A. Raetsky,M. Chetverik

NO PASSION FOR FASHION

Fierce Openings For Your New Repertoire © 2011 A. Raetsky, M. Chetverik English Translation© 2011 Mongoose Press

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any fo rm by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by an information storage and retrieval system, without written permissionfr om the Publisher.

Publisher: Mongoose Press 1005 Boylston Street, Suite 324 Newton Highlands, MA 02461 [email protected] www.MongoosePress.com

ISBN 978-1 -936277-26-1 Library of Congress Control Number: 2011925050

Distributed to the trade by National Book Network [email protected], 800-462-6420 For all other sales inquiries please contact the publisher.

Translated by: Sarah Hurst Layout: Andrey Elkov Editor Sean Marsh Cover Design: Kaloyan N achev Printed in China

First English edition 0987654321 CONTENTS

From the authors ...... 4

1. A. Raetsky. THE 'S ...... 5 The variation 2 ...ef 3.ll:lf3d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.lllg1 f5

2. A. Raetsky. PETROV'S DEFENSE ...... 15 The variation 3.d4 lllxe4 4.de �c5

3. M. Chetverik. THE ...... 24 The Alapin Defense 3 .. J[b4

4. A. Raetsky. THE ...... 44 The variation 2 ...lll f6 3.d4ll:lxd5 4.c4 Ci:lb4

5. M. Chetverik. ALEKHINE'S DEFENSE ...... 57 The Cambridge Gambit 2.e5 Ci:ld5 3.d4 d6 4.c4ll:lb6 5.f4 g5

6. A. Raetsky. THE FRENCH DEFENSE ...... 65 The variation 3.e5 c5 4.'i¥g4

7. M. Chetverik. THE St. GEORGE DEFENSE ...... 82 l.e4 a6

8. A. Raetsky. THE SICILIAN DEFENSE ...... 130 The Cobra system 2.Ci:lf3 lllc6 3.d4 cd 4.li"xd4 lllf6 5.ll:lc3 e6 6.ll:ldb5 �c5

9. M. Chetverik. THE ALBIN COUNTERGAMBIT ...... 149 l.d4 d5 2.c4 e5

10. A. Raetsky THE ...... 195 The variation l.d4 d5 2.lllf3c6 lll 3.g3 �g4 4 . .tg2'i¥d7

11. A. Raetsky. THE ...... 221 The variation l.c4 e5 2.lllc3 �b4 3.llld5 �a5

3 From the Authors

The theory ofthe most fashionable openings is now being updated to cover the first 30 moves, and even the first 40. The main purchasers of opening monographs are candidate masters and club players. Not many of them are looking to fill their heads with fa r too much information. So, understandably, they want to deviate from the main lines as soon as possible and prefer to choose half-forgotten variations. Con­ trary to the opinion of officialthe ory, these variations are sometimes no worse than the "sophisticated" ones. Not even the objective shortcomings of such rarities should frighten you away from trying them in practice - as besides the classical there's also Rapidplay and Blitz. Eleven opening systems are presented in this work. The authors play White more strictly than Black, and with the ten plans fo r Black there's just one fo r White (the French with �g4 in chapter 6). Seven chapters were created by Alexander Raetsky and four by Maxim Chetverik. We have frequently used games and analyses that haven't been published before. The authors are sticking with fo rms of exposition that are identical to those in our previous Russian-language works The Catalan and Th e 's Gambit Accepted - games with notes and illustrative individual lines in the systems. If the duels don't go over the limit of 30 moves they're included in fu ll, othetwise they're "cut" at the point when the course of the battle no longer has any relation to the opening. Without disregarding the computer's prescriptions, we've tried not to go overboard with specific variations and have given preference to explanations. Explaining the configuration of forces and the plans fo r both players is like hiring a navigator in the unfamiliar waters of rare systems. Hopefully the reader, armed with the unusual openings we suggest, will enjoy set­ ting fashions rather than merely fo llowing them. Chapter 1

The King's Gambit

The variation l.e4 e5 2.f4 ef 3.l2Jf3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.l2Jglf5

The glorious King's Gambit was consigned to history in the mid- l91h century. It may have seemed that the romantic opening was destined fo r oblivion, but fo rtunately the future Wo rld Champion, Boris Spassky, started using it regularly and success­ fu lly in the 1960s. Indeed, over the course of his career Spassky never lost a serious game with the King's Gambit and his victims included Bronstein, Fischer, Portisch, Karpov and Seirawan. himself was also a fan of 2 f4; he played it episodically over a period of 50 years. In more recent times, the King's Gambit has been occasionally adopted by , Alexei Fedorov and all three of the Polgar sisters. Theory books are rarely convinced about White's chances and it is still comparatively rare, but playing l...e5 nevertheless requires the second player to be prepared in the event of a "surprise". Meeting fire with fire, our recommendation is to remember that there are two f­ pawns which are permitted to move in the early stages of a game of chess.

l.e4 eS in the American Chess Quarterly, Vo l. 1 2.f4 ef (1961), No. 1. The right move is 3 ...d6!" 3.R:'lf3 Although his analyses have been fo rgot­ In the very first Spassky - Fischer ten and the American never had a chance duel (Mar del Plata, 1960) 3 ...g5 4.h4 to test them in practice, 3 ...d6 began to g4 5.R'le5 LLlf6 6.d4 d6 7.LLld3 LLlxe4 be called the Fischer Defense. 8.�xf4 was encountered, with repeated 3... d6 confirmation in practice of the com­ 4.d4 gS pensation fo r the . Fischer wrote S.h4 g4 in : "This loss 6.LLlgl spurred me to look fo r a "refutation"of In the Rapid game Morozevich the King's Gambit, which I published - Kasparov (Paris, 1995) White rejected Chapter I

this main continuation in favor of the miere (we were outdone by Metz and theoretically unsound 6.

1. K. ZUSE - T. MIKHALCHAK The tabiya of the Fischer Defense. Here 6 ...iie 7, 6 ...f3, 6 ...

6 The King's Gambit

The only makes it easier fo r ll.�d2! Black to mobilize his army and doesn't Forces an exchange of queens by inflict any inconveniences on him. aggravating the fact that the g-pawn is 7... 'il'e7+ undefended. ll.l:tcl �f5 12.d5 tt'lf6 In the event of7 ...�x f5 8.J,xf41/i' e7 + 13.l:tdl c5 14.tt'lb5 �d7 is weaker, and (unlike 8 ...1/i'e7+ 9.Ci'le2 f3) White can the pawn advantage on the queenside is cover with his knight without worrying gradually making itself felt. about losing a piece. Then again, 9.tt'le2 11... 'il'xe2+ tt'lc6 10.tt'lbc3 tt'lb4 ll.l:tcl tt'lf6 12.a3 12.tt'lgxe2 J,g6 tt'lbd5 13.tt'lxd5 tt'lxd5 14.�g5 tt'lf6 is 13.l:tel �d7 more likely to benefit Black. t4.hs .fin 8.'i¥e2 15.tt'lg3 tt'la6 After 8 . .1ie2 iixf5 9 . .1ixf4 'il'e4 He should have continued 15... 10.'ii'd2 tt'lc6 ll.tt'lc3 it goes without �c7 and l6... tt'ld7. Now 16. .1ie2tt'lh6 saying that the queen doesn't destroy 17.tt'lge4 would have been very unpleas­ the g2 pawn (ll...'il'xg2?? 12.1/i'e3+and ant fo r Black. 13.l:th2, catching the queen), but the 16.ii,d3 �e6? d4 pawn. A queen excursion after the It was essential to complete the knight g2 pawn is much more successful with maneuver (l6... tt'lb4 or 16... tt'lc7), es­ 9.tt'lc3 iih6 10.tt'ld5 'il'e4! ll.tt'lxc7+ tablishing control over d5. Black's sec­ �d7 (ll...�d8 rules out a from ond straight oversight allows Zuse to ef­ b5, but there's also no reason to rule it ficiently achieve an advantage. out!) 12.tt'lxa8 'il'xg2 13. .1ib5+ (13.,1,[3 gf 14.'i¥xf3'il'xf3 15.tt'lxf3 tt'lf6 will cer­ tainly end with the death ofthe a8 knight) 13... tt'lc6 14.d5 tt'lf6 (14 ...tt'lg e7!?) 15.dc+ be 16.1li'd4 cb 17.1li'xa7+ �d8 18.1li'c7+�e8 19.1li'b8+�e 7 19.1li'xh8. White is two rooks up, but his pieces are in such absurd corner spots that Black wins almost any way he wants to. 8... iixfS 9.J,xf4 iixc2 It's better not to take the pawn, but to solidifY an advantage in development 17.d5! �xdS with 9 ...tt'lc6 10.c3 0-0-0. 18 . .1if5+ �d8?! 10.tt'lc3 c6 The lesser of the evils is an evacua­ In the variation 10 ...tt'lc6 ll.tt'ld5 tion of the king to the queenside after l/i'xe2+ 12.�xe2 0-0-0 13. .fixg4+ �b8 18 ...�c 7 19.tt'lxd5+ cd 20.l:thfl �h6 14.tt'le2 .fig7 White won the pawn back, 2l.�xh6 tt'lxh6 22.l:te7+ �b6. Black but didn't achieve equality because of finished his development and, although his worse . now he also parts with the h7 pawn, he

7 Chapter I

somehow manages to the enemy Black - as is the sharpvariation 7 ...�e7 pawn on h5. 8.Cllc3 CfJf6 9.e5 de lO.de CfJh5 11.CfJd5 19.tllxd5 cd (Neffe - van Buelow, , 1997) 20.i.g5+! ile7 ll. ..�f7 12.�c4 C£Ja6 13.CfJe2 iie6 21.�xe7! C£Jxe7 14.�a4+ c6 15.CfJdxf4 0-0-0 16.CfJxh5 22.�el �e8 Jib4+! 17.c3 C£Jc5! Thanks to the White has an op­ 8.C£Jc3 iih6!? portunity fo r a winning h-pawn push By keeping the f4 pawn Black pre­ - 23.h6! C£Jb4 24.iixh7 C£Jbc6 25.CfJf5 vents the normal development of the Wd7 26.C£Jxe7 C£Jxe7 27.i.d3, and the queen's bishop. The modest problem path to a queen is open. of peacefully equalizing the chances is solved by 8 ...fe 9.C£Jxe4 C£Jxe4 10.�xe4+ 2. A. SHEVCHENKO - A. RAETSKY �e7 ll.�xe7+ iixe7 12.iixf4 iif5. Tallinn, 1992 9.ef+ How not to play the King's Gambit l.e4 eS was demonstrated by White in the game 2.f4 ef Zuse - Raetsky (Biel, 1994): 9.e5? de 3.CfJf3 d6 10.�xe5+? Wf7 ll.iic4+ Wg7 12.�c5 4.d4 gS �e8+ 13.Wdl b6 14.�a3 C£Jc6 15.C£Jge2 5.h4 g4 ilb7, in which he was lefta pawn down, 6.C£Jgl fS uncastled and undeveloped. 7.�e2?! 9... Wf7 10.�f2 �e8+ ll.Wdl It's better to play this immediately than out of necessity a little later. The colorful variation ll.CfJge2 g3! 12.�f3 C£Jc6 13.Wdl C£Je5! 14.de de+ 15.�d3 iixf5 16.�xd8+ �axd8+ 17.Wel iif8! (intending 18 ... ilc5 and 19... i.f2#) is illustrative - White is a knight up and with that there's a lack of even any slightly tolerable continuations. 11... g3 It's tempting to get onto the same 12.�f3 iixfS file as the king, but here the queen is 13.iic4+ preventing its own pieces from getting From a practical point of view de­ into play. fending this kind ofposition is a thankless 7... CfJf6 and most likely impossible task. Rybka The very boring continuation 7 ...fe suggests 13.�xb7 CfJbd7 14.iid3 �b8 8.�xe4+ �e7 9.�xe7+ C£Jxe7 10.i.xf4 15.�c6 �b6 16.�a4 iig4+ 17.C£Jf3,but Jig7 1l.c3 CfJbc6 is also favorable fo r that's in Black's favor too.

8 The King's Gambit

13... c.tlg7 22.'i¥xc7 Cllf2 14.ll:Jge2 �g4 23. c.tlfl 'i¥hl+ 15.'i¥xb7 24.tllg1 Cllg4 White resigned.

3. A. BALZAR - A. RAETSKY Giessen, 1994

l.e4 e5 2.f4 ef 3.Cllt3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.tllg1 f5 7.Cllc3 15... d5! Developing the minor pieces on the Cuts the queen off from its com­ queenside is the only decent plan in the rades-in-arms. As a consequence a new situation that has arisen. Of course, on wave of attack rebounds on White. 7 ...fe White doesn't reply 8.tllxe4?! 'i¥e7 16.�d3 Clle4! 9.'i¥e2 Cllc6 10.c3 �f5 ll.CZ'lf2 �h6 17:i¥xa8? (without compensationfo r the pawn), but An amusing coincidence: three years 8.�xf4, switching to the main variations. later the unknown Dutchmen Van der 7... tllf6 Kooij and de Laat found themselves 8.�xf4 fe in this same place. After 17 .�xe4 de 8 ...Cll xe4!? 9.tllxe4 fe hasn't been 18.c.tlel (18.'i¥xa8?'i¥xd4+ 19.�d2 f3!) tested in practice, although an addition­ 18 ... Clld7 19.Cllxf4? e3 20.Cllfe 2 'i¥f6 al exchange of a pair of knights theoreti­ 21.l:tfl 'i¥xh4 22.c.tldl l:tf8 23.l:tel �h5 cally suits Black. White gave up the fight, although with 19. .ixf4 .ixf4 20.tllxf4 l:tb8 21.'i¥c6 l:txb2 22.Cllce2 e3 the rotten position could still be defended. Shevchenko leaves the deadly e4 knight alive and loses as quickly as the Dutchman. 17... tllf2+ 18.c.tle1 tllxh1 But not 18 ...tll xd3+? 19.cd l:txe2+ 20.Cllxe2 'i¥e8 21.c.tld2!,and the king es- capes punishment. 19.'i¥xd5 'i¥xh4 20 . .ic4 c.tlh8! Another fo rk in the road. Here 9.g3 21.'i¥t7 �h5 is examined, in game 4-9.'i¥d2, and in

9 Chapter I game 5 - 9.d5. 9.

10 The King's Gambit

a with passed pawns against two been encountered more often than bishops, and the battle can end in all others. kinds of ways. Even with the very strong 9... dS 25 ...\t>bS 26.�e5+ ii.d6 27.�xe2 ii.xg3 lO.ii.eS?! 28.'i.t'g2 ii.c7 (28 ...iix h4? 29.'i.t'h3!) The bishop frees a spot fo r the king's 29.�e4 White's situation isn't as dire as knight. The slightly cumbersome posi­ in the game. tion of the minor pieces hasn't had the 24 ... ii.d6 slightest success. Joseph Gallagher's 25.tilf6 �xc2 analysis, 10.tilb5 tila6 ll.ii.e5c6 12.�g5 26JH2 �xa2 ii.e7 13.tild6+ 'i.t'f8(?) 14.�h6+ \t>g8 27.tilc3 �at+ 15.tilxe4! (with a win) didn't stand up 28.'i.t'h2 iib4 to testing by Rybka: 13... i&,xd6 14.i&,xf6 29.tilfe4 �as � a5+ 15.c3 �f8 , with a clear advantage Black took advantage of his extra fo r Black. By the way, the Anglo-Swiss pawn. was the chief proponent of the gambit at the end of the 201h century 4. J. HECTOR - P. LEKO and the author of a book with the ambi­ Copenhagen, 1995 tious title Winning with the King'sGa mbit. Which makes it all the more interesting l.e4 eS that such an authoritative expert played 2.f4 ef l.tl:lf3 against me in Baden (1995) and 3.tilt3 d6 the Four Knights Opening in Gdichen 4.d4 gS (1999) ... S.h4 g4 It's best fo r White to continue 6.tilgl fS 10.0-0-0 c6 ll.h5 (seizing space and 7.tilc3 tilf6 taking a convenient square away fr om 8.ii.xf4 fe the knight; 11. tilge2 tilh5 12.iie5 �g8 9.�d2 13.tilg3 tilxg3 14.li.xg3 iie6 15.ii.e2 tild7 is probably favorable fo r Black) ll...iie6 12.tilge2 tilbd7 13.tilg3 a5 14.iie2 a4. Each player has his trumps: White plans to put pressure on the f- file, and Black has reciprocal chances on the queenside. 10... c6 ll.tilge2 ii.e6 12.tilf4 Letting the queen go out in front is useless due to an exchange sacrifice - 12.�g5 tilbd7 13.tl:lf4 �e7! (13... Logical preparation fo r iif7?! 14.�f5 is less clear) 14.tilh5 queenside. This continuation has tilxh5 15.ii.xh8 tilg3 16.�gl 0-0-0.

11 Chapter I

Getting the bishop offh8 will cost more �xe3+ 21.<;t>bl h5 I'lladd the simpler material, as in the example variation 17... c5 18.g3 d4 19.�a3 �xe5. The only 17.0-0-0 �xg5 18.hg i.e7 19.i.f6 lllxf6 difficulty that the young Hungarian en­ 20.gf i.xf6 21.i.e2�g5+ 22.<;t>b1 .lte3 dured in this game was the problem of 23.�gel i.t2. having too many good choices. 12... �f7 18.llle2 13.llld1?! After 18.lllxh5 �xh5 19.�e2 .ltg7 The Swedish Grandmaster recklessly 20.lllxg4 i.xg4 21.i.xg4+ <;t>b8 or follows his intended course, clearly un­ 20.�xg4+ i.xg4 2l.CZ'lxg4 �he8 in ex­ derestimating his 16-year-old oppo­ change for the g4 pawn Black takes on nent. He should have castled and in re­ e5 and finishes off his opponent with his ply to 13... lll bd7 agreed to central pawns. 14.i.xf6. White has paltry compensa­ 18... i.b6 tion for the pawn, fo r which he should 19. <;t>bl i.xe3 "thank" the bishop, which wandered off 20.�xe3 <;t>bS to the wrong spot e5. 21.�g5 �hg8 13... CZ'lbd7 22.�f5 i.g6 14.lll e3 lllxeS! 23.�g5 �deS 15.de �c7! 24.�xg4 �xeS 25.�g5 �xgS 26.hg �eS 27.g4 CZ'lg7 28.lllf4 lll e6 White resigned.

5. A. FEDOROV - Z. GYIMESI Pula, 2001

Alexei Fedorov is a star ofBelarusian chess and a true knight of the King's Gambit. Only he could be destined to 16.�c3 deliver two terrible blows to my inven- 16.�d4 0-0-0! 17.ef �xf4 18.�xa7 tion ... i.h6! lost immediately. Now Leko's l.e4 eS variation should end with a similar result, 2.f4 ef 16... �b6!? 17.0-0-0 �b4 18.�b3 .ltc5 3.lllf3 d6 19.CZ'lf5 �xb3 20.ab i.g6, although cas­ 4.d4 gS tling queenside may be even stronger. 5.h4 g4 16... 0-0-0 6.CZ'lg1 rs 17.0-0-0 CZ'lhS 7.lllc3 lllf6 To Leko's prescription 17 ...CZ'ld7 8.�xf4 fe 18.e6 �xf4 19.ed+ <;t>c7 20.�xh8 9.d5!?

12 The King's Gambit

True, with the very strong 1l...c6 the in­ teresting tactic 12.dc be 13.ii.xe7 �xe7 14. .itx c6+! C1Jxc6 15.�d5 can be fo und, winning back the piece favorably. 10.1i.c4 Fedorov develops a piece fo r now. He is familiar with the previous games, in which 10.h5 was tried without much success. After 10 ...h6 1l.�d2 Black can't castle kingside, and in the duel Matros - Hector (Stockholm, 1998) he calmly prepared to castle queenside: We 've convinced ourselves ofhow lit­ 1I...C1Jbd7 12.C1Jge2 tl:Jb6 13.tl:Jg3 �e7 tie the speedy mobilization of the white 14.ii.b5+(1 4.0-0-0!?) 14... ii.d7 15.C1Jf5 army promises. Partly because White has �f8 16.0-0 0-0-0 17.1i.e3 (17.ii.xd7+ run head-on into the pawn pair d5/e4. :!::i:xd7 18 ..ite3 is more precise, preserv­ The idea of separating the central pawns ing the powerful knight on f5 ) 17... ii.xf5 ahead of time creeps in, seizing territory 18.:!::i:xf5 �e7 19.a4 a6 20 ..ite2 C1Jbd7, and freeing the d4 square for the pieces with good play. Against Shulman (Par­ along the way. Grandmaster David was dubice, 1999), Gorin didn't even try to the first to visit this idea (against Alkaer­ slow the pawn down and didn't regret sig, Antwerp, 1996), with a subsequent it: 10... 0-0!? 1l.h6 .ith8 12.�d2 tl:Jbd7 9 .. .tl'lbd7 10.ll:lge2 ii.g7 ll.tl:Jd4 tl:Jf8 13.0-0-0 tl:Jc5 14.tl:Jge2 e3!? 15.ii.xe3 12.ii.b5+ Jid7 13.C1Jf5 \t>t7 14.tl:Jxg7 tl:Jfe4 16.'�e1 �f6 17.tl:Jd4 1i.d7 (17... \t>xg7 15.0-0 h6 16.1i.e3 tl:Jg6 17.Jixd7 tl:Jt2 18. .itxf2 �xf2 19.tl:Jdb5 �f7is no �xd7 18.�d4 tl:Je5 19.tl:Jxe4 tl:Jxe4 worse, at least) 18.tl:Jxe4 tl:Jxe4 19.ii.d3 20.�xe4 - White won the pawn back :!::tae8 20.:!::i:fl �e5 2l.:!::i:xf8+ :!::i:xf8 and wasn't averse to keeping the enemy 22.1i.gl tl:Jc5 23.1i.c4 :!::l:e8, . king busy. The maneuver tl:Jb8-d7-f8 10... tl:Jbd7 doesn't impress at all, of course. 10 ...0-0 11.tl:Jge2 (1l.h5?! tl:Jxh5!) 9... ii.g7 1I...tl:Jh5 12.ii.e3 a6 fo llowed by ...b5 Against Fedorov (Katrineholm, is interesting, and we need proof of the 1999), lbragimov strove to exchange fo r the pawn. off the bishop: 9 ...tl:Jh5?! 10.ii.g5 ii.e7 ll.h5 0-0 1l.ii.b5+ \t>t7? 12.tl:Jge2 a6 13.0-0+ 12.h6 tl:Je8!? \t>g8 (13... \t>g6 14.tl:Jxe4 ab? 15.�d3 By analogy with the example Shul­ \t>g7 16.�c3+with a win) 14. .ita4.itxg5 man - Gorin it was worth thinking about 15.hg C1Jd7 16.tl:Jf4 tl:Jxf4 17.�xg4! tl:Je5 12... .ith8 13.tl:Jge2 tl:Jb6 14.ii.b3 tl:Jfd7!? 18.�xf4 \t>g7 19.tl:Jxe4 b5 20.ii.b3 ii.d7 (opening lines for three pieces at once!). 21.tl:Jf6 h5 22.:!::i:ae1, and Black resigned. 13.tl:Jge2 The miniature occurred asa consequence For now all the variations are play­ of a neglectfulattitude towards his king. able fo r Black: 13.hg Il:xf4 14.tl:Jge2 :!::l:t7

13 Chapter I

15.tilxe4 tile5 16.il.d3 il.f5; 13.�xg4 The Hungarian Grandmaster misses tilb6 14.�g3 I:txf4! 15.�xf4 il.xc3+ asuperbtacticalchance: 15 ...tilf3+! 16 .gf 16.bc tilxc4 or 13.jl,d2 e3! 14.hg ed+ ef 17.jl,e3 �e7 18.�d4 fe 19Si.'xe2tilf 6 15.�xd2 tilxg7. - the passive bishops don't compensate 13... jl,xc3+ fo r the lack of a pawn, and the white Dimeshi doesn't miss the opportu­ king is also feeling uncomfortable. nity to double his partner's pawns. A 16.�d2 aS?! worthy alternative is 13... jl,e5 14.il.xe5 Before putting pressure on his oppo­ tilxe5 15.�d4 jl,f5 , with an excellent nent on the queenside he should have ac­ centralized knight. tivated his pieces. For example, fo llow­ 14.bxc3 tileS ing Fedorov's prescription: 16 ...tilx f4 1S.il.b3?! 17.tilxf4 e3!? 18.�xe3 �g5 19.g3 tilf6 The variation 15.�d4 tilxc4 20.0-0-0 I:l:e8 2l.�d4 I:l:e4 22.�d2 a5 16.�xc4 b5!? 17.�xb5 a5 demonstrates 23.a3 jl,d7,with a complicated game. an amusing "equality in poverty" - both 17 .il.gS e3?! players' pieces are disconnected, their Ve ry weak resistance for such a strong pawns are weak, and their kings aren't player! With an active dark-squared safe. Although it was worth it for White bishop pushing the central pawn is to continue that way. useless; he had to look for chances af­ ter 17... �d7 18.tilg3 a4 19.il.c4 tile5 20.jl,e2c6!? 18.�xe3 tilf6 19.0-0 �e8 20.�d4 tilhS?! In the case of 20... �xe2 21.I:l:ael �a6 22.I:l:xf6 �a7 23.I:l:xg6+! hg 24.�xa7 I:l:xa725 .I:l:e7Black can't avoid losses, but it's still the lesser evil. 21.tilg3! I:txfl+ 22.I:l:xfl tileS 23.tilxhS �xhS 24.�xeS! 1S... tilg6?! Black resigned (24 ...de 25.d6+).

.... [-�ce.lttiV&lb".N:--····--········ ·,-c-·····'"·········--·------············-····---··-. ---·················· .. ······1 t � � ofF�rtl¥�$�e;an«;��idertl1ee��fwh&thap� f· lt���thlt'resultstkel! 1'ftete's ••� � pehs,witk�.dSr?, roJ.UPensa- l pawn.hut ·. . . ·. i �cu�lltltvitf�etitm:rotttre .Bj������"Pr,�ts;are�'4S+o1Jiziol18;anadv�fotMlttt�tappear;�-�it:,���biectiVet,�move . . . ! i eg�t�.e��;".ts!? . . ,j . > • �-...:-.;��.. �� �--�-'�"'-•••"'-••••��;;-�.. �-�--:. .;;.,,.;,.',... :,..;,.,...;.: ...... : .. � .. '_.; ;._ �:. .._,. ,._ ,. .. .. _ ,..:w _..,___ ' ,. .. ' ...,,.,.,.;;..;..- L'tbatf�esfans....�.: .... of�KitJi'sOaatbk'tf,Y�t�b·;...... :...... �__;,_._;._-;.,.: ...... �;. ;,.,,.,._,..:.:...... ,. ,.,. !I 14 Chapter 2 Petrov' s Defense

The variation l.e4 e5 2.tZ:lf3 tZ:lf6 3.d4 tZ:lxe4 4.de J,c5

Fashions in chess can be just the same as fa shions elsewhere; sometimes they are in­ teresting and sometimes they are dull. The Petrov has a solid reputation ofbelonging to the latter. Is it possible to produce something colorfulin a dull world? We think so! And what's more, the fu n starts as early as the fourth move!

l.e4 e5 is sought with 4.de d5 5.lllbd2, but in Vllt3 lllf6 advocating that students take the pawn 3.d4 lllxe4 I stopped in confusion at 4 ...�c5!? The attack on the t2 square by hanging piec­ es immediately changes the character of the struggle - in the style of the Traxler Counterattack in the Two Knights De­ fe nse. The published evidence ofWhite's advantage isn't too convincing, so in practice I have preferred a bird in the hand - the quiet equality after 4 ...d5. In 2005 my co-author and I pub­ lished the monograph Pe tro ffDe fence in the UK (Everyman Chess). Our inves­ tigations into 4 ...lic5!? convinced me 4.de that you can and should play like that There's absolutely no reason to at­ (game 4 appeared), and that the disdain tempt to prioritize the main line 4.�d3 for bringing the bishop out by the chess d5 5.lllxe5, although it has numerous world as a whole and top players in par­ admirers. White strives fo r solid play, ticular was a pure misunderstanding. Fi­ without getting involved in long-winded nally, in December 2007, Va ssily Ivan­ theoretical discussions. The same thing chuk played this way (game 2). I'd like Chapter 11 to dream that he was moved to try this The aggressive development of experiment by reading our monograph, the bishop is yielding in popularity to but the real reason was most likely the 5.Vj'd5, but if the centralization of the Ukrainian genius's indifferent attitude queen doesn't display any merits we'll towards entrenched opinions. Until a have to go back to the alternative. horde of imitators pounces on this "nov­ 5... lllxfl elty", I'll hurry up with my own investi­ The most fundamental. After 5 ... gations. Jl,xf2+?! 6.�fl he has to be clever to 4 ... il,c5!? avoid losing one of his pieces. With 6 ... The most fleeting familiarity with d5 7.Vj'xd5 Vj'xd5 8.il,xd5 f5 9.ef lllxf6 the position convinces one that White 10.�xf2 ll:Jxd5 1l.Mel+ �fl Black should go on the attack, and not defend achieves his designated aim, but notice­ the f2 square. In the variation 5.llld4? ably lags in development. 5 ...d5 6.Vj'xd5 lllxf2! 6.�xf2 Vj'h4+ 7.�e3 il,xd4+ Vj'xd5 7 . .Jixd5ll:Jxf2 8.Mfl tZ:lg4 is more 8.Vj'xd4 Vj'ei+ 9.�f3 Vj'xc l Black solid, with a slightly worse position. won the piece back, kicking the white 6.Jl,xfi+!? king out into the open, where it will Bearing down on the weak enemy get slaughtered. Or 5.il,e3 il,xe3 6.fe square with the same fe rvor that the en­ d5 7.ed ll:Jxd6 - fo r this White broke emy just displayed against the f2 square. up his pawn chain? My respect goes to Previously I had a lower opinion of the only two continuations - 5.il,c4 (game thrust 6.Vj'd5 than it deserved. 6 ...Vj'e7 1) and 5.Vj'd5 (game 24). 7.Mfl? c6 8.Vj'd2 d5 has been encoun­ tered, and Black is leftwith an extra cen­ 1. V. SIMAGIN - A. KHACHATUROV tral pawn. White still weasels his way out USSR, 1959 somehow: 7.b4! il,b6 (with 7 ... lllxh1 ?! 8.bc White freezes his partner's queen­ l.e4 e5 side at the price of just the exchange) 2.ll:Jf3 lllf6 8.Mfl ll:Jg4 (8 ...c6?! is weaker here be­ 3.d4 ll:Jxe4 cause of 9.Vj'd6) 9.Vj'e4d5 (after9 ...f5 ?! 4.de .lieS 10.Vj'xf5 Vj'xb4+ 11.lllfd2! there is im­ 5 . .Jic4 pending trouble on the f-file) 10 . .Jixd5 c6 1l..Jib3 f5 12.Vj'e2 Vj'xb4+ 13. .Jid2 Vj'c5, then most likely 14 ...ll:Je3 , with exchanges. Black is completely fine, so we can go on. 6... �f8 I'm in two minds about accepting the sacrifice. Onthe one hand, this may be best objectively. On the other, after 6 ...�x fl 7.Vj'd5+ �e8 it's not only un­ pleasant to lie low under attack in the example variation 8.Vj'xc5ll:Jxh1 9 . .Jig5

16 Petrov's Defense d6 10.V�Ve3 'i¥d7 11.tlJc3 h6 12.Jl,h4 g5 'i¥e8 11.Jl,e3 'i¥e6 12.'i¥e4 d6 13.0-0-0 13.CZJ d5 � f8, but also to oppose the CZJc6 14.Mxh1 'i¥f5. centralization with 8.Jl,g5 Jl,e7 9.Jl,xe7 1l.�g5 c6 'i¥xe7 10.�xf2 (Yusupov). Replacing 12.'i¥d4 'i¥e8!? 7 ...� e8 with the harsher retreat 7 ...� g6, after 8.0-0 d6 9.Mxf2 Jl,xf2+ 10.�xf2 (8.Mfl d6 9.Mxf2 �xf2+ 10.�xf2 is identical) 10 ...h6 11.tlJc3 promises White the initiative fo r the exchange. Next may fo llow 11... CZJc6 12.e6 'i¥f6 13.'i¥d3+ 'i¥f5 14.ttJd5 'i¥xd3 15.cd �xe6 16.CZJxc7 �g4 17.CZJxa8 Mxa8, al­ most certainly with a drawing outcome. 7.'i¥d5 tlJ:xh1 8.'i¥xc5+ Khachaturov recommended 8.�h5!? 'i¥e79.Jl,g5 �f2+ 10.�e2 'i¥e611. tlJc3. 13.CZJe4?! An extremely dangerous plan - it isn't Simagin declines his partner's in­ difficultfo r Black to fall into a desperate vitation to take the pawn with check. position, as in the variation 11...@xd5? After 13.'i¥xd6+ �g8 14.0-0-0 I{Jf2 12.CZJxd5 Jl,b6 13.Jl,e7+ �g8 14.tlJg5 (the queen is no longer preventing the g6 15.�f3. Still, Rybka sees a draw: 11... knight's escape, but then again the latter h6! 12.�d2 g6 (with an immediate 11... can't get very far) 15.Mfl tlJg4 16.h3 h6 g6 the bishop transferred to f6 ) 13.Mxh1 17.Jl,d2ttJa6 18.hg Jl,xg4Black remains Jl,b6 14.Mfl �g7 15.tlJh4! gh 16.Mf6 the exchange up and with 19 ...Md8 plans 'i¥xd5 17.tlJf5 + �g8 18.tlJe7+, with to force the queen back to the unappeal­ . ing spot a3. Instead of the slightly ad­ 8... �xf7 venturous onslaught it was worth elimi­ 9.'i¥d5+ nating the knight first (13.0-0-0 and Either side can vary their play with 14.Mxhl), and then acting according to no change to the evaluation - White's his opponent's strategy. activity is counterbalanced by his lack of 13... de material. Using the constrained position 14.'i¥c5+ of the queen with the help of 9.'i¥c4+ 14.CZJxe5 isn't enough because of �e8 10.�g5 doesn't work due to 10... 14 ...tlJd7 15.�f4 CZJxeS 16.Jl,xe5 'i¥d7 d5 11.'i¥e2'i¥d7 12.CZJc3 h6 13.Jl,e3 c6 17.Jl,d6+ �g8 18.0-0-0 'i¥g4 19.Mxh1 14.0-0-0 'i¥e7 15.Mxhl �e6 and ...CZJd 7, Jl,f5, and there's nothing to compensate rousing the queenside to life. fo r the loss. 9... �f8 14... �g8 10.CZJc3 d6 15.0-0-0 CZJd7 Blackmailing your opponent with an 16.'i¥e3 h6 exchange of queens isn't bad either: 1 0 ... 17.�h4 b6

17 Chapter 11

18.�c3 �e6 19J�d6?! Tempting Khachaturov with the a2 pawn. Taking it would be rash, as shown by the colorful variation 19... �xa2? 20.�xc6 Mb8 2l.b3! �al +?! 22.�d2 �a5+ 23.�e3 the white king is liter­ ally mocking his opponent's larger, but completely uncoordinated and therefore helpless army. Chess isn't checkers - captures are not obligatory! Black doesn't touch the Trojan horse, and Simagin may have re­ main line, but 5 ...tl:lxf2? doesn't deserve gretted that he left the wayward knight a recommendation. After6. �xc5 tllxhl immune. Then again, after 19.Mxhl c5 7.�g5 f6 8.efgf9.Jih4 �e7+ 10.�xe7+ Black completes his development, and �xe7 ll.tllc3 White gets two pieces fo r there's nothing real fo r the exchange a rook and an overwhelming position. and a pawn. 5... Jixt2+ 19... �f5 Reinforcing the knight with the help 20.�xc6 Mb8 of 5 ...f5 isn't as bad as leaving it fo rked. 21.�c4+ �fl Still, it's a second-rate move: 6.Jic4 22.�d3 Jixf2+ 7.�e2 (the king has let the bish- The scales then started tipping back op go forward - quite a success!) 7 ...� e 7 and fo rth wildly - probably because of 8.tllc3 c6 (it's worth testing 8 ...tl:lxc3 . Simagin won on the 33'ct 9.bc Jib6 10.Jig5 �e6 ll.�d3 �g6) move ; here after 22... Jib7! things would 9.�f7+ �xf7 10.Jixt7+ �xf7 ll.tllxe4 have been bad fo r him. fe 12.tllg5+ �g6 13.�xf2 Me8 14.tl:lxe4 Mxe5 15.tl:ld6tl:la6 16.Jif4 Me6 17.Madl 2. L. BRUZON - V. IVANCHUK tl:lc5 18.�f3 (P. Carlsson - Mellado, Merida, 2007 Calvia, 2004). The knight has nailed the extra d7 pawn to the spot, and White has l.e4 e5 nothing to complain about. 2.11.:lf3 tl:lf6 6.�dl 3.d4 tl:lxe4 Unlike 6.�e2 (games 3 and 4), the 4.de Jic5 king doesn't flounder around so much 5.�d5 in the way of its comrades-in-arms here. Although it doesn't keep the bishop in (See Diagram) its sights, and Black gets a reprieve. The attack on two minor pieces at 6... f5 the same time is the most principled 7.�c4 continuation. Unlike 5.Jic4 it's all the After 7.ef tllxf6 8.�e5+ Black is a other way around here: 5 ...�xf2 + - the fu ll pawn up both without queens (8 ...

18 Petrov's Defense

VJ/ie7 9.''i!!he7+ 'tlxe7) and with them 10.�b3 - 8 ...'tlf8 9.�d3 (A Vovk - Ovanisy­ an, Moscow, 2007) 9 ...d5 lO.IIfl tZ'lc6 l l.VJ/if4 �c5 fo llowed by ...�d 6. 7... VJ/ie7 7 ...l:If8 8.tZ'lbd2 c6 allows a posi­ tional similar to the one that occurred in game 3. After 9.tZ'lxe4!? cd 10.tZ'ld6+ 'tle7 ll.�g5+ IIf6 ! 12.�xd5 tZ'lc6 13.ef+ gf 14.tZ'lxf5+ 'tle8 15.tZ'ld6+'tle7 White can settle fo r perpetualcheck or move his pieces some more (16.�f4!?). Because of the lag in development there's no point in giving 10... aS the queen back: 11...'tle6?! 12.ii,xd8 Against Maze (Biel, 2008) I con­ l:Ixd8 13.tZ'lg5+ 'tlxe5 14.tZ'ldt7+ 'tld4 tinued 10 ...tZ'la6, returning the pawn 15.ii,b3! or 12... dc 13.IIfl �c5 14.tZ'lg5+ in the interests of development. I knew 'tlxe5 15.tZ'ldt7+ l:Ixt7 16.tZ'lxt7+ 'tle6 nothing about the prior game, played six 17.tZ'lg5+ 'tle5 18.'tld2 !, with a fo rmi­ months earlier. Then again, my strong dable initiative in both cases. French opponent was also uninformed. If Black doesn't want to fo rce events There fo llowed 11.tZ'lxe4 fe 12.VJ/ixe4 d5 there's the unclear variation 8 ...tZ'lg5 (simultaneously opening up his bishop 9.IIfl �b6 10.c3 CZJc6 ll.'tlc2 tZ'le6. and "killing" the enemy one) 13.VJ/ie2 Replacing 8.tZ'lbd2with 8.tZ'lc3 rules out li_b6 14.c3 tZ'lc5 15.�c2 0-0 16.�g5 transferring the knight via g5, but offers �e8! 17.ite3 �h5 18.'tld2?! �g4?! the equally indeterminate possibility 8 ... (missing a simple win - 18 ...tZ'le4+ tZ'lxc3 9.bc VJ/ie7. 19.�xe4 de 20.<1Jd4 l.g4 2l.�el c5! 8.tZ'lc3 c6 22.t1Jxb5 �fd8+ 23.'.i?c2 iie2) 19.IIafl In the interesting variation 8 ... l:Iae8 20.li_d4 �d7 2l.h3 j,xf322 .IIxf3 tZ'lxc3 9.bc tZ'lc6 lO.IIfl �b6 ll.ii,g5 l:Ixf3 23.o/iixf3 �xf3 24.gf c5 25.1H5! VJ/ie6 12.tZ'lh4 h6 13.VJ/ib5 hg 14.�xe6 tllf8 26.�f2 :lxe5. Having avoided op­ de 15.tZ'lf3 g4 16.tZ'lg5 �d7, by contrast posite-colored bishops, I still couldn't with game 3 Black now gets two minor make the most of my extra pawn. pieces fo r the queen he gave up. But the ll.a4 merits of the position are balanced by After ll.a3 LL\a6 12.tllxe4 fe 13.'�xe4 the insufficient material. d5 14.VJ/ie2 �b6 a position arises fr om 9.V/iid3 b5 the game Maze - Raetsky with the in­ In the case of 9 ...�c 5 lO.IIfl b5 significant addition ofa3 and a5. ll.�b3 tZ'lf2+?! 12.l:Ixf2 �xf2 13.VJ/ixf5 11... b4 Black wins the exchange but concedes the Again after ll...ba 12.l:Ixa4 tZ'la6 initiative to his opponent. So it's better to 13.tllxe4 fe 14.o/iixe4 LL\c5 15.�g5 VJ/if8 avoid acquisitions and prefer ll...a5. 16.'�e2 LL\xa4 17.�xa4 Black gains the

19 Chapter 11 exchange (this time after catching the 3. P. GLAVINA - A. JUAREZ queen's rook in a fo rk) to the detriment Argentina, 1987 of his position. 12.11'Jxe4 fe l.e4 eS 13.%\Ve2 2.tt:Jf3 tt:Jf6 In the event of 13.%\Vxe4 d5 14.%\Ve2 3.d4 tLlxe4 iia7! 15.Jig5 %\Ve6 16.Jie3 0-0 the ex­ 4.de iicS change of bishops includes the queen's 5.%\VdS iixf2+ rook in the game in the best way pos­ 6.�e2 sible. White has problems everywhere with his king, and there's a feeling that Ivanchuk isn't about to give up his own. And only a dozen or so moves have been made! 13... dS! 13. .. ef? 14.%\Vxf2 fg 15.%\Vxg2 opens up the game in White's favor. Now Bru­ zon decided not to burden himself with the stupefied b3 bishop in the variation 14.%\Vxf2 ef 15.%\Vxf3 and, perhaps, his decision was the wrong one. 14.ed %1Vxd6+ An unaesthetic and apparently risky 15.iid2 e3 advance. But how to save the piece? 16.�fl iia6 6... fS 17.iic4 iixc4 7.tt:Jc3 18.%\Vxc4 �a7! After 7.ef tt:Jxf6 8.%\Ve5+ the king 19.�e2 �e7 moves away to the f-file, and the bish­ 20.iiel %\Vg6 op is inviolable due to the knight fo rk 21.g3 �e4 (which had already been noticed by von 22.%1Vd3 tt:Jd7 Bilguer!). But where exactly to put the After 23.�dl? 0-0! 24.%\Vxd7 %\VhS king? It seems that there isn't a signifi­ 25.g4 %\Vh3 26.tt:Jg5 %\Vg2 27.iixf2 cant different. In the variation 8 ...�f 8 �xfl+ 28.�xf2 ef+ the Cuban ended 9.iig5 iib6 lO.tLlc3 tLlc6 11.%\Vf4 h6! the battle, not surviving the appear­ 12.iixf6 %1Vxf6 13.%\Vxf6 + gf Black is left ance of a second queen. He should have a pawn up. The piece sacrifice 12.iih4 looked fo r practical chances in the varia­ g5 13.tLlxg5 hg 14.Jixg5 iid4 shouldn't tion 23.Jixf2 tt:Jc5!24.%\Vdl ef+ 25.�xf2 worry him. Then again, with 8 ...�f 7 0-0 26.�gl %1Vf6 , with the threat of27... 9.tLlg5+ �f8 10.tt:Jc3 iib6 ll.tLld5 h6 �d8. Ivanchuk's energetic and precise 12.tt:Jf3 tt:Jc6 13.%\Vf4 �g8 the knight's actions eliminated the threats on the brief visit to g5 turnsout to be useless. It a2-g8 diagonal and unexpectedly turned goes without saying that Black shouldn't play against the white king. allow himself recklessness like 9 ...� g6?

20 Petrov's Defense

10.�f3! (opening a path fo r his own culties in coordinating his fo rces Black bishop, while not parting from the en­ has to play very precisely. emy one) 10... Mf 8 1L�d3+ Ci:Je4+ ll.�g3!? 12.�e2 or 12.iH4,with a win. A weighty decision, as in the middle­ 7... c6 game the third rank isn't intended fo r By comparison with 7.Ci:Jbd2 (with a the king. Probably with ll.�e3 d4!? possible of moves) the pos­ 12.�f4 (12.Ci:Jxd4? f4 !) 12 ...h6 13.h4 sibility of7 ...Ci:Jx c3+ 8.bc has opened up '

21 Chapter II

18.tllh4 8.tllxe4 fe 19.�xd6 9.tllg5?! 20.�d3 White is still searching fo r an ad­ The players then started blundering vantage, although he should have come in turn, and we should end the demon­ down to earth already. In the variation stration here. 2l.g3 d6 22.\t>g2 would 9.1li'xe4 1li'e7 10.J[g5 1li'e6 ll.l':I:d l tllc6 have preserved approximate equality. 12.�el d5!? 13.l':I:xd5 1li'g4 14.1li'xg4 �xg4 Black has excellent play, but it's 4. A. LUKOVNIKOV - A. RAETSKY still fo r a pawn. 9 ...0-0 is stronger, not Vo ronezh, 2005 fearing a cavalry swoop: 10.tllg5 g6 11.\!/dl d5 12.ed 1li'xd6+ 13.�d2 h6 l.e4 e5 14.tllf3 �f5 15.1li'e5 1li'xe5 16.tllxe5 2.tllf3 tllf6 tlld7 17 .tllxd7 �xd7 18.�c4+ \t>g7 3.d4 tllxe4 19.l':I:el l:I:ae8, with a more pleasant 4.de �c5 ending, as the queen's rook is out of the 5.1li'd5 �xf2+ game. 6.�e2 f5 9 ... 7.tllc3 �b6! 10.tllxe4 Wasting valuable time on winning a pawn is an impermissible luxury: 10.b2.xh7?! lt:Jc6 ll.Ci:Jg5 tllxe5 12.J[f4 d6 13.V;Wxe4 J[g4+ 14.\t>d2 0-0-0, and, despite material equality, White's chances of saving himself are slight. The black king is safe, which can't be said about the white one. 10... Ci:Jc6 ll.�f4?! Clutching fo r the e5 pawn like a drowning man clutching at a straw, The right time to return the extra White scorns the exchange of queens pawn. The praise isn't so much fo r the in vain: 11.\!/d 1 1li'xe5 12.�c4 1li'xd5 quality of the move (although the move 13.�xd5. A draw a pawn down can't be is good), as for the psychological calcu­ ruled out. lation. Master Lukovnikov played the 11... l:I:f8 opening at an energetic pace and had 12.�g3?! almost certainly thought of a queen sac­ Lukovnikov gives up the game with­ rifice on 7 ...c6. That scenario suits his out resistance - opening the file enables rather one-sided aggressive style better Black's success. No matter how woeful than anything else, but now he faces White's position was after 12.g3 1li'b4! either the prosaic, or... allow me to de­ (with a subsequent ...tll e7 or ...1li'd4) , fe nd! his only chances were here.

22 Petrov's Defense

12... '?i'b4! 15. '.t>d3 12 ...d6? 13.ed �g4+ 14.'.t>d2 0-0-0 It's naive to think that the king will 15.Mel is premature. The king hides on defend itself, Steinitz-style. Black's re­ c 1, and the white pieces have suddenly ply underlines the fa ct that the central­ improved. It's hardly possible to talk ized queen is also in danger. Then again, about an advantage fo r Black here. 15.'.t>el �f5 16.�d3 0-0-0 is no stron­ 13.b3 d6 ger. 14.c3 15... tZle7 On 14.ed the following chain of 16.�b5+ �d7 moves is possible: 14... �g4+ 15.'.t>d3 17.'?i'b4 �b2 0-0-0 16.c3 Mfe8! 17.cb (17.'fi'xc6 'fi'a5!) 18.�e2 dS 17... tZlx b4+ 18.'.t>c4 tZlxd5 19.'.t>xd5 c6+ 18 ...tZld5 18.�c4 tZle3! won just as 20.'.t>c4 Mxe4+. Everything is equal fo r quickly. now - but not for very long. Rybka sug­ 19.�h5+ g6 gests a more soothing version of the ex­ 20.tZld2 aS! change ofqueens -17.h3 �e6 1 8.�xe6+ White resigned. That same "move " Mxe6 19.cb tZlxb4+ 20.'.t>c3 Mxe4, and a would obviously have followed on 20 ... win isn't far off. The same Rybka advises c5!, with the similar idea of deflecting 14... �f 5! 15.Mel 0-0-0 16.'.t>dl 'fi'a3!, the queen from the b5 square. A check not letting the king sneak off. with the bishop from b5 will finally de­ 14... �a3 stroy my opponent's defenses. r··coNciusloN:·------1 It's difficult to believe that everything we've seen came aboutfrom a symmetri- ! cal Petrov's Defense,w hich hasn't overcome (despitethe Cochrane Gambit and j! ji varioussharp systems) its reputation as a dryopening. Devotees won'tof 4.de get j

their desiredpeace! Even less so after. ..4 .ic5!, where I don'tsee anyadvantage i allfor White. i i It is not often that Black gets to displace the enemy king early in the ga e. i i so m i Black kings havemore experiencein such matters but whitemonarchs may strug- i! gle to navigate their way to subsequent safety. Look at your opponent's face as i j you unveil new fashion 4... Ac5! and should be able to detect he i your with you t ir i

..���-����-=-��:-�-���:�-���� -��-��-��-:��:��:��-�-:-���-:����::...... t ...1

23 Chapter 3 The Ruy Lopez

The Alapin Defense3 ...il,b4

There's little doubt that The Ruy Lopez opening has stood the test of time. As far as chess fashions go, 3.Jlb5 has outlived all of its rivals fo r attention. Black needs a reliable defense, but how is it possible to avoid all of the long theoretical lines? In the 20th century the continuation 3 ...a6 gradually supplanted all the other de­ fenses. Enthusiasm fo r the classical Chigorin systems was replaced by interest in the Open variation, and most recently overwhelmingly by the Marshall Attack. Alterna­ tives to 3 ...a6 were thus left by the wayside of theory. Only one branch of the Berlin Defense was lucky - a test of the stability of one particular tabiya was done at the highest level, playing in a big part in Vladimir Kramnik's successfu l title challenge against in 2000. We have in mind a surprise fo r the opponent, which may nevertheless appear somewhat familiar in some respects ...

l.e4 e5 prevents active play on the b-file and VZ'lf3 LLlc6 the a3-f8 diagonal. 3.Jlb5 i.b4 The idea of bringing the bishop out The black bishop copies the posi­ comes from the Russian master Alapin, tion of the white one. The d-pawn who stood up fo r Black's interests virtu­ is instantly pinned, and on LLlc3 the ally single-handed at the turnof the 19th bishop can be exchanged fo r the knight and 20th centuries. So 3 ...Jlb4 has right­ when necessary. David Bronstein no­ fully been named the Alapin Defense. ticed the similarity of 3 ...il b4 to the Even in a number of forgotten and , with the favorable dif­ discarded defenses on the third move, ference for White that there's no need Alapin's child turned out to be a Cinder­ to sacrificea pawn to create the pawn ella. Opening books brushed it off with center (c3 and d4). The comparison very truncated variations, and a harsh fa lls short, though, as the saved pawn verdict fo r Black came in positions where The Ruy Lopez the theory should have only just begun. the knight on f6 , and on S.c3 they've Strong practitioners avoided the varia­ naively continued S ...�c S (although S ... tion, although the tests from the pen of �aS 6.�xc6 already leads to the loss of Mark Taimanov and Ratmir Kholmov are a central pawn without any particular well known, and the Swede Hector compensation), switching to the system was seriouslyinterested in 3 .. Ji,b4. 3 ...�cS a down. White's preference has been given in roughly equal proportions to the con­ tinuations 4.c3 and 4.0-0, often inter­ woven with each other. Other possibili­ ties aren't likely to refute 3 ...�b4 such as the expanded fianchetto in the game Kupreichik - Chetverik (St. Petersburg, 2000): 4.a3 �aS S.b4 �b6 6.�b2 d6 7.d4 ed 8.tllbd2 (in the case of 8.tllxd4 tllge7 9.0-0 0-0 it's difficult to bring the queen's knight into play) 8 ...�d 7 9.�xc6 bc 10.�xd4 �xd4 11.tllxd4 �f6 12.tll 2b3 tll e7 13.0-0 0-0 14.l:i:ell:i:ae8 5.d4 1S.�f3�gS 16.�g3 �hS 17.�c3 (win­ S.c3 �aS is in the same category as ning the pawn instead of repeating moves the line 4.c3. Here White decides not to puts the white king in danger) 17... Wh 8 create a pawn center, reserving the c3 18.�c4 tllg6 19.tllxc6 tllf4 (19 ...tll h4 is square fo r the knight. even more energetic) 20.l:i:e3 (it's more 5... ed solid to return the knight to the center 6.tllxd4 0-0 first: 20.tllcd4 l:i:eS 2l.l:i:e3) 20 ...�g4 7.�g5 2l.g3. Black's initiative soon hit a wall. I On 7.tllc3 most often it's been sug­ hadn't noticed that after 2l.. .fS! 22.Whl gested that the bishop establish itself tllh3 23.f3�gS 24.f4 �hS my opponent - 7 ...a6. In the example variation 8.�c4 couldn't stabilize the center - 2S.eS? bS 9.tllxc6 de (9 ...tllxc6 lO.�dS is evi­ �f7!, an unusual , winning dently in White's favor) 10.�d3 tllg6 the material. activity of Black's pieces compensates fo r the defects in his pawn structure. 1. R. BYRNE - J. HECTOR 7... f6 London, 1991 It's unseemly fo r "true Alapiners" to fe ar this insignificant weakening. l.e4 eS It's useful to break loose with a tempo 2.tll f3 tll c6 and keep the eS square under observa­ 3.�b5 �b4 tion. 4.0-0 tllge7 8.�e3 dS The knight absolutely must support Release in the center is the best re- its colleague. We ak players have placed action to any bishop retreat. But more

25 Chapter Ill

modest behavior isn't criminal either: Black doesn't want to exchange on 8 ...�h 8 9.a3 it,a5 10.c4 d6 ll.it,xc6 be c3, allowing the creation of an isolated 12.ti'lb3 it,b6 13.c5 de 14.�xc5 'iVe8 pawn. A strange but not very significant 15.'iVc2 J::l:t7 16.0 ld2 ti'lg6 (Isonzo - moment. Bobras, Chania, 1994). Black's queen­ 16.it,c4 'iVc7 side is disfigured and blocked, but over­ 17.h3 it,e6 all the position remains robust. 18.l::!:adl ti'lxc3 9.a3 19.it,xe6 ti'lxdl 20.it,xg8 ti'lxt2 2t.it,xt2 l::!:xg8 22.it,xa7 The mutual destruction of fo rces has led to a cloudless endgame fo r Black. But the imagination of the inventor Jonny Hector ran dry here and the technique of the very experienced Robert Byme prevailed. On the 42"d move White cel­ ebrated his victory.

The position of the bishop on b4 After 9.ed 'iVxd5 White has the in­ does nothing less than provoke White genious possibility of exploiting the to attack it with the help of 4.c3, when strongest enemy pieces on the a2-g8 di­ the response 4.c3 it,a5 is encountered agonal. An immediate 10.'iVd3 doesn't in the majority of games played with work because of 10 ...ti'le5, but in the the Alapin Defense. They then con­ case of 10.ti'lc3!? it,xc3 ll.'iVd3!? ti'le5 tinue 5.ti'la3 (to conclusively hunt down the queen happily hits the bishop. Of their prey after 6.ti'lc4) and 5.0-0 (to course, ll...'iVxd4 12.�xd4 it,xd4 is determine their plan on the next move). stronger, with three minor pieces fo r the 5.it,xc6!? has also been used. After 5 ... dc queen and a very decent position. 6.ti'lxe5 the c3 pawn prevents the reply 9... ti'lxd4 6 ...'iVd4, and Black chooses between 6 ... lO.'iVxd4 it,d6 'iVe77. d4 f6 and 6 ...'iVg5. In both cases ll.ed it,es White gives the pawn back, but con­ 12.'iVc4 �h8 strains the a5 bishop and gets a stable There's nothing wrong with win­ advantage. There's nothing terrible fo r ning the pawn back immediately. Black Black here, but it isn't very pleasant to postpones the measure by one move, as play, especially when you're trying to 13.ti'lc3 a6 14.'iVa4 it,f5 15.it,e2 it,xc3 win against a lower-rated opponent. So 16.bc ti'lxd5 can't suit White. it's worth thinking about 5 ...bc!? For ex­ 13.'iVb3 ti'lxd5 ample, 6.ti'lxe5 'iVe77.d4 f6 8.'iVh5+g6 14.it,cs l::!:gS 9.ti'lxg6 'iVxe4+ 10.�e3 'iVxg6 ll.'iVxa5 15.ti'lc3 c6 'iVxg2 12.l::!:fl 'iVd5,and in the event of

26 The Ruy Lopez

13.�xc7?! �a6 the light squares fall. Or knight and then plays to keep the bish­ 6.0-0 �f6 7.d4 ed 8.b4 �b6 9.cd CJJe7 op on a5. 10.®c3 h6 l l.�e3 0-0 12.�d2 d6, with 6.CJJc4 a6 views to counterplay (Glek - Ve selovsky, I tried 6 ...0-0 in a game with Za­ Moscow, 1980). grebelny (Harkany Tenkes Cup, 1991). After 7.�a4 �b6 8.0-0 d5 9.ed �xd5 2. A. IVANOV - B. LUGO 10.®xb6 cb ll.�c4 �d6 12.�el a6 San Diego, 2004 13.�a3 White's advantage gradually disappeared, and after an exchange of l.e4 e5 queens 13... �xa3 14.ba b5 15.�b3 ®g6 2.CJJf3 CJJc6 the opening problems should be con­ 3.�b5 �b4 sidered solved. However, after castling 4.c3 �as White can win a pawn. And if 7.®cxe5 5.CJJa3 CJJxe5 8.CJJxe5 d5 9.�d3 �d6 lO.CiJf3 ®g6 promises Black reciprocal chanc­ es, then 7.CJJxa5 CJJxa5 8.CJJxe5 d5 9.d3 �d6 lO.CiJf3 llde .de �g6 12.0-0 �xe4 13.�el �d5 14.�a4 CJJac6 15.�f4 (Howell - Lach, Germany 1991) threat­ ens disaster fo r the c7 pawn and the en­ tire line 6 ...0-0. By the way, the Austrian Wi llibald Lach, who was playing Black, is the author of a good pamphlet on the Alapin Defense. 7.l.a4 Grandmasters Bruzon and Ivanov To exchange off the bishop and then in their duels with Lugo retreated the show off the bishop pair in an open bishop, disregarding its exchange in game. Bilger, Suetin (in the mono­ vain. In the example variation 7.�xc6!? graph The Complete Sp anish) and some CJJxc6 8.d4 d5 (8 .. b5 and especially 8 ... other theoreticians considered the de­ �b6 are even less attractive) 9.®xa5 velopment of the knight a refutation of CJJxa5 lO.de de ll.�xd8+ �xd8 the Alapin Defense, without troubling 12.®g5 the compensation fo r the pawn themselves with weighty arguments. It is indiscernible. isn't easy fo r Black to play this, but he 7... b5 can - and should! 8.CJJxa5 CJJxa5 5... CJJge7 9.�c2 CJJc6 The more flexible move 5 ...�b 6 10.d4 is the main one here and is exam- Against Lugo (Dominican Republic, ined below. 5 ...CiJf 6 is similar to the 2003) Bruzon embarked on play in the move-order 5 ...�b6 6.®c4 CiJf6. With center a little later: 10.0-0 d6 ll.h3 0-0

5 ...CJJ ge7, Black reinforces the queen's 12.d4 ®g6 13.a4 �b8?! (why not 13...

27 Chapter Ill

2id7,not conceding the file?) 14.ab ab 3. BARLOV - D. VELIMIROVIC 15.2ie3 h6 16.1/j'd2 ed 17.cd d5 18.e5 Tivat, 1994 tlJce7 19.CiJe1 2if5 20.tiJd3. White is appreciably better. l.e4 eS 10... ed 2.tiJf3 tlJc6 ll.cd dS 3.2ib5 2ib4 12.e5 4.c3 2ia5 A typical metamorphosis in the cen­ 5.tiJa3 2ib6 ter fo r 3 ...2ib4, which is almost always 6.tlJc4 playable fo r Black. He usually manages to subjugate the light squares. 12... 2ig4 13.2ie3 1/j'd7 14.h3 2if5 15.0-0 0-0 16.J:\c1 f6 !? In a maneuvering battle White's chances are a little better. Lugo doesn't want to be outplayed by a stronger oppo­ nent and so he complicates the game. 17.ef J:\xf6 18.2ig5 2ixc2 6 ... tiJf6 19.1/j'xc2 J:\xt3!? For a long time it seemed necessary 20.2ixe7 CiJxd4 to reinforce the e5 pawn, until in 1988 21.1/j'xc7 the Moscow theoreticians Pimonov and The idea has justified itself. Black has Ve selovsky researched a counterattack. a sensible choice between a practically As a consequence, the knight move out drawn endgame (21... 1/j'xc7 22.J:\xc7 shares favor with 6 ...d6. Against Kalegin J:\f723.J:\e1 tiJf 5 24.g4 tlJxe7 25.J:\exe7 (Anapa, 1981) Kholmov preferred 6 ...f6 , J:\xe7 26.J:\xe7 J:\c8) and a decent mid­ but here you don't manage to complete dlegame (2l...tiJe2+ 22.�h2 1/j'fS). your development without weakening The game itself concluded quickly after your position: 7.d4 ed 8.cd d5 9.CiJxb6 Black tried a third choice and White re­ ab 10.e5 2ig4 11.0-0 CiJe7, and now acted badly: 21...1/j'fS 22.gf?? (22.J:\ce1!) 12.ef gf 13.h3 2ih5 14.2if4 is indisput­ 22 ..,1/j'xh3 0- 1 ably in White's favor. 7.d3 It seems that 5 ...CiJge7?! should be White settles fo r little, declining an rejected. On the other hand it has be­ exchange on c6 with an elimination of come clear what Black should worry the e5 pawn. The extensive analyses by about. The dark-squared bishop needs the Muscovites concern exceptionally special care, and it should be put in a complex positions that are difficult to more stable position. understand even fo r advanced analytical

28 The Ruy Lopez programs. Pimonov and Ve selovsky con­ Mae8 23.Mfdl (Sofia Polgar - Berkov­ sidered the variation 7 .1txc6 be 8.1i''lcxe5 ich, Amsterdam, 1995) by the pres­ tLlxe4 9.%Ye2 d5 10.d3 1ta6 ll.c4 f6 ! ence of opposite-colored bishops. Sofia 12.tLlxc6 %Yd6 13.cd 1ixf2+ 14.�fl f5 didn't even begin to look fo r chances 15.1ie3 1ixe3 16.%Yxe3 a bottleneck, and settled fo r a draw. but it can be "opened". Instead of an 13... 1te6 unhappy endgame after 16... %Yxd5?! Black isn't ready to advance in the 17.tLlb4%Yc5 18.%Yxc5 tLlxc5 you should center yet: 13... d5?! 14.ed tLlxd5 15.d4! play a dynamic middlegame - 16... 0-0! e4 16.tLle5,and the pawn can't be con­ 17.�gl tLlf6. Black's initiative isn't as gratulated fo r losing contact with its col­ convincing with ll.tLlxc6 %Yd6 12.tLlb4 leagues. 0-0 13.0-0 - the white king has gone off 14.�xe6 Mxe6 to its own flank, and the pawns fall short 15.tLlh4 d5 fo r now. Nowispreciselythetime! On the next 7.d4 hasn't been successful, used move the pawn could go on through, but by Psakhis against Berkovich (Tel Aviv, Ve lirnirovic considered the exchange in 1992): 7 ...tLlx e4 8.tLlxb6 ab 9.de d5 the center playable. lO.ed tLlxd6 11. 1ie2 %Yf6 12.1tg5 @g6 16.%Yf3 tLle7 13.1if4 0-0 14.0-0 Md8 15.1td3 %Yh5 17.1te3 %Yc7 16.tLlg5 %Yxdl 17.Mfxdl. The queens 18.tLlf5 de have left the board, and the chances 19.de tLlxfS have equalized. 20.ef Md6 7... d6 21.'i¥g3 Me8 8.a4 a6 22.M:adl Mxdl 9.tLlxb6 cb 23.M:xdl 'i¥c6 The similar change in structure in 3 ... 24.'i¥h4 aS 1tb4 is often harmless fo r Black. The po­ Takes the valuable b4 square away sition is closed for now, and it isn't easy from the queen. White is slightly better, to get to the weak b6 and d6 pawns. but it's difficult for him to improve his 10.1ic4 h6 position. ll.h3 0-0 12.0-0 Me8 Practitioners haven't fo llowed the 13.Mel paths of Pimonov and Ve selovsky, so After 13.1te3 d5! the b6 pawn falls without drawing any definite conclu­ anyway, but nothing terrible happens. sions about the quality of 6 ...tLlf6, let's In the variation 14.ed tLlxd5 15.1ixd5 switch to 6 ...d6. %Yxd5 16.1txb6 1if5 17.d4 1ie4 18.Mel ed 19.1ixd4 tLlxd4 20.cd MacS the loss 4. E. MORTENSEN - M. CHElVERIK is made up fo r by piece activity, and in Copenhagen, 2004 the event of 15.d4 1ie6 16.1ixd5 1txd5 17.de tLlxe5 18.tLlxe5Mxe5 19.%Yd4Me4 l.e4 eS 20.%Yxb6 %Yxb6 21.1txb6 Me2 22.b4 2.tLlf3 tLlc6

29 Chapter Ill

3.�b5 �b4 tll c6 14.'i¥dl 'i¥h4, with an imitation 4.c3 cli a5 of activity from Black now. Or 12... tll c6 5/Z'la3 �b6 13.'i¥dl �e6 14.a3 tlla5 15.�f4 'i¥f6 6.tllc4 d6 16.�g3 (Czarnota - Kuzmicz, Poland, 2007) 16 ...tll b3 17.Mbl Mfd8 18.'i¥e2 'i¥e7 19.f3f6 , with impenetrable fo rtress walls. How great the value of each move is fo r Black is illustrated by the con­ tinuation 7.0-0 tllge7 8.a4 �e6?! (the extremely strong 8 ...0-0 is dis­ cussed below in example 6 Prochazka - Chetverik). The "childish" thrust 9.CLlg5 fo llows, with the subtext 9 ... �xc4? 10.�xc4 0-0? ll.'i¥h5. In the case of 9 ...a6 10.tllxe6 fe ll.CLlxb6 ab 7.d4 12.�xc6+ tllxc6 13.'i¥h5+ g6 14.'i¥h6 Actually7 .a4 � e6 8.d4 ed was played Black has bunched-up pawns and a in the game, but out of methodological bad king, and with 12 ...bc 13.'i¥g4 he considerations I'm slightly changing loses a pawn altogether. There's still the move-order. Most likely, on 7.a4 the good news that in the variation the reply 7 ...a6 is a little weaker. Then 9 ...0-0 10.'i¥h5 h6 ll.tllxe6 fe 12.'i¥g4 8.tllxb6 cb 9.�c4 CLlf6 10.d3 takes us �f6 13.Jfi.xc6 tllxc6 14.a5 �c5 15.b4 to the game Barlov - Ve limirovic. It d5 16.ed �xd5 White doesn't succeed is better to double the pawns another in winning a piece because of 17 ...Mf 4, way: 8.�xc6+ be 9.d4 CLlf6 10.0-0 ed and settles fo r a positional advantage. ll.e5! de 12.tllfx e5, with a decent ini­ Evidently with 12.�xc6 tllxc6 13.a5 tiative. �c5 14.b4 d5 15.a6! his advantage is It makes sense fo r White to castle, as even more impressive. his opponent has established a pawn on 7... ed d6, and later it will advance with the loss 8.a4!? ofa tempo. For some reason White hasn't A gambit here is more interesting exploited this nuance in the necessary than the line 8.cd d5. In the old game way in practice: 7.0-0 tllge7 8.d4 ed 9.cd Wo lf - Alapin (, 1900) White d5 lO.ed 'i¥xd5 ll.'i¥a4!?, and it seems kept the enemy king in the center: that on 12.tllxb6 the pawn will have to 9.tllxb6 ab 10.tlle5 tlle7 ll.�g5 'i¥d6 be knocked out of the center. In an en­ 12.�xe7 �xe7 13.0-0 de 14.�xc6 be. counter with Lukez (Stockholm, 1990) But he didn't have enough strength to Tiviakov continued 9.tllxb6 ab (afterthe seriously bother it. Even with the best "correct" capture towards the center no 15.'i¥h5g6 16.'i¥h4+�f 8 17.'i¥xe4 �e6 more problems are evident) 10.tllxd4 18.tllxc6 Mxa2 19.Mxa2 �xa2 the posi­ 0-0 ll.Mel tllxd4 12.'i¥xd4 �e6 13.a3 tion equalizes.

30 The Ruy Lopez

We 're already fa miliar with the idea ll.CfJxd4 �d7 12.CfJf5 (probably a little 9.ed '{i'xd5 10.'{i'a4, to fo rce the oppo­ premature) 12 ...�xf 5 13.ef'{i'd7 14.g4 f6 nent to strike out from the center after 15.�f4 h5 16.f3g6 17.fg C£Jxg6 18.�g3 an exchange on b6. Hector has tried 0-0-0 19.0-0 hg 20.fg C£Jge5. And how three different defenses here, and the are the bishops better than the knights third one was logically the best: 10 ... here? Again, we've convinced ourselves Cf'Je7 ll.Ci'Jxb6 cb 12.0-0 0-0 13.:Sela6 that the exchange C£Jxb6, ab isn't a great 14.�c4 '{i'd6 15.'{i'a3 '{i'xa3 16.ba b5 achievement. 17.�b3 �e6 18.�xe6 fe 19.:Sxe6 Ci'Jd5 9... d5?! 20.�d2 :Sfe8 2l.:Sxe8+ :Sxe8 22.:Sel Black isn't keeping an eye on the :Sxel + 23.�xel Wf7 (Lima - Hector, outside pawn, which could cost him Manila, 1992). Having solidly reinforced de�rly. True, with the stronger 9 ...�x c4 on d5, there's no way that Black should 10.�xc4 CfJf6 ll.d5 �a5+ 12.�d2 lose. Subsequently, due to a , �xd2+ 13.'{i'xd2 CfJb8 14.C£Jd4 0-0 it's White almost lost. difficultto get reciprocal play. 8... �e6 lO.ed Black has only accepted the sacri­ After 10.a5! de 11.CfJfe5 �xc4 fice in the "excavated" game Betinsh 12.C£Jxc4 �xd4 13.a6 '{i'f6 14.0-0 :Sd8 - Lebedev (1900): 8 ...dc 9.a5 �c5 15.'{i'g4C£Jge7 16 .ab 0-0 in the duel Hell­ 10.b4! �xb4 ll.'{i'a4 �c5 12.a6! b6 ers - Hector (Malmo, 1988) Black suc­ 13.�xc6+ �d7 14.0-0 Cf'Je7 15.�xd7+ cessfully positioned his pieces, but the '{i'xd7 16.'{i'b3b5 17.Cf'Jce5! de 18.Cf'Jxe5 passed b7 pawn was unpleasant enough. '{i'd4 19.'{i'xf7+ Wd8 20.li1Wxg7 :g8 1l.ab ef l2.'�xf3 �xc4 13.�xc6+ be 2I.'{i'f6 '{i'xe4 22.:Sdl + �d6 23.itg5, 14.'i¥xc6+ Wf8 15.'i¥xc4 cb 16. 0-0 is with a win. A superb attack by Betinsh even better - Black has big problems but a far from ideal defense by Lebedev. with hisdevel opment. So, with ll...Wf812.�x c6 �c5 his own 10... itxd5 pieces prevent his bishop from sneaking If 10 ...'i¥xd5, then ll.CfJe3 'i¥h5 off (the variation 13.�d5 c6 14.�xf7 12.�xc6+ be 13.0-0 a5 14.b3 and �a3. Wxf7 15.�a3 promises the initiative, The bishops can't deploy here, and the but in no way a win). Instead of 12 ...b6? king is stuck inthe center - Black is no­ the continuation 12 ...Cf'Je7 13.Cf'Ja5 ba ticeably worse. 14.�xc6+ �d7 15.�xd7+ '{i'xd7 was 11.0-0 C£Jge7 incomparably more stubborn - Black 12.a5 �xc4 has preserved all his pawns fo r now, It's precisely this knight that should while half of the white pawn chain has be taken. 12... �xf3? 13.'{i'xf3 �xd4? been removed .. leads to a fiasco because of the battering 9.cd ram 14.a6! Against Hector (La Coruna, 1995) 13.�xc4 �xd4 Suarez tried to prove the superior­ Dangers lie in wait at every step! On ity of the pair of bishops over the pair 13... C£Jxa5? the response 14.:Sxa5!�x a5 of knights: 9.Cf'Jxb6 ab 10.�g5 C£Jge7 15.C£Jg5wins.

31 Chapter Ill

an exchange of queens 18.�c2! �xc2 19.1ixc2. In the variation 19 ...1ix b2 20.Ma2 ll:ld6 21.Mxb2 lllxa5 three con­ nected passed pawns still don't compen­ sate fo r the loss of the piece. 18.Sixf5 hg 19.�e4 g4 20.Sixc6 gf 21.Sixb7 Mab8 22.�xf3 �b4 23.Sie4 The chances have equalized. The 14.�b3! simplest thing here was also to equalize The queen has chosen the best park­ the number of pawns by taking with the ing spot. After 14.�a4 Sif6 15.a6 ba bishop on b2. 16.Md1 �b8 17.Sig5 0-0 18.Sixf6 gf Black has six (!) isolated pawns, but two And so, with 5.ll:la3 White strikes, of them are extra. but he won't win without blunders by 14... 0-0 his opponent. At the same time, after 15.Md1 lllf5 castling kingside the development of With 15... �d6 16.1ie3lll f5 the op­ the knight to the edge of the board loses position of the rook and queen unex­ fo rce. pectedly has an effect - with the help of the temporary covering of a file 17.Sid5! 5. R. KALOD - M. CHETVERIK (17 ...Sixe3 18 .Sixf7+). Allpossible sup­ Frydek-Mistek, 1996 port from the cavalry fo r the centralized bishop also has negative aspects: 16.a6!? l.e4 e5 ba 17.Mxa6 (the pair ofblack horses has 2.lllf3 lllc6 been split up!) 17... Mb8 18.�c2 lllb4 3.�b5 �b4 19.�xf5 �xf2+ 20.Wxf2 �xdl 21.lllg5 4.c3 Sia5 �h5 22.Ma4, with an advantage. 5.0-0 lllge7 16.Sig5 �d6 17.Sid3?! In the event of 17.g4! I was counting on staying afloatwith the help of 17... h6 18.gf hg. It seems that this life preserver has a hole in it - 19.1id5! (19... �c5 20.Mac l or 19 ... �f6 20.�xb7). 17... h6! Black has avoided the worst fate, but shouldn't relax. 17 ...� c5?! didn't work because of the hanging pieces after

32 The Ruy Lopez

The fundamentalposition of the Alapin 9.lZ'lxe5 is also harmless, as the knight Defense. White usually wins a pawn here can't hold out in the center. For exam­ with a flank onslaught (games 7 and 8) or ple, 9 ...de 10.d4 f6 ll.tZ'lg4 c5! 12.lZ'le3 creates a pawn center (games 9 and 10). a6 13.�e2 cd 14.�xd4 �xd4 15.cd 6.Ct'la3 �e6 16.b3 tZ'lac6 17.�b2 l:tfd8 18.l:tfdl We 've looked at a ofthis l:tac8 19.�c4 tZ'ld5,with a good block­ kind of knight move out both with a de­ ading position fo r Black (Jansa - Khol­ cisive pawn attack and with level-head­ mov, Trencianske Teplice, 1979). On ed castling. But here the queen's pawn ll.b4!? the continuation ll...c6 12.�a4 advances from its initial position to d5 in fe 13.ba �xa5 14.�a3 l:te8 15.�b3+ one move, and then there's nothing fo r tZ'ld5 16.�d6 ed 17.'ii'xd4 �h8 main­ Black to fe ar. tains equality. 6... 0-0 9... �g4 7.tZ'lc4 The author's specialty - defending A 191h-century miniature by the a pawn with a pin and the exchange of master MaxHarmonist vividly demon­ a knight. However, there's no reason to strates that it's unseemly to chase ma­ reproach the primitive defense of the terial to the detriment of development: pawn 9 ...f6 either. For example, 10.�a4 7.'ii'a4 d5! 8.�xc6 tZ'lxc6 9.tZ'lxe5? tZ'lxe5 (or 10.b4 tZ'lac6 ll.�e3, with a micro­ 10.'ii'xa5lZ'lf 3+! ll.�hl 'ii'd6 12.gf'ii'f4 scopic advantage) 10 ....ii.d 7 ll.ii.c2 de 13.�g2 �h3+! 14.�xh3 'ii'xf3+ 15. 12.de �b5 13.l:tel 'ii'xdl 14.�xdl c5 �h4g5+! 16.�xg5 �h8!, with unavoid­ 15.b4 cb 16.cb tZ'lc4 17.a4 �e8 18.lZ'ld2 able mate (Stutzkowski - Harmon­ �fl 19.tZ'lxc4 �xc4 (Rozentalis - Hec­ ist, Berlin, 1898). Obviously 13.�xd5 tor, Stockholm, 1990), and the endgame 'ii'xf3+ 14.�gl �h3 15.'ii'g5 �e2 can't justifiably resulted in a draw. As in a be considered an improvement of the typical closed Spanish, the pair of white defense, but it's already too late to bring bishops doesn't manage to obtain suffi­ the knight in to help - 13.tZ'lc2 'ii'xf3+ cient space fo r productive activity. 14.�gl 'ii'g4+ 15.�hl 'ii'xe4+ 16.�gl 10.h3 ii.xf3 'ii'xc2, and eliminating the pawn after ll.�xf3 a6 17... ii.h 3 costs White the exchange. 12.ii.a4 7... d5 8.tZ'lxa5 tZ'lxa5 9.d3 Suetin considered this variation unsatisfactory on the basis of his game with Gusev (Dubna, 1979): 9.'ii'a4 c6 10.�e2 tZ'lg6 ll.d3 b5 12.'ii'c2 f5 13.a4. The knight shouldn't vegetate on the periphery; 9 ...de lO.tZ'lxe5 c6 ll.�e2 f6 12.lZ'lc4 tZ'lxc4 13.'ii'xc4�d5 is stronger, or simply 9 ...tZ'la c6.

33 Chapter Ill

12... d4 17... Mb8 In a battle with a pair of enemy bish­ 18.Mtb1 'iVc7 ops it's best to close the position, of 19.'iVf3 a3 course. Against Alpert (Budapest, 1994) Offering my opponent a strong I attacked impetuously with my pawns square on an . After 19 ...Lll f4 without coming into contact with my 20.�xf4 ef (the a5 pawn has lost its de­ opponent's army: 12... b5 13.�c2 f5 ?! fender) or simply doubling the rooks, (it isn't too late fo r 13 ...d4 here either) neither player has an advantage. 14.ed 'iVxd5 15.'iVxd5 Lllxd5 16.Mel 20.Mb3 Mb7 Mfe8 17.�d2, threatening 18.c4 with 2l.Mab1 clearly better prospects. In the case of21.Mxa3 Mfb8 22.'iVdl 13.'iVg3 tllg6 Lll f4 23.�xf4 efthe weak a5 pawn makes 14.�d2 it difficult fo r White to contest the dis­ Let's try to break up the pawn pair puted file. by it from the right. After 21... Mtb8 14.f4 Lllxf4 15.�xf4 ef 16.Mxf4 'iVd6 22.'iVd1 h6 17.Mg4 'iVxg3 18.Mxg3 b5 19.�c2 c5 the 23.'iVcl d4 pawn gets a new support, and there's Now 23 ...Mxb3 24.Mxb3 Mxb3 25.ab nothing fo r Black to worry about. Lllh4 26.'iVxa3 'iVc6 followed by 'iVg6 is 14... cS correct, with sufficientcounterpl ay fo r a 15.b4 draw. Kalod may have rushed a little with this decision, which is correct in prin- 6. P. PROCHAZKA- M. CHETVERIK ciple. 15.cd?! 'iVxd4 16.�xa5 'iVxa4 de- Budapest, 2005 fines the position unfavorably fo r White, so it was worth not defining anything l.e4 e5 fo r now. 15.Mfcl!? is appropriate (the 2.tllf3 tllc6 queen's rook supports b4 later from bl). 3.�b5 �b4 15... bS 4.c3 �aS 16.ba 5.0-0 tllge7 No matter how modest the oppor­ 6.d3 tunities are for the white bishops in the case of 16.�dl cb 17.cb tllc6, hopes of an advantage are preserved. 16... ba 17.c4 We can crack the game open in the interests of the white bishop: 17.cd 'iVxd4 18.�e3 'iVxd3 19.�xc5 'iVxg3 20.fg Mfc8. Then the knight acquires a new lease of life via f8, and we get an equal endgame.

