A. Hildebrand

Ulf Andersson Against the World's Best

A chess match has been played in Stockholm. Perhaps the strangest one ever to take place in our country. A match which, for a couple of weeks, kept all of Sweden's chess players in suspense. Here it was not merely the case that two of the Nordic countries' foremost chess players were meeting. Nor merely two grandmasters at the top level of the game. Here two playing styles also met: the offensive and the defensive. Here, too, two individuals met: the confident world star Larsen and the calm, withdrawn, yet at the same time young and bold Ulf Andersson. And it became quite a match!

This will be a somewhat unusual chess report. It is purely chess-theoretical questions that the commentators will have to answer.

Has Ulf Been Lost to Swedish Chess?

This question has perhaps not been discussed very much in the press, but all the more among players. Should we try to produce grandmasters and international masters so that they will later simply bid farewell to us? The issue is not new; it is highly topical in practically all our sports. And one can argue that there is much truth in it. When a professional player declines national-team duty, a World Championship qualifier, etc., is he within his rights to do so? Has he not some obligation toward his national federation and his country? The question has a moral aspect and can be answered either yes or no, depending on how one sees it and who one is. Is it right to demand of a professional that, suddenly, out of solidarity with his country, he should put aside his work and place his labor at the country's disposal free of charge? Or, conversely, if he has given up a job on the "free market" in order to devote himself to chess, is it right to demand an "emergency payment," for example, with funds that the national federation might otherwise have invested in a player under development?

In sport one is strict. If a player refuses to take part in an international match, the federation can suspend him a week before and a week after the international match. And this also applies to international competitions! Are such sanctions justified? Are they even legal? Can they purely in principle be carried that far, especially in sports where one earns one's living from competitions, such as, for example, Bent Larsen, who now lives in Las Palmas? (We do not, however, approve of it being called "the Spanish hero" who preferred to be "Spanish".)

But what about Ulf? I have had the opportunity to talk to him during his stay in Stockholm. And we talk with each other not as teammates and national-team players but as chess players and good friends. I know that Ulf has refrained from taking part in a number of national-team matches and has also said no even to World Championship qualification in the form of participation in tournaments. But I am far from thinking that this is for reasons of principle. If he declines, it is because of scheduling. A professional chess player must "time" his tournaments far in advance. Perhaps six months or more. A national-team match can easily clash with a tournament in Yugoslavia or Cuba. And not infrequently one has to withdraw from such tournaments in order to fly home for a few days and play not only without compensation but perhaps at a direct financial loss, forfeiting a lot of money or falling behind in a tournament where one could very well need to stay near the top.

But plans made long in advance can also be changed. If we are considerate and place them in such a way that Ulf can get home, then he will not say no to playing. The same applies to the FIDE zonal tournament - that is, a World Championship qualifying event which means an enormous amount to Swedish chess players. Ulf Andersson in an interzonal tournament - yes, that can attract our press sharks or perhaps other organizers to take an interest in and simply finance an interzonal tournament in Sweden. Who knows?

Nor can one blame Ulf here. FIDE's zonal tournaments, unfortunately, have a rather poor history. Only a few months before they are to be played does the World Chess Federation still not know when and where they will be held. How is one to combine that with the participation of professional grandmasters, who usually have a "fully booked" schedule six to nine months in advance? Ulf told me that he had not objected to taking part in a zonal tournament, especially since it is a competition of great importance, but not nearly as lucrative as other tournaments, unless it happens to clash with some other tournament.

In such a case he naturally has the choice, where he can choose between leaving a good tournament and two fights to go home to a free one-day event. That is one thing. But what about the whole match against Andersson-Larsen to decide the question perhaps once and for all? This we shall explain shortly.

Is Chess Culture?

Does one want to see Ulf Andersson competing on home soil (and the last time he did so before the match with Larsen was in Gothenburg in 1971), then one must create the conditions for it. Let him play at the level he considers appropriate. (A national-team match against Norway, for example, he should be able to manage without Ulf, but how is it with a championship event there?) Some of the top chess players have got themselves settled in Sweden and abroad. If we do not act, we may perhaps really lose Ulf Andersson to Swedish chess. And that would be a great loss, for Ulf Andersson is a young man. A chess genius to be reckoned with.

And now to the match itself, which was not about anything (except money and honor), but meant a great deal. Both in chess terms and from the point of view of public relations.

