Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 525

Efstratilos Grivas

GRIVAS METHOD
MIDDLEGAME STRATEGIES
Akoglaniz para Immortal

Chess
Evo ution
l

Cover designer
Piotr Pielach

Typesetting
Piotr Pielach <'Arww.i-press.pl>

First edition 2017 by Chess Evolution

Grivas method. Middlegame strategies


Copyright© 2017 Chess Evolution

All rights reserved. No part of this publication 1nay be


reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or trans1nitted in any
form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission
of the publisher.
ISBN 978-615-5 793-00-4

All sales or enquiries should be directed to Chess Evolution


2040 Budaors, Nyar utca 16, Magyarorszag

e-mail: info@chess-evolution.com
website: www.chess-evolution.co1n
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
KEY TO SYMBOLS 5
INTRODUCTION 7
EDITORIAL PREFACE 9
BIBLIOGRAPHY 11

SURVEYS ON MIDDLEGAME STRATEGY 13


A Backward Problem 13
Domination 20
Initiative 30
Preparation 40
Queen Exchange 47
The Bad Bishop 57
The Capablanca Manoeuvre 66
The Forepost 79
The Hungarian Knight-Tour 100
The Royal Centre 1 05
The Superfluous Knight 113
Weak Square 125
The buried bishop 1 52
Underdevelopment 174
The Capablanca Manoeuvre 66
The Forepost 79

The !Hungarian Knight-Tour 100

The Royal Centre 105

The Superfluous Knight 113


Weak Square 125

The buried bishop 152

Underdevelopment 174

Unfortunate bishop 188

SURVEYS ON TACTICS 195

Attack via the Edge Files 195

Boden's Mate 212


Cast lled Death 217

Fierce Queen 225

Lethal Diagonals 231


Long-term Sacrifices 238
New York Queen Sac 251

The G-point Check 255

The !Pony Express 259

The Smothered Mate 265


Twin Games 280
KEY TO SYMBOLS

= Equality or equal chances


;t; \,Vhite has a slight advantage

+ Black has a slight advantage


± \,Vhite is better
+ Black is better
+- White has a decisive advantage
-+ Black has a decisive advantage
co unclear

.;; with co1npensation


� with counterplay
t with initiative
➔ with an attack

� with the idea


□ only move
N novelty
! a good move
! ! an excellent move
? a weak move
?? a blunder
!? an interesing move
?! a dubious move
+ check
# 1nate
INTRODUCTION
Dear Reader,
A responsible chess trainer is 'destined' to analyse, prepare and
teach his/her trainees the plain truth and the difficult paths to
chess excellence. Well, this is easier said than done, but of course
nothing is really as difficult as it sometimes appears.
When the responsible trainer knows ,,vhat to do and how to do it,
tlhings get simpler and can be more easily absorbed by the
trainee! And fro1n time-to-time the responsible trainer should
reveal his work and his ways of teaching.
The book that you are holding in your hands is a kind of
continuation of my previous work named 'Chess Analytics'
(English language - Russell Enterprises Inc, 2012); a work that
was also translated into Italian and Spanish. The basic concept is
simple but quite effective: various s u r v
- eys on all aspects of the
game, covering and explaining unrevealed or poorly explained
ideas and paths.
In the present book by 'Chess Evolution', a total of 40 concepts
are deeply analysed. Well, noth-ing really too difficult, as the
1nodern author has at his disposal powerful databases,
tablebases, analysed material, books and - by adding his
knowledge - you ,,vill get what you are looking for!
Today we have shorter time-controls and there isn't really
enough tilne to dig into the subtleties of each ending. You have to
know and to repeat knowledge; don't be carried away by the
usual myth of the 'chess talent'. As I have repeatedly written and
proved, 'talent is the excuse of the failed'.
'Unfortunately', the modern chess player is entitled and forced to
work more than his predeces-sors. The 1nodern chess trainer also
needs to prepare more delicate the1nes, understand them and
tlhen teach the1n to his students. So, there is plenty of room for
everything and for everybody who is thirsty for knowledge.
Knowledge is the key word. And knowledge is absorbed sub­
consciously; it is impossible to re-me1nber everything you study.
So, it is highly important to work with good material and good
trainers in order to improve tovvards the Chess Olympus.
Nowadays the help of the Silicon Monster (chess analysis
engines) is quite valuable, as it can save an author countless
hours of analysis and checking. But still the role of the qualified
trainer remains important; he knows where the truth is - he
knows vvhat to keep and what to throw away...
I do not want to hold a 'high nose' and clailn that everything I
have written is perfect and completely sound; I always think of
the surprise factor and I just try to write honestly and with
responsibility.
Have a nice reading journey!
Efstratios Grivas
9Athens, 2017
EDITORIAL PREFACE

For a chess book to be instructive and informative, it would help


a lot if these factors are present; that the author possesses the
gift, the passion and love for the ga1ne and at one point in time,
he is or was a competitive chessplayer - preferably
a grand1naster. And it would also be to his advantage if he has
previous experience in writing, and is or was actively involved in
training and conducting chess seminars and lectures.
All of these elements are wonderful of course, but more is
required from the author to ensure success. He must work hard
in collating pertinent chess materials to substantiate his thoughts
and ideas. In order to best illustrate and appreciate the theme
that he is introducing, the author needs to compile instructive
games of the great masters or fro1n average players. Even better
is for the author to include those games he vvon and lost - as long
as it pertains to the subject being tackled. As the saying goes, it is
the player hilnself who knows best about the intricacies and turn
of events that occurred in his ga1nes.
It is beneficial to provide a 'label or name' to the motifs the
author is presenting, in order to help the reader recall the
concept vvhen it appears in his O\A/n actual ga1nes. Appropriate
title descriptions of concepts is a good guide for readers to better
understand its objective and how to achieve it. Likewise,
providing a 'conclusion' at the end of each 1nethod is crucial in
aiding the reader to co1npletely discern what the author is trying
to transmit and to impart.
The author beco1nes effective when he is not stingy in sharing
his ideas. He must have a child-like attitude v-rherein he is very
eager, proud and generous in passing on to the readers all his
knowledge and understanding accumulated through many years
of competing. And it would be impressive if he is also
experienced in chess writing and teaching.
Most authors are focused on e1nphasizing the ilnportance of
knowing and understanding basic and general principles to
achieve success. However, readers must be constantly reminded
and enlightened that exceptions to the rules or out of the box
concepts are essential as well. A good example here is the 'The
Bad Bishop' perception ,,vhich Efstratios propounds in his
excellent book 'Grivas Method - Middlegame Strategies'.
When all these ingredients mentioned above are present - and
you augment it with spicy tidbits about great players, composers,
anecdotes, recollections, puzzles, memorable events etc. - then
a complete recipe for a good, yummy and worth-reading chess
book is served. And this book is it.
Eugene Torre, 2017
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Advanced Chess School: Volumes 1-8; Efstratios Grivas; FIDE


2014-2017
British Chess Magazine; Various Contributors; BCM 1987-2017
Chess Analytics: Training \lvith a Grandmaster; Efstratios Grivas;
Russel Enterprises 2012
Chess College 1: Strategy; Efstratios Grivas; Gambit 2006
Chess College 2: Pawn Play; Efstratios Grivas; Gambit 2006
Chess College 3: Technique; Efs1tratios Grivas; Ga1nbit 2006
Chess Curiosities; Tiln Krabbe; Allen & Unwin Ltd 1985
Chess Expertise Step by Step. Volume 1: Unexpected Tactics;
Efstratios Grivas; Chessbase 2011
Chess Expertise Step by Step. Volume 2: Mastering Strategy;
Efstratios Grivas; Chessbase 2011
Chess for Tigers; Simon Webb; Oxford University Press 1978
Chess Today (Internet Newspaper); Alexander Baburin; 2006-
2017
ChessBase Mega Database; Various Contributors; ChessBase 2017
Informator; Various Contributors; Informator 1966-2017
Learn from the Legends; Mihail Marin; Quality Chess 2004
My System; Aaron Nilnzovvitsch; Hays Publications 1991
Ne,,v In Chess (Magazine & Yearbook); Various Contributors;
Interchess BV 1984-2017
Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy; John Watson; Gambit 1998
The Middlega1ne; Euwe / Kramer; Hays Publications 1999
Wikipedia - Various Articles; Wikipedia 2017
SURVEYS ON MIDDLEGAME STRATEGY

A BACKWARD PROBLEM
Modern backward pawns are not considered as bad as, let's say,
30 years ago. Modern approaches and 1nethods are very much
concerned with the so-called 'activity' 1neasure.
As long as the possessor of a backward pawn can preserve an
elastic and potentially-active position, his deficit is not that
important, as the opposing side cannot 'concentrate' on it.
A good strategy is to exchange pieces, preserving only those that
could be useful in pressuring the backward pawn. In this case,
the backward pawn side will hardly find any activity, while
passivity is something that they ,,vill have to live with!
Well, this of course doesn't guarantee a win, but mostly
a pleasant, non-dangerous, middlegame or endgame.
Let's examine some cases with a back,,vard black d -pav.rn:

o Karpov Anatoly
■ Gheorghiu Florin
Moscow 1977

1.c4 cs 2 ..!bf3 .!bf6 3..!bc3 e6 4.g3 b6 5..ig2 .ib7 6.0-0 .ie7 7.cl4 cxd4
8.Wxd4 cl6 9.b3 0-0 10.�dt .!bbd7 11..ib2 a6

12.YNe3!?
An interesting set-up. \,Vhite plans to play lLJd4 and then get his
queen on the diagonal.

12 ...YNb8

Not bad, but more 'logical' is 12 .. .',®'c7 13.lLJd4 i.xg2 14.*xgZ !l:fe8
15.*gl if8 16.fi:acl flac8 17.liie4 liixe4 18.'�xe4 Wb819.a4+=
Timman,J-Lobron,E Brussels 1992.

13..!bd4 .ixg2

13... tZ:ieS 14.h3 .ixg2 15.*xgZ Wb7+ 16.*gl flab8 17.fi:acl a'.fe8, as
in Anelli,A-Szmetan,J Buenos Aires 1978, seems to be more
accurate.

14.*xg2 Wb7+

The text allows \,Vhite a pleasant endgame and I feel that Black
slhould go for something like 14...lLJeS 15.f3 Wb7 16.WdZ fi:fd8 l7.e4
dS 18.exdS exdS 19.We2+= Rubinetti,J-Szmetan,J Quilmes 1980.

15.YNf3! Wxf3+ 16.�xf3 !!fc817. .!bd4 !!ab818.�ac1

Exchanging queens simply means that there will be less tactics


on the board, which emphasises permanent weaknesses, such as
tlhe backward black d-pawn. Of course White has just a slight
(.but nearly permanent) advantage, and Black is fairly still in the
game.
18 ..h6
. 19.e4 <tle8?!

A passive retreat. 19... t2:ie5 is more to the point.

20.f4 .if6 21.@f3 Elb7

Logical was 21... @f8! when White should avoid 22.eS? dxeS
23.t2:ixe6+ @e7+

22 .ia3!
. l3bc7 23.<tlce2!

Time for regrouping!

23 ...!bcS
. 24J!d2 g6 25.tl:Jc2 .ig7 26.tl:ie3!

26...fS?!

The text doesn't add anything to Black's cause. More logical was
26...bS 27.h3 hS 28. g 4 hxg4+ 29.hxg4+=

27.exfS gxfS 28.h3! hS 29.Elgt!

Preparing an assault on the kingside.

29 ..l3f7
.

Another passive approach. Black needs to become active, so


29...bS was essential: 30.g4 hxg4+ 31.hxg4 fxg4+ 32 JJxg4 bxc4
33.bxc4+=

30.g4! hxg4+ 31.hxg4 fxg4+ 32J!xg4 '.!lf8 33.t:f:Jg3

33...a5

33...'.!le7!? looked better and surprisingly allows Black to stay in


the game: 34.a'.g6 !l:f6 35.a'.xf6 lt:ixf6 36.b4 (36.lt:iefS+I? exfS
37.tbxfS+ '.!lf8 38J:!xd6 '.!lf7 39.lt:ixg7 '.!?xg7 40.f1xb6+=) 36...tbcd7
37.b5 lt:ie8 (37...tbcS 38.f1e2 '.!lf7 39.fS+=) 38.tbe4 lt:ic5 39.ixcS dxcS
40.a'.e2+=

34.�g6 '.!le7? !

But this is really bad. Also unsatisfactory was 34...f1f6?! 35.�xg7!


'.!?xg7 (35...lt:ixg7 36.!l:xd6±) 36.lt:ihS+ '.!lg6 37.tbxf6 '.!lxf6 38.a'.h2± or
34...ic3?! 35.a'.dl (35.�h2 t:f:Jc7 36.fS±) 35...'.!le7 36.hcS dxcS
37.tbe4 id4 38.fS± but good was 34...ieS! 35.tbgfS t:f:Jg7! 36.fxeS
tZ:ixfS 37.©e2+=

35.fS! :Sf6

35...exfS loses to 36.tZ:idS+ ©d8 37.iLJxb6.

36.�xf6 t2lxf6 37J\!:e2! :Sf8?!

Although not pleasant, Black had to opt for 37...es 38.ixcS bxcS
39J'ih2 a4 40.li:le4±

38..ixcS!

Decisive, and better than 38.fxe6?! ti:ixe6 39.tZ:iefS+ ©d7 40.:axe6


©xe6 41.iLJxg7+ *ct7 42.iLJ7f5±

38...bxcS

38...dxcS 39.fxe6 ti:ig8+ 40.ti:iefS+ *e8 41.e7+-

39.fxe6 ©xe6

39...t2::ig8+ 40.tZ:iefS+ ©e8 41.e7 :af6 42.s!?e4+-

40.ti:ief5+ t2le4 41.s!?xe4

Of course bad vvas 41.t2::lxe4? :axfS+ 42.*g4 ieS= but 41.!l:xe4+


!es 42.�e2 !l:xfS+ 43.iLJxfS *xfS 44.@e3+- was also winning.

10
-
oSuba Mihai
■ Nicholson John
Malaga 2001

1.c4 q)f6 2.�f3 cs 3.�c3 e6 4.g3 b6 5.i.g2 i.b7 6.0-0 i.e7 7.d4 cxd4
8.Wxd4 d6

A well-known position in the popular 'Hedgehog' set-up.

9.i.gS

In general I like \,Vhite's potential set-up. Exchanges that '"'ill


support the centre and avoid a future ...bS or ...dS advances.

9... a6 10.hf6 i.xf6 11.Wd3

11.Wf4 was chosen by 1\11.Carlsen: 11... 0-0 12.�fdl i.e7 13.liie4


.ixe4 14.Wxe4 fla7 15.tbd4+= Carlsen,M-Gashimov,V Wijk aan Zee
2012.

11...�a712.�ad1 i.e7 13.q)d4

Another idea is 13.iLJe4 0-0 14.Wi'e3 .ia8 15.�d2 �d7 16.�fdl +=


Korchnoi,V-Atlas,V Ptuj 1995.

13 ... i.xg2 14.�xg2 Wc8


15.f4

A quite interesting idea, ailning at weakening e6 or gaining the


dS-square.

15...ltlc6

15...�c7?1 fails to 16.fSI es (16...ltlc6 17.tDxc6 flxc6 18.fxe6 fxe6


19.tDe4±) l7.lt'.\b3 !l:xc4 18.li:idS .id8 19.f6� Nikolic,P-Ribli,Z Novi
Sad 1982.

16.l'.U3 0 0
- 17 tt:l
. xc6 Wxc6 18.f5 �c719.b3

19 ...�b7

Worse is 19...fld8?1 20.fxe6 fxe6 21.We3 dS 22.cxdS exdS 23.b4!


(23.Wd3?! d4 24.li:ie4 bSoo Freisler,P-Panchenko,A Berlin 1991)
23...�cd7 24.li:ixdS±
20.a4
White must stop ...bS.
20...�bb8 21.We3 �be8?

A faulty tactical 'solution'. The alternative was 21..J�d7 22.h4+=


22.fxe6 .if6 23.We4

White gets the advantage an}'\•vay, but he should seriously


consider here: 23.exf7+ fi:xf7 24.Wf4± or 23.ll)dS !l:xe6 24.Wxb6
fu{e2+ 25.�f2 fi:xf2+ 26.�xf2±

23...VNxe4 24.l!bxe4 �xe6 25.l!bxf6+ gxf6 26.�f2

White has much the better ending, as Black is full of weak


pawns.
26...�fe8 27Ji:d2 �f8 28.�fd3 �e7 29J\!:d5! �g8 30.a5
Creating a further weakness!

Black couldn't stand the passive 31...bxaS 32.!l:xaS !l:a8±

32.�xd6 �xa5 33.�d7+ �e6?!


Black doesn't like passivity, but sometimes it is the only
solution. Black had to opt for 33...l!?f8 34J1:d8+ (34J1:a7 l!?g7
3S.l:!dd7 fi:f8 36.E'.db7±) 34...E'.xd8 3S.fi:xd8+ ©e7 36.fi:b8 !l:fS+ 37.l!?e3
bS 38.!l:b7+ l!?e8 39.E'.a7±

34.�a7

Even better was 34.g4! !l:cS 3S.!B.3d6+ \!?es 36.l!?f3+-

34...�a2?!

34...�fS+ 3S.l!?e3 !l:eS+ 36.l!?d2 as 37.fi:ad7±, was the only chance.

Winning material.

35...l!?fS 36.�xf7 l!?g6 3 7 . �ee7 �b2 38.�g7+ l!?f5

39.l!?f3!

And a mating net is created!

39...�xb3+ 40.e3 h5 41.h3 1-0


□ Tiviakov Sergei
■ Anand Viswanathan
Baden Baden 2012

1.e4 cs 2 . tilf3 d6 3 . i.bS+ tild7 4.d4 cxd4 S.YNxd4 a6 6.i.xd7+ hd7


7 .c4 es 8 . Wd3 h6 9 . tilc3 tilf6 10.0-0 i.e7 11.a4

Also possible is 11.fl:dl fic8 12 ..b3 fi:c6 13.a4 0 0- 14.i.a3+=


Fressinet,L-Kolbus,D Germany 2007.

11 ... b6

A highly dubious choice according to S.Tiviakov.

12 . b3 :Sa7

Another try is 12...ic6 13.ia3 f1:a7 14.lt:idS lt:ixdS 15.cxdS i.d7


16.tbdZ bS 17.axbS ixbS 18.tbc4+= Gdanski,J-Koch,J Arnhem 1987.

13 .�dl i.c814.i.a3 �d7

A backward pa,,vn position - typical of the 'Sicilian Defence' -


is on the board. But this is quite unpleasant for Black, and while
he is in no immediate danger, nor does he have any active
prospects.
15 .!bd2
.

White is heading his knight to dS (.!bd2-f1-e3); typical of such


pawn structures.

15 ...0-0 16.!bft
. i.b717..!be3 :Se8 18.�cdS �xdS 19 .!bxdS
. hdS
20.YNxdS

White has exchanged many pieces, but the ones left are all quite
useful to him, so he holds a nice advantage.

20...YNa8 21.Wxa8 ):!xa8 22.�dS f6 23.:Sadt �ad8 24.g3!

Another typical idea in such positions. White cannot win by just


pressing one ,,veakness; Black will defend it. He needs to create
further weaknesses in other part of the board and start moving
his pieces around them. This is what we call the 'Rule of the Two
Weaknesses'!
24...gs 2s.f4

25 ...gxf4?

Black's last not only doesn't solve any of his problems, but it
opens up the g fi
- le for White. Black's serious lack of space and
mobility means that he cannot s·witch from one side to the next
as quickly as his opponent. Had he left it to White to exchange,
then it would have been the f -file opened, and it ,,vould be far
easier to keep control ot both.

26.gxf4 �f7 27.�f2 exf4 28.�f3 @e6

29..icl!

The bishop will attack both d6 and h6 from the excellent f 4 -


square.

29...�c8 30.hf4 .if8 31.h4!


Another excellent and typical idea. Targets must be fixed, so
will h6! Also, a strong outpost will be created on g6.

31...�c6 32.hS !!b7 33 ..ie3 �b8 34..id4 !!c7 35 J!g1 .ig7 36.:Sg6 �f7
37 ..ie3

And \,Vhite wins 1naterial...

37...�d7?

Missing a shot that White also missed with the ti1ne-control


approaching.

The spectacular 38.eS! ,,vould have won on the spot, but


fortunately for the Dutch GM, this does not squander the ,,vin:
38...©f7 38... dxeS 39J(xd7 ©xd7 40J�xg7++ -) 39.exf6 i.f8
(39 ...hf6? 40 Jl:f5!) 40 .i.xh6 and the end is near.

38...�f7 39.©g4 .if8 40..ixh6 hh6 41.�xh6 �g7+ 42.©f4!

42.a'.g6? would be a blunder: 42 ...l;lxg6+ 43.hxg6 !l:g8 44.©hS fl:h8+


45.©g4 !l:g8=

42...�f8 43.aS!

Opening up further weaknesses to overwhelm Black's pieces.


43 ...�gl

43...bxaS is no help: 44.eS! dxeS+ 45.:fuceS+! lt>f7 46.l::-lfSI lt>e6


4 7.l::-lxas !!a8 48.E'.eS+ ci!?f7 49Jaf5+-

44.axb6 �bl 45.b7 �xb3

46.e S! dxeS+ 47.:SxeS+ lt>d6 48.i!fs lt>e6 49 .�h7 :Sd8 50.�dS!

Black resigned due to 50 ... fi:xdS 51.cxdS+ lt>xdS 52.lt>fS ci!?c6 53.h6.

1-0

CONCLUSION

Selective exchanges help the pressure against a backvvard pawn.


Its possessor should certainly try to avoid them.
DOMINATION
Chess is a game of domination. Fro1n our very first moves vve try
to dominate the opponent, the development, the centre, the
pieces' placement and so on.
We try to get better positions than our opponent and in the end
to cash in the full point by precise, dominating play.
Co1nplete domination means that vve can nearly do what vve like
and that our opponent is helpless, no matter how hard he is
trying!
Well, that's too good to be realised in every game, but from
tiime-to-time we might be able to achieve complete domination!
Domination is the dream of every chess player. He would love
to be able to play simultaneously in every part of the board and
siimply be better every'\,vhere. This might happen sometimes; no
counterplay by our opponent - nothing to fear.
Don1inated factors can be 1net in every stage of the ga1ne, even
pawnless endga1nes! We will start v.rith some studies of the
famous chess co1nposer Genrikh Kasparyan, but firstly I feel that
we should kno,,v a bit more about him.
Genrikh Kasparyan (27 February 1910 in Tbilisi - 27 Dece1nber
1995 in Yerevan) is considered to have been one of the greatest
composers of chess endgame studies.
Outside Armenia, he is better known by the Russian version of
his name Genrikh Moiseyevich Kasparyan or Kasparian.
Genrikh Kasparyan became a national master in 1936 and an
international master in 1950. He ,,vas awarded the titles of
International Judge of Chess Compositions in 1956 and
International Grandmaster of Chess Composition in 1972, the
first composer to receive this title from FIDE.
Genrikh Kasparyan was also an active chess player, winning the
Armenian championship ten tilnes (from 1934 to 1956, including
two ties v.rith future World Champion Tigran Petrosian) and the
Tillis championship three times (1931, 1937, and 1945).
He reached the USSR Championship finals four tilnes (1931,
1937, 1947 and 1952), but never finished higher than tenth place.
Genrikh Kasparyan is best known for his compositions. He
started with chess problems, mainly three-movers, but soon
discovered that his best field was in endga1ne studies.
He wrote several books and collections and composed about 600
studies, many on the theme of domination, winning 57 first
prizes. He won the USSR Composing Championship several times.
Study 1
Kasparian Genrikh
1967 0

The 1naterial is so limited and 1nost players would think that the
draw is near. But here the side to move dominates the game and
it is \,Vhite's turn!

1.Wb2+!

Nothing else works. 1.Wc3+? fails to impress after 1...Wg7!


2.Wh3+ Wh7! (2... l!?g8? 3.fl:g2+ -) 3.Wc3+ Wg7 4.l'.:ih2+ l!?g8 5.Wc4+
:i!f7!= The main concept of the queen's movement is to co-operate
with her rook in certain variations.

1 ...Wg7

1...l!?g8 loses to 2.1;1g2+ l!?f7 3.Wb7+.

2.:Sh2+ l!?g8 3.Wa2+!


White's queen operates hannoniously from the 2nd rank!

3 ...Wf7

3.. Jl:f7 4J;1g2+- is a sad story...

4.Wg2+! Wg7 5.Wd5+ Wf7


Again 5...�f7 loses to 6Jl:g2.

6.:Sg2+ *h7 7.We4+!

and White mates!

7...*h8

7... *h6 8.We3+ ; 7...WfS 8.Wh4+.

8.WeS+ *h7 9.Wh2+ WhS+ 10.WxhS# 1-0

Study 2
Kasparian Genrikh
1968 0

Adding an extra rook for both sides makes the right to the first
move even 1nore important; domination is in sight...

1.:Sh3+!

l.fi:hl +? offers nothing after l. ..fi:h7 2.�xh7+ (2.Wd4+ *g8 3.�.e:3+


� i!g7�)" 2'.'.".Wxh7! (2... iixn7? 3.l;!:li3+ �g6 4.Wd3+ i!fS 5.l;(g3+ @f6
6.Wa6+!+ -) 3.!1:h3 !i:f2+! 4.@g3 !1:f3+=

1 ...:Sh7

l...'i!?g8 loses to 2.!i:gl! and next moving the king to the h -file!

2.Wc3+!

As in the previous study, the queen should co-operate with her


rook on the same rank, so wrong would be 2.Wd4+? 'i!?g8=

2...Wg7+ loses to 3.Wxg7+ 'i!?xg7 4.l!a7+.

3.:Sg3+ :Sg7 4 W
. b3+! Wf7

.•..•.•.,•�
If 4...!i:ff7, then 5.i!a8+ @h7 6.Wbl ++-

■ • ��­
•- • .•
-�•.•.-�.­ .
• �

5.:Sa7! Wxb3

Nothing is changed by 5 ...!1:xg3+ 6.Wxg3++-

6.:Sgxg7+ 'i!?h8 7.:Sh7+ 'i!?g8 8 .�ag7# 1-0

Of course do1nination is easier when material is increased.


Study 3
Kasparian Genrikh
1938 0

I ■ ■ ���­
••••••••
no■ � ■
■ ■:■ -�
•.•.•-�-

••••
Here the 7th rank domination by the white rooks is rather
important. The white king is more flexible and this factor leads
to the win.

1 J!aa7!

Full domination!

1 ...f3+ 2.@f2!

White must be careful, as wrong would be 2.@fl? f1:h6! 3.b7 f2


4.f1:g7+ @h8 5.f1:f7 �hl +! 6.@g2 fl=W+ 7J%xfl �hxfl 8.b8=W f!xb8
9.@xfl=

2 ...:Sg6

2 ..Jl:h6 now loses to 3.b7! (3.£lg7+? @h8 4.b7 f1:h2+ 5.@e3 f1:e2+
6.@d3 !1:d8+= ) 3...l::'!h2+ 4.@g3! (4.�e3? �b21 5.!l:a8 f2= ) 4 ... f2
(4...:!:tg2-r S.<Jih3 f2 6.b8� fl=� 7.Wb3-r 1Yh8 8.�h7ll ; 4...�b2 s.�a8)
5.f1:g7+ @h8 6.f1:f7!+-

3.b7 l3g2+ 4.@ft!

Precise! Again 4.@e3? doesn't help: 4...�e2+ 5.@d3 E!b2 6.�g7+


@h8 7.l::'!h7+ @g8.
4 ...f2

. . ��­
After 4...�b2 White wins b5.fl:a8 flbl + 6.�;,f2 f1:b2+ 7.s!?g3! f2
8.f1:xf8+ s!?xf8 9.@g2 @e8 10.f1:c7.

��- ·-
•••••••·•
·
•-�.
• •
. .�.i.�•
� �-
5.:Sf7!!

Not only the only 'Arinning but also the only not losing move!
5 ...:Sb8 6.:Sa8 !

6.f1:c7 �f8!

6 ...s!?xf7 7.:Sxb8 :Sgl+ 8.@xf2 l3bl

And now the usual endgame trick:


9.:Sh8! l3xb7 10.�h7+ s!?e6 11.�xb7 1-0
Study 4
Kasparian Genrikh
1934 0

The black king is in danger and White has to create a 'do1ninated


e.nvironment' to take the point.

1.Wf7! .ie3!

1. ..id2 loses to 2.We7+ Wf6 (2 ...gS 3.i>h2+- ; 2...igS 3.We4++-)


3.Wd7! las 4.Wa4+.

2.We7+! gs 3 . ©h2!

It looks like it is all over; the black king is about to be mated...

3 ....tg1+! 4.©xg1 Wc1+

4 ...Wd4+ loses to 5.We3!! Wxe3+ 6.©h2+-


5.We1+!!

The only way! 5.*h2? Whl + 6.�xhl=

5 ...Wxe1+ 6 . *h2

And now \,Vhite threatens mate v.rith either tg3 or g3. When the
black g -pawn moves to g4, 1nate follo,11/s with i.d8 - full
do1nination!

6 ...Wf2 7..td6!

This puts Black into zugzwang, as the black queen is unable to


protect her king from all mating threats...

7...Wf4+ 8.g3+ ! Wxg3+ 9.hg3# 1-0

Endgame domination is not one of the easiest, so the following


studies are impressive:

Study 5
Reti Richard
1922 0

It looks like Black will survive...

1JLJd4+! ©CS

Black is obliged to go for the v.1hite a p


- awn as auicklv as
possible. After 1:::- @b7 2��xh2-@a6 3.t2::ib3 White wins.

Black has no 1nove, as his bishop has been do1ninated: 2 ...�b4


3.a6 - 2 ... �dS 3.a6 - 2 ...if4 3.t2::ie6+ - 2 ...�xd4 3.a6 - 2 ...id2
3.lt:\b3+ - 2 ...icl 3.t2::ib3+.

1-0

Study
Rinck Henri
1903 0

1 J!a8!

An excellent move, dominating the black queen who has only


one available square.

1...Wa2

l..J1h7 2.ig6!+-;
l...Wxa8 2.if3++ -;
l...We6 2.�a6++ -;
l...Wc4 2J�c8++-

2 J!xa4! Wg8
2...�xa4 3 ..te8++-

3 .:Sa8!

But now the black queen has no square at all - note the above
variations, so White wins material.
1-0

Of course the previous studies were ilnpressive, but what about


tlhe real world?
In general the easiest vvay to go about it is the 'Rule of the Two
Weaknesses' - a rule that vve often meet in modern chess. Think
of this rule as the second door to happiness; the second
battlefield.
Chess players try to play naturally and reproduce ideas and
moves that they \II/ere 'taught' by their predecessors.
They tend to 1nostly focus on a certain part of the board more
than another and look for chances there. But a chess board is
a totality and one should seek play and domination in every part
ofit.

o Zhu Chen
■ Stefanova Antoaneta
Nalchik 2011 0

87.:Sh6!
And Black is dominated by White's mighty knight!

87...a4

Passive defence ,111ith 87...l::-id2+ 88.l!?c3 !i:d8 does not help: 89.tbc4
%!.b8 90.l:ff6 l!?c5 91.!i:fS+ l!?c6 92.%1.hS !l:b7 93.l!?b2 �b8 94.l!?a3 �b7
95.l'.:'ig5 !l:b8 96.lt:ieS+ ®b7 97.®a4!: ®a6 98.§g6 !l:b7 99.lt:ic4 !i:b8
10 0 .iLJxaS !i:h8 101.t2:lc4 J;b8 10 2.%i:xb6+ �xb6 10 3.t2:ixb6 l!?xb6
104.l!?b4+- 87...l::'lg2 also loses to 88.iLJc4 !i:g4+ 89.l!?c3 !i:g3+ 90 .l!?b2
a4 91.iLJd6+ (the octopus controls the rook) 91...l!?aS (91...l!?cS
92.t2:ie4++ -) 92.!i:hS+ l!?a6 93.bxa4+-

88..!bc4! axb3

88...l!?a6 89.�xb6+ l!?a7 90.bxa4+- or 88...l!?b4?! 89.!i:xb6#

89.�xb6+ l!?a4 90.l!?cS

And Black is powerless as her own b -pawn prevents a stalemate


defence and the white rook has no real check.

90...�eS+

90 ...b2?! 91.!i:b4#

91..!bxeS b2 92.�xb2 1-0

□ Alekhine Alexander
■ Nimzowitsch Aron
San Remo 1930

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.<tlc3 .tb4 4.e5 cs 5..td2 .!be7 6.<tlb5 .txd2+


7.Wxd2 0-0 8.c3 b6 9.f4 .ta6 10Ji�f3 Wd7 11.a4 .!bbc6
White has more space and he can create an initiative on both
f]anks, as the centre is blocked.

12.b4! cxb4

12...c4 might be more natural, but it vvould give White a free


hand on the kingside after so1nething like 13.lt:id6 or 13.lt:ia3 0.d8
14.lt:ic2.

13.cxb4 ib7 14.�d6

14...fS?!

Black had to opt for 14...as 15.bS (15.ibS axb4 16.0-0 looks also
good) 15...lt:ib416.id3 fS 17.0-0 +=, but of course his position
would be rather unpleasant. Black would be passive, squeezed
and without a proper plan...

15.aS! tl:Jc8
15...bxaS 16.bS /2Sd8 17J!:xa5±

16.<!b xb7 YNxb7 17 .a6! YNf7

After 17...Wife7 \,Vhite will complete his development vvith


18.ib51 loxb4? 19.f!:bl +-

18 .ib5!
. <!b8e7 19.0- 0

White has completed his development and is ready to take action


on the open c-file. Meanwhile Black is passive and has to adopt
a wait-and-see policy.

19...h6 20J!fc1 �fc8 21.�c2!

21...YNeS?!

Good or bad, I think that Black should try to unpin the c-file, so
21...lbdS should be tried: 22.l;acl !i:xc2 23.l;xcZ log6 (23..J:'lc8?
24.l;lxc8! [24..id7? :iaxc2 25.Wxc2 lt:ig6 26.Wc7 lt:if8 27.Wxa7 lt:ic6
28.Wxb6 Wxd7] 24...lt:ixc8 25.Wc3 li:Je7 26.Wc7+ -) 24.Wcl±

22.�acl

22.l;la3! f1c7 23.l;lac3 :aac8 24.Wcl was more accurate, according


to A.Alekhine.

22...�ab8 23 . W e3 :Sc7 24 .�c3 Wd7 25.:S1c2 �f8 26 . W cl �bc8

A depressing picture! This is vvhat I call full domination; White


has only to bring the bacon home...

27..ia4!

With the deadly threat 28.bS.

27...bS 28..ixbS �e8 29..ia4 �d8 30.h4!

Black will soon run out of moves - a zugzwang and end of the
game.

30...VNe8

30 ...g6 31.'i!?h2 hS 32.�h3 creates an impressive picture!

31.bS
Heavy material losses ensue so Black resigned. An impressive
and classical example of full domination...

10
-

□ Beliavsky Alexander
■ Bareev Evgeny
Minsk 1987

1.d4 fS 2.c4 �f6 3.g3 e6 4..ig2 dlS 5.�f3 c6 6.0-0 .id6 7.M4 0 0
-
8..ixd6 �xd6 9.Wc2 b6 10.�a3 li:Ja6 11J!ac1 .ib7 12.cxdS cxd5
13.�bS �e7 14.�a4 �e8 15.:Sc3 <tiec7 16.�xc7 �xc7

Obviously \,Vhite's enjoys the initiative on the queenside (and the


weak es-square) and looks like he v.rill also fully dominate on the
c -file. But a more detailed examination shows that Black can
probably defend. So, White thought to open a second front on the
kingside - his spatial advantage helps!

17.h3!

An excellent idea, as White's gets nearly nowhere with 17.iLieS


:r!fc8 18Jl:fcl lLJe8+=

17...!Uc8?!

The battle-field will be turned to the kingside, so Black might


have chosen 17...a6! planning ...t2:i b 5 d
- 6.
18.g4 g6

White has a nice advantage after 18... li::ie8 19J1:xc8 hc8 20.gxfS
e:xfS 21.li::ieS, as the black d-pawn has turned into a weak one.

19.gxfS gxfS

20.li::ie5

White's idea is revealed - the white rooks will deal with the
newly-opened g fi- lel

20...li::ie8 21.l3g3+ '.!?h8 22.'.!?h2! �f6 23J!g1

White's attack on the black king via the g fil


- e is growing - in
tlhe meanwhile the black rooks are doing nothing!

23 ..l3c7
.

The 7th rank needs protection. After 23... a6? 24.�b41 White
wins material: 24.. Jtc7 (24... �xb4?? 25.li::if7#) 25. �xb6+-

24.if3 ic6

After 24 ...li::ie4 25.ixe4 fxe4 26. �xa71 \o\rins on the spot!


25.Wb3!

The obvious 25.lt:\xc6?! is not the best, as after 25...Wd7 (25...'&e8


26.l::-lcl !l:ac8 27.Wa3 !l:xc6 28.�c6 flxc6 29.Wxa7+ -) 26J1.cl �ac8
White loses some of his advantage!

25...�g8

There is hardly any defence for Black. For exa1nple 25 ...i.e8


26.We3 Wf8 27.WgS+- or 25 ...f4 26.l::-lg7 Wxg7 27J�xg7 *xg7 28.Wa3+-

26.�h5?!

26.l::-lxg8+ ti:ixg8 27.i.hS was more accurate.

26...Wf8?!

Black should be more stubborn and try to continue the fight


with 26...!l:f8. Then White ,,vould have to find 27.!l:g7 Wxg7 28.�g7
@xg7 29.Wg3+ s!?h8 30 .lt:\g6+ hxg6 31.Wxc7 ie8 32.if3 flf7±

Back to the 'correct' continuation!

27 ...�xg8
28 .YNg3

The text is winning, but White also had 28.YNa3! YNxa3 29.bxa3
h6 (29...ibS 30 .iLJf7++ -) 30 .a'.cl 0,e7 31.ie8+-

28 ..�b5
.

Alternatives like 28...ie8 29.ixe8 Vli'xe8 30 .t2:id7!+- or 28...iLJf6


29.t2:ig6+ hxg6 30 .Vli'xc7 t2:ixh5 31.Vli'xc6+- prove \,Vhite's decisive
advantage.

29 .YNh4! tZlf6
INITIATIVE
With the term initiative we tend to describe the possibility of
creating direct or indirect threats that cannot be ignored.
The player v.,rith the initiative thus puts his opponent in the
position of having to use his turns responding to threats rather
than making his own.
A player with the initiative v.rill often seek to 1nanoeuvre his
pieces into more and more advantageous positions as he
launches successive attacks.
The player v.,rho lacks the initiative may seek to gain (or regain
it) it through counterattack.
The concept of tempo is closely tied to initiative, as players can
acquire the initiative or buttress it by gaining a tempo.
The initiative is ilnportant in all phases of the ga1ne, but 1nore
important in the endga1ne than in the middlegame and more
important in the middlega1ne than in the opening (Euwe &
Meiden 1966). Having the initiative puts the opponent on the
defensive.
GM Larry Evans considers four ele1nents of chess: pawn
structure, force (material), space (controlling the centre and
piece mobility), and time.
As ti1ne is measured in tempi, having a time advantage is
having the initiative. The initiative should be kept as long as
possible and only given up for another advantage.
The following ga1ne is full of 1nemories. It comes from the
annual team championship of the Balkan countries (men,
women, junior and girls sections), v.,rhich was quite popular in
those days.
It was played in the men's section (Romania vs. Yugoslavia) and
I was lucky to watch it live, as I vvas playing in the junior section
at that time - I was just 18 years old...
Mihai Suba was a great Romanian GM v.,rith a lot of successes
and an original way of playing and thinking.
He love<l an<l s11nnorte<l the 'He<le-ehoe-' in times wh ere
everybody else neglected it. He wrote some books, among others
the 1nust-read 'Dynamic Chess Strategy' - an excellent and
unique book!

o Suba Mihai
■ Cebalo Miso
Skopje 1984

1.c4 cs 2.ltJf3 €if6 3.ltJc3 ltJc6 4.g3 dS 5.cxdS ltJxdS 6..tg2 e6 7.0-0
!i.e7 8.d4 0-0

9.:Sbl!?

A novelty at that time, in a very well-known position. 9.ltJxdS or


9.e4, are the main moves, even after the text. White is playing
a useful move in case Black goes for a ...ltJxc3 exchange and also
protects the b 2 -pa\AJn, which is in need in so1ne variations.

9...cxd4?!

I do not like the text move - White scores quite well after it. An
i
interesting alternative is 9...'WaS 10.idZ!? (10.Wd2!? cxd4 11.ltJxd4
ib4 [11...ltJxd4? 12.ltJxdS!+-] 12.tbb3 Wa6 13.%1d1+=) 10...ti:ixc3
(10... cxd4?! 11.ibxd4 ti:ixc3 12.ixc3 Wxa2 13.ltJxc6 bxc6 14.ixc6
:!!b8 15.Wd4 .if6 16.Wif4 E!b6 [16... es 17.heS±] 17.ixf6 gxf6
18.Wg4+ 4?h8 19.Wf3 @g7 20.b4±) 11.hc3 Wxa2 12.ti:id2 Wa6
(12 ... cxd4 13.%1a1 Wxal 14.Wxal dxc3 15.bxc3±) 13.dxcS WbS 14.b4
aS! 15.bxaS WxcS 16.Wcl eS (16...lt:lxaS? 17.E!al i.d8 18.WbZ f6
19.l;fcl +-) 17.WbZ+= In all the above variations we can easily
observe hov,r well the white rook stands on the b - file.
10.lbxd4 lbxd4

10...if6 11.lbxc6 bxc6 12.Wc2+= is pleasant for \,Vhite, but


probably playable. Bad is 10...tZ:ldb4?! 11.tZ:lf3 (11.ie3!?) 11...Wxdl
12J::lxdl if6 13.lbgS '.ge8 14.lbge4 !es 15.if4 hf4 16.gxf4±
Suba,M-Lauridsen,J Coria del Rio 2002.
11.Wxd4 .tf6

After 1 l...lbxc3 12.Wxc3± or 12.bxc3±, White has all the pressure


on the queenside. The 'Catalan' bishop on g2 is a monster!
12.Wc4 lbxc3

12...½xc3 13.bxc3 tZ:lb6 14.WcS± leaves White with the bishop


pair and good pressure on the queenside - see the white rook
on bl. ..
13.bxc3

The opening phase has gone very much in White's favour, as


Black has failed to solve his develop1nent problems on the
queenside. I think that Black should have avoided variations
where the bl-rook ,tvould become useful; which means to be
found on an open or semi-open file!
13...V£fa5
A normal 'attacking' move. 13...:3'.b8? is a bad try after 14..ia3
.ie7 (14...f1e8 lS Jlfdl .td7 16.hb7+-) lS.:!':!:fdl We8 16.Wc7+-

14.ie3!
.

Co1npleting development - the c3-pawn is not as ilnportant as


the open files for the rooks are.

14..Wxc3
. 15.Wa4

1S.Wxc3 was also possible: 1S ... hc3 16.hb71 (16.�fcl?! �as


17.i.xb7 hb7 18.1;!;xb7 i.b6! =) 16...hb7 17.1;!;xb7 as 18.:!:'1cl 1!fc8
19.�a7! 1;!;ab8 20 .�b6! and the black a p
- awn v.rill fall. But it is
difficult to calculate this variation in full, especially White's last
two moves. White's text is based mostly on general concepts than
concrete calculation - what we call intuitional moves.

15 ...id8!
.

16.ixa7?!
.

A difficult move. After 16J:'1.fcl Was 17.WxaS .txaS, we have


already seen 18..ixb7 hb7 19Jl:xb7 �b6!=, but good was 16.E(fdl
Was 17.Wc4 .ib6 18.1;!;bS Wa3 19.Eld3 We7 20 ..ixb6 axb6 21.1;!;xb6+=
The text 1nove looks scary, as it is self-pinning White's bishop, but
it is based on concrete calculation - can't live without it!

16...id7?!
.
Concrete calculation is not ah,vays precise! Here bad vvas
16...Wc7?! 17.Wd4 Was 18.icS '.8:e8 19.a3± or 16...WaS?! 17.WxaS
ixaS 18.icS �d8 19.�7 ixb7 20Jtxb7 '.8:d2 21.1;1.fbl! hS 22.'.8:7b2±
but Black could go for 16 ...Wd2! 17.ixb7 (17.'.8:xb7 hb 7 18.�7
fuca7 19.Wxa7 Wxe2=; 17.if3 id7 18.Wd4 Wxd4 19.hd4 �a2
20.l:�xb7=) 17...ixb7 18.E!xb7 Wxe2 19.Wd7! Wc2! or 19...Wxa2
20.icS if6 21.ixf8 flxf8 and it is difficult to see how White ,II/ill
get so1nething 1nore than the better side of a draw.
17.Wxd7 �xa7 18.Elfc1

Why does White stand better? Well, it is about the harmonious


co-operation of his pieces; look at Black's pieces, how 'isolated'
they seem to be...

18...Wf6 19.a4 (19.�c2 We7 20.Wxe7 ixe7 21.!l:xb7±) 19...We7


20.Wxe7 i.xe7 21.�xb7 �xb7 22.�7± or 18...Wa3 19.�c8 ie7
... give rather unpleasant endgames, although the opposite­
coloured bishops offer Black some hopes of survival.

19.!k8! bS?

19...WxaZ? loses to 20Ji: d1 +-, but maybe 19 ... :!%a8 was the lesser
evil: 20.:!%xa8 Wxa8 21.Wd2±, as \Nhite wins the b7-pavvn. But who
·wants to defend this unpleasant opposite-coloured bishop ending
forever...

20..ib7!

Another self-pinning move, which was obviously missed by


Black. Well, White is not a 1nasochist who likes to pin his bishops
around (remember 16.ha7) - but it is important to preserve his
queen's dominating position on d7.

20....ie7
Black's back rank is rather weak and this can be proven after
20...b4 21.l'!dl! ie7

22.fl:dcl! (22.l'!e8? icS! 23.Wc8 g6 24.!1:xf8+ .ixf8 25.%td8 Wxd8


26.Wxd8 !1:xb7 27.�g2±) 22...WgS (22...id8 23.!1:lcS Wb6 24.%tb5+- )
23J;xf8+ ixf8 24.!1:c8+-

21.�bc1!

21. ..Wib4

On 21. ..idS White wins vvith 22.!1:b8! (22J�dl?! ie7 23.l'!e8 �4)
22 ...Wa3 23.l%cc8 ie7 24.l'!xf8+ hf8 25.:!::tc8! (with the idea l'!c7 -
Black's 7th rank is vveak as well!) 25 ...Wb4 26.�g2 !1:xa2 (26...We4+
27.�h3!+- ) 27.%tc7+-

22.�1c7! :Sxc8 23.Wxc8+! i.f8 24.Wie8! h6

Or 24...Wbl + 25.�g2 Wg6 (25...!1:xb7 26.Wxf7+ �h8 27.Wxf8#)


26.�c8+-

25.VNxf7+ @h8

26.YNg6

26.l;1c8 YNbl + 27.@g2 vge4+ 28.f3! vgxe2+ 29.@h3 YNfl + 30 .@g4 �a4+
31.f4+-

26..J�a4 27J:!:c8

Black resigned, as White's threats (Qf7 - .ie4) are too strong.

10
-

Approximately a 1nonth later the Thessaloniki 1984 Olympiad


started. Both M.Suba and I participated - for me this was my
2nd Oly1npiad and the first as a player!
And again the great Romanian GM played his favourite idea,
against the board one Icelandic player at that event, Margeir
Petursson:

oSuba Mihai
■ Petursson Margeir
Thessaloniki 1 984

1.c4 cs 2.�f3 ti::lf6 3.�c3 e6 4.g3 <tic6 5.�g2 �e7 6.0-0 0 0- 7.d4 dS
8.cxdS �xdS 9.�b1
9...�f6

Black was obviously a bit better prepared, trying an interesting


continuation.

10..!bxdS W!xdS

10 ...exdS!? is interesting: 11.dxcS ifs 12.%tal !1:e8 13.e3 ie4


14.W!b3 Was 15.id2 W!xcS 16J:l:acl Wb6 17.ic3 W!xb3 18.axb3 ixc3
19.re:xc3 %l:ad8 20.!'!dl ½-1/2 Eingorn,V-Lputian,S Minsk 1987.

11.dxc5 Wxc5

11 ...Wxa2?! 12.igS!± is nice for White; his knight can land on d6


in some variations!

12.W!a4!

Again White prepares strong pressure on the queenside.

12 ....id7 13.i.e3 W!e7


Now it looks like Black has co1npleted his development. The
open-centre nature of the position could mean that after a few
exchanges the draw will be in hand.

14.Wfe4!

Although White could also play 14.b41? or 14.!!fcl, I like this


centralisation move.

14...gac815.b4

Probably better than 15.h4 b6 16.l:!fdl :!!fd8 17.igS h6 18.ixf6


Wxf6 19.l%d2 ie8 20 .l%bd1 !1:xd2 21.�xd2 !1:d8 22.%1xd8 Wxd8 23.lt)eS
luxes 24.WxeS \Wc8 25.if3 ic6 ½.-112 Olafsson,H-Miles,A Reykjavik
1986.

15 ...b6 16 .�d2!

A difficult move - retreating is not in the human nature - but


White understood that the bishop should come to the a 3 f- 8
diagonal after he pushes his b p
- awn.

16 ...gfd8 17 .bS <tlaS 18..tb4 Wfe8 19.a4


19...a6? !

19....tc3?! wasn't satisfactory either: 20 .haS! (20 .hc3 �xc3


21.!!fdl [21.lt:lgS fS {21 ...g6? 22.Wh4 hS 23.€ie4+-} 22.WeS rlcS
23.Wal We7=] 21...1::tc4 22.WeSoo i::txa4? 23.Wc7 €ic4 24.:ad4+-)
20 ...haS (20 ...bxaS 21.t2:le5 .txeS 22.WixeS±) 21.€\eS±, but probably
OK vvas 19...i::tc4! 20 .We3 es 21.8d2 �d4oo.

20..ixaS!

A difficult move again. Exchanging a good bishop for an 'edged'


knight is not your daily advice, but here there is a concrete
reason: White's passed a p- awn will be quicker.

20...bxaS 21.bxa6

Also strong is 21.b6.

21....ixa4 22.:Sfcl i.c6 23.Wie3


23...g6?

A critical 1nistake. Black had to opt for 23 ..J!aS 24.a7 i.dS 25.�c7,
where \!Vhite stands better but nothing is clear-cut yet.

24.a7 a4 25.�eS!

Further exchanges will help the more advanced white a-pawn.

25....ixg2 26.�xcS! �xc8 27.l!?xg2 a3

27...heS 28.WxeS a3 loses to 29.�bS Vlic6+ 30.f3 a2 31.�xcS+ Vlixc8


32.Wb8+-

28.lbd7!

White 1nust be careful! 28.�bS? would be a blunder: 28.. J:1:xbS


29.t2:\d7 i.b2! 30.axb8=Vli Vlixb8 31.lt:\xbS a2 32.Wa7 al =W 33.Vlixal
.½xal=

28....ib2

The knight cannot be taken: 28 ...Vlixd7 29.�bS a2 30.aS=Vli �xb8


31.WxbS+ ©g7 32.Wa3! VlidS+ (32...al= Vli 33.Waf8#) 33.e4! Wxe4+

ctJ
34.4?h3! VlifS+ 35.g4+-

-�■
. ....
'ti'■ �&
.
0 ■ ■ .t. ■ .t.
,.
•*- ••••••�:�••m•

� .
■■ w�
,. , ,·1 - � g
�O'i
,,.,.,, ii�
m:a • m
, ,. ,., ,. ,

29.Vlixa3?!

Spectacular, but clearer was 29.�xb2! axb2 30.t2:\f6+ 'i!?f8 31.Vlia3+


We7 32.t2:\xh7+ @e8 (32...@.e:7 33.Vlixe7 b l=Vli 34.�.e:S VlifS 35.e4 Vlif6
36.Wb7 :Sc2 37.lt:ixe6+ ©h6 38.lt:lf4+- ) 33.Wa4+ ©d8 34.a8=W bl =W
35.Wd4+ Wd7 36.WaS+ :Sc7 37.Wf6+ We7 38.Wxe7+ ©xe7 39.Wxc7++-

29...�xa3 30.�f6+ ©f8?

Black should have tried to defend with 30...©h8! 31.lt:lxe8 :i!a8


32.flb7 !cs 33J!b5 (33.i�xf?!? %!:xe8 34.:Sb7 ixa7 35.fuca7±; 33Jlc7
ixa7 34.a'.xf?) 33...ha7 34.tbd6 rfb8!? (34...�g8 35.a:as �d8 36.t2:lb7
:i!a8 [36...ib6 37.%!:a6+-; 36..J�d7 37.:Sxa7 l!?g7 38.e4+-] 37.fla6 ©f8
38.tbaS ©e8 39.lt:lc6+- ) 35.�xb8+ ixb8 36.lt:lxf?+±

31.qJxe8 1:!:a8 32.l::l:b7! �cs

33 ...;g,xa7 34.tbd7+ ©g7 35.lt:lxcS+- or 33 ...ixa7 34.tbxh7+ ©g8


35.tbg5+-

34.qJe4 ha7

34...id4 35.:Sb4! ixa7 36Jla4+-

35.qJg5

White wins a good pawn and the case of knight vs. bishop with
pawns on one side is quite favourable for him.

35...h6? 36.lt:lxe6+ ©g8 37.tbc7+-


36.�xf7 �cs 3 7.�gS l3e8 38.h4!

38.tuxh7? i.e 7.

38...h6

39.�f7!

The knight is quite a tricky piece - a second pa\!\rn falls...

39...�f8 40.�es gs 41.hxgs hxgs 42.�f3 :Se7 43.:SbS

Black resigned: 43...g4 44Jag5+ 1;1:g7 45.Elxg7+ .½xg7 46.�h2.

1-0

Sacrificing material - mostly pawn(s) - is a co1nmon way to


create an initiative and take over the driver's seat.
Well, that doesn't auto1natically mean that you will cross the
finishing line first, but your chances are nevertheless greater.

□ Portisch Lajos
■ Matanovic Aleksandar
Adelaide 1971

24...�f6
White's advantage is indisputable. He is better co-ordinated and
has two advanced pawns. The only technical proble1n see1ns to
be that both pawns are under attack.

25.h6?

In general this should be a very strong move, if not for 25.hxg6


hxg6 26.Wd2±, with the threat 1':!:e7. And even better was 25.Wd21
ti:lxhS (25...i.dS 26.lcigS! Wxd6 27.hxg6 hxg6 28.l'!dl fld8 29.;!t}e4
ti:lxe4 30.ixe4+-; 25 ...ti:le4 26. Wf4+-) 26.ti:leS hg2 27.�xg2, when
Black is helpless against threats such as ;!t}c6, WdS or d7. \l\fith his
text move, White goes for a long-tenn positional sacrifice, based
on the black king's v,reaknesses and his m,vn activity.

25..JJxd6

Black cannot live with this nasty pav,rn on d6. The main
alternative was 25 ...i.xf3? when White can introduce a nice
combinative line: 26.d7! Wxd7 (26...hg2 27.Wxf6!+-) 27.Wxf6 Wd4
28.fleS!+-
26Jbe5!

Another tactical finesse, forcing the black bishop to retreat.

26....ieS

Again 26 ...hg2? allows a strong tactic: 27.lt:id7! Wxd7 28.Wxf6


Wd4 29.!1:eS!+-

27..!bg4! �hS

Black's position looks suspicious, but only concrete calculation


will reveal the truth.

28..idS!

White would love to play 28.!1:eS? but this fails to 28...Wdl +


29.Wel (29.©h2? Wxg4 30Jtxh5 lilfxhS+ 31.4?g1 lilfxh6-+) 29...Wxel+
30.!lxel fS=+

28....id7

It is understandable that Black ,,vants to kick away the nasty


white knight. Bad would be 28...WxdS? 29.lt:lf6+ lt:ixf6 30.Wxf6+- or
28...Wf8? 29.tuf6+ lt:lxf6 30.Wxf6 bS (30...Wxh6? 31.�xe8+ fixe8
32.ixf7+ @f8 33 ..idS#) 31.�e7 c4 32.�xa7 cxb3 33.axb3+-, but
interesting '\lvas 28....ic6!? 29.hc6 (29.EleS? ixdS 30.:1!!.xhS 4?f8!
31.E'.xdS WxdS 32.Wh8+ 4?e7 33.Wxb8 Wdl + 34.4?h2 Wxg4 35.Wxa7+
ct?e8=) 29...Wxc6 30.E'.e7 !1:d8 31.Wel!±
29.�e5?

This natural 1nove spoils the game! Stronger was 29.l:l:dl! .½e6
(29 ...\We7? 30.ixf?+! \Wxf7 31.ti:ieS+- ) 30.ti:if6+ ti:ixf6 31.\Wxf6 \Wf8
32.ixe6 fxe6 33.\Wxe6+ Wf7 34.Wxf?+ ©xf7 35.'.E:d7+ ©f6 (35 ...@g8
36.a'.xa7+-) 36.%!:xa7 gs 37.%!:g7! when Black is in deep trouble:
37..J:ta8 (37...bS 38.%!:xh7 @g6 39.%!:c7+-) 38.�xh7 ©g6 (38...'.E:xa2
39.l�b7 bS 40.%1:xbS @g6 41.1:!b6++- ) 39.1:!b7 ©xh6 40.'.E:xb6++-

29....ixg4 30.�xh5 Wf8 31.:Se5 ¥Nxh6 32 J!e7

A critical point of the game...White has sacrificed a second pawn


and his activity is great.

32...gf8?!

A better way to 'calm' White down was to return the won


material: 32...Wg7! 33.hf?+ ©h8 34.\Wxg7+ ©xg7 35.%!:xa7 @f6=
33.Wc4!

A good double attack!

33 ... Wg5 34.�xf7+ �g7 35J:!:xa7

And now the difference is obvious; the queens are still on the
board and the black king is not secure.

35...�h6?

Black cracks. 35...Wd2! was his only move to stay in the game:
36.<tg2 (36.WdS WxdS 37..ixdS+ *h6 38.*g2+=) 36....id7! 37.WdS
i.c6! 38..igS+ :Sf7!! 39.!l:xfl+ *xg8 40.Wxc6 �xf7= But this
variation is not 'hu1nan' and cannot really be found over-the­
board and with limited time...

36.�gS! �xg8 37.Wxg8 Wc1+ 38.�h2 �f3 39.Wf8+

And Black resigned as he loses the bishop. 39 ...*gS 40.Wxf3+­


\1Vhite had a forced mate as well: 39.:axh7+ *gs 40.WdS+ *fS
41.Wd7+ ©eS 42J1e7+ ©f6 43.Wd6+ ®gS 44.a'.eS+ ©h6 45.Wf8+ ©h7
46.l::!e7#

1-0
CONCLUSION

Initiative is the modern way to prevail, from the human point of


view. One must not forget that when there is action, there is re­
action; when there is attack, there is defence.
PREPARATION
Home preparation is a must in our modern tilnes, 1nuch more
than it was 20-30 years ago. And this is mainly due to computer
engines and large databases, which offer an enormous amount
of information which wasn't available beforehand.
Of course it is fine and even welcomed to be prepared in an
original and very 'personal' way, as this could easily give you the
upper hand.
At the end of the day, what really counta after a pleasant
opening outcome, are the classical values and the way of
handling the 1niddlegame according to common know-ledge as
proved by the great past masters.

D Short Nigel
■ L:Ami Erwin
London 2009

1.e4 c6 2.ltlc3 d5 3.ltlf3

An interesting line to face the never-ending 1nodern lil1es of the


'Caro-Kann Defence'. I \Vould call it a speciality ofN.Short, as he
has played it quite a lot, introducing nevv and interesting ideas.

3....tg4

A standard way of playing. A very complicated line arises after


3 ... lt:if6 4.es lt:ie4 S.it}e2 \Wb6 6.d4 cs.
4.h3 Axf3

I do not like the idea of giving-up the bishop pair so easily. More
combative is 4...ihS 5.d41? (This is a rare continuation and not
without reason. 5.g4 ig6 6.exdS cxdS 7.ibS+ lt:c6 8.�es :acs is
another theoretical discussion....) S ...e6 (5...dxe4?! 6.�xe4 i.xf3
7.Wxf3 Wxd4 8.ie3 Wxb2 9.ic4 Wb4+ 10.t2:ld2 t2:lf6?! [10 ...e6 11.a'.bl
We7 12.t2:le4iii] 11.l;bl Wd6 12Ji:xb7± Short,N-Adianto,U Internet
2000) 6.id3 t2:if6 (6 ... dxe4 7.tbxe4 �d7 followed by 8...�gf6 is
a solid option. Black's position is slightly worse, but free of
weaknesses) 7.eS! tbfd7 8.g4 ig6 9.hg6 hxg6 10.tbe2 cs 11.c3 t2:lc6
12.i>fl += Short,N-Postny,E Kolkata 2009.

5 .Wxf3 �f6 6.i.e2

6 ...dxe4

Solid is 6...e6, with more-or-less equal chances, although I would


prefer to play White's position after 7.0-0 d4 (7...dxe4 8.t2:lxe4
t2:ixe4 9.Wxe4 .!bd7 10.d4 �f6 11.We3 id6 12.c4 0-0 13.b3 We7 14.a3
es 15.ib2 flfe8 16.dxeS ixeS 17.heS WxeS 18.WxeS a:xeS 19.if3
'i!?f8= Short,N-Anand,V Merida 2001) 8.t2:lb1 t2:ibd7 9.d3 id6 10.idl
0 - 0 11.WeZ es 12.c3oo Short,N-Adianto,U Internet 2000.

7.<tixe4 �xe4 8.Wxe4 WdS

I think that Black has to go for this. After 8...ti:id7 9.0-0 e6, White
can play 10.b4I tbf6 11.Wc4 ie7 12.bS cxbS 13.¥9xb5+ Wd7 14.�bl
WxbS lS.hbS+ �d8 16.d4 @c7 17.c4+= Frolov,A-Horvath,C Siofok
1990.

9.Wg4 ltJd7 10.0-0 <ilf6

11.Wa4

White has tried two other moves here: 11.Wg3 e6 12..if3 Wd6
13.Wxd6 hd6 14.b4! a6 1S.a3 @e7 16J.l:b1 a:ac8 17.flel gs 18.d3
ffilg8 19.�b2 'LidS 20.g3+= Mitkov,N-Adamson,R Wheeling 2012
and 11.Wb4 Wd7 12.d3 e6 13.Wh4 i.e7 14.Wg3 0-0-0 1S.i.e 3 cs
16.b4+= Borosova,Z-Hladik,L Banska Stiavnica 2013. In both cases
Black can improve.

11...We4

Black insists on exchanging the queens. After 11. .. e6 12.d4 i.e7


13.E'.dl 0-0 14.c4 Wd7 1S ..ie3 %!:fd8 16.�acl Czebe,A-Dors,R
Slovakia 2011, White enjoys a very pleasant bishop pair
middlegame, where the queens being on board cannot be to his
disadvantage.

12.Wxe4 ltlxe4

In this endgame White enjoys a pleasant advantage due to his


bishop pair and the possibility to set-up the pawn structure as he
pleases. Maybe Black can hold, but in my opinion only if you are
a modern engine - in human practice Black will more-or-less
lose, especially if he is the underdog!
13.l:'!el!

A very tricky and elastic move !

13...g6

What else? If 13...e6? then 14..i.hS! t2:if6 15J1:xe6+ !i.e7 16.�eS±


and after 13 ...t2:if6 White will go for 14.b4l expanding on the
queenside and preparing the b5 advance, enlarging the
battlefield of his light-squared bishop- remember that Black is
missing his!

14.d4!

White decides to take-up the centre.

14...ig7 15.�f3 t'LJf6 16.c4 r!d8

Black has no choice, as 16...e6? fails to 17.dS+ Keep in 1nind that


White would love to exchange the central pawns, as this would
enlarge the battlefield and the do1nination of his bishop pair.

17.ie3 0-0
18.�adl

The classical value of centralisation! Another, hypermodern,


way of playing is with 18.:!!abl!? :!:l:d7 19.b4 �c8 20 .a4+=

18 ...e6 19.g4!

150 years ago W.Steinitz taught us the idea of restriction in


similar positions with the bishop pair. The modern chess player
doesn't have to be so 'creative'; just to follow the orders of his
great predecessors, adding his own 'spices'...

19 ..h6
. 20.h4

White simply wants to kick the black knight away from control
of the dS-square, so his future dS advance will be easier and
1noreeffective.