34 The Ruy Lopez

A completely predictable strategy, if ly valid plan: lO.tlJxb6 ab ll.tlJg5�d 7 White had encountered the Alapin De­ 12.f4 ef 13.�xf4 tlJg6 14 . ..ig3 tlJce5, fe nse fo r the first time and didn't want with a satisfactory position. to argue in the main lines with a more 10... a6 learned partner. After reinforcing the e4 11.tlJxb6 cb pawn it's more difficultfo r Black to start 12.�c4 �xc4 reciprocal play. I repay the debt with an equivalent 6... 0-0 measure - doubling the enemy pawns. 7.tlJbd2 �b6 12... d5 13.ed �xd5 14.I'l:el �c7 is no Black should fo rget about moving worse, and since the e5 pawn is eas­ the queen's pawn two steps fo rward fo r ily defended, the game is virtually now. In the case of 7 ...d5?! 8.ed �xd5 equal. 9.�c4 �d8 lO.I'l:el tlJg6 ll.b4 �b6 13.dc �c7 12.b5 White takes on e5. A preliminary 14.�d3 Il:ac8 defense of the f6 pawn didn't help Hec­ 15.I'l:d1 gfd8 tor in his encounter with Davies (Swe­ 16 . ..ia3 den, 1987): 7 ...f6 8.tlJc4 d5?! 9.ed �xd5 The talented Hungarian is 10.a4 �e6 ll.�xc6 tlJxc6 12.b4, and aiming at d6 via the b4 pawn. It was bet­ the compensation fo r the piece here will ter to put the b6 pawn directly in the be as dubious as it was in the previous beauty spot (16.�e3). variation for the pawn. 16... tlJg6 The bishop retreat can change plac­ 17.g3 �d7 es with 7 ...d6. With 8.tlJc4 a6 9.�xc6 17 ...f6 is stronger, proactively de­ tlJxc6 1 O.d4 �g4 ll.de (ll.d5 b5) fending the pawn and preparing 18 ... ll...�xf3 12.�xf3 tlJxe5 13.tlJxe5 de tlJce7, with an attack on the c4 pawn. 14.�e3 White's achievements are more Possibly Prochazka would then have had than modest. Against Lugo (Havana, to transfer his bishop via cl to e3 any­ 1992) Hemandez continued 9.�a4 b5 way. A very complicated position with 10.tlJxa5 tlJxa5 ll.�c2 �g4 12.h3 �h5 approximate equality. 13.b4 tlJac6 14.a4 f6 15.�b3+ �h8 16.�e6 �fl17. �xf7 Il:xfl 18.�b3 I'l:f8 19.�e3, and couldn't break through his opponent's cast-iron reinforcements. 8.tlJc4 d6 9.a4 This position can be reached via 5.tlJa3 - the knight has changed its route, but it still ends up on c4. 9... �e6 10.b4 Destroys his opponent's pawn struc­ ture. Activity on the kingside is an equal- 18.tlJe1

35 Chapter Ill

18.c5 be 19.bc 0Ja5 20.cd 0Jc4 leaves few chances to make a conquest, as the a4, c3 and d6 pawns need protection. 18... 0Jce7 19.0Jg2 'i¥xa4 20.0Je3!? 'i¥c6 The rather sluggish knight maneu­ ver gave me the courage to remove my partner's outside pawn. Now is the time to regret being greedy. After 20 ...'i¥e8 2l.b5 the black horses are completely sidelined, although that's still better than switching to an endgame. It seems that the practice of the sys­ 2l.b5 ab tem 3 ...1ib4 should be considered fin­ 22.cb 'i¥xc3 ished with this. The white knight has 23.'i¥xc3 �xc3 eliminated the central pawn and based 24.ihd6 �cc8 itself on a commanding height. The Here Prochazka played 25. iixe7 black knight has wandered off tothe edge 0Jxe7 26.�xd8+ �xd8 27. �a7 �b8 of the board without visible prospects fo r 28.0Jc4 0Jc8 27.�a2 f6 and his advan­ active participation in the coming bat­ tage was eroded because of an inaccu­ tle. But back in the century before last rate move-order. Whether I would have Semyon Alapin displayed extraordinary managed to make a draw after 25.�a7 skill and saved Black's position with his �d7 26.1ixe7 �xdl + 27.0Jxdl 0Jxe7 successful play against Schlechter and 28.�xb7 �cl 29.\£?g2 0Jc8 30.0Je3 is Bird. Still, the queen's wing of White's still a big question. camp has been dented, and the kingside is insufficientlydef ended. And now it's the turn of the most 9... 0-0 surprising line in the Alapin Defense! 10.d4 After the game Bird - Alapin (Vi­ 7. V. ANAND - J. HECTOR enna, 1898) White deviated from the Palma de Mallorca, 1989 continuation 10.0Jf3 d5 ll.e5 because of the quick opening of files: 11...iig 4 l.e4 e5 12.d4 f6 13.ii,a3 �e8 14.ef (14.�el fe 2.0Jf3 0Jc6 15.�xe5 0Jc4 16.�xe8+ 'i¥xe8 17.1ib4 3.ii,b5 iib4 Jixf3 18.gf 'i¥h5 is in Black's favor) 4.c3 !ia5 14 ...'i¥xf 6 15.0Jbd2 a6 (with 15... 0Jc 4 5.0-0 0Jge7 Black's initiative should be enough fo r 6.ii,xc6 0Jxc6 perpetual check - 16.0Jxc4 de 17.'i¥a4 7.b4 Jib6 ii,xt3 18.'i¥xc4+ \£?h8 19.gf 'i¥xf3 8.b5 0Ja5 20.�ael 'i¥g4+) 16.ba �xa6 17.�el 9.0Jxe5 �ea8 18.!ie7 'i¥g6 19.0Je5 iixdl

36 The Ruy Lopez

20.CZlxg6 hg 21.l:l:axd l. I can't say that lable (13... CZlx c4? 14.l:l:bl �a6 15.CLlb4 Alapin's switching of the activity to the �b5 16.a4), but with the inclusion of queenside was the best decision, but 12 ...f5 13.e5 his greed is unpunished. nevertheless Black even won a slightly In the fo rced variation 13... �xb5 14.c4 worse endgame. CZlxc4 15.a4 �d5 16.CZlxc4 �xc4 17.a5 10... �e8! �xd4 18.l:l:a4 �d5 19.CLlf4 �xt2+ A multidimensional move. After... d6 20.Wxf2 �xdl 21.l:l:xdl fe 22.CLld5 l:l:t7 the queen casts an unfriendly look at the Black collected four pawns fo r the lost weak b5 and e4 pawns, and the advance bishop and didn't have to lose. ...f5 opens a way out for it to the kingside. 12.CZlec4 In the fa mous game Geller - Taimanov In the interests of consolidation (Zurich, 1953) Black preferred 10 ...d5, Anand returns the pawn. Let's have a presumably not being familiar with Ala­ look at the way the duel Ernst - Hector pin's find. In reply ll.ctJd2 f6 12.CLld3 (Malmo, 1990) went: 12.ef d6 13.CZlef3 de 13.CZlxe4 �d5 14.l:l:el�xb5 15.�a3 �xb5 14.g4 g6 15.CZlb3?gf l6.�h6 l:l:e8 deserves attention, and having returned 17.g5 �e2 (17... �e6!?) 18.�xe2 l:l:xe2 the extra pawn, White solidly holds the 19.l:l:fel l:l:xel + 20.l:l:xel Wf7. The h6 initiative. bishop no longer outweighs the locked­ 1l.ctJd2 in b6 bishop, and Black won in the Defending the vulnerable pawns end. Of course, 15.c4 �d7 16.c5! de with the help of ll.�d3 was encoun­ 17.�a3! is more energetic, so it's worth tered in game 8. ll.l:l:eI! ? is interest­ muddying the waters with a piece sacri­ ing, completing the mobilization of fice, 16... gfl ? 17.cb fg 18.CLlg5 ab. Pos­ fo rces at the price of the b5 pawn. In sibly Hector activated the wrong pawn. the game Toenniges - Chetverik (Bad 13... i.x f5 14.a4 �f7 leads to a standard Ems, 2007) after ll...d6 12.CLld3 �xb5 position fo r the variation, in which 13.CLla3 �c6 14.d5 �d7 15.�e3 f6 Black's command of the light squares 16.c4 �xe3 17.l:l:xe3 b6 18.l:l:cl a6 prevents his opponent from stirring up 19.�d2 CLlb7 20.CLlc2 White seized the queenside. space, constraining his opponent con­ 12... fe siderably. It wasn't worth prodding the 13.CZle3 enemy chain into an advance; 13... �e8 White abstains from putting pres­ 14.CZlf4 �d7 15.CZlc2 f6 maintained ap­ sure on the e-pawn. With 13.�a4 CZlxc4 proximate equality. 14.�xc4+ Wh8 15.l:l:el an attempt 11... fS to preserve the pawn balance no mat­ Against K. Hansen (Kiljava, 1984) ter what makes mobilizing the queen­ a very young Dreev rushed to win the side difficult - 15 ...�h5?! 16.CZlxe4 pawn back: ll...d6 12.CLld3 �xb5 13.c4 d5 17.CLlg3 �xh2+ 18.Wxh2 de 19.a4. �d7 14.�b2 c5 15.d5 �c7 16.l:l:b l l:l:b8 He should open a second front: 15 ...a6 17.CLlf4 �g4 18.�xg4 �xg4 19.�c3. 16.ba l:l:xa6 17.CZlxe4 l:l:a5,with rich re­ Thanks to the inactive a5 knight Black's ciprocal play. Even without queens ( 14 ... position is poor. The c4 pawn was invio- �f7 15.�xf7+ l:l:xt7 16.CZlxe4 a6 17.ba

37 Chapter Ill l::txa6) definite compensation fo r the loss is at hand. 13... c6 With the aim of returning the bishop from a lethargic snooze to fully-fledged life. Although 13... d6 14.a4 a6 15.tl:ld5 ab 16.ab 'i¥xb5 was perhaps objectively stronger, with complicated play. 14.�a3 l::tf6 15.�b4 d5 16.bc Opening a new route fo r the c8 bish­ op; 16.f3ef l7.l::txf3l::t xf3 18.'i¥xf3 leaves 11... f5 more chances of an advantage. The pawns should only be advanced 16... be in this order. In the case of ll...d6? 17.'iY a4 'iY d8 12.tllf3 f5 13.e5 White stabilizes the 18.f3 center, leaving his opponent no com­ Hector meets the undermining move pensation fo r the loss. For example, 13 ... at full fo rce: by transferring his bishop he f4 14.�a3 �f5 15.'i¥e2 �g4 16.tllbd2 manages to preserve his central pawn. l::tf5 17.h3 �h5 18.'i¥e4(1 8.'i¥d3 is even 18... �a6 stronger, then on 18... �g6 there's a le­ 19.l::tfe 1 �d3! thal choice between 19.c4 and 19.tl:lh4) 20.tllg4 l::te6 18 ...�g6 19.ed 'i¥xe4 20.tl:lxe4 tl:lc4 21.fe de 2l.�c5 (Zetocha - Chetverik, Buda­ Black's chances are no worse. Af­ pest, 1995). ter big adventures the skirmish ended 12.tlld2 peacefully on the 58th move . An historical excursion to the 19th century - play on the light squares in the 8. V. VARAD I- M. CHETVERIK encounter Schlechter - Alapin (Berlin, Harkany Te nkes Cup, 2003 1897): 12.'i¥g3 'it>h8 (12... fe 13.tlld2 d6 14.tl:lg4 �d7 15.a4 a6 16.ba l::txa6 isn't l.e4 e5 bad fo r Black, but he probably didn't 2.tl:lf3 tl:lc6 want to worry about the e4 pawn) 13.ef 3.�b5 �b4 d6 14.tl:lf3'i¥xb5 15.�e3 �xf5 16.tllbd2 4.c3 �as 'i¥a4 17.tl:lh4 tl:lc4 18.tllxf5 l::txf5 5.0-0 tl:lge7 19.'i¥h3 tl:lxd2 20.�xd2 l::taf8 21.'i¥d3 6.�xc6 tl:lxc6 c5 22.dc �xc5 23.�e3 b6, and nothing 7.b4 �b6 interesting happened up until the draw­ 8.b5 tl:la5 ing outcome on the 37th move. 9.tl:lxe5 0-0 The move in the game Andrijevic 10.d4 'i¥e8! - Hector (Cannes, 1989) is instruc­ ll.'i¥d3 tive: 12.l::tel d6 13.tllf3 fe 14.l::txe4 'i¥g6

38 The Ruy Lopez

15.lt'lh4 �h5 16.�e2 �xe2 17.:c!xe2 22.f5 h6 lig4 18.f3 1id7 19.li:la3 c6 20.bc Cl:Jxc6. 23.li:le6 l::!f6 White keeps the extra pawn, but his army 24.Jig5 is scattered across the whole board, and he has to look fo r equality, not fo r an ad­ vantage. 12... d6 13.Cl:Jef3 fe 14.li:lxe4 lifS Te n years earlier I continued 14 ... �g6 (then assuming ...lid 7 and ...:c!ae8 with normal play), but that time I pre­ ferred to fo llow the analysis of Cordel - the fo rgotten German theoretician who had a sober look at many things, includ­ ing the Alapin Defense. It's all heading fo r a draw: 24 ...:c!xe6! 15.l::!e1 �h8 25.:c!xe6 Cl:Je5 26.l::!xh6+ gh 27.�xh6+ 16.Cl:Jf6+! was threatened. Instead �g8 28.�e6+ �h7 29.�e7+ or 25 ... of a purely defensive move 15 ...�f7 �g8!? (intending not only 26... hg, but 16.Cl:Jfg5 �c4 deserved attention, aim­ also 26 ...�xc3) 26.�el! hg 27.l::!e8+ ing to conquer the light squares. :c!xe8+ 28.�xe8+ �h7 29.�h5+. I 16.�e2 didn't notice the second variation, and Regarding White's position Cordel instead of the first one I decided not to is full of despair. He gives the variation receive a check, but to declare one. But 16.d5 �g6 17.Cl:Jh4 (?) iixf2+! (while after 24 ... li:le5? 25.l::!xe5! de 26.ii.xf6 17.1if4ii.g4 18.1ig3 lixf3 19.gfis com­ �e3+ 27.�g2 �e2+ 28.�h3 �f3+ pletely playable, despite the misshapen 29. � g3 the perpetual check didn't hap­ pawns), but he calls the worthy move in pen and the affair came down to a hope­ the game the lesser evil. less endgame. 16... ii.xe4 17.�xe4 �xbS And so, the exotic continuation from 18.li:lg5 �fS games 7 and 8 is a real success fo r Black. 19.�h4?! He has counterplay everywhere, and Instead of exchanging queens with objectively his position is most likely no approximate equality Va radi embarks on worse. Let's have a look at how play un­ a rather adventurous attack. fo lds with a "central" strategy by White. 19... Cl:Jc4 20.g4 �g6 9. N. DJUKIC - M. MARKOVIC The queen disregards the promising retreats to d3 or c2, provoking a risky at­ Kopaonik, 2005 tack by the f-pawn. l.e4 eS 21.f4 �d3 2.Cl:Jf3 li:lc6

39 Chapter Ill

3.li,b5 li,b4 fo r White: 8.Li'lc3 Jtxc3 9.bc de 10.ll'lg5 4.c3 li,a5 Jtf5 ll.�e2 (on ll.f3 the response 11... 5.0-0 ll:lge7 e3! is good, although 11.lJ:e1 looks more 6.d4 ed natural and stronger) 11...0-0 12.ll:lxe4 7.cd d5 JJ:e8 13.f3a6 14.Jtd3 ll:ld5 15.li,d2 li,g6 16.�f2 b5 17.JJ:fe1 tlla5, blocking the pawn duo with good prospects. A mass attack on the c6 knight guar­ antees that he wins a pawn, but in return Black gets a powerful bishop pair and a palpable advantage in development. The instructive game Mukhin - Ve selovsky (Moscow, 1970) deserves to be given in full: 8.tlle5 0-0 9.�a4 li,b6 10.ll:lxc6 ll:lxc6 ll.li,xc6 be 12.�xc6 Jta6 13.lJ:d1 de 14.�xe4? (it was time to pull back - 14.ll:lc3Jtd 3 15.ll:lxe4 �xd4 16.�c3 Only conveniently-developed piec­ �xc3 17.ll:lxc3) 14... lJ:e8 15.�f4 c5! es can put up a worthy fight against 16.ll:lc3 cd 17.tlle4 Jte2 18.JJ:e1 Jtc7 White's pawn superiority in the center. 19.�d2 d3 20.tll c3 �d6 2l.g3 Ji,f3 No problems with development are ex­ 22.lJ:e3 li,b7 23.lJ:xd3 �c6 24.f3li,b6+ pected here. First let's investigate open­ 25.�g2 �c5 26.JJ:d6 �gl+ 27.�h3 ing up the position with an exchange in Jtx£3.An impressive rout! the center (either e4xd5 or ...d5xe4). In 8... 0-0 game 10 we'll look at the advance 8.e5. In a duel between two experts on the 8.'�!ltVa4 Alapin Defense, Ve selovsky - Gusev Almost always associated with an (Rostov-on-Don, 1969) the reason­ exchange on d5, although the exchange able alternative 8 ... de!? was tested. Af­ is sometimes practiced without � a4. A ter 9.tlle5 li,b6 10.ll:lxc6 be II.li,xc6+ typical structure fo r the variation arises li,d7 12.d5?! Jtxc6 13.dc �d4! 14.�xd4 with 8.ed �xd5 9.li,xc6+ ll:lxc6 10.ll:lc3 li,xd4 15.tlld2 f5 the c-pawn, which has Jtxc3 ll.bc. Obviously it doesn't make been chipped away from its colleagues, is White happy, but, fo rtunately fo r him, defenseless. Of course, instead of 12.d5?! he can put pressure on c7. White has he should have simplified the game with a minuscule advantage, as in the game a double exchange on d7. Klovans - Muratov (Moscow, 1959): 9.ed 11...0-0 12.Ji,f4 li,g4 13.Jtxc7 JJ:ac8 9.li,g5,threatening to win the dark­ 14.li,g3 ll:le715.lJ:el ll:lg6 16.�b3 Ji,x£3 squared bishop, was encountered in the 17.gf�xf3 . game Navara - Czerwonski (Olomouc, The encounter Mikhalchishin - 2000). Black went out to an endgame Chetverik from a clock simul (Voronezh, with bad pawns: 9 ...de 10.li,xc6 be 1982) was marked by a slight advantage 11.tlle5 f6 12.�xa5 fg 13.tll c3 �xd4

40 The Ruy Lopez

14.1ihc7�d8?! 15.�xd8 :&!:xd8 16.:&!:fel 19.:&!:db1 c6 .iif5 17.lZ'lxe4 .iixe4 18.:&!:xe4. The con­ 20.a4 a6 tinuation 14 ...li'ld5! 15.11'lxc6 �xc3! 21.:&!:e1 f6 16.�d6 �f6 17.�xd5+ (it's because of A classic of the blockading genre: the this capture that defending the knight is c3 and d4 pawns don't even dare make useless) 17 ...�h 8 is stronger, with coun­ a sound. The magic of the opposite col­ terplay. ors didn't work either - Grandmaster 9 ... �xd5 Dj ukic didn't save a slightly worse end­ 10.11'lc3 �h5 game. Black isn't rushing to create the pawn pair c3/d4 fo r his opponent, although 10. N. KALESIS - M. CHETVERIK 10... .ii xc3 ll.bc .iig4 12. .iie2 �e6 looks Primorsko, 1990 more or less satisfactory. 11.li,g5 1.e4 e5 Let's glance at the fo llowing short, 2.11Jf3 11'lc6 very boring, but equal game: ll.:&!:el 3.li,b5 .iib4 a6 12.li,d3 b5 13.�b3 .iif5 14. .iixf5 4.c3 .iia5 �xf5 15. .iie3 :&!:ad8 16.:&!:edl .iib6 5.0-0 11'lge7 17.11'le2 11'ld5 18.11'lg3�g6 19.�a3 :&!:a8 6.d4 ed 20.�b3 :&!:ad82l .�a3, with a repetition 7.cd d5 of moves. Strange as it may seem, this 8.e5 was the romantic 191h century (Metger - Alapin, Berlin, 1897)! 11... .iixc3 This exchange is probably appropri­ ate here. On ll...f6 the response 12.d5!? .iixc3 13.dc fg 14.�b3+ �h8 15.�xc3 g4 16.�e5! �xe5 17.11'lxe5 be 18 . .iic4 is possible, and the black pawns have ac­ quired a pathetic look. 12.bc li,g4 13 . .iixe7 li,xf3 14 . .iixc6 .iixc6 15.�d1 White stabilizes the position in the A fr uitless attempt to extract divi­ center more often than he chooses other dends in the endgame, as perpetual moves including captures. Seizing space check was possible in the middlegame is a useful measure, but that makes it - 15.�a3 .iixg2! easier fo r the black pieces to come into 15 ... �xd1 the battle. 16.:&!:fxd1 :&!:fe8 8... h6 17 . .iig5 .iid5 A non-compulsory prophylactic 18 . .iie3 b5 move. With immediate castling Black

41 Chapter Ill shouldn't fe ar the pin 9.�g5 at least turn the bishop to h7 (so as not to deal because of a concentrated attack on the with an exchange on e4) and to release base of the d4 pawn: 9 ...h6 10.�h4 g5 the pressure with an exchange on e5 at a 1 l.�g3 �g4 12.Ci'lc3�b6 13.tlle2 �d7. convenient moment, with a satisfactory In the line 8.e5 a closed center and un­ position. problematic development allow Black to hazard the ...g5 thrust. 9.h3 0-0 lO.CZlc3 �b6 Against Macieja (Czestochowa, 1992) Czerwonski made the undermin­ ing move 1 0 ...f6 , risky without 8 ...h6 be­ cause ofthe exchange on f6 , and on l:l:xf6 - �g5. In this case the light squares are exposed, although that's also insignifi­ cant! There fo llowed ll.l:l:e1fe 12.CZlxe5 CZlxe5 13.l:l:xe5 (13.de �b6 14.l:l:e2 c6 15.�d3 maintained approximate equal­ 17... �e6?! ity) 13... c6 14.�fl �c7 15.lle2 tllf5 To take on f6 with the queen on 16.�d3 �f6 17.li,e3li,d 7 18.l:l:dlCZlxe3 e5xf6 after an advance by the f- pawn. 19.�xe3 l:l:ae8 20.�d2 l:l:xe2 21.�xe2 However, the queen is positioned poorly l:l:e8 22.�d3 �f5 23.�f3 �g6, and on e6. This is evident from the variation even with some simplifications Black is 18.CZlg3 f6 ?! 19.tllxe4 de 20.CZlg6! (20 ... fe eling fantastic. CZlxg6? 21.li,b3). If 18... f6 ?! is replaced ll.tlle2 �fS with 18 ...f5 , there fo llows an exchange 12.tllh4 a6 on e4 and g4. Kalessis immediately gets Instead of an immediate bishop re­ the g-pawn moving. treat to e4 or h 7 I succumbed to the 18.g4 fS temptation of clarifying the white bish­ 19.l:l:gl '.tih7 op's intentions. 13.li,xc6 be 14.tllxf5 20.b4 g6 tllxf5 15.�d3 �d7 is playable for Black, 2t.li,b3 but it isn't worth doubling pawns unnec­ His stubbornre jection oftllg3 (which essarily. is strong on any move, starting with the 13.�a4 �h7 l6'h) offered Black the good recipro­ 14.�e3 �d7 cal chance 2l.. .fg 22.hg g5!, and Rybka 15.f4 �e4 only sees a draw fo r White - 23.f5 �d7 16.�d2 l:l:ae8 24.li,xg5 hg 25.�xg5 �xd4 26.�h5+ 17.\t/h2 \t/g827.�g5+. Having missed the con­ White is preparing the advance venient opportunity, later - in a rather 18.g4. The alternative 17.CZlg3 creates dubious position - I outwitted my op­ the unpleasant threat of 18.f5, but then ponent. Whatever happens, happens fo r 17... f6 defuses it. Next it's useful to re- the best!

42 The Ruy Lopez r·co,NCi usioiV; ··-·····------,.------·1 After e�rythingtl1at has 1leen state

43 Chapter 4 The Scandinavian Defense

The variation 1. e4 d5 2.exd5 t2Jf6 3.d4 t2Jxd5 4.c4 t2Jb4

The Scandinavian Defense achieves the dream of many black openings: the liberat­ ing ...d5, eliminating the proud e4 pawn, is carried out without extensive prepara­ tion! The lines with 2 ...�xd5 have become very fashionable in recent years, espe­ cially when it became clear that the queen can hold her own in a central position after 3.LLlc3�d6 rather than scurrying to the edge of the board. We would like to suggest a less fa shionable option, which will take opponents away from their normal experiences and fo rce them to think fo r themselves at a very early stage.

l.e4 d5 started developing his pieces yet. The 2.ed LLlf6 pawn advanced in the first well-known 3.d4 tLlxd5 duel on 2 ...tLlx d5 - the fifth game of the Morphy - Anderssen match (Paris, 1858). Adolph Anderssen established the fashion fo r the indifferent 4 ...tLlf 6, and fo r almost half a century only this was played. Then Black decided to try 4 ...LLlb6 (it became the most popular) , and the provocative 4 ...LLlb4. 4... LLlb4 This was first played by Marshall against Tartakower (Karlsbad, 1907). The fo ray has a strictly tactical character 4.c4 and highlights the vulnerability of the c2 This seizing of space is only appar­ square. If White thinks about winning ently highly threatening, as White hasn't the overreaching knight, unpleasant The Scandinavian Defense

surprises lie in wait fo r him. My coach, ponent's actions and loses the advantage International Master Mikhail Kislov, of the first move . showed me this variation in the early 5... ii.fS 1970s. Forces the queen's knight to occupy Black shouldn't automatically car­ the unappealing a3 square. The tempt­ ry out the direct threat 5 .. .'�xd4. On ing blow in the center 5 ...e5!? only jus­ 5.LLlc3? the indicated trick gives White tifies itself with captures. On 6.de there full compensation fo r the pawn thanks fo llows 6 ...'iVx dl+ 7.xdl iif5 or 7 ... to his advantage in development. In the Jig4. If 6.LLlxe5, then 6 ...'iVxd4 7.'iVe2 example variation 5 ...'iVxd4?! 6.'iVa4+ ii.f5 8.LLlc6+ (8.LLlg6+?? lie4) 8 ... LZJ8c6 7.iie3'iVg4 8.a3 LLla6 9.LLlf3li.d 7 'iVe4 9.'iVxe4+ iixe4 lO.LLlxb4 iixb4+ 10.0-0-0 0-0-0 ll.h3 'iVh5 12.Md5 the ll.iid2 LLlc6 12.LLlc3 iif5 13.0-0-0 queen thrashes about under attacks from 0-0-0, with faster development. 6.a3! e4 the enemy soldiers. While 5.LLlc3?leaves 7.LLlg5 iie7 8.LLlxt7! xf7 9.ab iixb4+ the c2 square undefended, and 5 ...iif 5 10.LLlc3 is correct, with a clear advan­ practically wins. tage as a consequence of the unstable The continuation 5. LLlf3 was encoun­ position of the black king. tered in game 1, and direct play against Instead of 8 ...xf7 an energetic the b4 knight in the next games. counterattack with sacrifices has been tested: 8 ...'iVxd4?! 9.LLlxh8 lig4!? 1. V. BAKLAN - A. MUZYCHUK lO.'iVb3 LZJ8c6 ll.lie3 0-0-0 12.1i.e2 Calvi, 2005 li.xe2 13.1i.xd4 LLlxd4 (Genba - Ulko, Moscow, 1995) 14.'iVh3+! b8 15.ab l.e4 dS li.xc4 16.LLla3 iixb4 17.'�c3or 17.dl, 2.ed LLlf6 with a win. There weren't enough re­

3.d4 LLlxdS sources, and at the decisive moment 4.c4 LLlb4 there was nothing to throw into the fur­ s.LZJo nace ... 6.LLla3 There's little sense in a preliminary check fr om a4, as he'll have to put his knight on the edge of the board any­ way, and the queen has nothing to do in its company. For example, Zakha­ rov - Prokopchuk (Kolontaevo, 1997): 6.'iVa4+ LZJ8c6 7.LLla3 e6 8.1i.e3 iie7 9.1i.e2 0-0 10.0-0 'iVd7 ll.Mfdl Mfd8 12.Md2 iif6?! 13.Madl aS 14.LLlb5 LLle7?, and here 15.g4! lixg4 16.LLle5 won immediately. Instead of the mis­ An insufficiently concrete move. taken bishop maneuver an exchange of White isn't paying attention to his op- queens is stronger, 12... LLle 5!? 13.'iVxd7

45 Chapter IV

lllxd7, with equality, or the more com­ ll.Ilfcl llld7 12.lllbl a5 13.lllc3 Ji,f6 plicated 12... a6, intending 13... b5. 14.a3 llla6 15.�e3 lle8 16.llle4 Si,e7 6... e6 17.Ildl a4 18.llle5 lllxe5 19.Si,xe5 Si,g6 7.Si,e2 Si,e7 20.ii.d3 ikf8 2l.�f4, fu ndamentally In the game Va n Der We ide - Kue­ constraining the opponent (Fedorchuk hn (Trizen, 1984) Black immediately - Zubarev, Kharkov, 1998). The con­ subjected the enemy center to fire: 7 ... tinuation 9 ...lll 8c6 pins your opponent c5!? 8.Si,e3 lll 8c6 9.dc �xdl + IO.llxdl down to defending the central pawn; as a6 11.0-0 llc8 12.Ild2 Si,e7 13.Ilfd 1 e5 a counterbalance White gets the possi­ 14.h3 0-0 15.b3 Ilfd8 16.g4 Si,e4 17.lllbl bilities lllb5 and d5. After 10.lllb5 llc8 Si,xbl 18.llxbl llxd2 19.lllxd2 lllxa2 ll.d5 ed 12.a3 lllc2 13.llcl de 14.llxc2 20.llle4, with a definite initiative. If you �xdl 15.Si,xdl Si,xc2 16.Si,xc2 (Miru­ want achieve more, you should choose mian - Simacek, Pardubice, 2000) two 9 ...�a5 10.0-0 Ild8 ll.�el ii.xc5. minor pieces are preferable to a rook 8.0-0 0-0 and two pawns. On the other hand, with 10... a6!? ll.lllxc7 llc8 12.d5 e5!? 13.dc ef 14.llld5 be 15.llld4!? cd 16.lllxf5 de no advantage is evident. 9... c6 The decisive 9 ... c5 with the position ofthe bishop on f4allowed 10.lllb5, with an attack on the c7 square, and deserved close attention here. In the variation 10.�b3 llld7!? ll.dc a5 12.Ilfdl �c8 Black wins the pawn back with sufficient counter chances. 10.�b3 The pawn pair c4/d4 determines The battle has a maneuvering char­ White's space advantage, but all its mag­ acter, and the significance of individual nificence comes crashing down around moves isn't as important as the value of the ill-fated a3 knight. The social reha­ the chosen plan. In a constrained po­ bilitation of the outlaw is a task fo r the sition Black must strive fo r exchanges near future. The position in the diagram fo llowing the example of the game often comes about after 3.Si,b5+ Si,d7 Areshchenko - Kreindl (Rethymno, 4.Si,e2 lllxd5 5.d4 Ji,f5 6.lllf3 e6 7.0-0 2003): 10.�d2 llld7 ll.Ilfdl h6 12.h3 Si,e7 8.c4 lllb4 9.llla3 0-0 (with an in­ lllf6 13.llle5 llle4 14.�el a5 15.Ji,f3 significant one-move delay). lllg5 16.ikg4 Si,xg4 17.lllxg4 lllh7 9.ii.e3 18.ikf4 lllf6 19.llle5 llld7, with chances 9.Ji,f4 shares sympathies approxi­ to equalize. 17.hg is a little more precise, mately equally with a move out to e3. without the knight leaving the center. Black's passive play allows the hermit 10... aS knight to come to life: 9 ...c6 10.�d2 h6 ll.Ilfdl

46 The Scandinavian Defense

Black's last move exposed the b6 22.Si.e4 tllb8 square, which ll.c5!? emphasizes. Then 23.tllf3 tllxe3 again, after ll...Cll d7 12.tllc4 W/ic7 24.W/ixe3 tlld7 13 . .Macl tlld5 both the white knight and 25.tlle5 tllxeS the black one have improved, and the 26.de W/ic7 position is approximately equal. 27 . .Mbcl g6 11... tlld7 28 . .Md6!? W/ia7 12 . .Md2 a4 29.h4 Si.xd6 13.Wiidl lllf6 30.ed 14.Wticl tlle4 For the exchange sacrifice White has lS. .Mdl b6 obtained a strong defended , Anna Muzychuk didn't exploit the extra space and chances of exploiting the fruits of the sharp activation of her fo rc­ defects on the kingside. es. She should have prepared the liber­ ating ...c5: 15... W/ia5 16.tllbl Wtia6 (16... A comparatively boring line is behind c5!? 17.d5 tlld6) 17.SH1 c5!? us. It's now the turn of the ambitious 16.tllbl tlld6 continuation 5.W/ia4+ (games 2 and 3). 17.tllel bS 18.a3 Si.xbl?! 2. J. RIAND-A . RAETSKY Parting with the most active piece Lausanne, 2001 on the board without regret. 18 ...tlla6 19.tllc3 tll c7 20.cb ab 21.tlld3 .Mc8 al­ l.e4 dS lowed her to count on equality. 2.ed tllf6 19 . .Mxbl tlla6 3.d4 lllxdS 4.c4 tllb4 5.W/ia4+ tll8c6

20.c5 20.Wiic2 tllc7 21.tllf3 isn't bad either, with favorable maintaining of the ten­ 6.d5?! sion. White has succumbed to the provo­ 20 ... tllfS cation. It's difficult to believe that the 21.Si.f3 .Mc8 attempt to win the knight will turn into

47 Chapter IV

a boomerang, and that the only one with A queen retreat to its initial position problems from now on will be White. often neutralizes the enemy's intrigues. The circumspect 6.a3 was encountered At the same time it's an admission of in game 3. rejecting material gains and the fail­ 6 ... b5! ure to mobilize pieces. The onslaught Deflecting the queen from the c2 of the black cavalry is tough: 7.�dl square (with 7.'�xb5),and simultaneous­ �f5 8.tZ'la3 tZ'le5, descending on the ly covering the a4-e8 diagonal, unleash­ d3 square. Or 7 . ..Ct:ld4 8.tZ'lc3e5 9.�e3 ing the c6 knight (in the event of 7.cb). �c5 10.tZ'lf3 0-0, with the tactical jus­ In a worse version the idea works in the tification ll.tZ'lxd4? ed 12.iLxd4 Me8+ variation 6 ...�f 5 7.tZ'la3 b5!? 8.�xb5 e6 13.�e2 �g4 14.f3 iLxf3! 9.dc Mb8 10.�a4. Now with lO... tZ'ld 3+ 7... tZ'ld4 ll.iLxd3 iLb4+ 12.�xb4 Mxb4 13.iLxf5 The alternative 7 ...�f 5 is possibly no ef 14.tZ'le2 0-0 15.0-0 White gets three less strong than the more popular line. minor pieces fo r the queen and an excel­ After 8.tZ'la3 �xd5 9.�e3 �e4 (the lent position. In the case of lO... tZ'lx a2!? threat to the white queen on the fourth ll.Mxa2 �b4+ 12.�xb4 Mxb4 an un­ rank should be borne in mind) 10.b3 equal exchange takes place in a substan­ tZ'ld4 11.0-0-0 e5 12.�xd4 ed 13.tZ'lf3 tially better situation fo r Black. But White tZ'lxa2+ 14.Wb2 tZ'lc3 15.�xd4 tZ'lxdl+ isn't left in debt either, if he makes an 16.�xdl �xa3+ 17.Wxa3 0-0 (Carras­ improvement: ll.�dl tZ'lxcl 12.�xd8+ co - Peric, Ve rona, 1995) Black is the Mxd8 13.Mxcl iLb4+ 14.Mc3.iLxc3+ exchange up and has an overwhelming 15.bc - two pieces against a rook give him position. An unusual position with two some winning chances in the ending. half-dead black knights arises with 8.iLe2 7.cb tZ'lc2+ 9.Wfl tZ'lxal lO.tZ'lc3 tZ'le5 ll.�f4 After 7.�xb5?! tZ'lc2+ 8.Wdl? �d7 tZ'ld3 12.�xf5 tZ'lxc1 13.�c4 �d6. Black Black plans to win the rook or the queen. is apparently in great danger, but Rybka Of course, on 9.dc he spares the queen still gives preference to him. (three pieces compensate fo r the loss) 8.tZ'la3 e5 in favor of pursuing the white king - 9 ... I remember that my coach and I iLg4+! 10.Wxc2 �dl + ll.Wc3 �xcl+ looked at 8 ...�xd5. Now I rejected 12.Wb4 �xb2+ 13.Wa5 �xal. Some­ the capture because of 9.�xb4 �e4+ how or other the king has avoided mate lO.Wdl �g4+?! ll.f3 0-0-0 12.�d2 fo r now, but Black (who is already the e5 13.�c4, with a desperate position exchange up) doesn't leave it in peace. fo r Black. Then again, 10 ...e5 ll.�c3 Obviously the king should step onto a iLxa3 12.ba 0-0 13.f3 �h4 promises dark square to avoid . Then counter chances, while 8 ...e5! aims fo r Black "only" has an endgame with win­ an advantage. ning chances: 8.Wd2 �d7 9.dc �f5+ 9.de 10.�d5 tZ'lxal ll.�d3 �xd3 12.�xd3 If 9.�d2, then the maneuver 9 ... �xd3+ 13.Wxd3 0-0-0+ 14.We2 tZ'lc2 tZ'lxd5and lO... tZ'lb6 fo rces the queen off 15.tZ'lf3 tZ'ld4+ 16.tZ'lxd4 Mxd4. a4 and the matchless d4 knight deter-

48 The Scandinavian Defense

mines Black's advantage. 9 .. :ihd5 isn't The Swiss player demonstrates a bad either, as the knight is inviolable strange indifference to the c2 square. - 10Jtxb4? �e4+ ll.�dl �g4+ 12.f3 With 12.�dl �d6 13.�c4 0-0 Black �xb4 13.�xb4 Md8, with a win. has excellent compensation fo r the ma­ 9... �xe6 terial loss, but that's all. 12... LlJbc2+ 13.LlJxc2 LlJxc2+ 14.�d1 LlJxa1 15.�c4? A fateful loss of a tempo. With the comparatively better 15.LlJf3 �e7 16.�cl 0-0 17.�bl c5 18S�ifxal ii,c8! 19.�xd8 Mxd8 the a6 pawn perishes, and being the exchange up should make a difference. 15... �e7 16.�c1 0-0 17.LlJf3 �e6 10.�d2?! 18.ii,xe6' fe lO.�e3 is significantly stronger - 19.�b1 LlJb3! due to a small detail mentioned in the 20.ab �d3+ next note. Now 10 ...�h4 penetrates the Whiteresig ned. fo urth rank with an X-ray through two knights! The careless ll.Mdl? costs him 3. A.ABREU - F. CRUZ thegame - ll...llJbc2+! 12.llJxc2LlJf3+. Mislata, 2005 The b5 pawn relieves White: ll.b6+! Ji.d7 12.b7! Mb8 13.�dl LlJf5 14.LlJf3 l.e4 d5 LlJxe3 15.LlJxh4 LlJxdl 16.Mxdl Mxb7, 2.ed LlJf6 and the chances are virtually equal. 10 ... 3.d4 LlJxd5 l/i;Yd5 (controlling the b7 square, where 4.c4 LlJb4 the valiant pawn can't be any more) 5.�a4+ LlJ8c6 ll.b6+ �d7 12.�dl c5 13.LlJf3LlJxf3+ 6.a3 14.gf �xdl + 15.Mxdl ab 16.�c4 �e7 is better, with a more pleasant endgame. 10... aS?! On 10 ...�h4! the response ll.b6+ .!d7 12.b7 doesn't work any more due to 12... �e4+ (the bishop isn't protect­ ing the king!). The white queen is also in for it after 11.0-0-0 LlJe2+! 12.�bl �f5+ 13.�al LlJc2+. ll.ba+ �d7 12.�a5?

49 Chapter IV

We 've convinced ourselves of how the trap. The lucky ones get an amnesty: great the danger emanating from the b4 weaving a net for the queen with the help knight is. By fo rcing it out of his half of of an immediate 8 ...b6? is only enough the board White protects himself from fo r a draw by repetition of moves - 9.b4! the main tactical difficulties. li'lb3 lO.Jib2a6 ll.'iVxc6+Jid 7 12.'iVb7 6... li'la6 li'lxal 13.ii.xal l::tb8 14. 'iVxa6 l::ta8 7.d5 15.'iVb7 l::tb8. To stop the queen from On 7.li'lf3 we have to acknowledge buying itself out you have to move the that the best method is the typical blow e-pawn - it doesn't matter whether it's in the center 7 ...e5! In the variation 8.de one or two steps fo rward. After8 ...e5 (or li'lc5 9.'iVc2 g6! lO.Jie3 ii.f5 ll.'iVc3 8 ...e6) 9.dc b6! there's no good defense li'ld3+ 12.ii.xd3 'iVxd3 afterexchanging to 10 ...a6. Just one nuance remains: on queens the pawn is inevitably won back. 10.'iiie2 (to retreat to b4 without fe aring a In the duel Gunnarsson - Bronstein discovered check) the solution is lO... a5 !, (Reykjavik, 1996) after 8.li'lxe5 'iVxd4 with the irrefutable ll...Jia6. 9.li'lxc6 'iVe4+ lO.Jie3 Jid7 ll.li'lc3 8... li'le5 Jixc6 12.li'lxe4 ii.xa4 13.l::tcl ii.c6 9.b4 li'lcd7 14.li'lc3 Jic5 15.b4 Jixe3 16.fe ii.d7 17 .c5 the queens were exchanged some­ what favorably fo r White because of the poor position of the a6 knight. David Ionovich won anyway, and in a conver­ sation with me after the game he com­ plained about how difficultit was to beat today's young players, even in such "off­ beat" systems. lO... li'lc5 is still stronger, to take on c6 with the queen. An energetic advance by the central pawn works wonderfully with7 .Ji e3 too. For example, 7 ...Jid 7 8.'iVc2 e5 9.li'lf3 Events are developing according ed 10.li'lxd4 li'lxd4 ll.ii.xd4 (Herrera ­ to an unusual (although also usual fo r F. Cruz, Spain, 2007) ll...'iVh4 12.Jie3 4 ...li'lb4) scenario. Out of nine moves by Jic5,with a lead in development. White Black two-thirds of them have had to go himself should untie the knot in the cen­ to the wandering king's knight ( ...li'lg8- ter - 9.de li'lxe5 10.li'lc3 ii.d6 ll.ii.e2 f6 -d5-b4-a6-c5-d7), another two to the and li'lf3, with equality. queen's knight, and only the first move 7... li'lc5 was made by a pawn! But the cavalry was 8.'iVdl only pursued by a fo ot soldier with the An attempt to win the pinned knight seizing of territory, although without the by means of 8.'iVb5?? is a step towards mobilization of pieces (the queen's voy­ the abyss. According to the database, a age with its subsequent return doesn't couple of dozen victims have entered count). As in Alekhine's Defense, the

50 The Scandinavian Defense advanced pawns are subject to a coun­ terattack. 10.iLb2 There's a point in exacerbating the absurdity of what's going on by fo rc­ ing the ninth straight knight move with the help of 10.f4!? White has conquered so much space that getting free with all conveniences is difficult. terAf 10... [iJg6 ll.GLlf3 e6 12.de fe 13.trlc3 �f6 14.�d4!? White exchanges queens with somewhat better prospects. 10... trlg6 18.ba To avoid driving the horses into the The pawn should have been won ground it was worth stopping the gallops in another version: 18.iLxf6 gf 19.trle4 and starting undermining moves (10... c6 iLe7 20.bc 0-0 21.trld4. The centralized or 10... e6) . white knights are much more imposing ll.h4 than the black bishops. Rybka gives the variation ll.GLlf3 18... �c7 trlf6 (the "celebratory" l01h knight 19.�b3 0-0 move!) 12.iLd3 e6 13.0-0 iLe7 14.�c2 20.�b2 l::rfe 8 0-0 15.l::rdl, with an advantage fo r In a complicated position Black's White, and not a particularly small one. chances are evidently no worse. An ex­ Since fairly normal play with kingside ample variation is 2I...txf6 gf 22.trle4 castling by both players can be fo recast �xa5+ 23.�fl Jie7 24.trlxf6+ iLxf6 now, moving the outside pawn isn't 25.�xf6 Jig4, with excellent play fo r completely appropriate. the pawn. 11... h5 12.g3 a5 From what we've seen it's obvious 13.iLe2 trlf6 that the check with the queen doesn't 14.trld2 e6 promise much. Isn't it better to fo rce the 15.de ..txe6 knight back without delay? In games 4-6 16 . ..tc3 iLd6 5.a3 was encountered. 17.trlgf3

(See Diagram) 4. E. VA SYUKOV - D. BRONSTEIN Moscow, 1973, Blitz 17... c5?! It wasn't worth knocking out l.e4 d5 the support from under the bishop. 2.ed trlf6 17... 0-0 18.0-0 l::re8 19.l::rel iLg4 20.c5 3.d4 trlxd5 trld5 2I...tb2iLf 8 22.�b3 �d7 was log­ 4.c4 trlb4 ical, with roughly equal chances. 5.a3

51 Chapter IV

to come out to c5. In the variation 8 ... e6 9.tZ'lf3 �d6 10.de �xe6 1l.c5 �e7 12.i¥xd8+ �xd8 13.tZ'ld4 �d7 14.tZ'lc3 the white pieces are more active. 8... eS Instead of a barrier in the way of the bishop another structure is also feasible: 8 ...e6 9.tZ'lc3 �d6 10.�e2 0-0 1l.tZ'lf3 :!:l:e8 12.0-0 ed 13.cd. There's a slight space shortage, but the position is solid.

9.tZ'lc3 � cS

5 ... lZJ4c6 Quite a few players have retreated to a6, but all of them, without exception, were amateurs. In arbitrary order White plays tZ'lc3, tZ'lf3, �e2, 0-0 and easily mobilizes his remaining soldiers, while Black constantly worries about the idea - where to put the rootless knight? 6.d5 Defending the pawn is the theme of the next examples (6.�e3 - game 5, 6.tZ'lf3-g ame 6). 10.h4

6... tZ'leS It makes senseto bother the lively bishop 7.�f4 a little: 10.b4!?�d 4 1l.tZ'lge2c5 12.h4 0-0 The bishop has picked up the func­ 13.h5 tZ'lf4 14.tZ'lxd4 cd 15.�xf4dc 16.�e3 tion of pursuing the knight from the f5 17.f4 (17.'i¥b3 is even more precise, re­ pawns. An exchange is also encoun­ moving the impediment on c3) 17 ...:!:l:e8 tered, 7.tZ'lf3 tZ'lxD+ 8.'iVxD, and on (Handke - Meisenhaelter, Bad Wiessee, 8 ...g6 the retort 9.i¥c3!?prevents Black 2002) 18.fe :!:l:xe5 19.�f2, and the sleep­ from castling kingside. Then again, the ing queenside makes it impossible to have alternative 8 ...e6 equalizes: 9.�d3 �d6 a fully-fledgedbattle . It's better fo r Black to lO.lZ'lc3 0-0 11.0-0 tZ'ld7. continue 1l...�xc3+ 12.tZ'lxc3 0-0 13.�e2 7... tZ'lg6 aS 14.0-0 �fS, with chances to equalize. The record fo r uninterrupted knight 10... 0-0 moves has been broken - that's six! It ll.i¥d2 fS ?! seems that the wanderer will reinforce The queen has apparently deterred itself on g6 anyway... the latest knight move 1l...tZ'lf4, although

8 .�g3 it was possible to play this way regardless 8.�e3 deserved attention, to then of the pawn sacrifice. After ll...lZ'lf4!? make it difficult fo r the black bishop 12.i.xf4 ef 13.i¥xf4 :!:l:e8+ compensa-

52 The Scandinavian Defense tion is on hand thanks to the unprotected This isn't strictly the only solution white king. Besides that, developing with (23 ...�h6+ !? 24.f4 �xe5 is playable fo r ll...liJd7 is also appropriate. Black), but it's unquestionably beautiful 12.h5 f4 and guarantees a draw.

13• .th2?! 24.c;;l;;>xb2 �b6+ In the case of 13.hg fg 14.gh+ <;;i;;>h8 25.<;;i;;>a2? 15.f3 .tf2+ 16.<;;i;;>dl White is clearly bet­ After 25.<;;i;;>c3 �a5+ 26.<;;i;;>d4 �b6+ ter, despite his dislodged king. Of course, 27.c5 �b2+ 28.<;;i;;>e3 �xa3+ 29.I'Id3 with a walled-in bishop achieving an ad­ �xc5+ perpetual check is unavoidable. vantage is considerably more difficult. Now 25 ...�c2! won instantly, while the im­ 13... t'Llh4 pressive move in the game isfa r from clear. 14.0-0-0 t'Lld7 25... .th3!? 15.t'Lle4 t'Llf5 26.�g5 gxf2+ 16.t'Llt3 t'Lld4 And 27.I'Id2? h6! 28.�g1 .tfS! 17JWc3 29.�d3 hg 30.�xf2 �aS 31.I'Ihd1 Anunenviable fate awaited the white �g4 32.�e2 �xe2 33.I'Ixe2 �c3 soon bishops in the future, and here there was brought Bronstein success in this ex­ an opportunity to put one of them on traordinarily fascinating battle. Only its feet - 17.<;;i;;>bl and 18. .td3. But now by returning the bishop with 27 . .te2! Bronstein makes the tenth and last move J::rxe2+ 28.J::rd2 could Va syukov have by the traveling knight, exchanging it fo r continued the fight for equality. its newly-developed antagonist. 5. H. JONKMAN ­ 17... t'Llxt3 18.�xf3 �d4 J. HOOGENDOORN 19.g3 t'Llf6! Soest, 2001 20.gf t'Llxe4 1.e4 d5 21.�xe4 �fS 2.ed t'Llf6 22.�g2 �f6 3.d4 t'Llxd5 23.fe 4.c4 t'Llb4 5.a3 lll4c6 6.ite3

23 ... .txb2+!

53 Chapter IV

One of two defenses of the central ll.Jid3 0-0 pawn that gives fans of 4 ...tt:lb4 a cold Without reciprocal castling the cen­ shower. It's very difficult fo r Black to tralizing move ll...tt:ld4!? deserved at­ find reciprocal chances. tention (the seventh jump in 11 moves!). 6... eS!? After 12.tllxd4 ed+ 13.iie2 c5 Black has A typical undermining move fo r chances to equalize. this system, clarifying the situation in 12.0-0 tt:lh4 the center. It isn't lost fo r Black if he 13.tt:lxh4 �xh4 plays it later either, fo r example: 6 ...g6 14.tt:lc3 aS 7.h3 !ig7 8.tt:lf3 0-0 9.tll c3 f5 !? 10.g3 15.f4!? tt:ld7 tt:ld7 ll.iie2 e5 (with a tolerable po­ 16.�d2 fS sition). Yo u constantly have to keep 17.tllb5 �d8 an eye out fo r the d5 advance; in the case of 6 ...iif 5 7.tt:lc3e6 8.tllf3 iie7? this advance wins a piece (9.d5 tt:la5 10.b4). 7.d5 tt:le7 8.tt:lf3 To transfer the bishop to g5 on the subsequent ...tt:lf 5. After 8.tt:lc3 tt:lf5, evidently you have to accept an ex­ change of the bishop and equalization of chances: 9.�d2 tt:lxe3 10.�xe3 tt:ld7 ll.tllf3 lieS 12.�d2 0-0 13.iie2 a5 14.0-0 f5 . 8 ... tt:lfS 18.b4?! Modest development is probably in­ Now Black has weaseled his way out appropriate already. For example, 8 ... successfully. Jonkman missed the pawn tt:lg69.tt:lc3 iie 7 10.h4!? tt:lxh4 1 l.tllxh4 sacrifice 18.c5! tt:lxc5 19.iic4, with a iixh4 12.�h5 iif6 13.!id3,with a very strong initiative. strong initiative fo r the pawn. 18... e4 9.iig5 iie7 19.iie2 tllf6 Edging out the bishop 9 ...f6 !? gives an 20.Mad1 ab impetus to the career of the neighboring 21.ab iid7 pawn: IO.iid2 e4 ll.g4!? ef 12.gf iixf5 22.tllc3 Wh8 13.�xf3 �e7+ 14.�e3, and without 23.c5 the queens White loses his advantage. 24.d6 is on the agenda, creating a Or lO.iicle4 ll.tllfd2 e3 12.fe tt:lxe3 central passed pawn, but how is it bet­ 13.�e2 �e7 14.0e4 tllxfl 15.Mxfl f5 ter than its counterpart that has already 16.tt:lg3 �xe2+ 17SiJxe2, with a very been prepared on e4? Now transferring insignificant advantage. the bishop via e8 to f7 was the best way 10.iixe7 �xe7 to maintain equality.

54 The Scandinavian Defense

6. A. GRILLON - A. RAETSKY 7 ... e6 Lausanne, 2008 In my childhood I was more deci­ sive! Against Goncharuk (Voronezh, l.e4 d5 1975) I was lucky enough to get through 2.ed tiJf6 the opening stage relatively successfully 3.d4 tlJxdS - 7 ...e5 8.d5 j,xf3 9.ii,xf3 tiJd4 10.0-0 4.c4 tiJb4 5.a3 tlJ4c6 g6 ll.l'::tel tiJxf3+l2 .'iVxf3 ii,g7 13.tiJc3 0-0 14.tiJe4 c6 l5.ii,d2, and replacing 6.tiJf3 10... g6 with 10 ...ii,e 7 1l.ii,e3 tiJxf3+ 12.'iVxf3 0-0 13.tiJc3 tiJd7 promises complete prosperity. Alas, the favor­ able picture is spoiled by the exchange operation 8.tlJxe5 ii,xe2 9.tlJxc6 ii,xd1 10.tiJxd8 ii,b3 1l.tiJd2 ii,xc4 12.tlJxc4 c,i{xd8 13.ii,f4, or, even more strongly, 1l.tiJxb7 tlJc6 12.0-0 ii,xc4 13.l'::tel+ c,i(d7 14.tlJc5+ii,xc5 15.dc, with an ad­ vantage. Afterthe exchanges 7 ...ii,xf3 8. j,xf3 'iVxd4?! 9. 'iVxd4 tlJxd4 10.ii,xb7 tlJc2+ And so, the bishop is vulnerable on ll.c,i{e2 tlJxa1 12.ii,xa8 tiJb3 13.ii,e3 a6 e3, and White is protecting his central 14.liJd2 tlJxd2 15.ii,xd2 it's hardly pos­ pawn in the most natural way. sible to oppose the bishop pair. Let's try 6... ii,g4 to free ourselves in the center again: 8 ... By tradition we need to test a break­ e5 9.de 'iVxdl+ 10.c,i{x d1 ii,c51l. ii,d5! through in the center: 6 ...e5 7 .d5 e4 tiJd7 12.ii,xc6 be 13.f4 - White is a 8.liJd4 liJxd4 9.'iVxd4 f5 10.ii,e2 h5 1 l.h4 pawn up and has a good position. c5 12.'iVc3'iVc7 13.ii,g5ii,d 6 14.0-0 with 8.0-0 tiJd7 play on the dark squares and a defended 9.tiJc3 ii,e7 passed pawn (Vlcek - Krajnak, Martin, lO.l'::tel 0-0 1996). The threat of 1l.ii,h5+ was re­ ll.ii,e3 tiJb6 pelled a little more cunningly with 10 ... c,i(f7 (ll.ii,hS+?! g6 12.'iVxh8?? ii,b4+). In turn, 8.tiJg5 tiJeS9.tiJx e4 f5 10.tiJg5 ii,e7 ll.'iVh5+! g6 12.'iVe2!is simpler for White, with a fu ll extra pawn. 7.ii,e2 A promising alternative is 7 .d5!? In the example variation 7 ... tlJe5 8.ii,e2 ii,xf3 9.ii,xf3 tiJbd7 10.0-0!? tlJxc4 11J:te 1 Black wins a pawn, but seriously lags in development.

55 Chapter IV

12.b3 15... 'lllllxc6 I racked mybrains to no avail -how to 16.'lllllg4 'lt>h8 create winning chances against an oppo­ 17.li:le4 Si,e7 nent who was lower-rated than me? That 18.li:lg5 l:!:ae8 isn't easy to do with 12.d5!? either. The 19.l:!:ad1 Si,xgS logical chain of moves 12... ed 13.cd �xf3 20.Si,xg5 li:lc8 14.�xf3 li:le5 15.�e2 li:lec4 16.Si,d4Si,f6 21.h4 li:ld6 17.�xc4 li:lxc4 18.li:le4 �xd4 19.'�xd4 22.h5 h6 li:ld6 leads to a solid position for Black Now transferring the bishop to e5 without real winning chances. doesn't promise much: 23.�f4 b5!? 12... 'llllid7 24.�e5 f6 25.�xd6 'llllixd6 26.cb 'lllllxa3 13.h3 �xf3 27.l:!:xe6 'lllllxb3 28.l:!:xe8 l:!:xe8, with 14.�xf3 �f6 prospects of mutual destruction of the 1S.Si,xc6 pawn islands. After 23.�c1 f5 24.'llllih4 Or 15.c5!? li:ld5 16.li:lxd5 ed 17.�g4 li:le4 2S.f3 li:lf6 26.�b2 'llllld7 27.d5 ed 'llllld8 18.'llllld3. Black is too constrained 28.l:!:xe8 'lllllxe8 29.Si,xf6 l:!:xf6 30.l:!:xd5 to lay siege to the weak d4 pawn, and an equal position arose, and on the 381h fo r the moment you have to worry about move the players made peace. equalizing.

.. ------.. ·--················································· r··iaNci usiiiN:··---·······------r

! ,- ' {>y) White refute 4 ... lLlb4right off the bat turn against hinl. Thisis i! !Attempts to j•news only fo · intpatient amateur pl aye rs. The game Raetsky' .demon- 1 Grillon - i stmtes tl1at wit,}) .a sensible strategy White has a stable minimal advantage , and so i ! playi ng for .a win·is n't easy. But the reserve ofstability in Bla<;k'spos ition is big !

cal'l't be ... enough, and there any·discussion ofrefuting 4 lLlb4.· Tile variation is i I ! good asa reservew� pon based on the effectof surprise . i-�---�------..·------: ______,______ji

56 Chapter 5 Alekhine' s Defense

The Cambridge Gambit 2.e5 tl'ld5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 tl'lb6 5.f4 g5

Alexander Alekhine may not have played "his" defense on many occasions, but the rich positions which can arise certainly reflect the fourth World Champion's intense style of play. Black invites the white pawns to chase his loose knight across the board and in one of the most popular lines no fewer than four of them join the fun.

l.e4 LiJf6 2.e5 LiJdS 3.d4 d6 4.c4 LiJb6 5.f4 There's a popular opinion that if any setup has the best chance of refuting Alekhine's Defense, it's the Four Pawns Attack. Testing this is easy. IfWhite can go on to achieve the advance d5 then the long chain with pawns side by side on d5 and e5 would curve a fo rmidable 5... g5!? arc, severely cramping Black's position. Yo u recall the well-known gambit l.e4 The would-be daring b6 knight (the LiJf6 2.e5 LiJd5 3.d4 d6 4.liJf3 de 5.tLlxe5 only developed piece for now) doesn't LiJd7 6.LiJ:xf7!? An unusual case of sacri­ inspire optimism. Adherents of l...LiJf6 fice being made famous due to a game in can be consoled only by the big choice which .. .it wasn't played! When Mikhail of retorts, one of which looks like pure Tal (in game 4 of his 1965 Candidates adventurism. match against ) declined to capture on f7it set the analysts thinking. It is, of course, merely one way inwhich the Chapter V first player can precipitate a sharp tactical The many-times Portuguese cham­ battle. Ye t White doesn't enjoy a complete pion wasn't against repeating an attack monopoly in this department. .. "for an encore", but he didn't catch his opponent unawares. The example Durao With an expanded ftanchetto Black - Pomar was unconvincing, as instead contests his opponent's privilege of sharp­ of 8 ...CZ'lf 4? the move 8 ... CZ'lb4 is strong, ening the game in Alekhine's Defense. He threatening the c2 and d4 squares. But hasn't reconciled himself to a reinforce­ White is also prepared to "work on ment of the e5 pawn and immediately un­ his mistakes" by replacing 7.c5?! with dermines the base. This was first played in 7.CZ'lf3! �f5 8.fe - and what to do about 1967 by the Yugoslav Gmndmaster Planinc. the g5 pawn? The enthusiastic King'sGambit fan wasn't 6... gf! afraid of anything, but other adherents of 7.CZ'lf3 %Vd7! Alekhine's Defense were skeptical about To cover his ''Achilles heel", specu­ the novelty. A literal quote fr om a mono­ lating on an exchange of queens (which gmph by Bagirov: " ...perhaps the strongest is usually useful for Black in the Cam­ blow 5 ...g5?! brings the fo llowing continua­ bridge Gambit). After 8.j,xf4 %Vg4 tion: 6.%Vh5!de 7.c5! CZ'ld5 8.fe CZ'lf4 9.,ihf4 9.%Vxg4 j,xg4 the game is approximate­ gf10.j,c 4 e6 ll.CZ'le2CZ'lc6 12.CZ'lbc3,with ly equal. a very strong attack on the f7square (Dumo 8.CZ'lg5 %Vf5 - Pomar, Madrid, 1983)". 9.g4?! With the sacrifice 9.j,d3! %Vxd3

1. J. DURAO - M. CHETVERIK 10.CZ'lxf7 White has reached the vulner­ Cappelle-la-Grande, 2005 able square. Black shouldn't go into the variation 10 ...j,g4? ll.CZ'lxd6+ \t>d7 l.e4 CZ'lf6 12.e6+!, but can declare perpetual 2.e5 CZ'ld5 check if he wants to, with 10 ...%Ve4+ 3.d4 d6 11.\t>fl %Vd3+ 12.\t>el %Ve4+. If he 4.c4 CZ'lb6 doesn't want to, then after 10 ...%Vg6!? 5.f4 g5 ll.%Vxg6 hg 12.CZ'lxh8 j,f5 he can try to 6.%Vh5 catch the knight that has wandered into the corner. With 13.CZ'lc3de 14.de j,g7 15.g4!? fg 16.hg the knight is saved, but the chances are probably on Black's side. 9 ... %Vg6 Opening lines is in no way worse than relocating the queen. In the ex­ ample variation 9 ...fg lO.hg CZ'lc6 ll.e6!? j,xe6 12.j,h3 %Vg6 13.%Vxg6 hg 14.d5 l:txh3 15.CZ'lxh3 j,xh3 16.dc j,g2 17.cb j,xb7 18.l:th8 \t>d7 Black has two pawns

58 Alekhine's Defense and clearly better prospects fo r the ex­ 21.l1Jd6 change. Now reinforcing the pawn, 21... 10.ed cd i,h6, promised more chances of win­ 11.c5 �xhS ning. Soon, because of his opponent's 12.gh de mistakes, the Portuguese veteran found 13.dc tLldS himself with a choice: fo rce perpetual 14.i,c4 e6 check by sacrificing a knight or con­ 14 ...f6 ! 15.i,xd5 (15.l1Je4? l1Jb4) tinue the battle with chances of success. 15 ...fg smoothed out the pawn chain A third thing happened - unable to and apparently promised a win without choose between the two paths, White ... major worries. lost on time! 15.l1Je4 l1Je3 16.i,xe3 fe And so, 6.�h5 doesn't refutethe au­ 17.l1Jbc3 dacious pawn dash. We should look fo r something else.

17... l1Ja6?! After 17 ...f5 18.l1Jd6+ i,xd6 19.ed 6.fg?! Badly timed. After 6 ...de i,d7 Black completes his development the pawn center falls to pieces even without incurring any damages. White, with 7.d5 - 7 ...e6! 8.l1Jc3 ed 9.lLlxd5 at most, takes on e3, but his partner still l1Jxd5 10.�xd5 i,b4+ ll.i,d2 i,xd2+ has a pair of connected passed pawns in 12.�xd2 �xd2+ 13.r:;i;xd2 l1Jc6, with reserve. an appreciably better ending. Exchang­ 18.i,b5+?! ing queens with 7.de �xdl+ 8.r:;i;xdl Losing an important tempo, since tllc6 is completely unpromising, al­ the black king itself isn't against being though the clarification 7.c5 t1Jd5 8.de on e7 either. In the case of 18.l1Jd6+ is also in Black's favor. There follows r:;i;e7 19.i,xa6 ba 20.:C:dli,h 6 2l.:C:gl 8 ...i,f 5! 9.t1Jf3 e6, aiming at the c5 Black's advantage is in question. pawn. 18... r:;i;e7 6.d5?!. Without the support of the 19.r:;i;e2 fS pieces the pawn ridge is harmless fo r 20.i,xa6 ba Black. After 6 ...e6 the continuation of

59 Chapter V

the premature attack 7.f5?! can be re­ 6... gf?! pelled most simply with the help of 7 ... Ltxf4 il.g7 ed 8.e6 @f6 9.cd @xf5 lO.ef+ @xf7 - The outwardly unattractive 7 ...de again the phalanx is smashed to smith­ 8.il.xe5 l:tg8 is probably already the ereens. It's better to call on the knights strongest. Asa consequence the rook can for assistance - 7.Cf'Jc3 il.g7 8.Cf'Jf3. start to speak with its full voice: 9.Cf'Jf3 Then there can be 8 ...g4 9.CiJd4 (after Cf'Jc6 lO.il.g3iUS ll.a3 e6 12.Cf'Jb5 l:tc8 9.Cf'Jg5 de his own knight prevents him 13.@d2?! (finishes off any possibility of from taking on g4 with a tempo) 9 ...ed favorably exchanging the light-squared lO.ed @xd6 ll.CiJdb5 @e7+ 12.@e2 bishops with the help of 13.il.d3) 13... il.xc3+! 13.bc Cf'Ja6 14.@xe7+ 'l!ixe7 a6 14.Cf'Jc3 Cf'Ja5 15.@dl il.g7 16.c5 15.cd Cf'Jxd5 - the bishop pair still Cf'Jd5 17.@a4+ Cf'Jc6 18.Cf'Je5? (with the doesn't fully compensate fo r being a comparatively better 18.id2 @d7 19.g3 pawn down. Cf'Jxc320.bc @d5 2l.il.e2il.h 3 the white Give the more fundamentalcontinu­ king comes to a standstill in the center ations special attention! right after the black one) 18... il.x e5 19.il.xe5 Cf'Je3 20.'1!if2 CiJg4+ 2l.'l!ie2 2. N. FERCEC - S. DRAZIC Cf'Jxe5 22.de @d3+ 23.'1!if2 @d2+ Bizovac, 2006 24.il.e2(D. Barthel - C. Scheerer, Ger­ many, 1995) 24 ...l:tg4! 25.l:thdl l:tf4+, l.e4 tZ'lf6 with a win. 2.e5 Cf'Jd5 8.c5 CiJ6d7 3.d4 d6 9.e6!? 4.c4 Cf'Jb6 Now the king loses the right to cas­ 5.f4 g5 tle, which is partly compensated fo r by 6.Cf'Jc3 the extra pawn and the strong "fist" in the center. But with 9.@g4! 'l!if8 lO.ed cd ll.cd Cf'Jf6 12.@h4 ed 13.il.d3 noth­ ing compensates for the ordeals with the king. 9 ... fe lO.@hS+ 'l!if8 11.0-0-0 @e8 l2.@h4 Cf'Jf6 l3.g4 Fercec doesn't let the enemy queen get to h5. Which, by the way, isn't ter­ rible at all: 13.Cf'Jf3 @h5 14.@g3 Cf'Jc6 The usual development of the 15.il.c4, with an advantage. knight brings with it the threat of c5, 13... Cf'Jc6 as the d5 square has been taken under control.

60 Alekhine's Defense

an immediate refutation of the auda­ cious 5 ...g5 .

3. T. GEORGESCU - M. CHETVERIK Eger, 2005

l.e4 li'lf6 2.e5 liJdS 3.d4 d6 4.c4 li'lb6 5.f4 g5 6.li'lt3 14.�c4 With 14.tt:lf3 �g6 15.g5 tt:lb4 16.tt:lelBlack has a choice between 16... li'le4and 16... �h5, but not such a strik­ ing initiative as there could be now after 14 ...�g6! 15.g5 li'lb4 16.�f2 li'lg4. 14... li'lb4?! 15.a3 liJbdS 16.li'lge2 h6 t7.Mdfl �g6 18.Mhgl \iife8 19.�d2 \iifd8 20.li'lf4 Cllxf4 6 ... gf 21.Mxf4 �d7 Here the pawn could advance further. 22.�el Ci'lh7 Ve ry complicated play can arise, sup­ 23.h4 gf8 posedly with better prospects fo r White, 24.Mgfl Mxf4 as in the variations 6 ...g4!? 7.Cllg5 de 25.Mxf4 8.c5 li'ld5 9.de h6 10.li'lc3 c6 ll.tZ:lge4 White's advantage isn't in doubt. or 8 ...f6 9.cb fg lO.fe tt:lc6 ll.bc �xc7 The main reason fo r Black's dif- 12.�e3. ficulties was the exchange on f4 . 6 ... 7.�xf4 �g7 �g7 is correct, not helping his oppo­ 8.�e2 nent to mobilize. Then 7.c5 leads to an 8.�d3 doesn't make much sense as exchange of queens in an inconvenient long as the black king is hiding on its way fo r White, so it's better fo r him to be own flank. After 8 ...de 9.de li'lc6 it's busy on the kingside. now White who needs a defense: 10.li'la3 As it happens, in the next game �g4 ll.�e4 �d7 12.�xd7+ li'lxd7, White did engage in this straightforward with equalization after the exchange of task. This is the most predictable strat­ queens. egy of behavior, which doesn't envisage 8 ... li'lc6

61 Chapter V

9.ed Now everything is coming together, Black has already prepared the ex­ while with 17.� d3 play in the spirit of change on e5 with the desired disap­ the Exchange Va riation didn't justify it­ pearance of the queens. After 9.lllc3 de self. lO.de �g4 11.0-0 �xd1 12.1:1:axd1 ll:ld7 17 ... lllf5 13.e6 �xe6 14.llld5 0-0-0 the chances 18.�d3 a6 are roughly equal. In the game Incedi 19.�xf5 ab - Chetverik (Frydek-Mistek, 1996) 20.�b1 1:1:a4! with the breakthrough on e6 White 21.b3 1:1:xd4 didn't come out looking too good: 22.�xd4 11.�xd8+ 1:1:xd8 12.e6 �xe6 13.�xc7 Now 22 ...�x d4 guaranteed an abun­ 1:1:c8 14.�xb6 ab 15.ll:lg5 �f5 16.0-0 dance of compensation fo r the exchange, �g6 - Black is wonderful. but in the game after 22 ...ll:lx d4 23.�e3 9... cd �c7 24.b4 ll:lc6 25.1:1:xd5 lllxb4 26.1:1:£5 10.ll:lc3 �g4 �e7 Black limited himself just to suffi­ ll.�e3 cient compensation. A series ofblunders A very strange version of the Ex­ in time trouble doomed him to defeat. change Variation of Alekhine's Defense has come about. Since Black has bor­ If we open a games database at 5 ... rowed some of the ideas fr om it very g5, the first game that is mentioned is a successfully, it was worth thinking about convincing win by Tringov over Planinc 11.d5 �xf3 12.�xf3 ll:le5 13.�xe5 (Varna, 1970). White quickly won a pawn �xe5 14.0-0, with equality. and subsequently made good on his ad­ 11... �xt3 vantage - 6.ed gf 7.dc �xc7 8.lllc3 e5 Against Winter (Goch, 1995) Pol­ 9.de lllc6 10.�xf4 �e6 ll.llle4 �b4+ zin chose a more dynamic plan: 11... 12.�f2 ll:lxc4 13.�xc4 �xc4 14.ll:lf3 d5 12.c5?! (12.cd lllxd5 13.ll:lxd5 �xd5 1:1:d8 15.�cl �b6+ 16.�e3 �b5 17.a4 14.0-0 is more solid) 12 ...lll c4 13.�xc4 lWia6 18.1:1:dl �b3 19.1:1:xd8+ �xd8 de 14.d5 ll:le5 15.�a4+ �d7 16.c6 20.lllc5 �xc5 21.�xc5. It's easy to ridi­ ll:ld3+ 17.�e2 be 18.dc �e6 19.1:1:hd1 cule 8 ...e5, but what to suggest instead? 0-0 - the result of the battle is a fo re­ Whatever happens, normal development gone conclusion. doesn't solve the problems: 8 ...�g7 9.c5 12.gf e6?! ll:l6d7 10.ll:lf3,and thanks to the coming 12 ... e5!? 13.de lllxc4! is very interest­ ll:ld5 the f4 pawn is on its last legs. ing. A slow relocation of the knight with Nevertheless, the Cambridge Gam­ an exposed kingside isn't completely ap­ bit hasn't been written out of the ar­ propriate. chives. It has been found that on 6.ed!? 13.�d2 d5 the response 6 ... �xd6 is possible. The 14.c5 lllc8 pawn fo rk isn't dangerous - the queen 15.1:1:g1 �f6 moves out from under it with check. In 16.0-0-0 lll8e7 practice Black has confidently held the 17.ll:lb5?! position in a very complicated battle. It

62 Alekhine's Defense was only in 2007 after laborious home exchange and another wonderful adver­ preparation that the Czech master Zvara tisement fo r exchanging queens. demonstrated serious arguments in Let's have a look at 7.fg. Now 7 ... White's favor. ilg7 8.c5 can lead to the main game, but 7 ...c5 has lost its fo rmer fo rce - 4. P. ZVARA - M. CHETVERIK 8.Ci:lc3 �xd4 9.�xd4 cd 10.Ci:lb5 Clla6 Olomouc, 2007 ll.Ci:lf3. 7 ...Cll c6!? is more interesting, gaining a tempo when desired with a l.e4 Ci:lf6 sacrifice of the b6 knight. For example, 2.e5 Ci:ldS 8.c5 �xd4 9.�xd4 (9.cb? �h4+) 9 ... 3.d4 d6 Ci:lxd4 lO.cb Cllc2+ 11. <:JildlCll xa l, and 4.c4 Ci:lb6 it isn't completely clear how White 5.f4 gS can eat the knight. Or 8.Ci:lf3 ilg4 9.c5 6.ed �xd6 �e6+ 10.<:Jilf2 ilxf3 ll.�xf3 ilg7 12.cb ilxd4+ 13.ile3 ilxb2 - the bishop tramples on everything that crosses its path. I suspect that both variations are favorable to White anyway, but there's no certainty about this. 7... �e6+

7.c5 White disconnects his pawns any­ way, eringoff the enemy knight a luxuri­ ous stall in the center. On the other hand the black queen is poorly positioned and won't find a suitable parking spot. 7 .ile2 was encountered in the game Kornilov­ 8.<:Jilt2! ich - Devyatkin (Smolensk, 2005): 7 ... What do we think about a queen ex­ c5 8.Ci:lc3�xd4 9.�xd4 (perhaps 9.�b3 change after 8.�e2 ? Aft er studying what is better, although 9 ...g4 doesn't let the was stated above, we warmly welcome it! knight come out) 9 ...cd 10.Cllb5 Clla6 Black conveniently positions his pieces, ll.fg e5 12.Ci:lf3 ilg7 13.c5 (prepares a and White's extra pawn doesn't make knight diversion, but 13.b3 is more solid) itself fe lt with such a compromised 13 ...Ci:ld 5 14.Ci:ld6+ <:Jile7 15 . .txa6 ba structure: 8 ....Ci:ld 5 9.fg ilg7 10.Ci:lf3 16.0-0 ile6 17. .td2l::r hd8 18. .ta5l::r xd6 Cllc6 ll.�xe6 .txe6 12.ilb5 Ci:ldb4 19.cd+ <:Jilxd6, with superb play for the 13.Clla3 0-0-0 14 . .txc6 Cllxc6 15.Cllc2

63 Chapter V

1l,f5 16.Cll e3 1l,g6 (Sieber - Chetverik, Wo rms, 2006). 8... Clld5 9.fg h6 A natural opening of fileson the flank where the white king is hanging out. But developing an attack that bypasses the solid enemy center isn't one of the easi­ est tasks. On 9 ...1l,g7 White defends his with the help of 10.Cllf3 Cll c6 1 1.Cll c3 'ii'f5 12.1l,b5 1l,d7 13.Cllxd5 'ii'xd5 14.�e3. 10.Cllt3 hg 18.Me5 n.1l,xg5 Embarking on a somewhat question­ In the event of 11.1l,c4?! g4 12.Mel able exchange sacrifice. Consolidation 'ii'f6 13.1l,xd5 gf 14.'ii'xf3 1l,g7 Black suggests itself: 18.Cllc3 Mg8 19.Mgl (19. wins the pawn back with a comfortable 1l,[l?! doesn't consolidate anything due position. to transferring the queen's knight to 11... 1l,h6 the kingside) 19 ...Cll d7 20.Clle2 Clld3+ 12.�b5+!? 21.1l,xd3 'ii'xd2 22.Cllxd2 1l,xd3, and Pursuing the queen is even more Black will have to search fo r a draw. promising than exchanging it off (with 18... e6 12.�xh6 'ii'xh6 13.'ii'd2 1l,e6 14.'ii'xh6 19.Cllc3 Clld7 Mxh6 it isn't easy fo r White to take ad­ 20.Mxf5 ef vantage ofbeing a pawn up). 21.Mel+ 12... c6 After 2l...'i.t'f8 22.'ii'e3 Cllg6 13.Me1 'ii'g4 23.�xh6+ Mxh6 24.Cllg5 Cll h8 25.1l,d3 14.h3 'ii'h5 White will take on f5 . But that's only a 15.�xh6 'ii'xh6 second pawn fo r the exchange he's given 16.1l,c4 Cllf4 up, and Black has no grounds fo r serious 17. 'ii'd2 1t,f5 concern.

...... _ .... ,.___ ,..__ .,______..� ..-- ...... -,...... ":',.,...... j7_,...,..,.,�,. .,.. - _... '"' ..... __ c�----· ; - ...... 1 �':'-'"�':-·"'---- �-r-;,-,"': ;"??,.. :"'S.

! ' - ', ,_ ' - ,, ' ' l i ' _ : C()NCL- l!SION: ' - ' - ' - - "-- - ' ' - ', ' , : -" - ._ , i- _ '�- - - __ - - _,_-, - " - ' ' ' - - - _·_ -- ' -- J _, ,,,, - . /. •_ _ : ' -- - - : - - : - We tbe·exehange 6;ed(efutes the i s1touldti!�ru�b:td the �oncilJSioiHbato...• xd� . till:hft ven �tevalW(;ambttedrldle 6 .•. l ·�we s l i (l�iNlet.r N'ot e�'jS t�mostWitb·Jitel y ..• in t1Ie spirit ofthe £X.. ·. i·cd� ·1.fi.l1Cg7 . Bl#� � vron'tP repare d5 .the ne ar fu e"It i r ctt� yanation. .�t�·:s�� pa\\'ll ptarmty role: in tuJ- i t iswt ele�·\Vlmt ���i��next�thtJ$eizillg � 9fSpaeeont healldkmgside with i !

..���i; ·1·:��"�-Jf��;i{::�_::��::�.::�J t64 Chapter 6 The French Defense

The variation l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.ti¥g4

Here, at the midway point of our ten recommendations fo r black, we present an idea fo r white against the French Defense. l.e4 e6 can hardly be refutedand French supporters are generally well prepared against surprises in the main lines ofthe Wi­ nawer, Classical and Tarrasch variations. Where, then, can we hope to offer some­ thing sharp,unusual and genuinely surprising? It is time for a backwards glance ...

