Petrosian Year by Year

Volume II (1963-1984)

Tibor Karolyi and Tigran Gyozalyan

Petrosian Year by Year: Volume II (1963-1984)
Authors: Tibor Karolyi and Tigran Gyozalyan
Edited by Andrew Burnett
Typesetting by Andrei Elkov (www.elkov.ru)
© LLC Elk and Ruby Publishing House, 2022. All rights reserved
Follow us on Twitter: @ilan_ruby
www.elkandruby.com
ISBN 978-5-6044692-9-3 (hardback), 978-5-6044692-2-4 (paperback)
 3

CONTENTS

Index of Games..........................................................................................................4
Introduction to Volume II......................................................................................9
1963........................................................................................................................... 11
1964........................................................................................................................... 40
1965........................................................................................................................... 58
1966........................................................................................................................... 71
1967......................................................................................................................... 103
1968......................................................................................................................... 121
1969......................................................................................................................... 139
1970......................................................................................................................... 174
1971......................................................................................................................... 199
1972......................................................................................................................... 230
1973......................................................................................................................... 262
1974......................................................................................................................... 283
1975......................................................................................................................... 310
1976......................................................................................................................... 333
1977......................................................................................................................... 355
1978......................................................................................................................... 372
1979......................................................................................................................... 392
1980 ........................................................................................................................ 409
1981 ........................................................................................................................ 425
1982 ........................................................................................................................ 449
1983 ........................................................................................................................ 473
1984 ........................................................................................................................ 488
Petrosian’s Remarkable Exchanges................................................................. 490
It’s Your Move....................................................................................................... 502
Afterword to Volume II ..................................................................................... 513
Index of Themes................................................................................................... 514
4 Petrosian Year by Year
Index of Games
Game White Black Opening Year

112 T. Petrosian M. Botvinnik Grunfeld Defence 1963

113 T. Petrosian M. Botvinnik English Opening 1963
114 T. Petrosian M. Botvinnik Grunfeld Defence 1963
115 P. Benko T. Petrosian Fragment 1963
116 T. Petrosian V. Korchnoi Fragment 1963
117 T. Petrosian R. Byrne Fragment 1964
118 T. Petrosian A. Roizman Fragment 1964
119 R. Naranja T. Petrosian Fragment 1964
120 T. Petrosian L. Tapaszto Fragment 1964
121 T. Petrosian M. Bertok English Opening 1965
122 T. Petrosian J. Donner Queen’s Gambit Declined 1965
123 M. Filip T. Petrosian Fragment 1965
124 V. Korchnoi T. Petrosian Fragment 1966
125 B. Spassky T. Petrosian Queen’s Pawn Opening 1966
126 T. Petrosian B. Spassky King’s Indian Defence 1966
127 T. Petrosian B. Spassky Fragment 1966
128 T. Petrosian A. Lutikov Queen’s Gambit Declined 1966
129 N. Minev T. Petrosian Fragment 1966
130 T. Petrosian D. Bronstein Queen’s Gambit Declined 1967
131 T. Petrosian F. Gheorghiu English Opening 1967
132 T. Petrosian V. Smyslov Slav Defence 1967
133 T. Petrosian V. Danov Sicilian Defence 1967
134 B. Gurgenidze T. Petrosian Fragment 1967
135 A. Dueckstein T. Petrosian Sicilian Defence 1968
136 T. Petrosian A. Bykhovsky Fragment 1968
137 O. Moiseev T. Petrosian Fragment 1968
138 M. Bobotsov T. Petrosian Queen’s Gambit Exchange 1968
139 T. Petrosian S. Gligoric King’s Indian Defence 1968
140 T. Petrosian B. Larsen Queen’s Indian Defence 1968
141 B. Spassky T. Petrosian Fragment 1969
142 B. Spassky T. Petrosian Queen’s Indian Defence 1969
143 T. Petrosian B. Spassky Fragment 1969
144 B. Spassky A. Suetin Queen’s Gambit Accepted 1963
145 A. Suetin V. Tseshkovsky Fragment 1972
146 T. Petrosian E. Vasiukov Fragment 1969
147 I. Zaitsev T. Petrosian French Defence 1969
148 J. Diez del Corral T. Petrosian French Defence 1969
149 I. Zaitsev B. Spassky Fragment 1960
150 I. Zaitsev O. Dementiev Sicilian Defence 1970
151 L. Polugaevsky T. Petrosian English Opening 1970
152 M. Udovcic T. Petrosian King’s Indian Attack 1970
 Index of Games 5

