Rudolf Charousek

  

     The Romantic Era chess was a time when the style of play that emphasizes quick, tactical maneuvers rather than long-term strategic planning. The style was popular in the 18th century until its decline in the 1880s. Romantic players consider winning to be secondary to winning with style! 

     Games during the Romantic Era usually opened with 1.e4 with the King's Gambit and Giuoco Piano to folloed. The era is generally considered to have ended with the 1873 Vienna tournament where Wilhelm Steinitz popularized positional play and the closed game thus ushering in the Modern, or Classical, Era. Then in, the 1930s the Hypermodern Era was ushered in

     One forgotten player of the Romantic E`ra was Rudolf Charousek (September 9, 1873 - April 18, 1900), a tragic figure who was known for his many brilliant tactical games. 

     He was born in what is modern day Lomecek which is near Prague, but as an infant his family moved to Debrecen, Hungary, where he became a naturalized Hungarian. 

     He learned to play chess at to age of 16. While studying law in Kassa, he soon became a strong player and during the 1890s he was was on the top ten players in the world. In 1893 he entered a correspondence tournament organized by the Budapest newspaper Pesti Hirlap, in which he eventually shared first place with Geza Maroczy. 

     Unfortunately, his career was cut short when he died at the age of 26 from tuberculosis. 

 

     In the following game Charousek neat Chigorin, but they played a tie-break match for sole first place which was won by Chigorin, 3-1.

[Event "Budapest"] [Site ""] [Date "1896.10.13"] [Round "?"] [White "Rudolf Charousek"] [Black "Mikhail Chigorin"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C33"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "49"] [EventDate "1896.10.04"] {C33: King's Gambit Accepted} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 {Statistically this old move (the Bishop's Gambit) yields slightly worse results than the more popular 3.Nf3. There is very little theory on the Bishop's Gambit and most lines are nameless. The bishop's gambit is the most important alternative to 3. Nf3. White allows 3...Qh4+ 4. Kf1 giving up castling, but castle, but his K is safe and he can gain several tempi on the black Q. White's plan is usually to develop quickly and start an attack on the K-side using the f-file and the B on c4. Many of black's defenses include the move ...d5 attacking the bishop on c4.} Nc6 {More to the point are wither 3...Qh4+ or 4...d5} 4. d4 Nf6 5. e5 { This hasty advance actually works in black's favor.} (5. Nc3 Bb4 6. Nge2 f3 7. gxf3 d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. O-O Nxc3 10. bxc3 {Black stands well. Reprintsev,A (2353)-Ismagilov,D (2188) chess.com INT 2022}) 5... d5 6. Bb3 (6. Bb5 Ne4 7. Bxf4 Qh4+ 8. g3 Nxg3 9. Bxg3 Qe4+ 10. Kf2 Qxh1 {Black's position s superior. Koch,J (2484)-Kosten,A (2493) Belfort FRA 2012}) 6... Bg4 (6... Ne4 {was an alternative.} 7. Nf3 Be7 8. Bxf4 O-O 9. Nbd2 Bf5 {with equal chances. Lanc,A (2355)-Olsarova,K (2278) Czech Rephblic 2014}) 7. Qd3 Nh5 {Chigorin has initiated a very dangers K-side attack. That Charousek escapes is a miracle.} 8. Nh3 Nb4 {It's odd that Chigorin does not press on with his K-side attack and instead resorts to this diversion on the Q-side which accomplishes nothing. } (8... f3 {was correct when white's best line is...} 9. O-O fxg2 10. Rf2 Qd7 { with a clear advantage.}) 9. Qc3 Na6 {It was too late to play ...f3. The N is now simply misplaced and out of play.} 10. O-O Be2 {[%mdl 8192] A bad miscalculation from which black cannot recover.} (10... g5 {and Black has nothing to worry.} 11. Ba4+ c6 (11... Bd7 {is also playable} 12. Bxd7+ Qxd7 13. Nxg5 Qg4 {but here white has a slight advantage.}) 12. Bxc6+ bxc6 13. Qxc6+ Bd7 14. Qxa6 Bxh3 {As a result of 10...Be2 this capture is not available.} 15. gxh3 ) 11. Ba4+ c6 {White now commences a sacrificial attack against black's vulnerable K which os caught in the center.} 12. Bxc6+ {[%mdl 512]} bxc6 13. Qxc6+ Ke7 14. Nxf4 {With this move Charousek misses the winning continuation.} (14. Nc3 {Bringing another piece into play and threatening Nxd5+ Surprisingly, it's not good enough for more than equality!} Nb4 15. Qb7+ Ke8 16. Nxe2 Rb8 17. Qxa7 Ra8 18. Qb7 Rb8 {draws}) (14. b3 {is a different story...the threat is mate with Ba3+.} Nb4 15. Ba3 a5 16. Nc3 Qc8 17. Bxb4+ axb4 18. Nxd5+ Kd8 19. Qb6+ Ke8 20. Nc7+ {and wins}) 14... Nxf4 15. Bxf4 {Intending Bg5+ and mate.} h6 {This prevents the threat, but is insufficient.} (15... Bxf1 {keeps the balance, but neither side has room for error!} 16. Nc3 Bxg2 17. Kxg2 Nb4 18. Bg5+ f6 19. Qb7+ Ke6 20. exf6 Nxc2 {In this complicated position the chances are equal.}) 16. Nc3 {[%mdl 2048] White has strong initiative.} Bc4 {his defends the d-Pawn, but it does not meet white's real threat.} (16... Qc8 { was necessary.} 17. Qxd5 Bxf1 18. Rxf1 Nc7 {ere, at least, black has some remote chances of defending himself.}) 17. e6 Rc8 {Black's position is lost, but this allows a clever finish worthy of a Romantic!} (17... fxe6 18. Rae1 Qc8 19. Bd6+ Kd8 20. Rxf8+ Rxf8 21. Qxc8+ Rxc8 22. Bxf8 Ke8 23. Bxg7 {with a decisive endgame advantage.}) 18. Bc7 {[%mdl 512]} fxe6 (18... Nxc7 19. Rxf7#) 19. Bxd8+ Rxd8 20. Qb7+ Rd7 {Now comes a game winning blow.} 21. Rf7+ {[%mdl 512]} Kxf7 22. Qxd7+ Be7 23. Re1 Re8 24. b3 {[%mdl 32] Trapping the B.} Kf8 25. bxc4 {Black resigned.} (25. bxc4 Bf6 26. Nxd5 Nb8 27. Qd6+ Kf7 28. Nc7 Re7 29. Nxe6 {is utterly hopeless.}) 1-0

Game 11Tahl-Botvinnik World Championship 1960

     Chess has been on the back burner for some time now owing to the post-storm cleanup which also lead to some home remodeling projects.  Plus there have been some obligatory social functions. Hopefully, things will soon return to “normal.” 

