WCC: Botvinnik-Smyslov 1954

Botvinnik on a "surprise move" and the benefits of home preparation:

-<10.g4!>

<An improvement found in the quiet of my study. <<<For my opponent, of course, it was a surprise.>>> After 10.Qf3 c6 11.g4 0-0 Fine obtained a good position Shainswit vs Fine, 1951. But now Black does not manage to castle, since White carries out the entire plan without wasting a tempo on Qf3...

This game is a clear example of how useful home preparation can be.>

Mikhail Botvinnik "Half a Century of Chess" Ken Neat ed., E. Strauss transl. (Cadogan 1984), pp.185-87

===

Golombek:

<"Shortly after resigning, (Smyslov)... came up to me and said quietly, rather as though he was appraising somebody else's game from the point of view of the opening theorist, <<<'Yes; the opening variation is bad for Black and should lead to a loss for him.'>>>">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.11

#################################

3d game

#################################

4th game

Golombek:

<"Smyslov, though, as was only natural, he must have felt his bad start deeply enough, <<<could still joke about it with me,>>> and during the interval of free time before the game commenced he was quite happily discussing with me musical topics, opera, ballet and the like...

The game was not finished in one day's play, but went to a second session. When Smyslov resigned it on the 24th, he was doing so on what should have been an auspicious occasion, for it was... his birthday.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), pp.20-21

#################################

5th game

Golombek:

<"For (this)... game <<<the venue was changed from the Tchaikovsky Hall to the Concert Hall of the Soviet Army;>>> but this hall being considerably smaller, it was soon full and, in order to avoid overcrowding, no more tickets were sold, much to the disgust of many latecomers who were unable to obtain admission.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.28

#################################

6th game

Golombek:

<"The (sixth) game <<<was again played>>> in the Concert Hall of the Soviet Army...">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.35

#################################

7th game

Golombek:

<"For the <<<seventh game...>>> we were back again in the beautiful Tchaikovsky Hall...">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.40

===

Botvinnik:

<"On this occasion <<<it was I who carelessly analysed the adjourned position>>> and, after still on the 48th move having a certain draw, I was forced on the 50th move to lay down my arms.">

-Mikhail Botvinnik, "Botvinnik's Complete Games (1942-1956) and Selected Writings (Part 2)" pp.27-28

Adjourned position:

41...Ra7

Botvinnik:

<"The <<<rook is excellently placed on the 7th rank,>>> holding up the h-pawn and supporting the advance of the queenside pawns.">

-Mikhail Botvinnik, "Three World Chess Championship Matches: 1954, 1957, 1958" I.Y. Botvinnik, ed., Steve Giddins transl. (New in Chess 2009), p.37

Position after 48.a4-

Botvinnik:

<"Now Black has another good drawing possibility- the manoeuvre ...Kd6-d5-c4 bxa4. <<<After obtaining two connected passed pawns on the queenside,>>> Black gives up his rook for the h-pawn (after the exhange of the g3 and f5 pawns) and draws.>

-"Three World Chess Championship Matches" p.37

===

After 48...Ke7

Botvinnik:

<"Incredible! Black finally plays his king to the 7th rank voluntarily, and loses. <<<I was so disappointed not to be able to find a satisfactory defence after 48.g4, that I forgot about the second drawing possibility.>>> The reader may be interested to know that when I came home, after the game, and picked up my pocket set, I found on the board a position in which a black knight and two connected passed a- and b-pawns were battling White's rook and bishop!">

-"Three World Chess Championship Matches" p.37

#################################

8th game

Golombek:

<"...it should be remembered that the <<<psychological effect on Botvinnik in not winning such a won game>>> must have been very great indeed, and that the half-point he lost in the eighth game was not all the quantity of points that he was going to lose in consequence.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.47

#################################

9th game

Botvinnik:

<"...in the 9th I suffered a heavy defeat after inaccurate play in the opening. This game was undoubtedly <<<Smyslov's best achievement>>> in the match.">

-"Botvinnik's Complete Games (1942-1956)" p.28

===

Golombek:

<"Botvinnik embarked on an interesting and complicated combination in which victory or defeat depended on a margin as narrow as a single hair's breadth. Unfortunately for the World Champion, he inadvertently transposed his moves and allowed Smyslov to obtain a won position by <<<a brilliant if fairly obvious Queen sacrifice.>>> The burst of applause this evoked from the spectators was somewhat difficult to quell.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.53

#################################

10th game

Botvinnik vs Smyslov, 1954 (0-1)

#################################

11th game

#################################

12th game

Golombek:

<"Today <<<television made its first appearance in the history of World Chess Championship matches,>>> the twelfth game being televised from 8 till 8:30 pm.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.68

#################################

13th game

Smyslov vs Botvinnik, 1954 (0-1)

Golombek:

"The thirteenth game... took place in the Concert Hall of the Soviet Army..."