20...�fe8

A passive way to defend. I feel that 20...hS!? is more combative:


21.gxhS (1naybe the primitive 21.gS is good: 21.. .lZig4 22.hg4
hxg4 23.*g2 E'.d7 24Jl:d2 flfd8 25.Ztedi fS 26.gxf6 ixf6 27.*g3,
when White wins a pa,,vn, but it is not easy to convert) 21. ..lbxhS
(21. .. gxhS 22.�g2 itJg4 23.dS lbxe3+ 24.�xe3 cxdS 25.cxdS exdS
26.ixdS+=) 22.dS exdS 23.cxdS cxdS 24..ixa7 (24.ElxdS �xdS
25.ixdS b6 26.b4 !l:d8 27.ib3 :!!d7 28.:!!c l +=) 24...�a8 25.icS %\fc8
26.b4+=
21.�g2

White is in no hurry; anyvvay, Black has no counterplay and is


doo1ned to passivity, which is not a good sign ...

21...lbd7?!

Making White's plans easier. 2,1...%1:d7 was a must, when White


can go for 22.gS hxgS 23.hxgS 0ih5 24.%1:hl :!!eds 25.�h4,
maintaining his pleasant advantage, which he still has to
convert...

22.d5!

Direct and good, although the simple 22.b3 and then dS, might
be even stronger!

22 ..lbe5
.

Again this helps \,Vhite. More stubborn was 22 ... exdS 23.cxdS
cS!? (23...cxdS 24.%1:xdS±), although after 24.M4! tt:leS 25.b3±,
White is still very much on top.
23.dxc6!

It was once said that the advantage of having the bishop pair is
that at a certain moment you can return one of them! Well, not
for free of course!

23...�xf3

After 23...�xc6 24.b3, White enjoys the bishop pair with an open
centre and a flexible majority on the queenside; advantages
which according to the classical principles should bring the point
home...

24.@xf3 bxc6 25.b3

White has exchanged his bishop pair advantage for a much­


better pawn structure. Fair enough!

25...as
26.gS!

This clever advance fixes the kingside paw·n structure; Black


would never get a passed pawn, so his three pawns equal White's
two. In a more 'technical' way, theoretically White has won
a pav.m!

26...hxgs 27.hxgs :Sas

Black has no satisfactory move: 27...a4 28.b4 (28.:g(xd8 :g(xd8


29.b4±) 28.. .l:� b8 29.a3± or 27 ...ic3 28.:ahl a4 29 Jaxd8 :iaxd8
30 .4?e4± I think that the last line was his best chance to fight on,
as now \,Vhite also controls the d fil - e.

28.:Sd7!

Penetration is nearly always a good idea and I know that


N.Short loves it...

28...Af8 29J�ed1 a4 30J!c7!

Not only attacking the pawn, but preparing the lethal l%dd7.

30...axb3 31.axb3 ):!ec8

Black will also not survive after 31...:g(ab8 32.:iadd7 :axb3 33.fxf7
�c3 34.!i:f6 !!:xc4 35.!i:xg6+ @h8 36.©e2!

32.:Sdd7 �c7 33.�xc7


33...�b8

Black could try to 'fish' with 33 ... cSI? 34.hc5 l'!b8 (34...hcS?!
35.§xcS �b8 36.%1:bS+-), where \!Vhite has to find 35..ie3I (the rook
ending after 35.@e4 ixcS 36.l'!xcS �xb3, offers Black some
survival chances) 35 ...!!xb3 36.§c8+-

34.�xc6 :Sxb3 35.:Sc8

White has an 'extra' c-pa,,vn and this carries the day.

35...fS

35 ...@g7 36.@e4 and .id4+ comes.

36.gxf6 @f7 37.@e4 S:b7 38.i.d4 gs 39.cS S:bl 40.c6 �cl 41..ie3

Black resigned...Nigel Short has a classical education. Of course


he is quite fond of tactics too (you can't live without the1n!) but
prilnarily he knows why, how and when!

1-0

Of course there is the option of the 'other way around', which


means following heavy analysed lines and trying to find some
improvement or some new idea.
□ Ushenina Anna
■ Svidler Peter
Tromso 2013

1.d4 .!bf6 2.c4 g6 3.ti::ic3 dS 4.cxdS t!t:ixdS S.e4ti::ixc3 6.bxc3 .ig7


7.ti::if3 cs 8J:!b1 0-09 .ie2
. cxd4 10.cxd4YHaS+ 11 i . d2 Wxa2 12.0 - 0
i.g413 i . gS h6 14.ie3 ltlc6 15 .clS !t:ia5 16Jl:e1 ixf3

The FIDE ex-Women's World Champion is a hard worker and she


constantly proves it. Some 'experts' criticised the FIDE system
when she ,.von the title, but very few know her abilities... Here
16...b6 17..!bd4 .i.d7 18J;ta1 (18.i.a6!+=) 18 ...'�b2 19.:!!bl �a2 20.8'.al
i&b2 21.�bl �a2 ½-½ Radjabov,T- Svidler,P London 2013, had
been played quite recently. Obviously P.Svidler didn't wish to
enter a theoretical discussion...
17.ixf3 t!t:ic4 18..if4 es

18...gS weakens Black's position: 19.i.g3 i.eS?! (19...b6!? 20.:!!e2


i&as 21.i.g4+ =) 20.l;(xb7± Esserman,M-Molner,M Saint Louis 2012.

19.dxe6 fxe6 20.:Sxb7! l3ad8

20..J:txf4? loses on the spot after 21.Wd7.


21.�d7!

An obvious and prepared novelty, played quickly. Previously


vVhite had tried 21 . Wcl but after 21...ib2! 22J:1xb2 0ixb2 23.ig3
Was 24Ji:f1 Wd2 2S.Wc6 Wd7 26.Wcl Wd2 27.Wc6 Wd7 28.Wcl Wfd2
Black was able to dravv (½-1/2) in Morozevich,A­
Nepomniachtchi,I Loo 2013.

21...�xd7

White holds a nice advantage after 21...0ib2 22.!!xg7+! <tJxg7


23.Wc2 1:1xf4 24.Wfc7+ �f7 2S.Wxd8.

22.Wxd7 ti:leS

Probably best. Again 22 ...!!Xf4? is unsatisfactory: 23.Wxe6+ <tJh7


(23 ...!!f7 24.l::kl) 24.l::!cl id4 25.Wd7+ ig7 26.WdS as 27.Wxc4
(27.�xc4? �xe4!!-+) 27 ...Wxc4 28.:axc4±

23..ixes hes
24.�fl!

Everything according to home-preparation! The threat is .ig4.

24...hS ! 25 ..ie2!

But it seems that there is another way to activate the bishop!


Material is equal and the opposite coloured b
- ishops might help
the draw, but as long as queens are on the board the black king
remains quite weak ...

I think that Black should opt for 25...aS! 26.Wc6 (26..ibS!? might
be better) 26....ixh2+ 27.iixh2 Wxe2 28.Wxe6+ <tlg7 29.WeS+ iih6
30 .iigl. White retains a small advantage due to the weaker black
king, but Black should be able to hold.

26.VNc8+ :Sf8 27.Wc6

27....id4?!

Too optimistic! Again Black should opt for 27...ixhZ+ 28.<tlxh2


Wxe2 29.Wxe6+ <tlg7 30 .WeS+ iih6 31.iigl +=

28..ic4! :Sxf2?
A clear blunder. P.Svidler had to go for 28...MZ+ 29.©hl Wa3!
when after 30 .1/Id7! White has the upper-hand but he would still
be very much in the game, but for no more than a draw in any
case... His king re1nains rather vveak and as it is well-known the
opposite-coloured bishops always help the attack!

29 .YNxe6+ ©h7

30.YNd7+

and as Black loses a piece after 30 ..JU7+ (30 ...�h6 31.i.xa2+-)


31.Wxd4, he resigned! An easy ga1ne for A.Ushenina, as she knew
her preparation, consisting of ideas, 1noves and variations. \,Vell,
not every day is such a bright one...

1-0

CONCLUSION

The 1nodern chess player is obliged to constantly work on his


opening preparation.
But, at the end of the day, he has to kno,,v what to do with his
advantage; if any at all!
So, classical studies and tactical ability are very much in need;
opening theory is a part of the preparation ...
QUEEN EXCHANGE
The exchange of the queens is a natural fact in a huge amount of
games.
But what about offering the exchange of the queens with the
creation of doubled and weak pavvns silnultaneously?
Well, that doesn't sounds logical but if there are fair
compensatory factors, then everything looks ,.veil and justified!
Of course it is not an easy decision to proceed ,.vith exchanges
that will strategically 'weaken' our position...
But chess is not an absolute game and we have to keep in mind
that rules rule (!) but exceptions do the job!
Well, when it is about central pawns it all looks easier, as in
M.Botvinnik's next ga1ne:

o Botvinnik Mikhail
■ Sorokin Nikolay
Moscow 1931

19...es

Black's position is ,,vithout ,.veaknesses, so if White is to achieve


anything he should do it quickly. Black's queen is his best-placed
piece, as it keeps White's aggressive advance as under control
and protects the important e S -pav.rn, so a superlative defensive
job is performed by this important piece.
20.VNe3!

So, important pieces must be exchanged! If White hesitates with


2O.h3 then after 2O ...�e61 21.he6 fxe6, Black should feel fine, as
he covers dS, opens the f fi- le, and contests the light squares. So, it
is actually a fight to double the e -pawn and he who succeeds in
doing so, is the happy one!

20...VNxe3 21.fxe3 .ig4 22.aS! �c8

After the alternative 22. ..lubd7 23.h3 �3 24.gxf3 li:icS


(24..Jl'.fd8? 25.tbdS!+ -) 25.tbdS (25.b4 tbe6 26.he6 fxe6 27.0a4 and
li:icS±) 25.. J!ab8 26. tbxf6+ gxf6 27.rl:g2+ \!;>h7 28Jad6± Black -vvould
not last long.

23.�cl!

.Eyeing up c7 and threatening es, so Black must cede his good


bishop.

23 ... .ixf3

23..Jae8?! 24.h3 ihS 25.li:idS! (25.tbh4 li:Je7 26.g4 ig6 27.idS±)


25...0xe4 26J1:dc2 lucd6 27.luc7+ -

24.gxf3

Now White's pawn structure is ilnproved and his central


doubled pawns are a considerable force. Add to that his strong
bishop and you \.Vill understand why he holds the advantage.
25...lZ:ic6?!

Good or bad, Black should have opted for 25...€\fxdS 26..ixdS


(26.exdS? lZ:ifS 27.s1>f2 lZ:id6 [blockading!] 28J'.!:dc2 l::1fc8oo) 26...lZ:ixdS
27.exdS (27Jixd5±) 27..J!fc8 28.!1:dc2 l::1xc2 29Jixc2 :acts 30.e4 lad?
31.l3c8+ s1>h7 32.s1>f2± or 25 ...lZ:iexdS 26..ixdS (26.exdS? '.afc8
27.l;dc2 �xc2 28Jixc2 lZ:ie8 29.s1>f2 [29.d6 !1:d8] 29 ...@f8 30.e4 @e7= )
26...lZ:ixdS 27.exdS± which transposes to the above line.

26.lbxfG-1- gxf6 27.Eld7 Elab8

Or 27 ...lZ:ixaS 28.%!:cc7 !1:ad8 29..ixf7+ @h8 30.l;xcl8 gxcts 31..idS


(31.b4 lZ:ic6 32 JJxb7 !1:dl + 33.@f2 flbl 34.s1>g3! !:!xb4 35.%!:c7 %!:b6
36.s1>g4+- ) 31...bS 32.s1>f2+-

28.@f2!

Forcing Black's hand, as the threat 29J!.gl + is lethal.

28...lZ:ixaS 29Jkc7 :Sbc8 30J!xf7 :Sxc7 31.�xc7+ i!?h8 32.�dS bS


Unfortunately for Black, 32...0ic6 33.l;xb7+- or 32 ..Jl:b8 33.�g3 is
curtains anyway.

33.b3!

33JJa7 0ic4 34.b3 lt:ib6 35.:ll:xa6 lt:ixdS 36.exdS also wins, but there
is no need to allow the badly-placed as-knight to be exchanged!

33...gds 34.�g3

34JH7 also looks good: 34...:i!d6 35.�g3 0ic6 36.�g4 lt:ib4 37.�fS
0ixd5 38.exdS !l:xdS 39.�g6 �g8 40J;i:a7 �f8±, but there is no need
to go after such pawns. The white king will deliver the decisive
blow.

34...fS 35.�h4 fxe4 36.fxe4 gd6 37.�hS gf6 38.h3 gd6 39.h4 �b6
40.�g4 �f6 41.�a7 �b6 42.:Se7 gd6 43.�c7 :Sf6 44.:Sa7 gb6 45_gc7
�f6 46.�hS gd6

47.i.f7!

Creating a mating net. Black's days are numbered.

47...gf6

47...�g7 48.b4! wins the knight!

48.i.g6 0ixb3 49.�xh6 :Sf8

Or 49 ...�g8 50.�gS :!1fl (50...:ll:f8 51.i.fS !l:e8 52.hS+-) 51.i.fS+-


50.�h7+ @g8 51.�g7+ @h8

52.�f7! :Sxf7 53.:Sxf7 @g8 54.@g6 �d2 55.�d7

1-0

The next example ofV.S1nyslov is even '1nore' difficult:


o Smyslov Vassily
■ Reshevsky Samuel Herman
The Hague/Moscow 1948

24...lbb8

White seems to stand better. He has gained the bishop pair and
he can put p:ressure on the weak, backward black d -pavvn. Well
all this sounds good for some future 'handling'... V.Smyslov
thought about the present and he proceeded accordingly...
25.�xe6!
Giving up the strong bishop is very effective. White is using the
temporary disconnection of Black's pieces to his advantage.

25...fxe6 26.Wh4! Wd7

26...Wxh4 27.gxh4 is all the same.

27.Wd8+ Wxd8 2 8.�xd8 eid7 29..ic7

White wins a good pawn and Black's days are numbered ...

29...eics 30J!xd6 �c8 31..ib6 eia4 32.�xe6 tZlxb2 33.�xeS eic4

Or 33 .. .l:l:xc3 34..id4 Elc2 35J�e7+-

34.�e6 tZl xb6 35.�b6 �xc3 36.!:!:xb7 �c2

Fighting bravely, S.Reshevsky has avoided an ilnmediate


collapse and reached a rook endgame only a pawn down.
However the white pawn mass on the kingside puts an end to
Black's desperate resistance.

37.h4 1:1:xa2 38.©g2 a5 39.h5 a4 40J!:a7 ©g8 41.g4 a3 42.©g3 �e2

42...:aal 43.©f4 a2 44.©fS+-


43.©f3!

Of course White can't afford the pawn exchange. The a p


- awn
makes no difference.

43...�a2 44.©e3 ©f8 45.f3 :Sal 46.©f4

Under the protection of his pawns the white king calmly goes
into the enemy ca1np.

46 ...a2 47.eS ©g8 48.©fS :Sf1 49.:Sxa2 �xf3+ S0.©g6 ©f8 51.:Sa8+
@e7 52.:Sa7+

1-0

Well, it is not always about material; strategy is above all:

□ Rogozenco Dorian
■ Morozevich Alexander
Istanbul 2000

21.g3
An about equal position at first sight, as White just needs to
castle to feel comfortable.
21...V9f6!

A difficult move, as the black kingside pawn structure is


shattered, but Black correctly evaluated that the positive sides
are more important. 21. ..cs 22.0-0= was nothing to be afraid of.
22.V9xf6 gxf6

The ,.veaknesses of Black's pavvn structure are not important,


because White can attack them only with the rook, but he
defends them easily with the king. More important is that White
is obliged to keep his king on el to defend the d2-square from
Black's rook.
23.hS!
The only and best way to activate the rook.

23...h6!

It is too early for 23...:ad3 24.idl (24.h6 �b3 25Jfu4 !i:xb2 26.:i!d4
©f8+) 24...ib3 25.l!?e2 ic4 26.l!?el ib3 (26 .. J!dS 27.:E!h4+= ) 27.©e2=

24.�h4! cS!

25.�e2?!

White relaxed too early, thinking that he had averted the


troubles. As is often the case, he needed to play another accurate
move for that: 2S.b4!= Not so good is 25.ig4 fS 26.ie2 ©g7 27..ic4
©f6=+

25...�b3!

Keeping the \IVhite king in danger!

26Jl:f4 <tlg7 27.g4 E!d6 28Jl:e4 <tlf8 29Jl:f4

29.ic4? loses to 29...!i:dl + 30 .@e2 !!:b l! -+

29...as 30.�e4 �d8 31.l:!f4 <tle7 32.�e4+ <tld6


33..idl? !

33.�f41 @es 34.%1.fS+ @e6 35.!!:f4, when Black still has to find
a way to break through.

33....ie6!

Now Black is ready for both ...bS and ...f5.

34..ie2

34.!!f4 @eS 35.ic2 bS=+

34...fS! 35.gxfS hfS 36.lU4 @es

White is in trouble - and in tune-trouble!

37.lU3

37.ic4 f6+ or 37.a4 '.Bg8+


37...b5! 38.e4?

Of course not 38..½xbS? .ig4-+, but weakening the e-pawn cannot


be helpful. \iVhite had to fight with 38Jtf4+

38...�e6-+ 39.�c3

39..ixbS .ig4 40J:!d3 :l!xd3 41..½xd3 .ixhS-+

39... c4 40.f3 ©f4 41.�c2 :Sd4 42.idt b4 43.axb4 axb4 44.�e2 ©e3
45.�cl

45...�d2! 46.�xc4 )'.!h2 47.Mt )'.!h1 48.:Sc2 �h3

White resigned, as after 49Jte2+ ©xf3 S0 .!1:f2+ ©xe4 51.J;xf7


fucf1+ 52.!1:xfl .ixf1 53.*xfl ©d3 the end is near.

0-1

Initiative and strategic compensation are quite com1non guides


for accepting structural weaknesses.

o Khalifman Alexander
■ Chiburdanidze Maia
Bazna 2007

1.d4 lbf6 2.c4 e6 3.lbf3 .tb4+ 4.�c3 c5 5.g3 �c6 6.�g2 �e4 7..td2
hc3 8.bxc3 �xd2 9.Wxd2 d6 10.0-0 0-0 11.�fdl We7 12.�ab1
:Sb8
An original position. Black is aiming to go for ...b6 and ...ia6,
putting pressure on White's weak queenside pawn-structure.
A logical plan and White has to do something about it...

13.dxc5! dxc5 14.Wd6!

White's two last moves looked a bit strange, but the real aim is
to make Black's development uncomfortable!

14..JJxd6 15.�xd6 .!ba5 16A:ie5! b6

Or 16...f6 17..!bc6 .!bxc6 18.ixc6, as i n the game.

17.�bdl f6 18..!bc6 �xc6 19..ixc6

After some further exchange, White dominates the only open


file, while Black can't really create an attack on the weak white c ­
pawns.

19...f5
19....\ka6 20 .i.bS! .ic8 21.f4±

20.f4 .ia6 21.�bS! .hbS 22.cxbS :Sbe8 23.:Sd7 :Sf7

Black thought that she might hold this ending, but the possession
of an open file and a more active king are decisive factors.

24.@f2! es

Black decides to do 'something', as passivity can't help: 24...El.ee7


25.�d8+ '.gf8 26.e4 i!xd8 27.!bcd8+ �f7 28.e5+-

25.:Sd8! :Sxd8?!

25...@f8 26.l:1:xe8+ @xe8 27.fxeS±, was Black's only chance...

26.:SxdS+ �f8 27.�xf8+! @xf8 28.fxeS

The pav,rn ending is lost.

2s ...@f7 29.@f3 gs
30.h4! @e6

Black could try 30...h6 31.hxgS hxgS 32.e4 @e6, but White is on
the right track after 33.c4! �xeS 34.exfS @xfS 35.g4+ ©eS
36.�e3+-, as the opposition decides.

31.hxgS ©xeS 32.g4! f4 33.a4 c4 34.e4 fxe3 35.@xe3 ©d5 36.©f4


©e6 37.@e4 @f7 38.©d5 ©g6

39.@ c6! @xg5 40.@b7 @xg4 41.�xa7 h5 42.aS 1-0

Repulsing an attack or more generally an initiative is a fair target


for a queen exchange of this type.
o Kasparov Garry
■ Karpov Anatoly
Moscow 1985 •

It seems that White has the upper hand ...

19...VNh6!

A planned well-beforehand queen exchange offer. Black


shatters his pawn structure, but saves his pawn, and the
opposite-coloured bishop ending is easy to handle.

20.VNxh6

20.'�e4 doesn't help. After 20...�5! Black stands quite active!

20...gxh6 21.�fel .ic4! 22.a3 bS 23.�adl �fS 24..tb2 l3cl5

White cannot prove any advantage, so he accepted the draw


offer.½-
□ Tai Mihail
■ Najdorf Miguel
Belgrade 1970 •

White is on the attack, but Black has already foreseen the


defence.

24..VNh6!
.

A 'typical' idea, by now! 24...g6?! 25.VNh4 vvould be quite


dangerous for Black.

25.VNxh6 gxh6

Black has shattered his own pawn structure, but repulsed


White's attack and has enough counterplay down the c-file.

26.!U3

26.tbf6+ /cxf6 27.�xf6 <tlg7 or 26.tlld6 �c7 27.tbxb7 �xb7 28.ie4


�d7, are not worse for Black.

26... �c7?!

After the text Black should be in trouble. Better was 26 ...tlle71=


28.�g3+! @h8

28...<'tig6? 29.tt:lf6+ @h8 30.lt:lxh7!±

29.lbd6

29.tt:lf6!? was dangerous: 29 ....tc8! (29 ...tt:lg6? 30.lt:lxh7! 1:'!.g8


31.tt:lf6+-; 29...1:'!.d8? 30.�7+ -; 29 ...tt:lfS? 30..ixfS exfS 31Jixf5 :!'::lxc2
32.!:!hS .ic8 33J1:xh6 .ifS 34.:!'::lh S!+-) 30.b3 l!c5 31.lt:lxh7 :!'::lg8 32J�e3
lt::lfS 33.hfS exfS 34.lilf6 :!'::lf8 35JU2+=

29...€:ic6!

29...lt:lg6?! 30..ixg6 hxg6 31.1:'!.xg6± or 2 9...lt:lg8? 30..ic4! .ic8


3 1.b3+-

30.�e3 @g7!

By playing only moves, Black stays in the game.

31.E:f6? tZlxeS!

31...lbe7
32.�bS?!

White could consider 32Jl:xf7+ !1:xf7 33.tbe8+ �f8 (33...l!?h8


34.tbxc7 lodS 35.tt:JxdS hdS 36.l!?gl+=) 34.tt:Jxc7 lildS 35.li:lxdS
.ixdS 36.l!?gl+= Black should be able to keep the draw in this
difficult ending but not without great effort!

32...lbg6 33.�d4 �d5!

33....½c6? 34.!1:c4+-

34.c4

34.lbe8+? !i:xe8 35.he8 !1:xc2+

34...bxc3 35.bxc3 :Sc5! 36.lbe8+ l!?h8 37.lbf6 :Sfc8

37...lilxeS? 38.tt:JxdS tt:Jc6 39.hc6 !i:xc6 40.lbf4+-

38.c4 hc4

38....½c6 39..½xc6 !i:Sxc6 40.!i:ee4 %1.cS 41.lbd7=

39.lb e4 .ixb5!

39...%1.xeS? 40..ixc4! fS 41.lild6! +-

40.lbxc5 �xc5 41.axbS


Adjourned and agreed drawn. After 41. ..ElxbS 42Jl:d7 c.k?g7 43.a'.a7
lt::lxeS, Black cannot lose.

CONCLUSION

Stereotypes do not make the 1naster; think outside of the box and
try to find the best move!
THE BAD BISHOP
Normally, a 'bad bishop' is a serious dravvback in one's position
- but not always. In fact, possession of the initiative or other
assets can sornetimes outv,reigh the presence of a bad bishop; this
bishop can so1netimes take an active part in an attack.
Moreover, when defending, as GM Mihai Suba once noted,
sometimes 'a bad bishop defends good pawns' (although it would
be more accurate to say 'important' or 'necessary' pawns), and
thus becomes a valuable piece, which the stronger side is forced
to exchange in order to break through the defence.
The great, deep-thinking researcher and Master Isaac Lipnitsky
commented in his book 'Questions of Modern Chess Theory'
(Kiev 1956): 'It would be wrong to say that a creatively concrete
approach to the position lessens the influence of the rules of
chess or contradicts them. The whole point is that in any given
position, the contradiction of any rules (or generalities) occurs
only at the price of the reaffinnation and victory of other
(rules)... Chess dogmatism does not occur only when:
1. Established rules are follo'1ved without regard for
circumstances of the position; it also occurs when:
2. The evaluation of a particular position is made primarily on
the basis of only the obvious, the already known and established
rules and generalisations.'
Keep in mind that the dynamic approach characteristic of
modern chess has in effect made general rules and principles
'useless' for the purpose of malting decisions in the majority of
concrete positions.
Of course, a thorough acquaintance with the general principles,
techniques and methods enriches and sharpens our intuition,
but still every position is rather unique and it should be
examined as such.
The first example is rather illuminating:
o Sznapik Aleksander
■ Bukal Vladimir
Zagreb 1979 •

In this typical 'French' structure, Black seems to be in dire straits.


He needs not only to somehow exchange the strong white knight
on d6, but also to activate his (usually) bad d 7 b
- ishop. But how to
do this?

19...�c4!

A pawn sacrifice can do the job!

20.�xc4?!

White should not have taken the pawn. 20.�xb7 !Efb8 21.�d6
(21.b3? �bS!+ or 21.lucS :iaxb2 22.a3 flab8=+) 21 ...tDxd6 (21. ..!Exb2!?
22.�xc4 dxc4 23.Wxc4 :iac8 24.Wa6 i':!:cc2�) 22.exd6 Wxd6 23.Wc3
Wb4= was better, proving that Black's position is not bad at all!

20...dxc4 21.Wxc4 .ic6

For a mere pa\lvn, Black has solved all his proble1ns and he even
holds the initiative due to his powerful bishop! Yes, the
previously 'bad' one has now come to life!

22.Wd3 g(fd8 23J�fd1 g(d724.We3 �ad8 25.g3 Wf7

While would be happy Lu relurn lhe pawn afler 25...�xf3?


26.Wxf3 E!xd4 27J�xd4 :iaxd4 28Jldl= An option alwavs to keep in
1nind!

26.�d3

26.lbel is also not an option: 26 .. .f4 27.Wxf4 (27.gxf4 Wg6+


28.Wg3 We4+) 27 ...Wxf4 28.gxf4 �xd4+

26...WhS 27.Wf4

or 27.:iaadl f4! 28.gxf4 (28.Wxf4? �f7- +) 28 ..Jaf7+

27....ie4

White is forced to give up the exchange, as after 28Jlc3 gs


29.hxgS f(xd4! 30 .�el i.c6 he can resign. What a future for the
formerly bad light-squared bishop!

28....ixd3 29.:Sxd3 Wg4 30.:Sc3?!

30 .We3 We4 31.b3 axb3 32.!1:xb3 !1:c8+ was a bit 'better'.

30 .. .VNxf4 31.gxf4 �d5 32.l!>fl �b5 33.:Sc2 l!>f7 34.hS l!>e7 35.l!>e2
@d7 36.<.!ldl
36...:Sa8! 37.tlld2

White was lost anyway: 37.<;i?dZ a3 38.b3 (38.bxa3 l:i:xa3 39.<;i?e2


gbaS-+) 38...l:i:xb3 39.axb3 a2-+

37...:Sb4 38.tLJf3 a3 39.b3 :Sxb3 40.ll)d2 :Sb40-1

o Knaak Rainer
■ Plachetka Jan
Bratislava 1983

1.d4 tllf62.c4 e63.tllc3 .ib44.e3 b65.tllge2 .ia66.tllg3 .ixc3+


7.bxc3 d5 8.Wf3 0-0 9.cxdS exd510 h . a6tbxa6

At first sight Black seems to have solved his opening 'problems'.


White's bishop does not look like the 'best piece' in this particular
position, as his central pawns are placed on the bishop's colour.
So, it is ilnportant for White to somehow activate this piece by
opening up the centre.
11.i?fe2!

Freeing his f p
- awn ,.vith gain of tempo.

Or 11 ...Wc8 12.0-0 cS 13.f3!+=

12 .0-0 cs 13.f3!

So, here it is! The start of a central pawn-roller idea, made


possible by ....ta6.

14.i.b2

White's 'bad' bishop proves to be a good protector of his central


pawns. At least for the time being, White can feel safe in the
centre.

14..i?fd7
.

After 14 ...c415.e4 White's b 2 b


- ishop ,.vill return to the c l h
-6
diagonal with po,.verful threats.

15.e4!

And the central white pawns are rolling!


15...cxd4 16.cxd4 We6

The vvhite d -pawn is protected by a small combination:


16...dxe4? 17.fxe4 ti:lxd4 18.V.if2! l2:ie6 19..ixf6 gxf6 20.ti:lfS <ilh8
21.'�bZ l2:ig7 22.Wxf6 �g8 23.tbd6+-

17.e5

White makes his bishop even 'worse', a quite irrelevant


consideration! More important is the creation of the ,.vhite
kingside pawn 1najority - the white f-pawn is coming!

It is too early for 18.f4?! fS! - a typical defensive idea.

18...�fd8 19.:Sadl <tlf8 20.f4!

After some preparations, White's kingside pawns are operating.

20...fS

What else? If\,Vhite is allowed to play 21.fS, his attack would be


lethal.

21.g4! ilbg6

Or 21... fxg4 22.fS Wh6 23.Wxg4+-

22.gxf5 WxfS
23..icl!

A 'bad' bishop that protects 'good' pawns (d4, f4) again!

23...�f8 24.�g3 '!Wh3 25.fS

White's position is already won, as his pawn mass is


unstoppable.

25...�h4 26Ji:d3 �ae8 27.Ah2! �b4 28.:Sb3 �xa2 29.:Sa3 :Sc8

Or 29...t2:lb4 30.t2:ih5+-

30.�xa2 �xf5 31.E(a3 �h4 32.�fS 1-0

o Kimelfeld Rudolf
■ Dvoretsky Mark
Moscow 1972 O

Black's bishop is bad and if White manages to get his knight to


the d4-square (with a pawn on f4 too), Black's position would
becon1e strategically critical. On the other hand, his bad bishop is
protecting an ilnportant pawn, which keeps his centre intact, and
the point is that White can never realise his intentions! Actually
Black is threatening ...d4 (or ...b5-b4), penetrating into White's
camp via c2, so, in a way, he has the initiative.

19.f4

White could think about:


a) 19.d4 �c4 (19...bS=+) 20.�dl bS 21.fi':d2 b4 22.tiJe2 �fc8 23.�fl
:!;!c2 24.'it>el �fl 25.tiJf4 (25.�dl ia4! 26.�xc2 [26.b3? �xa2! -+]
26...�xc2+ 27.�el MS=+) 25..J!cl + 26.l'!dl �8c4 27.tiJe2 .!;1c2=+
b) 19.fi':e2 bS 20.a3 (20.�fel b4 21.lt)dl .!;cl 22.f3 l!fc8+) 20...aS
21.f4 b4 22.axb4 axb4 23.!Zla2 b3 24.lLJb4 �a8=+
c) 19.f3 bS 20.flf2 b4 21.!Zle2 ibS 22.l'.!e3 ½ Jh Englert,F-Brynell,S
Copenhagen 2013.
These variations prove the viability of Black's position (and of
the bad bishop too!).

19 ..d4!
. 20 . .!be2

Endings arising after 20.lLJbS fi':c2 (20...ixbS!? 21.�xbS b6 22.�b4


l:!c2 23.a3 �d2=+) 21.lt:ixd4 l!xb2 22.lt:ixe6 (22.fi':aS!? :f!b4 23.tiJc2 E'.a4
24.l'.!xa4 ixa4 25.tiJd4 :!;!d8 26.tiJxe6 �xd3 27.lLJcS �a3=+) 22... ixe6
23.l!xe6 fi':xa2 are difficult to defend, as the two black passed
pawns on the queenside are always more dangerous than the
white d-pa\vn.

20...�c2

21 .fS?!

White had to go for the line mentioned above, starting with


21.tiJxd4.

21. ..exfS 22..!bxd4:Sxb2 23 .:Scl


Black holds a pleasant advantage after 23.�e7 !U7 24.lt:JxfS .ixfS
(24... @fS 25.l:�xf7+ *xf7+) 25.�eS+ !l:f8 26.1%xf8+ �xf8 27.fudS+
@e7+

23...g6! 24.:Sc7

24.ridS �f7 25.�c7 .ie8+

24...�eS! 25.�f3

I think that White should seek salvation in 25J:1:xe8+ .txe8


26.tt:ie6 .ic6 27J%.g7+ @h8 28.:!c!c7 hS 29.tt:if4 @g8 30.g3+

25...�xe5 26.�xe5 �e6+

The rest of the moves are unavailable. Black holds a clear


advantage and has every reason to be happy with his formerly
bad bishop!

0-1

o Grivas Efstratios
■ Sarantos Vasilios
Athens 2001 C

By comparing the bishops at first glance, we will co1ne to the


conclusion that Black has the superior one, as the central pawns
are placed on dark squares. But both bishops have limited
1nobility, so vve cannot really be sure of the comparison. Here
there is somethin.e; that it is more important; the b-file, ,,vhich
White can seize.
22 ..ia3!

Sooner-or-later White will try to get a rook to b6, sacrificing the


exchange. Then his bishop will beco1ne a tremendous piece!
22...:Sfa8 23.:Sb3 Wd8 24.:Sfbl

White has do1ninated the b-file, but still it is difficult to ilnprove.


Some preparatory moves cannot do any hann!

24..Wc8
. 25.Wb2 �6a7 26.h3! hS

Opening a second front \"1ith 26...gxh3 27.gxh3 @h8 28.@h2 can


be good only for White, as he can 1nore easily transfer his forces
to the kingside.
28.:Sb6! .txb6?

Black shouldn't have accepted the exchange sacrifice and tried


instead to defend with 28...We8 29.�b7 Wd8. White could then
attempt to triple on the b-file with the queen behind the rooks
and look to invade. But this is far from easy: 30.E!b3 We7 31.We2
©g6 32 J:l:lb2 and so on.

29.cxb6 :Sb7 30.VNc3 Y!fd7 31..icS

White dominates; the black rooks are too passive.

31...:Sa6 32..id4 :Sa8 33.Y!fcS :Sa6 34.©g3!

The white king joins the attack!

34...�a8 35.1:k l ©e8?

The last mistake. Necessary was 35 ...h4+! 36.©f2 (36.©xh4? E\h8+


37.©g3 Wd8! 38.©h2 Wh4+) 36...g3+ 37.©e2 ©e8 and the fight
continues.

36.hxg4 h4+

36...hxg4 37.�hl is curtains and 36 .. .fxg4 37.:!!hl is not much


different.

37.©xh4 Wh7+ 38.©g3 :Sc8 39.gS Wh5 40.Wd6

40.WxaS was fine as well.

40... ©f7 41.:Sxc6 Wg4+ 42.©f2 Wh4+ 43.©e2 Wg4+ 44.©el Wh4+
45.©e2 Wg4+ 46.@d2 Wxg2+ 47.©c3 !:ixc6+ 48.Wxc6 !:ie7 49.b7 Wf1
50.©b2! We2+ 51.©a3 Wd3+ 52..ic3 Wb1 53 ..ib2

The 'bad' bishop secured the white king in the end! And in
general it was proved to be 1nuch 1nore valuable than the black
rook...

1-0
Well, if the bad bishop can prevail so easily, then it might be
a good thought to exchange it as soon as is possible!
A bit of a strange thought indeed, but let's have a look at the
next two games, which might change your approach!
The ex-\!Vorld Cha1npion Bobby Fischer was an expert in
handling the bishop. He has played many beautiful ga1nes and
his contribution to the 'handling theory' is enonnous.
But you have to keep in 1nind that, although he was fond of
bishops, he also knew what to do with the knights! The next
example is good proof:

This is another well-known position fro1n a game of the great


Robert Fischer.
22.qJXd7+!

'Exchanging' (transforming) advantages is a quite common


feature in modern chess ga1nes. It is true that White had
a powerful knight on cs and the decision to exchange it for the
(relatively bad) d7-bishop vvas not easy at all, but nevertheless it
was the correct one, as now White's minor piece is much
stronger than Black's. White has a much healthier pawn
structure (Black has weak and isolated a- and ct-pawns) and the
presence ofpa,Nns on both flanks nearly always favours the
bishop. One should not forget that the black a-pawn will be
a permanent target of the "'rhite bishop, as Black cannot push it
to as; White's reply then with bS (ifhe cannot play bxaS winning
a pa\l\rn) will give him a strong passed pawn.

22...E!Xd7 23.!kl

Adding the occupation of the c -file to his advantages.

23..J�d6

Or 23 ...d4 24.:!:1:c4 :1:!ad8 25.a3±

24.EIC7

Penetrating to the 7th rank is also nearly always correct.

The alternative was 24...ti:Je8 25.�b7 �c8 26.l!?f2 ti:Jc7 27.@e3±

25.E!e2 g6 26.@f2!

White needs all his pieces for the final assault! The king is an
important piece and we should always think about how to make
it work more effectively.

26...hS 27.f4 h4

27...ti:Jb6 28J:1ee7 �f6 29.g3± is not an improve1nent.

28.@f3 f5 29.@e3
29...d4+

What else? If 29...ti:Jf6 30 .�d4 li:Je4 31.�ec2 and \,Vhite is in full


control over the entire board.

30.�d2 ti:Jb6

Or 30 ...ti:Jf6 31.ic4! lbe4+ 32.�d3 �ad8 33.a3 and Black has run
out of useful moves. The harmonious co-ordination of the white
forces is extraordinary.

31.�ee7 lbd5 32.�f7+ �e8 33.�b7 lbxb4 34.i.c4

The text 1nove was enough to force Black to resign, but there
was also a mate starting with 34.:§.h7! A famous and ,,vell-known
example, which can teach us to think outside of the box,
so1nething that matures the trainee and allow hi1n to climb the
mountain!

1-0

o Goetsche Frank
■ Grivas Efstratios
Dortmund 1991 •

17...<!bxd3!

A seemingly irrational exchange of the excellently placed es­


knight for the restricted d3-bishop. Black simplifies the position
by exchanging pieces, obtains the advantage of the bishop pair
and prepares to launch an attack (by ...ll�a4 and ...id4) in case of
the inferior 18.cxd3. Thus the e4-pawn is further weakened.

18JNxd3 �ae8 19 .�hfl �xfl 20.:Sxfl Wa4! 21.b3 VNd4!

Offering another exchange. White must play ,,vith great care so


as not to lose material.

22..icl .if7?

More black pieces will contribute to the pressure on e4 (rook on


e8, bishop on g6).

23.�f4 .ig6 24.�fS hfS! 25.Wxd4 Axd4 26.exfS Af6

With his last few moves Black exchanged two clear strategic
advantages (bishop pair, isolated e-pawn) for a 1nore decisive
one, the possession of the open e fi
- le, through which he will
invade the enemy lines. The limited material complicates White's
defensive task, as he cannot control all possible entry points (,e2,
el). The position can be considered won for Black.
Such instances of transformation of advantages are quite
common in 1nodern chess. Knowledge of all the strategic
elements and their correct application in practice allow for
several such operations. Naturally, experience also has its say!

27.�fl �e2 28.g3

No salvation '1Vas offered by 28.g4 !.1h2 29.gS .tes 30.f6 gxf6


31.gxf6 <j;,f7 32.!.1f3 Elhl!

2 8...�h2 29.h4 �g2 30.i.f4 hS!

Immobilising the white kingside pawns. The activation of the


black king will prove decisive.

31.a4 as 32.<;!;icl <;!;if7 33.<;!;idl


33....ieS!

The final detail. White ,,vill either lose material or allow Black
a passed e-pawn, a much more active king and possession of the
7th rank; these are obvious advantages that suffice for victory.

34..ixeS dxeS 35J!f3 b6

White resigned in view of 36.�c3 cs 37 Jtd3 �f6 38.B'.d6+ �xf5


39.J%xb6 J%xg3 40.�bS gS! 41.hxgS h4.

0-1

CONCLUSION

The definition of the bad bishop in practice is a difficult task.


Keeping a cool and objective head is a primary precondition to
understand \o\rhat is bad and what is good - and obviously you
1nustn't be carried away by general conclusions.
The real bad bishop is harmless; the 'bad' bishop can bite!
THE CAPABLANCA MANOEUVRE
This is one of the 1neans of trying to counter the 'Queen's Gambit
Declined' (QGD) minority attack, which was first used by the
great Jose Raul Capablanca during his World Championship
match with Alexander Alekhine.
This plan still occurs in games played today and represents
a major weapon in the defending side's general arsenal of ideas.
J.R.Capablanca's re1narkable intuition led him to understand
that in the 'QGD - Exchange Variation' pawn structure
formation, the very best place for a black knight is on the d6-
square. From here it not only helps defend against the minority
attack (b4-b5) but it is ready to hop into either c4 or e4 at the
right moment.
Additionally the knight can be used to support an exchange of
the light-squared bishops with ...i.fS (White's bishop presumably
standing on d3).
This is one of Black's major themes in this structural formation
because it makes b 4 b - 5 even harder for \,Vhite to achieve and
may also help to expose the c4-square.
Well, before we go on, it is good to knov.r some basic things
about the life of the great Maestro:
Jose Raul Capablanca y Graupera (19 November 1888 - 8
March 1942) was a Cuban chess player who was \,Vorld Chess
Champion from 1921 to 1927. A chess prodigy, he is considered
by many as one of the greatest players of all time, widely
renowned for his exceptional endgame skill and speed of play.
Born in Havana, he beat Cuban champion Juan Corzo in
a match at the age of 13 years. His victory over Frank Marshall in
a match in 1909 earned him an invitation to the 1911 San
Sebastian tournament, which he won ahead of players such as
Akiba Rubinstein, Aron Nimzowitsch and Siegbert Tarrasch.
During the next several years, J.R.Capablanca had a strong
series of tournament results. After several unsuccessful attempts
to arrange a 111atch with the then World Champion Emanuel
Lasker, J.R.Capablanca finally won the title from E.Lasker in
1921. J.R.Capablanca vvas undefeated for 8 years from February
1 0 , 1916 to March 21, 1924, a period which included the World
Championship match with E.Lasker.
J.R.Capablanca lost the title in 1927 to Alexander Alekhine, who
had never beaten him before the match. Follo,.ving unsuccessful
attempts to arrange a return 1natch over many years, relations
between them became bitter.
J.R.Capablanca continued his excellent tournament results in
this period but ,.vithdrew from serious chess in 1931. He made
a comeback in 1934, with some good results, but also showed
sy1nptoms of high blood pressure. He died in 1942 of 'a cerebral
hemorrhage provoked by hypertension'.
J.R.Capablanca excelled in simple positions and endgames;
Bobby Fischer described hiln as possessing a 'real light touch'. He
could play tactical chess when necessary, and had good defensive
technique.
He wrote several chess books during his career, of which Chess
Fundamentals was regarded by Mikhail Botvinnik as the best
chess book ever written.
J.R. Capablanca preferred to not present detailed analysis but
focused on critical moments in a game. His style of chess was
influential in the play of future World Cha1npions Bobby Fischer
and Anatoly Karpov.
Here is the historic game:

□ Alekhine Alexander
■ Capablanca Jose Raul
Buenos Aires 1927

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3 . t"tJf3 �d7 4.�c3 t"tJgf6 5 ..ig5 .ie7 6.e3 0-0 7.!k1 c6
8.Wc2 a6 9.a3 h6 10..ih4 �e8 11.cxd5 exd5 12.�d3 �h5 13.�xe7
�xe7 14.0-0 t"tJhf6 15.h3
It v,as all the way back in 1927 when the great Capa first
introduced this very important idea:

15 ...<t:le8! 16.<t:le2 <t:l d6

This is a really superb post for the knight, as it's now very
difficult for White to achieve any of his desired pawn levers (b4-
b5 or e3-e4). The ga1ne now sees steady simplification after
which neither side has much to play for.

17.<t:lg3 lbf8 18.lbe5 f6

Black can afford this dangerous-looking 1nove as White cannot


really benefit from the holes around the black king.

19.<t:lg6 lbxg6 20.hg6 .ie6 21.lbe2 Wd7 22.lbf4


22...AfS!

Of course. The exchange of the light-squared bishops helps


Black to better control the valuable c4-square. As previously
mentioned, another point behind having the knight on d6 is that
it is often able to support this exchange.

23.Ax!S �xfS

23...ltJxfS is playable but Black is satisfied with the draw.

24.�xfS qlxfS 25.qld3 qld6

In an equal position both sides decided to call it a day.

½-½

No real attention was paid to the Capa's manoeuvre; the game


thought to be a well -played one and that was all...
The usual 'suspect', the 'Soviet School', took over and
understood the importance of the 1nanoeuvre for the QGD pawn
structure (or Carlsbad as it is sometilnes called) and started
implementing it often:

□ Bobotsov Milko
■ Petrosian Tigran
Lugano 1 968

1.d4 llbf6 2.c4 e6 3.llbf3 dS 4 .cxd!S exdS 5.e£Jc3 c6 6 ..igS .ie 7 7J�fc2
g68.e3 .ifS 9 ..id3 hd3 10.'Wxd3 llbbd7

Black has little to complain about with his opening outcome; in


general he scores well from this position.

11 i
. .h6

Another try is 11.0 -0 0 -0 12.h3 fl:e8 13.i.f4 .if8 14.tbeS ig7 15.�h2
tZ:ixeS 16.heS ti:le4 17.hg7 �xg7 18.ti:ixe4 fl:xe4 19.b4 a6 20.a4
Wd6 21.bS cs 22.dxcS WxcS 23.bxa6 El:xa6 24.:i�fbl fl:axa4 25.�xa4
:i!xa4 26JXxb7 d4 27.exd4 Wcl+ 28.�h2 Wf4+ 29.Wg3 Wxg3+
30 .�xg3 fl:xd4 31.�f3 �c4 32.�g3 !!:d4 33.�f3 Z!c4 34.�g3 !!:d4 ½ ½ -
Bu,X-Wei,Y Wuxi 2016.

11...tbg4 12 ..if4 0-0 13.0 -0 �e8 14.h3 e£Jgf615.llbe5 e£Jb6 16..ig5


<tie41 7..ixe7 'Wxe718.'Wc2 e£Jd6!

Black preserves his valuable knight and places it directly on d6.


19.�a4 �bc4!

The good centralised white knight should be exchanged and not


the edge one!

Black's strategy has triumphed; he has no problems at all and he


can start thinking of his kingside activity.

22.�act YNg5 23.YNdt h5 24.s!.>ht �e7!

A good plan: Black will double rooks on the e fi


- le or on his 2nd
rank, preparing a well-tilned invasion.

29...gS 30 .li:ih2 Wg6 was more accurate.

30.�h2 �e8 31.s!.>gt �e4 32.YNf3 We6!

Black would also be in the driver's seat after 32...Wxf3 33.�xf3


g s, but there is no reason to exchange queens, as then his attack
would lack steam.
33...gS!

A good tactical shot.

34.VNxhS fS! 35.Elel g4 36.hxg4 fxg4 37.f3?!

Losing quickly, but even after 37.Wih4 g3 38.fxg3 lt::ixg3 39.ElcZ


Wg6 40J;!f2 lt::ie4 41.Etfe2 !l:ee7! Black's attack is strong.

37...gxf3 38.lt::ixf3

38.Wxf3 l'!f8 39.WeZ lt:lg3 40.Widl Wih6-+

38...Elh7 39.WeS Wc8! 40.'�f4 Elf8 41.WeS �fS

and White resigned, as his queen is lost.

0-1

The importance of preserving a knight (and the queen in most


cases) on the board can be seen in the following game:

o Andersson Ulf
■ Atalik Suat
Kusadasi2006

1.ti:if3 dS 2.d4 lt::if6 3.c4 e6 4.l'llc3 c6 5.cxdS exdS 6.�gs �e7 7.Wc2
g6 8.e3 �fS 9.�d3 hd3 10.Wxd3 lt::ibd7 11.0-0 0-0 12.:Sabl as
13.Wc2 Ele8 14.a3 tob6 153 Da4?!
This move looks really bad - and it has to be bad. White has to
opt for 15.lDeS lDfd7 16. .ixe7 �xe7 17.lDxd7 :E:xd7 18.lt'.'Ja4 lt'.'Jc8!oo, as
in Kaposztas,M-Szalai,K Hungary 20 07.

15....!bxa4 16.Wxa4

16....!be4! 17.he7 :Sxe7

Black is ready to place his knight on d6 and then try his chances
on both sides.

18.vti'c2 a4 19. .!bd2 .!bxcl2?!

Of course there v.ras no point to this exchange, as the white


knight has no real prospects. 19 ...lt'.'id6 20 J!bel Wd7=+ was the
correct follow-up.

20.�xd2 �as 21.�c3! �xc3 22.bxc3 bS 23 J!fe1 f5 24.@ft :Sf8


25.@e2

The endgame is equal and neither side can do much.

25...@f7

Or 25 ...f4 26.@d3 f3 27.g3=

26.@d3 @e6 27.h4 @cl6 28.g3 h6 29.:Shl :Sfe8 30.:Sbet :Sc8 31J�b1
©e6 32.:Sb2 @d6 33.E(bbt :Sce8 34.:Sbet :Sc8 35.:Sbt :Sees
½-½

The next tv.ro games are an even more vivid demonstration of


Black's strategic the1nes.
Black exchanges the light-squared bishops in the opening and
with the knight on d6 effectively stymies any hope that White
might have had of playing b4-b5.
The knight later plays a decisive role in both Black's kingside
pawn advance and an eventual harvest of White's queenside
pawns (or in the attack).

o Nikolic Predrag
■ Kramnik Vladimir
Monte Carlo 1 998

1.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.tZ'Jf3 dS 4.tZ'Jc3 c6 S.cxdS exdS 6..igS .ie7 7.e3
.ifS 8..id3 .ixd3 9.'%Vxd3 tZ'Jbd7 10.0-0 0-0 11.�abl as 12.a3 �e4
13..ixe7 '%Vxe7 14.b4

A typical 1ninority attack for which Black see1ns to be fully


prepared.

14...bS!

A black knight is prepared to safely enter the c4-square sooner­


o r -later.

15.Wc2 axb4 16.axb4 tZ'Jd6!


Avoiding future exchanges which would ease White's position.
The d6-knight is a much more useful piece than any of its
opposing knights.
17J�b3 lbb6 18.q)e5 l:!fc8 19.lbd3 q)bc4 20.q)c5 l:!e8 21.h3 g6
22.!k1 !:!:a7!

Black prepares the full occupation of the a-file (or not?). His
active pieces and plans secure the advantage.
23.Wi'd1 hS 24.�h1 Wi'gS 25.e:bb1

It's quite clear that something went wrong for White in the
middlega1ne. He succeeded neither in his minority attack, v.,rhich
Black managed to properly halt, nor in a central break. Black's
reactions were excellent and, as a result, he has taken over the
important a-file and has placed his knights on excellent central
squares. Black has a great advantage, but no position can be won
just by sitting back and waiting - a typical mistake that we see
in a lot of games. Having achieved a huge advantage only means
that we have the better chances of winning, but not that we have
already won! Black must form a plan to convert his huge
advantage.

25 ...e:ae7!?

Ot course 25 ...�ea8 is the 1nove that 99.99% ot all serious chess


players ,,vould choose but Kramnik belongs to the other 0.01 %
minority, which consists of the absolute top genii! He judged that
he could not 'expect' much from the a-file and that the real target
is the white king, so he chose to transfer his forces tovvards him.
Doubling rooks on the e-file and sacrificing a knight on e3 was
seriously considered by Kra1nnik, although this is hardly
a standard plan in such positions. A povverful plan which will
break down White's defence.
26.�al lbfS

Now the threat of ...lt:ixe3 becomes very real!

There vvas no reason to prepare the next sac further. \,Vhite's


position falls apart as Black's activity is too powerful. This game
is highly instructional, as it shows how the 'logical imagination•·
of a strong GM converts an unquestionable positional advantage
into a full point on the scorecard, without 'sitting on his hands'
and waiting for the fruits to fall. It is of great importance to
shake the tree well!

..,.
-E�•­

�-
� .t.

�"·
m ■ 9
"t o
9,,
'.'•';'
-
t:,
m
· ,,,,, .�
"...-�
- '��
= ---" �
"".?,_,
;�!"'- •�

27...ltJcxe3! 28.fxe3 �xe3 29.l'!. f2

There ,...,as no real alternative: 29.WdZ Wh4 30.'.E:aal ltJg3+ 31.lt>hZ


liJe2 32.li:Jxez :fuce2 33.Wdl fl8e3-+
29...Wh4

Co1nbining the attack ,,vith threats of material gains; the weak


white pawns (d4, b4) can fall apart.
30.VNd2

White could try 30 .<;i;/gl although after 30 ...ti:!xd4 (30 ...�el+


31.Wxel �el+ 32.�xel Wxd4=+) 31.Wd2 t2:if5 32.t2:ie2 Wf6 Black
would be in the driver's seat anyway.

30...lDxd4

Also possible was 30 ...Wxd4 31.Wxd4 t2:ixd4 32.<;i;/gl (32.�d2 t2:if5


33.<;i;/gl h4=+) 32...ti::lfS 33.�f4 h4=+ but there is no point to
exchanging queens when in attack.

31.�cfl?

31.t2:id3? t2:ib3-+ was not a real alternative, but White had to opt
for 31.<;i;/gl ti::ifS 32.t2:ie2 Wf6, transposing to the line mentioned
above on White's 30th move.

31...t2:if5! 32.furfS

Making Black's task easier. More practical chances were to be


found in 32.<;i;/gl Wxb4 33.t2:ixd5 WxcS 34.t2:if6+ <;i;/g7 35.tllxe8+ �xe8
or in 32.�f4 WgS! 33.<;i;/gl lXxh3, although White's position would
be objectively lost in both cases.

32...gxfS 33.lbdl

Or 33.tlld3 Wg3! 34Jl:dl �d3 35.Wxd3 '.9.el +-+

33...�el 34.<;i;/gl �8e2! 35.VNc3 :S xdl 0-1

□ Portisch Lajos
■ Kasparov Garry
Skelleftea 1989

1.d4 d5 2.<tlf3 lbf6 3.c4 e6 4.cxdlS exdS 5.<tlc3 c6 6.Wc2 <tla6 7.a3
.!iJc7 8..tgs g6 9.e3 .tf5 10..td3 .txd3 11.VNxd3 .te 7 12.0-0 0-0 13.b4
.!iJe4 14..tf4 <tixc3
15JNxc3?!

White should definitely take out Black's remaining knight via


15.ixc7 "?Nxc7 16."?Nxc3= Probably he missed Black's clever
sixteenth move.

15 ... .id6 16.hd6 �bS!

Very clever. No,,v Black's knight gets to the ideal square and it
becomes much easier for him to advance on the kingside than it
is for White to make progress on the other flank.

17."?Nb3 �xd6 18.a4 a6

A clear 1nistake would be 18... aS?! 19.bS! cxbS 20."?NxdS!oo.

The knight will be driven away from here via ...f7-f6. 19.g3
might have been a better plan, intending to reinforce White's
king position ,,vith 'bf3-h4-g2. It would have been very difficult
for Black to make progress after that, but of course he would be
the only one to have chances.

19...�e8 20.�fel "?NgS 21.h3?!

21.g3 was better here too, not least because Black's


breakthrough may co1ne via ...f7-f5-f4.

21. ..�g7 22."?Nc2 �e6 23.�acl �ae8 24.Wbl


And here 24.Wdl was better, keeping the queen in contact with
the kingside.

24...VNhS! 25.Wb3

Black should be quite satisfied by the opening outcome and his


middlegame prospects. White seems to have no active plan at his
disposal, as his minority attack cannot progress. As a result of
this, Black's hands on the kingside are free and as his pieces are
well-placed, his kingside pawns must start rolling. This can be
done best by the ...f6, ...gs and ...hS structural formation.

25...f6 26.�d3

It seems that White could put up a 1nore stubborn defence after


26.tbf3 gS 27.l2:'ih2 but this is not the case after 27 ... fS!+

26...g5 27.Wdl Wg6!

Of course! Black's queen will prove to be more useful than its


counterpart.

28.Wc2 �6e7! 29.!!edl

fvlaybe White had to try 29.tbcS ,ivhen Black should callnly


retreat with 29...Wf7 (29 ... Wxc2 30.fl:xc2 fS 31.lt:ld3 f4 32.ti:leS fxe3
33.fxe3 li:Jf7 34.ltixf7 i>xf7 35.bS!=+ or 29 ...fS 30.ti:ld3 f4 31.lt:leS=+
should only help 'Nhite) 30.li:Jd3 hS, when the attack will grow
strong.
29...hS 30.�bl

After 30.liJel, Black would again avoid the exchange of queens


with 30...�h6! in order to maintain his chances against White's
king.

30...h4 31.�c2 g4 32.�f4?

This loses. \,Vhite's best try V1ras 32.hxg4 Wxg4 33.l1Jf4 after which
33...@h6 34.l!?h2 �g8 gives Black very dangerous attacking
chances, but nothing that's crystal clear.

32...�xc2

Novv Black accepts the queen exchange, as he has a clear


winning continuation to follow.

33.�xc2 g3! 34.�d3

34.fxg3 is powerfully met by 34...tbfS!-+

34...l!?h6 35.l!?ft \!?gs 36.�e2?!

In time-trouble White's resistance crumbles and we see the d6-


knight make a decisive entrance. 36.:!;(e2 was best, though Black
could then play 36 ...liJe4 37.f3 l1Jd6 intending 38...liJc4.

36..J-Dc4! 37.�cc3 �b2 38.�d2 �xa4

The first pawn falls. "vith 1nore to follow.


39.�b 3 �b6 40.<tlgl

Or 40.fxg3 ltlc4-+

40...�c4 41.-!i::if3+ @h5 42J:!dd3 a5! 43.bxaS :Sa8 44.Eldl Elxa5


45.�el b5 46.:Se2 :Sal+ 47.Elel �,ea7 48.fxg3 �xel+

48...hxg3 \A/ould also have been good.

49.@xel �al+ 50.@e2 hxg3 51.<tlel �a2+ 52.@dl Eld2+ 53.@cl Ele2
54.@dl �xe3 55.Elxe3 �xe3+ 56.*eZ <tlf5 57.<tlc2 -!i::ih 4 58.�b4

58.4?fl *gS 59.ti:ib4 -..!Jf4 60.�xc6 *e4-+ \A/ould see Black's king
make a decisive entrance.

58 ...�xg2 59.*f3 <tlh4+ 60.*xg3 <tlf5+ 61.*f4 <tixd4 62.@e3 �f5+


0-1

Of course, Black is not ah"lays in the driver's seat - but at least


he can't complain about the opening outco1ne!

□ Wang Yue
■ Carlsen Magnus
Dresden 2008

1.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.�c3 �b4 4.�c2 d5 5.cxd5 exd5 6.�g5 h6


7 .�xf6 Wxf6 8.<tlf3 0-0 9.e3 .if5 10.�d3 hd3 11.Wxd3 c6 12.0-0
<tld7 13.a3 �xc3 14.Wxc3 �b6
As already said, the 'QGD-Carlsbad' structure \>Vith only knights
on the board is considered comfortable for Black. The present
game doesn't change that evaluation but sheds light on some
niceties.

15.�es WfS 16.�fct f6 17.tt:ld3 tt:lc4 18.�c5 tt:ld6 19.Wc2!

The exchange of the queens is essential for White's defence and


by it he keeps an equal game.

19...Wxc2

In my opinion, Black should seriously consider 19 ...WhSoo.

20.�xc2 �ae8 21.g3 gs

This move creates an object of attack for White ( h 2 h


- 4). 21... hS!?
= was the main alternative.

22.@g2 @g7 23.a4 �e7 24.�hl @g6 25.:Sc3 hS 26.h4 :Sh8

26...g4!? maintains an equal game as the transfer of White's


knight to f4 is harmless.

27.�ccl

27.hxgS!? fxgS 28.�d3 @f6oo.

27...�hh7 28.:Sh2 �fS?!

28...g4 was still possible, ,,vith a co1npletely dead position.

29.hxgs fxgs 30.tt:ld3 g4

No,,v the situation is completely different: the white knight has


the es-square, and Black's hS-pa\>vn is ,,veak.

31.�chl @gS 32. li:lf4 !t:Jg7

32 ...h4? 33.gxh4+ :1!xh4 34.1�xh4 �xh4+ 35.:a.xh4!+-


33.b4!

The 'two weaknesses rule'! White can be active on both sides of


the board and this fact guarantees hiln the advantage.

33... a6 34.b5 axb5 35.axb5 �h6 36.�al ll:lf5 37.�a8 h4!?

37..J!.g7+= is possible but the text move gi-ves White a see1ningly


attractive possibility.

38. gxh4+

38.�g8+ :r:!g7 39.a'.xg7+ 0.xg7 40 .l;lxh4 a'.xh4 41.gxh4+ @xh4


42.bxc6 bxc6 43.ti:lg6+ @gS 44.ti:'ieS is hardly enough for victory,
e.g. after 44 ... lZ'lhS 4S.0.xc6 �fS but \,Vhite could have considered
it.

38...ll:lxh4+ 39.:Sxh4!?

A 'brilliant move' but Black miraculously holds his ground.


Therefore 39.@fl+= may have been better.

39...©xh4

The alternative 39...a'.xh4!? 40 .l;g8+ @fS 41.0.g6 a'.hh7 42.0.xe7+


�xe7 43.bxc6 bxc6 44.@g3 looks bad but after the active 44.. J:!.c7!
4S.l;lxg4 cs 46.E'.f4+ @e6 47.dxcS �cs Black should hold.

40.�g8
40.bxc6 bxc6 41.'.gg8 %ta7oo.

40..lU7
. 41 .f3

41.bxc6 !l:xc6! (41 ...bxc6? 42.f3 !+ -) 42.�g6+ @hS 43.tt:ieS '.gf5


44.tbxc6 bxc6=

41...:Sxf442.exf4cxhS!

Again accurate, as 42 ...gxf3+? 43.@xf3 should be lost for Black:


43...cxbS 44.fS b4 45.@f4 b3 46.!l:gl.

43 :S
. xg4+

43.fxg4 fla6! 44.fS (44.@f3 %ta3+ 45.@e2 b4= ) 44...b4 45.@f3 !l:al !
46JJh8+ @gS 47.'.ghS+ @f6 48.�h6+ @gS 49.'.gg6+ @h4 50.@f4 rlfl+
51.@eS bS! 52.'.gb6 @xg4 53.f6 @gS=

43 ..@hS
. 44.:SgS+ @h445.�g7!

45.gxdS?! '.gb6!

45 ..@hS
. 46.:Sxb7:Sa647.�xbS @h4!

48.:Sb2

48.!!xdS fla2+ 49.@fl @g3 50.fS @xf3 51.@el @e4= or 48.@f2 fla2+
49.@e3 !l:a3+ 50.@e2 fla2+ 51.@d3 !l:a3+ 52.@c2 (52.@d2 @g3 53.fS
@xf3=) 52 ...!l:xf3 53.�xdS @g4 54.!l:dS @fS! 55.dS @e4 56.d6 @dS=
48 ... �a4 49J�d2 @hS

Despite two extra pawns, White can't strengthen his position.

S0.@g3 �b4 51.�dl Ela4 52.@h3 Ela3 53.�hl Eld3 54.@g3+ @g6
55.Elh4 �d2 56.Elg4+ @f6 57.fS ½ ½
-

o Artemiev Vladislav
■ lnarkiev Ernesto
Sochi 2015

1.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.�f3 dS 4.�c3 �bd7 5.cxdS exdS 6..tf4 c6 7.e3
�hS 8.�gs �e7 9.he7 Wxe7 10.�e2

10... g6!

Probably best; the knight is heading to d6 via g7-f5.

11.�d2 �g7 12.a3 0-0 13.b4 a6 14.0-0 �fS 15.Wcl �b6 16.Wb2
�d6

Black has completed his usual plan, but \,Vhite also stands fine
as many 1ninor pieces are still on the board.

17.a4 �e6 18.Elfcl fS !

Starting his own activity on the kingside.


19.bS looks natural. Black would opt for 19...cxbS 20.axbS aSoo.

19...VNf6 20.aS

White changes his strategy, ailning to play on the dark squares.


First he blocks the queenside and then he will r e -inforce the eS­
square.

20...lbd7 21.f4! gs 22.lbf3 h6?!

