Dvoretsky I Yusupov · Secrets of Opening Preparation PrOgressinCfiess
Volume 23 of the ongoing series
Editorial board GM Victor Korchnoi GM Helmut Pfleger GM Nigel Short GM Rudolf Teschner
2007 EDITION OLMS m Mark Dvoretsky and Artur Yusupov
Secrets of Opening Preparation
School of Future Champions 2
Edited and translated by Ken Neat
2007 EDITION OLMS m 4
Books by the same authors:
MarkDvorefsky, Artur Yusupov, School of Future Champions
Vol. 1 : Secretsof Chess Training ISBN 978-3-283-00515-3 Available
Vol. 2: Secretsof Opening Preparation ISBN 978-3-283-00516-0 Available
Vol. 3: Secretsof Endgame Technique ISBN 978-3-283-00517-7 In Preparation
Vol. 4: Secretsof Positional Play ISBN 978-3-283-00518-4 In Preparation
Vol. 5: Secretsof Creative Thinking ISBN 978-3-283-00519-1 In Preparation
Mark Dvorefsky, School of Chess Excellence
Vol. 1 : Endgame Analysis ISBN 978-3-283-00416-3 Available
Vol. 2: Tactical Play ISBN 978-3-283-00417-0 Available
Vol. 3: Strategic Play ISBN 978-3-283-00418-7 Available
Vol. 4: Opening Developments ISBN 978-3-283-00419-4 Available
Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek
Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the internet at http://dnb.ddb.de.
© 2007 Edition Olms AG
Willikonerstr. 1 0 · CH-8618 Oetwil a. S./Zurich E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.edition-olms.com
All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not. by way of trade or otherwise. be lent. re-sold. hired out or otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser.
Printed in Germany
Editor and translator: Ken Neat
Typeset: Arno Nickel · Edition Marco. D-1 0551 Berlin
Printed by: Druckerei Fri edr. Schmucker GmbH. D-49624 Lbningen
Cover: Eva Konig, D-22769 Hamburg
ISBN 978-3-283-00516-0 ctJ s Contents
Introduction (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 6
PARTI
General Principles of Opening Play (A rturYu supov) ...... 9 Logic in the Opening (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 30
Su rprises in the Opening (A rturYusu pov) ...... 45
The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening (Sergey Dolmatov) ...... 62
A practical Exercise (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 84
PARTII
The Development of an Opening Repertoire (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 95
King's Indian Attack, from White's Point of View (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 126
Preparation for a Game (A rtur Yu supov) ...... 156
You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! (Yuri Razuvaev) ...... 170
PARTIll
How do Opening Novelties originate? (Boris Zlotnik) ...... 181
The Move ...g7 -g5 in the French Defence (Aiexey Kosikov) ...... 192
Opening Research (Vladimir Vulfson) ...... 202
PART IV
Middlegame Problems (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 211
The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame (A/exey Kosikov) ...... 224
In the Footsteps of one Game (Mark Dvoretsky) ...... 234
PARTV
Games by Pupils of the School (A rtur Yusupov) ...... 255
Index of Players ...... 274 Index of Openings ...... 277 6
Mark Dvoretsky
Introduction
hen embarking on some serious en Another idea which justified itself was the W terprise, one always endeavours to conducting of thematic sessions. Each of plan it as well and as accurately as possible. our meetings was devoted to some direction And if the project proves to be a good one, of work on chess. The 'massed' attack in this things usually develop successfully. direction -lectures, practical exercises, and Grandmaster Yusupov and I discussed in additional material which we provided for detail the directions and principles of the the pupils - gave a strong impetus for working of the school fo r gifted young chess improvement in the given field. players, which we were intending to organ We would like to be able to help any player ise. And now it is pleasant to report that our who wishes to play more strongly than main ideas have withstood the test of time. before, and who for this aim is prepared to An indication of this is provided by the work seriously on self-improvement. But the successes of pupils from the school. Many number of pupils at the school is limited. of them have already become quite strong Therefore right from the start we planned to players, victors and medal-winners in the prepare instructional books, combining lec junior championships of the country, Europe tures read at the sessions with the most and the world. In 1992 alone, four of our interesting articles on the given topic. pupils became champions of the world or The first such book, based on the materials Europe -llakha Kadymova, lnna Gaponen of the first session of our school, was ko, Alexey Alexandrov and Va dim Zviagin published in 1991 . Secrets of Chess Tra in tsev. ing (Oims 2006) was a new and greatly Our main principle was a reliable one, since expanded edition. In it the most general earlier it had been verified on our own questions of studying chess are analysed - experience. We realised perfectly well that the disclosure and elimination of a player's we should not simply convey specific chess weaknesses, the technique of analysing knowledge to the pupils - over two ten-day your own and other players' games and the sessions in a year you can't show much, and extraction of useful information from them, besides, this is by no means the most the role of the classical heritage, and so on. important thing when teaching chess. It is Now you have before you our second book. fa r more important: a) to fam iliarise pu It is devoted to the opening. What new ideas pils with the general ideas, methods and can we offer here to the reader? It is worth procedures of play- they have universal speaking about this in more detail. importance; b) to reveal rational ways of It is probable that a good 50% of all chess working on chess and means of master books are monographs, analysing a specific ing general ideas, as well as obtaining opening variation or a collection of them. necessary specific information; c) to Essentially these are reference books, and analyse deficiencies in the pupils' play sometimes you have to consult them, but to and help to eliminate them. master opening theory with them alone is Introduction 7 not easy. They offer too much information, The second part is devoted to the develop the greater part of which is completely ment of an opening repertoire, and prepara superfluous, and there is too little explana tion for an event or for a specific opponent. tion of the general ideas typical of the This topic is continued in the third part, variations in question. In addition, opening which talks about the independent analysis monographs very quickly become outdated. of opening positions and the technology of For chess amateurs who want to learn devising novelties. quickly how to play a particular opening, The fourth part traces the connection of the there are appropriate books, which analyse opening with other stages of the game, and only the necessary minimum number of demonstrates the continuity of chess ideas. variations. They are indeed very useful. But In it the central idea, permeating the entire to achieve genuine mastery in playing the book, is especially emphasised: the key to opening stage of the game, using only your success lies not in the mechanical ready-made prescriptions, is impossible. memorising of opening information, but in You need to study the methods of opening assimilating the wealth of chess ideas and preparation in general, reflect on the typical improving your chess culture. problems which other players encounter, However, although it was not our main and independently analyse opening sys objective, the reader will also find a consid tems that appeal to you. erable amount of useful specific information Our book will help you in this work. It is -opening novelties (some of which have not intended for players (in particular, young yet been employed in practice), recommen players) wishing to deepen their under dations on the playing of the most diverse standing of chess in general and the positions, and reviews of a number of opening stage in particular, and to learn to opening systems (King's Indian Attack, work independently on the opening. Closed Va riation of the Ruy Lopez, Queen's The first part of the book describes the Gambit Accepted, and others). problems you will encounter in playing the Finally, by tradition we conclude the book opening, and what is needed to successfully with extracts from the games of pupils at the solve them at the board. Here the central school, annotated by grandmaster Yusupov. place is given over to lectures by World Here there are models of high-level, full Championship Candidates Artur Yusupov blooded opening struggles, as well as and Sergey Dolmatov (Sergey is an active examples of instructive opening mistakes. collaborator at our school). In my view, it is exceptionally interesting to follow the thought In his comments on the pupils' games, train of these outstanding grandmasters, Yusupov focuses on those general prob who openly describe what they think about lems of opening play, which he described in during a game, how they find the best the lecture which begins our book. When moves, and why they sometimes go wrong. studying his lecture, it probably makes sense to immediately refer to the concluding But in order to learn to take correct chapter, and examine them in parallel. decisions, an acquaintance with 'theory' alone is insufficient. Practical training is also This book has been created by a team of needed. At each session of the school we authors. Apart from the author of these lines invariably arrange various events , competi and grandmasters Yusupov and Dolmatov, it tions, and so on. One such training session also includes articles by grandmaster Yuri is described in the first part of the book. Razuvaev and national masters Boris Zlotnik, 8 Introduction
Alexey Kosikov and Vladimir Vulfson. I am of opening preparation, and suggest new sincerely grateful to all of them. I hope that ideas to him in this field, the authors will the compiled views of different experts on consider their objective fulfilled. one and the same problems will prove For this new edition the text has been interesting to the readers, and impart a checked anew, many analytical corrections certain diversity to the book. have been included, and the chapter on the If our work should force the reader to think King's Indian Attack has been considerably about the difficult but fascinating problems expanded. 9
PART I
Artur Yusupov
General Principles of Opening Play
et us ask ourselves the question: what opponent's development? Of course, the L does the strategy of opening play com ideal is if you can combine the one with the prise? If you look at the games of strong other. But if there is a choice, in every masters, you will see that the players aim specific case you must act in accordance above all for the rapid mobilisation of their with the situation- here there is no universal forces. And this is understandable: the prescription. But even so, it is better not to greater the number of pieces in play, the forget about your own development. greater the attacking possibilities. Rapid What else concerns a player in the opening? development is the basis of opening Of course, the fo rming of the pawn structure. play. It is possible that at an early stage you will There is a second important factor: from the be able to provoke a weakening in the very first moves a struggle for the centre opponent's pawn fo rmation, or, as they say, develops. The centre is a kind of dominant spoil his pawns. Remember: much de height in a chess battle: whoever seizes it pends on what sort of pawn structure will subsequently have the better prospects. you obtain - fa vourable or unfavourable. Naturally, from the very start both sides And, finally, fr om the very fi rst moves a focus on the central squares e4, e5, d4 and struggle fo r the initiative develops, and d5. As a rule, players aim either to this is perhaps the chief essence of occupy the centre with pawns, or to opening play. Can you imagine a game develop piece pressure on it. nowadays, where for some time the two Along with this, the two sides try to forestall players simply bring out their pieces, and each other's intentions. It makes sense then begin looking to see what has hap with some move to delay the opponent 's pened and what do to next? Of cou rse not. It development or hinder his actions - it is is natural that White, who has the right of the probable that the 'loss of a tempo ' will first move, should usually aim in the opening subsequently be justified. You should to gain a lead in development, occupy the not begrudge a tempo spent on prevent centre and be the first to create threats. ing him fr om castling - with this you will Before turning to specific examples, I should consolidate your lead in development. Thus draw your attention to another important the third principle of opening play is to fight factor. Th e modern handling of the open against the opponent's ideas, with the aim of ing is inseparably linked with a plan of hindering his development and preventing play in the middlegame (a nd sometimes him from gaining control of the centre. even the contours of a fu ture endgame Yo u ask, which is more important: to have to be taken into account!). And today develop your own pieces or hinder the it is hard to draw a clear line between the 10 � General Principles of Opening Play opening and the middlegame, especially We see how with each move new forces since, although in somewhat different form, come into play. White occupies the centre all the listed principles of opening strategy with pawns, while Black prepares to exert are also applicable to the middlegame. piece pressure on it. 7 tt'ic3 i.fS And so, let us examine in more detail the Not a frequently-occurring move, but a first opening principle (rapid mobilisation of perfectly possible one. Black develops his the forces). We should remember several bishop and establishes control over the simple rules: central e4-square, with the intention of
1) do not move one and the same piece playing 8 . ..tt'i e4. twice (there should be a serious motivation 8 dS for such moves); Here there are also other continuations - 2) don't waste time on prophylactic moves .l::i.e1, b2-b3 and tt'ie1 . The move made is with the rooks' pawns - it is more important also quite logical: with gain of tempo White to develop the pieces quickly; increases his spatial gains in the centre. 3) don't bring out the queen prematurely: the 8... tt'ias choice of a place fo r it is an exceptionally For the second time in the opening Black important problem, since the character of moves the same piece, but in the given the subsequent play can largely depend on instance this is justified: firstly, he was the position of the queen; forced to do this, and secondly, 8 . ..tt'i a5 4) don't launch a premature, unprepared creates a counter-threat to the c4-pawn. attack; 5) don't go pawn-grabbing, especially in open positions, where a lead in develop ment has enormous significance; remember that a tempo in the opening is sometimes more important than a pawn.
We will now analyse a game of mine with grandmaster Boris Gulko. I think that from its example the principles of mobilising the forces and opening play in general will become more understandable.
Yusupov - Gulko Reykjavik 1990 Now the question arises: what should White King's Indian Defence play? 1 d4 tt'if6 9 tt'id2?! 2 c4 g6 The move made in the game has certain 3 tt'if3 i.g7 drawbacks. At d2 the knight blocks the path 4 g3 0-0 of the bishop on c1 . I was hoping that the 5 i.g2 d6 threat of 1 0 b4 would force the opponent to 6 0-0 tt'ic6 block the position on the queenside by General Principles of Opening Play 11
... c7-c5. Then White gains a tempo by Note how consistently Gulko brings new advancing his pawn to e4, and later com forces into play, gradually building up the pletes his development by 'ii'c2, b2-b3, pressure. Exploiting White's routine play, �b2 and so on. Alas, events took a different which has hampered his development, turn. Black has already seized the initiative. Now 9l2Jd4! looks more natural and logical. The he is obliged to follow a very important bishop at f5 is attacked, and the c4-pawn is principle, which was formulated long ago by indirectly defended: if 9 ...lt:J xc4? there fol Steinitz: the player with an advantage is lows 10 tt::lxf5 gxf5 11 ifd3, and White obliged to attack, as otherwise he risks regains his pawn, obtaining the better pawn losing his advantage! structure. After9 ...i.. d7 10 ifd3 White has a 13 .l:!.e1 promising position. White tries somehow to establish coordina 9 ... c6! tion between his pieces. He prepares to After gaining some lead in development, my continue his development with 14 tt::lf1 and opponent resolutely opens the position. at the same time he prevents the manoeu Now I was faced with a new problem: how to vre of the black bishop via e2 to a6, where it extinguish Black's intended initiative? I was would exert dangerous pressure. unable to solve this task and I got into 13 ... b5 difficulties. Here there were also other possibilities, The logical follow-up to 9 lt:Jd2 was the 13... if b6, for example. 13... i.. d7 also came energetic 10 b4!?. The main idea, which I into consideration, vacating the g4-square did not see during the game, is after for the manoeuvre of the knight to e5 and
10 ... lbxd5 11 cxd5 i..xc3 to play 12 e4! (I planning to meet 14 lt:Jf1 with 14... lt:Jc4. only considered 12 i..a3? i..xd2). It is 14 a3 probable that White will gain two pieces for a Here too it was possible to play 14 ...i.. d7!? rook, but in return Black will have several 15 lt:Jf1 lt:Jc4 16 tt::le3 tt::lg4. But Gulko found a pawns. It is not easy to evaluate such a much more interesting continuation, based situation; it is quite possible that we have on the same general evaluation of the here a position of dynamic equilibrium. position: Black has a lead in development, In the game White played routinely. and ther efor e it is advantageous for him 10 e4?! i..g4! to open up the game. With this cunning move Black provokes new weaknesses: either the advance f2-f3, which allows Black tactical possibilities involving ...if b6+, or the move of the queen to c2, where afterthe opening of the c-file it will come under the unpleasant pressure of the rook on c8. 11 'Yi'c2 cxd5 12 cxd5 Capturing with the e-pawn would have been even worse: in this case the black bishop would have gained the excellent f5-square. 12 . . . l:tc8 12 � General Principles of Opening Play
14 ... e6! not yet possible to predict how it will all end. After the exchange of pawns on d5 the 17 h3 i.fS bishop will obtain the f5-square, which is A tempting reply. Also possible was 17... i. e6, extremely unpleasant for White. If he replies in reply to which there would have followed 15 h3?!, there follows 15... exd 5 16 hxg4 d4, 18 exd5 i.f5 19 .l:r.xe8+ 'it'xe8 20 'iff1 . White and my pawn structure will be hopelessly is a pawn up, although Black, of course, has spoiled , i.e. Black transforms one form of strong counterplay. advantage into another: a lead in develop 18 g4 ment into a superior pawn structure. The only move. White, albeit at the cost of a I had to try another method of defence, pawn, nevertheless manages to complete which can be expressed roughly as follows: his development. when everything is bad, it is already too late 18 ... i.xe4 to fear anything! 19 t'Llxe4 15 'ii'd3 The knight has finally left the d2-square! What to do? I was already resigned to the fact that I would be unable to complete my 19 ... t'Llxe4 development by normal means, and I try In view of White's retarded development, everything possible to complicate the play. regaining the pawn by 20 i.xe4?! would Such tactics can sometimes give quite good have been equivalent to capitulation: 20 ... practical results, although with correct play dxe4 21 'it'xd6 'ii'h4!. 20 'ii'xd5? is also bad on the part of the opponent they should on account of the very strong reply 20 ....l:!. e5!. probably be punished. Objectively the quiet 20 t'Llxa7!? 15 t'Llf1 (15 ...exd5 16 exd5) was neverthe In this game White acts against all the rules, less the lesser evil. and with accurate play by the opponent he 15 ... exdS should have been punished . But I was 16 t'Llxb5 aware that after the 'normal' development of Whereas for White the opening has not yet events I had nothing to hope for. ended, Black, of course, is already deep in 20 ... .l:!.b8 the middlegame. Now he could have played In the event of 21 'ir'xd5?! the tactical stroke 16... 'tlf b6!?, securing a retreat for his bishop 21 ...t'Ll xf2!? suggests itself, for example: 22 to d7. The advanced position of the bishop .Uxe8+ �xe8 23 'it>xf2 t'Llb3 24 t'Llc6 with an at g4 is perhaps the only defect of his game unclear game. But the inclusion of 21 ...U e5! (there is a possibility that the bishop may be would appear to set White altogether insolu cut offfrom the main forces). ble problems: his pieces are uncoordinated, But from the standpoint of fighting fo r the and the same terrible blow on f2 is threat initiative, Gulko found perhaps an even ened (22 'it'd3 t'Llxf2 23 �xf2 'it'h4+!). better move. Naturally, he must exploit the opportunity to 16 ... Ue8!? bring his hitherto inactive bishop into play. Yet another black piece comes into play ... 21 i.e3 i.xb2 From this moment on, balancing on the 22 .Uab1 edge of the abyss, I time after time found If 22 Uad1 the reply 22 ...t'Ll c3 is unpleasant, resources for continuing the struggle. I was for example: 23 Ud2 d4 24 Uxb2 1:1.xb2 25 simply fortunate that the position proved 'ii'xd4 t'Lle2+ 26 Uxe2 Uxe2, and if 27 i.h6, quite complicated and for the moment it is then simply 27 ... U8e5, blocking the danger- General Principles of Opening Play 'Ll 13 ous diagonal and remaining with a great The correct reaction was 24 ... 'ii'd7!. But material advantage. Gulko did not notice that in the variation 25 22 ... l:tb3 'ii'xa5 lt:Jxb1 26 l:txb1 there is the deadly Gulko conducts the game purposefully and 26 ... �c3!. White would have had to con finds a concrete way of increa�ing his tinue trying to stir up trouble with 26 �c6 (26 advantage. .lbe8+ 'ii'xe8 27 �c6 'ii'b8 is no better), but not for long: 26 ...l:txe1+ 27 'ii'xe1 'ii'xa7 28 23 'ii'xd5 'ii'e8+ c:i;g7 29 �e7 .:!.b8, and Black wins. White would have lost quickly after 23 'ii'c2 Fortunately for me, however, Gulko was 'i'b8 24 lt::lc6 lt::lxc6 25 'ii'xc6 .l:.c8. tempted by a queen sacrifice. 23 ... lt::lc3 24 . . . lt:Jxb1 ? 25 �d8 l:f.xe1 + 26 �f1 A completely unclear position has arisen, in which the threats of the two sides would appear to be mutually compensating. 26 . . . lt:Jc3
Here there is an interesting calculating problem - find the continuation which promises White the best practical chances. In essence, there are three possibilities: 1) 24 'ii'xb3 lt::lxb3 25 .l:!.xb2 lt::lc5. In my view, Black has the advantage (although it can happen that such a surrender of material will help to repair the position); 27 'ii'd2! 2) 24 lt::lc6 - objectively, perhaps, this 27 'ii'xa5? was bad: 27... lt:Je2+ 28 c:i;g2 counter-stroke is the strongest. However, li:Jf4+ 29 c:i;g1 lt:Jxh3+ 30 c:i;g2 li:Jf4+ 31 c:i;g1 after 24 . .. lt::lxd5 25 lt:Jxd8 lt:Jxe3 Black, of �c3, and therefore White takes control of course, has an obvious advantage (for the f4-square. However, 27 'ii'a8!? was also example, 26 .l:.xe3 l:tbxe3 27 fxe3 �xa3); possible. If 27 ... lt:Je2+? there follows not 28 3) The move which I made in the game, and c:i;g2? li:Jf4+, but 28 c:i;h2! c:i;g7 29 �e 7 �e5+ on which I was pinning my hopes. 30 f4!, in the event of 27 ....l:.e8 there is the 24 �g5!? pretty reply 28 lt:Jc8!, while 27 ... c:i;g7 28 Here Black needed to solve the last difficult c:i;g2! (but not 28 �xa5? lt:Je2+) enables problem, after which he would most prob White to escape in good time from the ably have gained a deserved win. unpleasant pin on the back rank. 14 <;t> General Principles of Opening Play
27 ... tt:'!e2+ Dvoretsky suggested the interesting varia tion 27 ... lld1!? 28 'ili'e3 tt:'!c4 29 'ili'e8+ c;i;>g7, and now either 30 !il..e7 tt:'!e2+31 c;i;>g2 tt:'!f4+ 32 c;i;>h2 tt:'!e6 33 !il..f8+! (33 !il..xc4? !il..e5+ leads to mate) 33 ...tt:'!xf8 34 !il..xc4 l:.b7, or 30 c;i;>h2!? l:txf131 !il..e7l::txf2+ 32 c;i;>g1h6 33 ..tf8+! (not immediately 33 c;i;>xf2? tt:'le4+) 33... c;i;>h7 34 c;i;>xf2 - in each case with chances for both sides. 28 c;i;>g2 iLc3 29 'ili'h6 29 'ili'xd6 is also possible. - position after 34 ...ii.f8 - 29 ... tt:'!c4 29 ... iLg7 30 'ili'd2 !il..c3 would have led to a 35 ... fxg6 draw. 36 'ii'xc4 l:txf1 30 tt:'!c6 !il..g7 37 'ili'xf4!? 31tt:'!e7+ c;i;>f8?! 37 'ii'xb3 c;i;>xd838 'ikc4 (38 h4!?) 38... l:txf2+ A mistake. Correct was 31... c;i;>h8! 32 tt:'!xg6+! 39 c;i;>g3 tt:'!xh3! 40 a4 was also advanta fxg6 33 !il..f6! ltb7 34 !il..xe2l:lxe2 35 !il..xg7+ geous to White. lhg7 36 'iff4! with equal chances. 37 ... .U.xa3 32 'ifxh7 tt:'!f4+ 38 iLh4? 33 c;i;>h2 c;i;>e8? 38 !il..f6!, controlling the a1-square, was In the opinion of grandmaster Igor Zaitsev, more accurate. Black would still have retained excellent 38 ... !taa1 drawing chances by continuing 33... l:r.xe7! 39 'ii'e4+ 34 iLxe7+c;i;>xe7 35 'ili'xg7 tt:'!e5 (or 35... tt:'!d2) Also quite good was 39 'ii'f6 l:th1+ 40 c;i;>g3! 36 !il..g2 .l:txa3. (after 40 c;i;>g2 White has to reckon with 34 'ifg8+! 40 ... l:.ag1+ 41 c;i;>t3 l:.xh3+ 42 c;i;>e2, and now Not 34 'ii'xg7? l:txf1 and then 35... .:Xh3 not 42... c;i;>d7? 43 !il..g5, but 42... !txh4! 43 mate. Wxh4 iLe7 44 'ikh8+ c;t>t? 45 'ifh7+ c;i;>f6) 34 ... iLf8 40 ...l:.hg1+ 41 c;i;>t3. Black would also not have saved the game 39 . . . c;i;>f7 with 34... c;i;>d7 35 'ifxf7 l:txf1 36 tt:'!c6+! c;i;>xc6 40 "ii'f3+ c;i;>g8 37 'ifxc4+ c;i;>d7 38 'ili'xb3. 41 'ii'd5+ c;i;>g7 42 'ii'b7+ c;i;>g8 (see diagram) 43 !il..g3 35tt:'!xg6! White prepares h3-h4. Afraid of coming The distance between a win and a loss under an attack, Black decides to transpose proved to be very short. After this blow into a difficult bishop ending. Black's position is no longer defensible (if 43 ... l:th1+ 35... tt:'!xg6 there simply follows 36 !il..xc4 ). 44 'ii'xh1 l:txh1+ General Principles of Opening Play 15
45 '>t>xh1 'it>f7 noteworthy in that it demonstrates the 46'1t>g2 �f6 importance of continuing to fight in any circumstances. Yes, White ended up in an 46 ... '>t>e6 was better. inferior position. But he did not lose heart, 47 f4 d5 and tried to initiate counterplay and seize 48�f2 i.d6 the initiative. In the end he was able to set 49 '>t>f3 'it>e6 his opponent difficult practical problems, 50� d4 i.e7! and the latter deviated from the correct 51 '>t>g3 i.b4! course ... 52 h4 i.e1+ The following is a somewhat simpler exam 53Wh 3 i.d2 ple. In contrast to the game with Gulko, for 54Wg 3 i.e1+ my meeting with Boris Spassky I was well 55 i.f2 i.c3 prepared. 56Wf3 i.g 7
More tenacious was 56 ... i.f6!? 57 h5 gxh5 Spassky - Yusupov 58 f5+ Wf7 59 gxh5, but even then it is Linares 1990 probable that the position cannot be held - Ruy Lopez White plays i.e3, �g4, i.g5, then 'it>f3-e2- d3-c2-b3-a4, and the d5-pawn is lost. 1 e4 e5 57 i.e 1!? 2 lLlf3 lbc6 57 i.b6!?, preparing We3 and i.d4, was 3 i.b5 a6 also good. 4i.a4 tbf6 57 ... i..f8?! 5 lbc3 58 i.c3 i.h6?! Spassky often employs this ancient continu 59 f5+! gxf5 ation, which at one time was considered virtually the main variation in the Ruy Lopez, 60 g5 but then almost went out of use. Black resigned in view of 60... i.f861 h5 'it>f7 From the common sense point of view, there 62 'it>f4. is nothing wrong with the move 5 lbc3: I should like once again to draw your White brings out a piece towards the centre. attention to Gulko's exceptionally consistent However, those who have studied the Ruy play in this game, right up to his fatal Lopez will know that it is nevertheless better mistake on the 24th move. Already in the to play 5 0-0, in order subsequently to create opening he began fighting for the initiative, a pawn centre with c2-c3 and d2-d4 (which and after gaining a lead in development he the knight on c3 hinders). continued purposefully building on it, bring 5... b5 ing more and more new pieces into the 5 ... i.c5!? is also possible. battle, not shunning temporary sacrifices. In this connection one can single out his 6 i.b3 i.e7 moves 14 ...e6! and 16 ....l:!.e8!. 7 d3 d6 As for White, after violating one of the main 8 lLld5 opening principles (the rapid mobilisation of It is tempting, of course, to strengthen the the forces) and conceding the initiative, he control of an important diagonal and in should have lost. But this game is also particular of the central d5-square. But 8 16 w General Principles of Opening Play tLldS leads to simplification and effectively to from the structure of the position. If Black an equal game. were able to make the moves ... �b7, 8... tLla5 . ..tLld7 and ...f7-f5, the play would be to his advantage. But he must act so as not to 9 tLlxe7 'ifxe7 allow the unpleasant sortie of the white 10 0-0 0-0 knight to h4. Therefore in my preparations Strangely enough, a novelty. 10 ...c5 is for the game I intended beginning with the usually played. retreat of the knight. 11 �d2 12 ... tLld7 1 This rather inactive move was also em Black has successfully solved his opening ployed earlier by Spassky. problems, without spending time on ... c7- 11.... tLlxb3 c5 - a move which, generally speaking, is 12 axb3 useful, but not immediately necessary. Here White should have displayed caution and prepared for the opponent's operations in the centre. But Spassky did not sense in time the danger of his position. Indeed, at this moment it is not easy to imagine that the situation may radically change literally within a few moves. 13 l:ie1?! 13 �aS cS 14 tLld2, as suggested later by the ex-world champion, would have led to equality. 13 ... �b7 Everything is ready for ...f7-f5. It was high time for White to think about defence, but to his misfortune he decided to pour further Let's think a little about the resulting fuel onto the fire. position. How would you go about solving 14 d4? Black's opening problems? 14 �gS f6 15 �h4 with the idea of 16 tLld2 12 ...c5 ? Well, a perfectly possible move, was better, when Black has only a slight strengthening Black's control over the cen advantage. tre. Have you any other suggestions? 14 ... ffi! 12... 4Jd7, preparing ...f7-f5 ? A good idea. Here White could have captured on eS, but Develop the bishop at b7? Yes, this comes the variations would have developed in my into Black's plans. But I did not want to play favour, for example: 15 dxeS fxe4 16 exd6 this immediately on account of the strong �f7! 17 �c3 l::tae8 18 tLlgS 'ii'xf2+ 19 'it>h1 reply 13 tLlh4.The pieces should be brought e3 20 'it'g4 hS 21 'ii'g3 cxd6 with advantage. out in the most accurate way, taking account of the opponent's resources. After lengthy reflection Spassky played differently. Let us sum up what has been said. Indeed, here the undermining of the central e4-pawn 15 exf5 l:.xf5 by ...f7-f5 suggests itself. It simply stems 16 dxe5 General Principles of Opening Plav 17
20 .l:txe1 .lli.xf3 21 .l:te7 .l:tc8 At the cost of enormous efforts I neverthe less managed to win this endgame, but only thanks to a serious mistake by my opponent. This game shows that aiming for control of the centre and paying careful attention to similar actions by the opponent enables many opening problems to be solved. There is another important factor: the specific plans of the two sides are determined by the pawn structure at a fairly early stage of the game . 16 ... .Uxf3! The next point. When developing the pieces, This sacrifice suggests itself. Of course, for tried to think what you will be doing a few the sake of activating the bishop at b7 Black moves later, what direction the play will take. does not begrudge giving up the exchange. Only, this should not be taken literally, that The consequences of the primitive 16 ... .lli.xf3 supposedly already in the opening you must were less clear: 17 gxf3 .l:txe5 (not 17 ... firmly devise and develop a plan, which will l2lxe5? 18 f4 'ir'h4 19 fxe5 .l:txf2 20 .lli.f4!) 18 lead directly to a win somewhere in the l:!.xe5 'ir'xe5 19 'ir'e 1. endgame. No, of course not. I have in mind fairly short operations, of three or four 17 gxf3 tt:Jxe5 moves, aimed at improving your position 18 .lli.f4 and worsening the position of the opponent. 18 f4 would have lost quickly to 18 ...'ii' f7 or In essence, an entire game is a sum of 18 ... 'i'h4. mini-operations, united by a general strategic idea, incorp orated in the open 18.. .. tt:Jxf3+?! ing chosen by you. Here I was rather faint-hearted and decided to take play into an endgame with How such short operations are planned will an extra pawn, which I might not have won. be seen in the following game. Of course, I should have continued the attack, but as bad luck would have it I made a mistake in my calculations. I thought that Yusupov- Lj ubojevic after 18 ... .Uf8 19 .lli.xe5 dxe5 20 'ii'd4 a not Tilburg 1987 altogether clear position would arise. How Queen's Gambit ever, it was sufficient to continue this 1 d4 lt:Jf6 variation slightly, to realise that the opposite 2 c4 was true: 20 ... ii'f6 21 ii'g4 .lli.xf3, and Black e6 has a powerful attack. [After 22 "ikg3 e4 23 3 lt:Jf3 d5 'iixcl its strength would still have had to be 4 tt:Jc3 .lli.e7 demonstrated- Dvoretsky.] 5 .lli.f4 0-0 In the game, alas, it all turned out far more 6 e3 prosaically. A well-known theoretical position. Ljubomir 19 'ir'xf3 ii'xe1 + Ljubojevic chooses a continuation which is 18
13 .U.c2 and then .Ud2 ? Well, this manoeu and drive my pieces away from the centre. vre is not bad, but I have something else in 15 ... .Ua6 mind: how would you react to the opponent's If 15... .U c8 there could have followed 16 last move? Remember an old procedure in lt:Ja7! with the idea of exploiting the weak such positions: by advancing your a ness of the c6-square - incidentally, a fairly pawn, you emphasise the instability of typical operation with a knight on e5. the knight on b6. 13 a4! Now Black faces a difficult dilemma: on the one hand, he does not want to allow his knight to be driven away, but on the other hand, after ...a7 -a5 White gains the b5- square. What then should he do? You suggest playing 13... d4 ? Let's see: 14 exd4 cxd4 15 lbb5 lt:Jfd5 16 �g3 and it is hard to defend the d4-pawn. But in itself the idea is interesting. With this pawn structure White must constantly reckon with the possible breakthrough ...d5-d4. In some cases it may prove rather unpleasant. 13 ... aS Think now: what would you have played White's first big achievement. Now it was here? Should White immediately play ac possible to immediately invade with the tively, or should he delay this and for the knight on b5, aiming to use the lbb5 + �f4 moment strengthen his position, denying construction for operations on the d6- and the opponent counterplay? This problem is c7-squares. But after some thought I de one of the most difficult when trying to cided for the moment not to deviate from my convert a positional advantage. plan and to retain the pressure on the d5- In this game I solved it incorrectly, by pawn. hurrying to begin concrete action. White had 14�f3 �e8 available the excellent move 16.b3!, se If Black had replied 14... � c8, I would indeed curely fixing the opponent's pawn structure have considered the manoeuvre 15 .Uc2 and and allowing the pressure to be built up 16 .U.d2, in order to strengthen the pressure unhindered. on the d5-pawn. But after the move made I 16lbd3?! could no longer resist the temptation to White's choice involved an oversight in one exploit the b5-square. of the variations. It is quite obvious that in 15lbb5! reply Black will advance his c-pawn, which The play takes on a tactical character. The 16 b3! would have prevented. unpleasant threat of 16lbxf7 and 17 i..c7 is 16 ... c4 created, and to parry it Black is forced to put 17 i..c7 his rook in a rather awkward position. In the event of 17 tt:Jc 7 cxd3 18 lt:Jxa6 i..xa6 At the same time lbb5 is not only an 19 i..c7 ii'd7 20 i..xb6 i..b4! Black would attacking move, but also a prophylactic one: have gained good compensation for the Black was now intending to play 15... .il. d6 exchange. 20 w General Principles of Opening Play
17 ... 'ii'd7! The white pieces - the knight on b5 and the bishop on c7 - are unexpectedly hanging. Thus if 18 lt:lf4 there follows the tactical stroke 18... lt:l xa4!. 18lt:le5 'ii'c8 19 b3!? 19 ..txb6 .U.Xb6 20 lt:lg4 would have given an equal game. 19 ... lt:la8! 20 bxc4 lt:lxc7 20 ...d4?! was dubious on account of 21 i.d5! �f8 22 'ii'f3. 25lt:ld6!! ir'xd6 21 cxdS ..td6! If 25 .. Jlxc5, then 26 lt:lxb7. 22lt:lc4! 26 .U.xaS ..txdS Black would have gained an obvious advan {Neither player noticed the clever reply tage after 22 lt:lc6 'ii'd7! (with the idea of 26 ... i.a6! with the idea of arresting the white 23 ...lt:l cxd5) 23 e4 lt:lxe4 24 i.xe4 .l:!.xe4 25 rook ona5 . If 27 r!e1 there fo llows 27 ...fi b4!, lt:lb8 'ike? 26 lt:lxa6 lt:lxa6. while if 27 ..te2- 27 ...'ik b6!. White is obliged Here Black had various possibilities. One of to play 27 .U.xa6lbxa6 28 'it'd4 with roughly them was an attempt to simplify the position equal chances. But this means that the by the counter-sacrifice of a piece: 22 ... move 22.. .i. c5!? should not be condemned i. 'i!? lt:lcxd5. However, after xh2+?! 23 xh2 - Dvoretsky.] 24 'i!?g 1 with the idea of 25 lt:lcd6 or 25 'ir'd4 27 'ir'd4! White has the advantage. It was probably best to play 22 .....t b4!, placing the bishop on The decisive move. Now the game is a defended square. In reply there could decided. have followed 23 d6!? or 23 e4!? (23 ...lt:l xe4 27 ... 'ir'e6 24 d6 with the threat of 25 d7). 27 ...lt:l e6? 28 .U.xd5 In the game Lj ubojevic committed a tactical 28 ..txdS lt:lxdS oversight, leading to defeat. 29l:td1 .l:tc8 22 ... ..tcS? 30 :cs! .U.xcS 23lt:lxa5! l:txas 31 iixcS hS 24lhc5 'it'd8 32 aS 'ii'e4 Here 24 .. .'it'b8 25 'it'd2 lt:la6 26 llc4 would 33 h3 g6 not have saved Black. Lj ubojevic was 34 'ir'c6 'it'b4 hoping to disentangle himself with the move 35 a6 'it'as in the game, but he overlooked a simple rejoinder. 36 'li'b7 'ii'a4 37l:!.b1 Black resigned. (see diagram) Let us now single out for what reason this game is of interest to us. In particular we see General Principles of Opening Play CLJ 21 that the struggle for the centre led to the structures? To some extent the game also creation of a specific pawn structure (hang gives answers to some of these questions. ing pawns), which influenced to a significant degree the subsequent plans of the two The following example will certainly gladden sides. Such pawn structures are a separate supporters of the Dutch Defence. This is a theme, which should be studied seriously. game of mine with grandmaster Alexander Here there are rules and exceptions to the Beliavsky, in which the plans of the two rules, there are features which are common sides were determined by a complex pawn to all structures of the given type and those structure, so typical of the 'Dutch'. which are typical only of some specific positions; also known are the standard Beliavsky - Yusupov plans, one of which White tried to follow. 54th USSR Championship, Minsk 1987 The second thing, to which I consider it Dutch Defence important to draw your attention, is this: it 1 d4 fS would seem that, by exchanging his central pawns, already in the opening White volun 2 c4 tt:lf6 ta rily conceded the centre. But in return he 3 g3 e6 set up strong piece pressure on the oppo 4 ii.g2 dS nent's central pawns and transformed them Black is aiming for a 'stonewall' set-up. His into real weaknesses. Thus the game forces aim is clear: to establish as close control as us to think about the problem of the possible over the e4-square - probably it is transformation of a pawn centre: it may be simply hard to imagine closer control. replaced by pieces, but sometimes it even However, this is achieved at the cost of a makes sense to give it up altogether. substantial weakening of a whole complex Ge nerally speaking, a pawn centre is good of dark squares. The e5-square is deprived not in itself, but for how it can be used for of pawn protection, and the fate of the game concrete aims. Say, for driving back the will largely be determined by how Black can opponent's pieces (remember how we care counter the opponent's intention to occupy fu lly looked out for the move ...d5 -d4), to this point. delay his development, or to obtain conven 5 tt:lf3 c6 ient squares fo r our own pieces under the cover of the pawns. But if, as in the game 6 0-0 ii.d6 just examined, the centre does not fulfil Earlier Black more often played the 'stone these objectives, it can easily become wall' with his bishop on e7. It seems to me vulnerable and be transformed into a target that at d6 the bishop is more logically for the opponent to attack. placed. Since the dark squares have been Of course, all that has been said by no weakened, it is desirable that the pieces means exhausts the problem of the pawn should defend them as far as possible. centre. Very important, for example, is the Why were they afraid to play 6 ...ii. d6 ? They difficult problem of pawn tensions (between thought that after 7 ii.f4 , by exchanging pawns on c4 and d5, d4 and c5, and so on). bishops, White would strengthen his control Here a whole array of questions arises. of e5 and gain an appreciable advantage. Wh ich tension should be retained, and However, it transpired that in this case too which not? How should these dynamic Black can put up a perfectly good fight. In tensions be maintained? At what moments reply to 7 i.f4 I recommend the immediate should they be transformed into more static exchange of bishops - 7 ...ii. xf4 , somewhat 22 � General Principles of Opening Play weakening the opponent's kingside. Other prepared for this. Therefore I chose the wise e2-e3 will be played, after which the other plan, involving the manoeuvre of the exchange on f4 will become extremely bishop to h5, where it will also be taking part dangerous for Black: White will reply exf4 in the play. and develop pressure on the e-file. This 9 ... i.d7!? procedure is worth bearing in mind. 10lt:le5 i.e8 7 b3 11 lt:ld3 Transparently hinting at the possible ex Not having any great experience in playing change of the dark-square bishops on a3 - the Dutch Defence, Beliavsky fails to find an an operation that is rather advantageous for effective plan. The time spent on playing the White. knight from f3 to d3 could probably have 7... 'ike7 been used more suitably. Instead of the I am agreeable to the exchange, but only move in the game White should have with the inclusion of the move a2-a4. Why? strengthened his position in the centre by 11 Because in this case the unequal value of e3 and subsequently perhaps even played the two sides' last moves will tell: the f2-f4. developing move with the queen is more 11 ... lt:lbd7 useful than the advance of the rook's pawn. 12 e3 During the time that White spends on playing his knight from a3 to a more active Not a very good decision. It would appear position, Black has time to prepare ...e6- e5. that White is operating without a definite plan. He should have accepted the fact that 8 i.b2 0-0 he has no advantage and played 12 f4 !?, 9 lt:lc3 securing himself an equal game. A natural developing move. However, I don't like it. The set-up introduced in his time by Tigran Petrosian is much better: develop the knight on d2 and subsequently aim for control of the e5-square with both knights (lt:lf3-e5-d3 and lt:ld2-f3). Incidentally, in the Dutch Defence White should be very cautious about occupying the e5-square. If, after an exchange of pieces, a pawn ends up on this square, Black will no longer have a weakness on e5 and usually he escapes from his opening difficulties. Now I have to try and solve the problem of my queenside development, and above all the question of my light-square bishop's What can be said about this position? Black 'employment' - virtually the main cause of is very solidly placed in the centre and his headaches in the Dutch Defence. Two pawn structure is sound. Therefore he fundamentally different plans are possible. already has the right to consider active play. The first is to fianchetto the bishop on b7, hoping subsequently to play ...c6- c5. How 12 ... g5! ever, with his knight on c3 White is well If you do not control the situation in the General Principles of Opening Play 23 centre, it is better to refrain from such on f4 (afterthe natural 16... "ir' xg5), but... actions. Because in reply you risk receiving a blow in the centre, dashing your hopes. But in the given instance there is no danger of this, since Black is closely controlling a whole complex of central squares. And the fact that he has set his sights on the kingside is quite understandable - nearly all of his pieces are aimed there. It follows that Black's plan stems intrinsically both from his pawn structure, and the arrangement of his pieces. I think that my position is already somewhat more pleasant. Apparently Beliavsky's evaluation of the situation was the same, otherwisehe would not have aimed for simplification. 13 a4 16 ... lt:ixc3! White reverts to the idea of exchanging the 17 �xc3 i.e2 dark-square bishops, hoping in this way to The knight on f4 could indeed have become extinguish the opponent's initiative. a defensive bulwark, and therefore I happily 13 ... ii.g6 give up my bishop for it. But for the sake of retaining this knight, it perhaps made sense 13 ....t h5 14 'iic1 lt:ie4 also came into for my opponent to part with the exchange: consideration, with somewhat the better 18 lt:if4 !? i.xf1 19 .l:!.xf1 . chances. The point of the move in the game is to forestall White's obvious plan: 'iic1 and 18 �fe1 i.xd3 �a3. Now if 14 'iic1 there follows, of course, 19 'ii'xd3 'it'xg5 14 .. .f4. Black has achieved a marked advantage. 14 f4 What does it consist of? In particular, the Beliavsky insists on carrying out his plan. structure of the position. He is threatening 14 ... i.h5 the extremely unpleasant plan of attacking the h2-g3 pawn chain with his h-pawn, after There was no longer anything fo r the bishop which appreciable weaknesses will arise in to do on g6. White's position. 15 "ir'c1 In order to neutralise this plan, Beliavsky Evidently White should have decided on 15 carried out the following exchanging opera This looks a little strange, but, on the .if3!?. tion: other hand, it is already time for him to think 20 i.a3 i.xa3 about defence. Besides, it may well turn out that soon the bishop on g2 will be a worse 21 .l:.xa3 lt:if6 piece that its opposite number on h5 - after 22 �f1 h5! all, it is running up against the securely 23 'iif4 �xf4 defended d5-pawn. 24 gxf4 15 ... lt:ie4 Despite the simplification, the resulting 16 fxg5 endgame is still difficult for White. I was the Played in the hope of establishing the knight first to occupy the g-file and in addition the 24 � General Principles of Opening Play white bishop proved to be much weaker 5e4 tt:Jxc3 than my knight. This is a fairly standard 6 bxc3 'stonewall' situation: the bishop runs up A fashionable variation of the Grunfeld against a solid rock of black pawns, whereas Defence. White has a pawn centre, which the agile knight creates threats without Black tries to undermine and attack with his hindrance. pieces. Later Black was able to win in instructive 6 ... Ji.g7 fashion, by taking play into a rook endgame. 7 Ji.c4 0-0 Moreover, again a position with a structural 8 tt:Je2 c5 advantage was created: afterthe exchange of minor pieces on the e4-square, the black 9 0-0 tt:Jc6 pawn which moved there seriously cramped 10 .1i.e3 the opponent. Here my opponent chose not the most Of the instructive features in this game I critical plan. would single out Black's attitude to the 10 ... tt:Ja5 centre: he paid constant attention to it and The usual continuation is 1 O ...Ji. g4. By endeavoured to control the important e5- removing the attack on the central d4-pawn, square with his pieces. And only after he grants me greater scope for manoeu- creating a secure position in the centre vring. did Black risk beginning active play on 11 Ji.d3 b6 the kingside. 12 .l:.c1 "ilic7 I will show you two more games from that The immediate capture on d4 came into same 54th USSR Championship in Minsk. consideration, since one of the problems of The first, with grandmaster Vitaly Tsesh such positions is the d4-d5 advance. In kovsky, is interesting for the way that White many cases it can be advantageous for made use of his pawn centre. In principle, White to advance his d-pawn, although in this is already a middlegame problem, but reply Black usually initiates counterplay studying the opening in isolation from the involving ...c5-c4 and the undermining middlegame is not a very advisable occupa move ...e7-e6 . tion. The typical pawn structure arising in For the moment I decided simply to the opening largely determines the entire strengthen my position. subsequent play. The modern approach to 13 'i!Vd2 .1i.b7 the opening consists precisely in studying such typical structures, and in a deeper Strictly speaking, the opening is at an end penetration into their characteristic regulari both sides have developed their pieces. But ties and typical playing methods. for a better understanding of this type of position it is useful to see how White uses his advantage in the centre to develop an Yusupov - Tseshkovsky initiative. 54th USSR Championship, Minsk 1987 14 .1i.h6 Grunfeld Defence One ofth e advantages of controlling the 1 d4 tt:Jf6 centre is that it is easier to switch play to 2c4 g6 the flanks. White considers that under the 3 tt:Jc3 d5 cover of his strong centre he already has the 4cxd5 tt:Jxd5 right to begin active play against the General Principles of Opening Play ltJ 25 opponent's king. The exchange of the dark square bishops comes into his strategic plan, since the g7-bishop is very active and in addition it is virtually the only defender of the king. 14 ... .l:.ad8 15 h4 1? A theoretical novelty. 15 d5 also came into consideration. After 15... c4 16 ..tc2 e6 17 .bg7 �xg7 White plays 18 f4 !, and if 18... ex d5 - 19 e5 with an attack. In the game I was able to carry out this idea, and in an even more favourable version. - position after 18... 'iii> xg7 - 15 . . . 'it'd6?! A rather abstract move. The centre could pawn centre is effectively replaced by a have been attacked more effectively by pawn-piece centre, under the cover of which ttJ ltJ 15... c6, and if 16 d5, then 16... e5, White conducts an attack on the king with aiming to use the central squares in order to great effect. disrupt the coordination of the white pieces. Tseshkovsky is an experienced player, of 16 d5 course he fully appreciated the danger of The start of an instructive operation, with capturing the d5-pawn, and he pinned his which White strengthens still further his hopes on attacking the centre. position in the centre. Black's reply is forced, 19 ... f5 since 16... e6? is bad because of 17 c4. However, here too the drawbacks of Black's 16 ... c4 position are patently obvious: his king is 17 .i.c2 open, his knight at a5 is shut out of the If Black could have anticipated the develop game, and in the centre White has more ment of events, he would now have pre pawns - all these factors are very signifi ferred ...e7 --e5. But Tseshkovsky evaluated cant. It is not surprising that a concrete the position incorrectly and advanced his decision is found. pawn only one square. 20 ltJd4! 17 ... e6?! The knight will help the pawns to advance 18 ..txg7 'iii>xg 7 further. And here White finally carried out his plan, 20 ... fxe4 involving a positional pawn sacrifice. 21 dxe6 Of course, not 21 ltJxe6+?? on account of (see diagram) 21 ...'if xe6. After making a pawn break through in the centre, White has gained a 19 f4! powerful passed pawn at e6 and created a mass of problems for his opponent. The idea is understandable: after 19... exd5 20 e5! White will occupy the excellent 21 . . . ltJc6 central square d4 with his knight, afterwhich 22 f5! there will follow f4-f5 and so on. That is, the 22 ..txe4?! would have been significantly 26 � General Principles of Opening Play weaker in view of 22 ...lt:J xd4 23 'ii'xd4 [A fter24 ... .U.d5!? 25 fxg6 Black should play 'it'xd4+ 24 cxd4 i.xe4 25 e7 .l:.xd4 26 25... n df5! 26 1lxf5 �xf5, and it is not easy exf8'ti'+ �xf8, and Black has sufficient fo r White to demonstrate his advantage. In compensation for the exchange. view of this, 25 :Xc4!? 'J:.dxf5 26 .U.xf5 i:.xf5 22 ... lt:Jxd4 27 d5! comes into consideration, for exam i. 'ti' � .U. 'it' 23 cxd4 ple: 27 ... xd5 28 c3+ h6 29 c7 xh4 30 'iie3+ 'iig5 31 'iih3+ 'Viih5 32 fixh5+ The queens must be retained. Now Black 1ixh5 33 e7 i.f7 34 eafk xeBi. 35 i.xeB with loses by force after 23 ..."i¥ xd4+? 24 "it'xd4 quite good winning chances in the endgame .l:.xd4 25 e7 .tle8 26 i.a4. It is easy to see - Dvoretsky.] that the capture on f5 is also hopeless (23 ....l:. xf5? 24 �xf5 gxf5 25 "iVg5+ ). As Boris 24 ... l:!.xf5 Gelfand commented, he could have de 25 l:txf5 gxf5 fended by 23 ....l:. de8!?, after which White 26 "ii'f4 ! would have continued the offensive with 24 Now the e6-pawn is indirectly defended i.a4! .l:.e7 25 i.d7. (26 .. .'it'xe6 27 'ii'c7+), and impending over 23 ... 'ti'e7 Black is 27 .l:.xc4 with the terrible threat of 24 i.a4! .l:.c7. 26 ... i.d5 26 ....l:!. f8 would also not have saved Black in view of 27 .l:.xc4 'iifxe6 28 .l:.c7+ .l:!.f7 29 i.b3 i.d5 30 i.xd5 'ifxd5 31 'ifg5+, and White wins by a direct attack. 27 'ir'e5+ 'lt>g6 27 ...� g8 28 l:tc3; 27 ...'ii' f6 28 e7. 28 l:tc3 f4 29 h5+ Black resigned.
The result of the game was justified. The play went badly for Black. First he missed a moment when he should have initiated a The triumph of White's central strategy! In fight in the centre, then he delayed slightly, the centre he effectively has three con and White got in first with his active nected passed pawns, and the e6-pawn is offensive play. What else can be said? Note especially dangerous. What can Black do how White combined the threat of a break against this? If 24 ...gxf5 , then White simply through in the centre with threats to the king. 'ti' goes into an endgame by 25 g5+, after This is also one of the advantages of a which the e-pawn can be stopped only by strong centre - at any moment under its giving up the exchange. And in the event of cover one can begin an attack on the king! 24 ....l:l d5 the goal is achieved by 25 fxg6 hxg6 26 .l:lxf8 "ii'xf8 27 l:tf1 l;If5 28 .l:Ixf5!, and again the e-pawn forces its way through to In the following game a popular variation of the queening square. Therefore Black has the Modern Benoni was played. little choice. General Principles of Opening Play 27
Yusupov- Dolmatov developed his bishop, e7 is by no means its 54th USSR Championship, Minsk 1987 best square, and this has given me an Modern Benoni opportunity to prevent Black's castling, which is so necessaryfo r him. 1 d4 lt:Jf6 11 . . . i.f8 2 c4 e6 The best proof that the moves i..g5 and ..lth6 3lLlf3 c5 were not a pointless waste of time. 4 d5 exd5 12 ii'e3 i..xh6 5cxd5 d6 13 ii'xh6 6lt:Jc3 g6 Now Black should have made use of the 7 i..f4 a6 respite to develop his pieces. The theoreti 8 e4 b5 cal continuation is 13... lt:J d7. But Sergey If one approaches things formally, such a Dolmatov employed a new move. flank attack by Black should be refuted by 13 ... b4?! play in the centre by White, and in general This decision would appear to be well such pawn moves are incorrect, premature motivated: the knight is driven away from and so on. But in the Modern Benoni the the centre to a less active position. But in so advance of the pawn to b5 has a serious doing Black creates a not very favourable point: it is not so much a matter of play pawn structure on the queenside, and the directly on the queenside, but rather a fight c4-square is transformed into a desirable against the enemy centre! Subsequently target for a white knight. From here it will not Black will normally drive away the strong only exert pressure on the d6-pawn, but also knight from c3, and in many cases, if he support the e4-e5 breakthrough. should succeed in advancing ...c5-c4 , his 14 lt:Jd 1 "it'f6 knight will aim for c5 and threaten the e4- Black unequivocally demonstrates that he is pawn. It can be said that the main idea of the also thinking about active play. For example, Modern Benoni is an attempt to by-pass the White has to reckon with the invasion of a enemy centre from the flank and exert piece on f4 (say, if 15 ..lte2 there follows pressure on it. 15... lt:J f4 ). White, of course, should play in accordance What should White do? No way of quickly with the rules, i.e. prepare a breakthrough in completing the development of the pieces is the centre. This is the aim of his next move. apparent. He is obliged to show a little 9 'i!Ve2 lt:Jh5 cunning. Black is already forced to defend against 15lt:Jd2! e4-e5. Again seemingly a move against the rules, 10 ..ltg5 i..e7 but in fact it is made in the interests of 11 i..h6 development - g2-g3 is prepared. In this The third move in the opening by one and way White simultaneously solves several the same piece! This would appear to be a problems: he shuts the enemy knight at h5 gross violation of the laws of development. out of the game, the bishop will support the But, after all, during this time Black too has centre from g2, and the knight may subse not made any useful moves: he has wasted quently go from d2 to c4 . time on moving his knight away from the Black stands significantly worse. Now he centre with ...lt:J h5, and although he has should have continued his development by 28 � General Principles of Opening Play playing 15... ltJ d7. True, in this case too after than this king move, but, naturally, this does 16 g3 ltJe5 17 ii.e2! (it is important to control not lead to anything good. the d3-square!) I have an appreciable 17 g3 i.g4 ltJ advantage. Thus if 17... g4, then White 18 ltJe3 i.f3 simply exchanges on g4, after which he can Here it was possible to play simply 19 ltJxf3 play both f2-f3, and ltJe3. 'ifxf3 20 i.g2 'iif6 21 ltJc4 with an obvious At one stroke Dolmatov tries to solve the advantage. But this is no longer enough for problem of his queenside and the c4- White. He acts more energetically, remem square, but it is probable that the move bering that, when you have a lead in made by him is already the decisive mis development (although for the moment it is take. not so obvious) you must attack! 15 ... ii.d7?! 19 e5! The decisive opening of the position! 19 ... dxe5 20 ltJxf3 11Vxf3 21 i.g 2 'i!Vf6 22 d6 �a7 Black can still put up a resistance. Thus if 23 ltJd5 he would reply 23 ...'if e6! and then 24... l:i. d7, attacking the d6-pawn. Therefore White does not hurry. 23 0-0 ltJg 7 Black would have lost quickly after 23 ...ltJ d7 24 ltJd5!? 'iig7 25 'it'e3 followed by 26 ltJe7, when it transpires that the rook at a7 is extremely badly placed and loss of material What should I do now? It is possible, of is unavoidable. course, to continue the intended plan with 16 g3, but then Black replies 16... i. b5, after Now I need to bring my heavy pieces into which White's main trump - the c4-square play, as otherwise the enemy defences will be knocked out: in the event of the cannot be breached. How to place the rooks exchange of bishops on b5, a black pawn is always a difficult problem. I think that here will end up on this square. White coped with it successfully. But there is another way: realise what the 24 l:i.ac1 ! ltJd7 opponent wants, and try to prevent him. 25 l:i.fd1 ltJf5 Fortunately there is such a possibility. If 25 ...ltJ e6, then after 26 ltJd5 'i!Vg5 27 'i!Vxg5 16 a4! ltJxg5 the white knight again invades at e7. Now the bishop can no longer go to b5. It 26 ltJxf5 'i!Vxf5 transpires that with 15... i. d7 Black has 27 l!Ve3! merely deprived his b8-knight of its lawful This is why the rook went to c1 ! The square, and now it is not apparent how he opponent has no satisfactorydef ence against can complete his development. the exchange sacrifice on c5. He did not in 16 . . . 'it;d8 fact manage to complete his development My opponent could not find anything better and connect his rooks. General Principles of Opening Play lZJ 29
27 ... e4 tially did not manage to get past the 28 �xe4 ife5 opening. This is why it is useful to examine 29 %1d5 'iife6 them as a whole. Black seemingly did not make any obvious mistakes, but from these Or 29 . ..'ik xb2 30 :dxc5. examples we have seen that sometimes it is 30 l:tdxc5 ltJxc5 sufficient to take one or two inexact deci 31 'ikxc5 sions - say, incorrectly evaluate the situa Black resigned . tion, fail to understand the pawn structure, Both these games, with Tseshkovsky and not begin a fight for the centre at the right Dolmatov, can be called opening games, time, or commit an inaccuracy in defence - since in both cases the opponents essen- in order to suffer a rapid defeat. 30 �
Mark Dvoretsky
Logic in the Opening
ow does opening theory develop? What Dolmatov - Rashkovsky H helps a player, at the board or in home 47th USSR Championship, Minsk 1979 analysis, to find the correct solution to an opening problem facing him? There is no doubt that here one cannot get by without an ability for improvisation, sharp combinative vision, and accurate calculation of varia tions. But in our opening investigations another component is nearly always present and plays a very important role - logic! I should like to draw your attention to several examples of the logical solving of opening problems.
It is clear that logic does not operate in an empty space. It is based on specific opening knowledge, and also on the typical methods fixing the e4-pawn, and only then strikes and evaluations which we have mastered, with ...d6 -d5. Any player who plays the and it helps to link all this with the given Scheveningen Va riation or the Najdorf Vari position and as a result to work out the ation must be well familiar with this idea: correct decision. The more ideas that we 00 .e6-e5! followed by 00 .d6-d5! know, the wider the scope for logic, and the In the following examples we will see the deeper and more accurate our reasoning influence of this idea on the taking of becomes. decisions both by White, and by Black. I will remind you of one of the standard methods which occurs in the Sicilian De Dolmatov - Lerner fe nce, in 'Scheveningen-type' positions. 47th USSR Championship, Minsk 1979 (see diagram)
It is clear that White's last move was 13 g4. A widely-known strategic principle states: against a flank attack it is desirable to reply with a counter-blow in the centre.
13 0.. d5! Black gained an excellent position. Note the situation which possibly existed before this. Let us put the pawn back on e6. If here ...d6- d5, White replies e4-e5, obtaining the strong point d4 fo r his knight. Therefore often Black first plays ...e6- e5, Logic in the Opening Cb 31
What should White play? He is intending to 8 f4 0-0 complete his development by Si.d2, l:tae1 9 Si.e3 "ikc7 'it> and h1, obtaining an active position. But 10 a4 b6 for choosing the best move these considera 11 Si.f3 Si.b7 tions are not enough - it is also necessary to employ the idea of 'prophylactic thinking', 12 'ife1 lbbd7 which we have already encountered many times. Let us ask ourselves: 'What does Black want; what ways does he have of continu ing?' The answer is now clear to us: 13... e5 and then ...d6- d5. Is this the only possibil ity? Hardly - it is probable that 13... d5 14 e5 tt:Je4 also has to be taken into account. If Sergey Dolmatov had reasoned in this way, he would surely have made the move which he himself recommends in his notes, namely 13 lbg3!. Then after 13... d5 14 e5 the black knight can no longer invade on e4, while if 13... e5 there would be the excellent re ply 14 lLlf5. What do you think should be White's main Unfortunately, in the game Dolmatov did not plan over the next few moves? Most th ink about his opponent's intentions. probably g2-g4-g5 (nothing is given by 13 13 'it>h1? ii'g3 lbc5 14 e5 dxe5 15 fxe5 lLlfe4! 16 lb lb In such positions this move in itself is quite xe4 xe4 ). good and useful, but here it is untimely and it After the immediate 13 g4?! it is not good to leaves Black with freedom to act. reply 13... e5? in view of 14 lLlf5 (with gain of 13 ... e5! tempo) and then 15 g5 - there is no time for the counter-blow ...d6- d5. It is tempting first 14 lbg 3 d5! to attack with e4-pawn with 13... lb c5, and Black has succeeded in striking at the only after 14 Si.f2 to continue 14 ...d5 or centre and he has seized the initiative. 14 ...e5 with an excellent game. However, White has an unexpected tactical resource: Smyslov - Hort 14 g5! lbfxe4 15 b4!, winning a piece, the Interzonal To urnament, Petropolis 1973 compensation for which after 15... d5 16 bxc5 bxc5 17 lbb3 is insufficient. However, Sicilian Defence Black can simply play 13... d5 14 e5 lbe4 1 e4 c5 with chances for both sides. 2 lLlf3 e6 Va sily Vasilievich - an experienced, cau 3 d4 cxd4 tious player - preferred to avoid unneces 4 lbxd4 tbf6 sary complications. 5 lbc3 d6 13 Si.f2!? 6 ii.e2 ii.e7 Now, when the e4-pawn (and the e4-square) 7 0-0 a6 are safely guarded, g2-g4-g5 is threatened . 32 � Logic in the Opening
However, the opponent has various ways of 14 ... tt'lc5? combating this threat. 15 g5 tt'lfd7 For example, the non-routine move 13... g6!? 16 l:.d1 is strong. By depriving the knight of the f5- Threatening 17 b4 tt'lb3 (17 ...tt'l d3 18 .l:.xd3) square, Black prepares 14... e5. 18 tt'lde2. The best chances of a defence 13... tt'l c5 also comes into consideration, were still given by the modest move again parrying g2-g4. The aggressive 14 16.. JH e8!, with the idea of meeting 17 b4 b4 ?! tt'lcd7 15 g4? seriously weakens the with the central counter 17... e5! (in the event queenside - as was shown by Sergey of 18 tt'lf5 the bishop on e7 is defended). Shipov, Black exploits this factor with the 16 . . . tt'lbB?! central counter 14... d5! . Black has lost the thread of the game. Just a In 1979 I was analysing this position with few moves ago he had normal Sicilian grandmaster Igor Platonov, and he sug knights - now where have they ended up! gested the thematic, typically Sicilian move Using the solidity of his centre, Smyslov 13... l: fe8!, which is now recommended in calmly strengthens his position and pre opening books. If 14 g4, then 14 ... e5! is very pares his pieces for an attack. strong, and after 15 tt'lf5 - either 15... d5! 17 i.e3 tt'lc6 (the bishop on e7 is defended), or 15 ...exf4 18 'i1t'g3 llfeB 16 g5 tt'le5! (Abramov-Akopov, corr. 1981 ). 19 i.g2 i.fB Initially I liked the central advance 14 e5, exploiting the fact that the rook is occupying 20 l:tf2 the e8-square, to which the knight might Also a typical Sicilian move - the c2-pawn is retreat. For example, 14... dxe5 15 fxe5 tt'ld5 supported. 16 tt'lxd5 i.xd5 17 i.xd5 exd5 18 e6 i.f6 19 20 ... 'iid7? exf7+ 'iitxf7 20 'ii'd1, and Black has a weak It was essential to exchange knights. How d5-pawn. Alas, after 14... dxe5 15 fxe5 ever, White would also have stood better tt'lxe5! 16 i.xb7 I overlooked the strong after20 ...tt'l xd4 21 i.xd4 e5 22 i.e3. intermediate move 16 ...tt'l eg4!, which gives Black the advantage. You see that a logical analysis, in which the calculation of concrete variations based on taking account of typical motifs, has enabled us to penetrate more deeply into the essence of the position and even find some new ideas (naturally, they require additional checking). Vlastimil Hort played superficially and soon came under a strong attack. 13 ... l:.acB? 14 g41 Now the knight is driven back from f6 . Hort vacates the d7-sq uare for it, but as a result 21 tt'lf3! he needlessly merely loses time. He should Black is in a cramped position, and so have resigned himself to retreating it to e8. Smyslov avoids the exchange. Besides, he Logic in the Opening l2J 33 has a concrete idea: h2-h4 and then the 1 c4 e5 manoeuvre of the knight to g4 via h2. High 2 ltJc3 ltJf6 class play! 3 ltJf3 ttJc6 21 . . . ltJb4 4g3 ..llb4 Afterth is the knight immediately goes to g4. 5 ..llg2 0-0 22 ttJes 'ikc7 6 0-0 e4 23 ltJg 4 ltJd7 7 ltJe1 24 ..lld4 For a long time it was thought that the ltJ Threatening 25 h6+. sharper move 7 ltJg5 did not promise White 24 ... e5 anything. However, the opinion changed 25 fxe5 ttJxeS after the world champion Garry Kasparov, in If 25 ...dxe5 26 ..lle3 with an obvious advan his match with Anatoly Karpov (Seville tage. 1987) and then against Vasily lvanchuk in the 1988 USSR Championship, played his 26 .l:!.df1 knight to g5. It was essential to exchange the terrible knight on g4. There now follows the conclud 7 ... .txc3 ing combination. 8 dxc3 h6 27 ..llxe5 dxe5 Black usually prevents the exchange of the 28 tt:lf6+ �h 8 c1-bishop for his knight, which is advanta geous to the opponent. 29 tt:lxh7! l:.e6 9 ltJc2 .U.e8 If 29 ...� xh7, then 30 g6+ is decisive 10 ltJe3 d6 30 .l:txf7 ..llc5+ 11 'ii'c2 aS 31 �h 1 .l:!.e7 32 .l:!.f8+ Black resigned . An excellent win by Va sily Vasilievich. Its basis was laid in the opening, when Black did not manage to meet White's flank attack g2-g4 with the standard counter-blow in the centre.
To come to the correct decision in the above ex amples it was necessary to make skilful use of a well-known opening idea. But often far more subtle, less obvious details of the position have to be taken into account. New games played in a particular variation add their arguments to the unceasing opening Black's last move is not essential (theory debate, and it is hard to get by without recommends 11 ...b6), but it is quite popular. studying them. It was chosen by Victor Korchnoi against At one time the following quiet variation of Karpov in the 6th game of their world the English Opening was very popular. championship match (Baguio 1978). From 34� Logic in the Opening the opening Karpov did not achieve any certainly be lost. White has an obvious thing: 12 a4 �e7 13 lt'ld5 lt'lxd5 14 cxd5 advantage. lt'l ii. ii. lt'l b8 15 e3 f5 16 h3 d7 17 c4 b6 18 14 exf3 ii.d7 'ii'c3 lt'lc5 19 b3 'it'd? 20 '>th2 �e 7 21 ii.d4 f6 15 .l:!.ae1 �f8 22 �ac1 �e8 23 ir'e3 Draw. 16 f4 Games from world championship matches, This is the set-up for which Uhlmann was even those as colourless as the one just aiming. examined, usually provide an impetus for the further development of opening theory. Grandmaster Wolfgang Uhlmann developed a promising plan of play for White and successfully employed it. Let us first try to decide for ourselves what should be aimed for here. White has two bishops. But for the moment this is not yet the 'advantage of the two bishops', since their mobility is restricted. To open the position and give the bishops freedom is White's main objective. If an exchange of knights takes place on d5, it will then be possible to advance the pawn to c4 and occupy the long diagonal with the dark square bishop. But what about the light square bishop? The e4-pawn, which it is The bishop is pressing strongly along the running up against, must be removed. h1-a8 diagonal. Sooner or later the knight will go to d5, and after the exchange on d5 Karpov did not even try to solve the problem the second bishop will come into play. In the of his light-square bishop. Uhlmann acted future White will advance his kingside fa r more energetically. pawns. The opponent has no counterplay, as the black knights lack strong points in the Uhlmann - Osmanovic centre, and so White can play for a win Decin 1979 without any risk. 12 ii.d2 �e7 16 ... liab8 13 f4! exf3 17 'ii'd3 lt'le7 In such positions it is dangerous not to 18 h3 capture on f3 - White plays f4-f5, cramps In such cases Aaron Nimzowitsch used to the opponent's light-square bishop, and say that White had a 'qualitative pawn prepares a pawn offensive on the kingside. majority' on the kingside. It resides in the In lnformatorthe following variation is given: fact that White's pawns can advance, ii. lt'l lt'l lt'l 13 ... d7 14 d5 xd5 15 cxd5 b8, and whereas Black's cannot. now, when the knight is a long way from the 18 ... ii.c6 e5-square - 16 f5!. If 16... f6 , then 17 ii.e3 followed by .l:!.f4 (or immediately 17 l:tf4) is 19 lt'ld5 strong, while if Black plays 16... e3, then 17 Of course, White is not agreeable to the ii.c1 and l:tf3 , when the pawn will almost exchange of his light-square bishop. Logic in the Opening lZJ 35
19 ... ttJexd5 20 cxd5 J::txe1 21 l:txe1 .tea 22 b4! A slight deviation from the plan which we have been discussing. In passing White also harasses the queenside. He wants to create active possibilities there: afterthe exchange on b4 to create a passed pawn and press on the backward c7-pawn. 22 ... axb4 23 cxb4 b5 Now a passed pawn does not result, but White has an overwhelming advantage. He chronic weaknesses have been created on can simply play 40 h4!, not fearing 40 ...tb g6? the c-file. (40 ...c6 or 40 ...c5 is more tenacious) 41 24 .tc3 .id7 .l:txd7 tbxh4+ 42 �g3 tLlxf3 43 �xf3 'it>f8 on 25 .id4 'iii'dB account of 44 g6!. Also very strong was 40 .t .t ..l:!. .i .l:!. 26 'i!i'c3 .:taB h5!? g6 41 f3 e8 42 f6 (or 42 xe8 .txe8 43 .tf6) . 27 a3 .l:tc8 Uhlmann preferred a spectacular, combina 28 'it>h2 tive way to the goal. There is nothing Black can move, and in the 40 g6! tbxg6!? meantime Uhlmann consistently strength 40.. .f 6 41 h4 or 40 ... .te8 41 gxf7+ .txf7 42 ens his position. .ih5! g6 43 .tg4 (43 i.f3) was hopeless. 28 ... l:taB 41 ..l:!.xd7 lLlh4+ 29 l:te3 l:tcB 42 'it>g3 tLlxf3 30 .tf3 lLleB 43 'it>xf3 �8 31 'it>g2 .l:ta8 Has White miscalculated? His rook is 32 'ii'e1 trapped. The battery on the e-file has been correctly 44 h4!! set up - rook in front, queen behind. No, he has not. This modest move is the idea of the combination: the h-pawn be 32 ... tbf6 comes a queen. 33 g4 lLlh7 44 ... 'it>eB 34 .ib2 :tea 45 .txg7 'iti>xd7 35 'ii'c3 'ii'f6 46 h5 llaB 36 'ili'xf6 tLlxf6 And without waiting for his opponent's reply, 37 g5 hxg5 Black resigned. 38 fxg5 lLlh7 39 .l:!.e7 lLlfB Now let us suppose that you have to play this variation with Black. You already know 36 � Logic in the Opening
Uhlmann's game, and you appreciate the home. In any case this unusual manoeuvre threat of White's two bishops. Of course, solves his defensive problems - the active you have no intention of losing ignomini position of the queen ensures Black coun ously, like Osmanovic. What to do? Change terplay. He gains time: in order to prepare variation? Well, if you approach things this lt:Jd5, White has to remove his king to h1 and way, you will never have any decent play b2-b3. But what is more important is openings - in each one problems will arise. the fact that the queen controls the d5- No, let's devise something here - it is square, and it is no longer easy for the white unlikely that White has a fo rced way to gain knight simply to be placed there. If White an advantage. plays f3-f4 , there is a possibility of exchang Only by clearly appreciating the danger will ing knights by ...lt:J g4, and lt:Jd5 will not be you be able to accustom yourself to the possible because of ...lt:J f2+. position, be imbued with its spirit, and as a 16 'it>h1 ii.d7 result find an idea which will help you. This 17 b3 Ite7 is what Black did in the following game. 18 'iNd3 .l::i.ae8 In order to prepare lt:Jd5, White has had to Uhlmann - Popov place his queen on d3, where it comes Berlin 1979 under attack by ...tt:J e5. Black has suc 12 �d2 �e7 ceeded in doubling his rooks. If 19 f4 there lt:J lt'l 13 f4 exf3 can follow either 19... g4, or 19... e4. lt'lxd5 14 exf3 19 tbd5 It appears that nothing can prevent White 20 cxd5 tbe5 from carrying out his plan. It develops very 21 'ii'd4! naturally: Itae1 , f3-f4 , and at some point The only move. 21 'i!Yc2? 'iNxd5 22 f4 'iNd3 is lt:Jd5. bad fo r White. 14 ... 'ii'e5! 21 ... "iVxd4 15 �ae1 'ii'c5 22 cxd4 lt'ld3 23 .l::i.xe7 .l::i.xe7 Here White already has to display accuracy: the invasion on e2 is threatened. Thus in the event of 24 ..txa5? b6 and 25 ...It e2 Black has active play. How can Black be pre vented from activating his rook? White must be able to meet ...l:!. e2 with .l::td1, but without allowing a check on f2 . 24 �g1 ! If now 24 ....l::i. e2, then 25 .l::td1, when the threat of SLf1 is very unpleasant, and in addition the a5-pawn is still hanging. 24 ... b6 25 Itd1 lt'lb4 I don't know whether Luben Popov found Two pawns are attacked -White is forced to this idea at the board , or prepared it at exchange. Logic in the Opening ltJ 37
26 i.xb4 axb4 from his main course of play, and at the 27 �c1 i.c8 same time he prevents the queen manoeu vre to c5. A roughly equal ending has been reached. 14 ... i.d7 28 f4 i.a6 29 i.f3 '>t>f8 30 '>t>f2 WeB 31 a3 bxa3 32 .Ua1 'it>d833 �xa3 i.b734 h4 f5 35 15 i.d2 h5l:!.e836 i.g2.l':.e7 37 b4 .l::te8 38 .l::!.a7 '.t>c8 If now 15... 'i!k f8 , then after 16 .l::!.ae1 the 39 i.f3 l:!.e7 40 .Ua1 Wd8 Draw same position is reached as in the Uhlmann Osmanovic game, where White was able to gain a clear advantage. Now let us think for Uhlmann. 'I worked out such a good plan, I'm not going to give it up 15 ... 'it'd8 now. I have to find an improvement.' Black nevertheless wants to switch his When you know the ideas, it is easier to queen to the g1-a7 diagonal via the b8- devise a novelty. Here it is conceived in a square. purely logical way. 16 h3 'iib8 The pattern of the position is appealing, but If now 17 .l:!.ae1 , then 17... 'ii a7 18 �h2 'iVc5. it would be good to prevent Black from White has a couple of extra tempi compared playing his queen to c5. How? He can be with the Uhlmann-Popov game, but never deprived of the e5-square, by placing the theless Black retains counter-chances. pawn on f4 . This means that instead of 12 17 ltJd5! lLlxd5 �d2 we should look at 12 f4. It looks rather 18 cxd5 'ii'a7+ dangerous fo r White to play this, with his 19 'it>h2 lbe7 development incomplete and his rooks unconnected. But it should be checked ... What would you advise White to do now?
Uhlmann - Plachetka Trencianske Te plice 1979 12 f4 exf3 13 exf3 'ii'e7 14 f4! Now White only needs to play i.d2 and Mae 1 , and he reaches the very position for which he is aiming. Of course, he has to reckon with ...lb e4, but on the other hand he has the reply lLld5. I will take this opportunity to once again emphasise an idea which we have already encountered many times. Th e deepest 20 f5! was very strong. It cramps the enemy moves, the best positional decisions, are pieces and gives White the advantage. those which combine the implementa Unfortunately, Uhlmann played slightly rou tion of your own plan with prophylaxis tinely. against th e opponent 's ideas. This is the strength of the move order chosen by 20 .l:f.ae1?! i.f5 Uhlmann: the grandmaster does not deviate If 20 ...
'it'g3 is strong. After this game the entire variation was 21 �a4 'it'f8 judged to favour White, and Black stopped playing this way. But wrongly so! After all, 22 g4 �d3 the next improvement is not so difficult to 23 �e3! find. Let us look once more at the position An important intermediate move. Incorrect after 12 f4 exf3 13 exf3. was 23 l:i.f3? b5! 24 "iVd1 .tc4 , and two pawns at d5 and a2 are under attack. 23 ... �a6 24 .l::i.f2 Here Black should probably have played 24 ...tt::l g6, because White wants to squeeze him with f4-f5 , and this way the knight can at least occupy the e5-square. 24 ... 'ifc4? 25 't!Vd1 ! tt::lg6 Otherwise26 f5 is very strong. But now the black bishop ends up in a dangerous position. 26 'it'd2! Preparing to push back the black pieces: The Uhlmann-Popov game demonstrated a b2-b3, c3-c4 and so on. promising idea for Black - the switching of his queen via e5 to the g1-a7 diagonal. In 26 ... tt::lh4 the Uhlmann-Piachetka game Black showed 26 ...a4! was more tenacious. that it was also possible to go there via b8. 27 b3 'it'a6 But for some reason he first moved his 28 c4! tt::lxg2 queen in the opposite direction: 13... 'ik' e7?. � 29 .l::'i.xg2 �e4 Illogical! Why not play 13... d7 and in reply to 14 f4 (or 14 �d2) - 14 ...'it' b8!, then 30 l:i.ge2 f5 ...'it' a7 and ..."i!V c5. Compared with the last 31 f5 was threatened. But now Uhlmann game, Black saves two tempi. Here I do not assails the opponent's kingside on the dark see any advantage for White. squares (there his g7 -point is hopelessly Imagine now that you have quickly looked at weak). As always occurs in such cases, the one of these games in lnformator, with presence of opposite-colour bishops sharply comments relating mainly to the middlegame. strengthens the attack. It is possible that you would simply trust its 31 �d4 c6 book evaluation. If you happened to see 32 gxf5 cxd5 Uhlmann's game with Popov, you would 33 'ii'c3! l:te7 decide that the variation does not give White 34 cxd5 l:!.ae8 anything, and if it was the one with Plachetka, you would evaluate it in favour of White. You 35 f6 gxf6 would take into account the evaluation, but 36 .txf6 you would not in fact acquire a true Black resigned . understanding of the position. Unfortu- Logic in the Opening ttJ 39 nately, this is how many players work on the In one of the team tournaments I happened opening. And this is why 'novelties' such as to play the following game.
13 . ...i d7 followed by 14 ...'ii' b8 sometimes remain unnoticed, although they can be Dvoretsky - Shmit arrived at almost automatically, if you delve Tbilisi 1979 into the position and follow the development of ideas in the given variation. Alekhine Defence But do you know in which wonderful classic 1 e4 tt:'lf6 game such a queen manoeuvre first oc 2 tt:'lc3 d5 curred? 3e5 tt:Je4 Other possible replies are 3 ...tt:J fd7 and 3 ...d4. Janowski - Rubinstein 4 tt:Jce2! Karlsbad 1907 Black's knight is in danger. Nimzowitsch called such pieces 'tempo-devourers'. The knight has already made two moves, and it will have to move again. Now White gains a tempo by attacking it with d2--d3,and then, perhaps, also another one: d3--d4. In the 1972 Moscow Championship the national master Vladimir Baikov played 4 ...d4 against me. Unfortunately, I did not notice that the reply 5 c3! would have been unpleasant for my opponent. 5 ...d3? is bad in view of 6 'ii'a4+, while if 5 ...dxc3 there follows not 6 'ili'a4+?! tt:'ld7 7 'ii'xe4? tt:Jc5, but simply 6 bxc3 with an obvious advan tage. True, as was shown later, the reply 29 ... 'iii'dB! 5 ...tt:J c6! promises Black some compensa Apparently with the idea of 30 ...'ii' g5. tion for the lost (or sacrificed?) pawn. 30 'ifg 4 'ii'bB!! 4... f6 31 'it>g 2 'ii'a7 5 d3 tt:'lg5 32 .U.fe1 'ii'c5 And Black gained the possibility of active play on the queenside. See how an idea from a quite different opening can sometimes come in useful! Incidentally, from which opening? The posi tion has an 'Old Indian' character, but in those times that opening was not yet employed. And indeed, the game began as a Four Knights. Enrich your chess culture, and collect ideas - la ter you will be able to use them in the most varied situations . 40 � Logic in the Opening
This is also an interesting opening problem. which in general also has some point. White has a way to secure a marked 6 tt'lg3 tt'lf7 advantage. 7 exf6 exf6 Yo u suggest playing 6 f4? The knight 8 d4 retreats to f7,fro m where it attacks White's We have reached the position which I would centre. like to discuss with you. 6 tt'lf4 (with the threat of 7 'iih5+) 6 ...f xe5 7 tt'lxd5 is an interesting idea. But Black replies 6 ...g6, and if 7 h4 - 7 ...tt'l e6. Correct is 6 .Jtxg5! fxg5 7 h4! gxh4 8 tt'lf4 (threatening 9 'it'h5+) 8 ...g6 9 .l:txh4 �g7 10 d4 and 11 ..ltd3 with terrible pressure on Black's kingside. This occurred in a game Polovodin-Palatnik in the same year, 1979, but not, unfortunately, in my game against Anatoly Shmit. Two games in this variation, and in neither of them did I see the strongest continuation. Such episodes should give cause fo r reflec tion, since this does not happen by accident. I never had any particular taste for playing the opening. I would aim not to obtain an Does this remind you of any other opening? advantage, but my own position, to avoid That's right, the Exchange Va riation of the opening preparations by my opponent, and French Defence. The pawn structure is to then somehow outplay him. With such an almost exactly the same. The only differ approach you often do not notice the ence is the pawn on f7 and the placing of the strongest continuations in the opening, pieces. White's knight has ended up on g3, since you are simply not in the habit of and Black's on f7. looking for them. Garry Kasparov, for exam Let us find out to whose advantage are ple, has a fundamentally diffe rent approach. these deviations from the Exchange Va ria Since childhood he has been aiming for the tion. For this, let us at least remember the maximum in the opening, to the seizure of initial moves of the game Winter-Aiekhine the initiative, and he has an excellent feeling (Nottingham 1936): 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 for where it is concealed. Of course, for him exd5 4 .Jtd3tt'lc6 5 tt'le2 ..ltd6 6 c3 'ii'h4!?. to find the strongest continuations such as 5 Why is this queen sortieneeded ? In order to c3 or 6 .Jtxg5 would not be difficult, since he prevent the important move ..ltf4 with the is accustomed to this and is trained to look exchange of White's passive bishop. In turn for them. But when a player has no such Black plans to carry out a similar operation habit, he misses certain important possibili ...tt'l ge7 and ....Jt f5. ties. Yo u see, a couple of examples from my Yes, in such positions control of the f4- and games, and it is immediately possible to f5-squares is very important. Returning to give a diagnosis. It is clear what to work on, my game with Shmit, I should mention that in order to improve, in the opening at any White can play �d3, tt'l1 e2 and .Jtf4 , event. whereas Black does not and will not have I played in my style - I found a quiet set-up, the possibility of ...� f5. Logic in the Opening ttJ 41
What else can be mentioned? Black's kingside is weakened. White will press on h7 by i.d3, c2-c3 and 'ii'c2 - the opponent will evidently have to reply ...g7- g6. I will play h2-h4, and at some time point h4-h5. Kingside castling will be dangerous for Black. It ca n be concluded that we have an improved version for White of the Exchange Va riation of the French Defence. With a quite development of events his position is preferable, and the further course of the game confirmed this.
