Korchnoi chess is my life

Few grandmasters have played more games than Korchnoi - I find in Chessbase Mega 2016 more than 5000 games. The database consists of about 5 million registered games so Korchnoi was in 1/1000 involved and probably in 1/200 as participant/ spectator in a tournament. If we look to only grandmastergames then the footprint of Korchnoi is even many times bigger.

He played against Levenfish (°1889) and against Carlsen (°1990), he won against all the worldchampions from Botvinnik till Kasparov at least one game - against Tal he had an enormous plusscore, however against Karpov he had a terrible minusscore. He lived to play chess, with an intensity which can't be found by other grandmasters. His gruffness, his stubbornness, his hate against the Sovjet-Union, his youth in the heavily besieged and famished Leningrad during WWII, his unexpected explosions but also his unexpected humor, his clear analysis on and off the board, his anecdotes from his excellent memory. We shall miss it. One of the greatest players has died and just like the recently deceased Mohammed Ali or Johan Cruijff, we should be happy to have them still seen at work during our lives.

I met Korchnoi twice live - this was during the Lost Boys tournament in Antwerp 1995 (won by Novikov and Sokolov ; Korchnoi was shared third with 5 other players.). The first time was the most memorable. He played in the third round a game against the strong Dutch Teun Van der Vorm and I was just watching at his board together with 5 other spectators when Van der Vorm resigned. Korchnoi didn't look happy and it quickly became clear why: ‘If I come up to the board, you should stand up to shake my hand. Not because I’m a grandmaster – also for that – but because I’m older and out of respect for my age you should stand up.’ Van der Vorm kept his mouth wisely but Victor the Terrible continued. ‘You play this game against my French and then you deviate from a game of Fischer. Why do you do that – do you think you’re better than Fischer ?’ Van der Vorm stammered something like ‘it looked playable’ but Korchnoi was not in the mood for jokes so there was no analysis afterwards. The fact that I can still easily remember this, just shows which impression it made upon me - and probably even more on Van der Vorm.

The second time was less impressive, in the center of Antwerp, during the same tournament. I was waiting -together with Franky D- at the crossroad of the Huidevetterstraat and the Meir for the trafficlights, when I noticed Korchnoi on the other side. I crossed the road but was too shied to start a conversation so just mumbled ‘good evening Mr Korchnoi’.  I think he did hear something. Franky waited for him to start a short conversation with him. Pity that smartphones didn't exist at that time.

On twitter a nice reaction of Svidler was posted, in which he stated than an insult by Korchnoi was a kind of honour (this remembered me Donner, as Dutch players you only played a role when Donner noticed you and ... scoffed at you - ‘Krabbé ? A cycler!’) – and if he became angry, then it was because you got him agitated. Noting more could annoy him than a lack of respect or a loss. Svidler won their first mutual game because Korchnoi kept playing for a win despite the equalizing play of Svidler, but Korchnoi destroyed him in their second game. He thought for an hour upon a forced continuation - Svider couldn't find the win for Korchnoi, but after that hour of reflection he was defeated quickly in a strong sequence of moves. When Svidler congratulated him after the game with the words « I always appreciate a well played game, even against me» Korchnoi relaxed. Both games are really nice to be replayed.

As metioned on Chessbase, his wife Petra stays behind alone – a soulmate, as she also experienced the black side of the communisme. When she met him the first time, she knew that they were matching - Korchnoi needed her, first as a secretary, later as wife and anchor. Korchnoi lived only for chess and that is literally. He didn't read romans or other books, he seldom or never went to cultural or sportive happenings. His biggest pleasure -after giving up smoking - was to enjoy a good piece of chocolate. He regretted the gap of culture; e.g he never read the Russian classical authors but his choice was made: everything for chess - no compromise.

I have one book of Korchnoi (PracticalRook Endgames) – the endgames are very deeply analyzed (Hubners style) but are very instructive. Somebody interested in how world-classplayers analyze - recommended (see e.g. chessgames or chesscafe for a review), even if it was only for the excellent introduction to elementary rookendgames.

