Re: Kings of Chess: Chess Championships of the Twentieth Century by William Winter
samsloan
by William Winter
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=4871878287
http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871878287
This is one of the great classics of chess literature. British
Champion William Winter deeply annotates 50 games that were played in
matches for the World Chess Championship, starting with the 1907 match
between Lasker and Marshall and ending with the 1951 match between
Botvinnk and Bronstein.
Winter writes with authority about these famous games, because he was
personally present when many of them were played. Winter met all but
one of the players he writes about in this book (he never met
Schlechter because Schlechter died at an early age) and Winter played
tournament games against most of the grandmasters discussed in this
book.
Winter was just strong enough to beat the best players in the world
occasionally, but he was never strong enough to be one of them. Winter
often played in top level grandmaster tournaments, but usually
finished near the bottom, although he generally managed to take a
scalp.
Winter reaches some surprising conclusions in his book. He states that
the best played match for the World Chess Championship was the 1910
Match between Lasker and Schlechter. This is not the match that would
first come to mind. The most famous game of that match was the last
game, when Schlechter only had to achieve a draw to win the match to
become World Chess Champion. Schlechter had a way to force a draw.
Instead, he tried a risky and daring plan to win and he lost as a
result.
This game between Lasker and Schlechter continues to be debated and
analyzed to this day.
William Winter was born September 11, 1898 and died December 18, 1955.
He should not be confused with the reclusive and possibly non-existent
chess historian Edward Winter, who lives in Switzerland.
One odd in curious fact about the great Indian Player, Sultan Khan, is
that although Sultan Khan was ranked as the 6th or 7th strongest chess
player in the world and he even defeated Capablanca when Capablanca
was regarded as unbeatable, is that Sultan Khan always lost to Winter
even though Winter always finished near the bottom and Sultan Khan
finished near the top of every tournament in which they both played.
Winter was himself involved in one of the most controversial chess
games ever played. Nottingham 1936 was the first tournament where the
Soviet Union under Stalin allowed one of their players to play outside
the country. The Soviet Union sent Botvinnik to play in Nottingham
1936.
In the last round with Botvinnik in contention for first prize, he was
pared against Winter, who was in dead last position.
The game went as follows:
[Event "Nottingham"]
[Date "1936"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
[Black "William Winter"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "A15"]
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 d5 4.e3 g6 5.d4 Bg7 6.Qb3 O-O 7.Bd2 b6 8.cxd5
cxd5 9.Ne5 Bb7 10.Bb5 a6 11.Be2 Nbd7 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.f4 e6 14.O-O f5
15.Bf3 Rb8 16.Rac1 b5 17.Ne2 Re8 18.Qa3 Bf8 19.Bb4 Bxb4 20.Qxb4 Qb6
21.Rc2 Kf7 22.Nc1 Rbc8 23.Rff2 Rc4 24.Qe1 Rec8 25.Bd1 Rxc2 26.Bxc2 a5
27.Nd3 Ba6 28.b4 axb4 29.Nxb4 Qa5 30.Bb3 Nf6 31.Rf1 Ne4 32.Nxa6 Qxa6
33.Qb4 Rc3 34.Re1 Qc6 35.h3 Rc1 36.Kh2 Qc3 37.Qxc3 Rxc3 38.Re2 1/2-1/2
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-+-+-+(
7+-+-+k+p'
6-+-+p+p+&
5+p+p+p+-%
4-+-zPnzP-+$
3+Ltr-zP-+P#
2P+-+R+PmK"
1+-+-+-+-!
xabcdefghy
Now in this position it is plainly obvious that White, Botvinnik, is
lost. White simply has no moves. Black can win easily by bringing his
king around starting with Ke7 and then slowly marching over to the
queen side.
Winter was a strong enough player and he must have seen this. Winter
must have seen that he was winning easily. Instead, here Winter
offered Botvinnik a draw.
Winter was a Communist who spent time in prison for his political
activities. It is widely believed that Winter offered Botvinnik a draw
to advance the cause of World Communism. Winter himself suggested this
possibility in his notes to this game. Also, Alekhine wrote about the
above position:
“Black agreed to call the game a draw; but it was a very premature
decision, to say the least. A simple plan was to bring his king over
to b4 threatening to sacrifice the exchange. To prevent this white
would be obliged to create new weaknesses in his position; e.g., after
38...Ke7 39 Bc2 followed by Bxe4 the rook ending would be quite
hopeless for White. It is a pity a game of such importance should have
remained practically a torso.”