8 . . . ltJc6 White's opening strategy has been justified 9c3 - he has a slight, but enduring advantage. White has a completely clear plan of action: He can gradually cramp his opponent by 17 i.d3, 'ii'c2 , ltJge2, ..if4 , h2-h4, 0-0-0 ... A ..ic1 (vacating the f4-square for his knight), whole series of moves can be made easily, then b2-b3, depriving the black knights of without reflection. The opponent needs to the c4-square, and so on. (Unfortunately, think how to combat this. here I hastened to seize control of the f5- 9 ... i.e& point, and played 17 h5?! g5 18 ..ixd6 ..ixd6 19 ltJf5, but did not achieve a lot.) Black prepares queenside castling, so as not to come under an attack on the kingside. Let us return to the moment when the 'Exchange Va riation' arose after White's 8th 10 ..id3 'ii'd7 move. Incidentally, here Shmit had a serious ltJ 11 1e2 think, but even so he did not sense the Here Black also has another problem. Do strategic danger threatening him. you remember the article "The 'superfluous' During the game I was concerned about the piece", which was offered for study in the reply 8 ...c5 !, changing the pawn structure. first book of this series (cf. Secrets of Chess After this it is no longer an Exchange Training)? Here too there is a 'superfluous' Va riation of the French Defence. But what piece: the d6-square is needed both for the does occur? Most probably a position with knight, and for the bishop, but together they an isolated d5-pawn for Black, and this ca nnot be accommodated on one square. If means the Ta rrasch Variation of the French the bishop goes to d6, the knight will be Defence. doing nothing on f7.And if the knight goes to In whose favour are the changes in the d6, how can the bishop be developed? position compared with the Ta rrasch Va ria 11 . . . ltJd6 tion? Anatoly Karpov, who at one time won a 12 'ii'c2 g6 number of games in this variation, wrote: 13 h4 0-0-0 'The main idea of White 's play is control of the d4-point. He must constantly keep an 14 ..if4 'iti>b8 eye on it. ' If White does not have secure 15 0-0-0 ltJa5 control of this point, he cannot count on any 16 'iti>b1 b6 advantage. 42 � Logic in the Opening
Usually in the Ta rrasch Va riation the knights 13 �e2 i.e6 stand on f3 and d2, and then, after an 14 �g3 exchange of pawns on c5, the knight goes It is advantageous for White to exchange the with gain of tempo to b3, from where it dark-square bishops. But Black is ready to controls the d4-point. But here the white counter this attempt. knight has moved to the side and is not 14 . . . lLie5! taking part in the battle for the centre. This factor improves Black's chances in compari The defence is based on the strong point at son with the normal Ta rrasch Va riation. e5. It is more difficult to evaluate the f6 , lbf7 15lLifd4 Si.d7 construction. Does it not weaken Black's I would have preferred the retreat to f7, to position? The answer to this question is not securely defend the d5-pawn. obvious. It is easier to figure out if you know 16 a4 a6 17 a5 'ikc7 18 c3 �ad8 19 lLic1 one of the strategic ideas which Black i..c8 20 tZ'id3 lLi7g6 21 lLif4 lLixf4 22 �xf4 sometimes employs in the Ta rrasch Va ria l::i.fe8 23 i..g3 ..tc5! 24 �f1 "iVf7 25 l!Va4 tion. It was demonstrated in the following 'ikg6 26 l::i.e3 lLig4 27 �d3 "iVf7 28 �xe8+ game. .U.xe8 29 "iVc2 g6 30 b4 i..a7 31 b5 lLie5 32 i..f1 axb5 33 lLixb5 i..c5 34 �d1 �g4 35 Gipslis - Korchnoi �a1 �a8 Draw. Amsterdam 1976 Let us return to the Alekhine Defence. French Defence Knowing Korchnoi's game, we can conclude 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lLid2 c5 4 lLigf3 lLic6 5 that the knight at f7 and pawn at f6 are not so exd5 exd5 6 i.b5 i.d67 dxc5 i.xc5 8 0-0 stupidly placed, and they may well come in lbe7 9lZ'ib3 �d6 10 �g5 0-0 11 l::i.e1 useful for Black in his set-up. This factor merely strengthens our impression that Black has a good version of the Ta rrasch Va riation. Chess is not like study composition, where there is always just one solution. I have shown one of the sensible approaches to the position, but a completely different logic is also possible. When I invited Nana Alexandria to consider the position, she found her own solution, and also a good one -the interesting queen check 8 ... 'ike7+!. How should White respond to it? The exchange of queens is not dangerous for Black. If 9 i..e3?, then 9 ...'ik b4+ is unpleas ant. 9 lZ'i1 e2 hampers White's development. An opening tabiya. Here many moves have 9 i..e2 looks natural, but then 9 ...i.. g4!. The
00 'Wi oo• ..t 00 been tried - . c7, g4, .a7-a6. Also exchange on e2 favours Black, but after10 possible is the plan chosen by Victor f3 �d7 (followed by ...lb c6 and ...0-0-0) the Korchnoi. knight has been deprived of the f3-square 11 ... f6!? and it is not easy for White to complete his 12 ..th4 'ii'b6 development. Logic in the Opening CtJ 43
How does one arrive at the move 8 .. .'ir'e7+ ? ..ll.d3lbc6 6 t'Dge2 t'Dge 7 fo llowed by ...il. f5, After all, it is not usual to play with the and there are no problems for Black. The queen, when there is only one knight text move, which I had played in some blitz developed. You can arrive at this check only games against Palle Ravn, is directed after experiencing a certain alarm, after against the very manoeuvre ...t'D ge 7 and realising that if the game develops naturally ...il. f5; after 5 ...t'D e7 6 il.d3 t'Dbc6 7 t'De2 it will take a favourable course for White. Not White's position is quite attractive. wishing to allow this, you look for drastic 'Because of this game 5 'fif3 became almost measures and sometimes find them. popular for a shortwhile, but it disappeared Absolutely original ideas occur extremely again because of the reply 5 ... 'ifie7+!, for rarely in chess. All this had already oc instance 6 t'De2 t'Dc6 7 'iixd5 t'Df6 with more curred, including the queen check. It is than enough for the pawn. much easier to find it, if you know the 'During the game I thought of the possibility following game, or more correctly Larsen's 5 .. .'ifie7+ and toyed with the idea 6 ..ll.e3 comments to it on the position arising in the il.xc3+ 7 bxc3 'iia3 8 Wd2, which may look opening. strange, but is very good fo r White. How ever, a Yugoslav game Mestrovic-Maric, Larsen - Portisch Kraljevo 1967, seems to prove that 6 il.e3 is t'D il. InterzonalTo urnament, Amsterdam 1964 of dubious value because of 6 ... f6 7 d3 c5!. After this I tend to believe that 5 ...'iV e 7 + French Defence is Black's strongest move. 1 e4 e6 'Immediately after the game O'Kelly stated 2d4 dS that the easiest solution fo r Black was 3 t'Dc3 ..ll.b4 5 ...il. e6, but I don't agree; after 6 il.d3 'iif6 4exd5 exdS White ought to play 7 il.f4!. 5 'it'f3 !? 'Also 5 ...c5 has been recommended, but 6 dxc5 d4 7 a3'it'a5 8 :I:ib1 1ooks verygood for White. 'Portisch had enough to think about!' It remains to add that in the game there followed 5 ... t'Dc6 6 .i.bS t'De7 7 .i.f4 0-0 8 0-0-0 t'DaS? (8 ....i. e6 was better) 9 t'Llge2 c6 10 .i.d3 b5 11 h4! t'Llc4 12 h5 f6 13 g4 �aS?! 14 .i.xc4 dxc4 15 a3! ..ll.xc3 (15 ... .i.xa3 16 bxa3 'it'xa3+ 17 Wd2 b4 18 l::ta 1 ! bxc3+ 19 t'Llxc3 'it'b4 20 �hb1 ) 16 t'Llxc3 'ikd8 17 l:the1 (17 t'Dxb5?! 'it'd5!) 17... a5 18 'it'g3 l:ta7 (18 ...b4 19 .i.d6!) 19 h6! g6 20 .i.d6l:te8 21 'it'f4! Wf722 il.eSf5 23 .i.bB l:tb7 24 'ir'eS! :gs 25 g5 b4 26 'ir'f6+ WeB 27 'it'xc6+ Wf7 28 'ir'f6+ 'lt>e8 29 dS l:tf8 Let us hand over to Bent Larsen: 30 'ir'c6+ 'it'd7 31 .i.d6 �f7 32 .i.xe7 bxc3 'This set Portisch thinking! The exchange 33 .i.b4+ Black resigned. variation has had a reputation as a dull drawish line for many years; fo r instance, 5 The conclusion from what has been said is Logic in the Opening obvious. Chess erudition, a knowledge of positions in question, although they are typical ideas, serves as a reliable basis in considered by opening theory, can well be the logical perception of opening problems, assigned to the middlegame. At one time I and helps correct solutions in the opening to wrote an article about the study of typical be found. However, not only in the opening. middlegame positions and in it I recom The boundary between the opening and the mended roughly the same approach. You middlegame is very arbitrary. Many of the can find it in the fourth part of this book. 45
Artur Yusupov
Surprises in the Opening
hat chess player has not stumbled on the contrary, it may awake our imagina W into a cunning opening trap, been tion and force the brain to work at full power. caught in a variation that appeared to be It often happens that the player who wins is condemned by theory but in reality proved not the one who prepares the variation, but fully viable, or fallen victim to his own the one for whom it was prepared! Relying opening preparation, which turned out on entirely on the strength of his home prepara verification to have a 'hole'? In other words, tion, a player is sometimes unable to force all of us have had occasion to encounter himself to play with full intensity. In this case, surprises in the opening and, of course, we any surprise in the opponent's actions, even are well familiar with the unpleasant feelings the most trivial, may prove fatal for him- he associated with this. simply does not manage to retune for a The search for unexpected (for this read - fierce and genuine struggle. new for the opponent!) ideas serves as the I should like to disclose the theme of today's main source of opening theory develop lesson using examples from my own games. ment. And if you think about it, all our efforts I will begin with one played in the World Cup in preparing for a game are aimed precisely with the Hungarian grandmaster Gyula Sax. at finding a way to perplex, surprise, stun Of course, for such important encounters the opponent, to upset his normal routine. To the players make especially thorough prepa surprise means to win! But, after all, our rations. I was hoping to catch Sax in one of opponents also aim for the same thing. the variations of the Queen's Indian De Of course, thorough opening preparation fence, of which I had made a fairly detailed significantly reduces the probability of some analysis. opening move or variation proving unex pected for you. However, it is not possible to Yusupov - Sax exclude unpleasant surprises completely, World Cup, Rotterdam 1989 and you should be inwardly prepared for Queen's Indian Defence them. 1 d4 lt'Jf6 There are different sorts of surprises. In other words, a new move by the opponent 2 c4 e6 may be objectively strong, but it may be 3lt'lf3 b6 aimed at you in particular, at your reaction, 4 g3 i..a6 since any surprise is in the first instance an 5 b3 attack on your nerves. And very much Apart from this, the most popular continua depends on how quickly you are able to take tion, I have also employed 5 lt'lbd2 several yourself in hand and tune up for a full times. blooded struggle. If you become flustered, this is likely to lead to a rapid collapse. 5 ... �b4+ Incidentally, meeting something unexpected 6 i..d2 i..e7 or unexplored is not bound to demoralise; What is the idea of this loss of a tempo, 46 � Surprises in the Opening
which Black goes in for? The point is that When the game was played, this move was afterb2-b3 the natural place for the bishop considered almost obligatory, but at the is on b2. White may still want later to switch present time theoreticians are increasingly his bishop to the long diagonal, but at c3 it is considering other continuations. One of the less securely placed than at b2, and in new and good alternatives is 12... tt:J f6 . This addition it takes away the natural square for was first played by Lajos Portisch against the development of the knight. If White does Anatoly Karpov (Rotterdam 1989), and later develop his knight on c3, all the same he will the same idea was used by Karpov himself subsequently have to move his bishop from in his match with me. The position is quite d2. Therefore with his manoeuvre Black intricate, despite its apparent simplicity. But effectively does not lose a tempo. we will not now go into its subtleties - for this 7 �g2 c6 there are reference books. Preparing ...d7 -d5. 13 e4 8 0-0 d5 Play in the centre! In reply, if you remember, in the matches between Kasparov and 9 tt:Je5 Karpov ( 1984-85 and 1986) the advance Exploiting the fact that fo r the moment it is ...b6-b5 was tested, after which White not possible to capture on c4 because of the played l:te1 . But the plan with ...c6-c5 is vulnerability of the c6-point, White tries to more usual. occupy the centre. The knight on e5 is very 13 ... c5 unpleasant for Black, and he must ex change it. 14 exd5 exd5 9... tt:Jfd7 15 dxc5 � Again supposedly against the rules (the White is not able to win a pawn: if 15 xd5 tt:J second move in the opening by the same there is the reply 15... f6 . piece), but in closed positions this is 15 ... dxc4 sometimes admissible. In the given case the After 13... c5 the given position arises more battle for the centre is more importantthan or less by force. If it is unfamiliar to you, it is the rapid development of the pieces. And in not so easy to work out its nuances at the view of the fact that the knight at b8 is board. In principle, such positions, critical literally crippled by the knight on e5, the for the opening variation, should be very move made is in some sense also a thoroughly studied in home preparations developing one. and subjected to detailed analysis. 1 0 tt:Jxd7 tt:Jxd7 16 c6 11 �c3 Now in particular White has to reckon with Here we have that insta nce about which I the reply 16... cx b3, since the capture on d7 told you: White is forced to waste a tempo, in does not work, as the bishop at c3 is order to bring his bishop onto the long hanging. There now begins a sharp tactical diagonal. In passing I should mention that skirmish, which seemed to me to be not the capture on c4 is dangerous for Black, unfavourable for White. since after 11 ...dxc 4 12 d5! cxd5 13 �xg7 16 ... cxb3! White prevents his opponent from castling, 17 l:te1 �b5 obtaining an enduring initiative for the pawn. Perhaps the most critical reply (although 11 . . . 0-0 later 17... b2!? 18 �xb2 tt:Jc5 came into 12 tt:Jd2 .l:tc8 fashion). Sax attacks the c6-pawn and is still Surprises in the Opening ttJ 47 not afraid of the capture on d7. If White Sax, I repeat, had replied too confidently wants to sell his bishop more dearly - 18 and quickly. . bg7 'it>xg7 19cxd7, then simply 19.. .'ifxd7. In such a situation the main thing is not to Black has the two bishops, and it is not become flustered, not to panic. You should apparent how the weakening of his position try to delve more deeply into the position can be exploited. and try to find what exactly the opponent has in mind. In addition, it is important to brace yourself psychologically for the fact that something unexpected awaits you, some unpleasant surprise ... Realising all this, I neverthelessdid not see any possibility of deviating from the planned capture on g7. Although, I have to admit, I made the move without my former optimism. 19 i.xg7
Now try to look ahead a little, to find out how the game may develop, and what resources are available to White. 18 l:tc1 ? A new move, which is worth considering ... Capture on b3 with the pawn? Yes, this is not a bad reply, perhaps the best. I advise you to look carefully at 18 axb3 at home - the resulting variations are very interesting. Is that all? In fact it is also possible to capture on b3 with the knight, in connection Here Black does not have much choice. with an interesting tactical idea: the sacrifice Thus 20 ... i.f6 is bad - White gains the .ixg7!. It is this possibility that I analysed in advantage after 21 ttJxc6 :Xc6 22 i.xc6 my home preparation - it is a pity if you did ..ixa1 23 'ii'xa1+. The main continuation, not notice it. which I examined in my home analysis, was, i. 18 ttJxb3!? ..ixc6 naturally 20 ... xg2. Let us together try and figure out what was Sax's defensive idea. At this moment the situation suddenly ceased to appeal to me: Sax all too willingly Let's immediately look at the critical line - 21 ttJ went in for the complications, which accord f5+ (other moves hardly deserve serious
There is nothing to be done - the knight has Are there any other suggestions? Capture to be moved into the centre. the d4-pawn with the queen? Let's take a 8 li:Je4 look: 1 0 �xd4 �b4+ 11 'it>d 1 (not 11 li:J � � For the moment the bishop check at b4 is ed2?? c3 or 11 ... xd2+), and now not to be feared - White simply blocks with Black is not obliged to exchange queens, but can play 11 ...1i' a3. Shall we look any his knight. limman continues to increase further? To be honest, with his king on d1 the pressure. White's position does not inspire confi 8... 'ifb6 dence. If it appears to you that White can defend himself here, try checking this position at home. In general, try to support all your feelings with concrete analysis. But remember: in a practical game you are not able to calculate everything to the end, and the main thing is to evaluate correctly the consequences of this or that continua tion, and decide for yourself whether it is worth going in for the variation, or at least seriously examining it. In the given instance, I repeat, I considered the move 1 0 'ir'xd4 to be very dangerous for White, even on psychological grounds, since it hands the Now consider: what should White do? What initiative to the opponent. But I wanted to be 'course of behaviour' should he choose, the attacking side, I myself wanted to fight after encountering such an unusual devel for the initiative with every move! opment of events in the opening, when 10 . . . Si.b4+! Black somehow over-sharply wants to seize The strongest reply - Black drives back one the initiative and win? of the opponent's already developed pieces. The value of each move is now very high. The capture on a2 would be extremely risky The b2-pawn is 'hanging', but to defend it for him, since it would give White the with the rook?!. .. The faint-hearted 9 li:Jd6+, opportunity to begin an attack with 11 e3, as trying somehow to subdue the opponent's well as with the simple capture 11 li:Jxd4. attacking mood, also does not look good: 11 li:Jed2 � iY after 9 ... xd6 10 exd6 xb2 I think that A purely practical decision: by blocking with Black has a minimal advantage. this knight, White reduces the opponent's 9li:Jf3 ! choice of replies. After all, in both cases The critical decision. Of course, White Black can capture on d2, but the move 11 cannot know fo r sure how the complications li:Jed2 forces this exchange, since in the will end, but he acts in accordance with the event of 11 ...'tlf a3 White is now free to rules of opening strategy and brings new capture on d4. pieces into the battle, not bothering about 11 ... Si.xd2+ the defence of the b2-pawn. 12 li:Jxd2 'it'xa2 9... 'it'xb2 It is possible to make an initial assessment 10 l::!.b1 of the operation begun with 10 .:l.b1 . White Surprises in the Opening ttJ 51 has lost a pawn, but in return he has gained 15 .l:lxb7 the opportunity to quickly complete the The rook is included in the attack. development of his pieces. Incidentally, 15 ... .l:ld8 which move best conforms with the given The alternative was 15... g6!?, preparing in aim? advance a shelter for the king, which, and 13 e3 this is already clear, will be unable to castle. Correct! Incidentally, if I had not foreseen Then 16 lt:Je4 is tempting, with the idea of this resource, I possibly would not have invading with the knight. White's initiative .l:t played 1 0 b 1 , but would have looked for seemed dangerous to me even in the event some alternative. It seemed to me that of the exchange of queens: 16.. . 'it'a5+ 17 White was firmly seizing the initiative. 'it'd2 'ifxd2+ (17... 'it' xe5? 18 'it'b4) 18 unable to find any attacking continuation. White is obliged to reject the planned knight 17 'ii'c3! sortieto g5. While improving the position of his queen, at 22 ... .i.d5! the same time White delays the develop ment of the opponent's knight. If 17...'�Jh6 there follows the unpleasant 18 'ii'b4. It is also not good to bring out the knight to e7: 18 .i.b5+ �f8 19 .U.xe 7! (weaker is 19 'ii'b4 �g7!) 19... l:t xd2 20 .Ue8+! �g7 21 'ii'xd2 'ii'b1+ 22 'ti'd1 'ti'xb5 23 .l:r.xh8, and White remains the exchange up. 11 . . . c.t>t8 18 .id3 White continues the attack and simultane ously completes his development. As you see, even in the course of such concrete tactical play the actions of the two players are in accordance with the basic principles By now both sides had little time left. In time of chess strategy. Indeed, both sides (de trouble it is not very pleasant to encounter spite the fact that one is attacking, and the such a threat, but White was able to find the other is obliged to parry immediate threats) correct solution to the problem. make moves which are either developing, or 23 .ie4! hinder the opponent's development! The exchange sacrifice is, of course, tempo 18 . . . .U.c8! rary. A subtle move. With the queen on the long 23 ... .ixb7 diagonal, the black king at g7 will feel 24 'ii'xb7 l:tb8 uncomfortable. After 18... cJi; g7? 19 0-0 White 25 'ii'e7 is already threatening l:txf7+!. Generally speaking, the position is equal. 19 'ii'b4+ Now Black is forced to play 25 ...l:t f8 , since Had Tim man delayed ....l:!. c8 fo r an instant, 25 ...'ti' e6? would be bad on account of the the white queen could have occupied the obvious 26 .U.xf7+!. central d4-point, whereas now it has to be 25 ... l:tf8 satisfied with the side square b4. 26 'ii'f6+ cJi;g8 19 . . . cJi;g7 27 'ti'g5 cJi;g7 20 0-0 lbh6 28 'ii'f6+ Black has managed after all to develop his knight. White forces a draw by repetition. 21 lbe4 28 ... �g8 Threatening 22 lbg5. But at just the right 29 'i!Vg5 cJ;;g7 time Timman is able to bring his last piece 30 'ilkf6+ into play! And here a draw was agreed. 21 ... l:thd8! Of course, had there been a little more time, 22 lbd6 I could have played on, say, by setting an Surprises in the Opening 53 attractive trap: 30 h3, hoping for the reply 30 . . . 'i'e6?. Then there follows 31 �f6 it'd? 32 .ic6! 'file? 33 �xh6+! 'lt>xh6 34 lt::lf5+ and White gives mate. But in a serious game I do not recommend you to be tempted by similar traps - it is not without its dangers. After the correct 30 ...lt::l g8! (taking control of the f6- point) White would still have had to over come certain difficulties. As it was, the game immediately ended in a draw. This game illustrates an important principle, which I usually endeavour to follow: On encount ering a surprise in the opening, endeavour on no account to concede the What moves would you now suggest for psychological advantage to the oppo Black? Let's give them in order: 7 ...lt::l c6, nent, but seek active possibilities and do 7 ...b6, 7 ...lt::l bd7, 7 ...� d7 - four in all. You everything possible to fi ght for the don't have any other ideas? Then look and initiative. Only then can you hope for a see what happened in the game. successful solution to your opening prob lems. 8... lt::ld5!? It is a well-known principle that in the The fo llowing example shows how it is opening you should not move the same possible to fight for a win in an opening set piece twice. However, in the given instance up with which the opponent is more familiar Black was pursuing a perfectly concrete than you. aim. I would not assert that my decision here was the best. No, but it is challenging, since it forces the opponent to solve concrete and Shirazi - Yusupov not very simple problems! Besides, strictly Saint John 1988 speaking, I do not really lose much time. After all, now White has to move his bishop, French Defence as otherwise after its exchange Black will 1 e4 e6 gain the advantage of the two bishops. 2 d4 d5 9 ..id2 3 lt::lc3 il.b4 In playing 8 ...lt::l d5, Black had to have some 4 lt::lge2 plan of action, since it is clear that the An unpleasant surprise, seeing as this opponent will want to push away the knight variation has great drawing tendencies, and by c2-c4. Then the loss of time will be quite I, despite the black pieces, was intending to unjustified. But what specifically should be play for a win. done? The pawn sacrifice 9 ...b5 seems dubious to me. There is, of course, this 4 ... dxe4 positional idea - to try andta ke control of the 5a3 il.e7 light squares, but for the moment it is too 6 lt::lxe4 lt::lf6 early for this. What then should be done? 7�d3 0-0 9... b6 8 il.f4 10 c4 il.a6 54� Surprises in the Opening In effect, Black is simply pulling his oppo on a8. This looks dangerous. I was about to nent's leg: I do not think that much can be move my rook to b8, but then I thought: achieved with an operation such as ...lt:J d5 suppose he captures my rook - perhaps and ....i a6. White had several normal after ...'it' xa8 I will gain counterplay on the reactions. One was 11 b4, another - 11 long diagonal? lt:J2g3 followed by 'ilt'c2. It is probable that On the other hand, if it were not for the soon the knight would have had to retreat to knight on d5, Black would be able to play f6 , afterwhich White would have a pleasant ...lt:J d7-e5 - afterall, the white queen is not game. Nevertheless, since Black has not defended! How can Black neverthelessland done anything particularly reprehensible, in this attractive tactical blow ...lt:J d7-e5 ? principle his handling of the opening is also The move made by me may objectively be possible. questionable, but in the end it was thanks to Kamran Shirazi approached the position it that I won the game. differently. He decided that his knight was 12 . . . lt:J5f6!? already developed - at e2, and that it was Can you explain what is the point of Black's time he developed his f1 -bishop. combination? After all, after the seemingly 11 g3 forced 13 lt:Jxf6+ .ixf6 14 .ixa8 ifxa8 A move provoked by the position of the 15 0-0 White does not face any threats ... bishop on a6. Well, of course, the point is that this 11 . . . lt:Jd7 variation is not at all forced! The intermedi lt:J 12 .ig2 ate stroke 14... e5! is in fact the idea of the combination. Here I again chose a problematic decision. Can anyone suggest what it was? Generally 13lt:Jxf6+ .ixf6 speaking, it is not so easy to find. 14 .ixa8 Of course, this operation is not obligatory, but, as I was hoping, Shirazi could not resist the temptation to capture the rook. 14 . . . lt:Je5! 15�e4 ifxa8 16 'ii'xa8 lt:Jd3+ It was extremely difficult for me to decide on this variation: after all, the exchange is the exchange! But after a careful study I realised that Black has compensation: the character of the play has changed sharply, and the initiative is on his side. In certain situations such risky play can be justified. Shirazi is a player of active style, Let us consider together the resources of who likes to attack. Players of this type often the two sides. First of all an anxious thought underestimate the opponent's threats, and occurs: what if the white queen should now they do not defend too confidently. retreat to c2? The knight will have to move 17 �1 .l:txa8 from d5, and then I may lose the exchange 18 b3 .ib7 Surprises in the Opening ltJ 55 The immediate 18... c5 also came into 23 'itte2 exf2 consideration. 24 ttJxf2 �xa1 19 l:.g1 c5 As a result Black is simply a healthy pawn to the good with the better position. 25 l:txa1 f6 26 .l:.c1 'it;f7 27 We3 e5 28 a4 'itte6 29 a5 f5 30 c5 bxc5 31 ttJd3 �d5 The conversion of the advantage is simple. Black gradually advances his kingside pawns. 32 ttJxc5+ 'ittd6 33 b4 g5 The weakness of the light squares in the 34 ttJa6 f4+ opponent's position and the fact that he is 35 'ittf2 e4 somewhat behind in development provide 36 h4 h6 definite compensation for the exchange. I There is no need to calculate any variations am not talking about anything more, but I -two connected passed pawns in combina think that the compensation is nevertheless tion with a powerful bishop are quite sufficient: Black's pieces are active, he has sufficient for a win. the two bishops, and in addition he has chances of winning another pawn. All this 37 ttJc7 'itte5 inspired me! 38 hxg5 hxg5 However, the position is far from clear, and 39 gxf4+ gxf4 how all this should turn out is hard to say. 40 :cs e3+ Had White now played, say, 20 �c3, it is 41 'itte2 'itte4 doubtful whether Black would have had White resigned. anything better than 20 ...l:. d8, allowing the Let us ask ourselves: how was Black able to follow ing variation: 21 dxc5 ttJxc5 22 �xf6 win so easily? After all, he encountered an gxf6 23 We 1 !? (but not 23 b4? ltJb3 ), and if unfamiliar system of development, which 23 ...tt'l xb3, then 24 .l:!.d1. usually does not bode well. In my view, the 20 �e3? lld8 secret of Black's success was largely Apparently Shirazi was intending to play 21 associated with the fact that he responded J:!. d1 , and it was only here that he saw the in the psychologically correct way to his ltJ sa me unpleasant reply 21... e5!. Upset by opponent's unexpected choice of opening. such a turn of events, he was unable to He did not allow himself to be drawn into any readjust correctly and he lost effectively well-studied, forcing variations, which were without a fight. possible, for example, after4 ttJge2 dxe4 5 21 ltJf4?! cxd4 a3 �xc3+, but preferred an original scheme 22 ttJxd3 dxe3 of development with a definite positional 56 c;t> Surprises in the Opening basis. Such tactics - to divertth e oppo 11 dxc5 nent fr om the well-trodden paths, espe In practice 11 liJg5 and 11 i..a3 have also cially if he is inferior to you in class - been tried. often bear fr uit. 11 . . . bxc5 The following example develops the theme 12 c4! of the French Defence. The game with White undermines the centre. Andrey Sokolov, which I want to show you, was played in our Candidates Match and, I remember, it afforded me great creative satisfaction. A. Sokolov - Yusupov Final Candidates Match, 3rd game Riga 1986 French Defence 1 e4 e6 2d4 d5 3liJc3 i..b4 4e5 liJe7 5a3 i..xc3+ 6 bxc3 c5 Here I had to think seriously. I had only 7liJf3 b6 some vague memories of the games from Match play has its specific features, and in it the Geller-Spassky Candidates quarter a particular place is given over to opening final match (Sukhumi 1968), where this duels. The aim of the last move is obvious: variation occurred several times. Black wants to exchange his bad 'French' In such situations you have to be guided by bishop. In the 1st game Sokolov preferred to common sense, and if the position allows it, avoid the exchange, by playing 8 i..b5+ i..d7 avoid the familiar paths as far as possible, 9 i..d3. He obtained a reasonable position, choosing positionally justified but less well but later he lost in a complicated struggle. It studied continuations. was clear that for the 3rd game Sokolov I sensed that the fu rther course of the would think up something new. But what? In struggle would largely depend on what my preparations with my trainer, to be squares the black knights would occupy, honest, I did not guess right, and the and in particular where the b8-knight would opening of this game came as something of be developed. a surprise to me. 12 ... 0-0 8a4 This move did not cause any great doubts. A typical move in such positions. 13 cxd5 8... i..a6 But here it was time to avoid the fa miliar 9 i..xa6 paths, and not wait for Sokolov to spring i.. 9 b5+ is more often played. some surprise. As far as I remembered, 9... liJxa6 Boris Spassky captured on d5 with his 10 0-0 liJb8 queen. Surprises in the Opening 57 13 ... tt:'lxd5!? 17... 'ik e7 White strengthens his position by Not a bad square for the knight. For the 18l:i.ad 1! (it has to be this rook) 18... l:i. fd8 19 moment Black is not particularly afraid of .l:td6, and if 19... l:I xd6, then 20 �xc5, c2-c4, since his knight can occupy the b4- winning a pawn. square. After some thought, I decided that the place 14 'it'd3 for the knight was at e7. Here it may come in What wo uld you suggest now for Black? To useful for the defence of the kingside and in answer this question correctly, you must see general it has good prospects: it can the aim of White's last move. possibly move to f5 and then d4, or else go to g6, attacking the e5-pawn. Of course, Well, of course, he wants to play 14 tt:'lg5, when choosing the move I also had to forcing the reply ...g7 -g6, which seriously analyse concrete variations. For example, weakens the dark squares. This weakening the following one, which looks rather dan is very significant, in view of the absence of gerous for Black: 15... tt:'l e7 16 .l::td1 'iixd3 17 an opponent to White's dark-square bishop. l:txd3 tt:'lbc6 18 �e3, and it appears that the 14 ... h6 c5-pawn cannot be defended . But. .. it only The position is very complicated. To 15 lld1 appears to be so! I had prepared the reply I was intending to reply 15... tt:'l c6, and if 16 18.. .l:Ifc8! and if 19 �xc5 - 19... tt:'l xe5!. This, ia3, then 16... tt:'l cb4, with unclear play. so to speak, is the tactical justification of Sokolov played more positively and ... less 15... tt:'l e7. successfully. In the given instance the general evaluation 15 c4 of the position is combined with concrete calculation, which is usually a necessary condition fo r taking the correct decision. You can give as many general considerations as you like in defence of a move, but if it then turns out that in one of the variations a pawn is simply lost - all your arguments will lose their point. Yo ur evaluations must without fail be supported by accurate calculation! 15 ... tt:'le7! 16 'i!Ve4 The next important question is where to develop the b8-knight: at c6 or d7? After some thought, I chose 16... tt:'l d7, since after 16... tt:'l bc6 it would have been much more What possibilities does Black have here? difficult to defend the c5-pawn. General With a pawn on a4, 15... tt:'l b6 obviously speaking, when you encounter an unfamiliar looks bad, and the knight is also badly system, you should pay extra attention to placed on c?. He has to choose between your opponent's threats. 15... tt:'l b4 and 15... tt:'l e7. 16 ... tt:'ld7 I rej ected 15... tt:'l b4, since I reckoned that 17 kib1 ? after 16 'l!lt'e4 tt:'l8c6 17 �e3 my knights The best continuation was 17ltd1. But I saw would be badly placed. At b4 the knight is that after 17... 'ii c7 I did not have to fear 18 outwardly active, but that is all. In reply to .f!d6?! in view of 18... tt:'l f5!, when it is bad to 58 � Surprises in the Opening play 19 .llc6? 'ii'b7 20 I!.b1 tLlb6 with the deadly threat of 21 ...It ac8. However, Sokolov played superficially. He realised that I would answer 17 l::td1 with 17... 'ii' c7, and he decided to prevent this, by preparing 18l:tb7 in reply. However, 17... 'ii' c7 is by no means obligatory. Black can easily equalise by 17... l:t b8. But at this moment I sensed that my position was already prefer able and that it was possible to play for a win. 17 ... 'iia5! If there is a possibility of making an active move, it should be made! Black seizes the - position after 19 'ii'c2 - initiative. For the moment the a4-pawn is It goes without saying that it is pleasant to hanging. White should probably have admit make such moves. ted his mistake and returned his rook to a1. 21 'ii'e2 'ii'xe5 18 l::td1 22 �e3 tLlf5 Why not simply capture the pawn now? After all, at first sight Black is not threatened with As a result of his combination Black has won anything. a pawn and is close to winning the game. However, he still has to overcome some It turns out that if 18... 'ii' xa4? there is the technical difficulties. idea 19 �xh6! gxh6 20 l::ta1 'ii'c6 21 'ii'xc6 ttJxc6 22 l:txd7, and White is alright. But 23 'iVf3 l:txd1 + Black is hoping fo r more. The immediate 23 ...tLl d4 was possibly pref 18 ... .l:I.ad8! erable, but I decided to play more simply. 18 ...tLl b6 was also not bad, but 18.. Jiad8 24 .Uxd1 tLld4 (only not 18... .U fd 8? 19llxd7!) nevertheless Here Sokolov committed a serious mistake. seemed to me to be the most energetic. As He should have chosen 25 'iib7. Then Black long as White's bishop lingers on the back would probably have had nothing better rank, his king may not feel safe: it has no than 25 ...tLl c2 26 'iif3 ttJxe3, and in the escape square, and the opponent is already resulting endgame White would retain draw creating tactical threats. ing chances. 19 'ii'c2 25 �xd4? cxd4 Sokolov decided to defend the a4-pawn, 26 itd3 l::td8 overlooking the spectacular reply. It is 27 g3 it'c5 amusing that, as in the preceding game, it is The queen makes way for the e-pawn. a knight sortiefrom d7 to e5 that proves fatal 28 f4?! for White! This merely leads to a weakening of White's (see diagram) king position. But all the same things are 19 . . . tLlxe5!! bad for him, and so this move should not be 20 ttJxe5 strongly criticised. The rest is easy. 20 .Uxd8 ttJxf3+. 28 ... 'ii'b4 20 ... 'iic31 29 .Ua1 aS Surprises in the Opening 59 A move that suggests itself, wouldn't you expectation, such a thing happens, the main agree? The enemy pawn is fixed and thing is not to engage in self-reproach (this Black's own pawn advances closer to the won't help matters!), but to remember an queening square. While it is possible, you ancient truth: to regret a mistake that has should aim to strengthen your position to the been made is to make a second mistake! maximum, and only then seek a concrete Let us analyse a game of mine with the plan for converting the advantage. In the English grandmaster To ny Miles. It was given instance, since White has no coun played at the start of the Interzonal To urna terplay at all, Black has no reason to hurry. ment in Tunis and was of great importance 30 h4 h5 for me. At that time Miles was considered to 31 .l:tb1 'ii'xa4 be one of the strongest players in the West, and he had achieved good tournament 32 .l:tb5 g6 results. I had Black, and therefore I decided 33 �2 'i!Va2+ to choose a safe opening. But here is what 34 �3 a4 came of this ... 35 .l:!.b6 With the idea of 36 .l:!.xe6. Here Black Miles - Yusupov repeated moves to gain time on the clock. Interzonal To urnament, Tunis 1985 35 ... �g7 Caro-Kann Defence 'it> 36 .l:l.b1 gB 1 c4 c6 37 .l:.b6 'ii'a1! At that time the Slav Defence was part of my Turning to resolute action. If 38 .U.xe6 I was opening repertoire, and it was this that I had intending 38 ....l:!. b8! 39 .l:.!.xg6+ 'it>f8 , and planned for my meeting with Miles. And Black himself launches an attack. suddenly - to my horror! - Miles replied with 38 �e2 a3 something quite unexpected. 39 .l:l.a6 'ifb2+ 2 e4! 40 "i¥d2 d3+ Of course, the exclamation mark is not for the strength of the move, but fo r the correct On seeing that the opponent had managed psychological choice. The point is that after to make the time control, Sokolov resigned . 1 e4 I do not play the Caro-Kann Defence, In what way is this game instructive? It and in my preparations for the game I had shows how important it is to pay attention to absent-mindedly overlooked this simple tran the opponent's threats - both to those that sition into it. Yes, such a transposition of are obvious - tactical, and to the more moves can be more unsettling than any camouflaged - positional. In this respect I prepared variation! would single out the move 15... tt:J e7, which 2... d5 in some way provided the basis for Black's success. At any event, it helped him to solve 3 exd5 cxd5 his opening problems. 4d4 tt:Jf6 Don't forget about another verycunning 5 tt:Jc3 tt:Jc6 ope ning weapon - move transposition ! When you encounter a little-known system, Sometimes it can be sufficient for the you naturally want to reduce it to something opponent simply to change the places of two that is more or less familiar to you. I had moves, fo r all your preparatory analytical some idea about the variations arising after6 work to come to nothing. If, contrary to tt:Jf3 il.g4, but, alas, Miles played differently. 60 � Surprises in the Opening 6 j,gS than 7 ...exf6 . The pawn captures towards At this my opening knowledge came to an the centre, thereby strengthening Black's end. What to do? Now 6 ...e6 would have led control of it. But, more important, it does not to well-known theoretical set-ups - well lead to a strategically unpromising situation, known, but not to me. Therefore I decided to where on the queenside White effectively look for some other sensible path. creates an extra pawn. 6... �e6!? 8�d2 Miles delays the development of his knight at f3 , in order later to have the possibility of f2-f4 , inhibiting the advance of the black e pawn. Naturally, such a decision also has its drawbacks - since neglecting the rules of development may tell. 8... liaS Now it is rather more difficult for Black to bring his dark-square bishop into play (he does not have ...� f8-h6), and so he completes his queenside development, aim ing for castling on that side of the board. The queen will be more actively placed at a5 than at d7. The concrete justification of the move is that if 9 ltJxd5?! there follows It was only afterthe game that I learned that 9 ...� xd2+ 10 'it>xd2 0-0-0, and then Black 6 ...� e6 had been introduced by Sergey regains the pawn on d5. Belavenets, and later taken up by Salo 9 c5 0-0-0 Flohr. At first sight Black's decision may seem eccentric, but in essence it is not 10 j,bS without point, since it does not greatly In my view, it would have been better for violate the principles of opening play. In White to complete his development by 10 deed, I develop a piece, establish control ltJge2 and then g2-g3. over the centre, strengthen the d5-point, and create the possible threat of capturing on c4 . It is hard to demand more of one move! 7 j,xf6 This exchange could have been delayed, by playing, for example, 7 l2lf3. But, as it turned out, Miles was following the recommenda tions of theory, based on a game Botvinnik Fiohr (Moscow 1965). In it after7 �xf6 exf6 8 c5 White gained a positional advantage, defined by his superior pawn structure. 7... gxf6! This move also has certain drawbacks, but on the whole, in my view, it is more logical What move would you now suggest for Surprises in the Opening 61 Black? 10... h5 and then ...Si. h6 ? There is 13 ti.d1 Si.f5 such an idea. But I decided to play more 14... tZ'l c2+ is threatened. Just 13 moves directly. have been made, and already Black has 10 . . . l:tg8! launched a decisive attack. This is the Black aims to create a weakening in the retribution for neglecting the development of opponent's position. In the event of 11 g3 he the pieces. could now have continued 11 ... h5, but he 14 a3 Sl. could also have considered 11 ... g4, hin- It was nevertheless better to play 14 tZ'lge2, dering the development of the knight at e2 but after 14... tZ'l c2+ 15 'it>f1 e5 16 tZ'lg3 llg4! and preparing the thematic advance ...e7- the complications favour Black. You suggest e5. 14... a6 ? A strong move - this is probably 11 f4 simpler. Miles prepares in advance to combat ...e7- 14 ... tZ'lc2+ e5. But, by making many pawn moves, he 15 'iii>d2 Si.e4! delays the development of his pieces, which After 15... e5 White could still have somehow I tryto exploit. resisted with 16 tZ'le2. But now the game 11 . . . i.h6 concludes quickly. Black's play is simple and natural. It some 16 tZ'lge2 l:txg2 how happens of its own accord , that all his 17 'ir'h4 tZ'lxd4 moves aid the implementation of his plan. From h6 the bishop helps ...e7-e5 to be 18 'ir'h3+ f5 carried out, but it is quite possible that it will 19 Si.d3 tZ'lxe2 also come in useful for the landing of some 20 ii.xe2 i.xf4+ tactical blow. It is time to resign, but through inertia Miles Here it was already essential for Miles to makes a few more moves. remember about development. True, if 12 21 �e1 d4 Sergey Dolmatov The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening hat does a player's opening prepa his best years, but in the games of, say, W ration normally comprise? The study Garry Kasparov, such examples are very of specific variations from books, lnformators, rare. He is accustomed to always carrying and articles devoted to particular openings. out specific plans, whereas manoeuvring There you will find key positions and you will does not pursue any clear aim. Apart, think about them, analyse, look fo r novel perhaps, from one: the opponent faces an ties, select useful games, and so on. This is examination in his understanding of abso the most common and undoubtedly the lutely all the subtleties of the position. If most legitimate way of processing opening neither of the sides has a positional advan info rmation - research within some specific tage (or it is insufficient to achieve any real opening. gains), it is often necessary to manoeuvre, But it is also possible to work in another way to move to and fro apparently aimlessly, -by the method of generalisation, selecting without worsening the placing of the pieces. general situations which arise in completely When the opponent is unable to withstand different openings. For example, it is useful such manoeuvring and he commits an to study typical pawn structures - some of inaccuracy, by tactical means one can them are simultaneously typical of several sharply change the character of the play and openings. Interesting conclusions can be seize the initiative. drawn by observing how different players I am studying this theme, but each of us can react to novelties: successfully, unsuccess choose his own. Having chosen a theme, fu lly, whether they spend a lot of time, look for examples in the games of top-class whether they try to immediately refute them players and analyse how they solve the or seek the most reliable continuations - problem interesting you. Endeavour from all here there are many interesting aspects. the examples to pick out those in which If you observe in yourself an ability to make there is something common, which unites generalisations on some chosen feature, them. The solving of such creative problems you can confidently exploit this ability. Such brings great benefit. an approach to the processing of opening I will dwell in more detail on the following info rmation may prove for you to be the most problem, as it is one to which no one has yet productive. I should once again emphasise: given serious consideration. Perhaps be you can improve in chess in all sorts of cause it requires a high chess standard. ways, in accordance with your individual Eminent grandmasters sometimes make inclinations. strong moves which they themselves find At present I am working on the middlegame, hard to explain. Moreover, it is almost and I have become interested in a theme impossible to demonstrate even in analysis which no one yet has seriously analysed - that these moves are objectively the strong the art of manoeuvring. Anatoly Karpov has est. Nevertheless, in a given specific game a good mastery of it, as did Lev Psakhis in they help problems to be successfully The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 63 solved, they make their mark on the entire I will show you some examples on the same subsequent play, and impart to it the theme, taken from my own games. I will not required character. If you can observesuch try to demonstrate rigorously that the solu moments in the games of top-class players, tions found in critical positions were the you may be able to sharply increase your strongest. But these moves will be semanti understanding of chess. cally important and will exert a decisive Here is a specific example: influence on the furthercou rse of the play. Incidentally, you will see examples of my reactions to surprises in the opening. The Kasparov - Karpov opponent employed a novelty and all the 2nd match game, Seville 1987 problems had to solved at the board , not in home analysis. I repeat: if you work on such situations, which few players notice, you may achieve serious progress. At a tournament in Iceland I met Lev Polugayevsky. The opening was a Dutch Defence. I often employ it with Black and it was not hard to guess that Polugayevsky would be fully armed. Usually he used to prepare very thoroughly for the opening. Indeed, a surprise awaited me. I realised this beforehand, from the manner in which my opponent conducted the game. He made his moves very slowly, obviously luring me, and not wanting me to avoid the main After the well-known opening moves 1 c4 variation. But I believed in my opening set I/Jf6 2 tt::lc3 e5 3 tt::lf3 tt::lc6 4 g3 ..tb4 5 ..tg2 ups, I wanted to uphold my views, and 0-0 6 0-0 e4 7 ltJg5 ..txc3 8 bxc3 .l::te8 9 f3 therefore I had no intention of deviating. Karpov employed a novelty - 9 ...e3 !?. How should White best respond to it? The pro blem facing White is an exceptionally diffi Polugayevsky - Dolmatov cult one. Kasparov found an outstanding Reykjavik 1990 solution, apparently the best solution to an Dutch Defence opening problem in the match - 10 d3! d5 11 'i'b3!!. Such moves are oftenfo und not in 1 d4 f5 home analysis, but at the chess board, when 2 liJf3 liJf6 the player is under strong emotional pres 3 g3 g6 sure. Many reviewers did not understand 4 ..tg2 ..tg7 why Karpov, afterempl oying the novelty and 5 0-0 0-0 winning the game, never played this again. The explanation is simple: at the board Kas 6c4 d6 parov refuted the novelty; the move 'it'b3 is 7 ltJc3 c6 very strong. I was one of Kasparov's sec This is the so-called Leningrad Va riation of onds at the match and I can state this with the Dutch Defence, not its most fashionable complete certainty. An excellent example of branch, which would appear to have been a creative solution to an irrational problem! introduced into modern tournament practice The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening by Artur Yusupov. But now, I think, I play it this was how I won with Black in a tense more than anyone else. It was also known struggle against Dmitry Gurevich (Palma de earlier, but it had a bad reputation. The usual Mallorca 1989) and Walter Browne at that continuation in this position is 7 ...'it' e8. same tournament in Reykjavik. 8 b3 10 'it'd2! This is what White played in the well-known A novelty, which was undoubtedly prepared game Karpov-Yusupov (Linares 1989), at home. Polugayevsky was very pleased which ended dismally fo r Artur - Karpov with this move; indeed, it is unexpected and scored a good win. But to me this plan unpleasant, and in my opening preparations seems unconvincing. I overlooked it. The idea is simple: White defends against the opponent's main posi 8 ... 'it'aS tional threat ...e5-e4 (1 O ...e4? is not possi The idea of this move is simple. I attack the ble because of 11 tt:Jxe4 ). You will realise knight on c3 and simultaneously prepare that if Black can advance his pawn to e4, he 9 ...e5. When I devised this novelty (Yusupov will obtain an excellent position. Only White 'it' played 8 ... c7 followed by ...a7-a5 and will have problems - his king's bishop is tt:l ... a6), I assumed that by advancing ...e7- shut in, and the undermining move f2-f3 is e5 Black would obtain a comfortable posi ineffective. This is why I mainly looked at 11 tion. I thought that White's best reply was 9 e4 (after the preliminary exchange on e5) � 'iV d2, but then I retreat 9 ... c7, when the and overlooked the possibility of 10 �d2. white bishop is less well placed than in the And since Black cannot play ...e5 -e4, it is Karpov-Yusupov game. This occurred in very awkward for him to make his reply. I several of my games, and they all ended in a reasoned as follows: 'I should be satisfied draw. But Polugayevsky played diffe rently. that at least I have played ...e7-e5 - that is 9 i.b2 e5 good!' 10 ... W/c7 11 dxe5 dxe5 12 e4 Of course, White does not allow ...e5 -e4. But what should I do now? In roughly this position I had replied either ...f xe4, or ...f5- f4 . By analogy with the games against Gurevich and Browne, I wanted to play 12.. .f4. But, alas, here this will not do, since after 13 gxf4 exf4 White breaks through in the centre with 14 e5, while the usual response 13... tt:l h5 loses its strength: 14 fxe5, and White has no real compensation for the pawn. [I think that 14 ...� g4! gives I first reached this position in a qualifying quite good counterplay - Dvoretsky.] tournament fo r the World Cup (Moscow In the event of 12... fxe4 13 tt:lg5 the knight, 1989) against Helgi Olafsson. He continued afterre aching e4, secures White a positional 10 dxe5 dxe5 11 e4. I failed to grasp the advantage. Incidentally, for your informa essence of the position, played 11 ...fxe4? !, tion: the structure in the Dutch Defence with and ended up worse. 11 ...f 4! is stronger - an isolated e5-pawn and a white knight on The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 65 e4 is sometimes not so easy to evaluate, but here the play has developed logically. under one condition - if Black's pawn is still Polugayevsky employed a novelty, and on c7, and his knight can go via c6 to d4. Black responded in probably the strongest Then Black usually has good counterplay. way. But here I sensed that the position was But if the pawn is on c6, then normally the still rather dangerous for Black. Although I position is significantly worse for Black. have achieved much (brought out my bishop Therefore 12.. .fxe4 is bad. to f5 in one move, and developed my After some thought I realised that Poluga knight), some problems, and very serious yevsky could not have thoroughly checked ones, remain. My pieces do not stand badly, all the variations (he had prepared at the but in time they may be pushed back by h2- tournament, immediately before the game), h3 and g3-g4. The e5-pawn is isolated, and and I hit on a move which he had probably the knight cannot get to d4. Exchanges overlooked . The move is quite natural, and merely make my defence more difficult, probably the strongest, but for some reason since the isolated pawn is retained and the it had escaped his attention. As a result the possibilities for counterplay will be fewer situation became equal - subsequently we and fewer. It was in such conditions that I were both obliged to solve independently had to find a plan of subsequent action. the problems at the board . The move which I made is, I think, the 12 ... lDa6! strongest. If such decisions interest you, look for them, for example, in the games of It transpires that the natural 13 .l::!.ad1 is unfavourable for White in view of 13... fxe4 Kasparov. Although this is not easily done - outwardly such moves are not prominent, 14 tt'lg5 �g4 with an attack on the rook. the commentators do not usually under Polugayevsky did not want to capture stand them, and they are not seriously immediately on f5, developing Black's pieces, explained. This is why it is best to study the but he had to. notes to games, written by the players 13 exfS ..ll.xfS themselves. 14 l::i.ad1 14 ... .l::!.fe8!! An imperceptible, unprepossessing move, but I am proud of it. All the subsequent play will be governed by the ideas embodied in this move. What is the point of it? The e5-pawn is weak, and it is useful to defend it. The rook is badly placed at f8 , since Black cannot play his knight to c5 in view of ..ll.a3. These are some of the motives for my decision. But this is not the only point, of course - there are also deeper reasons for placing the rook on e8. It is clear that White wants to play h2-h3, depriving the black pieces of the g4-point and securing the e3-square for the queen. Then he will I should like to draw your particular attention play g3-g4. It is against this plan that Black to this position, since it is associated with has prepared a tactical antidote, involving the main theme of our discussion. Up to the invasion of his knight on d3. 66 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 15 h3 ltJc5 square, now the bishop can be placed there, ltJ 16 1i'e3 ltJd3! followed by ...e5 -e4 and ... c2. Yo u can see that it is not so easy to drive back the This is the whole point - the knight is black pieces. Polugayevsky hopes to do this invulnerable in view of the fork: 17 .l:!.xd3? after first covering the weak c2- and d3- �xd3 18 'it'xd3 e4. squares. If you are in a good frame of mind and can 18 ltJe1 h5! find such decisions, it means that you do not have to fear inferior positions and that you are capable of saving a game where you are dubiously placed. I am convinced that if I had not found this idea, and instead of .. J:lfe8 I had made some 'normal' move, 14.. J lad8 for example, then I would have imperceptibly ended up in a difficult position and gradually lost, without even understand ing why this happened. And I would prob ably have reckoned that I had ended up in a bad position from the opening and that the entire variation was unsuitable. That is how many games end, when a player fails to find the only creative decision contained in the position. Of course, I did not know for sure how it would all end, but I realised that after Black prevents g3-g4 and at the same time 14... .l:!. fe8 I would gain counter-chances. If I prepares ...'it> h 7 and ...SL. h6. Note that with was going to lose the game, it would be in a the knight on f3 I would not have played this. struggle. When my opponent replied 15 h3, I Apart from virtues, moves also have draw became finally convinced that I had made backs: the opponent has parried my threats, the correct choice. This, if you like, is but in so doing he has disconnected his complex prophylaxis: Black had to realise rooks and allowed me to play ...h7 -h5. that White wanted to play h2-h3, and to find White now has to hurry, since the plan with how to combat this. ...'it> h7 and ...SL. h6 is unpleasant for him. Afterin teresting adventures the game ended 19 a3 ltJc2 in a draw. I don't see where White could The knight has done a great deal of work have improved on what he played and and it can now be sent off on holiday. gained an advantage. 20 ttJxc2 SL.xc2 17 SL.a1 Here Polugayevsky faced an interesting 18 g4 is threatened. The knight on d3 is problem, and he coped with it successfully. insecure, and I did not want to place my There is a choice between l:td2 and .l:!.c1 . It pawn on e4. looks safer to play 21 l:tc1 , since Black ltJ 17 ... b4 cannot reply 21 ...SL. xb3? 22 ltJe4. He is I continue to harass the opponent with little forced to retreat 21 ...SL. f5 . After 22 ltJe4 threats: on this occasion the fork ...ltJ c2. In ltJxe4 23 SL.xe4 Black can choose between the event of 18 g4 White has to reckon with 23 ...SL. xh3 and 23 ...'it> h7. We looked at this 18... SL. d3. First the knight went to this afterthe game - here Black is alright. The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 67 21 .l:!.d2! 'it'a6. I would have replied 25 ...'it' b6, plan Polugayevsky made the more forceful move. ning 26 ...e4 . White prevents this by 26 l:td6 Here the rook is much more active that on 'ii'xa6 27 l:!.xa6. If Black defends his a7- c1 , since it remains on the open file. True, pawn with an 'accurate' move such as the b3-pawn is sacrificed. Retreating the 27 ...l:!. e7, then after 28 l:tc1 his position is bishop with 21 .....t f5 would be a psychologi very difficult, and perhaps lost, despite the cal concession, which is undesirable. If you extra pawn. 27 ...c3 is necessary, when the are offered a pawn and there is no forced subsequent play is forced: 28 l:tc1 c2 29 refutation, the sacrifice should be accepted, ..tc6 l:ted8 30 .t!.xc2 .t!.d 1 + 31 �g2 l'lxa 1 32 in my view. ..td5+ tt:Jxd5 33 l:txc8+ 'it>h7 34 l:txa7 l:ta2. 21 ... ..txb3! Some danger for Black would still appear to exist, but objectively this is a draw. 22 tt:Jb51 I think it will have become more clear to you If 22 'i!fd3 there is the reply 22 .. .'�f7. what I had in mind, when I talked about defending the g6-pawn and threatening the moves in an irrational position which have a c4-pawn. White does not have time to attack decisive influence on the further course of the bishop on b3. the play. 14... .l:!. fe8 is such a move. It is not a 22 ... cxb5 question of whether it is possible to demon 23 'iVxb3 bxc4 strate in analysis that it is the strongest. This 24 'iVxb7 .l:tac8 move contains a certain set of ideas, which were later carried out in the game - this is the main thing. Here is another example on the same theme, rather more complicated. Also to a certain extent prophylaxis, but not at all obvious. The following game against Kirill Georgiev was played in a European champi ons cup match. Dolmatov - Georgiev Moscow 1989 Sicilian Defence 1 e4 c5 White, of course, has full compensation for 2 tt:Jf3 d6 the pawn . In this position I offered a draw, 3 d4 cxd4 and it was accepted. Both players were 4 tt:Jxd4 tt:Jf6 already short of time. Polugayevsky thought 5 tt:Jc3 g6 that it was risky to play on a pawn down, 6 ..te3 ..tg7 while I sensed that I would be unable to convert my pawn advantage. Subsequent 7 f3 0-0 analysis confirmed that the agreement to a 8 'ii'd2 tt:Jc6 draw was justified. The Dragon Va riation. The attitude of strong Polugayevsky was intending to play 25 players to this opening is fairly unanimous: it 68 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening is rather dangerous for Black. But in top 9 ... e6 level games White normally avoids the sharpest and most critical lines, and does not try directly to refute Black's set-up. The point is that the theory of the Dragon Va riation is very extensive and is constantly growing thanks to games by medium strength players. But among the leading grandmasters there are few who employ it with Black. Therefore those who play 1 e4 are reluctant to constantly engage in compli cated searchings, when it is not clear whether they will ever come in useful. In the Dragon Va riation I, fo r example, always face the problem: how to obtain not even an advantage with White, but simply a comfortable position. I never play 9 i.c4 : I think that afterthe present game this move there is too much theory there, and very little will go out of use. It was once played against scope for independent play. I want to play me several years earlier by Vitaly Tsesh chess, and not compete in accuracy of kovsky (at the international tournament in opening analysis. Therefore I am interested Frunze in 1983). I remembered only that, in 9 0-0-0 and 9 g4; both continuations are although I won, I did not obtain anything in possible. Now the popularity of castling has particular out of the opening. I again had to grown, because after9 ...d5 they have found ponder over the position. the new resource 10 'it'e1!?. Black's idea is clear - he wants to play 9 g4 ...d6 -d5. Before White exchanges on d5, it I have been employing this move for a long is desirable to drive away the knight by g4- time. I once lost a game where I castled g5. I looked at the natural variation 1 0 0-0-0 queenside, and I decided to try 9 g4, not a d5 11 g5 lt:Jh5 and noticed that if now 12 new idea, but a forgotten one. However, I exd5, then Black exchanges twice on d4 and was forestalled by Anatoly Karpov, who captures the g5-pawn with check. employed it in 1982 against Jonathan Perhaps White should defend the g5-pawn Mestel and To ny Miles. The variation be beforehand? 10 h4 looks natural, but after came popular. But in the end Black found a 1 0 ...d5 11 g5 lt:Jh5 Black has the possibility strong antidote, and today this continuation of exchanging his knight for my bishop by is not highly rated fo r White. I know several ...tt:J g3. Incidentally, that is what happened in ways fo r Black to equalise. The most my game with Tseshkovsky - after 1 0 0-0-0 reliable is a plan, which according to theory d5 11 g5 lt:Jh5 12 h4 Black played 12... tt:J g3 results in an unclear endgame: 9 ...i. e6 13 .l:i.g1 tt:Jxf1 14 .l:i.gxf1 tt:Je5 and an unclear tt:J 'ilt' fo llowed by ... xd4 and ... a5. On this position was reached. theme I recommend you to look at the notes Now the point of the move made by me will to my game with Alexey Shirov (Kiaipeda become clear. 1988) in Mark Dvoretsky's book School of Chess Excellence 4 - Opening Develop 10 l:!.g1! ments (p.1 63). Incidentally, it is fa r worse to Seemingly a logical decision, but it was not begin with 9 ...tt:J xd4. easy to play this. Here the problem was The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening ltJ 69 purely psychological - I had to overcome a tack. But there Black's king's bishop is on certain routine. It appears that we should be e7. He plays ...tt'l b6, after which it is not mounting a traditional attack with h2-h4-h5, easy for White to parry the threatened knight and the move .l::tg1 does not fit in with this invasion on c4.But here, with the bishop on plan. In fact it is far more important to carry g7, the knight can be restricted by the typical out the prophylactic idea embodied in the idea b2-b3. White should not be afraid to modern rook move. After Black has played make this move. But with the bishop on e? ...e7-e6 , he can no longer avoid the Black in reply would have the dangerous pin advance in the centre. ...ii. b4. 10 ... d5 13 ... tt'lb6 11 g5 14 f4 Now if 11.. .<�J h5 there follows 12 exd5, and It is useful to deprive the knight of the e5- the knight on the edge of the board stands point. very badly - it has altogether no moves. 14 ... .Ue8 Sometimes in such cases White plays his 15.l:i.g3 knight to g3, forcing the exchange and 15 iLf2 was perhaps more accurate, not opening the h-file fo r his attack. allowing the exchange sacrifice. Georgiev decided to play his knight to a 15 ... ii.d7 normal position. 16 ii.f2 .Uc8 11 . . . tt'ld7 One senses that Black has serious prob [Many seemingly buried opening set-ups lems with his d5-pawn, and he is unable to prove on closer inspection to be very much initiate counterplay. If ...tt'l c6-a5 there is alive. That is the case here: Black ended up always the reply b2-b3!. in a difficult position not as a consequence 17 �b1 of a bad opening variation, but as a result of this unfortunate knight retreat to a square For the moment White simply improves his where it has fe w prospects.Lat er the correct position. He need not be in a hurry to try and plan was fo und: 11...tbe8! (Wolff-Fedoro win, but should first consolidate in the wicz, USA Championship 1992). After the centre. exchange of pawns on dS the knight goes 17 ... tt'le7 via cl to e6. Perhaps somewhere Kirill could have played On the other hand, in the game Zapata more cunningly, and also at some point Armas, Havana 1986, after 10 0-0-0 dS 11 found an interesting idea like 10 .l:i.g1 !, or g5 li:JhS White demonstrated an important 14.. J:He8! in the previous game. But he has improvement: 12 f4! (instead of 12 h4), played routinely and now his position be which would appear to promise him an comes strategically hopeless. advantage - Dvoretsky.] (see diagram) 12 exd5 exd5 I did not even consider 13 tt'lxd5, because 18 b3! tt'lf5 White's retarded development is bound to Exchanges merely hasten the end for Black. tell. If 18... ii. xd4, then 19 ii.xd4 tt'lf5 20 ii.xb6 13 0-0-0 axb6 21 tt'lxd5. Similar positions sometimes arise in the 19 tt'lxf5 ii.xf5 Scheveningen Va riation, in the Keres At- 20 ii.h3 70 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 23 ... h5 Since he has played this, it would seem that 24 gxh6 suits him. I did not bother to check by calculating variations. I firmly stick to my course, especially since this is good enough to win. 24 Jl.xg7 'it>xg7 25 a4 A completely standard move with an enemy knight on b6. 26 a5 is threatened, and if the opponent replies 25 ...a5, my knight obtains the b5-point, the support of the black knight is removed, and I can attack it, for example, -position after 1 .. .<�)e - 7 7 with 26 'ii'f2 . I only need to exchange a pair of bishops, 25 ... .Uc5 and it becomes apparent just how much 26 "it'f2 weaker the knight on b6 is than the one on I saw that I could transfer my queen to the c3. It would appear that nothing difficult central square d4, and this satisfied me remains: exchange pieces and win the perfectly well. After the game Kirill sug game. gested an interesting possibility: 26 .l:!.g3 20 ... il.xh3 'i*'c8 27 �d4+ �g8 28 f5 with an attack. I 21 l:txh3 iid7 was aiming for play in the centre and did not 22 .Ud3 even think about moving my rook to the side. I find it hard to condemn myself for this How well my rook has come into play! And move, since it leads to a further improve after all, this is the consequence of the ment in the placing of the pieces and retains modest move 1 0 .Ug 1 !. a winning position. 22 . . . 'ii'g4 26 ... .Uec8 In such a position it is no longer possible to Black is forced to concede the open e-file. devise anything. The only variation that I 27 'i!Vd4+ �g8 had to calculate was ...'ii' g4 afterthe double .U exchange on c3. Let us check: 22 ...Jl. xc3 23 28 e1 "it'd7 .l:!.xc3 .Uxc3 24 'iWxc3 'it'g4 25 l:te1! l:txe1 + 26 'ifxe1 , and after 26 ...'ii' xf4 27 "it'e8+ 'it>g7 28 �c5 there is no satisfactory defence against the mate. 23 il.d4 White has completely implemented his idea. I have not even needed to advance my kingside pawns - the game should be decided by active play in the centre. But from this moment my opponent began to defend resourcefully. Georgiev played un expectedly, trying to change the pattern of the play. The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 71 Here I made what was probably a serious I thought that after 31 bxc4 l:lxc4 32 'i*'f6 d4 mistake. White's forces are fully mobilised 33 l!Vxc6 I would remain a piece up, and it was now time for him to begin a forgetting that the knight is captured with concrete exploitation of his advantage and check. After committing something irrepara to calculate 29 tt'lb5!. But, to be honest, I did ble, fortunately I did not lose my head, and I not look at this move at all, because the c2- realised that it was now dangerous to play pawn is hanging. But after 29 ....l:!. xc2 I for a win. should have seen the simple 30 tt'lxa?, 31 bxc4 l:lxc4 winning. And if 29 ... a6, then all the same 32 'ii'xd5 l:!.xc3 there follows 30 tt'la?! 1:.8c7 31 l:.de3, when 33 'ifxc6 l:13xc6 there is no defence against the check on e8. The game would have come to its logical 34 lie8+ �xeS conclusion. But I was evidently not destined 35 .Uxe8+ 'it>g7 to win it. I continued playing in the same 36 Wb3 unhurried manner as before. And within a few moves we agreed a draw. Incidentally, players often have to resolve Thus in this game too one move -10 .l:!.g1 - the following problem: whether to play exerted a very serious influence on the positionally or switch to concrete action. In entire course of the play, and simply the given instance I think that up till now I predetermined it. The opponent's possibili had done everything correctly, although ties were restricted and the rook success other solutions may have been possible. But fully, without loss of time, came into play. this moment is a very important one - here I delayed, violating the famous rule of Wilhelm Steinitz: 'The player with an advantage is The following example is a game with Alexander Beliavsky. It concluded success obliged to attack, as otherwise he risks fully for me. losing this advantage'. True, the move made by me does not throw away the win, but merely complicates it. The trouble is Dolmatov - Beliavsky that, as Siegbert Ta rrasch said, 'mistakes 56th USSR Championship, Odessa 1989 never happen singly', and one mistake Ruy Lopez often gives rise to another one. 1 e4 e5 29 �b2? 'ir'c6 2 tt'lf3 tt'lc6 And here something inexplicable happened . White's position is, of course, totally won. 3 ..tb5 a6 The simplest was 30 f5! gxf5 31 g6, when 4 ..ta4 tt'lf6 31 ...fxg6 fails to 32 .Ue7. But 30 .t!.e? 5 0-0 ..te7 followed by .t!.de3 is also not bad. At this 6 .l::!.e1 b5 point I clearly saw that the only danger for 7 ..tb3 d6 me was the tactical stroke ...tt'l c4+. 8 c3 0-0 30 �de3?? 9 h3 tt'lbB I thought that I was continuing to strengthen 10 d4 tt'lbd7 my position and, above all, defending against ...tt'l c4+, but I overlooked that in fact 11 tt'lbd2 ..tb7 I was simply provoking this move ... 