Did Korchnoi play impressive games to be stored as heritage? Yes Any wins of Korchnoi in collections of best played or most memorable games? No In the little book « Legendäre Schachpartien » of Humboldt, there are more than 100 memorable games. 2 of them are losses by Korchnoi, no wins are included. If we compare then Tal is mentioned 6 times, Kasparov 8 times. Also in other collections we see very few wins of Korchnoi ( in Bouwmeesters 100 brilliant games there are surprisingly still 2: Korchnoi-Udovcic, Leningrad 1967, in which he has to fight against his French defense and the latte middlegame of Korchnoi-Yusupov, Rotterdam 1988). Korchnoi was not brilliant, he liked defending and counterattack, but as Spassky sneakily formulated: « He can play anything, from attack to defense, from complex middlegames to technical endgames. He masters his openingtheory and posses an unbelievable strength to work. It is only a pity that he didn't have the talent to become worldchampion. » That hits the nail on its head. Just like Kamsky years later, Korchnoi also missed that last sparkel of creativity, dare, talent, luck, readiness to take risks, ingeniousness, - call it like you want - to jump over the last hurdle. Often he introduced a novelty on the board, which already was tried 50 years ago, because ‘everything that is forgotten is new (again)’.

My personal selection of Korchnoi games is therefore Van der Vorm – Korchnoi (Fischer-Darga).

[Event "op Antwerp BEL"] [Site "op Antwerp BEL"] [Date "1995"] [Round "3"] [Result "0-1"] [White "Teun van der Vorm"] [Black "Viktor Korchnoi"] [ECO "C19"] [WhiteElo "?"] [BlackElo "?"] [PlyCount "134"] 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3 6. bxc3 Qc7 7. Nf3 Ne7 8. a4 b6 9. Bb5 Bd7 10. Bd3 Nbc6 11. O-O c4 12. Be2 f6 13. Re1 {(In 1960 Fischer played Ba3 in his game against Darga.)}O-O-O 14. Ba3 Be8 15. Bf1 Qd7 16. exf6 gxf6 17. Qe2 Bf7 18. g3 Nf5 19. Bh3 Rde8 20. Qd2 Bg6 21. Qf4 Qc7 22. Qxc7 Kxc7 23. Re2 Bh5 24. Bxf5 exf5 25. Rxe8 Rxe8 26. Re1 Rxe1 27. Nxe1 a5 28. f3 Na7 29. Kf2 b5 30. Ng2 bxa4 31. Ne3 Nb5 32. Bb2 a3 33. Ba1 Kc6 34. Nxf5 Nc7 35. Ne3 Ne6 36. g4 Bg6 37. Kg3 Ng7 38. f4 Be4 39. f5 h6 40. Kf4 Bh1 41. h4 Kd6 42. h5 Ne8 43. Kg3 Be4 44. Kf2 Kc6 45. Ke2 Nd6 46. Kf2 Nf7 47. Ke2 Ng5 48. Kf2 Kb5 49. Ke2 Nh3 50. Kf1 Bf3 51. Ke1 Kc6 52. Kf1 Bh1 53. Ke2 Ng5 54. Ke1 Ne4 55. Ke2 a2 56. Bb2 Nd6 57. Kf2 Be4 58. Ke2 Nb5 59. Ba1 a4 60. Bb2 Na3 61. g5 a1=Q 62. Bxa1 fxg5 63. f6 Kd7 64. Ng4 Nxc2 65. Nxh6 Nxa1 66. Nf7 Bd3 67. Kf3 Ke6 0-1

and Karpov-Korchnoi from the tournament of Dortmund 1994, in which they both scored 50%.

