Petrosian v Spassky, 1966, game 10: two exchange sacrifices
Tigran Petrosian, the world champion, played this game against Boris Spassky in game 10 of their 1966 world championship match in Moscow. He won games 7 and 10 with rare sacrificial attacks; Spassky remarked that Petrosian's opponents never knew when he would suddenly play like Tal. Petrosian kept his title, 12½–11½.
The whole game
The opening is a King's Indian Defence with White's bishop fianchettoed on g2.
What Stockfish makes of it
We had Stockfish check every move.
19...f4 and 20.gxf4: a slip each
The grandmaster Vassilios Kotronias called 19...f4 a serious mistake, because it gave up control of e5, and Stockfish agrees: about a third of a pawn worse for Black with 19...Qf6, against nearly one and a half after 19...f4. Kotronias also wrote that 20.gxf4 was the only Petrosian move in the game that deserves criticism, and that 20.Rxf4 would have won easily. Stockfish agrees again: 20.Rxf4 keeps White about one and a half pawns better, 20.gxf4 only about a third.
21.Ne3 and 24.Rxf4: the exchange sacrifices
21.Ne3 leaves the rook on f1 to be taken; White had no real alternative, since 21.Rf2 loses to ...Rxf4. Stockfish rates the position about level after it, and 22.Rxf1 was the only good recapture. Spassky's 23...Nxf4 was the real mistake: 23...Qf6 would have kept Black only about a pawn worse, and after 23...Nxf4 White is three and a half pawns better. Petrosian gave up the second exchange with 24.Rxf4. Stockfish slightly prefers 24.Ne4 first, but both win.
30.Qh8+!: the queen sacrifice
After the second sacrifice Black is two exchanges up but helpless. 25.Be6+, 27.Nxd6 and 30.Qh8+ were each the only move that kept White's winning advantage. White wins back one exchange on move 29, and 30.Qh8+ wins the other rook: after 30...Kxh8 31.Nxf7+ the knight forks king and queen. Spassky resigned.
How we checked
- The moves are from Wikipedia's page on Tigran Petrosian and chessgames.info, which agree; a 1984 column in The Spectator and Wikipedia's page on the exchange) agree on the parts they print. We replayed every move with python-chess: all are legal.
- The engine: Stockfish 16.1 checked every move at depth 22, and the key moments again at depth 26. "A pawn better" is Stockfish's measure of the position, not a count of material.
- The history and the named opinions are from Wikipedia, The Spectator and Kotronias's comments as reported by British Chess News.
Try it. Real positions, set at your level, every answer checked against the board. No account needed to start.
Start trainingMore famous games
- The Immortal Game
- The Evergreen Game
- The Opera Game
- Zukertort v Blackburne, London 1883
- Lasker v Bauer, Amsterdam 1889
- Steinitz v von Bardeleben, Hastings 1895
- Rotlewi v Rubinstein, Łódź 1907
- Levitsky v Marshall, Breslau 1912
- Edward Lasker v Thomas, London 1912
- Lasker v Capablanca, St Petersburg 1914
- Capablanca v Marshall, New York 1918
- Adams v Torre, 1920
- The Immortal Zugzwang Game
- Réti v Alekhine, Baden-Baden 1925
- Euwe v Alekhine, 1935, game 26
- Botvinnik v Capablanca, AVRO 1938
- The Game of the Century
- Polugaevsky v Nezhmetdinov, Sochi 1958
- Tal v Smyslov, Candidates 1959
- Spassky v Bronstein, 1960
- Tal v Botvinnik, 1960, game 1
- Robert Byrne v Fischer, 1963
- Spassky v Petrosian, 1969, game 19
- Larsen v Spassky, Belgrade 1970
- Fischer v Spassky, 1972, game 6
- Karpov v Spassky, 1974, game 9
- Liu Wenzhe v Donner, 1978
- Karpov v Kasparov, 1985, game 16
- Kasparov v Karpov, Seville 1987, game 24
- Shirov v Judit Polgár, Buenos Aires 1994
- Topalov v Shirov, Linares 1998
- Kasparov's Immortal
- Kasparov v Kramnik, 2000, game 3
- Kramnik v Leko, Brissago 2004, game 14
- Anand's Immortal
- Anand v Carlsen, Chennai 2013, game 9
- Wei Yi v Bruzón, Danzhou 2015
- Carlsen v Karjakin, 2016, tiebreak game 4
- Carlsen v Nepomniachtchi, 2021, game 6