Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
catalan
EVERYMAN CHESS
Gloucester Publishers pic www.everymanchess.com
First published in 2004 by Gloucester Publishers plc (formerly Everyman Publishers
plc), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT
The right of Alexander Raetsky and Maxim Chetverik to be identified as the authors
of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and
Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic
tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher.
Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480,
246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480.
All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House,
10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT
tel: 020 7253 7887 fax: 020 7490 3708
email: info@everymanchess.com
website: www.everymanchess.com
Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and i� used in this
work under license from Random House Inc.
Bibliography 4
Introduction 5
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tiJf3 tiJf6 4 93
Books
Katalonskoe Nachalo, J.Neistadt (Moscow, 1986)
Beating the Flank Openings, v'Kotronias (Batsford, London 1996)
Winning with the Catalan, A.Dunnington (Batsford, London 1997)
The Queen's Gambit and Catalan for Black, L.Janjgava (Gambit, London 2000)
Die Katalanische Eroeffnung, A.Raetsky, M. Chetverik (Kania, Germany 2001)
Periodicals:
New In Chess Yearbook 1-67
Chess Informant 1-86
Shakhmatny bulletin, USSR/Russia.
Shakhma!J v SSSR
Database:
Chess Assistant: Huge base 2003
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Esben Lund and Jacob Aagaard for moral and technical support dur
ing our work with this book, as well as our families for their forgiveness for our not so secret
Catalan lover.
This book is dedicated to the Catalan bishop. Thank you for everything!
INTRODUCTION I
5
Th e Catalan
we are proud of our nicest wins but the main the centre. After 18...dxe4 19 ttJxe4 �xe5 20
reason for their inclusion is that we feel we �d3 �d5 21 'iVe3 �e6 22 �6! the end is
understand these games quite well. Not sur fast approaching.
prisingly, our losses also feature. 1 9 exd5! bxc3 20 d6 �d7 2 1 .tc5! l!!.xa 1
One of Alexander's most brilliant victo 21...l:tb8 22 l:tdbl g6 23 l:ta7 .i.g7 24
ries, against a strong Hungarian Grandmas l:txb7 l:txb7 25 �xb7 'iVxb7 26 l:txb7 0-0 27
ter, did not find its way into the first draft of f4 c2 28 .i.e3 l:td8 29 l:tb2 and Black has a
the book, but our friend Jacob Aagaard in hopeless task - 29 ...f6 30 e6! l:txd6 31 l:tb8+
sisted that we include it, so here it is. It and White wins.
should serve as a warning of the power of 22 ':xa 1 �d8 23 Wilxc3!?
the Catalan ... Simple and safe, but 23 Jtb6+ rJ;;c8 24
Jtc7! is another way to end the game.
Raetsky-Varga 23 . . . h5 24 l:ra7 �c8 25 'iVa5 �b8 26
Zurich 2000 .tb6! ?
This does win, but a more direct route is
1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 ttJf3 c6 4 g3 b5 5 26 l:txb7+! �xb7 (26 ...rJ;;xb7 27 �a7+ rJ;;c8
.tg2 .tb7 6 0-0 e6 7 a4 a6 8 b3 cxb3 9 28 �a8 mate) 27 �d8+ �c8 28 .i.a7+ rJ;;b7
�xb3 ttJf6 1 0 J:td 1 ttJbd7 1 1 ttJe5 �b6 29 �6+ rJ;;a8 30 d7! etc.
1 2 ttJc3 ttJxe5 1 3 dxe5 ttJd5 26 . . .txd6
. 27 exd6 �xd6 28 J:ta8 + !
13...ttJg4!? is also possible. White has com
pensation but it is not clear how much. The
following lengthy - and by no means forced
- fantasy line illustrates relevant themes: 14
ttJe4 ttJxe5 15 .i.f4 ttJc4 16 l:tac1 ttJa5 17
�c3 .l:!.d8 18 .i.e3 l:txdH 19 l:txdl c5! 20
.i.xc5 �c7 21 axb5 .i.xe4 22 .i.xe4 .i.xc5 23
l:tc1 rJ;;e7 24 �xc5+ �xc5 25 l:txc5 axb5 26
l:txb5 ttJc4 and Black maintains the balance.
1 4.txd5 ! ?
White parts with his good bishop t o fur
ther the collective cause - namely the exploi
tation of Black's tardy kingside development. Winning a piece.
1 4 . . . exd5 28 . . .txa8
. 29 Wila7 + �c8 30 Wilxa8+
14...cxd5 does not work because after 15 �d7 31 'iVxh8 c5 32 'iVd8 + �c6 33
Jte3 �c7 16 axb5 .i.e7 17 bxa6 .i.xa6 18 Wilxd6 + �xd6 34 �f 1 �d5 35 �e2 g5
�a4+ �d7 19 'iVxd7+ rJ;;xd7 20 ttJa4 White 36 h3 g4 37 h4 1 -0
wins the exchange. The Catalan is a dangerous weapon for
1 5 axb5 axb5 1 6 .te3 �d8? the positional player, and often we find our
After this Black is, surprisingly, completely selves enjoying a lasting advantage in the
outplayed. The problem is the advance e2-e4. rniddlegame and endgame due to the
After the accurate 16...Jtc5 17 .i.xc5 'iVxc5 strength of the Catalan bishop, or the weak
18 l:txa8+ Jtxa8 19 e4 d4! 20 ttJe2 d3! 21 ness of c6 or c5 and so on. We hope you will
'iVxd3 0-0 22 'iVd6 'iVc2 Black is doing fine. enjoy many such advantages, and that you
1 7 .ta7 ! Wilc7 1 8 e4! b4 find this book useful.
Black cannot avoid the deadly opening of
6
CHA PTER ONE I
Closed Catalan:
4 .,te7 5 .,tg2 0-0
. . .
7
Th e C a t a l a n
8
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iL g 2 0 - 0
With this confrontational pawn structure ttJeS 1 5 "iV f4 ttJh5 1 6 'it'e3 iLc5 1 7 b4! iLxb4
the current placement of the pieces and other 18 0-0 Black did not have enough compensa
tactical nuances are more important than tion for the exchange in C.Horvath-yu Sha
strategic considerations. Black develops his oteng, Budapest 2000) 13 'if'h4 (13 'it'f4 e5!
light-squared bishop either to b7 (Game 13) 14 'iih 4 ttJc6! 15 iLxa8 ttJd4! gives Black a
or - more often - on a6 (Games 14 & 15). In very strong attack) 13. .. ttJd5 14 'it'e4 iLc6! 15
the line starting with 7 'it'c2 c6 8 ttJbd2 b6 9 iLxc6 ttJxc6 with strong play for the pawn.
b3 iLa6 White has a choice between 13 'ili'fS, Even worse here is 12 ttJc3?! l:!.c8 13 ttJb3
13 iLb2 and 13 ttJf1. The move order 10 'ir'hS 14 'iif4 iLc6 15 0-0 h6 16 e4 ttJbd7 17
iLb2 l:!.c8 11 e4 cS 12 exdS exdS 13 'ir'fS is f3 as! 18 g4 'ili'eS 19 "iVg3 "iVxg3 20 hxg3 ttJe5
analysed in Game 15. and Black's prospects were preferable in
Korchnoi-Short, Lucerne 1989.
Game 1 7 . . . cxd4 8 lL'lxd4
H . Olafsson-E . Gelier
Reyifyavik 1986
18 h4 h6 19 ttJd2 'i!i'b6 20 ttJe4, when White Interesting is 8 ... e5!? 9 ttJfS d4 10 ttJxe7+
was a shade better in Dorfman-Bansch, 'iixe7 11 iLgs ttJc6 12 ttJd2 h6 13 i.xf6
Lvov 1984. 'it'xf6 14 c5 iLfS 15 'it'a4 as in Zilberstein
7 0-0 A.Geller, Belgorod 1989. Now it is possible
White needs to be careful even here. He for Black to continue I s .. :iVg6 16 ttJc4 i.e4
could easily get himself into trouble: 17 ttJd6 iLxg2 18 'litxg2 'iVe6 with reasonable
K.Grigorian-Vyzhmanavin, Pinsk 1986 con chances. It is not clear that the d6-knight is
tinued 7 cxdS?! cxd4 8 ttJxd4 ttJxdS 9 'iVb3 well placed.
ttJc6 10 ttJxc6 bxc6 11 e4 ttJb4 12 0-0 cS!, 9 lL'lxc6 bxc6 1 0 b3
when White was behind in development and White has also tried 10 l:td l 'iib 6 11 ttJc3
was therefore not suited by the open charac iLa6 12 iLe3 'i!Vb7 13 cxd5 cxd5 14 iLd4 but
ter of the position. After 13 ttJa3 ttJc6 14 without much success. After 14.J:tac8 15
iLe3 l:!.b8 15 "iVc3 ttJd4 16 'lithl iLa6 17 'i!Vb3 iLc5 16 'ili'xb 7 iLxb 7 17 e3 iLxd4 18
�fdl eS 18 b3 'it'c8 19 "iVaS .l:!.b4 Black had a .uxd4 .l:!.cs 19 ltad1 as 20 iLfl iLc6 21 h3
slight edge. l:tb8 a draw was agreed in Gulko-Khalifman,
There is also 7 dxcS 'it'aS+ 8 ttJc3 dxc4 9 Lucerne 1997.
ttJd2 'it'xcs 10 ttJa4 "iVaS 11 "iVxc4 iLd7, e.g. 1 0 . . a5
.
12 iLxb7 iLbS! (an important zwischenzug as This looks like a luxury that offers Black
after 12 ... iLxa4? 13 iLxa8 ttJbd7 14 iLg2 nothing in terms of development. Serious
9
Th e C a t a l a n
consideration should b e given t o the con unpleasant for Black in Kengis-Klovans, Riga
tinuation 10 ... �a6 1 1 �b2 .l::!.c 8 12 e3 iVb6 1 987.
1 3 ttJd2.l::!. fd8 14.l::!. fd1 ttJd7 1 5 l:tac1 �b7 1 6 1 6 .i.xf6 4Jxf6
ttJ f3 c5, when 1 7 ttJe5? ttJxe5 1 8 �xe5 d4! After 1 6 ...'ti'xf6 1 7 'iVd2! 'iVd8 1 8 e4!
19 exd4 �xg2 20 'itxg2 f6 21 �f4 cxd4 22 White is better according to H.Olafsson.
'iVe4 e5 23 �d2 �a3 24.l::!.b 1 as was excel 1 7 4Je5 .i.b 7 1 8 �d2 �a3 1 9 c5 .i.a6
lent for Black in Gulko-Karpov, Thessaloniki White has secured the queenside and is
1 988. Instead Karpov gives 1 7 cxd5 exd5 1 8 now free to start action on the kingside.
'ti'fS ttJf6 1 9 ttJg5 with chances for both 20 g4!
sides.
1 1 .i.b2
After 1 1 ttJc3 iLa6 12 .l:!.d1 'ti'c7 13 ttJa4
dxc4 14 bxc4 .l:[ab8 1 5 iLd2 e5 1 6 nab 1
.l::!.xb 1 1 7 .l:txb 1 ttJd7 Black - in control of the
c5-square - was doing fine in Gulko
Hjartarsson, Iinares 1 989.
1 1 . . . .i.a6
An interesting alternative here is 1 1 ...a4!?
12 ttJd2 a3 13 �d4 (1 3 �c3?? d4 and the
bishop is lost) 1 3. .. dxc4 1 4 e3 cxb3 1 5 ttJxb3
ttJd5 1 6.l::!. fd 1 'ifc 7 1 7 e4 ttJf6 1 8 'ti'c3 �a6
1 9 ttJc5 .l::!. fd8 20 .l:tab 1 when White had
compensation for the pawn in Kengis-Gild. 20 . . . J:rc7 21 g 5 4Jd7 22 4Jxd7 J:rxd7 23
Garcia, Manila 1 992 (whether there is more e4 d4 24 e5 .i.b5 25 .i.e4 d3 26 h4 a4
than enough is not completely clear) . 26 .. .'ilib4 looks safer, when after 27 'ii'xb4
1 2 4Jd2 4Jd7 1 3 J:rfd 1 .i.f6 1 4 J:rac 1 J:rc8 axb4 28 f3 f6 29 gxf6 gxf6 30 exf6 .l:txf6 3 1
1 5 4Jf3 'it f2 .l:!.f4 3 2.l::!.g 1+ 'it f7 33.l::!.g4 e 5 3 4 'it>e3 h 5
35 l':tg5 l':txh4 3 6 .l::!.c g1 White has nothing
special.
27 h5! axb3 28 axb3 'ilt'xb3 29 h6 g6?!
An improvement is 29 ....l::!. fd8 30 hxg7
'itxg7 3 1 'iY'f4 d2 32 'iY'f6+ 'itg8 33 .l::!.x d2!
'ti'a3! (not 33 ... l':txd2? 34 i.xh7+! �xh7 35
'ti'xf7+ 'It>h8 36 g6 etc.) 34 .l:tb 1 'it'a4 and
Black still has sufficient counterplay.
30 'ii'f4 f5
Black loses in the event of 30 ....l:[fd8 3 1
'tWf6 'it>f8 32 �xg6!, when White comes
crashing through: 32 ... 'ite8 33 'iVh8+ <t;e7 34
'ti'g7! .l:tf8 35 .l:ta1 ! and Black's parry is over.
1 5 . . :ii'e 7 31 gxf6
White is already a little better. After White also has the better game after 3 1
1 5 ... iLxb2 1 6 'ti'xb2 'iib 6 1 7 e4 ttJc5 1 8 iVd4! exf6 iVb2 32 .ub1 'iiVd4 33 l':txb5! cxb5 34
dxc4 1 9 ttJe5.l::!. fd8 20 ttJxc4.l::!.xd4 21 ttJxb6 .l::!.x d3. The following line is important:
l:.cd8 22.l::!.xd4.l::!.xd4 23 �fl i.xfl 24 'itxfl 34 ...'iVa1+ 35 <t;g2 .l::!.xd3 36 'ti'c7! ! l':tf7 37
ttJxe4 25 l':txc6 the endgame was slightly �c8+ l:tf8 38 'iVxe6+ 'itt h 8 39 'iVe7 l':tg8 40
10
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iL g 2 0 - 0
i.xd3 and White is completely winning. He I n the event o f 7 ltJbd2 Black should
is threatening 41 f7 and after 40 ... b4 there is transpose to the main lines with 7 ...ltJbd7.
even 41 'iYg7+ lIxg7 42 hxg7+ �g8 43 .Jtc4 Instead Grivas-Papaioannou, Portaria 1 996
mate. continued with the unnecessary 7 ... b5, and
31 . . . l:td4 32 f3 iLc4? after 8 cxb5 cxb5 9 ltJb3 as 10 .Jtf4 ltJa6 1 1
32 ... l:td7 puts up some resistance, al ltJe5 .Jtb7 1 2 l:tc1 'iVb6 1 3 .Jtg5 lIfd8 1 4 e3
though 33 'ifg5 'ifb2 34 �h1 ! still gives h6 1 5 .Jtxf6 .Jtxf6 1 6 f4 White had a slight
White a strong attack. lead.
33 l:tb 1 1 -0 7 'iVc2 can of course easily transpose to
After 33 ...'ilVc2 there comes 34 f7! etc. the main lines featured later in this chapter,
but White's immediate action in the centre is
Game 2 of independent significance, e.g. 7 ... b6 8
Pigusov-Goldin ltJbd2 i.b7 9 e4 ltJa6 1 0 a3 c5 1 1 e5 ltJd7 1 2
Irkutsk 1986 cxd5 i.xd5 1 3 'iVd3 �c8 1 4 ltJe4 cxd4 1 5
ltJeg5 f5 1 6 exf6 ltJxf6 1 7 ltJxd4 SLc4 1 8
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 iLe7 5 'ifd1 nd8 1 9 .Jtxa8 'ifxa8 2 0 'ifB 'it'xB 21
iLg2 0-0 6 0-0 c6 ltJgxB .Jtxfl 22 �xfl and White had the
Black has some inventive alternatives: more comfortable ending in Karpov-Tal,
6 ...ltJa6 7 ltJc3 c5 8 cxd5 exd5 is a Tar Brussels 1 987. An interesting alternative here
rasch with the knight on a6 instead of c6, a is 1 1 ...ltJe4 1 2 ltJxe4 dxe4 1 3 ltJd2 cxd4 1 4
feature that sees Black without any hold on ltJxe4 'ifc7 1 5 .Jtf4 ltJc5, when Damljanovic
d4. Rausis-Ponomariov, Enghien les Bains Popchev, Yugoslavia 1 997 saw the over the
1 999 went 9 dxc5 ltJxc5 1 0 i.e3 i.g4 1 1 h3 top 1 6 ltJf6+?! i.xf6?! (preferable is 1 6 ... gxf6
.Jte6 12 ltJd4 J:tc8 1 3 nc1 a6 14 l:tc2 b5 1 5 1 7 exf6 .Jtd6 1 8 "it'd1 �h8 with the better
a3 'ii'd 7 1 6 'it>h2 lIfd8 1 7 lId2 'iib 7 1 8 'ilVb1 game for Black; it is difficult to see how
ltJce4 1 9 ltJxe4 ltJxe4 20 lld3 .Jtd7 21 l:tfd 1 White's pieces should succeed in attacking
with a slight edge for White. the black king) 1 7 exf6 'ifd8 1 8 .Jtxb7 ltJxb7
6 ... ltJc6 7 'i¥c2 ltJb4 8 'i¥b3 dxc4 9 'ifxc4 1 9 fxg7 l:.e8 20 lIfe1 f6, and now 21 'iVe4
b5!? is ambitious but weakening. Then 1 0 ltJc5 22 'iVB would have maintained White's
� 3 a s 1 1 ltJc3 J:tb8 1 2 .Jtf4 a4 1 3 'ifd1 lead .
.Jtb7 1 4 nc1 ltJbd5 1 5 ltJxd5 ltJxd5 was an 7 . . . b6
edge for White in Kengis-Hertneck, Ger Black is slightly worse - in traditional
many 2000. Here 9 ... b6 looks solid but is not Catalan fashion - after 7 ... dxc4 8 ltJe5 ltJbd7
too exciting for Black: 10 ltJc3 i.a6 1 1 'tIYb3 9 ltJxc4, e.g. 9 ... ltJb6 1 0 ltJe5 .td7 1 1 e4 c5
c5 1 2 dxc5 .Jtxc5 1 3 ltJe5 l:.c8 1 4 .Jtg5 'ilVd4 12 i.e3 cxd4 1 3 i.xd4 i.e8 14 a4 ltJfd7 1 5
1 5 i.f4 ltJbd5 1 6 e3 'iVb4 17 l:tfd1 ltJxf4 1 8 ltJxd7 ltJxd7 1 6 e5! ltJc5 1 7 b4! ltJb3 1 8
gxf4 l:tc7 1 9 ltJc6 'iYc4 20 'ifc2 .Jtxe3?! 'it'xb3 'ifxd4 1 9 b 5 and White had the freer
(20 ... ltJg4!? with an unclear game is better, game in Raetsky-Lemanczyk, Dusseldorf
with the following tactical justification: 2 1 2001 .
b3?! ltJxe3 2 2 fxe3 'i¥xf4 and Black has good 8 ttJe5 iLb7
counterplay; 21 ltJd4 improves) 21 fxe3.l!Ixc6 Black can run into trouble with 8 ... ltJfd7?,
22 l:td4 'ilVc5 23 SLxc6 'ifxc6 24 'ifg2 'ifc7 25 when 9 cxd5 cxd5 1 0 ltJxd5! exd5 1 1 .i.xd5
lIad1 .Jtb7 26 ltJb5 'iVb8 27 'iVd2 and White ltJxe5 1 2 dxe5 .Jth3 1 3 i.xa8 .txfl 14 'i'xfl
was on his way to winning in Rausis-Kulaots, ltJd7 1 5 .Jtd5 ltJxe5 1 6 e4 left White a clear
Sweden 2000. pawn up in Chetverik-Laihonen, Nagyka
7 ttJc3 nizsa 1 993.
1 1
Th e C a t a l a n
8 ... .i.a6 9 cxd5 (9 'it'a4!? b5 1 0 cxb5 cxb5 advantage for White in Ivanchuk-Dautov,
1 1 ttJxb5 'iie 8 12 ttJc3 'it'xa4 1 3 ttJxa4 ..txe2 Tashkent 1 987.
14 �el .i.b5 1 5 ttJc5 l:te8 1 6 i.e3 ttJfd7 1 7 1 1 b3 b5 1 2 ttJe3
a4 ttJxe5 1 8 axb5 ttJc4 1 9 b 4 produced an Also possible is 12 ttJe5, after which the
edge for White in Tunik-Dautov, Moscow thematic 12 ... c5 results in superior prospects
1 989) 9 ... cxd5 1 0 .i.f4 ttJfd7 (after 1 0 ... .i.b7 for White following 1 3 d5 b4 14 ttJe2 'YWc7
1 1 nel ttJh5 12 .i.d2 ttJf6 1 3 ttJb5 ttJe8 1 4 1 5 .i.b2 lId8 1 6 lIe1 . Instead 12 ... b4 looks a
'it'c2 f6 1 5 ttJd3 ttJc6 1 6 ttJf4 'it'd7 1 7 e4! little suspicious (and greedy), as was demon
favoured White in Smejkal-Bc)nsch, Germany strated in Dizdar-limbach, Hamburg 1 993,
1 998) 1 1 ]::te l (1 1 ttJxd5?! exd5 1 2 .i.xd5 which went 13 ttJe2 .i.xe2 14 'YWxe2 'YWxd4 1 5
ttJxe5 1 3 dxe5? does not work this time due i.b2 'it'b6 1 6 l:!ael .l:td8 1 7 .tIc4!? with more
to 1 3 ... .i.xe2!, when Black wins material) than sufficient compensation. 'The subse
1 1 ...ttJxe5 1 2 .i.xe5 and White is a shade quent 17 ... a5 1 8 'it'c2 .l:ta6 19 ttJxf7!? 'itxf7 20
better. e5 ttJd5 21 'it'xh 7, l:trn 22 l:tg4 'it>e8 23 .tIxg7
'YWd8 24 .i.h3 c5 25 l:tdl left White in the
driving seat.
1 2 . . . b4 1 3 ttJe2 ttJbd7
I t is dangerous to take the pawn -
1 3. .. ..txe2 1 4 'it'xe2 'it'xd4 1 5 ..tb2 'it'b6 1 6
ttJc4 'it'b5 1 7 .i.xf6 gxf6 1 8 .:tad 1 a s 1 9 .tIfel
a4 20 e5 and White had a strong attack in
Smyslov-Guimard, Groningen 1 946.
14 �e 1 �c8 1 5 i.b2 'i'a5 1 6 ttJf4 g6
16 ... c5 17 e5 ttJe8 18 d5 and Black is in
trouble.
1 7 ttJd3 �fd8 1 8 ttJc4 'i'h5 1 9 'i'c2
Even the ending after 1 9 'iix h5 ttJxh5 20
9 e4! dxc4 a3!? offers White the better prospects.
Black loses a pawn after 9 ... ttJbd7? 1 0 1 9 . . . 'ilfb5 20 a3
ttJxc6! .i.xc6 1 1 exd5 exd5 1 2 cxd5 .i.b7,
when White has 13 d6! .i.xg2 14 dxe7 'it'xe7
1 5 'it>xg2 l:tfd8 1 6 'it'f3 l:tac8 1 7 .l:tdl 'it'b4 1 8
.l:tb 1 h 6 1 9 .i.f4 'iia5 20 d5, which was close
to winning in Poluliahov-Dragomaretsky,
Sochi 1 996. Black was also rather quickly in a
bad way in Korchnoi-Yusupov, Rotterdam
1 988, finding himself clearly worse after
9 ... ttJa6 1 0 .i.f4 dxc4 1 1 ttJxc4 b5 1 2 ttJe3
ttJd7 13 ttJg4 b4 14 ttJa4 ttJb6 1 5 ..te3 ttJc4
1 6 .l:tel ttJxe3 1 7 ttJxe3 .l:tc8 1 8 e5! etc.
1 0 ttJxc4 i.a6
The weakening of the queenside with
1 0 ... b5 seems risky. For example 1 1 ttJe3 b4 20 . . . ttJd5 ! ?
12 e5 bxc3 1 3 exf6 .i.xf6 1 4 bxc3 ttJd7 1 5 Black has t o try something. 2 0. . .bxa3 2 1
i.. a3 .l:te8 1 6 .l:tbl ttJb6 1 7 ];tel 'YWc7 1 8 ttJg4 .i.xa3 c5 2 2 d 5 gives White a clear lead.
i.e7 1 9 .i.xe 7 .uxe 7 20 ttJe5 led to a clear 21 axb4!
12
Clo s e d C a t a la n : 4... � e 7 5 Ji.g 2 0 - 0
13
Th e C a t a l a n
�e2 l:Iab8?!, when 1 7 axbS cxbS 1 8 eS ttJe8 again later the same year. Perhaps White did
19 dS! proved rather inconvenient for the not know of this game?
defender. After the improvement l S ... eS 1 6 1 7 ttJd4
dxeS ttJg4 1 7 i.d4 .ie6 1 8 �e2 .ics White After 17 ttJf4 'ifxb2 1 8 'ifxb2 ttJxb2 19 eS
has 1 9 ttJdS!? cxdS 20 exdS .ixd4 21 .l:!.xd4 Uh6, as in Maherramzade-Kacheishvili, Baku
.ifS 22 l:Iel , with sufficient compensation 1 997, White has compensation after 20 %:tab 1
for the piece to claim a lead. ttJd3 21 ttJxd3 cxd3 22 ttJe4, but better is
9 ... b6 10 'iVe2 and now 1O ... .i.a6 1 1 Udl 1 7 ... ttJ7eS! with a strong position for Black.
'ifc8 12 dS!? exdS 13 exdS .l:!.e8 14 dxc6 ttJcS 1 7 . . . .ltc5 1 8 ttJc2 'iWxb2 1 9 ttJd 1 'ii'b 3
1 5 ttJbS ttJd3 1 6 .u.xd3! cxd3 17 'iYxd3 fur The black queen will survive, leaving
nished White with compensation for the White's minor pieces looking very odd in
exchange in I.Zaitsev-Lukacs, Dubna 1 979, deed. Topalov clearly must have overlooked
while 10 ... aS 1 1 .l::!.d l i.a6 12 .i.f4 .l:!.e8 1 3 something.
ttJd2 ttJ f8 1 4 ttJxc4 ttJg6 1 5 .i.e3 should be 20 ttJde3 ttJ7e5 2 1 h3 .lte6 22 Wh2
better for White, which was the case in Ivan 22 i.. x eS ttJxeS 23 1:I.ab 1 'ifxa4 24 .l:!.xb7
chuk-Dreev, Tallinn 1 986 after l S ... ttJdS!? 1 6 'i¥a6 gives Black a clear advantage.
e S .l:!.c8 1 7 .l:!.ac1 ttJxe3 1 8 fxd b S 1 9 ttJa3 22 . . . %:th6 23 %:tab 1 ? !
'iYb6 20 i.f1 etc. 2 3 f4 ttJg4+ 2 4 ttJxg4 .i.xg4 2 5 'iYxg4
1 0 dxe5 ttJg4 1 1 .ltf4 'ii'a 5 1 2 e6 'iVxc2 26 h4 improves, although Black is
After 12 'iYd4 .l::[d 8 13 'ii'xc4 ttJdxeS 1 4 ahead after 26 ... .l:!.f8.
ttJxeS ttJxeS 1 5 'iYb3 b 6 1 6 ttJdS cxdS 1 7 23 . . . .ltg4!
i.xeS i.a6 1 8 .l::t fel d4 Black has the better
chances.
1 2 . . . fxe6
12 ... ttJdeS 13 ttJxeS ttJxeS 14 exf7+ J:!.xf7
15 ttJdS cxdS 1 6 i.xeS dxe4 17 i.c3 'it'a6 1 8
.ixe4 i. fS 1 9 i.xfS l:txfS 20 'i¥g4 .l:i. f7 even
tually led to equality in Ignatiev-Yagupov, St.
Petersburg 1 998.
1 3 'ii'e 2
Later Topalov tried to improve on his play
in the main game, still without proving an
advantage - Topalov-Kasparov, Sarajevo
2000 went 1 3 eS ttJdxeS 14 ttJxeS ttJxeS 1 5
'ifbs i.d6! 1 6 ttJe4 1:I.fS 1 7 'iYe8+ .l:!. f8 1 8 A key tactic.
'iWhs ::tfS and a draw was agreed. 24 ttJxg4
1 3 . . . ttJge5 1 4 ttJd4 ttJd3! 24 'iid2 .l:txh3+! 25 i.xh3 ttJf3+ wins for
The e6-pawn is of lesser importance than Black, while 24 f3 loses to 24 ... ttJxf3+! 25
the placement of the pieces. i.xf3 i.xh3 with a deadly attack after 26
1 5 ttJxe6 %:tf6 1 6 .ltc 7 ttJg2 'ifc3! etc.
1 6 ttJc7? loses to 1 6 ... ttJxf4 1 7 'iYxc4+ 24 . . . ttJxg4+ 25 'iWxg4 'iWxc2 26 'iWg5
�h8 1 8 ttJxa8 ttJeS 1 9 'iYb3 ttJxg2 20 'iitxg2 26 f4 runs into 26 ... ttJf2! 27 'iff3 l:Ixh3+
ttJf3 21 Ufdl �hS and Black has a winning 28 .i.xh3 ttJg4+ 29 �hl 'iWh2 mate.
attack. 26 . . . ttJxf2! 27 %:txf2
1 6 . . . 'ii'b4 27 'it'xcs again meets with 27 ... .l:!.xh3+!,
All of this was - oddly enough - played now with a twist after 28 'it>g1 Uh1+! 29
14
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . ii.. e 7 5 ii.. g 2 0 - 0
8 . . . b6
Black has two main alternatives:
8 ...'iVb6 appears inadequate. White was a
litde better in Korchnoi-S.Polgar, Munich
2000 after 9 .l:.d 1 'it'xb3 10 axb3 b6 1 1 e4
i.b 7 1 2 e5 ttJe8 1 3 .tg5 .txg5 1 4 ttJxg5 h6
1 5 ttJh3 ttJc 7 1 6 ttJf4 a5 1 7 h4 i.a6 1 8 l:tac1
.l:.ac8 1 9 cxd5 cxd5 20 J:td2.
But 8 ... ttJb6!? looks sound. Then 9 c5
ttJbd7 10 �c2 b6 1 1 b4 a5 12 b5 i.b7 1 3
cxb6 cxb5 1 4 ttJxb5 �xb6 1 5 .l:.bl .l:.fc8 1 6
�d3 i.a6 1 7 a4 i.b4 1 8 ..td2 ..txb5 1 9 axb5
:c4 gave Black the initiative in Martynov White has also tried 10 .l:.ac1 dxc4 1 1
Sherbakov, Taby 1 99 1 . This leaves 9 cxd5 'iVxc4 ttJdS 1 2 ttJeS, when the natural
cxd5, when an interesting idea is 10 l:tdl !? 1 2 ... ttJxeS results in an unclear game after 1 3
with the point that after 1 0 ... .td7 1 1 ttJe5 i.xeS .tgS 1 4 e 3 i.xe3!? 1 5 fxe3 ttJxe3 1 6
.l:.c8 12 i.f4 White is a lime better. Instead 'iie 2 ttJxfl 1 7 '.txfl f6 1 8 .if4 'tid7 (Ulibin
Chetverik-o.Kozlov, Pecs 1 996 went 1 0 & Tiviakov) . In Ulibin-Tiviakov, Kastellanata
ttJe5 ttJfd7! (the knight o n b 6 i s the better 1 998 Black opted for the dubious 12 ... bS?!
placed of the two) 1 1 e4 ttJxe5 12 dxe5 d4 1 3 but soon suffered: 1 3 'iVd3 ttJxe5 14 ..txe5
.I:tdl i.c5 1 4 ttJb5 .id7 1 5 a4 a6 and now 'it'b6 1 5 ttJe4 f6 1 6 .if4 .l:.ad8 17 .id2 .ic8
White should have played 1 6 ttJd6 ..txd6 1 7 1 8 ttJcS as 19 .l:.fd 1 'it>h8 20 'iVa3! b4 21 �a4
15
Th e C a t a l a n
'iWb5 2 2 'it'xb5 cxb5 2 3 lLlb3 a 4 2 4 lLla5 �d7 A very exciting piece sacrifice. White gets
25 lLlc6 �xc6 26 ':'xc6 and life was not easy two pawns and free access to the queenside
for the defender. in return for the bishop. Meanwhile the
1 0 . . . cxdS knight remains stuck on h5. The alternative is
1 O ... exd5 1 1 l:tad1 lteS 1 2 e4!? lLlxe4 1 3 1 3 �f4!? lLlxf4 1 4 gxf4 rs 1 5 lLlb5 l:tf6 1 6
lLlxe4 dxe4 1 4 lLle5 lLlxe5 1 5 dxe5 'WcS 1 6 :c7 l:[bS 1 7 :tfel a6 1 S lLla7! with an attack
Ji.xe4 Ji. f8 1 7 .l:.d2 c 5 1 S Ji.xb7 'Wxb 7 1 9 on the queenside (Romanishin).
l:tfd1 1:te7 2 0 h4 l:[cS 21 'it'd5 'iVxd5 22 l:.xd5 1 3 . . . ii'xc7 1 4 lLlxdS ii'd6
was a litde better for White in Rashkovsky White gets an extra possibility after
Goloshchapov, Ekaterinburg 1 999 in view of 1 4... 'it'dS, when 1 5 lLlxe7+ transposes and 1 5
the domination of the d-ftle. lLlc7!? offers a hell o f a ride: 1 5 ... lLlc5 1 6
10 ... lLlxd5 1 1 lLlxd5 exd5 12 nael c5 1 3 l:txc5! bxc5 1 7 'Wxb7 l:!.bS 1 S 'Wxa7 'it'cS! 1 9
l::t fd1 ncS 1 4 h4 cxd4 was played i n Chet lLld5 �d6 20 'it'e7! exd5 2 1 'it'xd6 and White
verik-Hajnal, Gyula 1 999. Now 1 5 lLlxd4 will probably have the better chances in the
lLlc5 1 6 'it'f3 gives White a slight plus due to endgame after 2 1 ...l:tdS 22 'i¥xc5 l:txb2 23
the superior pieces and the isolated d-pawn. 'it'xcs ktxcS 24 e3 as all the pawns are on one
If possible the queen will go to g4, and in the flank and Black has problems with the knight
event of 1 6 ... 'ii'd 7 White can consider 1 7 on h5.
�h2! with the idea o f 1 S �h3. 1 S lLlxe7 + ii'xe7 1 6 l:tc7 .ltdS 1 7 ii'bS
1 1 l:tac 1 l:tfd8
1 1 lLlb5!? is interesting, after which 17 .. .l:1adS 1 S ':xa7 'iVd6 19 .l:.el , with
1 1 ...a6?! is risky thanks to 1 2 lLld6!, when .l:i.cc7 to follow, also looks dangerous for
White gets the two bishops. Tiviakov gives Black.
1 1 ...lLleS 1 2 lIael a6 1 3 lLlc3 with an even 1 8 e4 .ltxe4
game, or 1 3 lLlc7 g5 1 4 lLlxaS gxf4 1 5 lLlxb6 Worth considering was 1 S ... a6 19 'We2
lLlxb6 1 6 gxf4 with unclear play. �xa2! (1 9 ... 'it'd6 20 :tfel Ji.xa2 21 e5! looks
1 1 . . . lLlhS dangerous) 20 .l:ta1 Ji.b3 21 'it'e3 'i¥b4 22
After 1 1 ...lLleS White achieves a slight 'it'c3 'it'xc3 23 ':xc3 e5 24 ':xb3 exd4 with
edge with 1 2l::tc2 lLld6 1 3l::t fel lLlc4 1 4 lLld2 approximately even chances in the endgame,
lLlxd2 1 5 �xd2, when an invasion down the although White might argue otherwise.
c-ftle is imminent. 1 9 ii'xhS ii'd6
1 2 .lteS f6 19 ... l1dcS is strongly met with 20 lLle5!
�xc7 2 1 Ji.xe4 fxe5 22 'ir'xh7+ 'iii' f8 23 �xaS
exd4 24 lId1 and Black's king is walking on
thin ice.
20 l:tfc 1 a6 21 lLlh4 .ltxg2 22 lLlxg2 eS?!
It was necessary to take the pawn with
22 ... 'it'xd4, and after 23 lLlf4 play 23 ...'iVe4,
when White has compensation. Perhaps 24
.l:i.1 c4!? is the best chance to fight for the
initiative.
23 lLlh4 g6?
23 ... exd4 24 lLlrs 'it'e5 puts up more resis
tance, although White has 25 lLlxg7! �xg7 26
.l:i.xd7+l::tx d7 27 'iVg4+ 'it>hS 2S 'iixd7 with a
1 3 .ltc7 ! ? near decisive lead.
16
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . i. e 7 5 i.g2 0 - 0
17
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 6 'iYxd4 'iWxd4 1 7 tLlfxd4 i.xb5 IS cxb5 20 ... tLld5 fails to 21 i.xd5! l:txd5 22 tLlc6!
tLla4 19 tLlf5 l:tfeS 20 i.d4 iLc5 21 l:tac1 l:txd2 23 tLlxdS iLd4 (only move) 24 'iVxd2
gave White a fantastic advantage in Roman tLlf3+ 25 Wg2 tLlxd2 26 iLxd4 IhdS 27 l:tc1
ishin-Ciric, Dortmund 1 976. As in so many with a wonderful ending.
positions in the Catalan, Black has a big 21 �ad 1
problem with the c6-square.