Every book of the history of chess during this period mentions the
great achievement of Botvinnik in tying for first with the Great
Capablanca in Nottingham 1936 and how this great achievement by
Botvinnik led the Soviet authorities to allow other Soviet players to
travel outside of the Soviet Union to participate in other grandmaster
chess tournaments.
The books that write about this great achievement of Botvinnik
invariably fail to mention that this achievement was made possible
because Winter, being an avowed Communist, sacrificed his own career
by offering Botvinnik a draw in a position where Botvinnik was clearly
lost.
Think about how chess history would been different if Winter had won
this game: Winter would have become known in chess history as the Man
Who Beat Botvinnik. Instead, Winter is known as the man who always
finished last. Botvinnik became known as “The Invincible”.
This is not to suggest that Winter had been ordered by Moscow to give
a draw to Botvinnik. In 1936, it was not yet thought that Moscow would
do things like that. Also, if Moscow had been giving such orders, it
would have ordered Winter to lose to Botvinnik, which would have given
Botvinnik undisputed first place at Nottingham 1936, instead of a mere
tie for first.
The game where many thought and some still think that a player
actually had been ordered to lose a game is in Winter's book. This
incident became so notorious that it is the subject of the opening
scene in the James Bond book and movie “From Russia with Love” where
the protagonist, “Kronstein”, an obvious play on the name of David
Bronstein, receives an order from the Kremlin to resign a game. The
actual game where this is said to have occurred was Botvinnik vs.
Bronstein, World Championship 1951, where the following position was
reached:
[Event "match"]
[Site "Ch World , Moscow (Russia)"]
[Date "1951.01.24"]
[Round "23"]
[White "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
[Black "David Bronstein"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E60"]
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 c6 4.Bg2 d5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Nh3 Bxh3
8.Bxh3 Nc6 9.Bg2 e6 10.e3 O-O 11.Bd2 Rc8 12.O-O Nd7 13.Ne2 Qb6 14.Bc3
Rfd8 15.Nf4 Nf6 16.Qb3 Ne4 17.Qxb6 axb6 18.Be1 Na5 19.Nd3 Bf8 20.f3
Nd6 21.Bf2 Bh6 22.Rac1 Nac4 23.Rfe1 Na5 24.Kf1 Bg7 25.g4 Nc6 26.b3 Nb5
27.Ke2 Bf8 28.a4 Nc7 29.Bg3 Na6 30.Bf1 f6 31.Red1 Na5 32.Rxc8 Rxc8
33.Rc1 Rxc1 34.Nxc1 Ba3 35.Kd1 Bxc1 36.Kxc1 Nxb3+ 37.Kc2 Na5 38.Kc3
Kf7 39.e4 f5 40.gxf5 gxf5 41.Bd3 Kg6 42.Bd6 Nc6 43.Bb1 Kf6 44.Bg3 fxe4
45.fxe4 h6 46.Bf4 h5 47.exd5 exd5 48.h4 Nab8 49.Bg5+ Kf7 50.Bf5 Na7
51.Bf4 Nbc6 52.Bd3 Nc8 53.Be2 Kg6 54.Bd3+ Kf6 55.Be2 Kg6 56.Bf3 N6e7
57.Bg5 1-0
XABCDEFGHY
8-+n+-+-+(
7+p+-sn-+-'
6-zp-+-+k+&
5+-+p+-vLp%
4P+-zP-+-zP$
3+-mK-+L+-#
2-+-+-+-+"
1+-+-+-+-!
xabcdefghy
In this position, which is also in the last game in Winter's book,
Black, in spite of being a pawn ahead, resigned the game and thereby
the World Chess Championship.
This is the stuff of which legends are made. Ever since, it has been
wondered whether Bronstein had been ordered by the Kremlin or by his
KGB Handler to resign.
I am now going to suggest a theory which has never previously been
advanced by anybody as to why Bronstein resigned in this position.
Hold your breath while I tell you what NOBODY, Nobody at all, has ever
suggested was the real reason for Black's strange resignation in this
position.
The reason is that Bronstein simply did not see that he has a defense.