12 ..tc2 �eB 30 . . . tt'lc4+! Black has played the Breyer Va riation. I only 72 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening had a slight knowledge of it - after all, one can't remember everything. Theory consid ers the main continuation to be 13 ti:Jf1 ..tfB 14 tt:Jg3 g6, after which it examines varia tions as fa r as the 20th or even 30th move. This leads to complicated positions, over which it is easy to lose control. I don't like playing this way, especially with White. But there is also another system, which is less popular, but quite dangerous. In my pre parations I came across the game Sokolov Beliavsky, played in the previous USSR Championship. Andrey Sokolov gained an advantage and I decided to act in the same way. this advance in the centre he would ex 13 a4 i.f8 change many pieces and equalise. And so I 14 ..td3 thought and thought, seeing as there was My impressions of this position change from ample time. On all of the preceding moves I game to game. I thought that Beliavsky's had spent about five minutes, but here I reply 14 ...c6 was obligatory. But then at the thought for 40 or 50. I found the correct tournament in Reykjavik in 1990 Helgi move earlier, but it was hard for me to Olafsson played 14 ...exd4 15 cxd4 c5 decide on it. For purely psychological against me, and Yefim Geller explained after reasons - I liked the idea, but it was the game that all this was known long ago. contradictory to the normal routine, and I As they say, well known, but in narrow could not bring myself to make it. circles ... Although the plan employed by 18 l:!.ab1 !! Olafsson was new to me, this did not Prophylaxis! On one occasion Ta rrasch prevent me from gaining an opening advan called such a move by Aaron Nimzowitsch tage by 16 axb5 axb5 17 .l:!.xa8 ..txa8 18 'mysterious', and in revenge Nimzowitsch dxc5! {this last move, as it turned out, was a gave the heading "'Mysterious' rook moves" novelty by me) 18... tt:J xc5 19 ..txb5. to a whole section of his book. He wrote: 14 ... c6 'We have here therefor e to do with a 15 b3 g6 preventive action . Hence it is only the outer form of the move which is mysteri Beliavsky played differently against Sokolov: ous (a rook to seize a file which is still 15... l:!. b8 16 i.a3 ti:Jh5. closed), its strategic end is not... The 16 i.a3 W/c7 prev ention of fr eeing moves by the 17 'it'c2 .l:i.ad8 opponent is fa r more important than considerations about wheth er the rook is (see diagram) effective at the given moment or is Here I stopped to think and I realised that on occupying a passive position.' But even this occasion Beliavsky was not intending to so, why does this move make it difficult for play his knight to f4 , as in the game with Black to carry out his planned ...d6 -d5 ? Sokolov, but was planning ...d6- d5. And, as It turns out that the immediate ...d6 -d5 is it initially seemed to me, if he were to make not threatened at all. Say, after the natural The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening ttJ 73 18 Mad1 if 18... d5? there follows 19 Jl.xf8 Jl.xe4 f5 I would have had to sacrifice my lt>xf8 20 b4! exd4 21 cxd4, and Black is left bishop on f5. with a bad light-square bishop and an I think that now Black should have played unfavourable pawn structure. Correct is the restrained 21 .. .'ir'd6. Beliavsky incor 18. . . bxa4! 19 bxa4, and only now 19.... d5 rectly opens lines. with equality. 21 ... exd4?! After 18 .l:!.ab1 !! Beliavsky can no longer 22 cxd4 'ii'd6 reply 18 ...bxa4 19 bxa4 d5, since the rook on the newly-opened file is attacking the bishop on b7, tying the queen to its defence. There follows 19 Jl.xf8 'it>xf8 20 exd5, and then White captures on e5, winning a pawn. And the reply to the immediate 18... d5 we already know. The reader is justified in asking: what happens if Black avoids ...d6 -d5, and plays, for example, 18... Jl. g7. The d6-point is weakened, but is this so important?Without going into details, I will merely comment that if White carries out his thematic move c3- c4, an exchange of pawns, opening the b file, is quite probable, and the rook at b1 may also come in useful. White's positional advantage is obvious, but Sasha Beliavsky is a rather straightforward here, unfortunately, I made a serious mis player. He usually copes excellently in take. I should have played 23 a5! .Ue7 24 tactical variations, but he is significantly 'iVb2 - then I would have had an extra tempo weaker in positional subtleties. Thus here compared with the game. Without thinking he does not want to give up his plan. He about what Black now wants (and he wants sees that the exchange of pawns on a4 is to double rooks on the open e-file}, White unfavourable for him, but that the immediate hurriedly, without any particular hesitation, ...d6 -d5ca nnot be directly refuted. And the made his next move. fact that it leads to a strategically difficult 23 'i:Vb3? position for Black is something that he does I was intending to attack the f7-point - 24 not notice. tt:Jg5. 18 ... d5? 23 .... .l:te7! 19 Jl.xf8 '>t>xf8 Black hopes to seize the initiative, since my 20 b4! pawns have suddenly become vulnerable. Of course, Black's position is not yet lost, 24 ....l:!. de8 is threatened , and then, afterthe but at the least White has gained a stable exchange of rooks, ...tt:J d5. opening advantage. Here I had to compose myself and find what 20 ... dxe4 appears to be the only way of maintaining 21 ii.xe4! White's entire construction. I did not want to complicate the play 24 i.c2! unnecessarily, and after 21 tt:Jxe4 tt:Jxe4 22 The bishop retreats here, in order to defend 74 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening the a4-pawn. When making my move, it was Typical Beliavsky play. If there is a possibil essential for me to calculate the variation ity, he immediately goes onto the attack; 24 ...l:!. xe1 + 25 l:!.xe1 tt:Jd5 26 l:!.b1 bxa4 27 now he is threatening both a check on e2, �xa4 tt:Jc3, and now 28 tt:Je4!. Without this and 31 .. ."it'd5. nuance White's position would be unpleas ant, but, fortunately, it is there. 24 ... l:tde8 25 'ii'b2! .::txe1+ 26 �xe1 l:txe1+ 27 tt:Jxe1 31 .i.d1 ! Perhaps my opponent did not notice this bishop manoeuvre? White defends against everything (31 ...'it' d5 32 .i.f3). If 31 ...'ii e7, then 32 tt:Jf3 is strong. Here 31 ... h5!? should probably have been played, but Beliavsky, 27 ... 4Jb6? as on the 18th move, does not wish to A serious mistake. Black had a choice: to abandon his plan, and he continues acting allow the blocking of the position by a4-a5, in the same manner, merely worsening his or himself exchange on a4. Beliavsky position. incorrectly evaluated the position. He should 31 . . . 'ifd5 have chosen 27 ...bxa4 ! 28 .i.xa4 tt:Jb6 with 32 .i.f3 'it'g5 an acceptable game. 33 'it11 ! "fi I should mention that if 27 .. . e7 I would Black's hopes were pinned on 33 �h2? tt:J 'i¥ have replied not 28 d3?! e2 and not 28 ifh4, but now he has to sound the retreat. In 'it> .i. tt:J � f1 ?! bxa4 29 xa4 a5, but 28 df3! e2 addition, Beliavsky was in time-trouble. 29 a5! tt:Je4 30 tt:Jd3 followed by "ii'c1 . 33 ... tt:J6d5 28 a5 tt:Jbd5 34 tt:Jde4 'iie7 29 tt:Jd3 35 tt:Jc3 Again White has the advantage, since the For a player in time-trouble, an unhurried opponent has been left with a bad bishop. manner of play is very unpleasant. I 29 ... .i.c8 strengthen my position, I exchange the An attempt to bring out the bishop to f5; I, of opponent's active pieces, and he does not course, prevent this. know at what moment to expect decisive 30 tt:Jc5 tt:Jf4 action. The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 75 35 ... 'i*'d6 have a light-square bishop. The correct The correct reply. After it I initially thought move, retaining chances of a successful that Black was intending to capture on d5 defence for Black, was 37 ...g5! with a piece, and I was all ready to play 36 37 ... h5? l2lxd5. But suddenly it occurred to me that Now I think that Black's position is hopeless. he would most probably capture with the 38 h4 '.t>g7 pawn. Wh en trying to convertan advan 39 'ife3 tt:Je6 tage th ere are usually more winning chances wh en there are not identical, but Unfortunately, here it was my turn to make a mistake. different pieces remaining on the board. It is better to have a bishop against a knight, than a bishop ending. I sensed that in the event of the capture on d5 with the pawn it would be more advantageous for me to retain my knight on c3, rather than the bishop. 36 i.xd5! cxd5 I was happy to have guessed my opponent's plans in time. 37 "ir'd2 40 g3 In principle, I do not recommend taking radical decisions on the 40th move. But in the given instance there was a win: two precise moves, after which the opponent could have resigned. 40 tt:Jxe6+! i.xe6 41 'i!Ve5+! 'ii'xe5 42 dxe5. The invasion of the white king is threatened, and if 42 .. .f6 there follows 43 f4 . I saw that the immediate 40 'ife5+ �xe5 41 dxe5 tt:Jxc5 was unclear, but Here is a little positional problem. How, do I simply did not have time to think about the you th ink, should Black conduct the de preliminary exchange on e6. fe nce? In time-trouble Beliavsky did not find Such mistakes usually prove costly. Black's the correct solution. position is bad, but he is hoping to construct In Black's position the weakness of the dark and hold some kind of fortress. The process squares is felt. Nothing can be done about of trying to breach the opponent's defences the queenside, but the weaknesses on the may prove long and difficult (indeed, the kingside could have been covered, by game dragged out for more than another 40 arranging the pawns on dark squares: f6- moves). If a possibility presents itself of g5-h6, as you are supposed to do when you immediately and advantageously changing 76 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening the course of the play, it should be checked In fact, his idea is unconvincing. And the and exploited. Subsequently such a conven point is not even that if 45 'i*'f4 there is the ient way may no longer occur. reasonable defence 45 ...Ji. f5 (White's last tt:J 'i!V [I think, nevertheless, that Dolmatov cor move is not the strongest - 45 e6+! xe6 'ii' rectly avoided fo rcing events. After 40 46 xc?+ wins). It is more important that the tt:Jxe6+ Ji.xe6 41 'iVe5+ 'iVxe5 42 dxe5 f6 43 bishop can be played to f5 a move earlier Ji. f4 Black would have succeeded in creating instead of moving the king. After 44 ... f5! 'i*' Ji. tt:J tt:J counterplay by 43.. .f xe5 (43 ...g5!? 44 exf6+ 45 h6 xd3+ 46 xd3 e6 White's c;!;xf6 also comes into consideration) 44 fxe5 advantage is reduced. g5! 45 tt:Je2 (45 g3? gxh4 46 gxh4 c;!;g6 will 41 . . . tt:Jc7 not do, and 45 hxg5 c;!;g6 is also dubious) 42 rtJd2 �g4 45... gxh4 (but not 45.. . c;!;g6? 46 tt:Jd4) 46 Well, I thought, he is merely helping me to tt:Jf4 rtJf7, and the vulnerability of the g2- advance my pawns. But my opponent, as it pawn seriously restricts White 's possibilities transpired, was trying to prevent the ma - Dvoretsky.] noeuvre tt:Jc3-e2-f4 . It is amusing how 40 ... f6 differently we approached the position. Here the game was adjourned. Unfortu 43 f3 Ji.e6 nately, in my analysis I was unable to find 44 tt:Je2 - �f7 the strongest plan for convertingmy advan 45 g4 hxg4 tage, which was later demonstrated by 46 fxg4 Ji.e6 Beliavsky. 47 g5 �f5 41 r;!;e1 48 gxf6+ r;!;xf6 The sealed move. When I adjourned the If 48 ...if xf6, then 49 ife5 is decisive. But game I had in mind a sensible plan. The after the move in the game White could have black knight will soon retreat to c?. White won by 49 ifh6! with the same idea - 'iih8+ can play his knight to f4 , but no direct win is and it'e5. apparent. And since this is so, I decided, I 49 'ilkg5+?! need to play f2-f3, g3-g4, and then advance 50 "iVe3 the pawn to g5 to wrest control of the dark I had already noticed my mistake and I tried squares. But before advancing the pawns, to correct it. I retreated my queen in the the king must be moved away from this hope that Beliavsky, not wishing to allow 51 wing. 'ii'e5, would return with his king to f6 . But he 'it> Instead of 41 e1 Beliavsky suggested was on the alert, despite mutual time tt:J tt:J tt:J 'it> "ii' playing 41 e2 c? 42 f4 f? 43 c1 !. I trouble, and he found the only correct did not see the retreat to c1 , and only looked defence. at 43 'iVc3. The main threat is tt:Jcd3 and 50 ... tt:Je6! then 'it'c5. With the queen on c3 there is the defe nce 43 ...'i!V c6 (the king stands at f? , so (see diagram) that tt:Jce6+ is not possible). With the queen on c1 in reply to 43 ... 'i!Vc6 he did not like 44 Suddenly it has become altogether unclear tt:Jfd 3 (with the threat of 45 'i!Vh6) 44 ...r;!; g? how to proceed further. The open position of 45 'it'f4. Sasha admittedthat because of this White's king ties his hands. I had very little plan he even did not want to resume the time left on the clock. I realised that only a game. tiny bit more, and I would have to give up The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening ttJ 77 - position after 50 ...ltJe6 - White had aimed for this position, rightly assuming that his wing pawns would be any dreams of winning. And here I managed stronger than the opponent's central pawns. to finda solution, perhaps one of the best in Interesting play commences. I reckoned the game. that Black had two moves: ...W h5 or .. .f5- 51 'ii'g3! f4 . If 57 ...f4 I was intending 58 'it>e2 'it>h5 59 A committing move, since several pawns 'it>f3 Wxh4 60 'it>xf4. Each side has only one are immediately exchanged , and White pawn left, but Black cannot save the game. remains with only two. I saw that I would The white king crosses to the queenside, obtain a superior knight endgame, but I driving away the knight. The d5-pawn didn't know whether it was won. On the merely hinders Black. other hand, even such a possibility might The second variation was 57 ...W h5 58 Wc3 subsequently not have presented itself. tt:Ja6 59 tt:Jxf5 'it>g4 60 tt:Je3 'it>xh4 61 tt:Jxd5 W W 'it> 'it> tLl tLl 'it> 51 . . . 'iVxgJ g5 62 c4 f5 63 b5 b8 64 b4 e6 65 tt:Jc6 tLld7 66 a6 and wins. If 51...lLlxc5 52 dxc5 with a great positional Beliavsky found a third possibility - he made advantage, since after 52 ..."it' f6 there fol a cunning waiting move. But he was no lows 52 'iif4, controlling the very important longer able to save the game. d4-point. 57 ... tLla6 52 lLlxg3 tt:Jxd4 58 We3 tt:Jc5 53 lLlxf5! gxf5 59 'it>f4 tLldJ+ l2J tt:J tt:J If 53 ... xf5 54 xa6, then 54 ... xh4 55 60 We3 tt:Jb4 CiJc?is bad for Black, while if 54 ...W e7 White 61 �4 tLldJ+ decides matters with 55 tt:Jc5 tLld4 56 a6 62 Wf3 tLlb4 CiJc6 57 'it>e3, intending tLlb3-d4 or Wf4-g5. 63 tLle2 'it>f6 54 l2Jxa6 tLlc6 64 tLlf4 d4 55 lLlc7 tt:Jxb4 This is something of an achievement - 56 lLlxb5 'it>g6 White has forced this pawn to advance, to 57 tt:Jd4 where it will be more easily attacked. But 62 ...'it> e5 would have lost immediately to 63 (see diagram) tt:Jd3+!. 78 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 65 'it>e2 <;t>f7 time, if the opponent is resisting with all his 66 'it>d1 ! might - in such cases mistakes are prob 67 'it>d2 able. It is always pleasant to put the opponent in zugzwang. Here is an example from another opening: 67 ... 'it>f7 the Caro-Kann Defence. The game is from the tournament in Hastings, one of my few There are various ways of winning. wins there. I scored only three, but this was decided to capture the pawn. good enough to give me first place, and 68 tt:le2 'it>g6 even on my own. 69 tt:lxd4 f4 70 We2 'it>h5 Dolmatov - Speelman 71 Wf3 'it>xh4 Hastings 1989/90 72 'it>xf4 Caro-KannDefence The win here is very simple, because it is 1 e4 c6 always hard for a knight to combat a 2 d4 d5 rook's pawn. 3 exd5 cxd5 72 ... 'it>h5 4c4 tt:lf6 73 We5 'it>g6 5 tt:lc3 e6 74 'it>d6 'it>f7 6 tt:lf3 i..b4 75 'it>c5 tt:la6+ nearly always employ the Panov Attack, 76 Wb6 tt:lb4 from where, as in the given instance, play 77 tt:lc6 tt:ld5+ frequently transposes into the Nimzo-lndian 78 <;t>b7 We6 Defence. 79 a6 'lt>d7 7 i..d3 dxc4 80 a7 tt:lc7 8 ii.xc4 0-0 81 tt:le5+ 'it>d8 9 0-0 tt:lbd7 82 tt:lc4 tt:la8 83 tt:lb6 tt:lc7 84 'it>c6 Black resigned. The game could have concluded sooner, if I had played more accurately. As it was, we saw an interesting and, unfortunately, rather typical picture. White solved the problems of the position and gained an advantage. Then he relaxed, committed some inaccuracies and squandered all his advantage or a significant part of it. Then he again com posed himself, again outplayed his oppo nent, and again began acting carelessly ... True, it is hard to play the best moves all the A theoretical position. Here there hasn't The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 79 been anything new for a long time. I know as follows: 'Simply physically have not the moves 10 l:!.e1 and 10 �d3. Black managed to make a mistake, since as yet replies 10 ...� xc3 11 bxc3 b6 followed by the only independent move I have made is 12 ....t b7, and White develops his bishop at the sensible �g5. What could be more g5 with a complicated battle. In the opinion natural than this move? The opponent may of theory White does not have any particular win a pawn, but he gives me several tempi, advantage. which must compensate for his small mate That day I was in the mood to play rial advantage.' something unusual. Especially against Jona 12 ... ifxc3 than Speelman, an out-of-the-ordinaryplayer , 13 .l:tc1 'it'as who himself seeks complications. He is a very active player, and it is pleasant to play against him - the games turn out to be interesting. I decided to make a committing move - to sacrifice the c3-pawn by 1 0 ig5!?. A similar sacrifice had already occurred in my game with Janos Flesch (Bucharest 1981). However, in it my opponent did not play 9 ...tt:l bd7, but immediately 9 ...� xc3?! 10 bxc3 'i!Vc7. There followed 11 �d3!? 1Llbd7(if 11...'i!Vxc3, then 12 �f4 is strong) 12 �a3! l:!.e8 13 tt:ld2! �d8 (totally bad is 13 ... 'i'xc3 14 tt:lc4 and wins) 14 'i!Vf3 4Jf8 15 I/Je4 with an obvious advantage for White. As you see, in not one of the lines did the When I sacrificed the pawn, I needed to see bishop come out to g5 - at the time I thought this position and without fail find the follow that there was nothing for it to do there. But ing move. If White plays something neutral, now I decided to try it. The idea occurred to let us suppose 14 .l:te1, preparing 4Je5, then me at the board - I hadn't analysed it at after 14 ...b6 15 4Je5 �b7 he remains home. without any real compensation. Black suc Speelman is a bold player and, of course, he cessfully completes his development, and in accepts the sacrifice. addition I have an isolated pawn in the 10 �g5!? �xc3 centre. Here even with material equality 11 bxc3 �c7 (give White back his pawn on b2) Black retains an excellent position. Therefore, I 12 i..d3! repeat, it was essential to see beforehand I made this last move quickly, since the the following move. pawn sacrifice is the idea behind the move 14 tt:Je5! 10 �g5. It is already too late to avoid the 'i!V 'i!V critical variations - the cautious 12 'ifd3 If now Black plays 14 ... b6, then 15 f3 d5 'ilt' tt:l would allow Black easy equality after 12... b6 16 h3 is strong, threatening 17 xd7. 13 �b3 i..b7 14 .:tfe 1 .:tac8. White develops a dangerous initiative. Such a turn of events did not satisfy Speelman. In general, this is a creative, problematic decision, involving a considerable risk. 14 ... tt:Jxe5 During the game I tried to convince myself 15.l::tc5 'i!Va3 80 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 16 dxeS! (now 21 exf6 �g8 22 'ii'h4+ Wg6 no longer It is unfavourable to capture on e5 with the works). White can also give perpetual check rook in view of 16... tt:J d5 and then ...f7-f5 - it by 18 'it'g4+ c.t>h8 19 'ii'h4 f5 20 'ii'f6+ 'it>g8 is not clear how White can develop his 21 'iig5+. initiative. I sat while my opponent was analysing 16 ... 'ii'xcS variations, and suddenly Speelman made a After the game Speelman suggested 16... diffe rent move. After the game I asked him: tt:Je4 . A quite unexpected possibility, which 'Were you playing for a win?' It transpired would not occur to everyone. It is a thematic that he had not been playing for a win. He move, which is justified in the event of 17 was afraid of capturing 17...gxf6 on account 'i!V 'it> 'i!V 'i¥ W �xe4 'ii'xc5. But after 17 l:txc8 Black ends of 18 g4+ h8 19 h4 f5 20 f6+ g8 21 Ii � l:t up in a bad position: 17... tt:J xg5 18 .l:f.xa8 e1 !? d7 22 e3. The only defence is ii' � ik .l::i.xa8 19 h4. Now 19... .l::i. d8 is not possible 22 ... c1 + 23 f1 xe3. Fortunately for me, because of 20 �xh7+, while the cunning Speelman reckoned that White still had 19... g6 is calmly answered by 20 �b1, and winning chances. Alas, after the game we the knight is nevertheless lost. did not find a win here. In addition, Reiner Knaak found another defence: 21...'it'c7!? 17 �xf6 22 .l:i.e3 .l:td8, when White is obliged to give perpetual check by 23 l::!.g3+ 'it>f8 24 'ii'h8+ rt;e 7 25 'ii'f6+ 'it>f8 . 17 ... .l::i.e8?! When Jonathan played this, in my surprise I became slightly fl ustered. I had been ex pecting a draw, and now I looked and couldn't see a perpetual check. And I was the exchange and a pawn down. 'Well, I've been unlucky!', I thought. For some five minutes I couldn't see anything sensible. I was diverted by all sorts of attacks like 18 �b5, and I was very surprised that I couldn't find a draw. And suddenly I realised that it was in vain that I was seeking a draw - I During the game I reckoned that this should be playing for mate! position was a draw. That is what I still think. 18 �xh7+!! Wxh7 I played well, the opponent also played 18... W f8? 19 'iig4 gxf6 20 exf6 was bad for worthily - what could be done, the game Black. should end in a draw. 'it> I thought that 17... gxf6 would automatically 19 ikhS+ g8 be played. The plausible attacking attempt 20 ikgS 'i¥f8 18 'ii'g4+ Wh8 19 exf6? is refuted by 21 l::i.d1! 19... .l::i. g8 20 'it'h4 h5, and White loses. I think that Speelman missed the sacrifice A draw occurs in the variation 18 �xh7+ on h7 with the subsequent inclusion of the c.t>xh7 19 ii'h5+ c.t>g8 (of course, not white rook in the attack (although the idea is 19 ...c.t> g7?? 20 exf6+ and wins) 20 'ii'g4+ roughly the same as in the variation he c.t>h7 (but not 20 ...c.t> h8? 21 exf6) 21 'ir'h4+ calculated after 17.. .fxg6). Otherwise he The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening ctJ 81 would not have gone in for this position. How with a draw by perpetual check after26 h3, can he now defend against the switching of 27 g4 and 28 .llg5+. After the game the rook to the g- or h-file? grandmaster Sergey Smagin, who was However, my opponent again surprised me following our game, reckoned that I could have won by 24 .Ug3. But it is precisely in - he fo und a way of prolonging the resistance for nearly a further fifty moves. this variation that Black has a defence: 24 ...1J. ed8 25 h3 1J.d3 26 f3 1J.d1 + 27 rtlh2 [As was later established, the game would i.d3! 28 i.e?!? (28 i.xg7 'ikc5) 28 ...f6 ! 29 not have been prolonged if White had i.xf6 g6 30 'ii'h4 ifc5!, or 29 exf6 'iit7 30 carried out more accurately the idea of 'fih6 (30 'ikxg7+!? 'ikxg7 31 l:!.xg7+ Wh8 32 switching the rook to the g-file: 19 'ikd3+! 1J.g5, and the most probable outcome is a (instead of 19 'ikh5+) 19. .. 25 ...W f8? 26 .l:i.h7 with unavoidable mate), sensed in this game. Such problems arise, 82 � The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening that at one moment I was doubtful whether I 41 ... 'it>e2 would win. 42 h5 l:lecB 30 'ii'xf7+ 'it>c6 43 iif1 + 'it>d2 44 iib5 'it>e3 45 g3 'it>d4 46 'it>g2 Everything seems to be alright: White has not allowed ...b6- b5, he has strengthened his position, and he has begun advancing his pawns. And I almost stopped paying any attention to Speelman's moves. 46. . . . 'it>c3 47 h6?! 4 7 g4! was far more accurate. 47 ... .l:!.hB There is no longer a simple win. Here I decided to complicate matters, by finally The h-pawn cannot promote on its own - it allowing the opponent to play ...b6-b 5. needs the support of the g-pawn. But Black 48 'ir'd7 b5 is endeavouring to obtain a passed pawn on 49 axb5 a4 the queenside. To participate in a race, to see who is quicker, is unpleasant. Therefore 50 b6 a3 I decided first to halt the opponent's 51 'ii'a4 'it>b2 counterplay, even if only for a time, and then 52 'ii'b4+ 'it>a2 to advance my pawns. 53 h7! 31 'ii'f3+ 'it>c5 By driving the king in front of the pawn, so 32 'ii'e3+ 'it>c6 that it cannot advance, White has indirectly 33 'ir'f3+ 'it>c5 defended his h-pawn. It cannot be taken, 34 'ika3+ 'it>c4 since the rook is lost. But even so, the position is not easy - I have allowed Black to 35 'ii'b3+ 'it>c5 advance his passed pawn too far. The win is 36 a4! .l:.bB achieved by just one tempo. 'ik 37 b5+ was threatened. Speelman de 53 ... :bcB fe nds his pawn and prepares ...b6- b5. 54 b7 .l:tc2+ 37 'i¥c3+ 'it>d5 55 'it>f3 l:tb2 38 f4 'it>e4 56 'ii'c4+ l:!.b3+ 39 'ii'f3+ 57 'it>g4 'it>b2 Also strong was 39 'i¥c4+!? 'it>e3 40 g3 with 58 'ii'cB .l:!.xh7 a winning position. After 58 ...a2 59 'ikxh8 a1'ir' (59 ....l:!. xb7 60 39 . . . 'it>d4 'ii'g8 a1'ii' 61 h8'ir') 60 b8'ii' 'ikd1+ 61 'it>g5 40 'ifc6 'it>e3 White avoids the checks, since the rook on 41 iVc1 + b3 is pinned. 41 g3! was simpler. 59 bB'ik .l:tg7+ The creative Solving of irrational Problems in the Opening 83 60 'it>h5 l:r.gxg3 most often, immediately afterthe opening 61 'ti'd6 .l::!.h3+ the problem of a key move, a move which 62 'it>g6 l:!.bg3+ gives the game a definite direction and exerts an enormous influence on the further 63 'it>f7 .Uh7+ course of the play. For me this is a deeply 64 'it>xe6 l:th6+ creative problem, associated not only with 65 'it>f5 llxd6 purely chess laws, but also with intuition, 66 exd6 a2 emotion, and psychological condition. The 67 d7 a1'ii' discoveries which I have shown could be 68 'ii'b7+ conceived only directly at the board, in the course of a tense battle. Therefore I advise The next move will be 69 d8'ii', and there is you: don't forget to strengthen your mind, not a single check. Black resigned . develop your intuition, and learn to control So, I have acquainted you with one of my your emotions. Don't restrict yourself only to approaches to working on chess. In each of the acquisition of knowledge, but try to the games examined we encountered - improve in the most varied fields. 84 � Mark Dvoretsky A practical Exercise invite you to test your strength by inde example, a forcing combination or an end I pendently seeking the replies to questions game that can be accurately calculated. Our which the players faced in the opening stage competition is a not altogether standard of one quite old game. one. Many of the problems are open to I fo und this game in a splendid book discussion. Sometimes it will be hard to published in 1979 Het groot analysebook demonstrate this 'this' is better than 'that'. Jan Timman, which in translation from the You will have to trust in your general Dutch means 'Jan Timman's Big Book of perception of the position, your intuition. Analyses'. I studied Timman's analyses with Calculation of variations is also required, of great interest and benefit to myself, and, of course, but it will be more important to see course, I found many mistakes in them. all the resources both for yourself, and for When a commentator does not restrict the opponent, and to evaluate correctly the himself to general remarks, but tries to resulting situations. analyse a game in real depth, mistakes are The questions will be purely practical and inevitable in view of the complexity of the they should be answered from the position problems facing the analyst. Many of the not of an analyst, but of a practical player. mistakes pointed out by readers of the book Yo ur objective is to find in a restricted time were corrected in its English edition The Art the most important, most significant varia of Chess Analysis. And in 1989 Timman tions for the taking of a decision, and to presented me with a new, French edition - guess the optimal way of combining calcula L'artde L'analyse. tion of variations with evaluation of position. Timman's book comprises commentaries to games, written by him in various years and Polugayevsky - Mecking published in the Dutch chess magazine. The Mar del Plata 1971 game which you will see is one of the first in the book, and is perhaps annotated less well Semi-Slav Defence than the others. This is a vivid illustration of 1 c4 c6 the fact that in his youth Timman was an 2lt:lf3 d5 indifferent analyst - subsequently, after 3 e3 lt:lf6 gaining experience, he began analysing 4lt:lc3 e6 much better. 5 b3 lt:lbd7 The time you have fo r the solving of the 6�b2 �d6 problems (with some of which even the commentator did not cope) will not be long: 7 d4 0-0 from 5 to 15 minutes. But don't be afraid - Had White now played 8 �c2, this would you will be helped by leading questions, have transposed into a well-known position outlining the problem more specifically. from the Meran Va riation (1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Exercises offered in competitions usually lt:lf3 lt:lf6 4 lt:lc3 e6 5 e3 lt:lbd7 6 'i'ic2 �d6 7 have completely clear-cut solutions - for b3 0-0 8 ..tb2), in which the light-square A Practical Exercise 85 bishop is usually developed on e2. But Lev Now regarding preference. 9 ...'it' e7 is the Polugayevsky deviates slightly from the move that I like most. Here, of course, I usual set-up. cannot demonstrate anything - I can only 8 �d3 �e8 explain. What is the idea? Let's investigate. 9 Vi'c2 Why didn't White castle just now? Because of the reply 9 . . . e5!. He does not have time to And now - the first question. capture on d5 in view of the fork 1 O . ..e4 , and so he has to exchange on e5 in a situation advantageous to Black. 9 'ii'c2 was played in order to take control of the e4-square, and in the event of 9 ... e5 to be able to exchange on d5. And now comes a rather refined reply - 9 ...'it' e7. In itself it is useful in such positions, but in addition Black renews the threat of a fork after ...e6- e5. Only Va sya Emelin chose this move, fo r which I have also given him an extra point. 9 ...'it' e7 was not made in the game or indicated in the notes. In effect this is an opening novelty, and not a bad one. This is 1) Suggest fo r Black the main candidate how they are devised: one only needs to moves (10 minutes). carefully analyse a game or opening varia tion, to delve into its latent ideas ... So, nearly all of you correctly determined As candidates, Ya n Te plitsky suggested the main ideas for Black. You even sug nearly all possible moves up to an including gested some which I did not have in mind, 9 . . . c5 - this is rather excessive. With such but also deserve consideration. I thought an abundance of possibilities it is hard to hit that here there are three main possibilities: the target, and it demands too much time. ... dxc4 10 bxc4 e5 - the standard plan in 1) 9 Endeavour with the help of evaluation to such positions, although when the bishop is somehow restrict the list of candidate on e2 - with the bishop on d3 it looks moves. weaker; 9 ... eS 2) the immediate 9 ...e5 - each time in such cases you must consider whether you 10 cxd5 cxdS should allow the exchange on d5; In such positions there is sometimes the 3) the preparatory move 9 ...'it' e7; the idea of typical move tLlb5, but, of course, not here it will be explained a little later. because of the check on b4. Vad im Zviagintsev suggests a completely 11 dxeS ttJxeS different plan: the completion of Black's 12 ttJxeS �xeS development by ...b7-b6 and ...� b7. I am 12... .l:i. xe5!? is more active. not prepared to comment on this sugges tion, since I have not analysed it. But it looks 13 tLle2 sensible, sometimes Black plays this way in Polugayevsky aims to simplify the position, similar positions, and therefore it receives to exchange the dark-square bishops. Black an extra point. again faces a committing decision. 86 � A Practical Exercise the check on a5 also has no particular point. Another active try is more interesting - 13... d4 !?. If 14 f4? or 14 .l:td1 ?, then 14.. .'ii'a5+ is strong. In reply to 14 exd4 one of you suggested 14... j_ d6!? with the idea after 15 h3 'ii'a5+ 16 Si.c3 'ili'g5 of developing pressure on White's kingside. Clever! But White can simply castle, and the bishop sacrifice, unfortunately, does not work: 15 0-0? j_xh2+ 16 �xh2 tbg4+ 17 'it>g1 'ii'd6 (17.. .'it'h4 18 'ii'c7!) 18 tbg3 'ii'h6 19 l!fe 1 'ifh2+ 20 'iitf1 . However, the simple 14... j_xd4 is quite 2) How should Black continue? sufficientfo r equality. (10 minutes) The critical reply is 14 e4!, and it is on this that the evaluation of 13... d4 depends. With quiet play White gains a slight but enduring positional advantage. Therefore in the first instance one should look at moves which disrupt the 'normal' course of play. The first try is 13.. . 'ir'a5+ 14 j_c3 j_xc3+ 15 'i¥xc3 'i¥xc3+ 16 tbxc3, and now 16... d4 , because otherwise White has the more pleasant endgame. After 17 lbb5! Black has to sacrifice the exchange: 17... dxe3 18 tbc7 exf2+. Nearly all of you reached this position in your calculations, but not everyone was able to accurately calculate the variation to the end. However, in the first edition of his book Timman also went wrong, attaching an 3) What does 14 ... t2Jxe4 lead to? exclamation mark to 19 �d2?, which is in (5 minutes) fact refuted by 19... l:i. d8 20 tbxa8 j_f5. Of course, 19 'it>xf2 tbg4+ 20 �g1 .l:!.d8 21 Absolutely all of you gave the correct tbxa8 .l:!.xd3 22 h3 is correct. This position evaluation. After 15 j_xe4 d3 16 ..txd3 Si.xb2 could have been unclear in view of the bad White should play not as suggested by placing of the white king (imagine if the Tim man - 17 .l:i.d 1? 'ii'a5+, but simply 17 black rook were on d2!), but here White is Si.xh7+! 'it>h8 18 'ii'xb2 'it>xh7 19 0-0, and alright: 22 ...tb f6 23 �h2 or 22 ...tb e3 23 'it>f2. Black has no compensation for the sacri For the exchange there is no real compen ficed pawn. sation. What then should Black do? White's pawn This entire variation subsequently occurred structure is better, and he is threatening to in the game Makarychev-Chekhov (Mos play f2-f4. The endgame after 14.. . 'iVa5+ 15 cow 1981 ). 'ii'd2 is clearly in White's favour. Black must Since the exchange sacrifice is incorrect, play as energetically as he can, and I think A Practical Exercise ctJ 87 that the only serious option is 14... tt:J g4!. But how to reply to 15 h3 ? It is possible to prevent the opponent from castling, but after 15.. .'i'a5+ 16 Wf1 the advantage is with White. 15... ii' h4 is stronger. Now if 16 0-0 there is the guerrilla raid 16... lt:J h2!, when all kinds of sacrifices are in the air: .....t xh3 or ....� 'lf3+. However, by playing 16 g3, White suddenly reminds Black that for a long time his d4-pawn has been en prise. But Black too does not lose heart,sinc e after16 .. .'i!t'h6 17 tt:Jxd4 'ir'b6 or 17... .l:. d8 the turmoil on the board does not end. Yo u don't know, by chance, how this final position should be - position after 16 tt::ld4 - evaluated? In analysis I found this entire series of moves, by looking at and rejecting Some of you suggested capturing on e5 not other co ntinuations. It is clear that Black has with the queen, but the rook. I will not give the right to play this way. It is risky for him, any points for this move, because I don't see for he remains a pawn down, but for White any particular virtues in it. White replies 15 lt:J 'ii' 'ir' 'i!V too there is a risk, since his kingside is d4, not fearing 15... b4+ 16 d2 xd4 ?? weakened and his king is stuck in the centre. 17 ..txh7+, and planning .i:!.c1 and then pos sibly 'ir'c7. He can also consider 15 llc1 d4 Thus we have established that Black had a 16 e4. not very successful queen check at a5 and a '�' tempting attempt to initiate complications by After 14.. . xe5 15 0-0 the recommendation tt:J 13.. . d4!?. But Mecking chose another move. 15... e4 is unconvincing. White places his rook on c1 and his knight on d4, and at an 13 . . . 'ir'd6 appropriate moment he can even exchange In order to give it an objective evaluation, on e4, leaving himself with a strong knight another question must first be answered. against a passive bishop. Black's position 4) Comment on the series of moves made retains the same drawbacks as in the game. in the game (15 minutes) On the other hand, 15... tt:J g4! gives Black reasonable counter-chances, and enables 14 ..txe5 'ir'xe5 him to sharpen the position. Of course, 15 0-0 ..td7 during the short time available you would 16 lt:Jd4 have been unable to calculate the variations (see diagram) exactly, but your positional feeling correctly suggested to many of you that Black should First let's evaluate the resulting position. have decided on this move. Logic, typical of After the exchange of the dark-square such situations, operates: before accepting bishops White has retained a slight positional the need to spend the entire game defend advantage, that is obvious. It is determined ing passively, you should first seek active by the isolated d5-pawn and the opponent's resources, which may change the unfavour passive light-square bishop. It is not clear able course of the play. And if a move such whether White can win, but at any event he as 15... tt:J g4 is not refuted directly, and it will be able to press for the entire game. leads to unclear situations, it should be Could Black have avoided such a fate? made. 88 � A Practical Exercise However, White in turn could have played first exercise, he again suggested a mass of more strongly, and not allowed an unneces possibilities, including some that were cor sary sharpening of the play. 15 �c3! was a rect, but he did not indicate any clear good prescription, instead of 15 0-0?!. Many preference. You should not be afraid to of you pointed this out. It is important to express your opinion. Of course, it may be dislodge the black queen from its excellent mistaken, but you learn from your mistakes. central square. The position after15 ... 'i&' xc3+ After all, the aim is not to score the most 16 lt:Jxc3 is already known to us from the points in the competition. We are training 13... 'ii' a5+ variation - it was not in vain that your approach to the taking of decisions, we calculated it. As you will remember, which you will be able to use in practical 16... d4 17 lLlb5 gives White the advantage. games. There, in the end, you will be obliged And if the queen moves, White can castle or to draw a clear conclusion, as to which you first play 16 'i!fd4. move you like less, and which you like more. Yo u suggest that 15 'it'c3 should be an But now we will carefully analyse the varia swered by 15... � g5 ? Well, I can castle, tion 15 0-0 lt:Jg4!. How to defend against the since 16 ... �h3 is not dangerous in view of mate? The first try is 16 g3 'i¥h5 17 h4. 17 lt:Jf4 . And meanwhile White is planning �d4 fo llowed by 'jVf4 , or, even more active 'it'c7. At any event, the counterplay which flared up after 15 0-0?! tt:lg4! is not obtained here. Vo lodya Balkan suggested the variation 15 "iic3 "it'h5 16 0-0 lt:Jg4 17 h3 tt:le5. You know, after 18lLlf4 White is still a little better, since the d5-pawn is weak. Also I am not obliged to castle, but can play 16 ir'd4 or 16 ir'c7. But in general, this is the correct approach Black must somehow try to sharpen the position. I have given him an extra point for his attempt to analyse 15 'it'c3. 5) What should Black play? (5 minutes) Now we can give an objective evaluation to the move 13.. . "it'd6. It leads to a rather Here Black has the powerfu l move 17... g5! , inferior, passive position. The more dynamic which gives him an excellent position with a 13 ...d4!? should have been preferred. strong attack. The threats are ...gxh4 and in I have given the maximum score - 1 0 points some cases ...lt:J e5. You analysed 18 'it>g2. 1 - to those who indicated the idea of had in mind 18... gxh4 19 .l:!.h1 h3+. In one of 15... lt:J g4!, giving Black counterplay, and 15 the replies it is written that 18... gxh4 is bad 'i!fc3! for White instead of castling. In two because of 19 lt:Jf4 . I don't think so - after cases I gave a score between five and ten, 19... h3+ 20 'it>h1 "it'h6 Black is well placed. when the reply was based on the correct However, it is possible that 18... l1 xe3 is premise, that White needs to devise some even stronger. The one who suggested this thing, since after 15 0-0 there is the strong receives an additional point. rejoinder 15... lt:J g4!, but 15 ii'c3 was not The only difficulty of the exercise is that suggested. I gave the fewest marks to Ya n there is another tempting move 17... lt:J e5, Te plitsky (I warned him!), since, as in the which is not so easy to refute. This was the A Practical Exercise ctJ 89 one recommended by Timman. But if the The second variation is 16... d4 17 i.xh7+ variation is continued: 18 tt:)f4 tt:)f3+ 19 'it>g2 'it>h8 18 h3. 'i'g4 (the piece sacrifice 19... tt:) xh4+ is also insufficient: 20 gxh4 'ii'g4+ 21 'it>h2 'ii'xh4+ 22 'it>g1 'ii'g5+ 23 tt:)g2 i.h3 24 f4 'ii'xg2+ 25 'fxg2 i.xg2 26 'it>xg2 .l:txe3 27 l:tf3 or 27 l:iad1 with a difficult endgame for Black) 20 l::th1 with the extremely unpleasant threat of 21 i.e2(or even 20 i.e2 tt:)xh4+ 21 'it>h1 ), it becomes clear that the position should be evaluated in favour of White. Let us continue looking at the defences against the mate threat after 15 0-0 tt:)g4. The second try is 16 tt:)g3. Here, there is really not even anything to ask - it is clear that Black plays 16... h5!. And then, say, 17 tt:) tt:) .!:Ife1 h4 (there is also 17... xh2!?) 18 f1 6) What position should Black go in for? 'ii' tt:) h3 19 g3 f6 followed by ... e5. Black (10 minutes) begins an attack on the light squares; his position is better. Black has numerous tempting continua Timman recommends 16 tt:)f4 and comes to tions. There are variations that are rather an amusing conclusion: after 16... tt:) f6 (in sharp and complicated, and in 10 minutes tending 17 ...d4) 17 tt:)e2 tt:)g4 18 tt:)f4 the of course, you will not calculate them all: result is a draw. But does the knight have to The aim is not so much to calculate, as to retrace its steps? Black has two active assess and sense where you will stand moves: 16... g5 and 16... d4. better, where your position will be more In the first, Dutch edition of his book, Tim secure. Let's try. man considered both moves to be bad, in Timmanex amines three variations. the English edition - only one of them, and tt:) 'ii' 1i' only in the French edition (taking account of The first: 18... xf2 19 xf2 dxe3 20 h4 g5 'if 'ii' 'ii' 'it> tt:) an article of mine in the magazine New in 21 h6 g7 22 xg7+ xg7 23 h5+ 'it> tt:) Chess, pointing out the mistakes in his xh7 24 f6+, and White wins. book) was the correct evaluation given - The second: 18 ...tt:) f6 19 i.g6!! (the f7-pawn both moves secure Black an excellent game. is awkward to defend) 19... dxe3 20 i.xf7 'if i. tt:) I will give one variation now, and you can try xf4 21 xe8 xe8. Black has won two to findthe second yourselves. pieces fo r a rook, but with such a king he cannot survive: after 22 fxe3! 'iVxe3+ 23 16 ... g5 17 h3 gxf4! 18 exf4 Wxf4 19 hxg4 'it>h1 White's threats are irresistible. Inciden ixg4 with advantage to Black. If White tally, instead of 21 ...tt:) xe8? it is fa r stronger regains the pawn by capturing on h7, Black to play 21 ...i. f5! 22 'ifc5 e2 23 1i'f8+ tt:)g8 24 will attack along the h-file. Where could l:.fe 1 1\Ves. Timman have gone wrong here? He was carried away by an attempt to win a pawn: And, finally, the third: 18 ...dxe3 19 hxg4 17...tt.Jxe3? 18 fxe3 'ifxe3+ 19 'it>h2 gxf4 20 exf2+ 20 Wxf2! 'it>xh7 21 J:tae1 . l:if3, afterwhich it is White who builds up a But why does Black commit hara-kiri , by powerful attack. himself opening lines for the white rooks? In 90 � A Practical Exercise this last variation he has the simple 19.. . '�i'xf4! by the method of elimination, choose the (instead of 19... exf 2+?) with brilliant pros piece sacrifice 16 ii.xh7 +, aftersensing (it is pects. not possible to calculate to the end), that Thus we see that in the event of 16 lt:Jf4 everything else is dangerous for White, Black is by no means bound to agree a draw whereas here an unclear endgame is - he straight away has two tempting reached. possibilities. We are now finished with the opening stage. What then should White do? Did the Play has gone into a quiet middlegame. It inaccuracy 15 0-0?! really lead to an inferior would be wrong to think that White has a big position for him? I don't think so. We must advantage, and certainly not a winning consider one other continuation: 16 .txh7+ position. In such situations experienced and 'lt>h8, and only now 17lt:Jg3. Evidently Black cool defenders are usually able to save the should win the bishop for three pawns: game. 17 ...g6 18 ii.xg6 fxg6 19 'ili'xg6, and then, But what told subsequently was the differ most probably, 19 ..J 1g8 20 �h5+ �xh5 21 ence in class between the two players. lt:Jxh5. Polugayevsky was a mature, positional competitor. As for Henrique Mecking ... A year afterthis game Tigran Petrosian wrote about him: 'He is indeed not a bad player. He will possibly play better, but I am sure that he will never become world champion. And mainly because of the narrowness of his chess thinking. Mecking does not under stand, for example, the significance of weak and strongsquares. I have played him three times. In 1968 he lost to me because of the weakness of the light squares. A year later he readily conceded all the dark squares to me, and again suffered a defeat. And at the tournament in San Antonio (1972) grand master Mecking again gave me control of When solving studies, if you are fortunate the dark squares, and with them also victory. enough to find a series of best moves, the Mecking is distinguished by his active piece evaluation of the final position usually does play, but he does not have a proper not present any difficulty - it is either a win, a understanding of the deep fe atures of a draw, or a loss. A practical game is far more position, and this fo rces me to have doubts complicated. Here forcing variations very about his chess future. ' A severe but often end in completely unclear positions. I instructive 'diagnosis'. don't know how to evaluate this position; if I should mention that a weakness on anyone knows, please tell me! But at any squares of a particular colour usually arises event I think this is the best that White has when pawns are arranged on squares of the after 15... lt:J g4!. same colour as a bishop. As we will now Imagine how difficult his task would have see, it is this elementary positional mistake been! He would have to examine the that is committed by Mecking. variations 16lt:Jg3, 16lt:Jf4 and 16 g3. Then, Let us see how the game developed. A Practical Exercise ltJ 91 16 ... ltac8 An old Russian proverb states: 'When two 17 'ii'e2 'ii'd6 do one and the same - it is not the same.' 18 'iVb2 Polugayevsky, like Mecking before him, has placed a pawn on a square of the same Note that if you have a light-square bishop, colour as his bishop. But he wants to your queen should usually be positioned on advance it further, fixing the queenside. And squares of the opposite colour. White covers if the opponent forestalls White's plan by the vulnerable points on the queenside and 26 ...a5, then, as shown by Timman, there prepares a possible advance of his pawns follows 27 �b5! �xb5 28 lbxb5. there. This device, a rather difficult one, inciden 18 ... a6?! tally, demanding a subtle evaluation of the Petrosian is right - Mecking does not know position, is called 'transformation of an on which squares he should keep his advantage'. White gives up one of his pawns. pluses: he exchanges the opponent's 'bad' 19 l::tac1 lbg4 bishop, but in return he hopes to gain Too late! Now this no longer has any great another one: superiority in the placing of his point. pieces. It is hard for Black defend the 20 lDf3 'fi'b6 invasion squares. For example, he loses a 'fi' 'ii lLJ 21 .l:i.xc8 l::txc8 pawn after 28 ... c6 29 xc6 bxc6 30 d4 c5 31 tt:Jc6. But in the event of 28 ...'fi' f6!? 22 .l::i.c1 chasing after the pawn by 29 'iixf6 tt:Jxf6 30 Polugayevsky operates in accordance with lLJd6 b6 31 tt:Jc8 is not justified, since in a well-known principle: 'Against youth -go return Black activates his king: 31 ...'it> f8! 32 into the endgame!' It is easy to see that tt:Jxb6 'it>e 7 33 tt:Jc8+ (33 f3 'it>d6) 33 ...'it> d7 ttJ .l:t � 22 ... xe3? does not work: 23 xc8+ xc8 34 lba7 'it>d6 35 tt:Jb5+ 'it>c5. White should 'i' 'ii' 23 c1 or 23 e5. simply reply 29 tt:Jd4!, retaining an appreci 22 ... lbt6 able advantage. 23 .l:txc8+ �xeS 26 ... "f/c7 24 'it'c3 �d7 27 'ii'xc7 lbxc7 25 lLJd4 tt:Jea 28 a5 26 a4! In Timman's opinion, here Black was obliged to try 28 ...tt:J e6!?. If 29 tt:Jxe6, then 29 .. .fxe6 30 f4 'it>f7, followed by ...h7- h6, ...'it> f6 and ...e6- e5. This was his best chance, promis ing real hopes of a draw. Instead there follows a superficial move. 28 . . . 'it>f8?! 29 'it>f1 Now this idea does not work - after29 ...tt:J e6 30 tt:Jxe6 fxe6? the h7-pawn is hanging. But Black could have played 29 ...h6 and then ...tt:J e6. 29 . . . 'it>e7 30 'it>e2 92 � A Practical Exercise his bishop to f3: 36 ii.e2 ii.d7 (36 ...d4+ 37 exd4 exd4+ 38 'it>xd4 i.xb3 39 ii.f3 'it>c7 40 'it>c5 is hopeless for Black) 37 ii.f3 i.c6 38 'it>b4 (with the threat of 39 fxe5+ 'it>xe5 40 'it>c5), and the pawn endgame arising after 38 ...d4 39 ii.xc6 bxc6 40 exd4 exd4 41 'iiic4 c5 42 b4 cxb4 43 �xd4 is won. And now the last exercise. 30 ... g6 It is laughable that a grandmaster should play this! He sees that if 30 ...lt:J e6 there is 31 lt:Jf5+, and without hesitation he places another pawn on a square of the colour of his bishop. 31 'it>d2 tt:Je6 32 tt:Jxe6?! I find this move hard to understand. 32 �c3 7) What would you have played? suggests itself. (5 minutes) 32 ... fxe6 Mecking has already spoiled his position so 33 f4 e5 much, that it is unclear whether he can now 34 g3 'it>d6 save it. But one should fight in any situation. Here Timman demonstrates with a serious The threat is 37 fxe5+ Wxe5 38 'it>c5, piece of analysis that Black could have held breaking through on the dark squares. In the the position by 34 ...ii. b5!. It is probable that event of the exchange on f4 , the white king this was indeed his best chance. At any goes to d4. It is improbable that White would event, White could not have gone into the fail to convert such an enormous positional pawn endgame, since after 35 ii.xb5 axb5 advantage - as Black's pawns are on 36 �c3 'it>e6! if 37 'it>b4? there is the reply squares of the same colour as his bishop. 37 ...d4 !. 36 ...d4! is the most natural move (at least 35 'it>c3 one pawn moves onto a dark square), and fo r this reason I gave you only five minutes. Now 35 ...i. b5 is no longer possible - in the There is no need to calculate it exactly; it is variation 36 i.xb5 axb5 37 'it>b4 d4 White sufficient merely to slightly weigh up the captures on e5 with check. resources of both sides. It may also lose, but 35 ... i.e6 it may not, and in any case it will be not so 36 'it>b4?! simple. White must decide: whether to In the later editions of his book Timman capture on d4, or on e5, or perhaps to play rightly points out that, before embarking on 37 e4. And who knows which reply is resolute action, White should have played correct? A Practical Exercise C2J 93 Initially Timman did not consider this de or h2-h4) would prove most opportune. fence at all. And when I mentioned it in my Polugayevsky had probably already seen article, in the French edition of his book he how he would break through, and he knew wrote that White wins with 37 e4 followed by that he would not require any reserve tempi 38 fxe5+ 'it>xe5 39 'it>c5 �xb3 40 'it>b6. But to give his opponent the move. � 'it> � after 40... d1 41 xb7 f3 Black has 41 ... �h1 nothing to fear. In addition, if desired White's 42 i.e2 �g2 'threat' can easily be parried by 37 ...� d7. 43 �g4 ii.e4 The strongest continuation is 37 exd4! exd4 44 rt;e7 38 h4 fo llowed by h4-h5. It is hopeless to go .tea into the pawn endgame: 38 ...� f5 39 �xf5 45 i.e6 '>t>d6 gxf5 40 '>t>c4 d3 41 'it>xd3 'it>c5(d5) 42 h5!. In 46 ii.g8 h6 a new English edition of his book, published 47 ii.f7 h5 in 1997, Timman tried to show that Black Forced. could save the game by 38 ...'1t> c6!. At the 48 �e8 �e2 end of the variation suggested by him, 39 h5 gxh5 40 �e4+! �d5 41 i.xh7 b5 White has 49 ii.f7 i.e4 the winning manoeuvre 42 �f5! followed by 43 �c8, but Black's last unfortunate move can be replaced by 41 ...b6 !. 36 ... exf4? Yet another confirmation of Petrosian's opinion, that Mecking has an indifferent understanding of position. The conclusion of the game shows how such endings are won. 37 gxf4 i.g4 38 'it>e3 i.f3 38...'it>c5 39 b4+. 39 '>t>d4 �g2 If White's bishop were to end up on the h 1- a8 diagonal, then, by playing e3-e4, he would attack the b7-pawn. 50 f5! 40 h4 i.f3 This breakthrough cracks Black's defences. 41 b4 lf50 ...gx f5 51 �xh5, and the passed h-pawn Before embarking on decisive action, in decides matters. accordance with the well-known endgame 50 ... ii.xf5 principle 'do not hurry!', White strengthens 51 ii.xd5 .tea his position to the maximum, making all the 52 e4 'it>e7 useful moves. 53 'it>e5 g5 However, the evaluation expressed in this 54 hxg5 h4 last sentence is not in fact as obvious as it 55 g6 h3 appears. Are White's pawn moves really useful? After all, a zugzwang situation might 56 g7 h2 arise, in which a reserve pawn move (b3-b4 57 g8� h1'iV 94 � A Practical Exercise 58 'it'f7+ 'it>d8 Passive tactics when playing the opening 59 'ii'f8+ are unpromising. On the contrary, here the maximum accuracy and the maximum en Black resigned . ergy are required. After all, the outcome of the opening battle often determines the Let us think about the causes of Black's entire future pattern of the game. The main failure. As regards the middlegame and the theme of our exercise was in fact the endgame - here everything is clear. We struggle for the initiative in the opening. You have already said enough about Mecking's have had some training in the concrete lack of understanding of a simple positional solving of opening problems. problem - on which squares he should keep his pawns. And now for the results of our competition. But, after all, the roots of Black's defeat were There was quite a compact group of leaders. laid back in the opening or immediately on The difference of one point between first emerging from it, when he ended up in an place and those who shared 2nd-4th is not inferior position. Why did this happen? very significant. All the leaders performed Mecking played timidly, and conceded the excellently, and successfully coped with initiative to his opponent. He did not exploit most of the exercises. But nevertheless the the active possibilities that were available to competition had a winner, and he was him in the opening: 13... d4 !, 15... tt:l g4! (and, Maxim Boguslavsky, with 38 points.* Con incidentally, also in the endgame - 36 ...d4 !). gratulations! Possibly because he did not sense the Second to fourth places were shared by strategic danger of his position. Perhaps Dragiev, Emelin and Georgiev, who each Mecking thought that in a quiet situation it scored 37 points. On 35 pointswere Makariev would be easier to defend against an and Zviagintsev. Makariev had a serious set experienced grandmaster. But this is radi back at the start, in the calculation of the cally incorrect. For an experienced grand 13... 'it' a5+ variation. And Vadim did not master there is nothing better - give him a cope, when asked to comment on a series of position in which he is not risking anything, moves, and he did not suggest 15... tt:l g4! - a and the only question is: will he win or not. very serious omission. This was his main Double-edged play, when there is a risk of loss, as he solved all the remaining exer losing, is far more unpleasant for him. cises well. Vo lodya Baklan scored 33 points. It cannot be said that White played the Well, and the one who performed least opening ideally. By not finding 15 'it'c3!, he successfuly was Ya n Te plitsky. See how thereby allowed 15... tt:l g4!, sharply chang dangerous it is to arrive at a competition at ing the character of the play. But otherwise the last moment. After his journey he Polugayevsky acted very sensibly. obviously did not have time to acclimatise. * The author does not consider it necessary to give exact details of how the points were awarded. The main thing to note is that several pupils performed almost equally successfully (translator's note). ctJ 95 PART II Mark Dvoretsky The Development of an Opening Repertoire here are many different approaches to similar mistake was made by grandmaster Tworking on your opening repertoire. This Mikhail Ta l in his preparations for the World is an individual matter, and every player has Championship Return Match with Mikhail his own principles. But I hope that what I Botvinnik. In the first match Ta l had prob have to say will prove useful. lems with White in the Caro-Kann Defence, although the score in this opening was nevertheless in his favour. In the Return Which openings to include in your Match he decided to 'dumbfound' Botvinnik repertoire with the then rare 3 e5 system. From the Yo ur choice of openings should be made purely chess point of view it was perhaps not primarily in accordance with your own badly prepared, and Ta l did indeed have tastes and style of play. This is a seem some interesting ideas there. But he ended ingly obvious principle, but nevertheless it is up with a minus score in this system: he won quite often violated. one game, but lost two, with several draws. When I was teaching in the Institute of The explanation was simple: Ta l had a very Physical Culture, one of my students, a good understanding of and a feeling for candidate master, who wasn't having much open positions with active piece play, success in tournaments, showed me his whereas e4-e5 leads to strategic, closed games. What surprised me was that, al positions. Botvinnik easily found his bear though he was a quiet and sensible lad, he ings in such play, whereas for Ta l it was by played sharp openings: the Sicilian, King's no means his strongest side. He went in Indian ... Why was this? It all turned out to be advance onto Botvinnik's territory, where the very simple. He had been studying in a latter felt more confident. And it was no group at the Moscow Pioneers Palace, the longer so important how the opening had trainer of which was fascinated by the theory been prepared. One can obtain promising of fashionable opening variations. That is, positions, but it you have a poor feeling for lhe player's choice of openings depended such play, mistakes are quite probable. And not on his own tastes, but on those of his that is what happened: Ta l often fa iled to trainer. I advised him to change his reper exploit the advantages of his position. toire, and in particular to switch to 1 d4 with This is a banal consideration, that the White. Soon the student's results improved, opening should be studied in accordance since he began playing his own sort of with your own tastes. There is another, chess. slightly less banal consideration - your This was an example involving a candidate opening repertoire should be constructed in master. But it seems to me that a quite relation to your own memory. For players 96 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire with a brilliant memory (such as, for exam adopt 'opening variations', but with an ple, Victor Gavrikov or Yuri Balashov) it indifferent one you should aim for 'open makes sense to include in their opening ing schemes'. repertoire complicated modern opening sys tems, where there is a great deal of theory, An example of an you have to know an enormous number of 'opening scheme' games, and remember various subtleties. There are numerous such variations: for In my time, when I was still a first category example, the ultra-sharp NajdorfVariation in player, I became interested in the question the Sicilian Defence. In openings such as of how to play with Black against the Closed the Grunfeld Defence or the King's Indian Va riation of the Sicilian Defence. We are Defence White has an enormous choice, sometimes troubled by strange problems! and it is he who determines the opening set How to play against the normal Sicilian was up - whereas Black has to be prepared for something that, apparently, I knew. everything. Only if you have a good memory At that time my trainer was Alexander can you play them with Black. Roshal, and it has to be said that he was a There is another factor, which it is useful for good trainer. At one training session he players with a good memory to exploit. They showed me a system of play against the can permit themselves to vary their opening Closed Va riation of the Sicilian Defence, repertoire and employ different openings, which appealed to me - it seemed logical. I since they are capable of mastering, re saw that it was suitable not only in this membering and subsequently choosing those opening, but also against a number of openings which are the most uncomfortable similar set-ups by White, such as the King's for their opponent. Indian Attack; i.e. the given scheme was fairly flexible and universal. I also recom For players with a less good memory it is mend it to you - you will not regret it. dangerous to embark on such a course. I I immediately began employing the new know for myself what agonizing work it is to plan. repeat 'theory' before a game. Everything is recorded in your notebooks, you have Gorodilov - Dvoretsky already looked through it ten times, and all the same you don't remember it. It is better Leningrad 1964 to aim for 'opening schemes' - logical French Defence systems with less theory, in which what is 1 e4 e6 more important is an understanding of 2 'it'e2 c5 position and a knowledge of typical ideas Black's plan is suitable for many eventuali and methods, rather than specific details or ties, including against the Chigorin Va riation precise move orders. of the French Defence. Openings in general can be arbitrarily 3 g3 tt:'lc6 divided into 'opening variations' and 'open 4 tt:'lf3 g6 ing schemes'. Of course, this is a compara 5�g2 �g7 tive division, since in the theory of any opening there are both exact, specific 6 0-0 tt:'lge7 variations, and logical, systematic elements 7 d3 0-0 - it is merely a question of their correlation. After the game I learned that in such Thus, with a good memoryyou can boldly situations one has to reckon with the The Development of an Opening Repertoire 97 positional threat of e4-e5. A fine game pressing on a weak, vulnerable pawn on c3. played on this theme was Petrosian The other bishop has also occupied an Pachman (Bled 1961)*. Well, when you are excellent diagonal and is attacking the d3- only just beginning to employ a new system, pawn. Black controls the open b-file and he there are many subtleties that you do not yet will intensify the pressure on the queenside know. A deep understanding is developed by ..."if a5. His well-devised scheme of by practice. development has allowed him quickly to 8 c3 d6 develop an initiative on the queenside. 9 tt:Je1? And what can White do? See how flexibly the black knights are placed. They are At that time I myself played this in similar defending each other, and at the same time positions: I retreated my knight, advanced the knight on e7 is controlling the f5-square. my pawns by f2-f4 and g3-g4, and thought Black must keep a careful look-out for f4-f5. that I would soon give mate. Strictly speak If this breakthrough becomes a threat (for ing, I was also interested in how to parry example, after g3-g4 ), he forestalls it by such attacks as Black. playing ...f7-f5 . In so doing he retains 9 ... Ilb8 control of all the central squares, and his The advance of the b-pawn is Black's main position remains solid and flexible. plan. He creates counterplay on the queen 14 'ii'c2? side. My opponent wants to develop his queen's 10 f4 b5 knight, but he runs into a tactical stroke 11 lt:Jf3 b4 typical of this set-up. 12 �e3 bxc3 14 . . . lt:Jb4! 13 bxc3 �a6 15 cxb4 �xa1 There is no need to show any more of the game - Black is a sound exchange to the good and he won easily. My first experience of employing this set-up proved successful. Things went equally well in this next game. Turovsky - Dvoretsky Moscow 1964 French Defence 1 e4 e6 2 'ii'e2 c5 I think that strategically the position is 3 tt'lf3 tt:Jc6 almost won. Not long ago the g7-bishop was running up against a securely defended 4 g3 g6 white pawn, but after ...b7-b5-b4xc3 it is 5�g2 �g7 • This game, as well as some others which will be mentioned, will be found in the appendix to the lecture. 98 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire 6 0-0 d6 bishop, which becomes 'bad'. Both strate· Yo u will see that on this occasion I already gies are possible, and each time a concrete understand the position better and I do not decision must be made as to which of them allow e4-e5. Cicero once said 'Everyone to follow. can make a mistake, but to persist in your 10 ... �e8?! delusions is merely senseless.' Why is this move dubious? At that time I did 7 tt:Jc3 lt:Jge 7 not yet realise that Black has to reckon not 8 d3 0-0 only with 11 ..ll.h6, but also 11 d4. After the Now the position is similar to a Closed opening of the d-file the d6-pawn becomes Va riation of the Sicilian Defence (the knight vulnerable. Usually in such cases d3-d4 has come out to c3). But it is more should be prevented by ...ltJd4. comfortable fo r Black than in the Closed 11 lt:Jd1? Va riation, since there White does not usually White wants to occupy the centre by c2-c3 block the f-pawn with his knight, and it is and d3-d4. This plan is too slow - it would 1W also not clear why he has played e2 - he make sense only if Black were unable to does not need this move. 'latch on' to the c3-pawn with his b-pawn. 9 ..ll.e3 .l:i.b8 11 ... bS Black's plan is the same - to advance his b 12 c3 b4 pawn, lengthening the diagonal of his 13 d4 bxc3 bishop on g7. 14 bxc3 ..ll.a6 10 iVd2 15l::!.e1 cxd4 16 cxd4 1Wa5! Black's pieces are far more harmoniously placed than the opponent's. His bishops, as in the previous game, are raking the entire board, his rooks control the open b- and C· files, and the d4-pawn is weak. In the event of 17 iVxa5 tt:Jxa5 the black knight goes to c4. 17 lt:Jc3 �ec8 18 �ec1 it'a3 Threatening the invasion of the rook at b2. 19 .l::!.ab1 tt:Jas When you know a plan, you don't even have Here there is an interesting problem, an to think long, as all the moves are natural. important one for the entire variation. White The play proceeds of its own accord : Black probably wants to play ..ll.h6. Black can could have acted like this even in a blitz preserve his strong bishop from exchange game. by 10.. J:!.e8, and if 11 ..ll.h6, then 11 . ....\l. hB. 20 .l:i.xb8 l::!.xb8 But another reaction is also possible: allow 21 .l::!.b1 l:i.c8! the exchange, rearrange the pawns on dark squares ( ...e6- e5, ...f7-f6 ), and play for the 22 lt:Jd1? restriction of the opponent's light-square 22 lt:Jb5 really was better. The Development of an Opening Repertoire ltJ 99 22 ... follows 7 tt:lce2! followed by c2-c3 and d3- The gathering of the harvest begins. How d4. The variation 7 ...ttJ xe2 8 ttJxe2 .txb2 9 ever, 22 ....t d3 was even stronger. l:tb1 is advantageous to White, since 1i' .t 1i' : 'ii' 23 �b4 'ifxa2 9 ... a5+? 10 d2 xa2 11 Xb2! xb2 12 .tc3 is bad for Black. 24 ltJc3 '11i'a3 7 f4 tt:lge7 25 .tc1?! 'ii'xb4 8 lDf3 26 l:lxb4 ltJb6! Which do you think is more accurate, 8 ...0-0 27 .td2 ltJc6 or 8 ...ltJ d4 ? We have already mentioned White resigned, since he loses a second that Black has to reckon with d3-d4. It is not pawn. always dangerous, but it seemed to me that In demonstrating these games, I have not it was better to prevent it. Now I am not so delved into variations. Firstly, because my sure: after 8 ...0-0 9 d4 there is 9 ...'ii' b6 or opponents were only first category players. 9 ...cxd4 10 tt:lxd4 'ii'b6. The same reaction Nuances and specific details are better follows after 9 0-0 l:Ib8 10 d4. On the other studied in games by stronger players. And hand, when the knight is on c6, the pawn secondly, because we are examining not an sacrifice 1 0 e5!? (which is not bad with the 'opening variation', but an 'opening scheme'. knight on d4) loses its strength. In such cases what is more important to you 8... ltJd4 is not a detailed variational analysis, but the 9 0-0 0-0 pattern of the play, the plans of the two One of the basic positions of the Closed sides, and typical methods. Sicilian has been reached. White has several continuations: 10 'ili'd2, 10 .tf2 , 10 Such comparatively easy play succeeded .l:lb1 and the afore-mentioned pawn sacrifice not only in junior events. I also successfully 10 e5. It is precisely here that general employed this set-up later, against strong considerations are insufficient - one cannot opponents. get by without a familiarity with the specific theory of the variation. But if you desire you Bronstein - Dvoretsky can carry out this work yourself, whereas Moscow 1976 here we have other objectives. Sicilian Defence 10 g4 What should Black play? It is very danger 1 e4 c5 ous to allow White to break up the black 2 tt:lc3 ltJc6 king's pawn screen with the pawn sacrifice 3 g3 g6 f4-f5. As we have already said, the standard 4.tg2 .i.g7 reaction to this threat is the counter ...f7-f5 . 5d3 e6 10 ... f5! 6 .te3 d6 (see diagram) But why not 6 ...ltJ d4 ? This is what Arnold Denker played against Vasily Smyslov in the But with what should Black recapture on f5? 1946 USSR-USA match. Remember: the For such positions there is a 'rule of thumb': d4-square should be occupied by the capture with the opposite pawn to the knight only after the white knight has opponent. If g4xf5 reply ...e6 xf5, and if appeared on f3 or e2. If 6 ...ltJ d4?! there e4xf5, then ...g6x f5 . I don't know how to 100 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire b2-pawn, he wants to play c2-c4. I guessed that this was his plan and I prepared an antidote. 17... lia eB 17... �ad8 , preparing ...d6-d5, was also good. 18�c1 'it'b7 Black's position is preferable: his pieces are exerting unpleasant pressure on the oppo nent's centre. - - position after 1 O .. . f5 explain this logically, but my experience of playing this set-up suggests that usually that is the way things are. 11 gxf 5 ex f 5 12 'ii'd2 The standard .. Jib8 and ...b7-b5-b4 is now rather slow. Black must complete his development and actively fight for the centre. Where is his light-square bishop best placed? Often in such cases it is developed at e6 (after first playing ...'>t>h8 , so as not to have to fear lbg5). But I decided 19 c4?! to place my bishop on c6, in order to oppose Positionally this move is justified: it prevents the white bishop on the long diagonal. ...d6-d5 and prepares the manoeuvre of the 12... �d7 knight via c3 to d5. However, in carrying out 13 'ii'f2 his plan, Bronstein underestimated the flank White finally dislodges the knight from d4. diversion I had prepared. Evidently he 13... lLlxf 3+ should have chosen 19 lbg3, when Black would have replied 19... d5 20 e5 d4 with 14 �xf 3 �c6 somewhat the better chances. I want to prepare (by playing ...b7-b6, and 19. . . 'ii'a6! perhaps ...it'd?) the advance ...d6-d5, after which Black wins the battle for the centre. I have a special term for such moves: 'strategic double attack'. The capture on a2 15 'ir'g 2 b6 is threatened, but in addition Black wants to 16liad1 'it'c7 exchange pawns in the centre. If the Black intends ...'ir'b7, ...liad8 and ...d6-d5. opponent recaptures on e4 with a piece, my 17lLl e2 knight will obtain the colossal f5-point. And if Of course, the b2-pawn cannot be taken - he recaptures with the pawn, I will pick up White replies c2-c3 and then begins trap the c4-pawn. ping the bishop. Now, after defending the 20 lbc 3 fx e4 The Development of an Opening Repertoire ttJ 101 21 dx e4 Some remarks on the technique of 21 ttJxe4 was nevertheless better. In my working on the opening opponent's place I would have begrudged The most unsuccessful method, which I giving up the pawn. know that many of you employ, is to copy 21 ... .1i.d4+ opening information into a notebook. One 22'iti>h1 'ii'xc4 can't think of anything worse! You fill up the pages of the notebook with games and 23 .l:.f e1 ?! 'iti>h8 variations, then new games, fresh ideas and 24 l2Je2 .1i.g7 additional variations appear, and it is not 25 b3 'ifa6 clear where you should put them. Some 26 l2Jg 3 'iib7 pages turn out to be unsuccessful, and have to be altered or even discarded, and in a Black has again set up a battery along the notebook you can't insert new pages. long diagonal, which he had a few moves Gradually you develop almost an aversion ago. After the natural move 27 l:txd6 he had to your opening notebook, as you sense prepared the counter 27 ...lhf5! (28 :Xc6 how out of date it is, and how awkward it is to tt:lh4!). record novelties in it. 27 l:tg1? All information, and opening information White should have supported his bishop: in part icular, should be recorded in a 27.l:!.f1 . Now I am able to force events to my card index. These can be either small advantage. cards, or large sheets. If necessary, you 27 ... l2Jf 5! write a new sheet, add it to any other, or 28 l2Jxf 5 l:txf 5 discard a sheet that is no longer appropri ate; i.e. you can do what you want with 28 . ..gxf5 29 .1i.b2 l:tf7 was also good. them. Yusupov, Dolmatov - all the players 29 l:txd6 .1i.x e4 who have worked with me, have a set of 30 .1i.x e4 'ii'xe4 folders with opening analyses, devoted to 31 'ii'xe4 l:tx e4 different openings and even individual varia tions. 32l:d8+ l:.f8 And another piece of advice: leave large 33 l:r.xfB+ .1i.xf8 margins - there will almost certainly be 34f 5 .1i.g7! things to add. Where you feel that some 35fxg6 .1i.d4 thing new will appear, leave space. Write 36 g7+ 'iti>g8 only on one side of a sheet. 37 .l:tf1 'iti>xg7 Of course, today such a method of working has become out of date. It is clearly far more Black has a decisive advantage. convenient to maintain your card index on a We will return again to this type of position, computer. There it is always as though but for the moment we will continue our brand-new: you can easily adjust, amplify or discussion about the development of an correct things, and there is a system of opening repertoire. opening keys, with the help of which everything can be neatly arranged. The computer processing of opening information is a topic demanding a special discussion; here we will not dwell on this question. 