1 3 . . . dxc4 1 4 bxc4
2 1 . . . 'ilfg4
2 1 ...tLld5? 22 .txd5! l:txd5 23 tLlb3 and
1 4 . . Jbc5? ! White wins material. 21 ...l:tdS 22 tLlb3! is also
Preferable IS 1 4...tLlxc5 1 5 'ii'f l 'iVeS very uncomfortable.
(1 5 ...tLlfd7!?) 1 6 tLlb5 tLlce4 1 7 tLlfd4 i.c5 I S 22 h3!
iLb2, when I S ...l:tdS should limit White to a This leads by force to a highly favourable
slight advantage. Worse is I S ...'iVe5?! 1 9 'ii'e2 ending.
iLxb5 20 cxb5 l:tcdS 21 tLlc6 l:txd1+ 22 22 . . . �xd4 23 hxg4 �xc3 24 �xc3 �xd2
l:txdl 'iVf5 23 i.d4, when Black was strug 25 �xd2 ltJexg4 26 �c6 h5 27 f3 ltJe3
gling a little in Gleizerov-Perez, Malaga 2001 . 28 �xf6 gxf6 29 �d7
1 5 ltJb5 �xb5 1 6 cxb5 �d5 1 7 ltJd4 ltJe5 White has all the chances.
After 17 ... tLlc5 IS 'iVc4 tLlfe4 1 9 i.e3 i.f6 29 . . . 'it>g7 30 �xa7 �d8 31 �d7 !
20 iLO! White stands clearly better according The minor piece endgame i s winning, and
to Gleizerov. The main idea behind iLo is, the attack on f7 cannot be allowed.
of course, to protect the rook. Now tLlf5 and 3 1 . . . �xd7 32 �xd7 ltJc4 33 'it>f2 'it>f8 34
tLlc6 are threats, and Black will probably have �h3!
to give up his second bishop. The h5-pawn is the target of this bishop
1 8 'ific3 manoeuvre.
IS 'iVe2? would be a slip as after IS ... i.c5! ! 34 . . . 'it>e7 35 �f1 ltJa3 36 f4 'it>d6 37
Black assumes the initiative. �e2 'it>c5 38 �xh5 ltJxb5 39 �xf7 'it>d4
1 8 . . . �c5 1 9 �b2! 40 'it>f3 ltJd6 4 1 �b3 f5 42 g4
Forced. 19 i.e3? tLlfg4! 20 i.xd5 'ii'x d5 White does not hesitate in creating a deci
21 'irb3 'iVe4 22 'irbl 'iNaS gives Black a sive passed pawn. An important point to
sensational attack, and 1 9 i.xd5? 'iVxd5 20 notice here is that as is a light square, so
iLe3 iLxd4 21 iLxd4 tLlf3+ 22 Wfl tLlxh2+ White does not risk having a pawn + bishop
23 Wg 1 tLlf3+ 24 Wfl tLlxd4 25 'iVxd4 'ifh 1+ versus king scenario in which he cannot win.
26 �e2 l:teS+ looks deadly. 42 .. .fxg4+ 43 'it>xg4 b5 44 'it>g5 b4 45
1 9 . . . �d6 20 �d2 'ifid7 'it>g6 ltJe4
18
Clo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . ii.. e 7 5 ii..g2 0 - 0
Black also loses after 45 ... 'it>e4 46 fS! ttJxfS 1 5 .. .'�Jfd7! is good, when 1 6 ttJxf7!? 'it>xf7 1 7
47 1i.c2+ etc. exd5 i s unclear. The alternatives are worse,
46 ii.. c 2 ttJc5 47 f5 'it'e5 48 f6 ttJd7 49 f7 e.g. 1 5 .. d4?! 16 e5! dxc3 17 'i!fc2! with a very
'it'd6 50 'it'g7 'it'e7 51 ii..f 5 1 -0 dangerous position for Black. And 1 5 ... h6?!
16 ttJxf7! 'it>xf7 17 e5 'it>g8 (1 7 ... ttJe4 18 e6+!
Game 6 'it>xe6 1 9 ttJxe4 is not something Black will
Korchnoi-Nogueiras survive, an important line being 1 9 ... dxe4 20
Moscow 1994 lWe2! i.d5 21 i.xe4 'i£tf7 22 'Wh5+ 'it>g8 23
'----------------.. lIxd5! and Black can resign as mate is com
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 ii.. e 7 5 ing) 1 8 exf6 1i.xf6 1 9 1i.a3 was a clear lead
ii.. g 2 0-0 6 0-0 ttJbd7 7 ttJc3 c6 8 b3 b6 for White in Tisdall-Chernuschevich, Halls
9 ii.. b 2 dall 1 996.
1 0 a4! ?
A highly original approach, gaining space
on the queenside. The alternative is lO ttJd2,
when Black has two main moves.
Ehlvest-Nogueiras, New Delhi 2000 went
lO ... b5 1 1 c5 (1 1 cxb5 cxb5 12 a3 lIc8 1 3 b4
ttJb6 14 ttJb3 ttJc4 1 5 1i.c1 ttJd7 1 6 lIa2 i.b7
1 7 ttJxb5 a6 1 8 ttJc3 was enough for an edge
in Korchnoi-Lputian, Sarajevo 1 998) l 1 ...b4
1 2 ttJa4 1i.b5 1 3 lIe 1 �c7 14 'iVc2 e5 1 5 e4!?
dxe4 1 6 ttJxe4 exd4 1 7 i.xd4 lIfe8 1 8 lIac1
J:tad8 1 9 ttJb2 and White's extra territory
afforded him more room for manoeuvre and
9 . . . ii.. a 6 therefore the superior prospects.
Black's main alternative is, not surpris lO ... lIc8 1 1 e4 dxe4 (l 1 ...c5 12 exd5 cxd4
ingly, 9 ... 1i.b7, when White has tried a few 13 dxe6 fxe6 14 ttJce4 slightly favoured
moves: White in Tregubov-Fomichenko, Krasnodar
10 "ifc2 might be best, transposing to 7 1 999) 1 2 ttJcxe4 (1 2 ttJdxe4?! b5! 1 3 lIel
'it'c2 c6 8 b3 b6 9 ii.b2 ii.b7 l O ttJc3 (see bxc4 1 4 'iVe2 'i¥a5 was pleasant for Black in
Game 1 0) . Cifuentes-Gomez, Terrasa 1 995) 1 2 ...ttJxe4
1 0 l:!.c1 ttJe4!? 1 1 ttJxe4 dxe4 1 2 ttJe5 fS 1 3 ttJxe4 ttJf6 14 'YWc2 ttJxe4 1 5 1i.xe4 h6 1 6
1 3 'it'c2 ttJxe5 1 4 dxe5 c5 1 5 l:!.cdl "ifc7 was Ihdl 1i.f6 1 7 'it'e2 lIe8 1 8 'ii f3 1i.b7 1 9 h4
a draw in Szabo-Spassky, Palma de Mallorca l:!.c7 20 l:!.fel and White was slightly better in
1 969, probably because the position offers Kaidanov-Cifuentes, Andorra 1 99 1 .
little promise of progress for either player. 1 0 . . . dxc4
Stojanovic-Jovcic, Tivat 1 995 went l O Black is not forced to take the pawn but it
ttJe5 ttJxe5 1 1 dxe5 ttJd7 1 2 cxd5 cxd5 1 3 e4 seems to be the best option. After lO ... lIc8
d4!? (a logical temporary pawn sacrifice, de 1 1 ttJd2 l:!.e8 12 e4 ttJf8 13 l:!.el ii.b7 14 as
signed to close out the g2-bishop) 14 'iVxd4 bxa5 1 5 c5 'iVc7 1 6 e5 ttJ6d7 17 ttJe2 ii.a6 1 8
i.c5 1 5 "it'dl ttJxe5 1 6 'it'h5 ttJg6 1 7 l:!.fdl 1i.c3 fS 1 9 h4 ii.b5 20 1i.xa5 'i!fb 7 2 1 ttJf4
'iVe 7 1 8 ttJa4 ii.a3 19 ii.xa3 'iVxa3 with an ttJb8 22 'iic 2 White had the advantage in
other draw. Poluliahov-Akhmadeev, St. Petersburg 1 999.
lO 'it'd3 c5 1 1 cxd5 exd5 1 2 .l:!.adl l:!.e8 1 3 1 1 bxc4 ii.. x c4 1 2 ttJd2 ii.. a 6 1 3 ii..x c6
dxc5 bxc5 1 4 ttJg5 ttJb6 1 5 e4!? and now .l:!.c8 1 4 ii.. g 2 ttJb8!
19
Th e Ca t a la n
1 9 �c 1 lLlc6
Forced. After 19 ... �d6 20 .if3 l:txc1 21
.ixe2 l:txb 1 22 l:txb 1 ltJc6 23 l:ta4 White is
close to winning.
20 �xc6 l:txc6 21 l:txe7 l:tfc8 22 lLlb3 h5
23 l:ta7? !
White should play 2 3 �e3!? ltJd5 2 4 l:ta7
J:k2 25 l:tel "it'd3 26 ltJal ltJxe3 27 ltJxc2
ltJxc2 28 .l:i.c1 l:!.c3 29 .l:.b7 with decent
chances of success.
23 . . . h4
Black needs to create some insecurity
around his opponent's king, but this is not
The knight is transferred to a square with the only way. After 23 ... .l:!.c2 24 ..ia3 ltJg4 25
a future, at the same time vacating a square 'iVel (25 'it'dl 'iVxdl 26 lhdl lhf2 27 l:td2
for the queen - and, in turn, the king's rook. l:tf3! and Black is still fighting) 25 ... "it'xel 26
Black should not be worse here. l:txe 1 J::tx f2 27 J::tc 1 J::tc c2! 28 .l:!.xc2 llxc2
1 5 lLlb5 'tWd7 1 6 'tWb 1 ! ? �xb5? ! there are still some drawing chances.
After this White always has the advantage 24 �f4 lLld5 25 .!:te 1 'tWg4 26 'tWd 1 'tWxd 1
of bishop versus knight. 1 6 ... ltJc6!? looks like 27 l:txd 1 l:tc3 28 l:tb 1 l:td3
an improvement. After 1 7 ltJc4 ltJxd4 1 8 28 ... ltJxf4 29 gxf4 l:tf3 30 l:tb7 .l:!.c6 31
ltJe5 ltJxe2+ 1 9 'lith 1 'iVd2 20 ltJc6 .l:!.xc6!? 2 1 llc1 l:td6 also offered stubborn resistance.
�xc6 ltJg4 Black has strong compensation 29 l:ta2 l:tcc3 30 l:tab2 h3? !
for the exchange in the form of a direct at 30 ... ltJxf4 31 gxf4 l:!.f3 was necessary ac
tack on the enemy king. White is forced to cording to Nogueiras.
play 22 'iWe4 'iWxb2 23 'iWxg4, with chances 31 �f 1 lLlxf4 32 gxf4 l:tf3?
for both sides. A blunder. After 32 ... 'lith7 33 'litel 'it>g6
1 7 axb5 'ii'x b5 1 8 l:txa 7 White still needs to solve some technical
problems before he can write 1 -0 on the
score sheet.
33 lLlc 1 ! 1 -0
Game l
Chiburdanidze-Vaganian
Biel 1994
20
C lo s e d C a t a l a n : 4 . . . � e 7 5 �g2 0 - 0
�h3 lLlb8 1 6 lLlf6+ �xf6 1 7 l::tx d8 �xd8 1 8 course Black must accept the exchange of
� f5 h6 1 9 b4!? cxb4 20 �b2 lLlbc6 2 1 'ii'e 4 the dark-squared bishops. Ara Minasian
lLle7 22 �h7+ 'it>h8 23 'iWg4 f6 24 �d3 lLlac6 Lputian, Yerevan 2000 continued 10 �a3
25 'ii'e 4 f5 26 'iWe6 saw Black come under �xa3 I 1 lLlxa3 f4 1 2 lLlbi g5!? 1 3 lLlc3 g4 1 4
heavy attack) lO bxc3 cxd4 1 1 cxd4 lLlb6 1 2 lLlh4 lLlg5 ( 1 4. . .lLlxf2!? 1 5 l::tf l fxg3 1 6 hxg3
�f4 lLld5 1 3 l:!.ac1 �d7 1 4 lLle5 �b5 1 5 lLlh3+ 1 7 'it>h2 followed by e2-e4 looks
'iWb2 �a6 1 6 l:lfdl with a healthy develop promising for White) 1 5 e4 lLlf6 1 6 exd5
ment lead for White in Allen-Soloveychik, exd5 1 7 cxd5 cxd5 with chances for both
Canberra 1 999. There followed 1 6 ...l:tc8 1 7 sides. In this kind of position Black obviously
�xc8 'ii'x c8 1 8 ::tcl 'ii'd 8 1 9 �d2 �d6 20 hopes that he will achieve something on the
lLlc4 �c7 21 e4 lLlb6 22 lLle3, and White's kingside, and he has reasonable chances of
stronger centre and more attractively posted doing so. White, for his part, will be looking
pieces combined to form an advantage. to quickly invade the queenside.
7 ... b6 weakens the c6-square and gives 9 a4! ?
White the advantage after 8 cxd5!, when
Black has two unpleasant recaptures. In the
case of 8 ...lLlxd5 9 lLlc3 �b7 lO lLlxd5 exd5
1 1 .l:tdl lLlf6 1 2 lLle5 White has a slight but
stable advantage. The knight would like to go
to f4 and exert pressure on d5. Karpov
Spas sky, Riga 1 975 continued 1 2 ... c5 1 3 dxc5
�xc5 1 4 lLld3 �d6 1 5 �f4l::te 8 16 e3 lLle4
17 �xd6 'iVxd6 1 8 lLlf4 l:tac8 1 9 'ii'a4, when
White's advantage had increased.
8 ... exd5 9 'iWc6 Si.a6 lO lLlc3 l:tc8
(l O ... ne8?! 1 1 lLle5 J::tb 8 12 'iVa4 �b7 1 3
lLlxd7 lLlxd7 1 4 lLlxd5 and White was a pawn
up for nothing in Raetsky-Renner, Apolda White i s putting immediate pressure on
1 993) 1 1 'ii'a4 lLlb8 12 �h3 'iVe8 1 3 'iWc2! the queenside. Consequently Black should
(1 3 �xc8 'iWxa4 14 lLlxa4 �xe2 1 5 l:tel now be careful how he develops.
�xf3 1 6 Si.b7 is less clear) 1 3. .. l:td8 1 4 Si.f4 9 �a6
. . .
�d6 1 5 �e5 and Black will have consider Inferior is 9 ... �b7?! due to 10 as!, with the
able problems getting his pieces into the threat of a5-a6. In Zagorjansky-Bonch
game. Osmolovsky, Moscow 1 949 White emerged
8 .l:!.d 1 b6 with the better game after 1 0 ... bxa5 1 1 c5
Black has little chance of equalising with lLle4 1 2 lLlbd2 f5 1 3 lLlb3 �a6 1 4 lLlxa5
8 ... b5. Then White has no use for the c-ftle, �b5 1 5 b4 'ii'e 8 1 6 lLle5l::t c 8 1 7 f3 lLlef6 1 8
so best is 9 c5, when Rashkovsky-Farago, lLlb7.
Sochi 1 980 went 9 ... lLle4 1 0 a4 �a6 1 1 axb5 1 0 b3 .l:!.c8!
Si.xb5 1 2 lLla3 a6 1 3 lLle1 f5 1 4 lLld3 �f6 1 5 Black needs to build up his ... c6-c5 push
lLlf4 IIe8 1 6 f3 lLlg5 1 7 h4 lLlfl 1 8 e4 g6 1 9 with some care. After lO ... c5 1 1 lLlc3 dxc4 1 2
e 5 �g7 20 �d2 'ii'e7 2 1 lLlxb5 axb5 22 lLld3 bxc4 �xc4 1 3 dxc5 �xc5 1 4 lLle5 lLlxe5!? 1 5
with an advantage for White, who had more l:txd8 .l:taxd8 1 6 �b2 there i s compensation
space and access to the f4-square (which for the queen, but not much. It seems to us
might prove problematic for Black on e6) . that White still has slightly superior long
8 ... lLle4 9 b3 f5 i s a n interesting idea. Of term prospects because Black has no obvious
21
Th e C a t a l a n
22
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iL g 2 0 - 0
30 lXb5 tt'd 1 3 1 tt'a5 tt'f3 32 iLd2 lXa8 �e8 1 7 f3 hxg3 1 8 hxg3 'ii'g 6 1 9 l2Je2 �d7
33lXxg 5 + ! 20 l2Jf4 'it'g5 21 '.t>f2 \itJf7 22 l:th1 llh8 with a
White correctly goes for the draw before balanced game.
he gets mated. 9 �d2! fS to b4 g5 1 1 a4 g4 1 2 l2Je 1 l2Jb6
33 . . . iLxg5 34 'ii'x g5 + 'itt h 7 35 'ii'h 6+ 1 3 l2Ja3 dxc4 14 e3 e5 1 5 dxe5 l2Jxa4!? 1 6
'itt g 8 36 'ii'g 5 + Y. - Y. l2Jxc4 i s a shade preferable for White, while
Black was in trouble in Kurajica-Flear, Las
Game 8 Palmas 1 993 after 1 5 ... .te6?! 1 6 as l2Jd5 1 7
Kengis-M . G u revich l2Jxc4 l2Jxb4 1 8 .1Lxb4 .txb4 1 9 l2Jd3 .te 7 20
Jurmala 1985 l:tfd1 etc.
9 tLibd2
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tLif3 tLif6 4 g3 iLe7 5 Harmless is 9 cxd5 cxd5, e.g. to l:tc1 �b7
iLg2 0-0 6 0-0 tLibd7 7 ifc2 c6 8 iLf4 ! ? 1 1 l2Jc3 l:!.c8 1 2 "it'd 1 l2Je8 1 3 l:tc2 g5 1 4 �d2
l2Jd6 1 5 l:tac 1 f6 1 6 l2Je 1 fS 1 7 l2Jd3 l:te8 1 8
l2Jb 1 l:txc2 1 9 .l:txc2 'itb8, Andersson-Bareev,
Ubeda 1 997. After the second pair of rooks
is exchanged Black is by no means worse.
9 . . iLb7 1 0 e4
.
23
Th e C a t a l a n
Black i n Stohl-San Segundo, Moscow 1 994. 2 7 d 5 I:tc2 2 8 d 6 with unclear play was an
1 1 . . . c5 1 2 exd5 exd5 1 3 'i!t'b 1 interesting idea. But Black is happy with the
1 3 �fe l l!e8 1 4 �f5 g6 1 5 'ii'h 3 dxc4 1 6 half point.
ttJxc4 cxd4 also gives Black a good game, 22 'i!t'c2 �e4 23 'i!t'e2 Y:z - Y:z
particularly after 1 7 ttJce5?! ttJxe5 1 8 i.xe5
d3 19 'ir'h6 i.c5 20 h3 i.xf3 21 i.xf3 l:txe5! Game 9
22 l:!.xe5 'ir'd4 as in Kaidanov-Vaganian, Dautov-Tiviakov
Armenia 1 994, when Black had a strong Venlo 2000
attack on the dark squares as well as a
dangerous passed pawn. All in all this is way 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tZlf3 tZlf6 4 g3 �e7 5
too much for an exchange. �g2 0-0 6 0-0 tZlbd7 7 'i!t'c2 c6 8 �f4 b6
1 3 . . .l::t e8 9 l:td 1
Also fine is 1 3. .. dxc4 14 ttJxc4 i.e4 1 5
'iii'ai cxd4 1 6 ttJd6 i.xd6 1 7 1i.xd6 I:te8 1 8
.l:txd4 with roughly even chances (Kengis) .
1 4 b3 dxc4 1 5 tZlxc4 �e4 1 6 'i!t'b2 b5
16 ...ttJd5 17 i.d6 1i.f6, with unclear play,
is a sound alternative.
1 7 tZlce5 c4
9 . . . �b7
Here this is sounder than 9 ... i.a6, as now
White would have different options:
10 b3 l:!.c8 1 1 ttJc3 dxc4 12 ttJd2 b5!? 1 3
bxc4 bxc4 1 4 'iVa4 i.b5 1 5 ttJxb5 cxb5 1 6
'iVxb5 'itb6 1 7 'ir'xb6 ttJxb6 presented Black
with interesting counterplay in Delchev
An alternative is 1 7 ... 'iib 6!? 1 8 .l:tfe l 'itb7 Beliavsky, Moscow 200 1 .
1 9 ttJh4 i.xg2 20 ttJxg2 ttJxe5 21 1i.xe5 cxd4 1 0 ttJe5! uses the posting o f the bishop on
22 i.xd4 with a draw. f4 creatively. After 1O .. .'�c8 1 1 ttJc3 Black
1 8 tZlxf7 ! has tried a couple of moves. 1 1 ...�7 12 b3
White enters the spirit of wild tactics. Af l:.ac8 1 3 e4 h6 14 ttJxd7 'ir'xd7 1 5 e5 ttJe8 1 6
ter 1 8 bxc4 bxc4 1 9 ttJxf7 Black has the at 1i.f1 ttJc7 1 7 a4 1i.b7 1 8 'ilVe2 favoured White
tractive alternative 1 9 .. .'ii b 6! 20 1i'xb6 axb6 in Burmakin-Graf, Ohrid 2001 . It is not clear
21 ttJd6 i.xd6 22 1i.xd6 c3 etc. where Black will find genuine counterplay; a
1 8 . . . c3 1 9 'i!t'e2 'i!t'b6 lack of breathing space is a problem.
19 ... i.xf3?? 20 'ir'e6! and White wins due Wojtkiewicz-Zubarev, Moscow 2002 went
to the threat of ttJh6+ and smothered mate. 1 1 ....l1.xc4 12 ttJxc4 dxc4 1 3 ttJe4 h5 14 ttJd6
20 tZl7e5 �a3 21 �h3 �a8 i.xd6 1 5 i.xd6 l::.d 8 1 6 a4 with an advantage
21 ...c2!? 22 i.xd7 cxd l 'iV 23 I:txdl i.xf3 for White. The two bishops are clearly
24 'iVxf3 ttJxd7 25 ttJxd7 'ir'c6 26 'i¥xc6 l::.x c6 stronger than the knights.
24
C lo s e d Ca t a la n : 4 . . . ii.. e 7 5 ii.. g 2 0 - 0
25
Th e Ca t a l a n
dxc5 bxc5 1 5 cxd5 exd5 1 6 ttJf4 ttJf6 1 7 l:txe1+ 22 l:txe1 h6 23 h4 l:td8 24 h5 with an
.l:tac1 d 4 1 8 ii.xb 7 ttJxb7 1 9 ttJc4 ttJd5 20 advantage to White thanks to the d-pawn
ttJxd5 'it'xd5 21 e3 ii.f6 22 e4 'ii'e 6 23 f4 and and the better king. Black's lot was much
White had the better game in Poluliahov worse in Smejkal-Padevski, Smederevska
Telnov, Tomsk 200 1 . Palanka 1 9 7 1 , when 1 7 ... ii.xb2 soon got him
8 ... b5 9 c5! (opening the c-ftle makes little into trouble: 1 8 'ii'xb2 l:tcd8 1 9 d6 'iib 8 20
sense with the queen on c2) 9 ... ttJe4 (this ttJh4! g6?! 21 l:tfel f6 22 ii.xb7 'it'xb7 23 l:te7
seems to be too time consuming) 1 0 ii.b2 as 'ii'c 6 24 'ii'e 2 ttJe5 25 l:tc7! 'ii'a 8 26 f4 ttJf7 27
1 1 ttJe5 ttJxe5 12 ii.xe4 fS (1 2 ... dxe4 1 3 dxe5 'ii'e 7 1 -0.
e3!? 14 fxe3 is perhaps a slight advantage for Vokac-Hrtanek, Karvina 2001 saw White
White; the knight has a freer game than the play the immediate 1 1 e4 dxe4 12 ttJxe4.
bishop on c8) 1 3 ii.g2 ttJg4 1 4 ttJd2 f4 1 5 h3 Then 12 ... c5 1 3 ttJxf6+ ii.xf6 14 ttJg5 ii.xg5
ttJh6 1 6 ttJf3 fxg3 1 7 fxg3 ttJfS 1 8 ttJe5! and 1 5 ii.xb7 l:tc7 1 6 ii.e4! g6 1 7 d5 exd5 1 8
White is better. V.Mikhaievsky-Rechlis, Israel cxd5 ii.f6 1 9 d6! is a good illustration of the
1 999 saw White continue with the weaker 1 5 kind of problems Black can quickly run into,
.l:tae 1 ?!, when 1 5 ... fxg3 1 6 hxg3 'ii'e 8 1 7 ii.f3 Black avoiding trouble with 1 2 ... ttJxe4 1 3
'ifh5 18 ii.xg4 'ii'xg4 19 ttJf3 'iVh3 20 ttJe5 1Vxe4 ttJf6 1 4 'ii'c2 c 5 1 5 dxc5 ii.e4
.l:tfS 21 g4 l:txe5 22 dxe5 'ii'xg4+ led to a (1 5 ... ii.xc5?? 1 6 ttJg5! and Black can resign)
draw. Instead of 9 ... ttJe4 the encounter 1 6 'iIfc3 ii.xc5 1 7 I:tfe 1 ii.a8 1 8 ttJe5 ii.xg2
A.Petrosian-Bischoff, Gennany 1 999 went 1 9 c;to>xg2 'ii'e 7 20 'ilff3 when White had a
9 ... a5 10 ttJbd2 b4 1 1 e4 ii.a6 12 l:f.el ttJe8 1 3 slight plus. Again it is the c6-square that is
e 5 ttJc7 1 4 h4 and White had the superior Black's main problem here.
prospects. There followed 1 4 ...ttJb5 1 5 ii.b2 1 0 J:!.d 1 J:!.c8
lte8 1 6 ttJf1 'iib 8 1 7 ttJe3 'ilka7 1 8 ttJg5 ttJfB
1 9 f4 ii.c8 20 ii.f1 h6 21 ttJf3 ii.d7 22 fS
with a menacing attack.
9 .i.b2
9 ttJc3 is premature in view of 9 ... ii.a6,
when the c-pawn is genuinely hanging. After
1 0 ttJd2 b5 1 1 l:f.dl l:tb8 1 2 e3 bxc4 1 3 bxc4
'ii'a 5 14 ttJb3 'ikc7 1 5 c5 e5 1 6 e4 dxe4 1 7
ttJxe4 ttJd5 1 8 dxe5 ttJxe5 1 9 ii.b2 .l:tfe8 20
ii.d4 ii.fB Black had solved his opening
problems in Bernard-Sosonko, France 1 999.
9 .i.a6
. . .
26
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . � e 7 5 � g 2 0 - 0
.
1 0 . . .J:re8
Black completely annihilates the enemy's Also possible is 1O ... c5!?, e.g. 1 1 cxd5 exd5
27
Th e C a t a la n
1 2 dxc5 �xc5 1 3 �b2 l:tc8 1 4 e 3 l:te8 1 5 tiJxd7 2 5 .lt f3 providing White with a mod
'ii'f5 'it'e 7 1 6 l:!.ac1 tiJ f8 1 7 tiJd4 g6 1 8 it'g5 est lead. In this position Black has problems
�xd4 1 9 exd4 �g7 20 �f1 h6 21 'ii'd2 getting the knight to d4, which is the only
tiJ8h7 and Black was no worse in Salov good square available. Nevertheless Black
Bauer, Enghiens-Ies-Bains 1 999. should be able to hold with accurate play.
1 1 e4 dxe4 1 2 . . . h6
Following up ".�b7 with 1 1 ...�a6 looks 1 2".c5 1 3 dxc5 �xc5 1 4 tiJgxe4 tiJxe4 1 5
illogical, and after 1 2 �f4 dxc4 1 3 tiJd2 c5 1 4 tiJxe4 favours White.
d 5 White i s able to generate an initiative. 1 3 lZJgxe4 lZJxe4 1 4 lZJxe4 lZJf6
Korchnoi-M.Gurevich, Antwerp 1 995 con
tinued 1 4".e5 1 5 �g5, when Korchnoi gives
1 5".tiJxd5 1 6 tiJxd5 �xg5 1 7 tiJf3! �b5 1 8
�h3 .ltc6 1 9 �xd7 .ltxd7 20 tiJxe5 �e6 21
tiJxc4 as a shade preferable for White. In
Odendahl-Tiviakov, Dieren 2001 Black
elected to capture on d5, but 1 4".exd5 1 5 e5
caused problems: 1 5".d4 (1 5".tiJg4 1 6 tiJxd5
tiJgxe5 1 7 tiJxc4 �xc4 1 8 bxc4 gives White
good control over the light squares and am
ple compensation) 1 6 exf6 �xf6 1 7 tiJce4 c3
1 8 tiJc4 �e7 19 tiJxc3! g5 (19".dxc3? 20
�h3 �b5 21 tiJe5 and White wins) 20 'ii' f5 !
gxf4 2 1 tiJd5 l:te8 22 �e4 and Black was 1 S cS!
under pressure. A thematic solution. The d5-square is not
l 1 ...c5 12 exd5 exd5 1 3 �b2 dxc4 14 d5! so important. Instead White has control over
gives White the advantage. The point is that d6 and Black's queenside is under a bind.
1 4".cxb3 1 5 axb3 �d6 opens the way for 1 6 Less troubling for Black is 1 5 �e3 l:!.c7 1 6
l:txa7. Sulava-Ferretti, Verona 1 998 went IId2 lld7 1 7 tiJxf6+ �xf6 1 8 :adl it'e7 1 9
1 4".il.. d 6 1 5 bxc4 tiJe5 1 6 tiJe4 l:te8 1 7 tiJxd6 c 5 l:tfd8 20 a4 e 5 2 1 dxe5 l:txd2 22 l:txd2
tiJxf3+ 1 8 �xf3 'ii'xd6 19 it'd3 Itcd8 20 a4 'iVxe5 23 h4 l:[xd2 24 it'xd2 bxc5 25 'ifa5,
'iVf8 21 a5 11d6 22 axb6 axb6 23 .l:tel .l:txeH Sulava-Inkiov, Nice 200 1 , with the smallest
24 l:he l , although White had all the chances. of edges for White - if anything.
1 2 lZJgS 1 S " .lZJdS
White wants to establish a knight on e4. 1 5".tiJxe4 16 .ltxe4 bxc5 17 dxc5 'ifc7 1 8
Another possibility is 12 tiJxe4, when �b2 .l:!.cd8 1 9 a3 gives White a slight but
1 2".tiJxe4 1 3 'ii'x e4 'ii'c 7 14 �f4 �d6 1 5 enduring advantage in view of the c6-pawn
�xd6 it'xd6 1 6 c5! �c7 1 7 l:tac1 :fd8 1 8 and, in tum, the bishop on b 7.
'iVel �a6 1 9 a4 �b8 20 b4 bxc5 2 1 dxc5 1 6 a3 as 1 7 i.f1 1kc7 1 8 i.d2 J:!.fd8 1 9
tiJf6 22 'iVe5 llxdH 23 .l:!.xdl it'c8 24 tiJd4 b4 axb4 20 i.xb4 J:!.a8?!
was very nice for White Jo.Horvath 20".tiJxb4!? is necessary, when 21 axb4
Krizsany, Paks 1 996. A year later Black im l:ta8 lirnits White's lead.
proved in Cvitan-Borgo, Porto San Giorgio 21 cxb6!
1 997, 1 2".c5 1 3 tiJxf6+ �xf6 1 4 tiJg5 �xg5 Now White occupies the c5-square and
1 5 �xb7 llc7 1 6 dxc5 �xc1 1 7 J::taxc 1 bxc5 starts pushing his a-pawn - a perfect reward
1 8 il..g2 it'e 7 19 l:[d2 tiJf6 20 l:tcd 1 g6 21 for his game-plan.
'ii'c 3 h5 22 h3 l:!.fc8 23 f4 .l:.d7 24 llxd7 2 1 " .'ii'x b6 22 i.xe7 lZJxe7 23 lZJcs i.c8
28
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iL g 2 0 - 0
29
Th e Ca t a l a n
..Il.xf6 2 2 ..Il.d2 'iNd6 2 3 a 3 'it'd7 2 4 ..Il.d3 and 1 2 ..tb2 c S 1 3 �fe 1 'iYb8 1 4 dxcS lLlxcs
Black's future was getting darker thanks to 14 ... ..Il.xc5 1 5 ttJg5 g6 1 6 .l:tac1 favours
the lack of play and White's presence in the White. Black has no active plan and ... dxc4
centre and prospects of a kingside offensive. exposes both d6 and f6 to the white knights.
9 ... dxe4 10 lLlxe4 ..Il.b7 is solid but passive. 1 S lLld4 as! ?
Black needs to pay special attention to the Perhaps 1 5 . . .dxc4!? makes life easier for
possibility of the clamping c4-c5, as in the Black, e.g. 1 6 ttJc6 �e8 1 7 ttJxe7+ 'Yixe7 1 8
previous main game. Raetsky-Whiteley, Cap ..Il.xb7 lLlxb 7 1 9 lLlxc4 and Black stands no
pelle la Grande 1 997 went 1 1 �d 1 ttJxe4 1 2 worse.
'ii'x e4 ttJf6 1 3 'ii'c2 �c8 1 4 ..Il.f4 ..Il.d6 1 5 1 6 a3 �c8 1 7 b4 axb4 1 8 axb4 lLld7 1 9
.i.xd6 'ii'x d6 1 6 c 5 it'c7 1 7 lIac1 �fd8 1 8 bS �xa 1 20 ..txa 1 lLlcs
ttJe5 ttJd7 1 9 cxb6 'it'xb6 20 ttJc4 it'c7 21 Also possible is 20 ... ..Il.c5 21 'iib 3 dxc4 22
�a4 and White was on top. In Krasenkow lLlxc4 .i.xg2 23 �xg2 lLld5 24 lLlc6 when the
Azmaiparashvili, Groningen 1 997 White knights are of equal worth. Black will proba
must have been in the driving seat after bly play ...lLld7-b8 very soon in order to ad
1 1 ...'it'c8 1 2 lLlxf6+ lLlxf6 1 3 c5, but the sub dress White's outpost.
sequent 1 3. .. lLld5 14 ..Il.g5 f6 1 5 ..Il.d2 bxc5 1 6 21 'i!Vb 1 dxc4 22 ..txb7 'i!Vxb7 23 lLlxc4
dxc5 e 5 1 7 b4 a s 1 8 bxa5 .i.d8 1 9 lLlh4 f5 20 lLldS 24 lLlc6
ttJf3 ..Il.f6 21 �abl e4 22 ttJg5 .i.a6 23 �b6!?
was unclear...
10 eS lLle8 1 1 b3
1 1 cxd5 is an alternative. Then 1 1 ...cxd5 is
a somewhat passive option - where is the
knight going from e8? Sargissian-Rivas,
Ubeda 2001 continued 12 �el l:tc8 1 3 it'a4
as 1 4 lLln .i.a6 1 5 h4 .i.d3 16 .i.g5 h6 1 7
..Il.xe7 'iVxe7 1 8 �ac1 ttJc7 1 9 �e3 ..Il.b5 20
'it'dl lLla6 21 �ec3 �xc3 22 �xc3 ttJdb8 23
g4 g6 24 'iid2 �g7 25 'ii'f4 and White had
more territory, chances to break through on
the kingside and control of the only open
fIle. Black does better to follow the example 24 . . . �a8 2S 'i!Vc2 ..tf8 26 ..td4
set in Buhmann-Vaganian, Germany 2000, White would be worse after 26 ttJd6?!
when l 1 ...exd5!? 12 �e1 ttJc7 1 3 ttJn lLle6 ..Il.xd6 27 exd6 'it'd7 28 ..Il.e5 f6 29 ..Il.d4
14 lLle3 g6 1 5 h4 c5 generated suffIcient 'i¥xd6 because the bishop is not very effec
counterplay, 1 6 ttJg4 cxd4 1 7 ..Il.h6 �e8 1 8 tive and the knight on c6 is basically out of
'it'd2 lLldc5 1 9 ttJxd4 it'd7 20 ttJxe6 lLlxe6 play.
resulting in a double-edged game. 26 . . . lLld7 27 �a1 �xa 1 + 28 ..txa 1 ..tcS
1 1 . . . lLlc7 %-%
After 1 1 ...�c8 12 ..Il.b2 c5 13 �ac1 cxd4
14 ttJxd4 Black was struggling in Hertneck Game 13
Stangl, Austria 1 997. There followed Raetsky-Landenbergue
1 4 ...'it'c7 1 5 :fe 1 'itb8 1 6 l\ib 1 lLlc7 1 7 a3 Scuol 200 1
'Yia8 1 8 b4 dxc4 1 9 ..Il.xb7 'iixb 7 20 lLlxc4
ttJd5 21 'iid 3 �fd8 22 ttJb5 and White 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 lLlf6 4 g3 ..te7 S
dominated proceedings. ..tg2 0-0 6 0-0 lLlbd7 7 'ii'c 2 c6 8 lLlbd2
30
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iLg2 0 - 0
31
Th e C a t a l a n
Game 14
28 ... l'.:tfe7 ? ? loses t o 2 9 1t.e4 'it>g8 3 0 l:txf6! Marin-Berescu
in view of 30 ....:.xe4 31 l:tfB+ 'it>xfB 32 'ii'xg7 Iasi 1999
mate, which leaves 28 .. .lhe6 (28 ... :ee7!?) 29
dxe6 lIe7 30 1t.xf6! 'iVd6! (30 ...gxf6? 3 1 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 lLlf6 4 g3 �e7 S
'ikxf6+ l:tg7 3 2 e 7 and White wins) 3 1 1t.xb7 �g2 0-0 6 0-0 lLlbd7 7 't!Vc2 c6 8 lLlbd2
(31 1t.xe7?? 'ii'd H 32 1t.fl 'itf3 and suddenly b6 9 b3 �a6 1 0 l:td 1
it is Black who wins) 3 1 ...ltxb7 32 e7 'it'dH 1 0 e4 .l:!.c8 1 1 l:te1 is a different approach,
33 'it>g2 'iVd5+ 34 f3 'iVd2+ 35 'it>h3 l:he7 36 against which Black should have sufficient
1t.xe7 11i'd7+ with a drawn ending. resources. 1 1 ...c5 1 2 exd5 exd5 1 3 1t.a3 l:te8
23 lLlfS lLlf6? 1 4 cxd5 tLlxd5 1 5 'iff5 tLl7 f6 1 6 dxc5 1t.xc5
This allows a combination that is not too 17 1t.xc5 l:txc5 simply equalised in Tosic
difficult to find. Consequently Black should Kosic, Trebinje 2001 , but 1 6 ... g6!? 1 7 'ii'h 3
play 23 .. .l::txb 2 24 'iVxb2 'it'e5 25 'ii'x e5 tLlxe5 1t.xc5 1 8 1t.xc5 l:txc5 19 .l::tx e8+ 'ii'x e8 20
26 l:el or 23 ... tLle5!? 24 f4 l:Ixg2+! 25 'it>xg2 ]:tel 'ii'd 8 21 'ii'h4 tLlc3!? is unclear according
tLlg6 26 'ii'e 4!? (26 1t.xg7? l:!.xd5 27 llxd5 to Kosic. Black seems fme in this position.