Bronstein is in a Zugzwang. None of his pieces can move. His pawns
cannot move. He definitely cannot move his king because then he drops
his vital h-pawn. So, one of his knights must move, but which ever
knight moves Black drops material.
It looks hopeless and therefore I believe that Bronstein simply did
not see that he has a defense and that after 57. …. Nf6 58. Bxd5 Nd6
Black has a playable, although of course very difficult, game.
Obviously, Bronstein was never going to admit that he simply missed
the best move, and therefore the legend grew that he was ordered by
the KGB to lose. They even made an action movie thriller movie based
on this, where the Bronstein / Kronstein character is sent on a
mission to do battle with James Bond, as punishment for disobeying the
order to lose the game.
Sam Sloan
New York
December 25, 2009
samsloan
wrote:
> On Jan 2, 5:50 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The game where many thought and some still think that a player
> > actually had been ordered to lose a game is in Winter's book. This
> > incident became so notorious that it is the subject of the opening
> > scene in the James Bond book and movie “From Russia with Love” where
> > the protagonist, “Kronstein”, an obvious play on the name of David
> > Bronstein, receives an order from the Kremlin to resign a game. The
> > actual game where this is said to have occurred was Botvinnik vs.
> > Bronstein, World Championship 1951, where the following position was
> > reached:
>
> No, the game in the movie was based on Spassky-Bronstein, USSR Ch,
> Leningrad 1960. And Kronsteen (not "Kronstein," and he was Czech, not
> Russian) was not ordered to lose; he merely got a message summoning
> him to a SPECTRE meeting, whereupon he quickly won the game and went,
> as can be seen here:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZWDxnXJI-s
>
> Perhaps things were different in the book; I have not read it.
I have read the book, and in the book while playing the game he
receives a note from his KGB colonel directing him to come at once.
To obey this order would require him to resign the game. He knows that
if he disobeys this order, the punishment will likely be execution.
Nevertheless, he decides to take the chance and he wins brilliantly.
The game Spassky-Bronstein, USSR Championship, Leningrad 1960 reached
a position almost exactly the same as the position in the movie
version but it was not part of the plot in the book.
Sam Sloan
Taylor Kingston
> On Jan 2, 6:44 pm, Taylor Kingston <taylor.kings...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 2, 5:50 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The game where many thought and some still think that a player
> > > actually had been ordered to lose a game is in Winter's book. This
> > > incident became so notorious that it is the subject of the opening
> > > scene in the James Bond book and movie “From Russia with Love” where
> > > the protagonist, “Kronstein”, an obvious play on the name of David
> > > Bronstein, receives an order from the Kremlin to resign a game. The
> > > actual game where this is said to have occurred was Botvinnik vs.
> > > Bronstein, World Championship 1951, where the following position was
> > > reached:
>
> > No, the game in the movie was based on Spassky-Bronstein, USSR Ch,
> > Leningrad 1960. And Kronsteen (not "Kronstein," and he was Czech, not
> > Russian) was not ordered to lose; he merely got a message summoning
> > him to a SPECTRE meeting, whereupon he quickly won the game and went,
> > as can be seen here:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZWDxnXJI-s
>
> > Perhaps things were different in the book; I have not read it.
>
> I have read the book, and in the book while playing the game he
> receives a note from his KGB colonel directing him to come at once.
The KGB? Not SPECTRE? How could a Czech be in the KGB?
> To obey this order would require him to resign the game. He knows that
> if he disobeys this order, the punishment will likely be execution.
Why would the KGB want a Russian to lose a game to a Canadian? Or
was his opponent in the book of some different nationality? If so,
what nationality?
> Nevertheless, he decides to take the chance and he wins brilliantly.
>
> The game Spassky-Bronstein, USSR Championship, Leningrad 1960 reached
> a position almost exactly the same as the position in the movie
> version but it was not part of the plot in the book.
So what game was in the book?
samsloan
In the book they are merely playing for the Championship of Moscow and
the players are both Russian.
There is no information about the game or the position in the book.
Sam Sloan
Taylor Kingston
>
> In the book they are merely playing for the Championship of Moscow and
> the players are both Russian.
>
> There is no information about the game or the position in the book.
