Chess 475
PHILIDOR
Prof. J. Haluinbirek (1st Prize, Sehachblinter, 1963). White to play and mate in three moves; solution next week.
Solution to No. 474 (Benedek: 16/4p3/4P1B1/ 3R2N1/4N1P1 /2BrkIK I/I R6). Kt-Q5 threats Kt- 134, Kt-B3. R-K5 or R x R. I R x B; 2 Kt-B4. I . . . R x R: 2 Kt-B3. 1 . . R-Q8; 2 R-K5. 1 ...PxKt; 2 RxRandl ...R-Q6; 2 BxR.An excellent example of threat separation. where four of Black's.possible moves each allow one and only one of the four threatened mates—and the fifth move stops all four threats and introduces a new mate.
Petrosian and Spassky
I can warmly recommend The 1969 World Chess Championship Match by P. H. Clarke (British Chess Magazine Ltd, 9, Market Street, St. Leon- ards-on-Sea, Sussex; 8s 6d) for a number of reasons. First, it was a very good match—hard-fought, fluctuating, conducted with great determination by both players throughout and with each player winning games in different and characteristic style. Next, the games are very well annotated; Clarke is a thorough, experienced and expert analyst and he had access to a wide range of comments of which he has taken full advantage without losing his own lucid and characteristic style. Finally there are very interesting interviews with Petrosian (before and after the match) and with Spassky (after his victory).
In the interviews with the players, the import- ance of physical and psychological (as well as technical) preparation is made abundantly clear. Petrosian, for instance, in reply to a question on who helped him in his preparation: 'Often the names of such assistants are kept secret . . . For names mean views and they influence the approach the future contender takes to the struggle. It also works the other way ... By observing the . .. ideas which your opponent demonstrates over the board it is possible to guess who is helping him. . . . In 1966. Spassky's adherence at the end of the match to systems with an early thrust P-QKt4 was enough to give away Smyslov.'
Or Spassky on his general strategy: ' .. to play in a strict, classical manner. Why? Together with Bondarevsky and Krogius, I came to the con- clusion that the World Champion, for all his great positional mastery, was not a player of a strict. classical profile. His style, directed towards limiting the opponent's possibilities, is unique and, particularly in match play, extraordinarily effective ... All the same, his unsurpassed skill at manoeuv- ring and tacking is sometimes dictated not only by the requirements of the position but rather by prophylactic tasks.' To try to interpret this, what Petrosian likes is a difficult position in which there is no need to take the initiative quickly; he then gradually deprives his opponent of any positive chances of his own—a state in which a collapse is very likely to occur. Spassky's counter was to aim at a simpler type of position—more open— in which positive. rather than constrictive. action was required: such positions, though objectively easier and less deep. were psychologically harder for Pctrosian.
Above all one gets an overwhelming impression of the strain of a match at this level, lasting for over two months. Let the players speak: first
Spasskv: • of decisive significance in such a pro- longed competition is the ability to maintain one's fighting mood, to maintain the desire and willing-
ness to fight to the last move of the last game'; and Petrosian: . I shall play in tournaments, with one condition—when 1 have overcome the physical and nervous exhaustion caused by this match' By his fine performance at Palma, scoring 111/17 without defeat, he has just shown that he has now done this; it is Spassky, fifth with 10/17 (3 wins, 14 draws) who is showing signs that the burden of the crown is weighing heavily on him
Previous page