[Event "Dortmund, Cat.16"] [Site "Dortmund, Cat.16"] [Date "1994.07.22"] [Round "7"] [Result "0-1"] [White "Anatoly Karpov"] [Black "Viktor Korchnoi"] [ECO "E12"] [WhiteElo "2780"] [BlackElo "2615"] [PlyCount "144"] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.a3 Bb7 5.Nc3 d5 6.Bg5 Be7 7.Qa4 c6 8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.cxd5 exd5 10.g3 O-O 11.Bg2 Nd7 12.O-O Be7 13.Rfd1 f5 14.e3 Bd6 15.Ne2 Qe7 16.Nf4 a5 17.Nd3 b5 18.Qc2 a4 19.Re1 Kh8 20.Rac1 Nb6 21.Nfe5 Nc4 22.f4 g5 23.Qe2 Rg8 24.Kf2 Raf8 25.Nf3 h6 26.Nfe5 Kh7 27.Kg1 Qe8 28.Qc2 Kh8 29.Nf2 Rg7 30.Re2 Bc8 31.Rce1 Rfg8 32.Nxc4 bxc4 33.Qxa4 Rb7 34.Nd1 h5 35.Kf2 Bd7 36.Qc2 Qg6 37.Kf1 h4 38.Rf2 g4 39.Kg1 Rgb8 40.Qe2 h3 41.Bf1 Bc7 42.b4 cxb3 43.Nb2 Bd6 44.a4 Qe6 45.Rd1 Ra7 46.Rd3 Kh7 47.Qd1 c5 48.Rxb3 Rxb3 49.Qxb3 c4 50.Qb6 Ra8 51.e4 fxe4 52.f5 Qe7 53.Nd1 Rb8 54.Qa5 Bc6 55.f6 Qe6 56.Ne3 Rb3 57.Qa7 Bb7 58.a5 Bf8 59.Rf4 Bh6 60.f7 Bxf4 61.f8=Q Bxe3 62.Kh1 Bh6 63.Qf2 Bg7 64.a6 Rf3 65.Qe1 Bxa6 66.Be2 Rf7 67.Qc5 c3 68.Qcxc3 Bxe2 69.Qxe2 Qf6 70.Qc1 Bh6 71.Qb1 Qf5 72.Kg1 Rc7 0-1

The last game was one of the rare wins of Korchnoi over Karpov. After their second worldchampionship in 1981 they still met each other 32 times. But something was broken for Korchnoi. Karpov had solved the code and became his nemesis. Of the 32 games, Karpov won 16 times (!), they made 15 draws and only once Karpov lost. But that one game must have made Korchnoi very happy for week or so. It was also a very special game: In an equal position Korchnoi permits Karpov to get a second queen, but that is immediately the losing move. Although the game still lasts more than 10 moves, Korchnoi doesn't blink anymore and wins. After the game Korchnoi commented " one way or another the board is too small for 2 queens».

HK5000

Peakrating

The strong British grandmaster Matthew Sadler doesn't really fit in today's routines of professional chess. As (sub-) worldclass-player he stopped playing in 2000 and chose a normal civilian life. Only in 2010 he found back his love for chess not by accident after his divorce. The rust quickly disappeared and today at age 42 he has a peakrating of 2670. Not surprisingly we find back this unusual career also in his style of play. Creativity and originality are omnipresent in his games. Experiments with dubious openings happen regularly. You will seldom see big theoretical battles.

A couple of months ago a new book Chess for Life was presented by this intriguing player so obviously I got curious. It wasn't an ordinary concept as by a number of interviews and analysis they explained how chess-skills develop or are maintained over the years. So it is not the usual technical book but rather an interesting psychological look at how some people keep playing strong chess.

The chapters were very varied even to such degree that it looked like a potpourri. There is much entertaining/ interesting stuff to discover but I couldn't find a common thread through the book. Unless maybe that active players consider winning still very important later in their career. Age seems not to matter really as the game is in the first place played to defeat the opponent. At the same time this also can give an explanation why so many players quit. Or winning is not so addictive anymore or it just becomes too difficult to keep on winning more games. The recently passed away legend Viktor Korchnoi was naturally the identification of an insatiable fighting spirit. I even read in 1 of the more unique obituaries on schaaksite that at the age of 73 he still hoped to increase his rating above 2650.

I was slightly disappointed to read that winning was of such importance for older players. I had hoped for other aspects of the game getting more attention in the book. Instead we get an overview of different techniques of how to stay successful in chess despite aging. Some players are even more ambitious. What can you do to make still progression and achieve a higher peakrating despite being not so young anymore?