But Sam, you clearly said it WAS in the book. I quote you from
above:
"This incident became so notorious that it is the subject of the
opening scene in the James Bond /BOOK/ and movie “From Russia with
Love” where the protagonist, “Kronstein”, an obvious play on the name
of David Bronstein, receives an order from the Kremlin to resign a
game." (emphasis added)
So once again, Sam, you didn't know what you were talking about, did
you?
samsloan
wrote:
No. It is your low reading comprehension.
In the book, Kronstein is playing a game for the Championship of
Moscow before a large audience that is watching the game.
He receives a note from a messenger telling him to come immediately.
After considering the fact that he might be executed for disobeying
the order, he decides to take the chance and finish the game.
The main difference is that the book is not a chess book and does not
show a board or a chess position.
Sam Sloan
samsloan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZWDxnXJI-s
I have just played this video and I see what you mean.
In the movie, Kronsteen is playing in a grandmaster tournament in
Vienna. He merely receives a message. There is nothing about him
possibly being executed if he does not obey.
In the book, he is playing against another Russian for the
Championship of Moscow. He stands to be executed if he disobeys.
I have just ordered the book. I will try to quote the relevant passage
when it arrives.
There is very little doubt that the incident in the book was inspired
by the real life game Botvinnik - Bronstein Moscow, 1951.
Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan
None
I have just played this video and I see what you mean. ...,
There is very little doubt that the incident in the book was inspired
by the real life game Botvinnik - Bronstein Moscow, 1951.
-- Sam Sloan
Careful where you step Sam. There is a lot of shit falling on the
floor. Just look up at the ceiling and you'll see what I mean.
Opry phantom
Well, there was plenty BS chess wise in the "Workers Paradise" in
those days; but Bronstein was a tad erratic. Then there was Keres. So
we have Keres, an Estonian and Bronstein, an Ukrainian both failing to
defeat the Great Russian, hmmm!?
I believe years later Smyslov made some comments concerning
Botvinnik...
To his credit he did push the non Russian, Kasparov forward against
the Party favorite Karpov, a true Russki.
And leave us not forget the infamous USSR vs The Rest of The World
match, where teetering on a win over Korchnoi, the Hungarian Portisch,
was called away by his ambassador, then returned to the board and blew
a won position.
Korchnoi was not pleased, Fischer was furious.
Taylor Kingston
> On Jan 2, 8:49 pm, Taylor Kingston <taylor.kings...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 2, 8:44 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In the book they are merely playing for the Championship of Moscow and
> > > the players are both Russian.
>
> > > There is no information about the game or the position in the book.
>
> > But Sam, you clearly said it WAS in the book. I quote you from
> > above:
>
> > "This incident became so notorious that it is the subject of the
> > opening scene in the James Bond /BOOK/ and movie “From Russia with
> > Love” where the protagonist, “Kronstein”, an obvious play on the name
> > of David Bronstein, receives an order from the Kremlin to resign a
> > game." (emphasis added)
>
> > So once again, Sam, you didn't know what you were talking about, did
> > you?
>
> No. It is your low reading comprehension.
Sam, when it comes to comprehending you, I can only read what you
write. You wrote "This incident became so notorious that it is the
subject of the opening scene in the James Bond book and movie 'From
Russia with Love.'" You clearly said "book AND movie," yet in fact the
movie and book scenes are quite different. And the Botvinnik-Bronstein
game is not the /subject/ of either, it was only a _basis_ for the
scene, if your supposition is correct. So don't go denigrating
people's reading ability, when you write in such a confused way.
Meanwhile, I'd still like to see exactly what Winter wrote about his
game with Botvinnik, where you claim he suggests that he "offered
Botvinnik a draw to advance the cause of World Communism."
> In the book, Kronstein is playing a game for the Championship of
> Moscow before a large audience that is watching the game.
>
> He receives a note from a messenger telling him to come immediately.
>
> After considering the fact that he might be executed for disobeying
> the order, he decides to take the chance and finish the game.
>
> The main difference is that the book is not a chess book and does not
> show a board or a chess position.
No, the main differences are:
1. In the movie, Kronsteen is Czech, not Russian.
2. His opponent is Canadian, not Russian.
3. The event is a match in Venice, not a tournament for the Moscow
Ch.
4. There is no order to lose the game, merely a note saying "You are
required at once."
5. The summons comes from SPECTRE, a secret international terror/
extortion cabal, not an organ of the Soviet government.