Game White Black Opening Year

153 V. Hort T. Petrosian French Defence 1970

154 T. Petrosian M. Fuller Fragment 1970
155 T. Petrosian H. Liebert Fragment 1970
156 T. Petrosian D. Tomic Fragment 1970
157 T. Petrosian C. Van den Berg Fragment 1971
158 T. Petrosian A. Karpov Fragment 1971
159 V. Korchnoi T. Petrosian Fragment 1971
160 T. Petrosian V. Korchnoi Fragment 1971
161 T. Petrosian R. Fischer Grunfeld Defence 1971
162 R. Fischer T. Petrosian Fragment 1971
163 V. Korchnoi T. Petrosian Meran Semi-Slav 1971
164 T. Petrosian B. Spassky Fragment 1971
165 B. Parma T. Petrosian Sicilian Defence 1971
166 T. Petrosian M. Tal Semi-Tarrasch Defence 1972
167 T. Petrosian M. Matulovic Leningrad Dutch 1972
168 T. Petrosian H. Ree English Opening 1972
169 L. Portisch T. Petrosian Fragment 1972
170 T. Petrosian B. Larsen Stonewall 1972
171 T. Petrosian J. Diez del Corral Fragment 1973
172 T. Petrosian R. Keene Fragment 1973
173 B. Enklaar T. Petrosian Fragment 1973
174 C. Langeweg T. Petrosian Fragment 1973
175 T. Petrosian I. Radulov Fragment 1973
176 T. Petrosian A. Karpov Queen’s Indian Defence 1973
177 L. Portisch T. Petrosian Fragment 1974
178 T. Petrosian L. Portisch Fragment 1974
179 T. Petrosian V. Korchnoi Fragment 1974
180 T. Petrosian B. Ivkov Nimzo-Indian Defence 1974
181 T. Petrosian D. Bronstein Fragment 1974
182 T. Petrosian L. Ljubojevic Fragment 1974
183 T. Petrosian Y. Kraidman Fragment 1974
184 T. Petrosian Y. Balashov Nimzo-Indian Defence 1974
185 R. Cardoso T. Petrosian Sicilian Defence 1975
186 T. Petrosian B. Gurgenidze Modern Defence 1975
187 T. Petrosian L. Ljubojevic Modern Benoni 1975
188 T. Petrosian S. Garcia Fragment 1975
189 T. Petrosian A. Beliavsky Fragment 1975
190 J. Klovans T. Petrosian Fragment 1975
191 T. Petrosian I. Dorfman Semi-Slav 1975
192 T. Petrosian J. Peters Fragment 1976
193 T. Petrosian O. Romanishin Fragment 1976
6 Petrosian Year by Year

Game White Black Opening Year

194 T. Petrosian B. Larsen Fragment 1976

195 T. Petrosian A. Karpov English Opening 1976
196 T. Petrosian N. Rashkovsky Modern Benoni 1976
197 T. Petrosian V. Kupreichik Slav Defence 1976
198 T. Petrosian V. Korchnoi Semi-Tarrasch Defence 1977
199 T. Petrosian M. Suba Fragment 1977
200 O. Romanishin T. Petrosian Irregular Opening 1977
201 T. Petrosian Y. Balashov Irregular Opening 1977
202 L. Portisch T. Petrosian Fragment 1978
203 T. Petrosian A. Lukin Modern Benoni 1978
204 T. Petrosian A. Kochiev Modern Defence 1978
205 A. Beliavsky T. Petrosian Fragment 1978
206 T. Petrosian L. Espig Old Indian Defence 1978
207 T. Petrosian K. Kaiszauri Leningrad Dutch 1978
208 T. Petrosian V. Ciocaltea King’s Indian Defence 1978
209 T. Petrosian G. Sax Pirc Defence 1979
210 A. Lutikov T. Petrosian Fragment 1979
211 T. Petrosian G. Guillermo Garcia Benoni Defence 1979
212 O. Panno T. Petrosian English Opening 1979
213 T. Petrosian G. Sosonko Fragment 1980
214 T. Petrosian D. Velimirovic Old Benoni Defence 1980
215 T. Petrosian B. Ivanovic Fragment 1980
216 G. Kasparov T. Petrosian Queen’s Indian Defence 1981
217 T. Petrosian S. Martinovic Modern Benoni 1981
218 D. Gazarek T. Petrosian Slav Gambit 1981
219 D. Campora T. Petrosian Fragment 1981
220 T. Petrosian G. Sosonko Fragment 1981
221 G. Kasparov T. Petrosian Queen’s Gambit Accepted 1981
222 T. Petrosian B. Ivkov Pirc Defence 1982
223 T. Petrosian R. Kholmov Bogo-Indian Defence 1982
224 J. Timman T. Petrosian Fragment 1982
225 T. Petrosian L. Psakhis Fragment 1982
226 W. Browne T. Petrosian Fragment 1982
227 T. Petrosian J. Pinter Fragment 1982
228 L. Portisch T. Petrosian English Opening 1982
229 T. Petrosian W. Browne Fragment 1982
230 T. Petrosian L. Psakhis Fragment 1983
231 T. Petrosian A. Beliavsky Queen’s Gambit Exchange 1983
232 L. Polugaevsky T. Petrosian Modern Defence 1983
233 T. Petrosian L. Ljubojevic Nimzo-Indian Defence 1983
A13 T. Petrosian O. Panno Fragment (exchanges) 1963
 Index of Games 7