Of course it matters a lot when we talk about a comeback or not. In the book the English FM Terry Chapman explains how he achieved at the age of 57 the FM-titel after 5 years of study. Closer we have our own even more powerful comeback of strong Jan. He achieved the IM-title at the age of 67. Also he spent an enormous amount of effort to improve his level.

Players having already a long active career, will get it of course much more difficult to find a way to increase their rating. There is not only less margin to study more but old (bad) habits are very hard to change. A recent exception is the natural Granda Zuniga (not long ago already popping up in my article extra sweet). On chess.com there was recently an article published in which he was congratulated with his new peakrating of 2699 at the age of 49. It is no surprise that in a recent interview he admit to work today in a much more structured way.

A great performance but maybe even more stunning is what our Belgian grandmaster Luc Winants achieved a few months ago. Not only he reconquered the first ranking upon young grandmasters such as Bart Michiels and Tanguy Ringoir but at the age of 53 he also managed to raise his peakrating till 2574 elo (fide). Luc pumped up his rating quietly with some solid victories. An example you can find in below technical clean game against the very experienced Russian grandmaster Vyacheslav Ikonnikov.

[Event "TCh-BEL 2015-16"] [Site "Belgium BEL"] [Date "2015.09.27"] [Round "1.1"] [White "Winants, L."] [Black "Ikonnikov, Vy"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A46"] [WhiteElo "2560"] [BlackElo "2518"] [PlyCount "75"] [EventDate "2015.09.27"] [WhiteTeam "Wirtzfeld 1"] [BlackTeam "Jean Jaures 1"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 b6 4. Bd3 Bb7 5. O-O Be7 6. c4 O-O 7. Nc3 d5 8. b3 Ne4 9. Bb2 Nd7 10. Rc1 Nxc3 11. Rxc3 Nf6 12. Qe2 a5 13. Rcc1 a4 14. c5 c6 15. b4 Nd7 16. a3 f5 17. cxb6 Qxb6 18. Rc2 Rfc8 19. Rfc1 Rc7 20. h3 Bd6 21. Ne5 Nf6 22. f3 Ne8 23. g4 fxg4 24. hxg4 Bxe5 25. dxe5 Ba6 26. Bd4 Qb7 27. Bxa6 Rxa6 28. Rc5 Rf7 29. f4 Nc7 30. Qc2 Nb5 31. Rxc6 Nxa3 32. Rc8 Rf8 33. Rxf8 Kxf8 34. Qxh7 Rc6 35. Bc5 Rxc5 36. Rxc5 Nc4 37. Rc8 Kf7 38. Qh5 1-0

Beating weaker players won't let you win many points but if you do it regularly then it still helps to improve the rating. A few years ago I didn't stand a chance in my game against Luc in the Belgian interclubs.

[Event "Interclub Wirtzfield - Deurne"] [Date "2013"] [White "Winants, L."] [Black "Brabo"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C85"] [WhiteElo "2535"] [BlackElo "2347"] [PlyCount "75"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. d3 { (Not only it was a surprise who I had to play but I also had no experience with this opening in serious games. In 1999 I once met Qe2 by Valère De Buck.)} Nd7 8. Nbd2 O-O 9. b3 {(Nc4 is more popular and I had studied that once for a game.)} Re8 { (F6 is played more often but there is nothing wrong with this move.)} 10. Bb2 f6 11. Nh4 Nc5 12. Nf5 Bxf5 $6 {(The same type of exchange as in my previous game against Sulskis Sarunas. Also here it is not very good. Correct is Bf8 with a playable position for black.)} 13. exf5 Qd7 14. Qf3 $6 {(Qg4 looks a bit more accurate.)} a5 15. a4 b6 16. Rfe1 Nb7 17. Ne4 Rad8 18. g4 Nd6 19. Kg2 Nf7 20. h4 Nd6 21. Ng3 Nf7 22. Re4 Qd5 23. Rae1 Bb4 24. Rg1 Nd6 25. Re2 b5 $6 {(It is not easy playing with black. Here I make the wrong decision to take actions on the queenside. Better is exchanging queens and black can defend.)} 26. Ne4 Nxe4 27. dxe4 Qd7 28. g5 Be7 $6 {(I lose the coordination while running low on time as Qf7 is mandatory for the defense.)} (28... Qf7 $1 29. Bc1 Rd7 30. Kh2 Kh8 31. h5 fxg5 32. Bxg5 Rf8 $5 $14) 29. Bc1 Qd4 $6 {(A desperate try to complicate which is refuted easily. Best was bxa4 although white has anyway all the cards.)} 30. Qh5 Qd7 31. Kh2 fxg5 32. hxg5 Bf8 33. g6 h6 34. Re3 Be7 35. Rd3 Bd6 36. f6 gxf6 37. g7 Re7 38. Rdg3 1-0

