World Chess Championship 1972

The World Chess Championship 1972 was a match between challenger Bobby Fischer of the United States and defending champion Boris Spassky of the Soviet Union for the World Chess Championship. The match took place in the Laugardalshöll arena in Reykjavík, Iceland and has been dubbed the Match of the Century. Fischer became the first American to be the official World Champion since Steinitz (the first Champion) became a naturalized American citizen in 1888. Fischer's win also ended 24 years of Soviet domination of the World Championship.

The first game started on July 11, 1972. The last game began on August 31 and was adjourned after 40 moves. Spassky resigned the next day without resuming play. Fischer won the match 12½–8½, becoming the eleventh official World Champion.

Background

The match was played during the Cold War, but during a period of increasing détente. The Soviet chess system had long held a monopoly on the game at the highest level. Spassky was the latest in an uninterrupted chain of Soviet World Chess Champions, stretching back to the 1948 championship.^[1]

Fischer, the eccentric 29-year-old American,^[2] was a vocal critic of the USSR's chess system. For instance, he believed that Soviet players gained an unfair advantage by agreeing to short draws among themselves in tournaments.^[3][4] Endowed with a fighting spirit, Fischer rarely agreed to draws in unclear or equal positions.

The expectations on Spassky were enormous because for the Soviets, chess was part of the political system.^[5][6][7] While Fischer was often famously critical of his home country ("Americans want to plunk in front of a TV and don't want to open a book ..."), he too carried the burden of expectation because of the political significance of the match.^[8] No American had been world champion since the first champion, Wilhelm Steinitz, became a naturalized American citizen in 1888.^[9] The excitement surrounding the match was such that it was called the "Match of the Century",^[10][11][12] even though the same term had been applied to the USSR vs. Rest of the World match just two years before.^[13]

Spassky, the champion, had lost a world championship match against Tigran Petrosian in 1966.^[14] In 1968, he won matches against Efim Geller, Bent Larsen, and Viktor Korchnoi to again win the right to challenge Petrosian for the title.^[15] This time Spassky triumphed, winning 12.5–10.5.^[16] He is often said to have a "universal style", "involving an ability to play the most varied types of positions".^[17] However, Garry Kasparov notes that "from childhood he clearly had a leaning toward sharp, attacking play, and possessed a splendid feel for the initiative".^[17] Before the match, Fischer had played five games against Spassky, with two draws and Spassky winning the other three.^[18]

However, in the Candidates matches en route to becoming the challenger, Fischer had demolished world-class grandmasters Mark Taimanov and Bent Larsen, each by a perfect score of 6–0, something no one else has ever done in any Candidates match, let alone done twice. After that, Fischer had split the first five games of his match against former world champion Tigran Petrosian, then closed out the match by winning the last four games.^[1] "No bare statement conveys the magnitude and impact of these results. ... Fischer sowed devastation".^[19] From the last seven rounds of the Interzonal until the first game against Petrosian, Fischer won 20 consecutive games against the world's top grandmasters.

Fischer also had a much higher Elo rating than Spassky, or indeed any player in history.^[20] On the July 1972 FIDE rating list, Fischer's 2785 was a record 125 points ahead of the number two player – Spassky, who had a 2660 rating.^[21] Fischer's extraordinary recent results and record Elo rating made him the pre-match favorite.^[22][23][24] Other observers, however, noted that Fischer had never won a game from Spassky.^[25]

Spassky's seconds for the match were Efim Geller, Nikolai Krogius and Iivo Nei.^[26] Fischer's second was William Lombardy.^[27] His entourage also included lawyer Paul Marshall, who would play a significant role in the events surrounding the match, and USCF representative Fred Cramer.^[28] The match referee was Lothar Schmid.^[29]

For some time, it was doubtful that the match would be played at all.^[30] Shortly before the match, Fischer demanded that the players receive, in addition to the agreed-upon prize fund of $125,000 (5/8 to the winner, 3/8 to the loser) and 30% of the proceeds from television and film rights, 30% of the box-office receipts.^[31][32] He failed to arrive in Iceland for the opening ceremony on July 1.^[31][33][34] Fischer's behavior was full of contradictions, as it had been throughout his career. He finally flew to Iceland and agreed to play after a two-day postponement of the match by FIDE President Max Euwe, a surprise doubling of the prize fund by British investment banker Jim Slater, and much persuasion, including a phone call by Henry Kissinger to Fischer.^[35][36] Many commentators, particularly from the USSR, have suggested that all this (and his continuing demands and unreasonableness) was part of Fischer's plan to "psych out" Spassky. Fischer's supporters say that winning the World Championship was the mission of his life, that he simply wanted the setting to be perfect for it when he took the stage, and that his behavior was the same as it had always been.

