS fXg6
16 NfJ
17 Rf2
18 B X h6
fX g6
B07
Qd6
24
25 a4
_ . .
BxfS
R X b6
Rb8
Nf6
18
19 Qd2
20 NgS
_ "
25 . . .
26 as
21 ReI
27 Nc1
28 Nb3
_ .
22 Nf3
Q-side.
29 Rat
30 Qc1
3t Ra2
(otherwise 23 a5 Qc7 24 a6 b6
etc.
22 . . .
23 NgS
24 RXfS+
RfS
wing-22 a4 as
Bb6
Qf6
Nd7
RfS
Qe7
KbS
Rn
32 Qa3
33 bXgS
153
BXgS
Bdt
34 Qd
This "trick" does not change anything.
34
35 Rb2
. .
B X b3
Ddl
the g5 pawn.
36 Q Xdl
37 Qel
Q X g5
NfS
38 KhZ
Qf6
39 Bh3
40 Qdl
Nh7
Ng5
41 b6
43
b4!
44 bxa7+
45 a6
hxg3+
43 Kxg3
Of course, not 43 Q Xg3 because of 43 . . .
Rf8
42 084
42
K x a7
Rh7.
45
46 Q Xh3
47 Kg2
48 Kh2
154
Qf4 +
Qfl+
Rf2 +
Game 55
49 R Xf2
50 Kbl
51 Kg2
52 KgI
57 KXe3
58 Kd2
Q X f2 +
Qe1+
Qe2+
. . .
Qh5.
WhIte resigns
Qe3 +
d X e3
KX b7
Kb6
KaS
g5
Kb4
155
M. Botvinnik P. Keres
Match-Tournament
for the World Championship
The Hague, 1 948
1 d4
Nf6
2 c4
3 Nc3
06
Bb4
4 e3
(k)
5 83
6 bxc3
Re8
Nb6
eXd4
Bxc3+
7 Ne2
e5
8 Ng3
d6
9 Be2
Nbd7
. .
Nc6.
10 (k)
oS
11 f3
11
IS .
c X d4
..
14
15 Rcl
156
Be6
Re7
Game 56
16 Q x d4
Black
essentially
Qc7
provokes
White
into
Rc8 17 Rfdl
R x d6 NeB 20 Rd4
Ree7).
17 cS
18 RxcS
21 R Xg7+ ! KXg7
22 Nh5+
Kg6
dXcS
Qf4
Also after 22
Qb8
20 Rg5
19 Bel
"
23 Qe3
'
Nbd7
157
M . Botvinnik M. Euwe
13 fxg7
14
Match Tournament
for the World Championship
Moscow, 1 948
1 d4
2 Nf3
3 c4
4 Nc3
d5
Nf6
into difficulties.
e6
c6
S e3
6 Bd3
7 Bxc4
S Bd3
9 e4
10 cS
Nc5
. . O-{) 1 5 Re l
were wrong?
14 . . .
Nbd7
d X c4
b5
a6
cS
10
11 N X bS
BXg7
cXd4
axb5
(II . , . NX e5).
12 exf6
Qb6
...
Bb7,
15 Bf4
White puts into effect his plan of occupying
158
Game 57
15 . . .
16 Ret
Euwe,
Bb7
Rd8
17 Be5
Rg8,
there
22 Qg3!
Qb7).
'"
Rd5
17 Ret
18 Be5
22 . . .
23 Qg7
24 Rc7
24
Rc7+ I
c
7
23
Qg3
+),
then
22
Qf3
f6
23
Qf4
Qx
N x d3 21 Q X d3 Kh8 (21 . . , f6 22
BxeS
19 . . .
20 Nxe5
21 QXd3
RxeS
Nxd3
6
Q x c7
Bd5
d3
Be4
Rf7
Rd7
e5
bXc4
Kf7
"
. c3 33 Q Xc3
33 Ke3
34 Qb4
35 Kd2
36 84
Ke6
Rc7
Rc6
Resigns
26 Qxe5
27 Qe3
28 b3
29 f3
3O Qd2
31 bXc4
32 Kf2
. .
25 Q X c7
threatening 24 Ng6 + .
18 . . .
19 RXeS
fxeS
Rf8
160
GA M E 5 8. GRONFE L D DEF E NC E
M . Botvinnik
D.
Bronstein
10 e3
11 Bd2
12 0-0
Nf6
g6
e6
13 Ne2
4 Bgl
5 eXd5
d5
e Xd5
Bg7
Qb6.
14
. .
. .
RfdS
BfS-b4. The
15 Nf4
8 B X h3
9 Bgl
Qb6
7 Nh3
14 Bc3
5
6 Nc3
0-0
Re8
Nd7
Nc6
e6
Nf6
after 16 Nd3 Ne4
Capablanca method.
16 Qb3
Ne4
. .
Nac4 22
21
22 Rac1
a Xb6
17 Q X b6
Bh6
Nac4
balance.
NaS
23 Rfel
. ,
Nf5
18 Bel
18 . . .
19 Nd3
NaS
BIS
(19
(26
Bg7
Nc6
20 B
lying 26 . . . f6.
Nd6
NbS
26 . . .
27 Ke2
best.
20 . . .
21 Btl
24 Kf1
25 g4
26 b3
. . .
. Na3. However, my
Game 58
Bf8
Nc7
Na6
f6
27 . . .
28 84
29 Bg3
30 Bfl
Rc8+
34 Kb2 Nb4
Here White had to seal his move. In general
NaS
31 Redl
32 R Xc8
33 Rcl
R X c8
an appropriate move.
42 Bd6
33 . . .
34 N X c1
35 Kdl
R X c1
Ba3
Kxcl
N X b3 +
39 Kc2
Na5,
nor
. . . Nc4 43 Bf4
(42
45 Bb3) 45
42 . . .
43 Bbl
and 44 Ba2)
(44 . . . Nab4
Nc6
b5).
to tell.
46
3S
36 KXcl
37 Kc2
38 Kc3
39 e4
' "
Bxcl
Kf7
fS
better results.
43 . . .
40 gxfS
41 Bd3
...
NXb3+
NaS
...
g x fS
Kg6
Kf6
be able to guess my ex
Na7
56 . . .
51 Bf4
52 Bd3
53 Be2
54 Bd3+
44 Bg3!!
Nbe6
Ne8
Kg6
the position.
54 . . .
55 Be2
S6 Bf3
Or 56 . . .
Kf6
Kg6
N6e7
44 . .
45 fXe4
46 Bf4
47 eXdS
.
fxe4
h6
57 BgS
lIS
47 " .
48 114
49BgS+
56 Bf5
e x dS
NabS
Kf7
Black ",signs.
A possible continuation was : 57 . . . Nc6
58 B X d5
Nd6
59 Bf3 Kf5 60
6 1 B x c6 b xc6 62a5.
164
Be l b5
GA M E 5 9. QUEEN'S GAM B I T
D. Bronstein
M. Botvinnik
12 . . .
13 d X e5
t4 Bg2
15 0-0-0
t d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
4 Nf3
S BgS
6 e4
cIS
c6
Nf6
e6
d xc4
bS
7 e5
8 Bb4
9 c X f6
h6
g5
9 ...
tO NeS
1l g3
12 Qe2
Nxe5
Qe7
Bb7
g x h4
Q X f6
Nd7
15 . . .
t6 f4
t7 Rd6
t8 Rhdt
1g eXd6
Bg7
0-0
Rad8
R X d6
19 . . .
2O Ne4
Qd8
Qa5
21 Kbl
22 . . .
23 Qg6
f5
c5
Qb6
24
25 Bxe4
26 g5!
27 fxg5
28 Q xe6+
29 Qg4!
3Og6
B X e4+
fXe4
h X g5
Qd8
Kh8
Qe8
Bb6
31 Q Xh4
32d7
33 Q X e4
34 a4
35 Qg4
36 Ka2
22 Qg4
Kg7
Qd8
Bg5
Qe7
Qf6
36 . . .
h4
166
37 Rgl
Game 59
Bf8 + 43 K X b3 Rb8 + .
42
43 Kb4
Kh7
Rh8 +
44 KcS
Be3+
. .
37
38 Ka3
39 QbS
h3+
Be3
Bh6
41 Qe5 + , o r 40 . . .
41 Qh7+ Kf8 42 g7+ ) 41 Q x f6 +
R X hS (40 . . . Q X dB
R X dB
Qh6+
46 K X c4
Q X e3
47d8=Q
48 R x d8
49 RdS
R X d8
Qe6+
as
3O b4
K X f6 42 g7.
40 Q X c5
45 Qxe3
White resigns
Rd8
exactly formulated.
41 Rd1
player.
41
42 Qg1+
played
in
Candidates Tournaments
He
three
(in
consecutive
his
167
13 Rfd1
14 cXdS
1S Nel
International Tournament
Budapest, 1 952
1 d4
2 <4
3 g3
4 Bg2
S Nf3
6
7 b3
Qf6
cXdS
e6
fS
Nf6
Be7
dS
IS . . .
as
Chekhover).
7 ...
8 Ba3
16 Ndf3
c6
Incautiously
Nbd7
B x a3 10 Nxa3
16
10 B Xe7 QXe7
I I Qa3
10 Nbd2
B x a3
16
17 Nd3
1 8 h X g3
11 Qxa3
12 Rac1
e3
White
Ne4
9 Qc1
So that after
By
played.
b6
Bb7
168
f4
fxg3
Game 60
31 . . .
18 . . .
19 Re2
20 QcI
21 Bb3
22 Kg2
23 B X d7
Rae8
Qh6
Qd6
Rf6
c5
34 R x a5
Rf8
35 Ke3
d4+
QXd7
Qd6
R x e2+
Re2
33 Kf3
32 Ra4
23 .
