Dec-16-09
 | | Honza Cervenka: Excellent fight. One must admire Botvinnik's resilience in long defense of difficult ending against ruling world champion as well as Spassky's invention in simplified position. When Spassky played 33.Nxh6, he had to see witty 36.f5 which saved the Knight and extra Pawn due to lovely 36...Kxh6?? 37.Rxg6#. Of course, 36.g5 Nxg5! 37.fxg5 Rxg5 equalises as the Knight on h6 is trapped. |
|
Dec-16-09 | | ARubinstein: Spassky was 26 years younger than Botvinnik, but never managed to beat him in the nine games they played. |
|
Sep-19-11 | | Karposian: Strong endgame play by Botvinnik, but if he had played the natural 17...Nxc5 instead of 17...Ngf6, he would propably not have had to face such a tough endgame anyway. If you can inflict isolated triple pawns on your opponent it is usually a good idea to do it! |
|
Sep-19-11 | | parisattack: <Karposian: Strong endgame play by Botvinnik, but if he had played the natural 17...Nxc5 instead of 17...Ngf6, he would propably not have had to face such a tough endgame anyway. If you can inflict isolated triple pawns on your opponent it is usually a good idea to do it!> I'll poke around, see if Botvinnik shows any comment on this move. Seems obvious so I suspect a reason he didn't play it. White controls d-file with pawns? Rooks get d-file? |
|
Sep-19-11 | | Karposian: Yes parisattack, you are absolutely right. There must have been something that concerned him, maybe that white could obtain some pressure on the d-file helped by his c-pawns, the gained control over the d6-square or something..anyway thanks for looking into it. Please tell me if you find something! |
|
Sep-20-13 | | crchandler: What about pressure on the b-file? 17. ... Nxc5 18. dxc5 Nf6 19. Rb4! Rb8 20. g4! with coming Rab1 next. Black seems to be in serious trouble. White's king can control enough squares on the d-file to keep Black from getting serious counterplay there and if Black's king tries to run to the queenside to defend against White's penetration he doesn't get there in time plus has to reckon with White's Ne5! |
|
Nov-24-13 | | Karposian: Yes <crchandler>, you seem to have a good point. After 17...Nxc5 White can double the rooks on the b-file rather quickly and this could possibly create some serious problems for Black. Maybe that is what concerned Botvinnik, I think you perhaps found the answer to why Botvinnik abstained from 17...Nxc5 <crchandler>. |
|
Mar-26-16
 | | keypusher:  click for larger viewAfter 41....Ra2: why can't Spassky play 42.Rxc4? After 42....Kf6 43.Rc5 Ra1 (else Kc1-b1) 44.c4 a5 45.Kc3 a4 46.Kb2 Rf1 47.Ka3 Ra1+ 48.Kb4 a3 49.Ra5 a2 50.Kb3 surely White is winning? Or if 42....Ra1, then 43.Rc5 a5 44.c4 a4 45.Kc3 a3 46.Kb3? |
|
Mar-26-16
 | | beatgiant: <keypusher>
From your diagram, 42. Rxc4 <Ra5> 43. Rf4 Kf6 44. Kd3 Rxf5 45. Rxf5+ Kxf5 is a tablebase draw. |
|
Mar-26-16
 | | keypusher: <beatgiant > Thanks, I hardly considered ...Ra5 "allowing" Rf4. |
|
Feb-18-23 | | Allanur: Preposterous style of Spassky always made me his fan. This game is one of those examples. At 16.Nc5 for example could lead to tripled pawn - something we would try to avoid but it is Spassky, he just plays it.
20.Na4 could end with the opponent winning pawn back as well as locating a rook on Spassky's second row but Spassky does not care and ignores it. I shall consult this game to Stockfish and comprehend what I am missing |
|