World-class match play (i.e., a series of games between the same two opponents) often involves one or both players preparing one or two openings very deeply, and playing them repeatedly during the match.^[37] Preparation for such a match also involves analysis of those opening lines known to be played by the upcoming opponent. Fischer had been famous for his unusually narrow opening repertoire: for example, almost invariably playing 1.e4 as White, and almost always playing the Najdorf Variation of the Sicilian Defense as Black against 1.e4.^[38][39] He surprised Spassky by repeatedly switching openings, and by playing openings that he had never, or only rarely, played before (such as 1.c4 as White, and Alekhine's Defense, the Pirc Defense, and the Paulsen Sicilian as Black).^[38] Even in openings that Fischer had played before in the match, he continually deviated from the variations he had previously played, almost never repeating the same line twice in the match.^[40]

Quarterfinals

Semifinals

Finals

Bobby Fischer

6

Mark Taimanov

0

Bobby Fischer

6

Bent Larsen

0

Bent Larsen

5½

Wolfgang Uhlmann

3½

Bobby Fischer

6½

Tigran Petrosian

2½

Viktor Korchnoi

5½

Efim Geller

2½

Viktor Korchnoi

4½

Tigran Petrosian

5½

Tigran Petrosian

4

Robert Hübner

3 (forfeit)

The match

The match was played as the best of 24 games, with wins counting 1 point and draws counting ½ point, and would end when one of the players scored 12½ points.^[41] If the match ended in a 12–12 tie, the defending champion (Spassky) would retain the title.^[42] The first time control was 40 moves in 2½ hours.^[43] Three games per week were scheduled.^[44] Each player was entitled to three postponements for medical reasons during the match.^[45][46] Games were scheduled to start on Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.^[47] If a game was adjourned, it was to be continued the next day.^[47] Saturday was a rest day.^[47]

Fischer insisted that a Staunton chess set from Jaques of London be used. The chessboard had to be remade at Fischer's request.^[48]

World Chess Championship Match 1972

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	Points
Boris Spassky (USSR)	1	1	0	½	0	0	½	0	½	0	1	½	0	½	½	½	½	½	½	½	0	8½
Bobby Fischer (USA)	0	-	1	½	1	1	½	1	½	1	0	½	1	½	½	½	½	½	½	½	1	12½

Fischer's disastrous start • Games 1 and 2

Spassky–Fischer, Game 1

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Fischer played 29... Bxh2?

In Game 1,^[49] after a series of piece exchanges in a placid Nimzo-Indian Defence, the position in the diagram was reached after 29. b5. It appeared to be a dead-drawn ending, and no one would have been remotely surprised if the players had agreed to a draw here.^[50][51][52]

Remarkably, Fischer blundered with 29...Bxh2?,^[53] a move that few players above master level would have played in light of the obvious 30.g3 and the fact that the h-pawn cannot save the bishop, trapping the bishop.^[52] In exchange for the lost bishop, Black is only able to obtain two pawns, which are worth less (see chess piece relative value). According to Garry Kasparov, Fischer probably planned 30...h5 31.Ke2 h4 32.Kf3 h3 33.Kg4 Bg1, but overlooked that 34.Kxh3 Bxf2 keeps the bishop trapped.^[54] Svetozar Gligorić reports that Fischer made the move very quickly and thinks that he simply overlooked the intermediate move 35.Bd2, which prevents the black bishop from escaping via the e1 square.^[55] Anatoly Karpov suggested that Spassky was afraid of Fischer and wanted to show that he could draw with the white pieces and that Fischer wanted to disprove that as the game headed for a stale draw.^[56] Owing to unusual features in the position, Fischer had good drawing chances despite having only two pawns for the bishop.^[57] However, the position became hopeless after he made at least one more bad move before the adjournment, which was done after move 40.^[58] Fischer could still have drawn the game by the correct 39th or 40th move.^[59] He resigned on move 56.

Following his loss Fischer made further demands on the organizers, including that all cameras be removed. When they were not, he refused to appear for Game 2, giving a default win to Spassky.^[60] His appeal was rejected. Karpov speculates that this forfeited game was actually a masterstroke on Fischer's part, a move designed specifically to upset Spassky's equanimity.^[56]

With the score now 2–0 in favor of Spassky, many observers believed that the match was over and Fischer would leave Iceland. He did not, a decision that some attribute to another phone call from Kissinger and a deluge of cablegrams to Fischer.^[61] Spassky, owing to his sporting spirit and respect and sympathy for Fischer, agreed to play the third game in a small room backstage, out of sight of the spectators. According to Pal Benko and Burt Hochberg, this concession was a psychological mistake by Spassky.^[62]

The turning point • Games 3 to 5

Spassky–Fischer, Game 3

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Fischer played 11... Nh5!?

Game 3^[63] proved to be the turning point of the match. Lombardy wrote of the beginning of the game:^[64]

When Bobby arrived, Boris was, as usual, seated at the table. Bobby did not sit down but went around inspecting the television equipment, and at this point Boris betrayed indignant agitation. Bobby tested the remote-control camera for possible sources of noise. Schmid watched the proceedings and became anxious. He felt the match once more was in jeopardy. Schmid took Bobby by the arm in an effort to get him to the playing table. Bobby brushed off Schmid's entreaties. "The American grandmaster permitted himself great liberty in his remarks, which were very disagreeable to hear," Spassky said later. Finally satisfied with the camera, Bobby settled down for the match.

