1972 Teesside International, 17 April - 5 May, Thornaby Pavilion, Thornaby-on-Tees

		Fed	Elo	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	Total
1	Bent Larsen	DEN	2660g	&;	1	½	½	1	0	1	½	1	1	1	½	½	½	1	1	11
2	Ljubomir Ljubojevic	YUG	2510g	0	&;	0	½	½	½	1	½	1	1	½	1	1	1	½	1	10
3	Lajos Portisch	HUN	2630g	½	1	&;	½	½	1	½	1	½	1	0	½	½	½	1	½	9½
4	Svetozar Gligoric	YUG	2600g	½	½	½	&;	½	½	½	½	½	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	9
5	Georgi P Tringov	BUL	2490g	0	½	½	½	&;	½	½	0	½	1	1	½	1	1	½	1	9
6	Bruno Parma	YUG	2530g	1	½	0	½	½	&;	½	½	½	1	½	½	½	½	½	1	8½
7	Ulf Andersson	SWE	2510m	0	0	½	½	½	½	&;	½	½	½	½	1	½	1	1	1	8½
8	Florin Gheorghiu	ROU	2530g	½	½	0	½	1	½	½	&;	½	0	1	½	1	½	½	½	8
9	Raymond D Keene	ENG	2465	0	0	½	½	½	½	½	½	&;	0	½	0	1	½	1	1	7
10	Gyula Sax	HUN	2400	0	0	0	1	0	0	½	1	1	&;	0	½	½	½	1	1	7
11	Robert G Wade	ENG	2365m	0	½	1	0	0	½	½	0	½	1	&;	1	½	0	½	½	6½
12	Istvan Bilek	HUN	2490g	½	0	½	0	½	½	0	½	1	½	0	&;	½	1	½	½	6½
13	Hans Joachim Hecht	FRG	2470m	½	0	½	1	0	½	½	0	0	½	½	½	&;	½	½	1	6½
14	Hans Ree	NED	2430m	½	0	½	0	0	½	0	½	½	½	1	0	½	&;	1	½	6
15	Robert Bellin	ENG	2200	0	½	0	0	½	½	0	½	0	0	½	½	½	0	&;	½	4
16	Bernard Cafferty	ENG	2440	0	0	½	0	0	0	0	½	0	0	½	½	0	½	½	&;	3

Average Elo: 2482, Category 10, GM norm = 9, IM norm = 7½

BCM, June 1972, ppn 199-206

The Teesside Grandmaster Tournament, April 17th - May 5th 1972

Report by H.Golombek

When, say in the year 2051, some (I hope) industrious and conscientious chess historian narrates the history of British chess in the 20th century, I believe he will point to this event as being one of considerable importance in that it was a clear turning point, a crucial occurence for the rise of this country in the international field. I am not thinking so much of its intrinsic importance as a tournament of great strength, though it has good claims to be considered as the strongest of its king to be held in Britain since Nottingham, 1936.

No, historically its greatest feature was the fact that, for the first time in the history of British chess, a local authority financially and otherwise sponsored an international grandmaster tournament. It must be admitted that it requires a massive and great local authority, in this case the Teesside County Borough, to have and furnish the necessary means. But there are other great local authorities throughout the length and breadth of the land who should be put on their mettle by the achievements that the Teesside have already wrought in this field. And, moreover, it is far from being the intention of the Teesside to stop at this one event. The Junior World Championship is already scheduled to take place here next year and other great events will most certainly follow. The reporter in the Soviet chess journal '64' who referred to this tournament as being the traditional international tournament at Stockton-on-Tees was of course writing with the customary journalistic latitude and should not be criticised if one or two errors had crept into his account. Admittedly it was not traditional, nor was it held at Stockton-on-Tees; but otherwise he was perfectly right to call it an international tournament. It would indeed be harsh to demand from a chess journalist a closer approximation to the truth than this. I should know, being one myself.

Perhaps the said Soviet scribe was merely indulging in a sort of poetic license and employing a rather pleasing figure of speech with a complicated Greek name by which the writer refers to an event in the future as though it has already happened. Keats's reference to the two brothers and the murdered man riding through fair Florence is all the more vivid inasmuch as the man is not yet murdered. Similarly the s.s.s was wishing to imply that the event was traditional by anticipation and hence his violently telescopic view of time. The Teesside Tournament is already as good as traditional.

Traditional or not, the event would never have even been projected had it not been for the initiative and enterprise of Gerry Walsh. And once he had conceived the idea he worked like a beaver to bring it to fruition. This too the chronicler in the year 2 051 should duly note. Those of us who worked with him to accomplish it can only make a guess as to the number of working hours he put into making sure that the tournament should be a success.

It did indeed need colossal energy and enthusiasm. In retrospect one wonders how he sustained it all, since Fate seemed to be putting obstacles continuously in the way. Not the least of these was the assembling at the Teesside of the right number of grandmasters and masters to make it an event of sufficiently high Elo rating. In the end it was of a nature adequately high to enable a competitor to achieve the grandmaster norm with 9 points and the master norm with 7½.

One of our chief difficulties in this respect lay in our dealings with the Soviet Union. I write our because I did join in with Gerry Walsh in this particular task of securing players for the tournament, the hope (which may or may not have been a will-of-the-wisp) being that my international connections and acquaintances might smooth our path. Nothing having been heard from the Soviet Chess Federation in reply to the original invitation I took the opportunity of Korchnoi's presence in this country (to play at Hastings) to send a letter via him to the secretary of the Soviet Chess Federation about the matter.

This produced results since in early February I received a telegram from the Federation asking for further details and saying that the decision would be made as to the sending of the players on receipt of these details. They were duly informed by both telegram and letter about these, but when another month had gone by without a word from them I sent another telegram to the federation saying that it was essential for the purposes of the programme etc. that we should know the names. Within five hours I received a reply saying that Tal and Vasiukov were coming.

This was fine news and particularly exhilarating when one considers that these two players are amongst the most imaginative grandmasters of our or any time. We heard that their visas had been applied for and granted and that they were due to travel to London Airport on Sunday April 16, the day before play commenced. Then, on Saturday April 15, there came a heavy blow. Gerry Walsh received the following telegram from the Soviet Chess Federation: -'Due unexpectedly changed circumstances Tal Vasiukov unable participate your tournament regret much'. What these circumstances were has not yet been revealed. My guess is that Tal fell ill a few days before and that this did not allow of the obtaining of an exit visa, through shortness of time, for an adequate replacement, and that too they were reluctant to send Vasiukov alone to such a strong tournament.

We now had two days to find two replacements. Fortunately the European Junior champion, Sax, was still in this country after having competed in the Junior International Tournament at Norwich. This was one and the other player was obtained by phoning up the ex-Dutch champion, Ree. He did not arrive till well after the opening of the first round so that his game with Portisch in that round had to be postponed till the first free day.

Now they were all here. The Mayor of Teesside, Alderman R.Hall, duly opened the tournament in the Thornaby Pavilion at Thornaby New Town Centre by making Larsen's first move for him. How the play went I shall now narrate but since the reader might be a little impatient to see the final results I give the table at once.

It was a good sign as to the hard-fought nature of the tournament that in the first round only three games were drawn and none of these were the so-called grandmaster draws. Another encouraging portent for the future was Wade's win over Sax. [Sax-Wade]

On move 24 White should have played Q-Q6 when Black, if he liked, could have gone for the draw by Kt-K1 etc.

The most important game of the round was the meeting between Larsen and Ljubojevic. As always Larsen pursued a most daring course, but one had the impression he was always secure in the way in which he rode the whirlwind and directed the storm. [Larsen-Ljubojevic]

In the next round Larsen looked to be in a bad way against Portisch for some time but managed to emerge from some middle-game complications with a draw. Sax demonstrated his incisive powers by winning very nicely against Gheorghiu. [Gheorghiu-Sax]

A very neat finish.

Larsen took the lead in Round Three by winning a long game against Keene. Now he had 2½ points, whilst second place was shared between Gligoric, Sax and Wade with 2 points each.

There was no change in the next round since, though Larsen drew with Ree, all his nearest rivals also drew. A win in Round Five against Bellin left Larsen in the lead with 4 points. It began to look as though Larsen was going to draw away from the field since those players (Portisch and Gligoric!) who had been deemed likely to dispute first place with him were not really in their best form. In fact this was Portisch's fifth draw in succession. He had some winning positions but had failed to press his advantage home.

Larsen's win against Bellin was a dubious affair and indeed he afterwards told me that Bellin could have won a piece against him with an easy win. Here is the game and readers can try and see if they can spot the flaw. [Larsen-Bellin]

Bellin could have won a piece and the game by 19 P-Q4; 20 QxP, KKt-Q2; 21 Kt-Kt6, KtxKt; 22 BxB, BxB etc. This was my analysis and Larsen confirmed that it was correct, adding, in excuse of Beilin's failure to adopt this line 'He trusted me'. The moral seems to be 'Put not thy trust in grandmasters, even when, or in particular when they are amongst the world's best tournament players'.