The match against Larsen has meant an enormous amount. It has shown that we can see Ulf at home, provided only that we have the energy and the means to carry out such a project. And here in fact not a single penny of federation money went in, and perhaps even the opposite. Admittedly all the posters said that it was Stockholm Chess Federation and Dagens Nyheter that were responsible for the match arrangements and its execution. And certainly it was so, but surely the match would never have come about if there had not been a fiery spirit in Bo Teddy Ladberg! Honor where honor is due!

It is he and only he who, after many months of stubborn negotiations behind the scenes, finally gave the signal and became responsible for the arrangements of the Gothenburg tournament - the first one which in the autumn brought Ulf forward to the home public. And the public showed its appreciation and gratitude by appearing day after day (for Sweden an impressive total of around 300 visitors per round) to fill the Cultural Center for five silent hours with the tournament contenders' soundless battle on the board. One could certainly not have hoped for anything better. And this despite the insignificant signs on the Cultural Center facade and entrances, where many a chess enthusiast could have slipped past without even knowing what was going on inside.

Even when one waited at the Chess House to have the three grandmasters adjudicate (a weekday morning) one of the match's adjourned games - before the sudden noon - one could never underestimate the Swedish chess public's great interest.

But let us now look back at the heading - is chess culture? Yes, replies Bent Larsen, "Chess is culture - at least in Stockholm, because chess is played at the Cultural Center!" But if chess is culture, should one not guard cultural values? Should one then not try to make sure that Ulf Andersson can more often compete on home soil? If Ladberg can arrange it - why can no one else do it? We do not have money, says the federation board. And God alone knows that this is true. But I would give Ladberg a seat on the Central Board, perhaps then there would be money? And more Andersson! No, quite so simple it may not be. But I would fully support chairman Bjorn Erik Hojers' idea - give Ulf Andersson a cultural worker's salary. A fixed wage to live on. Then he would not need to overexert himself by flitting from tournament to tournament, so that he could choose and select. Recover when he most needs it. Appear before the Swedish public when opportunities arise. The Danish government has, for example, granted grandmaster Fridrik Olafsson a living allowance in order to fight for Iceland's colors both at home and abroad. If we do not do something, perhaps we really will lose Ulf Andersson to Swedish chess. And that is a great loss, for Ulf Andersson is a young man. A chess genius to be reckoned with.

A Convincing Victory

I have often advocated match play. Most recently I wrote a letter to the national federation. A match is something completely different from a tournament. Even if one may sometimes meet in a chess match without ever having played against each other before, one usually plays against the same opponent over and over again. One can, for example, have bad luck in the drawing of lots and meet a row of weak players as White, only then to play as Black against the favorites. And this of course changes the picture. In a match the situation is different. Here one meets one player and the number of white and black games is the same. The decisive factor is playing strength and psychological factors.

Two grandmasters sit locked in combat on the stage. One is Bent Larsen, Denmark, a grandmaster since 1956 and, formerly, ranked as the world's No. 7 (together with ex-world champion Spassky) with an Elo rating of 2625. The other is the 23-year-old Swedish grandmaster Ulf Andersson, ranked No. 23 in the "world ranking". His Elo is 2565. Bent Larsen has a great deal of match experience from both ordinary matches (e.g. Olafsson, Westerinen, etc.) and World Championship qualifying matches (Geller, Tal, Spassky, etc.). Ulf Andersson has practically no match experience. His match play is largely limited to the training matches against Akvist and Martens in 1969 - in other words, in his "green youth". Well, who will you bet on? Unfortunately England's bookmakers were not listening to this. But if they had, the odds would probably have been 1 to 10 or 2 to 11 in Bent's favor.

The Curtain Rises

First match game. One can, so to speak, feel Ulf studying. Maneuvering behind his lines. Reading the position. Gradually he gets into time trouble. Should time trouble become his bane in this match? Hardly. Ulf is often, unfortunately all too often, in time trouble. But to manage time and position in an adjourned game is not so easy, yet he keeps control. The result is a draw. Match score: 1/2-1/2.

Second match game. The opening - English with a "Dutch" setup in Black's defense. Ulf plays quietly and Bent again finds himself on the defensive. He does not quite manage it. The Dane's knight adventures on the kingside are not so good at all but bury Black's position. Ulf's queen enters and inflicts the decisive blow. The endgame that arises after the adjournment is favorable for White. And Ulf begins calmly to realize his advantage in a precisely executed endgame. 1 1/2-1/2.