'ii'd 8! and Black wins) 26 ... 'ii'a 8 27 tLle3, in Also possible is 14 ... cxd4!? 1 5 1t.xe7 lIxc2 1 6
both cases with a slightl edge for White. 1t.xd8 I:txd8 1 7 :ec1 l:tdc8 when Black,
24 lLlxh6 + ! gxh6 2S �xf6 l:tde8 26 'iiVf S again, looks no worse. Perhaps White could
l:re 1 + consider 1 8 tLlc4!? .l:txcH 1 9 .l:!.xc 1 b5 20
tLlxd4 bxc4 21 tLlc6 'it>fB 22 bxc4 with a
complex struggle ahead.
1 0 . . . l:tc8
10 ... b5 led to a slight advantage for White
in Filippov�liang Chong, Shenjang 1 999
after 1 1 c5 b4 12 e4!? tLlxe4 1 3 tLlxe4 dxe4
1 4 'iVxe4 tLlxc5 1 5 'ii'c 2 tLld7 1 6 tLle5 tLlxe5
1 7 dxe5 'ii'c 7 1 8 'ii'x c6 'ii'x c6 1 9 1t.xc6 .l:!.ac8
20 1t.e4 1t.b5 21 1t.e3.
1O ... c5 1 1 e4 dxc4 12 tLlxc4 cxd4 13 tLlxd4
.l:!.c8 1 4 e5 tLld5 1 5 'ii'b 2! secures White a
small plus. Black, as always, has problems
with the light squares. Poluljahov-Feigin,
27 �f 1 ! ! Kakhovka 1 997 went 1 5 ... 1t.xc4 1 6 bxc4
32
C lo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iL g 2 0 - 0
l:!.xc4 1 7 .1i.xd5! exd5 1 8 lbf5 .1i.b4 1 9 l:txd5 l:txd8 �cxd8 24 .1i.g5 lIb8 25 'ii'd l :£1+ 26
.1i.c3 20 'ii'e2 'ii'c 7 21 .1i.b2 .1i.xb2 22 'iVxb2 'iit h3 .1i.xa 1 27 'iVxa 1 .1i.f1+ 28 'iitg4 .1i.e2+ 29
lbc5 23 lbd6 'ii'c 6 24 J::tadl and White was 'iit h4 l:txh2+ 30 .1i.h3 l:tb5! with a balanced
firmly in control. game.
1 1 e4 c5 In Delchev-L.B.Hansen, Istanbul, 2000
1 1 ...'ii'c 7 1 2 e5 lbe8 1 3 lbfl 'itb8 1 4 .1i.g5 Black chose the alternative capture: ( 1 3 lbfl)
.1i.xg5 1 5 lbxg5 g6 1 6 f4! is clearly better for 1 3. .. dxc4 1 4 d5 lbe8 15 bxc4 lbd6 16 lbe3
White according to Beliavsky. l:!.e8 1 7 .1i.fl b5 1 8 ltbl bxc4 1 9 'ii'a4 .1i.b7
1 2 exd5 exd5 20 .1i.d2 l:ta8 21 .1i.a5 lbb6 22 'ii'c 2 .1i.c8 23
lbe5 and White was doing well. Stohl prefers
1 4 ... cxb3 1 5 axb3 .1i.xfl 1 6 .1i.xfl 'ii'c 7, al
though he still likes White after 1 7 .1i.f4 .1i.d6
1 8 .1i.xd6 'ii'x d6 1 9 �xa7 .I:ta8 (1 9 ... lbxd5? 20
.1i.c4 lb7f6 21 lbg5 g6 22 .1i.xd5 lbxd5 23
lbe4 'itb8 24 .l:!.d7 lbb4 25 'iVc3 and White
wins) 20 l:txa8 .I:txa8 21 lbh4 g6 22 lbg2.
1 3 cxd4
. . .
33
Th e C a t a l a n
I
.Jtxd5, the subsequent 1 6 ... ttJf8 1 7 dxc5 bxc4 .Jtxf6 .Jtxf6 with an assessment of 'unclear' -
1 8 bxc4 .Jtxc5 1 9 cxd5 .Jtxf2+ 20 'it>h 1 .l:!.c2 as usual, further tests are required.
21 .Jtxf6 'ii'xf6 22 ttJde4 being good for 1 7 . . . dxc4 1 8 lZJc6 l:txc6 1 9 �xc6 'iYb6
White) 1 6 cxd5 .te2 1 7 l:te1 ttJxd5 1 8 l:tac1 20 �xd7 if'xb2 21 l:tab 1 'ifa3
with a complicated struggle ahead. 21 ...'iVd4 is even stronger according to
1 4 lZJxd4 b5 1 5 �f5 bxc4 1 6 bxc4 Marin. After 22 ttJf3 'iVxf2+ 23 'it>xf2 ttJe4+
24 'it>g2 ttJxg5 25 ttJxg5 .txg5 26 l:td6 .tc8
Black has all the chances, while 22 'iVa5 .Jtc5
23 'ii'xa6 'iVxf2+ 24 'it>h 1 ttJe4! leaves White's
king in serious trouble.
22 �b5 lZJe4?
A tactical error. Black would have been
fine after 22 ... c3! 23 ttJc4 'iic 5 24 'iWxc5
.txc5 25 l:tdc1 .Jtxb5 26 l:txb5 ttJe4 27 ttJe3
l:td8, retaining the passed pawn and with
excellent compensation for the exchange.
23 lZJxc4 'iYf3 24 'iYe3 ii'xe3 25 lZJxe3
�xb5 26 lZJd5! �c5 27 l:txb5 �xf2+
27 ...ttJxf2 28 l:tc1 .Jtd4 29 l:tc4 and wins.
1 6 . . . g6! 28 Wg2 f5?
An important move. Black has been After the more precise 28 ... h5 White still
through a lot of suffering in this position. remains well on top after 29 ::tb7 .Jtc5 30
1 6 ... 'iVb6?! 1 7 .l:!.ab 1 dxc4 1 8 ttJe4! g6 1 9 ttJe7+ Wg7 31 ttJc6.
ttJxf6+ ttJxf6 2 0 'i!t'f3 lUe 8 2 1 ttJc6 'iYxc6 22 29 l:tb7 l:tf7 30 lZJe7 + Wg7 31 .l:!.dd7 l:tf8
'iYxc6 l:txc6 23 .txc6 l:tc8 24 .Jtxf6 .Jtxf6 25 32 1ZJg8 + ! 1 -0
.Jte4 offers White good winning chances.
16 ... .Jtxc4?! 17 ttJxc4 .l:!.xc4 18 .txd5 g6 1 9
'iVg5 ttJxd5 20 'ii'x d5 ttJb6 21 ttJf5! gx f5 22
'it'e5 .Jtf6 23 'ii'xf6 'iVxf6 24 .Jtxf6 was seen
in Nielsen-Danielsen, Randers 1 996, White
eventually converting this favourable ending.
1 6 ... ttJb6?! 1 7 cxd5 ttJa4 (1 7 ... ttJbxd5 is
met with 1 8 ttJe6! fxe6 19 'iVxe6+ 'it>h8 20
'iNxa6 and White is a pawn up for nothing)
1 8 l:Iab1 ttJxb2 1 9 l:txb2 .tc5 20 ttJc6 't'kd6
21 ttJe4 ttJxe4 22 .Jtxe4 g6 23 'ii f3 f5 24
.td3 .txd3 25 l:txd3 f4 26 g4 ::tce8 27 .l:!.e2
and White was on his way to the full point in
Sorokin-Hoffman, Villa Martelli 1 997.
1 7 if'g5?! Game 15
TIlls proves to be too risky as Black easily Raetsky-Gattenloehner
obtains compensation for the exchange. Su Winterthur 2002
lava proposes the following line as a possible
improvement: 1 7 'ii'h 3 dxc4 1 8 .Jtc3 ttJc5 1 9 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lZJf3 lZJf6 4 g3 �e7 5
ttJc6 l:txc6! 2 0 1i.xc6 ttJd3 21 ttJe4 'itb6! 22 �g2 0-0 6 0-0 lZJbd7 7 if'c2 c6 8 lZJbd2
'iYg2! ttJg4! 23 .l:!.ab 1 'ii'x c6 24 ttJf6+ 'it'xf6 25 b6 9 b3 �a6 1 0 �b2 l:tc8 1 1 e4 c5
34
Clo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . ii.. e 7 5 ii..g2 0 - 0
In Kasparov-Huss, Zurich (simul) 1 987, faulty 1 5 ... bxc5?, finding himself a pawn
1 1 ...'iVc7 12 l:tfel 'iYb8 13 l!tac1 l::t fd8 1 4 down for nothing after 1 6 ltJg5 d4 1 7 ltJe6!
'iYb 1 h 6 1 5 a 3 .i. b7 1 6 e5 ltJe8 1 7 cxd5! cxd5 fxe6 18 �xe6+ 'it>g7 19 'tWxa6. Gelfand
18 .tfl earned White an advantage, albeit Sorokin, Sochi 1 986 went 1 5 ...ltJxc5 1 6 'it'h6
nothing spectacular. However, this soon lIe8 17 .i.e5 l:td7 1 8 .th3 ltJe6 1 9 l:tfe 1 dxc4
snowballed, and after 1 8 ...l:txc1 1 9 l:txc1 l:tc8 20 .i.xe6 fxe6 21 ltJe4 .i.b7 22 ltJfg5 .i.xe4
20 b4 l:txc1 21 .i.xc1 �c8 22 b5 �c3 23 a4 23 ltJxe4 cxb3 24 axb3 and White had a
g5?! 24 h3 ltJfS 25 .i.b2 �c8 26 .i.d3 White fonnidable attack.
was clearly better. 1 5 ltJxd4 ttJc5 1 6 �ad 1 ttJd3
1 2 exd5 exd5 1 3 'ii'f 5!? Kochiev-Shaposhnikov, St. Petersburg
1 3 l:!.fd 1 transposes to the previous game. 1 996 is worth a look: 1 6 ... l:Ie8 1 7 ltJ2f3 ltJce4
An alternative is 1 3 .l:!.fe l , when Lobron 1 8 ltJe5 'iVc7 1 9 ltJe6! 't\Vd6 (1 9 ... fxe6 20
Knaak, Germany 1 998 continued 1 3 ... cxd4 'iVxe6+ 'it>g7 21 'i¥f7+ 'it>h8 [21 ...�h6 22
14 ltJxd4 b5 1 5 .l:tadl .i.c5 1 6 ltJf5 'iVb6 1 7 ltJg4+!] 22 .i.xe4 J:lfS 23 'iVxd5! ltJxd5 24
ltJe 7+ .txe 7 1 8 l:txe7 bxc4 1 9 bxc4 dxc4 20 ltJf7+ �g8 25 ltJh6 mate) 20 ltJxf7! 'it>xf7 2 1
ltJe4 c3 21 .i.xc3 ltJxe4 22 .i.xe4 ltJf6 23 .txe4 ltJxe4 2 2 l:!.xd5 'i¥xd5 2 3 cxd5 and
.i.f3 'tWc5 24 l:te3 lUe8 25 'iVd2, with a slight White was winning.
edge for White. 1 6 ... h5 1 7 ltJ2f3 ltJce4 1 8 ltJe5 �e8 1 9
1 3 . . . 96 1 4 'ii'h 3 .i.xe4 was the course o f Razuvaev-Lputian,
Frunze 1 979, when 19 ... dxe4?! met with 20
ltJf5! gxf5 21 'iVxf5 lIc5 22 b4 l:!.c7 23 lId6!
.tc8 24 'iVg5+ �h7 25 ltJd7! �xd7 26 lhd7
.txd7 27 .txf6 .txf6 28 'iVxf6 l:!.xc4 29 'iVe7
1 -0. Razuvaev gives 1 9 ...ltJxe4 20 l:tfe l with
an attack for White.
1 7 ii.. a 1 �c5
1 4 . . . cxd4
Black plans a knight manoeuvre. 14 ... h5
15 l:tfe1 cxd4 1 6 ltJxd4 ltJc5 was played in
Raetsky-D.Frolov, Smolensk 2000, but this
looks rather risky for Black. There followed
1 7 ltJf5! gxf5 1 8 .l:!.xe 7! 'fixe 7 1 9 'iVh4! Itc6
(19 ... ltJcd7 20 'fig5+ 'it>h7 21 �xf5+ 'it>h6 22
'fif4+ 'it>g6 23 ltJf3 ltJe4 24 l:tel f5 25 .i.h3 1 8 ii.. x d5 ! !
and Black is in for a rough ride) 20 �g5+ A surprising move. Usually White does
'it>h7 21 'iVxf5+ 'it>g8 22 'i'g5+ 'it>h7 and a not surrender this bishop if he can help it, yet
draw was agreed, but 23 cxd5 l:td6 24 b4! here he does not even bother to recapture on
gives White a strong attack. d5. In fact this was home preparation. In a
In Rustemov-Nikolenko, Moscow 1 999 previous game 1 8 f4? was played, but with
Black followed 14 ... l:tc7 1 5 dxc5 with the little success. After 1 8 ... dxc4! 1 9 ltJc6 l:txc6!
35
Th e C a t a l a n
28 . . . e3?
A blunder. I f 28 ... :f7 Black is struggling,
but while 29 g4 l:lc5 30 lIfd1 exf3 31 "i'e6
£1+ 32 'it>x£1 .l:!.c8 33 'it>g3 'iVg2+ 34 'iith4
22 . . .l::t h S favours White, there remains work to do.
Only move. After 22.. .fxe6 23 'iVxe6+ 29 'ii'e 7 1 -0
<j;g7 24 lId7+ White wins.
36
Clo s e d C a t a la n : 4 . . . iL e 7 5 iLg2 0 - 0
Summary
The evaluation of the gambit continuation 6 . ..lbbd7 7 ttJc3 dxc4 8 e4 (Game 3) has changed
during the last decade. Earlier Black defended with 8 ... ttJb6, 8 ... c6 9 a4 as or 9 ... b6, but White
has a strong initiative in the centre in all of these lines. Now Black has discovered 8 ... c6 9 a4
e5!? 1 0 dxe5 ttJg4 1 1 i.f4 'ifa5. Another modern idea is action on the queenside with 8 ... a6 9
a4 l:[b8 1 0 as b5, but this variation needs more practice before a safe conclusion can be made.
After 7 ttJc3 c6 White seldom develops his queen on b3, often being forced to exchange on
d5, when Black usually equalises quite comfortably. It seems to us that 8 'iVd3 has more going
for it than 8 'ifb3. However, after 8 ... b6 White should not hurry with 9 e4 because 9 ... i.a6 1 0
b3 dxc4 1 1 bxc4 e 5 i s nice for Black. O n the other hand, recent victories b y G M Gleizerov
have shown that after 9 .l:!.d1 i.a6 10 b3 1:[c8 1 1 e4 Black has problems.
In the case of the move order 7 ttJc3 c6 8 b3 b6 9 i.b2 i.a6 (Game 6), then 10 ttJd2, with
the standard idea of e2-e4, deserves attention. Indeed White's chances look preferable. An
other interesting idea is 10 a4, although with 10 ... dxc4 1 1 bxc4 i.xc4 12 ttJd2 i.a6 13 i.xc6
Black can equalise with accurate defence.
After 7 'ifc2 c6 8 i.f4 b6 the standard plan 9 ttJbd2 i.b7 10 e4 (Game 8) does not give
White any advantage as the bishop is not well placed on f4 after ... c6-c5. Perhaps White should
play 9 l:td1 i.a6 10 ttJe5, or 9 ... i.b7 1 0 ttJc3 dxc4 1 1 ttJd2 (Game 9) .
In the event of e2-e4 the reply ... d5xe4 is unpopular. If Black is late with the freeing advance
... c6-c5 White can himself push with c4-c5 (Game 1 1), which is in fact quite effective.
The advance e4-e5 is still relevant (Game 1 2). After 7 'iVc2 c6 8 ttJbd2 b6 9 e4 i.a6 this
plan promises White the better chances, although in the case of 9 ... i.b 7 1 0 e5 ttJe8 1 1 b3 ttJc7
12 i.b2 c5 the bishop is well placed on b7 and the position is about equal. After 1 1 cxd5 cxd5
White is slighdy better but instead of 1 1 ... cxd5 the alternative 1 1 ... exd5 looks more promising
for Black, whose intention is to play ...ttJe8-c7-e6 and prepare counterplay involving ... c6-c5.
In the CC the most popular position arises after 7 'ifc2 c6 8 ttJbd2 b6 9 b3 i.a6:
Recent practice has demonstrated that 10 lId1 does not lead to an advantage for White. In
the complex struggle Black has sufficient resources with which to oppose White's activity in
the centre and on the kingside (Game 1 4) . On the other hand, after 10 i.b2 ltc8 1 1 e4 c5 1 2
exd5 exd5 1 3 'iWf5!? White has a genuine initiative, and we d o not see how Black can equalise.
8 b3 b6: 9 i.b2 i.a6 1 0 l:td1l::tc 8 1 1 ttJc3 Game 10; 9 l:td 1 i.b7 1 0 ttJc3
- - Game 1 1
S . . . b6
9 e4 - Game 12
9 b3 iLa6
9 ... i.b7 - Game 13
1 0 l:td 1 - Game 14
10 i.b2 - Game 15
CHA PTER TWO I
4 . . . c6 5 i.,g2 i.,d6
38
4 . . . c 6 5 il.. g 2 il.. d 6
verik-Jurcisin, Presov, 1 999. White doesn't .ixe5 lhe5 1 4 ttJ O lIe8 1 5 ttJd4 i.e6 1 6
have full compensation for the pawn deficit 'iVd3 'ii'd7 1 7 l:tac1 l:tac8 1 8 "ifb5 and Black's
in this endgame.) 8 ... 0-0 9 l:!.dl 'fie7 10 i.g5 isolated pawn left him a little worse. Black
h6 1 1 .ixf6 ttJxf6 1 2 ttJd2 e5, as in Lputian can also try 9 ... b6 to 'iVc2 .ib7 1 1 e4 e5 with
Arencibia, Biel 1 993, which continued 1 3 a mix of systems. Samisch-Rellstab, Swine
d5!? cxd5 1 4 ttJxd5 ttJxd5 1 5 i.xd5 c 3 1 6 munde 1 930 continued 1 2 dxe5 ttJxe5 1 3
'ifxc3 .ig4 1 7 ttJc4 .l:!.ac8 1 8 'fie3 i.b8 1 9 l:tad l ?! 'iVc7 1 4 exd5 cxd5 1 5 ttJd4 a6 1 6 ttJfS
'ife4 with a slight edge for White (more ac i.fS 17 ttJO ttJed7 with chances for both
tive). sides. However, 1 3 ttJxe5 i.xe5 1 4 .ixe5
7 . . . 0-0 .l:txe5 1 5 f4 .l:te8 1 6 e5 ttJg4 17 'it'd3 im
Early play in the centre with 7 ... b6 8 .ib2 proves, gaining space and thus putting White
c5?! is not to be recommended. In Chetverik on top.
Hajek, Bratislava 2000 White won after 9 1 0 tUxe4 dxe4 1 1 tUe5 f5 1 2 f3!
cxd5 exd5 1 0 dxc5 bxc5? 1 1 e4! i.e7 1 2 e5 White opens up the position while Black's
.ia6 13 exf6, so Black should prefer queenside remains undeveloped.
to ... ttJxc5 1 1 ttJc3 i.b7 12 b4, when White 1 2 . . . exf3
has a useful lead in development in this iso 1 2 ...ttJxe5 has also been tried. Koller
lated d-pawn position. Wiechmann, Germany 1 994 went 1 3 dxe5
8 il.. b 2 .ic5+ 14 �hl exO 1 5 .l:!.xO 'fie7 16 .l:td3
(Black cannot liberate the queen's bishop)
1 6 ... i.b6 17 'iVd2 l:[d8 1 8 .l:tdl l:lxd3 1 9
'ii'x d3 with a huge advantage for White.
1 3 il.. x f3 "iic 7 1 4 tUxd 7 ! il.. x d7 1 5 e4 e5
15 ... fxe4 16 i.xe4 g6 17 'fid3 cJi;g7 18 c5!
.ifS 19 d5+ e5 20 d6 'iid 8 21 'fic4 is given
by Tartakover, Black's position being critical.
Black should play 1 5 ... .ifS 1 6 e5 l:tad8 in
\ order to facilitate development, although
White still has the initiative after the move 1 7
'iVe2.
1 6 c5 il..f 8 1 7 'iWc2 exd4?!
1 7 ... fxe4?! 18 i.xe4 g6 1 9 i.xg6! and
8 . . . .l:!.e8 White wins. 1 7 ... f4!? is interesting, keeping
Black can transpose to the Dutch Defence the position closed, 1 8 gxf4 exf4 1 9 'it>h 1
with 8 ...ttJe4 9 ttJbd2 fS. leaving White a little better thanks to his
9 ct:Jbd2 presence in the centre and more breathing
White can prevent ... e6-e5 with 9 ttJe5 space for his forces.
'iVc7 to f4 b6 1 1 ttJd2 .ib7 12 e4, as in 1 8 exf5 .l:!.ad8 1 9 il.. h 5! .l:!.e5 20 il..xd4
Euwe-Davidson, Amsterdam 1 924, when .l:!.xf5? !
White took action in the centre and was re Black can also try 2 0. . .lId5, when 21 'iic4
warded with a pull after 1 2 ... dxe4 1 3 ttJxe4 �h8 22 i.g4 sees White retain the extra
ttJxe4 1 4 .ixe4 ttJf6 1 5 i.g2 c5 1 6 d5 exd5 material and the initiative, while 2 1 ...i.e6?
17 cxd5. loses to 22 fxe6 .l:i.xd4 23 .l:!.xfS+! �xfS 24
9 . . . tUe4? ! illIt-! lbd5 il.. x f5 22 "iix f5 .l:!.xd4 23 .l:!.f 1 !
Lokvenc-Stolz, Haque 1 928 went 9 ... e5 to .l:!.d8
cxd5 cxd5 1 1 dxe5 ttJxe5 1 2 ttJxe5 i.xe5 1 3 Alekhine gives 23 .. .'iVe7 24 .if7+ cJi;h8 25
39
Th e C a t a l a n
.idS! 'iVf6 2 6 'it'c8 and wins. the previous line. The natural 9 ... dxe4 1 0
24 i.f7 + �h8 2S i.e8! 1 -0 liJxe4 liJxe4 1 1 'iVxe4 e 5 1 2 dxe5 liJxe5 1 3
liJg5 liJg6 (1 3 ...g6!? i s an interesting option)
14 'ii'c 2 h6 1 5 liJe4 .i.f5 1 6 .l:tel lUe8 1 7
.i.d2l::tad8 1 8 'iVb3 .i.e5 1 9 .i.b4 'iVc7 earned
Black a decent game in Smyslov-Sehner,
Farum 1 986.
9 b3 is the quiet approach. Indeed in Ra
zuvaev-Skatchkov, St. Petersburg 1 997 this
policy resulted in a steady lead for White
after 9 ... b6 1 0 .i.b2 .i.b7 1 1 e4 dxe4 1 2 liJxe4
liJxe4 1 3 'ii'xe4 l:tad8 1 4 !:tadl liJf6 1 5 'iVc2
thanks to Black's development problems.
These were compounded after the subse
quent 1 5 ... c5? 1 6 dxc5 .i.xf3 ( 1 6 ... .i.xc5? 1 7
A famous final move. liJg5) 1 7 cxd6 .i.xd 1 1 8 'ii'xh 7+! liJxh7 1 9
dxe7 .i.e2 2 0 exfB'ii' + liJxfB 2 1 l:t a l 1:td2 22
Game 1 7 .i.c3 l::!c 2 23 .i.e5 liJd7 24 .i.e4 J:td2 25 .i.c3
Panov-M . M a kogonov and White was close to winning.
Kiev 1938 9 cxdS ttJxdS? !
Or 9 ... cxd5 1 0 dxe5 liJxe5 1 1 liJxe5 .i.xe5
1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 c6 S 1 2 liJf3 �th an edge for White. Rogers
i.g2 -td6 6 0-0 ttJbd7 7 'ii'c 2 0-0 8 ttJbd2 Handoko, Djakarta 1 993 continued 1 2 ... .id6
eS?! 1 3 .l:!.d 1 .l:!.e8 1 4 .i.g5 .i.e6 1 5 liJd4 .ie5 16
Too early. Another try is 8 ... b6 9 e4 (after liJxe6 fxe6 17 e4 h6 18 .i.xf6 'iVxf6 19 exd5
the greedy 9 cxd5?! cxd5 1 0 'iVc6 'iVc7 1 1 .l:!.ac8 20 'iVd3 .i.xb2 21 .l:!.abl exd5 22
'ii'x a8 .i.a6 1 2 'iVxfB+ liJxfB White has two .i.xd5+ �h8 23 .ixb7 J:!.cd8 24 'iVf3 and,
rooks for the queen but is behind in devel although White had won a pawn, the oppo-
\
opment) 9 ... dxe4 10 liJxe4 liJxe4 1 1 'iVxe4. site coloured bishops offered Black chances
Raetsky-J . Gunnarsson, Hafnarfjordur 1 996 of saving the game.
continued 1 1 ....i.b7 12 .i.f4 liJf6 13 'ii'e 3 c5 1 0 ttJc4 'ii'e 7 1 1 e4
14 lladl .i.xf4 15 'ii'xf4 'iVe7 16 .l:!.fel cxd4 Also good is 1 1 liJxd6 'iVxd6 1 2 l:[dl 'i'e7
1 7 1:txd4 lIac8 1 8 liJe5 .i.xg2 1 9 �xg2 .l:!.fd8 1 3 e4 liJb4 1 4 'ifb3 liJa6 1 5 .i.g5 when
20 .l:!.edl l:i.xd4 21 'iVxd4, White possessing White has the bishop pair and an active posi
the d-flle and a queenside pawn majority. tion. In Bogoljubov-Joss, ZUrich 1 934 this
Black's prospects failed to improve after proved significant after 1 5 ... 'ife8 1 6 dxe5
2 1 . ..h6 22 a3 'iVb7+ 23 f3 b5 24 c5 liJd5 25 liJxe5 17 �d8 liJxf3+ 1 8 .i.xf3 'iVe5 1 9
b4 f6 26 liJd3 'ii'a6 27 liJf4. lhfB+ �xfB 2 0 .i.f4 'iVe6 21 'ii'c 3.
8 ...'iVe7 presents White with a few choices: 1 1 ttJSb6
. . .
40
4 . . . c 6 5 i. g 2 i. d 6
.l:!.del 'iVg6 1 9 lbh4 'iVf7 20 lbfS 'ii' f8 21 f4 9 e4 is good enough only for equaliry. For
lbd5 22 'it'f2 g6 23 J::tx eS 'it'xeS 24 .l:!.el 'it'f8 example Pirc-Bogoljubov, Bad Harzburg
25 i.xd5+ cxd5 26 lbe7+ <t;f7 27 lbxd5 and 1 935 went 9 ... dxe4 1 0 lbxe4 lbxe4 1 1 'iVxe4
White regained rhe material wirh a winning e5 1 2 i.g5 f6 1 3 i.d2 exd4 14 'iVxd4 lbe5 1 5
position. i.c3 c5 1 6 'iVd5+ i.e6 1 7 'iVxb7 ttbS l S 'iVe4
1 3 . . . exd4 1 4 i.f4 "fie7 1 5 l:txd4 l:te8 1 6 lbxc4 1 9 b3 lbb6 20 J::ta el 'iVc7, and Black
i.d6 'iWe6 1 7 a4 4Jf8 had solved his opening problems.
17 ... a5 I S i.c7 f6 1 9 l:.adl does not help Alternatively 9 J::td l 'iVe7 1 0 e4 lbxe4 1 1
Black. lbxe4 dxe4 1 2 'ii'xe4 e5 1 3 i.g5! f6 1 4 i.d
1 8 a5 4Jbd7 1 9 l:tad 1 f6 exd4 1 5 'iVxe 7 i.xe 7 16 i.xd4 i.c5 17 .l:!.e 1
19 ... lbf6 20 lbg5 'iVg4 21 f4 also favours saw White maintain a modest lead in devel
White. opment in Ricardi-Panno, Florida 2001 . An
20 i.f 1 ! 'it'f7 21 i.c4 4Je6 22 e5! 'it>h8 ending advantage resulted after 1 7 ...l::tx e 1+ I S
22 ... fxe5? is poor in view of 23 lbg5, while J::txe l i.xd4 1 9 lbxd4 lbe5 20 b3 i.g4 2 1 h3
22 ... lbxe5 loses: 23 i.xe5 fxe5 24 lbg5 'iig6 i.d7 22 f4 lbf7 23 c5 <t;f8 24 <t;f2 in view of
25 'iixg6 hxg6 26 .l:!.dS etc. After 22 ...'iVg6 23 White's extra space.
'i'xg6 hxg6 24 i.xe6+ l::tx e6 25 i.a3 Black's 9 . . . e5
cramped position will soon fall apart. 9 ... 'iVe7 10 i.b2 e5 1 1 cxd5 lbxd5 12 e4
23 l:tg4! 4Jdf8 lbb4 1 3 'i¥bl b5?! 14 a3 lba6 1 5 b4 i.b7 1 6
Or 23 ... lbxe5 24 lbxe5 fxe5 25 i.xe5 l:tgS lbb3 ItedS 1 7 'iic 2 J:!abS I S J::tad l favoured
26 l:th4 and wins. White in Raetsky-Budde, Cappelle la Grande
24 exf6 'it'xf6 25 4Je5 b5 26 i.a2 c5 27 2001 , Black's forces lacking co-ordination.
i.d5 i.a6 28 l:th4 g5 29 l:th6 'iWg7 30 1 0 cxd5
i.xf8 4Jxf8 31 4Jf7 + 1 -0 Also possible is 10 dxe5 lbxe5 1 1 1i.b2
lbxf3+ 1 2 lbxf3 dxc4 1 3 bxc4 'iVe7 14 e3
Game 1 8 1i.g4 1 5 lbd4 'iVd7 1 6 f3 i.h3 1 7 e4 i.c5 I S
Orsag-Haba J::tad 1 J::tadS 1 9 <t;h 1 , when Black has com
Tumov 1996 pleted development and is ready to contest
the centre. Note rhat 14 ... lbe4?! is dubious,
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 4Jf3 4Jf6 4 g3 c6 5 as was demonstrated In Greenfeld
i.g2 i.d6 6 0-0 4Jbd7 7 'iWc2 0-0 8 4Jbd2 Zsu.Polgar, Pardubice 1 994, 1 5 l:labl c5 1 6
l:te8 J::t fel i.c7 1 7 lbh4 l::tb S l S .i::tb dl b 5 1 9 cxb5
l::tx b5 20 i.al J::tb 6 21 J::td 5 leaving Black
with numerous weaknesses (c5, for instance)
and White the advantage.
1 0 . . . cxd5
1O ...lbxd5?! is best avoided in view of 1 1
lbc4 i.c7 1 2 lbfxe5 lbxe5 1 3 dxe5 i.xe5 1 4
lbxe5 .l:!.xe5 1 5 i.b2 when White has the
bishop pair and central control. His initiative
developed quickly in Nikcevic-Vencl, Arand
jelovac 1 990: 1 5 . .J:teS 1 6 e4 lbf6 1 7 l:.ad 1
'iVe7 I S h3 i.e6 1 9 f4 l:.adS 20 fS i.cs 21 e5
lbd5 22 f6 wirh a huge advantage.
1 1 dxe5 4Jxe5 1 2 i.b2 4Jc6
9 b3 Also possible is 12 ... i.g4 13 lbxe5 i.xe5
41
Th e C a t a l a n
1 4 �xeS �xeS 1 S ttJf3 �e7. Andersson Or 3 1 ...�e4 32 'it>f1 :g4 33 WiVe1 and
Cifuentes, Benidorm 1 994 continued 1 6 ttJd4 White consolidates .
.l:!.c8 17 �2 J::te c7 1 8 l:tac1 h6 (Cifuentes 32 'ii'e 1 'ii'g 4 33 !:td 1 !:te4
gives 1 8 ... hS!?) 19 e3 a6 20 l:tfe 1 'iid7 21 f3 Black can win one more pawn but at the
SLe6 22 'it>f2 'iVd6 23 l:txc7 'iVxc7 24 l:le2. cost of exchanging all the heavy pieces:
With �c2 White trades more pieces in order 33 ... l:!.xe3 34 �xe3 l:txe3 3S 'it'xe3 'YWxd1+ 36
to step closer to an endgame that is favour 'it>f2 and the three pawns are no match for
able due to the isolated d-pawn. the minor piece, Black losing his attacking
1 3 !:tfe 1 .ltg4 1 4 a3 l:te8 1 5 'ii'd 3 ttJe4 1 6 potential.
b4 34 'ii'f 2? !
Interesting is 1 6 'YWxdS ttJxf2!? 1 7 ttJgS 34 �d3 secures White the better game.
ttJeS 1 8 i..x eS 'iVxgS 1 9 �xd6 'iVe3 with a 34 . . . 'ilVg5
highly complicated position in which Black Or 34... �xe3 3S 'ii' f3 !? �xf3 36 �xe8+
has a strong attack for the piece. �h7 37 ttJxf3 "it'xfS with a complex situa
1 6 . . . .ltf8 1 7 e3 'ii'b 6? ! tion.
Better is 1 7...'YWd6!? 1 8 �ac 1 i.. f5 . 35 f6 g6 36 'it>f 1 .ltg3 37 'ii'f 3 l:txe3 38
1 8 !:tae 1 !:txe3?
White can grab the pawn with 1 8 'iVxdS!? Poor. White should go for 38 'iVxdS 'iVg4
lIcd8 19 'YWc4! as the g4-bishop is hanging. 39 �f3 'YWh3+ with equal chances.
1 8 . . !:ted8 1 9 .ltd4 ttJxd4 20 ttJxd4 ttJf6
. 38 . . .!:txe3 39 'ii'x d5 'ii'x f6 + 40 ttJf3
21 1tJ2b3 Not 40 SLf3? �eS 41 'it>g2 SLxd4 42 l:txd4
l:txf3 and Black wins.
40 . . . 'ii'b 2 4 1 'ii'd 8+ 'it>h7 42 'ii'd 2 'ii'x a3
42
4 . . . c 6 5 iL g 2 iL d 6
Summary
These examples indicate that in the ... .td6 system it is not necessary for White to hurry with
e2-e4 as this serves only to justify Black's own advance of the e-pawn, which appears to prom
ise excellent equalising chances (for example 6 0-0 tiJbd7 7 'iic 2 0-0 8 tiJbd2 .l:te8 9 e4 dxe4 1 0
tiJxe4 tiJxe4 1 1 'iie 4 e 5 with further simplifications that cancel out any White edge). A more
promising strategy for White is to complete queenside development with b2-b3 and .tb2.
After 9 b3 e5 10 cxd5 cxd5 1 1 dxe5 tiJxe5 1 2 .tb2 we again have a position with an isolated
pawn, albeit an acceptable version for Black, who enjoys the better development and, in prac
tice, tends to achieve equality.
5 . iLd6
. . 7 b3 8 1L1bd2
43
CHA PTER THREE I
4 . . . dxc4 5 'iVa4 +
44
4 . . . dx c 4 5 'il a 4 +
One idea for White is to hold back the �c 7 1 9 b4 axb4 20 axb4 'It>d7.
capture on c4 and instead continue develop 6 'ilxc4 b5 7 'ilc2
ment with 6 �g2 (Game 23), although 6 Abramovic-Maksimenko, Novi Sad 2000
"i'xc4 is the main continuation. Then 6 ... a6 went 7 'iWd3 lLlbd7 8 �g2 �b7 9 0-0 a6 1 0
(Games 24-26) is designed to harass White's a4 c 5 1 1 axb5 �e4 1 2 'iWdl axb5 1 3 k[xa8
queen with the help of ... b7-b5 and, in so 'it'xa8 1 4 lLla3 b4 1 5 lLlc4 cxd4 1 6 �f4 'iWa6
doing, solve Black's main strategic problem - 1 7 b3 �c5 1 8 lLlxd4 �xg2 1 9 'It>xg2 0-0,
the development of the queen's bishop. Black completing development.