With Larsen drawing a brief game with Bilek in Round 6 his rivals had a chance of catching up with him. He now had 4½ points and the Roumanian grandmaster Gheorghiu could have overhauled him since he had 3½ at the start of this round; but he could do no more than draw a long and hard-fought game with Bellin. Gligoric won well against Ree and so came up to equal second and the battle between two of the world's youngest grandmasters, Ljubojevic and Andersson went in favour of the former, largely because Andersson made a strange blunder on his 20th move that cost a piece. So Ljubojevic also had 4 points. [Ljubojevic-Andersson]

Larsen had a narrow escape in the next round. He soon had a bad game against Gligoric and only just managed to emerge with a draw after looking lost for some time. Since Ljubojevic won well against Hecht, he and Larsen were sharing the lead with 5 points out of 7. The British champion Keene was the architect of his own misfortune in this round. In a winning position against Sax he sacrificed a Rook for a quick finish but it was an unsound sacrifice. Perhaps he had been influenced to make this sacrifice by a previous game of a somewhat similar type against Donner at Palma de Mallorca where in fact the Rook sacrifice was absolutely sound. This loss cost him a valuable point in his quest for the g.m. title.

Round 8 saw Larsen back in the sole lead again as his rival Ljubojevic was unable to do more than draw with Wade, whereas he beat Tringov in a typical larsenical way. But this round was chiefly distinguished by a really beautiful game by Gligoric in which he sacrificed his Queen for two Knights. Poor Bilek, who, to make matters worse, was in acute time trouble for the latter part of the game, must have felt that there were four black Knights in action against him at one stage. [Bilek-Gligoric]

Larsen held on to the lead in Round 9 with a pleasing win against Sax and since Gligoric likewise won, against Bellin, he was in second place with 6½ points as opposed to Larsen's 7. Wade distinguished himself in this round by winning a 91 move game against the Hungarian grandmaster Portisch. If the run of play showed that he was a little lucky to win, still, Wade deserves what luck there is going if only for his fighting spirit which sets a fine example to those players whose wan spirit casts a sort of blight over the game of chess.

Someone must have told Larsen about two united passed pawns on the sixth rank being worth more than a Rook; but seemingly Sax had not heard of this and only resigned when faced with these same pawns on the seventh rank. [Sax-Larsen]

Another nice win, this time over Ulf Andersson, in Round 10, enabled Larsen to draw away from the field. He now had 8 points and Gligoric and Ljubojevic were next with 7 each. In a way it seemed a shame that this should be the particular round chosen by Swedish television for their coverage. But Ulf, a blithe spirit if there ever was one, did not mind one bit. With Sax winning rather surprisingly against Gligoric in the next round and Ljubojevic drawing with the peacefully inclined Parma, Larsen's harder fought draw against Hecht left him still leading with 8½ ahead of Ljubojevic 7½ and Gligoric 7.

In Round 12 Larsen's lead began to assume really large proportions. He won another interesting game, against Wade, (he has annotated it for our Games Section) and so he had 9½ points as compared with Ljubojevic's 8 and Gligoric's 7½.

Ljubojevic in fact had a hard time in this round against Bellin and looked to be losing at one stage. It was at this point that he gave me the benefit of his knowledge and experience of the F.I.D.E. Rules to inform me (a somewhat unwilling pupil) of some new rules of which I had not been aware.

I should explain that I was games controller at the Teesside. With some twenty minutes still to go before the end of the first session the Yugoslav grandmaster came to me with the interesting and indeed novel request 'You must make Bellin seal his move'. Being ignorant of the particular rule covering this I found myself unable to accede to his request.

Some minutes later he was back with another rule, this time so new that the bloom had been hardly brushed off its wings and I was almost dazzled by its shining novelty. 'You must make Bellin sit down at the board when it is his turn to move. It is a F.I.D.E. rule. Otherwise he goes away and gets help from someone else'. I looked to see whether Bellin was getting help from anyone; but he was merely a few feet away staring raptly at the demonstration board. So I told Ljubojevic that his rule did not exist and that if I caught Bellin getting advice from anyone I would forfeit the game in L's favour.

Oddly enough, no one else amongst the players had heard of L's F.I.D.E. rule and odder still he suffered from this attack of new rules only when he had a bad position. Later on in the tournament he was to be still more categoric in his opinion of my powers as a F.I.D.E. judge on the occasion of his losing to Portisch. But perhaps I have devoted too much time to what was, after all, not representative of the play and players at the Teesside. Apart from these brushes harmony prevailed throughout the event.

