Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
First published 1 98 1
Jon Kinlay 1 98 1
ISBN 0 7 1 34 2 1 39 9 (limp)
Photoset by Andek Printing, London
and printed in Great Britain by
Bill ing & Son Ltd,
London, Guildford & Worcester
for the publishers
B.T. Batsford Ltd , 4 Fitzhardinge Street,
London W I H OAH
Contents
Symbols
Acknowledgments
I Int roduction
2 Central Counterattacks: 6 . . . d5; 6 . . . e5
3 6 . . . h6
4 Queenside C ounterattack: 6 . . . a6
5 6 . . . lbc6; 6 . . . i.. e7
Index of Complete Games
Index of Variations
vi
vii
I
15
19
56
75
1 00
101
Symbols
+
;!; +
+
++
=
00
!
!!
!?
?!
?
??
Corres
OL
IZ
L
Ch
\.-S f
Check
Slight advantage
Clear advantage
Winning advantage
Level position
Unclear p osition
Good move
Outstanding move
Interesting move
Dubious move
Weak move
Blunder
Correspondence
Olym piad
Interz onal
League
Championship
Semi-final
Acknowledgments
My thanks are due to Graham Hillyard for checking the manuscript,
to Paul Lamford for his editorial work and especiallyto Bob Wade,
and off the chess board will always be a source of inspiration, and, above
all, to my wife Margaret for her enduring support and patience.
Jonathan Kinlay,
London, July
1 98 1 .
1 Introduction
2 Introduction
4
lbxd4
lbf6
S lbc3
d6
6
g4
Keres wrote: ' Th is interesting
idea came into my mind during
the course of the game . In this
position the continuation 6 g3
followed by i.g2 was often employ
ed and an attack on the king's
wing was begun only later by f4
and g4. The thought came into my
head, however, why not save a
tempo and begin immediately
with g4?'
6
c6
It is interesting that Bogoljubow
avoided the natural attempts at
refutation, 6 . . . d5 and 6 . . . e 5 .
Perhaps he chose this solid contin
uation instinctively, or perhaps,
like Keres, he was able to convince
himself through over-the-board
analysis that the idea was sound.
In any event he must h ave found
the situation confusing and it is
not too surprising that he rather
quickly goes wrong.
g5
7
xd4?
Black quite j ustifiably desires to
simplify the position as much as
possibl e, but exchanging the knights
at this stage turns out to be an
error of judgment. The white queen
takes up a dominating position in
t he centre of the board where it
hinders both the development of
Black's pieces and his intended
expansion on the queenside - a
theme we wil l be returning to at
various stages of the analysis to
follow.
8
9
11Vxd4
lbd7
i.e3
a6
1 0 i.el
1!fc7
11
f4
b6
It now transpires that the normal
1 1 . . . b5 will merely result in a
serious weakening of Black's pawn
formation after 12 a4! since the
undesirable exchange 12 . . . ba i s
forced due to the positioning of
White's queen - directly the result
of the premature simplification on
move 7 . White's advantage is
al ready substantial .
12
fS! (2)
2
B
Introduction 3
Basic Strategies
4 Introduction
A) 6
B) 6
...
d5; 6
...
e5
..
h6
Introduction 5
5
B
6 Introduction
Introduction 7
8 Introduction
Introduction 9
10 Introduction
1Wxg2 1 -0.
Anot her illust rat ion of the king
side v queenside att ack t heme is
provided by the game Alexandria
Kozlovskaya , Tbilisi 1 979, which
once again shows the- strength of
the plan of breaking open Black's
pawn barrier by attacking the
white squares with h4-h5 followed
by g5-g6.
13
w
Introduction 11
12 Introduction
17
w
Introduction 13
19
B
...
14 Introduction
2 Central Counterattacks: 6
. . .
d5;
e5
16 6
...
d5; 6
...
e5
23
6
after 8 ... hg! (8 .. .i.e6? is too slow:
9 gh .i.xfS 10 ef .i.e7 I I h6
Bagirov-Morsovich, USSR 1 960)
9 lt:l e3 .i.e6 10 Wd2 lt:l c6 1 1 0-0-0
lt:ld4 12 .i.xf6 gf 1 3 lt:lb5 't!Vb 6 ! 14
lt:lxd4 ed 1 5 Wxd4 't!rxd4 1 6 Ilxd4
.i. h6 =F. B la c k ha d more than
sufficient compensation fo r the
broken pawns in terms of his very
active piece play.
lt:lxe4
8
9 lt:lxg7+
.txg7
1 0 lt:lxe4
d5
1 1 . lt:lg3 (24)
.
...
d5: 6
..
e5 1 7
lt:lh5 Ilh7
13
14
15
25
B
24
B
7
.td 7
Black cannot avoid the exchange
of bishops ai though it emphasises
his weakness on the white squares.
18 6 . . d5; 6 . . . e5
.
3 6 ... h6
29
w
20 6 . h6
..
30
6 ... h6 21
0 0 0
. o .
31
0 0 0
22 6 . . . h6
32
fe
1 5 xe6!
15
1!rxe5 1 6 libe l be 1 7
1Wxd7+! xd7 I S c7 mate.
16
ef
gf
.ixe4
1 7 e4
1 7 . . . f g I S 1!rxd7+ "t!Vxd7 1 9
xf6+ e7 20 lixd7+ 'it>xf6 2 1
.ixb7 Ji bS 22 .i xa6 .
1 8 i.xe4
0-0-0
19 1We2 (33)
33
B
6 . . . h6 23
34
24 6 . . . h6
...
35
6 . . . h6 25
'8h7 't!f d8 25 a3 lilf8? 26 g7 lilg8 27
lilf l ..e8 28 lilf7 8 29 ..f 5 7
A21 1 3
1 2 .t g2
12 . . . .te7 1 3 b l ( 1 3 f4) 1 3 . . .
lilxd4 1 4 ..xd4 .tc6 1 5 lilh3 0-0-0
1 6 llhd3 b8 1 7 lLld5!? ed 1 8 ed
ll:lxd5! 1 9 .txd5 .txg5
Gipslis
Liberzon, Tallinn 1 969.
A21 1 4
1 2 .te2
This move has invariably been
Karpov's choice in the position.
White endeavours to constrict his
opponent further by supporting
the advance of the h-pawn.
0-0-0
12
.te7
13
f4
b8
14
h5
14 . . . ll:la5 1 5 llh3 lilc6 16 lilb3
.te8 1 7 b I b8 18 "t!Ve3 was
Sutterer-Podzielny, West German
Ch 1 978, in which White retained
a substantial spatial advantage.
.te8
1 5 b1
1 5 . . . d5 16 e5 lile4 1 7 lilxe4 de
1 8 .txe7 lilxe7 19 "t!Ve3 lLlf5 20
ll:lxf5 ef 2 1 llhg I Karpov
Steinberg, USSR 1 97 1 .
1 6 .tf3 (36)
=
36
B
26 6 ... h6
6 . . . h6 27
A2 1 2 1 1 0 . . . lDe5
A2 1 22 1 0 . . . a6 (the main line).
A2121
lDeS
10
11
1!fel
This move has the benefit of
reinf orcing c4 but 1 1 .te2 is
playable, e.g. 1 1 . . . .td7 12 0-0-0
lih3 (playing to exploit the absence
of the bishop f rom f l - Black now
threatens 1 3 . . . lixc3 or 13 . . . lDf3;
a mistake would be 1 2 . . . 1!fxf2 on
account of 1 3 lDd4) 1 3 .ie3?! ( 1 3
f 4! lDf 3 1 4 .txf3 lixf3 1 5 e 5 lDg8
1 6 lt:ld4 lih3 1 7 f 5 or 1 3 . . . lixc3
14 .txf 6! lixb3 1 5 ab ) 1 3 . . .
lixe3! 1 4 f e g 6 1 5 1!fd4 .th6 1 6
1!fxb6 ab 1 7 lixd6 .tc6 with f ull
compensation f or the exchange,
Browne-Kavalek, USA Ch 1 975.
