There was a tie between Leonid Stein, Pal Benko and Svetozar Gligoric for sixth spot which was won by Stein in a playoff. Unfortunately for him, he was ineligible because there was an FIDE rule that limited the number of players from the same country to three. So Benko, who had finished second in the playoff, got the sixth spot.
The remaining two places were the seeded players Paul Keres and Mikhail Tal who had qualified by finishing first and second at the Bled-Zagreb-Belgrade Candidates in 1959. .
Korchnoy led after the first cycle, but then collapsed and scored only one win in the next 11 rounds.
Bobby Fischer, who had won the Stockholm Interzonal by 2.5 points, got off to a terrible start and after the first cycle his score was a miserable 2-5. Ex-world champion Tal withdrew due to kidney illness after the end of the third cycle.
Going into the last cycle, Keres was leading with Petrosian and Geller a half point behind. Geller lost only one game in thw tournament. It came in round 23 and it was to Fischer.
Also in round 23 Petrosian tied Keres by destroying Korchnoy in today’s featured game. The win gave Petrosian a half-point lead over Keres going into the last round.
In the last round Petrosian surprised everybody when he took a quick draw as white against the tail-ender, Dr. Miroslav Filip. Maybe it was not a surprise though because of claims that the Russians had fixed the results.
Keres had a chance IF he beat Fischer. But. even though Keres got the advantage, he managed to let it slip and Fischer got the draw. One wonders if Keres was ordered not to win.
While all that was going on Benko was beating Geller in a Queen and Pawn ending, but lost on time. If you ever saw Benko playing that should not come as a surprise...the guy moved as slow as molasses.
As a result Petrosian eked out a first place finish by just a half a point. He went on to become the World Champion from 1963 to 1969.
In this tournament Petrosian, Keres,and Geller drew all twelve of their games against each other...the average length of the games was only 18 moves! As a result there was widespread speculation that the Russians had cheated.
Not long after the tournament there was an article by Fischer titled
"The Russians Have Fixed World Chess” that appeared in Sports Illustrated and the German magazine Der Spiegel. He claimed that the Russians had agreed in advance to draw their games against each other. As a result, FIDE eliminated candidates tournaments and switched to a matches between the top qualifiers.
A game that I liked (Fritz 17)
Tigran Petrosian–Viktor Korchnoi1–0A31Candidates Tournament, Curacao23Willemstad CUW16.06.1962Stockfish 16
A31: Symmetrical English 1.c4 c5 2.f3 f6 3.d4 Its rather amusing that
Alekhlne considered this move to be premature and recommended instead 3.Nf3 cxd4 4.xd4 g6 5.c3 d5 If 5...Bg7 the game transposes into the Sicilian
Maroczy Bind after 6.e4, something Korcjnoy prefers not to play against. 6.g5 At the time this was an innovation dxc4 6...g7 7.xf6 xf6 8.cxd5 b6 9.b3 a5 10.a4 b4 11.e3 d7 12.d4 xb2 13.c1 xc1+ 14.xc1 0-0
Draw agreed Sakaev,K (2580)-Khalifman,A (2650) St Petersburg 1997 7.e3 a5
In view of white's simple development Korchnoi is tempted to play sharply, but
this move has its disadvantages as will be seen. First, his Ps are weakened by
white's next move, white gets the superior center, jis Ns become very active
and in the long run blacks' Q proves to be poorly placed. Best was 7...Bg7 7...g7 8.xc4 0-0 9.0-0 a6 Korchnoi had reached this position at
least twice before. At Moscow in 1952 he faced 10.Qb3 against Smyslov and in
Leningrad in 1956 Simagin played 10.Qe2 8.xf6 exf6 White already has a
slight advantage. Against Petrosian black could aready be considered to be in
serious trouble. 9.xc4 b4 9...g7 10.b5+ d7 11.f3 c7 12.xd7+ xd7 13.e4 f5 14.c5 wuth the advantage. 10.c1 Petrosian prefers this move
because it keeps the c-file open. 10.0-0 sacrifices a P, but that was not
Petrosian's style. After xc3 11.bxc3 xc3 12.b5+ d7 12...d7 13.c1 a5 14.c8+ 13.c1 a5 14.e6 fxe6 15.xc8+ xc8 16.xd7+ 10.0-0 xc3 11.bxc3 0-0 This is the correct move as after 12.b3 black's position is
tolerable. 10...a6 This move loses a tempo and it turns out to be a costly
mistake. 10...0-0 should have been played. 11.0-0 xc3 12.xc3 d7
and white can claim only a small advantage. 11.0-0 d7
An elementary mistake...leaving his K in the center one move too long. 11...xc3± 12.xc3 0-0 13.f3 d7 14.fc1 Black's position is difficult, but
not without some hope of defending himself. 12.a3 This move was highly
praised, but engines don't like it because they think the tactical shot 12.