Game White Black Opening Year

A14 T. Petrosian L. Polugaevsky Fragment (exchanges) 1963

A15 T. Petrosian J. Rubinetti Fragment (exchanges) 1964
A16 T. Petrosian S. Reshevsky Fragment (exchanges) 1964
A17 T. Petrosian S. Reshevsky Fragment (exchanges) 1964
A18 V. Simagin T. Petrosian Fragment (exchanges) 1966
A19 T. Petrosian D. Janosevic Fragment (exchanges) 1967
A20 T. Petrosian H. Mecking Fragment (exchanges) 1971
A21 T. Petrosian S. Gligoric Fragment (exchanges) 1973
A22 T. Petrosian H. Ree Fragment (exchanges) 1973
A23 T. Petrosian B. Huguet Fragment (exchanges) 1973
A24 V. Tukmakov T. Petrosian Fragment (exchanges) 1973
A25 T. Petrosian S. Gligoric Fragment (exchanges) 1974
A26 T. Petrosian B. Gulko Fragment (exchanges) 1978
A27 T. Petrosian Y. Balashov Fragment (exchanges) 1978
A28 T. Petrosian M. Vukic Fragment (exchanges) 1979
A29 T. Petrosian M. Vukic Fragment (exchanges) 1979
A30 T. Petrosian L. Bronstein Fragment (exchanges) 1979
A31 L. Portisch T. Petrosian Fragment (exchanges) 1981
A32 G. Agzamov T. Petrosian Fragment (exchanges) 1981
A33 T. Petrosian M. Vukic Fragment (exchanges) 1981
A34 T. Petrosian T. Miles Fragment (exchanges) 1981
A35 T. Petrosian T. Miles Fragment (exchanges) 1981
B26 T. Petrosian M. Tal Fragment (test) 1963
B27 T. Petrosian A. Olivera Fragment (test) 1964
B28 E. Eliskases T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1964
B29 A. Foguelman T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1964
B30 T. Petrosian S. Reshevsky Fragment (test) 1964
B31 T. Petrosian E. Mnatsakanian Fragment (test) 1965
B32 M. Botvinnik T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1966
B33 T. Petrosian Y. Estrin Fragment (test) 1968
B34 T. Petrosian A. Matanovic Fragment (test) 1969
B35 T. Petrosian J. Penrose Fragment (test) 1969
B36 M. Najdorf T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1969
B37 T. Petrosian R. Nicevski Fragment (test) 1970
B38 T. Petrosian H. Ree Fragment (test) 1971
B39 T. Petrosian A. Korolkov Fragment (test) 1972
B40 T. Petrosian N. Katishonok Fragment (test) 1972
B41 T. Petrosian R. Cardoso Fragment (test) 1974
B42 T. Petrosian F. Visier Segovia Fragment (test) 1974
B43 T. Petrosian A. Beliavsky Fragment (test) 1975
B44 T. Petrosian O. Rodriguez Vargas Fragment (test) 1975
8 Petrosian Year by Year

Game White Black Opening Year

B45 T. Petrosian B. Gurgenidze Fragment (test) 1975

B46 T. Petrosian K. Grigorian Fragment (test) 1977
B47 G. Botterill T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1977
B48 D. Janosevic T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1978
B49 T. Petrosian B. Ivkov Fragment (test) 1979
B50 T. Petrosian M. Vukic Fragment (test) 1979
B51 J. Fernandez Garcia T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1980
B52 D. Zecevic T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1980
B53 M. Matulovic T. Petrosian Fragment (test) 1981
B54 T. Petrosian J. Timman Fragment (test) 1982
B55 T. Petrosian A. Veingold Fragment (test) 1983
 Introduction to Volume II

In Volume I, we covered the first half of Tigran Petrosian’s career.

Petrosian probably experienced the toughest childhood of all world
champions. He achieved outstanding results in his youth in Georgia and
produced a number of masterpieces. He started out as a tactician, but
gradually transformed his play to match his personality and became a
master of manoeuvring.
His strength gradually grew, and in the early nineteen fifties became a
world-class player. In the 1956 Candidates event he purposefully tried to
win against the very best players, but did poorly in the beginning. Perhaps
he should have first tried to adopt such an approach once or twice earlier.
Petrosian raised his level around 1958, but Tal had appeared on the scene
and produced slightly stronger performances. Botvinnik played very little
by then, and at the end of the fifties was possibly no longer stronger than
Petrosian. Tal beat Botvinnik, but was unable to organise his private life in a
way required to maintain his level, and in addition suffered health problems.
By contrast, Petrosian was an exemplary family man who – in Soviet terms –
provided superb living standards for his family.
After Tal’s failure against Botvinnik, Petrosian produced the most
consistent results among his rivals and became the strongest player in the
world. He won the Curacao Candidates event. It was to his advantage that
the match for the world championship against the 51-year-old champion was
rather long.
In Volume II, we start by looking at how Tigran beat the great but aging
Botvinnik, and how he defended his title against Spassky. He became the first
world champion to retain his title with a win since Alekhine in 1934 against
Bogoljubov. We look at his tournaments and games in detail as the world
champion. We also look at all his Candidates matches, including his historical
matches against Fischer and Korchnoi. We will follow him all the way to his
final event, in 1983.
In chess, players are mainly judged according to what they have achieved,
but it is also valid to rate them according to how many masterpieces they
produced. If one judges the greats in this way, Petrosian was on the highest
level. He achieved everything that was possible in his time. He was the world
and Olympic champion. Indeed, no other player has equalled his number of
medals at Chess Olympiads and European Championships. Petrosian had a
unique style. Many enjoyed his games and admired his play. We hope that our
book will increase the number of Petrosian fans, and our explanations might
help in this respect. We hope that we will be able to shed light on some of
10