After (Spassky with White) 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nc3 g6 (Benoni Defense, ECO code A61) 7.Nd2 Nbd7 8.e4 Bg7 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 Re8 11.Qc2, Fischer demonstrated his acute intuitive feel for the position with 11...Nh5!? Allowing White to shatter Black's kingside pawn structure looks antipositional, but Fischer's assessment that his kingside attack created significant counterplay proved correct.^[65]

Spassky–Fischer, Game 5

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Spassky played 27. Qc2??

Surprised by Fischer's novelty, which he had gleaned from the Yugoslav grandmaster Dragoljub Velimirović, Spassky did not react in the best way.^[66] In particular, his 18th move, weakening the light squares, was a mistake.^[67] Fischer won after:

12.Bxh5 gxh5 13.Nc4 Ne5 14.Ne3 Qh4 15.Bd2 Ng4 16.Nxg4 hxg4 17.Bf4 Qf6 18.g3 Bd7 19.a4 b6 20.Rfe1 a6 21.Re2 b5 22.Rae1 Qg6 23.b3 Re7 24.Qd3 Rb8 25.axb5 axb5 26.b4 c4 27.Qd2 Rbe8 28.Re3 h5 29.R3e2 Kh7 30.Re3 Kg8 31.R3e2 Bxc3 32.Qxc3 Rxe4 33.Rxe4 Rxe4 34.Rxe4 Qxe4 35.Bh6 Qg6 36.Bc1 Qb1 37.Kf1 Bf5 38.Ke2 Qe4+ 39.Qe3 Qc2+ 40.Qd2 Qb3 41.Qd4 Bd3+ 0–1

In Game 4,^[68] Fischer as White played the Sozin Variation against Spassky's Sicilian Defence. Spassky played a pawn sacrifice evidently prepared at home, gaining a strong attack, but failed to convert it into a win.^[69] The game ended in a draw.

Game 5^[70] was another Nimzo–Indian, this time the Hübner Variation: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nf3 c5 5.e3 Nc6 6.Bd3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 d6.^[71] Fischer rebuffed Spassky's attempt to attack and obtained a blocked position where Spassky was saddled with weak pawns and his bishop pair had no prospects.^[72] After 26 moves, Spassky faced the position in the diagram on the right. Perhaps his game was lost anyway, but he blundered with 27.Qc2??, and resigned after Fischer's 27...Bxa4! After 28.Qxa4 Qxe4, Black's dual threats of 29...Qxg2# and 29...Qxe1# would decide; alternatively, 28.Qd2 (or 28.Qb1) Bxd1 29.Qxd1 Qxe4 30.Qd2 a4 wins.

Fischer had drawn level (the score was now 2½ to 2½), and although FIDE rules stipulated that the champion retained the title if the match ended in a tie (after 24 games), the effect of the first two games had already been wiped out.

The juggernaut continues • Games 6 to 13

Fischer–Spassky, Game 6

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Fischer played 38. Rxf6!

In Game 6,^[73] Fischer, who almost always opened with 1.e4, played 1.c4 for only the third time in a serious game.^[74] The game transposed to the Queen's Gambit Declined, Tartakower Variation. After 1.c4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 b6 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.Rc1 Be6 12.Qa4 c5 13.Qa3 Rc8 14.Bb5!? (introduced in Furman–Geller, Moscow 1970),^[75] Spassky responded with 14...a6?! (Geller had previously shown Spassky 14...Qb7!, the move with which he later beat Jan Timman at Hilversum 1973,^[75] but Spassky apparently forgot about it.)^[76] 15.dxc5 bxc5 16.0-0 Ra7 17.Be2 Nd7 18.Nd4 Qf8 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.e4 d4 21.f4 Qe7 22.e5 Rb8 23.Bc4 Kh8 24.Qh3 Nf8 25.b3 a5 26.f5, White had a crushing attack. The game concluded 26...exf5 27.Rxf5 Nh7 28.Rcf1 Qd8 29.Qg3 Re7 30.h4 Rbb7 31.e6 Rbc7 32.Qe5 Qe8 33.a4 Qd8 34.R1f2 Qe8 35.R2f3 Qd8 36.Bd3 Qe8 37.Qe4 Nf6 (diagram) 38.Rxf6 gxf6 39.Rxf6 Kg8 40.Bc4 Kh8 41.Qf4 1–0

After this game, Spassky joined the audience in applauding Fischer's win.^[77] He later called it the best game of the match.^{[citation needed]} This win gave Fischer the lead for the first time in the match.^[78]

In Game 7,^[79] Spassky played 1.e4 for the first time in the match.^[77][80] Fischer defended aggressively with his favorite Poisoned Pawn Variation of the Najdorf Sicilian. He consolidated his extra pawn and reached a winning endgame, but then played carelessly, allowing Spassky to salvage a draw.^[81] In the final position, Fischer had two extra pawns but had to execute a draw by perpetual check in order to escape being checkmated by Spassky's two rooks and knight.^[82]

In Game 8,^[83] Fischer again played 1.c4; the game remained an English Opening rather than transposing to another opening as game 6 had. Spassky gave up an exchange for little compensation in the way of a positional advantage, and it is unclear whether it was a sacrifice or a blunder. Fischer won, and he was ahead 5–3.

