Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8108, F.i.d.e. Ilyumzhinov
and Dalai Lama at Chicago.

Will they all be fighting Draws?
Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8148. This starts the count.
Draws 1, Decisive 0.

World Championship G2.
Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8151.
Draws 2, Decisive 0.

World Championship G3.
Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8157. Draws 3, Decisive 0.
But for stodginess they should have gone to Capablanca Chess or something
else. That's what this proves, too many Draws is going to prove that as it
goes up and up.

World Championship G4. Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8159.
Draws 4, Decisive 0. Unfulfilled fans packing Moscow to the tune of total
route.

World Chess Championship G5.
Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8166.  Draws 5, Decisive 0. 
Sveshnikov, not playing, won the Latvian chess championship as recently as
2010, and game five was played within parameters of his system.

World Chess Championship Games 6-8.
Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8175. 7 and 8 are decisive.
Draws 6, Decisive 2.

World Chess Championship. Http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8190. 
Draws 9, Decisive 2.

World Chess Championship.
Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8194. Draws 10, Decisive 2.
Underwhelming says Chessbase. So what else is new, time to take Capablanca
seriously instead of saying for the 9th decade in a row he was wrong about
the Draw Death. Of  course he was wrong, just look at all the post-world
war two intricacies he never dreamed of, still going on. Look again at the
amazing to believe game 8 of this tournament of a Win in 17 moves, http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8175. What a game, what a fascinating turn of events.

Thirteen years ago thirteenth chess champion beat the world,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov_versus_the_World. The one game over
weeks was even a lot more exciting and interesting than the two Deep Blue versus GK
six-game matches earlier, to anyone who followed the three of them all great sporting fare. In contrast, recent championship just concluded 2012 had Draws 10
and Decisive 2, and a technical tiebreak or blitz/rapids rather went to Anand.

Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8323, where firsthand
Fischer loses game one.

Spassky won game 2 on forfeit since Fischer refused to seat himself when
the clock was started on 13 July 1972 (was it a friday the thirteenth too?). The dispute was over cameras' positioning. Score now Spassky 2
to Fischer 0, and game 3 is scheduled for today 16.July.1972, presumed deep word from Chessbase in the offing.
Historically Fischer has never beaten Spassky any single game and they are playing for world champion.

If they don't continue the simultaneous Spassky-Fischer recap 40 yrs. ex post facto, we
will to some extent. Http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8332.
Computers and chess their revived in-front-of-the-curve subject matter, how would CVs, or a few specific cvs or just a few more FRC-based initial positions,
complicate or solve the eventuality they describe that anymore a gm-computer match is become pointless? Or some of our modest Mutators: the Winther pawn drive rank 5, the Lasker stalemate as Draw, Italian free castling suggested by Chess Cafe Harding in the late 20th century upon Kasparov's 1997
loss to Deep Blue? Before the present environment, Chessbase used to feature computer tournaments
themselves with some frequency, and there are now separate specialty
sites for that.

Game three, http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044727. Previous contests Spassky and Fischer had seen Spassky winning three and two Draws. Played 40 yrs. ago July 16, afore game 3 was the first Fischer win between the two.  Only this one game was played in closed playing area, separate from spectators, without all the objected cameras. 
The Benoni opening played here has the six set moves and the divergencies begin with White move 7. Benoni Defense reached its peak popularity precisely the decade after this match. It seems repugnant to variantists, but they keep track of exact percentages of wins from what White's 7th move is. They have to since they operate in such a narrow realm within the imagined single right set of rules. Spassky's
 chosen 7 N f3-d2 wins what percentage of the time, rather unfairly using results before and since this game?  46.6%. Superficially Spassky's choice is best, as only '7 a4' has detectably higher percentage 50%.

Game 4, http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044365, played forty
yrs. ago yesterday, 18.July.1972, is Draw, leaving the tournament score
Spassky 2.5, Fischer 1.5.
The whole schmeil through the first six moves by Fischer and Spassky is called what? Sicilian Defense: Fischer-Sozin Attack; Leonhardt Variation. Never mind just remembering the moves is easier, the name dramatizes the action. This game 4 is played back in the auditorium as the rest of the tournament. Now Sicilian Defense cum Fischer-Sozin Attack peaked in popularity around 1950. Since Fischer was not really player yet then, obviously specific names get made and attached over time.
Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence.  See there that '1 e4 c5' is enough to make it Sicilian, or Sicilian Defence, just the c5 response to regular e4, get it? Then upon the established '6 ...e6' it is full-fledge Sicilian Defence Fischer-Sozin Attack.