24 Nfe5
25 f4
Rc2
36 K Xd4
37 Ke3
Rd8+
Rg2
exchange.
25 . . .
26 Re7
exd4
situation,
. . . Bg2-fJ X d3 he
38 g4
39 b4
26 . . .
27 R xe5
28 Q X c5
whereas by
Nc5
bXc5
Q X c5
4O a4
Rc2
Bd5
Bbl
BaS
30 RXd4
ReS
31 Ncd3
For the exchange White has a pawn and a
41 Ra7
Ra2
R X bS
45 ' "
46 f6
RXe5+
Kf7
47 R X e5
48 Rf5
42 . . .
43 as
Now Black
R x a8 +
B x a8
45 Nc4,
or 43 . . .
Bg2
analysis
had
prepared
another
continuation . . .
I reached this posItion in my analysis
42 as).
Black's achievements
g5 !
her
mercy.
Evidently
had earned
her
career.
48
RdS
Bb7!
44 . . .
49 Kc12
44 fS
45 Re7
170
BclI!
Game 60
so Ne5+
KfS
51 Rx g5
It would appear that White has achieved
all he could want. If 5 1 . .
. Be6,
then in two
51
. .
RxaS!!
52 Nd7+
53 R x aS
54 Ke3
55 Kf4
56 Ra7
57 Kg5
58 KX h4
59 Kg5
6O Rc7
61 Rcl
62 Kf5
63 Ke5
64 Rc7+
65 Rb7
66 Rh4
67 Kf5
68 Kg6
69 KgS
70 Rh4
7l Rb8+
72 Rb7+
73 f7
74 Kg6
75 Rg7
76 fS= Q +
77 Kf6
78 Re7+
Drawn
17\
BXd7
Bxg4
Be6
Bc4
h5
h4
Bh3
Bc4
Bal
Bd5
Kf7
Bh3
Kf8
Bc4
Ba2
Bd5
Bf7+
Bd5
Bb3
Kf7
Kf8
Ke7
Bc4
Bb3
KXfS
KeS
Kd8
GA M E 6 1 . GRO N F E L D DEFENC E
O. Troianescu M . Botvinnik
International Tournament
Budapest, 1952
1 d4
2 c4
3 Nc3
4 e3
Q x a5 I l Bd2 b4 12 Ndl c5
10
11 Qb2
12 Qxb4
13 Qb2
Nf6
g6
_ .
d5
4
5 NO
6 b4
also
14 Na4
15 Qc2
Black can
it is liable to be attacked.
overcome
15
16 Qb3
17 Bb2
. .
his
opening
difficulties by 6 . . . b6 (followed by 7
"
. (5)
7 Qb3
More sensible was the natural 7 Bb2. Now
White's rook at al is undefended, his queen's
sortie is premature, and these factors allow
Black to take the initiative at an early stage.
7
8 BX c4
9 Be2
10
QaS
c6
6 ...
Be6
axb4
Na6
b4
Bg7
dXc4
bS
as
1 8 Bd l
172
Brs
Ne4
Nc7
Game 61
tion
is
. . . b3 !
(21 Rfel Q x c2
. . . R xa4 22 B X g7 K x g7,
and
by 20 . . , Qa4 21 Q x a4
22 R X c2 b3) 2 1
the
passed
b-pawn
would
become
threatening.
18 . . .
19 &2
NbS
Nbd6
Be6
21 Qd3 Bc4.
20 Rfel
21 Qd3
Be6
46 . . . K X d4.
cSt
grave consequences.
22 d X c5
23 NXcS
N X cS
Bc4
I KdS
Kf8
B X b2, or 24 B x g7 BXd3 25 B X f8 B x c2
7 f5 g5 8 Ke8.
1 73
3 fS
4 Kc7
4 ...
5 Kc8!
Ke7
Kd6
Or 5 . . . Ke8 6 f6.
6 Kd8
6
7 Ke7
8 Kf7
Kf4
f6
K X g4
9 KX
10 Kg6, and White wins
Ke8
gS
KeS
174
M . Botvinnik Y. Geller
. .
9 Qc2
10
..
c6.
a6
BfS
development of the
loss of time.
11 e4
12 b3
13 Bb2
14 b X c4
IS Rabl
16 a3
1 d4
2 c4
3 g3
4 Bg2
S Nc3
6 Nf3
7 dS
Nf6
g6
Bg7
d6
Nc6
17 Ndl
first.
7. . .
8 Nd2
Bd7
bS
bXc4
RbS
Rb4
Rb8
NaS
cS
17
18 Ne3
19 Bc3
. .
Qc7
Rb7
27 e5
28 Qc3
Ne8
f6
counter-play.
19
20 b3
21 R X bl
22 N X bl
. .
RebS
RXbl
RXbl+
mission.
29 e6
22 . . .
23 Nd2
30 Be4
Qb6
Ne8
31 Bd3
32 Be2
33 h4
34 Bd3
35 f5
Qb6 33 Be2)
33 Qd2.
24 B X g7
25 KhZ
Ba4
Ng7
NbS
Ng7
Ne8
Ng7
Nb3
N x g7
Ne8
36 Qb2
37 N X b3
38 Ng2
39Ncl
40 Be2
41 Q X d4
Qa5
Qel
Qdl
gXf5
Qd4
Resigns
26 f4
Nf6
play chess.
176
oS
13 . . .
14 QXd4
15 RXd4
16 Bb3
Ne6
cXd4
Nf6
d6
e6
h6
Q X d4
N x d4
Re8
16 . . .
17 Rd2
Rg8
be a mis
understanding.
he
leads to.
8 Bxf6
9 0-0-0
10 f4
11 Bc4
I I Be2 is
. .
18 fS
19 Rdf2
b4
Ke7
19 . . .
Bb6!
17
gxf6
a6
Bd7
squares.
11
12 Kbl
13 RhO
. , .
hS
Qb6
177
36
37 ReI
38 Ndl
39 Ne3
40 Nbl
. .
20 fxe6
21 RXf6
22 R Xf8
Rg4
BeS
Rf4
Rf3
Bg3
fXe6
RefS
BXfS
Bh6
Be3
BgI
23 Rf2
24 Bc4
25 Re2
26 g3
Correctly
played.
Mter 26
h3
White
41 Rgl
ofa draw.
b x g3
R X g3
BeS
26
27 hXg3
28 a3
. .
31 RbI
32 Kb3
33 Bd3
34 Rb4
35 a4
36 Rhl
Meanwhile,
if
29 Ka2
continuation.
30 ReI
correct
41
. ,
42 Nd2
43 Ka3
44 Ne4
BbS
Bd4
RgS
BeS
Bg6
Rg3
Bf6
Bxe4
BdS+
Rf2
BhZ
45 Rg6
Bx e4
178
Game 63
46 Bxe4
47 Bd3
Black's
d5
Be5
misadventures begin
from
62 Kc4
63 Kd4
64 Ke3
65 Rhl
66 Kd3
67 Rh5+
68 Rb8
69 Rh5+
70 Rh3
71 Rh4+
72 Rb5 +
73 Rb4
this
48 Rg8
49 b4
50 Rgl
Kd7
Bf6
Rh2
Rdl
Ke6
52 c4 d4 53 Kb3
of 54
51 Kb3
52 Rdl
Kf6
Rf4 +
Ke5
Re4+
Rg4
Kd6
Ke5
Kf4
Rg8
KeS
Kd6
Kd6
Ke7
73
74 Ke4
53 c4
. .
Rg3 +
54 Ka.1
55 B X c4
56 Bb3
57 Ka2
58 Bc4
pawn.
Rb2+
dxc4
Rc2
Bb2+
Rf2
as
74 . . .
75 Kd4 or 75 Rh5.
59 bxaS
60 Kb3
61 Bb5
Bd2
75 Bd3
75 . . .
76 Rh5
Bc3+
BXaS
b6
Bg5
76
. .
KeS!
both
77 Ke5 R X d3
ISO
M . Botvinnik M . Taimanov
7 ...
8 Nf4
8 ...
9 Be2
e6
Bb4
No6
dS
Be7
. .
BfS
S Ne2
6 a3
7 cXdS
0-0
Nf6
e x d5
181
16 . . .
17 Qf3
10 g4
11 N x e6
Be6
17 . . .
18 Ra2
11 . . .
12 0-0
13 f4
Nd6
a4
c6
fXe6
Qd7
19 bXc6
20 Rc2
QXc6
Qd7
Nd8!
14 . . .
IS b4
'
IS . . .
21 gS
22 Bxh7+
NM
16 bS
as
NeB
182
Came 64
two pawns for his piece, and he retains
serious threats which fully compensate for
his minimal material deficit.
22 . . .
23 Qh3 +
K X b7
KgS
DdS
25 g6
26 N x f6+
27 g7
30 . . .
Nf6
g x f6
31 Rf3!
R X c3 33 Qh8+ i).
27 . . .
ReS
28 Qh8+
29 QhS+
Nf7
Kf7
KgS
RaS
Rh5).
32
_ "
eS
183
33 Rh3
34 Q X b3
3S exf4
Q X h3
e x f4
Bb6
36 Bb2
37 Kfl
Rb!5
BaS
Rb3
Rbe3
ReI +
Be7
184
M . Botvinnik V. Smysloy
8 ...
9 K Xfl
BXfl
e x d5
Ba6
Be7
dS
10 g4!
185
on Qf3.
c6
of Stahlberg.
18 dS
Nfd?
of
knights-I! . . . Ne4
knight against
RXd6
(23
. .
R X d6
26 Qf5 + .
Bd6
19 B X d6
Q x gS
13 e4
d X e4
14 Nxe4
BXf4
while after 20 d X c6 N X c6 he
completes
his
development.
However . . .
of 15 h5.
15 BXf4
16 hS!
