Yefim Geller versus World Champions: A Tribute (Part I) by Lev Khariton "One of the strongest aspects of Geller's talent is his ability to research, to seek the new and discover the secret essence of chess." Mikhail Tal Yefim Geller, or as chess players in the Soviet Union (or Russia - I have definitely got mixed up with all these names) used to call him, Yefim Petrovich, to show a special sign of respect and even reverence, passed away on November 17, 1998 at the age of 73. Most probably, future generations of chess players will remember him as the Philidor or the Steinitz of the 20th century - so great was his contribution to the game. What strikes me most is that he left no literary heritage except for some books of his selected games and short articles on opening theory scattered here and there in old Russian chess magazines. My guess is that, possibly, he was well aware that much that is being written today (I am speaking about chess as well as non-chess literature) becomes unnecessary and sometimes laughable garbage tomorrow. Or, more likely, (and this happens quite often to talented people) he was simply lazy or averse to writing. Another guess why his writings are so scarce is that he was too much of a chess fighter who was far happier at the chessboard than at the writing desk. All his theories appear in the most explicit form on the scoresheets of his games. And this silent, non-descript man played a great number of games, especially if we take into account that the peak of his chess glory occurred when chess tournaments were not as frequent as they are today and each event was a landmark in a chess player's career. In most of the obituaries or articles that I read soon after Geller's death, the authors did not fail to mention Geller's positive score in individual encounters with the World Champions. Geller has lived a long life in chess - from his first well-known tournament in 1949 when he almost won the USSR Championship on his first try, to his last tournament in Elista in 1995. Except for Spassky, to whom Geller "owed" three games (-6 +9), and the "young" champions Karpov (-2 +1) and Kasparov (-1 +0), Geller held a plus record against Botvinnik (+4 -1), Smyslov (+10 - 7), Petrosian (+4 -2) and Fischer (+5 -3). His scores against Tal and Euwe were even, (+6 -6) and (+1 -1) respectively. It is to pay tribute to the great chess player and to analyse his art that I have written these lines. Meeting with the glorious past The candidates' tournament in Zurich in 1953 stands out as a special, memorable event. In this competition, of 15 strongest grandmasters of that time took part, with the young generation represented by Petrosian, Averbakh, Taimanov and Geller was pitted against the more experienced players, Bronstein, Keres, Boleslavsky and Kotov. Max Euwe did not belong to any camp. He was chess history by definition. And each grandmaster meeting him could not avoid thinking that he was playing the chess player who had won a match against Alexander Alekhine! I remember Botvinnik was always proud that he had played with all the World Champions except Steinitz. Geller and his young colleagues were proud to have played with Max Euwe. Geller-Euwe Zurich, 1953 David Bronstein called this game one of the best games of the Zurich tournament and it was awarded a special beauty prize. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 b6 Although Euwe at the time of the tournament was not too active in chess, evidently he was following the development of chess theory. This variation was very popular in the candidates' tournament as well as in many other competitions of the early 50s. 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.f3 Nc6 9.Ne2 0-0 10.0-0 Na5 11.e4 Ne8 12.Ng3 cxd4 13.cxd4 Rc8 14.f4 Nxc4 15.f5 f6 16.Rf4 It seems that White's attack may become very dangerous. But it was not easy to frighten Euwe - especially if we remember that he played two world championship matches with Alekhine, the greatest master of attack. 