11
.td7
Or 1 1 . . . 1!fc7 and now:
(a) 12 0-0-0 .td7 13 f 4 lDc6 14 .tg2
a6 1 5 .tf 3 0-0-0 1 6 h4 b8 1 7 h5
Ilc8 1 8 c.t>b l .te8 1 9 .th4! (the
black square plan! ) 19 . . . lt:ld7?
(better was 1 9 . . . lt:la5 20 lt:lxa5
1!fxa5 2 1 .tf2 lt:ld7 22 We3 lt:lc5)
20 .tf2 lDc5 21 lihg l g6 22 hg f g
2 3 f5! lDxb3 24 a b gf 2 5 ef ef 26
lt:ld5 1!fa5? 27 .ib6 @b5 28 1!ff2
Tatai-Sax, Budapest 1 976.
(b) 1 2 h4 .id7 13 0-0-0 Ilc8 1 4 h5
lDc4 15 Ilh3 b5 Gipslis-Sax,
Amsterdam 1 976, and now 1 6
lt:ld4! with the idea 1 6 . . . b4 1 7 lDd5!
Ilc8
0-0-0
12
f4
13
Less forceful is 1 3 h4 as played
in the game Lanka-Knaak, Jurmala
1 978, which continued 1 3 . . . a6 1 4
28 6 . . . h6
h4
12
This is the currently favoured
try for an advantage . Experie nce
with alternatives has not been
extensive but 12 .te3 seems worthy
of investigation .
(a) 1 2 f3?! llc8 ( 1 2 . . 0-0-0? 1 3
.te3 1!Vc7 1 4 a4 ) 1 3 b l @c7
14 f4 b5 1 5 .ig2 b4 1 6 l0e2 a5 and
.
6 . . h6 29
.
40
B
30 6 . . . h6
1 980.
15
16
.t c8
.tf3 (41)
6 . . h6 31
.
...
...
32 6 . . . h6
42
w
6 . . . h6 33
threatening 28 l:td7.
13
b4
1 3 . . . .tb7 is the natural move
and until recently was considered
perfectly adequate, e.g.
(a) 1 4 'i!?b1 .te7 15 h4 ( 1 5 a3 b4 1 6
ab lt:lxb4 1 7 h4 e5 ) 1 5 . . . b4 16
lt:le2 a5 17 Ilhe 1 0-0-0 1 8 lt:led4
lt:lxd4 19 @xd4 'i!?b8 20 @g l (20 c4 !
be 2 1 ll c l oo) 20 . . . e5 + Stean
Spassky, Moscow 1 975.
(b) 14 h4 0-Q-O 1 5 f5 'i!?b8 1 6 fe fe 17
lt:ld4 lt:lxd4 18 @xd4 i.e7 1 9 i.h3
e5 20 @e3 b4 21 lt:ld5 lL!xd5 22 ed
.ixg5 23 hg @a5 24 't!re4 Ilhf8 +
Timman-Ligterink, Netherlands Ch
1 978.
However, a recent game has cast
d oubt on the move, with the result
that pref rence is currently given
to the text.
(c) 1 4 @e3! b4 1 5 lt:la4 lt:ld7 (trying
to cover the dark squares while
preparing for . . . e5) 1 6 e5! d5 ( 1 6 . . .
de 1 7 llxd7 ! 't!rxd7 1 8 lL!b6 't!rc7 1 9
lhxa8 i.xa8 2 0 fe ) 1 7 f5 ! 't!rxe 5
( 1 7 . . . lL!cxe5 1 8 fe fe 1 9 lt:ld4 't!rd6
20 i.f4 ) 1 8 't!rf2 't!rxf5 (after 1 8 . . .
e7 1 9 i.xe7 lt:lxe7 20 fe fe 2 1
lt:ld4 Black's position is near to
collapse) 19 't!rxf5 ef 20 ll he l +? (20
xd5! ) 20 . . . lt:lce5 2 1 lt:la5
:b8? (2 1 . . . llh2 oo) 22 lt:lxb7
:xb7 23 llxd5 llc7? 24 ll l xe5+
1 -0 Razuvayev-Commons, Lublin,
1 978.
1 4 lL!a4
14 e5 be 1 5 't!rc3 lt:ld5 1 6 . lld5 ed
1 7 .id5 ..tb7 + .
e5
14
de
fe
15
16
17
18
h3
'trf2
i.e3
i.e6
lt:ld7
lt:la5 (43)
43
34 6 . . . h6
45
B
6 . . . h6 35
d-file.
18
li:c8? (47)
48
B
47
w
36 6 . . . h6
develop the queen on the more
active e2 square where it supports
an eventual e5 break. The game
Ljubojevic-Larsen, Orense 1 975,
went 10 Wd2 "@b6 1 1 db5 ( 1 1
.i.e3 ! ) 1 1 . . . g4! 1 2 h3 a6 1 3
xd6+ .i.xd6 1 4 h g llxh l + 1 5
.i.xh 1 e5 regaining the pawn
with an excellent position.
.i.e7
10
1 1 Wd2
a6
't!fc7
12
0-0-0
On 1 2 . . . "@b6 White has the
important resource 1 3 .i.e3 ! which
maintains his knight in its strong
central post.
13
f4 (49)
49
B
xd4
13
This is the manoeuvre which is
supposed to equalise. Safer is 1 3 . . .
0-0-0, although White retains his
superiority with 14 .i.f3 - see A2 1 1 .
.i.c6
1 4 Wxd4
eS!
IS
The move overlooked by theory.
Gipslis-Liberzon, USSR Ch 1 969,
went instead 15 .i.h3 b5 16 llhe l
't!fa7 ! 1 7 't!fd3 b4 with equal
chances .
.i.xg2
IS
15 . . . de 16 .t.xc6+ Wxc6 ( 1 6 . . .
be?! 1 7 fe lld8 - 1 7 . . . d7 1 8
i.xe 7 xe 7 19 e4 xe5 20 Wc5+
e8 21 d6 + ; 1 7 . . . d5 18
i.xe 7 Wxe 7 1 9 e4 - 18 't!fa4 )
17 fe lld8 18 't!fe3 d5 ( 1 8 . . . g4
1 9 Wf4 ) 1 9 xd5 llxd5 20 .i.xe7
xe7 21 ll xd5 leaves Black with
plenty of problems to solve: 21 . . .
Wxd5 22 lld 1 followed by 2 3
Wg5 + o r 2 3 't!fc5+; 2 1 . . . e d 22
't!fg5+ .
.i. xh1
16
ef
(a) 16 ... gf!? 17 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 8
Wxf6 llf8 1 9 llh2 .i.c6 20 h 5 ;1;- .
(b) 1 6 ... eS. 1 7 Wg l ! gf ( l 7 . . . .i.xh l
1 8 fe7 f6 - 1 8 . . .i.c6 19 fe d5 20
xd5 .i.xd5 21 ll xd5 - 1 9
.i.xf6! g f 2 0 Wg7 llxh4 2 1 Wf8+
d7 22 fe ! fe 23 Wxa8 xe7 24
llfl ) 1 8 't!fg2 fg 1 9 d5 .
17
fe
f6
(a) 1 7 ... eS? 1 8 fe de 1 9 't!fd8+ .
(b) 1 7 ... .i.c6 1 8 't!fxg7 d7 1 9
Wxf7 llhe8 2 0 f5 ! .
gf
1 8 .i.xf6!
d7
1 9 't!fxf6
20
rs! (50J
.
50
B
6
B
J.g2 (51)
51
8
. .
h6 3 7
h4
8
8 h3 transposes to l i n e 82 after
8 . . lDc6. At this and other stages
9 g5 will lead to positions discussed
under A.
Black is already in difficulties,
as can be seen from the fol lowing
lines.