22... gxf4 23.exf4 lbe4oo.

23.lbeS @h8 24.�a4!

White now stands better and Black should organise his defence.

24...�g8

25..id3?!

25.t2:ic5 �g7 26.if3!+=

25...�g7 26.�e2 We7 27.�fl �f6 28.�cs �ag8 29.Wbl .ic8 30.Wel
We8 31.Wg3 Vfle7 32..ic2 �h7 33.Vflh3 We8 34..id3 We7 35.Wg3 Vfle8
36.VNh3 Vfle7 37.Wg3 :Shg7 38.Wh3 :Sh7 39.<!lhl We8 40.@gl

White couldn't find anything attractive to improve his position


and he called it a day.

½-½
CONCLUSION

So the 1nain characteristics of this manoeuvre (taking into


account the stronger side as vVhite and the defending side as
Black) are:
l. The defending side places his knight on the d6/d3=square,
1naking the n1inority attack \•vith b4-b5/... b5-b4 harder.
2. The defending side should preserve the major pieces (queen
& rooks), exchanging all other minor pieces if possible.
3. The defending side can launch an attack on the kingside,
using his pawn structure. This is better done with the pawns
placed on f 6 -g5-h5, not weakening the es-square.
4. The best reaction for the stronger side is a well-timed e4
break in the centre.
THE FOREPOST
The strategic element of the forepost is directly related to those
of the open file and tl1e outpost.
From this one can deduce the actual definition of the term
(which was introduced into English-language chess literature in
my book series 'Chess College' - Gambit 2006), i.e. an outpost on
an open file, on which we can place a minor piece.
But what is the use of the forepost? Why is it so important?
With the use of the forepost we achieve the blocking of a file
that we are not immediately able to control. Behind the forepost
we can double our rooks or manoeuvre the1n with complete
freedo1n.
At an appropriate moment the forepost can be removed,
allowing our rooks to spring into action. If necessary, the file can
be blocked again in the same way.
The piece occupying the forepost 1nay simultaneously be able to
create threats, so that the opponent is unable to fulfil all
defensive requirements of his position and allo"v the invasion of
our rooks.
In general, the combination of an open file, a forepost and an
outpost is a significant strategic advantage in itself and may
easily suffice for victory.
.Especially, a forepost deep in the opponent's camp can create
1nany 1nore difficulties for him, as he does not have enough
space for manoeuvres at his disposal.
In certain rare cases the forepost may be used on diagonals that
need to be blocked, utilising the same 1nechanism.
We will start our examination with a forepost deep in the
opponent's ca1np, on a7 (h7) and even on some neighbouring
square!
Example 1 0

This is the main example, describing the concept.

1.�a7!

Unexpectedly, White conquers the a fi- le by temporarily


blocking it on a square deep inside Black's camp; Black can do
nothing about it.

1...eifs 2.l:'l:a6 :Sfc8 3.:Sca1 es 4 ..icS fu{a6 SJ!xa6

White won without much trouble; the a -file and his chances to
win are fairly increased.

10
-

Well, the constructed example is nice, but what about the real
world? We do not really know when this concept was firstly
implemented, but we can take a good look at the next game for
the FIDE World Championship (Candidates):

□ Spassky Boris
■ Karpov Anatoly
Leningrad 1 974 •

31...f4
White already occupies the a-file (the only open one), but Black's
rooks are not so badly placed and even pressing down the c-file.

32..ia7!

This is the first tilne that this concept was used between such
strong players.
32...gbb7

33.Wel!

White is targetil1g the b6-square, so his queen must be


transferred to the gl-a7 diagonal.

33... Wd8 34.Wf2 �c8 35.�a6 .if6!


Precise defence; Black tries to kick the vvhite queen away from
this diagonal.

36..ib6 We7

Black could even go for 36...ih4!? 37.hd8 ixf2+ 38.@xf2 !l:xd8


39J:l:a7+=

37.:Sa7 :Scb8 38.:Sxb7 :Sxb7

39.*fl!

Preserving the queen on the important diagonal.

39....ih4 40.Wgl iog7 41.:Sa7?!

There is no point in exchanging the rook that controls the only


open file on the board. White could preserve a small, but lasting
advantage with the natural 41.:aas lt:)f6 42.iaS+=

41...:Sxa7 42 .ixa7
. Wd8 43.Wb6 Wc7 44.Wxc7 lt:)xc7

The position is now equal and very close to the draw.

45..ib8 lLJe8 46.lLJcl .id8! 47..ia7 .ia5 48.c4 bxc4 49.hc4 iof7
50.lLJb3 .ic7 51..if2 gs 52 .iel
. h5 53.lLJcl lLJf6 54 .lLJ d3 iog6 55 .ia6
.
g4 56.hxg4 hxg4 57.liJb2 liJh7 58.liJc4 lLJg5 59 . @f2 @f6 60 ..ib4 4:lf7
½-½
Not long afterwards, in the Nice Olympiad, a classical and very
well-kno\o\rn game was played:

o Karpov Anatoly
■ Unzicker Wolfgang
Nice 1974

23...�rl&

A.Karpov was probably 'inspired' by the previous ga1ne...

24..ia7!

Now every white piece has the opportunity to take up natural


and strong positions. At the sa1ne time, Black's normal 'blood
circulation' has been disrupted, and the guilty party in this
instance is the knight on b7.

24...<!be8 25..ic2

Here comes the rooks' doubling on the a-file.


25...<!bc7 26.l::!eal Vlfe7 27 ..ibl .ie8

The 1nain problem of Black's cramped position is that he cannot


exchange any pieces and he has not enough space for their
regrouping, so he to just sit in a passive position, waiting for
White to show his hand.

28.<!be2 �d8
White's spatial advantage is great but Black's position is solid and
defensible. So, White uses the rule of the two weaknesses: as he
cannot ,.vin (at least directly) on the queenside, he opens
a second front on the kingside. And that's the power of the
spatial advantage, as pieces can be transferred to either side in
no time.

29.6bh2! !J.g7 30.f4 f6

Bleak is 30...exf4 31.6bxf4 tz:ib7 (31. ..ih6? 32.tz:ixg6!+-) 32.tbf3±

31.fS! gS?!

Black should refrain fro1n creating ne,,v weaknesses on the


kingside. He should strongly think of 31 ...id7 32.lilfl± or 31...gxfS
32.exfS lilfl 33.lilfl±

32.!J.c2!

The bishop will be transferred to the dl-hS diagonal.

32...�f7 33.6bg3 6bb7

33...hS looks like the only move, but in fact helps White to
completely open the kingside: 34.idl h4 35.lcigfl ie8 36.g3 hxg3
37.tbxg3 ifl 38.tz:if3 �f8 39.h4 gxh4 40.lbxh4+-

34.�d1 h6

On principle, this 1nove should not be 1nade until it is forced.


The weakening of g6 only accelerates Black's demise.

35..ihS!

After the exchange of the light-squared bishops, the light


squares will be rather weak and White will invade via them.

35...We8 36.Wdl! q)d8

37.�a3

As Black has no useful move, White takes his time to 1nake the
first time-control (move 40) and will only then decide how to
finish the job!

37...@f8 38.�la2 @g8 39.q)g4! @f8 40.q)e3 @g8 41..ixf7+ €ixf7

If 41. ..Wxf7 then 42.WhS WxhS 43.loxhS @f7 44..ib6! and the end
is near...

42.VBhS €id8

42...'2lh8 keeps Lhe while queeu away fruu1 g6, bul ca1111ul :;ave
the ga1ne: 43.log4 WxhS 44.loxhS @f7 45.ib6+-

43.VNg6! @f8 44.q)h5

Black resigned as the threats of log4 and �6 cannot be met. The


threat of moving the a7-bishop has been a continual nightmare
for Black!
1-0

The concept was seen in another top ga1ne, this time for the FIDE
World Cha1npionship of 1985:

o Kasparov Garry
■ Karpov Anatoly
Moscow 1985

White holds a s1nall advantage, but it is not easy to propose


a good plan, or is it not so?
27..ih7!
A reflection of the a 7 -square; the idea remains the same.
27...�f8?!

Too passive. Black should opt for 27.. JJ.g7 28.ifS E!gg8 29.lt'.lg3+=

28.�h6! ttlc7 29.tZ'Jg3 0.f7 30.l:!h2 ttle6 31.tZ'Jd3!

Correctly preserving the knight, as Black lacks any other serious


plan than exchanging so1ne pieces.
31... tZ'Jg7 32.!kht <!?e7 33.0.f2

The 'early' 33.i.g6?! E!xh2+ 34.l;\xh2 ghs gives \!Vhite nothing.


33...�d8

34..ifS? !

There is no point in this. As in the previous game, \,Vhite should


open a second front: 34.@c3! .ie6 35.e4 lt:ld6 36.a4±

34...�xh2 35.�xh2 <tlxfS 36.gxfS :Sh8! 37.:Sxh8 0.xh8

Now White has lost most of his advantage and the game steers
towards the safe waters of a draw.
38.e4 0.f7 39.0.g4 <tld6! 40.0.e3 dxe4 41.fxe4 b6 42.b4?!
White's last inaccuracy. He should opt for 42.eS lt:lf7 (42...lt:le8?!
43.0.e4±) 43.lt:lg4 fxeS 44.dxeS cs 45.@d3+=

42....ia6! 43.�g4 tZ:lbS 44.@d3 <tla3+

White has nothing better than 45.@d2 lt:lb5 46.@d3 0.a3+.


½-½

o Tu Hoang Thong
■ Komliakov Viktor
Moscow 1994

23....ie7

It seems that Black should be more-or-.less OK, but the truth is


that White stands better.

24..ia6!

Not exactly the a7-square but one very near to it; the idea
remains the same.
24... !k7 25.l:!aS :Sca7 26.�hal

Both sides have done their duty and doubled their rooks on the
a fi - le. White k:eeps tlie advantage, as anytime lie 1noves his a6-
bishop Black will be obliged to hand \1\/hite a passed pawn after
.. .:!:(xaS as White will reply bxaS.

26...@e8?

A blunder. Black had to go for 26 ...id8 27.*e2 ltJc4 28.ib7! �xas


29.ixa8 !1:xa8 30.bxaS <.!le8 31.e4+

27.@e2?

27.ibS! would win: 27...!1:xaS 28.ixc6+ @d8 29.bxa5+-

27...�b8 28.�bS!

28...�xaS?

Black blunders again. More stubborn was 28...!l:c7 29.t2::ia6 !1:cc8


3 0 .id3 (30 .t2::ixb8? cxbS+) 30 ....½xd3+ 31.*xd3 !l:b7 32.t2::ic5±

29.�xc6+ @d8 30.�xaS

30.bxaS was good as well.

30....!bc8 31.bS

White wins.
31...�d6?! 32.lbd7! 1-0

One of most important features in this concept is the well-timed


removal of the forepost.
It must be effective and at least allow us to achieve our main
target; the domination of the open file.
The ideal situation is for it to be removed v.rith a lethal double
attack, as in the next two games:

o Trifunovic Petar
■ Aaron Manuel
Beverwijk 1962 O

31.�g8!

A double attack on h7 and d8 serves up a violent solution -


Black resigned.
1-0

oVon Popiel lgnatz


■ Marco Georg
Monte Carlo 1 902 O

In a way the d4-bishop is a kind of forepost, but obviously a bad


one.
36J�d1?

A blunder. 36.lDh4! was winning for White: 36...ct?h7 37.lDf3 Wes


38.eS++-
But after the text move Black resigned! He could turn the tables
here with a double threat after 36....igl ! which reveals one of the
main powers of the forepost: the perfect time to re1nove it!
1-0

But of course things are not often so ideal! Sometimes we need to


go for complications:

o Jussupow Artur
■ Karpov Anatoly
London 1989

29 ... �d7
The forepost has worked well and White has been able to double
rooks on the open d -file.

30.�xf7!?

A radical decision! White based his idea on the long-term pin on


the d-file.

30...<.!?xf7

Possible was 30...Wxf7 although after 31.Wih3 ,,vith attacking


ideas such as l.':l'.d6-g6 and !i:1d6, \I\Thite seems to have the upper
hand.

31.Y9d2

The ending after 31.Wh3 is unclear: 31 ...We6 32.Wxe6+ i>xe6


33.l.':l'.d6+ �e7 34J�xh6 tZ'lf8 35.:!%xd8 @xd8 36.!i:xa6 bxc4 37.bxc4
rj;,e7. White prefers to continue the pinning.

31...i>eS 32.VliaS bxc4?!

32...�c6! 33.cxbS axbS 34.WixbSoo.

33.bxc4? !

33Jld6! with ideas like Wxa6 and :!!e6 or simply !l:xh6, ,,vas much
better.

33...�cc8?! 34.Wia4!
34...!k7?

Black had to opt for 34...�b8! when still nothing is clear after
35.'1Wc6 �b6 36.V!Jc7 '1We6 37.l�dS.

35.Wxa6 :Sb8 36.Wg6+ @f8?!

Hastening the end, but also losing was 36...i>d8 37.Elf3 i>c8
38.�f7 or 36...V!Jf7 37.Wxf7+ ©xf7 38.:i:i:xd7+ £lxd7 39Jl:xd7+.

37.!U3+ 1-0

□so Wesley
■ Shirov Alexei
Malmo 2011

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.<!bf3 <tlf6 4.e3 e6 5.b3 <tlbd7 6 ..id3 .id6 7..ib2
V!Je7 8.<tleS .ib4+ 9.�d2 �xeS 10.dxeS <tld7 11.a3 .iaS 12.0-0 f6
13.<!bf3 .ic7 14.exf6 <tixf6 15.<tleS 0-0 16. f4 .id7 17J!f3 .ie8 18.Wc2
hes 19.heS <!be4 20..ixe4 dxe4 21.�ffl .tg6
White stands somehow better, as he has much the better bishop.

22 .c S!

An excellent move, preparing the d 6 f- orepost!

22 ...�fd8 23..td6 YNf7 24.gadl

Now Black has to accept passivity and White can prepare plans
both in the centre and on the kingside, while the queenside also
co1nes to mind!

24..iJS
. 25.�d4 �d7 26.h3! hS

Black cannot allovv a future g4 advance.

27.�fdl Wig6 28.©h2 h4

It is understandable that Black wants to 'kill' the advance g4


forever, but his pawn on h4 will be a permanent weakness.
Natural is 28 ...E!ad8 29.�f2, when White can prepare �h4 and
:!!gl, with g4 to come.

29 .YNf2 WihS 30.�1d2 ©h7?

Allowing a tactical shot. Black had to wait with something like


30 ..J!ad8, when White can continue with 31.a4, trying to creatre
plans on the queenside as well!
31.�eS!

The forepost is removed with effect!

31...l'.U7

Black's resources are limited: 31..1l:xd4 32.%1:xd4 %1:f8 33.fl:d7 Elf7


34.Elxf7 Vlixf7 35.Vlixh4++- or 31...1:'!dS 32.!;(b4! V!Jf7 (32..J:1xd2
33.Vlixd2 V!Jf7 34.Vliel!+-) 33J:1xd5 exdS 34.V!Jxh4++-

32.�d7 �af8 33.E!2d6 @g8 34.�xf7 �xf7 35.!:!:d8+ @h7

White has improved his position a lot, as he fully controls the


only open file and his rook has already broken into Black's camp.
Now new weaknesses should be created.

36.a4 a6 37.Vliel i.g6 38.@gl i.fS 39.Vlif2 �g6

White's 1nain idea is to attack the black king with something like
Vlid2, !!b8 and 'md8. But some preparations must be made first, as
Black might have ...Vfig6-g3 and ....ixh3, as counterplay. Anyway
Black cannot improve his position and White is in no hurry.

40.@fl �fS 41.�el fi.e8 42.Wd2 �g6 43J':lb8 Vfig3+

43..J(f8 44.�fl WhS 45.©gl Wg6 46.We2!+-

44.Wf2!

White wins material and the game!

44....ihS 4S.�xb7 !:!:f7 46 . Vfixg3 hxg3 47.�b6 �d7 48.fi.d6!

The forepost returns, depriving Black of any counterplay along


the d-file.

48...e s 49.fxes :Sf7 S0.e6 �f2 S1.hg3 !:!:xg2 S2 . fi.f4 gs 53.@fl S:c2
S4.fi.xg5 1':lxcs SS.h4 �g6 S6.e7 �fS S 7.�b8 �es S8 . �f8+ �g4
S9.�g2

After 59 ....ig6 60 Jl:f4+ �hS 61.@g3 cS (61 ...l'!dS 62.l'!f8) 62JJ:f8


Black is in zugzv,ang.

1-0

□ Sasikiran Krishnan
■Yu Vangyi
Tabriz 201 4

1.d4 lbf6 2.c4 e6 3.lbf3 b6 4 .a3 Aa6 S.Wb3 <tlc6 6.Wc2 lba5 7.e4
�b7 8.<tlc3 cs 9.dS exdS 10.exdS fi.e7 11.fi.d3 fi.a6 12.b3 0-0 13.0-0
<tlb7 14.�el <tld6 15.M4 �e8 16.h3 fi.f8
Black has a passive position and lacks space, so he wants to
relieve the pressure somewhat by exchanging off pieces ...

17.i.eS!

But White is having none of it - a forepost is created!

17...g6 18J!e3 l!i:Jh5 19J!ae1 /!i:Jg7 20.g4!

White is probably winning already. Not only does he have more


space and a clear attack, but Black's bishop and rook cannot
come to the defence meaning he will be outnumbered when the
sho,A/do\lvn comes.

20...i.b7 21.Wd2 a6 22.a4 fS

Tin1e for the forepost to be removed!

23.i.xd6! l3xe3 24.Wxe3 hd6 25.Wh6!


With the threat �gs.

25....ie7 26.gxf5! <tixfS 27.�xfS gxf5

27....if8 28.�f4 gxfS 29.WxfS h6 30.� e4+-

28.<.!lh1! �f6

There is no defence. If 28 ...Wf8 White finishes off the game with


the beautiful 29Ji:g1+ <.!lh8 30.lDeS!+-

29.�gl+ <.!lh8 30.<tlh4! 1-0

Well done by now and I think that the concept has been fully
understood.
But I am always of the opinion that a trainer or an author
should back his opinion and prove that he knows his subjects.
And what better vvay than the implementation of the subject in
his/her ovvn games?
So, five games of mine will follow. Although I wasn't successful
in all of them, I ,,vas able to improve by learning from my
mistakes and keeping an objective mind.

o Komljenovic Davor
■ Grivas Efstratios
Munich 1987

1.d4 fS 2.6bf3 <tif6 3.g3 g6 4..ig2 .ig7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 7.lillc3 We8
8.dS 6ba6 9.�e3

A ne,,v continuation that doesn't trouble Black. White's main


options in this position are 9.�d4 and 9.:iabl.

9 ...c6 10.l:!b1

10.a'.cl and 10.V?ib3 are also possible, and more in the spirit of
the position.

10....id7 11.§d2?!
It beco1nes evident that White is not operating on the basis of
a specific plan but is just making some 'simple' moves. This
approach cannot bring any positive results.

11 ...lbg4! 12 .id4
. .ih6!

This had escaped White's attention. The next fe\lv moves are
forced.

13.lbgs cs 14.�e3 <t:ixe3 1s:�xe3 <t:ic7

Black has obtained the bishop pair and his position strikes one as
more harmonious in general. His immediate plan is to start play
on the queenside. The only plan apparently available to White is
the advance e4, v,rhich requires a lot of preparatory 1noves (h4,
f4, Wd3); still, it is his only decent plan.

16 . b4?
As mentioned above, this cannot be the right idea. With this
move White further v,reakens his dark squares and offers Black
the semi-open c-file, with a ready-made target on it (the c4-
pawn).

16...cxb4 17.gxb4 b6 18.Wf4 �a6 19.:Sbb1 :Sc8!

20.�bS

The only vvay to avoid 1naterial losses. Black had of course


foreseen this continuation and now proceeds to transform his
advantage: the strategic advantages of the semi-open file and the
backward c-pawn are exchanged for an open file and a better
minor piece (knight vs bishop).

20....ixbS! 21.cxbs �cs 22.Wh4 .ixgs 23.Wxgs

Black is better, mainly thanks to his excellent knight. On cs, this


knight fulfils an important task, that of Black's forepost on the c-
title. Black is planning to firstly improve the place1nent ot his
queen and then to double his rooks on the c -file, awaiting
a suitable moment to 1nove the c s -knight and occupy the file.
White's greatest cause for headache is the passivity of his
position.

23...V9f7! 24J'.{b4 Wf6! 25.Wd2

After 25.Wxf6 exf6! Black would also enjoy possession of the


semi-open e-file. On the other hand, the black queen is now
do1ninantly placed on the long al-h8 diagonal, controlling
several important squares.
25 ..!k7!
. 26J�c4?

White fails to vvithstand the pressure and blunders badly. The


correct move-order was 26.%1:cl !'!fc8 27Jl:bc4, when Black stands
better but the conversion of his advantage into victory will
require some more hard work. So, now the lethal effect of the
forepost comes, revealing a double attack, which seals the
victory. It is true that strategy is crowned by tactics...

26...�e4!

The forepost 1noves vvith direct effect!


27.V9c2 l3xc4 28.V9xc4<tid2 0-1
o Grivas Efstratios
■ Genov Petar
lraklion 1993

1.d4 tbf6 2.c4 e6 3.tbf3 b6 4.g3 .ia6 5.Wb3 c6?!

5 ...lZ\c6 remains the main line.

6 ..igS!

If you want to become a good player you shouldn't play so early


on automatic pilot! The 'natural' 6.i.g2?! dS would fully justify
Black's last move. Since the hl-a8 diagonal will be blocked after
...dS, the white bishop will have no targ,ets on g2.
6 ...dS

7.cxdS! cxdS

7... exdS?! 8..ixf6! Wxf6 9.tllc3 <!t:id7 10..ig2 followed by 0-0, :!:!fel
and e4 promises a clear advantage to White.

8.e3! .ixft 9.<.!lxft .ie7 10.<.!lg2 tbc6!

The only continuation so as not to lose control of the c -file. After


10...t2:ibd7?1 11.:i:!cl 0-0 12.tllc3 a6 13.t2:ia4 Black's problems ,.vould
be insoluble. Another bad move, handing a tempo to White, is
10...h6?1 11.hf6 hf6 12.:1:!cl 0-0 13.tllc3 Wd7 14Jl:c2 t2:ic6 15.Wa4
:!:!fc8 16.l]acl :!:!c 7 17.tbxdS WxdS 18.!!xc6 Wd7 19.Wc2 !i:ac8 20.!i:xc7
1-0 Grivas,E-Tsouktakos,N Athens 2004.
11.l:'kl <llaS 12.\WbS+! \Wd7 13.\Wa6!

Threatening 14.lt:leS!

13...�d6 14 . .txf6 gxf6 15.�c3 Wb7 16.\We2

The exchange of queens would significantly relieve Black


(16.Wxb7? tZ:ixb7 17.tZ:lbS �d7!), who no,.v faces a multitude of
problems: not only must he cater for the c-file, but also for his
kingside weaknesses. This is the concept of the 'Rule of the Two
Weaknesses'.

16...0-0 17.l:'k2!

What we practically have here is a case of a forepost (the c3-


knight) very close to the ,.vhite camp. White ,.vill double rooks on
the c-file and at the same tilne develop an initiative on the flank
\-vhere the exposed black king resides. At the appropriate
moment the forepost ,.vill be removed in such a way that Black
\-Vill be unable to defend against all of White's threats. A silnple
plan, but the execution is difficult!

17...l'.3ac8 18J!ac1 �g7 19.'lle1!

A strong move, aimed at the transfer of the knight(s) to the f+


square; fa·om there, in combi11ation with the approach of the
white queen (QhS) they will be able to create direct threats
against the black king.
19...fS 20.�d3 �c4?!

This appears strong, but in reality only serves to complicate


Black's defensive task, as this knight works as a second forepost
for White. Better is 20...t2:lc6 and ...t2:ie7, assigning the knight to the
defence of the king.

21.WhS h6 22.lbe2! Wa6?

With the false impression of im1ninent material gain, thanks to


the double threat 23...Wixa2 and 23...t2:ixe3+. The defensive
22 ...Wd7 was essential.

23....ie7

23...Wxa2 is no improvement: 24.Wh4! �c7 25.t2:lh5+ l!;ih7 26.t2:if6+


\!;lg? 27.t2:lf4 �fc8 (27...hf4 28.gxf4 intending Z!gl and \!;lh3+)
28.*hl! SN..e7 29.g4!

24.b3 �d6 25..!beS! .igS

This move loses in spectacular fashion, but in any event there


was no salvation. Black could not free his position by 25...1:'!.xcZ
26.E'.xc2 !1:c8 in viev,r of 27..!bxf7 lbxf7 (27..J1xc2 28.Wg6+ *f8
29..!bxe6+ @e8 30.tZ:leS+!) 28.�g6+ *f8 (28...@h8 29.1:'!.xc8+ Wxc8
30.�xf7) 29.lbxe6+ *e8 30.a:c7, winning for White.

26..!bxe6+ ! !

White's great positional superiority creates the basic


requirements for tactical combinations!

26...fxe6 27.Elc7+ @h8 28.Wg6

Black cannot avoid mate.

1-0

In the next game the forepost is not a central one but a mere
'edge' one. But it still helps!

o Grivas Efstratios
■ Kolani Leonard
Ankara 1993

1.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.f3 g6 4..ie3 c6 5.c4 �bd7 6.�c3 a6?! 7.a4!
Black has already developed the queen's knight to d7, so he does
not have the standard manoeuvre ...lt:i a 6 b
- 4 at his disposal after
7 ... as.

7 ...was 8 . i.d3 i.g 7 9.�ge2 o-o 10 . 0-0 es

11 .�bl!

Preparing to meet 11. .. cs ,,vith 12.b41 cxb4 13.'LJaZ. Silnilarly,


after ll. ..exd4 12.b41 White ,,vould have the edge.

1 1 ...Wc7 12.Wd2 �e8 13.b4b6 14.bS

Fighting for control of the dS-square. Black has no choice.

14...axbS 1S .axbS cS 16 d
. S

After 16.dxeS lt:ixeS! Black has adequate counterplay.

16 ..i.
. b717J�a1 �f8?!

The direct 17 ..Jl:xal 18J:!xal l!a8 seems better. White would


retain a plus thanks to his space advantage and kingside
attacking potential, but Black would in turn have partly got rid of
his problems on the a fi - le.

18 W
. b2 �6d7 19.g3 f6 20.�a4!
White us,es the a4-knight as a forepost. His spatial superiority
allows him to develop an initiative on both sides of the board
but, for this venture to prove successful, he must refrain from
exchanging pieces; this \vould help Black, who is suffering from
a lack of space.

20...�a7 21.�a2 �ea8 22J!fa1 Wb8 23.kd2

As Black can only \Vait, White improves the placement of his


pieces in preparation for the f4 break, which anyway is the only
really promising idea at his disposal.

23...@f7 24.Wc2 ci>g8 25.6bc1 Wd8 26.kft @f7 27.kh3 Wb8 28.ttid3
Wd8 29.l::!et kc8 30.�eat kb7 31.�ft kc8 32.f4

After several preparatory moves, White proceeds according to


plan.

32...ci>g8 33.�a3 @h8 34.fxeS

Another good option was 34.fS gs 35.i.g4! intending h4, �g2 and
%!hl.

34...6bxe5 35.ttixeS dxeS

This move offers White a passed ct-pawn, but 35 ...fxeS 36.ixc8


fucc8 37Jl:af3 is too dangerous to contemplate.

36..ixc8 :Sxc8 37.�fat �ca8 38.Wb3 ttid7


If Black could place his knight on d6 he wouldn't face any real
problems. However, things are not so simple yet.

39.lbc3!

The tilne has co1ne to re1nove the forepost, since White has,
thanks to his purposeful strategy, increased his advantage (in
addition to his spatial plus, better bishop and forepost, he now
also has a protected passed pawn). Naturally, the white rooks will
not manage to infiltrate into the enemy camp as they will be
pro1nptly exchanged. However,. the occupation of the a -file by the
white queen will prove just as significant, in combination ,,vith
the advance of the ,,vhite pawns on the kingside (minority
attack!) this will further increase White's plus.

39...�xa3 40.�xa3 �xa3 41.Y{{xa3 �b8 42.g4!

Preventing a possible pawn-break with .. .fS, ,,vhile also clearing


the g3-square for the knight, which can help the advance of the
kingside pawns. Indeed, the advances gs and h 4 -h5 are an
integral part of White's plan, since he cannot hope to win only on
one flank, but needs to combine play on both.

42 ...h6 43.lt:ie2 l!?h7 44.q)g3 lt:if8 45.�a6 �d7 46.h4!


White now threatens 47.hS, gaining the fS-square for his knight.
White's superiority would be clear, perhaps even decisive, but
Black anyway had to sit tight. The sacrifice he now employs
offers nothing of value and hence should have been avoided.

46...fS? 47.gxfS <tlf6 48.fxg6+ �xg6 49.�g2 �h7 50.VNa3!

The queen's mission on the a-file has ended, as new and n1ore
significant inroads have been created on the kingside.

50...'lle8 51.'llfS <tld6 52.VNg3 Wf8 53.'llxd6 VNxd6 54.hS Wf6 55.Wg4
�g8 56..iel Wd8 57..ig3 Wf6 58.WfS WxfS 59.exfS e4

1-0

The next tvvo games you certainly can't call a success for the
author!

o Grivas Efstratios
■ Gabriel Christian
Budapest 1 994

1.d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.tt:lf3 <tlf6 4.tt:lc3 .te7 5.i.gS 0-0 6.e3 h6 7..th4 b6
8..id3 dxc4

This move is not considered the 1nost accurate. The


continuation 8...fil)7 9.0-0 'llbd7 10.WeZ 'lle4 lends a dynamic
character to the position.

9..txc4 .tb7 10.0-0 'llbd7 11.�e2


11. ..lbe4

Black is trying to free his position by exchanges. Instead, the


premature 11. ..cS?! 12.J;;ffdl would be fraught with danger for
Black.

12.lbxe4! .ixe4

After the alternative 12 ...ixh4 13.lL!c3! if6 14.:ll:fdl Vlle7 15 ..ia6!


White is in the driving seat.

13..ig3! .id6 14.:Sfcl1 hg3 15.hxg3 Wfe7 16.:Sac1 :Sfd8 17..icl3!

Both sides have played useful moves, preparing for the eventual
...cs advance.

17... .ixd3 18.:Sxcl3 c5 19.:Sdc3! tllf6?

Black should refrain fro1n releasing the tension and wait with
19...as 20.WfbS E'.ab8.
20.dxc5! e£Je4 21.!:!:c4 e£Jxc5 22.e£Jd4! VNf8 23.b4! e£Jd7 24.�c6 :Se8

White's superiority is obvious. He controls the c-file while the c6-


knight (the forepost) radiates po,.ver. Moreover, the black pieces
are huddled on the back rank, devoid of any prospects.

25.e4 e£Jf6 26.�dl ?!

There was no reason for this move. Much better was 26.a4! or
even 26.E!4c3 and !;!a3.

26...b5!? 27.:Sc5 a6

28.VNc2?!

White has strayed fro1n the right path. After 28.a4! bxa4 29.VNc4
he would retain his advantage.

28... @h8 29..!be5 @g8 30.e£Jc6 @h8 31.a3 S:ec8 32.e£Je5?!


From the 26th 1nove onwards \,Vhite has been playing without
a particular plan for converting his superiority. Consequently, he
slowly ruins his position. 32.f3 and 33.�cl was necessary.

32...�xcS 33.bxcS �c8 34.c6 We7 35.�hl?!

White should of course continue with 35.f3! VJ!c7 36.Vl!c3, when


he retains the better chances, despite the childish mistakes
c01nmitted so far.

35...�g8! 36.a4 b4 37.Wc4 as 38.f4 Wc7 39.�d3 Wb6 40.�h2 h5


41.WbS Wc7 42J�d4

White could continue pressing for victory, but instead agreed to


a dravv, disappointed with his many 1nistakes.

o Nikolaidis loannis
■ Grivas Efstratios
Karditsa 1998

1.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 .tg7 4..tg2 0-0 5. � f3 d6 6.0-0 �c6 7.q:ic3 .tfS
8 ..tgs q:ie4??

A mediocre reaction to a rather 1nediocre line (8.igS). 8...h6


9.M6 .txf6 is preferable.

9.ti:ixe4 he4 10.d5 .txf3?


Black fails to understand the problems of the position. 10 ...lt:ib8
should be preferred.

11.exf3!

Intending to apply pressure on the semi-open e-file and the


backvvard e 7 -pawn in particular.

11 ..lbeS
. 12 .!kl b6?!

The ilnmediate 12...i.f6 is better. Black mistakenly feared


White's cs advance.

13 .�el .if614.h4!

Naturally, 14.�xf6? exf6 would im1nediately solve Black's


problems.

14...as 15.f4! �d7 16 .�e2!

Black's position is already lost. White threatens to double rooks


on the e f- ile and place his light-squared bishop on h3, while
Black is devoid of any substantial prospects.

16..lbcS
. 17..ih3 <JJg7 18.h5 h6

Ugly, but what else is there?

19 �
. 6+ exf6
20.Y!fd4!

If Black '"'ere given time to play 20.. .fS, shutting out the white
bishop, a great part of his difficulties would vanish.

20...ll:e8 21.ll:cel �xe2 22.�xe2 Y!ff8 23.hxg6 fxg6?

Black's only chance lay in 23 ..J�eS! 24.:axeS Y!fxe8 25.gxf7 47xf7,


retaining some survival chances despite the material deficit.

24.�e6!

The forepostl Now the black rook will be aimlessly moving to


and fro, \"lhile White will have all the time in the world to
organise his future plans.

Z4...�e8 zs.�e3 �e7 26.fS gs?

The final error. 26...gxfS 27.Y!ff4 47h8 was essential.


27.b3! We8 28.a3 €id7 29.�xd7! VNxd7 30 . �e6! !:!:f7

No better is 30 ..J:1xe6 31.fxe6 We7 32.g4! White will bring his


king to fS and then advance his queenside pa\ivns, \IVhile in the
meantime Black v,ill run out of useful 1noves.

31.VNdl! !!f8 32.We2! 1-0

Black resigned due to 32 ...E'.f7 33.VNhS! A very 'clean' game,


despite (or rather thanks to!) Black's mistakes, where several
strategic elements were encountered: open and semi-open files,
forepost and passed pawn!

CONCLUSION

The forepost is an important strategical concept, which is not


widely spread among low-rated players but vastly used by the
top.
It is important to understand and implement it properly. And
ahvays keep in mind that it is directly and strongly connected
with the concepts of the open file and the outpost.
THE HUNGARIAN KNIGHT-TOUR
One of the main advices of the experts is to not place your pieces
on the edge of the board.
Centralisation and initiative are a must in our days and chess
players are usually focused on these two assets.
I also believe in these assets but I do not feel ashamed to use
some edge squares for my pieces, if this is necessary for my
plans...
I have noticed some ga1nes where a knight is placed
temporarily on hl/h8, as a part of its route to 'more' central
squares!
Sometilnes this knight-tour is connected \IVith the g4/ ...g5
advance and pressure on the centre.
I named the concept 'The Hungarian Knight-Tour' mainly
because I primarily met it in Hungarian players' ga1nes!
But let's see what it is about after all:

o Lukacs Peter
■ Horvath Gyula
Budapest 1989 O

White should feel happy due to his more centralised pieces. But it
is essential to force the es advance, activating his rooks and his
knight as well. The not-so-\ivell-placed knight should be
transferred to a better square, namely c6 or e6.
29.g4!?

Preparing the knight-route to the d4-square via hl.

29...V!Ja6?

Black loses valuable time. He should also think of improving his


knight and this is better done by heading for the cs-square. So,
29...tbd7! was a must: 3O.lbhl E!c7 31.�g3 �cs 32.0ifS �d3 33.a:floo.
He obviously thought that his knight on b6 defends against the
es-advance, because of the pressure on the dS-pawn.

30.�hl V!Jc8 31.h3 �e8?!

Although Black has lost time with his queen, he should again
opt for placing his knight on cs: 31..J:!c 7 32.�g3 lt:\d7 33.li:ifS V!Ja6
34.lt:\e7+ @h8 35.lLJc6+=

32.lbg3 g6 33.tt:le2 V!Jd7 34.tt:ld4

Now Black is in trouble - the white knight makes the


difference...

34...�cc8 35 J!dl?

Here White could play 3S.f5! After 35 ... gS (3S... a6 36.fxg6 hxg6
37.!lfl V!Je7 38.lt:\e6±) 36.tbe6, and ideas as V!Jd4 and h4-�h3, he
would have a nearly decisive advantage.

35...tt:la4! 36.tt:lc6?!
Again '.in.fS! ti\r.S '.i7.ti\en w011lrl he preferahle. R11t White was
focused on the es-advance...

36...a6 37.YNd4 gfg

Nov.r everything has been prepared for the final assault,


so1nething quite c01n1non in modern players' ga1nes; something
that it is driven by the 'plan'!

38.eS! fxeS 39.fxeS dxeS?

The decisive 1nistake. Black should have opted for 39...�ce8!


40.e6 Wg7+=

40J�xeS?

After 40.ti.JxeS! Wdo 41.gS! the threat of ti.lg4 is difficult to be


met...

40...�xc6?

Panic! Black had to try to defend vvith 40...Elce8 41.!Edel f!XeS


42.WxeS±

41.dxc6 Wxc6 42.�e7 Wf6 43.Wxf6 �xf6 44.�d8+ :Sf8 4SJ!dd7

1-0

I was lucky to watch the 2nd example live, as I was present at the
2013 Tata Steel event:
□ Nikolic Predrag
■ Rapport Richard
Wijk aan Zee 2013 O
31.VNd2

Black's knight looks more-or-less OK, but still it lacks any good
attacking square. And passivity is not welcomed by the new
generation!

31. ..gS!?

After 31...*g7 32.gS! h6 33.lh4 Wb4 34J;1c2 chances would be


more-or-less equal.

32.!k2?!

The active 32.ti:ie4! should be best: 32 ...Wb4 (32...gxf4 33.exf4


Wb4 34.tbf6+ *g7 3S.ti:ihS+ ..t,fg 36.Wxb4 �b4 37.aS+=) 33.Wxb4
�b4 34.tbxgS tbxgS 3S.fxgS �xa4 36J%bl fla2! (36...E(b4?1 37.1;1al
�b6 38.*f2±) 37J1b6 as 38.:!!Xd6 a4 39.�d8+ *f7 40.�d7+ *g6
41.d6 ri:d2 42Jla7 *xgS 43.d7 hS 44.gxhS ©xhS 45.�fl a3 46:;f;>el
�d6= Note that if White wants to have a passed & protected pawn
with fS, then he would have· to live with an excellently-placed
black knight on es.

32...VNb4!

Now Black improves his queen before any further operations.


33.<.!lh2 Wc4 34.<.!lg2

34...lbh8!

The knight-tour begins...

35.<.!lf2 ti:lg6 36.ti:le2

White could think of 36.fxgS li:ieSoo.

36...Wxa4 37.�b2?!

White's time-trouble was a key-factor here, as he 1nissed his


chance with 37J:'!a2 Wi'c4 38.fxgS lbeS 39.li:if4oo.

37...gxf4 38.exf4?

Another grave 1nistake. Forced was 38J!xb3 Wxb3 39.exf4 Wi'xh3


40.Wb2! Wi'h4+ (40 ...Wi'xg4 41.Wb8+ <.!?f7 42.Wxd6) 41.<.!le3 Vfde7+
42.<.!lf3 aS=+

38...c4?

Returning the favour. 38...l:l:xh3! 39.:Sb8+ <.!?f7 40 J:!b7+ lbe7-+ was


rather easy...

39.fS?

Ping-pong time-trouble mistakes. 39.fucb3! seems to hold:


39...cxb3 40.fS! li:ieS 41.WgS+ �f7 42.WhS+=
39...c3!

Decisive - Black wins the white knight!

40.We3 cxb2 41.We6+ <J;;g7 42.fxg6 %1.b7-+

40...VNf4+ 41.<J;;el

41.Wxf4 !;lxb2+ 42.@g3 ti:Jxf4 43.@xf4 as-+

41 ...VNg3+ 42.<J;;dl �xc3 43 �


. b8+

43.fxg6 Wf3+ 44.We2 Whl + 45J�el �cl+-+

43...<J;;g7 44.�b7+ <J;;f6 4S.fxg6 Wf3+ 46.YNe2 Whl+

and White resigned due to 47.Wel WxdS+ 48.Wd2 Whl+ 49.Wel


:1:i.d3+ S0.<J;;c2 Wxel Sl.<J;;xd3 Wfl + 52.@d4 Wf2+ 53.�c3 Wf3+.

0-1
□ Ghaem Maghami Ehsan
■ Salem AR Saleh

. ■
Khanty-Mansiysk 2013 0
■ ■ �
.,:;;;
■ •
.\lll,�,�-� �-� ��,;.,
I
·.��....
-�!P.nn�-�•

.t. 'll .t.
,,,,�

- ��lb
.t. �

· - � �

■!:r,r•-,,
t:,

-
��

�■��
½ -�

t:,
-

• • • rm
vVhitc's spatial advantage is an ilnportant factor in this position,
as it deprives Black of any form of counterplay. But something
can still be improved!
31.it}hl! :SfS 32.lt}g3 it}e7!?

Black decided to sac the exchange, hoping for a good blockade


on the light squares. 32 ...E'lf7 33.h4± and hS wasn't too appealing
to hiln...
33.h4!?

33.€ixf5 exfS 34.�d2 lt:le6 v,ras Black's idea, although after 35.h4I
\!Vhite should win. But the Hungarian Knight looks too important
to exchange it for a rook...
33...<J;>g8 34.hS gxhS
Very well-played and decisive, as now the blockade on fS will be
broken.

35...YNbS

Black is without defence. Also easy was 35..J:!.f? 36.fS exfS


37.ti:igxfS lt:ixfS 38.lt:ixfS+-

36.VNxbS axb5 37.tohxfS toxfS 38.toxfS exfS 39.!kl toe6 40J!c6


c;fif7 41.:Sd6 .if8 42.:SxdS 1-0

□ lljin Artem
■ Wilschut Peter
Leiden 2013 O

It seems that Black's activity on the kingside is pro1nising, but in


reality it only weakens his position!

19.fxgS! hxg5 20.g4!

And now the Black centre '\Nill fall under heavy attack.

20...Wid7 21.gxfS hf5 22.tohl

A well-known idea, but here I would have opted for 22.'4?hl �6


23.�gl <4?h7 24.�afl We6 25.l;g3+=

22....ih3! 23.1:u2 We6?!


Black missed the active 23 ...lt:lg4I After 24.i:l:xf8+ i:l:xf8 25.�xe4
lt:lf6 26.�c2 �e6, \I\Thite cannot really afford to protect his extra
pawn: 27.lt:l f2 (27.id2? lt:lg4-+) 27 ... �xe3 28.�d3=

24.lbg3

The knight has completed its mission and now the black centre
is rather weak ...

24...ih6 25.:Sdl

Also good \A/as 25.aS bS 26.i.fl hfl 27J!.axf1 t2)g4 28.i:l:xf8+ i:l:xf8
29Jlxf8+ i.xf8 30 .cxbS cxbS 31. � xe4±

25...�ad8 26.�d2

\Nhite seems to be in no hurry with the dS-advance, but here it


was quite good: 26.dSI cxdS 27..ixf6 exf6 28.cxdS±

26...as

27..ifl?

A bad idea, losing the advantage. 27.d5! again was strong.

27 ....ig4?

And Black returns the favour! 27 ...hfl 28.Elxfl lbg4 was


unclear.
2 8..ig2

Nov.r the e4-pawn is lost...

2 8...lU7 29..!bxe4 lil xe4 30JNxe4 VNxe4 31..ixe4 .id7 32.�xf7 @xf7
33.cS g4 34.@f2 1-0

CONCLUSION

Obviously, dog1natic treatment should be forbidden! Our piec, es


should seek centralisation in general, but any square is good and
should be used for this purpose!
Ifwe keep this in 1nind, vve v.rill be able to find manoeuvres
such as tZ:lh1/h8, which in certain cases will improve our position.
THE ROYAL CENTRE
The centre is the most ilnportant part of the board, as it is a key­
stone to dominating and controlling the entire ga1ne.
A logical concept which we are trained in since our chess
childhood and vve try to ilnplement in our ga1nes, either fighting
to gain or to destroy it!
But what about the so-called Royal Centre? The centre which is
constructed by four central doubled e- and ct-pawns; a rare case
as nobody is willing to allo'\l\r his opponent to take this luxury!
Naturally, there are so1ne games where this concept was met -
and usually the weaker side was driven by a weak player!

o Alekhine Alexander
■ Betak Miroslav
Czechoslovakia 1925

A really impressive white centre which deprives Black of


mobility and active plans; this is exactly what the pov.rerful
centre does!
17.�h4 li:ld7

17...i.xgS wouldn't save Black, but nevertheless he had to try it:


18.lLixg6 hxg6 19 ..ixgS WxgS 20.:!!cl Wh4+ 21.l!?d2 We7 22.e6! fxe6
23.l;lxf8+ �xf8 24.dxe6 Wxe6 25.eS lLid7 26.'e¥f1 + �gs 27.Wg2+-
18.�f5
18.lllxg6 hxg6 19.e6+- looks stronger.

18... .ixfS 19.exfS �xeS

Desperation, but even 19 ...i.xgS 20.f6 hcl 21.Wxcl +- was


curtains.
20.dxeS WxdS 21.f6 WxeS 22.fxe7 Wxe7 23.i,d2 �ad8 24.Wc2 1-0

o Osieka Udo
■ Schienmann Bruno
Germany 1990

32.e4

A fine centre, but Black's attack is more dangerous!


32...lll2f3+?

32....tf3! \,vas decisive: 33.e6 lllxfl 34Jlxfl hg2 35.exf7+ @f8-+

33.�xf3?

After 33.gxf3 lt:ixf3+ 34.fuct3 hf3 35.Wb2, White would be three


pawns up but his stripped- bare king is a big obstacle to
overcome; Black is better.
33...�xf3+?
Concluding a series of silly moves! Good was 33...ixf3! 34.gxf3
lt:lxf3+ 35.@fl Whl+-+

34.gxf3 .txf3 35.Wh2?!

As mentioned beforehand, 35.Wb2 was the only move.

35...Wg4+ 36.@fl he4

The white centre is falling apart...

37.a3 .td3+?!

37... Wf3+! 38.@gl !l:a4-+

38.@f2 Wxd4+ 39.i.e3 Wxc4 40.d6 :Sxa3 41.Wg3 .tfS 42.Wf4 l3a2+
43.@gl Wc2 44.Wf2 Wc3! 45.i.d4 Wb4 46.We3 �d2 47.l3fl .th3

4 7..J;txd4! 48.:fucfS !l:dl+ 49.@f2 Wh4+ 50.Wg3 Wd4+ 51.We3 E'.d2+-+

48.l3f2 :Sxd4 49.Wxh3 l3g4+ 50.@fl Wbl+ 51.@e2 Wc2+ 52.@f3


We4# 0-1

o Skjoldan Benjamin
■ Minina Veronika
Malmo2003

27.e4
Of course Black is lost; his pieces are uncoordinated and the
white centre is impressive.

27 ...c6

Black has to try something. Of no help is the alternative 27.. .'�fdS


28.lbe3 lLJe8 29.tbc4±

28. d 6?!

The text blunders a pawn. Natural \lvas 28.lLJe3.

28 ..�e6
. ?!

Black had to try 28...ixd6, although he \"!ill lose after 29.h4 �hS
3 0 .�c3 ie7 31.dS.

29 d
. 5! cxd5 30.exd5 �c5 31.e6! fxe632.dxe6?!

32.'&c3 is mate in 8! But anY\"lay, White is winning.


32 ..lLJxe6
. 33.�xg5 �xg5 34.d7 �b8

34...:l!dS 35.:l!e8 �f7 36.E!xf7+-

35.l:'!e8 1-0

□ Piche Guy
■ Dumont Felix
Repentigny 2008

1.f4d5 2 e. 3 g63.�f3 .ig7 4.d4 lbf6 5.c4.if5 6.�c3 0-07.\Wb3 b6


8.cxd5lbe49.ic4 lbd7 10.<te5Axe5 11 .fxe5 e612.0-0lbxc3
13 .bxc3 �e8 14.e4exd5 15..ixd5.ie616.c4.ixd5 17.cxd5
Strong centre, space, dark-square weaknesses around the black
king; what else does White need to win?

17...VNh4 18.YNf3 f6

18..J:!f8 19..ia3+-

19.e6

19.exf6 was winning as well: 19..Ji:xe4 20.f7+ <J;;g7 21.ia3 lt:lf8


22.g3!+-

19...lt:lb8 20.g3! WhS 21.Wxf6 gs

21...lt:la6 22.Wf7+ <J;;h8 23.if4+-

22.YNf7+ ! Wxf7 23.exf7+ @f8 24.fxe8=W+ @xe8 25.i.xg5 lt:la6 26.a3


@d7 27.:Sf7+ @c8 28.:Sf8+ @b7 29.:Sxa8 @xa8 1-0

□ Fekete Albert
■ Egedi Istvan
Hungary 2008
In the endgame this centre is not so strong, as it can be
considered as a deficit of doubled, useless pawns! Here it is not
easy for White to create a passed pavvn, ,,vhile Black can think of
his tvvo majorities on either side of the board (a7-b6 vs a3 and h6-
g7 vs h2).

39...ggz 40.gct ©d7 41.e6+!

White has to be active, so he is obliged to 'destroy' his centre.


But by exchanging his two central pawns for the black c- and f ­
pavvns, he achieves two connected passed pav,rns!

41...fxe6 42.dxe6+ ©xe6 43J'!xc7 gs+ 44.©f3 !:ixh2 45.dS+ ©d6?

45...©eS! 46J:!e7+ ©d6 47J1e6+ ©d7 v,rould be unclear.

46.gc6+ ©d7 47 .gg6?

Passed pawns must be pushed! 47.eS !i:d2 48.e6+ ©e7 49.1:l:c7+


©f8 50 .©e4 ,,vould be curtains!

47...ght 48.©e3 ©e7 49.eS !:!:et+ 50.©d4 :Sdt+ 51.©e4 :Set+ 52.©fS
�f1+ 53.@g4 :Sgt+ 54.@f3 :Sf1+ 55.@g2
SS...lUS?

55..J!.el! 56.d6+ @d7 57Jag7+ �d8 58.:!i:g8+=

S6.d6+ @f7

56...@d7 57Jag7+ �c6 58Jac7+ @ds 59.d7+ ­

S7.e6+

Not bad, but 57.d7 ,,vas clearer.

S7...@ xg6 S8.d7 :SdS S9.e7 �xd7 60.e8W+ �f7 61.@g3 @ g7 62.WeS+
@h7 63.We6 @g7 64.We8 �f8 6S.YEeS+ @g6 66.Wd4 :Sf7 67.Wh8 hS
68.Wg8+ �g7 69.We6+ @h7 70.Wf6 @g8 71.Wh6 g4 72.WxhS @f8
73.WdS �c7? 74.Wd6+?

74.Wd8++-

74...�e7 7S.@ xg4 @e8 76.@fS :Sd7 77.Wc6 @d8 78.@e6 �c7
79.Wa8+ !:!:c8 80.WdS+?

80.Wb7 la:c7 81.WdS+ �e8 82.Wa8+ or 80.Wxa7 were easy wins.

80...@c7 81.WeS+ @b7 82.@d7 �cs 83.We4+ @b8 84.a4 �c7+


8S.@d6 �cs 86.We7 as 87.Wf7 @a8 88.We8+ �b7 89.We7+

White has a ,,vinning position but for some reason he agreed to


a drawl
½-½

D Dazj Andrea
■ Cocciaretto Marco
Porto Sant Elpidio 2008

31.d4

White stands better, although the weakness of the Vihite king


should not be underestimated.

31...�b8 32.�b4?

32.a4± was natural.

32...c3?

32...EtxbS was forced, although White remains on top: 33.Wf2


Wb3 34.e6 fxe6 35.dxe6 �e6 36.dS .ih3 37.eS E1xd5 38.e6 .ixe6
39J:lxe6 c3 40.!l:el c2 41.i.d2±

33.�xc3?!

33.We2! Wxe2 34J;(xe2 !l:xbS 35.�c3+-

33...�xb5 34.Wf2?

:Blundering a piece...

34...Wixc3

And Black won in 64 1noves.

35.V£fe3 Wic2 36.We2 Wic3 37.:!!dl e:b2 38.�d3 �bl+ 39.©f2 �fl+
40.Wixfl Wic2+ 41.We2 Wcl 42.Wel Wc2+ 43.e:dz Wc3 44.d6 .tg4
45.Wie3 Wcl 46.dS Whl 47.h4 Wh2+ 48.©fl .th3+ 49.©el Whl +
50.Wigl Wxgl+ 51.©e2 Wfl+ 52.<i>e3 Wgl+ 53.<i>d3 .tfl+ 54.©c3
Wxg3+ 55.©d4 Wxa3 56.d7 Wb4+ 57.©e3 Wc3+ 58.©f2 Wixd2+
59.©xfl Wf4+ 60.©gl Wg3+ 61.©f l Wxh4 62.e6 fxe6 63.dxe6 <i>f8
6 4.eS ©e7 0-1

1-0

□ Fizzotti Mario
■ Moroni Luca Jr
Robecchetto 2008

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.tof3 �f6 4.tbc3 .tb4 5. .tgs �c6 6.e3 .td7 7.cxd5
exdS 8.Wb3 hc3+ 9.bxc3 e:b8 10.hf6 Wxf6 11.Wxd5 We6
12.Wixe6+ he6 13.e4 �e7 14.dS .td7 15.�d3 tog6 16.0-0 0-0
17.e:fel e:fe8 18.tbd4 toes 19.�fl c6 20.f4 cs 21.fxeS cxd4 22.cxd4
Of course this case is easy, as White has the impressive centre
with two good pav,rns up and Black has no counterplay!
22...�e7 23.�acl .tg4 24.d6 :Sd7 25.h3 i.hS 26Jk7 �xc7 27.dxc7
E!c8 28.!kl ©f8 29.dS a6 30.d6 ©e8 31.i.c4 ©d7 32..tdS b5 33.i.b7

33.ic6+ ©e6 34.d7.

1-0

o Hoareau William
■ Stephan Victor
Aix les Bains 2009

1.d4 g6 2.g3 l£lf6 3..tg2 .tg7 4.l£lf3 o-o s.o-o d6 6.b3 es 7..tb2 e4
8.tt:ifd2 dS 9.c4 e3 10.fxe3 .th6 11.e4 l£lg4 12.cxd5 l£le3 13.Wcl
l£lxf1 14.Wxf1 l£ld.7 15.e5 l£lb6 16.e4

White has sacrificed an exchange, but this looks too little for
a position with such an impressive centre. Black must find an
active plan.

16...fS! 17.exf6?!

White is losing his advantage. Why not 17.�d3! fxe4 18.lllxe4


lllxdS 19.lllbc3±

17....ie3+ 18.©h1 VNxf6 19.VNxf6 �xf6 20.lllf1 .ih6 21.€lbd2 :Sf2


22..ic3 .id7 23.@g1 �ff8?!

Black must stay active. 23..J�af8 24.fl:el i.bS would lead to


unclear play.

24.�e1 :Sae8 2S.lllc4 !/i.g7 26.l!beS?!

26.eS! lllxc4 27.bxc4±

26...cS! 27.dxc6 hc6 28.�c4 Eld8 29.�xb6 axb6 30.eS �6


31..ib4 �fe8 32..ic3 bS 33..ixc6 bxc6 34.a4 b4 3S..ib2 �dS 36.©f2
cs 37.l!be3 .ixe3+ 38.lt>xe3 cxd4+ 39.hd4 Eled8 40.:Sd1

40...�xeS+!

Black is now fine. Tlhe ga1ne ended in a draw in 69 moves, after


some blunders...

41.@d3 �cs 42.@e4 �c2 43.h4 Ele2+ 44.@d3 �g2 4S.@c4 �xg3
46.aS :Sg4 47.a6 lt>f7 48.a7 @e6 49.@bS �xh4 S0. .ib6 �xd1 S1.a8�
:SclS+ S2.@a6 �f4 53.VNe8+ @f5 S4.�f7+ ©e4 SS.�xh7 l3f6 S6.�h4+
©e5 57.Wg3+ g,f5 58.Wf3+ ©e5 59.VNe2+ ©fS 60.<J?b7 gs 61.VNf3+
©e6 62.We4+ .\3e5 63.Wxb4 ©fS 64.�c7 .\3f7 65.Wid6 :See7 66.WidS+
©g6 67.Wc6+ ©h5 68.Whl+ ©g6 69.Wc6+ ©h5 ½-½

o Howell David
■ Nielsen Peter Heine
Amsterdam 2010

1.e4 es 2.�f3 .!llc6 3.�bS a6 4.hc6 dxc6 5.0- 0 ec,e7 6.�xeS Wid4
7.Wih5 g6 8.Wig5 �g7 9.�d3 fS 10.eS cs 11.b3 b6 12.�b2 Wig4
13.Wie3 t"ildS 14.Wiel f4 15.f3 Wigs 16.c4 .ifS 17.t"ilxcS bxcS 18.cxdS
.id3 19.t"ilc3 0-0 20.l?ie4 WifS 21.�xcS .ixfl 22.©xfl �ad8 23.We4
�fe8 24.d4 Wxe4 25.fxe4

Black is an exchange up but a 'position' down (!), as he has no


counterplay. For example: 25...as 26.tbe6 :Sd7 27.:Scl :See7 28.d6+-

1-0

D Tikkanen Hans
■Andreasson lngvar
Sweden 2012

1.c4 es 2.g3 t"ilc6 3.�g2 g6 4.�c3 �g7 5.e4 d6 6.tlige2 .ie6 7.�dS
t?ige7 8.0-0 0-0 9.h3 Wd7 10.©h2 .\3ae8 11.Wia4 f5 12.d3 �f7 13.�g5
�c8 14.Wb5 f4 15.gxf4 h6 16.�h4 �ef8 17.�g3 a6 18.Wib3 �d8
19.fxeS dxeS 20.f4 c6 21.fxeS .\3xf1 22.:Sxfl .\3xf1 23..ixfl cxdS
24.cxdS �f7 25.d4
Three pa,111ns for a piece for White, but here the pawns are worth
more, as they are central and dominating. It is obvious that at
some certain moment Black will have to return the piece for at
best two pawns...

25...gs 26.-!i:lc3 @h7 27.V9a4

27.ieZ! looks better: 27...hS (27...0,e7 28.V9b6±) 28.Wd1 Wes


29.Wc1 .ih6 30.if2±

27...V9e7?!

27...Wxa4! 28.0,xa4 ig6 29.id3 ti:Je7 offered more survival


chances.

28.V9c4 6bc6 29.e6 -!i:lb6?!

Good or bad, Black had to go for 29...he6 30.eS! (30.dxe6 hd4


31.ie2±30...if7 31.e6 .ixe6 32.dxe6 hd4 33.igZ±

30.V9c5! �xd4 31.Wxe7 -!i:lxe7 32.exf7 @g7 33..ic7?!

33.eS ! ti:JbxdS 34.e6+- ,111as lethal.

33...6bd7 34..ic4 6bc8?!

Black's last chance lay in 34...ti:Jg61 35.ib3 ieS+ 36.heS+ lLigxeS±

35.�e2 .ieS+ 36..ixeS+ -!i:lxeS 37..ihS �d6 38.@g3 bS 39.b4 �dxf7


40.@f2 1- 0
o Gombas Csongor
■ Meca Rares Stefan
Calimanesti 2016

1.c4 es 2.tl:ic3 tl:if6 3.e3 tl:ic6 4.g3 .tcs s..tg2 0-0 6.tl:ige2 d6 7.0-0
.tg4 8.d3 .ixe2 9.WxeZ .ib4 10..id2 hc3 ll.hc3 dS 12.�adl Vfle7
13.cxdS �b4 14.e4 tl:Jxa2 1S.f4 Wes+ 16.d4 .!ilxc3 17.bxc3 Vflb6
18.fxeS tl:Jd7

An ilnpressive and fully-supported centre! Black is plain lost!

19.e6

Much easier was 19.i.h3! ti:lxeS 20.!1:bl Wh6 21.iig2 lt:lg6


22J:'lxb7+-

19...fxe6 20.dxe6?

Why not 20.!Thll Was (20...Vfld6 21.eS V/Je7 22J!xf8+ li.'ixf8


23J:'lxb7+- ) 21.dxe6 li.'ib6 22.Wc2+-

20...Vflxe6 21.eS c6 22.i.e4 l:!xft+?

22...li.'ib6I 23 J!al ti:ldS 24J;J:xf8+ �xf8 25.hdS WxdS 26J!xa7 V/Jb3±


would allow Black to fight.

23.�xft bS 24.WhS?

24..ifS ! We8 25.We4 t2:.f8 26.e6+-


24...g6 25.Wh6 l3f8 26.l3xf8+ .!bxf8 27.Wf4 Wf7?

27...b4! 28.cxb4 Wc4=

28.�xc6

White was happy with a draw, as otherwise he would vvin with


28...Wb3 29.Wf3 Wbl + 30 .Wfl +-

½-½

CONCLUSION

The Royal Centre is not a joke! It gives full control over the board
and usually limits our opponent's counterplay to a minilnum.
It is a concept we would love to have but we shouldn't dare
allow it our opponent, although in chess nothing is absolute -
take things case by case!
THE SUPERF LUOUS KNIGHT
One of the most intriguing ideas that has actually been codified is
the brainchild of the Russian trainer, the late IM Mark Dvoretsky.
In quite a nu1nber of excellent editions and books, he discusses
positions in which one side conquers a key square (an outpost,
for instance) and is able to occupy it with a number of pieces.
Very often, he points out, a defender will more or less blindly
exchange at least one pair of pieces on that square, even though
he cannot contest it enough times to rid himself of all the pieces
which may eventually settle there. But the defender has an
alternative strategy which is often superior:
'If the square cannot be won back by 1neans of exchanges, then
one 1nay...forget about exchanges altogether (after all, only one of
the opponent's pieces will be able to occupy the 'important high
ground', and the others v.rill turn out to be, so to speak,
superfluous' -Mark Dvoretsky.
He called the 1nultiple claimants to a single outpost 'superfluous
pieces'.
Example 1
Suba Mihai
1991 0 e

White has a great square in the centre (dS), which is defended


and supported by pawns (c4 & e4) and cannot be attacked by the
opponent's pawns. Naturally, White would love to have one of his
pieces on this square. If there are two knights that want to get to
the square (c3 & dS), then only one will reach it, while the other
has to settle for a less-promising square. This piece (the c3-
knight) is called an 'extra' piece because it has to ,.vait for when
the other piece, which occupies this great square, 1noves or is
traded. M.Dvoretsky's concept is for the weaker side; not to allow
the trade of an 'extra' piece - to keep it out of play.
White to 1nove should play 1.ti:ixc7! Wxc7 2.tLJdS v.rith the clear
advantage of a dominating knight against a limited bishop and
automatic play on the queenside by b4, bxcS etc. Black to move
should avoid the exchange and n1ake the knight on c3
superfluous, e.g. 1...Ne6! keeping the game alive with good
counterchances on the kingside, according to M.Suba.
'Superfluous' may sound a bit fancy and 1nore common see1ns to
be the 'extra piece' (Lishnaya Figura' was the original article title
of M.Dvoretsky's work published back in 1981 in 64-
Shakhmatnoye Obozreniye) which refers to the same, basically:
having one great square for a piece but two pieces who would
like to be there.
As a result, one of these two pieces is extra. While its r.olleag11e
shines, the extra piece doesn't really have a good place where it
can be assigned a useful task.
For the opponent it is important to recognise this problem of the
other player and avoid exchanging the problem piece.
Of course the concept in question is not so easy to understand
and furthennore to implement.
But this is the 'fate' of a player that wishes to improve and climb
to the top; to deal with the difficult; to think outside the box...
To better understand the concept, let's see a game from a long
time ago ...

o Zukertort Johannes Hermann


■ Blackburne Joseph Henry
London 1883

1.c4 e6 2.e3 lilf6 3.0.f3 b6 4.�e2 .tb7 5 . 0 -0 d5 6.d4 �d6 7.lilc3 0-0
8.b3 lilbd7 9.�2 Wffe7 10.<!i:lb5 <!i:le4 11.<!i:lxd6 cxd6 12.�d2 �df6
13.f3?!