16... b5! "The beginning of a remarkable plan," writes Bronstein. As soon as Black's queen enters the game, Black's counterattack will be formidable. 17.Rh4 Qb6 18.e5 Nxe5 19.fxe6 Nxd3 20.Qxd3 Qxe6 21.Qxh7+ Kf7 22.Bh6 (See Diagram) 22...Rh8!! In all books containing the annotations of this game this move is accompanied by two exclamation marks - so unusual and beautiful is it! 23.Qxh8 Rc2 24.Rc1 White could have played here 24.d5 and on 24...Qb6+ 25.Kh1 Qf2 26.Rg1 Bxd5 27.Re4! White is OK. If 24...Bxd5, 25.Rd1! Rxg2+ 26.Kf1 gh 27.Qxh6. Now Black wins immediately. 24... Rxg2+ 25.Kf1 Qb3 26.Ke1 Qf3 0-1 Euwe-Geller Zurich, 1953 (See Diagram) White: Kg2, Qg7, Rf3, Nb6; pawns - a5, b4, c5, e2, h3 Black: Kb8, Qc1, Rd8, Be3; pawns - a6, b7, c6, d4, h7 56.Rf1 Both kings are in danger, but White's king is more vulnerable. Black threatened to win the game immediately by Qg1 mate. However, White could have defended differently by counterattacking Black's king with 56.Rf7. Incidentally, this move was recommended by Bronstein in his book on the Zurich tournament. He proposed the following variation: 56...Qg1+ 57.Kf3 Qf1+ 58.Kg3 Bf4+! 59.Kh4 Qf2+ 60.Kg4 h5+ and Black wins. "But it was not easy to find this at the chessboard," concluded Bronstein. Geller did not agree with Bronstein's analysis and this is what he found: 61.Kf5? Bc7+! 62.Kg6 Qxe2!! 63.Rxc7 Qe4+ 64.Kg5 Qe3+! 65.Kf5 Qxh3+ 66.Ke5 Re8+ 67.Re7 Rxe7+ 68.Qxe7 Qe3+ 69.Kf6 Qxe7+ and one of the black pawns queens. "But White can continue," wrote Geller in his annotations, "61.Kxh5 Qxe2+ 62.Kh4! Qe1+ 63.Kh5!, and since 63...Qe5+ is bad in view of 64.Qxe5+ Bxe5 65.Nd7+, Black is unable to drive the White king away from h4 or h5." Extremely complicated variations! But doubtless, the text move loses almost without any resistance. 56...Qd2 57.Rf7 White has no defence since 57.Qg4 is met by 57...d3, and 57.Kf3 by 57...Bh6. 57...Qxe2+ 58.Kg3 Qe1+ 59.Kf3 Qh1+ 60.Kg3 Or 60.Ke2 d3+! 61.Kxe3 Re8+ and White loses. 60...Qg1+ 61.Kf3 Qf2+ 62.Ke4 Re8+ 63.Re7 Qh4+ 0-1 Respect and revolt Although Geller's style of play underwent a significant evolution - from a purely combinative, attacking player with a clear-cut penchant for sacrifices to an all-around strategist with an encyclopedic knowledge of chess openings - all his life he professed Botvinnik's approach to chess. For him, as for Botvinnik, all phases of the game - the opening, the middlegame and the endgame - were closely linked, and great is the number of the games which had been planned by Geller from start to finish at home. Geller wrote, "I personally gain great satisfaction from chess when, like Botvinnik, I am engaged in studying the secrets of this ancient and eternally youthful game. Botvinnik showed the road which is now followed by all the leading grandmasters. This road is the study of chess, the maximum correlation of the game with science..." (The Application of Chess Theory, pp.166-167). How could then Geller play successfully with the 6th World Champion? It is well known that too much respect can easily turn into obedience and at the chessboard this may eventually become a serious handicap. I think that Geller, before each game with Botvinnik, managed to rise to the occasion. Respecting Botvinnik as a chess player and a great innovator in chess, Geller succeeded in being on a par with the champion strategically. As to tactics, his style of play was much more dynamic, flexible and devoid of dogmatic concepts. This was a revolt of the pupil against the teacher, the pupil armed with same basic weapons, but equipped with a more advanced knowledge of openings oriented towards, I repeat, extremely dynamic play imbued with sacrifices