his lesser-known masterpieces. Indeed, some of his majestic games have gone
virtually unnoticed. Here is an example:

Gazarek, Danko – Petrosian, Tigran

Oberwart (3), 1981
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-+k+-t0
9+-w-vp+-0
9-s-+p+p+0
9zp+lZ-Sp0
9-+pT-+-Z0
9+-Z-+-W-0
9-+-+LZP+0
9T-V-+-M-0
xiiiiiiiiy
19...Exg5!! 20.Exg5 Kd7!!

Petrosian obtained a clear advantage with two stunning moves and went
on to win. See Game 218 for full commentary. Artur Sarkisian told your
Armenian author that Petrosian would come out with the aphorism: “If you
have a pawn, you don’t need a brain”. This game shows that he used his brain
even when he was ahead on material.
The records of the second half of Petrosian’s career are far more detailed
than the first. We cover it in the same way as we did the first half in Volume
I, going through his chess journey virtually game by game and analysing the
best of them. We again provide “Petrosian’s Remarkable Exchanges” and “It’s
Your Move” chapters.
Dear Readers, please join us in our exploration of the second half of
Petrosian’s amazing career. You will enjoy it very much and learn a lot from
his numerous masterpieces!

International Master
Tibor Karolyi
FIDE Master
Tigran Gyozalyan
 1966 75

3 plans for how to play: if he was in the lead, if it was level, and if he were to
find himself trailing. According to Vasiliev, Petrosian believed that tactically
he was not weaker than Spassky and interestingly Keres also mentions how
strong Tigran was in that department.
Prior to the match Petrosian had played 10 games with Boris, winning
one and drawing nine, but the last time they had faced each other was
back in 1961. Spassky’s results in 1964 and 1965 were more impressive
than Tigran’s: in 1964 he won the strong Belgrade tournament, the Soviet
zonal, and the Amsterdam Interzonal in a 4-player tie. In 1965 he beat
Keres 6:4 in the quarterfinal of the Candidates matches, Geller 5.5:2.5 in
the semi-final and Tal 7:4, though his win in the final was less convincing
than the result suggests. He also shared first place at Hastings.

Petrosian-Spassky World Championship Match

The event opened on the 9th of April, with the first game played on the 11th.
The venue was the Variety Theatre in the heart of Moscow. It is worth looking
at what changes and what type of attention the match drew in Petrosian’s
homeland. Your Armenian author remembers: “These matches were shown on
the central channel of Armenian television. We received moves from Moscow,
which were shown live by Master of Sports of the USSR, now Academician
of the Academy of Sciences of Armenia, Honorary Vice-President of FIDE,
Vanik Surenovich Zakaryan. The Central Television of Armenia could
switch off any transmission to show the moves of the current game. My
task in the house was to set up the chess board and monitor every move.
My father would return from work and we discussed the current position.
Almost every day, Uncle Sergei, who, by the way, was my father’s constant
chess opponent, would come and visit. I must say that chess had become very
popular in Armenia. In houses, and especially in courtyards, one could see
people playing chess in Armenia, besides the popular game of backgammon.
My father, a great chess lover, regularly played against friends in our house.”
In game 1 Spassky was White and they followed the 1964 game Spassky-
Matulovic, which saw a mainline of the …Ef5 Caro-Kann. Petrosian’s good
preparation gave him easy equality. Keres writes that Petrosian told him how
difficult it was to play the first game of his Botvinnik match because of the
conditions in the theatre, with a lot spectators and playing on the stage alone,
which was unfamiliar to him. This time, it was Spassky who experienced this
feeling. They played on; Spassky made a careless move, but Petrosian did
not look deep enough and only made a reasonable move. While Spassky was
thinking, Petrosian realised that he had missed winning a pawn. Petrosian
76 Petrosian Year by Year