B l l 8 . . h5?!
B I 2 8 . . . g6? !
813 8
lDc6
Bll
hS?!
8
lDg4
9
gS
f3
10
10 't!t'e2 't!Vc7 I I f3 lDe5 I2 f4
lDg4 1 3 J.f3 , O' Kelly-Stoltz,
Zaandam I 946, is similar to the
column.
10
lileS
f4
11
lt:lg4
1 2 J.f3
lDc6
1 3 lDxc6
be
1 4 J.xg4
hg
1 5 't!Vxg4
't!t'b6
16
dS
b3
1 7 't!t'f3
J.b4
1 8 J.d2 (52)
.
. . .
38 6 . . . h6
812
g6?!
8
This move was tried by Stahlberg
as Black against O' Kelly at Mar
del Plata 1 948. The game continued
hg
9
gS
10
hg
nxh 1 +
11
.ixh1
lDh7
1 2 'Wg4!
eS
ed
1 3 1!rh4
14
lDdS
with White attacking down the
h-file.
813
lD c6
8
The sturdiest alternative. None
theless White's initiative is gaining
momentum:
hg
9
gS
nxh 1 +
10
hg
1 1 .ixh 1 (53)
53
54
82
7
lD c6
As we saw in variation B l Black
ru ns into difficulties if he does not
play energetically enough in the
6 . . . h6 39
centre. For this reason it is more
accurate to develop the queen 's
knight immediately in order to be
prepared to exchange White's
actively placed pieces as soon as
danger threatens. White is forced
to play more slowly than after 7 . . .
a6 and the immediate threat of . . .
ll:\xd4 and . . . ll:\ xg4 will cause him
to lose some time safeguarding the
pawn.
h3
8
As before , 8 g5 will effect a
transposition to lines handled
under A.
8 tt:lb3 allows Black to equalise
with 8 . . . e5 9 g5 hg 10 .ixg5 .ie7
I I .ixf6 .ixf6 12 ll:\d5 .ig5 or even
take the initiative with a pawn
sacrifice: . . . a5 ( ! ) 9 a4 d5 10 ed
ll:lb4 l l de Wxd l + 1 2 ct>xd l tt:lxg4
1 3 ef+ ct>xf7 14 ll:\e4 .if5 .
The position after 8 h 3 can also
be reached by inverting the order
of White's 7th and 8th moves.
White's intention, having taken
care of his g-pawn, is to continue
his development before attempting
any further action on the kingside.
He will use his pieces to maintain a
grip on the centre , for which
purpose the bishop is well placed
on g2, and then push forward his
kingside pawns, slowly increasing
his spatial advantage until an
opportunity appears for a direct
assault.
In many ways this strategy is
similar to the one which White
follows in Maroczy bind formations
with the difference that his pieces
...
...
40 6 . . . h6
1 0 't!fd3 .ic6 I I .if4 't!t"a5 1 2 0-0-0
0-0-0 13 't!t"g3! (forcing the weakness)
1 3 . . . e5 14 .ie3 b8 1 5 lild3 't!t"c7
1 6 lilhd l lilc8 1 7 lil l d2 .ie7 1 8 h4
. Having deprived his opponent
of counterplay White proceeded
smoothly with his attack on the
wing.
The game Hort-Andersson, Malta
OL 1980, featured a novel approach
by Black: 8
.ie7 9 .ie3 ll:\e5!? 1 0
f4 lDc4 I I .i f2 .id7 ( I I . . . lDxb2?
12 't!t"b l ) 12 b3 't!t"a5 1 3 't!t"d3
lDa3 14 0-0 lilc8 1 5 ll:\ce2 0-0 ( 1 5 . . .
e5 1 6 ll:\f5 ! ) 1 6 c3 ( 1 6 c4 b5 ! +) 1 6 . .
lilfd8 1 7 lilac I lDb5 1 8 a4 ll:\ xd4 1 9
ll:\xd4! a 6 2 0 lilfe l 't!t"c7 2 1 c4 ;!;.
From the position in diagram 56
White must choose between 9 0-0
and the more flexible 9 .ie3 . The
only important feature to distinguish
between the two lines arises if
White castles queenside in order
to push his attack forward with all
the more vigour. The choice is,
however, essentially a question of
style as White's prospects are
reasonable in either case.
B 2 1 9 0-0
B22 9 .ie3
B21
9
0-0
.id7
10 .i e3
10 ll:lde2 has also been played
with the idea of avoiding exchanges
and further increasing the pressure
on d5. However, the move allows
Black scope to expand on the
queenside without fear of tricks
on the long diagonal . This in itself
need not be a bad thing: in variations
...
6 . . . h6 41
d4 coupled with . . . e5: 12
0-0 1 3
f4 l0xd4 1 4 .i.xd4 e 5 1 5 .i.e3 ef I 6
lixf4 .i.e6 with level chances.
12
0-0
The game Enklaar-Petrosian,
Amsterdam I 973, continued instead
with I 2 . . . b5 1 3 a3 l0xd4 I 4 .i.xd4
e5 I 5 .i.e3 .i.e6 I 6 l0d5 .i.xd5 I 7
e d l0d7 a nd here White could
maintain a slight pull with 18 f4
according to Petrosian .
l0xd4(!)
l3
f4
1 4 .i.xd4
eS
15
.i.e3
ef
16
lixf4
.i. e6
.i.xdS
1 7 lOdS
18
ed (58)
58
B
R. Byrne-Reshevsky, USA Ch
I 966/67 . The position is level.
822
9 .i.e3
This is the more flexible of
White's alternatives and allows
him to consider the possibility of
castling long in addition to trans
posing to the previous line.
.i.d7
9
An i mporta nt departure was
seen in the ga me Horvath-Stean,
Virovitica 1 97 7 : 9 . . . "t!t'c7 1 0 1!Ve2
42 6 . . . h6
.t.xd4 .t.c6 1; R. Byrne-Lombardy,
USA Ch 1 972.
12
W'aS
The same idea as in the game
Matulovic-Sax mentioned earlier.
Black's position seems in no way
improved for having delayed the
manoeuvre until White has castled.
1 2 . . 0-0 was indicated (but not 1 2
. . . b5? allowing 1 3 e 5 ! ) .
1 3 lilb3
W'c7
1 4
bS
0-0 (60)
IS
libel
l::t g l (61)
61
B
60
w
6 . . . h6 43
strive to achieve his ideal formation
by alternating attacking moves
( l::t g l , h4) with developing moves
( .i.e3, .i.e2) so that the threat of . . .
d 5 is contained a s much a s possible.
If he can surmount these initial
difficulties White should cope
successfully with other attempts
by Black to gain counterplay and
reach a very promising attacking
position indeed.
Before oeginning the detailed
analysis of the line we pause for a
word about White's seventh move
alternatives.
(a) 7 .i.el commits the bishop
rather too ea rly - it's useful to
retain the option of a check on b5
in case of a quick . . . d5 by Black.
(b) 7 h4 dclares White's intentions
too soon and allows Black to
make preparations for a rapid
counterstrike in the centre . 7 . . .
.te7 ( ! ) and now:
b I ) 8 llgl d5! - transposing to C2.
b2) More interesting is the novel
I 1Wf3!? e.g. S . . . h 5 ! (S . . . .!Llc6 9
tlxc6 be 1 0 g5 olild7 I I g6 oo) 9 gh
/()xh5 I 0 .i.g5 lt:lc6 ( 1 0 . . . .i.xg5?
I I hg 't!t"xg5 I 2 lt':ldb5 ) I 1 0-0-0
.txg5 ( I I . . . a6) I 2 hg 't!fxg5+ I 3
*b I lt:lxd4 I 4 l::t x d4 .i.d7 I 5 ll xd6
.tc6 I6 llxc6? ! ( 1 6 .i.e2 g6 oo) I 6
. . , be I 7 e 5 l::t d S ! I S 't!t"xc6+ ct>f8
1 9 't!t'c5+ <t>gS 20 .i.c4 lt:lf4 +
Ljubojevic-Timman, Montreal i 979.
b3) The curiosity 8 llh3, guarding
the rook in preparation for g5, was
played in the game Torre-Hubner,
Rio de Ja neiro IZ I 979. After S . . .
d S 9 .i.b5 + ct>f8 1 0 e 5 lt:lfd7 I I .i.f4
..
