�

Chess StiJrs

'?''ii!I!QtJi"'
Editorial Panel: GM [Link], IM [Link], [Link],
[Link], [Link]
Technical Editor: IM Semko Semkov

Translation by: GM Evgeny Ermenkov (Chapters 6-13, 23-29)

Eugene Landa

Author Khalifman's photograph by Elisabeth Karnazes

Cover design by Kalojan Nachev

Copyright © 2003 by Alexander Khalifman and Sergei Soloviov

Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. - Sofia

ISBN 954-8782-32-4
Opening for White According to
Anand l.e4

Book I l.e4 e5

Rare System
Latvian Gambit
Philidor's Defence
Petroff Defence
Ruy Lopez without 3 . . . a6

Alexander Khalifman
14th World Chess Champion
Contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Part 1. Rare System; Latvian Gambit; Philidor's Defence

l.e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 without 2...li:Jf6 and 2...lt:Jc6

1 various without 2...f5, 2...d6 , 2... lt:Jf6, 2...lt:Jc6 ...... 10

2 2.. f5 [Link]::lxe5..................................2 0
.

3 2... d6 3.d4 �g4; 3 . f5; 3... lt:Jd7 .2 4 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 2... d6 3.d4 ed.................................3 0

5 2... d6 3.d4 li:Jf6 .4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Part 2. Petroff Defence

l.e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 li:Jf6 [Link]:Je5 d6 [Link]::lf3 lt:Je4 5.d4

6 5... �e7 ..................................... 48

7 5... d5 6.�d3 lt:Jc6............................. 51
8 5... d5 6...td3 �d6 7.0 -0 0-0 8.c4 c6 (8...�g4;
8...lt:Jf6; 8...�e6 ) 9.�c2 lt:Jf6; 9... f5; 9... .Ue8 ........ 56
9 5... d5 6.�d3 �d6 7.0-0 0-0 8.c4 c6 9.�c2 lt:Ja6 .... 59
10 5... d5 6.�d3 �e7 7.0-0 various ................ 64
11 5... d5 6.�d3 �e7 7.0-0 lt:Jc6 8.c4 li:Jb4 (8...lt:Jf6)
9.�e2 0-0 (9...dc) [Link]:Jc3 various................ 6 7
12 5... d5 6.�d3 �e7 7.0-0 lt:Jc6 8.c4 lt:Jb4 9.�e2 0-0
[Link]:Jc3 �f5 .................................. 7 6
13 5... d5 6.�d3 �e7 7.0-0 lt:Jc6 8.c4 lt:Jb4 9.�e2 0-0
[Link]:Jc3 �e6 .................................. 8 2

Part 3. Ruy Lopez without 3 ... a6

l.e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 lt:Jc6 3.�b5

14 3... �b4; 3...lt:Jge7 ; 3... f6 ........................9 1

15 3 ... g6 0 0 0 0 0 0 .9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5
 16 3 . . . lt:Jd4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
17 3 ... d6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
.

18 3 . . . ii.e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 12
19 3 . . . f5 [Link]:Je3 various without 4 . . . fe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 19
20 3 . . . f5 [Link]:Je3 fe [Link]:Je4 various without 5 . . . d5 . . . . . . 128
21 3 . . . f5 [Link]:Je3 fe [Link]:Je4 d5 [Link]:Je5 de [Link]:Je6 various . . . 138
22 3 . . . f5 [Link]:Je3 fe [Link]:Je4 d5 [Link]:Je5 de [Link]:Je6 �g5 . . . . . 144
23 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4. 0-0 various ; 4 . . . Ji.e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
24 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4. 0-0 lt:Je4 5.d4 various; 5 . . . Ji.e7 . . . . . . . . . . 166
25 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4.0-0 lt:Je4 5.d4 lt:Jd6 6 . .1i.e6 de (6 . . . be)
[Link] lt:Je4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
26 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4.0-0 lt:Je4 5.d4 lt:Jd6 [Link].e6 de [Link] lt:Jf5
8. �d8 Wd8 [Link]:Je3 Ji.e7 ; 9 a5 ; 9 . . . lt:Je7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
27 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4. 0-0 lt:Je4 5.d4 lt:Jd6 [Link].e6 de [Link] lt:Jf5
8. �d8 Wd8 [Link]:Je3 ii.e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
28 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4.0-0 lt:Je4 5.d4 lt:Jd6 [Link].e6 de [Link] lt:Jf5
8. �d8 Wd8 [Link]:Je3 We8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
29 3 . . . lt:Jf6 4. 0-0 lt:Je4 5.d4 lt:Jd6 6 . .1i.e6 de [Link] lt:Jf5
8. �d8 Wd8 9 .lt:Je3 Ji.d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 1

Index ofVariations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 229

6
 Preface

Dear Reader,

The first book of the series "Opening for White according to Anand
- l . e4" is finally in your hands. This publication is a logical sequel
of the 5 volume study "Opening for White according to Kramnik ­
l . lt:'lf3". However I am fully aware that my current undertaking
requires even more effort and responsibility than the previous one .
Let me explain my standpoint - when the first player opens the
game with l . lt:'lf3 (or l.c4 and even l.d4), he certainly can, and must,
aim at obtaining an opening edge. However a direct clash in closed
systems occurs generally in somewhat later stage of the game, thus
leaving of prime importance the better understanding of the arising
middlegame positions. Conversely, open systems usually feature an
early head- on collision when encyclopedical knowledge and precise
calculations could often decide the battle. In fact every move of both
sides involves taking far-going decisions. That is one more reason
to account for the popularity of the king's pawn move on all levels,
ranging from an amateur blitz to super-tournaments and world title
competitions.
I tried to explain in depth the general concept of the series
"Opening for . . . according to . . . " in the introduction of the first book
"Opening for White according to Kramnik - l . lt:'lf3":
"Here is one way to deal with this problem - take as your ideal
model someone oftoday's leading grandmasters, whose style is akin
to yourself and whose successes you admire. Then try to build your
opening repertoire according to his one. But there still remain a few
problems though: whom to select as the prototype, on one hand, and,
on the other, how to begin playing oneself the opening of one's hero?
Of course, one can extract the latter's games from the database and
take particular care to study them thoroughly. But this is also not
quite simple in itself· your future opponent may not know the latest
theoretical developments employed <<at the highest level>> at all, and,
furthermore, he can at any time make a rather mediocre move or
side-step the theory, and you will have to decide on your own: what
to do next, what plan to select, how to obtain an advantage."

7
 Perhaps there is a relevant question - why namely Anand? Indeed
nowadays a great number of top players use l . e4 as an exclusive
weapon in their repertoire . I think that Anand's treatment of the
opening is best suited for the vast chess audience, including players
of .very different calibre. If you tried to imitate hyper-aggressive
blade runners as Kasparov or Shirov, for instance, without their
talent and erudition you would most likely encounter soon
insurmountable difficulties . I would be the least to understate the
natural gift and good home preparation of the Indian prodigy. I just
consider his active positional Capablanca-like style to be the best
model for studying without excessive risk of crashes.
The first book comprises the "open" systems, i.e. openings that
feature the moves l . e4 e5, without the main lines of the Ruy Lopez
(l . e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3.i.b5 a6). The most frequently played variations
of the Ruy Lopez are so deep and complicated that certainly deserve
a separate volume , but I am sure that the present book will be very
useful to you too. In the first place you will find in such topical
systems as the Petroff Defence (l.e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jf6) as well as the
Berlin Defence ( l . e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3.i.b5 l2Jf6) which are hot news
in tournaments of all categories lately.
I would like to believe that the composite of my own innovative
analyses and the cream of modern theory would help the Reader in
his quest for an opening advantage (and not only in the two above­
mentioned systems ! ) .
S o play like Anand - l . e2-e4 ! . White begins and . . . ! ?

A. Khalifman, 14th World Chess Champion

8
 Part 1
Rare System
l .e4 e5 2.liJf3 various without 2 . f5; 2 . . .•. d6;
2 ...liJf6; 2 ...liJc6

Latvian Gambit
l .e4 e5 2. liJf3 f5
Philidor's Defence
l .e4 e5 2. liJf3 d6

fence.
C hapter 3 deals with two
quite dubious possibilities for
Black - 3 . i.g4 and 3 . . f5, as well
. . .

as the move 3 . . ti)d7 , which en­

.

ables White to achieve the bishop

pair advantage in a symmetrical
position.
The exchange on d4, which is
After the moves: l . e4 e5 2 . becoming more and more popu­
ti)f3 , Black's principal responses lar nowadays, is treated in Chap­
are: 2 . . ti)f6, and 2 . ti)c6, which
. . . ter 4. White usually castles long
are analysed in the next Parts. and his actions in the centre and
We'll begin our study with the so­ on the kingside are more effec­
called irregular defences, though tive than Black's counterplay on
in �orne occasions it is not so easy the queenside. White is better
for White to prove their "irregu­ prepared for the eventual open­
larity " without a special prepa­ ing of the centre with the move
ration. These continuations oc­ d6-d5.
cur in the tournament practice Finally, we analyse the move
only once in a while, but never­ 3 . ti)f6 in Chapter 5. It habitu­
. .

theless every chess player must ally leads to the complete open­
be ready to face them. Chapter 2 ing of the centre after the ex­
deals with the variations of the change of the d and e-pawns of
sharp Latvian Gambit. both opponents. White has bet­
The other chapters of this ter chances, because ofhis active
Part deal with Philidor's De- pieces and better development.

9
Chapter 1
\,.,;·
Chapter 1 l .tbf3 d5 2.d4 c6

l .e4 e5 [Link]:::Jf3 this move Black deprives his

king's knight of his 'natural'
place. In a quite common way 3 .
li:\c3 c 6 4.d4 exd4 5 .�g5 �d6 (5 . . .
�g6 6. �xd4±) [Link]:\xd4±, White
obtains a huge advantage in de­
velopment and in space, etc.
Somewhat weird seems the con­
tinuation 2 . . . c6? ! . It is most ad­
visable for White not to engage
in complications, since the sim­
We start our study with the ple 3 . d4 exd4 4 . �xd4 , gives
variations that are not too much White substantial advantage .
attended by the opening manu­ After 4 . . . d6 [Link]:\c3 �b6 (worse is
als with this familiar to every 5 . . . li:\f6 6.�f4 li:\h5 7. �e3±, and
chess player position. Of course, White's big advantage is obvious)
the principal continuations here 6.�e2 �xd4 [Link]:\xd4 li:\ffi 8 .�f4
are 2 . . . li:\c6 and 2 . . . li:\f6, but there li:\bd7 9 . 0-0-0 li:\e5, despite its
also exist other ways of defend­ apparent firmness, Black's posi­
ing the black e5-pawn; besides, tion is too passive . After the nec­
Black may abstain from defend­ essary preparation with 1 0 .h3
ing it (in that case, Petrov De­ it.e7 11 .i.e3 0-0, White launches
fence is the most appropriate the offensive by 1 2 . f4 li:\g6 1 3 .
opening). Thus, in this chapter g4±, obtaining a terrible attack
we examine : a) 2 f6?, b) 2 ..• •.. in the centre and on the kingside.
�c5?!, c) 2 �d6, d ) 2 d5, e )
... ...

2 .'�e7. The continuation 2 . . .

.. a) 2 f6?
..•

�ffi?! does not need any special This continuation i s well

consideration. Everybody knows known since the legendary G.
that it is not justified to move the Greco. The ancient manuscripts
queen too far in the very begin­ contain the following game ,
ning of the game, moreover, by where White begins and wins by:

10
 l.e4 e5 2.0{3

3.lDxe5! 7.i.e2

al) 3 ...fxe5? 7 ...�f5

This loses in a forced way. Attacking the white c2-pawn.
4:�h5+ �e7 Failing is the attempt to com-
In the case of 4 . . . g6 5 . "�xe5+ plete the development by 7 . . . lDc6
'fi e 7 6 . 'fixh8 lDf6 , the white 8.0-0 .id7. After 9 . lDc3 'fie6 (for
queen is not trapped 7 . d3 d5 some unknown reason, the great
8 .�g5 lDbd7 9.lDc3 c6 10.0-0-0 M. Chigorin once decided to test
�f7 1 l . exd5 �g7 12. 'fixh7 lDxh7 this incorrect variation, but af­
1 3 . � x e 7 � x e 7 1 4 . dxc6 bxc6 ter 9 . . . 'fig6?, his opponent deliv­
1 5 .�e2+- , and White wins ered a dreadful blow 1 0 . lDe 5 !
5.'fixe5+ �f7 6.�c4+ �g6?! lDxe5 1 1 . .ih5+-, and Black lost
More stubborn is 6 . . . d 5 , his queen, Schiffers - Chigorin,
though White wins easily there St. Petersburg 1897. Strange, but
too 7 .�xd5+ �g6 8 .h4 ! h5 (or the game eventually ended with
8 . . . h6 9.�xb 7 ! +- , and 9 . . . �xb7 a draw and during it Black had
runs into 1 0 . 'fif5#) 9.�xb7 ! i.d6 an opportunity of an effective
10. 'fia5+-, with decisive material mating combination after 11 . . .
advantage for White. 0-0-0 1 2 . .ixg6 hxg6 13. 'fie2 .id6
7.'fif5+ �h6 8.d4+ g5 9.h4 14.lDe4 lDf3+ 15.gxf3 �xh2+ 16.
�g7 1 0 . 'fif7+ �h6 l l .hxg5# 'it>g2 �h3+ 1 7 .�h1 i.. e 5 18.�g1
Greco - NN, Europe 1620. .ih2+ 19.�h1 .ie5 20.'fie1 �g4+
2l .�g1 �xf3 22.lDg3 lDe7 23. 'fie3
a2) 3 ... 'fie7 �c6 24. 'fixa7? There M. Chigorin
This does not lose immedi­ could have checkmated in 5 : 24 . . .
ately. llh1+ ! ! 25.lDxh1 i.h2 + ! 26. �xh2
4.lDf3 d5 :h8+ 27.�g3 lDf5+ 28.�f4 l:th4#)
In the case of 4 . . . 'fixe4+ 5 . 10 .i.f4 0-0-0 , White plays 1 1 .
�e2±, White obtains a n obvious lDb5 ! , and the material losses are
advantage since he is ahead in inevitable for Black, for example:
development. ll . . . �e8 12.�d3 i.. d6 13 .l:te 1 'fig4
5 .d3 dxe4 6.dxe4 'fixe4+ (also losing is 13 . . . 'fif7 14.�xd6

11
 Chapter 1

cxd6 1 5 . J.f5 + 'it'b8 16. ltJxd6+-, ng1 +--; Black also cannot survive
with overwhelming advantage with 9 . . . ltJc6 1 0 . 0-0 ltJge 7 1 1 .
for White. Black's best surviving �c4!, and the black queen i s in
chance is the variation 13 . . . .i.e5 trouble, for example: 1 1 . . . 0-0-0
14 . .i.xe5 fxe5 15.ltJxe5 ltJxe5 16. 12.ltJe1 ltJe5 13. �h4 g5 14. �g3+-­
.i.f5 �xf5 1 7 . ltJxa7+ 'it'b 8 1 8 . and the black queen is entrap­
�xd8+ 'it'xa 7 19. �xe8±, though ped) 1 0 . �c4 ltJ d 7 ( or 1 0 . . . b 5
White's advantage is also suffi­ 1 l . �d4 .i. e 7 1 2 . �e3+-, with a
ciently big there) 14 . .i.xd6 cxd6, plenty of threats) l l . g4 ! , and
and now White again has a win­ Black loses a piece at least, for
ning combination 15.l:lxe8 ! nxe8 example: ll . . . ltJb6 (in the case of
16 . .i.f5+ ! �xf5 1 7 .ltJxd6+, win­ ll . . . J.g6, White has a common
ning the black queen, as it hap­ win by 1 2 . ltJd4 ltJe5 1 3 . �e6+)
pened in the game Westman - 1 2 . �d4 .tg6 1 3 . �e3+ ltJe7 14.
Havansi, Krakow 1964. ltJd4+-, with a huge material
conquest for White.
9.0-0 J.xc3
In the case of 9 . . . �xc2 1 0 .
�xc2 J.xc2, despite the queens'
exchange, White's huge lead in
development and the activity of
his pieces result in a difficult
position for the opponent. Mter
11.ltJd4 .i.g6 12.ltJd5 J.d6 1 3 .l1e 1 ,
Black faces a n arduous choice.
8.ltJc3! For example, Black cannot sur­
This energetic continuation vive with 13 . . . ltJe7 14.J.f3 c6, due
allows White to develop his of­ to 15.J.f4!+-.
fensive successfully. 10.bxc3 ltJc6
8 ... J.b4
IfBlack captures the c2-pawn
immediately by 8 . . . �xc2 , then
after 9.�d5 ! , it turns out that the
black queen is endangered, for
example : 9 . . . c6 (an interesting
fight takes place in the variation
9 . . . J.b4 10. �b5+ ltJc6 1 1 . 0-0
0-0-0 1 2 . ltJe 1 ltJd4 ! ? . Despite
B lack's desperate resi stance
White wins all the same 1 3 . ll ..i.b5!
�xb4 ltJxe2+ 14.'it'h 1 ! �xc 1 15. It turns out that Black is com­
l:[Link] 1 ltJxc1 1 6 . � f4 ! J.d3 1 7 . pletely defenceless due to the

12
 l.e4 e5 2. ll:lf3

threats along the e-file, for ex­ 6.i.g5 ..txe5 [Link]:ld5 �e6 8.dxe5
ample: l l . . . ll:lge7 (Black loses �xe5 [Link] gxf6, leads to a loss
in a forced way also after 11 . . . of queen in a forced manner af­
<Ji;f7 12.l:te1 l:td8 [Link]:ld4 �d5 14. ter 10. �g4 �xb2 1 l . �g7 �xa 1+
�e2 ll:lxd4 1 5 . cxd4 �xd4 1 6 . 12.<Ji;e2 .U.f8 1 3 .ll:lxf6+ �xf6 14.
i.e8+ <J;;f8 1 7 . i.a3+ c 5 18.i.h5 g6 �xf6+- , and, though White's
1 9 . l:ta d l +- ) 1 2 . l:l. e 1 �xc2 1 3 . material advantage is not too big,
i.xc6+ bxc6 14. i.a3+- , winning Black's position is lost all the
a piece. same, since the important black
h7-pawn is doomed and Black
b) 2 ...i.c5?! [Link]:lxe5 has no counterplay.
4.lLlf3 �e7
In the case of 4 . . . d5 5 . exd5
�xd5 6 .ll:lc3 �d6, some tension
remains, though Black obtains
no compensation for the pawn.
The most accurate way for White
seems 7.i.b5±.
[Link]:lc3 ll:lf6 6.d4 ll:lxe4!?
An interesting attempt to con­
fuse the opponent. Nevertheless,
3 ... ll:lc6!? White simply plays :
Black is trying to play for a [Link]:lxe4
lead in development. White must A small illustration is ap­
be precise, however ridicu­ propriate here - wors e is 7 .
lous Black's play may seem. Of ll:ld5?! ..tb4+, and in the ancient
course, some primitive continu­ game Baird - Busch, Nurnberg
ation like 3 . . . �e7 (or 3 . . . �h4 4. 1906, White stumbled with 8 .
d4 �xe4+ 5 .i.e3 i.b6 [Link]:lc3 �h4 i.d2?, which was followed by 8 . . .
7 .i.c4+-, with overwhelming po­ ll:lxd2 + ! 9 . ll:lxe7 ll:lxf3 + 1 0 . <Ji;e2
sition for White) 4 . d4 i.d6, re­ ll:lfxd4+ 1 l . <Ji;d3 i.xe7 - +, and
sults in insurmountable difficul­ Black obtained the decisive edge.
ties for Black (White's task is 7 ... �xe4+
even simpler in the case of 4 . . .
i.b6 5 .ll:lc3 i.a5 6 .i.c4+- ). After
5 . ll:lc3, an attempt of starting
complications by 5 . . . ll:lf6 ( out­
right bad is 5 . . . i.xe5 [Link]:ld5 �h4
7.dxe5 �xe4+ 8.i.e3 �xe5. Black
is a pawn up at the moment, but
after 9 . �d4!+- , huge material
losses are inevitable for him)

13
 Chapter 1

8 .i.e3
• in a better position. Somewhat
Black's attacking ardour is better for Black is 3 . . . "§"e7 4.dxe5
wearig out. In the case of the best i.xe5 5 . ll:lxe5 "§"xe5 6 . ll:lc3 ll:lf6
for Black continuation 8 . . . ll:lb4, 7.f4 "§"e7 8 .i.d3±, though in this
White obtains advantage by 9. case White obtains the pair of
dxc5 ll:lxc2+ 1 0 .�d2 ll:lxa 1 1 1 . bishops advantage in a forced
"§"xal±. way, as well as apace advantage.
The continuation 3 . . . ll:lc6 [Link]:lc3
c) 2 .i.d6
•.• exd4 [Link]:lxd4;!;, transposes into a
variation which is dealt with lat­
er.
[Link]:lxd4 ll:lc6 [Link]:lc3
The arising p o s i t i o n r e ­
sembles the Scotch Game i n a
way, with the essential difference
that Black cannot timely start
a counterplay in the centre due
to the n e c e s sity of l o s i n g a
tempo for the mentioned bishop's
By this move Black defends move.
his pawn and also does not lose 5 .i.b4
.••

immediately. Nevertheless, tak­ Black is even worse in the

ing into account that the black case of 5 . . . ll:lffi. After [Link]:lf5 i.f8
bishop will have to be trans­ 7.i.g5, Black is forced to weaken
ferred to some more n�tural po­ the kingside drastically, and af­
sition later, this is essentially a ter 7 . . . h6 8 .i.h4 g5 9.i.g3 .i.b4
loss of tempo. 10. �f3±, White obtains a percep­
3.d4 exd4 tible advantage.
Black has a wide choice of con­ [Link]:lxc6 .i.xc3+
tinuations, but none of them pro­ Wor s e is 6 . . . bx c 6 , due to
vides him with chances for equal­ 7. �d4±.
isation, though White must not 7.bxc3 bxc6 8."§"d4 "§"f6 9 .
overestimate his position. Of .i.d3 d6
course, in the case of3 . . . ffi?, Black
weakens the kingside irrepara­
bly. After 4 . .i.c4, Black's position
is utterly sad, for example: 4 . . .
ll:lc6 5 . dxe5 ll:lxe 5 ( o r 5 . . . fxe 5
[Link]:lg5+---, with a n immediate win
for White) [Link]:lxe5 .i.xe5 7.i.xg8
l:.xg8 8.f4 i.d6 9."§"h5+ �f8 10.
"§"xh7+---, and White is a pawn up

14
 loe4 e5 2. ltJ{3

10.0-0;!;;, and White's position tage in the development is rather

is apparently preferable. impressive) 8 .a4 Ji.d6 9od3 �c6
1 0 .1le l . And now the attack
d) 2 .. d5
. along the e-file decides the issue.
This not-quite-correct but Black is too behind in develop­
sharp continuation demands ment. Mter the forced 1 0 . 0 of6 ,
from White accuracy in particu­ follows l l od4 +- , and White's
lar variations. threats are rather irrefutable.
3.exd5 The variation 5 .. oc6 6oii.a4, is
somewhat analogous to the pre­
vious one, because the opposition
along the e-file is dangerous for
Black, for example: 6 . . 0 �g6 (in
the case of 6 .ooii.d6 7 0 0-0 tLlf6
8o.U.e 1 0-0 9 o d4 tLlbd7 1 0odxe5
tLlxe5 l l otLlxe5 il.xe5 1 201i.f4±,
Black suffered material losses in
the game Schmuck - Vogelhuber,
Germany 19960 Even worse for
3 ...e4 Black is the active 6oo. e4o After
The most principled continu­ 7 . 0-0 f5 8 . d3 tLlf6 9 .1i.b3 �e7
ation. Black exacerbates the situ­ 10.dxe4 fxe4 llotLlg5+-, Black's
ation to the limit. However, other position is hopeless) 7o�e2 tLle7
continuations are also seen. 8oii.b3 f6 9.d4 �xg2 (weaker is
3 . . . �xd5 4.tLlc3 �e6 (after 4 . . . 9 0 oexd4 10.tLle4±, with danger­
0

�a5 5.d4±, a transposition into ous threat s ) 1 0 . l:. g 1 � h 3 . It

the Scandinavian takes place seems that Black managed to
and , perhaps, this is the best organise some counterplay, but
choice for Black). Now 5.1i.b5+ his insufficient development tells
fol l o w s . White activate s hi s there too. After 1l.dxe5 ii.f5 (or
king's bishop with tempo, pre­ l loo o il.g4 1 2 . llg3 �h5 1 3oexf6
paring a play down the e-file at gxf6 14otLle4+-, winning) 12oexf6
the same time . Black has a gxf6 13oil.f4±, in the game Xie
rather limited choice there: Jun - Deep Juni or, Internet
5oooii. d 7 6 . 0-0 ii.xb5 (after 2000, Black failed to cope with
6 o oo a6 7 J:te 1 , White's threats the problems.
along the e-file are extremely In the case of 3oooii.d6, it is
dangerous, for example: 7ooo f6 80 better for White not to play for
[Link] c5 9od4 cxd4 10otLlxd4 �f7 110 retaining the extra pawn but to
f4±, with good winning chances continue the development in­
for White) 7otLlxb5 �c4 (or 7 0 0 0 stead. After 4.d4 e4 5.tLle5, Black
�b6 80 �e2±, and White's advan- manages to regain the material

15
 Chapter 1

in the variation 5 . . . lt:Je7 6 . ..ib5+

c6 7 . dxc6 bxc6 8 . ..ie2 ..ixe5 9 .
dxe5 �a5+ [Link]:Jd2 ..ie6 (bad is
10 . . . the 5 ? , due to l l . lt:J c4+- ,
with irrefutable White's threats)
1 1 . 0-0 �xe5, however, White ob­
tains a perceptible advantage
there, continuing with [Link]:Jc4
..ixc4 13 . ..ixc4±. The pair of bish­
ops and the better pawn struc­ 4 lt:Jf6
.•.

ture provides White with signifi­ Failing is Black's attempt of

cant advantage in the forthcom­ playing for advantage in devel­
ing struggle. The continuation opment by 4 . . . ..ie7. After 5. �xe4
5 . . . lt:Jf6 6 . ..ib5+ ..id7 (in the varia­ lt:Jf6 6 . ..ib5+ ..id7 (impossible is
tion 6 . . . c6 7 . dxc6 bxc6 8 . ..ie2 6 . . . c6?, due to the simple 7.dxc6
..ixe5 9 . dxe5, in contrast to the lt:Jxe4 8 . cxb 7+, winning) 7. �e2
previous one, the black knight is lt:Jxd5 8 . ..ixd7+ �xd7 9 . d4±, in
attacked and Black loses the the game Morphy - Paulsen,
right to castle after 9 . . . �a5+ New York 1857, White obtained
1 0 . lt:Jd2 �xe5 l l . lt:Jc4 �d5 1 2 . an extra pawn without any com­
lt:Jd6+ W e 7 13 . ..if4±, with a clear plications .
advantage) [Link]:Jxd7 lt:Jbxd7 8.0-0 Sensible seems 4 . . . �e7, and
a6 (the move 8 . . . lt:Jxd5, leads by the white knight is attacked
force to a position, where White again. 5 .lt:Jd4 lt:Jf6 (not better is
obtains better chances because the active 5 . . . � e 5 . After the
Black's king is too vulnerable forced continuation [Link]:Jb5 ..id6
9 . lt:Jd2 f5 1 0 . lt:Jxe4 ..ixh2+ 1 1 . 7.d4 �e7 8 . c4 ..ib4+ 9 . ..id2 ..ixd2
Wxh2 �h4+ 1 2 . W g 1 fxe 4 1 3 . [Link]:Jxd2 a6 ll .lt:Jc3 f5 12. 0-0-0±,
..ixd7+ Wxd7 14.c4 lt:Jf6 15. �a4+ in the old game Morphy - Mon­
c6 16. d5±) 9 . ..ixd7+ �xd7, allows gredien, Paris 1859, White re�
White to retain the extra pawn tained the extra pawn and con­
after 1 0 . c4 0-0-0 ll .lt:Jc3?�f5 verted it later), 6 . lt:Jc3 �e5 (if
1 2 . ..id2 :he8 1 3 .lt:Je2 �h5 14. 6 . . . g6, or 6 . . . a6, then the under­
h3±. Despite some tension re­ mining 7 .d3 follows, and after 7 . . .
maining in this position, the ex­ exd3 8 . �xe7+ ..ixe7 9 . ..ixd3±,
tra pawn in the centre allows White retains the extra pawn in
White to count on successful out­ both cases. In the variation 6 . . . c6
come. 7 . dxc6 bxc6 8 . d3± Nil s s o n -
.4 � e2 P. Nielsen, C openhagen 1 9 9 7 ,
It is practically the only move White a l s o obtains an extra
allowing White to fight for ad­ pawn ) , and after 7 . lt:J f3 � e 7
vantage. [Link]:Jg5 ..ig4 9. �c4±, White's ad-

16
 1. e4 e5 2. ltJf3

vantage is practically decisive. 6.dxe4 0-0 7 . ltJc3 lle8 , are not

Quite logical seems also 4 . . . correct. After 8 .�d2 ! ..tb4 (out­
f5 , though after the standard right hazardous is 8 . . . b5 9 . �xb5
break 5 . d 3 , Black has no real ltJa6 10.ltJd4 ltJxe4 1 1 .lLlxe4 ..tf6
opportunities of counterplay; 12.ltJe6 fxe6 1 3 .ltJxf6+ gxf6 14.
moreover, the light squares in 0-0-0+- Kotronias - Pandavos,
Black's camp are weakened dras­ Peristeri 1 9 9 3 ) 9 . 0-0-0 i.xc3
tically. After the natural 5 . . . ttJf6 10 . ..txc3 ltJxe4, White plays 1 1 .
(or 5 . . . i.e7 6 . dxe4 fxe4 7 . �xe4 �e3 ! , and i n the variation 1 1 . . .
ltJf6 8. �d4±, and Black can re­ ltJxc3 (losing is ll . . . ltJg3?! 12. �d4
gain one of the pawns at the cost ltJf5 13. �f4+- . Somewhat better
of the queens' exchange , after is 1 1 . . .i.g4, though after 12.i.b5
which the game is reduced to ltJd7 13 .h3 ltJxc3 14. �xc3 i.xf3
simple realisation of White's ex­ 15. �xf3±, White retains an ex­
tra pawn) 6.dxe4 fxe4 7.ltJc3 ..tb4, tra pawn and obtains good win­
White obtains a big advantage by ning chanc e s ) 1 2 . � x c 3 ltJ d 7
force 8 . �b5+ c6 9. �xb4 exf3 10. 13.�b5± D e Smet - Schneider,
�g5 cxd5 (the counterattack on corr. 1989. White's position al­
the queenside by 10 . . . a5 1 1 . �a3 lows him to hope for success.
b5, is also desperate. However, 6.ltJbd2 ..tf5
some accuracy is needed on In the variation 6 . . . lLlc6 7 .
White's part when calculating ltJxe4 ..t e 6 8 . ltJxf6 + gxf6 9 . c3
the variations . In this c a s e , 0-0-0 10.d4 i.g4 ll.h3±, Black
White obtains a practically win­ obtains no compensation for the
ning position after 12. �c5 b4 13. pawn.
dxc6 bxc3 14.c7 �e7+ 15. �xe7+ 7 .dxe4 ..txe4
Wxe7 1 6 . cxb8� :xb8 17.bxc3±, Losing ri ght away i s 7 . . .
when White faces only technical ltJxe4? , due to 8 . ltJh4+- . How­
obstacles). The game Tal - Luti­ ever, now follows a small combi­
kov, Tallinn 1964, continued 1 1 . nation:
0-0-0 ltJc6 1 2 . �a3 � e 6 , when
the most simple was 1 3 . gxf3±,
with an extra pawn and pair of
bishops in an open position,
which made White's chances bet­
ter. By the way, Black had prob­
lems with the king, whose vul­
nerable position spelled troubles.
5.d3
A standard break.
5 ... �xd5 8.ltJg5! �xg5 9.ltJxe4 �e5
FUrther sacrifices by 5 . . . �e7 10.lLlxf6+ gxf6 l l.i.f4 �xe2+

17
Chapter 1

Even worse is 11 . . . .i.b4+ 12.c3 i s deprived of any weaknesses

�xe2+ 1 3 . i.xe2 i.a5 14 . .i.f3+-, despite being rather ridiculous.
with White's overwhelming ad­ It is not so easy for White to open
vantag e , Schweber - Alfaro , favourably the play.
Zarate 1972. 3.ltJc3 c6
A rather sharp play occurs af­
ter 3 . . . ltJffi 4.i.c4 h6 (it is neces­
sary in view of the threat of
5.ltJg5) 5 . 0-0 d6 6.h3 (White also
prevents the possible knight's
pin) 6 . . . c6 7 . d4 b5 (perhaps, bet­
ter is 7 . . . �c7, transposing into
variations anal ogous t o the
Philidor's Defence, though it as­
sumes a loss of tempo) 8 . dxe5
12 ..i. xe2 ± dxe5 9. i.b3 b4. Black is trying to
Perhaps White's advantage is overtake the initiative, but his
sufficient for the point. insufficient development does
not allow him to hope for equali­
e) 2 ... � e 7 sation. White plays [Link] l ltJbd7
(dangerous for Black is 10 . . . ltJxe4
ll .l:tel i.f5 1 2 . ltJbd2 ltJxd2 13 .
.i.xd2 e4 14.c3 ! , and the play is
opened to White's benefit. Mter
14 . . . bxc3 1 5 . i.xc3±, White ob­
tains an obvious advantage
thanks to the threats 1 6 . ltJe5,
and 16 . .id5), followed by 1 1 .a3 !?
White manages to open up the
play, which gives him better
Amongst all the variations chances thanks to Black's insuf­
discussed in this chapter, this ficient development. Mter 1 1 . . .
one seems to be the most reli­ bxa3 1 2 . ltJxa3 ltJxe4 ( 1 2 . . . ltJc5
able. Black has protected the 1 3 . ltJc4±) 13 . .Ue l ltJec5 1 4 .ltJc4
pawn while moving the queen ltJxb3 1 5 . cxb3 ffi 16.ltJd4±, White
not too far. Essentially, Black in­ obtains a crushing initiative.
tends to obtain a position resem­ 4.d4 d6 5 . .i c4
bling those ones from the Phili­ Less active is the move 5 .h3,
dor's Defence, though the black transposing to the positions al­
queen is positioned rather la­ ready examined.
mely in many variations . One 5 ... .i.g4
should note that Black's position Mter 5 . . . ltJd7 , Black cannot

18
 l . e4 e5 2. lL\f3

disentangle the knot of pieces in

the centre . Pos sible is 5 . . . g6
6.�g5 f6 7.�e3 , and Black begins
to construct the bulwark with
7 . . . lL:\h6 . Nevertheless, after 8 .
0-0 �g7 9 . a4;l;, Black obtained
too passive position in the game
Kr. Georgiev - Latas, Myslenice
1987.
5 . . . h6 is also possible. An ap­ White's position is obviously
proximate course of events is more promising. Better for Black
perfectly illustrated by the game is the continuation 1 l . . .h6 (the
Feher - Ezsol, Balatonbereny attractive 11 . . . b5 meets a refuta­
1996. After 6.a4 lL:\£6 7 . 0-0 ..ltg4 tion; after the forced 1 2 . �xb5 !
[Link] 1 lL:Ibd7 9 . d5 lL:Ib6 10 . ..\tfl;l; cxb5 [Link]:\d5 �d8 14 . ..\txffi gxffi
White's position is obviously bet­ 1 5 . lL:\xf6+! lL:\x£6 1 6 . thb5+ lL:\d7
ter. 1 7 . lL:\xe5 .ih6+ [Link] 1 0-0 1 9 .
6.dxe5 dxe5 7...ig5 ! ltJf6 8.h3 lL:\xd7 lte8 , follows 2 0 . e 5 , and
�h5 9:�d3 Black has no satisfactory defence
White gets rid of the pin. against the threat of 2 1 . lL:If6 ) ,
9 . . .lL:\bd7 10.g4 i.. g6 which leads t o White's percep­
(diagram) tible advantage 12 . ..ixf6 lL:\xf6
11.0-0-0 [Link]:\h4;l;.

19
 Chapter 2 l .e4 e5 2.tbf3 f5
Latvian Gambit

3 . . .tt:'!c6 is rather hazardous, cer­

tain accuracy is needed from
White, since Black obtains many
opened files and diagonals. The
simplest way for White is to con­
tinue the development, while re­
taining the extra pawn, for ex­
ample: [Link]:'!xc6 dxc6 [Link]:'!c3 it.c5
(or 5 .. ff : f e7 6 . d3 tt:'!f6 7 .i.g5 i.d7
This opening is known as the 8.1t.e2±, and White's position is
Latvian Gambit. It was mainly firm) 6.d3 tt:'!f6 7 .i.e2 0-0 8 . 0-0
developed by K. B ehting, and fxe4 [Link]:'!xe4 tt:'!xe4 1 0 . dxe4 �h4.
also by group of Latvian chess Black's threats seem dangerous.
players whose participation was Nevertheless, after ll .i.e3 i.xe3
reflected by the name of the 1 2 . 1t.c4+ �h8 1 3 . fxe3 i.g4 14.
opening. �d4±, the tension recedes and
[Link]:'!xe5 �f6 White obtains rather good win­
The principal move , which ning chances .
drawback is that the black king's [Link]:'!c4!
knight is deprived of his best This move's idea is to keep
square. Other continuations pose the white d-pawn on its initial
less problems to White . position in order to undermine
The move 3 . . . 'ifte7?, is just Black's centre later.
losing after 4 . �h5+ g6 5 . tt:'!xg6 4 fxe4
..•

�xe4+ 6.1t.e2 tt:'!f6 7 . �h3 hxg6 (or The venturesome continu­

7 . . . l:. g 8 8 . tt:'!c3 'ift c 6 9 . tt:'!f4 +- , ation 4 . . . b 5 , only fa cilitates
with overwhelming position for White's regrouping. After [Link]:'!e3
White) 8 . 'iffxh8 'iftxg2 9.l:tfl tt:'!g4 fxe4 (outright incorrect is 5 . . . c6
10.d4+- , and Black's position is 6.l2Jxf5 d5 7 .l2Jg3 i.c5 8 . �e2 tt:'!e7
hopeless since 10 . . . tt:'!xh2 is im­ 9 .c3 +- , and the game Agopov ­
possible, due to l l . it.h6. Sersch , Gausdal 2 0 0 0 , ended
Although the continuation soon with White's victory) [Link]:'!c3

20
 l.e4 e5 2. tLlf3 f5

c6 [Link]:lxe4 �h4 [Link]:lg3 d5 9 .d4±, was difficult for Black to com­

Black obtains no compensation plete the development) 13 .tLlb5
for the material damage. �b6+ 14 . ..te3 c5 [Link]:le5±. Black's
[Link]:lc3 pieces are awkwardly placed ,
The black e4-pawn is under while his king is stuck in the cen­
attack. Black can protect it di­ tre for quite a long time. White
rectly, as well as in an indirect obtained a big advantage.
way. 5 . . . �e6? is also bad. White
obtains huge advantage in a
standard way 6 .tt:le3 c6 7 . d3 tt:lf6
8 . dxe4 tt:lxe4 9 . tt:lxe4 �xe4 1 0 .
-td3 �e5. I t i s practically forced,
but now the black queen and
king are standing on the e-file
which leads to catastrophe. M­
ter 11.0-0 ..tb4 (losing is 1 1 . . . ..te7
12.lle1 0-0 13 .tLlf5 +- , and Black
is forced to give away the queen)
5 ... �f7 12.a3 ii.a5 [Link]:lc4+- . Despite the
Perhaps this is the strongest material advantage , B l ack's
continuation, though other con­ position is hopeless - which a
tinuations have been tested too: single look at the position may
5 . . . c6? This move is not a de­ confirm.
fence at all, since [Link]:lxe4 �e6, is More complicated play arises
followed by 7 . �h5+ ! 'it>d8 (or 7 . . . after 5 . . . �g6 . There White can
g6 8 . �e5+-) 8 . �e5, and the pawn conduct a thematic break 6 . d3
fork by 8 . . . d 5 , fails to 9 . �xe6 without any preparation. 6 . . . ..tb4
ii.xe6 [Link]:lg5 +- , winning. (Black faces severe difficulties
5 . . . tt:le7?! Now the black e4- after 6 . . . exd3? 7 . ..txd3 �xg2? 8 .
pawn is untouchable, so White �h5+ g 6 9. �e5+ ii. e 7 10 . ..te4+­
transpose to the main set-up by and suffers huge material losses,
[Link]:le3 . Mter 6 . . . �e5 7 . d4 exd3 or 8 . . . Wd8 [Link].g5+ tt:lf6 10.-te4+­
8 .ii.xd3 d5 9 . 0-0, White obtains and the black queen is trapped.
big advantage in the develop­ Somewhat better is 7 . . . �e6+ 8 .
ment. The game Pachman - .te3 tt:lf6 9. 0-0± Roth - Antusch,
Florian, Prague 1943 , proceeded Bayern 1 9 8 8 , though White's
with 9 . . . -t e 6 ( not better was huge advantage in the develop­
9 . . . c6 10.�e1 �d6 1 1 . tt:lf5 ii.xf5 ment provides him with good
12.-tx£'5±, with a big advantage chances for success. ) 7 .ii.d2, and
for White) 10.f4 �d6 ll.f5 [Link] now Black faces a difficult choice;
1 2 . tt:lg4 h5 (also in the case of in the case of 7 . . . ..txc3 (the con­
12 . . . tt:ld7 13 .tt:lb5 �c6 14 . ..tf4±, it tinuation 7 . . . exd3 8. ii.xd3 �xg2 ,

21
 Chapter 2

gives White a strong attack in a - Minerva, Cecchina 1997) 9 . ..td2

forced way 9. �e2 'it>f8 10.0-0-0±) ..txc3 10.i.xc3±, leads to the po­
8.i.xc3, White obtains big advan­ sition where the pair of bishops
tage after 8 . . . ttJf6 (even worse is advantage and the better devel­
8 . . . d5. After the forced 9.tLle5 �f5 opment define White's substan­
1 0 . dx e 4 � x e 4 + l l . i. e 2 tLl f6 , tial advantage.
White quickly obtained the deci­
sive advantage in the game
Smyslov - Kamishov, Moscow
1945 : 1 2 . 0-0 c6 1 3 . i.h5+ 'it>f8
14.:e l+- ) 9 . [Link] ! (exchanging
the dark-squared bishop, White
breaks through to the e4-square).
Now both 9 . . . �xffi 1 0 . dxe4 0-0
11 .f3±, with an extra pawn, and
9 . . . gxffi 10 .tLle3 d6 1l.dxe4±, with
a huge positional advantage, give 7.d3! exd3
White good chances for success. In the case of 7 . . . d5 8 . dxe4
More stubborn is 7 . . . ttJffi. Mter dxe4 9.tLlxe4 �e7 10 . ..td3 tDffi 11.
8.tLlxe4 ..txd2+ 9. �xd2 0-0, as it tDxffi+ �xf6 12.0-0 +-, Black is a
happened in the game Howell - pawn down in a bad position,
Beyer, Hamburg 1992 (another Overbeck - Van Hove, Dortmund
opportunity 9 . . . tDxe4 1 0 . dxe4 2000.
�xe4+ 1 1 .tLle3 d6 12. 0-0-0 ..te6 8.i.xd3 d5 9.0-0 i.c5
13 . ..td3±, also leads t o White's Losing is 9 . . . d4. Mter 10 . ..tc4
perceptible advantage) , White �d7 1 1 . �h5+ 'it>d8 12 . .ii d 1 tLlf6
could have obtained an obvious 13. �h4 c5, follows 14.tLled5 ! �g4
advantage continuing [Link]+ ( or 1 4 . . . dxc3 1 5 . ..tg5 +- , with
�xffi 11.d4±, though Black would White's irrefutable threats )
have held on there. 1 5 . ..tg5 �xh4 16 . ..txh4 tLlbd7 1 7 .
6.tLle3 c6 tLle4+- , and despite the queens'
The continuation 6 . . . ttJf6 7 . exchange White triumphs .
..tc4 �g6 (bad i s 7 . . . �e7 8 . d3 c6 More solid is 9 . . . ..td6 1 0 . .ii e 1
9 . dxe4, with a clear advantage tLle7, yet White has an opportu­
for White, while the pawn lunge nity of developing the initiative
9 . . . b5, which happened in one of 11 .tDexd5 ! cxd5 12.tLlb5. The best
the games, led to White's imme­ way for Black is 12 . . . 0-0 , but af­
diate win after 1 0 . tLlf5 ! � e 5 ter 13.tLlxd6 �x£2+ 14.'it>h1 ..tg4
1l.f4+-) 8.d3 ..tb4 (Black does not 15. �d2, White obtains an advan­
obtain the sufficient compensa­ tage , for examp l e : 1 5 . . . � h4
tion in the variation 8 . . . c6 9.dxe4 16. �e3 , and Black is forced to
i.c5 10.0-0 d6 11. �e2± De Blasio give away a pawn. Mter 16 . . .

22
 l.e4 e5 2.lDf3 f5

liJbc6 1 7 . ltJxb7±, White's position l l .c4 liJf6 1 2 . cxd5 cxd5

is obviously preferable. 13.liJc3 i.e6
lO.liJa4 Black has no choice. Losing is
White prepares the under­ 13 . . . d4?, due to 14.liJb5 dxe3 1 5 .
mining of the black central pawn. liJc7+ � f8 16.i.xe3 b6 1 7 . liJxa8
10 ...i.e7 i.d6 18.i.f5.
The other retreat 10 . . . i.d6 14.i.f5 i.xf5 15.liJxf5 liJc6
has the drawback that the black Bad is 15 . . . i.c5?, due to 16.
bishop gets under attack in many i.e3 i.b4 1 7 . a3 , and Black has to
variations, and in a response to play 17 . . . �d7. After 1 8 . liJxg7+
l l . c4, Black has to play 1 1 . . .d4 �xg7 19.axb4, Black is a pawn
(in the case of ll . . . liJe7 12.liJc3 down in a bad position.
i.e6 1 3 . cxd5 cxd5, White obtains 16.liJxe7 Wxe7
an opportunity of 14 .liJb5, and In the case of 16 . . . liJxe7 1 7.
after the forced 14 . . . liJc8, White �a4+, Black also loses the oppor­
plays 1 5 . liJxd6+ liJxd6 16. "�c2± tunity of the castling 17 . . . liJc6 (or
White's position is obviously bet­ 17 . . . Wf8 1 8 . �b4 b6 19.l::t e l±, and
ter. And if Black plays similarly White obtains a significant ad­
to the main line 1 1 . . .liJf6 12.cxd5 vantage) 18 . .l::t e 1 + Wf8 19. i.g5±,
cxd5 1 3 . liJc3 i.e6, then after 14. and White's position is much
i.f5, Black cannot exchange on more preferable.
f5 since his d6-bishop gets under 1 7.i.e3 Wf8 18.�a4 Wg8
fire and White obtains an impor­
tant tempo for the attack. Now
Black has to give away the d5-
pawn. After 14 . . . 0-0 1 5 . i.xe6
�xe6 16.liJexd5±, Black obtains
no compensation for it) 12.liJc2
c5, and White develops the offen­
sive 13.b4! cxb4. After 14.liJxd4,
White's threats are extremely
dangerous, for example: 14 . . . liJc6
(or 14 . . . liJe7 15.liJb5 i.e5 16.f4! 19.l1adl±
[Link] 1 1 7 . liJ d 6 + W f8 1 8 . liJxf7 The complications are over.
i.d4+ 1 9 .Wh1 Wxf7 20.f5 ! , and The black king is badly placed
White's attack continues) 1 5 . and the black central pawn is
liJxc6 bxc6 16.i.e4 �xc4 17.�xd6 weak. White's chances are sig­
�xe4 1 8 . liJ c 5 , with multiple nificantly better in the forthcom­
White's threats. ing battle.

23
 Chapter 3 l .e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 d6
Philidor's Defence

3 . . . lLl c 6 4 . i. b 5 l e a d s with
another move order to the Old
Steinitz Defence in the Ruy
Lopez (see Chapter 17).

a) 3 ... i.g4?! 4.dxe5

It is impossible to play 4 . . .
dxe5 at once due to 5 . �xd8 'it>xd8
6.lLlxe5, so Black has to make a
This continuation was intro ­ choice: either he exchanges his
duced into chess practice by the g4-bishop for the f3 -knight at
18th century French player [Link]­ first, then takes the e5-pawn con­
lidor. Nowadays it is rarely used ceding to his opponent the ad­
by top players, but not because vantage of a bishop pair; or he
of some forced refutation. The sacrifices a pawn, leading out his
reason is that the pawn struc­ b8-knight, and intending to ob­
tures after 2 . . . d6 are relatively tain some advantage in develop­
not very promising for Black. ment as compensation.
White has precise ways of get­ 4 ... lLl c6
ting a better (even if sometimes 4 . . . lLld7 5 . exd6 i.xd6 6 . lLlc3
only slightly better) pos ition lLlgf6 7.i.e2 �e7 (Black has at­
without real counterchances for tacked the e4-pawn and White
the opponent. has to defend it somehow on his
3.d4 next move. ) 8.lLld4 (8.lLld2 !?) 8 . . .
In this position Black has a i.xe2 (Losing a piece : 8 . . . lLlxe4 9 .
large choice of continuations , lLlxe4 �xe4 10.f3+-) 9. �xe2 i.b4
from which we will examine a) 10.0-0 i.xc3 l l . bxc3 0-0 1 2 . f3
3 . . . i. g4 , b) 3 . . . f5 and c) 3 . . . lLld7 �c5 13.i.d2± Johansson - Her­
in this chapter. The line with rstrom, Haninge 1997. Though
3 . . . e5xd4 can be found in Chap­ White's pawn is doubled, still it
ter 4, and the move 3 . . . lLlf6 is in is an extra one . His further play
Chapter 5 . should be connected with using

24
 2. ltJf3 d6 3. d4

his pawn majority on the king.­ tion for the piece is insufficient,
side. Cooper - Hodgson, Chester 1979.
4 . . . i.xf3 5 . '�xf3 dxe5 6. t'l'b3 !?
(White forces a weakening of the b) 3 ...f5
light squares. 6 .i.c4 "f!fe7;1; could
have allowed Black to avoid it. )
6 . . . b6 7.i.c4± Light squares are
extremely weak in Black's camp;
moreover, he is greatly behind
with the development. White ac­
tivates his pieces with tempo,
attacking the black queen, which
is forced to go to f6 or to e7 now,
and has every prospect of trans­
forming his development advan­ A risky continuat i o n . Al­
tage into material or of creating though Black is underdeveloped,
an attack to the king. he seriously weakens his king
5.exd6 i.xd6 6.h3 (exposing the a2-g8 diagonal and
It is quite possible to play opening files in the centre), and
immediately 6 .i.b5 ltJge7 7. i.e3 he still cannot inflict serious
a6 8 .i.e2 h6 9 .h3 i.h5 10.!LJbd2 damage to White in the centre.
i.g6 1 1 . 0-0 ltJe5 12.ltJxe5 i.xe5 4.ltJc3
1 3 . ltJ c4± with an extra pawn, Black has three continuations
Kramnik - Molignier, Lyon (si­ at his disposal : bl) 4 ... exd4, b2)
multaneous) 200 1 4 !LJf6 and b3) 4 fxe4.
•.. ..•

6 ..th5 7 . ..tb5 t'l'e7 8."f!te2

.•.

!LJf6 9.g4 !LJxg4 bl) 4 exd4 5."f!txd4 ltJc6

•.•

In case of 9 . . . i.g6 White also If 5 . . . fxe4, then 6 .i.g5 ltJf6 7 .

wins a piece after 10.e5. ltJxe4 i.e7 8 . i.c4±. Black has
1 0.hxg4 .i.xg4 1l .i.e3 0-0 fallen behind with the develop­
12.i.xc6 bxc6 ment and cannot castle. This line
leads to White's large advantage
in the ending as well: 8. 0-0-0
0-0 9.!LJxf6+ i.xf6 1 0 .i.c4+ 'it>h8
l l . i.xf6 "f!txf6 1 2 . "f!txf6 gxf6 1 3 .
ltJd4 i.d7 14.l:!.he l± Tseshkovsky
- Inkiov, Minsk 1982 .
6.i.b5 fxe4
Or 6 . . . i.d7 7 . i.xc6 i.xc6 8 .
i.g5 t'l'd7 (8 . . . ltJf6 was relatively
better, in order to castle at the
13.!LJbd2± Black's compensa- cost of the f5-pawn 9 . exf5±) 9 .

25
Chapter 3

0-0-0 l?Je7 1 0 J lhe 1 and here b2) 4 l?Jf6

••.

Black did not find anything bet­

ter than 10 . . . 0-0-0 (White was
threatening to take on e7 or f5),
that after 1 l . �xa7 b6 1 2 . exf5+­
led to a hopeless position in the
game Kratz - Anton, Mehlingen
1992.
7 . .tg5 �d7
In case of 7 . . . l?Jf6 there will
follow 8.l?Jxe4 i.. e 7 9 .i..xf6 ! i..xf6
1 0 . � d 5 ± , again hampering This continuation leads Black
Black's short castling. With his to a bad position.
next moves White castles and 5.dxe5 tt:ixe4
puts the rook on e 1 , and after Also bad is 5 . . . fXe4 6. exf6 exf3
that the black king is in trouble. 7.£7+ (White can simply win the
8 � e3! ?
. pawn as well - 7 . �xfJ �xf6 8 .
White does not want to trade �xf6 gxf6 9 .tt:id5±) 7 . . . 'it;xf7 8 .
queens after 8 . �xe4+ �e6 9 . �xfJ+ 'it;e8 9 . ..tc4 with Black's
�xe6+ i.. x e6 10. 0-0-0 'it;f7oo. hopeless position, Lomax - Oost­
8 ... .te7 heim, Guernsey 1987. The un­
If 8 . . . l?Jge7, then 9.l?Jxe4 will castled king will be mated soon.
follow as well - Black has the 6.l?Jxe4 fxe4 7 .l?Jg5 d5
same problems with his king and Loosing is 7 . . . ..tf5 8 . �d5 �d7
undeveloped pieces. 9 . �xb 7 , Sergeant - Senneck,
9.l?Jxe4 .txg5 [Link]:ifxg5lbge7 Nottingham 1946.
8.e6 ..tc5
Avoiding the fork threat 9.
tt:i£7.
[Link]:ixe4!
In case of 9. l?J f7 now there is
9 . . . �f6 with a threat of check­
mate.
9 ... ..te7
The move 9 . . . dxe4 will be fol­
lowed by a double blow 1 0 . �h5+
11 .0-0-0± g6 11. �xc5± - Black's position is
with White's large advantage, extremely weakened, moreover,
because after 1 1 . . . 0-0 ( l l . . . h6 he cannot keep the e4-pawn.
1 2 .l?Jc5 �g4 1 3 . l?Jge6±) follows 10.�h5+ g6 ll .�e5 l:tf8
12 . .tc4+ d5 13 .l?Jc3 , winning the In case of 11 . . . 0-0 Black suf­
d5-pawn. fers material losses: 12 . ..th6 .tf6,

26
 [Link] d6 3. d4

and now the simplest way is [Link]::lxe4 d5

1 3 . tt::l x f6 + tl'xf6 14. "ifixc7 with 5 . . . exd4 6 . tl'e2!? (The idea of
material advantage. the move is to prepare faster a
12.i.e3 long castle and to use the e-file,
White also has an advantage weakened by Black . ) 6 . . . i. e 7
after [Link]::l g 5± owing to the extra ( 6 . . . tt::l e 7 7 . tt::l x d4±; 6 . . . tl'e 7 7 .
pawn that he is still keeping, i.g5±) 7 .tt::lxd4 tt::l c 6 8 .tt::lx c6 bxc6
better development and danger­ 9 .i.d2±. Black is behind in devel­
ous position of the black king. opment with a seriously weak­
12 ... dxe4 ened position.
5 . . . tt::lf6 6 .tt::lx f6+ gxf6 7 . dxe5
dxe5 (7 . . . fxe5 would weaken the
black king very much and White
can make use Qf this fact by
[Link]::l g5 tl'f6 9 .i.c4 with a strong
attack. ) 8 . .td3;t White has an
advantage thanks to his better
development and the weakened
diagonals d3-h7 and d1-h5 .
6 .tt::l x e5 dxe4 7 ."ifth 5 + g6
13J:tdl [Link]::lxg6 tiJf6
With a strongest attack, for After 8 . . . hxg6 9 . tl'xg6+ �d7
example , 1 3 . . . i.b4+ ( 1 3 . . . i.d6 1 0 . tl'f5 + �e8 l l . tl'e5± White
14.i.b5+ c6 15.l:txd6 tl'a5+ 16.c3 takes the h8-rook and after that
"ifixb5 1 7 . i.g5 tl'b6 18. "ific5 ! and there is a position, where he has
Black has no defence) 14.c3 tl'f6 a rook and three pawns for two
1 5 . tl'xc 7 i. x c 3 + 1 6.bxc3 tt::l c6 black knights , i.e. a material ad­
1 7 . i. b 5 . tl'x c 3 + 1 8 . �fl i.xe6 vantage approximately of one
[Link]'xb7 l:c8 20.i.g5 - it is pos­ and a half pawn. In c a s e of
sible to escape mate only at the queens exchange , in the end­
cost of serious material losses. game his passed pawns will be
very dangerous. If the queens
b3) 4 fxe4
••• stay on the board, then the ex­
posed position of the black king
will be important.
At the same time White has
to reckon with Black's counter­
chances, connected with the ac­
tivity of his minor pieces.
9. "ifie5+ �f7 10.i.c4+ �g7
10 . . . �xg6 [Link]'g5#
ll.i.h6+ �xh6

27
 Chapter 3

1 1 . . .'it>xg6?? 12. �g5# 4 . . . h6?! This is not very good

12.lLlxh8 .tb4+ 13.c3 �xh8 for Black. 5 . dxe5 �e7 (The only
14.h4 �g7 15.�xc7+ ..td7 acceptable move for Black. 5 . . .
dxe5 gives White an opportunity
of dragging out the black king
into the centre and attacking it:
6 . .txf7 + ! �xfl 7 . lLlxe5+ �f6 8 .
lLlc3 ! �xe5 9. �d5+ � f6 1 0 . �f5+
�e7 1 1 .lLld5+ �d6 12 . ..tf4+ �c6
1 3 . �e6+ ..td6 1 4 . lLlb4+ �b6 -
14 . . . �b5 15.a4+ �a5 16. �c4 c6
1 7 . lLld5 with mate - 1 5 . il.xd6
cxd6 16. �xd6+ �a5 1 7 .lL:ld5 b6
16.�g3± 1 8 . c4+- . The move 1 9 . �a3# is
White has a material advan­ threatening, and 18 . . . �a6 will be
tage, moreover, Black's king is in followed by 19. �c6 - threatening
a bad position. is 20.lLlb4+ �a5 2 l . �b5# - 19 . . .
�g5 20.lLlc7+ �a5 2 l .b4+, and
c) 3 lL:ld7
..• Black's king is defenceless . The
other continuations fail as well :
8 . . . .tb4 9. �d4 il.xc3+ 10.bxc3+-,
and Black has to allow the tak­
ing of the d7-knight with check,
because impossible is 10 . . . �e6
11. �d5+ �f6 12. �fl + with mate;
or 8 . . . i.c5 9. �£3+ �xe5 1 0 . �f5+
�d6 1l .i.f4+ �e7 12 .lLld5+ 'it'e8
13.lLlxc7+ �xc7 14.i.xc7+-; or 8 . . .
lLle7 9 . �d4 �e6 1 0 . f4 and i n the
4 ...tc4 game Formanek - Metz , Atlanta
Now Black has to be very 1967, Black resigned, because it
accurate when parrying the was not possible to defend from
threats to the f7 -square . So, los­ the threats 1 1 . �c4+ and 1 1 .f5+.)
ing is 4 . . . ..t e 7 ? 5 . dx e 5 lLlxe5 6.e6 (6.lLlc3 deserves attention as
( 5 . . . dxe5 is bad because of 6. well. ) 6 . . . fxe6 7. 0-0± White has
�d5 ! , and it is possible to defend an advantage in development.
from mate only at the cost of a Black's squares along the diago­
piece 6 . . . ..tb4+ 7 . c3+-) 6 . lLlxe5 nal h5-e8 and the e6-square are
dxe5 7 . �h5. A double attack to weakened. White can use these
f7 and e5 wins a pawn. 7 . . . g6 weaknesses either by means of
8. �xe5 lL:lf6 9 . ..th6+-. lL:lf.3-d4 and f2-f4-f5 , or by e4-e5,
4 . . . c6 depending on Black's play.

28
 [Link]\f3 d6 3. d4

5 .0-0 .i.e7 6.dxe5 dxe5 7. of the bishop pair advantage),

l2J g5!? won in the game Boleslavsky -
This move aims at getting the Sherbakov, Moscow 1942.
advantage of the bishop pair. 8 . . . �f6 9 . ..txg5 t'l'g6 10. t'l'h4±.
7 .i.xg5
..• Thanks to the weakness on d6
Dubious is 7 . . . l2:\h6?! 8 .l2:\e6! and the absence of Black's dark­
fxe6 [Link].. xh6 l2Jb6 (of course, it is squared bishop, White manages
impossible to take the piece: 9 . . . to seize the d-file and to obtain a
gxh6?? 1 0 . "�h5 + � f8 l l . it.. x e6 large advantage. For example :
�e8 12."�'xh6#) 10. t'l'h5+ g6 1 1 . 10 . . . tt:l gf6 ll.f3 0-0 12 .i.e3 tt:lb6
� e 2 t'l' d 4 1 2 . l2Jd2 t'l'xb2 1 3 . a4. 13.i.b3 l:te8 14.l2Jd2 it.. e6 15.i.xe6
White's compensation for the l:.xe6 1 6 . a 4 .l:t ee8 1 7 . a 5 tt:l c 8
pawn is more than sufficient - 1 8 . l2Jc4 l2J d 7 1 9 . .l:[Link] l ± Granda
the black queen is in danger, the Zuniga - Rogers, New York 1998.
king is not castled, the pawns e6 9 ..txg5 l2Jgf6
.

and e5 (and b7, if there will be

an opportunity) are weak. The
game H a m d o u chi - Wahab ,
Dubai 1995, went on 13 . . . ..td7 14.
a5 l2Jc8 15.l2Jb3 t'l'c3 16 . ..td2 �xc2
17 J%fc1 t'l'b2 18 . .l:[Link] 1 when Black
resigned in view of 1 8 . . . �c2
19 . ..td3 capturing the queen.
8.t'l'h5 t'l'e7
The other moves are worse:
8 . . . g6 9. t'l'xg5 �xg5 [Link]..xg5 10.�e2;!;
l2Jc5 ll.l2Jd2 l2Je6 [Link].. e 3 l2Jf6 13. White has a small edge owing
f3 ( 1 3 .l2Jf3 is also possible, offer­ to the advantage of the bishop
ing Black to exchange the pawns pair and Black's q u e e n s i d e ,
e4 and e5. That would only in­ which is slightly weakened by c7-
crease the bishop's power, for c6. In the game Gipslis - Csom,
example, 13 . . . l2:\xe4 14.l2Jxe5 l2Jd6 Budapest 1977 was 10 . . . h6 1 1 .
15 . ..td3 l2Jf5 1 6 .it.. d 2 l2Jc5 1 7 . .:tfe 1 i.d2 0-0 (in case o f l l . . . b5 12 .
..te6 18.�c4 l2Jd6 19 . ..txe6 l2Jxe6 i.d3 tt:lc5 with an idea to ex­
20 .l%.ad 1 l2Jb5 2 1 .�h6 with deci­ change one of White's bishops, it
sive threats, Keres - Menvielle, is possible to play 13 . ..ta5;!; with
Tel Aviv 1964) 13 . . . l2Jh5 14.a4 a small advantage due to the
� e 7 1 5 .lHd 1 lt d 8 1 6 . � a 2 f6 weakness of Black's queenside)
17.l2Jc4 b6 18.l%.xd8 l2Jxd8 19.a5 12.a4 b6 1 3 . f3 �b7 14 . ..te3 a6
..te6 20.i.b3 �xc4 2 1 . �xc4± and 1 5 . t'l'f2 b5 1 6 . ..td3 tt:le8 [Link]:ld2
White, combining action on both tt:lc7 [Link]:lb3 l2Je6 19J'Ud 1 l:tfd8
sides (this is one of chief pluses [Link] tt:ldf8 2 1 .�b6;!;.

29
 Chapter 4 l .e4 e5 2.ltJf3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.ltJxd4
Philidor's Defence

1 0 . f3 t ( White intends to ex­

change the dark-squared bish­
ops, planning the further push­
ing g2-g4 and to hxg4 - h4-h5. )
1 0 . . . lbxd4 (or 1 0 . . . lbe5 1 l . �h6
lb7c6 12.i.xg7 �xg7 13 .�e2 f6
14.�b 1 lbxd4 15. �xd4 i.e6 16.f4
lbc6 17. �d2 �d7 1 8 . f5 gxf5 19 .
�xh5 lbe5 20 .exf5 i.xf5 2 1 .lbe2t
Mohr - Gyorkos , Austria 1997
Black has two fundamentally and later the weakened black
different approaches. The first is castle began to tell ) 1 l . �xd4
connected with fianchettoing the i.xd4 12. �xd4 lbc6 13. �e3 (Also
king's bishop a) 4 g6, and the
•.• possible is 1 3 . �d2 �e6 14. i.e2
second one - with the develop­ �f6 1 5 . f4 liae8 1 6 . f5 gxf5 1 7 .
ment of the bishop to e7, which �xh5 Stertenbrink - Spassky,
starts with the move b) 4 ...lbf6. Germany 1987, with better play
The branch 4 . . . �e7 5.lbc3 lbf6 for White, who has already ru­
transposes to the line b) 4 ... lbf6. ined the black king's pawn shield. )
13 . . . �e6 14.�e2 �f6 15.�b 1 lLle5
a) 4 ... g6 16.g4 hxg4 1 7 . f4 lLlc4 1 8 . i.xc4
Black leads his bishop to the i.xc4 19.h5 Koeller - Balshan,
long diagonal, where it is more Biel 1995, with an attack.
active than on e 7 , but at the 7.�d2 0-0
same time he gives White a The line 7 . . . lLlc6 8 . £3 0-0 9 .
"clue" (the g6-pawn) for a pawn 0-0-0 leads by different move­
attack to the kingside (h2-h4-h5 , order to the main variation - 7 . . .
rarely f2-f4-f5) in the opposite­ 0-0. After 7 . . . d5 8 . exd5 lLlxd5 9.
side castles position. i.g5 f6 10. 0-0-0!± Black is hard
5.lbc3 i.g7· 6.i.e3 lbf6 set, as his king and the queen fall
There is another possible de­ under attack along the open files.
velopment of the knight - 6 . . . lbe7 10 . . . fxg5 ( 10 . . . lLlxc3 1 l . �xc3 fxg5
7. �d2 lbbc6 8 . 0-0-0 0-0 9.h4 h5 12.i.b5+-) 11. �e2+ �f7 12. �£3+

30
 2. tt:'lf3 d6 3.d4 ed 4. ltJd4

..tf6 ( 1 2 . . . lt:lf6 13.i.c4+- ; 12 . . . lt:lf4 upper hand, who has already cre­
13 . ..tc4+-) 1 3 . tt:'lxd5 (or 13. t'txd5 ated a threat to the enemy king
t'txd5 [Link]:lxd5 i.d8 15.i.c4 �g7 having his own monarch se­
[Link]±) 13 . . . c6 [Link]:lxf6 �xf6 cured.
1 5 . i.c4+ �g7 1 6 . .1:1he l± White, 10.i.xd4 i.e6 ll .g4! c5 12 .
who has seized the open files, has .tea �a5
a clear edge.
8.0-0-0

13.i.h6!±
Practically for all variations
Again Black chooses between which are cited below the follow­
two continuations : a1) 8 .. lt:lc6 . ing play is typical . White can
and a2) 8 Jie8.•. perfectly combine his attack
against the black king with ma­
al) 8 lt:l c6
•.. terial gains in the centre (the d­
This move , which in general and b-pawns , first of all). Even
is connected with the idea of a opening up files near the white
counter-attack against the white king is not fatal. On the contrary,
king through the exchange on d4, after swaping the dark-squared
i.e6, c7-c5, t'ta5, b7-b5, leads to bishops, Black will be in constant
a sharp play in which White's concern about the holes around
chances are appreciably higher. his king. To create counterplay
9.f3 tt:'lxd4 Black will have to go for mate­
9 . . . l:te8 transposes to the line rial and positional concessions.
8 . . . .l:te8. 13 ... i.xh6
Mter 9 . . . ii.e6 1 0 . lt:lxe6 fxe6 Other continuations also do
l l . h4t White has a clear play not help Black.
connected with g2-g4, h4-h5xg6 13 . . . b5 (the move 13 . . . ..txa2??
and an attack along the h-file. In lose� immediately 14 . .ixg7 �xg7
the game Berg - B. Larsen, Den­ [Link]:lxa2 t'txa2 16. t'tc3) 14 . .ixg7
mark 1 9 9 1 followed ll . . . t'te8 'ito>xg7 1 5 . lt:lxb 5 ! t'txa2 1 6 . �c3 !
12.g4 d5 1 3 . exd5 lt:lxd5 [Link]:lxd5 White pins the f6-knight. 16 . . . h6
exd5 1 5 . h5 l:td8 1 6 . hxg6 hxg6 17.h4 l:th8 18.l:tg1 g5 19.f4! and
17 . ..tg5 .Ud6 18.l:le1 with White's in Sandor - Gross, Balatonbe-

31
 Chapter 4

reny 1996 White achieved a win­ the weak f6- s quare near the
ning position. black king.
13 . . . .:fd8 14 . .txg7 �xg7 15.h4 17 axb5 18.e5 tt.Jxg4
.•.

(Deserves attention 1 5 .�b 1 b5 1 8 . . . 4.J e 8 1 9 . lt.J e 4 ( with a

1 6 . g5 lt.Jh5 1 7 . � e 3 ± ) 15 . . . h5 threat of 20.4.Jf6+) 19 . . £5 20.4.Jg5
.

(Black cannot take a pawn 15 . . . White regains his s acrificed

i. x a 2 b e c a u s e o f 1 6 . h 5 i. e 6 piece with interest.
1 7 . hxg6 �a1+ 18 .[Link] 1 ..ia2 19. 19.fxg4 �b4
�h6+ �h8 20.g7+- or 1 7 . . . fxg6 Black does not let the white
1 8 . � h 6 + �g8 1 9 . g5 lt.Jh5 2 0 . knight to e4.
l:txh5+-) 1 6 . gxh5 lt.Jxh5 1 7 . .l:.g1 20.a5!
b5 1 8 . �g5 b4 [Link] 1 llh8 20. Suddenly the a-pawn turns
�xd6 l:!ae8 2 1 . 't:i'e5+ �h7 22.lta6 out to be a passed one.
�dB 23 . i.b5. White has a clear 20 �xg4 2 1 ..: e 1 't:i'f5 22.
••.

advantage - he grabs one of the 't:i'h4 b4 23.4.Je4 h5 24.l:�d2 �g7

black queenside pawns, thus get­ In Oesterle - Malaniuk, Forli
ting a material advantage Yur­ 1990 after 24 . . . �h8 [Link].Jxc5 .Ub5
taev - Gulko, Frunze 1985. 26.1:.£2 Black had to give up his
14.�xh6 b5 queen: 26 . . . llxc5 (if Black is stub­
At least it is a bold continua­ born in his repulsion to sacrifice
tion , introduced by the game the queen, then after 26 . . . �g4
Makarichev - Tukmakov, Palma 27.'t:i'f6+ �g8 28 . .Uf4 �h3 29 . .l:.f3
de Mallorca 1989. We will be fol­ 't:i'g4 3 0 . !tg3 't:i'f5 3 l . llg5 �xf6
lowing it further as our main 32.exf6+- he is a pawn down in
variation. the endgame) 2 7 . l:.xf5 i.xf5
In the game Hennigan - We­ 28 . .Ue2±.
steri n e n , Gausdal 1 9 9 5 was 25.�f6+ �h6
1 4 . . . ..ixa2 15.h4 i.e6 16 .h5 't:i'c7
(White threatened with 1 7 .hxg6
fxg6 1 8 . g5 lt.Jh5 19. lt.Jh5 gxh5
20. �xe6+. The move 16 . . . �a 1+
failed to 1 7 .�d2 �xb2 18.l:.b 1
�a3 1 9 . hxg6 fxg6 2 0 . g5 lt.Jh5
2 1..U xh5+-) 17.4.Jb5 't:i'e7 18.4.Jxd6
lt.Jd7 1 9 . f4 i.xg4 20 . ..ic4! �h8
2 1 . 4.Jxf7+ l:.xf7 22.i.xf7 gxh5 and
here the easiest winning line was
2 3 . l:.xd7 i.xd7 2 4 . 't:i'xh5 �xe4 [Link].Jxc5
25. �h6+-. and White has converted his
15.i.xb5 l:tab8 16.a4 a6 1 7. material advantage: 26 . . . llb5 27.
.:xd6!� lt.Jxe6 fxe6 28. 't:i'xf5 .l:.xf5 29.a6
White does his best to reach l:lfxe5 30.l:!.xe5 llxe5 3 1...U d6 �g5

32
 2. 0{3 d6 3. d4 ed 4. l2Jd4

3 2 . c4 'itt h 4 3 3 .'itt c 2 'itt h3 34.'itt b 3 l2Jh5 1 2 . l2Jxd5 l2Jxd4 1 3 . .i.xd4

'i!txh2 3 5 . 'itt x b4 !te l 3 6 . a7 llal ..txd4 14. �xd4 �xg5 + 1 5 . �d2
37.l:td2+ Makarichev - 'fukma­ �dB (15 . . . �e5 16.f4 �xe4 17 .i..b 5
kov, Palma de Mallorca 1989. iL.e6 18 . .i.xe8± with the extra
exchange. Also bad is 16 . . . �d6
a2) s ...:es 9.f3 1 7 . e5 �c5 1 8 .i.. e 2 and Black has
to concede to a losing rook end­
ing 18 . . . ..te6 [Link].xh5 �xd5 20.
�xd5 iL.xd5 2 l. . l:i.xd5 gxh5 22.
lld7+-) 16. �h6 ( 1 7 .l2Jf4 threat­
ens) 16 . . . �d6 17 .l:tg1 l2Jf6 18.i..b 5
l:te5 ( 1 8 . . . c6 1 9 . l2Jb6±) 1 9 . i.. c4
l2Jxd5 20.i..x d5±. White has pro ­
duced severe threats to the black
kingside : sacrifices on g6, f3-f4-
f5.
9 . .lL!c6
. 10 . . .l2Jxd4 l l .i.. xd4 i.. e6 (After
Dangerous is 9 . . . a6 10.h4 b5 ll . . . c5 1 2 . .i. f2 ! �a5 1 3 . �xd6±
l l . i.. h 6 t . The play unfolds Black does not have enough com­
around the black king, whereas pensation for the pawn, although
the white one is safe. The game White has to switch to deflecting
Van der Sterren - Jacobsen, threats for a while. ) 12.g5 l2Jh5
Silkeborg 1980 followed ll . . . i..h8 13.i..xg7 l2Jxg7 14.h4t. It is not
12.i.. g 5 .i.b7 13 .h5 l2Jbd7 14.g3 clear what can Black oppose to
i.. g 7 15.hxg6 hxg6 (Nevertheless, White's play on the kingside .
better is 15 . . . fxg6 leaving a pawn Rodin - Meister, Podolsk 1992
on the h-file 1 6 . i.. h 3 l2Jf8 1 7 . further followed 14 . . . �e7 15.f4 c6
l2J d 5 t ) 1 6 . g4 l2J e 5 1 7 . tH4 c 5 1 6 . i.. e 2 �ad8 1 7 . i.. f3 f6 1 8 . h5
18. i.. h 6 ! i.. h 8 ( 1 8 . . . cxd4 19.i..xg7 fxg5 19.hxg6 hxg6 20 .l:tdg1 �£8
l2Jfxg4 20 . ..txe5 l2Jxe5 2 Uh d4±) 2 U :txg5 �xg5 22.fxg5 lhf3 23.b3
1 9 .l2Jf5 ! b4 20 . .i.g7 ! (White ex­ with a material advantage.
changes the main defender of the ll.i.. e2 a6 12.g5!? l2Jh5 13.f4
black king) 20 . . . l2Jh5 2 l . �h6 l2Jg4
i.. x g7 2 2 . l2Jxg7 bxc3 2 3 . lhh5
cxb2+ 24.'itt b l gxh5 25 .l2Jxh5, and
Black resigned in view of the
imminent mate.
10.g4 l2Je5
10 . . . a6 ll ...te2 l2Je5 steers the
play to the main line.
1 0 . . . d 5 l e a d s forcedly to
White's huge advantage. l l . g5

33
Chapter 4

14..tgl t goes for the centre to d5 . White

Black must get his g4-knight develops the bishop on f4 in case
out of trouble ( 1 5 .h3 is threaten­ of d6-d5. The bishop on f4 is also
ing) - his next moves are forced. useful in case Black plays on c6
Further in the game [Link]­ in order to rob the white knight
gov - Meij ers , Mezezers 2000 of the d5-square and prepare the
was 14 . . . c5 15.ctJb3 ii.xc3 16.bxc3 b5-b4 advance.
�xe4 1 7 . h3 ctJg3 1 8 . Ji.f3 .Ua4 6 ...0-0 7.�d2
1 9 . Ji.xc5 ctJxh 1 2 0 . [Link] 1 �xa2
2 l .'it>b 1 l;Ia4 and now the easiest
is 22. �xd6 �xd6 23 . .Uxd6 ii.e6
(23 . . . h5 [Link].d8+ 'it>h7 25.hxg4+­
and 2 6 . Ji.d4 with the decisive
material advantage ) 2 4 . [Link] 7
.l:.b8 25.hxg4 .l:.x£4 [Link].xa6± with
a material advantage.

b) 4. .. ctJf6
Black must make up his mind
whether he immediately carries
out a break-through in the cen­
tre bl) 7 ... d5, or he prepares a
queenside action by b2) 7 .. .a6,
b3) 7. .. c6 or b4) 7 . ..ctJc6.

bl) 7...d5 8.ctJdb5

White uses the weakening
of the c7-pawn. The emerging
5.lLlc3 ii.e7 complications lead after a best
The line 5 . . . g6 6 . ..te3 ..tg7 play of both sides to White's
7 . �d2 transposes to the varia­ edge in the ending. To hazy con­
tion with 4 . . . g6, which is consid­ sequences leads 8 . exd5 ctJxd5
ered above. 9.ltJxd5 �xd5 10 .ctJb5 �e4+ 1 1 .
6 . ..tf4!? ..t e 2 � x g 2 ( 1 1 . . . .Ud8 1 2 . � e 3 )
As in the variation with the 1 2 . 0-0-0 ctJa6 1 3 . .Uhg 1 �xf2
black king's bishop fianchetto, ( 1 3 . . . �c6 1 4 . .Uxg7+ 'it>xg7 1 5 .
White arranges a long castling ..te5+ f6 1 6 . .Ug 1 + 'it>h8 1 7 . �g5
with further kingside pawns on­ ..tg4 ! ) 14 . ..th6 g6 15 . ..txf8 ..txf8"".
set ( f3 , g4 , h4 ) . The s imilar Black has sufficient compensa­
counterplay against the white tion for the exchange .
king (a6, b5-b4) is less efficient In the current position Black
- the white c3-knight simply players used the moves b l a )

34
 2. tt'lf3 d6 3. d4 ed 4. ltJd4

8 ... c6!? and blb) 8 ... .tb4. lost because of the knight, stuck
on aS and doomed to be grabbed.
b l a) 8 ... c6!? 15 tt:Jxe4 16.�xd4+ �xd4
..•

[Link]'lxd4 .i.b4+ 18.'it>e2

1 S . c3 tt'lxc3 + 1 9 . 'it>d2 tt'lb5+
20.'it>d3 .UdS .
18 ... tt'lg3+ 19.'it>f3 tt'lxhl 20 .
.ic4
20.c3 .id6 2 l ..i.d3 .i.g4+.
20 ...b5 2 1 .tt'lc7 .l:f.e7 22 ..tb3
.l:f.xc7

A sharp continuation, which

is an i d e a of the Romanian
player Nisipeanu. Black hopes
to use his lead in development
and the exposed enemy king by
a s acrifice of the aS-rook. In
M . B rodsky - Nisipeanu , Bu­
charest 200 1 further was
[Link]'lc7 d4 [Link]'le2 g5 ll . .te5 23 ..l:[Link];!;;
tt'lbd7 The ephemeral initiative of
l l . . . tt'lxe4 12. �xd4+-. Black is not enough to make up
12 . .i.xf6 tt'lxf6 13. �xg5+! for the pawn deficiency.
Apparently no success t o
White yields the line [Link]:JxaS bib) 8 .tb4 9.0-0-0
..•

tt'lxe4 14:�xd4 �a5+ 15.c3 ( 1 5 . On 9.exd5 even 9 . . . .UeS+ 10.

tt'lc3 .i.f6 16. �xe4 .i.xc3+ 1 7 .bxc3 .i.e2 tt:Jxd5 is enough. [Link]:Jxc7 d4
�xc3+ 1S.'it>e2 �xa 1 [Link]:Jc7 �c3 (9 . . . tt:Jxe4 1 0 . � x d 5 � x d 5 1 1 .
- the move !tdS threatens, the c7- tt'l7xd5t) 10. 0-0-0 tt'lc6 l l . tt:JxaS
knight cannot be saved) 15 . . . .tf5 �a5oo does not yield White any
1 6 . f3 .tc5 1 7 .b4 .txd4 1S.bxa5 dividends .
.i.£2+ 19.'it>d1 .UdS+ 20.'it>c1 .i.e3+
2 1 . Wb2 tt:Jf2oo.
13 ... 'it>h8 [Link]'lxa8 .l;i.e8 15.
�d2!
In the abovementioned game
White played 1 5 . f3 , but after
15 . . . tt'lxe4 16. �e5+ 'it>gS 17. �xd4
.i.c5 1 S . �xe4 !:i.xe4 19.fxe4 .i.e3
20.!:i.d1 .i.£2+ 2 l .'it>xf2 �xd 1 he

35
 Chapter 4

9 ... c6 after 12.bxc3 g5 (worse is 12 . . .

Also possible is 9 . . . ltJxe4 10. �e7 1 3 .'it>b2 g5 1 4 . .ig3 f5 1 5 .
�xd5 �xd5 ll.ltJxd5 ltJa6 12 . .ie3 ltJxa8 f4 1 6 . �e 1 ! fxg3 1 7 . f3 -
c6 1 3 . ltJbc7 cxd5 14.ltJxa8 - the Black loses a knight because of
white knight gets out of captiv­ the pin, that was why the queen
ity preserving the extra material. should not have been placed on
9 . . . .ia5 1 0 . exd5 a6 1 1 . ltJd4 e7 - 17 . . . ltJa6 18 . .ixa6 bxa6 19 .
.txc3 ( a fter 1 1 . . . ltJe4 1 2 . '� e 3 fxe4 .tg4 20.I!.d4 20 . . Jha8 2 1 .
ltJxc3 1 3 . bxc3 White i s a pawn exd5 with the extra exchange
up, though his opponent has (less clear is 20. exd5 �b7+ 2 1 .
some compensation. However 'it>c1 .ixd 1 , Shabanov - Vorotni­
the following line leads to mate- kov, Krasnodar 1 99 1 ) . 1 3 . �xe4
rial losses 13 . . . �xd5? 1 4 . ltJb3 (Leads to a better endgame for
�f5 1 5 . g4±; 1 1 . . . ltJxd5 1 2 . ltJb3 White forcedly. To unclear con­
�f6 1 3 . ltJxa5 ltJxf4 1 4 . g3 ltJe6 sequences leads the variant
15 . .ig2;!;) 12. �xc3 ltJxd5 13.�g3 which was in the game Yagupov
ltJxf4 14. �xf4 �d5 15 .ltJb3 �f5 - Kozlov, Thla 2000: 13 . .ig3 f5 14.
16.�xc7 ltJc6 ( 1 6 . . . �xf2 runs to ltJxa8 f4 15. �xa 7?! - better is 15 .
1 7 . .t c4 ltJc6 1 8 . l:thfl �e3+ 19. .txf4 gxf4 16. �xa7 ltJa6 1 7 . .Ue1
'it> b 1 - in order to repel the �a5 18 . .Uxe4 dxe4 19 . .ic4+ 'it>g7
threats to f7 Black has to sacri­ 20. �d4+ 'it>g6 21.ltJb6± - 15 . . . fxg3
fice his b7-pawn with the move 1 6 . .i d 3 ltJxf2 1 7 . �xb8 ltJx d 1
19 . . . .te6 20.l:[Link] 1 �h6 2 l ..ixe6 1 8 .lhd 1 .t g4 1 9 . �xg3 .i x d 1
fx e 6 2 2 . � x b 7 ± ) 1 7 . � g3 .i e 6 20. 'it>xd 1 and here the correct
18 . .id3± Istratescu - Gelashvili, 20 . . . .Uf7 gave Black an edge . )
Patras 200 1 . Black does not have 13 . . . �xc7 14. �xh7+ 'it>xh7 1 5 .
sufficient compensation for a i..x c7 .i e 6 1 6 . h4;!;. The bishop
pawn . pair advantage coupled with the
lO.ltJc7 ltJxe4 l l .�e3 .tc5 black king's poor position deter­
11 . . . ltJxc3 is not good - 1 2 . mines White's advantage.
bxc3 .ia3+ 13 .'it>b l±. After cap­ 1 2 . �xe4 � x c 7 1 3 . .ixc 7
turing on a8 White will have a dxe4 14.ltJxe4 .ib6 1 5 . .ixb6
whole extra rook for a pawn for axb6
some time , and a strayed, but
hard to capture knight, as shown
by the game Kalegin - Riabcho ­
nok, Smolensk 1992: 1 3 . . . ltJa6
14.ltJxa8 b5 15. �g3 ltJc5 16 . .td3
ltJxd3 1 7 .:Xd3 .if5 18 .ltJc7 .ixd3
19.cxd3+-.
Stronger is 1 1 . . . .ixc3 with the
idea of harrassing the f4-bishop

36
 2. tLlf3 d6 3. d4 ed 4. tLld4

16.a3;!; l:r.xe7+-) deserves consideration

In the current position White the move 1 3 . �b4 ! ? with the
has an advantage in the place­ threat of tLlxh7+ (less clear is 1 3 .
ment of his pieces - the knight lthe 1 �xg2 14.i.xc7 tLlc6 15 .h4
can occupy the d6-square, weak­ �g4 1 6 . ll g 1 �a4 1 7 . c3 �xa2
ened by his opponent, the rooks 18. �f4 �h8, Konguvel - Yurtaev,
- the central o p e n fi l e s . In Calcutta 1998) - after 1 3 . . . tLld7
Yagupov - G. Kuzmin, Alushta 14.i.e4 �b5 15. �xb5 axb5 1 6 .
1999 further was 16 . . . tLld7 1 7 . it.xc7 l:!.xa2 1 7 . i.d6 l:td8 1 8 . c3
i.c4 tLlc5 18 .J:the 1 tLlxe4 19 . .lhe4 White has a better endgame and
b5 20.i.b3 c5 2 l .i.d5 �a6 22 .11e7 prospects to attack the weak en­
l:!.f6 23.f3 b6 24.�c7 h5 25 .l:l.c6 emy queenside pawns.
i. f5 2 6 Jbf6 gxf6 27 . i. c6 b4 8 ...b5 9.f3 b4
28.axb4 cxb4 29.l:td5± with ma­ Too optimistic is 9 . . . d5 - in
terial gains. comparison with the variation
8 . . . d5 Black has weakened the
b2) 7 . . a6
. queenside even more with the
move b 7 -b 5 . In E r m enkov -
Lechtynsky, Berlin 1982 after
1 0 . tLlxd5 tLlxd5 l l . exd5 �xd5
1 2 . tLlb3 �xd2+ 1 3 . .t:!.xd2 Black
made up his mind to sacrifice a
pawn - 13 . . . i.f5, but in the case
of the immediate 14.i.xc7 (in the
game was 14.tLld4 i.g6 1 5 . i.xc7
l:l.c8 [Link].f4 i.f6 and White had
to step back with the knight -
8.0-0-0 17 .tLlb3 tLlc6 18.a3 a5ii5) 14 . . . l:tc8
The atempt to open up the 15 .i.f4 he was unlikely to get
play in the centre brings Black real compensation for it.
troubl e s : 8 . . . d5 9 . exd5 tLlxd5 The move 9 . . . i.e6 with the
1 0 . tLlxd5 �xd5 l l .tLlb3 �c6 12. idea to prevent the white knight
i.d3±. White has a development from taking d5 does not decide
advantage and targets on both anything, too. White can force
flanks. On 12 . . . i.f6 (not good is the exchange of the e6-bishop for
12 . . . "� a4 - the queen will be the f5-knight (playing tLlf5 right
lonely in the centre as the other away or later), e.g. , 10.tLlf5 i.xf5
black pieces are lagging behind l l . exf5 tLlc6 1 2 . g4 tLle5 1 3 . h4
in development. In Salinnikov - (better is 1 3 . �g2� not giving up
Payen, [Link] 1998 fur­ material and threatening with
ther came 13 .l:!.he 1 i.e6 14.�b 1 further pawns' onset) 1 3 . . . b4
c5 15 .l:Ie4 c4 16.i.xc4 i.xc4 1 7 . 14.tLle2 tLlc4 (o14 . . .tLlxf3 1 5 . �e3

37
 Chapter 4

ltJe5 16.g5 lt:lfd7) 15. �d4 d5 16.g5

ltJh5 1 7 . i.h2 with White's clear
edge Bellon Lopez - Van den
Bosch, Olot 1969.

12 .ltJa3 ltJc6 with Black's advan­

tage; [Link]:lf5 i.xf5 12.exf5 d5! 13.
g4 d4+) 1 0 . . . �b6 (Now 1 0 . . . c5
fails to 1 1 .lt:lb5 and after 1 1 . . .
�a5, unlike in the variant 10.
lO.ltJd5± lt:lce2 there are neither the un­
White has an advantage, as protected b5-knight nor the ma­
he dominates the centre. He has ting threat on a 1 , so the simple
opportunities to attack the black capture of the pawn is possible
king, he can show his activity in 12.i.xd6) ll.g4 t White manages
the c e ntre or even direct it to design serious threats to the
against the weakened black black king much earlier than his
queenside pawns. In Kholmov ­ opponent. On c6-c5 the attacked
Antoshin, Havana 1968 further knight will move to f5 and on the
was 10 . . . ltJxd5 ll.exd5 a5 12 . .tc4 obligatory .txf5 White either
.l1.b7 13 .ltJf5 ltJd7 [Link]:lxe7+ �xe7 takes with the g-pawn, opening
1 5 J:the 1 � d 8 16 . .l1.g5 f6 (the up the file for an attack, or with
weakening of the e6-square is the e-pawn with the further g4-
very annoying for Black). 1 7 . .l1.e3 g5 and f5-f6 . In Lanka - Bos­
ltJe5 18 . .l1.b5 .l1.a6 19 . .l1.xa6 llxa6 boom, Netherlands 1994 further
20.f4 lt:lg6 2 1 . �d3 �aS 22 . ..1td2 - came ll . . . :ds (after ll . . . d5 12.e5
White has a space advantage, the lt:le8 1 3 . h4 White's attack re­
e-file for the rooks and good op­ sulted in mate: 13 . . . ltJc7 14.ltJf5
portunities to utilise the defects i.c5 15 . .td3 lt:ld7 16 . .th6 lt:lxe5
in the enemy pawn structure. 1 7 .ltJxg7 Wh8 18. ltJh5 lt:le8 19.
�g5 ltJxf3 20 . .tg7 Wg8 2 l . .txh7 +
b3) 7 ... c6 wxh7 2 2 . �h6+ W g8 2 3 . �h8 #
(diagram) Hyldkrog - Jensen, corr. 1984)
8.0-0-0 d5 1 2 .h4 c5 1 3 .lt:lf5 i.xf5 1 4 . gxf5
Via 8 . . . b5 Black can start his (� 15. �g2 ltJd4 16 . .th6 ltJe8 17.
play on the queenside. 9.£3 b4 10. .tg5 lt:lf6 1 8 . ltJd2 �b7 1 9 . i.d3
lt:lb 1! (To unclear consequences Wh8 20.11dg1 l:tg8 2 l . f4 llac8 22.
leads 1 0 .ltJce2 c5 11 .lt:lb5?! �a5 lt:lc4 and not waiting for the in-
(,cnf )
38
f1
' '-t
... . ...
j )
s� � . � \l ' ' 6
- _...._ .
 2. l2Jf3 d6 3.d4 ed 4. l2Jd4

evitable e4-e5, Black "twitched" pushed back on the queenside)

his pawn 22 . . . d5 [Link]:Je5 i.d6 and gives White good chances to at­
lost the exchange 24.i.a6+-. tack the black king. In Brustman
9.exd5 lt:Jxd5 [Link]:Jxd5 �xd5 - Chiburdanidze, Novi Sad 1990
ll.<it•bl further was : 15 . . . �a6 1 6 . i.h6 !
White has an initiative owing ii.xd4 ( 1 6 . . . gxh6 1 7 . �xh6 f6 18.
to his development advantage :h4 .l:tf7 1 9 .l2Je6 i.xe6 20. l:td8+
and the black queen's poor posi­ [Link] 2 l .lhf8+-) 17.lhd4 gxh6 18.
tion. �xh6 i.f5 ( 1 8 . . . .1l.d7 1 9 . �g5+
ll ... a5 12.i.e2 a4 �h8 20. �f6+ ct>g8 2 l .i.e4 with a
To take the pawn with 12 . . . threat of 22.i.xh7+) 19.l:td8 lt:Jd7
�xg2 i s dangerous for Black, 20. �g5+ .1l.g6 2 1 .l:t8xd7±.
since the g-file got open and
White creates serious threats to b4) 7 ... lt:Jc6
the black king along it, e.g. , 13.
�hg1 �d5 14.i.h6 i.f6 1 5 . �f4
lt:Jd7 ( 1 5 . . . �e5 16.i.xg7 �xf4 1 7 .
i.xf6+ i.g4 18.l:!.xg4+ �xg4 19.
i.xg4+-) 16. i.xg7 i.xg7 1 7 . lt:Jf5
�e5 18.l::t xg7 ct>h8 19 . .U.xh7+ ! +-.
13.i.f3 �c4
In Leko - Barbero, Hungary
1995 it was 13 . . . �c5 14J�he 1 i.f6
15.i.e3 and after Black's blunder
1 5 . . . 11d8? ( 1 5 . . . �b6;t must have 8.0-0-0 lt:Jxd4
been played) [Link]:Jxc6 ! l:txd2 1 7 . Black exchanges the knight to
.1l.xc5 l:!.xd 1 + 1 8 . i.xd1 + - White get a possibility to transfer his
won a pawn. bishop on an active position on
14 ..l:the l �c5 the e6-square. On 8 . . . lt:Je5 White
can prepare the move g4 by 9.h3,
e.g. , 9 . . . c6 10.g4 �c7 ll.g5 lt:Je8
. 1 2 . lt:Jf5 .1l.xf5 1 3 . exf5 f6 1 4 . g6
with an attack Zuckerman -
Nikolic, Bari 1970.
The move 8 . . . .1l.d7 is not good
because on this square Black's
bishop is passive and does not
contribute in creating a counter­
play. In Borghi - Varga, Buenos
15 .:te4!�
• Aires 1978 Black connected this
The black pieces' poor set-up move with the idea of exchang­
(they are either undeveloped or ing the dark-squared bishops af-

39
 Chapter 4

ter 9 . f3 tt::l h 5 1 0 . i.. e 3 tt::lx d4 1 1 . threats of 20.h6 and 20.i.. c 4.