Game 9^[84] was delayed when Spassky took time off (pleading illness). The game was a Semi-Tarrasch Variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined. Fischer played a theoretical novelty on the ninth move, and the game ended in a quiet draw after just 29 moves. The players' behavior, however, provided for much entertainment, with Fischer rocking back and forth in his chair and Spassky imitating him, which one spectator described as "two dead men dancing".^{[citation needed]}

In Game 10,^[85] Fischer played the Ruy Lopez, an opening on which he was a great expert.^[86] He initiated a dangerous attack on Spassky's king with 26.Bb3!, suddenly placing Black in a critical situation.^[87][88] Spassky sacrificed the exchange for a pawn, reaching a sharp endgame where his two connected passed pawns gave almost sufficient compensation for Fischer's small material advantage.^[89] Spassky had drawing chances, but played inexactly, and Fischer won the game with precise play.^[88][90]

Spassky–Fischer, Game 11

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Spassky played the extraordinary 14. Nb1!?

Game 11^[91] was a dramatic win for Spassky, his first since Games 1 and 2. As in Game 7, Fischer essayed his favorite Poisoned Pawn Variation; Spassky surprised him with the startling 14.Nb1 (given !! by many annotators at the time), retreating the knight to its starting position.^[92] Although later analysis showed that the move was only sufficient for equality if Black responded correctly, Fischer did not.^[93] After inferior defense by Fischer, Spassky trapped Fischer's queen and handed him his only defeat ever as Black in the Poisoned Pawn.^[94]

Game 12, a quiet Queen's Gambit Declined, ended in an opposite-colored bishops endgame draw after 55 moves.^[95]

Spassky–Fischer, Game 13

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Position after 61. Bf8

In Game 13, Fischer avoided the Sicilian Defense, with which he had lost Game 11, instead preferring Alekhine's Defense.^[96] The game swung one way, then another, and was finally adjourned at move 42 with Fischer having an edge in a sharp position but no clear win. The Soviet team's analysis convinced them that the position was clearly drawn. Fischer stayed up until 8 a.m. the following morning analyzing it (the resumption being at 2:30 p.m.). He had not found a win either. Amazingly, he managed to set traps for Spassky, who fell into them and lost. Spassky's seconds were stunned, and Spassky himself refused to leave the board for a long time after the game was over, unable to believe the result. He remarked, "It is very strange. How can one lose with the opponent's only rook locked in completely at g8?"^[97]

Former World Champion Mikhail Botvinnik said that this game made a particularly strong impression on him. He called it "the highest creative achievement of Fischer". He resolved a drawish opposite-colored bishops endgame by sacrificing his bishop and trapping his own rook. "Then five passed pawns struggled with the white rook. Nothing similar had been seen before in chess".^[98]

David Bronstein said "Of all the games from the match, the 13th appeals to me most of all. When I play through the game I still cannot grasp the innermost motive behind this or that plan or even individual move. Like an enigma, it still teases my imagination."^[99]

Spassky–Fischer, Game 13: 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 g6 5.Bc4 Nb6 6.Bb3 Bg7 7.Nbd2 0-0 8.h3 a5 9.a4 dxe5 10.dxe5 Na6 11.0-0 Nc5 12.Qe2 Qe8 13.Ne4 Nbxa4 14.Bxa4 Nxa4 15.Re1 Nb6 16.Bd2 a4 17.Bg5 h6 18.Bh4 Bf5 19.g4 Be6 20.Nd4 Bc4 21.Qd2 Qd7 22.Rad1 Rfe8 23.f4 Bd5 24.Nc5 Qc8 25.Qc3 e6 26.Kh2 Nd7 27.Nd3 c5 28.Nb5 Qc6 29.Nd6 Qxd6 30.exd6 Bxc3 31.bxc3 f6 32.g5 hxg5 33.fxg5 f5 34.Bg3 Kf7 35.Ne5+ Nxe5 36.Bxe5 b5 37.Rf1 Rh8 38.Bf6 a3 39.Rf4 a2 40.c4 Bxc4 41.d7 Bd5 42.Kg3 Ra3+ 43.c3 Rha8 44.Rh4 e5 45.Rh7+ Ke6 46.Re7+ Kd6 47.Rxe5 Rxc3+ 48.Kf2 Rc2+ 49.Ke1 Kxd7 50.Rexd5+ Kc6 51.Rd6+ Kb7 52.Rd7+ Ka6 53.R7d2 Rxd2 54.Kxd2 b4 55.h4 Kb5 56.h5 c4 57.Ra1 gxh5 58.g6 h4 59.g7 h3 60.Be7 Rg8 61.Bf8 (diagram) h2 62.Kc2 Kc6 63.Rd1 b3+ 64.Kc3 h1=Q 65.Rxh1 Kd5 66.Kb2 f4 67.Rd1+ Ke4 68.Rc1 Kd3 69.Rd1+ Ke2 70.Rc1 f3 71.Bc5 Rxg7 72.Rxc4 Rd7 73.Re4+ Kf1 74.Bd4 f2 0–1

When Spassky and Fischer shook hands, many in the audience thought that they had agreed to a draw, thinking that 75.Rf4 draws. But 75...Rxd4! 76.Rxd4 Ke2 wins; 75.Be5 Rd1 76.Kxb3 Re1 also wins for Black.^[100]

Endgame • Games 14 to 21

The next seven games (Games 14 through 20) were drawn. Fischer was unable to get the initiative. Spassky was choosing lines that Fischer was unable to break.^[101] With a three-point lead, Fischer was content to inch towards the title, and Spassky seemed resigned to his fate. The off-the-board antics continued to be as interesting as ever, including a lawsuit against Fischer for damages by Chester Fox, who had filming rights to the match (Fischer had objected to what he said were noticeable camera noises, and the Icelandic hosts had reluctantly – they were to share in film revenues along with the two contestants – removed the television cameras), a Fischer demand to remove the first seven rows of spectators (eventually, three rows were cleared), and Soviet claims that Fischer was using electronic and chemical devices to 'control' Spassky, resulting in an Icelandic police sweep of the hall.

Game 14^[102] was postponed at Spassky's request.^[46] Fischer was again White in a Queen's Gambit Declined. He played carelessly and lost a pawn on move 21. However, Spassky blundered it back on move 27 and the game settled into a 40-move draw.^[103]

In Game 15,^[104] Fischer returned to the Najdorf Sicilian, but played the main line rather than the Poisoned Pawn Variation with which he had lost Game 11. At move 13, Fischer sacrificed a pawn for counterplay. Spassky accepted it, and later a second pawn, but allowed Fischer a very strong attack.^[105] Spassky, on the brink of disaster, "found miraculous replies while in time pressure" and Fischer was only able to achieve a draw by threefold repetition after 43 moves.^[106] Two years later, Yugoslav grandmaster Dragoljub Velimirović improved on Spassky's play with the piece sacrifice 14.Bxb5!?, winning a crushing victory in Velimirović–Al Kazzaz, Nice Olympiad 1974.^{[107][108][109]} Black in turn later improved on Fischer's 13...0-0-0 with 13...b4.^[110]

Game 16^[111] saw Fischer playing the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez, a favorite line of his.^[112] Spassky defended well, and after a tactical flurry in the endgame, ended up with the nominal advantage of an extra pawn in a rook ending known to be an easy book draw.^[113] Although a draw could have been agreed after move 34,^[114] Spassky "used his symbolic material advantage for a little psychological torture", prolonging the game until move 60 before agreeing to a draw.^[115]

In Game 17,^[116] Fischer played the Pirc Defense for the first time in his career.^[117] That game and Game 18, a Sicilian Defense, Richter–Rauzer Attack,^[118] both ended in draws by the threefold repetition rule.^[119] Game 19, the second Alekhine's Defense of the match, ended in an uneventful draw after 40 moves.^[120]

Fischer–Spassky, Game 20

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Final position

In Game 20,^[121] another Richter–Rauzer, Fischer was unable to make progress and Spassky got a better position. Fischer headed for a drawish endgame but Spassky twice avoided a draw by threefold repetition.^[101] After 54 moves, Fischer made an incorrect claim of threefold repetition, but Spassky agreed to a draw anyway.^[122] See threefold repetition#Fischer versus Spassky.

Spassky–Fischer, Game 21

	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h
8									8
7									7
6									6
5									5
4									4
3									3
2									2
1									1
	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	h

Final match position, after 41. Bd7?

Game 21^[123] turned out to be the last game. Fischer used a line of the Sicilian that he had never before played as Black, and further surprised Spassky with a novelty on move eight.^[38][124] Spassky played badly in the endgame and the game was adjourned with a big advantage for Fischer. However, Fischer's 40th move was not the best; he should have played 40...Kg4! before ...h5 (his actual 40th move). Had Spassky sealed 41.Kh3! (preventing ...Kg4), he would have had drawing chances. However, his 41.Bd7? would have allowed Black to win with 41...Kg4 followed by pushing his h-pawn.^[125] On September 1, the day scheduled for resumption of the game, arbiter Lothar Schmid informed Fischer and the audience that Spassky had resigned the game by telephone, making Fischer the winner of the match.^[126]

The final score was 12½–8½ in favor of Fischer, making him the eleventh World Champion. Spassky won three games (including the forfeit in game 2), Fischer won seven games, and there were eleven draws.^[127] The controversial Grandmaster Jan Donner criticized Spassky's telephone resignation in print, though Fischer had outright forfeited games earlier in the match.^[128]

Notes

1. ^ ^{a b} Evans & Smith 1973, p. 8.
2. ^ "Fischer, according to some of the psychiatrists who are regulars at the Manhattan Chess Club, is a paranoid and is 'psychotically suspicious, like most paranoids." Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 75.
3. ^ In 1963, Sports Illustrated published a famous article by Fischer in which he expounded this view, entitled "The Russians Have Fixed World Chess". Alexander 1972, p. 31.
4. ^ "Bobby Fischer, then as now the enfant terrible of the chess world, charged that the Russians were in collusion, agreeing to draw with each other while playing no-holds-barred games with non-Russians, and to nothing to jeopardize the position of whichever one of them was leading." Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 35.
5. ^ "Throughout all the Soviet comments on their chess successes runs the theme that more than chess is at stake. For example, when Botvinnik won the world title in 1948 Pravda commented, 'Botvinnik was not simply playing chess, he was defending the honour of his country,' and in 1961 The Moral Code of the Builder of Communism stated, 'Our task is to educate chess-players towards communist consciousness, love of labour and discipline and loyalty to the good of society.'" Alexander 1972, p. 46.
6. ^ "When Botvinnik won the Nottingham tournament of 1936, Pravda said in an editorial that his victory was a triumph of Marxist–Leninist chess". Donner 2006, p. 138 (originally published in De Tijd, June 28, 1972).
7. ^ "Spassky, of course, was carrying a burden that Fischer was not laden with: he was playing not only for himself, but also for the Soviet government, the Soviet system. He represented an ideology. Soviet chess players were supreme, so the theory went, because the Soviet social, political and governmental system was so much better." Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 108.
8. ^ Fisher's 1972 Match Was Cold War Battle January 19, 2008
9. ^ Steinitz entry at World Chess Museum and Hall of Fame. Chessmuseum.org. Retrieved on 2009-03-03.
10. ^ Perhaps the best-selling book on the match was subtitled "The New York Times Report on the Chess Match of the Century". Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972. Gligorić's book on the match was also subtitled "The Chess Match of the Century". Gligorić 1972.
11. ^ "Even before a move has been made, this breathtaking, blood-curdling and heartrending encounter is justly being labelled as 'the Match of the Century'." Donner 2006, p. 136 (originally published in De Tijd, June 28, 1972).
12. ^ Byrne & Nei 1974, p. vii.
13. ^ The term is used that way in Russian, and also by Edmar Mednis in his book How to Beat Bobby Fischer. Mednis 1997, p. 247.
14. ^ Kažić 1974, pp. 230-31.
15. ^ Kažić 1974, pp. 194–96.
16. ^ Kažić 1974, pp. 231–32.
17. ^ ^{a b} Kasparov 2004a, p. 182.
18. ^ Alexander 1972, pp. 60–61.
19. ^ Steiner 1974, p. 42.
20. ^ Alexander 1972, p. 74.
21. ^ All Time Rankings – lists the top 10 from 1970 to 1997.
22. ^ "Despite his dismal score against Spassky, Fischer is the choice of nearly every expert. Indeed, London bookmakers favor him 6-to-5." Evans & Smith 1973, p. 8.
23. ^ Of the players and expert commentators at the annual Hastings Christmas tournament in 1971–72, apart from one International Master who predicted a Spassky victory, almost everyone else predicted that Fischer would win easily. Gligorić 1972, pp. 13–14.
24. ^ "Lay opinion is overwhelmingly in support of Fischer, expert opinion is divided in the proportion of about 2 to 1 in his favour." Alexander 1972, p. 74.
25. ^ Bill Goichberg, "Masters and Experts View the Match", Chess Life & Review, July 1972, pp. 409–10 (also available on DVD).
26. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 59.
27. ^ Alexander 1972, p. 79.
28. ^ Alexander 1972, pp. 77, 79.
29. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 76.
30. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, pp. 63–64.
31. ^ ^{a b} Alexander 1972, p. 77.
32. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 60.
33. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, pp. 62–63.
34. ^ Edmonds & Eidinow 2004, pp. 138–39.
35. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, pp. 63–67.
36. ^ Edmonds & Eidinow 2004, pp. 143–44.
37. ^ An extreme example of this was seen in the 1927 World Championship match between José Raúl Capablanca and Alexander Alekhine, where all but two of the thirty-four games featured the Queen's Gambit Declined. José Raul Capablanca, World's Championship Matches, 1921 and 1927, Dover Publications, 1977, p. 46. ISBN 0-486-23189-5.
38. ^ ^{a b c} Mednis 1997, p. xxviii.
39. ^ "Before the match there was a lot of talk that it is comparatively easy to prepare for Fischer, because he is very conservative in his choice of openings. Especially with White, Fischer plays [1.e4] almost without exception." Byrne and Nei 1974, p. 106.
40. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 48, 65, 87, 91, 113, 117.
41. ^ FIDE Article 7, Rule 8, reproduced in Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 204.
42. ^ FIDE Article 7, Rule 6, reproduced in Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 204.
43. ^ FIDE Article 7, Rule 9b, reproduced in Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 204.
44. ^ FIDE Article 7, Rule 9a, reproduced in Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 204.
45. ^ FIDE Article 7, Rule 10, reproduced in Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 204.
46. ^ ^{a b} Gligorić 1972, p. 86.
47. ^ ^{a b c} Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky, p. 59.
48. ^ Edmonds & Eidinow 2004, pp. 163–64
49. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 1
50. ^ Evans & Smith, p. 26.
51. ^ Byrne and Nei, p. 82.
52. ^ ^{a b} Alexander, p. 86.
53. ^ Garry Kasparov (2004b), Max Euwe & Jan Timman (2009), Dmitry Plisetsky & Sergey Voronkov (2005), Svetozar Gligoric (1972), and C.H.O'D. Alexander (1972) all give this move one question mark (a bad move but not a blunder). Larry Evans and Ken Smith (1973) give it "?!" (a dubious move).