44 6 . . . h6
29 lld3 ) 22 g6! '@a4+ 23 b l
l:txc3 24 llc l ! lla3 25 '@xd7+ ! ! 1 -0
Perenyi-Barczay, Hungary 1 979.
c22) 9 e5 10 l0f5 ( 1 0 l0b3 b5 1 1 f3
.i.b7 oo) 1 0 . . . g6 1 1 g5 ! ( 1 1 l0xh6
J.xh6 12 .i.xh6 l0c5 ! 13 '@h4 .i.xg4
=F=F; l l lDg3 lOb6 1 2 .i.e2 h 5 1 3 '@h4
J.e7 1 4 g5 l0h7 =F Ermenkov
Polugayevsky, Buenos Aires OL
1 978) 1 1 ... gf 1 2 ef! d5! 13 gf ( l 3
o-O-O d4 1 4 gfdc 1 5 .i.c4 '@xf6 1 6 f4
l0c5 ! 1 7 libe l .i.xf5 1 8 '@g2 .i.e4 1 9
'@g3 l0e6 ( =F) 20 fe '@g6 2 1 .i.xe6
cb+ 22 'ibxb2 fe 23 '@f4 lieS 24 lld2
.i.b4 0- 1 Sax-Gheorghiu , Wij k aan
Zee 1 9 8 1 ) 13 . . . d4 14 .i.c4! ( 1 4 lDe4
lDxf6 ! 1 5 '@h4 l0xe4 1 6 '@xe4 de 1 7
'@xe5+ .i.e6 ! 1 8 lld l ef+ 1 9 ct>e2
'@g5 and Black went over to the
attack in Perenyi-Tompa, Hungary
1 979) 14 . . . l0xf6 ( 14 . . . de 15 .i.xf7+
'ibxf7 1 6 '@h5+ ; 14 . . . '@a5 1 5
.i.xf7+ xf7 1 6 '@h5+ <t>xf6 1 7
'@g6+ 'ibe7 1 8 o-o-o with a dangerous
attack for the piece) 1 5 0-0-0 't!t'd7?!
( 1 5 . . . '@c7 !?) Perenyi-Cabrilo,
Kecskemet 1 979. Now Perenyi's
suggestion is 16 llhe l .i.e7 ( 1 6 . . .
'@xf5? 1 7 '@xf5 .i.xf5 1 8 .i.xd4 )
1 7 f4 '@xf5 1 8 '@xf5 .i.xf5 1 9 fe de 20
ef .i.xf6 2 1 llxe3+ ct>f8 22 l:U3
J.g5+ 23 ct>b l .i.g6 24 Itd7 .
From diagram 6 1 Black has:
Cl 7 . . . lDc6
C2 7 . . . .i.e7
7
d5?! would fail for reasons
similar to those which caused
Blac k's demise in the 6 . . . d5 1ine as
the interpolation of the moves 6 . . .
h 6 7 It g I does little t o alter the
character of the position as far as
...
...
62
w
6 ... h6 45
without further delay. He can secure
counterplay either by meeting his
opponent head-on with 8 . . . h5 or
opening up the centre with 8 . . . d5.
8 . . . ll:lxd4 on the other hand
leaves White fully in control: 9
't!t'xd4 ll:ld7 10 g5 hg I I hg ll:le5 1 2
lig3 ! a6 1 3 .i.e3 .i.d7 1 4 0-0-0 't!Vc7
1 5 f4 ll:lc6 16 't!rd2 and White's
position has considerable attacking
potential . The game Guseinov
Morgulev, USSR 1 9 7 5 , continued
16 . . . g6 1 7 ll:la4 b5 1 8 ll:lb6 lib8 1 9
tl:lxd7 't!Vxd7 2 0 .i.c5 .
C l l l 8 . . . h5
C l l 2 8 ... d5
CU I
h5
8
9
hg
9 g5 was a recent try in Belya vsky
Andersson, Moscow 1 98 1 , which
continued 9 . . . ll:lg4 10 .i.e2 't!rb6?
( 1 0 . . . g6! I I ll:lxc6 be 1 2 .i.xg4 - J2
'ld4 'lb6! + - 1 2 . . . hg 1 3 't!rxg4
i.g7 oo) I I .i.xg4 't!rxd4 12 .i.e3
't!t'b4? ( 1 2 . . . 't!rxd l + 13 .i.xd l g6 14
tl:lb5 'i!?d7 15 i.e2 a6 16 ll:ld4 ;t) 1 3
.i.e2 g 6 1 4 a3 ! 'i!Vxb2 1 5 ll:lb5 't!re5
1 6 lib I 'itd7 1 7 't!Vd3 a6 1 8 f4 'i!Vg7
19 ll:lxd6 .i.xd6 20 lid I lid8 2 1
i.b6 't!t'f8 22 e5 'i!?e8 23 i.xd8 ll:lxd 8
2 4 't!Vxd6 't!rxd6 25 li xd6 .
ll:lxh5
9
ll:lf6
10 i.g5
10 . . . 't!rc7 , though not clearly
bad , is certainly more dangerous
for Black : I I 't!Vd2 a6 12 0-0-0
ll:lxd4 ( 1 2 . . . .i.d7 allows the lively
13 ll:lf5 ! ef 1 4 ll:ld5 't!t'b8 15 ef) 1 3
't!Vxd4 .i.d7 1 4 'itb l lic8 1 5 .i.e2 b5
1 6 lige I 't!rc 5 17 't!Vd2 ll:lf6 ( 1 7 ... b4
1 8 ll:ld5 ! ed 1 9 .i.xh 5 or 1 7 . . .
't!Vxf2 1 8 e 5 d5 1 9 ll:lxd5 ed 20 e6
.i.c6 2 1 .i.xh5 ) 18 a3 't!Vc7?! ( 1 8
. . . i.e7 1 9 e5 't!Vxe5 20 .i.xb5 't!Vc5)
1 9 f4 't!rb7 20 e5 de 21 .i.f3 't!Vxf3
22 .i.xf6 't!Vc6 23 ll:le4 Vasyukov
Larsen , Manila 1 974.
I I 't!Vd2
In the game Jansa-Andersson,
Cienfuegos 1975, White experiment
ed successfully with the aggressive
I I h 5 ! ? The continuation was I I . . .
a 6 ( I I . . . ll:lxd4 1 2 't!Vxd4 lixh5 1 3
.i.b5+ i.d7 1 4 .i.xd7+ 't!rxd7 1 5
i.xf6 g f 1 6 't!Vxf6 ; I I . . . 't!rb6 ! ) 1 2
ll:lxc6 be 1 3 't!rf3 .i.e7 1 4 e5 ! de 1 5 h6
gh 1 6 i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 7 lid I .i.d 7 1 8
ll:le4 i.e7 1 9 lig7 lif8 20 .i.c4 with
a powerful attack.
't!rb6
II
a6
1 2 ll:lb3
.i.d7 (63)
13
0-0-0
46 6 . . . h6
the. rook to gi where it hinders
rather than helps the evolution of
his strategy: I4 f4 is impossible and
if I 4 J.e2 then I 4 . . . 't!Vxf2 can be
played as I 5 .ie3 leaves the h-pawn
hanging.
Despite this consideration it
should be possible for White to
realise his advantage by redeploying
the rook and aiming for play in the
centre rather than on the wing.
