Fischer Decoded Part One

Hello
As all serious chess players know Fischer brought chess to new levels of professionalism and quality. Many books have been written on Fischer and each has its own distinct flavour. My aim is to show two major hallmarks in Fischer's games: Efficiency and the pursuit of the sustainable initiative with an emphasis on piece activity even in the endgames. In this Part I will look at Fischer's love affair with the Exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez- a variation which brought him a lot of success, especially in  the 1966 Olympiad in Havanna.
My belief is that Fischer looked deeply at the pawn formation and saw a lot of potential in his 4-3 majority on the Kingside as well as scope for simple but very effective piece play. So lets see how Fischer did the simple things well in this variation.

Fischer v Rubinetti 1970
1.e4e5 2.Nf3Nc6 3.Bb5a6 4.Bc6dc6 5.0-0f6 - A good positional move which bolsters e5 and black has no fears of light square exploitation by white in view of the exchange on c6.

6.d4Bg4 7.de5Qd1 8.Rd1Bf3 9.gf3fe5 10.Be3 now its important to demystify Fischer. He is doing the natural thing- moving out the pieces.
10....Bd6 11.Nd2 -First the bishop then the knight. Harmonious piece development was the key to Fischer's impressive use of his pieces.

11....Ne7 12.Nc40-0-0 a decisive moment. Fischer now has a target- b7. 13.Rd3b5 14.Na5Bb4 15.Nb3
White has achieved something significant.The inducement of weaknesses on the c-file. Super GMs were to follow this aspect of Fischer's play. After development, the probing and inducement of weaknesses.

15...Rd3 16.cd3Ng6 17.Kf1 -Notice Fischer has not done anything magical here. He has simply activated his King. 17...Rf8 18.Ke2Nf4 19.Bf4Rf4 20.Rg1Rh4 21.Rg7Rh2 22.a3Bd6 23.f4! -This is the difference between the sides. Fischer will now create a passed pawn.1970 was the year when Fischer's inner giant woke up. It would appear that the sides were equal but this move breaks the deadlock.

23....ef4 24.d4Kd8 25.Na5-Fischer had a knack for this kind of move. Paradoxical knight moves which threatenned vital squares.
25....c5 26.e5Bf8 27.Nc6+ Fischer always responded to a threat with an equal or stronger threat.

27....Ke8 28.Rc7 and 1-0 Queens were exchanged and still the game lasted only 28 moves.
Its important to note Fischer did nothing fabulous or spectacular. He did simple accurate moves.

Next game:

Fischer v Gligoric 1966

1.e4e5 2.Nf3Nc6 3.Bb5a6 4.Bc6dc6 5.0-0f6 6.d4Bg4 7.c3!? Fischer wanted to set Gligoric different problems.

7...ed4 8.cd4 The effect of this exchange is to open the c-file and release the c3 square for the knight.
Later on GMs learnt to keep the tension as much as possible in general.

8....Qd7 9.h3Be6 (9...Bh5 10.Ne5! was Fischer v Jimenez) 10.Nc30-0-0 11.Bf4Nge7 12.Rac1
In three simple moves development is nearly complete. Notice the order, knight, bishop and then rook.
I really believe this simple efficiency was attractive to Fischer.

12....Ng6 13.Bg3Bd6 14.Na4 Once again we see very simple chess.We also see Fischer's desire to improve the pieces here.Note how simple the moves become. 14...Bg3? The game is transformed to black's detriment.White has just been given an open invitation to the c5 square. Again Fischer will target the b7 and c6 pawns.
15.fg3Kb8 -A sign of discomfort facing the white rook on c1. 16.Nc5Qd6 17.Qa4 in two simple moves Fischer has increased his attacking assets around the black king.This must have been the other motivation for playing this variation.The apparent simplicity of the opening was bound to have a GM let down his guard.

17....Ka7? Fatal. 18.Na6! the knight is not to be taken otherwise 19.Rc6 and mate ensues or black has to part with his darling queen.

18....Bh3 19.e5Ne5 Gligoric faced with mortal blows seeks to muddy the waters.
20.de5fe5 21.Nc5Kb8 22.gh3e4 23.Ne4Qe7 24.Rc3b5 25.Qc2 1-0

So there you are , two Fischer victories with simple traits:
1) Creation of an imbalance on move 4.

2) Simple development

3)Expoiting weaknesses

4) Organising simple attacks.

5) Converting advantages in the simplest most efficient manner.

6) Responding to threats with equal or stronger threats.