54. ^ Kasparov 2004b, p. 434.
55. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 34.
56. ^ ^{a b} Karpov 1990, p. 100.
57. ^ Robert Byrne wrote, "The wonder is that, even though he now loses the bishop for two pawns, he would have been able to draw had it not been for his later mistakes." Byrne and Nei 1974, p. 83.
58. ^ Mednis 1997, pp. 275–76.
59. ^ Gligorić 1972 (p. 34), Alexander 1972 (p. 86), and Evans & Smith 1973 (p. 29) all give Fischer's 40th move as a bad move, stating that he could still have drawn with the correct 40th move. More recent books by Kasparov 2004b (p. 435) and Plisetsky & Voronkov (p. 443) give Fischer's 39th move as weak, claiming that his last opportunity to draw the game was with 39...e5! Mednis 1997 (pp. 274–76) says that Fischer's 37th move was bad, and thinks he missed a draw with 37...a6. Euwe and Timman (pp. 55–57), citing analysis of Friðrik Ólafsson and independently Jon Speelman say that Fischer could have drawn after 36. a4? and that Fischer could have forced a draw with 37...a6 or with 39...e5.
60. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 2
61. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, pp. 99–100.
62. ^ They write that it "had a costly psychological effect on Spassky". Pal Benko and Burt Hochberg, Winning with Chess Psychology, David McKay, 1991, p. 87. ISBN 0-8129-1866-5. Benko and Hochberg also quote Spassky as saying after the match, "My acceding to Fischer's groundless demand to play in a closed room was a big psychological mistake." Id., p. 92.
63. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 3
64. ^ "A Mystery Wrapped in an Enigma" William Lombardy, January 21, 1974, Bobby-Fischer.net
65. ^ Evans & Smith 1973, p. 40.
66. ^ Just a few weeks after the game, at the Skopje Olympiad, Gligorić improved on Spassky's play with 11.a4 Ne5 12.Qc2 Nh5 13.Bxh5 gxh5 (reaching the same position as after Black's 13th move in Spassky–Fischer, Game 3) 14.Nd1! Qh4 15.Ne3 Ng4 16.Nxg4 hxg4 17.Nc4 with a substantial advantage. Soltis 2003, p. 266. Gligorić won in 38 moves in Gligorić–Kavalek, Skopje Olympiad 1972. ChessGames.com. Retrieved on 2009-03-05.
67. ^ Evans & Smith 1973, pp. 40–42.
68. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 4
69. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 43–46.
70. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 5
71. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 48.
72. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 47–49.
73. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 6
74. ^ The two prior occasions were at the 1970 Palma de Mallorca Interzonal, when Fischer played 1.c4 against Lev Polugaevsky and Oscar Panno. Gligorić 1972, p. 52.
75. ^ ^{a b} D. Marović, Play the Queen's Gambit, Maxwell Macmillan Chess, 1991, p. 130. ISBN 1-85744-016-1.
76. ^ After Furman–Geller, Semyon Furman, Geller, Spassky, and Eduard Gufeld analyzed the game, and "Geller analyzed a plan associated with material sacrifices that would begin with the move 14...Qb7!" Geller was also one of Spassky's seconds for the match, and "during the preparation for the match they studied this position" (after 14.Bb5). Eduard Gufeld, "Inventors and Novelty-Makers", Chess Life, March 2001, p. 26.
77. ^ ^{a b} Gligorić 1972, p. 55.
78. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 54.
79. ^ Spassky–Fischer, game 7
80. ^ Byrne and Nei 1974, p. 112.
81. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 58–59.
82. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 59.
83. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 8
84. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 9
85. ^ Fischer–Spassky, game 10
86. ^ Byrne and Nei, p. 106.
87. ^ Byrne and Nei, p. 133.
88. ^ ^{a b} Gligorić 1972, p. 71.
89. ^ Byrne and Nei, p. 134.
90. ^ Byrne and Nei, p. 134–35.
91. ^ Spassky–Fischer, game 11
92. ^ Mednis 1997, pp. 278–79.
93. ^ Mednis 1997, p. 279.
94. ^ Fischer games as Black in Poisoned Pawn. ChessGames.com. Retrieved on 2009-02-28.
95. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 12
96. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 13
97. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 86. Gligoric wrote "KN1", using descriptive notation, which has been changed in the text to algebraic notation ("g8").
98. ^ Soltis 2003, p. 271.
99. ^ Plisetsky and Voronkov, p. 359.
100. ^ Soltis 2003, p. 275.
101. ^ ^{a b} Gligorić 1972, p. 116.
102. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 14
103. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 87–89.
104. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 15
105. ^ Gligorić, pp. 92–93.
106. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 90–91.
107. ^ Raymond Keene and David Levy, The 1974 World Chess Olympiad, R.H.M. Press, 1975, p. 34. ISBN 0-89058-006.
108. ^ Velimirović–Al Kazzaz, Nice Olympiad 1974 (1–0, 28). ChessGames.com. Retrieved on 2009-03-05.
109. ^ See also Gunawan–Adianto, Indonesia 1983 (1–0, 31). ChessGames.com. Retrieved on 2009-03-05. But see Anderson–Gormally, British Championship 2007 (0–1, 73). ChessGames.com. Retrieved on 2009-03-05.
110. ^ Nick de Firmian, Modern Chess Openings (15th ed. 2008), Random House Puzzles & Games, p. 255. ISBN 978-0-8129-3682-7.
111. ^ Fischer–Spassky, Game 16
112. ^ Larry Kaufman, The Chess Advantage in Black and White, Random House Puzzles & Games, 2004, pp. 4–5. ISBN 9-8129-3571-3.
113. ^ Gligorić 1972, pp. 96–98.
114. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 99.
115. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 96.
116. ^ Spassky–Fischer, game 17
117. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 102.
118. ^ Fischer–Spassky, game 18
119. ^ Alexander, p. 132.
120. ^ Spassky–Fischer, game 19
121. ^ Fischer–Spassky, game 20
122. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 119.
123. ^ Spassky–Fischer, Game 21
124. ^ Byrne & Nei 1974, pp. 207–08.
125. ^ Gligorić 1972, p. 123.
126. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, pp. 192–93.
127. ^ Roberts, Schonberg, Horowitz & Reshevsky 1972, p. 194.
128. ^ Euwe and Timman, p. 51.

