chessmountain, Spassky was describing playing Petrosian in 1966 as part of his learning process. He had already recognized that Botvinnik was learning and preparing in his first matches with his opponents. Botvinnik only won his championship matches two times - both rematches. Winning a rematch in 1969, required dedication for Spassky. After that, his motivation was reduced. In 1972, Fischer won the title and my impression, despite Fischer's claims that he would be champion for 15 years, was that he had achieved his goal and be at a loss to sustain his drive. Notice that Botvinnik was 18 years older than Petrosian, and of course older than his other challengers. In fact, Petrosian lost his title at the age of 40 while Botvinnik faced all his challengers starting at that age.

Petrosian,is one of the hardest player to beat in a match on his heyday.Even the great Botvinik,could not beat him.Spassky on the interview,sometimes in 1966.He said,if he lose to Petrosian then,he will still be the challenger in 1969 and will beat Petrosian and then he will lose in crown in 1972.Because he already achieve his dream to become aworld champion.He admitted,he is like a russian lazy bear..He lose in 1966,but then he beat him in 1969.It only shows during that time,Spassky knew he is the strongest player between 1967-70.

diogens, yes, the Scheveningen and the Najdorf are related and either variation can be reached with the same moves as in the game. In the Najdorf, Black plays 5...a6 an in the Scheveningen, Black plays 5...e6. In either variation, both moves are usually played. A Kasparov book on the Najdorf dealt with playing it Scheveningen style. This meant Black plays e6 rather than e5 (for example, against 6.Be2). If White plays the English Attack, it can be used against either Black variation.

But most often black plays e6-Be7 (specially after 6.Bg5). So I believe that Najdorf variation and Scheveningen variation overlap quite a bit, no?

Tks. for your prompt and clear answer NM GreenLaser.

what a really great game

diogens, the bishop on f8 usually develops to e7 in the Najdorf. However, the Najdorf Variation is classified in the ECO code as B90-99. This covers many games in which the usual was deviated from. In the game shown, after 7.Bc4, Black played Qa5. Black has also played 7...e6, 7...g6, and 7...h6. Playing ...g6 allows Black to play Bg7, but does not guarantee it. g6 protects f5 and although Bg7 followed by 0-0 seems normal after g6, Black is still allowed to play 0-0-0 with the bishop on f8. In some other positions after White plays Bg5 and Bxf6, Black may hope to play Bh6 (particularly if White has played 0-0-0).

Here are a few other examples that include the move g6 (or g5) for Black after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6:

6.a4 g6

6.Be3 Ng4 7.Bg5 h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Bg3 Bg7

6.f4 Nbd7 7.Bd3 g6; 7.a4 g6; 7.Be2 g6

6.f4 g6

I have a technical question for you, NM GreenLaser. In the Najdorf, black DSB always developes via e6-Be7 or are they other typical ways of developing it?

mf92, thanks for the line. Notice that in the notes is " ( 10... e5 11. Nf5 Bxf5 12. exf5 Rc8 13. Bb3 Be7 ) was preferred by Geller to the game continuation." Comparing your line with Geller's shows that 13.Bb3 is better than 13.Kb1.

Always enjoy your articles NM Greenlaser

Great game, thanks for posting it!

Educational. Improves my game.

very gud game

This is another version of Achilles v. Ajax

@GreenLaser - Yes I've seen this image on a few chess books...seems to be a good 'stock' photo when publishing a new version. The book I have it on is my copy of My System.

The icon used by Chess_Patzer is supposed to be Achilles and Ajax playing a board game as shown on an amphora in a museum. It is very similar to the image used by Dr. E. Wildhagen, the publisher of Weltgeschichte des Schachs in Hamburg, in his books. Those books had the games of various players and World Championship matches.

I like the way White played 13 g4...sacrificing a pawn then eventually opening up the g-file with the Queen and Rook plus the pushed of pawn at e5! Afterwhich, combinations are all coming!

Thanks for the info Greenlaser. @flashboy2222 - yes, that would be called the Chekhover variation. You don't see it played a lot on the GM level, but is quite popular elsewhere. In one database I looked it was the second most popular move after the typical Nxd4.

has anyone done anything about 4. Qxd4?

For those discussing 13.Bb3: The moves Kb1 and Bb3 are often played in this variation. They do not appear to be active moves, but are prophylactic. If 13.Kb1, Black has 13...b5 and if 14.Bb3 b4 15.Nce2 Nxe4. Instead White has 14.Nc6 or 14.Nd5 (because 14...Qxd2 is not check) which do not lose a pawn, but Black has some more activity than in the game. After White's actual move 13.Bb3, if Black plays 13...b5, then 14.Nc6 Qc7 15.Nxe7+ Qxe7 16.e5 is good for White. In the game, Black played 13...Re8 defending e7. Then White's 14.Kb1 prevented a Black Qxd2 from being a check if the knight on c3 were to move. White got to play Bb3 and Kb1 versus Black's Re8 and Bf8 and then White played g4. That is not to say there were not other possibilities, as some are in the notes, but this is what happened.