Spassky played a total of 7 matches prior to playing Petrosian in 1969 for the second time for the Championship. He beat Tal, Keres, Geller, Korchnoi, and Larsen. I think all these matches made him invincably stronger so that the second time he played Petrosian he dispatched him with great play. He had learned how to present problems to his opponents that disrupted their style of play. FIDE should go back to match play to determine the Champ as it gives the challenger a chance to learn how to play in matches. Spassky's games are full of many learning oppourtunities. He played like Magnus before there was a Magnus. Show us more of his games please.
Well said brother. It irks me that sp many people list morphy fischer and tal. Spassky is much more than the guy who lost to fischer he was very strong
Hi 👋🏻, Iam a subscriber of your RUclips channel. I feel awesome to watch those legendary moves and matches 🥰☺️👍. But, I have suggestion for you, whenever they play the move please highlight that square; so that it will helpful for us to find the move very quickly. Otherwise we need to pause the video for some time, to identify your last move. I hope you ll understand my point. Thank you very much sir, and all the very best for your upcoming videos 😊❤
Hi. Thanks a lot for your suggestion, it makes perfect sense to me. However, I couldn't find how to do it on chessbase 12, which I'm using, I'm not sure if it's possible. I might try dragging pieces sometimes though, it might help. Thank you for your kind words, I also wish you all the best.
Spassky was a very strong player, but, but, but, this game was clearly arranged!! A normal attack for a grandmaster, when his soft opponent has conveniently put all his pieces on the quuenside, away from protecting the king. This is so obvious to a chess player, that black was too obviously just asking for it. Fischer told you so too that the Soviets did this, as is now widely known and admitted. This is a fine example of an arranged win for Spassky. Geller was a brilliant chess player too. But he did what he was told to do, as they all did to some extent, but possibly not Botvinnik. He complained a lot about this sort of thing!
I don't think this game was arranged. It was the third closed Sicilian in the match, and in the two previous games Geller got advantage after the opening. So Spassky prepared improvements for this game and it seems Geller wasn't ready for them.
It doesn't make sense to me. There is no evidence that the match was arranged, to the best of my knowledge, no one ever claimed that it was. The score of the match was 5.5 - 2.5, so I think Spassky was in better shape. In his interview after the match Geller said, that he lost due to the lack of practice at that time, as he took part only in one small tournament before the match, while usually he played in lots of strong tournaments. For this reason he often got into time trouble and made blunders.
@@chesswisdom I guess you could argue both ways. But it is well known that some players were favoured at times in Soviet circles. I will look more into it and see what I can find. But in the game mentioned black's play looks pure lunacy. Hence one can assume that there was one player being favoured. As such may have happened for Smyslov in 1953. It's well known when Soviet players had a draw between themselves. Korchnoi, Bronstein and Averbakh have openly talked about fixes in the past. I would like to believe that it was a fair match. Just looked too fishy to me. I'm happy to be wrong about it. After all, this was when Spassky was in his prime. So, in the balance, is a fair summation I think. 🤔
I just found this channel and i was astonished for the classic game collection. New suscriber
I'm glad to see Spassky being celebrated for his brilliance.
Thank you again - this is very nicely explained. Will recommend this to my students!
My pleasure!
Thanks a Lot for providing numerous instructive videos with indepth analysis.
My pleasure.
I really appreciate the fact that you show us the works of the most forgotten player
Spassky played a total of 7 matches prior to playing Petrosian in 1969 for the second time for the Championship. He beat Tal, Keres, Geller, Korchnoi, and Larsen. I think all these matches made him invincably stronger so that the second time he played Petrosian he dispatched him with great play. He had learned how to present problems to his opponents that disrupted their style of play. FIDE should go back to match play to determine the Champ as it gives the challenger a chance to learn how to play in matches. Spassky's games are full of many learning oppourtunities. He played like Magnus before there was a Magnus. Show us more of his games please.
Thank you for your comment. I'm planning to make more videos on Spassky's games soon.
Well said brother. It irks me that sp many people list morphy fischer and tal. Spassky is much more than the guy who lost to fischer he was very strong
Thanks for your useful contents. there are really made for learning not for gaining subsscriberes! Like most of other chess chanals...
My pleasure.
Thx for sharing this interesting game!
My pleasure.
Clásica partida.gracias Chess Wisdom.Saludos.
My pleasure. Thanks for watching.
Very nice game analysis. I just discovered your channel and have subscribed and "liked" this video. Thanks!
Thank you!
Spassky deseves so much more than just being the dude Bobby Fischer beat.
Hi 👋🏻, Iam a subscriber of your RUclips channel. I feel awesome to watch those legendary moves and matches 🥰☺️👍.
But, I have suggestion for you, whenever they play the move please highlight that square; so that it will helpful for us to find the move very quickly. Otherwise we need to pause the video for some time, to identify your last move.
I hope you ll understand my point. Thank you very much sir, and all the very best for your upcoming videos 😊❤
Hi. Thanks a lot for your suggestion, it makes perfect sense to me. However, I couldn't find how to do it on chessbase 12, which I'm using, I'm not sure if it's possible. I might try dragging pieces sometimes though, it might help. Thank you for your kind words, I also wish you all the best.
He should set off fireworks, too.
Spassky was a very strong player, but, but, but, this game was clearly arranged!! A normal attack for a grandmaster, when his soft opponent has conveniently put all his pieces on the quuenside, away from protecting the king. This is so obvious to a chess player, that black was too obviously just asking for it. Fischer told you so too that the Soviets did this, as is now widely known and admitted. This is a fine example of an arranged win for Spassky. Geller was a brilliant chess player too. But he did what he was told to do, as they all did to some extent, but possibly not Botvinnik. He complained a lot about this sort of thing!
I don't think this game was arranged. It was the third closed Sicilian in the match, and in the two previous games Geller got advantage after the opening. So Spassky prepared improvements for this game and it seems Geller wasn't ready for them.
@@chesswisdom
Lol. And how many games did Geller win ? None! Clearly a fix.
It doesn't make sense to me. There is no evidence that the match was arranged, to the best of my knowledge, no one ever claimed that it was. The score of the match was 5.5 - 2.5, so I think Spassky was in better shape. In his interview after the match Geller said, that he lost due to the lack of practice at that time, as he took part only in one small tournament before the match, while usually he played in lots of strong tournaments. For this reason he often got into time trouble and made blunders.
@@chesswisdom
You always need a credible cover story!
@@chesswisdom
I guess you could argue both ways. But it is well known that some players were favoured at times in Soviet circles. I will look more into it and see what I can find. But in the game mentioned black's play looks pure lunacy. Hence one can assume that there was one player being favoured. As such may have happened for Smyslov in 1953. It's well known when Soviet players had a draw between themselves. Korchnoi, Bronstein and Averbakh have openly talked about fixes in the past. I would like to believe that it was a fair match. Just looked too fishy to me. I'm happy to be wrong about it. After all, this was when Spassky was in his prime. So, in the balance, is a fair summation I think. 🤔