I don't know Luc personally so I can only guess how much he worked at chess. I am curious if he developed new techniques or adopted new methods. It is a pity that there hasn't been more publicity about this unique performance. Schaakfabriek doesn't bring much news anymore today.

Brabo

Fischer

Garry Kasparov played a huge number of fantastic games in his active career but maybe the series he published about himself and the former worldchampions will become his most important heritage. It hits me how often contemporary literature refers to these books. It looks like every serious chessplayer read the books.

The most recent one of the series which I read covered, as the title already reveals, Fischer. However Kasparov doesn't only talk about the 11th worldchampion. Reshevsky, Larsen and Najdorf are also getting their chapter which I liked very much. Unfortunately this meant that only half of the book remained for Fischer. On top Kasparov spends a considerable amount of space on Fischers weird behavior off the board which further shrinks the technical part of chess. I counted in total only 59 games of Fischer (some of them only partly).

About maybe the greatest player ever, I expected much more stuff. Was it Kasparovs ego that forbids him to praise Fischer? He surely would never admit that Fischer was stronger. After having finished the book I felt that I didn't get the right picture about Fischers strength. Besides it is not the first time that I search a supplementary book of a former-woldchampion after reading My Great Predecessors. I have read about Tal also the excellent book The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal.

About Fischer many books appeared but which one is the most appropriate for me? Naturally it depends what you want to find in a book. The book The Career and Complete Games of Fischer by Karsten Muller is doubtless the most complete collection of Fischer's games with more than 700. However the analytical part isn't very appealing as I see little difference with a database. The book My 60 memorable games door Robert Fischer is technically much better but has a big disadvantage that it stops in 1967. We all know that his best years were just after. An addition or follow-up never happened. Fischer was not anymore interested.

Being slightly lost, I consulted the biggest Fischer-expert in Belgium: Robert Schuermans. I explained him that I was searching a book with a large collection of Fischers games spanning his career but also well analyzed. Old analysis supported by contemporary engines are considered a plus. Anecdotes and side information improve the readability so should neither be neglected. Robert thought for a while but had to disappoint me. The book I wanted, must still be written. A real pity so I asked him which book he liked the most about Fischer. This time Robert didn't hesitate as "My 60 memorable games" is the uncontested number 1 for him.

So I bought this book in de denksportkampioen. I wasn't disappointed. The book is not only very enjoyable to read but it also includes many excellent analysis of the worldchampion himself. This is rare as in that era there were no engines playing decent chess. As Fischer played almost exclusively 1.e4, I became curious of any overlaps with my repertoire. Besides I don't follow any fashion and often play some old lines.

In 5 a 6 games I was lucky to discover Fischer's opinion about openings I also play. The book discuss the game of 62 against Keres which was part of my article old wine in new skins. The most intriguing game from theoretical perspective was for me his Sicilian game of 61 against Reshevsky. The last time I played the classical Sicilian Dragon with Be3 already dates from 1999 when I suffered a scornful defeat against Marcel Van Herck.

