Botvinnik-Bronstein, 1951 World Championship Match- 4 Bronstein Victories with Black
Throughout the last 100 years of modern chess, there is an overarching feeling that having the White pieces is a slight advantage. Players from many generations follow a simple formula for tournament success: Draw with Black, go for a win with White. Even Carlsen has pointed out to that strategy when discussing his plans to win elite tournaments: draw with Black, go for the win with White.
World Championship 1951 Score-line:
As many of you know, Bronstein is my favorite player. His game are rich in content; his chess culture is wide and deep. The strategic and tactical content of his games is both illumining and entertaining. He has said that his goal in playing Botvinnik for the World Championship was to prove that Botvinnik was not unbeatable; that Botvinnik's strategy was NOT foolproof!
In the course of the 1951 World Championship Match against Botvinnik, Bronstein had 5 victories, out of which 4 were with the Black pieces! How unlikely is this, specially against Botvinnik?
Yet this is exactly what happened! Today we will take a look at games 17 and 11 of this match.
(Game 11 with commentaries courtesy of Simaginfan)
Yet in the 1951 World Championship Match against Botvinnik, of his four victories with Black, two were with the Nimzo-Indian Defense, one was with the Queen's Indian Defense, and one with the King's Indian Defense. In his victories with the Nimzo-Indian Defense and the Queen's Indian Defense, Bronstein was able to outplay Botvinnik in positional play. From this standpoint, Bronstein succeeded in demonstrating that Botvinnik's strategy was NOT foolproof!
Now, if you read my posts, you will have noticed a common theme in them: I love to find common themes in different openings, or in different players from different eras.
Examining the 17th game, a Nimzo-Indian Defense, I found parallel positional themes to Petrosian's Variation in the French Winawer.....
Petrosian's Variation in the French Winawer has some characteristic traits; Black plays ...b6, ...Qd7 and ...Ba6, to exchange the white-squared bishops, and thus remain with the "good" bishop for Black and the "bad" bishop for White. White's pawn on e5 blocks the main, long diagonal in the dark-squares, thus making White's bishop a strategically inferior piece. Here is an example:
Now, let us look at game 17 from the Botvinnik-Bronstein 1951 WC Match:
Do you see the similarity? Bronstein, with his "crazy" opening, has been able to achieve a strategically superior position!
OK, let us take a closer look at this game.
I hope that this game inspires players to look more closely at both Petrosian's and Bronstein's games.
Petrosian quote about Bronstein:
"The younger generation of players think that modern chess began with such things as the Informator, but players of my generation know that it started with Bronstein!"
February 27, 2021- Addendum:
who has agreed to provide comments to another of Bronstein's wins with Black in this match, a game in which Bronstein played the Queen's Indian Defense against Botvinnik, challenging him in positional play, and outplaying him also! So here we go!