�xd4 i.g5, however this plan ll.�d2
needs a lot of time and White White withdraws his queen
manages to advance his pawns from the i.f6-attack in advance
on the kingside : 1 2 . g4 i.xe3+ and prevents a possible swap of
1 3 . �xe3 tt::l f6 14.g5 tt::l e 8 15 .h4 c6 the dark-squared bishops on g5 .
16.f4± with a clear advantage. n .. tt::le 5
.

Also passive is 8 . . . l:.e8 9 . f3 Possible is ll . . . a6 1 2 .<;fo>b 1 b5

i. f8 ; again with his last moves [Link]::l d 5 i.xd5 14.exd5t . As it is
Black has not undertaken any­ typical for positions like that,
thing to create his own play and White plans a pawn attack on the
if he intended to lead his bishop kings ide ( g4 - g 5 , h4- h 5 , g6 ) .
out to g7, as in the game Weng ­ Black's possible counter-chances
Frazao, Litomys 1994, which saw are in his play against the b2-
10.h4 g6, then it is not clear why square or in exchanging pieces,
he did not fianchetto it as early although White is able to hinder
as on the 4th or the 5th move. Fur­ it.
ther came l l .tt::l x c6 bxc6 12.e5
tt::l h5 1 3 . i. g5 � d 7 1 4 . tt::l e4 d5
( 1 4 . . . �xe5 1 5 . g4 ) 1 5 . g4 dxe4
(15 . . . �e6 16.i.c4! �xe5 17 J:tde 1
�g7 1 8 . gxh5 dxe4 19.hxg6 hxg6
20.fxe4) 16. �xd7 i.xd7 17.l:txd7
tt::l g 7 18.i.c4 with an overwhelm­
ing positional advantage.
9.�xd4 i. e6 10.:f3 tt::l d7
Or 10 . . . a6 1 l . g4 b5 ( l l . . . .l:l.e8
12.h4± White's chances, who has 12.<;to>b 1;!;;
already advanced his kingside Ankerst - Straub, Munich
pawn s , are obviously better) 1993 went on 12 . . . c6 when 1 3 .
1 2 . h4 c5 1 3 . �d2 �a5 ( 1 3 . . . b4 i.g3 !? was worth consideration,
[Link]::l d 5 i.xd5 15.exd5 tt::l d 7 16.g5 with the idea of f4-f5 . In the
tt::lb 6 1 7 . h5± - White starts to at­ arisen position White retains his
tack earlier than his opponent slight advantage thanks to his
Martorelli - Scalcione, Monteca­ more active central position. In
tini Te rme 2 0 0 2 ) 1 4 . <;fo> b 1 b4 the game White played 13 .i.e2
[Link]::l d 5 i.xd5 16.exd5 tt::l d 7 17.g5 (with the idea of g4 ) . In this
tt::lb 6 18 .h5±. Black is evidently case the move led to a loss of
late with his counterplay - g6 is time, since after b5-b4 the white
already on the agenda and 18 . . . knight is better off retreating to
c4? ! (with the idea of c3 ) does not e2. 13 . . . b5 14.g4 a5 1 5 . �e3 �c7
work because of 19.�d4 with the 16.i.d3 11fb8oo.

40
 Chapter 5 l .e4 e5 2.ltJf3 d6 3.d4 ltJf6
Philidor's Defence

9.�d l±) 9.dxe7 dxc4 10.exf8�+

� (on lO . . .lhffi comes ll .l:e l±
.

with the threat of ltJb l-c3xe4)

l l . ltJb d 2 . B l ack has s e ri o u s
troubles - his is behind i n devel­
opment and his king and the c4-
pawn are exposed to attack .
l l . . . ltJxd2 12.ltJxd2 i.. e 6 13 .l:te l
Wf7 (This attempt to develop
B l ack's l a s t move allows somehow the pieces results in a
White a possibility to get a lead difficult position for Black, but
in development in position with 13 . . . i..f7 14.b3 brings no allevia­
an open centre, which in the fu­ tion as well - after i.. a 3+ the king
ture can be turned into a bishop will have to retreat to g8 , which
pair advantage in the endgame, means that with the rook locked
for instance. on h8 and White's domination
4.dxe5 along the open central files the
The alternative is 4.ltJc3 . losses will be just around the cor­
4 ...ttJxe4 5.�d5 ner. ) 1 4 . ttJ f3 h6 1 5 . ltJ e 5 + Wf6
The best move ! It is both as­ 16.i.. d2 ttJd7 ( 16 . . . ltJc6 1 7 .ltJxc6
saulting the e4-knight and pre­ bxc6 1 8 . i.. c 3 + Wf7 1 9 . i.. x g7±)
venting its protection with the 1 7 .ltJxd7+ i.. x d7 1 8 . i.. c3 + W f7
move d5. White affects the co ­ 19. i.. x g7±. White h a s a sound
ordination of Black's forces. extra pawn and the only draw­
5 ...ttJc5 ing chance for Black is the bish­
The move 5 . . . f5 terribly weak­ ops of the opposite colour.
ens the a2-h8 diagonal, and with 6.i..g5
the king in the centre exposed on B l ack h a s two mov e s : a )
the open central files, Black's 6 ...i.. e 7 and b) 6 �d7.
•••

position is dubious: 6 . i.. c4 �e7

7. 0-0 c6 8 . exd6 cxd5 (8 . . . ltJxd6 a) 6 i.. e 7 7.exd6 �xd6
..•

9 . � d 3 ltJ e 4 l O . l:t e l ± ; 8 . . . �f6 Of course, 7 . . . cxd6 8 . i.. b 5±

41
 Chapter S

gives White a clear edge due to �xg4 .ixg4 15.f3 .id7 1 6 .b4 ttJa4
the weakness of the d6-pawn, 17 . ttJ b 5 ttJxb4 1 8 . tiJxb4 ..txb 5
which is difficult to protect with 19 . .ixb5 ltJc3 20 . .:Xd6 cxd6±) 10.
the poorly set up black pieces. �xd6 .ixd6 l l . tiJ b 5 ltJ e 4 1 2 .
8.tiJc3 ttJxd6 cxd6 1 3 . ..th4 ltJc6 14.ltJd4±
White's advantage consists in his
bishop pair advantage and bet­
ter pawn structure , Steiner -
Von Holzhausen, Berlin 1928;
8 . . . c6 9 . �xd6 it.xd6 1 0 . 0-0-0
.ie7 (Or 10 . . . .ic7 ll . .ie3 ttJe6
1 2 . ltJe4 0-0 1 3 . tiJd6 ..txd6 1 4 .
l:.xd6 tiJ d 7 1 5 . .t c 4 tiJf6 1 6 .tiJe5
ttJe4 1 7 . .Udd 1± the bishop pair
advantage ensures some edge to
8 . .ttJe6
. White , Ko r n e e v - B u k a c e k ,
In this position Black has a Werfen 1992) 1 l . i.c4 .te6 1 2 .
great choice of approximately �he 1 ttJba6 1 3 . i.xe7 Wxe7 14.
equal continuations, but owing to ttJd4 .l:the8 1 5 .ttJxe6 fxe6 16.a3,
the better position of the white Seyffer - Hoermann, Germany
pieces the assessment varies 1989. White is better - he threat­
fro m a s l i ght advantage for ens after b2-b4 and ltJe4-d6(g5)
White to appreciable one, both in to attack Black's weaknesses;
the middlegame and in the end­ 8 . . . � x d 5 9 . tiJx d 5 .td6 1 0 .
game after a queens exchange. 0-0-0 (the move 1 0 . .t e 3 was
The move 8 . . . ..te6 gives White worth considering with the idea
a possibility to get a bishop pair of tiJd2-c4) 10 . . . tiJc6 (To White's
advantage after 9. �xd6 i.xd6 advantage leads 10 . . . .te6 11 . .te3
10.tiJb5;:!:;; tiJbd7 12.tiJc3 tiJf6 13.tiJb5± Mar­
8 . . . 0-0 9 .0-0-0 .ie6 (again to ciano - Berend , France 1 9 9 8 .
White's advantage leads 9 . . . tiJc6 Black fails t o impede the move
1 0 . �xd6 .ixd6 l l . tiJb5;:!:;. Also tiJb5 by 12 . . . a6? because of the
seen is 9 . . . a6 10 ..ie3 .te6 1l.�h5 loss of a piece 13 .b4) 1 l . .tb5 ttJe6
�c6 1 2 . liJd4 �e8 13.ttJxe6 ttJxe6 (ll . . . ..td7 12 .lthe 1 ttJe6 1 3 . c4 .l:tc8
14 . .tc4±. Black's pieces are ex­ 14 . .tf4 a6 15 . .ixd6 cxd6 16 . .ixc6
tremely badly placed, Engelbert .ixc6 [Link] l;:!:; Nijboer - Cifuen­
- Dreyer, Germany 1982 and also tes, Netherlands 1994, the d6-
9 . . . h6 10 . .ie3 tiJba6 , Llames - pawn is weak) 1 2 . l:!.he 1 0-0
Olea, Gijon 1999 when 1 1 . �h5 13 . .th4 f6 ( 1 3 . . . tiJf4 14 . .tg3±)
would have given White a seri­ 14 . .ig3 .txg3 1 5 . hxg3 , Madl -
ous advantage , e . g . , 1 1 . . . �e6 Coenen, Budapest 1992, White
1 2 . tiJd5 ..td6 1 3 . ttJd4 �g4 1 4 . has seized the central files ;

42
 2. lb{3 d6 3. d4 tD{6 [Link] tDe4 5. 'fid5 lDc5 6. i.g5

8 . . . 'fie6+ occurred in the game <J;f6 19.l:e3 ttJc5 20.b4 ttJa6 2 1 .

Rublevsky - Abramovic, Budva l:de 1 ttJc7 22 . c4± White's pieces'
1996, which went on 9 . ..te3 c6 10. active position and the possibil­
'fid4 0-0 1l...tc4 'fig4 12.0-0-0 b5 ity for an attack against the
13. 'fie5! 'fixc4 14. 'fixe7 ttJb7 (14 . . . black king constitute White's
ttJba6 1 5 . ttJe 5 'fie6 16.i.xc5+-; advantage , Gusev - Antoshin,
1 4 . . . ttJe6?? 1 5 . ttJe5+-) 1 5 . ttJg5 Moscow 1955) 13 . .:[Link] 1 i.e6 (or
'fih4 ( On 15 . . . h 6 may follow 1 3 . . . ttJe6 1 4 . ttJ e 5 l:d8 1 5 . ttJ e 4
16 .l:td4 'fic5 17. 'fixc5 ttJxc5 1 8 . ttJd7 16.ttJg6 .:.e8 1 7 .ttJxe7+ .:xe7
ttJge4 ttJxe4 1 9 . ttJxe4±. Black's 18.ttJd6± a bishop pair advantage
dark squares and the queenside and the knight on d6 give White
pawns are weak) 16 . .U.d4 'fih5 a technically winning position,
1 7 .l:thd l±. Black has only his Melamed - Kalinina, Alushta
queen "developed"; 1 999) 14 . ..txc5 ..txc5 1 5 .i.xe6
8 . . . a6 9 . 0-0-0 i.e6 10 . ..txe7 fxe6 16 ..Ud2 (Lindfeldt - Bank,
'fixe7 1 1 . 'fie5 f6 1 2 . 'fih5+ ..tf7 13. Esbjerg 1997) and after 16 . . . .U.e8
'fih4 ttJbd7 14.l:e 1 ttJe6 15.i.c4;!; 1 7.ttJe4± Black would be unable
Keitlinghaus - Gretarsson, Rey­ to secure his pawn.
kjavik 1997, a pin along the e­ 9 . ..ixe7 'fixe7 10.0-0--0 ttJ c6
file is troublesome. 10 . . . 0-0 1 l . 'fih51', White has
8 . . . h6 9 . i. e 3 c6 (9 . . . 'fixd5 an initiative in the centre and on
1 0 . ttJ x d 5 ttJe6 l l . ttJ x e 7 <J; x e 7 the kingside thanks to his bet­
1 2 . ttJd4± Korneev - Hoffman , ter development.
Linares 1 9 9 7 ) 1 0 . 'fixd6 .i.xd6 10 . . . c6 1 1 . 'fid2 0-0 12.i.c4 b5
1 1 . 0-0-0 i.e7 12.i.c4� (Despite 13 .i.b3 a5 14. 'fid6 'fixd6 15 .l:txd6
the simplifications, Black did not ttJc5 16.a3 ttJxb3+ 1 7 . cxb3 i.b7
achieve equality - the white 18 . .U.e1 l:.a6 19.l:te7 Brodsky - To­
rooks will operate freely along ledano, Benasque 1996, Black's
the open central fil e s , while pieces are not co- ordinated.
Black's main concern is how to ll. 'fie4
complete his development. White 1 1 .i.b5 i.d7 �0-0-0 .
threatens with 1 3 . .i.xc5 i.xc5 ll ... 'ftb4 12.i.c4 0-0 13.ttJd5
14.l:he 1 + ) 1 2 . . .0-0 (Black play­ 'fic5
ers also tried 12 . . . ttJba6 13 .l:.he 1
..te6 14 . .i.xe6 ttJxe6 15.ttJd4 ttJxd4
1 6 . i.xd4 f6 1 7 . ..te3 , the black
king and the pinned bishop are
very uncomfortable on the open
central file Prie - Shaw, Moscow
1994 and 12 . . . i.e6 13.i.xc5 ..txc4
1 4 . l:.he 1 i.e6 1 5 . ttJe4 ttJd7 1 6 .
i.xe7 <J;xe7 17.ttJd6 l:tab8 18.ttJd4

43
 Chapter S

14.�h4;!;; �xf6 gxf6 1 6 . �xc5 �xc5 1 7 .

The actively placed pieces l:td8+-) [Link]:lxd5 lt:le6 - allowed
make White's play much easier. White to acomplish the men­
In Ionov - Yandemirov Elista tioned i d e a ( s e e the note to
1994 further was 14 . . . l:td8?! (an White's S th move ) . 1 1 . 0-0-0
immediate 14 . . . b5;!;; is better with 0-0 (Nothing changes l l . . . lt:lc6,
the idea of organising a counter­ which is met with the same move
play on the queenside) 1 5.l:thel± as the castling 1 2 .lt:ld2 with the
b5 1 6.�b3 �b7?? ( 16 . . . �d7± al­ idea of lt:lc4(e4). 12 . . . lt:le7 1 3 . lt:lc4
lowed Black to avoid the imme­ lt:lxd5 [Link]:lxd6+ cxd6 1 5 . l:txd5
diate losses) 1 7.l:txe6!+- a5 ( 1 7 . . . rJi>e7 16.�c4± with a bishop pair
fxe6 18 .lt:lg5 exd5 19.�xh7+ rJi>f8 advantage, Quinteros - Najdorf,
[Link]:le6+-; 18 . . . h6 [Link]:lxe6 �d6 Buenos Aires 1975 or 12 . . . �d7
[Link]:lxd8+-) [Link]:lg5 h6 19 .l:txh6! 1 3 . lt:le4 �e7 1 4 . f4 f5 1 5 . lt:lxe7
and Black resigned. lt:lxe7 [Link]:lc5 lt:lxc5 17.�xc5 lt:lc6
18.l:tel± with a bishop pair ad­
b) 6 ... � d7 vantage and vulnerable black
king in Rowell -Tepper, Pardu­
bice 1994) 12 .lt:ld2!;!;; . Black faces
an unpleasant choice: to admit
the exchange ofhis dark-squared
bishop or to clear the f8-square
for its retreat by 12 . . . .U.d8 , but
after 1 3 . lt:lc4 (or 1 3 . lt:l e4 � f8
14.i.c4) 13 . . . �f8 14.�e2;!;; White
is more active and he dominates
the centre.
7.exd6 .ixd6 [Link]:lc3 9.0-0-0
An important idea in White's
plan is the exchange of the d6-
bishop (or a threat of exchange)
and a transition to a better
endgame.
8 ... 0-0
B l a c k can exchange the
queens outright b y 8 . . . � e 6 +
9 . �e3 �xd5 (unsatisfactory is
9 . . . c6 10. �d4 0-0 1l...t c4 �g6 12.
0-0-0 �e7 13 .lt:le5 �f6 [Link]:lxf7 9 ... a6
�xd4 15.i.xd4+-, as was in the Defending against lt:lb5 . The
game Rublevsky - Zaru b i n , options are:
Voronez 199 1 o r 14 . . . l:f.xf7 1 5 . 9 . . . lt:lc6 (in practice have oc-

44
 2. li:J{3 d6 3. d4 ltJf6 4. de ltJe4 5. tfld5 &fJc5 6. i.g5

curred retreats of the queen to bishop pair advantage.

f5 and c6 and they do not hinder 10 ..ie3
•

White's principal idea. After the

move &fJb5 with 9 . . . tf/f5 after the
preliminary queen exchange and
ll .&iJd4 Black will face the same
troubles as with 9 . . . &fJc6) 1 0 .
&fJb5;!;. White achieves his goal
and the advantage. However, he
should keep in mind the active
black knights and a possible
counterplay along the opened up
c-file, e . g . , 1 0 . . . tf/e6 ( 1 0 . . . '�g4 10 tf/c6
.•.

11 .&fJxd6 cxd6 12 . .te3 .te6 1 3 . Black strives to trade queens

�xd6 ltJ e 4 14. tf/a3 l:tac8 15 .h3 and if he manages to retain the
t!Jg6 16 . ..id3± - there is no com­ same material in the endgame
pensation for a pawn, Svensson (i.e. not to allow an exchange of
- Boe, Gotenburg 1994) ll.&fJxd6 the bishop for a knight, first of
cxd6 12 . ..ie3 tf/xd5 1 3 .l:hd5 ltJe4 all), a draw will be not far off.
14.�d3 f5 15 . ..ixe4 fxe4, Becerra With queens on the board Black
- Hoffman, Cuba 1994 and here will have to reckon with the awk­
the move 16.&fJd2± led to a win of ward position of his pieces and
pawn. possible worrisome threats to the
9 . . . h6 !? (The only alternative king (�h5, &fJg5).
is 9 . . . a6, which prevents &fJb5) The continuation 10 . . . &fJe6 1 1 .
10 . ..ie3 tf/e7 (or 10 . . . &fJe6 ll . .tc4 �d3 &fJc6 1 2 . tf/h5 g 6 1 3 . tf/h6 f5
&fJc6 1 2 . �b 1 tf/e7 1 3 . tf/h5 l:td8 14. �c4± Danek - Lane, Poznan
14.&fJd5 tf/f8 15.l:the l± White has 1985 seriously weakens Black's
the upper hand thanks to his ac­ position.
tive central pieces , Prasad - 10 . . . tf/e7 1 1 . tf/h5 &fJbd7 cannot
Chakkravarthy, Sangli 2 0 0 0 ) solve the problems because of
1 1 . tf/h5 White has better pros­ 12.&fJd5 �e6 ( 1 2 . . . tfld8 13 . .ic4±)
pects , since he has a develop­ 13. &fJg5 tf/g6 14. �xg6 (on 14. tf/h4
ment advantage and possibilities Black answers 14 . . . h6 driving
for play in the centre and on the the knight away) 14 . . . hxg6 15 .b4
kingside . Moreover, the unlucky &fJe6 16.ltJe4± and as far as im­
black queen is still chased. In possible is 16 . . . �e5 17.&fJe7+ �h7
Brynell - H. Hansen, Copen­ 18.&fJxc8+- White exchanges on
hagen 2000 further came 1 1 . . . d6 and wins a pawn.
&iJbd7 12.&fJd5 tf/e4 13Jtd4 �g6 ll .&fJe5!?
14. �h4 &fJb6 15.&fJe7 + if..x e7 16. In practice o ccurred only
tf/xe7 &fJe6 17.�dl± White has the 11. tf/h5, which in the game Van

45
Chapter S

der Werf - Cifuentes Parada,

Wijk aan Zee 1993 after 11 . . .
tt:lbd 7 ! ( with the idea o f tt:lf6 )
12 . .id4 .tf4+ ! 1 3 .<Ji>b 1 �h6 14.
�xh6 .ixh6 15 .tt:ld5 tt:le6 16. tt:le7
<Ji>h8 1 7 . tt:lxc8 :taxeS brought
White a slight advantage. Still,
with the move l l . tt:le5 White
achieves even more profitable
exchange of the dark-squared
bishop. the black dark-squared bishop,
ll ... �xd5 as the capture on c7 is threat­
(diagram) ened, immediately or after an
[Link]:lxd5;t exchange on c5) and 12 . . . .ixe5
White manages to exchange 13 . .ixc5 :teB is met by 14.f4±.

Conclusion
White is much better prepared for a concrete tactical fight in ev­
ery line of the Philidor's Defence after a precise play. Black has to
defend usually a worse position without too many counter-chances.
White succeeds to obtain the bishop pair advantage in a symmetri­
cal position quite often.

46
 Part 2
Petroff Defence
l .e4 e5 2.lijf3 lt:lf6

ensures his long lasting posi­

tional edge, but Black's position
remains very solid throughout.
The rest of the chapters deal
with 5 . . . d5. We analyse the plan
with 6 . . . tL!c6 and 7 . . . i.g4, which
is aimed at exerting pressure at
White's d4-pawn, in Chapter 7 .
Chapters 8 and 9 treat the
Petroff Defence is becoming active plan with the development
more and more popular at top ofBlack's dark-squared bishop to
level chess since the nineties of d6, in which the black knight
the 2 0th century. This is due to usually remains on e4 and Black
the fact that as a rule the cen­ opts for a kingside counterplay.
tral e-pawns are exchanged in The fashionable lines of this sys­
this opening and the arising tem are dealt with in Chapter 9.
symmetrical pawn structure Chapter 10 i s devoted t o
with a single open file is rather Black's attempts t o avoid the
drawish. Black has seldom any main lines of the 6 . . . i.e7 varia­
difficulties with his development tion. The analysis of the most
and almost never obtains poorly critical contemporary lines of the
placed pieces. Accordingly Pe­ Petroff Defence, starting with
troffDefence is a very solid open­ the moves l . e4 e5 2 .l2Jf3 l2Jf6 3 .
ing, almost ideally suitable for l2Jxe5 d6 4.l2Jf3 l2Jxe4 5.d4 d 5 6 .
Black to play to equalize easily. i.d3 i.e7 7 . 0-0 l2Jc6 8 . c4, begins
Therefore the strong players are with Chapter 1 1 . Black's fa­
often using it when the tourna­ vourite choice here is 8 . . . l2Jf6
ment or match situation requires 9.h3 0-0. He usually exchanges
playing for a draw. on d4 and then plays against
We are going to have a look White's isolate d central pawn.
first at lines in which Black re­ Finally, the subjects of our
frains from early d7-d5 and plays last two chapters are the two
passively in the centre retreat­ most popular lines nowadays -

ing with the knight to f6 (Chap­ 8 . . . l2Jb4 9.�e2 0-0 l O . lLlc3 il.f5
ter 6). White's space advantage ( C h apter 1 2 ) and 10 . . . il. e 6
and better piece development (Chapter 13).

47
 Chapter 6 l .e4 e5 2.tLlf3 tLlf6 3.tLlxe5
Petroff Defence

13 . i&.xd7+ ltJxd7 1 4 . ltJg5±) 1 1 .

i.. g 3 i&. g 7 1 2 . 0-0-0 .:.he8 1 3 .
.l:the 1± - and White preserves his
material advantage without any
compensation for Black.
3 . . . "i!Je7 4.ltJf3 ltJxe4 (Or 4 . . .
"i!Jxe4+ 5.i.. e 2 d5 6.0-0 iLe7 7.d4;!;
White is better since the exposed
position of Black's queen will
3 . . d6
. present him with additional
This is no doubt the best tempi for development . ) 5 . .ie2
move. The other two attempts to d5 6.0-0 - Black's queen on e7 is
recapture the pawn are less ad­ hindering the development and
visable because Black slows his can be attacked along the e-file.
development considerably. 4.ltJf3 ltJxe4 5.d4
3 . . . ltJxe4?! 4.'i;lte2 "i!Je7 5. "i!Jxe4 White is not pushing back the
d6 6 . d4 dxe5 (After 6 . . . f6 7.ltJc3 knight on e4 deliberately, hoping
dxe5 8 . ltJd 5 "i!Jd6 9 . dxe5 fxe5 to gain the initiative attacking it
10.i&.f4± - Black is too much be­ later in the opening.
hind in his development. Or 5 .ie7
...

6 . . . ltJd7 7.ltJc3 dxe5 8.ltJd5± - and The main lines of this open­
White wins at least a pawn since ing arise after 5 . . . d5 and we are
8 . . . "i!Jd6 doesn't work because of going to analyse them later. The
9.dxe5 ltJxe5 10.f4 i.. e 6 1 1 . ltJc3 move in the text is too timid and
ltJd7 1 2 . f5+-) 7.dxe5 ltJc6 8 .i&.b5 White obtains the advantage
i&. d 7 9 . ltJ c 3 0-0-0 1 0 . iL f4 g5 relatively easy. Refraining from
(Black fails to regains his pawn d 7 -d5 Black presents the oppo­
in the other lines as well : 10 . . . a6 nent with an undisputed domi­
l l . i.. c4± Sax - Hulak, Budapest nation in the centre and comfort­
1 9 7 5 ; 10 . . . "i!Jb4 1 1 . 0-0-0 "i!Jxe4 able piece development.
1 2 . ltJxe4± Gusev - Afromeev, The other moves usually lead
'fula 200 1 , and if 12 . . . ltJxe5 , then to well known lines by transpo-

48
 2. 0{3 ttJ{6 3. ttJe5 d6 4. ttJf3 ttJe4 5. d4 i.. e 7 6. .1i.d3

sition: or 12 . . . 'i!i'f8 13 . .txe7+ �xe7 14.

5 . . . ttJf6 6 . i.. d 3 i.. e 7, and 5 . . . �d2± - and Black's deficiency in
i.. g4 6 .i.. d 3 C/jf6 ( 6 . . . d 5 is dealt development renders his situa­
with in the lines after 5 . . . d5) 7. tion critical. ) l l .ttJd5 �e8 12.c3
0-0 il... e 7 lead to the line - 5 . . . (The other line is also possible
i.. e 7. 12 . .l:!e1 i.. e 6 1 3 . �e4 g6 14.ttJxe7
6.i.. d3 C/jf6 �xe7 15.c3 and White has the
bishop pair advantage) 12 . . . .te6
13.ttJf4. (Just like before White
can capture on e7 getting the two
bishop advantage . ) 1 3 . . . .t d 7
1 4 . .te3;!; - and White's position
is very active.
7.0-0 0-0
After 7 . . . .tg4 8.h3 .th5 9.�e 1
0-0 1 0 . c4 d5 l l . ttJc3 dxc4 1 2 .
i..xc4;!; White keeps the edge i n a
About 6 . . . d5 see the lines af­ standard position with an iso­
ter 5 . . . d5. lated pawn because of his active
The move 6 . . . ttJg5 (with the pieces. If Black tries to attack the
idea to simplify the position ex­ d4 pawn immediately with 12 . . .
changing a couple of pieces) is ttJc6, there follows 1 3 . g4 .ig6
not good enough to equaliz e : 14.ttJe5 and 14 . . . ttJxd4 doesn't
7.ttJxg5 il... xg5 8 . �e2+ i.. e 7 (It is work because of 15.ttJxg6 hxg6
too dangerous for Black to play 16 . .l:txe7±.
8 . . . il... e 6 9 . f4 ! il... h 4+ 1 0 . g3 il... e 7 8.h3
l l . f5 .td5 1 2 . 0-0 0-0 13 .ttJc3±
and White has the advantage in
development and good attacking
chances. Mter 8 . . . 'i!i'f8 [Link]... e 3± it
is quite unclear why Black has
forfeited his rights to castle -
Velimirovic - Murey, Moscow
1 9 8 2 ) 9 . 0-0 0-0 ( O r 9 . . . ttJc6
10.c3;!; and White is better with
his rather active pieces . ) 10.ttJc3
ttJc6 (It is worse for Black to play s ....:.es
10 . . . c6 11..l:t e 1 l:te8 12. il... g5 i.. e 6 Black has been trying some
13 . .txe7 �xe7 14. �e4 g6 15.d5 other moves here as well :
cxd5 16.ttJxd5± - and White has 8 . . . ttJc6 9 . c3 .l:!e8 (or 9 . . . h6
the edge because of his powerful 10.l::t e l .l:te8 1l.ttJbd2 i..£8 [Link]
pieces and the weakness on d6, d5 13.ttJe5 .1i.d6 14 . .if4 - and the

49
 Chapter 6

occupation of the e5-square en­ ghiu, Buenos Aires 1970; 9 . . . c5

sures White's lasting initiative ­ 10.d5 [Link] [Link]:lc3 a6 12.a4 a5 13.
King - B arua, London 1 9 8 2 ) i.g5 h6 14. i.h4 lt:la6 15 . .Ucl lt:lb4
10 . .l:Ie 1 � d 7 [Link]:lbd2 .t fB [Link]:le4 16.i.b l;!; Fedorowicz - Smyslov,
d5 ( or 1 2 . . . lt:lxe4 1 3 . .txe4 h6 Dortmund 1986.
14 . .td2 �f6 15. �c2;!; Liberzon ­ [Link]:lc3 c6
Smyslov, Ve nice 1 9 7 4 - and The knight manoeuvre fails to
White has a comfortable posi­ equalize - lO . . . lt:l£8 ll . .l:tel lt:lg6
tional edge ) 1 3 . lt:lg3 �d6 1 4 . (or l l . . .lt:le6 12 .b4 g6 13.l:.b l c6
l:txe8+ �xe8 15. �c2 h 6 16.i.d2 14 . .l:tb2 [Link] 15 . .l:tbe2 �d7 16.i.e3
�fB 1 7. lt:lf5 i.xf5 18 . .txf5 , Bron­ i.g7 1 7 . �d2;!; Vasiukov - Ros­
stein - Smyslov, Leningrad 197 1 setto , Camaguey 1974) 1 2 . '�c2
- and White enjoys the bishop i. d 7 1 3 . �g5 i. c 6 1 4 . d 5 i. d 7
pair advantage. 15 . .:.ad l a 6 16.�e3;!; Arnason -
The line 8 . . . c6 9 . c4 lt:l b d 7 Karpov, Oslo 1984 - and White
[Link]:lc3;!; usually leads t o posi­ is better in all the examples due
tions in the variation with 8 . . . l::te 8 to his extra space quite typical
by transposition. for this line.
Or 8 . . . c5 [Link]:lc3 lt:lc6 10.l:te1 a6
l l . d5 lt:la7 12.a4 i.d7 13.a5 :te8
14 . .t fl h6 1 5 . � f4;!; Karpov -
Smyslov, Moscow 1 9 7 2 - and
Black is rather passive due to the
lack of space.
9.c4 lt:lbd7
The other moves here also
lead to positions better for White,
because of his space advantage
and more active piece s : 9 . . . c6 l l .l:te 1;!;
1 0 .lt:lc3 a6 l l . b4 lt:lbd7 12 . .te3 White has the space advan­
lt:lfB 13.a4 a5 14.b5 lt:lg6 15.l:te1 tage (as usual) and better piece
lt:lh5 16. �d2 .td7 1 7 .l:tab l;!; 'fuk­ disposition. The game Shomoev
makov - Bronstein, Moscow - Grachev, Tomsk 2002, contin­
197 1 ; 9 . . . lt:lc6 [Link]:lc3 h6 ll .l:te 1 ued ll . . . lt:lfB (or l l . . . a6 1 2 . �c2
.tfB 12.l:.xe8 �xe8 1 3 .i.f4 i.d7 lt:lfB 13.i.f4 lt:lg6 14.i.h2;!;) 12.i.f4
14. �d2 �c8 15.d5 lt:lb4 [Link]:le4 lt:lg6 13.i.h2 with an advantage
lt:lxe4 17. i.xe4;!; Fischer - Gheor- for White.

50
Chapter 7 l .e4 e5 2.ttJf3 ttJf6 3.ttJxe5 d6 4.ttJf3
ttJxe4 5.d4 d5
Petroff Defence

variations after 6 . . . i.e7.

This chapter is devoted to the
least popular of the three main
lines - 6 . . . ttJc6.
6 ttJ c6 7.0-0 .il.g4
.•.

The idea of this move is to

attack the weakened d4-pawn.
7 . . . ..ie7 will be analysed in the
lines after 6 . . . �e7.
This is the main line . Black 8.c4 ttJf6
pushes that pawn forward en­ The move 8 . . . � e 7 is once
abling his active piece develop­ again leading to l i n e s aft e r
ment (ltJc6 , � f5 or ..ig4) and 6 . . . i. e 7 by transposition.
fighting for the centre. White will The pawn capture is obvi­
have to play c2-c4 later and that ously premature 8 . . . �xf3 9. thf3
will lead to the formation of an ttJxd4. After 10 :§'e3 ttJf5 l l . '§'e l
isolated central d4-pawn that ttJ e 7 ( Otherwise Black loses a
Black plans to attack later. piece) 12.cxd5 ttJd6 13.ttJc3 '§'d7
.6 � d3 14 . ..ie3± White has a substantial
There are three important lead in development and good
variations in the diagrammed prospects to attack the enemy
position - 6 . . . ttJc6, 6 . . . i.d6 and king stranded in the centre.
6 . . . ..ie7. 9.ttJc3
The other moves lead to posi­
tions after one of these three
lines, for example: after 6 . . . �g4
7 . 0-0 the move 7 . . . ..ie7 trans­
poses to lines after 6 . . . ..ie7, the
move 7 . . . �d6 - to 6 . . . �d6 and the
move 7 . . . ltJc6 - to 6 . . . ltJc6.
6 . . . �£5 7. 0-0 �e7 and 6 . . . ttJf6
7 . 0-0 �e7 are dealt with in the

51
Chapter 7

Black is forced now to make a Black has some other moves

principled choice: here as well :
- to transpose to lines after 13 . . . h6 14. �c2 .l:!.e8 ( 1 4 . . . tt:Jf6
6 . . . !JL.e7, except that there White 15.�f4 a6 16. �d3 .l:!.e8 1 7 . .l:!.ad 1
could have prevented the pin tt:Ja7 18.d5 �d7 [Link]:Je5, Hunt ­
�g4, while now the bishop is on Milligan , Delden 1 9 9 3 - and
g4 already - a) 9 ....i e7 White has a powerful kingside
- or to take on f3 and later on attack) 1 5 . �d3 tt:Jf6 1 6 . �xh6 ,
d4 winning a pawn, but falling and since 16 . . . gxh6 17 Jhe6 fxe6
behind in development present­ 1 8 . �g6+ 'iii> h 8 1 9 . �xh6+ lti>g8
ing White with a lasting initia­ [Link]:Jg5 was leading to check­
tive - b) 9 . . . .ix:f3. mate, Black was left with a pawn
down in a hopeless position in
a ) 9 . . . .i e 7 1 0 .cxd5 tt:Jxd5 the game C h andler - Fri e s ­
ll.h3 .ie6 Nielsen, Bundesliga 1982;
l l . . .�h5 12 .�e4 tt:Jf6 13.�xc6 13 . . . tt:Jxc3 14.bxc3 �f6 15 . .l:!.b 1
bxc6 1 4 . g4 �g6 1 5 . tt:Je5±. The b6 16.I!b5 a6 17 .!1h5 g6 [Link]:Jg5
doubled pawns and the mis­ �xg5 19.�xg5--t Gipslis - Roth­
placed bishop on g6 make Black's fuss, Germany 1996, and White
position difficult, for example : has a kingside attack;
1 5 . . . � d 6 ( or 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6 . f4±) 13 . . . �d7 14.�b5 tt:Jxc3 ( 14 . . . a6
1 6 . tt:Jxc6 �c8 1 7 . .l:!.e 1 + 'litf8 1 8 . is worse for Black after 1 5 .tt:Je5
�f3+- Chandler - Gravel, Ovie­ �e8 [Link]:Jxc6 bxc6 17.�a4± - and
do 1992. Black's queenside is destroyed
12.a3 0-0 13 ..l:!elt Flores - Szmetan, Buenos Aires
1999. While 16 . . . tt:Jxc3 is hopeless
after 1 7 . tt:Jxe7+ �xe7 1 8 . bxc3
axb5 19.d5 �ad8 20. �f3+-) 1 5 .
bxc3 �f6 1 6 . i.g5 a6 1 7 . �xc6
�xc6 1 8 . �xf6 gxf6 19. �d2± -
Black's kingside pawns are ter­
ribly weak, so White has a big
advantage Nijboer - Kroe z e ,
Netherlands 2000 ;
13 . . . a6 1 4 . �c2 tt:Jf6 ( 14 . . . h6
This is a standard posi­ has been tried too 15.�h7+ 'lith8
tion with an isolated pawn and 16.iH5 .ixf5 - but not 16 . . . �d7
White's chances in the middle­ 1 7 .i.xe6 fxe6 18. �e4, Timofeev
game are better mostly because - Gashimov, Dubai 2 0 0 3 , and
of the possible initiative on the Black's e6 pawn is rather weak
kingside. - 1 7 . �xf5 tt:Jxc3 1 8 .bxc3;!; - and
13 .if6
••. White has better piece placement

52
 5. d4 d5 6. il..d3 tDc6 7. 0-0 il..g4 8. c4 tDf6 9. tDc3

and more space . ) 1 5 . i. e 3 h6 2 0 . i.xd4;t D e l Rio Ange l i s -

1 6 . � a d l tD d 5 , B arbul e s cu - Barez Menendez, Madrid 1995,
Radovici , Romania 1 9 9 2 , and and White has a bishop against
White could have tried here a knight in an open position ,
1 7 . -t c U with well developed which gives him the advantage.
pieces and good chances for a 15 . . . l:tbS 1 6 . lt:lxf6+ 'f1xf6 1 7 .
kingside attack; i.g5 �g6 1S.'f1xd5 il.xd3 19 .lt:lh4
13 . . . �eS 14 . .tc2 tDxc3 15.bxc3 � d 6 2 0 . 'f1xd6 cxd6 2 l . d 5 f6
.tffi 16J�b l b6 (It is worse to play [Link].e3 lt:le5 23 . .txa7 l:aS [Link].d4
here 16 . . . i.d5 1 7.1heS+ �xeS lS. l:i.a5 25 . .l::!. a dl l:txd5 26. il.c3;t Hel­
i.f4 'f1e7 19 .tDh2 g6 20.tDg4± Po­ lers - Schussler, Malmo 1 9 S 7 ,
povic - Handoko, Zagreb 19S5, and White has a small edge in
and Black will not manage to the endgam e , because of the
d e fend his numerous weak­ weakness on d6.
nesses . ) 17.tDd2 tDa5 lS.tDe4 i.f5 16.d5 i.xe4 17 . .txe4 tDe7
19. �f3 i.g6 20. i.f4 i.e7 2 l . a4 18 . .te3 tD e c 8 1 9 J:t ac 1 tDd6
tDc4 22.i.b3 tDd6 23.tDxd6 .txd6 20.i.b1 'f1d7 2 1 ..l:tc5 g6
24. i.xd6 'f1xd6 25 .l:te3 �adS 26.
:be l 'it>f8 27.h4 f6 2S . .te6 c6 29.
�g4 t Balashov - Kochiev, Lenin­
grad 1977, and White kept his
initiative and better piece posi­
tion despite the simplifications.
14.tDe4 i.f5
But not 1 4 . . . i.xd4 1 5 . tDeg5
tDffi 16 . .U.xe6 fxe6 17.tDxe6 �d7
1 S . tDfxd4 tDxd4 1 9 . tDxd4 �fdS
20 . ..te3 c5, De Firmian - Bhat, 22.:ec1;t
USA 1996, and now White was Shirov - I . Sokolov, Las Vegas
winning with 2 l . i.f5+-. 1 9 9 9 , and White has active
After 14 . . . h6 1 5 . tD c5 .t c S pieces and a space advantage.
1 6 . i. c2± - White has the ha­
bitual perspectives in this line of b) 9 ... i.xf3
a kingside attack (but not 16.
tDe5 tDxd4 1 7 . .tc4 tDe7 - and
White had to fight to equalize in
the game Sanakoev - Morgado,
ICCF 1994).
15.�b3 tDb6
Black has also tried here 15 . . .
tDxd4 1 6 . tDxf6+ tDxf6 1 7 . lt:lxd4
il.xd3 1 S . 'f1xd3 c5 [Link].e3 cxd4

53
 Chapter 7

lO.�xf3 liJxd4 ity of the bishop over the knight

Black has won a pawn, but in an open position.
will have imminent problems 12.i.xc4 i.e7
with his development and his It is insufficient to play 12 . . .
king in the centre. lt:Jc6 (Black should not let the e­
ll.�h3!? file remain completely open)
That particular move caused 1 3 . i.g5 i.e7 14.i.xf6 i.xf6 1 5 .
the decline of popularity of the l:fe 1 +- and White got a decisive
line with Black's capturing of the advantage in the game Howell -
d4 pawn. Unlike the other re­ Duskoj anov, Oropesa del Mar
treats, White's queen is posed to 2001 because 15 . . . i.e7 was re­
attack Black's king immediately futed by [Link]:Jd5 0-0 [Link]!xe7+
in case of a short castle. lt:Jxe7 1 8 . .Uad 1 �e8 19.l:td7+-.
13.i.g5 �c8
After the natural develop­
ment 13 . . . 0-0 1 4 . ltad 1 c5 1 5 .
l:.fe 1, White has more than suffi­
cient compensation for the pawn
- better development and excel­
lent piece placement. Black has
to be on the alert about the even­
tual exchange sacrifice on e7, fol­
lowed by liJd5. The game Kuprei­
ll ... dxc4 chik - Jussupow, Minsk 1 9 8 7
B l ack has also tried here continued 1 5 . . . h6 16.i.xh6 ( 16.
ll . . . .te7 12.cxd5 liJxd5 13.l:te 1 c6 l:[Link] 7 was also very good here
14.i.g5� , White prevents Black and now after 16 . . . �xe7 1 7 . lt:Jd5
from castling and attacks along lead to material losses for Black
the open central files. in the game Brodsky - Trofimov,
Or ll . . . lL!e6 1 2 . cxd5 lt:Jxd5 Alushta 1999 while after 16 . . .
13 .i.b5+ c6 14Jid 1;!: (White re­ hxg5 1 7 .:Xb7;!: White could have
captures his pawn keeping the a strong pressure along the 7 th
advantage in development . ) rank . ) 1 6 . . . gxh6 1 7 . �xh6, and
There might follow 14 . . . cxb5 (but White's attack was very danger­
not 1 4 . . . lL!ec7 1 5 . lt:Jxd5 lt:Jxd5 ous . Black played 1 7 . . . lL!h7 in
1 6 . � b 3 cxb 5 1 7 . li.xd5 with a that game, but soon lost some
quick checkmate) 15.!lxd5 �c8, material and the game as well :
Suarez Real - Fernandez Torre, 18.l:td3 i.g5 1 9 . �h5 �f6 20.l:tg3
Norena 200 1 , and here [Link]:Jxb5 .Uae8 2 1 . lt:Je4 'it>h8 2 2 . h4 lhe4
�c6 1 7 . �d3 i.c5 1 8 .li:Jd6+ was 2 3 . li.xe4 .tf4 2 4 . lig4 i.h6 2 5 .
leading to a clear advantage for �xc5±.
White, because of the superior- 14.�d3 lL!e6

54
 5. d4 d5 6. Ji.d3 l:LJc6 7. 0-0 Ji.g4 8.c4 l:LJf6 9. l:LJc3

14 . . . c5 was very bad for Black 16.l:LJd5�

after 1 5 .[Link] l i:LJe6 16 . ..txf6 i.xf6 White has a wonderful com­
1 7 . �f5± Howell - Van K�me­ pensation for the pawn with his
nade, Port Erin 200 1 . better development and ample
15.i.xf6 i.xf6 attacking prospects against the
black king, for example: 16 . . . i.d8
17.f4 0-0 ( 1 7 . . . c6 looks very risky
due to 18.f5 cxd5 19 . .tb5+ �f8
20.fxe6 i.b6+ 2 l .�hl �xe6 22.
�ae l ) 18.f5 l:LJc5 1 9 . �d4 1:iJd7 20.
[Link] l i:LJf6 2 l .l:iJe7+ i.xe7 22.l::i.x e7
and the strong pressure against
f7 is more than sufficient com­
pensation for the pawn (analy­
sis).

55
 Chapter 8 l .e4 e5 2."bf3 "Df6 3."bxe5 d6 4."bf3
"bxe4 5.d4 d5 6 .i.. d3 i.d6
•

Petroff Defence

sufficient. ) 9.cxd5 f5 10.h3 �h5

1 l .tt'lc3 tt'l d 7 ( O r 1 1 . . . t'l' e 8 1 2 .
�e2± - and White has a solid
extra pawn. It is useless for
Black to try 1 l . . J�e8 12.�e1 tt'lxc3
13J:txe8+ �xe8 14.bxc3 �xf3 15.
�xf3 �e1+ 16. �fl tt'ld7 17.�b2±
Kashdan - Levin , Hollywood
1954 . ) 1 2 . tt'lxe4 fxe4 1 3 . �xe4
This is an active plan. Black tt'lf6 1 4 . � f5 'it>h8 1 5 . g4 tt'lxd5
places the bishop on d6 eyeing 16.�e6 �f7 [Link]'lg5±, White wins
the kingside of the opponent and the exchange and after 17 . . . �xe6
hoping to create some threats [Link]'lxe6 t'l'f6 [Link]'lxf8 �xf8 20.
against the enemy king exploit­ �d3 , Gipslis - Chri s t e n s e n ,
ing the knight on e4, while the Gausdal 1 9 9 2 the weaknesses
d5 pawn will be usually sup­ around White's king were not
ported with c7-c6. enough to compensate Black's
7.0-0 0-0 material deficit.
After 7 . . . �g4 8.c4 Black should 8 . . . tt'lf6 (The retreat of this
refrain from 8 . . . c6 (it is better to knight is not quite in the spirit
play 8 . . . 0-0 transposing to the of the active development of the
main line after 7 . . . 0-0) 9.h3 �h5 bishop on d6 . ) After 9 . � g5;!;
1 0 J 1e l±. Mter 10 . . . f5 1 l . cxd5 White has an effortless lasting
cxd5 12. t'l'b3 White wins a pawn advantage, for example : 9 . . . dxc4
capturing either the d5 or the b7 10.�xc4 �g4 11 .h3 ii.xf3 12. �xf3
pawn. tt'lc6 [Link]'lc3 tt'lxd4 14. t'l'xb7 t'l'b8
8.c4 c6 1 5 . t'l'xb8 Itaxb8 16 . .l:.ad 1 tt'le6
B,l ack has tried here some 1 7 . [Link]± O'Kelly de Galway -
other possibilities: Radulescu, Bucharest 1953.
8 . . . �g4 (Black's compensa­ 8 . . . �e6 9.�e 1 ! �e8 (The other
tion for the lost material is not lines are unsatisfactory too :

56
 5. d4 d5 6. i.d3 i.d6 7. 0-0 0-0 8. c4

9 . . . c6 10.cxd5 cxd5 1l.i.xe4 dxe4

12.ltJg5± and White wins mate­
rial ; 9 . . . f5 1 0 . '�b3 dxc4 ll .i.xc4
- but not 1 1 . �xb7 cxd3 12. '�xa8
ltJa6c.o - 11 . . . i.xc4 12. �xc4+ 'it>h8
13.ltJc3± Zude - Rissmann, Ger­
many 1993, and the e-file is very
strong for White after the trade
of the black knight. ) 10.c5 i.e7
(Or 10 . . . i.f8 1l .ltJc3 and if 11 . . . dealt with in the next chapter.
i. f5 12. �b3± ; the other try also 9 . . . i.f5 10.ltJc3 l:le8 leads by
fails : ll . . . f5 1 2 . �b3 b6 13.i.g5 ! transposition to the variations
and Black's position is difficult - after 9 . . . .:te8 and is analysed
13 . . . ltJxg5 14.ltJxg5 �xg5 15 . .U.Xe6 there.
.:txe6 1 6 . �xd 5 +- , while after 9 . . . ltJf6 enables White to pin
11 . . . ltJxc3 12.bxc3;!; - White has favourably with 10.i.g5, because
the advantage just like in the of the position of the black bishop
lines after 1 0 . . . i. e 7 . ) 1 1 .ltJc3 on d6, for example : 10 . . . h6 1 1 .
( 1 l.. � xe4?! dxe4 12.llxe4 it..x c5+) i.h4 dxc4 12.i.xc4 ltJbd7 13.ltJc3;!;
ll . . . ltJxc3 ( l l . . . f5 ? 1 2 . t'l' b 3 ± ) Ilyin-Zhenevsky - Poliak, Lenin­
12 .bxc3 ltJ d 7 ( O r 12 . . . b 6 1 3 . t'l'c2 grad 1938, and White had an
h6 14.cxb6 axb6 15.ltJe5± �it..b 5.) advantage in development and
1 3 . i. f4;!;. White obtained some active position in the centre.
space advantage and better piece 9 . . . f5 1 0 . ltJc3 i.e6 ( 10 . . . ltJa6
placement. The game Kamsky - after 1 1 . a3;!; transposes to the
Jussupow, Tilburg 1992 contin­ variations after - 9 . . . ltJa6. After
ued 13 . . . b6 14. t'l'c2 ltJf8 15 .ltJe5 f5 the exchange 10 . . . ltJxc3 1 1 .
i. f6 ( 1 5 . . . bxc5? ! 1 6 . i. b 5 ltJ d 7 bxc3 i s senseless, because the e5-
1 7 . ltJ c 6 � c 8 1 8 . ltJx e 7 + lh e 7 square is weakened with the dis­
[Link].. c6 .l:.b8 20. it..x d5±) 16.i.b5 appearance of the knight on e4.
i.xe5 1 7 . it.. x e5 i.d7 1 8 . c6 i.c8 10 . . . 'it>h8 is risky becaus e of
( 18 . . . i.e6 1 9 . i.a6±) 1 9 . i.g3 a6 1 1 . cxd5 cxd5 1 2 . ltJxd5 i.xh2+
20 .i.d3 :te6 2 1..�.xe6 i.xe6 22. 1 3 . 'it>xh2 �xd5 1 4 . i.c4 � d 6 +
a4 ! ? �e8 (22 . . . ltJg6 2 3 . f4 ! � ) 15.ltJe5 ltJc6 1 6 .i.f4 t'l' f6 17.ltJxc6
23.i.xc7 �xc6 24.i.g3;!; - and the bxc6 18.i.e5 �h6+ 19.'it>g1 ltJg5 ,
two bishops and the weaknesses Macieja - Meijers, Istanbul 2000,
on Black's queenside guaranteed and now 20. i.d3 ! ?;!; was giving
White's edge. White the two bishop advantage
.9 � c2 and the better position. ) 1 1 . �b3
(diagram) (The pressure against d5 is forc­
9 l:.e8
... ing now Black to exchange on c3 . )
The main line with 9 . . . ltJa6 is l l . . . ltJxc3 ( 11 . . . ltJa6? 12.cxd5 cxd5

57
Chapter S

1 3 . ..ixe4 fxe4 1 4 . ltlg5 ..if5 1 5 . (Black's best try is probably -

�xd5+- Pavasovic - Gunnars­ 12 . . . ltlxc3 13.bxc3t ) 13 . ..if4 l:.f5
son, Istanbul 2000.) 12.bxc3 dxc4 ( 13 . . J:te8 14.cxd5 cxd5 1 5 .ltlxe4
13 . ..ixc4 ..ixc4 14.�xc4+ �h8 15. dxe4 1 6 . i.xe4±) 1 4 . cxd5 l:.xf4
l:l. e 1 , a n d the p a wn o n f5 i s ( 14 . . . cxd5 15.ltlxd5±) 1 5 . i.xe4.
just a n additional weakness in u.:e t i.b4
Black's position. 11. . . ltla6 12 .a3 leads by trans­
10.ltlc3 ..if5 position to the lines after 9 . . . ltla6
Black has two more possibili­ 10. a3 .U.e8 11 . .l:te 1 i.f5.
ties :
Taking o n c 3 i s bad for Black:
10 . . . ltlxc3 ll.i.xh7+ �h8 12.bxc3
and after 1 2 . . . g6 1 3 . ..ig5 ..ie7
14 . ..ixg6 ..ixg5 (14 . . . fxg6 15. �xg6
- White simply brings the rook
in with a decisive attack. ) 15 .
..ixf7 l:.e4 1 6 . cxd5 cxd5 1 7 . �b3 -
White has four pawns for the
piece and since the black king is
quite bare White has a formi­ 12 ..ig5!?
.

dable advantage. (The line 12 .l:.e3 ! ? ..ixc3 1 3 .

1 0 . . . ..ig4 is also better for bxc3;!; - also deserves attention,
White after ll .ltle5 ! t White pro ­ because White obtains two bish­
vokes favourable complications. ops and initiative in the centre. )
Black made an immediate mis­ 1 2 . . . ltlxg5 (Or 1 2 . . ffi 1 3 . ..if4 i.xc3
.

take in the game Kasparov - 14.bxc3 ltld7 1 5 .ltld2± Milos -

Garza Castro, Galicia 199 1 with Lahu d , Sao Paulo 2 0 0 2 , and
1 1 . . . �h4 1 2 . g3 �h5 1 3 . ltlxg4 Black has grave problems along
ltlxc3 1 4 . bxc3 �xg4 15 . ..ixh7+ the b 1-h7 diagonal . ) 1 3 . l:txe8+
�h8 1 6 . .i.d3+- and lost a pawn. �xe8 14.ltlxg5±. White wins ma­
Mter 1 1 . . . ..ixe5 1 2 . dxe5 White terial , since after 1 4 . . . i.xd3
keeps the two bishop advantage 15. �xd3 g6 16.cxd5 i.xc3 there
in an open position: 12 . . . l:l.xe5 follows 1 7 . dxc6!

58
Chapter 9 l .e4 e5 2.ttJf3 tiJf6 3.lZJxe5 d6 4.lZJf3
lZJxe4 5.d4 d5 6.i.d3 i.d6 7.0-0 0-0
8.c4 c6 9:�c2 lZJa6 1 0.a3
Petroff Defence

ll .liJc3 liJc7 12.b4 ..id7

Black has a l s o trie d here
1 2 .. . '�h8 1 3 . ..ib2 ..t d 7 1 4 . liJ e 5
..t e 8 1 5 .liJe2 't{f g 5 1 6 . ..t h 1 't{fh4
17.g3 �f6 18.f3 liJg5 19.liJf4 liJge6
20.liJxe6 liJxe6 2 l .f4 :dB 22.c5
..ic7 23 .a4 a6 [Link] 1 , Zontakh
- Kochyev, St. Petersburg 2002,
and White achieved a total domi­
nation over the whole board af­
Black now has the choice be­ ter having pushed away the ac­
tween: a) IO f5, b) IO J:te8, c)
•.. .• tive enemy pieces .
IO .ig4.
••• The surrender o f the centre
a) IO f5
.•• is quite illogical 12 . . . liJxc3 1 3 .
This move is played with the �xc3 dxc4 1 4. .ixc4+ liJd5 1 5 . �b3
following ideas : at first Black ..t>h8 16 . .ig5 ..te7 17 . .ixe7 liJxe7
keeps his knight on the central 18.liJe5 liJd5 19 . .txd5 cxd5 2 0 .
e4 square, although only tempo­ l:.fe 1 ± [Link] - Sterni­
rary (until the move f2-f3 ); sec­ na, Tbilisi 1973, and Black's po­
ond he has the option to start sition is strategically hopeless.
pushing pawns on the kingside 13 . .ib2 liJg5 14.liJe5 .ixe5
later, which might be trouble­ 15.dxe5 f4 16.f3 ..th8 1 7.l::tfdl
some for the opponent and third �e8 18.l::t ac l dxc4 19 . .ixc4 a5
he intends to attack the central 20. 't{ff2 axb4
squares d4 and e5 with pieces
(with a knight manoeuvre from
a6 to e6, a bishop to f6 and a
queen on g7).
Naturally White's main tasks
are to bring one of his knights to
e5, push away Black's knight
from e4 and then think about
what comes next.

59
 Chapter 9

2 1 .axb4;;!; 12.ltJxe4!
White kept his advantage due White fails to obtain any ad­
to his active centralized pieces in vantage after 12.ltJe5 iLxe5 1 3 .
the game Leko - Morozevich , dxe5 ltJac5 1 4 . f3 ltJxd3 1 5 . "f!!x d3
Dortmund 2002. ltJxc3 = . The inclusion of the
moves 12.c5 ..tc7 after 13.ltJxe4
b) IO .:.es
•.. dxe4 1 4 . iLxe4 iLxf3 1 5 . ..txf3
"f!!xd4 16.iLe3 allows Black to sac­
rifice the exchange with 1 6 . . .
l:.xe3 1 7 . fx e 3 "f!! x e 3 + 1 8 . "f!! f2
"f!!xf2+ 19.l:.xf2 ltJxc5 20.l:l.d1 a5
obtaining a quite reasonable
game.
12 dxe4 13 ...txe4 iLxf3
.••

13 . . . f5 i s not s atisfactory,
since after 14 . .i.xf5 ..txf3 15.gxf3
�h4 1 6 .h3 l:.e7 1 7 . ..td2 g6 1 8 .
ll.ltJc3 .i.g4 iLg4± - Black's compensation for
Black starts his counter-at­ the material deficit is insufficient
tack against the d4 pawn. 11 . . . and the b a d p o s i t i o n of the
..tf5, defending the knight, has bishop on g4 can not be exploited
also been played. 12 . .Ue 1 White successfully.
is not threatening to capture on 14 . .txf3 "f!! h4 1 5 .g3 "f!! x d4
e4 yet, but he still has the edge. 16 .te3 "f!!f6
•

Black will fail to preserve his

knight on e4 and after its ex­
change or retreat White will
have a distinct space advantage.
The game Anand - Kasimdzha­
nov, Hyderabad 2002 continued
with 12 . . . h6 13.c5 ( 13 .ltJxe4 dxe4
14.iLxe4 "f!! e 7«>) 13 . . . ..tc7 14 . ..td2
..ta5 (Anand considered best here
14 . . . ltJxd2 1 5 .lhe8+ "f!! x e8 1 6 .
"f!!x d2;;!; - but Black still has less 17 ...te4;;!;
space and a "bad" knight on a6 White is slightly better in this
to worry about . ) 1 5 . iLf4 ..txc3 position due to the bishop pair
16.bxc3 ltJc7 1 7 . h3 ltJe6 18 . ..th2 advantage. His plan is to occupy
ltJ6g5 1 9 . ltJe5 f6 20. ltJg4± , and the d-file pushing the queenside
Black's knight on e4 has no good pawns forward. Black's counter­
square to retreat to against the play is based on the manoeuvres
threat of f2-f3 . ltJa6-c7-e6, ..te5 and the exploi-

60
 6. i..d3 i..d6 7. 0-0 0-0 8. c4 c6 9. 1tlc2 tba6 JO. a3

tation of the d4- outpost. There ll . . . i.. f5 12.b4! White is pre­

might follow 1 7 . . . g6 (Or 17 . . . h6 venting Black's knight from com­
18 .b4 tl:Jc7 19.l:tad 1 i.. e 5 20 .l:.d7 ing to c5, after the exchange on
l:.e7 2 1 .l:1fd l ± Anand - Piket, e5. 12 . . . �h4 [Link]:Jc3 l:tae8 (After
Monte Carlo 200 1 , White occu­ 13 . . . ti:Jxc3 14.i..xf5 1t/xd4 15.i..xh 7
pied the d-file and increased his 'if.?h8 [Link]:Jf3± - White wins ma­
advantage. ) 18 .b4 tl:Jc7 19.l:.ad 1 terial because 16 . . . tl:Je2+ 17. �xe2
a 5 20.b5 i..x a3 ( 2 0 . . . cxb5 was ob­ �xa 1 will be followed by 18.i.b2 ,
viously insufficient after 2 l .c5 winning the queen. 1 3 . . . ti:J c 7
i.. e 5 22.c6 b6 23.i.. xb6 tl:Je6 24.c7 was tried i n the game Shirov -
in the game Nedev - Safin, Ere­ Adams, Sarajevo 2000, but Black
van 200 1 , because the advanced just lost a pawn after [Link]:Jf3 1t/h5
passed pawn made White's win­ [Link]:Jxe4 dxe4 1 6 .i..x e4 i..x e4 1 7 .
ning chances quite real) 2 l . bxc6 1t/xe4 . ) 14.cxd5 ! (White has no
bxc6 22.i.. d 4 1t/e6 23 .i.a 1 ! (Black advantage after 14.i.. b 2 f6 15.g3
will have to counter s erious �h5 1 6 . tl:Jxe4 i.. xe4 1 7 . i.. x e4
threats on the long diagonal ) dxe4 [Link]:Jxc6 bxc6 19.c5 i.xg3
23 . . . i.e7 24.l:.de 1 i.. f6 25.i..xg6 20.hxg3) 14 . . . ti:Jxc3 15.i..xf5 1t/xd4
1t/h3 (or 25 . . . 1t/xe 1 26.i..xh7+ 'i;g7 ( 1 5 . . . ti:Jxd5 1 6 . g3 1t/xd4 1 7 .i.. b 2
(26 . . . 'i;f8 27.i..xf6) 27.i..xf6+ <t;x£'6 �xb2 1 8 . 1t/xb 2 i.xe5 1 9 . 1t/ c 2
28 . l:lxe 1 lhe 1 + 2 9 .'it> g2 - and [Link] 1 [Link] l±) 16.i.xh7+ 'i;h8
Black is clearly worse, because [Link]:Jf3 tl:Je2+ 1 8 . 1t/xe2 1t/xa 1 19.
of his exposed king) 26 .i.xh7+ �c2 1t/f6 2 0 . dxc6 bxc6 2 l . i.g5
1t/xh7 27. 1t/xh7+ 'i;xh7 28.i..xf6±, �e6 22 . .tf5 �e2 23. �xe2 lhe2
and White won material in the 24. i.. d 3 l:ta2 25.i.. x a6 ltxa3 26.
game Kasimdzhanov - Akopian, i.b7 i.. xb4 27.i.xc6. White has
Moscow 2002. good chances to press his mate­
rial advantage home.
c) 10 ... i.. g4 1l. . .i.h5 12.cxd5 cxd5 [Link]:Jc3
tl:Jxc3 ([Link] recommended
here 13 . . . i..x e5 ! ? 14.dxe5 tl:Jac5 ,
but that can be met by [Link]:Jxe4
tl:Jxd3 16.�xd3 i.. g6 1 [Link]:Jf6+ (but
not 17.1t/b3 i..x e4 1 8 . 1t/xb7 1t/h4
19.f3 .i.d3 20.l:.f2 �d4�) 17 . . . gxf6
18. 1t/g3 fxe5 19.h4 with an attack
against the weakened black king.
Black had probably better play
1 7 . . . �xf6 1 8 . 1t/xd5± hoping to
ll .ti:Je5 .i.xe5 make a draw in the future end­
Retreating with the bishop is game with a pawn down, due to
weaker: the bishops of opposite colour. )

61
Chapter 9

1 4 . bxc3 �h8 (After 1 4 . . . i.xe5 18 �b6+

.•.

Kasparov suggested 15.i.xh7+! The other possibility is 18 . . .

�h8 1 6 . dxe5 g6 1 7 . '�d2! �xh7 ttJc2 19.:f2. The critical move
18. t'th6+ �g8 19. i.g5 f6 20.i.xf6 here was 19 . . . d4 (in the game
l:txf6 2 l . exf6 t'txf6 22.f3!± - and Macieja - Mamedjarova, Batumi
the black bishop is endangered, 2002 Black just lost a piece and
but Black could improve with got a hopeless position after 19 . . .
14 . . . ..tg6 . ) 15.f4 i.xe5? ! (The best l:[e8? 20.l:txc2+-) 20.tLle4 f5 2 1 .
is 15 . . . f6 . ) 1 6 . fxe5 i.g6 1 7 . a4 ! exf6 tLle3 2 2 . '�e6+ l:. f7 23 .:d2
� d 7 18 . ..t a 3 l1fe8 19 . ..txg6 fxg6 (White is not better after 23 J:te2
( 19 . . . hxg6 20 . .Uf3+-. ) 20.'�'b3±. In ttJf5 24. t'txf7+ �xf7 25.ltJg5+ �g8
the game Kasparov - Shirov, 26.f7+ �h8 2 7 . f8 t't + t'txf8 2 8 .
Wijk aan Zee 200 1 White achieved i.xf8 l::txf8) 23 . . . ttJf5 24.i.f4 t'te8
a big advantage, because Black (or 24 . . . h6 25.g4 tZ:lh4 26 .�£2 g5
had no counterplay against the 2 7 . ltJ d6 t'txf6 2 8 . �xf7 + t'txf7
attack along the f-file. 29.tLlxf7 �xf7 3 0 . i.d6 �e6 3 1 .
12.dxe5 ttJac5 13.f3 l:txd4+-) 2 5 . t'txe8+ l:!.xe8 26.g4
White has to enter the follow­ ttJe3 (26 . . . ltJh4 27.�£2 :xe4 28.
ing forced line , otherwise he has fxe4 1hf6 2 9 . �g3+-) 2 7 . ..txe3
no advantage after the simple (27 . .Uxd4 c5ao) 27 . . . dxe3 28.l::t e 2 -
exchange on d3. White has two pawns for the ex­
13 ttJxd3 14.t'txd3 ttJc5 15.
•.• change and a powerful passed
t'td4 tLlb3 16.�xg4 tZ:lxa1 17. pawn .
..th6 g6 19.l1f2 l1fe8 20. t'tf4 f5
After 1 7 . . . t'tb6+ White can This is definitely not the best.
trans p o s e to the game with The critical position was arising
18.1::!.£2 , or try 18.Wh1 g6 19. t'tf4;!;. after 20 . . . t'tc7 2 1 Jle2 .Ue6 22.
cxd5 cxd5 2 3 . �d41' - and the
weak dark squares and the weak
knight on a1 are more than suf­
ficient compensation for the ex­
change.
21 .cxd5 ttJb3 22.e6 cxd5 23.
ttJxd5 t'txe6 24.ltJc7 t'tc6 25.
ttJxe8
25.tLlxa8? .:.e1+ 26.:fl �c5-+
25 l1xe8
••.

18.tLlc3! (diagram)
White refrains from winning 26.g4!±
the exchange temporarily, trying Shirov - Leko, Linares 2000.
to exploit the weak dark squares The position was simplified con­
around the enemy king. siderably, but Black was still in

62
6. i..d3 i..d6 7. 0-0 0-0 B. c4 c6 9. �c2 I:Da6 10. a3

dire straits . The dark squares

around the black king are very
weak in a middlegame with
queens , while White's bishop
would be much stronger than
Black's knight in an eventual
endgame. White is trying to open
the position even more with his
last move.

63
 Chapter 1 0 l .e4 e 5 2.tiJf3 tiJf6 3.tiJxe5 d 6 4.tiJf3
ttJxe4 5.d4 d5 6 .lid3 j_e7 7.0-0
•

Petroff Defence

rest 1992, and now White had to

play 12.ttJbd2 lle8 13. �c2;l;; with
an advantage in the centre, cre­
ating some threats . ) 1 0 . ttJbd2
ttJc6 l l .c3 l:r.e8 12. �c2 i.h5 13.
ttJe5;l;; Alapin - Mason, Dresden
1892, and White had an excellent
development and initiative ;
7 . . . i.g4. White should play
We are going to deal with the 8.h3 ! ? i.h5 9.c4 in this line. It is
main line - 7 . . . ttJc6 in the next practically always useful for
chapters , while now we will see White to include the moves h3
a)7 0-0 and b)7 i.f5.
... ... and i.h5 whenever Black pins
The other moves are not so the knight, because White has
popular: the additional possibility to play
7 . . . ttJd6 (As a rule whenever g2-g4 at some moment and avoid
Black retreats with the knight to the pin. The game Ljubojevic -
d6, he switches off to a passive Handoko, Indonesia 1 983 went
defence in a s omewhat sym­ on 9 . . . ttJf6 10 .ttJc3 dxc4 1l.i.xc4
metrical position, slightly worse 0-0 1 2 . g4 i.g6 1 3 . ttJ e 5 - and
though . ) 8 . i. f4 0-0 9 . ttJc3 c6 White had active pieces while the
10 .ttJe2;l;; Torre - Balinas , Mel­ black bishop on g6 was mis­
bourne 1975. White brings one place d . Black tri e d a break­
of his knights to g3 trying to oc­ through on the other side , but
cupy the e5- outpost with the that backfired: 13 . . . c5 1 4 . dxc5
other one in an opportune mo ­ "i!ic7 1 5 . i.f4 �xc5 1 6 . l:l c 1 ttJc6
ment and aims at a kingside ini­ 1 7 . ttJxg6 hxg6 1 8 . ttJb5± - and
tiative; Black's queen was endangered.
7 . . . ttJf6 8.l;te 1 0-0 9.i.f4 i.g4
(Or 9 . . . ttJc6 1 0 . c3 i.d6 l l .i.e5 a) 7 0-0 SJ:te l ttJd6
...

i.g4, Milu - Dumitrache, Bucha- We dealt with 8 . . . ttJf6 9.i.f4 in

64
 5. d4 d5 6. �d3 �e7 7. 0-0

the lines after 7 . . . l2Jf6. ter development for White.

Black should refrain from 8 . . . 10.h3 �xf3
l2Jg5, because of 9.l2Jxg5 �xg5 10. Or 10 . . . �h5 1 1..l::t e 5, forcing
�h5 h6 1 l . �xg5 �xg5 12. �xg5 the exchange of the bishop.
hxg5 13 .l:.e5± Soskov - Z. Ivanov, 1 1 . �xf3 c6 1 2 .l2Jd2 ltJ d 7
Mureck 1998, and White had an 13.l::te2 l::te 8 14.l:tael �f8
extra pawn in an endgame.
Black fails to keep his knight
in the centre after 8 . . . f5 9.c4 c6
1 0 . cxd5 cxd5 1 1 . l2Jc3± Tabun­
shikov - Duz-Khotimirsky, Mos­
cow 1901, because White pushes
the knight away from e4, while
the weakness on e5 hurts.
8 . . . l2Jc6 is interesting, but
still after 9.�xe4 dxe4 10.l:!.xe4
�f5 11..�.e1 l2Jb4 12 .l2Ja3 c5 13. 1 5 . � g3 ;:!;
�f4 l:.c8 14. �d2, Szelag - Weg­ White had an excellent piece
larz, Poraj 1997, Black's compen­ placement and a two bishop ad­
sation for the pawn was insuffi­ vantage in the game - Timman
cient. - Hort, Bugojno 1978.
9.�f4 �g4
The other square for the de­ b) 7 . . . �f5
velopment of this bishop is not
satisfactory: 9 . . . �e6 10.c3 l2Jd7
1 1 . �c2 g6? (Black had better
play here 1 1 . . . h 6 , but it was
weakening the kingside never­
theless . ) 1 2 . �h6 l:.e8 1 3 Jhe6
fxe6 14. i..x g6+- Chandler - Hon
Kah Seng, Jakarta 1 9 7 8 , and
White had a decisive advantage.
Black can also play here the
solid line s : 9 . . . l2Jc6 1 0 . c3 �g4 8.l:tel l2Jc6
ll .h3 i.. h 5 12 .l2Jbd2 �g6, Lanka Or 8 . . . 0-0 9 . c4 c6 (9 . . . l2Jc6 has
- Mikenas, Riga 1978, and White been dealt with in the main line
could try 13.�xg6 fxg6 14.�h2;:!;, by transposition) 10. �c2 l2Ja6 (If
preserving some edge because of 10 . . . l2Jd7 White has 1 1 .lLlc3 lLldf6
the better pawn structure; or 12 .l2Je5!? l:.e8 1 3 .i.. f4 - while the
9 . . . l2Jd7 10 .l2Jbd2 �e8 ll.c3 l2Jf8 immediate 1 3 . f3 is not favour­
12. �c2;:!; Hess - Taruffi, Reggio able for White after 13 . . . dxc4
Emilia 1978, with somewhat bet- 14.i..xe4 �xd4+ 1 5 .'it>fl ltJxe4 16.

65
 Chapter 10

fxe4 �xe5 1 7 . exf5 �xh2 - 13 . . . antees White some advantage.

�b4 14.a3 �xc3 15.bxc3;!; - and [Link]:Jc3 tt:Jf6
Black has problems with his After 11 . . . tt:Jxc3 1�.bxc3 lt:Jd5
knight on e 4 . ) l l . a3;!;. Black's ( 1 2 . . . lt:Jc2? 13 . .Ue5 lt:Jxa 1 14.l::tx f5,
pieces now are rather passive in White traps the knight on a1 eas­
comparison to the lines after ily) 13 . .txc4 .te6 14.�b3 , Jako­
6 . . . �d6. The dark-squared bi­ venko - Mij ailovic, Budapest
shop is misplaced and the e-file 1995 and Black was losing the
is not operative for the black pawn on b7 without any compen­
rook. sation, because 14 . . . 1:r.b8 15 .lt:Jg5
9.c4 tt:Jb4 was even worse.
Black can also play 9 . . . 0-0 12 . .txc4
10 .lt:Jc3 tt:Jxc3 ll.bxc3 .txd3 12. 12. �a4+ !? is very interesting.
�xd3 dxc4 13. �xc4. White has After 1 2 . . . � f8 1 3 . .t x c 4 tt:J c 2
mobile pawns in the centre and [Link]:Jh4t, if Black takes the rook
more active pieces. After 13 . . . - White will capture two pieces
�d6 [Link] 1 lte8 15 .�e3 �f6 16. for it, while 14 . . . tt:Jxd4 1 5 .lt:Jxf5
�a4 b6 1 7 .�g5 �g6 18.g3 tt:Je7 lt:Jxf5 16 . .tf4 tt:Jd6 1 7 . 1:[Link] 1 t pre­
19 . .txe7 .U.xe7 20 .�g2 h6 21 .lhe7 sented White with a powerful
.txe7 22.1:r.e1 �d6 23 . �a6;!; Tim­ initiative against the weakened
man - Van der Sterren, Hilver­ black king in the game Wolff -
sum 1983, White kept his edge Levin, Hawaii 1998.
due to his active pieces and the 12 ... 0-0 1 3 .a3 lt:Jc6 14 .d5
weak light squares on Black's tt:Ja5 15 ..ta2 c5
queenside despite the simplifica­
tions.
lO . .tfl dxc4
After 10 . . . 0-0 ll.a3 lt:Jc6 12.
lt:Jc3 lt:Jxc3 13.bxc3 dxc4 14 . .txc4,
we reach by transposition the
line 7 . . . tt:Jc6 8.c4 tt:Jb4 9 . .te2 0-0
[Link]:Jc3 .tf5 ll .a3 lt:Jxc3 12 .bxc3
tt:Jc6 1 3 .l:e1 dxc4 14 . .txc4, that
we are doing to deal with later.
If 10 . . . c5 White plays l l . a3 This position was reached in
lt:Jc6 1 2 .lt:Jc3 tt:Jxc3 1 3 . bxc3 0-0 the game Karpov - Portisch,
(after 1 3 . . . cxd4 [Link]:Jxd4 lt:Jxd4 Tilburg 1982. White had to play
1 5 . �xd4 0-0 1 6 . cxd5 .tf6 1 7 . here 1 6 . lt:J e 5 followed by �f3
�d2± - White remains with an achieving a substantial advan­
extra pawn) 14.cxd5 �xd5 15.c4 tage , b e c a u s e of his central
�d6 16.d5;!; - and the protected passed pawn, active pieces and
passed pawn in the centre guar- the misplaced black knight on a5.

66
Chapter 1 1 l .e4 e5 2.tbf3 tLlf6 3.tbxe5 d6 4.tbf3
tbxe4 5.d4 d5 6 ..td3 .te7 7.0-0 tbc6
Petroff Defence

8 . . . �e6 9 . cxd5 �xd5 10.l2Jc3

tt:lxc3 l l . bxc3 0-0 1 2 . l2J d2 ! ?;!;
(White activates his knight (try­
ing to bring it to e4), threaten­
ing to win a piece with c4 and d5
in the process. The game Sad­
vakasov - Aliev, Doha 2003 went
on 12 . . . �e6 1 3 .l::!. e 1 �d7 [Link]:le4
l:lad8 1 5 . �h5 g6 1 6 . �h6 and
The main line in this varia­ White had the initiative on the
tion. kingside.
8.c4 8 . . . 0-0 [Link]:lc3 (The other pos­
We have already discussed sibility for White leads to unclear
that White must play energeti­ positions - 9 . cxd5 �xd5 10 . .U.e1
cally in order to fight for an open­ �f5 11. �c2 l2Jb4 - ll . . . l2Jd6 !? -
ing advantage. He should try to 12 . .axe4 tt:lxc2 1 3 . �xd5 �f6oo)
exploit the somewhat "hanging" 9 . . . l2Jxc3 (9 . . . l2Jf6 transposes to
position of the knight on e4. the main line after 8 . . . ti:lf6) 10.
White should not be deterred by bxc3 dxc4 ( 1 0 . . . .ae6 l l . cx d 5
the possibility of the appearance �xd5 12 .ti:ld2 transposes t o the
of an isolated pawn on d4 - he variations after 8 . . . �e6) 1l .�xc4
has an ample compensation for �f5 (Black has tried here 1 1 . . .
that with a free development of �g4 1 2 .l:t e 1 ..lt d 6 1 3 . h3 � h 5
his pieces and an advantage in 14 . .l:!.b U Moreno Carnero - Al
the centre and the kingside. Badani, Istanbul 2000, but White
We will analyse now a) 8 . . . had active pieces and a solid edge
tt:lf6 and b ) 8 . . .tt:lb4 i n details. in the centre. Or ll . . . l2Ja5 12 .�d3
The moves 8 ... �£5 9 .l::!. e 1 trans- c5 13 .d5 c4 14.�c2 b6 15. �f41'
pose to the lines after 7 . . . �f5, Norris - Kristensen, Ribe 1978,
and we have studied them in the and White had a dangerous
previous chapter. passed central pawn . ) 12 .l:Ie U;

67
 Chapter 1 1

Black failed to solve the opening pressure along the b-file. IfBlack
problems - White had the advan­ plays b7-b6 White will have a
tage in the centre and very ac­ target for eventual pawn breaks
tive pieces. The game Brodsky ­ like a4-a5 and c4-c5. If White
Biriukov, S t . Petersburg 1 9 9 9 manages to penetrate the enemy
continu e d 1 2 . . . a6 1 3 . a4 .U b 8 camp his advantage might be­
14.h3 i. ffi 15 .a5 .l:r.e8 16.i.e3 �d7 come decisive . ) 15 . . . l::!. a d8 ( Or
17 .tLld2 tLla7 18.tLlb3 i.e7 19.�fl 15 . . . tLle7 1 6 . c4 c6 17 . .l::[ ab 1 b6 18.
and White had the initiative. a4 l!.ab8 19.l:tb3 h6 20 . .l::[ e b 1 .l::[ fdB
8 . . . �g4 9 . cxd5 �xd5 10 .tLlc3 2 l . i.c2 i.c7 22.a5 Wf8 23 .Wg2
tLlxc3 l l . bxc3 0-0 (Black can ex­ WeB 24. axb6 axb6 25 . .l::[ e 1 Wf8 26.
change on f3 immediately with lla3 l:taB 27.J::!. e a1 llxa3 28.llxa3
the idea to castle long and WeB 29.lta7, Timman - Jussu­
defend the vulnerable b7 -pawn pow, Belfort 1 9BB - and White
with his king. It is an illusion keeps the pressure) 16. l:lad 1 b6
however that the black king 1 7.i.g5 ffi 18.�e3 tLle7 19.c4 c6
might be safe on the queenside 2 0 . i. c2 tLlg6 2 l . c5;!:; Ehlvest -
in an endgame with so many Jussupow, Saint John 19BB, and
pieces. After 11 . . . .txf3 12. �xf3 White succeeded in weakening
�xf3 1 3 . gxf3 0-0-0 14 . .l:r.b 1 g6 his opponent's position.
Black prevents the check from f5
that would expose his king dan­ a) 8 . . . tLlf6
gerously on the semi- open file.
Stil l , after 1 5 . l::!. e U the two
bishop advantage and the open
files and diagonals for the rooks
and the bishops are more than
sufficient compensation for the
defects of White's pawn struc­
ture. The comparison to the lines
in which Black castles short is in
favour of White, since he has the
additional chances to attack the This is a solid, but a rather
black king along the b-file - Sax passive move . Bl ack retreats
- Insam, Lugano 1984) 12 .lte 1 with his knight from e4 relying
.txf3 (Black must trade on f3 to exploit the isolated d4-pawn
outright, otherwise White would later.
play �e4 neutralizing the pin of 9.h3
the knight . ) 1 3 . �xf3 �xf3 14. White prevents the pin of the
gxf3 ..lt d6 1 5 . �e3 (White has the knight on f3 , with this useful ,
advantage d e s pite his pawn although not y e t o b l i gatory
weaknesses. He has a strong move.

68
 5. d4 d5 6. i.. d3 i.. e 7 7. 0-0 tt::\c 6 8. c4

9 . . . 0-0 Black has to make up his

B l ack has tried two more mind now about the method of
moves here: playing against the is olated
9 . ..lL\b4 10 . ..te2 dxc4 (If 10 .. . pawn, whether to exchange on c4
..tf5, then l l . a3 , and after 11 . . . immediately a1) 10 ... dxc4, leav­
tt::l c 2 [Link]::lh4 i.. e 4 13.£'3 tt::lxa 1 14. ing the knight on c6, or manoeu­
fxe4 tt::lx e4 [Link]:Jf5 ..tf6 [Link]::l c 3t ­ vre that same knight to the
the knight on a1 is doomed and blocking square d5 in front of the
White will have two pieces for a pawn a2) 10 . . . tt:Jb4. Black has to
rook. Black had better retreat take into account the possibility
with the knight - ll . . . tt::l c 6 12. of White playing c4-c5 if he tries
tt::l e 5;!:;) 1 l .i.. xc4 0-0 [Link]::lc 3 , and something else. 10 . . . ..te6 l l . c5;!:;
we have reached a position from was already dealt with in the
the line with 9 . . . 0-0 that we are lines after 9 . . . ..te6.
going to deal with later; After 1 0 . . . h6 l l . a3 ..te6 (if
and 9 . . . ..t e 6 1 0 . c 5 0-0 1 1 . ll . . .l:te8 White should better play
tt::l c3;!:;. The pawn structure is 1 2 . cxd5 tt::l x d5 1 3 . i.. c 2 with an
symmetrical, but White has the initiative on the kingside) 12.c5
edge due to his space advantage a5 13 . ..tf4 b6 14. tt::lb 5 tt::l e 8 15 . .Uc1
and comfortable piece place­ bxc5 16.dxc5 ..tf6 17.i.b 1 , Socko
ment. The game Yasseen - Han­ - Zielinska, Polanica Zdroj 1995 ,
doko, Doha 1992 continued 11 . . . and White had a clear advantage
b 6 (or 1 l . . .a6 12.a3 �d7 [Link] 1 , with a lot of extra space , the
Brenj o - Mijailovic, Banja Vru­ strong d4 knight and prospects
cica 1991 and White had space of a kingside attack.
advantage on the queenside) 12.
�a4 ..td7 1 3 . ..tb5 �e8 14Jle1 a6 a1) 10 ... dxc4 ll.i..xc4
and White had to play here 15 .
..t fl - after which the black
knight poses no serious threats,
while White's pieces are placed
better.
[Link]::lc 3

This position can be reached

by transposition in lines from the
Queen's Gambit Accepted as well
as the Chigorin Defence. We are
going to deal with it now, irrel-

69
 Chapter 1 1

evantly of the way it was actu­ better placed.

ally reached. 12.i.d3 ..te6 [Link] tt:lc6
ll ... tt:la5 If 13 . . . c5 14 . .ig5 ! h6 15 . ..th4 t
Black repels the white bishop - the active white pieces guar­
from c4 with the idea to develop antee his initiative even after the
his bishop on e6, occupying the exchange of the central pawns.
a2-g8 diagonal. The development 14.a3 a6
of the black bishop on f5 is less It is not good for Black to play
advisable in this pawn structure: 14 . . . f1d7 1 5 . ..tb5 l:!.fd8 16. f1a4 a6
1 l . . . .tf5 12Jle 1 1 7 . .txc6 f1xc6 1 8 . f1xc6 bxc6
- i n the game Vaisser - Z . 19 .tt:le5 ..tf8 20.i.e3 , A. Sokolov
Polgar, Oviedo 1 9 9 3 Black chose - Koch, Marseilles 200 1 , because
12 . . . a6 1 3 . a3 b5 14.i.b3 b4 15. the endgame was rather un­
axb4 tt:lxb4, but after [Link]:le5 c5 pleasant for him due to the pawn
17 .d5 White had a great advan­ weaknesses on the queenside.
tage because of his passed pawn Black has some other more
and the numerous weaknesses of reliable moves:
his opponent. The game contin­ 14 . . . f1d6 15 . .te3 tt:ld5 16. f1c2
ued 1 7 . . . .t d 6 1 8 . tt:l c6 f1c7 (if '.ti>h8 (Black is defending the h7
18 . . . tt:lxc6, then 19.dxc6 f1c7 20. pawn indirectly without weaken­
ft£3±) 19 . ..tg5 tLld3 20. ft£3 i.g6 ing his kingside . ) 1 7 . l h d U .
2 U�e2 tt:le5 [Link]:lxe5 i.xe5 23. White has some advantage i n the
Itae 1 ..td4 24 ..ta4 - White acti­ centre and good prospects to cre­
vated his pieces and was ready ate some threats on the kingside
to support the promotion of his later. In the game Gelfand -
passed pawn. Adams, Wijk aan Zee 1994 Black
Aft e r 1 2 . . . h 6 , which was weakened the whole complex of
played in the game Pedersen - squares along the e-file with the
Lindfeldt, Nyborg 200 1 White move 1 7 . . . f5 ( 1 7 . . . l:t a d 8 w a s
had to try 13.d5 tt:la5 14.-tfl , and clearly better), an d after 18 . .i c 1
if 1 4 . . . c6 1 5 . tt:l d 4 i. d 7 , then �adS 19.lle2 .t f6 [Link] 1 .tc8
[Link]:lxc6 i.xc6 ( 16 . . . tt:lxc6 17.d6±) 2 l ...tc4 White's advantage in­
1 7 . dxc6± with the bishop pair creased;
advantage. 14 . . . �e8 15 . .tb5 f1d6 16 . .tg5 .
Black fails to equalize with Black will have t o take o n c 6 with
12 . . . tt:la5 13 . .tfl . The knight on the pawn after the exchange and
a5 is misplaced and it is useless then his pawns on the queenside
to retreat it to c6, because of d5 will be rather weak, for example:
and tt:ld4. The pawn advance c5 16 .. J!ed8 1 7 . .txf6 .txf6 18 .tt:le4
is not going to work either with f1f4 1 9 . .txc6 bxc6 2 0 . f1 c l f1f5
a knight on a5 and a bishop on 21 .tt:lxf6+ f1xf6 22. f1xc6± Lobron
f5 . White's pieces are evidently - Handoko, Zagreb 1985.

70
 5. d4 d5 6. .i.d3 .i.e7 7. 0-0 tt.Jc6 8. c4

15 .i.f4 tt.Jd5
• ll ..ie2 dxc4
.

In the game Kasparov - Kar­ Black's other moves here are

pov, Moscow 1985 Black played inferior:
15 . . . '�d7, but after 16 .tt.Je5 tt.Jxe5 1 l . . . .tf5 1 2 . a3 tt.Jc6 1 3 . �f4;!;.
17 .dxe5 tt.Jd5 1 8 .tt.Jxd5 .i.xd5 19. Black has problems to finish his
�c2 g6 20.l:.ad 1 c6 2 l . .i.h6 l:.fd8 development, because he failed
22.e6 fxe6 23 . .i.xg6 .i.f8 24 . .i.xf8 to exchange some pieces in the
lhf8 25.�e4 White was better, centre in this position. Accord­
because of the weaknesses on ingly he will strive hard to find a
Black's kingside. good plan in the middlegame.
16 .i.g3 .i.f6 1 7 .i.e4 tt.Jce7
• • The game Dolmatov - Karner,
Tallinn 1985 continued 13 . . . dxc4
[Link].xc4 tt.Je8? ! 15.�d5 �d6 16.
tt.Je5 with a considerable domina­
tion of White in the centre ;
ll . . . c5 12.a3 tt.Jc6 13.dxc5 dxc4
14.�e3;!;. The position is sym­
metrical, but White has made a
couple of useful moves in ad­
vance of Black. White has the
advantage, because Black will
18.�c2;!; have problems defending the c4
We have reached a standard pawn and the d6 square is weak
position with an isolated pawn. too. The game Velimirovic -
White has a space advantage and Schussler, Smederevska Palanka
the possibility to gain the initia­ 1979 went on 14 . . . tt.Ja5 1 5 . �c2
tive on the kingside . Black is �d7 1 6 J:tad 1 �c7 1 7 .lt.Jg5 ! g6
solid in the centre with his ex­ 1 8 . tt.J ge4 .t f5 1 9 . tt.Jxf6 + �xf6
cellent blocking d5 square. Nev­ 20. '�a4 il.xc3 2 l .bxc3 J:l.fd8 22.
ertheless White's prospects in l:ld6 !± and the weakness of the
the middlegame are better. dark squares was very tangible ;
1 l . . .il.e6 12 .a3 tt.Jc6 1 3 .c5 tt.Je4
a2) IO tt.Jb4
•.• 14 . .tb5;!;. Black can not support
the knight on e4 with f5, because
White exchanges on c6, followed
by lt.Je5, so Black must trade on
c3 , which leads to an advantage
for White.
12 ..i.xc4 tt.Jbd5
If 12 . . . c6 1 3 .:e 1 i.. f5 ( 1 3 . . .
tt.Jbd5 leads to the main lines af­
ter 12 . . . tt.Jbd5 by transposition)

71
 Chapter 1 1

White plays 14.a3 liJbd5 (after attack Black's kingside, weak­

14 . . . liJc2 1 5 . .l::f. e 5 liJxa 1 16 . .1Ixf5 - ened along the b 1-h 7 diagonal
Black will lose material after after the move h7-h6.
White captures the knight on al. 17.a3 liJbd5 18.liJa4
Black's best chance is 15 . . . .ig6 In thi s position the white
16.l:a2 c5 17.d5± - but still White knights can occupy both squares
will be a pawn up. ) 15 . .ig5;l; - defended by the d4 pawn - c5
Black should better develop his and e5. Moreover, the knight on
bishop on e6, if he has a block­ c5 will exert strong pressure
ing d5 knight, and not to f5, be­ against e6 and b7 and Black's
cause this difference in compari­ attempt to repel it with b6 will
son to the main line will be in weaken the c6-square irrevoca­
favour of White. bly.
13.l:.e1 c6 14. �b3 18 ... liJd7 19 . .td2
White is attacking the b7- White is allowing the black
pawn, so the black bishop must rook to come to the centre.
remain on c8 in order to defend 1 9 . . . l:.e8 20.l:.adl .tf6 2 1 .
it. Black's next move is practi­ lDe5 �c7 22.f4
cally forced, otherwise White White is supporting the cen­
would play 1 5.liJe5. tralized knight on e5 and creates
14 ...liJb6 the threat f4-f5 . So the black
Black can hope now to de­ knight on d7 is forced to retreat
velop his bishop to e6 and neu­ and the white knight will be es­
tralize the pressure along the a2- tablished on c5.
g8 diagonal. 22 liJf8 23.liJc5 :adS
.•.