With the positional threat of 17 h6, after
which the position of the black king becomes
hopeless. E.g. : 16 . . . Na6 17 h6 Re8
g6 18 Qa4)
(17
. .
20 Qf3!
Re8
17 Nd6
Re6
..
Uame 6S
20
21 QXd5
22 Rc1
23 b4
24 Rh3
25 Rd3
26 b5
27 BXc5
. .
QXd5
cXd5
Na6
28 RXc5
29 a4
30 Rdc3
b6
Kb7
Nf6
Nc5
bXc5
RbS
Rb7
187
GAM E 6 6. QUEEN'S GA M B I T
M . Botvinnik N. Minev
9 ...
10 N Xf6 +
1 1th Olympiad
Amsterdam, 1954
I Nf3
2 c4
3 d4
4 Nc3
S e3
6 Bd3
7 Bxc4
Nf6
dS
e6
Nbd7
d xc4
bS
8 Bd3
b4
c6
11 e4
9 Ne4
This continuation seemed to me better
14 Nd2!
IS Nc4
16 f4
10 BXe4 Bb7
11 Qa4 Qb6 12 Bd2 Bd6 J3 O-{) O-{) 14 a3 I).
14 Ba6)
RgS
QaS
12 0-0
13 Qe2
Bd6
Bb7
gXf6
Qc7
16 , . .
17 a3!
c5
Game 66
since on move 23 (see below) instead of having
to retreat his queen to e2, he would have had
the active move 23 Qc4 + .
22 Q X d3
fxe4
On 22
. NXe4 White would be free to
play 23 Be3 followed by d4-<l5.
.
23 Qe2
. .
Qb7
f5
Nf6
c4! !
24 f5!
Now the game is opened up even more,
and the position of the black king becomes
extremely dangerous.
24
25 Qxe4
.
c X d3
R X d6
NdS
N X b4
KXb7
fXe6
Kc6
KdS
Nc6
44 g5
45 g6
31 Bf4
a4
Rdd8
Rh8!
45 ' "
Rbi
46 Kh4!
47 Kb5
Rgl
Kc4!
36 Rf7
37 Rafl
38 RXf7
39 Be5
Rbg8
Rh8
Rbg8
RgfS
R Xf7
ReS
40 B X d4
41 Kf2
NXd4
K X d4
a5
48 R14+
49 RfJ
50 R14+
51 RfJ
52 RgJ
53 bX gJ
Rc2 +
RXb2
Kb5
Kb4
KbS
Kb4
RXg3
190
a3
Game 66
54 g7
55g8=Q
56 Qg4+
a2
62Kb5
63 Kg4
a1=Q
KaS
Qb8+
Qh1
64 Q4 +
Ka5
65 Qe5 +
Ka4
Qd1+
66 g6
67 Kg5
57 Q xe6
Qd8 +
68 Kf5
69 Kf4
70 Qe3
71 Qe5
72 Kf5
73 KgS
Qe8+
Qc1+
Qc7 +
Qc1+
Qe8 +
Qd8 +
57
. _ _
Qb8 +
+ 58 Kg5 Qcl +
58 Kg6
59 g4
60 gS
61 Qf5 +
Qc3
Qd2
Qd4
Ka4
74 Qf6!
74 Kh6 would be a mistake because of
. 74 . . .
Qh4 +
75 Kg7
Qh3,
which
was
191
QdS+
Qd8+
Qe8
83 QeS+
84 g7
After 76
Qh8 + White wins by 77 Kg4
'
(77 . . . Qg7 78 Qf7 Qc3 79 g7). Therefore
Minev changes from checks to a pin.
. . .
77 Qf4+
Ka4
Qb1+
Qd1+
Qd +
Qd2+
Qa2+
Qe2+
Qh2+
KaS
Ka4
KaS
Qe7+
Qf8 +
Qb6
192
W. Unzicker M. Botvinnik
1 1 th Olympiad
Amsterdam, 1954
l e4
2 d4
3 Nc3
4 eS
S a3
6 b4
7 Qg4
. . .
Nbc6,
e6
dS
Bb4
11 Qb4
cS
BaS
cXd4
Qc7
Kf8
13 e x f6
g X f6
14 Bh6
Ng6
15 h4,
and
12 0-0
after
8 bxa5
dxc3
9 Q X g7
NcS
Rg8
(12
1 1 Nf3
(Il /4 Q X a5)
11 ' "
12 . . .
13 Q x c3
14 a4
tS Ba3
8 bxaS
9 Nf3
ID his best years he used, to play energetically,
to Bd3
13 Nxe5
Bd7
ReS
NXd3
16 Q x c7
17 cXd3
Ne7
Nd7
193
R X c7
23 . . .
24Ra7
O t herwi se 2..
. . .
a6
Rc5.
24 . . .
25 R X a6
Rc2
17 . . .
2S . .
26 Ra7
27 Ke2
.
f6
(18 . . .
oppor tunity.
28 Nd2
18 Rfel
18 . . .
19 R X el
28 . . .
29 Kdl
R X el +
Kf7
30 e x f6
Rd8
seven t h
21 . . .
Kxe7
ReS
rank.
I mme diately
de cisive
was:
30 . . .
31 Ne4
22 RXb7
Ra2
Kd8
N othing come s of 29 . . . R a l + 30 K c2
lO Re7
21 Bxe7
Ra2
R x a4
d4
gXf6
Be6
23 Kfl
32 NcS
Bd5
25 g5 R X d3 26 K g2 e t c.
194
Game 67
42 . . .
43 Kd2
44 Rf7
45 Ke2
33 a6
Ra1 +
White's
34
34 Kc2
3S Kb2
Ra3
Ra2+
46 Ra7
47 Kf1
48 b4
(36 Rd7 +
manoeuvres
have
of 36 Nxe6 + .
der
unsuccessful
Re5
Kd8
RfS
Ke8
and
37 RXd5).
36 Kb1
RaS
ReS +
Rb5
rs
37 Nb7+ !
37
38 axb7
39 Kc2
4O b8 = Q +
.
49 g3
SO Rd7
BXb7
RbS+
Kc7
Kf8
40 . . .
41 R x h7
42 Re7
K X b8
Kc8
Re7 e5 (or
so . . .
51 Kg2
52 hS
e5
Kg8
RaS
RbS
Kh8
RaS
RdS
57 . . .
58 dxe4.
59 Ke2
6O Kd2
. .
Ra3+
Rf3
e4+
fxg4+
d3+
Kh7
Ra4!
65 e5
66 Ke1
67 Rf6
Rf5
Rf4
Rd4
196
67 . . .
But not 67 ' "
Re4+
R x f6 68 e Xf6 KXh6 69
Game 67
Ke2 Kg6 70 Ke3 K x f6 71 Kf4 g3 72 fXg3
and White wins.
68 Kfl
69 Kg2
70 Kg3
71 Kb4
72 Kh5
Rg8
g3
DraWD
Rxe5
RaS
RgS
197
GA M E 6 8. QUEEN'S GA M B IT
A. Kotov M . Botvinnik
13
14 Q X d3
cIS
c6
Nf6
e6
Nbd7
Bb4
0-0
15 f4
16 Rael
16 . . .
17 Rc2
17 . . .
Qe7
eS
11 cXdS
12 dxeS
13 Nd4
Rd8
Bd6
9 ...
10 Qc2
Qe7
8 ...
9 b3
N X d3
QeS
BcS
18 Na4
B X d4
19 Q X d4
198
Game 68
19 . . .
20 Bb4
21 Rc3
22 Rc:cl
Bf5
Qd7
Ne4
33 . . .
34 Rdl
35 Rddl
36 Qe2
37 Qf2
22 . . .
23 RIdl
b6
f6
24 Nc3
25 RXc3
26 Qd2
27 b3
28 Qrl
N X c3
Be4
Qg4
Qg6
b5
Be2
Be4
Qf5
Qg6
84
. .
39 bxa4
40 Rdl
41 Qb4
It is interesting to note that, from the ma
terial point of view, this game is reminiscent
of my game with Kotov in 1939 (Game 37).
Here, however, White has better defensive
chances.
30 Ba3
31 Bc5
32 Reel
33 Bd4
b4
Rdc8
Q x a4
Rc2
chances.
42 RXc2
43 Qg3
b5
Qe8
29 Kh2
Now it is time to be active on the Q-side.
R x c8
Qxe2
43
' "
44 BXf6
Q X al
Qxgl+
46 Bd4
47 Kg3
48 b4
49 Kf2
. . .
b2
BXgl
Be4
Kf7
g6
Ke6
50 Ke2
51 Kd2
52 Bf6
53 Be7
54 Bf6
Kf5
Kg4
Kg3
Kh3
59 . . , gS!!
54
55 Be7
is blocked.
60 fXgS
Kf3
61 e X d4
freedom.
Or 61 B X d4 Kg3 62 g6 K x h4 63 Kd2
b3
Be6
Black could have won another pawn58 . . . K x e3 59 Kxb3 K X f4, but that
d4 + !
57 Be7
58 Kc3
. . . h4 61 Bd6
Kg4
Bf5!
56 Bf6
(60
Kg3
200
Game 68
62 Ba3
63 Kd3
64 Ke4
65 Kf3
K X b4
K X gS
b4
BdS+
WhIte resigns
In 1955 I played in my twelfth and last
201
M . Botvinnik S . Gligoric
12th Olympiad
Moscow, 1956
d6
RbS
6 h4
7 d3
White
B X h5 9 B X h6 B X h6 10 g4
while after 8 . .
he loses material.
and
systematic
8 h5
participation
threat of mate.
9 BXh6
10 hXg6
l c4
2 g3
3 Bg2
4 Nc3
5 NO
Bd7
g6
c5
Bg7
Nc6
Nh6
11 Qcl
B X b6
hXg6
Game 69
12 R x h8 mate.
11 . . .