References

• C. H. O'D. Alexander (1972). Fischer v. Spassky. Vintage. ISBN 0-394-71830-5.
• Pal Benko and Burt Hochberg, Winning with Chess Psychology, McKay Chess Library
• Robert Byrne and Ivo Nei, Both Sides of the Chessboard, Quadrangle/The New York Times Book Co., 1974. ISBN 0-8129-0379-X.
• J. H. Donner, The King: Chess Pieces, New in Chess, 2006. ISBN 90-5691-171-6.
• David Edmonds and John Eidinow, Bobby Fischer goes to War: How the Soviets Lost the Most Extraordinary Chess Match of All Time, Ecco, 2004, ISBN 0-06-051024-2
• Euwe, Max; Timman, Jan (2009), Fischer World Champion! (3rd ed.), New in Chess, ISBN 978-90-5691-563-5 
• Larry Evans and Ken Smith (1973). Chess World Championship 1972: Fischer vs. Spassky. Simon & Schuster ISBN 0-671-21546-9.
• Svetozar Gligorić, Fischer vs. Spassky – The Chess Match of the Century, Simon and Schuster, 1972, ISBN 978-0-671-21397-8
• Karpov, Anatoly (1990), Karpov on Karpov: Memoirs of a chess world champion, Liberty Publishing, ISBN 0-689-12060-5 
• Kasparov, Garry (2004a), My Great Predecessors, part III, Everyman Chess, ISBN 1-85744-371-3 
• Kasparov, Garry (2004b), My Great Predecessors, part IV, Everyman Chess, ISBN 1-85744-395-0 
• Kažić, B.M. (1974), International Championship Chess: A Complete Record of FIDE Events, Pitman, ISBN 0-273-07078-9 
• William Lombardy, The Fischer story - A mystery wrapped in an enigma
• Mednis, Edmar (1997), How to Beat Bobby Fischer, Dover, ISBN 0-486-29844-2 
• Plisetsky, Dimitry; Voronkov, Sergey (2005), Russians versus Fischer, Everyman Chess, ISBN 1-85744-380-2 
• Richard Roberts, Harold C. Schonberg, Al Horowitz and Samuel Reshevsky, Fischer/Spassky: The New York Times Report on the Chess Match of the Century, Bantam Books, 1972.
• Soltis, Andy (2003), Bobby Fischer Rediscovered, Batsford, ISBN 978-0-7134-8846-3 
• Steiner, George (1974), Fields of Force: Fischer and Spassky at Reykjavik, Viking Press 

External links

• Match games in PGN format, and a javascript interface
• Match games available with a pgn chessviewer on internet on the chessgames.com website
• Brief comments by Bobby Fischer on the upcoming 1972 Match Video Clip
• Fischer vs Spassky Documentary BBC Documentary
• Spassky vs Fischer 1972, Video Clips with expert commentary: Game 3, Game 5, Game 6, Game 8, Game 10, Game 11, Game 13