declared in an interview after the match that, while Spassky was thinking,
he checked his pulse and it measured 140. Had Petrosian won the pawn, he
could have pressed, but it would not have meant an easy win.
In the second game, they played a mainline Queen’s Gambit Declined.
Spassky equalised, but somewhat over-ambitiously sacrificed a pawn, after
which he had to work for the draw, agreed to after Spassky’s 50th move. Keres
writes that Spassky could have been happy with the result of the first two
games, but not the type of positions he obtained; hardly anybody could match
Petrosian at positional play.
In the third game Spassky chose the Panov Variation against the Caro-Kann
and played with the resulting standard isolated pawn. Petrosian equalized and
then Spassky made a risky pawn sacrifice. Petrosian neutralised his play, but then
got into time trouble and was unable to convert his advantage. The game was
adjourned and Petrosian sealed the 43rd move, but they agreed to a draw without
resumption. It had been a golden opportunity for Petrosian to take the lead.
In game 4 Spassky chose the closed variation against the Catalan and
Petrosian got a clear advantage again, though he played cautiously and
eventually found himself a pawn down. Spassky sealed the 41st move, but the
rook ending was clearly not winning for Black and Petrosian’s 44th move was
the last of this draw.
In the fifth game Petrosian deviated in the Panov and played the risky 5...
g6 variation. He offered an exchange of queens, and Spassky – after thinking
for half an hour – swapped them. Petrosian’s position was a bit unpleasant,
but with some inaccurate moves he lost a pawn and got into trouble. But
Spassky, when he was already winning, gave back the pawn and threw away
the advantage. Petrosian’s 40th move gave away another pawn, from then on
he had to work hard, but was able to hold because of the limited material.
Petrosian sealed his 42nd move and needed 79 moves to obtain his half share
of the point. They had set a record: so far in a world championship match the
players had never produced five draws in a row. In the sixth game, Spassky
switched to the Semi-Tarrasch and drew effortlessly in 15 moves.

Game 125 Spassky starts roughly 50 percent

of his games with 1.e4 and just
Spassky, Boris – Petrosian, Tigran slightly fewer with 1.d4.
World Championship Final, 1...Cf6 2.Cf3 e6 3.Eg5
Moscow (7), 1966 Spassky employs Petrosian’s
Queen’s Pawn Opening weapon, but he himself played this
variation a few times. Petrosian
1.d4 played a lovely game against the
 1966 77

somewhat-related London System a Tigran copies Reshevsky’s play

few years previously: 1.d4 d5 2.Cf3 by developing the knight to d7.
Cf6 3.Ef4 g6 4.h3 c5 5.c3 Cbd7 6.Ed3 c5
6.Cbd2 Eg7 7.e3 0-0 8.Ee2 b6 9.0-0 Petrosian is aware that if Black
Eb7 10.Ce5 castles too early, White can launch a
XIIIIIIIIY huge attack against the Black king;
9r+-w-tk+0 therefore he holds back on where
9zl+nzpvp0 he will place his king. Spassky had
9-z-+-sp+0 a game from this position two years
9+-zpS-+-0 earlier: 6...b6 7.c3 Eb7 8.Ic2 c5 9.0-0
9-+-Z-V-+0 h6 10.Eh4 0-0 11.Gae1 c4 12.Ee2
9+-Z-Z-+P0 Ic7 13.Eg3 Ed6 14.Exd6 Ixd6
9PZ-SLZP+0 15.e4 Cxe4 16.Cxe4 dxe4 17.Cd2
9T-+Q+RM-0 b5 18.Cxe4 If4 19.Ef3 Gab8. The
xiiiiiiiiy position was equal but Spassky
10...Ce8! Petrosian starts a went on to win an interesting queen
nice re-arrangement of his knights. ending in Spassky, B – Reshevsky,
11.Cdf3 Cdf6 12.Eb5 Cd6 S, Amsterdam, 1964. There was also
13.Ea4 Ic8! Petrosian prevents a game played the previous year to
White from exchanging pieces. our main encounter and Petrosian
14.Ec2 Cfe4 15.Gb1 f6 16.Cd3 possibly knew of it: 6...0-0 7.0-0 c5
Cc4 17.Ie2 a5 Petrosian nicely 8.c3 b6 9.e4 dxe4 10.Cxe4 Eb7
gains space. 18.Gfd1 Kh8 19.Eh2 11.Exf6 Cxf6 12.Cxf6+ Exf6
Ea6 20.Ie1 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Ie2 Gb8 15.Cd2
XIIIIIIIIY Ed5 16.Ce4 Ee7 17.c4 Ec6 18.Gad1
9r+q+-t-m0 Ic7 19.f4 Gfd8 20.Cg3 g6 Knezevic,
9+-+-z-vp0 M – Matulovic, M, Titograd, 1965.
9lz-+-zp+0 7.c3 b6
9z-zp+-+-0 Petrosian says that he wanted to
9-+nZn+-+0 play a move Spassky did not expect
9+-ZNZN+P0 but this time please do not trust him,
9PZL+-ZPV0 as he had surely prepared it. Dear
9+R+RW-M-0 readers, please do not pay attention
xiiiiiiiiy to what active players say about the
20...g5! Petrosian plays on both opening!
wings of the board. 21.dxc5? bxc5 8.0-0 Eb7 9.Ce5
and Black had gained a lovely Spassky sticks to his plan for the
advantage in the game Troeger, P – match and plays aggressively. White
Petrosian, T, Hamburg, 1960. could also try playing for e4, but that
3...d5 4.Cbd2 Ee7 5.e3 Cbd7 doesn’t offer a fight.
78 Petrosian Year by Year