14 .ig2
I4 'i!?b i 0-0-0 I5 J.e3 't!Vc7 I 6 f4?
llxh4! I 7 't!rf2 lL!g4 I 8 't!Vxh4 lL!xe3
I9 lld2 J.e7 20 't!rh 5 g6 2I 't!Vf3
lL!xfl 22 't!rxfl cilb8 with full
compensation for the exchange in
Cardoso-Andersson, Manila I 974.
't!Vc7
14
IS
llgel
.ie7
0-0-0
f4
16
Balashov-Andersson, Cienfuegos
I 9 7 5. Now instead of the incorrect
sacrifice 17 lL!dS? ed I 8 ed lL!xd 5 !
I 9 J.xd5 f6 =F White should
continue 17 't!re2 preparing to
break open the centre with e5,
when he stands rather better.
Cll2
dS!? (64)
8
64
w
6 . . . h6 47
65
B
48 6 . . h6
.
IU'8+ 1 -0.
Cl2
8 .te3
After this move White is even
better prepared to deal with Black's
counterthreats in the centre.
a6 (67)
8
...
important variation .
White's strategy has evolved
smoothly so far, and he has
contained Black's counterplay while
strengthening his own lines in the
centre and on the kingside . The
question he now faces is whether
to continue the quiet pattern of
development with 9 i.e2 or 9 1fe2,
or attempt an immediate foray
with 9 h4.
It is difficult to evaluate these
possibilities precisely but in general
terms it may be said that neither of
the two developing plans can be
incorrect and both have their
good points, the former offering
immediate protection to the g-pawn
and related white squares on the
kingside, the latter preparing for
queenside castling while retaining
options on the placement of the
bishop. The interesting question,
however, is whether White can
achieve more with the third, more
active, approach.
C l 2 1 9 .te2
C l 22 9 't!Ve2
C l 23 9 h4
Cl21
9 .te2
We examine :
C l 2 1 1 9 . . . .td7
C l 2 1 2 9 . . . i.e7
C l 2 1 3 9 . . . 't!Va5 ( ! )
The latter i s the only move for
Black if he is to upset the smooth
running of White's scheme. The
alternatives 9 . . . i.d7 and 9 . . . i.e7
allo w the first player to reach his
ideal position with 10 h4. Once he
6 . . . h6 49
h'as achieved this set-up White will
be very well placed, threatening to
throw back his opponent's pieces
with g5, when the prospect of an
open file on the kingside will be
most unwelcome to Black. In
addition there is the further threat
of g6 rupturing the protective
barrier around the black king.
All in all the message is one of
warning to Black players as both
theory and practice indicate that
they are in for a very rough ride in
these variations.
Cl21 1
9
i.d7
10
h4 (68)
68
B
50 6 . . . h6
69
B
6 . . . h6 51
71
B
72
w
52 6 . . . h6
...
74
6 . . . h6 53
9
WaS
(a) 9 . . . dS worked out badly for
Black in the game Gheorghiu
R. Garcia , Buenos Aires 1 970,
which went 10 ed ll:lxd5 I I ll:lxd5
@xd5 ( I I . . . ed 12 g5 hg 1 3 hg
followed by 14 .i.e2, 1 5 @d2 and 1 6
0-0-0 ) 1 2 i.g2 't!Va5+ 1 3 c3 ll:le5
1 4 1fe2 't!Vc7 15 0-0-0 i.d7 16 .i.f4!
ll:ld3+ 17 1fxd3 1fxf4+ 18 'i!?b 1
1fc7 1 9 't!Vf3 .
(b) 9 . . . hS(i) may well be Black's
best but is as yet untried . After 10
gh ll:lxh5 1 1 .i.g5 ll:lf6 he is a
tempo ahead on line C I l l .
't!Vc 7
1 0 ll:l b3
This was the course of the game
Krnic-Jansa, Sombor 1 970, quoted
in line C l 2 1 3, where 1 1 .i.e2 d5!?
1
occurred . A substantial improve
ment is . . .
hg
11
gS
ll:l d 7
12
hg
f6
13
g6!
f4
bS
14
ll:lb6
15 @f3
16
0-0-0 (76)
76
B
avenues of attack.
C2
7
.i.e7 (77)
77
w
54 6 . . . h6
e5
10
Willynilly White must go on.
Ineffectual is I 0 ed ltlxd5 I I .i.d2
.i.f6 ! ( I I . . . .i.xh4 12 1We2 .i.f6 1 3
0-0-0 -*.xd4 1 4 ltlxd5 'i!Vxd 5 1 5
.i.e3 ! -*.xe3+ 1 6 1Wxe 3 ! 1Wxb5 1 7
lld8+ <t>e7 1 8 llxh8 with consider
able compensation, Radulov-Sax,
Vraca 1 975) 12 ltlf3 ltlxc3 1 3 -*.xc3
i.xc3 14 be 't!fxd I +
79
B
= .
10
ltlfd7
6 . . . h6 55
12
t3
'tWd2
o-o-o
J.d7
l0f6 (80)
80
w
4 Queenside Counterattack : 6 . . . a6
h4! - see B l Chapter 3), but the
move may have some independent
significance. Some examples :
a1) 7
lL! fd7 S 0-0 lL!c6 9 'it>h 1
.te7 1 0 f4 0-0 1 1 g5 ll:lxd4 1 2 '1Vxd4
b5 ( 1 2 . . . e 5 ! ) R. Byrne-Spassky,
match ( 1 ) 1 974. Now best is 1 3 a4!
libS 14 ab ab 15 b3 Bondarevsky.
a2) 7
lL!c6 S lL!xc6 !? be 9 e5 d5
1 0 ed '1Vxd6 ( 1 0 .. . .ixd6 1 1 ll:le4
followed by 1 2 c4) 1 1 lL!e4 '@c7 1 2
c 4 lL!f4 1 3 .ixf4 '@xf4 1 4 lL!f6+?
( 1 4 ll:ld6+ .txd6 1 5 .txc6+ 'it>e7 1 6
.txaS lidS =t= ; 1 4 '@a4! .id7 1 5
lid 1 '@c7? ! - 1 5 . . . .te l w - 1 6 c5
) 14 ... 'it>e7 ! 15 lL!e4 ( 1 5 .ixc6
lia7 1 6 ll:le4 lic7 1 7 '@a4 f6 =t=) 1 5
. . . h 5 ! =t= Planinc-Ribli, Wij k aan
Zee 1 97 3 .
S h3 was tried in Radulov
Cvetkovic, Vrnj acka Banja 1 974,
which continued S . . . '1Vc7 9 ll:lde2
.te7 1 0 0-0 0-0 1 1 f4? ( 1 1 g5 lL!d7
1 2 f4) 1 1 . . . d 5 ! 1 2 e5 .ic5+ 1 3 'it>h 1
lL!d7 + .
a3) 7
'1Vc7 S 0-0 ll:lc6 9 h 3 h 6 1 0
a4 .id7 1 1 lL!xc6 .txc6 1 2 .te3
.te7 1 3 '@d2 lidS 14 a5 (;!;) 14 . . .
't!n> S 1 5 lifd 1 d5? ! 1 6 ed lL!xd5 1 7
ll:lxd5 .txd 5 l S .ib6 ! lieS 1 9
.ixd5 ed 20 lie l Engel-Estrin,
Corres 1 977.
(b) White also has the possibility
of a sharp piece sacrifice in 7 .ie3
.
...
...
6 . . . a6 57
...
...
8 h4 transposes to A after 8 . .
b5 9 a 3 b7 " 1 0 e3 . There have
been a few independent tries but
none provides any evidence that
White does better to avoid the
transposition :
(a) 9 g2 b 7 1 0 h 5 ! ? ll:l c 6 I I a 3
li e S 1 2 ll h 3 ? ! ll:lxd4 1 3 't!Vxd4 llc4
14 't!Ve3 e7 1 5 f4 e 5 ! 16 f5 h6 1 7 g6
fg 18 hg ll:lf6 1 9 d2 'tta 8 20 0-0-0
ll:lxe4 =t= =t= Cardoso-Andersson, Las
Palmas 1975.
