16 JUNE 1979, Page 29

Brothers

David Levy

One would hardly think it credible that chess players could or would form themselves into a trade union but that is exactly what happened in the US a little over a year ago. Calling themselves the Professional Chess Association, many of America's leading Masters and Grandmasters decided to campaign in unison for a better deal. What they hoped to achieve was not quite clear but one of their aims was to raise the standing of chess as a profession, i.e. to reap greater financial rewards for their toils.

Within a few months of its inception the PCA struck its first (and hitherto only) important blow. When the 1978 US Championship was announced for Santa Monica, the PCA informed the US Chess Federation that its members would boycott the event unless the appearance fees and prize fund were substantially increased. The Federation acquiesced and added $10,000 which was not as much as the PCA had hoped for but at least it was a start. Since then little has happened within professional chess circles in the US, apart from the fact that the PCA's President married the bulletin editor's girl friend, and recent months have seen the organisation slip into a moribund state.

Whether it be for better or for worse, I cannot see any hope of a similar association being set up in Britain. Our leading players regularly boycott the British Championship because the financial conditions are painfully insufficient to attract the top professionals, and here we consider it necessary to charge our players an entry fee for the event, rather than pay appearance fees to the Grandmasters and Masters. Most British players show little or no concern for raising professional standards in this country, though one must commend Tony Miles who has done something to help the professional cause. In 1977 he refused to play in the English team at the European Championship finals in Moscow because it would have meant turning down a lucrative invitation to a tournament in Brazil, and Tony is one who understands that the glory of representing one's country cannot be used to pay the mortgage. His action was publicised in various parts of the chess press (often critically), and last year the English Olympiad team received a certain measure of financial support in the form of appearance fees. It seems that Tony's one-man 'strike' has benefited not only himself but also a number of his colleagues.

Miles's achievement is symptomatic of the professional chess scene as a whole. The few professional players who make what I would describe as a good living create their own opportunities rather than work for them within the framework of some sort of union. Bent Larsen, one of the most successful, refuses all tournament invitations unless the appearance fee meets his requirements, while other Grandmasters are less demanding and permit tournament organisers to get off rather lightly, to their own financial detriment.

Even in the US there are very few players who can be proud of their life-style. One who can is Walter Browne, who won his national championship in 1975, 1976 and 1977. Entirely through his own efforts Walter lives in a delightful house in Berkeley, complete with a waterfall in the garden, and any young player who wishes to devote his life to chess would do well to make Browne his professional idol, provided he is not afraid of hard work. Browne is always on the lookout for a rewarding opportunity and it is amazing how many come his way. His latest venture, announced last week, is a short match with Karpov. The world champion will take black in every game and will receive a fee of $50,000. Browne's share of the loot will depend on how much sponsorship he can locate.

The idea of a contest between two unevenly matched players is hardly new. During the 19th century matches at odds were very much in vogue, but nowadays events of this kind are almost unheard of. Grandmaster technique is so very much more advanced than it was a hundred years ago that to give odds of a pawn or more would be foolhardy, even for Fischer or Karpov. Taking Black is a sensible way of making the match a more even contest, though in this particular instance I would still put my money on Karpov. This is what happened when they first met. The notes are based on those by Karpov in the tournament book.

Karpov-Browne, San Antonio 1972: English Opening. 1 P-QB4 P-Q84 2 P-QN3 N-KB3 3 B-N2 p-KN3 4 BxN An interesting idea. White sacrifices the bishop pair in return for complete control of Q5. 4. . . PxB 5 N-QB3 B-N2 6 P-N3 N-B3 7 B-N2 P-B4 8 P-K3 0-09 KN-K2 P-QR3 10 QR-B1 P-QN4 11 P-Q3 11 PxP PxP 12 NxP RxP 13 RAP would have been dangerous on account of 13 . . . Q-R4 14 N(5)-B3 RxP! 11 . . B-N2 12 0-0 P-Q3 13 Q-Q2 Q-R4 14 KR-Q1 QR-N1 15 N-Q5 QxQ 16 RxQ P-N5 17 P-Q4 KR-Q1 18 R(1)-Q1?! White would maintain an overwhelming advantage after 18 PxP PxP 19 R(1)-01, threatening 20 N-K7ch. 18. . . PxP 19PxP K-B1 20 P-85? After this move most of White's advantage is dissipated. 20 N-K3 was simpler. 20 . . . N-R2! Aiming for . . . 0N4 and . . . 0B6. 21 N-K3 BxB 22 KxB PxP 23 PxP RxR 24 RxR R-B1 25 N-Q5 RxP 26 NxP P-QR4 27 N-Q5 R-B3? 27 . . . N-B3 was more accurate but Browne, as usual, was in severe time pressure. 28 N-K3 R-B4 29 N-KB4 B-R330 R-Q5 RxR 31 N(4)xR BxN? Again Black should play . . . N-B3. Now white has real winning chances for the second time in the game. 32 NxB K-K2 33 N-B4 N-B3 34 K-B3 K-K3 35 K-K3 K-04 36 P-OR3 K-K3 37 K-Q3 K-Q4 38 P-B3 P-R3 39 K-B3 P-R4 40 K-Q3 P-B3 41 P-B4! Black should play. . N-B3. Now White has real 0B4 due to 42 NxP and his knight cannot leave the defence of the QRP. 41 . . . P-N4 42 N-K3ch K-K3 43 P-KR4 PxRP 44 PxP N-K2 45 K-B4 N-N3 46 N-N2 K-Q3 47 K-N5 K-Q4 48 KxP K-K5 49 P-N4 K-B6 50 P-N5 KxN 51 P-N6 N-B! 52 K-N5 N-Q2 53 P-R4 NxP 54 KxN K-B6 55 P-R5 KxP 56 P-R6 K-K6 57 P-R7 P-B5 58 P-R8= Q P-B6 59 Q-K8ch Black resigns.