Bobby vs Spassky game 1

[AlanLlewellyn]

Its been 50 years since the bobby match and i only just found out bobby didnt immediately resign after playing Bxh2 in the famous match, some analysis is given below of what he must have missed...

[AlanLlewellyn]

5k2/pp4pp/3bpp2/1P6/8/P2KP3/5PPP/2B5 b - - 0 29booby is black and has just played the famous blunder Bxh2, the theory is he thought he could get his bishop out with 30 g3 h5 31 Ke2 h4 32 Kf3 h3!! 33 Kg4 Bg1 34 Kxh3 Bxf2 when the move he missed was 35 Bd2 stopping 35...Be1 and trapping in the Bishop.

[AlanLlewellyn]

note the position shows immediately before 29...Bxh2

[IM Jack Rudd]

The other line worth looking at is 32...g5 33.Kg2 g4 34.Kxh2 h3.

[AlanLlewellyn]

is that good enough for a draw?

[Nick Ivell]

It was far from a clear loss. I think I saw some analysis from Speelman showing that Bobby could still have drawn with best play.

Of course ...Bxh2 was still a terrible move. Why risk losing in such a sterile position?

[Paul Cooksey]

Speelman did indeed look at the ending in detail in his excellent book Analysing the Ending. I heard him remark on a stream that computer analysis had refuted his main idea. This thread reminding me to have a look at it with Stockfish

[Nick Ivell]

Bobby had a history of taking big risks with Black against Boris.

This continued in game 3 with his positionally risky ...Nh5. Only, this time, it worked! Boris was a shadow of his usual self in the first half of the match. I can only conclude he was completely rattled by all the off-board antics.

Of course Bobby was the stronger player by 1972, but not that much stronger. The match should still have been a contest.

I've been thinking nostalgically about the match, as it happened exactly 50 years ago.

[Roger de Coverly]

Bobby had a history of taking big risks with Black against Boris.

Did he ever explain why he took on h2? Presumably he thought he could rescue the Bishop or gain adequate or winning compensation for the piece. But where did he miscalculate?

[Paul Heaton]

It was far from a clear loss. I think I saw some analysis from Speelman showing that Bobby could still have drawn with best play.

Of course ...Bxh2 was still a terrible move. Why risk losing in such a sterile position?

In Gudmundur Thorarinsson’s (organiser of the match) recent book he says Fischer told him he missed Bd2 (this was much later, in 2005). In the 1992 match press conference Fischer was asked a question on if he was trying to complicate a drawn position, to which he replied -“basically, that’s right”.

I suspect the noise from the tv cameras was also bothering him.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Of course Bobby was the stronger player by 1972, but not that much stronger. The match should still have been a contest.

Well, if anything, the match "should" have been even more one-sided than it was; Spassky did actually gain rating points from the event.

[Nick Ivell]

Bd2 seems a very simple thing for Bobby to have missed.

I suspect we will never know the reason for the blunder.

[AlanLlewellyn]

Bd2 seems a very simple thing for Bobby to have missed.

I suspect we will never know the reason for the blunder.

although Bxh2 is considered a patzer move theyre are rare occasions it works

[AlanLlewellyn]

Bobby probably thought he was invincible and wanted to find a way to win the first game to prove he was invincible

[Nick Ivell]

I don't think he had that invincible feeling at the start of the match.

He had always lost to Boris as Black. In fact, I think Bobby may have been full of self-doubt.