My generation ofplayers didn't know 2.d4 d5 computers in our childhood and youth; 3.e5 c5 we gathered chess wisdom exclusively from books and magazines. The timeless textbooks by Aron Nimzowitsch were a real repository of this kind of wisdom. The brilliant master of combinational play preferred to reveal the laws of po­ sitional play to the chess world, and he presented them in a fascinating way. In the past century the theory of the mid­ dlegame has been enriched by valuable discoveries, but the fo undation from Nimzowitsch has remained whole and intact. The theory of openings (which 4.'iVg4 Nimzowitsch didn't leave without at­ The early queen thrust, attacking tention) has moved a long way fo rward, the g7 square, freezes the opponent's but the temptation to take the maestro's kingside. White parts with his central d4 recommendations into our armory was pawn, which doesn't affect the fate of its too great. ward on e5. With the help of Nimzow­ l.e4 e6 itsch's favorite method - over-protec- Chapter VI

tion - the advanced pawn remains alive The key position ofthe Nimzowitsch and helps to suppress the enemy. Aron variation. Black now has to determine Isaevich played like this in games I and how to oppose the clampdown strategy. 2. My coach Mikhail Kislov successfully With the help of6... f5 Hakansson places employed 4.'i¥g4 (game 3) and inculcat­ a barrier in the path of the bishop, seiz­ ed a taste fo r it in his pupils. Yo ur humble ing territory along the way. 6 ...'i¥c7 was servant adopted his teacher's precepts encountered in games 2 and 3, 6 ...g6 in (games 4-6) and, in turn, passed them game 5, and 6 ...Cll ge7 in games 6 and 7. on to his student Jaroslaw Gelfenboim The natural development 6 ... i,d7 can - an emigre from who lives in easily work with any of the moves and Germany (game 7). usually leads to transpositions. So as not to violate the continuity of The continuation 6 ...'i¥a5 +, which the generations, a slight deviance in the was used later against Nimzowitsch by logic of presenting the material has been Ve ra Menchik, is belated (by compari­ allowed. The continuation 4 ...Cllc6 5. Cllf3 son with game 4) and only deserves a 'i¥a5+ from game 4 (Raetsky - Miezis) is passing mention. Mter 7. Cllbd2 and then a detour offthe main line ofthe variation. Cllb3 it's simpler for White to take on d4. In the notes to that game branches on the Strong players haven't been enthusias­ fourth move are also examined. tic about the bishop exchange 6 ...Cll b4 7.0-0 Cllxd3 8.cd either. The advantage in development and space is apprecia­ 1. A. NIMZOWITSCH ­ bly stronger than the power of Black's A. HAKANSSON bishop pair. Kristianstad, 1922 6 ...Cll h6 7.i,xh6 gh is still worth­ while, to get active play on the opened l.e4 e6 file later. For example, 8.0-0 i,d7 2.d4 dS 9.Cllbd2 'i¥c7 10.l:l:fe1 0-0-0 11.Cllb3 3.e5 cS i,b4 12.l:l:e2 f5 13.ef (it's more sen­ 4.'i¥g4 cd sible to retreat the queen and keep the 5.Cllf3 Cllc6 pawn, fo r which this all started) 13 ... 6.i,d3 l:l:hg8 14.'i¥h5 4 'i¥f 15.f7 l:l:g7, with mutual chances (Raetsky - K. Fischer, Apolda, 1994). In his namesake Kay's place Robert Fischer would probably have improved his position in the cen­ ter - 13 ...e5!? 14.iH5i,d 6 15.i,xd7+ 'i¥xd7 16.'i¥h5l:l:hf8. 6... fS 7.'i¥g3 The queen is occupying the best spot a la Nimzowitsch, over-protecting the e5 pawn. Naturally we won't discuss

66 The French Defense

7.ef?! CZ'l:xf6 , with wonderful develop­ 10 ...!fi.c5 ll .h5 CZ'lf8was tested in the en­ ment and a potentially fo rmidable cen­ counter Yu chtman - Gorodetsky (Tyu­ ter for Black. men, 1959): 12.c3!? de 13.CZ'lxc3 h6?! 7... CZ'lge7 (13... a6 is stronger) 14.!li.f4 a6 15.!fi.xf5 !, In his monograph and accepting the sacrifice after 15... ef Suetin considered speedy queenside 16.e6 'l'Wa5 17.a3 leads Black into a cui­ castling to be a refutation of 4.�g4 on de-sac. In the variation 4.'l'Wg4 the Kiev the basis of the game Honfi - Portisch master Jacob Yuchtman demonstrated (Budapest, 1964): 7 ...!fi.d 7 8.0-0 �c7 the not-inconsiderable power of his 9.c3!? 0-0-0 IO.!fi.f4 CZ'lge7 ll.cd CZ'lg6 combinational gift. 12.CZ'lc3(?!) CZ'lxf4 13.�xf4 h6 14.h4 10... !fi.d7 g5! 15.hg hg 16.CZ'lxg5 .� h6! 17.CZ'lb5 ll.a3 0-0-0 �b6 18.CZ'ld6+ c;i;b8 19.CZ'ldf7 !fi.xg5 12.b4 20.CZ'lxg5 I:'ldg8 2l.I'Ifdl CZ'lxd4 22.!fi.fl Nimzowitsch correctly pointed ct::lc6 23.g3 I:'lh5 24.CZ'lf7 I:'lg4 25.�f3 out that winning the exchange with �h7 26.CZ'ld6 CZ'lxe5 27.�a3 f4 . White 12.h5 CZ'lge7 13.CZ'lg5 l:le8 14.CZ'lf7 Ilg8 resigned - the queen has rescued the 15.CZ'ld6+ doesn't lead to weighty hyperactive knight, but there's no one achievements because of the lag in de­ to help the king ... Honfi didn't exploit velopment and weakness of the h-pawn. the reciprocal chances on the queen­ Now with 12... Wb8 White's advantage is side with 12.!fi.g5 !fi.e7 13.!fi.xe7CZ'lg xe7 of the same modest proportions as win­ 14.CZ'lc3 Ilhg8 15.I'Ifcl c;i;b8 16.b4. The ning the exchange. Hakansson slips up, move IO.cd may be even more pre­ creating a hook fo r an attack. cise, and after 10 ...CZ'lb4 ll.CZ'lg5 CZ'lh6 12... a6 12.CZ'lc3 CZ'lxd3 13.�xd3 c;i;b8 14.!li.f4 13.h5 CZ'lge7 JLe7 15.I:'Ifcl Black is cramped. Or 14.�d2 h6? 10 ...'l'Wb6 ll.CZ'lc3 CZ'lxd4 12.CZ'lg5 CZ'lh6 And this is now a mistake that the au­ 13.!fi.e3 c;i;b8 14.I:'Iac l !fi.e7 15.CZ'lxe6! thor of My System ignored. After 14 ...g5 ! 1Lxe6 16.CZ'lb5 'l'Wxb5 17.!fi.xb5 CZ'lxb5 15.!fi.xg5 Ilg8 the half-open file doesn't 18.!fi.c5 - here the disconnected mi­ allow White to quietly bring his plans to nor pieces are weaker than the white life. queen. 15.a4 gS 8.0-0 CZ'lg6 16.b5 f4 9.h4!? For some reason Hakansson goes The appearance of a black knight on along with his great opponent's provo­ g6 is a green light fo r the outside pawn! cation too meekly. A knight sacrifice 9... 'l'Wc7 left him practical chances of saving 10.l:le1 himself, 16 ...�e 8 17.bc CZ'lxc6, count­ Nimzowitsch solidly reinforced the ing on taking the third pawn fo r the attacked pawn and was ready to send his piece on h5. knight out from g6 at an inconvenient 17.'l'W g4 CZ'lb8 moment fo r his opponent. His advice 18.c3 I:'le8

67 Chapter VI

19.cd �d8 20.Mcl �b6 21.a5 �a7 22.b6 �a8

An immediate attack on the cen­ tral pawn is encountered more oftenin other continuations. Strictly speaking, Szekely played like this after ...Ll:Jge7- The best comment we can make here g6, but the main line came about with is ... no comment! the branch 6 ...�c7. 23.Mc7 Ll:Jf5 7.�g3 24.Ll:Jc3 iLe7 After the natural pawn reinforce­ 25.Ll:Jxd5 Ll:Jxd4 ment the game develops in a traditional 26.Ll:Jxd4 ed way fo r the Nimzowitsch variation. 27.�xd7+! Ll:Jxd7 7.!1Lf4 is completely tame, as after 7 ... 28.Ll:Je6# Ll:Jge7 8.0-0 Ll:Jg6 9.Mel Black plays fo r the pin 9 ...f5 or 9 ...Ll:Jxf 4 lO.�xf4 It seems that 6 ...f5 isn't the best f5 . It's more circumspect to exchange decision. The escaped e5 pawn takes offthe knight as was done in the game space away from Black, cutting the en­ Rogers - Davies (Sydney, 1975): emy army in two. Next we'll see a very 9.ihg6 hg lO.Ll:Jbd2 ite7 ll.tLlb3 !1Ld7 valuable resource in the battle with the l2.iLg3Mh5 l3.Ll:Jbxd4 Ll:Jxd4 14.tLlxd4 pawn - the undermining move 0-0-0 15.Macl Mdh8 16.Ll:Jf3 �c4 ...f6 . l7.�d4 �xd4 18.tLlxd4 �b8 19.c3 Mc8 20.f4 !1Lc5 2l.itf2ilx d4 22.itxd4 !1Lb5 2. A. NIMZOWITSCH - J. SZEKELY 23.Mf3- playing fo r a ceasefire without Kecskemet, 1927 attempting to get an advantage. About 7.0-0 - in the next game. l.e4 e6 7... Ll:Jge7 2.d4 d5 We can feel out the weakness on 3.e5 c5 c2: 7 ...Ll:Jb4 8.0-0 Ll:Jxc2 9.!1Lxc2 �xc2 4.�g4 cd 10.Ll:Jxd4 �a4 (10... �g6 ll.�b3 a6 5.Ll:Jf3 Ll:Jc6 12.tLlc3 b5?! l3.tLldxb5!) ll.ile3 iLd7 6.itd3 �c7 12.tLlc3 �a5 l3.a3 Ll:Je7 14.b4 �a6

68 The French Defense

15.b5 �a5 16J:!.fcl�d8 17.a4 (Gergel how White shou/dn 't play the Nimzow­ - Hlavacek, Pardubice, 1998). Out of itsch Gambit! Only after 11..\tg5 l:e8 16 moves seven have been made by the can White advance b4 without fearing ... black queen, and there has been no time f6 , but then he can't win the pawn back. to develop the kingside. The compensa­ In this position it's better to sacri­ tion fo r the pawn is indisputable. fice, evidently: 9.c3!? de 10.tlJxc3 a6 Let's carry out the main undermin­ ll.�e3 g6 12.l:acl b5 (in the varia­ ing move in the Nimzowitsch varia­ tion 12... .\tg7 13.�h4 �xe5 14.l:el tion: 7 ...f6 !? White can't preserve his �g7 15.�h6 the exchange of bishops foundations in the center, as on 8.iH4 exposes the dark squares considerably) there fo llows 8 ...g5 . The continuation 13.l:fel �g7 14.�c5 �a5 (Gelfen­ 8.�xh7?! prevents Black fr om castling boim - Khadempour, Germany, 2001) at the price of colossal concessions: 8 ... 15.�h4 b4 16.tlJe2. White has a superb tlJxe5 9.�g6+ �d8 10.tlJxd4 tlJxg6 blockade fo r the pawn; fu rthermore, the ll.�xg6 e5 12.tlJe2 tlJe7 13.�g3 �xc2 black king remains in the center. 14.tlJbc3? d4, and it's already time to 9.l:el .ltcs resign (Prelati - Naumkin, Italy, 1996). The siege of the e5 pawn has hit a In the variation 8.ef �xg3 9.f7+ r:iJxf7 brick wall, shouldn't he start undermin­ lO.hg tlJf6 ll.�f4 h6 12.1i:Je5 White ing it?! The course of the game Yucht­ blockades the center somewhat, but it's man - Matulovic (Kiev, 1953) wasn't frightening to imagine what will happen completely logical: 9 ...f6 !? 10.�xg6+ as a result of the movement of the black hg 1l.c3 d3! 12.�xg6+ �f7 13.�xd3 pawns. fe 14.tlJxe5 tlJxe5 15.l:xe5.ltd 6 16.�e2 8.0-0 tlJg6 �xe5 17.�xe5 �f6 18.�g3 0-0 19.tlJd2 The maneuver finishes logically. 8 ... e5 20.l't:::f3 l:e8 2l.�g5 �f5 22.l:el, .ltd7 has also been employed, to castle with an advantage in development. In­ queenside at a suitable moment. Now stead of 17 ...�f 6 the move 17 ...�h5 is White has two standard plans for the stronger, with the kind of ungracious in­ Nimzowitsch variation at his disposal: vitation to exchange queens that White the pawn sacrifice 9.c3 to open up the can't refuse. And then neither a block­ game and an expanded fianchetto with ade of the center nor an attack on it will a removal of the d4 pawn. The latter work. encountered powerful resistance in the The continuation 9 ...tll b4 10.tlJxd4 center in the game Janzen - Zumsande tllxd3 1l.cd isn't as favorable fo r Black, (Germany, 1999): 9.a3 tlJg6 1 OJ��el as the queen on an open file here is less 0-0-0 ll.b4?! f6 12.�xg6 hg 13.�b2 likely to be the attacker than the attacked. tlJxe5 14.tlJxe5 fe 15.�xg6 e4 16.h3 After ll...�e7 12.tlld2 0-0 13.tlJ2f3 f6 ? �e5 17.tlJd2 �e8 18.�g4 �h5 19.f4 14.ef �xg3 15.hg .ltxf6 16.tllxe6 �xe6 �f6 20.�g3 �d6 21.l:fl l:hf8 22.tlJb3 17.l:xe6 :C:ac8 18.l:e2 l:c7 19 . .\tg5 �xf4 23.�el e5, with an unusual pawn ( Genocchio -Van Der Burch, Belgium, fo rmation and a completely won posi­ 2007) White is a pawn up in the ending. tion for Black. A wonderful illustration of The moral is that the undermining move

69 Chapter VI

...f6 , which is favorable fo r Black in prin­ On 16.ef �d6 17.1/ih4 e5 18.�b5 �d7 ciple, shouldn't be made automatically! Nimzowitsch far-sightedly remarked 13... 1/ib6 is playable, pinning the enemy that some sacrifice would decide mat­ down to a defense of the b2 pawn. ters, but he didn't see it. Rybka did: 10.h4 �f8?! 19.�xc6 �xc6 20.f7! �xf7 21.11Jxe5+! Nimzowitsch thought that with the �xe5 22.11Jf3 �f6 23.�xf6 CiJxf6 24. best 10 ...�d 7 ll.h5 I1Jge7 12.1/ixg7 11Je5+. Another good path ended with 0-0-0 the continuation 13.�g5 was un­ 16.1/if4!? �e8 17.�xf6 11Jxf6 18.1/ixf6 pleasant for Black. Hardly: after 13... h6 l:!:f8 19.1/ih4. 14.�xe7 �xe7 15.1/ixf7 l:!:df8 16.1/ig7 16... b6? Black is guaranteed a draw by repetition With the help of 16 ...fg 17.11Jxc5 of moves. In the case of 13.�xh7 CiJf5 l/ie7 18.11Jb3 11Jxh6 19.11Jxg5 a4 Black 14.�xf5 ef 15.h6 1/ib6White strives fo r an rips out the "nail" on h6 and fo rces one advantage, but he should expect counter­ of the aggressive knights out of its de­ play (the f2 square). His initiative can be fe nded position. extinguished by returning the pawn and 17 .ef l/ixg3

exchanging queens - IO... h5 ll.�xg6 fg After 17... �d 6 18.1/ih4 e5 White 12.1/ixg6+ l/it7 13.1/ixf7+ �xf7. emphasizes the weakness of the c6 ll.hS CiJge7 square which was provoked by 16.CiJb3: 12.h6 g6 19.�b5! �d7 20.�xc6 �xc6 2l.�f4! ef The battering by the outside pawn 22.11Jbxd4 �d7 23.f7!, with a win. has exposed the dark squares and marked 18.fg �d6 out a clear advantage fo r White. Szekely covers the e5 square but 13.a3 aS leaves the d4 pawn undefended. In the 14.�gS CiJg8 variation 18... a4 19.11Jxc5 be 20.f7!�xf7 1S.CiJbd2 2l.�b5 CiJge7 22.Mfl �a6 23.�xc6 CiJxc6 24.11Jxd4 �xfl 25.l:!:xfl + White gets two pieces fo r a rook and all the winning chances. 19.�bS 11Ja7 20.11Jfxd4! �f7 Blocks the pawn whose advance brings so much unpleasantness. Exploit­ ing the hanging minor pieces doesn't work - 20 ...e5 2l.�c6 l:!:b8 22.11Jb5. 21.c4! eS 22.cd! ed 23.�e8+ �f8 1S... f6 24.f7 16.11Jb3 A decisive rush by the unblocked Sophisticated analytical programs passed pawn (24 ...11Je 7 25.�f6). After are merciless towards the old analyses. 24 ...�f S 2S.tllxd4 �cS 26.l:!:ad1 tllbS

70. The French Defense

27.fgi!l+ J::l,xg8 28.�xb5 �f7 29.d6 (with the tactical subtext 13.tlld2 J::l,h6 Black ceased his resistance. 14.�d3 e4 15.�e2? d3! 16.cd J::l,xh3!). In the line 8.2H4 fe 9.tt:Jxe5?! (9.ilih5+ 3. M. KISLOV - J. NOVOSAK ilit7 10.i!lxf7+ �xf7 ll.tt:Jxe5+ tt:Jxe5 Frydek-Mistek, 1996 12.�xe5 tt:Je7 13.f4 is stronger, settling fo r equality) Watson corrects Keres - l.e4 e6 9 ...tt:Jf 6!, with a formidable center in the 2.d4 dS variation 10.tt:Jxc6 tt:Jxg4 ll.�xc7 be. In 3.e5 cS my opinion Black's center demonstrates 4.i!lg4 cd its grandeur even more strikingly with 5.tt:Jf3 Cllc6 8 ...g5!? 9.�d2 fe 10.�b5 tt:Jh6 ll.ilixg5 6.�d3 i!lc7 tt:Jt7 12.ilih5a6 13.2hc6+ be. 8.tt:Jxe5 i!lxeS 9.�f4 ilif6 The alternative is the reciprocal at­ tack 9 ...tt:Jf 6!?. It isn't advantageous to White to prevent his opponent from cas­ tling, as after 10.�b5+?! i.d7 l l.�xd7+ �xd7 l2.ilig3 (1. Rabinovich - Ilyin- Zhenevsky, Leningrad, 1932) 12 ...ilif 5 there's no playable defense to 13... tt:Jh 5. The eccentric 13.�b8!? can be met by a calm capture on c2, but the simplest is the accurate 13... tt:Je 8! The continu­ 7.0-0!? ation IO.i!lxg7? ilixf4! ll.ilixh8 i.d7 My coach prefers to sacrifice the is completely bad, and there's nothing pawn, as a result of which the center to counter the plan 12... 0-0-0 and 13... turns black. In exchange White counts �h6. on exploiting his significant lead in de­ In the variation 9 ... tt:Jf6 IO.i!lg3 velopment. ilih5 ll.c3 �g4! 12.�xg4 tt:Jxg4 13.cd 7... tt:JxeS �d7 the compensation fo r the pawn is The American International Mas­ in question. In the battle fo r the initia­ ter John Watson published a number of tive White should certainly keep the valuable analyses in a monograph fr om queens on the board, striving fo r the the pre-computer era on the French continuation ll.�e5!? i!lg4 12.�b5+ Defense. Here he turns his attention i.d7 13.i.xd7+ �xd7 14.i!lb3 �c8 to 7 ...f6 !?, which occurred in the long­ 15.f3 �g5 16.f4 i!lg4 17.�xd4. ago game Smyslov - Lisitsyn (Moscow, 10.�g5 1942). After 8.�xh7 tt:Jxe5 9.tt:Jxe5 fe Not with the aim of repeating lO.i.g6+ �d8 ll.h3 tllf6 12.ilidl the moves, of course (too modest a success), future Wo rld Champion would have but with the idea of restructuring fo r a been in trouble in the event of l2... i.c5! new wave of attack. On lO.J::l,el the re-

71 Chapter VI

spouse 10 ...h5! 11.'i¥g3 h4 12. .ltb5+ 14. .ltxf5 ef .ltd7 13.ii.xd7+ '\t>xd7 14.'i¥b3 'i¥xf4! 15.Mfel+ .lte6 15.'i¥xb7+ 'i¥c7 16.'i¥xa8 LZ:lf6 is strong, 16.f8 15.h8 25.Md8 h6, and capitu­ serving his extra material. lation without waiting fo r 26.Me6. 12. 'i¥h4 f7 12 .

72 The French Defense

The centralizing ...b8 15.b5 ®a5 7.�f4 ®b4 8.\t>d1c4 9.c3 �a4+ 10.b3 16.Jtg5 Mc8 17.�xd4 ®c4 18.a4 h6 cb 1l.®xb3 ®xa2 12.\t>c2 Jtd7 (12.. . 19.Jtf6 Jtxf6 20.ef. White's pieces have b5 13.Jtb2 Jta6is interesting, then 13.. . more freedom. �b8 and ...b4) 13.®fd2 Mc8 14.Jtb2 Sometimes in the interests of devel­ Jtb415. \t>b1Jtxc3 16.Mxa2 Jtxd2(Nei opment Black makes a pawn sacrifice - Gleizerov, Osterlars, 1995). The data­ (a fleeting one, it's true). After 5 ...®ge7 bases are silent about subsequent events. 6.dc ®g6 7.,te3 ®gxe5 8.®xe5 ®xe5 After an unusual exchange of queens 9.�g3 ®g6 10.®c3 Jte7 11.0-0-0 0-0 a there's a definite initiative fo r Black double-edged position arises. In an en­ - 17.�g3 Jtf4! 18.�xg7 Mg8 19.Mxa4 counter with Sikora-Lerch (Trnava, �xg7 20.Mxa7 ®g4. It's better fo r White 1980) Ambroz preferred to activate the

73 Chapter VI queenside: 9 ...d4?! 10.�xe5 de ll.fe And here 7 ...1i:lh 6!? is worthy of at­ �a5+ 12.Ci'lc3 �d7 13.0-0-0 �c6. tention, without fearing . The duel ended in a wondrously beau­ You only have to worry about a static tiful draw - 14.1i:ld5!? 0-0-0 15.1i:lb6+! endgame with the doubled pawns turn­ ab 16.l:xd8+ Wxd8 17.�b8+ Wd7 ing into an incurable defect, as happened 18.�b5!�xb5 19.l:dl+ �d5 20.�xb7+ to Ivanovic with Antic (Vrnjacka Banja, We8 21.�b8+ Wd7. The knight thrust 1999): 8.�xh6 gh 9.�d3 c4 10.�e2 should have been done differently - �a5+ ll.li:lbd2 �b4 12.bc �xd2+?! 14.�e2! �xc5 15.tlld5! �xd5 16.l:xd5 13.1i:lxd2 �c3 14.l:cl �xd4 15.�xd4 �xd5 17.�b5+ Wd8 18.l:dl �xdl + li:lxd4 16.il.d� �d7 17.cd ed 18.1i:lb3 19. W xd 1, and the queen is clearly stron­ li:lc6 19.f4. Black missed an opportunity ger than the rooks. to complicate the game with the help If on 5 ...1i:lge7 we continue in the of 12... 1i:lxd4!? 13.�xd4 �c3 14.�f4 spirit of the variation 6.il.d3,then again �xal. Besides that, the deflection 9 ... holding back fr om the exchange ...c5xd4 h5!? is promising - on 10.�f4 there fo l­ justifies itself - 6 ...c4!? 7.�e2 li:lf5 low 10... l:g8 , and on 10.�xh5 - 10 ... 8.c3 �e7 9.h4 f6 10.1i:lbd2 b5 ll.h5 b4 c4 ll.�e2 li:lxd4 12.1i:lxd4 �xd4 13.c3 12.1i:lfl fe 13.de be 14.bc �c7 15.il.f4 �e4, and there's nothing fo r Black to 0-0, with a surpassing initiative fo r Black complain about. (Egorov - Lependin, Novokuznetsk, 8.�d3 �d7 1999). ll.�h5+!? g6 12.�g4 deserved Miezis prefers to act in an aggres­ attention, fo llowed by attacking the sive key, rejecting the peaceful equality weakened pawn structure with h5. after 8 ...1i:lb4 9.0-0 li:lxd3 lO.cd li:le7 6.�d2 �b6 ll.�xd4 (ll.li:lxd4 h5 12.�f4 li:lg6 There is another method, character­ 13.�e3 �d7 is somewhat weaker) 11... istic of the Nimzowitsch variation: when �xd4 12.1i:lxd4 il.d7 13.l:clli:lg6 14.f4 one player attacks the queen, the other h5. doesn't move it away immediately, but 9.0-0 0-0-0 turnsto a reciprocal attack. Here this try 10.c3 f6!? is demonstrated by Atalik against Po­ Trying to start reciprocal play as padic (Budva, 2003): 6 ...1i:lh 6!? 7.�g5 soon as possible. After lO... dc ll.li:lxc3 �b6 8.b3 li:lf5 9.�d3 li:lfxd4 10.1i:lxd4 Wb8 12.�f4 this is more difficult to do li:lxd4 11.0-0 �d7 12.1i:lc3 h6 13.�h5 because of the vulnerability of the f7 �e7 14.l:fel g6 15.�dl h5 16.a4 il.c6 square. 17.�cl h4 18.h3 l:h5 19.tlle2 li:lxe2 ll.cd hS 20.l:xe2 c4 21.bc de 22.il.e4 �xe4 12.�g3 h4!? 23.l:xe4 �c6 24.�el l:d8 - the game 13.1i:lxh4 is fo llowing Black's will. After an ex­ The game enters a zone of complica­ change of queens, 7.�xa5 li:lxg4 8.�b5, tions that don't give up their control eas­ White is a little more pleasant because of ily. With 13.�g4 f5 14.�f4 l:h5 15.il.e2 the poor position of the g4 knight. �e7 and ...g5 it's difficultto calmly op­ 7.b3 cd pose the oncoming pawn wave.

74 The French Defense

13 ... iVxd4 �aS 28.iVa7+�b 4 29.iVd4+ - which 14Jl:Jg6 iVxal certainly doesn't exhaust all the possi­ bilities. 17.iVg5! iVb2 18.llbl iVa3 19Jl:Jxh8 ike8 20.tilg6 ikxg6 21.�xg6 tilf6 22.Ll:Jb5!? Passions have abated. White has the bishop pair and a better pawn structure, and the black king is unstably posi­ tioned. I rushed a little with the knight thrust; I only should have resorted to lS.ef! sacrifices after 22.llcl a6 23.iVe3 eS?! - In the event of 1S.Ii"lxh8 iVxeS 24.tilbl!iVxa2 2S.iVb6 tild7 26.l:hc6+ 16.iH4 iVhS 17.tilg6 �cS Black has be 27.iVxc6+ �b8 28.iVxdS,and White an extra pawn in a fo rmidable chain, should win. and the counterplay doesn't fu lly com­ 22... iVxa2 pensate fo r it. In this sample variation 23.llcl �d7 18.�c7 lle8 19.�d6 �xd6 20.iVxd6 24.h4 CfJge7 2l.CfJc3! tilxg6 22.�xg6 iVxg6 Imminent time trouble interferes 23.CfJbS�d 8 24.iVc7+ �e7 2S.iVd6+ with the course of events. 24.iVe3 tile4 "t>f7 26.iVxd7+ lle7 27.CfJd6+ �g8 2S.�xe4 de 26.ikel should have been 28.iVc8+ �h7 29.tilxb7 tild4 the ma­ preferred, with a serious initiative. terial equalized, but the advantage re­ 24... iVxb3 mained. White will try to take the rook 25.llbl iVa4 afterfirst breaking up the chain. 26.iVg3 llc8 15... tilxf6 27.tilc3 iVa6 On the retreat lS... llhS? a sudden In the variation 27 ...iVd4 28.llxb7+ attack has been prepared 16.CfJc3 iVb2 �d8 29 .ikf4 eS 30.�e3l iVxc331 .�b6+ 17.CfJbS (17... eS 18.ikc3iVxa2 19.CfJxf8 ab 32.iVxc3 tilaS White has to returnthe �xf8 20.iVxg7,with a win). queen and switch to an endgame with­ 16.1:Z"lc3 tilhS?! out real winning chances - 33. iVxc8+ Instead of an interim attack 16... �xc8 34.llf7 �cS 3S.llxg7. \'Wb2 immediately is more precise. 28.�d3 iVaS Rybka gives extensive analysis right 29.llxb7+ up to perpetual check: 17 .CfJbS eS Mter 29 ...�d 8 30.llxg7l �e7 18.�c3 tilhS 19.iVgS iVxa2 20.llal 31.llf7 it's difficult for Black to de­ \'Wxb3 21.llxa7! tilxa7 22.tilxa7+ �c7 fe nd, but that's still the best chance. 23.�xeS+ ikd6 24.ikxd6+ �xd6 Miezis continued 29... llc7?! 30.tilx d5! 2S.iVe7+�c 7 26.tilbS+�b 6 27.iVe3+ iVal+ 3l.llbl iVxbl+ 32.�xbl tilxdS

75 Chapter VI

33.1i,e4,and here there's nothing for the ment) 10.c3 Si,d7 ll.h4 Lllh6 12.a4 tllg4 lost queen. In a completely won position 13.tlla3 Si,g7 14.Ji,f4 0-0 (in the event of I blundered my bishop, then let go of the 14... �xb2 15.tllb5 de! does White have remnants of my advantage, and, finally, anything more than the repetition of the draw. moves 16.l:!:abl �a2 17.l:!:al ?) 15.tllb5 de 16.bc �c5 17.l:!:fel tlld8 18.tllfd4 5. A. RAETSKY - M. SHAERER Lllf7 19.l:!:acl l:!:ae8 20.f3 tllgxe5 Geneva, 2007 21.l:!:xe5tll xe5 22.ii.xe5 f4 23.�el. The duel ended with an absurd blunder - l.e4 e6 23 ...l:!:e7?? 24.1i,d6. It's surprising that 2.d4 d5 the commentator on the game, Lane 3.e5 c5 (in his book), had already buried Black 4.'i�Vg4 cd here, and doesn't explain how to achieve 5.tllt3 tllc6 an advantage in the variation 23 ...1i,x b5 6.ii,d3 g6 24.ab �e7 25.h5 Si,xe5 26.�xe5 �f6 27.�d6 �e7. 8.l:!:el tllge7 9.h4!? A flank assault as a result of 6 ...g6. Pressure on d4 has also been tested: 9.tllbd2 �c7 10.�g3 0-0 ll.Lllb3, and in the event of ll. .. f6 12.ef �xg3 13.hg Ji,xf6 14.Ji,f4 White blocks the center with somewhat better prospects. It's better to preserve the enemy pawn as a target: ll...tllf5 12.Ji,xf5 ef 13.ii.g5 ii.d7 14.ii.f6 �b6 15.l:!:adl l:!:ac8 - the Intending an attack on the central chances are roughly equal. pawn by the bishop. The fianchetto 9... 0-0 hasn't gained supporters, as the e5 pawn 10.h5 tllb4 won't be eliminated anyway, and the The danger posed by the white black pawn chain loses its elasticity. bishop is too insignificant to rush to ex­ 7.0-0 Si,g7 change it off. In the example variation It isn't clear whether it's worth rush­ 10 ...Lll f5 ll.�h3 �c7 12.Ji,xf5 ef 13.hg ing to relocate the bishop. Against Hec­ fg 14.1i,h6 J:!:e815. tllbd2 f4 16.�h4 Ji,f5 tor (London, 1991) King seized ter­ White doesn't get anything real. ritory first: 7 ...f5 8.�g3 �b6 9.a3 a5 11.1i,g5 tllxd3 (exposes the b5 square, but on the other 12.cd f6?! hand rules out one of the main plans in 12 ... l:!:e8was necessary, to retreat to the Nimzowitsch variation, b4, ii,b2, f8 on 13.h6. White has the initiative , but tlld2-b3, and fo rces you to switch to an­ it's far less pronounced than it would be other one - c3, with play fo r develop- after opening upthe game.

76 The French Defense

13.ef �xf6 6. A. RAETSKY - V. LISIK 14.�xf6 Mxf6 Vo ronezh, 1987 15.Cllbd2 eS My opponent is desperately trying to l.e4 e6 break through the blockade, which even 2.d4 dS Nimzowitsch wouldn't be ashamed of 3.e5 cS after 15... tll c6 16.tlle5 tllxe5 17.Mxe5. 4.�g4 cd Unfortunately, every opening-up of 5.tllf3 tllc6 the position deepens the difficulties fo r 6.�d3 tllge7 Black because of her weak pawns and The knight move out is virtually al­ poorly-covered king. ways accompanied by its subsequent re­ 16.�g3 ..trs location to g6 (game 7). The annotated 17 .tllxeS tllc6 game was an original exception. 18.tlldf3 �d6

7.0-0 tllb4 19.tllxc6 The queen's knight is exchanged fo r With the disappearance ofthe queens the enemy bishop, and the king's knight part of my advantage evaporates. With replaces the queen's knight. A com­ 19.hg hg 20.�h4 tllxe5 21.tllxe5 Me8 pletely playable continuation. 22.tllf3 Mff8 23.�xd4 the resistance 8.tllxd4 tllxd3 didn't promise to be protracted. 9.cd tllc6 19... be In the structure that has arisen the 20. �xd6 Mxd6 e5 pawn is ready to reinforce its new 21.tllxd4 �xd3 neighbor, so the g6 knight isn't doing 22.Macl Mc8 much good - as in the variation 9 ...tllg6 23.Me3 ila6 10.tllf3 h5 ll.�g3 h4 12.�g4 h3 13.g3 24.b4 �c4 Jtd7 14.tllc3 �b6 15.d4. 25.Me7 a6 10.tllf3 26.h6 Retreating the knight or exchanging On the 381h move White took his ad­ it on c6 is a matter of taste. After an ex­ vantage to victory. change it's easier fo r Black to mobilize

77 Chapter VI the queenside, but the problem of the kingside still hasn't been solved. 10... �d7 11.tiJ c3 tiJb4 A repeat thrust by the knight is use­ less; ll...'i¥b6 12.gbl gc8 is prefer­ able. 12.gd1 h5 13.'i¥g3 aS So that after a3 White can't advance b4 immediately. Trying to get rid of the pressure on the kingside doesn't work whatever he does - after 13. .. h4 14.'i¥f4 king's rook and bishop, which are fro­ (with the idea of tLlg5)the queen has its zen in their initial positions, are pow­ sights on the f7 square, and with 14 ... erless to help. The variation 19 ...'i¥xa4 �e7 15.'i¥g4 it takes the g7 pawn into 20.gxc8+ �xc8 2l.tLlc7+<;;t> d7 22.gcl the beauty spot. �c5! (the knight is in danger, but it can 14.�g5 'i¥b6 still find a refuge) 23.tiJa8! b6 24.�e3 15.gac1 gc8 'i¥g4 25.lllxb6+ �xb6 26.�xb6 'i¥xg3 15 ...d4 wins a pawn; in return 27.gc7+ <;;t>d8 28.hg �d7 29.�xa5 is 16.t£Je4 t£Jxa2 17.gal tLlb4 18.Ci:ld6+ interesting, and, despite the opposite­ �xd6 19.ed gives White a strong passed colored bishops, Black is highly unlikely pawn and obvious compensation. to hold out. 16.a3 t£Jc6 19... gxcl 17.a4 20.gxc1 Jixb5 Creating a base fo r a knight invasion 21.ab 'i¥xb2 on b5. In the case of 17... 'i¥xb2 18.tiJb5 22.h4 <;;t>d7 'i¥b4 19.h3 (against 19 ...'i¥g4) 19 ...'i¥xa4 23.'i¥f4 f5 20.gbl an initiative fo r the loss is at 24.b6! hand. Lisik should have continued like Finishes the battle. The rook gets that anyway, consoling himself with ma­ a support on the seventh rank, and the terial superiority - what if the onslaught queen gets access to the enemy king via gets bogged down! a4. Exchanging queens is useless - 24 ... 17... tiJd4?! 'i¥b4 25.gc7+ <;;t>e8 26.gxb7 'i¥xf4 18.tiJxd4 'i¥xd4 27.Jixf4 <;;t>d8 28.gc7! �e7 29.ga7! gf8 30.�d2. In the game the black king (See Diagram) proceeded to its "home" flankunder an 19.Ct:lb5! avalanche of checks, where it was mat­ With exchanges White paves a road ed: 24 ...<;;t> e8 25.'i¥a4+ <;;t>n 26.'i¥d7+ to the king, which is stuck in the center. <;;t>g6 27.'i¥xe6+ <;;t>b7 28.'i¥xf5 + g6 But these are exchanges of the monarch's 29.gc7+ Jig7 30.gxg7+! <;;t>xg7 few guards, and the troubled queen and 31.'i¥d7+.

78 The French Defense

7. J. GELFENBOIM -P. SCHWSSER �d7 14Jlac1 (14.tl:lb3?! tl:lxb4! 15.ab Germany, 2001 Vj/xc2),then 15.tl:lb3and won the pawn back with roughly equal chances. l.e4 e6 9... de 2.d4 dS The universally-acknowledged ex­ 3.e5 cS pert on the French Defense, Grandmas­ 4.Vj/g4 cd ter Uhlmann (against Honfi, Leipzig, s.tl:ln tl:lc6 1982), didn't accept the sacrifice, drag­ 6.�d3 tl:lge7 ging his opponent into long maneuvers: 7.0-0 tl:lg6 9 ... 0-0 lO.cd tl:lb4 1l.:i:tdlf5 !? (restrict­ ing the bishop is no worse than exchang­ ing it oft) 12.Vj/h5 Vj/e8 13.tl:le1 �d7 14.tl:lc3Vj/f7 15.�e2 l:tfc8 16.�g5 �f8 17.a3 tl:lc6 18.l:td3 �e8 19.Vj/h3 b5 20.:i:tad1 l:tab8 2l.�h5 b4 22.ab l:txb4 23.�c1 Vj/b7, and gradually outplayed him. 10.tl:lxc3 !iLd7 In the case of 10... 0-0 1l.h4!? taking on h4 is risky: 11...tl:lxh4?! 12.�xh7+! �xh7 13.tl:lg5+ �xg5 14.�xg5 tl:lf3+ l5.gf f6 16.ef :i:txf6 17.�g2, with a 8.l:tel very strong attack. It's necessary to On 8.Vj/g3 !iLe7 9.a3 you have to concentrate the threats against the e5 reckon with an exchange operation, 9 ... pawn with ll...�c7. In the example i.h4!? 10.tl:lxh4 Vj/xh4. variation 12.�g3 f5 13.h5 f4 l4.�h2 8... !iLe7 tl:lgxe5 l5.tl:lxe5 tl:lxe5 16.iLxf4 tl:lf3+ 9.c3 17.gf �xf4 18.�xf4 l:txf4 19.tl:lxd5 ed In accordance with his adventurous 20.l:txe7 :i:txf3 2l.l:te8+�f7 22.�b5 a6 style (and fo llowing my recommenda­ 23.�d7 �xd7 24.l:txa8l:th3 an approxi­ tion) Jaroslaw plays aggressively against mately equal ending arises. the Grandmaster. He was burdened with ll.a3 the unsuccessful experience of using the It isn't essential to prevent 11...tl:lb4, variation against Kritz (Germany, 2000): as later the knight will be invited to leave 9.a3 0-0 10.t'l:lbd2 f5 ll.Vj/g3a5 12.t'l:lb3 b4. That happened in the game Svesh­ �b6 13.h4 a4 14.tl:lbd2 Vj/c7 15.tl:lfl? nikov -Komarov (Vmjacka Banja, 1999): (l5.�h2 is correct, to meet ...f4 with an ll.�d2 tl:lb4 12.�b1 l:tc8 l3.a3 tl:lc6 exchange on g6) 15... f4 16.Vj/h2tl:lgx e5, 14.�d3 0-0 (14... tl:la 5, recommended and White considered further resistance by Sveshnikov, allows the combination­ pointless. He should have completed the al explosion 15.tl:lxd5! ed 16.e6! �xe6 expanded fianchetto by means of 10.b4 17.l:txe6! fe 18.�xg6+ hg 19.�xg6+ a6 ll.�b2 �c7 12.�xg6 hg 13.t'l:lbd2 �d7 20.tl:le5+ �c7 2l.!iLxa5+ b6

79 Chapter VI

22.1i'lf7 �d7 23.lt'lxh8 �f6!, and Black 17.ef gf should hold out) 15.h4!? f5 (15. ..liJxh4?! 18.ctJf4 �g8 16.�xh7+! '\.t>xh7 17.CLlg5+ �xg5 19.CZlxe6 �d6 18.�xg5 is as dangerous fo r Black as Nominally the fo rces are equal, but 10... 0-0 ll.h4!? CZlxh4?!) 16.ef �xf6 the material advantage is gradually mov­ 17.�g5 �xf3! 18.�xf3 .ixg5 19.�xg6. ing away towards Black because of the Komarov continued 19... .ixh4?! on the g-file. On 20.f4 the 20.�f7+ '\.t>h8 21.�adl �b6 22.�xe6! response 20 ...CLlf 8 wins, combining a �xe6 23.�xe6 CLld4 24.�xd4 �xd4, not defense of the h7 square with an attack coping with the active white pieces. While on the queen. with 19 ...�f 6 perpetual check is reason­ 20.�g4 CZleS able (20.�d3 .ixh4 21.�h5 g6 22.�xg6 21.�xe5 �xe5 hg 23.�xg6+ '\.t>h824.�h6+). 22.f4 �xb2 11... 0-0 23.�bl �c3? 12.�g5?! 23 ...�xa3 is correct, to protect the He should have preferred the stan­ dark-squared bishop in the event of dard dash by the outside pawn 12.h4, for �xb7. After 24.�f5 �xg5+! 25.hg �g6 example, 12... f5 13.ef �xf6 14. .ixg6 hg 26.�xd5 �xd3 Black is left a piece up. 15.�xg6 CZle7 16.�d3 CZlf5, with mu­ tual chances. 12... '\.t>h8 Black shouldn't exchange bishops on his own initiative, so as not to bring the knight out to an attacking position. Af­ ter 12... �x g5 13.CZlxg5 �b6 14.�h5 h6 15.CLlxf7 �xf7 16.�xg6 �xf2 17.�h7+ '\.t>f7 18.'\.t>hl the position is very sharp and the chances are roughly equal. 13.�h5 CLld4! This elegant exchange operation re­ duces White's attacking potential. In the 24 . .ixh7! '\.t>xh7 case of 14.�xe7 CZlxf3+ 15.�xf3 CZlxe7 25.�xb7 �xa3?! White's activity clearly isn't worth a pawn. In the case of 25 ...�el + 26.'\.t>g2 Gelfenboim embarked on an onslaught in �e4+ 27.'\.t>gl �g7 28.CZlxg7 '\.t>xg7 the adventurous style and didn't miscalculate queen has not only defended the bishop, - under pressure from the threats Grand­ but also prevented its white counterpart master Schlosser, a stronger opponent by from establishing itself on the bl-h7 diag­ 300 Elo points, he went on to let go of the onal (which happened in the game). Then win, and then the draw too. there fo llows 29.�xf6 +! '\.t>xf6 30.�g5+ 14.h4 CLlxf3+ '\.t>f7 3l.�xe7+! �xe7 32.�xd5+ �e6 15.gf �e8 33.�xa8, and making the best of the ex­ 16.CZle2!? f5 tra bishop is in serious doubt.

80 The French Defense

26.�f5+ �h8 30.�h3 �f3+). But the armor in this 27.�h2 l:!:g6 game has clearly yielded to the ammuni­ 28.h5 tion - 28 ...l:!:xg5? 29.lZJxg5 fg 30.�e5+ Schlosser should have been satisfied �g8 31.l'::!:xe7 �f7,and here 32.h6! �f8 with a draw here (28 . . . �f3 29.hg �xf2+ 33.h7 won immediately.

. �--�-�-�-�-�-�-�--... -..------..--- ..---- ...---·------, CONCL l/810N: � i At®Ni n.zowitsch's original opening ide a.4.\ig4 hast®le d out tone rable 8.$:hi� strategic principles. Black getu� man)' op tio� for good l10t, play. More-ISJu� Ii he immediately plays fo r trap , . lilld White ia:s to be �ful not . ji i ove:r� a so as to 1 fall into the abyss. There 's no way that the Nilw>wit$Ch Gatt1bit bea ·midn j [l weapon �nst theFrench Defense,alth ough it re� ptayailleasancan oc� ion - j 1 al surprise in serlous gam�. As a contffi,}latton witll �elllaleU�tgy,

. i . . c0,Jsi��ie . Wg ropria te 4 4 iSapp m·,�pi� �d·Jl:U����ss · �,�f t!te �n j [ de�lopefi·P� and fr01ll�e ��1te h��s��usl! ���"pyerthe � �J��iJfi'Vfm j

... c •• •••••••• >:� ••.2; •·•·· ····•····••·••··········'·······•·•••:..... :� . -••·••••······'···"'' •••• t.:���"��-�-�l . . � � : ,j

81 Chapter 7 The St.George Defense

Is it possible to surprise a World Champion on the very first move , with a reply to 1 e4 he definitely won't have analyzed? Just how likely would it be to go on to beat one of the kings of chess after such a start? It seems very unlikely, but it has happened (and not in a Blitz game, either).

l.e4 a6!? ny byulleten. The editorial staff, who From personal experience, I can previously hadn't been inclined to com­ confirm that this inconspicuous pawn ment on publications, censored the ma­ move provokes an ironic smile from terial, and only Perestroika and Glas­ most opponents and spectators. Besides, nost opened the way fo r this "nonsense" everyone has heard of the sensational in its full glory. Meanwhile, Remizov's win by To ny Miles over Anatoly Kar­ interesting analyses are conscientious pov in 1980, which was in the era of the and sufficiently objective . After pick­ latter's unchallenged reign on the chess ing up the "virus" I've played l...a6 Olympus. We can assume that Karpov over the past 10 years in more than 100 lost his internal equilibrium as a result of games with the classical time control. his partner's monstrous impudence, but I've lost more often than not to stronger Miles didn't suffer from tremors before opponents, fought with varying success the greats and could wipe the floor with with my equals, and almost always won anyone and in any opening. But that against those who are lower-rated than would hardly work, let's say, in l.e4 f5 ?!, me. We can predict a similar result with but l...a6, it turns out, still doesn't over­ any "correct" reply to l.e4, but on the step the boundary of acceptable risk ... other hand the "incorrect" one is much The English player's success drew more fu n! attention to l...a6. In the USSR Yu ri In the 191h century the modest ad­ Remizov became a fan of the system, vance by the outside pawn was used by placing theoretical articles in Sh akhmat- the English amateur Baker - in simulta- The St.George Defense neous games against Steinitz and Black­ 1. D. WERNER - M. CHETVERIK burne. Early publications named 1 e4 a6 Budapest, 2003 the Baker Defense, but it was renamed the St. George Defense after Miles de­ l.e4 a6 feated Karpov. Sometimes it is even 2.c4 e5 called the Birmingham Defense, after 3.ti'lf3 lilc6 the English Grandmaster's home city. International Master Mike Basman - another Englishman! - did more analysis than most on the St. George. He published a book on the subject and even produced a series of audio cassette tapes (this was back in the days before DVDs) featuring his games and thoughts on 1 e4 a6. After l.e4 a6 2.d4 Black plays 2 ... b5 , then the bishop comes out to b7 with its sights on e4. If the pawn moves fo rward, the knight gets a fantastic Andso, we won't have a Spanish or an parking spot on d5. If the pawn stays Italian. However, some variations simi­ where it is, an undermining of the lar to the are possi­ neighboring d4-pawn will most likely ble. In the encounter Haidu - Chetverik fo llow with ...c5. The pawn pair d4/e4 (Aggtelek, 2002) this happened: 4.lilc3 constrains Black, and at the same time tZ'lf6 5.d4 �b4 6.'{i'd3 ed 7.tilxd4 tileS he's subjected to pressure from the en­ 8.�c2 d6 (provoking 9.'{i'a4+ lilfd7 emy army. Later we'll see that along 10.�xb4 c5, and the white queen is with the original positions that are spe­ out of position) 9.f4 itxc3+ (9 ...lilc 6!? cific only to the St. George, positions 10.lilxc6 be) lO.'{i'xc3 lilg6 (redeploy­ reminiscent of the Sicilian and French ment via d7 to c5 is more aggressive) can often arise. ll.�d3 0-0 12.0-0 l'::l:e8 13.'{i'c2 '{i'e7 To hinder the queen's bishop from 14.lilf5 �xf5 15.ef tilf8 16.itd2 c6 coming out White has used 2.a4 and 17.l:l:ael '{i'c7 18.ite3 lil8d7 19.itd4, (slightly more often) 2.c4. After l.e4 with a freer position fo r White. a6 2.a4 Black has a pleasant choice be­ 5.a3!? isn't poison-free. On 5 ... itc5 tween 2 ...c5 and 2 ...e5 - the inclusion the standard exchange combination of a4 and a6 will benefit him. The con­ 6.lilxe5! lilxe5 7.d4 itxd4 8.'{i'xd4 d6 tinuation l.e4 a6 2.c4 c5 3.li'lf3leads 9.itg5 h6 10.ith4 c5 11.\\iid1 (Teger ­ to positions from the Paulsen System, Chetverik,Wo rms, 2006) 11...0-0 12.ite2 which are almost always achievable via ite6 13.b3 b5!? works with counterplay, l.e4 c5 2.li'lf3 a6 3.c4. Open games with while 9.ite2 preserves the opening ad­ the unusual inclusion are presented in vantage. The g7 square after 5 ...g6 looks game 1. like a convenient place for the bishop.

83 Chapter VII

But why don't we try something in 11.\t/ xd2 0-0 the style of the Scotch? 12.�d3 'i¥c6 4.d4?! ed 13.�cl tlle4+ 5.li'Jxd4 'i¥h4! 14.�xe4 'i¥xe4 In the real Scotch (l.e4 e5 2.CZJf3 15.f3 'i¥g6 tllc6 3.d4 ed 4.tllxd4) the thrust 4 ... 16.g4 b6 'i¥h4 isn't the "bestseller" because of 17.c5 iib7 the knight thrust to b5 in various modi­ 18.cb cb fications (5.tllb5, 5.tllc3 �b4 6.tllb5, 19.�hfl 5.tllc3 �b4 6.�e2 'i¥xe4 7.tt'lb5).With We mer didn't dare to return the the inclusion of ...a6, all thoughts of tllb5 pawn, as with 19.'i¥xb6 �c6 20.�hfl are ruled out, and White's supposed ini­ �fe8 21.'i¥d4 �e6 22.�f4 �ae8 the tiative fo r the pawn wanes considerably. white king is hardly likely to escape the fire from the enemy army. 19... b5 20.'i¥d3 'i¥e6 2l.b3 �c6 22.'i¥d4 a5 23.�c5 �fe8 Making the best ofthe extra pawn took place without any adventures and was suc­ cessfully completed on the 441h move.

What else can White do on the second move? 2.tllc3 doesn't impress, as after 6.tt'lc2 2 ...b5 he has to watch out for ...b4. The The German master, after blundering course of the game Reinisch - Chetverik at the very beginning of the game, tries (Stare Mesto, 2008) is amusing: 3.f4 � b7 to avoid exchanges. 6.tllc3 �b4 7.�e2 4.d3 e6 5.tllf3 b4 6.tlle2 �c5 7.d4 �b6 'i¥xe4 8.tllxc6 de 9.0-0 'i¥e7 10.'i¥b3 is 8.tt'lg3h5 9.iid3h4 10.tt'lfltll f6 ll.'i¥e2 still stronger, and White scrapes together 'i¥e7 12.tllld 2 tllc6 13.c3 tlla5 14.c4 d6 compensation fo r half a pawn. 15.e5 tt'lh5 (15... tt'ld7!?) 16.tt'lb3. The 6... 'i¥xe4+ opposition of the a5 and h5 knights with 7.�e3 tt'lb4 the four white central pawns is a sight that Exchanges should be done with cau­ would have given Tarrasch a stroke! The tion! The variation 7 ...iib4+ 8.tt'lxb4 funniest part is that I didn't do anything tllxb4 9.tllc3 tllc2+ 10.\t/d2 tllxe3 criminal, and after 16... tll xb3 17.ab 0-0 ll.tt'lxe4 tllxdl l2.�xdl is far from clear or 16 ...�d8 counterplay is at hand. due to White's lead in development. If White intended f4 in combination 8.tt'lxb4 �xb4+ with d3, then the place fo r the queen's 9.tt'ld2 tt'lf6 knight is on d2. An example sketch: 2.f4 10.'i¥b3 �xd2+ b5 3.tllf3 .iib7 4.d3 e6 5.�e3 (otherwise

84 The St. George Defense

5 ...1tc 5!?) 5 ...c5 6.®bd2 ®f6 7Yiile2, although in the event of 5.f4 1tg7 6.®f3 then the king moves away to the queen­ d6 7.0-0 ®d7 8.c3 c5 9.�e2 ®h6!? side and after h3 and g4 we switch to the Black shouldn't worry. attack. Black, however, doesn't lose his s.®f3 cs optimism, as he has solid bastions. Strictly speaking, Grandmaster Bar­ tel was playing the French, and his op­ 2. L. CYBOROWSKI- M. BARTEL ponent responded with a King's Indian Poland, 2007 setup. This position comes about even more often via l.e4 c5 2.®f3 a6 3.g3 b5 l.e4 a6 4.1tg2 1tb7 5.d3 e6. White makes his 2.g3 own hay without thinking of refuting the enemy's flank action. 6.0-0 d6 7.Mel Occasionally the rook has been left where it is to support an attack on the kingside. Then 7.a4 ®d7 8.V�b'e2f6 ®g 9.®h4 1te7 10.f4 0-0 11.1te3 1tc6 12.®d2 Vliic7 13.g4 is possible, with an unpredictable outcome of the attack due to the absence of flaws in the fo rtress. 7... ®f6 8.a4 White opposes the fo rmidable b7 With 8.e5 ®fd7 9.ed 1txd6 10.®c3 bishop with the g2 bishop. Fans of 0-0 ll.®e4 1te7 12.b3 ®c6 13.1tb2 the King's Indian use a universal set �c7 14.�d2 Mfe8 15.h4 e5 (Nishimura of moves in the opening, and the St. - Movsesian, Mlada Boleslav, 1994) George doesn't ruffie their feathers. a barrier goes up in the path of the b2 2... bS bishop, and the onslaught burns out. 3.1tg2 1tb7 8... ®bd7 4.d3 e6 9.ab ab A double fianchetto 4 ...g6 is appro­ 10.Mxa8 �xa8 priate here, as the g7 bishop isn't com­ ll.®a3 1tc6 ing up against the standard pawn barrier After c4 Bartel intended to lock the c3jd4. In the duel Mueller - Chetverik chain. Meanwhile, after ll...�a6!? 12.c4?! (Bad Wildbad, 2004) White opened the be 13.®xc4 ®xe4! (Gachon - Miralles, a-file, which only played into Black's France, 2002) a pawn is lost, and the bish­ hands: 5.®f3 1tg7 6.0-0 d6 7.c3 ®d7 op pair doesn't compensate fo r that. 8J�el ®gf6 9.a4 0-0 lO.ab ab ll.Mxa8 12.c4 b4 'i¥xa8 12.®a3 �a6 13.®d4 c6 14.1te3 13.®b5 �b7 �a8 15.h3 e5 16.®b3 c5. The kingside A subtle psychological moment. is more suitable fo r energetic actions, Having rejected 13... �a5, Black sug-

85 Chapter VII gests that his opponent defends on b5 Let's go one more step fo rward. (with rather dismal play after 14.'i¥a4 l.e4 a6 !iie7 15.!iif4 e5 16.!iig5 0-0 17.Ihl). 2.d4 bS Cyborowski justifiably considered the pawn sacrifice more promising.

White now has to choose a piece setup. Let's divide up contact (3.a4 and 14.d4! !iixbS 3.c4) and non-contact lines, among Taking on e4 and thereby opening a which the set up involving putting the central flle is too dangerous - 14 ...!ii xe4 bishop on d3 and the knight on f3 pre­ 15.fiif4 or 14 . ..Ci:Jxe4 15.d5! ed 16.lll g5! dominates. Lower-rated players some­ lS.cb 'i¥xb5 times use 3.!iif4 , although on that 16.e5 de square the bishop is useless, and with a Black can't avoid opening up the subsequent e5 tlld5 it's attacked and a game. In the case of 16 . ..Ci:Jd5?! 17.tllg5! tempo will be lost. In the game Csikos - h6 18.tllxf7! �xt7 19.!iixd5 ed 20.'i¥f3+ Chetverik (Balatonfo ldvar, 2008) there there's a strong attack fo r the sacrificed fo llowed 3 ...!ii b7 4.tlld2 tllf6 5.!iid3 e6 piece. 6.tllgf3 c5 7.c3 cd 8.cd tllc6 9.0-0 'i¥b6 17.tZl xeS tZlxe5 (9 ...!ii e7!?) 10.!iie3 (10.d5! ed ll.e5 18.de tlld7 - you have to watch carefully fo r this 19.'i¥f3 tllb8 standard sacrifice in the St. George) 20.'i¥a8 !iie7 10 ...tll g4 ll.'i¥e2tll xe3 12.fe !iie7 13.a4 There then fo llowed 21.fiic6+ tllb4 14.!iibl f6 ! (neutralizes my oppo­ 'i¥xc6 22.'i¥xb8+ !lidS 23.ll:dl 'i¥b6 nent's onslaught) 15.tllh4 0-0 16.'i¥h5 24.'i¥xb6 fiixb6 - in the endgame the ll:t7 17.ab 'i¥xb5 18.'i¥xb5 ab 19.ll:xa8+ remnants of White's initiative were !iixa8 20.ll:cl ll:f821. tllhf3 !iic6. Black only enough to win a pawn back, and a simply has a pleasant position, and draw loomed on the horizon. It's more without exchanging queens (17... ab !?) difficult to defend after 21.'i¥a7!?Cas­ it's pleasant in all respects. tling doesn't work, and with queens on 3.c3 !iib7 4.f3 (Werching - Chetverik, the board the king fe els uncomfortable Harkany Te nkes Cup, 2001) hasn't lost in the center. its rationale. White has removed targets

86 The St. George Defense fo r an attack from his partner and plans 4.�d3 e6 to develop without impediment. Black 4 ...LZ'lf 6, and also 4 ...c5 usually lead started new provocations: 4 ...e6 5.�e3 to a transposition of moves. After 4 ... �h4+!? 6.g3 �d8 7.�g2 h5!? 8.h4 c5 c5 accepting the sacrifice promises rich 9.LZ'le2�c7 10.a4 b4 l l.cb?! (it was worth counterplay: 5.dc e6 6.�e3 �c8 7.b4 a5 maintaining the tension) 11...cd 12.�xd4 8.c3 LZ'lf6 9.LZ'ld2 ab lO.cb l'la3! 1l.�e2 �xb4+ 13.LZ'lbc3 LZ'lf6 14.l'lcl LZ'lc6 LZ'lc6 12.l'lb1 LZ'lg4!? 15.�f2 d5 (it's better to make impor­ 5.LZ'lf3 tant decisions after castling) 16.ed .l'ld8 5 . .i.e3 is associated with underesti­ 17.0-0 ed 18.LZ'ld4 (18.LZ'lf4!?) 18... 0-0 mating the b7 bishop: 5 ...f5 !? 6.ef (with 19.LZ'lce2 �d7, with a decent position. 6.LZ'ld2 LZ'lf6 the "ugly" 7.�f3 is re­ The paradoxical idea 4 ...e5!? 5.�e3 f5 !? quired to hold the center) 6 ...�b4+ (6 ... 6.ef LZ'lh6!?,with perplexing play will be a �xg2 7.�h5+ g6 8.fg .i.g7 9.gh+ �f8 reason to work on the line 3.c4, which is lO.hg�+ �xg8 1l.�g4 .i.xh1 12.LZ'ld2 far more relevant than 3.c3. �h4+ 13.�xh4 .l'lxh4 leaves Black with We can't ignore the impulsive 3.f4. the exchange fo r a pawn, but he wants There's no doubt that this advance has to play with the queens on the board) energy, but its drawbacks just slightly 7.�f2 ef 8.c3 �d6 9.0f3 LZ'lf6 10 . .l'le1 outweigh that - the restricting of the cl 0-0 ll.�g1 LZ'lg4 g312. �e8 13.LZ'le5? bishop, the weakness of the gl-a7 diago­ (13 . .i.f2 or 13.�e2 maintained the ten­ nal, and the difficulties in defending the sion) 13 .....\txeS! 14.de d6! 15.LZ'ld2 de central pawns. 16.0f3? �c6! 17.h3 0xe3 18.l'lxe3 �c5 19.�f2 i.xf320.�xf3 e4 21.�h1 3. M. COZETTE - M. CHETVERIK ed 2V&Vxa8 0c6 23.�b7 .l'le8,with ca­ La Fere, 2008 pitulation by White in the game Sikula - Chetverik (Dyu1a, 1999). l.e4 a6 5... cS 2.d4 bS 6.c3 LZ'lf6 3.(4 It isn't worth recommending the provocation 6 ...0c 6 here: 7.d5 LZ'lce7 8.d6 LZ'lg69.i.c 2, and there's nothing to compensate fo r the "nail" on d6. Later we'll see that this isn't always the case. 7.�e2 The advance e5 in the St. George always increases White's chances of an attack, and then Black's chances if the attack runs out of steam. The latter did happen in the encounter Machata - Chetverik (Bratislava, 2001): 7.e5 LZ'ld5 8.0-0 g6 9.a3 (possibly the pawn should 3 ... �b7 have been bolder) 9 .. :i�'b6 10.�h1 .i.e7

87 Chapter VII

1l.'{i'e2 cd 12.cd tllc6 13.j,e3 l:l:c8 9 ... cd 14.l:l:c1 0-0 15.tllc3 tlla5 16.tlle4 tllc4 10.cd 17.i.xc4 be 18.l:l:ab1 l:l:c7. As prom­ In connection with the imminent ised, the dark-squared bishop is looking exit from the stage of the d3 bishop shabby, and Black has the initiative on 10.lllxd4 looks stronger. But after 10 ... the queenside. tllxd4 1l.cd 0-0 12.a3 l:l:c8 13.tllc3 d6 If 7.lllbd2, then another "perk" of 14.f5 tlld7 and ...i.f 6 Black meets the the opening works - an immediate ex­ enemy onslaught at full fo rce. change on d4, so that the knight can't go 10... tllb4 to c3. After 7 ...cd 8.cd lllc6 9.a3 (against 11.e5 tllxd3 9 ...lll b4) 9 ...'{i'b6 10.tllb3 i.e7 11.0-0 12.'{i'xd3 a5 the merit of having played f4 isn't ob­ The variation 12.ef!? lllxc 1 13.fg! vious, and White will probably have to l:l:g8 14.l:l:xc l l:l:xg7justified 10.cd in the worry about equalizing. well-known way. The black bishops are 7... i.e7 superb, but no reliable refuge is evident The Dutch master We lling, a player for the king. with an eccentric style and an admirer of 12... CZldS l...a6, won a pawn after 7 ...'{i'b6 8.i.e 3? 13.tllc3 l:l:c8 c4 9.j,c2 i.xe4 (which without ... c4 led to the loss of a piece). 8.dc j,xc5 9.b4 j,e7 10.a4 is correct - the undermining move without the possibility of the reply ...b4 wins on strength, and this method is also worth remembering. 8.0-0 tllc6 Black doesn't rush to castle, so asnot to face a sacrifice on h7 after 8 ...0-0 9.e5 tlld5 10.dc i.xc5+ 1l.�hl. The con­ tinuation 11...f5 12.ef l:l:xf6 is relatively playable, but with incomplete develop­ ment it's better to avoid these kind of 14.a3?! weakening moves. With 14.i.d2 tllxc3 15.i.xc3the c3

9 .�h1 bishop doesn't shine in particular, and Against Pergericht (Lucerne, 1982) neither does White's position as a whole. Moraza prevented lllb4, allowing an ex­ On the other hand, his pawn structure change of the dark-squared bishop: 9.a3 remains fine. cd lO.cd '{i'b6 ll.i.e3 tllg4 12.tllbd2 14... tllxc3 tllxe3 13.'{i'xe3 a5 14.�hl a4 15.l:l:ac1 15.bc i.dS tlla5 16.f5. Now in the case of 16... 0-0 16.l:l:f2 '{i'c7 17.tlle5 '{i'd8 by kicking the knight off 17.i.b2 '{i'b7 e5 Black won the tempi back that were No matter how wretched White's lost on ...'{i'd8-b6-d8. position looks in the event of 17 ... '{i'c4

88 The St.George Defense

18.'1i'xc4 llxc4, considerable effort is required to break open his defenses. I suggested that Cozette should attack, controlling the situation and waiting for new mistakes. Typical play fo r an open tournament fo r my partner's strength (Elo 2026). 18.llel g6 19.CZlg5 0-0 20.'1i'h3 h5 21. '.i?gl '.i?g7 22.'1i'd3 l:lc4 23.lle3 h4 Using this bishop sensibly in the St. 24.llh3 l:lh8 George is another problem! White im­ 25.g3 l:l4c8! mediately takes a parking spot away 26.gh llh5 from it, but its comrades-in-arms estab­ White has even won a pawn, but only lish themselves. to.the detriment of his position. It wasn't 3... �b7 difficult to take the game to victory. 4.CZld2 The Danish master Daniel Ve ster­ The line 3.f3�b7 comes about more baek Pedersen used nothing more nor oftenvia l.d4 b5 2.e4 �b7 3.f3 (defend­ less than the English Attack here! But ing the pawn and attacking an enemy Black didn't sign up for a Sicilian! Af­ one) 3 ...a6. And now an intersection ter 4.f3 e65.'�d2 tbffi 6. g4 d5 7.e5 CZld7 leads to other branches - 4.a4 to 3.a4, 8.itg2 c5 9.c3 �c6 10.lt'ie2 h5! 11.0-0 4.c4 to 3.c4 and 4.�e3 to 3.�e3. �c8 12.?2:f4 h4 (dulls the game, more promising is 12... hg 13.fg �h4 14.h3 4. J. MCDONNELL - M. BASMAN �e7) 13.L"L:d3h3 14.l.hl ttJa5 15.b3 g6 Torquay, 1998 16.f4 c4 17/i:cl (Pedersen - Chetver­ ik, Copenhagen, 2004) 17... tZ:l b6 18. b4 l.e4 a6 tZ:lc6 the position closed with conflict­ Michael Basman has been a promi­ free tendencies. nent personality in British chess since Of course, it's better fo r White to before the advent of Miles. He has stuck complete the mobilization of the king­ to an off-beat style that is also distinctive side, as in the game Z. Szabo - Csom of a number of today's British stars. Far (Budapest, 1992): 5.�d3 d6 6.CZle2 CZld7 more often Basman has used the French 7.0-0 c5 8.c4 cd 9.tZ:lxd4 b4 10.tZld2CZlc5 move-order l.e4 e6 2.d4 a6, with a sub­ ll.�c2 !iie7 12.!iia4+ '.i?f8.�c 13 2 sequent ...b5, but here he immediately CZlf6 14.�e2 h6 15.!iif2 'i¥c7 16.a3 ba played l...a6. 17.b4 CZlcd7 18Jha3. White has broken 2.d4 b5 through the blockade and has notice­ 3.�e3 ably more freedom. Yo u should fight

89 Chapter VII for space anyway in the St. George and 12.tlle2 0-0 prevent c4 when possible. Yo u can give An insufficiently concrete decision; the game a "French" character: 5 ... it's more difficult fo r White to prove his Ci.Jf6 6.Ci.Je2d5 7.e5 Ci.Jfd7 8.0-0 c5 9.c3 superiority in the complicated play after tt'lc6 10.tt'ld2 11i'b6 ll.f4 g6 12.Ci.Jf3 iie7 12... tll g4 13.�d4 e5 14.h3 ed 15.hg de. 13.dc iixc5 14.�xc5 (14.Ci.Jed4!?) 14 ... 13.h3 tlle5 tllxc5 15.lt>h1 b4 16.cb tt'lxb4 17.�bl 14.�c2 �c6 tllc6, and the position has opened up in 15.1/i'aS lli'b7 Black's favor (Shinzel - Klaric, Tmava, 1980). 4... tt'lf6 5.�d3 e6 6.c3 White masks the intentions of the king's knight. After 6.tt'lgf3 �e7 7.0-0 0-0 or 6.f3 (with a choice of parking spots on e2 or h3) Black will most likely ad­ vance ... d5, with decent "French" play. 6... c5!? 7.dc Wins a pawn and subsequently holds It's no longer clear how Black can onto the gain. Purtov played more cau­ win the pawn back. But the white king tiously against Remizov (Novosibirsk, hasn't taken refuge on the flank yet, and 1995): 7.Ci.Jh3 cd 8.cd �b4 9.f3 Ci.Jc6 the position isn't devoid of attack tar­ 10.11i'e2 d6 ll.lli'f2 �a5 12.0-0 �b6 gets - heightened caution was required. 13.Mac 1 0-0 14.Mfd1 1/i'e7 15.CiJ b3 gfc8 Instead of 16.11i'b6! lli'c8 17.Ci.Jd4 White 16.1t>hl Ci.Jb4 17.�bl. Then again, played routinely and yielded the advan­ Black's position, which is like a coiled tage to his opponent. spring, is capable of resisting the enemy 16.f3?! �b5 aggression. 17.lli'b6 1/i'd7 7... lli'c7 18.iif2 gfc8 8.b4 d6 19.f4 tt'lc6 9.a4 ba 20.�b3?! This is questionable. With the very McDonnell didn't notice the "long" strong 9 ...dc lO.ab cb ll.cb �xb4 the tactic or didn't calculate it to the end. material and the position have equal­ 20.Ma2 Mab8 21.11i'e3 iixb4! 22.�bl ized. was necessary, with chances of resis­ 10.11i'xa4+ Ci.Jbd7 tance. 11.cd �xd6 20 ... tt'lxb4! If Black takes on c3 the d6 pawn re­ 21.cb �xb4 mains alive - ll...l!i'xc3? 12.Ma3 1/i'cl+ 22.11i'd4 l!i'xd4 13.1t>e2 �xd6? 14.tt'lc4, with a win. 23.tt'lxd4 Ci.Jxe4

90 The St.George Defense

24.i,e3 l:Ic3 and blocking the chain would have been 25.liJxe4 l:Ixe3+ more accurate if it had been done differ­ 26.�f2 l:Ixe4 ently: 5 ...�xf3 6.VI!ixf3 tl:Jc6 7.�xc4 e6 27.tl:Jxb5 i,cS+ 8.VI!if4 d5 9.itb3 �b4+ 10.tl:Jc3 tl:Jge7, One way or another a loss can't with good play. be avoided. If 28.�fl, then 28 ...l:Ib8 In the variation 4.d5 e6 5.tl:Jf3i,b4+ 29.l:Ixa6 l:Ixb5. The king's flight to the 6.itd2 Vl!ie7 7.�xb4 Vl!ixb4+ 8.VIlid2 enemy front only hastened the con­ Vl!ixd2+ 9.tl:Jbxd2 be lO.de fe ll.itxc4 clusion: 28.�f3 lle3+ 29.�g4 l:Ixb3 White is preferable. Instead of 4 ...e6, 30.tl:Jc7 l:Ic8 31.tl:Jxa6 f5 + 32.�h4 undermining the pawn cabin from the ii.e7+ 33.�h5 g6+ 34.�h6 llg3!, and other direction is much more interesting mate on the next move can't be pre­ - with the help of 4 ...c6! The beautiful vented. "checkers" position deserves a diagram.

Let's switch to the contact lines on the third move. Firstly about the ad­ vance 3.c4. In reply to such a shameless seizing of space Black should continue his development without disrupting his pawn chain: 3 ...bc?! 4.ilxc4 e6 5.tl:Jc3 c6 6.d5! (pre-empts the prepared ...d5) 6 ...ed 7.ed tl:Jf6 8.tl:Jge2 V/!ic7i,b3 9. ii.b7 10.i,f4 Vllia5 11.0-0 ile7 12.VIlid3 0-0 13.llfdl l:Ie8 14.a3i,d 8 15.�c2 g6 16.b4 Vllib6 17.�b3 (Van Hoolandt - Lebel, Cannes, 2007) - Black's queen­ Covering the b7 bishop shouldn't side hasn't been mobilized and his king­ upset you, as the diagonal will inevitably side has been weakened. open up. On the other hand, the black After 3.c4 �b7 the attack on the e4 king is fe eling calmer. Remizov sug­ pawn fo rces White to decide: change the gests the variation 5.tl:Jc3cd 6.ed e6 7.cb structure in the center ( 4.e5 or 4.d5) or tl:Jf6 8.de fe 9.tl:Jf3 �c5, with sufficient defend the pawn (4.tl:Jd2or 4.f3). compensation fo r the pawn. In fact, the The rare move 4.e5 justified itself bishops are very attractive and the cen­ in the game Strand - Chetverik (Oslo, tral pawn pair is potentially strong. 2006): 4 ...bc 5.tl:Jf3 d5 6.ed cd 7.�xc4 e6 8.tl:Jc3 (8.d5!?) 8 ...�x f3 9.VIlixf3 d5 5. E. VOROBEV - B. SAVCHENKO lO.itb3tl:Jc 6? (10... tl:Jf 6 1 1.0-0 �d6 vir­ St. Petersburg, 2003 tually equalized the chances) ll.tl:Jxd5! llc8 12.tl:Jc3 Vllixd4 13.�e3 Vllif6 l.e4 a6 14.VIlie2ilb4 15.0-0 tl:Jge7 16.VIlixa6 0-0 2.d4 b5 17.l:Ia c 1, and there's no compensation 3.c4 �b7 fo r the pawn. Exchanging off the bishop 4.tl:Jd2

91 Chapter VII

Not a very active continuation. But tive away to Black: 8.0-0 lilf6 9 . .txd5 the e4 pawn is defended, and Black has 'i¥xd5 10.'i¥a4+ 'i¥b5 ll.'i¥c2 tllc6 to think about the fate of the b5 pawn. 12.Cile4 .te7 13 . .tf4 l':Ic8 14.l':Ifcl Cilb4 15.Cilxf6 + gf 16. 'i¥c4?! (16.'i¥d2 holds onto a minimal advantage) 16 ...Cild 3 17. 'i¥xb5+ ab 18.l':Ixc7 l':Ixc7 19 ..txc7 �d7 20 . .tg3Cilx b2 2l.l':Ibll':Ic8! 7.e5 7 . .td3 .te7 8.0-0 a5 9.l':Iel0-0 is a roughly equivalent continuation. Then Black can exchange off the light-squared bishops via a6 and close the center with ...d5. 7... GildS 8.0-0 .te7 4... be 9.l':Iel In the case of 4 ...b4 5.Cilgf3e6 6 . .td3 After 9 .td. 3 f5 !? 10.ef lilxf6 1l.'i¥c2 (and on ...c5 then d5) Black has local­ (Ippolito - Stripunsky, New Yo rk, 2002) ized achievements on the queenside, Black retained a satisfactory position by and after ...g5 - also on the kingside. means of ll...0-0 12.Cile4 tllxe4 13..txe4 But the battle in the center is hopelessly .txe4 14.'i¥xe4 Cilc6 15.d5 ed 16.'i¥xd5+ lost, and his position is firmly worse. As �h8. Without the committed 9 ...f5 you a result of a pawn sacrifice, 4 ...e6 5.cb can get by with the substitute 9 ...tll c6. Cilf6 6.e5 GildS, the compensation is probably insufficient.

s . .txc4 e6 5 ...Cilf 6?? is refuted by the double attack 6.'i¥b3. There have been prec­ edents! 6.Cilgf3 6.'i¥b3 isuseless here due to 6 ... Cilc6! (7.'i¥xb7? Cila5 costs White his queen). On 6.d5 Black successfully brings his army into the battle with the help of 6 ... .tc5 7.Cile2 lilf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.tllc3 ed lO.ed d6. 9 ... d6 6 ... tllf6 Savchenko immediately puts pres­ 6 ... d5 7.ed .txd5 doesn't complete­ sure on the e5 pawn. In the St. George ly equalize because of the weakness there's a high probability of an attack by on c7. Then again, in the game Jacko White on the kingside, and you shouldn't - Chetverik (Presov, 2004) eliminating always rush to castle. Here, on the other the pawn resulted in giving the initia- hand, after 9 ...0-0 10.Cile4 h6 an attack's

92 The St. George Defense

chances of success are insignificant. The 6. Y. SEIRAWAN - B. SPASSKY fa ct that reciprocal chances fo r Black USA vs. the Wo rld, (Rapid) 1990 aren't evident either is another matter. lO.tZle4 tZld7 l.e4 a6 ll.tZlfg5! de 2.d4 b5 After ll...h6 the knight sacrific­ 3.c4 i,b7 es 12.tZlxe6! fe 13.ed cd 14.tZlxd6+! 4.f3 be 1l.xd6 15J:Ixe6+ li,e7 16.li,xd5 li,xd5 The actual move-order in the game 17.'iVh5+'\£7[8 18.'iVxd5give White three was 1 d4 b5 2 e4 li,b73 f3 a6 4 c4 be. pawns for a piece and the initiative. 12.'iVh5 g6 13.'iVf3 gf8 Rationally fe aring fo r the fu ture of his king with 13 ...0-0 14. 'iVh3, Savchen­ ko leaves it in the center. 14.tZlxh7 ed Black loses the exchange in any case. It's better to give it up by means of 14 ... :i.h8 15.tZleg5 Mxh7 16.tZlxh7 ed 17.QJg5 i.xg5 18.li,xd5li,xd5 19.'iVxd5 Ji,f6. 15.tZleg5 tZlc5 16.QJxf8 i,xg5 Don't think that the 1Qth Wo rld 17.i,xg5 'iVxg5 Champion was holding back by ad­ 18.tZlh7 'iVd8 vancing his outside pawn so early in the 19.'iVg4 Q'lf6 game. The fact that Spassky didn't con­ 20.QJxf6+ 'iVxf6 sider it a sin in the decisive game of his 21.b4 tZla4 Wo rld Championship match with Petro­ 22.li,xe6! 'i£7f8 sian (although it was afterthat game that 23.i,c4 Md8 Petrosian kept his crown), completely 24.i,d3 ... complementsthe unofficial match ... Black doesn't even have a pawn fo r s.i,xc4 e6 the exchange, and his position looks More lively play occurs in the case worse. But he won anyway! of 5 ...d5. For example, 6.'iVb3! de 7.'iVxb7 tZlbd7 8.'iVc6 e5 9.de li,b4+ (in And so, the bland continuation the case of 9 ...tZle7 lO.'iVa4 tZlg6 ll.f4 4.tZld2 promises White slightly better i,c5 12.'iVxc4 li,xgl 13.Mxgl 'iVh4+ play. Doesn't the more natural defense 14.g3 1/;l!ixh2 15.i,e3 'iVxb2 16.i,d4 'iVb5 4.f3 promise even more? Now 4 ...b4 the queen won the pawns back with demonstrates the same indifference heroic efforts, but the chances didn't to White's center as with 4.tZld2, and equalize) lO.li,d2 tZle7 ll.'iVa4 li,c5 doesn't deserve a recommendation ei­ 12.f4 0-0 13.1/;l!ixc4 'iVb8 14.tZlc3 l/;l!lxb2 ther. Let's turnto 4 ...bc. 15.Mbl l/;l!la3 16.Mb3 tZlb6 17.'iVe2'iVa5

93 Chapter VII

18.1i'lf3 �ad8 19.g3 �d7 20.\£7fl �fd8 In the structure that has arisen c5 is 2l.ii,elii,b4 22.\£7g2 (Pataki - Nurkic, the best square fo r the king's bishop. It Tu zla, 2003). White has made his king was also worth establishing it here, be­ safe, and the compensation for the pawn fo re Seirawan could interfere. is in question. 8.ii,e3 aS 6.V:Vb3 9.1i'lc3 li'la6 The queen thrust is a persistent idea in 10.de fe the line 4 ...bc. It enabled the creation of the miniature Euwe - Abrahams (Bour­ nemouth, 1939): 6.1i'lc3d5 7.1/li¥b3li'lc 6? (7 ...de is better, in the spirit of the game Pataki - Nurldc) 8.ed li'lxd4 9.1/li¥xb7 �b8 10.1/li¥xa6 �a8. Black naively be­ lieved in the mechanism of perpetual pursuit ofthe queen, but ll.ii,b5+\£7e 7 12.d6+! dispelled the illusion. It's worth resorting to the advance ...d5 a little later: 6 ...1i'lf 6 7.1i'lge2 d5 8.1/li¥b3�a7 (a temporary inconvenience) 9.ed ed 10.ii,d3c5 ll.dc li'lbd7 12.ii,e3 ll.eS li'lxc5 13.1/li¥c2 �a8 14.0-0 ii,d6 15.1i'lb5! Instead of ll.li'lge2 and 12.0-0 the (Drozdovskij - Karanda, Kiev, 2003) American opens up the long diagonal, 15 ...ab 16.ii,xc5 0-0 17.b4. Although which is dubious out of tactical consid­ even here White's chances should be erations. preferred. 11... a4!? 6... '�liVeS Spassky was presented with an op­ The example ofVorobev - Savchen­ portunity to start complications with ko suggests that 6 ...1i'lc 6!? is available ll...li'lg4! 12.ii,f4 ii,c5 (and then 13... and probably stronger than defending the li'le3) or 12... g5!? 13.ii,xg5 li'lxe5 bishop. After 7.1i'le2 li'la5 8.1/li¥c3li'lx c4 14.ii,f6 li'lxc4 15.1/li¥xc4 �g8. But the 9.1/li¥xc4 d5 10.1/li¥a4+ 'iliVd7 11.1/li¥xd7+ interimattack doesn't spoil anything, as \£7xd7 12.Lllbc3 White can count on on 12.1i'lxa4 the continuation 12... 1i'ld 5 only a minimal advantage. 13.ii,f2 ii,b4+ 14.1i'lc3 ii,xc3+ 15.bc 7.d5 li'lf4 gives good play fo r the pawn. After this game only 7.1i'le2 was en­ 12.1/li¥d1 li'lg8?! countered. On 7 ... 1i'lc6 the potential Why on earth be so passive?! 12 ... bishop exchange after ...li'la 5 prevents li'lg4! 13.ii,f4 g5 or 13... ii,c 5 as before 8.ii,d2. The black pieces don't have the led to a double-edged game. strength to deploy within the framework 13.1i'lge2 a3 of the existing possibilities; the position 14.�b1 li'le7 is cramped. 15.0-0 li'lfS 7... li'lf6 16.ii,f2 ab

94 The St. George Defense

17.S,xb2 ii.c5 ter, preventing me from castling) 16 ... 18.'i¥d2 0-0 ii.xf3 17.ii.xf3 tllxf3+ 18.gf0-0 19.�e4 19.Cl'lg3 ii.xf2+ 'i¥f7 20.ii.g3be , and Black won quickly 20.'i¥xf2 and easily. White blundered with her The white pieces are positioned sig­ castling choice - after 11. 'iYd3! 0-0 nificantly more actively. Subsequently 12.0-0-0 de 13.tlld5 there's a solid ad­ Seirawan exchanged queens unsuccess­ vantage on her side. Black shouldn't try fully and suffered a defeat on the 581h to be too original; in the case of 5 ...ed move. It is worth noting that Seirawan 6.'i¥xd4tll c6 7.'i¥d2b4 it's difficult fo r and Spassky contested the position af­ White to bring her queen's knight into ter 1 d4 b5 twice more at the same event the game. (this time in Blitz games; one win fo r 5... f5!? Seirawan and a draw). Spassky clearly had fa ith in Black's chances!

Having concluded the conversation about 3.c4 on a high champion's note, we risk missing the most extravagant line of the St. George.

7. TIAN, TIAN - M. CHETVERIK Budapest, 2001

l.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 The right way to root the attention of 3.c4 ii.b7 players and spectators at the tournament 4.13 e5!? to your board is to reach the position in S.cb the diagram! Remizov, in the analysis Two more possibilities require study. that I depended on, subtly perceived the On 5.de Black takes back on e5, sta­ hidden tactical nuances: after clearing bilizing the queenside (5 ...b4 6.ii.e3 the long diagonal and the fo urth rank �h4+ 7.g3 'i¥h5and 8 ... 'i¥xe5), or by the black pieces work very productively. sacrificing the b-pawn (5 ...tll c6 6.cb ab 6.ef 7.ii.xb5 tllxe5). There probably isn't A speedy development of the queen­ anything fo r him to fe ar. The continu­ side, 6.ii.e3fe 7.tllc3, doesn't solve the ation 5.ii.e3 didn't have any success in problems with the kingside - Black con­ the game Chorvatova - Chetverik (Hlo­ tinues 7 ...'i¥h4+! 8.g3 �e7, with good hovec, 2000): 5 ...f5 6.eftllh6 7.de tllxf5 play. After 6.de!? fe 7.tllc3 ii.b4 8.�d4

8.ii.f2 ii.b4+9. tllc3 'i¥e7 10.f4 d6 (10.. . \ it isn't clear whether the queen should tlld6!?, intending tlld6e4) ll.tllf3 de go to e7 immediately or after 8 ...'i¥h4+ 12.fe tlld7 13.ii.e2 ii.xc3+ 14.bc tllxe5 9.g3. Evaluating the irrational positions 15.0-0 S,d8 16.'i¥c2?! (16.'i¥b3 is bet- that arise isn't too easy fo r a computer

95 Chapter VII

\ brain. Black isn't as bad as Rybka thinks Time trouble had crept up on us, and he is! Black decided to fo rce the game. There 6 ... �h4+ was nothing wrong with the restrained 7.g3 Ji,b4+ 17... tll d6!?, of course. 8.iLd2 18.lllxh7 S:h8 On 8.'�f2!? Remizov suggests a vari- 19.tllg5 tllxg3 ation that wins the exchange, 8 ...�xd4+ 20.tllti+ c;i;e7 9.�xd4 ed 10.lll e2 lllf6 (?!) ll.tllxd4 21.lllxh8 Jlc5 12.Ji,e3tll g4+ 13.fg iLxhl l4.lllc3 iLb7 15.S:cl 0-0. If we continue the analysis, then after 16.tlld5!! iLxd4 17.tlle7+ c;i}fl18 .1i.xd4 c;i;xe7 19.S:xc7 iLd5 20.b6 Black is a rook up, but his fate isn't enviable. While with lO... iLc5 ll.b4 iLb6 12.iLb2 d3+ 13.tlld4 lllh6 the chances are roughly equal. White can count on an advantage by replac­ ing 10.tlle2 with lO.iLd2 (lO... iLx d2 ll.lllxd2 ab 12.iLxb5 lllh6 13.tlle2 lllxf5 14.S:hcl, with a trump in the fo rm of an outside passed pawn). There followed 21...tllgxe2 22. 8... �xd4 tllg6+ c;i)f6 23.S:xc7 iLc6 24.lllh4 S:h8 9.1i.xb4 �xb4+ 25.lllg2 tllg3 26.hg S:xhl+ 27. c;i)f2 10.�d2 �xd2+ c;i;e6, and the game was drawn very ll.tllxd2 lllh6 quickly. A superficial glance at the ll...ab 12 . .ihb5 tlle7 is a little more variation 21...S:xh8 22.S:xc7 iLc6 precise, with good potential fo r the 23.hg S:xhl + 24.1i.fl S:h2!fr ightens us pawn trio. off that choice - White is a pawn up, 12.S:cl c;i;d8 and also has an advanced passed pawn. 13.lllh3?! Nevertheless, due to the activity of the By breaking up the chain with 13.b6! black pieces the Chinese woman would cb 14.tllc4, the Chinese player insured still have had to work to achieve equal­ herself against any problems. ity. 13... ab Without pronouncing a finalverdict 14.a3 lllc6 on the advance 3.c4, let's switch to the It's difficult to decide which of the undermining move 3.a4. It makes clos­ knights to send to the center. 14... lll xf5 er contact with the main lines, as a4 is 15.iLxb5 tlld4 16.1i.e2 S:f8 is also at­ a tried and tested weapon in the battle tractive fo r Black. against the St. George. On 3 ...b4 an ad­ lS.iLxbS llld4 vance of the c-pawn one or two squares 16.Ji,e2 lllhxfS forward suggests itself above all. This

17.tllg5 gf8 action is associated with taking en pas-

96 The St.George Defense

sant, of course. That doesn't inspire be­ seizing the initiative. But Basman twist­ cause of 4 ...bc 5.bc e6 6.l1Jf3 lZ'lf6 7.e5 ed things here, too: 6.lZ'ld2 e6 7.�xb5 l1Jd58. c4 lZ'lb49.�e 2 �e7 10.lZ'lc3,or, f5 s:�e2 lZ'lf6 9.li,d3 c5 10.l1Jgf3 c4 even more likely, because of 5.lZ'lxc3. ll.j_xc4 fe 12.lZ'le5 j_d6 13.c3 0-0 On 4.c3 the response 4 ...�b7 5.�d3 14.0-0 Wi/c715 .f4 (Chandler - Basman, lllf6 6.�e2 e6 is good by comparison, London, 1979). White just had to bring and with 4.c4 there's at least the rather his queen's bishop into the battle, and sad continuation 4 ...c5 5.d5 d6, as the the fate of the romantic would be a fo re­ bishop hasn't got onto the long diago­ gone conclusion. nal yet. 5.l1Jf3 The main reply 3 ...�b7 offers White After 5.ba l1Jxa6 Black could rightly the choice of 4.ab, 4.lZ'ld2, 4.f3 and leave his knight under fire as long as the 4.�d3, with a separate example fo r each g2 square was unprotected. Potentially of these moves. In the event of 4.d5 (as his chances are even a little better be­ with 3.c4) the response 4 ...c6 isn't bad, cause of his pawn superiority in the cen­ but it's even better to play an undermin­ ter. 5.d5!? is more interesting, disengag­ ing move after 4 ...lZ'lf 6 (5.ab l1Jxe4 is ing the bishop from the rook and thereby probably better fo r Black). freezing the queenside. In the example variation 5 ...e6 6.lZ'lc3 j_b4 7.j_d2 8. Z. JONAS - M. CHETVERIK �xc3 8.j_xc3 lZ'lf6 9.ba l1Jxd5 10.�d4 Ve szprem, 1998 lZ'lf6 ll.lZ'lf3 White keeps his passed pawn and has hopes of an advantage. l.e4 a6 Here 9 ...l1Jx a6? didn't work because of 2.d4 bS 10.f3li,xc2 ll.�d2! (but not ll.�xc2? 3.a4 j_b7 lZ'lb4!). 4.ab 5... e6 Now and in the coming moves I didn't want to exchange rooks after... ab. But with 6.ba!? j_b7 7.a7 l1Jc6 8.j_d3 efforts to avoid an exchange are futile. 6.lZ'lbd2 i.b7 7.�e2 lZ'lf6 8.0-0 �e7 9.ba �xa6 Celebrating the fa ct that his partner had "given in", Black made a slight mis­ calculation in a long variation. 9 ...l1Jx a6 is simpler.