White quickly drops back to c2 in Game 24 7 . . . iLb7 8 iLg2
to prevent ... b7-b5, while in Games 25 & 26 Also possible is 8 lLlbd2 lLlbd7 9 e4 iLe7
Black is allowed to complete his main plan 10 a3 c5!? 1 1 �xb5 0-0 with compensation
and push the b-pawn. according to M.Gurevich. In this line White
can try to prevent the thematic ... c6-c5, a
Black plays 5 . . . c6 plan adopted in the encounter Gheorghiu
r----------------
.. R.Bagirov, Bern 200 1 : 9 lLlb3 'iWb6 1 0 �g2
Game 19 as!? 1 1 .ig5 a 4 1 2 lLlbd2 c5 1 3 �xf6 lLlxf6
Mednis-Prie 14 0-0 l:tc8 15 l:tac1 �e7 16 dxc5. Now
Cannes 2000 1 6...�xc5! 1 7 'ifb 1 0-0 would have given
Black the better chances due to the bishop
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 pair and space on the queens ide.
'i'a4+ c6 8 . . ttJbd7
.
45
Th e Ca t a l a n
46
4 . . . dx c 4 5 'iW a 4 +
.ixb7 'iVxb7 1 4 axb5 ttJxe5 1 5 ttJc3 iJ.. e 7 1 6 'i'e4 'iixe4 1 8 ttJxe4 fS 1 9 a3 iJ.. e 7 20 ttJc3
.if4 ttJg6 1 7 'iVe4 'iix e4 1 8 ttJxe4 etc. etc.
10 i.e3 1 6 'iWe4 'i!fxe4
10 0-0 'ifxd4 (10 ... c5!? is interesting) 1 1 Avoiding the exchange with 16 ... 'it'a6
ttJxd7 'iVxd7 1 2 .l:!.dl 'it'c8 1 3 ttJc3 a6 1 4 iJ..g5 gives White the better chances after 17 ttJd5
with compensation for the pawn. White is 'tIi'c6 1 8 .l:!.ac1 'it'xc1 19 .l:txc1 l:!.xc1+ 20 'iit>g2.
well developed and ready for action. 1 7 Q\xe4 f5
10 . . . c5 1 1 Q\xd7 Q\xd7 1 2 i.xb7 'iWxb7 1 7 ... .l:tc4?! runs into 1 8 i.xg 7! .l:tg8 1 9
1 3 0-0 iJ.. x ffi .l:!.xe4 20 iJ.. d 6 l::t xe2 21 l::t ac1 and
White is well on top.
1 8 Q\g5 e5! 1 9 i.xa7 i.e7 20 i.e3 h6 2 1
Q\f3 Wf7
Completing development is the aim of
Black's pawn sacrifice, resulting in an active
game for Black.
22 .l:!.fc 1 g5 23 b3 f4 24 i.d2 We6 25
.l:!.xc8 .l:!.xc8 26 .l:!.c 1 .l:!.a8 27 .l:!.c2
27 l:!.c6+ 'iit>d 5 28 .l:txh6 g4 29 l:!.h7 'it>e6
and again Black has compensation, winning
back one of the invested pawns with an ag
gressive stance.
27 . . . Q\f6 28 Q\e 1
1 3 . . . cxd4? ! 28 gxf4 gxf4 29 e3 promises White a small
1 3 ... 1:tc8 has also been played. Raetsky edge.
Rausch, Biel 1 997 continued 14 l:[c1 iJ.. e 7 1 5 28 . . . Q\d5 29 e4
dxc5 ttJxc5 1 6 b4 iJ.. f6 1 7 ttJc3 ttJd7 1 8 'iVe4
'i'a6 1 9 i.d4 0-0 with equality, while
17 ... ttJa4 1 8 'it'e4 'ifa8! (1 8 .. .'ika6? 19 ttJxb5!
.l:!.xc1+ 20 .l:!.xc1 'ii'x b5 21 .l:!.c8+ iJ.. d 8 22
.l:!.xd8+!) 19 ttJxb5! leads to a forced draw
after 1 9 .. .'it'xe4 20 l:txc8+ 'it>e7 21 l:tc7+ 'it>ffi.
Here 14 ...c4?! risks giving White a free hand
in the centre. Raetsky-Tregubov, Krasnodar
1 995 went 1 5 a4 a6 1 6 axb5 axb5 1 7 ttJc3
.ib4 1 8 d5 exd5?! (1 8 ... i.xc3 19 dxe6 fxe6
20 'iVxc3 0-0 and White has only a small
advantage) 1 9 .l:ta7 �c6 and White now
changed gear and emerged with a clear ad
vantage after 20 .l:!.ca1 ! iJ.. c 5 21 l:t l a6 ttJb6 22 29 . . .fxe3 30 i.xe3 e4 3 1 i.d4 i.f6 32
.ixc5 'iix c5 23 1:tb7. .l:!.c6 + Wd7 33 .l:!.c4
14 i.xd4 .l:!.c8 33 l:txf6 ttJxf6 34 .i.xf6 l:txa2 and, with a
After 14 ... e5 1 5 iJ.. e 3 i.e7 16 l:tdl 0-0 1 7 rook versus two minor pieces, Black has
'it' fS White has an action position. definite compensation. His king and rook are
1 5 Q\c3! b4 active and 'W'hite's pieces lack co-ordination.
Again the push in the centre with 1 5 ... e5 is 33 . . . .l:!.xa2 34 i.xf6 Q\xf6 35 Q\c2 l:!.b2
insufficient for equality - 16 i.e3 i.b4 1 7 36 Q\xb4 Yo - Yo
47
Th e C a t a la n
s . . . iLcs
6 ... c5 7 dxc5 i.c6 transposes to 5 i.g2 c5
6 'ii'a4+ i.d7 7 �xc4 i.c6 8 dxc5 (see the
notes to Game 76).
7 iLg2 ttJbd7
Gleizerov-Akhmadeev, Kstovo 1 997 went
7 ... i.e7 8 ttJc3 0-0 9 0-0 a6 1 0 �d3 b5 1 1 1 1 . . . �d5?!
i.g5 ttJbd7 1 2 a3 i.b7 1 3 b4 h6 1 4 i.xf6 1 1 ...h6 is once again a sensible option,
ttJxf6 1 5 ttJe5 i.xg2 1 6 �xg2 with the finn with 1 2 i.xf6 'it'xf6 1 3 0-0 ttJxc3 1 4 bxc3
grip on c5 earning White the pleasant pros i.a5 giving White central control, while the
pects. bishop pair helps Black's . quest for equality.
8 ttJc3 ttJbS 1 2 iLxfS iLb5
Also possible is 8 ... i.e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 'iVd3 The recapture 1 2 ...gxf6 invites White to
ttJd5 1 1 e4 ttJxc3 1 2 bxc3 fS (12 ... ttJc5 1 3 generate an initiative after 1 3 0-0 i.xc3 14
ir"e3 ttJxe4 i s best avoided i n view o f 1 4 bxc3 ir"a5 15 c4, although this might be pref
ttJe5!, regaining the pawn and keeping a plus) erable to the text.
1 3 exfS exfS 14 ttJel i.xg2 1 5 ttJxg2 ttJb6 1 6 1 3 �c2 �xa2 1 4 0-0 ttJxc3 1 5 iLxg7
a4 a s 1 7 l:te 1 tt f7 with approximate equality �g8
in Zaichik-Shabalov, Philadelphia 2000. 1 5 ... ttJxbl 1 6 'it'xc7! .l:!.g8 1 7 ttJe5! l:txg7
9 �d3 iLb4 1 0 iLg5 1 8 �xb7 a6 1 9 'it'xa8+ �e7 20 i.c6 and
Petrov-Alekhine, Buenos Aires 1 939 saw White's attack against the bare king is very
considerable trading during the next dozen dangerous.
or so moves: 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 l:tdl h6 12 ttJe5 1 S J:ta 1 ttJxe2+ 1 7 'it>h 1 �d5 1 8 �xh7
i.xg2 1 3 �xg2 'it'e7 14 ttJe4 l:tad8 1 5 ttJxf6+ O-O-O?
'it'xf6 1 6 'it'f3 'it'xf3+ 1 7 ttJxf3 ttJc4 1 8 b3 1 8 ... l:txg7 19 "iixg7 i.c6 20 h4 is clearly
48
4 . . . dx c 4 5 "ii a 4 +
better for White, but Black is holding on. .i.b6 1 6 .i.g5 ttJd7 1 7 .l:!adl h6 1 8 .i.f4 0-0-0
19 J:txa7 with a level game.
8 'it'c2 ttJc6 (8 . . . .i.e4 9 'fid 1 transposes to
8 �d3 .i.e4 9 'iWdl) 9 'fia4 .i.b4+ 1 0 ttJc3
ttJe4 1 1 0-0 saw White sacrifice a pawn for
the initiative in S.Larsen-Thesing, Soro 1 982.
There followed 1 1 .. ..i.xc3 12 bxc3 ttJxc3 1 3
'it'c2 ttJe4 1 4 .i.a3 ttJd6 1 5 .i.xd6 'it'xd6 1 6
e4 ttJb4 1 7 �e2 .i.c6 1 8 d 5 .i.d7 1 9 a3 ttJa6
20 e5 'it'e7 21 d6 cxd6 22 exd6 'it'xd6 23 ttJe5
and, despite being two pawns down, White's
active play furnished him ample compensa
tion.
S . . . c5
Andersson-Ille scas, Pamplona 1 997/98 is
White has a decisive lead. the way to play this line for Black: 8 ... .i.e4 9
1 9 . . . c6 20 J:tfa 1 'it'd 1 c5 1 0 ttJc3 .i.c6 1 1 0-0 ttJbd7 1 2 .i.e3
20 .i.e5 is clear-cut. .i.e7 13 dxc5 (typical Andersson) 1 3. .. .i.xc5
20 . . . "iif 5 21 "iix f5 exf5 22 i.f6 J:tdeS 23 14 .i.xc5 ttJxc5 1 5 'fixd8+ llxd8 16 lIac1
i.e5 f4 24 i.h3 + J:te6 25 J:taS + 1 -0 'it>e7 1 7 b4 ttJcd7 and the ending was level,
although White was probably happy anyway!
Game 22 9 lLlc3 i.c6 1 0 0-0 lLlbd7 1 1 J:td 1
Alekhine-Rabar The more direct approach with 1 1 e4
Munich 1942 promises White an edge, l 1 ...cxd4 1 2 ttJxd4
ttJe5 1 3 'iWd 1 'i!ib6 14 ttJxc6 ttJxc6 1 5 'fia4
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 lLlf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 giving White the bishop pair and the more
"iia4+ i.d7 6 "iix c4 i.c6 7 i.g2 i.d5 active forces.
1 1 . . . cxd4
With 1 1 ...'iVb6 Black retains the tension in
the centre for a while. Gereben-Szabo, Bu
dapest 1 948 continued 12 e4 cxd4 13 ttJxd4
.i.c5 14 .i.e3 ttJe5 1 5 'fie2 ttJfg4 1 6 ttJxc6
.i.xe3 17 ttJxe5 .i.xf2+ 1 8 'it>h 1 ttJxe5 1 9
ttJa4 'it'a5 2 0 'it'xf2 'it'xa4 2 1 'it'c5 and Black
had a pawn but needed to address develop
ment, White's activity maintaining the bal
ance.
1 2 lLlxd4 i.xg2 1 3 Wxg2 i.e7 1 4 "iif 3!
The queen takes over the bishop's role on
the long diagonal.
S "iid 3 1 4 . . . "iib 6?
Other queen moves have been tried here. 14 . . .'ir'c8 also favours White after 15 ttJb3
After 8 'fia4+ .i.c6 9 'fidl e5!? 10 0-0 exd4 ttJe5 1 6 'fif4 ttJc6 1 7 .i.e3, although this
1 1 'iixd4 'iixd4 12 ttJxd4 .i.xg2 1 3 'it>xg2 improves on the game for Black. Now White
.i.c5 the smoke begins to clear and Black sacrifices material to generate an initiative.
faces no problems, e.g. 14 ttJb3 ttJa6 1 5 ttJc3 1 5 i.e3! 0-0
49
Th e Ca t a l a n
6 . . . a6
Not the only possibility. After 6 ... c6 7
'it'xc4 ..td6 8 0-0 e5 the break in the centre is
not entirely satisfying for Black, e.g. 9 ltJc3
0-0 1 0 .l:td1 'ike7 1 1 'ikb3 exd4 1 2 ltJxd4 i.c5
13 h3 ltJe5 14 ..tg5 h6 15 ..txf6 'iIxf6 1 6
ltJe4 'it'e7 1 7 ltJxc5 'iix c5 1 8 .l:tac1 and White
has a small advantage due to his lead in de
velopment. 6 ... ..te7 7 'it'xc4 0-0 8 0-0 a6 9
1 9 lDxg7! �c2 c5 1 0 .l:td1 .l:ta7 1 1 e4 b6 1 2 ltJc3 .tb7
A nice, traditional wrecking of the king 1 3 d5 exd5 1 4 e5 ltJe8 1 5 ltJxd5 saw White
side from one of histoty's greatest attacking seize the initiative in Lautier-Pinter, France
players. 1 993, when Black had to surrender his light
1 9 . . .'�xg7 squared bishop - 1 5 ... ..txd5 1 6 .l:txd5 ltJc7 1 7
19 ... ltJce4 20 b4! 'iie 5 21 ..tf4 'itb5 22 a4 .l:td3 ltJe6 1 8 b 3 'ilb8 1 9 i.b 2 .l:td8 2 0 .l:tad 1
(White really wants his bishop on the a1-h8 b5 21 h4 etc.
diagonal!) 22 .. .'ihb4 23 i.e5 is nice for 7 lDc3 !ii.. e 7
White. Again Black has other options:
20 !ii.. d 4! lDce4 21 'ilixe4 'tiffS 22 'ilixfS 7 ... c5 8 0-0 .l:tb8 9 i.f4 b5 10 'ild1 .l:tb6 1 1
exfS 23 ':!:!'ac 1 ':!:!'fe8 24 .:!:!.c7 ! ':!:!'xe2 2S d5 (Black keeps his pawn but now White
':!:!'xb7 'itig6 26 .bf6 'itixf6 27 .:!:!.d6 + ! 1 -0 attacks in the centre) 1 1 ...exd5 1 2 ltJxd5
In view of the continuation 27 ...�g7 28 ltJxd5 1 3 �xd5 ..tb7 1 4 �d2 ii.e7 1 5 a4
.l:tdd7 .l:!.f8 29 '>itG .l:tc2 30 .l:tdc7 .l:td2 3 1 with compensation for the pawn in Speel
'it>e3. man-Andersson, Hastings 1 980/8 1 . There
followed 1 5 ... ltJf6 1 6 'ilxd8+ i.xd8 1 7 .l:tfd1
Black plays S . . . lDbd7 ltJd5 1 8 axb5 ltJxf4 1 9 gxf4 .l:txb5 20 ltJe5
....--------------
. --. i.xg2 21 '>itxg2 i.c7 (21 ...l1xb2? is poor in
Game 23 view of 22 .uxd8+!) 22 ltJxc4 .txf4 23 .l:txa6
Andersson -A . Sokolov 0-0 and Black had finally castled. White won
Bar 1997 the pawn back but the game was equal. Also
'-------... possible here is 8 ... cxd4 9 ltJxd4 'iWb6 10
1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 lDf3 lDf6 4 g3 dxc4 S ltJc2 i.e7 1 1 'it'xc4 0-0, when Black ad
'ilia4+ lDbd7 6 !ii.. g 2 dressed development and achieved a good
50
4 . . . dx c 4 5 'W a 4 +
position after 1 2 b4 ltJe5 1 3 'iVb3 .i.d7 1 4 ploit the c-file or the often weakened c5-
.i.e3 'it'c 7 1 5 l:Iac1 .i.c6 1 6 .i.xc6 ltJxc6 1 7 square. Consequently 16 .i.g5 l:Ic4! 17 e3 c5
.i.f4 'iVb6 i n Lindberg-Jakovenko, Oropesa 1 8 1Lxf6 gxf6 19 dxc5 0-0 20 l:tac1 l:!.d8 21
2001 . ltJb 1 .l:i.xc5 22 .l:i.xc5 .i.xc5 23 .l:i.c1 .i.b4 left
7 ... .l:Ib8 looks sensible. 8 'iixc4 b5 9 'iYd3 Black with the superior ending .
.i.b7 1 0 0-0 c5 1 1 .i.f4 .l:i.c8 1 2 dxc5 .i.xc5 1 3 9 lLlxd7
Itadl 0-0 1 4 ltJe5 and White was trying to 9 ltJxc4 has also been played. Black was
generate an initiative In Andersson never in danger in the opening in Poluljahov
Kasparov, Belgrade (6) 1 985, which went Zakharevich, St. Petersburg 200 1 , which
14 ...1Lxg2 1 5 'It>xg2 ltJxe5 1 6 .i.xe5 .i.e7 1 7 went 9 ... c5 10 dxc5 1Lxc5 1 1 0-0 .l:i.b8 1 2
'it'f3 'it'a s 1 8 it'b7 .l:i.fe8 1 9 a3 b 4 (securing a 'it'dl 'ii'c 7 1 3 1Lf4 e5 1 4 .i.e3 b5 1 5 .i.xc5
level game) 20 .i.xf6 gxf6 21 axb4 'it'xb4 22 ltJxc5 1 6 ltJe3 .i.b7 1 7 1Lxb7 .l:i.xb7 1 8 .l:i.c1
Wixb4 .i.xb4 23 ltJe4 'It>g7 24 ltJd6 with a 'ii'd 8 etc.
draw. Returning to the 1 2th move, the more 9 . . . .i.xd7 1 0 'Wxc4 b5 1 1 'Wb3 b4 1 2
sophisticated 1 2 ... b4 has also been tried. In lLle4 .i.b5 1 3 lLlxf6 + .i.xf6 1 4 .i.e3
Mochalov-Sveshnikov, Minsk 2000 compli Also possible is the greedy 14 .i.xa8 'ifxa8
cations soon led to the arrival of the ending 1 5 0, although in the following lines Black
phase after 1 3 ltJa4 'it'a5 1 4 ltJb6 ltJxc5 1 5 obtains healthy compensation: 1 5 ... 1Lxd4 1 6
ltJc4 it'b5 1 6 ltJd6+ .i.xd6 1 7 �xb5+ axb5 .i.e3 (1 6 'ii'xb4 c 5 1 7 'iVb3 e 5 1 8 a4 .i.d7 is
1 8 .i.xd6 ltJfe4 1 9 1Lxc5 .l:i.xc5, when Black's fine for Black as White still needs to com
activity was sufficient to maintain the bal plete development) 1 6 ... e5! 1 7 .l:i.c1 (White
ance: 20 .i:tfc1 'It>e7 21 .l:i.xc5 ltJxc5 22 .l:i.c1 must be careful here, e.g. 1 7 .i.xd4 exd4 1 8
.l:!.c8 23 ltJe5 ltJa4 24 .uxc8 1Lxc8 etc. 'ii'xb4? .l:i.e8 1 9 0-0-0 c5! with the better
8 lLle5 chances for Black thanks to his busier pieces
and White's insecure king) 1 7 ... c5 18 .i.xd4
exd4 1 9 .i:txc5 .l:i.e8 20 .l:i.xb5 (White returns
the exchange and secures equality) 20 ... axb5
21 'it'f2 'iVa7! 22 .i:te1 �c5 etc. (A.Sokolov)
1 4 . . J:tb8 1 5 l:td 1 c5!
8 . . . 0-0
Another Andersson game went 8 .. J::tb 8 9
ltJxd7 (or 9 'iYxc4 c5 1 0 ltJxd7 'iYxd7 1 1 .i.f4
b5 1 2 'iVd3 c4 1 3 'iYc2 .i:tb6 with counterplay
for Black) 9 ...'iVxd7 10 'iYxc4 b5 1 1 'iVd3
1Lb7 1 2 .i.xb7 ':'xb7 1 3 Wio .l:i.b6 1 4 0-0 Black temporarily sacrifices a pawn in or
'it'c6 1 5 'ii'xc6+ l::txc 6 and Black was well der to activate his forces. Note that White's
developed in Andersson-Hubner, Tilburg king is still in the centre.
1 98 1 , with White getting no chance to ex- 1 6 dxc5 'Wa5 1 7 l:td2 .i.a4 1 8 'Wc4 .i.c3!
51
Th e Ca t a l a n
Black continues t o play with purpose. Korchnoi, Moscow (8) 1 974, Black devel
1 9 O-O! i.b5 20 'tib3 oped fluidly and had no problems after 7
20 'ii'g4? is poor in view of 20 ....i.xd2 21 .i.g2 b6 8 0-0 .i.b7 9 l:tdl a6 1 0 dxc5 .txc5
.i.xd2 'ii'xa2 and White has lost a pawn for 1 1 b4 .te7 12 .tb2 b5 13 'ii'd4 l:tc8 1 4
no compensation. lLlbd2 0-0. Also possible here i s 8 lLle5 cxd4
20 . . . i.xd2 9 lLlxf7! 'it>xf7 10 .txa8 lLlc5 when White
20 ... .ta4 21 'it'c4 .i.b5 with a repetition. wins the exchange but lags behind in devel
2 1 i.xd2 i.xe2 22 l:!.e 1 opment, and must face Black's counterplay.
The passed pawn on the c-ftle gives White 7 dxc5 .txc5 8 .tg2 a6 (8 ...'il'c7 9 lLla3!?
only a little compensation. might favour White) 9 'ifb3 l:!.a7 1 0 a4 and
22 . . . it'b5 now the direct 1 O ... b5 1 1 axb5 'it'b6 1 2 0-0
22 ... 'ii'c7 23 c6 as is more accurate, with 'ilVxb5 1 3 'ilVxb5 axb5 1 4 l:txa7 .i.xa7 1 5 lLlc3
an edge for Black. keeps White ahead in the development race
23 e6 a5 24 i.e3 a4 25 it'e2 i.d3 26 and therefore earns him an edge. Chetverik
'tid 1 i.e4 27 b3 axb3 28 axb3 i.e2 29 Vujosevic, Gyongyos 1 997 instead continued
'tie2 l:!.be8 30 h3 1 0 ... b6 1 1 0-0 .i.b7 1 2 lLlc3 'iVa8, when Black
Now it is difficult for Black to proceed. should be fine in the hedgehog position that
30 . . . e5 31 'tib2 f6 32 ..t>h2 i.h5 33 l:!.e5 results from 1 3 lLlh4 .i.xg2 14 lLlxg2 0-0 1 5
%-% .i.e3 etc.
After 3 3... 'it'd3 3 4 'iVxd2 'il'xd2 3 5 .txd2 7 'ilfe2 e5 8 i.g2 b6
.i.f7 36 .txb4 .txb3 37 c7 Wf7 38 .tb7 .te6 Grivas-Kourkounakis, Athens 1 996 went
the position is balanced. 8 ... cxd4 9 lLlxd4 .ll.b4+ 10 .ll. d2 'it'e7 1 1 0-0
0-0 12 J:td 1 lLlb6 1 3 .i.xb4 'il'xb4 14 lLlc3
Game 24 and Black had problems with queenside de
H Gbner-Smyslov velopment.
TilbufJ!, 1982 9 liJe5
G.Agzamov-Zaid, USSR 1 984 demon
1 d4 d 5 2 e4 e6 3 liJf3 liJf6 4 g3 dxe4 5 strated an interesting approach to the posi
'tia4+ liJbd7 6 it'xe4 tion: 9 dxc5 .i.xc5 10 lLlg5!? llb8 1 1 lLlc3
.i.b7 12 0-0 .i.xg2 1 3 Wxg2 'ilVc8 14 l:tdl
'itb 7+ 1 5 f3 0-0 1 6 lLlce4 lLlxe4 17 lLlxe4
.i.e7 1 8 lLld6 (after this exchange White has
the superior minor piece) 1 8 ... .i.xd6 1 9 1Ixd6
l:tbc8 20 'it'dl and White was better.
9 . . . liJd5 1 0 liJe3
The aggressive 10 lLlc6!? 'iVc7 1 1 e4 is in
teresting. Zaitchik-A.Ivanov, Beltsy 1 977
continued 1 1 ...'ii'x c6 1 2 exd5 exd5 1 3 lLlc3
lLlf6 1 4 .i.g5 cxd4 1 5 .i.xf6 dxc3 1 6 1l.xc3
and Black once again experienced develop
ment difficulties. There followed 1 6 ... .i.e6 17
'it'e2 'iWb5 18 'ii'e 5 �c8 1 9 a4 'ii'c 4 20 .i.fl
6 . . . a6 'iie4+ 21 'ii'xe4 dxe4 22 .i.xa6, White win
The immediate break in the centre with ning back the pawn with advantage.
6 ... c5 is also possible, bringing the game to a 1 0 . . . i.b7
new junction. For example in Karpov- 1O ...lLlxe5 1 1 lLlxd5 exd5 12 dxe5 .i.e7 13
52
4 . . . dx c 4 5 'Wi a 4 +
0-0 0-0 1 4 f4 and White has an initiative on 28 . . . J:txa2 29 J:tac 1 J:t2a4 30 'ii"c 5 'Wixc5
the kingside. 3 1 J:txc5 J:ta 1 32 J:tcc 1
1 1 liJxd5 exd5 1 2 0-0 !il.. e 7 1 3 J:td 1 0-0 32 l:[xa 1 l:!.xa 1 33 'it>f1 d3 34 l:[d5 e4 35 f3
1 4 'Wif5 �xb2 36 fxe4 iLc3 is poor for White.
14 �f4 l:!.c8 1 5 ..wfS is more precise. 32 . . . J:txc 1 33 J:txc 1 e4! 34 '1t>f 1 J:ta2 35
14 . . . liJxe5 1 5 dxe5 J:ta7 ! J:tb 1 '1t>f7 36 !il.. b4 J:ta4 37 !il.. d 2 '1t>e6 38
h4 '1t>d5
Black has control of the centre and supe
rior forces.
39 '1t>e 1 J:ta2 40 h 5 d3 4 1 !il.. c 1 !il.. d 4 42
g4 b4 43 g5
43 .td2 �xb2 44 �xb4 doesn't work for
White in view of 44 .. �d4 45 .td2 .txf2+.
.
43 . . . 1:.a8
The threat of ... J:Ih8 forces White into a
hopeless rook ending.
44 !il.. e 3 !il.. x e3 45 fxe3 J:th8 46 J:ta 1 J:txh5
47 J:ta7 g6 48 J:ta6 J:th2 49 J:txg6 J:te2+
,?O '1t>d 1 J:txe3 51 J:tg8 J:tg3 52 '1t>d2 '1t>c4
1 6 e6?! 53 b3 + '1t>xb3 54 g6 J:tg2+ 55 '1t>e3 d2
White goes for the direct attack in the cen 56 J:td8 '1t>c2 57 J:tc8 + '1t>d 1 0-1
tre. Other tries don't promise an advantage,
e.g. 1 6 'iVd3 'iVc7 1 7 �xd5 �xd5 1 8 'it'xd5 Game 25
l:!.d8 1 9 'iib 3 l:txd 1+ 20 'it'xd 1 'iVxe5 with an Alekhine-Junge
equal game, or Smyslov's 1 6 e3 g6 1 7 'iVf4 f6 Prague 1942
1 8 e6 'it'c8, when Black frees himself success
fully. 1 d4 d 5 2 c4 e6 3 liJf3 liJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
1 6 . . . d4 1 7 !il.. x b7 J:txb7 1 8 e3 !il.. f 6 1 9 'ii"a 4+ liJbd7 6 'ii"x c4 a6 7 !il.. g 2
exd4 �e7 ! 20 !il.. e 3
20 exf7+ l:1fxf7 21 ..wd3 'it'xd4! 22 'iVb3 c4
hands over the initiative to Black.
20 . . .fxe6 21 'Wig4 h5! 22 'Wixh5
This is better than 22 'iVe4 cxd4 23 �xd4
l:!.d7 24 'it'xe6+ 'it>h8 25 'ii'xd7 'ii'x d7 26
.i.xf6 'it'e6 27 .td4 when White suffers on
the light squares.
22 . . .cxd4 23 'Wie2 'ii"d 5!
The centralization of the queen and
Black's centre are more important features
here than the a-pawn.
24 'ii"x a6 b5 25 'Wia5 e5 26 !il.. d 2 J:ta8 27
'Wib4 J:tea7 28 !il.. e 1 7 . . . b5
White should prefer the more adventur Also possible is 7 ... c5 8 dxc5 .txc5 9 'it'd3
ous 28 l:1ac1 l:txa2 29 l:!.c5 'iWf3 30 l:!.dc1 b5!?, as played in Nogueiras-Marjanovic,
..wd3! 31 l:!.xb5 �h7, although Black retains Sarajevo 1 985, which continued 10 4Je5 4Jd5
the initiative. 1 1 4Jxd7 �xd7 12 4Jc3 4Jb4 13 'ii'b l �c6
53
Th e Ca t a l a n
54
4 . . . dx c 4 5 'iVa 4 +
into serious trouble, e.g. 1 7 ... l:td8 1 8 4Jxd4! 23 . . J�hc8 24 e4! 'iWb3 25 11a 1 ! b4 26
.tIxd4 1 9 l:ta8+ <j;; e 7 20 .lte3 and White is .!:taS + �b5 27 .!:ta5 + �cS 28 'iVc5+ �d7
winning. 1 5 ... .ltc5 1 6 4Jb3 presents White 29 .!:ta7 + 1 -0
with compensation. Black is mated.
16 ttJb3 ttJc5?!
Better is 16 ... �e7 1 7 e3 dxe3 18 �xe3 Game 26
'iVe6, when 19 4Ja5! earns White compensa Cu . H ansen-Van Wely
tion. Istanbul 2000
1 7 ttJxc5 Jtxc5?
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJfS 4 g3 dxc4 5
'iVa4+ ttJbd7 S 'iWxc4 as 7 Jtg2 b5 8 'iVc6
.!:tb8 9 Jtf4 ttJd5
011- Morozevich, Groningen 1 997 went
9 ... i.b4+!? to 4Jbd2 (to i.d2 i.c5!? is inter
esting, 1 1 dxc5 .ltb7 1 2 4Je5 .ltxc6 1 3 tDxc6
"iVc8 1 4 4Ja7 introducing a draw by repeti-
_ tion) to . . i.b7 1 1 'it'xc7 'iVxc7 12 i.xc7 .tIc8
.
1 0 . . . Jte7
Again 1O ... i.b4+?! is possible. After 1 1
tDbd2 4Je7 1 2 .ltxe7 .ltxe7 1 3 l:tc1 White
controls the c-file and has the better chances,
but this is a lesser evil for Black than the
eccentric 12 .. .'itxe7?!, when Smyslov
Black's king is stranded. S.Polgar, London 1 996 left White better after
55
Th e C a t a l a n
1 3 'it'c2 iLb7 1 4 a 3 iLxd2+ 1 5 'iixd2 f6 1 6 1 5 ... iLxf3 1 6 iLxf3 c 5 1 7 dxc5 liJxc5 1 8 .l:i.fc 1
l:. c 1 nc8 1 7 'iVb4+ c;t> e 8 1 8 0-0. slightly favours White. The bishop i s better
1 1 i.xe7 'i'xe7 1 2 ttJc3 i.b7 than the knight, but Black's king is active
12 ... liJb4?! leads to wild complications: 1 3 near the centre. There followed 1 8 ....l':thc8 1 9
'it'xc7! liJc2+ 1 4 c;t>dl ! liJxal 1 5 liJe5! 'iVd8! .l:!.c2 liJd7 20 l::t ac1 liJb6 2 1 .l:!.xc8 .l:!.xc8 22
1 6 'it'xd8+ c;t>xd8 1 7 liJc6+ (better than 1 7 .l:i.xc8 liJxc8 23 iLb7 liJd6 24 iLxa6 c;t>d7 25
liJxf7+ c;t>e7 1 8 liJxh8 b4 1 9 liJa4 b 3 and b3 c;t>c6 26 a4 c;t>b6 27 iLxb5 liJxb5 28 axb5
Black is doing fine) 1 7 ...c;t>c7 1 8 liJxb8 and c;t>xb5 29 c;t>g2 c;t>b4 30 �f3 c;t>xb3 with a
now Monin-Vul, Kecskemet 1 992 went draw.
1 8 ... c;t>xb8 1 9 c;t>d2 liJb6 20 l::tx al b4 21 liJdl 1 5 " .i.d5 ! ?
l:td8, when Black gets his pawn back after 22 Black also has 1 5 .. J:tb6 1 6 0-0 .uc8, e.g. 1 7
e3 e5 but walks into the clever 23 b3 exd4 24 liJd2 iLxg2 1 8 c;t>xg2 c5 1 9 dxc5 �xc5 20
e4 (Vul) with the better prospects for White, liJb3 l::t x c1 21 i:txc 1 , when the knight is bet
whose knight will find a good outpost on d3. ter on b3. Thanks to his control of the c-ftle
Illescas-Onischuk, Wijk aan Zee 1 997 went White has the slightly better prospects. Gle
1 8 ... liJxb8 1 9 c;t>d2 :d8 20 e3 e5, when Illes izerov-Serper, Moscow 1 992 proved less
cas proposes 21 :tc1 with advantage to attractive for White after 1 7 liJg5 iLxg2 1 8
White, who keeps the extra pawn. c;t>xg2 .l:i.d6! ' 1 9 e3?! when, i f he had time for
Also interesting is 1 2 ...'iVb4!? 1 3 0-0 liJxc3 liJe4, he would enjoy a solid advantage.
1 4 bxc3 'it'd6 1 5 'it'xd6 cxd6, when the end However, 1 9 ... c5 20 dxc5 l:td5! is enough for
ing is okay for Black. Atalik-Li Wenliang, a small lead for Black.
Beijing 1 996 was agreed drawn after 1 6 a4 1 6 l:txc7 l:thc8 1 7 l:ta7
bxa4 1 7 l:txa4 c;t>e7 1 8 l:1fa 1 l::tb 2 1 9 e3 iLb7 1 7 l:txc8 l::tx c8 1 8 c;t>d2 liJf6 and Black
20 liJe 1 iLxg2 21 c;t>xg2 l::t c 8 22 l:txa6 .l:!.xc3 controls the light squares in the centre and
23 .l:!.6a2 .l:!.xa2 24 lha2. has compensation for the pawn.
1 3 ttJxd5 i.xc6 1 4 ttJxe7 <tIxe7 1 7 " .11a8
Also possible is 1 7...l::t c 2!? 1 8 0-0 f6, again
with compensation.
1 8 l:txa8 i.xa8 1 9 <tId2 ttJf6 20 ttJe 1
20 l:tgl seems too slow. After 20 .. J::tc4 21
liJe5 lhd4+ 22 c;t>e3 J:td8 23 iLxa8 l:txa8 24
.l:!.c1 the idea is to generate activity but Black
defends successfully with 24 ... liJd5+.
20" .i.xg2 21 ttJxg2 l:td8 22 e3 ttJe4+ 23
<tIe2 l:tc8
Black is very active.
24 ttJe 1 l:tc 1 25 l:tg 1 f5 26 f3 ttJf6 27
l:tg2
Or 27 c;t>d2 l:tal 28 a3 liJd5 with
1 5 l:tc 1 compensation.
1 5 0-0 gives Black the opportunity to 27 " .ttJd5 28 e4 fxe4 29 fxe4 ttJf6 30
launch the c-pawn. Wojtkiewicz-Kaidanov, ttJd3 l:tc4 31 ttJe5 l:tc2 + 32 <tIf3 l:txg2 33
New York 1 993 is a good example, when <tIxg2 ttJxe4 Yz Y2-
56
4 . . . dx c 4 5 � a 4 +
Summary
After 5 ... c6 6 'it'xc4 b5 7 i*'c2 �b7 8 �g2 lLibd7 the continuation 9 lLie5 is the most interest
ing available to White, albeit one that offers nothing more than equality. Black has 9 ... lLixe5 1 0
dxe5 lLid5!, closing the dangerous h l -a8 diagonal, but perhaps 9 ...'iVb6 i s even more precise,
attacking the d4-pawn and renewing the threat of ... c6-c5.
There is also another defence that confl11TI s 5 'ifa4+ lacks punch. After 5 ... �d7 6 'iVxc4
.ic6 7 �g2 the game Andersson-Illescas is perhaps the most exact advertisement: 7 ... �d5 8
'l'd3 �e4 9 'iVdl c5 1 0 lLic3 �c6 etc.
Black can, step by step, equalize in the 5 ... lLibd7 variation. As is demonstrated in Game 24,
Black should not fear 6 'iVxc4 a6 7 'iVc2 c5 8 �g2. Actually this is the position from the varia-
tion 5 ... c6 6 'it'xc4 b5 7 'iVc2 �b7 8 �g2 lLibd7 with the extra tempo ... a7-a6 (as Black will
play ... c6-c5 later in that line, but here do it in one go with ... c7-c5), which is therefore a defi-
nite improvement on a position considered fine for Black. It is interesting that the same posi
tion can occur after the main continuation 8 'i'c6 :tb8 (after 9 0-0 �b7 10 'iVc2 c5) . For Black
it is enough to play ... :b8-c8, which guarantees him an equal game. Therefore White most
often aims to use the position of the queen on c6 for an attack on the weakened c7-square
with 9 �f4.
Black can sacrifice a pawn in order to activate his pieces with 9 ... �b4 (Morozevich). In
Game 26, Hansen-Van Wely, we see that in the main line after 9 ...lLid5 10 iLg5 �e7 1 1 �xe7
'i'xe7 the chances are approximately even.