Here Vvhite could have understood the superfluous knight


theme and continued vvith the strange but fully-justified 13.lt:ibl!
By avoiding the exchange on d2, White intends to drive the
knight away from e4. The black f6-knight is superfluous and in
general the black knights are stepping all over each other after
the simple retreat 13.lbbl! Play might continue 13...lbd7 (13 ... eS?
14.f3 lt:igS 15.dxeS dxeS 16..ia3±) 14.f3 lt:ief6 15.lbc3t White has
1nore space, a healthier pawn .structure and a concrete plan to
continue with. This idea has already been pointed out by
A.Jussupow.

13...lbxd2 14.Wxd2 dxc4 15.�xc4 d5 16.�d3 Elfc8 17.Elae1 �c7


18.e4 �ac8 19.eS 6i:le8 20.f4 g6 21.�e3 f5 22.exf6 libxf6 23.fS lbe4
24.�xe4 dxe4 25.fxg6 �c2 26.gxh7+ @h8 27.dS+ es

28.Wb4! El8c5 29.Elf8+ @xh7 30.Wxe4+ @g7 31.�xeS+ @xf8


32.�g7+ @g8 33.Wxe7 1-0
o Savon Vladimir
■ Dvoretsky Mark
Odessa 1974

1.c4 g6 2.g3 !J.g7 3..ig2 d6 4.�c3 es 5.d3 �c6 6.e3 �f6 7.tz:lge2 0-0
8.0-0 .ie6 9.�dS Wd7

10.!'lbl was played in Ubilava,E-Dvoretsky,M Batumi 1969:


10...i.h3 11.tliec3 .ixg2 12.@xg2 lLJh5! 13.b4 f5 14.b5 lLJd8 15.l2:ie2 c6
16.bxc6 bxc6 17.Wa4 @h8 18.f3 �e6 19.t2:idc3 !1:f7oo.

10...Ah3

Although M.Dvoretsky recommends here 10...l2:ie8! to avoid the


exchange of the superfluous c3-knight, in this later game he
continued with the text. A possible continuation is 11.f4 fS
(11. ...ih3 12.1bch3 Wxh3 13.fS+= Van Wely,L-L'Ami,E Eindhoven
2010) 12.Wa4 �d8 13.Wa3 lLJf7 14..id2 l!?h8 15J�ae1 Wd8 16.e4 c6
17.�e3+= Grachev,B-Arutinian,D Pardubice 2005. Black's problem
in this variation is that he loses some precious te1npos to
complete his plan.

11.6Zlxf6+ !

Exchanging the superfluous c 3 -knightl

11...Axf6 12.tz:ldS .id8 13.Ad2 Axg2 14.-©xg2 fS 15.Wb3


White stands slightly better. Drav.r in 58.

□ Dolmatov Sergey
■ Romanishin Oleg
Minsk 1979 O

White has a spatial advantage, but Black has at his disposal the
strong point es, for which both his knights and the dark-squared
bishop are contending. White cannot and should not fight for the
es-square - one of the opponent's pieces vvill occupy it, but the
other two will prove 'superfluous' - M.Dvoretsky.

27..ic3

A much better idea is 27.i.aS! �de8! (27...b6 28.�c3+= x c6)


28.ia4 .id8! 29 ..ic3 �6+ 3O.0d4 f1:e7 31.h3 04e5 32.47h2oo.

27...�4e5 28..id4 b6 29.a4?

Better vvas 29..ic3 and if 29....if6, then 3O.0d4.

29 ....if6 30.�xeS hes 31.heS �xeS 32.aS g6


Look at what has happened: Black still controls es, but his two
'superfluous', unnecessary pieces have now left the board: the
dark-squared bishop and the knight fro1n g6. Meanwhile, White
is left with two 'slackers' - both the knight at g3 and the bishop
stand poorly. Black's chances are now indisputably better and,
exploiting his opponent's later inaccuracies, he went on to win -
M. Dvoretsky. Black won in 56 1noves.

0-1

34...lt:le7? !

A dubious decision - Black is actually trading off the


'superfluous' knight on b4. How could the defence be improved?
Instead of the illogical exchange of knights, I suggested 34... e4,
putting at least one pawn on a light square - the opposite colour
to his o,,vn bishop - and allowing Black to activate his pieces, if
only a little, by ...We5-d4, if White allows it - M.Dvoretsky.

35.:Sa6 Wd7

If the knight returns with 35 ...&bc8, then 36.lt:ic3! followed by a


regrouping vvith &bbdS and lt:le4.

.m:■�-�-
-�

-
ai2i�
� ��
-
if

•••

� • •

LS- �■ �
,, ,, , �

a a ■■'!'Unm LS
• • -:�
t/,U;
- ,.•� -��('"
� � "····" LS i®-1
-

• W,@ jJ/J

• � P-1¼ �

36J�e4 l[)xdS 37.�xdS �e7 38.:Sfal .if8

White's advantage has increased. All his pieces are much more
active, with the knight's superiority over the poor bishop at f8
being particularly acute.

39.�e2 :Sc6

40.:S6a3! :ScS 41.:Sf3!

An excellent manoeuvre. A.Karpov trades off the rook ,,vhich


defends the king, and then puts together a killing attack.

41. ..�xf3 42.Wxf3 Wf7

42...�xc4 43.Wf6+ @g8 44.'bb6+-

43.Wg4 hS 44.We4 :Sc8

44...@h7 45.�a3 i.g7 46.!U3 Wie6 47.g4!+-

45.�a3 WfS 46.l:�a7+ @h6 47.We3+ gs 48.We2 gbs 49.g4! hxg4


50.hxg4 Wb1+ 51.@g2 �b7 52.:Sxb7 Wxb7 53.Wf3 Wc8 54.Wf6+
@h7 55.Wf7+ 1-0

o Grivas Efstratios
■ Halldorsson Gudmundur
Reykjavik 1 994

1.d4 fS 2.'bf3 �f6 3.g3 e6 4..ig2 dS 5.b3 c6 6.0-0 i.e7 7.i.a3 0-0
8.c4 t2)bd7 9.Wc2 1xa3 10.l!bxa3 We7 11.WbZ b6 12J�acl 1b7
13.�c2 �e4 14.�ce1

14...lbgS?!

Exchanges do not help Black's cause, (especially v.rhen it


concerns your best-placed piece!), as his central pav.rns becomes
weaker (not enough good pieces to protect them). 14... gS!? is
preferable, seeking complications. Here both pairs of knights are
superfluous! White's are dealing with the es-square and Black's
with the e4-square. But Black, by exchanging a pair, weakens his
position as his es-square is not controlled by pav.rn or bishop, in
contrast with White vvho can control it ,,vith both.
15.�xgs Wxg5 16.�d3 We7 17.b4! :Sfc8 18.a4 aS 19.bS! cs

20.l'.Udl!

White's superiority is obvious. He commands more space, his


1ninor pieces are better-placed and the outpost on es is at his
1nercy. The eventual opening of the position favours White who,
by having occupied more space, is better prepared to undertake
action and proceed to favourable exchanges.

20...:Sc7

Black loses at least one pav.rn after 20 ...cxd4 21.cxdS .i.xdS


(21 ... eS? 22.d6) 22..ixdS exdS 23.Wxd4 Wd6 24.tbf4.

21.dxcS <tixcS

21 ...bxcS? 22.cxdS exdS 23.lLJf4! and Black's position collapses:


23...d4 24.lLJdS!

22.�xcS :SxcS 23.cxdS .ixdS 24.:SxcS .ixg2?

Black cannot avoid loss of material after 24...WxcS ZS.Wes!


(outpost!), but this ,,vas surely better than the text move.
25.:Sccl
And White wins.
25....idS 26.WeS! !3d8 27Jk7 WgS 28.e4!

Another piece falls!


28...Wg4 29.f3 WgS 30.exdS

and Black finally called it a day...


1-0

o Lautier Joel
■ lvanchuk Vassily
Monte Carlo 1996

1.d4 .!bf6 2.c4 g6 3.<!l:lc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6..igS <!l:lc6 7.<!l:lge2 a6
8.Wd2 .id7 9.h4 hS 10.0-0-0 bS 11.<!l:ldS bxc4 12.<!l:lec3

12...<!l:lh7!?

Black deals vvith the superfluous knight on c3 and he is ready to


kick the dS-knight a,,vay.
13..ie3 e6 14.<!l:lf4 eS! 15.dxeS <!l:lxeS 16.�fdS

White has made no ilnprovement during the last few 1noves,


while Black should be happy; he has opened the long diagonal
for his g7-bishop and ilnproved his c6-knight. The white knights
are still not doing n1uch...

16...gb817..th6? .txh6! 18.Vlfxh6 c6!

Again the dS-knight is kicked away, while the black queen will
join the attack.

19.<!be3 .te6 20..te2 Was

Black stands better, but the game ended in a draw in 63 moves.

½-½

o Kurajica Bojan
■ Trkulja Goran
Sarajevo 1998 O

Black has two knights but only one perfect square: e6. The c7-
knight is placed very badly; it does not have any future and it is
also far from the queenside where White plans to start an attack.

25.<!bhS!

Threatening ltJf6+, winning an exchange.

25...ge7 26.�d4! Vlfxb3?!

Of course not 26...lLJxd4? 27.Vlfxg7# but Black should defend with


26 ...Vlfh6 27.�xa7 Vlfg6.

27.�cS! :Sed7 28.tbf6+ '.!lh8 29.<!bxd7 gxd7


So, White has the exchange for tv.ro pawns. This would be a good
1naterial balance for Black if his pieces were well-placed - but
the c7-knight is still out of play and his rook cannot get to the
open c fi
- le because the superfluous knight is in its way. Finally,
the cs-bishop controls all the dark squares and Black has to deal
with the weakness on f7. White is clearly better.

30.�d6 Wic4 31.fffS

31.ffxc4?! dxc4 32.�bl ltJdS and the superfluous knight comes


alive!

31...ffe4 32.ffxe4 dxe4 33.!Uel

Nov.r White can win the e 4 -pavvn.

33...ltJbS 34.�b4

Since there are open files in the position, White wants to


exchange one pair of rooks, so the other rook can totally
do1ninate Black's position.

34...�d3 35.:Sxd3 exd3 36.:Sdl b6 3 7 .�xd3 h6 38J::ld7 l!?g8 39.a4


�bd4 40.:Sxa7 <tic6 41 . �a8+ l!?h7 42.�d6 1-0

□ Schandorff Lars
■ Nielsen Peter Heine
Aalborg 2006
1.d4 .!bf6 2.c4 e6 3..!bc3 i.b4 4.e3 0-0 5..!bge2 �e8 6.a3 M8 7.tl:if4 d6
8.i.e2 es 9.dxes dxeS 10.VNxds gxd8 11..!bfdS

11. ..lbe8!

After the coming ...c6, the d S -knight will not have any good
squares to retreat to.
12.0-0 tl:ia6

12...c6 was an alternative: 13.lDb4 ie6.

13.�dt .ie6

No,,v 13...c6? would be a blunder due to 14..!bf6+.

14.qJe4 c6 15.lbdc3

Now ,,ve have the same situation but with a different square: e4.
15....ie7 16.�xd8 .!3xd8 17.g4

Preventing ...fS, thus White secures the e 1 s- quare for this


knight. On the other hand, he weakens the light squares around
his king.

17...tbf6

An interesting moment. Eventually, Black decided to trade one of


White's knights. This is so because Black did not see what to do
with the knight on e8 - he evaluated the c 3 -knight as being
better than his e8-knight. 17...g6 preparing .. JS was an
alternative: 18.b4 (18.gS!?) 18... fS 19.gxfS gxfS 20.lt:lg3 'Lif6oc.

18.tbxf6+ .ixf6 19.tbe4 .ie7 20.b4 f6 21.lflfl h5 22.gxhS f5

Finally, Black finds a vvay to undermine the strong e 4 k- night.

23.bS cxbS 24.cxbS tbc7 25 ..!bc3 e4 26.@el M6 27..id2 li:'la8


28..!3c1 li:'lb6 29..!bdl E!d7 30..ic3 .ie7 31..ib4 .ixb4+ 32.axb4 lflf7
33..!3a1 .!bdS 34.�xa7 tbxb4 35.f3 exf3 36.ixf3 .!bd3+ 37.lflfl li:'leS
38..ieZ .!bc4 39.lflfZ .!bd6

The position is approximately equal but no moves were


recorded from now on - this was a blindfold rapid game!

0-1

The following exa1nple shm.vs how Black traded one knight from
the lt:ld5-tZ:ic3 couple when he was fully prepared.
At first he avoided the trade, since the other knight would end
u p landing on dS, but later he traded when the dS-knight would
no longer be favourable for White.
The position is from 'Sicilian Defence - Sveshnikov Variation'
structures: White ovvns the dS-square, and as long as a piece can
remain there, he should stand vvell. Ideally, \I\Thite would want to
leave a dS-knight vs an f8-bishop and trade all the other minor
pieces, but this is still a wish...

o Swiercz Dariusz
■ Damljanovic Branko
Plovdiv 2008

1.e4 cs 2.ti'lf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.�xd4 tilc6 S.�bS d6 6.iJ4 es 7.i.e3


.ie6 8.ti'llc3 a6 9.�a3 i:lf6 10.ti'lc4 bS 11.�b6 :Sb8 12.�bdS

12...<lbg4!

Black decides to lead a dark-squared strategy: he gives up light


squares but ,,vill attack on the dark squares. He trades the e3-
bishop; the defender of the dark squares.

13.i.e2 �xe3 14.tilxe3 g6 1S.a4

White must attack on the light squares, since he is stronger


there, having his e2-bishop.

1S...ti'ld4 16.axbS axb5 17.ti'lcdS .ih6 18.c3 .ixe3!


At last, trading the 'extra' white piece. Doing so, Black regains
control of the light squares and gets a good position. And this is
a good example to understand that in chess nothing is absolute!
Note that after 18...�c6? 19J!a6! White is much better; his pieces
are 1nore active.

19.q)xe3 q)xe2 20.Wfxe2 0-0 21.0-0 f5 22.exfS gxf5 23.f4

Since White has a knight versus Black's bishop, he wants to fix


the pawn structure. On the other hand, Black 1nust keep it as
flexible as possible.

23...Wfb6

23... e4?! vvould make the e 3 -knight an excellent piece.

24.*h1 �be8 25.Wfd2 *h8 26.!U3

26....ic8!

A good regrouping, transferring the bishop to the long diagonal.

27.�afl .ib7 28.�g3?!

28JBf2!co.

28....ie4 29.�gs d5 30.fxeS?

30.Wff2 d4 31.cxd4 Wfxd4=+ was obligatory.


30...f4! 31.ti::ig4

31.lt:ixdS f3!-+

31... f3! 32.:Sf2 fxg2+ 33.�gl E(xf2

33..J:1a8!-+

34.Wxf2?!

34.tbxf2 :t:i.a8 35.Wcl Wa7!-+

34...�a8! 3S.:Sg8+ �xg8 36.t2lf6+ Wxf6 37.Wxf6 :Sal+ 0-1

o Ganguly Surya Shekhar


■ Giri Anish
Doha 2015

1.e4 cs 2.t2lf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.t2lxd4 .!bf6 SJLJc3 a6 6.h3 es 7.t2lde2


hS 8.�gS �e6 9.� xf6 Wxf6 10.tZldS Wd8 11.Wd3 �d7 12.0-0-0 g6
13.�bl tZlcS 14.Wf3 �g7 1S.�ec3 bS 16..ie2 E(b8 17.a3
17....id7!

Defending the bS-pawn and preparing ...a5-b4. Note that Black


is almost never intending to play something like ... .ixdS, as this
would help the superfluous c 3 k
- night!

18.�e3 as

19 .b4

While this stops b4, one thing which is certain is that White's
king is quite exposed now.

19...1£ie6 20.g3 1£id4 21..id3 .ie6 22.f4 axb4 23.axb4 l3a8!


24.fS!?

White sacrifices a pawn, trying to get play on the light squares.

24...gxfS 25.exfS tZlxfS 26.i,xfS .b.fS 27.g4 hxg4 28.hxg4 gxhl


29 .gxhl .te6

Black has won a pawn and looks pretty solid, although White
with his excellent knights does have some compensation.

30.gS?!

30 .W/e4 with the idea of t:f:Jc7+ was interesting.

30...@f8 31.tZlf6 �a6 32.Wf3 Wc7 33.0.h7+ @e8 34.0.f6+ hf6


35.gxf6 @d7

Black has got rid of his bad bishop and his king is also safe. Add
to it the fact that he is a pawn up and you will realise that the
rest is just a matter of technique for a player of A.Giri's calibre.

36.gdl Wa7 37.@b2 i,c4 38.We4 @c7 39.t:f:JdS+ @b8 40.0.c3 @c7
41.Wf3 Wa8 42.We3 Wc6 43.Wg3 gas 44.1:!al gxal 45 .�xal Wb6
46.Wh4d5 47.@b2 Wd6

47...e4! 48.lili'gS (48.Wlf4+ Wd6 -+) 48...Wd4 49.Wg7 @d6 50 .Wf8+ @es
51.W/e7+ iifS would have been quite an easy win for Black. His
king escapes the perpetual and the e -pawn marches towards the
last rank.
48.©cl Wa6 49.WgS @d6 50.Wg8 Wa3+ 51.@d2 Wa7 52.We8 Wd7
53.VNg8 Wb7 54.We8

54...Wd7?

Again 54... e4! was good: 55.Wg8 V!la7 56.We8 V!ld7 57.V!lg8 lt>eS-+ It
is important to activate the king in order to win. The f6-pawn
will fall now.
55.Wg8 e4 56.Wg3+ @c6 57.�·es Wc7 ss.�·es+ @b6 59.�'e7

White has just too much activity now.


59...Wf4+ 60.@dl Vlifl+ 61.@d2 Wf4+ 62.@dl e3 63.Wd8+ @a6
64.Wa8+ @b6 65.Wd8+ @a6

Quite a depressing drav, for A.Giri, who was better for almost
the entire game.
½-½

CONCLUSION

Overall, ·when the opponent has an 'extra' piece, one should


ahvays consider taking it - as well as leaving it there and
playing around it
As in the above exa1nples, the opponent's one knight might be
very active in the centre, while the other knight is completely out
of play.
It is ideal for the opponent to trade that bad knight. That is vvhy
one should avoid trading the active knight: so the passive knight
has nowhere to go.
All the examples above demonstrated this technique. At the end,
one of the opponent's knights got traded but only when it was
favourable for him.
WEAK SQUARE
The ele1nent of the strong/weak square (outpost) is one of the
most-often met in practice. The creation and occupation of an
outpost plays a significant role in the course of many chess
games.
An outpost is a square where we can place one of our pieces
without it being attacked by an enemy pawn. Naturally, an
outpost gains in value if it is central, and even more so if it is
situated inside the enemy camp.
The ilnportance of the outpost increases further if the opponent
has no bishop moving on squares of the corresponding colour. In
most cases it is beneficial to be able to control the ol!.ltpost with
one of our pawns.
Another factor adding value to the outpost is its location on an
open file. In that case we are able to double our roolks behind our
piece occupying the outpost, and then open the file at the right
moment.
The piece we usually aim to place on an outpost is the knight,
follovved by the bishop, the rook and - in rare cases - the
queen.
It follows from the above that a square representing an outpost
for us is also a weakness for the opponent and may have
seriously negative consequences for him.
In practice v,1e encounter tv.ro different cases revolving around
the outpost:
1. The outpost has already been created. In this case our task is
simple: control it and exploit it.
2. The outpost has not yet been created. This case is clearly
1nore demanding, as we first have to identify which square can
serve as an outpost and then try to wrest its control fro1n the
opponent. Methods often used in this case are the strengthening
of our control of the outpost by pawns and the exchange of those
pieces of the opponent that can control it.
Naturally, the possession of one or more outposts does not
guarantee victory. Tne piece tnat v.rill occupy tne outpost will
have to c o -operate harmoniously with the rest of our army from
its povverful position in order to further our aims.
As a conclusion vve can state that knights love outposts - they
just sit there and don't bother moving at all, as they are able to
control a fair a111ount of squares fro1n behind and fro1n
a distance!
The first two games that follow are clear examples of a good
knight vs bad bishop theme, using the concept of the outpost.

o Bras Emanouel
■ Grivas Efstratios
Khania 2000

t.d4 �f6 2.�f3 g6 3.c4 �g7 4.�c3 0-0 5.e4 d6 6.�e2 �bd7 7.0-0 es

8.dxeS

This exchange offers 1nore-or-less nothing to White. Actually


White exchanges his d4-pa\,vn for Black's d6 and that cannot be
to his benefit. There are some lines in the 'KID' where White
successfully proceeds with such an exchange, but there must
ah,vays be a good reason for it.

8 ...dxeS 9.Wi'c2 c6 10.:Sdl Wc7!

White has voluntarily accepted a weak square in his camp (d4)


which, consequently, represents a potential outpost for the black
pieces. Black now plans to transfer a knight to d4 via e6.
Naturally, things are not that simple yet - but at least Black has
a clear plan and \,Vhite does not.

11.b3?!

Too passive. White should continue with 11.%!b1 intending b4


and cs to gain space.

11. ..�e8 12.i,a3?! �f8! 13..txf'8 �xf8

The exchange of the dark-squared bishops is in Black's favour


as no..
v the d4-square is even weaker.

14.V!id2?!

It becomes dear that vVhite is playing without a plan. His only


ailn is to exchange as many pieces as possible, so1nething he
believes will bring the game to a drawish conclusion. In what
follo,.vs, Black makes full use of this 1nistaken strategy. White
should in any case have played 14.h3! to prevent Black's next
move, which is an essential link in his plan.

14...i.g4!

The f3-knight controls d4, so it must be exchanged.

15.V!id6 �xd6 16.�xd6 i>g7!

The careles.s exchange 16...hf3? 17.a:xf6! would ruin all of


Black's efforts.
17 <.!?
. f1

White cannot play 17.ti:id2? 1%ad8I 18J!.xd8 '.Bxd8 19.ixg4 :f!.xd2I as


then Black retains all his former advantages, having also
obtained possession of the d-file and the 7th rank.

. dd1 <tid4
17 ...ixf3! 18.ixf3 <te6 19 E!

Black has completed his plan and occupied the outpost on d4.
Moreover, he preserves the better minor pieces: \I\Thite's bishop
is bad. Ho,,vever, in order to improve his position further, Black
has to initiate play on at least one of the flanks, aiming
eventually to invade the white ranks there.
20.�e2 <tid7 21.!:!:acl <tics

21 ...aS?I would be pointless due to 22.ti:ia4I allowing \I\Thite


decent counterplay for no reason whatsoever.
22 f3
.

After 22.b4 ti:ice6 Black \Nill continue with 23 ...aS! This ,,vill
either open the a-file for the black rooks or force the surrender
of the cs-square to the mercy of the black knights (after 24.bS).
22...aS! 23.<.!?f2
23... fS!

Since for the 1noment it proves impossible to open a file on the


queenside, Black changes tack and switches his attention to the
other flank. The plan is to gain space with ...f4 and then advance
the re1naining kingside pawns. The end result of this operation
will be to open one or other of the g -and h-files.

24.�d3?!

White's final mistake. Instead, he had to counter Black's above­


mentioned plan and seek counterplay in an unbalanced pawn­
structure. Thus, the indicated choice was 24.exfS! gxfS 25.f4!?
lZ:ixe2 (transforming one strategic ele1nent, the outpost, into
another - a passed pa,,vn) 26.lZ:ixeZ e4. Black's advantage
remains but White retains 1nuch better saving chances,
especially if he can engineer the g4 advance under favourable
circu1nstances.

24... f4! 25.�e2 ged8 26.�xd4 �xd4 27.lt>e2 gs 28."11 qJe6!

The exchange of one pair of rooks (but not two!) is favourable


for Black. \"1hen a wing file is finally opened and the black rook
invades, White will be unable to protect all his weaknesses due
to the reduced material.

2 9.El:xd4 �xd4+ 30.lt>d2 hS! 31.h3


31 ... g4!

Black is ready to open a file at the appropriate moment. Then he


will invade White's camp and exercise unbearable pressure. The
position is lost for White, who behaved very unambitiously:
ahvays and only seeking exchanges, of which Black accepted
only the ones in his favour. Actually Black won because he knew
what, where and ifto exchange.

32 .fxg4hxg4 33.hxg4 l3h8 34.l3gl e:h4 35.g5?!

White had to defend ,.vith 35.©el, although 35 ...:i;J:xg4 36.�f2 :!:;J:g3


37.E'.dl i;e3 is a slow and sure death.

35 ..l3g4
. 36..id3?! .!bf3+ 37.gxf3 e:xgl 38.a4 �g639..ie2 �xg5
40.�c3 c5 0-1

□ Trifunovic Petar
■ Teschner Rudolf
Dortmund 7967

1.d4 .!bf62.<!ilf3 b63.ig5ib7 4.ltlbd2 g65.e3 ig7 6.id3 c5 7.c3 0-


0 8.0-0 d69.Y!fe2 tllbd7 10.:Sfdl :Sc8 11.a4 Yffc7 12.a5 e5
Both sides have completed their development harmoniously.
With his last move Black tried to anticipate \I\Thite's activity on
the queenside with counterplay in the centre. White understood
that Black's dS-square might beco1ne weak, as it is no longer
controlled by a pav.rn. So, this causes a natural reaction to Black's
recent central activity. \I\Thite must focus his future plans on this
factor, as potential success will be the turning point for the
correct evaluation of the current position.
13.dxeS! <tixeS?!

In many openings there are potential weak squares around, but


this fact does not affect the near future so much, as long as
a good number of pieces re1nain on the board. And of course, the
explanation is silnple: the vveak squares are controlled by pieces.
13... dxeS 14.e4 would be the natural follow-up, when White
could preserve a slight opening advantage but nothing more.
14.<iJxeS dxeS
15..ixf6!

White is following his excellent plan ,,vith accuracy. Pieces that


might control the dS-square should be eliminated!

15....ixf6 16..ie4!

Here goes the last one!

16....ixe4

Black's problems are huge: 16....ig7 17.axb6 axb6 18.:aa7 �b8


19.tZlc4 fS 20.idS+ i>h8 21.e4±

17.tZlxe4 .ie7? !

Too passive. For better or worse, Black should have tried to


liberate his bishop ,,vith 17...ig7, although White retains a large
advantage: 18.c4 (18.tZld6 �cd8 19.axb6 axb6 20.tZlbS Wc6 21.e4 c4
22)2::ia3 b5 23.tZlc2+=) 18...fS 19.t2:ld6 (19.l2Jc3 e4 20.tZldS Wb7
21.h4+=) 19..Jkd8 20.tZlbS Wf7 21.e4! fxe4 22.l?id6 We6 23.li.)xe4
:ad4 24.axb6 axb6 25.b3±

18.axb6 axb6 19.c4

Not only opening the knight's route to dS (lt:lc3-d5) but also


strengthening it.

19...�a8

Black's chances would also be slim after 19.. .fS 20.tZlc3 e4 21.tZldS
Wb7 22.Wc2! �f6 23.Wb3.

20..!bc3 f5 21.e4!

21.tZldS would also be fine, but why not fix another pawn on the
same colour as the bishop?

21...�xal 22.S:xal f4
White's advantage is obvious and consists of;
1. Good knight vs bad bishop;
2. Control of the weak central dS square;
3. Control of the open a-file;
4. Control of the light squares.
Now v,re are entering the technical phase of the game, ,,vhere
\!Vhite should transform his positional advantage into a material
one.

23.Wg4�d8

23...Wc8 24.Wxc8 �xc8 25.lbdS .id8 26J:i:a7 leaves Black with no


survival chances, as \!Vhite's king will deliver the final blO\,v ,,vith
his advance, either to the kingside or to the queenside.

24..!bdS Wf7 25.Ela8 hS 26.Wdt We6 27.f3!

Avoiding any unnecessary counterplay with .. .f3.

27...gs 28.h3

28.lbxf4? gxf4 29.a'.xd8 Wxc4 would give Black hope.

28...Wf7 29.b3

After 29.li:lxf4? W/xf4 30J�xd8 �xd8 31.Wxd8+ �f7 Black would


have some drawing chances due to perpetual check possibilities.
White does not need such pawns. After all, what are Black's
intentions to improve his position?
29...VNg7

Opening the door to the white queen!


30....if6 31.WdS + <!>h8 32J:!xf8+ Wxf8 33.We6 �g7 34.lbdS ©h7
35.©h2

Co1nplete do1nination. \,Vhite is not in a hurry to pick up any


pawns yet (35.Vlfxb6), as he is getting ready for the 'really' tasty
one!
35...Wd8

36.Wf7! h4 37.�e7

and the king ·will fall!


37...WfS 38.Wg6+ @h8 39.WhS+ 1-0

Ex-World Champion V.Anand is a great player and obviously he


knows everything about our royal game, but still his
performance in the next two ga1nes wasn't the desired one.
Against G.Kamsky he failed to capitalise and against J.Polgar he
was smashed!
Note that the following three ga1nes were first published in my
book 'Chess Analytics' (Russell Enterprises, 2012) and in 1nany
other sources and books of course.

o Anand Viswanathan
■ Kamsky Gata
Sanghi Nagar 1 994

White enjoys the advantage of the better minor piece (kniglht vs


bishop) and the better pav.rn-structure, as Black's d6-pav,n
cannot be considered ideally placed. As a plan, White can
consider combining his excellently-placed knight ,.vith the
creation of a passed pav.rn on the queenside, and generally play
on both sides of the board. Black has no active counterplay and
he is doo1ned to passivity.

36.lk3 !!:b8 37.Wd3 @g7

White also stands better after 37...i.dS 38.l:%c4 flc8 (38...@g7 39.b4
axb4 40.furn4 Wa7 41.%1:xbS Wxb8±) 39.b4.

38.g3?!
Following the principle of 'not hurrying', White gradually
'improves' his position. But 38.b4! axb4 39.�c7 Wa8 v-ras critical,
as now \,Vhite has the pleasant choice between two good moves:
a) 40.Wb3 (40 .Wf3 '.B:f8) 40...WaS! 41.g31 (41.tbb6 :;;!f8 42.'.B:c6 hSoo
43.tbc4? Wa8 44.'.B:xd6 Wxe4 45.'.B:dl '.B:d8+) 41. ..:;;!f8 (41 ...�d2? 42.Wf3
:!:!.f8 43.Wf6+ ii>h6 44.lt:le7! or 41. ..id8 42Jid7 are excellent for
White, but maybe Black's best practical chance lay in 41..J:(a81?
42.h4 id8 43.'.B:d7 Wxa4 44.Wxa4 '.B:xa4 45.1!xd8 b3 46Jl:b8 gxe4
4 7.l':lxb3±) 42.�b7 id2 43.Wf3 igS (43...Wd8 44.aS!) 44.h4 i-d8
45.Wb3±, but still this position looks quite unpleasant for him.
b) 40 .Wc4!? and now another split:
bl) 40...Wxa4? 41.�+I <;i;,h6 (41...<;!;,xf7 42.lLJb6+) 42.1!xh7+!
<;!;,xh7 43.Wc7+ <;i;,h6 44.Wxb8±
b2) 40...�d8 41.'.B:d7 b3 (41. ..Wxa4 42.'.B:xf7+! <;i;,h8 43.rlf8+ <;!;,g7
44.�g8+ <;i;,h6 4S.lLJe3!+-) 42.tbb4 <;i;,h6 43.Wxf7 Wxe4 44.Wxh7+ �gs
45_gxd6+-
b3) 40...WaS 41.lLJf4 dS 42.tbxdS b3 43.0ic3 %\f8 44J1:b7±
b4) 40...b3 41.lLJb6 dS! 42.:Sxf7+! 'i!lxf7 43.Wc7+ i.e7 44.lLJxa8 gb4!
45.tbb6! b2 46.tbc8 blW+ 47.<;i;,h2 1!b7! 48.0id6+ <;i;,f6 49.Wxb7 Wcl
S0. W c7! I Wxc7 51.tbe8+ 47f7 52.tbxc7 dxe4 53.aS icS 54.0ib5 hf2
55.g31+-

38 ....id8!

Of course Black covers the c7-square!

39.VNf3 Wd7

Also possible is 39...:1;.(c8 40.�gZ :!':!:xc3 41.Wxc3 fS 42.f3.


40.Wig4? is out of the question: 40...Wixg4 (40...Vlie61?) 41.hxg4
ib6! 42Jld3 i.cS= \,Vhite has not only lost the 'Capablanca
Theorem' option (Wi+li:l vs Vli+i.) but also the chance for a passed
queenside pawn.

40...hS

Taking away the g4-square is useful and also, under some


circumstances, the pawn might advance to h4.

41.!k4 Wib7 42J!c3

It is too early for 42.b4 axb4 43J1xb4 as Black can sacrifice his
queen with 43...Wixb4! (43...Wia8 44.l%b5!±) 44.lcixb4 :l:l:xb4,
retaining decent chances to survive: 45.Widl f!d4 46.Wic2 h4. But
good enough is the other option ,,vith 42.h4! ;gcs (42 ...Wixb3
43.Wixb3 ii:xb3 44.;gcs i.f6 45.r:l:a8 gs 46.hxgS ixgS 47.f!xaS ;ga3
48.fla6 id2 49.:l:l:xd6 ii:xa4 S0.li:lf6±) 43.Wic3 �c4 44.Wixc4 Wia7
45.b4+=

42...Wid7 43.Wie2 .ib6 44.Wid2!

Of course not 44.li:lxb6? :1i:xb6=

44....idS!

44...icS? looks attractive, but fails tactically to 45J:U3 (45.WigS


Wd8 46.lbe7!±) 45 ...Wd8 46.'2:if6 !lb7 47.WgS as the cs-bishop is far
away from the defence. Black's fate is also silnilar after 44.. .fS?
45.exfS WxfS 46.t2:ixb6 f1Xb6 47.:!i:c7+ 4?f6 48.WdS We6 49.Wf3+ WfS
S0.Wa8+-

45.Wc2 Wb7 46.Wd3 .ib6 47.Wf3 .id8

48.g4?!

I do not like the text, as it weakens the dark squares on the


kingside without offering anything positive. 48.h4 is natural,
preserving White's advantage: 48..J:tc8 (48.. .fS 49.exfS gxfS
50Jk4! Wxb3 51.t2:ie3±) 49.a'.xc8 (49.Wd3 :!i:xc3 S0.Wxc3 fS 51.f3
[51.4?f3 ib6!] 51...fxe4 52.fxe4 Wa6 53.WcZ i.b6oo) 49...Wxc8
S0.Wd3.

48...hxg4 49.hxg4

It would be preferable to recapture vvith the queen (intending


h4-h5) but here 49.Wxg4 fails to 49 .. .fS! with an unclear game.

49...!k8!

Novv that White has weakened his kingside, Black vvillingly


trades off the rooks, in order to invade and harass the white
monarch. Also possible ,,vas 49...Wd7 50.Wg3 (S0Ji:cl Wb7 51.b4
axb4 52.Wh3 igS!) 50...igS 51.:ac7 We6oo.

50.We3 �xc3 51.Wxc3 Wa6


52.VNc2

After 52.b4 axb4 53.Wxb4 vgez 54.�g3 �4+! 55.4,xh4 Wxf2+


56.<i!;,h3 Wf3+ Black gets a draw (remember 48.g4?!).

52...VNa7

And now Black's queen threatens to infiltrate via d4.

53.VNd2 VNb7 54.VNd3

White still stands slightly better and he should have continued


the fight with 54.b4 axb4 55.Wxb4+=

½-½

□ Polgar Judit
■ Anand Viswanathan
Wi jk aan Zee 1998
With precise play, White has achieved her strategic goal - the
'eternal' knight on dS vs Black's rather poor bishop. As the knight
should not just sit on dS and watch, \,Vhite needs to organize an
attack in which it can take part.

30... lkS 31.'�e3 �e7 32.�d3 �d8 33.Wd2 �c6 34.'�dl '.!?g8 35.h4!

White understands that she will not win by \vorking only on the
central file. So, she opens a 'second front' on the kingside - in
complete accordance 'Arith the \vell-known 1nethod of realising
one's advantage, the 'two weaknesses principle'.

35... '.!?g7? !

This 'sit & wait' policy is faulty, as White will ahivays find ways to
get through. Black should have stopped the further advance of
White's h-pawn by playing 35 ...hS. Then White can try to
penetrate through the queenside: 36.�al Wg4 37.f3 �c8 38.Wa4
Wb7 39.tbe3±

36.hS

No,,v there is tension on the kingside.

36...�gs 37.Wf3 �c8 38J!dl

White prepares to transfer her major pieces to the h-file,


creating threats against the king.

38 ... lk6 39.We2 �c8 40.�hl '.!?g8


41.f3!

White vacates the f2-square, fro1n where her queen will


threaten both flanks (Wif2-a7 and Wif2-g1-h2). Keep in 1nind that,
in order to make the opponent's defence as difficult as possible, it
is necessary to create problems for him over the entire board.
41. ..�b8 42.Wf2 �b7

Black has defended against the white queen's invasion on the


diagonal, but White now has the additional possibility of cS!
43.hxg6!

A good move, as the alternative 43.cS?! dxcS 44.WxcS �b8!


(44...Wa6? 45.tcif6+!! @g7 [45 ...hf6 46.Wc8+ @g7 47.h6# or
45...Wxf6 46.Wc8+ Wd8 47.Wxb7 Wid2+ 48.@h3+-] 46.lue8+ @g8
47.WixeS+) 45.WixaS !1:c8 would give Black too much counterplay.
43...fxg6

Alas, recapturing ,,vith 43...hxg6 is prohibited, as after 44.1/Ngl fS


(or 44....if6 45.1/Nh2 .ig7 46.1/Nh4) 45.Wh2 fJ.f6 46.1/Nh3! (46.Wh6 !J.g7
47 . WgS 47.1/Nh7+ ,;f]fl 48J'.:!:al E'.a7] 47...!%f71 is not so clear: 48.Wd8+
fJ.f8 49.WxaS? fxe4 50 .fxe4? Wg41-+) 46... !1:fl 47.g4 fxe4 48.fxe4
White wins: 48..Jib7 49.4?g3 gf7 50.Wh6 .ig7 51.Wh7+ @f8 52.gSI
[!a7 53.�f6 Wf7 54J�fl fJ.xf6 55.�h6+ Wg7 56.�f6+ :r::tf7 57.ftxg6+-


-�.-
■•■�'i'-
■E • -�­.t.
■ ■.t. �
�l■�r.--.. �
�-- · � wz�• w)t._�... ...;.
l1'Ri

n ■n is"
•.,,. J.�•. �;,,
-�-
a
�» - �
u
-

e • �-•
4 4.cS!

Once the position of the black king has been weakened, White
does not mind opening the c fi
- le.

44...dxcS 45.WxcS .id8 46.)'!cl!

The rook no longer has any business on the h fi


- le, so White
transfers it to the opened c fi
- le.

46...4?f7? !

A loss of time. 46...,;f]g7 was more accurate.

47.We3 ,;f]g7 48 .�c4 :Sd7 49.Wcl

This regrouping (rook in front - queen behind it) is a typical


method of open file domination.

49...hS 50.)'!c6 )'!d6 51.�c8 Wd7 52.WcS @h6


53.�b8

White had no reason to avoid the im1nediate 53Ji:a8


(threatening :Sa7) 53...�b6 54.li?icl + <J;ig7 55.WgS.

S3...�f6

53...gS only \'veakens the f S -square: 54.:Sa8! We6 (54...g4 55.fxg4


hxg4 56.Wf2! <J;ig6 57.Wf8) 55 .t2Je3 Eld2+ 56.@fl +- (56.<J;igl? i.b6),
but Black 1night had tried 53 ...@g7 54.%tb7 (54.:Sa8!? fil)6 55.Wcl
i.d8 56.We3 ib6 57.WgS±) 54...Wxb7 55.Wxd6±

S4.VNe3+ �gS?!

Also bad is 54...�h7?! 55.%\a8+- but Black had to play 54...<J;ig7


55J1a8 WbS 56.:Sa7+! (56.t2Jc7 :Sd3 57.We2±) 56 ...f1d7 (56 ...*g8
57.ibxf6+ l:l:xf6 58.Wh6 We2+ 59.<J;ih3 Wfl+ 60.<J;ih4+- ) 57.:Sxd7+
Wxd7 58.Wb6 �d8 (58...Wd8 59.We6) 59.Wb8±
White's position is obviously much better, thanks to the strong
d5-knight and the weak black king, so it's not so strange that
a winning combination exists!

SS.f4! exf4

Black had to try 55 ...ixf4, although his survival chances after


56.gxf4 Wg4+ 57.Wg3 We2+ 58.�h3 Wfl+ 59.Wg2 Wxg2+ 60.@xg2
exf4 61.�h8+ @g7 62.l:l:a8 would be sli1n. And now J.Polgar had the
chance to add her name to the precious list of players
-
performing the co1nbination of 'The Driving'!

S6.�h8+!

And Black resigned, as he 'felt' the coming combination after


the forced 56...g;>g7 57.Wid4+ �f6 58.Wixf6+! !1xf6 59J:!h7+ 'it>xh7
60.t2.)xf6+ @g7 61.t2.lxd7+-

1-0

There are certain mechanisms to create a strong/weak square -


an outpost. Strong players do it perfectly!

o Smyslov Vassily
■ Rudakovsky losif
Moscow 1945

1.e4 cs 2.li�f3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lbxd4 lbf6 S..!bc3 d6 6.�e2 �e7 7.0-0
0-0 8.�e3 lbc6 9.f4 Yflc7 10.Wel lbxd4 11.�xd4 es 12.�e3 �e6
13.fS �c4 14.�xc4 Wxc4
15..igS!

White prepares an ideal position for his knight. After the


exchange on f6, it will be placed on the excellent dS-square, from
where it will guide White's forces into action all over-the-board.
This is a typical method of creating a good knight vs bad bishop
theme.

15...:Sfe8 16.i.xf6 i.xf6 17.�d5 i.d8

Black could think of giving up the exchange with 17...'�xc2


18.1ff2 Wi'cS (18... Wi'c6 19J'!c1 Wi'a4 20. b3±) 19J:1:cl Wi'd4 20.�c7±
Although material is lost, I do not see what else he can do...

18.c3

White's knight is ideally placed on the strong dS-outpost and


dominates the whole board. If we add to this \l\lhite's superior
pawn-structure (the d6-pawn is backward and weak), we can
easily understand that he should be holding a large plus.
Strategically Black's position is very difficult and, in general, we
should avoid such positions ifwe cannot c01npensate for the
strategic defects in a specific way.

18...bS 19.b3 Wes+ 20.@hl :Sc8 21.:Sf3

Preparing a kingside assault.

21...@h8? !
For good or bad, Black had to play 21...f6. After 22.a4 (yes, White
can play on both sides!) 22...a6 23.axbS axbS 24.'.9.h3 White's
position is supe,rior but Black is not losing quite yet.
22.f6!

Now White will quickly achieve victory by attacking the black


1nonarch.

22...gxf6

22...g6 23.Wd2 E!g8 24.Wh6 gS 25.l;h3+- or 22...'.9.g8 23.Wh4+-

23.Wh4 :Sg8 24.�xf6 l3g7

24....txf6 25.Wxf6+ '.9.g7 26.l;g3 is only a transposition.

■ �m....■ L...• �

■ i ,m;;t� - •R

��._,,,,�
%1( ,m

25.l3g3! �xf6

Or 25 ...ie7 26.'.l;xg7 �xg7 27J1xh7+ �xf6 28.Wh6#

26.Wxf6 1:!:cg8 27.:Sdl!

and Black has no defence to White's idea: fucd6, fucg7 and !1:d8+.

27...dS 28.l3xg7

1-0

A perfect game and a very well-known example. But the younger


generation of players also learn from their predecessors - and
do it even 'better':

o Fedoseev Vladlmlr
■ Bocharov Dmitry
Moscow 2016

1.e4 cs 2.�f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.q)xd4 q)f6 S.tilc3 a6 6.�e2 es 7..!bb3


�e7 8.0-0 0-0 9..ie3 .!bbd7 10.a4 b6 11.�c4 .ib7 12 . .!bd2 Yflc7
13.Yfle2 q)c5

14.�fdl!

White reinforces his control over the d S -square, using small


tactics.

14...l'.3fd8

The e4-pawn cannot really be touched right now: 14...ltlcxe4?!


15 ..!bdxe4 ti:ixe4 (15 ...ixe4 16..!bxe4 li:lxe417.id5=) 16. tZ:idS!±
Another try is 14..Jifc8 15.f3 h6 16.if2 ltle6 17.ia2 �f4 18.Yflc4+=
Ponkratov,P-Kiselev,P St Petersburg 2012.
lS..ixcS!

The first unusual move of the game and a novelty. In the


'Sicilian Defence' we are taught that the dark-squared bishop is
extremely i1nportant and we shouldn't part with it so easily. But
here the battle is for the dS-square and the bishop on e3 doesn't
really fight for it. Hence, this is a very logical move. The old
continuation is 15.igS li:le6 16.hf6 ixf6 17.idS �d418.Wc4 f1ac8
19.ixb7 Wxb7 20 .Wd3 bS 21.axbS axbS 22.t2.'ib3+= Aliavdin,N­
No,,vicki,B Lazy 2013.

15...V!ixcS

16.lb fl!

The knight gets ready to go to e3 to control the dS-square.

16...bs 17.ib3 bxa4?!

l7...b4 looked more natural, although after 18.tiJdS li:\xdS


19.ixdS hdS 20 .:iaxdS± White is clearly better. Obviously Black
wishes to open files on the queenside, planning to achieve
counterplay.

18.�xa4 .ic6

Black should strongly take into consideration the advance


18...dS!? 19.exdS t2.'ixd5 20 .li:\xdS hdS 21.ixdS a:xdS 22.�a6 :aad8,
where he is a pawn down, but his activity 1night compensate.

19.�c4! Wb6 20 . � e3 as
White is better, there is no doubt about that, but how to increase
the advantage?
21.g4!

Again an unusual move but once again extremely logical. The


knight on f6 will be kicked away and the white knights will enjoy
themselves on the dS-square.

21...VNb7 22.g5 <tid7

23J�xc6!

A tactical sequence, but it is not so easy to spot what is going on.


The real weakness that White has spotted like an eagle is the f7-
square.
23...VNxc6 24.<tif5
White's pieces dominate on the weakened light squares in Black's
camp...

24....if8

Black is busted: 24..J1e8 25.WhS g6 26.�xf7+ �xf7 27.Wxh7+ ©e6


28.lt:ig7+ ©f7 29.lLJhS+ l!?e6 30.Wxg6++- or 24...bgS 25J�xd6 Wb7
26.WhS �f6 27.�dS Wxb2 28Jaxf6+-

25.V9f3!
Surprisingly it is extremely difficult to 1neet lLJh6+.

Or 26.� g6 27.lLJh4+-

26...lLJc5 27.hf7 Wd7

Tactics conclude domination...


28.�g6+!

Not so difficult, but nonetheless very beautiful.

28...hxg6 29.�xg6

And Black resigned, as there is just no way to prevent the mate


on hS.

1-0

As has been proven by the previous games, a knight on an


outpost is a tremendous piece, operating harmoniously vvith the
rest of his army.
But a bishop can do the job as ,.veil, even in the presence of
opposite-coloured ones. M.Adams seems to be an expert!
Although I am not 'happy' that the loser B.Esen ,.vas 1ny student
at that tilne, he gained a lot from the analysis and understanding
of his 'mistaken' road - and ilnproved! Also note that this game
was first published in my book 'Chess Analytics' (Russell
Enterprises, 2012).

o Adams Michael
■ Esen Baris
Konya 2010

22...<J;,g7

White holds a pleasant and nearly permanent advantage. His


bishop is certainly a much better piece than its counterpart, as
there are many more targets at its disposal. Also, the backv.rard
black d -pawn is not a great feature for Black either; it will not fall
easily but makes his defence harder. So far with the evaluation;
what are White's plans? Well, he should co1nbine offensives in
various parts of the board (�a3-f3, g3, 'it>g2, h4-h5, etc.) but n1ost
important is that he should not swap any of the remaining
pieces, With every exchange Black can 1nore easily organise his
defence, as at the moment his lack of space is difficult to endure.

23.i.c4

The ,,vhite bishop takes up its position; the first and permanent
target is the ft-square (and not by 'force' the ft-pawn) and
generally the a2-g8 diagonal. Black has no counterpart to defend
with...

23...�f8

White must stay passive for the time being.

Black's policy (a passive one) cannot be reco1nmended. He


should try to become active and exchange some pieces; therefore
he should atte1npt 24 ... fS. After 25.exfS fixfS (2S ...gxfS 26.fig3+
'it>h8 27.Wd2!±) 26J1:f3± White stands clearly better - but far from
winning.

25.!U3 We8

Nov, 25.. .fS?! fails to 26.exfS gxfS (26 ...l;xfS 27Jl:xf5 gxfS 28.Wf7+
'ith8 29.ha6+- ; 26 ...WaS 27.Wxa8 !l:xa8 28.i.dS �f8 29.c4 gxfS
30.l:�b3 gbs 31.aS bS 32.cxbS axbS 33.a6±) 27.We6 �h8 28.ha6+-

26.�b3

26...f6

Black weakens the a2-g8 diagonal but he had to somehovv


liberate his queen. Note that 26...fS?I wasn't good here either:
27.exfS E!xfS 28.�fS gxfS 29.V.ie6+-

27.Vb'd2

Now the bishop will be placed on the 'royal' dS-square, while


the h6 square might come under a combined attack.

27...as
28.l'.k3?

A 1nysterious move. White exchanges an active piece, losing his


c01nbined attack on h6. More logical was 28Jlli3 hS 29.�e2±

28...�xc3 29.Wxc3 Wc8

White advantage has certainly reduced; he is now obliged to


keep the queens on board, otherwise he would lose the
opportunity to attack various spots in Black's camp.

30.�e3 �cs 31.We2

31...fS!

Correct - Black has to be active.

32.exfS �xfS

Safe and correct. After 32...gxfS?! 33JJd3! White's attack cannot


be underestilnated.

33.�dS Wic7 34.g3 :!!f8 35.h4

This is the plan that was discussed above. \,Vhite tries to weaken
Black's kingside defence by organising an attack on the g6-pawn.

35 ...V!ic8 36.:Sd3 WfS 37.�dS Wd7 38.We4 �c8 39.:!!f3

39...�f6?!

Exchanges nearly always favours the defender! For this reason


Black had to opt for 39...�f8.

40.<.!lg2 :ScS 41.b3 �c8 42.hS We7

Now after 42...�f8 comes 43.hxg6 hxg6 44.ic4 ie7 4511:xf8 .txf8
46.id3 Wf7 47.c4 and \Nhite wins a pawn with the upco1ning
48.Wc6.

43.Wig4 :ScS

43...�xc2 44.hxg6 hxg6 45.ie4+-

44.c4

Nov, it's all over; Black has no real defence against \Nhite's
kingside threats.

44... �c7 45.Wih3 Wd8


Or 45 ...gxhS 46.WxhS h6 47.Wg4+ .igS 48J1f5+-

46.We6

Also good is 46.h6+ @h8 47.Wg4 and Black is in zugzwang!

46...�gs 47.hxg6 hxg6 48.�e4 M6 49.�d3!

As was stated before, combined attacks are White's 'secret'


weapons!

49...�d7 50.Wg4 �gs

50...gS 51.WhS !i:f7 52 . .ig6+-

51.f4

vVhite wins as the black king will not find any shelter.

Sl...exf4 52.gxf4 if6 53.Wxg6+ '.!?f8 54.S:g3 dS 55..txdS

1-0

Well, as 1nentioned, M.Ada1ns knovvs his stuff- and he proved it


once again in the next game.
It is true that Black's position was somewhat better than in the
previous game, but still passivity was an obstacle.
After Black failed to take his chance, \iVhite was merciless,
securing the point with ease.

o Adams Michael
■ Van Wely Loek
Hoogeveen 2013

1.e4 cs 2.tllf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.tllxd4 tllf6 S.tllc3 a6 6.�e3 e6 7.Wf3


<tlbd7 8.0-0-0 Wc7 9.Wg3 <tics 10.f3 .td7 11.tllb3 tlla4 12.<tlxa4
.txa4 13.'.!?b1 l3c8 14.i.d3 hS 1SJ::!he1 eS 16.Wf2 !J.e7 17..ib6 Wb8
18.lba5 lbd7 19.tllc4
19...�xc2+ !?

Changing the character of the position, but White is ready for


this. 19 ...0-0 20.b3 .ic6 21.g4 looks worse than it actually is. Black
is a little bit worse probably, but he has chances.

20.<.!lxc2 libxb6 21.Wxb6 �d8 22.Wb3 bS 23.<.!lbt bxc4 24.Wxb8


:Sxb8 25.hc4

A forced sequence has landed us in this endgame. The issue for


Black here is that he holds two permanent disadvantages. The
first is that his bishop \II/ill simply never be as useful as \1\/hite's,
who will dominate the board. The second is that White has
a mobile majority on the queenside, letting him create
a potential passed pawn. Black will never push dS, so he will
have a permanent weakness on this square, along \11/ith his other
disadvantages.

25...:Sb6 26.:Sd3 1:!:f8 27.1:!:ct f5


An attempt at alleviating the blockade. White has to decide
whether to let go a bit of his hold on dS or give Black the f-file.

28.i.dS '.Yd7

29.exfS!

The correct decision. The rooks and bishop will be enough to


consolidate the blockade.
29...gxfS 30.i.e4 �f4 31.g3 gf6 32.h4 as 33 J:k5 gfg

34.a3!

As it's suicide for Black's a p


- awn to ever advance to a4, \,Vhite
can play this move to prepare a future b4 (passed pawn).

34... '.Ye6 35.gcs i.e7 36.�c7 gbs 37.i.c6?!

37.a4! �cs 38.:r!:xcS dxcS 39.Eib3! \II/as perhaps better, as Black has
difficulty holding on to all his pawns.

37 ..ll:b6?
.

A bad mistake. 37...:1:1.cS! v._ras the only way to play for Black:
38.*a2 :1:!.b81 (halting b4), and White still has to prove his
advantage.

38 ..id5+ @f6 39.g4!

Now it's \>Vilu1ing. Black's rook on b6 is nowhere near as


important as White's on c7, which is fueling a strong attack
against the opponent king.

39...hxg4 40.fxg4 e4

Otherwise Black 'vVill lose his bishop after 41.gS+.

41..ixe4

41.gS+! was stronger: 41. ..*fS 42J;1e3 and White wins a pawn
while Black's king is still not feeling co1nfortable.

41 ....idS 42J!c2 g5 43J!f3+ l!lg7 44.ll:xf8 @ xf8 45.Elc8 <tie7 46.h5


White's passed pawn on the h-file is too strong. Black can't afford
to lose any more 1naterial, but it is not easy to put a stop to the h­
pawn.

46..d5
. 47.ixd5
. �d748J!a8 �f6 49.i.e4 ll:f1+ 50.�a2 �f2 51.i.f5+
@e752.h6.tb653.h7id4 54.h8=�

and Black resigned as there is nothing left to play for after


54..J:txb21- 55.�al 1--

1-0

A very interesting concept is the creation of a strong outpost by


1neans of a pawn sacrifice.
The Soviet School studied this concept in depth and came to the
conclusion that it is a worthy one:

□ Botvinnik Mikhail
■ Pomar Salamanca Arturo
Varna 1962

1.g3 dS 2.filf3 cs 3.ig2 ltlc6 4.d3 es 5 0


. -0 id6 6.e4 d4 7.ltlbd2
<tlge7 8.c4 f6 9 . q)h4 ie610.f4 exf4 11.gxf4 Wc7
12.eS!

The introduction to a well-known concept: the creation of an


outpost.

12 ... fxeS 11.3.fS �f7 14.�e4

White used the mechanism of a typical pawn sacrifice to secure:


1. Superior piece play;
2. Strong e4-outpost;
3. Strong g2-bishop;
4. Badly placed d 6 -bishop.
And all these for a mere pawn!

14...0-0- 0

Although the text 1nove is not satisfactory, Black can barely play
something better. An exa1nple is 14...�g8 15.Wg4 if8 16.li:lg6!
hxg6 17.fxg6 li:lf6 18.�xf6! gxf6 19.�xf6+ @d8 20.g7 �g7 21.Wxg7
;ges 22.igS+-

1s.VNg4 @b8 16.Wxg7

White is allowed to win his sacrificed pawn back too early ­


and almost without a fight. That's why Black had to prefer
so1nething other than 14...0 -0-0.
Maybe Black has to try 16 ..Jl:df8, \A/hen White can continue
17.f6!? 1':1:hg8 18.Wxh7 �h8 19.Wg7 1':1:hg8 20.i.h6±

17.!U-2

I wouldn't called this a dubious 1nove, but still, quite good is


l 7.tbxd6 Wxd6 18.f6 lt.:lg6 19.tbfS Wc7 20.Wxc7+ r;k;xc7 21.i.e4± It
seems that White's position is so good that he is 'permitted' to
play s01nething like second-best 1noves and still be better!

17...h6 18.�d2 �dg8 19.Wf6 tZ'lc8

20.<!bg6! hg6

20..J;!h7 21.We6 !l:f7 22J%af1±

21.fxg6 �e7 22.Wf7?

White blunders his valuable g6-pawn. He should opt for 22.We6


�g7 23.i.h3 !1:hg8 24J�g2±

22...<!bd8! 23.WfS �4! 24.�f3 tZ'le7 25.Wh3 li::ixg6 26.li::if6 .ixf6


27.�xf6

Though again a pawn down, White's position is still nice (strong


bishop-pair, open f-file).

27...VJie7 28.e:afl
28....!bf4?

And Black, in turn, blunders badly. Instead he had to play


28..Jih7 29.l!?hl;;

29.ll:6xf4! exf4 30..ixf4+

And the queen is lost or 1nate follows on c8.


1-0

o Pilnik Herman
■ Geller Efim
Gothenburg 1955

1.e4 cs 2..!bf3 .!bc6 3.d4 cxd4 4..!bxd4 .!bf6 S•.!bc3 d6 6..ie2 es


7.�b3 .ie7 8.0-0 0-0 9..ie3 .ie6 10..if3 as 11.�dS .ixdS 12.exdS
�b8 13.c4 .!ba6 14..id2 b6 1S ..ic3 .!bcS 16. .!bxcS bxcS 17Jfe1 .!bd7
18..idt a4 19..ic2 f5 20.S:dt g6 21.VNe2 .if6 22.f3
Both sides seem to be happy with their positions and their
middlegame expectations. White's last move was played with the
intention of preventing ...e4 and the exchange of dark-squared
bishops, vvhich would favour Black in terms of both 'static'
advantages and the initiative.

22...e4!

Anyway! The bishops' exchange, plus the outpost which will be


created for Black's knight by the change in the pawn-structure,
constitutes great value for a pawn. This is a typical positional
sacrifice that should be remembered.

23..axf6 �xf6 24.fxe4

Forced: 24.f4? Wxb2-+

24...f4! 25 J!f2 .!bes

Black was not intending the naive 25 ...VffxbZ? 26.Wg4 li::le5


27.�e6+ li::lf7 28..ixa4±
Now it's time to take stock of Black's idea. Actually \II/hat he did
was to 'exchange' a pawn for a strong outpost, and the question
is: was it worth it? In 1ny opinion the answer is yes, and it is

1••��•im
based on the following compensating factors:

-■
.••
�■-z:· • "a■
��·� ••

!�:•

•• -,,¼.•�-1'V

• �,, •
>,,,,, "

- -r_,- ,,, m ,,,,,


� ¼<.., -

.t. LS lS �
LSD LS� .
..

1. Good knight vs bad bishop;


2. Strong es-outpost;
3. Pawn majority on the kingside.
Black holds the advantage and has a clear plan in mind: activity
on the kingside. And in the meantime, ,,vhat can White really do?

26.�dfl Wh4 27..tdl :Sf7 28.Wc2 gs 29.Wc3 :Saf8

Black is coming!

30.h3

Or 30 .ha4 f3 (30 ...tbg4 31.h3 lt:lxf2 32.%\xf2 f3+) 31..½.dl fxg2


32.l'.l:xf7 gxflW+ 33.%\xfl f!Xfl+ 34.�xfl Wxe4+

30...hS 31..te2

31... g4! 32.:Sxf4

Desperation, but the waiting policy was hardly helpful: 32..idl


�h7 33.ie2 f3-+

32...gxf4 33J!xf4 :Sxf4 34.g3 tZlf3+

A nice tactical shot to finish the game. Having stressed that the
strength of the outpost lay partly in the role it plays in supporting
operations against the f3 square, it comes at an appropriate
1noment. But 34...Wxh3 was also winning: 35.gxf4 g3 36.We3 Wh2+
37.'itlfl g2+

35.<.!?f2 Wxh3 36.gxf4 g3+! 37.<.!?xf3 g2+ 38.<.!?f2 Wh2 0-1


o Gheorghiu Florin
■ Kasparov Garry
Thessaloniki 1988

1.d4 li:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3.<tlc3 1i.g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.1i.e3 es 7.dS c6
8.Wd2 cxdS 9.cxdS <tibd7 10.<tige2 a6 11.<tlc1 <tihS 12.1i.d3 f5
13.li:Jte2 ltidf6 14.exfS gxfS 15.lt:ig3

15... e4!?

Same stuff.

16..!bxhS <tixhS 17.fxe4 f4 18.i.f2 1i.g4!

Wrong ,,vould be 18...f3? 19.'.1;1g1! fxg2 20Jllg2 Wf6 21.0-0-0 ih3


22.l%xg7+ li:Jxg7 23.ie3±

19.h3

.Possible is 19.ie2, where after 19...ixe2! 20.Wxe2 (20.lbxe2


We?;;;) 20...WgS 21.Wf3 flae8 (21...li:Jf6 22.h4 Wh6 23.0-0- 0 li:Jd7�)
22.0-0 lcif6 23.id4 lcig4 24.ixg7 Wlxg7, Black has good
compensation, based on the e s -outpost.

19... i.d7 20.0-0-0 1i.e5 21.<.!?bt Wf6 22.1i.e2 <tig3


23.i.xg3?!

Handing over the bishop pair is not a good sign. White should
consider 23Jl:hel .ixc3 (23...tI:ixe2 24.'llxeZ f3 [24...Wg6 25 . Wd3+=]
25.gxf3 Wxf3 26..id4 Wxe4+ 27.�al �ae8oo) 24.Wxc3 Wxc3 25.bxc3
'llxe4 26.i.d4 ifS 27.�b2 :!!ac8=

23...fxg3 24."3 E!ac8 25.lbe2 Wg6?!

Pointless. Black would do well after the logical 25 ...%1:cS 26J!cl


b6.

26.!kl! l3xc1+ 27.Wxcl

27 .. J!xf31 28.gxf3 g2 29.�gl .ixh3 30.'lle2 i.h2 31.!!:cl glW 32.lt:\xgl


i.xgl 33:�b4 .ie3=+

27...l3c8 28.We3 Wf6 29.Wd2 �cs


30.�cl?

A passive move. \,Vhite had to go for 30.l::l:cl ixh3 (30.. Ji:xcl+


31.�xcl .ixh3 32.li:id3oo) 31.�xcS dxcS 32.WiaS (32.gxh3? Wxf3
33.WigS+ .ig7 34.WdS+ .if8 35.WgS+ 4f7-+) 32 ....ixb2 (32 ...hSl?
33.WxcS h4oo) 33.gxh3 Wixf3 34.WdS+ 4g7 35.tZlxg3=

30....if4! 31.Wb4

31.Wid3 .ibS 32.Wb3 Wd4 33J!dl �xcl+ 34.�cl id3+-+

31....ibS

The black bishop pair dominates!

32.�b3 .id3+ 33.�al S:c2 34J!b1

34.Wid4 .ieS! 35.Wxd3 �xb2!-+

34....ieS 3S.�cl

35.li:id2 as-+

3S....ixb2+ 36.Wxb2 �xb2+! 0 - 1

o Kotov Alexander
■ Gligoric Svetozar
Zurich 1953

1.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 �g7 4.e4 d6 S.f3 0-0 6.�e3 es 7.ds cs
8.�d3 �hS 9.�ge2 f5 10.exfS gxf5 11.VNc2

This is a nearly identical position to the game Botvinnik -Pomar,


but with colours reversed.

11... e4! 12.fxe4 f4 13..if2 �d7 14.�gl!

White correctly prepares to challenge the upco1ning black


knight on es.

14...VNgS 15..ifl �e5 16.�f3 VNe7 17.<!bxe5 WxeS

Black has full compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

18.0-0-0 <!bf6 19.h3 .id7 20..id3 a6 21.�bl!?

An interesting idea, planning <!bd2-f3, kicking away the black


queen. White 1night later return the pawn with es, gaining the
initiative.
21... f3!