[Event "Zilveren Toren Deurne - Kask"] [Date "1999"] [White "Brabo"] [Black "Van Herck, M."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B74"] [WhiteElo "2270"] [BlackElo "2269"] [PlyCount "80"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Be2 g6 7. Be3 Bg7 8. O-O O-O 9. Nb3 Be6 10. f4 Qc8 11. Kh1 Rd8 12. Bg1 d5 13. e5 Ne4 14. Bd3 f6 15. exf6 exf6 16. Nb5 {(Here I improve my game played against Lagast for the interclub Roeselare - Bredene 1997. At that time I evaluated the position slightly better for white but now I need to revise this as black is ok.)} f5 17. c3 Bf7 18. N5d4 $146 { (I still found a4 in the database with equality. Till here I only consumed 5 minutes while my opponent had spent already 1 hour and a quarter.)} Qc7 $5 19. Bc2 $5 {(I adopt the same plan as my game against Lagast. I transfer the bishop to b3 to put pressure against d5.)} Re8 20. Qd3 Rac8 21. Rad1 $5 a6 22. Bb1 $5 {(Weird but I already get the feeling that black has conquered the initiative. I want to play a3 so Ba2 becomes possible. For now it is impossible to move the knight from b3.)} Bh6 $1 23. Qf3 $5 {(G3 is recommended by Rebel10 but I did not dare to play such move as black only has to play later d4 and Bd5 which almost mates me.)} Nd6 $1 24. Be3 $5 {(Rebel10 shows Nxc6 but that would allow to fortify blacks only weakness.)} Nc4 25. Bc1 Bg7 $1 {(The bishop did its job so returns to the main-diagonal.)} 26. Nxc6 $5 {(Played after a long reflection as this admits my opening failed. Maybe Rfe1 is better but if black exchanges everything and puts the knight back on e4 then white is paralyzed. Probably I should have proposed a draw here as Marcel would have likely accepted. With less time on the clock remaining mistakes are more likely.)} bxc6 27. Nc5 $5 {(Maybe it was better to exchange a pair of rooks on the e-file but I did not want to permit c5.)} a5 $5 28. b3 $5 {(I am annoyed by the knight but chasing it just creates a new weakness on c3. Bd3 to exchange the rooks is the alternative.)} Qe7 29. Nd3 $6 {(Here Na4 is probably stronger and white has no problems with c3. Although a knight on the rim does not look great.)} (29. Na4 Nd6 30. Ba3 Qc7 31. c4 $132 {(And white survives the pressure.)}) 29... Nd6 30. Nf2 $6 {(Too passive as now it really becomes difficult for white. Better was Bb2 but even then black is better.)} Qe2 $5 {(To keep the queens on the board and play c5 is also clearly better for black.)} 31. Qd3 $5 {(Nh3 is recommended by both of my engines but a knight on the rim is not my cup of tea.)} Qxd3 $5 { (Nb5 already wins a pawn but black wants to play it more positional.)} 32. Rxd3 Ne4 $5 {(C5 is shown by Rebel10 with the strong threat of d4.)} 33. Nd1 $5 {(The computer wants to take on e4 and relieve the pressure of the queenside but I do not like to give black such passed pawn and let him activate his bad bishop.)} a4 $5 {(Black destroys the queenside, also possible was c5 with a clear advantage for black.)} 34. b4 $2 {(White can not hold anymore the position. Also bxa4 and Bc2 give black a large advantage.)} ( 34. bxa4 d4 35. Rxd4 Nxc3 36. Rb4 Nxb1 37. Rxb1 Bc4 38. Rg1 Bd4 39. Rb4 Bxg1 40. Kxg1 Bxa2 $17) (34. Bc2 axb3 35. axb3 Ra8 36. Re3 Ra2 $17) 34... d4 $1 { (Quite amazing how black played the middlegame so well with little time. In the meanwhile I was also getting low in time.)} 35. Rxd4 $6 {(With not much time left I find nothing better but also Rdf3 or cxd4 should lose.)} Bxd4 $6 {(This wins but Nxc3 is a bit more convincing.)} 36. cxd4 Rcd8 37. Bc2 Rxd4 38. Bxa4 Ra8 $6 {(Bxa3 was somewhat stronger but this should also win easily.)} 39. Bxc6 Rxa2 40. Be3 $5 {(Taking the bishop on e4 would give black a strong passed pawn.)} Rxb4 {(Black was slightly surprised that I resigned here already but the position is easily won for black as his rooks are too active.)} 0-1

I didn't find any improvements for white so I replaced Be3 by Bg5. Fischer however claims in his book that white can create chances without playing 0-0. His analysis looked very convincing so I became interested to find out what our current top-engines tell us about that idea. To revive an old opening, can be useful in practice.