     The following game was one of the key games of the match. Botvinnik had the momentum after winning games 8 and 9 to close within one point, but the loss of this game left the normally imperturbable Botvinnik psychologically shattered.

     Tahl’s trainer Koblentz said, “Botvinnik, a man of strong will, who was capable of hiding his emotions, left the stage literally broken, and behind his horned-rimmed glasses his eyes were incredibly sad... At this moment he appeared to me to be very unhappy.” 

 

 

     This game also shows that Tahl also knew how to play positional chess and was more than just a swindler. 

     Calculating tactical lines often fails to be satisfactory. If you have a superior position and there are no immediate tactical threats you must find a way to improve your position. To this end a tentative plan is helpful. You need to draw up a “wish list” of piece setups. You begin with an objective then constantly check it tactically. Hopefully, when your plan is successful, the balance will eventually tip in your favor and you can then launch the decisive attack. 

 

The short version of finding an attacking plan is:

     1) Deciding on a point to attack 

     2) Figuring out what pieces are required and any P-breaks that will be necessary 

     3) Determining the path to get your pieces into the desired positions 

     4) Calculating the exact sequence of moves being sure to include

         possible defensive replies.     

     5) Modifying you ‘plan” as required 

     6) Constantly reassessing the position at critical points. This results in planning an attack, calculating variations and, if necessary, modifying the plan.

     

     One difference between games of the older masters and modern day players lies in items 5 and 6. In older games you often see games where a plan is executed flawlessly and the clash of ideas is clear because the loser did not defend until it was too late. 

     Modern players tend to play games where plans are adopted for a few moves and when the plan becomes obsolete, they toss it out and replace it with a new one. The result is ‘plans’ are often nothing more than short maneuvers, lasting 2-4 moves, designed to place a piece on a better square for example. 

     Modern players rely on intuition and imagination, often accepting positions that older masters would have looked at in horror, as long as the play is dynamic enough. Sticking with a plan too long is often as bad as not having one at all. 

     In the following game both players adopted plans that were only partially completed when they had to be abandoned to meet changing conditions. In this game both players used strategic and tactical weapons against each other.