12 Rxh8+
13 Qb6
No better is
Bg7
B X h8
B X c3 +
e6
have prevented
20 . . .
21 Rh8
22 Nf6
Ke7!
Ne4 QhS
useless.
16 . . .
23 B X c6
Be8
(i8 . . .
Nd8 and then . . . bS). He did not have to fear
1 7 Nh7, as after 1 7 . . . RgS I S Rhl f6 , White's
initiative would have petered out.
24
Kd7
on Black's
. , Rf8 2S Q X fS.
25 QXg6
Nd8
24 Rb7
N X c6
overcome
17 Qg7
18 f4
the
Kc7
Bc6
Kb6
bishop sacrifice
20 Rh7 followed by
the g6 pawn is
15 . . .
16 Kd2
Qe7
Nd8
18 . . .
19 RbI
20 Ne4
18 NxJ7
18 . . . Qe7).
Ka6
26 84
203
2S . . . KaS.
Ka5
K X a4
Kb3
27 Qg5
28 Rhl
Ka5 30
Nd5!), while
29 Qb4
30 g4
Kb2
204
M . Botvinnik M . Najdorf
10 NXdS
attacking
clear.
1 c4
Nf6
e6
Bb4
c5
d5
logical,
although
11 Q x dS
U Bd2
13 Bc3
e x dS
BfS
Na6
14 B X a6
IS R X a6
b X a6
Bd3!
c X d4
16 RaS
17 Kd2
18 Rc5!
Better is 6 . , . B xc3+ 7 N X c3 c X d4
Bc4
a6
dXc3
of the opponent's
7 axb4
8 NXc3
is
6 a3
potential
2 Nc3
3 d4
4 e3
5 Ne2
Q x dS
NxdS!
9 cxdS
dX c4
205
18 . . ,
19 g4
Rfd8
' "
28 ' "
29 R x e7
f6 it is not possible
30 DeS
Black is safe.
19
20 b4
21 RbI
Ra8
h6
Rd7
21
22 b3
23 Rgl
24 Bd4
2S f3
26 bS '
RXe7
Rd8
Re8
DbS
Kh7
Re6
Re8
f6
31 Ke1
Bd3
32 Rd7
33 R X dS
34 Rd3
Be2
B X b3
' "
3S Rc3
27 Rgel
Now the white pieces are very nicely placed,
but that is all. Meanwhile, the standard plan
36 Bd4
37 ReS
38 Be3
39 Bd4
40 Bc3
41 e4
Be4
BbS
Be8
Rb8
Rd8
Rb8
Rd8
27
28 Re7
KgB
206
41
Rd3
Game 70
47 Rb7+
Kf8
48 Kf2
49 Rb6
50 Rb8+
51 Rb7+
52 Kg3
53 b5
Rb3
Ra3
following
analysis
shows
that
although
(43 f4 a5!)
54 Kf4
55 b6
Kf7
Kf8
a5
a4
Rb3
50 . . . fX e5 +
51 KXe5 Bf3 52 Kf4 Boo 53 g5 hXg5+
54 KXg5 Bd7 in view of 55 Bxg7!! KX g7
56 h6+ Kg8 57 Kg6 Be8+ 58 Kfo BdT
59 Ke5 a5 60 fo a4 61 Kd6 a3 62 KXd7 a2
63 Ke7 al=Q 64 [7+ Kh7 65f8=Q) 5 I e6 +
50 e5 Bb7 (a loss results from
easily.
SS
KgS
Bdl .
42 . . .
Bb5
is easier.
56 Kf5
43 R Xb5
44 Rb8+
Rb5+
R x c3
S7 Ke6
S8 f4
Kf7
a3
a2
e-pawn is dangerous.
59 ' "
45 Rb7+
46 Rb8+
Kf8
Kf7
a2 60 Ra7 R X b6 61 R x a2.
S9 Ra7
6O Kf5
207
RXb6+
Rb7
59 Kf7)
61 R X a2
62 RaS
Kf7
62 . . .
63 RdS
64 eS
65 fxeS
Rc7
Ra7
fxeS
Ke7
Rg2 73
66 e6
68 Rd7+
69 Rf7 +
70 Kg6
71 h6!
RaS
. .
RXd7 67 e6 + , etc.
66
Ra4
Ra6 67 Rd7 + Kf8
If 71 ' "
Kf8
Kg8
g4
gXb6
Ra8, then 72 h x g7 g3 73 e7
Ra6 + 74 Rf6.
67 gS
72 e7
73 Rf6
Ra8
Resigns
hXgS
him
RtJ7 + R Xill
69 eX ill Kxill 70 Kg6 hxg5 71 KXg7 g4
208
GA M E 71 . N I M ZO-I N D I A N DE FE NCE
M. Botvinnik V. Smyslov
11 b X c4
Nf6
e6
Bb4
b6
Ba6
Bxc3+
12 Nb5
sacrifice. e.g. 12 . . . c X d4 13 B X fS Q X f8
14 e X d4 Rd8
d5
9 K xfI e xd5, 8 b4 B X c4 9 B X c4 d X c4
10 Qe2 a5 1 1 b5 Nd, or 8 Qf3 0-0 9 Be2 c5
10 d x c5 Nbd7.
.
()...{I
lO Ba3
8 .
9 a4
Bb7
7 NX c3
8 b3
Nc6
c5
dX c4
209
13 Be2
Ne4
1 4 BO
Ng5
diagonal is indefensible.
25 NJI
26 Nf2
BXe6
15 Bxe6!
16 f3
27 a X bS
28 Qd2
a X bS
Rac8
86
16 . . .
bS
e4
play 1 6 . . . f5 immediately.
17 Nc3
f5
18 (k)
19 Qd3
Qf6
Rfd8
29 Rfel
20 d5
21 e4
22 eXdS
23 Bb2
of counterplay.
Nf7
e x dS
Bd7
NeS
29 . . .
3O Bc3
31 Khl
32 Ra2
33 Real
24 Qe2
Re8
Re7
Rb7
hS
f4
pawn.
210
33 . . .
34 BXb4
b4
Qb6
Game 71
35 Bc3
36 Ndl
Qe3
39 Ne3
4O b4
41 Ra8+
36 ' "
37 RXd2
38 Bd4
Q X d2
Nd3
RebS
Rb3
R8b7
21 1
I I c X b5
(13 . . .
Nf6
2 c4
g6
3 Nc3
Bg7
4 e4
d6
5 f3
(k)
a6
Nc6
6 Be3
7 Bd3
11 Ba2
12 cXb5
13 b4
14 BX c4
15 (k}
16
b5 so that after
16 . . .
e x d4
stronger
continuation.
Therefore
Rb8
on the Q-side.
15 . . .
16 Qd2
c6
Nb6
Nd7
18 Q Xh6
10 . . .
axb5
Nc4
bXc4
9 ...
tO Bbt
b5
8 Nge2
9 a3
NaS
10 . . .
b5
212
19 a4
20 Rfbl
Na8
Game 72
to take the
26 . . .
27 d xe6
fS
fXe4
Nc7
20 , . .
21 Qe3
22 fxe4
e6
N X e6
2S Qg4 !
23015
It might appear that this move gives Black
counter-play because of the weakness of the
28 . . ,
29 Nd4
30 Radl
23 . . .
24 exdS
c X dS
30 . . .
Bb7
ReS
26 Qf2
Bb7
27 Nc6
B x c6
(26
. . . g5
31 Qf4
the pawn at
ReS
under attack.
32 Nc6
2S Rf1
26 Qe6 + l,
B X c6
25
Nc7
30 . . . N x d4 31 Q X d4 Q X d4 32 R X d4 dS
(25 . . . NXdJ
RfeS
Qg7
33 Q Xc4+
34 Q Xc6
Qd7
26 Qd4
213
015
RdS
Qe7
Qd6
41 Q x e4 Qc5 + .
37 Rfel
40
Or
40 . "
Rh5 41 g3
d4
41 Ne4
Ne6
When
Rde8
42 b6 Nf4 (or
38 RxeS
R x eS
214
M . Botvinnik V. Smyslov
S Bgl
6 bxc3
7 RbI
Nf6
dS
N x dS
g6
N x c3
Bg7
Nd7
13
after
Bb7!
14 Qc2
15 Rfdl
16 N xeS
17 K X gl
8 04
This plan cannot give White any advantage.
On
N x eS
Qc8
B X gl
17 . . . Be4.
17
18 RdS
. .
0-0
Rb8
R X eS
18 . - .
19 R X eS
10 0-0
11 d4
However,
easily.
8 ..9 Nf3
rejoinder.
Qe6
B X eS
b6
eS
lO Rd!
The conclusion of the manoeuvre started
centre.
12 Ba3
13 dXeS
Re8
20 . . .
21 Qe4
215
Re8
29
3O Kd3
bS
b4
21 . . .
22 Q X e6
23 Kf3
Bf6
R X e6
Re6
31 g4!
24 ReI
2S e3
26 Bb2
Bd4
Bc5
It
transpires
that after
31 . . .
fXg4
31 . . .
32 Be3
ReS
Re6
26 . . .
27 Ke2
28 b3
fS
Kf7
of . . . Ra5.
33 Rgl!
Now White's rook breaks through on
the g-file.
33 . . .
34 Kc2
35 g X fS
36 BX f6
28 . . .
29 84
Be7
. . .
Rd6+
Bf6
gXfS
KXf6
37 Rg8
38 Ke3
Rc6
Game 73
a6!
39 Rh8
4O Rg8 +
KgS
Kf6
41 Rh8
This move was sealed by me. It is not easy
for White to exploit his advantage, which
43 Rh7
Kg6
the d-file.
46 Kc3
Rh8
Rc5)
_ . .
KgS
44
Kf6
Rc6
46 Kc3
42 Kd4
46
of active play.