What was happening forty yrs. ago to the day? Game 5 played 20.July.1972.
Just the four moves first define this one's opening, Nimzo-Indian
Defense: Huebner Variation. 
Http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044723. With Fischer win,
series ties 2.5 - 2.5. //////////////////  Tucking the Bishop behind the Pawns is far the most regular continuation, so Spassky can be said to vary with 5 e3.  Well, sort of, since a transpositional search shows once the Pawn is at e3, it is Gligoric System, a different classification for games past played, where the e2-e3 gets played at move 4 not move 5. Yet either way after White's fifth it is the exact same board position, just the different ways to arrive there.

The tournament is well-spaced for ostensibly highest quality before computer days and this takes all
summer. Still on game 5 of 20.July.1972, http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044723, it is the second Nimzo-Indian so
far, and experts credit frankly the win to Spassky's blunder in this very
last move 27.  The annotations put two question marks '??'. Namely, 27
Qc2 Bxa4.  No more moves and 0-1, series tied at 2.5-2.5. What should
Spassky play rather than Qc2 for the game to proceed normally, about equal in position as it is certainly in material? The Qc2 is not a move even for the local club. Was Fischer still rattling Spassky? The next
game is not til Monday.

What was happening forty years ago to the day? 23.July.1972 Game 6, http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044366. Move '41 Qf4 1-0' is just logical ending to the position with the advanced Pawn for White. The crisp Capablanca-like play came earlier. Move 41 is neat for what variantists think of as ''mad Queen OrthoChess'': rabiosa because perfecting Chess, Queen gains the Rook and Bishop power after year 1500. At move 41, if the Black Rook does not interpose, it is to be checkmate, and if Black Rook moves e7-h7, the Queen will be lost. It is not frequent without any Knight involved to get such interesting Scylla and Charybdis position letting Black no way out, despite up in material.

<IMG SRC="/play/pbm/drawdiagram.php?code=rnr3k5qpp1pp2b2p1BPp12Q3PN2PP3PPP2R1K2R&set=medium">

Where does Black go wrong in Game 6 played 23.July.1972? The tournmant now
becomes 3.5-2.5 and the games run to end of August.
Http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044366. Instead of 15
...bxc5, how about taking with the Rook 15 ...Rxc5?  By 37 ...Nf6, it is too late as Fischer will inevitably under-trade Rook for that Knight in ensuing exchange sacrifice.  Once Spassky makes the supposed mistake 14 ...a6 instead of 14 ...Qb7, called ''correct'' and discovered later, it throws a monkey wrench into all the subsequent moves in not comparing exactly with any other score even since from rather early Move 15 on. Http://www.home.roadrunner.com/~etzel/72game6.htm.   //// Later: the link calls Game 6 here one of the best in the tournament. Can anyone find '15 ...Rxc5' annotated in support of Black? It appears after 15 ...Rxc5, 1 0-0 R-a7 or 1 Rxc5 Qxc5 or 1 b4 Rxc1, every choice advantages Black afterwards. Fischer's position may not be so great at this point with that right continuation against inactive Pawns of White. He only gets away with it upon quick Castling the very next move, which the forward Rook at c5 then would alleviate instead.

Game 7 played today 25.July.1972 is Draw,
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044728.
Spassky should take the full point, not Fischer, in the last Game 6 with 15 ...Rxc5. No computer is having been used used for the hypothesis, and as well possibly with other annotations there is not even suggested a Black win missed yet at any other Move the Game 6 that puts Fischer ahead for the rest of the tournament.  Is there a saving move for Fischer in a Move 16 with the White Knight or something else? Black would appear to stand better after the corrected Move 15, and White's best chance to defer the outcome is the same 0-0 really made.

Http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1340520/10-greatest-chess-games-from-Kasparov-vs-Bobby-Fischers-victory.html. Number 6 by the Mail in the list is Fischer-Spassky Game 6, that this thread shows Spassky wins with 15 ...Rxc5.
Game 8 played today 27.July.1972: Http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044367.

Game 9 played 1.August.1972 Draws,
Http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1128884.

Http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1008423, where Game 10 is
played forty years ago to the day 3.August.1972. Where does Black go wrong? What would be better move than 26 ...axb5? Can Black save this one somehow?