102 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire 'Your own theory' studying, say, the Nimzo-lndian Defence?' Let us suppose that you have successfully He picks up the Encyclopaedia and studies chosen your openings, and your index is it. This happens, but not often. Usually the maintained irreproachably: in it are both the introduction into the repertoire of a new latest games, and extracts from opening scheme or variation is preceded by some articles. You understand everything per impulse. For many young players this is the fectly well and you remember it. 'An opening help of a trainer. He says: 'I have some good advantage is guaranteed', you think and ... analysis of a certain opening system; I will you will be wrong. Because to achieve great show it to you and you will beat everyone.' successes it is not enough to know 'official' This often proves useful. Only, don't be theory. It is essential (as Botvinnik com come accustomed to working in this way. mented in this time) to have 'your own After all, sooner or later the trainer's supply theory of the openings'. of ideas will dry up, and you yourself will It is veryimpo rtant to introduce into your reach a level where no trainer can help you repert oire some opening schemes or any more. Then you yourself have to devise variations where your views diff er from things. But for the time being a trainer's help the theoretical ones, even if only very is indeed your 'magic wand'. slightly. This may be a novelty, as a result After Valery Chekhov won the qualifying of which an entire variation is reassessed or tournament for the 1975 Junior World a scheme, which was considered bad, is Championship, it transpired that those open rehabilitated. Or it may be the non-tradi ings which he had employed earlier were tional assessment of a known position. Let not suitable for the world championship. us suppose that the position is considered There was no active opening for Black, and not too favourable, but it appeals to you. You with White he played all kinds of rubbish, work out a plan and reckon that this position, although before coming to me he had which has a dubious reputation, is one that studied in the Pioneers Palace with an you can go in for. openings trainer. In general, you should have something Realising where our weak points were, and special of your own, your own systems, for what problems needed to be solved, I invited which you have a feeling and have ana grandmaster Evgeny Sveshnikov to a train lysed. For a player who knows only that ing session. The range of openings which he which has already been played, it is hard to was able to show is well known - he has count on success. Against an experienced been playing them all his life. For Black - the opponent he will never gain an advantage: Chelyabinsk Variation, and for White - the the latter also knows everything. But thanks Sicilian with 2 c3. This was just what we to 'your own theory' you may be able to needed: to obtain a system with White in the outplay the opponent in the opening, put him Sicilian and an active system with Black in an uncomfortable position, or lure him against 1 e4. At that time the theory of the onto ground where he will not understand Chelyabinsk Variation was not yet devel around what the struggle revolves. oped, and it was constantly employed only by Sveshnikov and Gennady Timoshchenko. How to expand your opening Sveshnikov helped us to master these two repertoire openings and at the world championship It rarely happens that a player scratches his Chekhov successfully employed them. They head, and then decides: 'Shouldn't I be became part of his repertoire. The Development of an Opening Repertoire � 103 Moreover, I also used the notes made at the number of games, and several pages of training session for myself, and I expanded minute text in the Encyclopaedia of Chess my repertoire. Later I showed the Chelya Openings. You don't know what you espe binsk Variation to ArturYusupov and Sergey cially need, which systems are the main Dolmatov, and for a time they also played it. ones, and which are secondary. You see the So that a few hours of study with Sveshnikov variations, but you don't understand what helped for a time to form the opening stands behind them. But if a trainer explains repertoireof a whole group of players. the main ideas and assists you in making a Another example was Dolmatov's prepara choice, this, of course, is a serious help. tion for the 1978 World Junior Champion ship. At that time a similar situation arose: Generally speaking, you can also expect Sergey did not have a serious variation with help not only from a trainer. It is very White against the Sicilian. I myself could not productive to work as a pair, with one of your help him, since I did not play anything friends. Each of you has his ideas and his worthwhile, and at the first convenient opening researches, and it is useful to opportunity I used to play � b5. To a training exchange them and analyse them together. session before the world championship we The drawbacks in such cases are always invited grandmaster Vladimir Tukmakov, an less than the benefits. Of course, you will no expert on the Sicilian Defence for Black. For longer be able to play an opening variation such a specialist, showing the main ideas against a colleague, which whom you have for White was not such a difficult task. The studied it together; and if he is the first to consultation with Tukmakov proved excep employ a novelty, you will no longer be able tionally useful for Dolmatov. At the world to make use of its surprise effect - these are championship he played normal lines against the minuses. But at the same time, firstly, the Sicilian, successfully combating the you will obtain information which previously Scheveningen Variation, and since then you did not have; secondly, your opening throughout his career he has successfully variations will be better developed. In the played the main variations of the Sicilian end you are competing not with your Defence with White colleague, but with the remaining players in Information often reaches us by accident. the world. You will be disarmed against your Once, when I was still a university student, I friend, but better armed against all remain called in at a lecture by grandmaster Yuri ing players, and this is more important. Here Razuvaev about the Exchange Variation of the many years' work of Yusupov and the Ruy Lopez. He showed some recent Dolmatov is a very notable example. Many games by Robert Fischer, and explained the variations were developed in their joint main ideas. I so liked this 90-minute lecture analyses. Yusupov borrowed some ideas that, after also looking at the Exchange from Dolmatov, and vice versa; as a result Variation myself, I later won several good they both improved their opening reper games with it. toires. Thus a suggestion by a trainer or expert may Thus a second way of expanding your prove very useful, and provide the impetus opening repertoire is to exchange informa for including an opening in your repertoire. tion with a colleague. And it is understandable why: when you begin studying an opening, you are faced A third source is the analysis of games. It is with an enormous body of material, a large in this way that strong players find for 104 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire themselves the most important ideas. At the Nezhm et din ov-N.N. first session of our school, Yusupov showed Kazan 1951 a game of his with Anatoly Karpov, and GrilnfeldDefence described how the Open Variation of the 1 d4 lLlf6 Ruy Lopez appeared in his repertoire. I 2 c4 g6 should remind you: he analysed the Karpov Savon game (1971 ) and found an improve 3lbc3 d5 ment for Black. The novelty provided the 4cxd 5 ltJxd 5 impetus for a study of the Open Variation in 5e4 ltJxc 3 general. 6 bxc 3 c5 7 �b 5+ ltJc6?! There is another way of improving: choose This move was recommended in the first for yourself a chess leader, whose ideas and edition of the Encyclopaedia (in the second style of play you like. The opening repertoire edition the mistake was corrected, and the of this player can be copied, by studying the main move for Black became 7 ...�d 7). systems employed by your idol. 8 d5 'ii'a5 Apart from this stroke, 8 ...a6 must also be Working with literature considered. Now a forcing exchange of Chess literature is a very important source blows begins. of new information. You should be con 9 'ii'a4! stantly looking through magazines, chess What should Black do? Nezhmetdinov has books and lnformator. You never know defended his bishop, and after the ex where you will run across an idea which will change on a4 Black loses a piece. later come in useful. Even in old publica 9. .. �xc 3+ tions. 10 'it>e2 �d7 Here is an example: many years ago I 10.. .'iVxa1 11 dxc6 is completely bad for studied a games collection of Rashid Black. In the event of 10... �g7 11 dxc6 0-0 Nezhmetdinov. This was a remarkable book: 12 .l::tb1 , in my view, he gains insufficient com very vivid games, and wonderful combina pensation for the sacrificed (or lost?) piece. tive play. There I noticed a combination which Nezhmetdinov had carried out in a 11 dxc6 bxc6 simultaneous display against an amateur. It 12�xc6 l::i.d8 appealed to me, and I included it in my card index of exercises. A few years passed. Something interested me in the GrOnfeld Defence, and I opened the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings. And suddenly I discovered that the opening variation from Nezhmetdinov's game, in which he found a forced win with White, had a diametrically opposite evaluation in the Encyclopaedia - in favour of Black. I immediately realised that this was a trap, in which it would be possible to catch some zealous reader of opening books. The Development of an Opening Repertoire ltJ 105 In the Encyclopaedia this position is evalu move order, and plays not 6 ...c5, but ated in favour of Black. The white rook is 6 ...�g7 ? Then one either has to prepare for hanging. Do you see what happens afterthe the main variations of the Grunfeld Defence, natural move 13 l::tb1 ? Quite correct: or find a way of avoiding them. We began 13. . .'i'd3+!! 14 �xd3 �xc6+, and Black analysing 7 �a3. Theory considers this wins a pawn. This happened in a game move, and later Dolmatov won an excellent lsakov-Nikitin (1947). game against Vladimir Bagirov. Neverthe You suggest 13 lDf3. An interesting move. It less, there is something 'non-Grunfeld' is not considered in the Encyclopaedia, so about the bishop on a3. In the end we let's have a look at it. What happens after realised that in this way it is hard to count on the capture of the rook? 13... 'ii' xa1 14 .l:!.d1 , an opening advantage. This means that one or more accurately 14 �xd7 + .l:.xd7 15 l:td1 . cannot get by without a mastery of the Excellent - White develops and prevents 'normal' Grunfeld. the capture of the rook. What can Black The second question: what happens if after play? Probably again 13... 'ifd3+ !. But now 6 ...c5 7 i..b5+ Black avoids 7 ...tDc 6 ? the capture of the queen is not obligatory. According to theory, 7 ...tiJd7 promises White After 14 �e1 'ii'c3+ White can repeat moves the better chances after 8 lDf3. After all, -already not bad - but he can also play for a what is one of the problems for White in this win: 15 �d2 'ifxa1+ 16 �e2. It is probable variation? Black attacks the central d4-pawn that the rook cannot be taken, since there with his c5-pawn, his bishop and his knight follows 17 ltJeS. This means 16... 'ifb2 , on c6. White defends it with his bishop and guarding the e5-square. And White, we knight. In principle it is advantageous for him assume, will play 17 l:ld1 or 17 l:tc1 . Does to develop his knight on f3, but he has to he have sufficient attack for the sacrificed reckon with the pin ...�g4 . Therefore White exchange? It is interesting to give some usually places his knight on e2, or if on f3, thought to this position. then after first making the not very neces But before delving into a complicated analy sary move .l:tb1 , in order to remove the rook sis, you should always ask yourself: 'Did I from the a1-h8 diagonal. But after 7 �b5+ not miss something earlier, at the very start tiJd7 8 lDf3 White does not have to worry of my calculations?' It is stupid to study about his centre -the opponent has neither lengthy variations, which in fact are not the pin ...�g4 , nor the development of his obligatory. And thus here after 13... 'ii' d3+ 14 knight on c6. �e1 Black has the excellent reply 14... �g7! , The most natural move is 7 ...�d7 . After 8 which simply refutes 13 tiJf3. �xd7+ 'ii'xd7 9 lDf3 White has achieved I suggest that you try to find for yourself the something: he does not have to fear the pin solution to the problem: how did Nezhm et on his knight and he succeeds in securely dinov win th e gam e? defending his centre. But does he have I showed this opening variation to Yusupov anything real? On the basis of some old and Dolmatov. It was of more interest to game, theory gave equality. We began Yusupov, since he constantly plays 1 d4, studying the resulting positions and found whereas Dolmatov plays it only occasion some ideas for White, and it even appeared ally. Thus we have an opening trap. Can it that he could hope for an advantage. Then be used? First two questions must be we came across on article in a foreign answered. magazine, where it was shown that with The first: what if Black chooses a different accurate play Black could nevertheless 106 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire equalise. We were unable to refute this One of the possible continuations (nowa conclusion, and so in the end we lost days 11 h3 is more popular), and a very old interest in the idea of the trap. one. It was first played by Frank Marshall Even so, at the 1981 Student Team Champi against Akiba Rubinstein at the Moscow onship in Graz, Yusupov managed to lure International Tournament of 1925. Theory one opponent into the prepared variation, considers that this variation leads to equality. and he won against Robert Morenz exactly 11. . . lbe4 as in the Nezhmetdinov game. So that the 12 ..ixe7 'ii'xe7 study of this old book brought some fruit, 13 ..ixe4 dxe4 even if only slight. 14 lbd2 f5 More often, of course, novelties are to be 15 f3 exf3 found in more recent games and articles. I 16 lbxf3 ..ie6 will tell the story of one successful discov 17 e4 fxe4 ery. 18 :xe4 For the 1984 World Junior Championship This move is stronger than 18 ltJxe4 ..if5. Alyosha Dreev and I prepared in Estonia at a joint training session with another partici pant in the tournament, Lembit 011. Interna tional master Iva Nei, Oil's trainer, brought to the session a whole suitcase-full of chess literature, including many foreign maga zines. I had not seen them before and in my spare time I began looking through them. In a Bulgarian magazine I came across an article devoted to one of the lines of the Carlsbad Variation in the Queen's Gambit. (It is probably more correct to call this the Exchange Variation, as prescribed in official theory, but the resulting pawn structure is usually called the 'Carlsbad', and I am accustomed to using this name for the entire 18... .Uad8 system). 19 l::tfe1 1 d4 d5 In the afore-mentioned game Marshall won 2c4 e6 quickly by 19 .l:!.e5 h6 20 lbe4 ir'b4?! 21 a3! 3lbc3 lbf6 'ii'c4 22 'iff2 ..if7? (22 ...b6! ) 23 b3! 'ir'xb3 24 4cxd5 exd5 ltJfd2 ir'a2 25 lbc3. However, Black could 5 ..ig5 ..ie7 have defended better: 20 ...ir'c7!? (with the threat of 21 ...l::t xd4) or 20 ...J::f. d5. 6 e3 0-0 19... h6 7 ..id3 l:te8 The game Tai-Vaganian (Moscow 1975) 8lbf3 lbb d7 subsequently developed as follows: 20 .l:!.e5 9 0-0 c6 �f7 21 'it'e4 .l:td6?22 'ife3 ltJd723 l::ta5, and 10 'ir'c2 lbt8 Black has no time to defend his a7-pawn in 11 l::tae1 view of the terrible threat of 24 ltJeS ltJxe5 The Development of an Opening Repertoire ctJ 107 25 .Uxe5. But this game too does not for both sides, which aids a more objective demonstrate any advantage for White - by view of the position. playing for simplification by 21 .....id7! Black In our series of games a mass of novelties could have hoped to equalise. was generated, and we gained a far better The author of the article suggested an feeling for the opening than before the interesting set-up for White: training. Yusupov included the Carlsbad 20 .l:!.1e3 !? ikf7 Variation for White in his opening repertoire. 21 'it'e2 At the Candidates Tournament he won a fighting game against Boris Spassky and White concentrates his forces closer to the crushed Jesus Nogueiras, and later too he kingside. If necessary, he can avoid ex successfully employed this system. changes on the e-file by occupying the e5- point with his knight and can then switch his It stands to reason that Yusupov's suc rooks to the neighbouring files on the cesses were not a result of some particular kingside. strength of the given variation. On the contrary, we came to the conclusion (which This idea seemed promising to me, from the was not hard to predict beforehand) that, as purely chess and from the practical point of in any sound opening, with accurate play view. After all, it is not possible to keep track Black can equalise. Simply we were some of every periodical; an article in a Bulgarian what ahead of our opponents, we under magazine would be known in Bulgaria, but stood the positions more deeply, and we had in other countries it might not be noticed. in reservesome ideas which were unfamiliar This meant we would have ideas with which to them. our opponents were unfamiliar. Since Artur plays the Queen's Gambit not However, this variation was of little use to only with White, our analyses also came in Dreev, since at that time he only played 1 useful for reinforcing his defence with Black, e4. I simply transcribed the analysis, realis In particular, in the 8th game of his Candi ing that sooner or later it would come in dates Match against Jan Timman, when the useful. opponent, playing White, desperately needed When Yusupov and I were preparing for the to win, Yusupov employed the novelty 1985 Candidates Tournament I suggested 18... h6!? (instead 18... .Uad8 ) prepared at to Artur that we should investigate this our training session, and easily equalised. system. I showed him the variations given in the article, and it appealed to him. First we analysed the resulting positions, and then With White, as with Black we played a training match with a time We have spoken briefly about the basic control of 15 minutes each per game. principles of building up your opening Incidentally, to consolidate opening informa repertoire. Now I will dwell in more detail on tion which is being studied, I strongly one specific method. It is appropriate for recommend you to play games with a those who in the opening do not aim with shortened time control (of course, after White for the maximum, for a definite preparatory analysis and with additional advantage, but seek their 'own game', their analysis after the games). They do not take type of position. much time, but in the opening, even if a Sometimes with White is makes sense to player has done preparatory work on it, new employ a system which you like for Black; problems are usually discovered. In the i.e. with White you play like Black with an opinion of Yusupov, you should play in turn extra tempo. 108 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire Soon after I included in my repertoire a 7 0-0 d6 successful method of play against the 8 d3 i.e6 Closed Variation of the Sicilian Defence, How to reply, do you remember? with which I won the majority of my games, 9t'Lld5! the idea naturally occurred to me of employ ing the same set-up with White. What was Of course, ...d6-d5 must be prevented . needed for this? Obviously to begin playing 9... 'ii'd7 the English Opening. Of course, in this 10 l:tb1 Black has many different systems, for which I can now explain why the knight is worse one has to be prepared. But if he aims for a placed at e7 than at f6 or h6. Here Black King's Indian set-up, there is a chance of cannot play 1 O ...i.h3 , because after the catching the opponent in the favourite exchange I will capture the c7-pawn. With scheme. the knight on f6 or h6, 1 O ...i.h3 is possible, Grandmaster Razuvaev once told me about since after the exchange on h3 White cannot a specific method, which he employs in his capture the c7-pawn because of ...t'Llg4 wi th (very productive) work on opening theory. mate. A little tactical detail, which is very He looks for the most important, representa significant. If Black were free to exchange tive examples of the opening in question. A the light-square bishops, he would not stand game in which both players (or at least one badly. Incidentally, the position with the of them) acts logically and consistently; knight on f6 is examined in my article 'The where valuable ideas and typical methods superfluous piece' in the book Secrets of occur. Such games help one to understand Chess Tra ining. the opening set-up more deeply and to 10 ... t'Lld8 remember it more easily. The game Dvoretsky-Veselovsky (Mos The game which I will now show you may cow 1967) went 1 O ...a5 11 a3 l::tae8? (the serve as a key example for the system queenside should not have been aban which we are currently discussing. doned to its fate) 12 b4 axb4 13 axb4 lLldB 14 b5 c6 15 bxc6 bxc6 16l'Llxe7+ �xe7. Dvoretsky - Timoshchenko USSR Team Championship, Moscow 1966 English Opening 1 c4 e5 2l'Llc3 t'Llc6 3 g3 g6 4 i.g2 i.g7 Black is playing the Closed Variation of the Sicilian with reversed colours. 5 e3 t'Llge7 An interesting moment. I consider this move to be rather weak: in this variation the knight is best placed at f6 or even h6. The basis of this evaluation is purely tactical and not at all obvious. You will see it within a few moves. A little exercise for you to solve yourself: 6t'Llge2 0-0 what is White's most exact course of action? The Development of an Opening Repertoire l2J 109 11 b4 tt::lxd5 My next move is one that, to be honest, I am If 11 ...c6 there follows 12 tt::lxe?+ 'ir'xe? 13 proud of. At that time I had only just become b5. After the exchange of pawns on c6 the a master, but the move, in my opinion, is one bishop comes out to a3, the queen to a4, and worthy of a grandmaster. It was found in a so on - White has an easy, pleasant game. purely logical way, and we will now follow The move made by Black leads to a closed this logic. type of game. What does Black want? It is always useful to 12 cxd5 ii.h3 ask yourself this question. Most probably, to What should White play in such cases? exchange his bad bishop: 16... ii.h6 . 13 e4! Should I agree to the exchange? If the The standard plan: after the light-square bishop is moved to b2 or g 1 , the black bishops have been exchanged, the pawns bishop will take control of the c1-square and are moved onto light squares. it will be hard for me to put into effect my 13 ... ii.xg2 natural plan- pressure on the backward c? pawn with the heavy pieces along the c-file. 14 'iitxg2 f5 In addition, the black knight will obtain the 15 f3 excellent square g5 in the vicinity of my king. I think that White's position is preferable. He It is very dangerous to 'stick to your has more space, and the black bishop is running up against its own pawns. If Black principles' and reason routinely: since the undermines the centre with ...c7-c6, there opponent's bishop is 'bad', it means that it follows tt::lc3. At some point subsequently should not be exchanged. But for any rule White exchanges on c6, and in the event of there are numerous exceptions. After some ... b7xc6 he advances b4-b5, obtaining the thought I decided: there was nothing to be central d5-point for his knight. Black in turn done, I would have to exchange. will acquire the possibility of placing his But on which square? I can allow him to knight on d4, but these points are not capture on c1 , when I occupy the c-file with equivalent. The knight at d4 is attacked by gain of tempo. I can capture on h6 - there the white bishop, whereas Black is unable to the black knight will be badly placed. The exchange his bishop for the white knight. second option seemed more reliable. Here it is, the advantage of a 'good' bishop But how should I arrange my pieces on the over a 'bad' one. c-file? The most natural set-up is the queen 15 ... tt::lf7 on c2, the rook from f1 to c1 , and the b1-rook can go to c3. This means we have a choice between 16 'ii'c2 and 16 .l::!.b3. The rook move is apparently more accurate. After the exchange on h6, the fork 'it'c 1 may be a possibility - with a simultaneous attack on c? and h6. This last consideration fully justified itself (true, in a slightly different form) in a game which I played two years later against national master Anatoly Kremenetsky (35th USSR Championship, Kharkov 1968). After 16 l:tb3 he did not reply 16... i.h6 , but 16... h6 . I acted in accordance with my plan: 110 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire 17 l:tc3, and after 17... lt:Jg5? 18 St.xg5 hxg5 fence, then ...lt:Je8 . 19 "it'c1 ! two black pawns- c7 and g5 - were There is also another tempting idea: to play under attack. 22 ..."it'b5 and then 23 ..."it'b6 , from where the 16 .l:r.b3!! it.h6 queen can embarrass White with the threat 17 it.xh6 lt:Jxh6 of an invasion on e3 or f2. 18 .l:r.c3 .l:r.f7 With correct defence I think that Black would have had an inferior but tenable position. What should I play? However, my opponent chose a faulty plan. The natural plan is 'ii'c2 and l:!.c1 . Black 22 ... g5? defends his pawn with ...l:!.c8 . What to do Timoshchenko mounts an attack on the next? Obviously, advance the queenside king, or more correctly, he thinks that he pawns. However, in this case a well-known does. The standard reaction to flank activity positional principle applies: before attack by the opponent is a counterblow in the ing, you should create a target to 'latch centre. But if 23 d4? there follows 23 ...fxe4, on' to. then ... lt:Jg4 or ... 'ii'g4 and ...l:!.cf8 - and all 19 'iic1 ! 'it>g7 the black pieces join the attack. This means 20 �a3 a6 that for the moment the routine recommen Forced -Black has to free his rook. But now dation is inapplicable. the a6-pawn makes it easier for White to What does the opponent want? Does he open lines on the queenside. He plays a2- intend to play 23 ...g4 ? But then White has a4, b4-b5 and after ...a6xb5 he recaptures the excellent reply 24 f4!. On g4 the pawn on b5 with his queen. takes away this square from the queen and 21 l:!.fc1 l:!.c8 the knight. 22 'iib3 Now let us consider 23 .. .f4. The reply 24 g4? The more aggressive move 22 "it'a5 came is not possible in view of 24 ...lt:Jxg4. What is into consideration. the drawback to Black's move? It removes the attack on the e4-pawn and I can finally strike at the enemy centre: 24 d4!, simulta neously including my rook and queen in the defence of the king side. It follows that at the moment I have nothing to fear - replies are prepared against each of the opponent's attacking moves. This means that I can coolly make a useful move on the queen side. A good example of clear, logical reasoning, based on 'prophylactic thinking'. 23 a4! f4 24 d4! All according to the rules: against a flank What should Black do now? He has a attack - a counterblow in the centre, and a terrible knight on h6. His natural strategy is timely one. Black has two attacking possi to switch it to better squares: ...lt:Jg8-f6 , and bilities: he can play ...g5-g4 either immedi if the c7-pawn requires more reliable de- ately, or first exchange on g3. But after The Development of an Opening Repertoire ctJ 111 24 . . .fxg3 25 hxg3 g4 there is the verystrong very seriously, so as not to allow him any reply 26 f4!. counter-chances. The knight can be taken, 24. .. g4 of course, but why allow even the slightest 25 dxe5 dxe5 sharpening of the play? How should White proceed further? I saw 33 .l:tg1 + t2Jg7 that there was an excellent square at e6 for 34 bxc6 bxc6 the white knight. 35 l:tc2! 26 gxf4! exf4 The game is won with quiet moves. Black 27 t2Jd4 'it>h8 cannot take on d5, and 36 .l:!.cg2 is threat 28 t2Je6 c6 ened. 29 'i¥b2! 35 ... l:l.e8 A methodical move. Try more often to pay The last hope: 36 .Ucg2? .Uxe6. attention to such 'trifles'. I force the oppo 36 .Uxg7+ nent to place his king on g8, after which I 36 .Uxc6 was also strong. don't have to fear any counterplay on the g 36... llxg7 file. Probably I would also have won without 37 'i!Vxg7+ 'iVxg7 this, but it is always useful first to restrict the opponent's possibilities. 38 t2Jxg7 cxd5? 29 . . . 'it>g8 Of course, 38 .. .'it>xg7 was also completely hopeless. 30 b5! 39 t2Jxe8 Black resigned. Take note: I showed some of the previous games from my notebook, but I remember the game with Timoshchenkowithout a crib, even though it was played a quarter of a century ago! Why? Because at one time I did some serious work on it, I thought about the meaning of every move, and this game became for me a defining, fundamental one in the given variation. From the King's Indian Defence to the King's Indian Attack The triumph of White's opening plan - his Inveterate King's Indian players sometimes offensive on the queenside. try to obtain their customary positions with reversed colours and an extra tempo. One 30 ... axb5 would imagine that it is not so difficult, 31 axb5 gxf3+ knowing the ideas of an opening, to make 32 'it>xf3 t2Jf5 advantageous use of the extra tempo. In In desperate situations a player often re fact, easy problems do not exist in chess sorts to 'kamikaze' tactics. Such final bursts and an extra tempo does not always prove of activity by the opponent should be treated to be a blessing. Why? Engraved on my 112 As you can see, the position is exactly the The Development of an Opening Repertoire lZJ 113 same. I have an extra tempo. For what get from e1 to e4. At some point Black should I use it? I decided to prepare f2-f4 by intends to play ...e5-e4 , perhaps after first 11 tt:le1 . But, although it may seem para bringing up his pieces and placing his knight doxical, this move did not improve, but on b4. worsened my position. I was probably let 13 ttJxb6 axb6 down by an analogy with the game against Threatening 14... b5. Mukhin, but to a greater extent by my 14 �d2 f5 unwillingness to think, to delve into the specific details of the position. 15 exf5 'ifxf5 But what should I have done? 11 ttJfd2 is 16 f3 tempting. If the opponent replies 11...ltJb6, Now Black would have gained the advan then White's move is certainly justified. He tage by 16.. . 'ifh3!, when 17 'i*'e2 b5 is has to reckon with 11.. .�g5 (with the same unfavourable for White, while if 17 ltJg2, idea as the move 1 0 �h3 -the exchange of then 17... .l!tf5 , intending 18.. . l:th5, is strong. the 'bad' bishop). What then should White White's position is falling apart, both on the play, do you see? I think that the only correct queenside, and on the kingside. reply is the gambit 12 f4! exf4 13 tiJf3 �h6 But here I was lucky - my opponent quite 14 tt:lh4!. I would not recommend you to go unnecessarily went in for complications. in for such a position with Black. See what 16 ... c4?! fascinating possibilities are revealed in a 17 'ii'e2 �c5 situation, which just now appeared perfectly 18 'it>g2 c3! understood and uninteresting! 18... l:!.ae8 19 dxc4 e4 is not dangerous in The positional threat of f2-f4 should most view of 20 fxe4 l:!.xe4 21 it'd3. probably be met by a typical blockading operation: 11.. .g6!? 12 f4 exf4 13 gxf4 f5. A 19 bxc3 b5 new type of game arises, one which, in my 20 a5 view, is not unfavourable for Black. Here Lev Alburt offered a draw, and I, What else can be done apart from11 tiJfd2 ? displaying optimism unwarranted by the Nothing in particular, apart from 11 b3 or 11 position, declined. But aftera tense struggle ltih1, moves which are only slightly useful the game nevertheless came to a peaceful for White. So that here there appears to be end. no great benefit from the extra tempo. However, White does not stand badly, and In the following example White used his we have already agreed that, by employing extra tempo more successfully. openings with reversed colours, we are aiming not for an opening advantage, but for Dvoretsky - Tataev our 'own game'. Beltsy 1972 11 ttJe1 ? tiJb6 King 's Indian Attack 12 i.xc8 'ii'xc8! 1 e4 c5 This would not have been possible with the 2 lDf3 g6 knight on f3. When Black played this, I 3 d3 �g7 became anxious. There is now the positional 4 g3 ttJc6 threat of . ..f7 -f5. For example, 13 b3 ttJxc4 14 bxc4 f5 15 exf5 'ii'xf5. White's pieces are 5 �g2 ttJf6 ridiculously placed, and his knight will never 6 0-0 d5 114 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire 7lbc3 0-0 against me. I had only just become a master, I reached this position several times with I had no serious knowledge of the theory of Black after 1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbf3 i..g7 4 this variation, and I had never seen the g3 0-0 5 i..g2 d6 6 0-0 lbc6 7 lbc3 e5 move 9 c5. Since Aaron Nimzowitsch's book (sometimes 7 ...i.. f5 or 7 ...i.. g4 is played My System, which I had previously read with here, but the most usual move is 7 ...a6 ). great pleasure, was still fresh in my mind, at the board I was able to find an idea in the spirit of Nimzowitsch, with a blockading knight on d6: 9 ...lbe8 10 cxd6 lbxd6. The continuation was 11 e4 c5?! 12 a4 ?! i..d7 13 .l:i.e1 h6 14 b3 f5 with a good game for Black. White could have seized the initiative by 12 dxc6 lbxc6 13 i..g5! f6 14 i..e3 followed by 15 i..c5 (lvkov-Uitumen, Palma de Mallorca 1970). Therefore Black does better not to hurry with 11...c5, but to first play 11 ...h6!, and then, according to circumstances, 12... c5 , 12... c6 or 12.. .f5. The main continuation is 9 e4 lbd7. The game Doda-Dvoretsky (Polanica Zdroj 1973) went 10 lbe1 f5 11 lLld3 lbf6 12 f3?! (12 f4 is better, as Etruk played against me a year White has a choice between 8 dxe5 and 8 earlier; 12 exf5, 12 i..d2 and 12 i..g5!? have d5. The pawn exchange is not as harmless also occurred) 12... h6! 13 i..d2 g5 (threaten as it appears. Initially I replied to 8 dxe5 with 8 ...dxe5. However, in the variation 9 'ji'xd8 ing 14... f4 ) 14 exf5 lbxf5. The initiative is with Black, whose subsequent plan is ... .l:r.xd8 1 0 i..g5 i..e6 11 lbd2 it is not so easy 'ii'e8-g6, oo.lbd4, oo.i.f5, oo. .l::!.f7, oo. .l:i.afB, to equalise, for example 11 ...h6 12 i..xf6 00.h 6-h5 and 00.g 5-g4. �d2 13 i..xg7 'it>xg7 14 i..xc6 bxc6 15 b3, and White's chances are somewhat better The manoeuvre of the knight to d3 is a little thanks to his superior pawn structure slow. White has some worthy alternatives: (Koyfman-Dvoretsky, Moscow Champion 1 0 i..e3, 1 0 i..d2 and 1 0 b4. He can also ship 1966). consider the non-routine 1 0 lbg5!? h6 11 lbh3 followed by 12 f4. The game Vaganian-Dvoretsky (USSR Championship First League, Tbilisi 1973) After this excursion into the theory of the went 8 dxe5 lbxe5 9 lbxe5 dxe5 1 0 'ji'xd8 King's Indian Defence, let us return to the .l:r.xd8 11 i..g5 .l:td4! 12 e3?! .l:i.xc4 13 .l:!.ac1 Dvoretsky-Tataev game . c6! 14 i..xf6 i..xf6 15 lbe4 .l:i.xc1 16 lbxf6+ (see diagram) Wg7 17 lbe8+ 'it>f8 18 .U.xc1 'i.t>xe8 19 .l:i.xc6 i.e6! 20 I1c5 .U.c8 Y.,-Y... White also achieves So, I have an extra tempo. Which moves for nothing with 12 b3 c6, but he retains White are useful, and which are not? What pressure by 12 lbd5! lbxd5 13 cxd5 e4 14 would you say, for example, about 8 .l:i.e1 ? .l::!.fd1 - here the theory books give inaccu Yes, this would be a move in the style of my rate information. game with Alburt, a move which does not After 8 d5 lbe7 in the 1966 Moscow improve, but worsens the position. Black Championship Vladimir Yurkov chose 9 c5 replies 8 ...d4 9 lbe2e5. Now White needs to The Development of an Opening Repertoire l2J 115 10 ... b6 11 'it?h2 ..ia6 12 e5 -position after 7 ...0-0 - play f2-f4, and in this case his rook is clearly worse placed at f1 than at e1 . 8 h3! In every eventuality it is useful to defend the g4-square - both in an endgame arising An interesting positional problem: to where after 8 ...dxe4, and in a blocked position should the knight retreat, d7 or e8? (We will after 8 ...d4 . Knowing the ideas of the not even consider the h 7 -square - there the corresponding variation of the King's Indian knight is out of play.) Defence, about which we have only just What is Black intending to do next? Of spoken, it was not difficult to find the correct course, he won't want to weaken his pawn solution with White. chain with ...f7-f6. He intends to seize My opponent did not want to play a space on the queenside by ...b6-b5-b4. theoretical position a tempo down, and he How should White react? He will probably tried to devise something new. try to prevent this plan by 13 a4. At the same time the knight thrust to b5 becomes a 8... h6 possibility. After 12... tt::l e8 Black retreats his 9 tt::ld2!? bishop to b7, and then plays ...a7-a6 , Ifnow 9 ...d4 , then it is clear that I have made ...tt::l c7 and ...b6-b5. Now tt::lb5 is no longer a useful move. After 9 .....ie6 or 9 ...e6 the dangerous, since the knight on e8 is planned advance f2-f4 gains in strength. defending the d6-square. But with the knight Black should probably have played 9 ...dxe4 on d7 none of this is possible, and White 10 dxe4 (nothing is given by 10 tt::lcxe4 gains the better prospects, since the oppo 1Llxe4 11 tt::lxe4 b6! 12 tt::lxc5 bxc5 13 ..ixc6 nent does not have any normal plan. �xh3) 10.. ."�c7 11 f4 .l:!.d8 12 e5 tt::le8. 12 ... tt::ld7? 9 ... e6 13 a4! l:.c8 10 f4 14 tt::lf3 'ir'c7 Now it is unfavourable for the opponent to 15 tt::lb5 ..ixb5 open the centre: after 1 O ...dxe4 11 dxe4 and 12 e5 'holes' appear in his position at d6 and 16 axb5 tt::ld4 f6, and the white knight will occupy a 17 c4! powerfulposition on e4. A good positional move: the diagonal of the 116 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire g2-bishop is lengthened, and the mobility of advancing on the queenside. Black has the opponent's pieces is restricted. parried the immediate threats, but nearly all 17 ... dxc4 of his forces are stuck there. In such cases 18 dxc4 'ikb8 the switching of the attack to the opposite wing proves very effective. 19 'iVa4 was threatened. 24 h4! 19 i.e3 Threatening 25 h5. 19 l2Jxd4!? cxd4 20 b3 also came into consideration. 24 ... h5 19 ... l2Jxf3+?! 25 g4 hxg4 After this exchange Black remains without 26 'ikxg4 i.g7 any counterplay at all. He should have 27 h5 tZ:lfS sacrificed a pawn: 19... .l:!.fd8 . White must play i.e4 and .U.g1 . But with 20 'iixf3 .U.fd8 which move should he begin? When trying 21 l:!.fd1 to convert an advantage, one should care There is now the unpleasant threat of 22 fully watch for the opponent's counter 'ii'b7, winning a pawn. chances. The natural move 28 i.e4? is refuted tactically: 28 ...l:.xc6 29 bxc6 i.xe5! 21 ... l:.c7 30 fxe5'ikxe5+ with the threats of 31 ...'iVxb2+ 22 �d6! i.f8 and 31 .. .f5 . 23 .l:!.c6 .l:!.dc8 28 .U.g1 ! How should White proceed further? White has a decisive advantage, which he converted into a win. When playing with reversed colours those set-ups which we like for Black, it is hardly ever possible to directly transfer from there any specific variations. On other hand, as I hope you have seen, a wide use can be made of the typical plans, methods and evaluations of the corresponding source openings. And in general, for a deep understanding of any opening, a study of general ideas is work that is no less and possibly more important that the memoris ing of specific variations. There is nothing that Black can move, and To solve opening problems, one sometimes his pieces are running up against his own has to use ideas typical of quite different pawn on c5. Here it is useful to remember schemes. This means that the practical the 'principle of two weaknesses'. It usually player should not restrict himself to a study operates in the endgame, but sometimes of games played only with 'his' openings. also in the middlegame, when the opponent Study well-annotated games, even if 'other' is completely tied down and deprived of openings are employed in them. You will not counterplay. Up till now White has been expand your opening repertoire straight The Development of an Opening Repertoire ttJ 117 away, but it is possible that some game will be used in the most varied openings. provide the impetus for this. But more Record ideas that appeal to you in the form important, you will expand your arsenal of of 'positional sketches', as described in the positional ideas, methods and evaluations, first book of this series (Secrets of Chess which, as I have already said, may possibly Training). Solutions Nezhmetdinov -N.N. (Kazan 1951 ). to weaken the pressure on his queenside, 13 'ili'b3!! 1fxa1 by exchanging the light-square bishops: Bad is 13... 'it'x b3 14 �xd7+ and 15 axb3, 17... �h3 . For this reason the natural move when White wins a piece. 17 'i!Va4? would be a serious inaccuracy. 14 �b2 �b1 It is easy to forestall the exchange of bishops by 17 l:i.e1 . But in itself this move is 15lt:lf3 ! 'ii'xh1 not needed by White, and it does not come 16lt:le5 into his plan. Threatening mate in one move. 17 �a3! 16 ... e6 The strongest continuation. While intensify 17 �xd7+ .l:i.xd7 ing the pressure on the queenside, at the 18 'ii'b8+ .l:i.d8 same time White preserves his light-square 18 .. :;t>e7 19 lt:Jc6 mate. bishop from exchange. In Nimzowitsch's 19 'iVb5+ opinion, it is such moves, combining the implementation of your own plan and prophy White has built up a decisive attack. The laxis against the opponent's ideas, that game concluded 19.. :lt>e7 20 �b7+ Appendix (games, mentioned in the lecture, which will supplement your impressions of the opening variations analysed) Petrosian - Pachman Bled 1961 King's Indian Attack 1 tt:Jf3 c5 2 g3 tt:Jc6 3 i.g2 g6 4 0-0 i.g7 5 d3 e6 6e4 tt:Jge7 7 IZ.e1 0-0?! 7 ...d6 is safer. 8 e5! d6 19 'ii'xf6+! <&t>xf6 9 exd6 'ii'xd6 20 i.e5+ <&t>g5 10 tt:Jbd2 'ii'c7 21 i.g7! Either here or on the following move ...b7- Black resigned. b6 should have been played. 11 tt:Jb3! tt:Jd4? Smyslov - Denker 12 i.f4 ii'b6 USSR-USA Match, Moscow 1946 13 tt:Je5 tt:Jxb3 Sicilian Defence 14 tt:Jc4! 1 e4 c5 14 axb3 tt:Jd5 15 tt:Jc4 'ii'c6 was less 2 tt:Jc3 tt:Jc6 accurate. 3 g3 g6 14 ... ii'b5 4 i.g2 i.g7 In the event of 14... 'ii' d8 15 axb3 the threats 5d3 e6 of 16 i.d6 and 16 .l:ta5 are unpleasant. 6 i.e3 tt:Jd4?! a5 15 axb3 7 tt:Jce2! d6 Black is forced to defend against 16 l:!.a5. 8 c3 tt:Jc6 16 i.d6 i.f6 8 ...tt:Jxe2 looks more natural. 17 ii'f3 <&t>g7 9 d4 cxd4 18 .l:!.e4?! 10 tt:Jxd4! The combination which White carried out on White must capture on d4 with a piece, in his next move was already possible here. order to subsequently exploit the weakness 18 . . . lidS of the d6-pawn. The Development of an Opening Repertoire ctJ 119 10 ... ltJxd4 21 .l::td1 .i:!.fd8 11 ii.xd4 e5 21 ... ii.xc4 22 l:tac1 . 11 ...tt:Jf6 was better. 22 l:tac1 11ac8 12 ii.e3 lbe7 23 b3 b6 13 lt:'le2 0-0 24 lt:'lc3! 14 0-0 ii.e6 White is planning the advantageous ex 15 'iid2 'fic7 change of the light-square bishops. And if Not 15 ...d5 in view of 16 ii.c5. 24 ...�h7 there follows 25 ..te4!, intending 26 h4, or 26 lt:'lb5 and 27 'iid3. 24 ... 'iie7 25 ii.d5 �h7 26 ii.xe6 'iixe6 27 l:td3 .Uc7 28 .Ucd1 l:tf7 29 lt:'le4 SiLtS 30 .U.d5 'it'g4 31 l:t1d3 The loss of the pawn is now unavoidable. 31 ltJxd6?! ii.xd6 32 .Uxd6 would have been premature: 32 ...'ii' xd1+!. 31 . . . ii.e7 16 .l::tfc1! 32 lt:'lxd6 ii.xd6 In order to gain control of the d5-point, White 33 l:txd6 l:tdf8 must prepare c3-c4. 16 b3, with the same 34 'fixeS aim, is weaker in view of 16... b5 (17 a4 bxa4 At first sight, a rather risky decision. By 18 J:txa4 ii.xb3). But now if 16... b5 there follows 17 a4! a6 (17... bxa4 18 11xa4 a5 19 giving up his f2-pawn, White exposes his �ca1 with the threat of 20 b4) 18 l:td1 , for king. But Smyslov has accurately calculated example: 18.. J:tad8? 19 axb5 axb5 20 lla7, that he will be the first to begin an attack. or 18.. Jlfd8 19 axb5 axb5 20 :Xa8 l:.xa8 21 34 ... l:txf2 'lxd6, or 18... ii.b3 19 'iixd6 'iixd6 20 .l::txd6 35 .:td7+ l:tf7 .ba4 21 lt:'lc1 , preparing 22 b3. 36 l:txf7+ l:txf7 16 ... f5 37 l:td8! l:tg7 17 c4 fxe4 38 'ilea g5 18 lt:'lc3 lt:'lf5 39 iVh8+ �g6 In the event of 18... ii.xc4 White has a 40 .Ud6+ w pleasant choice of 19 lt:'ld1, 19 ltJxe4 or 41 'iixh6 19.b3. It has all become clear. Black has no 19 ltJxe4 ltJxe3 counterplay- his rook is passive, his king is 19... tt:Jd4 20 c5! d5 21 lt:'lg5ii.f7 22 f4 with an vulnerable, and in addition, being two pawns attack for White. down, he cannot agree to the exchange of 20 'iixe3 h6 queens. 120 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire 41 ... it'f5 after 12 i.b5 b6 13l:!.ad1 a6 14 i.d3 b5 15 42 l:!.d1 ! lli'c5+ i.b1 i.b7he obtained an excellent position. 43 'it>g2 �e7 11 .i:td1 44 .l:!.f1 + 'it>g8 11 0-0?! was inaccurate in view of 11 ...lbe5! 45 �f6 'ii'e8 with equality. 46 �f5 g4 11 ... e6 47 .Uf2 'ike7 12 0-0 �c7 48 �d3 .l:tg5 49 Ite2 'ii'f8 50 �e4 :tg7 51 'ii'd5+ 'ii'f7 52 l:!.e6! Black resigned. Dolmatov - Bagirov Frunze 1983 GrOnfeld Defence 1 c4 tt::lf6 2 tt::lc3 d5 3 cxd5 tt::lxd5 13 e5! 4d4 g6 The start of a sharp plan of attack on the 5 e4 ttJxc3 kingside, typical of such positions. 6 bxc3 i.g7 13 ... i.b7 7 i.a3 tt::ld7 14 tt::lg5 .l:.fc8 Black can get by without this move, by 14... h6? loses to 15 tt::lxe6! 'ilic6 16 d5. playing 7 ...b6!? followed by ...i.b7 , ...0-0 15 'i!ib1 and ...c7- c5, after which his knight will be 15 i.e4 came into consideration, with the able to occupy the more active c6-square. aim of occupying the central e4-point with 8 tt::lf3 c5 the knight (if 15... h6 , then 16 tt::lxe6 is still 9 'i!Vb3 0-0 strong). But Dolmatov avoids the exchange, hoping to use his bishop to break up the 10 i.d3 enemy king's defences. Obviously weaker is 1 0 i.e2 cxd4 11 cxd4 15 ... l:!.ab8 tt::lf6. If 1 0 l:td1 the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings recommends 1 0 ...cxd4 11 cxd4 16 h4 b5 tt::lf6 12 i.d3 i.g4 13 �xb 7 i.xf3 14 gxf3 This pawn offensiveon the queenside is too 'iVxd4 , evaluating the resulting position as late. 16... 'ir'c6! was better, threatening mate roughly equal. and intending ...'ii' a4 . 10 ... b6?! 17 h5 b4 Black played more actively in the game 18 hxg6! bxa3 Evans-Korchnoi (Buenos Aires 1960): 1 0 ... If 18... hxg6, then 19 i.xg6 fxg6 20 ttJxe6 'i!ic7 11 0-0 .l::!.b8 (intending ... b7-b5), and it'c6 21 d5 is decisive. The Development of an Opening Repertoire lLJ 121 19 gxf7+ 'it>h8 30 �xf5! exf5 20 i.xh7 31 'ilt'xg6 .l:!.b1+ Threatening 'iVb1 -g6-h5. 32 'it>h2 :b6 20 ... lbf8 33 e6 '>t>d6 21 1i'd3 i.h6 34 1i'xf5 cxd4 If 21 ...cxd4 , then 22 'iVh3 i.xe5 23 i.g8+ 35 cxd4 9-;c7 lt>g7 24 'iig4! 'it>h6 25 f4. And Black resigned. 22 'ii'h3! i.xg5 23 i.g8+ 'it>g7 Timman - Yusupov 24 l::i.d3 Candidates Match, 8th Game, Tilburg 1986 Queen's Gambit 1 d4 d5 2c4 e6 3 tt::lc3 tt::lf6 4cxd5 exd5 5 i.g5 i.e7 6 e3 tt::lbd7 7 'ilt'c2 0-0 8 i.d3 .Ue8 9 tt::lf3 tt::lf8 10 0-0 c6 11 .i:.ae1 tt::le4 24 ... .Jte4 12 .i.xe7 'iVxe7 24 ... .1Lf4!would have created more difficul 13 i.xe4 dxe4 ties for the opponent, but even in this case, 14 tt::ld2 f5 according to analysis by Dolmatov, White In the World Team Championship (Luzern would have retained a decisive advantage: 1985) against Zoltan Ribli, Yusupov em 25 'i'h4!tt::l g6 26 'ii'f6+ �f8 27 'ifxg6cxd4 28 ployed a riskier plan: 14... b6!? 15 'ilt'a4 b5! cxd4 .i.a6 29 .l:!.g3! (but not 29 l:!.f3? �c1 !) and gained a quick draw. (Incidentally, in 29 ....1Lxg3 30 'ifh6+ �e7 31 f8'i¥+! (31 that same event in the very same variation 't!Yxe6+? �xe6 32 f8'if+ �d7 is much he beat Li Zunian with White). Timman was weaker) 31 ....l:!.xf8 32 'ifg7+ 'it>d8 33 'ifxf8+ evidently hoping for a repetition of this 'it>d7 34 i.xe6+! �xe6 35 'ii'f6+ �d7 variation and had certainly found a way of (35 ...'it>d5 36 'ii'f3+ �e6 37 d5+ �d7 38 improving on Ribli's play. But Yusupov had 't!Yxg3) 36 "ii'xa6 i.h4 37 ..Wxa3, and White made a deep study of this variation, which in has four pawns for the bishop. case of necessity gave him the possibility of 25 llg3 'iVd8 varying his plans, thus avoiding prepared 26 f4 i.f5 lines by the opponent. 27 "iVh2 tt::lg6 15 f3 exf3 28 fxg5 'it>f8 16 tt::lxf3 i.e6 29 'iVh6+ 'it>e7 17 e4 fxe4 122 The Development of an Opening Repertoire 18 l:txe4 h6!? Taking account of the situation in the match, 19 tt'le2?! with an exchange sacrifice Yusupov forces a An unsuccessful reaction to the novelty. 19 draw. 28 ...ll.f8 29 tt'lf5 'iife6 or 29 ...'lt>h7 was .l:tfe1 was preferable, or 19 tt'le5, as Yusupov also not bad . had played against me a year earlier in 29 'ii'f7+ 'lt>h7 some training games with a 15-minute time 30 'ii'xe8 'ii'xb2! control. 31 l:!.f2 'iifa1 + 32 l:tf1 'ii'a2 Natural tactics in such a situation - without changing the position, to reach the adjourn ment and to check at home whether or not there are any winning chances. 33 l:!.f2 'ii'a1+ 34 l:tf1 "i'Va2 35 l:tf2 'ii'b1+ 36 l:tf1 'ii'b2 37 l:tf2 'ii'b1 + 38 l:!.f1 'ii'c2 39 l:tf2 'ii'c1+ 40 l:tf1 'iifd2 19 ... 'i!fb4! 41 llf2 'iifd1 + Black forces favourable simplification. Draw. 20 a3 Mukhin - Dvoretsky In the event of 20 tt'le5 Black can simply Moscow 1969 capture the pawn: 20 ...il.xa2 . King's Indian Defence 20 . . . 'it'b3 1 c4 tt'lf6 20 ...'ii' c4 21 tt'lc3 wasless good. 2 tt'lf3 g6 21 'it'd2 il.d5 3 tt'lc3 il.g7 22 l:!.xe8 .l:!.xe8 4e4 d6 23 tt'le5 tt'le6 5 d4 0-0 24 tt'lc3 'ii'b6 6 il.e2 e5 25 tt'lxd5 cxd5 7 d5 tt'la6 26 tt'lf3 tt'lf8 8 0-0 tt'lc5 Black wants to tie down his opponent by 9 tt'ld2?! a5 27 ...l:!.e4 and 28 ...tt'le6, but with the same idea 26 ...tt'ld8 was more accurate. In some 10 b3 il.h6! cases the knight could have gone to c6, for 11 'ii'c2 tt'le8 example, in reply to 26 l:!.c1 . 12 tt'lf3 il.xc1 27 'ii'f2 ! tt'lg6 13 'ii'xc1 f5 Intending ....l:!.e4 or ...tt'lf4 . 14 exf5 il.xf5 28 tt'lh4! tt'lxh4 15 'ii'e3 'it'f6 The Development of an Opening Repertoire lLJ 123 15. ..b6!? is also good. 24 ... tt:Jxe2+ 16 ti:Jd2 tt:Jg7 25 'ii'xe2 �d3 17 a3? But not immediately 25 ...'ii' b2? 26 tt:Jxe4. 17 f3 is correct, with roughly equal chances. 26 'ii'e1 'ili'b2! 26 ...'ifd4!? was also tempting, creating the terrible threat of 27 ...l:txf2! 28 1i'xf2e3 . Then 27 l:f.c3tt:Jxb4! (but not 27 ...l:txf2? 28 �d3!) 28 tt:Jb3'ifb6 is hopeless for White. The only defence is 27 g3!, when the immediate 27 ...l:Ixf 2?! 28 'it'xf2 e3 allows White to save himself by 29 'ii'f4!. Therefore the following combination suggests itself: 27 ...tt:Jxb4!? (27 ...'ii b2 is stronger) 28 tt:Jxb4 (28 tt:Jb3 'ii'b2 29 tt:Jxb4 'ii'xb3 with advantage to Black) 28 .. J�xf229 'i1Vxf2 e3. 17 ... �c2! 18 b4 After 18 tt:Jb5 White was concerned about 18... c6, although perhaps he should have played this and followed up with 19 b4!?. 18 ... axb4 19 axb4 .l::!.xa1 20 .U.xa1 ti:JfS 21 'ili'h3 21 'i'f3? e4 or 21 tt:Jde4? �xe4 22 tt:Jxe4 'fh4 was bad for White. Now 30 'ii'f4 exd2! no longer helps White, 21 ... tt:Jd4! since his rook is not defended by the knight. 22 1i'e3 tt:Ja6 However, he finds the fantastic reply 30 23 tt:Ja2 'ii'f7+!! (it has to be this square!) 30 ...'� xf7 Hardly any better was 23 b5, after which I 31 ti:Jf3, when the queen cannot go to e4 had in mind the following variation: 23 ...tt:Jc5 because of the knight fork, and otherwise 24 .tf1 e4 25 1Ia2 tt:Jf5 26 'ii'h3 e3 27 l:lxc2 White plays 32 tt:Jxd3 and 33 tt:Jfe1 , consoli tt'ld4 28 ti:Jde4 tt:Jxe4 29 tt:Jxe4 'ii'f4 30 .l:.a2 dating his forces. e2!. 27 tt:Jc3 tt:Jxb4 23 ... e4! 28 tt:Jdxe4 �xe4 24 .l:.c1 29 tt:Jxe4 ti:Jd3 In the event of 24 .l:i.e1 !? Black would have 30 l::tb1 it'eS!? replied as in the game: 24 ...tt:Jxe2+ 25 'ii'xe2 This move, winning a pawn, was prepared .td3 26 'ti'e3 ir'b2. beforehand and therefore it was made 124 � The Development of an Opening Repertoire quickly. But meanwhile, here Black should 6d4 lbc6 have stopped and carefully calculated the 7 0-0 e5 variations. 8 d5 lbe7 During the game both I and my opponent 9 e4 lbd7 thought that 30 ...'iVd4?! was refuted by 31 10 lbe1 f5 'ii'e2 'ii'xc4 32 lbg5 ii'xd5 33 'ii'e7. We did not notice the only, but sufficient defence 11 lbd3 lbf6 against the mate: 33 ...�f2! 34 'ii'xh7+ 'it>f8. 12 f4 !? fxe4 However, after 34 lDf3 or 34 'iVh6+ 'it>e7 35 12... lbxe4 13 lbxe4 fxe4 was more accu lbf3 the outcome remains unclear. rate, because afterthe move in the game my Instead of 31 ...'ii' xc4? Black has the deci opponent could have replied 13 fxe5!?. sive 31 ...l:tf4! 32 lbg5 l:!.xf2. However, 13 lbxe4 lbxe4 White's play can also be improved: 31 ii'e3!, 14 �xe4 exf4 and Black is nevertheless obliged to go in 14... ..th3 was slightly weaker, since after 15 for the complicated variation given above l:!.e1 Black has to reckon with 16 fxe5 dxe5 (31 ...ii'xc4 32 lbg5 etc.). 17 lDf2. After 30... 'iVc2! 31 ii'd 1 nothing is given by 15 lbxf4 lDf5 31 .. J:!xf2? 32 lbxf2 'iixf2+ 33 'it>h1 'ii'e3 34 �f3(f1 ), but the simple 31 ...'it'xc4 is ad equate. Here the white queen is less active than after 30 ...'iVd4 . 31 'it'e2 lbxf2 32 l:!.e1 lbxe4 33 'ifxe4 l:!.e8! 34 'it'xe5 l:!.xe5 35 .l:!.xe5?! It is probable that the rook endgame is also lost. 35 ... dxe5 36 'it>f2 'it>f7 37 'it>e3 'it>e7! White resigned, since after 38 c5 b6 39 'it>e4 An important position for the evaluation of bxc5 40 'it>xe5he soon ends up in zugzwang. the variation. If 16 'i¥d3 Black replies 16... ii'f6 followed by ...�d7 and ....:tae8, when he is excellently placed. White should Etruk - Dvoretsky play 16 lbe6 �xe6 17 dxe6. In this case his Viljandi 1972 chances are evidently preferable, although King's Indian Defence a draw is still the most probable outcome. 1 c4 lbf6 16 g4? 2 g3 g6 A nervy move, handing the initiative to the 3 �g2 ..tg7 opponent. 4 lbc3 0-0 16 ... lbd4 5 lbf3 d6 17 h3 The Development of an Opening Repertoire ttJ 125 If 17 .lte3 there follows 17 ... ii'h4! 18 �xd4 Black loses after 25 ...l:txe4? 26 lixe4 l:If2+ 'i'xg4+ 19 'it'xg4 �xd4+ 20 'ittg2 �xg4 or 19 27 'ittg3 nxd2 28 lle7. ig2 .l:!.xf4 with advantage to Black. 26 'ittg3! :as 17 ... 1Vh4 In the variation 26 ... �c8 27 .l:!.b8 �xg4 28 18 'ife1 .l:!.xe8 �xe2 29 .l:te7 �xc4 30 �h6 the Comparatively best. 18 1Vd3? is bad be activity of the white pieces compensates for cause of 18... �xg4! 19 hxg4 1Vxg4+ 20 'itth 1 the two lost pawns. ie5 21 �d2 �xf4 22 �xf4 .l:!.xf4 23 .U.xf4 27 c5! �cB 'i'xf4 24 'it'xd4 l:te8 25 .U.e1 1Vh4+. In the 28 cxb6 �xb7 event of 18 �e3 1Vg3+ 19 tt::lg2 .l:!.xf1 + 20 29 bxc7 l:tacB 'ixf1 the simplest is 20 ...it'xh3, but 20 ...�e5 30 �b4?? is also decisive, or even 20 ...�xg4 21 hxg4 l'xg4 22 1Vd3 tt:Je2+ 23 'ittf2 .U.f8+ 24 'itte1 The decisive mistake! After 30 �a5 White 1Llg3. should be able to gain a draw, although 30 ....l:tfe8 would still have set him some 18 ... 'iVxe1 problems. 19 .l:txe1 �d7? 30 ... l:!.xc7 Indecisive! I wrongly avoided the previously 31 �xd6 l:tc3+ intended 19... .lte5 20 tt::le2 tt::lf3+ 21 �xf3 :Xf3 22 'ittg2 .l:tf7 (22 ...�d3!? ). Now if 23 32 'itth4 :es ih6 it is possible to capture the b2-pawn, 33 .U.b2 :txe4 and otherwise ...h7-h5 is unpleasant, open 34 l:!.xb7 h6! ing up the game with the two bishops. 35 �b4 l:ld3 20 'ittg2! .l:!.aeB 36 �c5 l:!.f4 21 �d2 �e5 37 .l:!.xa7 .l:!.ff3 22 tt:Je2 tt:Jxe2 38 .l:!.aB+ 'ittg7 23 .l:txe2 �xb2 39 .l:!.a7+ 'ittf6 24 .l:tb1 �d4 40 .l:!.a6+ 'itte5 25 l:!.xb7 �b6 White resigned. 126 � Mark Dvoretsky King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) A. player who opens 1 e4 can, if he wishes, 3 lt:Jd2 c5 /"'\ include in his opening repertoire the 4 tt:Jgf3 tt:Jc6 system 1 e4 e6 2 d3!? or 1 e4 c5 2 tt:Jf3 e6 5g3 tt:Jf6 3 d3!? . Avoiding the French or Sicilian 6�g2 �e7 Defence, White develops his pieces in the same way as Black does in the King's Indian 7 0-0 Defence. In so doing White is counting not only on the extra tempo compared with the King's Indian Defence, which he has be cause of the reversed colours, but mainly on Black's not very favourable move ...e7-e6 (in the King's Indian Defence it is extremely rare for White to play e2-e3). The same positions can also be reached from the Reti Opening - 1 tt:Jf3 d5 2 g3 c5 3 �g2 tt:Jc6 4 0-0 - if now or a move later Black plays ...e7-e6. (However, the King's Indian Attack also includes various other set-ups by Black - provided only that White has developed his pieces in King's Indian fashion.) But since the given review is based 1) Basic ideas for White on personal experience in the King's Indian (examples with poor play by the opponent) Attack and largely contains my own games, and I usually played 1 e4, it is to this move Knight sacrifice on g5 order that the main attention will be paid. Dvoretsky - Damsky Some of the games given below are not of Moscow 1969 theoretical importance, since at least one of the players did not act in the best way. 7 ... 0-0 However, they may prove useful for becom 8.l:te1 b6?! ing familiar with the pattern of play charac 9e5 lt:Jd7 teristic of the given opening, and the typical 10 lLlf1 �b7 strategic and tactical ideas and methods 11 h4 'flc7? employed in it. If Black had attacked the pawn a little earlier, White would have had to defend it with the I. Black develops his bishop on e7 not very useful move \!Ve2. But now the 1 e4 e6 attack on the pawn is pointless, since it can 2d3 dS be defended by the bishop. King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) tLJ 127 12 ..ltf4 b5 Knight sacrifice on d5 Compared with the normal handling of the variation (8 ...b5 etc.) Black has wasted Dvoretsky - Yusupov several tempi. Blitz game, Moscow 1987 13 lt:J1h2 d5-d4? 7... jt'c7 This makes it easier for White to launch a 8 l::!.e1 0-0 decisive attack. 9 e5 lt:Jd7 10 jt'e2 b5 11 h4 a5 12 lt:Jf1 a4 13 a3 b4 14 i.f4 bxa3 15 bxa3 i.a6 16lt:Je3 With the black queen on c7, it is advanta geous for White to play his knight to g4 via the e3-square (rather than h2), with the strong threat of lt:Jxd5!. 16 ... l:tfe8? 14 lt:Jg5! h6 15 jt'h5! hxg5 16 hxg5 .l:!.fb8 If 16... .l:i.fd8 17 lt:Jg4 lt:Jf8, then 18 ..lte4 followed by 'lt>g2 and .Uh1 is strong. 17 lt:Jg4 lt:Jf8 18 lt:Jf6+! Stronger then 18 i.e4 lt:Jg6. 18 ... i.xf6 If 18. . . gxf6 19 exf6 e5 20 i.d5 (or 20 ifh6 lbe621 i.e4) 20 ...i.d6 21 i¥h6 lt:Je6 22 g6 with mate. 19 exf6 e5 17 lt:Jxd5! exd5 20 i.d5! .l:te8 18 e6 'i*'c8 19 exf7+! �xf7 20 ...exf4 21 l:te7;20 .. J:td8 21 'it>g2;20 ...it'd7 21 fxg7 lt:Jg6 22 jt'xg6 'ii'xd5 23 jt'h6. 20 'ilr'e6+ 'lt>f8 21 g6 lt:Jd8 21 lt:Jg5 ..ltxg5 22 gxf7+ 22 i.d6+ Ji..e7 Black resigned in view of 22 ...lt:Jxf7 23 'ifg5 23 i.xd5 g6 24 'ifh6. Black resigned. 128 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) Undermining of the centre by c2-c4 Dvoretsky-Damsky game) with the idea of t'Llg4 and t'Llxh6+. If 15... t'Lle5 , then 16 f4! Dvoretsky - Gorchakov hxg5 17 hxg5 g6 18 fxe5 gxh5 19 exd6 .ig7 Moscow 1973 (19... i.xg5 20 t'Llxd5!), and now either 20 i.h3 followed by t'Lle3-g2-f4, or the same 7 ... 0-0 strike at the centre 20 c4!?. 8�e1 b5 9 e5 t'Lld7 Dolmatov - Meyer 10 l'Llf1 f5?! Philadelphia 1991 11 exf6 i.xf6 7... 0-0 If 11 ...t'Llxf6, then 12 i.f4, aiming to occupy 8 .l:!.e1 b5 the e5-point. 9 e5 t'Lle8 12 h4 10 l'Llf1 f6?! 12 .l:!.xe6? was a mistake in view of 11 exf6 i.xf6 12... t'Llde5, but 12 t'Lle3!? with the idea of c2-c4 was possible. 12 t'Lle3 it'd6 12 . . . t'Llb6 If 12... e5 Dolmatov was planning 13 c4! bxc4 14 dxc4 e4 15 l'Lld2 with advantage to 12... h6!? 13 t'Lle3 or 13 l'Ll1h2. White. 13 t'Llg5! "it'd6 If 13... e5, then 14 c4! is strong, demolishing Black's centre. 13 c4! t'Llc7 14 t'Llg4 e5 15 l'Llxf6+ gxf6 But here too 14 c4!? came into considera- In the event of 15... 'i1Vxf6 White has a tion: 14... bxc4 15 dxc4 i.xg5 (15... t'Llxc4? pleasant choice between 16 cxd5 and 16 16 t'Llxe6!) 16 i.xg5 (or 16 hxg5) 16... t'Llxc4 , i.g5!?. although the correctness of the positional pawn sacrifice would still have had to be 16 cxd5 demonstrated. 17 l'Lld2! Another interesting possibility is 14 "ii'h5!? 17.. .f 5 18 t'Llc4!. h6 15 t'Lle3 (the same idea as in the 18 t'Lle4 'ilie7 King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) ltJ 129 19 i..h6 .Ufd8 have proved premature because of the 20 l:tc1 c4 counter 15... i.. b4!. The following variations 21 'ifh5 Itac8 are possible: 22 dxc4 bxc4 a) 16 tt:'ld2?! exd5 17 e6 'ikxf4!? 18 gxf4 .l::!.xe6 19 'ii'd1 .l:tg6+ and 20 ...tt:'lf6 with a 23 f4! dangerous attack for Black; White has an undisputed advantage. b) 16 .l:!.ec1? exd5 17 e6 l:.xe6! 18 'ifxe6 Some players aim to play c2-c4 as early as 'ifxf4! 19'ifxd7 'it'xc1 !; possible, and therefore after 1 e4 c5 2 tt:'lf3 c) 16 .l:ted1? exd5 17 e6 .l::!.xe6! 18 'iVxe6 e6 3 d3 d5 they refrain from 4 tt:'lbd2 in 'ikxf4! 19 'ifxd7 'iff3! 20 tt:'lh2 'ir'xd1+!; favour of 4 'ir'e2. After completing their kingside development, they plan to play c2- d) 16 l:.eb1!!. The only move, which can be found by the method of elimination. Now c4 and tt:'lc3. after 16... exd5 17 e6 the move 17... l:txe6?! no longer works: 18 'ii'xe6 'ir'xf4 19 'ii'xd7 An exchange of knights on d4 is ii'f3 20 tt:'lh2!. normally advantageous to White The move in the game is stronger than 15 'ifg4?! 'it>h8 16 .l:!.e2 (intending tt:'lh2-f3) in Fischer - U.Geller view of 16... .l:.c6 17 .:!.c1 b4 18 tt:'lh2 i..a6 Netanya 1968 with the unpleasant threat of 19... i.. xd3. 7 ... 0-0 15 ... l!c6 8�e1 'ikc7 16l:!.ac1 i..a6? 9 e5 tt:'ld7 Now the thematic stroke on d5 secures 10 'ike2 b5 White the advantage. Black should have 11 h4 a5 chosen between 16... 'ifb6 and 16... i.. b4. 12 tt:'lf1 tt:'ld4?! 17 i..xd5! exd5 13 tt:'lxd4 cxd4 18 e6 'ifd8 14 i..f4 l:ta6!? 19 exd7 .l:te6 20 "ili'g4! f5 If 20 ...'ii' xd7, then 21 i..e5 is decisive. 21 'ii'h5 'i!fxd7 22 tt:'lf3 g6 23 'ii'h6 i..f6 24 lhe6 'i!Vxe6 25 i..e5!! An elegant stroke, after which White's positional advantage becomes decisive. The obvious 25 .U.e1? would have unexpect edly led to a draw after 25 ...'ii xe1 +!! 26 tt:'lxe1 i..g7 27 'it'g5 i..f6. 25 ... i..xe5 15 tt:'lh2! 26 l:!.e1 f4!? The standard sacrifice 15 i..xd5?! would 27 .U.xe5 'iid7 130 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 28 h5! fxg3 16 Si.h3 29 hxg6! gxf2+ Fischer is apparently preparing tt:'lg5. The If 29 ...l:txf3, then 30 l:te8+! 'ii'xe8 31 'ii'xh7+ other standard plan is 16 h5, intending 17 h6 <;i(f8 32 g7+. g6 18 tt:'lg4 followed by play against the 30 <;i;>xf2 hxg6 weakened dark squares on the kingside ('it'd2, Si.g5and so on). 31 'it'xg6+ 'i!r'g7 16 ... d4 32 .Ug5! l:tf7 17 tt:'lf1 tt:'lb6 Black resigned. 18 tt:'lg5 tt:'ld5 2) The main line 19 Si.d2 Si.xg5 20 Si.xg5 'ilr'd7 Fischer - Miagmasuren 21 'it'h5 llfc8 Interzonal Tournament, Sousse 1967 22 tt:'ld2 tt:'lc3 7... 0-0 23 Si.f6! 't't'e8 8 e5 tt:'ld7 Black would have lost after 23 ...gxf6 24 exf6 9lte1 b5 <;i;>h8 25 tt:'lf3 tt:'ld5 26 'ilr'h6 ltg8 26 tt:'le5'i'c7 10 tt:'lf1 b4 27 Si.g2! followed by 28 Si.e4. 11 h4 a5 24 tt:'le4 g6 12 Si.f4 a4 25 'iVg5! 4Jxe4 13 a3! 26 �xe4 c4 White should not allow 13... a3 14 b3 tt:'la7 This thematic move should have been made with the manoeuvre of the knight to c3. a little earlier. 13 ... bxa3 27 h5! cxd3 14 bxa3 28 .l:!.h4 l:!.a7 Now Black has to reckon with c2-c4, striking If 28 ...dxc2 , then 29 hxg6 fxg6 30 l:txh7. at the centre. 29 Si.g2!! dxc2?! 14 . . . 4Ja5?! 29 ...'it'f8 30 Si.e4 dxc2 31 hxg6 fxg6 32 14... 4Jd 4!?. Si.xg6 would not have helped. 15 4Je3 Si.a6 30 'ilr'h6 "iff8 31 'i!t'xh7+! Black resigned. Dvoretsky - Tseshkovsky USSR Championship, First League, Odessa 1974 7 ... 0-0 8 l:te1 b5 9e5 tt:'ld7 10 tt:'lf1 b4 11 h4 a5 12 Si.f4 l:i.e8!? King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) ttJ 131 An interesting prophylactic move. 17 ... h6 13 lbe3 �a6 Only here did I begin to check the variations, 14 a4!? and I came to the conclusion that all White's The start of a dubious plan. The standard combinative attempts are refuted: 18 'ii'h5 course would be 14 h5 followed by lbg4 and (18 lbxf7? c.t>xf7 19 'ii'h5+ g6!) 18... hxg5 19 h5-h6. hxg5 g6 20 'i!Vh4 (20 'ii'h3? �xg5) 20... lbd4 21 c.t>h2 (21 lbg4 lbf5 22 'ii'h3 c.t>g7!) 14 ... bxa3 21 ...lLlf5 22 lLlxf5exf5 (22 ...gxf5 23 .l:th1 �f8 15 bxa3 24 c.t>g1 �g7 25 'ilt'h7+ c.t>f8 26 g6 and 27 White prepares c2-c4. Compared with the �h6) 23 .l:th1 �f8 24 c.t>g1 �g7. Alas, I immediate 14 c4 bxc3 15 bxc3 and 16.c4, overlooked the powerful stroke 23 e6! here the b4-square is unavailable to the (instead of 23 .l::.h?). 1 black knight. 18 lLlh3? �f8 15 ... .Uc8 White's play has come to a standstill. Black, who has the possibilities ...d5-d4 or ...lLld4 available, stands clearly better. 3) Black delays castling Dvoretsky - Cook Saint John 1988 7... b6 8l:!.e1 �b7 9 c3 'i!Vc7 9 ...0-0 . 16 .l:ta2 After the immediate 16 c4 I did not like 16.. . dxc4 17 dxc4 lbb6 18 tLld2 it'd4?! - and I was wrong: 19 .l:tb1 or 19 �e4 .l:ted8 20 'i'b1 would have promised White an advan tage. I decided to advance c2-c4 in a more favourable situation. For example, 16... a4 17 c4 lbb6 18 l:td2!'it'c7 19 "ifc2. And in the event of 16... lbb6 , as it seemed to me, the attack 17 tLlg5gains in strength. 16 ... lbb6 17 lbg5 10 it'e2 Quickly played, without proper calculation. In such situations White should not be in a However, Black was already threatening hurry to advance e4-e5. After 1 0 e5 lbd7 it 17.. .d4. is bad to play 11 d4? cxd4 12 cxd4 lbb4 132 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 13 .l:!.e3 'ir'c2! 14 'ir'e 1 'iig6 (Hort),while if 12 23 ..td2 tiJf1 !? there follows 12... 0-0-0 with chances White has a decisive advantage. for both sides (but not 12... ttJcxe5? 13 ttJxe5 23 ...tbd7 24 hxg6 e5 25 tba5lt:Jb6 26 lZ'lc6 ttJxe5 14 .lii.f4 .lii.d6 15 ..txe5 ..txe5 16 'iih5 fxg6 27 .l:!.xe5 .lii.d6 28 .Ue6 :d7 29 ii.a5 with advantage to White, as in the game Wb7 30 ttJxa7+ Wxa7 31 ..txb6+ "jgxb6 32 Nadyrkhanov-Saltaev, Tashkent 1993). llxb6Wxb6 33 'ii'a4 .l:!.hd834 "jgc6+Wa7 35 10 . . . 0-0-0 Uxd6 Black resigned. 11 a3 Logical: White prepares an offensive on the If the black king has remained in the centre, queenside, where the enemy king has just the plan involving the exchange on d5 also taken shelter. In reply 11 ...h6!? came into makes sense. consideration, and if 12 b4, then either 12... g5 or 12... tbe5. Dvoretsky - Bogomolov 11 ... ..ta6 Moscow 1967 12 e5 tiJd7 7 ... b5?! 13 h4! 8.U.e1 It is important to hinder the thematic Even stronger was 8 exd5 exd5 9 d4! (9 advance ...g7-g 5. c4!?) 9 ...c4 10 a4! b4 11 ttJe5with the threat 13 ... h6 of 12 tbxc4 (suggested by Viorel Bologan). 14 h5 tiJf8 8... i.b7 If 14... g5 White was intending 15 hxg6 fxg6 9exd5 exd5 16 ..th3 tiJf8 17 tiJf1 or 17.b4!?. 10 c4! 15 b4 g6 A typical blow at the centre. 15.. .f6 16 exf6 ..txf6 17 �b1 . 10 ... bxc4 16 .l:!.b1 ..tb7 11 dxc4 0-0 17 bxc5 bxc5 12 cxd5 ttJxdS 18 lbb3?! 13 ttJc4 18 hxg6 ttJxg6 19 lbb3 was probably stronger, and if 19... h5 20 i.g5, aiming at the c5-pawn. After the move in the game Black should have replied 18... gxh5 19 i.e3 tiJd7. 18 ... ..ta6? 19 ..te3! ttJxe5 19 ...c4 20 tbc5!? ..txc5 21 ..txc5 with an attack. 20 ttJxe5 Also possible was 20 .lii.f4 ttJxf3+ 21 'i!t'xf3 .lii.d6 22 ..txd6 �d6 23 c4 or 23 d4. 20 . . . 'ir'xe5 21 'ir'c2 "jgc7 22 c4 d4?! White's position is somewhat preferable. In King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) lLJ 133 the subsequent battle, which was not with out its mistakes, he managed to outplay his opponent. 13... �f6 14 �g5!? �xg5 15 ltJxg5ltJd4 16 'ld2 h6 17 ltJe4ltJb 4 18liad1 ltJbc219 .U.f1 f5 20 ltJf6+ 'it'xf6 21 �xb7 l:i.ad8 22 Wh1 'lf7 23 ltJa5 .U.b8 (23... ltJb 4!?) 24 �g2 l:l:xb2 25 'ii'c3 .l:!.b5? (25 ....J:txa2 26 'ii'xc5 ti:Je6) 26 a4 l:.bb8 27 'ii'xc5 (27 ltJc6!) 27...l:.bc8(27 ... 'ii'f6) 28 ltJc6l:txc6 29 �xc6 l:l:c8 'ii'30 xc2! .i:txc631 'ili'd3 l:td632 f3 'ii'd5 33 l:.c1 Wh7 34 g4 'ii'f7 35 l:i.c4Black lost on time. - position after 12... d 4- If White plays e4-e5, Black should aim for ...g7-g5 - it is on this advance that the hxg5 16 �xg5 �xg5 17ltJxg5 ltJcxe5. evaluation of the position depends. 15 d4 liJf8 16 ltJ1d2 ltJg6 Chekhov - A.lvanov 17 �e3 Qualifying Tournament for the World Junior Championship, Sochi 1975 White has an advantage in space and good prospects of mounting an attack on the 1 g3 ltJf6 queenside, whereas the opponent has no 2 �g2 d5 real counterplay. 3 ltJf3 e6 17... cxd4 18 cxd4 �b4 19 'ii'a4 ltJge720 a3 4 0-0 i.e7 �xd2 21 ltJxd2Wb8 22 .l:!.ac1 ltJd523 ltJe4 5 d3 b6 .l::i.d7 24 .l:i.c2 .l:i.c8 25 .l:tec1 .l:i.dd8 26 �f1 6 liJbd2 �b7 'ii'e7 27 �d2 'iff8 28 l:txc6 l:.xc6 29 l:.xc6 'ii'e8 30 �b5 a6 31 .l:tc8+ Black resigned. 7e4 c5 8 e5 ltJfd7 9 .U.e1 ltJc6 II. Black develops his bishop 10 ltJf1 'ii'c7 on g7 Already here 1 0 ...g5 !? came into considera tion. 1 e4 e6 11 ii.f4 h6 2 d3 d5 12 h4 d4? 3 ltJd2 c5 4 ltJgf3 ltJc6 (see diagram) 5 g3 g6 12 . ..g5! or 12... 0-0-0 13 ltJe3 g5 (13... ltJf8) 6�g2 �g7 was better. 7 0-0 ltJge7 13 c3 dxc3 7 ... 4Jf6is evidently weaker in view of 8 exd5 14 bxc3 0-0-0 ltJxd5 (8 ...exd5 9 lle1+) 9 ltJb3 b6 10 c4 It was still not too late to play 14... g5 15 hxg5 ltJc7 11 d4. 134 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 8l:le1 12 ... a4 13 a3 b5 It was possible to exchange a pair of knights by 13... tt:Jd 4!?, but after 14 tt:Jxd4 cxd4 15 tt:Jh2 White would have retained the better chances. 14 lLl1 h2 b4 15 .tf4 �h7 16lLlg4 lLlg8 1) It is unfavourable fo r Black to castle - White's attackis very dangerous Dvoretsky - Ubi lava Tbilisi 1979 8 ... 0-0 9 e5 9 h4!? h6 10 e5 has also been tried. 9 . . . 'ir'c7 17 c4! 10 'ife2 After 17 h5 g5 the sacrifice on g5 does not White carries out a standard plan of attack: work. In order to strengthen it, White wants lLlf1 , h2-h4, .tf4, tt:Jh2-g4 and so on. to win control of the e4-square by attacking Compared with the variation with the bishop the d5-pawn with his c-pawn. on e 7, it is harder for the opponent to defend, since the dark squares on his 17 ... bxc3 kingside have been weakened by the move 18 bxc3 .ta6 ...g7-g6. In this connection, serious consid 19 c4! dxc4 eration should be given to the attempt to 20 dxc4 sharply change the character of the play by Now 21 h5 (and if 21 ...g5 22 .txg5) cannot 10... g5!? (a recommendation of Viktor be prevented. Ciocaltea). 20 ... .l:tab8 10 ... aS 11 h4 h6 21 h5! 12 lLlf1 21 lLlf6+?was less good: 21 ...�h8 22 h5 g5, or 22 1i'e3 tt:Jd4! 23 tt:Jxd4 cxd4 24 'ir'xd4 It is usually advantageous for White to block l:tfd8. the play on the queenside - therefore it made sense to play 12 a4!?, then c2-c3 and 21 ... �h8 lLlf 1 . I decided not to deviate from my plan. 21 ...g5 22 .txg5! was hopeless. King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 135 22 hxg6 fxg6 23 lLlf6! lt:Jge7 23... lt:Jd4! was a tougher defence. 24 .Uad1 24 tt:lh4!? was also strong. 24 ... .Ubd8 25 lld6! �b7 26 .l:!xe6 lt:Jd4 26 . ..lLlf5 27 lt:Jd5 'it'f7 28 l:1xc6 �xc6 29 e6 and wins. 27 lLlxd4 cxd4 28 'ii'd3 �xg2 29 'it>xg2 �f7 15 ... 'ii'd7 30 .l:!.h1! lLlf5 If 15... l:tac8!? I would have simply replied 16 31 g4 'ii'b7+ l:tac1 !, since 16 lLlh2 would allow Black to 32 'it>g1 lt:Je3 complicate matters by 16... �xe5!? 17 �xe5 33 �xe3 'ii'f3 lt:Jxe5 18 'ii'xe5 'ii'xe5 19 .l:i.xe5 .l:i.xc2. 34 'ii'xg6 �xf6 16lLlh2 l:tae8 35 .l:i.xh6+ 17 lt:lg4 f6 Black resigned. After 17... h5 18 lLlf6+ �xf6 19 exf6 (threat ening 20 �h6) 19... 'it>h7 20 �e5 and 21 f4 White would have gained an overwhelming Dvoretsky - Khalifman advantage. Sverdlovsk 1987 18 exf6 �xf6 8... 0-0 19 lt:Jxf6+ .Uxf6 9 e5 'it'c7 20 �h3 .l:i.xf4 10 1Ve2 b6 20 ...�c8 21 �e5 was also hopeless. 11 h4 �a6 21 gxf4 �c8 12 lLlf1 22 'ii'f3 12 c3!? also does not look bad, but then 22 f5 was premature in view of 22 ...e5. White has to reckon with 12.. .f 6 13 exf6 22 ... .U.xf6 14 lLlf1 e5. 'iii'f7 23 'it'g3 'it>h8 12 ... lt:Jd4 If 23 .. JU8 there follows 24 f5. 13 lLlxd4 cxd4 24 .Ue2 l:tf8 14 �f4 lt:Jc6?! 25 It.ae1 lt:Jd8 14. ..l:tac8 15 .l:i.ac1 1Vc5was better, with the intention of attacking the queenside pawns 26 f5! gxf5 with the queen. However, 16 lLlh2 followed 27 1Ve5+ 'it'g7+ by lLlg4 or h4-h5 would have given White a 28 1Vxg7+ 'it>xg7 dangerous attack. 29 f4 15 a3 And White won the endgame. 136 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 2) The pawn should not be advanced better chances for White. In the event of to e5 before Black castles kingside - 18.. .�c6 he has the promising piece sacri· because of counterplay by ...h7 -h6 fice 19 tt:lxe6!fxe6 20 .l:txe6, although it does and ...g�g5 not lead to a direct win: 20 ....l:tf7 21 �g5 �e8 22 �xe7? �d7. Dvoretsky - Anikaev 18 ... �xd5 USSR Championship Semi-Final, 19 �xd5 tt:lxd5 Odessa 1972 20 tt:le4 l:fd8 8 ... b6 21 �g5 f6 9 e5?! 'jic7 22 �d2 11d7 10 'iie2 h6! 23 .l:te2 11 h4 g5! Draw. 12 hxg5 hxg5 13 tt:lxg5 ii'xe5! 3) The tension in the centre is retained 14 ifxe5 tt:lxe5?! After 14 ...�xe5! Black would have stood Dvoretsky - Averkin better. USSR Championship, First League, 15 tt:lc4!? Odessa 1974 8 ... b6 9c3 �b7 If 9 ...�a6?! White has 10 exd5 tt:lxd5 11 'it'a4. 10 tt:lf1 h6 11 h4 d4!? The endgame after 11 ... dxe4 12 dxe4 'iixd1 13 .l::!.xd 1 is evidently more pleasant for White. 12 c4 e5 13 h5 White obviously needs to advance f2-f4. With this aim he could have played 13 tt:l3h2 15 ... tt:lxc4?! immediately. He should have decided on the positional 13 ... �c8 exchange sacrifice 15... dxc4! 16 �xa8 13... 1i'd7!? looks more natural. cxd3. 14 tt:lh4 16 dxc4 �b7 White is consistent, although it is unclear 17 c3 where the knight stands better: here or on 17a4!?. h2. 17 ... 0-0 14 ... �f6 18 cxd5?! 