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-wk+-t0 Spassky, as in the match so far,
9zl+nvpzp0 wants to bring his opponent down
by attacking him aggressively and
9-z-+ps-+0 sacrifices a pawn. On the other hand,
9+-zpS-V-0 Spassky no longer has a pleasant,
9-+-Z-+-+0 safe continuation.
9+-ZLZ-+-0 XIIIIIIIIY
9PZ-S-ZPZ0 9r+-+k+-t0
9T-+Q+RM-0 9zlwnvpz-0
xiiiiiiiiy 9-z-+p+-z0
9+-zpZ-+-0
9...Cxe5! 10.dxe5 Cd7
11.Ef4?!
9-Z-+-V-+0
According to the database this 9+-ZLZN+-0
move is a novelty. It would be 9P+-+-ZPZ0
interesting to know what Petrosian 9T-+Q+RM-0
would have played after 11.Exe7 xiiiiiiiiy
Ixe7 12.f4. 13...g5!
11...Ic7 Spassky sticks to his earlier
Petrosian highlights 11...g5 as approach, but Petrosian changed his
more vigorous, but Kasparov prefers for this game. In the first few games
the text move because of 12.Eg3 h5 he tried to win by looking for safety
13.f4 h4 14.Ef2. first, but Spassky survived all of these
12.Cf3 games. Maybe the fact that he was
12.Ig4? g5 would win a piece, lost in the fifth game made him want
while after 12.Ih5 g6 13.Ih6 to win more as he realised sooner or
Ef8 14.Ih3 Eg7 15.Cf3 Cxe5 later he would lose a game. It is so
16.Eb5+ White would have some unpleasant for the opponent when
compensation for the pawn, but after he faces a new approach. It worked
15…0-0-0 Black would be somewhat magically for Petrosian when, after
better. a few slow lines against Botvinnik’s
12...h6! Grunfeld and after Botvinnik
Petrosian attaches an exclamation equalised, he went for a sharp opening
mark to this move. It has several battle. According to Petrosian, this
functions: Black can consider time there was no other choice,
playing …g5: it doesn’t show yet although 13...cxb4 14.cxb4 Exb4
where he wants to castle, and it also would be OK for Black.
takes away the possibility of White 14.Eg3 h5!
playing Cg5. Petrosian’s moves are not only
13.b4 surprising (from him), but strong as
 1966 79

well. 14...cxb4? 15.cxb4 Exb4 16.Cd4 16...0-0-0!

would be risky against Spassky. Petrosian attaches an exclamation
15.h4 mark to this move, but now it is hard
Petrosian says that 15.h3 would to do anything else. Of course, both
also fail to hold the e5-pawn: 15...0-0-0! his general strategy and long castling
and Black makes sure his king doesn’t are very strong.
remain in the centre. This looks 17.a4?!
stronger than 15...g4 16.hxg4 hxg4 It is easy to criticise this
(16…0-0-0!?) 17.Ch2 Cxe5 18.Cxg4 move, but much harder to suggest
Ed6 19.bxc5 bxc5 20.Ia4+, though something else. For example, after
White would not be worse. 16.bxc5 17.bxc5 Cxc5 18.Cd4 Gdg8 Black
bxc5 looks ambitious for Black but would stand clearly better thanks to
also strong, though White would also his play on the g-file. Maybe Spassky
get chances. (If 16...Cxc5 17.Cd4 should just wait with 17.Kh1 and
Cxd3 18.Ixd3 Ic4 Black would on 17...Gdg8 play 18.Ee2 or 18.Gb1
have nice play against the c3-pawn.) and see how Black plans to build the
17.Gb1 g4 18.hxg4 hxg4 19.Ch2 c4 attack.
20.Ec2 Cxe5 21.Cxg4 Ed6 and 17...c4!
Black stands a bit better. Petrosian closes the queenside.
15...gxh4! Doing so is practical as Black ensures
Petrosian opens the g-file, which he won’t lose. He says that people
spells more danger for White. After present were surprised but explains
15...g4 16.Cg5 Cxe5 17.bxc5 (17. that White can do very little with
Eb5+ Kf8) 17...bxc5 18.Gb1 the the d4-square. Maybe attacking
position would be unclear. with 17...Gdg8 is objectively even
16.Ef4 stronger.
If instead 16.Cxh4? then 18.Ee2
16…0-0-0 when Black will play … 18.Ef5 – after the game Spassky
Gdg8 and his attack will be faster. pointed to this move to defend the
XIIIIIIIIY g2-pawn, and many commentators
9r+-+k+-t0 also suggested it.
XIIIIIIIIY
9zlwnvp+-0 9-+kt-+-t0
9-z-+p+-+0 9zlwnvp+-0
9+-zpZ-+p0 9-z-+p+-+0
9-Z-+-V-z0 9+-+pZL+p0
9+-ZLZN+-0 9PZp+-V-z0
9P+-+-ZP+0 9+-Z-ZN+-0
9-+-+-ZP+0
9T-+Q+RM-0 9T-+Q+RM-0
xiiiiiiiiy xiiiiiiiiy
80 Petrosian Year by Year

a) Taking the bishop would 21...Ghg8 22.a5?!