4 •.. �xe4 10.�xa6 Mxa6 Meatier than 4 ...ab 5.Mxa8 �xa8 - ll.Mxa6 l1Jxa6 in a symmetrical structure Black has to 12.�e2 �aS fight to equalize without real chances of 13.lZ'lb3 0-0

97 Chapter VII

14.�g5 �b7 4.tZ'ld2 15.tZ'le5 Having prevented the pin 15.l"hl, I planned to kick the knight out of the center, but on 15... d6? I saw the zwisch­ enzug 16.tZ'la5 here. The reserve of sta­ bility in Black's position is very big, and nothing terrible happened. 15... l:l:d8 16.l:l:a1 tZ'lb4 17.�c4 h6 18.�h4 Jonas hadn't realized that the next edging out of the bishop would exclude 4 •.. ct'lf6 it from play, and that that was more sig­ A game against Semenyuk turned nificant than weakening the kingside. out very badly fo r Remizov (Novosi­ Exchanging on f6 preserved a slight ad­ birsk, 1996): 4 ...{{5 ?! 5.dc e6 6.b4 ct'lf6 vantage. 7.ab a5? 8.�b2 ab, and the simplest 18... gS here is 9.l:l:xa8 �xa8 lO.�al �b7 19.�g3 £2fd5 ll.�a7 �c8 12.�e5, winning a piece. 20.l:l:a5 d6 Sacrificing the c-pawn is incorrect in 21.tZ'ld3 <£c6 this specific case, as the hanging white 22.l:l:a1 �f6 pawns can be easily defended or given 23.c3 up without regret. Not falling into the trap (23.,�a5? In the branch 4 ...b4 catastrophe lay l:l:a8!). in wait fo r Alexandria against Lputian 23... (Biel, 1997): 5.c4 be 6.bc a5 7.�a3 d6 24.l:l:xa8+ �xa8 8.�b3 l:l:a7 9.ctJgf3 e6 10.�b5+ ct'ld7 25.�b5 r:;!;g7 ll.d5 ed 12.ed g6 13.0-0 �g7 14.c4 26.f4? tZ'le3 r�gf6 ?? 15.�e3+. We can easily explain 27.�f2?? tZ'lxd4 the blunder in an unhappy position - it's Zolt had fo rgotten about the queen wrong fo r the rook to vegetate on a7, and on a8 so completely that fo r a couple of it doesn't usually go there. Play that goes minutes he couldn't get his head around according to the game Zaja - Tomescu it! Then, naturally, he resigned. (Reggio Emilia, 2001) is more solid: 5 ... c5 6.d5 e5 7.g3 d6 8.�g2 g6 9.ct'le2 �g7 9. D. FROLOV - D. KUTUZOV 10.0-0 ct'le7 ll.f4 ct'ld7 12.ct'lf3 �c7. Novosibirsk, 2002 It's very difficult fo r White to fight his way through the pawn obstructions, al­ 1.e4 a6 though Black doesn't have any recipro­ 2.d4 bS cal chances, it's true. 3.a4 �b7 5.e5

98 The St.George Defense

In the St. George the undermin­ ing move a4 shouldn't be met with the exchange ...ba, as lines open in White's favor. But on 5.f3 fo llowing Remizov we can approve 5 ...ba!? The "principled" 6.c4 collides with 6 ...tll c6!, and it's in­ convenient to defend the central pawn. Mt er 7.e5 tllg8 8.tlle4 e6 and then most likely ...f6 Black has nothing to com­ plain about. 5... tlldS 6.tllb3 It isn't possible to win a pawn here! 9.tllc5 The duel Ninov - Chetverik (Gien, White couldn't take the pawn im­ 2004) unfolded in an unusual way: 6.ab mediately, of course, because of 9 ... ab 7Jha8 �xa8 8Jixb5(?) tllc3(?) 9.bc �xc3+!, but 9.tllbd2 �e7 10.Mxa4 0-0 j,xg2 10.f3 e6 ll.tlle4 (ll.�f2! �xhl ll.tllc4 is quieter and more precise. 12.tlle2 took dut the bishop without 9... Ji,xcS adventures) ll...�h4+ 12.tllg3 �xhl lO.dc Wlfe7 13.�e2 c6 14.�d3 c5 15.�f2 cd 16.cd ll.!::xa4 �xcS Jib4+ 17.�fl (on 17.�dl I intended l2.!::g4 [£"b6 17 ...�g2!? 18.�xg2 �xd4, with some l3.�e3 �xf3 chances) 17... tll c6 18.�e3 (18.�b2!?), l4.gf and now 18 ... �c3! maintained approxi- After exchanging queens, 14.1ixc5 mate equality, as 19.0 le2? is beauti­ @ xd l 15.�xdl tllc6 16. Mxg7 tllxe5, at fullyref uted by the variation 19 ...�h3+ a stretch the bishops compensate fo r be­ 20.�gl �el! 21.�fl �xfl+ 22.�xfl ing a pawn down. �xg3 (given by Ninov). I had lost sight 14... �xeS of the simple continuation 8 ...tll e3! (in­ l5.Mg5 fS ? stead of 8 ...tll c3?) 9.fe �xg2, and the Ignoring his opponent's zwischen­ bishop successfully leaves the corner. zug; 15 ...�f 6 16.Mhgl tllc6 17.Mxg7 h6 6... e6 is completely playable. 7.tllt3 �b4+ t6.f4! �as 8.c3 l7.Mxg7 tlldS 8.�d2 ba 9.Mxa4 �xd2+ 10.tllbxd2 l8.Mhgl cS doesn't create perceptible problems fo r l9.�g2 Black, but on the other hand it doesn't The extra pawn can't console Black permit tactical liberties either. Anyway, - his queenside is dozing and his king Black decided not to go into the compli­ is in danger. In the variation 19... c4 cated variation 8 ...tll xc3!? 9.bc �xc3+ 20.�xd5 �xd5 2l.�xd5 ed 22.Mg8+ 10.�d2 �xal ll.�xal. Mxg8 23.Mxg8+ �f7 24.Mc8 getting 8... ba!? disentangled isn't on the cards.

99 Chapter VII

19 ... �d8 file. In the meticulously-prepared line 5.ab 20.�xd5 ed f5 6.efli'lh67.de li'lxf5 the variation 8.�f4 21.�xd5 �al+ �c5 9.li'lc3 ab 10.J:.:l,xa8 �xa8 ll.li'lxb5 22.�e2 �xb2+ 0-0 12.li'lh3(with a highly likely move on 23.Wf3 J:.:l,a7 foot by the white king to the queenside) 24.�xc5 �b7+ doesn't promise Black compensation 25.�g3 hS fo r the two pawns. And how to play after 26.�h4 li'lc6 6.de!? fe 7.li'lc3... ? It isn't surprising that 27.�d6 J:.:l,e8 4 ...e5 has hardly found any supporters. 28.J:.:l,g8 S.c4 The white king fe els like it's on a The next example fo r 5.�e3 is nota­ feather pillow on h4, while its opposite ble fo r the colorful names of the players: number is facing the prospect of a termi­ Raetsky - Ghuloom Sale m (Abu Dhabi, nal sleep. Black resigned ... 2005). In 1990 my co-author unsuccess­ fully tried playing 1...a6 and has been 10. J. LEVITT - D. HOWELL somewhat disparaging of the St. George Staunton Memorial, London, 2006 ever since. Ghuloom Salem is that same Arab personage who suddenly started l.e4 a6 creating unbelievable miracles against 2.d4 bS strong Grandmasters. -A suspicion arose The actual move-order in the game (which quickly transformed into a cer­ was 1 d4 b5 2 e4 Bb7 3 f3 a6 .. tainty) that his Eastern headgear was 3.a4 �b7 hiding a modem means of communica­ 4.f3 tion with a powerful computer that was lurking somewhere in the background. To avoid new scandals the organizers in the Emirates, according to rumors, now pay their "prodigy" not to participate in tournaments!And so, the bland but pure draw Raetsky - Fritz (or some other iron monster): 5 ...d5!? 6.li'ld2 li'ld7 7.e5 c5 8.f4 e6 9.li'le2 li'lh6 10.ti'lf3 �e7 ll.g3 0-0 12.�h3 a5 13.0-0 �a6 14.J:.:l,f2 ti'lf5 15.�xf5 ef 16.dc li'lxc5 17.�xc5 �xc5 18.li'led4 J:.:l,e8 19.�g2 �d7. 5... eS!?

4 •.. b4 After eliminating the tension on the Remizov published extensive analyses queenside the decisive advance in the that presented the continuation 4 ...e5!? in center gained strength. Levitt doesn't a very winning light. Evidently it's less jus­ want to play with an extra pawn, so as tified here than with 3.c4, because of the not to lag in development after 6.de li'lc6 activity of the white rook on the outside 7.f4 �c5 8.li'ld2 f6 .

100 The St.George Defense

6.tt:Je2 fS !? 19.�a5 �d8 Howell is clearly "going with the 20.�g5 'iYxgS flow". 6 ...ed 7.tZ:lxd4 'iYf6 8.tZ:lb3tt:Jc 6 is 21.hg tt:Jxa1 still stronger, with comfortable equality. 22.gf �xf6 7.ef 'iYh4+ 23.itf5 0-0 8.g3 'iYf6 24.�d3 ite5 9.d5 25.(4 �f6 Not covering the long diagonal fo r Capitalizing on being the exchange long enough; 9.'iYd3!?ed lO.tZ:ld2,with up is a matter of straightforward tech­ the idea of tZ:le4, would have fo rced nique. Black to rack his brains. 9.... 'iYxfS 11. Y. GOZZOLI - M. CHETVERIK 10.tZ:ld2 tZ:lf6 La Fere, 2006 ll.h4 c6 l.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.a4 itb7 4.�d3

12.dc?! Here and later White doesn't even try to develop the queenside (12.g4!? �g6 13.tZ:lb3). An army that is cut in half isn't battle-ready! Now play flowsin a normal direction 12... tZ:lxc6 fo r the St. George. 13.�h3 'iYd3 4... e6 14.�b3 �g6 5.�f3 c5 Exchanging queens is already very Sometimes Black prefers 5 ...b4, good (14 ...e4!? 15.'iYxd3 ed 16.tZ:lf4 so as not to deal with an exchange of �d6), but Howell hasn't extracted ev­ rooks. Usually after 6.0-0 c5 7.tZ:lbd2 erything from the rniddlegame yet. cd 8.tZ:lxd4 there's a grafting with a rare 15.'iYe3 �e7 branch of the Paulsen System ( l.e4 c5 16.0-0 tt:Jd4 2.tt:Jf3e6 3.d4 cd 4.tZ:lxd4 a6 5.�d3 b5 17. Wh2 tt:Jc2 6.0-0 �b7 7.a4 b4 8.tt:Jd2). The breach­ 18.'iYxe5 d6 es on the queenside demand careful

101 Chapter VII

play from Black. Then again, in the tLlf6 8.e5 tLld5 9.tLlbd2 b4 10.0Je4 Sie7 game Predojevic - M. Popovic (Plovdiv, ll.tll fd 2!? 0-0 12.tll c4 f5 (Black is still 2008) he gradually managed to over­ prepared to tolerate one strong knight, come the difficulties: 8 ...tLlc 6 9.tLlxc6 but not two!) 13.ef tLlxf6 14.tllxf6 + �xc6 10.b3 tLlf6 ll.Sib2 Sie7 12.�e2 Sixf6 15.tLld6?! Sid516. tll e4 tLlc6 17.c4 a5 13.l:tad1 �c7 14.tLlf3 (it was prob­ be 18.bc tLle5 19.Sia3 Sie7 20.tLld6?? ably worth sending the knight to c4) (an exchange of bishops continued the 14 ... 0-0 15.tLld4Sib7 16.c;t>h1�f 4 17.f3 battle, although also under Black's dic­ d5 18.e5 tLld7 19.Sib5 lil c5. tates) 20 ...Sixd6 2l.Sixd6 �g5 22.f3 6.dc � e3+, and White resigned (Schiff - In the encounter Sessler - Chetverik Chetverik, Linz, 2007). White's actions (Bad Ems, 2008) after 6.ab ab 7J::xa8 before the rash maneuver 0Jc4-d6-e4 Sixa8 8.dc the weak amateur offered were completely rational, and 15.�g4 peace. It's lamentable that these kinds of tLlc6 16.iH4 with a subsequent Sid6 re­ positions with an exchange of rooks pro­ tained the initiative. vide a weighty basis fo r the blackmailing Instead of ll.tLlfd2 Khalifman rec­ of more sophisticated opponents. Sub­ ommends ll.c4 be 12.bc, somewhat sequently White's small advantage only overestimating the strength of the knight grew: 8 ...Sixc5 9.�e2 b4 10.0-0 tLlf6 invasion on d6 after 12... tLlc 6 13.Sia3 ll.tLlbd2 d5 12.e5 tLlfd7 13.tLlb3 Sie7 0-0. The knight isn't all-powerful, and 14.tLlfd4 tLlc6 15.tLlxc6 Sixc6 16.tLld4 its support on e5 is shaky (especially af­ � c7, and now the most precise is 17.l:te 1 ter ...f6 ). tLlc5 18.�g4 g6 19.Sih6. 8.tLlbd2

6... SixeS 8.tllg5!? �f6 9.�h5 g6 10.�e2 tll c6 7.0-0 11.tLl f3 d6 (here the pawn is subjected to Against Cebalo (Yugoslavia, 1987) danger; it was worth thinking about 12... Drasko started a battle fo r the light �g7, with a subsequent knight move squares, skipping castling: 7. � e2 b4 out to e7 or f6 ) 12.tLlbd2 tLlge7 13.tLlc4 8.tLlbd2 d6 9.e5 tLld7 lO.ed �xd6 0-0 14.Sig5 �g7 15.�d2 l:i:fe8 16.�f4 ll.tLlc4 Sic7 12.Sie4 Sixe4 13.�xe4 d5 (Zelcic - Jeric, Lj ubljana, 2000) tLlgf6 14.�c6?! (most likely not noticing 17.Sif6!? g5!? 18.tLlxg5 tLlg6 19.�f3 Black'ssubtle l61h move) 14 ...0-0 15.Sig5 tlld4! 20.Sixd4 Sixd4 21.tLld6 is more h6 16.Sih4 �b8! 17.a5 l:tc8 18.Sixf6 aggressive, with complications that are tLlxf6 19.�a4 �b7 20.tLle3 Sif4 2l.�b3 presumably favorable fo r White. Sixe3 22.fe �e4 23.0-0-0 l:tc5 24.l:td4 8... dS � g6 - White has weak pawns and an Instead of blocking the center 8 ... unstably-positioned king. Instead of the tll c6 9.�e2 d6 10.tllb3 (lO.tLlc4 tLla5 exchange ofbishops 12.Sie4 it was worth ll.Sie3 Sixe3 12.tllxe3 tll f6 13.e5 de castling anyway. 14.tllxe5 �c7) 10 ...Sib6 ll.Sie3 tll f6 7... b4 12.l:i:fdl tLlg4 (it's better to exchange For now Black has no reason to bishops on your own initiative) 13.Sixb6 provoke the automatic thrust e5: 7 ... �xb6 14.a5 �a7 15.Sic4 l:td8 16.h3 tllf6

102 The St. George Defense

17.e5 de 18Jhd8+ t,IJxd8 19.t,IJxe5 0-0 17.VIIif4 g5 20.�a4 is playable. Little by little Stajcic 18.VI/ig4 d4?! outplayed Csom (Budapest, 1993); then Not a very tenacious defense! In the again, the affair ended in a draw. case of 18... �g8!? taking on b4 is unfa­ 9.t,IJb3 t,IJd7 vorable because of the deflection 19 ... 10.e5 Vl/ic7 h5, and on 19.VIIih5 the move 19 ...g4 is relevant. True, 19.h3 creates the un­ pleasant threat of20.VIIih5 - it's very dif­ ficult fo r Black to defend. 19.VIIih5 �e7

ll.a5 A typical breaking-up of the chain fo r the St. George. Often it's perfectly good, but with the presence of the obvi­ ous alternative Il.t,IJxc5 t,IJxc5 12.�d2 20.tLlxg5! t,IJdxe5 t,IJxd3 13.cd a5 14.�cl Vllid8 15.t,IJd4, In the case of 20 ...hg 2l.�xg5+ f6 that's hardly the case here. 22.ef+ -;td6 23.'�'g4 e5 24.f4 the execu­ 11... t,IJe7 tion of the black king takes place in a 12.�el t,IJc6 very short time. 13.t,IJxc5 t,IJxc5 21/i'xf7!? 14.�d2 h6 If we strictly stick to the truth, the On 14... 0-0?! Gozzoli wouldn't have punctuation marks should change plac­ failed to sacrifice - 15.�xh7+! �xh7 es. Now the win is more complicated, 16.t,IJg5+ �g8 17.VIIih5 �fe8 18.VIIih7+ while 2l.LZ'e4 concluded the battle. �f8 19.VIIih8+ �e7 20.VI/ixg7. Undoubt­ 21... t,IJxf7 edly a favorable enterprise, although also 22.�xe6+! �f8? not a winning one. According to Rybka, accepting the 15.VI/ie2 �c8 rook sacrifice loses in all variations, 16.VIIie3 t,IJd7?! the most inventive of which is 22 ... Black's trump card was the possibili­ �xe6 23.�el + t,IJce5 24.VIIif5 + �d5 ty of exchanging off the dangerous light­ 25.�xb4 �he8 26.f4 �cd8 27.fe t,IJxe5 squared bishop. This should have been 28.VIIie4+ �e6 29.VIIig6+ �d5 30.c4+! done now (16 ...t,IJx d3 17.cd 0-0 18.VIIif4 de 3l.VI/ie4+ �e6 32.VIIif5 + �d5 33.bc Vl/ie7)or after 16... VI/ie7 17.t,IJd4. �c6 34.�e4+ �b5 35.�bl �c4

103 Chapter VII

36.Jic2!Gozzoli didn't have much time ly-fledged play after 4 ...h6 5.�h4 c5!? left at his disposal, so it was worth fo rc­ 6.dc �c8! (here the queen doesn't suf­ ing him to work a little. fe r when �g3 is played) 7.llld2 (being a 23.:!lael pawn up in the variation 7.b4?! g5 8.�g3 There's no shield from the f7 knight, Jlg79.c3 a5 doesn't bring White joy) 7 ... of course ... �xc5 8.llle2 g5 9.Jlg3 Jlg7 lO.c3 lllc6 23... :!ld8 11.0-0 lllf6 l2.a4 b4 (evidently 12 ...0-0 24.�c5+ :!ld6 13.ab ab 14.�b3 b4 is even more sol­ 25.Jlf4 id) 13.:!lcl 0-0 14.cb �xb4 15.f4 lllg4 Black resigned. 16.lllc4 llla5 17.�d2 �xd2 18.lllxd2 lllc6 (18... �x b2 19.:!lc5 allows unnec­

12. Z. SZABO- M. CHETVERIK essary activity) 19.h3 gf 20.�xf4 lllge5 Gyongyos, 1998 2l.Jlbllll g6. l.e4 a6 4... e6 2.d4 b5 With 4 ... lllf6 it's necessary to reckon 3.Jld3 with 5.e5. The knight isn't as active on e2 The most predictable reply to the St. as on f3, but on the other hand the path George. All measures are postponed un­ fo r the f- pawn is open. The latter cir­ til the completion of development. cumstance helped Ulibin to energetical­ 3... Jlb7 ly demolish Beck (Budapest, 1989): 5 ... - 4.LZ'le2 tlld5 6.0-0 e6 7.a4 ba 8.:!lxa4 lllb4 9.Jlc4 (the alternative is an unusual knight po­ sition fo r the system after 9.lllf4 !? lllxd3 10.lllxd3) 9 ...Jie 4 10.Jlb3 Jle7 ll.Jld2 llld5?! (the signal fo r a pawn attack; the knight should have been reinforced by means of ll...a5) 12.lllg3 Jlg6 13.f4 lllb6 14.f5! ef 15.lllxf5 Jif8? (15... 0-0 16.lllxe7+ �xe7 17.Jlb4d6 wasn't lost yet) 16.�f3 f6 17.:!lel, and Black ceased his resistance. 5.0-0 c5 6.c3 tllf6 Almost always associated with rein­ 7.f3 fo rcing the center by means of f3 . We Grandmaster Ovsejevitsch shuffied saw this setup in the line 3.Jle3, and the knights in an unusual way and won now priority is given to mobilizing the almost as quickly as Ulibin did: 7.llld2 kingside. lllc6 8.a3 :!lc8 9.tll f3 Jie7 10.lllg3 0-0?! There's definite sense in 4.Jlg5, ll.e5 tlld5 12.dc Jixc5? 13.Jlxh7+! to double the opponent's pawns on Wxh7 14.lllg5+ Wg8 15.�h5 :!le8 lllf6 . In the game Te rek - Chetverik 16.�xfl+Wh8 17.�h5+Wg8 18.�h7+ (Gyongyos, 2004) Black obtained fu l- Wf8 19.�h8+ We7 20.�xg7 mate

104 The St. George Defense

( Ovsejevitsch - Koeffner, Erbendorf, Rybka suggests the typical battering 2006). The most important rule of the ram fo r these kinds of positions: ...h5- St. George was violated -before moving h4-h3 (if you're able to go that far). your king to the flank, look around! 12... Black, though, decided not to neglect �c7 prevented the standard sacrifice, castling. and with the interim exchange lO ...cd 14.�d3 d6 ll.cd castling is completely safe. 15.�b2 tlld7 7... tllc6 16.tlld2 �f6 8.�c2 17.f4 g6 In the case of exchanging off the 18.l:l:t2 �h4!? light-squared bishop only blocking play 19J�t3 0-0 promises White any hope. But in the 20.l:l:h3 �d8 variation 8.�e3 cd 9.cd tllb4 10.tllbc3 21.l:l:fl fS ! tllxd3 ll.�xd3 b4 12.tll a4 �c6 13.�c2 22.�bl �f6 ::lc8 14.tllc5 �b5 15.�d2 d5 16.e5 tlld7 23.�g3 �g7 the "French" bishop looked out fr om be­ The strong Hungarian master was al­ hind the pawn stockade, and there are no most outplayed! But time trouble inter­ problems. In the game Liasota - Chet­ fered, and in the end White celebrated verik (Harkany Te nkes Cup, 2000) there success. fo llowed 12.tlldl �e7 13.d5 �b8! 14.de fe 15.tll d4 (15.� f4 prevented the creation l.e4 a6 ofadark-squared ) 15... �d6 16.h3 2.d4 bS (16.g3? �xg3! 17.hg �xg3+ 18.�hl 3.�d3 �b7 tllxe4! 19.fe �h4+ 20.�gl �xe4 - with 4.tllt3 the bishops on the board jokes are bad!) 16 ...0-0 17.g4? (17.tllf2 provides a solid defense) 17... �2+ 18.�hl li';xe4! Now the defense collapses, and White resigned right on time. Rarely in 1...a6 do you manage to extract so much fr om the g l­ a7 diagonal; you can't do it without all possible help from your partner! 8... l:l:c8 9.a3 �b6 lO.�hl If 10.�e3, then lO ... cd ll.cd d5!?, and White can't close the position. And We 've come to an important fo rk in so 12... de brings the bishop to life. the road with the signposts "4... e6" and 10... cd "4 ...tll f6 ". Let's obey the signs in turn. ll.cd tlla5 4... e6 12.b3 b4 Up until now transpositions of 13.a4 �e7 moves have hardly bothered us, but now

105 Chapter VII they provide no respite! Every new move 7.0-0 brings new nuances to the position, but The clamp on the center 7.e5 can if White varies his play without worry­ be "opened" by two equivalent meth­ ing about it, Black will sometimes find ods. Firstly, 7 ...d5 8.ed Lllf6 ! (to stop the himself teetering between life and death. knight from going to e4). Secondly, 7 ... Yo u can't continue l...a6 and then act f5 8.ef tllxf6 9.�g5 �b4!? 10.0-0 �xc3 lackadaisically! ll.bc Vl/ic7 12.1iJd4 0-0 (12... VI/ixc3 13.�xf6 gf 14.VI/ih5+ 'I!Je7 15.VI/ih6 'I!Jt7 13. A. ZOZULIA - V. BAKLAN 16.�h5+ 'I!Je7leads 1to a repetition of We rther, 2004 moves, and consequently a small moral victory fo r Black) 13.a4 e5 (winning a l.e4 a6 pawn with the help of 13 ...ba 14.Mxa4 '2.d4 b5 �xc3 15.�xf6 Mxf6 16.VIIih5 g6 17.VI/ie5 3.�d3 �b7 is risky) 14.,ixf6 �xf6 15.VIIih5! g6 (15... 4.Lllf3 e6 ed? 16.:fel �c6 17.ab is already more 5.ClJc3 than risky) 16.�g5 'l!it7 17.VIIih6 'l!ig8.In Development that is uncharacteristic the game Kosztolanczi - Chetverik (Rev­ ofthe St. George makes definitesense at fulop, 1998) White wasn't satisfied with a this point. Now the logical edging out of draw, but 18J:�ael!? is very fa r from a win the knight with 5 ...b4 is hardly good be­ after the correct 18... d5! 19.ab Llld7. cause of6.Llla4 - the knight disrupts the 7... Vl/ic7 liberating ...c5 and itself is ready to go to 7 ...0ffi 8.e5 i.'Zld5 9.tlle4 �e7 isn't c5 at an inconvenient moment fo r Black. very attractive, as we 'll see in example The variation 5 ...Lll f6 6.e5 liJd5 7.c'2.xd5 19. Evaluating the merit of 8.e5 in reply �xd5 can't be refuted (in the system 1... to 7 ...0e 7 is difficult because of the lack a6 the bishop is generally positioned ex­ of practical material. Tigran Petrosian cellently on d5), but it's uncomfortable and Simonian (Yerevan, 2006) arrived fo r Black to play with an undefended at this position by a torturous route after kingside. There remains ... 7 ...0e7. Then there was 8.�f4 d6 9.�g3 5... c5 &-=:bc6 IO.e5 de ll.Llle4 �b6 12.0xe5 6.dc �xc5 �f5 13.�h5 Vl/ie7 14.Mfel Lllxg3, and the Wo rld Champion's namesake van­ quished his partner with the zwischen­ zug 15.Llld6+!? In a groggy condition Simonian "set sail": 15... '1!Jf8 ?! (the ending after 15... VIIi xd6 16.VI/ixt7+ 'l!id8 17.�xg7 Mf8 18.Lllt7+ Mxf7 19.VI/ixt7 �e7 20.VI/ixe7+'l!ixe7 21 .hg doesn't look unhappy fo r Black at all) 16.VI/ixt7+ �xt7 17.0ext7 i.'Zlh5?(17 ... '1!ie7 18.hg Mhf8 is considerably more stubborn) 18.0xh8 'I!Je7 19.Lllxb7 Mxh8 20.�e4 Llle5 2l.b4.

106 The St. George Defense

s:�e2 Cllc6 14. A. PETROSIAN - I. CSOM 9.�e3 �e7 Ye revan, 1989 10.Clld4 Ci:Jf6 11.£4 d6 l.e4 a6 12.�h1 2.d4 bS We 've encroached on Sicilian ter­ 3.iid3 iib7 ritory, where with a delay of three (!) 4.Cllf3 e6 moves Roy Chowdhury and Fominykh S.Ci:Jbd2 fo und themselves (Kolkata, 2007): 12.Cllb3 0-0 13.a3 l::tfe 8 14.Uael b4 15.ab Cllxb4 16.�hl e5 17.'i¥d2Cll g4 18.Jigl ef 19.'i¥xf4 Clle5 20.Ci:Jd4 �f6 21.'i¥d2. Equality wasn't violated in a peaceful, completely normal Sicilian battle. 12... b4 13.Ci:Jd1 Possibly 13.Clla4 Cllxd4 (in the event of 13. ..0-0 14.Cllb3 Ci:Jd7 15.l::tac l White is preparing c3) 14.iixd4 e5 15.iigl ,!c6 16.Cllb6 l::tb8 17.fe de 18.Cllc4 is stronger, settling the knight on a good Most often after e5 the knight re­ spot. locates to e4, although the b3 and c4 13... 0-0 squares also work for it. 14.Cllf2 Cllxd4 5... cS

15.iixd4 eS The natural move 5 ...ti1 tO was thrown 16.fe de into doubt by master Eric Peterson, 17.iie3 who was carefully prepared by his wife, No active plan is visible for White Grandmaster Eva Repkova: 6.a4! c5 7.ab - only perhaps preparing c3, which is ab 8.�xa8 l.xa8 9.dc l.xc5 10.0-0 'i¥b6 easy to hinder. In the example variation ll.�e2 b4 12.C:2c4 'fi/c7 (and sensing 17... l::t ad8 18.l::tac l 'i¥a5 19.iic4 Cllxe4 disaster I offered a draw... ) 13.e5 iixf3 20.Cllxe4 iixe4 21.'i¥f2 l::tc8 22.iixf7+ 14.'i¥xf3 LL:d5 15.�g3 g6 16.iih6 Cllc6 �h8 Black retains the better prospects. 17.l::tal �b8 18.iie4 CZ'ld4 19.'ilh4 l::tg8 17... �h8 20.iixd5 li'f5 21.'ile4 ed 22.'i¥xd5 iia7 To meet the thrust Jig5with an ex- 23.CZ'ld6+ CZ'lxd6 24.ed, and Black re­ change ofbishops by means of ...Cll g8. signed (Peterson - Chetverik, Presov, 18.l::tac1 iic6 2004). A very effective transfer of fire 19.c3 'i¥b7 from the queenside to the kingside with 20.iig5 a concluding breakthrough in the cen­ Here 20 ...a5 maintains approximate ter. Black's play can be corrected (it was equality. The fire on her central pawn worth thinking about sacrificing the b5 doesn't allow White to deploy. pawn with ll...'ilc7 12.'ile2CZ'lc 6 or re-

107 Chapter VII placing 10... V:Vb6 with 10... b4), but that On 7 ...ti:lf 6 the response 8.dc de search is the lesser ofthe evils. So here 5 ... 9.ilc2 ile7 10.e5 ti:ld5 1l.tt'le4 0-0 c5 is more solid, and with the move-order 12.ilg5 can fo llow, with the initiative. 4 .. .li'lf6 5.ti:lbd2 e6 6.a4, the continua­ Now the knight takes on c5 with an ad­ tion 6 ...ti:lc 6 7.c3 b4 8.0-0 be 9.bc ile7 vantage. 10.Mb1 Mb8 probably keeps you afloat. 8.Mel 6.c3 Csom should have defended Black's After6.dc!? ilxc57.0 -0 Black doesn't interests earlier here. After 8.a4 c4 9.ilc2 have to continue 7 ...ti:lf 6, exposing him­ ti:lgf6 10.Me1 ile7 11.e5 ti:ld5 12.ed self to e5. Then again, both 7 ...ti:lc 6 and �xd6 13.ti:le4 ile7 14.ab ab 15.Mxa8 7 ...ti:le 7 allow the fa miliar breakthrough �xa8 16.ti:le5 0-0 17.1li'h5 f5 18.tt'lg5 a4 with better prospects fo r White. itxg5 19.ilxg5 (Browne - Csom, Sura­ 6... d6 karta, 1982) he achieved a draw with dif­ The pawn's modest behavior corre­ ficulty, and possibly in the repeat expe­ sponds with White's restrained strategy rience intended a preliminary exchange (ti:ld2 and c3). Shengelia advanced his on e5 in response to 11.e5. pawn more decisively against Aloma 8... ile7 Vidal (Banj ol, 2007): 6 ...d5 7.0-0 ti:lf6 9.ti:lfl 8.Mel cd 9.ti:lxd4 ti:lc6 10.e5 ti:lxd4 The plan from the game Marin - 11.cd ti:ld7 12.a4 b4 13.a5 iLe7 14.f4. Nanu. Opening up the game promised Because of the poor position of his mi­ more, 9.e5!? cd IO.ed (IO.cd de ll.de nor pieces Black didn't achieve equality. ti:lc5 12.� c2 tt'lh6!? doesn't give any­ In my opinion, switching to the French thing) 10 ...ilxd6 11.ile4!ti:lc 5 12.ilxb7 track limits Black's possibilities in the tt'lxb7 13.tt'lxd4 ti:le7 14.ti:le4. St. George, and you should only resort 9... ti:lgf6 to ...d5 in the fa ce of direct danger. 10.tt'lg3 c4 7.0-0 ll.�c2 l!i'c7 In a game against Nanu (Bucha­ rest, 1998) Marin carried out the clas­ sic knight transfer to the kingside: 7.V:Ve2 ti:ld7 8.ti:lfl ti:lgf6 9.tt'lg3 e5?! 10.a4 c4 11.ilc2 g6 12.b3 cb 13.ilxb3 ilg7 14.ila3 V:Vc7 (14 ...V:Ve7 defends the weak f7 square and therefore is preferable) 15.0-0 h5 16.1li'a2 tt'lb6?! 17.ilxd6! l!i'xd6 18.ilxf7+ �f8 19.de l!i'e7 20.ilxg6 ti:lg4 21.tt'lf5,with a ca­ pitulation by Black. The main reason fo r the difficulties was the advance 9 ...e5?!, which unmanned the a2-g8 diagonal; 12.d5!? 9 ...ile7 10 .0-0 0-0 is natural and safe. Black has delayed castling, which has 7... ti:lbd7 become an incentive fo r a correct pawn

108 The St. George Defense sacrifice. 12 ...ed? 13.ed ltJxd5 14.lLlf5 Black is waiting with ...ttJf 6 until doesn't work at all, and exchanging knights White has played c3. doesn't equalize either, 12... ltJe5 13.de 6.c3 0xf3+ 1H!Vxf3 fe 15.1:Z'le2!? e5 16.0g3. The exchange 6.d5 ed 7.ed �xd5 Csom closes the position and accurately 8.itxb5! compromises Black's posi­ guides the ship to the drawing harbor. tion. But why play into your opponent's 12... e5 hands?! After6 ...c4 7.i,e2 0f6 8.de fe 13.lLlf5 �f8 9.e5 lLld5 the strong pawn chain is a 14.a4 h6 guarantee of safety. 15.h3 g6 A duel with Schussler (Reykjavik, 16.ltJg3 � g7 1980) turned out to be much more dif­ 17.i,e3 0-0 ficult fo r Miles than the one against 18.'i!ld2 'it'h7 Karpov: 6.dc i,xc5 7.'i!le2ltJe 7 8.lLlbd2 19.lla3 ttJc5 ltJg6?! 9.lLlb3 i,b6 10.a4 b4 ll.a5 i,c7 20.llea1 lLlfd7 12.ltJc5 i,c8 13.e5 'i!le7 14.i,e4 lLlc6 21.'i!ld1 lLlb6 15.i,xc6 de 16.'i!lc4 'i!ld8 17.ltJd3 0-0 22.ab ab 18.'i!lxb4 c5 19.'i!le4 llb820.ltJ xc5 i,xa5 23.llxa8 llxa8 2l.c3, and the English Grandmaster held 24.llxa8 ltJxa8 out only thanks to his partner's leniency. 25.'i!la1 He should have leftthe knight on e7 and Draw. preferred 8 ... 0-0 9.ltJb3i,b6 lO.iH4 f5 !? 6... lLlf6 15. K. VAN DER WEIDE ­ The setup 6 ... 'i!lc7 7.'i!le2 d6 in the M. CARRABEOGARC IA spirit of game 14 is less justifiable, as Seville, 2007 White positions his pieces more active­ ly: 8.i,f4 ltJd7 9.ltJbd2e5 lO.i,g3 �e7 l.e4 a6 ll.a4 c4 12.�c2 llc8?! 13.ab ab 14.b3 2.d4 b5 h5 15.h4 0gf6 16.bc be 17Jltb l 0-0

3.i,d3 / �b7 18.l'la7 .l'lb8 19.ltJxc4, winning a pawn 4.ltJf3 e6 with an overwhelming position (Saric 5.0-0 c5 - Poley, Saint-La, 2005). Black moved his rook offthe outside file in vain, and his position still didn't shine. 7.ltJbd2 7.e5 ltJd5 takes us to game 19. 7... �e7 Previously the thought flashed through my mind that after the knight comes out to d2 an exchange on d4 in­ creases its strength - but it's not a pana­ cea fo r all ills. An example - Crouch - Rogers (London, 1992): 7 ...cd 8.cd �e7

109 Chapter VII

(in the case of 8 .. .Ci'lc6 9.d5! ed lO.l:lel! 10... c4 !li, e7 ll.e5 the knight has no suitable 1t.li,c2 h6 retreat) 9.a4 b4 10.'i¥e2 d6 ll.e5 de 12.a4 0-0 12.de I'Llfd7 13.1'Lle4 li,d5 14.l:ldl I'Llc6 13.1'Llfl 15.�f4 h6?! (castling here is awful, but In the case of 13.e5 I'Lld5 14.1'Lle4 ba essential anyway) 16.l:lacl 'i\la5 17.�c4 15.�xa4 I'Lla7 and ...I'Llb5 it isn't clear 0b6 18.1'Lld6+! �xd6 19.£t.xd5 I'Llxd5 how White should conduct the attack. 20.ed I'Llxf4 2l.d7+ We7 22.'i\le4 I'!Jd5 13... d6 23.l:lxc6 'i\lxa4 24.l:ldcl l:lhd8 25.1'Lle5 14.1'Llg3 \ llfe8 lla7 26.1i'lxf7! Wxf7 27.�xe6+ Wf8 15.'i¥e2 �f8 28.iH5+ I'Llf6 29.'i\lc5+ Wg8 30.�xa7 16.e5 de l:lxd7 31.'i¥b8+ Wh7 32.h3, and the 17.de I'Lld5 combinational attack concluded by pro­ 18.li,d2 l:lad8 saically capitalizing on the material. 19.ab ab Switching to the French Defense no­ 20.1'llh5 g6 ticeably cools down the game, as usual: 21.0g3 �g7 7 ...1'Llc 6 8.l:leld5 9.e5 1'Lld7 lO.I'Llfl �e7 22.h4 l'llde7 ll.I'Llg3h5 12.h3 cd 13.cd I'Llb6 14.b3 l:lc8 There isn't even any sign ofan attack, 15.a3 g6 16.li,e3 Wd7 17.1i'ld2 b4 18.a4 and Black's chances are really no worse. a5 19.1'Llf3 Wc7 20.'i¥d2 Wb8 21.1'Lle2 Only a higher class of play brought Van I'Lld7 22.�g5 J:\f8 23.h4 �b6 (Hracek Der We ide a victory. - L. Karlsson, Gothenburg, 2005). Black exchanged off the light-squared bishops 16. A. DELCHEV- M. CHETVERIK and gradually defended. Cannes, 2005 8.l:le1 Again after 8.dc li,xc5 9.e5 (i': d5 l.e4 a6 we find ourselves in game 19. It wasn't 2.d4 b5 worth neglecting this. 3.Ad3 �b7 8... 'i\lc7 4.f�jf3 e6 9.a3 I'Llc6 5.0-0 I'Llf6 10.b4 6.::e1 Against Band (Balaguer, 1996) Be­ serra carried out a typical knight ma­ neuver lO.I'Llfl h6 ll.I'Llg3 d6 12.'i¥e2c4 13.�c2 e5 14.1'Llf5 �f8 15.h3 g6 16.1'Lle3 I'LlaS 17.de de 18. 1'Lld5 1'Llxd5 19.ed 0-0-0 20.1'Llxe5 �xd5 21.�f4 �d6 22.lladl, and White is on the verge of winning. 13... e5? exposed the d5 and f5 squares; after 13. ..0-0 14.e5 de 15.de I'Lld7 the sacrifice 16.�xh6!? is fa r fr om deadly (16... 1'Llc xe5 17.I'Ll xe5 'i\1xe5 18.'i\1 g4 'i\1f6 ).

110 The St. George Defense

The possibility of defending the the bishop. For example, 9.iLe3 (9.a4 pawn with the rook opened up thanks to c4 10.lic2is a little stronger) 9 ...0bd7 the "inert" 4 ...e6. 10.0bd2 c4 1 utc2 ikd6 12.h3 h6 6 ... cS 13.�e2 '1Jiic7 14.0fl �b7 15.iLd2 0-0 Without this planned advance Black 16.b3 t:Lb6 17.0.e3lixf3 18.gf (Forgacs was doomed to passive defense. Spassky - Chetverik, Gyongyos, 1998) 18... Mfc8 had to do that against Zhu Chen ( Co­ 19.Cllg4 �e7, with an excellent posi­ penhagen, 1997): 6 ...iLe 7 7.Cllbd2 d6 tion. 8.c3 Cllbd7 9.a4 ba 10.�xa4 0-0 ll.Cllb3 8 ... Clle4 c'iJb6 12.�a2 Ma7 13.Clla5 Sia8 14.b4 After 8 ...0f d7 9.Cllg5! it's difficult c'ilfd7 15.�e2 c5 16.bc de 17.SLd2. In­ fo r Black to stop the various tactical stead of 9 ...ba it's sounder to maintain threats. It's possible to lose in one move: the tension with the help of 9 ...c6. 9 ...cd? 10.0xe6! (Jowett - Andersen, 7.c3 Denmark, 1991). In the case of 9 ...g6 By comparison with 5 ...c5 the ad­ 10.�g4 �e7 11.Cllxh7! Mxh7 12.iLg5 vance d5 has gained strength, as after Cllxe5 13.de �d7 Black is floundering 7.d5 c4 the f1 square has been freed for somewhat, but he'll hardly want to re­ the bishop. Then again, the position peat the experience of trying to survive. is very unclear: 8.iLfl iLc5 9.iLg5 h6 9.®bd2 ®xd2 lO.iLh4 g5 1l.iLg30-0. lO.iLxd2 ®c6 7... dS A preliminary exchange on d4 isn't In accordance with Remizov's rec­ an improvement: 10 ...cd 1l.®xd4 tZ:Ic6 ommendation Black blocks the center. 12.a4 ®xd4 13.cd b4 14.a5, and Black In a battle with such a fo rmidable op­ has no counterplay. Delchev recom­ ponent I decided not to fight in an open mended 10 ...c4 as the best continuation, game with major pieces on the central preparing to castle queenside. Against files. Nevertheless, the main reply here Bukal junior (Zagreb, 1998) Hecimovic is 7 ...iLe 7 (game 17). In the game Lutz was apparently also dreaming about cas­ - Laveryd (K-atrineholm, 1999) there tling queenside, but he didn't manage to fo llowed 7 ...�b6 8.:1Lg5 cd 9.cd Cllc6 do it: ll.�c2 L'2c6 12.®g5 lie7 13.�h5 lO.iLfl Clla5 11.Cllc3 iLb4 (ll...h6!? g6 14.�g4 �d7 15.h4 h5 16.'¥!if3 iLfS 12.iLxf6 gf deforms the pawns but re­ 17.!:e3 lih6 18.®f6 Mg8 19.Mf3 iLxg5 inforces the center) 12.d5 0-0 13.Clle5 20.lixg5 '¥ie72l. �f4 '¥!ifS 22.'¥1id2 '¥!ig7 '¥!ic7 14.iLxf6 gf 15.Cllg4 '¥1if4 16.e5 f5 23.a4 c�e7 24.ab ab 25.Mxa8+ iLxa8 17.Cllf6 + Wh8 18.�h5 h6 19.Me3, and 26.�cl, with a decisive advantage. eight moves later the attack was crowned ll.dc with success. A timely relinquishment of the cen­ 8.e5 ter. After ll.iLe3cd 12.cd iLe7 13.Il:cl Once again I'll draw your attention h6 14.®d2 ®aS 15.b3 ®c6 16.�g4 g6 to the superb position of the bishop after 17.f4 h5 18.'¥1ih3 (Koj s - Chetverik, 8.ed ikxd5 - it's working in two direc­ Karvina, 1999) the attack fizzled out, tions, and the c6 knight isn't blocking and with it the advantage. The "bad"

Ill Chapter VII bishop gets a little better in the case of take on d4 later, when :C:ac 1 doesn't stop 12.�xd4, although in the chain b2/c3/ Black. d4/e5 it looks just like a big pawn. 17.:C:ac1 'it>b8 11... �xc5 18.c4 be 12.1:Z'lg5 19.l:txc4 'Wid7 The standard operation to slow down 20.�g5 liJe7 and undermine the b-pawn, 12.b4 �b6 21.iH6 l:thf8 13.a4 ba 14.l�ha4, is unquestionably fa ­ 22.1iJg5 h5 vorable fo r White. The choice between 23.1iJh7 l:tfe8 that plan and getting things going onthe 24.�g5 kingside, as the Bulgarian Grandmaster Opens a path fo r the knight to e4 did, is a matter of taste. via f6 . Despite the material equality, 12... 'W/c7 Black is bad, as both flanks are in ruins. 13.'Wih5 g6 Delchev didn't delay in-finishing off his 14.'Wlh3 0-0-0 vanquished enemy: 24 ...'W/a4 25.1iJf6 Evacuating the king to the half-de­ l:th8 26.1iJe4 �xe4 27.�xe7 �xd3 stroyed flank deepens Black's difficul­ 28.'Wixd3 l:td529.b5 'W/a5 30.�b4 'Wlxa2 ties. 14 ...1iJx e5 was refuted by the tem­ 3l.ba 'it>a7 32.l:tec1 l:thd8 33.�d6 l:td7 porary sacrifice 15.1iJxe6! It was worth 34.l:tc8 'W/a5 35.'W/c4 and Black re­ thinking about 14... �e7, and castling signed. kingside can soon come to the fo re. 15.b4 �b6 17. E. GLEIZEROV - C. IONESCU Predyal, 2007

l.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.�d3 �b7 4.1iJf3 e6 5.0-0 liJf6 6.l:te1 c5 7.c3 �e7

16.1iJf3 16.a4 liJxe5 17.l:he5!? 'W/xe5 18.1iJxf7, like the more primitive 17.ab liJxd3 18.'Wlxd3 ab 19.'Wlxb5, favors White. Delchev preferred to defend the e5 pawn. 16... d4!? On 17.cd I planned 17 ...'it>b8, to

112 The St.George Defense

Since with 7 ...d5 Black doesn't even ll.llJa3 'i¥b6 get close to equalizing, the natural bish­ 12.d5 op development is a priori the strongest. 8.i,g5 Is the bishop move refuted by the ad­ venturous 8.e5 li'ld5 c9.d i,xc5 10.tllg5 (Glek - Giffard, Le Touquet, 1994)? Hardly, although you have to defend ac­ curately. The variation 10 ...'i¥b6 ll.tile4 1Le7 12.'i¥g4 is in White's favor, but in the case of 10... 'i¥c7!? a similar measure doesn't achieve its aim due to the hang­ ing pawn on e5. 8... d6 8 ...h6 9.i,xf6 gf has also been en­ 12 ... e5? countered. Later we 'll see more than The Romanian Grandmaster makes once that doubling the pawns isn't too a blunder that is catastrophic in its con­ dangerous fo r Black, but here 10.d5! no­ sequences. Closing the center unties ticeably pins down the opponent. After Gleizerov's hands on the queenside, 10 ...c4 ll.i,fl 'i¥b6 12.b3 i,c5 13.'i¥d2 and with logical play he destroys his cb 14.ab b4 15.Ma2 a5 16.'i¥f4 i,e7 opponent in the shortest possible time. 17.Md2 llJa6 18.i,c4 llJc5 19.�g3 �f8 12 ...0-0 13.de fe 14.ab ab 15.llJd4 llJc5 in the game Kovacs - Csom (Szent­ is correct, and White's advantage is im­ gotthard, 2001) the chances equalized. perceptible. White fo rgot to give his queen's knight 13.Ae3 <�c5 a start in life; 15.cb l?ixb4 16.llJc3 a5 14/L:d2 0-0 17.Macl is definitely in his fa vor. 15.b4! cb 9.a4 c4 16.tilxb3 llJfd7 A more traditional exchange was en­ 17.Mbl .� c8 countered by Erdos with Paschall (Bu­ 18.ab ab dapest, 2004): 9 ...cd lO.cd ba ll.Mxa4 19.1i'lxb5! 'i¥xb5 li'lbd7 12.llJc3llJb6 13.Ma2 d5 14.i,xf6 20.llJxc5 'i¥c4 1Lxf6 15.e5 i,e7 16.'i¥al 0-0 17.i,xa6 21.llJxd7 Sixd7 1Lxa6 18.Mxa6 'i¥d7 19.Mxa8 Mxa8 22.Mb7 'i¥c8 20.'i¥cl Mc8, and White's extra pawn 23.'i¥bl Mal is worth very little. With an exchange of 24.'i¥xal �xb7 the dark-squared bishops, 14.e5 llJfd7 25.c4 15.i,xe7 'i¥xe7 16.'i¥c2 h6 17.Meal, And a few moves later the extra pawn winning a pawn is more valuable. 10... brought White victory. b4!? and ...d5 are more interesting, re­ stricting the bl knight. l.e4 a6 10.i,c2 llJbd7 2.d4 b5

113 Chapter VII

3.1ld3 1lb7 1le4 8.li:Ja3 e6 9.0-0 ba 10.c3 li:Jd5, with 4.£{jf3 li:Jf6 an intricate game. Unlike 4 ...e6, Black limits White's 6... e6 possibilities, but provokes 5.e5!? I'm Here 6 ...li:Jb 4!? is at least no weaker. afraid of that move! An imitation of After exchanging bishops, 7.1le4 �xe4 confidence in my powers comes to the 8.li:Jxe4 e6 9.0-0 d5 lO.ed cd ll.c3 d5!, rescue: the knight decisively gets into the pawns are sensibly positioned on the play, so an opponent who isn't that light squares, and the chances equalize. competent doesn't dare to cross the de­ In the sharper variation 7.�xh7 Mxh7 marcation line. But why tremble with 8.li:Jxh7 1le4 9.li:Jxf8 li:Jxc2+ lO.<;,t>n fear every time, isn't it smarter to look <;,t>xf8 ll.li:Jc3 1lh7 12.Mbl Black can the danger in the fa ce and try to under­ fight fo r an advantage. stand it?! 7.�f3 Defending from ...li:Jb4 with 7.c3 18. F. HANDKE - V. POLEY provokes Black to take the knight down Stockholm, 2004 from its commanding height with the help of 7 ...1le 7. On a reinforcement of l.e4 a6 the knight with a pawn, 8.h4, Remizov 2.d4 bS devised some wonderfu l variations, the 3.1ld3 �b7 most colorful of which is 8 ...c5 9.�f3 4.li:Jf3 li:Jf6 1lxg5 lO.hg cd ll.g6! (a dagger blow S.eS li:JdS that seems to finish off Black) ll. .. f5 !! 12.Mxh7 ::ct:g8 13.�h5 �c7! 14.Mh8 �xe5+ 15.1le3 de 16.Mxg8+ <;,t>e7 17.�g5+ <;,t>d6, with the noncommittal evaluation "unclear". It seems that the queen is the best support fo r the knight, and after 8.�g4!? h5!? 9.�h3 li:Jc6 (or 9 ...d6) White is preferable. Castling kingside doesn't harmonize too well with the knight thrust, as, firstly, the rook moves off a promising file(which makes a difference in the variation 7.0-0 1le7 8.li:Jxh7?! g6), and secondly, unlike 6.li:Jg5 the variation 7.c3, the d4 square is left The energetic knight surge has to unguarded (7.0-0 �e7 8.h4 c5! 9.dc li:Jc6 be examined first of all. Example 19 is 10.Mel 1lxc5is favorable fo r Black). dedicated to the more solid branches 7... �e7 6.0-0 and 6.c3 (which are often interwo­ With 7 ...f5 !? 8.ef �xf6 9.1lxh7 ven with each other). It isn't bad to meet 1ld6!? being a pawn up doesn't guaran­ the undermining move 6.a4 with pres­ tee White an advantage either with the sure on the c2 square - 6 ...li:Jb4!? 7.1le2 queens on the board (10.�h5+ <;,t>f8

114 The St.George Defense ll.tll c3 tllxc3 12.bc j,xg2 13.Mgl j,d5) he doesn't get a real advantage. 13.�f 4! e5 or without them (10.c3 �x£3 1l.j,g6+ 14.tlle4! is correct, and the material won �f8 12.tllxf3 tll e7 13.j,c2j,x £3 14.gf should be enough fo r victory. Mxh2 15.Mxh2 j,xh2). 13... �xb7 8.tllxh7 tllc6 14.tlle4 �t7 The half-open file almost compen­ 15.cd Me8 sates fo r being a pawn down, but he 16.tllc5+ \t>b6 should think carefully about the posi­ 17.b4 e5 tioning of his minor pieces. Is it worth 18.d5!? �xd5 the long diagonal with 19.j,e4 �d4? knights? 8 ...j,c 6 9.tllxf8 �xf8 10.0-0 Why has the queen gone into a hud­ tllb4 ll.�g3 1i'lxd3 12.cd �h4 deserves dle of white pieces?! Especially in the preference. presence of the decent continuation 9.c3 0-0-0 19... �t7 20.tll c3 c6. 10.j,g5?! 20.0-0 j,xc5 After 10.0-0 f6 ll.a4 b4 12.� g3 21.bc+ �a7 White defends the weak link in the po­ 22.tlld2 \t>b8 sition - the kingside - and is ready to 23.a4 advance on the strong queenside. White's army has closed ranks and 10... f6 switched to an attack on the enemy ll.ef tllxf6?! king's bastions. And things don't look A beautiful exchanging combination good for it! White won on move 30. has been missed: ll...gf 12.1i'lxf6 j,h6! 13.j,xh6 tllxf6 14.j,g5 tllb4 15.j,xf6 19. A. KHAMATGALEEV ­ tllxd3+ 16.�xd3 �xf6. Despite being M. CHE1VERIK two pawns down, Black is fantastic. Presov, 2000 12.tllxf6 li'lxd4 l.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.j,d3 .tb7 4.1i'lf3 tllf6 5.e5 tlld5 6.c3 Here and after 6.0-0 everything usu­ ally moves towards the main position that arises in two moves' time. 6 ... c5 7.0-0 White is right to take the pawn and 13.�xb7+!? hold onto his gain: 7.dc!? e6 8.b4 a5 Handke gets three minorpieces for the 9.1lib3 tllc6 IO.j,d2 1!ib8 11.0-0 tllxe5 queen, but because of his unsecured king 12.tllxe5 1/ixe5 13.Mel 1lif6 14.tll a3

115 Chapter VII

ile7 15.tllxb5 0-0 16.a3 �fb8 17.�adl 10.0e4 lilb6 tllf4 18.ilxf4 lilxf4 19.1ilc4 lilxc4 ll.ile3 20.ilxc4 (Bellin - Ljubojevic, Te es­ No matter how dear the pair of bish- side, 1972) - Black has to look fo r a ops keeping a lookout on the kingside is draw. So a more precise move-order is to White, he doesn't fe ar an exchange 6 ...e6 7.0-0 c5. By the way, Lj ubojevic on e3 due to the reinforcing of the cen­ shouldn't be counted as an admirer of ter and the opening of the f- file. the expanded fianchetto, as in fa ct what 11... f5 occurred was l.e4 c5 2.tllf3 a6 3.c3 b5 Nevertheless, with ll...CLlcb4 4.d4 ilb75.ild 3 tllf6 6.e5 0d5. 12.ilbl CLlxe3 13.fe CLl d5 14.1ile2 f5 the 7 ... e6 exchange takes place in such favorable circumstances fo r Black that it's better fo r White to give up his light-squared bishop: 12.a3 0xd3 13.1ilxd3 and after �cl the knight goes to c5. It seems that ll...ile7 12.�cl ctlcb4 13.ilbl(?!) is more favorable fo r White, as the bish­ op hasn't locked the rook in. But that concern fo r the rook costs him a pawn: 13... 0x a2! 14.ilxa2 0xe3 15.CLld6+ ilxd6 16.fe ile7 17.1ild3 0-0 18.�c2 b4 19.�cf2 a5 20.0d2 ila6 21.ilc4 d5 22.ed lilxd6 23.1ile4 �ac8 24.b3 8.tllbd2 a4, with a win very soon (Sandstrom White should probably exchange - Laveryd, Haninge, 1997). Again he on c5 and then send his queen's knight should prefer relocating the knight to to the center as in the game Mana­ c5 after 13.a3 0xd3 14.1ilxd3. I de­ gadze - Gogolis (Icaria, 2002): 8.dc cided to exchange off the constraining ilxc5 9.0bd2 ile7 10.0e4 t2. c6 e5 pawn before the knight achieved its ll.ilg5 f6 12.ef gf 13.ilh6 1ilc7 14.a4 desired goal. b4 15.cb tll cxb4 16.�cl lilb6 17.Jic4 12.ef gf �g8 18.tllh4 ilc6 19.1ilh5+ �d8 20.�fdl, with the initiative. The varia­ tion 15.c4 Ci:lf4 16.c5 Ci:lxd3 17.1ilxd3 tll e5 18.tllxe5 lilxe5 19.�fel is also more attractive fo r White, while with 16.1ild2 Ci:lxd3 17.1ilxd3 f5 18.tllg3 �g8 19.1ile3 �g4!? (Teichmeister - Chetverik, Linz, 2007) Black's situ­ ation works out fine. 8... cd 9.cd Ci:lc6

116 The St.George Defense

The pawn chain d7je6jf 6, which is 16... 'i!d8 far from exotic in the St. George, is play­ 17.llle2 able fo r Black with the presence of good White hasn't exploited the fruits pieces and even not such a good king. of his find; 17.1i'la4 Mg8 18.Gllb6 Mb8 13.a4 19.'ila4 noticeably constrained his op­ l3.Mcl f5 l4.1i'lc5 doesn't promise ponent. any real advantages because ofl4... 1i'lxe3 17... Mg8?! 15.fe Mg8 16.1i'lh4 0-0-0!? In the game After 17 ...1i'lx a5 18.'ila4+ li'lc6 Basagic - Steffens (Bled, 2003) Black 19.d5!? ed 20.Gllf4 j,d6 21.1i'lxd5Black's neglected elementary caution - 14 ... extra pawn isn't worth much, but the f4 ? 15.1i'lg5!fe 16.'ilh5+�d 8 17.1i'lf7+ position is sufficientlyuncle ar. �c7 18.1i'lxh8 (taking the rook with the 18.d5! li'le7 queen after 18.'ile5+ is even stronger) 19.de de 18... j,e7 19.1i'lf7, and the subsequent 20.Gllf4 battle is pointless. Then came 20 ...j,d 5? 21.1i'le5, and 13... f5 it's impossible to defend against two 141i'lc3 deadly queen checks at once. I should Winning the exchange, as in the have looked fo r salvation by exchanging example Basagic - Steffens, isn't as off one of the knights: 20 ...j,h 6 2l.gf2 clear: 14.ab fe 15.bc j,xc6 16.1i'le5 ed j,xf4 22.ef li'ld5. 17.'ilh5+ �d8 18.1i'lf7+ �c8 19.1i'lxh8 'i!xb2, and the passed d-pawn doesn't 20. A KARPOV - A. MILES allow White to relax. Although 14 ...ab Skara, 1980 15.Mxa8+ j,xa8 is objectively stronger - the dividends fo r White from the ex­ l.e4 a6 change of rooks aren't immediately ob­ 2.d4 b5 vious. 3.j,d3 itb7 14... li'lxe3 4.1i'lt3 li'lf6 15.fe b4 5.'ile2 In connection with White's excellent Most people play like this automati- retort 15... lih 6 16.Mel Mg8 is prefer­ cally, without thinking about the possi­ able, with roughly equal chances. bility of e5. Of course, the queen move 16.a5! doesn't allow the opponent to breathe a Rybka doesn't approve of accepting sigh of relief either. the sacrifice, in particular because of the 5... e6 variation 16... 1i'lx a5 17.1i'la4 'ild8 18.e4! 6.a4 fe ?! 19.1i'le5ed? 20.'ilh5+�e 7 2l.gf7+ The Wo rld Champion is in such a �d6 22.1i'lc4+! �c6 23.1i'ld6!!, with un­ hurry to plunge into the battle that he avoidable mate. Khamatgaleev hadn't skips castling. He didn't have many fo l­ calculated up to 23.1i'ld6!!,but he sensed lowers - not because of the quality of the dynamic of the position and sacri­ the move , but under the influence of the ficed calmly. result.

117 Chapter VII

After the exchange of rooks 7.ab ab 8.�xa8 itxa8 White's opening ad­ vantage gradually disappears. For ex­ ample, 9.dc b4 lO.tLlbd2 itxc5 ll.e5 tLld5 12.tLle4 ite7 13.itg5 f6 14.ef tLlxf6 (14... gf?! allows the trick 15.tLle5! h5 16.tLlg6 fg 17.tLlxh8 tLlf4 18.V//if3) 15.tLle5 iixe4 16.�xe4 (Kovacik - Chetverik, Hlohovec, 200 1) 16... V/li a5 17.itcl tLlxe4 18.V//ixe4 V//ia6 19.V//ie2, with a likely draw after exchanging queens. By comparison with the simi­ 6 ... c5 lar variation in the line 4 ...e6 5.tLlbd 2!? 6 ...b4, is probably weaker because of tLlf6 (Peterson - Chetverik) a tempo 7.c4, reinforcing the center. In the en­ has been lost on V//ie2. counter Lindberg - R. Agrest (Stock­ 7... li,xc5 holm, 2004) Black came out of the Yo u can start with 7 ...b4, as the c5 opening in full health: 7 ...bc 8.bc d5 pawn isn't going anywhere. In the game 9.tLlbd2 c5 10.0-0 tLlc6 ll.�bl V//ic7 Eisenbeiser - Chetverik (Budapest, 12.dc itxc5 13.ed tLlxd5 14.tLle4 ite7 2003) after 8.e5 tLld5 9.itg5 V/lic7 10.c4 15.V//ib2 �b8 16.c4 tLlf6. This was a be ll.tLlxc3 tLlxc3 12.bc �xf3 13.gf consequence of the premature relin­ V/lixc5 14.0-0 tLlc6 15.f4 h6 16.ith4 g5! quishment of the center; the unexpect­ 17.itg3 gf 18.iixf4 h5 19.Whl �g7 ed tactic 12.tLlg5!h6 13.tLlxe6! fe 14.ed 20.�fel V//ixc3 2l.�ac l V//ia5 22.V//ie4 remained out of the picture, with a very �c8 Black achieved a good position, and strong attack. would have had a better one by destroy­ 7.dc ing the pawn on the 181h move . 9.itg5 After 7.c3 cd 8.cd b4 9.0-0 ite7 didn'tjustifyitself, although even with 9. 10.tLl bd2 none of the sensible replies is 0-0 i,xc5 10.c4 be ll.tLlxc3tLlx c3 12.bc without drawbacks. On 10... tLlc 6 there V/lic7 13.�el tLlc6 there isn't anything fo llows the sacrifice ll.d5! ed 12.e5; on particular to praise. The advance c4 as a 10 ...d6 - ll.e5 de 12.de and tLle4,and reaction to ...b4 isn't as strong after the the continuation ll.e5 tLld5 12.� e4 g6 exchange on c5. 13.tLlb3 is met with castling. In the ab­ 8. t;iJbd2 b4 sence of anything better I advanced 10 ... 9.e5 d5 against Pribyl (Presov, 2000). And If White stubbornly refuses to move after ll.e5 tLlfd7 12.a5! how I suffered the pawn, his opponent seizes the im­ with my knight on d7! Evidently on 7.c3 portant central square: 9.0-0 V/lic7 the best thing is to establish a pawn chain lO.tLlb3ite7 1L1i,d2 tLlc6 12.a5 (12.e5 - with chances of equalizing in the ex­ tLlg4 13.�fel f6 ! 14.ef tLlxf6 clearly suits ample variation 7 ...c4 8.itc2 ite79.0-0 Black, so the appropriate moment fo r e5 0-0 10.e5 tLld5 ll.VIIie4 g6. has been missed) 12... tLlg4 13.�fcl h5

118 The St. George Defense

14.h3 �f6 15.c3 \fjld6 16.1i,el(Farkas ­ tage here), but 13.tlle5! causes serious Chetverik, Kecskemet, 2002) 16 ...tll ce5 inconvenience. 17.tllxe5 tllxe5 18.�c2 be 19.�xc3 It's better fo r Black to castle as soon llc8,with fully-fledgedplay. as possible, keeping the advance of the 9... tlldS f-pawn in reserve . As in the game T. 10.tlle4 Mesaros - Chetverik (Zalakaros, 2004): In practice White has always brought 11...0-0 12.tlld6 �c6 13.h4 (and with his knight closer to the kingside, al­ the very strong 13.�xe7 \fjlxe7 14.\fjle4 though it's possibly worth keeping it f5 15. \fjld4 g5 Black doesn't lose hope of near the queenside: 10.tllc4!? f5 1l.ef stirring up the queenside) 13 ...f6 14.ef tll:xf6 (ll...gf?! 12.tllfe 5! cJile7 13.�e4 tll:xf6 15.tllc4 �d5 16.tllce5 \fjle8 (ev­ \fjlc7 14.\fjlh5) 12.�e3 \fjlc7 13.�xc5 erything's going according to Remizov \fjlxc5 14.\fjle5 \fjlxe5 15.tllfXe5, with so far ...) 17.�xf6 llxf6? (the result of slightly better chances. a miscalculation; 17... gf 18.tllg4 tllc6 10... �e7 19.tlle3 �xf3 20.\fjlxf3 tlle5 21.\fjle2 tllxd3+ 22.\fjlxd3 d5 is correct) 18.tllg5 h6 19.�h7+! cJilh8 20.\fjld3! (only here did I see on my planned 20 ...tll c6? a mate of wondrous beauty - 21.tllgf7+! llxf7 22.tllg6+ cJilxh7 23.tllf8+ cJilg8 24. \fjlh7+ cJilxf8 25. \fjlh8!) 20 ...1i,c5 21.tllg6+ llxg6 22.�xg6 'i¥f8, and fo r some reason Mesaros didn't think being the exchange and a pawn up was enough after 23 . .tf7!g6 24.'i¥xg6 'i¥g7 25.tllf3. 11... tZ'lc6 It isn't worth fo llowing the example Remizov analyzes the position that of the white king yet: 1 1...0-0?! 12.tlleg5! arises in detail. It's interesting to see g6 13.�e4 CZ':c6 14.�h4 h5 15.g4. whether White's initiative will grow into 12 . .td2 a serious attack ... Against Schulz (Hamburg, 1980) 11.0-0 We sterinen tried to improve on Kar­ .. .like the one that finished off Pre­ pov's play. Without the slightest success: drag Popovic in a speed duel with Carnic 12.�g5 f6 13.ef gf 14.�h6 \fjlc7 15.g3 (Belgrade, 2006): ll.�g5 f6 12.ef tllxf6 llg8 16.llfc1 tlle5 (16... f5 17.tlled2 13.�xf6 gf 14.tlle5!? 0-0? 15.\fjlg4+ llg6 18.�e3 d6 is even more promis­ cJilh8 16.tllg5! \fjle8 17.\fjlh3 h5 18.�g6. ing) 17.tll xe5 \fjlxe5, and Black has no Of course, 14 ...fe didn't leave White any­ regrets about delaying castling. thing better than an exchange of queens, 12... \fjlc7 winning the piece back, 15.\fjlh5+ cJilf8 If 12 ...f5 , then 13.efgf 14.tlld4! tlle5 16.\fjlf3+ �f6 1 HIV:xf6 + \fjlxf6 18.tllxf6 (accepting the sacrifice leads to a fo rced (there isn't even a shadow of an advan- mate) 15.\fjlh5+tll f7.Black's position is

119 Chapter VII far from lost, and there's also no need to weaken it. 13.c4 be 14.GZ:lxc3 GZ:lxc3 14... GZ:ld b4 is more precise. Black has already achieved an excellent position on the queenside, and all that's leftis fo r him to castle at a point when it won't be risky. 15.Jhc3 GZ:lb4 16.lixb4 �xb4 17.Ikacl %Yb6 18.lie4 The pin isn't threatening to win a It was worth reminding Miles about piece at all (on e5 there fo llows ...h6, the existence of the backward d7 pawn obviously) . It isn't easy fo r White to find (18.Ikfdl!?). useful activity fo r his queen's bishop, 18 ... 0-0 and this is just a variation fo r employ­ 19.GZ:lg5 h6 ing it. 20.lih7+ �h8 6... c5 21.libl lie7 What to take the bishop with after 22.GZ:le4 .SacS 6 ...h6 7.lixf6 ? Whatever you like! In the I don't know what happened to the game R. Schmidt - Chetverik (Mari­ Wo rld Champion at this point (in an im­ anske Lazne, 2002) the queen took: portant match in the European Champi­ 7 ...�xf 6 8.GZ:lbd2 c5 9.e5 �d8 IO.dc onship!). Mt er some inexplicable blun­ lixc5 ll.GZ:le4 lie7 12.a4 (the under­ ders, 23.�d3? Ikxcl 24.Ikxcl �xb2 mining move should have been played 25.Ikel? �xe5 26.�xd7 lib4 27.Ike3 after castling) 12... �a5+ 13.GZ:lfd2 ba �d5 28.�xd5 lixd5 Black easily made 14.\jj'g4 �xe5 15.GZ:lc4 h5! 16.�f3 �d5, the best of his advantage. A sensation and Black is guaranteed an extra pawn. had occurred, and from that moment on In a duel with Kap (Bad Ems, 2007) I the new history of the St. George De­ chose 7 ...gf 8.GZ:lbd2 (here, in contrast, fe nse had begun. it wasn't worth delaying with a4) 8 ... c5 9.c3 cd lO.cd GZ:lc6 ll.a3 �b6 12.d5 21. P. FREISLER -A. JANTURIN GZ:le7 13.de de 14.Ikcl Ikd8 15.libl Pardubice, 2007 Li:'lg6 16.�e3 �xe3 17.fe lid6 18.0-0 �e7 and with the bishop pair I won in l.e4 a6 the end. Wo olley also gave me the ad­ 2.d4 b5 vantage of the two bishops (Cappelle­ 3.lid3 lib7 la-Grande, 2008): 7.lih4 lie7 8.Lbbd2 4.GZ:lf3 GZ:lf6 lilh5!? 9.1i.g3 (exchanging bishops is 5.�e2 e6 sounder) 9 ...lilx g3 lO.hg c5 ll.dc lixc5 6.lig5 12.e5 lilc6 13.lile4 lie7 14.a4 b4 15.g4

120 The St. George Defense

Wilc7 16.tlJed2 d6 17.ed Wi/xd6 18.0-0-0 The very strong 14 ...Jid 6 contains Wilf4, although Black's advantage hasn't the dangerous threat 15... LlJe5, and been delineated yet. its tactical basis is 15.hg hg 16.Wi/xg5? 7.dc LlJd4 17.iih4 LlJf5! 18.ef LDh3+! 19.gh Out of respect fo r one of the lords of iih2#. the St. George - an example of a battle 15.LlJef3 by him with a higher-rated opponent: The continuation 15.a4 would have 7.c3 cd 8.cd h6 9.iih4 (in this posi­ been more to the point. In the variation tion it's better to move the bishop away 15... LlJe5 16 .�xf4 LlJxg4 17.iixc7 \t;xc7 to d2) 9 ...iie7 10.a4 LDc6 ll.ab LlJb4!? 18.ab ab 19.iixb5 gh there are mutual 12.iixf6 iixf6 13.ba LDxd3+ 14.Wi/xd3 chances. Not bothering the king, Fre­ Wilb6 15.0-0 iixa6 16.Wiid2 0-0 17J�cl isler gives the initiative away to his part- l:t:fb8 18.l:t:c2Jib7 19.l:t:xa8 l:t:xa8 20.e5 ner. iie7 (Shavtvaladze - Remizov, Halki­ 15... l:t:hg8 diki, 2000). Despite being a pawn up, 16.hg hg it's time fo r White to worry about equal­ 17.l:t:fe1 f6 izing. Evidently the exchange on c5 is 18.a4 b4 stronger. 19.LlJc4 l:t:h8 7... il.xcS 20.e5 fS 8.LlJbd2 21.Wi/xg5 After 8.e5 h6 9.ef hg IO.fg l:t:g8 ll.LlJbd2 il.e7 12.LDe5 l:t:xg7 13.0-0-0 d6 14.LlJef3 LlJc6 15.LDb3 Wilc7 16.LlJfd4 LlJe5 (Linik - Kutuzov, Calvia, 2006) with the help of the pin White stopped his opponent from castling, but this won't scare fans of the St. George. The pair of black bishops is worth more here. 8 ... h6 9.iih4 Wi/c7 10.0-0 LlJhS ll.LDe1 LlJf4 21... LlJhS 12.Wi/g4 gS In the case of 21...LlJxg2! 22.\t;xg2 13.il.g3 LlJc6 LlJd4 23.LDd2 �dg8 24.Wi/f6 Wilc6 the win 14.h4?! was achieved more easily, but the move White is operating where he's weak­ in the game doesn't let victory slide ei­ est. Bearing in mind the likely relocation ther. of the black king to the queenside 14.a4 22.LlJd6+ \t;b8 is logical, and in the event of 14 ...b4 the 23.LDxb7 Wilxb7 knight acquires the excellent c4 square. 24.iih2 l:t:dg8 14... 0-0-0?! 25.Wi/h4

121 Chapter VII

Here 25 .. J:rg4 26.�h3 �c8 fin­ 16.tLlxe6! fe 17.�xe6+ \t'h8 18.�xd5 ished the battle immediately. Not ac­ �e8 19.�xe8+ �xe8 20.�xb7 �xh2+ knowledging the straightforward paths, 21.\t'fl �a7 22.�f3. Janturin continued 25 .. .Ci'ld4 26.li'lg5 7.c3 tLlg3!? 27.�xg3 �h5 28.tLle4 �xg3 29.tLlxg3 �g5, and won a dozen moves later.

l.e4 a6 2.d4 b5 3.�d3 �b7 4.tLlf3 tLlf6 5.�e2 e6 6.0-0 c5 We 're steadily approaching the tabi­ ya of the St. George. The last chance to turn off the smooth path is 7.dc. Here We 've reached the tabiya. White the curious trick 7 ...�xc5 8.t1Jbd2 d6 demonstrates the most predictable 9.e5 de 10.�xb5+!? is well known. Ac­ strategy - not being deflected towards cepting the sacrifice can lead to a rep­ original ideas, he has made the most etition of moves: lO... ab 11.�xb5+ natural moves, obtained a balanced po­ tLlbd7 12.�xb7 �b8 13.�c6 �b6 sition and is waiting fo r Black's choice. 14.�a4 �b4. Against Nicevski (Trna­ Playing 7 ...tLlc 6 is hair-raising, as the va, 1980) Klaric preferred to get more: central white pawns get moving (game 10 ...tLlbd7!? ll.�xd7+ tLlxd7 12.tLlxe5 23). But this is a double-edged sword �xg2! 13.\t'xg2 �g5+ 14.\t'hl �xe5 and as St. George fa ns welcome unclear 15.�xe5 tLlxe5 16.tLle4 �a7 17.�f4 positions, it is still choice of the major­ t1Jf3 18.�ad1 0-0. Black achieved his ity. But first - a look at the minority's aim on the 371h move, but there are no choice. conditions fo r that here yet. In the encounter Duman - Gelas­ 22. N. VITIUGOV - B. SAVCHENKO hvili (Adana, 2006) White didn't try to Kazan, 2003 fo rce events: 9.tLlb3�b6 10.a4 b4 ll.a5 �c7 12.tLlfd4 tLlbd7 13.�dl d5 (with­ l.e4 a6 out worries, as e5 is impossible here) 2.d4 b5 14.ed t1Jxd5 15.�h5?! CZJ7f6 16.�h4 3.�d3 �b7 �d6 17.�d2 �c7 18.�e1 0-0 19.c4?! 4.t1Jf3 tLlf6 be 20.bc tLlf4 21.�fl tLlg622.�h3 tLle4. 5.�e2 e6 The white queen's excursion clearly 6.0-0 c5 hasn't justified itself; the computer sug­ 7.c3 �e7 gests the complicated (and, perhaps, fa ­ The interim exchange opens up ac­ vorable fo r White) variation 15.�c4 0-0 cess to c3 fo r the knight, as in the game

122 The St.George Defense

Rublevsky - Drazic (Bastia, 2004): 7 ...cd 8.cd Jle7 9.li:Jc3 0-0 10.Jlg5 d6 ll.e5 tt'lfd7 12.Jlf4 Jlxf3?!(instead of 12... de 13.de tt'lc6 Black exchanges off the bishop and creates a light-squared chain - strategically flawless, but as­ sociated with risk to the king) 13.�xf3 d5 14.�g4<;i;>h8 15.l::tac l l::ta7 16.l::tfe l, and then l::te3, switching to the attack. Closing the center, 7 ...d5 is only allowable in the case of subsequent blocking of the position after 8.e5 tt'le4 9.tt'lbd2 tt'lxd2 10.Jlxd2 with 10 ...c4. 8 ... tt'lc6 The move 10 ...tt'lc 6? is significantly Provokes White into a breakthrough weaker because of ll.dc :ilxc5 12.b4 in the center. In a game with Ponfile­ :ilb6 13.a4 (a familiar method!) 13... ba nok (St. Petersburg, 2006) Gorovykh 14.l::txa4 tt'lb8 15.l::tfa l h6 16.Jle3:ilxe3 slowed down the d-pawn, agreeing to 17.'�xe30-0 18.b5, with an overwhelm­ passive defense: 8 ...cd 9.cd d5 10.Jlxf6 ing advantage (Miles - Chaivichit, (an equivalent continuation is 10.e5, Thessaloniki, 1984). I wasn't familiar with an exchange of the dark-squared with Miles' experience of playing against bishops) 10 ...:ilx f6 ll.a4 b4 12.e5 Jle7 the St. George and I repeated the Thai 13.tt'lbd2 0-0 14.l'Llb3 l'Llc6 15.l::tfc l a5 player's mistake in my encounter with 16.Ci:Jc5 i.xc5 17.l:xc5 �b6 18.l::tac l D. Mesaros (Kecskemet, 1999): 14 ...a5 h6 19.h4 �fc8 20.�c2 l'Lla7, with ex­ 15.b5 tt'lb8 16.tt'ld4 �c7 17.�g4 GL d7 changes of major pieces on the open file. 18.tt'lxe6! fe 19.�xe6+ <;i;>d8 20.Jlg5+ A solid plan, but at the same time Black <;i;>c8 2l.Jlf5. At the price of a knight immediately limits his claims to equal White has his opponent in a vice and chances. preserves a decisive attack even in un­ 9.d5! ed fo rced continuations. The position has to be opened up, of 8.Jlg5 course. After9 ...c4?! 10.Jlc2l'Lla 5 ll.d6 Not bad. But still White has some­ Jlf8 12.b4 cb 13.ab h6 14.Jtd2 (Sermek thing a little better: 8.e5 tt'ld5 9.dc Jtxc5 - Cigan, Bled, 1998) White cut the en­ (losing an important tempo right away!) emy camp into two and dominates. 10.a4 b4 ll.c4 tt'le7 12.tt'lbd2 tt'lg6 10.Jlxf6 13.tt'le4 �c7 14.tt'lxc5 �xc5 15.Jle4 The correct version of the sacrifice; :ilxe4 16.�xe4 �c6 17.�e2 �c7 18.b3 in the case of lO.ed?! tt'lxd5 ll.�e4 h6 0-0 19.l::tdl tt'lc6 20.Jlb2 (Shirjaev 12.Jlh4 tt'lc7 13.l::tel d5 14.�f5 tt'le6 - Remizov, Angarsk, 2007) - Black has Black successfully consolidates. no counterplay. 10... de ll.Jtxe4 gf 12.l::tdl VJi/c7

123 Chapter VII

13.a4 ba 3.iid3 iib7 Savchenko probably went slightly 4.0f3 0f6 overboard in his effort to play creative 5.�e2 e6 chess. After 13... b4 14Jt'lbd2 C2ld8 6.0-0 c5 15.®c4 ®e6 the knight maneuver takes 7.c3 0c6 place in a safer situation. 8.d5 14.l:'l:xa4 C2ld8 15.®a3 White had an attractive knight trans­ fer to f5 via h4 at his disposal. It's im­ portant that the rook is defending the bishop, and there's no point in ...�e5 (a valuable resource with 13... b4 14.0h4). 15... ®e6 16.0c2 Vitiugov almost certainly had a subse­ quent exchange sacrifice in mind, but his priorities were misplaced. There he had sufficient compensation, here - a clear If the "nail" that is to be hammered advantage after 16.iixb7 �xb7 17.C2lc4. in on d6 compromises Black's position, 16... d5 then there's no reason to further discuss 17 .iixd5 iixd5 the merits of 7 ...®c 6. But Basman had 18.l:'l:xd5 ®f4 already demonstrated the presence of 19.l:'l:xf4 �xf4 rich reciprocal tactical chances. Varia­ 20.®e3 �e4 tions with a rejection of the ambitious 21.®d2 �e6 advance in the center are in the next ex­ The battle ended in a draw by per­ ample. petual check: 22.�d3 l:'l:d8 23.:xd8+ 8... 0e7 iixd8 24.®e4 ile7 25.®f5! l:'l:g8 26.g3 9.d6 l:'l:g4 27.f3 l:'l:g6 28.\t>g2 \t>f8 29.0xe7 The rising star of French chess Ed­ �xe7 30.�xa6 f5 31.�c8+ \t>g7 ouard tried to reinforce his pawn cen­ 32.�xf5 l:'l:b6 33.�g4+. The strong ter against me (Cappelle-la-Grande, Grandmasters, finalists in the 2008 Rus­ 2004), but the enterprise ended in col­ sian Cup, were no more than promising lapse - 9.c4?! be lO.iixc4 0xe4! ll.de juniors five years earlier, but they played fe 12.0e5?! ®g6 13.®xg6 hg 14.�g4 a wonderful, substantial game. �f6 15.iid3 �f5 16.h3 iid6. The trick l l.�xe4 ed 12.0g5!? is harmless: 12... 23. A. VESZPREMI - M. CHETVERIK �b6 13.�f4 f6 14.iid3 fg 15.�xg5 Balatonfoldvar, 2008 �f6, and he can't scrape together compensation fo r the two pawns. 1.e4 a6 An exchange on e6 isn't particularly 2.d4 b5 dangerous, but it also isn't that hard to

124 The St.George Defense

fa ll into a difficultposition: 9.de de (9 ... fe is more dynamic, but weakens your position unnecessarily) 10.1i.g5 �b6 ll.tlJbd2 tlJg6 12.c4 b4 13.e5 li:Jd7 14.l::!:ad l h6 15.1i.xg6 hg 16.i.e4 1Le7 17.h3 0-0-0 18.1i.xb7+ �xb7 19.tZ',e4 g4 20.hg �a7 21.l::!:d3 VJifc722.CLJg 3 tlJb8 23.l::!:fd l tlJc6 24.VJJJe4 l::!:xd3 25.�xd3 l::!:d8 26.l::!:xd8 1i.xd8 27.tlJh5 g6 28.®f4, with an extra pawn and a better position (Potkin - Landin, St. Petersburg, 1998). It was essential to prevent e5 by means of 10 ...®g6 ll.tlJbd2 1i.d6 12.l::!:fd l VJifc7, A very complicated position with a with an equal game. choice of different strategies. Firstly, a 9... tlJg6 battle fo r space: 12... f5 13.a4 b4 (13... lO.eS Si.xf3! c4!? 14.1i.c2b4 deserved attention, not He has to part with his superb bishop opening up the queenside too much) without regrets! It comes up against the 14.cb cb 15.1i.xa6 1!Wh4 16.1i.b7 (16. wonderful d5 knight anyway with 10... Si.b5 l::!:c8 17.tlJd2 tlJgf4 18.VJifel g5, with tlJd5?! ll.Si.xg6hg 12.h3 f6 13.VJifc2�fl counterplay) 16... l::!: a5 17.1i.xd5 l::!:xd5 14.tlJbd2 and has nothing to do. On the 18.f4 (Kulesza - Chetverik, Karvina, other hand, now the breaches near the 2001) 18... ®xf 4 19.VJilc4 VJifh3 20.1i.xf4 king guarantee Black counterplay. �f3+ 2l.�gl VJilg4+, with perpetual ll.gf qjdS check. 12.�hl Evidently the most promising idea The best defense to 12.. .Ci:Jgf4 and is to undermine the enemy pawn duo, ...VJifg5 . 12.VJife4?was refuted in the min­ which occurred in the source game iature L. Cako - Jap Tj oen San (Gron­ Afek - Basman (Biel, 1979): 12... ingen, 1 999): 12 ...1i.x d6! ( 12... f5 13.ef f6 !? 13.�xg6+ hg 14.�d3 (14.f4 g5!? gf??, like 13... ®xf 6??, isn't worth dis­ 15.VJile4 f5 16.'�g2 g4 doesn't claim an cussing, although 13... 1i.xd6! 14.fg l::!:g8 advantage, but it's really time fo r White 15.�hl l::!:xg7 16.l::!:gl VJifb8 17.l::!:g2 l::!:fl to think about safety) 14 ...�f l 15.l::!:gl doesn't depress Black either) 13.ed f5 g5 16.tlJd2? i.xd6!, with a winning po­ 14.VJilel tlJgf4 15.1i.xf4 tlJxf4 16.1i.xf5 ? sition (17.ed :xh2+! 18.�xh2 VJifh8+ 1!Wg5+ 17.1i.g4 h5 18.VJife3 hg. I had a 19.�g2 ®f4+). fo rtunate opportunity to repeat the suc­ Against Steffens (Binz, 1994) Mov­ cess of the Dutch player. Against Kes­ sisyan was unable to improve on White's kowski (Wunsiedel, 2008) I hit upon the play: 12... f6 13.1i.e4 fe 14.1i.xd5 ed 15.f4 idea of playing 12... 1i.xd6! 13.ed f5 , but j,xd6 16.fe j,xe5!? (a correct sacrifice; I parried 14.VJilelwith inexplicable cas­ then again, 16... VJife7 is no worse) 17.f4 tling and didn't get any compensation 0-0 18.fe l::!:xfl + 19.VJifxfl VJifh420.1i.e3?! fo r the piece. (he should have gone for an exchange of

125 Chapter VII queens by means of 20. CZJd2 llf821. 1fi' g 1 19.llg1 h6 llf2 22.1fi'g3 lfi'xg3 23.hg) 20 ...1If8 19 ...Cll h3 20.llgfl Cllf4 leads to a 21.1fi'g2 1fi'el+ 22.j{glCll f4 23.1fi'f3 llf5 repetition of moves, and on 20.llg2 24.1fi'e3 lfi'dl, with a win. The branch the defense of the pawn 20 ...h6 gains 8.d5 Clle7 9.d6 probably brings with it strength. 21.. .lfi'b6 is threatened, and more danger for the white king than any in the event of 22.1fi'e3 lla8 Black takes other. away the file. 12 ... Cllgf4 20.1fi'e3 Black positions his knight on a weak I was waiting nervously fo r Ve spre­ square, not doing anything with the f­ mi's reply - I'd just seen the queen pawn. Then again the pawn pair can sacrifice 20.1fi'xf4 !? gf 21.llxg7 �f8 also catch its breath. Snubbing Basman 22.llagl, with very decent compensa­ I continued this way three times, reject­ tion. Now, though, a repetition of moves ing the tried-and-tested 12 ...f6 . is again logical (20 ...Cll d5 21.1fi'd4 Cllf4 13.j{xf4 Cllxf4 22.1fi'e3), but fo rtunately fo r him (yes, 14.1fi'e4 gS exactly!) my partner blundered. 15.a4 c4 20... ClldS There's no certainty that this is the 21.1fi' e?! 1 lfi'b6 strongest either. In the example variation 22.b3? Cllxc3 15... j{g7!? 16 .llel llb8 17.ab ab 18.1fi'e3 23.bc ( ...Cll g6 was threatened) 18 ...0-0 19.j{c2 In the end the prosperity of the play­ f5 20.1fi'xc5 b4! Black loses a pawn ers depends on the stability of the e5jd6 and a file, but gets excellent counter­ chain. 23 ...1fi'd4! destroys it and prom­ play. Against Branding (Prague, 2002) ises an almost won position. In the game I continued 15 ...b4 16.cb cb 17.tbd2 there was 23 ...b4?! 24.f4 lfi'd4?! (belat­ j{g7 18.llacl?! Cllxd3 19.�xd3 itxe5 edly this is just a loss of time and a bad 20.llc7 lfi'f6, with a full extra pawn. If alternative to the continuation 24 ...f5 !? he doesn't chase an ephemeral initiative 25.�e3 �f7) 25.�e3 �xe3 26.fe. The and defends the pawn, Black becomes chain now has a support, and the advan­ active: 18.Cllc4 llb8(18 ... llc8!? 19.�a cl tage is already with White. f6 ) 19.llacl f5 20.1fi'd4 0-0 21.:fel b3! 22.j{fl llb4 23.1fi'a7 g4 24.fg fg 24. A. HUNT - M. BASMAN 25J�'rc3h5 26.Clld2 Clld5 27.llxb3 :l:xb3 To rquay, 1998 28.Cllxb3 lfi'h4 29.1Ie2g3! 30.fg (Kalata - Chetverik, Bardejov, 2004) 30 ...1fi'xa4, l.e4 a6 with an advantage. Again the weakened 2.d4 bS kingside has been subjected to an attack, 3.j{d3 j{b7 and there was no benefitfr om the appar­ 4.Cllf3 Cllf6 ently fo rmidable central pair. s.�e2 e6 16.iic2 llb8 6.0-0 cS 17.ab ab 7.c3 Cllc6 18.Clld2 j{g7 8.Cllbd2

126 The St.George Defense

ter 8 ...h6 9.1th4 cd the pawn pair in the center doesn't survive because of ...g5 followed by ...g4, with a removal of the d-pawn. The more solid exchange on f6 mainly leads to equality: 9.ii.xf6 �xf6 10.d5 tileS ll.tllxe5 �xe5 12.f4 �c7 13.de de (Wigger - Chetverik, Essen, 2006) 14.c4 b4. 8.a4 with a subsequent exchange of rooks has lost its fo rmer strength, as it doesn't go well with c2c3: 8 ...cd 9.ab ab 10.Mxa8 �xa8 ll.e5 tild5 12.cd b4 Black's positional threat shouldn't 13.�e4 (13.ii.e3 and 14.tllbd2 is more be ignored here. It's illustrated by a frag­ judicious) 13... f5 14.ef tllxf6 15.�h4 ment from Zemlicka - Chetverik (Stare 1ta6! 16.1txa6 �xa6 (Reyer - Chet­ Mesto, 2008): 8.h3 cd 9.cd(9.tllxd4 tlle5 verik, We rther, 2009). Black hides his 10.1tc2 1tc5is a little stronger, but h3 is king on the flank without any problems, completely unnecessary here) 9 ...tll b4 while it isn't easy fo r White to complete lO.Mel tllxd3 ll.�xd3 Mc8 12.1tf4 his development sensibly. �b6 13.tllbd2 1te7,and with the bish­ Khalifman deals with 7 ...tll c6 in one op pair Black welcomes any opening-up stroke: "8.e5 tlld5 9.ii.e4 cd 10.1txd5 ed of the game, and White isn't capable of ll.cd �b6 12.Mdl 1te7 13.tllc3 tlld8 closing it without cooperation from his 14.l.g5 li.xg5 15.tllxg5, and Black has partner. a bad bishop, weakened dark squares, 8.a3 radically prevents ...tll b4; then and a weak d5 pawn (Douven - We lling, the knight can change its route: 8 ...cd Eindhoven, 1983)". Out ofwhat he list­ 9.cd tlla5 10.tllbd2 (the privilege of de­ ed only the bad bishop is noticeable, but veloping the knight to c3 can't be used, is that really a life sentence? The correc­ alas ...) 10 ...d5 ll.e5 tlld7 12.b4 tllc4 tion ll...b4 12.l.e3 lie7 13.tllbd2 0-0 13.tllb3 1te7 14.tllel 1tc6?! 15.�g4 g6 14.tllb3 a5 demonstrates how easy it is 16.1th6 �c7 17.1te2 Mg8 18.h4 0-0-0 fo r the bishop to rise from the ashes. It's 19.tlld3 Mde8 20.tllbc5 1txc5 21.tllxc5 indicative that Douven didn't have any tllxc5 22.bc Wb7 23.1tg5 Wa7 24.Mfbl imitators. (Katsuhara - Chetverik, Budapest, 8 ... cd 2005). Black came under pressure only In accordance with the well-known because he neglected to castle kingside rule: "the knight has come out to d2 on the 141h move and was unable to do so - exchange on d4 immediately". Espe­ later. If the "French" structure doesn't cially as you have to reckon with d5, as appeal to him, it's worth thinking about did occur in the game Ligterink - Hodg­ 8 ...c4, whichgains strength after a3. son (Manchester, 1981): 8 ...�b6?! 9.d5 8.1tg5 is used comparatively often, tlle7 10.c4 tllg6 ll.g3 b4, and instead of but without any particular success. Af- the tame 12.b3?! e5 13.1tb2d6 with im-

127 Chapter VII passable obstructions the continuation By analogy with 10 ...Mc8 11.L'Llb3.In 12.e5 tllg4 13.h3 L'Llh6 14.�e4 suggested the encounter Dochev - Laveryd (Swe­ itself, and you wouldn't envy Black. den, 1997) there fo llowed ll.a3 L'Llc2 9.cd 12.Ma2 b4 13.e5 L'Lld5 14.L'Llb3 tllxa3! In the event of9.L'Llxd4 it's best to ex­ 15.ba L'Llc3 16.VIilc2 (a pin that's impos­ change off the knight immediately, be­ sible in a similar variation from 10... fo re it gets reinforced by its double ( 10. :!::tc8) 16... �e 4 17.1/ixe4 tllxe4 18.�xe4 L'Ll2f3) - the character ofthe battle is the :!::tb8 19.Mc2 1/id8 20.a4 �e7 2l.�b2 same as with the knights on the board. :!::tc8 22.Md2, and a draw was agreed. A 9... L'Llb4!? drawn position, there's nothing to say! A sound idea - chase the bishop to Then again, the game in the database bl, seize the c-file and extract something may have been cut short. from this. Unsophisticated develop­ 11... 1/ic4 ment, 9 ...�e 7 places the fa miliar pawn 12.:!::tel sacrifice 10.d5!? ed ll.e5 in doubt. In the case of 12.1/ixc4 be 13.L'Llbd2 IO.�bl V/ilc7 :!::tc8 14.tlle5 tllc6 the white bishops After 10 ...:!::t c8 ll.a3 L'Llc2 12.:!::ta2 "don't make a sound". the threat of capturing the knight is re­ 12... :!::tcS pelled by 12... b4! (in the variation 13.e5 13.L'Lle5 1/ixe2 L'Lld5 14.L'Llb3 tllxa3! the knight sells its 14.:!::txe2 d6 life fo r a high price). The duel Bielc­ 15.0Jd3 d5 zyk - Dey (Berlin, 1994) went sharply: Exposes the dark squares; then again, ll.e5 L'Llfd5 12.L'Lle4 1/JJ}c7 13.a3 tllc2 with 15... tt:lc 6 16.d5 tt:ld8 1 7.a4 j,e7 too 14.L'Lld6+ �xd6 15.ed V/ilc4 16.V/ile5f6 !? Black has to fightfo r equality. (16... tll xal 17.1�!Jxg7 Vlilxfl + 18.�xfl 16.L'Lldc5 �xc5 l:'rxcl+ 19.�e2 L'Llf4+ 20.�e3 0:'ld5+ 17.0Jxc5 �aS fo rces an amusing perpetual check, 18.e5 tt:ld7 but Black is striving fo r more) 17.V/il g3 19.tt:lb3 :!::tc4 �f7 18.b3 V/ilc3 19.:!::ta2 L'Llxd4 20.�e4 20.�e3 0-0 tllxf3+ 2l.gf V/ifxb3 22.Md2 Vlilc3. White 21.a3 tt:lc6 has very vague compensation fo r the two 22.f4 pawns, and only serious blunders by his Black didn't want to send his rook to opponent gave him the win. The stron­ the periphery with 22 ...g6 23.�d3 :!::ta4, gest continuation is ll.L'Llb3, prevent­ although it's far from clear how it could ing ...L'Llc 2 (l l ...�e7 12.a3 or ll...V/ilc7 be reached there. Basman sacrificed the 12.e5 L'Llfd5 13.�d2). exchange and made a draw on the 581h ll.L'Llb3 move, not without difficulty.

