My Favourite Annotators. Part Three. Mark Taimanov
Afternoon everyone. I am back with another look at a master of the art of annotating a chess game. Mark Taimanov. In passing, I must say that many Soviet players of the era were outstanding annotators - perhaps it was all to do with the training they received and their general chess culture, where understanding was paramount.
It's a little sad that he is predominantly remembered for the Fischer debacle. He has written a book about it, which I do not have - friends who have it tell me that it is a remarkable book, and I can well believe them.
He was a very strong player in his own right. A Soviet Champion who competed in 23 (!) championship finals - even qualifying for a final was something back then. He was also a true chess artist and creator. I became a fan very early in my chess life after seeing his notes to the following beautiful game in 'CHESS' magazine.
His annotations tick all the boxes I gave in the first of this little series. They really are exquisite! Into this book
to choose a game to give here, I decided on the following one. The introduction to it alone fills more than a whole page! My long time readers may have read this blog of mine - https://www.chess.com/blog/simaginfan/svetozar-gligoric-benoni-killer and be aware of both the theoretical debate of the time and Gligoric's status in it. Stemming from a famous Spassky - Fischer game, the chief practical and theoretical protagonist of the White side was Gligoric - he both played it and wrote about it.
A little of the introduction in the book.
In short, this game ( Gligoric - Kavalek. Simaginfan) too left scope for new research. But a sizeable amount of material on the variation had accumulated, and Gligoric devoted a substantial article to it in Sahovski Glasnik.
The role played by authors of theoretical researches is a noble but thankless
one, particularly if they have not yet left the competitive arena. By sharing their
knowledge, they often, against their will, reveal trumps to their opponents. And that
is what happened (although with a favourable final outcome) on this occasion.
The article by Gligoric caught my attention during my preparations for the
Interzonal Tournament, because it both provided a broad amount of information,
and in places raised some thorny problems.
Together with my trainer at the time, Yevgeny Vasyukov, who was also
greatly interested in this line, we made a thorough study of Gligoric's recommendations,
and on certain questions came to our own conclusions. In particular, it
seemed to us that after the exchange on h5 Black can try to exploit the weakness of
the light squares in the enemy position, for which the bishop should be developed
on the a6-fl diagonal.
It was decided that the right time for this was precisely that critical moment from the Gligoric-
Kavalek game on the 14th move.
When at the opening of the tournament the pairings gave me the black pieces
against Gligoric, it became clear that it was in this game that our discovery would
undergo a practical testing...
And so, after just two or three minutes, during which these moves were made: the 'desired' position was reached.
Enjoy the game and the extraordinary notes!
With apologies for the inevitable errors which will creep in when trying to transcribe notes on this scale. Thanks for joining me.