42 . . .
45 Rd5
ReS
to play 42
...
. ,
Re6
47 Rd4
KgS
48 Rd7
49 Kb4
Rc6
49 . . .
Kf6
50 Rd4
51 RdS
KgS
Re6
52 Rc:8
f4
53 e X f4 +
54 Rxe7
55 Rb7!
56 Rh6
White also wins after 56
K X f4
Kf3
Re4
bS
. .
Kxh2 71 Kb7.
59 . . .
60 cS
61 Ka6
57 a x bS
Fatigue begins to tell. I decided to retain
the passed c-pawn, although I should have
directed my attention towards the a-pawn :
62 Kb7
63 Rb6
Rb2+
Re2
57 . . .
58 Rf6+
59 KXbS
Re2
Rb2 +
Ra2+
64 e6
6S e7
a x bS
Kg2
66 Rc6
67 Rb6
68 f4
K X h3
Kg2
Rb2+
Re2
Resigns
played.
218
9 bxc3
10 RbI
1 3th Olympiad
Munich, 1958
1 d4
2 c4
e6
Nf6
Bb4
b6
3 Nc3
4 e3
10 . . .
c5
5 Bd3
11 a4
over.
Bb7
5
6 Nf3
7 0-0
.
Ne4
f5
12 a5
N x c3 8 b X c3 B Xc3 9 R b I
Nd7
...
13
8 Qc2
Nc$).
d6
pawn at a7.
Nc6,
8 b x c3 N x c3 9 Qc2 B x l3 IO g X I3 Qg5 +
IS
...
Qc7
BXc3 9 b X c3
B X c3
13
. . _
14 Bxd2
N X d2
Nd7
15 Rb2
And now the refusal to exchange on b6 is
219
22 Ra2
23 QX e4
b X a5
15
16 Rat
. .
Otherwise 1 6 . . .
Qc7
Nb6 and
17
...
23
Wbite resigns
a4,
. .
16 . . .
17 R Xa5
Nb6
Qf7
17 . . .
Be4 !!
17 . . . N X 04
18 B X e4
fXe4
if
19 Qb3
the exchange.
19 . . .
20 Q X c4
21 Q x e6 +
N X c4
Q x a5
Kb8
for thought.
220
Game 74
Such
utilitarian
approach
to
chess
221
M. Tal M. Botvinnik
13 Ret
14 BgS +
c6
d5
d x e4
BfS
Bg6
Nf6
b6
Bb7
e6
Nbd7
Kf8
RXb7
16
g6!
. .
Bd6
fxe6
Qc7
222
Game 75
24 c4
25 dS
26 cxdS
27 d6
Re7
more freedom.
27 . . .
28 Rc1
29 Rc7
30 BXf6
30 . . .
31 Kf2
32 R Xd7
Kg7
32 . . .
33 Kf3
34 Kf4
35 g4
Rxel+
. . . Q Xg3 22 R Xe7 +
Q xg3
Ke6
KXd7
K X d6
Ke6
NdS +
36 Ke4
By 36 Kg5 Kn 37 h5 White achieves
22 Rxel
23 fXg3
N Xf6
Incidentally, 21
Rd7
Kn
Rn
21
Ndf6
R X h4 20 Qd3.
19 Bg5
Ng4
cxd5
37 Kf4
38 Ke4
Nf6+
NdS+
Nb4
39 a3
After 39 a4 it would have been more diffi
23 . . .
39 . . .
4O b!i
41 b6
Rf8!
223
Nc6
g5
41
Kf6
43 . . .
44a4
45 Kd6
46 Kd5
Kg6
Ne2
Nc1 +
Ne2
Nf4+
NaS
Nb3
as
K X h6
57 Ke4
58 g3
Wbite resigns
224
Kf6
Ne2
O . Neikirch M . Botvinnik
14th Olympiad
Leipzig, 1960
1 e4
2 Nf3
3 d4
4 N xd4
5 Nc3
6 Bc4
11 . . .
cS
Nc6
c X d4
Nf6
d6
6 ...
7 Db3
Ne8
12 . . .
e6
flanks.
7 . ..
8 0-0
9 Kb1
Be7
0-0
13 Nc6
13 . . .
14 N Xe7+
15 a X b3
10 (4
ll e5
NaS
b6
Qd7
Q xe7
f6!
19 . . .
b5!
20 RaS
N X d6
NfS
20 . . .
Bb7
21 Nd6
NXd6
Rd8!
Qc6.
23 Qd2
18 . . .
23 . . .
24 QXd6
Qe8!
RXd6
Qd8
25 Q Xe6+
26 Qel
19 Ne4
226
WhIte reslp.
Rf7
Re7
M . Botvinnik L. Schmid
14th Olympiad
Leipzig, 1960
1 d4
7 C)..()
Nc7
8 a4
a6
cS
Bd7
9 Nd2
b5
lO Nc4
d6
3 e4
4 Nf3
g6
I was tempted
place.
n eS!
4...
Bg7
5 Be2
Nf6
6 Nc3
Na6
Now (after
5 Be2)
would
have
been
disorganized.
11
12 axb5
d x e5
a X b5
17
18 NXd7
c x b2
NXd7
Q x aS
b4
19 Bb5
Bd4
e5
e X 4
22 B X d7+
The simplest road to victory.
22
Q X d7
23 Qe2+
15 d6!
23
24 Qe5
25 RbI
26 Q Xc5
27 R x b2
28 RbI
b X c3
. .
Qc8
29 gx f3
3O Qc6
Kf8
Kg8
6
Kg7
Re8
3
Qb3
Resigns
228
GA M E 7 8. N I M ZO-INDIAN DEF E NC E
M . Botvinnik: M . Tal
9 . ..
10 Bb2
11 dS
Nf6
e6
Bb4
0-0
dS
d x c4
Bd6
11 . . .
12 b3
eS
Bg4
Nc6
Ne7
Bd7
Ng6
229
27 Qb5
28 Qe2
29 Ne3!
Ng8
N6e7
29
14 Ne6
15 dxe6
fXe6
Kh8
Nb6
16 e X d7
17 0-0
18 Nd5
QXd7
Qf5
30 Ng4!
18 . . .
30 . . Qh5 31 Kg2
(31 Nxe5 QXh3) 3 1 . . . Nc6.
h-file.
Ng8
21 Qg4
22 Qe2
23 e4
Qc2
Qf5
Qc2
Qf5
Better
was
31 h Xg4
32 Kg2
33 BdS!
exchange.
19 Qg4
:zo Qe2
N X g4
Nc6
Be7
33 . . .
Nd4
34 B X d4
3S Bc4!
23
24 Radl
25 Qg4
26 g3
Qd7
Rad8
Qe8
Nh6
e x d4
35 . . .
230
cS
Game 7S
After this move Black has the s1ightconsola
36 115
37 f4
41
41 Qe4
43 &4
Bf6
d3
38 R X dJ
39 Bxd3
40 eS
R X dJ
Bd4
g6
Kg7
b6
Black reslglIS.
41 Rb1
231
M. Botvinnik M. Tal
9
10
. .
Nf6
g6
Bg7
d6
Nbcl7
6 Be3
7 Nge2
8 dS
eS
11 Kbl
NbS
.Ndf6
g X fS
0-0
fS
86
232
Game 79
22 Q X gS+
23 Rh6
h X gS
23 . . .
fXg4
IS b X g3
cS
White'.
attack develops
much
faster.
16 Bb6
17 g4
18 BXg7
Qg6
bS
24 fxg4
24 . .
25 Rg6+
26 ReI
27 Rg7 +
K x g7
b X c4
18
19 Rb4
. .
and
30 R x a8 because of 30
Rfl + )
28 . . . Nd7 29 R X fS + N x f8 30 N x d6 etc.
28 Ne4
h6!
Nd7
21 Rdbl
hopeless.
20 Be2
BXg4
Kf7
Ke7
Ke8
QgS
233
29 NXd6+
30 R X fS +
31 NX c4
32 Rf7
33 d6+
Kd8
N X fS
Bd7
Kc7
Resigus
GA M E 8 0. QUEEN'S GA M B I T
M . Botvinnik W. Unzicker
c4
1 c4
2 Nf3
3 g3
4 Bgl
S
6 cxdS
7 d4
Nf6
e6
cIS
cS
Nc6
10 NeS
e X clS
11 N X c4
position,
Black's.
11 . . .
12 dS
13 N X clS
Be6
d x c4
NXdS
Bf6
8 Nc3
14 Rei
Be7
Be3
Rfd!.
14 Rct
Of course,
not
Bd4
14 . . . B x b2
15 Dxd4
16 e4!
DXdS
15 R X c4,
Game 80
The exchanges 16 Bc5 Bxg2 17 K x g2 Re8
1 8 RXc4 Q X d l 19 R x d l RXe2 obviously
do not suit White.
16 . , .
BXe4
2S Rc6
26 Rc2
Qb2
26 . . .
Qa3
27 QeS
Intending 28 Bd5.
27 . . .
28 1m
Qb4
Rb6
19 Qc2!
g6
RbS
QbS+
Qd7
31 Qe4
3O Be4
Qf6
31 . . .
32 Ree2
33 Re3
34 R3e2
35 Rb2
Rd6
Nd4
Nf5
Nd4
Nd4
RfdS
35
Nr5
. .
36 Qg2
235
Qh3+
. .
Qf5
Nf4
37 f4!
44 . . .
QbS
QaS
39 g4
This restricts the mobility of the knight,
which in certain circumstances could have
gone via f5 to e3.
39 . . .
Ne6
40 fS
4S h4
46 Rc2
. .
RXe1+
f5
Rdl
R8d4
hxg6
Kg7
Q x el +
49 Bn!
g X fS
80
Game
After 54 . . . Rf7 55
49
50 ReS
55
56 Kf4
Ne5+
Ng4
57 Ra6
itself in danger.