128 The St. George Defense r·coiVci usio.M ·------i : � We exaag�!'a tethe merits ofthe St. George Whitesets a.sliglit ! Defense ! ' . shouldn 't · · _' ·' ' ' _ firstly, it 's a - and_ _ ,, , l ' ' , , , - , , fot- ' ab , ' it: -oo�/' ,' be, ' ' I withvery ' , _ - _ , - , ' ; , , / , ' ', - _ � : _ - - _' _ - - _ _ , ' _ - - ' , , , ' , , -, ; ,. , - i !. adVantaae 'Varied�r. situ� ·Seen But,� it 's verysligbt�Mf oaeo!'\Vhitet, ohave so ! ,rexperi�eqllire$.ce'ofp��byla�)Us in•h structure s and to .!mow the oftlle llU} i 1 .Bute�rt a devot� is pitf.dls o�� ·1 c,l(o� Jreparation lltltilrely tQ�Yc l"·�a6;in� · !• the $� � as a re8e1Ve defeme to ape . � S? . ! ! G�ijie ��rbthinkperfecitly routinely\VeU (we 've already 1�e4. �� i j .ag��ave -p;,t;tlahYiiastilyl'6Whowhipped int o sbape can�� ·a lotnotedoftroUble .�·)';�here!}. �Ill$��•·!'�.�n� ·.i · ·. · i de.l"fttl.pon in and Bli� games� • · .. · . l L�[ --���------�:��--�--�------�--�-�----ltapid------play--· ------�------�------�-�--�---��---�·��--�--���-:-��x-�:��-�· ;�_L�����:�

129 Chapter 8 The Sicilian Defense

The Cobra System, l.e4 c5 2.tLlf3tLlc 6 3.d4 cd 4.tlJxd4 tlJf6 5.tLlc3 e6 6.t1Jdb5 Jlc5

The popularity of the Sicilian Defense has led to the development of an enormous body of theory, covering virtually all variations. It is not so easy to hide away from the heavily analyzed branches of the main lines. Fashion dictates that a deep knowledge of the likes of Dragon and N aj dorf are required to stay alive if the white d-pawn is advanced two squares on the third move. Fortunately, there are still some variations which have largely evaded the attention of the theorists.

l.e4 c5 (2002's Me eting I e4) by the authors fo r Vllt3 0c6 the British publishing company Every­ 3.d4 cd man Chess. Despite the growing popu­ 4.0xd4 0f6 larity of the continuation 6.0xc6 be 5.0c3 e6 7.e5, the knight thrust to b5, emphasiz­ ing the weakness of the d6 square, is still considered the main line. 6.0db5 In our monograph we only the ex­ amined the solid move 6 ...itb4 here. In essence it has just one drawback - after 7.a3 ii.xc3+ 8.0xc3 d5 9.ed ed in a very simple position the probability of a draw is too high, and it's extremely difficult fo r Black to play fo r a win on command. The continuation 6 ...d6 7.itf4 e5 leads to a wide-ranging investigation of posi­ The initial position of the Four tions from the Chelyabinsk Variation, Knights Variation of the Sicilian - the which doesn't always suit Black either. subject of the research in the first book 6... itc5!? The Sicilian Defense

This attracted my attention after a 12.0-0-0 Vliixe3 13.h3 Vliixd2+ 14.l:rxd2 publication by the Swedish International is stronger, preserving the powerful Master Jesper Hall in the magazine New blockading knight. in Chess (2002). In turn, the source of 7... We7 inspiration fo r Hall was the research by Black has undertaken the unprin­ the Swedish theoretician Rolf Martens. cipled exchange of a bishop fo r a knight The latter only analyzed unorthodox more often after 6 ...:1Lb4 7.CLid6+. In plans and came up with unusual names the variation 7 ...iixd6?! 8.VIiixd6 Vliie7 fo r them. On a whim from an associa­ 9.iif4 e5 lO.VIiixe7+ Wxe7 ll.iig5 the tive idea of Martens 6 ...iic 5!? became white knight proudly establishes itself on the Cobra - and the funny name caught d5 without the slightest reciprocal play on. from the opponent. The continuation 7.ctJd6+ was en­ 8.CLixc8+ countered in games 1 and 2, and 7.iif4 in games 3-5.

1. A. LUKYANENKO - A. RAETSKY Vo ronezh, 2003

l.e4 cS 2.ctJf3 CLic6 3.d4 cd 4.CLixd4 CLif6 S.CLic3 e6 6.ctJdb5 iicS 7.CLid6+ White doesn't try to preserve her The most natural reaction to 6 ... knight on the commanding height iic5,but probably not the most cor­ (8.JH4 - game 2), counting on a sub­ rect one. 7.:1Le3 has been used occa­ sequent opening-up of the game. Then sionally, with the aim of exchanging the advantage of the two bishops can offthe c5 bishop and thereby stabiliz­ make itself fe lt, and also the central­ ing the position of the knight on d6 at ized black king. No matter how sad it is the price of an undesirable doubling to exchange the knight fo r the sleeping of pawns: 7 ...iix e3 8.CLid6+ We7 bishop, 8.ti:lc4?! is noticeably weaker 9.fe Vliic7 lO.CLidb5?! Vliie5 ll.VIiid2 due to 8 ...d5 . The game T. Ponomariov a6 12.CLid4 b5 13.0-0-0 iib7 14.CLif3 - Raetsky (Voronezh, 2003) turned out Vliic5 15.a3 l:rac8 16.Jid3 l':rc7 17.Wbl to be one-sided: 9.ed ed lO.CLia3 (10. l':rhc8 18.l':rhfl d6. Black's chances are Vliie2+ Wf8 ll.t:!Ja3 iig4 12.f3 CLid4 is significantly better, above all thanks no better) IO... l:re8 ll.:iLe2Wf8 12. 0-0 to his control of the e5 square (Wells iixa3 13.ba d4 14.t:!Jbl iif5 15.Jig5 h6 - Hall, Germany, 1999). In Hall's 16.iih4 l:rc8 17.iid3 iixd3 18.VIiixd3 opinion, lO.CLicb5 Vliib6 ll.VIiid2 CLig4 CLie5 19.VIiib3 t:!Jg6 20.iixf6 Vliixf6 ,

131 Chapter VIII

and Black soon won. The alternative White avoids the simplifications that 9.e5 tlld7 10.�g4!? only justifies itself led to a completely equal position in the with the greedy lO... dc? - 1 Liig5+ f6 encounter Fercec - Doncea (Oberwart, 12. .iixf6+!gfl3.�xg7+ �e8 14.�xh8+ 2003): 11.0-0 tllxc3 12.bc tlle5 13.itf4 tllf8 15.J::i:dl �c7 16.ef, with the initia­ tllxd3 14.cd it.d6 15 . .iig5+ f6 16 . .iid2 tive. 10... �f8 ll..iig5 �c7 12.tlld2 �c7 17.�g4 �f7 18.�h5+ g6 19.�h3 .iixf2+! 13.�xf2 �b6+ 14 . .iie3 �xb2 .iif4 20.it.xf4 �xf4 . is correct, exploiting the weaknesses on 11... tlle5 b2, e5 and f2. 12.0-0 tllb4 8... J::i:xc8 13.�h5!? 9 . .iid3 Saving the bishop from the exchange So as not to worry about the fate of with 13. .iie2?! doesn't work due to 13... the central pawn in fu ture. After9.it.e2 tllxc2!, winning a pawn without com­ .iib4 10.it.d2 .iixc3 ll.it.xc3 tllxe4 pensation. 12. .iixg7 J::i:g8 13.it.d4d5 Black's superi­ 13... f6 !? ority in the center promises better pros­ The unsafe position of the king is pects. Or 10.�d3 tlle5 ll.�g3 .iixc3+ Black's main problem. Against Shtyka 12.bc �a5 13.0-0 tllxe4 14.�h4+ tllf6 (Voronezh, 2005) I didn't manage to 15.J::i:bl J::i:c7 16.J::i:b5 �xc3 17.itb2 solve it: 13... tll bxd3 14.cd .iid4 (14... tllg6 18.�a4 �c6 19.ita3+ d6 (Los­ tllxd3?! 15.J::i:dl �d5 16.�h4+ f6 kamp - Raetsky, Cappelle-la-Grande, 17.tllxc5 �xc5 18.�g3, with a double 2004) - White's activity isn't worth two attack) 15. .ii d2 �d5 16. .iib4+ �d7 pawns. 17.tll d6 (17.tllc3 .iixc3 18. .iixc3 tllg6 9 ... dS 19.�g4 is more precise, threatening Having surpassed his opponent in 20. � a4+) 17 ...g6? (misses an oppor­ development, Black embarks on an open tunity to complicate the game with the battle. He has normal play even without help of 17... a5 18. .iia3 b5 19.tllxf7 b4) ...d5, which is evidence of his prosper­ 18.�h4 J::i:c2 19.tllxf7! tllxf7 20.�e7+ ity. For example, 9 ...tll e5 10.0-0 a6 �c6 21.�xf7 it.xb2 22.J::i:ael, and, ll.�hl d6 12.f4 tllxd3 13.cd (13.'ihd3 in addition to the difficulties with his tllg4 14.�g3 h5) 13... .ii d4 14. .iid2 �b6 king, Black can't maintain the pawn 15.tlle2 .iie3 16 . .iic3 tllg4, controlling balance. the dark squares (Del Rio Angelis - Bel­ 14.�xe5!? Ion, Albacete, 2004). The tactical exchange of queens is 10.ed conditioned by a fizzling-out of the ini­ After 10.0-0 de ll.tllxe4 tllxe4 tiative in the middlegame. With 14.it.d2 12.it.xe4 �xdl 13.J::i:xdl J::i:hd8 the tllbxd3 15.cd tllxd3 16.tllxc5 tllxc5 bishops can't display themselves at full 17.J::i:adl �e8 18.�h3 �f7 it compen­ force because of the activity of the black sates fo r the loss with difficulty. pieces. 14... fe 10... tllxd5 15. .iig5+ �f7 ll.tlle4 16.it.xd8 tllxd3

132 The Sicilian Defense

ko had to work some more to achieve a draw. Animmediate 23 ...c4 is also good, as after 24.�xa7 lld2 25.a4 llxc2 26.a5 llxb2 the passed c-pawn is in no way worse than its white antagonist.

2. J. ZAWADZKA - A. RAETSKY Lausanne, 2005

l.e4 cS 2.tllf3 tllc6 3.d4 cd 17..�a5! 4.tllxd4 tllf6 Continues the battle fo r the advan­ 5.tllc3 e6 tage, while in the rook ending after 17.cd 6.tlldb5 �c5 llhxd8 18.llfcl b6 19.�fl llxd3 20.b4 The talented Polish player, despite lld4 21.tllxc5 be 22.bc lld2 it's time to her young age, knows a lot and is capa­ make peace. ble of a lot, and just imagine - the bish­ 17... tllf4 ! op on c5 looks lost! I've used the Cobra The pawn structure that has arisen four times against women Grandmas­ requires you to protect the knights and ters. The inevitable reply was the not­ not miss the bishops. The variation 17... so-strong 7.tlld6+, and only Zawadzka tllxb2 18.llabl b6 19.�xb6 ab 20.�xb2 left the snake's stinger alive. leads to an unpleasant ending fo r Black. 7 .Ci:'.d6+ 1Je7 18.llfdl �g6 8.�f4 19.lld7 b6 20.�d2 llhd8 21.tllxc5 On 2l.llxa7 Black has the interesting possibility 2l...�xf2+!? 22.�xf2 llxc2 at his disposal. It's difficult fo r White to coordinate her fo rces, which is why in the case of 23.b3 lldxd2+ 24.tllxd2 llxd2+ or 23.g3 tild3+ 24. �f3 tllxb2 it isn't clear how she can get winning chances, and 23.lldl lld4 24.�f3 lld3+ basically fo rces a repetition of moves. 21... be 8 ... eS 22.llxd8 llxd8 Forces the knight off d6, although 23.�e3 now in addition to the weakening of the There fo llowed 23 ... a6 24. �fl c4 d6 square the d5 and f5 squares are ex­ 25.�xf4 ef26. �e2 �fS, and Lukyanen- posed. A double attack on the b2 and f2

133 Chapter VIII

pawns with the help of 8 ...'!!lV b6 produc­ planned ...d5. Mt er ll.'!ilVd3 d5 12.ed es no results due to 9.'!ilVd2 (threaten­ '!ilVxd5 13.0-0-0 '!ilVxd3 14.�xd3 �e6 ing 10.1i'lc4) 9 .. Jixf2+ lO.'!ilVxf2 '!!lVxb2 15.tLle4 tLlg4 16.tLlc5 �xf5 17.�xf5 ll.'!!lVc5 '!!lVxal+ 12.�d2 �f8 13.tLlf5+ tLlxe3 18.tLld7+ �e7 19.fe �ad8 in a �g8 14.tLle7+! (the false trail l4.tLlh6+? quiet situation the chances are equal gh 15.�xh6 is refuted by the impressive (Schaub - Raetsky, Basel, 2004). If 15... 1!ilVxc3+!) 14... tLlxe7 15.'!!lVxe7 h6 you're looking fo r a more complicated 16.�d3 '!!lVxhl 17.'!ilVd8+ �h7 18.e5+ game it's worth choosing 12... �xf 5!? tLle4 (18... g6 19.�xg6+!) 19.�xe4+ g6 13.'!ilVxf5 0d4!? 14.'!ilVd30xd5 15.�xd4 20.'!!lVe7, with a rout. ed 16.'!ilVxd4 '!!lVa5, with both kings in a 9.�f5+ shaky position. Unlike game 1, the exchange on c8 10... �b4 has a worthy substitute. On 9.0xc8+ Again the pin is the strongest deci­ �xc8 10.�g5 the continuation 10 ... sion. 10 ...d6 is timid, as in this branch �f8?! ll.�e2 �b4 12.0-0 �xc3 13.bc it's assumed that the pawn will take a '!!lVe7 14.�xf6 gf 15.�b1 �c7 16.�g4 double step. Then again, after ll.il,c4 is insufficient to equalize - the bishop �b4 12.0-0 �xf5 13.ef �xc3 14.bc h6 is clearly superior to the knight, which 15.�xf6 (Hall examines 15.il,h4 tLle7 has no strong squares. 10 ...�b4 1l.'!ilVd5 16.il,xf6 gf 17.'!ilVfJ '!!lVc8 18.�d5 tLlxd5 �xc3+ 12.bc '!!lVa5 13.0-0-0 '!ilVxd5 14.ed 19.'!ilVxd5 �e7 20.�fdl '!!lVc6, and Black (14.�xd5 �hd8 15.�b2 h6 16.�xf6 + is no worse) 15... '!ilVxf6 16.�bl �b8 �xf6 preserves equality) 14 ...0a 5 15.f4 17.�d5 (Mista - Raetsky, Cappelle­ h6 16.�h4 ef 17.d6+ �e6 18.g3 tLle4 la-Grande, 2004) 17 ...tLle7 18.�xb7 19.�h3+ f5 20.�he l �c4 2l.�d4 �xd4 0xf5 19.�e4 �xbl 20.'!!lVxb 1 g6 or 22.cd (Purkashian - Raetsky, Abu Dha­ 18.�e4 �g8 19.'!ilVd3d5 20.�xd5 0xd5 bi, 2004) 22 ...�xd6 23.�xf5 0c3 24.gf 2l.'!ilVxd5�h 7 Black is close to equality. 0c6 is stronger. In a position with such In the game there was the blunder 17... pawn islands the black knights are pref­ Cl:';aS?, which was leftunpunished by the erable to the white bishops. Polish Grandmaster, who didn't spot 9... �f8 18.li.xf7! 10.�g5 Defining the intentions of the en­ In reply to 10.�e3 the modest ad­ emy bishop does no good at all: 10 ...h6?! vance 10 ...d6 preserves an insignificant ll.�xf6 '!ilVxf6 12.tLld5 '!ilVd8 13.il,c4 g6 advantage fo r White. For example, 14.0fe3 �g7 15.0-0 d6 16.c3 a5 17.a4 ll.�xc5 de 12.'!ilVxd8+ tLlxd8 13.tLld6 �f8 18.�h1 f5 19.efgf20.f4 ef2l.�xf4. �e6 14.0-0-0 �b8 15.tLld5 (15.g3 0c6 Against Giffa rd (Cappelle-la-Grande, 16.f4 is equivalent) 15... tLlxd5 16.ed 2004) Inarkiev achieved a better config­ �d7 17.il,d3 f6 18.f4!? ef 19.�hf1 uration of fo rces, in particular his king, 0f7 20.0xf7 �xf7 2l.�xf4 (Zozulia with simple moves. - Raetsky, Basel, 2003). It's better fo r ll.il,c4 Black to threaten the e4 pawn with the If 1l.'!ilVfJ, with the idea of castling knight pin 10 ...il, b4 and prepare the queenside, then it's expedient fo r Black

134 The Sicilian Defense

After 15.0-0 �xc2 16.l:'!:d2 �f5 to go into the variation ll...li'ld4!? 17.l:'!:fdl h6 18.�e3 g6 Hall gives prefer­ 12.lllxd4 ed 13.a3 de 14.ab cb 15.l:'!:bl ence to Black. Let's continue the analy­ Vl/ie7 16.�xf6gfl7.l:'!:xb2 d5 18.�e2 (18. sis: 19.f3 �g7 20.a3 �xc3 21.bc l:'!:he8 �d3 f5 !) 18 ...de 19.VI/ie3 Vl/ie5 20.l:'!:b3 22.l:'!:d6 llld5 23.�xd5 cd 24.1:'!:6xd5 �g7, with a more promising game. - the opposite-colored bishops presage 11... dS! a draw. This thematic breakthrough in the 15... �xd3 center solves the problem of mobilizing 16.cd the queenside and emphasizes the hang­ There's no point in tearing down the ing position of the f5 knight. smooth pawn chain. A logical develop­ 12.ed ment of events is 16.l:'!:xd3 llld5 17.�d2 In the variation 12.�xf6 Vl!ixf6 �xc3 18. .,txc3 f6 19.Jld2 �f7 20.c4 13.VIIixd5 �xf5 14.ef �xc3+ 15.bc g6! lllb6 2l.b3 l:'!:ad8, with an exchange of 16.l:'!:bl b6 because of the broken chain rooks on the open file and equality. the compensation fo r the loss is obvi­ 16... llldS ous. In the game Va sey - Raetsky (Lenk, 17 . .,td2 l:'!:b8 2005) there fo llowed 13.�xd5 �xf5 18.0-0 lllxc3 14.efl:'!:d8 15.VI!if3 llld4 16.VI/ie4g6! (16... Black leaves too few pieces on the l:'!:xd5 17.VIIixd5 .,txc3+ 18.bc lllxc2+ is board. 18... f6 19.llle4 �f7 20.a3 Jle7 premature fo r now, the rook in the cor­ 21.b4 l:'!:hd8 preserved a few more prac­ ner should be activated first) 17.f g hg tical chances. 18.g3? (prevents 18 ...l:'!:h4, but. 18.ib3 19.Jlxc3 ilxc3 �g7 19.0-0-0 is stronger, with an unclear 20.bc �e7 game) 18 ...l:'!:xd5! 19.VI!ixd5 .,txc3+20.bc 21.�fe1 �f6 lllxc2+ 2l.�e2 lllxal 22.l:'!:xal l:'!:xh2, 22.d4 l:'!:be8 and Black made good on his advantage. 23.de+ l:'!:xeS 12... .i:xfS 24.�fl :xel+ 13.dc Vl!ixdl+ 25.�xe1 �e6 14.l:'!:xd1 be Zawadzka' s cautious play neutralized her opponent's minimal advantage, and 10 moves later a peace was concluded.

3. A. DEWRME - A. RAETSKY Sautron, 2007

l.e4 cS 2.lllf3 lllc6 3.d4 cd 4.lllxd4 lllf6 5.lllc3 e6 6.llldb5 JlcS

135 Chapter VIII

7.iH4 14 ...�xe3+ 15.Mf2 gf8 16.�h5 the f7 square is undefended) 15.tLlb5 �xe3+ 16.Mf2�c5 17.b4! �xb4 18.�d5 tLle6 19.tLld6+ �f8 20.Mxf7+�g8 21.Mafl , with a rout. 8.iid6 It's more precise to put the bishop here after 8.iic7 �e7 (game 4). Seizing space has been tried several times, 8.e5!? tLle8 9.tLle4. In Hall's opinion, coor­ dinating it with an attack on the black king is wrong, as there aren't enough offensive resources. That's probably Strong pressure on the dark squares the case, although extreme caution is is undoubtedly more promising than the necessary in defense. For example, 9 ... hasty onslaught 7.tiJ d6+. Here the anal­ iie7 IO.iid3 a6 ll.�h5!? ab 12.tLlf6+ yses (with subsequent successful prac­ tiJxf6 13.ef iib4+ 14.c3 g6 15.�g5 tical experiences) by Jesper Hall have e5! 16.iie3 iia5 17.h4 e4 18.iixb5 h6 been subjected to revision. 19.�f4 (Hermansen - Melikadamian, 7... 0-0 Los Angeles, 2003), and now it's vital to In the first well-known game in the pull out the nail on f6 with 19 ...Me8 and Cobra, Osnos versus Suetin (Leningrad, 20 ...Me6. Hall suggests acting in a stra­ 1963) 7 ...e5 was tried. The weakening tegic key with play fo r a blockade: IO.c3 of the d5 square leads to a solid advan­ (an invasion on d6 requires preparation; tage fo r White. Anyway, with 8.iie3d6 IO.tiJbd6?! f6 11.ef tLlxf6 12.tLlxf6 + 9.iixc5 de 10.�xd8+ �xd8 11.0-0-0+ iixf6 13.c3 iixc3+ is premature) 10 ... �e7 12.tLlc7 Mb8 13.liJ7d5+ tLlxd5 f6 (now in the case of 10... a6 11.tLlbd6 14.tLlxd5+ �f8 15.tLle3 iie6 16.iic4 f6 12.ef tt'lxf6 13.tLlxf6 + iixf6 14.�d2 (Dochev - Lindgren, Sweden, 1997) Black remains under pressure) 1l.ef 16 ... �e7 17.iid5 Mhd8 Black's posi­ .ixf6 12.�d6 tLlxd6 13.tLlbxd6, and in tion is defendable. But relative prosper­ its turn 12... iie5!, with a subsequent ity can't be achieved just any old how. ?2' c6e7d5 (or f5 ) and ...�c7 evidently Unlike the branch 7 .ii e3 the variation removes the blockade. 8 ...iix e3? 9.tLl d6+ �f8 lO.fe gives 8... iixd6 White a colossal initiative in return fo r After 8 ...�b6!? (with the prosaic his ruined pawns, above all on the f­ idea of9.iixf8?? iixf2+ 10.�e2 �e3#) file. The miniature Grospeter - Orso 9.iixc5 �xc5 10.�d6 �b6 11.�c7 (Berlin, 1996) is instructive: 10 ...tLle 8 �c5 12.�d6 �b6 some games have 11.tLlxe8 �xe8 12.iic4 (here castling ended in a repetition of moves. White's would really have helped Black, but refusal to pursue the queen is associated his king has already moved ...) 12... with a definite risk: 13.�d2 d5 14.ed ed �h4+ 13.g3 �h6 14.0-0!? liJd8 (after 15.0-0-0 iie6 16.f3 Mfe8, getting free

136 The Sicilian Defense

with all conveniences, or 13.0-0-0 �xf2 Delorme doesn't rush to castle king­ 14.tZ'lc7 �e3+ 15.l:t:d2 tZ'le8 16.tZ'lxe8 side, so that after ll...li'le8he can keep l:t:xe8, and the compensation fo r the a piece on d6. pawn requires proof. The exchange on 11... e5 d6 allows him to avoid the undesirable 12.tZ'lf5 repetition of moves. A voluntary knight retreat with the 9.tZ'lxd6 aim of destroying the fleeing enemy king In the case of 9.�xd6?! the queen - a debatable decision. 12.f4!? is stron­ comes out to b6 with even more impact, ger (repelling Black's unpleasant threat probing the weaknesses on b2 and f2:9 ... 12... tZ'ld 4, and the knight stays in the en­ a6 10.tZ'ld4 �b6 ll.tZ'lb3 a5 12.a4 tZ'lg4 emy's rear) 12 ...b5 13.fe tZ'lxe5 14.0-0-0 13.�c5 �xc5 14.tZ'lxc5b6 15.tZ'ld3f5 !?, Jib7 15.�d4 tZ'lc6 16.�c5, with an ap­ with superb play. preciable advantage. 9... a6 12... d5 Here with 9 ...�b6 the queen is 13.tZ'lxg7!? tZ'lxe4 kicked out - lO.tZ'lc4 �c5 l l.�d6 �g5 14.tZ'lxe4 de 12.f4 �g6 13.�d3 �xg2 14.0-0-0, with 15.tZ'lh5 �e7 an initiative fo r the pawn that was given 16.�h6 f6 up. Adventurous actions quickly led to collapse fo r Iordachescu in a duel with Solak (Predyal, 2007): 9 ...tZ'le 8 lO.tZ'lxe8 l:t:xe8 ll.�d6 �b6 12.tZ'lb5 l:t:f8 13.0-0-0?! �xf2 14.tZ'lc7 l:t:b8 15.R b5 �b6 1 6.l:t:hfl a6 17.�e2 �e3+ 18.:d2 b5 19.tZ'ld5 ed 20.ed tZ'ld4 21.'iiixb8? (21. �g4 �b7 22.�f4 is more stubborn, as the black knight has been caught in the center ofthe board) 2l...tZ'lxe2+22.� dl d6!, and White resigned. Again kicking the queen off b6 was a vital necessity - 13.a4 a6 14.a5 �d8 15.tZ'lc7, and then The attack by a small number of piec­ 16.�d3 with pressure. es has been slowed down, and Black's 10.Jie2 �c7 predominance inthe center has become In the variations 10... e5 ll.tZ'ld5 palpable. White maintains approximate tZ'ld4 12.�c4 b5 13.Jib3 tZ'le8 14.tZ'lxc8 equality anyway after 17.�c4+ �h8 l:t:xc8 15.c3 tZ'le6 16.0-0 and 12... tZ'lxd5 18.c3 �g4 19.0-0 tZ'la5 20.Jid5 l:t:ad8! 13.�xd5 �c7 14.c3 �xd6 15.cd l:t:b8 21.c4 (if 21.�xe4?, then 2l...f5 and in 16.0-0 b5 17.l:t:cl �b7 18.l:t:c5 White association with 22 ...l:t:d6 it's necessary didn't keep his knight on d6, although to part with a piece) 2l...�e2 22.l:t:fcl he solidly established a piece on d5 and f5 . Delorme chooses a somewhat riskier looked more promising. plan with queenside castling. ll.�d2 17.0-0-0 �e6

137 Chapter VIII

In the event of 17 ...ttJ d4 White 7.li.f4 0-0 manages to emphasize the instabil­ 8.Ji.c7 Vlile7 ity of the knight's position with the 9.Ji.d6 help of 18.li.c4+ 'it'h8 19.ttJf4! V/ilg7? 20.ttJg6+. 18.c3 'it'h8 The variation 18 ...li.x a2 19]:;,d6! f5 20.g4 f4 21.ttJf6+ 'it'h8 22.ttJxe4 doesn't suit Black, but on the other hand he had the unexpected tactical opportu­ nity 18... ttJd 4!? 19.cd li.xa2 20.de fe 2U'!:d2 �ac8+ 22.'\t>dl �b3+ 23.�e1 �cl+ 24.�d1 �xd1 25.::xdl ::xd1 + 26.'it'xd1 �xf2 at his disposal, and the exposed position of the king isn't likely to let White count on success. 9 ... li.xd6 19.�d6?! 10. Vlilxd6 After 19.'1t'b1Vlilf7 a rook invasion is Only by blackmailing his opponent advisable and makes claims on an ad­ with an exchange of queens can White vantage, but here after Black's obvious count on an advantage. In the event of reply the rook is hanging. 10.ttJxd6 the simplest is to exchange off 19... �f7 the knight with lO... ttJe8 - in the varia­ 20.�hd1 ttJd4 tion ll.ttJcb5 a6 12.ttJxe8 ab 13.ttJd6 b4 21.�1xd4 ed 14.li.c4 b6 15.0-0 li.a6 16.li.xa6 �xa6 22.�xd4 li.xa2 Black rid himself of the problematic c8 White has been left the exchange Cobra bishop and thanks to counterplay down, but there's no reason to panic. on the a-ftle was no worse. Now a non-stop attack on the bishop Against Wyss (Lenk, 2006) I pre­ makes sense with 23.�a4 li.b3 24.�b4 ferred 10 ...e5, with the idea of 11... li.a2 (24 ...Ji.d 5? 25.ttJf4) 25.�a4. As a ttJd4 (asin game 3 with Delorme) - the result of crude blunders Delorme was author's original method of fighting mated as soon as the 29th move. against the d6 knight, which has been successfully tried several times. Then 4. Y. BERTHELOT - A. RAETSKY came ll.ttJf5 Vlilb4 12.a3 VliJa5 13.VIilf3? Sautron, 2005 d5 14.0-0-0 Ji.xf5 15.VIilxf5 d4 16.ttJe2 b5 17.h4 b4 18.�h3, and with the very l.e4 c5 strong 18.... ttJe 7 19.VIilf3 �fc8 White's 2.ttJt3 ttJc6 army presents a pathetic spectacle. In 3.d4 cd the event of 13.b4 Vli!d8 (the queen's 4.ttJxd4 I{Jf6 journeyhas come fu ll circle) 14.ttJd6 a5 5.ttJc3 e6 Black hooks the b4 pawn and gets recip- 6.ttJdb5 li.c5 rocal chances.

138 The Sicilian Defense

10... �d8 manage to get counterplay: 16.�d4 d6 Deviating from the exchange and 17.b3 Mb8 18.a3 c5 19.�c3 �d8 20.e5 preparing to chase the queen off d6 with (20.tt:lxc5 �e7 21.tlla4 i,b7, getting the help of ll...tt:le8. The main line 10 ... free) 20 ...�d 7 21.tllb2 de 22.�xe5 tllf6 tt:le8ll .�xe7 tt:lxe7and then ...f5 is in­ 23.�xc5, and nothing real is evident for vestigated in game 5. The drawback of the pawn. Nevertheless, I was able to the version of the exchange 10 ...�xd6 win in my opponent's time trouble. ll.tllxd6 tt:le8 12.tllxe8 Mxe8 is that the 11... Mb8 rook doesn't support ...f5 , and 13.tt:lb5 12.i,e2 bS!? Md8 14.tt:ld6 b6 15.0-0-0 Mb8 16.i,b5 This sacrifice is more adventurous, fundamentally turns the screw. more interesting and probably stronger 11.tt:lc7!? than the modest little step 12... b6. In Now the knight is exchanged off on the latter case Vo karev didn't create any e8 and the queen stays on d6. 1L.te2 problems for Chuprov (Nizhny Tagil, a6 12.tt:lc7 Ma7 is quite another matter, 2007) - 13.e5 tt:le8 14.tt:lxe8 Mxe8 15.f4 as the knight is threatened with danger i,b7 16.�f3 tt:la5 17.tt:le4?! i,d5 18.b3 from the a7 rook. On 13.e5 the tactic 13... tt:lb7 19.�b4 i,xe4 20.i,xe4 d5! 2l.ed tt:lxe5!? 14.�xe5 b6 15.tllxe6 fe 16.0-0-0 a5 22.�d2 tt:lxd6 23.i,d3tt:lb7 24.�e3 Mc7 17.i,f3 i,b7 18.i,xb7 Mxb7 main­ tt:lc5 25.0-0-0 �f6 26.�e5 �xe5 27.fe tains approximate equality, and also the Mad8 - but White's play is corrected variation 13... b5 14.tt:lxe6 fe 15.ef �xffi by 17.0-0 tt:lc4 18.�d4 i,xf3 19.Mxf3 16.0-0-0 �f4+ 17.�xf4 �xf4 18.f3 d5 20.ed ltJxd6 21.:d1 tt:lf5 22.�xd8 (Baramidze - Chernov, Nuremberg, �bxd8 23.l:fd3 �xd3 24.Mxd3, with 2007) 18... Mc7 19.g3 Mf820.f 4 i,b7. a minimal advantage. In Khalifman's The main continuation is 11.0-0-0. opinion, instead of 16.�f3 the continu­ In the encounter To sic - Bakic (Bel­ ation 16.0-0-0!? tt:le7 17.�xd7 i,xg2 grade, 2007) Black achieved a solid po­ 18.�xa7 tt:ld5 19.Mhgl Ma8 20.�b7 sition after ll...a6 12.tlld4 (12.tllc7? tt:lxc3 2l.�xg2 tt:lxe2+ 22.�xe2 Uxa2 Ma7 doesn't work at all here) 12 ...�b6 23.Mxg7+ c:tlxg7 24.Uxd8 Uxd8 25.c3 13.tt:lxc6 de 14.Ud2 �a5 15.i,e2 e5 promises more, with the advantage of 16.a3 i,e6 17.Mhdl Ufe8 18.f3 Uac8 the queen over rooks. 19.�b4 �c7. Or 13.f4 tlle8 (unfor­ 13.tt:l7xb5 tunately it doesn't win the knight) Against Brochet (France, 2007) Ber­ 14.tt:la4 �a5 15.tt:lxc6 (Sasu-Ducso­ thelot acted according to our joint anal­ ara - Raetsky, Sautron, 2004). I didn't ysis of the ending of the game: 13.e5!? find any resources to play fo r a win b4 14.ef bc 15.fg c:tlxg7 16.�g3+ c:tlh8 (which I needed to continue the battle 17.�xc3+ e5. White has kept his ex­ fo r a Grandmaster ) with 15... tra pawn, but does he have an advan­ de 16.�d4 e5!? 17.fe i,g4 18.Md2 b5 tage (let's say, with 18.tllb5 �f6 19.0-0 19.tllc3 b4 20.tt:lbl �c7, and I preferred Ug8 20.Uadl)? The variation 13 ...tll e8 the asymmetrical 15... bc?! Because of 14.tt:lxe8 Uxe8 15.0-0 b4 16.tt:le4 �b7 the passivity of his pieces Black didn't isn't as attractive fo r Black as it seemed

139 Chapter VIII to Khalifman, and actually after 17 .� d3 W g7 doesn't give him any reason to '!i'a5 18.LZlc5 he has major problems. complain about his fate. White takes the pawn specifically 19.11i'd3 l:i:xb2 with the c7 knight, as with 13.iixb5? A colorful position comes about in D:c7 14.�xc6 de the knight gets entan­ the case ofl9... d4!? 20.LZldliH5 21 .11i'd2 gled in the enemy nets. l:i:a422.11i'x a5 l:i:xa5 23.�d3 �xd3 24.cd 13... '!i'a5 LZld5, with the embodiment of wretch­ If he had wanted to achieve a draw edness on dl and its smug counterpartin Black could have gone down the path of the center. Still, thanks to his extra pawn simplifications - 13... a6 14.LZld4 D:xb2 White should hold out. 15.LZlxc6 de 16.1!i'xd8 l:i:xd8 17.l:i:dl 20.l:i:ab1 l:i:xb1 l:i:xdl + 18.Wxdl Wf8 and ... We7. But 21.l:i:xb1 d4 there was no such desire. 22.l:i:d1 14.1li'd2 d5 Rushing with 22 ... �f5, I missed The alternative is the tactical op­ 23.11i'b5!'!i'xb5 24.LZlxb5 �xc2 25.l:i:xd4 eration 14 ...�a6 15.a4 �xb5 16.�xb5 l:i:xd4 26.LZlxd4, with exchanges and a LZlxe4! 17.LZlxe4 l:i:xb5 l8.ab '!i'xal+ quick draw. 22 ...g6 23.11i'd2'!i'e5, with a 19.11i'dl '!i'a5+ 20.LZlc3 LZlb4 21.0-0 definite advantage maintained the ten­ d5, which is more common in the Ben­ si on. ko Gambit. The players' chances are roughly equal. 5. M. CARLSEN - R. VIDONYAK 15.ed ed Gausdal, 2005 16.0-0 l:i:d8 17.LZld4 LZlxd4 l.e4 c5 18.1!i'xd4 2.LZlf3 LZlc6 3.d4 cd 4.LZlxd4 LZlf6 5.tiJc3 e6 6/:i:JdbS �cS 7.Jif4 0-0 8.�c7 '!i'e7 9.li,d6 �xd6 10.'i¥xd6 LZle8 ll.'i¥xe7 11.'i¥ d2 leads to a normal Sicilian in a playable fo rm fo r Black. Then 11... a6 12.LZld4 LZlxd4 13.1!i'xd4b5 14.0-0-0 18... d6 l5.h4 l:i:b8 16.a3 (16.e5 de 17.1!i'xe5 Before taking on b2, Black prevents 'i¥c7 l8.'i¥xc7 LZlxc7, with approximate a reciprocal capture on d5. Then again, equality) 16 ...�b7 17.'i¥b6 l:i:c8 18.f3 18 ...l:i:xb2 19.LZlxd5 l:i:xc2 20.LZlxf6+ l:i:c6 19.'i¥e3 LZlf6 20.LZle2 e5 2l.®g3 gf 21.11i'e4 �f5 22.11i'e7 l:i:d7 23.1!i'e8+ �c8 22.�d3 'i¥c7 23.Wbl �e6 is pos-

140 The Sicilian Defense

sible (Wedberg - Hall, Sweden, 2000). 13... ti'Jxd6 Black has successfully regrouped and his 14.l:Ixd6 fe position is preferable. 15.ti'Jxe4 ti'Jf5 11... ti'Jxe7 16.l:Id2 d5 12.0-0-0 17.ti'Jg5

A position that arises compara­ This position from the Cobra can be tively often in the Cobra. Apart from called a key one with full justification. the advance ...f5 there are no other It's more typical of the French Defense sensible plans for Black. Accompany­ -with a "bad" light-squared bishop and ing it with an expanded fianchetto only a backward e6 pawn. No matter how weakens the queenside: 12... a6 13.ti'Jd6 passive Black's position is, he still has a ti'Jxd6 14.l:Ixd6 f5 15.1i.d3 fe 16.1i.xe4 choice between a strategy of simplifica­ l:Ia7 17.f3 b5 18.b4 tllf5 19.1i.xf5 l:Ixf5 tions (with play most likely heading fo r a 20S£ib2 �f8 2l.ti'Je4 �e7 22.l:Ihdl draw) and trying to maintainthe heat of l:Ic7 23.ti'Jc5, with the classic advan­ the battle in the hope of grabbing some­ tage of the knight over the bishop (Jenni thing. - Raetsky, Lenk, 2003). 17... b6 12... f5 Grandmaster Bellon prefers 17... 13.tt'ld6 ti'Jh4, giving up his ambitions. Then A fundamentally different pawn again, he achieved an armistice against structure is created with 13.e5. After 13... Coleman (England, 2006) relatively eas­ ti'Jg6the rook is deflected to the defense ily: 18.g3 ti'Jf319 .ti'Jxf3 l:Ixf320.1i.g2 l:It7 of the advanced pawn, and the expand­ 2l.f4 g6 22.h4 h5 23.l:Iel 1i.d7 24.1i.h3 ed fianchetto gains strength: 14.l:Iel a6 l:If6 25.l:Ide2 �f7 - the weakness on e6 15.ti'Jd4 b5 16.h4 1i.b7 17.h5 ti'Je7 18.a3 is solidly defended, and it isn't clear how l:Ic8 19.l:Ih3 tllc7 20.f4 ti'Jcd5 2l.ti'Jxd5 White can make progress. (Barua - Bellon, Gibraltar, 2004) 21... Smoothing out the chain in the cen­ ti'Jxd5. Now 22.g3 is fo rced, and it's ter with the help of 17 ...1i.d 7 18.1i.d3 e5 completely unclear what the rook is do­ doesn't work because of 19.1i.e4! Let's ing on h3. Black is fine. fo llow Hall's analysis: 19... de 20.l:Ixd7

141 Chapter VIII e3 2l.fe tt:lxe3 22.l:rel tt:lxg2 23.l:rxe5 iLd7 20.l:rel tt:lfl 2l.c4 l:rac8 22.1!/bl l:rad8 24.l:rxd8 l:rxd8 25.l:re7tll f4 26.b4, l:rfe8 23.cd (according to Khalifman, with excellent activity from the white 23.l:rc2!?iLc 6 24.ti:ld4iLb7 25.c d iLxd5 army. 26.f3 is a little more precise) 23 ...ed 18.tt:lt3 24.l:rxe8+ l:rxe8 25.iLc2 iLg4 26.iLb3 With the aim of establishing the iLxf3 27.gfl:rel+ 28.1!/c2 1!/f8 29.l:rxd5 knight on e5 and advancing c4. Now l!?e7. The extra pawn can only nomi­ with 18.iLd3?! e5 there's no pin on the nally be considered extra, and with ac­ file, and 19.iLe4 would fail. The contin­ tive pieces Black held out without much uation 19.l:rel e4 20.iLb5 tt:le7 21..:e3 trouble. 20 ...l:rf 6 21.l:rde2 l:re8 22.tt:le5 h6 22.tllh3 iLe6 23.iLa4 ti:lf5 24.l:rc3 iLb523.iLx b5 tt:lxb5 24.tt:lc6 1!/fl25 .a4 (Czebe - Chemov, Interlaken, 2003) ti:ld6 26.f3g5 27.b3 a5 has also been en­ 24 ...d4 25.l:rc7 e3 demonstrates how countered (Edouard - Brochet, France, easily the unprepossessing pawn duo in 2007) - after exchanging bishops Black the center gains strength if it's left with­ didn't completely equalize the chances. out the required attention. 20.c3 tt:lc5 It's better to develop the bishop 21.iL c2 aS another way: 18.iLb5 a6 19.iLc6 l:ra7 22.l:rel 20.l:rel l:rc7 (20 ...l:rf 6? 21.l:rxd5!) White has a solid advantage. Rybka 21.tt:le6 l:rxc6 22.tllxf8 l!ixf8 23.ti:lxd5 suggests 22 ...b5 here, and, if allowed, tt:lh4. In Hall's opinion, Black's chanc­ 23 ...b4. True, most probably you won't es are no worse thanks to the possibility be allowed to do it - 23.l:re5!?(23 ...b4?! of attacking pawns on the kingside. 24.c4). Separated from their own kind, 18... ti:ld6 the pawns become more vulnerable, and 19.iLd3 tt:lb7 the Norwegian wunderkind reminded Vidonyak transfers his knight from his partner of this incontestable truth: one strong spot to another, which 22 ...a4 23.tt:le5 a3 24.b3 l:ra7 25.b4 doesn't change the evaluation of the tt:Ja6 26.0 l:rc7 27.l:re3 iLb7 28.l:rd4 position as difficult fo r Black. In the �b8 29.1!id2 iLa6 30.c4 de 31.l:rxa3 duel Berg - Hall (Germany, 2002) the itb5 32 . .:c3, winning the c4 pawn and knight preferred a stall in the rear: 19... the game. r··coNciusioN;··---··-·--·····--·---········------·········-·········-·································1 r Cobra-tamers: in the main line 7;.1U4 0-0 8.i.c7 .'Wie7 9.i.d Good news fo 6 ] ! .tx:d6 1 O.'Wix:d6 Whit e is guaranteedan advanta ge. Comfort.ingnews of the ! fo rfans i poisonous snake ·'"'" after an exchange of queens lO... 'be8 lt'Wixe 7 f!Jxe7 it's far decisive , gets intp a te nse battle (ll.f!Jc7!'?). i ! fro m and with l0; .. 'ttd8 Wbite i only ofd�ades . ollly itc�n be ! i The Cobra is a couple old . and8P a $lltpriSe , especially i against anu!1$op histic t\t ed playe�, �tgofplaye m:haveape tline inthe Sicilian and i we enc pu rage the te�de:ttoa dpPt the pet C9f>ra into their repertoire. i , :,����---�:�--.:------�--"'------"'-··----"'-.; ...... ______..__ ...... _._.,______., ______i ...... L :.. .._.; __ .:, ...... :...... !

142 Chapter 9 The Albin Countergambit

The Romanian master Adolf Albin confidently advanced his e-pawn against Lasker in 1893 and ventured the same step against Chigorin three years later. Albin's novelty was in tune with an era that was the heyday of the Orthodox Defense, when Black invented deviations at the early stages of the opening. From the very beginning the gambit acquired a reputation fo r being incorrect and was used by famous players epi­ sodically. It was only in the new millennium that Morozevich breathed life into the almost-forgotten opening, and 2 ...e5 gradually started being played. In 1998 the authors published with the company Schachverlag Kania the mono­ graph A/bins Gegengambit. The work was presented in the format of the Encyclopedia of Chess Op enings, i.e. without words. By comparison with the comprehensiveness of chess databases the value of such books has evaporated, so priority hasbeen given to explanations. Only the main line is investigated here, which arises after 3.de d4 4.t1Jf3 t1Jc6. The rest either doesn't provide a critical test fo r the Albin or switches to other openings. An exception is the solid line 3.de d4 4.e4, where the author has no ideas of his own - fo r some reason my opponents have ignored the natural pawn advance. The continuation 4.e4 hardly claims to refute the gambit, and games from recent years haven't changed that. Alexander Raetsky is respectful towards 2 ...e5, but on l.d4 d5 2.c4 he prefers the greedy, banal and flavorless capture on c4. So his co-author - a fan of the Albin Countergambit - will take over.

l.d4 d5 c3 and e3 squares away from the op­ 2.c4 e5 ponent and splits the enemy camp into 3.de d4 two halves, destroying the cooperation 4.t1Jt3 t1Jc6 between them. Thanks to the advanced The d4 pawn is unquestionably the pawn Black gets various tactical possi­ star on the board. It takes the important bilities. The main problem is rooted in Chapter IX

the fact that this is a gambit, and White is a pawn up fr om the start. Anexchange of the e5 pawn fo r the d4 pawn is fairly common, with accompanying simplifi­ cations - nothing less than a misfortune fo r Black. Even if you manage to grab another pawn along the way (usually c4), equality isn't guaranteed.

LLlb3) 8 ...a5 9.LLlb3 'iVe7 (9 ...b6 10.e3!) 10.LLlfxd4 0xd4 ll.LLlxd4 LLlxe5 12.e3, and a favorable exchange of pawns has been carried out. 7 ...�f 5!? 8.'iVa4 'iVd7 9.0-0-0 0-0-0 10.LLlb3 �c2! deserves attention, exchanging off the knight. The d4 pawn remains alive, and White's kingside is locked up, as before. In the position in the diagram 5.g3 is Markos used 5.�g5 against me encountered more oftenthan all the other (Bratislava, 1998): 5 ...f6 6.ef gf 7.�f4 moves put together. A fa ir distance behind LLlge7 8.e3 LLlg6 9.�d3 (9.�g3 Si.b4+ it are the continuations 5.a3 and 5.LLlbd2. 10.LLlbd2 lays claim to an advantage) Of the others, 5.e3, 5.SH4 and 5.�g5 de­ 9 ...�b4+ 10.LLlbd2 de 1l.�xg6+ hg serve a mention. After5.e3 �b4+ 6.�d2 12.�xe3 �f5 13.a3 �e7 14.'iVb3 'iVd7 de 7 .fe the extra pawn is devalued in a 15.0-0-0 0-0-0 16.'iVc3 'iVe6 17.�d4 standard gambit structure. An exchange �d7 18.�he1 'iVfl 19.LLlb3?!(in the case on d2 leads to equality. Wm ning the pawn of 19.LLlg5 'iVf8 20.LLlgf3 'iVfl is a justi­ back has been encountered a few times, fiable repetition of moves) 19... �hd8 7 ...�g4 8.�e2 �xf3 9.�xf3 'iVh4+ 10.g3 20.h3 g5 2l.�e3? �d3 22.�xd3 �xd3 'iVxc4 1l.�xc6+ 'iVxc6 12.0-0 - here the 23.�c2 i.h7!(then again, 23 ...�d1 +! is chances are also equal. just as lethal). The future Grandmaster After 5.�f4 LLlge76.LLl bd2 LLlg6 7.�g3 didn't display tenacity in defense, nor did he distinguish himselfin the opening. (See Diagram) Capturing on f6 with the pawn is only White solidly defends his pawn weak­ justified by winning a tempo; in other ness at the price of mobilizing the king­ lines such weakening moves are avoided. side. Inventiveness is still required from Basically, the undermining move ...f6 Black to prevent events from unfolding is encountered rarely these days. Black according to his opponent's scenario - frees himself, but it's a shame to part both after 7 ...�c 5 8.a3 (preparing b4 or with the pawn irretrievably.

144 The AlbinCountergambit

On 5.i,g5 the response 5 ...i,e 7 6.a3 i1xd2+ 7.�xd2 i1g4 8.b3 (8.�f4!?) 6.i,xe7 CJJgxe7 is solid, but 5 ...CJJ ge7!? S ...i,x£3 9.gf CJJxe5 10.f4 CJJc6 ll.i1b2 is more substantial, with a subsequent �h4 12.e3 tiJf6 13.i,g2 0-0 (Riordan 6.tiJbd2 (and with 6.e3 i,g4 7.h3 i,x£3 - Sagalchik, USA, 2001), and instead of 8.'iVxf3 h6 9.i,f4 CJJg6 lO.tiJd2 de 14.0-0 l:':tad8 15.ed tiJh5 with imminent ll.i,xe3 CJJgxe5 12.�e4 �e7 Black play against the king, castling queenside doesn't experience any difficulties) 6 ... preserved the opening advantage. h6 7.i,h4 i,e6 8.�a4 �d7 9.tJ'Je4?! In the event of 5 ... i,e6 it's possible (9.0-0-0 tiJf5 10.i,g3 0-0-0 ll.tiJb3 to part with the c4 pawn: 6.tiJb3!? i,xc4 �e7 is correct) 9 ...tJ'Jf 5 10.0-0-0 CJJxe5 7.tiJbxd4 i,c5 8.e3 (8.i,e3!?and l:':tc1are ll.�xd7+ CJJxd7 12.g4 CJJxh4 13.CiJxh4 also promising, although the kingside still i1xc4 14.Ihd4 i1xa2 15.f40-0-0 16.i,g2 needs to be developed) 8 ...i,xf1 9.IIxfl c6 17.tJ'Jf5 c;i;c7 18.IIhdl i,d5 (Ovsi­ �d7 lO.CJJxc6 �xc6 1l.i,d2 i,b6 (the annikov - Zablotsky, Saratov, 2006) comparatively better ll...a5 didn't allow - Black is now a fu ll pawn up. you to hold out on the c-file either- 12.l:':tc1 CJJe7 13.a3 a4 14.�c2 b6 15.i1b4 i,xb4+ l.d4 dS 16.ab �xc2 17.l:':txc2 tiJd5 18.c;i;e2 with 2.c4 eS an advantage in the ending) 12.IIcl �g6 3.de d4 13.�c2 �xg2 14.�a4+ c;i;f8 15.�e4 IId8 4.tJ'Jf3 CJJc6 16.i,b4+ CJJe7 17.l:':tgl�h3 18.tiJg5�h5 S.tiJbd2 19.e6! c5 20.i,c3, and Dzevlan quickly crushed Furhoff (Stockholm, 1992).

1. I. SOKOWV - A. MOROZEVICH Wij k aan Zee, 2005

l.d4 dS 2.c4 eS 3.de d4 4.tJ'Jf3 CJJc6

5 .tiJbd2 CJJge7

An original kind of bridge between 5.a3 and 5.g3. The continuation 5.tiJbd2 i1g4 6.a3 was examined in the line 5.a3, and 5.tiJbd2 i,g4 6.g3 in 5.g3. The f3 knight is defended, and a substitute for the bishop move out to g4 must be sought. An exchange of the bishop fo r the d2 knight in the interests of the safety of the d-pawn doesn't impress: 5 ...i,b4

145 Chapter IX

Morozevich has also played like this 10.�f2 0-0 ll.ji,d3 L'Llh6 12.h3 L'Lle6 on 5.a3, and on 5.g3. But the position 13.�d2 ji,xd2 14.0bxd2 t!lc5 15.ji,c2 in the diagram was defended as Black j'l,f5 16.e4 ji,e6 17.b4 0a6 18.:cl:hbl fo r the first time by none other than the c5 19.a3 :cl:ad8 20.�e3 - those knights teacher ofthe chess world, the dogmatist wouldn't have appealed to Tarrasch! Dr. Tarrasch! Not a bad advertisement! 7... ji,e7 6.L'Llb3 Asa result ofweak play by Whitein the Again we'll see the continuations game Napier - Tarrasch (Monte Carlo, 6.a3 and 6.g3 in the lines 5.a3 and 5.g3 1902) only Black was happy with the po­ respectively. sition that arose: 7 ... \f/ e6 8.h3 h5 9.j'l,g5 6... {� f5 li e7 10.�xe7 'i!fxe7ll. 'i!fd30-0-0 12.h4 7.a3 a5 13.g3 a4 14. � h3 g6 15.L'Llbd2 'i!fc5 White isn't in a hurry to change the 16.0-0 �b8 17. ® g2 0xe5 18.0xe5 deadlocked situation around the pawn. Vj

146 The Albin Countergambit

Devotees of the gambit won't be uating his king to gl via fl he flung open surprised by this kind of flank strategy the doors and windows of its residence

as a counterbalance to play in the cen­ - 21.e3? lllb3 22.�d1 �aS+ 23.�e2 ter - since the situation in the center lllecS24.�g2 �a6, with a rout. has temporarily stabilized, and excur­ sions on the periphery go unpunished. 2. M. ILLESCAS - J. FLUVIA It isn't worth winning the pawn back Spain, 2005 -in Rybka's variation lO... :as ll.b4 ab 12.Ci:Jxb3 lllxe5 13.lllxe5 �xe5 14.jof4 l.d4 dS �e6 15.jl,h3 �b6 16.c5 �f6 17.jl,g5the 2.c4 eS castaway rook flounders around under a 3.de d4 hail of blows. 4.lllt3 lllc6 11.jl,b3 g6 S.lllbd2 Ylg4 12.llle4 h4?! 6.h3 The exchange operation 12 ...lll h4!? 13.@xc8 lllxf3+ 14.�xf3 �xc8 15.jl,f4 �d7 (Dautov) left few chances fo r suc­ cess, so Morozevich bluffs. 13.jl,f4 hg 14.hg lllg7 The knight leaves a space fo r the bishop. 14 ...lll xg3 15.fg �xh3 16.0-0-0 established a pawn balance at the price of the king's safety. 1S.jl,g2?! By exchanging rooks Sokolov makes his opponent's defense easier. lllescas suggests getting some cer­ After 15.lllf6 +! jl,xf6 16.ef it's impos­ tainty about the bishop, which, as a rule, sible to take on f6 immediately due to leads to total simplifications. 17.jl,d7+!, and in the case of 16... lll e6 6... .�xt3 17.1�e4 �xf6 White recoups with the c7 Exchanging is encountered more of­ pawn. ten than retreating, as Black maintains 15 ... �xhl+ a course to an apparently harmless end­ 16.3i,xh1 jl,fS game. 6 ...jl,h 5 7.a3 �e7 with a trans­ 17 .lllfg S ®aS position of moves is examined with 6.a3 18.�t3?! llle6 jl,g4 7.t?ibd2 �e7. 19.lllh7 3i,xe4 7.Cllxt3 jl,b4+ 20.�xe4 c6 It isn't worth deviating from the Sokolov had lost the thread of the chosen course, as gambit play dries up game (as evidenced by the loss of a tern­ without the light-squared bishop. After po on the l81h move), and here he made 7 ...jl,c5 8.a3 a5 White has his sights on an unforgivable blunder. Instead of evac- the b7 square with �b3 immediately or

147 Chapter IX

with the inclusion of 9.g3 CfJge7 10.Jig2 and all White can do is dream of one CfJg6.A fragment from the offhand game on the kingside. But his pawn march Capablanca - Aurbach (Paris, 1914) on the queen's flank, supported by the isn't an example to imitate either: 7 ... killer from g2, was so dangerous that f6 8.ef CfJxf6 9.g3 Jib4+ 10.Jid2 V/ile7 Miralles won eight moves later. 11... ll.a3 Jixd2+ 12. Vlilxd2. Here the little­ Jixd2 12.VIilxd2 CfJf6 13.gfdl CfJc6 is known player equalized his chances with probably more solid. 12... C!Je 4 13.VIilc2 CfJc5, and if desired 9... Vlilxb4+ could declare against 10.VIild2 V/ilxc4 the fu ture Wo rld Champion (if the latter A novelty, but not an improvement. didn't snap out of his laid-back condi­ 10 ...VIilxd2+ 11.Wxd2 CfJge7 12.e4 de+ tion) - 14.b4 d3 15.VIildld2 +! 16.CfJxd2 13.Wxe3 CfJg6 was played previously. CfJd3! But the prophylactic 9.a3 doesn't White parts with his extra pawn on the let you serenely slide through the open­ e5 square or hurls it fo rward to its doom ing stage - there's no convenient spot with e6 - his advantage evaporates in ei­ fo r the dark-squared bishop. ther case. 8.Jid2 V/ile7 ll.e3 de 9.Jixb4+ 12.Jixc4 ed+ The draw Meessen - Henry (Namur, 13.Wxd2 CfJge7 2006) was appealing: 9.a3 Jixd2+ 14.Wc3 0-0 10.V/ilxd2 0-0-0 11.e3 (11.0-0-0 CfJxe5 15.gadl gadS 12.CfJxd4 CfJxc4 13.VIilc3CfJd 6 14.e3 CfJe4 16.e6 fe - the knight, having drawn a polygon, 17.Jixe6+ Wh8 has based itself on a superb spot) 11... CfJh6 12.CfJxd4 CfJxd4 13.ed c5 14.V/ila5 gxd4 15.V/ilxa7 ge8 16.Jie2 ge4 17.0-0-0! (now there's no way to avoid perpetual check!) 17... gxe2 18.f4 ge4 19.gd5 gxc4+ 20.Wb1 gd8 21.VIila8+ Wc7 22.VIila5+Wc8 23.V/ila8+. But with 14.d5!? V/ilxe5+ 15.Jie2ghe8 16.f4 V/ile7 17.Wf2White consolidates with an ex­ tra passed pawn. Instead of 11...CfJh6 the continuation 11...CfJxe5 12.CfJxe5 V/ilxe5 13.0-0-0 c5 is more natural and stron­ ger, equalizing. The pieces on the board are the same, A typical Albin structure arose in the but the situation has changed. Here the game Miralles - Pergericht (Cannes, bishop is fantastic and in an asymmetri­ 1988): 9.g3 0-0-0 10.Jig2 CfJxe5 cal structure it defines White's advan­ 11.0-0 CfJxf3+ 12.ef1? Jixd2 13.VIilxd2 tage. The knight jump that Illescas un­ Vlilf6 14.a4 CfJe7 15.f4 h5 16.h4 Wb8 dertook is only good with a preliminary 17.a5. Black has a central passed pawn, exchange of rooks.

148 The Albin Countergambit

18.tllg5 l::!,xdl 3. S. FARAGO - M. CHETVERIK 19.l::!,xdl J::!,xf2 Budapest, 2002 20.tllf7+ �g8 21.tt'ld8+ �f8 l.d4 dS 22.tllxc6 tllxc6 2.c4 eS 23.l::!,d7 l::!,xg2 3.de d4 24.J::!,f7+ �e8 4.tllf3 tllc6 25.l::!,xc7 l::!,g3+ 5.a3 aS 26.�c4 l::!,g5 The position is equal and the battle should have ended in a draw. However, Black went on to lose.

l.d4 dS 2.c4 eS 3.de d4 4.tllf3 tllc6 5.a3

A very natural desire - to stop the b-pawn. Now the prophylactic role of 5.a3 comes to the fo re, and by com­ parison with 5.e3 the move 6.e3 gains force (there's no ...ii.b4 +). Bareev and Morozevich found themselves here with a transposition of moves (Elista, 1997). They started with the Chigorin Defense (l.d4 d5 2.c4 li".c6 3.e3 e5 4.de d4 5.a3 a5 6.'i'\f3),and the duel was illuminated This modest pawn move is consid­ in a corresponding monograph by Mo­ erably better than it looks. The black rozevich and Barsky. I'lldirect anyone pieces can't get to the b4 square. To an who's curious to it, only commenting even greater degree this is a support for that after ...6 ii.c 5 7.ed �xd4 (to hook b4 - a useful advance in a gambit even the e5 pawn; 7 ...tll xd4 is at least no if Black castles kingside. The queen's worse) 8.�e2 tllge7 9.0-0 0-0 IO.tllc3 it bishop comfortably makes its way to b2, looks like equality can be achieved with and the permanent threat of b5 influ­ 10... �xe5 ll.tt'lxe5 tllxe5 12.�g5 f6 ences the center in the strongest pos­ 13.�e3 �e6. sible way. 6.tt'lbd2 On 6.g3 Black has to choose a setup from the system 5.g3, in which the inclu-

149 Chapter IX si on of a3 and ...aS does him no harm. ...a4 and ...iia 5 White still doesn't suc­ This is unlikely to be a plan with castling ceed in completing his development. queenside, but on the other hand the Schiffers fairly points out that instead of fashionable maneuver . ..CiJe7-g6 is rel­ the futile blocking of the bishop 9.e3 de evant. 10.�xd8+ tllxd8 l l.iixe3 iixe3 12.fe is 6 ... iicS more promising.