[Event "World Championship Match"] [Site "Moscow URS"] [Date "1960.04.07"] [Round "11"] [White "Mikhail Thl"] [Black "Mikhail Botvinnik"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A05"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "143"] [EventDate "1960.??.??"] {D78: Fianchetto Gruenfeld} 1. Nf3 {It's possible that Tahl was not interested in facing another Caro-Kann.} Nf6 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. O-O O-O 5. c4 c6 6. b3 Ne4 7. d4 d5 {This hybrid opening resembles the Catalan and Gruenfeld and it's a area in which Botvinnik had some experience.} 8. Bb2 Be6 {This odd looking move is explained by black';s desire to win a tempo by threatening ,,,dxc4. However, the threat proves to be ineffective. Additionally, black remains somewhat handicapped by the Bs awkward position. A better continuation would have been 8...Bf5} 9. Nbd2 Nxd2 10. Qxd2 Na6 {Now Botvinnik realized he cannot win the P without running into serious trouble. His best move is now known to be 10...h6} (10... dxc4 11. Ng5 cxb3 12. Nxe6 fxe6 {White is better. Doda, Z-Trifunovic,P Halle 1963}) 11. Rac1 Qd6 12. Ne5 Rfd8 13. Rfd1 Rac8 14. Qa5 dxc4 {With this move Botvinnik hope to get some pressure on thr half open d-file. Although the position is nearly equal, black's position is more difficult to play.} (14... Bxe5 {was a reasonable alternative.} 15. cxd5 Bxd5 16. dxe5 Qb4 17. Bc3 Qxa5 18. Bxa5 b6 {with a fully equal position.}) 15. Nxc4 {This is slightly better than taking with the P.} (15. bxc4 {This does not, as one of the original annotators claimed, lose.} Bxe5 16. Ba3 (16. Qxe5 {as originally suggest turns out badly after} Qxe5 17. dxe5 Nb4 18. a3 Na2 19. Ra1 Bxc4 {with much the better of it.}) 16... Qc7 17. Qxe5 Qxe5 18. dxe5) 15... Qc7 16. Qe1 Qb8 17. e4 Bxc4 {This N was performing no function and so Botvinnik correctly decided to exchange it for white's more valuable N.} 18. Rxc4 (18. bxc4 c5 19. e5 cxd4 20. Bxd4 b6 {and it's white who finds himself under some pressure.}) 18... Nc7 {After this black finds himself in some difficulties.} ( 18... c5 {keeps the balance.} 19. e5 cxd4 20. Rcxd4 Rxd4 {wuth equal chances.}) 19. Bh3 e6 20. Bc1 $1 Qa8 {This mysterious move anticipates Bf4 possibly followed by d4-d5.} 21. Bg5 Re8 22. Qd2 f5 {This move only serves to make black's defense more difficult. However, it's probably a good practical choice because rather than relying on a passive defense it seeks active counterplay.} (22... Nb5 {is a better choice, Even so, after} 23. Bg2 Rc7 24. d5 e5 25. Be3 { white's active position assures him of the better game.}) 23. Bh6 {This move got an ! from one early annotator who wrote that Tahl meets his opponent's plan with fine positional judgment. It actully allows black to equalize.} (23. Re1 Rf8 24. exf5 exf5 25. Bg2 Rf7 26. d5 {The advance of the d-Pawn had to happen sooner or later.} Nxd5 27. Bxd5 cxd5 28. Qxd5 Bf8 {Prevents the R from reaching e7} 29. Rec1 Rxc4 30. Rxc4 Qe8 31. Rc7 {In spite of the equal material white is clearly better.}) 23... Bxh6 24. Qxh6 Re7 25. Re1 Rf8 26. Rc5 Qd8 27. Re5 {This leaves the d-Pawn subject to capture, but taking it would not result in black gaining any advantage.} Rg7 (27... Qxd4 {was more profitable. For example...} 28. exf5 gxf5 29. Bf1 Rg7 30. Bc4 Rg6 {with complete equality.}) 28. Qd2 Qd6 {While this threatens 29...Nb5, seeking play on the K-side with 28...h5 would have been more fruitful.} (28... h5 29. exf5 gxf5 30. Bf1 h4 {with good play.}) 29. Bf1 Rd7 {Botvinnik had put up a stout defense and he has obtained good counterplay...his pressure on the d-Pawn is becoming dangerous.} 30. exf5 {The correct decision. White will meet the pressure on his d-Pawn by counter-pressure on the e-file.} Rxf5 {It is necessary to keep the e-file at least half closed.} (30... gxf5 31. Bc4 Qxd4 32. Qh6 {White is better.}) (30... exf5 31. Bc4+ Kg7 32. b4 Qf6 33. b5 { with good play.}) 31. R5e4 Rf6 {It's hard to explain why Botvinnik didn't equalize with 31...Rd5} (31... Rd5 32. R1e3 c5 {with complete equality.}) 32. h4 {The idea behind this move is to give black another isolated P.} Kg7 33. h5 gxh5 34. Rh4 (34. Qg5+ {was slightly more accurate.} Rg6 35. Qxh5 {followed by either 36.Bh3 or 36.Bc4}) 34... Kg8 35. Bd3 (35. Rxh5 {allows black to equalize after} Qxd4 36. Qe2 Rdf7) 35... Rg7 {Preparing to flee with 35...Kf8 would have been more prudent.} 36. Re5 {[%mdl 32] The R comes into play with devastating effect.} Rff7 37. Qh6 (37. Rexh5 $18 {was stronger...} Nd5 38. Qe1 Re7 39. Rh6 {with unbearable pressure.}) 37... Qe7 38. Rexh5 Nd5 39. Qd2 { Although white has an excellent position there is no mating attack so he must now find other targets to attack.} (39. Bxh7+ {loses after} Rxh7 40. Rg5+ Kh8 41. Qg6 Nf6) 39... Nf6 40. Rh6 {[%mdl 2048]} Qd6 41. Rf4 Qf8 {Botvinnik has devised a plan by which he hopes tp draw, but it is faulty.} (41... Ng4 { was necessary.} 42. Rxf7 Kxf7 43. Rxh7 Rxh7 44. Bxh7 c5 45. Qe2 Qxd4 {White retains te advantage, but black is still very much in the game.}) 42. Qe3 Nd5 { Black's idea is to give up a P for what he hopes will be drawing chances.} 43. Rxf7 Qxf7 44. Qe5 {Tahl declines the P and keeps his attack going.} (44. Qxe6 Qxe6 45. Rxe6 Nf4 46. Re3 Nxd3 47. Rxd3 Rd7 {with possible drawing chances.}) 44... Nc7 45. Qc5 Qf3 {Botvinnik's counterattack has failed and his position is now quite lost.} 46. Bxh7+ {[%mdl 512]} Rxh7 47. Qg5+ Kh8 (47... Rg7 48. Qd8+ Qf8 49. Rh8+ $3 {[%mdl 512]} Kxh8 50. Qxf8+) 48. Qd8+ Kg7 49. Rxh7+ Kxh7 50. Qxc7+ {[%mdl 4096] Technically the ending is lost for black. but the presence of the Qs makes white's task difficult. As we will see, Tahl was more than just a tricky tactician; he also excelled at all phases of the game.} Kg6 51. Qxb7 Qe4 52. Qa6 Qb1+ 53. Kg2 Qe4+ 54. Kf1 Qb1+ 55. Ke2 Qc2+ (55... Kf6 { would have allowed a bit more resistance.} 56. Qd3 Qxa2+ 57. Kf3 {the g-Pawn should prove decisive.}) 56. Kf3 Qf5+ 57. Ke3 Qg5+ 58. Ke2 Qh5+ 59. Kd2 Kf6 60. Qxc6 Qa5+ 61. Qc3 Qxa2+ 62. Ke3 Kf7 63. d5 {Even in the ending Tahl never hesitated to sacrifice a P for the sake of active play. Watch is Q and K close in on black's K!} exd5 64. Qc7+ Ke6 65. Qc6+ Ke7 66. Qxd5 Qa1 67. Qe4+ Kf7 68. Kf4 Qc1+ 69. Kg4 Qa1 70. Qd5+ Kf8 71. Kf5 Qb1+ 72. Kf6 {Black resigned.} (72. Kf6 Qb2+ 73. Ke6 Qc1 (73... Qe2+ 74. Qe5 Qg4+ 75. Qf5+) 74. Qa8+ Kg7 75. Qxa7+ {wins easily.}) *

QGD, Symmetrical Defense

     While checking offbeat defenses the QGD, the Symmetrical Defense (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5) drew my attention. It was analyzed as far back as 1604 but was studied by the Austrian players Hans Haberditz, Hans Muller and Ernst Gruenfeld. Today most theoreticians think white’s advantage is too great and the best black has is a draw. Of course, it can transpose into the Tarrasch variation if white wants to go that route.

     White usually plays 3.cxd5 when it is not advisable for black to play 3...Qxd5 because white gets a big lead in development. Instead, black should play 3...Nf6 intending to recapture on d5 with his Knight. White should be able to maintain the advantage with either 4.Nf3 or 4.e4 though. 

     One of the games I came across was the following amusing Spielmann debacle. 

     Rudolf Spielmann (1883-1942) is well known. His opponent is lesser known. Hans Fahrni (1874-1939) was a Swiss master. In 1892 he was joint Swiss champion. His best results were: 1909, first ahead of Tartakower, Alapin and Spielmann in a Munich quadrangular tournament and first place in 1911 at San Remo. 

     In 1916, he began suffering from psychosis…a generic term for a mental state often described as involving a "loss of contact with reality.” He was hospitalized, but after his release, he had a relapse. 

     In this game Spielmann played a horrible continuation and Fahrni handed him an ignominious defeat.

 

 

     The game was played in the Barmen Meisterturnier A 1905. For the most part, it was a three-way race between Cohn, Swiderski and Forgacs, with occasional challenges from others. 

     The first two were tied for the lead after round 9, but Cohn lost to Swiderski in round 10 and was always a bit behind after that. 

     Forgacs, recovering from a slow start, caught Swiderski in round 11. Round 16 proved critical. 