15 ..id3 ..ie6 16. �c2 hG

•

Black is preventing eventual

tactical strikes against e6 and
h7, depriving the white knight
from the g5-square. Black tried
to solve the same problem with
16 . . . .td5 in the game Ponomariov
- Karpov, Wijk aan Zee 2003 , but
after 1 7 .liJe5 h6 18 . .tf4 I!e8 19.
l:e2 he had to retreat with the
bishop to e6 anyway (Black's 24.-tctt
counterplay is based on the pos­ White's space advantage and
sibility of liJd5, but presently better piece placement ensure
that square is occupied by the his lasting initiative, besides the
b i s h o p . ) , a n d after 1 9 . . . .t e 6 opponent has no clear-cut coun­
20. �d2 .if8 2 l..l:f. a e l liJbd5 22. terplay. In the game Bologan -
..ltg3 White had good chances to Kasimdzhanov, Pamplona 2002

72
 5. d4 d5 6. i.d3 i.e7 7. 0-0 tL\c6 8. c4

White managed to break Black's It is also very important whether

defence l ater with f4-f5 (at a White will manage to push his
moment in which Black had re­ central pawns forward.
linquished his control over the 9. i.e2
knight on e5) and later sacrificed The tournament practice
a bishop on h6 . proved that White should not let
that bishop be exchanged.
b) 8 . . . t2J b4 Black has two basic defences:
bl) 9 ... dxc4 and b2) 9 ... 0-0.
9 . . . i.f5 1 0 . a 3 t2Jc6 l l . l2J c 3
l2Jxc3 12.bxc3 0-0 i s dealt with
in the line b2) 9 . . . 0-0 .
The move 9 . . . i.e6 before cas-
tling is unsatisfactory, because of
10.c5! and so if Black wants to
play the line with 0-0 and to de­
velop later the bishop to e6 , he
should castle first and only then
Black loses a tempo in this put the bishop on e6. Now 10 . . . a5
fashion (the knight must retreat (After 10 . . . 0-0 1 l . �b3 a5 12.a3
to c6 after a3), but he rejects tLlc6 1 3 . �xb7 ii.d7 14. �b3 .ltg4
the bishop from its active posi­ 15. �a4 Black has no compensa­
tion on d3 and fights for the cen­ tion for the pawn) l l .l2Je5 f6 (oth­
tre . There are some lines in erwise White pushes Black's
which Black manages to play c7- knights away) 12.l2Jd3 0-0 1 3 .
c5 b e fore the retreat of the l2Jf4 ii. fl 14. ii.g4;!; The weakness
knight. Black must often ex­ of the e6-square is very tangible
change knights on c3 and there now. The game N ataf - Topalov,
appears a typical pawn structure C annes 2002 went on 14 . . . g6
with a mobile pawn-tandem c3 15.l2Je6 �xe6 16 .ii.xe6+ Wg7 1 7 .
and d4 in the centre. The evalu­ a3 l2Jc6 1 8 . l2J c3 .Ue8 1 9 . l2Jxd5
ation of the arising positions de­ kxc5 20.dxc5 .Uxe6 2 1 . .1i.f4 l2Je5
pends on several factors . At first 22 . .Uc1 c6 23.l2Jb6 �xd1 24 . .Ufxd 1
White should avoid exchanges of .Uae8 and now after 25.£3 White
pieces, because that typically di­ had the advantage in the end­
minishes his advantage in this game, because of the weak black
pawn structure. Secondly it is pawns on the queenside and
important for Black to develop the vulnerable d6-square.
his pieces harmoniously. Black bl) 9 ... dxc4 10.i.xc4 0-0
has often to recapture on d5 with The other moves in this posi­
his queen and that might spell tion usually lead to the same
danger for that piece sometimes. lines via transposition after the

73
 Chapter 1 1

subsequent 0-0. lt:Jc6 1 6 . lt:Jx c 6 .ixd4 1 7 . lt:Jxd8

l l .lt:Jc3 lt:Jd6 lhd8 18.l:.ad l± - Black has grave
B l ack has also tried here problems with his light pieces in
ll . . . lt:Jxc3 12.bxc3 lt:Jd5 13."t:M3 c6 the centre. Black is lost after 14 . . .
1 4 . i. b 3 t Popovic - Kap elan, lt:Jf5 15.dxc5 �xd 1 16.11axd 1 g5
Vrsac 1989, and the space advan­ 1 7 .lt:Je4 Wg7 1 8 . lt:Jxf6 Wxf6 1 9 .
tage and the solid centre secure .td2+-.
White's better chances. In case [Link]:Jxc4 lt:Jxc4 16 .tc4 .txd4
•

of 1 1 . . . lt:Jf6, the move 12.h3 trans­

poses to the line - 8 . . . tt:Jf6, we
have already been dealing with.
White can try instead [Link]:Je5 !?
(trying to save a tempo on h3 )
1 2 . . . c6 1 3 . a 3 lt:Jbd5 1 4 . l:t e U ,
which hasn't passed the test of
the grandmaster practice yet.
12 ..tb3 .tf6
The move 1 2 . . . .tg4?! looks
rather dubious after 13 .h3 .ih5 [Link]:Jb5t
14.g4 .tg6 1 5 .lt:Je5 .tf6 16.f4 .te4 This position with an open
17 .l:.e 1± Koglin - Engelmann, centre allows White to get the
Leverkusen 1997, and White's advantage, because Black has to
initiative looks ominous, since part with his dark-squared bi­
Black's pieces are obviously to ­ shop. If Black tries to keep that
tally disco- ordinated. bishop the arising endgame is
Black has also tried 12 .. .<it'h8 clearly inferior for Black : 1 7 . . .
(The idea of this move is to pre­ .tc5 18 .lt:Jc7 �xd 1 ( 18 . . . lib8 19.
pare the displacement of the .txf7 + Wxf7 2 0 . �b3+ Wf6 2 1 .
knight after lt:Je5 with f7-f6 . ) llad1 +-) 19.liaxd1 llb8 20.a3 lt:Jc6
13.a3 lt:Jc6 14.h3 .t f6 15 . .if4 .tf5 2 l .b4 .tb6 [Link]:Jd5 .:as 23 . .td6
16.l:tc1 Ilc8 17 .lle 1 - and White's .:.es [Link]:Jxb6±.
pieces were much more active.
[Link]:Je5 c5 b2) 9 ...0-0 [Link]:Jc3
Black is trying to provoke ex­
changes in the centre and equal­
ize in this fashion. After 13 . . . lt:Jc6
14 . .tf4 lt:Jf5 [Link]:Jxc6 bxc6 16.d5t
A. S okolov - G. Agzamov, Riga
1985 Black was left with weak
pawns on the queenside.
14 . .tf4 c4
In case of 14 . . . cxd4 15. �xd4

74
 5. d4 d5 6. i..d3 i..e 7 7. 0-0 ltJc6 8. c4

This is the most critical posi­ ter 1l .a3 ltJc6 12 .h3 .ae6 1 3 . c5;!:;
tion of the contemporary Petroff White has a space advantage on
Defence. Black has to make the the queenside in the symmetri­
choice of how to develop and in cal pawn structure. (The tourna­
what order of moves. ment practice has only tested
10 ...b6 13.cxd5 by now. )
The stronger and more popu­ ll.a3
lar lines for Black: 10 . . . .af5 and ll .lLle5 is unclear after 11 . . .
10 . . . i.. e 6 will be dealt with in the i..b 7 12.l:!.e 1 c5 !?�.
next chapters. ll ... ltJxc3 12.bxc3 lLlc6 13.
After 1 0 . . . c5?! White plays cxd5 �xd5 14J:tel i..b 7
l l . dxc5 and ll . . . i.. x c5 is bad Black does not solve his prob­
for Black (Black's best chance lems with 14 . . . Ite8 15 . .1i.f4 i.. d 6
is 1 1 . . . i.. e 6 , so that White's 16.c4 �a5 1 7 .i.. e 3, Kotronias -
extra pawn remained doubled. ) Piket, Lisbon 2001 , and the black
after 12.a3± - Black simply loses queen is rather uncomfortable,
a pawn without any compensa­ which is typical for this variation
tion. though.
10 . . . 14e8 . This is not the best 15 . .td3 l:tae8 16.c4 �dB
order of moves . After ll.a3 lLlxc3 16 . . . �h5 is quite dangerous
1 2 .bxc3 ltJc6 1 3 . cxd5 �xd5 14. for Black after 1 7 .d5.
l:!.b l;\; White temporarily pre­ 17.d5 ltJb8
vents the development of the
bishop on c8 and keeps his open­
ing edge.
10 . . . .ag4 (The g4-square in
this position is obviously not the
best for the development of the
bishop. ) Black has grave prob­
lems after 1 l .h3 i.. h 5 12.a3 lLlxc3
1 3 . bxc3 lLlc6 14.cxd5 �xd5 15 .
.:.b 1± - and the bishop on h5 and
the pawn on b7 are hanging si­ 18.lLle5t
multaneously. White played later i..b 2 and
10 . . . lLlf6 is j ust a concession f4 and kept a lasting initiative in
in this position, because Black is the centre and the kingside
losing tempi while manoeuvring based on the strong knight on e5
each knight and s ettles for a in the game Kasparov - Olafs­
purely defensive set-up. Now af- son, Kopavogur 2000.

75
 Chapter 1 2 l .e4 e 5 [Link]:Jf3 ti:Jf6 [Link]:Jxe5 d 6 [Link]:Jf3
tt:Jxe4 5.d4 d5 6.i.. d3 i.. e 7 7.0-0 tt:Jc6
8.c4 ti:Jb4 9.i.. e2 0-0 I [Link]:Jc3 i.. f5
Petroff Defence

ceptible : 1 5 . . . c5 ( or 1 5 . . . .t f6
[Link]::l e 5 c5 1 7 . �f3± - and White
is dominating in the centre )
16 . .l:te5! (this is even stronger
than 1 6 . tt::l e 5 .t f6 , Ehlvest -
Khalifman, Minsk 1987, 1 7 . �f3
transposing to the previous line)
16 . . . ti'd7 (after 16 . . . ..tg4 1 7 .h3
.txf3 1 8 . �xf3± White's light­
We are going to deal in this squared bishop is left without an
chapter with one of the most opponent and becomes extremely
popular lines for Black. Black is powerful) 1 7 .l::. d 5 �c8 18 . ..tg5±
d eveloping his bishop on the White wins the c5-pawn.
most natural square.
ll.a3 tt::l xc3 12.bxc3 tt::lc 6
Of course not 12 . . . tt::l c 2? 13 .
.na2+-.
13.1:1e l
White plays a useful develop­
ing move and lets Black make up
his mind whether to exchange in
the centre a) 13 . . . dxc4, or find
some useful move of his own like
b) 13 :es, c) 13 .te6, or d)
• . . .•. 15.1:1a2!?
13 . .tf6.
. . White is fighting for an ad­
vantage trying to occupy the
a) 13 dxc4 14 ..txc4 .td6
..• open e-file with his rooks. He in­
14 . . . .tf6 15 . .tf4 is dealt with tends to manoeuvre his knight to
in the line 13 . . . .tf6 14 . .tf4 dxc4 e4 via g5 in order to create
by transposition. After 14 . . . tt::l a5 threats on the kingside.
1 5 .i.a2 White's pressure along 15 ... ti' d7
the a2-g8 diagonal is very per- 15 . . . tt::l a 5 1 6 . ..td3 �d7 (The

76
 JO,tiJc3 i-{5 l l.a3 tlJc3 12. bc tlJc6 13. 'geJ

line 16 . . . .txd3 is preserving position remains just the same

matching pieces on the board af­ - White has a strong initiative
ter 1 7 . "t:'l'xd3 �e8 18 .�ae2 lhe2 with imminent threats against ffi
19.lhe2 h6 20.c4t. White keeps and h6, Shirov - Karpov, Prague
his initiative and his pieces are 2002.
better placed. ) 17 .�ae2;t. White 18.l:.ae2 1:.xe2 19:�xe2 h6
has a small edge. He has occu­
pied the e-file and Black will be
reluctant to exchange on d3 and
play .l:.fe8 because of tiJg5 .
16.tiJg5 tlJa5
After 1 6 . . . h6 1 7 . tlJ e4 l::. a e8
18.l::. a e2;t Black will have to ex­
change on e4 sooner or later just
like in the other lines :
1 6 . . J�ae8 1 7 . l::. a e2 tiJd8 1 8 .
tlJe4 Si.xe4 19.l::.x e4 l:txe4 2 0 . .Uxe4 20.tlJe4;t
l:r.e8 2 l .f3 ;t McShane - Schan­ White has managed to create
dorff, Esbjerg 200 1 . White' is bet­ certain threats on the kingside
ter, because of his bishop pair that will eventually force Black
advantage; to exchange on e4 at some mo­
16 . . . i.g6 17.tlJe4 :fe8 18.l:tae2 ment. White will enjoy his two ­
i.xe4 19.l;lxe4 l:txe4 20.l;lxe4 .l:.e8 bishop advantage then.
2 l .f3;t. White is trying to keep
the rooks on the board with his b) 13 l:.e8
..•

last move. It is disadvantageous

for Black to exchange rooks on
e4, because the white pawn will
come to the centre. White's two
bishops give him a clear edge in
the middlegame as well as in the
endgame, but still Black should
have enough defensive resources
for a draw after a correct play,
Adams - Anand, New Delhi (m/
3 ) 2000. 14.cxd5 "t:'l'xd5 15.i.f4 l:.ac8
1 7 ..td3 l:.fe8 The other way to defend that
Black succeeds to keep his pawn is 15 . . . i.d6, and White pre­
knight on the beautiful c4-out­ serves his edge with 16.c4 t'l'e4
post with 1 7 . . . b5 1 8 : �f3 i.g6 1 7 . i.e3 . This is an important
19.llae2 tiJc4 20.a4 a6 2 l .h4 h6 move in order to avoid further
22.tiJe4t . The evaluation of the exchanges, while the black queen

77
Chapter 12

on e4 is in a perilous situation
and can not retreat back safely.
1 7 . . . .Uad8 18 Jla2 �g6 ( 18 . . . �f4
is losing a piece after 19.lLld2+-)
19. �cl (White is again prevent­
ing the b i shop trade on f4 . )
1 9 . . . lLla5 20.c5 �e7 2 l . �b5 �d5,
Kasparov - Karpov, New York
(m/4) 2 0 0 2 , and now 2 2 . �xe8
�xa2 23 . .i.a4 threatening i.f4, Ponomariov, Moscow 200 1 . The
attacking on e7 and c7, was cre­ idea of the move is to force the
ating problems that Black could exchange on d5 and take with
have hardly coped with. the bisho p . This avoids the
16.h3 .i.f6 17.lLlh2 �a5 18. lines where capturing there with
i.d2 .:.cd8 1 9.i.f3 h6 20.lLlg4 the queen was exposing it too
i.xg4 2 1 .hxg4 i.g5 22.i.xg5 much.
hxg5 23 ..:.xe8+ 14.cxd5 i.xd5 15.lLld2!?
Anand recommends here 23. This move was recom­
�c l ! - White is preparing l:lb l mended by A . Lukin ( Svidler
and is eyeing the g5 pawn. played here 1 5 . .i.e3). White is
23 ..:.xe8 24.�d3 lLld8 25.g3
.• threatening to win a piece with
c6 26.'it>g2 lLle6 27 ..:.bl l:te7 c4 and d5 and Black can not ig­
nore this. He has to retreat with
the knight to a5 or with the
bishop to e6:
15 ..te6
••.

Or 15 . . . lLla5 16.i.d3;!;.
16.:tbl l:tb8

28.c4;!;
White is better in this posi­
tion with a knight against a
bishop, Kramnik - Anand,Wijk
aan Zee 2003 .

c) 13 i.e6
..• 17.i.d3;!;
(diagram) White is regrouping his forces
This move was played for the against the kingside .of the en­
first time in the game Svidler - emy and his initiative is evident.

78
 [Link]:JC3 i.f5 l l . a3 0.c3 12. bc tl:Jc6 13. �el

d) 13 . . . .tf6 14 ..tf4
• 1 6 . . J:tfe8 was played in the
game Short - Karpov, Prague
2002, and now White had to play
[Link]:Jfl !?;!; when the black pieces
in the centre are quite uncom­
fortable.
1 [Link]:Jb3 �ce8 1 8 .ti:Jc5 �c8
19:�a4 a5 20.i.f3 �xe l + 2 1 .
�xel ti:Jd8 [Link]:Je4 i.xe4

Black must parry somehow

the threat of taking on d5 and c7
next: dl) 14 �c8, d2) 14 ... dxc4,
.•.

d3) 14 tl:J a5.

•••

14 . . . tl:Je7?! is not to be recom­

mended. After 1 5 . '�b3 b6 ( 1 5 . . .
llb8 16.i.e5;;!; was to be preferred,
because Black was not weaken­
ing the c6-square. ) 16.cxd5 tLlxd5 23.l:txe4;;!;
1 7 . i.e5 ..ig4 (Black's moves 1 7 White has some edge thanks
and 1 8 were not convincing. He to his two bishop s , Shirov -
had better try 17 . . . c6 18.c4 ti:Jc7 Kramnik, Monte Carlo 1 999.
19.i.d3;;!; - White achieved some
progress in the centre having d2) 14 ... dxc4
pushed c4 and establishing the
knight on e5, but Black's position
is still very solid. ) 18 . .l:lad1 i.e7?!
19.h3 i.h5 20.g4! i.g6 2 l . .tg3±
Kasparov - I. Sokolov, Sarajevo
2000. White has a great advan­
tage . The appe arance of the
white knight on e5 will be deadly
for Black, because of the weak c6-
square and the exposed bishop
on g6. 15.i.xc4 �d7
Black has also tried 1 5 . . . tl:Ja5
dl) 14 l:c8 15.cxd5 �xd5
•.. 16.i.a2 c5 1 [Link]:Je5 (The other pos­
[Link]:Jd2 �d7 sibility is 17 .i.e5 cxd4 1 8 . cxd4;;!;.
1 6 . . . ti:Jxd4? doesn't work, be­ White has a powerful central
cause of 1 7 . i. c4 �d7 1 8 . cxd4 passed pawn and a strong bishop
�xd4 19. �f.3+-. on a2, but Black's position is

79
Chapter 12

quite solid. ) 17 . . . cxd4 18.cxd4 - 20.c4;1;

White has a strong pawn in the Stefansson -Thorfinnsson,
centre and pressure along the a2- Reykjavik 200 1 . White has two
f7. Black tried to play actively on powerful bishops and a future
the queenside in the game Kova­ passed pawn in the centre.
lev - Bode, Dresden 1994, but
after 18 . . . l:.c8 (o18 . . . lDc6 19.lDxc6 d3) 14 . . . lDa5
bxc6 2 0 . �e5;1;) 1 9 . �a4 a6 2 0 .
l:Lac 1 b 5 ? (o20 . . . l:.xc1 2 1..� xcl;i;)
2 1 .lhc8 i.xc8 22.lDxf7 he lost
material : 22 . . . �xd4 23 . �xd4
i.xd4 24. i.d6 lDc4 25. i.xc4 bxc4
2 6 . i.xf8 'i!txfl 2 7 .l:f.e4 i.f6 2 8 .
l::tx c4+-.
16.lDg5
White can also think about
16.�a2 !?;1; with the idea to double
the rooks along the e-file. 15.cxd5 �xd5 16.lDe5
16 ... �xg5 Black managed to survive in
After 1 6 . . . lDa5 1 7 . .ta2 h6 the game Alexander Sokolov -
18.lDe4 i.e7 19. �h5 Black has to [Link], Germany 1998 after
exchange one of his bishops any­ capturing the pawn - 1 6 . i.xc7
way (most probably the light­ .Uac8 17 . i. e 5 ( 1 7 . i.xa5 �xa5
squared one), since after 19 . . . 18.c4 l:tfd8=) 1 7 .. Jhc3 18. i.xf6
lD c 6 , White has 2 0 . i.xh6 , Al gxf6 19 . .l:!.c1 l:txc l 20. �xc 1 l:f.e8
Sayed - Ahmad, Beirut 2000, 2 l . �c7 i.g6 22.h3 'i!tg7 and the
and Black can not capture the weakness of the black pawns on
bishop because after 20 . . . gxh6 the kingside was not perceivable.
2 1 . �xh6 there is no defence 16 ... �b3
against the transfer of the white After 1 6 . . . c5 White plays
rook along the third rank. 1 7 .i.g4! ( but not 17 . i.£3 �b3
17 .i.xg5 .l:Ue8 18. �f3 lDa5 1 8 . dxc5 .Uad8 1 9 . �c1 �a4�)
19.�a2 c6 1 7 ... i.xg4 18.lDxg4 �dB 19.lDxf6
�f6 20 . .ie5 �c6 2l.dxc5;1; Adams
- Dao Thien, New Delhi (m/2)
2000. White has the advantage,
because of his extra c5-pawn and
the control over the d6-square.
It is not easy to win though, be­
cause White can not create a
passed pawn.
17.�xb3

80
 lO. ltJc3 Jl..f5 l l.a3 ltJc3 12. bc ltJc6 13.�el

White is not better after 1 7 .

ltJg4 i.xg4 18 . ..txg4 �xc3 19.i.d2
�xd4 2 0 . i.xa5 �xa 1 2 l . �xa 1
[Link] 1 22 . .Uxa 1 b6 23. i.c3 ltad8=.
17 .. 4Jxb3 1s.:a2 :res
.

Or 18 . . . c6 19.ltJg4!? and White

obtains the bishop pair advan­
tage in the endgame after the
trade on g4, while 19 . . . i.e7 can
be met with 2 0 . i. d 1 lUeS 2 1 .
4Jh6+ ( 2 1 .4Je3 i.e6 2 2 . d5 ltJc1 19 ..ic4!;!;;
•

23 .dxe6 liJd3co) 2 1 . . .gxh6 22.i.xb3 This is better than 1 9 .llb2

i.d6 (22 . . . i.xa3 is just bad for ltJa5, because now Black is forced
Black 2 3 . lhe8+ .U.xe8 24 . g4±) to exchange his bishop for the
23 .i.e3;!;; . Black has some weak­ knight immediately. 19 . . . JJ.. x e5
nesses on the kingside and that 2 0 . l:tae2 ltJa5 2 l . i.d5;!;; . White
determines White's minimal ad­ has the two bishop advantage in
vantage. the endgame.

81
 Chapter 1 3 l .e4 e 5 2.lbf3 lbf6 3.lbxe5 d 6 4.lbf3
lbxe4 5.d4 d5 6.i.d3 i.e7 7.0-0 lbc6
8.c4 lbb4 9.i.e2 0-0 10.lbc3 i.e6
Petroff Defence

1 1 . . . ltJxc3 is not advisable

12.bxc3 ltJc6 13.ltJxc6 bxc6 14.c5
i.f5 1 5 . .tf4 i.g5 1 6 . �d2;!; Ku­
laots - Lehiste, Tallinn 2000.
Black's position is very passive
and far from equal .
Black has not tried yet 1 1 . . .
i.d6 !? 1 2 . ..ie3 c5 !? with the idea
to attack the knight on e5, avoid­
We are going to analyse the ing the possibility of White tak­
most popular line of the Petroff ing on e4 and playing d5, unlike
Defence in this chapter. Black the line with the immediate
develops a piece, supports the d5- ll . . . c5 . White must simply re­
square and avoids problems with treat the knight 13 .ltJf3 and af­
the exposed queen that were the­ ter 13 . . . cxd4 14.ltJxd4 �c7 15.h3;!;
matic for the line 1 0 . . . .tf5 . preserve some advantage in con­
ll .ltJe5 nection with the imminent cap­
White must make an useful ture on e6.
waiting move , while the natural
1 l . .i e 3 , as the practice has a) ll . . . c5 1 2 .ltJxe4 dxe4
shown, leads to an almost com­ 13.d5
plete equality after ll . . . .tf5 (this
move now seems a bit strange,
but Black creates the threat to
take on c3 and then fork on c2,
which was impossible without
the bishop on e3) 12 .llc1 dxc4
13 . .txc4 c6 14.ltJe5 ltJxc3 15.bxc3
ltJd5 16. �f3 i.e6=.
After l l .ltJe5 Black has two
basic defences: a) ll ... c5 and b)
ll f6.
.•• This is an interesting pawn

82
 10. tLlc3 ..te6 11. tLle5

structure - White has a pro ­ 14 . . . tLla6 1 5 . f4;t. The right

tected passed pawn in the cen­ place for the Black bishop is on
tre, while Black has a pawn ma­ the a1-h8 diagonal , i.e. on f6 in
jority on the kingside. Naturally this pawn structure, and not on
the central passed pawn com­ d6 - that square is suitable for
prises a long lasting advantage the knight. Black must lose time
ensuring White's edge in every and retreat with the bishop, so
endgame. Meanwhile if Black White gets the edge.
manages to p o s t a bl ocking 15.axb4 ..td7
knight on d6 and bring his bishop Or 15 . . . ..tf5 16.bxc5 �c7 17.g3
on the a 1- h8 diagonal he will �xc5 1 8 . � e 3 � d 6 1 9 . c 5 �f6
have a wonderful game. 2 0 . �b3 ..txb2 2 Ula4 ..te5 2 2 .
Black's weak point in this po ­ �xb 7 ..t h 3 2 3 .l::t e 1 a5 2 4 . d6±
sition is the knight on b4, which Baklan - Timman, Neum 2000.
is roaming in pursuit of a good Black can hardly cope with
square (b4-a6-c7-e8-d6). White's passed pawns.
Black must now decide whe­ 16.bxc5 �c7
ther he will retreat with the Or 16 . . . f5 17.f4 exf3 18.lixf3
bishop a3) 13 . . . ..tc8, or attack � c 7 1 9 . d6 ! ± N adyrkh anov -
the knight firstly with al) 13 ... Majorovas, Krasnodar 1994, and
..td6 or a2) 13 .'�c7.
•. after 19 . . . �xc5+ 20. �e3 Black
B l ack has also tri ed here would lose a piece if he takes on
13 . . . ..tf5 , but it is the wrong d6, so White keeps his protected
square for the bishop and it is passed pawn.
going to be attacked there. 14.a3
tLla6 15 .£'3;!;. White is opening the
f-file and that emphasizes the
drawback of the disposition of
the bishop on f5 . Black now can
not play the move f7-f5, which is
essential for his counterplay.
White can also play 1 5 . ..tg4
1 5 . . . �c8 1 6 . f3 ..txg4 1 7 . tLlxg4
exf3 18. �xf3 f5 19.tLle5;t and the
weakness of the e6 square is 17 ...t e3±
quite unpl e a s ant for Black, White must keep the pawn
Khachian - Egin, Sochi 1997. tandem c5+d5 on the queenside,
while Black's counterplay on the
al) 13 .....td6 14.a3 ..txe5 kingside fails. 1 7 . . . ..txh2+ (After
This move is very risky, since 17 . . . i.xb2 18.l:[bl± Black has no
White now has mobile passed counterplay and White's central
pawns in the centre. pawns are very powerful . ) 1 8 .

83
 Chapter 13

'>!i>h1 ..te5 (Black's attempt to at­ chuk - Nielsen, Bled 2002. White
tack the king backfires : 18 . . f5 . had no opening advantage to
19.d6 �d8 20 .'>!i>xh2 f4 2 1 . '1¥td5+ brag about.
'>!i>h8 22. �xe4 �h4+ 23 .'>t>g1 �ae8 14 . . . ex£l
24. �xb7 fxe3 25.fxe3+-; 23 . . . ..tc6 14 . . . ..tc8 is "tougher" - 15.a3
24. 'l¥te7 .l:!.f6 - 24 . . . �h6 25 . ..td4 - ltla6 16 . ..te3;!;. White is a little
2 5 . d 7 ..txd7 2 6 . �xd7 �h6 2 7 . better after 16 . . . £'6 1 7 .ltlg4 ..txg4
�h3+-) 1 9 . .i d 4 l:r.fe8 ( O r 1 9 . . . 18 . ..txg4 f5 19 . .ie2. He can try
..txd4 20. �xd4 a5 2 1.l:ta3± Mtfa1 to organize g4, or b4 after the
and White's advantage is obvi­ retreat of the knight to a6, with
ous . ) 20.b4 �dB 2 l ..ixe5 .l:!.xe5 the preparing moves �d2 and
2 2 . l::t a 3± Wahls - Pavasovic, .:.ab l . It is essential for White
Dresden 1998. The white pawns that he has placed the bishop on
are moving for w ard , while e 3 , controlling the important
Black can not create any threats central d4-square for the enemy
against the enemy king. bishop.
[Link]:rJ ..tf5
a2) 13 ... '1¥tc7 Black makes use of the active
knight on b4.

14.f4
White achieves nothing with [Link] l;!;
14.a3 �xe5 15.axb4 ..td7 16.bxc5 White is attacking the bishop
..txc5 1 7 . �b3 b6, Rizouk - Gu­ and covering the c2 square. ( 16.
stafsson, Andorra la Vella 2002. a3 was also possible - 16 . . . ltlc2
White's passed pawn was reli­ 1 7 .I:.a2 .if6 18.i.d3 , but not 18.
ably blocked. ltlh4 ..txh4 19 . .U.xf5 ltld4. Black
The other possibility 14 . ..tf4 preserves his knight in the cen­
leads to equality after 14 . . . .id6 tre with 18 . . . .ixd3 19. �xd3 ltld4
15.a3 (In case of 15.dxe6 ..txe5 20.ltlg5 .ixg5 2 l . .ixg5;!;. White
the black knight will soon occupy puts his bishop on e3 with his
the weak d4-square. Therefore next move attacking the knight
White is trying to repel the on d4. This would be rather un­
knight firstly. ) 15 . . . ltlc6= Ivan- pleasant for Black, because his

84
 10. l'Lx:3 i.e6 11. tt:\e5

knight has no good squares to is weak and White can exploit

retreat to and if Black allows the that after the exchange of the f2
exchange on d4 - the pawn there and e3 pawns and the opening
will be very weak and difficult to up of the e-file. Black will defi­
defend too . ) 1 6 . . . i.. e 4 17.a3 tt::\ a6 nitely fail to equalize.
1 8 .i.. d 3 i.. x d3 [Link]::\x d3;!;. Black Black has also tried two other
failed to solve the problems of the moves beside 16 . . . �d6:
opening. He has no compensa­ 16 . . . i.d6 1 7 . f4 exf3 Now that
tion for White's extra space and the black bishop is on d6 already,
protected passed pawn. Black's the exchange 1 7 . . . i..xg4 18 . ..txg4
knight on a6 is misplaced, while f5 19.i.e2 is promising White a
White's pieces are very active slight edge , because Black's
with good prospects for a king­ bishop is evidently not on its best
side initiative. square. [Link].xf3 �c7 19.g3 i.. d 7
[Link]::\f2 . White's task is to com­
a3) 13 i.. c 8
..• plete his development and neu­
tralize the tactical threats of the
opponent. The long-lasting ad­
vantages of his po sition will
surely tell later. 20 . . . b5 2 l .b3
l:!.ae8 22. 'iit;> g2 Jl.e5 23 .�b l i.. d4
24.i.d2 b4 25 . a4 �c8 26.l:!.be l
Ji.f5 [Link].e4 llxe4 [Link]::\x e4 i..h 3+
29 . ..thl [Link] 3 0 J :bfl �g4 3 1 .
tt::\ d6;!; Topalov - Shirov, Moscow
2 0 0 1 . White will have better
14.a3 tt::\ a6 15:�c2 chances in the endgame after the
The straightforward 15.f4 f6 exchanges;
[Link]::\ g4 i..xg4 1 7 .i..xg4 f5 18.i.e2 16 . . . tt::\ c 7 1 7 . f3 exf3 18 .Ji.xf3
i.. f6 , Leko - Kramnik, Monte i.d6 [Link]::\f2 f5 20 .b3 ! ?;!; This is a
Carlo 200 1 , did not provide any prophylactic move, which neu­
advantage for White. The black trali zes B l ack's counterplay
bishop occupies an ideal square against the c4-pawn and enables
on d4, while the black knight White to start his active play
heads to d6 easily. later. The immediate 2 0 . tt::\ d 3
15 f6 [Link]::\g4 �d6
..• (this move is definitely a part of
Black has to solve long-last­ White's plan to occupy the f4-
ing problems in this position. square and ob srerve the e6-
White has a protected passed square) allows Black to attack
pawn ; Black's knight on a6 is White's centre : 20 . . . b5 2 l . b 3
misplaced and it will take a long (2l .i.e3 bxc4 22. tt::\x c5 �e7 2 3 .
time to redeploy; the e6-square tt::\e 6 tt::\x e6 24.dxe6 .l:tb8 2 5 . "ittxc4

85
Chapter 13

.ltxe6= Motylev - Mahesh, Cal- that will be perceptible after ex­

cutta 2002. White is not better changes in the centre.
after the exchanges in the cen­
tre . ) 2 l . . .bxc4 22.bxc4 �h4 23.g3
�d4+ 24.'.ti>g2 ka6 - the defence
of the white pawn on c4 is prob­
lematic.
1 7.f3 f5 18.ltJf2 .tf6 19.fxe4
.te5 20.h3 .td4

12.ltJf3
Black must choose a waiting
move that is going to be useful
in the fi ght ahea d . We will
analyse the following moves in
detail: bl) 12 c5, b2) 12 :te8
..• •..

and b3) 12 ... cofi>h8.

21 .e5;!; The immediate exchange is
White gives back his extra not very good for Black - 12 . . .
pawn, but avoids Black's coun­ ltJxc3 13.bxc3 ltJc6 14.ltJd2;!; fol­
terplay along the f-file. He ob­ lowed by l:te1 and i.d3 and White
tains a p awn structure that has a strong initiative on the
favours the manoeuvre with the kingside (weakened by f7-f6).
knight to e6. 2 l . . . �xe5 22.'.ti>h1 12 . . . Itc8. This waiting move is
kd7 23.ltJd3 i.a4. Black is occu­ not quite satisfactory, because
pying the e-file temporarily, but after 1 3 . �b3 ltJxc3 14.bxc3 dxc4
is failing to achieve anything 1 5 . i.xc4 .txc4 1 6 . �xc4+ ltJd5
substantial out of it while the e6- 1 7 . .l:.b l;!;; Timoshenko - Sulypa,
square is weakened even more. Ordzhonikidze 2000, Black has
24. �xa4 �xe2 25.l:t.f3 l:Lae8 26. to go back with the rook to de­
i.f4 h6 27.i.d6 lif6 28.ltJf4 �e4 fend the b7-pawn.
29 .ltJe6;!;; Anand - Shirov, Mos­ 12 . . . f5 13. �b3 dxc4 14.i.xc4
cow 200 1 . Black will have to give i.xc4 15. �xc4+ cofi>h8 16 .ltJe5t ­
the exchange on e6 sooner or White has the edge because of
later and he will not have enough the weak a2-h7 diagonal and the
compensation for it. powerful knight on e5.
12 . . . �d7 1 3 . .te3 cofi>h8 1 4 . a3
b) l l ... f6 ltJxc3 15.bxc3 ltJc6 16.cxd5 .txd5
This move rejects the knight, 17.c4. White manages to push his
but creates a weakness on e6 central pawns now. 1 7 . . . i.xf3

86
 10. tbc3 i.e6 11. tbe5

1 8 . i.xf3 l:tad8 19J%e1 f5 20.d5 16 tbxc3

•.•

tbe5 2 l .i.d4 tbxf3+. 22. "�xf3 i.f6 16 . . . a5 is losing the d5 pawn:

23.i.xf6 l:!.xf6 24 . .l:te5;!; Bologan ­ 17J:tad1 �e7 18.tba4 Sif7 19. �e3
Zulfugaryi, Minsk 2000. White is l:tc7 20.a3 tba6 2 l . cxd5± Khalif­
better because of the occupation man - Karpov, Bali 2000 and
of the e-file. Black has no compensation for
the pawn, or 1 7 . . . �e8 18.tbxd5
b l ) 12 c5
••. i.xd5 19.cxd5± Torre - Handoko,
Bali 2000 and White has a sound
extra pawn.
17. �xc3 tbc6
Black's position was really
bad after 1 7 . . . tba6 1 8 .b4 �c8
19 .tbd4 tbc7 20 . .l::t ad 1 �d7 2 l .h3
llfe8 22.c5± De Firmian - Neik­
sans, Istanbul 2000. White had
a powerful blocking knight in
front of the isolated pawn and a
13 . ..te3 l:tc8 promising pawn majority on the
That is not solving the prob­ queenside.
lems , so maybe Black should try 18.b4 l:txc4 19 ..txc4 dxc4
instead 13 . . . b6 14Jlc1 tbxc3 15.
bxc3 tbc6 16.dxc5 ..txc5 17 . ..txc5
bxc5 1 8 . �a4 �c7 19.cxd5 i.xd5
20 . .tc4 i.f7 2 l . i.xf7+ l:txf7 22.
life !;!; Timoshenko - Laurent,
C appelle la Grande 200 1 . White
is again better because of the
weak a2-g8 diagonal, the strong
c5-pawn and the important e­
file.
14.dxc5 i.xc5 15.i.xc5 l:txc5 20.b5± Lutz - Kutuzovic,
But not 1 5 . . . tb xc5? 1 6 . a 3 Pula 2000. Black's passed pawn
lbba6 1 7 . cxd5+-. i"s harmless and quite not enough
16.�b3 to compensate the loss of the ex­
It turns out that Black is ei­ change.
ther losing material or has to
comply with substantial posi­ b2) 12 ...l:te8
tional concessions. It is not easy (diagram)
to defend the d5-pawn with the 13.i.e3 i.f8
stray knight on b4 and rook on Black has tried here: 13 .. .'it>h8
c5. 14.a3 tbxc3 15.bxc3 tbc6 16.cxd5

87
Chapter 13

b3) 12 wh8
.••

� x d 5 1 7 . c4 � e 4 1 8 . d 5 �xf3
19.�xf.3 lt:Je5 20.�e4 g6 2 l . c5t
Sedina - Dolzhikova, Warsaw 13.�b3 a5
200 1 . White has the bishop pair The simplification 13 . . . dxc4
advantage and active pawns in 14 . .txc4 .txc4 1 5 . �xc4 lt:Jxc3
the centre. 16.bxc3 leads to a slight edge for
14.a3 lt:Jxc3 15.bxc3 lt:Jc6 16. White . 1 6 . . . �d5 ( O r 1 6 . . . lt:Jd5
cxd5 .txd5 1 7.c4 .tf7 18.'�c2 1 7 .-Ub U; - the e6-square is weak
lt:Ja5 and the white central pawns are
Or 18 . . . �d7 19 . .td3 g6 2 0 . mobile. White is better. ) 1 7 . �e2
�fe 1 �d6 2 l . �b2 b 6 [Link] U;. ( stronger than 1 7 . �b3 �xb3
White has the edge in the centre 18.axb3 lt:Jd5 19J�e 1 :res 20 . .td2
and Black has a weak kingside c6 2l.c4 lt:Jb6 [Link]:Jh4 Wg8 [Link]:Jf5
and particularly the f6-square, Wf7 [Link]; Adams - Timman,
Kovchan - Nikolajev, Oropesa Wijk aan Zee 2000, and White
del Mar 200 1 . had a slight, but stable advan­
1 9 ..td3 g6 tage in the endgame. ) 17 . . . lt:Jc6
[Link] 1 l:tab8 (This pawn must be
defended, because its sacrifice
after 18 . . . l:!.ae8 19 .:b5 �d6 20.
�b2 �c4 2 l . :Xb7 l:te2 [Link]:Jd2±
leaves Black with insufficient
compensation . ) 1 9 . c4 �h5 2 0 .
�e3;!;. White's pieces are very
active and his central pawns are
mobile.
In case of 13 . . . lt:Jxc3 14.bxc3
Adams - Timman, Wijk aan lt:Jc6 (Black should better play
Zee 2001 and now White had to 14 . . . dxc4 15.�xc4 .txc4 16. �xc4
continue with 20.h4!?;!;, with ac­ transposing to the previous line
tive play on the kingside. 13 . . . dxc4) 1 5 . �xb7 lt:Ja5 16. �a6

88
 10. tt::\c3 ..ie6 l l . tt::\e5

c6 1 7 . cxd5± White remains with

an extra pawn.
14.cxd5!?
The other possibility leads to
unclear position - 14.c5 ..if5�.
14 ...a4 15:�dl
White's move 15. �c4 will be
met with 15 . . . ..ltf7 [Link]::lxe4 ..ixd5.
15 ... ..1txd5 1 6 .tt::l x d5 �xd5
1 7.a3 tt::lc 6 18 . ..ltf4 20.1:1c i;l;
1 8 . ..ie3 f5 1 9 . �c2 tt::l d 6 20 . The position of Black' queen
.Uad 1 ..if6ex> is allowing Black to is unstable and his pawns on the
create counterplay against the queenside a4 and c7 are weak.
d4-pawn. Our analysis finds White's posi­
18 ..id6 19 ...ixd6 tt::lxd6
.•. tion preferable.

Conclusion
Black usually complies with a little worse, but quite defendable
positions, playing the Petroff Defence. The middlegame is thematic
for two types of pawn structures - White's isolated d4 pawn, or the
pawn tandem c3+d4. Black's most natural defensive resource is the
simplification of the position by exchanging a couple of minor pieces.
Conversely, White should strive to avoid exchanges and try to create
problems to the opponent in the centre and on the kingside, because
he has extra space and active pieces.
White manages to keep some advantage in most of the lines of the
Petroff Defence mostly due to various concrete factors in every
different variation.

89
 Part 3
Ruy Lopez without 3 ... a6
l .e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3.1i.. b 5

stricts his choice of developing

systems . To be sure, the threat
is not imminent yet as 4. i.. x c6
dxc6 5 .l2Jxe5 fails to 5 . . . tM4 and
Black regains the pawn with a
good game. Building on this pos­
sibility, Black manages to insert
3 . . . a6, which is covered in Book
II. The present Book confines to
Way back in 1561 the Span­ the lines without 3 . . . a6 .
ish priest Ruy Lopez described The Chapter 14 considers the
in his book Libro del Aj edrez rarely seen continuations 3 . . .
some variations arising after ii.d6, 3 . . : �f6, 3 . . . ..1tb4, 3 . . . l2Jge7,
3 .i.. b 5. Later chess theory called 3 . . . f6. The subject of Chapter 15
these systems after him - the is the Fianchetto Defence (3 . . . g6),
Ruy Lopez. Chapter 1 6 deals with the Bird's
In the opening the task of Defence (3 . . . l2Jd4), Chapter 17 -
White is not only to effectuate a with Old Steinitz Defence (3 . . . d6)
good deployment of his pieces. and Chapter 18 - with the Clas­
He should also actively hinder sical D e fence (3 . . . i.. c 5 ) . The
the opponent in following plans sharp Jaenisch Gambit (3 . . . f5) is
of his own, giving Black no re­ thouroghly analysed in Chapters
spite . The last move of White 19-22. The gem of this volume
(3. i..b 5) increases the pressure is the Berlin Defence (3 . . . l2Jf6),
on the most delicate point in the which burst of popularity was
opponent's camp. Black must be due to the world title match
constantly on his guard against Kasparov - Kramnik, London
the threat of i.. xc6 followed by 2000. It is scrutinised in Chap­
l2Jxe5, and that significantly re- ters 23-29.

90
 Chapter 14 l .e4 e 5 2.ttJf3 ttJc6 3.�b5

8. �xb6 axb6 9.tDc3 (9.i.xg5 l:ta5

10.tDc3 is not bad too) 9 . . . i.g7
10.f4 tDe7 1 1 . 0-0±.
The continuation 3 . . . i.d6?!
does not meet the established
conception of the harmonious
development of pieces because
the bishop placed before the d­
pawn impedes the development
This chapter deals with the of its mate on the other flank,
variations when Black tries to and in this way of Black's whole
avoid usual classical patterns: a) queenside. But, certainly, White
3 i.b4, b) 3 tDge7 and c )
. . . . . . must play vigorously to prove the
3 f6.
... incorrectness of this sort of the
3 . . . g5?! (This move only weak­ opening performance, as other­
ens Black's kingside. ) 4.d4 tL!xd4 wise Black may develop his
(Black may lose soon in case of kingside and move the queen's
4 . . . exd4 5 .i.xg5 f6 6.tDxd4 fxg5 bishop on b7 to have then no par­
7 . �h5+ 'i;e7 8 .lDf5+ 'i;f6 9.h4+-; ticular problems. 4. 0-0 (Before
after 4 . . . g4 White has a large proceeding to active play by the
advantage after the simple 5 . self-suggesting d2-d4 White re­
tDxe5 tDxe5 6 . dx e5 ±) 5 . tL!xd4 moves his king from the centre
exd4 6. �xd4 �f6 (6 ... f6?! 7.i.xg5) and, at the same time, employs
7 . e5 (White gets a good play also the h1-rook. ) 4 . . . tL!f6 5.d4! Using
after 7 . �xf6 tDxf6 8 . e 5 tL!g4 his development advantage ,
9 .i.xg5 Keres) 7 . . . �b6, Elbers ­ White gives a start to the active
Welling, Eindhoven 1987, (the operation, threatening with the
other queen's retreat 7 . . . �g6 is simple i.xc6 and then dxe5 with
worse. After it White's initiative a fork. 5 . . . tDxe4 6. �e2 (Seems to
is developing by itself. 8 . tDc3 be the most aggressive move ,
�xc2? 9. e6+-; 8 . . . i.e7 9.i.e3 to causing great difficulties in the
be followed by 0-0-0 or tL!d5) defence of Black's pieces, which,

91
 Chapter 14

in turn, impedes their normal 7 . dxe5 �xe5 8. i.d3;t White's

development). 6 . . . f5 There is no advantage is irrefutable due to
other acceptable way to save the his prevalence in development
knight. 7.dxe5 Jtc5 (Black is not and the weakening of Black's
ready for the active counterplay kingside.
of 7 . . . lt:Jxe5? [Link]:Jxe5 Jtxe5 9.£3 c6
1 0 . Jtd3 �h4 l l . g3 ; 10 . . . �b6+ a) 3 ... Jtb4
1 l . �h 1 0-0 1 2 . fxe4 Jtxb2 1 3 . (The Alapin Defence)
i.xb2 �xb2 [Link]:Jd2+-; 1 1 . . . Jtxb2
12.Jtxb2 �xb2 [Link]:Jd2 d5 14.fxe4
fxe4 1 5 . lt:Jxe4 dxe4 1 6 . �xe4+­
with the decisive attack . ) 8 .
lt:Jbd2 ! Exchanging Black's active
knight, White increases his de­
velopment advantage. 8 . . . lt:Jxd2
9 . Jtxd2± White's development
advantage grows menacing, and
Black can't castle because of the
queen check on c4. This continuation, inviting
3 . . . �f6 looks somewhat un­ White to attack, presents no
natural too, usually queen is the problems for the development of
last piece to be developed, yet it White's initiative, too.
involves a more viable idea than 4.c3
the variation with 3 . . . Jtd6: Black A natural reply to Black's
hopes to use the early thrust of third move.
the enemy queen to put up ac­ 4 ...Jt a5 [Link]:J a3!?
tive counterplay on the kingside, The knight goes on c4: White
so White must play rather neatly wants to get the most from the
to prove that the move �f6 has awkward position of the black
not been premature. 4.c3 (This bishop.
is perhaps the most consistent 5 ...Jtb6
continuation: White acts in the 5 . . . lt:Jge7?! is bad in view of
classical style, playing in the cen­ [Link]:Jc4±, promising Black great
tre in answer to the early flank difficulties in defence.
advance, and attacking at first [Link]:Jc4 d6
with the pawns to clear up space In case of 6 . . . lt:Jf6 an immedi­
for his pieces to come next). 4 . . . g5 ate attack in the centre is pos­
(Too sharply, maybe better is 4 . . . sible, and 7 . d4 ! ? lt:Jxe4 8 . lt:Jxb6
Jtc5 transposing into the varia­ axb6 9 . dxe5 d5 1 0 . exd6 lt:Jxd6
tion of 3 . . . Jtc5 with the queen on 1l .Jte2 �f6 12.Jtg5 �g6 13. Jtf4
f6 that will be analysed in Chap­ 0-0 1 4 . 0-0 l:.d8 1 5 . Jt d3 �h5
ter 1 8 ) . 5 . d4 g4 6 . lt:Jxe5 lt:Jxe5 16 .lt:Jg5 �xd 1 1 7 .11fxd 1 h6 1 8 .

92
 l. e4 e5 2. tbf3 tbc6 3. kb5

tbe4 tbe8 [Link]; gave White a b) 3 ..tbge7

.

better chance owing to his bishop (The Cozio Defence)

pair in Psakhis - Berkovich, Tel
Aviv 1992 .
7.d4 exd4 8.cxd4 d5 9.exd5
�xd5 10.�a4 tbge7
10 . . . kd7?! is dubious, as the
delay of the kingside develop­
ment might cost Black very
dearly. After 1 1 . 0-0 tbge7 12.l::!. e 1
a 6 13.kxc6 �xc6 1 4 . �a3 ke6 1 5 .
kg5 ! White launched a powerful
attack in the game Jansa - Hec­ This method of the develop­
tor, Kerteminde 1 99 1 ; neither ment is more playable, introduc­
Black achieved a clear equality ing one more minor piece into the
after 10 . . . a6 l l . tbxb6 cxb6 1 2 . fight, even though the diagonal
kc4 �a5+ 13. �xa5 tZ:lxa5 [Link]:le5 for development of the f8-bishop
ke6 15.kxe6 fxe6 16.�d2 tbc6 turns out blocked, as a result. To
1 7 . tbc4 l:.d8 1 8 . tZ:lxb6 l:lxd4 19. make use of this circumstance
0-0-0 tbf6 20.kc3;!; when he had White used to play
a weakness on e6, and White's 4.0-0
bishop was stronger than his Black's best answer seems to
knight in Sax - Hector, Haninge be:
1990. 4 g6
•.•

ll.tbxb6 cxb6 12.0-0 0-0 In case of 4 . . . d6 after 5 . d4 !

exd4 (5 . . . k d 7 i s possible a s well ,
but·after 6.d5;!; White exchanges
the light-squared bishop, and in
the s u b s e q u e n t struggle h e
stands better) 6.tbxd4 kd7 7.tbc3
g6?! (Black fails to develop nor­
mally, so perhaps he should con­
fine himself to 7 . . . tbxd4 8. �xd4;!;,
still experiencing problems with
the development ) . 8 . �g5! em­
13.l:.eU phasising the weakness of the
Lima - Hector, Manila 1992 . dark squares in the opponent's
White maintains a stable advan­ camp: 8 . . . �g7 9 .tLld5 !±.
tage with his pair of bishops in Also Black's position is quite
the open position and the passed passive in case of 4 . . . tbg6 5.c3 d6
d-pawn, besides Black's queen­ (5 . . . a6 6.kc4 ! ? tba5 7 . �e2 tZ:lf4
side pawn structure is spoiled. 8 . d4 tbxe 2 + 9 . �xe2 exd4 1 0 .

93
 Chapter 14

cxd4;t) 6 . d4 i.d7 7 . d5 lt:Jb8 8. more vulnerable). 9.i.b3 (On this

i.xd7+ lt:Jxd7 9 . c4 i.e7 [Link]:Jc3 very square, maintaining control
0-0 ll.i.e3;t when the difference over d5). 9 . . . 0-0 [Link]:Jc3 d6 1 1 .
in p r o s p ects of White's and tt:Jd5 !? (White's idea i s t o keep the
Black's minor pieces is obviously light-squared bishop on the a2-
to White's favour. g8 diagonal even if he has to ex­
Still Black has 4 . . . a6 5.i.a4 change a pair of minor pieces to
(interesting is 5 .ii.c4!? lt:Jg6 6.c3 achieve this, and at the same
ii.e7 7 . d4 d6 8.i.e3;t) 5 . . . d6 6.c3 time he prevents the thrust i.g4
i.d7 7 . d4 transposing into the that could be possible in case of
Modern Steinitz Defence. l l .a3 i.g4�) l l . . .h6 ( l l . . . i.g4
5.c3 meets the unpleasant 1 2 . i.g5) .
[Link]:Jxe7+ lt:Jxe7 13.i.e3;t allows
White to maintain his advantage
due to his prevalence in the cen­
tre and superior activity of his
pieces.
6.d4 exd4
Black wants to attack the en­
emy pawn centre immediately by
a counterstroke on the seventh
move, more passive play prom­
5 i.g7
.•. ises him no good prospects, for
In the event of 5 . . . d6 White example: 6 . . . 0-0 7.d5 a6 8 .i.e2
has the strong resource of 6.d4 lt:Ja7 (8 . . .lt:Jb8 9.d6t) 9.c4 or 6 . . . a6
i.d7 7 . dxe5 dxe5 and then 8 . 7.i.xc6 ! ? lt:Jxc6 8 . d5;t.
i.c4!?;t putting unpleasant pres­ 7.cxd4 d5
sure upon Black's kingside and Pa s s i v e p l ay can't s o l ve
threatening with �b3 ot lt:Jg5 . Black's problems again:
5 . . . a6 6 . i. a4 i.g7 (the line after 7 . . . 0-0 8 . d5 lt:Je5 [Link]:Jxe5
6 . . . d6 7.d4 produces variations of i.xe5 10.f4 i.g7 White delivers
the Modern Steinitz Defence , the mighty blow of ll.f5 !?t de­
B ook II). 7 . d4 exd4 8 . cxd4 b5 veloping a perceptible initiative
(8 . . . d5 after 9.exd5 lt:Jxd5 [Link] on the kingside ;
i.e6 l l..t g 5 results in a position while the move 7 . . . a6 after
similar to the variation of 5 . . . i.g7 8 . i. a4 stirs the play into the
6 . d4 exd4 7 . cxd4 d5 8.exd5 lt:Jxd5 variation with 5 . . . a6.
9.�el+ ii.e6 10.i.g5 only White's 8.exd5 lt:Jxd5
light-squared bishop does not Another capture 8 . . . �xd5? !
hang in lines any more, and per­ adds fuel to the fire of White's
haps Black's a-pawn would look attack : 9 . lt:J c3 �h5 1 0 . i.xc6+
better on a7 because on a6 it is bxc6 ll .lle l±.

94
 l.e4 e5 2. ttJf3 ttJc6 3. .i b5

9 .i.g5
• lov deserves attention, the best
Also the preliminary check answer to keep up the advantage
9 . l':.e 1 + is possibl e , but after being 16.ttJc5 ! ? , while the allur­
9 . . . .te6 10 ..tg5 �d6 the play gets ing 16 . .i.h6 fails in view of 16 . . .
transposed into the 9.i.g5 varia­ .i.f5 ! , hanging u p White's pieces.
tion. 16.b3 .if5 1 7 . .id2 �b6
9 ••• �d6 1 0 . .:te 1 + .i.e6 1 1 . Black had real problems af­
ttJbd2 0-0 ter 1 7 . . . �f8 1 8 . ttJg3 l:[Link] 1 + 19 .
.[Link] 1 .i.d7 20.ttJe5 �e8 2 l . �c5
.ixe5 22.dxe5 �xe5 23 . .l:td1 lla8
24 . i.a5 ii. e 8 25 . .l::t e 1 �d6 2 6 .
�xd6 cxd6 27.ttJe4;!:; when White
gained a substantial advantage
in the ending owing to the obvi­
ous weakness of the dark squa­
res in Black's camp in Tseshkov­
sky - Dreev, Moscow 1992.
1 8 .ttJc5 h5 1 9 .ttJe5 nhd8
12.ttJe4 20.�a3 ne7
Thi s move introduces the
main line in this variation, but
12 .ttJc4!? �b4 13.a4 deserves a
serious examination as well (also
good is 13 . .i.xc6 bxc6 1 4 . � c l
llfe8 1 5 . .i. d 2 � b 5 1 6 . a4 �a6
17. ttJce5;!:; emphasising the weak­
ness of Black's pawn structure,
Djordjevic - Stankovic, Nis 1993)
13 . . . a6 14 . .i.xc6 bxc6 1 5 . ttJfe5
lUe8 1 6 . l:t c 1 �b7 1 7 .ii.d2 ttJe7 21.:acU
18.b4;!:; fixing the weak points in Wolff - [Link], Biel 1993 .
Black's position that can't be cov­ White parried the opponent's
ered with his bishop pair, Palac tactical threats and fixed the
- D'Amore, Baden 1999. weak points in Black's position,
12 �b4 13 . .ixc6 bxc6 14.
.•. yet Black's defensive resources
�c1 J:fe8 are still big enough.
Black's play was hopeless af­
ter 1 4 . . . �b6 1 5 . .i.h6 l:.fe8 1 6 . c) 3 ...f6
.ixg7 cJ.txg7 1 7 . ttJc5;!:; in Jansa ­ A low-grade move, which the
Schwarzkopf, Badenweiler 1990. first World Champion W. Steinitz
15.h3 l:lab8 sometimes played. The only plus
15 . . . �b6 !? offered by I. Soko- of this move is the strengthen-

95
 Chapter 14

ing of the e5-square , but it has sacrificed e5-pawn , although

much more vital shortcomings: it White certainly should not un­
delays the development , de­ derestimate his opportunities .
prives the g8-knight of a nice f6- 5 . i.xc6 dxc6 6 . dxe5 fxe 5 ( 6 . . .
square, weakens the black king's 'it!xd 1+ [Link] 1 i.g4 8 .i.f4 0-0-0
position . . . If White is resolute, he 9 . lt:Jbd2 g5 1 0 . i.g3±) 7 . 'iff x d8+
can claim a considerable advan­ Wxd8 8 . lt:Jx e 5 + - Gaboleiro -
tage . That is why this Black's Silva, Marinha Grande 2000;
third move is played very rarely 4 . . . d6 5.d5 a6 6.i.a4 b5 7 . dxc6
nowadays. bxa4 8.c4 i.g4 9. 'iffx a4 i.xf3 10.
4.d4 gxf3± B oucqueau - Woodfin,
Thi s is certainly the best IECG 2000, and White's extra
move. White can choose later the pawn is more significant than
best side for castling. his slightly weakened kingside
pawns;
This unusual development is
hardly good: 4 . . . i.d6 5.c3! lt:Jge7
[Link]:Jbd2. The idea of lt:Jd2-c4 is
dangerous for Black. 6 . . . exd4
(6 . . . 0-0 7 .lt:Jc4±) 7 . cxd4 lt:Jg6 8 .
0-0± ; 4 . . . lt:J x d 4 5 . lt:Jxd4 exd4
(5 ... c6 6.i.c4 exd4 7 . 'iffxd4±. The
d-pawn will remain weak for a
long time . ) 6 . 'it!xd4 c6 7 . i. c4
4 .tt:Jge7
•• 'it!a5+ 8.lLlc3 'it!c5 9. 'iff d3 lt:Je7 10.
Black also tried other possi­ i.e3± Em. Lasker - Kahn, New
bilities , but everywhere White York 1928. Black's queen is in for
obtained a big advantage after long and joyless wandering all
correct play: over the board;
4 . . . d 5 ? ! Horner - Griffi n , 4 . . . exd4 5 . lt:Jxd4 lLlxd4 (5 . . .
IECG 1 9 9 6 . This move is too i.b4+ 6 . c3 lt:Jxd4 7 . 'iff x d4±; 5 . . .
bold and reckless! 5.lLlxe5 ! fxe5 lt:Jge7 [Link]:Jc3 lLlxd4 7 . 'it!xd4 lt:Jc6,
6: �h5+ g6 (6 . . . We7 7.i.xc6 bxc6 Neusel - Karwatzki , Germany
8.i.g5+ lt:Jf6 9.dxe5 dxe4 10.exf6+ 1 9 8 8 , 8 . 'iff d5 lt:Je5 9 . f4 c6 1 0 .
gxf6 l l .i.xf6+ Wxf6 12. 'it!h4 Wg7 'it!d4±; 5 . . . 'iff e 7 [Link]:Jc3 'iff e 5? ! [Link]:Jf3
13 . '�xd8 i.b4+ 14. 'it!d2 i.xd2+ 'it!h5, Galego - Cordovil , Lisbon
1 5 . lt:Jxd2+-) 7 . the5+ 'it>f7 ( 7 . . . 1997, [Link]:Jd5 i.d6 9. 0-0±; 5 . . . a6 ,
'iff e 7 8 . 'iffxh8 'iffx e4+ 9.i.e3 'iffxg2 Salinardi - Zucchi , Chivilcoy
1 0 . l::t f l +-) 8 . 'iff x h8 lLlf6 9 . 0-0 1987, 6 .i.c4 ! 'it!e7 7 . lt:Jc3 'iff c 5 ! ? A
lLlxd4 1 0 . e5+-; peculiar double attack on White's
4 . . . a6 . Black does not get bishop and knight, however, it
enough compensation for the does not save Black from his

96
 i. e4 e5 2. l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3. i.b5

problems. 8 .i.xg8 �xd4 9. �h5+

g6 10. �d5 !±) 6 . �xd4 c6 (6 . . . b6
7 . i.c4 i. c 5 8 . � d 5 + - ; 6 . . . i.d6
7.f4±; 6 . . . c5 7. �d5 �a5+ 8.l2Jc3±;
6 . . . a6 7 . i.c4± Shahin - Shquti,
Istambul 1998) 7.i.c4 l2Je7 (7 . . . c5
8 . �d5±; 7 . . . �c7 8.0-0 i.d6, "Jun­
ior 5 . 0" - "Crafty 1 6 . 6", Utrecht
1 9 9 9 , 9 . f4 �b6 1 0 . i. e3 �xd4
l l . i.xd4±) 8 . l2Jc3 l2Jg6 (8 . . . �b6
9. �d 1 ! l2Jg6 1 0 . 0-0±) 9. 0-0 �b6, 1 3 .f4 1-0 D aniuszewski -
Comte - Marchal , Jeune 1996, Rubinstein, Lodz 1907. This bril­
1 0 . �d l±. liant game has become a part of
5.dxe5 l2Jxe5 chess history turning into a re­
5 . . . fxe5 6.l2Jc3 l2Jg6 7.l2Jd5±. quiem for 3 . . f6. If a small won­
.

6.l2Jxe5 fxe5 7.l2Jc3 l2Jg6 8. der happens and your opponent

0-0 i.c5 [Link] c6 IO.i.c4 �f6 "surprises" you with this archaic
10 . . . �h4 l l . f4 exf4 12. i.xf4 opening, do not be upset - it is a
l2Jxf4 1 3 . g3 �g5 14Jhf4±. rare chance for you to score a
11. �h5 d6 12.i.g5 �f8 quick and beautiful win!

97
Chapter 1 5 l .e4 e 5 2.lbf3 ttJc6 3.Jtb5 g6
Fianchetto Defence

thoughtlessly. 5 . i.xc6 dxc6 6 .

tt:lxe5 'f1e7 ( 6 . . . c 5 [Link].e3 'f1e7 8 .
'f1d3 ! cxd4 [Link].xd4±) [Link]:lc3 i.xe5.
Now Black's dark squares are
weak, but otherwise he will sim­
ply be a pawn down. 8.dxe5 'f1xe5
9 . i. e3± D obrotin - Korotkov,
Moscow 1996.
It may seem strange, but cap­
This o l d and fre q u e ntly turing with the knight promises
played on different levels varia­ White a stable advantage . . . in
tion has not lost its significance the endgame. 4 . . . tt:lxd4 5 . tt:lxd4
nowadays . It gives White consid­ exd4 6. 'f1xd4 'f1f6 (Black hopes to
erable freedom for his activity, solve his defensive problems by
but decisive advantage for him exchanging the queens . Illogical
has not been found yet (and it is is 6 . . . tt:lf6? ! 7.e5 c5 8 . 'f1h4 'f1a5+
not likely to expect such a deed [Link]:lc3 tt:ld5 10.i.d2 tt:lxc3 ll.i.xc3
for the near future) . White's edge 'f1xb5 1 2 . e 6 dxe6 1 3 . i.xh8+- ;
is hardly much bigger than in 7 . . . tt:lh5 8 . tt:lc3±) 7 . e5 'f1b6 (Too
other, more popular systems. provocative is 7 . . .'i!ie7 8.0-0 ! i.g7
Hence we suggest you the sharp­ 9.�e1 c6 [Link]:lc3 !±. Having such
est idea, connected with a pawn a tremendous advantage in de­
sacrifice as early as on move 5. velopment, White should not pay
The arising positions demand attention to trifles like possible
Black's utmost attentiveness and loss of the b5-bishop. 10 . . . cxb5
thorough knowledge from the ll .tt:ld5 'ifid8 12. 'f1c5+-) 8. 'f1xb6
very beginning of the game. (The queen's retreat to d3 has
4.d4 exd4 been tested in tournaments, but
4 . . . i.g7?! is obviously an in­ White has excellent chances in
correct move , making Black's the ending, so there is no neces­
chances worse. The e5-pawn is sity to seek complications for the
too precious for "sacrificing" it so sake of the complications . ) 8 . . .

98
 3. i.b5 g6 4. d4

axb6 9.lbc3 c6 (9 . . . l:1a5 is inven­ timid reply 5 . . . d3 6 . tbd3 .tg7 ,

tive, but after the simple 10.Bd2 Velimirovic - Mukhametov, Ce­
c6 l l .Be2 it turns out that the tinje 1992, could be more prom­
capture of the e5-pawn is dubi­ ising. We suggest to continue the
ous: ll . . . l:txe5 12.ltJa4. The prob­ sharp course by 7 . h4 ! ? This is
lem is not only in the b6-pawn, GM [Link]'s move. 7 . . . ltJf6
also the bishop is going to c3 . (the other development of the
12 . . . d6 13.lbxb6 i.g4 14.£3 i.f5 knight is unconvincing: 7 . . . lbge7
1 5 .i.c3 .txc2 16.lbc4 f6 17.lbxe5 8.h5, and after that White's at­
dxe5 18.�d2 i.f5 19 . .td3 i£.h6+ tack may soon become danger­
2 0 . � c2±) 10 . .t c 4 ! d5 l l . exd6 ous; Black has lots of weaknesses
.txd6 1 2 . 0-0 .tf5 13.l1e1+ �f8 after the unforced by events
1 4 . .te3. Despite the simplifica­ move 7 . . . h 5 ? ! 8 . .t g 5 ± ; 7 . . . h6
tion, Black's lag in development 8 . .tf4±) 8.h5 ! The fact that White
causes him lots of trouble. 14 . . . obtains the open h-file for his
�g7 1 5 .I:.ad 1 .tc5 16.i.b3 ttJf6 attack is more important now
1 7 . J£.xc5 bxc5 1 8 . l:te7 ltJd5 1 9 . than inessential loss of a pawn.
lbxd5 cxd5 2 0 . .txd5±, and White 8 . . . lbxh5 9. i£.g5 .tf6 (Also after
soon won in the game Van den 9 . . . f6 10.i.e3 lbe5 ll .lbxe5 fxe5
Bosch - Loman, the Hague 1929. 1 2 .lbd2 White has an obvious
lead in development. ) 10.i£.h6 d6
ll.lbbd2, and after 0-0-0 White
obtains a strong initiative;
Immediately l o s e s 5 . . . d 5 ?
6 . �xd4+- , a n d B lack suffers
material losses;
5 . . . .tg7?! A move without any
idea; Black voluntarily cedes
mastery in the centre to his op­
ponent . 6 . cxd4 lb g e 7 ( 6 . . . a6
5.c3!? 7.i.a4 b5 8.i£.b3 d6, [Link]
This very pawn sac is our sug­ - Velez , Fuerteventura 1 9 9 2 ,
gestion to you. It undoubtedly 9.d5! lbe5 10.lbxe5 dxe5 11.0-0±)
has enough right to exist - White 7 . d5 lbe5, Dochev - Zshivkov,
not only wins a tempo for devel­ Bulgaria 199 1 , 8 . d6. A typical
opment, but also can use the blocking move , hindering the
open c-file to his benefit. development of Black's queen­
5 ... dxc3 side. 8 . . . cxd6 9.ltJc3±, and Black
Of course, like in all gambit cannot easyly complete the de­
variations, it is better for Black ployment of his pieces ;
to take the gift. 5 . . . a6 6 . i. c 4 d3 7 . 0-0 h 6 ,
It is unbelievable that the Mahia - Aguila, Argentine 1986,

99
Chapter 15

8. �b 3 �e7 9 . i.xd3 lt:\f6 1 0 . c4 2 l . . . �e6 22.b3 �h7 23. e5±;

i.g7 1 1 .lt:\c3 0-0 [Link] 1±. White's 7 . . . i.f6 , [Link] - Amorosi,
advantage is stable because he Italy 1999. White is not too afraid
has the important d5-outpost to exchange the dark-squared
where his knight can jump at the bishops - he can effectively make
right moment. use of the weak dark squares in
[Link]:\xc3 i.g7 7 .i.g5 the opponent's camp. But first it
An imp ortant r e s erve for is possible to strengthen the po­
White's attack. Of course, Black sition by the move 8 .h4 ! h6 (it is
can fence off the threat to his too dangerous to open up the
queen by different means, but all h-file to the white rook : 8 . . .
of them are rather inconvenient i.xg5 9 . hxg5±) 9 . i.xf6 � x f6
for him. (9 . . . lt:\xf6 10.e5 lt:\g4 1 1 . �e2 0-0
12.0-0-0±) 10.e5! �e6 (in case of
the capture 10 . . . lt:\xe5? 1 1 . �e2+­
the knight is lost) 11 .lt:\d5 Wd8
12.0-0 lt:\ge7 13 .i.c4±.
8.i.f4 lt:\e5!
GM [Link]'s witty move is
probably Black's best chance to
repulse the attack. With so many
pieces on the board Balck has
only little hope to successfully
7 ...f6 finish his development, so he
N o w the pawn deprives tries to weaken the efficacy of the
Black's pieces of the nice f6- incoming attack by trading some
square, moreover, the king's po­ pieces. Of course, it is necessary
sition is being weakened. But is to examine his other attempts as
it possible to find something bet­ well:
ter? We are not sure about it. 8 . . . lt:\ge 7 9 . �b3 ! This move
Judge for yourself: hinders Black's castling. 9 . . . d6
7 . . . lt:\f6?? 8 . i.xc6 bxc6 9. e5+-; (the black king soon got into
7 . . . lt:\ge7 [Link]:\d5 h6 9.i.f6 i.xf6 trouble after 9 . . . a6 1 0 .i.e2 d6
[Link]:\xf6+ Wf8 1 1 . �d2 . It is hard 11.0-0 i.d7 12 .l:tac1 �c8 13 .1:[Link] 1
to show a good way for Black's lt:\e5 14.i.xe5 fxe5 15 .lt:\g5 i.h6
development. For example : 11 . . . 1 6 . �f7 + Wd8 1 7 . h4 i.xg5 1 8 .
lt:\g8 1 2 . lt:\d5 lt:\f6 1 3 . �c3 Wg7 hxg5 l:te8 19.f4 i.e6 2 0 . �f6 exf4
1 4 . 0-0-0 l:f.e8 1 5 . l:.he 1 a6 1 6 . 2 l .e5 �d7 22. exd6 cxd6 [Link]:\e4
i.xc6 bxc6 1 7 .lt:\b4 i.b7 18 .lt:\e5 1-0 Har Zvi - B ailon, Agios
d6 [Link]:\exc6 i.xc6 [Link]:\xc6 �c8 Nikolaos 1995) 1 0 . 0-0 i.d7 11.
2 l . h 3 ! White should hinder lt:\d5 lt:\a5 (11 . . . a6 1 2 . i.e2 .l:f.b8
Black's queen from going to g4. 13 .i.e3 ! lt:\xd5 14.exd5 lt:\e5 1 5 .

100
 3. i.b5 g6 4. d4

�a7 liaS 1 6 . '�xb7±) 12 . .txd7+ 10 . . . .th6 1l. �e3 .txf4 12.�xf4 c6

�xd7 1 3 . �c3 lLlac6 1 4 . liJxf6+ 13.i.. c4±.
i.xf6 1 5 . �xf6 0-0-0 16. �c3 d5 ll .ta4!?
.

17 .liJe5 d4 18. �d3 �e6! 19.lLlxc6 A cunning move - not deter­

lLlxc6 20.l:Ifc 1 l:Ihe8 2 l .f3± Yer­ mining his king's position yet,
molinsky - Kreiman, New York White takes away in advance his
1993 . White has obtained a posi­ bishop from possible attacks and
tional advantage because his at the same time vacates the
king is in a safer position, his promising b 5-square for his
bishop is stronger than the black knight.
knight, and his pawns are bet­ ll ... liJc6
ter placed; Obviously disadvantageous is
Developing the knight on the 11 . . . 0-0? 12. �c4+ d5 13.exd5±.
edge of the board 8 . . . liJh6 does 12.�c4 a6
not promise Black an easy life: 12 . . . liJe5 13.i.xe5 fXe5 14.liJb5
9 . liJd5 d6 1 0 . liJd4 .td7 l l .l:tc 1 c6 15 .liJd6+ rJi;e7 16. �b4 <J;; f6 1 7 .
0-0 12.lLlxc6 bxc6 13. i..x c6±. f4 �e7 18.fxe5+ �xe5 19.f4+-.
In case of 12 . . . g5 1 3 . i.g3±
White can play h2-h4 or f3-f4 to
his benefit.
13.tLld5! b5 14:�c3 l:ta7
Black's trouble lies in the fact
that it is not easy to recapture
the pawn with . profit, finishing
his development - the opponent
retains dangerous threats in
all variati ons ! For examp l e :
9.�d4!? 14 . . . 0-0 1 5 .i.. b 3 f5 16. �e3 rJi;h8
A n e w and strong move , 17.i.xc7 �h4 18.i.. g3 f4 19. i.xf4
which has not been played yet. i.xb2 20 . .l:lb 1 .tg7 2 l .i.g5 �h5
9 . lLlxf3+
.. (2 1 . . . �h3 22.lLlf4 .l:txf4 23. �xf4
9 . . . liJe7? Black does not man- liJe5 2 4 . rJi;e2 i. b 7 2 5 . i.. f6 lte8
age to win back the pawn: 1 0 . 26.l:.hd 1 +-) 22.i.d1 d6 2 3 . h4 !
liJxe5 fxe5 ll.i.xe5+-; Black's queen i s trapped. 2 3 . . .
9 . . . liJc6 1 0 . i.xc6 bxc6 l l . e 5 lLle5 24.f4 liJg4 25. �g3 .l::t e 8 26.
: b s 1 2 . 0-0 ! In such a perfect <J;;fl !+-.
position White should not expose 1 5 .i.b3 liJe5 1 6 .i. e 3 .l:.b7
his king even to a small risk, cas­ 17.f4 liJg4 18.i.d4 c6 19.l:tc 1 !
tling long. 12 . . . f5 1 3 . i.g5 liJe7 White threatens t o drive
14.�f6 0-0 1 5 . liJg5±. away Black's knight from g4, so
10.gxf3 liJe7 Black must concede a disadvan­
10 . . . c6 1 1 . 0-0 cxb5 12.lLlxb5±; tageous exchange.

101
Chapter 15

19 . . . cxd5 2 0 . '�xc8 �xeS Black escaped the m ating

2 1 ..:xc8+ ct;e7 22.:txh8 .txhS threat, but the endgame which
23 . .txd5 .:.c7 arised after a mass simplifica­
tion, is difficult for him. We can
conclude that the gambit varia­
tion, which we suggested, offers
White excellent chances for a big
advantage without long and
laborious positional work. This
is a rarity for such a solid open­
ing as the Ruy Lopez . White's
risky pawn sacrifice is amply re­
warded with perfect attacking
[Link];d2!± opportunities.

102
 Chapter 1 6 l .e4 e5 2.t2Jf3 tbc6 3.i.b5 t2Jd4
Bird's Defence

�g7 1 0 . '§'xe4 '§'f6 it's unclear

how White could gain an advan­
tage.

Using certain exposure of the

Ruy-Lope z -like bishop on b 5 ,
Black tries t o put u p a n immedi­
ate fight for the centre by this
move . But, as practice shows , Black has two main continu­
this thrust is somewhat early ations : a) 5 .Jtc5 and b) 5 c6.
..• ..•

because Black is not prepared White meets 5 . . . tiJf6 with

for such an active play. Also note 6.e5.
the important fact that Black's Black has no time for 5 . . . g6 .
pawn appearing on d4 is rather White's best option in this case
a weak point, and the subse­ is to emphasise the sluggishness
quent struggle in this variation of Black's development by 6 . c3
will prove this statement. (but also the immediate advance
4.tiJxd4 exd4 5.0-0 on the kingside 6.f4!? ..tg7 7.f5 is
In c a s e o f the immediate possible), and after 6 . . . ..tg7 7 . e5
transfer of the bishop to a more tiJe7 (certainly not 7 . . . i.xe5? be-
active position by 5 . ..tc4!? Black cause of 8 . l:te 1 +-) 8 . cxd4 0-0
simply answers with 5 . . . c6, s�ir­ (8 . . . c6 9.i.. c4 0-0 10.b3 d5 ll . ..td3
ring play into the main varia­ �b6 1 2 . i.. b 2;!:; Rios - Moreno,
tions, but 5 . . . tiJf6 !? deserves at­ Ciego de Avila 1996) 9 . b 3 c6
tention too, and after 6. 0-0 ttJxe4 10.i.. e2 tiJf5 ll . ..tb2 �b6 12.tiJa3
7.i.. xf7 + 'it>xf7 8. '§'h5+ g6 9. �d5+ tiJxd4 1 3 . tiJc4 tiJxe2 + 1 4 . '§'xe2

103
Chapter 1 6

fla6 1 5 . d3;!; Black returned the logically, White meets a flank

missing pawn but lagged behind attack with active play in the
in development, and also the centre. In case of 6.d3 Black has
weakness of his dark squares 6 . . . li:Jf6, and then 7.f4 lt:Jg4 with
was perceptible in Becerra Ri­ some unclear play). 6 . . . ..tc5 (in
vero - Moreno, San Juan 1995. case of 6 . . . c6 7 . ..ta4 the hamper­
5 . . . lt:Je7 is passive. Black pre­ ing 7 . . . d3 is quite dubious be­
pares d7-d5 after c6, but he ex­ cause after 8 . �f3± White simply
periences difficulties with the takes the pawn without any com­
kingside development, which al­ pensation for Black, Timman -
low White to proceed relatively Marmier, Zurich 1988) 7 . cxd4
quickly to active play: after 6.d3 ..ixd4 [Link]:Jc3 c6 9 . ..tc4 lt:Jffi 10 .lt:Je2
c6 (the following attempt to com­ ..tb6 ll .e5 d5 12 . ..tb3 lt:Jg8 13 .d4
plete the development did not .tg4 14.f3 .te6 1 5 . i.c2 lt:Je7 16.
solve Black's problems : 6 . . . g6 i.g5 �d7 1 7 . .txe7 �xe7 1 8 . �d2
7 . ..tg5 ..tg7 8 . li:Jd2 0-0 9 . f4 d6 0-0-0 1 9 . 'it>h 1 'it>b8 2 0 . f4 ..tg4
10 . ..ic4 'it>h8 1 l . �e2 �e8 12.l:tae 1 2 1 . t2lg1 ffi 22.�ae l;!; gave Black
i.d7 1 3 . �£2 b5 14 . ..ib3 a5 15.a3 a fairly active p o s i t i o n , yet
a4 1 6 . ..ia2 ..ie6 1 7 . ..ixe6 fxe6 White's advantage in the centre
18. �h4;!; gave White good attack­ helped him refute the opponent's
ing prospects in the game Moroz thrusts and prepare further im­
- Vladimirov, Barnaul 1988; and provements of his own position
no better was 6 . . . lt:Jc6 7 . f4 g6 in the game Leko - Morozevich,
8 . �f3 ..ig7 9 . .ixc6 dxc6 1 0 . f5 Moscow 2002.
with an attack in Van Riemsdijk
- Trombetta, Mar del Plata 1992) a) 5 .....ic5
7 . .ic4 d 5 8 . ..ib3 ..i e 6 9 . f4 g6
1 0 . � e 1 dxe4 1 1 . ..ixe6 fxe6 1 2 .
�xe4 �d5 1 3 . l:!. e l;!; Black did
simplify the position, but ob­
tained real pawn weaknes ses
instead in the game Prie - Anic,
Narbonne 1997.
The idea of 5 . . . h5 is quite in­
teresting. (Black invites the op­
ponent to demonstrate his inten­
tions and provokes him to the 6.i.c4
next, quite consistent action. At White wants to play �h5 on
the same time, Black maintains occasion to increase then his
control over g4 and prepares a pressure on the kingside.
possible attack on the kingside 6 ... d6 7 .d3 li:Jf6
by li:Jf6-g4 , �h4 . ) 6 . c3 (Really As shown by practice, other

104
 3. i.. b 5 ttJd4 4. ttJd4 ed 5. 0-0

continuations don't save Black 7 ... 8 . ..ig5 h6 9 . ..ih4 g5 10.

trouble: i.. g3 i.. g4
7. J l:,e7 8 . ..ig5 0-0 9.'gth5 i.e6 1 0 . . . tLlg4 promotes White's
10. �h4! l:te8 ll.i.xe6 fxe6 12.f4!? initiative on the kingside: ll .h3
�d7 1 3 . llf3 ! ttJg6 14. �h5 ttJf8 ttJe5 12.i.b3 ..ie6 1 3 . �h5 i.xb3
1 5 .ttJd2 a6 16. llafl d5 17J1g3 ! 14.axb3 �f6 1 5 . f4±, Gelfand -
allowed White to create real Kupreichik, Sverdlovsk 1987.
threats on the kingside despite ll.f3 ..ie6 12.tLld2 �d7 13.
certain rigidity of his play in ..ixe6 fxe6
Brenke - Binder, corr. 1996;
7 . . . �h4 8.tLld2 ttJf6 9.f4 i.e6
10.tiJf3;!:: gave White a develop­
ment advantage in Hamarat -
Burger, corr 1990/93 ;
7 . . . ..i e 6 neutralises White's
dangerous bishop . But White
made use of his development
advantage to obtain other posi­
tional advantages . And after
8.i.xe6 fxe6 9. �h5+ g6 10. �e2 14.f4±
f:/e7 1 1 . tLld2 tLlh6 1 2 . tLlb3 ttJf7 White stands clearly better
13.tLlxc5 dxc5 14.i.d2;!:: he stood owing to his more active pieces
really better due to his superior and well - p o s i t i o n e d p a wn s ,
pawn structure and the bishop Ghinda - Kotronias , Athens
that was stronger than Black's 1986.
knight in Moldovan - Martinkus,
Hollabrunn 1998; b) 5 c6
•.•

7 . . . c6 8 .'gl' h5 �e7 (the prob­

lems were not solved after the
unnatural 8 . . . � d 7 9 . i.g5 h6
10.ttJd2 g6 1 1 . �h4 �g4 12.f4 'it>f8
1 3 .h3 �xh4 1 4 . i.xh4 f5 1 5 . a4
fxe4 16.ttJxe4 b6 1 7 .i.a2 d5 18.
ttJxc5 bxc5 19.c4 tLle7 20.l:[Link]± in
Oil - Gusein ov, USSR 1 9 8 8 ,
when Black did force exchanges
but in a worse version) 9.i.g5
ttJ f6 1 0 . � h 4 h6 l l . ttJ d 2 llg8 6 ...ic4
12.i.xf6 �xf6 13. �xf6 gxf6 14.f4 In case of 6 . i.a4 ttJf6 7 . c3
f5 15 .11ae l;!:: leaves the initia­ Black has already 7 . . . d3 , for
tive on White's side in the end­ example, after the principal
game. 8. f:/£3 d5 (worse is the alluring

105
Chapter 16

8 . . . � a 5 in view o f 9 . .t b 3 �e5 koff, Gausdal 198 1 ) 9.i.xe6 fxe6

1 0 . �xd3 l2Jxe4 1 l . �e2 ! , laying 10.d4 ltJf6 ll .d5 cxd5 1 2 . exd5 e5
stress upon Black's underdevel­ 13.�b3 �d7 14.f4 exf4 15 . .txf4
opment, 1 l . . .i.d6 ( 1l . . .d5 1 2.d3 .te7 1 6 . l2Jb 5 0-0 1 7 . ltJ d4 i.d8
i.d6 1 3 . f4+-) 12.f4 �e7 13 . .l:!.e1 18 .ltJe6± Panov - Trupan, Mos­
l2Jc5 14 . .txf7±) 9.e5 ltJe4 10. �xd3 cow 1 9 49. White's active play
l2Jc5 1 1 . �c2 d4 ! ii5 B enj amin - gained him a substantial posi­
Soltis, San Francisco 1998. Black tional advantage.
managed to confuse the concord 7.exd5 cxd5 s . .tb5+ .td7
of White's pieces at the cost of a 9.l:tel+ ltJe7
pawn. Bad is 9 . . . i.e7? because of the
6 ... d5 simple 10. �g4 ! .
The fundamental continua­
tion.
Black's problems do not dis­
appear in the event of 6 . . . ltJf6:
after 7 .It.e 1 (7.e5 looks tempting,
but then Black has the standard
7 . . . d5!oo, and the same is in case
of 7 . d 3 d 5 ! ? ) 7 . . . d6 8 . c3 ltJg4
( 8 . . . '�b6 9 . '�b3 �xb3 10 . .txb3
dxc3 ll.bxc3 i.e7 12.d4;!; Berczes
- Zoltan, Budapest 2002 ; 8 . . . dxc3 10.c4!?
9 . l2Jxc3 i.e7 1 0 . d4;!;) 9 . h3 lll e 5 This way of developing the
10.d3 l2Jxc4 ll.dxc4 dxc3 12.l2Jxc3 initiative is relatively new. White
.te7 13 . .tf4 0-0 14. �d3 .te6 15. undermines Black's position in
l:tad 1;!; Matanovic - Glikisman, the centre right away and quite
Kraljevo 1967, White left his op­ consistently in view of his devel­
ponent behind in development opment advantage.
and was ready to launch some 10 ... a6
active operation, also Black's d6- Black's unwillingness to open
pawn could become a source of the position up is very natural,
trouble for him very soon. because otherwise in case of
6 . . . d6 is passive, and the fol­ 10 . . . .txb5 ll.cxb5 �b6 [Link] a3 or
lowing line is the best argument 10 . . . dxc4 l l . i.xc4 or 10 . . . dxc3
for this estimation: 7 . c3 ! dxc3 ll.i.xd7+ �xd7 12.dxc3 he faces
(7 . . . b5 8 . i.b3 �f6 9.a4t Kobe - great problems every time.
Vucemilovic, Kranj 1995; 7 . . . ltJf6 10 . . . l:i.c8 occurred in the chess
8 . �b3 ! ? ) 8 . ltJxc3 .te6 (8 . . . lll f6 practice, but again after 1 l . d3
9. �b3 �c7 10.d4 b5 ll . .td3 :b8 i.xb5 1 2 . cxb5 �d7 1 3 .l2Ja3 f6
12. i.g5 b4 13 .l2Je2 i.e7 14.l:tac 1 [Link] 2 �xb5 15.l2Jxd4 �d7 16.
0-0 1 5 . �c2± Schneider - Serna- �h5+ g6 1 7 . �h4 White had a

106
 3. i.b5 ltJd4 4. ttJd4 ed 5. 0-0

strong initiative in Luther - Klip, with the unavoidable opening up

Pardubice 1999. of the queenside, for example af­
ll.i.xd7 �xd7 12.d3 0-0-0 ter 14 . . . ttJf5 15.b5.
Not good is 12 . . . g6 running 15.dxc4 ttJc6
into the simple 13.i.g5±.
The plan implying the imme­
diate advance of the black d­
pawn is of little use, too: after
12 . . . dxc4 1 3 . dxc4 0-0-0 14.b4 d3
1 5 . i.b2 d2 1 6 . l:.e2± Black's re­
tard in development leaves him
no hope to take the initiative.
Also Black can't hide his king
on the kingside with the help of
12 . . . f6 followed by �fl because 16.b5!±
of 1 3 . �h5+ g6 1 4 . �h4± with It's very difficult for Black to
White's strong pressure. oppose White's increasing activ­
13.liJd2 �b8 14.b4 dxc4 ity on the queenside, Kasparov
It's already hard to refute b5 - Khalifman, Moscow 2002.

107
Chapter 1 7 l .e4 e5 2.tiJf3 ltJc6 3.i.b5 d6
Old Steinitz Defence

different options : one is to de­

velop his pieces granting the op­
ponent the right to make the
important decisions a) 5 ltJf6, or
•..

immediat..'"!ly relieve the tension

in the centre b) 5 exd4.
•.•

Steinitz's most favourite con­

tinuation 5 . . . ltJge7 does not yield
an equality. 6.dxe5 (Em. Lasker
This system used to be Black's played against Steinitz more
main defensive weapon in the than once 6 . .tc4 ltJxd4 7 . ltJxd4
XIX century. For many years exd4 8 . thd4 ltJc6 9 . �e3;!; with a
it has been keeping its reputa­ minute advantage ) 6 . . . ltJ x e 5
tion of a solid, but passive for­ (6 . . . dxe5 7 . .te3 ltJg6 8 . �e2 .td6
mation. 9.0-0-0 a6 10 ..txc6 .txc6 1l.h4t.
4.d4 .td7 White has an initiative - the
The move 4 . . . .tg4?! is dubious knight failed to find a comfort­
5 . dxe5 dxe5 6 . '�xd8+ l:txd8 7 . able stand, [Link] - A.
.txc6+ bxc6 8 . .te3 . I n the end­ Ivanov, Lviv 1974) 7.ltJxe5 dxe5
game White has an advantage (of course, not 7 . . . .txb5 8 .ltJxf7 ! )
thanks to his better pawn struc­ 8 . .tc4 ! .te6 (bad i s 8 . . . ltJg6? 9 .
ture, Duras - Marshall , Nurn­ �d5 .t e 6 1 0 . '�xb 7 ! .t x c 4 1 1 .
berg 1906. �c6+ ) 9 . .txe6 �xd 1+ 1 0 . ltJxd 1
In case of 4 . . . exd4 the capture fxe6 ll .f3;!;. White has a slight
by the knight 5.ltJxd4 .td7 6.ltJc3 but lasting endgame advantage.
leads to positions which are con­ Black's doubled pawns make the
sidered below ; 5 . thd4 can be manoeuvring of his pieces more
reached from Philidor's Defence difficult, Rozentalis - I. Sokolov,
as well. Tilburg 1993 .
5.ltJc3
Black has two fundamentally a) 5 ltJf6 6 . .txc6 .txc6 7.
..•

108
 3 . ..ib5 d6 4. d4 ..td7 5. tLlc3

�d3 activity of his pieces' harmonious

White prepares a long cas­ position, Nimzowitsch - L. Stei­
tling, leaving a choice for his ner, Bad Niendorf 1927.
bishop. 8.tLlxd4 ..te7
The idea of fianchettoing the
dark-squared bishop is dubious:
8 . . . g6? ! 9 . ..tg5 (White should not
be allured by the pawn 9.tLlxc6?!
bxc6 1 0 . -r!ia6 -r!id7 l l . "f!ib7 �c8
1 2 . -r!ixa7 ..tg7 1 3 . 0-0 0-0 , as
shown by the famous game Nim­
zowitsch - Capablanca, St. Pe­
tersburg 1914) 9 . . . ..tg7 10. 0-0-0
-r!id7 ( 10 . . . 0-0? immediately loses
7.. exd4
. to l l . tLlx c 6 b x c 6 1 2 . e 5 d x e 5
The best continuation. 1 3 . -r!if3 and Black resigned i n
Poor is 7 . . . -r!ie7 8. ii.g5 h6 9 . view o f 13 . . . -r!i e 7 14.tLle4, Kutu­
..ixf6 -r!ixf6 10.dxe5 dxe5 11 .tLld5 zovic - Dobrovolsky, Harkany
-r!id6 1 2 . 0-0-0± with the idea 1994) ll.h3! 0-0 12 .�he l± with
of -r!ic3 and Black will have to White's overwhelming position
play f7-f6 irreversibly weakening in the centre, Alekhine - Brinck­
the kingside's light s quare s , mann, Kecskemet 1927.
Tatai - Calvo, Palma d e Mall orca Almost the same assess­
1967. ment can be attributed to the
The position after 7 . . . tLld7 oc­ continuation 8 . . . -r!id7 [Link].g5 ..te7
curred twice in Nimzowitsch's 1 0 . 0-0-0 0-0 i l . lLlf5 �fe8 1 2 .
practice. In his game against l:[Link] 1 ..i d S 13 . f4±, White's on­
Breyer he was tempted by the slaught unfolds with no hitches,
straightforward 8.d5, but after Alekhine - Pedreira, Santa Cruz
8 . . . tLlc5 9. -r!ic4 ..td7 10 .b4 tLla6 1945.
l l .i.e3 i.e7 1 2 . 0-0 0-0 1 3 . a4 Possible is 8 . . . ..td7 guarding
'iti>h8 Black has a clear plan of the f5-square. After 9.i.g5 i.e7
counterplay, which is in f7 -f5 and 10. 0-0-0 0-0 l l . f4 tLle8 [Link].xe7
it compensates for the knight's -r!ixe7 13.tLld5 -r!id8 14.g4 ! ? tLlf6
awkward position, Nimzowitsch 1 5 .li:Jf5;t White's positional ad­
- Breyer, Gothenburg 1 9 2 0 . vantage is obvious, still the de­
Seven years later Nimzowitsch fence is not exhausted, Spiel­
got a chance to demonstrate an mann - Maroczy, Gothenburg
improvement: 8 . ..ie3 exd4 9 . 1920 .
..txd4 ! f6 1 0 . li:Jh4 ! tLlc5 1 1 . -r!ie2 9.tLlf5 g6
-r!id7 1 2 . li:Jf5± and White has a With 9 . . . 0-0 Black falls under
clear advantage thanks to the a pin along the h4-d8 diagonal :

109
 Chapter 1 7

10.�g5 �d7 1 1 . tLlxe7+ 'f!ixe7 12. castling and the onset o n the
0-0-0 i.c6 1 3 . tM4 l:Ue8 14.f3;!; kingside much promising. Black
and after the exchanges on f6 can complicate the play). 14 . . .
White acquires a comfortable f5 1 5 . f3 tLle5 1 6 . 'f!ie3 fxe4 1 7 .
endgame, Wedberg - Abramovic, fxe4 tLlg4 1 8 . 'f!id4;!;. Despite the
New York 1990. isolation of the e4-pawn, White
retains better chances, as Black
has weakened the squares
around his king and the h8-rook
is still out of play.