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.73

===

Soltis:

"...Botvinnik revealed one of his new weapons, 5...b6, and it prompted Smyslov to launch an unsound attack (6.Nge2 d6 7.0-0 Bb7 8.f4 f5 9.g4?! fxg4 10.f5 Qd7) that lost in 41 moves."

Position after <5...b6>

Position after <9.g4?!>

Position after <10...Qd7>

-Andrew Soltis, "Soviet Chess 1917-1991" (McFarland 1997),p.220

===

here is the full text from <Botvinnik's> notebook concerning the move <5...b6> in game 13, also from p.52:

<"5...b7-b6

<<<I wanted to surprise my opponent>>>. Of course, he expected the continuation 5...e6, followed by ...Ng8-e7, which I played long ago as my game against Alexander at the Nottingham tournament of 1936. It later turned out that it was against this very system that Smyslov had prepared an unpleasant response: 5...e6 6.Be3 Nd4 7.Nce2!, although even here, theory now considers that Black can equalise by means of 7...b6 8.c3 Nxe2. However, as will become clear, the move 5...b6 cannot be considered very good. I found the correct plan for Black only in Game 15.">

Botvinnik's notebook entry for Game 15:

<"1.e2-e4 c7 c5 2.Nb1-c3

Once again, the Closed Variation. <<<Smyslov had evidently come to the conclusion that the system with 5...b6 is not sufficient for equality, and quite rightly so.>>> However, a surprise awaited him...

2... Nb8-c6 3.g2-g3 g7-g6 4.Bf1-g2 Bf8-g7 6.d2-d3 d7-d6

Black prepares to implement a different plan.

6.Ng1-e2.....

6...e7-e5! Now the bishop on g2 is shut in, the advance d3-d4 becomes hard to achieve, and the advance f2-f4 can be met by ...f7-f5.">

-"Three World Chess Championship Matches" pp.57-58

the first 5 moves of game 13 and game 15 are identical, except that in game 15, instead of playing <5...b6>, Botvinnik now plays the move his analysis suggests is superior, <5...d6>.

===

EDIT <thomastonk>

"Botvinnik said that he wanted to surprise Smyslov, but he didn't state that he had prepared it. And since the line is not in the notebook, it is definitely possible that he decided to play 5.. b6 at the board."

EDIT <thomastonk>

Yesterday I found the German edition of Botvinnik's match book for the WC match of 1954 (published in 1957). The original text of the game comments is the same as for the 2007 edition, I would say, but the translations differ. The comment on 5.. b6, which is discussed above, does not use the German word for '(to) surprise' (Überraschung/überraschen), but the German word for 'change' or 'alternation' (Abwechslung). So, I had to consult the Russian original. The word Botvinnik used is 'разнообразие', and according to my dictonary the old translation is better.

This is is only a small detail, and in fact it would be necessary that a Russian speaker would read the whole paragraph, but maybe even this single word supports the possibilty that 5.. b6 was no home-preparation.

A book can win or lose in translation, the truth always loses. ;-)

#################################

14th game

Botvinnik vs Smyslov, 1954 (0-1)

Soltis:

<"Smyslov later said the game that gave him the greatest esthetic pleasure in his entire career was the 14th of the match. But Botvinnik later saw treachery, since in the 14th game Smyslov quickly innovated in an opening Botvinnik had never tried before. <<<He accused his second, Kan, of disclosing his opening preparation to the enemy camp.>>>

Even though Smyslov publicly denied this, Botvinnik never took back his accusation.">

-Andrew Soltis, "Soviet Chess 1917-1991" (McFarland 1997),p.220

===

The following is not confirmation for <Soltis'> claims but it hints strongly at the notion <Botvinnik> did suspect <Kan> had given away secret preparations in this game.

This is what <Smyslov> writes, from this position, Black to move:

And now,

<"11...exd4! A highly unpleasant <<<surprise>>>, leading to great tactical complications...">

<"...This continuation made such a strong impression on my opponent, that in his notes to this game Botvinnik wrote: <<<'It is surprising that Smyslov was able to make highly detailed preparations for a variation which I had never before adopted, except in training games...'>>>">

I suppose the rest of the passage might serve as something like a "public denial" by Smyslov that he was gifted with this analysis by somebody else.