     Cohn lost to Spielmann, who found his form for this game after losing five in a row! Perlis, going up against tail-ender Pettersson (who had scored one draw in 15 games), slowly frittered away an endgame. That ended their challenges and Swiderski collapsed and lost his last two games while Forgacs won his last two games and took the tournament by a full point. 

     Although Spielmann’s play in the following game was hardly perfect, the game is a good example of why the Symmetrical Defense is not a good choice. 

[Event "Barmen Meisterturnier B"] [Site ""] [Date "1905.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Hans Fahrni"] [Black "Rudolf Spielmann"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D02"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "53"] [EventDate "1905.08.14"] {D06: Queen's Gambit: Symmetrical Defense} 1. d4 {[%mdl 32]} d5 2. Nf3 c5 3. c4 Nc6 {This is a poor decision because it costs black too much time. Transposing into the Tarrach Defense with 3...e6 would have been better.} (3... dxc4 { is the only other viable alternative, but it is not entirely satisfactory.} 4. e3 e6 5. Bxc4 a6 {etc.}) (3... e5) 4. cxd5 Qxd5 5. Nc3 Qd8 {The only reasonable move.} (5... Qd6 6. Nb5 Qb8 7. d5 {is not very appetizing for black. }) 6. d5 {White already has a significant advantage.} Nb8 (6... Nb4 {is a losing move.} 7. e4 a6 8. a3 Qa5 9. Bd2 {Black has trapped his own N. Galochkin,S-Rafalski,K (1550) Pardubice 2006}) 7. e4 {Black has a serious lack of development and his next mover only makes matters worse because it allow white the opportunity to open up the position. However, even after, say, 7... g6 black's position is pretty bad.} e6 8. Bb5+ {White is winning!} Bd7 9. dxe6 fxe6 10. Ng5 Qb6 (10... Qe7 {is no better.} 11. Bxd7+ Qxd7 12. Qxd7+ Nxd7 13. Nxe6) 11. Qh5+ g6 12. Qf3 Nh6 13. Qf6 {Black could safely resign at any time.} Bxb5 (13... Rg8 14. Qxe6+ Qxe6 15. Nxe6 {There is no way to meet the threat of Nxc7+}) 14. Qxh8 Nd7 15. Nxb5 Qxb5 16. Nxe6 Qb4+ 17. Qc3 Qxe4+ 18. Qe3 Qb4+ 19. Bd2 {[%mdl 32]} Nf5 20. Ng7+ Kd8 21. Qe8+ Kc7 22. Bxb4 Rxe8+ 23. Nxe8+ Kd8 24. Bc3 Kxe8 25. O-O-O b5 26. Rhe1+ Kd8 27. Ba5+ {Black finally resigned. This game is a good argument for not playing the Symmetrical Defense!} 1-0

Buddy Simonson

     Albert Simonson (December 26, 1914 – November 16, 1965) was one of the strongest American players of the 1930s and was part of the American team which won the gold medals at the 1933 Chess Olympics. 

     “Buddy” Simonson was born into a wealthy family. His father Leo was a successful wig maker to the Manhattan rich, the theater and movie businesses. His mother, Irene, was from the family that owned the Illinois Watch Case Company in Elgin, Illinois. 

     Simonson showed tremendous skill soon after learning the game. At New York 1933, he scored 7-3 to tie for places with Arthur Dake behind Reuben Fine. This earned him selection to the United States Olympic team at age 18. In the Olympiad at Folkestone 1933 he played first reserve board and scored 3-3, as the Americans won the team gold medal. Simonson's teammates were Reube Fine, Isaac Kashdan, Artheu Dake and Frank Marshall. 

     In the 1935 U.S. Open at Milwaukee, Wisconsin he scored 5.5-3.5 to tie for 4th-6th places. In the first modern US Championship in 1936 Simonson placed second with 11-5 behind Samuel Reshevsky. He scored 11-5 in the 1938 U.S. Championship to finish third behind Reshevsky and Fine. 

     In the U.S. Championship of 1940 he tied for 4th-5th places with 10-6 behind Reshevsky, Fine, and Kashdan. In the 1951 U.S. Championship hefinished tied for 11th-12th, with only 3.5-7.5. 

     Simonson was ranked 6th in the country on the first official rating list issued in 1950. Simonson served with the Army during World War II, attaining the rank of Sergeant. Simonson was very skilled at card and board games, but had a serious gambling problem. 

     He was married three times, and fathered three children. Simonson was a colorful character in U.S. chess history, but little is really known about him. 

     Arnold Denker sheds a little light on the real Simonson in his chapter on the man he called A Daring Young Man on the Flying Trapeze in the delightful The Bobby Fischer I Knew. Denker wrote that Simonson burst onto the New York chess scene like a meteor and then disappeared almost as quickly. But, during his short stay, he won many honors as a player, as a problemist and as a member of the U.S. team at the Folkestone Olympiad. 

     According to Denker, the high point of Simonson’s career occurred in 1936, where only a final round defeat prevented him from winning the first modern US Championship. After that setback, his interest in chess seemed to wane. He did well enough in the 1938 and 1940 championships, but his comeback attempt in the 1951 fixture ended catastrophically, when he shared 10th – 12th places. Denker went on to fill in some of the details and ends the chapter on Simonson describing himself sitting at Simonson’s funeral in the All Souls Unitarian church in New York City thinking, “What a waste.” 

     Physically, Denker described Simonson as a young man as bring tall and shy, always with the slicked-back hair style men wore in the 1930s, well-cut clothes accompanied by an umbrella draped over his arm. 

     According to Denker, if Simonson had chosen a career in chess, there was no telling how far he could have gone. Unfortunately, like many young men who were handed a fortune and never compelled to work, he had no appreciation of it and piddled it all away. Simonson had a restless nature that caused him to jump from one thing to another without ever really accomplishing anything. He became bored with chess and took up pinochle, bridge, gin, poker and backgammon, always willing to gamble on the outcome and always with the very best player he could locate; he nearly always lost. 

     $429,000. In 1933, at age 19, that is the equivalent of how much Simonson collected for his first annuity that had been left to him by Grandpa Elgin. Actually it was $25,000, but $25,000 went a lot further in those days. 

     He was to receive many of these annuities but always, after paying off gambling debts, there was little left. Denker described how on occasions loan sharks had threatened to break his legs and how Simonson often sold off ‘futurities’ on his annuities for as little a $0.25 on the dollar. 

     Simonson also had a habit of pulling practical jokes on people and that sometimes made him enemies. 