be unclear: 18...exf5 19.e6 Ed6 Barcza doesn’t like this move as it
20.exd7+ Gxd7 21.Id4 when White allows the c4-pawn to be defended.
is two pawns down, but Black’s 22...b5 23.Gad1
pawns are shattered and therefore XIIIIIIIIY
White would not stand worse. 9-+k+-+r+0
b) 18...d4!! Crouch found this
very strong move.
9+lwnvp+-0
b1) 19.cxd4? exf5 20.e6 and 9p+-+p+-+0
here both Kasparov’s 20...Ic6 and 9Zp+pZ-+p0
Crouch’s 20...Ed6 21.Exd6 Ixd6 9-Zp+-Vrz0
22.exd7+ give Black a dominant 9+-Z-ZN+-0
position.
b2) 19.Cxd4 Cxe5 and Black is
9-+-WLZP+0
better after either 20.Ic2 Ghg8 or
9+-+R+-TK0
20.Eh3 a6. xiiiiiiiiy
18...a6! 23...Ef8!
Petrosian makes sure White Moving the bishop forces Spassky
can’t open a file and attack on the to reckon with the plan of …f6, exf6
queenside. …e5. “The challenger’s position has
19.Kh1 Gdg8 20.Gg1 Gg4 become too alarming, and he decides
21.Id2 on an extreme measure – to accept
21.Ch2!? Playing this early the exchange sacrifice – although it
would take the sting out of the is well known that Petrosian never
exchange sacrifice. Kasparov says sacrifices anything against anyone in
that White’s position would be pitiful vain.” (Tal)
after this idea of Suetin’s as Black 24.Ch2?!
could manoeuvre the queen to g7 Spassky doesn’t want to wait
and carry out h3. But it is not simple and immediately goes for the offered
to accomplish this. For example: 21... exchange, though both alternatives
Gg6 (21...Cxe5 22.Exg4 and White are better:
is still in the game) 22.Cf3 Ghg8 a) 24.Ic2 Eg7 25.Eh2 Gh8
23.Id2, and now: 26.Id2 Cf8 27.Ic2 Cg6 and Black
a) 23...Id8 24.a5 b5 25.Cd4 Ic7 has a clear edge.
when Black is clearly better. b) 24.Gde1 and now;
b) 23...Ef8! Black first transfers b1) 24...f6 25.exf6 (Black’s
the bishop to g7. 24.Eh2 Eg7 advantage is clear after 25.Id4 Id8
25.Id4 Gg4 26.Id2 Cxe5 and 26.exf6 Ixf6 27.Ce5 Cxe5 28.Exe5
Black has an edge with the exchange Gxd4 29.Exf6 Gd2) 25...e5 26.f7
sacrifice. (26.Cxe5 Cxe5) 26...G8g7 27.Cxe5
 1966 81

Cxe5 28.Exg4+ hxg4 29.e4 Gxf7 27...dxe4 28.Gxd6 Ixd6 29.Gd1 Ic7
30.exd5 and White stands worse. 30.Id4 f6.
b2) 24...Eg7!? 25.Gd1 (If 25.Ch2 28.Exd6 Ixd6 29.Gd4
Exe5 Black has a clear advantage.) This accelerates the end, but
25...Cxe5 26.Cxe5 Exe5 27.Exg4 there is no saving move for White.
hxg4 28.f3 and White’s position is 29.f4! is relatively best, but after 29…
really difficult. f5 30.Gge1 (30.e5 Ie7) 30...h3 31.g3
XIIIIIIIIY (On 31.gxh3 e5 Black wins.) 31...
9-+k+-vr+0 fxe4 Black is winning. On Kasparov’s
29.Gd2 29…Ie5 would win, and
9+lwn+p+-0 29.exd5 Exd5 wins.
9p+-+p+-+0 XIIIIIIIIY
9Zp+pZ-+p0 9-+k+-+r+0
9-Zp+-Vrz0 9+l+n+p+-0
9+-Z-Z-+-0 9p+-wp+-+0
9-+-WLZPS0 9Zp+p+-+-0
9+-+R+-TK0 9-ZpTP+pz0
xiiiiiiiiy 9+-Z-W-+-0
24...Cxe5!
Petrosian’s strategic play
9-+-+LZP+0
prevails. The exchange sacrifice is
9+-+-+-TK0
really strong and in fact Black is now xiiiiiiiiy
winning. 29...e5! 30.Gd2
25.Cxg4 hxg4 26.e4 Ed6 30.Gxd5 Exd5 31.Gd1 Cf6
If 26...dxe4?? 27.Exe5. 32.exd5 Kb8 and again Black wins.
27.Ie3 Cd7 30...f5!
“Played in Petrosian’s style: “Euwe once remarked that
before launching the decisive attack, Petrosian is a great master of pawn
Black strengthens his centre,” wrote play. The present game is a good
Averbakh. “A paradoxical manoeuvre. example of this and a splendid
27... g3 or 27... dxe4 suggest themselves. illustration of the ideas of the great
Even so, Petrosian’s decision is Philidor.” (Averbakh)
more original and in practice more 31.exd5
unpleasant for the opponent. Black If 31.exf5 h3! or if 31.exf5 Cf6!
believes in the strength of his position,” (Kasparov’s 30...If6 wins as well)
were Suetin’s words. Let’s take a look 32.f3 (On 32.Ih6 Crouch shows
at these moves! If 27...g3!? 28.fxg3 that 32...Ce4 33.Ixd6 Cxf2+
(28.f3 Cg4!) 28...hxg3 29.Ggf1 f5 and checkmates.) 32...Ch5 33.fxg4 Cg3+
Black wins, while Black also wins after 34.Kh2 d4! wins as Tal pointed out.
82 Petrosian Year by Year