K X h4
Rd7
Re7
57 . . .
58 Bd5
59 Be4
54 Kf3
Black could
55 Bc4
Kg6
Kh5
51 R Xf5+
52 Ra5
53 Kfl
Bc4
resign.
Kh5
Ne5
Ng6
237
GA M E 8 1 . S IC I LI AN DEFENC E
J. Littlewood M. Botvinnik
Hastings, 1961-1962
1 e4
2 Nf3
3 d4
4 N X d4
5 Nc3
11 ()...O...(I
12 Kbl
cS
d6
c x d4
Nf6
g6
Bg7
a6
bS
9 Bb3
10 Qd2
Bb7
Nbd7
NoS
N X b3
B X h6
b4!
Nd7
238
Game 81
17 . . .
18 hS
bxc3
20 bXc3
21 gxh7+
After 2 1
e x d4
R X d4 Qa5
22
Rf4
fXg6
23 R x f6 Rx f6 24 Q X h7 + KfSWhite's attack
again fizzles out.
21 . . .
22 R X d4
23 Qe3
18 . . .
dXe5
24 Qd2
25 Kal
26 Rct
27 QXa2
28 RXd8
19 hxg6
Nf6
N xa2
RXd8
White resigns
Nxc3+
RadS
Q x a2+
Bc6.
Kh8
QaS
NdS
seem that
239
GA M E 8 2. GRO N F E L D DEF E NC E
M. Botvinnik R. Fischer
1 5th Olympiad
Varna, 1962
Ragozin system
used to
starting with
5 ...
6 Q xc4
7 e4
8 Be3
Nfd7
9 Be2
games.
success in chess is decided not only by talent,
d X e4
Bg4
Nc6
be played.
10 Rdl
g6
Nf6
d5
11 Qc5
I I Qd3 B X fJ 12 g X fJ e5 13 d5 Nd4 leads
only to an equal game.
11 ' "
12 b3
13 g x fJ
4 NfJ
5 Qb3
Nb6
Bg7
Qd6
B XfJ
Rfd8
Game 82
told me that by first playing J3 . . e6 Black
could gain equality, but during the game
neither Fischer nor I knew this!
White now tries to take the initiative.
.
14 d5
IS NbS
Ne5
Ned7
23 RdS
Now White controls the e5 square.
23 . . .
24 Bf3
b6
17 . . .
Q Xf4
24 .
25 N X e6
"
"
Ne6
241
39 Be2
4O Kf3
25
26 Rd3
27 Re3
f'>(e6
Ne5
e5
41 Kg3
28 Bxe5
29 Rxe5
30 Re7
31 R X d7
32 Bg4
Kf6
Kg5
Ne4+
BXe5
R X d6
Rd7
N Xd7
32
33 Re1
34 Kg2
Rc7
Kf7
42 BXe4
Rxe4
34 . . .
35 Re3
Ne5
Re7
36 Rf3 +
43 Ra3
36
h5.
Kg7
Re4
Rd4
37 Rc3
38 Bdl
39
...
43 . . ,
ReI).
242
Re7
Game 82
defence".
44 Rf3
44
47
Re7
more sensible.
R x a4
Kf5
ReS
45 a4
inevitable.
49 Rf7+
50 Rg7
5t Kf3
. .
48 h4+
b5 47
RfTJ
47
Rf7
a6
Ke5
Rat
b5
alternative 45 . . , Kh6
thing.
It was much more difficult to "endure"
52 h5!
unique discovery.
46 Rf7
Ra5
Captain
The rest of
52
. .
53 Kg2
47 R Xh7!!
It seems unbelievable that White can hope
for a draw here. The whole point is that,
when Black starts advancing
his Q-side
243
54 Rg5+
55 R X hS
56 f4
57 RbS
58 Khl
Ra3+
g x hS
Kd6
h4
Kc6
h3 +
as
59 (S
60 RbS
6l f6
62 Rb6+
63 Ra6
64 Rc6
6S Ra6
66 Rc6
67 Ra6
68 Kgl
Dra..
Kc7
Kd6
KOO
Kf7
Kg6
a4
Kf7
Rd3
a3
S7 Rg6+
S8 Rg7+
S9 Rg6+
60 RgS+
61 Rg4+
62 Rh4
63h7
64 h8 = Q
Kb7
Ka6
KaS
Ka4
Ka3
b2
bl=Q
Shakhmaty
SS Rg4 +
56 RgS+
article by
in
l'
A.
KeS
Ke6
Qh3+!) 70 . . Q X fH 71 Kd3.
244
Game 82
strove to win
sis.
In
style,
Tigran
Vartanovich
Petrosian
of chess players.
245
GA M E 8 3.
QUEEN'S
GAM BI T AC CEPTED
M . Botvinnik T. Petrosian
in
my
notebook :
1 0 Rdl
Qc7
d x c4
3 Nf3
Nf6
4 03
06
5 Bxc4
eS
6
7 a4
a6
(if Black
I I Nd4!
12 . . Q x c6
13 Bb5 aXb5 14 axb5 RXal 15 b xc6
Rxbl due to 16 b4! Rxb4 17 BaJ and White
wins) 13 b4 Nd7 (or 13 . . ' Ne4 14 Bb2 O-()
15 BdJ Nf6 16 Nd2 Rb8 17 Nc4, with advan
d5
2 c4
was
1 d4
of Rubinstein.
Kh8
My opponent
10 04
11 e5
Nc6
7 ...
8 Q02
Be7
According to theory
. . . c X d4 is strong
11 . . .
"
Nd4
Be7.
12 . . . N x f3 +
BxeS
9 d x eS
Ng4
13 g X f3 N X f2, he has to
exchange knights.
12 N X d4
Q X d4
refrained from
correctly.
this
move,
fearing
some
After all,
threatened by
Black's
I came to the
while his
attack.
246
Game 83
Qc5
15 . . .
13 NaJ!
16 Ral
16 B X c5
Q x c5
Qd6
1 7 Bb5 +
. . .
Fischer I
played weakly.
By continuing
. .
14 R X aJ
15 b3
16
BXa3
NXe5
1 9 Qd2 f6
Q x c4
16 Q X e5 0-0 1 7 Bh6 Qg4 18 Rad3 Qg6
19 BXg7 or 18 . . . /6 19 Q(7) 16 Qc2
(but not 16 f3 in view of 16 . . QfJ) 16
Nxc4 (/6 . . . Q x c4 17 Rd, 16 . . . . Bd7
17 Be2, or J(j
()-{) 17 Be2 Qf5 18 Q(7)
.
Qf5
Bc6
19 . . .
castling
Rde8 21 Bd6,
long
because
of 20 Be7
20 Rei
. .
. ,
Bd7
better.
Nx c4
. .
17 bXc4
18 Ba3
19 Rd2
h5!
21 Qe3
f6
Since 21 . . .
39 Re4
4O Re3
22 Q xe6+
23 Rxe6+
24 Re7 +
25 05
41 Kg3
42Bc7
43 fXg4
Rhe8
was
also
Rhe8
44 Bf4
Re8
27 . . .
28 f3
Ra4
hxg4
Bd7
possible.
26 Bd6
27 Rxe8
Qxe6
Kf7
Kg6
Rod8
The immediate 25 . . .
Bc6
Rc4+
Kf7
Of course, not 44
' "
Rxa5, on which
Rxe8
Rel+
29 Kf2
3O Bb4
31 Ba3
32 Bd6
33 Rd4
Rat
RbI
Rb3
Rc3
45 Rb3! !
33
34 Kg3
35 h4
36c5
. .
Rc2 +
Bd7
Be6
50 Re5
Bc4
Bb5
Rc3
48 Rf3 +
Ra3 +
Ke8
49 Re3
5 1 Kf2 g4 52 Rg5
Kd7
would
Rf3 +
and
37 Kf4
38 g4
fXg5
36 ' "
adjournment analysis,
c6
entices
it does
45 . . .
46g5
248
Bc8
Game 83
51 R X .6
52 Rc5 +
fXg5
46 . "
the g7 pawn.
be
52
53 Rc6+
S4 Kf4
55 Kg3
. .
47 h X g5
48Be3
49 Rb6+
50 .6
Ra3
R x aS
Kg6
Kf5
bXc6
Kg6
Kb5
Ra4+
DraWD
execution.
249
GAM E 8 4. QUEEN'S GA M B IT
M . Botvinnik T. Petrosian
11 . . .
12 Kg2
13 N Xd4
d5
e6
Be7
e x d5
c6
BfS
Be6
13 . . .
14 exd4
but
apparently
the
most
1970
(see
NXd4
Nd7
Nf6
15 Qc2
9 ...
IO Nf3
cXd4
M)
Nf6
He is not
cS
given situation.
16f3
game.
10
11 Kfl
. .
Nc6
Game 84
22 . , .
23 B X e4
16 . . .
17 BeS
ReS
Bd6
Ne4
23 , . .
Z4 Rd2
25 Re3
26 b3
RXc4
Re8
a6
18 Rael
go
pawn
hunting
26 , . .
27 Na4
Z8 Nb2
29 Nd3
Levenfish
1939),
Rc6
b6
as
29 . . .
f6
his opponent.
18 , . .
19 RxeS
BXeS
19
20 Qf2
:u ReZ
22 Rhol
.
g6
Nd7
Nb6
30 h4
be
30 ,
31 RXe8+
. .
Bf7
4O a5
41 Nc5
42 Kg3
43 Kf4
44 Ke5
31
BXe8
. .
32 Qe3
33g5
Bf7
Be6
34 Nf4
bxa5
Bf5
a4
a3
R x f6
36 Qe5
Rd6
44 . . .
Rb4
pawn.