15 hxg6 fxg6 18 a4! was stronger, with somewhat the 16 f4 King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) tZJ 137 10... d4 or 10.. . a4 came into consideration. 11 dxe4 it'xd1 12 �xd1 a4 16 ... h5! Not 16 ... exf4? because of 17 l2Jxg6! l2Jxg6 18 e5. 17 f5? A strategic mistake. It was necessary to 13l:!.b1! 0-0 maintain the tension: 17 l2Jh2. If 13... a3 , then 14 bxa3, attacking the b6- 17 ... g5 pawn. Black's position is better, since White has no 14 .ltf4 e5?! active possibilities. For the sake of a few active moves it was hardly worth Black shutting in his own Dolmatov - A.Sokolov bishop on g7 and weakening the light Interzonal Tournament, Manila 1990 squares. However, in the variation 14... a3!? 15 �dc1! axb2 16 l:!.xb2 the b6-pawn is 8... b6 vulnerable, and at the board it was not easy 9 c3 to judge how the complications would In the opinion of Sergey Dolmatov, 9 l2Jf1 is conclude after 16... l2Jb4 17 l:!.d2! l2Jxa2 18 more accurate, with the intention of playing l:!.a1 e5!. 10 e5, for example, in reply to 9 ...d4 . And 15 .lte3 .lte6 9 ...dxe4 1 0 dxe4 'ii'xd 1 11 �xd 1 leads to 16 b3 axb3 roughly the same favourable endgame for White that occurred in the game. 17 axb3 White's position is preferable. 9... a5!? 10 lLlf1 17 . . . .l:.fd8 18 lLl1d2 White intends e4-e5. In the game Ljubojevic f6 Kasparov, Niksic 1983 (where the moves 9 18... l:!.d3 19l:tdc1 and 20 .ltf1 . h4 h6 were included) White played 11 a4, to 19 .ltf1 .ltf8 which Kasparov replied 11 ...�a 7!? . But after 19... l2Jd4!? came into consideration, after 10 a4 Dolmatov was concerned about the which Dolmatov was intending 20 cxd4 cxd4 reply 10... d4 . 21 .ltxd4 exd4 22 .ltc4. 10 ... dxe4 20 b4! 138 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 20 ..tc4 was premature on account of 9 c3 'i!ic7? 20 ...'� f7. An inaccurate move order. 9 .....tb7 is cor 20 ... !Ia3? rect. It was essential to exchange on b4, in order to open the diagonal for the dark-square bishop and possibly make use of the d4- point. 21 bxc5 bxc5 22 �dc1 tt:lc8 23 ..tc4 ..txc4 23 ...�f7? is not possible in view of 24 .l:.b7 +. 24 tt:lxc4 �a4 25 tt:lfd2 tt:ld6?! 26 tt:lb6 l::ta2 27 .Ua1 l::txa1 28 �xa1 f5 29 tt:ld5 fxe4? 10 exd5! exd5 29 ... �f7 was a tougher defence. If 1 O ...tt:lxd5, then 11 d4! cxd4 12 tt:lxd4 30 tt:lf6+ �f7 tt:lxd4 13 i..xd5 is strong. 31 tt:lfxe4 11 tt:lf1 0-0 White now has a decisive positional advan 12 ..tf4 'it'd7 tage, which Dolmatov accurately converted 13 d4 into a win. 13.h4!? was also good. 31 ...tt:lf5 32 .l:ta6 tt:lxe3 33fxe3 (33 .Uxc6!?) 33 ... tt:lb8 34 .l:If6+ �e7 35 l:tb6tt:ld7 36 J:tc6 13 ... cxd4 �as 37 �2 �a2 38 �e2 �dB 39 �d3 ..te7 14 cxd4 ..tb7? 40 h4 tt:lb8?! 41 .l:te6! tt:ld7 (41 ...�d7 42 14 ...tt:lf5 was better, not fearing 15 tt'le5 �xe5 tt:lc6 43 tt:lxc5+) 42 tt:lc4 l:tg243 tt:la5 tt:lxe5 16 dxe5 ..tb7followed by 17... d4 . But ..tf8 44 tt:lc6+ �c7 45 tt:lxe5 tt:lxe5+ 46 now after 15 !i.c1 (as in the game) or 15 h4 l:txe5 �dB 47 h5 ..te7 48 hxg6 hxg6 49 White has a significant advantage . .l::te6 g5 50 .l:te5'it>d7 51 �c4 .Ug1 52 tt:lxg5 l:txg353 tt:le4.l::t h3 54 tt:lxc5+�dB 55 tt:le6+ Kaiszauri - Tu kmakov �d7 56 tt:ld4..tf6 57 .l::tf5 �e7 58 �d3 .Uh1 Vilnius 1978 59 c4 l:ta1 60.l::t b5 .Ua3+ 61 �e4 �d7 62 l:!.b7+ �c8 63 l:tb3l:ta1 64�d5 l:t.d1 65 c5 8 ... b6 Black resigned. 9 exd5!? exd5 9 ...tt:lxd5!? comes into consideration, and if 4) Exchange of pawns on d5 10 d4 cxd4 11 tt:lb3, then not 11 ...i.. b7?! 12 tt:lfxd4 tt:lxd4 13 tt:lxd4 (threatening 14 c4) 13... :tc8 14 :txe6+!! fxe6 15 tt:lxe6 'ii'd7 16 Yurtaev - Dvoretsky tt:lxg7+ 1i'xg7 17 i..xd5 with a powerful Frunze 1983 attack (Komlyakov-Moskalenko, Noyabrsk 8 ... b6 1995), but 11 ...d3!? 12 'i!Vxd3 0-0 13 tt'lfd4 King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) ttJ 139 tt:Jxd4 14 lt:Jxd4 .i.b7 15 .i.d2 l:tc8, and 16 dubious for Black, but 1 O ...c4 !? comes into c4?does not work in view of 16... .i.a6 17 b3 consideration. tt:Jc7 (a recommendation by llya Odessky). 10 lt:Jb3 10 d4 0-0 10 ... 'ir'b6 If 10... lt:Jxd4, then 11 lt:Jxd4 .i.xd4 12 lt:Jb3 1 O ....i.g 4!? is preferable, although after 11 with advantage to White. And if 10... c4 he h3 .i.xf3 12 'ii'xf3 0-0 13 Si.f4, intending .U.fe1 has the strong reply 11 lt:Jes lt:Jxd4 12 and .U.ad1 , White retains positional compen tt:Jdxc4. sation for the sacrificed pawn. 11 dxc5 bxc5 Now he could have simply played 11 .i.f4! 12 lt:Jb3 c4 0-0 12 .i.d6 and 13 ..tcs with the better 13 lt:Jbd4 .i.g4 chances. I preferred 11 Si.g5, and after 11.. .lt:Jf5 (11...0-0!? 12lt:Jfxd4 lt:Jf5!) 12.U.e1 + 14 .i.e3 'it'd? ii.e6 I went in for a double-edged combina 15 'ii'd2 tion: 13 g4 lt:Jd6 14 lt:Jfxd4! (14 c3 lt:Je4!) From the opening White has gained some 14... .i.xd4 15 lt:Jxd4 'ir'xd4 16 .i.xd5!?. After what the better position. fascinating complications the game ended in a draw. Dvoretsky - Vulfson Moscow 1986 Ill. Black plays ....id6 and ... tbge7 8 exd5!? (Instead of 8 .:te1). 1 e4 e6 8... exd5 2 d3 d5 3li:Jd2 c5 If 8 . ..ti:Jxd5 !? I was intending 9lt:Jb3 b6 10 c4 followed by 11 d4, but, as Odessky has 4lt:Jgf3 lt:Jc6 pointed out, Black retains a good position by 5g3 .i.d6 continuing 11.. .lt:Jde7! 12 d4 .i.a6!. 6 .i.g2 lt:Jge7 9 d4 cxd4 7 0-0 0-0 10. ..ti:Jxd 4?! 11 lt:Jxd4 .i.xd4 12 lt:Jb3 is 8lt:Jh4!? 140 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) - position after 16... J:!.ab8 - 1) Black meets the opponent's pawns his pieces and fully neutralising the pres· with ... f7-f5 sure on the b-file. Ciocaltea - Liberzon 17 ... tt:'lc8?! Netanya 1983 This knight retreat allows White to carry out a typical diversion on the kingside. 17... .U.ae8 8 ... f5 was better, and if 18 l:tc2, then 18... tt:'ld 8. 9 f4 j.c7 18 tt:'lg5 10 c3 'it>h8 Threatening 19 'ii'h5. 11 exf5 exf5 18 ... g6?! 12 tt:'ldf3 18 .. J:if6 was preferable. This arrangement of the white knights is 19 c4! d4 typical of the given variation. Not 19... dxc3? 20 j.xc6 followed by 21 12 ... j.e6 j.c3+. By blocking the queenside White has 13 J:le1 freed his hands for action on the kingside, Another development scheme is 13 j.e3!?, where he is stronger. followed by j.f2, 'iid2, l!ae1 and a possible 20 'ii'e2 tt:'lb6 d3-d4. 21 b3 nbe8 13 ... j.g8 22 �f2 tt:'lc8 14 j.d2 �d7 23 j_f3 nxe1+ 15 a3 a5 24 Ilxe1 .l:Le8 16 a4 l:tab8 25 llxe8 'iixe8 (see diagram) 26 g4! tt:'ld6 In the event of 26 ...fxg4 27 j.xg4 White Black intends 17 ...b5 18 axb5 .l:txb5 with would have followed up with f4-f5. pressure on b2. 27 gxf5 tt:'lxf5 17 l:tc1 1 27 ...gxf5 came into consideration, intending An excellent prophylactic move. If 17... b5 28 �g2 tt:'lb4! 29 'ii'h3 tt:'lxd3 30 tt:'lxf5 tt:'lxf5 White replies 18 axb5 l:txb5 19 .l::tc2 followed 31 'iixf5 'ii'g6 32 'it'g4 "iff6 with chances for by j.c1 and l:tce2, harmoniously deploying both sides. King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) ctJ 141 28 .ie4 t:Lle3? 14 ... h6 28 ... t:Llce7was better. 15 d4 l:td8 29 .ixc6! bxc6 16 Si.f2 cxd4?! 29 ... 'ii'xc6 30 'ii'xe3 dxe3 31 Si.c3+ or 30 17t:Llxd4 t:Llxd4 .be3 dxe3 31 'ii'b2+. 18 Si.xd4 30 t:Lle4 t:Llg4?! White has an overwhelming positional ad 31 'ii'g2 t:Llh6 vantage. 32 'ifg5 'i*'f8 33 ii'xc5 'ifxc5 2) Black does not play ... f7-f5 34 t:Llxc5 Black resigned. Dvoretsky- Dieks Wijk aan Zee 1975 Dvoretsky - Chekhov 8... b6 Sverdlovsk 1987 9 f4 Si.c7!? 8... b6 10 f5 exf5 9 f4 f5 If 1 O ...dxe4?! there is the strong positional 10 exf5 exf5 pawn sacrifice 11 f6! gxf6 12 t:Llxe4. 11 lLldf3 'it'c7?! 11 exf5 12 c3 A quieter alternative is 11 t:Llxf5 dxe4 12 It is also possible to place the bishop on e3 t:Llxe7+ with roughly equal chances. immediately, in order after 12... d4 13 Si.f2to 11 . . . f6 undermine Black's centre by c2-c3. 12 c3 Si.a6 12 . . . Si.a6 12... t:Lle5!? 13 d4 cxd4 14 cxd4 t:Ll5c6 looks 13 .l:r.e1 l:tae8 tempting, but White has the strong manoeu vre 15t:Llb1! and 16t:Llc3. 13lLldf3 'ifd7 14 g4 'ifd6?! 15 I::!.f2 .l:i.ae8 14 .\tel! 14 tZ:lg5 suggests itself, but after 14... �d7! there does not appear to be any favourable combination. 142 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 16 ..ih3! 11 ...e5 comes into consideration. Now Black has to reckon with g4-g5, but my 12 c3 lt:Ja5?! main idea was to gain control of the f4-point White also stands better in the event of after lt:Jg2. 12... ..tc5+ 13 'iti>h1 e5 14 f5 lt:Jc8 (Dvoretsky 16 ... h6 Mikhalchishin, Tbilisi 1980). Possibly he 17 lt:Jg2 d4 should play 15 'ii'h5, intending g3-g4-g5 18 c4 ..ib7 (but, of course, not immediately - because 19 lt:Jf4 of the reply .....tf2 ). White's position is preferable. However, his 13 e5 ..tc5+ opening strategy was rather risky and it 14 'iti>h1 lt:Jd5 probably requires refinement. If 14.. Jlc8 White has the strong reply 15 b4! cxb3 16 axb3. Fischer - lvkov 15 lt:Je4 ii.b7 Santa Monica 1966 16 'ii'h5 tt:Je7 8... b6 17 g4 ..ixe4?! 9 f4 dxe4 18 ..txe4 g6 10 dxe4 ..ia6 19 'ii'h6 lt:Jd5 11 l:!.e1 Black also has a bad position after 19 ... 'iti'h8 20 lt:Jf3. 20 f5 l:!.e8 21 fxg6 fxg6 22 lt:Jxg6! 'ii'd7 23 lt:Jf4 .:tad8 24 tt:'lh5 'iti>h8 25 lt:Jf6 lt:Jxf6 26 exf6 l:!.g8 27 ..tf4 l:!.xg4 28 l:!.ad1 l:!.dg8 29 f7! Black resigned. 11 ... c4 11 ...ii.c7 has also occurred: 12 c3 ii.d3 (12... 'iii' d7?! 13 "ii'h5 .l:i.ad8 14 e5 f5? 15 exf6 .:Xf6 16 lt:Je4.l:!.h6 17 'ifxh6!and White won, Lerner-Dolmatov, Kharkov 1975) 13 e5. IV. Black leaves his pawn on c7 The game Dolmatov-Lautier (Polanica Zdroj 1991 ) continued 13... 'i!i'd7?! (13... b5 fol 1 e4 e6 lowed by ...c5-c4, ...ii.b6+ and ...lt:Jd5 was stronger) 14 lt:Je4 .Uad8 15 'ilig4 ..txe4 ?! 16 2 d3 d5 ..ixe4 lt:Jg6 17 tt:'lf3 lt:Jce7 18 ii.c2! with 3 lt:Jd2 lt:Jf6 advantage to White. 4 lt:Jgf3 lt:Jc6 King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 143 - position after 10 ...l:.e8 - Dvoretsky- Ek Wijk aan Zee 1975 11 ... ..ig4 12 h3 5c3 ..ih5 13 a3 ..td6?1 Black intends to play ...e6-e5 and it is quite probable that at some point he will ex 14 .i.b2 li:Jb8? change pawns on e4. In this case the bishop 15 exd5 lt:Jxd5 will be not too well placed on g2. Therefore it 16 c4 li:Jf4 makes sense to develop it on the f1-a6 17 g3 lt:Je6 diagonal. What essentially results is a 18lt:Jxe5 .i.xe5 Philidor Defence with reversed colours and 19l:txe5 two extra tempi for White. And White won. 5... e5 5 ...a5 is more accurate. Dvoretsky - Orlov 6..ie2 Moscow 1984 (time control: 30 minutes for In such positions it is worth making the the game) useful move b2-b4!. 5 c3 dxe4 6 ... a5 6dxe4 .i.c5 7 0-0 il..e7 8l:te1 0-0 9 'ii'c2 h6 10 ..if1 l:.e8 (see diagram) 11 b3 One of the typical plans in such positions is b2-b3, a2-a3, ..ib2and b3-b4, as a result of which White gains space on the queenside and creates potential threats to the e5- pawn. In reply Black did not manage to find a good arrangement of his forces. 144 cJif King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 7 ii.b5! ii.d7 4 0-0 lbc6 8 0-0 0-0 5 d3 e5 9 'ife2 6lZ'lbd2 ii.e7 9 b4!? ii.b6 10 'ife2. 7e4 0-0 9... a6 8 c3 dxe4? 10 ii.d3 e5 An unfortunate exchange. Now White ac 11 b4 ii.a7 quires a clear plan of play against the 12 lZ'lc4 .l:te8 weaknesses at c4, d5 and f5. 13 ii.g5 h6 9 dxe4 'iic7 14 ii.h4 ii.g4 10 'ii'c2 .l:te8 15 .l:f.ad1 'iVe7 11 .Ue1 16 h3 ii.h5 I did not play 11 lbc4, to avoid suggesting to 17 a4 'ili'e6 the opponent the correct arrangement of his 18 lZ'le3 g5 forces: 11... ii.e612 lbe3h6. 19 ii.g3 g4 11 .. . ii.f8 19... ii.xe3 waspreferable. 12lZ'lf1 g6? 20 hxg4 lbxg4 White's next move should have been pre 21 lZ'ld5 .l:tac8 vented by 12... h6. 22 ii.c4 'ii'g6 13 ii.g5! i.g7 23 .l:td3 14 ii.xf6 Not 23 lZ'lh4? lZ'lxf2. White wants to seize control of the d5-point 23 ... lbe7 and so he exchanges one of its defenders 24 lZ'lh4 lbxf2? the knight on f6. Of course, he could have first played his knight to e3. The decisive error. But the advantage is also with White after 24... 'ili'g5 25 lbxe7+ ltxe7 14 ... ii.xf6 26 'ili'c2. 15lZ'le3 i.e6 25 lZ'lxe7+ .U.xe7 26 ii.xf2 ii.xe2 27 lZ'lxg6 Black resigned. V. Exploiting the weakness of the light squares Dvoretsky - Rogozhnikov USSR Schoolboys Championship, Moscow 1965 1 g3 lbf6 2 ii.g2 d5 3lZ'lf3 c5 16 ii.f1 ! King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 145 And now he exchanges another defender of 29 h4 �e7 the d5-point - Black's light-square bishop. 30 it'd3! b4 16 ... a6 If 30 . . . c4 there follows 31 'ir'e3and 32 'ii'b6. 17 i.c4 l1ad8 31 tt:Jg5 bxc3 18 l::tad1 b5 32 bxc3 tLld8? 19 .idS! tt:Je7 33 "iib5? 20 i.xe6! Carried away by his plan of "iib5 and 'ii'xc5!, Transformation of an advantage: White White overlooked the possibility of 33 gives up his central point, but spoils the 'i\Vxd8!. opponent's pawn structure. With the inter 33 ... tt:Jf7 mediate move 19 ii.d5! he lured the enemy 34 'i\Vxc5! 'ii'd7 knight to the unfortunate square e7, from 35 "iic7! where it will have to return with loss of tempo And soon Black resigned. to c6. Weaker was 20 c4?! �xd5 21 tt:Jxd5 tt:Jxd5 22 exd5 �g7 followed by ...f7-f5 and ...e5 - e4, or 22 cxd5 c4, intending ...�f6 -e7- Dvoretsky - Kupreichik c5(d6). USSR Championship, First League, Odessa 1974 20 ... fxe6 1 e4 c5 21 l:.xd8 l:.xd8 2 tt:Jf3 e6 22 �d1 3 d3 d5 The exchange of rooks makes it harder for 4 tt:Jbd2 tt:Jc6 Black to defend the doubled pawns and widens the scope of the white queen. 5 g3 dxe4?! 22 ... tt:Jc6 6dxe4 b6 23 a4! If 7 �g2 there is the strong reply 7 ...�a6 , and therefore I develop my bishop on the f1- Now the queenside pawns also become a6 diagonal. vulnerable. 7 i.b5! i.d7 23 ... l:txd1 + The pawn structure arising after 7 ...i.b7 8 24 11Vxd1 �f7 tt:Je5!? 'i/c79 tt:Jxc6 �xc6 10 'i/e2 seems to 25 tt:Jg4 h5 me to be favourable for White, although, of 26 tt:Jxf6! course, here Black is very close to equality. Another transformation of advantage. White 8 'ii'e2! exchanges the opponent's bad bishop, but It is important to prevent ...a7 -a6. Now if in return he further weakens Black's central 8 ...a6?! there follows 9 ..txa6 tt:Jb4 10 ii.d3 pawns and also the dark squares on the tt:Jxa2 11 tt:Je5!with advantage to White, only kingside, where an invasion will be threat not 11 0-0? in view of 11 ...tt:Jc 3!. ened. 8 . . . tt:Jf6 26 ... �xf6 9 c3 �e7 27 axb5 axb5 10 0-0 0-0 28 'ir'd2 'ito>g7 11 a4 'ii'c7 146 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) by 21 ...tt:lxc4 22 'it'xc4 l:tfd8 23 l:ted1 i.f6, intending ...'ii c6. 22 axb5 axb5 23 .1i.xb5 c4?! 24 l:ta4! Black loses material, without gaining any compensation. 24 ....l:!.fb8 25 .1i.xc4 tt:Jxc4 26 .l:!.xc4 'i'b6?! 27 tt:lxe5 l:tb7 (27 ...'i!Yxb2 28 l:tc8+!) 28 b4 .1i.f8 29 .l:tc6'it'd8 28 b4 .1i.f8 29 l:tc6'i!i'd8 30 'it'c4 'it'd2 31 tt:lf3 'ii'c2 32 e5 l:ta2 33 .U.f1 l:.b2 34 l1c8 Black resigned. 12 .l::te1 12 tt:lc4? a6 13 i.f4 'it'b7 is weaker, but 12 VI. Black chooses a Sicilian set-up e5 tt:ld5 13 i.d3 came into consideration. -he does not play ...d7 -d5 12 ... e5 Black is afraid of e4-e5, and so he weakens 1 e4 c5 his d5-point. White's subsequent plan is roughly the same as in the previous game. 2 tt:lf3 e6 3 d3 tt:lc6 13 tt:lf1 a6!? 4 g3 g6 14 i.d3 14 .1i.xa6 tt:lxe4 is unclear. 14 ... tt:la5 If 14 ...h6 , then 15 tt:le3followed by 16 tt:lf5. 15 .1i.g5 tt:lb3? 16 i.xf6! i.xf6 17 l:ta3 .1i.e6 After 17 ...tt:la5 18 tt:le3.1i.e6 19 i.xa6 c4 20 .1i.b5Black has no compensation for the lost pawn. 18 tt:le3 18 .11Lxa6?! c4 19 .I1Lb5 .1i.e7 was less clear. 18 . . . .1i.e7 19 tt:lc4! Black intends ...i.g7 , ...tt:lge7, ...0-0 , . ..d7 - Stronger than 19 .11Lc4 tt:la5. d6, ...�b8 and ...b7-b5. In my view, this is 19 . . . .1i.xc4 one of the best systems of defence. If now 20 .11Lxc4 tt:la5 White develops his knight on c3, it trans 21 �aa1 b5? poses into the Closed Variation of the An unsuccessful attempt to confuse mat Sicilian Defence. Here we will examine ters. Black should have patiently defended other plans for White. King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) ctJ 147 1) 5 d4 variation After1 0.. . 0-0 White consolidates his advan tage by 11 tt:Jc3! (less accurate is 11 c4?! a5 Dvoretsky - Filipowicz followed by ...i.. a6). The best chances of a Varna 1980 successful defence are promised by Mikhail 5d4!? cxd4 Tal's recommendation of 10... i.. b7, intend 6 tt:Jxd4 ing ...tt:Jc8 . The loss of a tempo (d2-d3-d4) is not as 11 i..d2!? pointless as it may appear at first sight. Nothing is given by 11 tt:Jd2?! i.e5 12 'it'd3 Black has to reckon with tt:Jb5, and, in d5 13 tt:Jb3 'it'b5, but it was possible to play addition, after the development of his bishop either 11 tt:Ja3!? i..e5 12 'ifd1 !? (12 'ii'd3?! at g7 the d6-square will come weak. Here d5 13 i.d2 'it'c7 is weaker) 12... d5 13 exd5 the d-file is not blocked for White by his exd5 (13... cxd5? 14 tLlc4!) 14 .l:!.e1 , or 12 bishop on d3, as in a line of the Paulsen i.d2! i.xd6 13 i..xa5 with advantage in the Variation, in which a similar situation arises endgame. (1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tt:Jxd4 a6 5 11 ... 'it'e5 1d3 g6!?). 12 'iixe5 .txe5 6... a6 13 i..c3 .txc3 7 i..g2 If 13.. .f6, then 14 f4 is not bad, but 14 .txe5 7 c4!? i..g7 8 i..e3 also comes into fxe5 15 tt:Jd2, with the extremely unpleasant consideration. threat of 16 tt:Jc4, is even better. 7 ... i..g7 14 tt:Jxc3 d5 8 tt:Jxc6 bxc6 15 tt:Ja4 .l::.b8 The endgame after 8 ...dxc6 9 ii'xd8+ Wxd8 16 b3 0� 10 lt:Jd2 is obviously in favour of White, since 17 f4 the opponent's dark squares on the queen side are weak. 17 .l::tfd 1, intending 18 .U.ac1 and 19 c4 with an advantage, was evidently even stronger. 9 0-0 tt:Je7 17 ... .l:!.d8? If 9 . ..d5 , then 10 exd5 cxd5 11 c4 and 12 t/Jc3. This makes it easier for White to play c2-c4. 18 .l:!.fd1 h6 19 c4 g5 19 ...d4 20 .l:!.d3f6 21 e5 or 20 ...g5 21 .l:!.ad1 gxf4 22 gxf4 tt:Jg6 23 .l:!.xd4 .l::txd4 24 �xd4 tt:Jxf425 .l:!.d8+ was bad for Black. 20 .l:!.d4! gxf4 21 gxf4 tt:Jg6 22 exd5 exd5 23 cxd5 cxd5 24 tt:Jc3! ii.e6 25 .l:!.ad1 'it>g7 26 tt:Jxd5 i..xd5 27 i..xd5 10 'i!Vd6! 'it'a5 White is a healthy pawn to the good. 148 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) Dvoretsky - Chubinsky 18 'ii'b6 :ac8 Philadelphia 1990 19 �h3 l::txc1 5d4 cxd4 20 l:!.xc1 llc8 6lt:'lxd4 a6 21 b3! l:!.xc1+ 7 �g2 'it'c7!? 22 �xc1 8 0-0 �g7 Black's position is strategically hopeless. Now if 9 lt:'lxc6 Black replies 9 ...dxc6!. This 22 ...lt:'lc8 23 'ife3 lt:'le7 24 'it'c3 c.t>f7 25 a4 means that White must aim to set up a 'ii'd8? (25 ...�f6 was a tougher defence) 26 strong pawn-piece centre. 'ii'f3 'it'd7 27 g4! 'ili'c728 i.a3f4 29 g5 h5 30 9�e3 lt:'lge7 gxh6 �xh6 31 'i¥g4 WeB 32 'ii'e6 'ii'c2 33 10 c4! 0-0 i.xd6 Black resigned. 11 lt:'lc3 Dvoretsky - Filipowicz Polanica Zdroj 1973 5 d4 �g7?! 6 dxc5 b6 An interesting idea. After 6 .. .'�i'a5+ 7 c3 'ii'xc5 8 �e3 Black would stand worse. 7 cxb6 'ii'xb6 8lt:'lbd2 d5 9 i.d3 lt:'lge7 10 c3 0-0 11 0-0 a5 12 a4 The opponent has gained definite although 11 ... d6 hardly sufficient compensation for the sacri In the event of 11 ...lt:'lxd4 12 �xd4 'ii'xc4 13 ficed pawn. �xg7 Wxg7 14 �c1 (or 14 'ii'd6) White has 12 ... l:.b8 more than sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 12... e5 came into consideration. 12 �c1 lt:'lxd4?! 13 i.xd4 e5?! 13 ...i.. xd4 14 'it'xd4 e5 really was better. 14 �e3 �e6 15 lt:'ld5 i.xd5 16 cxd5 White has gained a great positional advan tage. If 16... 'i¥a5 he was intending 17 'ii'd2! 'it'xa2 18 'ii'b4 or 17... 'ii' xd2 18 i.xd2 followed by 19 �b4. 16 . . . 'it'd7 17 'ii'b3 f5?! King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) ctJ 149 13 l:ta3! .ib7 14 .l::tb3 it'a7 15 'iie2 .l:tfd8 It made sense to place this rook on e8, in order to prepare ...e6-e5. 16 l:te1 ita8 17 h4! The active possibilities for both sides are restricted, and so White makes a semi waiting pawn move, which in some cases may nevertheless come in useful. 17 ... d4?! 18 lbc4! .ia6 2) Bishop sortie to g5 19 l:txb8 l:ixb8 20 itc2 'iib7 Veselovsky - Dvoretsky 21 ..if1 ! dxc3 Moscow Championship 1973 22 bxc3 .ixc4 5 .ig5!? 'ikc7 22 . . .'iib3? is unsuitable because of 23 'ilt'xb3 6 .ig2 .ig7 .U.xb3 24 l2Jxa5 (or 24l2Jcd2). 7 lbc3 lbge7 23 .ixc4 .l:Ic8 8 'ifd2 h6 24 .id2 l2Je5! Black avoids the exchange of bishops: 8 ... 25 l2Jxe5 .ixe5 0-0 9 .ih6. 26 .ib5 'ii'c7!? 9 ..ie3 l2Jd4 27 l:te3 10 0-0 d6 27 'iitg2!? is also strong. 11 lbe1 .id7 27 ... lbc6 28 'ii'a2 White has retained the advantage. I think that quite a good reaction to d3-d4 is a positional pawn sacrifice. 5 d4 cxd4 6 l2Jxd4 .ig7! 7 lbb5 d5 8 exd5 exd5 9 'iixd5 -.e7+! 10 ..ie2 .ig4! The right way - it is important to prevent the Draw. A position that is hard to evaluate has simplification of the position by 11 'ii'd6. arisen. 1 50 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) 3) Plan with c2-c3 and d3-d4 12 lDc3 l:tc8 13 ..tf4 lDa5 Fischer - Pan no 14 .l:!.c1 b5 Buenos Aires 1970 15 b3! b4 5 .ig2 .ig7 16lDe2 .ib5 6 0-0 lDge7 16 ...l:txc 1 was more accurate. 7 .l:!.e1 d6 17 'ii'd2 lDac6 If 7 ...0-0 , then 8 e5 is unpleasant. 18 g4 aS? 8 c3 0-0 In a cramped position one should aim for 8 ...e5!? is a sound continuation - see the exchanges. 18... .ixe2! was essential. How following game. ever, after 19 'ii'xe2 'ii'b6 20 .ie3 lDb8 21 .if1 White would have stood better. 9 d4 cxd4 19 lDg3 'ilfb6 10 cxd4 20 h4! lDb8 21 i.h6 liJd7 22 'ti'g51 Threatening 22 .ixg7 �xg7 23 'ii'xe7 or 23 lDh5+ . 22 ... .l:!.xc1 23 llxc1 .ixh6 Black also has a difficult position after 23 ...f6!? 24 exf6 .ixh6 25 'ti'xh6 ltJxf6 26 .ih3. 24 'ifxh6 .l:.c8 25 llxc8+ lDxc8 26 h5! 'ifd8? 10 ... d5?! It was necessary to play 26 ...lDf8 27 'ii'f4 (27 'ii'c1 !?) 27 ...Wc7 (28 h6 or 28 lDg5 was 10 ...'ii' b6 11 d5 .ixb2 12 .ixb2 'ii'xb2 is threatened), although after 28 .if1 !? .ixf1 stronger, leading to rather sharp variations, 29 �xf1 White would have retained an not unfavourable for Black. For example: 13 obvious advantage. dxc6 'ii'xa 1 14 'ii'b3 ( 14 cxb 7 .ixb7 15 'ii'b3 .id5!16 exd5 .:!.ab8 17'ii'd3 liJxd5) 14... lDxc6 27 lDg5 lDf8 15 lDc3 lDd4 16 .l:!.xa1 lDxb3 17 axb3 .id7 28 .ie41! (Ljubojevic-Hubner, Buenos Aires 1998), or A spectacular breakthrough of the enemy 13 lDbd2 lDa5 14 'ii'a4 'ii'b6 15 e5 ltJxd5 16 defences. However, 28 lDxh7!? lDxh7 29 exd6 'ii'd8 17 lDe5 b6 18 d7 .ib7. hxg6 fxg6 30 Wxg6+ �h8 31 Wxe6 was 11 e5 almost equally strong, or 28 hxg6!? fxg6 Now White's chances are preferable. It is (28... hxg6 29 'ifh8+!) 29 lDxh7!. not easy to attack his centre: 11 ...lDf5 12 28 ... 'ife7 lDc3 'ii'b6 13lDa4, or 11 ...f6 12 exf6 .ixf6 13 28 ...dxe4 29 lD3xe4 is totally bad, while if i.h6. 28 ....tea , then 29 hxg6 hxg6 30 liJh5! is 11 ... i.d7 decisive. King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) lZJ 151 29 lt:'lxh7! lt:'lxh7 12 �b2 'i!Vd7 30 hxg6 fxg6 30 ...lt:'lf8 31 g7 leads to a quick mate. 31 il.xg6 lt:'Jg5 31 ...'it'g7 32 �xh7+ 'it'xh7 33 'ii'xe6+ is also completely hopeless. 32 lt:'lh5 lt:'lf3+ 33 '>t>g2 lt:'lh4+ 34 '>t>g3 lt:'Jxg6 35 lt:'lf6+! �f7 36 'i!Vh7+ Black resigned. Fang - Dvoretsky 13 d4?! Philadelphia 1991 (time control: 45 minutes for the game) A clever, but dubious pawn sacrifice. How ever, also after other continuations Black 5�g2 �g7 would not have stood badly. For example: 6 0-0 lt:'Jge7 13 'iie2 liae8 14 "ilr'f1 f5 (14... a6!? ) 15 b5 7 l:te1 d6 lt:'ld8 16 d4 exd4 17 cxd4 fxe4 18lt:'lxe4�g4! 8 c3 e5!? 19 lt:'Jed2 lt:'lf5 (Dominguez-Dvoretsky, Ter 9lt:'lbd2 rassa 1996). 13 lt:'lb3 b6 14 d4 comes into The attempt to break through immediately in consideration. the centre by 9 il.e3 0-0 1 0 d4 is unsuccess 13 ... exd4 ful. Black replies 1 0 ... exd4 11 cxd4, and now 14 cxd4 cxb4 either 11 ...il.g4 (although then he has to 15 "ikb1 reckon with the exchange sacrifice 12 dxc5), After 15 axb4 lt:'lxb4 White would not have or 11 ... d5!?. time to prevent ...d6-d5 in view of the threat After 9 a3 0-0 1 0 b4 h6 it is wrong to play 11 of 16... lt:'ld3 . bxc5? dxc5 12 c4 in view of 12... f5! 13lt:'lc3 15 ... bxa3 (13 exf5? e4) 13.. .f4 14 lt:'ld5 g5 with advantage to Black (Djindjihashvili-Dvo 16�xa3 d5 retsky, Philadelphia 1991 ), while 11 lt:'lbd2 17 lt:'le5! lt:'Jxe5 transposes into the game which we are now 18 dxe5 d4 examining. 19 f4 lt:'lc6 9 ... 0-0 This and the following moves were made 10 a3 h6 with the aim of safeguarding the d4-pawn. In the event of 10... a5?! 11 a4 White's Probably it should have been disregarded position is preferable. for the sake of rapidly advancing the 11 b4 �e6 queenside pawns: 19... b5!? 20 lt:'lf3 (not 20 f5? gxf5 21 exf5 �xf5) 20 ...a5 21 lt:'Jxd4 b4. A different development scheme was tried in the game Lau-HObner, Munich 1988: 11 ...b6 20 lt:'lf3 12 ii.b2�b7 13 'it'b3'it'd? . 20 .l:i.f1 (trying to frighten the opponent with 1 52 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) the advance f4-f5) 20 ...ii.h3 21 lLlc4did not Fischer - Durao work in view of 21 ...ii.xg2 22 c.t>xg2 b5! 23 Olympiad, Havana 1966 lt:ld6 lLlxe5! 24 fxe5 ii.xe5, and the white 5 ii.g2 ii.g7 knight is trapped. 6 0-0 lLlge7 20 ... ii.c4 7 c3 21 .l::td1 ii.e2 An attempt to create a strong pawn centre, 22 .l:td2 ii.xf3 while saving a tempo on the non-essential Of course, not 22 ...d3?! 23 lLle1 lLld4? 24 move .l:.e1 . But here too with accurate play .l:!.axd3. Black can successfully solve his opening 23 ii.xf3 .l:!.fd8 problems. 24 ii.e2 b5?! 7... 0-0 In this situation too 7 ...e5!? is not a bad Playing on the opponent's time-trouble. reply. After8 ii.e3 it is risky to reply 8 ...b6 9 After 24 ....l:!.ac8 25 'ii'd1 White would have d4 exd4 1 0 cxd4 d5 in view of 11 exd5 tt:lxd5 retained compensation for the sacrificed 12 ii.g5. The other standard reaction 8 ...d6 pawn. 9 d4 exd4 1 0 cxd4 ii.g4 is stronger: 25 ii.xb5 .Uab8 a) 11 d5 lLle5 12 lt:lbd2 ii'd7? 13 lLlxe5! 26 ltxd4? �xe5 14 f3 ii.h3 15 lLlc4 with advantage Now Black's trappy tactics prove justified. (Bologan-Rogozenko, Riga 1995). I think But meanwhile, after26 'ii'f1! the advantage that Black was obliged to accept the would have passed to his opponent. exchange sacrifice: 11 ...ii.xf3! 12 �xf3 26 ... ii'e7?! �xb2 13 lLld2 �xa 1 14 'ii'xa 1 lt:ld4!. b) 11 dxc5 dxc5 ( 11 ...ii.xb2? 12 lLlbd2 is Obviously White was hoping for 26... ifxd4+? much weaker) 12 'ii'c1 0-0 13 lLlbd2 (13 27 ii.xd4 lt:lxd4 28 .l:!.d3!. I quickly made a ii.xc5 .Uc8 14 lLlc3 ii.xf3 15 ii.xe7 ifxe7 16 move planned beforehand, not noticing the ii.xf3 lt:ld4 with excellent compensation for winning continuation 26 ...1\Vc7! 27 .Uxd8+ the sacrificed pawn) 13... b6 14 h3 ii.e6 with lt:lxd8. a roughly equal game (Hug-Hart, Interzonal 27 l:txd8+ lt:lxd8 Tournament, Petropolis 1973). 28 �d3 'ii'b4 8 d4 29 lla2 lLlc6 Threatening 30 ...ii'b6+ followedby ...lLlb4 . After 30 �h1 'ii'b3 Black would have retained the initiative, which in time-trouble would be not easy to extinguish. But now came a final oversight. 30 ifc2?? ii'b6+ 31 �g2 lLlb4 32 'iic4 lLlxa2 33 ii.d4 'ii'b4 34 ii.xa7 'it'd2+ 35 �h3 .l:tb2 White resigned. King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) t2J 153 After 8 ...cxd4 9 cxd4 it is unfavourable for 12... fxe5 (if 12... �d7 there is the unpleasant Black to play 9 ...'ifb6? (which, I should reply 13 g4) 13 dxe5 �d7 14 .ii.f4 h6 15 h4 remind you, worked with the inclusion of the .i.e8 (here the same idea 15... lt'Jxh4 16 moves .l:!.e1 and ...d7 -d6) 10 d5 �xb2 11 lbxh4 �xf4 - if 16... g5 White has both 17 ixb2 'i!Vxb2 12 dxc6 'ifxa1 13 cxd7 .Ud8 14 lbg6, and 17 ltJxd5!? - 17 gxf4 'iixh4 does 'lb3 (Bologan). He continues 9 ...d5 10 e5, not work on account of 18 ltJxd5! .l:!.d8 19 and a position from the previously analysed lbf6+ .i.xf6 20 exf6 with a great advantage game Fischer-Panna is reached with an for White) 16 'ii'd2 'iib6?! 17 .l:lad1! .l:!.d8 18 extra tempo for Black (there the rook lba4ifb5? 19 b3 �h7 20 .i.f1 'it'b4 21 'it'xb4 already stood at e1 ), resulting from the fact lbxb4 22 lLlc5 .i.f7 23 a3!, and White won that the pawn has advanced to d5 in one (Ljubojevic-Timman, Hilversum 1973). move - from d7. Now you will be able to properly appreciate Now 1 0 ...b5? is incorrect in view of the the subtle prophylactic move 12... �h 8!, weakening of the c5-square: 11 lbbd2a5 12 made in the game Dvoretsky-Kalinin, Wijk 1Llb3a4 13 ltJc5'ikb6 14 �f4 f6 15 .l:!.e1 with aan Zee 1999. In the tactical variations advantage to White (Bologan-Kurz, Biel involving ...lbxh4 White will not have the 1995). counter-stroke ltJxd5!. If 13 .i.f4 there Black's best counter-plan involves pressure follows 13... g5 14 exf6 .1Lxf6 15 .i.e5 ltJxe5 on the enemy centre. But if it is implemented (15... .i.xe5!? ) 16 ltJxe5 'ii'b6. inaccurately White still retains the better 13 h4 .1Ld7 14 .1Lf4 (in reply to 14 g4 Black chances, as shown by two games by can sacrifice a piece: 14... lbxh4! 15 lbxh4 Ljubomir Ljubojevic. fxe5) 14.. .fxe5 15 dxe5? ltJxh4! 16 ltJxh4g5, 10 .. .f6 11 .Ue1 fxe5 12 dxe5 .ii.d7 13 lbc3 and the advantage is already with Black . .U.c8 14 .ii.f4 lbf5 15 'ii'd2 lLla5 16 b3 b5?? White should have played 15 ..txe5 ltJxe5 (16.. . h6 was essential) 17 .1l.g5 'ifb6 18 g4 (or 15... .1l.xe5 16 dxe5 iib6) 16 ltJxe5 with and the knight has no move (Ljubojevic chances for both sides. Tatai, Manila 1973). After this lengthy theoretical excursion, let 10 ... lt'lf5 11 lLlc3 f6 12 .Ue1 (12 �f4?! fxe5 us to return to the Fischer-Durao game. 13 dxe5 allows counterplay that is thematic 8... d6?! for this variation: 13... h6 14 h4 lbxh4! 15 1Llxh4 .l:!.xf4! 16 gxf4 �xh4 with excellent Black hopes to exchange on d4 a little later, compensation for the sacrificed exchange) at a more appropriate moment, but his hopes are not destined to be realised. 9 dxc5! dxc5 10 'ii'e2 b6 11 e5 11 .Ud1? is inaccurate in view of 11 ...i.a6 . 11 ... a5 12 �e1 i.a6 13 'it'e4 .l:!.a7 14 lLlbd2 .i.d3 15 'iih4 ltJd5 16 'it'xd8 .l:!.xd8 17 a4! .l:!.ad7 154 � King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) Black's pieces are actively placed, and 6 ... ttJge7 therefore it may seem that he stands quite It is possible, of course, to give the play a well. But in fact in his position there are quite different character, by choosing 6 . . . rather many weak squares, and this factor d5!?, but this is sometimes not to the taste of gives White a great positional advantage. those who aim with Black for Sicilian Fischer begins the processing of these positions. weaknesses with the exchange of the light 7 ..te3 square bishops. 7 d4?! is premature: 7 ...cxd4 8 cxd4 'i'b6. 18 ..tf1 ! ..txf1 7... d6 19 'it>xf1 ttJde7 20 ttJc4 ttJc8 7 ...b6!? was worth trying, and if 8 d4, then not 8 ...d5? ! 9 dxc5, but either 8 . ..d6 or 21 ..tg5 ttJ6e7 8 ...cxd4 !?. After 8 0-0 0-0 9 d4 in the game 22 tiJfd2 h6 Radulov-Taimanov, Interzonal Tournament, 23 ..txe7 l:txe7 Leningrad 1973, White gained a promising 24 :a3! �c7 position after 9 ...cxd4 10 ttJxd4 ..tb7 11 25 l:.b3 l:tc6 ttJxc6 ..txc6 12 'iid6 tLlc8 13 'iid2 'ike? 14 26 ttJe4 ..tf8 ttJa3, but 9 .....ta6 10 l:!.e1 cxd4 11 4:lxd4 ttJe5 came into consideration. 27 'it>e2 ..te7 28 f4 'it>f8 29 g4 'it>e8 30 l:!.f1 l:!.d5 31 l:!.f3 .l:td8 32 l:!.h3 ..tf8 33 ttJxa5! Fischer's play creates a highly artistic impression. It is instructive to follow how he exchanged the pieces that he did not need, strengthened to the maximum the placing of his remaining pieces, and finally landed a decisive blow. 33 ...bxa5 loses to 34 lLlf6+ 'it>e7 35 .l:tb7+. 33 ..J::t c7 34 ltJc4 l:!.a7 35 ttJxb6 ttJxb6 36 8 0-0 l:!.xb6 l:!.da8 37 lLlf6+ 'it>d8 38 l:!.c6 .l:tc7 39 The logical consequence of the move order .l::!.d3+ 'it>c8 40 l:!.xc7+ 'it>xc7 41 .l:r.d7+ 'it>c6 chosen by White was the immediate 8 d4. 42 l:!.xf7 Black resigned. If 8 ...cxd4 there follows 9 ttJxd4! 0-0 10 0-0, while if 8 .. .'ii'b6 - simply 9 'iid2. Possibly Bukhtin - Dvoretsky Black should maintain the tension in the Moscow Championship 1972 centre by 8 ...b6 !?, but this is already 5 ..tg2 ..tg7 something of a concession compared with 6 c3!? the variations analysed earlier. An attempt to begin active play in the centre, 8... 0-0 by saving another tempo: on castling. 9 tiJbd2 King's Indian Attack (from White's Point of View) Cb 155 The consequences of 9 d4 have been seen choosing 12... �c8!? , and if 13 dxc5, then in our analysis of the previous game. White not 13... dxc5?! 14 'if'b3 followed by ..ltf1 or employed a different arrangement of his l2Jc4, but 13... bxc5. forces in the game Udov-Dvoretsky, Mos 13 ttJxd4 ttJxd4 cow Championship 1967: 9 'if'c 1 .U.e8 (avoid In the event of 13 ...4Je5 White would have ing the exchange of the dark-square bish neutralised the bishop at a6 by 14 tiJb5. ops after 10 ..lth6) 10 ttJa3 .l:tb8 11 .l:td1 ?! (11 14 cxd4 .th6 ..lth8 12 ttJc2; 11 d4!?) 11 ... b5 12 ttJc2 b4 13 d4 bxc3 14 bxc3 'if'a5 (14... cxd4 15 14 ..ltxd4 was preferable, when White's tt'lcxd4) 15 'if'a3 'ii'xa3 16 ttJxa3, and now position would have remained more pleas Black should have played 16... d5! . ant. 9... b6 14 ... ttJc6 The pawn does not manage to advance to Another possibility was 14... l:!.c8 , and if 15 b4, since the variation 9 ...b5?! 10 d4 b4 11 'ifb3- either 15 ...d5 , or 15... ttJc6 16 d5 tiJd4 dxc5 bxc3 12 bxc3 is advantageous to 17 ..ltxd4 ..ltxd4 18 dxe6 'if'f6!?. White. However, it made sense to take 15 tiJb1 ! tiJb4 control of the d4-square by 9 ...e5!? . The 16 ..ltf1 ..ltxf1 arrangement of Black's forces is the optimal 17 .l:.xf1 d5 one both with his pawn on e6, and on e5. 18 e5 l:tc8 10 d4 aS!? 19 ttJa3 11 a4 19 ttJc3!?, intending 20 h4, looks more Changing the character of the play by 11 natural. Black would have replied 19.. .f6. dxc5 bxc5 12 e5!? came into consideration. 19 . . . 'if'd7 11 ... ..lta6 20 'if'b3 f6 12 l:te1 cxd4 Draw. The two sides' chances are roughly This exchange could have been delayed, by equal. 156 \t> Artur Yusupov Preparation for a Game ' ifficult in study, easy in battle', Suvo- logic, such an approach to the solving of D rov liked to repeat, tirelessly urging opening problems, has a right to exist. his generals to make practice attacks. This As a rule, players nevertheless do not stick ageless precept of the great commander is too rigidly to such tactics, preferring occa also fully applicable to chess. The more sionally to vary their opening set-ups. difficult and painstaking your preparatory Because otherwise it becomes just too easy work, the easier and more inspired the game for their opponents to prepare. itself will be! As an example I will show a preparation Preparation for a game is a highly individual which I made with Mark Dvoretsky at the process. And here much depends on what Candidates Tournament in Montpellier be kind of opening arsenal you have at your fore my game with the Cuban player Jesus disposal. Some players solve this problem Nogueiras. At that time he had a rather fairly simply: they do not prepare for every narrow repertoire, and we noticed that in the specific opponent, but make preparations Queen's Gambit he often employed one and for an entire tournament, deciding before same variation, a very risky one, in my view. hand the range of openings that they are Delving into the position, we found a new intending to employ. They hope that, if they plan, which I in fact employed in the game. encounter any surprise in the opening, they The novelty proved uncommonly effective!It will be able to deal with the situation directly need hardly be said how much our task was at the board. Usually these are players with eased by the narrowness of the opponent's a narrow, well-developed opening reper opening repertoire. toire. An example is provided by grandmaster Andrey Sokolov. To predict what opening you will have in a game with him is not at all Yusupov - Nogueiras difficult: with White he exclusively chooses Candidates Tournament, Montpellier 1985 e2-e4, and with Black, say, the Queen's Queen's Gambit Indian Defence. And that's all! Andrey sticks 1 d4 d5 accurately to his opening repertoire, but he 2c4 e6 knows it thoroughly, of course, since he has great experience of playing his systems. 3 tDc3 c6 Sokolov reckons that if an opponent suc 4tDf3 tt)f6 ceeds in casting doubts on some variation of 5 i..g5 tDbd7 his, he will quickly be able to repair it; for his 6cxd5 exd5 next opponent it will be significantly more 7e3 i..d6 difficult to find a defect in this variation, and in the end he will have a completely 'fire It was this set-up that Nogueiras used to proof' repertoire, which is especially impor employ. tant when playing Black. In general, such 8 i..d3 tDf8 Preparation for a Game tD 157 10 0-0 .llxe5 11 dxe5 In our preparations we considered 11 ...tt:J6d7, after which we were intending 12 .lii.f4, and if 12... ii'xb2?! 13 l:!.c1 lt:Jg6, then 14 .lii.xg6 hxg6 15 e4!, opening lines in the centre. Instead of capturing the pawn, Black does better to complete his development with 12... tt:Jc5 . This is what happened in the game Gulko-Smagin (Moscow Champion ship 1984). 11 . . . lt:Jg4?! An unsuccessful reply. An attempt to play Black wants to play ...lt:Jg6 , ...h7-h6 and actively while insufficiently well-developed force the exchange on f6. An obvious cannot be recommended. Nevertheless, in drawback to his plan is the fact that he has our preparations we considered this move, already moved the same piece twice in the although, of course, our analysis was rather opening, and he intends to move it a third cursory. At home it had seemed to me that time, which clearly violates the principles of by playing 12 .llf4 lt:Jg6 13 il.xg6 hxg6 14 h3 development. In addition, 8 ...tt:Jf8 delays lt:Jh6 15 e4 White would gain an advantage. castling. All this encourages White to play But at the board I realised that Black can actively. defend by 15... 'ti'xb2 16 .Uc1 0-0, returning 9 tt:Je5 the extra pawn. This move suggests itself. Black has lifted Delving into the position, I found a stronger his control of e5, and the white knight continuation. Can you see what is was? No? promptly heads there. In reply to 9 ...lt:Jg6 What if I make the leading suggestion that there follows 1 0 f4. The plan involving the the position of the knight on g4 must be occupation of the central e5-point was indirectly exploited? introduced back in the 19th century by the 12 'ii'a4! great American player Harry Nelson Pillsbury. The extremely unpleasant threat of 13 tt:Jxd5 Here is a more recent example: the game has been created. If 12... .lii. d7, then White Chernin-Cvetkovic (Belgrade 1988) went can choose between 13 'ii'a3!? f6 14 exf6 10... 0-0 11 'ilt'c2 (11 0-0!?) 11 ...'ti'e8 12 0-0 gxf6 15 il.h4 and the more camouflaged ib4?! 13 'it>h1 , and soon White launched a idea of 13 e6!? .lii.xe6 14 tt:Jxd5 il.xd5 15 decisive offensive. 'ti'xg4. In both cases, with a lead in 9 ... 'it'b6 development and the two bishops, his Black wants to exchange the powerful position is strategically won. knight on e5 before it is supported by the f 12 ... ii'xb2 pawn. With this aim he violates yet another Black, as they say, throws caution to the opening principle, by bringing his queen out winds. too early. If in addition he decides to capture with his queen on b2, his pawn-grabbing 13 .Uac1 may cost him dearly: after 1 0 0-0 'ir'xb2 11 Of course, not 13 tt:Jxd5?�xe5. But now it is lk1 White gains a significant lead in not possible to capture with the knight on e5, development. if only because of 13... tt:Jxe5 14 .l:tc2'ir'b6 15 1 58 � Preparation for a Game ltJxd5 (14 ltJxd5 ltJxd3 15 .l:r.xc6 is also 18 ..txb5 ltJe6 strong). 19 'ili'b2 cxb5 13 ... ..td7 20 ..th4 Black resigned. It goes without saying that this was a severe punishment for his violation of opening principles! I thought that I had convincingly refuted the 'Nogueiras variation'. Imagine my surprise when a few years later I suddenly saw the match game Timman-Ljubojevic (Hilver sum 1987), played with the same variation. True, in it Black lasted only a little longer. Instead of 10... ..txe5 he played 10.. .'ifxb2 (Ljubomir Ljubojevic very much likes to have extra pawns) 11 .l:r.c1 ltJg6 12 f4 (12 ..txf6!? gxf6 13 ltJg4) 12 ... 0-0 13 l:tc2 'i'b6? (13... 'ii' a3 was better) 14 ..txf6gxf6 15 tt:'lg4 ..txg4 16 'ii'xg4 ltth8 17 l:tb1 'ili'c7 18 ttJxdS Here I thought for a long time, realising that 'ii'd8 19 ltJc3 ..txf4 20 .l:te2! .l:r.e8 21 tt:'le4. in such a position there was simply bound to Jan Timman gained a marked advantage, be a forced win. 14 .l:r.c2'ili'b6 15 l:.b1 'ili'c7 16 and the incorrect combination made by the ltJxd5 seems to suggest itself, but after opponent merely hastened his demise: 16... 'ili'xe5 nothing definite is apparent, while 21 .....tx e3+?! 22 l:txe3 'ii'xd4 23 .:e1 tt:'leS if 16 ..tf4 Black can continue the fight with 24 'ili'f5 , and Black resigned in view of 16... ltJe6 . 24 ...ltJxd3 25 ltJxf6. And here it suddenly dawned on me! Let us return once again to my game with 14 iVd4!! Nogueiras. The question may be asked: if I A move of murderous strength. With the had prepared the entire variation before simple centralisation of his queen White hand, why in the course of the game did I simultaneously creates five (!) threats: 15 have to look for a stronger continuation? ltJxd5, 15 ltJb5, 15 ltJe4, 15 .l:r.b1 and 15 e6 Well, this is a valid question and one which (15... ..txe6 16 'ili'xg7). It is not possible to is worth dwelling on in more detail. defend simultaneously against all of these. Here it all depends on the time spent on the For example, 14... 'ili'b6 parries four of the preparation. It is one thing to study some threats, but the fifth proves decisive - 15 variation at home, in the quiet of your study, e6!. so to speak, and quite another when you 14 ... f6 have to do this during the course of a 15 exf6 gxf6 tournament. It is clear that during immediate preparations for a game (usually lasting a 16 ..txf6 llg8 couple of hours) it is hard to take all nuances If Nogueiras had played 16... ltJxf6 17 'ili'xf6 into account. That was also the case here . .l:r.g8, the opposition of the queens could We did not study in detail how to play have been exploited by 18 ltJxd5. against 11 ...ltJg4 , as our objective was a 17 ltJb5 'ii'xb5 different one: simply to convince ourselves 17 .. .'it'xd4 18 ltJd6 mate. that after this continuation too the position Preparation for a Game ctJ 159 was favourable for White and rather danger my game with the Hungarian grandmaster ous for Black. The move planned at home, Zoltan Ribli, which we will now examine. 12 .i.f4, was sufficient to confirm this Preparing for a game with Ribli is difficult, evaluation. This by no means signifies that it since he is one of those players who varies is the strongest. his opening systems. He has quite a wide You should not blindly trust your opening repertoire and he has a thorough knowledge preparations. And not only because a of the variations he employs. However, at mistake may creep in to your preliminary that tournament in Montpellier I somehow analysis. The main thing is something else: managed to guess what he would play, and, the tension of the struggle, the stressful in addition, in the variation in question I had competitive situation itself sharply accentu an important improvement stored up. So ates your intuition, strengthens your imagi that my entire preparation essentially re nation, and also raises your calculating duced to me simply looking through my ability. This is why, however meticulous your notebook and refreshing the lines in my analysis has been, during a game you memory! should check the variations you have found, I should mention that in making immediate and seek stronger alternatives. At the board preparations for a game during the course of you may hit on some new and unexpected an event you should observe a sense of idea! Of course, on moves such as 9 lDe5 measure - what is the point of spending five and 10 f4 (in reply to 9 ...lDg6) it is not worth hours studying, if after this you arrive for a spending time, but when there arises a game with a headache and unable to position which has not been analysed, but understand anything? The optimal variation merely estimated, here a serious verification is when all your main analytical work is done is simply essential. beforehand, and during an event you merely remember your analyses, refresh them in Thus, success in the opening largely de your memory. pends on your ability to guess what variation the opponent will choose, and successfully Yusupov - Ribli prepare for it. This is especially important Candidates Tournament, Montpellier 1985 (but also difficult!) when meeting a player Queen's Gambit such as Timman, for example, who has a 1 d4 lDf6 very broad opening repertoire. 2 c4 e6 But there is no guarantee that, during the 3 lDf3 d5 couple of hours spent at a tournament preparing for a specific opponent, you will 4lDc3 c5 definitely devise the optimal way of combat 5cxd5 lDxd5 ing the opening set-ups employed by him. 6e4 lDxc3 Therefore a second significant factor of 7 bxc3 cxd4 success is the quality of your preparation 8cxd4 lDc6 before the competition, the depth of your 9 .i.c4 b5 opening erudition, and the breadth of your own opening repertoire. All this is well known in theory. Any experienced player will no doubt easily 10 .i.e2 .i.b4+ remember instances when his old prepara 11 .i.d2 'ii'a5 tions came into action. For example, as in 12 d5 exd5 160 � Preparation for a Game 13 exd5 t:De7 guides, but after 18... 'ii' d6!? Black would Why did Ribli choose this variation? I think appear to equalise. However, from the very because he was hoping to catch me start it appeared to me that the position is unawares - after all, this was not his main rather more pleasant for White. And the opening weapon. In addition, I had never analytical work that I did merely reinforced played this as White, and this position had this opinion. not occurred in any of my games. But here 18 .U.c1 ! he was simply unlucky: how could he have The fruit of my efforts at home. White known that three or four years earlier I had develops his rook and simultaneously pre made a serious study of the Tarrasch vents the reply 18... 'tid6 (in view of 19 �c6). Defence Deferred and had found an im 18 ... t:Dd6 provement for White? It is well known that the knight is a good 14 0-0 �xd2 blockader, so that Ribli's decision is posi 15 t:Dxd2 0-0 tionally justified. He was probably hoping 16 t:Db3 1id8 that after the obvious 19 t:Dd4 �d720 tt:Jc6 An interesting pawn structure has arisen. his queen would come out to f6 and the White has a strong passed pawn in the position would become equal: indeed, the centre, which Black is intending to blockade knight at d6 is excellently placed and the and possibly attack. black rooks will now occupy the e-file. 17 �f3 But it turns out that White can prevent the 17 �xb5 has also been tried. In the game queen from coming out to f6. Kir.Georgiev-Ribli (Sarajevo 1985) there 19 'ii'd4! followed 17... �b 7 18 t:Dc5(in the event of 18 An unpleasant continuation for Black. Now d6 t:Df5Black has counter-threats) 18... 'ii' b6! 19... 1if6 leads to the spoiling of his pawn 19 t:Dxb7 'it'xb5 20 .l:tb1 'ii'xd5 21 .l:te1 'ii'xd 1 structure. Even so, this was probably the 22 �bxd1 t:Dc6 23 .l:td7 t:Db8! 24 .l:tde7 t:Dc6, lesser evil. What Ribli played was less good. and the players agreed a draw. 19 . . . 'ii'b6?! 17 ... t:Df5 Here the queen stands worse than at f6. It is remote from the kingside and White can develop his initiative there unhindered. It is clear that now he should no longer ex change queens. 20 'ii'f4 ! �d7 21 t:Dd4 �feB?! A significant inaccuracy; the rook should have been kept at f8 for the defence of the royal residence. 22 t:Dc6 (see diagram) White has an appreciable advantage, largely the result of successful opening prepara tion. The position reached was not only Here 18 'il¥d3 is analysed in the theoretical familiar to me, but also close to me in style. Preparation for a Game CLJ 161 [Already here it was possible to begin the 'gathering of the harvest', by playing 24 :Xe8+!, when 24 ...1:1xe 8 is not possible because of 25 lDe5.And if 24 ...�xe 8 White decides matters with 25 lDe7+ �f8 26 ilb4 "ikxf2+!? 27 �h 1! or 25... �h8 26 ltJc8!"ikd8 27"ikc7! (27"ikb4!? �d7 28 lDd6) 27 ...fix c7 28 llxc7- Dvoretsky.] 24 ... ltJc4 25 h3 h6 26 i.d3! White has strengthened his position to the - position after22 l2Jc6- maximum, and now it is time to switch to concrete play. I exploit the fact that the double capture on c6 leads to loss of Can one expect more from the opening? material: 26 ...�xc6 27 dxc6 l:txe1 + 28 l:ixe1 Perhaps the only instance closer to the 'iixc6 29 �e4 'iie8 30 �h7+. 'ideal' is when you know all the moves right to the end - as Lev Polugayevsky some 26 ... ltJb2 times achieved. But in my view such an What else? approach is irrational: it demands an enor 27 �b1 mous expenditure of energy, and for what The bishop has no intention of leaving the in order to win, as a rule, only one single active diagonal. Black's position is practi game?! cally hopeless. Of course, here we have a different case. 27 ... �xc6 But for a 'normal' player, say what you like, this is ideal preparation. Generally speak 28 dxc6 l:txe1+ ing, if you find a move such as 18 .l:tc1 , you 29 .:lxe1 'ii'xc6 see that the resulting position is slightly betterfor you and also that it is to your taste -then confidently go in for it! I remember that Ribli was upset by this turn of events. Perhaps it was for this reason that subsequently he did not defend in the most tenacious way. 22 ... ltJc4 23 l::tfe1 White probes the weakness of the e7- square. 23 ... ltJb2 24 �e4 The threat of the knight fork on d3 has been Here, as they say, many roads lead to parried, and Ribli has nothing better than to Rome. In particular, 30 "ikb4!is very strong return his knight to its starting point. both attacking the knight, and defending the 162 � Preparation for a Game rook on e1 . But I was attracted by another 3 c4 e6 idea. 4cxd5 exd5 30 i.e4! 5 tt:Jc3 tt:Jc6 Now 30 ...�c4 was the most tenacious, but 6 g3 tt:Jf6 after 31 �d2 l:te8 32 i.h7+ 'l!;>xh7 33 l:!.xe8 7 i.g2 i.e7 White is the exchange up with a winning 8 0-0 0-0 position. Ribli played differently and ... fell into a prepared trap. 9 i.g5 i.e6 The usual 9 ...cxd4 1 0 tt:Jxd4 h6 leads to 30 ... �c3 more complicated play. 31 l1c1 tt:Jd3 Ribli was pinning his hopes on this counter 10 dxc5 i.xc5 stroke. Now 32 .Uxc3? is incorrect: 32 ...tt:Jxf4 11 i.xf6 'ifxf6 33 l:tf3 tt:Je2+ (the same check would have 12 tt:Jxd5 'i!t'xb2 followed after 33 i.xa8) 34 'i!;>f1 l:!.e8 35 l:te3 13 tt:Jc7 .Uad8 tt:Jd4 36 i.h7+ 'i!;>f8, and Black remains a 14 �c1 �xc1 pawn up. 15 .Uaxc1 32 �xf7+!! This variation occurred in the 16th game of Loss of material becomes inevitable. Black the Petrosian-Spassky World Champion resigned. ship Match (Moscow 1969), and then for The following example is practically on the many years it went out of favour. But in same theme, with the significance differ 1988, at the tournament in Linares, the ence that, even with the best will in the Spanish grandmaster (then still an interna world, I simply could not have guessed my tional master) Miguel lllescas employed it opponent's choice of opening: Kevin Sprag against Alexander Beliavsky and equalised. gett employed the Tarrasch Defence for the It was evidently this game that Spraggett first time in his life! The Canadian grand was guided by. master prepared very thoroughly for our What oversight, you may ask, did he make Candidates match, and the Tarrasch De in his choice of opening? Spraggett did not fence was in fact one of his opening take account of the fact that I had also surprises. But he guessed wrongly! And in participated in that tournament and, natu two respects: firstly, the prepared variation rally, I had also paid attention to the afore was one that I had analysed well, and mentioned game, since two rounds later I secondly, it corresponded more with my was due to play White against lllescas. style of play that with his own. These are the subtleties which sometimes After suffering a disaster, Spraggett did not have to be taken into account during persist and in the match he didn't employ the preparations! What is importantis not even Tarrasch Defence again. whether a particular variation occurred in the opponent's games, but whether he was there, where this variation was employed! Yusupov - Spraggett Spraggett effectively fell victim to my prepa 3rd match game, Quebec 1989 ration for the game with lllescas (in which, Queen's Gambit incidentally, another variety of the Tarrasch 1 d4 d5 Defence occurred). However, it so hap 2 tt:Jf3 c5 pened that I had first studied the given Preparation for a Game ltJ 163 position long before the tournament in 18 e3! Linares. Realising that an exchange of rooks is un 15 ... il...e7 favourable for him, White does not hurrywith Spassky preferred 15 ...b6 against Petrosian, the move l:tb1 . Besides, it is not yet clear but after 16 lt:Jxe6 fxe6 17 il...h3 or 17 e3 he whether it will subsequently be required (the would have encountered difficulties (in the rook may prove useful on c1 ). The move game Petrosian played less accurately - 17 made by me, which I had prepared for the I!c4). game with lllescas, proved to be a theoreti cal novelty, although what, it would appear, 16 lt:Jxe6 fxe6 could be more logical?- White takes control 17l::tc4 il...f6 of the d4-square, on which exchanges undesirable for him could have occurred. 18 ... l:td6 19 h4 h6 20 .l:!.e4 l:tfd8 21 il...h3 I prevent the exchange of a pair of rooks. The attempt to insist on this by 21 ...e5 would have had serious consequences for Black: 22 Wg2 lid1 23 l::txd1 l:txd1 , and the white bishop gains the opportunity to attack the b7-pawn from c8 (then the knight on c6 will also be attacked), whereas the black bishop on f6 is bad. Naturally, such a prospect did not appeal to Spraggett, and he prefers to At this point 18 l::tb1 was usually played. defend without making any unnecessary Here are a few examples, showing that weakening. Spraggett had serious grounds for thinking that he would be able to make an accurate 21 ... 'it>f7 draw: 22 'it>g2 .l:!.e8 18... l::t d7 19 h4 li:Jd4!?, and Black advanta Here the fact that White did not hurry with geously simplifies the position (Ftacnik .Ub1 again came in useful. Delving into the Minev, Bucharest 1978); position, I realised that there was altogether nothing for the rook to do on b1 . Moreover, I 18... .l:!.d6 (the b7-pawn is indirectly de fended) 19 h4 h6 20 .l:!.e4 b6 21 il...h3 Wf? 22 came to the conclusion that White's main J:!.c1 (22 e3 l:tc8 23 g4 g5! also leads to objective now was the activation of his equality, as in the afore-mentioned Beliavs knight, for which I made a concrete plan. ky-lllescas game) 22 ....U.e8 23 e3 l:te7 24 Let's ponder over this together and try to i.f1 lt:Ja5!, and Black does not experience decide - what plan? any difficulties(Ornste in-Schneider, Copen (see diagram) hagen 1981 ). Incidentally, in the Encyclopaedia of Chess It is clear that the only square via which the Openings, none other than Garry Kasparov knight can come into play, without fear of judged the given opening variation to be being exchanged, is d2. But how can I take sufficientfor equality. control of it? That's right, by defending it with 164 � Preparation for a Game 25 .l:!.f4! Creating the tactical threat of 26 J:txc6 �c6 27 tt:Je5+, while if 25 ...'it>g8 , then 26 4Jd2! followed by tt:Je4is very strong. 25 . . . 'it>g6 26 g4! It transpires that if 26 ...tt:Je5 there is the unpleasant reply 27 g5, for example: 27 ...hxg5 (it is better to play immediately 27 ...lt:Jd3 28 h5+! 'it>f729 gxf6 tt:Jxf4+30 exf4 gxf6) 28 hxg5 lt:Jd3 29 gxf6 tt:Jxf4+ 30 exf4, and if 30 ...gxf6 31 f5+! with an overwhelm - position after22 .. J:te8- ing advantage. The simple 27 tt:Jxe5+ �xe5 28 l:tf8is also strong - the black king is in an a rook. So that the first stage of the plan is anxious position. clear - the manoeuvre of the rook from f1 to 26 ... �a1 c2. And when the knight arrives on c4, not The only move. only do concrete threats appear, but it also 27 .Uc1 il.b2 becomes possible to advance the kingside pawns, f2-f4 for example - a good way of 28 .l::i.c2 il.a1 improving the position. The repetition of moves has allowed me to I think that already here one can draw gain time for thought. For the moment I conclusions about Spraggett's preparations could not see any decisive strengthening of for the game with me, and my preparations the position: to 29 h5+ 'it>h7 30 g5 Black for the game ... with lllescas. Black has no replies 30 ...g6 , and if 29 .l:!.fc4?!, then simply prospects, whereas White has obtained the 29 ...tt:Je 5. Therefore I decided to make a sort of position that he wanted - he has a neutral move (at the same time slightly slight but enduring advantage, and a plan for strengthening my position), inviting the strengthening his game. opponent to guess what in fact White was contemplating. I have to admit that during the game I rather forgot my previous analysis. But unexpect 29 a4! edly this proved opportune: at the board the It is not easy for Black to defend, especially need arose to think seriously about the when short of time, as Spraggett was. position, as though to evaluate with a fresh 29 ... tt:Je5?! glance, and calculate the variations anew. 30 tt:Jxe5+ �xeS So that even the opponent's somewhat 31 �f8! unexpected choice of opening proved to be a factor in my favour. In this version, a position with opposite 23 �c1 .l::i.e7 colour bishops suited me fine. Here it is obvious that the black king will come under 24 .l:!.c2 b6? a mating attack. An imperceptible, but significant mistake - 31 . . . .Udd7 Spraggett weakens the position of his knight. White immediately exploits this fac 31 ...'it>h7 was more tenacious. tor. 32 f4 Preparation for a Game lLJ 165 A strong reply. Now 32... i.e?? is bad on game - I managed to win this important account of the decisive breakthrough 33 fS+ encounter. An instance which once again exf5 34 gxf5+ 'it>h7 35 f6!. reminds us that serious analytical work is 32 ... l:tc7 never wasted - of course, if the results are 33 l:td2 i.c3 recorded, comprehended, and lodged in your memory.As a rule, in chess, work done 34 l:!d6 'it>h7 for future use sooner or later (it may even be 35 g5 hxg5 many years after) justifies itself. 36 hxg5 i.b4 I must once again emphasise that, in my view, the main preparatory work should be carried out beforehand. Not at competitions, but between them! I remember a conversa tion with Korchnoi at the Tilburg tournament of 1987. Complaining about his not very successful play, Victor Lvovich said that, un fortunately, he had not had time to prepare properly for the tournament and had arrived at it without any fresh ideas. This had upset him. Indeed, before an important event it is very importantto have something in mind, to produce a definite reserve of new ideas - without this it is hard to count on success. 37 .:tdd8?! Young, not too skilful players, sometimes try Unfortunately, I did not notice a spectacular to build their preparations on the study of blow, which would have concluded the less explored, so to speak, side variations. game immediately: 37 g6+! 'it>h6 (37 ...'it>xg6 In principle, this is normal for a player who 38 i.fS+) 38 i.fS!. has not yet acquired a broad opening 37 . . . 'it>g6 repertoire, who on account of his youth has simply not had time to assimilate the If 37 ... g6 the most energetic is 38 J:Ih8+'it>g7 39 l:.h6 with the terrible threat of 40 .l:.dh8. avalanche of theory which currently engulfs the professional player. However, there is no 38 'it>f3 l:tf7 point in transforming the avoidance of 39 l:th8 e5 theoretical continuations into an end in 40 i.g4 itself, by deliberately choosing not the best Of course, 40 i.e6 would have won the lines, and basing your play on various types exchange, but White wants to weave a of 'crooked', trappy moves - such strategy is mating net. And he succeeds in doing this. incorrect. 40 ... exf4 What course, then, is the most advisable? 41 .l:td5! fxe3+ My position is simple: in the opening you 42 'it>g3 should aim to make objectively the best Black resigned. moves, even if in your preparations this demands a significantly greater volume of This is how, in a rather strange way - thanks work and a more detailed analysis. And in to preparation for an altogether different any case, that which you play must be 166 � Preparation for a Game thoroughly studied, and you should sense of mistakes by him is sharply increased. all the nuances. Remember, for example, Gata Kamsky's failure at the Linares tournament of 1991. It Summing up what has been said, let us is largely explained by the fact that his formulate the two main principles for the opponents quickly discovered defects in his choice of opening when preparing for a opening repertoire, and they easily dragged specific opponent. Kamsky into positions which were unfamiliar to him (simply on account of his youth and The first. Yo u should proceed from your lack of experience). Right through the own possibilities, i.e. aim to obtain a tournament he suffered terribly, especially position which you yourself know well as Black, with which he lost all his games! and which corresponds to your chess tastes and style of play. Since, if you have As a 'positive' example I will describe my a leaning towards positional actions, and as game with the English grandmaster Jonathan a result of your preparation you obtain Speelman from the same tournament. I will gambit play with wild complications, you risk not show it on the board, but will simply seeing your hopes dashed, despite the most inform you of the problems which I encoun conscientious preparatory work. Therefore tered in my preparations. experienced grandmasters sometimes re This was the game from the first round, and ject even promising continuations, if they do it can happen that your mood for the entire not correspond with their style. It is hard, event will depend on its result! I had White, you will agree, to expect from Garry Kasparov and the opponent's opening repertoire was that, even playing Black, he will go in for a not a secret to me. I wasn't worried about passive position. It is simply not in his the Queen's Gambit, although, of course, nature! See how he played in his matches just in case I had a specific variation pre against Anatoly Karpov: deliberately avoid pared. Looking at Speelman's recent games, ing passive positions, he preferred to give I came to the conclusion that the probability up a pawn and make a draw in a compli of him employing the Slav Defence was also cated struggle, rather that, without sacrific not very great. Therefore for it too I did not ing anything, make the same draw by particularly prepare, especially as I had accurate, defensive play. And by contrast, something in reserve. see how Karpov prepared. You will see that But I had to reckon with the fact that Speel in the opening he did everything possible to man, a player with a fighting and original avoid unnecessary complications, and went style, might well answer 1 d4 with 1 . ..d6 - it in for them only when he was sure that he has to be said that he has a good feeling for had prepared a genuinely powerful, promis Pirc Defence-type positions and he quite ing continuation, when such an evaluation often plays them. Even so, I will not hide the was supported by deep analysis. fact that initially I was tempted to play this. Thus, the main objective of your preparation But then I rejected this idea, since here I had is to obtain a game which is comfortable for nothing prepared. I decided not to embark you. on a critical theoretical dispute, preferring to The second objective is perhaps more save effort on preparation. subtle - try to lure the opponent into And suddenly an idea occurred to me, how positions which are least in keeping with even in this case I might drag Speelman into his style, and do not correspond to his 'my' type of position. After 1 d4 d6 I should chess tastes. In this case the probability play 2 g3!. You will ask, what is the Preparation for a Game ltJ 167 advantage of this move order, compared, may be provided by my game with Kasparov say with 2 lt:Jf3 ? The subtle point is that in from the same tournament in Linares. Here reply to 2 lt:Jf3the English grandmaster often what told was mainly the factor of surprise. employs the system 2 ...lt:Jf6 3 c4 .l1.g4. But Kasparov did not expect that I would choose by playing 2 g3, I sharply weaken the the Dutch Defence (Leningrad Variation). strength of the bishop move to g4, since I And when I replied to 1 c4 with 1 ...f5 , for a succeed in supporting the knight with the moment he became flustered. I saw that my bishop from g2, which would hardly appeal reply was unpleasant for him, and that he to Speelman. Of course, this move order had obviously not anticipated it in his might lead to a normal King's Indian with the preparations. As a result, Kasparov spent move g2-g3, but this did not bother me - more time than me on the opening, but even this variation was part of my opening this was not the main thing: speaking in repertoire. tennis language, his well-developed first As you see, I was helped in my manoeuvrings serve did not go in, and he had to use his by the fact that I had a choice of different second, less powerful one. I soon managed systems against the King's Indian Defence. to seize the initiative. And yet a win in this If I had employed, for example, only the last round game would have been so Samisch Variation, it would have been far important for him! harder to avoid Speelman's intricate prepa Of course, it is no bad thing to spring a rations. Thus after 1 d4 d6 2 c4 he could surprise in the opening. However, I don't have replied 2 ...g6 , managing without ...tt:Jf6. recommend that for this you employ a I would also have had to analyse this ... As it variation that you are playing for the first was, with the one move 2 g3 all the time in your life. It is extremely dangerous to preparation was practically completed! bluff, especially against a skilled opponent. In the game after 1 d4 d6 2 g3 we In principle, it is possible to give numerous transposed into a King's Indian Defence, a pieces of advice about preparation. There position which was well familiar to me was are as many opinions as there are people! reached , and as a result I was able to Every top player has his own prescriptions, achieve the more pleasant game. I was often an entire system of preparation. For quite satisfied with the outcome of the example, I can mention the so-called 'Capa opening. blanca rule'. It is very sensible and useful. It goes without saying that such preparation Capablanca said that for a tournament he is very economical. But, in my view, immedi usually prepared one opening each for ate preparations should as far as possible White and for Black (in the latter case, be economical and rational, because exces apparently, one each against 1 d4 and 1 e4 ). sive expenditure of energy immediately How did he justify such an approach? By the before a game may, as I have already said, fact that if in his set-up there were some boomerang during play. This is why you defects, the opponent, who in a tournament should be able to vary your play in the did not have a great deal of spare time, opening. Firstly, this increases your chances would be unlikely to discover them. And of luring the opponent into a position that is indeed, if you have been struggling with a uncomfortable for him, and secondly, it variation, say, for a week and have not found becomes more difficult to prepare for a a refutation, why, you may ask, should the game with you. opponent be able to find one in the two Another example of successful preparation hours before a game? 168 � Preparation for a Game Thus preparation for a tournament begins The most striking representative of this long before it starts. This enables you to tendency, which, incidentally, to some ex save strength during the event, and eases tent resembles the afore-mentioned 'Capa the choice of opening for a specific oppo blanca rule', was, as is well known, the great nent. As I have already said, the ideal Akiba Rubinstein. version is when you don't need to analyse Such an approach is not flexible, but it is anything at all, but merely to refresh your economical. And, of course, in this case you home preparations in your memory. Of have to know your openings thoroughly! course, like any ideal, it is unattainable, but Otherwisethe opponent, aftereasily reckon you should aim for it! ing what opening will occur, will confuse you If you are nevertheless obliged to work with some prepared surprise. The creation immediately before a game, approach the of a brilliantly-developed, practically irre preparation rationally. Don't endeavour to proachable opening repertoire is, naturally, refute without fail the opponent's set-up - something that is within the capabilities of sometimes it makes sense to avoid it. Don't only a very experienced player. But even for get involved in a theoretical discussion in a young players such a course is not at all line where you feel that the opponent is well appropriate: you can expand your arsenal prepared. Only if you sense some serious gradually, analysing one variation after defect in a variation chosen by him (remem another, instead of aiming straight away to ber the 'Nogueiras variation'), can you not employ all the openings. spare any effort in search of a concrete I should like to mention one more 'opening refutation. device', although it relates more to the field It is very important to be able to guess the of chess psychology. I have in mind the opponent's actions: how he will prepare, camouflaging of your intentions. Imagine what he will chose, what he will expect from that you have guessed right with the choice you. Without this it is hardly possible to of opening variation and the opponent has arrange your preparation correctly. Endeav fallen into your trap. Nevertheless you don't our to understand who you are dealing with: let on that you have caught him in your whether it is a player who is combinative or variation, but, on the contrary, you do positional, bold or cautious, dogmatic or everything possible to conceal this from experimental. .. For example, if you know him, so that he does not sense the danger in that the opponent handles endings badly, is time. Incidentally, this is how Kasparov and it worth trying to devise something in the Karpov act. And often, despite the fact that opening? Isn't it simpler to find a variation both the position and the entire subsequent which leads directly to the endgame? play are well known to them, they continue However, if your own opening arsenal is to think for a long time over their moves. limited, even the most correct compiling of I should like to warn against becoming the opponent's creative portrait will not carried away by such devices. In principle enable you to exploit his weak points. In this they are possible, but in very moderate, so case you effectively have no choice. Play to speak, medicinal doses. In other words, that which you know well, i.e. not against a camouflaging is one thing, but don't waste specific opponent, but as though against his too much time - this is not without its pieces (remember the title of the collection dangers. Firstly, during the course of the of best games by the Yugoslav grandmaster game unforeseen problems may arise; Svetozar Gligoric: I play against Pieces?). secondly, time may be needed for the Preparation for a Game ctJ 169 conversion of an advantage. Therefore I example, as you will remember, in my game would advise you to act differently: if you with Nogueiras I did not follow my last know how to play in the resulting position, recommendation of quickly making the and it has been thoroughly studied by you at previously prepared moves. In fact here home, then make the moves quickly! In this there is no contradiction. Chess is not an way you will create additional psychological arithmetic game, it is by no means unam pressure on your opponent. After all, he will biguous, and the employment of a particular realise that he has been caught in a rule sometimes depends on the most minute variation, he will no longer be so certain in nuances in the situation. Don't try to work his actions, and this will give you a serious out for yourself a strict set of instructions for psychological initiative. And it is for the all eventualities in life - it is more important seizure of the initiative - both purely chess, simply to know various approaches to the and psychological - that we should aim solving of the problems arising. And the when playing the opening. choice of a particular approach will often be At first sight some of my pieces of advice purely subjective, depending on the style may seem to contradict one another. For and tastes of the player. 