(b) 9 f4 b7 1 0 f5 ! ? e5? (10 ... ef I I
ll:lxf5 ll:\e5 oo) I I ll:lde2 ll:lb6 1 2
g2 ll:l8d7 1 3 ll:lg3 lieS 1 4 f6! gf
1 5 0-0 A.Rodriguez-Espig, Halle
1 976.
(c) 9 hS b7 (9 ... b4 10 ll:lce2 b7
I I g2 ll:lc5 12 ll:lg3 ll:lbd7 13 f4
e7 1 4 'ttg4 h6 1 5 g6 Ljubojevic
Tal, Las Palmas 1975) 1 0 g2 ll:lc6
I I e3 ll:lde5 12 't!Ve2? ll:lxd4 1 3
xd4 't!Vxg5 =t= =t= Okrajek-Vogt,
East German Ch 1 978.
A
bS
8 e 3
For 8 . . . ll:lc6 or 8 . . . e7 see
Chapter 5 .
The most usual move a t this
point is 9 a3 but there are other
ways for White to handle the
position and these are examined
afterwards.
AI 9 a3
A2 Other moves.
AI
9
a3 (82)
We pause at this very important
position to outline the strategies
of the two combatants.
.
58 6 . . . a6
A l i i 10 Jlg l
A l l 2 1 0 ..d2
A l l 3 10 ..g4!?
A l l 4 1 0 f4
A i l S 1 0 h4!
1 0 .tg2 leads to a pos1t10n
handled under section C.
Al l 1
10
ll g1
White makes further preparations
before launching his attack with f4
or h4.
ll:lcS
10
For 10 . . . ll:lb6 see A l 2.
1 0 . . . lL!c6 allows a standard
space gaining manoeuvre
II
lL!xc6 .txc6 1 2 'ttd4 ;!;, when
White's control of the centre
is enhanced by the dominating
position of his queen, which Black
cannot easily displace without
incurring some positional disad
vantage . In addition it is difficult
for Black to achieve much on the
queenside, as the sequel illustrates:
1 2 . . . 't!Vc7 1 3 h4 't!fb7 14 .i.g2 a5 1 5
f4 b4?! 1 6 ab a b 1 7 llxa8 't!Vxa8 1 8
'ttx b4 d 5 1 9 'ttd4 e 5 20 fe .i.c5 2 1
't!Vd2 't!Va7 2 2 .i.xc5 't!Vxc5 2 3 llfl
-
6 . . . a6 59
60 6 . . . a6
1 2 . . . ltlc6!?
ttibd7 (85J
t3
o-o-o
Fischer-Najdorf, Leipzig O L
1 960. White n o w continued with
the sacrificial 14 xb5 ab 1 5
ltldxb5 't!Vc6 1 6 ltlxd6+ xd6 1 7
'W'xc6 0-0-0 1 8 't!Vxc6 xc6 with
good prospects in the ensuing
endgame.
A113
10 'W'g4!? (86)
1 7 xb 5 ! ab 1 8 llJdxb5 llJd8 1 9
ligfl i.e7 20 @h6 llJf7 2 1 @g7
6 . . . a6 61
Ilf8 22 ..xh7 ll:lxe4 23 lhfi! lilxfi
24 t!rg8+ IUS 25 t!rxg6+ 7 26
ltlxe4 xe4 27 t!rxe4 with a
winning position for White in
Fedorowicz-Petrosian, Hastings
1 977/78.
All4
h6
f4
10
Tackling the pawn storm head-on
in the hope of exploiting the
temporary insecurity of the white
king ( 1 1 gh t!rh4+ ).
10 . . . ll:lb6 is handled under A 1 2.
11
f5 (88)
18
19
0-0
ll:'ld5
g7
g4! (89)
89
w
Eruslanova-Minogina, Nikolayev
1 978. In this complex position,
with attack and counterattack in
full swing, the chances are about
even. The game continued 20 b6
'fflt 4 21 ltlc7+ <i!?d7. 22 1!t'd2 b7
with obscure complications .
AilS
10
h4! (90)
62 6 . . . a6
6 . . . a6 63
..
64 6 . . . a6
Al22
10
li g1
8d7 (94)
...
6 . . . a6 65
1!re7
1 6 1!rg4
lieS
0-0-0
17
f4?
18
This falls foul of the conventional
exchange sacrifice on c3. Better
was 18 '4!h4, though after 18 ... i.g7
19 1!rh7 Black can defend his
kingside with ease and continue
his attack on the other flank.
18
lixe3!
19
be
i.xe4
Torre-Espig, Polanica Zdroj
1 977, continued 20 1!rh3 i.g7 2 1
r:J;;d 2 d 5 2 2 li a 1 lt:la4 23 ll:\e2 i.f5
24 1!rh7 25 i.h3 ll:\xc 3 ! =F =F .
A123
10
f4 (9 7)
66 6 . . . a6
6 . . . a6 67
98
B
lD8d7
10
It is important to note that
while the flank attack is in progress
White maintains sufficient central
control to render useless any action
taken there by Black: 10 . . . d5?! 1 1
ed ed ( l l . . . lbxd5 1 2 lt:lxd5 't!Pxd5
1 3 litg l J.b7 14 J.g2 't!Pd7 1 5
lt:lxe6 ! =\) 1 2 lbde2 lbc4 1 3 't!Pxd5
lt:lxe3 1 4 fe lia7 1 5 't!Pxd8+ xd8
16 0-0-0+ e8 17 J.g2 Hort
Ree, Amsterdam(IBM) 1978.
J.b7
11
h5
The natural move but one which,
however, has the defect of removing
sorely needed support from the
pawn on e6.
In the game Savereide-Markovic,
Malta ( Women's OL) 1 980, Black
tried to contain the threat of g5-g6
with 1 1 . . . lbe5. The game continued
1 2 lih3 ! (see the main line for an
explanation of this manoeuvre) 1 2
. . . 't!t'c7 (after 1 2 . . . lt:lbc4 1 3 J.c l it
is difficult to find a counter to the
threat of 14 f4 and 1 5 g6; 12 . . .
J.b7 i s the main line) 1 3 g6 !? hg 1 4
h g lb xg6 1 5 lixh8 lt:lxh8 1 6 't!Ph5
lt:lg6 1 7 J.h3 when apart from the
direct threat of 1 8 lt:lxe6 White's
68 6 . . . a6
101
B
12
xf7
1 3 i.c4+
This forceful continuation is
White's best try. After 13 1!Vg4
'tlfe 7 1 4 i.g2 lt!e5 1 5 0-0+ c;!;>e8 1 6
1!Vg3 lt:lbc6 1 7 b e g6 Black was
winning in Kochiev-Tukmakov,
USSR 1 972.
13
'it>e8
14
0-0
lt:le5
1 5 1!Ve2
lt:lbc6
1!Ve7! ( 102)
16
l:U5
1 02
w
6 . . . a6 69
1 03
104
70 6 . . . a6
Bruggemann-Espig, W German
Ch 1 979. Now Black should round
off his plan with 1 7 . . . lt:lc5
(intending 18 . . . lt:le6) 1 8 lt:ld5
lt:lxd5 19 ed lih5 after which he
stands clearly better.
c
8 .tg2
This is a popular treat ment of
the 6 . . . a6 line in which rather
more emphasis is placed on central
play .
White's intention is to strengthen
his grip on the centre, containing
Black's counterplay while slowly
6 . . . a6 7I
9
0-0
White need not worry unduly
about . .. b4 as the knight can be
...
72 6 . . . a6
II
12
lbce2
lbg3
lbc5
d5 (1 08)
108
w
8
't!Vc7 (1 09)
This move is rather more flexible
than either 8 . . . b5 or 8 . . . lbc6 but
suffers from the defect that if
109
w
. .
a6 73
D l 8 J.c4
02 8 a4
D1
8 J.c4 (1 1 1)
Ill
B
JJO
B
...