To return to its course:- Round 13 saw LjubojeviC's loss to Portisch, and perhaps still more pleasing for Larsen with his eye set on first place, Gligoric's loss to Hecht. A draw with Gheorghiu in this round gave him a lead of two points over the field. The leading scores, with two rounds to go, were Larsen 10, Portisch and Ljubojevic 8, Gligoric 7½ and Andersson, Gheorghiu, Parma and Tringov 7.

It was in this round that Wade completed his trio of wins against the Hungarians and his game against Bilek is given in Keene's Column on page 208 of this issue.

The decision as to the first prize came in the next round, Round 14, when, by beating Cafferty in 37 moves, Larsen made sure of the prize since his score of 11 could not be attained by any other player.

Ljubojevic, who beat Keene, and Portisch, winning against Bellin, were sharing second place with 9 points and Gligoric came up to fourth place by winning quickly, but not without trouble, against Wade. [Gligoric-Wade]

The finish was very pleasing; but after the game Wade pointed out two occasions on which he could have done better. The first was on move 11 when he could have gained the advantage by 11 ..., PxP and 12 ..., B-B4; and the second was on move 16 when much better was 16 ..., P-Q4 followed by B-B5.

Round 15 was concerned with the destination of the remaining eight prizes, Larsen already being assured of the first prize £500. By beating Ree Ljubojevic won the second prize of £400. Portisch's draw with Keene was enough to give him the third prize of £300. Tringov, by winning a long and hard-fought game against Wade, shared fourth and fifth prizes (£260 and £200) with Gligoric who drew with Gheorghiu.

Andersson beat Bellin and thus shared sixth and seventh prizes (£175 and £125) with Parma, who inflicted on Larsen his only loss in the event. It seems that Parma has a very fine individual record against Larsen. Gheorghiu won eighth prize of £100 alone and Keene and Sax shared the remaining prize of £75 together with a suitable proportion of their point money. Non-prizewinners received £10 per point.

So Larsen added yet another tournament triumph to his long list of successes. He seems to have surmounted the traumatic experience of losing 0-6 to Fischer unscathed. What is particularly attractive about the presence of Larsen in a tournament is that you can always depend upon seeing some really imaginative and original chess being played. This tournament was no exception.

Ljubojevic confirmed his position as one of the leading young grandmasters of the day and he too has an attractive and vigorous style of play. Neither Portisch nor Gligoric, though they both improved towards the later stages of the event seemed in their best form. Perhaps they have been playing too much of late.

Keene did best of the English players. His form was better than that at Hastings, but I still feel that a little more vigour and fighting spirit would work wonders with his play. Perhaps he could borrow some from Wade who, as I have indicated in this account, was truly admirable in his energetic approach to the game. Of the other home players Bellin fought hard and had some excellent draws to his credit against established and genuine grandmasters. He would also have done better had he employed some of Wade's will to win. No doubt this will come with time and practice. Cafferty obtained a number of good positions but then had an unfortunate tendency to drift. Possibly still more play is the answer.

---

1972 Teesside: Subsidiary Events

Though unreported by the contemporary chess press (at a time when attention focused on what was happening, or not happening, in Iceland), there were some subsidiary tournaments played during the Teesside GM event. Originally a big open had been planned but, owing to insufficient interest, the plan was changed and three consecutive one-week, six-round tournaments were held instead, involving some strong players. Only sketchy details have come to light.

Major, 2nd Week (24?-28? April): (1-2) Gerald H Bennett (Sutton Coldfield), James E Tarjan (USA) 5½/6; (3) Ronald A Harris (London) 5; (4) Gerald P Hildred 4½, etc. Among others taking part: (Louis) Alan Edwards (Leicester), F Norman Stephenson (Middlesbrough), Leslie S Blackstock (Kidderminster), Peter Charles Griffiths (Solihull), Timothy D Harding (Birmingham), Kevin J Wicker (London), (Patricia) Anne Sunnucks, Richard V M Hall (Birmingham), Alfred Milner (Manchester), Brian A Foreman (Leicester), C W Morley. (Sources of info: Tim Harding; Birmingham Daily Post, 29 April 1972; Norman Stephenson)

Major, 3rd Week (1-5 May): several of the second-week competitors plus Martin Obst (FRG), Eileen B Tranmer, R W Oates, Dr. Mohamed R Mahdavi, R J Green, R A Summersell.

---

File Updated

27 January 2026	First uploaded to BritBase. 120 games, crosstable and magazine report. Plus 18 games from subsidiary events. Thanks to Andy Ansel, Tim Harding and Norman Stephenson for games.
29 January 2026	Many thanks to Gert Ligterink who points out an error in Portisch-Parma, round 14: Black played 65...Rb4, not 65...Rh4 which would have allowed the more obvious win with 66 b6.