170 � Yuri Razuvaev Yo u were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! Everything returns to its own circles. It is only these circles that turn. Andrey Voznesensky ven so, the chess childhood of our the character of an epidemic; we have Egeneration (to say nothing of those who laboured mightily, digging over masses of are a little older) was a happy one. The era chess earth. The initial position, so frighten of lnformator and EGO (in this form the ing a hundred years ago, has lost its Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings sounds innocent mystery, and in all the openings more frightening) came later. We didn't (classical, or those which were once irregu know about opening indexes, we didn't lar) reliable paths have been not only laid, waste hours recording games, our hands but also thoroughly trampled down. What is weren't covered in dried glue, and our meant by opening theory? It seemed that scissors did not cut up the innumerable this was the method of play in the initial bulletins of transient tournaments. The front position. But how everything has changed of the so-called information boom had not now. Now we choose some position after, yet arrived, and the language of essential say, eighteen moves - and start from there! symbols was pleasantly sparse and under standable to anyone. Nowadays, on open ing a copy of lnformator, even an experi enced professional initially has to anxiously skim through the incomplete (for the mo ment!), but furiously increasing page of the new Esperanto. At that time chess books could simply be read (hardly any reference books on the openings were published). True, far fewer books were published, but I agree with the opinion that in childhood it is more important to have only one book, but a good one and a favourite one. Therefore it was not difficult for us to satisfy our needs. And to obtain a book, you could simply go into a shop and buy it. For the uninitiated, I will describe how this But everything changes, including chess. tabiya arises. The avalanche of information engulfing us 1 e4 c5 2 l2lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l2\xd4 l2lf65 today is accompanied by an intensive, total l2\c3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 't1Vb6 8't1Vd2 �xb2 9 study of the opening. During the past twenty .Ub1 'ii'a3 10 f5 l2\c6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 tt'lxc6 years the investigative surge has acquired bxc6 13 e5 dxe5 14 .iLxf6 gxf615 l2\e4il.. e7 You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! ttJ 171 16 ..lte2 h5 17 I1b3'it'a4 18lbxf6+ ..ltxf6 19 been established: 1)the old Italian School (a c4 glorious time: pawns were sacrificed as But surely this isn't all forced? - the reader though they were of no consequence); 2) will exclaim, trying to suppress a mixed Fran9ois-Andre Philidor (affirmation of the feeling of surprise and mild panic. basics of the positional school, the first Calm down, of course it isn't. But chess also attempt at a harmonious view on chess has its fashions- this is one thing. Secondly, etc.). it is easier to analyse this position than the There's no denying that these books were initial one. However, it has to be admitted diligently and well written, but, as a rule, that in some places we have delved so unfeeling paper has turned everything into deeply, that we no longer remember the an assertion of dogmas, and for ever initial aims and directions. But we remember excluded us from active searching. I, for that 'there is no striving more natural than example, am still tormented by the origin of the striving for knowledge'. the Steinitz Gambit (1 e4 e5 2 tt'lc3 tt'lc6 3 f4 Sergey Makarychev once told me about a exf4 4 d4). From certain authors I read with visit to Tunis. Shortly before his departure astonishment that the creator of this stag he dropped in at a chess club, and in one of geringly bold and imaginative idea is re the rooms he came across a group of garded as a dogmatist. However, if the juniors, absorbed in an analysis of intricate experiments of Wilhelm Steinitz so stagger branches of the Chelyabinsk Variation (this us today, how they must have shocked the was at the time when this paradoxical contemporaries of the first world champion. system was beginning to 'blossom'). Calling A worthy response to the birth of the new in two days later at a chess club in Tunis, gambit was made by the Homer of chess - Sergey was considerably staggered to see Sam Loyd. See what a problem he created an equally enchanting picture, moreover - in connection with this. who would have thought it! - the positions on the boards were remarkably similar. Yes, when in the not too distant future powerful computers finally become involved, we will become witnesses to (and participants in) events far more vivid than those brilliantly depicted in the prophetic speech by Ostap Bender in Vasyuki. Moreover, one cannot help noticing that the further you go into the forest, the less generalisations there are. Of course, chess ideas (like any others) have a great magical attraction, but sometimes it is useful to stop and look around. Enormous experience has helped mankind to accurately establish that 'a thousand ways lead to fallacy, but only The solution is amazingly beautiful: 1 'it>e2!! one to the truth'. And the history of chess (if it were possible, I would add another ideas eloquently speaks of the dialectics of couple of exclamation marks from myself) chess theory. 1 ...f1'iV + 2 'it>e3. In literature a customary scheme has long Or the birth of the Alekhine Defence. How 172 � You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! was it that the great maestro, who so valued edition of his famous treatise The Noble time in chess and for a couple of tempi was Game of Chess ( 1745) pointed out the pos capable of any sacrifice, could believe in the sibility of 3 ...e5!? . Highly important in the paradoxical 1 e4 tiJf6 ? history of the 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e3 e5 In general, it is time to say that the develop variation were the La Bourdonnais-McDon ment of chess ideas more resembles a wild nell matches. Sadly, all that most of us vine than a conifer. Before our eyes open remember of this wonderful duel is the final ings are born, sink into oblivion, and then position from the 16th game of the fourth are revived anew. match. This position is as old as chess itself (1 d4 In their matches the afore-mentioned varia d5 2 c4). At any event, it features in the tion occurred frequently, always with La Gottingen manuscript (late 15th century) Bourdonnais playing White, and McDonnell and in Damiano's book (151 2). The first correspondingly playing Black. Unfortunately, books give the variation 2 ...dxc4 3 e4 b5 4 the author of these lines does not possess a4 c6 5 axb5 cxb5 6 b3. Ruy Lopez any works by the participantsin the matches, (according to tradition - the first major but he has read with great interest the opening theoretician) in 1561 in his treatise comments of Mikhail lvanovich Chigorin, Libro de Ia invenci6n liberal y arte del juego who called the games between La Bour del Axedrez refined the move order: 5 b3 donnais and McDonnell 'brilliant inspirations and if 5 ...cxb3 6 axb3 with advantage to of the past' . We will pick out the most White. More than forty years later, Salvia, interesting of them. who glorified Leonardo da Cutri in his romance II Puttino, altramente detto if La Bourdonnais - McDonnell cava/iero e"ante, pointed out an attractive 6th game of the second match trap which is familiar to us all: 2 ...dxc4 3 e3 Queen's Gambit b5 4 a4 c6 5 axb5 cxb5 6 1i'f3. 1 d4 d5 In fact the gambit proved to be hypothetical, and Black set about seeking counterplay. 2c4 dxc4 The Syrian player Phillip Stamma, the 3 e3 e5 inventor of algebraic notation, in the second 4 i..xc4 exd4 You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! ttJ 173 5exd4 lbf6 17 lbg6+ 'iitg8 6lbc3 !IL.e7 18 !IL.b3+ lbbd5 Here Chigorin makes an interesting com 19 lbxd5 ment: 'La Bourdonnais acknowledges 6 ... Very pretty - if 19 ...lbxh5 20 lbde7 mate. i..d6 to be better than the move in the 19 ... cxd5 present game. ' Since the theory of the 20 !IL.xd5+ lbxd5 3 ...e5 variation was poorly developed, La Bourdonnais' evaluation, speaking in edito 21 'ii'xd5+ .:tf7 rial language, deserves consideration. 22 lbe5 !IL.e6 7lbf3 0-0 23 'ii'xe6 !IL.xe5 8 0-0 24 dxe5 fxe3 In the first match 8 !IL.e3 occurred, but the 25 l:txe3 move played here looks more natural. and White won. 8... c6 Here again there is an interesting comment The following game gives food for thought by Chigorin: 'This method was suggested by its authentic uniqueness makes a modern Philidor, but La Bourdonnais considers it and genuinely brilliant impression. bad. ' But what does modern theory say? Unfortunately, during the intervening 150 years it has not proved possible to give an La Bourdonnais - McDonnell exact reply. It can only be mentioned that 15th game of the first match until recently they believed Philidor. Now Queen's Gambit they have doubts. 1 d4 d5 9 h3 lbbd7 2c4 dxc4 10 !IL.e3 lbb6 3e3 e5 11 !IL.b3 lbfd5 4 !IL.xc4 exd4 Modern-day players more often play as 5exd4 lbf6 Steinitz did - 11 ...lbbd5. 6lbc3 !IL.e7 12 'ii'e2 7lbf3 0-0 The 17th game of the first match went 12 a4 8 h3 c6 a5 13 lbe5 !IL.e6 14 !IL.c2 f5? 15 'iWe2 f4 16 .id2 'ii'e8 17 .Uae1 !IL.f7 18 'ike4 g6 19 .ixf4! lbxf4 20 'ii'xf4 !IL.c421 'ii'h6 !IL.xf1 22 .ixg6! hxg6 23 lbxg6 lbc8 24 'ii'h8+ ctm 25 'i'h7+�6 26 lbf4 !IL.d327 l:te6+'ot>g5 28 i'h6+'iit f5 29 g4 mate. 12 . . . 'iii'h8 13 l:tae1 !IL.d6 14 !IL.c2 f5? Constancy in delusions is customarily called obstinacy. 15 lbe5 f4? 16 'ii'h5 lbf6 174 � You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! 9 .te3 .tf5 La Bourdonnais - McDonnell 10 g4!? 7th game of the third match Such play demands not only accuracy, but Queen's Gambit also inspiration: the centre is open, Black is 1 d4 d5 guaranteed counterplay, and therefore the 2 c4 dxc4 outcome will be decided in a direct battle. 3 e3 e5 10 ... .tg6 4.txc4 exd4 11 lbe5! lbbd7 5exd4 lbf6 12lbxg6 hxg6 6lbc3 13 h4! lbb6 14 .tb3 lbfd5 15 h5 lbxe3 16 fxe3 .th4+ 17 �d2 gxh5 18 'ili'f3 .tg5 19 l:taf1 !! The reader wishing to read detailed com ments on the game can find them in Yakov Neishtadt's splendid book Nekoronovannye chempiony (The uncrowned champions). I should add that every move of La Bour donnais is imbued with energy and strength. 19 ... ifxd4+ 6 ... .td6 20 �c2 iff6 As has already been mentioned earlier, it 21 l:txh5 iVg6+ was this move that La Bourdonnais consid Even the exchange of queens would not ered best. have saved Black - 21 ...iVxf3 22 �xf3 .te7 7lbf3 0-0 23 .l:!.hf5.tf6 24 g5 .txc325 bxc3 lbd526 e4 8 h3 .l:!.e8+ etc. After 21 ...g6 Chigorin gives the follow 9 .te3 .tf4 ing variation: 22 iVh3 gxh5 (if 22 ...iVe5 23 A rash move. 'Don't cut everything that .l::!.f5) 23 .l:!.xf6 .txf6 24 'it'xh5, and Black has grows', Kozma Prutkov severely warns. no defence against g5--g6. 10 'ii'd2 '*'e7 22 e4 lbd5 11 0-0 .txe3 23 .l::!.fh1 .th6 12 fxe3 it'xe3+ 24 g5! f5 13 'it'xe3 .:txe3 25 lbxd5 cxd5 14lbe5! 26 .txd5+ �h7 And here is the retribution. We see that even 27 .l:!.xh6+ �xh6 150 years ago one could be caught in home 28 gxh6 preparation. Black resigned. 14 ... .te6 You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! ltJ 175 15 .txe6 fxe6 variation: 1 e4 e5 2 ltJf3 ltJf6 3 ltJxe5 d6 4 16 Wf2 l:txe5 ltJf3 ltJxe45 d4 d5 6 .td3.te7 7 0-0 ltJc6 8 17 dxe5 .l:!.e1 .tg49 c4 ltJf6 10 cxd5 ltJxd5 11 ltJc3 0-0 12 .te4.te6 . etc. Several years of tests, and the evaluation The La Bourdonnais-McDonnell matches arrow moved from ( = ) to (± ). It transpired demonstrated the attacking possibilities for that, with the e-file open, it was not easy for White after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e3 e5. The Black to defend. An echo of these changes position arising after the emergence from was provided by games, played in the the opening was characterised by Chigorin Queen's Gambit Accepted. as follows: 'A t the given moment the position of Black's game is very similar to the Timman - Panno position which occurred in Zukertort's and Mar del Plata 1982 Lasker's games with Steinitz. The only Queen's Gambit different is that in the present game Black 1 d4 d5 has a pawn on c6, and not one on e6. But 2 c4 dxc4 the plan of defence is the same, both with McDonnell, and with Steinitz. ' 3ltJc3 e5 After theLa Bourdonnais-McDonnell matches 4e3 exd4 the variation sank into oblivion and practi 5exd4 ltJf6 cally went out of use. Somewhere in the first 6 .txc4 ii.e7 quarter of the 20th century they came to the 7ltJf3 0-0 conclusion that it is better for White to play 8 h3 ltJbd7 against a pawn on e6, rather than on c6. 9 0-0 ltJb6 Why did they decide this? The author has to frankly admit that he has not dug as deeply 10 ii..b3 c6 as this; moreover, it seems to me that they 11 lte1 ltJfd5 simply decided, and that was it. Later, as often happens, virtually only 3 ltJf3 was played (in extreme cases 3 e4 ), and in notes for the ill-informed it was stated that 3 e3 was weaker because of the counter-stroke 3 ... e5. Of course, there were a few doubt ers, but no one paid any attention to them. In 1965 a book by Neishtadt on the Queen's Gambit Accepted was published. The vener able theoretician wrote: '3 ltJf3is correct, not allowing ...e7-e5 - book authors unani mously assert. However, the strength of the ...e7-e5 counter-stroke should not be over estimated.' As often happens, help arrived from another side. In the mid-1970s there began a surge A familiar position. Note Jan Timman's next in the popularity of the Petroff Defence. A move: Black has moved his knight away serious analysis was made of the following from the kingside, and White immediately 176 c;i? You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! directs his second knight closer to the black 39 'it'c5+ 'it>g7 monarch. 40 l:!.e7 'it>xf6 12 lt:Je4 �e8 41 'ife5 mate 13 ..ltd2 ..ltf5 The conclusion to this excellent game is 14 lt:Jg3 ..lte6 steeped in the traditions of the 19th century. 15 ..ltc2 lt:Jd7 16 a3 li:Jf8 In the following example White was not able to exploit the advantages of his position, but 17 ..ltd3 g6?! his method of play in the opening is In Timman's opinion, 17 .. .f6 followed by undoubtedly of interest. ....Itt? was better, but even in this case the initiative is with White. Browne - Petrosian 18 ..lth6 lt:Jf6 Las Palmas 1982 19 'ifd2 ..ltd5 Queen's Gambit 20 lt:Je5 lt:Je6 1 d4 d5 21 ..ltc2 lt:Jd7 2 c4 dxc4 22 lt:Jg4 ..ltg5 3lt:Jc3 e5 23 ..ltxg5 'ifxg5 4e3 exd4 24 'ifb4 li:Jf6! 5exd4 lt:Jf6 25 l:!.e5 'ifh4 6 ..ltxc4 11..e7 26 lt:Jxf6+ 'ii'xf6 7lt:Jf3 0-0 27 lt:Je4 'it'd8 8 0-0 li:Jbd7 Typical of this type of position: Black An interesting moment. The American grand defends well, but he is unable to completely master does not waste time on prophylaxis extinguish White's initiative. With his last (8 h3), and Tigran Petrosian does not play move Oscar Panno missed an opportunity 8 .....1tg4 - apparently, both are right. to simplify the position by 27 .....1txe4 28 �e4 .l:!.e7. 9 1i..b3 lt:Jb6 28 ..ltb3! a5 10 .l::!.e1 c6 29 'it'c3 ..ltxb3 11 1i..g5 li:Jbd5 30 't!Vxb3 1i'xd4 Petrosian judges this position to favour White. 31 li:Jf6+ 'it>h8 12li:Jxd5 cxd5 32 I:lae1 .l:!.eb8?! 13lt:Je5 11..e6 33 I:l1e4 'ifd8 14 li:Jd3! 34 llxe6! fxe6 35 1i'c3 'ife7 (see diagram) If 35 .. .'il*'f8 Timman gives the spectacular A subtle manoeuvre. White rapidly expands finish 36 lt:Jxh7+! 'l.t>xh7 37 I:lh4+ 'ir'h6 38 his possibilities, whereas Black is left with 'ikf6!. an unpleasant choice of technically difficult 36 lt:Jh5+ \t>g8 endings. 37 �xe6 'ir'f7 14 . . . lt:Je4 38 lt:Jf6+ 'it>f8 15 11..xe7 'ir'xe7 You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! 177 5exd4 tt'lf6 6tt'lf3 i.e7 7 0-0 0-0 8 h3 tt'lbd7 9tt'lc3 tt'lb6 10 i.b3 tt'lbd5 Following Philidor and Steinitz! 11 :e1 c6 12 i.g5 i.e6 13tt'le5 tt'lc7 The precarious placing of the black pieces - position after 14 ltJd3 - on the e-file begins to tell. For example, 13... 'it'a 5 14 tt'lxf7! i.xf7 15 tt'lxd5tt'lxd 5 16 i.xe7 or 14... �xf7 15 'it'e2! (pointed out by 16 f3 tt'lf6 Lev Psakhis, but 15 i.xf6 is also good), and 17 tt'lc5 l:tac8 'it is hard to offer Black any good advice', 18 .:te3 .:r.c6 which in the language of symbols looks like this: (+-). 19 'ilfd2 b6 20 tt'lxe6 l:txe6 [The accurate reply 14... ltJxc3! cast s doubts on the combination: 15 bxc3 (15tt'lh6+�hB 21 .:.ae1 l:txe3 16bxc3 i.xb3 17'iixb3 Wxg5 18tt'lf7+ 'i:.xf7 22 'ilfxe3 'ii'b4 19 Wxf7 tt'ld5) 15... i.xf7 16 .l::txe7 Wxg5 - 23 'it'c3! 'iid6 Dvoretsky.] 24 l:te5 h6 14 i.c2 .:tea 25 'itf2?! 15 'ifd3 g6 Here Walter Browne began his usual 'time 16 'ii'f3 tt'lfd5 trouble race', and on the 41st move the 17 i.xe7 'ilfxe7 game ended in a draw. As was shown by 18 Wg3 .l:.ad8 Petrosian, instead of the move in the game, 25 g4 followed by �g2, h2-h4 and g4-g5 19 .:.ad1 tt'lf6 was very strong, with advantage to White. 20 f4! tt'lh5 21 'it'f2 f5 Dear reader, have you ever seen an article There is no other defence against f4-f5 . without a brilliant example by the author? 'A ridiculous question', you will say. I agree. 22 g4 tt'lg7 23 gxf5 gxf5 Razuvaev - Bagirov If 23 ...tt'lxf5 White has the good reply 24 Yaroslavl 1982 i.xf5 gxf5 25 �h2 �h8 26 d5 tt'lxd5 27 Queen's Gambit tt'lxd5.l:.x d5 28 llxd5 cxd5 29 'ilfd4Wg 7 30 1 d4 d5 llg 1 (+-). 2 c4 dxc4 24 �h2 �h8 3 e3 e5 25 l:tg1 i.d5 4i.xc4 exd4 26 l:tg5 and Wh4 was threatened. 178 You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! 26 l'Llxd5 cxd5 Such moves are easy to find and pleasant to make. 34 ... l:!.xe8 35 'ifxd5+ Black resigned. Our excursion has come to an end, and the unpleasant, responsible moment for sum ming up has arrived. We often argue about the strongest move in various positions but, thank God, at present we all play diffe rently. It seems to me that in the opening you can fantasise a little, and endeavour to find yourself (or someone else's position which is the most comfortable for you). In this question I am all for subjectivity. 27 Itg6! l'Lle6 So, you were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! After 27 ... 1 d4 lDf6 2 c4 e6 3 lDc3 ll.b44 'ii'b3 c5 5 is skilled in subtle piece play, is highly suited dxc5 lDc6 6 lDf3 lDe4 7 ll.d2lDxc5 8 'i!kc2 to positions from our theme. 0-0 9 a3 ll.xc3 10 ll.xc3 a5 11 g3 'ife7 12 .tg2 e5 13 0-0 a4 Vaganian - Hubner Tilburg 1983 Queen's Gambit 1 d4 d5 2c4 dxc4 3 lDc3 e5 4 e3 exd4 5exd4 ltjf6 6ll.xc4 ll.e7 7 lDf3 0-0 8 0-0 lDbd7 The attempt to simplify by 8 ...ll.g4 gave White the advantage after 9 h3 ll.xf3 10 'ifxf3 lDc6 11 ll.e3 ltJxd4 12 'ifxb7 c5 13 ll.xd4 cxd4 14 l:1ad1 l:tc8 15 b3 l:!c7 16 'iff3 Under the diagram I read: 'White has the two l:.d7 17 lDe2in the game Zaichik-Karpeshov bishops and a solid position. Black in (Volgodonsk 1983). compensation has a strongly posted knight at c5. All things considered, the position 9 l:.e1 lDb6 seems to be slightly fa vourable to Wh ite, 10 ll.b3 c6 th ough probably not fa vourable enough to 11 ll.g5 ll.g4 win. This variation is taken from a game Carelessness, bordering on frivolousness. Stahlberg-Nimzowitsch, won by Wh ite. Without his light-square bishop it will be very Since Nimzowitsch has specialised in difficult for Black to 'suppress' the bishop on this kind of defence, it must be assumed b3. that there is nothing better fo r Black in 12 'ili'd3 ll.xf3 this variation ... ' After 12... ll.h5, as recommended by certain How unfortunate! After all, we are talking commentators, 13 lDe5 is very unpleasant. about one of the most correct of modern 13 'ifxf3 lDfd5 openings - the Nimzo-lndian Defence. It has to be admitted that in the evaluation of 14ll.xe7 opening ideas even geniuses can be mis The position is full of temptations and taken. And since that time, when I write mirages. 14 ltxe7 lDxe7 15 .l:!.e1 looks very opening articles and books, I invariably have appealing, but Vaganian gives a brilliant a feeling of impending doom. But on this refutation: 15... lDbc 8 16 'ife2.l:;le8 17 ll.xf7+ occasion I was lucky, and during the c;fo>xf7 18 'ili'e6+ 'iti>t8 19 .l:te3 liJd6 20 l:!.f3+ intervening seven years the evaluations lDef5! 21 l:txf5+ lDxf5 22 ..Wxf5+ ii'f6!!, and made in the article have remained in force. White loses because of the lack of an escape square fo r his king. In conclusion I have pleasure in offering to the reader another interesting example. The 14 . . . lDxe7 easy, elegant style of Rafael Vaganian, who 15.l:te5! 180 � You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais! A subtle technique: White does not allow the 19 ttJe4 'ir'c7 black knight to go to d5, and this significantly 20 ttJd6 was threatened. From this moment strengthens the pressure of the bishop on White begins to dictate matters. b3. 20 h4! h6 15 ... ttJg6 The h-pawn was taboo: 20 ...ttJxh4 21 'i'h5 16 .U.e4 ttJd7 ltJg6 22 �h3 h6 23 'ir'xg6! (indicated by 17 l:.d1 ika5 Va ganian). Black stops half-way. The place for the black 21 'ii'g4 'ifi>h8 knight is at f6 . Although even in this case 22 h5 ltJf4 after the preparatory 18 .U.e3 White plays d4-d5, and the superiority of the bishop 22 ...ii'f4 23 ikxf4 ttJxf4 24 tiJd6! was no over the knight will be appreciable. better. 18 l:!.e3 l:.ad8? 23 l:.g3 g5 Black misses the last opportunity to play 24 hxg6 fxg6 ...ttJf6. Now White succeeds in including his 25 l:te1 knight in the attack, after which Black will be The movements of the white pieces are unable to hold the position. uncommonly harmonious and natural. In such situations one has to sense the melody, and then the moves suggest them selves. 25 ... .U.de8 26 .l:!.ge3 ttJb6 27 ttJc5 'ir'c8 An oversight, which hastens the end. 28 'ir'xf4! Black resigned. tLJ 181 PA RT Ill Boris Zlotnik How do Opening Novelties originate? A striving for the new is the first demand of human imagination. Stendhal efining in aphoristic fo rm the specific We will begin with novelties from the fi rst D nature of the three stages of the chess group, which even today, despite the gen game, Rudolf Spielmann once wrote: 'In the eral information boom, still occur quite often. opening a chess player is a book, in the middlegame a creator, and in the endgame Zlotnik - Gik a machine. ' Dubna 1968 There is no doubt that in chess, as in life , the Sicilian Defence commonplace and the prosaic predominate over the unusual and the artistic. However, 1 e4 c5 even in the opening, and especially in the 2 tt::lf3 d6 endgame, there is, of course, scope for 3 d4 cxd4 creativity. The search for opening discover 4 tt::lxd4 tt::lf6 ies against the background of a chess 5 tt::lc3 g6 player's everyday work in mastering new 6 j{_eJ j_g7 systems and variations, and perfecting those that he already employs, is one of the 7 j(,c4 most attractive aspects of chess, in which As Alexander Alekhine liked to say in such the investigative and artistic components of cases: 'lapsus manus'. The reason why the the game intersect. natural 7 f3 was not played was a banal one Since the finding of opening novelties is to a - before the game the young, newly-fledged certain extent an intimate process, with the master had been bathing in the Vo lga and aim of giving greater clarity to the explana sunning himself, and on sitting down at the tion, most of the given examples have been board in a mellow, relaxed state, he auto taken from the author's games. matically brought out his bishop to c4 , thinking that 7 f3 0-0 had already been It is customary to separate opening innova played. tions into two groups. The first contains those which were generated directly during 7 ... tt::lg4 a tournament game; in the second are those 8 ii.b5+ 'it>f8 found at home, in the quiet of one's study. 9 0-0!? 182 w How do Opening Novelties originate? 9 0-0. This idea also does not occur in modern tournaments. Such a conspiracy of silence is usually explained not only by ignorance. The answer came only in 1987 at the USSR Junior Championship, when one of the participants, Sergey Tiviakov - then one of the most promising young players in the country - showed me a counter-novelty for Black. I think that, if only in the moral sense, copyright exists in chess; therefore I cannot give Black's idea here, and I would like to suggest to the readers that they tryto find it themselves. 9 ... lt:ixe3 In the game Skold-Botvinnik (Stockholm 10 fxe3 e6 1962), which I knew at that time, White 11 i.c4 "ii'e7 played 9 'ii'd2, avoiding the deformation of 12 lt:icb5! his pawn structure afterthe exchange on e3. ..tgB? However, as the subsequent course of events showed, Black's two bishops are a more weighty factor than the loss of the right to castle. Annoyed by my absentmindedness on the one hand, and feeling the need to reassure myself on the other, I took a purely emotional (my emphasis - B.Ziotnik) deci sion to sharply change the course of events. After the move in the game and the exchange on e3 White is saddled with doubled and isolated e-pawns, but on the other hand the f-file is opened and his lead in development becomes threatening. For about 20 years I did not return in my 12... i.e5 was necessary. Now Black's posi thoughts to the diagram position, thinking tion is hit by a tornado of sacrifices. It is that the accidentally devised novelty was a interesting that the subsequent events made one-off, and was suitable only for surprising such a strong impression on my opponent, the opponent in a single game. Therefore, that after the game he not only congratu when I saw my game with Evgeny Gik in a lated me on my win, but also thanked me for book by Eduard Gufeld, devoted to the my beautiful play. A rare instance of gentle Dragon Va riation (1982), I was genuinely manly behaviour in the ultra-competitive surprised to see a question mark attached to world of chess. 7 .. .'�Jg4. In his book Botvinnik's Best Games, 13 lt:ixd6!! "ii'xd6 Vo lume 3: 1957-1970 (Moravian Chess 2001 ) Mikhail Botvinnik regards 7 i.c4 as an 14lt:ixe6! "ii'xe6 opening slip, but he makes no mention of Hoping to obtain three pieces for the queen. How do Opening Novelties originate? 183 Mate would have resulted from 14... 'i!Vxd 1 15 Uaxd 1 tt'lc6 16 tt'lc7 �b8 17 .ltxf7+ '>t>f8 18 .ltb3+ '>t>e7 19llf7 mate. (14. ...lte5 ! was more tenacious. However, even then Wh ite would have retained an obvious advantage, by continuing 15 "ii'xd6 �xd6 16 tbdB .lte6 17 .ltxe6 fxe6 18 'fJ.ad1 �el 19 tbf7 - Dvoretsky.] 15 'ii'd8+ .ltf8 16 l::!xf7! '>i?xf7 Or 16.. .'ii'xf7 17l:!.f1 . 17 "ii'xc8 "ii'xc4 18 "ii'xc4+ '>t>g7 19 "ii'd4+ At the time when this game was played, the Black resigned . chess world was under the influence of Garry Kasparov's brilliant win over Slavoljub Rather than as the result of an emotional fit, Marjanovic (Olympiad, Malta 1980), which improvised novelties, i.e. those not pre went: 15... \i'd ?? 16 .lth3 '>t>h8? (16... �d8 !) pared beforehand, occur far more often as 17 tt'le4! .ltxb2 18 tt'lg5! with a decisive the result of studying a position and grasp attack for White. ing its essence in a state of maximum While I was thinking about my next move, I concentration, directly against the ticking of recalled rather vaguely that Kasparov had the clock in the tournament hall. gained a spectacular win, but I had no thoughts of my own regarding this position. Kuzovkin - Zlotnik Delving into the situation, I came to the Moscow 1981 conclusion that the most unpleasant piece Queen's Indian Defence for Black was the knight on f5 . Therefore I 1 d4 tt'lf6 began studying 15.. .'�d7 and 15... .ltc8 . I didn't like the first of these because of 16 2c4 e6 .lth3.My basis for choosing the second was 3 tt'lf3 b6 the variation 15... .ltc8 16 tt'ld6 .ltxc3! 17 4 g3 .ltb7 bxc3 .lte6 18 c4 dxc4 19 .ltxa8 "ii'xa8 with 5 .ltg2 .lte7 excellent prospects for Black. 6 0-0 0-0 After the game I acquainted myself with 7 d5!? exd5 Kasparov's notes to his game with Marja 8 tt'lh4 c6 novic, and in particular, with his evaluation 9 cxd5 tt'lxd5 of 15... .ltc8 as being promising for White in view of the variation 16 tt'ld6 .lte6 17 tt'lxd5 10 tt'lf5 tt'lc7 tt'lxd5 18 .ltxd5 .ltxd5 19 "ii'xd5 .ltxb2 20 d5 11 tt'lc3 'fJ.ad1 . 12 e4 .ltf6 Apparently, after my present game with 13 exd5 cxd5 Kuzovkin (lnformator 31/618) Kasparov 14 .ltf4 tt'lba6 changed his opinion about 15... .ltc8 , and in 15 .l:!.e1 his book The Te st of Time he commented 184 � How do Opening Novelties originate? that it was acceptable. It would appear that 32 �2 l:!.a3 15... �c8 is not only a possible move, but White resigned. also the strongest. At any event, this idea was employed against Kasparov by Anatoly The main form of novelty is, of course, the Karpov in the second game of their first one prepared at home in the quiet of one's match (1984/85) after a slightly different study. One can distinguish three types of move order: 13 �f4 �c8; there followed 14 such novelties: accidental, on the basis of g4 4:Jba6 15 .l:!.c1 �d7 16 'ii'd2 tt:Jc5, and analogy, and the creation of new positions. I Black's position proved very sound. After will give some examples of each type. this the entire gambit with 7 d5 went out of One of the most impressive novelties of fashion. 1988 came in the following position. Returning to the source game, I should 1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 tt:Jc3�b 4 4 eS cS S aJ mention that the comparatively best move �xc3+ 6 bxc3 tt:Je77 'ir'g40- 0 8 4:Jf3 tL'lbc6 for White was nevertheless 16 4:Jd6. 9 �d3 fS 10 exf6 .l:txf6 11 �gS eS! 1S ... �c8! 16 tt:Jd4?! 'ii'd7 17 .l:!.c1 �b7 18 �eS �xeS 19 l:!.xeS l:tfe8 Black has managed to consolidate his position, retaining his extra pawn. 20 l:thS g6 21 'ji'd2 f6 22 �h4 tt:Jcs 23 4:Jb3 l:!.ad8? 23 ...4:J5e6 was better. Now White could have reduced Black's advantage to the minimum by 24 tt:Jxc5 bxc5 25 tt:Ja4 tt:Je626 Black's last move had been known fo r a long tt:Jxc5 tt:Jxc5 27 �xc5, although after 27 ...d4 time and the verdict of theory was unani it would not have been easy for him to mous: it was bad to play this in view of 12 defend. �xh 7 + 'it>xh7 13 ifh5+�g8 14 .i.xf6 gxf6 15 24 l:!.d1? lieS dxe5. 2S tt:JxcS bxcS Citing the generally-accepted opinion, the 26 l:!.a4 author of these lines also gave this variation 26 tt:Ja4 was also no better on account of in his book on the French Defence, pub 26 ...'ti'e7 27 'ji'a5tt:Je6 . lished in 1982. However, during the process 26 ... a6 of working on the book I realised that many 27 J:taS 'ii'e7 existing evaluations were based on old games, and games that were not always 28 f4 .l:te3 played by players of high standard. Both 29 b4 cxb4 these factors, the age of the evaluations and 30 tt:JxdS .i.xdS the low standard of the players, necessarily 31 .i.xdS+ �g7 suggests that the conclusions of theory in How do Opening Novelties originate? tLJ 185 such cases may be dubious. 9 .li£.d3 f5 The history of the move 11 ...e5! - the 10 exf6 .l:!.xf6 novelty here is mainly the change of 11 .ll£.g5 e5! assessment from question mark to exclama 12 'it'h4 tion mark - is as follows. According to Dokhoian, 11 ...e5 left Lev In the summer of the previous year, Yuri Psakhis in a state of shock. He thought over Dokhoian (who was then still a master and a his reply for more than 40 minutes, and he student at the chess faculty) and his trainer, still did not risk going in for the main the teacher Sergey Kishnev, asked me how continuation: 12 .li£.xh7+ 'it>xh7 13 'it'h5+ to ease Black's difficulties in the variation 11 'it>g8 14 jLxf6 gxf6 15 dxe5, given in all the .tg5�f7 12 jLxe7 .l::!.xe 7 13 'ii'h4. I knew well books on the French Defence. from my own practical experience what a thankless task it was to defend as Black in this variation. As the author of an opening book, in which, taking account of the con siderations only just expressed, a number of assessments were dubious, I suggested, or more precisely expressed my certainty, that the move 11 ...e5 was perfectly possible. As the result of a brief joint analysis, to general surprise, including that of the per son what had suggested investigating this continuation, it was established that 11 ...e5 was a promising move, and it became clear that a new branch on the tree of opening theory had been generated. The opportunity to be the first to test 11 ...e5 in practice, and Despite the irrational nature of the position, to reap the harvest of the novelty, fell to defined in particular by the exposed position Dokhoian. Here is the game which ap of the black king, the situation is one not peared first in the annals of opening theory only of approximate material equality, but (Inform a tor 46/383 ). also positional equality. The secret of the Psakhis - Dokhoian position is that Black should aim for the USSR Championship, First League, exchange of queens by 15... �f8 with the Klaipeda 1988 idea of 16... ii'f7 . Analysis has shown that it is not so simple to advance White's three (!) French Defence connected passed pawn on the kingside. 1 e4 e6 The game Abramovic-Dokhoian (Belgrade 2 d4 d5 1988) went 12 'ii'g3 .l:!.xf3 13 gxf3 c4 ! 14 3 tbc3 jLb4 .ll£.xe7? (14 .i.e2 was better) 14... 'it'xe7 15 4e5 c5 jLe2 exd4 16 'iiif1 .li£.f5 with a clear advan 5 a3 jLxc3+ tage for Black. 6 bxc3 tbe7 12 ... e4 7'tlt'g4 0-0 13 .li£.xf6 gxf6 8 tbf3 tbbc6 14 'ii'xf6 exd3 186 � How do Opening Novelties originate? 14... exf3 was weaker on account of 15 gxf3 tt::lg6 16 'ii'xd8+ tt:Jxd8 17 dxc5! tt::le6 18 ..txg6! hxg5 19 0-0-0 tt:Jxc5 20 1hd5 with advantage to White (indicated by Dokhoian). 15 cxd3 cxd4 16 tt:Jxd4 tt:Jxd4 17 'i*'xd4 ..tf5 18 0-0 tt:Jc6 19 'ii'e3 d4 20 cxd4 'iixd4 21 .l:tfd1 .l:!.d8 22 l:i.ab1 .l:td7 23 'ii'g5+ A very unusual type of move, especially for Draw. the opening stage - a piece is simply placed en prise. How did the idea of this move arise? We will now consider an example of an opening novelty, devised by analogy. This The prototype was provided by the game type is the one that occurs most often. The Fischer-Korchnoi (Candidates To urna degree of analogy with known examples can ment, Curac;:ao 1962), in which after the differ, of course, from being obvious to hard moves 1 e4 d6 2 d4 tt::lf6 3 tt::lc3 g6 4 f4 i.g7 to establish. We will consider an example 5 tt::lf3 0-0 6 ..te2 c5 7 dxc5 'ii'a5 8 0-0 which is roughly equidistant from the two 'ii'xc5+ 9 'it>h1 tt:Jc61 0 tt::ld2 a5 11 tt::lb3 'i'b6 extreme points. 12 a4 tt::lb4 13 g4? the following position arose. Makarychev - Zlotnik Moscow 1978 Sicilian Defence 1 e4 c5 2 tt::lf3 tt:Jc6 3 tt:Jc3 g6 4d4 cxd4 5 tt:Jxd4 i.g7 6 ..te3 tt:Jf6 7 ..tc4 'ii'a5 8 0-0 0-0 9 tt::lb3 'ii'c7 There followed 13... ..tx g4! (an idea of 10 ..te2 d6 Evgeny Vasyukov) 14 ..txg4 tt::lxg4 15 'i'xg4 11 f4 a5 tt:Jxc2 16 tt::lb5 tt:Jxa1 17 tt:Jxa1 'ii'c6, and 12 a4 tt:Jb4 Black had an obvious advantage. 13 ..tf3 ..tg4! If the two diagrams are compared, it is easy How do Opening Novelties originate? l2J 187 to establish their similarity. The next step in The critical position, reached practically by the search for the idea was my own dismal force after the acceptance of the sacrifice. experience, in a game with the Kharkov Now 20 ... l:.fe8was essential, and in view of master Alexander Va isman (Moscow 1964 ), the threat of 21 ...'it'c4 it would seem that when, playing White in the last but one Black's chances are even preferable. diagram, instead of 13 �f3 1 played 13 g4?, However, I was so pleased that I had finally after which, of course, there followed 13... managed to employ the novelty which I had .bg4!. Reflecting on the results of these two been nurturing for two years, that I was games, I came to the following conclusion: unable to force myself to play with full since afterthe capture of the g4-pawn with intensity, and I made a series of second-rate the bishop Black gains an advantage, it can moves. be assumed that in the similar position, but 20 ... f6? without the win of the white g-pawn, the bishop move to g4 is sufficientfo r equality. 21 �c5 l:i.f7 22 'ii'e3! Returning to the game with Sergey Maka 'ii'c6?! rychev, I should mention that the grandmas 22 ....Ua6 was better, followed by ....l:ta 6-c6 ter very quickly grasped the essence of the and ...b7- b6. novelty and after literally a few minutes' 23 �b6 l!d7? thought he offered a draw. But I was loathe Blundering a pawn. It was still not too late to to part with the game ... maintain equality by 23 ...l:l.a6! 24 �xa5 b6 14 il.xg4 tt:Jxg4 25 �b4 l:i.xa4. 15 'it'xg4 �xc3! [After 26 l:!.xa4 "fixa4 27 'ikxb6! Black's 16 bxc3 tt:Jxc2 position is difficult. The knight is taboo 17 il.d4 tt:Jxa1 (27 ..."fix b3? 28 "Yiib8+ cJ;;g7 29 il.f8+), and 18 l::txa1 e5 White, after playing h2-h3 and tt:Jc5, will create threats to the enemy king - Dvoretsky.] 18. . . b5 19 axb5 'iic4 20 tt:'ld2'ii' xb5, creating a passed pawn on the a-file, also came into 24 tt:Jxa5 'ii'e6 consideration. 25 c4! f5 19 fxe5 dxe5 [Black misses his last chance to complicate 20 �g3 matters by 25.. .1id3! 26 'i\Yc5 (26 'itkxd3 "fixb6+ and 27 ...l:!.xa5; 26 'ilf2 :I:!d2) 26 ... 'ild6!? (or 26... 'it'g4 !?) 27 'ii'xd6 'i:J.xd6 28 �c5 l:!.d729 �b4 l:!.d4 - Dvoretsky.] 26 c5 f4 27 "ii'b3 'ii'xb3 28 tt:Jxb3 g5 29 cj;;f1 f3 30 gxf3 l:i.d3 31 tt:Ja5 l:i.xf3+ 32 cJ;;g1 l:i.f7 33 tt:Jc4 And White won. 188 � How do Opening Novelties originate? We will now examine two games by well d5-pawn nullified all these attempts. Thus, known grandmasters. In the first of these the for example, the game Bronstein-Geller novelty was apparently devised by making (Teesside 1975) went 15 a4, and after use of the classical heritage, while in the 15... li:Jb6 16 .l:d 1 'ike? 17 axb5 axb5 18lLla3 second a new position was created. b4!? 19 cxb4 .l:.xa3 Black obtained good play. Romanishin - Geller 15li:Jd2 li:Jb6 43rd USSR Championship, Ye revan 1975 16li:Jf1 ! Ruy Lopez An interesting gambit idea. It is noteworthy 1 e4 e5 that a number of participants in this tourna ment - the 42nd USSR Championship - 2li:Jf3 lt:Jc6 were 'green with envy' on seeing White's 3�b5 a6 last move, stating that their attempts to find 4�a4 li:Jf6 some new idea in the given position had 5 0-0 �e7 been unsuccessful. 6 .l:te1 b5 Now 16 ...lt:Jf xd5 is unfavourable because of 7 i.b3 0-0 17 i.e4, but at first sight it is unclear what 8 d4 d6 compensation White will have after the capture on d5 with the other knight. 9 c3 i.g4 16 ... li:Jbxd5 10 d5 lt:Ja5 11 i.c2 c6 12 h3 i.xf3 13 'it'xf3 cxd5 14 exd5 lt:Jc4 So, the position, for which Oleg Roman ish in was aiming when he played 15 li:Jd2, has been reached. What does White have for the sacrificed pawn? And how, finally, did Romanishin devise his idea? Before the present game this position had I would venture to suggest that a prototype occurred many times in various tourna was provided by the famous game Bran ments. Repeated attempts had been made stein-Keres (Candidates To urnament, Bu to demonstrate White's superiority thanks to dapest 1950): 1 e4 e5 2 li:Jf3 li:Jc6 3 �b5 a6 his pair of bishops, but the weakness of the 4 .ta4 li:Jf6 5 0-0 i.e76 .l:i.e1 b5 7 i.b3 d6 8 How do Opening Novelties originate? ttJ 189 c3 0-0 9 d4 il.g4 10 h3(?!) ..txf3 11 20 b4 lZ'lfe8 'i'xf3(?!) exd4 12 'it'd1 dxc3 13 t2Jxc3 21 il.e3 tZ'lbS 22 il.c2 .l:lc8 23 .U.xa6 l:txc3 24 .l::!.a8 'ikc7 25 1i'd5 lZ'lf6? This move allows White to regain his pawn, while keeping the initiative. The variation 25 ....l::!. xc2 26 'ii'xb5 lZ'lf6 27 J::tea1 ! was also to his advantage. The best move was 25 ... tZ'ld4!, for example: 26 il.xd4 lZ'lf6 27 �xf8+ il.xf8 28 il.xh7+ 'iitxh7 29 'ii'a8 'ii'c8 30 'ii'xc8 l:.xc8, and Black's chances are by no means worse. 26 l:l.xf8+ il.xf8 Despite the formal difference of the two last 26 ...'iit xf8 was dangerous because of 27 diagrams, one cannot help but notice their 'ir'xb5 l:l.xc2 28 J::ta 1 . similarity in content - in both cases in return 27 il.xh7+ 'iitxh7 for the sacrificed pawn White has the bishop 28 1i'xb5 pair and prospects of an attack on the king. Thus, material equality has been restored, 17 tZ'lg3 tZ'lc7 and the passed b-pawn and the possibility of After 17... l:l.e8 18 lZ'lf5�f8 19 il.b3tZ'lb6 20 sharply activating his rook mean that White's �g5! with the threat of 21 tZ'lh6+ White has position is to be preferred. Without doubt, an obvious advantage. the psychological initiative was also now on 18 a4 bxa4 his side - after all, White has managed to demonstrate the correctness (in practice!) of 18. ..b4 came into consideration. White can play 19 cxb4, regaining the pawn, but after his idea. Also of significance was the fact that, in search of a refutation, Yefim Geller 19.. . lZ'le6 20 lZ'lf5 g6 21 t2Jxe7+ 'iixe7 or had expended a great deal of time. 19.. . g6 20 il.h6.l::!. e8 21 lZ'lf5 il.f8Bla ck has a good game. In the event of 19 lZ'lf5 bxc3 20 Therefore it is not surprising that, although �h6 tZ'le6! (20 ...cx b2? 21 il.xg7 bxa1'it'22 White's positional advantage is not so great, .U.xa 1 lZ'lfe8 23 'ii'h5 or 22 ...t2Jce8 23 'iig3, Black lost rather quickly. with a win for White in both cases) 21 'ii'g3 28 . . . 'iitg8 tL'lh5 24 'it'g4 Black has a pleasant choice 29 l:ta1 dS between 24 ...lZ'lf6 with a repetition of moves, 30 l:ta7 'ii'c4 and the tempting 24 ...cx b2. [As was pointed 31 'iib8 d4 out by Vlado Kovacevic, after 19... bxc3 ?! there is the simple reply 20 bxc3! ttJe6 21 31 ...'ii' xb4 was more accurate, and after 32 �a3 with the dangerousthreats of22 l:!.xe5 'ii'xe5 l:tc8 Black would have had better and 22 �ad1. In the game Kurajica chances of a successful defence. Smejkal, Titovo Uzice 1978, Black preferred 32 ..tgs tZ'lh7? 19... tZ'le6!? 20 'iib l .U.eB - Dvoretsky.] [Here too 31 ...'ii xb4 was necessary - 19 ..txa4 .l::!.b8 Dvoretsky.] 190 � How do Opening Novelties originate? 33 �e7 d3 33 ...'it'c8 was no better, for example: 34 'it'xe5 +Itc1 35 �h2 d3 36 �xf8 'ii'xf8 (or 36 ...lbxf8 37 lbf5) 37 'iie3 Itc8 38 'ii'xd3 'it'xb4 39 l:txf7. 34 �xf8 lbxf8 35 Ua8 d2 36 'ii'xf8+ �h7 37 'ii'h8+ 'ittg6 38 'it'h5+ �f6 39 'iff5+ Black resigned . Thus, an unusual position has been created, We will now consider an example showing one that only formally resembles known the creation of an original position with a positions. However, White has lost a tempo pawn sacrifice that had no analogue, and on the advance of his e-pawn, as a result of which occurred, incidentally, in the same which he is behind in development, and in tournament against the same opponent. addition his pawn centre is in danger, in view of the undermining moves ...f7-f5 and ...e7- e6. He is now required to play resourcefully Gulko - Geller and he must be prepared to take risks. 43rd USSR Championship, Ye revan 1975 9a4! GrOnfeld Defence The prelude to an interesting pawn sacrifice. 1 d4 d5 The natural 9 0-0 was less good because of 2 lbf3 tbf6 9 ...e6 10 d6 (after 10 dxe6 i..xe6 Black has 3 e3!? an excellent game) 1 O ...lbc6 with the idea of ...lbc6- d4, and it becomes difficult to defend A very rare move for a game at grandmaster the queen's pawn. In view of the threat of 10 level, but it is this that begins the construc a5, Black's next move is forced. tion of the intended position. 9 ... f5 3 ... g6 4c4 �g7 10 lbbd2 5 cxd5 ttJxd5 10 a5 did not work on account of 1 0 ...fxe4 11 6�e2 axb6 exf3 12 l:!.xa7 fxe2 13 'iVa4 i..d7 and 14... lba6 . Another unusual move. 6 lbc3 would have led to fa miliar lines of the GrOnfeld Defence. 10 . . . fxe4 White's outwardly unpretentious play natu 11 ttJxe4 lbxd5 rally provokes an active reaction by his 12 0-0 b6 opponent. .. 13 i..c4 e6 6 ... c5 14 a5! 7e4 lbb6 8 d5 0-0 (see diagram) How do Opening Novelties originate? ctJ 191 19 .td3 After 19 .txe6+and mass exchanges on e6, White would have regained his pawn, but ended up in an inferior position. 19 ... .tb7 20 tt:Je5 .l:Id8? Again a natural move proves to be a mistake, and this time, apparently, a deci sive one. After 20 ...lt:Jb4 ! 21 I:txa8 .txa8 (21 ...'ii' xa8? 22 'ir'h5!) 22 ii.b1 lt:Jc6 there would still have been all to play for. 21 ii.b1 l:.d4 21 ...lld5 was comparatively better, after White has reached the position fo r which he which there would have followed 22 f4 . was aiming, when he sacrificed the pawn. 22 lt:Jef3 14 .l:te1 was less good on account of Here 22 lt:Jxh7 would have been more 14. ..h6! , when it is not easy for White to develop his initiative. quickly decisive. After 22 ...ii.xe5 23 lt:Jxf8 'ir'c6 24 f3 Black would have lost the 14 . . . lt:Ja6 exchange. [In fa ct, the capture on h7 is Apparently the strongest reply. 14... lt:Jc6 , for incorrect in view of the counter 22 ... 't:.f5! - example, was weaker on account of 15 axb6 Dvoretsky.] bpk lt:Jxb6 16 .tb5lt:Jd4 17 lt:Jxd4'it'xd4 18 .tc6 22 ... .:td7 l:!.b8 19 .te3!with the better game for White. 15 axb6 axb6? 23 lt:Je5 l:.d4 This natural move is a poor one. By no 24 .l:ta3 means always, especially in such an unu All White's pieces have joined the attack sual position, is the natural the best. and the threatened sacrifice on h7 cannot be 15. ..'iVx b6 was stronger. Then nothing is prevented. After Black's reply in the game, given by 16 .txd5 on account of 16... exd5 White 'prosaically' restricts himself to the 17 ir'xd5+ .te6, while after 16 .l::le1 tt:Jac7 win of the exchange. Black would have retained adequate defen 24 ... lt:Jd5 sive resources. 25 tt:Jef3 lt:Jf4 16 tt:Jeg5 tt:Jdc7 26 .txf4 .Udxf4 17 'it'e2?! 27 lt:Jxe6 .l:tb4 17 'ii'b3 was stronger, when 17... b5 is 28 'ir'd1 ! ii.xf3 insufficient in view of the simple 18 .txe6+, 29 gxf3 'iic6 while if 17 ...'i!Vd6, then 18 l:.e1 is good. [18 'i:!e1 is a poor move in view of 18... b5! - 30 lt:Jxf8 ii.xf8 preferable is 18 �d1 'iWc6 19 lt:Jh4! b5 20 31 .te4 'iff6 �h3! 'ike8! 21 SLd3 e5 22 'ikg3 .tf5 with 32 'ifd5+ Wh8 chances fo r both sides - Dvoretsky.] 33 �xa6! 17 . . . 'ife8 Black lost on time, but his position is, of 18 .Ue1 b5 course, hopeless. 192 � Alexey Kosikov The Move ...g7 -g5 in the French Defence hess has been in existence for a Black also plays ...f7-f6 , after which a C millennium and a half. But despite such struggle begins for the e5-point: White a venerable age, it is currently experiencing reinforces his centre and tries to organise an a second youth. The popularity of the game attack (with pawns or pieces) on the is growing and the number of tournaments is kingside. increasing. Views on chess strategy in Modern chess has become 'total'; the general, and on opening theory in particular, struggle in it is conducted by all the pieces are rapidly changing. and on any part of the board. And for Black In recent years systems which previously in the French Defence, nowadays a counter were considered unpromising, such as the attack on the kingside is an equally custom Dutch Defence or the Italian Game, have arywea pon as play on the queenside. become fashionable. New trends in opening theory have appeared. Fifty years ago the I first encountered the move ...g7 -g5 some Chelyabinsk Va riation was simply consid thirty years ago, when analysing the game ered an anathema - it was thought that Sakharov-Petrosian (USSR Champion Black's position consisted entirely of weak ship Semi-Final, Kiev 1957). nesses. And the Vo lga Gambit? Already in 1 e4 e6 the opening Black sacrifices a pawn, and then dreams about the endgame. Mean 2 d4 dS while, both of these systems are now very 3 tt:Jc3 ..tb4 popular. Moreover, White sometimes seeks 4e5 c5 ways of avoiding them, not allowing them. 5 ..lli.d2 tt:Je7 Great changes are also occurring within 6 a3 ..txc3 opening systems: approaches to them, 7 ..txc3 cxd4 ways of playing them, and evaluations are 8 'iixd4 tt:Jts changing. 9 'iig4?! The French Defence is an old love of mine; I have been employing it fo r more than 9 'it'f4 is more accurate. quarter of a century. Using its example I 9 ... hS would like to show what changes are 10 'it'f4 currently occurring in the interpretation of various opening lines. (see diagram) What are the classical concepts of standard 10 ... gS! French positions, arising after the advance 11 ..tbS+ tt:Jc6 of the white pawn to e5? Black's plans have 12 'ifd2 d4! always been associated with pressure on the d4-pawn and the development of his 13 ..tb4 �dS! initiative on the queenside. Sometimes 14 'iie2 �xg2 The Move ...g7-g5 in the French Defence lb 193 12 lle1 0-0-0 13 �a3 - position after 1 0 'iVf4- 15 'ir'f3 'ifxf3 16 ltJxf3 �d7 What possible plan does Black have? In the 17 ltJxg5 ttJxe5 event of the pawn exchange on f6 he will Black has gained an advantage and he went endeavour to play ...e6- e5. But if the pawn on to win. tension in the centre is maintained, it makes For those times the move ...g7 -g5 looked sense to play ...f6-f5 at some point and then remarkable and appeared merely to be an attack on the kingside. exception, in no way disproving the general I planned the following piece set-up: switch rule. But I remembered this idea, and I the rook from d8 to f7, where it will not only began employing it frequently and not assist the attack, but also help in the unsuccessfully. defence along the 7th rank; place the knight on f5 and support it with ...h7 -h5; play the Tumenok - Kosikov king to a8 and retreat the bishop to c8, Kiev 1977 supportingthe b 7 -point and vacating the 7th French Defence rank for the rook. But in some cases ...i.d7 - e8-g6(h5) is also possible. 1 e4 e6 2d4 d5 With what should Black begin? 3 ltJc3 �b4 13 ... �df8! 4e5 ltJe7 The correct move. Now nothing is given by 14 i.d6?! 'ir'd8, when after ...l::i.f7 and ...ltJf5 5 a3 i.xc3+ the bishop comes under attack. Apparently 6 bxc3 c5 White does best to play 14 i.f1 .l:i.f7 15 g3!, 7 a4 ltJbc6 intending after the exchange of pawns to Nowadays in this position I prefer 7 ...'Wic7 . bring out the bishop to h3 (Duebaii-Fichtl, 8 lDf3 �d7 Bamberg 1972). 9 i.d3 �c7 14 a5 .l:i.f7 10 0-0 c4! 15 a6? 11 i.e2 f6 A serious strategic mistake - the blocking of � 194 The Move ...g7-g5 in the French Defence the queenside is to Black's advantage. In 24 ... Wd8! addition, the a6-pawn may subsequently Before the start of a decisive assault it is become weak. useful to safeguard one's own king. Now 25 15 ... b6 l:txb6 axb6 26 a7 l2lxa7 27 l:txa7 l2lc8 is no 16 �d6 ii'd8 longer dangerous. White should probably 17 liJh4 have set up a defensive line by ii'f2 , l:i.e1 , l:tad1 and .l:i.d2. White prevents 17... l2lf5 and prepares f2-f4 . 25 'ii'c1? 17 ... f5! White has practically no chance of creating Black's flank attack may be successful only an attack, and nevertheless he aims for one. if the centre is stable. The hasty 17... g5? is a This is the difference between obstinacy mistake in view of 18 exf6 . and tenacity! 18 f4 Let's outline a plan of action for Black. It is importa nt for him to advance his pawn to f4 (after first playing ...l:!.g4 ). In this case the pressure on g2 is intensified, and the f5- square is vacated for the knight and the b1- h7 diagonal for the bishop or queen. But first he must eliminate White's hopes associated with the rook sacrifice on b6. When the plan is clear, the subsequent moves are easy to make. 25 ... tt:Jc8! 26 �a3 �e8 27 "i!Ve3 l:th8 28 Si..c1 l2lce7 29 "i!Vf2 l:!.g4 18 . .. g5! 30 �e2 .1l.h5 A typical pawn sacrifice for the sake of 30 .. .f4 31 l2le1 was premature. opening lines - a kind of 'Volga Gambit' in the French Defence. 31 lZ'ld2 19 fxg5 "i!Vg8 When defending it is in general recom mended to exchange pieces. However, the 20 "i!Vd2 .l::!.g7 exchange of the light-square bishops does 21 l2lf3 h6 not bring White any relief. 22 gxh6 �g6! 31 ... .l::!.g7 22 ....l::!. xg2+ would have been a blunder, 32 i.xh5 1'1xh5 since after 23 �h1 fo llowed by 24 1'1g1 the 33 lZ'lf3 �g4! initiative on the kingside is seized by White he simply has more pieces there. 34 �d2 f4 23 �f1 1'1hxh6 35 l:!.e1 �h7 24 1:1eb1 Threatening 36 ...i¥xc2 . Now Black has to reckon with the rook 36 l:!.ac1 l2lf5 sacrifice on b6, say, in reply to 24 ...�e 8?. 37 Wf1 ?! The Move ...g7-g5 in the French Defence ctJ 195 5 i.d3 c5 6 c3 ltJc6 7 lDe2 cxd4 8 cxd4 f6 9 exf6 lDxf6 10 lDf3 i.d6 11 0-0 'ii'c7 12 ltJc3 a6 13 i.g5 0-0 14 i.h4 lDh5! There is a struggle in progress for the central d4- and e5-points. White wanted to Note the great activity of the black pieces. exchange the dark-square bishops, whereas The accumulation of positional advantages for Black it is advantageous to give up his usually prepares the ground for a decisive knight for the enemy bishop. combinative breakthrough. And here such 15 i.g3?! an appropriate moment has in fact arrived! White should not have fa llen in with his 37 ... .l:!xh2! opponent's plans. 15l:i.e1 was stronger, and 38 lDxh2 ltJg3+ subsequently even �h4-g5-e3, in order to support the weak d4-pawn. 39 ii'xg3 15 ... ltJxg3 Forced: 39 'it>g1 iixh2+! leads to mate. 16 hxg3 g6! 39 ... l:l.xg3 The g7-sq uare must be vacated for the 40 'it>g1 'ii'g6 queen; from there it intensifies the attack on 41 i.xf4 .l:i.xg2+ the key d4- and e5-squares. Black's position 42 'it>f1 l:.g1+ is already preferable. 43 'it>f2 ii'g2+ 17 .l:!.c1 'ii'g7 After44 We3 the knight, which all the game 18 i.b1 has been standing in ambush, lands the concluding blow: 44 ...ltJe7 ! 45 l:l.xg 1 lDf5 mate. White resigned. To day in the French Defence Black ad vances his pawn to g5 in the most varied situations. Here is one more example. Smagin - Vaiser Barnaul 1984 French Defence 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 ltJd2 lDf6 4e5 lDfd7 18 ... g5! � 196 The Move ...g7--g5 in the French Defence This is not an attack on the king. By 26 gxh4 threatening the f3-knight, Black further in If 26 'lt>g1, then 26 .. .'i!tf7! is strong, attacking tensifies the pressure on the enemy centre. the f2-point and intending 27 ...lLlf3+ and 19 Ite1 .Jtd7 28 ...ex d5. There is no need to hurry: the complications 26 ... gxh4+ after 19... g4 20 lbe5..tx e5?! 21 dxe5 lLlxe5 27 cJi>f1 .Jtb5+ 22 lLlxd5! exd5 23 �xd5+ lbf7 24 .l:!.c7 28 c.t>e1 favour White. 20 'ii'd2? Here 28 .. .'it'g2! would have won immedi ately. Black played less accurately (28 ... 20 'it'd3 was better. There now follows an Si.b4+), but all the same he soon won. exchange sacrifice, typical in such posi tions. 20 ... .l:!.xf3! And now I would like to reveal to you the 21 gxf3 lLlxd4 story of how I conceived a new opening idea, which in the mid-1980s became very 22 cJi>g2 popular. You will see from within the If 22 l:te3, then 22 .....tf4 ! is strong. mechanism of how an opening novelty 22 ... .l:!.f8 emerges. 23 .l:!.h1 h6 When studying the Ta rrasch Va riation of the 24 'ii'd1 lLlxf3 French Defence, on one occasion I was 25 lLlxd5!? considering how Black should play afterthe following moves: 1 e4 e6 2d4 d5 3lLld2 lbf6 4e5 lLlfd7 5 f4 c5 6 c3 lLlc6 7lLldf3 Who has outwitted whom? 25 ...exd 5? 26 it'xd5+ 'ii'f7 is incorrect in view of 27 i.e4!, when it is now Black who has problems. And if 25 ....Jtc6? there follows simply 26 �xc6! bxc6 27 lLle3. 25 . . . lLlh4+!! Neverthelessthe move ...g6-g5 also comes in useful for the attack. The Move ...g7--g5 in the French Defence ttJ 197 A 'prompt' was found in a game which made In order to emphasise the vulnerability of the an enormous impression on me. white king, Vaganian blows up the central fortifications with the aid of material sacri- Reshevsky - Vaganian fices. Skopje 1976 15 fxe5 tLldxe5! 7 ... 'ii'a5 16 dxe5 il..h4+!! 8�2 il..e7 17 'it>xh4 �xf3!! 9 il..d3 'ii'b6 Now 18 gxf3 'iVf2+ leads to a quick mate. 10 tLle2 f6 18 �f1 'ili'b4+ 11 exf6 19 il.f4 'i!t'e7+ 20 il.g5 'ii'e6! In an earlier game Adorjan-Vaganian (Tees side 197 4) White chose 11 'lt>g3 (intending 21 il.f5 l:txf5 h2-h3 and 'it>h2). But this did not lead to a 22 tLlf4 'i¥xe5 quiet life: Rafael Vaganian replied 11 ...g5!? 23 'ii'g4 l:tf7 12 �e1 cxd4 13 tt:Jexd4 ( 13 cxd4 gxf4+ 14 24 ifh5 tLle7 tt:Jxf4 fxe5 15 dxe5 tLlc5) 13... gxf 4+ 14 il..xf4 25 g4 tLlg6+ fxe5 15 tt:Jxe5 tLldxe5 16 .l:!.xe5 (Black also 26 'it>g3 il.d7 has an excellent position after 16 il.xe5 tt:Jxe5 17 �xe5 il.d7 18 'iVh5+ 'it>d8) 27 �ae1 'ikd6 16 ...tt:Jxe5 17 il..xe5 �g8+ 18 'i.t>h3�g5, and 28 il..h6 .U.af8 in a sharp skirmish he finally won. White resigned. 11 . . . il.xf6 This brilliant rout suggested to me the main 12 'it>g3 cxd4 idea by which Black should be guided, in 13 cxd4 0-0 order to exploit his lead in development: he 14l:re1 ? must detain the enemy king in the centre, and then blow up the centre at any cost. The decisive mistake. 14 h3 followed by 'it>h2 was essential. But in the game Panchenko-Kosikov (Dne propetrovsk 1978) my opponent replied to 7 .. :�a5 with 8 dxc5! 'iVxc5 (of course, 8 ...il.. xc5? 9 b4 is bad) 9 tLlh3 fo llowed by tLlf2-d3. White gained an advantage and he went on to win. White also has another excellent set-up: 8 il..e3! cxd4 (8 ... b5 9 dxc5! b4 does not work because of 1 0 tLld4il.b 7 11 a3! bxc3 12 b4: Tseshkovsky-Vaganian, Vilnius 1975) 9 tLlxd4 tLlxd4 1 0 il.xd4. In the search for an improvement in Black's play, a logical thought occurred: why place the queen on a5, if all the same it later returns to b6? 7 ... 'i¥b6!? 14 ... e5!! I began studying this move, rummaging � 198 The Move ...g7 --g5 in the French Defence through opening books. The theory of that up the game, by removing the barrier of time stated that White gains an advantage. pawns. 8 g3 cxd4 It was this that gave birth to an idea, which at 9 cxd4 first sight seemed crazy: 11 ...g5!?. Nearly After 9 ltJxd4 ltJc5 followed by ...ltJe4 and all Black's forces are grouped together on ...f7-f6 Black gains counterplay. the queenside, and yet he launches tactical operations on the kingside, where the 9... �b4+ opponent has more pieces. Anti-positional? 10 'iii>f2 f6 Not altogether since, as we have already 11 '>t>g2 mentioned, Black is better developed and it If now 11 ...0-0 , then 12 �d3 followed by is very important for him to open lines. In ltJe2and h2-h4. addition, the white king is sheltering on the kingside. · In February 1980 the Premier League of the USSR Championship was held in Vilnius. I was there for several days and one evening I showed my idea to Gennady Kuzmin, a grandmaster with a very unusual way of thinking. Nevertheless, his verdict was un ambiguous: 'This cannot be, because it can never be.' True, he was not able to demon strate anything with variations. In the summer of 1981 , also in Vilnius, the All-Union Schoolchildren's Spartakiad was held. Appearing for the Ukraine team was one of my pupils, 13-year-old Lena Sedina. In an important match against the Moscow I fo cussed on this position fo r a long time. team, with the agreement of the trainers the Black has a strange clump of pieces on the novelty was put into action fo r the first time. queenside ('iVb6, ltJd?, �c8, .Ua8) - they The experiment proved successful. Without seriously hinder their mutual development. going into details, I will show the opening Of course, it is possible to play 11 ...'iVc7 , stage. intending ...ltJb6, ...�d? and ...0-0-0, but during this time White will also complete his development, and his spatial superiority will Saburova - Sedina leave its mark on the entire subsequent play. Vilnius 1981 But let's approach the situation from the 11 ... g5!? other side. At least Black has developed four 12 exf6 g4 pieces, whereas the opponent has devel 13 f7+! '>t>f8! oped only one knight, which in addition is 14 ltJe5 depriving the other knight of its best square If 14ltJg5 Blackwas intending 14... ltJf6 with f3 . It is also Black to move. He has a the threat of 15... h6. significant lead in development. As is well known, in closed positions this is not too 14 ... ii'xd4 important a factor. Hence Black must open 15 ii'xd4 ltJxd4 The Move ...g7 -g5 in the French Defence l2J 199 16 tt:Jxg4 r#;;xfl Polyantsev- Kaplun 17 l'L'lf3 tt:Jxf3 Ukrainian Spartakiad 1983 18 r#;;xf3 b6! 10 ... g5! 19 �b5 .ii.b7 11 fxg5 tt:Jdxe5 20 .l:!.d1 We7 12 tt:Jxe5 tt:Jxe5 21 �xd7 ..t>xd7 13 'i!tg2 tt:Jc6 22 �d2 �d6 14 l'L'lf3 �f8! Black has achieved a good position, and in 15 b3 .ii.g7 the end she went on to win the game. 16 �b2 �d7 Of course, one does not have to be a 17 .tr.c1 h6! grandmaster to realise that at some point 18 gxh6 llxh6 Black's position was rather dangerous. 19 �e2? Thus, for example, instead of 14 tt:Je5Wh ite 19 tt:Je5was better should nevertheless have considered 14 19 ... 0-0-0 t2lg5l'L'lf6 , and now 15 h3!. [19... e5! with the threat of 20 . . . �h3+ was I did not want to expose the king too much, very strong - Dvoretsky.] and so new searches for an improvement to Black's play were sought. In the end I was 20 tt:Je5 �e8 able to find another way of implementing the 21 'it'd2 'itb8 same idea. It turns out that the g-pawn can 22 �f3 f6 also be advanced a move earlier: 11 ... g5!. 23 tt:Jxc6+ �xc6 Black has achieved a positional advantage and later he successfully converted it. But it was not in this game that my novelty was first tested in practice. A few months earlier it had been employed by Lena Sed ina. Voronova - Sedina Women's USSR Championship Semi-Final 1983 10 ... g5! 11 .ii.e3 f6 With this move order the undermining move gains in strength, although 11 . ..g4 also I showed my new idea to an old friend of came into consideration. mine, the Te rnopolsk master Leonid Kaplun, 12 �h3 h5! and with my agreement he employed it in 13 �xe6 the autumn of 1983. [It is curious that the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings recommends 13 exf6 g4 14 f7+ 'ittfB 15 l'L'lh4 with the evaluation 'advantage fo r Wh ite '. Although in fa ct after 15... gxh3 200 � The Move ...g7-g5 in the French Defence 16 l?Jg6+�g7 17 l?JxhBl?Jf6! 18 l?Jxh3l?Jg4+ on e3 - because of the bishop on b4, the 19 �g 1 i..d7 the evaluation changes to queen could not capture the b2-pawn. Of diametrically opposite - Dvoretsky.] course, it is tempting to force �f2, but is it 13 ... gxf4 not possible to get by without this check? 14 i..xd7+ i..xd7 15 gxf4 fxe5 Serebro - Kosikov 16 dxe5 i..c5 Kiev 1984 17 'ii'b3 d4! 9... i..e7!? A sharp position has been reached, in which 10 i..h3 Black has more than sufficient compensa Bad, of course, is 10 i..d3? l?Jxd4. tion for the sacrificed pawn. She went on to 10 ... f6 !? win. 11 �f1 A complicated position, most probably fa Since then numerous games have been vourable for Black, results from 11 l?Je2 0-0! played with my variation, and improvements 12 i..xe6+ (12 0-0 fxe5 13 fxe5 l?Jdxe5) have been found both for White, and for 12... �h8 13 i..xd7?! i..xd7 14 0-0 i..g4. But Black, but as far as I know a refutation has the continuation in the game also suited me not in fact been discovered. This is not - I have managed to force the king to move surprising: the move 10... g5 is positionally without giving a check on b4. justified and is fully in accordance with the 11 . . . 0-0 modern 'total' approach to the struggle. 12 'iti>g2 g5!? While the variation was not yet widely known and was still in the development stage, I naturally took a lively interest in its fate. But when it finally began to be con stantly employed in tournaments of the most varied standard, my interest in it gradually cooled. It is a tedious business processing numerous recently-played games, taking opening refinements virtually as far as the 40th move. A search for new paths began. Generally speaking, the key to success in the opening is largely associated with the ability to be ahead of opening fashion, even if only by half a step. However, new ideas do not appear as a result of the mechanical 13 'ili'b3? analysis of variations - one must endeavour Fearing an attack, White seeks the ex to penetrate into the essence of the events change of queens, but in so doing he ta kes occurring on the board. his queen away from the kingside, where Remember the Polyantsev-Kaplun game. the main events are bound to occur. The fate Black had to retreat his bishop from b4 to a of Black's idea depends on the evaluation of better post. And in the Sedina-Voronova the sharper moves 13 exf6!? and 13 fxg5!?. game White managed to develop her bishop 13 . . . 'ii'a6 The Move ...g7-g5 in the French Defence CtJ 201 14 .i.xe6+ 'it>h8 24 .i.f4 15 .i.xd5 g4 24 tt'lf4 tt'ld4+ would have led to the loss of 16 .i.e3!? tt'lb6! the queen, but even so this was White's best 17 .i.e4! gxf3+ chance. 18 .i.xf3 lbc4 24 ... 'ii'd3+ 19 tt'le2 fxe5 25 'iitf2 .i.c5+ 20 dxe5 26 'it>e1 "ir'e4! The position may still seem unclear. In fact, 27 .i.g5 Black wins by force. How? White also loses after27 .U.f1 tt'ld428 'it'g4 The sacrifice on e5 suggests itself. But in the lbc2+ 29 'it>d2.U.d8+. va riation 20 ...lb4 xe5 21 fxe5 .U.xf3 22 'it>xf3 27 ... .i.b4+ i.g4+ 23 'it>xg4 'iixe2+ 24 'it>h3 the king 28 'it>d1 "ii'xh1 + escapes from the pursuit. No, the sacrifice 29 'it>c2 'ti'e4+ must be associated with another idea. 30 'it>b3 "ii'd3+ 20 ... lb4xe5! 31 'it>a4 b5 mate 21 fxe5 .U.xf3! 22 'it>xf3 .i.e6!! Thus, in the French Defence, along with the The third sacrifice in a row! It is important to classical methods of play, Black can and include the rook in the attack with gain of should make use of plans involving sharp tempo. attempts to seize the initiative. And the 23 'it'xe6 .U.f8+ signal for the start of active play on the But not 23 ...lbd4 +?? 24 lbxd4, and the territory of the opponent is often provided by queen is defended. the counter-blow ...g7 -g5! 202 � Vladimir Vulfson Opening Research H ow does the study of forcing opening 9 it..c4 it..d7 variations proceed? I will share my own 10 h4 �c8 experience of working on the Dragon Va ria 11 il.b3 lt:Je5 tion of the Sicilian Defence. 12 0-0-0 lt:Jc4 Robert Fischer stated that in this variation a 13 il.xc4 .l::i.xc4 grandmaster can lose to a first category player, since White's strategy is so very 14 h5 li:Jxh5 simple and logical. Ye s, indeed, here seri 15 g4 li:Jf6 ous difficulties lie in wait for Black, but 16li:Jde2 'i!t'a5 players who employ the Dragon Va riation try 17 it..h6 it..xh6 to compensate for this with a better knowl 18 'ii'xh6 .Ufc8 edge of opening theory and typical ideas. Yo u can't play this variation by blindly copying the games of other players. Many ideas, which are employed at the board, are first thoroughly checked at home. Success is achieved not by the player who has learned the variation better from the books, but by the one who has carried out more research work. I will describe a few epi sodes from battles in the Dragon Va riation. In 1974 Anatoly Karpov's win over Victor Korchnoi in the second game of Candidates Final Match made a great impression on everyone. Karpov - Korchnoi 19 .Ud3 Moscow 1974 This move came as a great surprise to Sicilian Defence Korchnoi. He thought for a long time, but 1 e4 c5 was unable to find a sensible plan of 2li:Jf3 d6 defence, and after 19... .U4c5? 20 g5 .Uxg5 3 d4 cxd4 21 .Ud5 .Uxd5 22 li:Jxd5 .Ue8 23li:Jef4 it..c6 24 e5 i..xd5 25 exf6 exf6 26 'iVxh7+ 'it>f8 27 4li:Jxd4 li:Jf6 'iVh8+ he suffered a crushing defeat. 5li:Jc3 g6 Immediately after the game Mikhail Botvinnik 6 it..e3 it..g7 suggested that Black should have defended 7 f3 li:Jc6 by 19.. . 'iVd8, with the idea of switching the 8 'ii'd2 0-0 queen to the defence of the kingside. It was Opening Research lb 203 with an analysis of this continuation that I began a fight to restore the reputation of the Dragon Va riation. First I convinced myself that the direct play for the win of a piece - 20 e5 does not achieve anything. Black defends with 20 ... dxe5 21 .Uhd1 tl.8c722 'ii'd2 e6 23 g5 ltJd5, or, if White continues playing for mate: 21 tt:Jg3 .l:td4 22 g5 ltJh5 23 ltJxh5 gxh5 24 'i'xh5 ii.f5. But can Black gain equality in the endgame after 20 g5 ltJh521 ltJg3'iVf8 ? I was unable to find an advantage for White in the variation 22 'ii'xf8+ 'ot>xf8 (but not 22 ....Uxf8 - position after25 f4 (analysis) - 23 ltJxh5 gxh5 24 lL'ld5} 23 ltJxh5 gxh5 24 l:txh5�8c5 , since in the event of 25 f4 b5 the 22lL'lxh5 gxh5 weakness of the e4-pawn is felt. However, 23 'iWxh5 'iWg7 things are far from brilliant for Black if the 24 f4 white pawn reaches h6: 22 ltJxh5 'i!Vxh6 Now 24 ...b5? 25 f5 b4 is clearly too late on (22 . . . gxh5 23 'ikxh5) 23 gxh6 gxh5 24 �d2 and he does not have full equality. Is he account of 26 Ii.dh3 with a mating attack. But really obliged to defend this inferior end Black has a counterblow in the centre. game? 24 ... d5! 19 ... ii.e6!? This move became the next stage of the search. The idea of it is to switch the queen to the defence of the kingside via the central square e5. 20 g5 lL'lh5 21 ltJg3 'ike5 It would appear that White wins by 22 Itxh5 gxh5 23 ltJxh5, when the threat of f3-f4 followed by ltJh5-f6+ looks irresistible. But Black nevertheless has the possibility of gaining a draw, by sacrificing first the exchange: 23 ....Uxc3 24 bxc3 l:txc3, and after 25 f4 also a rook. In this way Black succeeds in neutralising (see diagram) the opponent's main threat of f4-f5 followed by .l::i.d3-h3 and in winning the ideal square 25 ... l:txc2+! 26 'it>xc2 �c5+. It is not hard to see that the king cannot hide from the f5 for his bishop. It is easy to see that perpetual check. Incidentally, this idea was variations such as 25 f5 dxe4 are in his found by the very young Leonid Yurtaev. favour. Things are more difficult for Black, if White 25 Ii.hd1 captures on h5 with his knight. White appears to retain all the pluses of his 204 � Opening Research position in view of the weakness of the 8th Along with Karpov's move - 16 tt:\de2, White rank. also has these possibilities: 16 Si.h6, 16 e5 So, is the entire variation really bad fo r and 16 tt:lb3. I will not dwell on all these Black, and does Karpov's move 19 .l:!.d3 set continuations, but will just describe one him insoluble problems? I had almost des theoretical duel. paired of finding anything, when I suddenly Back in 1976, when I discussed the move 16 discovered a paradoxical defence. e5 with Yurtaev, we came to the conclusion 25 ... 'ir'f8 ! that along with the book move 16... tt:lxg4 Black could also consider 16... dxe5. After If White does not go in for the repetition of moves 26 �h1 'iVg7, he is forced to concede later working out all the details, I began the f5-square. Of course, he remains a pawn waiting for someone to employ 16 e5 up, but the pressure on c2 ties down his against me. And then, 10 years later, the pieces. national master Arkhipkin went in for this position. It only remained to wait for one of my opponents to go in for the position after 19 Arkhipkin - Vulfson .l:!.d3. But time passed, and the theoryof the Dragon Va riation proceeded along other Moscow 1986 main lines. It was established that after 16 16 e5 dxe5!? tt:\de2 Black obtains good play by 16... .l:!.e8 . 17 tt:lb3 "i/c7 Then his plans began increasingly often to 18 g5 ii..f5 be associated with the impeding ...h7 -h5. 19 gxf6 exf6 So that, unfortunately, the analysis which I 20 ii..h6 have showed you is now no longer topical. This natural move is wrong - playing for For many years I awaited an opportunity to mate does not give White anything. employ an interesting preparation in another 20 ... g5! branch of the Dragon Va riation. Let us return Now the main defensive functions are to the 'tabiya' arising after 1 e4 c5 2 tt:lf3d6 handed over to the light-square bishop. 3 d4 cxd4 4 tt:\xd4 tt:lf6 5 tt:\c3 g6 6 Si.e3 21 tt:\e4 .l:!.xe4! �g7 7 f3 0-0 8 "ir'd2 tt:\c6 9 Si.c4 Si.d7 10 h4 tt:\e5 11 Si.b3 .Uc8 12 0-0-0 tt:\c4 13 Si.xc4 The only way! In the event of 21 ...Si.xe4 22 .l:txc4 14 h5 tt:\xh5 15 g4 tt:\f6. fxe4 .l:!.xe4 White would have gained a very strong attack by 23 'iVh2! �h4 24 'ikxh4. 22 fxe4 ii..xe4 23 ii..xg7 'it>xg7 24 .l:!.h3 ii..g6 Black wants to advance as quickly as possible his pawn mass on the kingside. Now White should on no account exchange the queens; his play must be based on the creation of tactical threats to the black king. Possibly I should have preferred 24 ...b6, in order to restrict the knight and prevent the following manoeuvre of the white rook. 25 .l:.c3 "f/e7 Opening Research ctJ 205 26l:!.c5 White is counting only on 26 ...f 5, which is not good because of 27 'it'c3. He should have thought about activating his knight: 26 li::lc5. 26 ... h5 27 a4 h4 28 a5 a6 291i'd5 The seemingly logical 29 .l:.d5 runs into an unexpected activation of Black's forces: 29... l:!.c8 30 c3 'ii'b4!. But now I prepare the advance of my f-pawn. - position after44 ..."ifc5 - 29 ... .l:!.e8 30 l:!.c3 g4 Malyutin - Vulfson 31 ltJc5 f5 Moscow 1987 32 ltJxb7 g3 24l:!.h2(ins tead of 24 l:th3).This novelty did 33 ltJd6 'ilg5+ not pose Black any problems. After 24 ... .l:.c8 25 ltJa1 ii.g6 26 c3 'ii'c4 27 a3 h5 28 ltJc2 34 31 J:l.c4 .U.xc4 32 lbxc4 f4 33 i..g1 i..c6 34 lbd2 g4 White's whole problem is that his rook has no way of returning to base. 35 fxg4 hxg4 36 .l::tc8 i..d5 37 c4 i..e6 38 .l::tc7 e4+ 39 'it>c1 e3 Here Black was awarded a win on adjudica -position after 19 ... exf6- tion, since after 40 lbe4 i..h4 his pawns cannot be stopped . 21 ... .l:txc3 Thus the last opening round was won by 22�xc3 White, but I think that it is still too early to In the event of 22 bxc3 i..f8 Black could close the entire opening variation. It is have hoped for counterplay on the queen Black's turn to come up with something. side. 22 ... �xc3 Another direction of research work on the 23 bxc3 b6 opening is the search for new continuations 24 'it>b2 in old, already forgotten variations. After all, In contrast to the positions examined earlier, many opening schemes cease to develop the white f3-pawn significantly hinders the not because they are condemned by theory, advance of the kingside pawns. At this point but on account of attention switching to I judged Black's position to be very difficult. other, more fashionable lines. 24 ... h5 Until recently, one such forgotten scheme 25 .l:th4? was the 4 f3 variation in the Nimzo-lndian But these intricacies are unnecessary. The Defence. At one time in the 1960s it was advance of the a-pawn looks far more often employed by grandmasters Lajos natural and strong, leading in the end to the Portisch and Florian Gheorghiu. One can creation of a passed pawn for White on the recall Gheorghiu's win over none other than queenside. Fischer at the World Chess Olympiad. 25 . . . 'it>h7 26 .l::ta4 .l:tc7 Gheorghiu - Fischer 27 .l::td8 i..d7 Olympiad, Havana 1966 28 .l::tb4 f5 Nimzo-lndian Defence This is the result of White's planless play! 1 d4 lbf6 The pawns begin their advance, against 2 c4 e6 which it is now very hard to defend. 3 lbc3 i..b4 29 lbd2 i..f6 4f3 d5 30 .l:tb8 g5 5 a3 i..xc3+ Opening Research ttJ 207 6 bxc3 0-0?! 