34
Bf?
35 Nd3
This, of course, is only to gain time on the
clock.
35 . . .
36 g Xf6
37 QgS
Be6
QXf6
Q X gS +
45 Nd3
QXd4
38 Ne5.
by
37 . . .
Kg7
38 Nf4
Kf7,
usefnl
4S
continuation.
38 hXgS
46 Kd6
47 Kc6
a4
RbS
Kf7
BXd3
48 Nc5.
48 RXd3
49 R XaJ
50 KXclS
51 Kc6
52 cIS
53 d6
54 Kd7
39 bxa4
In the event of 39 Ne5 Rc3 40 b X a4 RaJ
41 Rb2 R X a4 42 RXb6 RXa2+ all the
Q-side pawns are exchanged, which facili
tates Black's defence.
39 . . .
Rb2
Rg2
RXgS+
b5
Rg2
Rc2+
b4
Rc4
Game 84
He should have tried 54 . . . g5 55 Ra5 Kf6
56 Kd8 h4 57 d7 h3, although by 58 Ra6+
Kg7 59 Re6 h260 ReI Kfl 6 1 a4 White should
nevertheless win.
55 f4
Rf2
56 Kc8
57 Ra7+
RXf4
253
GA M E 8 5. RETI OPENING
M.
Botvinnik
J.
Donner
Amsterdam, 1963
After I had opted out of the battle for the
World Championship. for the first time since
1948 I found some time for playing in tour
naments which were not even indirectly con
nected with official events for the Champion
ship title. The small tournament in Amster
dam was the first such "free" event. Up to
the moment of our encounter, both players
occupied high places, but for victory in the
tournament I had to win this game without
fail.
1 c4
Nf6
e6
2 Nf3
d5
3 g3
4 Bg2
Be7
5 0-0
0-0
6 b3
b6
7 Bb2
Bb7
8 c X d5
10 . . .
t1 Nbd2
12 a3
NXd5
Be7
14 Nd4!
BX eS
Nd7
N5fli
eS
14 . . .
15 KXg2
16 Qb3
B xg2
Qc7
Qb7+
Game 85
16
17 Rfcl
18 Qf3
.
1tft8
Qb7+
Nc15
25 .
26 Nc4
27 e5
.
create complications.
1g e4
19
28 Ral
BfS
29 Ra7
Q x a7
a X bS
R X al
Ra8
30 Nxa7
31 N X b6
R X a7
(29
in
Rc7
rook,
ReS
22 a4 "
23 a X b5
24 R xal
25 Rdl!
21 Nc6
...
27 . . .
N5f6
a6
. ,
20 bS!
White's
Ne8
NcS
b5 pawn (on
32 . . . Nc7
or
32 . . . Rb7
255
V. Aloni M. Botvinnik
16th Olympiad
Tel-Aviv, 1964
1 d4
2 c4
3 dS
4 Nc3
5 e4
6 b3
12 ()...()
13 N x e5
Nf6
cS
g6
d6
Bg7
13 . .
!l
()...()
14 Radl
15 Bel3
e6
dXe6
. .
.
9 Nf3
The manoeuvre
Nd4
BXe6
QaS
10 Qd2
tl Be2
d X e5
6 ...
7 Be3
NdeS
Nc6
Nd7!
and clever.
15 . . .
16 b4!
B X b3
Game 86
After 16 Bxd4 e Xd4 17 gXh3 d x c3
Black has both a material, and a positional
advantage.
16 . . .
c X b4
Bg4
18 Rbi
19 BXd4
20 RXb4
21 a4!
Qd8
e X d4
b6
f5
B Xf5
bXa5
24 . . .
25 Q Xd3
26 g3
Qg4
27 Rei
Or 27 Kg2 Rf7 (this move makes no sense
with the white rook at b7), followed by . . .
RafS.
Rf3
27 . . .
Raf8
28 Qbl
29 Re4
A clever move. After 29 . . . Qd7 (or
29 . . Qh3) White has the combination
30 Ne7+ Kh8 31 N X g6 + . Black, ofcourse,
does not retreat his queen but sacrifices a
rook. The decisive factor is that the rook at
b5 is out of play. Could White have fore
seen this ?
.
29
30 fXg3
31 Kbl
. .
BXd3
Qh4
RXg3+
Q X g3 +
d3 !
257
32 Ne7+
33 Qel
34 Kg!
Kb8
Qb3+
b x g6
34
. .
d2!
Kg8!
258
P.
Trifunovic M . Botvinnik
Noordwijk, 1965
1 d4
l e4
3 NfJ
4 c3
9 Re1
g6
Bg7
d6
9 ...
Preventing this.
10 a4
11 Nfl
a6
NbS
Q X dl
12 R x dl
13 b3
Bg4
4 ...
5 Nbdl
6 &4
7 0-0
8 dxe5
13 . . .
14 gXf3
15 B Xf4
Nf6
0-0
Nc6
e5
dxeS
BXf3
Nf4
conve
259
16 Nell
17 Be2
eXf4
Rab8
b5
aXb5
NeS
b4
B x eS
Kg7
Bd4
3O Rb7
27 . . .
28 Rb8+
29 Nc4
Rfd8
31 Kgl
Ral+
ReI
22 . . .
06
26 R X b4
27 Nell
RXe2
Ral
260
33 . .
34 Khl
3S NdS
36 Rb5
.
RXf2+
BXb2
Kh6
Game 87
42
43 Ng7+
44 Ne6+
45 R X b7
46 Kgl
47 Kf2
48 b4
.
36
37 Rb7
38 Rb5
Kg7
Kh6
f6
KeS
Kd8
KeS
RXf3
Rg3+
g5
Rb3
39 Nf7+
40 Rb7
41 Nd8
42 Ne6 +
Kg7
Kf8
De5
261
49 b5
5O Rg7
51 Kgl
52 b6
White resigns
g4
Rb2+
g3
f3
GAM E 8 8. PI RC DE FENC E
A. Gipslis M . Botvinnik
Trade Unions Spartakiad
Moscow, 1965
1 e4
d6
1 d4
Nf6
3 Nc3
g6
8 hS
Bg4
9 b x g6
f X g6
10 Bel
d x eS
11 NgS
The critical point of the game. The position
is so complicated that it is difficult to give
a definite opinion. Later, 1 1 Ng5 was even
accompanied by an exclamation mark in
4 f4
This is the most unpleasant continuation
for Black.
4 ...
Bg7
S NfJ
()...()
6 eS
Nfd7
11
DfS
11 rXeS
game.
7 114
Qd5).
Nb6
. .
c5
II . . .
hS!
262
Game 88
13 g4
14 Bxg4
h X g4
castling long.
20 dS
14 . . .
15 Ne6
Nc6
Nxe5
21 Q X b2 (2J dxe5?Qxb5 22
Nxb5 R x e5)
21 . . . Nc4 22 Q X b7 NXe3 (22 . . . Qe6
23 Ne4) 23 Q x a8 Nxc2+ 24 Kd2 Q x d4+
25 K x c2 Rf2 + 26Kb3 Qb6+ 27 Kc4 Qa6 + ,
20
R XeS
21 Bd4
After 21 d X c6 QXc6 22 Bd4 Q X h l +
23 Kd2 Black wins by 23 . . . Qh6+
(24 KeJ
Qh4 +), but now his position seems critical.
15 . . .
Qd7!
16 B X f5
17 N x g7
18 Be3
RXfS
21 . . .
Kxg7
22 B X eS+
23 Rh4
18
19 Qe2
Nc4
N X b2
. .
21 Qh6 +),
21
(19
. .
N6xeS
RhS
Nc4!
24 RXb8
because of 25 . . . Rhl + .
263
24
25 Qb2+
27 Ndl
28 Qd4
29 Qf2
3O Ke2
31 Kf1
32 Ke2
33 Nc3
K X h8
Kg7
26 Qf4
. .
26
b4 is difficult to repulse.
.
White resigns
Qh3
264
Qg2
Kg8
Qhl+
Qe4+
Qbl +
Q xdS
Qd2+
GA M E 8 9. ENG L I S H OPENING
L. Szab6 M. Botvinnik
Amsterdam, 1966
1 c4
c5
2 Nc3
3 Nf3
4 d4
S Nxd4
6 Nc2
g6
Bg7
c x d4
Nc6
8 ...
9 b5
10 hXg6
fS
fXe4
10 NXe4),
d6
6 ...
IS Na4 B xa l 16 R x c8 R x c8 17 N x a l
NeS.
hXg6
BfS
7 e4
12 Nc3
7 ...
10 . . .
II NXe4
Nh6
8 114
26S
Qa5
Qe5 +
' "
B X c3!.
Nd4
Rhl
20 . . .
21 Qc7+
After 13 . .
14 Nd5.
14 Ne3
15 Qa4
with no alternative.
Ng4
21 . . .
22 Nd5+
23 N XC4
Qh2)
Ne5
K X c7
Kd7
g5
16 RXh8
17 Qb5
18 Nedl
but the
RXh8
QC4
266
WbIte resigns
M.
Botvinnik
K. Zuidema
Amsterdam, 1966
1 NO
2 g3
3 Bg2
4 0-{)
5 c4
6 cxd5
7 d4
8 dx c5
Nf6
g6
Bg7
0-0
d5
NxdS
c5
11 03
Securing the position of the queen at c2,
and restricting the mobility of Black's knight
at a6.
11
12 Nc4
13 Qc2
14 Rdl
Na6
b x OO
10 Nbd2
The alternative, perhaps even more active
plan for White, is rapidly to transfer his
pieces to the Q-side, e. g. 10 Nd4 Bb7 I I Na3
Qb6 12 Nb3 Rfd8 13 Bd2 Qc7 14 Nc4 etc.
10 . . .
c5
9 00
9 ...