The clamp on the queenside ...a4 7 ... iia7 fixes the weaknesses b2 and c4 in place 8.iig5 tllge7 at an appropriate moment. Here it's 9.�d2 h6 premature: 6 ...a4?! 7.b3 ab 8.Li'lxb3 10.iih4 iie6 9.Li'lbxd4 tllxd4 10.�xd4 �xd4 ll.tllxd4 iixc4 12.iib2 �a4 13.e3 iixfl 14.�xfl iic5 15.Li'lb5 c6 16.Li'lc3 �c4 17.�e2 tlle7 18.�fdl Li'lc8 19.a4, and White made the best of his pawn (Dy­ achkov - Kanep, Moscow, 2005). In the game Clery - Chetverik (La Fere, 2006) Black relocated his knight to f5 to defend his central pawn, but he didn't pay enough attention to its safe­ ty: 6 ...tll ge7 7.tllb3 tllf5 8.iig5 �d7?! 9.g4 h6 lO.iicl a4 ll.gf ab 12.iih3 �a5 13.iid2 �c5 14.�xb3 (and why 10... a4 not 14.e6! ?) 14... tll xe5 15.tllxe5 �xe5 Saleh Salem, the young talent from 16.0-0-0, with a justified swift victory. the United Arab Emirates, repeated I should have looked fo r compensation Farago's moves against me (Parubice, fo r the pawn with 8 ...iie7 9.iix e7 �xe7 2007). But an improvement lay in wait 10.tllbxd4 Li'lcxd4 ll.Li'lxd4 tllxe5 12.e3 fo r White - 10... iif 5 ll.tllg3?! g5!, and, 0-0. Without a doubt the exchange of having been disappointed with the vari­ queens 8.e4.de 9.�xd8+ tllxd8 lO.fe is ation 12.tllxf5 tllxf5 13.iig3 g4 14.tllgl just as pleasant fo r White as it is without 'i/lie7 (winning the pawn back with bet­ the addition of 5.a3 a5. ter chances) he went fo r a dubious 7.0e4 sacrifice, 12.tllxg5?! hg 13.iixg5 �d7 International Master Farago (who 14.�f4 iic5 15.h4. The continuation has the same name as the fa mous ll.�c2 �d7 12.0-0-0 is more accurate, Grandmaster) fo llows an old recom­ although no one wants to go into a pin mendation by Schiffers. Against Cohn voluntarily. (Munich, 1900) Showalter contin­ 11.0-0-0 iifS ued 7.tllb3 iia7 8.iig5 Li'lge7 9.c5 h6 12.tllg3 iig6 10.iixe7 �xe7 ll.l:lcl 0-0 12.�d2 Having convinced myself that af­ iig4 13.tllbxd4 iixf3 14.tllxf3 iixc5 ter 12... ith 7? 13.tllh5! 0-0? the move 15.�c3 iib6. Because of the threat of 14.tllxg7! ends matters, I don't let the

150 The Albin Countergambit knight into my camp. 12... g5 13.Ci'lxf5 23.Ci'lf3 f6 Ci'lxf5 14.�g3 g4 is too late, as with tran­ 24.Ci'lxe5 fe sit via e 1 the knight defends the pawn 25.�g4 �f6 from d3. There's approximate equality on 13.e4 the board. In time trouble Black blun­ 13.�f4 0-0 14.e4 is more precise, dered again and ruined the game con­ ruling out a capture . clusively. 13... de 14.�c3 �c8 4. N. PERT - I. ROGERS 15.�xe7 cJfJxe7 England, 2002 So as not to lift the attack on the pawn, although with 15... Cll xe7 16.fe 0-0 1.d4 dS 17.�e2 �e6 there's nothing to worry 2.c4 eS about with a pair oflong-range bishops. 3.de d4 16.fe �cS?! 4.Ci'lf3 Cllc6 Useful in principle, but played at the S.a3 �e6 wrong time. I should have finished my with the help of 16... �d8 17.�e 2 cJfJf8. 17.�d5 b6 18.e4 Not only blunts Black's light -squared bishop, but also White's. After 18.Jid3! winning the pawn back opens the way to winning combinations like 18... �x e3+?! 19.cJfJbl�e6 20.�el �c5 2l.�d6! 18... �e8?! Black returns to artificial castling in an unsuitable fo rm. In the case of 18... The attack on the pawn isn't condu­ �d8 19.�d3 cJfJf8 20.�c2 White's ad­ cive to possibilities fo r White to defend vantage isn't huge. In the sharpvariation it. 6.b4!? is very unclear, with the exam­ 19.e6?! �xe6 20.�xg7 �xe4 2l.Ci'lxe4 ple variation 6 ...�xc4 7.Ci'lbd2 �e6 8.b5 �xd5 22.cd �xe4 because of his poor Clla5 9.�a4 c5 lO.bc Cllxc6. Neverthe­ development only White has problems. less, practical players prefer to keep their 19.Ci'lh4?! pawn superiority. Now 19.e6! �xe6 20.�xg7 was rel­ 6.e3 evant and led to an advantage, as the ac­ Leads to an important typical posi­ tive rook isn't exchanged off. tion fo r the gambit. If he wants to keep 19... c;!Jf8 the queens on the board White chooses 20.�e2 cJfJgS 6.Ci'lbd2. Vo lzhin conducted his attack 21.�hd1 �e6 beautifully and energetically against Re­ 22.Ci'lgf5 CllxeS witz (Orhus, 1997): 6 ...�d7 7.b4 Cllge7

151 Chapter IX

8.li'lb3!?Lll g6 9.Lllbxd4 .txc4 10.Lllxc6 9 ...Lll g6 10.Lllg5 (9 ...h6!? precluded the Vjlxc6 ll..tb2 a5 12.Llld4 Vjla6 13.b5! knight thrust) 10 ...Lll gxe5 ll.tllxe6 fe li,xb5 14.�cl .tc4 15.Vjlc2 b5 16.Vjle4! 12.h3 tlld3+ 13. .txd3 �xd3 14.�e2 .te7 17.h4! 0-0-0 18.h5 tllf8 19.Lllc6 �d7 15.b4 tlld4+ 16 . .txd4 �xd4 �d7 20.�xc4! be 2l.e3 .tc5 22 . .txc4 17.�acl .te7 18.tllf3 �d8 19.�hdl Vjlb7 23.0-0 Llle6 24.a4! tlld8 25.li,b5 �xd1 20.�xdl .tf6 21.Llld2 �f822. Llle4 - the outcome of the skirmish is prede­ .te7 23.�d3. It's more pleasant to play termined. In the unusual variation 8 ... White, but no real chances of success �xc4 9.Lllc5! Vjlc8 (9... Vjld5? 10.e4! de are evident. ll..txc4 ef+ 12.�xf2 Vjlxc4? 13.Vjld7#) 9 ... LllfS 10. tllxd4 Lllxe5 ll.f4 b6 12.fe be 13.bc With the aim of exchanging off the the chances are still with White. bishop or fo rcing it away and seizing We can send the knight after the the d4 square. After 9 ...Lll g6 10.Lllb5 pawn without losing time on ...Vjld7: �d7 ll.Lllbd4 Lllgxe5 12.Lllxe5 Lllxe5 6 ... Lllge7 7.g3 Lllg6 8 . .tg2 .te7 9.b4 13.Lllxe6 fe 14 . .te2 tlld3+ 15. .txd3 0-0 10.0-0. As promised, thanks to the �xd3 16.�e2 �d8 (1. Farago - Mestel, b-pawn the situation is gradually being Rakovica, 1982) a structure arose from clarified in White's favor: 10... �b8?! the fragment Leitao - Mekhitarian, and ll.li,b2 Lllgxe5 12.b5 tllxf3+ 13.Lllxf3 against the bishop Black makes a draw Llla5 14.Lllxd4 Lllxc4 15.Lllxe6 Vjlxdl without difficulty. 16.�fxdl fe (Johannessen - Hector, Sweden, 2005) 17.�d7!, with a winning position. It's vital to provoke a conflict in the center before the bishop comes out to b2: 10 ...a5 ll.b5 Lllcxe5 12.Si,b2 c5 13.bc Lllxc6, with a decent game. Replacing 7.g3 with 7.Lllb3 Lllf5 8.Vjld3 leads to a favorable position fo r White fr om game 1 (5.tllbd2 .te6 6.Lllb3 Lllf5 7.a3 .te6 8.Vjld3). 6 ... de 7.Vjlxd8+ �xd8 8.�xe3 Lllge7 lO.�dl It's easier fo r the black pieces to get Babula pointed out that after 10 ..tf 4 into play, and the extra pawn on e5 needs Lllcd4?! ll.Lllxd4 �xd4 12.g3 it's unfa­ defending. It's still difficult to believe vorable to return the pawn: 12... .txc4?! that with normal play White is capable 13..te3! Lllxe3 14.fe �g4 15.h3. But of losing, but that has happened fairly with the inclusion of 10 ...h6 ll.h4 in the often anyway. indicated variation the rook retreats to 9.Lllc3 g4 with a peacefulheart. Winning a sec­ 9. Lllbd2 was encountered in the game ond pawn with 10.Lllb5 �d7 ll..txa7 Leitao - Mekhitarian (Brazil, 2006): Lllxa7 12.Lllxa7 c6 13.Lllc8 almost cer-

152 The Albin Countergarnbit

tainly isn't enough fo r victory. So with Sadler (Germany, 2003) Agrest pre­ fe rred ll.l:l:d1 li'lxe3 12.fe g6 13.li'lbd4 !ilg7 14.li'lxc6 be 15.!ile2 c5 16.�f 2 a5 17.b3 �e7 18.li'lg5 l:l:b8 19.li'lxe6 fe 20.l:l:xd7+�x d7 21.l:l:dl+ �e7 22.l:l:d3 !ilxe5. There were no resources left to continue the battle. 10 ... li'lxe3 ll.l:l:xd8+ �xd8 12.fe g6 13.!ile2 !ilg7 14.li'ld4 li'lxeS Current fashion prescribes bringing Rogers would have avoided destroy­ the knight to g6. Its legislator was Mo­ ing the chain by retreating his bishop to rozevich, who used 5 ...ti'Jge7 in a Rapid d7 (which is impossible with 14.li'lg5). game with To palov (Monaco, 2005). In any case, it's now White who's look­ 6.b4 ing for equality. We familiarized ourselves with the 15.ti'Jxe6 fe continuation 6.li'lbd2 !ile6 in the line 16.h4 h6 5 ...!ile 6. The response 6 ...li'lg6 7.li'lb3 17.l:l:fl �e7 !ile7 is logical and good, with subse­ 18.�d2 li'lfl quent kingside castling. 19.c5 l:l:d8+ The repetition of moves after 6.e3 20.�c2 !ilxc3 itg4 7.i.e2 de 8.�xd8+ l:l:xd8 9.!ilxe3 21.�xc3 l:l:dS Jixf3 10.Jixf3 ti'Jxe5 ll.!ilxb7 li'lxc4

22.b4 l:l:eS 12. ;t xa7 <'ZJa5 13.Jd3 li'lb3 14.l:l:a2li'lcl 23.�d4 l:l:dS+ (Parker - Pert, Swansea, 2006) is al­ 24.�c3 l:l:eS ready used to make draw agreements! By Pert didn't agree to a repetition of the way, with 7.ed Jixf3 8.�xf3 �xd4 moves. 25.l:l:f3 dragged the game out 9.li'lc3 �xe5+ 10.!ile2 li'lg6 Black also until the 751h move but didn't influence gradually equalizes his chances. the result. After 6.e3 li'lf5 7.e4 li'lh4 Black is fine. The d-pawn has acquired the privileged status of a passed pawn, and 5. Y. YAKOVICH -V. VOROTNIKOV the seizing of space doesn't take strong Moscow, 2007 squares away from the black pieces. 7 .b4 is more promising, initiating a favorable l.d4 dS exchange of queens: 7 ...de 8.�xd8+ 2.c4 eS li'lxd8 9.fe a5 10.b5 li'le6 ll.li'lc3 !ile7 3.de d4 12.!ild3 li'lc5 13.!ilc2 !ile6 14.li'ld5 !ild8 4.li'lt3 li'lc6 15.li'ld4 li'lh416. 0-0 li'lg617.li'lx e6 (17. S.a3 li'lge7 Jib2 !ilxd5 18. cd li'lxe5 19.li'lf5 ilf6

153 Chapter IX

20.ii,d4b6 2l.Madl is equivalent) 17... %Vd7 13.tllc3 or 13.tlld2 tllf5 14.tllf3, fe 18.ii,xg6+ hg 19.lllf4 Mh6 20.ii,b2 with an advantage for White. g5 21.tlle2 ii,e7 22.Madl (Conquest 8.b5 tllcxe5 - Acher, France, 2008). It's useful for 9.tllxe5 Black to delay a little with the exchange An exchange of queens was encoun­ - 7 ...ii,e 6 8.b5 de 9.%Vxd8+tll xd8 lO.fe tered in a Rapid game between Wo rld �c5, and after ...b6 and ...tll b7 the Champions Karpov and Kasimdzhanov knight comes back to life. (Tallinn, 2006): 9.%Vxd4 %Vxd4 10.ii,xd4 6... tllg6 tllxc4 ll.tllfd2 tlld6 12.a4 tllf5 13.ii,c3 The fo llowing duel between strong ii,c5 14.e3 0-0 15.tllb3 ii,b6?! (15... Grandmasters is reminiscent of the ii,b4 l6.ii,xb4 ab is harmless fo r Black) "golden age" of the Albin Counter­ 16.tll ld2 tlld6 17.tllc4 tllxc4 18.ii,xc4 gambit: 6 ...ii,g4 7.ii,b2 tllf5 8.%Vd3 g6 Me8 19.0-0 tlle5 20.�e2 ii,e6 21.tllxa5 9.e6!? ii,g7 lO.ef+ ®xf7 ll.tllbd2 Me8 Mxa5 22.ii,xe5 ii,b3, and now 23.ii,dl 12.g3?! tlle3! 13.c5 %Vd5 14.Mcl tllxfl ii,c4 24.�c3 �xfl 25.ii,xa5 ii,xa5 15.Mxfl Mxe2+!? (a speculative sacri­ 26.®xfl preserved the extra pawn and fice fo r the spectators instead of the cor­ chances of success with opposite-col­ rect 15... Mad8) 16.®xe2 tlle5 17.%Vxd4 ored bishops. For White it's worth rec­ ii,xf3+ 18.tllxf3 %Vxf3+ 19.®d2 (Ba­ ommending ll.e3 tlld6 l2.tllbd2 ii,d7 bula - Banikas, Turin, 2006), and now 13.a4 tllf5 14.ii,c3ii,b4 15.Mcl, with a it wasn't worth scorning the beautiful more harmonious configuration of his draw 19... ii,h 6+ 20.®c2 Md8! 21.%Vxd8 fo rces. %Vf5+ 22.®c3 %Vf3+. Babula acciden­ Yakovich is fo llowing the mentioned tally hit upon a tactical ; 12.h3 duel To palov - Morozevich fo r now, and ii,xf3 13.tllxf3 preserved his advantage. that's not the worst example to imitate. In Av rukh's opinion, 9.%Ve4ii,x f3 lO.ef Without exchanging a pair of knights, ii,g7 ll.f4 0-0 12. tLld2 is even more pre­ taking with the bishop on d4 is less cise. precise: 9.li,xd4 tllxf3+ lO.ef %Ve7+! 7.ii,b2 aS ll.'!Jje2 >!i'xe2+ 12.ii,xe2 tllf4 13.g3 It's useful to mess up the queenside. tLlxe2 14.®xe2 �e6, and the bishops In the game Zarubin - Kanep (St. Pe­ compensate fo r the shortfall. tersburg, 2006) White kept his extra 9... tllxe5 pawn without the slightest trouble: 7 ... 10.e3 ii,e6 tllcxe5 8.tllxe5 tllxe5 9.e3 ii,e6 10.c5 ll.ii,xd4 tllxc4 %Vh4? ll.%Vxd4 tllg4 12.%Vf4 0-0-0 12.1/1!Vc2 13.ii,e2 ii,e7 14.%Vg3 %Vxg3 15.hg ii,f6 After 12.tlld2 tllxd2 13.%Vxd2'iVd5!? 16.ii,xf6 tllxf6 17.tllc3 h5 18.tllb5 ®b8 winning a pawn with the double attack 19.tlld4 ii,c8 20.Mdl. With the bet­ 14.1/1!Vc3 provides Black with compen­ ter 10 ...tll c6 ll.ed ii,e7! 12.b5 tlla5 sation due to the activity of his pieces 13.tlld2 ii,g5 counterplay can be fo und. - 14 ...ii,d 6!? 15.ii,xg7 Mg8 16.ii,f6 a4. And again "two cents" from Av rukh: In the case of 15.f3 f6 16.ii,d3 (Kri­ 10.ii,xd4 tllxc4 ll.'iVc2 tlld6 12.ii,d3 voshey - Lorenzo, Balaguer, 2006) the

154 The Albin Countergambit kings can get to their "home" flank; the celona, 2007) Arias covered the vul­ chances are also equal. nerable g7 square with his queen: 17... 12... tlld6 �d3 18.tllc3 �g6 19.�f3 ii,c520. tlle2 13.ii,d3 �g5 ii,d6 2l.�xb7 0-0 22.tllg3 h5 23.f4 ii,c4 24.Mfcl h4 25.tllfl Mc7 26.�f3 ii,d3 27.Mxc7 ii,xc7. Here the bishops compensate fo r being a pawn down, but on the other hand with the very strong 19.Mfbl! �xg3 20.hg Mc7 21.Mb5 and 22.Mxa5 no compensation is in view. 18.tllc3 �c6 19.Mfcl h4 20.�g5 h3 21.e4 f6 22.�xa5 ii,d6 23.g3 0-0 14.0-0 White has won a pawn, while Black Topalov took pity on the b-pawn, has mobilized and doesn't lack counter­ exposing the light squares: 14.f4 �h4+ play. 15 .g3 �h5 ( 15... �h3!? prevents kingside castling) 16.tllc3 tllf5 17.0-0. Instead of 6. V. GOWD - A. RAETSKY 17... i,d 6 with opportunities to castle Biel, 2007 on either side, Morozevich laid himself open - 17 ...0-0-0?! 18.ii,a7! �g4?! I l.d4 dS wonder how after 19.tlla4! to neutralize 2.c4 eS the innocent idea 20.tllb6 #?! 3.de d4 14... tllxbS 4.&2f3 li::c6 1S.ii,xb5+ 5.a3 li,g4 In the case of 15.ii,b20-0-0 16.a4 tlla7 17.ii,e4f5 18.ii,f3 ii,b4 the black king is safe , and if his knight can get off a7, his extra pawn can make the difference. 15... �xbS 16.�xc7 Mc8 Vo rotnikov would immediately have achieved comfortable play with the help of 16 ...�d7!? 17.�g3 f6 , 18... ii,d 6 and 19... 0-0. 17.�g3 hS!? Black's bishops are potentially dan­ gerous, but first he has to complete his An old-fashioned line. Before the development. Against Gonzales (Bar- discovery by Morozevich ( ...tll ge7-g6)

155 Chapter IX the bishop move out with subsequent �xc5 13.tt'lc4 tt'lf6 14.b4 �xb4+ 15.ab queenside castling was the main and uni­ l:::txb4 16.�c2 �d5 17.e4 de 18.tt'lxe3 versal reply to 5.g3, 5.tt'lbd2 and 5.a3. �xf3 19.�g2, and Black resigned. 6.�b3!? 7.tt'lbd2 Logically aiming at the b7 pawn, as A good alternative is 7.�g5, to shel­ soon the bishop won't be defending it any ter the king on the queenside as soon more. The queen move is encountered as possible (7 ...�d7 8.tt'lbd2 tt'lge7 much less often than 6.tt'lbd2 (game 7), 9.0-0-0). You have to look fo r reciprocal although it's no less strong. The logi­ play with 7 ...f6 8.ef tt'lxf6 , with pressure cal 6.b4 was played by Petrosian against on the open lines. Porreka (Belgrade, 1954): 6 ...�e7 (an 7... tt'lge7 immediate exchange of the bishop al­ 8.h3 �f5 lows a favorable capture "away from the Exchanging offthe bishop to speed up center" fo r White) 7.�a4 0-0-0 8.iH4 the mobilization of your fo rces doesn't �xf3 9.gf \t>b8 10.tt'ld2 tt'lxe5 ll.�b3 equalize either - 8 ...�xf3 9.tt'lxf3 tt'lg6 tt'lg6 12.�g3 f5 13.f4 tt'lf6 14.�d3 tt'le4 10.e3 �e7 ll.ed tt'lxd4 12.tt'lxd4 �xd4 15.�h3 tt'lxd2 16.\t>xd2 tt'lxf4?! 17.�xf4 13.�e3 �xe5 14.�b5+ �xb5 15.cb g5 18.�xc7+ �xc7 19.�xf5 �f4+ l:::td8 16.l:::tcl �d6 17.g3. The number 20.\t>c2�xf2 21.l:::tafl �e3 22.�e4. The of pawns has evened out, but it won't be opposite-colored bishops are unques­ easy to oppose the two bishops. tionably in White's favor, but the fu ture 9.e4 de Wo rld Champion extracted nothing fr om On 9 ...�e 6 there would at least fo l­ the opening. Instead of the unconsidered low 10.tt'lg5tt'lg 6 ll.tt'lxe6 fe 12.c5, fir­ tactic 16... tt'lh4 and ...g6 is stronger; Eu­ ing at a new pawn weakness. By the way, we 's recipe ll...tt'lf6 and ...tt'lh5 deserved 9.e3 ruled out a bishop move out. attention earlier - the white bishops are 10.�xe3 working below capacity. Another advantage of6.�b3!? - the 6... l:::tb8 queen fe els fa ntastic on e3, as in the The sacrifice of the b7 pawn perfo ­ example variation 10 ...tt'lg6 ll.g4 �e6 rates the queenside, not helping to acti­ 12.b4 �e7 13.�b2 0-0 14.�e2. vate the black pieces much. Then again, 10... �g6 with 6 ...tt'lge7 7.�x b7 l:::tb8 8.�a6 �d7 ll.g4 9.b4 tt'lg6 10.tt'lbd2 �e7 there's com­ Asa result of the exchanges ll.e6!? fe pensation - the white queen is a long 12.�xe6 �d7 13.�xd7+ \t>xd7 14.�e2 way away. Creating a pawn pair in the White is a pawn up and has an excel­ center to the detriment of his develop­ lent position. Golod follows a more in­ ment quickly ruined Vlahosagainst Ata­ genious path, and Black even manages lik (Halkidiki, 1998): 6 ...�d7 7.�xb7 to open a file fo r his rook. As a conse­ l:::tb8 8.�a6 f6 9.tt'lbd2 l:::tb6 10.�a4 quence, the king stays in the center. � xf3 ll.gf ( 11.ttJ xf3 isno worse, but the 11... h5 Turkish Grandmaster had another route 12.l:::tgl hg in mind fo r the knight) ll...fe 12.c5! 13.hg �d7

156 The AlbinCountergambit

14.b3 Ild8 3.de d4 15.�b2 �d3 4.tllt3 Lllc6 5.a3 �g4 6.tllbd2 �e7

16.tllg5 The knight supports the break­ through e6 and frees a path fo r the f­ Developing the queen with an ac­ pawn. Black's problem is that simplifi­ companying attack on the central pawn cations aren't good news fo r him either: became well known after the duel Lask­ 16.0-0-0 �xfl 17.Ildxfl �d3 18.�xd3 er - Alekhine (St. Petersburg, 1914), Ilxd3 19.\!/c2 Ild7 20.e6 fe 2l.Ilel. although, in fact, Lasker himself had Which is why the exchange ...� d3 didn't played this way as Black in a simul six occur in the game (on the I7th move). years previously. The queen isn't posi­ 16... �xfl tioned as well on d7, as without the fi­ 17.Lllxfl tlld4 anchetto g3 and �g2 there's no benefit 18.0-0-0 cS from the diagonal battery. For example, 19.f4 Lllec6 6 ...�d7 7.b4 tllge7 8.h3 �e6 9.b5 Llla5 20.f5 �e7 1Q.Vj'a4 b6 ll.Jib2 c5 12.bc ti:lexc6 21.Ile1! 13.Lllxd4 lieS (13. .. Lllxd4 14.�xd7+ In severe time trouble my co-author \!/xd7 15.�xd4 Lllxc4 16.tllxc4 �xc4 lost in one move - 21...\!/d7? 22.tllxf7! 17.0-0-0 Ilc8 18.\!/b2 isn't enough ei­ The unequal battle could have contin­ ther) 14.e3 0-0 15.1'Llxc6 ti:lxc6 16.�e2 ued with 21...tllxb3+ 22.\!/b1 tllbd4 (I. Farago - Bukal, Austria, 2008). Even 23.f6 �d7. With a lucky convergence of if Black were to win one of the missing circumstances it's even possible not to pawns back with the help of 16... tll xe5 lose here. 17.�xd7 tllxd7, he wouldn't get any compensation fo r the other. 7. V. SHTYRENKOV -M. CHEfVERIK 7.h3 Karvina, 1998 The less-common 7.g3 is no worse. For example, 7 ...0-0-0 8.�g2 tllxe5 l.d4 dS 9.tllxe5 �xe5 10.tllf3 �e8 (testing a du­ 2.c4 eS bious recommendation from the mono-

157 Chapter IX

graph A/bins Gegengambit) 11.0-0 Ci'lf6 �g6 9.�g2 0-0-0 10.�b3 h5!? ll.g5 12.Ci'lxd4 r4lc5 13.�b3! Mxd4? (why grab h4 12.Ci'lfl f6 (12... �e6 13.�f4 Ci'lge7 undefended pieces? It's better to cover 14.Ci'l ld2 �b8 and then ...0c8- b6 is the king with 13... c6) 14.�xb7+ �d8 more solid) 13.�f4 Mh5 14.Mgl �c5 (Ramlow - Chetverik, Gyongyos, 1996), 15.0 ld2 �e7 16.�hl �f5 17.Mcl a6 and on 15.b4! no playable reply is evident 18.ef gf 19.'ilia2 �xh3 20.g6 �e6 21.b4 at all. It's better for Black to exchange off �f5 22.�h2 lll h6 23.'ilib2 0:'lg4(Nedela the bishop fo r the sake of the d4 pawn's - Chetverik, Frydek-Mistek, 1996). The safety - 10... Jhf3 1 LYixf3(1:f 6. battle was, is and will be very confusing. 7... �hS We 've skipped past two critical points: Exchanging on f3 means agreeing to 12 ...f6 ?! - a serious decision, as Nedela a permanently worse position. There's could defuse the situation at a conve­ a certain sense in 7 ....�f 5: 8.�a4 0-0-0 nient moment, and 17.gf gf 18.0-0-0 9.b4 �b8 10.g4 �c8 (the bishop was ap­ - that's the moment. propriate fo r guarding the king) 11.� b2 8... 0-0-0 Ci'lxe5 12.0-0-0 c5!? 13.bc �d7 14.'ilib3 9.b4 �b8 �c6 15.l:\g1 'ilixc5 16.Ci'lxe5 'ilixe5 10.�b2 17.'ilig3 'ilixg3 18.Mxg3 lilf6 19.l:t:d3 It's useful to put the central pawn in the �e7, with a roughly equal game (Jovan­ beauty spot as soon as possible. After 1 O.g4 ic - Dimitrov, Zadar, 2007). Of course, .� g6 l l .�g2 Black gets time to open up the 8.g4 �g6 is identical to 7 ...�h 5 8.g4 kingside: ll...h5 12. � b2 hg 13.hg M:xhl+ �g6. 14.�xhl, with interesting variations like 8.'ilia4 14 ...f6 !? 15.0-0-0 �e8!? 16.ef0xf6 17.b5 Virtually fo rces queenside castling 0xg4!? 18.bc r4lxc6 19.'1i'b3tlixf2 20.Mfl and opens the hunting season on the 0:xh1 2I.ki::xh1�xe2 22.Me1 'ilit223.Mf l black king. In the game Graf - Barua �g2 24.1bd4 b6. On the whole White's (Tripoli, 2004) White preferred to shake chances are slightly better. up the queenside with a siege of the d4 pawn: 8.b4 0-0-0 9. w b2 tiixe5 10.�b3 �g6 11.0xe5 �xe5 12.g3 'li'e6?!13. �f 3 d3 14.e3 �f5 15.jJ,g2'ilixf3 16.0xf3 f6 17.0-0 tile7 18.Mfdl Ci'lc6 19.kracl. The pawn has become more vulnerable on d3, which is characteristic of the Albin Countergambit. The central pawn's dash should be like a small explosion with the quick achievement of an advantage! He should have reduced the pressure on d4 with the maneuver 12... �e 4!?, agreeing to exchange offthe bishop. 10 ... f6 Anexpanded fianchetto on the king­ 10... Ci'lxe5 used to be considered rash side provides a hook fo r an attack: 8.g4 on the basis of the textbook rout Goldin

158 The AlbinCountergambit

- Mengarini (New Yo rk, 1991): l l.li'lxe5 12.e6!? �xe5 12.g4 �g6 13.lllf3 �e4 14.�xd4!? Now not with the aim of deflecting c5? 15.�e5+ �a8 16.�g2 (16.l"l:dl the queen from the c5 square, but to l"l:xdl+ 17.1iVxdl allows you to resist entice it to the tempo tilf3xd4. If 12.b5 without the queens on the board with tilxe5 13.tilxd4, then 13 ... tild7!, trans­ the help of 17... �b l) 16 ...lll f6 17.0-0 ferring to the superb c5 spot. �xc4 18.l"l:fcl liVe6 19.bc llld7 20.�d4 12... a6? 'i¥e4 21.Lile5. Black's play was substan­ I should have continued 12 ...�xe6 tially improved by Bergez against Brun­ 13.b5 llle5 14.lllxd4 �e8 anyway, not ner (France, 2005): 14 ...l"l:xd4! 15.lllxd4 weakening my king's cover. At the same tilf6 16.l"l:dl 'i¥xhl 17.lllb5 �c5!? 18.bc time the white king is exposed, which a6 19.Llid4?! (19.�a5!? 1li'h2 20.lllc3 is compensates to some degree fo r being a stronger) 19 ...lll e4 20.�b3lllxc5 21.'i¥e3 pawn down. h5 22.tilf3 hg 23.hg b6, and the white 13.bS ab king is now the one being subjected to se­ 14.cb liVeS+ vere danger. The leader of Danish chess, 1S.tilc4 tileS Nielsen, gave a convincing retort in his 16.e3! tilxt3 encounter with Rasmussen (Silkeborg, 17.gf d3 2008): 13.�g2 lllf6 14.lllf3 �f4 15.0-0 18.�b3 h5 16.�xd4 l"l:xd4 17.e3, with a winning The simplest here is 18.�d4 l"l:xd4 position. There's no way to radically im­ 19.ed �xd4 20.�b3. The passed pawn is prove Black's defense, which means that doomed, and there's no point fo r Black 10... tilxe5?! is suspect. in fighting any longer. 11.0-0-0 18... 0e7? A beautiful variation fr om the mono­ After 18 ...'ii

159 Chapter IX

with 5.tLlbd2 and 5.a3 not everything liberated, but White also adapts to the is cloudless fo r Black. But the block­ disappearance of the e5 pawn: 7.il.g2 ing of the working lines fo r the queen �f5 8.0-0 �d7 9.a3 a5 10.�f4 h6?! and bishop with 5.1iJbd2 and the pro­ ll.�b3 0-0-0 12.tLle5 �e6 (Bagaturov phylactic 5.a3 aren't the most natural - Schumacher, Schw bisch Gm nd, continuations. More likely we can ex­ 1999) 13.1iJd2! tLlxe5 14.�xb7+ �d7 pect the logical bishop fianchetto from 15.�b5+ c6 16.�xe5, and, having oc­ White 5.g3, 6.�g2, and a refutation of cupied the cleared h2-b8 diagonal, the "incorrect" gambit by the mobilized White is on the verge of winning. Since fo rces. As White isn't pouncing on the with ...f6 the gambit pawn isn't won d4 pawn immediately, Black's choice is back, White doesn't mind an exchange very large. of queens: 7 ...il.g4 8.0-0 �d7 9.1iJbd2 Black's possibilities are examined in 0-0-0 10.tLlb3 �h3 1l.il.g5 �g4 the fo llowing order. In game 8 the move (ll...�e7 12.�xf6 �xf6 13.tLlc5 �f5 5 ...�c5 was used; then the establish­ 14.�xh3 �xh3 15.�a4, with an at­ ment of a battery on the c8-h3 diagonal, tack) 12.�d2 �d6 13.�xf6 gf 14.�h6 starting with 5 ...�g4 (games 9 and 10) �xg2 15.�xg2 :!::lhe8 16.:!::lad1 �f8 and 5 ...�e 6 (games 11- 13). For dessert 17.�xh7 :!::lxe2 18.h3 �d7 19.�xd7+ - the fashionable idea of removing the :!::lxd7 20.tLlbxd4 tLlxd4 21.tLlxd4 :!::lxb2 e5 pawn by means of 5 ... tLlge7 (and, if 22.:!::lfe l, and Gligoric made the best of possible, ...tLlg6xe5) occurred in games his advantage against Lj ubojevic (Porto­ 14-20. roz, 1975). 5 ...�f 5 will transpose to lines with 5 ...�g4 and 5 ...�e 6 in the case of a 8. V. INKIOV - G. SZITAS subsequent ...�h3. However, playing Condom Open, 2002 the bishop to f5 doesn't have the mer­ its of developing to g4 (with pressure on l.d4 dS the d1-h5 diagonal) and e6 (with sights 2.c4 eS on c4). It isn't worth taking the threat to 3.de d4

the c2 square into account. In the curi­ 4.1iJf3 tLlc6 ous variation 5 ...�f 5 6.�g2 tLlb4 7.0-0 S.g3 il.cS tLlc2 8.tLlh4 �d7 9.tLlxf5 �xf5 IO.e4 de 11.fe �g6 12.e6! fe 13.�f3liJf 6 14.�xb7 :!::ld8 15.�c6+ :!::ld7 16.�xc7 it's time fo r Black to resign, without even having tast­ ed the rooks. This is by no means the only time the Albin has suffered after an e6 thrust. Indeed, watching out for this ad­ vance should be considered a golden rule fo r players on both sides of the board. 5 ...f6 6.ef liJxf6 is used very rarely by strong players. The black pieces are

160 The Albin Countergambit

Reinforces the star of the show - the the unsuccessful provocation I should d4 pawn. The battle is going on in a pre­ have castled) 18.f4 �f6 19.1ixf5 �xf5 dominantly strategic key with the queens 20.Ilfel l:Ic6 2l.Ile5 �g6 22.b4!!, de­ on the board. stroying Black's defenses. Again White 6.1ig2 was dictating the conditions, missing the On 6.li'lbd2 (to send the knight to very strong continuation 11.ll:lh4! l:Ia6 b3 immediately) it's best to reject 6 ...a5 . 12.f4. After 7.1:Z:Jb3 1ib4+ 8.1id2 1ie7 9.1ig2 7.a3 a4 10.Cllc1 �e6 11.�c2 the knight, The advance ...a5 isn't without its which has been fo rced back, will com­ drawbacks, but Black fe els out of his fo rtably reposition itself on d3. Or 7 ... element without it, too! An immedi­ il.a7 8.c5 Cllge7 9.il.g2 0-0 10.0-0 Cllf5 ate knight excursion to b3 emphasizes 11.1ig5 �d7 12.�c2, and Black keeps the flaws in the position of the knight the d4 pawn at the price of bricking up on e7: 7.ll:lbd2!? ll:lg6 8.ll:lb3 il.b4+ the bishop. With the very strong 6 ...�e7 9.1id2 1ie7 (as if the shuttle maneuver 7.il.g2 Cllxe5 8.Cllxe5 �xe5 the number had achieved its aim ...) 10.ll:la5!ll:lg xe5 of pawns is the same, and the chances of ll.ll:lxe5 ll:lxe5 12.lllxb7. The knight equalizing are high. only threw a nasty look at the central 6... Cllge7 pawn, but reached the distant one! Black shouldn't move his outside 7... aS pawn without good reason. I was suc­ 8.lllbd2 1ia7 cessively convinced of this by Seres In the old game Schlechter - Mar­ (Revfulop, 1995) and Csaba Horvath shall (Paris, 1900) there fo llowed 8 ... (Budapest, 1996). In the game Seres kg4 9.0-0 0-0 10.h3 i.xf3 11.ll:lxf3 - Chetverik the knight went to b5: 6 ...a5 ll:lg6 12.e6! fe 13.ll:lg5 Ile8 14.�b3 Ila6 7.0-0 Cllge7 8.Clla3!? 0-0 (doubling the 15.�b5! a4 (to trap the queen on a cap­ pawns only opens the valuable b-file fo r ture of the bishop by means of 16 ...Ila5) White: 8 ... 1ixa3 9.ba 0-0 10.1ib2 Cllf5 16.�d2. Carl Schlechter is conducting ll.�d3 �e7 12.Cllxd4 Cllfxd4 13.1ixd4 the game faultlessly and on 16 ...�a 7 has Cllxe5 14.�e3 Ile8 15.Ilab1) 9.Cllb5 prepared the devastating blow 17 .Cllxh7! a4 10.1ig5 l:Ie8 11.�c2 h6 12.il.xe7 For some reason he was rattled by the Ilxe7!? 13.Ilfdl �g4 14.h3 �h5 15.g4 pre-death "jab" 16 ...d3!?, and after 1ig6 16.�d2 Ild7 17.�f4 1ic2! 18.Ild2 17.�xc5?! de 18.il.c3efllV+ 19.Ilxf1 he g5 19.�g3 1ig6. Black stays afloat with had to win the game all over again. 17.ed titanic efforts, but 10.1if4! with a sub­ 1id4 18.c5! is correct, demolishing the sequent e6 threatens the c7 square and queenside. leads to an advantage. Against Nemeth (Zalakaros, 1995) I Horvath exchanged the dark -squared continued 8 ...ll:lg6 9.lllb3 il.a7 10.�g5 bishops: 8.b3!? 1if5 9.�a3 b6 10.1ic5 �d7 1l.c5 h6 12.1icl lllgxe5 13.lllxe5 be ll.CLlbd2 l:Ia6 12.e6!? fe 13.llle 1 ll:lxe5 14.�xd4 �xd4 15.ll:lxd4 �xc5 llle5 14.ll:le4 1ixe4 15.il.xe4 lllf5 16.ll:lb5 il.b6 17.1if4 f6 18.Ilc1 c6 16.ll:ld3 lllxd3 17.ed �g5?! (instead of 19.llld6+ <$ie720.ll:lx c8 Ilaxc8 21.1ixe5

161 Chapter IX

fe 22.e3 l:l:cd8 23.1!/e2 l:l:d6,draw. I was 10.h5 tllgxe5 lucky that my opponent, an amateur, ll.h6 g6 wasn't thinking big, otherwise with 12.tllxe5 tllxe5 18.�e3! l:l:a6 19.b4! ab 20.�xb6 l:l:xb6 13.tl'lf3 21.tllxc7+ l!ifl 22.tl'ld5 l:l:b5 23.tl'lxb4 The Bulgarian Grandmaster thought the circuitous knight maneuver would it would be easier to beat his less so­ have returned his pawn superiority. phisticated partner in a simple position than in the more complicated one after 13.�a4+ c6 14.tlle4 0-0 15.c5. True, the more complicated path is more promis­ ing here. 13... tl'lxf3+ 14.�xf3 c6 Prepares the bishop fo r changing diagonals. A rather cumbersome pro­ cedure; it's also possible to play with a blunted bishop - 14 ...0-0 15.b4 d3!? 16.c5 �f6 17.l:l:bl l:l:d8 18.�b2 �e7. 15.b4 �b8 9.h4!? 16.�b2 ..lies This pawn dash sows confusion in 17.l:l:h4 his opponent's ranks, although all is A debatable decision, instead of not lost on the queenside yet: 9.0-0 0-0 which it was more natural to castle or to 10.b4!? (sacrificing his extra pawn with a continue 17.b5!? c5 18.e3, retaining the convincing demonstration of the differ­ possibility of castling. ence in strength ofthe opposing armies) 17... ab? lO... ab ll.ab tl'lxb4 12.�a3 (12.�b3 c5 17... 0-0 18.�xd4 �f6 19.�xf6 1li'xf6 13.tl'le4 is also good) 12... tl'lbc6 (12... c5 20J::rd4 �h3 suggested itself, and the 13.tl'lb3 �b6 14 . ..ixb4 l:l:xal 15.�xal unsecured king doesn't let White calmly cb 16.c5 ..ic7 17.tl'lbxd4) 13.tl'lb3�g 4 make the most of his extra pawn. 14.h3 ..ih5 15.g4 �g6 16.tllel f5 17.ef 18.ab l:l:xa1 l:l:xf6 18.tl'ld3 �fl 19.�c2, with an ad­ 19.�xa1 l!i'g5 vantage (Ligterink - Brenninkmeijer, 20.1!1f1 0-0 Groningen, 2001). Incidentally, that 21.�xd4 l:l:e8 example was taken from an exotic the­ 22 . ..ixe5 l!i'xe5 matic tournamentfor our era (dedicated 23.�xe5 l:l:xe5 to the Albin Countergambit). 24.l:l:e4 l:l:xe4 9... tl'lg6 25 . ..ixe4 Otherwise the attacking pawn takes Being a pawn up like this is a piece the g6 square away from the knight, and of cake fo r a Grandmaster! Victory was it will be difficultto destroy the e5 pawn achieved a couple of dozen moves later. (9 ...0-0 10.h5 h6 ll.tl'le4 �g4 12. ..if4).

162 The Albin Countergambit

l.d4 d5 In the game V. Milov - Renet (France, 2.c4 e5 2002) White conducted an attack on the 3.de d4 queenside, not worrying about the fa te 4.tlJf3 tlJc6 of his king: 7.'iVb3 0-0-0 8.�d2 tlJge7 5.g3 �g4 9.tLla3 d3 10.e3 'iVf5 ll.tLlh4 (ll.tLld4? is refuted with ll...Mxd4! 12.ed �f3!, and the king will be in trouble here!) 11... 'iVh5?! 12.tLlb5 g5 13.h3 �e2 14.tlJf5! tLlxf5 15.tLlxa7+ tlJxa7 16.'iVxb7+ 'it'd7 17.g4 'iVh6 18.gf'iVb6 19.'iVxb6 cb 20.�c3, with three pawns fo r a knight and better chances. But after ll...'iVxe5 12.tLlb5 'iVc5 the White onslaught is hard to implement. 7... 0-0-0 And if you hold back with the queen­ side castling?! 7 ...tlJge7 provo ked Tolush The bishop joins the game on the into beautiful pawn sacrifices against dl-h5 diagonal (X-raying the e2 and dl Home (Hastings, 1953): 8.b4!? tLlxb4 squares). Ifnece ssary it exchanges itself 9.e6!? �xe6 10.tLle5 'iVc8 ll.'iVa4+ fo r the f3 knight. tLlbc6 12.tLlxc6 tLlxc6 13.�xc6+ be

6 .�g2 14.'iVxc6+ J.d7 15.'iVe4+ J.e7 16.�a3, There's no reason to fo cus our atten­ and Black castled sadly, washing his tion on the fa irly popular continuation hands of the dark-squared bishop. It 6.tlJbd2. It isn't possible to avoid play­ isn't all so tragic here (for example, in ing �g2 anyway, and the development the case of 12 ...�d7 13.�b4 be 14.tLld2 of the knight to d2 may be postponed or the battle continues), and subsequently canceled. strong players have ignored the sacri­ 6 ... 'iVd7 fices. Aswe'll see later, the most suitable Logically creating a battery fo r a re­ time fo r ...tlJge7 has passed ... ciprocal attack with opposite-side cas­ In this position Rybka doesn't ap­ tling. Other methods of mobilizing the prove of the exchange 7 ...�h 3, which is fo rces are almost never encountered. For favorable for Black in principle, due to example, after ...6 �b4+ 7.�d2 'iVe7 8.J.xh3 'iVxh3 9.e3! de 10.J.xe3. Black 8.0-0 0-0-0 9.'iVb3 �xd2 10.tlJbxd2 f6 doesn't get the pawn back or mate the ll.ef tLlxf6 12.Mael Mhe8 13.e3 Black's enemy king, and he can't really hide his development is fine, but he has no good own king. It's strange that such a simple specific plan andtheref ore no compen­ and convincing recipe has hardly been sation fo r the pawn. tested in practice! 7.0-0 After 7 ...0-0-0 the classic Albin tabi­ Sometimes White delays castling, ya is on the board (a discussion of the not determining the target of his attack. modernAlbin tabiya is still to come).

163 Chapter IX

8 ...a6 has been used. Then 9J::kd1 tlla5 10.�d3 tllc6 ll.i':llbd2 f6 12.tlle4!? fe 13.ii.g5 l:e8 14.a3 h6 15.ii.c1 i':llf6 (Roeder - Kistella, Groningen, 1996) 16.tllh4 is possible. Black has to defend against a knight invasion on g6 and a march by the b-pawn. In the case of 13... �e7 14.�xe7 �xe7 15.a3 i':llf6 16.b4 the hook ...a6 also makes itself fe lt, al­ though there are no grounds fo r serious concern.

Violent routs caused by Black don't 9. V. MALAKHATKO - C. PHILIPPE count. But there are always those who Marseilles, 2006 want to reach the white king a little more quickly. "The great equalizer", the Albin l.d4 d5 Countergambit, has brought numerous 2.c4 e5 victories to its adherents over stronger 3.de d4 partners, which is virtually impossible to 4.i':llf3 tllc6 do in orthodox defenses. 5.g3 �g4 Along with 8.�a4 (game 9) and 6.�g2 �d7 8.i':llbd2 (game 10) the move 8.�b3 7.0-0 0-0-0 has been encountered just as often.The 8.�a4 queen frees a place fo r the rook, aiming at the b7 square. Exchanging off the ac­ complice in the pressure, 8 ...�h3?, sub­ jects you to a fiasco as a consequence of the typical sacrifice 9.e6! as in Spassky - Forintos (Sochi, 1964): 9 ...�xe6 10.tlle5 �d6 (10 ...tll a5? ll.ii.xb7+! - this miniature has also occurred) 11.tllxc6 be 12.�a4 �c5 13.tlla3 �b6 14.�xc6 ii.xa3 15.ba tlle7 16.ii.b5 c6 17.ii.a6+ �d7 18.�f4 �c5 19.l:abl �h3 20.l:b7+ �e6, with a subsequent short-term visit by the monarch to the The queen frees a spot fo r the rook, kingside and its inglorious return to the aiming at the a7 pawn. While, impor­ center to meet its death. tantly, not closing off the path fo r the After 8.�b3 tlla5 9.�b5 �xb5 10.cb b-pawn. The opposition of the queens f6 1l.ef tllxf6 the compensation fo r the on the line a4-e8 will probably play into pawn is in question. To fo rce out the White's hands. queen without allowing �b5, the move 8... �b8

164 The Albin Countergambit

Unlike the variation 8.�b3, an of­ dl are a zone of special attention in the fe r to exchange bishops, 8 ...�h 3, isn't gambit. criminal here. Jettisoning the pawn with 10.b4 9.e6 has lost its fo rce; he should prefer Let's have a look at how the authori­ 9.a3 �xg2 10.�xg2 h5 11.h4 Lilh6 1 2.b4 ties treat the gambit: 10.tllb3 tllc8 ll.c5 �b8 (12... �e6 13.b5 tllxe5 14.�xa7 is �e7 (and with ll...�xf3 12.ef tllcxe5 rife with unpleasantness fo r the black 13.�xd7 tilxd7 14.c6 tileS 15.cb Lilxb7 king) 13.b5 tlle7 14.�g5 �g4 15.Lilbd2 you're fa cing a battle fo r a draw) 12.Mdl f6 16.efgf 17.�xf6 Mg8 (Akobian - Tay­ �xf3 13.ef tllxe5 14.�xd7 Mxd7 lor, Los Angeles, 2003). Black's initia­ 15.f4 tllc6 16.�xc6 be 17.Mxd4 Mhd8 tive is hardly going to make up fo r being 18.Mxd7 Mxd7 19.�d2 Jixc5 20.Mcl two pawns down. �b6 2l.Mxc6 tt'ld6 22.�fl tlle4 23.�el 9.tt'lbd2 (Polugaevsky - Vasiukov, Moscow, With 9.Mdl the tete-a-tete on the 1964). Taking advantage of the extra a4-e8 diagonal works against White: 9 ... doubled pawn didn't work out. The ma­ �xf3!10 .�xf3?!tll xe5 1l.�xd7 tllxf3+ neuver ...tll ge7 -c8 is a logical reaction 12.ef Mxd7 13.tllc3 tt'le7 14.tlle4 tllc6 to �a4, it's just that the knight didn't 15.b3 �e7 16.f4a5 17.�b2 b6 18.Macl get to b6 due to the efforts of the white �b7 19.a3 Mhd8 (Burke - Reprint­ c5 pawn. As a result of simplifications sev, Chicago, 1997). Reprintsev likes 10 ...tll g6 1l.Mdl tllcxe5 12.�xd7 Mxd7 and is capable of playing the Albin 13.tllxe5 tllxe5 14.Mxd4 Mxd4 15.Lilxd4 Countergambit; the advantage in the tllxc4 the position is almost equal. ending floated over to him by itself. 10... tllg6 True, with lO.ef tllxe5 ll.�xd7 �xd7 1l.b5 12.Lild2 things are still more pleasant An advance by its neighbor deserved fo r White. attention, ll.c5. After ll...tilcxe5 9... tllge7 12.�xd7 Mxd7 13. .tb2 tllc6 14.b5 As a rule the inclusion of ...h5 and tllce5 15.tllxe5 tllxe5 16.tllb3 �xe2?? h4 is favorable for Black, if it's only the 17.Mfel Black's back rank is suddenly white king that's hiding on the kingside. destroyed. The short skirmish Korotylev - Muel­ 11... tllcxe5 ler (Biel, 2003) was decided in White's favor with a series of : 9 ... h5 10.h4 tllge7 ll.b4 tllg6 12.b5 tllcxe5 13.tllb3 (13.c5!?) 13... tll xf3+?! 14.ef �h3?! 15. tllxd4! �xg2 16.tllc6+! be 17.bc �c8 18.�e3 a6 19.Mfbl+ �a8 20.Mb7. Black relieved the tension in­ stead of inflaming it - 13... d3! 14.tllxe5 tllxe5 15.�e3 b6 16.�d4 de 17.�xe5 e�+ 18.Mxfl �e7 19.tild4 Mh6! The symmetrical diagonals a4-e8 and h5-

165 Chapter IX

12.liJb3 19.1!j'f3 Malakhatko doesn't determine Black resigned. the intentions of the queen's bishop. Then again, in opposition to Mosion­ 10. J. VAN DER WIEL ­ zhik (Moscow, 1966), Kortchnoi was S. TMAKOV convincing enough: 12.j,b2 tiJx£3+ Groningen, 2001 13.ef j,f5 (or 13 ... j,h3 14.tiJb3 j,xg2 15.�xg2 d3 16.j,d4 b6 17.1!j'a6c5 18.bc 1.d4 d5 l!j'xc6 19.c5, destroying the king's apart­ 2.c4 e5 ments) 14.tiJb3j,c2 15 .1!j'a5d3 16.Ci'id4 3.de d4 �c5 17.tiJxc2 de 18.l::!:ac l f6 19.f4 h5 4.tiJt3 tiJc6 20.I!j'c3 tiJe7 2l.�a3 �xa3 22.�xa3, 5.g3 �g4 and then the elimination of the doomed 6.j,g2 l!j'd7 passed pawn on c2. 7.0-0 0-0-0 12... j,xf3 8.<'Z"bd2 Without the addition of h4 and ...h5 the fa miliar move from the frag­ ment Korotylev - Mueller 12... d3 is insufficient: 13.tiJxe5 t1Jxe5 14.,Jte3b6 15.j,d4 de 16.j,xe5 e�+ 17.�xfl �e7 18.tiJd4, and for the knight you have to give up not the anemic rook in the cor­ ner (which can't get to the h6 square), but the central one. 13.ef l!j'fS

White's attacking potential is so great that it doesn't dissolve in the varia­ tion 13... 1!j'e6 14.c5 l!j'd5 15.f4 tiJO+ The knight decides to make its way 16.j,xf3 1!j'xf3 17.tiJxd4 1!j'c318. b6! even in the world without delay. Most likely it with an exchange of the key bishop. would then go to b3, letting the pawn go 14.f4 tiJd3 to b4 or leaving it on b2, depending on 15.tiJa5 tiJcS circumstances. 16.1!j'd1 h5 8 ... h5 Not having thought about how to con­ In the case of 8 ...j,h 3 9.tiJb3 h5 nect the mobilization of the kingside with (on 9 ...j,x g2 10.�xg2 h5 the move a defense of the king, the French player ll.h4 slows the onslaught) IO.j,g5 j,e7 undertakes a desperate onslaught. Mal­ ll.j,xe7 tiJgxe7 12.tiJc5l!j'g4 13.j,xh3 akhatko doesn't attach the slightest signif­ l!j'xh3 14.1!j'a4 �b8 15.1!j'b5 b6 16.a4 icance to the harmless demonstration and White gets ahead. completes his unusual queen pirouette. The continuation 8 ...tiJg e7 9.1!j'a4 17.j,a3 h4 �b8 goes off to the preceding game. The 18.j,xc5 j,xc5 momentary closure ofthe a3-f8diagonal

166 The Albin Countergambit provokes White into playing in response The crossfire on the long diagonal to 8 ...tll ge7 the move 9.b4!? Opening and the half-open file is so intimidating the b-file would have meant being sub­ that we'll designate the aim differently jected to an attack (9 ...liJ xb4 lO. .Mbl - don't catch a mate! A reciprocal on­ tllg6 ll.�a3 tllc6 12.c5). After 9... tll g6 slaught with an exchange of two pieces 10.'i¥a4or 10.b5 with a subsequent 'i¥a4 fo r a rook solves this problem, but that's we again find ourselves in game 9. all: 10 ... h4 ll.Mbl hg 12.fg d3 13 . .Mxb4 9.b4!? de 14. .Meltll xb4 15.'i¥xb4 tlle7 16. .Mxe2, A standard correct sacrifice, the ef­ and there's no compensation fo r the fe ctiveness of which depends on spe­ damages. It's better to undertake an ex­ cific circumstances. More often White change operation, 1 O ...�xd2 ll.i.xd2 goes fo r safety - 9.h4, fo r example, 9 ... �xf3 12.�xf3 tllxe5 13.'i¥xa7 tllxf3+ tllh6 10.tllb3 �e7 ll.�f4 �h3 12.'i¥d3 14.ef'i¥c6,with chances of equalizing. �xg2 13.�xg2 tllf5 14.tllbd2 g5!? 15.hg 10.a3 tlla6 h4 16 . .Mhl.Black advances his pawn to To block the c5 square. Doing the h3 or chooses exchanges - 16 ...hg 17.fg same with the a5 square, an exchangesac­ .Mxhl 18. .Mxhl (Golubovic - Matetic, rifice breaks through: 10 ...tll c6 ll..Mbl Rijeka, 2004), and the initiative gradu­ b6 12.'i¥a4tll a5 13. .Mb5 c5 14 . .Mxa5! ally fa des. It's better not to sacrifice, but ll.tllb3 d3 to win material back with the help of Afterll ...�c5 the block doesn't with­ 10 ....�xf3 ll.�xf3tll xe5 12.i.d5tll f5 . stand the pressureeither as a result of the 9... tllxb4 non-obvious 12.i.d2! and 13.�b4! Va n Tiviakov is playing the gambit in Der Wiel scrupulously researched 12 ... accordance with the conditions of the �a4, and, as the main reply, 13.i.g5. thematic tournament, which go against The practical value ofhis analyses was re­ the grain fo r the acknowledged expert duced by the fa ct that he lost sight of the on the classical openings. The aim of alternative 13.lZlfxd4!, and a pin on the his novelty is to take the a4 square away central file doesn't work, fo r example, from the queen. After 9 ...�x b4 10.'i¥ a4 13... c5 14 . .Mbl.Md7 15.h3 �e6 16. ®xe6! catastrophe awaits Black at every step: .Mxdl l7.�xb7+!, with a win. 10 ... �h3? ll.e6! �xe6 12 . .Mbl i.h3? 12.�e3! ®e7 (this persistent idea doesn't lead to any­ thing good!) 13.tlle5! tllxe5 14.�xb7+! �xb7 15.'i¥xb4+ �c6 16.�a3, with mate no later than the l91h move (Ost­ berg - Unander, Sundsvall, 1979). Or 10 ...�c3?! ll.Mbl �f5? (ll...tlla5 12.Mb5 b6 is more stubborn, connect­ ing the soldiers in a ring), and against D. Mesaros (Hungary, 1993) Cziszar missed the knockout continuation 12. .Mxb7! �xb7 13.tllb3!

167 Chapter IX

13.1i'la5!? less in the face of the onslaught by the The Dutchman recklessly throws enemy's superior fo rces. 19 ...�d 7, then himself into the attack. 13.ed 'i¥xd3 the simplest is 20.'i¥a4+ �c8 2l.'i¥xa7. 14.'i¥bl! is no worse, although it isn't as clear either, and in the event of an ex­ And so, with 5 ...i,g4 a tangible ad­ change of queens the a6 knight looks ex­ vantage fo r White protrudes through the tremely shabby. web of tactical variations. Now we 're 13... b6 going to combine the construction of a If the knight continues its route - battery with an attack on the c4 pawn 13... 1i'lc 6, then besides 14.1i'lxc6 'i¥xc6 - 5 ...i,e 6. 15.ed, the sacrifice 14.1i'lxb7! �xb7 15.1i'ld4! de 16.'i¥a4! wins. 14.e6! The most common sacrifice in the Albin Countergambit! To successfully develop the assault a knight rebound with a tempo is needed. 14... 'i¥d6? Tiviakov doesn't take the pawn so as not to be attacked by the knight, there­ by shortening his life. Although with 14 ...'i¥xe6 15.1i'lg5 'i¥f6 16.i,b7+ �b8 17.i,xa6 .txe2 18.'i¥b3 i,x[l 19.l:i:xfl Before investigating the main de­ the black king's situation is also alarm­ fense 6.1i'lbd2 we'll mention the second­ ing, due to c4c5. ary ones. 15.1i'lg5! de 6.b3 with opposite-side castling is too In the variation 15... ba 16.1i'lxf7 timid: 6 ...'i¥d7 7.i,g2 0-0-0 8.0-0 i,h3 'i¥xe6 17. .tb7+! �xb7 18.1i'lxd8+ the 9.i,b2 i,xg2 10.�xg2 h5 ll.h4 li'lh6 queen doesn't manage to dodge the 12.1i'la3 (12.1i'lbd2 is more precise, not nimble knight either. giving the opponent the favorable chance 16.'i¥a4 exfl'i¥+ 12... i,x a3 13.i,xa3 l:i:he8 and 14... 17.l:i:xfl i,xe6 li'lxe5) 12... 'i¥g4 13.'i¥d2 i,e7 14.'i¥f4 The database's version is 17 ...fe , on li'lf5 15.1i'lc2 d3 16.ed l:i:xd3 17.'i¥xg4 fg which White also wins. The commen­ 18.1i'lg5 i,xg5 19.hg l:i:d2 20.l:i:acl l:i:h3 tator Van Der Wiel says that capturing (A. Jussupow - Chetverik, Deizisau, with the bishop made sense, and you 2006). Now perpetual check was a jus­ have to believe a Grandmaster. In the tifiable result of the battle after 21.� g 1! case of l7... ba the response 18.'i¥b5!im­ li'lxg3 22.fg l:i:xg3+ 23.�hl l:i:h3+. mediately ended matters. The more sensible defense 6.'i¥b3is 18.1i'lb7 'i¥d3 encountered far less often. The queen 19.'i¥xa6 doesn't plan to take the b7 pawn im­ Black resigned. The king is defense- mediately (with 6 ...'i¥d7 7.'i¥xb7 l:i:b8

168 The AlbinCountergambit

8.�a6 ilb4+ 9.ild2 tlJge7the initiative 4.tlJf3 tlJc6 costs two pawns), but at an appropri­ 5.g3 ile6 ate moment. The best thing fo r Black 6.CiJbd2 �d7 is to exploit the vulnerable position of the queen with the help of 6 .. .'i¥d7 7.ilg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 tlJa5 9.�b5 CJJxc4 10.�xd7+ Mxd7 ll.b3 tlJa5 12.ilb2c5 or 12... tlJc6, getting close to equality. 6.�a4 also subjects the strongest piece to an attack, but from the king's knight, not the queen's knight. I've used 6 ...�d7 7.ilg2 tlJge7 8.0-0 tlJc8 twice, but now I'm not sure about my choice. After 9.�d1! i1xc4 10.CiJbd2 and 11. tlJb3 White takes on d4 with a clear advantage. 7 ...d3 doesn't refute Two games that are important fo r the queen's absence on the flank either: the theory of 6 ...i1b4 (renewing the 8.0-0! de 9.Me1 tlJxe5 (if9 ...0-0-0, then threat to the c4 pawn) were played at 10.CiJc3, 1I.ile3, and elimination of the same tournament (Buenos Aires, the e2 pawn) 10.�xd7+ tlJxd7 ll.CiJd4! 2003) by Grandmaster Sagalchik. In ilxc4 12.ilxb7 Mb8 13.ilf3 ilb4 the second round he quickly equalized 14.ild2 tlJe7 15.i1xe2 ilxe2 16.Mxe2, his chances against Scarella: 7. � c2 and it isn't easy fo r Black to hold the tlJge7 8.a3 i1f5 9.'i¥a4 ilxd2+ 10.i1xd2 endgame. The very strong 7 ...0-0-0 'iYd7 ll.ii.g5 (1 Liig2 d3!? 12.ed 'i¥xd3 8.0-0 Wb8 9.CiJbd2 takes the game to 13.Ji.e30-0-0 14.Mdl 'iYxdl+ 15.�xdl 6.CiJbd2. Mxdl+ 16.Wxdl is a little better) 11... In the interests of development it's h6 12.ifixe7 "i!ixe7 13. .1ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0 possible to disregard the attacked pawn. Wb8 15.Mfd1 ile4. In the eighth round 6.i1g2 hasn't been spoiled with atten­ Shabalov didn't try and cling to the tion from practical players, and Rybka's pawn: 7 .ilg2!? ilxc4 8.0-0 ifixd2 (8 ... interesting line 6 ...ilxc4 7.0-0 �d7 ild5 9.CiJb3,and also 8 ...ila6 9.a3 ile7 8.CiJbd2 i1a6 hasn't been encountered a 1 O.b4 and 1l.Mb 1 are unquestionably single time. It's best to leave this virgin in White's favor) 9.'i¥xd2 tlJge7 10.Mdl branch in an uncertain condition and 0-0 1I.CiJxd4 CiJxd4 12.�xd4 ilxe2 move on to 6.CiJbd2. 13.�xd8 Maxd8 14.Mxd8 Mxd8 15.ilg5 Wf8 16.ilxb7 Mb8 17.ifie4 Mxb2, and 11. G. DANNER - M. KEKELIDZE here the strongest is 18.Mc1 c6 19.a4 Batumi, 2002 Mb4 20.ifixe7+ Wxe7 21.i1xc6, with play fo r two results. l.d4 d5 7.ifig2 ilh3 2.c4 e5 7 ...tlJge7 was encountered in game 3.de d4 12, and the main 7 ...0-0-0 in game 13.

169 Chapter IX

By exchanging bishops Black tries to the black pieces easily come into play. emphasize a certain passivity from the Against We sterinen (Pelaro, 2002) 01s­ d2 knight. son exploited his advantage in develop­ Having suffered with castling queen­ ment, opening up the position: 9.0-0 side, I started using 7 ...1l,e 7 8.0-0 h5. il,h3 10.il,xh3 l{ilxh3 1l.e3 de 12.ti:le4! After 9.h4 ti:lh6 the knight heads fo r f5 ef+ 13.Mxf2 l{ild7 14.Md2 l{ilg4 15.1{iie2 or g4, depending on White's behavior. il,e7 16.Md5 Wf8 17.Jl,f4 tZlf6 18.ti:lxf6 It isn't easy to refute Black's harmoni­ Jl,xf6 19.Mel -the initiative outweighs ous configuration, fo r example, 10.�a4 the deficit. Rybka touches up Black's Md8 1l.l{ilb5!? (transferring the queen play beautifully: 12 ...1{ii g4!? 13.Mel Md8 to a defended square with a tempo) 11... 14.�d2 Md3 15.ti:lc3 1l,c5 16.1{iie2 tZld4 Mb8 12.tZlg5 a6 13.�xc6 ab 14.iixd7+ 17.ti:lxd4 1{iixe2 18.Mxe2 Mxd2 19.Mxd2 il,xd7 15.ti:lgf3 ti:lf5 16.b3 c5 17.a4 ba ed 20.ti:lb3 il,b4, and the black-and­ 18.ba Mh6!? 19.ti:lb3 l:a6 20.a5 �e6, white tangle has come undone to mutual with excellent play (Bove - Chetverik, satisfaction. Cappelle-la-Grande, 2004). Instead The success of the exchange 8.1l,xh3 of 13.1l,xc6 it was worth sending the l{ilxh3 depends on the success of the queen back: 13.1{iia4 tZlxe5 14.1{iixd7+ evacuation of the white king (evidently il,xd7 15.ti:lgf3,and it's difficult to de­ now to the queenside) and the mobil­ fend the weak pawn. Against Brennink­ ity of the black queen. After 9.tZlb3 meijer (Groningen, 2001) Tiviakov de­ 0-0-0 IO.ii,g5 f6 ll.ef tZlxf6 12.a3 d3 layed castling for a little while and soon 13.ed Me8+ 14.1l,e3 ti:lg4 15.1{iie2 g6 fo und himself two pawns up: 8.1{iia4 h5 16.ti:lg5 l{ilh5 17.tZle4 ti:lce5 18.ti:lbd2 9.ti:lb3 Md8 10.0-0 h4 ll.iH4 hg 12.fg (18.il,d4 l{ilf5 19.0-0-0 is even stron­ il,h3 13.1l,xh3 Mxh3 (on 13... 1{iixh3 ger, solidly covering the king) 18 ....1i,g7 the thrust 14.tZla5 fo rces the queen to 19.h3 Mhf8 20.il,c5 Mf7 2l.f4 ti:lxd3+ get moving) 14.Madl ti:lh6 15.ti:lbxd4 22.1{iixd3 tZlf6 23.Wf2 (Jumabayev - tZlxd4 16.1{iixd7+ Mxd7 17.tZlxd4 Kuderinov, Astana, 2007) there's no full tZlg4?! 18.tZlf3. It was better to look fo r compensation fo r the piece. It was nec­ compensation fo r the pawn after 9 ... essary to be more aggressive about keep­ d3!? IO.tZlfd4 tZlxe5 1l.l{ilxd7+ il,xd7 ing the enemy king in the center: 11... 12.1l,xb7 Mb8 13.il,d5 tZlf6. gf 12.Ji,f4 Jl,b4+ 13.ti:lfd2 l{ilg2 14.Mfl 8.0-0 ti:le5 15.1l,xe5 (otherwise the knight In the Albin Countergambit an ex­ gives check from d3 or f3) 15... fe . change of the light-squared bishops 8... h5 is almost always a small (and some­ A fa miliar nuance - throwing the times a considerable) achievement fo r pawn fo rward before the exchange on Black. White has returned the pawn a g2, to prevent the blocking move h4. But few times with the help of 8.e6, but af­ now is exactly the right time to exchange ter 8 ...:axe6 the exchange hasn't been on h3. After 9.ii,xh3 l{ilxh3 10.ti:le4 prevented yet. In the case of9.ti:lg5 Jl,f5 0-0-0 1l.iH4 or 11.1l,g5 il,e7 12.1l,xe7 10.I{ilb3 0-0-0 11.0-0 ti:lh6 and 12... f6 tZlgxe7 13.1{iid3 the white king is safe,

170 The Albin Countergambit

and it's completely unclear what plan ant fo r White thanks to his centraliza­ Black should choose. tion. 9.'1�V'a4 �xg2 16... �xb4 10.�xg2 h4 17.�e3 CZ'lh6 ll.b4 18.Md1 Ma3 In the variation ll.CZ'lxh4?! g5 19.'i¥c2 CZ'lg4 12.CZ'lhf3 Vjlh3+ 13.�gl �e7 14.Mdl?! 20.'i¥f5+ �b8 g4 15.CZ'lh4 �xh4 16.gh d3! White's de­ Danner lost a piece here (2l .CZ'lg5? fense comes apart at the seams. With the 'i¥h5 22.CZ'lxf7 CZ'lxe3 23.CZ'lxe3 Mxe3 help of 14.Mel g4 15.CZ'lh4 �xh4 16.gh 24.'i¥xh5 Mxh5), and the battle lost Vjl:xh4 17.CZ'lfl 0-0-0 18.�f4 White re­ its purpose. Only 2l.Me2 Ma5 22.Mbl pels the direct threats, although with would have just about held the position. such a lacerated kingside he can't even dream of an advantage. 12. A. LILIENTHAL ­ 11... hg S. TARTAKOWER 12.fg Vjlb3+ Paris, 1933 Not getting deflected by an elimina­ tion of the pawn, Black plans a break­ l.d4 d5 through in the center. After 12... �x b4 2.c4 e5 13.Mbl �xd2 14.�xd2 0-0-0 15.Vjlb5 3.de d4 b6 in a complicated position the chances 4.CZ'lt3 CZ'lc6 are roughly equal. 5.g3 �e6 13.�g1 d3 6.CZ'lbd2 'i¥d7 14.ed 0-0-0 7.�g2 CZ'lge7 15.Mf2 Mxd3

The knight is going to g6, and elimi­ 16.CZ'lfl ?! nating the central pawn restores the But here it isn't a good idea to leave balance. With opposite-side castling an the pawn undefended. In the variation attack by White will most likely outstrip 16.a3 CZ'lh6 17.Vjlc2 Md8 18.CZ'lfl VjlhS his opponent's assault, so Black doesn't 19.�xh6 M:xh620.'i¥e4 it's more pleas- rule out castling kingside fo r himself.

171 Chapter IX

8.0-0 where to put it that would help the situ­ There's sense in advancing pawns ation. more quickly, saving a tempo on castling. After 9.�a4 Black also risks par­ For example, 8.a3 tL:lg6 9.b4lih 3 10.e6!? ticipating in a miniature with the ti­ lixe6 ll.b5 tL:ld8 12.h4 (a more natural niest slip-up. A brief confrontation siege of the d4 pawn is 12.Jib2 c5 13.bc between two future stars of German tL:lxc6 14.tL:lb3) 12... f6 13.�c2 c5 14.bc chess: 9 ...Jie 7 IO.a3 tL:lgxe5 ll.tZ:lxe5 tL:lxc6 15.h5 tL:lge5 16.tL:lxe5 fe 17.Jie4 h6 tL:lxe5 12.�xd7+ 'it>xd7?? (12... tL:lx d7 18.l:tbl Jic5 19.l:tb5 Jib6, with a satis­ 13.Jixb7 l:tb8 14.lie4 0-0, and Black factory position (Fedorowicz - Couche, doesn't lose hope a pawn down) 13.f4 Las Ve gas, 1995). Instead of 9 ...Jih 3 it tL:lxc4 14.f5 (Unzicker - Schmid, was worth thinking about development Heidelberg, 1949). Or IO.tL:lb3 0-0-0 - 9 ...Jie 7 IO.b5 tL:lcxe5 ll.tZ:lxe5 tL:lxe5 ll.tZ:lfxd4 tL:lxd4 12.�xa7! c6 13.Ae3 12.Jixb7 l:tb8 13.tL:lf3!? c5! tL:lxb3?? (13 ... tL:lxe2+ 14.\t>hl �c7 8... tL:lg6 15.l:tfel tL:lxg3+ 16.hg �b8 17.�xb8+ 9.a3 'it>xb8 is a safe improvement) 14.Ab6! Concentrating attacks on the d4 (Jaracz - Krahe, Bad Wiessee, 2007). pawn is promising: 9.tL:lb3 0-0-0 lO.Jig5 (a standard deflection of the pawn's de­ fender) IO ...Jie 7 1 Uixe7 �xe7 12.�c2 tL:lgxe5 13.tL:lxe5 tL:lxe5 14.Jixb7+! 'it>xb7 15.�e4+. An improvement for Black is 9 ...l:td8, and an evacuation of the king to the short side. Against Gasic (Sarajevo, 1972) Hart immediately got the advantage ofthe two bishops: 9.tL:lg5 tL:lgxe5 IO.tL:lxe6 �xe6 ll.tZ:lf3 0-0-0 12.�b3 tL:la5 13.�b5 tL:lxf3+ 14.lixf3 tL:lc6 15.Jid5 �d7 16.l:tdl a6 17.�b3 Jic5 18.�f3 - the 9 ... 0-0-0 turn by the queen enabled the creation Grandmaster Kostic chose king­ of a fo rmidable battery on the long diag­ side castling several times. Then an ex­ onal. Success is unattainable with 12... change of the e5 and d4 pawns is likely, tL:lxf3+ 13.Jixf3h5 14.h4 Ac5, with an and White retains the extra pawn with­ insignificant advantage fo r White. out compensation. Counterplay against With 9.�b3 a trap appears, which the king doesn't work out: 9 ...Ae 7 IO.b4 should be remembered. After 9 ...lie 7?! l:td8 1Lib2 0-0 12.l:tcl lih3 13.tL:lb3 10.�xb7 l:tb8? ll.tZ:lxd4! (Sorm - Va ­ Axg2 14.\t>xg2 �g4 15.tL:lbxd4 tL:lxd4 hedi, Bad Homburg, 2008) White is left 16.tL:lxd4 tL:lxe5 17.f4 c5 (R. Byme two pawns up. 9 ...0-0-0 IO.l:tdl h6 is - Kostic, radio match, 1950) 18.fe cd correct - because of the knight on d2 19.l:tf4 �g6 20.l:txd4, increasing the there's no ll.tZ:lxd4, and there's no- advantage to two pawns.

172 The Albin Countergambit

10.b4 22.l:i:fd1, and fo r victory all that remains 10.'�a4 allows an exchange of is to restructure the major pieces. queens with approximate equality: 10... 19.bc be Wb8 1l.l:i:d1 lllcxe5 12.'iYxd7 l:i:xd7 20.llla5 hg?! 13.b3 f6 14.h3 1Le7 15.llle1 l:i:hd8 16.f4 Now 2l.fg (in connection with the lllf7 17.llldf3 h5 18.e4 de 19.l:i:xd7 l:i:xd7 threat 22.l:i:xf5!) would have immedi­ 20.ilxe3 lllh6 21.llld4 lllf5 22.lllxf5 ately ended the battle. Lilienthal me­ ilxf5 (Asgeirsson - Raetsky, Reykjavik, chanically played 21.hg?!; anyway 21... 1996). The possession of an open file is l:i:h6 22.l:i:cd1 'iYe7 23.l:i:xd8+ Wxd8 neutralized bythe miserable g6 knight. 24.l:i:dl+ Wc8 25.'iYc3 and iLfl were 10... lllcxe5 hopeless in the end fo r Black. 11.lllxe5 lllxe5 12.'iYc2 13. C. CROUCH -A. SPICE The queen is heading fo r e4, which is England, 2006 easy to prevent. If the chain is straight­ ened out with 12.c5, then the simplifica­ l.d4 d5 tions 12... ilh 3 13.iLxh3 'iYxh3 14.lllf3 2.c4 e5 l2Jxf3+ 15.ef lLe716.l:i:e1 'iYf 6 maintain 3.de d4 equality. On 12.ilb2an exchange of the 4.lllf3 lllc6 light-squared bishops can also be ex­ 5.g3 ile6 pected - White is slightly better. 6.ll'lbd2 'iYd7 12... d3 7.lLg2 0-0-0 13.ed lllxd3?! The backward d3 pawn in the gambit is only a burden fo r White, and so there's no reason to rush to take it. The useful prophylactic 13... Wb8 or the aggressive 13... h5 are both more relevant. 14.lllb3 lllxcl The knight, reinforced on a fantas­ tic spot, doesn't stop White from con­ ducting an attack: 14 ...ilf 5 15.llla5 c6 15.'iYb3 'iYc7 (against b5) 16 . .1le3 a6 17.'iYc3. Tartakower exchanges off the potentially dangerous bishop. An unsophisticated strategy - the 15.l:i:axcl ilf5 king immediately makes its choice, and 16.'iYb2 h5 mutual pawn attacks with opposite-side 17.c5 c6 castling is most likely. 18.b5 h4 8.0-0 Bringing the rook to the defense of As with 7 ...lll ge7, delaying kingside the palace ruins is already useless - 18 ... castling is of interest. A fragment from l:i:h6 19.bc be 20.lll a5 'iYc72l .'iYb4iLd 3 Zimmerman - Chetverik (Harkany

173 Chapter IX

Tenkes Cup, 1996) is instructive: 8.a3 probing the weakness of t7. I don't see a /]jge7 9.b4 /]jg6 10.�a4 �b8 1 L�b2 good reply to 9.b4! /]jcxe5 12.�xd7 .l:,Ixd7 13.c5 �d5 But even with 9.�a4 Black's path 14./]jxe5 /]jxe5 15.ii.xd5 .l:,Ixd5 16./]jb3 isn't strewn with roses. After 9 ...�b8 d3 17 . .l:,Id1 /]jc4 18.�c1 �e7 19 . .l:,Ixd3 10./]jg5!?/]jxe5 ll .�xd7 /]jxd7 12./]jxe6 .l:,Ihd8 20 . .l:,Ixd5 .l:,Ixd5 2l.f4 b6 22.cb cb fe 13./]jf3 e5 14./]jg5 /]jh6 15.ii.d2 �e7 23./]jd2 /]je324. �f2 /]jc2 25./]jc4. De­ 16./]je6 .l:,Idg8 17.f4 (Garcia Palermo ­ spair emanates from what we've seen: Cockcroft, Palma de Mallorca, 1992) the White gradually won the weak pawn, road opens for the long-range bishops. easily overcoming the pathetic attempts Anexchange of queens was also favorable at resistance. We have to change this fo r White in the encounter Mchedlish­ scenario immediately - 8 ...h5!? 9.b4 h4 vili - Raetsky (Yerevan, 1996): IO./]jb3 (even bearing in mind the position of the /]jxe5 ll.�xd7 /]jxf3+ 12.�xf3 .l:,Ixd7 white king in the center). 13..l:,Id1 /]jf6 14 . .l:,Ixd4 .l:,Ixd4 15./]jxd4 8... h5 �xc4 16.�g5 /]je8 17.b3 �a6 18. .l:,Id1 Against Onkoud (France, 2003) /]jd6 19./]jc2�b5 20.�f4 �e7 21./]je3 Inkiov after 8 ...Cjj ge7 9./]jg5 /]jxe5 h4 22./]jd5 �f8 23./]jc3 ii.c6 24.ii.xc6 10./]jxe6 �xe6 11./]je4 /]j7c6 12.b3 be 25./]ja4. It's particularly unpleas­ f5 13./]jg5 �f6 14./]jh3 h6 15./]jf4 g5 ant that Black is choosing between vari­ 16./]jd5 �t7 17.�b2 �g7 18.e3 com­ ous difficulties, and the top prize is a pleted his lengthy knight maneuver draw! In pursuit of the modest prize with rather modest success. The situ­ 13... c5 14.ii.f4+ �c8 15.e3 d3 16.ii.e4 ation suggests not only maneuvering b6 17 . .l:,Ixd3 (17.�xd3 �e7 and ...�f 6, play, but also the wild complications with pressure) 17... �xc4 18. .l:,Ixd7 �xd7 that arise with 1l...�xc4 12.i,g5 f6 19. .l:,Idl+ �c8 is preferable. 13. .l:,Ic1 �b5 14./]jxf6 !? gf 15.i,xf6 9... /]jb6 (15... .l:,Ig8? isn't good because of 16.a4 10.b4!? �a5 17.b4). Having rejected 9./]jg5, Black has used a tempo on develop­ White will probably arrive at the varia­ ment, but White has only slowed down tions from game 12. the onslaught. So the conditions fo r the 9.h4 sacrifice have probably changed for the 9.b4!? ii.xb4 10.�a4 is useful to worse. compare with the similar branch from 10... Cjjg4 5 ...�g4 (game 10). Here on 10... h4 Having concentrated his attacks on there fo llows 11. /]jxh4 (the bishop the e5 pawn, Black doesn't have to ac­ doesn't keep the e2 pawn in its sights). cept the sacrifice. Although destroying The exchange 10... �xd2 11.�xd2 can't the pawn with either of the pieces is be combined with an exchange on f3 due playable. The sharp variation 10 .../]jx b4 to the arrival of the bishop on e6, and 11./]je4 d3 12.�g5 .l:,Ie8 13.ed /]jg4 White puts paid to the playable varia­ 14. .l:,Ibl/]jxd3 15.�b3b5 16.�xb5 �xb5 tion fo r Black 1l... Cjj ge7 12. .l:,Iab1 �f5 17.cb �xa2 18. .l:,Ial �d5 establishes 13..l:,Ib2 ii.e4 with the thrust 13./]jg5!, equality after an exchange of queens.

174 The Albin Countergambit

In the case of 10 ...�x b4 ll.'!Wa4 �f5 In the changed structure it's normal 12.1iJb3the right choice at the junction to put the bishop on c5 and keep it there is essential. On 12 ...�e 4 the response fo r as long as possible. With 13... �c5 13.�g5 is strong, and on 12... �e7 an ex­ 14.1iJxe5 liJxe5 15.1iJe4 '!We7the chanc­ change of knights is favorable fo r White, es are roughly equal, but after opening 13.1iJa5 liJxa5 14.'!Wxa5 c;;t>b8 15.Mdl c5 the b-file they establish themselves on 16.�f4 '1Wc7 17.Vilixc7+c;;t> xc7. The best White's side. decision is 12... 1iJg4 13.�b2 (13.�g5?! 14.bc liJxc6 f6 ) 13 ...�e 4 14.1iJfxd4 �xg2 15.c;;t>xg2 15.1iJg5 �e7 liJgxe5 16.1iJxc6 liJxc6. Eliminating 16.Mab1 �xgS?! the g7 pawn secures Black counterplay Playing without queens, 16 ...1iJc e5 on the kingside: 17.�xg7 Mhg8 18.�f6 17.'!Wxd7 Mxd7 18.1iJxe6 fe 19.Mfcl Mde8 19.1iJd4 Mg6 20.IiJxc6 Mxg3+! Mhd8, is difficult fo r Black; neverthe­ 21.fg Mxe2+ 22.Mf2 Mxf2+ 23.c;;t>xf2 less, it was already better to continue 'lWd2+, with perpetual check. that way. ll.'!Wa4 c;;t>bS 17.hg 12.b5 The beautiful 17.�a3!? Another modification of the pawn frees the key file more quickly. After sacrifice is 12.�b2!? Now 12 ...1iJx b4 17... 1iJge5 18.hg there's no good defense 13.'!Wxd7 �xd7 14.�xd4 liJc2 15.Mabl to the threat of 19.f4. liJxd4 16.1iJxd4, and, not having suc­ 17... �rs ceeded in winning the pawn back, Black 18.1iJe4 acquires a pair of good bishops anyway. Tactical blows are hanging from all Evidently 12... �x b4 13.Madl :"'he8 directions - l8... �x e4 l9.�xe4 c;;t>a8 14.1iJb3 �f8 is better, harmoniously 20.�xd4! Black has fatefully advanced positioning his pieces fo r the coming his pawn, and the white knight has battle. made six straight jumps to achieve a 12... liJcxeS victory. 13.�b2 18... h4? 19.1iJc5 '!We8 20.1iJxb7! hg 21.1iJxd8 �xb1 22.1iJxc6+ c;;t>cs 23.1iJxa7+. Black resigned.

In the case of5 ...�e 6 Black has it no easier than after 5 ...�g4. With the high- ly likely opposite-side castling White calmly parts with the c4 pawn, which is positioned on the same file as the black 13 ... cS?! king. So a new system of defense ap-

175 Chapter IX

peared in practice thanks to the difficult ll.iU4 iib4+ 12.�f l (White doesn't times. want a draw) 12... iih 3+ 13.�gl (Bar­ sov - Adnani, Casablanca, 2005) l.d4 d5 13 ...0-0 14.iixc6 be 15.'iYxd4 'iYc8 is 2.c4 e5 better, and it isn't easy for the rook to 3.de d4 get offhl. 4.tllf3 tllc6 The pin 6.Jig5 prevents the knight 5.g3 tllge7!? from going after the pawn. Then it makes sense to acquire the advan­ tage of the two bishops: 6 ...h6 7.iixe7 iixe7 8.iig2 g5!? (the standard pawn dash isn't fo r an attack on the king, but aims to influence the center) 9.0-0 (with 9.h3 iie6 lO.'iYb3 'iYd7 castling is more difficult) 9 ...g4 10.<:1'leltll xe5 ll.tll d3 tllg6 12.tlla3 0-0 13.tllc2 c6 14.tllcl iif6 15.tllb3 'iYe7 16.tllcxd4 I:i:d8 17.c5 a5 18.a4 li,e6 19.e3 li,xb3 20.'iYxb3 li,xd4 2l.ed I':rxd4 22.I:i:fel I':rb4 23.'iYc3 'iYg5 24.I':re4 I:rxe4 It's astounding how rarely anyone 25.iixe4 tllf8, and the black knight has continued this way in the past! Ap­ doesn't concede to the white bishop parently it's because the Albin Coun­ here (Anastasian - Abbasov, Abu tergambit has always had a reputation Dhabi, 2006). for mutual attacks with opposite-side 6... tllg6 castling and wasn't considered a po­ There's a junction here: 7.0-0 sitional opening. With 5 ...tll ge7 the (games 15-17) after winning the pawn game doesn't flare up with combina­ back leads to relatively quiet positions, tional fire very often. With Morozev­ while an attempt to destroy Black's ich's touch the excursion after the e5 plans by means of 7.iig5 (games 18- pawn has acquired considerable popu­ 20) - to more complicated ones. Nev­ larity in the 21'1 century, and its theory ertheless, White's opportunities aren't is still in the process of being estab­ exhausted with this ... lished. 6.iig2 14. I. KHENKIN -V. IKONNIKOV 6.tllbd2 tllg6 7.tllb3 has also been Port Erin, 2006 encountered, immediately a1mmg at the d4 pawn. Black shouldn't be l.d4 d5 greedy: 7 ...tll gxe5 8.iig2 iib4+9.ii d2 2.c4 e5 iixd2+ lO.'iYxd2 tllxc4 ll.'iYd3 'iYd5 3.de d4 12.tll h4 'iYb5 13.0-0 - the queen is out 4.tllf3 tllc6 ofplace on b5. 9 ...tll xf3+lO.iix f3 iie7 5.g3 tllge7

176 The Albin Countergambit

6.itg2 tllg6 is more aggressive, then ll...l'Zg8, ...h6 and ...g5 also shakes the white king's cabin. 7 ... itb4+ Black is trying to castle as soon as possible, to unpin the knight. Unbur­ dening in the center after 7 ...�d7 is in­ sufficient: 8.0-0 tllgxe5 9.tllxe5 tllxe5 10. �xd7+. Taking with the knight or the king isn't on the cards at all, and in the case of 10 ...itxd7 l l.itxb7 l'Zb8 12.itg2 tllxc4 13.b3 tlle5 14.itf4 f6 15.tlld2 White has a better pawn structure and 7.�a4 an advantage in development. This pin has been encountered at the Opposing the queen, 7 ...itd 7 isn't Grandmaster level several times in re­ dangerous at all fo r the latter. An exam­ cent years. 7.itf4, defending the pawn ple is D. Gurevich - Nakamura (USA, in a direct - albeit primitive - way, 2007): 8.0-0!? (on 8.�b3 the reply 8 ... shouldn't be dismissed either. At least itb4+ disengages the queen from the at a thematic tournament in Groningen undefended pawn) 8 ...itc5 (now on 8 ... (2001) Tiviakov very quickly achieved tllcxe5 the retreat to b3 gains strength) a winning position against Ligterink: 9.itg5 f6 ?! 10.�b5! itb6 ll.ef gf 12.c5 7 ...tll xf4 8.gf f6 9.tt'lbd2 fe lO.fe Jif5 tllce5?! 13.�b3 itxc5 l4.tllxe5 tllxe5 ll.�b3 itb4 12.a3 itxd2+ 13.tllxd2 15.�xb7 l'Zc8 16.�d5, and Black is a �g5 14.l'Zgl 0-0-0 15.�xb7+! �xb7 pawn down, as well as being in a pulver­ 16.itxc6+ �xc6 17.l'Zxg5 g6 18.0-0-0, ized position. The fault was with 9 ...f6 ?! two pawns up in the ending. Hoekse­ - an advance that requires caution in the ma's correction ll...tt'lb4doesn't actu­ gambit. There 's nothing wrong with 9 ... ally correct anything due to 12.l'Zcl a5 ite7 10.itxe7 �xe7. In the picturesque 13.c5! Yo u should transpose the moves: variation ll.�b3 tllgxe5 12.�xb7 0-0 7 ...f6 8.ef tllxf4 9.f7+!? �xf7 10.gf�f6 13.tllxe5 �xe5 14.itxc6 l'Zab8 15.�a6 ll.tt'lg5+ �e8 12.�d3 �xf4 13.�e4+ l'Zb6 16.�xb6 ab 17.itxd7 �xe2 White �xe4 14.itxe4 h6 15.tllf3 g5, with a has a rook, bishop and knight fo r the playable ending. queen, but adapting such a diffuse army If timed correctly, opposite-side to useful plans isn't easy. castling doesn't have to be bad news 8.tt'lbd2 fo r Black. For example, 7 ...iig4 8.0-0 With 8.itd2 the play is typical fo r tllxf4 9.gf�d7 10.tt'lbd2 0-0-0 ll.tt'lb3 the quiet branches of 5 ...tll ge7. Black h5 12.�cl h4 13.l'Zdl h3 14.ithlitxf3 has no cause fo r concern: 8 ...itx d2+ 15.itxf3 l'Zh4 16.�hl g5!, with coun­ 9.tt'lbxd2 0-0 10.0-0 tllgxe5 ll.tt'lxe5 terplay (Cebalo - Fontaine, Subotica, tllxe5 12.l'Zadl d3 13.ed itg4 14.l'Zde l 2005). The setup 10.�b3 0-0-0 ll.l'Zdl tllxd3 15.l'Ze3c6.

177 Chapter IX

8 ... 0-0 better) 15... �e7 16.1Lf4 g5!? 17.1Ld2 9.0-0 aS c6 18.�c2 a4 19.e3 1Le6, and now it's In the simul game Alekhine - Pires Black who's aiming fo r an advantage. (Lisbon, 1941), after9 ...j,x d2 IO.j,xd2 Exchanging offall the knights doesn't tl'igxe5 (10 ...tl'ic xe5?! 1L,tb4!) cause him any problems at all. 1l.tl'ixe5 CDxe5 12.�b5 I:l:e8 13.j,g5 11... �g4 f6 14.j,f4 c6 15.�b3 �b6 16.I:i:fd1 c5 Ikonnikov could have immediately 17.1Ld5+ j,e6 18.�xe5 fe 19.�xb7 continued 1 1...CD cx e5, but he waits until I:i:ab8 20.�xb6 ab 2l.�c6 I:l:ec8 one more pawn step relieves the tension 22.j,b5 the unknown amateur saved on the queenside. There's sense in that, the endgame a pawn down against the as the pawn chain loses its elasticity. Wo rld Champion, but by replacing 12.b5 CDcxeS 16... c5 with 16.. .Ct'lg6 he would have 13.�b2 j,f6 been heading for equality. Even stron­ It's a shame that invading through ger is 9 ...1Le 7 10.a3 CDcxe5 1l.b4 d3! the breach doesn't work - after 13... 12.e3 (Lautier - Kanep, Gothenburg, �c5 14.tl'ixe5 tl'ixe5 15.I:i:fe1 the bishop 2005) 12... tl'ix f3 + (he should exchange is kicked away by the maneuver tlJb3. with the knight, intending to separate 14.tl'ie4 the queen from the passed pawn after After 14.tl'ixe5 tl'ixe5 15.1Lxb7 1Lxe2 CDd4) 13.CDxf3 �f6 14.I:I:b1 �f5, with 16.I:i:fe1 d3 17.�xa8 �xa8 White won good play (Dautov). the exchange at the price of his crucial 10.a3 �e7 light-squared bishop. His advantage here is in serious question. Defending the pawn with 14.I:i:ae1 deserved at­ tention, to exchange on e5 on the next move. 14 ... IS.ef On 15.�xf3 Rybka came up with the ingenious variation 15... d3 16.�h5!? (not losing sight of the e2 pawn) 16... tl'if3+ 17.�xf3 1Lxb2 18.I:i:ad1 de 19.I:i:xd8 e�+ 20.<;-t>xf1 I:i:axd8 (spe­ cifically the queen's rook, so that on ll.b4 2l.CDc5 you can reply 2l...b6) 2l.�xa5 Khenkin is playing this game consid­ b6 22.�b4 �d4, not giving preference erably more adventurously than he did to either player. in the "active" game against Morozevich 15... CDd3 (Mainz, 2005): 1l.I:i:d1xe5 tl'ic 12.CDxe5 16.�c2 tl'ixe5 13.CDf3 CDxf3+ 14.�xf3 �f6 16.I:i:ab1 tl'ixb2 17.I:I:xb2 is of in­ 15.c5 (15.e3 �e5 16.ed �f6!? 17.<;-t>g2 terest, and after 17 ...CD e5 (the knight j,xd4 18.1Lg5!�xg5 19.I:i:xd4 is a little should be taken off the poor spot) the

178 The Albin Countergambit c4 pawn isn't hanging. If 16 .. J:re8,then White succeeds in moving his bishop away to al. 16 ... tl:Jxb2 17.�xb2 tl:JeS 18.l'lfd1 d3 A more complicated continua­ tion than 18... tl:Jx c4 19.tl:Jxf6 + �xf6 20.�xd4 �xd4 21.l'lxd4 tl:Jd6 (where, despite his pawn advantage on the queenside, Black should be happy with a draw). 19.Wf1 Black doesn't rush to take the Possibly 19.�c1 �d4 20.tl:Jxf6+ gf doomed pawn (7 ...tl:Jg xe5 - games 16 2l.f4 tt'ld7 22 . .1ixb7 is more precise. Af­ and 17), preferring to complete his de­ ter ...tl:Jc5 Black successfully positions velopment. his knight but is still a pawn down and 8.b3 worse off. Striving to destroy the central pawn 19... tl:Jxc4 as quickly as possible. A worthy alter­ 20.tl:Jxf6+ �xf6 native is 8.e3!? de (the complicated In the case of 20 ...gf 2l.�c3 �d5 play with 8 ...d3 9.�b3 l'lb8 IO.tl:Jel 22.f4 �xb5 23.l'lab1 Black is two pawns itf5 11.tl:Jc3 is supposedly favorable fo r up at this point. Here only a small suc­ White, but without the queens on the cess is likely - preserving the pawn bal­ board the advantage comes along all ance. by itself) 9.�xd8+ i.xd8 lO. .Itxe3 0-0 2l.�xf6 gf 1l.tZ'lc3ite 6 (after ll...tl:Jgxe5 12.tl:Jxe5 22.l'lxd3 l'lfd8 tl:Jxe5 13.lic5 l:e8 14.l'lfel you have to 23.l'lc3 l'ld4 defend the rook with the help of 14 ... 24.f4 l'lb8 lid7,parting with the b7 pawn) 12.b3 Achieving a draw cost Black consid­ l'le8 13.l'ladl lig4 14.h3 iixf3 15.iixf3 erable effort in the endgame. tl:Jgxe5 16.lig2tl:Jg6 17.l'lfe1 a6 18.iic5 l'le6 19.l'lxe6 fe 20.tl:Je4 lif6 2l.l'ld7 15. Y. PISKOV - M. MOZNY l'lc8 22.tl:Jxf6 + gf 23.lixc6 be 24.iib4, Clichy, 1990 and Epishin easily put the squeeze on Kostic (Bad Wiessee, 2006). 1.d4 dS 8... tl:JgxeS 2.c4 eS Nothing else works. The Czech 3.de d4 master Mozny, who championed 5 ... 4.tl:Jf3 tl:Jc6 tl:Jge7bef ore the advent ofMorozevich, 5.g3 tl:Jge7 unsuccessfully used 8 ...lig4?! against 6.�g2 tl:Jg6 Panzalovic (Germany, 1993): 9.iib2 7.0-0 lie7 iixf3 IO.ef tl:Jgxe5 ll.f4 tl:Jd7 12.iixc6

179 Chapter IX be 13.�xd4 tllf6 14.l::rel �xd4 15.�xd4 14.tllxc5!! 'ii?d7 16.tllc3 c5 17.�e5, with a won Impressively destroying Black's po­ endgame. sition. Against Gries (Germany, 2008) 9.tllxe5 tllxe5 Legde was satisfied with an insignifi­ 10.�b2 �f6 cant advantage: 14.�h5 0-0 15.ed ed The American master Mark Gins- 16.l::radl g6 17.�f3 �f5 18.�f4. The burg threw the entire line 7 ...�e7 into continuation 15.tllxc5 g6 16.�d5 de doubt with the variation 10 ...c5 ll.e3! 17.tlle4 �e6 18.�xd8 ef+ 19.l::rxt2 �f6 12.ed cd 13.tlld2 �g4 14.�bl!? l::raxd8 20.tllf6 + �xf6 2l.�xf6 is stron­ Without disputing the overall conclu­ ger, with a pair of powerful bishops in sion, I'll point out that after 14 ...0-0 the ending. 15.�xb7 l::rb8 16.�g2 d3 there's dishar­ 14... �xc5 mony in White's army, and 14.f3 �f5 15.ed 0xd4 15.f4 tllg4 16.tlle4 promises more. With No good defense is apparent: 15... ll.e3 �g4 12.�d2! tllf3+ 13.�xf3 �f8 16.d5 tlle7 17.l::rel; 15... �e 7 16.d5 �xf3 14.ed the breaches in the king's 0b4 17.�xg7 l::rg8 18.�c3; 15 ...�b6 refuge evidently don't compensate fo r 16.d5 tlle7 17.�a3 0-0 18.c5; 15 ...�f 6 the loss of a pawn. 16.�e2+ �e7 17.�xc6+ be 18.�f3 0-0 1l.tlld2 c5 19.dc �xc5 20.l::rfe l - it's all depressing! If ll...tllc6, then 12.�xc6+ be 16.b4! �xb4?! 13.tlle4, and a capture on d4 with all Yo u wouldn't envy Black either in conveniences. On 11.. .d3 the simplest the case of 16 ...�b6 17.c5 tlle6 18.cb is 12.ed 0-0 13.�c2 �xd3 14.�xd3 �xb6 19.�g4, but at least some kind of tllxd3 15.�xf6 gf 16.tlle4, although resistance is possible here. Now Piskov 12.tlle4 tllf3+ 13.�xf3 �xb2 14.l::rbl finishes the battle with sweeping queen �e5 15.tllc5 c6 16.�xd3 �e7 17.�e3 moves. �d6 18.tlle4 �c7 19.�c5 f5 20.�xe7+ 17.�a4+ 0c6 'ii?xe7 21.tllc5 (Antic - Sarkar, Fox­ 18.�xc6+ be woods, 2006) is also in White's favor. 19.�xg7 l::rg8 12.tlle4 �e7 20.�xc6+ �d7 13.e3 tllc6 21.l::rfe 1 + �e7 22.l::rxe7+! �xe7 23.�xa8+ �d8 24.�e4+ �e7 25.�xh7 Black resigned.

