I was a Victim of

Bobby Fischer
By

Mark Taimanov

Quality Chess
www.qualitychess.co.uk
 Contents
Key to Symbols used 4
Publisher’s Foreword 5

A Necessary Foreword (1993) 7

Preface (1992) 9

Bobby Fischer, as I Knew Him
1 Fischer – In Life and at the Chess Board 13
2 His Personal Development – Talent, Character, Image 29
3 The Pinnacle of a Career 35
4 Breakdown 47

The Long-Suffering Duel

5 ‘Civil Execution’ 53
6 On the Eve of the Match 57
7 The Start – Game 1 63
8 Endgame Catastrophe – Game 2 75
9 The Most Bitter Game – Game 3 95
10 Agony – Game 4 109
11 “I’m sorry” – Game 5 123
12 The End – Game 6 139

The Aftermath
13 The Origins of Fischer’s Reclusion 153
14 Postscript 155

Appendices
15 Translator’s Notes 161
16 Additional Games 167
17 Additional Material 189
18 45 Years Later 195
19 12 Interesting Positions – by GM Jacob Aagaard 201
20 Thoughts and Solutions 207

Name Index 247

 Publisher’s Foreword
I was a Victim of Bobby Fischer sounds like the sort of ‘jazzed-up’ title a Western publisher might
choose instead of the sober title the Russian author preferred. But that’s not the case here – I was
a Victim of Bobby Fischer is a direct translation of the Russian title Mark Taimanov wanted. The
author is sadly no longer with us, having died at the age of 90 in 2016, but his wishes were clearly
expressed to us by his Russian publisher and his widow: his title was to be used, his text was to be
faithfully translated – a task Douglas Griffin performed admirably – and no computer corrections
added in his main text. If we wanted to add text, we could do so at the beginning of the book
and the end, but his story should flow as he intended in the heart of the book. We were happy to
follow the author’s instructions.

So who was Mark Taimanov? I suspect younger readers might know him only for the Sicilian
variation named in his honour, or for losing 6–0 to Bobby Fischer. In the pages that follow
we shall learn all about that match, its origins and its aftermath, including severe personal
consequences for Taimanov.
But there was so much more to Taimanov – he was one of the greatest chess players of the
20th century. Twice he tied for the Soviet Championship, once winning the play-off against
Spassky and Averbakh, once being edged out by Botvinnik. Taimanov won Olympiad team Gold,
while his record in European Team Championships was extraordinary – in four such events, he
achieved a clean sweep of four team Golds and four individual Golds. He still played strongly at
an advanced age, winning the World Senior Championship twice.
Strict judges might place Taimanov just below the great World Champions of the 20th century,
but he should be pushed no lower.

Chess was just one of three outstanding careers that Taimanov enjoyed, with music and writing
the other two. He was renowned as a world-class concert pianist. And typically of Taimanov, his
career was long – at the age of just eleven he starred in a Soviet film, though curiously playing a
violin rather than on his favoured piano.

As publishers, we rarely mention an author’s personal life, but Taimanov also lived his life to the
fullest in this area. He married four times, including becoming a father to twins at the age of 78.

Towards the end of the book, after the author has had his say, we added some sections that we
hope the reader will appreciate. The translator Douglas Griffin , with much-appreciated help from
individuals we mention on page 2, did valuable archaeological work, unearthing and translating
interesting material, including other annotated games involving Taimanov.
6 Mark Taimanov – I was a Victim of Bobby Fischer

And then GM Jacob Aagaard discusses 12 Interesting Positions from the book with three young
American friends – Sam Shankland, Jeffery Xiong and Awonder Liang. It’s not a computer-check
of the book – which Taimanov would have disliked – but instead four modern grandmasters
revealing what they can see in the positions Taimanov played and analysed. Our thanks to the
young Americans.

We hope you will enjoy this work by Mark Evgenievich Taimanov. Since the author is largely
writing about a match he lost, you might guess that this book would be full of regrets. At the risk
of giving away a spoiler, I will say that this is far from true, and Taimanov’s book is infused with
his love of the beauty of chess.

John Shaw
Glasgow, April 2021
 Preface (1992)
“Chess was for him a miraculous world, to which he dedicated his entire
life. Some called him a genius and the greatest champion of all time;
others an egocentric, unpredictable loner...”