     By the late 1930s he needed money and founded a direct mailing business that turned out to be quite successful. This prompted him to get married, but more gambling debts soon caused his wife to leave him. 

     After WW2 broke out Simonson was drafted and, as Sergeant Simonson, ended up in England. After the war he married an English woman, but that marriage did not last long and when it ended he returned to the U.S. where he married a third time, also short-lived. 

     Always a chain smoker, his health declined as his emphysema worsened and while on a trip to San Juan in mid-November, 1955, shortly after his 51st birthday, he passed away. 

     Held at the Hotel Empire in New York in August of 1951 and directed by Hans Kmoch, no players were seeded directly into the championship finals, but competed in four, six-player preliminary sections. Mengarini, Horowitz, and Shainswit qualified out of Group A, while in Group B, Bernstein and Reshevsky qualified and Santasiere advanced over Shipman by way of a coin toss tie breaker. Evans, Seidman, and Simonson qualified out of Group C, and Pinkus, Pavey, and Hanauer qualified out of Group D.

 

 

     This would be the only U.S. championship prior to the emergence of Bobby Fischer in which Reshevsky would play but not place first.

[Event "US Champ Finals, New York"] [Site "New York, NY USA"] [Date "1951.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Albert Simonson"] [Black "Albert Pinkus"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D46"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventDate "1951.??.??"] {D46: Semi-Slav} 1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 c6 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Bd3 Bd6 7. e4 {Aggressive play. The main line is 7.Qc2} dxe4 8. Nxe4 Nxe4 9. Bxe4 Nf6 { This quite natural move has had poor results in practice. Black does much better with the freeing 9...e5!} (9... e5 10. O-O exd4 11. Qxd4 Qf6 {with full equality.}) 10. Bc2 Bb4+ 11. Ke2 {Of course, the natural move is 11.Bd2, but Simonson's strange looking 11.Ke2 is Stockfish's choice!} O-O 12. Bg5 Be7 ( 12... h6 {is more precise.} 13. Bf4 (13. Bh4 e5) 13... Bd6) 13. Qd3 {White is already operating with threats.} g6 14. h4 (14. Rhe1 b5 15. Kf1 bxc4 16. Qxc4 Rb8 17. Bb3 Nd5 18. Bxe7 Qxe7 19. Kg1 {White us better and in Korobov,A (2571) -Novita,A (2306) Dubai 2004 he went on to win in a handful of more moves.}) 14... b5 {Black has no time for routine moves. He needs to deal with the pending K-side attack without delay.} (14... Ng4 15. Qc3 e5 {and his position is satisfactory.} (15... Bxg5 {is too dangerous because after} 16. hxg5 e5 17. dxe5 Qe7 18. Rad1 {white has the btter game.})) 15. b3 bxc4 16. bxc4 Ba6 { Once again black should play ...Ng4} 17. Ne5 {Too routine.} (17. h5 {gives white a powerful attack. The P cannot be taken because of mate on h7} Nxh5 ( 17... gxh5 18. Bxf6 Bxf6 19. Qxh7#) 18. Rxh5 gxh5 19. Qxh7#) 17... Rc8 { This was his last chance. 17...Nh5 holding up white's advance was his best try. } 18. h5 {[%mdl 2080] Keeping Black busy.} Nd7 19. Nxd7 (19. hxg6 {turns out to be not quite so good as it looks. After} Nxe5 20. gxh7+ Kh8 21. Bxe7 Nxd3 22. Bxd8 Nf4+ 23. Kf3 Rfxd8 24. Kxf4 Rxd4+ {Black has survived and the chances are now equal/}) 19... Qxd7 20. hxg6 Bxg5 {In spite of the way things look black has excellent defensive possibilities. However, one wrong step is likely to prove fatal.} (20... hxg6 21. Qh3 Bxc4+ 22. Bd3 Bxd3+ 23. Kd1 Bc2+ 24. Kxc2 {mates next move.}) (20... fxg6 21. Rxh7 {and white has a winning attack because black cannot take the R.} Kxh7 22. Qxg6+ Kh8 23. Rh1#) 21. Rxh7 (21. g7 Kxg7 22. Rxh7+ Kf6 {And, because black controls the dark squares the K gets away.}) 21... Rfd8 {[%mdl 8192] This is the fatal slip!} (21... e5 {This surprising move is the only way to keep the balance, but it looks far too dangerous to play because of...} 22. gxf7+ Rxf7 23. Qg6+ Rg7 24. Qxg5 Bxc4+ 25. Ke1 {Otherwise he gets mated after...} (25. Kd1 Qxd4+ 26. Kc1 Qxa1+ 27. Kd2 Rxg5 {etc.}) 25... exd4 26. Kd2 Rxg5 27. Rxd7 Rxg2 28. Rxd4 Rxf2+ {with a likely draw.}) 22. gxf7+ Kf8 23. Qg6 Bxc4+ 24. Ke1 {Black resigned} (24. Ke1 { It's mate in 5...} Bd2+ 25. Kd1 Be2+ 26. Kxe2 Ke7 27. f8=Q+ Kxf8 28. Qf6+ Qf7 29. Qxf7#) 1-0

Weinstock Wallops Stenzel

     National Master Solomon Weinstock (1925-2009) passed away peacefully at his home in New York after a brief illness. 

     He retired from Brooklyn College after more than 20 years as professor of Psychology where h was a distinguished teacher and researcher. 

     Weinstock served in the Army during World War II. After the war, he majored in math and physics and graduated from City College of New York; he received his doctorate in Psychology from Indiana University. 

     He was a strong advocate for civil rights and environmental issues, enjoyed nature, chamber music, traveling and art. 

     Weinstock was a participant in the 1944 US Championship in which he scored 7-10 and tied for 10etg place with Atillio Di Camillo. Weinstock won the Correspondence League of America championship in 1999. 

 

 

     His opponent in the following game was Harold Stenzel (born 1952) who is an International Arbiter. The game was fairly even until Stenzel played 12...Bxa6 which precluded his castling to safety on the Q-side. His final mistake was the loss of time trying to make K-side threats with 15...Qh5. After that he got walloped. 