57
CHA PTER FOUR I
The Semi-Open Catalan :
4 . . . dxc4 5 i.. g 2 i.. e 7 6 0-0 0-0
58
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 � g 2 � e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
slightly better development and pressure plays ... c7-c5 without any trouble. Such posi
down the b-file. Here White has a major tions tend to be equal. This is why most
choice between 8 jLxc6 bxc6 9 4Jxc6 �e8 players now prefer to develop the dark
10 4Jxe7 'iVxe7 1 1 'iVa4 (Game 31), 8 4Jxc6 squared bishop on f4 (Games 41 & 42) or d2
bxc6 9 e3 (Game 32) and the more popular 8 (Games 43-45) . After 1 0 jLf4 i.d6 or 1 0
ttJxc6 bxc6 9 4Ja3 (Games 33 & 34). i.d2 jLd6 the further 1 1 i.g5 makes more
The main line these days is 7 'tic2, with sense as it is difficult for Black to achieve
the obvious aim of restoring material equity. ... c7-c5 (see the notes to Game 43). After 1 0
If Black tries to protect his extra pawn with i.f4 w e consider 1 O ...4Jc6 i n Game 41 and
... b7-b5 he can quickly lose material after 8 a4 1 O ... 4Jd5 in Game 42. We discuss various
c6? 9 axb5 cxb5 1 0 4Jg5. possibilities for Black after 1 0 jLd2 in Game
After 7 'iVc2 c5 White has a steady edge 43, and various 1 1 th moves for Black after
similar to that after 7 4Je5 c5. The most 1 0 i.d2 i.e4 1 1 �c1 in Game 44. The main
common reply to 7 'iVc2 is 7 ... a6. Now White answer, the subtle manoeuvre 1 1 ...i.b7, is
has to decide whether he wants to take on c4 considered in Game 45.
immediately or first prevent ... b7-b5 with 8
a4. The 8 a4 line has, over time, become very Game 27
popular. The defences 8 ... b6 and 8 ... 4Jbd7 Wojtkiewicz-Dzhandzhgava
have disappeared from recent practice, and Hastings 1989/90
even 8 ... 4Jc6 is seldom seen. After 9 'iVxc4
'iVd5 10 4Jbd2 l:td8 1 1 e3 Black rehabilitated 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 liJf3 liJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
1 1 ...i.d7 in Lahner-Michenka with tactics, �g2 �e7 6 0-0
replying to 12 4Je5?! 4Jxe5 13 'iVc7 with Another move is 6 4Jc3, one sample game
13 ... 4Jc6! etc. However, after the quiet 12 b3 going 6...0-0 7 4Je5 c5 8 dxc5 'tic7 9 4Jxc4
Black's position is passive. 'ii'x c5 1 0 �3 4Jc6 1 1 jLe3 4Jd4 1 2 i.xd4
In the case of 8 ... c5 (Game 35) 9 4Jbd2 'ii'xd4 1 3 0-0 l:tb8, when White had some
cxd4 1 0 4Jxc4 4Jc6 1 1 l:tdl 4Jd5 it is interest pressure on the queenside in Gelfand
ing to play 1 2 4Jd4, but it seems that this is Speelman, linares 1 99 1 , although Black
not enough for an advantage. Instead White managed to free himself in the event of 1 4
obtains the better prospects after 9 dxc5 i.xc5 l:tfd1 �c5 1 5 l;Iac1 jLd7 1 6 4Je4 'iib5 1 7
10 tLlbd2 4Jc6 1 1 4Jxc4 'ii'e7 12 4Jfe5. 'ii'd 3 l:tfd8 1 8 4Jed6 'iVa6 1 9 4Je3 b 5 20 'iVa3
Today, after 8 a4, most players prefer 'ii'b 6, with an equal middlegame position.
8 ... jLd7 to try to place the bishop on the long 6 . . . 0-0
diagonal. White gets very little from exchang
ing this bishop with 9 4Je5 i.c6 1 0 4Jxc6
tLlxc6 because Black is well developed. After
8 ... i.d7 White should choose between 9 l:tdl
i.c6 10 4Jc3 (Games 36 & 37) and 9 'it'c4
(Games 38-40) .
The immediate 8 'iVxc4 permits Black's
bishop to occupy the long diagonal after
8 ... b5 9 �c2 jLb7. The drawback of this
continuation from Black's point of view is
the weakening of the queenside pawns. The
main plan for Black here is the advance ... c7-
c5. For example after 10 i.g5 Black often
59
Th e C a t a la n
60
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 i. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
tDxc3 1 7 bxc3 ttJg4 1 8 ttJe3 ttJxf2! was terri 29 4Jg6 i.gS 30 <l;g2 <l;e6 3 1 <l;f3 %:td7
ble for White. Or 3 1 ...'it>fS 32 J::!e 1 ! J::!d 7 33 l:te4 and f4
9 'i'e2 4Jb6 1 0 %:td 1 i.d7 1 1 e4 %:teS falls.
32 <l;e4 %:tadS 33 %:tae 1
Now ... c7-c5 is no longer possible.
33 . . . %:tf7 34 l:!.g 1 !
Directed against ... f4-f3.
34 .. J:rtS 3S %:tg4 %:td7 36 b4 e6 37 a4 f3
3S i.xgS hxgS 39 bS!
The final breakthrough.
39 . . . axbS 40 axbS %:te7
40 ... cxb5 loses to 41 .l:!.c8 l::t d f7 42 l1e8+
'iitd7 43 e6+ etc.
41 %:teS %:teS 42 bxe6 bxe6 43 %:tg 1 4Jf4
44 %:tge 1 %:tf7 4S %:txe6 + %:txe6 46 %:txe6 +
1 -0
1 2 i.e3
12 �f4!? is worth a try. White plays 7 4Ja3
1 2 . . . i.fS 1 3 h4
White uses his space advantage to engi Game 28
neer an attack. Poluljahov-Nikolaev
1 3 . . . 'i'eS 1 4 i.f4 a6 1 S hS h6 1 6 a3 f6 Belorechensk 1988
Black has no time to push the c-pawn
immediately as 1 6 ...ttJa5 1 7 ttJe5! c5 1 8 dxc5 1 d4 dS 2 e4 e6 3 4Jf3 4Jf6 4 g3 dxe4 S
�xc5 1 9 �g4! (Wojtkiewicz) is very promis i.g2 i.e7 6 0-0 0-0 7 4Ja3
ing for White.
1 7 eS fS 1 S 4Jh4 4Je7 1 9 g4! 4JbdS 20
i.d2 i.e6
After 20 ... ttJxc3 21 bxc3 fxg4 22 'i!Vxg4
White still has a dangerous attack, although
this looks better than what happens in the
game.
21 gxfS exfS 22 'ii'x e4
White has won back the pawn and Black
still hasn't completed development.
22 . . . %:tdS 23 4JxdS! i.xdS
23 ...ttJxd5?! 24 i.h3 loses .the pawn on fS.
24 i.xdS + 4JxdS 2S 'i'd3 f4 26 'iWfS!
In the ending White keeps the advantage. 7 . . . i.xa3
26 . . . 'ii'x fS 27 4JxfS <l;f7 2S 4Jh4 i.e7 Also possible is 7 ... c3 8 bxc3 c5, although
Another line goes 28 ... c5 29 dxc5 �xc5 30 this seems to help White consolide the cen
J::!ac1 i.b6 31 ttJg6 'iit e 6 32 'it'g2 with advan tre. Grabuzov-Vavra, Pardubice 1 993 con
tage to White, the f4-pawn being vulnerable. tinued 9 ttJe5 ttJbd7 (9 ... ttJd5 10 'iib 3 cxd4
Nevertheless, Black should go for this break 1 1 cxd4 ttJc6 12 ttJxc6 bxc6 1 3 e4 ttJb6 1 4
at some point in order to undermine the �e3 i s a shade preferable for White) 1 0
support of the e5-pawn. ttJac4 ttJxe5 1 1 ttJxe5 'fIc7 1 2 'iVb3 l:td8 1 3
61
Th e C a t a la n
.i.f4 lLlhS 1 4 .i.e3 lLlf6 1 S :fd 1 and White's lLlxf6+ 'iVxf6 1 S .i.f4 'ii'e 7 1 6 a4 iLb7 1 7 .l:te1
central control was enough for an edge. with definite compensation.
Black also has 7 ... .i.d7 8 lLlxc4 .i.c6 9 .i.f4 9 a6 1 0 �a3 �e8 1 1 ttJe5 ttJd5 1 2 e4
. . .
White took the other c-pawn: 8 dxcS iLxcs 9 In the event of 12 . ..ttJ f6 White can sacri
lLlxc4 lLlc6 1 0 a3 as 1 1 iLgS h6 1 2 'iVxd8 fice a piece with 1 3 lLlxf7!? 'it>xf7 1 4 eS lLldS
lIxd8 1 3 iLxf6 gxf6 14 .l:tfd1 .i.d7 1 S lLlfd2! 1 S 'ii'hS+ 'it>g8 1 6 .i.e4 g6, when Krasenkow
and (again) Black's weakened pawns tipped Arbakov, Moscow 1 989 witnessed 1 7 iLxg6!
the balance in White's favour, while White's hxg6 1 8 'iWxg6+ 'it>h8 1 9 i:tfe 1 lLlc3 (White's
more active forces are also significant. threat was l:te4) 20 .l:te3 .i.b 7 (20 ... 'it'd7 21
8 bxa3 b5 "iVhS+ 'it>g7 22 :0 lLldS 23 g4! - Krasenkow
Another possibility is 8 ... lLldS 9 'iYc2 bS - wins for White) 21 I!.xc3 lLld7?! 22 'iYh6+
10 i:tb 1 a6 1 1 i:td 1 h6 12 lLleS iLd7 13 a4 'it>g8 23 g4 lie7 24 l:th3 with a dangerous
lLlc6 14 .i.a3 with compensation for the attack. Black can improve with 2 1 ...lLlc6!,
pawn in Kamsky-Gogoladze, Ivano forcing the draw: 22 'iVh6+ 'it>g8 23 "iVg6+
Frankovsk 1 988. The earlier encounter 'it>h8 etc. (Mitenkov) . Note that Black must
Sveshnikov-Ubilava, USSR 1 98 1 went accept the second sacrifice, e.g. 1 7 ...l:te 7?! 1 8
8 ... lLlbd7 9 a4 as 1 0 .i.a3 Ue8 1 1 .l:lc1 .l:ta6!? iLxe7 'ii'x e7 1 9 .i.e4 (also strong i s 1 9
(1 1 ...lLlb6 12 lLleS iLd7 13 iLxb7 iLxa4 14 iLxh7+!? "iVxh7 2 0 'iiVe8+ 'it>g7 21 'iVxc8 and
'it'd2 and Black keeps the pawn but at the Black's forces lack co-ordination) 1 9 ...lLlc6
cost of damaging his own pawns, and White 20 f4 'iif7 , Kuzmin-Anand, Frunze 1 988.
also has the bishop pair) 12 .l:txc4 lLlb6 1 3 Then Anand gives 21 .i.xh7+! 'iYxh7 22
.l:tcs iLd7 1 4 lLleS lLlxa4 1 S iLxb7 lLlxcs 1 6 'iVe8+ 'it>g7 23 f5! iLb7 24 f6+ 'it>h6 2S f7
iLxcs iLc8 1 7 lLlc6 'iYd7 1 8 lLlb8 'iVbs 1 9 with a near decisive lead.
iLxa6 .i.xa6 2 0 lLlxa6 "iVxa6 2 1 'iVc2 and the If this is not your style, then there is the
bishop and superior formation left White on quieter 1 3 l:[b1 iLb7 1 4 :e1 , after which
top. Black must play precisely to maintain the
9 a4 balance. Gleizerov-Zhukhovitsky, USSR
An interesting plan is 9 lLlgS!? c6 1 0 e4 h6 1 986 continued 14 ... lLlc6 1 S lLlxc4 'iVxd4 1 6
1 1 eS lLldS 12 lLle4, White's knight exploiting 'it'c2 "iVxc4 (16...'iWa7 1 7 lLld2 i s interesting)
the weakened dark squares in Black's camp. 1 7 'it'xc4 bxc4 1 8 .l:txb7 and now instead of
Kinsman-Stefansson, Stockholm 1 993 saw 1 8 ... lLleS?! 1 9 .l:tc1 .l:tec8 20 f4 lLlc6 21 .l:tbb1
White emerge from 1 2 ... f5 1 3 exf6 lLlxf6 1 4 as 22 l:txc4 lLlb4 23 iLxb4 axb4 24 l:tbxb4,
62
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 SL g 2 SL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
Black should have played 1 8 ...ttJd4 1 9 e5 1 8 SLb4 exd5 1 9 exd5 SLxd5 20 SLxc3
lDd5 with chances for both sides. White has SLxg2 21 4Jg4!
the bishop pair to compensate the two 21 'it'xg2 'iVd5+ 22 llf3 is a more quiet
knights and the passed pawn on the c-file. approach, the dark-squared bishop promising
1 3 a5 White good chances. Nevertheless, White's
An interesting option is 13 'it'h5!? f6 14 attack in the game looks formidable.
lDg4 c6 15 as ttJa4. 21 . . . 4Jh5 22 l:tad 1 ! SLd5 23 f5! l:te2 24
1 3 . . . 4J6d7 1 4 f4 4Je3 c6 25 fxg6 fxg6 26 4Jxd5 cxd5 27
But now the same manoeuvre is not to be l:txd5
recommended for White: 14 'it'h5?! ttJxe5 1 5
dxe5 �d3 1 6 Jte7 (1 6 jLc5 and the queen
sacrifice 1 6 ...ttJd7 1 7 lladl ttJxc5!? is good)
16...l:txe7 1 7 llad 1 c5 1 8 l:txd3 cxd3 and
Black has the better chances. The pawn pha
lanx is very strong.
14 . . . SLb7 1 5 'ifh5
27 . . . 4Jd7??
The oruy route is 27 ...'iVe8 28 l:txh5 'iVe3+
29 ..wxe3 l:txe3, when White keeps an advan
tage in the endgame due to his more active
forces after 30 l:tc5 ttJd7 31 l:I.c7 ltJe5 32
jLxe5 l:txe5 33 l:tm l:tc8 34 l:txh7 l:txc7 35
l:txc7 b4 36 l:tc6 l:txa5 37 l:txg6+ 'it>f7 38 l:tg4
1 5 . . . g6 l:txa2 39 l:txb4 as.
15 ...ttJxe5 16 fxe5 'iVxd4+ 17 'it>hl wins a 28 l:txh5! 'ife7 29 'iVxg6 + ! 1 -0
pawn for Black but the f-file is opened for
attack. Game 29
1 6 'ifh6? Khalifman-Portisch
A poor move. White finds himself with Rqkjavik 199 1
the initiative after 1 6 'it'h3 ttJxe5 1 7 dxe5
'i'd4+ 1 8 'it>hl jLxe4 1 9 .l:tadl 'iVe3 20 l:tfel 1 d 4 d 5 2 c4 e 6 3 4Jf3 4Jf6 4 g 3 dxc4 5
'i'xa3 21 jLxe4. SLg2 SLe7 6 0-0 0-0 7 4Ja3 SLxa3 8 bxa3
1 6 . . . 4Jf6? SLd7
16 ... ttJxe5 1 7 dxe5 'iVd4+ 1 8 'itth l jLxe4 After 8 ... ttJc6 9 jLb2 Y.Mikhalevsky
19 lladl jLxg2+ 20 'itt xg2 'iVe4+ 21 'it>h3 Pigusov, Ubeda 1 997 went 9 ... ttJd5 10 l:I.cl
ltJc6 wins for Black. ttJb6 1 1 e4 i.. d7 1 2 l:te l , when White's cen
1 7 d5 c3 tral control served as sufficient compensation
The capture 17 ... exd5 18 exd5 Jtxd5 1 9 for the pawn. There followed 12 ...ttJe7 1 3
l:tadl c 6 20 Jtb2 simply creates attacking ttJe5 i..b 5 1 4 'iVh5 'iVe8 1 5 Jth3 f5 1 6 'iVg5
chances for White. h6 1 7 'iNh4 l:tf6 (17 ... ttJg6 1 8 ttJxg6 'iVxg6 1 9
63
Th e Ca t a l a n
dS is well balanced) 1 8 �g2 c 6 1 9 d S ! ? cxdS 1 7 �xeS for White, whose bishops dominate
20 exdS ttJexdS 21 ttJxc4 �xc4 22 �xf6 in this wide open position.
ttJxf6 23 l::txc4 ttJxc4 24 'ii'x c4 .u.c8 25 1ib3 Another try is 1 1 .. .'ilid6!? 12 ltc1 bS 13 e4
cJ;; f7 26 'ii'xb7+ 'ii'd 7, the smoke clearing to eS! 14 f4 l:tad8! 1 5 dS (1 5 fxeS ttJxeS 16 'ii'c2
reveal a level ending. 'ilVb6 favours Black, whose knight is heading
Another path is 9 ...!tb8 1 0 'ii'c 2 bS 1 1 for d3) 1 S ... exf4 1 6 gxf4 ltfe8. Here White's
llad1 when Korchnoi-o.Rodriquez, Barce centre looks dominating, but Wnite must
lona 1 992 continued 1 1 ...ttJe7 (1 1 ...�b7?! 1 2 keep his eyes peeled, e.g. 1 7 cJ;; h 1 ttJxe4! 1 8
ttJgS! h6 1 3 dS! ttJb4 1 4 axb4 hxgS 1 5 dxe6 �xe4 l:txe4 1 9 dxc6 'ilixc6 2 0 'ii'f3 l:td3 21
'ii'e 7 1 6 exf7+ 1hf7 1 7 �xb7 l:hb7 1 8 'ii'g6! 'iit'g2 'iit'g6 with the superior ending for Black.
left Black with weak pawns .in Glek-Klovans, White was more circumspect in Alburt
Tashkent 1 987) 1 2 e4 �b7 1 3 l:tfe 1 ttJg6 1 4 Geller, New York 1 990, albeit only for a few
h4. White's latest thrust i s quite typical. Hav moves: 1 7 'ii' c2 ttJe 7 1 8 'ii'f2 0g4 1 9 'iiig3 f5
ing completed development and with control 20 llcd1 'ii'b6+ and now 21 �d4? met with
of the centre, White begins a kingside offen 2 1 . . .'ii'g6! 22 �f3 hS! and Black assumed
sive: 1 4 ... .:te8 1 5 ttJh2 'ii'e 7 1 6 'ii'e2 eS 1 7 hS control because White was unable to hold on
ttJf8 1 8 dxeS ttJ6d7 1 9 ttJg4 h6 20 f4 with a to the centre and his king was also suscepti
menacing initiative. ble to attack. Geller offers 21 cJ;; h 1 as an
9 lLle5 improvement, when 2 1 . . .'ii'e 3!? 22 �f3 c3 23
Zaichik-Soffer, Rishon Ie Zion 1 998 went �c1 'ilics 24 �xg4 fxg4 25 'ii'xg4 ttJg6 is
9 'ii'c 2 �c6, Black surrendering the c4-pawn unclear.
to complete development. This policy 1 2 l:1.b 1
proved successfill after 10 1fxc4 ttJbd7 1 1 Glek-Klovans, Frunze 1 988 went 1 2 l::tc 1
�gS �dS 1 2 'ii'b4 b6 1 3 !tfd1 h6 1 4 �xf6 ttJb6 13 e3 'ilid7 14 1fc2 ltab8 1 S l:tfd1 l:iJe7
'ii'xf6 1 5 !iac 1 llfc8 1 6 'ii'b 1 �b7 1 7 e4 'ilie7 16 � f1 'ii'a4 17 'iit'b 1 , White uninterested in
1 8 'iiid3 ttJf8 1 9 dS l:td8 20 'ii'b 3 .l:tac8, when the exchange of queens as this would relieve
Black had a solid position. some of the pressure. After 1 7 .. .l::tfd 8 1 8 e4
9 . . . .ltc6 1 0 lLlxc6 lLlxc6 1 1 .ltb2 lld6 1 9 'ii'a 1 f6 20 J:te1 ttJc6 21 �h3 .l:!.f8 22
eS!? fxeS 23 dxeS %:td2 24 �xe6+ 'It>h8 25
�f1 'ii'b s 26 �c3 l:td3 the situation remained
unclear.
1 2 . . . lLlb6
1 2 ... bS?! 1 3 e4 ttJb6, as in Krasenkow
Timoscenko, Tashkent 1 987, appears dubi
ous. Krasenkow analyses the following: 1 4
d S ! ttJe7 1 5 'ii'g4 ttJg6 1 6 dxe6 with the more
pleasant game for White, or 1 4 ... exdS 1 5
exdS ttJe7 1 6 d 6 'ii'xd6 1 7 'ilixd6 cxd6 1 8
�xa8 ttJxa8 1 9 lHd 1 when Black has two
pawns for the exchange but White's activity
and Black's vulnerable pawns combine to
1 1 . . .lLld5 favour the first player.
1 1 . ..'ilid7?! looks wrong. Kozul- 1 3 e3 'iid 6 1 4 'iic 2 .l:!.fd8 1 5 J:!.fd 1 J:!.ab8
Kir.Georgiev, Sarajevo 2002 went 1 2 'ilVa4 1 6 e4 e5! 1 7 d5
ttJxd4 1 3 'ilixc4 l:.ad8, when Georgiev pro This is better than 1 7 dxeS?! 'it'cs 1 8 e6
poses 14 l:tfd 1 eS 1 5 e3 'iiie6 1 6 'ii' xe6 ttJxe6 fxe6 1 9 l:txd8+ l::tx d8 20 eS ttJd4 21 i.xd4
64
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 iL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
.l:!.xd4 with an aggressive stance for Black. retained excellent winning chances: 33 Wg4!
17 . . . ttJd4! 1 8 iLxd4 exd4 1 9 J:txd4 c6 'iVg6+ 34 Wf3 �f6+ 35 We4 g6 36 .ltd3
The greedy looking 19 ......xa3 20 e5 'iVc5 iff5+ 37 Wd4 iff6+ 38 Wc5 "'e5+ 39 <>t>c6
is an option. "'f6+ 40 Wc7 ife7+ 41 Wb8 "'d8+ 42 <>t>xa7
20 a4 'ii'c 5 "'xa5+ 43 "'a6 ifc5+ 44 Was etc.
20... cxd5 2 1 exd5 g6 22 as ifc5 23 'iWc3
tZlxd5 24 ifxc4 ifxc4 25 l:txc4 was seen in White plays 7 ttJe5
Krasenkow-Flear, Paris 1 990, the Catalan
bishop affording White the lead. Came 30
21 'ii'c 3 cxd5 Psa khis-Stefansson
2 1 . . .ttJxa4 22 'iVxc4 'iVxc4 23 l:Ixc4 ttJb6 Winnipeg 1997
24 dxc6 ttJxc4 25 c7 .l:!.dc8 26 cxb8'ii l:txb8
(Korpics-Gyimesi, Balatonbereny 1 992) leads 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
to a similar minor piece endgame, with the iLg2 iLe7 6 0-0 0-0 7 ttJe5
better prospects for White.
22 exd5 J:tbc8 23 J:tb5
7 . . . c5
Another option is the rather unorthodox
23 . . . 'ii'e 7? ! 7 .. .'iWd6 8 ttJxc4 �a6. Tukmakov-G.Kuzmin,
23. . .ttJxa4 2 4 l:Ixc5 ttJxc3 2 5 lldxc4 nxc5 Tallinn 1 998 continued 9 �3 �d8 10 ttJc3
26 l:txc5 ttJxa2 and a draw was agreed in ttJc6 (1 O .. .l::txd4? 1 1 ttJb5 l:Id7 12 ttJe5 and
Nesis-Andonov, Correspondence 1 997. Black loses the exchange) 1 1 e3 ttJa5 1 2
24 a5 ttJa4 25 'ii'c 2 'ii'e 1 + 26 iLf 1 ttJc3 ttJxa5 'iix a5 1 3 .ltd2 'iWb6 1 4 'iVc2 .ltd7 1 5
27 J:txb7 ttJxd5 28 J:txc4 b4 .ltc6 1 6 ttJa4 .ltxa4 1 7 �xa4 e 5 1 8 .ltc3
With 28 l:Id1 ! 'ili'e5 (28 .. .'iVxa5? loses to 29 e4 19 J:tfc 1 �e6 20 �c2 .ltd6 21 b5 l:te8 22
'i'f5!) 29 .ltxc4 White keeps an advantage. .ltd2 h5 23 h3 a6 24 a4 and White had the
2B . . . ttJe3 ! ? initiative.
Black has to try something. The straight 8 dxc5 iLxc5
forward 28 . . .l:Ixc4 29 �xc4 'ili'xa5 30 �a6 It appears that Black's queen is awk-wardly
leads to a very difficult ending. placed after 8 . . .�c7 9 ttJxc4 ifxc5, as was
29 fxe3 J:txc4 30 'ii'xc4 'ii'x e3 + 3 1 'itg2 demonstrated in Pinter-Kallai, Hungary 1 988:
J:td2+ 32 'ith3 'ii'h 6+ 33 'ii'h 4? % - % 10 b3 l:td8 1 1 ttJbd2 ttJc6 12 .ltb2 l:Ib8 1 3
Inviting Black to force perpetual check. l:tc1 with a definite lead for White. This in
However, with the following amazing king creased after 13 . . .ifb5 14 a3 .ltd7 1 5 b4 .lte8
march White could have kept the piece and 16 e4 h5?! 17 h3 ifg5 1 8 e5 ttJh7 19 'iVe2 h4
65
Th e C a t a la n
20 liJe4 � 6 2 1 liJcd6 f5 22 liJc5, when (we are familiar with this manoeuvre by now;
White's forces occupied influential posts. White is slightly better) 14 ... .id4 1 5 liJe4
9 lLle3 'fIe7 .i.a6 1 6 e3 .ixc4 17 'iVxc4 .ixb2 1 8 nab 1
Vaulin-Feoktistov, Moscow 1 998 took a 'iVa3, which was seen in Vaulin-Stanojevic,
more sober course after 9 ... 'iVd4 to 'iWxd4 Nis 1 996. There followed 1 9 .ixf6 gxf6
.i.xd4 1 1 liJxc4 liJc6 1 2 liJb5 e5 1 3 e3 i.c5 (1 9 ... .i.xf6 20 liJxf6+ gxf6 21 'iVg4+ �fS 22
14 b3 liJe8 (14 ... i.e6 allows White to put a 'ir'h5 �g7 23 .l:i.b7 .l:i.fS 24 J::td l gives White a
knight on d6: 1 5 liJbd6 l:tab8 1 6 i.b2 etc.) dangerous initiative) 20 'iWxc6 f5?! (20 .. J:tac8
1 5 .i.a3 .i.xa3 1 6 liJbxa3 f6 17 .i.d5+ �h8 21 �7 l:tb8 22 'iVc7 and White shifts the
1 8 .i.xc6 bxc6 and White 'sacrificed' the queen to the kingside) 21 liJg5 .if6
Catalan bishop in order to inflict upon his (2 1 . ..l:tac8 22 'i¥b7 with double threats on b2
opponent a weakened queenside. This pro and f7) 22 liJxe6! J::ta c8 23 liJxd8 l:txc6 24
vided a target in the corning ending after 1 9 liJxc6 with a very nice ending for White, his
liJa5 i.d7 2 0 l:tfdl l:t f7 2 1 l:tac 1 l:.c8 22 �g2 two rooks being more than a match for the
etc. queen and Black's pawns being weak.
9 ... 'iVe7 allows the pin on the knight with 1 1 J:!.xf2 'ifxe4 1 2 J:txf6 ! gxf6 1 3 �h6
to i.g5, when Ribli-Gopal, Calcutta 1 992 lLld7 !
continued 10 ... h6 1 1 .ixf6 'iVxf6 12 liJxc4 The natural looking 1 3. . .liJc6? i s in fact
liJc6 1 3 .ixc6! bxc6 1 4 liJe4 'iie 7?! 1 5 liJe5 poor in view of 1 4 e3 .l:!.d8 1 5 'it'h5 e5 1 6
'iic7 1 6 liJxc5 'iVxe5 1 7 'iVc2 l:tb8 1 8 b3 'iVh5 liJe4 'iVe6 1 7 'iVh4 �h8 1 8 liJxf6 liJe7 (Thin
1 9 l:tfdl Itb5 20 .l:i.ac 1 as 21 ':'d6 and Black's ius-Comp 'Mephisto', Berlin 1 992) 1 9 .i.fS!,
weaknesses on the queenside were more when White wins at least a piece.
important features in the position than the 1 4 lLle4
weakened light squares around White's king.
Black can restrict his opponent to a slight
edge with 1 4 ...'iVf5 1 5 liJxc5 'iWxc5 1 6 'iWa4.
1 0 lLlxe4
66
Th e S e m i- Op e n Ca t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 � g 2 � e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
ttJe8 1 9 'ii'x d8 wins for White) 1 8 ttJxh7! 'It>d8 28 'iVfS+ 'litc7 29 'iid6+ �xc8 30 'ti'd7
'it'g6 1 9 'ii'h4 l:f.e8 20 l:If1 ! 'ii'x h7 2 1 �e4 mate!
(psakhis) and White has a menacing attack. 26 'iVdS + 'it>g7 27 'iVg5 + Yo - Yo
1 5 �c 1 f5
Black defends well. Again 1 5 . . . .l:!.d8? is Game 3 1
punished after 16 ttJxf6+ 'It>h8 17 'it'd3! G elfand-Aseev
'iVb6+ 1 8 �e3 ttJxf6 19 'ti'c3! 'i&'d6 20 'iix f6+ Kla;peda 1988
'it>g8 21 l:Ifl ! l:Id7 22 l:tf4 'It>fS 23 J:f.g4 and
White wins. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ltJf3 ltJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
1 6 ltJd6 �g2 �e7 6 0-0 0-0 7 ltJe5 ltJc6 S �xc6
White should force matters with 1 6 .lrLxfS!, bxc6
e.g. 16 ... ttJxfS (1 6 ... 'litxfS?! 17 'iVd6+ 'iVxd6 1 8
ttJxd6 ttJb6 1 9 J::t c 7 .lrLd7 20 lhb7 clearly
favours White, while 1 6 . . .'iVxfS 1 7 ttJd6 'ikd8
18 e4 is also nice) 17 ttJf6+ 'litg7 (1 7 . . . 'lith8 1 8
'iVd8 is worse) 1 8 'iVd8 'iib6+ 1 9 'iixb6 axb6
20 ttJe8+ 'it>g6 21 ttJd6 1i.d7 22 a3 and White
wins back the pawn with interest in this end
game thanks to the queenside majority and
active pieces.
16 . . . ltJe5! 1 7 �xfS 't'ib6 + 1 S e3 ! ?
O r 1 8 'lit h 1 ttJg4 1 9 ttJxc8 ttJf2+ 2 0 'litg 1
ttJh3+ and Black can force the draw.
1 S . . . 't'ixe3+ 1 9 'it>h 1 ltJg4 20 �c2 'it>xfS
9 ltJxc6
9 ttJc3?! c5 10 dxc5 .lrLxc5 1 1 �a4 ttJd5!
12 ttJe4 ttJb6 13 'iic 2 was the dubious (for
White) course of Korchnoi-Petrosian, Can
didates '/dinal Match (game 1), Ciocco 1 977.
Now 1 3. . .'ilVd5!? 1 4 ttJg5 f5 15 1l.f4 .lrLd6!
(Kotronias) allows Black to keep both his
pawn and the light-squared bishop. His
chances are better.
9 . . . �eS 1 0 ltJxe 7 +
1 0 'iVa4?! has been tried. Pigusov
Naumkin, Belgrade 1 988 continued 1O . . . 1l.d6
1 1 'iix c4 a5 1 2 ttJe5 c5 1 3 ttJf3 1i.a6 14 'iVc2
Black has left the worst of his problems .l:!.c8 and Black had the initiative: 1 5 ttJc3
behind him. cxd4 16 ttJxd4 1l.e5 17 .l:!.d 1 and now
21 ltJxcS ltJf2 + 22 �xf2 �xf2 23 �xb7 17 . . . ttJd5 (pigusov) leaves Black on top.
�bS 1 0 . . . 't'ixe7 1 1 't'ia4
White has two minor pieces for the rook Also possible is 1 1 b3 cxb3 1 2 1i.a3 b2 1 3
but the exposed position of his king forces �xb2 l:Id8 1 4 'ilVc2 l:tb8 with an equal posi
him to take a perpetual. tion. White has the better pawn structure but
24 �dS + 'it>g7 25 'iVg5 + 'it>hS Black is active.
Not 25 ... 'litfS?? 26 'i&'h6+ 'lite8 27 1l.c6+ 1 1 . . . c5
67
Th e C a t a l a n
Black has several other options. favour White. 1 7 'iVg5 i s too slow but went
The queen manoeuvre 1 1 ...'iVd6 12 lidl unpunished in Gelfand-Timoscenko, Sverd
1Va6 isn't quite satisfactory in this position, lovsk 1 987, when after 1 7 ...1Vh3?! 1 8 'iVc5!
either. White had the better prospects after .Jtd5 19 e4 the only way to break the domi
1 3 'iVxa6 .Jtxa6 1 4 ltJc3 .:tab8 1 5 e4 h6 1 6 f3 nation of the light squares was to sacrifice,
:fd8 1 7 :b 1 ltJd7 1 8 .Jte3 ltJb6 1 9 .:tbel in but this did not prove correct after
Malakhov-Dervishi, Montecatini Terme 1 9 ... .uxe4?! 20 fxe4 ltJg4 21 1:t£1 ltJxh2 22
1 998. Black's pawns on the c-me are weak 'iVxc7 .uc8 23 .l:txh2 .l:txc7 24 ltxh3 11xc1+ 25
but b2 is also an object of attack, while White 'it>£1 .Jtxe4 26 g4, when White was winning.
enjoys more space. Black should follow the example of Pigusov
Stohl-Polak, Czechoslovakia 1 990 saw Raetsky, Voronezh 1 988, 1 7 ... .Jtc4 1 8 'iVxh5
1 1 ...a5 12 1Vxc4 .Jta6 13 'it'c2 .ufd8 14 ltdl ltJxh5 1 9 lte 1 .uxe2 20 ltxe2 .Jtxe2 21 'it>£1
c5! (this freeing pawn break secures Black .Jtc4 22 ltJc3 ltJf6 23 .Jte3 leading to a nice
equal chances) 1 5 dxc5 .uxd 1+ 1 6 'it'xdl ending for White in view of the better pawn
'iVxc5 17 ltJc3 ltJg4 18 'it'fl and now structure and the presence of knights on the
Kotronias gives 1 8 ...!lc8!? 1 9 .Jtd2 'iVh5 20 board.
h3 ltJe5 21 1Vg2 ltJc4 22 .Jtel 'iVfS 23 e4 1 2 'ii'x c4
'ii'f6, when Black's activity fully compensates 1 2 'it'a3 .Jtb7 1 3 ltJc3 ltfc8 is equal.
the missing pawn. 1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3 'ii'x d4 e5
1 1 .. .e5 1 2 dxe5 1Vxe5 is also possible, and After 1 3 ... ,Ud8!? 1 4 'iVh4 J::tb 8 1 5 b3 .Jta6
leads to complex play. Korchnoi-Kotronias, 1 6 ltJc3 'iVc5 1 7 ltJe4 ltJxe4 1 8 'iixe4 the
Haifa 1 989 went 1 3 ltJc3 ltJe4 14 'iVxc4 exchange of knights should guarantee Black
ltJxc3 1 5 'iVxc3 1Vxe2 1 6 nel 'iVb5 1 7 J:te5 good counterplay due to the presence of
'iVd7 1 8 .Jtf4 .Jtb7 1 9 llc5 !lfd8 20 f3 'iVd3 opposite coloured bishops. The subsequent
21 .Jtxc7 l:td7 when the opposite coloured 1 8.J:tb4 1 9 1Ve3 1Vc2 20 .Jta3 l:te4 21 ltfel
bishops offered Black adequate counterplay. ii'xe2 resulted in a draw in Krasenkow-Ribli,
The other option is 1 3 'iVxc4, when Germany 1 998.
1 3 ... .Jte6 leads to a further branch. Black has 1 4 'ii'h 4
compensation after 14 1Vc2 .JtfS 1 5 'iVd2
:fe8 1 6 ltJc3 ltJe4 17 ltJxe4 1Vxe4 due
(again) to the presence of opposite coloured
bishops. This leaves 1 4 1Vd3 !lad8 1 5 'iVe3
'iih 5 1 6 f3, e.g. 1 6 ... .Jtc4! 1 7 ltJc3 ltfe8 1 8
'iVg5 'iih 3 1 9 It £1 (1 9 .Jte3 .Jtxe2!? 20 ltJxe2
l:td5 21 'iVf4 ttde5 22 .Jtxa7 Ihe2 23 .Jt£1
l:hb2 24 a4 and this pawn looks like a killer
but Black generates counterplay on the op
posite flank with 24 ... h5 - Kotronias)
1 9 ... .Jtxe2!? and now 20 .Jte3?! was Kachiani
Gersinska-Bojkovic, Belgrade 1 990, when
Black could have secured the advantage with
20 ... .Jtxf3! 21 ltxf3 ltJg4, forcing White to 1 4 . . . 'ii'e 6
part with material due to the threat against Hiibner-Handke, Germany 2001 contin
h2. However, 20 .Jtf4 .Jtd l !? 2 1 .Jte5 h6 22 ued 14 ...ltb8 1 5 b3 ltd8 16 .Jtb2 h6 17 ltJa3
'iVf4 ltJd5 23 'it'c4 is unclear. 1 6 ... 1tfe8 has .Jtg4 1 8 ltJc4 .Jtxe2 1 9 1tfe 1 .Jtxc4 20 'it'xc4
also been played, although the lines seem to ltd5 21 J:tad l and White's forces had finally
68
Th e S e m i- Op e n Ca t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 iL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
joined the battle. After 2 1 . . .Ita5 22 .ic3 l:k5 Itxg3 ttJe6, again with compensation.
23 'iVd3 White's bishop and queenside ma 28 ':'xg2 ttJg6 29 'iiVg 4 'iiVa 6 30 'iiVg 3 iLe8
jority afforded him the better prospects. 3 1 nf2
White can try to repair the light squares with 31 .tg5 allows the nice trick 3 1 ....ih3!? 32
15 ttJc3 .l:tb4 16 e4 .ib 7 1 7 f3 (1 7 .ig5 ':xb2 'iVxh3 ::'xc3! etc.