16. V. MILOV - A. RAETSKY Biel, 2005

l.d4 d5 2.c4 e5

180 The Albin Countergambit

3.de d4 The b3 square is generally intended 4.1:t:Jf3 tllc6 fo r a pawn (9.b3 - game 17), but you also 5.g3 tllge7 have to reckon with this queen thrust. 6.j,g2 tll g6 An exchange of the remaining knights, 7.0-0 tllgxe5 9.tlld2 j,e7 10.tllf3 tllxf3+ 1l.ii,xf3,is 8.tllxe5 completely harmless. The internet duel It's not at all certain that White Lautier - Raetsky (2004) may at least has to rush with the exchange. 8.tllbd2 convince you ofthis: 11. ..0-0 12J�,f4 c5 j,e7 9.b4!? (the threat of 10.b5 virtu­ 13.ii,d5 ii,d6 (13... �b6 14.�d2 ii,e6 ally fo rces an exchange of this pawn is more accurate, as later an exchange fo r the central one) 9 ...tll xf3+ 10.tllxf3 of the dark-squared bishops reinforced tllxb4 ll.tllxd4 0-0 12.ii,e3is interest­ the minimal advantage) 14.�d2 ii,h3 ing. Whether Black kicks the enemy 15.1':rfe1 l':rb8 16.e4 b5!? 17.e5 ii,c7 knight out of the center or prefers to put 18.�c2 ii,e6 19.ii,xe6 fe 20.cb l':rxb5 up a barrier on the long diagonal, 12... 2l.b3 �d5 - this is the kind of position c6, - time and effort are still needed you can only dream about in the Albin to equalize his chances. After 12 ...c6 Countergambit! 13.�a4 tlla6 14.1':rfdl tllc5 15.�c2 �a5 9... ii,e7 16.1':rab1 �a4 17.tllb3 (Petkov - Niko­ My first experience of opposing lov, Plovdiv, 2006) instead of 17 ...tll e6 9.�b3 turned into a catastrophe: 9 ... with a slightly worse position Nikolov c5 10.e3 (IO.ii,xb7 l':rb8 ll.�a4+ ii,d7 preferred the more aesthetically pleas­ 12.�a6 ii,h3 13.1':rd1�d7 14.ii,d5 ii,e7 ing 17 ...1':re8?!, and was immediately left is unconvincing) 10 ...j,e 7 ll.ed �xd4? a pawn down - 18.j,xc5!ii,xc5 19.ite4! (ll...cd 12.'1'Wb5+ tllc6 13.ii,xc6+ be ii,e7 20.ii,xh7+ �f8 2l.j,e4. In the 14.'t,'hc6+ itd7 15.'1'Wd5 0-0 16.'�xd4, variation 12... c5 13.tllb3 �b6 14.a3 and despite White beingtwo pawns up, l':rd8 15.'iYb1 tllc6 16.�c2 g6 17.1':rab1 it isn't very clear) 12.ii,f4 ii,g4? (with White has the more promising position. 12... tll g6 13.1':rd1 tllxf4 14.1':rxd4 tlle2+ 8. .. tllxe5 15.�h1 tllxd4 I should have given up the queen fo r a rook and bishop) 13.tll c3 f6 14.�xb7 l':rd8 15.1':rael ii,d7 16.1':rdl tlld3 17.ii,e4 tllxf4 18.1':rxd4 tllh3+ 19.�g2 cd 20.tlld5 ii,d6 2l.ii,f5! ii,xf5 22.�xg7 ii,e523.'�e 7# (Galianina Ry­ janova - Chetverik, Gyongyos, 1999). Four months later in the game Deak - Chetverik (Gyula, 1999) Black pre­ fe rred to develop his bishop - with com­ plete success, overshadowing the past fi­ asco: 9 ...j,c5 10.�b5+ tlld7 1l.b4 ii,e7 12.ii,b2 c6 13.�a4 tllb6 14.�c2 ii,e6 15.c5? tllc4 16.tlld2 d3! 17.ed tllxb2

181 Chapter IX

18.1'lle4? (in a groggy condition the 11... �xd4 Hungarian master didn't want to fight 12.j,f4 �f6 the exchange down) 18... �d4 19.�abl The fo ray 12... 1'll d3!? deserved the l'llxd3. White could still claim an ad­ closest attention. After 13.j,e3 �xb2 vantage with the help of 15.�dl �f6 14.1'llc3 �xb3 15.ab in the best case 16.1'lld2 0-0 17.1'lle4 l'llxc4 18.1'llxf6+ White wins a pawn back on the queen­ �xf6 19.�xd4 �g6 20.e4, and thus 9 ... side. He should go down the path of sac­ �e7 (not coming under attack from b4) rifices: 14.�xd3!? �xal 15.1'llc3 �b2 looks like the strongest. 16.1'lld5 j,d6 17.�d4 j,f5! 18.�e3 �c2 10.e3 19.�cl �a4. The initiative and the ma­ After 10.�xb7 �b8 ll.�a4+ �d7!? terial roughly balance each other. 12.�xa7?! c6 (13.�xd4?! �tO) White's 13.1'lla3?! queen and bishop stood apart from their I'll venture to assert: high-class comrades-in-arms. With the strongest players often play against the Albin 12.�a6 the bishop returns home without Countergambit at lower than usual hindrance, but that doesn't resemble an strength! In this case not because of advantage. Anex pedition to the rear ofthe the non-standard nature of the posi­ weak d4 pawn promises more: 10.�b5+!? tion (everything is within the bounds l'lld7 ll.�d5!? c5 12.e3 de 13.i,xe3,with of decency here), but fo r psychologi­ pleasant play.Against Zablotsky (Kemero­ cal reasons. In the pursuit of the elusive vo , 2007) Zakhartsov continued lO.�dl advantage (assumed in the Albin from 0-0 ll.l'llc3, exploiting the pin on the the start) Milov positions his knight central file. Black should have maintained poorly. Then again, with 13.1'll d2! l'llg6 approximate equality in a complicated 14.�e3 �xb2 15.�xb2 �xb2 16.�abl position with the help of ll...c5 12.1'lld5 j,c3 17.�xb7 �xb7 18.�xb7 l'lle5 no i,d6 13.f4 1'llc6 14.�d2 �e8. real advantage is visible. 10... 0-0 13... c6 In contrast to the fragment Ryzha­ 14.�fel l'llg6! nova - Chetverik, the king moves off lS.i,ct �b6 to the flank and there's no reason to 16.�c2 �e6 fear a premature centralization of the A second straight move with the de­ queen. With lO... de ll.�xe3 c6 12.1'llc3 velopment of a piece out of concrete 0-0 13.�adl �c7 14.j,f4 because ofthe considerations was the strongest here pressure on b7 Black has some problems and led to a clear advantage: 16... �b4! with his queenside. 17.�e2 �g4 18.f3 �e6 19.�e3 �ad8. ll.ed Now after 17.c5 transferring the queen If he's slow with the exchange then to M ioses its fo rce due to 18.�e4. it's not the queen that establishes itself 17.c5 �c7 on d4, but a pawn: ll.�dl c5 12.ed cd 18.�d2 �adS 13.�f4 1'llc6 14.1'llc3 1'lla5 15.�c2 �g4 19.�c3 l'lleS 16.1'lle2 �f6 - Black's situation isn't This was precisely the right time to too bad. hook the c5 pawn - 19 ...�d 4!? 20.b4 a5

182 The Albin Countergambit

2l.i.xd4 Mxd4 22.b5 Mfd8, with better 27.'i¥b3 i.f6 prospects. 28.Mxb7 'i¥xc5 20.Me2 i.d5 29.tt::le3 Md2 21.Mael i.xg2 30.tt::lg4 22.i.xe5 i.xe5 The pathetic white nag hasturned into 23.\'�ixg2 an unbridled mustang! Now its exchange Milov was facing a choice - which should have been provoked (30 ...h5 of his opponent's bishops to stop. Prob­ 31.tt::lxffi+ gf 32.'i¥f3 \tlg7 33.Me2 Mxe2 ably the dark-squared one was right: 34. 'i¥xe2 Md8, approaching a draw), and after 23.Mxe5!? i.d5 24.tt::lc4 the latest ifthe bishop is saved, then it covers the exchange of minor pieces leaves White back rank. On 30 ...i.d4? the rabid pranc­ more commanding major ones, and er won the bishop by fo rce - 31.Me8! 'iVd5 otherwise the knight enthusiastically 32.'i¥xd5 cd 33.Mbb8 i.c5 34.Mxf8+ moves to d6. i.xf835.Ci'le5 f6 36.tt::ld7 \tff737. tt::lxf8. 23... �d4 24.'i¥c4?! 17. V. EPISHIN - M. CHETVERIK A repetition of moves is objectively Bad Wiessee, 2006 stronger (24.b4 a5 25.Me7 Md7 26.Me8 Md8 27.Me7 Md7), but cynically count­ l.d4 d5 ing on his opponent's time trouble the 2.c4 e5 Swiss Grandmaster bluffs. 3.de d4 24... 'i¥a5 4.tt::lf3 tt::lc6 25.Me7 5.g3 tt::lge7 6.i.g2 tt::lg6 7.0-0 tt::lgxe5 8.tt::lxe5 tt::lxe5 9.b3

25 ... i.xb2? Instead of this poorly-timed pawn capture 25 ...i.f 6! 26.M7e3 Md4! 27.'i¥c2 Md2 28.tt::l c4 Mxc2 29.tt::lxa5 Mxb2 is correct, and whether White will achieve 9 ... �c5 a draw is still in question. Now this energetic bishop thrust 26.tt::lc2 Md5 looks like the strongest move . The draw-

183 Chapter IX backs of 9 ...ii.e 7 were revealed in game fg 2l.�g4+ 'itih8 22.Mxf8+ �xf8 15. Against Gnusarev (Astana, 2007) 23.�d4+ '\t/g8 24.�g4+ 'itih8,dra w. Kairbekov confirmed his knight in the In the game Malinin - Chetverik center - 9 ...c5 10.e3 lilc6 ll.ed tilxd4 (Sukhumi, 2006) as a result of home 12.1ilc3 il.e713 .ii.b20-0. White replied preparation my opponent sent his knight with the same measure and with more to e4, not determining the place fo r the active bishops looked more promising: queen's bishop immediately. There fo l­ 14.tild5 ii.f6 15.�d2 il.e6 16.1ilxf6 + lowed 10.tild2 0-0 ll.tile4 il.e7 12.ii.b2 �xf6 17.il.xd4 cd 18.ii.xb7 Mad8 c5 13.e3 1ilc6 14.ed cd 15.a3 a5 16.�d3 19.ii.g2 d3 20.Mae l il.g4 2l.Me3 il.e2 il.g4 17.h3 il.e6 18.f4 �d7 19.'\t/h2 22.Mcl. Mad8 20.Mf2 h6 2l.Mdl gfe8 22.�fl?! 10.ii.a3 (in a "stagnant" position the blockade When I was preparing fo r Epishin shouldn't be removed) 22 ...f5 23.tild2 I took into account his uncertain play ii.f6 24.tilf3 a4! 25.b4 �f7 26.c5 il.c4 against Te ran (Calvia, 2005): 10.ii.b2 27.�hl d3 - with such a strange queen 0-0 ll.lila3 �e7 12.1ilc2 Md8 13.�d2? White's position doesn't instill one with (the logical conclusion of the maneuver confidence. Against Strohhaeker (Dres­ 13.tilxd4 after 13.. . il.g4 14.h3 il.xd4 den, 2003) Neverov seized the initiative 15.ii.xd4 c5 16.hg gxd4 17.�c2 Mxg4 after 15.f4 ii.f5 16.g4 il.xe4 17.il.xe4 leads to an equalization of the mate­ il.c5 18.�d3 �h4 19.a3 �xg4+ 20.'\t/hl rial and the position, with which it's f5 2l.ii.d5+ 'itih8 22.b4 ii.b6 23.Mf3, also necessary to come to terms) 13 ... which was the legacy of greed - 19... a5 d3! 14.1ile3,and 14... il.b4! is very strong 20.h3 gfe8 is solid. here. White doesn't lose a piece, as it may 10... ii.xa3 seem, but after 15.�dl de 16.�xe2 Md2 ll.lilxa3 cS 17.'1i'h5 Mxb2 18.tild5 �d6 19.1ilxb4 Exchanging off the dark-squared il.g420.�g5 c6 he isn't celebrating. bishops is no better or worse than More often the knight chooses an­ lO.lLb2. Castling immediately was re­ other route - to e4 via d2, with the aim jected because of 12.1ilb5 c5 13.e3, al­ of disturbing the bishop. Ginsburg thinks though 13... d3 14.�d2 il.g4 15.f4 1ilc6, that on 10.ii.b20-0 ll.lild2 the only re­ and also 13 ... de 14.�xd8 ef+ 15.Mxf2 ply is ll...a5!, providing the bishop with �xd8 16.ii.d5 il.e6 17.il.xb7 gab8 a refuge on a7. In the encounter Kachur 18.ii.e4 Md7 don't disturb the approxi­ - Koziak (Barlinek, 2006) Black radi­ mate equality. cally prevented the centralization of the 12.1ilc2 knight: ll...f5!? 12.e3 (12.tilf3 with an The position allowed fo r a dynam­ exchange of knights guaranteed a slight ic decision: 12.b4! cb 13.�a4+ lilc6 advantage) 12... de 13.ii.xe5 ed 14.�c2 14.il.xc6+ be 15.�xc6+ ii.d7 16.�e4+ f4 15.il.xf4 ii.f5 (the exchange sacri­ il.e6 17.1ilc2,with an advantage. fice 15... Mxf 4!? 16.gf �d4 is roughly 12... Mb8 equivalent) 16.il.e4 ii.xf2+!? 17.'itix f2 Now the plan to advance 13.b4 has il.xe4 18.�xe4 g5 19.'\t/g2 gf 20.Mad l become obvious; Black has disentangled

184 The Albin Countergambit himself and is ready to meet the under­ Epishin has adroitly positioned his mining move with the solid defense 13... pieces so that he can advance one of b6 14.l::i:b1 �g4 15/Z'lel0-0. The con­ his pawns, depending on the actions of tinuation 12 ...0-0 13.b4!? cb 14.'t'lxb4 his opponent. As a consequence a de­ trlxc4 15.trld5 �e6 16.'�xd4 trlb6 17.e4 flecting sacrifice ofthe b-pawn is rather l::i:c8 probably isn't enough fo r equality. questionable. 19 ...�h 3 20.�xh3 �xh3 13.�d2 �f6 seemed dangerous due to 2l.f5, but There's no way I can find time to let's look fu rther: 21...trle522. l::i:f4 �h6 castle! 13... 0-0 14.e3 d3 15.trle1and J::i:dl 23.f6 g6 - the queen is safe, but the po­ almost certainly end with the fall of the sitional concessions are irreversible. Af­ advanced pawn, and it's doubtful wheth­ ter 2l.�f3 it's better for White to strive er I'd manage to get compensation fo r it. fo r e5. But in the case of 13... de 14.�xe3 �c7 19... bS!? it isn't clear how to install the unsightly 20.cb knight on the first-class d5 spot. The Grandmaster had apparently 14.f4 trlc6 decided to win with little blood, devi­ 15.e4 ating from the principle continuations. White's pressure demands extreme 20.trlxc5 be 2l.bc �d6 22.trlb3 J::i:d8 concentration from Black, but he has 23.e5 �c7 24.�e4 doesn't promise already achieved a small bonus in the Black full compensation fo r his losses. shape of a defended passed pawn. It was 20... J::i:bS worth thinking about 15.e3!? 0-0 16.ed zt.:n trlb4 trlxd4 17.trlxd4 cd 18.l::i:fe 1, with a typi­ 22.e5 iib7 cal position fo r the gambit, in which the 23.�xb7 trlxd3 passed pawn is more of a weakness than 24.Wxd3 :xb7 a strength. 25.f5 �c6 15 ... 0-0 A timely change of flank. On 25 ... 16.trle1 �h6 l::i:be7 the unpleasant 26.e6! fe 27.�c4! 17.trld3 b6 lay in wait. 18.l::i:ae1 l::i:e8 26.l::i:fe2 �bS 19.�d1 27.�xb5 l::i:xbS 28.J::i:c2 hS 29.e6 The result of the simplifications is a drawn rook ending. After 29 ...fe 30.fe g6 it's difficult to even imagine a dif­ fe rent outcome, but what occurred in the game, 29 ...f6 ?!, gave White a stable advantage. Anyway, balancing on the edge of the abyss, I exchanged off all the pawns and fo rced a ceasefire on the 81" move.

185 Chapter IX

18. D. RAT - M. CHETVERIK virtually rules out a retreat to h4 or f4 , Budapest, 1999 so the bishop has to go a long way away to its own home front. More important l.d4 dS is the established pawn superiority, and 2.c4 eS also the prospects of an assault on the 3.de d4 black king, if it heads for the queen­ 4.1i:Jf3 ®c6 side. 5.g3 ®ge7 9.itcl 6.itg2 ®g6 The bishop isn't preventing the 7.itg5 knight from coming out to d2. Never­ theless, the bishop should have been po­ sitioned on d2, and the knight won't be an orphan on a3 either. In a duel with Arlandi (lmperia, 1996) Mozny didn't rush to castle, and after 9.li,d2 ite6 10.'i¥a4 'i¥d7 11.0-0 ith3?! 12.e3 h5?! 13.ed li,xg2 14.'it>xg2 h4 15.'i¥c2 'i¥g4 16.l:te1+ 'it>fl 17.'i¥e4 he was left two pawns down in a poor position. In the game P. Horvath - Chetverik (Harkany Tenkes Cup, 2001) a rout also lay in wait fo r Black: 11.. .0-0-0 12.b4 'it>b8 13.c5 Prevents the normal course of events d3?! 14.ed ith3 (14 ...'i¥xd3 15.ite3 - winning the pawn back with subse­ 'i¥c4 16.®fd2, and the pawn can't be quent kingside castling. The choice of taken due to 1Lixc6) 15.b5 ®ce5 defenses has narrowed down a lot. Af­ 16.®xe5 ®xe5 17.c6! 'i¥xd3 18.itxh3 ter 7 ...ite 7?! 8.itxe7 capturing with the ®f3+ 19.'it>h1 itc5?! (after 19 ...l:td 4 queen or either of the knights doesn't 20.'i¥d1 or 20.'i¥b3 'i¥xb3 21.ab I win regain the loss and does nothing to com­ the piece back, but Black's situation is pensate fo r it, so 8 ...'it>x e7?!? has been bad) 20.itf4 itd4 21.®a3 itxal 22.b6! tried twice. In the curious variation Instead of the mistimed breakthrough 9.'i¥d3 ®gxe5 10.®xe5 ®xe5 ll.'i¥e4 in the center a prophylactic was appro­ 'it>f6 by a happy coincidence you don't priate - 13... a6 14.®a3 itd5 15.b5 ab get mated, which isn't much consolation 16.®xb5 li,xc5,and it isn't easy to reach fo r Black, of course. The most relevant the king. The advance b5 is more dan­ 7 ...'i¥d7 was encountered in games 19 gerous after 15.l:tfbll:tg8 16.l:tb2 and a and 20. doubling of the rooks. Then a discharge 7... f6 is justified, 16... ®c e5 17.'i¥xd7 l:txd7, 8.ef gf fighting a pawn down. By attacking the bishop Black has 9... Ji,fS won time fo r development. Besides 10.a3 'i¥d7 that, the position of the knight on g6 11.0-0

186 The Albin Countergambit

A couple of months later (Hlohovec, 15... 'i¥g4!? 1999) International Master Gladischev Leads to incomparably more com­ awaited me here, not knowing about plicated play than the "dual" 15... 'i¥f 5 his predecessor, apparently. White left 16.c5 (16.b5 l1Jce5 17.l1Jxd4? l1Jh4+! his king in the center, which didn't kills the white king) 16 ...a6. The dual justify itself: ll.b4 0-0-0 12.'i¥a4 �b8 isn't bad, by the way, as it's very difficult 13.ct:Jbd2Mg8!? (13... d3!? 14.b5 ct:Jce5) to attack the black king. 14.�b2 �h6! (prevents castling; the 16.h3 tenacious 15.Mdl meets with a rebuff, Another move-order is 16.b5 l1Jce5 15... �h 3 16.�xh3 'i¥xh3 17.b5?! Mge8! 17.h3, to take on d4 after kicking out 18.bc Mxe2+! 19.�xe2 d3+ 20.�el the queen. In the fascinating varia­ Me8+) 15.b5 l1Jce5 16.l1Jxd4 l1Jf4! tion 17... 'i¥c8 18.l1Jxd4 �c5 19.iie3 17 .iic6? (allows a combination; with ct:Jh4+! 20.�h2 iixd4 2l.iixd4 Mxd4! 17 .gf Mxg2 18.fe �xd2+ 19.�x d2 fe 22.Mxd4 l1Jhf3+! 23.ef t1Jxf3+ 24.�g2 20.Mhgl he has chances to save him­ l1Jxd4 Black is a pawn down in the end, self) 17 ...t1Je d3+! 18.edl1Jxd3+ 19.�fl but he has at his disposal a choice be­ lLlxb2 20.�xd7 iid3+! 2l.�g2 l1Jxa4 tween 17... 'i¥e4 18.ctJc3 l1Jh4+! 19.�fl 22.iie6 �xd2 23.�xg8 Mxd4, with a 'i¥f5 20.l1J:xh4 'i¥:xh3+ 2l.�gl Mg8 and quick win. 17 ...'i¥f5 18.l1Jxd4 l1Jh4+! 19.gh Mg8+ 11... 0-0-0 20.iig5 Mxd4! 2l.Mxd4 �c5 22.'i¥dl 12.'i¥a4 �xd4 23.'i¥xd4 fg , with tangled play in Typical play fo r this gambit to get both cases. ahead probably isn't the best here - af­ 16 ... 'i¥e4 ter exchanging the light-squared bish­ 17.b5 ops the king's residence is open to the four winds. White's main trump card is his extra pawn, and so he should strive fo r simplifications. After 12.e3!? d3 13.l1Jd4l1Jxd4 14.ed iih3 (14... 'i¥xd4?? 15.'i¥f3) 15.'i¥xd3 �xg2 16.�xg2 l1Je5 17.'i¥e4 'i¥xd4 18.'i¥xd4 Mxd4 com­ pensation is at hand, but no more than that. 12 ... �h3 13.b4 �xg2 14.�xg2 �b8 15.Md1 17 ... l1Jh4+!? 15.e3 is already late because of 15 ... Instead of 17... l1Jce5, switching �h6! (16.l1Jxd4? lLlh4+!; 16.ed �xcl to a variation from the previous note, 17.Mxcl l1Jf4+!; 16.Mel Mhg8), empha­ Black goes fo r a combination regard­ sizing the weakness not only of the light less of consequences. If the knight is squares, but also the dark ones. taken, then after 18.gh Mg8+ 19.�fl

187 Chapter IX

Ci'le5 20.b6!? cb 21..l:lxd4! (21.Ci'lbd2? likely leads to a draw. A draw also oc­ 'i¥f5!) 21.. . .l:lgl+! 22.c;irxgl Ci'lxf3+23.e f curred in the game - after 24 ...�h 6 'i¥xd4 the piece is won back, and with 25.'i¥c4 'i¥a5 26 . .l:lcdl 'i¥c3 27.'i¥f7 his pawns disintegrating there's nothing 'i¥xc5 28.'i¥xh7 'i¥g5 and another 50 fo r White to count on. moves with double time trouble and 18.c;irgl Ci'leS! vacillations of the evaluation from one 19.Ci'lxh4 .l:lg8 extreme to the other. 20.Ci'lg2?! In such a sharp position it's difficult April 22, 2005, Lenin's birthday. A to decide at the board which road leads match in the Russian Club Champion­ to Rome and which one into the abyss. ship between Maksven (Ekaterinburg) Rat justifiably rejected 20.Ci'lf3?Ci'lx f3+ and Red October (Voronezh). Maksven 21.ef'i¥xf3 (with the idea of ...�d 6), but is advancing; October unquestionably with the help of20. c;irh2!? 'i¥xe22l ..l:ld2 has the worst-rated combatants among 'i¥e4 22.'i¥dl he retained chances of all the teams in the premier league. On defending himself, being left with extra board two Raetsky has to battle Dreev. material. With great difficulty I persuade Sasha to 20 ... 'i¥xe2 play the Albin, motivated by the simple 21.Ci'ld2! slogan, "If you have to die, do it with a The Romanian master correctly fanfare!" noticed that he had to cover the f3 square, even at the price of his conquest. 19. A. DREEV -A. RAETSKY 2l.�e3? �c5 22.Ci'lc3 'i¥h5! 23.Ci'lf4 Dagomys, 2005 'i¥f3! lost immediately. In the variation 2l.�f4?! Ci'lf3+ 22.c;irhl �xf2 23.Ci'ld2 l.d4 dS .l:lxg3! 24.�xg3 'i¥xg3 25.Ci'lxf3 �xf3 2.c4 eS White is a rook up, but can he with­ 3.de d4 stand the pressure from his opponent? 4.Ci'lf3 Ci'lc6 And the fatal continuation fo r White S.g3 Ci'lge7 2l.Ci'lc3?! Ci'lf3+ 22.c;irhl 'i¥xf2 23.Ci'le4 6.�g2 Ci'lg6 'i¥e2 24.�e3 �h6! 25.�xh6?! 'i¥xe4 7 . .ig5 'i¥d7 26.�f4 'i¥f5 27.g4 .l:lxg4! can be edited only by throwing out some of the mate­ rial - 25 . .l:lel Ci'lxel 26 . .l:lxel 'i¥h5. 21... Ci'ld3 22 . .l:lfl Ci'lxcl 23 . .l:laxc1 'i¥xd2 24.c5 The passions have abated, all things are equal, and the endgame in the case of 24 ...d3 25 . .l:lfdl 'i¥b2 26 . .l:lc2 .l:ld4 27 . .l:lxb2 .l:lxa4 28 . .l:lxd3 �xc5 most

188 The Albin Countergambit

The queen isn't positioned very well The pockmarked kingside fo rces Black to in the path of the bishop, but on the resort to castling long: 9 ...h6 lO.�cl e5 other hand the e5 pawn's time is nearly ll.tiJbd2'i¥f7 12.e3 �e6 13.ed ed 14.'i¥a4 up. White can only choose how exactly 0-0-0 15.b4 Wb8 16.Mel �e7 (16 ...Cll xb4 to part with it. 17.Mbl �d7 18.'i¥a5 b6 19.Mxb4 �xb4 8.e6 20.'i¥xb4 c5 21.'i¥b3,with two pieces for a Castling was encountered in game rook and an advantage, although also with­ 20. Now Black's pawn skeleton changes out an attack) 17.1b3 �f6 18.Clle4 �xc4 its fo rm in typical fashion fo r the gam­ 19.LZJ:xf0 gf 20.b5 tzlce5 21.Cllxd4 (Akes­ bit. son - Feygin, Belgium, 2006) 2l...�d5 8... fe 22.tzlc6+ tzlxc6 23.bc �xg2 24.Wxg2 Bearing in mind that deploying a 'i¥d5+ 25.'i¥e4 'i¥xe4+ 26.Mxe4, with a central pawn duet on the dark squares better ending. can knock off the dark-squared bish­ 10.Cllbd2 ops: 8 ...�b4+ 9.�d2 fe 10.�xb4 Cllxb4 That also occurred in the ftrst well­ 11.0-0 e5 12.Cllbd2 0-0, with a view to known game on 8.e6, Krasenkow - Mo­ equalizing. Taking on e6 with the queen rozevich (Moscow, 1993). The new trends isn't favorable - 8 ...'i¥xe6?! 9.Cllxd4 in the gambit ( ...Cll ge7-g6) hadn't ma­ �b4+ 10.Cllc3 �xc3+ ll.bc Cllxd4 tured yet back then, and only the Rapid 12.cd (12.'i¥xd4is also good) 12 ...'�x c4 game Van We ly - Morozevich (Monte 13.0-0. It's very difficult to oppose the Carlo, 2004) spurred interest in the varia­ white bishops. tion: IO.'�a4�d6 11.Cllbd2h6 12.c5!�f8 9.0-0 (12... hg 13.cd g4 14.Cllg5 'i¥xd6 15.lZJc4 The home preparation was based on �tO 16.t1Je4, like 12 ...�x c5 13.'i¥c2 the January game Dreev - Nakamura hg 14.�xg6+ �f7 15.'i¥xt7 + Wxf7 (Gibraltar, 2005): 9.a3 a5 10.'i¥a4 h6 16.Cllxg5+ Wg6 17.Macl, are in White's ll.�cl e5 12.Cllbd2 �e7 13.0-0 0-0 favor) 13.�h4 a5 14.a3 Ma6?! (the rook is 14.b4 (bringing his knight to d3 via el out of place here; 14 ...'i¥e6!? 15.b4 �d7 immediately is a little more unpleas­ 16.b5 lllce7 is playable) 15.Mfel 'i¥f5 ant fo r Black) 14 ...Cll d8 15.'i¥xd7 16.Macl �e7 17.�xe7 Cllgxe7 18.e3 0-0 �xd7 16.b5 a4 17.Cllel c6 18.Mbl cb 19.ed ed, and 20.'i¥c4+ Wh8 21.Cllb3 d3 19.cb Ma5 20.�e4 Cllh8 21.Clld3 Cllhf7 22.Mcdl destroys the d-pawn, which has 22.tzlc4 Mxb5 23.Mxb5 �xb5 24.Cllcxe5 been chipped away from its colleagues. tzlxe5 25.tzlxe5 �d6 26.�d5+ Wh7 To avoid being subjected to c5 it's worth 27.�e4+ Wg8 28.�d5+, with a repeti­ thinking about 10... �e7 ll.�xe7 LZJcxe7 tion of moves. A recurrence of'i¥a4 isn't 12.'i¥b3 0-0, or testing the bishop's in­ assumed, as exchanging queens in this tentions after 10... h6. situation is harmless fo r Black. The retreat lO.�cl!? demonstrates 9... e5 that the play here is more blocking in On 9 ...h6 there follows lO.�cl - the nature than tempo-seeking. After 10 ... bishop is also ready to move away to its 'i¥f7 it isn't obligatory to defend the home haunts on 9 ...e5 without any duress. pawn; against Szoen (Poland, 2006)

189 Chapter IX

Lagowski achieved a tangible initia­ 16.fe Vjyg6!? 17.Vjybl!? tllxe5 18.gh �h3 tive with ll.tllg5!? �xc4 12.b3 Vjyg8 19.tlld6+ Vjyxd6 20.it,xh3.The path fo r 13.tllc3! it,e6 14.tllxe6 Vjyxe6 15.tlle4 the black king has been blocked on both �d6 16.Vjyd3h6 17.Vjyb5 0-0-0 18.�d2 flanks, which is of little consequence. tllge7 19.a3 tlld5 20.!Ifcl �e7 2l.b4. Or 12.tllb3 0-0 13.a3 it,d6 14.c5 �e7 The continuation 10... �e 7 ll.tllg5 15.�xe7 Vjyxe7 16.tllfd 2 �f5 - in the �xg5 12.�xg5 0-0 is more solid, and pursuit of an exchange of bishops White again the bishop has to be brought back has messed up his queenside and is into its own camp in order to bring ac­ hardly likely to get an advantage. tive plans (like e3) to life. 12... Vjyf7 10... h6 13.tlle4 ll.�h4 �b4!? The tactic 13.tllxd4?! ed 14.it,d5 The h4 bishop can be counted in the �e6 15.Vjye4�d 7 l6.tllf3 causes Black bad pieces department, and exchanging some concern, but his extra piece prob­ it off is undesirable: ll...�e7 12.it,xe7 ably outweighs that. Wo rrying about the Vjyxe7 13.Vjyc2Vjyf7 14.tllel 0-0 15.tlld3 fate of his king, Black can satisfy himself �h8 16.b4 it,g4 17.!Iael !Iae8?! (you with being the exchange up - 13... tll xd4 should stop the aggression on the queen­ 14.Vjya4+ Vjyd7 15.Vjyxb4 tZ:lc2 l6.Vjyc3 side with the help of 17... a6) 18.b5 tlld8 tllxal l7.!Ixal c6. 19.Vjya4 Vjyf5 20.tlle4 Vjyh5 2l.f3 �e6 13... CLlxh4 22.!Icltll f7 23.Vjyxa7�c 8 24.Vjyc5,with After 13... 0-0 14.a3 CLlxh4 15.tllxh4 an extra pawn but no hint of counterplay �e7 16.tllf3 �f5 17.tllfd2 a5 the black (Krasenkow - Morozevich, Podolsk, pieces are positioned fa ntastically. Now 1993). But it's already time fo r the king the position opens, and whatever hap­ to leave the center, which is just open­ pens a flightby the monarch to the king­ ing up after e3. In the variation ll...Vjyf7 side has been ruled out. l2.e3 tllxh4?! 13.tllxh4 g5 l4.�xc6+! be 14.CLlxh4 �e7 15.tllhf3 the pawn pair is doomed. Then 15.f4!? �xh4 again, with a material sacrifice it's still 16.fe Vjye7 possible to correct everything: 12... �b4!? 17.gh 13.ed 0-0 14.de it,g4 or 14.d5 tlld4 15.tllxd4 ed 16.tlle4 tllxh4 17.gh Vjyf4. Why not put the bishop on b4 with­ out wasting time on ...Vjyf7? Black took advantage of his own recommendation from New in Chess, which Dreev was unlikely to know about. 12.Vjyc2 If the knight retreats without an in­ terim attack, there's the possibility of the sharp variation 12.tlle4 Vjyf7 13.a3 tllxh4 14.1i'lxh4 it,e7 15.f4!? �xh4

190 The Albin Countergambit

17 ... �d7?! Preparing an evacuation of the king to the queenside - out of the frying pan, into the fire! But the heat in the center wasn't even flaring up that much: 17... �xe5 (17. ..CiJxe5 18.�b3 l:l:f8 19.c5 is more risky) 18.ti'ld2ii.e6 19.ii.xc6+ be 20.�g6+ ctle7, with an unclear posi­ tion. 18.b4! 0-0-0?! In the case of 18 ...ti'lx b4 19.�b2! ii.c6 20.a3 ti'la6 2l.�xd4 l:l:d8 22.�f2 the king is stuck fa st in the center, where, 25.�a5? nevertheless, it fe els more comfortable He should have organized coop­ than on the flank. eration between his major pieces with 19.ti'lc5 �xe5 25.l:l:xg7 l:l:hf8 26.�dl. The move in 20.�a4 a6 the game probably lets his advantage 21.ti'lxd7 slip. 2l.ti'lxb7! ctlxb7? 22.b5 won, so he 25... b6 had to look fo r chances after an ex­ 26.�d5+ change of queens: 21...0 b8 22. � a5 As a result of sacrifices, 26.ii.h3+!? l:l:de8 23.�xe5 l:l:xe5 24.0c5 - rather �xh3 27.l:l:e7+! ctlxe7 28.�xe5+ nebulous. �e6 29.'ihg7+ �e8 30.'i¥xh8+ ctid7 21... �xd7 3l.�xd4+ �c8 White returned mate­ 22.l:l:t7+?! rial, and Black settled his king in a safe Here and later Dreev conducts his place (which was rejected a dozen moves attack inaccurately: 22.b5 ab 23.cb ago) - chances are equal. �e3+ 24.ctlhl 0e5 25.�xb7 l:l:hf8 26... �d6 26.�g2 put Black in an extremely dif­ 27.�a4 c6 ficult position. Forces events, unlike 27 .. .VJ/ixe2 22 ... ctle6?! 28.�xa6 d3, with utter vagueness. Now It would be great to at least change 28.l:l:xg7 l:l:hf8 29.�f3 d3! 30.c5+ be the punctuation marks around - the 3l.bc+ �xc5 32.l:l:dlmade it possible black king boldly heads fo r the center, to avoid total simplifications, but with counting on slight disharmony in his virtually no benefit fo r White. enemy's army. 22 ...ctlc 8 23.�xc6 d3! 28.�xa6 0xt7 24.�a5 �xa5 (but not 24 ... �xal +? After 29.�xb6 0e5 30.�c5+ 25.ctlg2) 25.ba be 26.ed l:l:xd3 is cor­ ctlc7 31.�a7+ ctlc8 32.�a6+ White rect, with a likely draw in a rook end­ only has perpetual check at his dis­ game. posal. Dreev preferred 29.l:l:xt7 l:l:hf8 23.l:l:afl �e3+ 30.�xb6 l:l:xt7 31.�xd8+ l:l:d7 32.c5+ 24.ctlhl ti'le5 ctlxd5 33.�xd7+ ctlc4 34.�xc6 �f2!

191 Chapter IX

(most likely an unforeseen resource) of water. Against Riazantsev (Noyabrsk, 3S.Vj'g2 Vj'et+36.Vj'gt Vj'xe237 .Vj'cl+ 2005) S. Novikov fo rced the bishop �xb4 38.c6 d3 39.c7 d2 40.Vj'b2+ �a4 away, to calmly position his own on e7. 4l.Vj'c2+ �bS 42.Vj'bl+ �a4 43.c8Vj' As a consequence, after 9 ...f6 10.ii.f4 dtVj'+ 44.Vj'xdl+ Vj'xdl+ 45.�g2 ®xf3+ll .®xf3 ii.e7 12.Vj'b3due to the Vj'e2+ 46.�g3 Vj'e3+ 47.�g4 Vj'e2+, hanging pawns on c7 and d4 he had to and Black declared perpetual check. And create new breaches: 12... g5 13.ii.d2 g4 so, in horror of Lenin on the anniversary 14.®h4 CZle5 15.ii.xb7 ii.xb7 16.Vj'xb7 of his birth, the Red October team beat �f7 17.b3 ®g6 18.CZlg2 - Black's po­ the favorites by a minimal margin and sition looks ruinous. In the game We r­ thus created the biggest sensation of the ner - Czebe (Balatonlelle, 2007) White championship. gradually outplayed his opponent quite out of the blue: 9 ...CZlxf3+ 10.®xf3 20. B. GELFAND - A. MOROZEVICH ii.c5 ll.Cl:lel0-0 12.Cl:ld3 (a knight ma­ Monte Carlo, 2004 (blindfold) neuver that is relevant to the Albin as a whole and here in particular) 12... Vj'f 5 l.d4 dS 13.Vj'd2 ii.e7 14.ii.xe7 ®xe7 15.Vj'b4 2.c4 eS Vj'f6 16.Vj'c5 c6 17.l::radl ii.e6 18.b3 3.de d4 l::rfd8 19J�d2 b6 20.Vj'e5Vj'xe5 21 .®xe5 4.®f3 ®c6 l::rd6 22.l::rfd l l::rad8 23.e3 c5 24.ed l::rxd4 S.g3 CZlge7 25.l::rxd4 l::rxd4 26.l::rxd4 cd, and White 6.ii.g2 ®g6 gradually worked on the weak pawn, 7 . .tg5 Vj'd7 which is easier to hold onto with the four 8.0-0 rooks on the board. 9 . .tf4 Gelfand clings to material, agree­ ing to ruin his pawn structure. Grand­ master Obukhov prefers 9.ii.d2 - this slightly clumsier retreat can only be made in connection with e3. For exam­ ple, 9 ...ii.c5 10.Vj'b3 0-0 ll.e3 ®gxe5 12.Cl:lxe5 CZlxe5 13.ed ii.xd4 14.Cl:lc3 Vj'g4 (this should have been played af­ ter the prophylactic 14... c6) 15.Cl:lb5 ii.b6 16.�f4 Vj'hS 17.l::rael Cl:lg4 18.h3 CZlxf2!? 19.l::rxf2 �xh3 20.l::re5!? (Ryb­ 8 ... h6 ka calculated 20.�e3 up to a difficult 8 .. Jljgxe5 9.CZlbd2 leads to a posi­ endgame fo r Black: 20 ...l::r ae8 2l.Vj'c3 tion from the branch 7.0-0 with the in­ Vj'eS 22.l::rfe 2 Vj'xc3 23.CZlxc3 ii.g4 clusion of ii.g5 and ...Vj'd7. If the bishop 24.ii.xb6 ii.xe225.�x a7 ii.xc426. l::rxe8 outing is a useful developing move, l::rxe8 27.ii.xb7) 20 ....txf2+ 2l.�xf2 g5 then the queen on d7 is like a fish out 22.Cl:lxc7 (Obukhov - Kurenkov, Vo -

192 The Albin Countergambit ronezh, 2005) 22 ....tx g2 23.<;i;>xg2 �ad8 13.tL:lb3 tL:lxe5 14.tL:lfxd4 0-0 15.'iYc2 24.1i'ld5 f6 , with mutual chances. 'iYg4 (15... 'iYe 7 is stronger, not rel­ Mt er 9 . .tcltL:lgxe5 a position aris­ egating the queen to the flank) 16. .te4 es from 7.0-0 with two extra tempi fo r 'iYh5 17.�gl c5 18. .tf3 (18.tL:lxc5? Black - ...h6 and ...'iYd7. These don't tL:lg4 costs him the exchange, but look like they should do any harm - 18.tL:lb5!? is interesting) 18... tL:lx f3 10.tL:lbd2 .te7 1l.'iYa4!? (to get a slight­ 19.tL:lxf3 <;i;>h8 20.'iYd2 'iYf5 (Narciso ly better position after 11... 0-0 with the - Fluvia, Badalona, 2005) - the two exchanges 12.tL:lxe5 tL:lxe5 13.'iYxd7 bishops are payback for the defects in tL:lxd7 or 13 ....tx d7) ll...tZ:lxf3+ the pawn structure. 12.tL:lxf3 0-0 13. .tf4 (Riazantsev - Ku­ 12... .te7 renkov, Minsk, 2005) 13... .tf 6 14.�ad1 12 ....tg7!? with sights on e5 isn't 'iYe7 15.�fel .te6 16.a3 �ad8 17.b4 thrown into any doubt by the variation a6 18.'iYc2. In Riazantsev's opinion 13.'iYd2tL:lxe5 14.'iYxf4 tL:lg6 15.tL:lf6+? White has a slight advantage here, un­ The paradoxical 15 ... <;i;>e7! is easy to noticed by Rybka. In the encounter overlook even in a "sighted" battle! He Postny - Abbasov (Bad Wiessee, 2007) has to retreat, and 15.'iYd2 'iYg4 16.tL:lg3 White preferred a standard fianchetto: tL:lf4 is attractive fo r Black. 10.tL:lxe5 tL:lxe5 1l.b3 .tc5 12.tL:ld2 0-0 13.'iYd2 13 . .tb2tL:lc6 14.tL:lf3 �e8 15.'iYd2'iYd 6 13.tL:lf6+?! .txf6 14.ef 'iYd6 freeing 16.�ad1 .tf5 17.tL:lx d4 tL:lxd4 18. .txd4 up the game is hardly worth studying. 'iYxd4 19.'iYxd4 .txd4 20.�xd4 �xe2 There's sense in moving the king off the 2l..txb7 �b8 22 . .td5 �xa2 23.:1:el. dangerous line: 13.<;i;>hl �g8 14.�g1 By this exchange operation White got �g6 15.�d3 �e6!?, then ....td 7 and a promising endgame, which is unat­ ...0-0-0, when Black successfully com­ tainable with 16 ....tg 4!? (17.h3 .txf3 pletes his development. 18. .txf3 a5 19.'iYc1�a d8, with equal­ 13... 'iYg4 ity). 14. <;i;>h1 .trs 9... tL:lxf4 15.tL:lxd4?! 10.gf g5! In the case of 15.h3 'iYh5 16.'iYxf4 Only this! He has to destroy the .txh3 no discovered check finishes strong pawn pair and open a valuable White off, so he can make a useful move file in the process. White returns his (17.�adl!?) and take the battle virtually acquisition, as with 11.'iYd2 gf 12.'iYxf4 to equality. �g8 13.<;i;>h1 'iYg4 compensation for 15... �d8?! one pawn appears, and in the case of Not the strongest pin. With 1l.fg hg 12.tL:lxg5 'iYg4!? 13.f4 .tc5 15... 0-0-0! 16.tL:lxc6 �xd2 17.tL:lxe7+ - fo r two. <;i;>d8 18.tL:lxf5 �d7 he doesn't get three ll.tL:lbd2 gf pieces for the queen, as there's nowhere 12.tL:le4 to retreat to from f5 . Possibly it's better to send the knight after the d4 pawn: 12.<;i;>h1 .tg7

193 Chapter IX

sible to prevent �adl with a subsequent 'i¥a8. The computer accurately (al­ though not immediately) sees similar tricks, while playing without looking at the board even elite Grandmasters chicken out here. 16... �xd2 17.lllxe7 �xe7 18.lllxd2 'i¥xe2 19.lllf3 �g8 20.b3 lllb4 21.llld4 'i¥g4 16.lllxf5? 22.i,e4 Gelfand doesn't exploit a fantas­ Despite missing the immediate de­ tic chance: 16.lllf6 +! i,x[6 17.i,xc6+ stroying deflection 22 ...lll d3!, Mo­ be 18.ef c5 19.'�a5! �xd4? (after 19... rozevich didn't let the win slip (22 ... �g5 cd 20.'i¥xc7 i,d7 2l.f3 'i¥e6 22.'i¥xf4 23.�gl 'i¥d7 24.lllf3 �xgl+ 25.�xgl the initiative for the bishop is obvious) llld3 26.�g2 c6 27.i,h7 aS 28.lllh4 20.'i¥xc5! �d7 21.'i¥c6!! - it's impos- lllxe5).

!·-coiici usiiiii: ·------1 ! ! In the line S.g3CfJg e7 the frivolous gambit undergoes a surprising metamorphosis, i 1 · acquiring a respectab le imageand hopes of re habilitation. If White doesn't have ! the luck to fm d anything convincing,the continuations 5.a3 and 5.l1Jbd2 come to ! i fo refro nt. Here,judgingby the i t practice, Whiteis guaran � i j the clearly insuffic en !

______[ ���-�-���-���:��: ]

194 Chapter 10 The Chigorin Defense

The variation l.d4 d5 2.tLlf3tLlc 6 3.g3 ii.g4 4.ii.g2 �d7

Mikhail Chigorin, challenger fo r Steinitz's Wo rld Championship title on two occa­ sions, produced several original paths in the openings. Blocking the c-pawn with his knight was considered almost a crime in queen's pawn openings, but Chigorin liked to go his own way and enjoyed considerable success with his defense. Here we look at using the Chigorin Defense specifically against the setup with an early g3.

l.tZ:lt3 d5 po) a position from the classical Benoni 2.g3 tZ:lc6!? arises. Not everyone likes these kinds of opening chameleons, as the advantage of the extra tempo has a tendency to dis­ appear. So in practice White often stops being coy about the intentions of his d­ pawn and decisively takes a double step. 3.d4 Let's go back to the initial position. The overture can look a little different. l.d4 d5 2.tZ:lt3 tZ:lc6!? Takes control of the very important d4 and e5 squares, preparing a move out This continuation, not the most by the light-squared bishop (an imme­ popular one, came to my attention in diate 2 ...,tg4 is met by the centraliza­ the mid-1990s. After3. ,tg2the advance tion 3.tZ:le5!?). Here 3.c4 and 3.,tf4 are 3 ...e5 leads to the Pirc Defense with played, but the subject of our investiga­ colors reversed and an extra tempo fo r tion will be a logical development of the White. In the case of 3 .c4 d4 with colors kingside. reversed (and once again an extra tern- 3.g3 ,tg4 Chapter X

A more ambitious way to develop the 5.ille5!? bishop than 3 ...i!H5. The first thing that should be tested 4.�g2 'i¥d7 is a centralization of the knight. In the With 4 ...e6 Black marshals a solid variation l.d4 d5 2.tllf3 �g4 that's the chain and satisfies himself with a small main and unquestionably the strongest achievement - the light-squared bish­ continuation, but here the knight is im­ op, which is passive in orthodox plans, mediately exchanged off. has come out to freedom. With his relo­ 5... tllxe5 cation of the queen Black expressed his 6.de desire to mobilize the queenside first and fo remost, which is very uncharacteristic of closed systems. Aggressive play begins in the spirit of the Albin Countergam­ bit, only inverted. Black first organizes a battery on the c8-h3 diagonal, castles queenside and only then, at an appro­ priate moment, advances ...e5. If he plays ...f6 beforehand, he doesn't have to sacrifice a pawn. As a result of my relentless use of3 ... �g4 and 4 ...'i¥d7 against strong Grand­ masters I positioned myself as a promi­ Who benefits from a change in the nent expert (let's drop any inappropriate pawn structure? By relocating to e5, the modesty!). It's just that my love fo r the pawn constrains the enemy consider­ variation turned out to be unrequited ably, in particular taking the f6 square - no other one has been marked by such away from the knight. The valuable poor statistical results for me! d4 square has been fr eed fo r the white Firstly the rare continuations 5.Clle5 pieces (the queen above all). At the same (game 1) and 5.�f4 (game 2) are in­ time a path has been cleared fo r the c7 vestigated. Then the turn comes fo r the pawn, and the entire chain acquires previously rejected 5.c4 (games 3-5). elasticity. White would like to advance The logical 5.0-0 is presented in games e4 and Black ...f6 , although both the one 6 and 7. Finally, an offer to the bishop to and the other are difficult. define itself, 5.h3 - in games 8-13. 6... c6 In this specific situation you shouldn't 1. P. Jagstaidt -A. Raetsky rush to castle queenside. The example Lausanne, 2001 of Lieb - T. Paehtz (Bad Worishofen, 2000) is a vivid illustration: 6 ...0-0-0?! l.d4 d5 7.'i¥d4! b6 8.tt:lc3 �h3 9.'i¥xd5! 'i¥xd5 2.lllt3 tt:lc6 (impatiently awaiting 10.�xd5? M.xd5! 3.g3 �g4 ll.illxd5 �g2 ...) 10.�xh3+! 'i¥d7 4.�g2 'i¥d7 ll.�xd7+ M.xd7 12.�d2 e6 13.0-0-0,

196 The Chigorin Defense

with an extra pawn. Or 7 ...'it>b8 8.�e3 by his own pawns. So very accurate de­ b6 9.tt::lc3 c6 10.a4, assaulting the black fensive play is required - 14.�d2 tt::le7 king's rickety refuge. 15.c3. My opponent remembered c4 at Against Drexel (Switzerland, 2004) I a very inopportune time. undertook an accelerated mobilization 14.c4?! hg of the kingside: 6 ...e6 7.c4 c6 8.�d4 1S.hg gxb1+ �h5 9.cd?! cd 10.tt::lc3 tt::le7 ll.f4 tt::lc6 16.�xh1 �e7! 12.�a4 �c5 13.e3 d4!? 14.tt::le4 �b4+ The queen is squinting at b4 with one 15.�d2 �xd2+ 16.'it>xd2 de+ 17.'it>xe3 eye and at h4 with the other. It's time to 0-0 18.tt::lc5 �e7 19.gacl gac8. The think about how to avoid losing in a few white pieces are positioned superbly, and moves ... only the king is following Steinitz's pos­ 17.cd �h4+ tulate too literally. The exchange on d5 18. 'it>d2 presented the excellent c6 square to the knight; in the case of9.tt::lc3 tt::le7 10.0-0 it isn't so easy fo r Black to deploy. 7.h3 �fS It's best fo r the bishop to stay on the c8-h3 diagonal, not allowing castling. Preference over the e6 square is based on control of the e4 square and an attack on the c2 pawn. 8.g4 In the variation 8.tt::lc3 �c7 9.�d4 �xc2 10.�f4 �b6 ll.�d2 �g6 12.0-0 White is better-developed, but due to the 18... tt::le7! closed nature of the position Black's ex­ Ignoring pawn losses, Black sends tra pawn may make a difference. his knight to the ideal spot in the center 8... �g6 fo r an attack on the king. 9.�f4 19.d6?! Instead of this rather abstract bishop With the best 19.e4 cd 20.�el �f2 move out he should have played fo r the 21.�fl de 22.fe gd8+ 23.'it>c2 tt::ld5 center - 9.c4 de (9 ...d4!?) 10.�xd7+ the knight still ends up on the corn­ 'it>xd7 ll.tt::ld2 e6 (ll...b5? 12.a4) manding height and salvation is highly 12.tt::lxc4 h5, and the chances are equal. unlikely. 9... hS 19... ctJdS 10.f3 e6 20.e3 tt::lxf4 ll.tt::ld2 �cS 21.ef �f2+ 12.tt::lb3 �b6 22.�e2 �e3+ 13.a4 aS 23. 'it>d1 �c2+! White's dark squares are weak, and An appealing combination fo r de­ his light-squared bishop is blocked in flectionfo rces mate. White resigned.

197 Chapter X

2. V. BAKLAN - A. RAETSKY There's sense in 8 ... Md8, to eliminate Cappelle-la-Grande, 1997 the constrained d5 pawn. The interesting variation 9.0-0 ®xd5 10.®xd5 �xd5 l.Ci'lf3 dS ll.�c2 .tf512.�a4+ �d7 13.�xa7 2.g3 Ci'lc6 e5 14.�xb7 ef 15.®e5! fe 16 . .tc6 j,d6 3.d4 j,g4 may occur, with unclear consequences. 4.j,g2 �d7 9.0-0 eS s.j,f4 Here 9 ...®x d5?! doesn't work be­ cause of 10.®xd5 �xd5 ll.�a4 �c6 12.�xa7 �a6 13.�xa6 ba 14.Mfcl e5 15 . .te3j,e 6 16.®d2 and by taking on c4 White gets an obvious advantage. If the pawn can't be won, it at least has to be exchanged off. lO.de j,xe6 With the inclusion of an exchange of major pieces playing this way isn't fa ­ vorable: lO ...�xdl ?! ll.Mfxdl Mxdl+ 12.Mxdl j,xe6 13.®d4j,d7?! 14.®db5, with a win, thanks to the colossal advan­ A slightly premature development of tage in development. On the other hand, the bishop. Afterhis reply Black intends 10 ...�xe6 ll.�a4 �a6 12.�xa6 Ci'lxa6 the advances ...e5 and/or ...g5 with a 13.®d2 j,e6 isn't bad - White's ini­ tempo. tiative completely goes toward winning

5 ••• f6 !? back a deficient pawn. 6.c4 ll.�cl j,cs Only with an attack on the d5 12.b3!? square can White continue the battle Baklan is trying to open a file fo r fo r opening superiority. Against Janse an attack. 12.Mdl!? deserved attention, (Calvia, 2006) Romanishin succeeded with the example variation 12 ...�e8 13. in his play fo r an advantage: 6.Ci'lbd2?! gxd8+ �xd8 14.®a4 �e7 15.®xc5 0-0-0 7.h3 .th5 8.c3 g5 9.j,e3 e6 �xc5 16.j,e3 �d6 17.b3!, and holding 10.b4 j,d6 ll.Ci'lb3 \t>b8 12.a4 .te8 onto the extra pawn isn't possible any 13.�d2 h5 14.b5 ®ce7 15.®c5 �c8 longer - 17 ...�a6?! (17... ®e 7 preserves 16.0-0 ®f5 17.®el ®ge7 18.®ed3 chances of equalizing) 18.Ci'ld4 .tf7 j,f7 19.a5. However, in the case of6 ... 19.bc �xc4? 20.�a3!, with a devastat­ e5!? 7.de g5 8.j,e3 d4 the bishop is ing attack. lost without sufficient pawn compen­ 12... ®e7 sation. 13.®e4 j,b6 6... de 14.bc j,b3 7.d5 ®b4 1S.j,xh3 �xh3 8.®c3 0-0-0 16.Mbl �e6!

198 The Chigorin Defense

17.lllfd2 23.:tbt! :xd2 The combinational path 17.c5 It seems that my opponent has got iia5 18.iixc7!? �xc7 19.'iH4+ �c8 the better of me, and the next blow puts 20.llld6+ :xd6 2l.cd Lllec6 22.:fc1 the dot on the "i". With ideal coopera­ :ds 23.:xb4 ,txb4 24.'�Vxb4 �xd6 is tion between his pieces White completes only enough fo r equality. his pursuit of the exposed black king. 24.:xc7+! �xc7 25.�a6+ �d7 26.:b7 :dt+ 27.�g2 g4 28.Lllc5+ �e8 29.�e6+ Black resigned.

3. I. BALINOV-A. RAETSKY Seefeld, 2000

l.Lllf3 dS 17 ... gS? 2.g3 Lllc6 Enthusiasm for zwischenzugs destroys 3.d4 ,tg4 Black's strong position in a matter of 4.,tg2 �d7 moves. After 17... c5 18.�b2 h5 19.iie3 5.c4!? Llla6 attacks on the c5 square produce no result due to the hanging piece on d2. 17... Lll ec6 18.�c3 itd4 19.�b3 g5 20.itxg5 fg 2l.a3 ,tg7 is also fu lly per­ missible, and it isn't easy to evaluate the players' chances precisely. 18.itxc7! itxc7 19.:xb4 Lllc6?! After 19 ...�c6 20.�b2 or 20.�a3 defending is very difficult, but not hope­ less. Black was counting on 20.:b2?! Llld4and missed a tactic. 2o.:xb7! Llld4 Of course, without the inclusion of In the case of 20 ...:xd2 2I.:xc7+ itf4 and ...f6 this blow in the center is �xc7 22.tllxd2 �xe2 23.:el �d3 more dangerous fo r Black. 24.:e3 �d7 25.�c3 or 25.Llle4 with an 5... e6 extra pawn White is on the verge of win­ Reinforcing the center is best in more ning. static positions, but here it separates the 21.�a3! Lllxe2+ queen from the bishop and destroys the 22.�hl �c6 battery. 5 ...dc was encountered in games

199 Chapter X

4 and 5. On 5 ...0-0-0 there may fol­ 7.ll'lc3 low 6.ll'lc3 de 7.d5 J.xf3 8.J.xf3 GZle5 On 7.�a4 the best is 7 ...tZlge7, so 9.�d4!? l2Jxf3+ lO.ef �b8 11.J.e3 b6 that on 8.�xc4 you can take the central 12.�xc4 e6 13.:C:d1 Jld6 14.ll'lb5 (pre­ pawn - 8 ...Jlxf3 9.Jlxf3 �xd4. mature; 14.0-0 ed 15.�xd5 preserved 7... 0-0-0 the initiative) 14 ...ed 15.:C:xd5 ll'le7?! 8.�a4 �b8 (after 15 ...�e6 White has to exchange After castling queenside the cost of queens with the help of :C:d4, which, a mistake increases. Against Kumaran considering the pawn structure, isn't (Dublin, 1993) Miles killed everything very favorable) 16.�a4 a5 17.:C:xd6! cd with the careless bishop move 8 ...Jlb4?, 18.Jlxb6 �e6+ (Ribli - Ruck, Hun­ getting mated on the l61h (!) move: gary, 1998) 19.�fl �h3+ 20.�gl :C:d7 9.ll'le5! ll'lxe5 10.�xa7! c6 ll.Jlf4! 21.�xa5 :C:c8 22.Jla7+ �b7 23.Jle3, Jld6 12.�a8+ �c7 13.ll'lb5+! �b6 and defending isn't easy fo r Black. (the knight can't be taken, as his own 6.0-0 bishop is blocking the escape hatch on The exchange 6.cd ed restores the d6) 14.�a7+ �xb5 15.a4+, and Miles battery on the c8-h3 diagonal. It's also resigned here; 15... �b4 16.�b6# re­ harmless because the black king can move mained offstage. Losing the a7 pawn away to the short side: 7.ll'lc3J.b4 8.0-0 isn't always so fatal - in the variation 8 ... l2Jge7 9.�b3 a5 10.:C:d1 0-0 11.J.g5 f6 Jlxf3!? 9.Jlxf3 ll'lxd4 10.�xa7 l2Jxf3+ 12.J.f4 �h8 13.a3 Jlxc3 14.�xc3 ll'lg6 ll.ef�c6 12.Jlf4ll'lf6 13.:C:fdlll'ld5 the 15.J.e3 a4 16.:C:e1 GZlce7 17.:C:acl c6 king escapes via d7, and there's nothing 18.ll'ld2 Jlh3 19.Jlh1 ll'lc8 20.f3 tZld6 fo r Black to fe ar. 21.J.f2 f5 22.e3 :C:fe8, with equal chances 9.:C:dl (Oliva - Rabiega, Guben, 2008). 10.Jlxf3 6... de The central pawn is poisoned here Since d5 has been neutralized, Black - 10 ...ll'lx d4?? ll.:C:xd4! �xd4 12.Jle3. gives up the center. Although this is il­ ll.�a5 logical - first reinforcing the center and Played fo r a fight. Peaceful play­ then giving it up immediately. The prob­ ers will be pleased to find an appealing lem is that holding the center doesn't option here; after ll.�xd7 :C:xd7 12.e3 rid you of difficulties: 6 ...GZlge7 7.tZlc3 ll'lf6 13.Jle2 ll'ld3 14.J.xd3 cd 15.:C:xd3 h5 (after 7 ... ll'lf5 an exchange on d5 c5 16.:C:dl cd 17.:C:xd4 Sosonko and sharply increases its strength) 8.b4!? de Fressinet (Cannes, 1996) agreed a draw. (forced by the threat of 9.b5) 9.b5 Jlxf3 11... tZlf6 10.Jlxf3 ll'lxd4 11.Jlxb7 :C:b8 12.J.g2 Greedy play by Black was convinc­ g6 13.:C:b1 Jlg7 14.Jla3! h415 .e3 ll'ldf5 ingly refuted inthe game Zablotsky - Tu ­ 16.J.c6! ll'lxc6 17.bc �xdl 18.:C:xb8+ zhik (Novokuznetsk, 2007): ll. ..ll'lc2?! �d8 19.:C:fbl, and White reached the 12.Jlf4 Jlb4 13.�b5 �xb5 14.ll'lxb5 king, stuck in the center, even without ll'lxal 15.Jlxc7+ �c8 16.Jlxd8 �xd8 the queens on the board (Larsen - Gar­ 17.Jlxb7! ll'lc2 18.:C:cl ll'lel 19.:C:xc4 barino, San Martin, 1995). a5 20.a3 Jld2 21.ll'ld6 �e7 22.tZle4,

200 The Chigorin Defense

and the ill-fated black knight has only squares can't be ruled out, but on the changed the location of its demise rath­ other hand 1 7 ....t d6 guarantees safety. er than avoiding it. On the other hand, 15.Cl:lxb5 Cl:la6 l l...b6!? shiftsthe white queen, presum­ 16.l:Iacl �b7 ably in Black's favor: 12.�e5 C£Je713 .a3 17.l:Ixc4 c6 CfJbd5or 12.�a3 a5 13.b3 C£Jc2 14.�b2 18.a4!? cb (14 ...C£Jx al 15.bc leaves White more The knight sacrifice can't be ac­ chances) 15.l:Ibl C£Jxd4. cepted due to the crushing power of 12 . .1U4 the white bishops: 18 ...cb? 19.ab Cl:lb8 Against We lls (Harkany Te nkes Cup, 20.l:Ic7+ �a8 21.l:Ixf7 l:Id7 22.l:Ixd7 1994) Loginov continued 12.a3 CfJbd5 C£Jxd7 23.l:Icl .ie7 24.l:Ic6! As it hap­ 13.e4 b6 14.�a6 C£Jxc3 15.bc �c6 pens, the sacrifice isn't fo rced, as with 16.a4!? Cl:lxe4 17.a5 f5 18.ab ab 19 . .1H4 18.Cl:lc3b5 the bishops come to the res­ �b7 20.�xc4 .id6 2l.�xe6 and ob­ cue again - 19.Cl:lxd5 be 20.C£Je3 e5! tained a noticeable advantage. The 2l.�xe5 f6 22.C£Jxc4 fe 23.Cl:lxe5 l:Ic8 knight should have been retreated in a 24.d5 cd 25 . .ixd5+ �b8 26.Cl:lf7 l:Ig8 way that would avoid an exchange on 27.Cl:le5 l:Ih8 28.Cl:lf7, with a repetition c3 later, opening the b-file. In the varia­ of moves. tion 12 ...Cl:lc 6 13.�a4 CfJd5 14.�xc4 18... C£Jab4 Cl:lb6 15.�d3 C£Jxd4 16 . .if4 the activity 19.Cl:lc3 C£Jxf4 fo r the insufficient pawn doesn't seem 20.gf :!e7 threatening. 21.l:Icl l:Ic8 12... CfJfdS 22.C£Je4 h6 13.a3 b6 23.C£Jg3 g6 14.�b5 24.h4 The simplest now was 24 ...f5 25.�g2 g5 26.hg hg 27.fg .ixg5 28.e3 a5, with comfortable equality. After 24 ...CfJ d5 25.h5 C£Jxf4 26.hg Cl:lxg6 27 . .ixc6+ �b8 28.b4 l:Ibd829.a5 definite difficul­ ties arose, which became insurmount­ able as a consequence of blunders in time trouble.

4. V. TUKMAKOV - A. RAETSKY Biel, 1997

14 ... �xb5 1.Cl:lf3 d5 The exchange of queens destroys 2.g3 C£Jc6 Balinov's aggressive plans. After 14 ... 3.d4 .ig4 Cl:lxc3 15.�xc4 C£Jxe2+ 16.�xe2 CfJd5 4.:!g2 �d7 17.Ihcl Cl:lxf4 18.gf play on the light 5.c4 de

201 Chapter X

6.d5 .ltxt3 9... 0-0-0 6 ...0-0-0 7JZ:Jc3with a transposition After 9 ...ed 10.itf4 tllg6 1l.'iVxd5 of moves is identical to 5 ...0-0-0. 'iVxd5 12.itxd5 c6 (12... tll xf4?! comes 7 . .ltxt3 tlle5 up against the zwischenzug 13.ihb7!) 8.itg2 13 . .ltxc4 tllxf4 14.gf Tukmakov gives preference to White. This is an almost imperceptible advantage, which has been disappearing as a result of the neu­ tralization ofWhite's activity. 10.0-0 White also preserves the initia­ tive without the queens: 10.�f4!? tllg6 ll.ite3 ed?! 12.'iVxd5 'iVxd5 13.itxd5 tlle5 14.0-0-0 l:te8 15.f4 tlld3+ (Wil­ helmi - Loeffier, Hamburg, 1996) 16.ed l:txe317.itx f7 cd 18.tlld5 l:te4 19.l:txd3. The move 12.'iVd4!?isn't bad either, so 8 ... e6 that on 12 ...b6 he can take on d5 with It's impossible to avoid the undermin­ the knight. It's best to continue develop­ ing of the constrained pawn, but it can be ing with ll...tllf6, with complicated p1ay postponed by a move by castling first. in the example variations 12.'iVd4 c5!? 9.tllc3 13.'iVxc4 ed 14.'iVb3 and 12.de 'iVxe6 9.'iVd4was encountered in game 5. A 13.'iVa4 a6 14.0-0 tlle5. harmlessexchange ofqueens, 9.itf4tllg6 10... tllf6 IO.de 'iVxdl+ ll.�xdl 0-0-0+ 12.�c2 In the variation IO... ed 1l.'iVd4 tllc6 tllxf4 13.gffe, has been used against me 12.'iVxd5 'iVxd5 13.itxd5 tlle5 14.f4tlle7 twice. First I got a short draw with Logi­ 15.Jixb7+ �xb7 16.fe tllc6 17.l:txf7 nov (Seefeld, 1995): 14.tlld2 �d6 15.e3 tllxe5 18.l:tf5 White won the pawn back e5 (15... c3 16.bc tllf6 17J:�abl c6 is at and achieved a slightly better ending. least no worse) 16.fe.ltxe5 17.tllxc4 �f6 ll.itf4 tllg6 18J:hdl tlle7 19.f4 c6 20.e4 �d4. Then 12.itg5 itc5 I unsuccessfully tried to beat a lower­ An insufficiently solid continuation. rated Icelandic opponent and convinced The correct path to restrain my partner's myself that it isn't difficult fo r Black to initiative is 12 ...ed 13.tllxd5 'iVe6 14.e4 make a draw here, but achieving more is c6 15.�xf6 gf 16.'iVh5 'iVe5 17.'iVg4+ problematic. 'iVe6, with a repetition of moves (17... An immediate 9.de is harmless be­ �b8 18.tlle3 @xb2 is risky, but with cause of the same exchange of queens. the help of 18 ...'iVb5 you can play fo r a 9 ...'iVxe6 IO.itxb7 tlld3+ 11.�f l (11. win). �d2?? tllxb2!) 11...'iVb6 12.ed 'iVxb7 13.'iVc2! h5 13.'iVa4+ �d8 14.l:tgl cd is more fu n, The point of relocating the queen and it isn't clear whose king is worse. becomes apparent, in particular, in 13...

202 The Chigorin Defense ed 14.�xf6gf15.'8:Jxd5 llle5 16.b4! �d6 20.�xe5 �xe5 17.f4 lllg4 18.'ihc4,with an advantage. 21.�xc4 Black advanced the pawn to get an at­ The combined attack on b 7 and f7 is tack in the event of an exchange on f6 . decisive . There then fo llowed 21...lllg4 Tukmakov immediately slows down the 22.'i¥b3c6 23.�xc6 �d4 24.�d5 l:.i:xd5 pawn, although it isn't too late to do that 25.�xd5 l:.i:d8 26.�xt7 �xt2+ 27.\t>g2 after 14.�xf6 gf 15.'i¥e4 e5 16.'i¥xc4 llle3+ 28. \t>h3 'i¥xt7 29.l:.i:xd8+, and �d6 either. Black resigned. 14.h4 \t>b8 Closing the position with the help of 5. V. TKACHIEV - A. RAETSKY 14... e5 doesn't work due to 15.llle4�e 7 Cape d'Agde, 1994 16.d6! cd 17.�xf6 gf 18.�xc4+ \t>b8 19.�xf7. 1.lllf3 d5 lS.l:.i:adl llles 2.g3 lllc6 Here on 15 ...e5 there fo llows 16.llla4! 3.d4 �g4 �d6 17.�xc4, since because of the po­ 4.�g2 'i¥d7 sition of the king the pawn fo rk doesn't 5.c4 de win the knight. 6.d5 �xf3 16.llle4 �e7 7.�xf3 llle5 17.�f4! 8.�g2 e6 9.'i¥d4

17... �d6?! 17 ...lll g6?! 18.de 'i¥xe619. lllg5 �c8 The queen kicks the knight out of 20.�xc4 isn't favorable either, coming the center to restore material equality down on the f7 square. Black's position with a capture on c4, not wasting the remained sound after 17... ed 18.lllxf6 advantage of the first move. If 9 ...f6 , (on 18.�xe5?! there's the impressive re­ then 10.f4 �b4+ ll.lllc3 lllf7 12.'i¥xc4 ciprocal pin 18 ...'i¥f5!) 18 ...gf 19.�xd5 �xc3+ 13.bc ed 14.�xd5 llld6 15.'i¥b3 �d6. llle7 16.�f3, with a wonderful bishop 18.de �xe6 duet. 19.lllg5! �e7 9 ... lllc6

203 Chapter X

9 ...,td 6!? hasn't been tested in prac­ tice - but why not? It's vital that after 1 O.f4 tl:Jg6 the move 11.�xg7? doesn't work because of ll...e5!, with the hor­ rible threat of 12 ....,tf 8, and with 11.0-0 e5 12.fe tl:Jxe5 13 . .,tf4 �e7 the chances are equal. 10.�xc4 ed 10 ...0-0-0 leads to more complicated play. In the case of ll.e4 ed 12.ed tl:Jf6 13.tl:Jc3 tl:Je5 14.�e2 ,tcs the space­ removing d5 pawn doesn't stop Black from ideally positioning his pieces. After Black's army has successfully mobi­ 15.0-0 .l"'he8 16.ite3tl:Je g4 17 . .,th3 h5 lized, and only the white bishops inter­ 18.�c4 .,txe3 19.fe .l"'xe3 20.�c5 �b8 fere with his complete happiness. I prob­ 2l..l"'xf6 .l"'xc3!22 .bc gf (Ledger - Pein, ably didn't activate the c6 knight in the England, 1997) Black won a pawn. best way here. After 15... tl:Je 5 16.0-0-0 It's better fo r White to sacrifice tl:Jc4 17.itf4 itxc3 18.bc tl:Jg6 19. .,td5 a pawn fo r the initiative by means of tl:Jxf4 20 . .txc4 tl:Je6 the divided pawns ll.tl:Jc3tl:Jb4 12.0-0 ed 13.�b3. In the on the queenside didn't leave White duel Skachkov - Zemerov (St. Peters­ chances of an advantage. burg, 2002) excellent play on the dark 15... tl:Jd4 squares was achieved at the price of the 16.0-0-0 .l"'he8 exchange: 13... tl:Jf 6 14. .,tg5 c6 15. .l"'fdl The e2 pawn is inviolable, of course - �f5 16.j,f4 g5 17. .,te3 tl:Jc2 18.itxa7 16 ....,txc3?! 17.bc tl:Jxe2+? 18.�c2 .l"'he8 tl:Jxal 19 . .l"'xal j,d6 20 . .l"'cl .,tc7 19 . .,t e3, destroying the surrounded knight. 21..,td4 .,tes 22 . .,tb6 itxc3 23.�xc3. 17 . .l"'he1 By replacing 15 . .l"'fdl with 15 . .l"'adl, In the case of 17.e3 itxc3 18 . .,txc3 White rids himself of the need to sacri­ tl:Je2+ 19.�c2 tl:Jxc3 20.�xc3 c6 the fice the exchange. endgame is more pleasant for White;but 11.�xd5 drawish tendencies are still to the fore. ll..,txd5? is rash due to ll. ..itb4+ Tkachiev tries to remind his opponent 12.tl:Jc3 .,txc3+ 13.bc 0-0-0 14.e4 tl:Jf6, about his pawn majority... winning a pawn. Mate from the d 1 17... f5 square also turns up with an attempt to 18.e3 win a piece: 12.�fl 0-0-0 13.itxc6? ...but his attempt is illogical. 18.e4!? �h3+ 14.,tg2.l"'dl# fe 19 . .,txe4 h6 20.ite3 .,txc3 (the knight 11... j,b4+ can't hold out in the center: 20 ...tl:Je c6? 12.tl:Jc3 �xd5 2I..,txd4 tl:Jxd4 22 . .txb7+!) 2l.bc tl:Jdc6 13.,txd5 tl:Jge7 22.f4 is more energetic, with a pair of 14 . .,tg2 0-0-0 bishops in an asymmetrical structure 15 . .,td2 and better prospects.