A second pawn sacrifice, as it is very important for Black to


preserve the 'dark-square complex' control.

22.gxf3 <tlhS 23JLJd2 <tlf4 24..tfl bS

Another interesting idea was 24...i.a4 25.lbb3 bS�

25.h4 <.t>h8 26.:1:!:gl M6 27.�b3 :e:ab8 28.i.el b4 29.<.t>bl )3a8 30..ig3


;g:gg 31.1.Wh2

31...:e:xg3! 32.�xg3 �e2 33 .Wxe2 Wxg3 34.�ct as 35.�d3 i.d4


36.hS Wh4 37..ig2 :e:g8 38.:1:!:hl Wg3 39.Mt a4 40.<.t>c2 a3 41.b3

130th sides were 'happy' with tihe draw (Black is n,vo pa,,vns
do,,vn), but I think that Black could continue: 41...%lf8 42.ltlel
(42..ig2 i.g4! 43.tbel .ic3 44.h6 hel 45.:l!xel .ixf3 46J1fl WeS!-+)
42...i.c3 43.t2:id3 Wxf3 44.?9xf3 �xf3 45.h6 .ie8 46.i.e2 !i:e3 47.l�:h2
gxe4 48.!i:f2 @g8 49.lbf4 i.d4 S0J!g2+ @h8 51.li:ie6 .ie3=+

½-½
□ Boleslavsky Isaak
■ Lisitsin Georgy
Leningrad 1956

1.e4cs 2.tcif3 d63.d4cxd4 4.tcixd4 tcif6 S.tcic3 g66..ie3 .ig7 7.f3


0-0 8.Wd2 .!bc6 9 0
. -0-0 lbxd4 10.�xd4Was 11.@bl es 12 ..ie3 .ie6
13 a
. 3 �fd8 14.ttlbS Wa4

1S.c4!?

This would be an excellent example of the creation of a weak


square via a pawn sacrifice, if not for the direct 15.loc7! and �bS,
winning.

1S ...ixc416.
. lbc3 Wb317.hc 4 Wxc4 18..igS! We619 .ixf6
. Wxf6
20 tci
. dS
At the cost of a mere pawn, White has achieved an excellent
outpost on dS and he can now concentrate on the attack against
the black king, as Black see1ns to have no counterplay...

20...VNh4 21.VNeZ .if8 22.Wfl!

Planning g3 and h4, avoiding the blockade with ...VNh3.

22...�ac8 23.g3 WgS 24.h4 VNh6 25.g4 gS?!

This loses quickly, but Black's position was in any event


hopeless.

26.hxgS Wxgs 27J!h5 Wg6 28.gS! h6 29.:Sxh6! Wxgs

and Black resigned, due to the upcoming VNhl and E'.gl.

1-0

CONCLUSION

The theory and the mechanisms that rule strong/weak squares


(outposts) is relatively easy to learn, but maybe a bit more
difficult to put into practice!
Well, as this concept is an often-met one, the trainee is obliged
to study and understand it, through the various materials
available.
THE BURIED BISHOP
A not-often-met strategic theme is the one of the 'buried bishop'.
A theme that we can see perfectly in the next example:

Example 1
Athens 2006

1-0

The meaning is quite simple: a bishop is unable to participate in


the battle, due to difficulties created mostly by its o\lvn pawns,
which restrain it from even the slightest mobility.
Of course, some 'help' is also necessary from the opponent's
pawns, which \lvill harmoniously cooperate to bury the bishop
tor ever!
There are certain mechanisms that can help create this kind of
advantage and can be studied in the games that follow.
But before we go on with the examples we should ask ourselves
\IVhat the purpose of burying a bishop is? Or to put it straighter,
how can we benefit from that? Well, usually we can convert our
advantage in the endga1ne.
Exchanging most of the rest of our pieces (all, ifwe can
penetrate the opponent's camp, but no pawns!) we will simply
play the game a piece up.
There is no point in counting the quantity; as always, quality is
more ilnportant. We are going to have a minor piece that works
and produces threats against an immobilised one that can only
sit back and watch.
We will start with exa1nples proving the incapability of the
completely buried bishop:

o w. Winter
■ J.R. Capablanca
Hastings 1919

1.e4 e5 2.€:if3 €:ic6 3.ltlc3 €:if6 4..ib5 i.b4 5.0-0 0-0 6.i.xc6 dxc6
7.d3 i.d6 8.i.g5 h6 9.i.h4 c5 10.ltld5 g5 11.ltlxf6+ VNxf6 12.�g3

This is a classical and very well-kno,11/n example.

12...�g4! 13.h3 hf3 14.VNxf3 VNxf3 15.gxf3

No,11/ Black is practically playing a piece up. The g3-bishop is


shut in and can only be freed by a pa,11/n sacrifice (e.g. @g2, ih2,
f4 and after ...exf4 White can play f3 and .igl), but that costs both
time and material. Black's correct plan to realise his positional
advantage is simple: take over the initiative on the queenside
and create a breakthrough to open up the position, as in practice
he has ',II/on' a piece (the d6-bishop).

15...f6 16.@g2 a5 17.a4

It is interesting to note that Black has a 'bad bishop' (seven


black pawns are on dark squares and he has a dark-squared
bishop!) but despite that, the only possible ,vay for White to save
the game would lie the alisence of the f2-pawn.

17...<.!;>f7 18.�h1 <.!;>e6 19.h4 :Sfb8

Black ignores the kingside play, as White can achieve nothing


there.

20.hxgS hxgs

Opening the h-file doesn't help. The main theatre of operations


is the queenside.

21.b3 c6!

No unnecessary haste: 21 ...bS? 22.axbS :§.xbS 23.l;a4 :§.b4


24.a'.haloo. Black calmly prepares the bS-thrust.

22.�a2 bS 23.!!hal

■ ■
■•■ ■ ■
E� ■

23...c4!

The decisive thrust after vvhich the d6-bishop can breathe and
participate actively in the game.

24.axbS

24.dxc4 bxc4 25.bxc4 :§.b4 follo\ved by ...a:ab8 and ...1.�xc4.

24...cxb3 25.cxb3

25.l%xa5?1 %!xa5 26J:!.xa5 b2- + is a typical trick!


25...�xbS

Now the white king and bishop are mere spectators, who can
only ,,vatch the black pieces conquering the queenside.

26.�a4 :Sxb3 27.cl4 :Sb5

27..J;tb4 28.dS+ cxd5 29.exdS+ @xd5 30.�xaS+ !i:xa5 31J;txa5+ icS


was another win for Black.

28.�c4 �b4 29.:Sxc6 :Sxd4

A wonderful game on the theme of the buried piece (the g3-


bishop).

0-1

□ Alexander Kotov
■ Isaac Kashdan
USA 1945

White holds the advantage, as his bishop pair and the possession
of the only open file are great pluses. But in general, the 1nain
problem for Black is his lack of counterplay, as his pieces and
especially his g7-bishop are quite restricted and in1mobilised.

32Jk8+ @h7 33.@e2 a4

There was not 1nuch to do, as the alternative 33 ... if6 34.h4 @g7
35.�c6 ltld8 36.fl:a6 a4 37..idS± see1ned equally unsatisfactory.
34..ixe6!

A nice transfonnation of the advantage; from bishop pair to the


buried bishop - an even better one.

34...fxe6 35 J!b8!

Wrong would be 35J�c6? as after 35...b41 Black's counterplay


would be great.

35... �xb8 3 6..ixb8 b4

There was not much difference on 36...4g8 37.'i!?d3 i.h6 38.f4+-

37.@d3 .ih6 38.f4! g5

39.g4!

Game over! The miserable black bishop will never 1nake it back
to the game, allowing its counterpart to operate without
opponent.

39...hxg4 40.hxg4 gxf4 41.exf4


Black resigned, as after 41... @g6 42.@c4 b3 43.axb3 axb3 44.@xb3,
there is no chance left for him.

1-0

o Anatoly Karpov
■ Lubomir Kavalek
Nice 1974

Black see1ns to hold a respectable position, as White's light­


squared bishop does not look like a good piece. But the truth is
quite different!

29..ixc5! �xc5 30.h6! M8

There ,,vas no choice, as 30 ...ib2 31.%tbl or 30 ...!h8 31.!!:bl l3c8


32.gS vvith the idea idl-a4-d7-e6, were also hopeless.

31.@c3?!
Defending against Black's ...1%aS-a3 threat, but this allows Black
to reduce the pressure. Correct was 31.gS! !l:aS 32.!�bl! �a3+
33.a:b3 gxa2 34.i.dl (planning a;b8, i.b3 and cs or �b8 and i.a4-
d7-e6) 34..J�al 3S. * d2 as 36J;Eb8 a4 37.�a8 with an easy win.

31... fxg4!

Black cannot really allow 31.. .l�as 32.*b3 !l:cS? 33. g S, when
a typical variation could run 33 ...*f7 34J!el !l:c7 3S.a3 �cs 36.§e6
©e8 37.*c3 *d7 38.@b4 @c7 39.i.dl 'i!td8 40.i.a4 !l:c7 41.ic6 !l:c8
42.a4 1%b8+ 43.'i!taS and White's a-pawn will promote.

32.ixg4

32...@f7!

The 1nost active try. A passive defence like 32 ... a:aS? 33.ie6+ �h8
34.@b3 :f!cS 3S.fS !l:c7 (3S...gS 36.�hS+ -) 36.1%h2 gs 37.:f(hS Z;b7+
38.@a4 �b8 39.@aS �a8 40.*b6 as 41.a4 would only play into
White's hands.

33.ie6+ @f6 34.ig8 S:c7 35.ixh7

White must be on the alert, as 3S.'i!td3?! ixh6 36Jl:xh6 'i!tg7


37. � 7+ @xg8 would offer just the better side of a draw.

35 ... e6 36.ig8 exd5 37.h7


37.ixdS? !1:h7! would be quite easy.

37....ig7?

Black blunders terribly! \Nith 37 .. J!xc4+ 38.�d3 ig7 39.hdS


(39.h8=W?! ixh8 40.�8 �c8=) 39 ...�cs 40.ie4 (40.�e4?! ih8
41Jlbl f!:bS= ) 40 ... dS 41.�d4! :i:'!aS 42.id3 @f7+! 43.@e3 ih8 44.:i:'l:gl
�a2 45.ixg6+ �f6 he could keep White's advantage to the
minimum.

Now it's all over.

38....ih8 39.©d3 l!.>fS 40 . l!.>e3 �e7+ 41.l!.>f3 as 42 . a4 l3c7 43..ie4+


@f6 44.�h6 �g7 45.l!.>g4 1 - 0

□ Gennadi Sosonko
■ Bosko Abramovic
New York1 986

30.h3
Opposite-coloured bishops are on the board, but the difference in
their activity is obvious.

30... g6!

Now White's g2-bishop is completely buried by its o,,vn pav-rns


and cannot be counted as a 'real' piece. White would be happy
after 30 ....ixb4? 31.g4 g6 32Jac7 bS 33.axbS axbS 34.gxfS gxfS
35Jlli7 f!dS 36.*g3=;
Even after 30 ...�f8? Black can get an advantage: 31.g4 g6
(31 ... hxg4? 32.hxg4 g6 33.gxfS gxfS 34.'.Bhl=) 32.gxfS gxfS 33.h4
r;J;ie7 34.i.h3 *xe6 35J�g1 .ie7 36.!i:g6+ *es 37J!h6 .ixh4+ 38.*fl
�dl + 39.�g2 fi:el 40 .!i:xhS �xe2+ 41.'i!lfl !!:f2+ 42.�gl .ig3+ But
White could put up resistance and have some practical chances.

31.g4 h4!

The 1niserable g 2 -bishop will never again participate in the


game. Black has in fact won a piece, and ,,vith a piece up the win
cannot be far away.

32.b5 axb5 33.axb5 �f8 34.!k4 �e7 35.gxf5 gxf5


Now Black can calmly ,,vin back his pawn and then even
exchange rooks, or in general win as he pleases. \iVhite decided to
commit suicide!

36.ixe4?! fxe4 37.El:xe4 0 - 1

o Anthony Miles
■ Vassily Smyslov
Dortmund 1986

26...gs

Black's unfortunate bishop is struggling to survive, but without


success. White, by using the usual method, 'wins a piece'.

27.hS! b2 28.<.!?d2 �b3 29.ic2 �b6 30.id3 :Sb3 31.ic2

31.<.!?c2 �a3 32.4'xb2 !ixa4 33.e3 would also have sufficed, but
Black could try to sacrifice his useless bishop with ...!!aS and
...i.xeS. There is no need to allow that!

31...gb6 32.c4 cs 33.@c3 as

34..ib3!

After the naive 34.IDcb2? !l:xb2 35.@xb2 it is not clear how White
would penetrate. White needs to preserve the rooks on board.
34...gxf4 35.gxf4 @d7 36.rtxb2 @e8 37.S:bl @f7 38.S:gl il.h8
39..ic2!

Back-rank mate sche1nes would allow the white rook to


penetrate into Black's can1p.

39....ig7 40..ig6+ @g8 41.l3d1

Black resigned. After 41...a'.b8 42.r!d7 '.!;1.f8 43.e3 the dual threats of
�a7 or Y:Jc7 win.
1-0

o Gabriel Sargissian
■ Alexander Areshchenko
Bundesliga 2005

15.�d3 Wixh4

Or 15 ...�xf3 16.gxf3 �3 17.axb3±

16.Wixe6!

A good point; Black's g7-bishop will have to suffer...

16...fxe6 17.lbxh4 li:Jb4 18.�c4 �f7 19.ti:Jf3 h6 20.a3 lbd5 21.:Sc2


:Sab8 22.e4 li:Jf4 23.g3 lbh3+ 24.�g2 q)g5

25.eS!

Burying the bishop...


25...�xf3 26.@xf3 bS 27..ib3 :Sb6 28.@e4 as

White's advantage is indisputable. Of course, he controls the only


open file on the board and the doubled black e-pawns are real
weaknesses, but most important is the fact that his bishop is
alive and kicking. The opponent's g7-bishop is buried alive in his
'fortress', unable to lend a precious hand to the rest of the black
pieces.

29.�fcl a4

29... b4 30.a4 would have hardly changed the result.

30..ia2 b4

31.�c6?!

31.axb4 :fum4 32.fl:c6 fl:d8 33.i.xe6+ @e8 34.fl:lc4 fl:xc4 35.!1:xc4 a3


(35 ...!l:a8 36.i.dS) 36.:li:a4 was more precise.
31...:Sxc6 32.:Sxc6 b3 33.�1 hS?!

33...gS 34J!c4 :!!a8 35.�d3 g4 36.@c3 hS 37.ie4 l:l:a6 38.i.c6 l:l:b6


39.@b2 would also win, but Black was 'obliged' to liberate his
bishop and try to find salvation in an opposite-coloured bishops
endga1ne.

34.h4! :Sb8 35.f4

Buried alive forever! Now White just needs to collect the black
queenside pa\lvns.

35 ... b2 36.@d3 a:b3+ 37.a:c3

An opposite-coloured bishops endgame is quite often drawish,


but in this case we have an endgame a bishop up!

37...:SbS 38.@c2 :Sb6 39.:Sc4 !!:b3 40.:Sc3 :Sb6 41 .i.a2! i.f8 42.:Sc4 gs
43.fxgS @g6 44.:Sb4

Black resigned as 44...l:l:a6 45.*xb2 @fS 46.�b8 i.g7 47.:!!g8 would


show the loneliness of the poor black bishop.

1-0

□ Piet Van der Weide


■ Rene Olthof
Oen Bosch 2009
White stands better due to his bishop pair and his spatial
advantage.

22..ixe6!

But, as is quite often the case, White transforms his advantage


from the bishop pair to the more active piece!

22 ...�xd2 23..ixd2 fxe6 24.©f2

Not good was the 'typical theme' with 24.h4? hSI (24... gS? 25.hS!)
25.�f2, as we will see later in the game. In such positions, this
early 'lockout' of the bishop is usually good only when there is an
extra piece for both sides on the board. We shall see why in the
proceeding play.

24...hS?!

Losing or not, Black had to go for 24...gS 25.fxgS hxgS 26.txgS


.ixeS 27.b3±, where at least his bishop would be active.

25.�e3 �e8

25...gs 26.fxgS txes 27 ..ic3 i.d6 28. g 6 ©g8 29.©f3 ©f8 30.h4 ©g8
31.g4+-

26.©f3 �f7 27.h3 .th6


28.b4!

White must open files on the queenside in order to allow his


king to penetrate.

28...cxb4 29.i.xb4 i.g7

White would still be in the driver's seat even after the relatively
'active' 29 ...gS 30..id2! gxf4 31..hf'4 ig7 32.c4

30.c4 @e8 31.cS bxcS 32.�xcS a6 33.@e4 �f8 34.@d4 @d7 35.@c4
@c6 36.i.b4 @b6 37.a4 @c6 38.i.aS i.h6

39.h4?

It looks like the end, as the bishop will be locked in forever. But
White had to go for 39.id2 ig7 40.g4! hxg4 41.hxg4 .th6 (41 ...gS
42.fxgS ixeS 43..tc3+- ) 42.gS! (now the bishop is also locked in!)
42...ig7 43.ib4 if8 44.icS @b7 45.@b4 @c6 46.ie3 ig7 47.@aS
@b7 48.i.f2 i.f8 49.icS and Black is in zugz,.vang: 49 ... @c6
(49 ....ig7 SO.he? @a7 Sl ..if6 .if8 S2.fS !+-) SO.'i!?xa6! @xcS Sl.@b7+-

39...�g7 40.�d8 �f8 41.@b4

Now, by using the zugzwang 1nethod, White ,.vill win material -


but this will not be enough for a win.

41...@d7 42.�b6 @c6 43.@aS @b7 44.�d8 @a7 45.�b6+

There ,.vas also nothing to be gained by 4S.@b4 @b7 46.@cS @c8


47.ias @b7 48..ib6 ig7 49.i.d8 if8 so.as ig7! (Black has to give
up the pawn, as SO...@c8? runs into Sl.@b6! @xd8 S2.@xa6 @c7
53.@bS @b7 (S3...ig7 54.a6 ih6 SS.a7 @b7 S6.a8= W+! @xa8
57.@c6+- ) S4.a6+ @a7 SS.@c6 @xa6 S6.@d7 @b6 57.@xe6+- )
51.ixe7 @c7

And \,Vhite cannot improve his position, as the sacrifice S2.id8+


'i!?xd8 S3.@b6 (S3.@d6? if8+ S4.@xe6 ib4- +) S3...@d7 54.@xa6
@c6 S S.@a7 @c7 56.@a6 i.f8 (S6...@c6=) S7.@b5 .ia3 S8.a6 i.cl
59.a7 @b7 6O.a8=W+ �xa8 61.@c6 ie3 62.@d6 .tf2 63.@xe6 ixg3
64.@f7 .txf4 6S.e6 id6 66.@xg6 .te7 67.@xhS @b8 68.@g4 @c7
69.hS i.f8 leads to a draw.

45...@b7 46.�cs �g7

Forced, as after 46...@c6? 47.'i!?xa6! (again!) 47...@xcS 48.@b7


@b4 49.@c6 White wins easily.
47.!J.xe7

It seems that it should be easy from now on, but the placement
of the white pawns on the 'vvrong' colour does not help.

47...!J.h6 48.@b4 @c6 49.@c4 !J.g7 50.@d4 @d7 51.!J.b4 @c6 52.@e4
@d7 53.@f3 @e8

54.g4

This plan leads to a draw, but the truth is that there is no other
satisfactory plan.

54...@f7?·

There was no win after the simple 54... hxg4+ 55.l!)xg4 ih6!
(55 ...@f7? 56.@gS ih8 57.l!)h6+-) 56.icS @f7, as \,Vhite cannot
make progress and his a p - awn is also on the wrong file in
relation to his bishop.

55.!J.d6?

Returning the favour. White could win with 55.gS! (re1nember


the note to White's 39th move) 55 ...l!)e8 56.'i!?e4 l!)d7 57.l!)d4 l!)c6
58.l!)c4 @b7 59.ie7 l!)C6 60.id6 'i!?b6 61.l!)b4 @c6 62.ic5 l!)d7
63.l!)aS+-
56.gS!

Finally! White wins!

56...i.g7 57.@e4 'i!?e8 58.@d4 'i!?d7 59.@cS 1 - 0

Well, the fully-buried bishop case is a rare one and ,.vell ­


examined already but there are other cases, such as the half­
buried bishop (which can come to life at a certain point) and the
bishop that returns from the dead (buried!)
Let's start with the first case; the half-buried bishop.

o Garry Kasparov
■ David Navara
Saint Louis 2017

1.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.es .ifs 4..!bc3 e6 s.g4 .ig6 6..!bge2 cs 7.i.e3 .!be7
8.f4 hS
9.f5!

This is a typical mechanism. With the help of a pawn sacrifice,


White half-buries Black's g6-bishop, while obtaining for his
knight the excellent 'outpost' on f4. Actually the text is forced, as
9.gS? lt:lfS 10..if2 lt:lc6 would already be much better for Black.

9 ...exf5 10.g5! �bc6 11.�f4

Mechanism completed; White has full compensation for the


sacrificed pawn.

11...a6

11 ...cxd4 12..ixd4 Was 13.a3 !t:lxd4 14.b4 Wc7 15.Wxd4 0-0-0


16.!t:lbS !t:lc6 17.!t:lxc7 lt:lxd4 18.0-0-0 !t:lf3 19.0ice6 �e8 20.lt:ixf8
�hxf8 21.e6 !t:lxgS 22.ibS± ,.vas Pasqua,G-Markus,R LSS email
2012.

12.�g2 cxd4 13.�xd4

13...�xd4?!

13...WaS 14.a3 lt:ixd4 15.Wxd4 0-0-0::::; was a much better try.

14.Wxd4 �c6 15.Wf2 �4?

15 ...WaS! 16.ixdS .icS 17.Wg2, was again a must for Black.

16.0-0-0! �xc3 17.bxc3 Wa5 18.:Sxd5?!


18..ixd5!+-

18 ..V. Nxc3 19.Wc5! Wxc5 20 l:". !xcS 0-0 21.hc6 bxc6 22.:Sdl

After a lot of exchanges, White will win back his invested


material, but Black still has the buried bishop on g6. So White
improved, while Black re1nained put, so it is not luck that the
position offers a clear advantage...

22...:Sab8 23.c4

23.e6! ©h7 24.e7 �fe8 25Ji:d7+- was another, faster way...


23...:Sfd8 24.Eld6 @f8 25 J!cxc6 Eldc8

Losing easier, but 25..J;i:bc8 26.©b2 (26.cS !i:xc6 27.'.Bxd8+ ©e7


28.l'.!dS+- ) 26...l'.!xc6 27.�xd8+ ©e7 28.�d4 :l!c5 29.lLid3 �c8 30.©c3+­
couldn't offer any hope either.
26 .©c2 h4 27.Elxc8+ :Sxc8 28. © c3 a5 29.:Sa6 :Sb8 30.:Sxa5 :Sbl
31.c5 Elel 32.Ela8+ ©e7 33.:Sa7+ ©e8
34..!bd3?!

As Kasparov noted later, it would be even better to pass a move


than to re1nove the knight from its excellent position on f4: 34.e6
:1:1.eS 35.c6 �cs+ 36.@d4 !i:xc6 37 .4e5+-

34...�e3 35.�d2?

But that's bad! White could again be in the driver's seat after
35.c6! f4 36.!l:a8+ �e7 37.c7 .½xd3 38.!i:e8+! (38.c8=W? MS++)
38...@xe8 39.c8W+ �e7 40.@d2+-

35...�h3?

35 .. .f4! 36 ..!bxf4 !l:xeS 37.c6 !l:cS 38.li:ixg6 fxg6 should hold for
Black.

36.c6 :Sxh2+ 37.�e3?

Obvious \II/as 37.@c3!+-


37...�c2!

38.e6?

It seems that time-trouble doesn't help legends either! Both


players are playing quite badly in this stage, and White again
missed 38.lbb4! '.Bc4 39.�a8+ @e7 40.c7 f4+ 41.@fZ ifS 42.lodS+
winning.

38...h3 39.li:lb4 f4+

39...hZ 40.'.Ba8+ @e7 41.fih8 �c4 42.li:idS+ @xe6 43.lof4+ @eS


44.lbd3+ l!?d6 ,,vould be drawish, but Black's need to free his
bishop is understandable...

40.@d4 h2 41J!a8+ @e7 42.:Sh8

42 ...�d2+?
Black could preserve equality with 42 ...!1c1! 43.tbdS+ l!lxe6
44.tbxf4+ iifS 45.0xg6 @xg6 46.IDiliZ !i:xc6 47.�gZ �a6.

43 @
. cS �e4?

Now Black is easily lost, so he should have tried 43.. .fxe6! 44:.c7
hl =W 45.c8= tb+! (45 J%xh1? \!ld7) 45...\!ld7 46.tbb6+ i>c7 47.!i:xhl
�g2 48.tbc4±

44.c7 .tb7

45.i> b6?

Chess engines claim that White would still be winning after


45.a3! ! - how many people would be able to 1nake this move.
even vvith time on the clock?!

45 ..i,c8!
. 46.EIXC8
. hl=W 47.1:!e8+

Or 47.lLJc6+ Wxc6+ 48.i>xc6 a'.c2+=.

47...�xe8 48.c8:;;�+ �e7


And finally a losing move... Good enough for the draw v;as
49.Wc7 + 4?xe6 SO.Wes+ �d7 Sl.We8+ !l:e7 s2:�c8+ 4?e5 53.WcS+ �e6
54.WcS+=

49..Jixc6+! SO.Wxc6

so...�d6 0 - 1

o David Bronstein
■ Alexa111der Beliavsky
Yerevan 1975

1.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.ltlc3 dxe4 4.ltlxe4 .ifs S.ltlcS Wb6 6.g4 .ig6 7.f4
e6 8.We2 .ie7 9.h4 hS
Black seems to be doing well ...

10.fS! exfS 11.gS

The same motif as in the previous game. Yes, every World


Champion has been 'educated' by his predecessors!

11...tZld7 12.tZlb3 Wc7 13.tZlh3!

The knight is on the road tovvards the f4 outpost.

13 ... 0-0-0 14.�f4 .id6 15.Wh2! tZlf8 16.0- 0-0 tZle6 17.hd6 :Sxd6
18.£c4! tZle7 19.tZlf4?!

19.i.xe6+! �xe6 20.Wxc7+ <:%Jxc7 21.tZ:icS l'.!d6 22.ti:"lf4;; was good


and in the spirit of the position.

19...tZlxf4 20.Wxf4 l'.l:dd8 21.Wxc7+ ©XC7 22.c3

22...l'.l:he8?

It was high time to liberate the bishop with 22 ...f4! 23.!:!dfl


(23.:l!hfl? lDfS! (23 ...lL\dS? 24.i.xdS :!:!xdS 25.flxf4 :1!:e8=) 24.�xf4 'De3
25.ixf7 �hf8+) 23...bS 24.ieZ li:idS 25.M3 tZ:ie3 26.f1:f2 :!!he8+

23.tZlcS!

Heading for f4!

23...tZlc8 24.tZld3 tZld6 25 ..ib3 :Se3 26.tZlf4


Exchanges have taken place, but White still has good
compensation - the g6-bishop is out of play...

26...�de8 27J!hg1 El8e7 28.1::!:dfl �e4 29.i.dl @d6 30..if3 cs


31.dxcS+ @xcS 32.�g2 1::!:d3 33.�f4 �d8?!

I feel that Black should accept the dravv with 33 ...!1:e3.

34.�dl! Eled7 3S.:Sxd7 1::!:xd7 36J!d1! 1::!:xdl+ 37.@xdl

37....!bd6?!

Black is playing carelessly. He should opt for 37...b6 38.@e2 @d6


39.@e3 @eS 40.a3 ti:id6= Of course White is not interested in
taking on hS, as this enables Black to get rid of his bad bishop.

38.@c2 as 39.a4 l!>b6 40.@d3 @c7?

A bad move. Natural was 40...@cS!


41.@d4! .!iJc8 42.b4! axb4 43.cxb4 .!iJe7 44.a5

44... f6?!

The final mistake, but Black's position was already critical.

45.gxf6 gxf6 46 . @c5 �f7 47.b5 �c8 48.b6

48.b6 Black resigned: 48...!bg6 49.!bxg6 .ixg6 50.@d6 f4 51.@e6+-

1-0

Well, temporarily burying a bishop is usually a bad idea, but


there are certain cases where it seems obligatory.
This is not so bad, as long as the bishop is able to come back to
life at some point.

□ Giorgio Porreca
■ David Bronstein
Belgrade 1 954

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3 tt:l. c3 dxe4 4 tt:l


. xe4 �f5 5 .tt:Jg3 .ig6 6.h4 h6 7.tt:lh3
.th7 8..tc4 tt:lf6 9.tt:lf4 q}bd7 10.0-0 1/:!1c7 11.�el
Black has probably mishandled the opening and now he faces
grave problems. He is looking for a way to complete his
development but this does not see1n to be an easy story.
11...�g8!

Temporarily retreating and strengthening the valuable e6-


square, as the immediate 11 ...e6? fails to 12.he6 fxe6 13.lt:lxe6+­
Well, the g8-bishop doesn't look like a great piece, but this fact is
a short-term one.

12..!bd3

A double-edged position would arise after the natural 12.a4 0-0-


0 13.c3 e6, so \N'hite tries to regroup his pieces.
12...e6 13..if4 i.d6 14.�xd6 Yfixd6 15..!bf5 Yfif8

Black's position with all these sidelined pieces does not look rosy,
but as there is nothing concrete for Wh!ite it can only be
improved!
16.VNf3?!

White loses his ·way. He should have tried 16.tZlf4!? i>d8! (16 ...0-
0-0? 17.ixe6 fxe6 18.'1Jg6 Wb4 19.c3+ -) 17.'1Je3 ih7 18.a4 <J?c7t

16...0-0-0 17.li:lg3 .ih7

Back to life!

18.a4

18.c3 gSoo was the natural continuation.

18....ixd3?

Both players missed that 18 ... tZ'lb6 ,Nins a pawn!

19..ixd3 Wd6 20.aS a6 21.Ela3 gs

Black has succeeded in completing his development, regrouped


his passively placed pieces, exchanged his half-buried bishop and
has no11v entered a double-edged middlegame.

22.hS Wf4

22...Wxd4 23.ha6 i>c7 24.i.floo

23.VNe2 <tic7

Black avoids giving \,Vhite attacking chances with 23 ...Wxd4


24.ixa6 bxa6 25.Wxa6+ 'i!Jc7 26J1c3;;

24.c3 S:he8 25.ti'i e4 �xe4 26.Wxe4?

As the ending is favourable for Black (weak pawns on as and


hS) White should have preserved the queens: 26..ixe4 iLJf6 27.g3
Wd6 (27 ...Wxe4 28.Wxe4 iLJxe4 29.:ll:xe4= ) 28 ..if3=

26...V�fxe4 27.he4 �f6 28.iJ3 g4! 29.�dl

29...ggs

29 ..JJdS!+ was even stronger.

30.ges :Sd5! 31.S:a4 :sgs

Black wins 1naterial and the game.

32..ib3 :Sdxe5 33.dxe5 �d7! 34..idl iLJxe5 35.ge4 :Sxh5 36.�xg4


�xg4 37.:Sxg4 gxa5 38.:Sg7 S:f5 39.g4 gf6 40.@g2 @d6 41.@g3 e5
42.ggs @d5 0 - 1

o Veselin Topalov
■ Viswanathan Anand
Sofia 2010

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.<!bf3 �f6 4.<!bc3 dxc4 5.a4 �f5 6.iLJe5 e6 7.f3 c5
8.e4 i.g6 9.�e3 cxd4 10.Wxd4 Wxd4 11..ixd4 iLJfd7
12..!bxd7!

12.tbxg6?! hxg6 13.ixc4 at first sight looks like it gives the


bishop pair to White, but it really offers him nothing, as after
13 .. .li:ic6 14.if2 !cs, Black has just solved his main problem in
this position - his inactive lightsquared bishop.
12 ... .!bxd7 13.i.xc4 a6 14J!c1 �g8

15.h4

Gaining space on any side cannot harm White's position.


15...h6 1 6.@e2

All these ideas (...f!:g8, h4, @e2) are quite com1non for this
variation and not hard to see played or to be met! The pre-ga1ne
training motifs that both opponents are 'taught' are helping them
to choose probably the most accurate move-order.
16....id6

Anand is ailning to activate his g8-rook by first playing ...@e7


and then exchanging his opponent's d4-bishop by ....icS. Another
option is 16....½cS 17 ..½xcS tuxes 18.hS ih7 19.l::lhdl �c8 20.aS 'tkle7
21.b4 tud7 22.tt:ia4±

17.hS .ih7

18.aS!

The 'gaining space' policy continues, as White no\l\r plans to use


the a4-square for his knight. Black still has to solve his light­
squared bishop proble1n and complete his development. In the
meantime White will have at his disposal a tempo or two to
prove an advantage.

18...'tkle7!

And what about the 'obvious' 18...ib4? I think that Topalov was
planning to sacrifice his a-pawn with 19.li:ia4!? (19.:l!al !1:c8 20.ib3
li:icS 21 ..ic2 @e7=; 19.tubSI? axbS 20.ixbS has 21.l!hdl) 19 ... haS
20.lt:icS (20.b4!? id8 (20...hb4 21.!!:bl;;t;) 21.ib3;;) 20...tt:ixcS
21.ixcS;; as it will be hard for Black to complete his
develop1nent. Obviously Anand doesn't feel it should be right to
go in for co1nplications before he is done with his development
and piece coordination - this is a co1nmon attitude in the great
players' thinking process.
19..!ba4 f6 20.b4!?

20.g4 );'!.gc8 21.lThdl .!g8 doesn't look very impressive here, so


White tries to be creative. His main problem is that he needs
a concrete plan to exert pressure, as his space advantage alone
isn't enough.

20..J�gc8
Accepting the pawn sacrifice with 20....txb4 could be proven
dangerous after 21.lThl .txaS 22.);'!.xb7 (or 22.tDcS bS 23.he6 lt:lxcS
24.!xg8 !xg8 25.hcS+ and 1naybe this is what Anand was mostly
afraid of.) 22 ...�gb8 23.:Shbl l:i'.xb7 24.:Sxb7 with strong pressure
along the 7th rank and im1nediate threats like lLlcS. But is seems
that Black can hold \-Vith

24...�d6! 25 ..!a7 �c6 26.ixa6 :!J..c7 27.a:bz 4;>d6! (27...:sxa7 28.fJ..bS+


�d6 29J!d2+±) 28.fl:d2+ <$;1e7 29.!bS id6=

21..icS

Not much is offered by 21.�cs ixcS 22.bxcS :Sc7=

21. ...ixcS

The safest, but Black could also go for 21...lt:lxcS 22.bxcS ic7
(22 ...hcS? 23.ixe6! ±) 23.0ib6 .txb6 24.cxb6 a:cs 25.ixa6! :Sxcl
26.fl:xcl :Sxa6 (26...bxa6? 27.:!'Kc7++-) 27.fi:c7+ 4;>d6 28.:Sxg7 he4
29.fxe4 �as 30.g4!? (30Jtxb 7 fl:xhS=) 30 ... fi:gS! and he will be able
to draw: 31.E(g6!? E'.xg6 32.hxg6 <;%Je7 33.l!?d3 <;%Jf8 34.<;%Jd4 l!?g7
35.<;%Jc5 <;%Jxg6 36.l!?d6 l!?f7 37.@c7 fS 38.gxfS exfS 39.eS f4 40.@d7 f3
41.e6+ <;%Jg7 42.e7 f2 43.e8=W fl =W=

22.bxc5 :Sc7

Silnple and nice, preparing ... !l:ac8. Black should avoid either
22...li:ixcS? 23.li:ib6+- or 22 ...!'!c6 23.E'.hdl !l:ac8 24.!l:xd7+ l!?xd7
25.ti:ib6+ E'.xb6 26.cxb6 ig8 27.eS±

The alternative 23J:!hdl li:ixcS 24.id3 1;(ac8 25.li:ib6 E'.d8 26.li:ia4


would end the game in a dravt by threefold repetition. Although
the text is not bad either, it is White that should be careful from
now on. Anand passed the opening exam vvith flying colours!

23...�d8

23...li:ixb6 24.cxb6 !l:cS 25.ha6! transposes to the note after


Black's 21st move.

24.idSI? is interesting. Black shouldn't take anything now, not


dS, not cs and not b6, but play instead 24...ti:ieS (24...li:ixcS
25.ixb7!; 24...ti:ixb6 25.axb6 f!c d7 26.ic4!; 24... exdS? 25.ti:ixdS+)
25.f4 li:id31 26.@xd3 exdS 27.fS! dxe4+ 28.<;%Jxe4 l!?e81=

24...�dxd7!
It seems that 24...!icxd7 would give White some chances after
25.c6! bxc6 26..ixa6 !l:a7 27.!l:xc6 �d6 28.Elxd6 �xd6 29.Eldl+ @e7
30.ic4 (30..icS !l:c7!) 30 .. .:t:!xaS 31.�bl as Black's h7-bishop still
remains a bad piece, but the liberating 31. ..fSI would do the job:
32.fill7+ �f6 33.exfS .ixfS= With the text move Black is perfectly
safe and might even try for something more if White overdoes
things.

25..id3 .ig8

Black thought about being ilnmediately active with 25 .. .fS but


after 26.c6!?
a) 26Jlc4 fxe4 27.fxe4 (27.he4?! fi.xe4 28.fxe4 1Yf6+) 27... eS=;
b) 26.eS!? �dS 27.f4 �dxcS 28.:i�xcS fuccS 29.!l:bl 'f!.c7 30.g41?�
(30.�d2 1t.g8 31..ie2 .if7 32 ..if3 �cS!=);
26...bxc6 27..ixa6 fxe4 28..lic4 exf3+ 29.gxf3� White's
compensation (in view of the passed a -pawn) is not bad but
probably not more than enough to keep the balance;
25...El.d4 seems to force a draw, but White has a resource: 26.c6!
El.a4 27J:1bl! �a2+ 28.@e3 bxc6 29.�al l f'!xg2 (29...Elxal 30J1:xal !l:a7
31JTh lt) 30.1t.xa6t

26.c6

Sooner or later White has to get rid of his weak c-pav;n.

26...�d6

Black could also go for 26 ...bxc6 27J�c2 :!:i.d4! (27...es 28.:1:1.hclt)


28Jl:al es 29.1t.xa6 cs 30.ibS �b4 31.a6 �a7 32.i'!aS �d6=;
26...�xc6 27.'.E!:xc6 bxc6 28.lThl looks a bit 1nore pleasant for
White due to his active pieces - take a look at the g8-bishop.

27.cxb7 :Sxb7 28Jk3 .if7!

Anand doesn't care to check Topalov's ideas - and rightly so!


After the 'active' 28...!l:b2+?1 29.@e3 �xg2 30.!l:c7+ El.d7 (30...@f8?
31 J1c8+ @f7 32J�b1+-) 31.:axd7+ @xd7 32Jl:d1! (32.:aal es 33.ha6
:aaZ=; 32.ixa6 :t:i:a2 33.�5+ �d6 34.a6 if7=) 32 ...@c6 33J(c1 + *d6
34.eS+! *xeS 35.ig6 Black will end up losing his unfortunate g8-
bishop, but still 1night have some survival chances due to his
pawns. After all, he doesn't have to go for it.

29.@e3

The ilnmediate 29.Ethcl makes sense and was probably a better


try, since it is risky to take the pawn: 29...i.xhS (29 ...ie8! 30.�c7+
:ad7 31.l:!7c5 :t:i:d6 32.g4 id7 33.@e3=) 30J�c7+ fucc7 31.!i:xc7+ �d7
32.l:'!c8t

29...�e8 30.g4 e5 31J!hc1 �cl7

It is true that it took Black a lot of time to fully activate his bishop
(. ..if5-g6-h7-g8-f7-e8-d7) but in the meantime White couldn't do
much. Full equality and the opponents could easily shake hands
but not in this match... Playing till the very end is a 'must' for
both players - Topalov made it completely clear before the
match and Anand would love to follow!
32.lk5 �b5

What an excellent post for the previously 'bad' bishop! Now


Black will not have to worry about his a-pav,rn, as with bishops
off the board, the balance can no longer be ruined. It is funny
that Anand equalized without any of his pieces being in the
opponent's half of the board.
33.i.xbS axbS

33..J!xbS? 34.:!:!xbS axbS 35.:i:!bll would just lose a pawn for


nothing!

34.�bl

After 34.:!!c7+ il:d7! Black would be OK. (34 .. J:1xc7? 35 J!xc7+ f1:d7
36.l;!cS! (36.:!!xd7+? <.!?xd7 37.<.!?d3 <.!?c6 38.<.!?c3 <.!?b7! = ) 36 ...f1:b7
3 7. <.!? d3 <.!?d6 38.:!:!dS+ <.!?c6 39.�c3±).

34...b4 3S.�b3 �a6 36.<.!?d3 �ba7

Novv, after some further forced exchanges, the game will end in
a draw.

37.�xb4 �as 38.�xas �as 39.�b7+ <.!?f8 40 .�e2 Ela2+

As no-one really wishes to offer a draw, the coming threefold


repetition will 'solve' the proble1n.

41.�e3 E!:a3+ 42 .�f2 Ela2+ 43.�e3 :Sa3+ 44.©f2 �a2+ 4S.©e3 E!:a3+
46.©f2

A draw offer through the arbiter could not be rejected by


Anand!

1/2
CONCLUSION

In general, burying a bishop is certainly a bad idea and should be


avoided at almost all costs. There are certain 1nechanisms and
ideas which were examined in this survey, ,,vhich would allow us
to dominate and cash in the point.
Exceptions do exist however, as long as the bishop can return
from the dead successfully...
UNDER-DEVELOPMENT
From our early chess years we learn that development and piece
coordination are key values in the playing ot a ga1ne.
Well, we are not always in a position to execute our 'knowledge'
perfectly, but in 1nost cases vve do reme1nber and try to apply
them.
The simple thing that we have to keep in mind is that in nearly
every case vve 1nust oppose the strategical or tactical plans of our
opponent utilising the same number of pieces he/she is using.
And also the silnplified idea of develop1nent and piece
coordination; all units must participate ,,vhen and where they are
needed.
But somehow there are still ga1nes played in which this
valuable axiom has to be 'omitted' for various reasons; mainly
because there is 'no tilne' to develop, or our opponent simply
keeps us 'behind'.
The following game yet 1nore proof of the lethal consequences
of poor development and piece coordination. White launched
a direct attack on the opposing king, and the poor development
of the black queenside pieces proved fatal. Black played the
entire ga1ne without three of his pieces...

o Efstratios Grivas
■ Emanouel Pandavos
Chania 1987

t.d4 ltJf6 2.<tif3 e6 3.�gs


The 'Torre Attack' is an interesting opening choice, which often
transposes into other openings. But by this move order White
can avoid some openings such as the 'Bogo-lndian Defence' or
some 'Queen's Indian Defence' variations. But of course every
opening and every move order has its own pluses and minuses...

3 ...h6

A 'principled' line for Black, who gets the bishop pair while
White gets the centre and easier development. It's a matter of
taste by the way... 3 ...dS or 3... cs are other popular choices.

4.hf6

Of course 4.ih4 is quite playable, but \iVhite is happy to go for


the centre.

4 ...Wxf6 5.e4

5 ...b6

The most common reply here is S...d6, and by way of example


here are some ofmy games: 6.ltic3 (6.eS We7 7.tt:\bd2 g6 8.i.d3 ig7
9.0-0 dxeS 10.dxeS ltic6 11.We2 id7 12.a3 gs 13.ie4oo Grivas,E­
Luther,T Leningrad 1989) 6...a6
a) 6...ltid7 7.Wd2 a6 (7...eS? 8.ltibS Wd8 9.WaS± Grivas,E­
Mastrokoukos,G Athens 2004; 7...g6 8.0-0- 0 a6 9.eSoo Grivas,E­
Pandavos,E Komotini 1992) 8.0-0-0 Wd8 9.h4 ie7 (9...bS 10.dS es
11.�bl ie7 12.We3oo Grivas,E-Mastrovasilis,A Iraklion 2004) 10.g4
bSoo Grivas,E-Gelashvili,T Bursa 2009;
b) 6...gS 7.es dxeS 8.li:ie4 Y!le7 9.li:ixeSoo Grivas,E-Logothetis,S
Kallithea 2002;
7.id3 li:ic6 8.0-0 id7oo Grivas,E-Sturua,Z Katerini 1992. In general
I feel that Black is doing OK with the 5 ... d6 and further ... a6 set­
up.

6..id3 .ib7 7..!bbd2

7...dS?!

Obviously not the best, as this 'French Defence' set-up seems to


favour VIThite. Another important game went as follows 7... d6
8.We2 a6 9.0-0-0 .!bd7 10.s!?bl es 11.c3 ie7 12.li:ic4;t; Korchnoi,V­
Karpov,A Hastings 1972.

8.We2!

There is no need to 'block' the centre with 8.es. White is better


developed and should keep his choices open.

8...dxe4

The alternative was 8....!bd7 9.0-0 gs 10.exdS �dS 11.ie4, when


White holds the advantage - better pieces and weaknesses on
both flanks for Black... but 1naybe this was the lesser evil, as
Black would be able to develop all his pieces, smnething that he
surely regretted during the ga1ne. Well, it is not so silnple to fully
understand the negative consequences of our moves, until it is
rather too late. But at the end of the day this is what separates
the really good players from the rest of the pack! The ability to
feel the position and its needs, based on primitive values such as
developnlent and piece coordination! Everything looks new
when it is well-forgotten and there is really not much to say as an
excuse!

9 ..ixe4

9 ...c6

Trying to 'protect' the light squares on the queenside by


preserving the bishops, as 9...ixe4 10 .lt:'!xe4 Wd8 11.0 -0 -0 ± was.n't
exactly what Black had vvished for. But as said, everything has
pluses and minuses and the evaluation between them makes the
difference.

10.6be5

Aggressive and natural, but also 10.a4 Wd8 11.aS, looks great for
White - Black's queenside is a mess ...

10...id6
.
11.f4!

ll.�dc4 i.c7 12.a4, looks excellent for White as ,,.,,ell, but the text
is also good, and it is supported by s1nall tactics.

11...0-0

After 11 ...Wxf4? 12J'J:f1 Wxh2 (12 ...�xeS 13.l;!xf4 hf4 14.Wf3+-)


13.�xf7 0-0

White can continue in style \lvith 14.0-0-0! :1'.!xf7 (14...i.a6 15.c4


�f7 16.i.h7+ @xh7 17.Elxf7 Wg3 18.ti:le4+- ) 15.�h7+! �xh7
(15 ...i>f8 16.Wxe6+- ) 16.:i'J:xf7, with a \i\ron position, as the double
threat of �b7 and Wg4 decides. Black's undeveloped queen.side
causes all the damage...

12.0-0

Of course, it was also possible to castle queenside with 12.g3


We7 13.0- 0-0, but there wasn't really much need. Kiniside
castling is also fine, but maybe [ess dangerous for Black!

12...V�fe713.�dc4

13...�e8?

A blunder in a bad position, Black should carefully think of his


undeveloped status and try to reduce the damage with
s01nething like 13 ...ia6 14.id3 Wc7 15.We4 fS 16.We3 lt:ld7
1 7.lt:lxd7 Wxd7, where of course White keeps a nice strategical
advantage due to Black's backv.1ard and weak e-pawn: 18.:1:!.fel
:i!f6 (18.. J�ae8? 19.lt:lxd6 hd3 20.lllxe8+ -) 19.llleS Wb7 20 .ixa6
Wxa6 21.Wf3 (21.lt:lxc6? J;!c8 22.lt:leS :i!xc2+) 21 ..J!.c8 22.c3± but
Black \>Vould be OK with his development and could fight.

14.VNh5?

Missing a killing tactic: 14.lllx.f7! 4i>xf7 15.WhS+ 4i>f8 (15 ...4i>g8


16.lllxd6+ -) 16.llleS! + -Well, White felt 'confident' in playing
natural and silnple attacking moves, forgetting this simple tactic.
Passive, but Black's position is beyond repair ... The main
alternative was 14...i.xeS 15. f xeS �a6 16.ti:ld6 hfl 17.�xfll
(17.lt:lxe8 Wxe8 18J;l:xf1 ti:ia6 19 . Wf3 :!!c8 20 .Wa3±) 17 ...1%f8 18.l;!xf71
�f7 19.Wg6 i>f8 20 .Wh7 Wd8 21.c3!, winning in all variations. But
probably White would have gone for the 17.lllxe8 variation, as all
these tactics were difficult to assess in an actual ga1ne, especially
21.c31 - in analysis everything is easier and clearer!

15JU3
Another 'natural' attacking 1nove, bringing more forces to join
the attack. But probably 1nore direct was 15.lt:lg4! fS (15 ...ti:id7
16.lllxh6+ gxh6 17.Wxh6 fS 18J:1:f3 flf7 19.:!!g3+ �g7 20 .flxg7+ Wxg7
21.Wxe6+ i>h8 22.lllxd6 fxe4 23.4:'lf7+ i>h7 24. Wxd7+-) 16.lllxd6
fxe4 (16...Wxd6 l7.lllxh6+ gxh6 JL8.Wg6+ �h8 19.Wxh6+ �g8
20 .Wg6+ i>h8 21.l;!f3 Wxd4+ 22.�hl Wg7 23.l;!h3+ @g8 24.Wxe6++ -)
1 7.lllxb7 Wxb7 18.Wg6 �h8 19.lt:l.eS �f6 20 .Wxe4+ -. Well, 14.WhS
and 15.l:!f3 can be called 'human' moves, but of course computer
engines will always be stronger than humans in tactical battles.

15...fS
15...heS 16.fxeS WgS, could be tried, but \I\Thite holds a decisive
advantage here as well: 17.WxgS (17.Wh3+-) 17...hxgS 18.lbd6 .ia6
19.c4+-, as Black is not in a position to complete his development
satisfactorily and without losing material.

White happily enters the tactics. In any event he can be


confident that he is fighting with some extra pieces, as Black's
queenside pieces (rook, bishop and knight) are not really
included. And here is exactly the point why Black seems to be
helpless and without a satisfactory defence - he hasn't enough
pieces at his disposal to perform his defensive duties!

16... Wf6 17..!bxd6 fxe4

17...Wxd4+ 18J'tf2 Wxd6 is losing to 19.�dl Wes 20 . lLi xf8 Wxf8


21.if3.

18.l�f2 e3 19.:l!e2 �d8 20.�xb7 �d7 21.�eS :!!xb7 22.Vlie8+ i>h7


23.l;fl \1\/as also good, when the game is decided by the helplessly
undeveloped black queenside. White is simply threatening here
g4-g5, ending the ga1ne by a direct attack.

18... Wxd4+ 19 . .!bf2


19...YNxb2

Black could go for developing the unfortunate b8-knight -


finally - but this wouldn't save him anyway: 19... �a6 20J;1d1
(20.�g3+-) 20...'�cs 21.Wh4 :i:tf6 22.�g3+-;
19 ...t2:id7 20.l?ixfS �xf8 21.!l:dl ltlf6 22.Wg6 Wes 23.�g3 We7
24.Wxh6+-

20.�d1!

Rooks belong on open files!

20...VNbS

20...Wxc2 21.tZ:ixfS <±>xf8 22.!l:dS+ leads to mate.

21.Y¾h4

21.Wg4 :!!e8 22.llleS was another way to win. Here Black is even
a pa'Arn up, but a king do,"ln... White will win '"'ith a direct attack:
22...WeZ (22 ...ltla6 23.�d7+ -) 23.\Wg6 ltla6 24.Wf7+ ©h8 25.l:!:h3 ggs
26.ltlg6+ (26.Wxb7+-) 26 ... @h7 27.g4! Wxc2 28.�xh6+! @xh6 29.tbfS!

21...�e8 22.fS

Opening lines against the blacik king. Well, here White has 1nore
than one way to win, such as 22.ltleS We2 23.WhS.

22...cs

22...exfS loses to 23.ltle7+ ©h7 24.gxfS (five white attacking


pieces versus two black defending pieces is too much of a deficit
to make a successful resistance ...) 24 ... WeZ 25.l:!:f7 ltld7

Tactics will always crown an oven"lhelming position: 26.gxg7+1


©xg7 27.ltlfS+ @g6 28.Wxh6+ ©xfS 29.g4+ @eS 30.Wd6#

23.�g3 exfS

A nice picture arises after 23... i'.ib2 24.ltlg4, '"'hen the white
knights are ready to kill the black king...

24.ltle7+ ©h8
25.YNhS

More direct was 25.fucg7! ©xg7 26.luxfS+ @g6 27.�xh6+, when


mate follows.

25... lbc6

Finally the black knight is developed but it is already too late...

26.�xg7!

The final and 'usual' blow. Here Black decided to give-up, as


mate is near: 26...�xg7 27.Wg6+ @f8 (27...'i!?h8 28.1iNxh6#) 28.�f6#

1-0

Of course the trainee should be schooled by examining more


than one game:
□ Haas
■ Heinrich Wolf
Vienna 1 9 1 0

1.e4 es 2.<tlf3 ltJc6 3.i.bS a6 4.i.a4 ltJf6 5.0-0 ltJxe4 6.d4 bS 7..ib3
dS

8.<tlxeS

This is not considered to be a dangerous continuation for Black.


Most players go for the natural 8.dxeS .ie6 and decide which line
to play from here.

8...<tixeS 9.dxeS

9 ...�b7

Here we meet a crossroads for Black. Instead of the text move,


he has some other options at his disposal:
9... c6 and now 10.c3
a) 10.itld2 itlxd2 11.ixd2 .ie7 (11. ..icS 12.WhS 0-0 13.l;!ael Wd7
14.Wf3 as 15.c3 WfS 16.Wdl Wg6 17..icZ .½.fS 18.hfS WxfS=
Wagner,A-Lang,Z Bayern 2003) 12.WhS ie6 13.c3 Wd7 14.igS i.fS
15.l':lfel (15.he7 .ig6) 15 ...�g6 16.Wh4 i.xgS 17.WxgS 0-0= Short,N­
Tim1nan,J El Escorial 1993;
b) 10.ie3 ie7 11.itld2 (11.c3 0-0 12.f3 ti:JcS 13.ic2 fS= Barle,J­
Tuklnakov,V Krk 1976) and nov,:

1 1...0ixd2!
bl) 11 ...i.fS 12.itlf3! .ig4 1 3.h3 .ihS (13 ...hf3 14.Wxf3 0-0 15.c3t
Ciocaltea,V-Kristinsson,J Vrnjacka Banja 1972) 14.g4 (14.c3 i.cS
1 5.ixcS ti:JxcS 16.ic2 0-0= Yudasin,A-Chekhov,V Soviet Union
1981) 14...ig6 15.itld4± Wc8? 16.lt:ixc6 Yfixc6 17.�xdS Wc8 18.Wf3±;
b2) 11 ...li:lcS 12.f4 (12.c3? 0id31 13.f4 iLJxb2 14.Wf3 ifs+ Boey,J­
Mikhalevski,V Ann,verp 1998) 12...0-0 13.c3 f6 14.ic2!t Sautto,D­
Lacrosse,M Cutro 2005;
12.WxdZ 0-0 (12....ifS 13.c3 0-0 14.icZ .ixc2 15.Wxcz Wd7
Martidis, A -Grivas,E Chania 1982) 13.Wc3!? ib7 (13...id7 14.icS
!!e8 15.f4 .ixcS-t 16.WxcS We7= Ciocaltea,V-Shvidler,E Netanya
1983) 14.f4 (14.icS !%e8 15.f4 hes+ 16.WxcS We7 l7.Wxe7 fuce7
18J'!ael 1::i.ae8 Gligoric, S -Matanovic,A Monte Carlo 1967) 14...aS=
Fischer,R-Addison,W New York 1966;
10...�cs 11.0id2 (11.We2 o-o 12.ie3 ifs 13.t2:id2 Wb6 14.iLJxe4 ixe4
15.filel �ad8 16.f3 ifs 17.l;!adl he3+ 1 8.Wxe3 Wxe3-t 19.fuce3 !l:d7
20.,t,f2 �fd8 21.�e2 cs Keres,P-Korchnoi,V Moscow 1973)
11...li:lxd2 12.ixd2 MS 13Jtel 0-0 14.ie3 ie7 15.a4 Wd7 16.Wi'd2
Hort,V-Karpov,A Bugojno 1980;
9 ...ie6 10.c3 (10.ie3 icS 11.hcS lt}xcS 12.f4 lcixb3! (12...g6 13.ti:ld2
0-0 14.lt}f3 ti:lxb3 15.axb3 cs 16.b4!;t (16.Wd2= Kieninger,G­
Bogoljubow,E Schwelm 1950)) 13.axb3 ifS=) 10...icS ll.lt}d2
ti:lxd2!
a) 11...ifS?! 12.ti:lf3 c6 13.lt}d4 .ixd4 14.cxd4 0 -015.ie3 f616.f3
ti:lgS 17.hgS fxgS 18.�cl �c8 19.Wd2± Smejkal,J-Kchouk,B Lugano
1968;
b) 11. ..0-0 12.lt}f3 f5 13.lt}d4 hd4 14.cxd4± (14.Wxd4 cs 15.Wi'dl f4
16.f3 ti:igS l7.a4 c418.ic2 ifS= Ehlvest,J-Ma1nedyarov,S Kocaeli
2002);
12.ixd2 Wh4 13.Wf3 0-0 14.ie3 he3 15.Wxe3 c6= Caro,H­
Cohn,W Bannen 1905. So Black seems to be fine without much
effort in all lines, proving that 8.lt}xeS is not dangerous. Maybe
the above opening analysis looks irrelevant to the examined
theme, but it is always useful to get to know some theoretical
lines, especially if you are an 'Open Ruy Lopez' enthusiast!

10 .ie3
.

Not dangerous for Black is 10.c3 icS 11.lt}d2 lt}xd2 12.ixd2 0-0
13.Wg4 We7 14.Wg3 f6 15.e6 id6 16.if4 fl:ad8 17.�fel :afe8oo
Vasiukov,E-Grivas,E Athens 1987.

10 ...icS
.
Aggressive and good, although not bad either is 10 ...i.e7 ll.lt:ld2
li:ixd2! 12.hd2 (12.Wxd2?! d4 13.Wxd4? Wxd4 14.hd4 cs 15.ie3
c4-+) 12 ...cs 13.c3 0-0=. As we can note, Black already has two
good continuations at his disposal.

11.Wg4?

This is a bad mistake, which falls into what we should consider


to be also an opening trap. White should choose between the
follovving alternatives:
a) 11.hcS lt:lxcS 12.ti:id2 (12.Wg4 0-0 13.c3 Wd7 14.Wxd7 lt:lxd7=
Hartston, W M - estel,A Hastings 1972) 12 ...0-0 13.'�hS (13.f4 Wh4
14.c3 E'.ad8 15.We2 fS 16.We3 We7= Klein,M-Bartel,M Nordwalde
1988) 13 ...d4 14.f4 (14.:!:'.!:adl li:ixb3 15.axb3 We7 16.l:Uel WcS=
Lanc,A-Stoica,V Bucharest 1979) 14...ti:ixb3 15.axb3 WdS 16J1f2 cs
17.l:i:el �ae8= Savon,V-Shianovsky,V Yerevan 1962;
b) ll.lt:ld2 .ixe3 (11. ..'2:.xd2 12.Wxd2 he3 13.Wxe3 YJ!e7 14.l:i:a dl;t)
12.�xe4 filJ6 13.WhS We7 14.�gS (14.lt':)g3 g6 15.Wh6 0-0-0oo)
14...g6oo Weinzettl,E-Foessmeier,U Austria 1989;
c) ll.We2 0-0 (ll...Wh4!? 12.li:id2 .ixe3 13.Wxe3 ti:ixd2 14.Wxd2 cS=)
12J!dl ixe3 13.Wxe3 �e8 (13...WgS? 14.WxgS lt:lxgS 15.ixdS±
Jovanovic,P-Yu,M Adelaide 2003) 14.ti:ld2 c6 15.f4 (15.ti:ixe4 :i!xeS
16.f3 We7) 15 ...'2:.xd2 16.!!:xd2 ic8=

11....ixe3!

As planned beforehand! Black's 1nain idea is based on his future


strong attack, which is helped by White's under-development. Of
course 11...0-0? 12.ih6 is out of the question.

12.YJ!xg7?

The natural follovv-up, but certainly the lesser evil here is


12.fxe3 0-0 13.e6 fxe6 14.Wxe6+ c;£;>h8 15.lt:lc3 WgS+. But who ,.vould
like to play with such a shattered pawn structure so early on and
·without compensation?
12..J;tgS! !

A splendid exchange sacrifice. All Black's pieces v.rill enter into


a vicious attack against the white king. From now on there is no
escape.

13JNxh8+ l!?e7 14.\Wxh7

14...Axf2+!

One of the main points of Black's tactical play.

15.l!?hl

Unfortunately for \l\lhite he can't continue vvith 15.il:xf2 due to


15 ...Wcl + 16.rl:fl \We3+ 17.47h1 ti:Jf2+ 18.©gl li.Jh3+ 19.@hl \Wgl +
20.flxgl ti:Jf2#. A nice smothered mate!

15...�g8!
The re1naining black rook joins the attack. Meanwhile, the
white queenside pieces ( a l -rook and bl- knight) are out of play
and still not developed...

16.Y!fh3

Forced: 16.g3 li:ixg3+ l7.hxg3 (17.*g2 li:ie4+ 18.*h3 Y!fg4#) l7 ... d4+

16...�g3+?

An incredible blunder that turns the tables! It was time for the

.
last black piece, the b 7 b
- ishop, to join the attack and this could be

-�-
done with the simple 16...d4!. White is helpless: l 7.�a3

-.lL
,-,�.�."�,-. �

•�a!.·�,1
�'II- .
- "' i1i.%1 {I{;@, �


;··'.
- • y �
- - %W, -

.� -� -�-)§(
-'1"9-,-o-,
\!Vhat else other than finally develop the poor bl-knight? But
now Black can end the ga1ne in style: l7 ...Wxg2+! 18.�xg2 li:ig3+
19.hxg3 �h8#. I knew about this opening trap already 35 years
ago, but unfortunately I was never able to benefit fro1n it, as no­
one proved that helpful!
17.VNxg3?

After the correct l7.hxg3! Black would be in trouble: l7 ...�g6


(17...%Vxe5? 18.%Vh4+ @d6 19.li'.lc3 �h8 20J;1xf2 fuch4+ 21.gxh4+-)
18.ixdSI (18Jl:xf2? �h6 19.lLJc3 �xh3+ 20.gxh3 Wixg3 21..ixdS Wixf2
22.ixb7 Vlixc2oo) 18 ...hdS 19.li'.lc3 �7 20.�xf2 �h6 21.�h2±

17...VNxg3

And White resigned: 18.hxg3 !!h8#

0-1

Understanding the terms of develop1nent is already a good step!


Basically, a develop1nent advantage is what's called a 'dynamic'
advantage, as opposed to a 'static' one like space, weak pawns,
etc.
The key thing to understand about dynamic advantages is that
if you dawdle around and allow your opponent too much of
a free hand, they disappear.
So, the case of a development advantage is a short-term one -
if you don't exploit it, your opponent will develop his pieces and
the 'disadvantage' will disappear.
So the key with dynamic advantages is you have to use them
right away, in order to gain something from them. Attacking the
opponent's king is in general a good idea.
But the advantage can also be used in other ways, for example:
1. Use the development advantage to force static weaknesses in
the opponent's position, things such as isolated pawns, backward
pawns, less space, doubled pawns, etc.
2. Use the development advantage to gain another kind of
dynan1ic advantage - better placed pieces for example. This is
often the precursor to an attack, or again the dynamic advantage
could be converted into a static one.
3. Look to open up the centre (especially if your opponent hasn't
castled) and attack the king. Think on a pawn break, not
necessarily to get a forced mate but to make room for your
developed pieces to have more options to attack, especially your
rooks. If you can get your rooks working before your opponent,
you're probably doing well!
4. If you can't really do anything with your pieces once they are
all developed, spend a little bi1t 1nore time thinking about their
development. Just because a piece is off of the back rank doesn't
1nean it's a well-placed piece.
The next ga1ne was a casual one and the great Aron
Nilnzowitsch analysed it for the magazine Rigasche Rundscau
(4th April 1914). Some notes from this analysis are inserted:

o Aron Nimzowitsch
■ Simon Alapin
Petersburg 1914

1.e4 e6

1 ... cs 2.tbf3 tbf6 3.tbc3 dS 4.exdS tZlxdS 5.d4 e6

2.d4 d5 3.�c3 �f6 4.exdS tbxd5

'Surrender of the centre'.