18 i.xf6 'iVxf6 1 9 'iVxf6 gxf6 20 l:tab 1 leads 31 . . . 'iiVd 6 32 iLg5?!
to an equal ending) 1 7 ...'iVc5+ 1 8 �g2 l:td8 Preferable is 32 l:tf1 .ia6.
19 l:t£1 lld3, when Black is active but White 32 . . . ttJf4 33 iLxf4 exf4 34 'ilfh4 iLe6 35
seems solid. Shipov gives 20 .ig5 .l:txc3!? 2 1 l:tf 1 l:td2! 36 l:tg 1 g6?
bxc3 ttJxe4!, breaking the light-squared Black misses a great opportunity in
domination and forcing White to find 22 36 . . J::tx b2 37 'ii f6? .ig4!! 38 'iix d6 .ixf3+ 39
.te3, when 22 ... 'ii'd 5 23 'iie 7 h5 24 .l:td 1 !? l:tg2 l:!.xg2 40 'iVd8+ �h7 41 'iVh4+ �g6 and
'iVxd1 25 'iixb4 ttJx£1 26 'iVxb7 ttJd3 27 wins.
'iVc8+ forces the draw. 37 'iiVf 6??
1 5 ttJe3 iLb7 1 6 e4 l:tfe8 Necessary is 37 e5 'iVd3! 38 'iVxf4 l:t£1 39
Worth considering is the plan to transfer ttJe4 lhf3 40 ttJf6+ �g7 41 ttJh5+ �h7 with
the knight to d3 with 1 6 ...ttJd7!? 1 7 g4 ttJc5 equality.
18 f3 ttJd3 (Aseev) with compensation. 37 . . . .i.g4! 0-1
1 7 f3 'iiVb 6 + 1 8 l:tf2
The continuation 1 8 'it>g2 h6 19 g4 .ta6
20 l:td1 l:td8 21 'iV£1 gives White a small
advantage.
1 8 . . . h6 1 9 'it'g2 l:td8 20 g4 l:td3 2 1 g 5
hxg5 22 iLxg5 ttJ h 7 23 l:tg 1
Game 32
Pi ket-Adams
Wyk aan Zee 2000
23 . . . l:te8
23 ... ttJxg5 24 'iVxg5 lld6 25 �h 1 1lg6 26 1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxe4 5
'iVd2 (Gelfand, Kapengut) is also a little bet iLg2 iLe7 6 0-0 0-0 7 ttJe5 ttJe6 8 ttJxe6
ter for White. bxe6 9 e3
24 'it'h 1 l:te6 25 iLe1 ttJf8 26 l:tfg2 l:tg6 9 'iia4 'iixd4 10 ttJc3 .id7 1 1 i.e3 'iVg4
Black enjoys some activity and therefore 1 2 .if3 'iVh3 1 3 'irVxc4 e5 is quite different,
has compensation for the pawn. Khurtsidze-Moiseenko, Ukraine 1 999 con
27 'iiVh 5 l:txg2 tinuing 14 l:tfd1 ttJg4 1 5 .ixg4 'iVxg4 1 6
Less forcing is 27 ... 'iVf6 28 l:tg3 .l:txg3 29 'ii'xg4 .txg4 1 7 f3 .te6 1 8 b3 as, when the
69
Th e C a t a l a n
1 0 . . . ttJb6
10 ... a5 1 1 l:td l 'ii'd 6 12 'it'xc4 SLa6 1 3
'iNc2 tiJb4 1 4 'it'd2 e 5 1 5 a3 tiJd3 1 6 SLe4
tiJxc1 1 7 l:txc 1 exd4 1 8 exd4 SLf6 1 9 l:txc6
'iNxd4 20 'it'xd4 SLxd4 21 tiJc3 and here a
draw was agreed in Ippolito-Gormally, Lon 1 2 SLxc6 SLb7 1 3 i.xb7 l:txb7 is equal.
don 1 999. The ending is equal; Black has the 1 2 . . :iVe8
bishop pair while White has the better pawn Markowski-J aracz, Warsaw 2001 went
structure. 1 2 ... a5?! 1 3 tiJd2 SLa6 1 4 b3 cxb3 1 5 tiJxb3
1 1 'ilVc2 SLb5 1 6 a4! SLxa4 1 7 �xa4 tiJxa4 1 8 tiJxa5
1 1 �xc6 l:tb8 1 2 'iib 5 SLb7 1 3 SLxb7 tiJb6 1 9 tiJxc6 'ii'd7 20 tiJxb8 l:txb8 21 i.d2
i:txb 7 with play for both sides. Meins SLd6 22 l:[al h5 23 h4 'iNe7 24 'iVc6, White's
Chandler, Germany 2000 saw the alternative bishop pair and pawn structure contributing
1 1 'ifa5 SLd7 1 2 tiJa3 SLd6 1 3 SLd2 'ife7 1 4 to his lead .
.u.fc1 l:[fb8 1 5 l:tab 1 e 5 1 6 tiJxc4 exd4 1 7 1 3 ttJd2 c5
exd4 tiJd5!? 1 8 tiJe3 (1 8 SLxd5 cxd5 1 9 'iWxd5 Kotronias gives 13 ...SLa6 14 b3 c5 1 5 i.b2
SLe6 20 'iVc6 SLf5 21 nel 'ii'f6 is unclear) cxd4 1 6 SLxd4 f6!?, planning ... e6-e5.
1 8 ... l:tb5 1 9 'iWa4 h6 20 'ii'c 2?! tiJxe3 21 SLxe3 14 dxc5
SLf5 22 'iVxc6 l:!.ab8 23 l:tal l:!.xb2 with ad 14 tiJxc4 leads only to a level game after
vantage to Black. Also possible is 1 1 ...i:tb8 1 2 1 4 ... cxd4 1 5 exd4 (1 5 llxd4 SLf6 is also
tiJa3 SLd7 1 3 SLd2 i.d6 1 4 l:tfc 1 'iVe7 1 5 equal) 1 5 ... tiJxc4 1 6 'ifxc4 i.d6.
�ab 1 c5 1 6 dxc5 SLxc5 1 7 b4 SLd6 with 1 4 . . . iLxc5 1 5 ttJxc4 ttJxc4 1 6 'ii'xc4 'i'b5
equality in Wells-Arlandi, Escaldes 1 998. 1 7 'ilVxb5 J:f.xb5 1 8 b3 iLb7 1 9 iLxb7
70
Th e S e m i - Op e n Ca t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii g 2 ii e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
9 . iixa3
. .
71
Th e C a t a l a n
72
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii.. g 2 ii.. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
After the inaccuracy o n the 39th move the opposite coloured bishops ensured that
Black could still play 40 .. .'ii'c 5 41 'it>g2 l:tc2 Black was okay. Browne gives 12 'iVxc4 .ia6
42 'iix c5 l:txc5 43 .l:!.b1 and, despite the fact 1 3 'iVc2, when White has the upper hand -
that White is better here, Black has good he has the bishop pair and the black pawns
chances of saving the game. After the text are very weak.
the struggle is probably over. 1 2 �xc6 l:tb8
41 l:txe5 l:tc1 + 42 'It>g2 .l:I.d 1 ? 12 ... .ia6 13 'it'c5 c6 14 .ig5 f6 15 .id2
42 ...l:tc2 43 h5 is a slight improvement for and White is better.
Black. 1 3 �c5 ii.. b 7
43 l:td5 l:te 1 44 l:td7 �c 1 45 �d5 1 -0 Posting the bishop more actively with
1 3 . . . .ia6 seems to work out well for Black
Game 34 here, e.g. 14 e4!? c3!? (14 .. .'it'd7?! 1 5 .if4
Manor-Anand l:tfc8 1 6 :fd1 4Ja4 1 7 'iVg5 l:tb2 1 8 d5 h6 1 9
London 1987 'iVg4 h 5 20 'iVxh5 4Jc3 2 1 .ie5 4Jxd1 22
.uxd 1 was difficult for Black in Sorg-Oettel,
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 Schwabisch Gmuend 1 996, but 17 ... 4Jb2 1 8
.1g2 ii.. e 7 6 0-0 0-0 7 ttJe5 ttJc6 8 ttJxc6 l:td2 c 3 1 9 .l:tc2 .l:tb5 20 d5!? i s interesting) 1 5
bxc6 9 ttJa3 ii.. x a3 1 0 bxa3 ttJd5 1 1 �a4 .l:!.e1 4Ja4 1 6 'WaS .ib5 1 7 l:tb1 c 6 and Black
is very solid. Also possible is 14 .if4 4Jd5 1 5
.ixd5 'iVxd5 1 6 'Wxa7 l:tb6 1 7 .ixc7 .ib7 1 8
f3 �a6 (1 8 ... l:tb2? 1 9 :tab 1 lIa8 20 e4 'iVb5
21 'iVb6 'iVxb6 22 .ixb6 l:!.xb1 23 l:txb1 f5 24
.ic5 and White had good chances thanks to
his two extra pawns in Palatnik-Razuvaev,
Thilisi 1 973) 1 9 'iVc5 1:[c8 20 'iVxd5 .ixd5 21
.if4 when a draw was agreed in Ftacnik
Kurajica, Dortmund 1 98 1 . However, the
following line is slightly better for White:
21 .. .c3! 22 e4 .ic4 23 l:tf2 1:txa3 24 .id6 :ta6
25 .ic5 e5 26 l:tc1 exd4 27 .ixd4 .l:txa2 etc.
1 4 e4
1 1 . . . ttJb6
Preferable to 1 1 ...4Jc3?! 1 2 'iVc2 (1 2
'iVxc4? 'iVxd4! and Black wins material)
12 ... 4Jb5 1 3 e3 4Jd6 1 4 a4 as 1 5 .ia3 'iVd7
16 .ixd6 cxd6 1 7 'iVxc4 .ib7 1 8 l:1fc1 lUc8
19 :tab 1 l:ta7 20 l:tb3, when Black's extra
pawn was less important than his develop
ment problems in Vera-Moran, Alcobendas
1994. In fact he was under considerable pres
sure after 20 ... c5 21 'iVb5 .ixg2 22 'it>xg2 g6
23 dxc5 dxc5 24 Ihc5 etc.
1 1 ...a5 12 'iVxc6 .ia6 13 'iVc5 was played
in Alburt-Browne, Philadelphia 1 989. After
1 3. .. 'iVd6 1 4 'iVxa5 c3 1 5 .ixd5 'ii'x d5 1 6 1 4 . . . �d6
'i'xc3 .ixe2 chances were even - once again Another option is 14 ... f5 15 f3 fxe4 1 6
73
Th e C a t a l a n
74
Th e S e m i- Op e n Ca t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 � g 2 � e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
Vaganian, Montpellier 1 985. For the ex Yerevan 2000. In fact 20 'ife5? 'it'xe5 2 1
change Black has two pawns and decent ltJxe5 ltJc2 2 2 l:!.abl ltJxe3! 2 3 fxe3 ..txe3+
pieces, inviting an evaluation of unclear. 24 'it>f1 ..txd2 25 l:!.xd2 e3 saw Black win
Shabalov-Ivanchuk, Novosibirsk 1 986 material.
went 8 ltJbd2 b5 9 ltJg5 l:ta7 10 b3 cxb3 1 1 Another option is 1 2 b3 ltJd5 1 3 ..tb2
ltJxb3 ..tb7 1 2 ..txb7 l:txb7 1 3 e4 ltJfd7! 1 4 l:!.d8 14 1:tac 1 ltJdb4 1 5 lic3 ltJd4 16 ltJxd4
ltJ f3 c 5 1 5 dxc5 ltJxc5 1 6 ltJxc5, when Sha ..txd4 1 7 'it'xd4!? .uxd4 1 8 i.xd4 and White
balov gives 1 6 ...l:!.c7 1 7 ltJxe6 l:!.xc2 1 8 ltJxd8 had a rook and bishop for the queen in Aro
.l:!.xd8 as equal. nian-Bick, Ubeda 2000. This seems okay here
S c5
. . . as Black is weak on the dark squares and lags
Quite different is 8 ...ltJc6 9 'it'xc4 'ii'd 5 10 behind on the queenside. The situation re
tLlbd2 (1 0 'it'd3 l:!.d8 1 1 ltJc3 'iih 5 12 'iVc4 mained unclear after 1 8 ...ltJc6 1 9 i.e3 e5 20
..td7 1 3 i.f4 i.d6 1 4 i.g5! is an attractive ltJb6 l:!.b8 21 i.c5 'ii'f6 22 ltJd5 etc.
alternative for White, who has more room The natural 12 ltJfe5 is White's most
for manoeuvre) 1 O ....:td8 1 1 e3, e.g. 1 1 ...i.d7 prorrusmg try for advantage. Gulko
(1 1 ...'ii'h 5 1 2 e4 ..td7 1 3 b3 b5 14 'it'c3 i.e8 I vanchuk, unares 1 990 was a shade better
15 axb5 axb5 1 6 1ha8 l:!.xa8 17 i.b2 l:!.a2 1 8 for White after 1 2 ... ltJxe5 1 3 ltJxe5 ltJd5 1 4
'it'c 1 ! 'ii'h 6 1 9 h3 g6 20 l:tel 'ii' rn 2 1 'fibl ltJd3 ..td6 1 5 ..td2 ltJf6 1 6 :tac 1 , while
tDb4 22 ltJe5 ltJd7 23 i.c3 favoured White 1 2 ... ltJd4 1 3 'it'd l l:!.d8 1 4 e3 ltJfS 1 5 'it'c2
in Kramnik-Piket, Dortmund 1 995) 1 2 ltJe5 receives a similar assessment.
(12 b3 is also good) 12 ... ltJxe5, when White 9 . . . cxd4 1 0 ltJxc4 ltJc6 1 1 l:!.d 1 ltJd5
should prefer 1 3 'ii't 3 ltJf3+ 14 i.xf3 'it'fS 1 5
'iVxc7, with insufficient compensation for
Black, to the continuation in Lahner
Michenka, Karvina 2001 , where 1 3 'it'xc7?
tLlc6! 14 ..txd5 ltJxd5 1 5 'iWxb7 ltJa5 1 6
'iVxa8 Iha8 left Black better because the
rook and two pawns were no match for the
bishop and knight. After 9 'ii'xc4 Black has
also tried 9 ...ltJb4. For example Filippov
A.Rodriguez, unares 1 997 continued 1 0
tLlc3 b 5 1 1 'ii'b 3 bxa4 1 2 ltJxa4 l:tb8 1 3 l:td 1
..tb7 1 4 ltJc3 'it'c8 1 5 ..tf4 ltJd3 1 6 l:txd3
..txf3, when Rodriguez gives 17 'it'a2!? i.xg2
18 'it>xg2 'ii'b7+ 1 9 �gl 'it'xb2 20 'it'xa6 as 1 2 ltJxd4 ! ? ltJdb4 1 3 ltJxc6 ltJxc2 1 4
somewhat better for White in view of the ltJxdS ltJxa 1 1 5 ltJxb 7 �xb 7
superior structure. Interesting is 1 5 ... ltJb3 1 6 ltJba5 ltJxa5 1 7
9 ltJbd2 ltJxa5 l:!.b8 1 8 ltJc6 l:!. b7 1 9 b 4 and White has
After 9 dxc5 ..txc5 10 ltJbd2 ltJc6 1 1 some compensation for the exchange. Also
tDxc4 'iJle7 it seems that 1 2 ..tg5 is good good enough for Black is 1 5 . . ..l:!.b8 16 ..tf4
enough only for equality, e.g. 1 2 ... h6 1 3 ..txf6 ..txb7 1 7 i.xb8 l:!.xb8 1 8 ..txb7 l:!.xb7 1 9
'i'xf6 1 4 l:!.fdl e5 1 5 e3 ..tfS 1 6 iVb3 e4 1 7 11xal 11b4 20 l:!.c1 l:!.xa4 21 ltJb6 l:!.d4 when
tDfd2 'ii'e 7 1 8 ltJb6 l:!.ad8 1 9 ltJd5 'ife6 20 the ending is even.
tLlf4 'iVxb3 21 ltJxb3 and the game is level, or 1 6 �xb7 tradS 1 7 l:!.f 1
18 'ifc2?! ltJb4 1 9 'iVc3 l:!.ac8, when Black Or 1 7 .l:.xd8 Ihd8 1 8 i.f4 with compen
enjoyed more space in Anastasian-Asrian, sation. The a6-pawn is difficult to protect.
75
Th e Ca t a l a n
17 ... ttJb3 18 iLxa6 J:ta8 1 9 iLb 5 ttJd4 20 3 1 . . .J:tb 7 32 J:td3 'iit h 6 33 f4 f6 34 J:te3
iLe3 iLe5 35 J:txe6 J:txb3 36 J:te6 J:tb5 37 J:te 7
iLb4 3 8 e4 J:te5!
N o t 38 ... l:txhS? 3 9 ttJe3 �f8 4 0 l:t f7 , and
White wins the g7 -pawn and with it the
game.
39 J:txe5 iLxe5 40 'iitf 3 'iit x h5
White has only a modest advantage.
41 ttJe3 'iit g 6 42 ttJf5 'iitf 7 43 'iit g4 iLg 1
44 h3 iLe5 45 ttJh4 iLf2 46 ttJf3 iLe5 47
ttJe 1 iLf2 48 ttJd3 iLe3 49 f5
From here White tries hard to win the
game but his efforts are met with some im
pressive defence. . .
49 ... iLb6 50 ttJf4 iLe7 5 1 'iitf 3 iLd6 52
20 . . . ttJxb5 'iite 3 iLe5 53 ttJg6 iLe7 54 'iitd 4 iLb8 55
20 ... ttJxe2+?! takes the wrong pawn. 'iit e 5 iLg3 56 'iitd 5 iLh2 57 'iit e 6 'iite 8 58
Black's majority on the kingside will not be ttJh4 'iite 7 59 ttJf3 iLf4 60 ttJd4 iLe3 61
very dangerous compared to White's a- and ttJe6 g6 62 ttJe7 'iitf 7 63 'iitd 7 gxf5 64
b-pawns. After 21 'iitg2 l:!.ad8 22 .Jtb6 White exf5 iLd4 65 ttJb5 iLb2 66 ttJd6 + 'iitf8 67
has the better chances. 'iit e 6 iLd4 68 ttJb5 iLb2 69 ttJe7 iLe5 70
21 axb5 J:tfb8 22 b6 J:tb7 23 J:tb1 iLb4 ttJd5 'iit g 7 71 ttJe3 iLe3 72 ttJg4 iLd4 73
24 iLf4 h5 25 iLe7 h4? ! h4 iLe3 74 h5 iLb2 75 ttJxf6 'iit h 6 76
Too ambitious. After 2S ...g6 the situation ttJg4+ 'iit x h5 77 ttJe5 'iit h 6 78 f6 'iit h 7 79
is about equal; Black returns the exchange at f7 'iit g 7 Yo - Yo
the right moment.
26 gxh4 J:te8 27 l:I.d 1 'iit h 7 28 'iit g 2 iLe7 Game 36
29 h5?! Ftacnik -Dutreeuw
Simple and good is 29 l:td7. Batumi 1999
29 . . . J:texe 7 30 bxe 7 J:txe 7 31 b3
1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxe4 5
iLg2 iLe7 6 0-0 0-0 7 'ilVe2 a6 8 a4 iLd7
9 J:td 1
In Urban-Rozentalis, Lubniewice 1 998
White unleashed the bishop with 9 ttJeS,
when there followed 9 ... �c6 10 ttJxc6 ttJxc6.
Then 1 1 �xc6 bxc6 12 l:!.d1 'iVdS 13 ttJa3
iVhS! is nice for Black, so Urban chose 1 1 e3
ttJaS 1 2 ttJd2 cS 1 3 dxcS 'iVc7 1 4 ttJxc4 'iVxcs
1 5 b3 .l:'tac8 1 6 iVb 1 ttJxc4 1 7 bxc4 ':c7 1 8
�b2 ttJd7 1 9 a s l:!.fc8 2 0 �a3 'iYgs 21 h4
'iYf6 22 �b2 'iYh6 and the game was still well
balanced. The b 7 -pawn is a bit weak, but so
White is tw o pawns up and has genuine is c4 and, while Black's knight will find a
winning chances, although the win will not good outpost on cS, White has the bishop
come easily. pair. 1 3 ...l:tc8 has also been tried here. After
76
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 iL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
Game 37
10 ttJe3 Dizdar-Sadler
10 'iWxc4 i.dS 1 1 'iVc2 lbc6 12 lbbd2 lbb4 Pula 1997
13 'itOl cS 14 e4 i.c6 I S eS lbd7! 1 6 lbe4 h6
17 dxcS .i.xe4 IS 'ii'x e4 lbxcs 19 l:txdS 1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxe4 5
liJxe4 20 l:txaS l:txaS is level according to iLg2 iLe7 6 0-0 0-0 7 'ii'e 2 a6 S a4 iLd7
Ribli. White's Catalan bishop is good but 9 J:td 1 iLe6 1 0 ttJe3
Black's knights are well posted and White's
queenside might prove vulnerable. However,
Black would prefer to see 17 b3?! .i.dS I S
liJc3 .i.xf3 1 9 .i.xf3 cxd4 20 l1xd4 'iWc7 a s in
Donguines-Villamayor, Calcutta 2001 , when
the weakness on eS tipped the scales in
Black's favour. Indeed after 21 l::t c 4 'ilVaS! 22
i.xb 7 l:tabS 23 .i.g2 lbxeS 24 .i.f4 liJxc4 2S
i.xbS liJd2! Black collected a pawn.
1 0 . . . ttJbd7
1O ... .i.xf3 is dealt with in the next main
game. Another possibility is 1O ...liJdS 1 1 e4
liJxc3 1 2 bxc3 bS 1 3 lbeS i.b7 14 irb l - a
typical manoeuvre for White. After 1 4 ... lbc6 1 0 . . . iLxf3 1 1 iLxf3 ttJe6 1 2 iLxe6 bxe6
IS liJxc4 eS 16 .i.e3 exd4 17 cxd4 bxc4 1 8 1 3 iLg5
'iWxb7 lbaS 1 9 'iYb2 ltbS 20 'iVc2 .l:tb3 21 13 as 'iVbs 14 'iVa4 (14 lta4 'iVb3! I S
i.f1 i.b4 22 ltac1 ltc3 Black does have 'iVxb3 cxb3 1 6 ltc4 c S 1 7 dxcS ltfdS 1 8
some compensation for his weaknesses, but ltxdS+ ltxdS saw Black generate sufficient
perhaps not enough. activity in N.Pert-Asrian, Yerevan 1 999, the
1 1 e4 b5 ending being equal after 19 i.f4 liJdS 20
77
Th e Ca t a l a n
tLJxd5 :xd5 21 l:tc3 e5 22 .i.e3 �f8) 1 4 ... c5 White's b-pawn can also b e attacked, while
15 �xc4 cxd4 1 6 l:txd4 c5 1 7 lld3 'iib4 1 8 Black has an extra pawn. At some point he
:a4 'iWb7 1 9 l:!.a3 "iib4 20 �a2 l::ta b8 was might play ... c6-c5.
seen in Beliavsky-Stohl, Portoroz 1 999, the 1 4 . . . 4:Jd7 ? !
bacl...-ward b-pawn affording Black equal Black had a slight edge i n Ftacnik
chances. P.Nielsen, Germany 1 999 after the interest
Black has also used the b8-square for his ing 1 4 ... h6!? 1 5 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 6 lbe4 .llb4 1 7
rook: 1 3. .. l::tb 8 14 'iVa4 :b4! (it is important lbcs 'iVc8 1 8 .l:!.ac1 .i.e7 1 9 lbe4 'ilVb7. Here
to keep the c4-pawn rather than its less c4 is no weaker than b2, and Black has a
important partner on c6) 1 5 'iYxc6 �d6 1 6 good bishop and decent piece play.
�f3 and now Romanishin-Brunner, 1 5 �xe 7 'it'xe 7 1 6 4:Je4 l:tb4 1 7 4:Jd2 e5
Altensteig 1 992 went 16 ... :fb8?! 1 7 e4 'it'c6 1 8 4:Jxe4 l:tfb8 1 9 l:tae 1 h6 20 dxe5
1 8 d5 with an excellent game for White, 20 d5 exd5 21 J:hd5 is playable, when
whose fortunes quickly improved after the 21 ...lbb6 22 lbxb6 cxb6 23 l::tc dl 'iVe4 is
faulty 1 8 ... exd5?, when the punishment came roughly level but 2 1 ...11xc4? 22 'ilVxc4 tLJb6
in the form of 1 9 e5 lbe8 20 lbxd5 'it'f8 21 23 iVb3! c4 24 l::tx c4 l:ta8 25 l::tc 6 lbxd5 26
'iVh5 l:t4b5 22 'ilVxh7 f6 23 �g8+! - a nice 'ii'x d5 simply leads to the loss of a pawn.
little trick that wins a piece. However, 20 . . . 4:Jf6
Kotronias gives 1 6 ...l:'td8 1 7 e4 'ilVc6 1 8 'iVe2 20 ... lbxc5? 21 lbaS and lbc6 is coming.
�7 1 9 l::ta2 c5!? 20 d5 exd5 21 exd5 h6! 21 4:Je5 l:txb2 22 'ife4
with an acceptable position for Black. 22 lbc6? runs into 22 ... �e8 23 �xb2
1 3 . . . l:tb8 l::txb2 24 l::td 8 'ilVxd8 25 lbxd8 lbe4 and
1 3 . .. tLJd5 14 .i.xe7 'ilVxe7 1 5 tLJe4 l::t fb 8 1 6 White loses a pawn. Both players should be
'ilVxc4 l::txb2 1 7 lIab 1 'iib4 1 8 it'xc6 l::txb 1 1 9 careful in this seemingly quiet position.
'iYxa8+ 'iWb8 2 0 'iixb8+ l::tx b8 21 tLJc5 tLJc3 22 . . . 4:Jd5 23 e4?
22 l::td2 as led to a level ending in Ti A mistake. After 23 lbd3!? White enjoys a
moshenko-Asrian, Ubeda 1 998. smal1 but solid edge.
14 e3 23 . . . 4:Je3!
78
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii.. g 2 ii.. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
2 5 'iWc3 'iWh5 2 6 nd8 + Wh7 2 7 nd2 1 2 lZ'lbl .i.e4 1 3 'lidl c5 1 4 lZ'lbd2 .i.d5 1 5
nxd2 28 'iWxd2 'iWxe5 dxc5 lZ'lbd7 1 6 lZ'lb3 lZ'lxc5 1 7 lZ'lxc5 .i.xc5
White's king is exposed and his centre Black had a fine position in Ara.Minasian
pawns are weak. Black has a decisive advan Yegiazarian, Yerevan 200 1 . There followed
tage. 1 8 lZ'le5 .i.xg2 1 9 'iVxd8 .l:.fxd8 20 �xg2
29 'iWd4 'ilVg5! l:tac8 21 lZ'ld3 .i.rn 22 .i.g5 .l:tc2 23 l:tac1
l:tdc8 24 l:txc2 l:txc2 25 .l:tc 1 with an equal
ending, but 20 ...l:td5!? 21 lZ'ld3 .i.d6 22 l:tdl
l:td8 offers Black chances of finding more.
Also possible is 10 .i.f4 as 1 1 lZ'lc3 lZ'la6,
when Hjartarsson gives 12 l:tad .i.d5 1 3
lZ'lxd5 exd5 1 4 � 5 �c8 with a balanced
game. Delchev-Flear, Creon 2001 continued
instead 1 2 .:tac1 lZ'lb4 1 3 .l:tfe l lZ'lfd5 1 4
lZ'lxd5 'iVxd5 1 5 1Wxd5 (1 5 .i.xc7 �xc4 1 6
l:txc4 .i.xa4 1 7 lZ'le5 f6 with approximate
equality, White's control of the centre being
weighed against Black's queenside majority)
1 5 ... lZ'lxd5 1 6 lZ'le5 lZ'lxf4 1 7 lZ'lxc6 (better
No exchange of queens! than 1 7 .i.xc6 .i.b4! 1 8 gxf4 .i.xel 1 9 .i.xb7
30 nf 1 e5 31 'iWc3 f6 32 Wg2 'iWg4 33 l:ta7 20 l:txc7 l:tb8 21 l:tc8+ l:txc8 22 .i.xc8
'i'c4 a5 34 h3 'iWd7 35 'iWc2 'ilVc6 36 nd 1 . l:tc7 with an edge for Black as White's pawns
J:!.b4 37 nd8 nxa4 38 nc8 nb4! 0- 1 are not quite enough for the exchange)
1 7 ...lZ'lxe2+ ( 1 7 ... bxc6 1 8 gxf4 l:tab8 1 9 l:txc6
Game 38 l::t xb2 20 l::t x c7 .i.b4 looks drawn) 1 8 l:txe2
Lputian-J . Polgar bxc6 19 .i.xc6 l:tad8 20 d5 .i.f6 21 dxe6 fxe6
WiJk aan Zee 2000 22 .i.b5 and White had a minimal advantage
in the shape of Black's pawn weaknesses.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 liJf3 liJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 Black opted for the Catalan trade of
ii..g 2 ii.. e 7 6 0-0 0-0 7 'iWc2 a6 8 a4 ii.. d 7 knight for dark-squared bishop in Hulak
9 'ilVxc4 ii.. c 6 Psakhis, Zagreb 1 993, emerging from
1 O ... lZ'ld5 1 1 lZ'lc3 lZ'lxf4 1 2 gxf4 as!? with
control of b4. There followed 1 3 l:!.fdl .i.d5
14 �5 lZ'la6 1 5 e4 .i.c6 16 "iVc4 lZ'lb4 1 7
lZ'le5 .i.e8 with more space for White but a
solid set-up for Black, the try 1 8 d5 exd5 1 9
lZ'lxd5 lZ'lxd5 20 Itxd5 .i.d6 21 lZ'l f3 .i.c6 22
l:td3 'iVc8 23 e5 .i.e7 producing unclear play.
1 0 . . . a5
The more modest 1 0 ... lZ'lbd7 has also
been played, e.g. 1 1 lZ'lc3 l:tc8 12 'ii'd3 lZ'ld5
13 .i.xe7 'ii'xe7 14 e4 lZ'lxc3 1 5 bxc3 l:!.fd8 1 6
l:tfe l lZ'lb6 1 7 'iVc2 .i.e8 1 8 l:teb l l:!.b8 1 9 c4
e5 20 d5 lZ'ld7 21 'iVc3 f6 22 lZ'ld2 b6 23 as
10 ii.. g 5 with an easier game for White (space) In
In the event of 1 0 lZ'lc3?! b 5 ! 1 1 'iVd3 b4 Wojtkiewicz-Watanabe, Merida 2000.
79
Th e C a t a l a n
11 ... h6 is the other means of dealing with I n Delchev-Lputian, Ohrid 2001 the con
the bishop. In Filippov-Kiriakov, St. Peters tinuation 14 ... b6 1 5 ttJel 'it'd7!? 1 6 ttJb5 :fc8
burg 2000 White dropped back to f4, and 1 7 ttJc2 ttJxc2 1 8 'it'xc2 .1e7 1 9 .1h3 .1xb5
after 1 2 .1f4 .1d6 1 3 .l:!.fdl as 1 4 ttJe5 .1xg2 20 axb5 c6 21 'iVe2 .l:IfS 22 d5 cxd5 23 exd5
1 5 �xg2 ttJb6 1 6 'ifb3 ttJfd5 1 7 ttJe4 .1b4 .1c5 24 dxe6 'it'e8 left Black with compensa
1 8 ttJc5 ttJxf4+ 1 9 gxf4 'it'd5+ 20 'it'xd5 tion for the pawn due to the presence of
ttJxd5 21 �f3 .1xc5 22 dxc5 l:[fd8 23 l:i.d2 f5 opposite coloured bishops, while there is also
chances remained even as both players had a pressure against £1.
knight in the centre. White can also use the With 1 5 .l:!.d2 .1b7 1 6 'it'e2 g6 17 'iVe3
tempo to turn his attentions to the queenside 'iVe7 1 8 h4 White starts an attack on the
with 12 i.xf6 ttJxf6 1 3 b4 .1d5 14 ttJxd5 kingside, but Black can defend. Romanishin
exd5 1 5 'ifb3 c6 1 6 e3 ttJe4 1 7 It.fc1 'it'd6 1 8 Kir.Georgiev, Ohrid 2001 went 1 8 ...l:tad8 1 9
nabl (Beliavsky-Karpov, Yugoslavia 1 996), lladl c 5 20 e 5 .1g7 2 1 dxc5 .1xf3 22 nxd8
when Beliavsky gives the continuation .l:!.xd8 23 llxd8+ 'it'xd8 24 .1xf3 bxc5 25
1 8 ... .1f6 1 9 ':c2 'it'e6 20 b5 cxb5 21 axb5 as 'it'xc5 ttJd3 26 'iVd6 .1f6!, the latest clever
as unclear, or 1 3 as 'it'd6 14 .l:!.fc1 .l:!.fd8 1 5 e3 move maintaining the balance.
I:tac8 16 'ifb3 llb8 17 'it'c2 .1xf3 1 8 .1xf3 c5 1 5 h4
19 ttJe2 cxd4 20 ttJxd4 ttJd5 21 'iib 3 ttJb4 22 15 .:tac1 .l:!.e8 16 d5 exd5 17 exd5 .1d7 1 8
1:[c4 b6 23 axb6 'it'xb6 24 :xb4 .1xb4 25 ttJd4 was seen i n Gelfand-Anand, Shenyang
ttJc6 as 26 ttJxb8 'it'xb8, which was equal in 2000, when 1 8 ... .1e5! 1 9 ttJcb5 .l:!.c8 20 ttJc6
Romanishin-Ivanovic, Belgrade 2000. bxc6 21 dxc6 i.e6 22 �hd8 Ilcxd8 23 'iVe2
1 1 ltJc3 ltJa6 1 2 ii.xf6 .1b3 would have given Black compensation
Of course White is not obliged to make for the material. Although there is only a
this capture immediately. 12 l:tac1 .1d5 rook and bishop for queen and pawn at the
(1 2 ... 'it'd6 13 ttJe5 .1xg2 14 �xg2 c6 1 5 moment, Black's forces look menacing .
.1xf6 gxf6 1 6 ttJ f3 gave White a small edge 1 5 . . . l:tc8 1 6 nd2 ii.g7 1 7 .l::ta d 1
in Kasparov-Karpov, World Championship White is slightly better due to his presence
(game 22), Moscow 1 984) 1 3 'it'd3 ttJb4 1 4 in the centre.
'ifbl c 6 1 5 e 4 .1c4 1 6 l:tfdl i.b3 1 7 :el 1 7 . . . 'ii'e 7 1 8 ltJg5 h6 1 9 ltJf3 b6 20 d5
.1c4!? is a line given by Chernin. Black is ii.d7 2 1 ltJd4 exd5 22 exd5 ii.g4
solid, although the position is unclear.
The alternative rook development is 1 2
�fd 1 . Then 1 2 .. :iVd6 1 3 e 3 h 6 1 4 .1xf6
.1xf6 1 5 ttJd2 .1xg2 1 6 �xg2 'ii'b4 1 7 'ii'e2
c6 1 8 ttJc4 is Tukmakov-Kir.Georgiev, Szirak
1 995, when 1 8 ... .1d8 1 9 e4 .1c7 20 d5 exd5
21 exd5 Ilfe8 22 'i¥f1 nad8 could have
earned Black equality according to
Kir.Georgiev. This leaves 1 2 ... .1d5 1 3 'i¥b5
ttJb4 1 4 .1xf6 .1xf6 1 5 e4 .1c6 1 6 'it'c4 g6
1 7 .l:Iac1 I:te8 1 8 d5 exd5 1 9 exd5 .1d7 20
ttJd4 .1e5 21 b3 'it'e7 22 liel 'iVf6 23 ttJe4
'it'g7 24 ttJc5 with an edge for White in Ftac
nik-Beliavsky, Germany 2000. White's pieces 23 ltJc6!
stand well but Black has his chances, too. With this move White gets rid of Black's
1 2 . . . ii.xf6 1 3 e4 ltJb4 1 4 l:tfd 1 g6 light-squared bishop and thus strengthens his
80
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 !il.. g 2 !il.. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
1 0 . . . !il.. d 5 1 1 'i'd3 e5
1 1 ...�e4 1 2 'iVe3 llJbd7 13 llJc3 �c6 1 4
'iVd3 .ib4 1 5 .l:tfe1 �xf3!? 1 6 �xf3 c 6 1 7
.l:tedl 'iiVa 5 1 8 h 4 h6 1 9 �d2 e 5 2 0 �el .l:tfe8
21 e3 .l:tad8 was equal in Beliavsky-Z.Almasi,
Ubeda 1 997, Black being ultra-solid. This
worked out better for Black than 1 4 ....l:tb8 1 5
49 !il..f 7+ 'it'c2 b 5 1 6 axb5 axb5, which was the course
49 gxh5!? Ihe8 50 h6 .ie7 (forced) 5 1 of Akopian-Ghaem Maghami, Yerevan 200 1 .
tL\xe7+ l::r x e7 5 2 l:!.xe7 a 3 and Black's ad After 1 7 llJe5 �xg2 1 8 'It>xg2 llJxe5 1 9 dxe5
vanced pawns give her adequate counterplay. llJd5 20 �xe7 't!Vxe7 21 llJe4 b4 22 l::r fel b3
After 53 l:ta7 a2 54 'It>f3 b5 55 'It>f4 llJa4 56 23 'iic 5 iYd7 24 'iic 6 'ilie7 25 h4 h6 26 .l:ta7
.l:tg7+ Wh8 57 .l:tgl b4 58 'i£tg5 b3 59 nel b2 White's activity gave him the better chances.