31...f4! 40...e4 41.Id1

Black’s pawn chain is simply 41.fxe4 f3! and Black lands
irresistible. checkmate.
32.Ie4 41...Cg4!
On 32.Ia7 Ih6 or 32...Kc7 Petrosian sealed this move,
would win. but after 41...Id7 Black would
32...Cf6 33.If5+ Kb8 34.f3 checkmate by force.
34.Ie6 Ixe6 35.dxe6 runs into 42.fxg4 f3 43.Gg2 fxg2+ 0–1
35...Ce4!
34...Ec8 35.Ib1 Until this game the players
XIIIIIIIIY had excelled at defending, but
9-ml+-+r+0 in this game Petrosian attacked
beautifully, with great strength.
9+-+-+-+-0 Tal: “I don’t know whether
9p+-w-s-+0 telepathy exists, but that evening
9Zp+Pz-+-0 the match participants were like
9-Zp+-zpz0 artists, performing at the request of
9+-Z-+P+-0 the spectators.”
Petrosian: “One of my best
9-+-TL+P+0 games. It demonstrates my creative
9+Q+-+-TK0 views – the utmost restriction
xiiiiiiiiy of the opponent’s possibilities,
35...g3 36.Ge1 h3 37.Ef1 strategy over the entire board, the
37.gxh3 g2+ 38.Kg1 Id7! wins. surrounding of the enemy king
37...Gh8 38.gxh3 Exh3 39.Kg1 and the gradual tightening of the
If 39.Exh3 Id7! encirclement around it.”
39...Exf1 40.Kxf1 Your Armenian author
40.Gxf1 Id7 with 41...Ih3 or remembers: “In 1966 my father
41...Ia7+ would be decisive. (Artavazd Gyozalyan, chemical
XIIIIIIIIY engineer and Honoured Technology
9-m-+-+-t0 Improver of Armenia) took a short
holiday to go to Moscow and watch
9+-+-+-+-0 the match at the Variety Theatre.
9p+-w-s-+0 Then he recounted many times
9Zp+Pz-+-0 that during the 7th game, when
9-Zp+-z-+0 Petrosian castled, he began to treat
9+-Z-+Pz-0 the spectators sitting next to them
with chocolates, which he had
9-+-T-+-+0 bought in the theatre buffet. And
9+Q+-TK+-0 he did it with joy, because after six
xiiiiiiiiy
 It’s Your Move
We will now show some interesting positions from Petrosian’s career. In
some cases there are several good possibilities. The solutions are contained at
the end of this section. In each position it is Petrosian to move.

B26) Petrosian, T – Tal, M B28) Eliskases, E – Petrosian, T

Moscow Spartakiad (3.1), 1963 Buenos Aires (3), 1964
XIIIIIIIIY XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0 9-+-+-+-+0
9+p+r+-m-0 9+-+-+pm-0
9-T-Z-+-+0 9-+-+p+p+0
9+-+-+pz-0 9+-+pZ-+p0
9-+-+-+-+0 9-s-Z-+-Z0
9+-+-+KZ-0 9+-T-+-Z-0
9-+-+-Z-Z0 9r+L+-Z-+0
9+-+-+-+-0 9+-M-+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy xiiiiiiiiy
B27) Petrosian, Tigran – B29) Foguelman, A – Petrosian,
Olivera, A T
Buenos Aires (2), 1964 Buenos Aires (12), 1964
XIIIIIIIIY XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+-+0 9r+r+l+k+0
9+-+-v-+p0 9+q+-+pzp0
9-m-+-+p+0 9p+-vp+n+0
9+p+-z-+-0 9+p+-+-+-0
9-+-+P+-+0 9-+-+P+-+0
9+PM-+NZP0 9+PS-VP+-0
9-+-+-+-+0 9P+-WL+PZ0
9+-+-+-+-0 9+-TR+-M-0
xiiiiiiiiy xiiiiiiiiy
516