[Event "Nassau County Chp, Long Island NY"] [Site ""] [Date "1988.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Solomon Weinstock"] [Black "Harold Stenzel"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C03"] [WhiteElo "2210"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "43"] [EventDate "1988.??.??"] {C10: French Defense} 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nc6 5. Nf3 b6 6. Bd3 (6. Bb5 {Was also playable. Here is an amusing miniature...} Qd5 {Correct was 6...Bb7} 7. Qe2 Nf6 8. c4 Bb4+ 9. Kf1 {Black resigned. Rausis,I (2575) -Herboth,T Baden-Baden 1993 After 9...Qd7 10.Ne5 he loses material.}) 6... Bb7 7. O-O Nf6 8. Bg5 h6 {Risky. He should play 8...Be7} (8... Nxd4 {would be a serious mistake.} 9. Nxd4 Bd6 (9... Qxd4 10. Bb5+) 10. Re1 {White us winning.}) 9. Bxf6 gxf6 {Evidently black though he would have attacking chances owing to the semi-open g-file. That won't be the case.} 10. c3 (10. d5 {This tactical shot secures excellent chances for white, For example...} exd5 11. Ng3 Bd6 12. Re1+ Kf8 13. Nf5 {Black is left with a shattered K-side and his K is likely to find itself in a predicament.}) 10... Be7 11. Qa4 {With his last two moves white has failed to take advantage of black's play with the result that the position is nearly equal.} Qd7 $1 $11 12. Ba6 Bxa6 {This is wrong because black is now unable to play ...O-O-O} (12... O-O-O 13. Bxb7+ Kxb7 {and jis K is quite safe.}) 13. Qxa6 $16 Rg8 14. Rad1 {[%mdl 32]} Qd5 15. Rfe1 Qh5 { This is consistent with his idea of conducting a K-side attack, but it is tactically faulty as Weinstock simmediately demonstrates.} (15... b5 {cutting off the Q offers a glimmer of hope.} 16. a4 Rb8 17. b4 f5 {and black is surviving.}) 16. Ng3 {Not bad, but 16.Qb7 was much more forceful.} (16. Qb7 Rd8 17. Qxc6+ {White has won a piece.}) 16... Qd5 17. c4 Qd7 18. d5 {Busting the position wide open with black's K caught in the center.} exd5 (18... Nb4 19. Qb7 Qc8 20. Qxc8+ Rxc8 21. a3 Na6 22. Nd4 e5 23. Nc6 {with a decisive advantage.}) 19. Rxd5 Qc8 20. Qa4 Qb7 21. Nd4 b5 22. Rxb5 $1 {Black resigned.} (22. Rxb5 Qc8 23. Nxc6 Kf8 24. Nxe7 {etc}) 1-0

Fischer Was Perfect, Others Weren’t

     Larry Evans once said Fischer’s weakness was overconfidence, stating that it "sometimes causes him to forget his opponents are also capable of finding good moves." Evans’ statement notwithstanding, the 1963/64 US Championship Bobby Fischer made a perfect score of 11-0. 

     Fischer’s first loss in a US Championship to Edmar Mednis had happened in the previous year’s tournament. Evans wrote that “Fischer plays about 50 per cent stronger with white than with black,” adding "It is hard to remember when he last lost with white." But, that’s exactly what happened in a long French Defense in his game against Mednis. 

     As a result of his defeat by Mednis, Fischer arrived at this championship determined not to let it happen again. This tournament was a strong one with only William Lombardy missing from the top rated players. 

 

     Fischer’s rating going in was FIDE 2702. For comparison, the other’s best ratings (either FIDE or national) were: Reshevsky 2621, Benko 2582, Evans 2602, and Robert Byrne 2550, Saidy 2490, Weinstein 2488, Bisguier 2499, Addison 2445, Mednis 2473, Donald Byrne 2434 and Steinmeyer 2425. 

Weinstein circa 1960

     Those ratings may not seem too high by today’s standards, but at the time most garden variety GMs were rated 2500-2600 with a few actually below that, so the championship did have some pretty strong players. Based on ratings though, Fischer was still in a class by himself and was expected to win the event, but what was not expected was the way he did it. 

     He had been studying for five or six hours a day according to friends and was well prepared in the openings as evidenced by his surprising Larry Evans with a King’s Gambit. 

     But, enough of Fischer...others were also playing and they produced some interesting games. Here’s one by Raymond Weinstein. I always liked his sharp style which he demonstrates in this game against Robert Byrne. Note that in this tournament Weinstein did not have a single draw! 

 

[Event "63/64 US Championship, New York"] [Site ""] [Date "1964.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Raymond Weinstein"] [Black "Robert Byrne"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E99"] [Annotator "Stockfish16"] [PlyCount "81"] [EventDate "1963.??.??"] {E99: King's Indian: Classical Main Line} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Nd7 10. f3 f5 11. g4 h5 { This is very risky especially against a sharp tactician like Weinstein. Safer was the usual ``...Kh8} 12. g5 {The only chance that offers any hope of gaining an advantage.} (12. gxf5 $16 gxf5 13. Nd3 f4 {is only equal.}) 12... h4 13. Nd3 f4 14. Kh1 {It's white who has all the chances.} Kf7 15. Bd2 (15. c5 { is even better.} Rh8 16. Qb3 b6 17. cxd6 cxd6 18. Qa3 Nc5 19. Nxc5 bxc5 20. b4 {White has the advantage and went on to win in Larsen,B-Tal,M Bled 1965}) (15. Rg1 {is also promising.} Rh8 16. Bf1 Nf8 17. Nf2 {White is slightly better. Vrana,F (2369)-Skreno,V (2189) Banska Stiavnica 2006}) 15... Rh8 16. Rg1 Ng8 17. b4 {Byrne has succeeded in defending himself on the K-side, so Weinstein seeks opportunities elsewhere.} Rh5 18. c5 Nf8 (18... Rxg5 {This is not to be recommnded.} 19. Rxg5 Qxg5 20. Nb5 Ngf6 21. Nxc7 Rb8 22. Ne6 Qh6 23. cxd6 Nh5 24. Bc3 Ng3+ 25. Kg1 (25. hxg3 hxg3+ 26. Kg1 Qh2+ 27. Kf1 Qh1#) 25... Nxe2+ 26. Qxe2 {White's position is a winning one.} g5) 19. Rc1 Bd7 20. Nxf4 {[%mdl 512] Nice!} exf4 21. Bxf4 Qe7 22. Qd2 {[%mdl 1024] White's active position is excellent compensation for the N.} Nh7 23. Be3 h3 24. Bd3 Kf8 25. Ne2 Qf7 26. Rg3 Ne7 27. cxd6 {Opening the way for the R to get into play.} cxd6 28. Rc7 Ke8 29. Rxb7 {White has 3Ps for the N, but more importantly he has a very active position.} Be5 30. f4 Bg7 31. Rxa7 Rxa7 32. Bxa7 Nf8 (32... Nxg5 {might work better.} 33. b5 Nxe4 34. Bxe4 Bc8 {but, here, too, white's advantage is significant.}) 33. b5 Bc8 34. Bb8 Bb7 35. Bxd6 {there is simply no way black can avoid disaster with so many white Ps coming at him.} Nf5 36. Bxf8 Bxf8 37. Rf3 Nd6 (37... Nh4 {offered a better defense.} 38. Rg3 Nf5 39. Rf3 (39. exf5 { and white has fallen into a trap!} Qxd5+ 40. Kg1 Bc5+ 41. Kf1 Qh1+ 42. Ng1 Bg2+ 43. Rxg2 hxg2+ 44. Qxg2 Rxh2 45. Qc6+ Kd8 46. Qf6+ Kd7 47. Qe6+ {and white has to take a draw by continuous checks.}) 39... Nh4 40. Rxh3 Bc5 {and at least black can make his opponent work for the point.}) 38. Nd4 Bc8 39. Qc3 Bb7 40. Ne6 Rh7 41. b6 {Byrne resigned. All he can do is make meaningless moves.} 1-0