The great American chessplayer Robert James Fischer is not yet fifty. For many of his peers and
colleagues this is a time of maturity, success and creative achievements.
Recall that at this time of their lives the World Champions of the past, Wilhelm Steinitz,
Emanuel Lasker, Alexander Alekhine and Mikhail Botvinnik firmly held the king’s sceptre in
their hands. And there is no doubt that the 11th World Champion R. Fischer, who abandoned
the throne undefeated, could, with his talent, devotion to chess, and sense of purpose, have still
today played an important role in the battle for the highest chess title. But, alas, one usually
speaks of him only in the past tense. For twenty years now Fischer has not taken part in any
competitions – by a strange whim of his extraordinary world view he voluntarily abandoned the
chess world, dooming himself to lonely seclusion...
But it is impossible to forget Fischer – he is a living legend with a mysterious, tragic fate, and
his name will continue to excite general interest.
...It occurs as if spontaneously, without any visible reasons, but every time in meetings with
chess lovers – be it at lectures, interviews, simultaneous displays – regardless of the topic of the
speech and the make-up of the audience, one question invariably arises and immediately intrigues
the auditorium: “What is Fischer doing now?”
Seemingly, during the past years when the attention of the chess world has been firmly focused
on the raging rivalry of the ‘two great Ks’ – Garry Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov – the name
of the strange chess recluse could have imperceptibly sunk into oblivion all by itself, gone once
and for all. But on the contrary, at this very moment, in the context of global discussions on the
fate of the chess crown, the figure of Robert Fischer has come to be of particular interest and
attractiveness as the only worthy counter-balance to the duet dominating on the Olympus.

It is amusing that diplomatic chess lovers are usually afraid to address questions to me about
Robert Fischer, and they simply excuse themselves for involuntary lack of tact, clearly considering
that a single reminder of that terrible name could traumatize the ageing grandmaster; that a hint
of that past fiasco could reopen old wounds... While appreciating this sensitivity, I will take this
opportunity to nonetheless reject this idea completely. I admit that although the memory of
the world championship quarter-final match in 1971 against Fischer brought me the greatest
disappointment, and moreover, also had far-reaching, distressing consequences for me (of which
we will later speak), I recall this duel as one of the brightest and most significant events of my
life. I got to be one of the last (followed by B. Larsen, T. Petrosian and B. Spassky) to play a
match with an outstanding grandmaster occupying an honourable place in the history of chess,
10 Mark Taimanov – I was a Victim of Bobby Fischer

and to experience enormous creative happiness, since it was generally recognized that, despite
the sensationally catastrophic result, the games themselves were exceptionally full of content and
fight.
This dramatic duel has, alas, not left its due mark in chess literature. At first, it was overshadowed
by the events leading to the historic change of champions, then by the withdrawal of Fischer from
chess life, and then by countless events that have taken place in quickly-passing time. For the new
generation that has entered the broad chess arena, my match with Fischer, as well as the great
grandmaster himself, has remained blurred by the unstoppable stream of topical information
flooding from periodical publications. But it is a sin to forget the milestones of history. Especially
the creativity of the leading lights. And therefore I consider it my duty to share on the pages of a
book my recollections of a great chessplayer and exceptional personality, against whom fate pitted
me in his very best years. I enter upon this mission with a sense of admiration for the talent of
Robert Fischer and I bow before his dedication to chess art.

Taimanov, Tal, Petrosian and Korchnoi – Tbilisi 1958

Chapter 7
The Start

GAME 1
64 Game 1

Already the first effort showed that both players were in uncompromising mood and did not want
to spend valuable time (10 games were allotted to the match) on a traditional starting warm-up.
Fischer was always characterized by such a fighting spirit, and I too, I confess, did not experience
any particular timidity. And not only by reason of my innate optimism, but also on the basis
of the two games that I had previously played against Fischer, in which I had collected only a
half-point, but in which during the course of the struggle, as the reader already knows, I had felt
completely confident.
The tone of the opening encounter was defined by the opening choice. The double-edged King’s
Indian Defence was the theoretical ‘gun’ that was destined to be ‘fired’ already in the first act. The
King’s Indian had served Fischer truly and faithfully for many years, and he was very consistent
in his attachment to certain openings. On my part, I too was thirsty for a principled discussion
along these lines, since I had previously played one of the most topical systems (indeed, it bears
my name) very readily, and for the match I had prepared a series of new continuations. Thus, the
first game.

Mark Taimanov – Robert James Fischer

Candidates quarter-final (1), Vancouver 1971
King’s Indian Defence

1.d4 ¤f6
This move was made 10 minutes after the start of the game. And not because Fischer had
thought over it for so long – he was simply... late. Incidentally, this was generally typical of Bobby.
Perhaps, this was a way of asserting himself? Or of unnerving the opponent?

2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 ¥g7 4.e4 d6 5.¤f3 0–0 6.¥e2 e5 7.0–0 ¤c6 8.d5 ¤e7
Probably neither opponent doubted that this position, which opens up broad space for creative
fantasy, would arise in our match. Each had his view on it, had deep feelings for it and had no
objective basis for avoiding this deeply-studied system. But who would be the first to present a
prepared surprise?