Let us consider the immedi­

ate surrender of the centre.
b) 5 . . exd4
.

l O .tLlg7+!? (also possible is

10.tLld4 - the loss of tempo is ir­
relevant, and the weakening of
g7-g6 will tell further) 10 . . . Wf8
1 l . �h6 Wg8 12.tLlf5! tLlg4 (With
1 2 . . . �f8 1 3 . i.xf8 'f!ixf8 14.tLle3
l:te8 1 5 .f3;!; White has a stable
advantage : Black's major pieces
have bad positions, his bishop is 6.tLlxd4 tLlfG
restrained by the enemy pawn Other options are:
chain. After the short castling 6 . . . tLlxd4 7. 'f!ixd4 tLlf6 (or 7 . . .
and the move 'f!id4, which weak­ �xb5 8 . tLlxb5 'f!i d 7 9 . c4± and
ens the queenside , White can White has the upper hand - he
expand on this flank with his controls the key squares) 8 . 0-0
pawns. There is a good d5-square �xb5 9.tLlxb5 a6 10 .tLlc3 �e7 1 1 .
in sight for his knights ) . 1 3 . b 3 0-0 12.i.b2±. The exchange of
tLl x e 7 + 'f!i x e 7 1 4 . � f4 (Now if two pairs of minor pieces did not
everything goes quietly White rid Black of all his problems .
plays f2-f3 and gets a position White has an annoying pressure
which has a lot in common with along the long diagonal, the d5-
the one which has been consid­ square needs a watch while with
ered in the previous note, with the move c7 -c6 Black weakens
the only difference that instead the d6-pawn, Euwe - Wiersma,
of the knight White has a dark­ Amsterdam 1920;
squared bishop left. This fact 6 . . . g6 7 .�e3 �g7 8 . 'f!id2 tLlf6
makes the plan with the long (on 8 . . . tLlge7 White can immedi-

110
 3. �b5 d6 4. d4 �d7 5. tLlc3

ately reveal his aggressive inten­

tions on the kingside by 9.h4)
9 . .ixc6! (The standard 9.£3 0-0
10. 0-0-0 meets the tactical ob­
jection 10 . . . tLlxd4 1l . .ixd4 tLlxe4!
12.tLlxe4 - in case of capture by
the pawn Black exchanges on d4
and b5 and checks on g5 by the
q u e e n - 1 2 . . . .i x b 5 1 3 . � c 3 ! ?
.ixd4 14. �xd4 f5 ! 15. �d5+ 'i;g7 10.0-0-0t
16.tLlxd6 �g5+ 17.l::t d2 .ic6= with In comparison to the game
equalization, Minasian - Moro ­ Psakhis - Haik, White will find
zevich, Jurmala 1992) 9 . . . bxc6 it difficult to develop his attack
1 0 . �h6 0-0 ll . .ixg7 'i;xg7 12. since the pawn shelter of the en­
0-0-0 .neB 13.£3 with a clear in­ emy king is still unharmed. How­
tention to advance the kingside's ever Black is deprived of real
pawns. Black's counterplay is too counterplay and will have to en­
sluggish. Mter the, say, 13 . . . �b8 dure the lasting initiative of the
14.g4 �b4 15.a3 �b7 16.l::t de 1 ! opponent . 10 . . . .Ue8 ( after 10 . . .
�ab8 17.tLld1 c 5 18.tLle2 .l:te5 19. tLlg4 1l .�xe7 �xe7 12. �g3 tLlf6
tLlg3 .ic6 20.h4± White's edge is 13 . .l:the 1 .Ufe8 14.f4 the threat e4-
tangible, Psakhis - Haik, Sochi e5 is hard to deflect, Hug -
1985. Moles, Stockholm 1969) 1 1 . £3
7.�xc6 bxc6 8.�d3 �c8 12.h4 �b7 13.g4 l:tab8 14.
After the frequently seen b3;!; 'i;h8 (White meets the coun­
8 . �f.3 , depending on the situa­ ter in the centre 14 . . . d5 by 1 5 . e5
tion, White makes his choice be­ .ia3+ 16.'i;b 1 .Uxe5 17. kxf6 gxf6
t w e e n invading f5 with the 18.f4 .l:r.ee8 19.g5 with a danger­
knight or pushing e4-e5, how­ ous attack). White has different
ever tournament experience ways to develop his offensive. In
proves that Black's defensive Velicka - Ramik, Brno 1 9 9 5
potential is s u fficient. Here White threw i n a pawn 1 5 . h5
comes the idea of preparing a tLlxg4 16.kxe7 tLle5 1 7 . �e3 .lixe7
long castle, lea wing a freeway to 18.h6, obtaining a nice compen­
the f-pawn. sation in the form of open files
8 . i.e7 9.�g5 0-0
.. on the kingside.

111
 Chapter 1 8 l .e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3.Jtb5 Jtc5
Classical Defence

7 . . . �d7 - 8 . '�a4 wins a piece ,

Em. Lasker - Richards, New York
(simul) 1892. 7 . . . d5 was played
in another simul-game of an ac­
tual World Champion Alekhine
- De Carvalho, Hong Kong (si­
mul) 1933, and White could have
achieved a decisive advantage
with 8. �b3 ! dxe4 9.tLle5 . If Black
Black is not stopping d2-d4 plays 7 . . . a6, after 8.�xc6+ bxc6
for White with this development 9. �a4 l!b8 10. a3+-, the bishop
of the bishop; he has no resources has no retreat squares. Black's
to do that. On the contrary - the best chance 6 . . . � b 6 7 . d 5 a6
idea is much rather to provoke [Link]. a4 ..lta5+ 9.�d2 �xd2+ 10.
d4 in order to counter a ttack tLlbxd2 b5 1l.dxc6 bxa4 12. �xa4±
White's centre later. leaves him with a pawn down
4.c3 without any compensation.
The most solid line for Black 4 . . . d5 is met with 5.t2Jxe5 �g5
is 4 . . . t2Jf6 5 . 0-0 0-0 6.d4 �b6, (Black loses a piece after 5 . . .
and we are going to study it in �xf2+ 6.Wxf2 �f6+ 7 . t2Jf.3 dxe4
Chapter 23 after the following 8.l:te 1 ) 6.0-0 �xe5 7.d4 �e6 (7 . . .
move order 3 . . . tLlf6 4. 0-0 �c5. �d6 8.dxc5 �xc5 9 . �xd5+-; 7 . . .
Now there are two main lines: �xd4 8.cxd4 �d6 9 . exd5 �xd5
a) 4 f5 and b) 4 . t2Jge7. Let's
•.. .. 10.t2Jc3 �d6 1l .d5 a6 12. �a4+-)
have a look first at some other 8.dxc5 dxe4 9 . ..1tf4±. White has
inferior variations for Black. avoided some unnecessary com­
The move 4 . . . d6? is not to be plications with a temporary piece
recommended. Mter 5 . d4 exd4 sacrifice and has a clear advan­
6 . cxd4 the natural 6 . . . �b4+ is tage due to the two bishops, bet­
met with [Link] and the pin of the ter development and the possi­
knight becomes deadly for Black, bility to attack the c7 and e4-
because of the misplaced ..ib4. If pawns. Mter 9 . . . a6 10.�a4 �e7

1 12
 2. lLlf3 lLlc6 3. i.b5 i.c5 4. c3

( 1 0 . . . �d7 1 l .lLld2 f5 12Jle 1 lLlf6 10.�xe4 f6 l l . i.f4 fxe5 12.i.xe5

1 3 . f3 winning the e 4 - p a w n ) i.f5 13. �e3 �e7. Black prepares
1 l..l::i. e 1 f5 12. �d5 � d 7 ( 1 2 . . . ..td7 c6-c5 with a sufficient compen­
13 . ..txc7) 13. �c4 and Black has sation for the pawn Chandler -
problems to castle. Gulko, Hastings 1989. The dubi­
Mter 4 . . . �f6 White should ous 5 . . . exd4 6 . cxd4 lLlce7 has
still play 5.d4 ! (this is stronger been played numerous times by
than 5 . 0-0 lLlge 7 ) despite the GM Hector. White managed to
seemingly excellent central con­ obtain a huge advantage in one
trol by Black. 5 . . . exd4 6.e5 �g6 of the latest games in this line :
(6 . . . lLlxe5? 7 . �e2 and White wins 7 . d5 ltJf6 8 .lLlc3 a6 9 . i.a4 0-0
a piece) 7.cxd4 lLlxd4 (or 7 . . . i.b4+ 10 .d6! cxd6 l l . i.g5 lLlg4 (if 11 . . .
8 . lLlc3 lLlge7 9 . 0-0 d5 1 0 . �b3 lLlc6 White should avoid the trap
i.xc3 ll.bxc3± [Link] - Kha­ 12 .lLld5?! [Link]-2+! - the simple 12.
ritonov, Lviv 1984 and the pow­ 0-0 emphasizes the annoying pin
erful centre provides White with along the h4-d8 diagonal ) 1 2 .
a lasting advantage ) 8 . lLlxd4 0 - 0 f6 1 3 . i. f4 lLl e 5 1 4 . l:! c l ± .
�b6. Black wins a pawn tacti­ Black's pieces placement looks
cally, but after 9. �g4 ! 'i!tf8 (9 . . . ugly and the bishops are with­
i.xd4 1 0 . �xg7±) 1 0 . ..te3 i.xd4 out good p r o s p e cts . White's
1 1 . �xd4 �xb5 1 2 . lLla3± he re­ knights can occupy the d5 and f5-
mains hopelessly behind in de­ squares, creating plenty of tacti­
velopment. White easily brings cal motives around the weakened
into action the rooks and Black black king, Nijboer - Hector,
will hardly be able to neutralize Wijk aan Zee 2003.
the threats with forces that lack After 4 . . . a6 the retreat of the
coordination. bishop 5.i.a4 leads to positions
Mter 4 . . . ..tb6 5 . 0-0 the devel­ analysed after the sequence
opment of the knight to e7 leads 3 . . . a6 4 . ..ta4 i.c5. The more prin­
to a position that we are going to cipled line is 5 . i.xc6 dxc6 6 .
analyse later, while ltJf6 will be lLlxe5. Mter 6 . . . �e7 White re­
treated in the chapter devoted to mains with an extra pawn: 7.d4
the move order 3 . . . lLlf6 4 . 0-0 i.d6 8 . f4 i.xe5 (8 . . . f6 9. 0-0 fxe5
i.c5. If White plays 5.d4 Black 1 0 . fxe5 i.xe5 1 l . �h5+ g6 1 2 .
must choose between 5 . . . ltJf6 and �xe5 �xe5 1 3 . dxe5±) 9 . dxe5
5 . . . exd4. In the first line White �h4+ 10.g3 �h3 1 1 . �£3 i.g4 12.
should try with 6 . 0-0 0-0 to �fl �h5 1 3 . lLld2 and Black's
transpose to positions arising counterplay on the light squares
after 3 . . . lLlf6 4 . 0-0 i.c5, since is not sufficient to equalize. If
6 . i.xc6 dxc6 7 . lLlxe5 does not 6 . . . �g5, then 7 . 0-0 �xe5 8 . d4
yield White any advantage - �e7 9 . dxc5 �xc5 1 0 . i. f4 . We
7 . . . 0-0 8.i.g5 �e8 ! 9 . �£3 lLlxe4 have the pawn structure of the

113
 Chapter 18

Exchange Variation, but Black 7 . . . lL!f6 and 7 . . . d6.

lacks the bishop's pair advantage 7 . . . lL!f6 8.d4 i.. b 6. White can
to compensate for that. White pinpoint the weakness of the en­
can develop his pieces in the fol­ emy centre with 9 . i.. d 5 ! ? exd4
lowing scheme : lL!d2, �c2 , llae 1 10.cxd4 and White is better both
retreat the bishop and start after 10 . . . 0-0 ll.l::t e 1 h6 (if 11 . . .
pushing the e and f-pawns . i.. b 7 the pin after 1 2 . i.. g5 is
Black tries here often 4 . . . "�e7 rather unpleasant) 1 2 . i.. b 3 d6
5.0-0. 13.lLlc3 with a space advantage
and a powerful pawn centre , as
well as in the line 1 0 . . . i.. b 7?!
ll .lL!c3 b4 12.e5! bxc3 1 3 . exf6
t'l'xf6 14.l::t e 1 + �f8 15.bxc3± Sax
- Szurovszky, Hungary 1997 -
and the mighty centre is restrict­
ing Black's pieces considerably,
while the black king hinders the
coordination of the rooks .
7 . . . d6 8.d4 i..b 6 [Link].g5 lLlf6 (af-
5 . . . lL!f6? is bad after 6.d4 ii.b6 ter 9 . . . f6 10.i.. e 3 Black has prob-
7 . i.. g5 and Black has to play lems with his king and the
7 . . . h6 [Link].xf6 gxf6 in order to knight on g8, Acs - Szurovszky,
defend the e5-outpost. Mter 9.d5 Hungary 1998). The position on
lL!d8 1 0 . lL!h4 White obtained a the board resembles the Arkhan­
huge positional advantage , P. gelsk Variation (3 . . . a6 4.i.. a4 lL!f6
Morphy - E . Morphy, New Or­ 5 . 0-0 b5 6 . ii.b3 ii.c5), but the
leans 1856. placement of the queen on e7
Black tried some awkward enables White to have some ad­
looking moves in order to keep ditional possibilities, for example
control over the centre in some after the standard 1 0 . a4 i.. b 7
old games like 5 . . . i.. b 6 6.d4 f6 ll.axb5 axb5 12.llxa8+ i..xa8 13.
[Link]!a3 lLld8 [Link]!c4 lLI£7, [Link] d5 lL!a5 White can start a king­
- Boden, London 1858, but that side operation with [Link]!h4 0-0
line seems a bit ridiculous. White 15 .lL!f5 t'l'd8 1 6 . i.. c 2 and Black
has the powerful 9 . "�a4! with a has problems defending, because
nice edge - the threat is to cap­ most of his pieces are stranded
ture on b6 and Black has to re­ on the queenside (in case of
capture with the c-pawn, while 13 . . . lL!a7 the knight manoeuvre
9 . . . c6 is unplayable due to 10 . is even stronger - 14. lL!h4 0-0
.txc6+-. 15 .lL!f5 �d8 1 6 . t'l'f3) .
After 5 . . . a6 6.i.. a4 b5 7 .i..b 3 We can start dealing with the
Black has two basic alternatives: main lines now.

1 14
 2. l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3. ..tb5 ..tc5 4. c3

a) 4 f5
.•. 10.l2Jd2 ..txe5 (if 10 . . . l2Jf6 , then
l l .h3± B oleslavsky - Tolush,
Moscow 1944 followed by g2-g3 .
After 10 . . . ..tf5 White wins a pawn
with the resolute l l . g4± Davies
- Sp eelman , Hastings 1 9 8 7 )
1 1 .dxe5 ..tf5 1 2 . 0-0 0-0-0 1 3 . f3 !
exf.3 14.l2Jx£3±. Black managed to
avoid losing a pawn, but White's
advantage is obvious. He has bet­
ter development, strong passed
5.d4 fxe4 central pawn and Black's queen
After 5 . . . exd4 White occupies has no good square where to
a lot of space in the centre with retre at, Anand - Pulkkinen ,
6.e5! and after 6 . . . dxc3 7.l2Jxc3 Oakham 1986 .
l2Jge7 8 . 0-0 0-0 9.l2Ja4 ..tb6 10. 8.0-0 l2Jf6 9 ..tf4 ..id6 10.c4
.

l2Jxb6 axb6 ll .I:!.e l . Black's weak �e6

king is more than sufficient com­
pensation for White's lack of a
pawn. Additionally Black has to
consider the ..tc4+ and l2Jg5 at­
tack, and might encounter some
problems developing his bishop,
Kovalev - [Link], Bela Crkva
1990.
6 ...txc6 dxc6
6 . . . exf3 7 . ..txf3 exd4 8 . 0-0 !
l2Jf6 9.l:e 1 + ..te7 1 0 . ..tg5± Torre ll.c5;!;
- Tatai, Haifa 1976. White has White is better, because ofthe
mobilized his pieces faster and prospective outpost on e5 and the
Black has to face a lot of prob­ weakness of the e4-pawn. After
lems now. After 10 . . . 0-0 White 1 1 . . . ..txe5 12 . ..txe5 l2Jg4!? (in case
has the strong 1 1 . �e2. of 1 2 . . . l2Jd5 1 3 . �h5+ �f7 1 4 .
7.l2Jxe5 �d5 �xf7+ �xf7 15.l2Jd2 ..t f5 16.l::. ae 1
The natural 7 . . . ..td6 is met by Black will be a pawn down in an
8 . �h5+ g6 9 . �e2 with White's endgame; the weakness on e4 is
edge (9.l2Jxg6? l2Jf6 10. �h4 l!g8 evident in the following lines too:
ll .lDe5 l%.xg2 12 . ..tg5? ..txe5 13. 12 . . . �e7 13J:te1 or 12 . . . 0-0 1 3 .
dxe5 ..tg4 ! -+ ). Black's e4-pawn is l2Jc3 !?) 13 . ..tg3 ! (It i s premature
rather weak. Black has to defend for White to try 13 . ..txc7? e3)
it with the queen, bringing it to 13 . . . 0-0 (now after 13 . . . e3 White
a vulnerable position - 9 . . . �h4 can play 1 4 J:t e 1 ) 1 4 J:t e 1 � f7

115
Chapter 18

15. t'l'b3 and White is going to win 5.0-0

one of the two pawns - c7 or e4. White is threatening d2-d4
If 11 . . . .lte7 12 .lt:lc3 0-0 13 . ..ig3 avoiding the check on b4 after
b6, then 14.,l;!e 1 ! bxc5 1 5 . dxc5 e5xd4 and c3xd4 .
.ltxc5 [Link]:lxe4 lt:lxe4 17 . .Uxe4 fol­ 5 i.b6
. . .

lowed by t'l'a4 and l:tae 1 , and 5 . . . a6 6 . ..ia4 leads by transpo -

White's position in the centre is sition to the line 3 . . . a6 4 . ..ia4
extremely powerful, so Black will ..ic5 .
hardly be able to defend his weak Black should not play 5 . . . d5?,
doubled pawns. because after 6 . lt:lxe5 dxe4 7 .
White is faced with a most lt:lxf7 �xf7 8 . t'l'h5+ White wins a
difficult task after the subtle pawn.
11 . . . 0-0 ! 12.cxd6 cxd6 (Black is If 5 . . . lt:lg6 6 . d4 exd4 7 . cxd4
recapturing his piece ) 13 . ..ig3 ..ib6 , as in the game Lasker ­
dxe5 14.dxe5 lt:ld5 [Link]:ld2. The Steinitz, Moscow 1 8 9 6 , White
s a crifice 1 5 . . . e 3 is not good can play the simple 8 . .ltg5 f6
enough to equalize completely - 9 . ..ie3 0-0 [Link]:lc3 and White's
16.fxe3 .Uxfl+ (It is weaker for centre is sound, while Black's
Black to play 16 . . . lt:lxe3 17.,l;!xffi+ king position has been compro­
'Ot>xffi 1 8 . t'tf3+ lt:lf5 [Link]:le4 'Ot>g8 mised.
20 . .U.d1 and White has the initia­ 5 . . . 0-0 allows White to ad­
tive . ) 1 7 . lt:lxfl , but it will not be vance the d-pawn forcefully -
easy for White to win with a 6.d4 exd4 7.cxd4 ..ib6 8 . d5 lt:lb8
doubled pawn and bishops of op­ 9.d6! lt:lg6 (after 9 . . . cxd6 White
posite colour. Mter 15 . . . t'l'g6 , as should better play [Link]:lc3!?, to be
in the game Hjartarson - Pirtti­ able after 10 . . . d5 to take with a
maki , Oslo 1983, White can keep piece 1 1 .lt:lxd5, so that Black is
a slight advantage with 16. �a4 left with weaknesses along the
(while 1 6 . ll e 1 is worse due to d-file). Black's position is quite
1 7 . . . e3 ! 1 7 . fxe3 ..ie6 with the cramped and that spells danger.
idea of lt:lb4) 16 . . . ..if5 1 7 .lbe l;!;. The following miniature is illus­
trating that perfectly: 1 0 . e 5
b) 4 lt:l ge7
•.• (Most probably White's b e s t
move here i s [Link]:lc3) 10 . . . lt:lc6 11.
l:r.e 1 l:r.e8? ( l l . . . cxd6) 1 2 . ..ig5 f6
13.i.c4+ 'Ot>h8 14.exf6 l:txe 1 + 1 5 .
t'l'xe 1 gxf6? 16. t'l'e8+ ! and White
checkmates - Neumann - Schul­
ten, Berlin 1865.
6.d4 exd4
After 6 . . . lt:lg6 7 . ..ixc6 dxc6
[Link]:lxe5 lt:lxe5 9.dxe5 Black is los-

116
 2. tDf3 tDc6 3. i.b5 i.c5 4. c3

ing a pawn without sufficient After 14 . . . hxg5 1 5 . 'i;;'tx c6+ We7

compensation. 1 6 . a3 �xb2 1 7 . ti:Jexg5± White
7.cxd4 d5 has a powerful attack for the
The insertion of the moves piece. The game Bogdanovic -
7 . . . a6 8.�a4 is not changing here Damjanovic, Pees 1 964 contin­
anything at all . ued 17 . . . ti:Jf4 1 8 . 'i;;'t e 4 ti:Je2+ 1 9 .
8.exd5 ti:Jxd5 �xe2 �xe2 2 0 . l:l.xe2 .U.ad8 2 1 .
Black managed to prevent his .Uae 1 .Uh6 [Link]:Jxf7 Wxf7 [Link]:Jg5+
opponent from having a total Wg8 [Link]:Jxe6+- and White won
domination in the centre, but he after a few moves.
is lagging behind in his develop­ After 1 1 . . . 'f;'fb4? ! 1 2 . i.xc6+
ment and castling, so White ob­ bxc6 13. 'i;;'t c2 Black will have to
tains a strong initiative. lose the c6-p awn . If 13 . . . 0-0
9 ..:!.el + .i.e6 IO ...tg5 �d6 14. �xc6 Black is lost after 14 . . .
This is practically the only h6? 1 5 . .Uxe6 ! fxe6 16. �xe6+ Wh8
move. The retreats to d 7 and c8 1 7 . �xd5 hxg5 1 8 . �xg5 'f;'fxb2
enable White to win a tempo 1 9 . 'f;'f h 5 + �g8 2 0 . 'f;'f d 5 + W h 8
with ti:Je5. 2 l..ll e 1 .l:!.ad8 22. 'i;;'t h 5+ Wg8 2 3 .
1 0 . . . ti:Jf6? is bad because of ti:Jg5 1-0 Barbera - Jove, Mislata
ll .ti:Jc3 0-0 12.d5! �xd5 13.i.xf6 1992, as well as after 14 . . . 'f;'fxb2?!
i.xf3 1 4 . 'f;'fxd8 ti:Jxd8 1 5 . i.xd8 [Link]:Jc4 ti:Jb4 (The other line is
�axd8 16.gxf3 �d2 1 7 . .U.e2 and even worse for Black 15 . . . 'i;;'t c3 16 .
White will have an extra piece in .l:lac l 'f;'fd3 17 . .Uxe6 fxe6 18. 'i;;'tx e6
an endgame. Wh8 19. 'i;;'tx d5+- Kercher - Zar­
ll .ti:Jbd2 ges, Dortmund 2001 , or 17 . . . ti:Jb4
18 . .l:le3) 16. 'i;;'tx e6 ! 'i;;'tx a1 1 7 . �e7!
�c3 18 .ti:Jxb6 axb6 19.i.d2 and
White remains with extra mate­
rial after the tactical complica­
tions. Black must comply with
some losses and try the stabiliz­
ing 14 . . . .l:lae8 1 5 .ti:Jb3 .
White remains with a better
endgame after 1 l . . . f6 1 2 . ti:Jc4
'f;'fd7 13. 'i;;'t e 2 0-0-0 ( 13 . . . 0-0 14.
11 ... 0-0 �xe6+ 'i;;'t x e6 1 5 . .l:lxe6 fxg5 1 6 .
The dubious move 1 1 . . . h6? i.xc6 bxc6 1 7 . .Ud1)14. �xe6 'i;;'tx e6
has been refuted long, long ago, 15.llxe6 fxg5 16.i.xc6 bxc6 1 7 .
nevertheless some players keep ti:Jxb6+ axb6 ( 1 7 . . . ti:Jxb6 1 8 . h3)
on trying it nowadays too. White [Link]:Jxg5 .
must know the right path: 1 2 . [Link]:Jc4
tt:Je4 'f;'fb4 13.�xc6+ bxc6 1 4 . �c1! After 1 2 . ti:Je4 'f;'fb4 1 3 . i.xc6

117
Chapter 18

bxc6 1 4 . a3 Black has an only 16.i.d2;!;;

move 14 . . . �c4, Gomboc - Cre­ Black is losing now the c6-
pan, Ljubljana 1998 . The other pawn, but has decent chances for
lines lead Black to the loss of the a successful defence due to the
b 6 -bishop , for example : 1 4 . . . powerful centralized knight on
�xb2? 1 5 .lle2 �b5 16. a4+- Uli­ d5. White has to solve the prob­
bin - Magem B adal s , Santa lem of the knight on e5 that is a
Clara 1 99 1 bit isolated from the rest of the
1 2 . . . �b4 13.i.xc6 bxc6 forces. Let's see some of the pos­
In case of 13 . . . �xc4 14.i.xb7 sible lines : 16 . . . �ffi [Link]::lxc6 �fl
.:tabS 15 . b3± White manages to (After 17 . . . i.d7, as in the game
keep his light-squared bishop Sax - Crepan, Ljubljana 1998,
from being exchanged for the the best for White is 1 8 . �b3
enemy 's knight. i.xc6 [Link]::lxb6 axb6 20.l::!.xc6 �fl.
14.l:tc l l:tfe8 relying on a passed a-pawn in
Black must ensure t o his distant future . If Black takes
queen a possibility for retreat. with the c-pawn on move 19 - the
Mter 14 . . . h6? 1 5 . a3 �b5 16.a4 knight on d5 will be less stable. )
�a6 ( 16 . . . �b4? 1 7 . i.d2+-) 1 7 . 18.�£'3 (Weaker i s 18 .b3 i.d7 19.
i.d2± White has a strong initia­ .Uxe8+ l:.xe8 2 0 .tt::lx b6 axb6 2 1 .
tive, for example: 1 7 . . . i.g4 ( 1 7 . . . �f3 �e6 [Link]::lb 4 tt::lxb4 23.i.xb4,
tt::lf6 1 8 .tt::l c e5) [Link]::l c e5 i.xf3 19. Supancic - Crepan, Bled 2000
�xf3 i.xd4 ( 1 9 . . . �xa4 [Link]::lxc6 and Black has good chances to
tt::lf6 2 l .b3 �b5 22 .l:.e5 �a6 23. draw, because of the bishops of
i.xh6) 20.rlxc6 tt::lb 6 2 l .i.b4. opposite colour. ) 1 8 . . . i. d 7 (If
[Link]::lfe5! f6 18 . . . �d7, White manages to pre­
serve his outpost on c6 with 19.
tt::lxb6 axb6 20.a3 ; 19 . . . cxb6 20.b4
b5 2 1..l:. c 5) 1 9 . tt::l 4 a5 ii.xa5 2 0 .
tt::l x a5 .:txe 1 + 2 Uh e 1 l:te8 2 2 .
1:.xe8+ i.xe8 23.b3. The presence
of the couple of knights on the
board and the weaknesses on
Black's queenside provide White
with excellent winning chances .

118
 Chapter 1 9 l .e4 e 5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3 .1l.b5 f5•

Jaenisch Gambit

6 . . . exd4 7 . lllx d4 ..ltd7 8. i.g5 ..lte7

9.i.xe7 t!ixe7 1 0 . 0-0 lll e 5 1 l . f4
i.xb5 12. lllxb5 lll c 6 13.�el 1-0
Novak - Havran, Slovakia 1997)
6 .lllxd4 i.d7 7. lll xf5 i.xf5 8 . exf5
lllf6 9. 0-0 ..lte7 10.i.c4 lll e 5 1 1 .
i.e6 c 6 12.l:!.el± Pierrot - Galli,
Buenos Aires 1998;
4 . . . a6. A rare move which is
4 t2J c3
. not that bad at all . White wins a
In this chapter we will con­ pawn, however his advantage is
sider the variants without the not decisive yet - Bl ack gets
capture 4 . . . f5xe4, viz. a) 4 i.b4,
.•. quite an active play which some­
b) 4 t2J d4, and c) 4 t2Jf6. As a
••. .•. how makes up for this l o s s .
rule, White takes the f5-pawn. 5.i.xc6 dxc6 [Link] e5 lllf6 (6 . . :�f6
With the knight on c3 this cap­ 7 .lll f3 fxe4 8 .lllx e4 t!ig6 9 . 0-0± ;
ture is in White's favour. We 6 . . :�e7 7.t!ih5+-) 7.d3 ..ltb4 8.exf5
stress it again - with the knight i.xf5 9.0-0± ;
on c3 ! White should not take on 4 . . . ..lt c 5 , Geus - G. Breyer,
f5 on the 4th move. Scheveningen 1 9 1 3 , [Link] e5 ! It is
The other continuations are strange that this definitely the
less popular. strongest move has not occurred
4 . . . d6. The move does �ot fit in tournaments yet! Things look
in the spirit of such a sharp open­ bad for Black: 5 . . . lllx e5 (5 . . . ..1txf2+
ing as Jaenisch Gambit. It is no 6.'it>xf2 lllx e5 7 . d4 lll g4+ 8 . 'it>g1
wonder that White quickly and t!ih4 9.g3+-) 6.d4±.
easily achieves a very favourable
p o s i t i o n . 5 . d4 exd4 ( 5 . . . fxe 4 a) 4 i.b4 5.exf5
.•.

6.t2Jxe4 a 6 7 . �xc6+ bxc6 8.dxe5 (diagram)

t!ie7 9 . �g5 t2Jf6 1 0 .lll xf6+ 1-0 5 lllf6
•..

Dirr - C ornelison, corr. 1994; A crucial point - Black's 41h

119
 Chapter 19

16 . .ic4+ l2Je6 17 .i.xe7 'it>xe7 18.

fxe6 dxe6 19. �d4 'it>fl 20. �f4+
'it>e7 2 1 . �g5+ 'it>fl 22. i.d3 �h6
23. �f4+-) 13 .l:tae1+ 'it>f7 14.�c4+
d5 15 . .l:te7 + �xe7 16.i.xd5+ 'it>e8
17 . .txe7 'it>xe7 18.l!e 1+ .ltxe 1 19.
�xd4 .Ue8 20. �xg7+ 'it>d8 2 1 .[Link]
i.b4 (2 1 . . . .l:!e2 22. �f6+ 'it>d7 23 .
.lte6+-) 22. i.xe8 'it>xe8 23.f6 i.£8
and 5th moves are used in differ­ (23 . . . i.e6 24. �g6+ 'it>d7 25. �h7+
ent succession! Sometimes Black 'it>c6 26. �e4+-) 24. �g6+ 'it>d8 25.
uses other moves which are more �fl ..td6 26.�g8+ 'it>d7 27. �xg4+
hazardous for him : 'it>c6 2 8 . �g8 'it>c5 ( 2 8 . . . b 5 2 9 .
5 . . . i. x c 3 ? ! , Sh amkovich - �g2+) [Link]+-.
Soloviev, Minsk 1957, 6 . dxc3 ! A 6.0-0 0-0 7 .d4
new idea. For some reason White The timely counter-strike in
players used only the less natu­ the centre faces Black with diffi­
ral capture with the b-pawn. culties - he fails to regain the
6 . . . d6 7 . i.g5 l2Jf6 (7 . . . l2Jge7?? pawn with benefit.
8 .l2Jxe5! dxe5 9. �h5+ 'it>£8 10.f6 7 ... e4
gxf6 1 1 .i.h6+ 'it'g8 12. i.c4+ l2Jd5 This is the most principled
13.i.xd5+ �xd5 14. �e8#) 8. �d3 line, of course - Black should try
0-0 (8 . . . e4 9 . i.xf6+-) 9 . 0-0-0 to complicate the play.
�e8 10 . .l:the l±; White has a good game after
5 . . . l2Jge 7 , B artos - B abies , 7 . . . l2Jxd4 8 . l2Jxd4 exd4 9. �xd4
Hungary 2002, 6.g4! GM [Link]­ i.xc3 1 0 . �xc3 d5 l l . i. d 3 b6
godov 's idea - courageous and 12.b4 l2Je4 13.i.xe4 dxe4 14.i.b2
dangerous for Black. Great com­ .l:tfl 15 . .l:!ad 1 �g5 1 6 . �c6 l:!.b8
plications spring up which do not 1 7 . �e8+ l:£8 1 8 . �e5 �fl 1 9 . f4
promise anything good for Black �e7 20.�xe7 llxe7 2 1 .l:d8+ 'it>fl
(he may be hopele s s ) . 6 . . . h5 22 . .l:!h8 �a8 23.lhh7 'it>g8 24.f6+­
( 6 . . . 0-0 ? ! 7 . d4 exd4 8 . l2Jxd4±) Suetin - Zinn, Russia 1 965
7 . d4! exd4 (7 . . . hxg4 8.l2Jxe5 l2Jxe5 8.l2Je5 �e8
9 . dxe5 c6 10 .�d2 cxb5 1 l . �xg4 8 . . . l2Je7 9.g4 i.xc3 10 .bxc3 d6
i.xc3 12. i.xc3 l:tg8 13.f6 gxf6 14. 11..ltc4+ l2Jfd5, Vuori - Wikman,
�h5+ 'it>£8 15.0-0-0 fxe5 16.�hg1 corr. 1982, 12.i.g5 ! A find which
d6 17.i.d2 l2Jf5 18.�xg8+ 'it>xg8 refutes Black's dubious idea.
19 .l:tg1+ l2Jg7 20.J::tx g7+ 'it>xg7 2 1 . 1 2 . . . c6 ( 1 2 . . . dxe5 1 3 . dx e 5 c6
i.h6+-) 8 .l2Jxd4 l2Jd5 9. 0-0 l2Jxc3 1 4 . f6+-) 1 3 .f3 exf3 ( 1 3 . . . 'it>h8
10.bxc3 i.xc3 1l..�. a3 l2Jxd4 12. 14.l2Jg6+ hxg6 1 5 . �e 1 ! ! +-) 14.
�d3 hxg4 ( 1 2 . . . ..txa 1 1 3 . l:txa1 .i.xd5+ cxd5 15.l2Jd3+-.
�g5 14J�e 1+ 'it>f7 15 . .U.e7+ �xe7 8 . . . �e7 9.i.f4 i.xc3 (The ex-

120
 2. lLI{3 lLlc6 3 . .i.b5 f5 4. ll.Jc3

perimental idea 9 . . . Ad6, Mitchell

- Ljublinsky, corr. 1970, could
offer White a decisive advantage
in a neat way : 1 0 . .l::f. e 1 ! ll.Jxe5
l l . ll.Jxe4 ! ! +- ) 1 0 .bxc3 ll.Ja5 1 1 .
ll.Jg4 a6 [Link]+ �xf6 13.1i.e2 d6
14.g4 g6 1 5 . 'it'h 1 ! GM Z. Lanka
uses a typical approach against
gambits - he gives the extra
pawn back, intercepting the ini­ 5.exf5!
tiative . 1 5 . . . gxf5 1 6 . g5 Black This is not a ceding of the cen­
managed to regain the pawn, but tre ! White perfectly uses his ad­
his king's shelter is very weake. vantage in development and
White's attack achieves its goal : opens the play.
16 . . . �e7 1 7 .llg1 IU'7 18.g6 blg7 Let's consider b 1 ) 5 ... tt::l xb5
1 9 . gxh7+ 'it'h8 2 0 . llxg7 �xg7 and b2) 5 ... c6.
2 l . �d2 ii.e6 2 2 .l::i. g l± Lanka - In case of 5 . . . ll.Jf6 there are the
Meinsohn, Lyon 1 993 . variants which are considered
9.f4 d6 further: c) 4 . . . ll.Jf6 5 . e4xf5 ll.Jd4.
Playing 5 . . . � f6 , B l ack is
ready to lose the castling right:
6 . 0-0 c6 7 . ll.Jxd4 exd4 8 J l e 1 +
'it'd8 . The loss o f the castling
within the first ten moves is a
common thing in the sharpest
Jaenisch Gambit. The king in the
middle is not easyly reachable.
[Link].Je4 �xf5 10 .Ad3! The attack
to the black queen explains the
10.g4!± unusual position of the bishop on
A nice positional sacrifice - d3 : 10 . . . d5 11 .ll.Jd6 �f4 1 2 . ll.Jxc8
White gets a very strong pawn :Xc8 , H. Schmidt - Sulger, corr.
centre as a compensation. 10 . . . 1986, White should strive here
dxe 5 l l . fx e 5 ll.J d 7 ( l l . . . ii.xc3 for opening up the play: 1 3 . c4!
12.bxc3 ll.Jd5 1 3 . � e l±) [Link].Jxe4 ll.Jf6 14.g3 �d6 ( 14 . . . �g5 1 5 . �£3
ll.Jcxe5 13.dxe5 �xe5 14. �d3 .i.a5 llc7 16 . .i.f5±) 15 . 1i.f5±.
1 5 . .i. f4 � e 7 1 6 . c 3 .i. b 6 + 1 7 .
'it'h1 h 5 1 8 .l::i. a e 1 hxg4 1 9 .ll.Jd6 bl) 5 ...ll.Jxb5 [Link].Jxb5 d6
1-0 Klovans - Ljublinsky, corr. 6 . . . c6 7 . ll.Jc3 d6 8 . d4 - see
1968. 6 . . . d6 7 . d4 c6 8 . ll.Jc3.
Black can show activity in the
b) 4 ... ll.J d4 centre : 6 . . . e4 7 . �e2 �e7. Rela-

121
 Chapter 19

tively the best move. (7 . . . d5 8.d3 to 11.0-0 !+-) 1 1 . 0-0 ..td7 12. �d3
i.xf5 9 . l2Jfd4+- loses immedi­ l2Jf6 13.d5! h6 14.l2Je6! It is not
ately; 8 . . . l2Jf6, Feistenauer - Lan­ an offer of exchange, as it may
zani, Groningen 1 98 1 , 9 . dxe4! seem; it is a sacrifice of two
dxe4 1 0 . i. f4+-; 9 . . . l2Jxe4 1 0 . pieces ! 14 . . . ..txe6 15.l2Jxa7+! �b8
l2Jg5+-) 8 . l2Jfd4 ! White should (equally hopeless is 1 5 . . . �d7
not take on c7 - he will lose 1 6 . �b 5 + c 6 1 7 . l2Jx c 6 ! + - ) 1 6 .
two knights for a rook. 8 . . . d5 9.c4 l2Jc6+. A beautiful combination!
c6 1 0 . l2Jc3 l2Jf6 l l . cxd5 cxd5 12. 16 . . .bxc6 1 7 . dxc6 l2Jd7 ( 1 7 .. J:te8
�b5 �d7 13 .d3 �xb5 14.l2Jdxb5. 1 8 . �a6 ..ic8 1 9 . �b5+ �a8 20.
The queen swap clearly favours �a5+ �b8 2 l . i.e3+-) 1 8 . �a6
White. 14 . . .<;t>f7 1 5 .l2Jc7 �b8 16. l2Jc5 1 9 . � b 5 + � c 8 ( 1 9 . . . � a 7
l2J7xd5 exd3 17. i.f4 l:ta8 18. l2Jc7 20. 1:!.£3+-) 2 0 . � a5+- Bloessl -
l:!.b8 19.l2Je6 .l::t a 8 20. 0-0-0 i.xe6 Kubler, corr. 199 1 . White check­
2 l . fxe6+ �xe6 22Jhd3+- [Link]­ mates by force - 20 . . . c;ii> b 8 2 1 ..l::tf3
vath - Godena, Germany 1980. �h4 22. �b4+ �c8 23 .l:!.a3 etc.
White has won a pawn. IO.�e2 0-0-0
7.d4 e4 10 . . . l2Jf6, Perlstrom - Schulze,
7 . . . c6 loses a pawn - 8.l2Jc3 corr. 1987, 1l.fxe4 ..tg4 1 2 .l2Jf3±.
i.xf5 9 . dxe5 dxe5 (9 . . . �d7 1 0 . ll.fxe4 Ite8 12.0-0 l2Jf6
0-0 0-0-0 l l .i.f4 l2Jh6 12.exd6
l2Jf7 13. �d4 ..ixd6 14.i.xd6 l2Jxd6
1 5 . �xa7 .l:.hf8 1 6 .l2Ja4 �c7 1 7 .
l2Jc5 �c8 1 8 . .l:tfe 1 .:.deS 19.l2Je5
.U.e7 2 0 . �a5+ b6 2 l . � a7+ 1-0
Humphries - Walters, corr. 1993)
1 0 . �e2 ..t g4 ( 1 0 . . . �c7 n . ..tf4
0-0-0 12 .tLlxe5 tLlf6 13.l2Jg6 �b6
1 4 . l2Jx h 8 �xb2 1 5 . 0-0 �xc3
1 6 . l2Jf7 .:.d7 1 7 . �e5 �xe5 1 8 .
l2Jxe5+- Aardvark - Zarkov, ICC 13.Itxf5!
1996) 11. �xe5+ �e7 12 . ..tg5 l2Jf6 A strong and spectacular sac­
1 3 . �xe 7 + [Link] 7 1 4 . l2J e 5 ..i f5 rifice of the exchange. 13 . . . �xf5
1 5 .0-0-0±. 14.l2Jxc7 ! l:!e7 ( 14 . . . �xc7?? 1 5 .
8.l2Jg5 ..txf5 9.f3! �c4+-) . This position happened
After the fall of the M-pawn in Haglund - Kazoks, corr. 1985,
the defence will be difficult for and now White could have set
Black. insoluble problems to Black: 15.
9 .. �d7
. �c4! l2Jxe4 1 6 .l2Jd5+ �b8 ( 16 . . .
9 . . . �e7 is used in practice too. �dB 17.l2Jxe4! D o not miss the
It leads Black to troubles as well. check on f2 ! 1 7 . . . l:txe4 ( 1 7 . . . �xe4
10.fxe4 0-0-0 . ( 1 0 . . . ..txe4?? fails 18 . ..tg5+-) 18 . ..te3 �e8 1 9 . Itfl

122
 2. lt:\f3 lt:\c6 3. i.b5 f5 4. lt:\c3

�d7 20. �d3 l:1e6 2 l .i.g5 ! h6 22. 6 . . . lt:\xf3 7. �xf3 lt:\f6 8.0-0 d5 (8 . . .
�h3+-) 1 7 .i.f4! :d7 18. :e 1 lt:\f6 i.c5 9 . .:le 1 d6 10.i.b3±; 8 . . . i.e7
[Link]:\xf6 �xf6 20 . .:.e8+ nd8 2 1 . [Link] 1 �c7 10.d4. White returnes
l:.xd 8 + � x d 8 2 2 . lt:\f7 �f6 2 2 . the pawn in the name of the at­
i.e3+-. What i s important i s that tack and quickly achieves his
the black rook cannot go to g8 goal. 10 . . . exd4 1 1 . i.f4 d6 12 .lt:\e4
because of the capture on d6. The 0-0 1 3 .i.b3+ 'it>h8 1 4 . lt:\g5 h6
arisen endgame is hopeless for 15 .lt:\f'7 'it>h7 16. �h3 lt:\g8 17. �h5
Black. i.xf5 1 8 . �xf5+ g6 1 9 . �h3 �xf'7
[Link]'7 l:1f8 2 l . i.xg8+ 1-0 Daa­
b2) 5 ...c6 men - B erbe n , Nether lands
1986) 9.l:te 1 e4 (9 . . . �d6 1 0 . d3
i.e7 1 l . �g3 0-0 1 2 . �xe5 �xe5
13 .l:txe5 i.d6 14. l:!.e2 i.xf5 15.
i.d2± Sion C astro - Galiana,
Palma de Mallorca 1 99 1 ) 10.d3
i.b4 ll.dxe4 dxe4 12. i.g5 0-0
13 .�xe4 i.xc3 14.bxc3 �d6 15.
i.b3+ Wh8 1 6 . lth4+- Ts e sh ­
kovsky - Inkiov, Sochi 1983.
6 . . . �f6 7 . 0-0 d6, Castro Tor­
6.i.a4! res - Salcedo Medero s , corr.
The calm retreat ofthe bishop 200 1 , [Link]:\xd4! exd4 9.l:te1+ 'it>d8 .
accentuates the complexity of the Black's idea is to hide the king
problems that Black faces . We behind a pawn shield and then
find the a4-square quite suitable to complete the development.
for the bishop in the positions White must take energetic mea­
considered in this chapter. It can sures, first of all he should de­
be said that in all cases White prive Black of the d4-pawn.
remains with an extra pawn in a 10 .lt:\e2! lt:\h6 ( 10 . . . i.xf5 l l . c3 ! d3
good position and gets superb 1 2 . lt:\d4 d5 13 .b4! i.d6 14. i.b2
attacking chances. lt:\e7 15.c4! �h6 16.g3 i.h3 1 7 . c5
6 ...d6 i.f4 18 .b5 i.xd2 19 . .l:1e5±) ll .c3
6 . . . �a5 7. 0-0 d6 - see 6 . . d6 . lt:\xf5 12 .i.c2 dxc3 13.dxc3 i.e7
7. 0-0 �a5. 14.c4 :e8 [Link]:\c3±.
6 . . . lt:\f6 7 . 0-0 i.c5 (7 . . . lt:\xf3+ 6 . . . b5. No one has ever played
8 . �xf3 - see 6 . . . lt:\f3 7 . �f3 lt:\f6 it yet, however this move looks
8 . 0-0 ) 8 . lt:\xe5 0-0 9 . lt:\f3± see sound and players should be
variant c). aware ofit. [Link]:\xd4 exd4 8 . �h5+
Serious difficulties, connected We7 9.i.b3 d5 (9 . . . �e8 1 0 . �h4+
mainly with the absence of a lt:\[6 11.0-0+-; 9 . . . dxc3 10.i.xg8
pawn are in store for Black after �e8 11. �h4+ Wd6+ 12. 'it>d1 .lhg8

123
 Chapter 19

13 .l:te 1+-) 10. t'i'h4+ tt::lffi l l . t'i'xd4 [Link]::le2±

�xf5 12. t'i'e5+ �e6 13.0-0±. Now White's task is simple ­
7.0-0 �xf5 to get at the enemy king. He
In case of 7 . . . t'i'a5 White gets must open up the position for
a huge advantage with the neat this . 1 0 . . . t'i'b6 ( 1 0 . . . d3 l l . tt::l d 4
move 8 . .l::t b 1 ! tt::l f6 9 .b4 t'i'b6 10. �d7 12 . .Ue 1 0-0-0 13.11xe7 �xe7
tt::l x d4 exd4 (10 . . . t'i'xd4 l l .tt::l e 2) 1 4 . t'i'xf5 iH6 1 5 . t'i'x d 7 + lbd7
ll .b5 t'i'c7?! ( l l . . . dxc3?? 12.dxc3 ; [Link]::lf3 b5 17.�b3 .Ue8 18.cxd3+­
more stubborn is 11 . . . c5 12: �e2+ Vaisman - Lanka, corr. 1 984)
Wd8? ! 13. tt::l e 4; 12 . . . �e7 13 .�e 1 ll.c3 dxc3 12.bxc3 0-0-0 1 3 . d4
t'i' d 8 1 4 . tt::l d 5 ! tt::l x d5 1 5 . t'i'h5+ d5 14. tt::l g 3 �g6 1 5 .�e l ± . The
Wd7?? 16.b6#; 15 ... g6? 16.fxg6 ; black king feels rather uncom­
1 5 . . . Wf8 16.�b3 �e8! 1 7 . �xe8+ fortable with all these pieces on
Wxe8 1 8 . �xd5 1:1b8 19.g4±) 12. the board.
bxc6 bxc6 13. t'i'£3 kd7 ( 13 . . . kb7?
14 . .U.xb7) 14.:e 1+ �e7 ( 14 . . . Wf7 c) 4 tt::lf6
..•

1 5 .�b3+ d5 [Link]::lx d5 ! ; 14 . . . Wd8

1 5 .tt::l e 2) 1 5 .tt::l b 5 t'i'b8 ( 15 . . . �a5
16. tt::lx d6+ WfB 17.�xc6) 16.�a3
( 16 .tt::l x d6+ t'i'xd6 1 7 .�a3) 16 . . .
cxb5 1 7 . �xd6 t'i'xd6 1 8 . �xa8 +
Wf7 19.�b3+ 1-0 Santos - Gu­
djev, corr. 1 984.
[Link]::lxd4 exd4 9.t'i'f3!? tt::le 7
Mter 9 . . . t'i'd7 1 0 .tt::l e 2 Black
immediately loses the ex­
tremely imp ortant d4-pawn . 5.exf5 tt::l d4
Also dangerous is 9 . . . g6 10.11e1+ In case of 5 . . . �b4 see variant
Wd7 l l .tt::l e 2 t'i'e7 12.d3 h5 13 .h3 a).
kg7 14.b4 Wc7 15.�b2 �h4 16. The timid move 5 . . . d6 leaves
b5 cxb5 1 7 .kxb5 �e5 18.c3 tt::lffi little chances for survival if
19.cxd4+- Morovic Fernandez ­ White plays energetically. 6 . d4
Gamarra, Corrientes 1985. e4 7.d5! a6 8 .�a4 b5 9 . dxc6 ex£3
10.�b3 fxg2 11..Ug1 �xf5 12. �£3
t'i'e7+ 13 .�e3 ke6 14.0-0-0 b4
15 . .:.de 1 �xb3 16.axb3 �f7 1 7 .
kg5+ Wd8 1 8 . tt::l d 5 h6 1 9 . �h4
WeB [Link]::lxf6 gxffi 2 1 . t'i'g4+ Wd8
22.�xffi+ 1-0 Cvetkovic - Ruje­
vic, Dravograd 1963 .
5 . . . �e7 6. 0-0 0-0 (Black has
managed to finish the develop-

124
 2. ltJ{3 tt:lc6 3. �b5 f5 4. ltJc3

ment successfully, and after the

evident next move d7-d6 it will
be not easy for White to defend
the f5-pawn. Taking this fact into
account, White is better not to
seek for a huge advantage, but to
stick to the win of the e5-pawn).
7.i.xc6 dxc6 8 .tt::lx e5 i.xf5 , Hof­
mann - E s chenbrenner, corr.
1993, 9 . d4 c5 (9 . . . i.d6 10.i.g5 c5 bxa4 12.i.xd4 tt::lx e4, [Link] -
1 l. . �e l±; 9 . . . '�d6 10 J::t e 1 .l::I a d8 Maderna, Buenos Aires 1 945 ,
1 1 . �e2 �feB 12.i.e3;!;) 10.d5;!;. 1 3 . tt::lx e4 i.xd4 1 4 . �xd4 �xh4
5 . . . i. c 5 6 . 0-0 0-0 7 . tt::l x e5 15.g3 �e7 [Link]::l d 6+-;
tt::l x e5 (7 . . . tt::l d 4 - see 5 . . . tt::l d4 6 . 6 . . . tt::l e 5 (An interesting move
tt::lx e5 i.c5 7 . 0-0 0-0) 8.d4 i.xd4 which has been used only once
(8 . . . i.d6 9 . dxe5 �xe5 1 0 . l:[Link]± in Hommeles - Jonkman, Neth­
Kokkila - Vaatainen , Finland erlands 1995. The black knight
1993. The witty lunge 8 . . . tt::lfg4 is about to take a comfortable
also results in a bad position: 9 . post on f7, so the white bishop
dxc5 .U.xf5 10.£3 tt::lxh2 . A sacri­ loses the target for atta ck . )
fice of despair as early as on 7 . �e2! (The precious a4-pawn
move 1 0 ! 1 l .Wxh2 �h4+ 12.'it'g1 cannot be defended ! ) 7 . . . i. e 7
l:th5 13. �d5+ Wh8 14. �e4 �h2+ ( The b e s t m o v e which gives
1 5 . W f2 l::t h 4 1 6 .l:th1 �xh 1 1 7 . Black hopes for a favourable out­
� x e 5 1 - 0 Pachman - S anta come of the game. Hopeless is 7 . . .
Cruz , Havana 1 964, the mate is tt::lfg4 8.g3 g5 9.fxg6+-; 8 . . . c6 9.h3
inescapable, or 9 . . . �h4 10.i.f4 tt::lf6 10.d4 tt::l £'7 l l .tt::lxe4 tt::lx e4 12.
.uxt5 1l.i.g3 �h6 12.i.e2 tt::lf6 13. �xe4+ i.e7 13.f6 ! The decisive
tt::l d 5 tt::lx d5 14. �xd5+ �e6 1 5 . weakening of the kingside 13 . . .
l:[Link] 1 + - Zimmermann - Kueh­ gxf6 14.�d3+-. Or 7 . . . c6 8 . d4! A
nel , corr. 197 1 ) 9 . �xd4 d6 10. nice counter-blow which demon­
i. d 3 c 5 1 1 . � e 3 tt::l fg4 12. �g3 strates the power of White's po­
tt::l x d3 13. �xd3;!; Neale - Gar­ sition. 8 . . . tt::l f7 9 . tt::l xe4 tt::l x e 4
dner, corr. 1989. 10. �xe4+ i.e7 l l .f6! gxf6 12 .�d3
The move 5 . . . e4 i s often d5 13. �f3+-) 8 .tt::lxe4 0-0 9.0-0;!;;
played but with no particular 6 . . . d5 7 . d3 i.e7 (a venture­
success. 6 .tt::l h 4. some 7 . . . d4 brought success to
(diagram) Black in the classic game Janow­
In this position Black tried a ski - Marshall, Paris 1905, but
lot of continuations : in case of the decisive 8 .tt::lx e4!
6 . . . i. c 5 7 . d3 tt::l d 4 8 . 0-0 c6 Black would have been in the
9 . i.a4 0-0 1 0 . dxe4 b 5 l l . i.e3 pots: 8 . . . tt::lxe4 9 . �h5+ g6 10.fXg6

125
 Chapter 19

lt:J f6 1 l . g 7 + lt:Jxh5 1 2 . gx h 8 � 14.�d 1 1-0 Ki. Georgiev - Rodri­

�xh4 1 3 . �xh7±) 8 . dxe4 dxe4 guez Vargas, Tarrassa 1990.
9 . �xd8+ �xd8 10.i.g5 0-0 1 1 . [Link]:Jxe5 .ltc5
0-0-0 . The endgame i s bad so 6 . . . c6 7 . ..ta4 i.c5 8 . 0-0 0-0
Black players have been avoid­ [Link]:Jf3 - see the main line. Bad
ing this position for many years for Black is 6 . . . lt:Jxb5 [Link]:Jxb5 d6
already. 1 1 . . .lt:Je5 1 2 . h3 a6 1 3 . [Link]:Jg4 ..txf5 [Link]:Jxf6+ gxf6 10. '{f;ff3
� a 4 c5 1 4 . ..tf4 lt:Jfd7 1 5 . ..txd7 ii.xc2 11.0-0 c6 12.l:te1 + ii.e7 1 3 .
lt:Jxd7 16. �g3 i.g5+ ( 1 6 . . . i.xh4 �xf6 cxb5 14. '{f;fxh8+- O'Hara ­
17.i.xh4 lhf5 18 .l:the 1 lt:J£8 19. Moeckel, TGT 1998.
lt:Jxe4 i.e6 20 . ..te7 X:.d5 2 1 .lt:Jc5+­ 7.0-0 0-0
C apablanca - Marshall , New 7 . . . c6 8 . ..ta4 0-0 9 .lt:Jf3 - see
York 1909) 17.<l;b 1 lt:Jf6 18.f4 ex£3 7 . . . 0-0 [Link]:Jf3 c6 9 . ii.a4.
[Link]:Jxf3 �h6 20 . ..td6 .l:te8 2 l .g4 [Link]:Jf3 c6
b6 2 2 .l:l h e 1 ..tb7 2 3 . lt:Je5 ..tg5 8 . . . d5 9 . lt:Jxd4 .txd4 1 0 . lt:Je2
24.a4 ..tg2 25 . .1:1g1 ..tb7 [Link]:Jc4+­ ..te5 ( 10 . . . ..tb6 ll.d4 ..txf5 [Link].f4
Duras - Duz-Khotimirsky, St. c6 13 . ..td3 ii.g4 14.f3 ..th5 15 .c3
Petersburg 1909. lt:Jd7 1 6 . �d2 �e7 1 7 .lbe 1 �f7
6 . . . i.e7 The bishop is eyeing [Link].d6 l:tfe8 [Link]:Jf4 �f6 [Link]:Jxh5
the white knight on h4, but Black �xd6 2 1 . �g5 g6 2 2 . i. f5 ll e 5
does not have time to benefit 23. '{f;fh6 �e7 24 . ..t e 6 + <;f;h8 2 5 .
from its unstable position. 7.d3 lt:Jf4 1-0 Boey - Schober, Ger­
exd3 8 . �xd3 d5 9 . 0-0 0-0 10. many 1996) 1 1 . d4 ..td6 1 2 . ii.f4
�g5 lt:Je5 1 1 .l::t e 1 lt:Jf7 12 .lt:Jf3 c6 ..txf5 1 3 . ..t x d 6 '{f;fxd6 1 4 . lt:J g3
13.�h4 lt:Jh6 [Link]:Jd4 .U.f7 15 .lt:Je6 lt:Je4 ! ? ( 1 4 . . . i.e6 1 5 . ii. d3±) 1 5 .
� d 6 16 . .tg3 �b4 17 . a3 �g4 lt:Jxf5 l:i.xf5 16.i.d3 rl.a£8 1 7 . ii.xe4
18. �xg4 lt:Jfxg4 [Link]:Jc7 .l:tb8 20. ( 1 7 . f3 ?? l::t h 5) 1 7 . . . dxe4 1 8 . c3±
lt:J7xd5 cxd5 2 l .i.xb8 .tc5 22 . ..tg3 Clayton --' Reeman, corr. 1995.
lt:Jxf5 23 J:ie8+ l::r.£8 24 . .U.xc8 1-0 8 . . . lt:Jxf5 9 . d4 ii.b6 1 0 . lt:Ja4 !
Koehnlein - Duz-Khotimirsky, White is better off annihilating
Hamburg 1 9 1 0 . right away the potentially dan­
6 . . . lt:J d 4 7 . � a4 �c5 8 . d 3 ± . gerous bishop. 10 . . . d5 ( 10 . . . lt:Je4
Black's attack fizzles out not hav­ 1 1 .lt:Jxb6 axb6 12.lle1 d5 13.i.d3
ing started yet. 8 . . . b 5 (After lt:Jh4 [Link].xe4 dxe4 [Link]:Jg5 '{f;ff6
8 . . . '{f;fe7 9. 0-0 0-0 10 . .tg5 �e5, [Link]:Jxe4 �g6 1 7 .lt:Jg3+- Bernad
Sandhoefner - Diermair, Austria - C anal , corr. 1 9 9 5 ) 1 1 . lt:Jxb6
2 0 0 2 , Bl ack even went on to axb6 1 2 .ii.g5 h6 13 . ..txf6 �xf6
score, but White overlooked the 14.c3 lt:Jh4 [Link]:Jxh4 �xh4 16. �e2
strongest continuation l l . dxe4! .tf5 17.a3 c6 18 .ii.d3 liae8 19.
lt:Jxe4 [Link]:Jxe4 �xe4 13 Jle 1+-) '{f;fd2 ii.xd3 20. �xd3 .U.e6 2 l . �d2
9 . i.b3 exd3 1 0 . �xd3 �e7+ 1 1 . l:Ue8 22J:tfe l± Margulis - Ha­
�e3 lt:Jg4 1 2 . f6 gxf6 13 .lt:Jd5 lt:Je5 milton, Philadelphia 1995.

126
 2. tL\{3 tL\c6 3 . .tb5 f5 4. tLlc3

8 . . . ttJxb5 9 . ttJxb5 d5 10 .tLlbd4! must be exchanged! 13 . . . ttJe4 14.

Not an obvious move , but the i.. xd6 tLlfxd6 1 5 . tLle5 �h4 16.f3
strongest one - White not only tL\g5 1 7 . ..tc2 l:lf6 18. �e 1 �h6 19.
retains his extra pawn, but also l:1d 1 i.. e 6 20.h4 tL\gf7 2 l .g4 g5 22.
forces favourable simplification. h5± [Link] - Briem, Reykja­
1 0 . . . ttJg4 ( 1 0 . . . ttJe4 l l . d3 ttJd6 vik 1982. 9 . . . d5 10.tLlxd4 ..txd4
[Link]\e6 .txe6 13.fxe6 �ffi 14.l:.e 1 l l .ttJe2 i..b 6 12.d4 ..txf5 13 . ..tf4.
tLlf5 1 5 . ..t g 5 �xb2 1 6 . e 7 l:.fe8 The best square for the bishop -
1 7 . "�e2 ltJd4 18.tLlxd4 .txd4 19. sooner or later it will be ex­
�e6+ Wh8 20. �xd5+- Tombette changed for the black b6-bishop
- Borniche corr. 1986. 10 . . . "�d6 and it will make White's task
l l . d3 tL\g4 1 2 .h3 ttJh2 13 .ttJb5 ! easier. 13 . . . ttJh5 14 . ..te5 �h4 1 5 .
Thus White manages to keep two tLlg3 .tg4 16. �d2 l::t ae8 1 7 . �ae 1
extra pawns. 13 . . . ttJxf3+ 14. �xf3 �xe5 18 . .lhe5± Unzicker - Nie­
�d7 1 5 . g4± Vasiukov - Egorov, vergelt, Zurich 1959.
USSR 1959, and in case of 15 . . . 10.�x:f3 d5 l l .i..b3 ttJe8
�xb5 16. �xd5+ Wh8 there is the
move 17 . ..te3±) ll.h3 tLle5, Aseev
- S . Soloviov, Leningrad 1986.
White could have retained the
extra pawn with active position:
12.l:.e 1 ! tLlxf3+ 13.tLlxf3 .txf5 14.
d4 i.. d 6 ( 14 . . . i.. b 6 15.i.. g 5±) 15 .
..tg5 �d7 [Link]\e5 �b5 1 7.b3±.
9.i.. a4
Black has not got sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed This position happened in
pawn, however the play along Prandstetter - J onkman, Decin
the f-file offers some tactical 1996. White could have played
chances. Therefore White must the decisive 1 2.g4! g6 1 3 .d3
be careful to parry threats on gxf5 14.g5 ttJc7 15.Wh1 ttJe6 16.
time. tLle2 f4 1 7.l:.gl± Besides the ex­
9 ...lLixf3+ tra pawn White got good chances
9 . . . ttJxf5 10.d4 .tb4 ll .tLle2 d5 to attack the black king while the
1 2 . c3 ..td6 13 . ..tf4 This bishop white king is absolutely safe.

In general we can conclude that up-to -date chess theory hardly

lets Black to set hopes for a good play in Jaenisch Gambit if he does
not venture into 4. . .fxe4. He could count only on the effect of sup rise
and insufficient preparation of the opponent. We believe that after
having read this chapter you are well armoured against such sur­
prise.

127
Chapter 20 l.e4 e5 2.ttJf3 ttJc6 3.i.b5 f5 4.ltJc3
fxe4 [Link]:Jxe4
Jaenisch Gambit

i.g7 10. d4+-) 1 0 . d4! ! ( 10 . . . cxd4

l l . i.g5 t!Je6 1 2 . 0-0-0 ! ! t!Jxa2
( 1 2 . . . .t e 7 1 3 J ! he 1 t!Jxa2 1 4 .
i.xe7+-) [Link]::lxg6 t!Ja1+ 14. '�d2
�a5+ 15.c3 dxc3+ 16. lt::lx c3+-.
Let's consider the rare con­
tinuation 5 . . . i.. e 7 6 . d4! exd4 7.
0-0 ! We did not discover any se­
rious drawing chances for Black.
5 lt::lf6
•.. It may seem strange - only seven
It's impossible to say which of moves have been played. The
the variants is better for Black ­ readers can check for themselves
the text-move or 5 . . . d5 which is how bad is Black's position:
considered as the main line. In 7 . . . d5 8 . lt::l eg5 h6 ( 8 . . . t!J d 6
the system under consioeration 9. �xd4 lt::lf6 10.i.f4 �d7 ll . .txc6
White's advantage is lasting, but �xc6 12.�fe 1 �f8 13.�xe7 �xe7
converting it is not an easy task 1 4 . �b4+-; 1 0 . . . .t d 7 1 l ..� xc6
at all. Besides the extra pawn t!Jxc6 12.�fe 1 h6 13J�xe7+ �xe7
which is obtained by force, the 14.�b4+ �e8 15.�e1+ lt::l e 4 16.
total absence of risk is another lt::l x e4 dxe4 1 7 . �xe4+ i.e6 1 8 .
important boon of White's posi­ �e 1+-; 9 . . . .tf6, Milic - Dueck­
tion. stein, Zagreb 1955, 10.i.f4! .txd4
No clear refutation of the l l .i.xd6 .txf2 + 1 2 Jh f2 cxd6
strange move 5 . . . a6?! has been 1 3 . l:!.e 1 + �f8 1 4 . lt::l x h 7 + l!xh7
presented in practice. Here it is, 1 5 . tt:lg5+- ; 1 l . . . cxd6 1 2 . tt:lxd4
simple and convincing: 6. i.xc6 tt:lge7 13.l:!.fe 1 0-0 14.i.xc6 lt::lx c6
bxc6, Gurgenidze - Lein, USSR 15 .l:!.ad l±) 9 . .txc6+ bxc6 [Link]::l f'7
1962 , [Link]::lx e5! The pawn can be �x£'7 ll .tt:le5+ �f6 12. t!Jxd4 c5
and must be taken! Black is ( 1 2 . . . �e8 13.ne1 .tf5 14.b4 h5
defenceless. 7 ... t!Je7 8. t!Jh5+ g6 9. 15 .h4 i.. e 4 1 6 . f3 i.d6 1 7 . .tg5+
t!Je2 c5 (9 . . . t!Jxe5?? [Link]::lf6+-; 9 . . . �e6 18.fxe4 i.xe5 1 9 . exd5+ �d6

128
 3. �b5 f5 4. li:\c3 fxe4 5. li:\xe4

20J1xe5 'i;l(xe5 2 l..lii. f4+- Czar ­ 3 1 . �h8# 1-0 Trifunovic - Kostic,

Zalan, corr. 1 96 1 ; 12 . . . We6 1 3 . Yugoslavia 193 7 ;
1:1e1 .lii. f6 14. 'i;l(g4 W e 7 1 5 . 'i;l(b4+-- ) 9 . . . Wf7 1 0 . c3 d 5 ( 1 0 . . . dxc3??
13 .li:\d7+ ! ! Up to this move we 1 1 . 'i;l(d5+ Wf8 12.i.c4+-; 10 . . . a6
have been following the games 1 1 . �b3+ Wf8 12.i.xc6 dxc6 13.
Voloshin - S . Savchenko ( 1970), i.f4 'i;l(d5 14. 'i;l(a3+ Wf7 [Link]:\e5+
Ko ndratiev - B ykov ( 1 9 6 3 ) , Wg8 16.l:!.ad1 i.e6 17.b3 c5 18.c4
Voloshin - Nadezdin ( 1979), all 'i;l(d6 [Link]:ld3+-; 1 l . . . d5 12.i.xc6
of them won by White after Black bxc6 1 3 . cx d 4 ± ) 1 l . cxd4 i. e 6
missed good opportunities . The 1 2 . i.xc6 bxc6 1 3 . li:\ e 5 + i.xe5
check by the knight quickly leads 14. 'i;l(h5+ g6 15.'i;l(xe5 'i;l(d6 16. 'i;l(g5
to victory. 13 . . . We6 14. 'i;l(g4+ Wd6 h6 1 7 . �h4 g5 1 8 . 'i;l(h 5 + W g 7
15 . .lii. f4+ Wc6 1 6 . 'i;l(e6+ .lii. d 6 1 7 . 19.f4± i. f7 20. 'i;l(g4 l::. h e8 2 1 . i.d2
li:\e5+ W b 6 1 8 . 'i;l(xd5 .lii. x e5 1 9 . l:h e 1 + 2 2 . l:h e 1 .U. e 8 2 3 J lx e 8
'i;l(xd8 �xf4 20. 'i;l(d5 c6 2 1 . 'i;l(b3+ i. x e 8 2 4 . fxg5 h5 2 5 . 'i;l(f3 1 - 0
Wc7 22. 'i;l(f7+-; Martiniuk - Razvaliaev, corr.
7 . . . li:\f6 8 .li:lxf6+ .lii. xf6 9 J:te 1 + 1994;
9 . . . Wf8, Zinn - Boey, Varna
1962, and now the best move (as
well as in the previous variant)
is the decisive 10.c3 ! , e.g. : 10 . . . d6
l l . li:lxd4± ; or 1 0 . . . d5 l l .i.xc6
bxc6 12.cxd4 i.g4 1 3 . 'i;l(d3 i.xf3
1 4 . �xf3± ; or 10 . . . dxc3 l l . bxc3
i.xc3 1 2 . i.xc6 bxc6 ( 1 2 . . . [Link] 1
13 . .lii. a 3+ d6 14 . .l:f.e8+-; 12 . . . [Link] 1
13 .i.g5 'i;l(e8 14.�d5 c6 15 .i.b3
Against the check Black tried to i.x£'2+ 1 6 . Wx f2 d5 1 7 . 'i;l(d4+-)
move the king and to cover it but 1 3 . li:ld4 'i;l(f6 1 4 . i.g5 'i;l(xg5 1 5 .
all of the variants are bad: 'i;l( f3 + 'i;l( f6 1 6 . 'i;l(xc3 h 6 1 7 . .lie3
9 . . . li:\e7 (9 . . . i.e7?? 1 0 . i.xc6 Wg8 18 . .l:!.f3 'i;l(g5 19.l1e1 i.a6 20.
dxc6 l l . i. g 5 + - ) 1 0 . li:\g5 0-0 . li:lf5 l:th7 2 1 .li:\e7 + Wh8 22. l:!f5
White has embarked upon a well �g4 23.h3 'i;l(a4 24. 'i;l(f3+-.
founded and decisive attack : [Link]:lxf6+ 'i;l(xf6
l l . li:\xh7 ! Wxh7 1 2 . 'i;l(h5+ Wg8 The main move which has a
13 . .lii. d 3 l:.e8 14 .g4! d6 15.g5 �e5 good reputation. Now White is a
1 6 . i.h7+ Wf8 1 7 . 'i;l(f3+ li:lf5 1 8 . pawn up. Black in his turn re­
i.xf5 Wg8 1 9 . i.d2 g 6 20.i.xg6 tains good drawing chances
�e7 2 1 . �h5 i.d7 22.f4 i.h8 23.f5 thanks to the bishops of opposite
i.e8 24.f6 �f7 25.l:!.xe8+ �xe8 colour.
26.l:!.e 1 'i;l(d7 27.i.xf7+ 'i;l(xf7 28.g6 The capture by the pawn
'i;l(xf6 29. 'i;l(h7+ Wf8 30 .i.h6+ i.g7 6 . . . gxf6?! is much more danger-

129
 Chapter 20

ous for Black. After 7.d4 White a corner. 8 . . . fxg5 9 . "fih5+ �d7
obtains perfect chances to get a 1 0 . d5 'fif6 ( 1 0 . . . h6 l l . h4±) 1 1 .
huge advantage, e . g. : i.xg5 'fif5 1 2 . dxc6+ bxc6 13. i.d3
e4 14. i.e2 'fig6 15. 'fih3+ �e8 16.
'fic3±; 8 ... h5 9. 'fid3 fxg5 10. 'fig6+
�d7 11.d5 .Uh6 12. 'fie4+-; 9 . . . �e7
10 . ..txc6 bxc6 1l.dxe5 fxe5 12.f4
..th6 1 3 . fxe5 dxe5 14. 'fig6 'fie8
1 5 . "fie4 i.a6 1 6 . c4 �d8 1 7 . 0-0
i.xg5 18 . ..txg5 �c8 19J�f5 �g8
2 0 J 1e 1 'fig6 2 1 . b4 "fie6 22.b5
..t b 7 2 3 . .U efl 1-0 Gutsche -
Hidalgo , I C C F 1 9 9 9 ; 8 . . . i. f5
7 . . ."fie7? 8 . 0-0 e4 9. i.c4±; 9. 'fif.3 fxg5 1 0 . 'fixf5 exd4 1 1 . 0-0
7 . . . l:tg8? 8.dxe5 �xg2 (8 . . ."fie7 i.e7 12.�e1 'fid7 1 3 . 'fixg5 �d8
9. 0-0 'fig7 10.g3 ll:\xe5 [Link]:\xe5±) 14. "fig7 �e8 1 5 . 'fixh7+-; 12 . . . h6
[Link]:\h4 �g7 10. 'fih5+ lif7 1 l . i.c4 1 3 . �f6 �d7 14. "fif5+ �e8 15 .h4
1-0 Neumann - Cherner, IECC 'fid7 1 6 . "fif6 l:tf8 1 7 . 'fixh6 "fif5
1998; 18. i(.xc6+ bxc6 19 . ..txg5 'fixf2+
It has been known for several 2 0 . �h 1 l:tf7 2 l . 'fih8+ �d7 2 2 .
decades that the obvious attack 'fixa8 i.xg5 23 . 'fie8# Predojevic
against the knight 7 . . . e4? is in - Dimovs ki, Halkidiki 2 0 0 1 ;
White's favour in view of the de­ 8 . . . a6 9.i.xc6+ bxc6 White forc­
cisive answer 8 .ll:\g5 ! i.b4+ (8 . . . edly wins in this position 1 0 .
fxg5 9 . 'fih5+-; 8 . . .d 5 9.'fih5+ �d7 dxe5 ! ! fxg5 ( 1 0 . . . fxe5 1 l . 'fih5+
[Link]:\f7+-; to put up with the loss �d7 [Link]:\f7 "fie8 1 3 . 'fif5+-) 1 1 .
of the pawn is relatively the best: 'fih5+ � d 7 1 2 . e6 + ! ! �xe6 1 3 .
e4: 8 . . . h5 [Link]:\xe4 d5 [Link]:\c5 i.xc5 0-0 ! Black cannot defend his
1 1 . dxc5 'fie7+ 12 . ..te3±) 9 . c3 fxg5 king against the straightforward
1 0 . "fih5+ �f8 1 1 . i.xg5 ll:\e7 1 2 . assault. 1 3 . . . i.g7 ( 13 . . . .Ug8 14.
i. c4 d5 1 3 . i.xd5 ! 1 - 0 Brinck­ l:te1+ �ffi 15 .lie8 'fid7 1 6.b4 d5
mann - Kieninger, Ludwigsha­ 1 7 .i.b2+ d4 18 .l:td 1 +-) 14.i.xg5
fen 1932; 'fie8 15 . .l:tae 1 + ..te5 16. 'fih4 �tl
7 . . . d5 8 . dxe5 ..tg7 (8 . . . ..tc5 9 . 17.f4 ..td4+ 18 .�h1 +-;
exffl 0 --0 10.i.g5+-) [Link]:\d4! Black 7 . . . i.g7 8 . dxe5 0-0 (The best
suffers fatal losses. 9 . . . 0-0 (9 . . . continuation - Black gets a kind
"fid7 1 0 . e6+-) 1 0 . ll:\xc6 bxc6 1 1 . of activity for the pawn. 8 . . . fxe5?!
i.xc6 i.e6 12.i.xa8 'fixa8 [Link] 9 . ..tg5 ..tf6 10 . ..txf6 'fixf6 1 1 .
l:.xf6 1 4 . 0-0+- Ryan - Webb , 'fid5±; 8 . . . 'fie7 9 . ..txc6 bxc6 1 0 .
Dublin 1 99 1 ; 0--0 fxe5 [Link]:\xe5! 0-0 [Link]:\d3 d6
7 . . . d 6 8 . ll:\g5 ! This typical 13 . ..tf4 ..ta6 14 . ..tg3 l:.ab8 15.l:.b 1
knight sacrifice drives Black into c 5 l 6 . .:.e 1 'fif7 1 7.b3 ..tb7 1 8 .ll:\f4

130
 3. .li.b5 f5 4. lbc3 fxe4 5. lbxe4

ii.d4 1 9 . '§'d2 .l:.beB 20.:XeB '§'xeB 1 0 . dxe5 0-0-0 l l . ii.d3 i.f5 1 2 .

2 l . c4± Mukhametov - Wilke , ii.xf5 + �xf5 1 3 . exd6 .li.xd6 14.
Krumbach 1 99 1 ; ll . . . i.xe5 1 2 . i.e3± Vamos - Herman, Paks
'§' h 5 + � d B 1 3 . .U e 1 i.xh2+ 1 4 . 1996;
�xh 2 + - ; 1 2 . . . � fB 1 3 . .U e 1 d6 7 . . . .li.d6 B . d4 0-0 9 . .li.xc6 bxc6
[Link].h6+ �gB 15.f4 i.d4+ 16.�h1 10.dxe5 ii.xe5 ( 1 0 . . . '§'g6? ll .lbh4
.li.e6 1 7 . f5+-) 9. '§'d5+ �hB 1 0 . �fl 12.exd6 .li.a6 13. '§'xa6 �xf2+
exf6 �xf6 1 1 . 0-0 a 6 12 . .li.a4 b5 14.�d1 �xh4 15.dxc7+- Hinks ­
1 3 . ii.b3 i.b7, Ziffer - Leisebein Oral, Bratislava 1993) l l .lbxe5
ve e 2002, [Link] g5 ! h6 1 5 . lll e4 lleB 12.f4 d6 1 3 . 0-0 dxe5 14.fxe5
'§'g6 1 6 . lb g3;t The g3-knight �xe5 1 5 . �xe5 .Uxe5 [Link].f4 .Ue7
deprives B l a ck o f attacking 17 . .Uae 1 lbe 1 1B .[Link] 1 .li.f5 19.
chances. ll . . . d6, Findlay - Och­ .U e 7 .li.xc2 2 0 . .li. e 5 ± D uarte -
koos, Toronto 1997, 12.c3 ! ii.g4 Sepulveda, Santiago 1994;
( 12 . . . i.f5 1 3 .:e 1 l:iaeB 14 . .UxeB 7 . . . ..tc5?! Le Du - Foucaud ,
.UxeB 1 5 . .li. e 3 .li. e 4 1 6 . '§'h5± ) . Fouesnant 1999, this provoking
White should play energetically, move is better to be addressed
otherwise Black can get a dan­ with the s i m p l e B . 0-0 ! lb d 4
gerous compensation . 13 .lbg5 ! ( B . . . 0-0?? 9 . '§' c4+- ; B . . . d6?? 9 .
.UaeB 14.f4! h6 15.lbe4 '§'g6 i 6. d4+-) 9.lbxd4 ii.xd4 1 0 . c3 ii.b6
lbg3±. 1 l . d4±.
7.'§'e2 8 .li.xc6 dxc6
.

B . . . '§'xc6 9 . '§'xe5 �f6 . Uncon­

vincing play - with the extra
pawn Black offers his opponent
extra tempi. 10. �xf6 (taking on
c7 was also possible.) 10 . . . .li.xf6
l l . d4± A . Fernandes - Rocha,
Lisboa 1997.
The move B . . . bxc6 occurs very
rarely but it is quite playable and
after 9. �xe5 Black tried lots of
7 ... .li.e7 continuations :
A pawn sacrifice is the best
decision, Black should not clutch
at material balance, e.g. :
7 . . . d6?! B.d4 .li.d7 (B . . . .li.g4 9.d5
.li.xf3 1 0 . gx f3 a6 1 l . dxc6 axb5
1 2 . cxb7 l:.bB 1 3 . '§'xb5+ �dB 14.
'§'c6+- Vohnout - Zitek, Plzen
1996) 9.0-0 '§'g6 (9 . . . 0-0-0 10.d5
lbe7 1 l.. �xd 7 + .Uxd 7 1 2 . c4+-)

131
Chapter 20

9 . . . �g6 1 0 . 0-0 0-0 11. �xe7 24.i.e5 .ltxb3 25 . .ltxf6 gxf6 26.a5
l1xf3 12.d3 llf8 1 3 . �g5 �fl (The i.c4 2 7 . tt:'l d4 �d7 2 8 . f4 � d 6
endgame after 1 3 . . . �xg5 1 4 . 29.�f2 �c5 30.�e3 �b4 3 1 .g4 h6
i.xg5± i s very comfortable for 32.h4 1-0 [Link] - Antu­
White. White retains his extra nes, Cienfuegos 1989; 1 1 . . . l:tb8
pawn and has prospects of using 12.l:.b 1 i.e6 13.b3 i.d5 14.�e2;!;
the weakness of the whole black What is imp ortant is that if
queenside. Therefore the bishops White allows doubling of the
of opposite colour do not spell a pawns along the f-file he will lose
draw here . ) 1 4 . b 3 ± C hura - almost all his winning chances.)
Semenova, Pardubice 1 992 ; 12.0-0 i.g4, Leow - Weemaes,
9 . . . �xe5+ [Link]:lxe5 i.f6 ll.d4 Thessaloniki 1984, 13 .tt:'ld2 ! l:.ab8
c5 12 . .lte3 1:1b8 13. 0-0-0 0-0 14. (13 . . . l:tae8 [Link]:'le4 i.e5 [Link] 1 d5
c3 cxd4 1 5 . cxd4 c5 16.l:l.d2 cxd4 [Link]:'lg3 i.xg3 1 7 . hxg3 .Ue2 1 8 .
1 7 .i.xd4 i.g5 18.i.e3 i.xe3 19. i.e3 .l:tb8 19.l:tfc l a 5 2 0 . .ltf4 l:tc8
fxe3 1:1e8 20 .tt:'lxd7, Nawrocki - 2 1 .�fl±) 14.l:.b U ;
Deptuch, corr 1980, White has a 9 . . . c 5 , Herrera - Antune s ,
great advantage in the endgame. Bayamo 1990, 10. 0-0 .lt b 7 ( 1 0 . . .
20 . . . .l:tb7 2 1 .tt:'lc5 l:tc7 22.b4±; �xe5 l l . tt:'lxe5 d 6 1 2 . tt:'lc4 i.a6
9 . . . 0-0 1 0 . 0-0 d6 1 1 . �xf6 1 3 . d3;!;) l l . l:te 1 .ltx£3 1 2 . �xf6
i.xf6 1 2 .d3 - see 9 . . . d6; gxf6 1 3 . gxf3 llg8+ 14.�h1 �fl
9 . . . � f7 1 0 . �xc7 ! The move 15.d3 l:i.g6 1 6 . .ltf4;!;.
has not gained popularity yet ­ [Link]:lxe5 ..if5
it was played once in an old mail They also play 9 . . . 0-0 1 0 . 0-0
game, although White won it. On when 10 . . . i.f5 transposes to the
the other hand we did not find main line.
any chances for Black to get suf­ If Black hinders the move d2-
fi cient compensation and yet d4, White (as an exception ! ) can
White has grabbed a s econd favourably fianchetto his bishop :
p awn already ! 1 0 . . . 0-0 l l . d 3 10 . . . c5 ll .b3 i.f5 1 2 . i.b2 .U.ae8
�e6+ ( 1 1 . . . i.d8 12. �g3 l:!.e8+ 1 3 . 13 . .:.ae 1 i.d6 1 4 . f4 �h4 1 5 . d3
i. e 3 i.f6 14.0-0 i.xb2 15 .�ab 1 i.e6 16. �f2 �h6 1 7 . �g3 b6 18.
�xa2? 16.lhb2 �xb2 17 . .ltd4+-; l:.e3 l:tf5 1 9Jie4 l:th5 20 . .Ufe 1 l:tf8
15 . . . .ltf6 16 .l:tb3±) 12. �e5 i.b4+ 2 1 .tt:'lg4 i.xg4 22. �xg4 i.xf4 23.
Rittner - Hunter, corr. 1973 , now llxf4 l:txf4 24.l:te8+ 1-0 Cutillas
the simplest was 13.c3±; - A. Lopez, corr. 1995;
9 . . . d6 1 0 . �xf6 i.xf6 l l . d3 10 . . . .lte6 ll .d4 l:Iae8 12 . .ltd2
0-0 ( 1 l . . .i.f5 12.0-0 �d7 13 .�b 1 i.d6 13.i.c3. A good post for the
.l:thb8 14.b3 a5 1 5 . a4 c5 16 . .ltd2 bishop . 13 . . . .ltd5 14.f4 l:1e6 15 .
.U.e8 1 7 J::tfe 1 d5 18 .l:txe8 llxe8 �d3 �h4 1 6 . .lt e 1 � e 7 1 7 . c4
19.l:te 1 c4 20.lhe8 �xe8 21..i.xa5 .i.xe5 1 8 . cxd5 i.xd4+ 1 9 . �xd4
cxb3 22.cxb3 i.xd3 23 . .ltxc7 i.c2 lte4 2 0 . �d3 l:t.e3 2 l . � c4 cxd5

132
 3. i.. b5 f5 4. tLlc3 fxe4 5. tZ:lxe4

22. �xd5+ Wh8 23.�c3 c6 24. �g5 �xc5 + 1 9 . �xc5 bxc5 2 0 . i.xc7
1-0 [Link] - [Link], Gyor 1997 ; ltxfl+ 2 l . 'it>xfl .Uf8+ 22.'it>g1 h6
10 . . . �d6 1 l . d4 c5 (for ll . . . �f5 2 3 . c4 l:.f7 24.�a5 Wg8 25 .l:1e5
see the main line. 1 1 . . .�e6 12.f4 .:d7 26.l:txc5 .Ud1+ 27 .Wf2 l:!.c 1
l:tae8 1 3 . �e3 c5 14.l:tae 1 �f5 1 5 . 28.i.. c 3 l:tc2+ 29 .We3 i.. x g2 3 0 .
d x c 5 �xe5 1 6 . fxe5 �xe5 1 7 . ltc7 g 5 3 l ..:g7 + 'it> f8 32.l:f.g6 h5
!txf8+ l:.xf8 1 8 . c6 bxc6 19.i..x a7 33.:Xg5 h4 34.l:a5 h3 35.lha7+­
�xe2 20.l:txe2 �c4 2 1 .l:te1 .Ua8 Kotronias - Seitaj , Ankara 1995)
22.i.. c 5 .:txa2 23.�a3± Pierrot - 14 . .ltxd4 i.. b 7 ( 14 . . . �f5 15.l:tae 1
Mahia, Buenos Aires 1998. An i..b 7 16. �c4+ 'it>h8 1 7 . 1:.e3 l:tad8
ingenious trap for the rook ! ) 1 8 . li g3 lH6 1 9 . � c 3 .l:tdf8 2 0 .
12.�e3. tt::l d3+- A . Kovacevic - Dini c ,
Kladovo 1992) 1 5 . �g4 .Uae8 1 6 .
l:!.ad 1 �h6 1 7 Jtde 1 i.. d 5 1 8 . f5
i.. c5 19. i..x c5 bxc5 20. �g3 �d6
2 l . �c3 i.. a8 22. �g3 :e7, Biega­
nowski - Wierzbicki, corr. 1 994,
23.f6 .U.xf6 24. �b3+ �ee6 25.l:!.xf6
gxf6 [Link]::l c 6+-.
10.0-0!
Actually, the fi2-pawn is un­
touchable! White should deter­
This position occurred more than mine the position of the d-pawn
once: only after Black's castling. If he
1 2 . . . ..txe5 1 3 . dxe5 �xe5 14. castles short the pawn goes on
�c4+ i.. e 6 1 5 . �xc5 �xc5 1 6 . d4, if long - on d3 . That's a key
�xc5 lUe S ;!; Vivo - Lanzani , moment!
Bratto 1994, White can continue
his fight for the whole point;
1 2 . . . �e6 1 3 . f4 . The knight
must be bolstered up . 13 . . . �f5
( 1 3 . . . cxd4 14.�xd4 �h6 1 5 . �e4
c6 16.c4 a6 17 . .Uad1 .l:.ae8 18 .b3±
Schiller - Hitchens, ICCF 1996)
1 4 . a3 .l:tae8 ( 1 4 . . . �e4 1 5 . � d3
�xd3 1 6 . tt::l x d3 cxd4 1 7 . �xd4
i.. c4 18.�e5;l;) 15 . .U.ae1 �d5 16.c4
i.. e 6 1 7 . d 5 ± 1 - 0 S p erhake - 10 ... 0-0
Wamplar, ICCF 1998. The c2-pawn cannot be taken!
12 . . . b6 1 3 . f4 cxd4 ( 13 . . . �f5 10 . . . �xc2 1l .d3 �a4 ( 1 1 . . . 0-0 12.
14.l:tae 1 �b7 1 5 . �c4+ Wh8 16. tt::lf3 �g6 [Link]::l e 1 ! +-; 1 1 . . . 0-0-0
dxc5 �xe5 1 7 . fxe5 �xe5 18.�f4 1 2 . 1:. e 1 �d6 1 3 . �g4+ 'it>b8 1 4 .

133
 Chapter 20

liJd 7 + . The win of the exchange against any defence of Black:

is more advantageous here than ll . . . I!.hf8 , Walther - Leise­
the win of the queen - 14 . .ig5?! bein , corr. 1987 , 12 . .td2 .id6
Zude - Brehm, Germany 1988, 13 .i.c3±;
14 . . . .txe5 15.i.xf6 i.xf6 with a 1 l . . . .td6 12.f4 h5 ( 1 2 . . . l:tde8
sudden compensation - 1 4 . . . 13.�f2 �e7 14 . .Ue 1 .te6, Bon ­
lhd7 15. �xd7 �g6 16.b3 .ixd3 Panman, corr. 199 1 , 15.ltJc4 ! .tc5
1 7 . .ib2 �h5 1 8 .h3 l:tf8 1 9 . g4 ! 16 . .te3+-; 12 . . . .txe5 13.fxe5 �g6,
�g6 2 0 . .l::t e 6 .t f5 2 1..U xg6 .txd7 Pereira - Ro o s e , corr. 1 9 8 7 ,
22.l:txg7+-) 1 2 .1:1e 1 ! �e6 ( 1 2 . . . 14. �f2 .th3 15 . .tf4 �hf8 16. �d2
0-0 13 .liJd7+-; 1 2. . . 0-0-0 13. �g4 1Ide8 17 .it.. g3±) 13. �f2! (A stan­
�b8 14. �xa4+-) 13 . .tg5 ! ! .ixg5 dard move which one must know
( 1 3 . . . 0-0 14 . .txe7 �xe7 1 5 . �g4 - the queen is perfect on f2.) �b8
.tb5 1 6 . liJd7+-; 1 3 . . . 0-0-0 14. ( 13 . . . .U.hf8 14. �xa7 .ixe5 15.fxe5
it.. x e7 �xe7 1 5 . �g4+-) 14. �h5+ �xe5 16 . .tg5 I!de8 17 . .tf4 �b5
�f8 1 5 . �xg5 �g8 1 6 . .l:te4 .tb5 [Link] 1 c5 1 9 . .ie3 �d7 20. �xc5
1 7.1be 1 htf8 ( 1 7 . . . �xa2 18.liJg4 1-0 Pauw - Wol ferink , corr.
h6 1 9.l:te8+ nxe8 20.nxe8+ �h7 1993) 14 . .te3 a6 15 . .td4±;
2 l . liJf6+ gxf6 22Jie7+ �f7 23. 1 l . . . .tc5 12 . .td2 .l:the8 13 . .tc3
11xf7# ; 1 7 . . . h6 1 8 . �g6 .Ue8 19. 11e6 14.�h 1 I!.de8 15.f4 h6 1 6.b4
�h5 11f8 20.liJg6 �f7 2 l..�.f4 .l::i. e 8 .td6 1 7 . �f2 b 6 18 . .td4 .txe5
22 . .l:txe8+ �xeS 23 . .t:Ie4 �f7 24. 19.fxe5 �d8 20 . .tc3 .tg6 2 l . a4±
It.e7+-) 18.ltJxc6 �xc6 19 . .Ue7 g6 Canela - Hoiberg, 'fuzla 1987,
20JUe6 �f5 2 1 . �h6+-; · White is a pawn up and has a
10 . . . 0-0-0. As practice shows, powerful attack;
the long castling is hazardous for 11 . . . g5 12 . .td2 ! .td6 1 3 . .tc3
Black. ll.d3 ! Now this is the good .Uhe8 14 . .Uae 1 .Ue7?? ( 14 . . . �h6
move - White often creates 15.�e3 �b8 16.f4±) 15.ltJxc6! ! A
threats to the black king along marvellous blow! 1 5 . . . .txh2+ 16.
the free g 1-a7 diagonal. �h1 �xc6 1 7 . �xe7 �h6 1 8 . �£'6
.ig6 19. �e6+ �b8 20. �h3 �xh3
2 l .gxh3 1-0 Fournell - Dankel­
mann, corr. 1 99 1 ;
l l . . . lihe8 12.f4 .id6 ( 1 2 . . . �b8
13 . .te3 a6 14. �f2 g5 [Link].. d4 �d6
1 6 . fxg5 �xd4 1 7 . �xd4 ltxd4
18 . .t:Ixf5 htd5 19 .�e 1 �c8 20.g4
.tc5+ 2 l .�fl+- Butze - Padros,
corr. 1987; 12 ... g5 1 3 . �f2 �b8 ,
Husted - Christensen, Denmark
It can be s aid for sure that 1994, 14 . .te3±; 1 3 . . . b6 14.fxg5
White's advantage i s stable �xe5 1 5 . �xf5+ �xf5 1 6 J 1xf5

134
 3. it.. b5 f5 4. lbc3 fxe4 5. lbxe4

iLc5+ 1 7 .'it>fl 11£'8 18 . .l:tf3 Itxf3+ 13 . . . b6 14 . ..td2 ..tc5 15 . ..te3 !