15 ... l:tc8 6 ...c5 is preferable, leading to one of the key 16 h5 liJf8 positions of the Samisch Va riation. How 17 g6 fxg6 ever, not all those who play the Nimzo 18 hxg6 h6 lndian Defence like this way of countering 19 it'b1 ltJa5 the Samisch Va riation. 20 liJf4 c4 7cxd5 exd5 The exchange on d4 looks more logical, to 8 e3 liJh5 use the c4-square for the knight. This early activity does not give Black an 21 .fi.c2 .l:!.c6 equal game. Fischer avoids 8 ...c5, wishing 22 .l:!.a2 liJd7 to preclude the well-known set-up where 23 a4 liJf6 White, after completing his development, carries out the central advance e3-e4. I 24 Ji.a3 'i!Vd7 should remind you that a classic example of 25 .l::!.b2 b6 this plan is the fa mous game Botvinnik 26 .l::!.b5 liJb7 Capablanca (AVRO To urnament 1938). But 27 e4 dxe4 8 ... .1i.f5 also occurs. 28 i.xe4 9 'it'c2 .l::!.e8 Gheorghiu avoids the unnecessary risk after 10 g4! liJf4 28 fxe4, since in this case Black could have 11 h4 c5 gained chances against the white king. 12�2 liJg6 28 ... .l:i.cc8 13 i.d3 liJc6 29 .l:!.e5 .fi.g4 14 liJe2 .fi.e6 30 liJd5 .l::!.xe5 15 g5! 31 liJxf6+ gxf6 32 dxe5 ltJc5 33 i.xc5 'i!Vd2+ 34 'iitg3 .ii.xf3 35 .fi.xf3 .Uxc5 36 'i!Vc1! Subsequently White converted his material advantage. Gradually Akiba Rubinstein's solid continua tion 4 e3 supplanted for a long time all other systems of play against the Nimzo-lndian Defence. For me a stimulus in the search fo r new ideas in the 4 f3 variation was provided by It is curious that at this moment Gheorghiu, the following episode. In 1978 the Moscow who was afraid of his formidable opponent, player Sergey Kishnev showed me an offered a draw. But the uncompromising interesting idea in the variation 1 d4 liJf6 2 Fischer declined, although his position was c4 e6 3 liJc3 i.b4 4 f3 c5 5 d5 .txc3+ 6 bxc3 already very dubious. 'i!Va5. 208 � Opening Research 9 ..te3 lbbd7 10 'iVd2 lLlf8 11 g4? At that time I still had a poor understanding of the positional nuances in blocked struc tures of this type. It is not surprising that in the subsequent battle my experienced op ponent completely outplayed me. This game served as a good lesson. 11 . . . tt:Jg6 12 h4 h5 13 g5 tt:Jg8 14lLlg3 lb8e7 Sergey was facing a decisive game, which 15 i.d3 i.d7 in the event of a win would bring him the master title. His opponent was an experi 16lbf5 tt:Jxf5 enced master and great expert on the 17 exf5 lbe7 Nimzo-lndian Defence, Boris Zlotnik. To 18 'ikc2 0-0-0 arrive empty-handed for such a game was 19 0-0 f6 simply dangerous. 20 f4 And here instead of the theoretical 7 i.d2 Kishnev suggested the pawn sacrifice 7 e4. We established that the acceptance of the pawn sacrifice brings Black nothing but problems. But in that game Black avoided 4 ...c5 and chose 4 ...d5. A fluctuating strug gle nevertheless ended in a win for White. The 7 e4 idea was first tested in practice two weeks later. Vulfson - Veselovsky Moscow 1978 Nimzo-/ndian Defence 1 d4 tt:Jf6 2c4 e6 And now try to find the strongest continua 3lbc3 ..tb4 tion for Black. 4 f3 c5 If you have a good positional feeling, you 5 d5 ..txc3+ would be bound to choose the pawn 6 bxc3 'ii'a5 sacrifice. 7 e4 d6 20 ... e4! On encountering a novelty, Black sensibly The white bishops become altogether decided to decline the gift. cramped. 8lLle2 e5 21 ..txe4 'ika4 Opening Research ltJ 209 22 'it'd3 And White soon converted his material Another little problem: what is Black's best advantage. way of converting his positional advantage? When I began studying the 4 f3 variation, I discovered that many of the positions arising in it had hardly been analysed. There was very little practical material. It was thought that Black obtained a good game, both in the variation 4 ...c5 5 d5 tLlh5, and after4 ...d5 5 a3 i.e?6 e4 dxe4 7 fxe4 e5 8 d5 ..tc5. The third possibility, which occurred in my game with Sergey Veselovsky, was also considered reliable. If he wishes, Black can switch to the Samisch Va riation: 4 ...d5 5 a3 i..xc3+ 6 bxc3 c5 7 cxd5 ttJxd5. In this variation too, theory was based on games played in the 1950s and 1960s. I devoted particular attention to the study of On this occasion the more patient among typical positions with a completely closed you are right, those who suggested 22 ...'it>b8 centre, which mainly demand not a knowl followed by the manoeuvre of the queen to edge of specific variations, but positional c8 (or, after ...3Lc8 - to d7) and the understanding. The fact that I achieved regaining of the f5-pawn at a convenient some success in this field is illustrated by moment. Those who preferred the energetic the following game. 22 ...b5 fell into the same trap as my opponent in the game. Vulfson - Loktev 22 ... b5? Moscow 1985 23 i..xc5! Nimzo-lndian Defence Now the character of the position changes sharply and Black loses practically without a 1 d4 ttJf6 fight. 2c4 e6 23 ... dxc5 3 ttJc3 i..b4 24 d6 'ilt'xc4? 4f3 c5 The decisive mistake! I will not give all the 5d5 d6 complicated variations, but will merely say 6 e4 i..xc3+ that the best chances of a defence were 7 bxc3 e5 given by the counter-sacrifice of a piece: 8 ..td3 ttJbd7 24.. . ttJc6 25 cxb5 �he8 26 bxc6 i..xc6 27 ixc6 �xc6 28 l:lfd 1 �e4. (see diagram) 25 ii'f3 The simple 25 dxe7 l::tde8 26 l::tae1 was also The idea of inhibiting the manoeuvre ...ttJd7- po ssible. f8-g6 had been found in home preparation. 25 ... ttJxf5? 9 'it'a4!? 0-0 26 ..td3 10 g4 ttJes 210 � Opening Research 24 ii.d1 After a slight regrouping of his bishops , White completely neutralises the pressure on the b-file, afterwhich all Black can do is defend passively. 24 ... lie7 25 'ii'd3 t:De8 26 ii.c2 'iii'dB 27 ii.d2 ii.c8 28 ii.c3 llb8 29 �d2 lleb7 30 'it'e3 lle7 31 .U.h2 llbb7 11 h4 32�g1 t:Dg7 After Black has castled kingside, the pawn 33 f4 exf4 storm looks more justified than in the game 34 'ii'xf4 t:De8 with Ve selovsky. 11 . . . t:Dc7 12 'ii'c2 a6 13 a4 l:tb8 14 t:De2 b5 15 aS Now Black will suffer from a chronic lack of space. 15 ... lieS 16 g5 t:Df8 17 h5 ii.d7 18 t:Dg3 g6 19 ii.e3 bxc4 20 ii.xc4 :b7 35 t:Df5! gxf5 21 ii.e2 'ii'b8 36 exf5 t:Dd7 22 ii.c1 37 f6 l:Ie5 Possession of the b-file does not bring Black 38 g6 hxg6 any significant benefits, although for a time it 39 hxg6 'ii'xf6 can divert White from his activity on the kingside. The following bishop manoeuvre 40 gxf7+ �xf7 by Black is clearly unsuccessful. Apparently, 41 .l:th7+ �f8 to gain at least some counterplay he should 42 'ii'g3 have decided on ...c5-c4 . Black resigned. 22 ... ii.b5 Thus, research work helps one to improve in 23 c4 ii.d7 over-the-board play. ltJ 211 PA RT IV Mark Dvoretsky Middlegame Problems he middlegame is the most complicated And then it is no longer a matter of Tand least studied stage of the chess indifference, whether the isolated pawn is game. One of the methods of working in this obtained from the Ta rrasch Defence to the field is the study of typical positions. Queen's Gambit or the Ta rrasch Va riation of Unfortunately, as yet there is no classifica the French Defence, because there are tion of such positions. It is not easy to create differences in both the placing of the other one - after all, the selection of typical pawns, and in the arrangement of the positions can be carried out on the basis of pieces, and therefore the methods used in various features. The most important fea these systems are somewhat diffe rent to ture is the pawn structure (for example, each other. positions with a isolated pawn, with a closed The following conclusion suggests itself: as centre, and so on). One can also take a rule, typicalmiddlegame positions are account of material (the battle of heavy closely linked with a particular opening pieces, knight against a 'bad' bishop), and variation, and therefore work on them is also the placing of the pieces, in particular at the same time work on the opening. the kings (king in the centre, castling on Often it is very hard to decide where the opposite sides, and so on). The develop opening ends and the middlegame begins ment of such a classification could signifi nowadays the very concept of the 'opening' cantly ease the selection and processing of differs strongly from that which existed information on the middlegame. earlier. The aim of the present article is to express On one occasion I was present at a lecture certain thoughts about the methods of about the Exchange Va riation of the Ruy working on typical positions. Lopez, read by Yuri Razuvaev to students in Nowadays it is not enough to know general the chess section of the Physical Culture conclusions. For example, that an isolated Institute. During the lecture the grandmaster pawn in the centre is not only a strength, but hardly demonstrated any 'book' variations also a weakness, and that, if you have an he showed some games by Robert Fischer, isolated pawn, you should play for an attack, model examples of how to play the typical whereas when playing against one you positions resulting in the opening system in should aim to simplify and to exploit the question. weak square in front of it, etc. All this is In particular, he showed the following game. correct, but to achieve success you must have a mastery of more subtle evaluations. 212 � Middlegame Problems Fischer - Portisch Dvoretsky - Ivanov Olympiad, Havana 1966 Moscow 1972 RuyLopez RuyLopez 1 e4 e5 2 t'Llf3t'Llc6 3 �b5 a6 4 �xc6 dxc6 1 e4 e5 2 t'Llf3 t'Llc6 3 �b5 a6 4 �xc6 dxc6 5 0-0 f6 6 d4 exd4 7 t'Llxd4c5 8 t'Llb3 'ii'xd1 5 0-0 f6 6 d4 exd4 7 t'Llxd4 c5 8 t'Llb3 'i'xd1 9 �xd1 �d6? 10 t'Lla5! 9 .l::txd1 �d6? 10 t'Lla5! b5 11 c4 t'Lle7 12 White has created the threat of 11 t'Llc4. The �e3 ri;f7 Only here did the game deviate tactical attempt to solve Black's develop from the above one. Now 13 t'Lld2 was not ment problems: 1 0 ...�g4 11 f3 0-0-0 does bad, but I decided to play 'Fischer-style'. not work on account of 12 e5!, when he 13 t'Llc3 .l:!.b8 loses a piece (Hort-Zhelyandinov, Havana 1967). But the natural move in the game leads to a weakening of the c5-pawn, which Fischer splendidly exploits. 10... b5 11 c4! (fixing the c5-pawn) 11... t'Lle7 12 �e3 f5 13 t'Llc3 f4 14 e5! .i.xe5(or 14.. .f xe5 15 t'Lle4) 15 .i.xcS .i.xc3 16 bxc3 �g6 17 �c6 l:.a8 18 cxbS axb5 19 �7 ! .i.e620 �xb5 l:.a5 21 a4 l:l.c8 22 l:.d4 �e5 23 f4 �c6 24 l:.d2 l:.ca8? 25 �xc7 l:.xa4 26 l:.xa4 l:.xa4 27 �xe6 Black resigned. 14 e5! .i.xe5 15 .i.xc5 .i.xc3 16 bxc3 �g6 In this game White copied not only Fischer's 17 �c6 .i.e6 18 cxb5 axb5 19 �7 ! l:.b8 20 strong play in the opening, but also his l:.d b1 �f721 �xb5 l:.hd822 l:.b4.i.xa2 23 middlegame ideas: the same e4-e5! break �xc7 l:.bc8 24 h4! l:.d2 25 .i.b6 f326 .i.e3! through, and the manoeuvre t'Llc6-a7! for l:.e2 27 �b5 l:.a8 28 h5 �e5 29 l:.f4+ �e7 the win of a pawn. 30 l:.d 1 l:.c8 31 l:.e4 �6 32 l:.d6+ �f5 33 Such a complete transfer of all the ideas l:.f4+ �g5 34 l:.xf3+ Black resigned. from one game to another is a rather rare After the lecture I wanted to play the Ex phenomenon, but constant use should be change Va riation, and a short time later made of general plans or specific ideas, such an opportunity presented itself. taken from examples that have been stud ied. It may be remembered that, in his game against Wolfgang Unzicker (Siegen 1970) Fischer himself used a strategic discovery Middlegame Problems l2J 213 of Emanuel Lasker (f4-f5!!) from a famous Fischer - Unzicker game of his against Jose Raul Capablanca. Olympiad, Siegen 1970 Ruy Lopez Lasker - Capablanca 1 e4 e5 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 il.b5 a6 4 il.xc6 dxc6 St. Petersburg 1914 5 0-0 f6 6 d4 exd4 7 ltJxd4 ltJe78 il.e3 ltJg6 Ruy Lopez 9 ltJd2 .i.d6 10 ltJc4 0-0 11 'ili'd3 ltJe5 12 1 e4 e5 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 il.b5 a6 4 il.xc6 dxc6 ltJxe5 il.xe5 13 f4 il.d6 5 d4 exd4 6 'ii'xd4 'ili'xd4 7 ltJxd4 il.d6 8 tt:'lc3 ltJe7 9 0-0 0-0 10 f4 .l:r.e8 11 ltJb3f6 14 f5! 1i'e7 15 .i.f4 ! .i.xf4 16 :Xf4 .i.d7 17 lle1 1i'c5 18 c3 llae8 19 g4 1i'd6 20 1i'g3 12 f5 ! lle7 21 �f3 c5 22 e5! fxe5 23 llfe4.i.c6 24 :Xesllfe8 251l xe7 :Xe7 26 �e5! h6 27 h4 Lasker restricts the mobility of the oppo .i.d7 28 1i'f4 1i'f6 29 lle2! .i.c8 30 1i'c4+ nent's light-square bishop, ensures the �h7 31 �g6 llxe2 32 11'xe2 .i.d7? ! exchange of the dark-square bishops, and (32 ...'ii' d6!) 33 1i'e7 11'xe7 34 �xe7 g5 35 fixes the f6-pawn, which he intends to attack hxg5 hxg5 36 �d5 .i.c6 37 �xc7 .i.f3 38 with g2-g4-g5 and possibly e4-e5. �e8 �h6 39 �f6 �g7 40 �f2 .i.d 1 41 �d7 12... b6 13 il.f4 il.b7?! c4 42 �g3 Black resigned. 13 ... il.xf4 ! 14 l:.xf4 c5 was simpler, with chances for both sides. The following conclusion can be drawn: the best method of studying typical middle 14 .ixd6 cxd6 15ltJd4.l:r.a d8 (15 ....i.c 8!) 16 game positions is to make a selection of tt:'le6 .l:.d7 17 I1ad1 ltJcS 18.l:r.f2 b5 19.l:r.fd2 games and then analyse the plans and I!.de7 20 b4 ct;n 21 a3 .taB? (21 ...nxe6 ! tactical and strategic methods used in was better) 22 'iii>f2 l:.a7 23 g4 h6 24 .l:r.d3 them. aS? 25 h4 axb4 26 axb4 l:.ae7 27 'it>f3llg8 28 �4 g6 29l:tg3 g5+ 30 'iii>f3 ltJb631 hxg5 It is clear that you should select games hxg5 32 lih3l:td 7 33 'it>g3 'it>e8 34 lidh1 conducted in exemplary fashion by both i.b7 35 e5! dxe5 36 ltJe4 ltJd5 37 ltJ6c5 sides, or by at least one of the players. .tea 38 ltJxd7 ..txd7 39 l:th7.l:r.f8 40 l:la1 You are recommended to select games, and 9 . ..0-0 1 0 tLld2 tLld7 11 ltJc4 Ji.g5. 10 tLld2 'i&'e6 11 ltJc4 0-0-0 (see diagram) In opening books you will find the recom mendation of Paul Keres 12 'iVg3 (with the idea of f2-f4 ), but then Black can immedi ately equalise by 12... ttJxe4 ! 13 'ii'xe5 'it'xe5 11 l:.b1 ! 14 ttJxe5 tLld6. It is better to chose the plan The pawns at a6 and c6 provide a good demonstrated by Capablanca in the previ target for White's queenside pawn storm. ous example. 11 ...f6 12 b4lLlf7 13 a4 Ji.xf3 14l:txf3 b6 15 12 ii.d2! b5! cxb5 16 axb5 a5 17lLld 5 'iVc5 18 c4 Classical examples should be used, but Middlegame Problems 4J 215 18 axb5 aS If 18... axb5, then 19 �a7! is good, for example: 19.. .f6 20 l:1b1 (20 lt:id5?! .l::i.xd5!), or 19... lt:ig620 lt:id5 .l:.xd5 21 l:!.a8+!'it>b7 22 exd5 'ii'xd5 23 l:!.xh8 lt:ixh8 24 �xg5. 19lt:id5 f6 Black is not helped by the exchange sacrifice 19... .l:.xd 5 20 exd5 'ii'xd5, after which 21 c4! is strong. 20 c4 �cs 21 �e3! �xe3? 21 ...lt:id7 is more tenacious, for example: 22 - position after 11... 0-0-0 - d4 h4 23 'ii'h2 �d6 24 c5 exd4 25 cxd6 dxe3 26 dxc7 exf2+ 27 .Uxf2l:!.de8 . not copied. The 'routine' 12 .l:!.b1 is less 22 fxe3 lt:id7 accurate - after all, in the event of the The structure of the position is the same as opening of lines on the queenside, the rook in the Capablanca-Janowski game. By will be needed on the a-file. Capablanca exploiting the weakness of the f6-pawn, was able to prepare b2-b4 only by .Ub1 !, White need not prepare the c4-c5 break whereas here White has another way, with through, but can carry it out straight away. which he also connects his rooks and 23 c5! h4 completes his development. 24 'ir'e1 lt:ixc5 12 ... lt:id7 25 .Uxf6 'ii'e8 The sharper 12.. J'ldg8 was preferable. 26 .i:lc6 'it>b8 13 b4 27l:!.xc5 Also a motif from the analysis of the previous game - the advance should be Black resigned. begun with the b-pawn. 13 a4? is incorrect because of 13... c5! . With the pawn on a2 the Just how viable Capablanca's plan has move ...c6-c5 is not to be feared, since proved is also shown by the following White replies a2-a3 and then b2-b4, achiev example. ing the opening of lines on the queenside. 13 ... h5 Mecking - Korchnoi 14 a4 g5 Candidates Match, 12th game 15ir'g3! Augusta 1974 Prophylaxis - White prevents the opening of RuyLopez lines on the kingside. 15... g4 is now point 1 e4 e5 2 lt:if3lt:ic6 3 �b5 a6 4 �xc6 dxc6 less in view of 16 h4!. 5 0-0 'ir'd66 d3 f6 7 �e3 �g4 8lt:ibd20-0-0 15 ... b6 16lt:ie3 lt:if8? (see diagram) First 16... 'it>b 7 is better. 17 b5! cxb5 216 � Middlegame Problems then it was almost forgotten, and only many years later did it again attract attention. 1 e4 e5 2 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 3 ..tb5 a6 4 ..ta4 tt:lf6 5 0-0 ..te7 6l:!.e1 b5 7 ..tb3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 tt:la5 10 ..tc2 c5 11 d4 fic7 9 .:tb1 ! lile7 10 b4 g5 11 a4lilg6 12 b5 (in the given insta nce the advance of the white 12 tt:lbd2 tt:lc6 pawns leads to the opening of lines) 13 d5 12 ... cxb5 13 axb5 axb5 14 .:txb5 9c6 15 .:tb2 -*.c5 16lilb3 -*.b4 17lilfd 4! exd4 18 9xg4+ 9d7 19 9xd7+ .:txd7 20 lilxd4! -*.c3 21 .:ta2 .:txd4 22 .:ta3! By his elegant combination Henrique Mecking has ob tained a winning position. 22... .l::i.b4 23 .l:!.xc3 .l:i.e8 24'.t>d7 f3 25 l:!.a 1 .l:i.b5 26 '.t>f2 '.t>d6 27 l:!.aa3 h5 28 l:!.a4 c6 29 .l:tca3 g4 30 l:!.a5 l:!.ee5 31 J:txb5 l:!.xb5 32 fxg4 hxg4 33 '.t>g3.l:tb 1 34 ..td4l:!.c1 35 .l:.c3 b5 36 ..txf6 b4 37 .l::i.b3 .l::i.f1 38 ..tg5c5 39 c3 bxc3 40 .l:.xc3 J:td 1 41 ..te3 c4 Black resigned. Now let us see how one might attempt a systematic study of a typical middlegame 13 ... tt:ld8 position. As an example I propose to White's plans after other knight moves are investigate the old plan with d4-d5 in the illustrated by two games of Yefim Geller. Chigorin Va riation of the Ruy Lopez. Let us select and analyse some games. But Geller - Mecking first of all I should mention one principle in Interzonal To urnament, this type of work. It is useful to study Palma de Mallorca 1970 methods of playing typical positions in an historic sense, in their development. 13... tt:la5 14 b3! ..td7 15 tt:lf1 tt:lb7 16 tt:lg3 This enables the ideas of the position to be c4?! (16... .U.fb8) 17 b4 .U.fc8 18 tt:lf5 ..tf8 more deeply understood. The move d4-d5 in the Chigorin Va riation of (see diagram) the Ruy Lopez was popular in the 1920s, Middlegame Problems CtJ 217 on the kingside is also strong: 15 g4 tt:Jc8 16 tt:Jg3g6 17 cJi>h2tt:Je8 18 i..h6 tt::\g7 19 l:lg1, as in the game Klovans-Schneider, Jurmala 1978) 15 ... .l:!.fb8 16 tt:Jg3tt:Jc8 17 a5! c4 18 i..d2 i..f8 19 tt::\h2 tt:Je7 20 Sl..g5! tt:Je8 21 'it'd2 'ii'b7 22 b4! cxb3 23 Sl..xb3 .l:tc8 24 l:lec1 h6 25 i..e3 f5 26 exf5 tt:Jxf5 27 tt:Jxf5 i..xf5 28 tt:Jf1 tt:Jf6 29 tt:Jg3 i..g6 30 c4! bxc4 31 i..xc4 i..e7 32 i..a2 �xc1 33 nxc1 'ii'b5 34 �c6 'fid3 35 Sl..c4 'fixd2 36 i..xd2 .il.f737 tt:Jf5 .il.d8 38 tt:Jxd6 i..xd5 39 .l:t.xa6l:!.xa6 40 Sl..xa6 Black resigned. 19 tt::\h2! a5 20 �e3! axb4 21 cxb4 i..xf5?! 14 a4 l:lb8 22 exf5 c3 23 tt::\g4! i..e7 24 tt:Jxf6+i.. xf6 25 As the following game shows, it is danger �e4! 'i*'d7 26 �f3 �c7 27 h4 f/ie7 28 g3 ous to weaken the queenside by playing tt:ld8 29 a3l:!.cc8 30 �b1 �c7 31 �e2 �b8 14 ...b4 (or 14 ...i.. d7 15 axb5 i..xb5 16 .il.a4). 32 .l::!.b3 �d7 33 'i*'f3 i..e7 34 �e3 i..f6 35 Capablanca -Vidmar �e4 i..e7 36 g4! f6 37 �e3 tt:Jf738 �bxc3 .Sbc8 39 Sl..e4 il..d8 40 i..d2 �c4 41 �xc4 New Yo rk 1924 .Sxc4 42 .l::!.c3 i..b6 43 l:txc4 bxc4 44 g5 14 ... b4 15 tt:Jc4 a5 (otherwise 16 a5!) fxg5 45 hxg5 il..d8 46 'it'h5c3 47 Sl..e3 h6 48 f6 Black resigned. Geller - He rnandez Las Palmas 1980 13... tt::\ a7 14 tt:Jf1 i..d7 16 tt:Jfxe5!? (in the opinion of Alexander Alekhine, 16 Sl..e3 tt:Jd7 17 tt:Jfd2 came into consideration) 16... i.. a6 17 i..b3! dxe5 18 d6 il..xd6 19 'i!Vxd6 ifxd6 20 tt:Jxd6 tt:Jb7?! (20 ....l:!.b8 was better) 21 tt:Jxb7 Sl..xb7 22 cxb4! cxb4? (too passive - 22 ...axb 4 23 f3 .il.a6 was necessary, followed by a possible 15 a4! (hindering the manoeuvre ...tt:Ja7 - ...c5-c4 ) 23 f3 l:lfd8 24 Sl..e3 h6 25 .l:!.ed1 c8-b6; however, the direct plan of an attack .il.c6 26 nac1 .il.e8 27 'it>f2 .l::!.xd 1 28 l:lxd 1 218 We have finally reached the main position of the variation. The following game is regarded as a classic example of play for Black. Thomas - Rubinstein Baden-Baden 1925 15 axb5 axb5 16 lZ'lf1 lZ'leS! 17 g4 g6 18 lZ'lg3 lZ'lg7 19 'it>h1 f6 35 ... f5! 20 l:tg1 tZ'lf7 36 exf5 �xh4 White has adopted a typical attacking set-up 37 f6 �xf6 on the kingside, while Black has demon 38 'ii'f3 �h4 strated the best regrouping of his forces for 39 �g6 Middlegame Problems 219 39 tt:Jxh5 or 39 ..th6 is bad because of 39 .....ig4 . 39 ... ..txg3+ 40 fxg3 ..tf5! 41 ..ixf7? It was nevertheless better to take the pawn: 41 ..txh5 tt:Jxh5 42 'i!Vxh5. However, after 42 . ..�g4 followed by ...'ii'f5 Black retains the advantage in the endgame in view of the weakness of the d5-pawn. 41 ... �xf7 42 tt:Je4 'ii'd7 43 ..th6 'it>g6! 44 ..txg7 'lt;lxg7 Black finally carried out the familiar ad vance: 78 ...f5 ! 79 •h2 fxg4 80 fxg4 •f6 81 45 b4?! c4 tLlf1 •f4 ! 82 •g2 �g7 83 tLlde3 tLle7 84 45 ... cxb4 46 cxb4 ..ixe4 47 'i!t'xe4 'it'g4 was •f3 g5! 85 h5 tLlh686 tLlg3 tLleg8 87 tLlh1 also strong. •h2 88 �d2? (it would have been more 46 t2Jd2 'i!t'f7 difficult for Black to break through after 88 Black is not only a pawn up, but he also has tbf2 tbf6 89 'Ot>f1 ) 88 ...tLlf6 89 tLlf2 •xf2 ! 90 good prospects of winning a second one - •xf2 tLlxe4+ 91 �e1 tLlxf2 92 �xf2 e4! 93 the d5-pawn. His position is won. .i.xc4 (desperation!) 93 ...bxc4 94 tLlxc4 47 'i*'e3 it'xd5 48 'it'g5+ ..ig649 'ti'e7+ �g8 tLlxg4+ 95 �e1 �f6 96 tLlxd6 �e5 97 tLlf7+ 50 'it'd8+ �f7 51 'i!Vd7+ �f6 52 'ii'd8+ �f5 �xd5 98 tLlxg5 h6 99 tLlf7.i.b5 100 lbd8 e3 53 'it'd7+ 'lf;lf6 54 'i!Vd8+ 'it>g7 55 'ii'e7+ 'ii'f7 White resigned. 56 'i'xd6 'i'f2+ 57 'it>h3 'it>h6! (zugzwang) 58 tt:Jb1'i!Nf5+ 59 'it>g2'ii' xb1 60 'ii'f8+ �g5 Rubinstein's game is very useful for an 611i'd8+ �g4 62 'ii'd7+ 'iff5 63 'it'd1+ �g5 understanding of Black's methods of play, White resigned . but his opponent manoeuvred unconvinc Ta rtakower wrote that 'The value of this ingly. If he was intending an attack on the game lies not in any variations, but in the kingside, why then open the a-file? - Black general construction of that solid defensive promptly began exchanging rooks on this basis, from which Black's counterattack file. It was more logical to block the queen develops.' side, in order to free his hands for the attack on the other side of the board , or else not In the game Thomas-Grunfeld, played two touch the queenside pawns at all, since it is ro unds later, Black employed the same plan of defence as Akiba Rubinstein, but later he not so easy for Black to obtain counterplay manoeuvred less accurately. The game there. Let us consider some examples. dragged on, and on the 78th move it re ached the following position: Bogoljubow- Rubinstein Baden-Baden 1925 15 c4!? (Instead of 15 axb5). Now in the event of an exchange of pawns White will exert pres- 220 � Middlegame Problems sure on the queenside. Rubinstein coolly lba5 10 .l1.c2 c5 11 d4 'ilc7 12 d5 iL.d7 13 replied: 'it>h1 c4 14l::tg1l2Je8 15 g4l2Jb7 16 tt:lbd2 15 ... b4 g6 17 l2Jf1 l2Jg7 18 �h6 f6 19 l2Je3 �hB? The game continued: 16 b3l2Je8 17 g4 g6 19... l2Jd8? is not possible because of 20 18 'it>h1l2Jg7 19 l:tg1 h5! 20 l2Jf1 hxg4 21 l2Jf5! gxf5 21 .l1.xg7 Here Yefi m Bogoljubow demonstrated two typical attacking ideas: the opening of lines by f2-f4 and the knight sacrifice on f5 . 22ll'lf5! Again a typical knight sacrifice. It is 24 f4! exf4 25 l2Jef5! l2Jxf5 (Black did not importantto note that on the kingside White risk accepting the piece sacrifice, preferring has such a great advantage in force, that a quiet and roughly equal position) 26 gxf5 even after the sacrifice he can develop his g5 27 .l1.xf4llf7 28 .l1.h2llh7 29 l2Jg2 lbf7 attack gradually, with quiet moves. If 22 ... gxf5 30 l2Je3 .l1.d731 'iit>g2 'itog7 32llh1 llbh8 33 Dubinin wanted to continue 23 gxf5 iL.f8 24 'iie2 'iic8 34 .l1.g3 'iig8 35 l2Jg4llx h1 36 l2Jh4!�e8 ! (24 ...l2Jf7 ? 25 'i!Vh5!) 25 iL.d2tt:lf1 l::txh1 .l::txh1 37 'itoxh1 'iih7+ 38 'it>g2'ii h5 39 26 'ii'f3! !'!.a7 27 llg4!, threatening 28 tt:lg6+! �d1l2Jh640 'iie1l2Jxg4 41 .l1.f3 a5 42 it'e2 hxg6 29 fxg6 with a win. iL.e8 43 �xg4 'it'h6 44 'itog1 �f7 Draw. 22 ....l1.f8 23 �xg7+ .l1.xg7 24 g5 .Uf8 25 h4! However, White's attack is not as harmless gxf5 26 gxf6 �xf6 27 exf5 it'c8?! 28 l2lg5! as it might appear from the games we have �xg5 29 .l::txg5?! (29 it'h5! was stronger) examined. Here is a typical example. 29 ...l2Jf7 30 .Uh5 .Ug8? (strangely enough, Black could have defended by playing 30 ...l2Jh 6!! 31 llxh6 �xf5) 31l::txh7+! 'it>xh7 Dubinin - Suetin 32 'ifh5+l2Jh6 33 l:tg61\Vf8 34l:i.xh6+ 'i'xh6 Russian Federation Te am Championship 35 f6+ e4 36 �xe4+ Black resigned. 1950 Here the plan of attack under consideration RuyLopez proved of use to White in a different opening 1 e4 e5 2 l2Jf3l2Jc6 3 .l1.b5 a6 4 .l1.a4l2Jf6 5 variation - with 6 'ii'e2 (instead of 6 .l:i.e1). 0-0 iL.e7 6 'iie2 b5 7 .l1.b3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 When choosing this system, White must be Middlegame Problems lLJ 221 prepared after6 ...b5 7 .i.b3 0-0 8 c3 for the In the 1st game of the Final Candidates gambit 8 ...d5!?, and if 9 exd5 ..tg4!, but his Match Spassky-Korchnoi (Kiev 1968) White opponent did not go in for this variation. developed his bishop on d2, but he did not Later too Black played passively (13... tZ:ic4 achieve much: 18 .i.d2.l:ta8 19 tZ:ie3l:i.fc8 20 ca me into consideration, or a move earlier - 'it>h2 .l:txa1 21 'ifxa1 'ii'd8 22 iVa? �a8! 23 12 ...c4 followed by ...tZ:ia 5-b7-c5, ...a6-a5 'ti'xb7 l:i.b8, and the players agreed a draw. and .....ta6, as in the game Marjanovic 18 ... l:'!.a8 Lengyel, Sarajevo 1980), did not create any 19 'ifd2 lUeS counterplay on the queenside, and merely 19... l:tfb8 and 20 ...'ifc8 is better. carried out Rubinstein's defensive set-up on 20 ..td3 g6 the kingside. White effectively had an extra tempo, which he saved on the move 6 .l:te1 21 tZ:ig3 ..tf8 (the rook went to g1 in one go) and, 22l:!a2 c4 exploiting his opponent's subsequent inac 23 ..tb1 1i'd8?! curacies, he carried out a brilliant combina tive attack. But even this fine game did not cast doubts on Rubinstein's plan of defence, which successfully withstood many tests. Things reached the point that the d4-d5 system disappeared for a long time from tourna ment play, although several attempts were made to revive it. And, finally, supporters of White found ideas which breathed new life into this old system. Let us return to the main position of the va riation after 14 a4l:i.b8. Karpov - Unzicker 24 ..ta7! Olympiad, Nice 1974 From a7 the bishop completely paralyses 15 axb5 axb5 the opponent's counterplay on the queens ide. 16 b4! tZ:ib7 Under its cover White gains the opportunity Black can also switch directly to Rubinstein's to calmly prepare a storm on the other side defensive set-up by 16... c4 17 lLif1 tZ:ie8. of the board. The plan chosen by his opponents - g2-g4, 24... tZ:ie8 25 ..tc2 tZ:ic7 26 l:i.ea1 "i/e7 27 tt:Jg3, Wh2 and l:i.g 1 - is evidently not too ..tb1 .tea 28 tZ:ie2tZ:id B 29 lLih2 ..tg7 30 f4 effective here. But White found another f6 31 f5 g5?! (31 ...gx f5 32 exf5 lLif7) 32 plan: 18 tZ:i3h2! f6 19 f4 tZ:if7 20 tZ:if3 g6 21 f5 ..tc2! ..tf7 33 tZ:ig3 tZ:ib7 34 ..td1 h6?! 35 tbg7 22 g4 with pressure on the kingside, as ..th5 'ife8 36 'it'd1 tt:'ld8 37 l::ta3 Wf8 38 in the game Karpov-Spassky (41 st USSR l:'!.1 a2 'it>g8 39 lZ:ig4! 'iitf8 40 tZ:ie3 'it>g8 41 Championship, Moscow 1973), which, how ..txf7+ tZ:ixf7 42 'it'h5tZ:id 8 43 �g6! 'it>f8 44 ever, ended in a draw. tZ:ih5 Black resigned . 17 tZ:if1 ..td7 18 ..te3 However, in my view the most accurate plan 222 � Middlegame Problems for White was demonstrated in the following answer is already known from the previous little-known game, which was judged the games: White must carry out f2-f4. best at the international tournament in 2B tt'le1 l:tafB Polanica Zdroj in 1972. In it White did not 29 f4 exf4 exchange pawns on b5. 30 ..txf4 tt'le5 31 tt'lf3 WeB Zuckerman - Kostro In the event of 31 ...tt'lxf3 + 32 'ifxf3 Black Polanica Zdroj 1972 would have been deprived of his only trump 15 b4! tt'lb7 - his centrally-placed knight. 16 tt'lf1 �d7 32 tt'ld4 .l:.eB 17 ..td2 J:tfcB 1B ..td3 It appears that White is preparing play on the queenside, but in fact he has a quite different intention. By pressure on the b5- pawn he forces the opponent to move ...c5- c4, afterwhich he blocks the queenside by a4-a5 and then begins play on the kingside. But what is the difference with the Bogol jubow-Rubinstein game, where White, by playing 15 c4, forced the immediate block ing of the queenside? Let us follow how events developed. 1B ... .:taB 19 'ii'e2 c4 A proper evaluation can now be made of It perhaps made sense to change the White's strategic idea. The arrangement of character of the play, by sacrificing the the queen side pawns is ideal for him, and he exchange: 19... bxa4 20 �xa6 tt'lxe4!? 21 has gained possession of the very important ..txb7tt'lx d2. d4-square. It should be mentioned that, 20 �c2 tt'leB even if Black were able to evacuate his king And here 20 ...a5 should have been consid to the queenside, White could have dis ered , although after 21 axb5 �xb5 22 tt'le3 turbed it with a foray along the g1-a7 the advantage would have remained with diagonal. White. 33 tt'lgf5! gxf5 21 aS! tt'ldB 34 gxf5 tt'lf7 22 g4 g6 It would appear that Black has no satisfac tory defence. White is intending, depending 23 tt'lg3 f6 on the circumstances, to place his bishop on 24 �h2 tt'lf7 h6, triple heavy pieces on the g-file, ad 25l1g1 tt'lg7 vance his h-pawn, and invade with his 26 :g2 �hB knight on e6. 27 .l:.ag1 l:tgB 35 l:.g4 tt'le5 How to further intensify the pressure? The 36 .l:th4 .l:1ef8 Middlegame Problems 223 37 .l:!.g6! ti:Jf7 Bronstein - Winiwarter 38 l:txh7+! �xh7 Krems 1967 391i'g4 Black resigned. I should like to add one more feature, in favour of the pawn set-up on the queenside chosen by Bernard Zuckerman -the idea of a positional piece sacrifice on c4. 36 �dxc4! bxc4 37 �xc4 .*.b5 38 �b6 .*.xe2 39 •xe2 .*.e7 40 �cB •xeS 41 .*.a7 �d7 42 •xa6 Black resigned. Thus, in this interesting variation the scales have tipped in favour of White. It is now Black's turn to come up with something ... 224 � Alexey Kosikov The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame o you remember the science fiction Pa latnik - Kosikov D novel by the Strugatsky brothers Mon Odessa 1979 day begins on Saturday? Its title conceals a Slav Defence deep philosophical thought: our tomorrow's 1 d4 d5 problems are generated today (if not yester day!). This is also the case in a chess game: 2 c4 c6 the endgame sometimes begins back in the 3 4Jf3 4Jf6 opening! 4 tt:Jc3 dxc4 When studying the opening it is not enough 5a4 i.f5 to mechanically learn variations by heart- 6 tt:Je5 you must have a deep understanding of the The continuation of Alexander Alekhine, events taking place on the board , and for which even today remains topical. The this you need to grasp the ideas of the alternative is 6 e3. forthcoming middlegame, and even the 6 ... e6 endgame. Besides, given the enormous 7 f3 i.b4 flood of info rmation which overwhelms chess players today, theory has developed so 8 tt:Jxc4 0-0 much that opening analyses sometimes 9 i.g5 h6 co nclude deep in the endgame. I remember 10 i.h4 c5 a game played in the Premier League of the 11 dxc5 'ifxd1+ 1984 USSR Championship between Igor 12l:l.xd1 i.c2 Novikov and Vladimir Tukmakov. White 13 .l:i.c1 i.h7?! employed an improvement on the 36th (!) move, after which an ending with bishop Black embarks on an unpromising path. To against pawns arose and, by gaining a win, those interested in this variation, I recom he changed the evaluation ofone ofthe then mend that they study the move 13 ...i.x a4!, fashionable variations of the GrOnfeld De made by Jan Ehlvest against Evgeny Bareev fence. (Tallinn 1986, lnformatorNo.41, Game 435). 14 e4 tt:Jc6 I should like to share with you my impres sions of how the opening struggle proceeds, (see diagram) and to show a game in which from the very Let us weigh up the pluses and minuses of start the forthcoming endgame had to be the resulting position and make an evalua reckoned with. During the lesson you will be tion of it. invited to carry out a few assignments for 1. White is somewhat behind in develop analysis at home. ment. In addition he has a complex of weak squares on the queenside. The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame t2J 225 23 �xe2 Black has the 'advantage of the two bish ops'. But this is a purely dogmatic evalua tion: what advantage can one speak of, given the position of the bishop at h7? 23 ... ..txc3 This exchange would appear to be forced. There was no way that I could be satisfied with 23... tt:'Jc6 24 lL'lb5 a6 25 lL'lbd6, when, exploiting the absence of my king and light square bishop, the opponent launches an attack on the queenside. - position after 14 ... tt::lc6- 24 bxc3 tt:'Jc6 25lL'ld6 b6 2. Black's bishop on h7 is extremely badly placed. In order to bring it into play, he must either advance ...f7-f5 - but then the e6- po int is weakened, or else clear the a2-g8 diagonal (for example: ...tt:'Jd 7, ...f7-f6 , ...e6-e5 and ... ..tg6-f7)- but this demands a lot of time. Whose pluses are more significant? Prac tice has shown that White's chances are better. 15 ..tt2 lL'ld7 16 ..te2 tt:'Jxc5 17 0-0 lL'lb3 Black, naturally, tries to exploit the weak ness of the d4-square. 26 r;t;d3 18 .l:tcd1 .U.fd8 The centralisation of the king suggests itself. 19 .l:txd8+! How can Black now parry the threat of it invading his position? Rook exchanges should extinguish Black's initiative, after which the main strategic 26 ... tt:'Je5+?27 Wd4 f6 is useless in view of defect of his position - his out-of-play bishop 28 tt:'Jc8. His king must be urgently brought on h7 - will be especially perceptible. up to the defence. 19 ... .U.xd8 26 . . . 'iii>f8 20 �d1 lL'lbd4 27 'it>c4 'it>e7 21 �f1 28 ..tg3 Of course, not 21 ..tf1 ?? ..txc3 22 bxc3 But what to do now? tt:lxf3+. 28 ... e5! 21 ... tt:'Jxe2 After 29 r;t;d5 r;t;d7! the pawn cannot be 22 .l:i.xd8+ tt:'Jxd8 taken: 30 ..txe5? f6 (or 30... �g8), and the 226 � The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame white king will be mated in the middle of the bishop and pawns on b7, d7, f7 and h7. It is board! quite probable that, by attacking the enemy 29 tt::lf5+ pawns, the knight will force them to advance Nothing is given by 29 tt::lb5 f6 followed by onto squares of the colour of the bishop and ....Jtg8+ - the endgame is certainly not the latter will be transformed into a 'bad' worse for Black. Bad is 29 tt::lc8+? c;t>d? 30 bishop. 'it>b5'it'c 7!, when there is no defence against Let us return to our position. The bishop is 31 ...a6+ , winning the knight. not so strong, and there are more pawn 29 ... .Jtxf5 weaknesses in White's position. His only active possibility is 31 'it>b5, and this is the 30 exf5 'it>d6 one which must be examined in the first instance. Black replies 31... tt:Je7!, not fear ing 32 f6 gxf6 33 c;t>a6 tt::ld5, when he retains his extra pawn. The variation 32 .Jtf2 tt:ld5 occurred by transposition in the game -we will see it in due course. It remains to check 32 'it>a6tt::l xf5. Now 33 �xa7 is hopeless for White: 33 ...tt::l xg3 34 hxg3 (34 �xb6 tt::le2 35 c4 tt::ld4) 34... 'it>c6 35 g4 g6 followed by ... f7-f5 and e5-e4. He is forced to play 33 .Jtf2, but then there follows 33 ... �c6 34 �xa7 tt::ld6 35 g4 (35 Jl.xb6 tt::lc8+) 35 ...g6 , and it is hard for White to defend against his opponent's clear plan: ...tt::l c4 , ...f7-f5 and ... e5-e4-e3. 31 .Jtf2 tt::le7 The position has changed markedly. Let's tryand evaluate it: who stands better, and by 32 c;t;b5 tt::ld5 how much? After 32 ...tt::l xf5 Black would have had to Some of you gave preference to White, and reckon with 33 a5. you consider his advantage to be significant. 33 c4 tt::lc7+ Why? A 'good' bishop in an open position 34 �b4 �c6 and the more active king. 35 a5?! No, such an evaluation is dogmatic and The position is now one that few of you will superficial, and I categorically disagree with want to try and uphold with White. The move it. In fact the advantage is now with Black, in the game loses by force, but 35 g4 tt::la6+ and it is a considerable advantage. 36 c;t>a3 tt::lc5 also looks completely hope I will express my views regarding the less. relationship of knight and bishop in endings. 35 ... tt::la6+ Even in an open position a knight may prove 36 c;t>c3 bxa5 stronger than a bishop if both sides have weaknesses. Here is a somewhat abstract 37 .Jtxa7 tt::lc5 example. Imagine an endgame without 38 g4 kings: White has a knight and pawns on a2, c2 , e2 and g2; Black has a dark-square (see diagram) The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame ltJ 227 And now, your first assignment. From the opening White appa rently gained an advantage. Where did he squander it, and how can his play be improved? The Slav Defence is an old, well-tested opening weapon of mine. Associated with it are memories, both joyful and sad, success ful discoveries and vexing losses. I should now like to describe to you the history of one of these discoveries. Black has not only an outside passed pawn Magerramov - Kosikov (and, as a result, a win in almost any pawn All-Union Qualifying To urnament, endgame); also important is the fact that the Daugavpils 1978 white bishop is shut out of play. How can this Slav Defence factor be exploited? 1 l'Llf3 d5 That's right - it is already time to begin 2 c4 c6 pursuing the bishop. 3 cxd5 cxd5 38 ... t'Lla4+! 4d4 t'Llf6 39 'it>b3 t'Llb6 5 t'Llc3 t'Llc6 Threatening 40 ...'it>b7. 6 i.f4 i.f5 40 �b8 f6 7 e3 e6 41 h4 t'Llc8!! 8�b5 l'Lld7 Complete domination of knight over bishop. 9 'it'a4 'i¥b6 The rest is elementary. 9 ...l:!.c8 is also played. 42 'it>a4 Wb7 10 t'Llh4 43 �xe5 fxe5 There was a time when it was thought that 44 'it>xa5 'it>c6 this move virtually refuted 9 ...'it'b6 . The 45 'it>b4 l'Lld6 point is that the primitive 10 ...i.g6 allows 46 'it>c3 'it>c5 White, by breaking through in the centre, to gain a serious advantage: 11 t'Llxg6 hxg6 12 47 'it>d3 t'Llxc4 e4! dxe4? 13 d5!. 48 'it>e4 �d6 10 ... �e4! 49 g5 h5 50 f4 exf4 (see diagram) 51 �xf4 t'Llb6 When I began studying the position after 1 0 52 'it>e4 t'Lld7 t'Llh4, I sensed that the only defect of White's 53 'it>d4 l'Llf6! plan was the unfortunate position of his An elegant concluding stroke. White re knight on the edge of the board . This was signed. how the move 1 O ...i.e4 ! originated. 228 � The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame b) 13... exd5! ? 14 tt'lf5 tt'lc5 15 .i.xc6+ bxc6 16 .l:txc5�xc5 17 0-0 0-0 (17.. .g6) 18 �e5 .i.f6 19 .i.xf6 gxf6 20 'Wid1 Wh8 21 'ikh5 d4! (the game Ehlvest-Sergeev,Leningrad 1979, went 21... klg8? 22 'iixfl 'iif8 23 'ii'e6 with chances for both sides) 22 exd4 'ikd5, and Black gains the advantage - Dvoretsky.] 12 0-0 a6 13 .i.xc6 - position after1 O ... ..te4! - It was first made two months earlier, in the game Buturin-Kosikov from the 1978 Ukrain ian Championship. 11 0-0 .i.e? (11 ...a6 or 11... .l:i.c8 came into consideration) 12 tt'lxe4!? dxe4 13 d5! tt'lc5! 14 dxc6 0-0! 15 'iic4 bxc6! 16 .i.a4 tt'lxa4 (less good was 16 ....i.xh4 17 .i.d6 tt'lxa4 18 .i.xf8 tt'lxb2 19 'ifxe4) 17 'li'xa4 .i.xh4 18 1Wxe4 .i.f6 (18 ...'ifx b2 was extremely dan With what should Black recapture on c6? gerous) 19 .i.e5 .i.xe5 20 'it'xe5 l:tad8 21 l:.fd1 'ili'b5! 22 'ii'xb5 (22 �c3 .l:i.d523 e4 l:tc5 13 ...'it'xc6 ? (hoping for 14 tt'lxe4? 'iixc1 ) is with counterplay) 22 ...cx b5 23 'it>f1 l::Ixd1 + clearly bad because of 14 'ifd 1!. How can he 24 .l:.xd 1 .l:.c8, and the players agreed a defend against the threats of 15 tt'lxe4 and draw. 15 tt'le2 ? If 14 ...tt'lb6, then 15 tt'lxe4'ii xc1 16 ii'xc1.l:.xc1 17 tt'lf6+! gxf6 18 !!xc1. This game apparently did me a bad service. At the qualifying tournament in Daugavpils The game went 13... 1J.xc6? 14 tt'lxe4 dxe4 (a few rounds before the meeting with Elmar 15 d5! exd5 16 tt'lf5. White's great lead in Magerramov), playing against Naum Rash development decides the outcome. There kovsky, I underestimated a similar break followed 16... g6 17 tt'ld4 l:i.xc1 18 .l:i.xc1 through in the centre and ended up in a 'li'xb2 19 l:r.c8+ �e7 20 tt'lb3! (the simplest difficult position. way to the goal) 20 ...g5 21 .i.xg5+ f6 22 'i!Vb4+ Wf7 23 'Yi'xb7 ii..e7 24 'ir'xd5+ '.t>g7 11 .l:i.c1 !? .l::tc8 25 'ii'xd7 .l::txc8 26 'it'xe7+, and Black [Some opening information: quite possible resigned in view of 26 ...�g6 27 �xe4+ is 11 ....i.e 7 12 tt.Jxe4 dxe4 13 d5, and now Wxg5 28 'ikf4+ Wg6 29 'it'g4+ and 30 �xc8. Black has a choice: And now - your second home assign a) 13... tt.Jc5 14 dxc6 0-0 15 .l:.xc5 'it'xc5 ment. 16 0-0 bxc6 17 .i.xc6 1J.ad8! 18 .i.g3 g5 c . 19 'ikxe4 (19 .i.xe4 gxh4 20 iLf4 1J.d2!) Evaluate the consequences of 13... bx 6 1 9 ...gxh4 with equality (Azmaiparashvili Dvoretsky, Tbilisi 1980); Let us return to the game with Magerramov. The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame lL1 229 In reply to 1 O .....ie4 ! he made a natural, but Black not so much threatens to regain the poor move. exchange, as vacates the c6-square for his 11 f3?! ..id3!! 'errant' bishop. Now an amusing situation arises: White is the exchange and a pawn It is this that constitutes the tactical justifica up, but both his knights are trapped. tion of Black's plan. It was also possible to play this a move earlier, but then White 15 'itd2 would have gained an advantage by 11 If 15 .Uc1 I was planning to reply 15 .....ic 6. liJxd5! exd5 12 ..ixd3. It is important to [Here it should be examined what happens provoke f2-f3, to deprive the white knight of after 16 '&te2 .tel (16... lbd5 17 Ji..g3 g5 18 the f3-square. e4) 17 lbc7 + '&td8 18 a3, and if 18... lba2, then 19 d5!?. It is possible that the position 12 liJxdS! is still in fa vour of Wh ite. Practically forced. In the event of 12 ..ixd3 In the game Glyanets-Dvoretsky (Tbilisi 'i'xb2 13 0-0 'i'xc3 14 ..ib5 ltJb6 Black's 1979) 15 g4?! (vacating the g2-square for position is close to winning. the knight) 15... lbd3+! 16 '&te2 lbxf4+ 17 12 ... ..ixbS exf4 was played. 13lLlxb6 Of course, not 13 'ii'xb5? exd5, when Black is a piece up. 13 ... ..ixa4 14 lLlxa8 14 lLlxa4 is bad: 14 .....ie7 15 ..ig3 g5 (here it is, the price of the move f2-f3 !). 17... ie 7!!. An importantintermediate move. The immediate 17... ..id6 is weaker: 181:!ac1 0-0 (1B. ..'i'li;e7?! 19 lbc7 Ji..c6? 20 d5; 18... ..ic6! 19 d5 exd5 20 liJf5 with some complications) 19 lbc7 Ji..c6 20 .:!.xc6 bxc6 21 lba6 Ji..xf4, and the endgame is most probably drawn. 1B lbg2. 18 .Uac1 0-0 is bad for White. If 18 Initially I had been planning 14 .....ie7, whic h g5 there follows 18... Ji..d6 19 tr.ac1 0-0 20 leads to unclear positions. For example, 15 lbc7Ji.. c6 21 .Uxc6 bxc6 22 lba6Ji.. xf4, and b3!? ..ixh4+ 16 'itd2 0-0 17 ltJc7. The Wh ite loses a pawn. following move, found literally a few hours 18... ..id6 19 1lac1 ..ic6!20 lbe30-0. Black before the game, is far stronger. has gained a material advantage and later 14 . . . lLlb4! he successfully converted it - Dvoretsky.] 230 � The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame 15 ... i..e7 39 �2 tt:'ld4 16 lt:Jc7+ 'it>d8 40 ..t>e3 tt:'lb3 17 .l::i.hc1 g5! 41 l:td1 tt:'la5 The ultra-sharp opening skirmish has con 42 .l::i.e1 i..e6 cluded to Black's obvious advantage. 43 .i::te2 18 tt:'lg6 18 �g3 gxh4 19 i..f4 tt:'lb6 was no better for White. 18 ... hxg6 19 �g3 tt:'ld5 20 tt:'lxd5 exd5 21 �c7+ 'it>e8 22 e4 The rooks need scope, so White tries to open lines. 22 ... �c6 23 exd5 �xd5 24 �d6 tt:'lb6 25 �xe7 'i;xe7 Now 43 ...tt::l c4+ suggests itself, and, which 26 h3 tt:'lc4+ ever way the white king moves, Black's king 27 'it>c3 breaks through on the opposite wing. In Not 27 ..t>c2 tt:'le3+ and 28 ...tt:'lx g2. stead of this I commit an oversight, which makes things much harder for Black. 27 . . . 'it>d6 43 ... �f5? 28 .i::te1 .i::tc8 f4+! 29 .l:!.e2 tt:'la3+ 44 gxf4+ 30 ..t>d2 .l:!.c2+ 45 �3+ 'it>d4 31 ..t>e1 .l::i.xe2+ 46 'it>xf4 32 'it>xe2 tt:'lc2 White has managed to reduce the number of pawns on the board, which improves his 33 .i::tc1 survivalch ances. After 33 .i::td1 �xa2 the win for Black is not in question. 46 ... tt:'lc4 47 g4 33 ... tt:'lxd4+ �d3 34 'it>f2 a5 48 .l::i.h2 f5 35 a3 a4 This move is forced - the threat of creating a passed h-pawn was too serious. 36 'it>e3 tt:'le6 49 gxf5 �xf5 37 .l::i.c2 b5 50 h4 White's position is hopeless - only elemen tt:'le3 tary accuracy is required. But, as is well 51 .l:!.d2+ �d3 known, the hardest thing is to win a won 52 'it>g5 tt:'lf5 position. After 52 ...tt:'lc4 Black would have to reckon 38l:!.d2 'it>e5 with 53 l:!.xd3+ 'it>xd3 54 'i;xg6. The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame '2J 231 53 'it>xg6! black king must help in driving the enemy Weaker was 53 .l:i.h2'it>e3 �f654 lt:Jd4 55 king as far away as possible. l:!.h3+ tt:Jf3 56 l:!.h1 �d2, and Black wins. 61 l:!.h2 tt:Je3 53 ... tt:Jxh4+ 62 'it>f3 tt:Jc4 54 �f6 �c4 63 .l:th4+ �e5! 64 .l:!.h5+ .ltf5 65 .l:!.h2 .lte4+ 66 �g3 �d4 67 'it>f4 tt:Je5 68 l:!.e2 lt:Jd3+ 69 'it>g4 The goal has been achieved - now it is time to attack the white pawns. 69 ... .i.d5 70 �g3 If 70 'it>f5, then 70 .....tf3 ! 71 .U.c2 'it>e3 72 �e6 .i.d1 73 .l::!.h2 .i.e2! proves decisive. Amazingly precise coordination by the black pieces! Here the game was adjourned. Analysis showed that it was not easy to convert the 70 ... .i.b3! advantage, but that to make a draw was 71 .l::!.h2 'lt>e3! even more difficult. The threat is ....i.b3-d 1-e2. And if 72 .l:!.h5, 55 .l:i.f2 then 72 .....tc 4 73 .l::!.h2 tt:Je1! followed by The sealed move. 74 ....i.e2 and 75 ...tt:Jd 3. Therefore White resigned. 55 ... tt:Jf5! 56 'it>e5 tt:Je3 Naturally, after this game White began 57 .l::td2 looking for new possibilities. White would have lost after both 57 �d6 11 0-0-0!? 'it>b3 58 'it>c6 (58 .l:!.f3tt:Jc 4+ and 59 ...tt:Jxb2 ) 58 ...tt:Jd 1, and 57 .l:!.f4+ 'it>c5 58.l::tf2 lt:Jc4+ 59 'it>e6b4 60 axb4+ 'it>xb4 'it>d561 'it>b362 .l::!.f3 tt:lxb2. 57 ... jLg6! 58 'it>f4 58 'it>d6!? 'lt>b3 59 'lt>c5 tt:Jc4 60.l:i.d4 tt:Jxb2 61 .l:i.b4+'it>xa3 62 .l:!.xb5was probably more tenacious. 58 ... tt:Jc2 59 .l:!.g2 jLd3 60 l:l.d2 'it>d4!! Before embarking on decisive action, the 232 � The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame This was played by Artur Yusupov against learn to solve independently the problems Alexander Beliavsky in the 1979 USSR facing you, not relying on the opinion of a Championship. Now 11 ... Jte7 does not work trainer or recognised experts. because of 12 f3 !. 11 ... lieS Assignment 1 (Palatnik-Kosikov). 12 f3 Jtg6 Up to the 23rd move White's actions did not 13 lt'lxg6 hxg6 cause either you or me any doubts. The first 14 'lt>b1 a6 questionable moment arose in the following Events developed as follows: 15 Jtd3 (it position. stands to reason that after the exchange on c6 White cannot hope fo r an opening advantage) 15 ...Jtb4 16 l::!.c1 0-0 17 a3 i.xc3 18 .Uxc3 e5! 19 dxe5 lt'lcxe520 'iic2 l::!.xc3 21 'ii'xc3 lt'lxd3 22 ifxd3 lt'lc5 23 'ii'd4 (of course, not 23 �xd5? in view of 23 ... .Ud8 and 24 ....Ud2) 23 ...g5! 24 Jte5 .Ud8. Black managed to equalise, and the game ended in a draw. A new attempt to improve White's play was made in the game Mordasov-Vekshenkov (Alma Ata 1980). 15 ..te2 Events later developed in similar fashion to the previous game: 15 ...Jtb 4 16 J:Ic10-0 17 Apparently not wishing to allow a weakening a3 ..txc3 18 .Uxc3 e5 19 dxe5 lt'lcxe5, but of White's queenside pawns, a group of you after 20 l1hc1l1xc3 21 llxc3 White gained (Zviagintsev, Boguslavsky, Kiryakov and the advantage. Makariev) suggested the variation 23 tt'la2 il..e7 24 'itxe2 lt'lc6 25 lt'lc3 a6 (25 ...f 5!?) 26 a5, giving preference to White in the final And now a third home assignment. position. But why? After the thematic break In reply to 15 Jte2 find the best plan of through 26 ...f5 ! (which, unfortunately, was defence for Black, one wh ich does not not even considered) 27 e5 (27 exf5 ..txf5) involve a we akening of his pawn struc 27... f4 ! the problem of the light-square bish ture. op is solved. There can follow 28 lt'la4 j;_c2 29 lt'lc5 ..txc5 30 ..txc5 Jtb3 with equality. Discussion of home assignments No, this recommendation is unconvincing. I have to say that no one was able to give I think that the moves made in the game accurate replies to all three assignments. Of 23 'it>xe2 ..txc3 24 bxc3 lt'lc6 are correct. course, they were quite difficult, and be We have already mentioned that Black's sides, as in general in the majority of main problems are his bishop, which is shut opening positions, the solutions offered may out of the game, and his less centralised seem ambiguous and questionable. Even king. White's success largely depends on so, such training is very important and whether he can quickly 'engage' the oppo useful. If you wish to feel confident in the nent, by initiating concrete play before the opening stage of the game, you need to approach of his main forces. The Connection of the Opening with the Endgame CZJ 233 In this connection, I liked the idea of Svidler, insufficientco mpensation for the pawn. [The Ba klan and Emelin, who suggested 25 a5!, balance can be retained by 19 'ikd4! and then 26 l2Jd6l2Jxa5 27 il_xa7fo llowed by (instead of 19 il_e5) 19. . .cxd4 20 .UxcB+ 28 il_b6.Wh ite does indeed have an obvious 'ikdB 21 .l:txdB+ 'it>xdB 22 exd4 - Dvoretsky.] advantage. 16 ...ii.. c5!?. An alternative, apparently also But the move in the game 25 l2Jd6! is no quite possible, was suggested: 16 ...tLlc 5 17 worse. Only, in reply to 25 ...b6 instead of the 'ifd4 ii'd8 18 lLlf5 l2Je6. routine 26 'it>d3? White should have played 17 b4!? 'ikxb4 18 'ikxb4ii.. xb4 19 I::!.xd5 g6! more concretely: 26 c4!. For example, with chances for both sides. 26... f5 27 c5 bxc5 28 i;_xc5 fxe4 29 fxe4, and only then 30 'it>d3with excellent winning Assignment 3 (Mordasov-Vekshenkov) chances. And White's decisive mistake after 26 'it>d3? Wf8 27 'it>c4 'it>e728 i;_g3e5 was the move 29 lLlf5+?. Assignment 2 (Rashkovsky-Kosikov). Most of you expressed the opinion, with which I agree, that by choosing 13... bx c6! Black would have gained a satisfactory position. Makariev, Zviagintsev and Kiryakov recom mend 15 ...it'a7 followed by 16... b5. An interesting plan, but, as Yusupov men tioned, not without its dangers. There can follow 16 l:!c1b5?! 17 tZ:lxb5! axb5 18 il_xb5 it'xa419 ii..xa4 l2Ja720 .l::txc8+ l2Jxc8 21 .l:!.c1 tZ:lb622 ..lib5, and the threat of a2-a4-a5 is very serious. All the other students chose 15... l2Ja5 16 .l::tc1 l2Jc4 with a not altogether clear posi Emelin and Baklan found the interesting tion, in which after 17 b3 I would neverthe variation 14 .l::tfd 1 ii..e 7 15 f3 g5 16 fxe4 gxf4 less prefer to play White. 17 lLlf3 dxe4 18 l2Jxe4 fxe3 with an unclear My suggestion is 15... i;_e7 16 e4 (otherwise game. This is probably so, but in the first Black has no problems) 16... 'ikd 8!!. With instance one should consider the sharp this unpretentious move, vacating the b6- attempt by White to break through immedi square for his knight, Black succeeds in ately in the centre. maintaining his centre. For example: 17 14 l2Jxe4 dxe4 15 d5 exd5 16 .i::tfd1 In the exd5 tZ:lb618 'ii'b3? (18 'ikc2tZ:lb4 19 'it'b3 is event of 16 lLlf5 g6 17 l2Jd6+i;_xd6 18 i;_xd6 better) 18 ...l2Ja5! 19 'it'c2 t2Jxd5, and Black c5 ! 19 ii..e5 f6 and 20 ... 1!t'c6 he has has the advantage. 234 � Mark Dvoretsky In the Footsteps of one Game (some non-theoretical reflections) Alltheory, dear friend, is grey, But the golden tree of life springs ever green. J. W. von Goethe game of chess only begins with the Chess games hardly ever repeat them A opening, but it by no means ends there. selves. But situations arising in them, ideas It sometimes happens that the treatment of and typical methods - these are often the opening determines the final result, but repeated. Sometimes one insignificant epi far more oftenthe outcome depends on the sode provokes a long chain of associations, skill of the two contestants in the subse and similar instances in your own games or quent stages of the game. And nevertheless those of others are remembered. Such many young players spend all their free time associations are very useful - they help the only on strengthening their opening reper studied material to be repeated and consoli toire, by a brief examination of countless dated. recent games, published in magazines, Many of the tales from the cycle A Th ousand bulletins or lnformators, or recorded on and One Nights are linked by common computer discs. As a result, imperceptibly to heroes or develop from one and the same themselves they merely become narrow initial situation. Without claiming to be a specialists. Without purposeful work on the Scheherazade, I will acquaint the readers middlegame and the endgame, knowledge with several chess stories, in the remember in these fields remains patchy, and the ing of which I was helped by one not general understanding of chess suffers. I especially interesting game (or more pre am convinced that a highly cultured, harmo cisely, its first half). I hope that these stories niously prepared player is bound to do better will provide a reasonable illustration of the than an 'openings-expert'. ideas expressed in the preamble to the On a brief examination of a game, behind its lecture. bare score it is very hard to see the pro blems faced by the opponents, the ideas Introduction behind the moves made, and pretty varia tions which remained off-stage. I prefer to study games by strong players, furnished Gavrikov - Dolmatov with detailed comments, desirably written by Ta llinn 1985 one of the two contestants. Such comments Queen's Gambit not only draw the readers into the creative 1t'bf3 t'bf6 laboratory of a grandmaster, but often e6 provoke a desire to argue with the conclu 2 c4 sions suggested, and stimulate your own 3t'bc3 d5 analytical searches. 4d4 iLe7 In the Footsteps of one Game CLJ 235 5 i.g5 0-0 6e3 h6 7 i.h4 b6 8 i.d3 .1b7 9 0-0 lL'lbd7 10 'fke2 c5 11 .l:!.fd1 ltJe4 12 .1g3 What can be said about the system of development chosen by White? It seems to me that its strategic idea is based on the uncomfortable opposition for the opponent of the white rook and the black queen, which Only here did the play deviate from the has no suitable square to go to, such as e2 source game played thirty (!) years earlier. in the white position. A similar motif also Gligoric-Unzicker (Olympiad, Dubrovnik occurs in other openings (for example, in the 1950) developed as follows: 17.. J1e8 18 Ta rrasch Defence to the Queen's Gambit), i.b5! .l:!.c8 (18 ....l:!.e7 19 ltJe4 and 20 d5!) 19 but here we will not develop this topic, ltJe4 'fke7 20 d5! e5 21 'ikg4 .l:!.ed8 22 i.xd7 re membering that at our disposal we do not .l::txd7 23 ltJxd6 'fkxd6 24 fxe5 'fie? 25 d6, have a thousand and one nights. and White won. 12.. . ltJxg3 18 .l:tac1 .l:!.c8 13 hxg3 dxc4? 19 i.a6 .l:!.c7 Here or on the previous move it was better 20 iVf3 'it'd7 to play ...cx d4. We will return to this 21 a3 .l:!.d8 moment, although some time later. 22 i.d3 g6 14 i.xc4 i.xf3 23 it'e2 .1f8 What else? Black has to reckon with both 15 Sergey Dolmatov has successfully deployed dxc5 and 15 d5. Bad is 14 ...cxd4 15 ltJxd4, his forces and has completely equalised. when the terrible 16 ltJxe6 is threatened. The game continued for a long time yet (and 15 gxf3! cxd4 was far from faultless), and in the end it 16 exd4! finished in a draw. In the event of 16 .l::txd4 i..f6 followed by But one gains the impression that White 17 ...'it'e7 Black would have time to safe stood better and did not exploit all this guard his queen against the action of the chances, wouldn't you agree? At some point enemy rook. But now it is hard to defend he delayed. But where? against the thematic central breakthrough d4-d5! First story: bishop or knight? 16. .. .1d6 17 f4 White did not in fact put into effect his main 17 d5 was premature in view of 17 ...e5 18 positional threat, d4-d5. Let us return to the tt:Je4 '1We7. position after Black's 17th move. Why not 17 ... ltJf6 break through in the centre at this moment? 236 � In the Footsteps of one Game The answer is simple: both players saw the Dvoretsky - Romanov variation 18 d5 exd5 19 tt:Jxd5 tt:Jxd5 20 Moscow 1963 i.xd5 (20 .Uxd5 'iif6 ) 20 .. Jk8. On the next Nimzo-lndian Defence move the black queen goes to f6 and 1 d4 tt:Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 tt:Jc3 i.b4 4 e3 c5 5 l2lf3 White's pressure on the d-file evaporates. d5 6 i.d3 0-0 7 0-0 cxd4 8 exd4 dxc4 9 If this is so, why not try capturing on d5 not i.xc4 b6 10 i.g5i.b7 11 'ii'e2 i.e7 12l:l.fd1 with the knight, but the bishop? 'iic7? 13 i.b3tt:Jc6 14 .l:!.ac1 �ac8 18 d5! exd5 19 i.xd5!! If 19 ...tt:Jxd 5, then both 20 tt:Jxd5 (the black queen has no convenient square) and 20 .l:txd5 are strong. 19 ....Uc8 is better, but here too White retains some initiative, by continu ing (if there is nothing better) 20 i.b7!? with the threat of 21 tt:Jb5(the immediate 20 tt:Jb5 is weaker in view of 20 .. .'�We7 21 �xe7?! ii..xe7 22 tt:Jxa7 �c2 and 23 ...ii.. c5). Grandmaster lossif Dorfman once half jokingly, half-seriously formulated the princi ple: 'The worst bishop is always better than the best knight'. Apparently, somewhere in our consciousness we agree with him, because we frequently overlook moves Please don't judge the preceding play too such as 19 i.xd5!! - it is a pity to allow the severely - after all, at that time the two exchange of a bishop. players had only second category rating! But even today I have no reason to criticise Overcoming this psychological barrier could my subsequent actions. However, at a be helped by familiarity with situations in young age non-routine decisions are some which similar non-routine decisions were times found more quickly than when one is taken. ('Similar' and 'non-routine' - at first more mature: due to lack of experience and sight, what incompatible words! But, as knowledge, stereotypes have not yet had Isaak Lipnitsky wrote in his remarkable book time to form. Voprosy sovremennoy shakhmatnoy teorii (Problems of modern chess theory): 'Crea 15 d5! exd5 tively concrete decisions are by no means 16 i.xd5! .Ufe8 some negation of chess generalisations, 17�c4 tbxd5? since the negation of one set of often 18 tt:Jxd5 �b8 obvious rules and laws occurs when other, 19 i.f4 tt:Ja5 perhaps more latent rules and laws, are 20 tt:Jxe7+ I::.xe7 established. ' 21 �xeS+! Here are two examples on the given topic from my own games. Black resigned. The following example, played in an event of far higher standard, will be analysed in more detail. In the Footsteps of one Game tLJ 237 Gulko - Dvoretsky This variation of the Ragozin Defence was 43rd USSR Championship, Yerevan 1975 handled somewhat differently by Mikhail Ragozin Defence Botvinnik. The first game of his Return Match in 1961 with Mikhail Ta l went 4 e3 0-0 1 d4 lt:Jf6 5 i..d3 d5 6 a3 dxc4 7 i..xc4 i..d6 8 li:Jf3 2c4 e6 lt:Jc6 9 li:Jb5?! e5 (9 ...i.. e7!?). 3lt:Jc3 �b4 4lt:Jf3 d5 5 e3 0-0 6 ii.d3 lt:Jc6 7 0-0 a6 A purely prophylactic move, provoked by the need, when carrying out the main plan 7 ... dxc4 8 �xc4 ii.d6 (intending 9 ...e5), to reckon with 9 lt:Jb5 and 9 ii.b5!?. However, according to theory the first of these is not dangerous. In the afore mentioned book Lipnitsky gives the interest ing game Bannik-Cherepkov (1952), which is of immediate relevance to our theme. In it after 9 lt:Jb5 'ii'e7! 10 i..d2 (also nothing is 1 0 lt:Jxd6 ifxd6! 11 dxe5 'it'xd1 + 12 'it>xd1 given by 10 lt:Jxd6cx d6 followed by 11.. .e5) lt:Jg4 13 '>t>e2 lt:Jcxe5 with an active position 10... lt:Je4 11 �e1 e5 12 dxe5 for Black. Why didn't Botvinnik play 10 dxe5 lt:Jxe5 11 lt:Jxd6 with an advantage? We already know the answer - because of 10 ...ii.x e5!. Later Botvinnik improved White's play: 9 b4! e5 10 i..b2 i..g4 11 dxe5 (11 d5 lt:Je7, as in the third game of the Return Match, leads to an unclear game). Black did not play 12 ...lt:Jxe5? (on account of 13li:Jxd6with the better chances for White), but 12... i..xe5!. The subsequent events took a tense course: 13 lt:Jxe5 lt:Jxe5 14 ii.e2.l:.d8 15 'ii'a4 lt:Jd2 16 lt:Jxc7 i..d7 17 ifa5 lt:Jxf118 lt:Jxa8 lt:Jxe3 19 fxe3 .l:.xa8 20'i¥b4 'i¥xb4 21 i.xb4, and the game ended in a draw. 238 � In the Footsteps of one Game I think you will agree that now the move ings evaluates the variation in favour of 11... 1i.x e5! very much suggests itself (and White). Nevertheless,I made another move. then, according to Konstantinopolsky - 12 11 . . . exd4?! 'ifxd8 .l:!.axd8 13 b5 1i.xf3 14 gxf3 l2Ja5 with Why? Behind this there is a rather cu rious equality). We are surprised to learn that Ta l story. chose 11... l2Jxe5? !. After 12 .fi.e2 "ike? 13 In those years I was helping Botvinnik to l2Jb5lifd8 14 'ifc2 a6 15 l2Jxd6cx d6 16 'ti'd 1 conduct lessons with talented young players the position was markedly worse for him. at the school directed by him. Not long 8 h3! before the championship of the country I An important prophylactic move, the point of showed the juniors the game Ta imanov which becomes clear on an examination of Fischer (Buenos Aires 1960), which was full the variation 8 a3 dxc4 9 i..xc4 (9 i..xh7+!?) of fascinating events in all its stages. In his 9 ...1i.d6 10 e4 e5. Now it would be advanta youth Robert Fischer used to employ the geous for White to retain the tension in the Ragozin Defence. On reaching this same centre, but after 11 i..e3 both 11... l2Jg4 and position, he chose 11... exd4 ?! 12 l2Jxd4 1i.d7 11 ...1i.g4 are strong. 13 l:te1 ike?? (13 ...l2Je5 14 i..f1 l2Jg6 was If he wishes, Black can continue 'jockeying preferable, although, as shown by the game for position' by 8 ... h6!? (it is useful to Keres-Lipnitsky, played in the 19th USSR deprive the white pieces of the g5-square), Championship, 1951, the plan of g2-g3, but he decides to clarify the situation. i..g2 and f2-f4 ensures White an enduring initiative) 14 1i.g5!l2Jxd4 15 l2Jd5! 'ife5 16 f4, 8... dxc4 and Mark Ta imanov gained a decisive 9 1i.xc4 i..d6 advantage. 10 e4 e5 One of the juniors asked why Fischer did not 11 i..e3 simplify the position by 12 ...l2Jxd4 13 1i.xd4 (if 13 'i*'xd4!? c5 14 'ti'd2 there follows not 14... b5? 15 lifd 1 i.e? 16 'ifxd8 .l:I.xd8 17 l2Jd5 l2Jxd5 18 i..xd5 .l:I.a7 19 b4, but 14... 1i.e 5!, threatening the exchange on c3 followed by the capture of the e4-pawn) 13 ...c5 or 13 ...b5. At the moment when this game was played, I trusted Lipnitsky's evaluation, which as sumed that Black gained good counterplay by activity on the queenside: 11... h6 12 .l:::i.e1 b5 13 1i.b3 1i.b7(no w theory regards this dif ferently-the Encyclopaedia of Chess Open- In the Footsteps of one Game ltJ 239 I was ready for this question (since I had analysed the position beforehand), and I explained that if 13 ...c5 White does not play 14 i.e3?! b5, but 14 i.xf6! 'iixf6 15 f4 , intending e4-e5, when he stands better. Stronger is 13 ...b5! 14 i.b3?! c5 15 �xf6 'ii'xf6 16 f4 (or 16 tiJd5 'it'e5 17 f4 �xe4) 16 ...c4 17 e5 �c5+, and Black solves all his problems. But instead of 14 �b3?! he has to reckon with 14 e5!. - position after 12 ..txd4!!- 14 e5? bxc4 Again, so not to deviate too much from the main theme, I won't mention the subsequent difficult struggle and the very clever trap in which Gulko finally caught me. However, this game, like the Ta imanov-Fischer game, can be found in the appendix to the lecture. White could have retained the advantage by 14 �b3! c5 15 '*'e3 c4 16 �c2!, and only if 16 ... b4 - 17 e5! bxc3 (17 ...ii.xe5 18 ttJxe5 And here the twelve-year-old Garik Kasparov bxc3 19 'ii'xc3 i.e6 20 l2Jxc4) 18.llad1. suggested the brilliant counter-stroke 14... The mistake made by my opponent can be c5!!. The main variation was quickly found: interpreted, if we remember a well-known 15 exf6 cxd4 16 fxg7 .l!te8 17 i.d5 dxc3 18 psychological chess principle: 'A threat (in .ixa8 cxb2 19 .l!tb1 iNf6 , and Black has this case e4-e5) is often stronger than its excellent compensation for the sacrificed exchange. immediate execution'. But this is a topic for a quite different conversation ... Against Boris Gulko I decided to use this novelty, found in a joint analysis at the Botvinnik School. Alas, my opponent fore Second story: study the comments stalled me. He captured on d4 not with the of grandmasters ! knight, like Ta imanov, but with the bishop. Let us again return to the place where we 12 ii.xd4!! began - to the divergence between the (see diagram) games Gligoric-Unzicker and Gavrikov Dolmatov. Let us open Svetozar Gligoric's After pondering over the position, I realised book I Play Against Pieces. In a note to that I was unable to combat successfully the Black's 17th move in his game against threat of e4-e5!. Wolfgang Unzicker he gives the variation 12 ... ttJxd4 17 ...l2Jf6 18 d5 exd5 19 i.xd5! llc8 20 tiJb5. 13 'iixd4 b5 Why did Viktor Gavrikov not make use of Here, fortunately for me, Boris was too hasty. this 'prompt'? 240 � In the Footsteps of one Game He didn't know the source game? Unlikely, to the certain conclusion that I was not very since he had already employed this varia familiar with opening theory. tion of the Queen's Gambit many times, and In the Four Pawns Va riation it is not possible Gavrikov works assiduously on opening to act on general grounds - one is obliged to theory. play 'move-by-move' and in sharp positions He had forgotten? Altogether improbable - find the only correct continuations. To Viktor has a phenomenal memory, and he conduct such a struggle without an accurate appears to remember absolutely everything. knowledge of the extensive theory of the I think the point is that players who are variation is very difficult. fascinated by opening theory try to quickly Balashov was highly skilled in the art of digest as much fresh information as possi opening preparation for a specific opponent. ble and are often not inclined to spend time I remember how in the USSR Championship on a thorough study of the games they First League in 197 4 he defeated Yuri examine, on an analysis of the commentar Razuvaev with Black in the main variation of ies on them. Apparently Gavrikov either did the Gri.infeld Defence, in which his opponent not notice Gligoric's comment, or he had not was a major expert. After the game Balashov read his book at all and had only seen the stated that the plan chosen by Black had Gligoric-Unzicker game (or more precisely, already been employed not long before by its opening stage) in an opening book. Va sily Smyslov. 'How did I miss this game, Many years ago a similar story occurred seeing as I carefully follow the theory of this with Yuri Balashov - a player with the same variation?!' Razuvaev lamented. In reply kind of absolute memory as Gavrikov, and Balashov smiled cunningly: 'You see, it was with the same approach to the study of the only published in the magazine The Chess opening. Player, and you don't receive it.' 5... 0-0 Ba lashov - Dvoretsky 6lLlf3 c5 USSR Spartakiad, Moscow 1967 7 d5 e6 King 's Indian Defence 8 i..e2 exd5 1 d4 ltJf6 9 cxd5 :es 2 c4 g6 10lLld2 3lLlc3 Ji.g7 didn't know anything about this move 4e4 d6 (however, I also didn't remember the sharp 5 f4 variations arising after 10 e5). I began A clever and, for me, extremely unpleasant looking how to deviate from theory, and I choice of opening variation. made an unexpected move. At a training session before the Spartakiad, 10 ... c4!? Yu ri and I were sharing a room. It was 'Bravo, excellently devised, boozer nose!', assumed that he would be playing on the said Buratino to the joiner Giuseppe. (Bura junior board for the Moscow team, and I was tino - a hugely popular Russian puppet cha his 'understudy'. However, the directors of racter, loosely based on Pinocchio and the Russian team managed to get Balashov created by Alexey To lstoy - translator). But, to play for them and they withdrew him from unfo rtunately, I was a little late: a year the Moscow team's training session. Our earlier, at the Olympiad in Havana, this had brief contact was sufficientfo r Yuri to come already been played by Robert Fischer. His In the Footsteps of one Game 241 opponent, Arturo Pomar, made a poor 20 tLlxe4 ..txa1 response: 11 ..tf3 tLlbd7 12 0-0? b5! 13 'it>h1 21 tLled6 .tel! a6 14 a4 l:tb8, and Black gained the 22 'ii'xcl advantage. I breathed a sigh of relief, since I had not 11 a4 tLla6 seen a clear reply to 22 'ii'c1, although I was 12 0-0 tLlc5 hoping that I would find one in case of 1l e5!? necessity. After the game I asked Balashov The quiet 13 ..tf3 was probably preferable. why he didn't play this. 'Risky', he shrugged Incidentally, on this topic a fairly extensive his shoulders. theory has now accumulated. 22 ... 'iVxd6 1l ... dxe5 2l tLlxd6 l:.xcl 14 tLlxc4 e4!? 24 ..td4 l:tdl Afraid of coming under an attack, I decided 25 tLlxe8 l:txd4 on a positional pawn sacrifice. 14... exf4 15 26l1e1 'it>f8 i.xf4 tLlce4! was also possible. 27 tLld6 .l:.xd5 15 .tel tLldl 28 l:r.e8+ 'it>g7 16 ..txdl exdl 29 tLlx b7 ..te6 17 'ifxdl ..tfS It is clear that the game should end in a 18 'iVd2 .l:tc8 draw. That in fact happened, although only 19 bl after many adventures. One of the instruc tive episodes in the rook endgame that soon arose is analysed in my book School of Chess Excellence 1 - Endgame Analysis in the chapter 'Rook against pawns'. After the game Balashov took me aback, by saying that 'all this had already happened', and referring to an article by Mikhail Ta l about the international tournament in Mal lorca in issue No.5 of the magazine Shakh maty in 1967. Of course, I found the maga zine and saw there the game Pomar-Toran (Palma de Mallorca 1966), which up to the 19th move took exactly the same course. But what staggered me most of all was Ta l's comment on Black's 19th move (tLlg4) . When he sacrificed the pawn Black calcu 'During the game I thought that 19... tLle4 20 lated as far as here and he was hoping that ttJxe4 ..txa 1 21 tLled6 ..tc3 was stronger. in the resulting position he would find But analysis showed that by continuing 22 sufficient tactical resources. 'ikc1! Wh ite retains an advantage, both 19 ... tLle4 material and positional. ' Here I calculated a variation which leads It was not without reason that I feared this almost by force to an acceptable ending for move. But why did Balashov, who remem Black. bered the game, the issue of the magazine 242 � In the Footsteps of one Game where it was published (and, it would seem, 21 'ilt'xd4 .l:txc4!! even the page number), not make use of the Black's idea is illustrated by the variation resource suggested by Ta l? The answer is 21 ...'ilt'h4 22 h3 l:!.xc4 23 bxc4 l:!.e3 24 hxg4 already known: it is probable that he had .l:!.h3 25 gxh3 'ilt'g3+ with perpetual check. merely seen the game, but had not studied But it is not enough to find an idea - it must it, and had not taken an interest in the be implemented in the most accurate way. commentary. By playing 24 li'd2! (instead of 24 hxg4?) Meanwhile, objectively the capture on c3 is 24 .. J!td325 'ilt'e1 White would have parried not a mistake, and White lost his advantage the attack. Therefore To ran changes the only on the next move. After 22 'i!Vxc3 'ii'xd6 move order. he had the brilliant possibility 23 'ii'h8+!! 22 bxc4 l:!.e3! �xh8 24 i.d4+ �g8, and only now 25 Threatening both 23 ...'ilt'h4 , and 23 .. J:td3. tt:'lxd6, when he remains a healthy pawn to the good. White's spectacular zwischenzug 23 h3 l:!.d3! was overlooked by both players - it was 24 'it'xa7 'ii'h4 discovered more than 30 years later by 25 .U.a2! grandmaster Viorel Bologan, when check The only possibility of continuing to play for ing my analyses on a computer. a win. We already know that 25 hxg4 �h3! I should mention in passing that nowadays leads to perpetual check, while if 25 tt:'le2? nearly all players -from ordinary amateurs there follows 25 ...l:!.xh 3! 26 gxh3 'ilt'xh3 27 to leading grandmasters - make active use l:!f2 i.e4. of computers in the study of sharp opening 25 ... tt:'le3 variations. Playing programs or analytical 26 'ilt'b8+ �g7 modules help to avoid tactical errors and suggest latent resources in a position -as a 27 'ilt'e5+ result, the quality of opening analyses and the speed with which they are carried out have increased markedly. Alas, there is also the other side of the coin, which is often forgotten. Yo ur tactical vision needs con stant training, as otherwise it will let you down at the board. By trusting the 'electronic nanny', we get out of the habit of checking for ourselves the correctness of ideas found. As a result of the lack of training, the corresponding skills, so important for any player, are also weakened. As regards the evaluation of the position, it can be concluded that 19... tt:'le4 is insuffi cient for equality. Black should go in for the 27 ... f6? brilliant combination, found by Roman To ran The losing move (Black was most probably after an hour and a half's thought in the in severe time-trouble). 27 ...�g8? was also afore-mentioned game. wrong, if only because of 28 l:!.b2! tt:'lxf1 29 19 ... tt:'lg4! l:txb7. But after 27 ...Wh6 the game would 20 i.d4 ..txd4+ apparently have ended in a draw: 28 tt:'le4 In the Footsteps of one Game 243 t'Llxf1 29 t'Llf6 t'Lle3 30 t'Llg8+'it>h5 31 t'Llf6+. 28 'ii'e7+ Wh6 29 t'Lle4! From this point onwards it is only White who is attacking. The threat is 30 'ii'f8+ 'it?h5 31 t'Llxf6+. 29 ... .txe4 30 'iixe4 l:!.b3 31 �b2!? f5 32 �xb3! fxe4 33l:!.xe3 White has a decisive material advantage. 33 ...'iVe7 34 'it>h2 g5 35 fxg5+ Wxg5 36 12 ... cxd4! .l:!.fe 1 �c7+ 37 'it?h1�xc4 38l:!.xe4 'ii'c3 39 13 exd4 Ud1 'ii'c2 40 llee1 Black resigned. If 13 t'Llxd4 Artur Yusupov was intending 13... t'Llxc3, in order to weaken the oppo Third story: what has my opponent nent's pressure on d5 and to obtain a shelter for the queen on the c-file. 13... t'Llxg3 14 devised? hxg3 t'Llf6 is also possible, for example: 15 Let us again return to that with which we .l:!.ac1 i.b4! 