Russians versus Fischer:Part VII
Submitted by
chessbibliophile on Sun, 10/18/2009 at 8:08pm.
Russians versus Fischer
by Dmitri Plisetsky and Sergey Voronkov
Hardcover, 462 pages
Everyman Chess.2005
http://www.everymanchess.com/
Boris Spassky enjoyed the indulgence of authorities not only because he was the world champion. He had a perfect score against Bobby ( +3 =2 -0). On record he was their best bet against the American. Boris knew it and expressed himself freely. During the post mortem on Taimanov’s defeat he cynically asked, “When we all lose to Fischer, will all of us be dragged on the carpet?” He knew how to pull strings with authorities. He demanded and got whatever he wanted from them. He was awarded a raise in salary- to 500 roubles a month the same as a Soviet minister. His family was settled into a new, plush, four-room apartment in the elite diplomatic quarter.For his own preparation he was offered a luxurious dacha near Moscow. When the work began he had both his trainer Bondarevesky and colleague, Geller with him. Bondarevesky had been a father figure to Boris, having helped in his ascent to the world championship. But Boris did not want him any more.His excuse was that Bondarevsky’s understanding of theory and praxis was out of date. He wanted only Geller to continue.Retaining Geller made sense to authorities. As mentioned before,he had beaten Fischer thrice in a row in the past and also happened to be an expert on theory.He knew Fischer's opening systems like the palm of his hand. But the authorities would have liked Bondarevesky to continue.In the end the old man himself said no.His protege had changed after becoming the world champion.He had no moral authority over him.Inwardly, Bondarevesky knew it was a lost cause, considering Spassky's casual attitude.So he departed. Now there were Geller, Krogius and Nei who formed Spassky's team.Krogius was a psychologist, and Nei, Spassky’s tennis partner. Neither had much to offer by way of opening expertise. That had to come from Geller.But Spassky did not want to work.Averbakh was sent to check how Spassky’s training was proceeding.This is what he saw.
Averbakh: “Spassky was sitting with Geller and Krogius.On the table there were cards and dominoes, and when it was time for lunch, Spassky pulled out a bottle of whisky.Everything became apparent immediately.”
Karpov was very young at that time.When he was asked by the authorities to play a training match with Spassky he felt it was a great honour.He imagined that the training camp was some kind of mysterious and sacred altar.What he saw disillusioned him.
Karpov: “I was amazed to observe that Spassky was doing nothing….over breakfast he would relate another episode from Greek myths he very much liked.Then there would be tennis.Then something else.He would time for anything as long as it wasn’t chess.At that time he was advocating the theory of the clear head.He thought that he would have a clear head,his strength would be fresh,and with his talent he would outplay any one.I also consider myself to be lazy, but the scale of Spassky’s laziness staggered me…”
*In contrast Bobby was dedication personified.He was already in seclusion at Grossinger's Resort in the Catskills.The preparation was meticulous.Robert Wade, a well-known expert on Soviet chess had sent him a dossier of over 1000 games of Spassky.It included not only known games but also others from minor tournaments in obscure places of the USSR.This dossier, bound in red velvet, became the constant companion of Bobby.At Grossinger's, he would take his meals in the dining room accompanied only by the dossier.If he ventured out, he would take it with him.Only one or two confidantes like Larry Evans had the privilege of analyzing Spassky’s games with him.Esentially he worked alone.Evans explained to the New York Times: “I probably have more influence on him than anybody else, and that’s exactly zero.”
The Soviet authorities did not come to know anything of Bobby's preparation.But they did ask the opinion of leading grandmasters who had been his rivals before.They gave detailed analysis of his play, all of which may be found in this book.Their opinions offer valuable insights into opening theory that can be used by any player.Among them only Korchnoi predicted that Bobby would change his opening repertoire and play 1.d4 or try defences like the Alekhine's.It was all wasted on Spassky.The final encounter justified the forebodings of both the authorities and the public in the Soviet Union.Spassky was found wanting at all the critical moments of the match.* Much has been written about this world championship, especially, the ending of the first game that Bobby lost.
In the game Bobby missed a problem-like draw on his 39th move just before the adjournment.When Botvinnik tried to demonstrate the draw, he tripped up, and was corrected by the Dutch grandmaster, Lodewijk Prins.In a fascinating article in New in Chess Magazine(2008/3) Jan Timman showed how he, Olafsson and Kasparov also tripped up in their analysis trying to demonstrate a win with 36.Kg4 in stead of 36.a4 played in the game. It was only the British grandmaster,Jonathan Speelman who found the right way to draw for Black in this line.Truely, a comedy of errors! Both the lines of analysis are so wonderfully "simple" that you begin to imagine you can always draw an ending, a whole piece down.Of course not!
To be continued
For more on the Match,you may see the link here:
http://www.chessville.com/reviews/FischerWorldChampion.htm
| 1593 reads | 9 comments |
3 votes: