| Stockholm Interzonal (1962) |
|
Held from January 27 until March 6, 1962, the Interzonal tournament in Stockholm was a 23-player round robin, with six players qualifying for the Curacao Candidates (1962) stage. The winner was Bobby Fischer with 17.5 (+13 =9 -0), joint-second with 15 were Geller and Petrosian, and joint-fourth with 14 were Filip and Korchnoi. But there was a three-way tie for sixth place among Gligoric, Benkö and Stein, all with 13.5 points. These three players then contested a double round-robin playoff tournament to decide sixth place. Stein won with 3/4, Benkö had 2/3 and Gligoric 0/3. The final game between Gligoric and Benkö was not played. Stein qualified only as a reserve, due to a ruling limiting the number of players from one country participating in the Candidates tournament to three, so the last place went to Benkö. 1 Gideon Stahlberg was arbiter. 2 Stockholm, Sweden, 27 January - 6 March 1962 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3
1 Fischer * ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 1 17.5
2 Geller ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 0 ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 0 1 15.0
3 Petrosian ½ ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 ½ 1 15.0
4 Korchnoi 0 ½ ½ * 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 1 1 ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 0 1 14.0
5 Filip ½ ½ ½ 0 * ½ ½ 1 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 14.0
6 Gligoric ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ * ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 0 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 13.5
7 Benkö ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ * ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 1 0 1 1 1 ½ 1 1 13.5
8 Stein ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 1 ½ * 0 1 ½ 0 1 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 13.5
9 Uhlmann ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ 0 1 * 0 1 1 ½ 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 12.5
10 Portisch 0 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 0 1 * ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 12.5
11 Pomar ½ 1 0 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ 0 0 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 12.0
12 Ólafsson 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 1 1 0 ½ ½ * ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 1 1 1 12.0
13 Bolbochan 0 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ * ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 1 11.5
14 Barcza 0 ½ ½ 0 0 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 0 1 11.0
15 Bilek 0 0 0 0 ½ 1 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ * ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 11.0
16 Bisguier 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 0 0 0 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ * ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 1 1 9.5
17 Yanofsky 0 0 ½ ½ 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ * ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 7.5
18 Bertok 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ * ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ 7.5
19 German 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 1 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 ½ * ½ ½ 1 1 7.0
20 Schweber 0 ½ 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ * 1 ½ ½ 7.0
21 Teschner ½ 0 0 0 0 ½ ½ 0 1 0 0 0 ½ 0 0 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 * 1 1 6.5
22 Cuellar 0 1 ½ 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 ½ 0 * ½ 5.5
23 Aaron 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 ½ * 4.0
Playoff 9-13 March 1962 (see Stockholm Interzonal Playoff (1962) for games):1 Stein ** ½½ 11 3
2 Benkö ½½ ** 1- 2
3 Gligoric 00 0- ** 0
Fischer, Geller, Petrosian, Korchnoi, Filip and Benkö qualified for the Curacao Candidates (1962).
Notes
1 Tidskrift för Schack, no. 7, September 1958, p. 195 (https://tfsarkiv.schack.se/pdf/1958...) and The Times, 10 March 1962, p. 7.
2 Tidskrift för Schack, no. 3, 1962, p. 66 (https://tfsarkiv.schack.se/pdf/1962...).
3 Magyar Sakkelet, 1962, p. 33. In Di Felice, Chess Results 1961-1963, pp. 223-224. Original collection: Game Collection: Interzonals 1962: Stockholm by
User: capybara. Previous: Portoroz Interzonal (1958). Next: Amsterdam Interzonal (1964)
|
|
| page 1 of 11; games 1-25 of 253 |
     |
 |
| Game |
| Result | Moves |
Year | Event/Locale | Opening |
| 1. Portisch vs I Bilek |
| ½-½ | 21 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | C93 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Smyslov Defense |
| 2. Benko vs A Bisguier |
 | 1-0 | 45 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A07 King's Indian Attack |
| 3. Bolbochan vs S Schweber |
| ½-½ | 27 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | B92 Sicilian, Najdorf, Opocensky Variation |
| 4. R Teschner vs Fischer |
| ½-½ | 41 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | E92 King's Indian |
| 5. Geller vs M Cuellar Gacharna |
| 0-1 | 42 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A04 Reti Opening |
| 6. Korchnoi vs E German |
| ½-½ | 41 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A21 English |
| 7. Petrosian vs F Olafsson |
 | 1-0 | 34 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A46 Queen's Pawn Game |
| 8. Uhlmann vs A Pomar Salamanca |
| 1-0 | 38 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | D48 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav, Meran |
| 9. Filip vs Yanofsky |
| 1-0 | 33 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A16 English |
| 10. M Aaron vs Barcza |
| 0-1 | 52 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A53 Old Indian |
| 11. M Bertok vs Gligoric |
| ½-½ | 17 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | E62 King's Indian, Fianchetto |
| 12. A Bisguier vs M Aaron |
| 1-0 | 68 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A53 Old Indian |
| 13. Yanofsky vs Bolbochan |
| 0-1 | 59 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | B92 Sicilian, Najdorf, Opocensky Variation |
| 14. Fischer vs Benko |
| ½-½ | 56 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | B32 Sicilian |
| 15. F Olafsson vs Geller |
| ½-½ | 24 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | A10 English |
| 16. M Cuellar Gacharna vs Korchnoi |
| 1-0 | 56 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | B70 Sicilian, Dragon Variation |
| 17. Stein vs Petrosian |
| ½-½ | 18 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | B18 Caro-Kann, Classical |
| 18. Barcza vs Portisch |
| ½-½ | 26 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | E54 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System |
| 19. Gligoric vs Uhlmann |
| ½-½ | 87 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | D86 Grunfeld, Exchange |
| 20. E German vs Filip |
| 0-1 | 48 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | B44 Sicilian |
| 21. A Pomar Salamanca vs R Teschner |
| 1-0 | 41 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | D16 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav |
| 22. S Schweber vs M Bertok |
| 1-0 | 54 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | E77 King's Indian |
| 23. I Bilek vs Barcza |
| ½-½ | 16 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | D32 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch |
| 24. Portisch vs A Bisguier |
| 1-0 | 41 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | D20 Queen's Gambit Accepted |
| 25. Bolbochan vs E German |
| 1-0 | 56 | 1962 | Stockholm Interzonal | D12 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav |
|
| page 1 of 11; games 1-25 of 253 |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-08-15 | | Karne: Fischer was 18 when he won this tournament. |
|
May-08-15
 | | AylerKupp: <<Petrosianic> According to Chessmetrics, Fischer's opposition at Stockholm averaged 2615, while his Curacao opposition averaged 2727. That's the difference in a nutshell.>
I don’t agree. After all, 6 of the 8 players at Curacao 1962 were also at Stockholm 1962 and were playing the same opposition. If a lower average rating in Stockholm vs. Curacao was the difference in Fischer winning the tournament, then the other 5 players that were both in Stockholm and Curacao would have also scored higher in Stockholm than they actually did. Of course, these are just 2 tournaments consisting of 22 games per player (Stockholm) and 28 games per player (Curacao, except for those who did not play Tal in the 4th round because of Tal's withdrawal) so the difference in player results are probably not statistically significant. I think that overconfidence (which the bad luck of losing his first 2 games should have cured) was more of a factor. Because of his relative inexperience he just didn't figure out the difference in effort that the other players would put out in Curacao given that at Stockholm it was sufficient to finish only in the top 6 to advance and in Curacao you had to come in 1st. But maybe the loss of those first 2 games had more of an impact on his confidence that he cared to admit or even realize. |
|
| Oct-09-15 | | Marmot PFL: Fischer plays his best but should have drawn a few more games and saved his best lines for the candidates. |
|
Oct-09-15
 | | diceman: <offramp: It's noticeable that Geller did better against the top 10 than Fischer did. +4, -1 for Geller, +2 for Fischer.> What's noticeable is he was the only one. |
|
| Jul-28-16 | | todicav23: While most of the people do not agree with me, I think Fischer was strong enough around 1962-1963 to become world champion. And this tournament shows that. A few things happened in Curacao. It is clear that the soviet players prearranged their games among themselves. Fischer was probably over-confident that he will win, based on the victory in this tournament. Unfortunately for him he had a bad start and he realized what the soviet players are doing. That was too much for him and he was not able to fight for the first place. People can say "well, if he was strong enough, he should have won all or most of his games and there was nothing the soviets could do". I don't think people realize that it was a big disadvantage for Fischer. Fischer had to fight in every game while Petrosian had 8 draws in 22 moves or less against Keres and Geller! I'm not saying that Fischer was the best player in the world at that time. He was part of the elite, along with Botvinnik, Petrosian, Tal, Keres or Geller. At that time there was no player clearly superior. Fischer also had the chess knowledge, the skills, the energy and even the experience to become world champion. |
|
Jul-28-16
 | | keypusher: <todicav>
This again? Sorry, but Fischer lost the first two games and was never in contention. Not the Soviets' fault. And he didn't have to win all or most of his games, or anything like that. He had to do better than +8 out of 27 games. He managed +1. Incidentally, Petrosian didn't just play short draws against Keres and Geller. He also played 25- and 23-move draws with...Bobby Fischer. Petrosian vs Fischer, 1962
Petrosian vs Fischer, 1962
Way to fight in every game, Bobby!
Petrosian also played a couple of 14-move draws with Filip and a number of short games against other opponents. Fischer played (by his standards) a number of short games. Bottom line, which I cannot stress strongly enough: it was a terrible tournament, and we're wasting our time arguing about it. |
|
| Jul-28-16 | | TheFocus: Just sour grapes on Bobby's part. Curacao just wasn't Bobby's time. |
|
| Aug-04-16 | | todicav23: No matter what people say, Petrosian had 8 free days at Curacao. That's a very big advantage because it saves a lot of energy. I have nothing against Petrosian. He was an amazing player, probably in top 10 players ever. |
|
| Feb-09-17 | | Howard: Simply put, 19-year-old Fischer simply wasn't strong enough to have much of a chance to win Curacao. You have to remember he was up against five battle-hardened Soviet players, all of whom were much more experienced when it came to exceptionally touch touraments. Granted, Fischer did have a chance to take first, but it was only a small one. |
|
| Feb-09-17 | | alphamaster: When you have a bad start and see the top three opponents make arranged draws between them, saving energy in such a long tournament, you loose confidence. Also because you feel that even if you come near the first place they will stop the draws and start throwing points to the leader.
