I am sorry to have to correct you. According to Chessbase Megadatabase 2010, the move 12...Bd7 was first played by Johann Nepomuk Berger against Erich Cohn, in round 10 of a tournament in Vienna on April 4th,1908.

LTJ

Chess players have nicknamed the Ruy Lopez as "The Spanish Torture" for a reason. In too many games, Black never quite equalizes, there's always something just a little bit wrong with his game, White always seems to have a tiny little initiative. In fact, the players who would benefit most from studying this game might consist of the players who seek to adopt the main lines of the Ruy as a weapon and need to learn how to keep up the pressure in the middle game.

Honza Cervenka: <crafty: 20...♗xg5 21. ♘d5 ♗h4 22. ♘f6+ ♗xf6 23. ♕xf6 ♗d7 (eval -0.42; depth 16 ply; 2000M nodes)>

This is a bit too cooperative line from white's perspective. After 20...Bxg5 21.Nd5 Bh4(?!) white can play 22.g3! practically forcing black to sac on d5 (22...Be7?? 23.Nxe7+ Rxe7 24.Qf6 with threats Qxe7 and Bh6, which can be covered at once only by move 24...Kf8 allowing simple 25.Qh8#, is clearly not an option here, and of course 22...Bxd5?? 23.exd5 leaves black with hanging Queen and Bishop), and it is a question, who is better after more or less forced 22...Rxd5 23.exd5 Bxd5 24.Be4 Bxe4 25.Qxe4 Qxe4 26.Rxe4. Here black has two Pawns for an Exchange but his QS Pawns are quite weak, and if white manages to activate his Rooks, he has at least very good winning chances, if the position is not won by force with optimal play (I would say it is despite of mere +0.2 evaluation of my obsolete engine).

But still I think that black should have taken the Pawn with intention 20...Bxg5 21.Nd5 Bxc1!? 22.Nf6+ Kh8 23.Nxe8 [23.Raxc1!? Rf8 24.Qg3 Qd6 25.Qg5 Kg7 (forced by threat Qh6) 26.Nh5+ Kg8 27.Re3 Nc6 28.Qh6 gxh5 29.Rg3+ Bg4 30.Qxh5 Kh8 31.Rxg4 Qf6 looks equal due to black's counter-play connected with eventual Rd8-d2 intrusion] 23...Bg5 24.Nf6 Nc4 (threatening Nd2 with win of Knight on f6) 25.Nd5 Nxb2 etc., again with 2 Pawns for Exchange and also a nice Bishop pair for black. It doesn't look like a position where black is going to lose in my humble opinion.

This line is absolutely correct but it is necessary to prolong it a bit. Of course, it is clear that after 33...Qxe4 34.Bf3 Qf4 35.Qxf4 exf4 36.Bc6 black cannot play 36...Rd8 for simple and brutal deadly pin after 37.Rd1 which will cost black a piece. But after 36...Re7 primitive 37.Ra7?? doesn't work for 37...Re1+ unpinning the Knight with decisive advantage of black: 38.Kh2 Ne5 39.Bxb5 (39.Bf3 is a bit better but also insufficient) 39...Ng4+ 40.Kh3 Nxf2+ 41.Kh4 h6 and white King is hopelessly catched in mating net. Also 36...Re7 37.Bxb5(?!) Nf6 is nothing special for white. But white still has the winning pin here after all: 36...Re7 37.Ra8+! (forcing the King to go to the 7th rank under pin) 37...Kg7 38.Ra7 with win of piece.

I guess that Karjakin and Svidler would have seen it even in these days...:-)))

Amazing instructive stuff behind the scenes. It is of course possible Fischer doesn't reverse engineer "skewers in theory" and simply calculates forward from any given position. But for me, I like the idea of a "Skewer in theory" rising to the surface and he has won similar earlier games based on skewers as well which "rise to the surface".

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.