When I am in form, my style is a little bit stubborn, almost brutal. Sometimes I feel a great spirit of fight which drives me on.

We were like bishops of opposite color.

Which do I prefer? Sex or chess? It depends on the position.

After I won the title, I was confronted with the real world. People do not behave naturally anymore - hypocrisy is everywhere.

In my country, at that time, being a champion of chess was like being a King. At that time I was a King … and when you are King you feel a lot of responsibility, but there is nobody there to help you.

I don’t want ever to be champion again.

I enjoy life, sometimes with a good bottle of wine! But don't count on me in tournaments that demand a lot of nervous energy, like the French championship. I am empty; these are not for me anymore.

I believe that judged by his style of play, Spassky is much closer to Alekhine and Tal than to Smyslov, Botvinnik, or Petrosian. This is probably why, when Spassky was in his best form, neither Tal nor Korchnoi could really put up much resistance against him. Spassky could read their play (especially that of Tal) like an open book.

The universal chess style, characterized by the ability to play quite different types of chess positions, is considered by many to derive from that of Boris Spassky. But I think that the general idea that Spassky has a universal style overlooks the fact that from an early age, Spassky had a bent for sharp, attacking play and a good eye for the initiative.

It is characteristic that Spassky has never in his life started a game with 1.Nf3. He must have considered it a 'semi-move', real moves being only those that lead to an immediate fight. All of those notorious opening peculiarities (such as avoiding this, that, and the other and preventing the other that and this) seemed repulsive to him.