74 6 . . . a6
lll bc:6
9 .tb3
9 . . . @c7 10 f4 lll e c6 1 1 .te3
lll xd4 12 xd4 lllc6 13 d2 b5 1 4
f5 lll a 5 1 5 0-0-0 Mikhalchishin
Stupica, Yugoslav Ch 1 96 1 .
lll x c6
10
lll x c6
11
.te3
.te7
bS
12
@dl
.td7
13
0-0-0
lib8
a3
14
0-0
f4
15
16
h4
as (1 12)
9
10
.te3
.tel
lll c6
llldeS
5 6
0 0
ltlc6; 6
J.e7
problem of the awkwardly placed
king's knight.
gS
lbd7 (1 14)
7
1 14
w
...
6 . . . lilc6; 6 . . . .tel 77
78 6 . . . t0c6; 6 . . . j.e 7
't!rc7
9
A necessary preparation for
the minority attack. The more
convoluted plans tend to lead Black
into difficulty:
(a) 9 t0c5 1 0 f4 ..td7 1 1 1!fe2 b 5 1 2
0-0-0 b4 1 3 t0xc6 .txc6 1 4 t0d5 !
1!fa5 I 5 j.xc5 d e 1 6 b i Krantz
Bryntse, Corres 1 977.
(b) 9
lOdeS 1 0 t0b3 .td7? ! ( 1 0 . . .
t0a5 was indicated, and then pos
sibly I I t0xa5 1!fxa5 1 2 f4 t0c6 1 3
't!rd2 b 5 I 4 h4 .tb7 I 5 h 5 g6 with a
complicated game in wbich Black's
chances are no worse than White's)
I I f4 t0g6 1 2 't!rd2 h6? (this move
only serves to open the g-file for
White's rook) 1 3 0-0-0 hg I 4 lixg5
( ) 14 . . . b5 I 5 1!fg2 't!rc7 I6 lilxg6!
fg 1 7 xg6+ 'i!ldS I S e5 d5 19 t0c5
.txc5 20 ..txc5 t0xe5 2I 't!rxg7
Savon-Gutman, Ashkhabad 197S.
f4
10
Worth considering is 1 0 1!fe2
with a similar idea to that used by
Karpov in line A l 3 , viz 10 . . . b5 I I
t0xc6 1!fxc6 1 2 0-0-0 .te7 1 3 j.d4
b4 14 t0d5 !
1 0 1!fh5 o n the other hand only
helps Black to free his position: 1 0
. . . t0de 5 I I f4 t0xd4 1 2 ..txd4 t0c6
13 j.e3 g6 14 't!re2 ..tg7 and the
slight weakness of Black's d-pawn
is more than fully compensated by
the power of his dark-squared
bishop. The game Salov-Popov,
USSR 1 979, continued 1 5 't!rd2
't!ra5 1 6 0-0-0 0-0 I 7 'i!lb l lidS I S
t0e2 1!fc7 ( I S . . . 1!fxd2 ) I 9 t0g3
b5 ( 1 9 . . . d 5 ! ) 20 f5 d5! 2 I f6 de 22
e2 li xd l + 23 1!fxd i .tf8 with
..
6 . . . l0c6; 6
II
12
a3
1!fd2
bS
lilb8
lOcS (1 1 7)
. . .
e 7 79
J J8
B
...
...
80 6 . . . ltlc6; 6 . . . 1.e7
...
1 20
B
6 . . . lbc6; 6
121
w
. . .
J.e7 8 1
82 6 . . . c6; 6 . . . J.. e 7
112
B
6 . . . lbc6; 6 .. i.e7 83
.
123
B
1 24
6 . . . l0c6; 6 . . .te 7 85
.
127
B
A3 i l 9 . . . J.e7
A322 9 . . . h6
A323 9 ... 'ttb 6
A321
9
J.e7 (129)
129
w
128
w
6 . . . c6, 6 . . Ae7 8 7
.
e5 1 8 g3 ( ) 1 8 . . . b4 19 e2
c6 20 Axg7! g7 2 1 f6+ 'itlh8
22 f4 e5 23 1t'h4 Ab7 24 lild3
xd3? 25 cd d5 26 'itlh 1 de 27 de
Ad6 28 g 6 with a winning attack,
M ed i na-Tringov, Skopje 1 972.
1 2 xd4
bS (130)
130
13 1
w
88
6 . . . lC.c6; 6 .
. .
J.e 7
0-0-0
14
15
b5
lb b6
a3
lbbc4
16
h4
R. Byrne-Peters, USA Ch 1975.
With White's f-pawn exchanged
Black has excellent squares for his
knights and can now generate a
dangerous attack.
A33
9
h4 (134)
134
B
9
tfc7
Black prepares for . . . b5. 9
.!Llxd4 1 0 'ttx d4 b5 is premature on
account of 1 1 a4 ! e.g. 1 1 . . . e5 1 2
'ttd l ba 1 3 f4 ( 1 3 0-0 ) 1 3 . . . J.b7
14 f5 (!) 14 . . . lieS 1 5 0-0 a3 ( 1 5 . . .
lbb6 1 6 lbxa4 d 5 1 7 e d J.xd5 1 8
J.xd5 lbxd5 1 9 tfe2 ) 1 6 lixa3
d5 17 lib3! lbc5 1 8 lixb7 .!Llxb7 1 9
lbxd5 Razuvayev-Ree, Amster
dam I 1 975.
For 9
J.e7 1 0 J.e3 see line
B32
h5
lOdeS
10
lbxd4
f4
11
lb c6
1 2 tfxd4
13 tff2
b5
14 J.e3
lib8
15
lba5 (135)
0 0 0
...
An improvement on 1 0 . . . J.e7
1 1 'tte 2 'ttc 7 1 2 J.e3 b5 1 3 0-0-0
J.b7 14 h4 b4 1 5 lC.d5 ! t Andersson
Kuijpers, Wijk aan Zee 1 97 1 . Now,
of course, on 1 1 h4 Black has I I ...
hg 1 2 hg lixh 1 + 13 J.xh l 'ttg 1 + .
1 1 'tte 2
hg
12 J.e3
'ttc 7
13
fg
lbce5
B 1 1 10 ... 0-0
B l 2 1 0 . . 1!fc7
B l 3 10 . . . h6(!)
B11
0-0
10
11
J.h3
With this move White aims for
i mmediate pressure on the e6
square coupled with the advance
f4-f5 , but 1 1 J.g2, transposing to
line A32 1 , also promises excellent
chances.
Less energetic is the move 11 .tel:
1 1 . . . llb8 1 2 '@d2 ltlxd4 1 3 1!fxd4
b5 14 a3 lle8 1 5 0-0 J.b7 1 6 llad l
(!) 1 6 . . . .*.c6 1 7 f5?! d5 1 8 fe fe 1 9
ed ed 20 1!ff4 .*.c5 2 1 J.xc5 ltlxc5
22 J.h5 't!Vb6 23 't!rf7+ 'lt>h8 24 'Cth2
d4! 25 llxd4 ltle6 26 lldd l b4 ! =F
S metana-Gross , Czech Team Ch
1 977/78.
ltl xd4
11
1 1 . . . 't!ra5 1 2 0-0 ltlxd4 13 't!rxd4
d5? (this plan misfires , but with
f5 coming Black badly needs
counterplay) 14 ed .ic5 1 5 't!rd3 ed
16 'lt>h2 J.xe3 1 7 1!Vxe3 ltlb6 1 8
.ig2 and Black's isolated d-pawn
1974.
12
13
14
1!fxd4
0-0-0
fS (138)
bS
llb8
138
B
6 . . . llJc6; 6 . . . .te 7 91
139
Alexandria-Kozlovskaya, _Rio de
Janeiro (Women's IZ) 1 979, which
White concluded forcefully as
follows: 1 5 . . . 't!Vd8 16 't!Vc3 .tb7 1 7
.txc5 .txd5 1 8 0-0-0 ! .tb7 ( 1 8 . . .