and profound calculation of variations. Out of the four games that Geller won against Botvinnik (Geller was always playing with black!) two games were King's Indians. More than that, both times Botvinnik, true to his principles, chose the same classical g3 variation. I do not think that his choice was in any way justified. Geller, together with Bronstein and Boleslavsky, was the leading expert on this defence, which owed its evolution and development, to a great extent, to these grandmasters. Since they were all born in the Ukraine, in the 50s the Soviets even proposed to call it the "Ukrainian Defence". The first game to be considered here is the last game between the two grandmasters... Botvinnik-Geller Belgrade, 1969 1.c4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.g3 0-0 6.Bg2 Nbd7 7.0-0 e5 8.e4 c6 The first deviation from their 1952 game. It seems that all these years Geller had been preparing for another encounter with Botvinnik! 9.h3 Qb6! A very important sortie with two ideas: it envisages Qb4, attacking the unprotected c4 pawn, and it also threatens to play 10...exd4.10.Re1 exd4 11.Nxd4 Re8 12.Re2 "Botvinnik himself considers the strongest move to be 12.Na4," wrote Geller, "driving the Black queen off the a7-g1 diagonal. The curious thing is that afterwards Botvinnik told me that during the game he had forgotten this move! And so he employed a continuation recommended to him by S. Furman". 12...Ng4 13.Nc2 Nge5 14.Ne3 Nc5 15.b3? Obviously, a tactical slip after which White loses a pawn. Geller recommended here 15.Rd2 Be6 with double-edged chances. (See Diagram) 15... Bxh3! Even chess giants sometimes overlook such simple moves!16.Bd2 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 h5 Black is a pawn up with a strong attack. 18.Rb1 Qd8 19.b4 Ne6 20.f4 Nd3 21.Nf1 a5 22.a3 axb4 23.axb4 Bxc3 24.Bxc3 Ndxf4+ 0-1 Botvinnik-Geller Budapest, 1952 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nc3 d6 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.0-0 e5 8.e4 exd4 9.Nxd4 Nc5 10.h3 Re8 11.Re1 a5 12.Qc2 a4 13.Be3 c6 14.Rad1 Qa5 15.a3 Nfd7 16.Bf1 Re7 17.f4 Nf6 18.Bf2 Bd7 19.e5 dxe5 20.fxe5 Ne8 21.Nf3 Bf5 22.Qe2 h5 23.Bd4 Nc7 24.Qf2 N7e6 25.Be3 Rae8 26.Nh4 Bxe5 27.Nxf5 gxf5 28.Qxf5 Ng7 29.Qf2 Bxc3 30.bxc3 Ne4 31.Qf4 Nxc3 32.Rc1 Na2 33.Rcd1 Nc3 34.Rc1 Ne4 35.Re2 Qf5 36.g4 hxg4 37.hxg4 Qg6 38.Rg2 Ng5 39.Qxg5 Rxe3 40.Qxg6 fxg6 41.c5 Ne6 42.Rb2 Re7 43.Bc4 Kg7 44.Bxe6 R7xe6 45.g5 Rb3 46.Rxb3 axb3 47.Rd1 Re2 0-1 Perhaps the best compliment to Geller was made by Botvinnik - "Before Geller we did not understand the King's Indian Defence." Overcoming the barrier I think that Geller's chess relations with Vassily Smyslov were unprecedented in chess history. At the start of his chess career Geller always lost to Smyslov. He was his most difficult opponent. Suffice it to remember that in the candidates' tournaments in 1953 and 1956 Geller lost all the four games to Smyslov. Some journalists were joking that Geller had finally made Smyslov World Champion! Usually when one great chess player loses to another outstanding grandmaster, it is almost impossible to change the turn of events, to overcome this psychological barrier. Chess history knows quite a few cases of inexplicable superiority of one player over another and the explanation, perhaps, lies only in the domain of psychology. Geller, however, achieved the impossible! In later years he defeated Smyslov 10 times, and having lost seven games, he won their lifetime match! Smyslov-Geller Moscow, 1955 This game was the 7th, additional, game in the tie-breaking match between Smyslov and Geller in the 22nd USSR Championship. The previous six games were all drawn, and Smyslov, probably, lost his usual vigilance. He played an opening that was at that time an especially dangerous weapon in Geller's hands. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 e5 7.Nge2 c6 8.d5 cxd5 9.cxd5 Ne8 10.Qd2 f5 11.h3 Nd7 12.g3 Nb6 13.b3 f4 14.gxf4 exf4 15.Bd4 Nd7 16.h4 Ne5 17.Bg2 Bd7 18.Bf2 Rc8 19.Nd4 Qa5 20.Rc1 Nc7 21.Rc2 Na6 22.0-0 Nc5 23.Nce2 Qxd2 24.Rxd2 (See Diagram) 24...Nxe4! "White's position explodes at the apparently most invulnerable point" (Geller). 25.fxe4 f3 26.Nxf3 White could have put up a much tougher resistance by playing 26.Ne6, for example: 26... fxe2 27.Re1 Bh6! 28.Rdxe2 Rxf2! 29.Rxf2 Nd3 30.Rfe2 Nxe1 31.Rxe1 Bd2 Re2 Rc1+ 33.Kh2 Be1 34.Kh3 h5! 35.Re3 Rc3 36.Rxc3 Bxc3 and although Black is still winning, he has a long way to go. 26...Nxf3+ 27.Bxf3 Rxf3 28.Bxa7 Rh3 29.Bf2 Be5 30.Nd4 Bg4 31.Be1 Re3 32.Bf2 Rxe4 33.Re1 Rxe1+ 34.Bxe1 Rc1 White resigned. If 35.Kf2, 35...Bf6, while 35.Kf1 is met by 35...Bg3. Geller-Smyslov Moscow, 1961 Geller: "It should be said that prior to the game both players had 8« points out of 13 and shared 2nd- 6th places. There were six round until the end of the championship and only four players were to go through to the Interzonal tournament. This rivalry intensified the battle, although Vassily Vassilievich and I very rarely had peaceful draws." 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0-0 5.Bd3 d5 6.Nf3 c5 7.0-0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 Qe7 9.a3 Ba5 10.Qc2 Bd7 11.Bd2 Nc6 12.Rad1 cxd4 13.exd4 Rac8 14.Qd3 Bxc3 15.Bxc3 Nd5 16.Bd2 Qf6 17.Ng5 Qg6 18.Qh3 h6 19.Bxd5 hxg5 20.Ba2 Nxd4 (See Diagram) 21.Qg4! The finesse foreseen by Geller long ago. Now White wins back the pawn, and, owing to his control over the d-file, embarks on the decisive attack against the enemy king. 21...Nf5 22.Bxg5 Bb5 23.Rfe1 Nh6 24.Qf4 Rc5 25.h4 Bc6 26.b4 Rf5 27.Qg3 Qh5 28.Rd4 Rb5 29.Qf4 e5 30.Rxe5 Rxe5 31.Qxe5 Re8 32.Qf4 Qe2 33.Bc4 Clock-work precision until the very end. If 33.Bxh6 Qxa2 34.Qg5 Qa1+ and Black wins! 33...Qe1+ 34.Kh2 Re4 35.Rd8+ Kh7 36.Bd3 Black resigned. A nice positional game in which strategy and tactics were in perfect harmony. Geller-Smyslov Moscow, 1965 I believe, this is one of Geller's most beautiful games. It was played in the candidates' match, which Geller won most convincingly. He won three games, and four games were drawn. Unfortunately, in his next match with Boris Spassky, he was unrecognizable. Thus Geller won two matches against Smyslov, in 1955 and 1965, that is, when Smyslov was in the prime of his chess powers. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 0-0 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Be3 Qc7 11.Rc1 Rd8 12.f4 e6 13.Kh1 b6 14.f5 Na5 15.Bd3 exf5 16.exf5 Bb7 17.Qd2 Re8 18.Ng3 Qc6 19.Rf2 Rad8 20.Bh6 Bh8 21.Qf4 Rd7 22.Ne4 c4 23.Bc2 Rde7 24.Rcf1 Rxe4 (See Diagram) 25.fxg6! A brilliant sacrificial concept reminiscent of Anderssen's "immortal game". Certainly, White's queen is untouchable because of 26.gxh7 mate. But no better is 25...Qxg6 on account of 26.Qxf7+ Qxf7 27.Rxf7. Smyslov finds an apparently solid defensive move, but Geller has foreseen everything... 25...f6 26.Qg5! Fantastically simple and beautiful! How can Black avoid now the imminent 27.g7 ? 26...Qd7 27.Kg1! The finishing touch. According to Geller, this move is dictated by the necessity of the position. On 27.Rxf6 Bxf6 28.Qxf6 hxg6 29.Qxg6+ Kh8 30.Bg5 R4e6 31.Bf6+ Rxf6 32.Rxf6 it was White who would have been mated - 32...Re1 mate! 27...Bg7 28.Rxf6 Rg4 29.gxh7+ Kh8 30.Bxg7+ Qxg7 31.Qxg4! Four queen sacrifices in one game! White resigned. Uncompromising struggle When chess players such as Tal and Geller meet at the chessboard, it is always a great and unforgettable event for chess fans. Throughout their chess careers both grandmasters never compromised in their individual encounters. While writing these notes, I thought that each of Geller's duels with each World Champion deserved special research, maybe even a book. Of