6. There is nothing, express or implied, about Kronsteen being
killed as punishment for his trivial tardiness.
7. Sloan's claim that the "Kronstein character is sent on a mission
to do battle with James Bond, as punishment for disobeying the order
to lose the game" is nonsense, at least as far as the film is
concerned. Kronsteen was chief of planning for SPECTRE, and the
meeting is merely to put into operation a plan he had already devised.
Kronsteen and Bond never meet.
Interestingly, in the game as shown in the movie, Black need not
have lost. The position is this:
W: Kg1, Qf4, Rf1, Bc4, Nf7, a2, b2, g2, h2
B: Kg8, Qe7, Ra8, Re8, Nf8, a7, b7, c7, g7, h6
This is identical to Spassky-Bronstein, USSR Ch 1960, after Black's
21st move, except that two pawns are missing, from c5 and d4. In the
movie, play proceeds 1.Nxe5+ Kh7?? 2.Qe4+ 1-0. If 2...Kh8 3.Rxf8+ Rxf8
4.Ng6+, or 2...g6 3.Rf7+ etc. Instead, with 1...Ne6! Black would have
had reasonable chances of survival. In the Spassky-Bronstein game,
with the pawns on c5 and d4, 1...Ne6 does no good. Why they removed
the pawns in the film, I don't know.
samsloan
> On Jan 2, 6:44 pm, Taylor Kingston <taylor.kings...@comcast.net>
> > > that although Sultan Khan was ranked as the 6th or 7th strongest chess
> > > player in the world and he even defeated Capablanca when Capablanca
> > > was regarded as unbeatable, is that Sultan Khan always lost to Winter
>
> > and Hastings 1930-31, but Sultan Khan won at London 1932:
>
> > [Event "London"]
> > [Site "London"]
> > [Date "1932.??.??"]
> > [Round "6"]
> > [White "Winter, William"]
> > [Black "Sultan Khan, Mir"]
> > [Result "0-1"]
> > [ECO "B38"]
> > [PlyCount "52"]
> > [EventDate "1932.02.??"]
> > [EventType "tourn"]
> > [EventRounds "11"]
> > [EventCountry "ENG"]
> > [Source "ChessBase"]
>
> > 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.e4 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3 O-O
> > 8.Nb3 Nh5 9.Nc3 e5 10.Nb5 b6 11.Qd2 Ba6 12.Rd1 Nf4 13.g3 Ne6 14.Qxd7
> > Bxb5 15.cxb5 Nb4 16.Qxd8 Rfxd8 17.Rxd8+ Rxd8 18.a3 Nc2+ 19.Kf2 Nxe3
> > 20.Kxe3 Bh6+ 21.Kf2 Rd1 22.Bg2 Rd3 23.Nc1 Rd2+ 24.Ne2 Nd4 25.Re1 Rxb2
> > 26.Kf1 Nc2 0-1
>
> > > Now in this position it is plainly obvious that White, Botvinnik, is
> > > lost. White simply has no moves. Black can win easily by bringing his
> > > king around starting with Ke7 and then slowly marching over to the
> > > queen side.
>
> > > Winter was a strong enough player and he must have seen this. Winter
> > > must have seen that he was winning easily. Instead, here Winter
> > > offered Botvinnik a draw.
>
> > talked about a thrown game, I thought he must have meant Winter lost.
>
> > > Winter was a Communist who spent time in prison for his political
> > > activities. It is widely believed that Winter offered Botvinnik a draw
> > > to advance the cause of World Communism. Winter himself suggested this
> > > possibility in his notes to this game.
>
>
> > > The books that write about this great achievement of Botvinnik
> > > invariably fail to mention that this achievement was made possible
> > > because Winter, being an avowed Communist, sacrificed his own career
> > > by offering Botvinnik a draw in a position where Botvinnik was clearly
> > > lost.
>
> > everyone's tired, they want to get the damn thing over with. Winter's
> > anxious to get himself a drink or three. He offers and draw from a
> > position of advantage so he can get to the bar ASAP.
>
> > > This is not to suggest that Winter had been ordered by Moscow to give
> > > a draw to Botvinnik. In 1936, it was not yet thought that Moscow would
> > > do things like that. Also, if Moscow had been giving such orders, it
> > > would have ordered Winter to lose to Botvinnik, which would have given
> > > Botvinnik undisputed first place at Nottingham 1936, instead of a mere
> > > tie for first.