1 9 . gxf3 l:tf8 2 0 . f4 ..td6 2 l .'it>f2 ..t£'8 ( 1 5 . . . ..txe3 1 6 . the3 g5 1 7 .
..txf4 22 . .txf4 .l:.xf4+ 23.'it>g3+­ l::. ae 1 g4 18 .b4 h 5 1 9 . tlrd2 h 4 2 0 .
Bashkov - Oral, Mlada Boleslav lie3 lif8 2 1 .a4 �h6 22.b5 cxb5 23 .
1993 ) 1 3 . �£'2! axb5 Itd4 24. lbc6 Ita4 2 5 . c4+­
Videki - Zelie, Split 200 1 ) 1 6 .
liae 1 'it>b8 17. � f3 'it>b7 [Link].. d2 a5
1 9 . a3 Ite7 20.b4 axb4 2 l . axb4
�d6 22.b5 .id7 23.c4 g6 24.!ta 1
l::t e 6 [Link].. e3 lif6 26. c5+- Palcia­
uskas - Brilla, corr. 1987;
13 . . . 'it>b8 14. it.. e 3 a6 1 5 . .id4
'f;\'f8 1 6 . lbc4 it.. c8 (16 . . . lle6 1 7 .
lbxd6 cxd6 1 8 Jh e 1 Itde8 1 9 .
llxe6 llxe6 2 0 . .l:te 1 l:be 1 + 2 1 .
Black has tried here various �xe 1 'f;\'f7 22.a4 g6 23 .b3 �e6 ,
moves - no equality found: Hrdina - Schwarz, corr. 1990, 24.
13 . . . c5 [Link].. e3 g5 15.lbc4 it..xf4 ..te3±; 1 6 . . . !td7 1 7 . a3 g6 1 8 .b4
[Link].. xf4 gxf4 17. 'f;\'xf4 1-0 Neu- ..te6 19.lbe5 it..xe5 [Link]..xe5 h5 2 1 .
marker - Leisebein, corr. 1990; .l:tfb 1 Itf7 22. a4± Smekalin - Gor-
13 . . . a6 1 4 . ..td2 'i;\'e7 15 .'it>h1 bunov, corr. 1996; 1 6 . . . �f7 1 7 .
'it>b8 16.l:tfe 1 � f8 17 .b4 lle6 18. it.. e 5 .Ue6 18 . ..txd6 cxd6 19. Itae 1
.l:tab 1 h5 1 9 . a4 g5 20.b5 axb5 2 1 . l:tde8 20.1:1xe6 l:i.xe6 2 l .lle 1 1Ig6
axb5 c5 22.lbc6+ bxc6 23.bxc6+ 22.lte3 it.. c 8 23.h3 .Ue6 24. ltxe6
'it>a7 24.lib7+ 1-0 Devereaux - 'i;\'xe6 25. 'i;\'d4 d5 26. �e5+ �xeS
Wittmann, Oxford 1998; 27 .lbxe5± Trubitsyn - Gorbunov,
1 3 . . . g5 1 4 . lbc4 i.. g4 1 5 . it.. e 3 corr. 1996) 1 7 . a3 g6 18 .b4 �h6
..txf4 16.i.. xf4 gxf4 17. �xf4 �xf4 1 9 . it.. c 5 it.. e 6 2 0 . it.. x d6 cxd6 2 1 .
1 8 . lhf4 ..th5 1 9 . 1Iafl .Ue2 2 0 . · lba5± Glek - Arbakov, corr. 1985 .
.l:t4f2 l:tde8 2 l . h3± A. Belov - ll.d4
Kondrashov, Kolontaevo 1998;
13 . . . ..txe5 14.fxe5 .Uxe5 15.d4
l:ta5 1 6 . i.. d2 l:tad5 1 7 . c4 J:lxd4
( 1 7 . . . .:.5d7 1 8 . �xf5 'f;\'xf5 19Jhf5
g6 2 0 .l:tf4 c5 2 l .d5 c6 2 2 . i.. e 3
cxd5 23.i..x c5 1-0 Wikman - Teo,
corr. 1989) 18.i.. c 3 g6 19.l::t a d1 c5
20 . ..txd4 cxd4 2 1 .g4 'i;\'g5 22 . .:.Xd4
..txg4 23.h4 �h5 24.l:txd8+ 'it>xd8
2 5 . �f8 + 'it>d7 26.l:tf7+ 'it>c6 2 7 .
l:tf6+ 'it> d 7 28. �g7+ 1-0 Glek ­ ll .id6
...

Yandemirov, USSR 1985; ll . . . l:tad8 12 . ..te3 c5 13.l::t ad 1

135
 Chapter 20

'it>h8 14.'it>h1 cxd4 15.i.xd4 �e6 mark itself. 19.l:i.c1 ltfd8 20. �f3
1 6 . llfe 1 i.d6 1 7 . a3 h6 1 8 . c4 c5 �f7 2 U1e2 a6 22. �f2± Videki ­
1 9 . .tc3 l:r.de8 20 J:txd6 �xd6 2 1 . Bozanic, Split 1998.
lLl f7 + l:txf7 2 2 . �xe8+ � f8 2 3 . 13.dxe5 �g6 14.l:tf2
�xfB + l:txf8 24.1:.e7+- Sorsa - White's advantage is out of
Lardot, Naantali 1998; question, but Black keeps prac­
1 1 . . .I:.ae8 12.f4 c5 ( 12 . . . .td6 - tical chances to maintain the
see 1 1 . . . .td6 12.f4 l:tae8) 13 . .i.e3 balance .
.td6 14.l:tae l . White has finished
the development harmoniously.
1 4 . . . 'it> h 8 1 5 . � f2 c 6 1 6 . dx c 5
.txe5 1 7 . fxe5 �xe5 18 . .td4 �d5 ,
Brinck- C la u s s e n - Vi sti s e n ,
Copenhagen 1999. The poor po­
sition of the black pieces should
have been used in a neat and
decisive way : 1 9 . g4 ! ! 19 . . . .:.d8
( 1 9 . . .lhe 1 20.�xe 1 +- ; 19 . . . 'it>g8
20.c4 �xc4 2 l . gxf5+-) 20.c3 i.e6 14 ..:ad8
.

2 l . �xf8 + �xf8 2 2 . nxf8+ .tg8 14 . . . h5 1 5 .'it>h1 .tg4 1 6 . � e 1

23J:lee8+-. l:.ad8 1 7 . .i.d2 b6 18J:tc 1 lld5 1 9 .
12.f4 i.xe5 h 3 .te6 20.ne2 l:i.fd8 2 l . 'it>h2 �f5
12 . . . c 5 13 . .te3 l:tae8 - see 22.i.e3 .n5d7 23 . �h4 .tc4 24.l:tf2
l l . . . l:tae8 12.f4 c5 13 .i.e3 i.d6. .i.d5 25 .l:!.g1 �e4 26.llf3 �xc2 27.
1 2 . . . l:tad8 1 3 . l:t f2 .txe5 1 4 . l%g3. As far as Black is stubborn
d4xe5 �g6 - see the main line. in hindering the g2-g4 advance
12 . . . .U a e 8 13 . .i.e3 c5 ( 1 3 . . . (and that is a correct approach),
.txe5 1 4 . dxe5 �g6 1 5 .l:tf2 h5 White has to use another possi­
(Black's move 15 . . . I;ld8 is a kind bility - via the g3-square his rook
of "loss" or "sacrifice" of tempo, breaks into the play. 27 . . . �f5 28.
Zidu - Rybak, corr. 1999. The l:lg5 �e4 29 . .:.Xh5 �xe3 30.I:.h8+
fine point is that this position Wfl 3 1 . �h5+ 'it>e7 32. �g5+ 'it>fl
happened a lot of times after 33 Jhd8 .:.xd8 34. �xd8± V. Kuz­
9 . . . .tf5 1 0 . d3 and the pawn was netsov - Stj azhkina, St. Peters­
arriving to d4 in two ste p s . burg 2002.
Therefore Black was achieving 14 . . . a5 15 . .te3 b6 1 6 . �c4+
this position with his turn to �h8 17 . .l::t d 1 Itfe8 18. �c3 �e6 19.
play! However even then he had a3 �g6 20 . .l:tfd2 h5 2 l ..tf2 .tg4
problems . 16.a4!?±) 16. 'it>h1 l:td8 22Jle 1 11ad8 23 . .th4 llxd2 24.
17.h3 lld5 18 .'it>h2 h4. The pawn �xd2 .te6 25 . .tg5 �fl 26 .h3 i.f5
has cancelled the move g2-g4 , 27.c3 b5 28 . �£2 'it>g8 29. �h4 c5
but very soon it could become a 30.g4. White came to the right

136
 3. .tb5 f5 4. tiJc3 fxe4 5. tiJxe4

plan much later than in the pre­ White regularly applies this
vious game , but the position al­ scheme, preparing the g2-g4 ad­
lows it - Black is passive and has vance . It is understandable -
nothing better than waiting. 30 . . . White has a clear pawn majority
hxg4 3 l . hxg4 .ic8 32.f5 �c4 33. on the kingside ( four pawns
�h5 �d7 34.e6 .ic6 35 .lie3 1-0 against two - double superior­
Ptacnikova - Cejkova, Nymburk ity); if White's pawns start roll­
1994. ing, there will be no rescue for
15 ..te3 b6 Black. 17 . . . �g3 18 .llf3 �g6 19.
15 . . . .l:!.d5 1 6 .1Iafl h5 1 7 .Wh 1 l:l f2 �g3 2 0 . 1If3 �g6 2 l . Wh2
W h 7 1 8 . h 3 li fd8 1 9 . .l:!.f3 Wg8 .ixc2 (The loss of fi2-pawn in this
20.Wh2 �h7, Wolff - Dawidow, sort of positions must not disturb
Philadelphia 199 1 , 2 1 ..l:!.g3 .ixc2 White, yet it would be good to
22.�f2 .id3 23 . .l:!.e 1 b6 24J:tg5±. snatch something in return - like
15 . . . a5 1 6 . Wh1 b6, Moroz - the c6, a7, or h4-pawn. In this
Mi. Tseitlin, corr. 1985, 17 .h3 h5 game White accomplished every­
18 .Wh2±. thing skilfully. ) 22 . .Ug3 �f5 (Oth­
[Link] h5 erwise the important h5-pawn is
lost.) 23. �c4+ .l:!.f7 24. �xc6 .ie4
25. �c4 l:!d3 26.l:!e1 .id5 27. �a4
�e6 28. �xa7 Wh7 29. �a4 kxa2
30 . .l:!.g5 g6 3 l . �e4 l:!b3 32 . .ic1
l:tf5 3 3 . 1Ixf5 gxf5 3 4 . �b7 �e7
35. �c8 kb 1 36 . .Ud 1 �g7 37.ltd7
lig3 38.l:!xg7+ lixg7 39.g4 (Hav­
ing won the queen for a rook,
White undertakes g2-g4 ! ) 39 . . .
fxg4 4 0 . hxg4 1-0 Schlosser -
1 7.h3± Baumgartner, Finkenstein 1990.

Conclusion
In the 5. . . CiJf6 variation White's edge is significant, however press­
ing it home is a hard work which demands accuracy. The great ex­
pectations of White are based on the centralised position of the as­
knight. Black often prefers to exchange this strong piece, but then
White obtains big pawn superiority on the kingside and arranges
the dreadful g2 -g4 advance. Black is saddled with long and
prospectless defence.

137
Chapter 2 1 l .e4 e5 2.tiJf3 ttJc6 3.i..b 5 f5 4.ttJc3
fxe4 5.ttJxe4 d5
Jaenisch Gambit

9. '�h5+ �e7 (9 ... g6? 1 0 .'�' e5+-)

1 0 . 'f1 e 5 + � e 6 l l . i£. xa8 'f1xa8
12. 'f1xc7 +.

[Link]::lxe5
Definitely the best move -
White should not avoid compli­
cations.
6 ... dxe4 White has already achieved ma­
The only move . The moves terial advantage and the black
6 . . . 'f1e7? 7.d4 and 6 . . . 'f1h4? [Link]::lg3 king is awkwardly placed.
lead to unpleasant consequences 12 . . . �f6 1 3 . 0-0 �g6 1 4 . d3 .
for Black. The simplest way t o play for
[Link]::lxc6 White. His pieces win freedom
In this chapter we will study and White's material advantage
two continuations for Black on attains paramount significance.
the 7th move 7 . . . 'f1d5 and 7 . . . bxc6. 14 . . . tt::lf6 1 5 .l:.e1 h5 16. 'f1g3+ �fl
They are thoroughly studied, 17.dxe4 h4 18. 'f1c7+ �e7 19.i£.e3
though not the most popular. ltc8 20. 'ffl x a 7 'ffJ c6 2 1 . h3 tt::l x e4
7 ... 'f1d5 22.a4 ti::lf6 23. a5± 1-0 Smejkal ­
After this move White steers Duckstein, Raach 1969;
the game by force into a sharp 12 . . . �d7 1 3 . d3 ti::l f6 ( 1 3 . . . exd3
ending, keeping the initiative. 1 4 . 0-0±) 1 4 . 0-0 h6 ( 1 4 . . . exd3
It is proved that Black has 15.cxd3 h6 16 .�d2 �fl 1 7 . .l:.fe 1
practically no chances for a good 'ffl c 6 18 .ltac l± Estrada - Domin­
play after 7 . . . bxc6?! 8.�xc6+ �d7 go , Spain 1 9 9 3 ) 1 5 . dxe4 tt::l e8

138
 3. it.. b5 f5 4. l'LJc3 fe 5. l'LJe4 d5 6. l'LJe5 de 7. l'LJc6

16. �a5 it.. e 6 1 7 .it.. e 3 a6 1S .l:1ae 1 11. l'LJ e5+-; 10 . . . �d7 ll. l'LJe5+ �d6
�f7 19. �a4 it.. e 7 20.f4 l'LJ d6 2 1 .£5 1 2 . c5+ �d5 1 3 .it.. c 4+ �xd4 14.
it.. c4 [Link].. c 5 it..xfl 23.i.xd6 .l:[Link] it.. e 3#) 1 1 . �e5+ l'LJ e 7 1 2 . l'LJxe7+
24. �d7 l:teS 25. �e6+ �£8 [Link]. �f7 13 .i.e8+ �xeS 14. l'LJ d5+ �f7
it.. x d6 1-0 Adamski - Nilsson, 15.�xc7+ �e6 16. l'LJ f4+-.
corr. 1962 ; S . . . �c5 , Stroe - Tzannetakis,
12 . . . �e8 13.0-0 l'LJf6 (13 . . . it.. d5 corr. 1994, 9 . d4 ! exd3 1 0 . it.. e3
14.d3 exd3 15.!te1+ it.. e 7 [Link].. g5 �d6 ll.c5! d2+ 12.�fl �f6 1 3 .
�dB 1 7 . �e5+- ; 13 . . . it.. e 7 14.d3 �h5+ g6 14. �e2, and White wins
�f7 1 5 . it.. e 3 l'LJ f6 1 6 . dxe4 .l:tcS at least the exchange: 14 . . . bxc6
1 7 . �xa7 �xe4 1 8 . c3± Evans ­ [Link].. g5+ �e6 [Link]..x c6+ �f7 1 7 .
Dueckstein, Lugano 1968; 14 . . . �xe6+ it..x e6 1 S .it..x aS it.. c4+ 19.
exd3 1 5 . cxd3 l'LJ f6 1 6 . .U e 1 �f7 �g1 it..xc5 ( 19 ... i.h6 20.h4!+-) 20.
1 7 . it.. e 3 .l:tcS 1 S . �xa7 �xa7 19. it.. xd2 l'LJ f6 2 1...U. c 1 .l:.d8 [Link].. e 1 +-
it..x a7± Sio - Tanin, corr. 1974; 9.�h5+ g6 10.�e5+
13 . . . �c8 14. �xcS+ it.. xcS 15.l:!.e 1
�f7 1 6 .l:X e 4 l'LJ f6 1 7 . l:t e 1 it.. d 6
1 S . d3 it.. f5 [Link].. d2 l:eS 20.l:txeS
�xeS 2 1 . a4+- Kudrin - Crafty,
I C C 1 9 9 5 . An example from
Michael Adams's career who
played as White of course : 13 . . .
� d 5 1 4 . d3 it.. d6 1 5 . �xg7 it.. e 5
1 6 . �xa7 exd3 17.lle1 l'LJ e7 1S.
�a4+ �f7 19. �e4 �xe4 20 . .Uxe4
it.. f6 2 l . cxd3 .UdS 22. it.. f4 l:txd3 10 �xe5
..•

[Link].. e 5 it..xa2 24.hf6 �xf6 25.h3 The attempt 10 . . . �f7 is pun­

it.. d 5 26 . .U.a6+ l'LJ c6 27 . .Uh4 �g7 ished by 11 .c5! (the capture on
2 8 . b4 llb3 29 . .Ub6+- Adams - h8 is much weaker) ll . . . �xe5
Ferron Garcia, London 1993) 14. ( ll . . . �xc5?? 12. l'LJ dS#) 12. l'LJ xe5+
d3 it.. e 7 1 5 .it.. g 5 �f7 ( 15 . . . h6 16. �g7 ( 1 2 . . . � e 7 1 3 . d4 it.. g7 1 4 .
it..x f6 gxf6 1 7 .lbe 1 l:i.g8 1S.f.3 �f7 it.. g 5+ l'LJ f6 1 5 . 0-0-0 c 6 1 6 . i.c4
19.:xe4 .U.c8 20. �a5 it.. d5 2 1 .l:te2 i.f5 1 7 . g4 .lte6 1 8 . l:.he 1 it.. x c4
i.c5+ 22.�h1 it.. b 6 23. �a4 �b7 1 9 . l'LJ xc4 �e6 2 0 . f3 +- Stets -
2 4 . �h4+- C o e n e n - S chuer­ Fedorovsky, Bydgoszcz 1 9 9 9 )
mans, B elgium 200 1 ) 1 6 . dxe4 13 .b4 it.. e 7 14 . .lt b 2 it.. f6 1 5 . 0-0
l:tcS 1 7 . �f4 .:.Xc2 18 . .l:tac 1 l:.xb2 it.. e 6 [Link] 1 it.. d 5 1 7 . it.. c 4 :ds
19.Itc7± Hennings - Lane, DDR 1S . .l::. a d 1 it.. x c4 1 9 . l'LJ xc4 it.. x b2
197 1 . 20. l'LJxb2 l'LJf6 2 1 .f.3 Ild4 22.a3 .Ue8
8.c4 �d6 2 3 . fxe4 l1dxe4 2 4 . lhe4 l:Ixe4
8 . . . �g5?? 9. d4�xg2 (9 . . . �f6 2 5 . d3 l:r.e2 26. tt:\c4 l'LJ d5 27.�fl
10. �h5+-) 10.�h5+ g6 ( 10 . . . �g6 .Ue6 2 S . l::. d 2± Gibbons - Gil l ,

139
 Chapter 21

Auckland 1996. .ltxe 1 1 9 . �xe 1 .ltxc4 2 0 . tiJxd8

11 .t2Jxe5+ c6 lhd8 2 1 . �e5+-) 1 5 . i. d 2 .lt d 6 ,
Worse is 1 1 . . . 'it>e7?! 12.d4 .ltg7 Daamen - Becx, Boxtel 1 9 8 9 ,
13 . .ltf4 tiJf6 1 4 . 0-0-0± Svec - ( 1 5 . . . .ltxd2+ 16 .'it>xd2 0-0-0 1 7 .
Weidel , Boeblingen 1985. lthe l ± ) 1 6 . tiJxc6 ! .lt d 7 1 7 . c 5 !
12 .lta4
• .ltxc5 18.�cl .ltb6 19.0-0 ! h 6 (A
White must not take on c6, similar endgame with the fa­
otherwise he would lose a piece! vourable for White material pro­
12 i.g7
•.. portion (a rook and two pawns
12 . . . .ltd6 13.d4 ! exd3 14.0-0! against black knight and bishop)
.ltf5 15.�e1 t2Je7, Anat - Verlager, arises also after 19 . . . h5 20.�fe1+
ICC 1996, White could use a very 'it>f8 2 1 . .ltb4+ 'it>g7 22.l:tcd 1 .ltxc6
strong sacrifice of the exchange: 23 . .ltc3+ 'it>h7 24 . .ltxc6 bxc6 25.
16 .g4! .ltb4 ( 1 6 . . . .ltxe5? 17.lhe5 l:txd3 �d8 2 6 . lhd8 .ltxd8 2 7 .
.ltxg4 18 . .ltg5+-) 1 7 . .ltg5 ! .ltxe 1 .ltxh8 'it>xh8 28 .�e8 .lt f6 29.b4±)
( 1 7 . . . d2 1 8 .�e3 .ltd7 1 9 . tiJxd7 20 J:!.fe 1 + 'it>f8 2 1 . .ltb4+ 'it>g7 22.
'it>xd7 2 0 . �b 3 ! +- ) 1 8 Jb e 1 d2 l:!.cd 1 i.xc6 2 3 . .ltc3+ 'it>h7 24.
19 . ..ixd2 ..ie6 20 . ..ib4 a5 2 1 ..ltc5 .ltxc6 bxc6 25J:txd3 �d8 26.�xd8
t2Jc8 22.t2Jxc6 'it>fl 23.tiJe5+ 'it>f6 .ltxd8 27 . .ltxh8 'it>xh8 28.�e8 .ltf6
24 . ..id4 �d8 25 . .ltc3 'it>e7 26.c5 (28 . . . .ltb6 29.l:te6 'it>g7 3 0 . l:txc6
t2Ja7 27 .tiJf.3 lld5 28 . .ltb3+-. t2Je7 3 1 .�c4±) 29.b4 'it>g7 30.�c8
12 . . . .lte6 1 3 . d4 ! (White gets t2Je7 3 l. . i:!.c7 'it>f7 3 2 . �xa 7 'it>e6
rid of the backward d2-pawn) 33 .l:ta6 'it>d6 34.b5 'it>c7 35.bxc6
13 . . . exd3 14 . ..ig5 ! An important t2Jxc6 36.'it>fl 'it>b7 3 7 .�a3± .
move which determines White's 14 . . . �g7 1 5 . 0-0-0 ! A key po­
initiative. sition, determinining the assess­
ment of the whole variati on.
White's main trump is the ad­
vantage in development.
1 5 . . . h6 1 6 . .ltf4 g5 1 7 . .lt g3
0-0-0 18 .nhe 1 .ltxe5. The cap­
ture on e5 happened to be forced
anyway. 19 . .ltxe5 l:th7 20.b3 �f5
(20 . . J:!.hd7 2 1 .'it>d2 llfl 22.f.3±) 2 1 .
b4 l:t e 7 22 . .lt c 3 l::t d e8 23 . .Uxe7
l1xe7 24.l:te 1 l:!.xe 1+ 25.�xe 1 tiJf6
The idea of distracting the white 2 6 . £3 .lte6 2 7 . .ltb3 b 5 28 . cxb5
bishop from the active g5-square i.xb3 29. axb3 cxb5 30 . .ltc3 tiJd5
is worth studying: 14 . . . �b4+ 3 1 .'it>d2 'it>d7 32.g3 'it>e6 33.'it>d3±;
( 1 4 . . . � e 7 , Wolff - I. Gurevich , 15 . . . .ltxe5. Now White gets a
USA 1 9 8 6 , 1 5 . h4 ! 0-0-0 1 6 . tangible advantage , i . e . the
0-0-0 tiJf6 17.l:the 1 .ltb4 18.ttJxc6 bishop pair. The question is if

140
 3. .i.b5 f5 4. li:Jc3 fe 5. li:Je4 d5 6. li:Je5 de 7. li:Jc6

Black had something better. 16. Black has to allow exchanges and
�he 1 h6 (Black had a possibility then the d3-pawn becomes very
to remain with two extra pawns : weak . This i s the pay off of
16 . . . 'itf7 1 7 . .:.Xe5 .i.xc4 18.![Link] 1 ! Black's early opening aggression.
.i.xa2, but things look bad for 20 . . . li:Jg4 2 1 J 1xe6 l:txe6 2 2 . c 5
him after 19 . .i.d2! h6 20 . .i.c3 lth7 �ae8 23.f3 li:Jf6 - 23 . . . li:Jxh2? 24.
2 1 ..� 5e3 'itf8 22 . .i.b4+ 'itg7 23. .i.f4+- - 24.lhe6 llxe6 25 . .i.xe6+
lhd3 .i.d5 24 . .i.c2! li:Jf6 25.:g3 'it>xe6 26 . .i.xh6 'itd5 27 . .i.e3 li:Jd 7
.i.f7 26 . .i.c3 lieS 27.�xe8 .i.xe8 2 8 . 'itd2+- ; 2 0 . . . g5 2 l . f4 . The
28 J:tf3+-; 2 l . . . .i.d5 22 . .i.b3 ! 23. weaknesses on the kingside are
!i. f3 + li:J f6 2 4 ..l h f6 + 'itg8 2 5 . disclosed and this is where the
nxg6+ 'itf7 26.l:tf6+ 'itg8 27.�e3 . black king is! 2 l . . . gxf4 22 . .i.xf4
Black is hopeless. 2 7 . . . h5 2 8 . a5 23 . .i.xh6 a4 2 4 . i. d 1 .i.xc4
h4+- ; 2 7 . . . .l::t g 7 2 8 . llxh6 .l:td8 2 5 . lhe8 l:.xe8 2 6 Jh e8 Wxe8
29.'itd2+-) 1 7.lhe5 : 2 7 . Wd2 .i.xa2 2 8 . Wxd3 b 5 2 9 .
Wd4±) 2 1 .lt5e4 li:Jc5 22.:f4+ .i.f5
23 . .lhe8 li:Jxb3+ 24.axb3 Wxe8 25.
g4 .i.e6 26.ktf6 i.f7 27 . .i.xh6+-;
17 . . . hxg5 1 8 . l:txe6+ Wf7 1 9 .
Itd6 ! li:Jf6 2 0 . l:t 1xd3 g 4 ( 2 0 . . .
ltxh2? 2 l .lH3+- ; 20 . . J :th4 2 1 .
.i.b3 ! c5 22 .Itf3 llf4 23.l:txf4 gxf4
24.i.d l±) 2 l . f3 ! Itxh2 2 2 . fxg4
li:Je4 (22 . . J:te8 2 3 . g5 ! li:Je4 2 4 .
l:tf3+- ; 22 . . . li:Jxg4 23 .l:td7+ Wf6
1 7 . . . Wf7 1 8 . .i.d2! The retreat 24 . .l::!.xb7±) 23 . .l::t f3 + Wg7 24.!:td7+
to e3 is worse - White needs the Wh6 25 . .l:le3 ! li:J c 5 ? ! ( 2 5 . . . li:Jg5
open e-file . 1 8 . . . li:Jf6 ( 1 8 . . . .i.xc4 26 . .[Link] 7 l:.xg2 27 . .i.xc6 !:txg4
19 . .l:le4 .i.xa2 20 . .i.c3+- - White's 28 . .i.d5+-) 26.g5+! 1-0 Timman
attack quickly decides the out­ - Piket , Wij k aan Z e e 1 9 9 5 ,
come; 19 . . . i.d5 20 .Itf4+ We6 2 1 . 2 6 . . . Wxg5 2 7 . .li e 5 + ; 2 6 . . . W h 5
i.c3 l:.h7 2 2 . .l:txd3±; 2 1 . . .g5 2 2 . 27.i.d1+ Wxg5 28.l:.e5+.
.l:le 1 Wd7 23J1d4 li:Je7 24.i.b4 !+-; 13.d4 exd3 14.0-0!
23 . . . li:Jf6 24.Itxd3 b5 25 . .i.xf6+-;
22 . . . 'itd6 2 3 . lld4 li:Jf6 24. l:.xd3
.l:lhf8 25 . .i.b4+ ! c5 26 . .i.c3 c4 27.
i.b4+ Wc7 28 . .:.d4 .l:lf7 29.lle7+
l:txe7 3 0 . i.xe7+-; 29 . . . Wc8 3 0 .
i.c2! +-; 2 4 . . . lthe8 2 5 . .l:lxe8 li:Jxe8
26 . .l:lh3±) 19 .i.b3 .l:1he8 20 . .:.de 1
20 . . . li:Jd7 (Black's position is bad
- defending his unprotected king

141
 Chapter 2 1

14 .txe5
..• 21..tb2+ lt:lffi 22 .lie7+ .tf7 23.g4
14 . . . lt:\e7 1 5 .�e 1 0-0 16 . .ig5 g5 ( 2 3 . . . l1he8 2 4 . g 5 .Uxe7 2 5 .
lt:\£5 1 7 .l:tad 1 l1e8 [Link]:lxd3 .te6, gxffi + 'ifi> f8 26 . .ia3+-) 24.f4! 'iti>g6
Gragger - C o ntedini , Reggio (24 . . . h6 25 . .l:.fl +-) 25.fxg5 lt:\xg4
Emilia 196 1 , White could have 26 . .ixh8 lhh8 2 7 . h3 �e8 2 8 .
retained his material advantage .llxe8 .ixe8 29.hxg4+-.
in a favourable situation: [Link]:\c5 15 ..l::t e l .te6
.txc4 2 0 . lt:lxb7 l:.xe 1 + 2 1 .lbe 1 The reversed move- order is
.td5 22.b3 h6 23 . .tf4 lt:\h4 24 . possible: 15 . . . lt:lf6 16.lbe5 'ifi>f7
.tg3 lt:\xg2 25.l1c1 l1c8 [Link]:ld6 17 . .tg5 - see 15 . . . 'ifi>f7 1 6 .!1xe5
.Uc7 [Link]:lf5±. lt:lffi 17 . .ig5 .
14 . . . .te6 15.lle1 0-0-0, 'fuovi­ 1 5 . . . 'iti>f7 1 6 . lhe5 lt:lf6 ( 1 6 . . .
nen - Auvinen, Helsinki 1998, .ie6 - see 1 5 . . . .ie6) 1 7 . .ig5 h6
there is a bag of tricks in this ( 1 7 . . . .ie6 18 . .l:.ae 1 liae8 1 9 . .ib3
position and White's advantage lt:\d7 20 . .l:t5e3 lt:\c5 2 l . .t d 1 h6
is not easy to be found! The fol­ 22.:1.£3+ i.£5 23 . .ie3 h5 24.h3 h4
lowing line is better: 16 . .tg5 ! d2 25.g4 hxg3 26.fxg3 .l::i. xh3 27.'ifi>g2
( 16 . . J�e8 [Link]:\xd3 lt:lffi [Link]±) d2 2 8 . l:.e2 lt:ld3 ) 1 8 . .id2 lt:\g4
17 . .Ue2 .if6 ( 1 7 . . . l:te8 1 8 .lt:\xc6 19 .l1ee 1 .te6 20 .l1ac 1 l:.ad8 2 1 .
bxc6 19 . .txc6 lt:lffi 20 . .txe8 l1xe8 l:.c3 h5 22.£3 lt:l ffi 23.'ifi>f2 l:the8,
2 l . .ixd2+- - White must not Kr. Georgiev - Moehring, Za­
take on c4 because of the rooks mardi 1978, 24 . .td 1 c5 25 .lle3
exchange and the following pin ..tf5 2 6 . l:.a3 ! a6 27 . llxe8 l:.xe8
along the c-file) 18.h4 ! ! Perfect! 28 . .te3 lt:ld7 2 9 . h3 h4 3 0 . .ig5
.txg5 ( 1 8 . . . h6 1 9 . .ixd2 .txe5 llh8 3 l .l:tb3 b6 3 2 . 'ifi> e 1 ! lieS+
2 0 . .l:.xe 5 .l:.xd2 2 l. . l:txe6 l1xb 2 33.'ifi>d2±.
22 . .U e 8 + 'iti> d 7 2 3 J la8+ - ; 1 9 . . . 1 6.l1xe5 Wf7 1 7 .tb3 lt:lf6
.

lixd2 20.l1xd2 .ixe5 2 1 .1Ie1 .tf4 18 ..tg5 lt:l d7

22.l1d4+-) 1 9 . hxg5 b5 20.cxb5 It is hard to say which of the
cxb5 2 l ..ic2±. moves is better here for Black.
The move 14 . . . .if5 which White wants to consolidate his
looks quite sound has not been position retaining the bishop
tested yet. GM A. Bezgodov has pair advantage and gradually
found an interesting combina­ closing the ring round the d3-
tion which call in question this pawn. Black strives for a fa­
move. 1 5 . lt:\xc6 ! ! .id7 1 6 J�e 1 + vourable ending with bishops of
'ifi> f8 1 7 .lt:\d4 .ixa4 ( 1 7 . . . d2? 1 8 . the opposite colour and a knight
.t x d 2 .i x a 4 1 9 . lt:le6+ 'ifi> f7 2 0 . versus bishop. His main chance
lt:lxg7+-) 18 .lt:\e6+ 'ifi> f7 [Link]:\xg7 ! is White's vulnerable c4-pawn.
There is no need to draw with the 18 . . . l:.ad8 19.h3 . In the pre­
check on g5. 19 . . . 'iti>xg7 20.b3 .te8 sent situation White prefers to
(20 . . . .Ue8 2 l ..ib2+ lt:lffi 22.bxa4±) leave the f3 - s quare fre e and

142
 3. i.b5 f5 4. l?Jc3 fe 5. l?Je4 d5 6. l?Je5 de 7. l?Jc6

hopes to utilise it for his rook - (Now White neatly "rounds up"
now the ffi-knight is pinned! 19 . . . the f2-pawn. ) 2 1 . . .l:tad8 22.£3 b6
h6 ( 1 9 . . J�he8 20 .l:te3 h5 2l .I:.d 1 23.b3 c5 24Jle2 l:td6 25.Wf2 lled8
..tf5 [Link] c5 23.£3 l?Jh7 24.i.xd8 26 . .U.5e3 lt8d7 27 . ..tf4 .Uc6 28 . .Uc3
l:lxe3 25 . .Uel±) 20 . ..td2 l?Jd7 2 1 . l?J h5 (28 . . . ..tf5 2 9 . l:txd2 .l:!xd2+
.Ue3 l?J c5 22.11£3+ <io>g8 23 .1:1e 1 ..tfl 30 . ..txd2 lld6 3 l .We2 i.b 1 32.
24.h4 b5 25.i.a5± llc8 (25 . . . l;td7 a3+-) 29 . ..tg5 l:tcd6 3 0 . g4 l?J f6
26.cxb5+-) 26J:tc1 l?Jb7 27 .Ac3 3 l . ..tf4 ltd4 3 2 . ..te5 ..txg4 3 3 .
llh7 28.cxb5 ..txb3 29.axb3 l:td7 ..txf6 ..tf5 3 4 . ..t e 5+- Stern -
30.l::. d 1 cxb5 3 1..l:!.fxd3+- Volchok Mallee, corr. 1 99 1 .
- Peleshev, corr. 1984.
18 . . . .l::l. h e8 19 . .Ue3 ..tf5 , De
Klerk - Vlugt, corr. 1983, 20.£3 !
A useful move indeed. It tunes
up the co- ordination of the white
pieces - the king gains access via
f2 to the annoying d3-pawn. An
additional and important conse­
quence of this excellent move is
the possibility of quick mobili­
sation of the white kingside's 19 . .:.e3±
pawns (the pawn maj ority is White's advantage is in the
there - it is to be remembered! ) activity of his pieces, the possi­
20 . . . lhe3 (20 . . . l:tad8 2l.Wf2±) 2 1 . bility to attack the unprotected
Axe3 a5 22.Wf2 Ae6 23.l:tc 1 ! The black king, and, important, in
fl4-pawn must not be lost! 23 . . . a4 the weakness of the black d3-
(23 . . . b5 24 . cxb5 ..txb3 2 5 . axb3 pawn which will fall off itself
cxb5 26 .l:tc7 +! We6 27 . .Uc6+ Wfl soon. The material advantage
28 . ..tg5±) 24 . ..td1 a3 25.b3±. will become one more plus for
18 . . . a5 19.l:!.ae 1 .Uhe8 20 . ..td1 White. 19 . . . h6 20.ltf3+ Wg7 2 1 .
d2 (20 . . . llad8 2 l .b3 b6 22 .£3 c5 ..td2 llhe8 22.l:txd3 l?J c5 2 3 . ..tc3+
2 3 . g4 a4 24.Wf2 axb3 2 5 . axb3 Wh7 24.l:te3 l?Jxb3 25.axb3± Sza­
lld4 26.h3 h5 27 . ..td2±) 2 1 .I Ue3 . lanczy - Polajzer, Hungary 1 98 1 .

Conclusion
In this chapter we have scrutinised two Black's possibilities on
the 71h move - they are interesting and not so popular in tournament
practice. The 7. . . bxc6 move can be labelled as losing because of the
big material advantage for White. This cannot be said of the second
possibility, i.e. 7. . . 'ffid5. Playing at his best White gets "only " a bit
more favourable endgame in which both sides are possibly yet to say
their final word.

143
 Chapter 22 l .e4 e5 2.tiJf3 tiJc6 3.i.b5 f5 4.ttJc3
fxe 4 5 . tiJ x e 4 d5 6 . tiJx e 5 d x e 4
7.tiJxc6 �g5
Jaenisch Gambit

The strongest move which Boons, corr. 1 99 1 , 1 l . �f7+ �xe5

leads to the main variation of 1 2 . d4+ exd3 1 3 . iH4+ �e4 1 4 .
Jaenisch Gambit. White's play �xd3+ W f3 15 .�e2+ �e4 16.f3+-
must be accurate and energetic. The move 8 . . . �f5? won't do as
It must b e based on certain well, 9 . �c4 ! �d7 (9 . . . �xg2 1 0 .
knowledge, too. tt::l e 5+ c6 1 1 . �f7 + �d8 1 2 . �fl
�xh 1 13 . thf8+ �c7 14. �xg7+
�b6 1 5 . tt::l c4+ �a6 1 6 . �c3+-)
10. �xe4+-.
9.f4!
The long experience proves
White should immediately re­
turn the extra pawn in order to
avoid trouble . In this way he
eliminates the need of protecting
the weakness on g2 . White often
8.�e2 manages to take advantage of
The queen has secured the the f-file (which is opened in case
b5-bishop and attacked the im­ of capture on f4) .
portant e4-pawn. It is notewor­
thy that Black loses by force
in case of the obvious capture on
g2.
8 ...tt::lf6
Let us explain why 8 . . . �xg2?
is bad. Because of the 9 . �h5+!
�d7 ( 9 . . . g6 1 0 . �e5+ �e7 1 1 .
tt::lx e7+ �f8 12.l:lfl �g4 1 3 .tt::lxg8
�xg8 14.�c4+ �f8 1 5 . d4 h6 16.
�xh8+ �e7 1 7 . �e5+ �d7 18.�f4 Black usually chooses one the
1-0 Bordonada - Hsu, Manila two answers: a) 9 ... �h4?! and b)
1 9 7 7 ) 1 0 . tt::l e5+ �e6, Balian - 9 ... �xf4 .

144
 6. tbe5 de 7. liJc6 �g5 8. �e2 liJf6 9.{4

Other (significantly weaker) S acrificing a pawn Black

retreats of the black queen al­ hopes to use his advantage in
most never o ccur in tourna­ development and the fact that
ments : 9 .. . '�h5 10 .li:Je5+ c6 1 1 . the white king is still in the
..tc4± ; 9 . . . '�c5 10.d4 �d6 [Link]:Je5+ middle . Nevertheless things are
c6 1 2 . i£.c4 �xd4 ( 1 2 . . . i£.e6 1 3 . not so serene for Black. First, his
i£. e 3 +- ) 1 3 . c 3 � b 6 ( 1 3 . . . � c 5 lead in development is contest­
1 4 . i£.e3 �e7 1 5 . i£.f7+ 'it> d 8 1 6 . able. Second, the white king can
0-0-0+-) 14.i£.f7+ 'it>d8 15.i£.e3 escape to the queenside. (Do not
�c7 ( 1 5 . . . i£.c5 16.�d1+ Wc7 17. take on c6 - you'll lose a piece !
li:Jc4 �b5 18.a4 �xa4 19 . .txc5+­ [Link]:Jxc6?? a6 1 3 . i£.a4 i£.d7)
Balcar - Rerabkova, Plzen 1998) 12 .....t c5
16. 0-0-0+ i£.d7 1 7 .li:Jxd7 li:Jxd7 Other alternatives were tried
18.i£.e6 i£.d6 19.kxd7+- Abbaso ­ too:
va - Prokopenko , Bratisl ava 12 . . . h5 1 3 . d 3 ! White should
1993. immediately take care of his de­
velopment ignoring dubious
a) 9 ... � h4?! raids to f7. If White waists time
Black often declined the cap­ Black can get good prospects ,
ture, however without much suc­ indeed. 13 . . . h4 ( 1 3 . . . ..tf5 14. dxe4
cess in the last years. i£.xe4 1 5 . li:Jf7 i£. c 5 1 6 . �fl �f8
10.g3 �h3 [Link]:Jg5 �g2 [Link]:Je6 1-0 Geemen
10 . . . �h6 l l .li:Je5+ c6 12. i£.c4 - Blijlevens, corr. 1972) 14. i£.d2
i£.c5 13 .d3 �f8 14 . ..te3 i£.b6 1 5 . hxg3 15.i£.f7+ 'it>d8 16.0-0-0! The
0-0-0 � h 3 1 6 . .ixb6 axb6 1 7 . white king left the hot zone on
dxe4 li:Jd7 1 8 . �d2 'it>e7 19 .li:Jxd7 time and Black's position imme­
i£.xd7 2 0 . � d 6 + 'it> e 8 2 l . � e 5 + diately became dubious . 16 . . . g2 ,
1-0 Gonzalez - Luque , corr. Van der Zwan - Den Hamer, corr.
1983. 1980, 1 7 J::t h g1 e3 1 8 .i£.a5+ b6
ll .li:Je5+ c6 19 .i£.c3 c5 20.�xg2 i£.b7 2 l . �g3
1 l . . . i£. d 7 ?? 1 2 . li:Jxd7 li:Jxd7 �xh2 22. �xe3+-;
13. �xe4+-. 12 . . . ..t e 6 . A s o l i d move ,
12 . ..tc4 though it presents no immediate
danger for White. He can fa­
vourably complete the develop­
ment retaining his extra pawn.
1 3 .b3 ! ..tc5 1 4 . i£.b2 0-0-0 1 5 .
0-0-0 .U h e 8 1 6 . ..t x e 6 + �xe6
17 . .l:the 1 h5 18. �c4 �d5 19. �fl
�f5 2 0 . d 3 ± Adorj a n - Rigo ,
Budapest 1976 ;
1 2 . . . ..tb4. A strange move .

145
 Chapter 22

Black gambles on surprise, but 1 3 . . . il.. e 6 , Lehmann - Nie­

White does not need anything wold, corr. 1 99 1 , [Link].d2! The
supernatural to counter this development is important - af­
move . 1 3 . c3 i.. a5 1 4 . d 3 exd3 ter a long castle White has per­
1 5 .li'lxd3+ 'ili>d8 [Link]'le5 'ili>c7 17.£'5 fect chances. 14 . . . il.. xc4 ( 14 . . . il.. d4
'it'b8 1 8 .i.. f4 il.. c 7 19. 0-0-0 i..xf5 15. 0-0-0 il..x e5 16.fxe5 il.. g4 1 7 .
[Link]'ld3 l:le8 2 1 . �£2± Andersson �fl+-) 1 5 . dxc4! 0-0-0 16. 0-0-0
- Llombart, corr. 1979; �he8 17. il.. a5 �xd 1+ 18.l:lxd1 h5
12 . . . il..f5 , Nemec - Zitek, Kla­ 19.�d2 b6 20. il.. c3 e3 2 l . �e2±;
tovy 1999, 13 .b3 ! 0-0-0 [Link].. b 2 13 . . . il.. f5 1 4 . il.. e 3 exd3 ( 14 . . .
il.. b4 1 5 . 0-0-0 li.he8 1 6 . � e 3 . �xe3 1 5 . �xe3± T. Schneider -
White retained his extra pawn Knies, corr. 1986; 14 . . . il.. d 6 1 5 .
and seized the initiative. Black's li'l f7 il..b 4+, Hodova - Umancova,
major pieces - the king and the Svetla nad Sazavou 1 9 9 9 , 1 6 .
q u e e n - are uncomfort ab l e . il.. d2 il.. g4 1 7 . �f2 il..x d2+ 18.'ili>xd2
16 . . . 'ili>b8 1 7 . [Link] �h5 18. il.. e 2±. l:lf8 1 9 . li'ld6+- ; 14 . . . il.b6, Gro ­
13.d3 motka - E . Nagy, corr. 199 1 , 1 5 .
0-0-0±; 1 4 . . . il.. b 4+ 1 5 . c3 il.. e 7
16.dxe4 il.. x e4 1 7 .il.. f7 + 'ili> f8 1 8 .
�fl il.. f5 19. 0-0-0± Goedhart -
Kuhlmann, corr. 1994) 1 5 . il..x d3
il..xe3 ( 1 5 . . . il.. x d3 [Link]'lxd3 il..x e3
1 7 . �xe3+ 'it>d8 18. 0-0-0+- Oes­
terle - Knies, corr. 1987) 16. �xe3
li'ld5 17 .il..xf5 �xf5 18. �d3± W.
Browne - D . Minic, Mannheim
1975;
13 li'lg4
•.. 13 . . . il.. d 4, Kosa - Bobak, De­
Black used various means to brezen 1998. A very interesting
set troubles to the opponent but move which requires a sharp and
the practice proved White's big concrete response. 14. il.. f7 +! The
advantage : beginning of White's counter-at­
1 3 . . . �g4 1 4 .li'lxg4 li'lxg4, W. tack. The more calm continua­
Schneider - Rost, corr. 1987, the tions would have lost the advan­
easiest winning move was 1 5 . tage. 14 . . . 'ili>e7 ( 14 . . . 'ili>d8 1 5 . dxe4
il.. e 6+- ; 'ili>c7 [Link]'lf.3 il.. g4 1 7 . c3 il.. c 5 18.f5
13 . . . h5 [Link].. e 3 i.. xe3 15.i.. f7+ .Uhf8 19.i.. f4+ 'ili>b6 20.b4+-; 14 . . .
'ili>d8 1 6 . �xe3± Rotter - Hucks, sli> f8 1 5 . il..b 3 il.. f5 1 6 . il.. e 3 il.. x b2
corr. 1984; 17 . .nd 1 il.. c 3 + 1 8 . � d2 il.. xd2+
13 . . . exd3, Kane - Behrmann, 19. �xd2 a5 20. �c3 l::!. e 8 21. �c5+
corr. 1 9 9 7 , 1 4 . cxd3 ! i.. e 7 ( 14 . . . l:te7 2 2 . dxe4+- ; 1 5 . . . exd3 1 6 .
�b4+ 1 5 .il.. d 2±) 1 5 . .id2±; �xd3 �g2 1 7 .l:tfl il.. h3 [Link].. e3!

146
 6. t:De5 de 7. ltJc6 �g5 8. �e2 ltJf6 9.{4

The exchange sacrifice is neces­ 2 l..�. h4 �g2 2 2 . �g5+ 'it>d7 23 .

sary. It gives White a decisive ad­ 0-0-0+-) [Link].g5+ 'it>c7 2 1 . ii.xc4
vantage . 18 . . . ii.xe3?? 1 9 . �d6+ ii.d4 [Link].f4+ 'it>b6 2 3 . c3 l:te8+
'it>e8 [Link].f7#; 1 8 . . .ii.xe5 19.fxe5 24.'it>d2 .tf6 25.g4-t- Heemsoth ­
�xfl + 2 0 . �xfl [Link] 2 1 .ii.c5+ Konstantinopolski, corr. 1975;
'it>e8 22.exf6-t-; 18 ... �xf1 19. �xfl 18. �b4 'it>c7
ii.xf1 [Link].xd4 ii.h3 2 1 .ii.c5+ �e8 18 . . . c5 19. �d2 lt:lg4 ( 1 9 . . . c4
22.0-0-0 lt:ld5 23 . .l:f.e1-t-) [Link].b3 ! 20. dxc4+-) 2 0 . �xh2 lt:lxh2 2 1 .
ii.g4 ( 1 5 . . . .Ud8 1 6 .ii.e3 exd3 1 7 . l:ih1 lt:lg4 [Link]:lg6+- Konikowski
cxd3 'it> ffi 18. 0-0-0±; 15 . . . l::!. e 8 1 6 . - Hawelko , Au gu s t o w 1 9 7 4 ;
dxe4±) 1 6 . lt:lxg4 �xg4 1 7 . dxe4 1 8 . . . .tf5 19. �d6+ 'it>c8 20 . .te6+
�xe2+ 1 8 . 'it>xe2 lt:lxe4 1 9 . 'it>d3 .txe6 2 1 . �xe6+ 'it>b8 22.�e7 a5
lt:l£2+ 20.'it>xd4 lt:lxh1 (20 . . . l:tad8+ (22 . . . lt:lhl 23 . lt:ld7 + 'it>c8 [Link]:lxb6
2 l . 'it> c3 lt:lxh 1 2 2 . ii. e 3 +- ) 2 1 . axb6 25 . .ite3 na6 26.0-0-0 lt:lxg3
ii.e3+-. 27. �xg7 lt:le2+ 2 8 . 'it>d2! +-) 2 3 .
14.�xe4! lt:lf2 [Link].f7+ 'it>d8 ii.e3 ii.xe3 [Link]:ld7+ 'it>c8 25. �xe3
15 . . . 'it>e7 16. �c4 ii.b6 17 . .Ufl lt:lg4 [Link]:lb6+ 'it>b8 27. �e2 �xe2+
�xh2 18. �b4+ c5 19. �d2 lt:lg4 2 8 . 'it>xe2± Redolfi - Anglada,
20. �xh2 lt:lxh2 2 1 .J:tf2 lt:lg4 22. corr. 1983 .
l:te2 lt:lxe5 [Link].c4 �g4 24.l:txe5±
Green - Furmston, corr. 1996.
16.�c4

19 . .i.e3!�
Black's attack has lost his
momentum and White's threats
A popular position in the are obviously prevailing. It often
recent past. Nowadays Black happens to unfounded attempts
makes sure to avoid it. for siezing the initiative in the
16 ....i.b6 opening. 1 9 . . . lt:lg4 ( 1 9 . . . ii.xe3
16 . . . lt:lxh 1 1 7 . �xc5 'it>c7 1 8 . 2 0 . �e7+ 'it>b8? 2 1 . �d6#; 2 0 . . .
�e7+ ii. d 7 1 9 . f5 �xf5 20. ii.f4+-; 'it>b6 2 1 . lt:l c4+- ; 1 9 . . . ii.h3 2 0 .
16 . . . �g2 1 7 . �xc5+-. ii.xb6+ axb6 2 1 . �e7 + 'it>b8 22.
1 7.l:tfl �xh2 �d6+ 'it>a7 2 3 . lt:lxc6+! bxc6 24.
17 . . . lt:lg4 [Link]:lxg4 �xg4 19.f5 �c7 + 'it>a6 25 . .itc4+ 'it>a5 26. �e5+
�xc4 ( 1 9 . . . ii.xf5 2 0 J H 4 �h3 b5 27. �c7+-; 19 . . . lt:lxd3+ 20.cxd3

147
 Chapter 22

�xg3 + 2 l.. � f2 .i.xf2+ 2 2 J 1xf2 passant ll . . . exd3?? results in

�e3+ 23.l;!e2 �g3+ 24.'iii' d 2 1-0 great troubles for Black 12 . .i.xd3
Goedhart - Martin Cervignon, �b4+ (to the same tragic conse­
corr. 1994) 20 . .i.xb6+ axb6 2 1 . quences leads 12 . . . �h4+ 1 3 . g3
�e7+ 'ot;b8 22. 0-0-0 �xg3 (22 . . . �b4+ 14 . .i.d2 �e7 15. 0-0-0 .i.h3
l:!.a5 2 3 . .l:th 1 �f2 24.lLlg6 hxg6 25. 1 6 . i.b4 � e 6 1 7 . i.c4 lLld5 1 8 .
�xh8 lLle3 26 . .i.b3 lLlxd 1 27. �d8 i.xd5 cxd5 1 9 . � b 5 + 'ot; d 8 20 .
�e3+ 2 8 . 'ot;b 1 +- B oucqueau - lhd5+ 'ot;c7 2 1 . �c4+ ..ltc5 22.l:!.xc5
Starace , IECG 2 0 0 1 ) 23 . �d6+ 'ot;d8 23.�d5+ 1-0 Kuhlmann -
'ot;a7 24.l:tf3 �g2 2 5 . d4 b5 2 6 . Hallila, corr. 1994) 13 . .i.d2 �e7
lLlxc6+ ! 1-0 Konikowski - Roose, 14.0-0-0 .i.e6 15 .l!.he 1 0-0-0 16.
corr. 1974. lLlxc6 bxc6 17 . .i.a6+ 'ot;b8 18 . .i.f4+
'ot;a8 1 9 . �xe6 .lhd 1 + 2 0 . l:!.xd 1
b) 9 �xf4 ... �xe6 2 1. . Ud8+ 1-0 Schmidt -
The strongest move - Black Markus, the Hague 196 1 .
simply regains a pawn. The move 1 1 . . . �f5? looks also
unconvincing 12 . ..itc4 .i.e6 13.�fl
.i.xc4 14. �xc4 �h5 15. �e6+ ..lte7
16.1Le3 l:td8 1 7 . g4+- Van Eijk ­
Boons , corr. 199 1 .
12.g3 �h3
The queens trade is weaker
12 . . . �h5 13. �xh5+ lLlxh5 14 . .i.c4
lLlf6 15 . .i.f7+ 'ot;e7 16 . ..itb3 .i.e6
1 7 . .i.g5 i.xb3 1 8 . axb3 'ot;e6 19.
lLlc4 lLld5 20. 0-0 h6 2 l .i.f4 g5
10.lLle5+! 22 . .i.e5 hlg8 23 . l:l a e l ± Milu -
White does not let the enemy Savic, Borovo 200 1 . Black is bad,
queen on the good d6-square. as his a4-pawn is weak.
IO c6
•.. 13 . ..1tc4
The only move actually. Evi­ From here the bishop holds a
dently worse is 10 . . . .i.d7? 1 l . d4 number of important squares
�h4+ 12.g3 �h3 13.lLlxd7 lLlxd7 under control .
14. �xe4+ i.e7 15 . .i.g5 0-0-0 16. 13 ... i.e6
i.xe7 .U.he8 1 7 . 0-0-0+- Plaskett 13 . . . ..1lg4? ! An unsuitable idea
- Cast, Birmingham 200 1 . - after the exchanges the e4-
Stupid i s 1 0 . . . 'ot; e 7 ? l l . d 4 pawn becomes weak. 1 4 . lLlxg4
�h4+ 1 2 . g3± Ross - Confente, �xg4 1 5 . �xg4 lLlxg4 16. 0-0 b5
corr. 1992. 17 . .i.e6 lLlf6 18 . .i.g5 .i.e7 19 . .Uae 1
ll.d4 �h4+ :dB 20.c3± Semenuk - Loysha,
The queen is heading for the Rostov 1972.
good h3-square. The capture en Possible is 13 . . . .i.d6 14. 1Lf4!

148
 6. lbe5 de 7. lbc6 '§'g5 8. �e2 lbf6 9.{4

i..x e5 (Black should better switch llxd4, Bologan - Chandler, Ger­

to the main line by 14 . . . i.. e 6 - see many 1 994 , 2 1 . .l::tx d4 i.. x d4 22.
13 . . . i.. e 6 14. �f4 �d6) 1 5 .i.. x e5 �xe4 �e5 23. �d3 '§'xe6 24. �xd4
i.. g4 16. '§'fl '§'h6 1 7 . '§'f4! an im­ 0-0 25. �xa7 '§'e2 26.'§'f2±.
portant resource ! White forces a 14 . . . �e7 15. 0-0-0 0-0 16.i.. g5
transfer to endgame with his !tae8 1 7 . 'it>b 1 i.. x c4 1 8 . '§'xc4+
clear edge thanks to the bishop lbd5 1 9 . i.. x e7 l:txe 7 20. �e2 e3
pair advantage. 17 . . . '§'xf4 18.gxf4 21.l:1hfl l:.e6 22Jlxf8+ 'it>x£8 23.c4
b5 19 .Ab3 a5 20 . a4 ,l;f,a7 2 l .'it>d2! lbb4 24 . g4± Balenovic - Zelie,
b4 22 . .l::th g1 h5 [Link] 1 lle7 24.c3 Medulin 1997.
bxc3+ 25.bxc3 'it>d7 26.i.. c 2 ..tf3 14 . . . i.. b4 1 5 . c3 i.. e 7 16. 0-0-0
2 7 . llb 1 lbe8 28 J:tb7+ 'it>d8 2 9 . 0-0, Diez Fraile - Ramon Perez ,
.Ub8+ 'it> d 7 30 .l:tgb 1 'it>e6 3 l..ltb 3+ Barcelona 2000, White keeps his
'it>f5 32.lig1 +- Loechner - Rube­ stable initiative with 1 7 .i.. g5 b5
sov, corr. 1960. (17 . . ..Uae8, Holmov - Ageichen­
14.i..f4 ko, Moscow 1997, 18. i.. xf6 i..x f6
1 9 . lbd7 '§'h6 + 2 0 . 'it> b 1 .Uf7 2 1 .
i.xe6 llxe6 22. �c4 i.. d 8 23 .lbe5
llfe7 [Link] 1 '§'xh2 25.llxe4+-.
You can check for yourself that
Black quickly suffers heavy ca­
sualties) 1 8 . i.. x e6+ '§'xe6 1 9 .
llhe l;t.
15.0-0-0 0-0-0
Mter 1 5 . . . .Ud8 a transfer to
the above-considered positions is
14 . i.. d6
. . possible (see 14 . . . l:td8 1 5 . 0-0-0
1 4 . . . 0-0-0 1 5 . 0-0-0 i.. b 4? i..d6), which are unfavourable for
(better is to return to the main Black.
line with 15 . . . i.. d 6 - see 14 . . . i.. d 6 1 5 . . . i.. g 4? ! 1 6 . lbxg4 ! ..li xf4+
1 5 . 0-0-0 0-0-0) 1 6 . c3 i.. a5?? 1 7 . gxf4 �xg4 1 8 . '§'xg4 lbxg4
1 7 . lbxc6! This move should be 19.:de 1 lbf6 20 .llhg1 g6 2 l . f5 !
remembered - it is always on the gxf5 22.l:tefl±.
agenda after a long castle. 17 . . . The sharp move 15 . . . b5 is not
bxc6 1 8 . i.. x e6+ '§'xe6 1 9 . �a6+ easy to refute, Kane - Manker,
'it>d7 20. '§'xa5+-. Compuserve 1 9 9 7 , 1 6 . i.. x e 6
The idea of delaying the castle �xe6 1 7 . d 5 ! lb x d 5 ( 1 7 . . . cxd 5
is dubious - 14 . . . l:td8 1 5 . 0-0-0 1 8 . �xb 5 + 'it>f8 1 9 . lb c6 i.. x f4 +
i.. d6 1 6 . i.. g5 ! '§'f5 (in case of 20.gxf4 �d6 2 l .Wb 1 .:.c8 22.lbd4!
16 . . . 0-0? 17. '§'fl± Black loses the Itb8 23 . '§'e2 'it>f7 24. Ithg1 �b4
exchange) 1 7 .i.. xf6 gxf6 18 .:hfl 25.b3 .Uhc8 26. '§'g2 '§'f8 27.f5±.
'§' g 5 + 1 9 . 'it>b 1 i.. x e5 2 0 . i.. x e6 White definitely outstrips his

149
 Chapter 22

opponent in creating dangerous l2Jf2 27 .ltd2+-; 26 . . . l2Jf6 27.l2Je6

threats . ) 1 8 . �h5+ g6 1 9 . l2Jxg6 l:t 8 d 7 2 8 . lixe4 l::t d 5 2 9 . l::t e 5 ± ;
�xg6 20. �xg6+ hxg6 2 l . i.xd6 2 5 . . . a6 26.h5::!;) 22.c4! b 6 2 3 . .llhe 1
0-0-0 2 2 . i.c5 a5 2 3 . h4::!; . The l:ted8 24. �e3 l2Jg4 25. �b3 .llx d4
possibility of creating a separate 26.c5+ <if;h8 27.:Xd4 .lhd4 28. �£7
passed pawn on the kingside and l2Jf6 2 9 . �xa7 b 5 3 0 . �f7 l2Jg8
the strong bishop provide White 31 .l2Je6 �d2 32.l2Jg5 �f6 33. �xf6
with the edge in the endgame. l2Jxf6 34.l2Jxe4 .ll d5 35 .lifl l2Jd7
An interesting play arises af­ 36.�c2± [Link] - Fritz 8,
ter Black's short castling 1 5 . . . Perm 2003 .
0-0 1 6 . l2J g 6 ! l::t fd8 ( 1 6 . . . hxg6 16.<;i;bl!
1 7 . i.xd6 l::t fe8 18 .i.e5::!;. White's A useful prophylactic and
bishops looks good , while the e4- multipurpose move. The practice
pawn is weak. ) 1 7 . i.xd6 llxd6 has proved its power.
1 8 . l2J f4 � h 6 1 9 . i. x e 6 + l1xe6
20.<;i;b l . An important position
for the assessment of the vari­
ant with Black's short castling.
According to our analyses White
retains s o m e e d g e . 2 0 . . . .l::. d6
(20 ... l:te7 2 l .c4! l:td8 22.d5 cxd5
23.cxd5 . A remarkable position
- both sides have passed pawns !
However the d5-pawn is stron­
ger than the e4, White's pieces 16 .. J:the8
are more active and the king The m o s t p o p u l a r move .
fe els safer. That constitutes Black also often plays 16 . . . �hf8
White's advantage . 2 3 . . . lld6 17 .lihfl ! Here Black has a wide
24.h4 l::t e 5 25. �e3 l2Jxd5 26. �c5 choice :
.Uc6 27. �d4+-; 24 . . . .l:te8 25 . .Ud4 1 7 . . . .lHe 8 ? ! A mere l o s s of
g5 26. l2Jg2 g4 27.l2Je3±) 2 l . h4! tempo. 18.a4±;
The black queen cannot jump 17 . . . i.d5 1 8 . i. g5 llde8 1 9 .
back into play quickly. It makes i.xd5 cxd5 20.i.xf6 11xf6 2 l . !txf6
easier for White to carry out his gxf6 22. l2Jg4 �h5 2 3 . l1 e 1 �g6
plans . 2 1 . . . .l:.e8 (2 1 . . .b5 22.l1he 1 2 4 . l2J e 3 �g5 2 5 . .Ufl �g6 2 6 .
llad8 23.c4 .l:txd4 24.lhd4 .Uxd4 �b5+- Wegener - Daub, Ham­
25.lld1 l::t x d1+ 2 6 . �xd 1 g5 27. burg 200 1 ;
hx g5 �xg5 28. �d8+ <if;f7 2 9 . 17 . . . g5?! 18 .i.xe6+! An impor­
�c7 + <if;g8 3 0 . �xc6 bxc4 3 1 . �a8+ tant find which puts 17 . . . g5 un­
�f7 3 2 . �xa 7 + <if;g8 3 3 . �d4+-; der question. 18 . . . �xe6 19.i.xg5
25 . . . c5 2 6 . cxb 5±; 23 . . . bxc4 24. i.xe5 20. dxe5 !lxd 1 + 2 1 . �xd 1
�xc4+ <if;h8 25. �c5 l2Jg4 26.�£'5 �xe5 22.h4±. The threats along

150
 6. tl:Je5 de 7. tt'lc6 �g5 8. �e2 tt'\{6 9.{4

the f-file, Black's unprotected Jagupov, Groningen 1 9 9 5 , 2 5 .

king, the weakness of the e4- l:i.xd5! White forces a transition
pawn and White's pawn major­ to winning endgame. 25 . . . cxd5
ity on the kingside - all that (25 . . . llxd5 26. �b4+-) 2 6 . �b5+
forms White's huge and, possi­ WaS (26 ... Wc7 27.l:!.e3+-) 27. �c6 +
bly, decisive advantage; Wb8 28 .lle3 �fl+ 29.Wa2 �c4+
1 7 . . . ii. c 7 1 8 . a4 1Ide8 ( 1 8 . . . 30 .�b3+ �xb3+ 3 l .Wxb3 gxf4 32.
Ji.xc4, Lallee - J. Campos, Villa e6 �feB (32 . . .llc8 33. �d6+ Wb7
Ballester 2 00 1 , 1 9 .tt::l xc4 ! ii.xf4 34.e7 11fe8 35. �d7+) 33. gxf4 �e7
20.11xf4 Itfe8 2 l . a5 �e6 22.a6! 34.f5 �c7 (34 .. J:tb7+ 35.Wa2 e3
tt::l d 5 23 . axb7+ Wxb7 24.11g4 g6 36.f6 e2 3 7 . e7+-) 35. �a6 IIb7 +
25 .4.Je5 e3 26.11d3±; 22 . . . bxa6 23 . 36 .Wa2 .l:tb6 3 7 . �a4+-.
tt::l a 5 c5 24.dxc5 l::[Link] 1 + 25. '�xd 1 17.1Ihfl
�d8 26. �e2;!;; 25 . . . tt::l d 5 26.l:th4;t;) Black is faced again with a
1 9 . a5 ii.xa5 2 0 . tt::l x c6 ! Ji.g4 2 1 . difficult choice.
tt::l x a7+ Wd8 2 2 . '�' e3 [Link] 1 2 3 . 1 7 .it.c7
•••

llxd 1 �h5 [Link].e2 �£7 (24 . . . �d5 1 7 . . . ii.xc4 1 8 . �xc4± . T h e

[Link]::lb 5 Ji.b6 26. �a3 e3 27 .tt'ld6 threats o f knight's intrusion to
�e6 28. ii.c4 e2 29.Ite1 +-) 25.d5 f7 or c6 are dangerous .
h6 26 . �c5 �d7 2 7 . �xa5+ We7 1 7 . . . Ji.xe5? 1 8 . Ji.xe6+ ! �xe6
28 .Ji.b5 � g4 2 9 . �c7+ tt'ld7 3 0 . 19.i.xe5 ! l:td7 ( 19 . . . �g4 Stroh­
�d6+ W£7 3 l . �xd7+ 1-0 Bobras meyer - Reij n e n , corr. 1 9 9 1 ,
- Sciborowski, Glogow 200 1 ; 20 . .l:tde l±) 20.llf4±.
1 7 . . . Wb8 1 8 . a4! White's plan 17 . . . h6 18.a4 ii.xe5 [Link].xe6+
is simple - to attack the enemy �xe6 , Michalczak - Goessling,
king! The distant black queen Recklinghausen 2002, 20.i.xe5;!;
cannot help much the defence . The white bishop is strong. The
1 8 . . . W a 8 ( 1 8 . . . Ji.xc4 1 9 . �xc4 defence is not easy for Black.
tt'ld5? [Link]'lxc6 !+-; 19 . . . ii.c7 , Ja­ 17 . . . .l:te7 18.a4 ii.c7, Toman ­
kubowski - Barglowski, Poland Ve sely, Ostrava 2 0 0 2 , 1 9 . a 5 !
200 1 , 20.g4 h6 2 U!de l . There is i.xa5 ( 1 9 . . . [Link] 5 2 0 . dxe5 tt::l d 5
a threat to catch the black queen. 2 1 . �xe4± ; 19 . . . a6 2 0 . ii.xa6±)
2 l . . .g5 [Link].g3+- ; 18 . . . Ji.d5 19.a5 [Link]::l x c6 ! bxc6 2 l . Ji.xe6+ �xe6
a6 [Link].xa6 bxa6 2 l .c4±. White ( 2 1 . . . l:!. x e 6 2 2 . � a 6 + W d 7 2 3 .
profitably regains the sacrificed �xa7+ We8 24. �xa5±) 22. �a6+
pawn retaining his powerful at­ 1Ib7 23 . �xa5 .l:td5 24. �a2 �d7
tack. ) 19.a5 ii.xc4 ( 1 9 . . . Ji.d5 20.a6 (24 . . . e3 25 . .life 1 e2 26 . .l::f. d 2 tt::l e4
b6 2 1..it. x d5 cxd5 22.�b5�) 20. 27 . .l:!.d3 �e8 2 8 . lixe2 llxd4 29.
�xc4 Ji.xe5 (20 . . . a6 2l .tt'lf7+-) 2 1 . Wel l ! +-) [Link].e5 lldb5 26.d5 cxd5
dxe5 lt.J d 5 2 2 . a6 ( 2 2 . �xe4? g5) 27.c4 �b4 28Jlxd5 �e7 29. �a5
22 . . . h6 ( 2 � . . . e3 2 3 . Ji.g5±) 2 3 . tt::lxd5 30. �xd5 �dB 3 1 . �e6+ l:!.d 7
axb7+ Wxb7 [Link] 1 g5 , Lutz - 32. c5+-.

151
Chapter 22

1 7 . . . 'it>b8 1 8 . a4 ! i.. c7 1 9 . a 5 - 20.a6 ! ! :xd4 2l.axb7 + 'it>xb7 22.

i.. xc4 [Link]:lxc4 i.. xf4 2 1 .l:xf4 a6 i.. a 6+ 'it>a8 23. �b5+-; 20 . . . cxd4
22.c3;t 2 l . axb7+ 'it>xb7 22.i.. a 6+ 'it>a8 23.
�b5 i.. c8 [Link]:lc6 i.. x a6 25. �xa6
i..xf4 [Link]:lxd8 i.. e 5 27. �c6+ 'it>b8
28. �c5+-) 19.i.. x e6+ �xe6 20.c4
(A deep move . White should be
careful about the safety of his
knight. ) 20 . . . c5 (20 . . . h6 2 l .h4 c5
22.d5 �a6 [Link]:lf'7 l:td7 24.i..x c7
:xc7 [Link]:lxh6 l:!.d7 26.d6 l:!.xd6
[Link]:Jf5 l:!.xd 1+ 28.llxd1 lle6 29.
tt:lxg7 lle5 30. �d2 �b6 3 1 . �f4
This p osition happened in �b3 32.lld6 tt:ld7 3 3 . �g4 �xa4
Trofimova - Krupkova, Zanka [Link]:le6 'it>b8 3 5 . �g8+ 'it> a 7 3 6 .
1 995 and now White could start lt:Jc7+- ; 24 . . . 'it>xc7 2 5 . d6 + 'it>b8
the attack. 2 6 . tt:lxh6 llxd6 2 7 . tt:lf5 llxd 1 +
18.a4!;t 28.:xdl;t) 2 l .d5 �a6 [Link]:Jf'7 l:!.d7
White has only one, but good [Link]:lg5 i..xf4 24.llxf4 .Ue5 [Link]:le6
enough plan - to smash the black .l:f.exd5 2 6 . llxd5 lhd5 2 7 . tt:lxg7
king. 18 . . . a5 ( 18 . . . lle7 19.a5 ! c5 l:.d7 2 8 . tt:lf5 �c6 2 9 . tt:le3 'it>b8
- capturing the pawn leads to po­ 30. �fl .l::t d 6 3 1. .Uf5± Such posi­
sition with material equality, but tions are in White's favour - he
with White's positional advan­ can calmly activate his pawn
tage: 19 . . . i..xa5 [Link]:lxc6! bxc6 2 1 . majority on the kingside, while
i.. x e6+ �xe6 22. �a6+ l:tb7 23. his opponent is doomed to linger­
�xa5 hld5 24. �a3 ! l:tdb5 25.i..c l± ing.

Conclusion
We have studied the main variation ofJaenisch Gambit. Black's
chances are much better here than in other systems of this opening.
White must be super accurate to achieve even a small edge. Nowa­
days the play with long castling is the main line of Black's defence.
White should ram the enemy castle with the a-pawn. Even if White
does not checkmate the enemy, he obtains some positional advan­
tage.

152
 Chapter 23 l .e4 e5 2.ttJf3 tbc6 3 . ..i.b5 tiJf6 4.0-0
Berlin Defence

4 . . . g6? This is an ill-founded

sacrifice of the central pawn
5 . ..ixc6 dxc6 ( 5 . . . bxc6 6 . li:::l x e5
..ig7 7.l:lel±) 6 .li:::l x e5 i.d6 (6 . . .
i.e6 7 . li:::l c 3±) 7 . li:::l f3 ± Jansa -
Hirn, Nurnberg 1987;
4 . . . li:::l d4? This idea brings
Black only hardship and suffer­
ing - he is losing too much time.
4 i.c5
••• 5 . li:::l x d4 exd4 6 . e 5 li:::l d 5 ( 6 . . . a6
This position is often reached 7 . exf6+-; 6 . . . li:::l e4 7 . �g4 li:::l g5
after a different move order - 8. "�xd4+-; 6 . . . c6 7. exf6+- ) 7. "�g4
3 . . . .tc5 4. 0-0 li:::l f6 . li:::lb4 (7 . . . c6 8. �xd4+-) 8.a3! li:::lxc2
The most popular move 4 . . . (8 . . . li:::l c6 9 . d3 li:::l x e5 10 . .:.e1 �e7
li:::lxe4 (after 3 . . .li:::l f6 4.0-0) will be 1 l . � d 1 ! c6 1 2 . f4+-) 9 . lia2 c6
considered in the next chapters. 10 . ..id3+-;
Black has also tried various 4 . . . �e7?! 5J;te1 g6, B .Hansen
inferior moves here: - Bonde, Hold 1977, 6 . d4 exd4
4 . . . h6? 5 . d4±; 4 . . . li:::lg4? 5.h3±; 7 .i.xc6 ! dxc6 8 .i.g5 h6 9 . e5+-;
4 . . . b6? 5 .i.xc6 dxc6 6 .li:::lxe 5 li:::lxe4 4 . . . a6? This is blundering the
7 .�e 1 �d5 (7 . . . �d4 8.d3 �x£2+ important central pawn and
9.Wh1 +-) 8 . d3 li:::lf6 9 .li:::l c3 �d6 Black is doomed to lose after it:
1 0 . li:::l c4+- Ayman - Howar d , 5 . .txc6 bxc6 (5 . . . dxc6 6. li:::lx e5+-)
IECG 2000; 6 .li:::lx e5 li:::lxe4 (6 . . . i.b7 7 . li:::l c 3+-;
4 . . . d5? 5 .exd5 li:::lx d5 (5 . . . �xd5 6 . . . .ic5 7 . d4+- Vitis - Lobos,
6 .li:::l c3 �e6 [Link]:::l x e5+-) 6 .li:::lx e5+­ Santiago 1 992 ; 6 . . . .te7 7. li:::l c 3+­
Holmberg - Halvors en, corr. Rogalewicz - Wojtalik, Warsaw
1962; 1994; 6 . . . �e7 7 . d4 li:::lxe4 8.lie1 d5
4 . . . li:::l e 7? 5 .li:::l x e5, Krueger - 9.£3+-; 6 . . . i.d6 [Link]:::l£3 +-) 7J:te l d5
Lach, Marburg 2000, 5 . . . li:::lx e4 (7 . . . f5 8. d3+-) 8 . d3 li:::l c 5 (8 . . . li:::lxf2
6 . .Uel li:::l d 6 7 .i.d3 b6 [Link]:::l c3 .tb7 9 . � f3 +- ) 9 . li:::l x c6+- Delivre -
[Link]:::l b 5+-; Mignard, France 2000;

153
 Chapter 23

4 . . . a6 5 . R.xc6 dxc6 6 . tt:lxe5 tt:lxd4 [Link]:lxd4+-; 5 . . . tt:ld4? [Link]:lxd4

R.d6 [Link]:lf3±; exd4 7.e5 tt:ld5 8 . �g4± ; 5 . . . h6? 6 .
4 . . . .i.b4 5 . c3 R.e7 (5 . . . i.c5 6 . .txc6 dxc6 [Link]:lxe5±; 5 . . . tt:lg4? 6 .
d4± ; 5 . . . R.d6 6 .d4 exd4 7.R.xc6+­ h3 tt:lf6 7.R.xc6 dxc6 [Link]:lxe5±; 5 . . .
Asenj o - Menendez Lopez, Astu­ .tc5? 6.c3 0-0 7.d4 exd4 8 . cxd4
rias 1999; 5 . . . .i.a5 6 . .txc6 bxc6 .tb4 9 . .i.d2 �e7 1 0 . e5 tt:ld5 1 1 .
7 . tt:lxe5 0-0, Ostwald - Weich­ tt:lc3± ; 5 . . . 0-0? 6 . .i.xc6 bxc6 7 .
hold, Ronneburg 1996, 8 . d3±; tt:lxe5±; 6 . . . dxc6 [Link]:lxe5 �d4 8 .
7 . . . tt:lxe4 [Link]:\xf7 Wxf7 9. �h5+ g6 tt:lf3±; 7 . . . R. d 6 8 . tt:lf3± ; 7 . . . �d6
1 0 . �xa5+- Guichaoua - Olier, 8.d4±; 7 . . . R.c5 8 . c3 l:e8 9 . d4 R.d6
France 1999) [Link] d6 (6 . . . 0-0, 10 . .t f4 tt:l g4 l l . h 3 .t x e 5 1 2 .
Rossi - Zarzur, Humberto Primo dxe5 �xdl 13Jhd l g5 14.R.xg5
2 0 0 2 , 7 . .i. x c 6 dxc6 8 . tt:l x e 5 ± ; tt:lxe5 [Link]:la3± Benischek - Putz,
6 . . . a 6 7.R.xc6 dxc6 [Link]:lxe5± Wind Bayern 1999; 8 . . . �e7 9.d4 h6 10 .
- Gorissen, Hengelo 1998) 7. d4 .tf4 .tb6 l l . tt:ld2 a5 1 2 . R.g3±
a6, Araya Toro - Garcia Gonza­ Felser - Berenstein, Bad Sege­
lez , Argentine 2 0 0 2 , 8 . i.xc6+ berg 2000) 6 . c3 0-0 7 . d4 exd4
bxc6 9 . dxe5±; (7 . . . R.g4 8 . .i.xc6 bxc6 9.dxe5 R.xf3
4 . . . .i.d6?! This seems un­ 10.�xf3 dxe5 1 1 . tt:ld2±; 7 . . . .i.d7
natural and is rather dubious . 8 .d5 tt:lb8 9.R.xd7 tt:lbxd7 10.c4;t)
5.d4 tt:lxe4 (This is the most stub­ [Link]:lxd4 tt:lxd4 9.cxd4 c6 10. R.d3;t
born move. The other tries are Fokin - Tabunshikov, Ru ssia
weaker: 5 . . . a6? 6 . R.xc6 dxc6 7 . 190 1 ;
dxe5+-; 5 . . . tt:lxd4? [Link]:lxd4 exd4 4 . . . d6. This solid move used to
7 . e5+- S . Berg -E . Johansson, be popular at the end of the 19th
Stockholm 1 9 7 2 ; 5 . . . exd4? 6 . and the beginning of the 20th cen­
.i.xc6 bxc6 7 . e5+-; 6 . . . R.xh2+ 7. tury. 5.l:te l .
Wxh2 dxc6 8. �xd4+- Usachyi ­
Franz, Bad Woerishofen 1 99 1 ;
5 . . . 0-0 6 . .txc6 bxc6 7.dxe5+-; 6 . . .
dxc6 7 .dxe5+-) 6 . dxe5 .te7 (The
best move . 6 . . . .t c 5 7 . � d 5 +- ;
6 . . . tt:lxe5 [Link]:lxe5 .txe5, Hames ­
Haigh, IECC 2 00 1 , is losing a
piece after the simple 8 . l:te l !
.i.xh2+ 9 .Wfl �h4 10.�f3+-; 8 . . .
�e7 9 . �f3 tt:ld6 10.�h5 .txh2+
[Link]+-; 9 . . . tt:lc5 10.�h5 .i.xh2+ Black has a choice now:
[Link] tt:le6 12. �xh2 ; 9 . . . tt:lg5 10. 5 . . . g6?! looks too slow - 6 . d4!
.txg5 �xg5 11. �e4 f6 12.f4+-) a6? ( 6 . . . tt:ld7 7 . tt:lc3±) 7 . .i.xc6+
7 J:�e l tt:lc5 [Link]:lc3 0-0 [Link]:ld5;t; bxc6 8.dxe5+- Djapanovic - Eix,
4 . . . R.e7 5 .l::te l d6 (5 . . . .td6 6.d4 Hassloch 1997;

154
 3. .ib5 lLlf6 4. 0-0 j_c5 5. c3

5 . . . a6, Em. Lasker - Croney, 10 . . . �xd6 leads to a sharp end­

USA 1926, 6 . j_xc6+ bxc6 7 . d4 game favourable for White -
lt'ld7 8 .lt'la3 ! This manoeuvre of 1 1 . �xd6 cxd6 [Link]'lfd2 0-0 1 3 .
the knight is typical for the l:.X e 4 .txe4 1 4 . lt'lxe4 l:tfe8 1 5 .
variation. 8 . . . .ie7 [Link]'lc4 f6 10. lt'lbd2 f5 [Link]'lg3 l:le1+ 1 7 .lt'lgfl
lt'la5 lt'lb8 1 l ..�.e3±; Itae8 [Link]'lb3 l:f.8e2 19 . .ltd2 .l:xa 1
5 . . . .ig4 6 . c3 a6 (6 . . . �d7 7.d4 20 .lt'lxa1 a5 2 l . lt'lb3 a4 [Link]'lcl±)
a6 8. j_a4 b5 9 .j_c2 d5? Dillon ­ 7.j_a4 b5 (7 . . . lt'le7 8.d4;t) 8 . .ltc2
Costales , Asturia 1997, 10.exd5 .tg4, Sagadin - Radtke , Voel­
�xd5 l l . dxe5 �xd 1 1 2 . j_xd 1 klingen 1970, 9.d4 .lte7 (9 . . . exd4
lt'l d 7 1 3 . a4 ± ; 9 . . . j_ e 7 1 0 . a4;t) 1 0 . cxd4 if.xf3 l l . gxf3;t) 1 0 . d 5
7.j_xc6+ bxc6 8 . d4 lt'ld7 (8 ... exd4 lt'l a 5 l l .lt'lbd2 0-0 1 2 . b4 lt'l b 7
9 . cxd4 j_e7 1 0 . h3 .ih5 1 1 . �c2 1 3 . a4 � d 7 1 4 . lLlfU ; 8 . . . j_ e 7 ,
�d7 1 2 . lt'lbd2 0-0 1 3 . b3 .:.feB Mangini - Lambert , Helsinki
14 . .ib2;t Zapata - Ibanez, Brazil 1952, 9.d4 0-0 [Link]'lbd2;t ; 8 . . . g6
1999) [Link]'lbd2 j_e7 10. �a4 lt'lb6 9 . d4 .ltg7, Giam Choo Kwee -
1 1 . �c2 j_f6 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.b3 Nashed, Skopj e 1972, 10.a4 0-0
0-0 [Link].a3 :es 15.h3 j_h5 16.g4 l l .d5 lt'le7 [Link]'la3;t ;
j_g6 [Link]'lfl;t Ries -Brunner, Bad 5 . . . .ie7 6.c3 0-0 (6 . . . lt'ld7 7 . d4
Wiessee 1997; 0-0 8 . lt'lb d 2 .t f6 9 . lt'l fl lt'l e 7 ,
5 . . .j_d7 6.c3 a6 (6 . . . d5?? is just Schories - Gregory, Hamburg
a blunder 7 . exd5 lt'lxd5 8 . .ixc6 192 1 , 10 .lt'le3 c6 ll . .lta4;t; 6 . . . a6
.ixc6 [Link]'lxe5+- Jones - Barker, 7.j_a4 b5 8 . .ic2 .ig4 9.h3 .lth5
IECC 1998; 6 . . . �e7 7.d4 0-0-0 1 0 . d4 j_xf3 l l . gx f3 0-0 , Me­
8 . d5 lt'lb8 , Fleischer - Walda, nendez - Macias Diaz, Asturias
Forchtenberg 2 0 0 3, 9 . c4± and 1 9 9 2 , 1 2 . d 5 lt'l a 5 1 3 . f4;t ; 6 . . .
White's attack must prevail ; 6 . . . .id7 7.d4 0-0 8 . d5 lt'lb8 9 . .ixd7
lt'le7 7 . .ixd7+ �xd7 8.d4 lt'lg6 9 . lt'lbxd7 10.c4;t; 9 . . . �xd7 10.c4;t.
c4 0-0-0 10. lt'lc3± Atienza - Pin­ Pawn structures of this type are
to, Almoradi 1998; 6 . . . .ie7 7. d4 advantageous for White, be­
0-0 8 . d5 lt'lb8 9 . if.xd7 lt'lbxd7 10. cause White's bishop is stronger
c4 lt'lc5 [Link]'lc3;t; 6 . . . g6 7.d4 j_g7 , than its counterpart, which is
Creath - J. Brown, Bognor Regis stranded behind its own pawns.
1965, [Link].xc6! That amusing ex­ White can plan a successful
change operation, quite routine queenside pawn expansion; 6 . . .
in these lines for many years , j_ g4 7 . d 4 .ltxf3 8 . �xf3 exd4
giv e s White better chance s . 9.cxd4 0-0 10. �d1 a6 l l .if.a4 b5
8 . . . if.xc6 9 . dxe5 dxe5 10. �xd8+ 1 2 . .ic2 lt'la5, Willemze - Van
:xd8 l l . lt'lxe5 if.xe4? ! 12.f3+-; D eurz e n , Hengelo 1 9 9 8 , 1 3 .
ll . . . .ltb5 [Link]'la3±; 9 . . . lt'lxe4 10. lt'lc3±; 7 . . . lt'ld7 8 . j_e2! This move
exd6 0-0 l l . dxc7 �xc7 12 . .ie3 now forces Black to trade off on
l:tad8 1 3 . j_d4 lt'lc5 1 4 . lt'lbd2± ; f3. 8 . . . .ixf3 - 8 . . . 0-0? fails to the

155
 Chapter 23

interesting trick 9.ltJxe5 ! �xe2 10.e5 .txf3 1l.gxf3 ltJh5 12.f4 g6

1 0 . ltJxc6 �xd 1 l l . lLixd8± - 9 . 1 3 . f5±; 1 l . . . ltJe8 12 . .1i.e3;t) 1 0 .
.Jtxf3 .tg5 10 .ltJa3 �xc 1 ll .l:txc 1 ltJd5 .Jt f6 11 ..1i.e3 ltJb6 12.ltJxf6+,
0-0 12. �d2 ltJb6 13.ltJc2 a5 14. Gregory - Taubenhaus , [Link]­
ltJe3 lle8 1 5 J�cd 1 a4 16. 'l¥fc2;t tersburg 1 9 14, 12 . . . �xf6 13 .l:!.c 1
Timman - Straeter, Germany d5 14.e5 '!¥fg6 15. 'l¥fc2 Si.xf3 16.
1999) 7.d4 exd4 (7 . . . a6? 8 . .Jtxc6 �xg6 fxg6 1 7 . .txc6 bxc6 18.gxf3
bxc6 9 . dxe5±; 7 . . . .Jtd7 8.d5 lLib8 .Uxf3 19.l:txc6±.
9 . .Jtxd7 ltJbxd7 1 0 . c4;t. Notice We can conclude convincingly
that the arising position can be that Black should better refrain
reached by different move or­ from avoiding the main varia­
ders. White should not avoid it. tions of the Berlin Defence on
7 . . . �g4 8 . .txc6 bxc6 9.dxe5 �xf3 move 4. The lines that we ana­
1 0 . �xf3 ± J e n s e n - Lievens , lysed were all too dangerous for
France 1995; 9 . . . dxe5 10. 'l¥fxd8 Black and might lead Black to a
.Ufxd8 l l . ltJx e 5 +- M . Smith - quick disaster; moreover White
[Link], Detroit 1992; 10 . . J::taxd8 did not have to put up too much
l l . lLixe5+- J. Gomez - Meneses, effort.
Cali 1999; 7 . . . ltJd7 8.ltJbd2 .tf6 5.c3
9 .lLifl ltJe7 10.ltJg3 c6 1l.. � a4 g6 White should strive to pre­
12.�h6 lie8 13.�b3 lLif8 14.�g5. pare d2-d4, otherwise he will not
The great champion Lasker pre­ have any advantage.
pared a decisive combination
with seemingly quite innocuous
manoeuvres. 14 . . . �xg5 15 .ltJxg5
ltJe6 16 . .txe6 .txe6 17 .ltJxe6 fxe6
18. �g4 <J;; f7 1 9J�e3 ltJg8 20.dxe5
dxe5 2 1 .lLih5 ! ! gxh5 22. �xh5+
<Jitg7 23 . .:,g3+ <Jith8 24. 'l¥ff7 lle7
25J1xg8+ �xg8 26. �xe7+-; 2 1 . . .
ltJf6 2 2 . lLixf6 <Jitxf6 2 3 . � d 1 +­
Em. Lasker - Romanovsky, Mos­
cow 1925) 8 . cxd4 .Jtg4 (8 . . . lLia5 5 ... 0-0
1998 9.ltJc3±) 9 .ltJc3 ! That looks Castling here is the most re-
strong. 9 . . . ltJ d 7 ( 9 . . . i.xf3 1 0 . liable and popular move.
gxf3±; 9 . . . a6 1 0 . .tfl ! lieS 1l .h3 5 . . . d6?? 6.d4+-;
.t x f3 1 2 . gx f3 .tf8 13 . .tg2 g6 5 . . . d5? 6.ltJxe5±;
14 . .tg5 .Jtg7 15.f4 h6 16 ..Jth4 �c8 5 . . . 'l¥fe7 6 . d4 exd4 (6 . . . .tb6
1 7 . d5 ltJe7 18 . .tg3 <Jith7 19 . .Jth2 7.i.xc6 dxc6 8 . ltJxe5± ; 7 . . . bxc6
lLid7 2 0 . � c 1 �d8 2 l . l:.c2 ltJg8 8.ltJxe5±) 7.cxd4 ..tb6, Sprague ­
2 2 . J:f.ce2 .:.e7 23 . e5± Belikov - Rosenfeld, Greater Peoria 1968,
Novopashin, Alushta 1999; 9 . . . d5 8.e5 lLid5 9 . .1i.c4 lLidb4 10.a3 lLia6

156
 3. �b5 tt:lf6 4.0-0 �c5 5. c3

1l..�. g5 �f8 1 2 . d5±; many times : 5 . . . tt:lxe4 6 . d4 exd4

5 . . . a6 6. �xc6! dxc6 (6 . . . bxc6 (Black is keeping his extra pawn
7 . tt:lxe5 tt:lxe4 8 . '�e2+-; 7 . . . 0-0 in this way, but he can succumb
8 . d3±; 7 . . . �e7 8 . d4 �d6 9 .tt:lf3 to a swift attack. The retreat 6 . . .
tt:lxe4 10.l:Ie 1 +- Lopez Gasson ­ i.e7 is safer and more solid 7 .
Lopez Borbon, S onora 2 0 0 1 ) tt:lxe5 tt:lxe5 8 . dxe5 0-0 9 . tt:ld2
[Link]:lxe5 'f!Je7 ( 7 . . . 0-0 8. d4±) 8.d4 tt:lxd2 10.�xd2 d5 l l . 'f!ih5;!;, and
�d6 [Link]:lf3 0-0 (9 . . . tt:lxe4 10.l:Ie1 White is only slightly better; 6 . . .
0-0 l l .tt:lg5+- Houna - Renaud, i.b6 7 . l:!. e 1 - see 5 . . . i.b6; 6 . . .
Dubai 1 986) 1 0 . e5+- Balcar - i.d6? ! 7 . dxe5±) 7 . cxd4 i.e7 (This
Konig, Klatovy 1998; 7 . . . tt:lxe4 is the best square for retreat of
8 . d4 �e7 9.:e 1 tt:lf6 10.�f4 0-0 the bishop. Black can hope now
1 1 . tt:ld2 tt:ld5 12 .i.g3 f6 13 .tt:ld3 to neutralize White's kingside
i.d6 14. 'f!if3 �xg3 15. �xg3 �d6 attack successfully, preserving
16. 'f!if3 b5 1 7 . tt:le4 �d7 [Link]:lec5± the extra pawn. 7 . . . �d6? That
Gonzalez - Ramirez, corr. 1990; move is quite dubious - Black is
5 . . . i.b6 6 . d4 tt:lxe4 (6 . . . 0-0 - forced now to expose his king's
see 5 . . . 0-0 ; 6 . . . exd4 7.cxd4 h6? 8. position without even winning a
tt:lc3± Feijoo - Polo, Burgas 199 1 ) pawn ! 8 . .l::t e 1 f5 , Puister - Stof­
7 . .l::t e 1 f5 (Amazingly Black has fers, Hengelo 1999, 9 .tt:lc3 0-0
not tried here the natural move 1 0 . tt:lxe4 fxe4 1 l..�. x e4 'f!if6 1 2 .
7 . . . d5, although it is quite pos­ �b3+ 'it>h8 13 .i.g5 � f5 14.i.d3±;
sible. 8 . tt:lxe5 0-0 9 . tt:lxc6 bxc6 7 . . . i.b6 is weaker because of 8.
1 0 . i. x c 6 'f!i f6 1 l..U x e 4 ! 'f!ixc6 d5! White should not let Black
12.l:Ie 1 a5;!;, and Black has good play d 7 - d 5 . 8 . . . tt:l e 7 , Boino -
drawing chances despite the McMahon, Lisbon 2000, [Link]:lc3 !
p a wn deficit . ) 8 . tt:lb d 2 tt:lxd2 . tt:lxc3 1 0 . bxc3 c6 l l . d6 ! ± ; 1 0 . . .
(8 . . . 0-0 [Link]:lxe4 fxe4 10.i.g5 ! �e8 0-Q l l . d 6 ! This i s hindering
1 1 .l:txe4 'f!Jg6 12 .i.c4+ Wh8 1 3 . Black's queenside development.
i. d 3 'f!i fl 14.l:!.h4+- Verber - Tay­ ll . . . cxd6 12.i.d3! White's inten­
lor, Chicago 1968. You can wit­ tion to crush the kingside of the
ness quite rarely so early, never­ opponent is now evident. Black
theless so successful rook activ­ will have grave problems defend­
ity ! ) 9 . tt:lxe5 ! White achieves a ing, for example: 1 2 . . . h6 13.i.c2
lasting positional advantage d5 14. �d3 f5 15 . .l::t e l± or 12 . . . d5
with this beautiful exchanging 13 .tt:lg5 . The following lines are
trick. 9 . . . 0-0 (9 . . . tt:le4? 1 0 . 'f!Jh5+ very instructive about the meth­
g6 l l . tt:lxg6 hxg6 1 2 . �xh8+ 'ittfl ods of attacking the enemy king.
1 3 . 'f!ih7+ 'it>f6 14.i.xc6 dxc6 1 5 . 13 . . . f5 14.l:te 1 h6 15.i.c2 hxg5 16.
lhe4 fxe4 1 6 . 'f!ih4+-) 1 0 . i.xd2 i.xg5 i.c5 1 7 .i.b3 g6 18.i.xd5+
tt:lxe5 1 l . dxe5;!;; 'it>g7 19.'f!ie2 .l:.f6 20. i.xf6+ 'it>xf6
Black has tested taking on e4 2 1 . � e 5 + 'it> g 5 2 2 . i. f3 d 5 2 3 .