Bxf7+ leads to a winning position. 12.xf7+ xf7 13.b3+ g7 14.d5 c5 15.xb4 xb4 16.xb4 e6 17.xc8 axc8 18.xe6+ f7 19.d4
Stockfish thinks white is clearly winning, but it's probable that Arthur
Bisguier was right when he said that he believed he could win with either side
if he was the stronger player. 12...e7 This loses quickly. 12...xc3 13.xc3 0-0 is best, but white has a neat reply... 14.e6 fxe6 15.xe6+ g7 16.xd7 d8 17.a4 with the advantage. 13.b4 The Q has no good
square. e5 13...c7 14.xf7+ xf7 15.b3+ e8 16.d5 b8 16...d8 17.e6 17.c7+ 13...h5 14.xh5 gxh5 15.d5 d8 16.d3 0-0 17.xc8 xc8 18.f5 b6 19.xc8 xc8 with a won ending. 14.f4 The point or the p
revious move. Black can't take the e-Pawn. b8 14...xe3+ 15.h1 b6 16.f3 The Q has no retreat so... g4 17.xe3 xd1 18.xd1 and white has won
a piece. 15.xf7+ Initiating a strong (and winning) attack. xf7 15...f8 16.a2 b6 17.b3 g7 18.f7+ h6 19.xe7 16.b3+ e8
No other move is worth mentioning. 17.d5 The threat is 18.Nc7+
with mate or winning the Q. d6 Against Nc7+ 18.e6 b5 18...a7 19.fd1 b6 20.c6 f7 21.xf6 xf6 22.g5+ g7 23.dxd6 f8 24.xf6 xf6 25.c3 19.dc7+ e7 20.d4 Intending Qe6+ and mate. f8 21.xa8 Black resigned. 21.xa8 xa8 22.e6 b8 23.c6 etc. 1–0
I remember that Fischer found it highly suspicious that Korchnoi suddenly began playing very weakly during the 2nd half of the tournament.
ReplyDeleteI always wondered why an agreement between 3 competitors to draw all their games against eachother would be a *dis*advantage to Fischer. I would think three players all getting 4 out of 8 would be *easier* to surpass then one of them getting 5 points, one 4 and one 3.
ReplyDeleteFact is that Fischer (born 1943) was not yet on the level of Keres (born 1916, Geller (1925) or Petrosian (1929). He only had a plus score against Benkö and tailender Filip, started with out of 7 and finished at 3.5 points distance from the winner Petrosian. Not very impressive.
Fischer was the youngest brat at the tournament failing to win against a field of matured grandmasters who were on average more than 15 years older than him. Even if there was a conspiracy, it certainly didn't harm him.
While there have may have been an element of sour grapes in Fischer's complaint, he was 100% correct in his accusation that the Soviets were cheating. By playing short prearranged draws with each other, the Soviets conserved their strength and tactics for non Soviets. This was conclusively confirmed by Korchnoi and other Soviets after the fall of the Iron Curtain.
ReplyDelete