A 'tricky' move order. The posiition could also arise from the
'Sicilian Defence': Nimzowitsch proposes here 5 ...�e7, with the
idea ...0-0, ...b6 and ...�b7, effecting restraint on the centre;
Another ga1ne between the two opponents went as follows
S ...tbxc3 6.bxc3 ie7 7.id3 tbd7 8.0-0 0-0 9.We2 !l:e8 10.a4 as 11.!1:el
c6 12 ..if4 li:Jf8 13.c4 .id6 14.i.xd6 Wxd6 lS.cS Wd8 16.We4 .id7
17.�abl f5 18.We3 bS 19.cxb6 :rfu8 20.b7 Wc7 21.ia6 cs 22.WeS Wc6
23.ibS Wxb7 24.dxcS !l:bc8 25.tbd4 ixbS 26.axbS li:Jg6 27.c6 Wb6
28.We3 f4 29.We4 �cd8 30.li:Jf3 l::(d6 31.h4 Wes 32.li:JeS l3d4 33.V¼e2
t2:ixh4 34.b6 �b4 3S.l';lxb4 axb4 36.b7 Wc3 37.We4 t2:if5 38.li:Jd7 lLJd4
39.b8=W 1 - 0 Nimzowitsch,A-Alapin,S St Petersburg 1914.

6.�xd5 Wxd5

The alternative 6... exdS 7.ibS+ id7 8.hd7+ tbxd7 9.0-0 !J..e7
10.dxcS lLJxcS 11.�el±, would lead to a risk-free position for
White, who could easily play for tvvo results, Black only for one...

7.�e3

With the threat of 8.dxcS, winning a pawn.

7...cxd4

Nimzm1vitsch had already played this position with the black


pieces: 8.Wxd4 Wxd4 9.t2Jxd4 a6 10.0-0-0 id7 ll.ie2 t2Jc6 12.if3;t;
Perlis,J-Nimzowitsch,A Karlsbad 1911. But the text move is good
as well.

8...a6
Preventing it:idbS, but given a ? by Nimzowitsch, ..vho
recommends 8...it:ic6.

9.�e2!?

Threatening if3. An interesting pawn sacrifice, which Black


slhould think twice before accepting!

9 ...�xgZ

Nilnzowitsch: 'Stealing a pawn. The consequences are grievous'.


Indeed, White gets a lot of tilne for his develop1nent. Black could
have opted for the 'safer' 9 ... es 10.if3 �as+ 11.idZ ib4
(11... �c7!?) 12.0 -0 hd2 13.it:ib3 �c7 14.�xd2t Tiviakov,S-Afek,Y
Vlissingen 20 0 3.

10."3 �g6?

The real mistake of the game! Black had to go for 10 ... �h3
ll.�d3 ie7 12.0 -0 -0 �. In general White's position seems to be
preferable, but as long there is nothing concrete, the battle would
have just started!
11.�d2
11...es

'The crisis. Black 1neans to be rid of the unpleasant knight, so


that he 1nay in some 1neasure catch up in development'. But what
else to do? 11 ....ie7 12.0-0-0 Wf6 13.f1hg'1 h6 14.ihl! already looks.
too strong for White.

12.0-0- 0 !

White sacrifices a piece to open-u p the position.

12... exd4 13.i.xd4

'\I\Thite's advantage in development is now too great'. Indeed,


White has completed his development, while Black has not! So,
the sacrificed piece is not so important for the time being. What
counts is v,hat re1nains on the board - not v,hat has left the
board!

13...<!bc6
So, another one of those 'usual' cases, where the 'centralised'
king comes under heavy fire. Of course some silnple tactics must
be performed ... 13 ...ie7 14J%hg1 WfS 15.We3! is winning as vvell.

14.i.f6!

Nimzov.ritsch: 'A problem move'. Note that 14.ixg7+- v.rins as


well.

14...Wxf6

If 14 ...ie7, then 15.ixc6+ id7 (15 ...bxc6 16.Wd8+! ixd8 17.fucd8#)


16.Wxd7+ \!;>f8 17.Wxe7+ \!;>g8 18.!!:d8+ �xd8 19.Wxd8#

15.�hel+

'Play in the @- and W-files at the same time. The danger of


a breakthrough is great'. The alternative was the 'more' accurate
15.ixc6+ bxc6 16 J ahe1+ ie7 17.Wd8#

15 ..i
. .e7

15...ie6 16.Wd7#

16 i
. .xc6+ \!;>f8
16...bxc6 17.�d8#. Time for the impressive end...
17.VNd8+! .ixd8 18J!e8# 1 - 0

CONCLUSION

Well, there is nothing new under the sun; we \<\<'ill always meet
gan1es \IVhere the underdevelopment factor will be present,
giving rise to brutal attacks.
Even good players, in the heat of the fight for the initiative, have
omitted the ilnportance of develop1nent and piece coordination!
But mainly this disaster happens to lo\<\<'er-rated layers, who
,vrongly think that they can get away with it!
When they do understand - it is already too late...
UNFORTUNATE BISHOP
The annual Isle of Man Masters ended on October 1st. A quite
interesting and prestigious tournament, won by the FIDE World
Champion Magnus Carlsen followed by Hikaru Nakamura and
Vishy Anand.
In the last round my friend Ivan Sokolov wasn't so successful
and lost a rather one-sided game, ,,vhere the the1ne of a bad piece
once 1nore proved its misery.

o Dennis Wagner
■ Ivan Sokolov
Isle of Man 2017

12...0-0-0

12...lt:ib6 13.f4 fS 14.id3 (14.b3 lt:ic8! 15.i.d3 lt:id6oo) 14...lt:ic4


15.ixfS i.xfS 16.luxfS luxb2 17.©e2 :1:tg8 18.g3 ti:ic4 19.e4 is
playable as well, as in Goganov,A-Xu,Y Moscow 2017. A difficult
to assess line, as Black gets shattered kingside pa,,vns but the
bishop pair as compensation. I think that this position is 1natter
of taste, but personally I have always liked White, as I believe
1nore in healthy pawn structures...

13.f4!?

A ne,,v 1nove but v.rith a co1n1non idea in such positions; to try to


bury the black light-squared bishop in his kingside cage. 13.0-0-0
</gc7 14.id3 !1g8 15.tbxg6 fxg6 16.g4 id6, looks OK for Black, as in
Zebre,P-Ottesen,S ICCF email 2009.

13...�e8?!

Nov,, the bishop gets into trouble. I would prefer to opt for
13.. .fSI? 14.�d3 ltlf6 15.hfS+ .txfS 16.tbxfS ib4, where Black has
invested a useless pawn for central control and activity. But of
course a pa\>vn is always a pav.1n - and a healthy one here!

14.fS! .th7 15.�f2 hS 16.i.d3 "16 17.�ael 6t:lb6 18J'!:e2!

White's idea is now simple: he will overprotect his only


vulnerable spot - the e3-pawn - and then he will bury Black's
light-squared bishop forever, with h3 and g4.

18 ...0c4 19.i.xc4 (19.:ahel tbd6 20.e4 i.gS 21.tbf3 dxe4 22.tbxe4


0xf5 23.tbexgS E!xe2+ 24Jl:xe2 fxgS 25.tbxgS tbxd4 26 ..ixh7 0xe2
27.</gxe2±) 19 ... dxc4 20.e4, doesn't look healthy either...

19.6t:lf3 6t:lc8 20.h3 :Seg8

21.g4!

Black's 'parked' pieces on the h-file allow this thematic move.


Nov.r the unfortunate light- squared bishop has been buried...

21...6t:ld6 22.:Seel .if8 23.:Segl �g7 24.6t:le2 i.g8 25.6t:lg3 �gh7


Black decided to sac the exchange, as 25 ... hxg4 26.hxg4 l:l:xhl
27.0.xhl, wasn't looking good in the long-run...

26..!hel

Well, \,Vhite could take the exchange, as 26.0.xhS fi:xhS 27.gxhS


i.h7 28.tbh4 �h6 29.:ag4 i.gS 30 .Elfl �4+ 31.fi:xh4 i.xfS 32.@e2
should be winning as well. But he preferred to play it 'safe' - the
bad bishop is a great asset for him anyway.

26 ...:Sg7 27.@f3 �gh7 28 ..!hg2 ltle8

29..!hf4

White wants to force the exchange of the rooks and Black insists
on sacrificing the exchange...

29....!hg7 30.�el @c7


Time to open-up the centre, seeking piece exchanges. White
dreams of getting a position w
· ith two-three pieces for each side,
when the unfortunate black bishop will decide the game...

31.e4! dxe4+ 32.ixe4 hxg4+ 33.hxg4 �xh1 34.�xhl �xhl


35..!bxhl ttle8 36A�g3 �h6 37.�d3 @d6 38.ttle4+ @e7 39.�c4 ttlc7
40..!bd3 as 41.a3 igs 42 ..!becs b6 43..!be4 .!be8?!

This loses, so 43...i.h6 was a better way to fight.

44.dS

44..!bxgS fxgS 45.�es looks like it wins a pawn on the spot, as


even the try to get rid of the bad piece with 45.. .f6? loses to
46.tbg6+. White either didn't notice it or simply wanted to
continue playing a 'piece-up' instead of a pawn-up.

44...cxdS 45.�xdS �h7 46.�c3 .!bd6 47.�e4 .!bc4 48.a4 �d6 49.�dS
ttld2+ 50.�e2
50...�g8?!

50 .. .t'Z\ bll was the only vvay to continue the fight: 51.hf? 8xc3+
5 2.bxc3±

54..!bfe4?!

Somewhat simpler was 54..!bh3! i.h6 (54... ll'if3 55.ll'ixgS fxgS


56.ll'idS+ �xa4 57.ll'if6+ -) 55.ll'id5+ @xa4 56.ll'ixf6+-

54....!bxe4 55..!bxe4 bS 56.axbS �xbS 57..tdS .th4 58.�d4 �b4


59.�a2 a4

What else? Black is trying to exchange all the queenside pa,.\'ns,


hoping for one of these positions without pav.rns in which
a piece-up wouldn't be enough...

60.�dS a3 61.bxa3+ �xa3 62..tc4 �b4 63..td3 �h7

The position has considerably simplified, but this only helps


White, who has finally found an entrance to capture the
unfortunate g 8 b
- ishop...
64.@d6 @as 6S.@e7 .ig6 66Jbxf6

66.fxg6 fS+ 67.@xf7 fxe4 68.i.xe4+- was winning as well, but


vVhite seems to be in no hurry - the unfortunate bishop is going
nowhere anyway.

66 ...@b4 67.fxg6 fxg6 68.hg6 �cs 69.@e6 @d4 70.lb e4 @e3


71.@fS @f3 72..if7 @e3

73.gS

White decided to go for the notorious bishop+knight ending, as


there is no other clear way to advance the g -pawn.

73....ixgs 74.lb xgs @d4 7S..ie6 ,;!;,e3 76.@eS ,;t,d3 77..iclS @c3
78.@e4 @d2 79.@d4 @c2 80.lb e4 @b2 81.lbd2 @c2 82.lbft ,;t,b2
83.lbe3 @cl 84.@c3 @bl 8S.lbc2 @ct
86.�a2!

In such endings the mate is performed in the bishop's colour­


corner, so White rightly drives the black king to the h l -corner.
Note that by now \,Vhite has played the ending quite accurately
and continues to do so!

86...@dl 87.�d4 @cl

87...'i!?el lasts three moves longer; 88.'i!?d3 ©f2 89.ti:ie2 ©g2


90.ie6 @f3 91.ifS *f2 92.ig4 <J?el 93.tllc3 *f2 94.ltle4+ (burying
the white king in the corner, as \,Vhite has created a n o p
- ass line
on the third rank) 94...@el 95.@c2 @fl 96.*d2 @g2 97.©e2 ©gl
98.ih3 @h2 99.ifl l!?g1 100.ltld2 *h2 101.l!?f2 @hl 102.ig2+ @h2
103.ltlf3#

88.ltJe2+ @dl 89.l!?d3 *el 90.@e3 @dl 91.�b3+ @el 92.�f4 @fl
93.ic2 and Black resigned : 93...@el 94.ll)d3+ l.t>fl 95.li>f3 l!?gl
96.@g3 @fl 97..idl l!?gl 98..ie2 �hl 99.ll)f2+ @gl 100.lt)h3+ @hl
101.M3#

1-0

Well, obviously the unfortunate black light-squared bishop made


all the difference in this ga1ne. This piece never really 1nade it to
the game, allowing White to 'win' material early, as he was
playing with an extra piece in the middlegame and the endgame.
Of course Black knew the dangers of such pa1Arn structures; he
even wrote a good book about them, but somehow he v,as self­
trapperl with no way out anrl although he tried harrl, offering
material at certain moments, he couldn't do much.
White was in the driver's seat and he could decide on the
appropriate moment to increase the advantage and finally
cashin the point. Well, that's the fate of unfortunate and badly
placed pieces in general...

o Matthias Bluebaum
■ Arkadij Naiditsch
Minsk 2017

1.d4 ll)f6 2.c4 e6 3.tZ'lc3 dS 4.cxdS exdS 5.i.gS c6 6.e3 Ms 7.Wf3


.ig6 8.Axf6 Va'xf6 9.Wxf6 gxf6 10.�f3 �d7 11.�h4 �h6

Here Black hasn't inserted the 1nove ...h6, but of course the
position is almost similar.
12.f4 h5 13.©f2 �c8

14.fS

A natural novelty. 14.h3 tbd6 15.g4 ie4 16.lbxe4 !bxe4+ 17.*f3


ti:ld6 18.id3;t Schramm,A-Sikorsky,H ICCF email 2012, also looks
good.

14....ih7 15.h3!

Preparing the burying of the unfortunate bishop...

15...�d6 16.g4 ©d717..id3 i.h6 18.�g2

Computers tent to underestilnate this position, evaluating it as


only slightly better for White. But in reality Black will play
a piece-dm.vn for the entire game ...

18...Elae8 19.©f3 Ele7 20.�f4 .tgs 21.Elaet Elhe8


22.e4?

22.lLicxdS! cxdS 23.lLixdS �e4 24..txe4 ltlxe4 25.l!e2 looks quite


good for White. But of course what he really wants is to have . a n
ending with two-three pieces for each side, where Black will lack
counterplay- and certainly a piece; the unfortunate bishop! The
problem is that the text allows a tactical strike. \,Vell, when one
has buried a bishop for good, he hardly thinks that he can rise
from the dead! What I mean is that when we feel perfectly safe,
we tend to overlook combinations.

22...hxg4+ 23.hxg4

23...�xfS!

Black plays his last card to get rid of the bishop. Maybe it is not
e.nough but it was the best practical chance indeed.
SURVEYS ON TACTICS
ATTACK VIA THE EDGE FILES
Opening files and diagonals around one's own king cannot be
a healthy attitude. A naked king is the butter on the bread of the
opponent and should be avoided at nearly any cost.
The usual file to be opened for a successful attack is the rook­
file, at least as practice has proven. And this is natural; open files
and diagonals should be difficult to defend, so they 1nust be
located far away...
Let's see a primitive example to fully understand the concept:
Example 1 •

Black has sacced his queen for only one minor piece, but his
threats down the h fi
- le are tre1nendous...

1 ...:Sah8

Doubling on the open file is as natural as a baby's cry, but


Black's position is so strong that even 1 ...lt:'le2+ is good as well:
2.Wxe2 !1:ah8 3.f4 g3 (3 ...he3+ 4.Wxe3 lt:'lxe4! 5.Wxe4 g3! 6.We7+
'i!?xe7 7.l!el + 'i!?d7 8.'i!?fl !1:hl + 9.'i!?e2 !1:e8+ 10 .l!?d2 !l:exel -+) 4.WxhS
he3+ 5.Elf2 tZ'lxhS 6.@fl gxf2 7.@e2 fl=W+ 8.@xfl lt:'lg3+ 9.@el
:ahl#

2.f4
2.g3 !l:hl+ 3.4?g2 �8h2#
or 2.f3 g3, lead to 1nate.
2 .. J!h1+

2 ...g3 3.1ili'xh5 lZixhS wins as well for Black.

3.*f2 .!bxe4+ 4.*e1 l3xf1+ 5.*xf1 �h1+ 6.i.g1

And a nice 1nate follovvs:

6 .. J!xg1+! 7.*xg1 ltlf3+ 8.*f1 .!l:Jg3# 0-1

As said, the above example is primitive, and more complex ideas


1nust be presented. The following examples are more-or-less
quick combinations, taking advantage of the weaknesses around
the king:

D Bok Benjamin
■ Rapport Richard
Riga 2014 e
White's bishop pair should be decisive in an ending, so Black
must act in the 1niddlegame. He is helped somewhat by the
weaknesses around the white king, especially on the light
squares.

21...�eS! 22.�cs �f3+ 23.@g2 :SeS!

23...li:igS 24.i>gl Wh3 would also be good, but Black 'dreamed' of


s01nething extra-ordinary...

24..ixf8 �h3+! 25.@xh3 :ShS+ 26.@g2 :Sxh2# 0 1-

o Suer Nevzat
■ Hort Vlastimil
Athens 1969 O

27..ixh6!

A nice co1nbination, vvhich allov;s \I\Thite to regain his pawn.

27...gxh6?

Blindness? Black had to play 27...@g8 28.Wh3! (planning !1:h4)


28 .. .f4 29.:!;!e4 WfS 30Jl:g4oo.

28.YNxh6+

And Black resigned, as he noted the lethal 28...Wh7 29.Wxh7+


@xh7 30.B'.h4#
1-0

When playing 3-minute blitz games on the Internet, nothing is


based on deep calculation, but mainly on intuition.
But what is intuition? Of course it is the sub-conscious
knowledge which has been hidden inside our brain, coining out
vvhen needed! Nothing more than this; it just requires a lot of
vvork beforehand!

White's pieces are better and 1nore 'attackingly' placed, but


obviously some tactics are in need.
20.e S! dxeS

20...fxeS loses to 21.hg6 hxg6 22.Wxg6+ fi:Jg7 23.ll}gS.

21.i.xg6!

White's kingside is shattered...


21...hxg6 22.Wxg6+ ll}g7
23.lbgS! 1/!1e7

23...fxgS 24J�f7.

24.1/!1h7+

24...@fS 25.1/!1h8#

1-0

White seems to enjoy an advantage as the back rank threats


force his opponent to exchange queens...or maybe not?

33...�a3+!

This terrific rook thrust concludes the game in style.


Or 34.bxa3 �xc3+ ,,vinning.

34... �a7+

And White resigned in view of inevitable checkmate: 35.i>b3


�a4#

0-1

Here we have a very silnilar finish as in M.Carlsen vs. S.Karjakin,


the last (16th) game of their 2016 Ne,,v York match:

□ Bernstein Ossip
■ Kotov Alexander
Groningen 7946 O

Black feels confident, as his king looks much safer and White's
weaknesses are ready to be attacked...

46.�cS+ @h7 47J!a8 :Sexb4?

But that's a blunder! Black had to opt for 47..J�c4! 48.r:l:xc4 dxc4
49.l'.:ld8 hS 50 .4?g3 Wbloo.
50.fS+!

I think that Black missed this combination, which is cro\lvned


after 50...exfS s1:mxh6+! gxh6 52Ji:ag8#

1-0

□ Lederle Vitus
■ Mertens Heiko
Bonn 2011 O

A very interesting case, as it looks like both kings will face


problems... Note that the assaults are taking place on both the
files and the diagonals.
26.qJXeS!

White can calmly allow the strike on g2.


26...�xg2+

26.. .:11xg2 ..vould have required ,i\Th ite to choose the right
discovered check, viz. 27.ti::lg4+! (instead, wrong v.rould be
27.ti::lfl+? g;,g8 28.ti::lh6+ g;,fg 29.:i!fl+ or 29.Wfl + since now Black
can go for the counterstrike: 29...fil2+! 30 .g;,gl ixh2+! 31.g;,xf2
Wg3#) which after 27 ... @gS leads to mate by force: 28.We6+! g;,f8
(28...Wfl 29.lcih6+ @f8 30 .W/xfl#) 29.Wf6+ Wfl 30 .Wh8+ Wg8
31.ig7+ �fl 32.ti::lh6#

27.�gl!

The ilnmediate 27.Wxg2 �xg2 would give the black king the
escape square g8, preventing any lethal discovered check by
White.

27...gg7

27...if3+ 28.ti::lg6# - check and counter mate!

28.ti::lg4

White should have scaled the g file: 28.�gG+! hxg6 29.Wxg2 with
a clear advantage.

28...�xh2+

This desperado move is crowned with unexpected success.


28...ic6! would have made the situation exciting again.
29..!bxh2?

White could simply play 29.@xg2+-

29... .tf3+

No,,v this discovered check yields rich dividends.

Possibly \,Vhite had overlooked that Black can answer 30 ..ixg7+


with 30 ...Wxg7+ - ahivays these counterchecks!

30... he2+ 31 J!xe2 Wif4+ 32.�f2 Wcl+ 33.@e2 �e8+ 34.@f3 VNe3#
0-1
vVhite has already sacced a piece and nov-r offers even more!

19.El:f6 ! !

Down two pieces, \,Vhite ensures the kingside remains cut off
with this move. After the naive 19.hxg3?! fS, the attack is harder
to conduct.

19...l!?g7

19...hc4, trying to take some of the steam out of White's attack


by exchanging pieces, doesn't quite do it: 20.hxg3 hd3 21.\Wxd3
The problem is that White still has myriad threats, vvhether the
silnplistic � d 2 x
- g5, to rl:afl or even a dS thrust if called for.
A sample line might go: 21... l!?g7 22.�e3 :!ah8 23J.iafl rl:ag8
24.�xgS+ l!?f8 25.l'!xf?+ \Wxf7 26.�xf7+ l!?xf7 27.\Wf6+ ©e8 28.\Wxe6+
©d8 29.d5! +-

20.�g4!

Black isn't given a moment's respite.

20...El:g8 21.hxg3 <tlb7

Desperately trying to bring support for f7.

22.El:afl <tld8 23. �e4 �b7

Forced. If 23..J!c8 then 24J;tg6+ 1+-

24.d5 �h8
And novv White is given the chance to perform a 'Windmill'!

25.YNg6+!!

Just incredible.

25...fxg6

If 25... @f8 then 26.dxe6 and there is no defence against l3xf7+.

26.�xg6+ @h7

The final windmill is an inescapable mating net.

27.�xgS+ *h6 28.�g6+ *h7 29.:Sg4+ *h6 30 . �f6+ *hS 31.�h4+

31 ... @gS 32JEg6#

1-0
A clear 'king in the cage' situation.

33.�xe6+! :Sxe6 34 .!k8+ @h7 35.�ff8

And as White is ready to deliver mate, Black has to devise a way


out...

35...�dl+ 36.@g2!

36.@h2? �d6+ 37.@g2 �xf8 38J 1xf8 !l:c6=

36 ...�dS+ 37.f3 :Sd8

The only vvay to stop the mate.

38.�cxd8 �xd8 39.�xd8 �xe3 40.@f2

and White has emerged two pawns up in the endgame.

40...�es 41.h4 �as 42.a3 :Sa4 43.@g3 :Sc4 44J!a8 l1:c7 45.h4 1-0
□ Wang Yue
■ Grischuk Alexander
Istanbul 2012 •

White seems to be in the driver's seat, as he is planning b4 with


an initiative.
19...gs,

A pa,"ln sacrifice, ailning to open the h-fi.le for Black's heavy


pieces.

20.hxgS?

White simple snatches the pawn, but keeping the kingside


closed was better, although it was very unclear: 20.hS �d7 21.b4
axb4 22.axb4 f4. That expansion on the kingside looks
threatening and after the text move the h-file is just too
dangerous, which is something \,Vhite might have
underestimated.
20...hxgs 21..ixgs �d7! 22.YNe3

22.b4 f4- + is already decisive, with the idea of ...YNh3. White 1nust
be careful.

It's honestly hard to find a 1nove here for White. Maybe f4 is


necessary but it looks ugly. The move played in the game is
natural, but too slow.
23.@g2 .½.f6! 24..½.a4?!

The idea is to play l::ihl and battle for the h -file. However, this is
too slov,r and A.Grischuk exploits this beautifully. 24.ih6+ @e7
leaves the bishop on h6 in a terribly awk,-vard situation. 24.hf6
Wxf6 and White can't stop the 1nultitude of deadly threats.

24...�xgs 25.VNxgs

25...�h2+!

The rook is taboo, which lets A.Grischuk infiltrate with decisive


effect!

26.@fl :Sh1+ 27.@g2 :Sh2+

Repeating moves like a pro.

28.@fl Wh7!

Nothing close to a perpetual, and the threats are obviously


decisive.

0-1

Wang Yue's sense of danger seemed to have disappeared in the


previous game. But in the next ga1ne he takes his revenge, using
the same motif- attack via the h fi
- le!
o Movsesian Sergei
■ Wang Yue
Istanbul ?01? •

21...VNc7!

A quiet move before the storm. Black threatens ...lt:ixeS and


a subsequent discovery. 21 .. .ei:lxeS? 22.�f2 spoils the position.

22..ag6

22.�f2 flaf8 and since the knight on d7 is covering f6, Black is


winning.

22...lt:ixe5 23.he4

Beautiful! The assault continues! The knight must be taken


because of the interposition between the queen and the bishop,
wliicli means e4 1s Jianging.

24.YNxd3 YNxh2+ 25.©f2 :Saf8+ 26.©e2 l3xf1 27.©xfl YNg3!

And yet another quiet move to seal the deal. The threat is
obviously ..J::Xhl, and it cannot be stopped.

28.©e2 �h1 29..id2 :Sxa1 30..ixdS cxd5 31.YNh7+ ©d8 32.©d3 Wg4

The mate threats continue, and since White is dm,vn an


exchange he can't afford to go around trading queens. This is
hopeless.

33.YNh8+ ©d7 34.b3 YNf5+ 0-1

Next comes an example which I consider a great lesson in


strategical tactics or tactical strategy!
What do I mean? Well, there are certain tilnes that calculation is
useless, silnply because 1noves appear as naturally as a baby's
cry!
Of course, at the end of the day - or in the start/end of the
combination - concrete calculation is a must but, this comes
easily after vve have understood what we have to do!

o lvanchuk Vassily
■ Wang Hao
Istanbul 2012 O

Black is too weak on the dark squares and he has no dark­


squared bishop with vvhich to defend...
20.�xc4! dxc4 21.fS! f6

21. ..exfS 22.fucfS ids 23J'l!af1 gfg 24.WgS! gives White a winning
attack for free. It's possible that Wang Hao simply 1nissed 22.fxg6.
We see in this variation why it was so important to keep the
queen on e7 and not c7 - the pressure on the f-file is too great.

22.fxg6!

It's all over now.

22 ..• fxeS 23.l:!f7 Wc6

24.gxh7+!

24.�afl? Wxg2+ 25.Wxg2 .txg2 26.gxh7+ �h8 27.©xg2 exd4


28.exd4 eS+= is a very survivable endgame. Maybe the Chinese
player was hoping for this, ,.vhich is not easy to hold, but
possible.

24...©xf7 25.!!fl+ @e7 26.hS=Wi!

This quiet move is, in essence, the point of the entire


combination. The quiet move distracts the rook to h8, where it is
vulnerable and not carrying out its defensive duties.

26...�xh8 27.Vffg7+ @d6

To the mere hu1nan, it is still unclear why the sacrifice works.


To V.Ivanchuk. this is child's play. If 27...�dS. then 28.Wixh8+ Wes
(28... i>c7 29J'!f7++ -) 29JU8+-

28.dxeS+!

28.'WxeS+? <J:Je7 leads to no more than a draw. After the text Black
resigned. If 28...�dS (28...'i!?cS 29.We7+ 4?d5 30 .E1dl + �e4 31.WgS
with unstoppable 1nate) then 29.E1dl + �e4 30.WgS!

This quiet move is the finishing touch of the co1nbination. White


threatens both Wf4 and £Kd4 mate, and Black cannot stop both of
them at the same time. The king covers the a 8 g- 2 diagonal so
there is no desperado sacrifice or any check of any kind.

1-0
24.�xf7+!

Co1nputer engines could not come up with the bishop sacrifice


quickly, but once it vvas played they were united in high praise
for M.Carlsen's tactical skills.

24...i>xf7

24...Wxf7 25.�h8+.

25.Yfi'f3+ i>g8

After 25 ...@g6 v.rhite wins with the spectacular 26.if6!! !i:xhl


(26 ... !l:cg8 27.!i:xh8 !l:xh8 28.Wg4+ @h7 [28...i>f7 29.Wxg7+ wins]
29.WhS+ l!?g8 30 .We8+ i>h7 31.�hl#; 26... gxf6 27.W!xf6#) 27Jl:xh1
i?f7 28.VlfhS+ g6 29.Wh7+ ©e8 30.Vlfg8+ i>d7 31.:ah7+.

26.�xh8+ l!?xh8 27.�hl+ i>g8


28.V�'h5

All three white pieces ailn at tlhe black king and black has no
defence against the beautiful finale.

28...�f8

28...lilxb2 29.if6! lile7 (29 ...Wia7 30 .'�h8+ l!lf7 31.Wxg7+ l!le8


32.lTh8#) 30.Wh8+ sbf7 31.Wxg7+ @e8 32J:th7 wins. 28 ...lile7
29.ixe7 Wxe7 30.Wh8+ ©f7 31.'&xc8 wins. 28...lild8 29.We8# or
28...Wf7 29.Wh8#

29 .if6
. !

Closing the shov,r with a splendid bishop move: 29...gxf6 (after


29 ...Wa7 \iVhite reshuffles the pieces: 30 .Wg6 lilb6 31.l;;l.h7 l:l:f7
32.WhS and wins) 30 .exf6! :!:!xf6 31.Wh8+ sbf7 32.:1:!.h7+ ©g6 33.Wg8+
'i!?fS 34J�h5+ @e4 35.Wg4+ sbd3 36.Wdl + ©e4 37.Wbl#

1-0

□ Grivas Efstratios
■ Farinata
Internet Chess Club 2017 O
As said, Internet blitz is interesting for tactical training. The
black player hasn't identified himself, so we "vill use his
nickname.
20..ixc6! Wxc4?

The only vvay for Black to stay in the game was with 20 ...bxc6
21.tt:ieS±

21.�xg7!

A nice and effective combination.

21...¥Nh4

21...©xg7 22Jl:gl+ @h7 23.Wxf6+ -

22.�g4! Wh6 23..ie4 �g8 24.�f4! @g7 25.:1!xf6!

The 'easy' vvay! Black resigned due to 25...Wxf6 26.:!:1.gl +.

10
-

□ Kamsky Gata
■ Seirawan Vasser
Saint Louis 2012 O
16.<.!lbl

After 16.g4 tbxg4 17JJhgl the novelty 17 ...tbxf2 was introduced


in Hovhannisyan,R-Akopian,V Plovdiv 2012 - see the game.
It has been confirmed in 1nany ga1nes that after 16.liJeS?! cS!
Black is doing well.

16...cs

The second most-popular and probably safer 1nove is 16...WdS


as, in particular, in S1neets,J-Kamsky,G Wijk aan Zee 20 09.

17. g4 ltixg4

17... ltJh7!? 18.l:".lhgl cxd4 19.ltJxd4 \!Nb6 20 ..ic3 %!fd8 21.f4 %!d5=+
Zhang,X-Guo,Q Xinghua 2014.

18JNe2

After 18.%!hgl (vvhich has occurred more often) it is possibly not


bad for Black to go for 18...lZ'lxf2 19.We2 lZ'lxdl 2 0 .ixh6 <.!lh7
Z 1.ixg7 Elg8 which has been seen in a number of games.
18...@h8?!

It is not easy to determine what Black's best is, but the text is
obviously not it! Paikidze,N-Girya,O Chennai 2011 followed
18...Wb6 19Jl:hg1 f5 20.tDe5 cxd4 21.lt:ld7 (less a1nbitious is
21.ti:lxg4!? fxg4 22.ixh6 gxh6 23.Wxg4+ ig5 24.f4 d3 25.cxd3 f!f5
26.Wg3 'i£?h7 27.fxg5 ½ -1/i Sutovsky,E-Solak,D Biel 2015) 21 ...Wa6,
and here important is the complex endga1ne which arises after
22.Wxa6 bxa6 23.ti.Jxf8. After 18 ...Wd5?! unpleasant for Black is

19J!hg1! which is even stronger than the interesting 19.lt:le5!? as


in Ginsburg,G-Fridman,D Zurich 2003. The stem game for 18.We2,
Fercec,N-Petrov,J Pula 1999, was nearly the most important so
far: 18...cxd4!? 19.!!hgl d3 (19...f5 20.Wxe6+ �f7 21.ti:le5 tZ\xe5
22.Wxe5 Wd6 23.Wxd6 hd6 24.i.xh6 Puranik,A-Abelgas,R
Olongapo City 2015) 20.cxd3 f5 21.Wxe6+ @h8 22.ic3 (probably
preferable is 22.d4!) 22...i.f6 23.tZlh4 hh4 24.i::!xg4 if6 25.�xg7
(25.�g6!? is hardly a radical improve1nent) 25 ...�xg7 26.�gl + @h8
27.E'.g8+ 'i£?h7! 28.Wxf5+, with a dra,.v.
19.�hgt 'llf6

Certainly insufficient for equality is 19 ...fS.

20.dxcS! Wc7

21.<tleS!

A novelty and a killing one! Black is not afraid of 21.!l:g2 WxcS


22.a'.dgt �g8 as in Dziel-Heihnann, ICCF 2003.

21....ixcS?

Black misses some nice blows. Clearly favouring White also is


21...WxcS?! 22..ic3! The critical line is possibly 21. ..a'.ad8 22.b4 and
if 22 ... as 23.a3 axb4 24.axb4, assessed by engines as better for
White, which is not totally obvious.

22..ixh6! gxh6
23.�d7! ! Wxd7

The point of\,Vhite's combination v.ras 23 ...�xd7 24.Wd2!l �h7


25.�g4! ! and wins.

24.�xd7 �xd7 25.Wd2

Now White wins much more prosaically.

25...�h7 26.b4!? �ad8 27.bxcS �f6 28.Wf4 �e8 29.We4+ @h8


30.Wxb7 �g7 31.Wxa7 �c8 32J::i:d1 �f5 33.�d7 @g7 34.a4 @f6
35.aS 1-0

o Hovhannisyan Robert
■ Akopian Vladimir
Plovdiv 201 2

1.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.lLJc3 dxe4 4.€Jxe4 .ifs 5.lLJg3 .ig6 6.h4 h6 7.lLJf3
lLJd7 8.h5 .ih7 9 ..id3 hd3 10.Wxd3 e6 11..id2 �gf6 12.0-0-0 .ie7
13.�e4 lLJxe4 14.Wxe4 lLJf6 15.Wd3 0-0 16.g4 lLJxg4 17.�hg1 lLJxf2
18.We2

The 1nove 18.We3 leads, as it seems, to a forced draw: 18...ti:ixdl


19.Wxh6 if6 20.if4! ixd4l 21..ieS ie3+ 22.Wxe3 li:ixe3 23.fucg7+
@h8 24J1xf7+ �g8 25.�g7+= with a perpetual.

18...�xd1 19.hh6 .if6

After 19 ...©h7 20.ixg7 one possible idea is 20..Jl:g8 21.We4+ fS


22.Wxe6 E!xg7 23Jtg6! :iaxg6 (23... '.!?h8 24.!1:h6+ gh7 2S.�h7+ *xh7
26.Wg6+ leads to the same) 24.Wxg6+ '.!?h8 2S.ti.)eS i.gS+ 26.�bl
Wf6 27.li:::,fl+ Wxfl 28.Wxfl.

20..ixg7 hg7 21.h6 Wf6

22.Wh2

Obviously not dangerous for Black is 22.!1:xg7+ *h8 23.li:::;gS


where the simple 23 ...Wxh6 leads to a draw after 24.l:!:h7+ Wxh7
25.ti.)xh7 *xh7 26.WhS+. But 22.hxg7 Wh6+! deserves checking.
After all, Black is playing with a semi-open king. One line which
comes into consideration is 23.*bl �fd8 24.Wxdl (24.E!xdl Zl:dS
25.Ei:::;eS �ad8 26.a3 E!xd4 27.�gl fS 28.ti.)g6 E!dl+ 29.�xdl �xdl +
30 .Wxdl Wxg6 31.WdS+ '.!?xg7 32.We7+ Vlffl 33.WgS+ *h7 34.V.ih4+
©g6 3S.Wg3+ '.!?f6 36.Wh4+ @es 37.Wh8+ Wf6 38.V.ibS+ '.!?e4 39.Wxb7
f4 40.Wxc6+ *e3 41.V.ihl f3 42.Wel + @f4 43.c4 Wd4 44.V.ih4+ @es
45.WgS+ *e4 0 -1 Horvath,A-Michalik,P Meissen 2013) 24...E!dS!
25.Ei:::;eS (2S.!1:hl is parried by 25 ... :ShS!) 2S ...!1:ad8 26.Wf3 (26.�hl?
�d4!; 26.Wfl f5 27.�hl? �xd4!) 26.. .fS! 27.c3 and here the
simplest is 27.. J!xeS! 28.dxeS :i:J.d7 - Black is even better.

22...Wxf3!

Black's moves are forced at this stage.

23.hxg7 We3+! 24.@bl!


24...�c3+!

24...Wxgl? 25.Wh8#

25.bxc3 Wxgl+ 26.Wxgt

Black holds this endgame easily.

26...�fd8 27.WgS '.!?h7

Up to now, the whole line was given by Alex Baburin in CT-3056.

28.Wf6 �d7 29.'.!?b2

29.©cl �ad8 30.a3 r!g8 31.Wh4+ '.!?g6 32.Wg4+ '.!?f6 33.Wh4+ <.!?xg7
34.Wg3+ ®f8 35.Wb8+ ©g7 36.Wg3+ ½-½ Baratosi,D-Manole,S Baile
Olanesti 2013.

29...�g8 30JNh4+ <.!?xg7 31.Wg3+ '.!?f8


Or 31. ..©h7=; 31...�hS=

32.YNbS+ �g7 33.YNg3+

After 33.Wixa7? it's risky for White.

33...©fS 34J�b8+ <.!;>g7 35.Wig3+ ½-½

In opposit e -sides castling situations there is not even one te1npo


to be missed.

Opposite castles give the opportunity to both sides to try their


knowledge...

28...axb3?

Natural but wrong. Black could prevail with 28 ...tilxgS! 29.ixgS


Wxb6 30.ixe4 ic3+! 31.©xc3 (31.©c2 axb3+ 32.©xc3 [32.©d3
Wd4+ 33.'it>e2 Wxe4+] 32...al = W+) 31 ...al= W+! (31. ..Wxb3+?
32.<.!;>dZ+- ) 32.©d2 (32.l;lxal Wd4+ 33.©c2 [33.�b4 !l:xc4+!]
33...axb3+ 34.©xb3 Wxc4+ 35.'it>b2 Wib4#) 32...Wbd4+ 33.id3
(33.�e2 Wxe4+) 33...Wab2+ 34.<.!;>el Wxh2 35.fuch2 Wgl +-+

29.g6!?

Objectively best for White was 29.Wxh7+ txh7 30.ixb7 al=W+


2 9...hS?

And Black assisted \Nith pleasure! Good was 29 ...ia3+! 30.@xb3


(30.@al b2+ 31.@xa2 .icS+ 325£?xb2 Wxb6+ 33.@c3 Wb4# ; 30.@,c3
al = W+ 31.@d2 [31.%txa1 �xc4+ 32.@xb3 lt:ld4+ 33.hd4 .tc2+
34.Wxc2 :ab4+ 35.�c3 Wxf3+ 36.Wd3 exd4+ 37.@c2 :ab2+) 31. ..ib4+
32.©e2 M3+ 33 .©f2 �a2+)

� ■ R ■ ■ �ffl
■��'i'■w•l•x�:•
··�·
� -- .
·-'•'···
mw■ �it•
,•.1.-.,
30 ...al=tb+! 31.:1:1.xal (31.�c3 !c1Xc4+! 32.©d2 [32.�xc4 Wc6+ 33.12.cS
WxcS# ; 32./uxc4 Wb4#)) 31. ..Wxb6+! 32.ixb6 lild4+ 33.@c3
(33.hd4 a'.cb8+ 34.filJ6 rixb6+ 3S.<;!,c3 ib4+ 36.4?b3 tel#)
3 3..J:!xc4+1 34.�d2 (34.@xc4 !clC8+ 35.ic 7 'i1xc7#) 34...tbxf3+ 35.�e2
li:ixh2-+

30.YNxhS .ia3+
31.@xb3

and Black resigned: 31...al=ltl+ 32.l;!xal Wxb6+ 33.ixb6 ltld4+


34.©c3 l'.'!:xc4+ 35.@d2 i!c2+ 36.@,e3 ltlfS+ 37.@xe4 lt:Jg3+ 38.@d3
lt::ixhS 39.ixa8+-

1-0

□ Aronian Levon
■ lvanchuk Vassily
Istanbul 2012 O

25.b4!

Surprisingly, the killing blow comes from the queenside. White


takes advantage of the opened files to deliver irrefutable threats.

25...axb4 26.axb4 .txb4 27J!a7 ttle628.ttle7


That's one exchange, and the attack continues strongly.

2 8... Wg7

28..J:'ig7 29.tbxdS loses a piece.

29.tbxg8 ©xg8 30.WxdS

Up the exchange, the rest is a piece of cake. However the finish


is quite pleasant.

30....icS 31.e3 bS 32.�a8 :Sxa8 33.Wxa8+ Wf8 34.We4 Wh6 35.:Sat


b4 36.:SaS .if8 37.Wg4+ Wg7 38.Wh4 h6 39.:Sa8 �c7

Basically any move here wins. Silnply Z!c8 creates too many
threats. But L.Aronian forces ilnmediate resignation:

40.�xf8+! Wxf8 41.Wg4+ ©h8 42.WfS 1 0-

And Black must drop the knight to prevent check1nate.

CONCLUSION

Violent attacks via open files and diagonals are spread all around
and are quite co1nmon in all of chess history.
One should be aware of their mechanisms and use prophylaxis
to avoid them, or take advantage of then1 if in the driver's seat.
BODEN'S MATE
Baden's Mate is a 1nating pattern characterised by bishops on
two criss-crossing diagonals (for example, bishops on a6 and f4
delivering 1nate to a king on c8), with possible flight squares for
the king being occupied by friendly pieces.
Most often the mated king has castled queenside, and is mated
on c8 or cl. Many variants on the mate are seen, for example
a king on e8 mated by bishops on g6 and a3, and a king on fl
1nated by bishops on h3 and b6.
Often the mate is immediately preceded by a sacrifice that opens
up the diagonal on ·which the bishop delivers mate. The mate is
named for Samuel Boden, who played a famous early game.

o Schulder R.
■ Boden Samuel
London 1853

1.e4 es 2.<tlf3 d6 3.c3 fS 4.ic4 ti::if6 5.d4 fxe4 6.dxe5 exf3 7.exf6
Wxf6 8.gxf3 qJC6 9.f4 .id7 10..ie3 0-0-0 11.�d2 :Se8 1Z.Wf3 .ifS
13.0-0-0

Nothing indicates the storm coming...

13...d5! 14.hdS Wxc3+ 15.bxc3 .ia3# 0-1

However, it had been known previously from the game Horwitz­


Popert, Hamburg 1844.
□ Horwitz Bernhard
■ Popert William
Hamburg 1844 e

Black set a trap with his next move:

1...�b8! 2.:Sxd5?

Which White fell intoI

2 ... c6?

Black blundered with the text move, instead of playing the


winning 2...Wxh2+ 3.Wxh2 !1:xh2+ 4.@xh2 c6+-+ After that White
could not save his rook because of the threatened mate in two.
Instead, he surprised Black with

3.:Sh5! Wxh5 4.Wxc6+ ! bxc6 5.�xa6#

1-0

Boden's Mate occurred in many later games, usually, as in the


Boden and Horwitz games, after the losing king has castled on
the queenside, and the winner sets up the 1nate by a queen
sacrifice on c3 or c6.
Perhaps the most famous example of Boden's Mate is the so­
called 'Peruvian Immortal Game':
o Canal Esteban
■NN
Budapest 1 934

1.e4 dS 2.exdS WxdS 3.q)c3 Was 4.d4 c6 S.qjf3 .ig4 6..if4 e6 7.h3
.ixf3 8.Wxf3 .ib4 9..ie2 q)d7 10.a3 0-0-0

11.axb4! Yfixa1+ 12.@d2 Wxh1 13.Wxc6+ ! bxc6 14..ia6# 1-0

And here come so1ne more examples to fully understand the


mechanisms of the 1nate:

o Diemer Emil Joseph


■ Portz
Lindau 1948

1.d4 dS 2.e4 dxe4 3.q)c3 lt:Jf6 4.f3 exf3 S.Yfixf3 Wxd4 6..ie3 Wes
7.0-0-0 c6 8.h3 .ie6 9..id3 <tlbd7 10.<tlge2 0-0-0 11..if4 YfihS

12.Yfixc6+! bxc6 13..ia6# 1-0


□ Lasker Edward
■ Englund Fritz
Scheveningen 1913

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 .!bc6 3..!bc3 �f6 4..ib5 .!bd4 5..!bxe5 We7 6.�f3 .!bxe4
7.0-0 �xc3 8.dxc3 .!bxf3+ 9.Wxf3 Wc5 10.!:!:el+ ie7 11.�d3 d5
12.ie3 Wd6 13.if4 Wf6 14.WxdS c6 15.We4 ie6 16J�e3 icS
17.ie5 Wh6 18J!g3 �f8 19.:Sdl 0-0-0

20:@·xc6+! bxc6 21.ia6# 1-0

□ Morphy Paul
■ Thompson James
New York 1859

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 .!bc6 3.ic4 ic5 4.b4 ixb4 5.c3 iaS 6.0-0 �b6 7.d4
d6 8.dxe5 <!iJxeS 9..!bxe5 dxeS 10.ixf7+ @e7 11.Wb3 .!bf6 12.�a3+
cs 13.E!dl Y!Jc7 14. f4 !:!:f8 15.ic4 E!d8 16.!:!:de1 id7 17.�c1 E!f8
18.fxeS Wxe5 19.if4 Y!Jh5 20.:Sdl @d8 21.eS <!iJe8 22.Yfla4 Wg4
23.e6 .!bf6 24.:Sxd7+ @c8
2S.Wc6+! bxc6 26.�a6# 1-0

o Reshevsky Samuel Herman


■ Duncan Edward
St. L ouis 1921

1.e4 es 2Jtif3 dS 3.exdS e4 4.We2 tZlf6 S.o!iic3 .icS 6.tZlxe4 0-0


7.�xf6+ Wxf6 8.c3 .id7 9.d4 .id6 10..ie3 MS 11.tZld2 ttid7 12.g3
:Sfe8 13.�g2 Wg6 14.0-0-0 cs 1S.dxc6 bxc6 16.hc6 l3ac8

17..ixd7?

17.dS was White's only chance.

17...l3xc3+!

White resigned due to 18.bxc3 i.a3#

0-1
o Stroud A.F.
■ Fraser Alistair
CCCA Corr 1961

1.d4 dS 2.c4 �fS 3.�c3 �f6 4.li:lf3 e6 5.e3 �b4 6.�d2 0-0 7.�es
�bd7 8.f3 �xeS 9. dxeS �d7 10.f4 li:lcS 11.Wf3 d4 12.exd4 Wxd4
13.0-0-0 �fd8 14.�e3

14... Wxc3+! 15.bxc3 �a3#

0-1

More rarely, Baden's Mate can occur, for example:


1. Where a white bishop on g6 delivers mate to a black king on
e8, which is hemmed in by a white bishop on a3, and his own
queen on d8 and knight on d7.
2. Where a bishop on h6 delivers mate to a black king on f8,
which is hem1ned in by a white bishop on c4, and its o\l\rn queen
on e8 and bishop on e7.
Examples of both cases follow:

o Alekhine Alexander
■ Vasic
Banja Luka 1931

1.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.<tlc3 �b4 4.�d3 �xc3+ 5.bxc3 h6 6.�a3 �d7


7.We2 dxe4 8.�xe4 �gf6 9.�d3 b6
10.Wxe6+! fxe6 11.i.g6# 1-0

o Elyashov
■ NN
Paris 1948

1.f4 e5 2.f:xe5 d6 3.exd6 hd6 4.<!bf3 gs 5.d4 g4 6.ltlg5 f5 7.e4 i.e7


8.ltlh3 gxh3 9.Y!fh5+ @f8 10..ic4 We8

11.Wh6+! t!i::ixh6 12.hh6# 1 - 0

o Zukertort Johannes Hermann


■ Anderssen Adolf
Breslau 1865

1.e4 e5 2.ltlf3 t!i::ic6 3.i.b5 ltlge7 4.c3 d6 5.d4 .id7 6.0-0 t!i::ig6 7.ltlg5
h6 8.t!i::ixf7 @xf7 9.i.c4+ @e7 10.Ytfh5 Y!fe8
11.VNg5+! hxg5 12.i,xg5# 1-0

o Pandolfini Bruce
■ NN
United States 1970

1.e4 e5 2.<tif3 Cbc6 3.i,b5 a6 4..ta4 ltJf6 5.0-0 ltJxe4 6.d4 exd4
7.:Sel d5 8.<tlxd4 .td6 9.<tixc6 hh2+ 10.@hl Wh4 11.�xe4+ dxe4
12.Wd8+ Wxd813.�xd8+ @xd8 14.@xh2

So far this is a position known to opening theory as the 'Riga


Variation' of the 'Ruy Lopez'. \,Vhite is considered to have the
advantage after 14....ie6 15 ..ie3.

14...f5?

But Black \A/as kind enough to be helpful!

15.i,g5# 1-0
□ Balk Oscar
■ Barnes Richard James
New Zealand 1 926

1.e4 es 2.q)f3 'iJc6 3..ic4 qjf6 4.ltlg5 d5 5.exd5 'iJa5 6..ib5+ c6


7 .dxc6 bxc6 8.ia4 h6 9.�f3 e4 10.�gl id6 11.d3 0-0 1Z.dxe4
tuxe4 13.i.e3 .ia6 14.�f3 Vffc7 15.�bd2 �fe8 16.c3

16...�xc3! 17.bxc3 �xe3+! 18.fxe3 .ig3+ 19.hxg3 Vf!xg3# 0-1


CONCLUSION

The Baden's Mate is characterised by specific and easy-to-learn


patterns and mechanisms.
Nov,radays it occurs less-often, as it has beco1ne known even to
beginners!
Nevertheless, good understanding can help you to avoid or to
execute this pretty combination!
CASTLED DEATH
A quite famous micro-combination is the one v.rhich involves
castling as the final and decisive move.
Of this double attack, working much like a discovered check,
many examples exist. But of course this cannot be implemented
without the clear help (blunder) of the opponent.
Please note that the main guide for this survey was Tim Krabbe's
excellent book 'Chess Curiosities' (Allen & Unwin 1985). But let's
examine the combination in question, starting with an
illuminating study:

Study 1

• • • •
Selezniev-Alexey-Sergeevich

-� -.
Tidskrift for Schach 1921 O


••••••••
®'d! �
.....�
. �
-� m
' !w.

-

!W� g
� � •
• Wf
•j/li

••••
,t. . �� .
•�
,.;
§ -

d%,

-
� !,Jj •
,Mm

-

Black see1ns to handle the white pawn...

1.d7!

But this is not the case! Wrong \,vould be 1.0-0-0? :Sa2! 2.d7 flal+
3.lt>c2 :Sxdl 4.�xdl �c7=

1 ...lt>c7 2 . d8=W+!

Precise, as again v.rrong would be 2 . 0 0


- -0? :Sb8=

2 ...lt>xd8
3.0-0-0+

And with this 'unexpected' move, White vvins the black rook!

1-0

So, after the prilnary - and most important for the explanation
of the combination - example, we will move on to rather 1nore
complex stuff:

Study 2

�■��,-■••• •
Katsnelson-Leonard
Moscow 1 980 O

-?&.-•.•• •
• •
- �,.•-,?&.
1:t

�-
••••
� .•. • . •
A passed pa-\,vn is always a threat. ..
1.a7!

l.%!:h7? looks like it's killing, but Black can continue ,;,vith 1...0-0-
0! 2.a7 !'le2+ 3.'i!?b3 %!:d3+-+
1...:Se2+

There is not much to be done. If 1 ..J:l:d8, then 2.fu{b61 (2.a8= �?


:l!e2+= ) 2 ...El:e2+ 3.@b3 !l:e3+ 4.@a4 !1:e4+ 5.©aS+-
And if 1...@f8, then 2.:l!f3+ ©g8 3.!1:ff7 f!ee8 4.El:fe7 !1:ed8 5.fucb6+-

2.©b1 !!:el+ 3.©c2 :Se2+ 4.©d1!

And not the naive 4.©d3? -vve will see later the reason.

4...0- 0 -0+

The 'unexpected' long castle and it seems that Black is doing


1nore than fine now...

S.:Sd7!

But again, this is not the case!

s...@xd7
5 ...!l:xd7+ fails to 6.l!?xe2+-

6.:Sd3+ !

No,,v it becomes clear why \IVhite played 4.©dl!

6...l!?c7 7.:Sxd8

And \I\Thite queens the pawn.


1-0

Now, enough with the studies; let's examine so1ne over-the-board


real examples.
Well, remember that the losing side has to assist by blundering
badly!

o Dunbar
■ Sjavkin
Poland 1925

1.e4 e5 2.ti:if3 'iJc6 3.d4 exd4 4.tilxd4 .ic5 5..ie3 d6?

A typical beginner's mistake...


6.ti:ixc6 bxc6 7..ixc5 dxc5 8.Wxd8+ �xd8 9.c4 �b8 10.'iJc3

\Nhite has a won position due to his 1nuch superior pawn


structure, but Black didn't need to blunder...
10...�xb2? 11.0-0-0+ 1 - 0

o Matisons Hermanis
■ Millers R.
Karalauci 1926

1.e4 c5 2.g3 ti:ic6 3..ig2 ti:if6 4.tilc3 e6 5.f4 d5 6.e5 d4 7.exf6 dxc3
8.fxg7 cxd2+ 9.Wxd2 �xg7 10..ixc6+ bxc6 11.Wxd8+ �xd8 12.c3
12.tbf3 '$;Jc7 13.0- 0, as in Haselhorst,H-Lamby,P E1nsdetten 2015,
is another story.
12...gbs 13.�e3!

\Nhite is now ready for 0-0-0, protecting his b 2 -pa\-vn...but Black


was too generous!

13...gxb2? 14.0-0- 0+! 1-0

o Feuer Otto
■ O'Kelly de Galway Alberic
Liege 1934

1.e4 e5 2.tLJf3 .!bc6 3.�h5 a6 4.�a4 d6 5.�xc6+ bxc6 6.d4 f6 7.�c3


�b8 8.Wd3 tZ'le7 9.h4 h5 10.�e3

White stands somewhat better due to his superior space control


and he prepares something like 0-0-0.
10...�xb2?!

10 ...exd4 11.ltJxd4 cs 12.ltJb3 g6+= looked like a must for Black;


obviously it wasn't his day...

11 .dxeS dxeS?

But that's a clear blunder. Forced was 11...lt:ig6, when White

•.a���
would simply stand better after 12.exf6 Wi'xf6 13.ltJe2!

. �-
,., • • •
B
..
� ½,, n � .. �
;�, ., .,�;,
�� _ ,,,,

B ,ii■ m '-'. ..�. :


�·�·".
. ,�.
.
t
� � �- D��
� , .,,


� -
� � ��
� � '!"¥

12.VNxd8+ �xd8 13.0-0-0+ 1-0

o Kantardzhiev Mikhail
■ Kiprov Alexander
Sofia 1937

1.e4e6 2.d4 dS 3.�d2 cs 4.exdS WxdS 5. �gf3 cxd4 6 .ic4


. Wd8
7. �b3 �c6 8. �bxd4 �xd4 9. �xd4 i.c510..ie3 �f6 11 .ib5+
. .id7
12 6b
. xe6!? .tb4+?

The wrong idea! Black should .have opted for 12 ...WaS+! 13.id2
.ixf2+! 14.�xf2 Wb6+ 15.ie3 Wx,e6=

13 .c3 hc3+ 14.bxc3 fxe6 15.:Sb1?

Good was 15.i.d3± with the bishop pair.

15 ...ixbS
. 16.E(xbS Wxdl+ 17.�xdl 6bd5

18 !. �xb7?

White falls into the trap! Fine ,,vas 18.�d2 b6 19.c4 ltlxe3
2 0 .�xe3=

18 ..6bxe3+
. 19.f:xe3 0-0-0+! 0-1

□ Borbely Istvan
■ Kovach
Oradea 1948

1.e4 cs 2.6bf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Wxd4 6bc6 5..ibS .id7 6.hc6 bxc6
7 .6bc3 ti:lf6 8..igS �b8 9.es dxeS 10.6bxe5
10...�xb2?!

10...Wb6 11.!l:d1 �xd4 12Jlxd4 E!b7+= was a must.

11.�xf6?

11.E!dl! :!:lb7 12.0-0 was curtains; White is silnply too well­


developed...

11...gxf6 12.�xd7

12...VNxd7?

An auto1natic response, which loses on the spot. Black had to


opt for 12..Jab7! 13.tZ:lxf6+ exf6+=

13.YNxd7+ �xd7 14.0-0-0+!

1-0
oNN
■ Abrahams Gerald
Moscow 1949

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.ltlc3 c6 4.e4 i .b4 5..id3 e5 6.dxe5 dxe4 7.i.xe4


.txc3+ 8.bxc3 Wxdl+ 9.�xdl .ie6 10.i:i:bl ltla6

A blitz game - with white a Soviet GM, who wanted to remain


anonymous...

11.�xb7? 0-0-0+ ! 0-1

o Jagelski
■ Kohler
Munich 1952

1.ltlh3 d5 2.g3 e5 3.f4 exf4 4.ltlxf4 i.d6 5.d4 ltlf6 6.c4 i.b4+ 7..td2
.txd2+ 8.ltl xd2 dxc4 9.ltl xc4 lbd5 10.Wd3 lb xf4 11.gxf4 Wh4+
12.Wg3 Wxg3+ 13.hxg3 .ie6 14..tg2 .ic8 15.ltla5 c6 16.d5 cxdS
17..ixdS ltl d7 18.lb xb7 hb7 19.i.xb7 !!:b8
20.�c6! :Sb6

Black seemed to have understood that 20..Jcrb2? ,,vould be


a blunder...

Or maybe not?

22.�xd7+ i>xd7 23.0-0-0+! 1-0

□ Schroeder
■ Rudy
New York 1958 e

Another blitz ga1ne.

18...a6! 19.l:!xb7?

Such combinations can be easily missed in short time controls!


Here 19.%i:b2 was a near 1nust.

19 ..0-0-0
. !

Here we have no check, but the double threat of the rook on b7


and the mate on d1, decides.

0-1

o Sznapik Aleksander
■ Adamski Jan
Gdynia 1973

1.e4 cs 2.tl'if3 e63.d4 cxd44.tl'Jxd4tl'Jf6 S.tl'Jc3 d66.i.e3 a67.f4 bS


8.Wf3 i.b7 9.Ad3 tl'Jbd7 10.g4 b4 11.tl'ice2 es 12.tl'ifS g613 .tl'Jfg3
exf4 14.i.xf4 hS tS.gxhS tl'JxhS 16.tl'J xhS ;gxhS 17.i.g3 i.g7 18 l . U1
Wf619.i.xd6Wxf3 20.1::ixf3 i.xb2 21.1::ibt Aes 22.1::ixb4 Axd6
23 .�xb7 tl'JeS 24.E!f6i.e7 2S J!f2 i.cS 26.�g2 tl'Jf3+ 27.@dt �xh2
28.�xh2 tl'Jxh2 29.�f4 tl'ig4 30.tl'J dS tl'Je3+ 31.�xe3 he3

32..ic4?

White should stand slightly better after 32.@eZ .icS 33..tc4, but
so1nehow messed-up ...

32...0-0-0+! 33.@e2 @xb7 34.@xe3 f6

And the rest of the game was easy for Black.


3S.©f4 :Sd7 36.i.d3 l3e7 37.Ac4 ©b6 38.Ag8 lt>cS 39.c3 as 40.Ab3
@d6 41.Ag8 Elc7 42.c4 �g7 43.AclS Ele7 44.@e3 lt>cS 4S.@d3 :Sh7 0-
1

o Kupreichik Viktor
■ Kapengut Albert
Minsk 1978

1.e4 e6 2.<tlf3 dS 3.es cs 4.c3 Ad7 S.tba3 .!bc6 6.ttlc2 :Sc8 7.d4 cxcl4
8.<tlcxd4 <tige7 9.�cl3 ltJxd4 10..!bxcl4 tbg6 11.YNeZ .icS 12.<tlb3 .ib6
13.h4 <tlxh4 14.YNg4 ltJg6 1S.�xg6 fxg6 16.:Sxh7

White seems to have a crushing attack...

16....ixf2+! 17.1.>e2

What else? If 17.@xf2? 0-0+ wins!

17...l3xh7?1

Much better was 17...�bS+! 18.'i!?dl E!xh7 19.YNxg6+ @d7 20.Wxh7


@c7 21.Wxg7+ ©b8+

18.YNxg6+ 'i!?f8 19.YNxh7 YNh4 20.YNxh4 �xh4

And the chances are now equal.

21.Ae3 b6 22.a4 �c4 23.aS �e4 24.�fl+ 'i!?e8 2S.sf4 �bS+ 26.'it>f3
.ia4 27.�xe4 dxe4+ 28.'i!?g4 .ixb3 29.'i!?xh4 bxaS 30.�xa7 .ids
31.g3 a4 ½-½

o Tuor Gallus
■ Hugentobler Patrick
Silvaplana 1982 O

17.:Sxb7?

White hurries to regain his pawn, but the text is a clear


blunder! He had to opt for 17Jl:c3 b6 18.'i!?e3 0-0+

17...0-0- 0+ ! 0-1

o Neely Elizabeth
■ Levit Roman
Chicago 1989

1.e4 es 2.<tif3 .!bc6 3.i.bS a6 4.i.a4 d6 5.i.xc6+ bxc6 6.d4 f6 7.i.e3


:Sb8 8.<tlc3 :Sxb2 9.dxeS fxeS
Here Black faces no problems.

10.�xe5?! Wf6!

Of course not 10 ...dxeS? 11.Wxd8+ ©xd8 12.0-0 -0 ++-

11.id4 dxeS 12.�dS cxd5 13.hb2 ib4+ 14.c3 icS

And Black had a clear advantage, which he later converted to


a win.

15.0-0 dxe4 16.Wd5 Wid6 17.Wxe4 .!iJf618.Wa4+ id719.Wb3 Wib6


20.c4 .!iJg4 21.Wxb6 cxb6 22J!ad1 !!:f8 23 .!!:d2 ie6 24.h3 .!iJxf2
25.gfxf2 l::!xf2 26.:Sxf2 e4 2 7 . ©fl hc4+ 28 . !!:e2 g6 29 .©el ixe2
30.<.!?xe2 <.!?d7 0-1

□ Mestek Igor
■ Voscilla Adriano
Pula 201 6

1.e4 e5 2..!iJf3 .!iJc6 3 . ib5 a6 4.ia4 d6 5.hc6+ bxc6 6.d4 f6 7.ie3


q)e7 8.CLJc3 1:!:b8 9.dxes fxe5 10.Wid3
10...l3xb2?

But here things are different. Black had to opt for 10 ... g6.

11.€lxe5! dxe5?

A second blunder in a row. Black had to accept a bad position


with 11..JEbS 12Jl:dl .ie6 13.lt:ic4±

12.¥Nxd8+ �xd8 13.0-0-0+ �e8 14.�xb2 .ie6 15.€la4 lLJc8 16.�c5


.ic4 17.�c3 lLJb6 18.ltib7 .ixa219.�d8+ �f7 20..ixb6 cxb6 21 . �al
1-0

CONCLUSION

This micro-co1nbination is quite easy to re1nember, as it is also


quite easy to forget!
The involvement of castling makes it a bit unusual, but it is still
a simple version of a double-attack.
And in most of the cases it is quite a forceful and efficient one,
as it usually comes with a nasty check fro1n nowhere!
FIERCE QUEEN
The queen is a 'sensitive' piece and obviously she cannot be
exposed to unnecessary and unforced attacks by any opposing
piece except her counterpart.
Pawns are especially quite dangerous, as the loss of a queen for
insufficient 1naterial logically leads to a lost game. But there are
certain cases where the queen 'doesn't care' or isn't afraid of the
opponent's pawns, obviously due to certain tactical
considerations.
In these cases the pawns are proved to be 'false guards' - let's
start with the famous game nicknamed as 'Meta-Morphysis'!

o Bird Henry Edward


■ Morphy Paul
London 1858

17.0-0- 0

Black has an extra pawn, but the position is quite sharp as the
kings are on different wings. Now P.Morphy started an amazing
combination:

17...�xf2?!