Daring Tactics by Anthony Suraci

 

     Anthony Suraci of East Haven, Connecticut played in the 1948 US Championship where he scored +3 -16 =0 and finished in 19th place out of 20. He was the 1951 state champion. Other than that nothing is known about Suraci. 

     However, the July 30, 1964 issue of the New York Times chess column headlined, “An Unknown Becomes Known Through Some Daring Tactics”. 

     So, he was an unknown local player. Chessgames.com has 27 of his games, mostly from the ‘48 championship and a couple of US Opens, the last being in 1962.

     Here is Suraci’s game featuring those daring tactics. His opponent was Harry Lyman (1915-1999), many time champion of New England and the 1957 US Amateur Champion who is remembered as the Dean of Boston chess. He was the uncle of Shelby Lyman. 

     At the time, Lyman was the champion of the Marshall Chess Club and was, himself, a fearless and dangerous tactician. When the two met and both were bent on complications a fierce battle ensued. The symmetrical opening meant a slow start, but things heated up after black’s 13th move.

 

[Event "Central New England Open, Fitchburg"] [Site "?"] [Date "1951.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Harry Lyman"] [Black "Anthony Suraci"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A00"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "84"] [EventDate "1951.??.??"] {A05: Reti Opening} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. O-O O-O 5. d3 d6 6. Nbd2 e5 7. e4 Bg4 8. h3 Bd7 9. Nc4 Qc8 (9... Nc6 10. c3 Ne8 11. Kh2 f5 12. exf5 Rxf5 {looks to be about equal. Apatoczky,P (2250)-Ponyi,A (2095) Hungary 1993}) 10. Kh2 Nc6 11. c3 Be6 12. Nh4 {The prelude to a K-side attack that never materializes. Probably his best course was to continue the slow maneuvering with 12.Ne3} Nh5 (12... Nxe4 {is the engine's preference, but after} 13. Bxe4 d5 14. Nxe5 dxe4 15. Nxc6 bxc6 {it's unlikely that a human would prefer black.} ) 13. f4 {Typical of Lyman's aggressive play, but here it opens up the K-side in black's favor. Again, 13.Ne3 was a solid continuation.} b5 {This is irrelevant and should have only served to drive white's N to a good square on e3.} (13... exf4 $1 $17 {and life is bright.} 14. gxf4 Bxc4 15. dxc4 Qe6) 14. Na3 {This places the N offside...it needs to be on e3 after which white's game would have been slightly better.} exf4 15. gxf4 Qd8 16. Nf3 Rb8 {With little to be immediately accomplished on the Q-side Suraci switches to the Q-side... real master play!} 17. d4 b4 18. Nc2 Bc4 19. Rf2 bxc3 20. bxc3 Ba6 {[%mdl 2048] } 21. e5 {This natural looking P push is the wrong one and it leaves white with a lost game.} (21. f5 {keeps white in the game.} Ne7 22. Ne3 Bc8 23. Kg1 d5 24. fxg6 hxg6 25. e5 c5 {and it's still a fight.}) 21... dxe5 22. Ba3 e4 { Offering the exchange, but white does not immediately accept it.} (22... Nxf4 { This was an alternative.} 23. Bxf8 Bxf8 24. Nxe5 Nxe5 25. dxe5 Qe8 {with an active position.}) 23. Ng5 {This is more of a gesture than anything. The immediate capture of the R was also playable.} f5 {[%mdl 32]} 24. Bxf8 Bxf8 25. Bf1 Bd6 26. Nxe4 {This only hastens the end, but it makes little difference what he plays.} fxe4 27. Bxa6 Nxf4 28. Bc4+ Kg7 {[%mdl 32]} 29. Kh1 Qh4 { The climax of black’s attack} 30. Qf1 Nxh3 31. Rf7+ Kh6 (31... Kh8 {lessens the force of his attack because white can trade Qs} 32. Qf6+ Qxf6 33. Rxf6 Rb2 34. Bb3 {But even here black's advantage is decisive.}) 32. Qe1 Bg3 33. Qd2+ g5 34. Be6 Nf4+ 35. Kg1 Nd8 36. Ne3 {Black still has toi be alert...allowing 37. Nf5 would be a tragedy.} Kg6 37. Rg7+ {Is black in trouble?} Kf6 {Not after this move!} (37... Kxg7 38. Nf5+ Kf6 39. Nxh4 Ndxe6 40. Ng2 Nh3+ 41. Kh1 Nf2+ { and black has to take the draw.}) 38. Bb3 Rxb3 {[%mdl 512]} 39. axb3 Nh3+ 40. Kf1 {Not that it matters, but 40.Kg2 holds out a bit longer.} Qf4+ 41. Kg2 Qf3+ 42. Kxh3 Bf2+ {It's mate in 2 so White resigned. Yes, 42...Bf4 was mate.} 0-1

Gheorghiu Demolishes de Castro

     It’s been quite an ordeal recovering from the recent flooding. Cleanup, replacing lost items and dealing with the insurance company has not left much free time, but a few spare moments here and there have been spent looking around in the 1970s chess world. 