16 cxd5 i.xc3 17 .l:.xc3t'Llxd 5 18 began. Remember that Dolmatov did not l:!.cc1 .l:.c8 19 i.a6, and here in the game manage to gain equality against Gavrikov. A Novikov-Lputian (51st USSR Champion sound plan of action for Black was demon ship, L vov 1984) the players agreed a draw. strated in the game which we will now 13 ... t'Llxg3 examine. 14 hxg3 t'Llf6 In contrast to the Gligoric-Unzicker and Gavrikov - Yusupov Gavrikov-Dolmatov games, here Black se Interzonal To urnament, Tunis 1985 curely controls the important d5-point. Queen's Gambit Not long before the Interzonal To urnament, 1 d4 t'Llf6 Yusupov headed the Moscow Pioneers 2 t'Llf3 d5 Palace team in the competition sponsored by the newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda 3 c4 e6 (grandmaster captains give simultaneous 4 t'Llc3 .te7 displays with clocks against the juniors from 5 .tg5 0-0 the other teams). Artur later told me that in 6 e3 h6 the match against Baku in one of the games 7 i.h4 b6 he employed this opening variation with 8 i.d3 i.b7 White, but he did not gain any advantage - his young opponent played the opening 9 0-0 t'Llbd7 stage extremely accurately. As it transpired, 10 "it'e2 c5 the juniors of the Baku team had been 11 i.g3 t'Lle4 helped in their preparations by their captain 12 Ufd 1 - Garry Kasparov. When he met Gavrikov, 244 � In the Footsteps of one Game Artur tried to remember this game ... sharply improve in positional play, the 15 ltJe5 :cs technique of converting an advantage, and various other fields. 16 .U.ac1 16 ltJb5? is clearly premature: 16... dxc 4 Of course, grandmaster Yusupov developed (the immediate 16... a6 17 ltJa7 l:tc7 is also the skill of prophylactic thinking long ago, possible) 17 Ji.xc4 a6 18 ltJa7l:tc7 withthe from the time when he was not yet a threats of 19... b5 or 19... 'jj' a8. But now grandmaster. Let us see this skill in action. Black has to reckon with ltJb5. 16 ... dxc4 17 ii.xc4 ltJd5 18 Ji.b3 ltJxc3 19 bxc3 Among the numerous deep conceptions expounded by Aaron Nimzowitsch in his book My System, one of the most important seems to me to be the idea of prophylaxis. Nimzowitsch wrote: 'Neither attack nor defence is, in my opinion, a matter properly pertainingto position play, which is rather an energetic and systematic application of prophylactic measures. ' This idea seems Artur asked himself: 'What does the oppo paradoxical and incomprehensible, but 1 nent want, and what would he play if it were hope that an analysis of the present game him to move?' Perhaps he was intending to will help it to be understood. sacrifice his knight on f7? (However, it is not This is what Nimzowitsch understands by clear whether the sacrifice is correct.) Black 'What it is concerned with prophylaxis: certainly has to reckon with activity in the above all else is to blunt the edge of certain centre by c3-c4 and d4-d5. Is that all? No, possibilities which in a positional sense there is also another threat: 'ii'd3 and then would be undesirable. ' He considers two ii.c2. The move ...f7-f5 weakens the posi forms of prophylaxis: the over-protection of tion too much, while in reply to ...g7 -g6 strategically important points and the pre there follows the knight sacrifice on g6. vention of freeing pawn moves. But prophy Now, knowing the opponent's ideas, it is laxis can be understood more widely, as the easier to choose your move. For example, prevention not only of pawn moves by the 19... Ji.a3 comes into consideration - after opponent, but also other ideas of his. 20 llc2 it is not easy for White to set up the Therefore from the standpoint of the practi battery on the b1-h7 diagonal. But does this cal player it is more useful to talk not even move help against c3-c4 and d4-d5, and about prophylaxis, but about 'prophylactic with what plan can it be linked? (Remember, thinking' - an inner resolve to identify the Nimzowitsch demands 'an energetic and opponent's ideas. I will disclose one my systematic application of prophylactic meas professional secrets, confirmed by my entire ures .') experience of training work: a player who masters the skill of prophylactic thinking 19 . . . l:tc7!! will significantly raise his standard, and A grandmaster move! Black improves his In the Footsteps of one Game ctJ 245 position and prepares ...'ifc8 (or ...'ii' a8), about his own active possibilities. which is a good antidote to White's offensive 24 ... g6 in the centre. Now almost certainly the knight sacrifice on f7 will be incorrect. 20 'ii'd3 ..if6 It transpires that after 21 ..ic2 g6 White cannot play 22 tt::lxg6? fxg6 - the black rook participates in the defence along the 7th rank. 21 tt::lg4 h5! Parrying the obvious threat of 22 ..ic2g6 23 tt::lxh6+. 22 tt::le3 22 tt::lxf6+ 'ifxf6 would have led to equality, but for the moment Gavrikov is hoping for more. 25 .l:Ie1 ?! White decided to improve the placing of his rooks, by playing .l:!.e 1 and .l:!.cd1. A sensible operation? Undoubtedly. However, abso lutely ill-timed. Now it was his turn to employ 'prophylactic thinking' and forestall Black's prosaic idea of activating his forces: ...c.itg7 and ...�h8. This problem would have been most simply solved by 25 'ii'e3! (but not 25 'ifh3? i.g5! and 26 ...'it>g 7), for example, 25 ...i.g7 (25 ...c.itg7? 26 'ifh6+; 25 ...i.g5 26 f4) 26 lt:Je5 withro ughly equal chances. 25 . . . 'it>g7 26 �cd1? But now what does White want? Either, as Consistent, but bad! White should have before, c3-c4 and d4-d5, or 23 d5 immedi forestalled the threatened attack on his king ately, in order to then supportthe d5-point by with a series of exchanges: 26 'ii'e3 (or 26 c3-c4. tt::lxf6 immediately) 26 .. J::ih8 27 tt::lxf6 'i!Vxf6 22 ... .l:td7! 28 ir'e5 with somewhat the better endgame Now 23 c4? .l:Ixd4 is not possible, while if 23 for Black. d5 Yusupov was intending 23 ... i.g5! 24 f4 26 ... .l:!.h8 ii..e? followed by ...i.c5 . 23 ..ia4 �d6 24 27 'ii'g3 lt:Jc4? i.a6 is also pointless. What does White want? Obviously, to 23 g4 hxg4 simplify the position by 28 tt::lxf6 'it'xf6 29 24 tt::lxg4 'ii'e5. But it is not hard to parry this threat Now what is threatened? Probably nothing. with a move which at the same time comes After strengthening his position with a series into Black's plan of attack. of prophylactic moves, Black can also think 27 ... .l:!.h5! 246 <;t> In the Footsteps of one Game How quickly White's position has become Appendix difficult! The Ta imanov-Fischer and Gulko-Dvoretsky 28 'ii'f4? games, the opening stages of which we 28 tt::lxf6 was nevertheless better. have already examined, contained many 28 ... ..te7! other interesting and instructive events - The bishop switches to a powerful attacking you can now make their acquaintance. position - d6. A possible variation is 29 tt::le5 ..td6 30'ii' e3 'ii'h4 31 f3 :xe5! 32 dxe5 ..tc5 Ta imanov - Fischer 33 l:txd7'ii' xe1 +. Buenos Aires 1960 291i'c1 ..td6 Ragozin Defence 30 tt::le5 'ii'h4 1 c4 tt::lf6 2 tt::lc3 e6 3 d4 ..tb4 4 e3 0-0 5 31 f3 'ii'g3 ..td3d5 6 tt::lf3 tt::lc6 7 0-0 dxc4 8 ..txc4 ..td6 32 l:te3 9 tt::lb5?! ..te7?1 (9 ...e5!?; 9 ...'ii' e7!?) 10 h3 32 tt::lxd7 .Uh1 +!. (10 'ii'c2!?, preparing l:td 1) 10... a6 11 tt::lc3 ..td6 12 e4 e5 13 ..te3 exd4?1 14 tt::lxd4? 32 ... l:td8! (14 ..txd4!!) 14... ..td7?! (14 ... tt::l xd4 15 ..txd4 The last black piece joins the attack b5! 16 e5 c5!!) (33 .. J:tdh8 is threatened). White resigned. 15 .l:.e1 fle7? White lost quickly, without making any obvious positional mistakes. There was a 16 ..tg5! tt::lxd4 simple reason: Gavrikov had not developed 16... ..te5 was better, although after 17 lLlf3 the skill of prophylactic thinking, which White would still have retained the advantage. Yusupov possessed. For this reason, in this 17 lLld5! game they proved, in boxing terminology, to The only way! The primitive 17 'ii'xd4? be 'in diffe rent weight categories'. would have allowed Black to simplify the Prophylaxis is one of my favourite themes. I position by 17... 'i!ke 5. could expand on it at length, but it is time to 17 . . . 'ii'e5 stop. In conclusion I should like to dispel the 18 f4 tt::lf3+ impression, which you may have acquired, that I am altogether against the serious study The only move. of opening theory. Remember the examples we have examined, and the difficulties which one of the sides sometimes encountered due to being insufficiently well-prepared in the opening, and you will realise that I am by no means appealing you to give up studying the opening. And in general, every player has the right to study that aspect of chess which most attracts him. I wanted only to warn against concentrating on opening theory alone, and to show what fascinating and useful discoveries can be made, by immers ing yourself in the amazing world of chess. 'Here morning stole up on Scheherazade, and she ceased her permitted discourse.' 19 'ii'xf3? In the Footsteps of one Game ctJ 247 Ta imanov makes the natural move, retaining 24l:!.ed1! an advantage, taking into account the Threatening 25 b4!. variation 19 ...'it'd 4+ 20 'ith1 'iixc4 21 i..xf6 24 ... i..c6 (it is probable that 21 l2Jxf6+ gxf6 22 i..xf6 also works). The capture with the pawn also 25 e5 came seriously into consideration, so as not Nothing is given by 25 l2Je7+i.. xe7 26 i..xe7 to allow the black queen to go to d4. .l:!.fe8 27 b4 'iib6 28 i..c5 on account of In good positions one usually does not want 28 ...i.. xe4. to take unnecessary risks, especially since 25 ... i..b4 no elementary win is apparent after 19 gxf3 'iixb2. For example, 20 .l:!.b1 'iia3 21 i..xf6?! 'iic5+ or 20 l:te2 'iia3 21 i..xf6?! gxf6 22 l2Jxf6+ 'ith823 l2Jxd7�g 8+. In the conversion of an advantage, at some point you have to exert yourself, calculate variations accurately, and find a concrete way to the goal. White would have won by 19 gxf3! �xb2 20 .l:!.e2 (20 .l:!.b1 'ii'a3 21 tt:Jxf6+ is also not bad) 20... 'ifa3 (if 20 ...i.. c5+ 21 'ith1 'it'd4, then at the least 22 i..xf6 gxf6 23 'iixd4 i..xd4 24 l:!.d1 c5 25 .l:!.xd4 cxd4 26 tt:Jxf6+ and 27 l2Jxd7 is possible) 21 l2Jxf6+ gxf6 22 i..xf6 . After 22 ...i.. xh3, the reply which concerned Ta imanov, there follows 26 'ir'e4 either 23 l:th2!'i¥e 3+ 24 'ith1'ii' xf4 25 e5!, or White could have won a pawn by 26 i.e? 23 'it'd5! h6 (23 ...i.. c5+ 24 'ith2; 23 ...i.. xf4 i..xe 7 27 ttJxe7 + 'ith8 28 l2Jxc6 bxc6 29 24 'ifh5) 24 'i!Vh5'ii c5+ 25 'i¥xc5 i..xc5+ 26 'ii'xc6. But with all the heavy pieces on the '.th2 i..e6 27 l:tg2+ 'ith7 28 ng?+ 'it>h8 29 board it would not have been easy to l:!.g5+ or 29 l:txf7+ 'itg8 30 .l:!.xf8+ 'itxf8 31 convertit, in view of the insecure position of i..xe6. his king (this is where the effect of 20 ...l2Jg4 Excessive laziness or caution can in fact is felt). turn out merely to be new obstructions on Ta imanov wisely avoids the temptation. the way to the winning of a game. Having a stable positional advantage, it is 19 . . . 'i!Vd4+ important not to 'sell too cheaply'. 20 'ith1 l2Jg4!? 26 ... i..xd5 Fischer was hoping that the weakening of 27 .l:txd5 'i!Vb6 the enemy king provoked by this move 28 f5! would subsequently come in useful for him. 20... l2Jxd5 21 i..xd5 was unpromising. An accurate move order. While attacking on the kingside, White at the same time creates 21 hxg4 'iixc4 a threat on the queenside: 29 a5 'ii'c6 30 'i¥b5 22 b3 .l:!.c1 . Weaker was 28 a5 'it'c6 29 f5, after The queen has no secure shelter: if22 ...'i¥d 4, which apart from 29 ...b5!? 30 .l:tc1 'ii'b7 then 23 .l:tad1 is strong. there is also the clever stroke 29 ...i.. d2!, 23 a4 'i¥a5 suggested by the eleven-year-old candidate 248 � In the Footsteps of one Game master Sasha Ryazantsev (30 �xd2 l1ad8, 34 fxg7 cxd5 and Black regains the piece). 35 gxf8ft'+ 'it>xf8 28 ... �c3 Also possible was 35 ....l:txf8 36 'i!Vxd5 'i!i'xb3 29 .l:tc1 �b2 37 �f6 (37 �h6? 'i¥g3, and 38 �xf8? 'iie1 + By threatening the b3-pawn, Fischer tries to 39 'it>h2 �xe5+ is bad for White) 37 ...'ife 3! divert the opponent from his attack. with an unclear position (but, of course, not 37 ...'i¥g 3? 38 'iid2!). 30 l:tb1 �c3 36 'iVxh7 If 36 'ii'xd5 there follows 36 ...l1xe5 37 'ii'd2 'ii'e6. 36 ... �xeS 37 l:tf4! 'i!Ve6 37 ...�g7 came into consideration. 38l:!.f1 31 l:tc1 ? 31 b4! would have won, for example 31 .. J1ae8 32 l:tc5! f6 33 �e3 �xe5 34 11xe5. 31 ... �b2 32 .l:tc4?! By playing 32 l1c2!, White would have forced 32 ...�x b3, after which there would Black has successfully conducted a difficult follow 33 l:txc7, retaining an attack. The defence and only a little more was required move in the game allows Black an important in order to completely neutralise the oppo tempo to bring up his reserves. nent's initiative. He should have moved his 32 ... l1ae8! bishop along the a1-h8 diagonal; only not to There begins a tactical skirmish, in which an g7, in view of 39 �c1 ! (39 �d2? 'iixg4) important role is assigned to the bishop on 39 ...'it'e7 40 g5 'it'b4 (intending 41 .. J1e1 )41 b2, attacking the e5-pawn. Both 33 ...c6 and �b2! d4 42 'iif5 'ili'xb3 43 g6 f6 44 �xd4, but 33 .. .f6 are threatened. to c3 or d4, when in the event of 39 Si.c1 33 f6? there is the reply 39 ...'it>e7 !. 33 �e3 'i!i'xb3 34 .l:txc7 was objectively Fatigued by such a gruelling game, Fischer stronger, since now Black could have seized makes a mistake, which could have proved the initiative, by playing 33 ...l:te6! with the decisive. idea of 34 fxg7 l:tfe8. 38 ... b5? 33 ... c6 39 axb5? In the Footsteps of one Game ttJ 249 Strangely enough, this natural exchange 45 .. .'iff1 + 46 �g1 �d4 suggests itself, (especially in time-trouble - just before the forcing 4 7 �h2 with roughly equal chances. fortieth move!) prevents White from con Fischer was probably trying for more, but he cluding his attack victoriously. overlooked his opponent's simple reply. He could have won by 39 .l:te1 !, creating the 46 �g1 ! 'ii'f4 irresistible threat of 40 �h6+ �e7 41 �g7. Black is forced to allow the exchange of 39 ... axb5 queens and go into an unpleasant bishop 40 �d2 ending. True, the draw has not yet been thrown away. Now if 40 .Ue1 there is the suitable reply 40 .. J�a8!! - the threat of the exchange 47 'ii'e7+ �c8 41 .. J:ta1 neutralises the white rook. For 48 'ii'f8+ 'ii'xf8 example, 41 �h6+ �e7 42 �g7 .l:!.a1 ! 43 49 �xf8 ..tg3! .l:txa 1 (better is 43 �h4+ f6 44 l:txa1 �xa 1 50 �1 d3! 45 g5 with equality) 43 ...�xa 1 44 �xa1 51 �b4 �d7 �e 1 + 45 'it>h2�x a1, and the queen ending 52 �e1 �f4 is in Black's favour. 53 j_cJ ..tg3 40 ... �e7! 54 g5 �e6?! 41 j_b4+ 'it>d8 An inaccuracy. 54 ...<;t>e7 55 g6 �f8 was 42 .Uxf7 simpler. 42 �a5+ �c8 43 l:.xf7.l:th8 44 .l:tc7+�b8 45 55 g6 �e7 .Ub7+etc. would also have led to a draw. The position of the king on e7 gives White a 42 ... llh8 tempo, necessary to free his king from 43 l:.f8+ .U.xf8 imprisonment. 44 �xf8 'iif6! 56 ..te1 ..tf4 White's extra pawn does not play any 57 �h4+ �8 significant role. The game should end in a draw. 45 �c5 58 g3! �d6! The natural move 58 .....te3? would have lost in view of 59 �f6 followed by �e1 and 45 ... d4? �f6-e5-f4. 250 � In the Footsteps of one Game 59 'iiif2 �c5+ 60 'iitf3 'it>g761 �g5 'it>xg6 62 �f4 'it>h5! 63 'it>e4 (63 g4+ 'it>h4) 63 ... 'it>g4 64 'it>xd3'iitf3 65 �c7 �f2 66 �d6 �e1 67 'it>d4'it>g4 68 'it>c5 b4 69 'it>b5'it>f5 70 'it>c4 'it>e671 �c7 'iitf5 72 'it>d3Wg4 73 �d6 �c3 74 'it>c4i.e1 75 i.xb4 i.xg3 76 i.c3 �d6 77 'it>d5 i.e7 78 i.d4 i.b4 79'it>c4 �as 80 i.c3i.d8 81 b4 Yuri Averbakh showed that Janowski was wrong to resign against Capablanca - he could have reached Centurini's position: 1 ... 'it>f4!! 2 il..d4 (2 �e5+ 'it>e3 3 b5 'it>d3 4 'it>c6 'it>c4) 2 ...'it>f3 ! 3 b5 'it>e2 4 Wc6 'it>d3 5 �b6 �g5 6 il..c7 (after 6 'it>b7 'it>c4 7 'it>a6 Black again takes his king to the rear of White's - 7 ...'1t>b3! 8 i.f2 �d8 9 i.e1 'it>a4! If we now make the moves 81 ...'it>f5 82 'it>d5, with a draw) 7 ...i.e3 8 'it>d5! (8 i.d6 'lt>c4) we obtain the position in which David 8 ...i.d2 !! (bad is 8 ...'it>c3 9 �d6 �b6 10 Janowski resigned to Jose Raul Capablanca 'it>c6or 9 ...'it>b3 10 i.c5'it>a4 11 'it>c6) 9 .id8 (at the New York To urnament of 1916). (9 b6 i.a5) 9 ...i.e3 10 i.e? i.b6! 12 c.t>c6 The black bishop is controlling a square �a5 13 i.d6'it>c4 . which the pawn must cross. White will try to evict the enemy bishop, by using intercep Even in his youth (at the time he was just tion - a highly important method in such seventeen) RobertFis cher seriously studied situations. Only the black king can prevent chess as a whole, and not only opening the interception. theory. He was familiar with Averbakh's analysis and therefore he gained a draw An analysis of this type of ending was made without difficulty. in the mid-19th century by the Italian player Luigi Centurini. He established the main 81 . . . 'it>f4! idea ofthe defence - the black king should 82 b5 'it>e4 be positioned to the rear of the white 83 �d4 i.c7 king. Here is one of his positions, showing 84 'it>c5 'it>d3! how Black should construct the defence: 85 'it>c6 'it>c4 (see diagram) 86 i.b6 i.g3 87 i.a7 i.c7 1 il..c7 is not possible, while after 1 i.e3 iL.a52 �b6 i.d2 3 �c7 i.e3 interception is Draw. not feasible, since the c5-square is control led by the black king. In the Footsteps of one Game ltJ 251 Gulko - Dvoretsky 21 l:td2 h6 43rd USSR Championship, Yerevan 1975 22 l:te1 Ragozin Defence Threatening 23 l1e5. 1 d4 lt:Jf6 2c4 e6 3 lt:Jc3�b 4 4 lt:Jf3 d5 5 e3 22 ... 'ii'g6 0-0 6 �d3 lt:Jc6 7 0-0 a6 8 h3 dxc4 9 ..ixc4 23 'it>h2 ..id6 10 e4 e5 11 �e3 exd4?! 12 ..ixd4!! lt:Jxd4 13 'ii'xd4 b5 14 e5? (14 ..ib3!c5 15 'ii'e3 c4 16 ..ic2! b4 17 e5!) 14... bxc4 15 exd6 Black's position is clearly worse; the white pieces are more active (he has to reckon with .Ue5 and �d6) and his queenside pawns are weak. In such cases it is What should Black play now? important to find an idea which may divert Having got away with a slight fright in the the opponent from the natural idea of further opening, in my joy I immediately committed strengthening his position, and to pose him a significant inaccuracy. Since in any case some problems. the queenside pawns will remain broken, I 23 . . . 'ii'f5! should at least have retained the more I thought that, in an ending with rooks on the active c4-pawn, which fixes White's weak board , the bishop might prove stronger than ness on b2. After 15... �e6! the two sides' the white knight and that to some extent this chances are roughly equal. would compensate for the weakness of my Unfortunately, I conducted the subsequent pawns. In the middlegame, by contrast, stage of the game superficially and my knights usually coordinate better with the opponent gradually outplayed me. queen. 15 . . . 'ii'xd6?! In addition Black sets his opponent a posi 16 'ii'xc4 ..ie6 tional trap - he tempts him into playing 24 'ii'd6?! (with the threat of 25 .i:!.e5), against 17 'it'e2 .Ufe8 which he had prepared 24 ....i:!.a d8! 25 �xd8 17... lt:Jd5 came into consideration. .l:i.xd8 26 .i:!.xd8+ 'it>h7. In the resulting posi 18 .Ufd1 �c5 tion I have real counter-chances, associated White would also have stood better after with ...�h5 and ...g7 -g5-g4. Incidentally, it 18... �b6 19 iVc2. was in connection with this plan that on the 19 �d2 �h5 previous move Black lured the king to h2. 20 �f4 c5 24 'it'xf5! �xf5 252 � In the Footsteps of one Game 25 .l:!.e5! l:lxe5 28 .l:.d6 26 tt::lxe5 .:tea The cool-headed 28 tt::le3 would have been 27 tt::lc4 more unpleasant for me. 28 ... tt::le41 29 tt::lxe4 l:txe4 30 tt::le3 i.e& 31 .l:!.xa6 .l:td4 Here I had to think for a long time. The position is very hard to defend. For example, if 27 ...i.e6 the simple 28 tt::le3 followed by 29 l:td6 is strong. It is unfavourable to play 27 ...l:te 1 28 l:!.d6 i.e629 tt::le3 or 28 ...tt::l e4 Black had aimed for this position. His rook is 29 tt::lxe4 i.xe4 30 f3 ! i.b7 (30... i.b1 31 now active (the threat is 32 ....l:.d 2, winning a .lba6) 31 tt::la5 :e7 32 b3. pawn), and his bishop is stronger than the 27 ...tt::l e4!? looks better. White has a choice: knight, restricting its mobility (it was for such a) 28 tt::lxe4 i.xe4(28 ....l:r.xe4? 29 tt::ld6), and a situation that I was hoping, when I now none of the following continuations is exchanged the queens). The chances of a convincing: 29 tt::ld6 l::te6, or 29 l::te2 lte6 draw are quite real. with the idea of ...i.d 5, or, finally, 29 l:.d6 1 was expecting the natural move 32 b3, i.b1! 30 l:.xa6 i.d3. parryingthe threat of 32 ....l:.d2 . After32 ...�e7 b) 28 l:.e2!? �8 (weaker is 28 ... tt::lf6 29 White has to reckon with ...f7-f5-f4 (espe l:.xe8+ tt::lxe8 30 tt::la4 i.e631 b3!? i.xc4 32 cially in the event of �g3 ). If 33 l:.c6ther e is bxc4 tt::ld6 33 tt::lxc5 a5 34 �g3 tt::lxc4 35 33 ....l:!.d2 (the a2- and b3-pawns are vulner �f4 ) 29 tt::la4 i.d7! 30 tt::lcb6 (the simple 30 able), while if 33 .l:!.a5 - 33 ...�d6. tt::lab6 leaves White with somewhat the In such cases another well-known psycho better position) 30 ...i.b5 31 .l:.c2 i.d3 32 logical effect often operates in Black's .l:tc1 tt::lxf2 33 tt::lxc5. The endgame looks favour. The opponent does not realise that dangerous for Black, but 33 ...l:te2 would the pawn was sacrificed for definite positional appear to maintain the balance. compensation; he thinks that he simply won 1 decided to employ my favourite defensive it. Reckoning that the goal is already close, method - to tempt the opponent into the win and that the remainder is a matter of of a pawn, in order in return to activate my technique, he frequently relaxes and begins pieces to the maximum. playing carelessly, which it is usually possi 27 ... �f8!? ble to exploit. In the Footsteps of one Game CLJ 253 But I was unlucky - Gulko did not make this After once again checking the variation psychological mistake. He thought for a long planned beforehand: 34 ...l::. e2 35 a6 .l:ixe3 time (leaving himself with just 10 minutes for 36 a? ..id5, without hesitation I made the 8 moves) and found an excellent practical losing move. chance. 34 ... l:!.e2? 32 .l::i.b6! 35 a6 l:!.xe3 White does not want to place his pawns on 36 .l:!.b8+! 'iite7 light squares and he plans a2-a3, retaining 37l:!.b7+! the possibility of also advancing this pawn Now White's idea becomes clear - the rook further. In addition, the move in the game has physically intercepted the a8-h1 diago involves a cunning trap, which I, alas, failed nal, afterwhic h the pawn cannot be halted. to spot. Black resigned. Of course, 32 .....ixa2?? 33 .:I.b8+ It is curious that, six months earlier in a game between the same players, a similar situation arose. And again Gulko rose to the What should Black play? occasion. In the Footsteps of one Game Gulko - Dvoretsky the black pawn on a square of the colour of Zonal To urnament, Vilnius 1975 its bishop, or 54 g4, to open a direct route for the king into the centre. It was they that I was counting on! After 54 b3? the black king becomes too active: 54 ...'it>f7 55 �c3 'it>e6 56 'it>g 1 'it>d5 57 �2 c4! (it is probable that 57 ...'it>e4 58 'it>e2 h5 also does not lose) 58 b4 'itc6 followed by ...'it>b5 and ...�xb4 . In the event of 54 g4? Black succeeds in advantageously exchanging a pair of pawns on the kingside: 54 ...'it>f7 55 �c3 c4! 56 'it>g2 'it>g657 �3 h5. Then the worst that Black is threatened with is the loss of his c-pawn, after which there arises a drawn ending, already familiar to us from the Ta imanov Fischer game. But it is not apparent how Black's position is strategically hopeless. If White can achieve even this, for example, 50 .. .'�g8,then 51 %:te4is strong. 58 gxh5+ 'it>xh559 'it>e4 �h6! 60 'it>d4 i.c1 I decided to provoke my opponent into a 61 'it>xc4 �xb2 62 �xb2 'it>h4. combination with the win of a pawn, since I Gulko assessed the position excellently and saw that the resulting bishop ending might made the winning move. prove difficult to win. 54 'it>g1 ! 50 . . . 'ii'f5!? 55 �c3 'it>e6 51 'ii'xf8+! �xf8 56 � 'it>f5 52 l:txf6 'ii'xf6 If 56 ...c4, then 57 'it>e3 'it>d5 58 �4 is 53 �xf6+ 'it>g8 decisive. 57 'it>e3! Again White is careful. If 57 �3? there would have followed 57 ...c4! 58 g4+ 'it>g6 (or 59 ...'it>g 5) and ...h7 -h5. 57 ... h5 57 ...c4 58 'it>d4 �4 59 'it>xc4. 58 b3 Only now has the time come to fix the black pawn. 58 ... �e7 59 'it>d3 h4 60 �e1 ! 'it>e5 61 'it>c4 'it>d6 Which moves for White suggest themselves 62 b4! in the first instance? Probably 54 b3, fixing Black resigned. ctJ 255 PA RT V Artur Yusupov Games by Pupils of the School n this chapter we will once again return to action in the centre. A just retribution for I the problems which players face when violating the principles of development would preparing for a game and during the playing have been the variation given by Dvoretsky: of its initial stage, by analysing the typical 14... tt:Jxe5! 15 'ii'e4 tZ'lc5! 16 'i!Vxa8.lib? . The mistakes revealed in the analysis of games queen is trapped and the advantage passes by our pupils. The number in brackets to Black. indicates the age of the pupil. 15 fxg6 tt:Jxe5 16 gxf7+ 'it>h8 Sitnik (8) - Stepanavichus 17 'it'g8+! .U.xg8 Ta llinn 1989 18 fxg8'it'mate Gaponenko (14)- Repkova European Girls Championship 1991 French Defence 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tZ'lc3 tt:Jf6 4 .JigS .lie7 5 e5 tZ'lfd7 6 h4 The Chatard-Aiekhine Attack. White sacri fices a pawn for the sake of gaining time and opening the h-file. Black usually declines How should White continue? He is actively the gambit and aims to carry out the placed, but the development of his pieces is standard central counter ...c7- c5. If 6 ...c5 is not yet complete. Of course, he should bring played immediately, Black has to reckon his knight into play by 14 tZ'lc3!. Subse with the knight sortie to b5 after the quently the knight will go to d5 or e4. exchange of the dark-square bishops, and Instead of this, the young player decided to so the simplest is to first play 6 ...a6. attack the opponent's king immediately. 6... h6?! 14 f5? tt:Jc5? 7 .lie3 c5 Now White achieves his aim. Unprepared 8 'i!Vg4 �f8 wing attacks should be met by energetic 9.l:!.h3? 256 � Games by Pupils of the School The same mistake as in the previous game to capture on f3 with the queen, and for the - you should not launch an attack moment the knight cannot be developed on without completing your development. the best square f3 . However, the position Correct was 9 t'bf3 t'bc6 1 0 0-0-0 with the arising after15 ifxf3'ii' xh4 1ooks anxious for better chances for White. Black (Dvoretsky). 9 ... t'bc6 14 t'bxf3 10 l::tg3 g6 11 .l:!.f3? 11 t'bf3 was better. It is amazing how quickly the situation has changed. Black has exchanged both of her already developed knights, and now the superiority in the placing of the white pieces 11 ... t'bdxe5? is very obvious. Black senses that a counterblow in the 14 ... d4? centre should refute her opponent's unpre pared attack, but the concrete method she 14... 'it>g7 was better. After the move in the chooses is unfortunate. In her annotations game Gaponenko builds up a decisive lnna Gaponenko gave the correct way: attack on the king. 11 ...cx d4! 12 'it'xg6 t'bdxe5 13 il.xh6+ �e8 15 tt:Je5 �f6 14 1Wg7 t'bxf3+ 15 t'bxf3 �f6 , and Black 16 t'be4! dxe3 wins. 17 .l:i.d1 exf2+ 12 dxe5 t'bxe5 18 �e2! 13 'ii'f4 t'bxf3+?! 18 'it>xf2 'i:Vxd 1 19 'i:Vxf6 ifd4+ 20 Wg3l:th7 It is well known that 'mistakes do not come 21 t'bxg6+ 'it>g8 22 t'be7+ �f8 leads to a singly'. 13... il.d6! was essential. In the event draw. of 14 'ii'a4 the simplest is 14... il.d7 15 'ii'a3 18 ... 'i!le7 t'bxf3+ 16 t'bxf3 'ii'e 7 with advantage to 19 t'bxf6 'it>g7 Black. Far stronger is 14 0-0-0! (development first 20 t'be4 f6 and foremost!), not fearing 14... t'bd3+? 15 21 'i:Vg3! g5 �xd3 �xf4 16 �xf4, when the minor pieces If 21 ...fxe5 22 1Wxe5+ 'it>g8 White was are clearly superior to the enemy queen. intending 23 l::td3! followed by 24 t'bf6+ 'it>f7 14 ...t'bxf3 has to be played. White is forced 25 l::tf3. Games by Pupils of the School ltJ 257 22 lbg4 .l:.f8 f8-bishop, and in addition he has exchanged 23 hxg5 f5 his more central d-pawn. As a consequence 24 gxh6+ �h7 the initiative passes to his opponent. 25 lDf6+ .l:.xf6 6 dxc5 'ifa5+ 26 lDxf6+ 'ifxf6 6 ...lba6?! is weaker on account of 7 'ii'd4, while if 6 ...lbbd7 ther e is 7 b4. 27 l:.d8! 'ifxb2 7 'ii'd2 'ii'xc5 If 27 ...f4 (hoping for 28 'ifg8+ �xh6 29 .l::lxc8?? 'ii'e5+), the simplest is 28 'ifd3+ Threatening 8 ...lbe4 . 'it'f5 (28 ...�xh6 29 'ii'h3+) 29 "ii'xf5+ exf5 30 8 i.xf6 gxf6 �xf2 b6 31 i.e2 (31 i.a6) 31... �xh6 9 g3 (31 ...i.b 7 32 l::td7+) 32 i.f3 l:.b8 33 i.c6 (Gaponenko). 28 'ii'c7+! �xh6 29 'ilfh2+ �g5 30 .U.g8+ Black resigned. Mugerman - Makariev (14) Moscow 1989 Tro mpowsky Attack 1 d4 lbf6 2 i.g5 e6 3 lDd2 c5 9 ... lbc6 4 lbe4?! A normal developing move. Its only draw The main objectives at the start of a game back is that after the natural reply 1 0 i.g2 are the rapid development of the pieces and the thematic advance ...e6-e5 is hindered. the struggle for the centre. Therefore you Black should have fo ught more actively should refrain from making repeated for the centre. Concrete analysis shows moves with one and the same piece that the immediate 9 ...e5! 10 i.g2 i.e6was (unless, of course, such a manoeuvre brings possible: some substantial gain or is forced). The a) 11 c4? 'ii'xc4 12 .:tc1 'ii'xa2 13 i.xd5 danger of violating this rule is illustrated by i.xd5 14 llc8+ �d7 15 l:txh8 'it'b1 +, and the following short variation: 4 dxc5?! i.xc5 White remains a piece down; 5 lbe4?? lbxe4 6 i.xd8i.xf2 mate. It was better to reinforce the centre by 4 e3. b) 11 0-0-0?! lbc6 12 i.xd5? 0-0-0 13 i.xe6+ (13 e4 lbb4) 13... fxe6 14 "ii'e1 4... d5 .:.Xd1 + 15 'ii'xd 1 lld8 (15... "ii'xf2 is also 4 ...cxd4 ?! 5 'ii'xd4 i.e? 6 lbd6+ favours good) 16 'ii'e1 'ii'd5 (16 ...lbb4!? 17 c3 White, since he is able to hinder the lbxa2+ 18 �b1 'ifb5! with the threat of opponent's development. 19... l:.d 1 +! 20 'ii'xd1 lbxc3+, while the knight 5 lbxc5 i.xc5 is invulnerable in view of the fork 19... 'ii' d5+) As a result of his dubious operation White 17 lDf3'i!i'xa2 18 lDd2(1 8 c3 lba5!) 18... a5!? has spent two tempi on the exchange of the with a dangerous initiative on the queenside 258 � Games by Pupils of the School (the threat is ...a5 -a4-a3); c) 11 l:1d 1 lbc6 12 i.xd5 i.xd5! (12... 0-0-0 13 c4 lbb4 14 e4 4Jxa2 is unconvincing) 13 'ii'xd5 'ii'b4+ 14 c3 (White is also worse after 14 'ii'd2 'ii'xb2) 14... 'ii' xb2 15 'ii'd7+ 'itf8 16 'ii'd2?! (16 'jj'f5! 'ii'xc3+ 17 'itf1 maintains the balance) 16 ... 'ii'xd2+ 17 l:.xd2 'ite7. Even in the endgame Black's better devel opment gives him the advantage. 10 i.g2 i.d7 11 lDf3 11 e3!? followed by 4Je2 came into consid eration. -position after 14 ....tc6 ?! - 11 ... 4Je5? llya Makariev repeats his opponent's mis It is dangerous to reply 15... e5? 16 l:tfe 1 take: he wastes time in the opening. He l:.he8 (16... 'ifd 6? 17 fxe5 fxe5 18 'ii'e3; should have continued his development: 16... d4? 17 i.xc6 bxc6 18 fxe5 fxe5 19 'ii'e2 11 ...e5! 12 l:.d 1 i.e6 13 0-0 0-0-0 would or 19 cxd4 with advantage to White) 17 fxe5 have given him control of the centre and led fxe5 18 'ii'g5 f6 (if 18... 'ii' d6 or 18... 'ii' e7 to a promising position. there follows 19 'ii'f5+) 19 'ii'xf6 l:r.f8 in view 12 0-0 4Jxf3+ of 20 'ii'xe5 'ii'xf2+ 21 'ith 1 , and the constant The outcome is that Black has wasted two threat of a bishop check on h3 severely tempi on the unnecessary exchange of restricts Black's possibilities. knights. However, if 12... 4Jc4 there is the If instead 15... d4? !, then after 16 i.xc6bxc6 unpleasant reply 13 'ii'h6!?, suggested by 17 cxd4 White has the advantage. More Dvoretsky. tenacious is 16... dxc3 17 i.xb7+'itxb7 with 13 exf3!? good drawing chances. If 13 i.xf3 Makariev was planning 13 ...'ite 7!? Black should probably prefer the prophylac - the obvious 13... 0-0-0 did not appeal to tic 15... 'itb 8!?, preparing both ...d5 -d4 and him because of 14 c3 followed by b2-b4, ...e6 -e5. a2-a4 and so on. 15 ... d41 13. . . 0-0-0 16 i.xc6 'ii'xc6 13... e5?! 14 f4 ! i.e6 15 fxe5 fxe5 16 'ii'g5. 17 .l:.ad1 :ds 14 f4 i.c6?! 18 'ifd3 'itb8!? Another mistake, similar to 9 ...4Jc6 - Black 19 l:.e4 llhd8 misses an opportunity for activity in the Black has achieved a good game. centre by 14 ...d4! and only then ...i.c6 . (see diagram) Gasymov - Zviagintsev (13) Leningrad 1990 15 l:tfe1?! Queen's Pawn Opening Returning the favour. White fights against 1 d4 d5 ...e6- e5, but allows a more dangerous advance. 15 c3!, hindering the thematic 2lDf3 4Jf6 ...d5-d4, was correct. 3 g3 i.f5!? Games by Pupils of the School ctJ 259 4c4 e6 hopes to disrupt the coordination of the 5 'i¥b3 opponent's forces. However, this is achieved The queen is a very important piece and its at the cost of a loss of time: Black placing has a great influence on the charac manoeuvres in the opening with his already ter of the subsequent play. The queen's developed pieces, committing the same position should not be determined too fundamental mistake as in the previous early. Very often, as happened in the example. His lead in development (White present game, by attacking the queen the has lost time on queen moves, and his opponent gains time for the development of bishop on d2 is not too well placed) should his forces. have been transformed into a more stable advantage - superior pawn structure. The In chess there are no rules which apply in correct course was suggested by Peter every case. The correctness of 'absolute' Svidler: 7 ....lte4 ! (here this repeat move with truths must each time be checked with the the bishop is justified by the fact that White concrete features of the position. Thus the in turn is forced to spend time on the early queen move to b3 is a fairly standard defence of the d4-pawn) 8 .ltc3.ltxf3 . There reaction to the development of Black's light can follow 9 exf3 'it'd5 10 'ii'xd5 tt:lxd5 11 square bishop in the Queen's Gambit. Even .ltb5 'it'd? 12 tt:ld2 a6 13 .ltxc6+ 'it>xc6 14 so, it is better for young players first to master general rules and only then seek tt:lc4.ltd6 with the better endgame for Black. exceptions to them. 8 .ltg2 tt:lb6 5... tt:lc6! 9 'ifc3?! 6 .ltd2?! Here the queen deprives its minor pieces of 6 c5 is preferable. Now Black gains an the convenient c3-square. 9 'ii'b3 was opportunity to exploit the advanced position better, not fearing 9 ....lte4 10 0-0! .ltxf3?! 11 of the queen. 'ii'xf3 'ifxd4 12 .ltc3 with excellent compen sation for the sacrificed pawn. 6... dxc4! 9... .lte4?! 7�xc4 If 7 �xb7, then 7 ....lte4 ! 8 'fib5.l:tb8. I would have preferred to complete my development with 9 ....ltb 4 10 'it'b3 a5 or 9 ....lte7 10 0-0 0-0 followed by ....ltf6 . 10 0-0! .lte7 1 O ....ltxf 3?! 11 'ii'xf3 'ir'xd4 12 �c3. 11 'ir'e3! f5 11 ....ltg6 !?. 12 .ltc3 0-0 13 'ili'c1 White prepares 14 tt:lbd2. 13 ... tt:lc4 By endlessly regrouping with his already developed pieces, Black gradually loses the initiative. 13... a5 or 13... .ltf6 came into 7 ... tt:ld7?! consideration. By attacking the queen Va dim Zviagintsev 14 b3 tt:ld6 260 � Games by Pupils of the School 15 i..b2 16 l:td1 lDe7?! 16 ...'ife8 17 lDbd2 (17 lDc3 i..xf3 and 18 ...lDx d4) 17... 'ifh5 wasmor e interesting. The move in the game allows the knight to come out to the more active c3-square. 17 lDc3 i..c6?! In his commentary Zviagintsev recommends 17 ...lDd 5!?, and if 18 lDxe4 (18 lDa4!?) 18 ... fxe4 19 lDe5, then 19 ...�g 5! with chances for both sides. 18 'ife3 'ilt'c8 19 i.h3!? lDe4 A serious mistake, which we have already Black is also worse after 19... lDd 5 20 lDxd5 encountered in the earlier games. By wast �xd5 21 .U.ac1 . ing time in the opening, White quickly ends 20 lDxe4 i..xe4 up in a difficultposit ion. 21 lDg5 8... lDxe5!! The advantage has passed to White - just Far weaker is the restrained 8 ...i.. b7? 9 i.f4 retribution for Black's slow and aimless with equality. After sacrificing the exchange, manoeuvring. Volodya Baklan begins an attack on the opponent's king. White's light-square bishop is cut offfro m the kings ide and from its main Nikonovich - Ba klan (12) forces. Alushta 1990 9�xa8 d5! Queen's Pawn Opening Of course, not 9 ...i.a6 10 i..g2 lDxc4 11 lDc3. Black aims not to regain the material, 1 d4 lDf6 but for rapid development and an attack. 2lDf3 c5 10 cxd5 3 dxc5?1 Often the best, and sometimes the only The exchange of the more central d-pawn defence against a gambit is the timely for the c-pawn is normally unfavourable. returning of the extra material, with the aim White made a similar mistake in the of consolidating one's forces or simplifying Mugerman-Makariev game, examined ear the position. Thus here White could have lier. 3 d5 or 3 e3 is better tried to buy off his opponent with two pawns 3 ... e6 by 10 i.f4 lDxc4 11 i..c6 lDxb2 12 'ii'b3, 4g3 i..xc5 although even in this case Black has the 5 i..g2 lDc6 advantage. Besides, instead of 11 ...lDxb2 there is 11...e5!? 12 i..g5 i..h3. 6 0-0 10 ... �a61? 6 c4?! 'ii'a5+!. The simple 1 O ... exd5!? is also not bad, 6 ... 0-0 including the bishop in the attack along the 7c4 b6 c8-h3 diagonal. For example: 11 i..f4 lDg6 8lDe5? (11 ...i.. h3? is not in the spirit of the position: Games by Pupils of the School 4:J 261 12 .Jtxe5.Jtxf1 13 'it'xf1 'it'xa8 14 �xf6 gxf6 14 'it>g2 15 tt:Jd2, and the chances are only with 14 tt:Jd2'ii' h3 15 tt:Jf3 tt:Jfg4with unavoidable White; however, Black's play can be im mate. proved with 13... tt:Jg 4!) 12 .Jtg5�h3 13 �c6 14 ... .JiLeS! .Jtxf1 14 �xf1 'it'd6 15 �b5 (15 �xf6 'it'xf6 The point of Black's idea. 16 �xd5 'ti'xb2) 15... tt:Je4 and wins. Or 12 �c6 tt:Jxf4 13 gxf4 'i!Vd6, and White's 15 .l:!.h1 'ifh3+ position is unenviable. 16 'it>g1 tt:Jfg4 The only way of establishing some kind of 17 e3 d4! defence was by 11 tt:Jc3! �h3 12 �xd5 �xf1 White resigned. He was severely punished 13 'it>xf1 . for neglecting the development of his pieces. 11 .Jtc6 11 .JiLf4 lt.Jg6!? 12 .Jtc6 tt:Jxf4 13 gxf4 'it'd6 Zviagintsev (15) - Feigin with an attack. CIS Junior Championship, Jurmala 1992 11 ... exd5 Benoni Defence 12 �a4 b5!? 1 d4 e6 A thematic move, but objectively not the 2 c4 c5 strongest. Black should probably have pre 3 d5 exd5 ferred 12... �c8 ! 13 'it>g2 (if 13 .JiLf4, then 4cxd5 d6 13.. .'ifh3! is decisive) 13... 'ili'f5 . 5 tt:Jc3 g6 13 �c2? 6e4 �g7 7 tt:Jge2 tt:Je7 A rare continuation, the point of which is to make an early attack on the centre by ...f7- f5. The inclusion of the moves 7 ...a6?! 8 a4 weakens this idea: 8 ...tt:Je7 9 tt:Jg3! 0-0 10 .Jte2 f5 11 exf5 tt:Jxf5 12 tt:Jxf5 �xf5 13 0-0, and Black has problems with the develop ment of his knight - 13... tt:Jd7? is not pos sible in view of 14 g4! �xc3 15 bxc3 .Jte4 16 f3 (analysis by Zviagintsev). But now after 8 tt:Jg3 0-09 .Jte2 f5 1 0 exf5 tt:Jxf5 11 tt:Jxf5 �xf5 12 0-0 Black can play 12... tt:Ja 6!. 8 �g5!? White fails to see his opponent's cunning White provokes a weakening of the kingside idea. As Baklan pointed out, the only pawns. defence was 13 �f4! .l:i.e8(13 ... tt:Jg6 .Jtc14 2 8 ... h6 tt:Jxf4 15 gxf4 'it'd? 16 f5!) 14 �c2 b4 15 lt.Jd2 9 .Jte3 f5!? tt:Jeg4 16 �d3 'ii'b6 with an unclear game. If 9 ... 0-0?! there would have followed 10 13 . . . 'it'd7! ii'd2 with gain of tempo. Black plans to The queen penetrates to h3, from where it exchange on e4 and then harass the bishop creates irresistible threats. on e3 with ...tt:Jf5 . 262 � Games by Pupils of the School ..ib5+!, but after13 ... �!? things are not so clear. 13... �8 is weaker on account of 14 hxg4 tt:'lxg4 15 tt:'le6+! or 14... ..ixg4 15 .ie2 with a dangerous initiative for White. 12... it'a 5! was also possible: 13 'ii'b3!? (13 it'c2 ..ixc3+! 14 bxc3 tt:'le5) 13... ..ixc 3+! (13... tt:'le5 14 ..ib5+with an attack for White) 14 bxc3 tt:'le5 15 ..ib5+ �d8! with double edged play (Zviagintsev). If 13 tt:'le6!?, then 13... ..ixc3+ 14 bxc3 tt:'le5. 13 tt:'le6 'it'xb2? If 13... ..ie5? Zviagintsev was planning 14 tt:'lb5� 15 a4!. Black should have played 13... ..ixc3+ 14 bxc3 tt:'le5. 10 g4!! The move in the game is a poor one. Black An excellent decision! In the King's Indian violates one of the simplest rules: don't go Defence White sometimes advances his g 'pawn-grabbing' in the opening. Now pawn in order to gain control of the f5- White wins by force, by exploiting the poor square and restrict the mobility of a knight position of the enemy queen. on e7, but usually this does not involve giving up a pawn. In the event of the 14 tt:'lxg7+ �f7 acceptance of the pawn sacrifice, White 15 ..id2! �xg7 gains compensation in the form of his strong 16llb1 �a3 and mobile pawn centre. 17 l:tb3 'ii'a5 10 ... fxg4 18 tt:'lb5 it'dB Weaker is 10... fxe 4?! 11 tt:'lg3 with advan 19 .Jtc3+ tt:'le5 tage. White has included his pieces in the attack 11 h3 with gain of tempo and prepared a conclud By inviting the exchange of the g-pawn, ing combinative stroke in the centre. Zviagintsev wants also to exchange the light-square bishops. Then he will endeav our to invade on the weakened e6-square with a knight. 11 . . . tt:'ld7!? Black would play into his opponent's hands by 11 ...gxh3 12 ..ixh3 or 11 ...a6 12 hxg4 ..ixg4 13 .ll.h3, with excellent compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 12 tt:'lf4 12 hxg4!? tt:'le5 13 tt:'lf4 came into considera tion. 12 . .. 'ii'b6? The start of a faulty manoeuvre. If 12... tt:'le5 Black was probably concerned about 13 20 tt:'lxd6! "ili'xd6 Games by Pupils of the School ltJ 263 21 'ii'a1 'it>f6 9 ... h6 22 hxg4 g5 Zviagintsev did not play 9 ...b6 ?!, because 23 f4! gxf4 he was afraid of 1 0 d5. For example, 1 0 ....lib 7 11 dxc6 .ltxc6 12 .ltb5! (in the 24 .ltxe5+! 'iixe5 event of the immediate 12 .ltg5 Black has 25 .l:txh6+! .l:!.xh6 the equalising 12... .ltxe 4!) 12... .ltb7 13 i.g5 26 g5+ with advantage to White. Black resigned . In the game Kuchukhidze-Zviagintsev, played earlier in the same tournament, in Kramnik - Zviagintsev (14) reply to 9 ... h6 White chose 10 a5!?. After Leningrad 1990 1 O ...l:.b8 nothing is given by 11 d5 b5 12 Philidor Defence axb6 lbxb6, but serious consideration should have been given to the prophylactic 11 1 e4 d6 .lta2!, and if 11 ...b5 12 axb6 axb6 13 d5. 2 d4 lbf6 Instead of this there followed 11 .lte3, and 3lbc3 e5 Black successfully solved the problem of his 4lbf3 queenside by 11 ... b5! 12 axb6 axb6 13 d5 White can also consider transposing into a b5 14 Ua7?! lib? 15 l:txb7 .ltxb7 16 .ltb3 superior endgame by 4 dxe5 dxe5 5 'ili'xd8+ b4!? 17lba2cxd 5 18 exd5 'iia5. 'it>xd86 lbf3 .lid6 7 .ltc4. The move in the Naturally, Volodya Kramnik had prepared for game leads to a variation of the Philidor the game and he tried to improve White's Defence. play. 4 ... lbbd7 10 i.e3!? 5 .ltc4 .lte7 6 0-0 0-0 7 l:.e1 7 'ii'e2. 7 ... c6 8 a4 'iic7 The standard reaction 8 ...a5!?, recom mended by modern theory, restricts the opponent's possibilities on the queenside. Afterthis White has tried 9 h3 exd4 1 0 lbxd4 (1 0 'ii'xd4 lbc5 11 .ltg5 lbe6 12 .ltxe6 .ltxe6 13 ltad1 l:te8 14 .ltxf6 .ltxf6 15 'ii'xd6 'ii'b6! with an unclear game, Timoshchenko Pianinc, Polanica Zdroj 1979) 1 O ...lbc5 11 10 ... l:te8?! .lif4 'ii'b6 12 lbb3 .lte6 13 .ltxe6 lbxe6 14 A routine move, vacating the f8-square for .lte3'ii c7 15lbd4 lbxd4 16 .ltxd4 l:!.ad8, and the knight or bishop. But now White suc the chances are equal (lvkov-Pianinc, Am ceeds in setting up a bind on the queenside. sterdam 1974). On encountering a surprise in the opening, 9 h3 Zviagintsev began playing rather passively Preparing the development of the bishop at and he conceded the initiative to his more e3. An alternative is 9 a5!?. experienced opponent. 264 � Games by Pupils of the School 10... lt:Jxe4 11 lt:Jxe4 d5 did not work account 20 axb7 i.xb7 of 12 i.xd5 cxd5 13lZ'lc3. Black should have 21 i.xb7 by fo ught against his opponent's plans, If 21 'ir'a4 there again follows 21 ...ii.e 7!. choosing either 10... a5!?, or 10... b6!? (with 21 . . . 'ir'xb7 the idea of ...a7- a6, ...i. b7 and ...b6- b5). If 22 !tb1 after 10. ..b6 White replies 11 lZ'lh4, then 11 ...lt:J xe4? does not work because of 12 lt:Jg6! or 12 lt:Jxe4 i.xh4 13 ifg4, but 11 ...exd4 and 12... lt:J e5 is possible. And if 11 d5, then 11 ...i.b7 12 dxc6 i.xc6 13 lZ'ld2 a6!? 14 ife2 ifb7 with chances for both sides. 11 a5! White is planning 12 d5. 11 ... i.f8?! 11 ... lt:Jf8 12 d5 lZ'lg6 is more natural. 12 d5! lt:Jc5 12 ...cxd5 13 i.xd5 lt:Jc5 is also unattractive. 1 3 lZ'ld2 If desired, it is also possible to spoil the 22 ... g5? opponent's pawn structure by 13 .Jtxc5 dxc5 14 dxc6 bxc6. Siegbert Ta rrasch rightly commented that if one piece stands badly, the game also 1 3 ... i.d7 stands badly. The principles of development 14 b4! cxd5 apply not only in the opening. Black should The only defence. have activated his bishop, but without 15 lZ'lxd5 lt:Jxd5 weakening his castled position in the proc 16 ii.xd5 lt:Je6 ess. The logical move was 22 .....ll. e7. Zviagintsev's suggestion 22 ...a5!? 23 bxa5 16... lt:Ja4? 17 "i¥f3! and 16... lt:Ja6? 17 'ir'b1 !? 'ir'c7 24 'it'g4 11xa5 25 it'xf4 .l:!.a2 was also were both bad for Black. interesting. 17 c4 lZ'lf4!? 23 h4! 18 i.xf4 exf4 In this way White gains an obvious advan 19 a6 tage. White's initiative on the queenside and in 23 ... �e6 the centre has led to the creation of pawn 24 1Vh5 weaknesses in the opponent's position. However, if the game is opened up, Black Weaker was 24 hxg5 hxg5 25 lZ'lf3 l:!.xe4 26 will acquire certain counter-chances. In the lt:Jxg5 .U.xe1+ 27 "i:Vxe1 'ir'e7 with counter event of 19 h4 (with the threat of 20 'iff3) chances (Zviagintsev). there is the reply 19... i.e7, activating the 24 ... �g6 'bad' bishop, but 19 ii'f3 !? or 19lZ'lf3!? came 25 hxg5 hxg5 into consideration. 26 e5! 19 ... i.c6 In the event of 26 lZ'lf3 Black would have Games by Pupils of the School 265 gained counterplay by 26 ...l:.ea! 27 ltJxg5 8 ... ltJdxb4 ..ih6. 9 0-0 26 ... l:.e8 For a long time the move 9 a3 suffered a 27 exd6 l:.xe1+ crisis because of the game lvanchuk 28 .l:.xe1 'ii'xb4? Korchnoi (Tilbur g 19a9), in which after9 ...b5 This loses immediately. Black should have 1 0 Wxb5 ltJc2+ 11 �d2 ltJxa 1 12 'il'xc6+ eliminated the more dangerous d-pawn: ..id7 13 'il'xc4 Victor Korchnoi employed the 2a ...l:.x d6. However, even in this case White novelty 13... c5 ! and gained a spectacular would have retained a great advantage by win: 14 'iii'a2 WaS+ 15 b4 cxb4 16 'il'xa1 .:tea continuing 29 b5! (weaker is 29 lDf3 'ili'xb4 17 lDe5 ..ib5 1a �e3? l:c2 (Black has an 30 Vxg5+ l:.g6 31 'ii'xf4 a5). For example: obvious advantage) 19 ..if3 0-0 20 a4 f6 21 29 .. Jbd2?! 30 'it'xg5+ �h7 31 .l:.ea'ii' b6! 32 lL!d3 ..ic4 22 ltJd2? Wg5+ (22 .....ix d3!) 23 .:Xfa 'il'xf2+ 33 �h2 'ii'g3+ (otherwise things lL!f4 e5 24 ltJxc4 exf4+ 25 gxf4 Wf5 26 ltJd6 end in mate) 34 'il'xg3 fxg3+ 35 �xg3 �g7 'il'e6+ White resigned. 36 :teawith a won rook endgame (variation The attempt by White to improve with 1a suggested by Mark Dvoretsky). lDd3 in the game Polovodin-S.Ivanov (St. 29 d7! 'ii'd6 Petersburg 1992) led to the same inauspi cious result: 1a... ..ixd3 19 'it>xd3 0-020 'ii'b2 29 ...'iii' xd2 30 l:td 1. bxa3 21 'ii'xa3?! (21 lDxa3was better, and if 30 ltJe4! 21 ...l:tba 22lL!c 4!) 21 ...'ii' b5+ 22 �d2 l:tfda Black resigned in view of 30 ...'il'x d7 31 23 e3?! Wf5! 24 �e2 l:tc2+ 25 lDd2 l::!.xd2+ 'it'xg6+! fxg6 32 lDf6+. 26 �xd2 'ii'xf2+ 27 �d3 Wxg2 2a l:.b1 e5 29 l:lb2 .l::!.xd4+ White resigned. Romanishin -Aiexandrov (17) Subsequently it transpired that White does Pula 1990 better to defend with 1a d5 or 1a a4. In English Opening addition, instead of 15 b4 it makes sense to A game with a grandmaster, especially one play 15 lL!c3!? cxd4 16 ltJxd4, as in the of such high calibre, is not only a serious game Bareev-Adams, Dortmund 2000, test, but also an excellent opportunity to which ended in a draw. learn some real chess. 9... l:.b8 1 d4 ltJf6 10 ltJc3 .i.d7?! 2c4 e6 3lL!f3 d5 4g3 dxc4 5 ..ig2 ltJc6 6 'il'a4 6 0-0 is another attempt. 6 ... ..ib4+ 7 ..id2 ltJd5 8 ..ixb4 a 'ii'b5 .i.xd2+9 lL!bxd2c3 1 0 bxc3 ltJxc3 11 'ii'd3 has also occurred, when White has compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 266 � Games by Pupils of the School For the moment Black is a pawn up, but he is (Dvoretsky), and the queen is trapped. The behind in development and his pieces are direct 14... �a8 {hoping for 15 'it'b7?tba5) is uncoordinated. 1 O ...a6 11 tbe5 0-0 (11 ... less good on account of 15 'it'xa8! 'ifxa8 16 'i!i'xd4 12 tbxc6 favours White) 12 tbxc6 exd5 'it'b7 17 tbc3; tbxc6 13 �xc6 bxc6 14 'it'xc4 �xb2 has 14 exd5 axb5 15 'ii'd 1 exd5, and it is White occurred several times, but after 15 l:tab1 who has to try and equalise; �b6 16 'ii'c5 White retains some initiative. In 14 tbc3tbxc3 15 bxc3 tbxd416 'it'xa6 (bad the game Krasenkow-Mednis (Palma de is 16 'ii'xc4? tbxf3+ 17 �xf3 �b5) 16... �b5 Mallo rca 1987) there followed 16 .. .f6 17 a4 17 1li'a7 tbe2+ 18 'it>h1 tbxc3 with chances Ue8 18 a5 nxb1 19 .Uxb1 'ii'd6 20 �xd6 for both sides (Dvoretsky). cxd6 21 .l:b6, and now Black should have 13 .. . .Uxb2 continued 21 ...'it>f7 ! 22 lhc6 'it>e7 with equalising chances. Later Uwe Bonsch 13... tbxc3 14 bxc3 tbxd4 15 'i¥xc4 l2Jxf3+ 16 managed to neutralise Oleg Romanishin's i.xf3 Si.b517 'iic5 leads to an advantage for initiative (Berlin 1990) by 16 ...h6 17 a4 a5 White. 18 �fd 1 �a6 19 e3 'it'g5 20 .l:xb6'it'xc5 21 14 'it'xc4 tba5 dxc5 cxb6 22 cxb6 l:tb823 l:tb1�d3 24 l:tb2 15 'it'd3 .l::tb3 'it>f8 . Instead of 17 a4 Alexander Khalifman 16 �fc1 tried 17 .tf.fd 1 against Sergey Ivanov (St. Petersburg 1996), and also failed to gain an advantage: 17... �x b1 18 .Uxb1 'i¥d6! 19 tbe4 'ii'd5 20 'i!Vxd5 cxd5 21 tbc5 �e8 22 .Ub8 'it>f8 . The move in the game is an interesting novelty. Alexey Alexandrov is prepared to return the pawn for the sake of very promising counterplay. 11 a3 b5! 12 lbxb5 tbd5! As shown by Romanishin, 12... a6 13 tbc3 tbxd4was weaker because of 14 'it'a5! lbb3 15 'ii'e5 f6 16 'ife4 (16 'ifh5+!? g6 17 'iih6) 16 ...tbxa 1 17 axb4 lbb3 18 'it'xc4, and 16 ... c5! White has a won position. Usually one should not delay castling, but situations sometimes occur when other 13 tbc3! factors prove more important than simple After 13 e4?! tbce7 14 exd5 �xb5 15 'ilt'xa7 development. In Black's position there is a exd5 White's position is preferable. Black's serious defect - the backward c-pawn, play can be improved by 14 ...ex d5! (instead which may prove weak. For the moment the of 14... �xb5) 15 'ii'xa7 .l:xb5 16 tbe5 0-0 activity of the pieces compensates fo r this with approximate equality. Incidentally, in drawback, but if White should succeed in stead of the knight retreat Alexandrov had disentangling himself, he will gain an obvi prepared 13 ...a6! ?, when the following vari ous advantage. Therefore Alexandrov hur ations are possible: ries to create counterplay in the centre and 14 'ifxa6? lbb6!with the threat of 15... i.c8 on the queenside. Games by Pupils of the School 267 Let us see what would have happened after the routine 16... 0-0 . In reply 17 tt::\d2?! is a mistake in view of 17... .ib5 18 'iff3 .U.xc3! 19 l:txc3 i.xe2! 20 'ifxe2 tt::\xc3 21 'ifa6 c5 or 21 ...'ii' xd4. 17 tt::\e5! is fa r more dangerous. After quiet continuations Black's position is clearly worse: 17... c6 18 e4 tt::\f6 19 'ii'd1 l:tb8 20 .l:!.ab1 or 17.. .f6 18 tt::\xd7 'i!Vxd7 19 i.xd5 exd5 20 'ii'a6 (Romanishin). Black is also not saved by 17... i.b5 18 'ifd2 tt::\xc3 19 l:!.xc3 f6 - now both 20 tt::\c6 .ixc6 (20 ...tt::\ xc6!? 21 l:!.xb3 tt::\xd4 22 l:tb1 ! i.xe2 23 l:!.b4! tt::\f3+ 24 i.xf3 'ifxd2 25 l:txd2 i.xf3 - position after 19 l:txc3- 26 �d7) 21 i.xc6 .U.xc3 22 ll¥xc3 tt::\xc6 23 affected by lack of time for thought. The 'ii'xc6 'ii'xd4 24 'ifxe6+ '.t>h8 25 .l:!.c1 c5 26 move in the game makes things easier for 'ii'c6! and 20 tt::\f3!? i.xe2?! 21 l:!.xb3 tt::\xb3 White. 22 �e2 tt::\xa1 23 �e6+! Wh8 24 'ifa2 are inauspicious for Black, according to analysis 19... l:!.b8? was incorrect: 20 tt::\xc4 tt::\b3 21 by Dvoretsky and Alexandrov. tt::\d6+ '.t>e7 (21 ...'.t>f8 22 'iff4) 22 .l:!.xb3.Uxb3 23 'ii'g5+ f6 24 'ii'c5 '.t>f8 25 ll¥xa7 with 17 'ii'd2 advantage to White (Romanishin). After 17 dxc5 i.b5 bad is 18 'i!fd4 tt::\xc3 19 That which is good as an exception should "i!Vxg7 tt::\xe2+ 20 '.t>h1 .l::i.f8 , and Black not be made into a rule! It was now time to remains a piece up. White would have to castle 19... 0- 0!?, when 20 tt::\xc4 'ii'c7 21 sacrifice his queen: 18 'iixb5+ (or 18 tt::\xb5 .l::i.ac1 is bad because of 21 ...l:!.xc3! 22 'i!Vxc3 .l::i.xd3 19 tt::\d6+ '.t>e7 20 exd3) 18.. Jixb5 19 l1c8. Alas, as Dvoretsky later established, tt::\xb5 tt::\b3 20 tt::\d6+ 'it>e7 21 tt::\e5 - with White would nevertheless have retained his unclear consequences. extra pawn, by continuing 21 �cc1 !! (instead The most accurate continuation was prob of 21 �ac1 ?) 21 ...tt::\ xc4 22 �c2. ably 17 tt::\e5! i.b5 ( 17... tt::\ xc3 18 �xc3 In view of the fact that a careful analysis of i.b5?does not work because of 19 'ii'f3) 18 'ifd2 tt::\xc3 19 .l:!.xc3, when there appears to all Black's alternative possibilities, begin be nothing better than 19... c4, transposing ning from the 12th move, has not enabled an into a favourable position for White, which improvement in his play to be found, one is occurred in the game. forced to conclude that Alexandrov's clever opening idea is objectively not altogether 17 ... c4 correct. 18 tt::\e5 tt::\xc3 20 a4! f6 19 .l:!.xc3 Both players saw that in the event of (see diagram) 20 ...i.a6 21 .l:!.xb3 White would gain a 19 ... i.b5 powerful attack: Up to this point both contestants had played a) 21 ...cx b3 22 tt::\c6 tt::\xc6 23 i.xc6+ rtJe7 splendidly and the young player had suc (23 ...'it>f8 24 'ii'b4+) 24 �g5+ f6 25 'it'c5+; cessfully stood up to his experienced oppo b) 21 ...tt::\ xb3 22 i.c6+! (weaker is 22 'i!Vb4 nent. But here Black's play began to be li¥xd4) 22 ...'it>f8 23 ll¥b4+ '.t>g8 24 .l::i.d 1 h5 268 � Games by Pupils of the School (24 ...'ii' f8 25 'iic3) 25 d5! (threatening 26 Boguslavsky (15) - Bazhin lt:Jxf7!). USSR Junior Team Championship 1990 21 axb5 fxe5 Modern Benoni 22 ii.c6+! 1 d4 lt:Jf6 A subtle decision. If 22 lhb3 lt:Jxb3 23 2 c4 e6 ii.c6+, then Black obtains some counterplay 3lt:Jc3 c5 in the endgame: 23 ...'it>f8 24 'i:Vb4+ 'i:Ve7 25 4d5 exd5 "ifxe7+ 'it>xe? 26 l:txa7+ 'it>f6 27 dxe5+ 'it>xe5, and 28 llxg7?? c3! is bad fo r White 5 cxd5 d6 (Dvoretsky). 6e4 g6 22 ... lt:Jxc6 7 f4 ii.g7 Forced. 8 e5 dxe5 23 bxc6 l:txc3 8 ...lt:Jf d7!?. 23 ...'it'xd4 would have led to a hopeless 9fxe5 lt:Jfd7 ending: 24 'i:Vxd4 exd4 25 l:.xc4. 10 e6 fxe6 24 "it'xc3 'it'xd4 11 dxe6 'i!Ve7 25 'ii'a3! 'it>f7 12 lt:Jd5! 'i!Vxe6+ 25 ...llf8 would not have helped: 26 c7 13 'ii'e2 'ifxe2+ "ifxf2+27 'it>h1 'it'd? 28 .Ud1 + (Romanishin ). 14 ..txe2 ..te5?! If 25 ...c3 there follows 26 c7! (less good is Such very sharp opening variations demand 26 .l:!.c127 c2 'it'b3 0-028 e3 'ii'd2 29 'ii'xc2 an accurate knowledge of theory. It is 'ii'xc2 30 .l:!.xc2 .l:!.c8, and Black retains extremely difficult to play them, simply on saving chances) 26 ...'it>f7 (26... 'ii' c4 27 the basis of common sense - the very first 'it'a4+! 'it'xa4 28 c8'ii+) 27 .l:tc1 llc828 .l:txc3 inaccuracy may prove fatal. and wins. To avoid conceding the initiative to his 26 e3 �d3 opponent, Black should have sacrificed a In the event of 26 ...'i:Ve4 the simple 27 whole rook: 14... 0- 0!! 15lt:Jc7 lt:Jc6 16lt:Jxa8 l�Vxa?+ 'it>f6 28 c7 is good. If 26 ...'it'b6 lt:Jb4. But is it conceivable to take such a (hoping for 27 'ii'd6? 'it>f6!), then, as shown decision at the board, without preparatory by Romanishin, White wins the endgame: analysis at home? 27 'i:Vxa7+ 'i:Vxa7 28 .l::i.xa7+ 'it,Jf6 29 l:ta4e4 15 lt:Jf3 lt:Jf6 30 llxc4 .l:tc8 (30 ...'it>e5 31 .l:td4and 32 lld7) 15... ii.d6? 16 ii.h6!. 31 'it>g2 'it>e5 32 'it>h3 (or 32 c?) 32 ...'1t>d5 33 .l:!.d4+. 16 ii.c4 lt:Jxd5 17 ii.xd5 ii.f6 27 'it'xa7+ 'it>f6 18 0-0 lt:Jc6 28 'it'b7 c3 (see diagram) 28 ...'i'b3 was more tenacious. 29 .l:!.a7 .Ug8 19 ii.g5! 30 'it'f7+ 'it>g5 The strategy chosen by Maxim Boguslavsky, typical of such positions, is rather instruc 31 h4+ 'it>g4 tive. Exchange the opponent's already 32 'lt>g2 'ii'e2 developed pieces - then your lead in 33 .l:!.a4+ development will become especially ap Black resigned . preciable. Games by Pupils of the School ttJ 269 when there are opposite-colour bishops a material advantage has no particular signifi cance - it is far more importantto have an attack. The black king is in deadly danger. If 23 ...c4 !? Boguslavsky was intending 24 .l:.f7+ - position after 18 ... ttlc6- .l:taS+) 28 .l:txc6+ Svidler (15) - Arkhipov Gausdal 1991 French Defence 1 e4 e6 2d4 d5 3 lt:Jd2 lt:Jf6 In the endgame Black is two pawns up. But 4e5 lt:Jfd7 270 � Games by Pupils of the School 5c3 c5 of 17 Ji.d2! 'ii'c7 18 lbb5'ii' b8 19 Ji.f4 f6 20 6 Ji.d3 lbc6 l:tac1 ! Ji.d6 21 llxc8+!. 7lbe2 cxd4 16 . . . Ji.e7 8 cxd4 'ii'b6 17 'i!lg4 g6! 9 0-0 18 f4! A problematic pawn sacrifice. As compensa Not 18 Ji.xg6? lbxe5. tion White gains an enduring initiative, 18 ... lbc5?! thanks to his lead in development. In Svidler's opinion, 18... h5!? 19 'ii'g3 Ji.c5 9... lbxd4 came into consideration, but not 19... lbc 5?! 10 lbxd4 'ii'xd4 20 Ji.xg6! fxg6(20 ...l:r.g8 21 Ji.xf7+! �xf7 22 'ii'h3) 21 'ifxg6+ �d8 22 f5! exf5 23 Ji.g5! 11 lbf3 'ii'b6 .U.e824 b4! (or 24 'ii'd6+ Ji.d725 b4!), when 12 'ii'a4 'i!Vb4 24 ...'ii' xb4 25 'ifd6+ Ji.d726 lbe6+lbxe6 27 The manoeuvre of the white queen to g4 Ji.xe7+ llxe7 28 'ii'xb4 is bad for Black. should be prevented. 19 Ji.xg61 13 'i!Vc2 'i!Vc5 Destroying the pawn screen; in full accord 14 'i!Ve2 ance with the demands of the position, The theoretical 14 Ji.xh7 b6 leads to White begins an attack on the king. equality. 19 ... fxg6 19... l:tg8 20 Ji.xf7+ �xf7 21 'it'h5+ is hopeless. 20 'ifxg6+ �d8 21 f5 exf5 If 21 ...'ilc7 , then 22 lbb5!. 22 e6 'it'a6 23 .Uad1 Here White had a serious alternative: 23 .l:tac1!? lbxe6 24 lbxf5 (but not 24 .l:txc8+? .l:txc8 25 lbxe6+ �d7, and it is Black who wins) 24 ...lle8 25 lbxh6!? with a strong attack. 23 ... Ji.xe6 14 ... h6?! 23 ...lbxe6 24 lbxf5 was worse. It is more logical for Black to continue his 24 lbxf5! .U.g8! development: 14 ...i.e 7 15 Ji.e3 'ii'a5, al According to analysis by Svidler, other though after 16 'ifc2!? White retains quite continuations lose: good compensation for the sacrificed pawn. a) 24 ....l:tc8 25 lbxe7�xe7 26 Ji.xc5+ .U.xc5 15 Ji.e3 'ii'a5 27 'it'g7+; 16 lbd4! b) 24 ...lbe4 25 lbxe7 �xe7 26 'it'g7+ �d6 The direct consequence of the loss of time 27 Ji.f4+; on the move of the rook's pawn. White c) 24... Ji.xf5 25 'it'xf5! 'it'e6 26 .l:txd5+. prepares f2-f4 . 16... lbxe 5? is bad because 25 'it'h7 Ji.f8! Games by Pupils of the School ctJ 271 Bad is 25 ....l:te8 26 liJxe7 lhe7 27'iii'h8+ 28 ...'itd 7, then 29 'ifh7+'itc6 30 l:tc1 + 'itb5 .l:.e8 28 'iff6+ 'it'd? 29 .llxc5, while if 31 llxa8 llxa8 32 a4+! is decisive . 25 ... .l::txg2+ White decides matters with 26 29 l::txa8 lba8 'itxg2'ii' e2+ 27 'ith1 .llxf5 28 'iii'xf5 'iii'xe3 29 29 ...l::1 xg2+? 30 'ith1! is pointless. 'iii'xd5+ 'itc730 I:tde1 'ii'g5 31 I:txe7+'iii' xe7 32 11f7(Svidler). However, 25 ....ll d6!? came 29 ...'ife2 !? would have posed more prob- into consideration. lems. Then only a draw results from 30 'ifh7+.ll f7 31 'it'h4+ 'it'd? 32 'ii'h3+ 'ite7 33 26 liJxh6 .llxh6 llc1 !? (33 .l::.f1 l:!.xa8 34 'ifh4+ 'ite6) 27 'ii'xh6 33 ...l:txa 8! (33 ..J�xg 2+? 34 'ith1 !) 34 llc7+ 'itf6 35 'ifh6+ .llg6 36 'ii'g7+ 'itf5 37 'it'd?+ 'ite5 38 'ii'e7+ (Svidler). However, stronger is 30 'ii'h4+! liJf6(30 ...'itd7 31 'ii'h7+) 31 .llc5+ 'itf7 (31 ...'itd7 32 'ii'a4+ 'itc7 33 'iii'f4+ 'itc6 34 'ii'd6+ 'itb5 35 a4+ 'itc436 l:!c1+ 'itb337 .l:.xg8) 32 l:tf8+!! l:!.xf8 33 l:lf1 , and White wins. 30 'ii'h4+! 'itd7 If 30 ...'itd6, then 31 'ii'xe4!. Now the capture of the knight is less convincing in view of 31 ...'ii' e2, and so White plays for mate. 31 'ii'h 7 + 'itc6 32 .l:tc1+ 'itb5 27 ... liJe4? 33 a4+! 'ita5 The middlegame is in progress, but Black 34 'ii'c7+ b6 has not yet completed his development. He 35 b4+ 'itxb4 would like to include his rook in the play, and 36 l:lb1+ 'ita5 therefore 27 ....l:tc8 looks logical. But then 37 .lld2+! there follows 28 .llxc5! llxc5 29 .llf8+, for example, 29 ...'itc7 30xg8 .ll .llxg8 31 'ii'g7+ Black resigned. 'itb632 'iii'xg8 'iie2 (hoping for 33 l::1f1 'ii'e3+ 34 'ith1 l:tc1 ) 33 'ii'g6+ and 34 'ii'd3, and Makariev (15) - Rasulov White retains an advantage sufficient for a CIS Junior Championship, Jurmala 1992 win. King's Indian Defence Svidler suggests 27 ...'ii' e2! 28 g3 liJe4 29 This example is something of a curiosity: 'ifxe6 'ifxe3+ 30 'itg2 'ife2+ 31 'itg1 'ii'e3+ White lost the game without making a single with perpetual check. If White does not want move of his own! Unfortunately, in his a draw, he can try29 .llf4 !?. preparations Makariev committed a very After Black's mistake the attack becomes common mistake: he decided to play a long irresistible. theoretical variation without thoroughly 28 .l:tf8+ 'ite7 checking its correctness. See what this led 28 ....l::t xf8? 29 'ii'xf8+ 'it'd? 30 'ii'xa8 'ife2 to. does not work in view of 31 'ii'xb7 + <&tea 32 1 d4 l[jf6 'ifa8+ 'it'd? 33 'ii'xa7+ followed by 34 .l::tf1 . If 2c4 g6 272 cJ;; Games by Pupils of the School 3 tt:'lc3 ..tg7 which continued 26 ...tt:'lh7 27 tt:'lb6 f3!? 4e4 0-0 (27 .....td7 28 tt:Jxd7 llxd7 29 ..tg4 or 5 tt:'lf3 d6 27 ...l:txb6 28 �xb6 'ir'xb629 'ir'xc8tt:Jxg5 30 'ir'g4, and White gains the advantage - 6 ..te2 tt:'lc6 V. Spasov) 28 �xf3 .U.xb6!29 �xb6 'ir'xb6 30 7 0-0 e5 'ii'xc8 tt:'lg5 31 l::txa6 'ii'e3? (31 ...'ii' xb2 was 8 d5 tt:'le7 essential, hoping for 32 l:!.xd6?! tt:'lf4 with 9 tt:'le1 tt:'ld7 counterplay; however, in the opinion of lan 10 tt:'ld3 f5 Rogers, even then White would retain the 11 ..td2 tt:Jf6 better chances by 32 'ir'c2! 'ii'd4 33 .l:ta3) 32 l:ta3 'ir'b6 (32 ...'ir'f4 33 l:!.c7!) 33 'ii'g4 ..th6 12 f3 f4 34 l!c2 Wh7 35 g3!, and White won. Rogers 13 c5 g5 annotated this game in the 46th issue of 14 cxd6 cxd6 lnformator. 15 tt:'lf2 tt:'lg6 26 ... tt:'lg4! 16 'ir'c2 �f7 27 ..txg4 ..txg4 17 l:tfc1 h5 For the moment the game is following a familiar course. 18 h3 a6!? Consideration should be given to the the matic 18... g4!? 19 fxg4 hxg4 20 hxg4 tt:Je8 (20 ...tt:'lh7 21 tt:'lb5 tt:'lg5 22 a4 with an unclear game, Sosonko-Kavalek, Tilburg 1980) 21 a4 ..tf6 22 lla3..th4 23 tt:'lcd1 ..tg3 24 tt:'lh3'ii' h4 25 tt:'ldf2 tt:'lf6 26 'ii'd1 ..td727 a5 .l:taf8 28 ..te1 , and in the game Sosonko Hellers (Wijk aan Zee 1986) the players agreed a draw. 19 a4 ..tf8 20 a5 g4! 28 'ir'c6? Less good was 20 ...b5? ! 21 axb6 'ir'xb6 22 Rogers attached an exclamation mark to tt:Ja4iVa? 23 ..ta5. this move and in reply considered only 21 fxg4 hxg4 28 .....td7 29 ..tb6! or 28 ...l:!.fb 7 29 tt:Jc5!. Makariev knew Rogers' analysis, but he did 22 hxg4 b5 not look critically at it, for which he was 23 axb6 'ii'xb6 punished. 24 tt:Ja4 'ir'a7 In the light of the present game, Spasov's 25 ..ta5 .l:tb8 recommendation 28 .l:ta3!?co mes into con If 25 .. J:tb7 there follows 26 :ta3 with the sideration. better chances for White. 28 ... ..te21 26 g5! This resource, which had not been taken The players are following the game Rogers into account, gives Black a very strong Sznapik (Olympiad, Thessaloniki 1988), attack. For example, 29 ..tb6'ir'e7 30 'ii'c7 Games by Pupils of the School 4:J 273 (30 tt'lh3 .tb5 31 'ilc7 'ilea, attacking the knight on a4) 30 ...'ilxg 5 31 'ilxb8tt'lh4 . The most tenacious was 29 tt'lb6.ltb5 30tt'lc8 (if the queen moves, then simply 30 ....l:r.xb6) 30 ...'ile3 31 'ilc3.lid?! (31 ....l:r.xc8 is uncon vincing: 32 'ilxc8f3 33 g3) 32 tt'lb6l:.xb6 33 'ii'xe3 fxe3 34 .txb6 exf2+ 35 .ltxf2 i.b5 (S.Shipov), but here too Black has a big advantage. 29 'ii'c2 f3 30 g3 Otherwise30 ...tt'lf4 . 30 ... .l:r.h7! Threatening 31 ... .l:r.h1+! 32 'iitxh1 'ii'xf2. 6 tt'lxe4 .txe4 7 d3 i.g68 i.g5i.e? 9 i.xe7 31 i.e1 .l:r.h3 'ilxe7+ 10 i.e2 tt'lc6 11 0-0 0-0 12 .l:r.e1 White resigned . l:tae8 13 'ii'd2 tt'le5 14 d4 tt'lxf3+ 15 i.xf3 'ild7 16 c3 b6 17 :XeS .l:r.xe8 18 .l:te1 l:l.xe1+ Sometimes even very strong players become 19 'ii'xe1 c;itf8 20 g3, and the players agreed victims of trustfulness. In the 44th issue of a draw. lnformator the game Miles-Christiansen The young Indian player Vishwanathan from the 1987 San Francisco tournament Anand decided to make use of such a was published. simple way of equalising. However, at the 1 e4 e5 tournament in Biel in 1988 after 5 ...i.f 5?? 2 tt'lf3 tt'lf6 his opponent Alonso Zapata replied: 3 tt'lxe5 d6 6 'ile21 4tt'lf3 tt'lxe4 Black had to resign in view of the inevitable 5tt'lc3 .tf5 loss of a piece (6 ...'ile7 7 tt'ld5) . 274 � Index of Players Alburt 112 Dvoretsky 39, 96, 97, 99, 108, 112, 113, Alexandrov 265 117, 122, 124, 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, 134, 135, 136, 138, 139, 141, 143, Anikaev 136 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 151, 154, 212, Arkhipkin 204 214, 236, 237, 240, 251 , 254 Arkhipov 269 Averkin 136 Ek 143 Etruk 124 Bagirov 120, 177 Baklan 260 Fang 151 Balashov 240 Feigin 261 _ Bazhin 268 Filipowicz 147, 148 Beliavsky 21, 71 Fischer 129, 130, 142, 150, 152, 206, 212, Bogoljubow 219 213, 246 Bogomolov 132 Gaponenko 255 Boguslavsky 268 Gasymov 258 Bronstein 99, 188, 223 Gavrikov 234, 243 Browne 176 Geller, U. 129 Bukhtin 154 Geller, Ye . 188, 190, 216, 217 Georgiev 67 Capa�anca 213, 214, 217 Gheorghiu 206 Chekhov 133, 141 Gik 181 Christiansen 273 Gipslis 42 Chubinsky 148 Gorchakov 128 Ciocaltea 140 Gorodilov 96 Cook 131 GrOnfeld 219 Gulko 10, 190, 237, 251 , 254 Damsky 126 Denker 118 Hernandez 217 Dieks 141 Hort 31 Dokhoian 185 Hubner 179 Dolmatov 27, 30, 63, 67, 71, 78, 120, 128, 137, 234 Ivanov 212 Dubinin 220 Ivanov, A. 133 Durao 152 lvkov 142 Index of Players ltJ 275 Janowski 39, 214 Nezhmetdinov 104, 117 Nikonovich 260 Kaiszauri 138 N.N. 104, 117 Kaplun 199 Nogueiras 156 Karpov 63, 202, 221 Kasparov 63 Orlov 143 Keres 188 Osmanovic 34 Khalifman 135 Koifman 205 Pachman 118 Korchnoi 42, 202, 215 Palatnik 224, 232 Koryakin 214 Panna 150, 175 Kosikov 193, 200, 224, 227, 232, 233 Petrosian 118, 176, 192 Kostro 222 Plachetka 37 Kramnik 263 Polugayevsky 63, 84 Kupreichik 145 Polyantsev 199 Kuzovkin 183 Pomar 241 Popov 36 La Bourdonnais 172, 173, 174 Portisch 43, 212 Larsen 43 Psakhis 185 Lasker 213 Lerner 30 Rashkovsky 30, 233 Liberzon 140 Rasulov 271 Lj ubojevic 17, 158 Razuvaev 177 Loktev 209 Repkova 255 Loyd 171 Reshevsky 197 Ribli 159 McDonnell 172, 173, 174 Rogozhnikov 144 Magerramov 227 Romanishin 188, 265 Makariev 257, 271 Romanov 236 Makarychev 186 Rubinstein 39, 218, 219 Malyutin 205 Mecking 84, 215, 216 Saburova 198 Meyer 128 Sakharov 192 Miagmasuren 130 Sax 45 Miles 59, 273 Sedina 198, 199 Mordasov 233 Serebro 200 Mugerman 257 Shirazi 53 Mukhin 122 Shmit 39 276 c;!( Index of Players Sitnik 255 Ubilava 134 Smagin 195 Uhlmann 34, 36, 37 Smyslov 31 , 118 Unzicker 213, 221 Sokolov, A. 56, 137 Speelman 78 Vaganian 179, 197 Spassky 15 Va iser 195 Spraggett 162 Vekshenkov 233 Stepanavichus 255 Veselovsky 108, 117, 149, 208 Subarova 198 Vidmar 217 Suetin 220 Voronova 199 Svidler 269 Vulfson 139, 204, 205, 208, 209 Ta imanov 246 Ta taev 113 Winiwarter 223 Thomas 218, 219 Timman 49, 121, 158, 175 Yu rtaev 138 Timoshchenko 108 Yusupov 10, 15, 17, 21, 24, 27, 45, 49, 53, To ran 241 56, 59, 121, 127, 156, 159, 162, 243 Ts eshkovsky 24, 130 Tukmakov 138 Zlotnik 181, 183, 186 Tumenok 193 Zuckerman 222 Turovsky 97 Zviagintsev 258, 261 , 263 CtJ 277 Index of Openings Alekhine Defence 39 Benoni Defence 261 Caro-Kann Defence 59, 78 Dutch Defence 21 , 63 English Opening 33, 63, 108, 265 French Defence 42, 43, 53, 56, 96, 97, 184, 185, 192-201 , 255, 269 GrOnfeld Defence 24, 104, 120, 190 King's Indian Attack 112, 113, 118, 126-155 King's Indian Defence 10, 122, 124, 240, 271 Modern Benoni 27, 268 Nimzo-lndian Defence 206, 208, 209, 236 Petroff Defence 273 Philidor Defence 263 Queen� Gambrt 17, 106, 121, 156, 159, 162, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 179, 234, 243 Queen's Indian Defence 45, 183 Queen's Pawn Opening 258, 260 Ragozin Defence 237, 246, 251 Ruy Lopez 15, 71 , 188, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216-223 Semi-Slav Defence 84 Sicilian Defence 31, 67, 99, 118, 181, 186, 202, 204, 205 Slav Defence 49, 224, 227 Trompowsky Attack 257 Mark Dvoretsky I Artur Yusupov SCHOOL OF FUTURE CHAMPIONS The world's top trainer, Mark Dvoretsky, and one of his best-known pupils, grandmaster Artur Yusupov, present a five-volume series based on courses given to talented young players throughout the world. The books contain contributions by other leading trainers and grandmasters, as well as games by pupils who have attended the courses. Mark Dvoretsky, Mark Dvoretsky, Mark Dvoretsky, Artur Yusupov Artur Yu supov Artur Yusupov Secrets of Secrets of Opening Secrets of Endgame Chess Training Preparation Technique School of Future School of Future School of Future Champions vo l. 1. Edited Champions vol. 2. Edited Champions vol. 3. Edited and translated by Ken Neat. and translated by Ken Neat. and translated by Ken Neat. ISBN 978-3-283-005 15-3 ISBN 978-3-283-0051 6-0 ISBN 978-3-283-005 17-7 In preparation In this fi rst volume the reader The second volume explains is shown how to assess his the basic principles of the Successful endgame play is all strengths and weaknesses, opening, discusses how to about technique. In this third analyse his own games, and build an opening repertoire volume of the series the learn from the rich heritage and produce opening novel authors explain how to study of the past by a study of the ties, and explores the connec the endgame and to analyse chess classics. Over a hun tion between the opening endgame positions, and illus dred graded test positions and the later stages - the trate the highly important provide ample material fo r middlegame and the end technique of converting an self-improvement. game. advantage. m EDITION 0LMS Willikonerstr. 10 · CH-86 18 Oetwil a.S./Zurich · www.edition-olms.com -All Olms books can be obtained from your bookstore - Join in and become one of Mark Dvoretsky's and Artur Yusupov's pupils! "This series of books is addressed to those who do not regard chess simply as an amusement, but want to understand its secrets more deeply and substantially raise their standard of play. How can this be achieved? What are the ways and methods of working inde pendently on chess? Th at is Mark Dvoretsky, Mark Dvoretsky, what we teach in our school, Artur Yusupov Artur Yusupov and that is what is described Secrets of Secrets of in these books. We hope that Positional Play Creative Thinking you will derive benefit from School of Future School of Future them." Champions vol. 4. Champions vol. 5. Edited and translated Edited and translated Mark Dvoretsky, by Ken Neat. by Ken Neat. ISBN 978-3-283-005 18-4 ISBN 978-3-283-00519-1 Artur Yusupov In preparation In preparation The main theme of volume 4 is The fi nal volume of the series "prophylaxis'; a concept fi rst deals with various creative expounded by Nimzowitsch aspects, such as the calcula and one which has been bril tion of va riations and the liantly developed by Mark development of intuition. It Dvoretsky and his pupils. The also explores the psychology art of positional play is ex of taking decisions, both plained in terms of planning, when attacking and when manoeuvring, the study of typ defending. ical positions, and deep strate gy in grandmaster games. m EDITION 0LMS Willikonerstr. 10 · CH-86 18 Oetwil a.S./Zi.irich · www.edition-olms.com - All Olms books can be obtained from your bookstore - Mark Dvoretsky SCHOOL OF CHESS EXCELLENCE Mark Dvoretsky is regarded as the leading chess coach in the world, and in this series of books he reveals the training methods that have transformed so many of his pupils into champions. Mark Dvoretsky Mark Dvoretsky Endgame Analysis Strategic Play School of Chess Excellence 1. School of Chess Excellence 3. Edited and translated Edited and translated by Ken Neat. by Ken Neat. ISBN 978-3-283-00416-3 ISBN 978-3-283-00418-7 This fi rst title is devoted to the endgame and This third volume in Mark Dvoretsky's course is examines a wide ra nge of positions, taken devoted to questions of strategy, and is aimed mainly from games of the author's pupils. The at improving the reader's positional under comments are packed with practical advice standing. The author also examines a number and special test positions and frequent ques of positions that lie on the boundary between tions ensure that the reader's participation in the middlegame and endgame. the book is an active one. Mark Dvoretsky Mark Dvoretsky Opening Ta ctical Play Developments School of Chess Excellence 2. School of Chess Excellence 4. Edited and translated Edited and translated by Ken Neat. by Ken Neat. ISBN 978-3-283-00417-0 ISBN 978-3-283-00419-4 The initial part of this book deals with combi Compared with the other books, substantially nations and tactical techniques, and suggests more space is given to the analysis of the open methods for developing a player's calculating ing problems that confront a player in a particu ability. lar game. The first half of the book is altogether In the second part the author analyses a number devoted to opening preparation, and also in the of fa scinating examples, in which he examines a second half nearly every game is accompanied wide variety of attacking and defensive means. by detailed opening information. III EDITION OLMS Willikonerstr. 10 · CH-8618 Oetwil a.S./Zurich · www.edition-olms.com - All Olms books can be obtained from your bookstore -