>
> > Cubans rather than the Russians who were giving orders. Winter had
> > Capablanca utterly busted, yet he went into total meltdown and lost:
>
> > [Event "Nottingham"]
> > [Site "Nottingham"]
> > [Date "1936.??.??"]
> > [Round "?"]
> > [White "Winter, William"]
> > [Black "Capablanca, Jose Raul"]
> > [Result "0-1"]
> > [ECO "A30"]
> > [PlyCount "74"]
> > [EventDate "1936.08.10"]
> > [EventType "tourn"]
> > [EventRounds "14"]
> > [EventCountry "ENG"]
> > [Source "ChessBase"]
>
> > 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 b6 3.g3 Bb7 4.Bg2 c5 5.O-O cxd4 6.Nxd4 Bxg2 7.Kxg2 g6
> > 8.b3 Bg7 9.Bb2 O-O 10.c4 d5 11.cxd5 Nxd5 12.e4 Nb4 13.Qd2 N8a6 14.Rd1
> > Rc8 15.Na3 Rc7 16.Nab5 Rd7 17.Qe2 Nc5 18.a3 Nbd3 19.Nc6 Qa8 20.Bxg7
> > Qxc6 21.Nd4 Qb7 22.Bxf8 Rxd4 23.Bh6 Rxe4 24.Qf3 f6 25.Kg1 Ne5 26.Qg2
> > g5 27.Rd8+ Kf7 28.f4 Ne6 29.Rb8 Qd5 30.Rf1 Qd4+ 31.Kh1 Ng4 32.Qh3 Nxh6
> > 33.Qxh6 Re2 34.Qxh7+?!
>
> > Instead, 34.Qh5+ Kg7 35.Qxe2 and Black can resign.
>
> > 34...Ng7 35.Qg8+ Kg6 36.f5+ Kh5 37.Qh7+??
>
> > The final blunder. After 37.Qc4 White would still be winning.
>
> > 37...Kg4 0-1
>
> > Black mates in at most seven moves.
>
> > > The game where many thought and some still think that a player
> > > incident became so notorious that it is the subject of the opening
> > > the protagonist, “Kronstein”, an obvious play on the name of David
> > > actual game where this is said to have occurred was Botvinnik vs.
> > > Bronstein, World Championship 1951, where the following position was
> > > reached:
>
> > No, the game in the movie was based on Spassky-Bronstein, USSR Ch,
> > Leningrad 1960. And Kronsteen (not "Kronstein," and he was Czech, not
> > Russian) was not ordered to lose; he merely got a message summoning
> > him to a SPECTRE meeting, whereupon he quickly won the game and went,
> > as can be seen here:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZWDxnXJI-s
>
> > Perhaps things were different in the book; I have not read it.
>
> > 57...Nf5 58.Bxd5 Ncd6, right? Without going into details, I'll just
> > note that both Fritz8 and Rybka 3.1 rate the resulting position at
> > about +2.25, i.e. winning for White. I'm not sure if Black can attain
> > a theoretical draw, but I'd guess that in practical play White would
> > win 8 times out of 10.
>
> Thank you for pointing out this terrible typo on my part.
>
> I meant 57. ... Nc6, not Nf6.
>
> Now, for example 58. Bxd5 Nd6 59. Bf3 Kf5 60. Bxh5 Ne4+ 61. K any Nxg5
> 62. hxg5 Kxg5 and Black, Bronstein, has some drawing chances.
>
> The question is not whether Botvinnik would be able to win but rather
> why Bronstein would resign in a position like this where he was
> leading the match up to this point and needed only a draw in a pawn up
> position to become the World Chess Champion.
>
> Sam Sloan
An additional factor is that there was still one game remaining to be
played.
Bronstein was in a must-win situation.
Botvinnik was surprised when Bornstein offered him a draw after just
22 moves.