157
 Chapter 23

�g7 !+- ; 13 . . . h6 14.lbh7 l1e8 15. 17.Ad2 d6 18.l:!.e1 �d7 1 9 . �c4

lbf6+ gxf6 16. �g4+ cJith8 1 7 . �h5 �dB 20.�xh6±.
lbg6 1 8 . �xh6+ cJitg8 1 9 . Axg6 6.d4
fxg6 2 0 . �xg6+ cJith8 2 l . �h5+
cJitgB 22.Ah6 cJith7 23 . .ltg5+ cJitg7
24. �h6+ cJitf7 25. �h7+ We6 26.
�f4+-; 13 . . . g6 14 .lbxh7 Wxh7 15.
Ag5 d6 1 6 . .if6 cJitgB 1 7 . �d2+- ;
1 5 . . . f6 1 6 . �h5+ Wg7 1 7 . �h6+
Wg8 18 . .ixg6 lbxg6 1 9 . �xg6+
Wh8 20. �h5+ cJitgB 2 l . i.h6 �e7
2 2 . � g 6 + Wh8 2 3 . �xf8 �xf8
24.:ae 1 +-; 13 . . . lbg6 14. �h5 h6
1 5 . lbxf7 lhf7 1 6 . �xg6± ) 8 . d 5 6 ....ib6
That position is not very attrac­ 6 . . . �d6?? is a bad blunder,
tive for Black, quite understand­ which loses a piece immediately.
ably so - Black has a difficult 7 .i.xc6 dxc6 8.dxe5+- Daumen ­
defence ahead. The extra pawn Kaemmer, Bingen 1 996.
is only a minute consolation. 6 . . . a6?? This is a ridiculous
8 . . . lbb8 (8 . . . lbd6 9 . i.a4 lb a 5 , "counterstrike", the white bishop
Lanka - Malaniuk, Odessa 1988. is traded off with tempo, while
White is obviously enjoying an its counterpart is lost! 7 . i.xc6
excellent compensation for the bxc6 8 . dx c 5 + - Andri asian -
pawn and he should play: 1 0 . Gouvart, France 2002.
l:.e 1 ! 0-0 l l .lbc3 b6 12 ."1'oi'd3 f5 The exchange on d4 is not
1 3 . .if4 lbac4 1 4 . .:.e2 i.f6 1 5 . necessary and presents White
i.b3±; 8 . . . lbb4?! 9.a3 c6?! - 9 . . . with plenty of additional possi­
lbd6 1 0 . lb c3± - 1 0 . axb4 cxb 5 bilities. 6 . . . exd4? 7. cxd4 �b6 (7 . . .
1 l .l:.e1 lb f6 ? ! 1 2 . d6 1-0 Wall - Ab4. This was another loss of
Burns, Wichita Falls 1970; ll . . . f5 time, but Black's position was
1 2 . d6 i.f6 1 3 . �d5+- ; ll . . . lbd6 ! already difficult anyway. 8 . a3
12. �e2±) 9.l:.e1 lbd6 10 . .id3 0-0 �a5 9.e5 lbd5 10.b4 .ib6 ll . .ic4
l l .lbc3 l:te8, Pomeroy - Lynn, lbce7 12 . .ig5 �e8 13.l:tel± Po ­
Dunedin 1975, 12. �c2 g6 (12 . . . h6 dravec - Paljusaj , Pula 2000. The
1 3 . �a4 lba6 1 4 . �g4 Wh8 1 5 . retreat to e7 .is hardly any bet­
lbb5±) 1 3 . h4 ! Axh4 ( 1 3 . . . lba6 ter: 7 . . . Ae7 8 . d5 lbb4 9.a3 lba6,
14. i.g5 lbb4 15. �d2 .ixg5 1 6 . Macejovsky - Badura, corr. 1982,
l:.xe8+ �xe8 1 7 . hxg5 lbxd3 1 8 . 10.e5±; 8 . . . lbb8, Sanchez - Kre­
�xd3 b 6 1 9 . l:r.e 1 � d 8 2 0 . �d2 mer, Amsterdam 1954, 9 .lbc3 d6
i.b7 2 l . lb e 5 f6 2 2 . lbg4 fxg5 10 .lbd4 a6 l l .Aa4±; 9 . . . c6 10.d6
[Link]!e4 lL!xe4 24.lhe4±) 14 . .Uxe8 cxb5 ll . .ig5±) 8 . e5 lbd5 (8 . . . lbe8
lbxe8 1 5 . lbxh4 �xh4 16.lbe4 h6 9 . d5 lbe7, Ananj ev - Schlich-

158
 3. .tb5 tt:'lf6 4. 0-0 ..tc5 5. c3

thaar, Neumuenster 1999, 10.d6! sure in the centre, but Black's

cxd6 ll.exd6 tt:'lc6 12 ...tg5 tt:'lf6 13. defensive resources should not
tt:'lc3±; 8 . . .tt:'le4 9.d5 tt:'lb8, Belunek be underestimated.
- Jancalek, Valtice 1992, 10. '�c2 7 h6
...

f5 l l . tt:'lc3+-) 9 . ..tc4 tt:'lce7 (9 . . . Black secures an emergency

tt:'ldb4 10.a3±; 9 . . . tt:'lde7 10.d5 tt:'la5 exit - to play g7-g5 in some mo­
ll . ..te2 ..tc5 1 2 . a3 +- Montero ment in the eventual complica­
Martinez - Grau, Santiago 1998) tions ahe a d . White will n o t
10 . ..tg5 �e8 ( 10 . . . h6 ll . ..txd5 achieve anything exchanging on
hxg5 1 2 . tt:'lxg5 ! tt:'lxd5 1 3 . '�h5+-; f6. The game will be only equal
12 . . . tt:'lf5 1 3 . �h5 tt:'lh6 1 4 . �g6 and Black is not losing a pawn
1-0 Herrera - Escriva, Mislata at all!
1997) 1 l . �b3 c6 12. liel±. Black 7 . . . a6? is just weak - 8 . .txc6
should not make so great conces­ dxc6, Blom - Marsman, Hengelo
sions in the opening stage. 1 9 9 9 . 9 . � c 1 ! ! exd4 1 0 . e 5 h6
6 . . . 1i.e7 7.l:.e1 exd4. Black is ll . .th4+- ; 9 . . . h6 10 . .th4 ! g5
obliged now to exchange on d4, [Link]:'lxg5 tt:'lxe4 [Link]:'lf3+-.
otherwise he is losing a pawn. 7 . . . exd4 8.e5 h6 9 . .txf6 gxf6,
White achieves a lasting advan­ Goze - Hakuc, IECC 200 1 , 10.
tage in the centre as a result. 8 . cxd4 d6 l l . ..txc6 bxc6 12. �cl±
cxd4 a 6 (8 . . . d5 9.e5 tt:'le4 [Link]:'lc3 and White has a big advantage,
..tf5 1 l..�. d 3 tt:'lxc3 12.bxc3 ..txd3 because Black has numerous
1 3 . �xd3;!;) 9 . ..ta4 b5 10 . ..tb3 d5 weaknesses.
( 1 0 . . . d6 1l .h3 ..tb7 [Link]:'lbd2 tt:'la5 7 . . . .U.e8? , Hitzgerova - Motlo­
13 . ..tc2 d5 14. e5± Seifert - Mar­ va, Czech Republic 1993 , 8. �c 1 ! ±
tens, France 1989; 13 . . . c5 14.b3±) - see 7 . . . h 6 8 . .th4 .U.e8 9 . � c l .
l l . e5 tt:'le4 [Link]:'lc3 tt:'lxc3 13.bxc3 Black c a n a l s o try to play
.tf5 14 . .tc2 � d 7 , C arlsson - without h7-h6 : 7 . . . d6 8 . �d3 �e7
Hj orth, E skilstuna 1 9 7 1 , 1 5 . (8 . . . h6 - see 7 . . . h 6 ; 8 . . . .t d 7
..tg5;!;. [Link]:'lbd2 h 6 10 . .th4 - see 7 . . . h6)
.7 .tg5 [Link]:'lbd2 tt:'ld8, Luther - Winants,
Halkidiki 2002, (9 . . . h6 10. 1i.h4 -
see 7 . . . h6 ; 9 . . . ..tg4 10.l::l. ae 1 tt:'ld8 ,
Radoj cic - Ko s ti c , Lj ublj ana
1947, ll .tt:'lc4 .tx£3 12.dxe5 dxe5
13. �x£3 tt:'le6 14 . .txf6 �xf6 15.
�xf6 gxf6 16 . ..td7 llfd8 1 7 .Itd 1
�f8 18 . ..ta4;!;) 10.d5!? (having in
mind to restrict the mobility
of the black knight on dB with
that pawn , but the bishop on
White is increasing the pres- b6 now becomes super active

159
 Chapter 23

instead! ) 10 . . . a6 1l...t a4 h6 12. ally leads to very complicated

il.h4 Wh8 1 3 . Wh1 g5? (An inap­ positions, but here Black's diffi­
propriate moment to get rid of culties seem insurmountable.
the pin. Black underestimated 9 . . . hxg5 (9 . . . lL\xe4 [Link]\f3 lL\g5 ,
the dangerous consequences of Ivkov - Aaron, Tel Aviv 1964,
the knight sacrifice. The cautious 1 l . �xg5 hxg5 1 2 . il. x c 6 dxc6
13 . . . .U.g8 was stronger - 14. il.c2 13.tLlxe5+-) 10. �xg5 �e7 1 1 . �f3
g5 1 5 . �g3 lLlh5 1 6 . lL\c4;!;) 1 4 . Wg7, Wiezer - Geyer, corr. 1983,
lL\xg5 ! hxg5 15.�xg5 .:lg8 16. �g3 12. �g3+-.
�g6 1 7 . f4 Wg7 18.f5 lLlh5 19.f6+ 8 . . . exd4 is too dangerous af­
lLlxf6 2 0 Jh f6 1-0 Horvath - ter 9.e5 g5 [Link].xc6 dxc6 ( 10 . . .
Koch, Budapest 1 98 1 . gxh4 i s not any better - [Link].a4
8 .il.h4 dxc3 1 2 . tLlxc3±) 1 1 . tLlxg5 dxc3
( 11 . . . �d5 1 2 .lLlf3 lL\e4 1 3 . cxd4
il.g4 14.tLlc3 lL\xc3 15.bxc3 c5 16.
il.f6± Popescu - Nichitelea, Ro­
mania 1988) 12.'�fxd8 lixd8 ( 1 2 . . .
cxb2 1 3 . �xf6 bxa 1 � 14. "fl'xh6
il.f5 1 5 .lLle4+-) 13.tLlxc3± Bern­
hardt - Zuidema, Zurich 1962.
9 .� d3
This is the best square for
the queen. White needs only to
The captures on f6 or e5 were bring the b 1-knight into action
not giving White any advantage and complete his development
at all. Black has to think about successfully. Sometimes White
the defence of the e5 pawn now. changes the order of moves and
8 ... d6 plays 7. �d3 d6 8.�g5 h6 9. il.h4,
8 . . . 'f!ie7?? loses material deci­ which leads to the same position.
sively - 9 . il.x c 6 , Pritchard - Still it seems more precise to
Hund, Biel 198 1 . develop the bishop first..
8 . . . .U. e 8 ? i s unne c e s s arily
risky, Lafond - Gaudron, France
1999, but White must follow with
the strong 9 . 'grc 1 ! , and Black has
serious problems , for example :
9 . . . d 6 ( 9 . . . g5 1 0 . lL\xg5 lL\xe4
1 1 .lLlf3+-; 9 . . . exd4 10.�xc6 dxc6
1 1 . e5±) 10. d5+-.
Black can not play 8 . . . g5?
[Link]\xg5 Such a sacrifice is quite
typical for these lines and usu- Black has two popular moves

160
 3. i.b5 l2Jf6 4. 0-0 i.c5 5. c3

here : a) 9 .'�e7 and b) 9 i.d7.

.. ... bxc3±.
9 . . . g5 This idea is too risky Black has another interest­
and small wonder it is not popu­ ing possibility to provoke com­
lar at all! 10.l2Jxg5 hxg5 ll.i.xg5 plications i.e. 9 . . . exd4 10.cxd4 g5
<Ji;g7, [Link] - Bayon, Oviedo ( 10 . . . i.g4 is illogical and there­
1 9 9 3 . (The king move might fore weak . If B l ack intends
seem to be wrong, but it is diffi­ to lead a calm , quiet life he
cult to defend even without it, for should refrain from giving up
example : 1 1 . . . exd4 12.i.xc6 bxc6 the centre. 1 1 .l2Jbd2 g5 12.i.xc6
13.cxd4 <Ji;g7 - see 9 . . . exd4, game bxc6 13.l2Jxg5 hxg5 14.i.xg5 <Ji;g7
Renet - Ninov, Ostend 1989; 13 . . . 15. �g3 �d7 16.h3±; ll . . . i.h5 12.
'ffi e 7 14. l2Jc3 'ffi e 6 15.f4 lieS 16. l:tfe 1 g5 13 .i.xc6 bxc6 14.l2Jxg5
<Ji;h1 l2Jh7 17.£'5 'ffi d 7 18.i.h6 <Ji;hS hxg5 1 5 . i.xg5 .tg6 1 6 . l2Jb3 d5
19.lli4 ffi 20.l:tg4 b!.e7 21.l2Je2 i.b7 1 7 . 'ffi f3 dxe4 18. 'ffixf6+- Arnason
22.l2Jf4 Itg8 23.lhg8+ <Ji;xg8 24. - Lima, Thessaloniki 1988) 1 1 .
'ffi g3+ l2Jg5 25.h4+-; 20 . . . .l:tg8 2 1 . i.xc6 bxc6 (ll . . . gxh4 12.i.a4 l2Jh5
.:f.xg8+ <Ji;xg8 22.l2Je2 'ffi£7 23. 'ffi g3 13 .i.c2 l2Jf4 1 4 . 'ffi d 2 'ffi f6 1 5 . e5
<Ji;hS 24.l2Jf4 l2Jg5 25.l2Jg6+ <Ji;g8 dx e5 1 6 . dxe5 'ffi c6 1 7 . l2Jc3+-;
2 6 . i.xg5 fxg5 2 7 .Itd 1 'ffi f6 2 8 . 12 . . . h3 13.g3 d5 14.e5 tt:Je4 1 5 .
e5+-) 12.l2Jd2! White completed l2Jc3 i. f5 1 6 . �e3±) 12.l2Jxg5 hxg5
his development and was ready 1 3 . i.xg5 <Ji;g7, Renet - Ninov,
for a direct kingside attack. We Ostend 1989, 14.l2Jc3 ! This is a
failed to find any satisfactory logical move , because White's
defence for Black. 12 . . . a6 ( 12 . . . pieces aim at joining the action
exd4 1 3 . i.xc6 bxc6 1 4 . cxd4�; as quickly as possible. The aris­
13 . . . dxc3 14.l2Jc4 bxc6 15.l2Jxb6 ing position is quite hard to
axb6 16. 'ffixc3 <Ji;g6 17 .f4 �h8 18. evaluate, but White has a good
f5+ <Ji;xg5 1 9 . 'ffi e 3+ <Ji;h5 20.!If3 compensation for the piece no
l2Jxe4 2 l ..:f.h3+ <Ji;g4 22 . .l:tfl l:txh3 doubt about that, for example:
23. 'ffif4+ <Ji;h5 24.g4+ <Ji;h4 25. 'ffih6 1 4 . . . .:f.h8 ( 1 4 . . . � d 7 1 5 . 'ffi d 2 � )
<Ji;xg4 26 . .l:tf4#) 13.i.xc6 bxc6 14. [Link] l �g8 16.e5 l2Jd7 1 7 . 'ffi g3
'ffi g3 .:.gs 15.f4 exd4 (15 . . . tt:Jh5 16. rbh7 [Link] l 'ffi g6 19 . .:.e4 dxe5
'ffih4 ffi 17.fxe5 fxg5 18. �xh5 �e8 20.dxe5 rbg8 2 l .e6 fxe6 22Jlxe6
19. 'ffix g5+ <Ji;h7 20. �h4+ rbg7 2 1 . �xe6 23.-iffi+ <J;; £7 24. �g7 + <Ji;eS
.:[Link]+-; 1 9 . . . 'ffi g6 2 0 . 'ffixg6+ <Ji;xg6 25. �xh8+ <J;; £7 26. 'ffi g7 + <Ji;eS 27.
2 1 . l2Jc4±) 16.e5! dxe5 ( 16 . . . dxc3+ l2Je4 �£7 28 .lle 1 ! ! +-. We see now
1 7 .<Ji;h1 l2Jh5 1 8 . 'ffi f3 ffi 19. 'ffixh5 that Black can force White to
fxg5 20.fxg5 .l:tf8 2 l . 'ffih 6+ <Ji;g8 sacrifice a piece in numerous
2 2 . g6+-) 1 7 . fxe5 l2Jh5 1 8 . 'ffi h 4 ways, but still White's chances
dxc3+ 19.<Ji;h1 'ffi d3 20. 'ffixh5 'ffi g6 after that seem to be prefer­
2 l .[Link]+ <J;; f8 22. 'ffixg6 lhg6 23. able.

161
 Chapter 23

a) 9 .. :�e7 lO.lLlbd2 (Black's bishop is under attack,

so it has to retreat. ) 14 . . . i.e6
( 14 . . . i.xf3 1 5 . lLlf5±; after 1 4 . . .
i.c8, Passoni -Facchetti , Italy
1994, White should better play
15 .lLlf5 just like after 14 . . . i.e6 -
Black will have to capture the
knight on f5 anyway. ) 1 5 . lLlf5
i.xf5 16.exf5 lLlbd7 1 7 . dxe5 dxe5
1 8 .i.c2 l:lfe8 1 9 . lLld2 �d6 2 0 .
�xd6 i.xd6 2 l .lLlc4 it.c7 22.l:!.ad 1
10 lLlb8
•.. lLld5 23 . lLle3 lLl7b6 24.i.b3 i.d8
This is hardly a "discharge" 25.lLlxd5 lLlxd5 26. i.g3± Tatai -
from an obliging draft with Geenen, Haifa 1989 and Black is
an alre ady developed p i e c e , losing a pawn.
but a comfortable and a well Black can cho ose another
aimed regrouping offorces, since route with the knight: 10 . . . lLld8.
B lack has more than enough The fate of the e5-pawn becomes
time to accomplish it. The fa­ critical then: l l .i.g3 ! c6 ( 1 1 . . .
mous Breyer system in the Ruy exd4 1 2 . cxd4 i.g4 1 3 . lLlh4 c6
Lopez is based on the same idea. 14.i.a4 g5 15. �a3 gxh4 16.i.xd6
If Black tries to exploit the �e8 1 7 .d5 i.d4 18 .h3 i.h5 19.
s am e i d e a a bit later he i s .[Link] 1 i.e5 20.f4 i.xd6 2 l . �xd6
doomed t o fail : 10 . . . i.g4 ll . .[Link] 1 Wg7 22.f5 b5 23.i.b3 �d7 24. �f4
lLlb8 ( l l . . .�ad8 12.h3 i.h5 13.a4 a5 25.d6 �a7+ [Link] 1 a4 27.i.c2
a5 1 4 . lLlc4 g5 1 5 .lLle3 i.g6 1 6 . �c5 28.i.b 1+- ; 1 1 . . .lLlh5 12.dxe5
lLlxg5 lLlxe4 1 7 .lLld5+- Perpinya lLlxg3 1 3 . exd6 ! ± ) 1 2 . i. a4 i.c7
- Minguez Rodriguez, Terrassa 13 .i.b3 lLlh5 14.lLlc4 lLlxg3 ( 14 . . .
1 9 9 6 ; 1 5 . . . gxh4 1 6 . lLlf5 � e 8 lLlf4 15. �d2 g5 1 6 . .:ad 1 b 5 1 7 .
1 7 . d 5 ± ; 1 l . . . g5 1 2 . i. g3 exd4 lLl e 3 �f6 1 8 . l:!.fe 1 h 5 1 9 . h4 g4
1 3 . cxd4 lLlh5, Borgo - Godena, 20.lLlg5 lLlde6, Ribic - Renaudin,
Reggio E milia 1 9 9 3 , 1 4 . lLl c4 Paris 1990, 2 l .d5 cxd5 22. i.xf4
lLlxg3 1 5 . hxg3 �f6 1 6 . e5 dxe5 lLlxf4 23.lLlxd5 lLlxd5 24.i.xd5±;
1 7 .i.xc6 bxc6 18.lLlfxe5± White 2 1 . . .lLlxg5 22.hxg5 �xg5 23.dxc6
can easily make use of the nu­ h4 24.i.xf4 �xf4 25. lLld5±) 1 5 .
merous weaknesses of the oppo­ fxg3 ! White's rook o n f1 now joins
nent ; 1 l . . . W h 8 , Janetschek - the action decisively and this is
Beyen, Skopje 1972, 12.h3 i.h5 more important than the some­
13 .lLlc4 i.xf3 14. �xf3 exd4 1 5 . what weakened white pawns.
i. x c 6 b x c 6 1 6 . e5+-; 1 2 . . . i. d 7 15 . . . l::. e 8 ( 1 5 . . . i.e6 1 6 . lLlh 4 ± )
13.a4 a 6 14.i.xc6 i.xc6 15.lLlc4±) 16.lLlh4! exd4 1 7 .it.c2 ! g 6 ( 1 7 . . .
1 2 . lLlc4 c6 1 3 . i.a4 i.c7 14.lLle3 dxc3 18.e5 g6 19.exd6+-) 18.cxd4

162
 3. i.b5 lLlf6 4. 0-0 i.c5 5. c3

d5 1 9 . exd5 cxd5 20.lLlxg6 "gfg5

2 1 .lZ'lf4+-.
10 . . . i.d7 1 l .a4. White is thre­
atening to capture the bishop on
b 6 after the exchange on c6 .
1 l . . .a6 12 .i.xc6 i.xc6 13 .lLlc4 g5
14.lLlxb6 cxb6 1 5 . d5 i.d7 (The
other line is more stubborn
15 . . . i.xd5 1 6 . exd5 e4 1 7 . "gf e2
gxh4 18.lLlxh4 lLlxd5 19 .lLlf5 "gfe5 The game [Link] - [Link]­
20.lLlxh6+ 'it>h7 2 1 .lLlg4 "gfe6 22.c4 ric, Hastings 1994 reached this
lLlf4 2 3 . "gfxe4+ "gfxe4 24. lLlf6 + position and now White could
'it>g6 2 5 . lLlxe4±) 1 6 . lLlxg5 hxg5 have acquired plenty of space on
1 7 . i.xg5 'it>h7 1 8 . "gfg3 �g8 1 9 . the queenside with: 14.b4! i.c7
"gfh4+ 1-0 Borgo - Kleinschroth, ( 14 . . . exd4 15.cxd4 i.c7 16.b5 lLlb6
Italy 2000. 17.lLlxb6 axb6 18.i.c2±; 14 . . . g5 .
l l .lUe l c6 This looks like the natural way
ll . . . i.d7 12.i.xd7 lLlbxd7 13. for Black to get some counter­
lLlc4 l:tfd8 14.lbd1 lLlfB 15 .lLle3 play, but White's play on the
lLlg6 1 6 . lLl f5 "gf e 6 1 7 . d 5 "gf e 8 queenside is clearly ahead of
18.i.xf6± Sanchez Victor - Ossa Black's one on the kingside.
Orlando, Medellin 200 1 . Black will in fact only weaken his
12.i.a4 lLlbd7 king's position without achieving
12 . . . i.g4 1 3 .lLlc4 - see 10 . . . anything substantially useful. )
i.g4 1l .�fe 1 lLlb8 12.lLlc4 c6 1 3 . 15.i.g3 i.c7 16.b5 c5. S o White
i.a4; 1 2 . . . g 5 1 3 . lLlxg5 hxg5 1 4 . managed to provoke weaknesses
i.xg5 'it> h 7 1 5 . "gfg3 l:th8 1 6 .l:te3 that are troublesome for Black.
i.d8 1 7 . .Uf3 lLlbd7 18.d5 .U.b8 19. 1 7.lLle3 lLlb6 18.i.c2 lLlh5 19.a4
dxc6 bxc6 20.i.xc6 "gfe6 2 1. .l:tf5 cxd4 20.cxd4 lLlxg3 2 l .hxg3 g4
1-0 Kuporosov - Navrotescu, 2 2 . lZ'lh2±) 1 5 . b5 lLlb6 1 6 . lLlxb6
Wattens 1 9 9 3 ; 12 . . . .l:td8 , Gra­ axb6 1 7.i.c2 g5 18.i.g3 lLlh5 19.
barska - Wi liczkiewi c z , Za­ d5 lLlxg3 20.hxg3;!;.
kopane 2000, 13 .b4!? g5 14. lLlxg5 b) 9 ....td7
hxg5 15.i.xg5 'it>h7 16.lLlc4 l:.g8
17.f4-7.
13.lLlc4 :es
13 . . . i.c7 14.lLle3 .U.e8 , Isonzo
- Van Hoolandt, Milan 2 0 0 2 ,
1 5 J lad 1 lLlb6 ( 1 5 . . . "gff8 1 6 .b4!
exd4 1 7 . cxd4 lhe4 1 8 . b 5 c 5
19.b6;!; and the complications are
favourable for White. ) 16.i.b3;!;.

163
 Chapter 23

This move is preferred by the 1 7 . d5! tL!d8 1 8 . a4±) 1 3 . i.b3 g5

famous GMs Peter Leko and 14 . .1tg3 tL!h5 [Link]!c4 f6 [Link]!xb6
Valery Salov. cxb6 [Link]!d2 b5 18.a4 tL!a5 19.
lO.tiJbd2 a6 i.d1 tL!xg3 20.hxg3 Ii.ac8 2 l .tL!fl
Black should have a plan, be­ b4 [Link]!e3± Ehl vest - Salov, Mos­
cause otherwise he might easily cow 1988 .
get punished quickly in this 12.cxd4 g5 [Link]!xg5 hxg5
seemingly solid position: 10 . . . l:te8 14.i.xg5 �g7
1 1 . a4 a6 12 . .ic4 'f!ie7 (Black's Back in 1998 Black played
tries to complicate matters are 14 . . . tL!xd4 in the game be­
doomed to fail : 12 . . . exd4 13.cxd4 tween the not so familiar play­
g5 , Salai - Sosna, Czech Repub­ ers Arnold - Wernert, Germany
lic 2000, and now White could 1998, and now White could have
have penalized his opponent for played 1 5 . 'iftg3 ! with a great
the ill-prepared kingside action edge : 15 . . . �g7 1 6 . i.h4+ �h7
with 1 4 . tL!xg5 ! hxg5 1 5 . i.xg5 17.e5 dxe5 1 8 . 'f!ixe5+-.
tL!xd4 1 6 . e 5 i.f5 1 7 . 'f!ig3 tL!h5
18. 'f!ih4+-) 13.1Ife 1 l:tad8 14.i.b3
.ta7 1 5 .tL!c4 exd4 16.cxd4 .tg4
17 .tL!cd2 �h8 18.h3 i.h5 19Jhc1
g5 20. i.g3 i.g6 2 1 . d5 tL!h5 22.
dxc6+ - P. Smirnov - Ulko , St.
Petersburg 2002;
About 10 . . . 'f!ie7 see the line a)
9 .. ."ifte7 [Link]!bd2 i.. d 7.
ll .i.c4 exd4
This pawn trade is in fact an This is a crucial position for
invitation for great complica­ the evaluation of this line. It is
tions ! White must be ready to not quite clear. Topalov lost it
sacrifice material in order to twice with White against Peter
fight for an opening advantage, Leko . He played both times
so Black might get good winning [Link]:lb3 and maybe that caused
chances in some lines . White will his demise?
have a lasting advantage with­ [Link]!f3!?
out any risk after the calm This move has been recom­
ll . . . 'f!ie7 12.J:tfe 1 �h8 (12 . . . i.. g4 mended by the analysts long ago,
did not solve the problems after but has not been tested in GM
13 .i.b3 i.a7 14.i.a4 b5 15.i.. c 2 practice yet. The knight seems to
.l:tfe8 1 6 . h3 i.. h 5 , Kuporosov - be better placed on f3 than on b3.
Tatar, Budapest 1990, and White White is a piece down anyway,
could have disrupted the coordi­ so it is worth to place this knight
nation of the enemy forces with rather passively on b3 with the

164
 3. .tb5 ltJf6 4. 0-0 .tc5 5. c3

quite unnatural idea of attack­ 20. �g7#; 18 . . . f5 19 . .itxe4 fxe4 20.

ing with the f-pawn? The answer �g5+ 'it>£7 2 l . �g7+ 'it>e6 22.d5+
to that question is definitely tt::lx d5 [Link]:Jg5+ 'it>f5 24.g4+ 'it>xg4
negative , since White's king 25 .ti:Jf7+ 'it>f5 26. �h7+ 'it>e6 27.
will be bare too after the pawn ti:Jxd8+-; 22 ... 'it>xd5 [Link] 1+ 'it>c6
attack ! 1 5 . . . tt:J e 7 ( 1 5 . . . '�e8 1 6 . 24.!tac 1 + 'it>b5 2 5 . tt:Jd4+ .txd4
!tfe 1 l:!.g8 1 7 . e5 dxe5 1 8 . tt:Jxe5 2 6 . a 4 + 'it>xa4 2 7 . �xd4+ 'it> b 5
ltJxe5 1 9 . .txf6 + 'it>xf6 20.!txe5 2 8 . �c4+ 'it> b 6 29 . .te3+ c5 3 0 .
�cB 2 l . �f3 .tf5 22 . .td3 lig5 23. ..ltxc5+ 'it> c 7 3 l . .itxd6+ 'it>b6 3 2 .
h4 .txd4 24. �f4+-; 16 ... ti:Jh7 1 7 . �c5#) 1 8 . �f4 d 5 19. -ltxffi �xffi
e5 dxe5 1 8 . dxe5 ..lte6 19 . .it f6 + 20 . .itxd5 ti:Jxd5 2 1 . �xe4± The
tt:Jxf6 20.exf6+ 'it> xf6 2l.�c3+ 'it>g6 position after the piece sacrifice
22 . .itd3+ f5 23.g4! !±; 15 . . . l:te8 16. is very complicated and our
l:.ae 1 tt:Je7 1 7 . .txf6+ 'it>xf6 18.e5+ analysis is far from conclusive.
dxe5 1 9 . �h7+-; 1 8 . . . 'it>g7 1 9 . Still we believe that if you have
..ltx£7 !± White captured a third studied properly the lines that
pawn for the piece and his attack we have shown you can enter the
continues. ) 1 6 . �d2! tt:Jxe4 ( 1 6 . . . complications confidently, be­
tt:Jfg8 1 7 . e5±) 17 . .th6+ 'it>h8 ( 1 7 . . . cause White is hardly risking to
'it>g6 18 . .itd3 d5?? 19. �g5+ 'it>h7 lose.

Conclusion about 4 .1.c5 ...

The system that we have been dealing with is very popular and
quite playable at a very high level as well. The most critical lines
arise after Black forces White to sacrifice a piece with g7-g5. We have
suggested some attractive possibilities for White that can yield good
practical results. Whenever the game steers into a quieter play White
preserves a lasting positional advantage, because of the extra space.
White should additionally have in mind our recommendation to op­
erate actively on the queenside with b2-b4.

165
 Chapter 24 l .e4 e5 2.ttJf3 ttJc6 3 .tb5 ttJf6 4.0-0
•

ttJxe4 5.d4
Berlin Defence

9.£3+-;
5 . . .�e7? 6.:e1 d5 7.i.xc6 bxc6
[Link].Jxe5 �d6 9.£3+-; 5 . . . .ib4? 6.c3
i.a5 7 . .U. e 1 d5 8 . lt.Jxe5 .id7 9 .
i.xc6 i.xc6 1 0 . f3+- Ivkina -
Brockmanns , Tallinn 1997;
5 . . . d6? 6 . d 5 a6 ( 6 . . . .id7 7.
dxc6+-) 7 .Ji.. d3 lt.Je7 (This is the
only way for Black to avoid los­
5 .ie7
... ing a piece, but his king is so
One of the ancient systems of weak that his position is beyond
the Ruy Lopez - the first game salvati on already. 7 . . . .ig4 8 .
dates back to the year 1803 ! It i.xe4+- Wallis - Wu , Sydney
still has the reputation of a su­ 2002 ; 7 . . . i.f5 8 . dxc6+- Wall -
per solid opening weapon and Judd, Dayton 198 1 ) 8 . .ixe4 f5 9 .
has some famous proponents at i.d3 e 4 10.l:!.e1 exd3 ( 1 0 . . . e xf.3 1 1 .
top G M level like Kramnik, �x£3 �d7 [Link]..g5+-) 1l.�xd3+-;
Piket, Timman . . . Black is losing a piece after
After 5 . . . a6 6 . .ia4 the stan­ 5 . . . lt.Jxd4? [Link].Jxd4 exd4 (6 . . . lt.Jd6,
dard positions of the Open De­ Sery - Cerveny, Brno 1907, 7.
fence are reached , see 3 . . . a6 .i:te 1+-; 6 . . . c6 7 .l1e 1+-) 7J:�e1 f5
4 . .ia4 [Link] 5 . 0-0 lt.Jxe4 6 . d4. ( 7 . . . �h4 8 . � f3 + - ; 7 . . . Ji.. e 7 8 .
We are going to analyse the .U.xe4+-) 8.£3 Ji.. d6 (8 . . . �h4 9.fxe4
move 5 . . . lt.Jd6 as the main line in fxe4 [Link].Jd2 e3 [Link].J£3+- Rojpra­
the next chapters, while now we payont - Sammut, Manila 1992;
are going to see some less popu­ 8 . . . �e7 9 . fxe4 fxe4 10. �xd4+­
lar and weaker moves in this Lausten -Wagner, Oberlinghaus
critical theoretical position: 1994; 8 . . . i.c5 9 . fxe4+- ; 8 . . . c6
5 . . . �ffi? 6.dxe5 lt.Jxe5 7.l:.e 1+-; 9.fxe4 cxb5, Gypser - Haeussler,
5 . . . lt.Jb4? is very weak - 6.l1e1 Passau 2000, 1 0 . �h5+! g6 1 1 .
f5 (6 . . . [Link] 7.dxe5 lt.Jg8 [Link].Jg5 Ji.. e 7 exf5+-) 9 . fxe4+- Mackenzie -
9 . e 6 ! +-) 7 . lt.Jxe5 �h4 8 . g3 �f6 Reichhelm, Germany 1866;

166
 3. ..tb5 ltJf6 4. 0-0 t:De4 5. d4 ..te7 6. 'f!Je2

5 . . . d5 is too dangerous for 5 . . . 'f!Je7 6.l:te1 f5 7 . i.xc6 dxc6

Black 6.ltJxe5 ..td7 (This is the 8.ttJxe5 c5 (8 . . . i.e6 9 . 'f!Jh5+ ..tfl
only move. The other lines lose 10. 'f!Jxf5+- Rajib - Arpit, India
outright : 6 . . . tiJd6? 7 . ltJxc6+- ; 2002) 9 . ltJc3 c6 1 0 . ltJxe4 fxe4
6 . . . 'f!Je7? 7.ltJxc6+-; 6 . . . 'f!Jf6, Tolar 11. 'f!Jh5+ g6 1 2 . ltJxg6 'f!Jfl 1 3 .
- Momotov, Plzen 1999, 7 .c4 tiJd6 'f!Je5+ 1-0 Lee - Shelton, IECG
8 . .l::r. e 1 ..t e 6 9 . i.xc6+ bxc6 1 0 . 1995;
'f!Ja4+- ; 6 . . . 'f!J d 6 , Czako - Szi­ 5 . . . exd4 6.�e 1 f5 (6 . . . ..te7 7.
getvari , Gyongyo 1998, 7 . .l::r. e 1 l:lxe4+- Garcia Melgar - Correa,
'f!Jb4 8.c4+-; 7 . . . i.d7 8.i.xc6 bxc6 Nigran 1998; 6 . . . 'f!Je7? This is
9 .f3+-) 7 .ltJxf7 ! This simple, but evidently not the right square for
efficient combination draws the the queen and Black is quickly
curtai n s fo r B l ack : 7 . . :J;xf7 l o s i n g a p i e c e . 7 . i. x c 6 dxc6
8. 'f!Jh5+ We6 (8 . . . g6 9. 'f!Jxd5+ ..te6 8.ltJxd4+- Sloan - Jones, New­
1 0 . 'f!Jxe4 i.f5 11 . ..tc4+ Wg7 1 2 . port 1960; 7 . . . bxc6 8 . ltJxd4 c5
'f!J e 3 +- M e t g e r - S u echting, 9 . f3+-; 8 . . . 'f!Je5 9 . f3+- Coley -
Hamburg 1 8 9 7 ) 9 . ltJ c3 ! ltJb4 Matthews , IECG 1995 ; The next
(9 ... i.e8 10. 'f!Jg4+ Wfl 11.ltJxe4+­ move for Black resembles the
Berger - Posener, Graz 1870) 10. Riga variation: 6 . . . d5 7.ltJxd4 a6
ltJxd5 ..txb5 l l . tiJf4+ '>td6 1 2 . 8.�xc6+ bxc6 9.f3+- ; 7 . . . 'f!Jf6 8.f3
'f!Jxb5 ttJf6 13.l:te 1 c5 14. 'f!Jxb7+­ �c5 9.c3+- Dam - Magalhaes,
Lange - Godeck, Germany 1867; IECC 1999; 7 . . . i.e7 8 . ltJxc6+-;
5 . . . f6?! 6 . dxe5 fxe5 7 . .l::r. e 1 d5 7 . . . ..td7 8 . ..txc6 ..txc6 9.f3 i.c5
8.ltJxe5 'f!Jf6 9.tiJd3±; 10 . ..te3 tiJf6 1 1 . ltJxc6 bxc6 1 2 .
5 . . . i.d6?! Black is losing too ..txc5+- ; 8 . . . b x c 6 9 . f3 f5 1 0 .
much time with this quite un­ fxe4+-; 9 . . . ..tc5 10.fxe4+-; 9 . . . c5
natural defence of the e5-pawn. 1 0 . tiJb3+- Nokka - Koskinen,
6 . dxe5 ltJxe5 ( 6 . . . i.c5 7. 'f!Jd5 a6 Tampere 1989 ; 7 . . . i.c5 8.i.xc6+
8 . i.c4+- Hynes - Stevenson, bxc6 9.f3 �g4, Evertsson - Fre­
IECG 2000; 6 . . . ..txe5 7 . ..txc6+-; driksson, Kristallen 1995 , 1 0 .
6 . . . i.e7 7 . 'f!Jd5±) 7 .1:1e 1 f5 (7 . . . ltJc5 fxg4+- ; 9 . . . 'f!Jh4 1 0 . g3 'f!Jh5 1 1 .
8.ltJxe5+- Fuentes - Tabima, Cali c3+-; 9 . . . 0-0 10.fxe4 dxe4 11 .i.e3
1999) 8.ltJxe5 i.xe5 9 . .lhe4 fxe4 'f!Jf6 12.c3+- Misecka - Sykora,
1 0 . 'f!Jh5+ Wf8 1 1 . 'f!Jxe5+- Abreu Bratislava 1998; 7 . . . i.d6 8.ltJxc6
- Neumeier, corr. 1990; i.xh2+ 9 . Wh 1 'f!Jh4 1 0 . lhe4+
5 . . . ltJf6?! is just a senseless dxe4 1 1 . 'f!Jd8+ 'f!Jxd8 12.ltJxd8+
loss of time. 6 . dxe5 ltJg4 (6 . . . ltJe4 Wxd8 1 3 . Wxh2 c 6 14 . ..tc4 f5
7 . 'f!Jd5±) 7 .h3 ltJgxe5 8.l:l.e1 i.d6 15 .ttJc3 h6 16.i.e3 We7 1 7 . ..tc5+
(8 . . . f6 9 . ttJx e 5 ltJxe5 1 0 . f4+-) <J;f6 18.l:ld1 i.e6 19.i.xe6 Wxe6
9 . ..txc6 dxc6 10.ltJxe5+- Williams 20J:td6+ Wfl 2 l..�. d 7+ Wg6 22.
- Pereira, Casual Compuserve ltJe2± Van Den Bosch - Oskam,
1995; Netherlands 1928) 7.ttJxd4 tiJxd4

167
 Chapter 24

(7 . ..ti'Je7?? 8 .tt::\ e 6 1-0 Dobias - not make it less forceful . It was

Muller, Mlada Boleslav 1 9 0 5 ; played many times by S . Tar­
7 . . . i. c 5 8.l::t x e4+ fxe4 9. �h5+ g6 rasch in his world championship
1 0 . thc5+- ; 7 . . . �h4 8 . g3 �f6 match against E m . Lasker in
9 . .i.xc6 dxc6 10.£3 .tc5 ll .c3 0-0 1908, while Anand played it just
12.fxe4+- Freukkink - Terwogt, recently against Piket . . .
corr. 1989; 7 . . :l�tf6 8 . .i.xc6 dxc6 6 tt:Jd6
•••

9 . £3 .tc5 10.c3+-; 8 . . . bxc6 9.£3+­ You can consider this move to

Lunkmoss - Schwekendiek, Ger­ be more or less "an only one".
many 1995) 8 . �xd4 Wfl (8 . . . .te7 6 . . . d5?! is very dangerous for
9. �xg7 .tf6 10. �h6+- Neumann Black due to 7 . ttJxe5 .i.d7 ( 7 . . .
-Winawer, Paris 1 8 6 7 ; 8 . . . c6 0-0 8 . i.xc6 f6 9 . c4+-) 8 . .txc6 !
9.i.d3 �a5 [Link]::\ c3 d5 1 l . �e5+ (This is the right exchange -
Wfl 12.i.xe4 fxe4 13.l:!.xe4 .td7, White must keep the pressure
We stra - De Zeeuw, Volmac along the e-file. Or 8 . tt::\ x d 7 ? !
1988, 1 4 . .te3 Wg8 15 ..l:ta4 �d8 tt::\xd4 [Link]::\ e 5+ c 6 10 . .txc6+ tt::\x c6
[Link]::\x d5+-) 9 . .tc4+ d5 10 . .i.xd5+ ll. tt::\£3 0-0+ Nemet - Trifunovic,
.te6 ll . .txe6+ Wxe6 12Jhe4+ ! Yugoslavia 1963 . ) 8 . . . .i.xc6 (8 . . .
fxe4 1 3 . �xe4+ Wf6 14. tt::\ c 3 c6 bxc6 9 . .l:te 1 tt::\ f6 , Podkriznik -
15 . .i.e3 .i.e7 16 . .l:te 1 �d7 17. �f4+ Adam, Krsko 1 9 9 7 , 1 0 . il.g5± ;
Wg6 1 8 . h4 �f5 1 9 . h5 + ! �xh5, 9 . . . 0-0 10.£3 tt::\ g5 l l .tt::\x d7 �e8
A. Karpov - C OMP Mephisto, 1 2 . tt::\ e 5 +- E m . Lasker - NN ,
Hannover 1983 . White can win Great Britain 1900; 9 . . . Wf8 1 0 .
by force now with 2 0 . g4 ! �a5 tt::\ c3 tt::\ xc3 ll.bxc3 il. e 8 12. �a6
2 l .b4! .txb4 22.i.b6!+-. �c8 1 3 . � a 5 .t d 6 14 . .t a 3 f6
The conclusion is quite obvi­ [Link]::\ d3 .tg6 16.lle3± Em. Lasker
ous - Black risks losing very - Scheve, Berlin 1891 ) 9.lle1 .td7
quickly if he avoids the main (9 . . . 0-0? 1 0 . f3 .th4 l l . fxe4±;
theoretical lines on move 5 . 9 ... Wf8 [Link]::\ c3 tt::\xc3 1l.bxc3 il.e8
12 . .l:!.b 1 b6 1 3 . c4 f6 1 4 . tt::\ d 3 ±
Napier - Scheve , Monte Carlo
1902) [Link]::\ d 2 tt::\ d 6 (The trade on
d2 is not helpful to the defence
at all: 10 . . . tt::\x d2 ll . .txd2 Wf8 -
11 . . . 0-0?? 1 2 .tt::\x d7+- - 1 2 . �f3
i.e6, Joachim - Kapic, Germany
2001 13 . .Ue2 !±) 1 1 .tt::\ x d7 �xd7
[Link]::\f3 f6 ( 1 2 . . . Wf8 [Link]::\ e 5 �e6
1 4 . i.d2 �e8 1 5 . i. b 4 tt::\ c4 1 6 .
6.�e2! i.xe7 + l::tx e7 1 7 . �£3± Rytshagov
This move has been discov­ - Norri, Espoo 1992 ; 12 . . . tt::\ c 8?!
ered long, long ago, but this does [Link]::\ e 5 �a4? ! - 1 3 . . . �d8 14 . ..tg5

168
 3. i. b5 l2Jf6 4. 0-0 'De4 5. d4 il.e7 6. �e2

<it>f8;!; - 14. �g4 0-0 1 5 .b3 �b4 White has a great advantage .
1 6 : gr d 7+-; 14 . . . .Ug8 15 .b3 �b5 Whi te's combination is very
16. a4+-; 15 . . . �b4 1 6 . �d7+ ! 1-0 beautiful and we feel obliged to
L. Medina - Castellanos, Cuba show it to you till the end. 15 . . .
1 9 9 4 , 16 . . . <it>f8 1 7 . �dB+ i.xd8 axb5 16. �d3 g6 1 7 .lhf8 + �xf8
1 8 .lZ:ld7#) 1 3 . i.f4 <it>f7 14. �d3 18 . .l:[Link] �e8 19 .�f'7 <it>g8 20.lhh7
Black only seems to be doing d6 2l.exd6 cxd6 22. �d5+ i.e6 23 .
well, while the two games played i.d4! ! +- Sauermann - Krantz,
in this position prove that to be corr. 1 9 8 7 ) 1 1 . i. a4 f4 ( 1 1 . . . b5
an illusion : 1 4 . . . g6 ( 1 4 . . . �adS 12 .i.b3 .Ub8 , Nurminen - Con­
1 5 . i.xd6 �xd6 1 6 J:te3 g6 1 7 . way, corr. 1 9 9 3 , 1 3 . i.f4 ! �e8
.l:!.ae 1 .Uhe8 1 8 . h4 h 5 1 9 . .Ue6 ! 1 4 . .Uad 1 ..tb7 1 5 . i.d5 �g6 16.
�xe6 20.l:txe6 <it>xe6 2 1 . �xg6+­ �d2 i.c5 17.c3±) 12.a3 b5 13.i.b3
B alashov - D zuban, Moscow i. b 7 1 4 . i. d 5 lZ:l a 5 1 5 J 1 d 1 c 5
1983) 1 5 .lZ:le5+ fxe5 16.dxe5 �c6 16.�e1 i.xd5 1 7 .lhd5 �c7 18.b3
1 7 . exd6 i.xd6 1 8 . �f3 ! d4 1 9 . �c6 19. �e4 .l:!.a7 2 0 . i.d2 lZ:lb7
.l:!.e4± Medina Garcia - Palacios 2 l . c4± Mallee - Ahman, corr.
de la Prida, Malaga 1965. 1992.
6 . . . £'5?! This weakening of the 7.i.xc6
kingside is quite unnecessary
7. dxe5 0-0 8 .lZ:lc3 lZ:lxc3 (8 . . . d6,
Teichmann - Leonhardt, Berlin
1 9 0 5 , 9 . lZ:lxe4 fxe4 1 0 . �xe4± )
9. �c4+ <it'h8 (9 . . . lZ:ld5 10. �xd5+
<it>h8, Loman - Trimborn, Scheve­
ningen 1905, 1 1 .i.f4 a6 12.i.e2
�e8 13 . .Uad 1 �g6 [Link]:ld4 lZ:lxd4
15. �xd4 b6 16.i.f3±) 10. �xc3 a6.
(The strange onslaught 10 . . . lZ:lb4,
Walther - Puchalla, corr. 1970, 7...bxc6
could have been refuted with the This is the main line and it
energetic 1 1 . i.g5 ! , fighting for has been played hundreds of
the dark squares. 1 l . . .i.xg5 - times in games of quite different
after the combination 1 l . . .lZ:lxa2 levels. Most of the lines have
12 . .Uxa2 i.xg5 [Link]:lxg5 �xg5 14. been analysed extensively and
�xc7 f4 15. �d6 lle8 16 . .Ue1 f3 17. Black as a rule defends success­
g3± Black's queenside is utterly fully. Nevertheless we are going
helpless - 1 2 . lZ:lxg5 �xg5 1 3 . to suggest some interesting pos­
�xb4 hte8 14.f4±; 1 0 . . . f4 1 1 . g3 sibilities for White.
fxg3 12.fxg3 i.b4 1 3 . �b3 - see The other recapture 7 . . . dxc6
11 . . . i.b4; 1 1 . . .i.b4 12. �b3 fxg3 looks a bit awkward, but the con­
13.fxg3 �e7 14.i.e3 a6 15 .lLlg5 ! ! temporary theory is not showing

169
 Chapter 24

a conclusive way for White to get �hl J:Z.g7 23 . .ig5+ �c8 24.tiJf6
the advantage . This is rather �f8 2 5 J :td3 e5 2 6 . tiJxd7 J:Z.xd7
strange having in mind that the 27.l:tel±) 19.tiJg4 - it is hardly
line is quite old. Accordingly we believable, but this position has
had to spend plenty of time and been played as early as the 19 th
effort in order to be able to pro­ century!
vide you with concrete and rea­
s onable recommendations for
White. 8.dxe5 tiJf5 9.�d1 .id7 10.
e6! This move is a must; other­
wise Black will not have any
problems whatsoever. 10 . . . fxe6
ll .tiJe5 .id6 12.'�h5+ g6 13.tiJxg6
tiJg7. This all looks very gloomy
for Black, but it is still quite com­
plicated. 1 4 . �h6 tiJf5 1 5 . �h3 .
White should avoid the repeti­ So Black has two interesting pos­
tion of moves if he wants to play sibilities to exchange queens .
for a win. 1 5 . . J ig8 (But not White needs to keep coolness and
15 . . . '�ffi? 16.tiJxh8 0-0-0 17 . .tg5 ! be extremely inventive with
t'txg5 1 8 . tiJf7 t'ig6 1 9 . tiJxd8+­ a profound knowledge of the
Moller - Taeckholm, Copenha­ opening lines if he wants to
gen 1899) 16. "thh7 :Z.g7 1 7 . t'th5! achieve some edge. The best that
White is rather backward in his he can hope for is a somewhat
development , although that better endgame after some 1 5-20
might not be so obvious yet. M­ moves.
ter the exchange of the queens 1 ) 19 . . . t'ih4 20. thh4+ tiJxh4
(in case of the check on h8) White 2 l . f3 e5 2 2 . h3 .ic5+ ( 2 2 . . . .tf5
might get in trouble, because the 23 .l:.e l .ixc2 24.tiJc3 .tf5 25 . .th6
defence of the white king will be .Ug6 26 . .if4 �f7 27 . .ixe5 �d8
difficult. Now White must play 28 .l:tad l±) 23 .�fl .ie6 (23 . . . .tf5
extremely precisely, otherwise 24 . .te3 .td6 25 .htd2 e4 26 . .tf2
B l ack will s i mply crush the tiJg6, Taubenhaus - Pollock, New
kingside of his opponent. 1 7 . . . York 1893 , White lost his way
t'if6 1 8 .tiJe5+! This is the only here and even lost the game. He
move ! E verything else gives had to complete his development
Black excellent (possibly better! ) instead and only Black would
chances . 1 8 . . .';l;>e7 ( 1 8 . . . � £8 1 9 . have problems after : 2 7 . tiJc3 !
tiJxd7+ llxd7 20.tiJc3±; 18 . . . �d8 exf3 28.gxf3 l::f.h 7 29.!i.e 1+ �f8 30.
19.tiJf3 tiJe7 20 . .ig5+- Lepge - tLle4 �xh3 3 l . tiJxd6 cxd6 3 2 .
[Link], Leipzig 1863 ; 19 . . . �£8 �d6 �xf3 33.tiJe3±) 24.tiJd2 �d8
20.tiJbd2 t'ig8 2 l .tiJe4 lhg2+ 22. 2 5 . l:. e l tiJf5 2 6 . �xe5 .id4 2 7 .

170
 3. iLb5 lL\f6 4. 0-0 lLle4 5. d4 iLe7 6. �e2

Itxe6+ ! This exchange sacrifice 8 lLlb7

.•.

neutralizes the concrete threats This is the main line. This

and White has now three con­ knight j oins later the action
nected p a s s e d pawns on the without any problems usually
kingside. 27 . . . �xe6 28 .lLle4 lLld6 via c5.
29 . ...t g 5 ...t x b2 30 . .:e 1 l:.b8 (30 . . . The other idea - 8 . . . lLlf5 9. �e4
.U h 8 3 l . c 3 ± ) 3 l . h4 lLlxe4 3 2 . g6 (9 . . . lLlh4 is only spelling disas­
l:txe4+ � f7 33.lLlh6+ �g6 34.g4 ter for the black king - 10.lLlxh4
l:ld7 35.f4±; �xh4 1 1 . �g4 g6 1 2 . i. h6 d 5
2) 1 9 . . . "�g6 2 0 . thg6 �xg6 13. �d4 it.g5, Esling - Wallace,
2 l . h3 e5 The white knight on g4 Melbourne 1 8 9 5 , 14 . i. g7 llg8
is the main defender of the white 15.i.f6 i.xf6 1 6 .exf6±, and it is
king against Black's onslaughts. not quite clear where the safe
22.c4 ! White must organize some haven for the black king i s ,
counterplay immediately! 22 . . . against the imminent attack;
lLld4 (22 . . . ltag8 23.c5 ...t x c5 24. 9 . . . d5 10.exd6 t'txd6, Paulsen -
l:txd7+ �xd7 25.lLlxe5+ 'itt e 6 26. Cordel, Berlin 1864, [Link].f4! t'td5
lLlxg6 lixg6 27.lLlc3 lLlh4 28.g4±; 1 2 . �xd5 cxd5 1 3 . it.xc7±; 10 . . .
22 . . . c5 2 3 . lLlc3 lLld4 2 4 . f3 .l:l.f8 lLlxd6 1 1 . t'txc6+ i. d 7 1 2 . �c3±)
[Link].d2 it.f5 [Link].e l±) 23.c5 lLlc2 1 0 . lLl d 4 ! The black knight is
(23 . . . ...tx c5 24.lLlxe5 l:td6 [Link].g5+ rather activ e , s o it must be
�f8 2 6 .lLlxd 7 + l:txd7 2 7 . lLlc3±) traded off. 1 0 . . . lLlxd4 ( Should
[Link].e3 This seemingly unnatu­ Black try to avoid the exchange
ral exchange operation preserves of the knight, he would lose too
some advantage to White. 24 . . . much time : 1 0 . . . lLlg7?! 1 l . ltd 1
lLlxa 1 2 5 . lLl a3 �xg4 2 6 . hxg4 i.b7 12 .i.h6 0-0 13 .lLlc3 l:!.b8 1 4 .
.l::f.xg4 27Jba1 e4 28. cxd6+ cxd6 t'tg4!± Timoshchenko - Kataly­
29J:td1 d5 30.lLlc2 b6 3 l .b4 .Uag8 mov, Tbilisi 1974) 1 1 . t'txd4
32.g3 �e6 33.�fl l:!.h8 34.�e2±
White's side is to be preferred in
this endgame, because of his bet­
ter piece coordination.
8.dxe5

11 . . . 0-0 12.i.h6 lieS 13.lLlc3

c5 ( 1 3 . . . �g5?! This move is just
very weak. It can only be ex­
plained with the poor develop-

171
 Chapter 24

ment of the theory in tho se tation of the weak c5-square for

years. The weakness of the dark more suitable moments later.
squares in the black position be­ Black's defence is rather difficult
comes immediately catastrophic. against a precise strong play by
14 . .axg5 't;;rxg5 15 .lbe4 �xe5 16. White ! 12 . . . .lte6 ( 1 2 . . -lt£5 13.lba4
.

lbf6+ 'it>f8 17. 't;;rh4 l1e6 18.lbxh7+ 0-0 14.b3 i.xc2 15 .olth6 l:i.e8 16.
WeB 1 9 . lbg5 't;;r f6 2 0 . 't;;r h 6 l:.e7 l:tacl±; 14 . . . �b8 15.olth6 l:le8, Be­
2 1 .lbh7 't;;r h8 22. 't;;rh4+- Tarrasch liavsky - Mikhalchishin, USSR
- Taub enhau s , Monte C arlo 1978, and now White was going
1 903 ; 13 . . . d5, Taimanov - Niki­ to have a lasting positional edge
tin, USSR 1969, 14.lba4! This is after the quiet move 1 6 . c 3 ;!:; ;
a new idea, because White usu­ 12 . . . �b8 13.i.h6 !? Black i s delay­
ally prefers to take en passant ing castling and White tries to
here. The move we are suggest­ keep the opponent's king in the
ing is quite logical and guaran­ centre quite reasonably at that.
tees White a lasting positional 13 . . J l b4 1 4 . 't;;r x a 7 ± ; 1 3 . . . .lt e 6
advantage as you can see from 14. �a4± ; 13 . . . Jhb2, Van der Wiel
the following lines : 14 . . . .ltf5 - Spassky, Rotterdam 1 9 8 8 ,
1 5 . b 3 ;!:; ; 1 4 . . . c5 1 5 . lbxc5 .ltxc5 14.lbe4! The weakness o f the
16. 't;;rx c5 �xe5 17.l:tfel;!:;; 14 . . . l1b8 dark squares in the black camp
1 5 .b3 l:tb4 16. 't;;r d 2 l:th4 17 . .af4 is evident. This is a quite typical
't;;r d 7 1 8 . f3 .aa6 1 9 . .[Link] 1 .lt b 5 motive in this variation. 14 . . . l:tb4
20 .lbc3 i.b4 2 l . oltg3 �h5 22.a3;!:;) 15 .l2lf6+ .ltxf6 16. 't;;r x b4+- ; 14 . . .
14. �d2 .ltb7 ( 1 4 . . . d6, Schartner Itb6 1 5 . .ltg7 ! :b4 1 6 . �xa7± ;
- Steniczka, corr. 1972, 15.exd6 15 . . . c5 16.lbxc5 ltg8 17 . .af6 .ltxf6
cxd6 1 6 .lbd5 .ab7 17.:fe 1 .ltxd5 1 8 . exf6 l:lxf6 1 9 . c4± The black
18. 't;;rx d5 .ltf6 19.c3;!:;) 15 .l:.ad1 d6 king will be safe nowhere. Black's
1 6 . 't;;r f4 dxe5 1 7 . 't;;r x e5 .af8 1 8 . compensation for the exchange is
.l:.Xd8 1Ixe5 1 9 . :xa8 i.xa8 2 0 . far from sufficient after 15 . . . dxe4
i.xf8 'it>xf8 2 1..l:t d 1 'it> e 7 22.f3;!:; 16. �xd8+ .ltxd8 17 .i.xh8±) 1 3 .
Gligoric - Trifunovic, Budapest lba4 't;;rb 8 14 . ..te3 a 5 15.a3 't;;rb 5
1 948 . Black is reduced to a diffi­ 16.b3 c5. As you can see, the ex­
cult and unrewarding defence, world champion preferred to give
since his pawns are just too up a pawn outright instead of
weak. suffering indefinitely defending
Black can al so try the re­ the c5-square. It is not easy to
sourceful 1 l . . .d5!?, against which say immediately whether the
we propose the solid 12.lbc3 ! The arising endgame is winning for
capture en passant allows Black White or a draw. 17.lbxc5 .ltxc5
to equalize after 1 2 . exd6 0-0 . 1 8 . �xc5 't;;r x c 5 1 9 . .axc5 'it> d 7
White need not force issues here, 20JUe l± Ljubojevic - Spassky,
because he can delay the exploi- Belfort 1988.

172
 3. i.b5 tiJ{6 4. 0-0 t:De4 5. d4 i.e7 6. �e2

[Link]:Jc3 0-0 l!b8 1 7 .b3;t; 1 4 . . . l:!.e6 1 5 . �d 4 !

Black might tran spose to This i s a n important move de­
the main lines with 9 . . . tt:Jc5 priving Black from a lot of use­
after 10.J:te1 0-0, but he could ful possibilities. 15 . . . .:g6 16.g3±;
also try to reach some original 15 . . . i.b7 16. �b4± Schlechter -
positions after 10 . . . i.a6. The idea Janowski , Paris 1900) 1 5 . �b4
is not bad, but White still keeps .l:tab8 [Link]:Je4! �g6 ( 16 . . . �xe5 17.
his edge 1 l . �d l . This is not tt:Jc5 �d6 18 .:ed1 �f8 19. l:lxd7
a loss of time because it is not :e5 [Link]:Jd3±) 1 7 . tt:Jc5 i.a8 1 8 .
quite clear yet how useful for �c3 d 6 [Link]:Ja6! c 5 20.£'3 :i.bc8 2 1 .
Black the bishop on a6 is. 11 . . . tt:Jxc7! ! This beautiful combina­
0-0 , Schmidt - Chigorin, Peters­ tion is a logical consequence
burg 1879, 1 2 .tt:Jd4! tt:Je6 ( 1 2 . . . f6 of Black's cramped passive posi­
1 3 . ..tf4 l!b8 14.e6 tt:Jxe6 15 .tt:Jxe6 tion. 2 1 . . .l:ted8 (2 1 . . .lhc7 22.exd6
dxe6 1 6 . l:i.xe6±) 1 3 . i. e3 J:tb8 l:tcc8 2 3 . d 7 l:!.xe 1 2 4 . l:!.xe 1 l:tf8
14.:b a. 25. �xc5 �b6 26. �xb6 axb6 27 .
[Link] .Ue8+-) [Link]:Jxa8+- Kuczynski ­
Grabarczyk, Plock 2000.
10 . . . d5. Mter this reckless po­
sitional decision Black's queen­
side becomes very weak. The
idea is to rely on the activity of
the black pieces. 1 1 . exd6 ..txd6
12.i.g5 �d7 ( 1 2 . . . f6, Osmolovsky
- Bondarevsky, Moscow 1946, 13.
�c4+ 'it>h8 14 . .1H4±) 1 3 . llad 1
�f5, Martinez - Em. Lasker, USA
10 tt:Jc5
.•• 1902 , ( 13 . . . tt:Jc5 14.i.f4 i.b7 1 5 .
10 . . . i.c5 l l .tt:Je4 d5 1 2 . exd6 � e 3 l:Ifd8 1 6 .b4 tt:J e 6 1 7 . ..txd6
cxd6 13 . ..tg5 �d7 14 . .l:.adl±. cxd6 [Link]:Je4 �c7 [Link]:Jfg5± Pu­
B lack can try the old, but schkanski - Archangelski, corr.
rarely played move 10 . . . .l:te8 only 1980, and Black can hardly de­
with the idea to surprise the op­ fend his unsupported centre as
ponent. Mter 1 1 . �c4 ! tt:Jc5 1 2 . well as the kingside simulta­
tt:Jg5 ! i.xg5 ( 1 2 . . . tt:J e 6 1 3 . tt:Jxe6 neously ; 13 . . . f6 1 4 . i.h4 �f7
fxe6 14.i.e3 l:tb8 15 .b3 l:tb4 16. 15 .tt:Je4 i.d7 1 6 . i.g3 i.xg3 1 7 .
�d3 d6 1 7 . l:tad l ± ; 1 6 . . . d5 1 7 . hxg3 i.g4 1 8 . �a6 tt:Jd8 19 .tt:Jc5±
tt:Ja4±) 1 3 . i.xg5 �xg5 14. �xc5 Mallee - Ahman , corr. 1 98 0 ;
i.b7 (Black has to defend a diffi­ 1 3 . . . c 5 1 4 . tt:Jd 5 f6 1 5 . i.f4 � f7
cult endgame after 1 4 . . . � e 7 1 6 . � b 5 i.xf4 1 7 . tt:Jxf4 l! b 8 1 8 .
1 5 . �xe7 .:Xe7, Magem Badals ­ � b 3 c4 1 9 . � a 3 ± Greenfeld -
Sanz Alonso, Leon 1990, [Link] 1 Lugovoi , St . Petersburg 1 99 9 )

173
 Chapter 24

1 4 . l2J e 4 ! h6 ( 1 4 . . . � g6 1 5 . l2Jh4 exploit the weakness of the c5-

�e6 1 6 . �f3± Black's situation square , just like in the main
spells trouble. The pawn on a2 lines.
is untouchable : 16 . . . �xa2? 1 7 . 12.l:[Link]
lZlffi+ gxffi 18. �xffi �c4 19.i.h6
�g4 20.h3+-) 1 5 . i.h4 �h5 16.
i.g3 ..tg4 17 . h3 ..txf3 1 8 . �xf3
�xf3 19.gxf3 .l:.fe8 20 . .Ue3 i.xg3
2 1 .l2Jxg3±. Both sides have pawn
weaknesses , but White has a
much easier access to the vulner­
able black queenside than Black
to White's kingside.
10 . . . f6 l l .i.f4 fxe5 1 2 . i.xe5
The occupation of the e5-square 12 ...d5
is a definite achievement for This is a very solid move -
White in these types of positions . Black organizes a tough defence
Black must create weaknesses if in the centre.
he wants to remove the white Some other moves have also
outpost there. 12 . . . i.c5 ( 12 . . . --tffi, been tried:
Jansa - Djuric, Vrnjacka Banja 12 .. Jtb8 13.b3 i.b4 14.i.d2 d5
1 98 1 , 1 3 . .Uad 1 i.xe5 1 4 . l2Jxe5 ( 14 . . . ffi, Nurminen - Valkesalmi,
l2Jd6 15.l2Je4 l2Jxe4 16.�xe4 �ffi corr. 199 1 , 15 .l2Je4! fxe5 16.i.xb4
17. �d4±; 12 . . .l:tf7 13 .l2Jd4 ..tf8 14. ltxb4 17.l2Jxe5 �e8 18.l2Jd3 lld4
..tg3 c5 15.l2Jf3 d6 16. �e4 .l:!.b8 17. 19.l2Jec5 l:td6 20. �e5±. This po­
..th4 �d7 18.l2Jg5 .Uf5 19.l2Jxh7 sition is a lovely illustration of
�xh7 20. g4+- Petrushin - [Link]­ the power of the "dark square
kitin, Simferopol 1989) 13.i.d4 strategy " of White in this line;
i.xd4 14. �c4+ d5 1 5 . �xd4 i.f5 14 . . . ..txc3 15 . ..txc3 c5 1 6 . l2Jd2
16 . .l:.e2 .:.m 17Jiae 1 l2Jd6 18 .l2Je5 i.b7 17.l2Je4±) 1 5 . exd6 cxd6 16.
l2Je4 19.l2Jxe4 ..txe4 20.£3 ..tf5 2 1 . l2J e 4 ! .txd2 ( 1 6 . . . d 5 1 7 . i.xb4
l2Jxc6 l:txc6 22 .l:l.e8+ �xe8 2 3 . llxb4 18.c4! �e7 19.cxd5 l2Jf4 20.
l:lxe8+ l::tx e8 2 4 . �xd5+ .Uce6 25. �c2±) 1 7 . �xd2 d5 18. �c3 �b6
�xf5+- Teichmann - Tarrasch, ( 18 . . . �e7 19.l2Jg3;l;; 18 . . . �c7 19.
Monte Carlo 1902. l2Jc5;l;) 19 .l2Jd6 �c7 20.l2Jf5 i.b7
n . .te3 l2Je6 (Black must be careful, because
White ' s plans are hardly the careless 20 . . . l:te8? loses after
changed after 1 1 . . . ..ta6 12. �d2 2 l ..:.xd5 ! ! cxd5 22.l:txe6+-) 2 1 .
l2Je6 13 . .l::. a d 1 d5 1 4 . exd6 cxd6 �e5 l1fc8 (2 1 . . . �xe5 22.l2Jxe5±;
1 5 .l2Jd4 l2Jxd4 16.i.xd4 d5, Em. 2 1 . . .lUe 8 2 2 . l2Jd6 l:Ie7 2 3 . l2Jxf7
Lasker - Levitsky, Moscow 1896, <t.>xf7 24. �f5±) 22.l2Jd6 .:.dB 23 .
17.l2Ja4;t. White's main idea is to l2Jxf7± Jansa - Knezevic, Na-

174
 3. ..tb5 l2Jf6 4. 0-0 liJe4 5. d4 ..te7 6. �e2

mestovo 198 7 ; bishops of opposite colour after:

12 . . . f6, Geller - Lengyel, Mos­ 15 . . . ..txc3 16 . ..txc3±, but White
cow 1975, this move has been preserves a lasting advantage.
played quite rarely although The pawn on a2 is again un­
White has not demonstrated how touchable: 16 . . . �xa2?! 17.b3 �a3
to obtain a convincing edge yet. 18.�c4 .lle 8 19 . ..tb4 �a6 20. �xa6
We suggest here the new idea of ..txa6 2 1..l:!.x d7±) 1 6. l2Je4! ..txd2
GM A. Bezgodov 1 3 . exf6 ..txf6 1 7 . �xd2± Verkerk - Jansson,
14.l2Je4! White has excellent at­ ICCF 1992.
tacking possibilities for the sac­ 13.exd6
rificed pawn in the centre and White must capture en pas­
the kingside. 14 . . . ..txb2 (declin­ sant otherwise Black might seize
ing the offer is simply weaker: the initiative !
14 . . . d5 1 5 . c4 ..ta6 16. "�c2 ..txc4? ! 13 ... cxd6 14.l2Jd4!
1 7 .b3) 1 5 . c3 ..ta3 16.l2Jeg5 ! �f6
1 7 . '� c2 �f5 1 8 . '�xf5 l:!.xf5 1 9 .
l2Jxe6 dxe6 20.l2Jd4±;
12 . . . f5 1 3 . exf6 - see 12 . . . £'6;
12 . . . ..tb7 is not to be recom-
mended after 13 .l2Jd4 l2Jxd4 14 .
..txd4 c5 1 5 . ..te3 d5, Tarantino ­
Argentieri, corr. 1989, 16. �b5!±,
and Black loses the c5-pawn;
1 2 . . . ..tb4, Lobron - Portisch,
Reggio Emilia 1 9 8 4 , 1 3 .l2Jd4! Black has to make up his
White should not be reluctant to mind now what piece to trade off
enter positions with bishops of for this white knight - the bishop
opposite colour. White's space on e7, or the knight on e6. His
advantage and the possibility to defence is difficult in both cases,
exploit the weakness of the dark though . . .
squares guarantees his better 14 l2Jxd4
.•.

chances. 13 . . . ..txc3 14.bxc3 l2Jxd4 In case of 14 . . . ..td7, White ex­

15.cxd4±; changes the bishop on e7, but not
1 2 . . . � e 8 . The idea of this the knight: 15 .l2Jf5! d5. The pawn
move is to prepare f7-f6 and on d6 was under attack. 1 6 .
place the queen actively on g6 or l2Jxe7+ �xe7 . This opening posi­
h5. Black fails to do this however, tion is quite fashionable. It was
after a precise play by White . played just recently in the game
13.l2Jd4 ..tb4 ( 13 . . . l2Jxd4 14 . ..txd4 Anand - Pike t , Monte C arlo
c5 15 . ..te3 d6 1 6 .l2Jd5 ..td8 1 7 . 1999. We recommend here 17.f4!
�f3±) 14.l2Jxe6 �xe6 15 . ..td2 .U.e8 - as the most resolute way to
(Black can also try to play with fight for the initiative. Black is

175
 Chapter 24

immediately forced to solve con­ has but an important drawback

crete problems - how to defend - White can easily occupy the
against the advance of this an­ weak c5-square!
noying aggressive pawn? 1 7 . . . Black has another much more
l:tfe8 ( 1 7 . . . '�b4 18.f5 l:i:Jc7 19.�f2 patient method of defending that
.U.fe8 20 . .td4±; 1 7 . . . f5 18.b3 :res has never been tested yet: 16 . . .
19. �f2 a6 20 . ..td4!±) 18. �£2 �d8 ..td7 1 7 . �g3 .tf8 1 8 . l:i:Je4 Ite6
1 9 . li:la4 f6 2 0 . c4 �a5, Palac - 1 9 . c4 d5 20 . cxd5 cxd5 2 l .l:i:Jc3
Kizov, Skopje 2002 . It became �a5 22.lhe6 .txe6 23 . h3 :c8
obvious that Black failed to solve 24. a3;t White's advantage is not
the problems in the opening. The so great, but Black's defence is
great advantage of White in this far from easy.
position could have been empha­ 17.l:i:Ja4 ..tf8
sized with 2 l .b3 ! , for example: d4 17 . . . .td7 18. �c3 .tf8, Hellers
22 . .txd4 l:i:Jxd4 23.�xe8+ �xe8 - Hartman, Eksjo 1986, 19.lbe8!
24. �xd4±. �xe8 (19 . . . ..txe8 20.i.c5;t) 20.l:te 1
15 ...t xd4 �dB 2 l ..tc5;t.
Black has formally the "two
bishop" advantage, but the active
white pieces amply compensate
for that. Black is a long way from
equality yet.
15 ....l:.e8
15 . . . .te6 16.�£3 d5 ( 1 6 . . . �d7
1 7 . �g3 f6, Horvath - Knezevic,
Stary Smokovec 1990, and White
could have kept his space advan­
tage after 18.l:i:Je4 .tf5 19. c4;t) 17. This position has long been
�g3 .tf6 18 .l:i:Je2. This is an ab­ the focus of theoretical discus­
solutely typical situation - White sions . Anand used to defend it
manages to exchange the dark­ with Black when he was young!
squared bishops after which the We are going to follow our ex­
weakness of the c5-square en­ ample game to the end in order
sures White's mo derate , but to illustrate the numerous defen­
long-lasting edge . 18 . . . ..txd4 sive possibilities for Black. 1 8 .
1 9 . l:i:Jxd4 � d 7 20.b4 a5 2 l . a3 ..tc5. Amazingly this move leads
axb4 22.axb4 l:Ue8 23. �c3 l:.ac8 to a forced draw. 18 . . . .:.xe 1 + 19.
24. �c5 �b7 25 . .Ue3 .td7 26.l::. de 1 :xe 1 �a5 ! 20.b4 (After 20. lle8??
lhe3 2 7 . ltxe3;t Omelchenko - .itd7! ! Black wins outright) 20 . . .
Ahman, corr. 1984. �d8 !? This line is not something
16.�f3 d5 we recommend for White, so we
This natural looking move are not going to analyse it so ex-

176
 3. .i.b5 l2Jf6 4. 0-0 l2Je4 5. d4 .i.e7 6. �e2

tensively. Black's capturing on a4 � Hellers - Anand, Groningen

leads to a forced draw. Most prob­ 1989.
ably Anand was trying to win 18.l:txe8! �xeS, Poenisch -
with Black. 2 l . i.xf8 �xf8 22. �c3 Gross, corr. 1987, Here we sug­
i.d7 23.a3 h6 24.f3 �d8 25.l2Jc5 gest the simple 19 ..i.c5! There
a5 2 6 . bxa5 .i. f5 2 7 . l2Jb3 �d6 might follow: 19 ... .i.a6 20. �c3
28.�b4 c5 29.l2Jxc5 nbs 30.�d4 .i.b5 21 ..l:.e 1 �dB 22 ..i.xf8 �xf8
�b5 3 l . a6 �xc5 3 2 J:te8+ �h7 2 3 .l2Jc5 .l:. e 8 2 4 . l2J d 7 .l:.xe 1 +
33.a7 �c4 34. �£2 l1xc2 35.a8� 25.�xe1 �d8 26.l2Jc5 �d6 27.
llxf2 36.�xf2 �c5+ 37 .�g3 �c7 �e8+ �f8 28.�e3±.

Conclusion about 5 . .i.. e 7

. .

We had a look at one of the most solid defensive systems of the

Ruy Lopez. White has no chances whatsoever to crush his opponent
with a beautiful direct attack - there are not any prerequisites for
that. White's main road to success (without any guarantee) is the
slow and patient purposeful exploitation of the latent vulnerability
of the dark squares! This opening forces Black to put up with per­
manent positional weaknesses, no matter what line of defence he
chooses. The c5-square happ�ns to be quite often the only key to the
conquest of the seemingly unassailable black fortress.

177
 Chapter 25 l .e4 e5 2.tiJf3 tiJc6 3.�b5 tiJf6 4.
0-0 t2Jxe4 5.d4 tiJd6 6.�xc6
Berlin Defence

ably and his pawn structure has

been compromised. - 1 1 . �h5+!
This important check weakens
the f6 -square. ll . . . g6 1 2 . � g4
ii.g7?? [Link].g5+- ; 12 . . . d5 13.exd6
cxd6 14. �c4 iLd7 1 5 .lt:\e4! il.e7 -
15 . . . �c7 16 . .Udl±; 1 5 . . . d5?? 16.
�c3+- - 1 6 . �d4 0-0 [Link]:\xd6±
Sion - C ampora , Leon 1 9 9 7 )
6 ... dxc6 9 .lt:\d4 0-0 1 0 . �f3 ! This is the
The best capture. ideal square for the queen from
The other move 6 . . . bxc6 is where it exerts a strong pressure
unfavourable for Black and it is over the opponent's position.
not popular at all. 7.dxe5 lt:\b7
[Link]:\c3 iLe7 (8 . . . lt:\c5 [Link]:\d4! This
centralized knight is very dan­
gerous for Black. Moreover it
vacated an excellent square for
the queen. 9 . . . .ii. a 6 10.l:%.e1 lt:\e6
l l .lt:\xe6 fxe6 1 2 . �h5 + ! g6 1 3 .
�g4 .ii. g 7 14. ii.g5 �b8 1 5 .lt:\e4
�xb2 1 6 .�ad 1 �xc2 1 7 . .if6 l1g8
1 8 . �h3 h5 1 9 . �a3+-; 1 l . . . dxe6
1 2 . �f3 iLb7 1 3 . �g3 c5 14. il.g5 1 ) 10 . . . ..ic5 1 1 . il.e3 l:!.e8 1 2 .
�d7 1 5 .lhd l± Aturupane - Hon l:tad 1 �e7 13.-Ufe l il.xd4 1 4 . .UXd4
Kah Seng, Buenos Aires 1978; lt:\c5 (14 . . . �xe5?? 15 . .l:te4+-) 1 5 .
9 . . . lt:\e6 [Link]:\xe6 fxe6 - Black's h4! White starts a n early king­
problems are not solved by 10 . . . side attack due to Black's lag in
dxe6 either, Allen - Laird, Bris­ development. 15 . . . lt:\e6 (Black's
bane 1995, 1 l . �f3 iLb7 12 .l:td1 compensation for the queen is
�e7 1 3 . lt:\ e4± Black's develop­ superficial after: 15 . . . �xe5 16 .
ment has been delayed consider- ..id2 �xe 1+ 1 [Link] 1 J:lxe 1 + 18.

178
 4. 0-0 lt:Je4 5. d4 lt:Jd6 6. i..c 6 de 7. de lt:Je4 8. �e2

'itt h 2±) 16.l:.g4 d5 Black should 14. �g3±) 13.exd6 lt:Jxd6 [Link]:Jxc6
better give up a pawn in order to �d7 [Link]:Je5 �f5 (the exchange
avoid the deadly kingside attack. sacrifice is fruitless 15 . . . l:!.xe5?!
16 . . . 'itt h8 [Link]:Je4 d5 18.exd6 cxd6 16. �xe5+- Huebner - Rossoli­
[Link]:Jg3 d5 [Link]:Jf5 �d7 2 L�h6 mo, Skopje 1972) 16. �xh4±. Gen­
Black is beyond salvation now: erally speaking it is enough for
2 l . . .I:tg8 [Link]:Jxg7 lt:Jxg7 23 . ..txg7 the White player to know the
�xg7 24. �f6 �xg4 25 . .l:te8#; 2 1 . . . manoeuvre lt:Jd4 and �f3 in or­
gxh6 22. �c3+ d4 23.hd4+-; 2 1 . . . der to achieve an excellent posi­
g 6 22. �c3 + 'itt g8 23.�f6 �dB 24. tion.
I:txe6+- ; 23 . . . c5 24 . ..itf8 h5 2 5 . 7.dxe5 lt:Je4
I:txe6 fxe6 2 6 . �xg6+ 'itt x f8 2 7 .
�g8#) 17. exd6 cxd6 1 8 . �xc6 ..ltb7
19. �b5±;
2) 10 . . . £'6 l l . e6! White should
not capture on f6 of course. Now
Black's pawn structure will be
d e s tr oy e d . 1 l . . . c 5 ( l l . . . dx e 6
1 2 . lt:Jxc6 �d7 1 3 . ..t e 3 ..t d 6 14.
lt:Jxa7 lt:Ja5 1 5 . lt:Jxc8±) 1 2 . exd7
�xd7 13 . lt:Jc6 ..td6 14.I:.e 1 I:.e8
15 . ..itd2± Black has numerous Thi s is the last possibility
pawn weaknesses and his pieces for Black to avoid playing the
are rather misplaced, particu­ now famous B erlin Endgame
larly the rook on a8 and the (about 7 . . . lt:Jf5 see the next chap­
knight; ters). White should not ex­
3) 10 . . . l:.e8 1 l . �g3 ! ..lth4 (The change queens now, because the
only move. ll . . . i.. c 5? [Link]:Jf5 g6 active black knight will not let
1 3 . ..tg5+-; 1 2 . . . ..tf8 1 3 . lt:Jh6+- ; White achieve any advantage in
ll . . . lt:Jc5 1 2 .lt:Jf5 lt:Je6 13.i.h6 g6 the endgame, while now in the
- and after 13 . . . .if8 [Link]:Je4 Black middlegame it is a juicy object for
is c l e arly inferi o r : 1 4 . . . 'itt h8 attack . In general , the move
1 5 . ..tg5 lt:Jxg5 [Link]:Jxg5 'itt g8 17. 7 . . . . lt:Je4 is not very popular, but
lt:Jh6+ gxh6 [Link]:Je6+- and White still some really strong players
is winning the queen. - [Link]:Jxe7 + employ it obtaining good practi­
�xe7 [Link]:Je4 lt:Jd4 16.l:.fe 1 lt:Jxc2 cal results, maybe because of the
17 . ..tg5 �f8 [Link]:Jf6+ 'itth8 19. �h4 bad preparation of their oppo ­
h5 2 0 . lt:Jxh5 gxh 5 2 l . i.. f6 + - ; nents. White must react con­
1 4 . . . lhe7 1 5 . lt:Je4 d5 1 6 . lt:Jf6 + cretely and quite energetically
'itth8 1 7 .f4 ..ta6 18. �h3 l:.e8 19.f5 too, otherwise Black equalizes
.ixfl 2 0 . l:txfl lt:Jd4 2 l . fxg6+-) easily.
1 2 . �f4 d6 ( 12 . . . lt:Jc5 13 .lt:Jf5 ..te7 8.�e2

179
 Chapter 25

This is the right move. Wf8 22. £3+-) 20. �b2+-; 14 . . . �e8
8 ....tf5 15.'Df6 gxf6 16 . .txf6 .te7 1 7 . �d2
The other possibility for Black .txffi 18.exf6 Wh8 19. �xd7±.
is 8 . . . l2Jc5 9.l1d1 .td7 (9 . . . �e7?! 9Jtd1
is too dangerous for Black after Black has tested two retreats
10 . .tg5 ! This is forcing consider­ of the queen here.
able positional concession from 9 ... � c8
Black. 10 . . . f6 1l ..te3 Black's de­ The move 9 . . . � e 7 is only
fence is rather difficult, for ex­ hampering the development of
ample : 1 l . . . fxe5?? 12 . .tg5 �e6 the bishop on f8 .
1 3 . � d 8 + W f7 1 4 .l'Li x e 5 + Wg8 1 0 . .te3 h 6 , Kindermann -
1 5 . '�f3 l2Jd7 1 6 .Ii.e8 �xe5 1 7 . Westerinen, Thessaloniki 1988.
�xe5 l2Jxe5 1 8 . �b 3 + 'Df7 1 9 . The idea of this move is to en­
'Dc3+-; l l . . . .tg4 1 2 . .txc5 .txf3 sure the possible retreat of the
1 3 . �xf3 �xc5 1 4 . exf6+-; 1 1 . . . knight on g5 , but this is a loss of
l2Jd7 1 2 . exf6 l2Jxf6 - 1 2 . . . gxf6 time that can be exploited by
1 3 . l2Jc3± - 1 3 . l2Jc3 .tg4 14. h3 White. ll.'Dbd2 ! This idea of GM
Ji.h5 1 5 J:td2 l2Je4 16.'Dxe4 �xe4 [Link], is practically refut­
1 7 . g4 Ji.g6 18.�e1 �e7 19 . .td4 ing Black's previous move.
�xe2 20.�dxe2 0-0 2 1 .lhe7 lhf3
22.l!xg7+ Wf8 23 .I!.xc7+-; 1 1 . . .
l2Je6 1 2 . l2Jc3 fxe5 1 3 . 'Dxe5 �f6
14 . .td4 �f5 15 .l2Jf3 .te7 1 6 . .te5
0-0 17 . .txc7±) 1 0 .l2Jc3 l2Je6 ( 10 . . .
.te7 1 l...t e 3 0-0?? - 1 1 . . .l2Je6 see
10 . . . l2Je6 - [Link].xc5 ii.xc5 13.l2Je4
.tb6 1 4 . e 6 fxe6 1 5 . l2J e5+- 1-0
Walbrodt - Janowski, Budapest
1 8 9 6 ) l l . .t e 3 i. b 4 ( l l . . . i. e 7
12.l:td3 �b8 13 .l1ad 1 i.c8 14.'De4 1) 1 1 . . . l2Jxd2 12.l:f.xd2 g5 This
0-0 1 5 . l2J g3 f5 1 6 . exf6 .txf6 move is dangerous for Black, but
1 7.i.c l±) 1 2 .l2Je4 0-0 1 3 .l2Jfg5 ! he can not finish his develop­
Black's pieces lack coordination, ment otherwise. 13.l2Jd4 .tg6 14.
so White's direct kingside attack e6! .l:.h7 ( 14 . . . fxe6 15.l2Jxe6 �xe6
is quite promising. 1 3 . . . l2Jxg5 16 . .i.d4+-; 14 . . . 0-0-0? 1 5 . l2Jxc6
( 1 3 . . . h6 14.'Dxe6 fxe6 [Link].c5+-; bxc6 1 6 . �a6+ Wb8 1 7 . �xa7+
13 . . . l:.e8 14. �h5+-) 14 . .txg5 �c8 WeB 1 8 . �a8#) 1 5 . �c4 i.g7 1 6 .
( 14 . . . i.e7 1 5 .l2Jc5 i.xg5 16.l2Jxd7 lle1 i.xd4 17 . .txd4 f5 [Link].c5 �ffi
l:te8 1 7 . �g4 �e7 18.f4+-) 15.a3 1 9 . e 7 .tf7 2 0 . �b4 b6 2 l .!td8+
i.a5 1 6 . c4 l1e8 1 7 .b4 .l:.xe5 1 8 . l:.xd8 22.exd8� Wxd8 23 . .te7+-;
i.f6 ! .l:. e 8 1 9 . i.xg7 Wxg7 ( 1 9 . . . 2) 1 1 . . .g5 1 2 . l2J d4 .tg6 1 3 .
i.g4 2 0 . l2Jf6+ Wxg7 2 l . l2Jxe8+ l2Jxe4 .txe4 1 4 . .txg5 hxg5 ( 14 . . .