     The year 1973 was filled with events: it saw the birth of the first mobile phone, abortion being declared a constitutional right, and the Battle of the Sexes, the most-watched tennis match of all times, It was a match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs, the two greatest tennis players of the day. King won easily.

     Vasily Panov (1906-1973) died in the USSR at the age of 66. He was champion of Moscow in 1929. Al Horowitz (1907-1973), a leading US players in the 1930’s and publisher of the great Chess Review magazine, died at the age of 65 in New York. Hans Kmoch (1894-1973) also passed away in New York at the age of 78.

     Aleksander Lipenieks (1908-1973) died in Lincoln, Nebraska at the age of 64. He was the city champion 15 times and also published a number of chess books. FIDE President Folk Rogard (1899-1973) died in Stockholm, Sweden at the age of 73. 

     Three-time USSR Champion Leonid Stein (1934-1973) died of a heart attack at the age of 38 in Moscow. And, two-time Yugoslav champion Braslav Rabar (1919-1973) died in Zagreb, Yugoslavia at the age of 54. 

     At the beginning of the year the world’s top rated players were: 1) Bobby Fischer (2780), 2) Mikhail Tal (2660), 3) Anatoly Karpov (2660), 4) Boris Spassky (2655), 5) Viktor Korchnoi (2650), 6) Lajos Portisch (2650), 7) Tigran Petrrosian (2640), 8) Mikhail Botvinnik (2630), 9) Lev Polugaevsky (2625), and 10) Bent Larsen (2620). 

     Walter Browne won the National Open in Las Vegas on tiebreaks over Laszlo Szabo and James Tarjan. He also won the World Open in New York City. Arthur Bisguier won the big Lone Pine tournament in California. Norman Weinstein, age 22, won the US Open, held in Chicago. 

     Bobby Fischer was making news. He was offered a million dollars to play a match in Las Vegas. According to his lawyer, Paul Marshall, Fischer had over $10 million in offers to or advertise, but he turned them all down...it was beneath his dignity to advertise any product. 

     He moved to Los Angles to continue his religious studies with the Worldwide Church of God. 

     In August, he announced his upcoming plans at a press conference in Beverly Hills, California with the chief lawyer for the Worldwide Church of God standing by his side. 

     In November, 1973, Fischer was the guest of Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos against whom he played an exhibition game that was broadcast on television. It lasted 5 minutes and a draw agreed after 8 moves. 

     Fischer also played Florencio Campomanes, President of the Philippines Chess Federation, a blitz game on television. Fischer won on time. 

     Ourense is a city in northwestern Spain known for its hot springs; they held an international tournament there in January of 1973. 

     From the beginning it looked like Romanian GM Florin Gheorghiu was going to win, which he did. The one point margin of victory was mainly due to defeat of Pal Benko in the very first round. 

 

 

     The tournament produce a number of interesting games, especially miniatures. Here is one of the more entertaining games in which Gheorghiu totally destroys De Castro. 

      Florin Gheorghiu was born in Bucharest on April 6, 1944. He won the World Junior Championship in 1953 and was awarded the IM title. In 1965 he became a Grandmaster. He won the Romanian Championship in 1960 (age 16), 1962, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1973, 1977 and 1984. At his peak in November 1980, he was rated No. 10 in the world. 

     Edgar De Castro was a Filipino player and International Arbiter and from the begin of 1960s to the mid-1970s was one of the leading Filipino players. Other than that nothing is known about him. 

[Event "Orense, Spain"] [Site ""] [Date "1973.01.14"] [Round "?"] [White "Florin Gheorghiu"] [Black "Edgar de Castro"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B87"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "43"] [EventDate "1973.01.08"] {Sicilian Defense} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bc4 e6 7. Bb3 b5 8. O-O Bb7 {Risky. Black delays castling and quickly experiences difficulties on the e-File. Much better was 6...Be7} (8... Be7 9. Qf3 Qc7 10. Qg3 O-O 11. Bh6 Ne8 {Black's defenses are adequate.}) 9. Re1 Nbd7 10. Bg5 Nc5 { This is a tactical error that allows white ti immediatley gain the advantage. Forcing white to make a decision with his B with 10...h6 was a reasonable try.} 11. Bd5 {Black is already in trouble.} b4 {[%mdl 8192]} (11... exd5 12. exd5+ Kd7 13. b4 Na4 14. Nxa4 bxa4 15. c4 {and white is winning.}) (11... Be7 { keeps the damage to a minimum.} 12. Bxb7 Nxb7 13. Nc6 Qc7 14. Nxe7 Kxe7 { White is better, but there is no forced win.}) 12. Bxb7 {Already white's position can be declared as won.} Nxb7 {There was no better alternative.} ( 12... bxc3 13. Nc6 Qc7 14. Bxa8 cxb2 15. Rb1 {is equally hopeless for black.}) 13. Nd5 {[%mdl 512]} exd5 (13... Rc8 14. Qf3 Be7 15. Nxe7 Qxe7 16. Nf5 exf5 17. exf5 {and wins.}) 14. exd5+ Kd7 15. c3 {White needs to open more lines.} b3 ( 15... bxc3 16. Qa4+ Kc8 17. Qc6+ Kb8 18. Bxf6 gxf6 19. Re8) 16. Qxb3 Nc5 17. Qc4 Rc8 {It's kind of hard to believe but up to here these moves were all played the previous year!} (17... Qc8 18. Nc6 h6 19. Bxf6 gxf6 20. Re3 Kc7 21. b4 Rg8 {Black resigned Tal,M (2625)-Mukhin,M (2420) Baku 1972}) 18. b4 Nce4 19. Qxa6 Nxc3 20. Rac1 Rc7 21. Qd3 {It's a moot point but there was a mate in 16 with 21.Rxc3} (21. Rxc3 Rxc3 22. Qa4+ Kc8 23. Nc6 Qb6 24. Qa8+ Kc7 25. Qd8+ Kb7 26. Qb8+ Ka6 27. b5+ Kxb5 28. Rb1+ Kc4 29. Qxb6 Kxd5 30. Qb5+ Rc5 31. Rd1+ Ke6 32. Nd4+ Ke7 33. Re1+ Kd8 34. Re8+ Kc7 35. Qb8+ Kd7 36. Qd8#) 21... Qc8 22. Nb5 {Black resigned} (22. Nb5 Ne2+ 23. Qxe2 Rxc1 24. Rxc1 Qxc1+ 25. Bxc1 {etc.}) 1-0