[Event "Moscow Wch-m"]
[Date "1951.01.25"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "24"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "David Bronstein"]
[Black "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
[ECO "D44"]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bg5 dxc4 6.a4 Bb4 7.e4 c5
8.Bxc4 cxd4 9.Nxd4 h6 10.Be3 Nxe4 11.O-O Nf6 12.Qf3 O-O
13.Rad1 Qe7 14.Rfe1 Nc6 15.Qg3 Kh8 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Bd4 Rd8
18.Rd3 Bb7 19.Ree3 Rxd4 20.Rxd4 Bc5 21.Rd1 Bxe3 22.Qxe3
1/2-1/2
True, Botvinnik is a pawn up in the final position but Bornstein has
an attack and Botvinnik will have a difficult time freeing his
position.
It seems unlikely that anybody would give a draw in such a must win
situation.
Sam Sloan
Taylor Kingston
>
> An additional factor is that there was still one game remaining to be
> played.
>
> Bronstein was in a must-win situation.
>
> Botvinnik was surprised when Bornstein offered him a draw after just
> 22 moves.
According to the match book by Winter and Wade, it was Botvinnik who
offered the draw.
> [Event "Moscow Wch-m"]
> [Date "1951.01.25"]
> [EventDate "?"]
> [Round "24"]
> [Result "1/2-1/2"]
> [White "David Bronstein"]
> [Black "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
> [ECO "D44"]
>
> 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bg5 dxc4 6.a4 Bb4 7.e4 c5
> 8.Bxc4 cxd4 9.Nxd4 h6 10.Be3 Nxe4 11.O-O Nf6 12.Qf3 O-O
> 13.Rad1 Qe7 14.Rfe1 Nc6 15.Qg3 Kh8 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Bd4 Rd8
> 18.Rd3 Bb7 19.Ree3 Rxd4 20.Rxd4 Bc5 21.Rd1 Bxe3 22.Qxe3
> 1/2-1/2
>
> True, Botvinnik is a pawn up in the final position but Bornstein has
> an attack and Botvinnik will have a difficult time freeing his
> position.
Nonsense. W&W comment "Black of course could play to win with his
extra pawn had such a course been necessary, or could immediately
force a draw by 22...Nd5 23.Nxd5 cxd5 24.Bxd5 Bxd5 25.Rxd5 Rd8."
Fritz8 and Rybka 3.1 concur in this assessment.
> It seems unlikely that anybody would give a draw in such a must win
> situation.
>
> Sam Sloan
In "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" (Cadogan, 1995), David Bronstein
himself wrote "I have been asked many, many times if I was obliged to
lose the 23rd game and if there was a conspiracy against me to stop me
from taking Botvinnik's title. A lot of nonsense has been written
about this."
Our Sam carries on the tradition!
Taylor Kingston
Jeez, Sam, even after watching the video you get it all wrong.
Kronsteen and McAdams are playing a match, not a tournament, and it's
in Venice, Italy, not Vienna, Austria. You didn't notice the canals?
Your presumption in denigrating others' comprehension is like Marlee
Matlin appointing herself a judge on American Idol.
raylopez99
RL
SPECTRE's convoluted scheme was concocted by chess master Kronsteen
(Vladek Sheybal), who claims to have considered "every possible
variation of countermove"--but the catch here is that he's incapable
of understanding that his plan's executors and intended victims can
still be complete wild cards when the situation calls for it. Consider
that cipher machines and chess are both capable of countless
permutations that nevertheless add up to a finite number; the whole
film is about trying to reclaim immutable logic in a world where
arrogance, love, and pure luck play immeasurably into the equation.
Grant and Bond's climactic train-compartment fight is the moment those
best-laid plans go right out the window--and what's left is a
claustrophobic battle royale between two headstrong brutes beating the
shit out of each other. Once the plan has failed, SPECTRE leader
Blofeld kills the seemingly-faultless Kronsteen, while the subservient
Romanova shoots her superior, Klebb; From Russia with Love is the
contemporary counterpart to No Country for Old Men and The Dark
Knight: all three films argue that even the agents of chaos are
subject to their own treachery.3 It's too easy to ghettoize the Bond
series as a piddling genre in itself, unworthy of conversation, but
through its excitement and complexity, it's impossible to deny that
this is great cinema--and perhaps the greatest of all spy thrillers.
Considerably meatier than Dr. No but not yet shackled to a workhorse
formula, From Russia with Love is ferocious and untamed in a way that
the series would not completely rejuvenate until Daniel Craig's blood-
swilling anti-hero took the reins.-Ian Pugh