But i agree that Fischer was not mature enough at the time to try to finish second or, at least, near the top and thus become the moral winner. |
|
Feb-09-17
 | | plang: You don't have a shred of evidence that anyone is "throwing points" or thinking about "throwing points" - I don't understand how someone who (presumably) likes chess keeps repeating crap like that. |
|
| Feb-18-17 | | zanzibar: According to the gospel of Korchnoi:
<This [izt] was perhaps the first tournament in which the young Fischer overcame all his opponents with enviable ease, and three rounds before the finish had already assured himself of first place. ...... I consider that, at that time, Fischer was still a little weaker than he was to be a few years later. ... If I had known than all that was to happen later, I would have gladly granted Stein the dubious pleasure of playing the Candidates Tournament at Curacao. There, as we all now know, everything was arranged by Petrosian. He agreed with his friend Geller to play draws in all their games together. They also persuaded Keres to join their coalition. ...> p44 |
|
Feb-19-17
 | | offramp: <zanzibar: ...They also persuaded Keres to join their coalition. ...> Does Kortschnoi mention that he asked Geller if he too could join the coalition, but received a frosty and memorable rebuff from the Cossack-like Geller. <"You are here to be beaten."> |
|
Feb-19-17
| | offramp: Sorry, the frosty rebuff was from the Elmer Fudd-like Petrosian: full source for the squanecdote is here: Curacao Candidates (1962) (kibitz #38). |
|
| Feb-19-17 | | Howard: Despite being a long-time fan of Petrosian, I don't know what offramp meant by that above remark. Oh, yes, I know who Elmer Fudd was. Always liked that funny laugh of his ! |
|
Feb-19-17
| | offramp: <Howard: Despite being a long-time fan of Petrosian, I don't know what offramp meant by that above remark.> Neither do I. Offramp's a flake. Perhaps he envisioned Petrosian saying "You are here to ba-ba-ba ba-ba-ba-ba a be a be to be a to be a to be beaten!" |
|
| Feb-19-17 | | zanzibar: <offramp> followup moved to relevant tourney: Curacao Candidates (1962) (kibitz #56) Oh, but I do wonder, what exactly is a "squanecdote"? A 64-"square" anecdote? |
|
Feb-20-17
| | offramp: An anecdote about a squall, a squall being a loud cry or yell. In this case the yell is either YOU!! or NO!! |
|
| Feb-20-17 | | zanzibar: Ha, didn't think of that one. |
|
| Jan-31-20 | | Petrosianic: One thing I don't remember is why this interzonal was so delayed (It should have been played in 1961). I remember hearing a story about one of the zonals being delayed, and/or replayed, but don't remember any details now. |
|
| Jan-31-20 | | Olavi: For some reason Uhlmann wasn't granted a visa for the Berg en Dal zonal in late 1960 and consequently all Eastern bloc players withdrew. Next autumn another zonal was played in Marienbad, enabling Olafsson to perform the unique feat of winning two zonals in the same cycle. That also explains why there was an uneven number of players in the interzonal. Tescher was given an extra spot, having finished second in Berg en Dal and skipping Marianske Lazne. |
|
Jan-31-20
 | | Sally Simpson: Heidenfeld writing about this event in the 1962 BCM says when East Germany met West Germany Uhlmann vs Teschner, 1962 it was the game without flags. It was also the start of Ulhmann losing 4 games on the the bounce. |
|
| Jan-31-20 | | Olavi: As for Uhlmann's zonal visa problems, the 1961 women's Olympiad in Emmen, Holland, was also cancelled. What was it with the Dutch at the time? They had organized the previous Olympiad in 1957 without problems. |
|
| Nov-30-21 | | Helios727: Given that Bisguier was 4th and Benko 8th in the qualifying U.S. Championship of 1960, how did these two men end up playing in this interzonal? |
|
| Dec-04-22 | | Jyrki: To todicav : Like someone commented, in 1962 Petrosian,Keres and Geller had much more experience about top level chess than Bobby.If we look chessmetrics, Petrosian was best player in world in 1961-63.Petrosian was progressing from year to year,and finally he reached #1 in 1961.So it looks like Petrosian was simply stronger player than Bobby in 1962.Bobby was not yet in his prime as chessplayer. I can agree with Keres when he commented Curaco :"I don´t know if Bobby agrees with me,but in my opinion his placement (4th place) corresponds his playing strength" . |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
NOTE: Create an account today
to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users.
Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username,
then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.
|
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
- No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
- No trolling.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
- Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.
Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic.
This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general,
visit the Kibitzer's Café.
|
Messages posted by Chessgames members
do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration. |
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Copyright 2001-2023, Chessgames Services LLC
|
Kibitzing