course, Geller's games with Tal merit special attention and analysis. Here only some of the highlights are considered. Tal-Geller Riga, 1958 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0- 0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d6 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Bb7 12.b4 cxb4 13.cxb4 Nc4 14.Nbd2 d5 15.exd5 exd4 16.Nxc4 bxc4 17.Qxd4 Bxb4 18.Rb1 Bxe1 19.Rxb7 Re8 20.d6 Qc8 21.Bg5 Re2 22.Rc7 Qe6 23.Nxe1 Rxe1+ 24.Kh2 Rd8 25.Bxf6 Tal sets up a trap and Geller falls into it! The apparently attractive 25.Re7 could be refuted here by 25...Qxe7 26.Bxh7+ Kh8! (See Diagram) 25...gxf6?? This was one of the most tragic blunders in Geller's chess career. Eventually it cost him a place in the Portoroz Interzonal. Such disasters happened to Geller occasionally and his explanation was invariably the same:; he began to study chess seriously quite late and the war years when he was conscripted into the Navy were not too conducive to chess! Doubtless, he should have played here 25...Qxf6 and after 26.Qxf6 gxf6 27.d7 Kg7 28.Bf5 Re5 29.Rc8 Rxf5 30.Rxd8 Rd5 the draw is the most likely result. 26.Re7 Qxd6+ Geller is obliged to make this 'ugly' move. He did not foresee that 26...Qxe7 is met by the simple 27.Qg4+! 27.Qxd6 Rxd6 28.Rxe1 Rd2 29.Rc1 Rxf2 30.Be4 Rxa2 31.Rxc4 a5 32.Rc8+ Kg7 33.Rc7 1-0 Geller-Tal Moscow, 1975 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 Bg4 7.Be3 Nc6 8.Qd2 e5 9.d5 Ne7 10.Rad1 Bd7 11.Ne1 Ng4 12.Bxg4 Bxg4 13.f3 Bd7 14.f4 exf4 15.Bxf4 f5 16.Nf3 fxe4 17.Nxe4 Bg4 18.Rde1 Qd7 19.Neg5 Rae8 20.c4 Nc8 21.Nd4 Rxe1 22.Rxe1 Re8 23.Rxe8+ Qxe8 24.h3 Bd7 25.Nde6 Bxe6 26.Nxe6 Qf7 27.b3 Qf6 28.Nxc7 Qa1+ 29.Kh2! "Under fire, the White King literally forces its way through the ranks of its own and enemy pieces deep into the opposing rearguard... Throughout all my tournament experience I do not recall a similar king march" (Geller). 29...Bd4 30.Qe2 Geller: "White could have won immediately by 30.Qc1! Qxa2 31.Qe1. But without this inaccuracy the marathon march of the White King from h2 to f8 would not have occurred". (See Diagram) 30...Ne7! An extraordinarily cunning trap! (Geller) 31.Nb5! Black could have turned the tables after the naive 31.Qxe7? Qg1+ 32.Kg3 Qf2+ 33.Kg4 Qxg2+ 34.Bg3 h5+ 35.Kh4 Qe4+!! 37.Qxe4 Bf6 - mate! An extremely beautiful variation showing 'behind the scenes' of the great players' tactics. 31...Bg1+ 32.Kg3 Nf5+ 33.Kf3 Nh4+ 34.Kg4 Nf5 35.Qe8+ Kg7 36.Qd7+ Kh8 37.Nxd6! Qd1+ 38.Kg5 Qh5+ 39.Kf6 Bd4+ 40.Ke6 Ng7+ 41.Kf7 g5+ Black resigned. I was lucky to see this game in the playing hall. The last ten moves or so both grandmasters were blitzing away - this was really a grand, unforgettable show! Geller-Tal Moscow, 1976 (See Diagram) White: Kg1, Qh5, Rd1, Rf1, Bd4, Be2, Nf6; pawns - a2, b2, c2, e5, g2, h2 Black: Kh8, Qc7, Ra8, Rf8, Bb7, Bc5, Nd7; pawns - a6, b5, e6, f7, g7, h6 19.Rf2?! "A move dictated by the soul of a chess artist," wrote Tal. "I must confess that this came as a surprise; at first I examined a continuation which seemed satisfactory - 19...Bxd4 20.Rxd4 Nxe5 21.Rh4 Rfd8 and here, to my horror, I noticed that White, with 22.Qg5!!, would force immediate capitulation. But what if, instead of 21...Rfd8, Black plays 21...Qc5? But it was after 21...Qc5 that my opponent had prepared a brilliant mating finish: 22.Qxh6+!! gxh6 23.Rxh6+ Kg7 24.Rh7+ Kg6 25.Bh5+ Kg5 26.h4+ Kxh4 27.Bxf7+ mating next move." Tal thought, however, that Geller should have played 19.Kh1! (instead of 19.Rf2) and Black would have had no defence. The game continued 19...Rad8 20.Ng4 Be4 21.Nxh6 gxh6 22.Qxh6+ Kg8 23.Rd3 It is clear that if White had played 19.Kh1, he could have won here by 23.Bd3! 23...Bxd4 Here the game was drawn since after 24.Rg3+ Bg6 25.Rxg6+ fxg6 26.Qxg6+ White has to be content with a perpetual and 24.Rxd4 is parried by 24...Bg6 25.Rh4 Qxe5.