204 The Chigorin Defense

18... L'Zle6 19.a3 �d6 20.®bl L'Zlc5 2l.L'Zlb5 �e5 22.�b4 L'Zld3 23.�xe7 l::l:xe7 24.L'Zlxa7+ ®b8 25.L'Zlb5 l::l:ed7 26.l::l:e2 Now 26 ...�x b2 27.L'Zld4 �xd4 28.l::l:xd3 �f6 29.l::l:xd7 l::l:xd7 led to op­ posite-colored bishops and a very prob­ able draw. In the game a drawing out­ White 's main plan is c4; the only come was also preordained by the oppo­ question is whether to include an ex­ site-colored bishops in the final analysis: change on h3. It seems that with his 26 ...L'Zlx b2 27.l::l:xd7 l::l:xd7 28.e4 (28. queen on d7 Black has nothing to fear. l::l:xb2?? �xb2 29.®xb2 l::l:d2+ 30.®c3 The success of White's actions on the l::l:xf2 3l.�hl l::l:xh2 32.�f3 l::l:h3) 28 ... queenside in the game Beltran - Gual L'Zlc4 29.f4 �f6 30.�h3 c6 31.�xf5 (Barcelona, 2008) wasn't completely (with 3l.e5 �xe5 32.fe eh 33.�xf5 l::l:e7 justified: 6.c4 �xg2 7.®xg2 e6 8.L'Zlc3 34.�xh7 L'Zlxa3+35.®a 2 L'Zlc4 36.e6 it's �b4 9.�a4 L'Zlge7 10.�d2 0-0 ll.Mfdl still possible to torment Black a little) �xc3 12.�xc3 f5 13.�b4 f4 14.l::l:ac l 31...Md8 32.e5 �e7 33.L'Zlc3 L'Zlxa3+ l::l:f6 15.�xe7 V/lixe7 16.�b5 Md8 34.®a2 h6 35.l::l:e3 ®c7 36.l::l:d3 L'Zlc4 17.V/Iixb7 V/lie8 18.b3, with an extra pawn 37.l::l:xd8. and a better position. lO... dc!? ll.�b5 I.'Zlf5 12.V/Iixb7l::l: b8 13.�a6 0-0 deserved 6.R. SHCHERBAKOV - V. IVANOV attention; giving up the center was also St. Petersburg, 2000 playable on the next move. 6... �xh3 l.i.'Zlf3 L'Zlc6 7.c4 e6 2.d4 d5 8.L'Zlc3 3.g3 �g4 Bearing in mind the possibility of8 ... 4.�g2 �d7 de it was worth thinking about 8.cd ed 5.0-0 9.L'Zlc3 0-0-0 10.a3 and b4. A queen on h3 alone isn't enough for mating threats. (See Diagram) For example, with the appearance of a There can't be anything more natu­ pawn on h4 the moves �f4 or L'Zlg5 are ral. True, Black has a chance to ex­ possible. change the light-squared bishops, which 8... L'Zlf6 does occur here (5 ...0-0 - game 7). The game Roeder - Dueckstein 5... �h3 (Vienna, 1990) went fairly quietly: 8 ... 6.�xh3 de 9.V/Iia4 I.'Zlf6 lO.l::l:dl �e7 ll.�g5 0-0

205 Chapter X

12.j,xf6 �xf6 13.llle4 1/jffS 14.lllxf6+ 24.j,xf8 Mxf8 l/jt'xf6 15.1/jt'xc4 Mfd8 16.1/jt'bS Mab8 25.Me6 lllb8 17.Macl g6. A typical picture fo r closed 26.Mael systems with a fianchetto and exchange On the 571h move White converted of the g2 bishop - White is a little more the advantage he'd achieved into a vic­ active , but the breach in the kingside tory. doesn't enable progress. 9/l:lgS 7. D. ZAGORSKIS -A. SAVICKAS Shcherbakov rejects an exchange on Vilnius, 2004 d5 in vain. The plan with the advance e4 and an accompanying exchange of l.lllf3 lllc6 queens (otherwise the knight thrust is 2.d4 dS useless) only justifies itself if his oppo­ 3.g3 �g4 nent makes mistakes. 4.�g2 l/jt'd7 9... 1/jt'bS 5.0-0 0-0-0 lO.cd ed ll.e4 1/jt'xdl 12.Mxdl de 13.d5 llleS 14.lllgxe4 lllxe4 15.lllxe4 0-0-0 16.�e3 �b8 17.�g2 f6 Instead of advancing the pawn to a dark square (undesirable with dark­ squared bishops on the board) 17... j,d 6 18.�d4 Mhe8 is stronger. Winning a pawn by means of 19.lllg5 h6 20.�xe5 6.c3 �xe5 21.lllxf7 is no more than a fig­ The black king has chosen its shel­ ment due to 2l...Md7 22.lllxe5 Mxe5, ter, and an attack on the queenside is with a drawing outcome. White's main plan. A more decisive 18.�d4 lllf7? pawn advance, c4, leads to positions With 18 ...�d6 19.f4 lllg6 the un­ from game 3. equal exchange that occurred in the 6... f6 game produces no result: 20.lllxf6 gf With the twofold aim of supporting 2l.�xf6 lllxf4+ 22.gf Mhg8+ 23.�hl and onslaught on the kingside ( ...g5 ), or, Mde8 - the position is equal. primarily, enabling a seizure of the cen­ 19.lllxf6! gf ter ( ...e5). In a game with We indl (Swit­ 20.�xf6 j,d6 zerland, 1995) I exchanged offthe light­ 21.f4 Mdf8 squared bishops first: 6 ...j,h3 7.b4 j,xg2 22.�g7 �c8 8.�xg2 f6 9.lllbd2 e5 10.b5 e4 (a typical 23.Mel Mhg8 counterattack) ll.bc ef+. After 12.lllxf3

206 The Chigorin Defense

�xc6 13.�d3 g5!? play on the flank �xe2 12.Se1 �a6 13.�xa6 tlJxa6, (replacing an operation in the center) with a roughly equal game) 10 ...tlJx f6 bothers the knight, and We indl decides 1l.a4 � a6 12.it.e3 CiJc6 (12... tlJ bd7 to send it closer to the black king. But 13.CiJbd2 �c5 is even more solid) then the defects in the pawn structure 13.�c2 CiJa5 14.tlJbd2 it.d6 15.c4 de allow Black to put the heat on his oppo­ 16.:C:fc1 it.b4?! (a booby-trapped move, nent with an exchange of queens: 12.ef instead of which 16 ...:C:he8 is prefera­ �xc6 13.:C:bl h5 14.h4 CiJe7 15.CiJb3 ble) 17.tl:lxc4 tlJxc4 18.�xc4?? :C:dl+, b6 16.�d3 �c4 17.�c2 CiJc6 18.a4 a5! and White resigned (Ayral - Flear, (blocks White's attack) 19.1H4 �xa4 France, 2001). The Grandmaster was 20.:C:al �c4, and no compensation fo r probably consciously bluffing; a more the pawn is visible. sophisticated opponent would have 7.b4 e5 fo und 18.tlle5!, with an indisputable A reciprocal flankstorm was tried, in advantage fo r White. particular, in the duel Valden - Skem­ 10.�xf3 bris (Greece, 2005): 7 ...g5 8.CiJbd2 h5 Again the zwischenzug 10.e6!? is favor­ 9.�a4 h4 (9 ...a6 after the queen retreat able fo r White but playing adventurously, provides a hook fo r a4 and b5) 10.b5 Zagorskis gets by just fine without it. CiJb8 1l.�xa7 hg 12.fg �xb5 13.c4 10... fe �a6 14.�xa6 CiJxa6 15.cd CiJb4 16.CiJb3 (16.e4 CiJc2 17.:C:bl CiJe3 18.Se1 Gllxg2 19.Wxg2 isn't a bad alternative) 16... CiJxd5 17.CiJxg5. White has won a pawn, but the position remains fa irly compli­ cated. Both players could vary their play in multiple ways - also with unpredict­ able consequences. 8.b5 If 8.de, then 8 ...fe ?! 9.b5 costs him the pawn, and on 8 ...�xf3 (counting on getting a tight-knit pawn pair in the cen­ ter) there follows the interim poke 9.e6!? ll.e4! tl:lf6 The continuation 8 ...CiJx e5 9.�e3 Wb8 12.ed e4 is stronger - it's difficultfo r White to at­ 13.�g2 tack the enemy king. This is precisely how you have to 8... tl:lb8 speculate on a pin on the c8-h3 diago­ 9.de it.xf3?! nal. In the case of 13.�e2 h5! 14.h4 In this case, with the king stuck on �xd5 15.�xd5 CiJxd5 the white bishops the c8-h3 diagonal, the bishop should aren't as dangerous. be preserved. Black has got an opportu­ 13... �xb5 nity to destroy the constraining pawn: The variation 13... �xd5 14.�h3+ 9 ...�xb5!? 10.ef (10.�d4 h5 1l.�xa7 CiJbd7 15.�xd5 CiJxd5 16.it.g5 it.e7

207 Chapter X

17.il.xe7 CJJxe7 ends with a solid advan­ The main continuation. "Putting tage fo r White, whether he plays 18.lldl the question to the bishop" can be use­ to enforce the pin or continues to de­ ful in principle, but the pawn on h3 may velop with 18.CiJd2,simply winning the become a hook fo r an attack. White pro­ . poses that the bishop makes a difficult 14.CiJd2 'iYxdS choice between an exchange and the 15.1iYa4 'iYc6 retreats 5 ...il.f 5 (game 9) and 5 ...il.h5 16.il.h3+ CiJfd7 (games 10-13). After 16... CiJbd7 17.'iYxa7 b6 18.lldl 5... il.xf3 'iYb7 19.'iYxb7+ �xb7 the diagonal pin 6.ef hasn't disappeared, but only shifted After the exchange on f3 the battle - 20.CiJxe4! CJJxe4 2l.il.g2. most often takes on a maneuvering 17.'iYxc6 CJJxc6 character, in contrast to the other lively 18.CiJxe4 il.e7 branches. I don't play such boring games 19.lldl h6 anymore! The peculiarity of taking with 20.il.e3 b6 the pawn "away from the center" is the 2l.lld5 CiJcb8 pressure on the central file that is crack­ 22.lladl ing open. The deathly pin dooms Black to ca­ On 6.il.xf3 the simplest is to fian­ pitulation, which, then again, had to chetto the bishop: 6 ...g6 7.il.g2 il.g7 wait another 36 moves. 8.e3 CiJf6 9.0-0 0-0 10.c4 de (10... e6 ll.CiJc3CiJe 7 and ...c6 create stable bas­ 8. V. TUKMAKOV - A. RAETSKY tions with absolutely negligible activity) Geneva, 1999 l l.CiJa3 e5! (a timely blow in the center) 12.CiJxc4 (with 12.de CJJxe5 13.'iYxd7 l.CiJf3 dS CiJfxd7 14.il.xb7 llab8 15.il.e4 the pres­ 2.g3 CiJc6 sure on b2 is palpable) 12 ...ed 13.ed 3.d4 il.g4 llad8 14.'iYb3 CiJxd4 15.'iYxb7 'iYe6 4.il.g2 'iYd7 16.b3 (Markowski - Gajewski, Krakow, 5.h3 2006) 16... lld7!? 17.'iYxa7 CJJe4, with an impressive knight stronghold in the center. In the case of 6 ...0-0-0 7.c3 libera­ tion follows - 7 ...e5 8.de CJJxe5 9.il.g2 �b8 IO.CiJd2 CiJf6 ll.CiJb3 'iYa4!? (11... CiJc4 is more natural, with sights on b2) 12.0-0 !te7 13Jtf4 CiJc4 14.CiJd4 'iYxdl 15.llaxdl llhe8 16.CiJb5, draw (F. Por­ tisch - Chetverik, Harkany Tenkes Cup,l999). Then there may fo llow 16 ... CiJd6 17.CiJxd6 il.xd6 18.il.g5 llxe2 19.il.xf6 gf 20.il.xd5 llxb2 2l.il.xf7,

208 The Chigorin Defense

with the well-known tendencies of an 12 ...[iJc e7 13.a4 [iJc8 deserved at­ ending with opposite-colored bishops. tention, suggesting that your opponent 7.CiJc3doesn't let you get free, but then storms the solid bastions. the setup ...e6 and ...f5 is assumed. 13.a4 aS 6... 0-0-0 14.b5 [iJce7 White most likely takes control of 1S.[iJb3 b6 the e5 and g5 squares with the help of 16.�f3 [iJd6 f4 , and the dash ... h5 blocks the recip­ 17.[iJd2 rocal h4. The tempo of the game trails off, and the black king doesn't feel too bad in the center. For example, 6 ... e6 7.0-0 h5 8.h4 [iJge7 9.c3 {iJf5 10.b4 a5!? 1l.b5 [iJa7 12.a4 [iJc8 13.f4 [iJcd6 14.[iJd2 g6 15.Il:e1 :!e7 16.{iJf3 [iJc4 17.:!fl {iJfd6 18.:!d3 (A. Va ida - Chet­ verik, Gyongyos, 1999), and it's time to castle - on either side. Against Dizdar (Sibenik, 2006) Golubovic didn't mind creating a weakness on e6 under the per­ sonal protection of the king: 6 ...h5 7.h4 e6 8.c3 �d6 9.0-0 [iJge7 10.f4 f6 (com­ 17 ... c6? pletely unforced!) ll.l:!e1 'i;Jf7 12.[iJd2 The king's can no longer [iJd8 13.{iJf3 c6 14.�d3 g6 15.l:!e2 a5 be called impregnable, but neverthe­ 16.a4 {iJf5 17.:!d2 l:!e8 18.b3 �c7 19.c4 less 17... g6 18.c4 .ltg7 is useful fo r the �b6 20.c5 :!c7 2l..ltc3 l:!e7 22 . .ih3 coming battle. Black has given a jolt �e8 23.l:!ael. Breaking down the de­ where he's weakest, and Tukmakov fense turned out to be too difficult, as achieves success without a single set­ there was only one weakness. back. 7.f4 e6 18.bc �xc6 A creative approach is possible 19.�a3 {iJefS even to such a lackluster position: 7 ... 20.l:!fcl [iJc4 g5!? 8.fg h6 9.gh [iJxh6 10.0-0 (Goldin 21.[iJxc4 �xc4 - Tate, Philadelphia, 1998) -akind of 22.�fl �c7 with a change of flank. 23.�xf8 l:!dxf8 Now the setup ...{iJf 5, ...e6, ....ltd 6, 24.c4 de ... l:!dg8 is capable of wearing down 24 ...l:!c8 is a little more stubborn, White's nerves. although in the variation 25.cd �b7 8.0-0 Wb8 26.�g2 �xd5 27.�d3 �d7 28.�a6 9.c3 hS 'Wia7 29.'Wib5 [iJd6 30.'Wie5 the rest­ 10.h4 [iJge7 less queen takes on g7, and that's also 11.[iJbd2 {lJfS enough for victory. 12.b4 a6 25.Il:xc4 'Wid7

209 Chapter X

26.l:l:bl <:J:Ja7 trois the important b1 square. The 27.l:l:xb6! game Obukhov - Zemerov (Omsk, Black resigned without waiting fo r 2001) took on a maneuvering charac­ the violence against the king: 27 ...<:J:Jx b6 ter: 7 .g4 ii.g6 8 .ii.f4 e6 9. CZJbd2 ii.d6 28.'i¥b3+<:J:Ja 7 29.l:l:c5. 10.iixd6 cd (the consolidation of the center compels you to castle kingside) 9. G. KAIDANOV - I. KHMELNITSKY 1l.tZ'lh4 tZ'lge7 12.f4 ii.fl 13.e3 l:l:c8 Parsippany, 1996 14.0-0 tZ'la5 15.'i¥e2 f5 16.l:l:fcl 0-0 17.tZ'l df3 tZ'lg6 18.tZ'lxg6 iixg6 19.tZ'lh4 l.d4 tZ'lc6 ii.fl 20.gf ef 2l.'i¥d3 .ii e6, with ap­ 2.tZ'lf3 d5 proximate equality. 3.g3 ii.g4 6... de 4.ii.g2 'i¥d7 6 ...e6 is more solid, but then not even 5.h3 ii.f5 a trace of the battery remains. A tense battle fo r the e4 square began in the encounter Bromberger - Lyell (Ban­ yoles, 2005): 7.tZ'lc3 Jib4 8.0-0 ii.xc3 9.bc ii.e4 10.l:l:e1 tZ'lge7 1 Uifl (mov­ ing away from the exchange of bishops is a standard trick in closed systems) 11...0-0-0 12.tZ'ld2 ii.f5 13.ii.g2h5 14.e4 de 15.tZ'lxe4 b6?! (15... iixe4 16.2he4 h4 17 .g4 e5 is correct, counting on hooking White) 16.'i¥f3 e5 17.ii.a3, and White has already established a fo rmidable light-squared battery, while no satisfac­ The bishop retreats in a way that tory defense is evident. preserves the light -squared battery and 7.tZ'lc3 e6 doesn't let the opponent castle. In the Taking control of the d5 and e4 young years of the variation (which has squares inone go doesn't work. Anyway, especially attracted Czech players), spe­ with 7 ...tZ'lf 6 8.d5 tZ'lb4 9.tZ'le5 tZ'lc2+ cificallyin the mid-201h century, this was 10.'i¥xc2 iixc2 ll.tZ'lxd7 tZ'lxd7 12.ii.f4 the only continuation used. This duel (Chuchelov - Gasparian, Pyramiden tarnished the reputation of 5 ...ii.f 5. Franken Cup, 1999) Black's situation 6.c4! isn'tthat bad. Only instead of12... 0-0-0? Undermining the center here is 13.l:l:c1 iif5 14.tZ'lb5 e5 15.de iib4+ definitively stronger than the plan 16.<:J:Jfl ii.xe6 17.iixc7you should con­ with c3 and b4. After 6.c3 f6 7.b4 g5 tinue 12 ...a6 (against tZ'lc3b5) 13.l:l:cl 8.tZ'lbd2 h5 9.tZ'lb3 e6 lO.tZ'lfd2 0-0-0 Jig6 14.tZ'le4 b5 15.b3 tZ'lb6 16.bc iixe4 Black shouldn't be afraid of the b-file 17.ii.xe4 CZJxc4 18.d6 0-0-0!, with a de- opening up, Il.tZ'lc5 ii.xc5 12.bc, in fendable position. particular because the bishop con- 8.e4 Jig6

210 The Chigorin Defense

9.0-0 i.d6 18.f4 Khmelnitsky doesn't castle here or later. Now 9 ...0-0-0 10.d5 ed ll.ed tLla5 12.tLle5 �d6 13.i.f4 �b4 promised more chances for a fully-fledged battle. 10.�e2 lLlaS ll.i.e3 bS?!

18... ef?! Khmelnitsky opens up the game and thereby hastens his demise. On 18 ... i.d6 Kaidanov recommended 19.l:td5, but 19... tLle7 20.fe i.b8 fo rces him to look for a more energetic continuation, Instead of ll...lbe7with subsequent and one can be found - 19.�f2!f6 20.fe kingside castling Black has carelessly ex­ i.xe5 21.i.f4 i.xf4 22.e5. posed himself. 19.e5 �c8 12.a3 20.i.xf4 .iLcS+ Kaidanov had the blow 12.b4! i.xb4 2Ute3 tLlh6 13.tLle5 �d8 14.�b2!? i.xc3 15.�xc3 22.iLxa8 i.xe3+ c6 16.i.d2 lLlb7 17.lLlxc6 with devasta­ 23.�xe3 �xa8 tion, but he missed this concealed op­ 24.�b6 tLlc6 portunity. 25.lLld5 12... c6 Black can't possibly succeed in cas­ 13.tLlh4 i.e7 tling - 25 ...0-0? 26.�xc6! The king's Black nudges his opponent towards sojourn in the center has brought it an exchange on g6, as with 13... l:td8 heavy losses and a swift capitulation: 14.d5! e5?! 15.dc �xc6 the knight in­ 25 ...�a7 26.lLlf6+! gf 27.l:td8+! We7 vades on f5 with a big impact. Never­ 28.ef+ We6 29.�xa7 tLlxa7 30.l:txh8 theless, the variation 14 ...cd 15.tLlxg6 lLlfS 31.l:ta8. hg 16.ed e5 17.a4 b4 18.tLlb5 is more playable fo r Black than what happened 10. F. GHEORGHIU - A. RAETSKY in the game. Lenk, 2005 14.tLlxg6 hg 15.d5! eS 1.d4 dS 16.l:tad1 a6 2.lLlf3 tLlc6 17.dc �xc6 3.g3 $Lg4

211 Chapter X

4.i.g2 'i.Vd7 6 ...e6 without worries. For example, 7. 5.h3 i.h5 0-0 de 8.'i.Va4 i.xf3 (the unloading 8 ... tlle5 9.'i.Vxd7+ tllxd7gives you a slightly passive but stable position) 9.i.xf3 l:rd8 10.'i.Vxc4 tllxd4 ll.i.xb7 c6 12.i.a6 e5 13.�h2 tllf6 14.tllc3 ite7 15.ite3 0-0 16.l:radl c5 17.i.cl l:rb8 18.'i.Vd3 'i.Yc6 19.i.c4 e4 20.'i.Vbl (A. Ivanov - Raetsky, St. Petersburg, 1999). Now 20 ...h6?! 21.itf4 l:rbd8 22.ite5 tlld7 23.tlld5 l:He8 24.itxd4 cd 25.tllxe7+ l:rxe726.l:rx d4 l:rde827.l:rf dl tllf6 28.b4 led to the loss of a pawn and a defeat. 20 ...l:rb4 2l.b3 l:rtb8 maintained ap­ Evidently the most precise reaction. proximate equality. The bishop isn't working in harmony In the case of 6.0-0 f6 undermin­ with the queen any more, but by staying ing the center with 7 .c4 gains fo rce. on the dl-h5 diagonal it actively partici­ In the interesting variation 7 ...de 8.d5 pates in the battle. tllb4 9.tllc3 itfl (9 ...l:rd8 10.tl:ld4 i.fl 6.tllbd2 ll.tlle6! itxe6 12.de 'i.Vxe6 13.'i.Va4+ The fianchetto 6.b3 0-0-0 7.i.b2 tllc6 14.ite3,with a very strong initia­ neutralizes the main plan ...e5, but tive fo r two pawns) 10.e4 e5 ll.tlld2 doesn't interfere at all with actions on c6 12.a3 tllxd5!? 13.ed cd by means of the flank: 7 ...f6 8.0-0 g5 9.tllbd2 g4 14.tllxc4! de 15.'i.Vxd7+ �xd7 16.iixb7 lO.hg i.xg4 ll.c4 e6 12.a3 tllge7 13.b4 White returns the piece and achieves an de? 14.tllxc4 h5 (14... itx f3 15.itxf3 advantage. 7 ...e6 8.cd (8 ...dc was already tllxd4 16.i.xd4 'i.Vxd4 17.'i.Vc2 doesn't planned here) 8 ...ed 9.tllc3 0-0-0 isn't make the black king happy) 15.b5 tllb8 enough for equality either. On 6.0-0 cas­ 16.%Yb3 ith6 17.a4 h4 18.tllfe 5! fe tling queenside is more precise, and only 19.tllxe5 'i.Ve820. tllxg4 tllf5 2l.'i.Vf3 c6 7.c3 serves as a signal for 7 ...f6 . 22.bc tllxc6 23.d5!, with a rout (Chu­ The main continuation 6.c3 with a prikov - Raetsky, Vo ronezh, 2004). subsequent b4 is illuminated in games Black did everything right until the reek­ 11-13. less exchange on c4, which flung open 6... 0-0-0 the doors and windows for an invasion 7.a3 by his opponent. In the variation 13... This support for the advance b4 is tllg6!? 14.c5 h5 15.b5 tllb8 16.b6 ab encountered comparatively rarely. The 17.cb c6 18.tllh2 itd6 the moves ...f5 b-pawn hurl is such an important ele­ and ...h4 were planned, with sufficient ment of White's attack that it's even counterplay. used without support in the fo rm of Since the light-squared battery has a sacrifice: 7.0-0 f6 8.b4!? tllxb4 9.c3 ordered a long life, on 6.c4 Black replies tllc6 10.%Ya4 e5 ll.de fe 12.e4 tllf6

212 The Chigorin Defense

13.l:':tbl \t'b8 14.ed tt:JxdS lS.'ib'bS(Huss The presence of good alternatives - Raetsky, Martigny, 2007) 1S... tt:Jb6 testifies to Black's prosperity. Here this 16.tt:JxeS tt:JxeS 17.'ib'xeS .ltg6. Black's is 10 ...tt:Jd 4!? 11.tiJxd4 ed 12.tt:Jf3'ib'xbS chances are still preferable thanks to his 13.tt:Jxd4 'ib'd7 14.0-0 CiJf6 1S.l:':tb1.lie S better piece configuration and the ob­ - the light-squared bishop is almost struction on the b-file. dead. In the game Sale - Raetsky (Abu ll.tt:Jxe5 'ib'xb5- Dhabi, 2001) White completely re­ 12.tt:Jd3 CiJf6 jected b4, and the pawn pair that ap­ 13.0-0 V§a4! peared in the center felt completely The queen blocks the advance of two safe: 7.0-0 f6 8.c3 eS 9.de fe 10.lt'lb3?! pawns simultaneously - an excellent (10.b4 e4 ll.bS ef 12.bc 'ib'xc6 13.tt:Jxf3 defensive resource! doesn't give any noticeable benefits, 14.tt:Jf4 iH7 but he should have continued that way 15. .ib2 �e7 nevertheless) 10.. .tl:l f6 ll.�e3 \t'b8 16 . .2i.c3 12.tiJcS �xcS 13.�xcS l:':the8 14.l:tel The bishop changes diagonal before tt:Je4 1S.�e3 d4 16.cd ed (Black has ...d4 takes it out of the game. In the seized the center and has better pros­ variation 16.tt:Jf3 tt:Jc4 17.�c 3 tlJe4!? pects) 17. .ltf4 h6 18.g4 .ltt719.l:':tc l gS 18 . .\txg7 Mhg8 the bishop gets to the 20.�h2 hS (20 ....1txa2?! 2l.'ib'a4 .ltt7 long diagonal at the price of a sharp ac­ 22.tiJd2! .2i.g6 23.�xe4!? .ltxe4 24.b4 tivation ofthe black army. promises an attack on the black king) 16... d4 2l.'ib'a4 hg 22.hg. The time trouble 17. .ib4 l:':the8 blunder 22 ....\td S? after 23.tt:Jxd4! 17 ....1tx b4 18.ab 'ib'xb4opens anoth­ tt:Jxd4?! 24 . .\txc7+ \t'a8 2S.'ib'xd4 er file near the king, which didn't seem killed the game. With 22 ...a6 the tactic safe. True, in the case of 19.tt:Jd3 'ib'bS 23.tiJxgS!? in the case of the sacrifice 20.'ib'bl!? 'ib'xbl 2l.l:':tfxb1 b6 22.CiJb3 being accepted is enough fo r a draw tt:Jxb323.c b .lidS! everything is fine fo r (23 ...tt:JxgS 24.l:txc6 be 2S.'ib'xa6 �dS Black. 26.'ib'b6+), but it probably turns against 18.c3 'ib'xd1 White after 23... .\tdS!? 24.tt:Jx e4 l:txe4! 19.l:tfxd1 2S.f3l:txg4! 7... f6 8.b4 e5 9.de fe 9 ...tt:JxeS 10.tt:JxeS fe 1l..ib2 'ib'e6 12.c4 d4 13.cS CiJe7 is roughly equiva­ lent, with a subsequent ...CiJd S. It's very difficult to evaluate each player's chances in the non-standard position that arises. 10.b5 CiJaS

213 Chapter X

19... de right away: 6 ...e6 7.0bd2 f5 8.b4 a6 After 19 ...,tx b4 20.ab? de 2l.Mxa5 9.0b3 lLlf6 lO.lZJc5 ,txc5 ll.bc lZJe4 Mxd2 22.Mcl c2 the passed pawn is 12.�d3 0-0 n,tf4 Mfe8 14.0e5 0xe5 decisive, but after 20.cb tLlb3 21.lLlxb3 15.�xe5. Because ofthe weakness on b7 ,txb3 22.Md2 there's no passed pawn Black has to defend passively. - and no advantage. 7.b4 20.�xc3 lZJc4 Prevents the pawns from seizing the 21.Mdbl c6 center, which fo llowed on 7.0bd2. In 22.0xc4 �xc4 the game Royer - Raetsky (Cappelle­ 23.,tas Md6 la-Grande, 2002) the pawns didn't 24.h4 CZ'ld5 experience an unhealthy interest on The short battle ended in a justifi­ White's part: 7 ...e5 8.de 0xe5 9.0xe5 able draw two moves later: 25.0xd5 cd fe 10.c4 c6 ll.cd cd 12.0-0 lLlf6 13.0f3 26.�b4 Ma6. In the variation 25 ...ihd5 �d6 14.�g5 �t7 15.�xf6 gf 16.0h4 26.e4 ,te6 27.,tc3g6 the play is a little ilc7 17.�c2 0-0-0 18.Mfdl 'it'b8 more complicated, but also within the 19.�f5 �e6!? 20.�xf6 Mdf8 2l.�h6 bounds of equality. Mhg8, with the initiative fo r a minimal loss. Ramming the center is also use­ 11. M. NOVIK - A. RAETSKY less: 8 ...fe 9.e4 0-0-0 lO.ed (10.0xe5 Dagomys, 2008 �e8! ll.tLlg4 lLlf6, seizing the initia­ tive) 10 ...�xd5 ll.�b3 �d3 12.,tfl l.lLlf3 d5 �d6 13.0g5 e4 (13... 0f 6 is more ac­ 2.g3 lLlc6 curate, so as not to worry about the cen­ 3.d4 ,tg4 tral pawn after an exchange of queens) 4.�g2 �d7 14.�e6+ �xe6 15.0xe6 Me8 16.0xf8 5.h3 ,ths Mxf8 17.�g2 lLlf6 18.0-0 Me8 19.0b3 6.c3 lZJe5, maintaining equality (Rahman - Saptarshi, Kolkata, 2007). 7... a6 Bearing in mind my opponent's preparation fo r my favorite 7 ...0-0-0 (games 12 and 13) Black doesn't define the position of the king fo r now. But, as is well known, if a tram driver looks fo r new routes, the tram goes off the rails. Another two defeats occurred, the rea­ sons for which weren't rooted in the opening. There's nothing bad about the prophylactic move by the outside pawn, 6 ... f6 neutralizing b5. Against Tkachiev (Bastia, 1997) Another method of delaying cas­ Flear preferred to build a "stonewall" Hing was encountered in the game

214 The Chigorin Defense

Kengis - Short (Yerevan, 1996): 7 ...e6 18.tiJxe7+ CZJxe7 19.ii.xf6 gf 20.'iVe6+ 8.tiJbd2 tiJge7 9.0-0 tiJc8 10.e4!? il..e7 l:td7 21.l:tbdl, with a win. Problems ll.tiJe5!? (a surprising attempt to turn with the black king have come to light, the opposition on the diagonal in his so it's best to abstain fr om ...e5 here. favor) 11... i.xdl 12.tiJxd7 iia4 13.ed 9.tiJbd2 f5 !? �xd7 14.dc+ �xc6 15.iixc6+ �xc6 Black has to switch to a "stone­ 16.a4 �d7 17.tiJb3 b6 18.l:tel tiJd6. wall" if he doesn't want to allow e4. 9 ... The chances gradually equalized, and ii.d6 10.e4 CZJge7 ll.l:tel de 12.tiJxe4 on the 291h move a draw was estab­ 0-0 13.a3 is tolerable for him, while lished. 11...0-0? 12.e5! fe 13.de tiJxe5 14.CZJxe5 8.0-0 ii.xe5 15.'iVxh5 costs him a piece. The provocation 8.ii.f4 g5 9.ii.cl 10.a4 ii.d6 temporarily postpones ...e5, which isn't ll.tiJb3 tiJf6 such a great loss fo r Black. In the game 12.b5 Shorokhov - Raetsky (Dagomys, 2008) An attack on the queenside can be tension in the center soon arose: 9 ... undertaken in various ways. Novik de­ ii.g6 lO.tiJbd2 e6 ll.tiJb3 b6 12.h4 g4 cided that after 12.tiJc5iixc5 13.bc 0-0 13.tiJfd2 h5 14.e4 tiJge7 15.0-0 ii.g7 14.l:tbl l:tab8 15.il..f4 the weak b7 pawn 16.a3 0-0 17.l:tel l:tad8 (it was better wouldn't be enough. not to leave the pawn undefended, but 12... tiJd8 to clarify the situation with the help of Opening up the game when you're 17 ...f5 !?) 18.'iVe2 e5 19.ii.b2 ed (it was behind in development is dangerous: worth relieving the situation by means 12 ...ab 13.ab tiJa7 14.tiJc5 iixc5 15.dc of 19 ...de 20.tiJxe4 Jifl 2l.'iVc2 'iVe6 'iVxb5 16.tiJd4 'iVd7 17.'iVb3 or 15 ... 22.tiJbd2 'iVd7) 20.cd f5 2l.ed tiJxd5 Jixf3 16.ii.xf3 'iVxb5 17.c4! de 18.'iVc2, 22.l:tacl l:tfe823. 'iVxa6 l:txel + 24.l:txel with the initiative. f4 25.'iVc4 iifl 26.'iVc2, and there's 13.tiJe5 'iVe7 nothing fo r the pawn. If 13 ...iixe5 14.fe CZJe4, then 8... e6 15.'iVel!, covering not only the c3 pawn In reply to 8 ...e5?! he can go into but also the g3 pawn (after 16.f3, catch­ a clinch - 9.e4!? de lO.t'iJxe5! ii.xdl ing the knight). ll.tiJxd7 �xd7 12.l:txdl f5 13.a4 tiJf6 14.c4 tiJe4 14.tiJa3, with a very promising bishop After castling opening the a-file pair in an asymmetrical position. The comes in handy - 14 ...0-0 15.Jib2 ab duel Kengis - Ilczuk (Suwalki, 1999) 16.ab l:txal 17.ii.xal de 18.tiJxc4 'iVd7 turned out to be fast-flowing: 9.de fe 19.tiJxd6 cd 20.'iVd3 iie8 2l.b6 'iVb5, 10.e4!? i.xf3 ll.'iVxf3 d4 12.cd 'iVxd4 with equality. (12... ed 13.b5! ab 14.'iVh5+g6 15.'iVxb5 15.'iVd3 0-0 ii.g7 16.l:tdl) 13.tiJc3 tiJf6 14. .\ig5 16.ii.b2 Qjfl ii.xb4 15.tiJd5 0-0-0 16.l:tabl ii.e7? 17.tiJf3 (now it becomes clear that the place 17.tiJxf7 'iVxfl 18.c5 ii.e7 19.tiJa5 fo r the bishop is on d6) 17.'iVb3 'iVa7 l:tfb8 is stronger, with approximate

215 Chapter X

equality, as now an opportunity to coun­ either. Under severe pressure from the terattack appears. clock, in a confused(presumably better) position I missed an elementary mate on the back rank.

12. A. KOGAN - A. RAETSKY Sautron, 2001

Contrary to the information in the databases, I played against the Israeli Grandmaster as Black, not White. And accordingly I didn't win, but lost, suc­ cumbing to the evil hand of fate that has harshly haunted me in the system 3 ... 17... de i.g4. In the case of 17 ...f4 ! 18.c5 fg 19.cd 1.tLlf3 d5 gf+ 20.z:!:xf2 tiJf:xd6 21.IIm tLlc4 2.g3 tLlc6 22.i.cl i.g6 Black has two pawns fo r a 3.d4 i.g4 piece and a serious initiative. 4.i.g2 'i¥d7 18.'�xc4 <;;t>b8 5.h3 i.h5 19.d5 e5 6.c3 f6 19 ...ed in the example variation 7.b4 0-0-0 20.'i¥xd5 ab 21.ab z:!:xal 22.�xal c6!? 23.bc be 24.'i¥xc6 ctJxg3! 25.fg 'i¥e3+ 26.<;;t>hl 'i¥xb3 27.�xg7+!? <;;t>xg7 28.tLld4 'i¥b8 29.tLle6+ <;;t>g8 30.tLlxf8 i.xf8 31.�d5 forces total simplifica­ tions with a very likely draw. 20.ctJh4!? 'i¥f6? In impending time trouble my part­ ner's unexpected move knocked me off balance. The position remained un­ clear: 20 ...g6 21.i.xe4 fe 22.'i¥xe4 tLlg5 23.'i¥e3 ab 24.ab lhal 25.j,xal tiJxh3+ 26.<;;t>g2 g5!? 27.<;;t>xh3 gh. 8.b5 21.tLlx f5 ! 'iYxf5 As a result of this pawn advance the 22.g4! 'iYd7 black knight isn't badly positioned on 23.'i¥xe4 �g6 a5, and White is only capable of pro­ 24.'i¥c4 voking an insignificant weakening of Novik has won a pawn without com­ the king's bastions. On two occasions pensation, but he didn't manage to avoid Burmakin continued 8.a4 against me time trouble and its associated blunders first. Then 8 ...'i¥e8!? is good, to support

216 The Chigorin Defense

...e5 and the opposition on the d-file. 2002) the g2 bishop is shut in fa st, and In Seefeld in 2000 we then went 9 .iia3 Black is safe. In the game 21...c5 (21... e5 lO.de fe 1l.b5 .i.xf3 12.iixf3 tlla5 a6!? 22.ba+ �xa6) 22.bc+ �xc6 23.c4 13.0-0 tllf6 14.iig2 iixa3 15.tllxa3 de 24.f3 ef 25.�xf3+ �d7 26.tllxc4 'JIJJe7 16.'JIJic2 'JIJJc5 (instead of the sub­ tllxc4 27.�xc4 suddenly brought the sequent exchange of the e-pawn 16... bishop to life - without noticeable ben­ 'JIJie6 or ...h5 and ...h4 are also inter­ efits. The impression is that the advance esting) 17.'JIJJf5 + �b8 18.'JIJixe5 �he8 a4 doesn't create problems fo r Black. 19.'JIJid4'JIJixd4 20.cd �xe2 2l..i.f3 �d2 9... b6 22.�fdl tllb3 23.�xd2 tllxd2 24.iig2 It's no longer news fo r readers that tllfe 4 - Black has a more compact pawn the pawn exchange 9 ...tll c4 10.'JIJixa7 structure and active knights. Tw o years 'JIJixb5 is far from fatal fo r the black king, later in the same Seefeld Burmakin tried as the queen comes out by itself, and 9.b5, flowing into the main game (note there's a high probability that it will be to 9.'JIJia4). exchanged. For example, 11.tllbd2 'JIJJa5 8.tt:lbd2 (game 13) isn't the most 12.'JIJixa5 tt:lxa5 13.CDb3 tllc4 14.tt:lfd2 natural move here, but there are quite tt:lxd2 15.�xd2 e5, with approximate a few examples, as CDbd2 is played a equality. move or two earlier with a subsequent 10.tllbd2 interlocking of branches. The same also White didn't sense the danger that goes fo r 8.0-0, with the possible con­ was threatening the b5 pawn. Evidently tinuation 8 ...e5 9.b5 tlla5 lO.'JIJia4 tllc4 to protect it the knight is better-posi­ ll.de (the unusual exchange of queens tioned on a3. In the variation 10.0-0 ll.'JIJixa7 'JIJixb5 12.de .ltc5 13.tlld4 a6 11.tlla3 e6 12.c4 �xa3 13.'JIJixa3 ab iixa7 14.tllxb5 iib6 preserves approxi­ 14.c5 �b7 White has compensation fo r mate equality) ll...iic5 12.tllbd2 .ltxf3 his loss. 13.tllxf3 tllxe5 14.iia3 iixa3 15.'JIJJxa3 10... a6!? �b8 16.tllxe5 fe 17.�fdl tt:lf6 18.c4 d4 ll.�bl iie8!? 19.�abl (Chuchelov - Raetsky, Cap­ Judging by his long think, the relo­ pelle-la-Grande, 2002) 19 ...�hf8 20.c5 cation of the "forgotten" bishop was a tlld5 21.iixd5 'JIJJxd5, and Black doesn't surprise fo r Kogan. Then again, 11...e6 experience difficulties. 12.0-0 .\tg6 13.�b2 CDh6 is also favor­ 8... tlla5 able fo r Black. 9.'JIJia4 12.iia3 ab After 9.a4 'JIJie8. 10.\ta3 e5 ll..i.xf8 13.'JIJidl tllh6 iixf3!?12 . .i.xf3 (in the variation 12. .\txg7 The most convenient moment pre­ .ltxg2 13.�h2 iie4 14. .\txh8 ed 15.cd sented itself to exchange off the dark­ 'JIJJg6the bishop doesn't get itself out of squared bishops: 13... .\tg6 14.�b2 the corner) 12 ...'JIJixf8 13.0-0 e4 14. .\tg2 e6 15.iixf8 �xf8 16.0-0 tt:le7. Now, f5 15.tlld2 tllf6 16.'JIJic2'JIJJt7 17.'JIJib1b6 though, something of an initiative 18.'JIJib4 'JIJif8 19.'JIJixf8 �hxf8 20.e3 �b7 fo r the lost pawn is beginning to take 21.�ac1 (Burmakin - Raetsky, Seefeld, shape.

217 Chapter X

14.ilb4 tllc4 fe the problem diagonal is completely 15.0-0 closed, but a reciprocal sacrifice of the 15.tllxc4 be 16.0-0 'i¥a4 17.'i¥d2 outside pawn, 25.a4, still promises an ilg6 18.l:!b2.lie 4 is premature - all the initiative. operative lines are blocked. 19.f4?! h4 15... e6 20.g4 'i¥a4 16.e4 tllf7 21.'i¥e2 .lic6 Mter 16 ....\ig6 17.tllxc4 be 18.tlld2 Playing it safe. The variation 21... tllfl 19.a4 the pawn advance can inflict ..txb422. l:!xb4'i¥xa2 23.ed ed 24.'i¥e6+ damage. To slow down its start I keep l:!d7 looks like a blind alley in White's the bishop on e8. attack, and the correctness of the sac­ 17.tllxc4 be rifice 25.tllxc4!? de 26.l:!bbl is in ques­ 18.tlld2! tion. 22.ed .lixd5 23.tllxc4 'i¥c6 24.tlle3 .lixg2 25.tllxg2 �b7 26.l:!fe1 ilxb4 27.l:!xb4 Damn time troubles have destroyed my successful career in the Chigorin set­ up! Perhaps 27 ... tlld6?! 28.c4 l:!a829.c5 tllc8 isn't so bad, but with a shortage of time playing with an unsecured king isn't pleasant - the result was a defeat The bishop is simply penetrating on the 53rc1 move. 27 ...J:!de8!? neutral- the long diagonal, which creates pre­ ized 28.c4? due to 28 ...e5!, with a hang- conditions fo r a sacrifice on c4. In the ing rook on b4. case of 18... tll g5 19.ed ed 20.h4 tlle6 21.tllxc4! de 22.'i¥f3 c6 . .1ix23 f8 l:!xf8 13. A. KOROTYLEV - A. RAETSKY 24.l:!xb6 'i¥c7 25.l:!fbl it almost wins, Biel, 2003 and with 18... .1ix b4 19.l:!xb4 h5 20.ed ed 21.tllxc4!? de 22.'i¥f3 'i¥e6 23.'i¥b7+ l.CLlf3 d5 �d7 24 . .1id5 'i¥d625. l:!xc4l:!c8 26.l:!c6 2.g3 tllc6 'i¥xd527.l:!x c7+ l:!xc728. 'i¥xd5+tll d6, 3.d4 ..tg4 it preserves the balance, according to 4 . ..tg2 'i¥d7 Rybka. 5.h3 JibS 18... h5 6.c3 f6 A deflecting sacrifice of the ex­ 7.b4 0-0-0 tra pawn, which was worth accepting. 8.tllbd2 Mt er 19.ilxf8 l:!xf8 20.'i¥xh5 CLlg5 21.'i¥e2f5 22.ef ef 23.h4 tlle4 24.tllxe4

218 The Chigorin Defense

has to go backwards: 9 ...tll b8 10.a4 e5 11.0-0 e4 l2.tllh2 f5 13.c4 tllf6 14.c5 - a very complicated position that's prob­ ably a little more favorable fo r White. 9... e5 10.b5 e4!? ll.tllh2 Inthe variation ll.bc ef12.cb+ �xb7 the king is naked! But a pin on the e-file can't be ruled out - 13. .ifl fe 14.iLxe2 .if3 15.l:'.l:gl �e6 (against 16.�fl), with approximate equality. 8 ... �e8!? 11... tllce7 We 've already seen this idea in the As a result of the typical zwischenzug battles against Burmakin. The advance fo r the system ( ...e4) Black has success­ ...e5 wasn't necessary in such a sound fully stabilized the position in the cen­ shelter: 8 ...e5 9.b5 tllb8 lO.de �xb5 ter. ll.�b3!? �a6 12.0-0 tllc6 13.e4 iLfl 12.a4 �b8 14.a4 .ic5 15.ef tllxf6 16.e5 tllh5?! 13.tllfl (16... tll d7 retained a playable position) An overture to an expansion of the 17.�b5! !iLb6 18.�xa6 ba 19.�h2 .ig6 bridgehead on the kingside. A debatable 20.tllb3 !iLd3 21.tllbd4!? (it's even better decision and not as natural a one as cas­ to sacrificethe exchange in the fo llowing tling with a subsequent pawn attack on fashion: 21.a5! .ixf1 22.ab .ixg2 23.ba the queenside. tllxg7 24.�xg2, with an overwhelm­ 13... tllf5 ing advantage) 2l... .ixd4 22.cd iLxfl 14.h4 23.!iLxfl J:'.i:df8 24 . .ixa6+ �d7 25 . .ie2, After 14.g4 tllh4 15.tlle3 tllxg2+ with more than sufficient compensation 16.tllxg2 iLfl the weakness of the king­ fo r the material (Badea - Milliet, Saint side is palpable. Affrique Open, 2003). Instead of play­ 14... tllgh6 ing fo r an exchange of queens 11.0-0 fe 15.!iLh3 .ig4 12.g4 .ie8 13.tllxe5 tllf6 is more natural The time has come to choose what - White's prospects are slightly better. set of pieces to leave on the board. With 9.tllb3 15... tll g4 16 . .ixg4 .ixg4 17.tlle3 tllxe3 9.b5!? deserved attention. With the 18 . .ixe3 the black bishops oppose bish­ position of the knight on d2 it isn't op and knight, but in the game bishop favorable to retreat to a5: 9 ...tll a5?! and knight battle the white knights. 10.�a4 b6 11.tllb3 tllc4 12.�xa7 �xb5 Later Black tries to open lines on the 13.�a8+ �d7 14.tllc5+! �e8 15.�b7 kingside by exploiting the breaches in tlld6 16.tlle6!? �xe2+ 17.�x e2 tllxb7 the enemy camp. 18.tllxd8 �xd8 19.!iLa3, with the ex­ 16.iLxh6 tllxb6 change and a better position. The knight 17 .!iLxg4 tllxg4

219 Chapter X

18.e3 hS 25... de?! 19.tlla5 g5 After 25 ...h4 26.0-0-0 hg 27.fg �g8 20.tllh2 tllxh2 28.c5 Ilxhl 29J:txhl i.f8 it's getting The difference in the position of the better and better for Black. Returning knights suggests rejecting a voluntary the knight to the game was careless at exchange: 20 ...�e6!? 2l.hg Jie7!? 22.gf minimum. (22.g6 �f5 23.�e2 �xg6) 22 ...tll xf6 26.tllxc4 �g8 23.�e2 h4 24.0-0-0 hg 25.fg Ilh3, with 27.0-0-0 a very strong initiative fo r the deficient In the case of 27.b6!? cb 28.a5 h4 pawn. 29 .ab a6 the black king still feels more 21.Ilxh2 gh comfortable than its centralized coun­ 22.Ilxh4 fS terpart. 23.�b3 Wa8 27 ... h4 Repels the transparent threat 28.gh Ilxh4 24.tllc6+! 29.Ilhgl Ilg4?! 24.c4 iie7 In the ritual time trouble I instinc­ 25.Ilhl tively strove for simplifications, but that's the wrong strategy here. I should have preferred 29 ...�e6, and then ha­ rassed the f2 pawn when possible. 30.Ilxg4 �xg4 31.tlle5 Here 3l...�g2 32.Ild2 Ilh8 led to a difficult but defendable position. After the disappearance of the queens, 31... �g8? 32.�xg8 Ilxg8 Black has a bad king and weak pawns - I didn't manage to save myself.

220 ,Chapter 11 The English Opening

The variation l.c4 e5 2.tZ:lc3kb 4 3.tZ:ld5 ka5

olid English players are difficultto surprisebut even here we can suggest something aS little unusual as early as the second move.

l.c4 eS rupts Black's plan. The bishop has to Vllc3 .ltb4 define itself. 3 ... �aS!? Breaking loose from the solid rank of 3 ...�c5, 3 ...Jid 6, 3 ...�e 7 and 3 ... a5. The bishop again provokes aggres­ sion against its person, this time from a pawn. 4.b4 Otherwise with the help of ...c6 and ...d5 Black most likely seizes the center with his pawns. Ve ry timid play by White enabled the creation of the miniature Bairaktari - Raetsky (Lucerne, 2003): This bishop move is encountered 4.g3 c6 5.lllc3 d5 6.cd cd 7 . .\tg2 lllf6 much less often than 2 ...lll f6 and 2 ... 8.lllf3 d4 9.lllbl? (missing a chance lllc6. Black tries to deform his oppo­ to start complicated play by means of nent's pawn structure with an exchange 9.b4! .ltxb4 10.%Va4+ lllc6 ll.lllxe5 de on c3 - exactly as in the analogous Ros­ 12.�xc6+ be 13.%Vxb4 %Vd5 14.lllf3) solimo system from the Sicilian Defense: 9 ...e4 10.lllg5 .�ifS 11.0-0 (ll.%Vb3%Vd7 l.e4 c5 2.lllf3 lllc6 3.Jib5. 12.lllxf7 %Vxf7 13.%Vb5+lll fd 7 14.%Vxa5 3.llld5 wins a pawn, but White's position is Unlike in the Sicilian, an unhin­ close to lost) ll...h6 12.%Va4+lll c6 13.f4 dered centralization of the knight dis- %Vd7 14.g4 hg 15.gfgf 16.d3 f3! 17.efe3 Chapter XI

18.f4 e2 19J�xc6 eri¥+ 20.Wxfl �xc6, penetrated by his opponent - 10 ...Ci:lf 5! and resistance ceased. 1l.Ci:lxf5 �f6, with an advantage fo r After 4.Ci:lf3 c6 5.Ci:lc3 d6 Black gets Black. Kaidanov recommended 8.tllb5 an Indian structure with a dark-squared d5 9.� b2 f6 10.�a3 Ci:le7 1 l.Ci:ld6+ Wf8 bishop that's no longer hemmed in by 12.e3, with the initiative fo r the pawn. its own pawns. In the case of 5.Ci:le3e4 6.Ci:ld4 tllf6 7.g3 d5 8.cd the position in the center stabilizes by various meth­ ods. In the game Romanishin - Hodg­ son (Moscow, 1987) there fo llowed 8 ... Ci:lxd5 9.�g2 0-0 10.0-0 Ci:lf4! ll.gf (with ll.tllxc6 Ci:lxc6 12.gf �c7 13.�xe4 �xf4 White's kingside has disintegrated and the compensation fo r the pawn is ob vi­ ous) ll...�xd4 12.�c2 l:Ie8 13.Ci:lc4 �c7 14.�c3 �xc3 15.dc �e6 16.Ci:le3 f5 17.tllc2 c5 18.f3 ef 19.�xf3 tllc6, with a slight advantage fo r Black. In the In the irrational position that hasarisen variation 8 ...cd 9.b4! �b6 10.�b2 White White has a pawn majority (three against successfullyblocks the center, but the in­ two) in the center and a space advantage. terim attack 8 ...�b6!? is of indisputable The asymmetry with the bishop pair fa ­ interest: 9.Ci:ldf5 0-0 lO.dc Ci:lxc6 1l.�g2 vors White. His main plan is the advance l:Ie8,with the idea of 12.0-0?! l:Ie5! d4 with an unpleasant dilemma fo r his op­ 4... c6 ponent. Conceding the center with ...ed The retreat 4 ...�b6, which has enables very strong pressure on the al-h8 hardly ever been encountered in prac­ diagonal, and afterd4 d6 the exchange de, tice, not only doesn't lead to the loss of de creates a defended passed pawn on d5. a piece, but is even completely playable. Besides that, the weakness of the d6 pawn White has an insignificant advantage in is the source of a headache. Black has to a complicated position: 5.c5 c6 6.tlle3 start reciprocal play based on his advan­ �c7 7.�b2 Ci:le7 8.Ci:lf3f6 9.d4 or 5.a4 tage in development. Most often this is an c6 6.Ci:lxb6 ab 7.�b2 d6 8.g3 tllf6 9.�g2 activation on the kingside with the help of 0-0 10.tllf3 �e6 ll.d3. the undermining move ...f5 . S.ba cd In games 1 and 2 the move 6 ...tll f6 6.cd was tested and in games 3-6 - the main Against Kaidanov (Irkutsk, 1983) continuation 6 ...�xa5 . after 6.tllf3 e4 (6 ... d6?! 7.�a4+ �d7 8.�b4! is weaker fo r Black, with White 1. R. SOFFER - I. MANOR coming down on the weak d6 pawn) Israel, 2000 7.tlld4dc8.�a4tlle7 9.tllb5 0-0 10.0.Jd6 Timoshchenko established a blockade, l.c4 eS which was unexpectedly and beautifully 2.tllc3 �b4

222 The English Opening

3.tt:Jd5 ii.aS 7 ...0-0 8.tt:Jf3 �e8 9.e3 \jjlxa5 10.d6!? 4.b4 c6 tt:Je4 ll.ii.d3 tt:Jxd6 12.ii.a3 e4 13.ii.xd6 S.ba cd ed 14.�cl tt:Jc6 15.�c5, and Black 6.cd tt:Jf6 "jolted" - 15... \jjl b4?? 16.�e5! �xe5 17.ii.xb4. Then again, after 15... \jjl a6 16.0-0 it's impossible to negate White's initiative. 8.tt:Jf3 The double attack 8.\jjlg3?! loses time to the detriment of development. 8 ... 0-0 9.\jjlxe5 tlJc6 10.\jjlc3 \jjlxd5 ll.ii.b2 d6 12.e3 tt:Je5 (12... ii.e 6!?) 13.f4 tt:Je4 14.\jjlc2 (Azmaiparashvili - Eingorn, Riga, 1980) 14... tt:Jg4!? 15.ii.c4 \jjlc6 16.tt:Jf3 ii.e6 17.ii.d3 tlJgf2 18.0-0 tt:Jxd3 19.\jjlxd3 is pos­ If he continues 6 ...tlJe 7 without sible, with an unclear game. 10 ...\jjl xc3 shutting in the f- pawn, then White re­ 11.dc tt:Jxd5 is simpler: the weak white strains his opponent in the center un­ pawns stand out, and the two bishops impeded with 7.e4 0-0 8.d4l? f5 9.de fe don't, fo r now. 10.\jjld2l 8... d6

7 .\jjlb3 Mt er 8 ...e4?! 9.tlJg5 h6 10.\jjlc4! Defending the pawn by means of 0-0 11.tlJxe4 tt:Jxd5 12.tt:Jd6 (12.ii.b2 7.\jjla4 was encountered ingame 2. 7.e4l? \jjlb4!?) 12 ...tt:Jb6 13.\jjlc3 \jjlxc3 14.dc \jjlxa5 8.f3 leads to the main line, but, the white knight paralyzes the enemy of course, above all we should evaluate army. It's better for Black to continue 7 ...tt:Jx e4. Mter 8.\jjlg4?l tt:Jf6 9.\jjlxg7 9 ...d6 10.f3 0-0 11.tt:Jxe4 tt:Jxe4 12.fe �g8 10.\jjlh6 �g6 11.\jjlh4 d6 White has tt:Ja6, with definite compensation fo r ruined pawns and inactive pieces. Of the pawn thanks to his advantage in course, he should destroy not the flank development. It's worth sending the pawn but the central one: 8.\jjle2 f5 9.f3 knight on a diffe rent route - 9.tlJd4!? tt:Jf6 10.\jjlxeS+ Wf7 11.\jjlc3 �e8+ and tt:Jf5. 12.Wf2 b6!? 13.tlJh3, with better pros­ 9 .ii.a3 tiJe4 pects. This rather awkward defense of the 7 ... \jjlxaS weak pawn is essential. Exchanging off If Black doesn't rush with ...d6, then the d-pawns with a simultaneous ex­ the white pawn gets through to d6 when change of queens is unsatisfactory: 9 ... the opportunity arises. A seizure of ter­ \jjlxd5?! 10.\jjlxdS tlJxd5 ll.ii.xd6 e4 ritory and the initiative takes place even 12.tlJd4ii.d7 13.f3ef14.gftlJc6 15.tlJxc6 after the fall of the overreaching pawn. ii.xc616 .�gl �d8 (16... 0-0-0? 17 .ii.h3+ The "little tragedy" J. Kristiansen leads to losses) 17.ii.c5 g6 18.�c1 (L. - Rausis (Ljungby, 1989) is instructive: Christiansen - Chekhov, Germany,

223 Chapter XI

1992). Black couldn't do anything to changes in White's favor. 12 ...tl.ld c5 stop the central pawns supported by the 13.�b4 �xb4 14.Ji,xb4 a6 15.�e2 bishops. Ji,g4 16.d4 ed 17.ed (distances the 10.e3 liJd7 knight from the superb spot at the price Castling is less precise because of of spoiling the pawn chain) 17 ...tl.la 4 1 Lid3 liJc5 12.Ji,xc5, and after the 18.l':I.fcl l:I.fe8 19.Ji,d3 �xf3 20.gf tl.lf6 fo rced capture with the queen the weak­ 21.Ji,c2 tl.lb6 22.�xd6 tl.lc4 23.Ji,xh7+ ness on d6 is tangible - 12... �xc5 \txh7 24.l:I.xc4 l:I.ad8 25.Ji,c7 l:I.xd5 13.1iJg5h6 14.liJe4 �c7 15.0-0. (Agrest - Adianto, Biel, 1997) is stron­ ll.Ji,bS ger. The chain has been completely White prevents the appearance of a deformed, and despite being a pawn knight on c5 with a tempo. Exchang­ up White doesn't dare to even dream ing queens has been tried, 1 U�c1 about winning. 0-0 12.�b4 �xb4 13.Ji,xb4 1iJb6 14.d3 12.Ji,xd7+ Ji,xd7 liJxd5 15 .Ji, a3.Black gets reciprocal play 13.�xb7?! with various knight retreats. 15... 1iJe c3!? It was worth completing his develop­ (Eliseev - Chepukaitis, St. Petersburg, ment, postponing the elimination of the 2001) 16.Ji,xd6 l':I.d8.Ji,xe5 17 liJxa2 pawn to the future: 13.0-0 l:I.c8 14.l::lac1 18.l:I.c4 b6 isn't bad. Against Kramnik 0-0 15.d3 tl.lc3 16.\thl Ji,a4 17.�xb7 (Kherson, 1991) Kharlov chose 15... or 15 ...tl.lc 5 16.�xc5 l::lxc5 17.�xb7. tl.lc5 16.tl.lxe5 (16.Ji,xc5 de 17.l:I.xc5 13... l::lc8 Ji,e6 18.e4 tl.lf4 19.tl.lxe5 f6 !? 20.tl.lc4 After 13 ...0-0 14.Ji,xd6 liJxd6 l:I.ac8 21.l':I.xc8 l:I.xc8 22.\td2 tl.lxd3! 15.�xd7 �xd5 16.0-0 l:I.fd8 17.�a4 23.Ji,xd3 Ji,xc4 is preferable, although White should consolidate, although this is almost certainly a draw) 16... de definite compensation fo r the loss is at 17.Ji,xc5 l':I.d8 18.�e2 b6 19.Ji,a3 Ji,a6, hand. gradually outplaying his opponent. 14.�b3 In the variation 14.Ji,b4 �a4 15.0-0 0-0 16.l':I.fb1 l':I.b8 17.�a7 Ji,f5 18.d3 l:I.xb4 19.l':I.xb4 �xb4 20.de �xe4 21.�xa6 �xd5 Black won the pawn back and was positioned more actively. 14... Ji,bS Castling doesn't necessarily have to be prevented - with 14... 0-0 15.0-0 l':I.b8 16.�d3 f5 17.l':I.fb1 l':I.fc8 the black piec­ es are fantastic. 15.Ji,b4 �b6 16.l':I.b1 tl.lc5 11... a6 Manor missed the interesting tactical After 11...0-0 12.0-0 tl.ldf6 13.d3 opportunity 16 ...0-0 17.d3 (before l':I.b1 tl.lc5 14.�xc5 de the pawn structure this didn't work because of...Ji,xd3)17 ...

224 The English Opening

.ita4! 18.'ilia3 (18.'ilixa4?! tllc3 19.'ilib3 tllxb l 20.�e2 a5) 18 ...tll c3 19.l:tb2 tllb5! 20 . .itd2 .itc2!, with better chances in a very complicated position. 17 . .itxcS 'illxcS 18.d4 After 18.d3 0-0 castling immedi­ ately isn't fa vorable fo r White due to 19 ... e4!, but if the bishop is kicked away first the goal is achievable - 19.a4 .itd7 20.0-0 'ilia5 21.llfcl 'ilixa4 22.'ilixa4 .itxa4 23.d4 f6 24.de fe 25.tlld2, with a more pleasant endgame. Black has spared the a5 pawn, and 18... 'ilic7 the desire to defend it is natural. The 19.de 'iliaS+ demise of the central pawn doesn't 20.tlld2 de have to be taken into account, as White 21.a4 .itd7 wins it back with the e5 pawn, block­ 22. 'illa3 'illxdS ing his opponent's camp and eliminat­ 23.e4?! ing his counterplay: 7 ...tll xd5?! 8.'ilie4 Haste. Correct is 23.f3 f5 (against tll e7 9.'ilixe5 0-0 10 . .itb2 f6 ll.'il!d6 24.tlle4) 24.e4 'il!d4 25.ef .itxf5 26.l:tb7. tllbc6 12.e3 (12. .itc3 doesn't give up The kings fe el equally uncomfortable. a pawn, but Black didn't consider its 23... 'il!d4 elimination a relief) 12 ...�h 8 13.tllf3 24.l:tb4 'il!d6 tllf5 14.'ilif4 tllfe 7 15.a6 b5 16 . .itd3 d5 25.'ilib2 0-0 17.0-0 (Slobodjan - Bluvshtein, Ha­ 26.0-0 vana, 2004). It's amusing that the players have 7... 0-0 only now got around to castling. After 8.e4 d6 26 ...a5 27.llc4 .ite6 28.llxc8 l:txc8 a 9 . .ita3 clear advantage fo r Black made itself Immediately taking the Achilles heel fe lt. in his sights. Mobilizing the kingside also holds onto an insignificant advantage: 2. L. GOFSHTEIN - A. VYDESLAVER 9.d3 tlla6 10 . .ite2 tlld7 ll.tllf3 f5 12.ef Tel Aviv, 2002 tlldc5 13.'ilia3 .itxf5 14.0-0 tllc7 (14... .itg4 is more solid, as now 15.tllxe5!? 1.c4 eS tllxd5 16 . .itf3 .ite6 17.d4 led to a no­ 2.tllc3 .itb4 ticeable advantage in the center) 15.d4 3.tlld5 .itaS ed 16.tllxd4 .ite4 17.tlle6 tll7xe6 4.b4 c6 18.de 'ilif6 19 . .itb2 'ilixe6 20.'ilig3 'ilig6 S.ba cd 21.llfdl 'ilixg3 22.hg (Hauchard - Cha­ 6.cd tllf6 banon, Toulouse, 1995). 7 .'illa4 9... tlle8

225 Chapter XI

9 ...tila 6 10.�xa6 ba creates an amus­ 21.�e3 is unquestionably in White's fa ­ ing column on the outside file. 11.�b4 vor, but now in the analogous variation tileS 12.tilf3 f6 13.0-0 �g4 (with the the fl rook is hanging. idea of smashing the pawns) doesn't give 17... l'::l:b8 White anything substantial. After 11. tile2 18.�c2 l'::l:b4 Black doesn't let the queen go to b4 at all 19.d3 �b6 - 11..J::rbs 12.0-o �d7 13.�c2 tiles 20.0-0 l'::l:b2 14.l'::l:ab1 l'::l:cS 15.tilc3 �xa5 16.�b4 2l.�c1 l'::l:xa2 �dS, planning ...f5 with counterplay. 22.tild2 �b4 10.1i.b5 23.tilc4 10.d4 is the ideal advance in prin­ ciple, but with an undeveloped kingside it's premature. Black achieves wonder­ ful play: 10... �d7 ll.�b4 ed 12.�xb7 1i.cS! 13.�b4 (13.�xaS?? �xa5+ 14.�d1 tilc7) 13 ...tila 6 14.�d2 f5 . 10... tild7 The logical consequence of9 ...tile 8 is an f-pawn dash: 10 ...f5 !? 11.1i.xe8 l'::l:xe8 12.�xd6 fe 13.tile2 tilc6! 14.dc �xd6 15.l'::l:cl. White is still a little better. ll.l'::l:cl tileS!? Wideslawer gives up a second pawn The pawns are now equal, but the to bring at least some dynamics to the doubled passed pawns aren't equivalent position. 11...tildf6 12.tile2a6 13.�xeS in strength to the defended passed d5 tilxeS 14.0-0 �d7 15.�b4 �b5 16.l'::l:fe 1 pawn. It's difficult to believe that seven preserved the extra pawn fo r White in a moves later White concludes the battle quiet situation. with a mating attack. The prelude was 12.1i.xc5 de an invasion on the c-file, so 23 ...l'::l: cS 13.1i.xe8 l'::l:xe8 was the strongest here. 14.l'::l:xc5 �d7 23... 1i.b5 15.�b3 b6 24.tile3 a4 16.l'::l:c3 25.l'::l:c8 a3 Gofshtein was probably right to give This pawn march is late; it was nec­ up the insignificant pawn so as not to essary to bring the queen into the de­ open a file fo r the black rook. But bring­ fe nse - 25 ...�f8 (with less success - on ing it back to the first rank is technically the next move). better. 26.tilf5 g6 16... ba 27.l'::l:c7! 17.tilt3 This change of front (from the eighth Carelessness again; 17.tile2 l'::l:bS rank to the seventh) is decisive . The 1S.�c2 l'::l:b4 19.0-0 �a4 20.�d3 �b5 knight can't be taken due to 28.�g5+

226 The English Opening

�f8 29. 'llif6 , and in the game there was 13.l:tb1 0-0 14.l:tb5 'llia6 15.0-0 l:tac8, 27 .. JU8 28.'1lig5 'llib2 29.li'lh6+ �g7 and Black is close to equalizing (D. 30.CZlg4. Horvath - Sherzer, Brno, 1993). 8.Jid3 3. J. LAUTIER - V. KOTRONIAS White is trying to get by without f3, Halkidiki, 1992 which exposes the dark squares. Af­ ter 8.ii,c4 the response 8 ...CZlx e4? loses l.c4 e5 because of 9.'1lig4 CZld6 10.'1!ixg7 l:tf8

2.CZlc3 1ib4 ll.'llixe5+, but 8 ...0-0 fo rces him to de­ 3.tlld5 1ia5 fe nd the pawn. Meanwhile, the defense 4.b4 c6 9.'1lie2 probably doesn't promise an ad­ S.ba cd vantage due to 9 ...b5! lO.ii,xb5 CZlxe4

6.cd 'l!ixa5 11.'l!i xe4xb5. 'l!i 7.e4 8... tZ:ia6 Against I. Ivanov (New Yo rk, 1990) Rohde attacked on the kingside without the slightest success: 8 ...d6 9.tZ:ie2 0-0 10.0-0 tZ:ih5?! 11.1ic2f5 12.d4! (timely!) 12 ...f4 13.de de 14.tZ:id4! tZ:if6 (14... ed?! 15.1lixh5 'llic3 16.1ib3 'l!ixa1? 17.1ia3 'l!ic3 18.1ixf8 �xf8 19.d6 and wins) 15.tZ:ib3 'llia6 16.ii,d3 'l!ia4 17.1ib2 tZ:ibd7 18.'1lie2 f3!? (frees a wonderful blocking square fo r the knight, but that isn't enough either) 19.gf tZ:ih5 20.�h1 CZlf4 21.'i¥d2b6 22.l:tfcl CZlxd323.'i¥ xd3 The tabiya of the system 3 ...1ia 5. 1ia6 24.'i¥e3,with a fu ll extra pawn. Op­ 7... CZlf6 erations on the queenside aren't without Immediately undermining the center defects either. Aft er lO... tZ:ibd7 11.ii,c2 with 7 ...f5 isn't so easy to refute. 8.1ib2 b6 12.d3 1ib7 13.1id2 'i¥c5 14.l:tcl the d6 9.1ic3 'l!id8 10.f4 CZld7 is presum­ queen fe els uncomfortable, and in the ably in White's favor, but the position is variation ll...b5 12.tZ:ig3 ii,a6 13.CZlf5 unclear. More promising are 8.ef 'llixd5 g6 14.tZ:ie7+ (14.CZlxd6? 'i¥b4!) 14 ...�g7 9. 'llih5+ 'llifl 10. 'llixfl+ �xfl 11.1ic4+ 15.d4 and CZlc6 the "circumnavigation" or 8 ...CZlf 6 9.d6!? (the creation of the confirms the knight on a weak square in solid central duet d6/e5 is postponed) the enemy camp. 9 ...0-0 10.'1!ib3+ �h8 ll.'llib5!? 'l!ixb5 9.f3 d6 12.1ixb5. Preparing ...f5 with the help of 10.1ib2 CZlcS 7 ...d6 looks more solid: 8.CZle2 f5 9.CZlc3 11.1ic2 1id7 tllf6 10.1ib5+ 1id7 1L�xd7+ CZlbxd7 12.a4! 12.ef CZlb6 (12... b5!? 13.0-0 b4 14.CZle2 After the exchange of queens 12.�c3 'llixd5 15.d4, with approximate equality) 'i¥a3 13.tZ:ie2 JibS 14.'1licl 'i¥xc 1

227 Chapter XI

15.Mxc1 1i,d3 White's advantage evapo­ constrained position with three pawn is­ rates. Lautier constrains his opponent lands against two Black faces a difficult even more ... battle fo r a draw. 12... 0-0 17... tZ:le8 13.tZ:le2 Kotronias plans ...f 5, which his op­ ...but is powerless to neutralize all his ponent deters. This isn't obligatory, active possibilities. Now the trick 13... as 18.Mel f5 19.e5 de 20.1i,xe5 tZ:lf6 1i,xa4!? 14. Mxa4 tZ:lxa4 15.1i,xa4 b5 of­ 21.\iigl is favorable fo r White. fe red reciprocal chances on the queen­ 18.g4 tZ:lc7 side. With 13.1i,c3 VJi/c7 14. tZ:le2 Black 19.g5 b5!? has other counterplay - 14 ...b5 15.ab Black has brought his reserve plan to 1i,xb5 16.1i,a5 VJi/e7. life. On the queen's wing he'll achieve 13... Mac8 definite progress: 20.ab VJilb6 2l.tZ:lc3 14,1i,c3 VJi/a6 tZ:lxb5 22.tZ:lxb5 1i,xb5. 15.d4 ed 20.tZ:lf4 b4?! 16.1i,xd4 It's more difficult fo r White to prove his advantage in the case of 20 ...ba 2l.tZ:lh5 tZ:le8. 21. VJild2! Now winning a pawn costs you a piece - 2l...tZ:lxa4? 22.VJildl! Subse­ quently Lautier prevailed in play against the king: 21...VJi/b6 22.a5 VJilb5 23.Mhb1 b3 24.1i,d1tZJ 7a6 25.1i,e2VJilb7 26.tt:Jh5 1i,g4!? 27.tZ:lxg7, with a triumph on the 391h move.

4. V. TUKMAKOV - A. RAETSKY 16... VJi/a5+ Lausanne, 2005 The French player has successfully carried out his planned advance, and 1.c4 e5 Black is already in trouble. 16... Mf e8 2.tZ:lc3 1i,b4 17.VJi/d2 tZ:lxa4?! is unfavorable because 3.tZ:ld5 1i,a5 of 18.0-0 b5 19.Mfb1, with very strong 4.b4 c6 pressure on the queenside. The tempt­ S.ba cd ing action on the kingside 18.1i,xf6 ?! 6.cd VJi/xa5 gf 19.tZ:lg3 doesn't achieve its aim be­ 7.e4 tZ:lf6 cause of the unexpected retort 19 ... 8.f3 Me5! This is played far more often than 17.'iiit2 8.1i,d3,although even by the next move It was worth thinking about 1 7. VJild2 it's possible to cast doubt on the gener­ VJilxd2+ 18.liixd2 Mc7 19.Mhbl. In a ally-accepted move.

228 The English Opening

tice the zesty refutation) 17 ...ed 18.�xd4 ii.g2! 19.1:\fl (19.1:\gl? ®d3+!) 19 ...:ilxfl 20.\t>xf1 , and no full compensation fo r the exchange is visible. 9. \t>f2!? A home-made dish. Tukmakov is trying to carry out the general idea d4 without delay. Itisn't that easy to exploit the insecure position of the white king. Games 5 and 6 are dedicated to the continuation 9.®e2. The move 9.�b3 has also been used, to support a bishop move 8 ... 0-0 out to a3. But rejecting the main plan with 8 ...d6 doesn't usually have indepen­ d4 doesn't promise much: 9 ...d6 IO.:ila3 dent significance. ...8 ®a 6!? deserves at­ ®e8 1l.®e2 f5 12.®c3 �d8 13.ef (or tention, to occupy the ideal spot on c5 13.:ilb5 ®d7 14.ef a6 15.:ilxd7 :ilxd7 with the knight as quickly as possible. 16.g4g6, with clear counterplay) 13 ...:ilx f5 On 9 .:ilb2 Black has the curious tactic 14.�xb7 ®d7 15.�a6 ®b6 16.�a5?! 9 ...0-0 IO.:ilxe5 ®xd5 1 U:l:b1 ®e3! (16.l:lc1is better, with the queen not leav­ 12.:ilc3�c7 13.de �xc3+ 14. \t>t2 ®c5, ing the a6-fl diagonal) 16 ...�h4 17.g3 with tangled play. Enterprising play on �h5 18.:ile2 :ild3! 19.0-0 ®c4 20.�b4 the kingside brought Black wonderful a5 2l.�b7 :ilxe2 22.®xe2 ®xd2 23.J:\f2 play in the encounter K. Hansen - Sosa ti:lxf3+ 24.\t>h1 ®f6, with a quick win (Istanbul, 2000): 9.®e2 ®c5 (count­ (Donchenko - Najer, Moscow, 1996). ing on 10 ...®d 3#!) IO.®c3 0-0 11.a4 9... d6 a6 12.:ila3 d6 13.:ile2 ®h5!? 14.0-0 10.d4 ®bd7 ti:lf4 15.\t>h1f5 16.:ilc4 fe (16... :ild 7!?) Besides this, I thought about the 17.®xe4 ®xe4 18.fe �c7 19.d3 h5 piece sacrifice 10 ...®xe4!? 1l.fe f5 , 20J:l:b1b5 2l.:ilb3:ilg4 22.�d2 �e7. but I considered it insufficient. Indeed, If 11.:ilb2 (instead of 11.a4) 11...d6 there aren't enough resources fo r an at­ 12.®b5, then the queen has to retreat tack: 12.®e2 fe + 13.\t>g1:ilg4 14.:ilb2 to b6, and 13.d4 ®cxe4! 14.fe a6 15.de ®d7 15.h3 (before exchanging on e5 a de 16.ii.xe5 ab exposes the white king. bolt hole has to be opened fo r the king; In a game with Schlosser (Cappelle-la­ 15.de? :ilxe2!) 15... :ilh5 16.de ®xe5 Grande, 2003) I returnedthe queen to its 17.:ilxe5 de 18.d6. initial position, and in the variation 12... ll.:ilb2 �d8 13.d4 ed 14.�xd4 a6 15.®c3 l:le8 11.� d2 or 11. tZ:le2 are more circum­ 16.ii.e2the battery on the long diagonal spect. Now a very promising opportu­ is no joking matter. The German Grand­ nity arose, 11...®h5!? 12.®e2 f5 ! 13.ef master blundered: 13.ii.e2 a6 14.®c3 e4!! (the key move!) 14.g4 (14.fe ti:ldf6 ®h5 15.g3 �b6 16.l:lb1 :ilh3 17.d4?! 15.®c3? ®xe4! 16.®xe4 :ilf5) 14 ...ef (splitting up the pawns, White didn't no- 15.®c3 ®hf6 16.h3 ®b6 or even 15 ...

229 Chapter XI

LLle5! 16.de iixf5 . If Black has sufficient defines White's clear advantage. Black counterplay then it's only in the vicinity is fa cing a thankless defense. Failing to of the white king's residence. Unfortu­ exploit a saving chance at one point, he nately I didn't find it and turned my at­ admitted his defeat on the 481h move. tention to the queenside. 11... �e8 5. S. AGDESTEIN - T. BAE 12.LLle2 b5 Oslo, 2006 13.a4! b4 14.tZ'lcl! l.c4 e5 2.tZ'lc3 iib4 3.tZ'ld5 iia5 4.b4 c6 5.ba cd 6.cd �xa5 7.e4 LLlf6 8.f3 0-0 9.tZ'le2 d6

14... :iia6 After this, with the help of 16.a5, Tu kmakov turns the screw even tighter. Meanwhile, 14 ...iib7!? 15.tZ'lb3 �d8 16.a5?! LLlxe4! 17.fe �h4+ is probably favorable fo r Black, and White has to reconcile himself with the generally-re­ inforcing ...a5 . The move 15.Jib5 pre­ serves his advantage, with a subsequent lO.tZ'lc3 exchange of bishop fo r knight. Opens up the bishop and at the same 15.tZ'lb3 �b6 time sends the knight to b5 with the aim 16.a5 �b7 of putting pressure on d6. 10.iib2was 17.�cl �ac8 encountered in game 6. 18.iixa6 �xa6 The advance 10.a4 restricts the enemy 19.�e2 �b7 queen and provides an outlet for the bish­ 20.de de op to a3 thanks to an attack on that same 21.�xc8 �xc8 chronic weakness on d6. With counter­ 22.�cl LLle8 play on the kingside Psakhis equalized 23.a6! �b8 his chances against lllescas (Novi Sad, The powerful defended passed pawn 1990): lO ...tZ'la 6 ll.tZ'lc3 LLlc5 12.ii,a3 on d5 together with the weakness on e5 tZ'lh5 13.iic4 iid7 14.�bl f5 15.0-0

230 The English Opening

(progress on the queenside meets with a tila6 l3.Mb1 (in the case of 13.Si,a3 reaction on the kingside - lS.Si,bSSi,xbS Si,d7 the minor pieces are hanging, but 16.1/jixbS \/jld8!? 17.Si,xcS de 18.1/jixcS �a3 is on the agenda now) 13... �d 7 fe 19.tilxe4 tilf4) lS ...fe 16.fe ttxfl+ 14.tilxd6! Si,a4 1S.tilxb7 �xc2 16.tilxaS 17.Si,xfl ttf8 18.Si,bS \/jlc7 19.Si,xd7 Si,xbl 17.Si,xa6, with a colossal advan­ tilxd7 20.\/jlb4tileS, and a draw was es­ tage. Black's chances are only on the tablished in an equal position. kingside. In the example variation 11... Lautier successfullyplayed the stan­ \/jld8 12.Si,a3 \/jlh4+ 13.'.i.'e2 tilf4+ dard d4 in an encounter with Torre 14.'.i.'e3 fS! 1S.g3 \/jlh6 16.gffe 17.fettxf4 (Manila, 1992): 10.tilg3 Si,d7 ll.ii,b2 18.'.i.'d3 ttxe4!? accepting the rook sac­ trc8 (with the idea of 12 ...�a 4, which rifice guarantees him perpetual check. was neutralized on the next move) 12.a4 11... fS tila6 13.�e2?! tileS?! 14.Si,c3 \/jld8 12.ef i[xf5 lS.aS hS 16.h4 b6 17.tra3 ba 18.Si,xaS 13.\/jlb3 \/jle8 19.0-0 ttab8 20.Si,c3tila 4 2l.�al In the main line 13.g4 \/jld8 14.\/jlb3 Mb4 22.d4. There was a serious obstacle \/jlh4+ '.i.'dlIS. tilg3 16.gf tilxh1 on the path to prosperity: l3... ttc7!? 17.\/jlxb7 White's chances are probably 14.Si,c3 trxc3! lS.dc \/jlxc3+ 16:;t?f2 preferable, but I don't think I'll try and 1/jicS+ 17.\�lfl tilb4, with more than prove that - it's all too confused.An im­ sufficient compensation fo r the ex­ mediate queen move out doesn't fo rce change. He should have prepared d4 Black to make weighty sacrifices. with the help of l3.Si,xa6 ba 14.�c3 13... tilf6 \/jlb61S. tile2. 14.�a3 e4! 10... tilhS!? 15.Si,xd6 On the prophylactic 10... a6 it's The position with 1S.f4 has a more useful to offer an exchange of queens closed character. Then there fo llows 1S... - 11.1/ji a4!? If the offer is accepted, a e3! l6.de tte8 17.\/jlb4 \/jlxb4 l8.Si,xb4 better ending fo r White comes about tilbd7 19.'.i.'d2 trac8, with comfortable - ll...\/jlxa4 12.tilxa4 tilbd7 13.Si,a3 bS play. 14.tilc3tileS 1S. �b4! tile8 16.a4! tilxa4 15... tre8 17.tilxa4 ba 18.ttxa4. In the Rapid 16.Si,b5 tilbd7 game M. Gurevich - Adianto (Batumi, 2001) Black declined the exchange and couldn't prevent d4 - 11...\/jld8 12.Si,e2 tilbd7 l3.d4 bS 14.\/jlb4 aS 1S.\/jlb2 b4 16.tild1ed 17 .\/jlxd4 Si,a6 18.Si,xa6 trxa6 19.tile3tileS 20.tilf S tre8 21.0-0 tilcd7 22.Si,e3, with a clear advantage. ll.g3 11.til bS is more logical, and the de­ fe nse of the pawn by the rook is unques­ tionably insufficient: 1l...ttd8 12.\/jlc2

231 Chapter XI

17.0-0-0 S.ba cd The king can't go off to its own 6.cd iVaS flank because of 17... i¥b6+, but with a 7.e4 tllf6 preliminary exchange on d7 the choice 8.f3 0-0 of castling short is sounder: 17.,txd7 9.tlle2 d6 ,txd7 18.0-0 ,th3 19.l:f2 e3 20.de l:xe3 10.,tb2 2l.i¥b4i¥xb4 22.,tx b4 a5 23.Lll d1 l:d3 24.,td2 l:xd5, with approximate equal­ ity. 17... ef 18.,tc7 If he removes the passed pawn White risks being left the exchange down - 18.l:hfl l:ac8 19.l:xf3 ,tg4 20.l:xf6 ,txd1 21.�xd1 tllxf6 22.,txe8 tllxe8 23.,te7 i¥b6 24.i¥xb6 ab. 18... b6 19.d6+ �f8 20.i¥a4 To kick the queen off a5 and quickly The Grandmaster doesn't want to undertake d4. play the unpredictable middlegame 10... tlla6 any more (20.l:dfl tllc5 2l.i¥b2l:e4!? 11.tllg3

22.tllxe4 ,txe4) and fo rces and ex­ White doesn't advance d4 as enthusi­ change of queens. astically here. Against A Ivanov (London, 20... i¥xa4 1994) Bogdan Lalic continued ll.,tc3 21.tllxa4 ,te4 i¥a3 12.d4 tlld7 (12 ...ed 13.,txd4 tllc5 22.tllc3 ,tb7 14.tllg3 ,td7 15.,te2 i¥a5+ 16.i¥d2 23.l:hfl a6 i¥xd2 17.�xd2, with afavorable exchange

24.,txd7 tllxd7 of queens, asin the game) 13.i¥xb3 i¥xb3 The passions have abated. White 14.ab f5 15.ef tllc7 16.de tllxe5 17.,txe5 doesn't even have a shadow of an advan­ de 18.tllg3 tlle8 (Lalic demonstrates a tage, and in his obstinate search fo r one win fo r White after 18... ,txf5? 19.d6 tlle8 Agdestein killed the game with a crude 20.,tc4+ �h8 21.tllxf5 l:xf5 22.d7 tlld6 blunder. 23.l:xa7! l:d8 24.,te6) 19.,tc4 tlld6 20.tlle4 tllxc4 2l.bc ,tx5 22.tlld6 b6 6. A. KOSTEN - A. RAETSKY 23.0-0, and won in the end. Sautron, 2004 A retreat home by the queen doesn't change the evaluation of the posi­ l.c4 eS tion: ll...i¥d8 12.d4 ed 13.tllxd4 tllc5 2.tllc3 ,tb4 14.,te2 ,td7 15.0-0 l:c8 16.l:cl tlla4 3.tlld5 ,tas 17.,tal i¥a5 18.tllb3 i¥b4 19.i¥d4 4.b4 c6 i¥xd4 20.,txd4 b6 21.,ta6 l:xcl

232 The English Opening

22.l':rxcl, with an advantage (Ermenkov Now the duel goes into a sphere of - Simanjuntak, Halkidiki, 2007). Black incalculable complications. The alter­ accidentally got the tactical opportu­ native is 18... ed 19.Jixd4 h4 20.Cllhl nity 13.. .Cll xe4!? 14.fe 'i¥h4+ 15.�d2 lih321 .l':rf2 iid7, asking White to prove Cllc5 (with foggy complications), but that the knight has a future. 13.'i¥xd4 preventedit. 19.�h1 Clla4! 11... 'i¥d8 20.lib4 Cllc3! 12.Jic3 CZlcS In fo r a penny, in for a pound! 20 ... 13.a4 Jid7 'i¥xd4?doesn't work because of21.l':rxa4 14.a5 'iYxdl 22.1ixdl l':rc4 23.Jib3 l':rd4 In the variation 14.d4 ed 15.lixd4 24.Clle2 l':rd3 25.l':ra3. 'i¥a5+ 16.�f2 a6 17.ite2 l':rfc8 Black 21.l':rxc3 latched onto the a4 pawn and stayed There was still the possibility of qui­ afloat. The target has moved, but the eting the position with 21.'i¥d3 'i¥xd3 rook takes the bishop in its sights and 22.Jixd3 ed 23.lixc3 de 24.Cllxh5 f5 thereby prevents d4. 25.Cllg3 - White's chances here are a 14... l':rc8 little better. 15.ite2 Clle8 21... l':rxc3 15 ...h5 deserved attention, to pro­ 22.de h4! voke h4. And then White may have to 23.e6!? think twice before castling. This pawn breakthrough is best with 16.0-0 'i¥g5 precisely this move-order. The posi­ Again not allowing d4 (17... 'i¥e3+). tion with pronounced asymmetry after The variation 17.lib2h5 18.d4 ed 19.f4 23.1ixc3 'i¥xc3 24.e6 fe 25.de lixe6 'i¥h6 20.Cllxh5 d3 2l.Jig4f5 22.ef lixf5 26.Cllf5 'i¥xa5 27.Cllxh4 isn't conducive is completely unclear, and Kosten de­ to precise evaluation. Of the two knight fe nds the bishop with the rook. retreats 23.Cllf5 lixf5 24.ef 'i¥xe5 de­ 17. l':ra3 h5 fo rms the structure, and 23.Cllh5 de 18.d4... 24.l':rel h3 25 . .1ixc3 'i¥xc3 26.'i¥alhg+ 27.�xg2 'iYxal 28.l':rxal f6 and ...tll d6 can lead to a blockade and a likely draw. 23... fe 24.de lixe6 25.Cllf5 lixf5 26.itxc3 The complicated variation 26.efl':rc6 27.itc4+ �h8 28.l':rel 'i¥f4 29.l':re4 'i¥xe4 30.fe l':rxc4doesn't disturb the ap­ proximate equality. 26... 'i¥xc3 18... 'i¥e3+!? 27.'i¥d5+

233 Chapter XI

This interim check seems to weigh .l:xfl+ 35.'i'V xf1 'i'V xaS. The white pawns the scales in White's favor. But the sub­ are shattered, and only the not entirely sequent course of the game doesn't con­ solid position of the black king prompt­ firm that theory: 27 ... \t>h7 28.ef tllf6! ed Kosten to look for practical chances. 29.'i'Vxd6 .l:e8 30.'i'Vd3 'i'Vb2 3L,tdt On the 52"ct move the game concluded a h3!? 32.gh 'i'Vb4 33.iib3 .l:el 34.iit7 peacefully.

�--coici usloN:·----·------·······-············--,······································--j We 've Proved to ourselvesthat de spite enjoying abUtidance oftac tical chanc � at1· l es, the continuation 3 ... .lta5lacks a soundstr a��c basis.Yo u shotlldn'tuse this l i rathe r dubious system all the time ; Nevertheless, · it 's gOOd against players who ! i . ! ne glect openingthe ory, and also pid and tournaments•. .3.� .ta5is pr ob .., li inRa ably capable of puzzlins even strong opening�litze Jq>e rts if the element of surprise :works . 1 i ...... _ ...... _ .. _ ...______,..._,.__ ..______.. ___ -_.______.. .. ______,.. ______,;. ! 1�··�--,�----- ...... _!

234 ISBN 978-1 -936277-26-1 $24.95 52495 I Jllllllllllllll 9 7 81936 277261