180
 4. 0-0 tlJe4 5. d4 tiJd6 6. i..c 6 de 7. de tlJe4 8. "ftt e2

�xe5?! 1 5 . f4 �d5 16.c4+-) 1 5 . completed his d e v e l o p m e n t ,

�xe4 l:th4 1 6 . g4+- ; while Black's task to d o that is
3) ll . . . tlJc5 12.CiJb3! White is much more difficult. ll . . . lhd 1 +
chasing the enemy knight, and 1 2 . .lhd 1 CiJc3 ( 12 . . . �b4 13.CiJc4 b5
that is quite effective in this sys­ 14.CiJd4 �xc4 1 5 . �xc4 bxc4 1 6 .
tem. 12 . . . CiJd7 ( 1 2 . . . CiJxb3 13.axb3 CiJxf5 g6 17.CiJd4+-) 13.bxc3 �xa3
a6 14.CiJd4 �g6 15.f4 l:IdB 16.f5 14.CiJd4 .tcB 1 5 . e6 . GM Jansa is
i.. h 7 1 7 . e6 l:td5 1 B . c4 l:te5 1 9 . exploiting the drawbacks of
tlJxc6 bxc6 2 0 .l:.xa6 fxe6 2 1 . "ftfh5+ Black's risky opening system
g6 22.fxg6 lhh5 23.l:.aB+-; 14 . . . quite exemplary. 15 . . . �e7 (15 . . .
"ftfxe5 1 5 . .l:ta5 ! ! Now it becomes "ftfxa2 16.c4 "ftfa5 17. �g4 17 . . . i.. d 6
clear why White has opened the 1B. �xg7 .l::t f8 1 9 . c5 �xc5 20.e7
a-file! 15 . . . c5 16.CiJxf5 "ftfxf5 17 . i..x e7 2 l .CiJe6+-; 1 7 . . . f6 1 B .CiJf5
..tg5+ �e6 1 B . �b5+ ! ! ) 13.CiJfd4! "ftf e 5 1 9 . CiJx g 7 + '>t> e 7 2 0 . CiJ f5 +
�xe5 1 4 . f4 �f6 1 5 . i.. d 2+ '>t>dB '>t>xe6 21 .CiJh6+ f5 22. �h5 .txh6
( 1 5 . . . i.. e 7 16 . ..tc3 c5 17 .CiJb5 "ftt c 6 23. �xh6+ "fttf6 24. "ftfxf6+ '>t>xf6 25.
1 B . CiJa5 � b 6 1 9 . CiJc4 �c6 2 0 . i..d 4+-; 23 . . . ..t>f7 24. i.. d4 �dB 25.
CiJbd6+ cxd6 2 l . CiJxd6+ - ; 1 9 . . . "ftfxh7+ '>t>e6 2 6 . �g6+ '>t>e7 2 7 .
�xb5 20.CiJd6+-) 16. i.. c3 Black's "ftt g5+-; 1 B . . . g6 1 9 . "ftfd4 i.. e 7 20.
king will hardly survive the on­ tlJg7+ Wf8 2 1 .i.. h6 "ftfe5 22. �xa7
slaught along the open files . "ftfe2 23.�a1 i.. d 6 24.CiJf5+ '>t>gB
16 . . . �g6 1 7.l:te 1 i.. d6 1B .CiJa5 CiJc5 25.CiJxd6 cxd6 26. �b6 �xe6 27.
1 9 . b 4 tlJe6 2 0 . CiJxb 7+ Wd7 2 1 . �dB+-; 22 . . . ..td6 2 3 .CiJf5+ '>t>eB
CiJxf5 �xf5 22.l::t ad 1 +-; 24. "ftfbB "ftfxh2+ 25 .'>t>f1 �h 1+ 26.
4) 1 1 . . . 0-0-0 12.tlJxe4 .lhd 1+ We2+-; 25 ... '>t>dB 26.CiJxd6 �h 1 +
13 .l:.xd 1 i..x e4 14.i.. g5 hxg5 1 5 . 2 7 .'>t>e2 �h5+ 2 B . f3 � e 5 + 2 9 .
�xe4± Black failed t o complete ..te3+-) 16. �h5 g 6 ( 16 . . . i..x e6 17.
his development and his pawns tlJxc6 ! The knight enables the
are very weak too. rook to reach the dB-square. 17 . . .
10 . . . i.. g 4 (After 9 . . . "ftfe7 1 0 . bxc6 1 B . i.. g 5+- )' 1 7 . �e5 f6 1 B .
..te3 ) . This move w a s recom­ �a5 "ftt dB 19 J:td3 i.. d 6 20.i..h 6±
mended by GM [Link]. Jansa - Sahu, Wrexham 1997.
l l .h3 ! Black's position is quite lO.CiJd4
unsatisfactory after this simple
move . l l . . . i.. x f3 ( l l . . . ..th5 1 2 .
CiJbd2 tlJxd2 1 3Jbd2 �e6 14.g4
..tg6 15.CiJd4 �xe5 16.f4 �e4 1 7 .
f5 0-0-0 1B . ..tf2+-) 12. �xf3 "ftfe5
13.i.. d4 �e6 14.tlJc3 f5 ( 14 . . . tlJxc3
15.l:.e1 +-) 15.tlJxe4 fxe4 16. �h5+
�f7 1 7 . �e5+ �e7 1B.�f5±;
10 . . . l:[Link] l l . CiJa3 White has

1B1
 Chapter 25

10 ....tc5 terial as possible hoping to sur­

10 . . . � e 7 is more cautious , vive the attack, giving back some
Fritsche - Murach, corr. 1985, of the material if necessary. 15.
but it is not solving the problems tt:lg5+ 'i;g8 16.l:!.el i.f5 1 7 . i.c3
either, although White must play i.e7 18.g4 i.xg5 19.gxf5 e5 20.
precisely: l l . g4 ! i.g6 ( ll . . .i.xg4 �c4+ 'it>f8 2 l..�xe5 a5 22 .l:.ae l
12.£3+-) 12.f4! Black has no time .tf6 23. �c5+ 'it>g8 24.l:te7 i.xe7
to castl e ! 12 . . . f5 1 3 . exf6 tt:lxf6 25.l:txe7+-) 14. i.g5 h6 15.�h41'
( 1 3 . . . gxf6? 14.f5+-) 14.f5 il.f7 15. .t d 6 ( 15 . . . � c 5 1 6 . � e 5 il. x d 4
tt:lc3 'it>f8 ( 1 5 . . . c5 1 [Link]:lf.3 ! tt:lxg4 17.l:txd4 0-0 18.l1adl+-; 1 5 . . . g5
1 7 . i.g5 tt:lf6 1 8 . il.xf6 gxf6 1 9 . 1 6 . �g3 i.g7 1 7 . tt:lf5 il.xb2 1 8 .
!te l+-) 1 6 .tt:le6+ i.xe6 1 7 . fxe6 l:tab l �c3 19.i.xc7 �xc7 [Link]:ld6
�e8 1 8 . g5 �g6 19 .'it>hl± The de­ 'it>f8 2 1..l:tx b7+-) [Link]:lf5 0-0 1 7 .
fence of the black king seems to tt:lxd6 cxd6 18.:1.xd6±.
be futile. ll .b4!
10 . . . i.g6 ll .e6 fxe6 ( ll . . . c5 12. This idea of GM Sulskis is
exf7 + 'it>xf7 1 3 . �c4+ 'ifi>f6 1 4 . very powerful and puts the whole
tt:lb5±) [Link]:ld2 1 ) 12 . . . c 5 [Link]:lxe4 7 . . . tt:le4 system in doubt. Black
cxd4 14J:txd4 i.e7 15.i.g5 i.xe4 must face now a lot of concrete
1 6 .i.xe7 'it>xe7 1 7 . �xe4 c5 1 8 . problems, quite difficult to solve
�h4+ 'it> f7 19.�f4+ 'it>g8 20. �e7 if at all . . .
1-0 McShane - Hj elm , Stock­ ll ....tb6
holm 2002 ; 2) 12 . . . tt:lc5 13 .b4! The retreat of the bishop is
�d7 14.i.b2 tt:la4 [Link]:lxe6 tt:lxb2 considered to be the most stub­
1 6 .tt:lc4! tt:lxd l ( 16 . . . i.d3 1 7 . cxd3 born line of defence. l l . . . i.e7? is
tt:lxd l 1 8 Jh d l �e7 1 9 .l:. e l g6 weak. 12.£3 Black's knight is de­
2 0 . tt:lc5 �d8 2 1 . tt:lxb7 �d7 22. prived from the c5-square now!
tt:le5 �e6 2 3 . tt:lx c 6 � x e 2 2 4 . 1 2 . . . tt:lg5 1 3 . h4+- ; l l . . . � x d 4
l:.xe2+-) 1 7 .�xd l Black has an 12.l:txd4±.
extra rook, but a hopeless posi­ In case of l l . . . i.xb4 White
tion, though. 17 . . . �e7 ( 1 7 . . . i.d6 plays 12.e6! i.g6 ( 1 2 . . . fxe6 1 3 .
1 8 . tt:lxc7+-) 1 8 . tt:lxc7+ <J;f7 1 9 . tt:lxf5 exf5 14.£3+-; 12 . . . 0-0?! 1 3 .
l:. d 7 � x d 7 2 0 . tt:l e 5 + 'it> e 7 2 1 . tt:lxf5+-) 1 3 . exf7+ 'it> f8 ( 1 3 . . . 'it>xf7
tt:lxd7+ 'it>xd7 [Link]:lxa8 i.d6 23. 14. �c4+-) 14. �c4 1) 14 . . . a5 15.
�g4+ 'it>e7 (23 ... 'it>d8 24. �d4+-) tt:le6+ 'it>e7 (15 . . . 'it>xf7 1 6 . tt:lf4+
24. �h4+ 'it>d7 25. �h3+ 'it>d8 26. 'it>f6 1 7 .tt:lxg6 �g4 18.£3 �c5+ 19.
�c3 'it>c8 27.g3 'it>b8 28. �xg7 !1c8 �xc5+-) 16.f8�+ l1xf8 1 7 . tt:lxf8
29.c3+-; 3) 12 . . . tt:lxd2 13.i.xd2 �xf8 18. �e2 �f6 19.c3 .l:td8 20.
�f7 ( 13 . . . 'it>f7 [Link]:lf.3 i.xc2 White l:lel �c5 (Black had some more
has an ample compensation for chances after 20 . . . 'it>f7, but White
the pawn, so Black has nothing still wins after: 2 l . cxb4 �xa l 22.
better than snatch as much rna- i.b2 �xa2 23. tt:lc3 �e6 24. �£3

182
 4. 0-0 tDe4 5. d4 ttJd6 6. i..c 6 de 7. de tDe4 8. �e2

'it>g8 25.tDxe4 i.xe4 26. '�c3 �g6

27.l:txe4 ltd1+ 28.J:.e1 l:.xe 1+ 29.
�xe 1 axb4 30.h4 c5 3 l .�e7 b6
32. �d8+ 'it>f7 33 . �xc7+ 'it>g8 34.
�d8 'it>f7 35. �d7 'it>f8 36.i.e5+-)
2 l . i.e3 'it>f8 2 2 . f3 �g5 23.fxe4
1-0 Sulskis - A. Popov, Leningrad
1990; 2) 14 . . . i.. d 6 15.ttJe6+ 'it>e7,
Sulskis - Westerinen, Gausdal
1995, 16.tDxg7 ! This is a quite
unusual position with a great 14.a4!
advantage for White. 16 . . . i.c5 White must play precisely
( 1 6 . . . ..1ie5 1 7 . i.a3+ c5 18 . ..1ixc5+ and energetically too. Black has
tDxc5 1 9 . �xc5+ 'it>f6 20.tDc3 c6 a mountain to climb now: 14 . . .
2 l .f4+-; 17 . . . ttJd6 18Jle 1 1it>f6 19. ttJg5 ( 1 4 . . . f6 1 5 . a 5 + - ; 1 4 . . . c 5
tDh5 i.. x h5 2 0 . �h4+-) 1 7 .tDc3 1 5 . a 5 ! cxd4 1 6 . axb6+- ; 1 4 . . . a5
i.. x f2+ 18.'it>fl ttJd6 19 . ..1ig5+ lit>f8 1 5 . � e 1 ttJg5 1 6 .bxa5 ..lixc2 1 7 .
( 1 9 . . . 'it>d 7?? 2 0 . �e6#) 20.ttJe6+ axb6 ..txd 1 1 8 .tDd2 ! +- ) 1 5 . ttJc3
'it>xf7 2 1 . �f4+ 'it>g8 (2 l . . .ttJf5 22. ..lixd4 ( 1 5 . . . ..tg6 16 . ..1ixg5 ..txd4+
ttJd8+-) 22.�f6 �d7 23.\it>x£2+-. 17 . ..1ie3 ..lixe3+ 18. �xe3+- - The
12.f3 �d7 13.i..e 3 0-0-0 threat against a7 now forces
Stefa n s s o n - We sterinen, Black to surrender his queen for
Reykjavik 2002. We have to ad­ a rook; 17 . . . ..txc3 18 . .Uxd7 llxd7
mit that Black has done rela­ 1 9 . llfl ± ) 1 6 . ..1ixd4 ! (The best
tively well. He completed his de­ capture. ) 1 6 . . . �e7 ( 16 . . . �e6 is
velopment and played very ac­ losing a kni ght 1 7 . h4 tDxf3 +
tively. White has a clear edge [Link].3 �g6+ 19. �g2+-) 1 7 . ..tc5
despite Black's admirable ef­ .Uxd 1+ 18-l:txd l �e8 19 . ..txa7 f6
forts . It is not clear whether 20.h4 ttJe6 2 l . g4 ..lig6 (2 l . . . �g6
Black might play any better in 22.h5+-) 22.h5 ..tf7 23 . ..tf2 ttJf4
the 7 . . . tDe4 system. 13 . . . .l:i.d8 24. �e3 ttJh3 + 25.'it>g2 tDxf2 26.
14. �e 1 ! c5 ( 14 . . .ttJg5 15.tDa3 0-0 �xf2 ! ± Black can not capture on
1 6 . h4+-) 1 5 . fxe4 cxd4 1 6 . exf5 e5, because of 27. �a7 , so he is
�xf5 1 7 .i.. f2 �xc2 18.tDa3+-. left a pawn down.

Conclusion about 7 . tZJe4 ..

The line that we have just been dealing with has never been quite
popular. It was the "secret opening weapon" of some players who
relied on the element of surprise. White must know with pinpoint
precision how to play correctly in order to achieve a serious opening
advantage. We hope that the games and analysis we have provided
will help the reader accomplish that task successfully.

183
Chapter 26 l .e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 tLlc6 3.�b5 tLlf6 4.
0-0 tLlxe4 5.d4 tLld6 6.�xc6 dxc6
7. dxe5 tLlf5 8. �xd8+ �xd8
Berlin Endgame

chapter. We intend to have a look

at 9 . . . .ii. e 6 in the next chapter.
The move 9 . . . 'i!i'e8 which enjoyed
popularity for many years will be
dealt with in Chapter 28, while
the contemporary and possibly
the strongest approach 9 . . . .id7
will be analysed in Chapter 29.
About 9 . . . h6 10 . .i:!. d 1 + 'i!i' e 8
This now "legendary ". Berlin 11.h3 - see 9 . . . 'it'e8 .
Defence endgame has a long and We must also have a look at
glorious history. We will remind the less popular moves.
you that the masterly defence of The old move 9 . . . .1i.b4 is only
this position was the key to the losing time and forces an ex­
s e n s ational win of Vl adimir change that is unfavourable for
Kramnik in his match against Black. 10.l2Je4 l2Je7 ( 10 . . . .ie6 1 1 .
Gary Kasparov in the year 2000. c3±) l l . .id2 .ii.x d2 12 . .Uad 1 t2Jd5
9.l2Jc3 13 .�xd2 'i!i'e7 14.l2Jd4 l2Jf4 1 5 .g3
The tournament practice has l2Jg6 1 6 . f4± Weiss - Schallopp,
shown that simple developing Frankfurt 1887.
move to be the best. The possible 9 . . . h5. This move has been
checks on d1 and g5 should bet­ tested in only one game for now
ter be kept in reserve. - Lj ubojevic - Salov, Linares
B l a ck n o w h a s an ample 1990. White should better play
choice of moves. We have to men­ 10.11d 1 + 'i!i'e8 1l .h3 transposing
tion that one defensive system to the line 9 . . . 'i!i' e 8 1 0 . h3 a5
often transposes into another 11 .l:td 1 which is seen in Chapter
and that complicates the study­ 28.
ing of theory, so White players
get disoriented sometimes . We a) 9 . �e7 10.l:td1+ 'i!i'e8
..

are going to scrutinize a) 9 .•. The move 10 . . . �d7 has not

�e7; b) 9 a5 ; c) 9 .l2Je7 in this
•.. .. been tested yet. White has to

184
 7. de lL\{5 8. "f!id8 �dB 9. lL!c3

play ll . ..tg5 ; just like in the line ll . . . h6 12 . i.xe7 l2Jxe7 ( 1 2 . . .

with 10 . . .c.t)e8. Black must cope �xe7?? 1 3 . g4+-) 1 3 . l2Jd4 l2Jg6
with serious problems. ( 1 1 . . . 1 4 . g3 �e7 1 5 . f4 i. g4 16 . .l:.d3
..txg5 1 2 . lLlxg5 � e 7 1 3 . l2Jxf7 ! l:.hd8 1 7 . lLle4±. This powerful
.l:Ihf8 1 4 . l2Jg5± with an extra centralization deprives the oppo­
pawn; ll . . . h6 12 .i.xe7+ �xe7 13. nent of any counterplay.
g4+- ; 1 2 . . . l2Jxe7 13 .e6 fxe6 14. 12.l2Jxg5 �e7
lLle5 l2Jd5 1 5 . l2Je4 �e8 16. l2Jxd7 12 . . . h6 !? This move was rec­
�xd7 1 7 . c4±) 1 l . . .�c8 12 . .Ud2 f6 ommended by GM [Link]
13 .l1ad 1 i.e6 ( 1 3 . . . fxg5 14.hd7 13 .l2Jge4! This is better than the
g4 15.lLle1 ..td6 16.llf7 lLlh6 1 7 . retreat to f3 , like in the game
llxg7 i.xe5 18 ..l:t e 7 i.xc3 19.bxc3 Korneev - Marselin (see later),
l2Jf5 20 . .Uf7 l2Jd6 2 1. .I:tg7 h5 22. because White was not threaten­
f3±) 14.exf6 gxf6 [Link] 1 ! (It is a ing g2-g4 anyway - the e 7 -
general law of strategy that the square is free. 1 3 . . . �e7 14.f4 lLle3
best way to utilize the advantage 15J:td2 lLlc4 (15 . . . i.e6 16.l:te 1 lLlc4
in development is to engage the 17 . .l:!.f2 lLlxb2 1 8 . £'5 i.d5 1 9 . f6+
opponent's pieces in direct cla­ gxf6 20.exf6+ �d8 2 1 .lLlxd5 cxd5
shes. White exploits some weak­ 22 .l:td2 c6 23.l2Jd6 <.t>d7 24.l2Jxf7
nesses of the enemy that are not l:lhe8 25.l2Je5+ <.t>c7 26.llde2 lLla4
so noticeable yet. ) 15 . . . i.c4 ( 1 5 . . . 27.l2Jg6+-) 1 6 . I!d4 lLle3 17 . .l:!.cl
fxg5 1 6 . .l:.xe6 g4 1 7 .l2Je5 h5 18. i.f5 18.�f2 l2Jg4+ 19.�g3 .l:.ad8
l2Jg6 l:r.d8 1 9 . l2Jxe7+ l2Jxe7 20. 20 . .l:.xd8 lhd8 2 1 .l::t e 1 h5 22.h3
.l:r.xd8+ �xd8 2 1. .l::f.h 6+-) 16 .lLld4 lLlh6 23 .�f3± White intends to
fXg5 17.lLlxf5 i.b4 18.a3 i.xc3 19. exchange the rooks and enter
l2Je7+ �b8 20.bxc3 a5 2 1. .�e4 i.f7 a kni ght endgame with good
(2 1 . . .b5 22.lLlxc6+ �b7 23.lLle5 chances for a win. We are going
.Uhe8 24.f3±) 22.h4 gxh4 23 Jhh4 to study extensively endgames of
c5 24.llh6 b6 25.f4 �b7 26.g4 i.c4 this type later in this chapter.
27.£'5 .l:.ae8 28.f6 llhf8 29.g5 i.g8 13 ..l:td3 h6 14.l2Jf3!
30.�h2 .l:.f7 3 1..l:!. d 7 b5 32.<.t>g3+- This is a new move of GM 0.
Korneev, which promises White
excellent chances to obtain the
advantage. The white knight is
in front the f-pawn [Link], but
it is restricting the mobility of
Black's knight and creates the
threat 15.g4.
14 g5 15.h3 lidS
••.

After 15 . . . i. e 6 1 6 . g4 l2J g 7
( 1 6 . . . lLlh4? 1 7 . lLlxh4 gxh4 1 8 .
ll .i.g5! i.xg5 f4 lbd8 19 . .l:tad 1 .l:.xd3 2 0 . .l:r.xd3

185
 Chapter 26

h5 2 1 . £5 kc8 22.lLle4 hxg4 23. l:tg8;!;. The rook endgame was

hxg4+-) 1 7.�g2 l:.ad8 18.l::. ad l± only a draw after 30 . . . ..txf5 !
the type of fight will be more or 3 l . gxf5 l:tg8 3 2 . .: e 3 :g2 3 3 .
less like that in the game. l:te6+ �g7 34.:e7 �f6 3 5 . 1:.h7
16.l:txd8 �xd8 1 7.l:.dl+ �e7 l:tf2+ 36. �e4=) 23 . . . gxh4+ 24.
18.g4 ttJg7 19.�g2 ..td7 20.�g3 'itxh4 c 5 ( This deprives the
l:tg8 2 1 .lLle4 ..te6 knight from the d4-square. 24 . . .
lDeB 25.lLlxe8 l:.xe8 26.lLld4 l:td8?
Enables White to reach a win­
ning king and pawn endgame:
27.lLlf5+ ..txf5 28 .l:.xd8 �xd8 29.
gxf5+-) 2 5 . lLl e l lLle8 2 6 . lLld5+
.ixd5 27 . .U.xd5 b6 28. lLlg2 lLlg7
29.f4 h5 3 0 . f5 hxg4+ 3 l . 'itxg4
�e8 (3 l . . .ffi 32.e6+-) 32.lLle3 .U.h l
33 J�d l .Uxd l (33 . . . .Uh2 34.lLld5
:Xc2 35.lDxc7+ �£8 36 . .l:!.d8+ �e7
[Link] f6± 37 . .l:!.a8 �d7 38.ltxa7 �c6 [Link]
Most of the times in this line tDe6 40 . lLlxe6 fxe6 4 1..l::. a 3+-)
if White's knight occupies this [Link]+-, and White should
square Black is in big trouble. win the knight endgame quickly.
22 .. J�h8 (Black loses material
immediately if he tries to ex­ b) 9 .. a5
.

change rooks with 22 . . . l:td8? 23.

llxd8 �xd8 24. lLlg8+-) 2 3 . h4 !
(White failed t o find that strong
move in the game! That proves
time and again that the White
player needs superb concentra­
tion and intensity to be success­
ful in the Berlin endgame. Kor­
neev managed to win later only
because of a mistake by his ad­
versary. 2 3 . b3 ? ! lLle8 24.lLlxe8 10.h3!
�xe8 2 5 . lLl d 4 ..tc8 2 6 . lLlf5 f6 If Black plays a7-a5 early,
2 7 . exf6 ..txf5 2 8 . gxf5 �f7 2 9 . White should avoid in his turn
: d 7 + �xf6 3 0 . l:t x c 7 .l:.b8 3 1 . the early a2-a4, because Black's
�g4+-; 27 . . . �f7 28 . .l:.d3 �xf6 29. dark squared bishop will gain
f4 gxf4+ 30.�4 a5? 3l.a4?! - 3 1 . permanent access to the wonder­
lLlxh6 �g6 32.lLlf5± - 3 l . . . ..te6? ful b4 squar e . Pre s e ntly the
3 2 . h4± Kor n e e v - Marce l i n , theory considers as best another
lstanbul 2003 ; 3 l . . . ..txf5 32.gxf5 method of neutrali z ation of

186
 7. de 0,{5 8. "ffldB WdB 9. liJc3

Black's activity on the queenside. White should not let that

IO a4
••. pawn to a3. It will be annoying
About 10 . . . WeB - see 9 . . . WeB . White there and might even be­
The second move in a row come dangerous later in the
with a rook pawn - 10 . . . h5?! is endgame. On the contrary, it
too risky. Black is losing too might be a target for attack at
much time unnecessarily and some moment on a4.
White can organize a strong at­ n ... ..te6 12.g4!
tack easily : l l . .i.g5+ WeB 1 2 . B l ack's knight is p u s h e d
.Uad 1 .i.e6 13 .�d2 .ib4 14J:tfd 1 away to a p a s sive p o s i ti o n .
liJe7 1 5 . liJd4 liJd5 1 6 . a3 .ltxc3 White's weaknesses o n the king­
17.bxc3 liJxc3 1B.liJxe6 fxe6 19. side are immaterial.
.UdB+ Wf7 20 ..l:IBd7+ Wg6 2l..l:f.1d3 12 liJe7
..•

liJ d 5 22 . .l:Ig3 b 5 23 . .i. f6 + Wf5 The other retreat of the knight

24 . .i.xg7 l:!.hdB 25 . .Uf7 + We4 26. puts Black on the verge of disas­
l:1d3 1-0 J. Gomez - Flores, Ath­ ter immediately 12 . . . liJh6?! 1 3 .
ens 200 1 . This short game is in liJ d 4 .id7 1 4 . .i.e3 c5 1 5 .liJde2
fact very instructive. liJgB 16.l:lad 1 WcB 17 . .Ud2 .ie7 1B.
10 . . . h6 is quite possible and llfd1 .lte6 19 . .ltxc5+-.
White should better meet it with 13 liJ g5
.

1 1 .a3 ! This move is rather use­

ful as a rule in many lines of the
Berlin endgame. l l . . . .i.e6 1 2 .
l%.d 1 + WcB 13.g4 liJe7 14.liJd4 .i.d7
15 . .i.f4 ! (The game Lutz - Ale­
ksandrov, S aint Vincent 2000
was thematic for the sharp line
1 5 . e6 .i.xe6 16 .liJxe6 fxe6 17 . .i.f4
and White had a decent compen­
sation for the pawn, but not more
than that. The game ended in a 13 .i. c4
...

draw. ) 15 . . . h5 16.£3 hxg4 17.hxg4 1 3 . . . liJ d 5 1 4 . liJ c e 4 ! White

liJd5 ( 1 7 . . . liJg6 1B . .i.g3;!;) 1B.liJxd5 doesn't need to exchange on e6
cxd5 19.Wg2;!;. White is threat­ yet. He preserves the chance to
ening to occupy the open h-file repel that bishop later with f2-
with 20.l:l.h 1 and Black can only f4-f5. 14 . . . h5 ( 14 . . . h6 15.liJxe6+
delay that, but not prevent it al­ fxe6 16.f4±) 15.f4 WeB 16.f5 .icB
together. White's rook will pen­ 1 7.Wg2 .i.e7 18 . .i.d2 f6 19.liJf3;!;.
etrate the enemy camp in a few If Black is not happy to only
moves, reach the h7-square and defend and he wants to find some
create powerful threats. active counterplay, he can try
ll.a3 13 . . . h5 14 . .i.e3 hxg4 15.hxg4 lt'lg6

187
 Chapter 26

(The counter-attack 15 .. J%h4 is tt:\e4+ 'it>f7 3 l . fx e 5 b 6 3 2 . e6 +

doomed to fail after 16.f3 .l:ta5 ..txe6 3 3 . tt:\g5+ 'it> e 7 3 4 .Ite 1 +- ;
1 7 . ..tf2 .l:th6 18.l:tfe1 tt:\g6 19.i.g3 30 . . . 'it>e7 3 l ..tc5+ 'it>f7 [Link]:\g5+
'it>c8 20 .'it>g2 .ie7 2 1 . tt:lxe6 fxe6 'it>f6. White finishes off his attack
22.f4±) 16.f4! White should not with a crushing exchange sacri­
be too cautious, because that will fice. 33 . .l:.d6+ ! ! cxd6 34 . .lixd6+
only give his opponent some ad­ 'it>e7 35 . .l:txg6+ 'it>e8 36.l:.xg7 exf4
ditional chances. It seems dan­ 37.'it>xf4 Ita5 38 . .Ue7+ 'it>£8 39 . .tb4
gerous at first sight to expose the c5 40 .�f7+-) 18 . .l:td4. Black can
king like that, but the concrete win the exchange (in numerous
calculations show that danger ways at that), he can shun the
looms only for Black ! Should sacrifice too, but White neverthe­
Black attack the rook and not the less keeps a powerful initiative
pawn, there follow some really throughout and considerable
beautiful lines : 16 . . . ..tc4 ( 1 6 . . . winning chances. 18 . . . b5 (It is il­
.lih4 17.f5 lhg4+ 18.'it>h2+-) 17. logical to play 18 . . . ..tc5? ! 19J::txc4
�ad l + ! ..txe3 + 2 0 . 'it>g2 .lih4 2 l .'it>g3 f6
[Link]:\e6 'it>d7 23.exf6+-; 18 . . . [Link]
1 9 . tt:lxf7 .i c 5 2 0 . tt:\xh8 .t x d 4
2 l . i. xd4 tt:l x h 8 2 2 . 'it>xfl tt:lg6
[Link]:le2 c5 24.i.xc5 'it>d7 25 . .te3±)
1 9 .l::tx c4 bxc4 [Link]:\xf7 l::t h 3 2 1 .
.td2 l::. g3 + 22 .'it>h2 .U.xg4 23 .f5 .
Black has won the exchange, but
he has a long and hard way to
equality in this amazing position.
23 . . . tt:\h8 (23 . . . tt:\e7 24.'it>h3 .Ud4
1 7 . . . 'it> c 8 (Black will have plenty 25 .i.e3 .Ud7 26. e6±) [Link]:\g5 .l:f.d4
of problems to solve after the 25 . .tf4 .U.d7 26.'it>g3 .te7 27 .tt:\e6
king retreats in the other direc­ .l:.a5 2 8 . 'it> f3 tt:\f7 2 9 . 'it> e 4 tt:\d8
tion too: 17 . . . 'it>e8 18 .llf3 . The f7 3 0 . tt:\xg7 ..txa3 3 l . bxa3 l:txg7
s q u are i s well protect e d , s o 32. e6±.
White need n o t sacrifice any- 14 ..[Link] 'it>e8
thing. 18 . . . .ie7 [Link]:\ge4 b5 20. Or 14 . . . h6 [Link]:\ge4 tt:ld5 16.f4
tt:lf2:t; 1 9 . . . .ie6 20.llg3 .id7 2 1 . h5 17.f5 hxg4 18.hxg4 ..te7 19.
tt:\ £2 i.h4 22.l:r.g2 ..txf2+ 23.'it>xf2 'it>g2;!;; .
l:r.h4 24.e6! This pawn sacrifice is 15.f4 h5
only temporary and Black has After 1 5 . . . h6 1 6 . tt:l f3 tt:l d 5
insurmountable difficulties now. 1 7 .tt:\e4 h 5 18.g5 :dB 1 9 . f5 the
2 4 . . . .i x e 6 ? 2 5 . f5+- ; 24 . . . fxe 6 advance of the white pawns
25 .'it>g3 ..tc8 26.l:tgd2 'it> f7 [Link]:\e4 spells a lot of trouble for Black.
l:th8 [Link]:\g5+ 'it> ff? 29 . .id4+ e5 30. 1 9 . . . tt:\e7 ( 1 9 . . . 'it>d7 20. e6+ 'it>c8

188
 7. de lL\{5 8. "fffdB <JildB 9. lLlc3

2 l .lLle5+- ; 1 9 . . . g6 20.fxg6 fxg6 lLlc6 2 1 . lLlf3 �c5+ 22.<Jilg2 back­

2 1 . lLl f6 + <Jil e 7 2 2 . e 6 i. g 7 2 3 . fires . Black has to retreat and
lLl e 5 +- ) 2 0 . lLl f6 + gxf6 2 l . exf6 then White starts attacking with
�d5 2 2 . fxe7 i.. x e7 2 3 . f6 i.. x f3 a vengeance : 22 . . J:thS 23 . i.. d 2
24 . .l:txe7+ <Jilf8 25.�f4+-. <Jild7 24.�e l .l:1h6 2 5 . e6 + fxe 6
1 5 . . . f6 1 6 . exf6 gxf6 1 7 .lLle6 2 6 . g5 l:thhS 2 7 . fxe6+ <Jil e S 2 S .
�xe6 1 S . .:.xe6 <Jilf7 19.f5 h5 20. .l:tf7±. White obtains an all-pow­
lLle4 i.. g7 2 l .<Jilg2 hxg4 22.hxg4 erful pawn chain after 1 7 . . . g6
.l:1h4 23.<Jilg3 .:ahS (23 . . . 1:1h l 24. 1S.f6 lLld5 19.lLlce4 1:th4 20.<Jilg2
lLlf2±) 24.lLlf2. White managed to lLlb6 2 1 .<Jilg3 l:thS 22.i.. f4±, and
consolidate his achievements on the permanent threat of e5-e6 is
the kingside and Black is help­ practically p aralyzing Black.
less to do a nything about it. lS .lLlce4 l:th4 ( 1 S . . . i.e7 19.<Jilg2±)
24 . . . [Link] ( 2 4 . . . lLld5 2 5 . c4 lLlb6 19.<Jilg2! �e7 (It turns out that
2 6 . i.. f4 lLlxc4 2 7 . i.. x c7±) 2 5 . c4 Black loses the exchange with­
lLlcS 26 . i.. f4 i.. c5 2 7 . lLle4 i.. d 4 out any c o m p e n s at i o n after
2S.�dl c5 29.l:txd4! White is once 19 ... �xg4+ 20.<Jilh3 l:lf4 2 1 .i..x f4
again sacrificing the exchange lLlxf4+ 22 .<Jilh2± So, since it is
and Black has no chances to hold unfavourable for Black to take
the position anymore. 29 . . . cxd4 that pawn his plans are doomed
30.�xf6+ <Jile7 3 1. .l:.g6 1:1h3+ 32. to fail and he is left to play a re­
<Jilg2 l:tb3 33 Jtg7 + <Jilf8 34.l1xc7 ally difficult position without any
ltxb2+ 35.lLlf2 lLla7 36.�d6+ <JileS counterplay whatsoever. ) 20.<Jilg3
37 .£'6+-. l::. hS 2 1 .f6 i.. f8 22. �d2 lidS 23.
.l:thl l:.xhl 24.l:txhl gxf6 25.exf6
i.d6+ 2 6 . <Jil f2 lLlb6 2 7 . lLlx d 6 +
:Xd6 2S.lLle4 ll d S 29.l:.hS+ <Jild7
3 0 .lLlc5+ <JileS 3 1 .lhdS+ <JilxdS
32".lLlxb7+ <JileS 33.lLlc5±.

That position was reached in

the game Lautier - Aronian, Ger­
many 2 0 0 3 , now White could
have increased his edge with the
energetic move 16.f5!±, for ex­
ample : 16 . . . hxg4 1 7 . hxg4 lLld5
(The counter-attacking 17 .. Jth4
1S.:e4 �d5 19.lLlxd5 cxd5 20.:f4 This move became immensely

189
 Chapter 26

popular lately due to the efforts ..tfxf'7 27.l2Je6 .l:td7 28.l2Jf4 l2Jxf4
of some eminent players. 29.i.xf4 i.f6 30 . ..ie5 AdS 3 l .b3±.
10.l2Jd4!? ll.f4 i.c5 12.i.e3 i.b6!
This is the principled and 12 . . . i.xd4 1 3 . i.xd4 ..if5 14.
probably the best move. White's l2Jd 1 ! i.xc2 15.l2Je3 i.d3 16 .l:tf2± ;
knight is centralized and the f­ 1 2 . . . l2Jh4? is just bad due to
pawn is free to go forward just 13.l2Jxc6+-.
in case. 13 ..l:tae l ! l2Jh4
10 l2Jg6
.•. Some analysts recommended
10 . . . c5 ll .l2Jf3 ! (Black repelled 13 . . . l2Je7, but it is not solving
the knight from d4, but he weak­ Black's problems after 1 4 . e 6
ened a whole complex of squares, fxe6? 1 5 . l2Jxe6+ i..x e6 1 6 . i.. x b6
p articul arly b5 and d 5 . The axb6 ( 1 6 . . . i.c4 1 7 . i.xc7+ 'Otfd7
seemingly strange retreat of the 1 8 . l:f2±) 17 . .:.xe6 l2Jd5 1 8 . l:l d 1
knight , b ack to its previous ..tfc8 19.l2Jxd5 cxd5 20.a3±; 14 . . .
square is in fact the best avail­ c5 ! 15.l2Jb3 .txe6 16.i.xc5 ! ..ixb3
able . ) 1 l . . . a6 (The idea of this 17.i.xb6 axb6 18.axb3 . This po­
move is simple - the b5-square sition seems to be very simple,
is protected and White's knight while in fact Black's defence is
will never come there. 1 l . . .h6? is quite difficult indeed. 18 . . . l2Jf5
losing immedi ately after 12 . 19.:e5 l2Jd6 20 . .l:td 1 .l:te8 2 1 .l2Je4
.l:td 1+ ..tfe8 1 3 . l2Jb5+-; 1 2 . . . i.d7 'Otfd7 22.l2Jxd6 cxd6 23.ned5 l:te6
1 3 . e6 fxe6 1 4 . l2Je5+-; 1 l . . . i.e6 24.f5 IH6 2 5 . g4 h6 2 6 . c4 lia2
12J�d 1 + ..tfc8 13.l2Jg5 h6 14.l2Jxe6 27..l:Ud2 g6 28.h4±.
fxe6 1 5 . l2Je4± ; 11 . . . i.f5 12.l2Jg5
..tf e 8 1 3 . l2Jb 5 l2J d 5 1 4 . c{ i. d 3
1 5 . cxd5 i.xb5 16.l::t d l;!;) 12.lld1+
..tfe8 ( 1 2 . . . i.d7?? 1 3 . e6 fxe6 14.
l2Je5+-) 13 . ..if4! i.g4 14.l:d3 l2Jg6
1 5 . .tg3 i.e7 ( 1 5 . . . .l:i.d8 16Jhd8+
Wxd8 1 7 . l2Jg5 ..tfe8 1 8 . l2Jd5 c6
1 9 .l2Je3 i.c8 2 0 . f4 h5 2 l . h4± )
16.:e 1 l:.d8 17.l2Jd5 c6 18.l2Jc7+ !
This piece is an unwelcome guest
in Black's camp. It is impossible 14.e6!±
to trap it and meanwhile the Black has plenty of problems
knight is a real nuisance. 18 . . . to solve after that move . 14 . . .
..tf f8 1 9 . .l:tb3 ! i.c8 ( 19 . . . b 5 20 .l:ta3 fxe6? ( GM A. Shirov considers
ll d 7 2 l . e6 fxe 6 2 2 . h3 ! b4 2 3 . this to be a serious mistake. The
l:tae3 !±) 20.c4 b5 2 l .a4 b 4 (2 1 . . . other moves are not any better
bxc4 22 .l:tb6) 22.l:.be3 h 5 23 .h3 either, for example : 14 . . . i.. x d4
h4 24.i.h2 l:h5 25.e6 .:.f5 26. exf'7 1 5 . i.xd4 l2Jf5 1 6 . e 7 + We8 1 7 .

190
 7. de 0.{5 8. 'f!!dB rJi;dB 9. 0.c3

.i.e5±; 16 . . . rJi;d7 1 7 . .i.c5 l:le8 18. rJi;d7 18 . .[Link] 1 l:tae8 19.:xe8 lhe8
.l:te5 0.d6 19 . .:!.fe l± or 14 . . . c5 15. 20.lhe8 Wxe8 2 l .rJi;f2 {jjf5 22.0.e4
0.b3 ! .i.xe6 1 6 . 0.xc5 .ixc5 1 7 . c5 (The king and pawn endgame,
.i.xc5. Black will hardly equalize: after the trade of knights , is
17 . . . rJi;d7 18 . .if2! 0.g6 19.f5 .ixf5 h o p e l e s s for B l ack 2 2 . . . 0. d 6
20 . .id4 .i e 6 2 l ..ixg7 l:thg8 22. 23.0.xd6+ cxd6 24. c4+- ) 2 3 . g4
il.f6± ; 18 . . . 0.f5 19.l:td 1 + 0.d6 20. 0.h6?! (23 . . . 0.e7 24.'it>f.3±) [Link];f.3
.ic5 rJi;c6 2 l . .ixd6 cxd6 22.f5±) 0.f7 25.h4 rJi;e7? (25 . . . h6 26.h5±)
15.0.xe6+! White obtains a clear 26.0.g5+- 0.d6 (26 . . . 0.xg5+ 27.
edge in the endgame. 15 ... .ixe6 hxg5) 27.0.xh7 0.c4 28.f5 0.xb2
1 6 . .i x b 6 axb 6 ( 1 6 . . . cxb6 1 7 . 29.g5 0.c4 30.h5 b 5 3 l .Wf4 0.a3
l:txe6± ; 16 . . . 1Lc4 17 .1Lf2 0.g6 18. (3 1 . . .0.d6 32.h6 gxh6 33.g6 0.e8
l:.d l+ rJi;c8 19.l:!.fe l±; 16 . . . .ih3 17. [Link];e5+-) 32.h6 gxh6 33.g6 0.c4
.i.d4! .ixg2 18 . .ixg7 .[Link] 1 9 . 34.f6+ rJi;e6 3 5 . f7 0.e5 36.f8N+ !
.ixh8+-; 1 7 . . . 0.xg2 [Link].d 1 ! rJi;c8 1 - 0 Shirov - Almasi , Tilburg
19.l:ld3 il.f5 [Link];xg2±) 17.l::tx e6 1996

191
Chapter 27 l .e4 e5 2.tLlf3 tLlc6 3.�b5 tLlf6 4.
0-0 tLlxe4 5.d4 tL'ld6 6 .txc6 dxc6 •

7. dxe5 ti:Jf5 8. �xd8+ �xd8 9.tLlc3

.te6
Berlin Endgame

too much time and is quite dubi­

ous. 12.tLle2 ! ..lte7 13.tLle4 a5 ( 13 . . .
.ie6 14.tLlf4±) 14.a4 h5 ( 14 . . . h6
15 .b3 b6 16 . ..1tb2 ..ltb7 1 7 .tLlf4±)
15 . ..1tg5 ttJh6 16.l:l.d2 h4 1 7 .tLld4
tLlf5 18 . .l::!. e 1 tLlxd4 1 9 Jh d4 c5
20J�d2 �xg5 2 1 . tLlxg5 l:th5 22.f4
..ltf5 23 .l:td5 b6 24. e6+- Brinck­
C l a u s s e n - H o l s t , D e nmark
lO.l:tdl + 1993.
It i s not possible t o state defi­ 1 1 . . . ..lt e 7 fails to equaliz e .
nitely what rook White should 12.tLlxe6 fxe6 1 3 . tLle4 (Black is
put to d 1 (the al or the f1 rook). very seldom defending this posi­
Many times White doesn't even tion nowadays. There are no win­
need a rook on d1 at all. White ning chances at all and drawing
needs to check with the rook im­ requires a l o t of effort to o . )
mediately now, because his plans 13 . . . h6 ( 1 3 . . . l::. d8 14.lhd8+ �xd8
differ, depending on the retreat 15 . ..1tg5 ! The exchange of bishops
of the black king. facilitates White's task to reach
Black has two squares for the a favourable knight endgame .
king a) 10 .. .'�e8 and b) IO ...�c8 . 15 . . . ..1txg5 16.tLlxg5 �e7 [Link] 1 ,
A . Frolov - Sinkovics , Do nau
a) IO ...�e8 1992, 1 7 . . . h6 1 8 . tLl f3 ! Itd8 1 9 .
We have reached now a posi­ lixd8 �xd8 20.�fl c5 2 l . �e2±.
tion that was popular long ago This knight endgame provides
and it was usually reached after White with considerable winning
the following order of moves chances. He has a pawn major­
9 .l:!.d 1 + �e8 10.tLlc3 ..lte6. ity on the kingside and active
ll.ttJg5 .ic4 pieces. Black can not create a
The retreat 1l . . . .ic8?! in or­ passed pawn on the queenside.
der to preserve the bishop pair Therefore thi s type o f p awn
seems paradoxical. It is losing structure is very crucial for all

192
 7. de tt:lf5 8. 'f!id8 'ito>d8 9. tt:lc3 i.e6 JO �d l .'

kinds of endgames, and particu­ tt::l x e5 2 4 . fxe6 .l:t e 7 2 5 . i. c 5 +- ;

larly about king and pawn end­ 2 4 . . J 1 d6 2 5 . i. c 5 + - ; 2 4 . . J :t d 8
games . White is striving for po­ 25.i.d4 tt::lxg4 26 . .U.f7 !+-) 23.'it>f.3
sitions like that , while Black l:.a5 24.a3 c5 25.c4+-. So evalu­
should better avoid them like ates the position GM P. Zarnicki.
plague. ) 14.g4! (This active move White hasn't created any con­
should be well prepared as a crete strong threats yet, but still
rul e . Its evaluation usually his evaluation is quite correct.
hinges on the effects of Black's White has practically an extra
counterstrikes h6-h5 or h7-h5 . If pawn and his pieces are totally
White manages to support his dominant . This is more than
pawn advance with h2-h3 , with­ enough to win. We are going to
out any concessions to Black, his follow the game to the end to
advantage increas e s . Should have a look at the technical stage
that fail , Black equalizes easily ofthe game. 25 . . . tt::le 7 26.'it>e4 .l:i.a4
and might even take the initia­ 2 7 . llc 1 tt::l c8 ( 2 7 . . . b5 2 8 . i. xc5
tive. Presently the pawn advance �xc4+ 29.l:!.xc4 bxc4 30 .'it>d4+-)
g2-g4 looks completely safe for 28.f5 b5 29.b3 .l:txa3 30.cxb5 .:.Xb3
White. ) 1 4 . . .'!i:'lh4 1 5 .f4 l:.f8 (The 3 l .i.xc5 exf5 + 3 2 . gxf5 .l:txb 5
most testing line here is 15 . . . h5 3 3 . i.xf8 'it>xf8 3 4 . l:!.x c 7 .l:tb4+
16 .h3, but Black fails to disrupt (34 ... tt::l e 7 [Link]::lx g7 ! ) 35.'it>f.3 l:!.b3 +
White's pawn chain, for example: 36 .'it>e2 tt::l e 7 3 7 .tt::lxg7 .l:tb4 38 . e6
16 . . . tt::l g6 17 .il.e3 hxg4 1 8 . hxg4 tt::l d 5 39 J1xa7 l:!.b2+ 40.'it>d3 l:!.xh2
I!h4 1 9 . tt::l f2 ±; 1 7 . . . r!f8 1 8 . ltfl 4 l .'it>d4 tt::l e 7 42 .f6 tt::l c 6+ 43 .'it>d5
hxg4 19.hxg4 I!d8 20. 'it>g2± ; 18 . . . 1-0 Zarnicki - Tempone, Pena
lth3 1 9 J�d3 ltd8 20.r!xd8+ 'it>xd8 City 1 996.
2 1 .l:!.d1+ 'it>e8 22.lld3 .l:t£3 23.i.d2 l l . . . h6 This move can be com­
.l:txd3 24.cxd3±) 16 .i.e3 tt::lg6 17. mented in the same fashion as
.l:tfl .l:td8 [Link]::l g3 ltd5 [Link]::lh5 l:.f7 11 . . . i.e7. Black will have to con­
20.'it>g2 i.f8 2 l. ..:.ad 1 l:!.fd7 2 2 . duct a long and painful defence
.l:txd5 ! (This is the most con­ in an inferior endgame. We must
crete approach to this position. admit, though, the presence of
Black can not solve his prob­ the bishops is going to facilitate
lems irrelevant of what he cap­ his defence a bit. [Link]::lx e6 fxe6
tures on d5 with! ) 22 . . . .lhd5 (This [Link]::le4 ( 13 . . . i.e7 14.g4 tt::lh4 15.f4
is the most stubborn defence . h5 1 6 . h3 hxg4 1 7 . hxg4 tt::l g6
2 2 . . . exd5 2 3 . e 6 + - ; 2 2 . . . cx d 5 . 1 8 . 'it>g2±; 15 . . . g5 1 6 . Itfl tt::l g6
Black has obtained a beautiful 17.fxg5 hxg5 1 8 .tt::l f6 +- ; 1 6 . . . gxf4
pawn chain, but just for a split 1 7 . i.xf4 tt::l g6 1 8 . i.g3±) 1 3 . . . c5
second. White's next move is im­ 14.'it>fl i.e7 1 5 . c3 .l:tf8 16.g3 b6
mediately disruptive and deci­ 17.'it>e2 .l:i.d8 18.lhd8+ 'it>xd8 19.f4
sive : 2 3 . f5 ! exf5 24.e6!+- ; 23 . . . 'it> d 7 2 0 . i. e 3 'it> c 6 2 1 . .l:t d 1 a 5 ,

193
 Chapter 27

Schoeneberg -Frobenius, Bam­ to repair the minute defects of

berg 1999, and Black was clearly White's pawn structure in order
worse. See how White had to ac­ to simplify a little bit. White has
tivate his kingside . 22 . .il.f2 ! g5 a clear advantage.
(22 . . . g6 2 3 . g4 lt:lh4 [Link]:lf6 g5
25.fxg5 hxg5 26 ..il.xh4 gxh4 27. b) 10 ...� c8
g5+-; 22 . . . h5 23.h3 li:lh6 24 . .il.e3
c4 [Link]:ld2 �b5 [Link]:lf3 li:lf5 27 .
.i.f2±) 23 . g4 lt:lh4 (23 . . . lt:lg7 24.
fxg5 hxg5 25 . .i.e3 .i:th8 26.:h1
�d5 2 7 . lt:lxg5 �xg5 2 8 . � xg5
�xe5 2 9 . h4+-) 24 . .i.xh4 gxh4
(24 . . . l:txf4? 25. �e3+-) 25. �e3±.
12.b3! .il.b4
Black's hopes were based on
this possibility for many years,
but then GM Dvoirys proved that [Link]:lg5 .i.c4
White is better despite the dis­ Should Black allow the ex­
ruption of his pawn structure. change on e6, the endgame will
13.bxc4! .i.xc3 14.l:!.bl b6 be clearly better for White; more­
over the black king will not par­
ticipate in the defence of the
kingside against White's pawn
onslaught.
l l . . . .i. c 5 ? ! is only helping
White after 1 2 . lt:lce4 .i.b6 1 3 .
lt:lxe6 fxe6 14.�fl . Black's de­
fence is very difficult and his
bishop i s rather m i s p l a c e d .
14 . . .l:t f8 15.a4 lt:le3+ ( 1 5 . . . a 5 1 6 .
15.g4! l:ta3 �b8 1 7 .l:td7 � a 7 18.l:tad3
This active move now is really .U.ae8 19.c4 �b8 20. c5+- Gdanski
dangerous ! Both Black's minor - Gretarsson, Gothenburg 1997;
pieces are unstable and White's 15 . . . a6 16 .l:.a3 ! White's rook is
initiative increases while he joining the action in a spectacu­
pushes away the enemy pieces to lar fashion. White is winning
squares even worse than before. several tempi like that. 16 .. J:td8
1 5 . . . lt:lh4 16.f4 h6 1 7 . lt:le4 .i.a5 17 .l:tad3±) 16.�xe3 .i.xe3 17 .l:!.a3
18 .l:tb3 h5 19.h3 hxg4 20.hxg4 .i.h6 ( 1 7 . . . .i.f4 18.l:tf3 l::tf5 19.g4
lt:lg6 2 l .�g2 l:td8 22.l:tbd3 lhd3 l:tf8 20 .lt:lg5+-) 18.g4 g6 19.l::t ad3
23.cxd3± Dvoirys - Aleksandrov, b6 20.g5 .il.g7 2 l .li:lf6±.
Smolensk 199 1 . Black was forced 12.b3 .tb4 13 ..il.b2

194
 7. de ll:lf5 8. t!idB 'i!tdB 9. lDc3 il..e 6 JO. lldl

'it>f3+-) 1 5 .il..x c3 ! ! (White should

not capture the fl-pawn, because
Black will be more than OK af­
ter that! ) 15 . . . hxg5 16 .h3! (This
is a multi-purpose move. White
stops g5-g4, blocking the king­
side, ensures the stability of
ll:lf5 and stops the p otential
threat .U.h8-h4 aiming to destroy
13 ..t xc 3
..• White's queenside. ) 16 . . . llh4 17.
One of the basic defensive g4 ll:le7 (The seemingly attractive
ideas for Black in the Berlin 1 7 . . . l1xh3? 18.gxf5 lhc3 is losing
defence endgame is the possibil­ a rook: 19.e6 fxe6 20.fxe6 1:1h3
ity of playing with bishops of 2 l .l:td7 b5 [Link] 1 'it>b7 23 J:td8
opposite colour - Black's light­ l:f.h8 24.e7 l::t e 8 25 . .l:!.xa8+-) 1 8 .
squared bishop against White's il.. d 2 f6 19.exf6 gxf6 20 . ..tc3 ! ll:lg8
dark-squared one . Sometimes (Black is now forced to retreat
in positions like that Black has with the knight to its initial
wonderful additional chances , s quare . The other defensive
because White's pawns o n the idea is refuted exquisitely: 20 . . .
queenside are quite vulnerable l:.h6 2 l . l::t e 1 ! This move is far
to an attack by the black bishop. from evident, but White can
Presently it is too early to talk not exploit the advantages of
about equality, because there are his p o s ition otherwi s e ! O n e
knights on the board. o f the rooks enables the other,
We are still not quite well ac­ presently idle rook on a 1 to
quainted with the variety of ex­ join the action. The attractive
cellent defensive resources at doubling of the rooks along
Black's disposal in the Berlin the d-file is less effective. 2 1 . . .
endgame. Look at this line in 'it>d7 22.l:.ad 1 + 'it>e8 2 3 . .:le6 'it>fl
which Black is counter-striking 24.l:.e3 l:le8 25.l::t d 7+-) 2 1 . .:ld3
repeatedly: 13 . . . h6 14.bxc4 ..txc3 b6 2 2 . f4 gxf4 23 JU1 'it>b7 24.
( 1 4 . . . hxg5 1 5 . ll:le4 il.. e7 1 6 . h3 . llxf4±.
This i s an important moment -
White should not allow the move
g5-g4 that is blocking the king­
side! 16 . . . .U.h4 17.g4! ll:lh6 18.'1t>g2
a5 19J�d3 b5 20J1ad 1 bxc4 2 1 .
lld7 ..td6 22.e6 fxe6 23 .ltxg7+-;
2 1 . . .ll:lg8 22 . ..tc1 f6 23.f4 gxf4 24.
exf6 gxf6 25 . ..txf4 l::t a 7 [Link]:lg3
llh7 2 7 . ll:lf5 a4 2 8 . h4 lH7 2 9 .

195
 Chapter 2 7

After the march of the white king i.g5 .l:l£'7 28.c4 liJb4 (28 . . . liJc3 29.
to g3 Black will have problems .l:.d2 .:am 30. i.f6+-) 29.lld2 �d7
stopping White's h-pawn. Black's 30 .l:!.ad 1 .l:Ixd2 3 l..�.x d2 �f8 32.
knight is rather passive as well. i.f6 �f7 3 3 . � d 8 liJ c 2 Bl ack's
14.i.xc3 i.d5 15.liJh3 h5 counterplay is not enough to save
The renowned expert in the the game, because White suc­
B erlin E ndgame GM Aleksej ceeds just in time. 34.�g8 liJd4
Aleksandrov tried another plan 3 5 J �g7 !ld7 3 6 . i. e7 liJxb 3 3 7 .
in a game played later: 15 . . . i.e6 l:.xh7+- ;
1 6 . liJf4 b6, Kruppa - Aleksan­ 2) 17 . . . �b7 18.�f2 �ad8 19.g4
drov, Minsk 1997 and won the liJe7 20.i.e1 (White's bishop re­
game. White needs to activate treats in order to decrease the
his pawn majority on the king­ effectiveness of the exchange
side immediately and therefore manoeuvre liJd5) 20 . . . liJd5 (20 . . .
we suggest here the move 1 7 .f3! liJg6 2 l . liJh5 liJxe5 22.liJxg7. This
change of the pawn structure is
in favour of White, because it fa­
cilitates his access to Black's
pawn weakne s s e s . 22 . . . .ii h g8
2 3 . liJxe6 fxe6 24 . ..ic3 liJg6 25 .
.l:r.xd8 .l:r.xd8 26.�e1 :td6 27.f4!±)
2 l .liJg2 ! h5 (This is a sacrifice,
but Black must give up a pawn
or a piece for a rather dubious
compensation. Should Black try
Meanwhile the white king will be to avoid any material conces­
able to take an active part in the sions , his position will remain
fight. extremely difficult anyway :
1 ) 1 7 . . . a5 1 8 . a4 ! Otherwise 2 l . . .c5 22.c4 liJb4 23.i.xb4 cxb4
Black will play 18 . . . a4 solving all 24.liJf4± ; 2 l . . . a5 22.c4 liJb4 23.
his problems . 18 . . . �b7 19.�f2 i.xb4 axb4 24.liJf4 i.c8 25.liJh5±)
.Uhd8 20.g4 liJe7 (20 . . . liJh4? is los- 2 2 . c4 hxg4 ( 2 2 . . . liJe7 2 3 J !xd8
ing by force after 2 l . �g3 liJg6 l:txd8 24.gxh5±) 23 . cxd5 i.xd5
22.liJh5 .ii g8 23.f4 liJe7 24.f5 i.c8 24.liJf4 gxf3 (24 . . . i.xf3 25.l!xd8
25.liJf4 g5 26.liJh5 liJd5 27.i.b2 .l:lxd8 2 6 . h4 l:!.d4 2 7 . � g3 ) 2 5 .
liJe3 28.�d2+ and Black is utterly �g3±;
hopeless) 2 l . h4 liJd5 2 2 . liJxe6 3) 17 . . . liJe3 18.l1d3 liJd5 (The
White could have avoided that exchange operation is unsatisfac­
exchange of the knights, because tory for Black 18 . . . liJxc2? 19.l!cl.
he was risking to dissipate all his Black loses a piece now with
advantage. 22 . . . fxe6 23. i.d2 .l:lf8 19 . . . liJa3?? 20.liJxe6 fxe6 2 l .i.. b 2
24.�g3 c5 25.h5 �c6 26.h6 g6 27. liJb5 22. a4+- and the knight is

196
 7. de liJ{5 8. 'f!Jd8 \ildB 9J bc3 ..lte6 JO. lldl

trapped. 19 . . . i.f5 20.lhc2 g5 2 1 . 25 . . J lha8 2 6 . l:lxg7 l:txa2 2 7 .

g4 ..ltxd3 22.ltJxd3 ; 2 0 . . . ..ltxd3 2 1 . .Udd7+-; 2 5 . . . g 5 2 6 . l:!.e 7 l:f.xe5
ltJxd3 . Black exchanges often two 27.l:.dd7 l:l.c8 2 8 . lixh7 �e2 29.
pieces for a rook in this line, but llhg7 l:.xa2 30 Jhg5 l:tb2 3 l..�d 3
here White's advantage is too l:l.a8 3 2 . h4 l:l a 3 3 3 . h 5 � axb3
great. White's pieces are coordi­ 34 . .l::!.xb3 �xb3 35.h6+-) 23.l::!. d 7
nated perfectly, while Black's (White should not calm down
pieces are a sad sight. 2 1 . . .l:!.d8 and let his opponent off the hook
22.ltJf4 .Udl+ 23 .\tf2 \tb7 24.e6! at any moment. That is an im­
White i s trying to create as portant principle in every open­
many weaknesses as possible in ing and the Berlin endgame is no
Black's camp before Black's sec­ exception at all. ) 23 . . . ltJf5 (23 . . .
ond rook joins the fight. Both llhe8 24 . ..ltg5 ltJf5 25.g4 h6 26.
black rooks will have to defend i.d8 ! tt.Je3 27.� 1d3 llc8 28.i.e7
then and that will considerably tt.Jc2 29.l:l.d2 tt.:lb4 30. i.xb4 axb4
reduce their scope of action . 3 l ..lhg7+-- ) 24.i.g5 c5 (24 . . . h6 25.
24 . . . fxe6 - 24 . . . f6 is even worse i.d8 l:.c8 26.g4 tt.Je3 27 JHd3 tt.:lc2
after 25.ltJh5 l:.g8 26 . .l:i.e2 .l:i.dd8 28.l::!. d2 �f8 29.\tf2 c5 30.i.e7 �f7
27.e7 l:tde8 28.g4 h6 29.f4 \tc8 3 l .J:txc2 l:te8 32.I:.cd2 l:f.exe7 3 3 .
30.f5 a5 3 l .i.xf6 gxf6 32.ltJxf6+­ l:.xe7 l:txe7 34.a4 g 5 35.l:f.d8 \tc6
- 25 . ..ltxg7±) 1 9 . ltJxe6 fxe6 20 . 3 6 . \tg3 J:th7 3 7 .h4 gxh4+ 3 8 .
..ltd2 \tb7 2 1 Jldl (White is going \txh4 .l:!.f7 39.\tg3 l:th7 40.f4 h5
to occupy the open d-file and 4 l . g5+- ; The idea to exchange
Black's knight will not remain on the rooks conceals a nice trap -
d5 for long, so White has a clear 36 . . . l:l.d7 37 . .l::!.x d 7 \txd7 38.f4 \te7
edge. ) 2 1 . . .a5 ! (Black's play along 39.fxg5 ! White should not push
the a-file is often quite effective that pawn forward, since it will
in the Berlin endgame and that lead to a positional draw - the
frequently neutralizes White's white king can not penetrate !
impressive accomplishments in 39 . . . hxg5 40 .h4 \tf7 4 l .hxg5 \tg7
the centre and on the kingside. 42.g6 \txg6 43 . \th4+-- ) 25. \tf2 a4
This is case here as well. Black 26.b4! (White should sacrifice a
will have excellent chances on pawn temporarily in order to
the queenside if White plays im­ prevent the penetration of the
precisely. ) 2 2 . c4 ! White forces black rook along the a-file. White
now a sharp, but favourable rook might lose all his edge if he al­
endgame. 22 . . . lLle7 (This cau­ lows that . ) 26 . . . cxb4 2 7 . g4 h6
tious move requires pinpoint pre­ 28.�d2 'iitc6 29.i.xb4 tt.Jd6 30.l:te7
cision from White. The other pos­ tt.Jxc4 3 l..l:.x e6+ Wb5 32Jlb l c5
sibility loses for Black - 22 . . . lLlb4 3 3 . �c3+ Wa6 3 4 J lg6 White's
23 . ..ltxb4 axb4 24 . .U. ld2 :a5 25. pieces and pawns are much more
lld7 l:txe5 26 . :xg7 h5 27 .h4+-; impre s sive than their black

197
 Chapter 2 7

counterparts. 3 4 . . . l:ta7 35.e6 neB on d5. 20 . . . .Ud8 2 1. .l:td2 b6 22.

3 6 . h4 l:i.ee7 3 7 . f4 lLld6 3 8 .�f3 ltad 1 �b7 [Link] �xd2 24.J:xd2
lLlb5 39.i.e5 lLld4+ 40.i.xd4 cxd4 h4 25.£3 c6. Black is preparing
4 l . � e4 l:tad7 4 2 . n d 1 �b5 43 . b6-b5, because he has no other
.l:lxd4 ltxd4+ 44.�xd4 �b4 45. roads to counterplay left. 26. �f2
�d5 �a3 46.�d6+-. b5 27.lLld7! This is a powerful
blow against the feeble Black
position. 27 . . . bxc4 28 .bxc4 i.xc4
[Link].c3 �c7 30.lLlxc5 �b6 3 1 .lLle4
c5 32.llb2+ �c6 33.lLlxg5±.
19.lLlg5 �b7

16.i.b2!
In the game Dvoirys - Ale­
ksandrov, Moscow 1996 White
played 1 6 . lLlf4 i.e6 1 7 . lid3 b6
1 8 . i.d2 �b7 1 9 . lLlxe6 fxe6 20.
i.g5 a5 2 l . g3 . This game has 20.f3!±
been considered as a classical There are plenty of fine points
model game in the Berlin End­ in the Berlin endgame and one
game, but Black's defence left a of them is that White should not
lot to be desired. In fact after be always in a hurry to exchange
2 l . . .a4 ! = Aleksandrov could have on e6. The knight has literally
obtained an excellent counter­ stuck the bishop on its place, be­
play. cause it must defend the f7 -
16 a5 1 7.c4 i.e6 18.a4!
••• pawn. S o the knight i s presently
White neutralizes Black's dominating the bishop and there­
counterplay on the queenside fore it is the stronger piece for a
and has his hands free for action while. White does not need to
on the kingside. exchange his strong piece with­
18 b6
..• out concrete achievements. 20 . . .
18 . . . c5 19.lLlf4 g5 20.lLld5. No­ lLle3 (We have to see what might
tice that White established his happen after the numerous ex­
knight on the dominant d5-out­ change s : 20 . . . :hd8 2 l .�f2 c5
post instead of exchanging it on 22.g3 lLld4 23.lLlxe6 fxe6 24.ltd3
e6. This is very advantageous for l:.d7 25 . .:tad 1 l:.ad8 26.�e3 lLlf5+
White, because it is quite un­ 27 .�e4 ltxd3 28 .nxd3 llxd3 29.
favourable for Black to exchange �xd3±. White has two possibili-

198
 7. de liJ{5 8. 'ffld8 �dB 9. liJc3 1Le6 lO. '![Link]

ties to press his advantage home ness of the doubled e-pawns is

- to create a passed pawn on the not so important, but White's
kingside, or go forward with his pieces are so much more active
king to the g5-square. There is than Black's. 26 . . J:tae8 27.�e3
however one additional chance l:.e7 28.lU1 �c8 29 . .l:!.f5 g6 30 . .l:tf6
and that is to penetrate with his l::t d8 3 l .l::tx d8+ �xd8 32.e6 ! I:.xe6
bishop on d8 and capture the 33.llxf7 liJc2 34.�f4 liJe 1 35.�g5 !
black pawns in case the black llxe4 36.�xg6 liJxg2 37 . .tf6+ The
pieces come to the rescue of the white pieces are in perfect har­
kingside. ) 2 1..U d3 liJc2 22 . .l:.ad l mony now. 37 . . . �e8 38. llxc7 l:te6
.tf5 23 .�3d2 l:.h£8 24.�£2 liJb4 3 9 . Wf5 .Ue3 40 .i.g5 .l:te l (40 . . .
25.liJe4! .txe4 26.fxe4. The weak- l:!xb3?! 4l.�e6+-) 4 1 .llxc6+-.

199
 Chapter 28 l .e4 e5 2.tbf3 tbc6 [Link].b5 tbf6 4.
0-0 tbxe4 5.d4 tbd6 [Link].xc6 dxc6
7. dxe5 ttJf5 8. �xd8+ �d8 9.tbc3
�e8
Berlin Endgame

1 0 . . . �c5 (This move looks

quite natural and maybe it will
be tested more often in the fu­
ture. Presently we know of only
two games with it and both of
them have been played more
than 30 years ago . ) ll .lLJe2 !? �e6
1 2 .tZ:lf4 �c4 ( 1 2 . . . �d5 1 3 . lLJxd5
cxd5 14.�d 1 c6 15.b4 �b6 16.a4
This is an old and quite reli­ a5 1 7 .�b l lLJg3 1 8 . bxa5 lLJe2+
able line. Nowadays the volun­ [Link] lLJc3 20 .l::tx b6 lLJxd 1 2 1 .
tary retreat of the king to its ini­ �d2+-; 1 2 . . . lLJd4 13.lLJxd4 �xd4
tial square seems a bit slow. It is 14.c3 �xe5 15.lLJxe6 fxe6 16.�e 1 ,
important to have in mind in this Tatai - Kurajica, Malaga 1970)
position that Black has lost his 13 .�e1 l::td 8 14.b3 �d5 1 5 . lLJxd5
right to castle irrevocably ! It cxd5 16.�g5 lLJe7 1 [Link] 1 �b4
might seem to you a bit ridicu­ 18J:1e2 h6 19.�cl. White has ob­
lous to be reminded of that, but tained a serious initiative which
you may often forget it in the is rather typical for the not so
heat of the fight. modern systems of the Berlin
10.h3! endgame. Black's main problems
This is the best move, because are the lack of coordination of
White is preparing the pawn ad­ pieces and the vulnerable situa­
vance g2-g4. The move is useful tion of the king;
even if White refrains from this 10 . . . h5 (This is not the best
plan, since it prevents �g4. move for Black. He is stopping
We are going to study thor­ g2-g4 temporarily indeed, but
oughly now the following moves creates considerable weaknesses
for Black: a) 10 ... �e7; b) 10 ... h6 ; in his position. You should bet­
c) 10 ... a5 and d) 10 lLJe7.
... ter study these lines simulta­
Black has als o tri ed some neously with the variation 9 . . .
other less popular moves here : h5 . ) 1 1..l::!. d l �e6 ( l l . . . lLJe7 1 2 .

200
 7. de tt::lf5 8. 'if!dB �dB 9. tt::lc3 �eB JO. h3

i.g5±; ll . . . i.e7 1 2 . tt::l e 2 h4 1 3 . 16.g4 tt::l e 7 1 7 . �h2 tt::l c 6 [Link]::l g 5 !

i.g5 ..te6 [Link]::l f4 :ds 15 . .l:.xd8+ h6 1 9 . tt::l e 4 h5 20. �g3 (White
�xd8, Korneev - Gorbatow, Mos­ has completed the nece s s ary
cow 1 9 9 5 , 1 6 . tt::l x e6+ fxe6 1 7 . preparati on for a successful
:d1+ �e8 18. i..x e7±. This type kingside pawn advance . ) 20 . . .
of endgame is quite favourable I:.d8 2 1 .f4 hxg4 22.hxg4 g6 23.
for White. He will manage to ex­ lhd8+ �xd8 [Link]::l g5 �e7 25.l:[d1
change the rooks sooner or later l:td8 26.l:txd8 �xd8 27. �f3 �e8
and will be free to press home his [Link]::lx e6 fxe6 29.a4 tt::l e 7 30.�e4
overwhelming kingside advan­ �f7 3 l . i.. e 1 tt::l c 6 3 2 . i.h4 tt::l d 4
tage . ) [Link]::l g 5 i.. e 7 (Black would 33. i.. d8 b5 34.axb5 tt::lx b5 35.c4
hardly be happy with 12 . . . i.. c4 1-0 [Link] - Narciso Dublan,
1 3 . tt::l c e4 i.. e 7 1 4 . b3 i.. d 5 1 5 . c4 Havana 1999. This was an in­
i.. x e4 1 6 . tt::l x e4 l:i.d8 1 7 . llxd8 + structive demonstration of the
�xd8 18.i.b2 c5 19 . .l:.d l± Romero strength of White's position. The
Holmes - Rodriguez Talavera, line 10 . . . b6 seems to need some
Linares 1 9 9 1 ) 1 3 . tt::l x e 6 fxe 6 repairs ;
1 4 . tt::l e 4 c5 ( 1 4 . . . tt::l h 6 1 5 . i.. x h6 10 . . . i.. e 6 (This is a logical de­
.l:!.xh6 16 .l:td3±) 15 .c3 a5 16.i.. g5 veloping move, but White man­
i.xg5 1 7 .tt::l xg5 �e7 18 . .l:.d2 .l:.ad8 ages to start his kingside ad­
1 9 . : a d 1 ll x d 2 2 0 ..l h d2 tt::l h4 vance outright, so nowadays 10 . . .
2 l . g3 tt::l g 6 22 .h4! .:tb8 (White i.. e 6 i s rarely played. ) l l . g4! tt::l e 7
manages to trade off the pawns 1 2 . tt::l g 5 (This move was intro ­
favourably after 22 . . . tt::l x e5 23. duced by GM V. Bologan. ) 1 2 . . .
.:e2± �f6? ! 24Jhe5+-; 23 ... tt::l d3 i.. c4 (This i s the most stubborn
2 4 . tt::l x e 6 + - ) 2 3 . f4± Prasad - move , but some other moves
Prakash, Madras 1994; have been t e s t e d t o o . Bl ack
10 . . . b6 (This is an interesting should not allow the exchange
idea and it is hardly weaker than on e 6 : 1 2 . . . h5 1 3 . tt::l x e 6 fx e 6
the fashionable lines. Still White 14.'it>g2 l:td8 , Fressinet - Mar­
won the only game in which that celin, France 1999, 1 5 . f4! hxg4
move was played, creating a real 16.hxg4 tt::l d5 1 7 .tt::l e 4 tt::lb 4 18.c3
exempl ary game in harmony tt::l d 3 1 9 .b3 i.e7 20 . i.e3±; 14 . . .
with the classical traditions of tt::ld 5 [Link]::le4 tt::lb 4 16.c3 tt::l d3 17.f4
the B erlin E ndgame . ) 1 1..U e 1 i.e7 18.b3 hxg4 19.hxg4 g5 20.
..tb4 ( 1 l . . .i.. b 7 1 2 .i.. f4 c5 [Link]::lb 5 fxg5 tt::lxe5 2 1 .i.f4 tt::l g6 22.i.xc7±.
i.. x f3 1 4 . gxf3 �d7 1 5 . e6+ �c6 This is how the old, but instruc­
1 6 . tt::l x c7 :c8 1 7 . exf7 :xc7 1 8 . tive game - Stein - Bisguier,
i.xc7 �xc7 19 . .l:te8 tt::l d6 2 0 . .l:!.ae 1 Tallinn 1971 proceeded; 12 . . . Itd8
tt::l xf7 2 1 .: 1e7+ i.. x e7 22.l:txe7+ [Link]::lx e6 fxe6 14. tt::l e 4 .Ud5 15.c4
�c6 23 . .lhf7±) 12.i.. d2 i.. e 6 13 .a3 llxe5. Black accepted the pawn
i.. x c3 1 4 . i.. x c3 c5 1 5 . .l:tad 1 a5 sacrifice and it was very risky,

201
 Chapter 28

but otherwise he would have had l:.ah8 30.l:r.xh6 lhh6 3 1 .:le l l:l.h8
to defend an inferior position 32 . .[Link] ..ic8 33 .lt:Jc4 c.i;>e6 34.l:!.e l
with practically an extra pawn c.i;>e7 3 5 .li:Jd2 l:.d8 3 6 . lt:Je4 l:td4
on the kingside for White. 16.l:.e1 [Link]:Jxg5 ltxb4 38 . .Uh1 l:td4 39.
h5 17.i.f4 l:.a5 18 . ..txc7+-; 1 6 . . . llh7 ..ie6 40.f4 :t.d2 4 l . f5 i.d5
lt:Jg6 1 7 . f4 l:ta5 - after 1 7 . . . i.c5+ 42 .li:Jxf7 i.xf7 43 . e6 l:txc2 44.
18.c.i;>g2 i.b4 1 9.l:.e2 l:ta5 20 .lt:Jg5 Itxf7+ 1-0 Bologan - Nikcevic,
e5 2 l . f5 li:Je7 [Link]:Jf3 ..td6 23 . ..td2 lgalo 1994;
.l:.c5 24.b3 a5 [Link]:Jg5+- Black's 10 . . . i.b4 (This move is rather
rook on c5 is lost now - 18 . ..td2 "provocative". Black knows that
l:ta4 19.b3 l:ta3 20.f5 li:Je5 2 l .li:Jg5 he will lose time (the bishop on
i.c5+ 22.c.i;>fl i.d4 23 . .l:.ad 1 l:txa2 b4 will be repelled from there
2 4 . lt:Jxe6 lt:J£3 2 5 . li:Jxd4+ lt:Jxe 1 with tempo), but he relies on the
26 . ..txe 1 c.i;>f7 [Link]:Je6 li.e8 28 . ..th4 solidity of his position. ) ll .lt:Je4
c.i;>g8 29 . .l:.d7+-; 20 . . . exf5 2 l . gxf5 i.e6 12.c3
lt:Jh4 22.c.i;>f2 c.i;>d7 23.f6 li:Jf5 24.
i.c3 c5 2 5 .I!.ed 1 + c.i;>c6 2 6 J :td5
li:Jd4 2 7 . i.b2 l:.a5 28.i.xd4 1-0
Lanka - Pl achetk a , C annes
1 992) 1 3 .I:.e1 li:Jd5 [Link]:Jd 1 ! (This
is a very instructive manoeuvre,
because the now active black
pieces have no targets and soon
they will have to retreat! ) 14 . . . h6
[Link]:Je4 li:Jb4 1 [Link]:Je3 i.d5 17 .lt:Jc3
i.c5 1 8 . a3 ..txe3 19.axb4 ..txc 1 Black has tried to solve his prob­
20J�exc1 c.i;>e7 2 l .c.i;>h2 h5 22.c.i;>g3 lems in this position in three dif­
hxg4 23.hxg4 g5 24.f3 c.i;>e6 (24 . . . ferent ways :
..i e 6 2 5 . lt:J e4±) 25 . .U. e 1 Ith6 26. 1) 12 . . . i.f8?! seems to be too
li:Jd1 (It might seem to you that challenging 1 3 . g4! lt:Je7 [Link]:Jg3 !
White has no advantage, more­ ..td5 [Link]:Jd4 c5 [Link]:Jc2 f6 1 7 . exf6
over he must defend against gxf6 1 8 . ..tf4 ltc8 1 9 . lt:Je3 ..tc6
B l ack's p o s sible penetration 20.l:.fe l c.i;>f7 2 l . li:Jh5 lt:Jg6 22.i.g3
along the h-file. This is all an il­ i.d6 23 . ..txd6 cxd6 [Link]:Jf5 Ithd8
lusion - White is in fact better. [Link]:Jh6+ c.i;>f8 26.1te6+-; 14 . . . lt:Jg6
Black's bishop is unstable and 15.l:.e l i.d5 16 .li:Jd4 li:Jh4 1 7 .i.g5
the pawn on g5 is under perma­ M+ [Link]:Jxf3 ..txf3 19.c4! Black's
nent threat. GM V. Bologan is light-squared bishop might be
exploiting the advantages of his lost. 19 . . . c5?! (Some commenta­
position quite efficiently. ) 26 . . . a6 tors recommended 19 . . . ..tb4 20.
( 2 6 . . . l:.ah8 2 7 .li:Jf2 a6 2 8 . b3±) l:.e3 ..id2 2 1..l::r.xf3 i.xg5 [Link]:Je4
27.b3 c.i;>e7 [Link]:Je3 ..te6 29.l:.h1 ..te7 [Link]±. White has a con-

202
 7. de ltJf5 8. "ffidB 'ito>dB 9. liJc3 'ito>eB 10.h3

siderable space advantage, very mended - De Sousa - Sinkovics,

active pieces and an aggressive Bagneux 1993) 1 3 . . . ..ta5 ( 1 3 . . .
pawn majority on the kingside i.e7, Gollain - Sinkovics, Bag­
and we think that is practically neux 2000, 14.b3 l:td8 15.c4 i.e6
guaranteeing White's win. The 1 6 . i.b 2 ltJh4 1 7 . liJd4 i.c8 1 8 .
other line might induce White to .:tad 1 liJg6 19 .liJe2±; 1 5 . . . i.xe4
go astray and is more interest­ 1 6 . .l:1xe4 .l:d 1 + 1 7 .l:le1 .[Link] 1 + 18.
ing: 19 . . . h6! ? 20.i.d2 1:1.d8 2 l .i.c3 liJxe1 i.c5 19.i.b2 'it>e7 20.g4 ltJh4
b5 22 . .Ue3 l:.d 1 + 23 . .:txd1 [Link] 1 2 1 . .Ud1 ltJg6 22.'it>g2 tiJf4+ 23 .'it>g3
2 4 . b 3 ! ± but here B l ack will ltJe2+ 24.'it>f3 ltJg1+ 25.'it>g2 ltJe2
hardly survive too, ifWhite plays 26.h4 a5 27 .h5 i.b4 28. liJc2 i.c3
precisely. ) 20.tiJh5 ! h6 (20 . . . .:tg8 2 9 . i. a 3 + - ; 28 . . . liJ c 3 2 9 . i.x c 3
2 l .l%.e3 i.c6 22.l:td1 i.e7 (22 . . . h6 i.xc3 30.f4±) 1 4 . ..tf4 ..t b 6 ( 14 . . .
23 .tiJf6+ gxf6 24.exf6+ i.e7 25. l:td8 15.e6 fxe6 16.liJc5 i.x£3 1 7 .
.l:txe7+ 'it>f8 26.i.xh6+) 23.i.xe7 liJxb7 i. d 5 1 8 . liJxa5 ltJh4 1 9 . £3
'it>xe7 24.l::t e d3±. Black will have i. x£3 2 0 . gxf3 tiJx£3+ 2 l .'it>f2 ltJxe 1
to face soon the consequences of 22 . .:txe 1 l:f8 23 .'it>e3±) 1 5 .b3 l:td8
f2-f4-f5 . What to do is not easy 1 6 . e6 fxe6 ( 1 6 . . . i.xe6 see 16 . . .
to point out? White is probably fxe6 1 7 . ltJeg5 h6 1 8 . ltJxe6 fxe6
winning. ) 2 l . i.h4! g5 2 2 . i.g3 19.:Xe6+ 'it>f7 20.l:tael±) 17.ltJeg5
i.e7 (22 . . . 'it>e7 23 .l:te3 i.c6 24.f4 h6 18.ltJxe6 i.xe6 19.l:txe6+ 'it>f7
.Ud8 25.e6 .:td2 26.f5 fxe6 27.lhe6 2 0 . l:. ae 1 l%.he8 2 1 . l:t x e 8 .l:lxe8
'it>d8 2 8 . i.e5 l:th7 29.i.f6+ 'it>c8 22 .lhe8 'it>xe8 23.g4 tiJd6 24.liJd2
30.l:tae 1 i.d6 3 UI6e2 .Uxe2 32. tiJb5 25 .i.e5 'it>f7 26.'it>fl±;
l:txe2 .U.f'7 33 .'it>f2 b5 34.i.g7+-) 3) Black should maybe forget
23 .e6! fxe6 24.l:txe6 'it>d7 (24 . . . 'it>f7 about 12 . . . i. d 5 , in favour of
2 5 . l:t a e 1 l%. a e 8 2 6 . l:. 6 e 5 l:.hf8 1 2 . . . i.e7 1 3 . l:te 1 , C ostantini -
27 .l:t5e3 i.c6 28 . ..txc7+-) 25.l:tae 1 Wagman, Italy 2 0 0 0 , 1 3 . . . h6
i.d8 (25 . . . i.d6 26.tiJf6+ 'it>c6 27. 14.i.f4! a5! (Black is looking for
i.xd6 cxd6 28.l:l6e3+-) 26.l:tg6 b6 some counterplay on the queen­
27 .l:te3 i.b7 28.f4 ! l:th7 29.f5 i.e7 side. The other moves just facili­
30 .l%.d3+ 'it>e8 3 l .llg8+! 1-0 Row­ tate White's task: 14 . . . h5? ! 1 5 .
son - Miles, London 2000. That liJfg5 i.d5 16.tiJf6+ gxf6 1 7 . exf6
game is a convincing proof that l:tg8 1 8 . g3 ! 'it>d7 1 9 . fxe7 ltJxe7
the eccentric move 12 . . . ..tf8 is [Link] 1 liJg6 2 l .c4 liJxf4 22.gxf4
unsatisfactory for Black; f6 23 . cxd5±; 14 . . . g5 15.i.h2 l:td8
2) 12 . . . ..td5 (This is a witty 1 6 . g4 ltJh4 1 7 . ltJxh4 gxh4 1 8 .
move . Black i s attacking his tiJf6+ i.xf6 1 9 . exf6 'it> d 7 2 0 . f4
opponent's knight instead of lthe8 2 l .b3 i.d5 22.c4 i.e4 23 .
retreating his own attacked 'it>f2 c5 2 4 . f5 'it>c6 25 . .l:.e2 l;Id4
knight ! ) 13 . .tle 1 ! (The retreat 26.l:[Link] 1 +-. White's bishop will
1 3 . tiJfd2? ! is not to be recom- capture the h 6 - p awn lat er. )

203
 Chapter 28

16 . . . lt:Jg7 17 .lt:Jf6+ 'it>f8 [Link]:Jd4 h5 defence and White should avoid

19.l:.ad 1 hxg4 20.hxg4 i.. d 5 (20 . . . it - [Link]:Jxh4?! i.. xh4 13 .lt:Je2 i.. e 7
i.. x a2 2 1 . : a 1 ± ) 2 l .b3 lt:Je6 2 2 . 1 4 J :tad 1 i.. c 5 = and the game
lt:Jxe6+ i.. x e 6 2 3 . lhd8+ i.. x d8 Bacrot - Kritz, Istanbul 2003
2 4 . f3 l:th6 2 5 . lt:Je4±) 15 . .:.ad 1 ! quickly ended in a draw. White
(White is concentrating forces in should play instead 1 2 . lt:Jd2 ! ?
the centre. ) 15 . . . 'it>f8 (Black fails i.. e 6 ( 1 2 . . . i.. f5 13 .lt:Jce4 lt:Jg6 14.
to equalize after capturing the i.h2 .:.d8 1 5 . 1:tfe 1 .l:i.d5 1 6 . lt:Jfl
pawn: 15 . . . i.. x a2 16.g4 lt:Jh4 17. lt:Jxe5 1 7 . lt:Jc3+-; 16 . . . l:tb5 1 7 .b3
lt:Jf6+ 'it>f8 [Link]:Jxh4+-; 1 7 . . . i..xf6 i.b4 18 . .l:te3±) [Link]:Jde4 l:!.d8 14.
18.exf6+ i.. e 6 [Link]:Jxh4 g5 [Link]:Jg6 l::t ad 1 i.. d 5 15.f3 lt:J£5 16 ..l:!.d2 i.. c4
fxg6 2 l .l:.xe6+ 'it>f7 22 .:e7+ 'it>xf6 17.l::tfd l .:.xd2 18 Jud2 h5 19.g3
23.l:tde 1 gxf4 24.h4!+-; 1 7 . . . gxf6 b5 20.a3 a5 2 l .'it>f2 b4 22.axb4
[Link]:Jxh4 l:td8 19.:a1 i.. e 6 [Link]:Jf5 axb4 [Link]:Ja4 i.. d5 [Link]:Jac5 'it>d8
.l:f.d5 2 l . c4 1:tc5 22.b3 i..x£5 23. exf6 25. e6±.
i.. e 6 24.fxe7 'it>xe7 25. i.. e 3 l:te5 12.a3!?
26.f4+-; 18 . . . fxe5 19.i..x e5 ! .l:i.g8 This m o d e s t prophylactic
2 0 . lt:Jf5 i.. e 6 2 l . lt:Jg7+ 'it>f8 2 2 . move yields wonderful practical
lbxe6+ fXe6 23.i..x c7 h 5 24.f3 'it>f7 results for White.
25 . .l:f.e5 hxg4 26.fXg4±) 16.g4 lt:Jh4 t2 .:ds
•.•

1 7 . lt:Jxh4 i.. xh4 1 8 . lt:J c5 i.. x a2 12 . . . Itg8 13 .lt:Je4 i.. d 5 14.l::!. fe l

1 9 . e6 i.. x e 6 2 0 . i.. x c7 i.. e 7 2 1 . h6 1 5 . g4 lt:Jh4 1 6 . lt:Jf6 + ! This
lt:Jxe6+ fxe6 22.l:txe6 'it>f7 23 . .l:te2 knight check is promising White
i.. f6 2 4 J :td 7 + 'it>g6 2 5 . f4 l:the8 excellent chances . 16 . . . gxf6 1 7 .
26 . .l:.xe8 .l:txe8 27.i..x a5 l:te3 28. lt:Jxh4 fxe5 [Link]:Jf5 i.. e 6 ( 1 8 . . . f6?
.:.xb7 l:txh3 29.'it>g2;!:;. 19.i.xe5+-) 19 .lt:Jxe7 'it>xe7 2 0 .
l::tx e5 f6 2 l..U e 3 f5 22 . .Uae 1 l:tg6
a) 10 i.. e 7
..• 23.'it>h2 fxg4 24.hxg4 l::!. d 8 25.l:Ie4
l:.d7 26.f3± ; 12 . . . h6 13.g4 lt:Jh4 14.
lt:Jxh4 i.xh4 1 5 .l::tfd 1 h 5 1 6 . f3
hxg4 1 7 . hxg4 g 5 18.i.. e 3 i.g3 19.
i.xg5 i..x e5 20 . .l:te 1 i.. xc3 2 l . bxc3.
Black's game is very difficult de­
spite the opposite coloured bish­
ops. The point is - White's bishop
is much stronger. 2 l . . . 'it>f8 2 2 .
l:tad 1 i.. d 5 23.i.. f6 l:th6 24. g5± ;
23 . . . l:tg8 24.'it>f2 .l:i.g6 25.g5±. The
ll.i..f4 i.. e 6 weakness of Black's king's posi­
ll . . . lt:Jh4 is just one ofthe new tion is just chronic.
ideas here. The exchange of the 13.1:tad1 h6 14.l::t fel a6
knights is facilitating Black's After 14 . . . .l:!.d7 1 5 . lt:Je4 .Uxd 1

204
 7. de ltJf5 8. t!id8 [Link]>dB 9. tLlc3 [Link]>e8 JO. h3

1 6.:xd 1 �d5 1 7 . tLled2 c5 18.c4

�e6 19 .b3 [Link]>d7 20.g4 tLld4 2 1 .
tLlb 1 [Link]>c6 22.tLlxd4+ cxd4 23.lhd4
White won a pawn in the game
Espinosa - Delgado, Cuba 2003.
15.tLle4 I:r.d5
15 . . . b6 1 6 . g4 lLlh4 1 7 . tLlxh4
.txh4 18. �g3 .te7 19.f4 g6 20.
lLlf6+ [Link]>fB 2 l . .th4 .l:!.xd 1 22 Jlxd 1
g5 2 3 . �g3 gxf4 24 . .txf4 [Link]>g7 This is one of the most popu­
[Link]>g2 lld8 26J:txd8 �xd8 27. lar moves. Black is taking the g5-
[Link]>g3± Steflitsch - Neub auer, square under control, stopping
Dornbirn 2002. White from ever exchanging
16.g4 tLlh4 1 7.tLlxh4 .txh4 the dark-squared bishops from
18 .tg3 .te7 19.tLlc3 l:xdl 20.
• there.
l:xdl h5 2 1 .f3 b5 [Link]>g2 a5 ll.l:dl .te7
2 3 .lLle2 hxg4 24 .hxg4 .t c 5 Black is weakening his posi­
25.tLlf4 g6 26.tLld3 .te7 tion dramatically with ll . . . g5?!
12.b3 �g7 1 3 . �b2 �e6 14.tLle4
i.d5 15.tLlfd2 Itd8 16.c4 �e6 1 7 .
tLl f3 b6 18.g4 tLl e 7 19 .AZJd4± Peng
Xiaomin - Schlindwein, Rotter­
dam 1998.
ll . . . b6 (Black intends to de­
velop his bishop on b7 or a6. This
is of course possible, but White
wi i l have then the additional
tactical resource to play e5-e6
27 .tel !
• at some opportune moment . )
I t became obvious now that 12.b3 .ta6 ( 1 2 . . . ..tb7 13.�b2 l::t d 8,
Bl ack's attempts to organiz e Pfrommer - Schlindwein, Wald­
some counterplay o n the queen­ shut 199 1 , 14.tLle2 ! ) 13 .�b2 .Ud8,
side backfired and Black has only Buenermann - Schlindwein,
created additional weaknesses. Germany 199 1 , 14.l:txd8+ [Link]>xd8
2 7 a4 28 .ta5 .td8 29.tLlb4
.•• • 15 .tLle4.
.t d 7 30.tLla6 .tc8 3 1 .tLlxc 7+ 1 l . . . .te6 12 .tLle2 �d5 [Link] l .
.txc7 32 ...txc7 .td7 33.b3 axb3 This position was tested i n only
3 4 . c xb 3 [Link]> e 7 35 .td6+ [Link]>d8
• one game. White keeps his edge
36.a4± Ponomariov - Vallej o attacking the centralized black
Pons , Bled 2002 . bishop. He is also completing his
development in the proc e s s .
b) 10 h6 .•• 1 3 . . . g5 ( 13 . . Jld8 14.b3 �c5 15.