[Event "New York/Los Angeles m"] [Site "Los Angeles"] [Date "1961.07.18"] [Round "2"] [White "Fischer, Robert James"] [Black "Reshevsky, Samuel Herman"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B72"] [PlyCount "75"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Be2 O-O 8. f4 d6 9. Nb3 Be6 10. g4 {(0-0 would transpose to my game against Marcel Van Herck. Fischer however evaluates blacks last move as an inaccuracy and believes white has some chances to find an advantage with g4.)} d5 { (My engines recommend Rc8 and white has troubles to keep the balance. This is also confirmed by my online openingbook.)} (10... Rc8 11. O-O (11. g5 Nd7 12. h4 (12. Qd2 Nc5 13. Nxc5 dxc5 14. Qxd8 Rfxd8 15. Kf2 Nb4 16. Rhc1 Bxc3 17. bxc3 Nxa2 $15 {[%eval -47,31] }) 12... Nc5 13. Nxc5 dxc5 14. Qxd8 Rfxd8 15. Kf2 Nd4 16. Rad1 Kf8 $11 {[%eval -18,26]}) (11. f5 Bd7 12. fxg6 (12. g5 Nxe4 13. Nxe4 Bxf5 14. Bd3 Bxb2 15. Rb1 Bg7 16. O-O b6 17. Qe2 Qd7 $11 {[%eval -28,27]}) 12... fxg6 13. g5 Nh5 14. Qd5 Kh8 15. Qd2 Bxc3 16. bxc3 Ne5 $15 {[%eval -60,27]}) (11. h4 Nb4 12. O-O Bxg4 13. Bxg4 Nxg4 14. Qxg4 Nxc2 15. Rae1 Nxe1 16. Rxe1 Rc4 $17 {[%eval -82,27]}) 11... Na5 12. f5 (12. e5 Ne8 13. Bxa7 Nc4 14. Qd4 Qc7 15. f5 Bxe5 16. Qf2 gxf5 17. gxf5 Bxc3 $15 {[%eval -32,26]}) 12... Bc4 13. Bxa7 (13. Bd3 d5 14. Nxa5 Qxa5 15. e5 d4 16. exf6 Bxf6 17. fxg6 dxe3 18. Qe2 Bxd3 $15 {[%eval -31,27]}) 13... Nd7 14. Kh1 Bxc3 15. bxc3 Bxe2 16. Qxe2 $15 {[%eval -43,28]}) 11. f5 Bc8 12. exd5 Nb4 13. Bf3 gxf5 14. a3 fxg4 15. Bg2 Na6 16. Qd3 e6 17. O-O-O Nxd5 18. h3 g3 19. Rhg1 Qd6 20. Bxd5 exd5 21. Nxd5 Kh8 22. Bf4 Qg6 23. Qd2 Bxh3 24. Rxg3 Bg4 25. Rh1 Rfe8 26. Ne3 Qe4 27. Qh2 Be6 28. Rxg7 Kxg7 29. Qh6 Kg8 30. Rg1 Qg6 31. Rxg6 fxg6 32. Nd4 Rad8 33. Be5 Rd7 34. Nxe6 Rxe6 35. Ng4 Rf7 36. Qg5 Rf1 37. Kd2 h5 38. Qd8 1-0

It was no big surprise to discover the engines didn't approve Fischers idea. The score of white in the online openingbook already hinted this. Fischer neither repeated the idea.

Such excursions once again confirm the gigantic gap in openings between the past and modern chess of today. The large part of the openings which were popular decades ago, have been reduced to footnotes in the theory which can only be used as a surprise on masterlevel. So from pure theoretical perspective you better read new books. Anyway these books I read primarily for the historical aspect.

Till today Fischer is a recurring topic in debates. An ultimate collection of his best games well analyzed and bundled in a new book doesn't sound to me useless. For sure we need to start with the 60 memorable games which Fischer chose. Fischer died in 2008 in Reykjavik so likely it is today easier juridical to reuse his work as base. Who (preferable a very strong player) dares as this will be a very big job while there is no guarantee about the return? No Kasparov already had his chance.

Brabo