White has to force the draw: 60 l:te8+ 'It>h7 1 2 dxe5
61 l::re 7+ 'It>h8 etc. 12 llJc3 .ic6 13 l::r fd 1 cxd4 14 llJxd4
81
Th e C a t a la n
i.xg2 1 5 'it;>xg2 'ii'a s 1 6 i.xf6 i.xf6 1 7 lLle4 Another possibility is 1 4. . ..::.c 8 1 5 l:.fd 1
.ixd4 1 8 'iVxd4 lLlc6 1 9 'ii'c 5 was level in :e8 1 6 lLle5 'iWb6 1 7 i.h3! l1cd8 1 8 as 'ii'b 3
Tukrnakov-Beliavsky, Portoroz 1 996, while 19 i.xf6 i.xf6 20 lLlxf7!, White's brilliant
Black also has the immediate 1 2 ... cxd4. Then sacrifice securing an advantage in Smyslov
Karpov-Beliavsky, linares 1 994 continued Nogueiras, Graz 1 984 after 20 ... 'it>xf7 21
1 3 lLlxd5 'it'xd5?! 14 h4! lLlbd7?! (1 4 ... lLlc6 1 5 'iVxc5 .uc8 22 'it'e3 i.xc3 23 bxc3 'ifxc3 24
i.xf6 i.xf6 1 6 lLlg5 'ti'fS 1 7 i.e4 'iVe5 1 8 'ii'f4+.
i.xc6 i.xg5 1 9 i.xb7 l:.a7 20 .ixa6 i.e7 21 1 5 .ixfS
l:.fdl is a shade favourable for White thanks 1 5 :fdl .ic6 1 6 'iWf4 lLlb3 17 :abl h6 1 8
to the passed queenside pawns) 1 5 lLlxd4 i.xf6 i.xf6 1 9 lLle4 i.xe4 20 'ii'x e4 lLlc5 2 1
'ii'd 6 1 6 l:.fdl lLlc5 1 7 iVc4 I:.fd8 1 8 b4! with 'ii'e 3 'ii'b4 22 lLle5 :ad8 2 3 lLld3 lLlxd3 24
a clear lead for White, who won after l:txd3 'ii'xa4 25 l:.xd8 I:.xd8 26 i.xb 7 was
1 8 ... lLlxa4? 1 9 'iib 3! 'ii'b 6 20 e3 etc. Black is agreed drawn in Adianto-Short, Beijing 2000.
only slightly worse after the correct However, an interesting suggestion is Pigu
1 3. .. lLlxd5 14 i.xe7 'ii'x e7 1 5 lLlxd4, when SOy S 1 5 lLlxd5!? lLlxd5 1 6 �a3 i.xg5 1 7
'
the Catalan bishop comes into play. lLlxg5 h 6 1 8 :fc1 lLld7 1 9 lLle4 b 5 20 axb5
1 2 . . . tDbd7 'iVxb5 21 lLlc3 lLlxc3 22 bxc3, when the
1 2 ... i.xc5 1 3 lLlc3 i.c6 is sensible. In On combination of the unbalanced pawn struc
ischuk-Zvjaginzev, Poikovsky 2002 a draw ture and bishop versus knight looks nice for
was agreed after 1 4 'iVc4 lLlbd7 1 5 b4 .ie7 White.
16 b5 i.xf3 1 7 i.xf3 lLle5 1 8 'ii'f4 lLlxf3+ 1 9 1 5 . . . .ixfS 1 S tDxd5 exd5 1 7 �a3 �bS
'iix f3 axb5 2 0 axb5 'iVb6 21 i.e3 'iVc7 22 1 7 ... lLle4!? is worth a try. 1 8 l::tadl l:.fd8 1 9
i.f4 'iVb6 23 i.e3. White can try 1 4 lLle5 e3 l:.ac8 2 0 lLld4 11c4 2 1 b 3 l:tcc8 2 2 b 4 'ii'b6
�xd3 1 5 lLlxd3 i.d4 16 .ixf6 .ixf6 1 7 lLle4 23 as 'ii'd 6 24 :c1 g6 25 'iVb2 'ii'd 7 26 b5
but 1 7 ... i.e7 is acceptable for Black, who was i.xd4 27 'ifxd4 'it'xb5 28 i.xe4 dxe4 and a
able to neutralise White's attempted initiative draw was agreed in Karpov-Gelfand,
in Papaioannou-Beliavsky, Istanbul 2000 Monaco (rapid) 200 1 . This is a bit premature
after 1 8 l:.fc 1 lLld7 1 9 lLlec5 lLlxc5 20 lLlxc5 as there is still a lot to play for in this posi
i.xg2 21 'it;>xg2 l:tfd8 22 lLld3 'it>f8 23 l:.c7 tion.
l:.ab8 24 l:.ac1 �e8 25 I:t7c4 f6 26 f4 :d7 27 1 8 .l:tab 1 tDb3 1 9 .l:tfd 1 l:!.fe8 20 e3 .l:tac8
l:.c8+ l:.xc8 28 l:!xc8+ l:.d8 29 :c7 l:!.d7 etc.
1 3 tDc3 tDxc5 1 4 �e3
21 tDd2!
After the knight exchange it might seem
1 4 . . . �a5 difficult for White to generate an initiative
82
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 iL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
83
Th e C a t a l a n
i. x f3 c 6 1 6 'iVb3 l:ta7 1 7 a s ! and White can minor pieces o n the other flank. However, an
hope for an edge. Then 1 7 ... i.xd4 1 8 l:.fd 1 improvement on the game is 22 ... b5! 23 lZ'ld2
'i'f6 1 9 l:ta4 e5 20 lZ'le4 is good for White, so i.d6 24 lZ'ldb3 'it>f8 with equality.
Azmaiparashvili-Gelfand, Moscow 2001 23 b4 'it'fS 24 J:tab 1 'it'e 7
went 1 7 ... lZ'ld7 1 8 l:tfdl 'i'c7 1 9 lZ'le4 i.e7 20 In reply to 24 ... b5 White sacrifices once
lZ'ld2 .l:.aa8 21 lZ'lc4 :ad8 22 :ac1 lZ'lf6 23 e4, again: 25 lZ'lxa6!? bxc4 26 lZ'lxb8 .i.xb8 27 b5
although White's space advantage meant and his pawns are dangerous.
something. 25 b5 axb5 26 J:txb5 b6 27 4Jd3 i.dS 2S
1 3 dxc5 i.xc5 4Jde5
Again Black is not without alternatives.
1 3 ...'i'xd l ?! is not the best option. Pigu
sov-Kruppa, Panormo 2001 continued 1 4
l:txd 1 i.xc5 1 5 lZ'lc3 .i.c6 1 6 lZ'le5 .i.xg2 1 7
'it>xg2 b 6 1 8 i.xf6 gxf6, and now White
could have obtained the chances after 1 9
lZ'lc4 lla7 2 0 lZ'le4 f5 21 lZ'lxc5 bxc5 22 l:td6
with considerable play and the superior struc
rure.
Black was okay in Kozul-Ribli, Solin/Split
2001 after 1 3 ... lZ'lbd7 1 4 lZ'lc3 i.c6 1 5 b4 as
16 b5 i.xf3 17 i.xf3 lZ'lxc5 1 8 .i.e3 l:Ic8 1 9
'iVbl i.d6 2 0 lZ'le4 lZ'lcxe4 21 i.xe4 'i'e7 22
i.g2 i.c5 23 .i.d2 b6 24 'iWb3 .l:tfd8 etc. 2S . . . 'it'fS?
1 3 ... h6 14 i.e3 lZ'ld5 1 5 'i'c1 'i'a5 1 6 28 ... lZ'le4 29 l:tdl f6 is better, when 30
lZ'lbd2 lZ'lxe3 1 7 lZ'lb3 'iVb4 1 8 'i'xe3 lZ'ld7 �d7+ 'it>e8 31 l:.d4 lZ'lc3 32 lZ'ld6+ 'it>e 7! 33
sees Black develop and thus earn a level lZ'lxc8+ l:txc8 34 l:tc4 .l:l.xc4 35 lZ'lxc4 lZ'lxb5
game. However, in Romanishin-Beliavsky, 36 axb5 slightly favours White as the b6-
Belgrade 2000 White's less precise play saw pawn needs protection. The bishop is passive
Black emerge from 1 6 lZ'la3?! lZ'ld7 1 7 lZ'lc4 and it is not easy to drive the knight away
'i'b4 1 8 lZ'le 1 lZ'lxe3 1 9 lZ'lxe3 lZ'lxc5 20 lZ'l1 c2 from c4. Nevertheless, Black has good
'iVb6 21 as 'ii'c7 22 i.xe4 lZ'lxe4 23 l:ta4 lZ'ld6 chances of saving the game.
24 lZ'la3 l:tac8 25 'i'xc7 l:!xc7 with a slight 29 4Jxb6 ! J:txc 1
lead, the knight rather misplaced on a3. Or 29 ... .i.xb6 30 l:txb6 .l:txb6 31 l:txc8+
14 'ili'xdS J:txdS 1 5 4Jbd2 i.c6 1 6 4Jb3 'it>e7 32 l:!a8 when, with accurate play, White
4Jbd7 should win.
16 ... i.b4!? 17 nfc 1 lZ'lbd7 1 8 i.d2 i.xd2 30 4Jbd 7 + 4Jxd7 3 1 4Jxd 7 + 'it'eS 32
19 lZ'lfxd2 i.xg2 20 'it>xg2 l:tdc8 21 lZ'lc4 4JxbS J:tcS 33 4Ja6 l:!.c2 34 e3 J:ta2 35
l:tab8 22 lZ'lca5 g5 23 'it>f1 'it>f8 24 'it>e 1 led to 4Jc5 i.c7 36 J:!.b7 'it'dS 37 l:!.b4 'it'e7
a draw in Savchenko-Pigusov, Ohrid 200 1 . 37 ... .i.d6 is another option. After 38
1 7 J:tfc 1 i.b6 1 S 4Jfd2 i.xg2 1 9 'it'xg2 lZ'lb7+ 'it>c7 39 lZ'lxd6 'it>xd6 40 l:tb7 l:ha4 41
J:tdcS 20 i.xf6 4Jxf6 21 4Jc4 i.c 7 22 l:txf7 J:tg4 42 f4 White has a decisive advan
4Jc5 J:tabS?! tage.
22...b6? is poor because after 23 lZ'lxa6! 3S 4Je4 f5 39 J:tb7 J:tc2
l:txa6 24 lZ'ld6 i.xd6 25 Ihc8+ .i.f8 26 :d 1 39 ... fxe4 40 l:hc7+ 'it>f6 41 l:tc4 'it>f5 42 h3
h5 27 l:tdd8 lZ'lh7 28 l:ta8 the rook and and Black's pawns are very weak.
passed a-pawn are clearly superior to the two 40 4Jg5 h6 41 4Jf3 'it'f6 42 4Jd4 J:tc4 43
84
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii.. g 2 ii.. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
ttJb5 ii..e 5 44 f4 ii.. c 3 4 5 �f7 + ! ttJe5 l:tfc8 21 l:td1 h6 22 .l:tcd2 was drawn in
The minor piece ending is winning for Schandorff-Nielsen, Esbjerg 2001) 1 5 :tfd1
White. (1 5 ttJe1 i.xg2! 1 6 ttJxg2 ttJd7 1 7 .l:!.fd1 'it'c7
45 . . .'it'xf7 46 ttJd6 + We7 47 ttJxc4 Wd7 1 8 c6 ttJb8 1 9 .l:tac1 'it'xc6 20 'iix c6 Itxc6 21
48 Wf3 Wc6 49 e4 Wc5 50 ttJe5 fxe4+ ttJf4 led to a draw in Khalifman-Yusupov,
51 Wxe4 Wb4 52 ttJc6 + Wxa4 53 ttJd4 Moscow 1 988) 1 5 ... i.xb3 1 6 'iix b3 'iic 7 1 7
Wb4 54 ttJxe6 Wc4 55 g4 ii.. f 6 56 h3 a4 'it'xc5 1 8 axb5 axb5 1 9 ttJd4 b 4 20 e3
ii.. b 2 57 h4 ii.. c 3 58 f5 ii.. b 2 59 ttJxg7 .l:tfd8 21 l::t d2 'iib 6 and the position was
ii.. x g7 60 g5 1 -0 symmetrical, equal and, consequently, drawn.
Also possible is 1 3. .. i.e4 1 4 'it'c3 (14 'it'c 1
White plays 7 'i'c2 a6 8 'i'xc4 c5 1 5 dxc5 as! 1 6 a4 'iid 5! 1 7 'tie3! is un
clear) 1 4 ... ttJd5 1 5 'it'd2 i.b4! 1 6 'it'd1 c5, the
Game 4 1 thematic break equalising for Black in Spiri
Jo . H orvath-Welis donov-Kotronias, Corfu 1 989 after 1 7 a3 c4!
Odorheiu 5ecuiesc 1993 1 8 axb4 cxb3 19 ii'xb3 'it'd6 20 ttJe5 i.xg2
21 �xg2, when 21 ...'iix b4 is even slightly
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 better for Black according to Kotronias.
ii..g 2 ii.. e 7 6 0-0 0-0 7 'i'c2 a6 8 'i'xc4 b5 1 0 . . . ttJc6
9 'i'c2 ii.. b 7 10 ... i.d6 1 1 i.g5 transposes to 10 i.d2
..id6 1 1 i.g5.
1 1 �d 1
In the event of 1 1 ttJbd2, worth consider
ing is 1 1 ...ttJxd4 1 2 ttJxd4 i.xg2 1 3 ttJxe6
fxe6 14 �xg2 c5 1 5 ttJf3 with unclear play.
Black's queenside majority compensates for
the slight weakness on e6. In Piket-Lautier,
Wijk aan Zee 1 997 Black opted for 1 1 ...l::t c 8
12 l:!.ad1 ttJb4 13 �1 ttJbd5 14 i.e5 ttJd7
15 ttJb3 'it'e8! 16 e4 ttJ5b6 17 .l:tfe 1 , when
1 7 ...ttJc4 would have guaranteed equality
according to Lautier. Kotronias gives 1 2
ttJb3 ttJb4 1 3 'it'c1 i.d5 1 4 ttJfd2 i.xg2 1 5
10 ii..f4 �xg2 c5! 1 6 dxc5 as! 1 7 a4 'iVd5+ 1 8 f3
1 0 i.g5 ttJbd7 1 1 ttJbd2 l:tc8 (1 1 ...c5!? 1 2 i.xc5! 1 9 e4 'it'h5 20 g4 ttJxg4 21 fxg4
i.xf6 gxf6! i s interesting) and White must 'it'xg4+ 22 ..ig3 i.b6 with an initiative for
address Black's desire to push the c-pawn. 1 2 Black thanks to White's exposed king.
ttJb3!? i.e4 1 3 'it'c1 c 5 1 4 ttJxc5! ttJxc5 1 5 Also possible is 1 1 ttJc3 ttJb4 (1 1 ...ttJxd4
dxc5 l:!.xc5 1 6 'iWe3 'it'a8 1 7 i.xf6 gxf6 was 1 2 ttJxd4 i.xg2 1 3 ttJxe6 fxe6 14 'i.t>xg2 c5 1 5
seen in Larsen-Ribli, Amsterdam 1 980, when .l:tad1 'it'e8 and the queen i s heading for c6,
1 8 .l:tad1 should secure a slight edge. White giving Black a good game) 12 �1 c5 1 3
can also throw in 1 2 i.xf6 ttJxf6 in order to dxc5 i.xc5, when the most narural course is
reduce his opponent's influence on c5. Kas 14 ttJg5 ..ixg2 1 5 �xg2 ttJbd5 etc. Instead
parov-Karpov, World Championship (game after 1 4 i.e5?! ttJg4 1 5 ttJe4 i.xe4! 1 6 'iix e4
20), Leningrad 1 986 went 1 3 ttJb3 c5 14 dxc5 f5 Kirov-Vera, Timisoara 1 987 went 17 'iib 1 ,
i.d5 (1 4 ... i.e4 1 5 'iic 3 i.d5 16 lIac1 i.xb3 White being punished for his passivity after
17 'iix b3 i.xc5 1 8 e3 'iib 6 19 l:tc2 .l:tc7 20 1 7 ... 'iib 6 1 8 e3 ..ixe3! 1 9 fxe3 ttJxe5 20
85
Th e C a t a l a n
ttJxe5 'iVxd+ 21 l::t f2 �xe5 2 2 �xa8 l:txa8, 1 4 . . . c S 1 S dxcS .ltxcs 1 6 .ltxf6 ifxf6 1 7
when the knight and two pawns fully com 4:Je4 'fie7 1 8 4:JxcS l:txcS 1 9 ifd2
pensated the rook, the secure outpost on d5 White is better due to the slight weakness
and the exposed white king adding to the of Black's queenside. These pawns are more
mix to leave Black better. Kotronias gives 1 7 advanced and therefore more exposed.
'it' f4 ttJc2! 1 8 l::t ab 1 (1 8 l::t ac1 ? ttJxf2! 1 9 .l:!.xf2 1 9 . . . tDf6
�e3 and Black wins) 1 8 ... 'iVb6 and Black 19 ... .l:!.fc8 20 ttJe1 h6 21 l::t a c1 l::t x c1 22
enjoys the initiative. l::tx c1 l::t x c1 23 'iVxc1 ttJf6 24 ttJd3 is Anders
1 1 . . . 4:Jb4 son-Kir.Georgiev, Sarajevo 1 985, again with
the better prospects for White.
20 it'd6 !
2 0 l::t ac 1 led only t o equality after 2 0... h6
21 l::tx c5 'iVxc5 22 l::t c 1 'iVb6 23 ttJe5 �xg2
24 'it>xg2 in Andersson-Beliavsky, Debreceen
1 992.
20 .. :ii'x d6 21 l:txd6 l:tfc8 22 4:Je 1 .ltxg2
23 Wxg2 as 24 l:ta6 a4 2S b3 axb3 26
axb3 gS 27 4:Jd3 l:tc2 28 l:ta8 �xa8 29
l:txa8 + Wg7 30 Wf 1 4:Je4 3 1 b4 4:Jd2+
32 We 1 4:Jb3 33 .l:ta7 Wf6
If Black tries to get rid of the well placed
knight on d3 with 33 ... ttJc1 ? he is punished
1 2 ff'c 1 after 34 �d1 l::t a2 35 l::txa2 ttJxa2 36 'it>c2,
1 2 �xc7? �xc7 1 3 �xc7 ttJc2 1 4 ttJe1 when the knight is caught.
ttJxa1 15 �xb7 l::t a7 and Black emerges the 34 l:td7 l:ta2?!
exchange up. Dubious. 34...g4 is more appropriate,
1 2 . . .l1c8 when 35 e3 l::t d2 36 ttJc5 l::t xd7 37 ttJxd7+
Also possible is 12 ... 'it'c8 13 �g5 c5 1 4 �e7! 38 ttJe5 f6! 39 ttJxg4 ttJc1 40 �d2 ttJa2
�xf6 �xf6 1 5 dxc5 a s with play for the sees Black regain the pawn with immediate
pawn in Sploshnov-Berzins, Trinec 1 998. equality.
There followed 16 ttJa3 1l.c6 17 ttJc2 l:!.a7! 1 8 3S f3 hS 36 Wf2 g4? !
ttJcd4 l::t c7 1 9 a3 ttJa6 20 'ife3 �xf3 2 1 i.xf3 After the more stubborn 36 ...l::t c2 37 f4
l::t x c5 when Black won back the pawn with gxf4 38 gxf4 ttJc1 39 ttJe5 'itfS 40 �f3 l::t c3+
equal chances after 22 ttJb3 l::t c2 23 ttJxa5 41 e3 f6 42 l::t c 7! Black anyway finds his king
'ii'c 7. in trouble.
1 3 4:Jc3 4:JbdS 1 4 .lteS ! ? 37 f4 l:td2 38 .l:!.b7 4:Jd4?
After 1 4 ttJxd5 i.xd5 1 5 �e3 c 6 1 6 ttJ e 1 38 ... l::tc2 39 ttJe5 is also good for White,
'i¥b6! 1 7 ttJd3 �xg2 1 8 �xg2 ttJd5 1 9 f3 c5 although the text loses.
the thrust helped free Black in Khalifman 39 We3 4:Jb3 40 4:JeS 1 -0
Lutz, Wijk aan Zee 1 995, 20 dxc5 ttJxe3+ 21 White wins at least one pawn.
'it'xe3 �xc5 22 ttJxc5 'ii'x c5 23 'iVxc5 .l:!.xc5
24 l::t a c1 l:tcc8 25 b4 g6 steering the game to Game 42
an equal ending. This is certainly preferable Kramnik -Svidler
(for Black) to 1 4 ... ttJxd5 1 5 e4 ttJf6 1 6 e5 Linares 1998
ttJd5 1 7 �g5. Black should keep an eye on
e4. 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 tDf3 tDf6 4 g3 dxc4 S
86
Th e S e m i - Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 JL g 2 JL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
JLg2 JLe7 6 0-0 0-0 7 'W!Vc2 a 6 8 'ii'x c4 b5 l:tcS 1 4 ttJc5?! (too ambitious - 1 4 l:tfdl c5 is
9 'ii'c 2 JLb7 10 JLf4 ttJd5 1 1 ttJc3 equal) 1 4 ... ttJxc5 1 5 dxc5 �xf3 1 6 �xf3
Another option for White is 1 1 ttJbd2 'iVd4 17 e3 'i!Vxc5 I S 'iVxc5 .ixc5 19 l:tfc1
ttJd7 1 2 ttJb3 c5 1 3 dxc5 lIcs 1 4 l:tadl ttJxc5 .i.d6 20 lIc6 lIaS 21 l:tc2 l:tabS 22 :c6 and
15 e4 ttJd7 1 6 'iWd3 ttJ5f6 (1 6 ...ttJxf4 1 7 Black was slightly better due to his extra
it'xd7 ttJe2+ I S 'lithl �xe4 1 9 'iVa7 gives pawn, but the game was drawn.
White too much play) 1 7 e5 ttJd5, when 1 3 . . . JLxf3? !
Black equalized in Beliavsky-I.Ivanov, Minsk 1 3. .. 'i'cS 1 4 ttJe4 c5 1 5 dxc5 ttJxc5 1 6
1 976. After I S l:tfel ttJxf4 19 'iVxd7 ttJxg2 20 ttJxc5 'i'xc5 1 7 'iVxc5 �xc5 I S l:tac1 l::t fcS
'iYxb7 ttJxel 21 l'lxdS ttJxf3+ 22 'litg2 l:tfxdS 1 9 ttJe5 �xg2 20 'litxg2 f6 21 ttJf3 .ifS 22 e3
23 'litxf3 .ifS 24 'iVxa6 1:[c2 White had a was the course of Ribli-Karpov, Amsterdam,
pawn and prospects of a passed pawn on the 1 9S0. White has a small advantage here and
queenside, while Black had more active he eventually won the game.
pieces. In Sosonko-Dutreeuw, Brussels 1 993
1 1 . . .ttJxf4 1 2 gxf4 White threw in 14 a4 b4 before 15 ttJe4. Af
ter the dubious 1 5 ... .id5?! 1 6 l:Iac1 l::t a7 1 7
ttJe5 ttJxe5 I S fxe5 'iVaS 1 9 'iVd3! f5 20 exf6
gxf6 21 .if3 l:tdS 22 'iVe3 'lithS 23 'lithl l:tgS
24 l:tgl c6 25 ttJd2 Black had numerous
weaknesses in this semi-closed position. Sos
onko offers 1 5 ... c5 16 dxc5 ttJxc5 17 ttJd6
.ixd6 IS .l!txd6.
1 4 JLxf3 l:!.b8 1 5 e3
1 5 ttJe4 .id6 16 e3 'iVh4 17 'lith 1 ttJf6 I S
ttJxf6+ 'iVxf6 1 9 l:tgl 'iVe7 20 .ic6 with the
better prospects for White in Smyslov
Barczay, Kapfenberg 1 970. The pawn pha
lanx dominates the enemy bishop, while
1 2 . . . ttJd7 White is able to attack Black's queenside
Stangl-Ruf, Kecskemet 1 990 went pawns.
12 ...ttJc6 1 3 l:tfdl ttJb4 14 'iWc1 'ifbs 1 5 a3 1 5 . . . ttJf6
ttJd5 1 6 ttJe5 ttJxc3 1 7 'i'xc3 �xg2 I S 'litxg2 1 5 ... 'i'cS leaves White in charge after 1 6
and White had a finn grip on the dark l:tac1 c 5 1 7 d5 exd5 I S ttJxd5 .id6 1 9 .ig4
squares which soon translated to an advan 'i!VdS (19 ... 'i'c6?! 20 'iVe4 'lithS? 21 ttJf6! and
tage after I S ... �d6 1 9 l:tac1 'i'b7+ 20 ttJc6 White wins a piece) 20 e4 (Sosonko). Black
�hS (20 ... .ixf4? 21 'i!Vf3) 21 'i!Vf3. The has problems on the d-ftle.
knight on c6 is very annoying for Black. 1 6 l:!.ac 1 'ii'd 6 1 7 ttJe2 l:!.fc8 1 8 e4 'ii'd 7
1 3 l:!.fd 1 1 9 d5!
1 3 ttJg5?! is best avoided, as demonstrated White breaks through in the centre and
in Gutman-Kochiev, Ashkhabad 1 975: obtains an advantage.
13 ... �xg5 14 .ixb7 .i.xf4! 15 �xaS 'iVh4 1 6 1 9 . . . exd5
l:tfd 1 l:txaS and Black had a pawn and an Or 19 ... .ifS 20 ttJd4! exd5 21 ttJc6 l:tb6
attack brewing. The further 1 7 'i!Ve4 'i!Vxh2+ 22 e5 ttJeS 23 l:txd5 'iVh3 24 'i'e4. Notice
I S 'litft l:teS 1 9 it'f3 .i.d6 20 e3 f5 left both how well White's pieces are posted compared
sides with something to bite on. Stangl to Black's uncoordinated forces.
Blauert, Dortmund 1 992 continued 1 3 ttJe4 20 e5 ttJe8 21 l:!.xd5 'ii'h 3 22 JLg2 'ii'h 4
87
Th e Ca t a la n
23 lLld4! 1 0 . . . lLlc6
White wins material. 1O ... i.d6 1 1 i.g5 tbbd7 is a different set
23 . . :ii'xf4 24 lLlc6 up. Ricardi-Soppe, San Fernando 1 993 went
1 2 tbbd2 h6 1 3 i.xf6 tbxf6 1 4 l:Hdl l:tc8 1 5
tbb3 i.e4 1 6 'iVc3 'ii'e 7 1 7 J::tac1 and White
had a finn grip on c5, securing an advantage
after 1 7 ... i.d5 1 8 tbe5 i.xg2 1 9 'it'xg2 i.xe5
20 dxe5 tbd5 21 'iic 5 'iVg5 22 'iVd4 tbb6 23
tbc5. Nor did Black have any joy in Hlibner
Eng, Gennany 1 985 after 1 2 ... c5 1 3 i.xf6
'ii'xf6?! 1 4 tbe5! i.xg2 1 5 tbxd7 'ii'd 8 1 6
tbxfB i.xfl 1 7 'iix h7+ 'it>xfB 1 8 l:!.xfl cxd4
1 9 'iib 8+ 'it'e7 20 'ii'xg7, when White won a
pawn, 20 ... 1i'h8 21 'iig5+ 'ii'f6 22 'ii'xf6+
'it'xf6 23 l:!.c1 adding the only open file to his
collection. Black has an improvement in
24 . . . .lth4 1 3 ... gxf6 1 4 tbe4, although White is still bet
After 24 ... i.g5 25 IIcd 1 �b6 26 l:t5d4 the ter.
queen is in trouble - 26 ... J::tx c6 27 'ii'x c6 'irfS After 10 ... tbbd7 White sends his bishop
28 J::td 8! and White wins (Marciano) . elsewhere - 1 1 i.a5. Chetverik-Ortmann,
25 l:tcd 1 l:tb6 26 l:t5d4 l:txc6 Gyula 2000 continued l 1 ...tbb6 1 2 tbbd2
Both 26 ... 'ii'h 6 27 'ii' f5 and 26 ...'iVg5 27 l::t c 8 1 3 i.xb6 cxb6 14 'ii'd 3 'ii'c 7 1 5 l:tfdl
'it'e4 win for White. .l:f.fd8, White's majority in the centre counting
27 .ltxc6 �xe5 28 .ltd7 l:td8 29 l:txh4 for more than Black's on the queenside. With
1 -0 1 6 a3 'ii'c2 1 7 'iVxc2 k[xc2 1 8 tbel ttc7 1 9
i.xb7 l:!.xb7 2 0 e 3 White's chances would
Game 43 have been better.
Kobalija-Kiriakov 1 1 ...l:tc8 12 tbbd2 l2Jb8 13 a3 l2Jc6 14
Dubai 2002 i.c3 b4?! 15 axb4 l2Jxb4 1 6 'iib 3 i.d5 1 7
'--------------... 'ii'a4 i.c6 1 8 'iVa5 i:tb8 1 9 l2Je5 i.xg2 20
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 lLlf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 'it>xg2 l:tb5 21 'iVa4 c 5 2 2 dxc5 i.xc5 23
.ltg2 .lte7 6 0-0 0-0 7 �c2 a6 8 �xc4 b5 l2Jdf3 saw Black's attempt to steal the advan
9 �c2 .ltb 7 1 0 .ltd2 tage leave him only with a weak a-pawn in
I.Almasi-Lauber, Gyula 1 997. I.Almasi gives
1 4 ... l2Jd5 1 5 b4 l2Jxc3 1 6 'iVxc3 l:ta8 1 7 l2Jb3
when White is better, again due to control of
c5 and the c-ftle.
1 1 ...l:!.a7 looks artificial, e.g. 1 2 l2Jbd2 'ii'a8
1 3 b4 l2Jb8 1 4 a3 l2Jc6 1 5 l2Jb3 l2Jxa5 1 6
l2Jxa5, Chetverik-B.Funnan, Karvina 1 998. I f
Black cannot move the c-pawn then the rook
looks a bit silly on a7. There followed
1 6 ... i.e4 1 7 l2Jel ! (White goes for an advan
tage in the ending) 1 7 ... i.xc2 1 8 i.xa8 l:taxa8
1 9 l2Jxc2 i.d6 20 f4 with total control of the
dark squares. After 1 3 ... e5 1 4 dxe5 l2Jxe5 1 5
88
Th e S e m i - Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 � g 2 � e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
89
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 1 'ii'c 1 tDbd7
Black has a range of options.
1 1 ....l:!.a7 (again!) was played in Nielsen
Krivonosov, Panormo 200 1 . After 1 2 iLe3
ttJd5 1 3 ttJc3 ttJxc3 1 4 'i*'xc3 .l:!.b 7 1 5 .l:!.fd 1
24 'iWa 1 ! c6 1 6 ttJe5 iLxg2 1 7 c,t>xg2 �d5+ 1 8 f3 b4 1 9
24 ttJe5 offers no advantage for White af 'iib 3 ttJd7 2 0 ttJd3 'ii¥b 5 21 :ac 1 Black was a
ter 24 ... cxd4 25 exd4 'iVb5 26 l:!.a7 .td6 27 little worse.
'fWal ttJd5 and the position is equal. l 1 ...c6 12 ttJc3!? .txf3 13 .txf3 'ii'xd4 14
24 . . . cxd4 .te3 'iVd8 15 a4 and Black had won a pawn
Better is 24 ... ttJc6 25 dxc5 .txc5 26 .tc3 but White had sufficient play in Nielsen
ttJb4 27 .l:!.a4. Rozentalis, Esbjerg 200 1 . There followed
25 tDxd4 '<t>f8?! 1 5 ... b4 1 6 ttJe4 ttJd5 1 7 .td4 'iVc7 1 8 ttJc5
A strange decision. The lesser evil is .l:!.d8 19 ir'c4 ttJd7 20 ttJxd7 lIxd7 21 .tc5 as
25 ...fNc7 26 .tf3 with the more pleasant po 22 .l:!.ac1 .txc5 23 'i*'xc5 .l:!.d6 24 .l:!.c2 .l:!.ad8
sition for White. 25 .l:!.fc1 and White had compensation for the
2S i.f3 pawn.
26 .ta5! ttJd5 27 .txd8 .txd8 28 .txd5 Chetverik-Namyslo, Budapest 2002 con
exd5 29 ttJf5 secures a definite edge. tinued 1 1 ...b4 1 2 .tg5 ttJbd7 1 3 ttJbd2 .tb7?!
2s . . :i'c7 27 '<t>g2 'ikc5 28 i.a5 'ikc4 29 14 ttJb3 c5? 1 5 .txf6 gxf6 1 6 dxc5 .l:!.c8 17
i.xd8! i.xd8 30 .!:!.cS .l:!.xcS 31 tDxcS .l:!.dl fNc7 18 'i*'h6! and the weakness of
'<t>e8? 32 'i'a8 'ikd3 33 tDd4 'ikc4 Black's kingside was cause for concern, the
Or 33 ... fNc3 34 .tc6+ We7 35 .ta4 .tb6 further 1 8 ... ttJxc5 1 9 ttJxc5 'i*'xc5? 20 lId4!
36 ttJc6+ and White wins. increasing White's lead to decisive propor
34 i.cS + 1 -0 tions: 20 ... iLxf3 21 lIh4 .th5 22 l:.xh5 'fWc2
23 e4 etc. Black is advised to follow the ex
Game 44 ample set in Sigurjonsson-Gruenfeld, Rand
Gelfand-Lutz ers 1 982 after 1 3 ... .td5, although 1 4 'iVc2 c5
Dortmund 2002 1 5 e4 .tb7 16 e5 ttJd5 17 iLxe7 �xe7 1 8
ttJe4 cxd4 1 9 .l:!.ad 1 .l:!.fc8 2 0 'iVb 1 proved
1 d4 d5 2 c4 eS 3 tDf3 tDfS 4 g3 dxc4 5 good for �'hite thanks to the great outpost
i.g2 i.e7 S 0-0 0-0 7 'ikc2 as 8 'ikxc4 b5 on d6.
9 'ikc2 i.b7 10 i.d2 i.e4 Finally, Black has tried 1 1 ...ttJc6, e.g. 1 2
90
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 iL e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
91
Th e C a t a la n
3 2 . . . i.e5 3 3 1:txd4 i.xd4 3 4 1:td 1 e5 3 5 favours White) 1 6 ttJe5 �xg2 1 7 �xg2 ttJd5
bxe5 tUxe5 36 1:txd4 tUb3 18 ttJc6 ttJxf4+ 19 'it'xf4 'iNe8 20 'iNf3 with a
pull for White, whose knight on c6 will prove
annoying. The later game Nielsen-Goldin,
Moscow 200 1 , continued instead 14 ...:c8 1 5
i:td1 �d5, Black preparing to push the c
pawn. There followed 1 6 ttJc5 ttJxc5 17 dxc5
�xf4 1 8 'ii'x f4 'ii'e 7 19 ttJe5! (a strong pawn
sacrifice) 1 9 ... 'ihc5 20 l:tac1 'ii'e 7 21 ttJc6
�xc6 22 J:txc6 l:tfd8 23 I:!.dc1 h6 24 a3 with
an advantage to White, who should be in no
hurry to win back the pawn.
1 3 ttJc3 ttJbd7 1 4 :dl 'iNb8 1 5 ttJe5 �xg2
1 6 ttJxd7 ttJxd7 1 7 �xg2 c5 1 8 dxc5 'irb7+
1 9 f3 �xc5 20 ttJe4 �e7 21 �c7 �xc7 22
Perhaps Black relied on this fork, but... �xc7 ttJf6 23 �d6 �xd6 24 ttJxd6, Tukma
37 1:te4! 1 -0 kov-Lalic, Palma de Mallorca 1 989 resulted in
White keeps the extra piece due to the an ending that was favourable for White.
mate threat on e8. Black has another option in 1 2 ... ttJd5 1 3
ttJc3 ttJxf4 1 4 'iixf4, e.g. 1 4. . .'iid 6 1 5 lUd l
Game 45 ttJd7 1 6 l:tac1 i:tac8 1 7 d 5 exd5 1 8 'it'xd6
Pigusov-Aseev �xd6 1 9 ttJxd5 �xd5 20 l:txd5 ttJb6 21
Sevastopol 1986 i:tdd 1 b4 22 i:tc6 ttJa4 23 .l:td2 as 24 l:ta6 !la8
which led to an edge for White in Fominyh
1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 tUf3 tUf6 4 g3 dxe4 5 Pihlajasalo, Elista 1 998. Black's pawn struc
i.g2 i.e7 6 0-0 0-0 7 'We2 a6 8 'Wxe4 b5 ture on the queenside is a bit exposed but, on
9 'We2 i.b7 1 0 i.d2 i.e4 1 1 'We 1 i.b7 the other hand, he has active pieces. In Piket
Karpov, Dortmund 1 995 Black took the
opportunity to push with 14 ... c5 1 5 dxc5
�xc5 1 6 %:tac1 'ii'e 7 1 7 l::tfd l .l:ta7, when
Piket proposes 1 8 a4! b4 1 9 ttJe4 �xe4 20
'iVxe4 as 21 ttJe5 with advantage to White.
His co-ordination is better and (again)
Black's queenside pawns are the more vul
nerable.