205
 Chapter 28

.tb2) 14.b3 i... e 7 ( 14 . . . .tg7 15 . .tb2 1 7.l:.xd 1 t2Jd5 18.l2Je1 g6 (Black

h5 16.c4 i... e 4? 1 7 .f3+-; 16 . . . .te6 has probably overlooked White's
1 [Link]:l d 3) 1 5 .i... b 2 .U.g8 16.c4 .te6 next move . But even after the
17.g4 t2Jh4 (The black knight will most stubborn 18 . . . :g8 19 .l2Jd3
be trapped in a rather peculiar i.. e 7 - 19 . . . g6 20.t2Jdf4± - 20.l2Jdf4
fashion after the careless 1 7 . . . t2Jb4 2 l .c3 t2Jc6 22.c4 t2Jb4 23.a3
l2Jg7? 18.l2Jg3 h5 19.f3±) 18.l2Jg3 l2Jc6 24.l2Jd5 i.d8 25 . .tc3± Black
a5 1 9 . l2J c 2 l2Jg6 2 0 . W h2 t2Jf4 is almost zugzwanged. ) 1 9 . c4 !
2 1 .l2Jd4 h5 22.l2Jxe6 fxe6 23.l2Jxh5 gxh5 2 0 . cxd5 i.f5 2 1 . h4 ! .l:g8
l2Jxh5 24.gxh5 l:i.h8 25 .a4 :xh5 22.g3 l:.g4 2 3 . l2Jg2 .l:i.e4 24. l2Jf4
2 6 J i d 3 l:. d 8 2 7 . .l:.xd8 + .txd8 i.g4 2 5 . l:t c l .t f3 2 6 . W fl .l:tb4
28 ..:.gl± Glek - Plachetka, Stare 27 . .Uc3 i.e4 28.f3 .tb 1 29.a3 .Ub6
Mesto 1992. 30.i.c1 .ta2 (30 . . . Wd8 3 l .e6+-)
1 1 . . .l2Je7 (The knight retreats 3 l .b4 cxb4 32.l:txc7 bxa3 3 3 . d6
from the vulnerable f5-square l:tc6 3 4 . i.xa3 .t g 7 3 5 . e 6 1 - 0
and can be redeployed to g6 or Zulfugarli - S akaev, Linares
d5. ) 12.l2Jd4 l2Jg6 13.f4 i... c 5 14. 200 1 .
l2Je4 i.xd4+ 15.1:1xd4 b6 16.i.e3 1 1 . . . .t b 4 1 2 . l2Je2 i.e7 ( 1 2 . . .
..if5 1 7 . l2Jg3 l2Je7 18.c4± Gallia­ i.c5 13.l2Jf4 i... e 6 14.b3 l:td8 1 5 .
mova-Ivanchuk - Marie, Gro ­ l:1xd8+ Wxd8 1 6 . .ib2 g 5 17J:td1+
ningen 1997. Wc8 1 8 .l2Jxe6 fxe6 1 9 . l:.d3 l:tf8
1 1 . . . a6?! This novelty is quite 20.l2Jd2 l2Jh4 2 1 . l2Je4± Van der
unsatisfactory and looks like a Wiel - Brenninkmeijer, Nether­
loss of tempo. It is very unlikely lands 1988; 14 . . . a5 1 5 . a4 l::t d 8,
to find any adherents . 12.l2Je2 Prie - Bauer, Narbonne 1997,
l2Je7 13.l2Jg3 c5 14.b3. White is 16 . .tb2) 13 .b3 (This is not only a
placing his pieces quite harmo­ very strong move , but al s o a
niously in order to exert pressure subtle trap that the super-expe­
on the kingside of his adversary. rienced GM V. Korchnoi fell in.
He is in fact playing with an ex­ 13 . . . h5?! (Black evidently consid­
tra tempo due to the Black's ered only one possibility of devel­
weak move 1 1 and has excellent opment of that bishop - to b2.
winning chances. 14 . . . ..ie6 ( 1 4 . . . (White's advantage was not so
c4 1 5 . ..ia3±) 1 5 . .tb2 l:Id8 16.l2Jh5 great after 13 . . . g5 14 . ..ib2 l:tg8
l:txd 1 + ( 16 . . . .Ud7 1 7 . l2Jf4 l:txd 1 + 15 .l2Jd2) 14. i... g 5! (Black is now
1 8 . .:.xd 1 i.f5 1 9 . c4 h5 2 0 . l2Jg5 forced to comply with the quite
.U.h6 2 l ..ta3 b6 22 .l:te 1 a5 23 . e6 unfavourable trade of bishops, or
f6 2 4 . l2J f7 .li h 7 2 5 . l:t d 1 .txe6 weaken his kingside after which
2 6 . l2Jg5 fxg5 2 7 . l2Jxe6 l2Jc6 2 8 . the defence of the dark squares
l2Jxc7+ Wf7 29.l2Ja8 !+-. Mter the becomes absolutely problematic.)
loss of the b6-pawn Black's resis­ 14 . . . f6 ( 14 . . . .te6 15.l2Jf4±, 14 . . . h4
tance is completely pointless . ) 1 5 . l2Jf4±) 1 5 . exf6 gxf6 1 6 . .tf4

206
 7. de liJf5 8. 'ffidB cJitdB 9. tiJc3 cJiteB 10. h3

tiJ d 6 1 7 . c4 cJit f7 1 8 . l:t ac 1 .i f5 (m/9) 2 0 0 0 ) 1 8 . . . a4 1 9 . li ac U

19.tiJg3 .th7 20.l:te1 liJe8, Adams Vuckovic - Sakaev, Herceg N ovi
- Korchnoi, Dos Hermanas 1999, 2000.
2 l .tiJxh5± ; 20 . . J:I.ae8 2 l .c5 tiJf5 12.liJe2!
22.liJxf5 it.xf5 [Link].xc7±. This redeployment is very
ll . . . .td7 12.i.f4 .l::t d 8 ( 12 . . . g5 useful for White. The knight is
13 . .th2 l:td8 14.liJe4 .te6 [Link] + headed for f4 and h5 to provoke
cJite7 16.g4 liJg7 17.liJd4±) 13.e6 ! weaknesses on Black's kingside.
(White h a s a n easy access t o
Black's king now. The weaker
13.g4?! lead to a quick draw in
the game C. Joecks - Fischer,
Bad Orb 1 9 8 9 ) 13 . . . i.xe6 1 4 .
i.xc7. I t might seem now that
Black's defence is easier, since he
got rid of the doubled pawns on
the queenside ! There are how­
ever some dynamic features of
the position that are much more 12 liJh4
•..

relevant. Black's pieces are quite Black played like that in the
misplaced and lack coordination. sensational game J .Polgar - G.
14 . . ..lhd1 + ( 14 . . Jlc8 15 . .th2 .tb4 Kasparov, Moscow 2002, which
16.g4 tiJe7 17.tiJd4 it.xc3 18.bxc3 White won briniantly.
h5 19.£3 hxg4 20.hxg4 .tc4 2 1 . We have to admit that Black
lle1 cJit d 7 2 2 . l:.ad1 tiJd5 23. tiJf5 has problem to acquire a good
l:.ce8 24Jlxe8 lhe8 25.tiJd6 liJxc3 game after the other moves as
26.l:tal±) 1 5.lhd1 it.e7 16.g4 liJh4 well, for example:
1 7.liJd4 .td7 18 .1:1e 1 cJ;;f8 19 . .ig3 12 . . . .te6 13.liJf4, Bertorello ­
c5 20 .tiJd5 cxd4 2 1 ..U.xe7 tiJ£3+ Ginzburg, Argentine 1994, 13 . . .
2 2 . cJitg2 .tc6 2 3 . .l::t c 7 .txd5 24. g5 14.liJxe6 fxe6 1 5 . g4± ;
l:tc8+ cJite7 25.l:txh8 tiJd2+ 26.£3±. 12 . . . .td7 1 3 .b3 Itd8 14 . .tb2
l l . . . a5 1 [Link].f4 i.e6 13.g4 liJe7 l:tg8 15 ..:ld2 .ic8 1 6 . .Uad 1 l:txd2
14.liJd4 tiJd5 ( 14 . . . tiJg6 [Link].g3;1;) 1 7 .liJxd2 g5 1 8 . g4 liJg7 19.liJe4
15.liJxe6 fxe6 16.tiJe2 it.c5 ( 16 . . . g5 liJe6 20.i.c1 l:tg6 2 l ..te3 c5 22.
17 . .tg3 .tg7 18.c4 tiJb6 19.b3 tiJd7 liJ2g3 b6 23.tiJh5± Em. Lasker ­
2 0 . liJ d4 .t x e 5 2 1 . it.x e 5 liJxe5 Beratende, B erlin 1 8 9 6 . This
22 . liJxe6 cJ;; f7 2 3 . liJc5;1; Kinder­ game was played more than 100
mann - Lalic, Portoroz 1998) years ago, but the level of play
1 7 . c4 tiJb6 1 8 . it.g3 (After 18.b3 of White satisfies the contempo­
a4! Black managed to organize rary standards ;
serious counterplay in the game 12 . . . a 5 13.a4 .t c 5 14.tiJf4 h5
Kasparov - Kramnik, London 15 .tiJg5 it.e7 1 6.liJe4 g5 17.tiJe2

207
 Chapter 28

l:!.g8 1 8 .b3 �e6 19.i.a3 l:tg6 20. i.e7 1 7 .rb g2 h5 1 8.liJf5 i.. f8
iJ.. x e7 rbxe7 2 l .liJf6 (As a rule, 19.rbf3 i.g6 20.l:.d2 hxg4+ 2 1 .
whenever White's knight reaches hxg4 :h3+ 22.rbg2 :h7 23.rbg3
that square White's advantage f6 24.i.. f4 i.xf5 25.gxf5 fxe5
becomes decisive and that game 26.:el i.d6 27.i.xe5 rbd7 28.c4
is no exception. ) 2 1 . . . .l:.h8 22 . .Ud3 c5 29.i.xd6 cxd6 30.:e6 l:.ah8
g4 23 . liJf4 Itg5 2 4 J:tad 1 .l:r.c8 31 .l:.exd6+ The rook endgame is
25 . .Ud7+! ( This is an exquisite winning for White. We intend to
exchange sacrifice . ) 25 . . . i.xd7 follow this game to the end as a
26 . .Ux d 7 + rb f8 2 7 . e 6 .l:!.g7 2 8 . tribute to the two superb GMs
liJ4xh5 gxh3 29.liJxg7 rbxg7 3 0 . that created it. 31. rbc8 32.:2d5
.•

.Uxf7+ rbg6 3 l . liJe4 liJd4 3 2 . f4 :h3+ 3 3 . rb g2 : h 2 + 3 4 . rb f3

1-0 Kokarev - Driamin, Moscow :2h3+ 35.rbe4 b6 36.:c6+ ebbS
200 1 ; 37J:.d7 l:.h2 38.rbe3 l:.f8 39.l:.cc7
After the enterprising 12 . . . g5 l:.xf5 40.l:.b7+ rbc8 4 1 .l:.dc7+
White must react with the ag­ 'it>d8 42.l:.xg7 rbc8 1-0 [Link]
gressive 13 . g4 ! liJg7 14.liJfd4 f6 - Kasparov, Moscow 2002.
( 14 . . . h5 1 5 . f3 hxg4 1 6 . hxg4 f6
1 7 . exf6 i.xf6 18 .i.e3±) 1 5 . exf6 c) 10 a5
..•

i.xf6 1 6 . liJg3 rbf7 1 7 . liJe4 �e7

1 8 . i.e3 .Ue8 19.f3 rbg6 20 . .Ud2
i.b4 2 l . c3 i.f8 22J1e 1 liJe6 23 .h4
gxh4 24.liJf5 h3 25.rbh2 b6 26.
rbxh3 .lta6 27.rbg3 i.c4 28 . .Uh2
liJg5 29.i.xg5 hxg5 30 . .:.h5 i.xa2
3 1..U xg5+ rbf7 32.l:.h 1 rbe6 33 .
.Uh7 i. d 5 3 4 . liJd4# Gadj ily -
Haznedaroglu, Batumi 1999.
13.l2Jxh4 i.xh4 14.i.e3 i.f5
This is another possibility for
Black that is gaining in popular­
ity. Black is waiting for White to
clarify his plans.
ll.i.f4!
The white bishop on f4 is usu­
ally placed quite well. It is not
hindering the mobility of the
other pieces , it can not be at­
tacked there and it can support
15.liJd4;j;; i.h7 (The commen- successfully the kingside pawn
tators recommended 15 . . . i.c8 ! ? onslaught (for example g2-g4 ,
16.rbg2;!; after the game . ) 16.g4 �g3 , then the white knight re-

208
 7. de lLl{5 8. 'f!idB WdB 9. lLlc3 WeB 10. h3

treats from f3 with f2-f4 to fol­ position patiently. ) 2 1 .lLld3 b6

low. This plan might seem to you [Link] 1 l:tg6 (Black's main prob­
rather slow, but it is often quite lem is the lack of active plan.
effective). Black has also the pos­ White is a bit restricted by the
sibility of e 5 - e 6 and i.xc7 to pawns on a4 and h4 indeed, but
think about. Black has a lot less useful things
ll .lte6
... to do ! White has a substantial
1 l . . .i.e7 12 .l:!.ad 1 h6?! (Black space advantage after all . . . )
was desperately trying to equal­ 23.i.f4! (Black's rook attempted
ize and he overlooked a simple, to be really active, but now it can
but rather e ffective tactical not go back safely to h6 at all . )
strike. Black's situation is on the 2 3 . . . b 5 24 . c3 i. d 5 2 5 . £'3 i.b3
verge of disaster after that . 2 6 . lLl c2 l:t d 8 2 7 . :x d 8 + i.xd8
12 . . . i.e6 1 3 . a3 ! ?:;!; ) 13 . e6 ! i.xe6 28.:d2 i.d5 29.Wf2 lLle7 (after
14.i.xc7 i.b4 15.lLla4 i.c4 ( 1 5 . . . the more natural move 29 . . . i.e7
.Uc8 16.i.e5 i.c4 17.g4 f6 18.i.h2 White can exploit the weak­
lLle7 19.a3± and it turns out quite nesses on the queenside with
unexpectedly that the black 30.lLlb4 i.xb4 3 l . cxb4 i.xe4 32.
bishop is trapped ! ) 1 6.lLlb6 [Link] fxe4 lLlg3 33.Wf3±) 30 .lLle3 i.xe4
[Link] We7 18.g4! (White traps 3 l .fxe4 lLlc8 3 2 . Wf3 lLlb6 3 3 . c4
this time the knight instead of il.. g5 34.cxb5 cxb5 35 . .Uc2 i.xf4
the bishop ! B oth times White 3 6 . 'itxf4 Wd7 3 7 . lLlf5 lLlc4 3 8 .
was successful due to beautiful lLlxh4+-: Bologan - Aleksandrov,
geometrical motive s ! ) 18 . . . .Uac8 Kishinev 1998. White finally cap­
19 . .l:1d7+ We8 2 0 . lLle5 .l:1xc7 2 1 . tured this pawn and that not
l;Ixc7 lLld6 22.lLld3 .id2 23.c4+­ only consolidated his great ad­
Nij boer - Erenburg, Istanbul vantage , but also crowned his
2003; opening strategy. This proves
ll . . . a4 1 2 . a3 ! i.e7 13 . .Uad 1 once again that White can break
lLlh4 1 4 . lLl d4 lLl f5 (The black even the most stubborn defence
knight has nothing to do on h4, with a purposeful play with a
so Black is retreating it back to surgical precision;
f5 . Meanwhile Black is testing ll . . . .ib4 (This move was sug­
White about his determination to gested by GM V. Korchnoi and
play for a win . . ) 1 5 . lLlde2 ! h5 created concrete problems to
(This is preventing the possible White. Black had a very difficult
g2-g4, but is not solving the prob­ position in the only game in
lems . ) 1 6 .lLle4 h4 1 7 . .Ud2 i.e6 which it was played, but man­
18.I:.fd 1 1:1h5 19.i.h2 lih6 20.lLlf4 aged to save it after a mistake
il.. c 4 (White can not repel that by his opponent. ) 12.lLle4 i.e6 13.
bishop safely with a pawn on a3, c3 i.f8 (13 ... i.d5 14.l:[Link] 1 il.. e 7 15.
so GM Bologan is improving his g4 lLlh4 16.lLlf6+ gxf6 1 7 . lLlxh4

209
 Chapter 28

'.i;d7 [Link].Jf5±) 14 . .l:.fe 1 h5 ( 14 . . . h6 .Uxd6 36.1lb4! (White could have

1 5 . g4 li.J e 7 1 6 . li.Jd4±) 1 5 . li.Jeg5 even lost after the exchange of
..td5 ( Black can not be happy the rooks . ) 36 . . J::td2 37.'.t;g3± .
with 1 5 . , . ..t e 7 1 6 . [Link] e 6 fx e 6
1 7 . g3 ± ) 1 6 . e 6 ! ( This tactical
possibility is often successful
for White in various lines of
the B erlin endgame . To take
or not to take that pawn?) 16 . . .
f6 ( GM V. Korchnoi preferred
this m o v e . Aft e r 1 6 . . . fx e 6
White's task is very easy : 1 7 .
li.Jxe6 �xe6 1 8 .lhe6+ '.f;f7 1 9 .
li.Jg5+ '.t;g8 20.�xc7+-; 18 . . . '.t;d7 12.a3!
19 . .l:.g6±) 1 7 .ti.Jf7 ! .l:.h7 18.i.xc7 This is preventing the move
a4! ( 1 8 . . . ..txe6? 19 .ti.Jd8 ! +-) 19. Ji.b4, and that does not seem so
li.Jd4! (White played imprecisely dangerous for Black, but the
here and mi s s e d his chance point is that after the disappear­
[Link].Jd2?! Lutz - Korchnoi, Dres­ ance of the knight on c3 the other
den 1998) 19 . . .ti.Jxd4 20.cxd4 (The black bishop might occupy the
piece placement of White is a bit d5-square, so White is prevent­
awkward, so Black has s ome ing this once and for all. Look at
chances of survival, but White is an example about the necessity
still clearly better. 20 . . . ..tb4 of this prophylactics : 12.g4 li.Je7
(20 ... a3 2 l .b3 ..tb4 22 ..l:.e2 '.t;e7 1 3 . li.Jd4 ti.Jd5 [Link].Jxe6 fxe6 1 5 .
23 . ..tb6! .l:te8 24 . .[Link] 1 ! ± ; 20 . . . g5 ..td2 �b4= Galkin - Aleksandrov,
2 l . ti.J d 6 + '.t;e7?? 2 2 . ti.Jf5 + '.i;e8 Russia 1997.
23.e7 �xe7 24 . ..td6+-; 2 l . . . ..txd6 12 . �c5
..

22 . ..txd6±) 2 1. .l:te2 '.t;e7 (Black 12 . . . l:!.d8 13 . .l:tfd 1 (What was

loses the exchange after 2 1 . . . Black threatening? Naturally
�xe6? 2 2 . ti.Jd8 ! +- ) 2 2 . a3 Ji.a5 li.Jd4 and Black could take the
( 2 2 . . . �c4 2 3 . l:f.e4 Ji.d5 24.l:!.e3 initiative outright! ) 13 . . . h6 (pre­
..ta5 2 5 .Ji.d6+ '.t;e8 26 ...tc5 �xe6 venting li.Jg5) 14.g4 ! li.Je7 15 .li.Jd4
27 . .U.x e 6 + '.f;xf7 2 8 . : e 7 + '.t;g6 (This is more or less typical for
29 . .lhb7+-) 23 .�d6+ 'it>e8 24 . ..tc5 the development of White's ini­
�c7 2 5 . !I c 1 g5 26. ti.Jd6+ ..txd6 tiative - all his pieces are on very
27.�xd6 lld8 28 .�b4 b6 29.l:tec2 comfortable square s . ) 1 5 . . . ti.Jd5
�e4 (29 . . . �xe6 30.lhc6+-) 30. [Link].Jxe6 fxe6 1 7 . li.Je2! (This is an
lhc6 ..txc6 3 1 .l:txc6 :Xd4 32.�d6 important move, because Black
l:td 1 + (32 . . . l:td7 3 3 . exd7+ '.t;xd7 will be reluctant to exchange on
3 4 J 1xb6 l:txd6 35 . .U.xd6+-) 3 3 . f4, therefore the knight will have
'.i;h2 l:td7 34.exd7+ '.i;xd7 35.l:txb6 to retreat from d5 after c2-c4 . )

210
 7. de lL\f5 8. "f!idB <tidB 9. lt::lc3 WeB JO. h3

17 . . . .il.c5 18.i.g3 We7 19.Wg2±. to e2 in the future and then

12 . . . lt::l e 7. This idea is quite Black's bishop will be an even
possible and not bad at all. White more miserable sight;
should attack the bishop on e6 3) 13 . . . i.c4 1 4 . l:fe 1 (White
immediately. [Link]::l d 4! will be permanently threaten­
ing now e5-e6 . Well, that move
will not nece s s arily be cata­
strophic for Black, but it will give
him food for thought. ) 14 . . . lt::l d 5
(Black's most solid method of
defence is to reduce the effect
of e5-e6 with exchanges . The
other possibility is weakening
Black's position a lot : 14 . . . c5?
[Link]::l db5+-; 14 . . . .:tc8 is not to be
1 ) 13 . . . lt::l d 5 1 4 . lt::l x e6 fxe 6 , recommended either 1 5 . e 6 f6
Z arnicki - Flore s , Argentine [Link] l±) 1 5 .lt::l x d5 ..ltxd5 1 6 . e6
200 1 , [Link]::l e 2;t .il.c5 16 .g4! (This (White can not attack the king
move might seem risky, but it is effectively, but his initiative is
quite useful for White both for not dimini shing after the ex­
the imminent pawn expansion changes . ) 16 . . . i.d6 (Weaker is
on the kingside, as well as for the 16 . . . fxe6 [Link]::lx e6 .il.xe6 18.lhe6+
White's piece coordination. The Wf7 ( 18 . . . Wd7 19 . .l:tae 1 i.c5 20.
white king can be comfortably l:6e4 a4 2 1..� e5+-) [Link] 1 .l:tc8
placed later on g2 . Black in his 20.g4±) 17.i.xd6 ! (White should
stead can hardly utilize the f-file not overemphasize the impor­
for anything real . ) 16 . . . l:.f8 17 . tance of Black's doubled pawns.
.il.g3 l:.d8 18 .l:.ad 1 .l:td7 19.c4 lt::lb 6 He should be ready to change the
20 . .l:txd7 Wxd7 (20 . . . lt::lxd7 2l .'it>g2 pawn structure at some oppor­
lt::lb 6 22 . .l:tcl;t) 2 l .Wg2 lt::lxc4 (21 . . . tune moment, if n e c e s s ary. )
a 4 22 .Itc 1 g5 23 .l:tc3 We7 24.f4 17 . . . cxd6 18 . .l:tad 1 ! fxe6 [Link]::lx e6
gxf4 2 5 . i.xf4) 22.l:tc 1 b5 23.b3 Wd7 [Link]::lf4 i.a2! (It is a super
.il.xa3 24 . .l:td l±; rare occurrence to see a black
2 ) 13 . . . lt::l g6 1 4 . lt::l x e6 fxe 6 bishop on a2 in any other open­
1 5 . i.g3 i.c5 1 6 . .l:tad 1 l:t d 8 1 7 . ing, while its appearance there
l:.xd 8 + W x d 8 1 8 . lt::l e 4;\;. Thes e in the Berlin defence endgame is
type s of positions are rather not regular, but rather frequent.
favourable for White . White is Now the concrete calculation
having an extra pawn on the shows that i.a2 is a must. After
kingside. Black's bishop is placed the seemingly natural 20 . . . i.f7?
without good prospect s . The Black is beyond salvation: 2 1 .
white king might be redeployed lt::l d 3 ! l:l.he8 2 2 . lt::l e 5 + W e 7 2 3 .

211
 Chapter 28

tt:lxc6+ Wf8 [Link]:ld4+-) 2 l .a4 i.c4 Black is naturally reluctant

22.b3 l::thf8 [Link]:lh5 i.e6 [Link]:lxg7 to allow the capture on e 6 ,
.txh3 25 Jld3 l:.f7 26.l:.xh3 .:Xg7 since it will lead to a long and
27.llh5;t. White's edge is much painful defence of a worse end­
more substantial than it seems game.
at first sight. The white pawns 15 ...i.xd4
are placed comfortably, while 1 5 . . . tt:ld5 1 6 . tt:lxe6 fxe6 1 7 .
B l ack h a s three p erceptible tt:le2 !;t.
weaknesses - a5 , d6 and h7. 16.l:txd4
13.l:tadl h6 This is an interesting position
If Black's bishop is placed on with some edge for White.
c 5 , the manoeuvre with the 16 ... c5
knight via e7 is bad for Black - S o m e commentators s u g­
13 . . . tt:le7?! [Link]:le4 i.b6 15.l:[Link] l gested 16 . . . h5!?. Let's analyse it
i.d5? ! ( 1 5 . . . tt:l d 5 1 6 . i. c U ) 1 6 . in details : 1 7 . f3 tt:ld5 1 8 . tLle2 !
tt:lffi+! (Notice this check with the (White should avoid here an ex­
knight . It is often the key to change of the knights, because it
White's big advantage. ) 16 . . . 'it>f8 leads to a quick draw. ) 18 . . . c5
[Link]:lxd5 cxd5 , J. Moreno - Mit­ 19.l:[Link] l l:.d8 20.i.g5 l:d7 2 l .tt:lg3
kov, Mondariz 1999. White had (White forces his opponent to
to exploit his tremendous edge in clarify his intentions about the
piece activity and act in a flash: h-pawn. This will be rather help­
1 8 . e 6 ! fx e 6 ( 1 8 . . . f6 1 9 . c4 c6 ful to White later in the game. )
20.i.d6 .l:td8 2 l .c5 i.a7 22.tLld4 g6 2 l . . .hxg4 (Advancing the pawn
23.tLlb3 a4 [Link]:la5+-) [Link]:lg5 c6 will turn it into a permanent
2 0 . tt:lx e 6 + 'it> f7 ( 2 0 . . . Wg8 2 1 . weakness 2 l . . .h4?! [Link]:le4 and
i.c7+- ) 2 1 . tt:lg5+ (White could the rook on h8 will have to de­
have taken on g7, but the retreat fend it. 22 . . . b6 23.'it>f2 tt:le7 24.f4
with the knight is stronger. ) tt:lc6 25.f5 .:.xd l 26 . .:.xd 1 i.c8 27.
2 l . . .'it>e8 22. i.d6 Wd7 23 .nxe7+ tt:lc3 g6 [Link]:lb5 gxf5 [Link]:la7 ! +-;
'it>xd6 24 . .l:Ide l +-. if 28 . . . 'it>f8 White plays the same
beautiful move 2 9 . tt:la 7 ! .t b 7
30 . .:d7+-) 22. hxg4 b6 2 3 . tt:lh5
.:h7 24.Wg2 tt:le7 (24 . . . c4 2 5 . c3
i.f5 26.l:th 1 ! i.c2 [Link]:lxg7+ 'it>f8
2 8 . tt:lf5 ! + - ; 25 . . . 'it>f8 2 6 . 'it>g3±)
25.'it>g3 tt:lc6 26.l:th1 l:td5 27 .lhd5
i.xd5 28.i.f6 ! ! (White obtains a
decisive advantage in a really ex­
quisite way. ) 28 . . . l:txh5 29.gxh5
gxf6 30 .h6 tt:le7 3 l . h7 tt:lg6 32.
14.g4! tt:le7 [Link]:ld4 · 'it>f2 ! (This i s the simplest -

212
 7. de l2Jf5 8. t!idB WdB 9. l2Jc3 �eB JO. h3

White wins the queen, instead of

only the exchange . ) 32 . . . l2:Jh8
(32 . . . Wf8 3 3 .exf6+-) 33J1gl+-.
1 7.:d2 l2:Jc6 18.l2:Jd5 i..xd5
The tentative move l8 . . . :c8
has also been tried, but White
has a lasting advantage as you
can see after the following lines :
1 9.l2:Je3 We7 ( 1 9 . . . l2:Jd4 20.f3 h5
2 l .c3 l2:Jb3 22 . .l::t ddl hxg4 23.hxg4 20.e6!
:dB 24.i.. g 5 �d7 25.l:r.xd7 Wxd7 White sacrifices a pawn tem­
26.l:!.d l + Wc6 27.f4 b5 28.f5 i.. c 8 porarily and breaks the pawn
2 9 . l2:J d 5 i.. b 7 3 0 . l2:Jf4 Wb6 3 1 . structure of the opponent irrevo­
�d7 �hl + 32.Wf2 �h2+ 33.Wg3 cably. Black will manage to build
lhb2. The game became sharper, an impenetrable line of defence
plenty of pawns were exchanged, after the other not so resolute
but all these developments were moves.
in favour of White . His pawns 20 ...fxe6 2 1 ..l:.e l
are faster and his pieces are GM A. Shirov demonstrates a
p o i s e d aggre s s ively. 3 4 . l:txf7 profound understanding of the
l2:Jd2 35.i.. d 8 l2:Je4+ 36.Wh3 .l:f.c2 fine points of the endgame and
3 7 . �x c 7 .tt x c 3 + 3 8 . Wh4 l:Ixa3 excellent calculations . See the
39 . .l::.x g7+ Wc6 40.f6 .ttf3 4 1 .l:tc7+ main line that he foresaw dur­
Wb6 42.l2:Je6 .l:.fl 43.Wh5+-) 20. ing the game: 2 1 . . .l2:Jd4 22.Wg2 !
i.. g3 l:tcd8 2 l .�fd l .U.Xd2 22.l:!.xd2 c6 (22 . . . .ttd8 23 . .:Xd8+ Wxd8 24.c3
l2:Jd4 23 .Wg2 h5 24.f4 hxg4 25. lt:\c6 25 . .l:txe6 Wd7 26.�e4 l2:Jd8
hxg4 g6 2 6 . c3 l2:Jb3 2 7 . .l:[Link] f5 27.i.. e 5 l:te8 28.f4 l2:Jf7 29.'it>f3 g6
2 8 . exf6 + Wxf6 2 9 . � d 8 .l:tx d8 30.i..g7 lhe4 3 l .Wxe4±) 23.�d6
30.i.. h 4+ Wf7 3 l .i..x d8 c6 32.f5 .tt f8 (23 . . . l2:Jxc2 24.l:tdxe6+ Wf7
gxf5 3 3 . gxf5;!;. This quite non­ 25 .l:l.e7+ Wf8 26.l:tle4± ; 23 . . . .l:td8
standard endgame is not easy to 24Jhd8+ Wxd8 25.c3+-) 24.i.. g3 !
evaluate, but only White can play We7 25 . .l:.d l ! ! This is a quite dy­
for a win. namic beautiful idea! Black is
19 ..l:l.xd5 b6 losing material now. White had
19 . . . l2:Jd4? is clearly weak . to find plenty of difficult quiet
The black knight might easily moves in order to reach this po­
get lost. 20.i.. e 3 ! l2:Jxc2 (20 . . . c6 sition! 25 .. .l:1fd8 (25 . . . l:tf3 26.i.. e 5
2 l. .l:f.d6 l2:Jf3+ 22.Wg2 l2:Jxe5 23. lbf8 27 . .l:.d2+ - ) 26.l:lxd8 lixd8
.[Link] f6 24.f4 tt:lg6 25.i..x c5+ Wf7 27.i.. c 7 .l:.d5 28.i.. xb6 ! l2:Jxc2 29.
26.:d7+ Wg8 27.i.. d 6 Wh7 28.f5 l:tc l l2:Jd4 30 . .:Xc5±. White is win­
lLl fB 29 . .[Link] 7 + - ) 2 1 . i.. x c 5 b6 ning at least a pawn with excel­
22.l:[Link]+-. lent winning chances.

213
Chapter 28

2 1 . ..:ds 22.:xe6+ <tff7 23. o n f5 i s not quite comfortable and

l:txd8 tiJxd8 its prospects there are not very
bright . It is going to be rede­
ployed to g6 or d5 with good
scopes for the future. If White
plays too schematically Black
might obtain an excellent posi­
tion, so White needs to be su­
perbly prepared.

24.:e3!!
This move needs a profound
understanding too , because
White must evaluate correctly
the consequences of the possible
minor pieces endgame. 24 ... tLle6
25 . ..te5! h5! (After the attractive
move 25 . . . l:ld8, White should try The move has naturally some
to exchange rooks with 26.l:ld3 drawback too. Black is delaying
l:1xd3 2 7 . cxd3 g5 28. <tlg2+- . A the development of the other
world class player should be able pieces and White can try to make
to evaluate such a position effort­ a good use out of it. Sometimes
lessly many moves in advance. the game might become very
All black pawns are weak and sharp, so both sides need to be
the white pieces will capture extremely inventive tactically.
them with ease . ) 26.:d3 hxg4 n.:el!
27.hxg4 c4 2S.:dl! <tl e '1 (28 . . . White i s placing t h e rook
:es 29.lld7+ .l:r.e7 30.he7+ <tfxe7 against the enemy king and that
3 l .f4 g6 32.<tff2+-) 29.<tfg2 :f8 x-ray impact might perform an
30.<tfg3 g5 3 1 .f3 :f7, Shirov - important role in the future
I . Sokolov, Saraj evo 1999. GM fight.
[Link] considers 32.:hl!± to ll ...tiJg6
be the best move in this position. White needs to know how to
punish the quite unsatisfactory
d) lO tLle7
.•. for this position move l l . . . a5?!
This position has been one of [Link]:le4 lt:lg6 [Link]:ld4! a4 14. �d2
the most interesting and fashion­ h6 15 . .l:!.ad 1 �d7 1 6 . c4 l:d8 17.
able in the Berlin endgame for i.. a5 b6 18 . ..tc3 (White is totally
many years . This is a clever dominating in the centre and is
move, because in fact the knight going to win material soon . )

214
 7. de ll:lf5 8. 'f!idB WdB 9. ll:lc3 <i;eB 10. h3

It looks like White is not threat­

1 8 . . . lt::l f4 ( 1 8 . . . .i. e 7 1 9 . li::l f6+- ;
ening anything in particular, but
1 8 . . . c5 1 9 . lt::l f6+ gxf6 2 0 . exf6+
i.. e 6 2 l :li::l x e6 fxe6 22.f7+ We7Black is doomed to suffer pain­
23 .lhd8 Wxd8 24.l:he6+-) 19. fully for long without any hopes
of taking the initiative. ) 16 . . . Wf7
lt::l f6+ ! gxf6 ( 1 9 . . . We7 2 0 . e6+-)
17 . .ta3 .l:.e8 ( 1 7 . . . li::lf5 ? 18.g4 lt::lh6
20.exf6+ ..ie6 (20 . . . lt::l e 6 2 1 .lt::lx e6
..ixe6 22.�xe6+ fxe6 23.f7 + Wxf7 19Jle7+ 'it>g6 [Link]::lh 4+ Wg5 2 1 .
lt::lg2+-) [Link]::l d 2 i.. ffi [Link]::l c4 lt::l c8
24.l::tx d8 .l:tg8 (24 . . . l::th 7 25.i.. e 5)
20.�xe8 Wxe8 2 1 ..Ue 1+ Wf7 22.
2 5 . l:!. d7+-) 2 l . li::l x e6 .:txd 1 2 2 .
lt::l a5 Itb8 23.i.. c 1 g5 (23 . . . lt::lb 6 24.
lt::l x c7+ W d 7 2 3 Jh d 1 + 'it>c8 24.
.i.e5+- Nisipeanu - Kosashvili, c4 .l::!. e 8 25 . .l:!.xe8 Wxe8 [Link]::lx b7
Elista 1998. i.. b 1 27.a4±) 24.g4 i.. xc2 25.f4 h6
[Link]::l e4 26.fxg5 hxg5 27 .l:i.f1 Wg6 28. i..b 2
That position was reached f5 29. i.. e 5 .l:!.a8 30. lt::l x b7± Nisi­
many times with transposition of peanu - Grabarczyk, Koszalin
moves 1 1 and 1 2 . White's knight 1998. It is not easy to offer any
on e4 is very powerful - it is con­ good advice to Black. Maybe he
trolling the c5, d6 and ill-squares. should better avoid the exchange
It might not be quite clear yet, combination starting with the
what exactly White has achieved, check on d6.
so we should better have a look 12 . . . h6 [Link]::ld4 c5 [Link]::lb 5 Wd7
at some games. 15.f4 Wc6 16.a4 i.. e 7 17.i.. e 3! i.. f5
(Black can also try to repel the
knight : 1 7 . . . a6 1 8 . lt::l b c3 f5 1 9 .
exf6 gxffi 20.l:lad 1 f5 2 l .li::l d2 i..h4
22 . .Ue2 l:td8 2 3 . 'it? h 2 ;t ; 1 8 . . . h5
19.l:!.ad 1 i..e 6 20.b4! This is a very
promising pawn sacrifice and it
is quite topical with a black king
on c6 at every moment. White
should have in mind that if Black
manages to defend successfully,
12 ...c5 White might even lose. The re­
This is Black's most popular treat of the rook seems inconclu­
defensive move, His idea is origi­ sive 20.!:tf1 lt::lh 4 and the game
nal and really brave - taking the was unclear, Pinski - Marcelin,
king to safety to the c6-square ! Erevan 1999. 20 . . . cxb4 - This is
The overly calm move 1 2 . . . more principled than 20 . . . b 6
..ie7?! is just playing onto White's 2 l .bxc5 bxc5 22.:f1;t - 2 l .li::l e 2
hands. [Link]::l d 6+! cxd6 14.exd6 f6 b6? 2 2 . f5 i.. d 5 2 3 . fxg6 i.. x e 4
15.dxe7 lt::lx e7 16.b3 (This posi­ 2 4 . gxf7+-; 2 l . . . i. d 5 2 2 . lt::l d 4+
tion is very unpleasant for Black. Wb6? [Link]::l b 3+ Wc6 24. lt::l a 5+-;

215
 Chapter 28

22 . . . �d7 23 .lt:lb3 c6 24.c4 bxc3 25. 2 7 . f5 g 5 28.�£2 g4 [Link].f4 ii.d5

lZ:Ixc3 �c7 2 6 . lZ:Ixd5+ cxd5 2 7 . 3 0 . h4+-. The centralized and
.lhd5 �ad8 28.l:c1+ �b8 29. !Icd1 well supported black bishop on
!Ixd5 3 0 . l:txd5 lidS 3 1 . !Ixd8 + d5 is strikingly helpless and that
it.xd8 3 2 . �f2;!;) 1 8 . lZ:I g3 it.xc2 ensures White's decisive advan­
( This i s a brave challenging tage - 1 9 . lZ:Ic5 it.xc5 2 0 . bxc5;!;.
decision, because the black king Black's pieces are not active
is on the same file ! It is a good at all and perform purely defen­
move, though. White has a stable sive functions. The pawns on g7
edge after the too tentative 18 . . . and b7 must be permanently
it.d7 19.Ited1 a6 [Link]:Ic3 Ithd8 2 1 . watched.) 15 . ..tb2 c5 (The com­
l:Id3 b 5 22.axb5+ axb5 23 .Itad 1 mentators labeled that move as
..th4 2 4 . �h2±) 1 9 . 11 e c 1 it.xa4 a mistake. Is that true? Our opin­
(This is courageous , but futile , ion is that Black is already
since that bishop might be nec­ clearly worse anyway, so his only
essary as a defender too. Black choice lies between one bad po­
had decent drawing chances af­ sition and another. 15 . . . ii.b4 This
ter 1 9 . . . it.d3 ! 20.b4 a6 2 l .lZ:Ia3 move was s ugge s t e d by GM
Itad8 2 2 . it.xc5;!;) 20. lZ:Id4+ �d7 Wedberg. White can rely on a
2 l..� x a4 cxd4 2 2 ..l:txd4+ �c8 substantial edge after: 16.c3 it.e7
23 .lZ:If5 a5 (23 . . . .l:tg8 24 . .l::t d 3 a5 1 7 .lZ:If6+ �f8. Black should re­
2 5 . ii.b 6 it.d8 2 6 . I!xd8+ 'it>xd8 frain from taking on f6 after
27 . .Uxc7 Ita6 2 8 . 11xb 7 + .l:lxb6 which his position is simply de­
29 . .l:lxb6 �c7 30 . .Ua6 lZ:Ixf4 3 1 . stroyed. [Link]:Ixd5 cxd5 19 . .l:lad 1
Itxa5±) [Link]:Ixg7± Brodsky -Van c5 2 0 . lZ:If5 lZ:If4 2 l . g3 lZ:Ixh3 +
den Doel, Wijk aan Zee 1999. 22 .'it>g2 lZ:Ig5 [Link]:Ie3 d4 _24.cxd4
12 . . . it.e6 (This move of experi­ cxd4 2 5 . l:Ixd4 lZ:I e 6 2 6 . Itx d 8 +
mental nature was invented by ii.xd8 2 7 . f4 g 6 2 8 . f5 gxf5 2 9 .
GM Kaminski , but failed to find lZ:Ixf5± ; 1 8 . . Jhd5 1 9 . lZ:If3 ! lZ:If4
supporters . You will now see 20.c4 .l:ld3 2 1 ..l:led 1 ! This is the
why! ) 13 .lZ:Id4 ..td5 14.b3! (There right rook to offer an exchange
is no better square than b2 for with! 2 l . . .lZ:Ixh3+ 22.gxh3 .l:lxf3
the White's bishop in a situation 23 .�d7 it.h4 24 .lixc7+-; 2 l . . .�e8
like that. White can now play c2- 22.'ifi>fl±. The position was sim­
c4 at some opportune moment plified considerably, but Black's
forcing the exchange of the pow­ situation did not become any bet­
erful it.d5 . ) 1 4 . . . 11d8 ( 14 . . . it.b4 ter. There is an evident differ­
1 5 . c3 it.a5 16.b4 it.b6 17 .lZ:If5 Itg8 ence between the activities of the
18 .a4 ! a5 - after 18 . . . a6 19.a5 pieces . Black's king position is
..ta7 [Link]:Ic5 ..txc5 2 l .bxc5 �d7 far from safe too. White can try
2 2 . f4 .l:.ae8 2 3 . lZ:Id4 h5 24. l:ta4 16.c3 and if 16 . . . it.a5 17.e6! it.xe6.
lZ:Ih4 25.g3 lZ:If3+ [Link]:Ixf3 ..txf3 Black must capture this pawn

216
 7. de tlJf5 8. 'fid8 Wd8 9. ttJc3 WeB 10.h3

outri ght to avoid the worst . dl) 13 ...h6

18 . .[Link] 1 �b6 19.c4 ttJf4 20 .tiJg5
�g8 2 l . tiJdxe6 ttJxe6 22 . .Uxd8+
Wxd8 23 . tiJxf7+ We7? 24.tlJg5+-;
23 . . . W d 7 2 4 . tlJ e 5 ± . The same
pawn now becomes much more
dangerous after 1 7 . . . tiJf4 18.e7!
Wxe7 19.tiJc5+ Wffi 20.b4 b6 2 l .c4
Wg6 22.cxd5 bxc5 23.ttJxc6 �xb4
24.Ite4+-; 18 . . . l::t d 7 19.ttJf5 �e6
20.tiJxg7+ Wxe7 2 l .b4 �b6 22.
�c1 ttJd3 23 . ..ig5+ Wf8 24 . ..ih6 This prophylactic move is not
We7 25.Ite2+-) 16.ttJf5 ..ie6 1 7 . e nj oying a g o o d reputati o n .
ttJe3 ..i e 7 18.g3 ! ! (This is a mag­ 13 . . . a 5 i s analysed i n the line d2.
nificent pawn sacrifice and we 14.a5!
believe not every GM would dare This is an important contem­
to undertake it. White creates in p orary theoretical p o s i t i o n .
return the simple, but deadly Black has not found the right
threat f4-f5-f6 ! ) 18 . . . ..ixh3 19.f4 path to equality yet.
(Black is totally helpless, which 14 . . . i.f5
is a quite rare situation so early 14 . . . �d7 15.�e3 �c6 16.ttJxc5
in the Berlin endgame ! ) 19 . . . ..if8 ..ixf.3 17 .gxf.3 tlJh4 ( 17 . . . ..ixc5?!
(The "total" retreat of the black 18 . .txc5 tiJf4 1 9 . Wh2±) 1 8 . l:.e2
pieces is equally hopeless: 19 . . . ttJxf.3 + 1 9 . Wg2 .txc5 2 0 . ..ixc5
�c8 20.£5 ttJf8 2 l .f6 gxf6 [Link] ttJh4+ 2 l . Wg3 tiJf5 + ( 2 l . . .tiJg6
..id6 2 3 .ttJf5 ttJe6 24J�ad l llg8 22.f4 ttJe7 23 .11d2 ttJc6 24.l::t ad l
25.ttJexd6+ cxd6 26.ttJxd6+ Wf8 a6 25.l::t d 7 �d8 26 .�xd8+ ttJxd8
27.tiJf5+-) 20.£5 ttJe7 2 l .f6 ttJf5 27.£5 g6 [Link] h5 29.b4 g5 30.c4
22.e6! (This attack is very beau­ ttJe6 3 l ..te7 l:!.g8 32 .b5+-. The
tiful ! ) 22 . . . tlJd4 ( 2 2 . . . fxe6 23 . black king is in a mating net.)
ttJxf5 + - ) 2 3 . e 7 � x e 7 2 4 . fx e 7 22.Wg4 g6 23 . l::!. d 2 h5+ [Link].3
Wxe7 25 .Wf2 b6 26.b4 ttJe6 ( 2 6 . . . l:td8 (Should Black refrain from
cxb4 27.tiJg5+-) 27.bxc5 f5 (27 . . . giving the a 7 - pawn, the end
bxc5 28 . ..ia3+- ) 2 8 . ttJc3 l:Ld2+ would be spectacular : 24 . . . a6
2 9 . ll e 2 .Uxe2+ 3 0 . ttJ x e 2 bxc5 [Link] 1 l:tc8 26 .We4 l:!.h7 27 .b4
3 l .tiJf4+- Bologan - Kaminski, b6 28.axb6 cxb6 29 . ..ixb6 ltc4+
Koszalin 1 999. 30 .Wd5 l:txb4 3 l .Wc6 tlJe7+ 32.
13.a4! Wb7 f5 33.:d8+ wf7 34 . .l:t 1d6 �e4
It will become evident soon 3 5 . � d4 a5 3 6 . f3 .Ue2 3 7 . W c 7
that the rook on al takes a ma­ 11xc2+ 38.Wd7+-) 25.lhd8 Wxd8
jor part in the action from its ini­ 26.�xa7±.
tial square. 14 . . . Wd7?! (This is a dubious

217
Chapter 28

move, because the black king will very middle o f the board. I n fact
not succeed to find a safe haven its march to d5 was a logical con­
like that . ) 1 5 . .Ua3 ! b6 (The usual sequence of what happened un­
hiding place for the king, the c6- til now in the opening s tage .
square is taboo this time: 15 . . . 2 l . . .f6 22 . .:d3+ cJi>c6 23.exf6 ii.f5
cJi>c6? 1 6 . l:tc3 b 6 1 7 .b4 ! +- and 24.b5+ cJi>xb5 25Jie1 cJi>c6 26.f7
Bl ack's p osition is in ruins . ) l:r.e6 2 7 . c4 .l:.d6 2 8 . lbxd6 i.xd3
1 6 . ax b 6 cxb 6 1 7 . J:t d 3.+ ! ( The 29.lbc8 a6 30 ..:e6+ cJi>d7 (30 . . . ii.d6
black king will be in trouble all 3 l .lbe7+ lbxe7 32.i.xe7 i.f5 33.
over the board. 1 7 . e6 + ? ! was .Uxd6+ cxd6 3 4 . f8 � l:txf8 3 5 .
clearly worse, giving away need­ ..ixf8+-) 3 1. .l:!.e8 ..i f5 3 2 . lbf3 b6
lessly a strong pawn Balcerak - 3 3 . axb6 cxb6 3 4 . lbx b 6 + cJi> c 6
Grabarczyk, Polanica Zdroj 2000) 35 .lbd5 a 5 36.lbe3 i. d 7 3 7 . f5+-.
17 . . . cJi>c7 18.lbd6 ii.e6 19.b4! cxb4
20.c3 ! b3 (20 . . . lbxe5? 2 l . lbb5+-;
20 . . . a5 2 l .cxb4 axb4 [Link].d2 b3
23.lbd4+-) 2 l .lbd4±.
15.h4!
White intends to chase the
black knight.
15 ... ..ie7
15 . . . h 5 16 . ..ig5 ! Black has
solved one of the problems - the
knight is safe. There appeared 1 6 . lb d 6 + ! ± cxd6 1 7.exd6
another problem, though - the .i.e6
white bishop now became too White did not win any mate­
powerful and Black's develop­ rial as a result of his combina­
ment is seriously hampered. tion. His positional achi eve­
1 6 . . . i.g4 ( 16 . . .l:.b8 17.a6 b6 18. ments are not strikingly obvious
lbc3 c6 19.lbe4 i.e6 20 . .l:tadl ii.d5 either. The essence of White's
2 1 .l:.e3 c4 22.lbd4 i.b4 23.lbb5±) deep and effective idea is the
17.lbfd2 . Black can now choose quite unstable and vulnerable
between a lot of moves, and none position of the black king. It will
of them satisfactory: 1) 17 . . . b6 have to survive an imminent se­
1 8 . axb6 cxb6 1 9 . lbc4 ..ie6 2 0 . vere onsl aught . Or 1 7 . . . i.xc2
lbxb6 l:t b 8 2 l . lb a4+- ; 2 ) 1 7 . . . 1 8 . dxe7 lbxe7 1 9 . i. e3 lbc6 2 0 .
lbxe 5? 1 8 . lbc4 f6 ( 1 8 . . . lbxc4?? l:.ac l ! ..ig6 2 l . a6 bxa6 22.llxc5
1 9 .lbf6+ cJi>d8 20 . .Ue8#) 19.lbxf6+ lbd8 23.i.d4+ lbe6 24.i.xg7 l::.h 7
gxf6 [Link].xf6 l:tg8 2 l .lbxe5+-; 3) 25 . ..if6+-; 23 . . . cJi>f8 24.h5±.
17 . . . cJi>d7 18.f4 cJi>c6 19 . .:te3 l:te8 18.dxe7 lbxe7 19.lbe5 lbf5
20.l:tc3 cJi>d5 2 l .b4. The black king 19 . . . l:.d8 20.i.e3 l:td5 2 l . lbd3
is quite uncomfortable in the b6 2 2 . axb6 axb6 2 3 . b 4 cxb4

218
 7. de tl:Jf5 8. �dB 'it>dB 9. ti:Jc3 'it>eB 10.h3

24.�xb6+- .
20.J:.a4!
This is another non-standard
development of the rook! The
B erlin endgame is abundant
with plenty of beautiful original
ideas of attack and defence.
20 'it>e7 2 1 JU4 l:.ac8 22.b4!
..•

b6 23.bxc5 bxc5 24.i.a3 g5

25 . .:tfe4 ltJxh4 26.ltJxf7 'it>xf7 held the advantage in some of
27 .l:.xe6 l::t h e8 28 . .:txe8 .:txe8 the games ! The most recent ex­
29.l:.xe8 'it>xe8 ample is Korneev - Sandipan,
Senden 2002.
14.:ta3!
We suggest this energetic
move that hasn't been tested in
practice yet.
14 ...h6
Or 14 . . . ii.d7 15. tl:Jeg5 c4 ( 1 5 . . .
h6 16.e6 fxe6 [Link]:Jxe6±) 16.e6 !
fxe6 1 7 .ti:Jxe6 ! i.xa3 ( 1 7 . . . ii.xe6
18.l:lae3±) [Link]:Jxc7±.
30.a6!+- Bl ack creates irreparable
This is practically decisive. weaknesses with 1 4 . . . c4? ! 1 5 .
The endgame now is an easy win :tal ! (The rook retreats calmly to
for White. 30 . . . 'it>d7 (30 . . . c4 3 1 . its initial square and the knight
i.c5+- ) 3 l . i.xc5 'it>c6 3 2 . i.xa7 on f3 will soon head for the won­
'it>b5 3 3 . ii.c 5 ! 'it>xa6 3 4 . i. f8 g4 derful d4- outpost . ) 1 5 . . . i. b 4
(34 . . . h5 3 5 . ii.e 7+-) 3 5 . i.xh6+­ ( 1 5 . . . i.f5 1 6 . ti:Jd4±) 1 6 . c3 i.f8
Adams - Almas i , Las Vegas 17.0Jd4±.
1999. This important game is 14 . . . l:.a6 1 5 . .l:ld3 i.f5 1 6 . g4
something like a huge milestone i.xe4 1 7 J 1xe4 l1e6 1 8 . ii.f4 h5
in the theory of the Berlin end­ [Link].g3 hxg4 2 0 . hxg4 ii.e7 2 1 .
game. ti:Jd2 i.h4 22.f4 ii.xg3 2 3 . .:Xg3±
This is a quite standard situa­
d2) 13 a5 •.• tion. White achieved a big advan­
(diagram) tage with his kingside pawn ad­
This contemporary position vance.
was played five times recently 14 . . . b6 1 5 . l:t d 3 i.f5 (After
and amazingly White didn't win 15 . . . i.b7 White attacks with the
it even once. As a rule White already familiar motive: [Link]:Jf6+
played some good moves and gxf6. There is no other move: -

219
Chapter 28

16 . . . We7?? 1 7 . .l:td7+ We6 18 .lt:Jg5+ l:tc6 ( 1 8 . . . lt:Jxe5? ! 1 9 . ..if4 l1 e 6

Wf5 19.g4# - 1 7 . exf6+ ..ie7 18. ( 1 9 . . . f6 20 . ..ixe5 fxe5 2 1..U d5±;
lt:Je5 lt:J f8 1 9 . fxe7 lt:Je6 2 0 . lt:Jg4 19 . . . lt:Jxd3?? 2 0 . lt:Jf6+ Wd8 2 1 .
W x e 7 2 1 . ..i g5 + W e B 2 2 . f4 h5 l:te8#) 2 0 . ..ixe5 .Uxe5 2 1..U d5 f6
23 .lt:Je5 Wf8 2 4 . lt:Jxf7+-) 1 6 . g4 ( 2 1 . . . l:txd5?? 2 2 . lt:Jf6 + Wd8 2 3 .
i.e6 1 7 .lt:Jeg5 i.e7 [Link]:Jxe6 fxe6 .l:le8#) [Link]:Jxf6+ gxf6 23.l:.dxe5+
1 9 . 'iii> g 2 �d8 ( 1 9 . . . h5 20. lt:Jg5±) fxe5 24 . .lh:e5+-) 19 . .U.c3 b6 20.f4
2 0 . lh d 8 + 'iii> x d8 2 1 . 'iii> g3 'iti> d 7 i.e7 2 1 . .U.d1 lt:Jh4 22.g4 lt:Jf3+ 23.
22 .l:td 1 + W c 6 23 . ..ig5 h 6 (23 . . . lt:Jxf3 ..ixe4 [Link]:Jd2 ..id5 25.f5 c4
il.xg5 2 4 . lt:Jxg5 lt:Jxe5 2 5 .lt:Jxe6 26.bxc4 h5 27.g5+- or 15 . . . ..id7
lt:Jc4 26.b3 lt:Jd6 [Link]:Jxg7+-) 24. 16.c4! (White is often sacrific­
..ixe7 lt:Jxe7 25.h4±. ing a pawn to create an attack
against the enemy king in this
line and the lack of queens on the
board seems to be immaterial.
White has to be cautious never­
theless ; otherwise he is risking
a lot. ) 16 . . . ..ixa4 ( 1 6 . . . :a6 1 7 .
l:.ed 1 ! ..ixa4 18 .b3 ..ic6 19.l:!.d8+
We7 20 .lt:Jxc5 l::i. b 6 2 l . ..ia3+-) 17.
lt:Jf6+ gxf6 18.exf6+ i.e7 19 .lt:Je5
l::i.h 7 20.b3 ! ..ic6 2 1 .lt:Jxc6 bxc6 22.
15J:td3!± ..ia3 lidS 23.l:txd8+ 'iti>xd8 24.fxe7
Black has certain problem to lt:Jxe7 25 . ..ixc5+-. We have to
complete his development, for point out that the line with 10 . . .
example: 1 5 . . . l:ta6 (Black i s try- lt:Je7 is in the process of develop­
ing to imitate White developing ment. Both sides have plenty of
his rook in this original fashion, resources at their disposal and
but it is not enough to equalize . ) only the future G M practice will
16 .i.e3 i.f5 [Link]:Jfd2 l:tb6 1 8.b3 help clarify the issue.

220
Chapter 29 l .e4 e5 2.l2Jf3 l2Jc6 3.i.. b 5 l2Jf6 4.
0-0 l2Jxe4 5.d4 l2Jd6 6.i..x c6 dxc6
7 .dxe5 l2Jf5 8. �xd8+ �xd8 9.l2Jc3
i.. d7
Berlin Endgame

right decision.
12 ...b6
Black has tried some other
moves here:
Black can repel the knight
immediately: 12 . . . h6 1 3 . tt:Jge4
.td7 tt:Je7 1 4 . .tb2 tt:Jg6 1 5 .ti:Je2
i.d7 16.£3±;
After 12 . . . c5 White should
better play 1 3 .i.b2 h6 [Link]:Jge4
This natural developing move i.c6 1 5 . tt:J d 5 . As you can s e e
was played for the first time White's knight has occupied
in this position in 1996 accord­ that wonderful outpost and that
ing to the database. It looks quite emphasizes the drawbacks of
amazing to unders tand why Black's move ( 1 2 . . . c5). Black's
Black never tried it before? The p o sition is stil l defendable ,
move became popular quickly though 1 5 . . . b6 1 6 . c4 'it>b7 1 7 .
and now comprises one of the l:td3:;t;
i n t e n s e l y analysed and fre ­ 1 2 . . . a5 13.i.b2 b6 14.l1d3 .te7
quently played lines o f the Ber- 1 5 .tt::lge4 .td7 16.a4 �d8 17.l::!. ad 1
lin endgame. ti:Jh4 [Link]::l e 2 .tf5 [Link]:d8+ .txd8
lO.l:.dl 'it>c8 [Link]::l 2g3 .tg6 2 1 .£3 (This idea is
The king must go to c8. The quite possible. White is not in a
e8-square is "reserved" for the hurry to start his kingside pawn
bishop! In case Black really plays advance, but solidifies the knight
10 . . . We8, White can follow with on e4 first. This can be very ef­
the simple l l .b3. fective whenever Black has no
ll .ti:Jg5 i.e8 12.b3! active ideas at his disposal . )
White used to hesitate for a 2 l . . . ti:Jf5 [Link]:Jxf5 .txf5 23.e6! (We
long time about what the best have already seen this idea of
disposition of forces was. Nowa­ exchanging pawns. After the loss
days it has been proved that the of the g7-pawn, Black's pawn
fianchettoing of the bishop is the structure on the kingside is con-

22 1
 Chapter 29

siderably weakened.) 23 . . . i.xe6 lZ:lg5 l:tf8 24.c4;!; The weakness of

24. i.xg7 i.e7 (24 . . . f5 [Link]:lf2±) the f7 and h4-pawns is perceiv­
25.i.f6 i.c5+ [Link]:lxc5 bxc5 27.c4 able. ) 16.g3 c5 ( 16 . . . l::t d8 1 7 Jlxd8
.if5 2 8 . g4 i.c2 2 9 J�d8+ <Jtb7 .txd8 18 . .Ud1 <Jtc8, Teran Alvarez
30 .lld2 ! i.b 1 3 1 .l:tb2 i.g6 32.f4 - Rizouk, Coria del Rio 2003 , 19.
i.e4 33 .<Jtf2 l1e8 34.f5 (White's f3 i.d7 20 . .U.d3 lZ:lh6 2 l .g4 hxg4
kingside pawn advance wins 22.hxg4 i.e7 23. <Jtg2;!;) 1 7 .lZ:ld5
here as usual . ) 34 . . . h5 3 5 . .Ue2 (Black surrenders the d5-outpost
<Jtc8 36.gxh5 <Jtd7 37 . .U.xe4! 1-0 in order to acquire some more
Sutovsky - Grabarczyk, Ohrid space for his pieces . White keeps
200 1 . It becomes obvious that a strong initiative with an ener­
White will have an extra bishop getic play. ) 17 . . . i.c6 1 8 . c4 liad8
at the end. Black will have to give 19.1:.d2! l:the8 (White should have
a whole rook for the h-pawn . in mind Black's 19 . . . lZ:ld4, which
37 . . . lhe4 38 .<Jtf3 and then 39.h6, can be met with 20.i.xd4 cxd4 -
and the pawn proceeds to h8 ; 20 . . . i.xd5? 2 l . cx d 5 cxd4 2 2 .
12 . . . i.e7 is a quite popular l:txd4± - 2 1 .lixd4 i.a3 2 2 . .Ue 1 h4
line too. [Link]:lge4 b6 (This is a 23.g4 i.b2 24.1:.d3 i.xe5 [Link]:lg5
fashionable position. ) 14.h3 ( 14. l:.d7 26.ltxe5 f6 27 .l:te6 fxg5? 28.
.Ud3 <Jtb7 1 5 . i.b2 leads to the l:txc6 <Jtxc6 [Link]:lb4+ <Jtc5 30 .:Xd7
main line by transposition. The <Jtxb4 3 U :txc7+-; 27 . . . i.xd5 28.
move 14.h3 was played by the lhd5 :Xd5 29.cxd5 fxg5 30.l:te5±)
renowned expert of the Berlin 20 .1:.ad1 .l:.d7 (Black has better
endgame for White - GM [Link]­ chances of survival after 20 . . . -tfB
logan and helped him to beat a 2 l .lZ:lg5 1:.d7 22 .<Jth2 lZ:ld4 23.f4
very strong opponent, so we de­ i.xd5 24.cxd5 f6 25.i.xd4 cxd4
cided to show you his game in 26 .lZ:lf3 fxe5 27.fxe5 l:txd5 - or
order to acquaint you better with 27 . . . i.c5 28 .b4 i.xb4 29Jlxd4;!; -
the fine points of this position. 28.lhd4 lhd4 29 . .U.xd4 �c6 30.g4
The theory of this line is in the hxg4 3 l..Uxg4 <Jtd5 32.�g3 c5 33.
process of formation, so no one <Jtf4 l:te7 34.llg2 llfl+ 35.�e3 i.e7
can tell what line will be consid­ 36.h4;!;. Black's suffering contin­
ered as best for White in the near ues. White is going to displace
future. ) 14 . . . <Jtb7 1 5.i.b2 h5 ( 1 5 . . . the black king from the centre
l:td8 16.:Xd8 i.xd8 1 7 . .Ud1 i.e7 with checks and then occupy
1 8 . £3 c5 1 9 .lZ:ld5 i.c6 [Link]:lxe7 the e 4 - s quare with his own
i.xe4 2 l . fxe4 lZ:lxe7 22.e6 f6 23. king. Still that was Black's best
.Ud7 l:te8 24.g4 h6 25.<Jtf2 g5 26. choice. ) 2 l . f4 i.d8 ( 2 1 . . .h4 22.g4
i.xf6 lZ:lg8 27.i.e5 l:txe6 28.lhc7+ lZ:lg3 [Link]:lxg3 hxg3 24.g5 a5 25.
<Jta6 29 . ..ltg7 lhe4 30J:tc8 lZ:le7 3 1 . <Jtg2±) 22.g4 hxg4 23.hxg4 lZ:lh6
.l:.h8+- ; 18 . . . h5 19.Wf2 h4 20 . ..1tc1 24.g5 ! (White opts for such dis­
c5 2 l .lZ:ld5 i.c6 [Link]:lxe7 lZ:lxe7 23. position of pawns on the kingside

222
 9. llJc3 i..d 7 IO. �dl �c8 11.0,g5 il.e8 12. b3

often, but here Black fails to ex­ There are two basic possibilities
ploit the weakening of the f5 and now:
g4-squares . ) 24 . . . lt::lf5 (24 . . . lt::l g4 1) The line 15 . . . f6 seems to be
25 . .U.e1 .:.hs 26.f5 i..x d5 27.cxd5 too risky. After 1 6 . exf6 gxf6
l:Ih3 28.e6 fxe6 29.fxe6 l:le7 30.d6 1 7 .lt::l e 2 (We have already seen
cxd6 3 1 . lt::l x d6+ �c6 3 2 .lt::l f5+- ) the same pawn structure in the
25 . .l:lh2 i.. e 7 (25 . . . f6 26.gxf6 gxf6 game Leko - Kramnik, see the
[Link]::l exf6 i..x f6 28. exf6±) 26.�£2 main line). Black's pieces are a
.Ued8 2 7 . lt::l g 3 lt::l d 4 ( 2 7 . . . lt::l x g3 bit more active indeed, but the
2 8 . �xg3 i.xd5 2 9 . cxd5 l:txd5 weak pawns need additional pro­
3 0 Jhd5 .l:txd5 3 1 .l:th7 i.. f8 3 2 . tection and that is more relevant.
.l:.h8 Il.d8 3 3 . f5 �c6 34.�g4 �d7 17 . . . l:tf8 [Link]::lf4 lt::l d 6 [Link]::lg 3 i.. f7
35.�h5±) 28. i..xd4 i..xd5 29.cxd5 20.l:l.e 1 l::tfe8 2 1..U de3 i.. d 8 (2 1 . . .
.l:txd5 [Link]::l f5 i.. f8 3 1 ..l:!h7. White i..f8 22.i..xf6 Itxe3 23.fxe3±) 22.
finally managed to penetrate the l:txe8 i.xe8 23.c4 i.. f7 [Link]::l e 6 f5
enemy kingside and exploit the 25.c5 White finally gained access
weaknesses there. The material to the enemy weaknesses. 25 . . .
is still equal, but Black's fate is lt::l e4 (25 . . . i..x e6 2 6 . .U.xe6 bxc5 27.
sealed. 3 l . . . cxd4 3 2 .lt::l x g7 .:.a5 i.. e5 'it>c8 28. i.. x d6 �d7 29.l:th6
33.a4 d3 [Link]::lf5 b5 35 . .U.xf7 bxa4 cxd6 3 0 .lt::l xf5 d5 3 l . g4 a5 3 2 .
36.bxa4 l:.xa4 3 7 .'it>f3 d2 3 8 . e6 h 4 a 4 33 .l:Ixh7+ � e 6 34 . .l:.h6+
i.. c 5 3 9 . e 7 li d 3 + 4 0 . � e 2 1-0 'it>e5 35.lhc6 axb3 36.axb3 �f4
Bologan - [Link], Bled 2002. 3 7 . .l:f.xc5 i.. b 6 3 8 . l:.xd5 l:l.a2 3 9 .
This was an excellent win. We lt::le 3+-) [Link]::lx e4 i.. x e6 [Link]::l d 6+
have to admit that GM [Link] cxd6 28.lhe6 dxc5 29.l1h6 i.. c 7
has contributed a lot to the 30 . .U.xh7 l:f.d8 31 .g4! This beauti­
theory of the Berlin Endgame ful move is defending against the
for White and had plenty of checkmate on the first rank and
beautiful and instructive victo­ helps create a passed pawn. 3 1 . . .
ries . fxg4 (3 1 . . .l:td5 32.gxf5 lhf5 33.h4
13.i..b 2 i.. e 7 b5 34.h5 c4 3 5 .h6 cxb3 36.axb3
Black can also play: 13 .. .'it>b7 l:th5 37 .l:f.e7 .l:txh6 38.i.. e 5+-) 3 2 .
14.l:td3 i.. e 7 1 5 .lt::l ge4 i.e5 .U.c8 33.f3 �b8 34.lhc7 l:l.xc7
35 .'it>f2 �c8 (35 . . . gxf3 36 .h4+-)
36.i.xc7 �xc7 37 .fxg4+-;
2) 15 . . . c5 1 6 .lt::l d 5 i.. c 6 1 7 . c4
l:.he8 18.l:.f3 ! (GM A. Grischuk
is forcing the black knight to
occupy a quite unfavourable
square with this rather original
manoeuvre, instead of proceed­
ing with the schematic pawn ad-

223
 Chapter 29

vance. It is quite often that the i.e3 'it>c6 30.cxb5+ 'it>xb5 3 l . li:J2c3
habitual "common sense" play is 'it>b4 [Link]:Jd5 i.xd5 33.ltxd5 'it>xb3
not the key to success in the Ber­ 34.ltd7 li:Jg6 35 . .Uxa7±; 15 . . . Wb7
lin endgame . ) 1 8 . . . li:Jh6 1 9 . h3 1 6 .llad 1 l:.h6 1 7 .li:Je2 c5 1 8 . c4
llad8 20.l;Id1 g6 2 l .g4 (White's i.c6 1 9 . li:J4g3 li:Jxg3 2 0 . li:Jxg3;!;
pawn offensive is very effective !.Herrera - Rizouk, Spain 2002.
now, while the black knight is in 15.lld3 lidS [Link]
a helpless situation . ) 2 1 . . .i.h4
22.l::t fd3 li:Jg8 (22 . . . f5 [Link]:Jef6 .Ue6
[Link]:Jf4 .:.Xd3 25.:Xd3 l:te7 26.£3;!;)
2 3 . f4 h6 (23 . . . f5 [Link]:Jef6 li:Jxf6
[Link]:Jxf6 �xd3 26.lhd3±) [Link]:Jd2
h5 (24 . . . f5 [Link]:Jf.3 i.e7 26.gxf5
gxf5 27. 'it>£2±. The threat of the
white's rooks penetrating down
the open g-file, is forcing Black
to additional concessions . ) 2 5 .
li:J£3 i.e7 26. 'it>£2 hxg4 27 . hxg4 16 ...l:txd3
l:d7 28.l:h1 (Black managed to We sugge st you answered
avoid the opening of the g-file, 16 . . .'it>c8 with 17 .li:Je2! (This is an
but the h-file spells disaster for idea of GM [Link]. Its es­
Black as well . ) 28 . . . i.d8 29.l:f.h7 sence can be summari z e d in
a5 30 J1d2 a4 3 l .f5 gxf5 32.gxf5 short like that: the move h2-h3
li:Je7 33 .li:Jxe7 l:texe7 34.£'6 l:txd2+ is not always favourable for
[Link]:Jxd2 .U.d7 36.'it>e3 'it>c8 37.�g7 White. The plan g2-g3 , h2-h4 and
'it>b7 38.i.c3 'it>a6 [Link]:Je4 a3 40. li:Je2-f4 is also possible and inter­
li:Jg5 1-0 Grischuk - Morozevich, esting. White's other tries did not
Wijk aan Zee 2002. Black's fl. produce too much until now, for
pawn is lost and that ends the example: 17.h3?! h5 [Link] lhd3
game. [Link].xd3 h4 20.i.g5 Ir.h5 2 1 .1:£3
[Link]:Jge4 'it>b7 li:Jd4 2 2 . i. x e 7 li:Jxf3 + 2 3 . gxf3
14 . . . h5 15 J1d3 i.d7, Nyysti ­ �xe5= Rowson - Miles, Scarbo­
Ferguson, Halkidiki 2002, 1 6 . rough 200 1 ; 19 . . . i.d7 [Link]:Je2 l:te8
�ad 1 ! i. e 6 ( 16 . . . !Id8 1 7 .g3 ! i.e6 2 l . i.b2 a5 22.g4 hxg4 23. hxg4
18 .h4 'it>b7 19 .li:Je2 i.d5 [Link]:J4c3 li:Jh4 24.£3 li:Jg6 ; 22.g3 c5oo Bakre
i.e6 2 l .li:Jf4 g5 22.lhd8 lhd8 23. - Aleksandrov, C alcutta 2002)
lhd8 i.xd8 [Link]:Jxe6 fxe6 25.hxg5 17 . . . lhd3 ( 1 7 . . . h5 18.g3 c5 [Link]:Jf4
i.xg5 [Link]:Je4±) 1 7 . g3 g5 18 .h3 :txd3 20 . .l:r.xd3 i.c6 2 1 . £3 g5 22.
'it>b7 [Link]:Je2 l:lad8 20.i.c1 �xd3 li:Jd5±) 18.�d3 i.d7 19.g3 h5 20.
2 U1xd3 l:tg8 22.£3 c5 23 .'it>f2 c4 li:Jf4 lth6 2 l .h4 c5 22.c4 i.c6 23.£3
[Link] l cxb3 2 5 . axb3 c5 26 . g4 a5 24. a4;!;.
hxg4 27.hxg4 li:Jh4 28.c4 b5 29. 17J�xd3 h5

224
 9.llx3 i..d 7 10. �d1 <l;cB 1 1. tbg5 i..eB 12. b3

17 . . . c5 (This is a logical move,

but it has not been tested in prac­
tice , so here is our analysis . )
1 8 . tt:\d5 i.. c6 1 9 . c4 .l:e8 2 0 . g4 !
tt:\h6 (Black must surely feel re­
luctant to play so passively, but
here this move is the least of
evils. The pawn sacrifice : 20 . . .
tt:\d4 might seem attractive with
the idea to activate the bishops. Black is in fact reduced to only
2 l . i.. x d4 cxd4 2 2 . lhd4 i. a 3 . defending. His basic hope is to
White in his stead can keep and exploit the strength of the two
even increase his advantage with bishops with time.
a pawn sacrifice ofhis own: 23.f4 18 <l;c8!?
.•.

.tb2 24.l:ld3 f6 [Link]:\exf6! Captur­ Black is simply developing his

ing with the other knight is just light-squared bishop once again
the same. 25 . . . gxf6 [Link]:\xf6 :e7 ensuring the d7-square for it.
27 .<1;£2 i.. c l 28. <i;g3 <l;c8 29.g5 White hasn't proved his advan­
i.. d 7 3 0 . tt:\x d 7 :xd 7 3 1 . lh d 7 tage in that position yet.
Wxd7 3 2 . W f3 W e 6 3 3 . 'it> e4+- ) Black is slightly worse after
2 l .f3 a5 22.a4. Black's eventual 18 . . . c5 1 9 . tt:\d5 .tc6 2 0 . c4 l:Ie8
counterplay on the queenside 2 l ..tb2 a5 22.a4 h4 23.f3;!;.
was stopped in its tracks and 18 . . . f6 This is a risky move.
now White can improve his posi­ Black's pawns on the kingside
tion at ease, for example: 22 . . . become very weak and the hopes
tt:\ g8 2 3 . W g 2 h 6 2 4 . Wg3 i.f8 for counterplay are futile. 19.exf6
[Link]:\f4 tt:\e7 26.e6 f6 27 .tt:\d5 <l;c8 gxf6 [Link]:\e2 c5 2 l . i.b2 :rs 22.
28.f4 tt:\xd5 29 . cxd5 i.b7 30 .Wf3 tt:\f4 i.c6 23.£'3 tt:\h4 [Link]:\d5 f5 25.
.ta6 3 1.l:t d l c4 32.f5 cxb3 33 .d6 tt:\ef6 i.d6 26.g3 tt:\g6 2 7 . tt:\xh5
cxd6 34. tt:\xd6+ i.. x d6 3 5 . :xd6 White's position is so strong that
..t b 7 + 3 6 . Wf4 b5 3 7 . :d7 bxa4 he can afford to win a pawn in
38.hg7 :ds 39.i..xf6 a3 40 . .txd8 numerous ways. 27 . . . :es 28.Wf2
b 2 4 l . ltg8 .t c 6 42 . ..tf6 + W b 7 tt:\ e 5 2 9 . i.x e 5 .t x e 5 3 0 . tt:\ hf4
43.i.e5 W a 7 44J�b8 a 2 45.i.xb2 i.d4+ 3 l .Wfl a5 32.c3 .tg7 33.c4
<l;xb8 46.£'6+-. i.d4 34.a4 :hs 3 5 .h4± Leko -
[Link];!; Kramnik, Budapest 200 1 .
(diagram) 19.g3!
White is better, because he This is another idea of GM
can play actively both in the cen­ A . B e z godov, which promi s e s
tre and on the kingside. He can White excellent prospects . 1 9 .
rely to create a dangerous passed g3 is a multi - p u r p o s e m o v e
pawn on the kingside , while with which White's pawn struc-

225
Chapter 29

ture on the kingside becomes .l::i.e 7 35.lth3+-. Black will have to

more flexible and mobile. White give a whole rook for the passed
is not afraid now of the blocking pawn) 34.g6 .l:Ie7 35 .l:.h3 .Ue8 36.
h5-h4 pawn move, because of the :i.h8 �d7 37 .�£2 :cs 38 .l:th7+
simple g3-g4 and the change of lDe7 [Link] l:.g8 40.�f3 c6 4 1 .
the pawn formation on the king­ lDf4+-.
side is definitely in favour of
Whit e . The white king steps
on g2 and becomes an active
piece supporting White's pawn
offence effectively. White can
counter Black's eventual threats
along the a8-h l diagonal with
the solid f2-f3. The line 19. i.g5
provokes simplifications fa­
vourable only for Black - 19 . . .
Sl.d7 20 . h3 .Ue8 2 l .i.xe7 lDxe7 20.�g2!;!;
22.lDg5 lDg6 23.lDxf7 � Svidler ­ 1 ) 20 . . . h4 2 l . g4 h3+ ( 2 1 . . .lDh6
P. Nielsen, Bremen 2 0 0 2 , and 22.£3±) 22.�f3 lDh4+ 23.�g3 lDg6
Black's counterplay proved to be 24.f4 Sl.h4+ 25.�£3 (Black fails to
enough for a draw. harm White's king in any way. )
19 ....td7 25 . . . c5 2 6 . lDd5 i.c6 2 7 . c4 �d8
This is a logical and solid 28 . .tb2 lDe7 29.lDec3 lDxd5 30.
move . The other possibility is lDxd5 i.d7 3 l .f5±;
advantageous for White 19 . . . h4?! 2) 20 . . . ..te6 2 1 . lDe2 .U.d8 22.
20.g4 lDh6 2 l . h3 f5 (Black will lDf4 :xd3 ( 2 2 . . . .td5 2 3 . f3 g6
have no counterplay without this 2 4 . lD c 3 i.e6 2 5 Jh d 8 + � x d 8
move. The same applies to 2 1 . . . 26.lDxe6+ fxe6 27.lDe4 a 5 28.c3
f6 ) 2 2 . exf6 gxf6 2 3 J H3 i.g6 b5 29.g4 hxg4 30.fxg4 lDg7 3 1 .
[Link] .txc2 25.lDfe4 �d7 26.g5 � g3 ± ; 2 3 . . . h4 2 4 . lDx d 5 cxd5
lDgB ( 2 6 . . . l:tg8 2 7 . �fl +-) 2 7 . 25.lDg5 hxg3 26.hxg3 lDh6 27.
:te3±; 1 9 . . . c5 20.lDd5 .tc6 2 l .c4 e6;!;) 2 3 . cxd3 g6 2 4 . lDxe6 fxe6
l:Id8 22.i.b2 a5 23.a4. Black can 25.i.b2 c5 26.h3 a5 27.g4 hxg4
not organize any counterplay. 28.hxg4 lDh6 29.�g3 lDf7 30.f4
See an example line in which lDdB 3 l . � f3 lDc6 3 2 . a3±. The
White's road to success is paved endgame is definitely in White's
with a pawn sacrifice : 23 . . . i.f8 favour. His king marches to e4
24.lDg5 ! l:1d7 25.e6 fxe6 26.lDxe6 and he pushes f4-f5 at some ap­
i.d6 27.h3 g6 28.f4 i.xd5 29.cxd5 propriate moment. The possible
I:!f7 3 0 . g4 hxg4 3 l . hxg4 lDh6 check creates additional prob­
32.f5 gxf5 33.g5 lDg8 (after the lems only for Black. 32 . . . lDd4+
pseudo-active 33 . . . lDg4? 34.g6 33.i.xd4 cxd4 34.a4 �d7 (34 . . . c5

226
 9. 4:Jc3 i.d7 JO. �dl r:J;cB 11.0,g5 [Link] 12. b3

3 5 .tLlf6 r:J;c7 3 6 . �e4 r:J;c6 3 7 . f5 25 . .l:.xe3 i.c7 26.tLlg5 f6 27.tLlf3

exf5+ 38.gxf5 gxf5+ 39.r:J;xf5 i.d8 i.f5 28.c4 i.b 1 29.a4 �d7 30 .r:J;f2
40.r:J;e6+-) 35.tLlf6+ r:J;c6 36.r:J;e4 l:.e6 3 1 .tLlh4 fxe5 32.i.xe5 i.xe5
r:J;c5 37.tLle8 c6 38.tLlc7+-; 33.fxe5 g5 34.tLlf3 g4 [Link] l:%.e8
3) 20 . . . �e8 2 l .i.b2 i.d8 22.f4 36.tLlg2 l:%.f8+ 37.tLlf4 h4 38.l:te2
c5 (22 . . . h4 23.g4 tLlh6 24.h3 f5 25. r:J;e7 3 9 . � d2±) 2 4 . g4 tLld4 2 5 .
exf6 gxf6 2 6 . tLld2 i.e7 2 7 . tLlf3 i.xd4 cxd4 26.r:J;f3± White's king
i.d6 [Link] :tg8 29.tLle4 i.e7 30. became a dominant piece and
ttJ£2 i.f5 3 1 .11d2 i.d6 32. l:.e2+-) that brought immediate results
23.tLld5 h4 (23 . . . c6 24.tLle3 tLlxe3+ - Black is losing a pawn.

Conclusion about the Berlin Endgame

This is one of the ancient methods of defence in the Ruy Lopez,
which became quite popular nowadays. Black exchanges queens early,
but this is not ending his problems. He has to consider the following:
[Link]'s king is deprived from castling and becomes a target for
an attack quite often.
[Link] has difficulties with the completion of his development,
because of his problems with the king. The hardship of connecting
the rooks makes only matters worse.
3. The knight on f5 is rather unstable. Black often loses additional
time to redeploy it to better squares. The attempt to defend against
the threat g2-g4 with the prophylactic moue h7-h5 creates more weak­
nesses on the kingside.
4. White's pawn majority on the kingside is the last, but not the
least factor in this position.
The exchanges are usually in favour of White in most of the
cases, because the importance of the future passed pawn on the
kingside increases. Black :S position has also some merits that White
should not underestimate, ifhe wants to achieve a positive result.
It is very solid and Black :S chances to turn the tables after even a
minute imprecision by White are considerable. White should not
be content with the achievement ofcertain small advantages. He
must keep his concentration and intensity till the successful end

What are White's plans to press his indisputable opening advan­

tage home ?
1. White usually has his hands free to exploit his pawn majority
on the kingside and create a winning passed pawn there if Black

227
Chapter 29

defends primitively in some old-fashioned way. White usually needs

then to exchange some pieces first. The easiest endgames to win are
the knight endgame and naturally the king and pawn endgame. It
is something like the exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez, but even
more favourable for White.
2. White can also activate his pawn majority on the kingside in
positions with many pieces on the board. The move h2-h3 is tremen­
dously crucial then and most of the games and analyses that we
have provided are based on it.
3. White also has another method of playing which is the most
enjoyable for many players - the direct attack. We have given you
plenty of examples and there is an abundance of methods for attack
too.
It is not quite easy to say how Black shouldplay to create most
problems for White. We believe that the players that have studied
our work thoroughly should not fear anything with White.

228
Index of Variations

Part 1. Rar'e System; Latvian Gambit; Philidor's Defence . . 9 .

Chapter 1 l . e4 e5 2 oliJf.3

a) 2ooo f6 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
b) 2000 i.c5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
c) 2000 i.d6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
d) 2000 d5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
e) 2000 'fle7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
0

Chapter 2 l . e4 e5 2oliJf.3 f5 3 oliJe5

3 0 0 0 'fle7; 3 0 0 0 liJc6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
0

3 0 0 0 'flf6 4oliJc4 fe 5oliJc3 c6; 5 o o oliJe7; 50 0 0 'fle6; 5 0 0 0 'flg6 0 0 0 2 1 0

3 0 0 0 'flf6 4oliJc4 fe 5oliJc3 'flfl 6 oliJe3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

Chapter 3 l . e4 e5 2oliJf.3 d6 3 od4

a) 3 0 0 0 i.g4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 0 00 000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 24
b) 3 0 0 0 f5 4oliJc3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
b1) 4oliJc3 e d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
b2) 4oliJc3 liJf6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
b3) 4oliJc3 fe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
c) 3 0 0 0 liJd7 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 00 00 000 0 0 0 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

Chapter 4 l . e4 e5 2oliJf.3 d6 3od4 ed 4oliJd4

a) 40 0 0 g6 5oliJc3 i.g7 6oi.e3 liJe7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

a1) 6oi.e3 liJf6 7o 'ftd2 0-0 8 0 0-0-0 liJc6 0 0 0 3 1
a2) 6oi.e3 liJf6 70 'fld2 0-0 8 0 0-0-0 l:te8 0 0 0 33
b) 4o o o lijf6 5oliJc3 il.e7 6oil.f4 0-0 7o 'fld2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
b1) 7o 'fld2 d5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
b2) 7o 'fld2 a6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37
b3) 7o 'fld2 c6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38
b4) 7o 'ftd2 liJc6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39

229
Index of Variations

Chapter 5 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 d6 3 . d4 li:lf6 [Link] lll e 4 5 . �d5

5 . . . f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a) 5 . . . lll c 5 6 . ..tg5 ..te7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1

b) 5 . . . lll c 5 6 . ..tg5 �d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Part 2. Petroff Defence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

. . .

Chapter 6 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 lllf6 3 .llle 5

3 . . . lll e 4; 3 . . . �e7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

3 . . . d6 4.lllf3 li:le4 5.d4 ..te7 6 . ..td3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49

Chapter 7 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lf6 3 .li:le5 d6 [Link]:lf3 lll e4 5.d4 d5 6 . ..ii. d 3

6 . . . lll c 6 7.0-0 ..tg4 8 . c4 Af3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1

a) 6 . . . li:lc6 7.0-0 i.g4 8.c4 li:lf6 [Link] c3 i.e7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
b) 6 . . . lll c 6 7.0-0 i.g4 8.c4 li:lf6 [Link] c3 ..tf3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Chapter 8 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lf6 3 .li:le5 d6 4.lllf3 lll e 4 5.d4 d5 6 . ..td3

i.d6 7. 0-0 0-0 8.c4

8 . . . i.g4; 8 . . . li:lf6; 8 . . . .te6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

8 . . . c6 9. �c2 li:lf6; 9 . . . f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 . . . . .

8 . . . c6 9. �c2 .lieS [Link] c3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Chapter 9 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lf6 3 .li:le5 d6 [Link]:lf3 li:le4 5.d4 d5 6 . ..td3

..ii. d6 7.0-0 0-0 8.c4 c6 9. �c2 li:la6 10.a3

a) 1 0 . . . f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
b) 10 . . . l:te8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
c) 10 . . . ..tg4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1

Chapter 10 l . e4 e 5 [Link]:lf3 li:lf6 3 .li:le5 d6 [Link]:lf3 li:le4 5.d4 d 5 6 . .td3

..te7 7 . 0-0

7 . . . lll d 6; 7 . . . li:lf6; 7 . . . Ag4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

a) 7 . . 0-0
. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
. . ... .. . . . 64
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

b) 7 . . . ..tf5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

230
 Index of Variations

Chapter 1 1 l . e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 tt:Jf6 3 .lt:Je5 d6 [Link]:Jf3 lt:Je4 5.d4 d5 6 . ..id3

!1L.e7 7. 0-0 lt:Jc6 8.c4

8 . . . !1Le6; 8 . . . 0-0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
8 ... ..ig4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
a) 8 . . . lt:Jf6 9.h3 lt:Jb4; 9 . . . !1Le6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
a1) 9.h3 0-0 10 .lt:Jc3 de . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
a2) 9.h3 0-0 [Link]:Jc3 lt:Jb4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71
b) 8 . . . lt:Jb4 9.!1L.e2 !1Le6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
b1) 9.!1L.e2 de. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
b2) 9.!1L.e2 0-0 [Link]:Jc3 without 10 . . . !1L.f5; 10 . . . !1L.e6 . . . . . 74

Chapter 1 2 1 . e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 tt:Jf6 3 .lt:Je5 d6 [Link]:Jf3 lt:Je4 5.d4 d5 6 . ..id3

!1L.e7 7. 0-0 lt:Jc6 8.c4 lt:Jb4 9 . ..ie2 0-0 10 .lt:Jc3 !1L.f5 1l.a3
lt:Jc3 12 .bc lt:Jc6 13.l:te1

a) 13 . . . de . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
b) 13 . . . l:te8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
c) 13 . . . !1Le6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
d) 13 . . . !1Lf6 14.!1L.f4 lt:Je7 . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
d1) 14.!1L.f4 l:tc8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79
d2) 14.!1L.f4 de . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
d3) 14 . ..if4 lt:Ja5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Chapter 1 3 l . e4 e5 [Link]:Jf3 lt:Jf6 3 .lt:Je5 d6 [Link]:Jf3 lt:Je4 5 . d4 d5 6.!1L.d3

!1L.e7 7. 0-0 lt:Jc6 8.c4 lt:Jb4 9 . ..ie2 0-0 [Link]:Jc3 !1Le6 1 1 .lt:Je5

1 1 . . . lt:Jc3 ; 1 1 . . . !1Ld6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
a) 11 . . . c5 [Link]:Je4 de 13.d5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
a1) 13.d5 !1L.d6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
a2) 13.d5 'i!tc7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
a3) 13.d5 !1Lc8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
b) 1 1 . . . f6 [Link]:Jf3 lt:Jc3 ; 12 . . . l:tc8; 12 . . . f5; 12 . . . 'i!td7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
b1) [Link]:Jf3 c 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
b2) 12 .lt:Jf3 lle8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
b3) [Link]:Jf3 'iti>h8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

23 1
Index of Variations

Part 3. Ruy Lopez without 3 a6 ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . 90

Chapter 14 l . e4 e5 2 ott:::lf3 tt:::l c6 3o.ib5

3 0 0 0 g5 ; 3 0 0 0 Jid6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 091
3 0 0 0 � f6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 092
a) 300 0 Jib4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 092
b) 3 0 0 0 tt:::l e 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 093
c) 3 0 0 0 f6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 095

Chapter 1 5 l . e4 e5 2 ott:::lf3 tt:::l c6 3 [Link]. b 5 g6 4od4

40 0 0 Jlg7 ; 40 0 0 tt:::l d4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 098 0

40 0 0 ed 5oc3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 099

Chapter 16 l . e4 e5 2ott:::lf3 tt:::l c6 3o..tb5 tt:::l d4 4ott:::l d4 ed 50 0-0

5000 g6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103
5000 tt:::l e 7; 5 0 0 0 h5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104
a) 5oo0 Jlc5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104
b) 5000 c6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105

Chapter 1 7 l . e4 e5 2 ott:::lf3 tt:::l c6 3o..tb5 d6 4od4 Jid7 5 ott:::l c 3

50 0 0 tt:::l ge7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108

a) 50 0 0 tt:::l f6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108
b) 5 0 0 0 ed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110
0

Chapter 18 l . e4 e5 2 ott:::lf3 tt:::l c6 3 o..tb5 ..tc5 4oc3

4 0 0 0 d6; 4 0 0 0 d5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112
400 0 �f6; 400 0 ..tb6; 40 00 a6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113
40 0 0 �e7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 114
a) 40 0 0 f5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115
b) 4 0 0 0 tt:::l ge7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 116

Chapter 1 9 l . e4 e5 2 ott:::lf3 tt:::l c6 3o..tb5 f5 4ott:::l c 3

4 0 0 d6; 4 o o 0 a6; 40 00 ..tc50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119

0 0 0

a) 40 0 0 Jlb4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119
0

232
 Index of Variations

b) 4 . . . li:ld4 [Link] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

b1) [Link]:lb5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
b2) [Link] c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
c) 4 . . . lllffi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

Chapter 20 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lc6 3 . .tb5 f5 [Link]:lc3 fe [Link]:le4

5 . . . a6; 5 . . . .te7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

5 . . . lijffi 6 .lll ffi gf . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 129 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5 . . . li:lffi [Link]:lffi �ffi 7 . �e2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :': . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1

Chapter 2 1 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lc6 3.i.b5 f5 [Link] c3 fe [Link]:le4 d5 [Link]:le5

de [Link]:lc6

7 . . . be . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 . . . �d5 8 . c4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Chapter 22 1 . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lc6 3 . .tb5 f5 [Link] c3 fe 5 .lll e 4 d5 [Link]:le5

de [Link] c6 "itig5 8 . "itie2

8... �g2 ; 8 . . . .tffi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

8. . . li:lffi 9.f4 "itih5 ; 9 . . . "itic5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
a) 8. . . li:lffi 9.f4 �h4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
b) 8. . . lll ffi 9.f4 "itif4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Chapter 23 l . e4 e5 2.tllf3 li:lc6 3 . .tb5" li:lffi 4.0-0

4th Black's Moves without 4 . . . .tc5 ; 4 . . . lll e 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

4 . . . i.c5 5.c3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

Chapter 24 l . e4 e5 [Link]:lf3 li:lc6 3.i.b5 lllffi 4.0-0 lll e 4 5 . d4

5th Black's Moves without 5 . . . .te7; 5 . . . li:ld6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

5 . . . i.e7 6 . �e2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Chapter 25 l . e4 e5 2.lllf3 li:lc6 3.i.b5 li:lffi 4. 0-0 li:le4 5 . d4 li:ld6

6 . .tc6

6 . . . be . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
6 . . . de 7 .de li:le4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

23 3
Index o{ Variations

Chapter 26 l . e4 e5 2.ltJf3 ltJc6 3 . .tb5 ltJf6 4.0-0 ltJe4 5.d4 ltJd6

6 . .tc6 de [Link] ltJf5 8. t'l'd8 �dB 9.ltJc3

9 . . . .tb4; 9 . . . h5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
a) 9 . . . .te7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
b) 9 . . . a5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
c) 9 . . . ltJe7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

Chapter 27 l . e4 e5 2.ltJf3 ltJc6 3 . .tb5 ltJf6 4.0-0 ltJe4 5.d4 ltJd6

6 . .tc6 de [Link] ltJf5 8. �d8 �d8 9.ltJc3 .te6 10 . .l:ld 1

a) 10 . . . �eB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
b) 1 0 . . . �c8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

Chapter 28 l . e4 e5 2.ltJf3 ltJc6 3 . .tb5 ltJf6 4. 0-0 ltJe4 5.d4 ltJd6

6 . .tc6 de [Link] ltJf5 8. �d8 �d8 9.ltJc3 �e8 10 .h3

10 . . . .tc5; 10 . . . h5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
10 . . . b6; 10 . . . .te6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
10 ... .tb4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
a) 10 . . . .te7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
b) 10 . . . h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
c) 1 0 . . . a5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
d) 10 . . . ltJe7 . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 14

Chapter 29 l . e4 e5 2.ltJf3 ltJc6 3 . .tb5 ltJf6 4.0-0 ltJe4 5 . d4 ltJd6

6 . .tc6 de [Link] ltJf5 8 . t'l'd8 �d8 9.ltJc3 .td7 10Jid1
�c8 ll.ltJg5 .te8 12.b3

12 . . . h6; 12 . . . c5; 12 . . . a5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221

12 . . . .te7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
12 . . . b6 13 . .tb2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

234
 New Books from CHESS STARS

SHIROV'S
ONE HUNDRED WINS
by S. Soloviov
316 pages, interviews, biography,
colour and b/w photos

paperback or hardcover

SUPER TOURNAMENTS 2002

556 pages + 16 pages with
colour photos
224 extensively commented
games by
Khalifman, Sakaev, Shipov etc.

For contacts:

Sergei Soloviov
E-mail:chesstars@[Link]; semkom@[Link]
Published by CHESS STARS ltd.
Printed in Bulgaria
 New Books from CHESS STARS

OPENING FOR WHITE

ACCORDING TO KRAMNIK
Vol. 5: 272 pages
Queen's Gambit Declined

"

__,#'
Sergei SOIDViDY
�

BORIS SPASSKY'S 400 LEKO'S ONE HUNDRED WINS

SELECTED GAMES by S. Soloviov
by S. Soloviov 340 pages, biography,
556 pages + photographs colour and b/w photos
cross tables, tournament results paperback or hardcover