.txe4 1 9 ];[be l 't!Vc7 20 :xe4 't!Vxc5
2 1 't!Vxc5 de 22 :xe5 ) 19 f6! gf
20 gf 't!Vc7 (20 . . . .tf8 2 1 't!Vf3 )
2 1 fe '@xc5 22 '@f3 '@c4 23 Wf6
.txe4 24 .td7+! 'iPxd7 25 't!Vxd6+
c8 26 't!Vd8 + b7 27 lid7+ 1-0.
813
10
h6(!)
Rather than sitting back passively
awaiting the attack Black takes an
active hand in trying to break up
White's pawn phalanx before it
becomes too dangerous.
11 't!Vf3 (1 41)
1 42
143
6 . . . li:lc6, 6 . .te 7 93
. .
J.xg5 14 hg - 14 hg hg 15 1lrg4 )
1 2 f3 ( 1 2 @g4! should be considered
- see A l l l Chapter 4) 1 2 . . . li:lc6
13 li:lxc6 .txc6 1 4 @d4 0-0 lS 0-0-0
8221
1 45
w
0-0
h4
10
In Kagan-Petrosian, Rio de
Janeiro IZ 1 979, Black speculated
with the early decentralisation 1 0
. . . t:b a 5 which worked o u t well
after some flaccid play by White:
1 1 'ttd 2 ( 1 1 h5! llJe5 - 11 . . . g6 12
lih 1! lif8 13 hg hg - 1 2 f4 llJec6
- 12 . . . tbec4 13 .i.cl with the
threat of 14 b4 and !J/ack' s knights
look rather silly - 1 3 'ttd 2 followed
by 14 0-0-0 and f5 or g6) 1 1 . . . 'ttc 7
12 0-0-0 g6 13 f4 b5 1 4 f5 llJe5 1 5
'ttf2 t:bac4 1 6 J.xc4 llJxc4 1 7 li[gfl
0-0 ( ) lS f6?! J.dS 19 h5 b4 20
t:bce2 e5 2 1 llJb3 J.g4 22 hg fg 23
b l l:[cS 24 lic l a5 25 c3 'ttb 7 26
t:bg3 a4 27 llJa 1 J.e6 2S cb 'ttx b4
29 b3 ab 30 t:bxb3 liaS 0- l .
11
hS
t:b deS (1 46)
=
1 46
w
6 . . . ltlc6: 6 . . .te l 95
.
147
w
following Kasparov-Polugayevsky,
USSR 1 979, which continued 24
li:Je4 j.xe4 25 de l1e8?! (25 . . . f6 26
l1h5 lia7 27 Ilc l ) 26 lic l d5?!
27 e5! h6 28 lih5 lixe5? (28 ... rtixg7
29 lig 1 + 'C&h7 30 f6 lig8 3 1 :axh6+
;!;) 29 f6 ! lif2+ 30 3 lif3+ 3 1
d4 lie4+ 3 2 c;!.>xd5 lieS 3 3 lixh6
lif5+ 34 4 lif4+ 35 c;!,>c5 lie5+
36 c;!.>b6 lie6+ 37 lic6 1 -0 (notes
by Kasparov).
B222
0-0
1 0 'iid 2
li:Jxd4
0-0-0
11
On 1 1 ... li:Jde5 White has 12 lig3,
a characteristic move in this line
preparing to transfer the attack to
the h-file, e.g. 1 2 . . . b5 1 3 li:Jxc6
li:Jxc6 14 f4 't!ra5 1 5 'tWf2 lib8 1 6
c;!.>b 1 b 4 1 7 li:Je2 Stein-Ciric,
Sarajevo 1 967.
b5
1 2 j.xd4
13
a3 (148)
=
13
j.b7
lieS
14
:1Ig3
lieS
15 c;!.>b1
li:Jb6
16
h4
li:Jc4
h5
17
li xc4
1 8 j.xc4
fg
19
g6
h6
20
hg
Shamkovich- H . Olafsson, Lone
Pine 1 979. Despite his logical play
Black's position is now rather
precarious. White should now
proceed with the sacrificial 2 1
lih 1 j_f8 2 2 :1Ixh6! g h 2 3 g 7 @h4
24 gft!l+ ct>xf8 25 j_g7+ <t>e7 26
j.xh6 with a ferocious attack.
B223
1 0 't!rh5
White's most aggressive and
currently most promising continu
ation. The idea is to set up an attack
on the h-flle with lig3-h3, provoking
the weakening . . . g6 which presents
a useful target for an f4-f5 or h4-h5
thrust.
19
0-0
lieS
11
0-0-0
12
:1Ig3 (149)
/49
B
/50
/51
B
98 6 . . . /Dc6; 6 . . . J..e 7
10
f4
White need not fear the advance
of the b-pawn but in any case 10 a3
is quite a natural move to consider,
after which 10 . . . J.b7 1 1 ..d2
transposes to A l l 2 Chapter 4
while 1 1 lilg 1 is line B 2 l
10
b4
J.b7
1 1 /D eel
12 /D g 3
'D eS
13 J.gl
'Dbd7
14 ..el ! (152)
.
152
B
6 . . ltlc6: 6 . . . A.e7 99
.
62
24
91
46
41
91
81
72
77
98
65
94
47
96
1
31
50
65
Mednis-Tim man
Mednis-Fernandez
Morris- Formanek
Perenyi-Barczay
Perenyi-Schneider
Pokojowczyk-Adamski
Radulov-Quinteros
Razuvayev-Commons
Rigo-Barczay
Rodriguez-Tringov
Savareide-Markovic
Sax-Gheorghiu
Tarjan-Naranj a
Thornally-Commons
Tseshkovsky-Anikayev
Ubilava-Anikayev
Vasyukov-Modr
79
29
24
43
57
24
85
33
57
81
67
43
98
66
30
86
64
Index of Variations
1 e 4 c 5 2 f3 e 6 3 d 4 c d 4 li:\xd4 f6 5 li:\c3 d 6 6 g4:
6 . . . d5
6 . . . e5
h6
15
7 f5
7 i.b5+
16
17
7 g5 hg 8 i.xg 5 :
8
. ..
8 ...
7 i.g2 :
7 ...
7 ...
a6
9 "t!Vd2 b5
c6 :
9 "t!Vd2 a6
9 "t!Vd2 "t!Vb6
9 h4
9 i.g2
a6
7 ...
c6 :
h4
i.e3
44
47
h4
53
54
7 . . . i.e7 :
8 i.e3
6 . . . a6 7 g5 li:lfd7
8 i. e 3 b5
23
26
33
35
37
38
43
c6
7 i.e3 a6 8 "t!Vf3 !?
7 l:i: g l :
21
a3 i. b 7 :
l O l:i: g l
l O "t!Vd2
l O "t!Vg4
l O f4
l O h4!
57
58
59
60
60
8
8
8
8
8
8
1 0 'ifd2
10 llg l
1 0 f4
10 h4!
i.e3 b5 9 f4
i.e3 b5 9 a4
llg l
i.g2
i.c4
a4
62
63
64
65
67
67
68
69
72
73
77
78
79
80
9 i.e3
9 f4
9 h4
84
8 ll:lbd5
8 i.g2 a6:
6 . . . i.e7 7 g5 t'Llfd7
8 i.e3 t'Llc6 9 f4 a6 1 0 h4:
1 0 . . . 0-0
10 . . 't!Vc7
10 . . h6
8 llg l a6
8 llg l t'Llc6 9 i.e3 a6:
10 h4
1 0 't!Vd2
10 't!Vh 5
8 h4 a6 9 i.e3:
9 . . b5
9
ll:lc6
.
. . .
85
87
89
89
90
9/
93
95
95
96
97