wrote in message
...
On Mar 26, 6:04 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"Mike Murray" wrote in message

...

Like help-bog, Taylor Kingston also make my point for me

I just want to say that I am taking no side or part in the Innes-
Murray-Helpbot argument over the importance of the KG as part of
Spassky's opening repertoire. I just wanted to supply some stats about
his record with it; others may interpret as they see fit.
One caveat: the ChessBase data may not be complete or entirely
accurate.

---

**No one is required to 'take sides' or 'interpret' what 12 games against
top GMs illustrate in a player's entire carear!

All that is illustrated here are the exceptions to the normal Spassky
repetoire against 2600+ players. That's what I wrote in the first place.

I am not dissing the KG at all, but initially stated that Spassky's trainers
strongly encouraged him to develop a much broader opening repetoire since
the KG was not going to be good enough to combat the top-tier - and Spassky
did - though serious study was not his metier.

Its interesting that in Cafferty's book, published 1972, there are 4 KGs
[some brilliant ones], and more than 100 other openings, and the long
forward by Leonard Barden makes the same point I did above - and cites
Krogius and also Ray Keene.

If USCF ever (a) find their own archives currently moldering in a
wharehouse, and (b) put them on line, then (c) a CL article 1970 has
extracts 'Portrait of a world champion', also published British Chess Mag,
May 1970, with interviewers, Krogius, Keene & Levy.

Barden's forward is very good on Boris's psychology, and the 'surprise
factor' of his opening repetoire- eg, playing the Marshall 3 times against
Tal, 'because' said Boris 'the Marshall is good enough to draw, which is all
I aimed at', and indeed Tal couldn't make headway against it.

His trainers were Tolush, then Zak then Bondarevsky, who seemed to
revitalise Boris after his year's ban from chess for 'underperformance' in
1961. Then Klaman knocked more sense into him and sharpened his play,
especially King attacks.

Spassky himself admitted he was a bit lazy, and indeed, would prefer reading
serious non-chess books, like Dostoyevski, eg - and personally I'm glad he
did, otherwise after similar struggles to Fischer's he would have lived half
his embittered, which was Fischer's fate for his devotion to chess and not
to his own maturity.

Phil Innes