Ç 
Æ 
Å   
Ä   
à  
Â   
Á 
À  
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
 Chapter 7 – The Start 65

9.¥d2
Fischer could also have expected here 9.b4, 9.¤e1 and 9.¤d2, which had all been encountered
many times in my games. The quiet developing move with the bishop has the aim of rapidly
mobilizing the queenside forces.

9...¤e8
Judging by how quickly and clearly Fischer reacted to my choice of variation, he was prepared
for the discussion.

Less convincing is 9...¤h5 in view of: 10.g3 f5 11.exf5 ¥xf5 12.¤g5 ¤f6

  
  
   
  
   
    
  
  

13.g4 ¥d7 14.¤ge4 ¤xe4 15.¤xe4 With a positional advantage for White.18

10.¦c1
10.b4 is often tried here, but I rejected it, since it was unnecessary for the set-up that I had
prepared for the match.

10...f5 11.exf5


  
   
  
   
   
 
  

66 Game 1

The opening of the game in the centre comes into White’s intended program, but the exchange
is better carried out a move later, playing first 11.£b3, which was tested in the 3rd game and led
to a successful opening outcome.

11...gxf5 12.¤g5
This thrust determines White’s strategic idea. With the transfer of the knight to e6 he strives,
even at the cost of a pawn sacrifice, to seize space in the centre and to develop piece pressure along
the opened files and diagonals.

Ç
Æ  
Å    
Ä  
à   
Â    
Á 
À  
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
12...h6 13.¤e6 ¥xe6 14.dxe6 £c8 15.£b3

Çw+
Æ   
Å  p O
Ä  + 
à   
Âq   
Á 
À   
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
15...c6!?
First and foremost, the d5-square should be defended.

Definite difficulties arise for Black in the case of 15...b6 16.¤d5 £xe6 17.¤xe7† £xe7
18.c5† ¢h8 19.cxd6 ¤xd6 20.¦c6, as was show by a later game of mine against M. Tseitlin
(1972).
 Chapter 7 – The Start 67

16.¥h5 £xe6
Fischer was a stickler for logical, clear solutions. He rejected the alternative 16...¤c7 without
any particular hesitation. And indeed, in this case after: 17.f4!? (also possible is 17.¥f7†)
17...¤xe6 (or 17...e4 18.¥f7† ¢h7 19.¤xe4! fxe4 20.f5 ¦xf7 21.exf7 ¤xf5 22.£h3) 18.c5 d5

 
   
  
 
    
   
  
   

19.fxe5 ¤xc5 (if 19...£c7, then 20.¤e2!?) 20.£b4 b6 21.¤a4 £e6 (21...¤xa4?! 22.£xe7)
22.¤xc5 bxc5 23.£xc5 An obvious initiative is on White’s side.

17.£xb7 ¤f6 18.¥e2 ¦fb8 19.£a6 ¦xb2 20.¦fd1

The time has come to summarize the results of the exciting opening battle. Perhaps, each of
the sides could be satisfied with it – Black has an extra pawn, White has active piece play. Such a
conflict usually preordains a sharp and uncompromising nature of the subsequent events.

Ç  
Æ    
Å 
Ä   
à   
Â    
Á 
À   
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
20...e4
A committal decision. Its negative points are obvious, since the weakness of the dark squares in the
centre becomes prominent. But, as is well known, Fischer did not tolerate passive positions and went
in for concessions (the cost of which he understood perfectly) for the sake of counterplay, associated
here with the seizing of space in the centre and the eventual enlivening of his king’s bishop.
At any rate, defence with 20...¤d7 21.£a3 ¦b7 22.¥e3 ¤c8 was not to his taste on account of
the possible blow 23.c5! and on 23...d5 (if 23...dxc5, then 24.¤a4) then 24.¤xd5.
68 Game 1


  
    
 
   
  
    
 
   

21.£a3!?
Fischer’s idea would be revealed in the variation: 21.¥f4 ¤e8 22.¥h5 (otherwise 22...¥xc3)
22...¥e5! 23.¥xe8?! ¥xf4!

21...¦b7 22.¥f4 d5 23.cxd5 cxd5

Note that the capture 23...¤exd5, which was recommended at the time by some commentators,
had its shortcomings in view of 24.¥c4 followed by 25.¤e2, which noticeably dynamizes White’s
game.

24.¤b5!

  
   
   
 
   
    
 
   

24...¤g6!?
An eye for an eye! Fischer never missed a possibility for counterplay! Thus, here for the sake of
the initiative he is ready to part with an exchange after 25.¤c7 £f7 26.¤xa8 ¤xf4, while on the
‘natural’ manoeuvre 25.£g3 he had prepared a tactical ‘trick’ – 25...¤h5! 26.¥xh5 ¤xf4 27.£xf4
¦xb5 28.¦c7 £e5!, permitting him to ‘come out of the water dry’.

But, all the same, problems still remain for Black.