The Second Przepiórka Memorial Tournament

When I have to write a report on a tournament in which I myself took part, I must therefore write about myself as well. I am reminded of Karinthy Frigyes’s phrase: “I shall explain my certificate.” This greatly hinders the work; sooner or later the human voice is struck which, despite all impartiality, is still balanced against reality. And so that this partiality should not be too dominant — although something of it will always be felt — it is best if the interested party simply lists the facts, arranges the groups of related and decisive games and positions, and leaves the reader to judge for himself.

When I sat down at my desk to prepare this report in the strict sense of the word, I nevertheless could not avoid a resolution. The leading group of the tournament stood out so markedly from the field that it seems necessary to deal with it separately. And since, I hope, I too was included among those three, this may be forgiven.

Grandmaster Geller was in a class of his own at the tournament. He was the only undefeated player; he alone fought his way through the fifteen rounds without a break. He did not have a single adjourned game, which gave him a great advantage over the others, who often had to battle with three or four adjourned games at once. Geller not only started best, but also finished best. He won the special prize for the best result over the last five rounds, and with this finish he pulled away from his two main rivals, Kholmov and Szabó.

The latter two lost their rhythm only in the eleventh and tenth rounds respectively. At the end of round ten, all three still had the same score: 8½ points. Kholmov, however, scored only 2½ points, and Szabó only 1½ points, from their last five games. Their failure in the final third of the tournament may perhaps be explained not only by mental fatigue, but also by the fact that both were trying at all costs to keep pace with Geller. Kholmov’s result will not surprise chess experts, for although he holds only the title of International Master, his recent performances in the Soviet Championship have come close to those of the winners, and he has left behind such outstanding players as Korchnoi, Petrosian, Boleslavsky, Aronin, Taimanov, Furman and others.

Finally, to speak of myself among the victorious trio: in the first half of the tournament I played good games and, for ten rounds, I was able to keep pace with the two Soviet players. The eleventh and twelfth rounds, however, were fatal, and my situation became almost hopeless. If I were superstitious, I would be inclined to believe that I should not play in the eleventh and twelfth rounds of long tournaments. In Bucharest in 1953 I had likewise been in a leading position, and in the two fatal rounds I also lost there. In both rounds then, as now, my games were characterized by a complete lack of ideas, despite otherwise good form.

But I do not have much hope that similar lapses can be avoided in the future by superstition. Rather, one must search for the factors which cause the chess player to go blind periodically: fatigue, mental state, and so on. One must also find the means by which such periods of chess blindness can be shortened. The present failure can undoubtedly be attributed largely to the fact that the “move order” unfortunately worked out for me in such a way that I had five games hanging, and since there was no separate rest day available, I played without rest almost continuously up to the tenth round.

Now, after having partly “explained my certificate”, let the certificate speak for itself.

The greatest event of the first round was undoubtedly Geller’s victory over Kholmov. This was somewhat surprising, since many had expected a peaceful draw. Geller, however, was quite unwilling to draw. The game had already been published in the previous issue of Magyar Sakkélet.

Apart from this game, Geller, Kholmov and Szabó remained undefeated until round eleven. Up to round seven all three were winning almost without interruption, while the others were beating one another. Only Ciocâltea was able for a while to keep step with Kholmov. He won the Borotvaélen game against Orbaan, in which Black found full counterplay in a not exactly sound, rarely used variation.

After the seventh round the standings were as follows: Geller and Szabó 6½; Ciocâltea and Kholmov 5½; Śliwa 4½; Franz and Orbaan 4; Fichtl 3½; Plater 3; Náhlík and Winiwarter 2½; Bogdanović, Doda, Gromek and Szukszta 2; Dzięciołowski 0 points.

In rounds seven to ten, Ciocâltea lost four games in succession and thus fell away from the leading trio. The battle around fourth place became even more compressed, because Bogdanović, who had started very badly, surprisingly began a winning streak of five games, while Plater was able to obtain 4½ points from six games. Kholmov continued his winning run, scoring 9½ points from ten games. As a typical example of the strategy he used in the tournament, we present the following game.

In this round, incidentally, everything was turned upside down. Not a single game was played in good form in which the player in the better position won.

The struggle for first place was decided by these defeats. Geller was still able to maintain his rhythm, and his first place was already secured two rounds before the finish. In round thirteen, characteristic of his easy play, he won a miniature against Náhlík, in which his opponent’s home analysis was refuted over the board.

In a relatively short article such as this, it is difficult to give a completely faithful picture of a tournament. What has been said is only a fraction of the interesting material which deserves preservation.

The organization of the Second Przepiórka Memorial Tournament was excellent in every respect. Better, one might say, than at the first memorial tournament held one year earlier in Szczawno-Zdrój. We encountered only one shortcoming, for which, however, we received an explanation: this year only this international tournament had been planned in Poland, but the International Chess Federation later also accepted Poland’s request to organize the Women’s World Championship Zonal Tournament. Thus the budget made it necessary for Szczawno-Zdrój to operate under certain restrictions.

The name of Szczawno-Zdrój has already entered chess history through the two memorial tournaments. The leaders of Polish chess, however, do not wish to stop here, but, together with the local authorities, have planned to make the Szczawno-Zdrój tournaments a tradition. The tournament to be held each year will certainly help the further development of many young Polish chess talents.

Szabó László