.,
8 .. .
Bb7
Rac8
14 . . .
15 Bd2
Rfd8
NbS
16 Bh3
e6
17 e4
Qc7
Nb6
happened on 17 . . . Nf6) 18 . . . R x d l +
19 R X d l , after which there is no salvation
in 19 . . . Bxe4 20 Qxe4 Q x a5 due to
267
18 Bf4
25 BXeS
26 B X eS
27 RbI!
Qc6
27
28 Rb7
29 Be5
JO KeI
. .
19 Nd6
20 R X d6
21 Q X e4
22 Ng5
R X d6
Q X e4
B X e4
B X a3
e4
BfB
22 . . .
NXc8
Bxb2
Bd5
30 . . .
Ne7
31 Bd6
32 R X a7
33 Ra6
34 f4
Kf7
Ke6
Bg7
34 . . .
Kd7!
35 Bxe7
36 Ra7+
37 Rc7
23 N X e6!
A continuation that White had to have in
K x e7
KfB
23
Or 23
. .
fxe6
38 . . .
Bxe6 24 Rxe6.
24 Rxd5
37 . . .
38 Ke2
39 Kd3
40 g4
e X d5
268
b6
d4
Bf6
Game 90
48 Rc7+
40
49 RcS+
Kg8
Kh7
KgB
B x h4 42 K X d4,
42 Ke4
43 g5
Bg7
hxg5
SO f5!
53 K Xc3.
51 KXr5
Bg7
52 ReS!!
44 bxg5
45 Kd3
46 Rc6
47 Ke4
gXf5+
52 . . .
Kf8
d3
KgS
Kf7
53 g6+
54 Re3
Kb6
Bd4
mating threats.
Kf6.
47 . . .
55 Rxd3
BbS
269
c2
56 Rb3+
57 Rb7+
Kg7
calmed down.
270
M. M. BOTVrNNIK'S RESULTS
IN TOURNAMENTS. MATCHES AND TEAM EVENTS
1923-1970
Year
II
Number of
Games
Played
Event, Town
I
I
I
I
1 . 1923
2. 1924
3. 1924
4. 1924
5. 1924
6. 1925
7. 1925
9. 1925
10. 1925
1 1 . 1925
12. 1925
13. 1925
14. 1926
15. 1926
16. 1926
17. 1926
18. 1926
21. 1927
22. 1927
23. 1927
24. 1927
25. 19271928
26. 1928
10th"
1
1
7
2
3
3
5
1
1
Leningrad
Match with B. Rivlin. Leningrad
Tournament at Detskoe Selo
10
3
10
9
3
9
1st
11
7
7
3rd-4th
"
12
2
11
1
1
2
1st
2nd-3rd
11
19. 1926
20. 1927
Draws Position
5
11
Leningrad
8. 1925
15
6
13
Lossesl
i
Wins
Match Stockholm-Leningrad
Team Match of Metallurgists.
Moscow-Leningrad
Match Leningrad-Moscow
Trade Union Team Competition.
Leningrad
Tournament of Six. Leningrad
5th USSR Championship. Moscow
Championship of Metallurgists.
Leningrad
Match of Higher Educational Establishments. Leningrad-Rastov
1st
1st
1st
"
"
-
"
1 st
-
""
1
1
11
2nd-3rd
10
2
3rd
1
1
1
10
20
6
9
1
4
1
3
7
"
2nd
11
1st
13
5th-6th
" =
=
Leningrad
Four City Match of Higher Educational Establishments. Moscow
COllI.
27\
1st
-
I
I :
Event, Town
Year
..
29. 1929
30. 1929
3 1 . 1929
32. 1929
33. 1930
34. 1930
35. 1930
36. 1930
Builders, Leningrad
Team Match of Metallurgists.
Leningrad-Moscow
Match Leningrad-Moscow
37. 1930
38. 1930- 8th Leningrad Championship
1931
Team Competition of Electrical
39. 1931
I
I
I
I
I
Number of
1
1
5
8
2
6
2
2
17
I
2
12
Moscow
7th USSR Championship, Moscow
9
17
11
1
Scientists, Leningrad
Master Tournament, Leningrad
8th USSR Championship, Leningrad
Match with S. Flohr, Moscow-Leningrad
Team Match of Electrical Industry
Trade Unions, Leningrad-Moscow
Master Tournament with the Participation
10
48. 1933
50. 1934
of M. Euwe, Leningrad
5 1 . 1934- International Tournament, Hastings
1935
2nd Moscow International Tournament
52. 1935
3rd Moscow International Tournament
53. 1936
57. 1938
58. 1939
54. 1936
55. 1937
56. 1938
If
eDIt'.
272
1st
3rd-4th
1st
2
1
42, 1931
49. 1934
41. 1931
43. 1932
44. 1932
45. 19321933
46. 1933
47. 1933
Wins
40. 1931
I
i
l
I I
I
'
1st
6
12
9
2nd
3
2
1
1st
1st
6
7
11
2
2
6
6
1st
13
19
12
2
11
3
9
7
6
19
18
14
13
17
14
17
2
2
1st
8
10
5th-6th
1st-2nd
2nd
1st-2nd
12
I
2
4
9
3
8
1st-2nd
1st
1st
3rd
1st
y
=
59. 1940
60. 1 940
61. 1941
62. 1941
Match with
V.
I Number of ! Wins
Ragozin, Leningrad
63. 1943
64. 1 9431944
65. 1944
66. 1945
67. 1945
68. 1946
69. 1946
70. 1946
71. 1947
72. 1948
73. 1951
Games
Played
12
IS
16
18
2
2
19
74. 1951
75. 1952
76. 1952
77. 1953
82. 1956
83. 1956
84. 1 957
85. 1958
14
2
1
13
3
4
1st
1st
1st
24
17
5
6
5
3
14
8
5th
8
9
7
6
10
5
9
15
22
5
7
23
21
\3
2
273
11
1st
1st
1st
87. 1958
88. 1959
Cont.
9
7
3
10
12
20
86. 1958
90. 1960
9 1 . 1960
9
7
11
1st
5th-6th
89. 1960
4
13
IS
11
19
1st
24
3
1
I
I
Draws Position
17
19
79. 1954
80. 1955
8 1 . 1955
19
1
20
14
Bronstein, Moscow
78. 1954
Looses
l
)
I
-! - - -- - - - -
Event, Town
7
9
I
!
- I II
, I
-I -,
2
6
8
13
7
7
3
2
8
I
I
3
7
6
1
i
I
II
4
2
6
13
5
1
--, -.
I I, i, ---
3rd-5th
1st-2nd
3td-5th
ii
1st-2nd
1st
Year
' Number or
Games
Event, Town
Played
92. 1961
95. 1962
96. 1962
97. 1963
9S.
99.
100.
101.
1963
1963
1964
1964
102.
103.
104.
105.
1964
1964
1965
1965
107. 1965
lOS.
109.
1 10.
111.
1965
1965
1966
1966
116. 1967
1 17. 1967
118. 1967
1 19.
120.
121.
1 22.
1968
1969
1969
1969 ,
1
I
\
I
21
10
9
9
4
7
9
12
I
i
I
2
7
3
1
6
7
4
3
7
5
2
8
4
2
2
2
7
5
5
9
9
4
2
S
5
22
9
5
2
12
112. 1966
113. 1966
1 1 4. 19661967
115. 1967
123. 1970
124. 1970
Enterprises, Moscow
USSR Team Championship
1 6th Olympiad, Tel-Aviv
106. 1965
Draws Position
Oberhausen
International Tournament. Hastings
94. 19611962
Lossesi
Wins
93. 1961
1
-
lst
3
1
-
1
2
17
13
15
1
15
4
9
5
7
8
9
7
3
9
1
2
3
4
2
3
5
12
I
I
7
8
6
1
5
1st
3
4
2
1st
I
1st
15
2
2
1
1
6
1st
-
1s t
2nd 3rd
2nd
1 2nd
7th
3rd4th
i
---- - - - -----_._ ..
274
To sum up, out of 1,202 games played (610 wins, 139 losses and 453 draws) 1 obtained al
most 70% of the points. In 59 tournaments I scored 33 outright wins, and on six occasions
shared 1st and 2nd prizes. On six occasions I failed to achieve 2nd or 3rd place, or a share of
these places (in 1923, 1927, 1934/1935, 1940, 1951 and 1969), and this occurred only once when
I was World Champion. Out of 13 matches I won 6, lost 3 and drew 4 (on two occasions this
retained me the title). In six Olympiads I played 73 games (39 wins, 3 losses and 31 draws).
275
INDEX OF OPENINGS
(Numbers refer to games)
Alekhine's Defence
Benoni Defence 77
27
Bogoljubow Defence
Caro-Kann Defence
16
19, 23 , 75
Catalan Opening 51
Dutch Defence 8, 54, 60
English Opening 32, 39, 55, 69, 73, 89
French Defence 22, 42, 48, 53, 67
Grilnfeld Defence 36, 38, 58, 61, 82, 90
King's Indian Attack 40
King's Indian Defence 3, 62, 12, 79,
Nimzo.Indian Defence
71, 74, 78
52, 83
6, 9. 11, 13,
34, 44, SO, 57, 59, 66, 68, 80, 84
Queen's Indian Defence 7, 1 Sf 28
Queen's Gambit
86
2, 4, 5,
Ragozin Defence 37
Reti Opening 12, 1 7, 25, 26, 47, 85
Ruy Lopez I, 24, 43, 45, 49
Sicilian Defence 18, 30, 63, 76, 81
Two Knights Defence 10
277
14, 20,
21, 31.
HALF A CENTURY
of Chess
M I K H A I L B O TV I N N I K
all time
Contains 90 annotated games from
Botvinnik's career
Includes victories over Capablanca,
ISBN 1 -85744-122-2