Help! I'm going to play Boris Spassky

That depends on who you include in the "chess community". With a reasonable definition of that, say, the people who take the game seriously (based on their own admission), it's probably pretty hard, but not VERY hard. Most people won't do it anyway, because the payoff is low compared how much time you have to put into it.

Chess community = everyone who plays chess as a hobby.  Also saying that 10% of this community would not find it very hard to hold an even position against a GM for 20 moves is being very generous.

It's not that hard if you play either a highly theoretical line or play something solid like a QGD.

Never said that. Of course Spassky will play subtle and good moves, and of course he can beat very strong GMs. I never ever ever even hinted that his chances were remotely good. I said that his chances are better than against other openings. There's a reason that Spassky very rarely played the KG (32 games out of 1,100 whites in the DB I just checked); it's very effective as a surprise weapon, but prepared opponents generally do pretty well against it.

What line do you think would give him better drawing chances?

Just get out there and kick his ass!

Just jump one of those horsey peices into his camp and have it lay a big nasty fart and poop at the king's feet.  As he chokes on the fumes he will lose on time.  Damn folks, it's really so simple.

Seriously...do some study...but show up...shake hands and do your best.  And have fun. 

I'll believe it when I see it.

The GM doesn't have to play into a theory heavy line that you know well.

I think that all lines give him equally bad drawing chances.

Why aren't more people recomending the CK? It's the perfect drawing opening if that's what you want. And don't go into the KG, it's too dangerous since spassky has never lost with it. I'd predict black to have 20% drawing chances. Although theory isn't ultra important in the CK, I think that would help more than as black in the king's gambit because the best caro kann lines are probably ones where it's equal with few imbalances.

Wow, first off, congratulations... You have the oppurtunity to play one of the more powerful chess players in the modern era. From my stand point i would look at this wonderful oppurtunity as an honor. Remember this, You are going to be playing one of the most amazing chess players. If you do not achieve a draw like you are hoping dont worry. I mean, honestly, how many people can say that they went head to head with Mr. Spassky. Take it seriously but not too seriously. Dont forget to enjoy yourself and have fun. Just do the best you can...

Of course as good as drawing against a GM is, winning against a GM is like 25 times better. Because then you can say you didn't have to play passive moves and hope he didn't destroy you. So I wouldn't even be that proud of a draw unless I could do it consistently.

The poster seemed extremely content with a draw. Instead of studying the KG, imagine if he put all of that time into the caro kann. He would be ultra prepared in his ultra defensive lines so that is his best way to draw in my opinion. 20% may be too much, but this much effort for a draw has to count for something. If he plays against the KG, he's like 99% lost (especially since it plays directly into his strengths where he might not even make it to move 20!), not that it's not great to play spassky, but he wants the draw. Studying the CK for hours (yeah I know it seems weird, but this would hope to neutralize white's play) seems to be his best shot. I think we're all biased towards our style, but cmon ck is definitley the way to go for draw at all costs. Personally I would play a more involved opening than that like my french which will still probably lose, but it should be a great game and it will probably do better than 1 ...e5.

Unless you're already a Caro-Kann player, it's probably not best to make your debut with it against a former World Champion... he's going to be *slightly* more familiar with it than you.

I'd suggest just planning to play your best defense to e4.  It's not hard to find Spassky games, so you should have plenty of opportunity to figure out what lines he's likely to play.  You will almost certainly still lose, but at least you went into it with your best foot forward, which is going to be the most fun anyway.

His choices are to play something sharp (it'll probably be more fun) and definitley lose or play something ultra solid and decreases that chance. But how could the king's gambit be better for him to play? I mean Spassky has had these brilliant defeats against GMs.

He's not going to decrease the chance of losing by playing a "solid" opening.

I agree - I think a solid opening is even infinitesimally slightly more likely to lose, just perhaps not as quickly and most probably less spectacularly and less enjoyably.

Yes he is. In the KG he will get completely wiped out but in the caro kann his position is still stable. The King's gambit is sharp but for black isn't it rather defensive except for the fact that you already have an extra pawn and can give it away and take advanatge of white's king or hold for dear life? But if he 'gets lucky' here at the very most he would have an extra doubled pawn against spassky but not win a piece or something since it's white who gets more tactics in this particular opening. I've come close to drawing other GM's with solid defenses but I admit it certainly is boring especially if you don't have a plan. But still I came pretty close. He's got to play well of course but spassky better tactics will be too obvious compared to slow strategy. Now I know the chances of draw are still quite low, but even the positional masters like karpov can't always convert their positional advantages but rarely lose. And spassky isn't one of those, so it's not like you only got a 1% shot with an opening that's tough to crack. I guess I have to get more experience in these simuls but I can't imagine a sharp opening not being taken advantage of by GM's easily. I got crushed by christiansen once because he played a gambit and I think that's their strategy. I'll just have to find out for myself though playing for draws aren't exactly fun.

It's just really hard for me to understand how  the ck isn't the best choice when you don't even know if white's won till move 30. Especially since Spassky is a King's gambit wizard. Can someone explain this?

Though I think solid is the way to go, it would be pretty annoying to get crushed slowly but surely. That's not very enjoyable and all you get is a tiny chance for draw! He probably should just have fun because he will suffer if he plays solid. In simuls I'll pick solid then sharp. I'll see what happens. And if it's a simul, it'll probably take spassky the most amount of time to come up with a winning plan. lol what if everybody played the ck at the simul? From my experience, without a doubt it's hardest to play positionally with lower time controls. I'm always in time pressure this way.

If Spassky plays 1.e4, I would go with the Caro-Kann Bronstein-Larsen where he has traditionally had trouble: 1...c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 de 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gf looking particularly at Larsen and Hodgson's wins against him from 1979.  Faced with Alekhine's Defence, Spassky tends to play the four pawns attack, so this is another area where you could book up.

If Spassky goes with 1.d4, the Queen's Gambit Accepted is probably your best bet. 1...d5 2.c4 dc.  Just follow the main line 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 taking a close look at Fischer's draw with him from the 1992 match.

Clearly spassky can crush anyone with the king's gambit.

 If I stand the exact same chance of losing, then my gut feeling is to go with 1...e5. If he plays the KG I'll have studied it a wee bit before hand. You never know, he might play the 'Ruy Lopez'. I think I can get to move 10 in most of the main lines in it without a compromise.

Question: What about losing? Someone like me mightened know when it's all over? Do you keep playing until it looks hopeless to yourself?