Smyslov:
<"As we know, the move 9.Be3 had been played earlier, and so, <<<in my theoretical analysis>>> of this opening system, this move was also examined, along with 9.d5 and 9.h3. And I succeeded in discovering an improvement for the defence with 11...exd4! Such is the history of the innovation which brought me success in the present game.">

-Vasily Smyslov, "Smyslov's 125 Selected Games" Ken Neat transl. (Cadogen 1983), pp.86-87

Here is <Botvinnik> speaking for himself about the nasty <11...exd4!> surprise:

<"My opponent played the last three moves (Botvinnik means moves 9-11) immediately, about which <<<I could not hide my surprise>>>. It is certainly rather surprising that Smyslov should have been so well prepared in all the subtleties of a variation that I had never played before, except in training games...">

-Mikhail Botvinnik, "Three World Chess Championship Matches: 1954, 1957, 1958" I.Y. Botvinnik, ed., Steve Giddins transl. (New in Chess 2009), p.55

The ellipses (...) are added by <Botvinnik>. In this context, they seem intended to connote something "implied but not said."

At <Nikolina gora> from 17 Oct. 1952 up until 13 Feb. 1954, on the eve of this match, <Botvinnik> played no fewer than 27 training games with <Kan>, so there can perhaps be little doubt "which training games" he is referring to here.

-Jan Timman, "Secret Matches: The Unknown Training Games of Mikhail Botvinnik" (Russell Enterprises Inc. 2000), pp.59-78

===

Golombek:

<"...back in the Tchaikovsky Concert Hall...

<<<(on) move 10... Smyslov launched an innovation with the most exciting consequences...>>>

(Smyslov) had clearly prepared the opening variation, as was evident from the time he took for the first eleven moves-- only twelve minutes. Botvinnik, though realising this, made no attempt to avoid the variation or transpose into one of the numerous other lines against the King's Indian. He would have been wiser had he done so, even if less courageous.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.78

===

Botvinnik on games 13 and 14:

"Smyslov's reckless play in the initial stage of the 13th game provided me with a new success. True, the same tactics enabled Smyslov to gain a spectacular win in the next tame, the 14th, but I think that this win contributed to the match subsequently tking a course unfavourable for my opponent."

-"Botvinnik's Complete Games (1942-1956)" p.28

#################################

15th game

Smyslov vs Botvinnik, 1954 (0-1)

#################################

16th game

#################################

17th game

#################################

18th game

Botvinnik:

<"...on one occasion in our match the arbiter Opocensky had to intervene; this occurred during the 18th game. Soon after the opening Smyslov's clock stopped, which was noticed by the demonstrator only some fifteen minutes later! More precisely, the clock did not stop- it continued going, and only the minute hand stopped, and so neither I nor my opponent noticed this, since the clock continued ticking...

During play a second, electric chess clock was in use, enabling th spectators to observe the situation on our clocks. This electric clock was operated by the demonstrator, and it was he (with a delay of fifteen minutes) who drew the arbiter's attention to the fault in Smyslov's clock.

Of course, Opecensky ordered that the faulty clock should be replaced. <<<In so doing, however, he set my opponent's clock to the same time as had been shown by the faulty clock! To my bewildered question, the arbiter replied that there was no mention in the match regulations about supervisory electric clocks, and therfore he couldn't put Smyslov's clock forward, although, essentially, it was clear how long the clock had stood still.>>> I immediately accepted the arbiter's decision, although I considered it incorrect.

I decided not to approach Smyslov directly; he was so engrossed in the position that he did not notice either our discussions, which took place at the other end of the stage, or the change of clocks itself, otherwise he would undoubtedly have asked that his clock be put forward...">

-"Botvinnik's Complete Games (1942-1956)" pp.29-30

===

Golombek:

<"On move 15 <<<Smyslov's clock stopped>>> (for no good reason that could afterwards be proved) and this was not noticed for some time. When it was noticed, a new clock was substituted, but it was deemed impossible to adjust Smyslov's time accordingly.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), pp.97-98

#################################

19th game

#################################

20th game

Botvinnik vs Smyslov, 1954 (0-1)

Golombek:

<"When Botvinnik resigned on the seventy-third move there was a <<<great burst of clapping and cheering from the audience,>>> and this applause was indeed well merited by Smyslov, who in this game had shown himself to be the world's best end-game player.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.110

#################################

21st game

#################################

22d game

#################################

23d game

Golombek:

<"...on the twenty-third move... <<<(Botvinnik) committed a terrible blunder>>> that lost two pawns and left him with a wrecked position. In another five moves he had resigned and the score was level at 11 1/2 all.">

-Harry Golombek, "World Chess Championship 1954" (Macgibbon & Kee 1954), p.126

#################################

24th game