I raise 1ny hat to the great chess artist, but the crude l7....tg4!
was correct - G.Kasparov. It looks to me that P.Morphy
consistently liked to be down pieces when such offers gave him
open lines and brilliant mating nets. His prodigious memory
allowed him to calculate moves far in advance. Thus he did not
consider being down in pieces a true detriment. But \A/hen eagle­
eyed P.Morphy goosed H.Bird "INith the text move, the game had
migrated to a completely different level - one that left White
wandering around like a duck hit over the head.
18.hfZ

18...VNa3!

A beautiful, geometrical and paradoxical 1nove from one end of


the board to the other. 18...ia3? is met by 19.'� e3!+=

19.c3!

The only defence: 19.WgS? :axb2 20.�d8+ �f7 21.�5+ g6 or


19.bxa3? ha3#

19...VNxaZ!
19...e3? is refuted by 20.ixe3 i.fS 21.Wc2!

20.b4 Wal+ 2L*c2 Wa4+

Black's attack has flowed along nicely until this critical point.

H.Bird crumbles under the pressure and loses quickly. This


position 1nakes a good tactical exercise, one v.rhich is solved by
P.Morphy easily. 22.*cl! is the only move and, as it seems now,
Black cannot win: 22 ... as (22 ...i.fS!? 23.ie3 (23.iel? e3 24.Wb2
aS+] 23 ...hb4 24.cxb4 r!:xb4 25.Wc2 Wa3+ 26.*d2 �b2 [26...fucd4+
27.*el Wxe3 28.�xd4 Wxd4 29.Wxc6=] 27.Wxb2 Wxb2+ 28.*el,
when Black has many pawns, but they are not very mobile)
23.Wc2 Wa3+ 24.Wb2 axb4 25.*bl!

This is the critical n1ove. Previously analysis went as follO\,vs:


25.Wxa3? bxa3 26..ig3! (26.�e3? �b3 27.@d2 !'lb2+ 28.*el a2
2 9J:l:al id7 30.�dl cs 3 1.dxcS i.e7 32.h4 h6!-+) 26...ie7 (26... a2?
2 7.4?d2 ia3 28.!1:al �b2+ 29.4?e3 !'lc2 30.hc7 �xc3+ 31.4?d2 ib2
32.if4 !'la3 33.id6 !1:a8 34.icS ifS 3S.�c2 ixal 36.�xal e3+
3 7.id3 g6 38.hfS gxfS 39.4?d3 4?f7 40.4?xe3 4?e6 41.4?f4=) 27.i.f4
(27.h4 e3 28.hc7 !'lb3 29.�dfl !'lb2 30.�h2 :1;!b7 31.ia6 flxc7
32.ixc8 f!xc8 33.@c2 cS+) 27 ...Ms 28.litdZ a2 29.fl:al (29.@e3 �b3
30.E'.al �c3+ 31.4?d2 ib4 32.47dl !'la3 33.idZ ixd2 34.4?xd2 e3+
3S.4?el 4?f7+) 29...�b2+ 30.4?e3 cS 31.idl 4?f7 32.:1;!el cxd4+
33.4?xd4 if6+ 34.*xdS hc3 3S.:l!fl ie6+ 36.*xe4 �b4+ 37.@e3
id4+ 38.4?d2 ic4 39.i.hS+ @g8 40.!1:xa2 ha2 41.hc7 if6=+ Now
Black can choose:
a) 25 ...ifS 26.Wxa3 bxa3+ 27.�al !'lb2 28.�hel! (28.�del? .if4!
28...ixh2 (28...if4 29.ig3 id2 30.flxd2 !l:xd2 31.hc7oo) 29.ie3 .ig3
30.E'.gl ih2 31.!1:g2 id6 32.!1:d2 �xd2 33.hd2 47f7 34.@a2 cs 3S.icl
g6 36.ixa3 if4 37.!1:gl and Black cannot win.
b) 2S ... Wa7!? 26.c4 b3 27.cS (27.El:hgl? ia3 28.Wal [28.�g7+?
©xg7 29.�gl+ 47f8 30.Wd2 icl !-+] 28 ... e3 29.ih4 ifS+ 30.id3 e2
31.ixfS exdl =W+ 32.Eixdl Wa4-+) 27...if4

(�A ■ -�■
-;�1:
i �//W
.
1 �
-
� .

; •
:,.,..,,. j1 �
,
,I
{!f - �-

• o,� • " '"'" � �

■,■.,�■B
•�•:• a:
28.E'.hgll (28.ig3? ih6 29.ieS !1:a8 30.!1:hgl ifS 31.�dfl ig6 32.h4
id2!-+ ; 28.iel? E'.a8 29.ic3 Wb8 30.!1:dfl ih6 31.idl ia6 32.hb3
Wb7 33Jl: dl �b8 34.4?a2 ie2 35.l�hel hdl 36.�xdl if4 37.!1:hl J.e3
38.ia4 Wa7 39.Wa3 �a8+) 28...!1:a8 29.ih4 MS! 30.:1;!gfl ! e3+ 31.*cl
ic2 32J:txf4 ixdl 33.ixdl Wal+ 34.Wxal !l:xal+ 35.@b2 !1:xdl
36J:!f3 !1:xd4 37.ie7!=
c) 25 ...Wa4!? 26.c4 b3 27.cS if4 28.ig3 ih6 29.Wall �xal +
305t>xal ri:a8+ 31.�b2 �a2+ 32.©xb3 1:!xe2 33.'.9:aloo.
d) 25 ...ia6 26.1;!.hel! Wxb2+ (26...he2 27.1:!xeZ Wa4 28.1:!gl ixh2
29.l!cl b3 30.c4 id6 31.cS ie7 32.ie3oo) 27.*xb2 bxc3+ 28.�xc3
ib4+ 29.*c2 ixel 30.�xel ixe2 31.l!xe2=
e) 25 ...Wxc3 26J!cl Wh3 (26 ...Wa3 27.ig3) 27.ig3 ifS 28.Wb3oo.
So it seems that P.Morphy's amazing sacrifice does not win
objectively.

22...i.xb4'. !

Black's king hunt flows nicely.

23.cxb4 :Sxb4+

24.Wxb4

What else? If 24.*cl? then 24...Wal+ 25.�c2 Wb2#


24...VNxb4+ 25.'i!lc2
Or 2S5!?a2 cs 26.dxcS e3 27.iel (27.ixe3 d4 28.ixd4 ie6+
29.�al Wa3+ 30.'i!?bl ifS+-+) 27 ...We4 28.ig3 Wc2+-+

25...e3 26..ixe3 "5+ 27J�d3 VNc4+ 28.@d2 VNa2+ 29.'i!ldl Wb1+

And so in the end, P.Morphy adds another feather to his cap...


When one plays with Morphy the sensation is as queer as the
first electric shock, or first love, or chloroform, or any entirely
novel experience - Henry Bird.
0-1

Well, there are many ways to 'evaluate' a move, as long as


certain criteria are presented:
1. Aesthetic appeal.
2. Complexity.
3. Efficiency.
4. Effect.
Certainly, the following game can 'help':

o Levitsky Stepan
■ Marshall Frank James
Breslau 1 9 1 2

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.toc3 c5 4.tof3 lbc6 5.exd5 exd5 6..ie2 tZlf6 7.0-0
.ie7 8..ig5 0-0 9.dxc5 �e6 10.tZld4 �xc5 11.tZlxe6 fxe6 12.�g4 VNd6
13..ih3 e:ae8 14.Wd2 .ib4 15..ixf6 �f6 16.:Sadl Wc5 17.We2 .ixc3
18.bxc3 Wxc3 19.El:xdS lbd4 20.WhS :Sef8 21.El:eS �h6 22.WgS :Sxh3
23.El:cS

Here Black actually has no less than five clear wins, but the 1nove
played is astonishing and one of the most beautiful in chess
history...

23...Wg3!

White decided to si1nply give-up, as nothing can save him:


24.Wxg3 (24.hxg3 0.e2#; 24.fxg3 lt:le2+ 25.�hl gxfl#) 24...lt:le2+
25.i>hl lt:lxg3+ 26.i>gl (26.fxg3 :t:.i:xfl#) 26...lt:le2+ 27.i>hl :t:Kc3-+ Well
in this game 23...Wg3 ,,vas not necessary at all and some other
moves are not much \-Vorse, although there is no move obviously
stronger - and by forcing liquidation it's not without practical
value. The game has been nickna1ned as 'The Gold Coin Game'.

0-1

The following game does not present any 'strange' queen 1nove
around the ene1ny pawns. But it is aesthetically beautiful, as the
white queen moves into the attack from far away.

□ Bogoljubow Efim
■ Mieses Jacques
Baden-Baden 1925

1.d4 fS 2.g3 lt:lf6 3..ig2 e6 4.lbf3 dS 5.0- 0 .id6 6.c4 c6 7.lbc3 0.bd7
8.Wc2 <tie4 9.@h1 Wf6 10.i.f4 i.xf4 11.gxf4 Wh6 12.e3 <tidf6
13.lLJeS <tid7 14.�g1 <tixe5 15.dxe5 lLJxc3 16.bxc3 i.d'7 17.�ad1 bS
18.WbZ 0 -0 19.Wa3 �fd8 20.cxhS cxbS 21.Wa6 WhS

The white queen stands 'miserable on the queenside, far away


from the rest of her army. It looks like Black is holding his own
but vVhite found an astonishing continuation:

22.�xdS!

22.fucdS? exdS 23.hdS+ @h8 24.�xg7 loses to 24.. .Vf?'dl +. With


a sudden change of plan, white assails the hostile position like
a streak of lightning - Emanuel Lasker.

22...exdS 23.�xg7+!

This double sacrifice exhibits the superb talent of the Russian


champion. He had to calculate not only the winning of the queen
for three pieces, but also several moves ahead of that - Saviely
Tartakower.

23 ... @xg7 24.Wf6+ @g8 25J!g1+ Wg4 26.�g4+ fxg4 27.fS

27.e6 .½c6 28.WgS+ �h8 29.e7 was easier.

27...�dcS 28.e6 i.c6 29.Wf7+ @h8 30.f6 :Sg8 31.Wc7 :Sacs 32.WeS
d4+ 33.@gl .ids 34.f7+ :Sg7 35.WxdS

The game was nicknamed 'I Play Against Mieses'.


1-0

o Alekhine Alexander
■ Supico
Lisbon 1941

1.e4 es 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.�xc3 .ib4 S..ic4 ffe7 6.lbge2 lbf6
7.0-0 0-0 8..igs Wies 9..txf6 fixf6 10.�ds fid6 11.eS fies 12.:Scl
ffaS 13.a3 .ixa3 14.bxa3 c6 1S.lbe7+ '.!lh8 16.'elid6 fid8 17.lbd4 b6
18.!k3 cs 19.�dfS .ta6

This ga1ne was played in June 1941 during a blindfold


simultaneous display. White is winning anyvvay, but he found the
quickest and 1nost effective continuation:

20.fig6!

As said, Black played horribly and White would have won easily
anyway, but the text move still looks spectacular. It's quite
a common the1ne when a castled king is surrounded by knights
and a 'lifted' rook is ready to come in: 20...fxg6 (20..Jig8 21.\Wxh7+
'.!lxh7 22J1:h3#; 20...hxg6 21.!%h3#) 21.lbxg6+ hxg6 22.!%h3+ Wh4
23.!!xh4# By the vvay, 20.lbg6+ fxg6 21.Wxg6 :!:1.xfS 22 J!h3 mates as
well.

1-0

American GM Nicolas Rossolimo, vvith Ukrainian and Italian


origins. ran a chess studio in Greenwich Village, NY in the 1960s.
He was a wonderful guy, and had many grandmasters visit the
studio, including Bobby Fischer. Rossoli1no died 'vvay before his
time in a tragic fall on a stairway.

□ Rossolimo Nicolas
■ Reissmann Paul
San Juan 1967

1.e4es 2.�f3 tZ'lc6 3.i.c4i.c5 4 . c 3 �f65.d4 exd46.cxd4 i.b4+


7 .i.d2 hd2+ 8.�bxd2 d5 9.exd5 tZ'lxd5 10 W . b3 �ce7 11.0-0c6
12 .�fel 0-0 13.a4 b614.tZ'le5 i.b715.a5 :Sc8 16.�e4 Wc7 17.a6 �as
18.Wh3 �f4 19.Wg4 tZ'led5 20.:Sa3 �e6 21.i.xdS cxd5 22.�f6+ @h8

23 W
. g6!

Of course \l\fhite could win as well 'vVith the 'natural' 23.Wxe6!


Wc1 (23...fxe6 24.tZ'lg6+ hxg6 25J:l.h3#) 24.�xf7+ :i;J.xf7 25J1c3, but
the 1nove played is far more beautiful!

23 ..Wc2
. 24.:Sh3

Black resigned due to 24.. .logS ZS.t2Jxf7+ (25.WxgS+-) 25 ..JJxf7


26.Wxc2 %txc2 27J1:e8+ �f8 28.:i;/.xfS# The game was nicknamed 'La
Regina Della Notte'.

1-0
□ Darga Klaus Viktor
■ Dueckstein Andreas
Lucerne 1963 O

26.Wfg6! 1-0

CONCLUSION

Expect the unexpected. Do not be fooled by pawn power and


control and false guards.
LETHAL DIAGONALS
Bishops live, move, threaten and defend on diagonals. We have
seen 1nany beautiful c01nbinations based on diagonal tricks and
we have studied many 1nore bishop endings.
And more-or-less we know how to mate with t,-vo bishops or
with bishop & knight vs. a lonely king...
But what about mates with a single bishop or mates in the late
middlegame? Well, these cases are rare birds, so their beauty is
even huger! \!\Then you want to create a masterpiece you firstly
have to imagine - and then to construct.
Well, imagination does not always become reality but it is
a good first step and it doesn't do any harm, depending on the
time you have left on your clock!
Let's start our 'imaginary' survey with some nice studies as
usual!

Study 1
Timman Jan
2007 0

Black seems to hold the draw here...

1.h4+!

Preparing the cage for the black king... 1.hxg4? i.d6+ 2.�h3 hS,
should be OK for Black.
1 ...©hS 2.�fS! .if8

2 ...id6+ 3.ltJxd6 fS 4.ltJxfS! .txfS s..te2+ ig4 6.hg4#

3.h3 .idt

3 ...hh3 4.ie2+ ig4 5.ixg4#

4..ie6! .ie2 5..!bg7+ .ixg7 6..ig4+ .ixg4 7.hxg4# 1-0

In this study, White is a pawn up but faced with threats by


Black's advanced pavvn. Nonetheless, he will prove that the two
bishops are po,.verful enough to ,,vin.

1.g7+!

White sacrifices a pawn for the initiative. If Black captures ,.vith


the king, he will face a deadly discovered check, so he takes with
the bishop, allowing White to move his h l b - ishop away with
tempo soon. With normal play, White can even lose if he isn't
careful, for example l.ia3+? ©g7! 2.if3 (losing is 2.dS? ltJxhl
3.ib2+ �xg6 4.ixh8 h2 5.ieS ltJg3!-+) 2 ...h2 3.dS ©xg6=

t ...hg7
No better is 1...©xg7 2.dS+ (the computer wants to play 2.if3+­
but V.Bron's variation is easier to understand. In the co1nputer
variation Black's knight is captured) 2...©g6 (after 2 ...@g8 3..ixh8
li:ixhl 4.d6!+- the passed pawn decides) 3.hh8 tuxhl 4.ieS+- and
the knight is caught in the corner.

2.�a3+ ©f7 3.idS+ ©g6!

Black ailns to exchange all the pawns, in which case even


a piece less - as long as he keeps his bishop - won't 1natter.

4.©f2

A nice sacrifice, playing for a trick to exchange the pawns. The


immediate capture on d4 does not work out: 4...ixd4+ 5.©xg3
with three variations, but in all of the1n the g4-pawn survives:
5...ieS+ (5...hS 6.ie4++-) 6.©f3! h2 (6... hS 7..ie4+ 4?h6 8.icl++-)
7.ie4+! �gs 8..ie7+ if6 9..ixf6+ 4?xf6 10.4?f4+-

5.hhl

If \,Vhite declines, according to V.Bron the n,vo extra pawns for


Black should secure a draw, although in a ga1ne Black would
certainly lose: 5.©e3? hd4+ 6.4?xd4 tbf2 7.4?e3 <tlxg4+ 8.4?f4 hS=
The study ,,vould still be sound if Black could only repeat the
1noves, this ,,vould be called a 'loss of tilne dual': 5.4?e3 tbg3 6.4?f2
li:ihl +
s ...hd4+ 6.©g3 .ieS+

How can the game now not end in a draw?

It would be wrong to take im1nediately: 7.©xh3? hS 8.ie4+ g;,gS!


9.icl+ (9.ie7+ �f6 10 .ixf6+ �xf6) 9 ...if4 10 .ixf4+ ©xf4 ll.gxh5
©gS= To invalidate this defence, White must steer the ieS to f6 -
in 'proble1n language', a 'Ro1nan' 1nanoeuvre.

7....if6+ ! 8.©xh3 hS 9..ie4+ ©h6

The second issue is that White has reached a position ,,vhere he


can fork king and bishop to reach this and another checkmate.
The first issue is that vvith the bishop on f6, the defence that once
worked now ends in checkmate: 9 ... @gS 10 .�cl#

10.gS+! hgS

Or, as ,,ve sa,,v before, 10 ... �xgS 11.icl#

11 .if8#
.
Certainly the 1naterial balance is enough for a draw, but Black
has a small positional issue preventing it - he is checkmated!
1-0

Study 3
Korolkov Vladimir
Trud 1935
1st Prize 1935 O

This ingenious study by Vladimir Korolkov features two bishops


that have to do heroic deeds while pawns 'ivant to promote all
over the board. Firstly, the f2-pawn wants to promote on fl, and
playing l.fi:bl e2 does not help either. So White has to create
counterplay. There is only one way to stop the pawn for now, and
that is to prepare a discovered check.
1.d7!
After 1.l:lbl? e2-+ White has no useful continuation.
Sacrificing the rook can stop the pawns for now, but vVhite can't
create enough counterplay to drav.r, for example 1J:1:f7+? @xf7
2 ..ia6 id8 3.@f4 (3.@f3 ib6 4.g4 [4.ic4+ @f6 5.@e2 aS-+] 4... 'i!?e6
5.gS 'i!?xd6 6.g6 @e6-+) 3 ...�6 4.@fS e2 5.ixe2 as 6.ic4+ @e8
7.'i!?e4 a4 8.@f3 @d7-+ and Black eventually wins with his passed
pawns.

1...@e7 2J'.{b8!

It is ilnportant to choose the correct order of moves, as the


immediate sacrifice 2.d8=Vli+? @xd8 3J1:b8 allows Black to take on
g3 without consequences: 3...ixg3 4J1:a8 (4.'i!?xg3 fl=W 5.ia6+ i>c7
6.!i:c8+ @d7) 4...ib8! 5.ia6 r!ic7 and \,Vhite is lacking a tempo
co1npared to the main line: 6.@h3 fl =W+ 7.hfl 'i!?b7= with a drav.r
because of the extra pawn on e3. Of course not 8.ig2? e2-+ and
Black even wins.

2....ixg3!

White must be very careful now, as the line we just sa,,v will
turn out to be a draw if White takes the bishop, so he 1nust bring
his rook to a secure place. Taking on g3 is the best defence, as
othen,vise White wins easily with his g-pa,,vn: 2...fl=W? 3.d8=W+
r!ixd8 4..ia6+ @c7 5.ixfl @xb8 6.gxh4+- and the pawn pro1notes
soon.

3.:Sa8!

Without the g-pawn, the draw is clear after 3.@xg3? fl =W


4.d8=W+ i>xd8 S.ia6+ 'i!Jc7, and now White loses his rook ifhe
wants to take the queen. Otherwise, there is nothing better than
perpetual check. 6.Elb7+ @c8 7.�b6+ (7J;!xa7+ @b8 8J;!b7+ i>a8)
7...'i!Jc7 8.Elb7+, and taking on a7 allows Black to go to a8. 8...@c8
9.a:xa7+ r!ib8 10.Elb7+ @a8=, although of course 10...@c8 also
draws as before.

3 ...f1=VN
Black can't be too clever: 3...ib8 4.ia6+- wins easily but not
4.:l!xb8? fl = W S.d8=W+ ,;1;,xd8 6.i.a6+ 'i!Jc7= again.

i0,- .
�-· - �--
:: ■ iL■ • •
w---
---""•■
•••••■•
• • � ffl
@•

�•-• .1.•
� - 1%.lla'f 1Wl

4.d8='eN+ @xd8 5.Aa6+ Ab8!

The heroic sacrifice of the bishop leads to the known dravv if


White takes, but if he captures the queen ilnmediately, Black
wins the rook. So what should White do?

6.hfl

Anyv.ray! 6.Elxb8+? @c7=

But not the other way round, as Black's pawn ,vill drav,r: 7.ie2?
i?b7 8.if3 e2!=

7 ... e2! 8.Axe2 @b7

White loses the rook...

9.i.1:3! @xa8

9... a6!? 10 .ixc6+!+-

10.Axc6#
And eventually \,Vhite is a pawn dovvn, which is not too much of
an issue as Black is checkmated...

1-0

o Jackson Edward Mackenzie


■ Marshall Frank James
London 1899 •

If White was on the 1nove he could draw with 23.:!;1hel. But Black
to 1nove can create troubles for the exposed white king.
22...:Se2! 23.:Sad1 :Sf2+
Also good is 23 ...hS 24.l;Ehfl �h2 25.a4 13:eS, when Black wins
material.
24.<.!?g4 hS+?!

Black goes for uncertain tactics. Better vvas 24...id6! 25.if4 ixf4
26.gxf4 rig2+ 27.©h4 !l:xc2, when Black "vill prevail.

25.©xhS

25...g6+?

But this is too rnuch. Black's last try was 25 ...!l:xfS+ 26.©g4 �f2
27.lThel a:xel 28.hel !l:xc2 29Jid2I when he has chances, but
White should probably defend.

26.fxg6 :Se5+ 27.@g4 f5+ 28.©h4

Not losing directly, but better was 28.©hSI f4+ 29.©g4 fxg3
3 0 .4?xg3 !l:ee2 31.ih6! .td6+ 32.�d6 cxd6 33.!l:bl and now Black
must go for perpetual check.

2 8...@g7 29.i.f4?

A terrible blunder. \,Vhite was OK after 29.�hSI f4+ 30.©g4 fxg3


31.4?xg3 !l:ee2 32.if4.

2 9...@ xg6! 30.i.gs

Probably \,Vhite missed the easy 30 .heS ie7+.


30...�f4+ !

Nice and lethal! White resigned: 31.hf4 (31.g4 1if2#; 31.gxf4


1if2#) 31 ...�e7+ 32 ..tgs iixgS#

0-1

o Gelfand Boris
■ Shirov Alexei
Odessa 2007 •

A Rapid game, but still the beauty of the final touch is extra­
ordinary!

41...Wif4+ !

An excellent resource, but even nicer was 41 ... al=Wi! 42.Wfxal


1ili'f4+!!

42.gxf4
42.fua4 fxgS# is out of the question...
42....if2+ 43.�g3 .ixg3+ 44.©xg3 al=W

And Black won the ending.

45.�xf6+ ©g7 46 .eS bS 47 .©h4 b4 48.©xhS �dl+ 49.©h4 b3 5O.e6


b2 51.:Sf7+ ©g8 52.:Sb7 bl=W 53.�xbl �xbl 54.©g4 �e4 0-1

CONCLUSION

The bishop is a long-range piece and delivers from afar. So, the
need to keep an open eye on the entire board is a necessity and
an obligation as well!
LONG TERM SACRIFICES
With the description long-term sacrifice we tend to mean
sacrifices which are not easy to evaluate in a fev-1 1noves and
1night take much more time to reach a final conclusion.
Usually these sacrifices demand a high price; normally a minor
or heavy piece!
In the Gashimov Memorial which was held in Shamkir,
Azerbaijan (April 2017), we came across two very interesting and
impressive games.
In the first game Vladilnir Kra1nnik tried to catch his opponent
in one of his pet lines. As this didn't work out, he had to go for
complications, sacrificing 1naterial.

o Kramnik Vladimir
■ Harikrishna Penteala
Shamkir 201 7
Notes based on those of GM Tiger Hillarp-Persson.
1.e4 es 2.<tlf3 .!bc6 3.i.b5

As far as we can observe, this is the first time V.Kramnik has


entered the 'Ruy Lopez' fro1n the white side in a very long tilne.
3.ic4 .!bf6 4.d3 ie7 5.0-0 0-0 6.Etel d6 7.c3 lilaS 8.i.bS a6 9.i.a4 bS
10..ic2 cs Why do we give this line? The explanation follows after
8.c3 in the game.

3•..a6!
P.Harikrishna also has the 'Berlin Defence' in the repertoire, but
to play it against V.Kra1nnik? Not good advice!

4 ..ia4 lbf6 5.0-0 .ie7

6.d3

6Jiel is still the 1nain move, but after 6...bS 7.ib3 0-0 8.c3 (8.a4
is the most challenging move for those who prefer to avoid the
'Marshall Gambit') 8...dS no one above 2600 has lost with the
black pieces in the last half year.

6...bS 7.�b3 d6

7...0-0 is played far less often. Perhaps since 8.a4 or 8.tbc3 d6


9.a3 is an option again.

8.a3
White must save the light-squared bishop. And since the other
options such as 8.ll)c3?! ti:iaS! have been found to set Black
few(er) problems, this see1ningly 1neek 1nove has become the
latest fashion. 8.a4 i.d7! is a neat point behind 7 ... d6. After 9.c3
ti:iaS 10..½c2 cS ll.d4 V.ib8 12.igS h6 13.txf6 ixf6 14.axbS axbS
15.dxcS dxcS 16.WdS Wc8 17.b4 i.e6 18.WxcS WxcS 19.bxcS c;i-,,d7!
Black was doing very v,rell, in Morozevich,A-Vitiugov,N Novi Sad
2016, and went on to win. 8.c3 0-0 9J!el ll)aS 10.ic2 cs is
a position that can also arise in the 'Prussian Defence' (3..½c4
0f6).

8...0-0

8...i.e6 is an idea that is usually better when \,Vhite has already


played h3. Then after 9.ixe6 fxe6 White ought to be a bit better
here, although it is far from clear: 10.c3 0-0 ll.tt)bd2 Wd7 12J1:el
:Sae8 (12 ...ll)hS!?) 13.a4+= Pavlidis,A-Schv.rarz,D Tallinn 2016.

9.<tlc3

There are few positions in chess \\There there are more than 4-5
decent 1noves, but in this position there are no less than 7
perfectly reasonable moves for Black! It is also notable that this
position vvas reached 4 times in the last FIDE-WC match between
M.Carlsen and S.Karjakin, with M.Carlsen, as Black, scoring three
drav.rs and one win!

9...<tlb8!?
The start of the 'Breyer' plan. Black is aiming for a harmonious
set-up with ...lt:ibd7 and ...�7, before continuing - usually ­
with ...fl:e8, ...if8, ... g6 and ...ig7. For someone who has played the
'Pirc/Modern Defence' for many years, it gives rise to a kind of
deja vu; haven't we seen something similar son1ewhere? 9...ie6
10.ie3 dS 11.igS! has scored ,,vell for White, vvhile 9 ...lt:iaS 10 .ia2
ie6 (playing 'Chigorin' style with 10 ...cs, makes more sense when
White has spent time on moves like c3 and h3. Here White is
ready to fight for the dS-square ilnmediately: ll.b4 !2Jc6 12.tLidS+=
This is possibly the reason why M.Carlsen played ...ll\b8, ... cs and
...lZ:ic6 in an earlier game. Here it actually helps White to have the
bishop kicked back to a2) was played by M.Carlsen in two of the
FIDE-WC ga1nes: ll.b4 (11.d4 ha2 12.fl:xa2 fl:e8 13.1,;l.al ll\c4 14J1el
%1.c8 1S.h3 h6 16. b 3 tbb617.ib2 .if8 18.dxeS dxeS 19.a4 c6 20 .Wxd8
%!.cxd8 21.axbS axbS 22.lDe2 ib4 23.ic3 hc3 24.ll\xc3 ll\bd7
25J�a6 1,;!.c8 26.b4 !!e6 27.!lbl cs 28.!!xe6 fxe6 29.tbxbS cxb4
30.fucb4 !!xc2 31.li:id6 !!cl+ 32. © h2 :!!c2 33.\!?gl ½ 1-12 Karjakin,S­
Carlsen,M New York 2016) ll .. .lL1c6 12.tbdS li:id4 13.lt:lgS hdS
14.exd5 ll\d7 15.ll\e4 fS 16.lt:ld2 f4 l7.c3 lt:lf5 18.lt:le4 We8 19.ib3
Wg6 20.f3 .th4 21.a4 lt:lf6 22.We2 as 23.axbS axb4 24.id2 bxc3
25.ixc3 lt:le3 26.!!fcl :!!xal 27.l!xal We8 28.ic4 <Jlh8 29.lt:lxf6 hf6
30J'ia3 e4 31.dxe4 ixc3 32Jl:xc3 Wes 33.!!cl %1.a8 34.h3 h6 35.©h2
Wd4 36.Wel Wb2 37.ifl %1.a2 38J1xc7 !lal 0 1 - Karjakin,S-Carlsen,M
Ne,,v York 2016.

10 6b
. e2
The start of the 1nost fa1nous 1nanoeuvre knm,vn to chess. The
end station is the g3-square, where the knight is bolstering e4,
stopping ... 0ihS, and 1naking sure that a future ...ig4 will be well
and truly kicked with h3; all this while not being in the way of
any other pieces.

10....!bbd7

P.Harikrishna is going for a more traditional interpretation of


the 'Breyer' set-up. M.Carlsen preferred 10... cs 11 ..!bg3 .!bc6 12.c3
�b8 13.h3 as 14.a4 b4 15.�el ie6 16.ic4 h6 17.ie3 Wc8 18.WeZ
�d8 19.ixe6 fxe6 20.d4 bxc3 21.bxc3 cxd4 22.cxd4 exd4 23.0ixd4
0ixd4 24.ixd4 :i!b4 2SJ1ecl Wd7 26..½.c3 l:);xa4 27..haS �xal
28.):);xal l:);a8 29.ic3 �xal+ 30.hal Wc6 31.'ii>hZ i>f7 32.ibZ Wes
33.f4 .id8 34.eS dxeS 3S..ixeS .ib6 36.Wdl WdS 37.WxdS 0ixd5 ½-½
Karjakin,S-Carlsen,M New York 2016.

11.c3

If Black is worried about the ...itlb6-cS plan that V.Kovalev used


against M.Kobalia (see next comment), it makes sense to play
11.tfig::l first: ll...tfib6 (11. ..tfics 12.�a2 �e6 is probably the reason
why V.Kramnik chose the move order with c3 first) 12.idZ cs
13.iaSI?

11. ..Ab7

This quite logical move seems new. If we c01npare the position


with the classical 'Breyer System', then White has played d3
instead of d4, has added a3, avoided h3 and can play the knight
to g3 without going !Eel first. Black should be ahead on tempi, but
not having played d4 is something of an advantage for White,
who is more flexible and doesn't have to worry about tactical
operations revolving around a weak e4-pav.m. 11... tZ\b6 12.tZ\g3 cs
13.d4 V!Jc7 14.ll:el a5 15.h3 id7 16.id2 a4 17.ic2 ti:lc4 18.icl %1fc8
led to a very co1nplex fight, in Kobalia,M-Kovalev,V Gjakova 2016.

12 ..!bg3 cs 13 .�e1 �c8

Black would love to get a chance to force the exchange of the c­


pawn for \,Vhite's d -pawn.

14.!bfS!?
.

This move changes the flow of the game and takes it into
unclear waters. More logical and reasonable are 14..ia2 or
14.ic2.

14...c4! 15.dxc4

If 15.i.c2 cxd3 16.hd3 f!e8 17.fd.c2, then 17...tLicS 18.i.gS .if8 and
Black's pieces are too harmonious for \,Vhite to even dream of an
advantage: 19. ti:i d2 g6 20.l2:ie3 .ie7 21.hf6 hf6 22.a4 igS=
15 ...txe4
.

Black can also consider 15 ...bxc4?! 16 ..icZ tbcS, but after 17..igS
'fJ.c7 18..ixf6 .ixf6 19.Wxd6 it seems that he doesn't have enough
compensation for the pawn.

16.!bxe7+
.

16.lt:ixd6? hd6 17Jjxd6 lt:lc5 leads to a total collapse on the light


squares.

16..Wxe7
. 17.cxbS axbS

18..igS!

This must be played before Black gets the chance to shut it out
of the game ,,vith ...h6.

18 .. .!bcS
. 19 .ta2
.
19.ic2 hc2 20.Wxc2 lt:le6 looks balanced.

19 ..h6
. 20.i.h4!?

Burning bridges. The bishop will be terribly passive on g3, so


the natural thing to do would be to go 20 .hf6 Wxf6 21J!e3. Still,
Black has no co1nplaints here, so V.Kramnik's choice was in
hannony with the bishop retreat to a2. He is aiming for
complications!

20 ... gS! 21.i.g3 i.h7

Usually the bishop is better off at g6, from where it supports hS


and leaves the h 7 s- quare for other pieces: 21...ig6 22..ibl ti:lfe4
23.�d2 dS 24.lt.\f3 f6 25.WxdS+ ©g7 and Black has a nice initiative
for the pawn.

22 W
. e2

22.ibl!? wasn't so bad, but obviously V.Kramnik is cooking-up


something tasty...

22 ..�g7!
.
Black's plan is simple but effective: to evacuate the knight from
f6, play ...f6 in order to bury the bishop on g3, and then occupy
the light squares. White needs to co1ne up ,,vith an antidote to
this scenario.

23.�adl?!

If V.Kramnik played this with the express intention of what is


coming next, then this is one the 'greatest' 1noves we have ever
seen. Wrong would be 23.�xbS? tbd3 and the b -pav.rn falls.
23.tbd4!? V9d7 24.tbb3 tbce4 25.tt:id2 tbcS 26.ib1 is another way to
get some grip on the light squares. If Black is unable to 1nove the
central pawns forward, they could turn out to be weak in the
end.

23...lbfe4! 24.1'.�dS

White doesn't have the tilne to play 24.�xbS, since 24...fS! leaves
the g3-bishop in mortal danger and 25.h3 :iab8 26.We2 f4 27..½h2
tba4 28J!b1 tbecS is game over-ish. To play something like 24.h3,
is paramount to resignation: 24...fS 25.i.hZ f4 26.i.b1 Wb7 27.tbdZ
tbf6 and Black has the most terrible domination.

24...fS

This looks so natural and so strong. How to stop oneself from


playi11g such a move? 24...f6! also looks nice when after 25.�1 fS
we get a position similar to the one in the game. How is the
sacrifice here? We would not be able to make a urecise
evaluation over-the-board. 24..J;Je8! might be the most flexible
move, planning on ...fS while opening a slot for the king on f8. It
seems that Black is just clearly better here.

25.�xeS!!

Daring and genius in one 1nove. V.Kramnik realised he was


sliding into a bad situation and decided to change the course of
the game, whatever the price. This is much trickier than
25.fucd6?! ltJxd6 26.WxeS+ �xeS 27..½.xeS+ flf6! when there is no
obvious vvay for White to get full compensation. With no queens
on the board, this would be far easier for a human to handle.

25...dxeS 26 ..ixeS+

Here we must pause and try to understand why V.Kramnik made


this sacrifice; what is his 'co1npensation'? Well, we can observe
that he has a lively position, two bishops, some pawns and in
combination ,,vith Black's weak king this can form a type of
compensation. The truth is that this co1npensation shouldn't be
enough for a rook, when it co1nes to the 'analysis mode', but over
a practical gam,e there are many problems to be solved. In a vvay
this type of sacrifice reminds of M.Tal; his semi-correct sacrifices,
which made him famous!

26...�f6?!

Not a big mistake, but a step in the wrong direction. Black


should find a way to exchange one of the bishops as quickly as
possible. The best way to do that is 26.....!?g6! (which avoids the
pins and prepares for ...ig8) 27..id4! .ig8! (novv the price of
avoiding the exchange is too high) 28..ixg8 (28..ibl *h7 29.WxbS
liib3+) 28..Jl:xg8 29.g4!? (29.WxbS g4 30.eies+ ..!?h7-+) 29 ..Jl:ge8
30.gxfS+ *h7 31.Wc2 Wb7 (31...Wd7!?) 32.f6 Wd7+ Even here there
are still traps to watch out for, so from a practical point of view
V.Kramnik's sacrifice was brilliant.

27.WxbS!

Picking up a pa\l'vn, so as to make the queenside pa\l',rn majority


1nobile.

27...�ce4 28.�d4 !:ifd8

What to do now?

29.h3!

What a cool move. It is still not clear what Black should do, so
airing the king cannot be wrong.

29...�b8 30.We2

There seem to be so many good moves for Black, but which one
wins?

30....ig8?!

30..J(e8 is what A.Karpov would have played. Over protecting


the knight on e4, it gives more freedom to the rest of the pieces.
31.b4 ig6 32.WbZ �h7 33.c4 �bd8 - M.Botvinnik would have
liked this one: 34.cS and finally, Black is ready for 34...g4!

31..ibl Wb7

31 ...�b3 32.iaZ! !!bb8 seems to draw, but can Black 'accept'


a draw a rook up?

32.b4 :Se8 33.c4


A few moves ago Black only had one problem; how to get out of
the pin and get his pieces active. Now there is a second issue. The
pa\-vns are starting to look menacing.

33...VNc6?

This move allows White to get fully coordinated. The last chance
for an advantage was 33...VNa6! but things are still not as clear as
the engine would like you to think: 34.bS!? (34.VNb2 hc4 35.:1:1.cl
i.dS 36J'.!:c7+ @g8 37.he4 fxe4 38.li:ih2 tbhS 39.li:ig4 l:c'lb7+) 34...Wd6
(34...Wxa3?! 35.ixe4 :Sxe4 36.Wd2 :Sbe8 37.:Sal�) 35.Wb2 hc4
36.a4 :Sa8 37.ixe4 :Sxe4 38.l:c'lxe4 fxe4 39.li:ieS ie6 (39 ...El:d8 40.tuc6)
40.b6 :Sxa4 41.tuc6 :Sxd4 42.lbxd4 @f7 43.b7 li:id7 44.li:ixe6 4?xe6
45.Wg7 and White will probably get a dra\-v.

34.VNb2

With this move Black's position goes fr01n hard - t o -handle to just
worse.

34...�bd8?!

34... 4?h7! is a good chance for Black, but after 35.cS (35.ieS !!bd8
36.tbd4 Wxc4 37.lbxfS :Sd2 38.li:id6 :Sxb2 39.hb2 Wb3 40.ixf6
Wxbl 41.:Sxbl tuxd6 42.a4oo), Black still needs to find a few exact
moves: 35...if?! (35 ... li:id7?! 36.tud2 ids 37.li:if1;5) 36.tbeS WdS
37.tbxf7 Wxf7 38.f3 li:ig3 39.ieS tbfhS 40.©h2 WdS 41.Wc3 li:ifl+
42.©gl tbfg3 43.ixb8 \Wd4+! 44.Wxd4 :1:1.xel+ 45.4?f2 :Se2+ 46.4?gl
:§:el+=
35.cS

35.bS Wd6 36.:!:!cl !l:c8 37.he4 !l:xe4 38.cS We7 39.c6 is even
better. Black is balancing on the edge of the abyss.

35...VNe6 36.bS!?

36.�cl! g4 37.hxg4 fxg4 38..ixe4 :iaxd4 39.Wxd4 Wxe4 40.Wxe4


:iaxe4 41.llld2 !l:e2 42.lllfl +=

36...l!.>f8?

Black's last chance was 36...Wb3! 37.Wal �g6! 38.hf6 (38.b6


llld7 39.l::icl !l:c8 40.c6 lllxb6 41.i.xe4 fxe4 42.ihS Wf7 43.lt:ieS+ !l:xeS
44.WxeS We6=) 38...lllxf6 39J:1xe8 �xe8 40.ixfS+ �g7 41.llld4 and
this unbalanced position seems to be in balance!

37.c6

37...g4?
This accelerates the end, but White's pav.rns were too advanced
for a remedy to be found. The feeling is that Black was already
psychologically 'destroyed'; after the rook sacrifice he felt obliged
to ,,,..,in at any cost; a typical misfortune of the defender!

38.hxg4 fxg4 39.�xe4! gxf3

Or 39 ...ti:ixe4 40.l%xe4 �xe4 41.ig7+ 1;;e7 42.�f6#

40.�xf6 Eld6 41.�g7+ *f7

And P.Harikrishna resigned: 42 ...�xeS (42...1�dd8 43.ixf3)


43.ig6+. A marvelous swindle by V.Kramnik!

1-0

In the second game the sacrificed material wasn't that high; just
an exchange!
Well, nowadays exchange sacrifices are spread around like
1nushrooms, so nothing new under the :sun!
Veselin Topalov kept his opponent's king unsafe and soon
delivered a deadly blow.

o Wojtaszek Radoslaw
■ Topalov Veselin
Shamkir 201 7
Notes based on those of GM Aleksandr Lenderman.
1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.lbf3 tilf6 4.e3 �fS

One of the many possible moves for Black here.

5.tilc3 e6 6.li:lh4 �g6

6 ...ie4 is slightly 1nore common, but 6 ...ig6 has been played


1nore than once by V.Topalov, including in big games, such as the
2016 Candidates in Mosco,/\/, against Hikaru Naka1nura.

7.tilxg6 hxg6 8.�d3!?

8J:1b1 !? has been played by H.Nakamura: 8...tbbd7 9.cs (the point


of 8.!!bl. Now White's idea is to play b4 and be able to protect his
space on the queenside) 9...as 10.a3 ie7 11.g3 es 12.i:g2 e4 13.b4
axb4 14.axb4 lt:\f8 15.bS lt.Je6 16.id2 0-0 17.lt.Ja4+= \,Vhite won the
opening battle and then won the game after complications,
Nakamura,H-Topalov,V Moscow 2016. It is certain that V.Topalov
had improvements though.
8...cs !?

Quite a rare move, so probably the first s1nall surprise for


R.Wojtaszek. The only high-level game fro1n this position was
between V.Kramnik and B.Gelfand from 2005.

9.11�b3

V.Kra1nnik also played this. Since the game was in 2005, it's
possible that V.Topalov had even analysed this position back
when he was preparing for his FIDE vVC match against
V.Kramnik.

9...'1Wd7

So far V.Topalov had played very quickly. It was obvious that he


was 'following' an already-analysed but never-played line...

10.cxdS exdS 11.dxcS

11...�c6!

According to the databases, a novelty - and a very interesting,


dynamic one, not to 1nention very good. Black is sacrificing
a pawn for the initiative. Now Black has a practical edge, since he
not only has the initiative, but is also probably better-prepared
than his opponent in this rare territory. 11...bc5 was played by
B.Gelfand but he got a somewhat worse position where he
might've had to suffer, had V.Kramnik played a bit more
precisely: 12.'Wb5 Wxb5 13.t2:'!xb5 @d7 14.0-0 li::ic6 15.!1:dl @e7
16.idZ i.b4 17.0.c3 (17.ixb4+ t2:'!xb4 18.2e2+=) 17..Ji!.ac8 18.%\acl
%thd8 19.a3 id6 20.li::ieZ (20.ieZ+=) 20 ...0.e5 and the game was
agreed drav.rn here, Kramnik,V-Gelfand,B Saint Vincent 2005.
12.�d2

R.Wojtaszek had his first big think here, for about 15 1ninutes.
He had alternatives: 12.lila4!? (trying to hold on to the pawn)
12... li::ie4! 13.ixe4 dxe4�, would lead to good compensation for
Black, since he has annoying threats like ...tbeS and ....'Wg4, and
he can castle quickly with ...0-0-0, while White's pieces are
uncoordinated. White's only move not to be worse now is 14.t2:'!c3
0-0-0 (14...fSI?) 15.t2:'Jxe4 %th4 16.f3 f5 17.0.fZ i.xcS and from
a practical standpoint we should prefer Black, even though the
position is dyna1nically equal. Another vvay is 12.Wa3 Wg4! 13.@fl
(13.0- 0?? !1:xh2 14.@xhZ Wh4+ 15.@gl t2:'!g4- +; 13.g3 i.e7�) 13 ...ie7�
with good compensation for the pawn.

12....ixcS

Now Black is able to avoid the queen trade, and therefore avoid
the slightly unpleasant endgame.

13.l'.3c1

13.t2:'!e2 1night lbe a little bit more solid: 13...0-0-0oo.

13...l'.3d8
Interesting is 13 ...d4!? 14.tDa4 (14.ltJe4 dxe3!) 14... dxe3! 15.ti:lxcS
exd2+ 16.g;,xd2 Wd6 17.:l�hel+ g;,fS 18.liJxb7 Wf4+ l95!?dl ltJeS
20.liJd6 Wd4 21.�xeS Wxd6 ,,vith very complex play. Of course this
is just a sample line and not all the moves are forced here.

14.ltJe2 1night be safer, but R.Wojtaszek is an ambitious player.

14....id6 15.�c5 .ixc5 16.Elxc5

16...d4?!

This move helped V.Topalov to win an excellent game, but


perhaps objectively it's slightly inaccurate. 16...@fS!? keeps the
balance. Naturally Black doesn't want to castle since he doesn't
want to give up control of the h-file. 16...gS or 16...ltJe4 are also
viable alternatives.

17..ib5?

But this move is probably asking more of the position than it


can offer. \I\Thite moving the same piece twice, falling behind in
development and allowing an initiative is very dangerous,
especially against V.Topalov. Good v.ras 17 .e4+= Black's knights
don't have a good outpost square, and in the long run White's
two bishops and strong centre should prove a nice advantage,
while the bishop on d3 blocks the passed pawn on d4 and can't
be dislodged easily. l 7 ...ti:lg4 18.fld5 Wc7 19.h3 is better for White.
17...0-0!

Playing for the initiative.

18.�xc6 bxc6

19.f3?!

Mistakes often come in pairs. When White played the move


.11..bS, he left behind the key e4-square, and now tries to cover that
mistake up by defending it. But here vve have a classic situation
where the cure is worse than the disease. Black no longer has
...li:ie4, but now White's king is fatally weakened. 19:�c2 still
keeps White in the game: 19 ...tbe4! 20.fi:eS! (20.Wxe4 dxe3 21.Wxe3
:13.fe8 22.0-0 :13.xe3 23 ..½xe3+ might also offer White drawing
chances) 20..J:!fe8 21.fi:xe8+ ii:xe8 22.0-0 d3 23.Wdl=+, when even
though Black is better with his strong passed pawn on d3, White
is still in the game.

19...Y!fe7

19..J:1b8 20.Wa3 dxe3 21.ne3 ti:JdS 22.0-0 tbxe3 23.Wxe3 E'.xb2+


was also very promising for Black.

20.lk2

20.E'.xc6 dxe3 21.ib4 Wd7 22.E'.d6 Wc7 23.Wc3 Wb8 24.Wd4 tbdS!
25.l::ixd8 l::ixd8 26.i.aS li:ib6+ is very dangerous for White. Here the
e3-pa\Jvn is very strong.
20....!bdS 21.©f2 gbs 22 . Wa3

22...�xb2!?

A very nice exchange sacrifice which shatters White's defences,


and from here on he is under heavy pressure. The only reason
we don't give this 1nove a double exclamation mark is because
objectively there were other good solutions for Black here,
arguably even a bit better: 22...'&h4+! 23.g3 dxe3+ 24.ixe3 Wh3
would've also been very strong for Black but this isn't so obvious
from afar. However, here White is kind of stuck to come up with
a good plan.

23.Wxb2!

23.Wxe7?! :1i:xc2 was Black's poiint: 24.WeS :1i:xd2+ 25.©g3 .!bxe3


26.©h3 lt:lxg2, when he ends up getting a rook, knight, and tv.ro
pawns for the queen, and a very strong initiative against the
White king. \11/hite is lost.

23...dxe3+ 24.he3 Wxe3+


The final mistake. 25.@fl keeps White in the game: 25 ...0f4!
stopping :!:!.e2. Here the king looks very bad, but White can still try
to defend here, for example: 26.Wc3 Wb6! (otherwise vVhite is
fine) 27.Wb3 (27.Wb2 Wa6+ 28.i>gl ti:id3 29.Wb3 l:l:e8�) 27...Wd4!
28.Wc4! (giving back some material to get rid of the dangerous
initiative) 28 ...Wdl + 29.@f2 ti:id3+ 3O.i>g3 Wxhl 31.Wxd3 Wel+
32.i>h3 We6+ 33.@g3+ is the best line for both sides according to
Stockfish 8. Black has good winning chances of course with the
extra pawn, but White can put up a good defence.

25...Wf4+

25 ...WgS+ was also good: 26.i>f2 lt:lf4 27.g3 (27.i>fl �e8- +)


27...ti:id3+.

26.@f2

26.i>h3? gs is mate in a few moves.


26..ll:b8!
.

The last piece joins the fray. Without this move, Black is not
even better. Nov.r, however, his attack is unstoppable. A typical
situation when three pieces attack the exposed king and the king
can't defend successfully.

27.VNcl VNd4+ 28 .@g3 <tie3 29.:ScS

29J'id2 'bf5+ 30 .@h3 \Wh4#

29 ..ll:b2
. 30.:Sgl ll:xa2 31.h3 Wid6+ 32.f4 Wid3 33.@h2 VNe4 34.:SgS

34..ll:c2!
.

And \,Vhite resigned since he's about to lose the f4-pawn and
Black will have both a material advantage and an unstoppable
attack, which will lead to more and bigger material gains: 3 5 � . el
�xf4+ 36.Wig3 (36J!:g3 ltlfS-+) 36...flxg2 + (36 ... ltlfl + 37.:1:1.xfl Wixf1 -+)
3 7.flxg2 ltlf1 +-+

0-1
CONCLUSION

Never forget the classical values and remember that ,ivhen


violating them the punishment might come rudely.
To dance you need two; to create a masterpiece you need the co­
operation of two again; just not both of them will feel happy in
tlhe end...
NEW YORK QUEEN SAC
In the last FIDE Vvorld Championship that was held in New York,
October 2016, the last game of the match ended vvith an
impressive queen sac.
Well, nothing too difficult or too deep, but still a nice touch to
a more-or-less 'boring' match.
Here, we will examine similar cases to the nowadays so-called
'New York Queen Sac'. The main motif of this sac is that the
queen is sacrificed on the third rank (h3/a3 or h6/a6), giving the
opportunity to her rooks to deliver the mate.
Our first example contains only one rook, but it is still
instructive:

Example 1 0

Here is the 'guide':


1.�h6+! ©xh6

1. ..�h8 2.hxg6.

2.hxg6+ ©gS

2 ...�g7 3.!!:xh7#

3.:ShS+! ©xhS 4.f4+ qlxe2


4 ...V9f3+ 5 ..ixf3+ tbxf3 6Jthl + tbh4 7.lt:if6+ 'i!?h6 8.:axh4+ r!Bg7
9.lt:ie8+ :!!xe8 10 .:!!xh7+ 'i!?f6 11J�f7#

5 .q)f6+ 'i!?h6 6.:Shl+ 'i!?g7 7.<tle8+! :Sxe8 8J!xh7+ 'i!?f6 9.:Sxf7#

1-0

The famous game mentioned above will open the series:

□ Carlsen Magnus
■ Karjakin Sergey
New York 2016 O

Of course White is ,-vinning her,e, but why not use some small
tactics to finish-off the game in style?

47.YNxf4! :Sa2+ 48.@hl Wf2

48...Wxf4 49.fucf4 if6 50.�fS was Black's only chance, but of


course White is winning here...

49.:Sc8+! @h7

After 49....tfS White mates as well: 50 .l;l:xfS+ 'i!?xf8 51.:!!xf7+ @e8


52.fil8+ @d7 53.�fS+ 'i!?c6 54.Etc8+ @b7 55.YNd7+ @a6 56.:!!a8#
50.VNh6+!

The end of the story! Black res.igned: 50 ...l!?xh6 51.!l:h8# or


50...gxh6 51.�xf?#
1-0

The following exa1nple is the oldest predecessor I could find;


I wouldn't be surprised if I am wrong...

□ Neumann Augustin
■ Przepiorka David
Vienna 1904 O

43JNxh6+ ! @xh6

43...gxh6 44.fum8#

4 4.�xh8+ @gs 45 .�hS# 1-0


o Hug Werner
■ Kavalek Lubomir
Haifa 1976 e

Black is a rook-up and he obviously thought that sooner-or-later


he would cash in the point...

35...fxg3?

Black could (and should!) mate by force here with 35 ..J%dl +


36.�h2 fxg3+ 37.fxg3, as nov,r comes the 'kno¼rn' 37...1lh'h3 +!
38.gxh3 (38.�xh3 !1:hl#) 38..Ja7d2+ 39.:!:te2 Elxe2#

36.fxg3?

36.�h8+ *g6 37.\We8+ :l!f7 38.\Wc6+ is a draw by perpetual check!

36...YNfS?

36...:l!dl +! 37.*h2 \Wh3+! v.rould be a nice end! Over the next


moves both sides overlook the combination...

37.�f8? We6?

37...:l!dl + 38.�h2 Wh3+!

38.�e8? YNf7?

38...:adl + 39.�h2 Wh3+!

39.�f8 We6 40.�e8? WdS?


40 ..J;J;dl+ 41.@h2 Wh3+!

41 l3
. h8+ @g642.Wxa6+ �d6 43.Wc8 We6 44.Wc3 �d3 45.Y�·as We3+
46.@hl 0-1

□ Popov Nikolay
■ Novopashin Arkady
Beltsy 1979 O

White to 1nove has already sme'1led blood...

30.!i'.J g6+! hxg631 l3


. xf8+ @h7 32 W
. h6+!

Black resigned: 32...@xh6 33J;1h8# or 32 ...gxh6 33.�xb7+ .½d7


3 4.ID{d7+ !i'.Je7 3SJ�xe7+ Vllf7 36.a:exfl#

1-0

□ Vyzmanavin Alexey
■ Tukmakov Vladimir
Soviet Union 1986 ®
White seems to have lethal threats, but Black has seen deeper...

33...ll:dl+ 34.@h2 1;Wh3+!

And \,Vhite resigned due to 35.@xh3 !Ehl# or 35.gxh3 1:i.xf2#

0 1-

The great Jan Timman was inspired as usual (!) and created tvvo
nice studies. I am copying the1n fro1n the 1nagazine 'New In
Chess', with his notes:

White 1nates in three moves. The key move is easy to find, at least
if you know what it's all about.
Blocking the back rank and opening the way for the white
queen to h6. Insufficient was 1.Wbl in view of l ... d3! and there is
no mate in n,vo.

1...gl=YN 2.Wh6+! gxh6

2...s1>xh6 3J1:h8#

3.:S5c7# 1-0

J.Timman mentions that this study is based on one by the


Russian composer Kalyagin from 1988.

1.<tlf4 YNxc4 2.�aS!

A defensive move that will eventually be important for the final


combination.

2 ....igS

Black has dangerous counterplay, threatening a devastating


check on e7.

3.f6!
Opening the f fi
- le.

3 ....txf6

Afte3... gxf6 4..ih4! .ixh4 5.lbg6+! hxg6 6.'�h6+ the white queen
will hoover up the board.

4 ..th4!

The open file was still blocked. The bishop sacrifice re1nedies
this.

4 ....txh4 5.lLJg6+!

Everything is becoming clear.

5 ...hxg6 6 ll:
. f8+ �h7 7.Wh6+!

And again, one of the rooks ,,vill mate.

1-0
THE G-POINT CHECK
An easy combination to be learned is the following one:

Example 1 0

It see1ns that White is in real trouble, as he is already two pav,1ns


dov,1n with so1ne lethal threats to his king as well. But it's his turn
to move, so he can execute the combination in question:

1.Wg7+! �xg7 2.:Sa8+ .if8 3.:Sxf8#

1-0

As in every strategic or tactical concept, there i s a mechanism


behind it, which 1nakes things move.
Here, the n1ain parts of the combination, which we call
mechanism, are:
1. The defending king has no escape fro1n the 8th or 7th ranks.
2. The attacking side's queen is given with check to drive the
defending bishop from its 8th rank.
3. The attacking side's rook delivers the mate on the 8th rank.
I do remember that 1nany years ago the following game made
headlines in every decent combinations' corner, for its simplicity
and spectacularness:
□ Braga Fernando Alberto

.•ilk.·•.■.■--��--·"-���w-,.�■
■ Portisch Lajos

m■t
Mar del Plata 1982 O

�-- -, �❖

. . � .
,, �

WI' ,El ��Tilir· --

• • ·.!l.-��
Bn�• ■ � ■n■ is
f,,;,

Of course \I\Thite is lost; ther,e is no question about it.

35.VBc8

But he thought that he might have a chance threatening so1ne


nasty checks. Well, I cannot really add a question mark to this
1nove, as any other move is losing as well, but the text makes it
spectacular...

35...VBgZ+ !

0-1

Quite recently, in the annual 'Sigeman' tourna1nent, Nigel Short


was lucky enough to have it on his dish...

o Short Nigel
■ Blomqvist Erik
Malmo2017 •

Although Black is a pawn-up, his position is a mess and he


cannot avoid mate by the joined white forces.

34...YNfl

A last 'try', although Black hardly threatens anything...

35.YNg4+ !

35.tbe7+ 47h8 36.Wxf7 is another way to mate, but less


spectacular...

35...<.!lh8 36.YNg7+ !

Black resigned: 36....ixg7 37.l:l:b8+ !1:c8 38J!.xc8+ M8 39.�xf8#


Nigel Short commented: 'One doesn't need Viagra after a finish
like this'.

1-0

After asking for help on Facebook to find more examples of this


co1nbination, games started to appear everywhere!
o Summerscale Aaron
■ Roberts Paul
Edinburgh 2009 •

White is two pawns up and obviously winning, but Black 'helped'


him to finish-off the ga1ne quicker!

34...VNxb3?! 35.'tYg7+! �xg7 36J!cl8+

And Black resigned due to 36....if8 37.'ff.xf8#

1-0

□ Givon Asaf
■ Wieczorek Oskar
Batumi 2010 O

White stands much better here, but as both kings are unsafe,
blunders can appear at any time!

38.'tYf8?
And that's a decisive one! After 38.1:1.a81 Black would be in
trouble.

38...VNbZ+!

And \,Vhite resigned after realising the cruel truth: 39..½xb2 :r:l:gl +
40.Wfl �xfl + 41..icl !!xcl#

0-1

o Spivack Simon
■ Astaneh Lopez Alex
London 2010 O

Black is on the attack, but White felt that he could create so1ne
counterplay...

32.�xe7+ 'i!lg8!

32 ....½xe7? would lose immediately to 33.f!xe7+.

33..ifl he7 34.�xe7?!

White's only chance was to be found in 34.Wxe7 Wxe7 35.�xe7


f(dl 36.4?gl iLlh3+ 37.4?g2 lcixf2 38.lcie3 h3+ 39.4?g3 , although of
course his position would still be losing.

34...VNgZ+ !

Resigned: 35.hg2 :r:l:dl + 36.f!el :r:l:xel+ 37..ifl :l!xfl#


0-1

□ Admiraal Miguoel
■ Vedder Henk
Belgium 2017 •
A typical lost position for Black; the fS-knight is a monster

. . ,. . ,.
compared to the 'poor' f 8 b- ishop...

l ■ B � Sl

.. .. .
p t� � •

■'if■�■tb■
- "' " , ,,_ , ¾ -

■�.■,m.■ D �

•• � m
@� " · '�
,,_ } �

37...VNxdS?!

This loses easily. Black had to try to fight with 37...Wb2 38J;1:e4
(38.a:e8? V.ibl + 39.©g2 WxfS 40 .�xf8+ iig7) 38...'.8.cS 39.tbe3 Wb8
40 .iig2+-

38.VNxf6+ ©g8 39.VNgS+ ©h8 40.�g7+!

And, as usual, Black resigned: 40 ...hg7 41.a:es+ .tf8 42.a:xf8#

1-0
□ Collas Silvia
■ Schoucair Henry
Rochefort 2005 O

27.Wxg7+?!

Of course here 27.li:Jxg7 wins on the spot, but White v.ranted to


make it spectacular! After the text move Black resigned: 27 ... fi.xg7
28J:ld8+ Wie8 29.:1:!xeS+ :!l:xe8 30 J:1:d7±

1-0
THE PONY EXPRESS
The knight is a tricky piece, especially when it is close to vvhere
the action is, meaning it is best used in areas of the board where
the opponent's pieces are clustered or close together.
As we perfectly well know, pieces are generally more povverful
if pJ.:ir.erl ne;:ir the centre of the hor1rrl, hut this is p;:irticulrlrly true
for a knight.
A knight on the edge of the board attacks only three or four
squares (depending on its exact location) and a knight in the
corner only two.
The mnemonic phrases 'A knight on the riln is grim' or 'A knight
on the rim is dim' are often used in chess instruction to reflect
this principle.
But things are quite different when the opponent's king is
located near the knight! Especially in cases when both knights
can co-operate to deliver deadly kisses. Then the pony express
c01nes by!

o Enevoldsen Jens
■ Nimzowitsch Aron
Copenhagen 1933

Black is active on the queenside but without concrete threats.


White's space advantage is good and he can create an attack.
Well, A.Nilnzowitsch ,,vas never famous for his tactical abilities
but for his strategy, so it is not a surprise that he underestilnated
White's potential attack.
22.�g4! bxc3 23.bxc3 �a3

Too optinlistic ...

24.�xa3!

The ,,vhite rook is not r1 vr1h1r1ble piece for the r1ttr1ck, while the
black bishop is a good defender, so this exchange sacrifice is fully
justified.

24....ixa3

24...Wb2 25.�6! Wxa3 26.ti:ihS+-

All \iVhite's pieces are on the attack now!

The ,,vhite knights are dancing around the black king, capturing
pawns which could defend him!

The show continues!


28...@xg7

28...�xg7 29.lt:\f6 :i:!h7 30.lt:\xh7 �xh7 31.WhS+ and mate follov,rs.

29.WhS f5 30.exf6+ @f7 31.ltl gS+ @xf6 32.Wf3+ @e7 33.Wf7+ @d8
34.Wxg8+ li:lf8

And White won two pav.,rns; more to come soon!

The ,ivhite knight continues its lethal 1narch!

3S...Wb2 36.tZlxf8 Wxc2 37.tZlxe6+ @e7 38..tgS+ @d6 39.Wf8+! �c6

39...i>xe6 40.Wf6#

40.Wxa3 1-0

o Ftacnik Lubomir
■ Cvitan Ognjen
Germany 1997

1.d4 tZlf6 2.tZlf3 g6 3.c4 �g7 4.li:lc3 0-0 S.e4 d6 6.�e2 es 7.0-0 tZlc6
8.ds tZle7 9.�d2 tZle8 10.b4 f5 11.cS tZlf6 12.f3 f4 13.li:lc4 gs 14.a4
€:lg6 1S..ta3 �f7 16.bS dxcS 17.�xcS hS 18.aS g4 19.b6 g3 20 ...t>hl
€:lh7 21.d6 Wh4 22.�gl �h3
A difficult position to play over-th e b
- oard ...

23.bxc7?

This position has been played before and \,Vhite should opt for
23.gxh3! Wxh3 24.�f2 gxf2 25.M2, achieving the better position:
25...axb6 26.tbdS! (26.it:lbS �d8 27.axb6 c6 28.tbc7+= Dall
Orsoletta,A-Gotz,K Sao Bento do Sul 2015) 26...cxd6 27.it:lxd6 it:lgS
(27...il:ff8 28.tbxb6 �ad8 29 ..tfl ilti'e6 30 ..tc4+-) 28.tbxf7 ti:ixf7 29.Wb3
'ii?h7 30 .ti:if6+ hf6 31.Wxf7+ i.g7 32.f1gl 1-0 \iVarner,D-Denny,K
Bridgeto,,vn 2 0 0 4. Note that 23.dxc7? also loses to 23 ...hg2+
24.©xg2 Wh3+ (0 -1 Peralta,E-Roselli Mailhe,B Montevideo 20 0 1)
25.©xh3 ti:igS+ 26.©g2 tbh4+ 27.<.!?hl g2# 0-1 Tie1nann,T­
Tiemann,C Willingen 2007.

