[Event "Leningrad"]
[Site "Ch URS , Leningrad (Russia)"]
[Date "1938.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Botvinnik"]
[Black "Chekhover"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Annotator "49: Personal Style"]
[ECO "E21"]
[PlyCount "85"]
[Source "Hays Publishing"]
[SourceDate "1964.01.01"]

{ 5. BOTVINNIK (1910-1992)  In some ways Botvinnik was a disciple of Lasker. He
was, like his great forerunner - first of all a great fighter. He revels in
difficult positions; but when necessary he also plays simple positions with
accuracy which is scarecely surpassable. his master stems from the harmony
which exists between his chess technique and his human attributes.  His style
is distinguished by great originality. Ne never minds having his pawn position
shattered, providing that he thereby obtains free play for his pieces.  In
this respect he goes much farther than Tarrasch, who spoke out in favour of
having an isolated d-pawn. Botvinnik was not only unafrad of an isolated
d-pawn; he quite frequently was prepared to accept doubled or even trebled
pawns  Botvinnik not only thirst for battle; as a rule he is thoroughly
prepared for it. Several times he lost matches in defence of the World
Championshpi - first against Smyslov, then against Tal, and then against
Petrosian. In two of these cases - against Smyslov and tal - he had the
opportunity for a return match, and both times he made such thorough
preparations, and directed those preparations so accurately at the weaknesses
of his opponents, that they were no match for him. His skill in the deep and
exhaustive analysis of adjounment positions is scarecely rivaled.  He has
adopted his own particular repertoire of openings, especially with the Black
pieces. Against 1. Pe4 his first choice of defence used to be the French and
then the Sicilian, in keeping with his preference for difficult positions.
Later he often used the Caro-Kann, especially when he needed a solid defence
against the ferocious attacking style of Tal } 1. d4 Nf6 ( 1... d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 e6 5. Bxc4 c5 6. O-O a6 7. a4 cxd4 8. exd4 { This variation
occured repeatedly in his match with Petrosian, the man who dethroned
Botvinnik as World Champion in 1963 } ) 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Nf3 ( 4. Qb3 { Botvinnik's variations with the White pieces exemplify his disregard of
weakened pawn structures } 4... c5 5. dxc5 Nc6 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bh4 Nd4 8. Qa4 $1 Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Nf5 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. Rc1 ) 4... O-O 5. Bg5 d6 6. e3 { Botvinnik wished to leave e4 open for occupation by his pieces } ( 6. e4 h6 7. Bxf6 Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 Qxf6 ) 6... Qe7 7. Be2 e5 8. Qc2 Re8 9. O-O Bxc3 { This practically forces the doubling of the c-pawns. Botvinnik was not afraid
of doubled pawns when there is positonal compensation (in this case the
possibility of occupying d5 later } 10. bxc3 ( 10. Qxc3 Ne4 11. Bxe7 Nxc3 ) 10... h6 11. Bh4 c5 { Black hopes to induce White to play Pd5, but it doesn't work out well here. } ( 11... g5 12. Bg3 Nh5 { Botvinnik } ) 12. Rfe1 { To be able to play Nd2 } 12... Bg4 13. Bxf6 Qxf6 14. Qe4 Bxf3 ( 14... Bc8 15. Qd5 { annoying to Black } ) 15. Bxf3 Nc6 16. dxc5 { "A double pawn is a weakness which my perhaps be
endured, but an isolated doubled pawn is a disadvantage which must lead to the
loss of the game". Not long ago this was the accepted opinoun, but Botvinnik's
games have repeatedly demonstrated that this must be taken with a grain of
salt } 16... dxc5 17. Rad1 Rad8 18. Rd5 { Here we see the doubled pawn as a
support pawn in the exploitation of a strong square } 18... b6 ( 18... Qe7 19. Red1 g6 20. -- f5 ) 19. Red1 Na5 20. h3 Rxd5 21. Rxd5 $1 { Botvinnik 
declines to dissolve his doubled pawns. He would then have a protected passed
pawn, but Black would have been able to favourably blockade it at once by ...
Nb7-d6 } ( 21. cxd5 Nb7 22. -- Nd6 ) 21... Qe7 ( 21... Rd8 22. Qd3 Rxd5 23. Qxd5 { White has excellent chances } ) 22. Bg4 Qb7 23. Bf5 Qb8 ( 23... -- 24. Rd7 Qxe4 25. Bxe4 -- 26. Bd5 ) ( 23... g6 24. Bxg6 fxg6 25. Qxg6+ Kf8 26. Rd6 $18 ) 24. Rd7 Rd8 { Black must surrender the e-pawn } ( 24... -- 25. Bh7+ Kf8 26. Qd5 Re7 27. Rd8+ ) 25. Qxe5 $1 { Black can't take the Queen because of mate on the back rank } 25... Nxc4 26. Qxb8 Rxb8 27. Be4 $3 { Now White threatens Bd5 winning the f-pawn } ( 27. Rxa7 Nd6 $132 28. -- c4 29. -- Nb5 ) 27... Na3 ( 27... -- 28. Bd5 ) 28. Bd5 Rf8 29. e4 $1 { Still White resists the temptation to win material } 29... a5 30. c4 $1 b5 31. cxb5 Nxb5 32. e5 a4 ( 32... g5 33. Rb7 Nc3 34. Bc4 { Black is lost } ) 33. f4 { White's pawn majority in the centre and
Kingside will now yield a decisive passed pawn } 33... Nd4 34. Kf2 g5 35. g3 gxf4 36. gxf4 Ne6 ( 36... Kg7 37. Ke3 Nf5+ 38. Ke4 Kg6 39. Bxf7+ Rxf7 40. Rxf7 Ng3+ 41. Kf3 Kxf7 42. Kxg3 c4 43. Kf2 c3 44. Ke2 { White wins easily as he can stop the c-pawn } ) 37. Ke3 c4 38. f5 { White still eschews material gain in order to proceed with his pain strategy } 38... Nc5 39. Rc7 Nd3 40. e6 fxe6 41. fxe6 Re8 42. e7+ Kg7 43. Bc6 1-0