Third match game. Nimzo-Indian with Ulf as Black. Should Ulf perhaps choose his usual openings? Here, it seems, not. Less good play in a theoretical line (which Ulf does not seem to know) gives White the advantage with a pawn win for Larsen. Is the Dane back? Presumably - until Larsen gets onto this path. Otherwise there is no reason to force matters - the pawn should win "as is", gently and methodically. But Bent gives up a pawn endgame. Forced adjournment too, suddenly he has allowed counterplay. Pure draw. And Bent still wants to play to win - otherwise he could have accepted a draw. A suicidal rook check on the 8th rank. Without having at least half the point saved. But now? What happens is a typical example of textbook chess for beginners. "Weakness on the first (respectively eighth) rank" is the chapter. Nothing fatal! Such mistakes are also made by world stars, even if they appear so often. But Bent thought the game was not lost. And it is likely that the match from now on is lost. At a match score of 1 1/2-2 1/2 Larsen is forced into desperate measures. And such measures now do not work against Ulf.

Fourth match game. Ulf Andersson's third consecutive game. The Dane sacrifices a pawn to seize the initiative, but the Swede's pieces are in place and parry everything. The game goes to an adjourned rook ending that should be a draw. Furthermore, Ulf has made a number of "best moves" and brought his king up into the center. After the adjournment Larsen begins to push his kingside pawns, but this costs him valuable time. And once again our grandmaster shows that he can not only play the endgame (it is said to be the most difficult part of chess, and a good barometer of a grandmaster's playing strength) but play it better! A very strong ending, where the Swede outplays the Dane in every respect.

The match score is now 3 1/2-1/2 - thus a pure disaster for Larsen.

Fifth match game. The fifth match game was again Nimzo-Indian, but now Ulf showed better opening tactics. Only here, in the fifth game, does Bent manage to direct the struggle according to his own wishes and get Ulf into an open and sharp exchange of blows with time pressure as a consequence. Unharmed, Ulf does not have time to calculate all the complicated variations, but without missing a drawing continuation, he takes a piece and thus invites an attack. The match score is 3 1/2-1 1/2.

Sixth match game. The sixth match game decided the fate of the match. Ulf opened cautiously and the opening phase of the game was an excellent illustration of what Euwe calls "Die Kunst des Lavierens". Black had difficulty finding a sensible plan, while White built up an easy-to-play position. In the middlegame Ulf won a pawn and sacrificed the exchange, which ensured him a long-term initiative with dangerous pressure along the long diagonal. The blow, however, would have been long overdue had Larsen not, on his 46th move, given away an important central pawn. On several occasions in this match the Dane seemed uncertain both in his play and in concrete calculation. What can this be due to? The match score is now 4 1/2-1 1/2 and Ulf Andersson has thus secured victory in the match.

Seventh match game. The battle has lost some of its interest, but it continues. Larsen must try to "improve" the figures and at least avoid a Swedish rout. Despite this, Larsen produces unusually pale and uninspired play. After having obtained a real "dream position" in the Sicilian he accomplishes almost nothing and allows Ulf to obtain counterplay. After two adjournments he nevertheless succeeds (after less sharp play on Ulf's part) in winning a queen endgame. Ulf's match lead is thereby reduced to 4 1/2-2 1/2.

Eighth match game. The tension has diminished considerably. Larsen evidently takes it more easily and plays as quickly as in the first match game (1 1/2 hours for the first 40 moves). He is also winning, but again strange things begin to happen. The endgame with rook and knight against rook for Larsen is handled so incredibly weakly that the Dane eventually finds himself in a mating net.

The final result of the match is therefore 5 1/2-2 1/2.

And the Sum of It All?

Fine chess propaganda, but at times Larsen's play was so inexplicably weak that one can almost ask whether it was only a temporary indisposition or whether Bent Larsen is seriously in decline. All assurances that the Dane is a future "World Championship candidate" seem in this situation more like a bad joke. We must, however, hope that the sympathetic Dane will recover and that this will not merely be in the form of statements to the press. After all, it is players such as Alekhine, Keres, Tal, Larsen and Fischer who have made chess something living and exciting in our time!