23...�xg2+! 24.©xg2 Wh3+!

This nice queen sac is the prelude to a 1nating attack, but not
24...tbgS? 25.�f2 ! +-

25.©xh3 �gs+ 26.<.t>g2 �h4+

White resigned due to 27.l!?hl g2# Well, Black didn't deliver the
1nate with the knight-pair but it obviously helped the tricky g ­
pawn!

0-1
oNN
■ Blackburne Joseph Henry
Great Britain 1871

1.e4 es 2.�f3 .!bc6 3.i.c4 i.c5 4.0-0 �f6 5.d3 d6 6.h3 lt\ e7 7.i.g5 c6
8.i.e3 i.b6 9.�c3 �g6 10.V�'d2 i.e6 11.i.b3 0-0 12.�adl VNd7
13..!bh2 hh3 14.ixh6 ixg2 1S.�xg2 tliJf4+ 16.�hl axh6 17.f3
<t\6h5 18.�f2 �g3+ 19.�gl VNh3 20.d4

Black's attack is not just tremendous; it leads to a forced


knightmare!

20...VNg2+! 21.�xg2 �h3# 0-1

□ Grivas Efstratios
■ Piluso
Internet Chess Club 2013

1.c4 c6 2 ..!bf3 dS 3.e3 .!bf6 4.b3 �g4 5.h3 i.hS 6.i.b2 e6 7.i .e2
<t\bd7 8.0-0 i.d6 9.cxd5 exd5 10.eid4 he2 11.VNxe2 VNc7 12.�f S 0-
0 13.�c3 �fe8 14.�acl i.f8 15.Wf3 �es 16.VNg3 �ac8
White's pride is the fS-knight but it needs help to be effective.

17.f4

Maybe not the best, but keep in mind that this was a 3-minute
game and accuracy wasn't easy. \,Vhite wants to open the long
diagonal.

17...lbd3?

A difficult move not to be played; temptation is strong! Black


should defend with 17...lbg6!

18.lbxdS! li::ie4

18...lt:ixcl loses to 1 9.�xf6+ ct?h8 20.!&h4. But now all four knights
attack something!

19..ixg7! 8e6 20.�xc7 �xg3 21.�xe6 �xf1?


21...tt:ieZ+ 22.@h2 fxe6 23.hfS exfS 24.:fJ.cel tt:ixel 25.E'.xel tt:ixf4
26.exf4 @xf8 27.%!.e5+-

22..!bh6# 1-0

o Clemenz Hermann
■ Eisenschmidt Elen
Dorpat 1890

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 .!bc6 3.i.c4 i.cS 4.b4 .txb4 5.c3 i,cS 6.d4 exd4
7 .cxd4 i.b6 8.0-0 d6 9..!bc3 i.d7 to.es dxe5 11.i:i:e1 �ge7 12.�g5
i,e6 13.he6 fxe6 14.�xe6 Wd6 15.�xg7+ @f8 16.Wg4 .ixd4
17..!be4 Wb4

A difficult life for the black king...

18..!be6+ @e8 19.�f6+ @f7 20.�g5+ @f8

20...@xf6 21.Vli'e6+ @g7 22.Vli'f7+ @h6 23..!be6++-

21..ia3 Wxa3?

The only way to prolong the fight was with 21 ...i.xfZ+ 22.@xf2
Wxg4 23.€ixg4+-
22.We6! �d8 23.Wf7+! �xf7 24.t!:l e6# 1-0

□ Lechtynsky Jiri
■ Kubicek Jaromir
Prague 1968

1.e4 d6 2.d4 �f6 3.�c3 g6 4.f4 .ii.g7 5.�f3 0 0 - 6 ..ii.d3 c6 7.0-0 Wb6
8.�hl .ig4 9.es �e8 10.�e2 �d7 11.We1 f6 12.e6 .ii.xe6 13.fS W
14.lbf4 tuc7 15.fxg6 hxg6 16. o:!i:lxg6 1::ife8 17.Wg3 lt:le6

White is on top and has a mating attack.


18.�gh4! .ihS 19.�fS �f7 20.Elel! �df8 21.Wxg7+

Black resigned: 21. ..li:lxg7 22.lLJh6#

1-0
o Prince Andrey Dadian of Mingrelia
■ Bitcham M.
Zugdidi 1892

1.e4e5 2.<tlf3 �c63.i.c4�f64.d.4exd45.0-0�xe46.�el d5


7 ..ixd5Wxd5 8.eic3 Wc49J!xe4+ .ie610..ig5.ic5 11.�d2 Wa6
12,q1b3 ib6 13.�dS h6

The knightmare begins!

14.eics! Wb5 15.:Sxe6+ �f8

15...fxe6 16.'�hS+ <;t,f8 17.lLixe6+ �g8 18.eif6+ gxf6 19.Wg6#

16.lLid7+ �g817.Wg4! h5

18.�5f6+! gxf6 19.i.h6+ hxg4 20.�xf6# 1-0


□ Smith J.
■ Derrickson George
Philadelphia 1860

1.e4 es 2..ic4 li:Jf6 3.li:Jf3 li:Jc6 4.0-0 .icS S.d3 d6 6.i.gS i.g4 7.h3 hS
8.hxg4 hxg4 9.li:Jh2 g3

10.li:Jf3?

White would be fine after the obvious 10.l2ig4 �xg4 ll.Wxg4


gxf2+ 12J�xf2 Wd7 13.lllif3.

10...li:Jg4! 11.i.xd8 .ixf2+ 12.�f2 gxf2+ 13.©fl �ht+ 14.©e2 �xdt


1 S.li:Jfd2

How else to stop the new black queen on fl?


1S ..li:Jd4
. +! 16.©xdt ttle3+ 17.©cl li:Je2# 0-1

□ Tarrasch Siegbert
■ Romberg
Nuremberg 1893

1.e4es 2.ttlf3 li:Jc6 3.d4exd44.�c4i.cS S.ttlgS li:Jh6 6.WhS 0-0 7.f4


We8 8.0 - 0 d3+ 9 ©. hl dxc2 10.li:lc3 d6 11 .fS li:JeS 12 li:l
. dS ©h8 13 .f6
.ig4
Black was a weak player and S.Tarrasch creates a nice motif!

14.fxg7+ �xg715.VNxh6+! �xh6 16.�e 6+ �h51 7.�df4+ �h6

17...©h4 18.g3#

18.qJe2+ �g6 19.!U6+! lt>xf6 20.�gS+ lt>g6 21 .6b2f4# 1-0

□ Hodgson Julian
■ Mahia Gustavo
Internet 2016

1.d4 fS 2.�gs cs 3.dxcS 6ba6 4.e4 fxe4 5 . 6bc3 �xcS 6..ic4 Wb6?!

A dubious novelty. Black has also tried 6...WaS 7.i.d2 6bf6 8.qJxe4
Wc7 9.qJxf6+ gxf6 10 .i.e3+= Benjamin, J D - e Fotis,G New York 1985,
and also 6.. .li:lf6?! 7.i.xf6 exf6 (7 ... gxf6? 8.V.ihS#) 8.WdS We7 9.0-0-0
a610 .qJh3±

7 .�dS! Wc6 8..ibS! Wg6 9.qJh3 qJe6


10.!bhf4!
. Wxgs 11..!bxe6 Wxg2 12 .!bdc7+
.

Accurate was 12.WhS+ g6 13.ti.:i dc7+ @f7 14.ll\d8+ 'i!?g7 15..!be8#

12 ..<.!?f7
. 13 W
. hS+ g6

13...@f6 14. .!be8+ <.!?xe6 15.ic4+ dS 16.WxdS#

14.!bd8
. + <.!?g715 ..!be8# 1-0

CONCLUSION

'Knightmares' are awful; beware and avoid them; otherwise


you will appear in my next survey! And believe 1ne; you wouldn't
like it at all.
THE SMOTHERED MATE
A smothered mate is a mate delivered by a knight in which the
mated king is unable to move because he is surrounded (or
smothered) by his own pieces.
The 1nate is usually seen in a corner of the board, since fev,rer
pieces are needed to surround the king there. The most com1non
form of s1no1thered mate is seen in the following diagra1n:

1.Wg8+!

The black knight (or rook) is lured to a 'poor' position.

1 ... :Sxg8 2.ciJf7# 1-0

The knight on fl delivers 1nate to the king on h8 which is


prevented fr01n escaping the check by the rook (or the knight) on
g8 and the pawns on g7 and h 7.
Silnilarly, White can be mated with the white king on hl and the
knight on f2. Analogous mates on al and a8 are rarer, because
kingside castling is the more common as it safely places the king
closer to the corner than it would be had the castling occurred on
the queenside.
For a smothered mate of this sort to occur in a game, it is
usually necessary to sacrifice material to compel pieces to
smother the king - a player is unlikely to voluntarily surround
his king ,.vith pieces in a position where a s1nothered mate is
possible.
One method is particularly common and involves: check ,,vith
tlhe knight, then move the knight away to deliver a double check
from the queen and knight, and then sacrifice the queen to force
tlhe rook (or other opposing piece) next to the king, then mate
with the knight.
This technique is so com1non as to have its own name:
'Philidor's Mate' or 'Philidor's Legacy', after Fran�ois-Andre
Danican Philidor.
This is something of a misnomer, however, as it is earlier
described in Luis Ramirez Lucena's 1497 text on chess,
'Repetici6n de Amores e Arte de Axedrez', which predates
F.Philidor by several hundred years.
Keep in mind that an enemy piece is decoyed when it is lured to
a position allo\l\ring a trap or a winning combination. The
smothered mate is another example of decoy.
The concepts of deflection and decoy are often confused, but
tlhere is a clear difference between them.

oNN
■ Greco Gioacchino
Italy 1620

1.e4e5 2.<tif3 <tlc6 3..ic4.ic5 4.0-0 <tlf6 5.�et 0-0 6.c3 We7 7 .d4
exd4 8.e5 6bg49.cxd4 <tixd4 10 .. <tlxd4Wh4 11.<tlf3 ¥Bxf2+ 12.�hl

12 ...VBgt+ 1 3.<tixgt 6bf2# 0-1


oNN
■ Greco Gioacchino
Italy 1625

1.e4e5 2.f4f5 3.exf5Wh4+ 4.g3 We7 5 W . h5+ <.!;>d8 6 fx


. e5 Wxe5,+
7 ..ie2 ltlf6 8.�f3 d5 9.g4h5 10.h3 hxg4 11.hxg4 �xht 12 W . xht
i&g3+ 13 <.!;>
. dt �xg414.Wxd5+ .id7 15. �f3

15..,q)fZ+ 16.<.!;>el q)d3+ 17.'it>dl 1§'el+ 18,q)xel q)f2#

0-1

These two games of the great Gioacchino Greco were the first to
be recorded with the theme of the smothered mate, long before
F .Philidor presented it.
But let's see how another great of those tilnes, P.Morphy, handled
it:

□ McConnell James
■ Morphy Paul
New Orleans 1849

1.e4e5 2.f4exf43. �f3 g5 4..ic4.ig7 5.d3 h6 6.0-0 �f6 7.c3 b5


8..ixb5 c6 9 ..ic 4 d5 10.exd5 cxd5 11.We2+ .ie6 12..ib3 0-0 13.d4
lue4 14..ic2 f5 15.ltlbd2 ltlc6 16.c4 hd4+ 17. �xd4 �xd418.�d3
i&b6 19.@ht ltlxc2 20.Wxc2 �f2+ 21.@gt
21. ...!bh3+ 22.@ht Wgt+ 23.gxgt .!bf2# 0-1

o Morphy Paul
■NN
New Orleans 1856

1.e4 es 2.f4 exf4 3..ic4 Wh4+ 4.�fl gs S..!bc3 Ag7 6.d4 �c6 7..!bf3
WhS 8..!bdS @d8 9.c3 �f6 10.�xf6 Axf6 11.eS Ag7 12.h4 f6 13.�gl
g4 14.�h2 fxeS 1S.�xg4 exd4 16.i.xf4 �f8 17..tgs+ �e7 18.We2
:Se8

19..!beS Wxe2 20.lbf7# 1-0

o Morphy Paul
■ Bryan Thomas Jefferson
New York 1859

1.e4 es 2.�f3 .!bc6 3.i.c4 .tcs 4.b4 .txb4 S.c3 .tcs 6.0-0 d6 7.d4
.ib6 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.VNb3 Wf6 10 ..ib5 .ie6 11.Wa4 �ge7 12.i.g5 Wg6
13.�xe7 c.t>xe7 14..txc6 bxc6 15.�xe5 Wf6 16.�xc6+ @f8 17.e5
Wg5 18.h4 Wg4

19.Wa3+ c.t>g8 20.�e7+ @f8 21.<!t:lg6+ 'it>g8 22.Wf8+ �xf8 23.�e7#

1-0

D Morphy Paul
■ Schrufer
Paris 185,9

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 �c6 3.i.c4 �f6 4.d4 exd4 5.0-0 �xe4 6.�e1 d5
7..txd5 Wxd5 8.�c3 Wh5 9.�xe4 i.e6 10.�eg5 .tb4

11.!l:xe6+ :fxe6 12.�xe6 W!f7 13.QJfg5 W!e7 14.We2 .id6 15.QJxg7+


@d7 16.Wlg4+ @cl8 17.�f7+ '&xf7 18.i.g5+ .te7 19.�e6+ @c8
20.�c5+ c.t>b8
21.lbd7+ ©C8 22.tlib6+ ©b8 23J;Tc8+ :Sxc8 24.lbd7# 1-0

And after the two old greats, we v.rill examine some more
examples, which are useful to keep in mind:

o Saalbach August
■ Pollmaecher Hermann
Leipzig 1861

1.e4 cs 2.lbf3 e6 3.lbc3 lbe7 4.d4 fS S.dS fxe4 6.�xe4 lbxdS 7.tlbeS
g6 8.Wf3 V9c7 9.V9f7+ @d8 10..igS+ tlbe7

11.We8+ @xe8 12.�f6+ @d8 13.lbf7# 1-0

□ capon C.H.
■ Taylor J.O.H.
Norwich 1873

1.e4 es 2.�f3 tlbc6 3.c4 .icS 4.�c3 .id4 S.lbbS d6 6.�bxd4 exd4
7 .b3 .ig4 8.h3 .ixf3 9.Wxf3 t£ie5 10.Wg3 t£if6 11..ie2 t£ixe412 W
. xg7
�h4 13.0-0d3 14.hd3 t£if3+ 15.@hl

15 ..Wxf2
. 16.Wxh8+ @d7 17 W
. g7 'Wgl+ 18J !xgl <ilf2# 0-1

o Chigorin Mikhail
■ Solov Alexander
Moscow 1884 O

45.�xd8+ t£ixd8 46.fi:ic7# 1-0

□ Blackburne Joseph Henry


■ Thomson
Glasgow 1885 O
30.YNeS+ lt>a8 31.q)c7+ 1-0

o Bird / Dobell
■ NN
London 1886

1.e4 es 2.f4 exf4 3.�f3 gs 4.q)c3 g4 s.�es Vfih4+ 6.g3 f:xg3 7.Vfixg4
g2+ 8.Vfixh4 gxhl=W 9.WhS i,e7 10.'�Xf7 q)f6

11.q)d6+ lt>d8 12.VNe8+ �xe8 13JLJf7# 1-0

o Mason James
■ NN
London 1900

1.e4 es 2.f4 ..acs 3.q)f3 d6 4.c3 .ig4 S..ic4 q)c6 6.d4 exd4 7.0-0
dxc3+ 8.@hl qJd4 9.qJXC3 i,xf3 10.gxf3 �e7 11 ..ie3 �e6 12.fS
.ixe3 13.fxe6 0-0 14.exf7+ @h8 1S.f4 <tig6 16.�dS .icS 17 .b4 i,b6
18.fS �es 19.WhS Wd7 20 JU4 Wxf7

21.Wxh7+ @xh7 22.:Sh4+ 'it>g8 23.�e7# 1-0

o Bernstein Ossip
■ Metger Johannes
Ostend 1907

1.c4 es 2.eilc3 <tlf6 3.g3 dS 4.cxdS �xdS S.�f3 <tlc6 6..tg2 .!bb6 7.0-
0 !J.e7 8.a3 .ie6 9.d3 0-0 10.b4 f6 11..ib2 Wc8 12.!kl �d8 13..!be4
<tlc414.Wc2 CLJxb2 1S.Wxb2 .ih3 16.hh3 Wxh3 17.b5 �aS
18.Wa2+ �h8 19.�xc7 �d7

20.�egs fxgs 21.�xcl7 Wxd7 22.�xes 1-0

□ Hallmann H.
■ Schneider W.
Correspondence 1931
1.e4 e5 2A:lc3 �f6 3..ic4 .tb4 4.d3 d5 5.exd5 .ixc3+ 6.bxc3 lt:lxd5
7.Wh5 0-0 8.lt:lf3 lt:lc6 9..ia3 �e8 10.lt:lg5 �f6

11.Wxf7+ l!?h8 1l2.Wg8+ �xg8 13.lt:lf7# 1-0

o Koltanowski Georges
■ Salazar J.
Ciudad Guatemala 1940

1.d4 lt:lf6 2.<!Ilf3 ,e6 3.e3 d5 4..id3 .ie7 5.t2lbd2 tZlbd7 6.0-0 0-0
7.We2 �e8 8.e4 dxe4 9.<!Ilxe4 c5 10.c3 b6 11.tZle5 .ib7 12.tZlxf7 Wc7
13.<!Ilfg5 .ixe4 14..ixe4 <!Ilxe4 15.Wxe4 0.f6 16.Wxe6+ l!?h8

17.tZlf7+ l!?g8 18, .tZlh6+ l!?h8 19.Wg8+ �xg8 20.tZlf7# 1-0

o Najdorf Miguel
■NN
Rafaela 1942
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.tbc3 tbf6 4.tbf3 a6 5.cxd5 tbxd5 6.e4 tbxc3
7.bxc3 i.e7 8.�d3 0-0 9.0- 0 c5 10.VNe2 cxd4 11.cxcl4 S:e8 12.!!dl
tbc6 13.i.b2 b5 14J!ac1 �b7 15.d5 exd5 16.exd5 tbb4 17.i.e4
�xa2 18.eie5 tbb4 19.hh7+ �f8 20.VNh5 hd5

21.l3xd5 VNxd5 22.VNxf7+ VNxf7 23.tbd7# 1-0

o Lasker Edward
■ Horowitz Israel Albert
New York 1946

1.d4 eit6 2.�f3 d5 3.e3 c5 4.c4 cxd4 5.�xd4 e5 6.tbf3 eic6 7.tbc3
d4 8.exd4 exd4 9.tbb5 �b4+ 10.�d2 0 - 0 11.�4 eixb4 12.tbbxd4

White can't prevent the smothered mate because he will lose


his knight, White is so s1nothered... £.Lasker did not compete in
the 194""6 USA Cfiampionship, in which Horo\o\ritz finished 6Th, so
this game may have been either a club game or an offhand game.

0-1

□ Slade Ronald Augustus


■ Hooper David Vincent
Bristol 1947

1.e4 cs 2 . ltlf3 �c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.lbxcl4 �f6 S . ltlc3 d6 6..ie2 e6 7.0-0
.ir.e7 8.�hl a6 9.f4 Wic7 10.£r.f3 .ir.cl7 11.ltlde2 0-0 12.b3 bS 13.a3
�ac8 14..tb2 :Sfd8 1S.:Scl ltlaS 16.We l �e8 17.eS .tc6 18.�e4 .txe4
19..txe4 dS 20..id3 g6 21.:1:!f3 ltlc6 22.:Sh3 f5 23.exf6 .ixf6 24.£r. x f6
�xf6 2S.:Se3 :Se8 26.�gl es 27.fxeS �xeS 2 8.'�h4 ltlfg4 29.:Seel

29...�xcl3 30.cxd3 Wixh2+ 31 .Wixh2 �f2# 0-1

□ Bloodgood Claude Frizzel


■ Evans Bill
Norfolk 1 961

1.g4 dS 2 .tg2
. c6 3.gs e s 4.h4 .id6 S.d3 .te6 6.e4 ltle7 7.ltld2 0-0
8 ..th3 .ixh3 9.ltlxh3 f5 10.gxf6 �xf6 11.exdS ltlxdS 12.�e4 :Sf7
13..tgs .te7 14.Wg4 WiaS+ 1S.c3 £1.xgs 16.�hxgs :Sf8
17.YNe6+ @h8 18. .!bf7+ i>g8 19.�h6+ �h8 20.YNg8+ gxg8 21..!bf7# 1-
0

□ Robatsch Karl
■ Bisguier Arthur Bernard
Hastings 1961 e

38 ...YNgl+ 0-1

□ Vepkhvishvili Varlam
■ Magalashvili Dimitri
Tbilisi 1966

1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.eic3 �g7 4.�gs .!bd7 5. .!bf3 ei gf6 6.�c4 0-0 7.e·5
dxe5 8.dxe5 .!bg4 9.e6 fxe6 10.� xe6+ �h8 11.�xg4 �cs 12.�xc8
�xc8 13.0-0 :Se8 14.:Se1 e5 15.YNd5 .!be6 16..!be4 eixg5 17.�exgs c6
18.<!bf7+ ©g8 19.<!bh6+ ©h8 20.Wfg8+ �xg8 21.<!bf7# 1-0

□ Unzicker Wolfgang
■ Sarapu Ortvin
Siegen 1970

1.e4 cs 2.<!bf3 �f6 3.es <!bdS 4.<!bc3 e6 5.<!bxdS exdS 6.d4 <!bc6
7.dxcS .ixcS 8.'!WxdS VHb6 9..ic4 .ixf2+ 10.©e2 0-0 11.�fl .icS
12.<!bgS �d4+ 13.©d1 <£ie6 14.<£ie4 d6 15.exd6 .ixd6 16.<£ixd6 S:d8
17..if4 �xf4

18.VHxf7+ ©h8 19.Wg8+ 1-0

This was exactly how the game Kharchenko Boris-Litvak Mikhail,


Alushta 2007 v,ras played!
o Sveshnikov Evgeny
■ Ivanov Igor Vasilievich
Minsk 1976 O

33.VNd6+ �gs 34.tZle7+ �fs 35.tZlxg6+ �gs 36.WfS+ 1:!:xfS 37.tZle7#


1-0

o Hendriks Richard
■ Welling Gerard
Sittard 1977 e

34...We3+ 35.�ht lbf2+ 36.�gt lbh3+ 37 .�ht Wgt+ 3S.�xgt tlJf2.#


0-1

o Murey Jacob
■ Mortensen Erling
Randers 1982

1.c4 tZlf6 2.lbc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.d4 i.g7 5.f3 0-0 6.�e3 es 7.tZlge2 c6
S.Wd2 exd4 9.�xd4 dS 10.cxdS cxdS 11.eS tZleS 12.f4 f6 13.lbf3
ttic7 14.0-0-0 f:xeS 1S..ic4 ©h8 16.li:lxd5 ttixdS 17.WxdS Wc7
18.lbxeS ..ifS 19..icS ttid7

20.Wg8+ 1-0

□ Timman Jan
■ Short Nigel
Tilburg 1990

1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 lbf6 4..ig2 .ie7 S.lb:f3 dS 6.0-0 0-0 7.b3 .id7
8..ia3 li:lc6 9.Wc1 as 10..ixe7 Wxe7 11.ftlc3 .ie8 12.We3 dxc4
13.bxc4 :Sd8 14.�fdl ttig4 1S.Wf4 M7 16.�ab1 es 17.dxeS gxd1+
18.�xdl �cs 19.ttigS .ixc4 20.lbdS lbd8 21.e6 .ixdS 22.�xdS Wa3
23.�d7 lbc6 24.hc6 bxc6 2S.e7 �e8

26.Wc4+ ©h8 27.li:lf7+ ©g8 28.li:lh6+ @h8 29.Wg8+ gxg8 30.li:lf7# 1-


0
□ Grischuk Alexander
■ Ponomariov Ruslan
Torshavn 2000

t.e4<tif6 2 e. s .!bdS 3 .d4d6 4.lbf3 g6 s..tc4.!bb6 6 ..tb3 .tg7 7.a4 as


8.<tigS e6 9 .f4dxeS 10.f:xeS cs 11.c3 cxd412.0-00-013 .cxd4�c6
14.!bf3
. f6 1S .!bc3
. f:xeS 16 .tgs
. �d7 17.dxeS .!bxeS 18.lbxeS l3xfl +
19 V!i
. xfl Wd4+ 20.@hl WxeS 21..id8 Wes 22..!be4Wb423.lbgS @h8
24.V!if7 .td7 2S .ixe6
. gxd8

26 .V!ig8+ l3xg8 27 .!bf7#


. 1-0

□ Larios Crespo Manuel


■ Salvador Lopez Daniel
Albacete 2001

1.e4dS 2 e . xdS WxdS 3. .!bc3 Was 4.cl4lbf6 s..td2 c6 6..ic4.tg47.f3


.ifS 8..!bge2 e6 9 ..!bg3 .tg6 10.We2 Wb6 11.0-0-0.te7 12 .f4V!ic7
13 l3
. de1 bS 14..!bxbS cxbS lS .txbS+
. @f8 16.f5 exf5 17.Wf3 f4
18 .@bl Vfixc2+ 19 .@al lbc6 20..ixf4 �c8 21 .gc1 lbxd422.Wb7
22...VNbl+ 23 .:Sxbl 6i:Jc2# 0-1

o Bischoff Klaus
■ Mueller Karsten
Hoeckendorf 2004

1.c4c6 2A)f3 dS 3 e . 3 .!bf6 4.ti::ic3 e6 5.d4ti::ibd7 6 VN


. c2 .id6 7.b3 es
8 ..ib2 e49.ti::id2 a6 10.i.e2 We7 11.0-0-0bS 12.f3 exf3 13 .ixf3 .
bxc414.bxc4.ia3 15.c5�2+ 16.@xb2 0-017J�he1 Wd8 18.e4
dxe419.ti::idxe4.!bdS 20.ti::ixdS cxdS 21.ti::id6 ti::i f6 22.h3 i.e6 23.1;Wc3
Vfffc7 24.@al �tb8 25J!b1 Wc6 26.�b3 VNa427.i.dl :Sxb3 28.i,xb3
Vfffa3 29J!e3 �d8 30.Wel :Sb8

31.�xe6 fxe6 32 .VNxe6+ @h8 33..!bf7+ @g8 34..!bh6+ @h8 35.VNg8+


qJXg8 36.6i:Jf7# 1-0
□ Duron Godoy Sari Esther
■ Garcia Castro Veronica
Mallorca 2004

1.e4 cs 2.<tlf3 d6 3.<tlc3 lt:lf6 4 ..ic4 g6 5.d4 cxd4 6.lt:lxd4 .ig7 7.0if3
0ic6 8.0-0 0-0 9..igS .id7 10.WdZ :Se8 11.:Sfel a6 12..ih6 .ih8
13.<tlgS lt:leS 14.WeZ lt:lfg4 15.f4 <ti xc4 16.VNxc4

16 ..J½'b6+ 17.<!>hl <tlf2+ 18.<!>gl <tlh3+ 19.<!>hl Wgl+ 20.l�xgl lt:lf2#


0-1

□ Lanka Zigurds
■ Radjabov Teimour
Mainz2005 •

51 ... Wgl+ 5 2.:Sxgl 0if2# 0-1


□ Visser Yge
■ Speelman Jonathan
London 2006 •

27..V. Ng1+ 28J:!xg1 li:lf2# 0-1

oNN
■ McCracken Terry
Internet 2007

1.e4cs 2.li:lf3 d6 3.c3 li:lc6 4.d4cxd4S.cxd4g6 6.dS <tlb8 7.<tlc3


�g78.�bS+ i . d79.Wa4 <tlf610.0-0a6 11.�xd7+ <tibxd712..ie3 0-0
13 .�acl �c8 14.E!fd1 li:lg41S .id2
. <tics 16.Wa3 <tld3 17.�c2 <tigxf2
18 .�fl Wb6 19.<tla4

19 ..li:lh3+
. 20. ©hl Wg1+ 0-1
□ Disawal Vishwas
■ Anshuman M.
Nagpur2008

1.e4cs 2.f4 d6 3.�bS+ �d7 4.hd7+ �xd7 5. �f3 g6 6 .0-0�g7 7.d3


Wb6 8.c3 �gf6 9 Jfe2 0-010. �a3 YNc7 11.�c2 l3fe8 12.eS dxeS
13 .fxeS �dS 14.e6 �7f6

15.exf7+ @xf7 16.�g5+ @g817.YNe6+ @h8 18.�f7+ @g8 19. �h6+


©h8 20.Wg8+ �xg8 21.�f7# 1-0

□ Reefschlaeger Helmut

-�■ltJ•·• �­
■ Astengo Corrado
Bad Wiessee 2008 O

■ A■ 8
.■·■·-•�� -- ·
•• • � • ».i
J.
1if �tr.<;>d;�t" "•I

[¢'
,$

Aal:l ■.t� 9
•Ir• ■ ■
� �

"" • --0 "1


mW
.

23 . �eS+ bS 24.�xbS+ axbS 25.'{gfxbS+ @f8 26.�d7+ @e8 27. �f6+


©f8 28.We8+ �xe8 29 . �d7# 1-0
□ Buhmann Rainer
■ Saeheng Boonsueb
Dresden 2008 O

2 4.6bxh6+ ©h8 25.VNxe6 6be7 26.Yfig8+ 1-0

□ Yildiz Betul Cemre


■ Batory Lucija
Rijeka 2010 O

1.e4 e5 2.�f3 6bc6 3.d4 exd4 4.� xd4 .ic5 5..ie3 Wf6 6.c3 �ge7
7 .�c4 6be5 8.�e2 d6 9.0-0 Yfig6 10.f3 .ih3 11J!f2 0-0 12.©hl .ie6
13.6bd2 Yfih5 14.l'ilf1 c6 15.�xe6 .ixe3 16.�xe3 fxe6 17.Yfixd6 VNg5
18.l'il c4 l'ilf7 19.Yfixe6 �g6 20.�d6 We3 21.l'ilxf7 �f4

22.�h6+ ©h8 23.Yfig8+ l3xg8 24.�f7# 1-0


□ Miezis Normunds

*��-..■.'-7:l�■..•
■ Navara David
Porto Carras 201 1 O

.. . ..,$/.�..•

d•...•

• • • •

•••• �

87.!£id7 i. xa7 88A:ic7# 1-0

□ Medina Warda Aulia


■ Lyons Kieran
Istanbul 2012

1.e4 cs 2.tz:Jf3 �c6 3.d4 cxd4 4..!bxd4 �f6 S.tz:lc3 e6 6.tz:JdbS d6


7.�f4 es 8.�gs a6 9.hf6 gxf6 10.tz:la3 f5 11.�c4 tz:J d4 12.WhS Wd7
13.tz:ldS �g7 14.tz:lb6 We7 1S.tz:ixa8 bS 16 . .!bb6 �b7 17.�dS Wd8
18.�d3 �xdS 19.exdS e4 20.�e2 b4 21.�c4 tz:ixc2+ 22.@d2 .!bxa1
23.:Sxal Wf6 24.WxfS Wd4+ 2S.©e1 0-0 26.E(dl Wes 27.Wxe4 a5
28.i.d3 f5 29.We6+ @h8 30.<tl xd6 �d4

31.6bf7+ <.!?g8 32..!bh6+ @h8 33.1/l.'g8+ :sxg8 34.tz:lf7# 1-0


To conclude our survey, we vvill see some often-met opening
traps:

o Hosticka Frantisek
■ Bartos Miroslav
Prague 201 5

1.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.tZ'Jd2 dxe4 4.lbxe4 tZ'Jd7 S.We2 qJgf6

o Stancu Timy Casian


■ Nita Andrei loan
Calimanesti Caciulata 2016

1.e4 eS 2.tZ'Jf3 lbc6 3.i.c4 lbd4 4.lbxeS VNgS 5.qJXf7

s ...Wxg2 6J'!f1 Wxe4+ 7 ..ie2 tZ'Jf3#0-1


□ Neudecker Georg
■ Leichum Engelbert
Schweinfurt 2016

1.d4 6bf6 2.c4 es 3.dxeS 6bg4 4.�f4 .ib4+ S.6bd2 6bc6 6.6bgf3 We7
7.a3

7...�gxeS 8.axb4 �d3# 0-1

CONCLUSION

The smothered mate is a relatively easy but very effective tactic.


It is an ilnportant one to learn and understand, as it occurs quite
often.
TWIN GAMES
'Identical' twins are the rarest case in our royal game. Especially,
when these twins come from the same player, in the same
tournament and in (nearly) consecutive rounds!
Let's start ,.vith a 'couple' by English GM J.Plaskett:

o Rath Ulrik
■ Plaskett James
Esbjerg 1982

1.ti::if3 �f6 2.c4 b6 3.g3 .ib7 4. i . g2 g6 5.b3 !J.g7 6.!i.b2 0-0 7.0-0li:la6
8.ti::ic3 cs 9 J!c1 dS 10.li:lxdS ti::ixdS 11 .ixg7
. 'i!lxg7 12.cxd5WxdS
13 d . 4:Sfd8 14.dxc5 li:lxc515.Wc2 Wd6 16.b4 �e6 17.Wb2+ f6
18 li:l
. gS hg2 19. �xe6+ Wxe6 20.'i!lxg2

This ga1ne was played in the 2nd round of the Esbjerg Open B­
Tournament back in 1982. White's non-ambitious play made
things easy for Black, but is there something more to look at than
the better side of the draw? The pawn structure is symmetrical
and after so1ne more heavy pieces exchanges there will be
nothing left to play for...
20..JNe4+ 21.f3

A correct response. 21.©gl :i3.ac8 22.a3 hS, would give Black


s01ne initiative.
21.. Jfe3 22.l'.!c3 �es 23.l:!fcl !:!:ac8! 24J!lc2?!

After 24.@f2! White would have no problems maintaining


equality.

24...�dl

The text looks like a great combinational 1nove! But objectively


best was 24...�xc3 2S.Wxc3 (2S.:!!xc3 �d1 26.%1.b3 Wd6=+) 2S..J�xc3
26.Z'lxc3 rl:d2 27.fi:a3 rl:xe2+ 28.@g1 aS 29.bxaS bxaS 30.�xaS gS,
when \Nhite would still have to suffer, but probably he could
hold. On the other hand, it is a very interesting move, as Black is
in no danger of losing and White should be careful...

25.�xc8 �e3 26.l:!8c4?

And White blunders, obviously shocked by Black's 24th move!


After 26.@h3 Black has nothing better than 26... Wh6+ (26...�hl
27.El8c4 Wf2 28.@g4! We3 29J�e4 hS+ 30.@h3 !'!xh2+ 31.@xh2
Wf2+=) 27.@g2 We3= Another good move was 26.�cl �d2
(26... Wgl +? 27.@h3 Wf1+ 28.@g4+ )- 27.�xd2 Wxd2 28.@fl Wxb4
29J':!8c7 as=

26...�gl+?

26...hS! was strong, when White is in trouble: 27.@h3 (27.a3?


Wg1+ 28.@h3 Wf1+ 29.@h4 @h6! -+) 27...Wf2 28.e3 Wf1 + 29.�g2
Wxc4+
27.©h3 We6+ 2 8. g4?

Returning material has never been an easy job to do! Here


White could have saved himself by 28.�g4 hS 29.Wd4 hxg4+
30 .Wixg4 We3 31.We4 Wh6+ 32.Wh4 We3 33.We4=

2 8...Wie3!

29.g5?
There is no clear mind anyn1ore, otherwise White would have
found his only continuation ,,vith 29.Wcl! :!1xcl 30 .�xcl Wxe2
31.�g3 hS 32.gxhS WeS+ 33.�gZ WgS+ 34.©hl WxhS 35JJ1c3 WdS+

2 9... Wixg5 30J!g4 Wh5+ 31.:Sh4 Wf5+ 32J!g4 h5! 33.:Scc4 g5!

White resigned, due to 34.WcZ hxg4+ 35.fxg4 Wfl#

0-1

□ Knudsen Per Bek


■ Plaskett James
Esbj erg 1982

1.<tlf3 �f6 2.c4 b6 3.g3 .ib7 4 .ig2


. g6 5 .b3 .ig7 6 ..ib2 0 0- 7.0-0 �a6
8.<tlc3 c5 9.:Sct d5 10.<tlxd5 <tixd5 11..ixg7 <.!;,xg712.cxd5 WixdS
13.d4 :Sfd8 14.dxc5 t!i:lxc5 15.Wc2 Wd6
16.b4

Another continuation here is 16.l;fdl Wf6 17.b4 (17.tbel hg2


18.©xg2 es 19.b4 lbe6 20.tbf3 as 21.a3 axb4 22.axb4 lt:igS 23.lbxgS
WxgS 24.Wc7 fi:dc8 2S.h4 WfS 26.Wxb6 We4+ 27.lt>gl fi:ab8 28.Wa6
:!!xcl 29.ri:xcl fi:xb4 30.Wa3 £'.bl 31.ri:xbl Wxbl+ 32.@g2 ½-112
Meier,G-Papp,G Belfort 2005) 17...tbe6 18.Wb3 l.%ac8 19.fu(c8 �xc8
20.Wa4 ri:c7 21.Wa3 a6 22.We3 bS 23.li:ieS .ixg2 24.�xg2 hS 25.h4
WfS 26J'3d3 %!c2 27.a3 �c7 28.©g1 ½-1/2 Schindler,W-
David,A Germany 1986.

16..tbe617.VNb2+
.

17.a3 :rl:ac8 18.Wb2+ f6 19.l.%xc8 ri:xc8 20.:!:tcl ½-½ Kochyev,A­


Speelman,J Hastings 1978.

17 .. £6
.

17...©g8 18.a3 :rl:ac8 19.ri:fel fi:xcl ½ - 1/2 Csom,I-Szekely,P Hungary


1999.

18.ltlgS hg2 19.ltlxe6+ Wxe6 20.d>xg2


And here again we have the position from the 2nd round, but
this is now in the 4th round, with the same player as Black!

20..hS!
.

Well, Black did his ho1nework,. as the text move offers better
chances than the 20 ...We4+ of the 2nd round!

21 h
. 4

White cannot afford to allow s01nething like ...h 4 -h3.

21...We4+ 22.f3 We3

Black seems to have a good strategy: to 1naintain all heavy


pieces on the board and try to create some threats on the enemy
king.

23 .�c2

If White had opted for something like the previous game ,.vith
23J3c3 Y41e5 24.1:1:fcl �ac8 25J'!lc2, then 25 .. J!.dl would work
perfectly after 26J�xc8? (26.�a3 Y41xb2 27.E'.xb2 E'.c7=+) 26...We3t-+

23...�d4 24J!fc1 �ad8 25.�c3 We6


26.!nc2?

A passive move. \iVhite had to opt for 26Jlc6! �es 27.�c8 �8d5
28.Y.ic2! Wie6! (28..Ji:d2?! 29.�g8+ @xg8 30.Wxg6+= ) 29.l�c6 Y.ie3
30.i'Jc3 and probably Black has nothing better than to accept the
draw...

26...�dl!

Echoes from the previous game...

27J9b3 Y.ieS

28.@f2?

A more stubborn defence was to be found in 28Ji:b2 !i:8d2


29J1xd2 fu{d2 30.fle3 �xe2+ 31.�xe2 Wxe2+ 32.i>gl bS+
.Even stronger vvas 28... :ll:gl! 29.f4 (29.*xgl Wxg3+ 30 .*fl 1c!dl#)
29...Wd4+ 30.1;1e3 Wal! 31.:ll:f3 filll-+

29.f4 We4! 30.gf3

30...�ddl

This dl-square is a proble1n for White in this variation...

31.*gZ !Edgl + 32.@f2 !\:bl-+

31...�h2# 0-1

Well, the previous 'couple' was what I call perfect twins! But this
case is quite rare, at least coinpared to cases of identical ideas
and positions fro1n different openings.
In the 'Acropolis 2007' international tournament held in Athens,
the following games were played in rounds 1 & 2:

□ Parginos Vassilios
■ Grivas Efstratios
Athens 2007

1.cl4 fS 2.h3 dS 3.g4 liJf6 4.q:Jf3 liJc6 5.q:Jc3 e6 6J�g1 liJe4 7.g.xfS
e.xfS 8.liJg5 q:Jxc3 9.bxc3 i.e7 1O.e4 fxe4
White has sacrificed a pawn trying to gain the initiative but
Black is well-prepared to defend properly.

11.Wh5+?!

A tempting 1nove. 11.lLJxe4?! leads nowhere after 11...0-0!


(11. .. dxe4? 12.WhS+ g6 13.f!xg6 hxg6 14.Wxg6+ �d7 15.WfS+=)
12.ih6 E1f7 13.WhS ifS 14.lLigS .ixgS 15.ixgS Wd6-+ but probably
White should have chosen the lesser evil 11.h4 �fS 12.i.h3 i.xh3
13.tbxh3 0 -0 14.Wg4 E1f7 15.i.h6 if6+

11...g6 12.Wh6 .if8 13.Wh4 h6!

No escape for the poor gS-knight!

14..ieZ �g7 15.�h5

Keep this diagra1n in mind; you v.rill need it for the next ga1ne!

15....if5
15 ...hxgS 16..ixgS Wd6 17..if4 Wl.e7 18..ixg6+ @f8 was also
winning, but Black wanted to play it safe.

16.VNf4 Wd7

16...0-0 was also enough. Unfortunately for White, all these


pieces gathering on the kingside V1ras nothing but an e1npty
balloon.

17.tbxe4 gxhS 18J;(xg7 Vflxg7 19.VflxfS dxe4 or 17.'t:\e6 Wxe6


18.VflxfS WxfS 19.hg6+ Wxg6 20.l!xg6 'i!if7 were easy and
ineffective.

17...exf3 18.furg6 .ixg6 19.hg6+ 'i!id8 0-1

o Malakhatko Vadim
■ Parginos Vassilios
Athens 2007

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.eic3 c5 4.cxd5 cxd4 5.'Wa4+ �d7 6.Wxd4 exd5


7.Wxd5 eif6 8.Wb3 eic6 9..!bf3 .ic5 10..ig5 h6 11..ixf6 Wxf6 12.eie4
We7 13.eixc5 Wxc5 14.e3

Black again sacrificed a pawn for the initiative, as in the previous


game.

14...Wa5+
It seems that the Black player loves this kind of check. The
alternative was 14..Jk8 15.ieZ ie6 16.VlibS VlixbS 17.hbS rJie7=+

15.Vlic3 �b4?!

15 ...Wxc3+ 16.bxc3 rJ,e7 \A/as \A/hat Black should have opted for.

16.�d4 !k8 17.Wd2 .ta4?!

Placing his pieces on the edge is not a good sign for Black.
17...b6 ·was better: 18.a3 lilc2+ 19.lilxcZ %1xc2 20.VlixaS bxaS 21.b4
axb4 22.axb4 0-0 23.id3 �b2 24.0-0 Z!xb4 25.'.!;1xa7 ibS 26.ixbS
%1xb5 27.g3±

18.b3 0-0?!

Black had to accept an inferior but 'defendable' position with


18...id7 19.ieZ tbc6 20.WxaS lbxaS 21.id3±

19.a3!

Compare this diagram with the previous ga1ne. V.Parginos has


put his pieces on the edge of the board again and loses in an
identical way!

1-0

The last 'couple' wasn't played in the same tournament, nor by


the same player, as there is a gap of 71 years between the two
games!
I feel that it is really ilnpressive how many 1noves in both ga1nes
were identical. Even the 1noves with ? or I were more-or-less the
same!
Obviously, the study of the old game (the first one) was my
guide to creating the new one. But the truth is that I didn't have
to create anything really new, except so1ne tactics, as everything
was quite clear from the study of the old game! It happened
again and again in my over-the-board career.
Keep in mind that this is an essential of learning; study and
repeat with innovations...

o Reti Richard
■ Grau Roberto
London 1927

1.c4 cs 2.�f3 q,f6 3.d4 dS 4.cxdS cxd4 S.VNxd4 �xdS 6.�c3 Wxd4
7.�xd4

White seems to enjoy a temporary slight advantage, as Black has


still to co1nplete his develop1nent and be careful of moves like
l2ib5. Dut as the pawn structure is identical, Dlack has good
chances to equalize.

7...a6!

A good prophylactic 1nove against the lt:ibS 'threat'. If instead


7... eS?! White enjoys a pleasant advantage after 8.ltJdbS tZla6
9.i.gS, as he controls too many central squares.
8.g3!

A natural developing move, planning to take over the long


diagonal. Not much is achieved by 8.i.gS .id7 9.M6 exf6 10 .ti:idS
:Sa? 11.0 -0 -0 ti:ic6.

s ...es
More-or-less forced, in conjunction with his previous move.
After 8...�d7?! 9.�g2 ti:ic6 10.lt:lxc6 �xc6 11.�xc6+ bxc6 12.�gs,
White \Vill enjoy a permanent advantage due to Black's shattered
queenside pawns.

9.<!i:lb3 <!i:lc6?

A very passive move, which doesn't really solve Black's opening


problems. Many years later, I happened to be a co1nmentator at
the FIDE World Rapid Championship in Khanty M - ansiysk and
I was happy to comment on the correct approach: 9 ...i.d7! 10 .i.g2
ic6 11.0 -0 .ib4 (11. ..h6!? is interesting) 12.igS hc3 13.ixf6 gxf6
14.bxc3 i.xg2 15.@xg2 ti:id7 and White had a slight advantage in
Vitiugov,N-Mamedyarov,S Khanty-Mansiysk 2013.

10.�g2 �d7 11.0-0 �e7

A natural developing move, not like the strange 11..J�b8?!


12.i.gS ti:ig8 13.:ll:adl f6 14.ie3+- Sorensen,H-Wium,O Copenhagen
1989.
12..igS!

With the idea of fully occupying the dS-square, after the


exchange on f6. But possible also was 12.�e3, intending li:icS or
.icS, still with a nice advantage.

12...0-0 13.�fdl

All the vvhite pieces come into a play with some threat.
Although the Silicon Monster considers this position as slightly
better for White, the truth is that Black faces unsolvable
problems.

13...�fd8

The other option with 13 ....ie6 14.hf6 .ixf6 (14...gxf6 15.lbdS±)


15.lbcS± doesn't change 1nuch - Black's centre and queenside
are very v,reak.

14..ixf6! gxf6

The alternative 14...hf6 15.lbcS �g4 16.h3! 1:'!xdl+ 17.a:xdl .ic8


18.lbd7! also looks terrible for Black.

Allowing a standard c01nbination. 15....lg4 16.�f1 was the only


way to continue the fight.

16.lbcS!
Is this a knightmare?
16..@f8?!
.

Black looked completely shaken. 16 ...hcS 17.lt:lxf6+ '.!?g7


18.lt:lxd7 just loses the house! 16...ig4 was the only chance to
fight on: 17.lt:lxe7+ lt:lxe7 18.�xb7 fl:xdl + 19.fl:xdl ixe2 20J�d2 i.bS
21.ixa6±

1 7.lt:lxf6!

A small but effective combination that wins huge material -


Black resigned.
1-0

As I said, 71 years after this game I v.ras lucky enough to repeat


the knowledge I had accumulated in my youthful years.
And I did it in a rapid game, where there is not enough time to
think; you have to just sub-consciously repeat your knov.rledge
and education!

□ Grivas Efstratios
■ Pountzas Hrisanthos
Kalavryta 1998

1.d4 .!bf6 2.c4 e6 3..!bf3 cs 4.g3 cxd4 5 ..!bxd4 .!bc6 6 ..ig2 .ic5 7..!bb3
.ie7 8..!bc3
Many years after the previous game I played the present one -
note the similarities...
8 ...d6

Maybe 8...b6 is a better try: 9.0-0 0-0 10.lt:idS .ia6 11.li:Jxe7+ W!xe7
12.lt:id2 d5 13.Wfa4 .ib7 14.b3 !i:fd8 15 ..ia3+= Morozevich,A- Leko,P
Zug 2013.
9.0-0 .id7?

As in the previous game this isn't the right approach. Black


might have tried 9...tt:ies 10.cS d5 11.e4 tbxe4 12.lt:ixe4 dxe4
13.Wxd8+ ixd8 14..txe4+= as in Iljin,A-Belov,V Sochi 2006.

10.�f4 W!b8

11.cS!

11.lt:icS was possible as well, but opening the centre can only be
to White's benefit.
11...es 12.cxd6 �xd6?!

Good or bad, Black had to opt for 12...exf4 13.dxe7 fxg3 14.hxg3
ti:Jxe7 15.W!d4 and pray - White still has to prove his advantage.

Like the previous game, but here the existence of queens on


board are in White's favour as the black king is 'weak'.

13....ie7 14..ixf6!

Dominating the dS-square.

14...gxf6

14....lxf6 15.ltJcS .ifs 16.lt:ldS it's a knights' tango.

15.ltJdS VNd6 16J:k1

Preparing the second knight penetration to cs - Black is nearly


lost, as he cannot control any central square.

16...gd8 17.<tlc5 VNb8

17 ...i.c8 18.li:ie4 wins on the spot.

18.e3!

Although the Silicon Monster proposes a capture of either


bishop (18.lt:lxe7 �xe7 19.e3 .ie6 20.Wa4+- or 18.'1Jxd7 !l:xd7
19.Wd3 Wd8 20.!Udl 'i!?f8 21.a3±) I like this quiet 1nove. It takes
away the d4-square fro1n the black knight and prepares to
activate the queen on hS.
18....ie6

If Black tries 18....ixcS 19.:!1xc5 Wd6 then White, among others,


has at his disposal a very nice combination: 20.WhS!! WxcS
21.lLixf6+ ile7 22.ltJe4 Was 23.Wh4+ ilf8 24.Wh6+ ile8 25.ti:lf6+
(25.Wf6 il.e6 26.Wxh8++-) 25 ... @e7 26.ll:idS+ @e8 27.Wd6 f6 28.ll:ixf6+
*f7 29.ti:lxd7+-

When the advantage is huge, a combination is on the way. As


soon as I found it, I went for it.

19...fxe6 20.WhS+

20...l!?d7?!

Pity! Black \II/as 'forced' to go for 20...ilf8 \II/hen 21J!xc6! is quite


strong: 21 ...exdS (21...bxc6 22.Wh6+ ilf7 23.l2:ixe7 l!?xe7 24.Wg7+
ild6 25.Etdl+ ilcS 26.E'.cl + ilbS 27.Wxf6+-) 22.Etc2 e4 23.f3+- and
the opposite-coloured bishops guarantees a strong \II/inning
attack for White.

21.ltJxf6+ !

The same move as in the previous game and Black resigned 'as
usual': 21....ixf6 22.Wf7+ ie7 23J%fdl + l!?c7 24.Wxe7+.

1-0

The follo\lving 'twin couple' refers to a combination, which is one


of the most beautiful in chess history and even the great Tigran
Petrosian com1nented that when he first came across it he was so
impressed that he stayed forever in chess!
This part is based on articles by Tiln Krabbe (Chess Curiosities;
1985) and Jan Timman (NIC Magazine; 1997/3, 1997/5 and
1999/5).

o Tylkowski
■ Wojciechowski Antoni
Poznan 1931

1.f4 dS 2.e3 cs 3.�f3 tbc6 4..ibS .ig4 5.0-0 e6 6.d3 .ie7 7.tbc3 d4
8.ti'lbl �f6 9.e4 0-0 10.hc6 bxc6 11.c3 dxc3 12.tbxc3 .ixf3
13.:Sxf3 tbg4 14.�hl �d4 15.�gl �xgl + 16.�xgl .id8 17..ie3
�xe3 18.�xe3 .ib6 19.�dl h6 20.eS f6 21.exf6 :Sxf6 22.:Sf3 c4+
23.d4 c5 24.d5 exd5 25 J!xd5 �h7 26.!l:d7 ll:d8 27.�b7 :Sg6 28.�g3
:Sxg3 29.hxg3

The start of the co1nbination is easy to predict; Black has to put


pressure on the ,,vhite pawns.

29...:SdZ! 30.tba4?

Wrong, although White could not even imagine what would


follo,,v. He could save the dra,,v with 30.a4! r:i:xbz 31.a5 �b3! (after
31 ....ixa5? 32.1:l:xbZ .ixc3 33.l::1:cZ .id4+ 34.�fl c3 35.g4 is not clear if
Black can draw) 32.axb6 axb6! 33.tLJa4 (33.'2:idS c3 34.fS! �g8
[34...h5 35.l?ie3 �b2 36.f6 �g8 37J!xg7+ �f8 38.r:i:b7 l3e2 39J!.b8+
Q;?f7 40.�b7+ Q;?f8=] 35JJb8+= is good as well) 33 ... �a3 34.�xb6 �xa4
35.l:l:b5.
30...�xb2! !

The main theme and the actual start of the combination.

31..!bxb2 c3 32.�xb6

Forced. If 32..!bd3 then 32...c4+ 33.:l!xb6 cxd3 and the black

• •
. -� �-
pawns are unstoppable.

� �
, :_ , :-
� �-

32...c4! !

Taking the square d3 under control. The threat now is ...c2.

33.�b4 a5!!

The conclusion of the combination. The white pieces lose their


co-ordination and the c -pawn will promote.

34..!bxc4

If 34Ji:xc4 then 34... cxbZ 35.a4 bl=Wi+ 36.�h2 Wib3-+


34... cz 35.q)xas cl=W+ 36.@h2

36...WcS!

Black wins the knight. It is not sure that Black had foreseen this,
but luck favours the brave!

37.�b2

The point is that after 37J%a4 (37J !b3 Wxa5 38.a3? Wh5+ 39.�gl
Wdl+) Black wins with 37... WhS+ 38.�gl Wdl +.

37...WxaS 38. g4 Wel 39.g3 h5 4O.gxhS @h6

We have no 1noves from here on, but according to the historians,


White resigned after fifteen more moves.

0-1
Two years later and in a far-away town and an era in vvhich
there \A/ere no publications (allnost), databases or internet (!)
a similar combination took place. This is the version that was
published in some sources:

o Ortueta Esteban Martin


■ Sanz Aguado Jose
Madri d 1933 e

1 ...:Sd2! 2.eila4?!

But here White could save hilnself with 2.a4! l!xb2 3.as :!!b3
4.axb6 axb6 S.tt:ia4 �a3 (5...bS? 6.tt:ixcS !l:bl + 7.�f2 c3 8.tbd3+-)
6 J:1:xb6 !i:xa4 7.!l:bS=

2 ...:Sxb2! 3.eilxb2 c3 4.:Sxb6 c4! ! 5.�b4 aS! ! 6.eilxc4 c2

'And White resigned'. It looks like White is busted, but actually


there is a defence:
7.:Sb3! cl=W+ 8.@f2 Wxc4 9 J!h3+

The saving 1nove. If the ,.vhite ih-pawn was on h3, then White
would lose this position.

9 ...@g6 10.a3

Here John Nunn thought that Black can win by taking his pa,,vn
to a4, his king to c4 and then liquidating into a ,.vinning pawn
ending. But this is not true, as White can defend:

10...a4 11.�g3+ @f5 12.�f3+ @e4 13.@g3 @dS 14.h4! Wb3 15.@h3
©c416.@h2

And Black has no way to improve his position further:

16... Wxf3 17.gxf3 @b3

White simply advances his pawns and reaches a drawn queen


ending:

18.f4 @xa3 19.fS @b3 20.f6 gxf6 21.hS a3 22.h6 a2 23.h7 al=W
24.h8=W ½-½

But 'of course' this was the 'wrong version' of the game. Years.
later the plain truth was revealed; the follo,,ving \Nas the actual
game:
□ Ortueta Esteban Martin
■ Sanz Aguado Jose
Madrid 1933

1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.ti:ic3 ti:if6 4.e5 �fd7 5.f4 .tb4 6..td2 0-0 7.ti:if3 f6
8.d4 c5 9.ti:ib5 fxe5 10.dxe5 !!:xf4 11.c3 ge4+ 12..te2 .ta5 13.0 0 -
€l xe5 14)ti xe5 gxe5 15..tf4 !!:f5 16..id3 �f6 17.Wc2 h6 18..te5 �d7
19..ixf6 �xf6 20.�xf6 ¥Nxf6 21.:Sft ¥Ne7 22..th7+ �h8 23.Wg6 il.d7
24.gf7 Wg5 25.Wxg5 hxg5 26.gxd7 �xh7 27.�xb7

27....ib6?!

According to Jose Raul Capablanca, here Black could grab the


advantage with 27 ...c4! But of course this is of little 'value' as it
has nothing to do with our theme.

28.c4 dxc4 29.ti:ic3?!

29.tbd6! was a far better try; probably White would be able to


draw.

29...gds 30.h3
Here again we have the case of the previous game 1nore-or-less!

30...gdz! 31.�a4

Novv Black's extra material on the kingside doesn't allow the


saving resource 31.a4: 31. .. :l!xbZ 32.aS !!b3 33.axb6 axb6 34.tba4
c3 35.lLJxc3 :l!xc3 36J1:xb6 !!e3-+

As usual, imagination ,.vins versus 1naterial!

32.�xb2 c3! 33.gxb6 c4!! 34J!b4 aS! ! 35 . �xc4 c2

0-1

This combination inspired the great Jan Tim1nan to construct


so1ne thematic studies:

Study 1
Timman Jan
1997 0
White is a pawn-up but his queenside faces proble1ns, so he has
to act.

1.f6! gxf6

Forced. If l..Jl:xb3 then 2Ji:h8+ ig8 3.f7 and if l....tg8 White wins
with 2.fxg7+ <j:Je7 3Ji:h8 :i!xb3 4.l!xg8 lt>f6 5.ti:le61

2J�xf7+ <j;Jg8

Not of course 2 ...©e8? in view of 3.ia4+.

3.:Sxb7! ! lbxb7?

Here the main problem is Boris Gelfand's analysis, ,,vhich states


that Black can defend with 3...fxgSI 4.l%xa7 �3 5.�as �e3+
6.<j;Jg4 li>f7. So, actually the study is incorrect but of course still
beautiful due to the various combinations and defences.

4.c6 �xb3 5.cS! !


The well-known theme. \,Vith this move the black pieces are
kept a,.vay from d6 and b6.

5 ...:SbS 6.a4!! fxgS!

The best defence, as Black has a hidden resource...

The point is that 7.axbS? is impossible in view of 7...lt:lxcS 8.c7


1tJe4+ 9.�g4 lt:ld6-+ White's last move is an enormous surprise.
Although a rook and a knight do,.vn, White is in no hurry to ,,vin
material back, but starts by hiding his king!

7 ...g4+ 8.�h4!

And White wins the coming queen ending: 8... g3 9.axbS g2


10 .cxb7 gl='W ll.b8= �+.

1-0

The following version is also more economical and of course the


improved and correct one:

Study 2
Timman Jan
1999 0
1.c6 �xb4 2 .cS! !

It is a draw after 2.axb4? lt:ld6 3.cs lt:lfS+ 4.*g4 lt:lxe3+ 5.47f3 cods
6.lt:le6 47ft 7.c7 lt:le7 8.lt:ld8+ ©e8 9.lbc6 lbc8.

2 ...:SbS 3.a4! ! fxgS 4.47h3! ! g4+ .5.©h4!

And White wins as in the previous version.

1-0

As Jan Timman states, he was not entirely satisfied by the two


previous studies, a clear indication of a dedicated and great
chessplayer!
So, his final, third 'version' is far more excellent and 'refined'
compared to the previous two, which 1nore-or-less looked
'unfinished'.

Study 3
TimmanJan
1999 0
As far as material is concerned, the situation is roughly equal.
White obviously depends on his passed c -pavvns.

1.�b4!

l.c6 lbd6 at once yields nothing, so White will have to start by


trying to dominate the ene1ny knight.

1...:Sbl

There is no other defence to the threatened 2.c6: l..Jl:gl+ 2.�f2


�g8 (2 ...Elcl 3.c6 !l:xc4 4.c7 :!:!c6 5.f4 e4 6.fS+-) 3.c6 lbd8 4..le7!+-

2.a3!

Tempting is 2.c6 �4 3.cs, but this fails to 3...tbxcS 4.c7 t2Je4+ I


5.fxe4 !i:c4.

2...as 3.c6

Only nov,1 can the bishop be sacrificed.

3...axb44.c5!!

The usual motif.

4...bxa3

4...tbxcS fails to 5.c7 t2Je4+ 6.fxe4 !l:cl 7.axb4 and a white pavvn
will promote.
5.c7

Now the black rook has to hurry back to the bottom rank to stop
the \'Vhite passed pawns.

5...:Sgl+ 6.©h3!

For two reasons, both of which will become apparent, the only
good square for the king.

6...:Sg8

Another try is 6... a2 7.c8=W+ Elg8 which fails to 8.ltld8!! lt:ixd8


(8...:1:!xdS 9.Wxb7 al=W 10.Wg7#; 8... al =W 9.ltlf7#) 9.Wa6, capturing
the a-pawn.

7.ti:id8! !!:xd8 8.c6!

Here is our theme again! Now we see why the king had to go to
h3; on the second rank a check on d2 vvould be annoying.

8...:Sg8

The best defence. If 8... a2 then 9.cxdS= W+ ltlxd8 10.c7.

9.cxb7 a2

10.b8=YN!

This is the only way to queen which wins, as 'Arill become clear
in a while. The alternative 10.c8=W? only draws after 10...al= V.i
11.Wxg8+ ©xg8 12.b8=V.i+ ©f7 13.Wc7+ ©e6.

10...at=W 11.Wxg8+ ©xg8 12.cS=W+ ©f7 13.Wd7+ ©g6

The other option with 13 ...i>f8 also loses: 14.V.ig7+ 'i!?e8 15.Wg8+
©d7 16.Wxh7+ i>d6 17.We4+-

14.Wg7+ ©h5 15.V.if7+ !

And this is the second reason for White's sixth move; the white
king assists in weaving a mating net!

15...©xh6 16.V.ixf6+ ©h5 17.Wg5# 1-0

Lately there is a strong feeling that the game Ortueta-Sanz is


a fake one and it was constructed after Tylkowski­
Wojciechowski.
In NIC Magazine 2017/1, Jan Timman continued his research,
vvith some nice extra examples:

Study 4
Timman Jan
2017 0

A near twin position of the study 1; there are just some extra
pawns on the kingside...

1.:Sf7+ ©g8 2.�xb7!


Insufficient for the win is 2.c6 bxc6 3.�xa7 fxgS 4.cS+ 'ii>f8 S.'.i>g4
'tlc4 6.�c7 'tlXe3+ 7.�xgS ti:idS 8J!'.c8+ 'ii>e7 9.Elxc6 'llf6 10 .l'!c7+ 'ii>d8
11.l'!xg7 �a6! and Black holds.

2 ...ttixb7 3.c6 �xb3 4.cS! �bs 5.a4! fxgs 6 l!?


. h3!

The same concept as in study 1.

6 ...g4+ 7.l!?h4! g3 8.axbS g2 9 .c xb7 g1=¥9 10.b8=¥9+ l!?f7 11.¥9xa7+


l!?f6 12.Wa6+! l!?xf5 13.Wc8+ l!?e4 14.Wg4+ Wxg4+ 15.l!?xg4\!?d5
16 . b6!

And \,Vhite wins, as his king enters e6, so be-cause of this wrong
would be 16.c6? 'ii>d6=

1-0

Study 5
Hanssen L.
1932 0

Normally White couldn't hope for more than a draw at best...

1.ttld6 ttic7

Or 1...tt:Je7 2.dS! l!?g8 (2...'lJXdS 3.tt:Jc8+ -) 3.'lJC8! �xc8 4.d6!+-

2.d5!
Taking the e6 square away from the black knight, while at the
same tilne preparing the final combination.

2 ...:Sf8 3.loe8! :Sxe8 4.d6!

And, as usual, it is over!

1-0

Study 6
Timman Jan
2017 □

1. <tlcS E!f8

Stopping 2.e7.

2.<tlf4!

The only way! Insufficient is 2.li:le3? t2id3l or 2.f4? t2id3 3.tcid7


'.B.h8+ 4.©g3 t2ixb2 5.fS c3 6.tciel gxfS 7.exfS lt:lc4 8.f6 ©b7 9.f7 0.d6
1 0 .lt:lc2 a4 11.©f4 lt:lxf7 12.exf7 ©c7 13.f8=W fi:xf8+ 14.t2:ixf8 ©b6=

2 .. J:!xf4 3.e7 E!h4+ 4.l!?gt!

Again the only path! 4.@g2? fails to 4...'.E:h8 5.tcie6 t2:id7! 6.es ©a7
7 .tcif8 f1xf8 8.e6 Elxf2+! 9.©xf2 lt:lf6-+

Вам также может понравиться