1 2 . . . 'We8 1 3 i.a5
13 a4!? is interesting. 1 3. .. c5 14 dxc5 �xc5
1 5 axb5 axb5 16 %:txa8 �xa8 17 �e3 �e7 1 8
'it'xc8 l::tx c8 1 9 ttJd4 �xg2 20 �xg2 b4 21
:c1 l:hc1 22 �xc1 gave White something in
1 2 1:td 1 Bareev-Aseev, Irkutsk 1 986, an important
1 2 �f4 �d6 1 3 ttJbd2 ttJbd7 1 4 ttJb3 and factor being the king's quick access to the
now Kasparov-Kramnik, World Champion centre. In Pigusov-Fokin, Kemerovo 1 985
ship (game 1 5), London 2000 went 14 ... �d5 Black pushed with 13 ... b4, but after 14 �g5
1 5 i:tdl 'ii'e 7 (1 5 ... 'ito8 1 6 ttJe5 �xg2 1 7 ttJbd7 1 5 ttJbd2 c5 1 6 ttJb3 �d5 1 7 ttJxc5
<t>xg2 �xe5 1 8 dxe5 'ito7+ 1 9 f3 ttJd5 20 e4 i.xc5?! 1 8 �xf6 gxf6 19 dxc5 ttJxc5 20 'iVh6
92
Th e S e m i- Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 i. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
(Black should always be aware o f this ma Not 21 llac 1 ? in view of 21 ....l:!.xc6! 22
noeuvre) White had generated a strong of 'iVxc6 �xe5 23 dxe5? ttJg4 and Black wins.
fensive: 20 ... ttJb3 21 .l:!.xd5! exd5 22 �h3 With 21 f3 White protects g4. After
'i'c2 23 ttJh4 ttJd4 24 e3 'ii'd2 25 �f5 and 2 1 ...ttJh5!? 22 'iib 3?! �xe5 23 ttJxe5 ttJxg3
White won. An improvement is 1 7 ... ttJxc5 1 8 24 hxg3? 'i*'xg3+ 25 'it'f1 .ll h 6! Black is win
dxc5 'ii'x c5 1 9 'it'xc5 �xc5 20 �xf6 gxf6 21 ning, so 22 e4 is better, with an unclear situa
lLld2!, although after the exchange of light tion.
squared bishops Black will have some prob 21 . . . a4 22 'ilf3 ltJe4 23 nac 1 a3 24 b3
lems on this colour complex on the queen b4 25 ltJd3 ltJc3 26 nxc3!
side. White has to be careful here: 26 ttJdxb4?!
1 3 . . . i.d6 �xb4 27 ttJxb4 .l:!.h6 28 .l:!.xc3 (28 .l:!.e 1 ?
13 ... c5 1 4 dxc5 'it'xc5 1 5 ttJbd2 ttJbd7 1 6 ttJxe2+!) 28...'it'xh2+ 2 9 'it'f1 'it'h 1 + 3 0 'it'xh 1
lLlb3 'it'xc1 1 7 .l:!.axc1 .l:!.fc8 1 8 �c7 'it' f8 was l:txh1+ 31 'it'g2 .l:!.xd1 when Black is the ex
Chernin-M.Gurevich, Vilnius 1 985. Black's change up but many pawns are being ex
king is approaching the centre so this end changed, promising White hopes of a draw.
game is equal. 26 . . . bxc3 27 'ilxd5 'ile6 28 'ilf3 ne8 29
14 ltJbd2 ltJc6 1 5 ltJb3 ltJxa5 1 6 ltJxa5 e3 c2 30 nc 1 'ilg6
.id5 1 7 ltJc6 a5 1 8 ltJfe5 na6 This is better than 30 ... �xg3?! 31 ttJdb4
18 ... �xg2 19 'it'xg2 lla6 20 'it'c2 with a llxc6 32 ttJxc6 �d6 33 'it'f1 , which nets
slight advantage for White. White the c2-pawn and with it the slightly
19 i.xd5 exd5 superior ending.
1 9 .. .'�Jxd5, to exchange one knight, is a 3 1 ltJde5 i.xe5 32 ltJxe5 nxe5 33 dxe5
dubious idea as Black loses control of e4: 20 'ii'd 3 34 'ilb7 g5
e4 ttJb4 21 a3 ttJxc6 22 ttJxc6 �7 23 d5
exd5 24 exd5 is given by Aseev. White is
better.
20 'ii'c 2
20 'it'g2!? is worth a try - after 20 ...l!e8
the position is unclear.
20 . . . 'ilh3
35 nxc2
White forces an equal queen ending. More
ambitious is 35 'it'g2 l:te6 36 'it'xc7 'it'd5+ 37
e4! 'i*'xe4+ 38 'it'gl l:tc6 39 'ii'd8+ cJ;;g7 40
'it'xg5+ 'it'f8, although the c2-pawn remains
dangerous.
35 . . . 'ilxc2 36 'ilc8 + ! % - %
21 'ilb3
93
Th e C a t a l a n
Summary
One of the main positions in the 7 ttJa3 line arises after the natural moves 7 ... �xa3 8 bxa3 bS
9 a4 a6 10 �a3 l:te8 1 1 ttJeS ttJdS 12 e4. White has the very interesting sacrifice 13 ttJxt7!?
after 12 ... ttJf6, and to us it seems that this is enough only for a draw. The jump to the other
wing, 12 ... ttJb6 (Game 28) leads to very complex play too, and requires more practical tests.
Another popular system in this line is 8 ... �d7, when after 9 ttJeS �c6 10 ttJxc6 ttJxc6 1 1 iLb2
White prepares e2-e4 and has genuine compensation for the pawn (Game 29) .
Practice has shown that against 7 ttJeS the best continuation is Robatsch's surgical decision
7 ... ttJc6!? In the case of 8 �xc6 bxc6 9 ttJxc6 'iVe8 10 ttJxe7+ 'iVxe7 1 1 'iVa4 Black can
achieve a good game in more than one fashion.
For instance Black can choose to exchange queens with 1 1 ...'iVd6 12 lIdl 'iVa6 or prepare
the development of the bishop to a6 with l 1 ...aS. Black also has good prospects if he chal
lenges the d4-pawn with 1 1 ... cS or 1 1 ... eS, thereby facilitating development. In the variation
l 1 ...cS 1 2 'iVxc4 cxd4 1 3 'ifxd4 Black has two reliable possibilities, 1 3 ... :d8 and 1 3 ... eS 1 4 'iVh4
'iVe6 I S ttJc3 �b7 (Game 3 1 ) . In the complicated variation l 1 ...eS 1 2 dxeS 'iVxeS 1 3 'iVxc4
�e6 1 4 'ir'd3 l:[ad8 I S 'iVe3 'iVhS 1 6 f3 �c4 (Kotronias) looks quite convincing.
After 8 ttJxc6 bxc6 9 ttJa3!? (Kuzmin) 9 ... �xa3 1 0 bxa3 White accepts the doubled a
pawns, the resulting situation appearing rather exotic. Then 1O .. JIb8 1 1 'iVa4 'iVxd4 1 2 �e3
'iVeS 1 3 'iVxa7 deserves more practice, while in the case of 1 0 ... �a6!? 1 1 �xc6 nb8 1 2 'iVa4
lIb6 there is not much difference between 1 3 �g2 and 1 3 �f3. In both cases Black tends to
equalize by playing ... c4-c3 at the right moment. In order to assess the variations with 1 O ...ttJdS
it is important to evaluate the endgame after 1 1 'iVa4 ttJb6 12 'iVxc6 Itb8 1 3 'iVcs �b7 14 e4
'iVd6 1 S �f4 'iYxcs 1 6 dxcS ttJa4 1 7 .l:tfc 1 �a6 1 8 �f1 ttJxcS 1 9 �xc4 (Game 34) . Black must
strive for a rook ending similar to Hjartarsson-Schussler. It does not seem likely that anything
can be made of the extra, doubled pawn.
As Black very often reaches a good position in the 9 ttJa3 line, White has tried the solid 9 e3
during recent years (Game 32). White has a normal queenside structure but also an obvious
problem with the development of the dark-squared bishop. Black has counter-chances after
something like 9 ...ttJdS 1 0 'iVa4 ttJb6 1 1 'iVc2 .l:Ib8 1 2 l:tdl 'iVe8 followed by... c6-cS.
In the modern line with 7 'iVc2 a6 8 a4 iLd7 Black solves his opening problems quite suc
cessfully. After 9 lIdl iLc6 10 ttJc3 ttJbd7 1 1 e4 bS 12 dS exdS 1 3 eS White has a dangerous
initiative, although in the event of 1 O ... �xf3 1 1 �xf3 ttJc6 1 2 �xc6 bxc6 the b-ftle means that
Black's chances are not worse. After 9 'iYxc4 �c6 the natural 1 0 ttJc3 allows Black to play
1 O ... bS with a good game, while in reply to 1 0 iLf4 Black attains equal prospects with 1 0 ... aS 1 1
ttJc3 ttJa6. Black should not develop in the same way against 1 0 �gS, where White can grab
the centre with 1 1 �xf6 �xf6 1 2 e4. Instead of 1 0 ... aS it is better to continue 1 O ... ttJbd7 1 1
ttJc3 h6 or to follow the main line with 1 O ... �dS. After 1 1 'iVd3 Black can continue to chase
the enemy queen with 1 1 ...�e4 or immediately play l 1 ...cS with equality. The advance ... c7-cS
is also strong in the case of 1 1 'it'c2 �e4 12 'iVdl and deserves further testing after 1 1 'iVc2
iLe4 12 'iVc1 . Also quite acceptable for Black here are 1 2 ... ttJbd7 and 12 ... h6, and a later
... �xf3 and ... c7-c6 with a solid set-up.
Black obtains the bishop pair and destroys White's pawn chain after 8 'iVxc4 bS 9 'iVc2 �b7
10 �f4 with 1 0 ... ttJdS 1 1 ttJc3 ttJxf4 12 gxf4. However, the pawn formation is quite typical for
the Catalan. The pawns on d4, e3, f4 and f2 provide White with something to bite on because
they offer good control over key squares in the centre.
But we believe that White does not have an advantage after 10 ... ttJc6 1 1 tIdl ttJb4 1 2
94
Th e S e m i - Op e n C a t a la n : 4 . . . dx c 4 5 il. g 2 il. e 7 6 0 - 0 0 - 0
'it'c 1 'ii'c 8!? 1 3 �gS cS!? etc. Note, however, that . . .c7-cS does not promise full equality in
the case of 1 2 . . . l::t c 8 1 3 ttJc3 ttJbdS 14 �eS. The deeper idea behind the quite passive look
ing 10 i.. d2 is to pin the c7-pawn with i.. d 2-aS, and this comes into play after 1 0 ... ttJbd7.
Another central idea in this line is to address the queenside with b2-b4.
It is probably better for Black to continue 10 ... ttJc6 1 1 e3 ttJb4 12 �xb4 i.. xb4 1 3 a3 i..d 6
14 ttJbd2 l::t c 8 1 5 b4 as! with good prospects of equality, as in the other lines White has a mini
mal edge, for example 1 0 ... �e4 1 1 'ii'c 1 b4 1 2 i..gS!? followed by ttJbd2. The problem with the
subtle manoeuvre 1 O ... �e4 1 1 �c1 �b7 is the possibility of 1 2 'ii'c2 with a repetition, which
might occasionally be an attractive option for White. Moreover White has something after 1 2
.tf4 ttJdS 1 3 ttJc3 ttJxf4 1 4 'it'xf4 o r after 1 2 l::t d l 'ikc8 1 3 a4!?
7 ttJeS
7 ... cS Game 30
-
7 ... ttJc6
8 �xc6 Game 3 1
-
8 a4
8 ... cS Game 35
-
8 b5 9 ii'c2 i.b7
. . .
10 il.d2 i.e4
1 0 ...ttJc6 Game 43
-
8 . bxc6
. . 8 . . . i.d7 1 1 ii'c 1
95
CHA PTER FIVE I
4 . . . dxc4 5 jLg2 a 6
96
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 a 6
97
Th e Ca t a l a n
Therefore after 5 ...a 6 6 0-0 b5 the main Bronstein, above: 1 3 ... c3! 1 4 bxc3 ltJd5 1 5
line is 7 ltJe5 ltJd5 8 a4 .ib7, when White ltJe4 h 6 1 6 .ia3 .ixa3 1 7 ':xa3 ltJxe3 1 8
has two quite different paths. One idea is to fxe3 � e7 1 9 l:!.aa 1 l:!.ab8 2 0 ltJ c 5 .1i.c4 21
play for positional compensation against l:!.fd 1 l:!.hd8 with an edge. White can improve
Black's pawns and weakened squares with 9 with 1 0 ltJf3 ltJc6 1 1 ltJbd2 .ie6 1 2 ltJg5
b3 (Game 59) . The second possibility is to .ib4 1 3 ltJxe6 fxe6 1 4 .ih3 when Black's
play in the centre with 9 e4 ltJf6 10 axb5 pawns are weak and his extra material lacks
axb5 1 1 l:!.xa8 .ixa8 1 2 ltJc3 (Game 60) . relevance, leaving White on top.
8 dxc5
Game 46 8 ltJe5 ltJa5 9 dxc5 �xdl 10 l:[xdl trans
Rashkovsky-K . G rigorian poses to 8 dxc5 'ii'x dl 9 l:!.xdl ltJa5 1 0 ltJe5,
Kishinev 1975 while 8 ... .td7 9 ltJa3 cxd4 10 ltJaxc4 is better
for White because of the weakness on b6.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 This leaves 8 ... ltJxd4 9 e3 ltJb3 1 0 �xd8+
i.. g 2 a6 6 a4 '.t>xd8 1 1 l:!.a3! (1 1 ltJxt7+ �e8 1 2 ltJxh8
ltJxa 1 1 3 ltJa3 l:!.a7 1 4 ltJxc4 b5 1 5 ltJe5 .ib7
favours Black) 1 1 ...'.t>e8 1 2 ltJxc4 ltJxc1 13
Ihc1 ltJd7 1 4 l:!.b3 J:tb8 15 as, as in
Gavrilov-Zhukhovitsky, Dubna 1 97 1 . Black
has a pawn but problems with queenside
development. The position is unclear.
8 . . . 'i!Vxd 1 9 �xd 1 ttJa5
Karpov-Sveshnikov, Moscow 1 976 con
tinued 9 ... .txc5 10 ltJbd2 ltJg4 1 1 e3 ltJge5
1 2 ltJxe5 ltJxe5 1 3 ltJe4 .ib4 1 4 .id2 .ixd2
1 5 l:!.xd2 �e7 1 6 ltJd6 l:[b8 1 7 f4 ltJg4 18
ltJxc4 .1i.d7 and White won the pawn back
with better prospects.
6 . . . c5 1 0 ttJe5
6 ... ltJc6 7 0-0 ltJa5 (7 .. J::tb 8 transposes to
6 0-0 ltJc6 7 a4 l:!.b8) 8 ltJbd2 c5 9 dxc5
.ixc5 10 ltJe5 c3! was Gulko-Bronstein, Vil
nus 1 975, Black inducing a weakness in the
enemy structure and in so doing obtaining
equal chances. After 1 1 bxc3 0-0 1 2 ltJec4
.ie7 1 3 ltJxa5 'iVxa5 14 '�3 e5 1 5 ltJc4 'iVc7
1 6 ltJb6 l:!.b8 1 7 c4 .ig4 Black solved his
queenside problems.
7 0-0 ttJc6
7 ... cxd4!? 8 'iVxd4 (White can try 8 ltJxd4
e5 9 ltJc2 'iVxd l 10 l:!.xd l but should expect
no more than equality after 1 0 ... ltJc6)
8 ... 'iVxd4 9 ltJxd4 e5 10 ltJc2 ltJc6 1 1 .1i.xc6+ 1 0 . . . ttJd5
bxc6 12 ltJe3 .ie6 13 ltJd2 and now in Black can also play 1O ... ltJd7 1 1 ltJxd7
Rashkovsky-Sveshnikov, Moscow 1 976 .ixd7 1 2 .id2 ltJb3 1 3 .ixb 7 .ixc5!
Black employed the same idea as in Gulko- (1 3 ... l:!.d8?! 14 c6!) 14 .txa8 ltJxa 1 1 5 ltJc3
98
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 a 6
tLlb3 1 6 �b 7 when �'hite keeps a small edge The lesser evil is 22 ...l:tfdS.
due to the vulnerable black pawns. 23 iLe4?!
1O .. .'�jb3!? 1 1 c6 ttJd5 12 l:ta2 bxc6 is Not the best. 23 i.xc6 bxc6 24 l:txc6 i.a5
worth a try. 25 l:txa6 .uxb3 26 l:txa5 l:txb2 27 l:!.aa7 gives
1 1 e4 �'hite a winning rook endgame. He is active
�te can also try the exchange 1 1 i.xd5 on the seventh rank and has a dangerous a
exd5 12 ttJc3, but 12 ... i.e6 13 ttJxd5 l:tc8 pawn.
equalizes. Note that continuing development 23 . . . g6 24 Wg2 .l:!.edS 25 iLxc6 bxc6 26
with 12 ... �xc5 1 3 ttJxd5 O-O? is unsound in l:txdS+ l:txdS?
view of 14 �e3 �d6 (1 4 ... .l1.xe3? 1 5 ttJe7+ Now Black loses, but 26 ... �xd8 27 ILxc6
Wh8 16 ttJxt7+! and Black is mated!) 1 5 l:txb3 28 �c1 'it>g7 29 l:txa6 is scarcely an
tLlxt7! 'it>xt7 1 6 ttJb6 etc. improvement.
1 1 . . . ttJb4 1 2 ttJd2 iLxc5 27 l:txc6 iLxf2 2S iLa3 iLd4 29 J:!.d6!
1 2 ...ttJb3 13 ttJxb3 cxb3 invites 14 l:!.a3 litxd6 30 exd6 iLb6 31 d7 iLdS 32 b4 f6
i.xc5 15 l:txb3 f6 16 ttJc4 with an edge for 33 a5! Wf7 34 b5 1 -0
White. Again Black is a little uncomfortable
on the queenside. White plays 6 ttJe5
1 3 ttJdxc4 ttJc2?
1 3. .. ttJxc4 14 ttJxc4 �d7 1 5 ttJe5 i.c6 1 6 Game 47
i.f4 and �te i s slightly better, a s i s the case Fominyh -Sveshnikov
after 13 ... ttJb3 1 4 l:tbl 0-0 1 5 i.e3 .l1.xe3 1 6 Elista 1995
tLlxe3.
14 l:tb1 ttJxc4 1 5 ttJxc4 iLd7 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
15 ... b5 is premature due to 16 e5 l:ta7 1 7 iLg2 a6 6 ttJe5
tLld6+ �xd6 1 8 l:txd6, when the bishop pair
and Black's vulnerability on the dark squares
combine to favour �te.
16 b3 iLc6 1 7 iLb2 0-0 1 S l:tbc 1 ttJb4
6 . . . iLb4+
Also possible is 6 ...l:ta7 7 0-0 b6 (7 ... b5?! is
dubious in view of 8 a4) 8 ttJc3 i.b 7 (Be
liavsky gives 8 ... b5 9 a4 b4 10 ttJa2 c5 1 1
1 9 ttJa5 ttJxc4 cxd4 1 2 as with compensation for the
1 9 ttJe5!? is an interesting option. pawn) 9 'iVa4+ ttJfd7 and now Beliavsky
1 9 . . . iLb6 Portish, Hungary 1 999 went 1 0 i.xb 7?!
19 ... i.e7 20 ttJxb7! helps �te. l:txb7 1 1 ttJc6 'iVc8! 12 ttJxb8 b5! with good
20 ttJxc6 ttJxc6 21 l:td7 l:tabS 22 e5 l:tfeS counterplay for Black. Instead after 1 0 l:tdl
99
Th e C a t a la n
1 00
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL. g 2 8 6
exd4 i.e7 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 ltJxc4 ltJc6 or choose i.xa8 �xa8 1 3 .l:!.g1 i.xe3 1 4 1:1. f1 �g2 1 5
the more interesting 7 ... .l:!.a7!, which had an �d6 "iVb7 and Black has a strong attack for
outing in Konopka-Kucera, Decin 1 995 the exchange. Dokhoian-Ftacnik, Germany
when 8 ltJxc4 b5 9 ltJe5 i.b7 10 i.xb 7 .l:!.xb 7 1 993 continued instead 1 1 �d4 "iVa5+ 1 2
101
Th e C a t a l a n
lbc3 'iix c5 1 3 i.xb7 (1 3 O-O!? is a possible lbe4 �c7 1 8 b4! in Ivanchuk-Novikov, Tal
improvement, but Black should be fine) lin 1 986, White securing the c5-square for the
1 3. .. �xd4 1 4 exd4 .l:!.b8 1 5 i.xa6 .l:!.xb2 with knight. After 1 8 ... 11d8 1 9 'ifb3 'it'f7 20 lbc5
an edge for Black. .Jl.c8 21 l:tfdl White was doing well. An al
9 . . . ttJxe5 1 0 �xe5 ternative is 1 6 .. J:td8 1 7 bxc4 tt:ie3!?, when
play might develop 1 8 cxb5! 'iVb6 1 9 fxe3
'iVxe3+ 20 .l:!.f2 with a mess.
1 7 fxe3 'ii'x e3 + 1 8 �f2 �xg2 19 'it>xg2
�d8 20 �c2 c3 21 �f3 �xd2 22 �xe3
�xd 1 23 �exc3 'it>e7 ! 24 �c6 J:!.d6 25
�c7 + �d7 26 �7c6 �d6
26 . . . .l:.a8 27 .l:.b6 and White's activity as
sures him of the draw.
27 �c7 + Y> - Y>
Game 49
Raetsky-Naiditsch
Dortmund 2000
1 0 . . . f6
10 ... i.xc5!? is a sharp but apparently per 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
fectly sound opportunity. White will get no �g2 a6 6 ttJe5 c5 7 ttJa3
where unless he accepts the challenge: 1 1
i.xg7 .l:Ig8:
1 2 i.d4?? lbf4! 1 3 'iHa4+ i..d 7 1 4 �xc4
lbxg2+ 0- 1 is the miniature Verat-Antunes,
Royan 1 989, while 12 i.. e 5 "iVg5 13 f4 'iid 8
14 i.xd5 "iVxd5 15 'iit'x d5 exd5 was also very
short but agreed drawn In Tratar
A.Petrosian, Ljubljana 1 995, where White
could have tried 1 4 lbc3!?, e.g. 1 4 ... lbe3 1 5
'iixd8+ 'it'xd8 1 6 i.. f6+ 'lite8 1 7 i.e4 with a
murky situation.
Salov-Portish, Brussels 1 988 continued 1 2
i.c3 b 5 1 3 i.d4 'iVb6 1 4 i.. x c5 'iVxc5 1 5
lbc3 i..b 7 1 6 lbxd5 i.xd5 1 7 .Jl.xd5 l:.d8 1 8 7 . . . 'ii'x d4? !
0-0 .l:!.xd5 1 9 �c2 h 5 with sufficient counter Black has problems with his queen after
play. this capture. More natural is 7 ... cxd4, as in
1 1 �d4 �xc5 the next main game. After 7 ... .l:.a7 8 dxc5
A common trick in these positions. 'iixd 1+ 9 'it>xd 1 .Jl.xc5 10 tt:iaxc4 b5 1 1 lbd3!
1 2 �xc5 'ii'a 5 + 1 3 ttJd2 White has the advantage. In Rashkovsky
13 lbc3 lbxc3 14 "iVd6 lbd5+ 1 5 'it'f1 'iVd8 Beliavsky, Baku 1 977 the subsequent
is unclear according to Ruban. 1 1 ....l:!.d7 1 2 lbce5 .l:!.d8 1 3 i.d2 i.b6 1 4 a4
1 3 . . . 'ii'x c5 1 4 �c 1 b5 1 5 b3 �b7 1 6 0-0 left Black's queenside under terrible pressure.
ttJe3 ! 8 'ii'a4+ ! ?
An important improvement. Earlier in the Although this check i s not necessarily the
same tournament Black played 1 6 ... c3?! 1 7 strongest move, in practical terms it is the
1 02
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i.. g 2 a 6
1 03
Th e C a t a l a n
l::t xd3 l:txf2 33 l:tfl White is easily winning endgame for White.
the ending. In reply to 8 ... �c5 9 �d2 is less effective
30 �cc7 We5 now as Black has control over the b6-square.
30 ... e5 3 1 l:tc6+ 'l¥tf5 32 as and the a-pawn Consequently in Alburt-I.Ivanov, New York
is a runner! 1 983 the subsequent 9 ...tLld5 1 0 tLld3 i.a7
3 1 a5 �a2 32 a6 .i.b2 33 a7 d3 34 �xd3 1 1 �a5 'it'd7 (1 1 ...'it'e7? 1 2 �xd5! exd5 1 3
.i.d4 35 �xd4 Wxd4 36 .l:txf7 g5 37 .l:!.xh7 �b4 and Black is i n trouble) 1 2 tLlde5 'iVe7
e5 38 �d7 + We4 39 Wg2 g4 40 h3 1 3 'iVb3 tLlc6 1 4 0-0 0-0 1 5 l:tac1 I:tb8 1 6
gxh3+ 4 1 Wxh3 Wf5 42 f3 �a4 43 g4+ tLlxc6 bxc6 1 7 'iVc2 c5 1 8 l::t fd 1 left the onus
Wg5 44 Wg3 .l:ta3 45 Wf2 Wf6 46 We2 on White to demonstrate compensation. lbis
We6 47 �b7 Wf6 48 Wd2 1 -0 leaves 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 b4!? (White needs to act
energetically) 1 O ... �xb4 1 1 lIbl �c5 1 2 tLld3
Came 50 �e7 1 3 tLlb6 l::t a7 1 4 fib3 tLlc6 1 5 �b2,
G irnza-Linder Russo-Haro, Guarapuava 1 992. An accurate
Cerma'!Y 1998 evaluation of the position is difficult as only
one game has been played, but White has
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tLlf3 tLlf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 compensation here. After 1 5 ... e5 he found 1 6
ii g2 a6 6 tLle5 c5 7 tLla3 cxd4 8 tLlaxc4 tLlxc8 'it'xc8 1 7 tLlxe5! tLlxe5 1 8 �xd4 �c5
19 i.xe5 with the advantage of the two bish
ops in an open position.
9 .i.d2
9 a4 b6 1 0 'iib 3 �b 7! should be okay for
Black. Berezin-Novikov, Donetsk 1 998 went
1 1 0-0 �xg2 1 2 'l¥txg2 'iVd5+ 1 3 f3 �c5 1 4
e 4 'iib 7 1 5 tLld3 0-0 1 6 a s with play for both
sides.
9 . . . b6 10 iVb3 .i.b7 1 1 .i.xb7 �xb7 1 2
tLla5 �e7 ! ?
A provocative move, and also one that
looks very strange when we consider the
plight of the ffi-bishop. Av.Bykhovsky
8 . . . �a7 Kaidanov, Irkutsk 1 983 continued 12 ...l:tc7
lbis developing move has been consid 1 3 'it'xb6 �c5 (1 3 ... Itc 1+?? 14 l:[xc1 'it'xb6
ered the most natural for some time, Black in 1 5 l:tc8+ 'l¥te7 1 6 l:hb8! and the threat of
danger of running into trouble if he is not �b4+ decides the game) 1 4 'iVb3 0-0 1 5 0-0
sufficiently acquainted with certain factors. 'it'd5 1 6 'iVxd5 tLlxd5 1 7 �fc1 lIfc8 1 8 tLld3
For example the ostensibly natural 8 ... �e7 is �b6 1 9 l::t xc7 l:txc7 20 l:tc1 with the stan
typical of what might happen if Black be dard Catalan ending advantage.
lieves the position is harmless. I.Almasi 1 2 ... 11a7 1 3 0-0 (1 3 tLlac6?! tLlxc6 1 4 tLlxc6
Vadasz, Budapest 1 997 went 9 �d2 as 1 0 'iVa8 1 5 'it'xb6? l:lb 7 1 6 'it'xd4 .l:!.c7 cannot be
'iVb3 tLlbd7 1 1 �xb7 a4! (1 1 ...l:tb8? 1 2 �xa5 recommended) 1 3 ... tLle4 1 4 'iVa4+ b5 1 5 'iVc2
�xb7 1 3 �xd8 �xhl 14 �b6 and Black tLlxd2 1 6 'iixd2 'iid 5 1 7 tLlf3 �c5 1 8 tLlb3
doesn't have enough for the queen - the a 0-0 1 9 tLlxc5 'iix c5 20 l:tfc1 'iVd5 21 'it'xd4
pawn is strong and f2-f3 is coming) 1 2 'it'f3 'iixd4 22 tLlxd4 l:td7 23 tLlb3 l:tfd8 with a
�xb7 13 'it'xb7 tLlxe5 14 tLlxe5 'it'd5 1 5 draw to come in Dizdar-Novikov, Lucerne
'iVc6+ 'it'xc6 1 6 tLlxc6 with a more pleasant 1 997.
1 04
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 a 6
Game 5 1
G leizerov-S . Ivanov
Poland 1992
1 6 . . J:tc7
16 ... 'Wd5?! 17 'iYel ! exposes Black's vul
nerable back rank.
1 7 J::ta c 1 i.c5 1 8 'i'f4
Perhaps White should put the brakes on
here. 1 8 .l:f.xc5 leads to equality after
1 8 . ..l:txc5 1 9 ttJb7 'ifc7 20 ttJxc5 �xe5 21
ttJb3 0-0 22 ttJxd4 tId8 23 tIel , when a draw
is on the cards.
1 8 . . . 0-0
Also possible is 18 ... f6 19 ttJec6 ttJxc6 20
l:txc5 ttJe5 21 l:txc7 �xc7 22 ttJb3 and Black 7 a4
IS no worse. Relatively harmless. 7 e3 and 7 ttJc3 are
19 llxc5 J::t x c5 20 tLlb7 'i'c7 21 tLlxc5 considered below. Also lacking punch is 7
it'xc5 22 J::t c 1 'i'd6 23 'i'e4? ! ttJa3 .i.xa3 8 bxa3, e.g. R ... O-O 9 i.b2 tIbR 1 0
White could also try 23 ttJc6 �xf4 24 �c2 b 5 1 1 tIad l , when Shipov-S.Ivanov, St.
ttJe7+ 'i;h8 25 gxf4 g6 26 'i;g2 with play for Petersburg 1 996 went l 1 ...tIb6!? 12 e4 .i.b7
the pawn, although Black still looks better. 13 ttJg5, the main idea behind this question
23 . . . g6 24 tLlc6 able knight manoeuvre perhaps being 13 ... a6
After 24 ttJf3?! tIdR 25 "it'xd4 'iYxd4 26 1 4 d5!? Instead there followed 1 3 ... ttJd7 1 4
1 05
Th e C a t a l a n
h 4 h 6 1 5 tt:Jh3 l:e8 1 6 tt:Jf4 e S ! (the downside .i.d2 .i.xd2 1 0 'iWxd2 0-0 1 1 'iYc3 bS 1 2 axb6
to the long knight journey) 1 7 dxeS tt:JcxeS cxb6 1 3 'iVxc4 .i.b7 14 e3 as 1 5 tt:Jc3 tt:Jb4 1 6
and Black was slightly better. There is some .t!.ad1 .i.a6 1 7 'iVb3 l:tc8 with equality In
compensation for the pawn, but not really Maiwald-S.Ivanov, Katowice 1 993.
enough to recommend trying this position 9 . . 4Jxa5
.
.i.e7 1 1 l:dl 0-0 12 e4 tt:Jcb4 13 �1 tt:Jxc3 tt:Jf3 tt:Jxe2+ 1 4 �hl tt:Jxc1 1 S l:txc1 0-0 with
14 bxc3 tt:Jd3 1 5 tt:Jd2 tt:Jxc1 16 l:xc1 eS saw an unclear game (S.Ivanov and Yuneev) .
Black generate excellent counterplay in Bu 1 0 'ii'a 4+ 4Jc6 1 1 4Je5 4Jd5
Xiangzhi-Drei, Reykjavik 2000. After 1 1 ...0-0 White gets an advantage
8 . . . �b4 with 1 2 .i.xc6! bxc6 1 3 tt:Jxc6 .i.d7 1 4 tt:Jxd8
The most logical move now the a-pawn is .i.xa4 1 5 tt:Jxe6 fxe6 1 6 .l:txa4, when his supe
exposed. After 8 ... bS 9 axb6 cxb6 White has rior pawn structure will help in the ending.
a chance to create an initiative, e.g. 10 .i.f4 1 2 4Jxc6 bxc6 1 3 'ii'x c6 + �d7 1 4 'ii'xc4
.i.d6 1 1 tt:JeS tt:Je 7 1 2 e4 .i.b 7 1 3 tt:Jc3 0-0 1 4 0-0
.i.gS! b S 1 5 .i.xf6 gxf6 1 6 tt:Jg4 tt:Jg6 1 7 h4
with a good attack for the pawn in Peturs
son-Oil, Groningen 1 997. 12 tt:Jxc4 .i.xf4 1 3
gxf4 0-0 was more peaceful in Timoshenko
Novikov, Nova Gorica 1 997, when 14 e3
tt:JfdS 1 5 tt:JeS .i.b 7 16 tt:Jd2 tt:Jg6 17 tt:Jxg6
hxg6 1 8 tt:Jf3 �e7 1 9 tt:JeS tt:Jb4 was no
worse for Black.
9 'iWc2
There is no route to an advantage here.
After 9 'it'a4 0-0 to tt:JeS .i.d7! 1 1 tt:Jxc4 'iYe7
12 'iVdl l:fd8 Black is fIne according to
S.Ivanov and Yuneev. Also harmless is 9
1 06
4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii. g 2 a 6
19 . . . c4?
A horrible blunder, after which White
wins by force. 19 ... exd5 is necessary, when 20
exd5 �g4 21 d6 (21 Iiel !?) 21 ...�xdl 22
'i'xdl .l:IadS 23 Iixa6 .l:IfeS is balanced.
20 d6!
Perhaps Black forgot about this move. 7 . . . ii.d7
20 . . . cxb3 The logical, calm approach. Black has no
20 ... �xd6 21 �xd6 'iVxd6 22 .l:Ixd6 cxb3 problem parting with the exchange on as -
does not work in view of 23 .l:Ixb6, when as can be seen in the notes to White's 9th
White emerges with an extra piece. move in the next main game. 7 ... l:!.bS is less
21 dxe7 l:rfcS accurate, White achieving a slight advantage
21 ...i.xe7 22 �e3. after S lbfd2!, e.g. S ... e5 9 �xc6+ bxc6 1 0
22 ii.e3 ii.cs 23 ii.xcs l:!.xcS dxe5 lbg4 1 1 lbxc4 i.e6 1 2 �c2 h5! 1 3 .l:Idl
White is less well developed but has the �c8 14 �e4! �d5 15 .l:Ixd5 cxd5 16 'it'xd5
significant advantage of a pawn on the 7th iLe7, Tukmakov-V.Mikhalevski, Biel 1 998.
rank, so now he decides the game. Now after 17 e6! �xe6 IS �xe6 fxe6 19 h3
24 J:!.xa6! J:!.xa6 White is a little better according to Tukma
24 ....l:IbS 25 .l:Ixb6! is no improvement. kov. White's knights got busy in Lputian
2S J:!.xd7 J:!.c 1 + 26 ii.f 1 lLlxd7 27 eS'Wi + Y.Milov, Istanbul 2000: S ... �d7 9 lbxc4 b5
lLlfS 2S lLld2 10 lbcd2 �b7 1 1 lbc3 lbdS 1 2 lbf3 c5 1 3 e4
107
Th e Ca t a l a n
cxd4 1 4 ttJxd4 ttJc6 15 �f4 l:tc8 1 6 ttJb3 ttJe5! was the course of Khalifman
�b4 1 7 e5 'iVxd1 1 8 .l:i.fxd1 ttJd7 19 ttJe4 A.Petrosian, Moscow 1 987. Then 1 2 ...ttJxe5
ttJdxe5 20 ttJec5 �xc5 21 �xe5 �b6 22 1 3 dxe5 �xe5 14 �a3! l:tb8 1 5 f4 �d6 1 6
�xg7 J:tg8 23 �f6 and Black still had some �xd6 cxd6 1 7 l:txd6 gives White good play
problems to solve. for the pawn, so Black chose 1 2 ... �xe5 1 3
8 ttJc3 dxe5 ttJxe5, when 1 4 ifh5! ttJd3 1 5 �a3
8 'iVe2 is considered in the next game. .l:!.b8 1 6 �e4 favoured White.
8 . . . ttJd5 9 ttJxc3 1 0 bxc3 b5 1 1 a4
. . .
1 08
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 a 6
White begins his kingside attack, exploit Another natural move for White is 9 tL'lc3,
ing the development lead. Also strong is 1 7 when 9 ... iLd6 invites 10 e4 e5 1 1 dxe5 tL'lxe5
'i'h5 tL'lg6 1 8 na7 0-0 1 9 l:tfal 'iVc8 20 h3, 12 tL'lxe5 .i.xe5 13 f4 with a fluent initiative
when Black is under pressure. for White, who generated an offensive in
1 7 . . . tUgS 1 8 f5 tUe 7 1 9 fS gxfS 20 J:taS Tkachiev-Beliavsky, Enghien 1 999 after the
lbg8 subsequent 1 3 ... .i.xc3 1 4 bxc3 c6 1 5 f5! 0-0
This seems to be very passive, and that in 1 6 iLg5 h6 1 7 .i.h4 'iib6+ 1 8 'iit h l tL'lh7 1 9
itself is a risk. 20 ... c6!? is less clear. l:tadl 'iVc7 2 0 e 5 etc. Beliavsky-Goldin, Nik
21 �h5 iLe8 22 J:teS iLd7 23 tUf3 ! �e7? sic 1 997 went 9 ... .i.e 7 10 tL'le5 tL'lxe5 1 1 dxe5
Black cracks under pressure, missing tL'ld5 12 tL'lxd5 exd5 1 3 .i.xd5 c6 14 iLe4 0-0
23 ... .i.xc6 24 tL'lxe5! iLxd5! 25 exd5 'iWe7 26 1 5 b3 iLe6 1 6 1lVc2 h6 with an unclear game.
tL'lc6 'iVe3+ 27 �hl .l:Ib6, which is still very 9 tL'le5 wins the exchange but is not the
difficult but at least forces White to work. strongest opportunity available. 9 ...tL'ld5 is
24 J:txe7 �dS 25 tUg5 ! the weak response, Tratar-A.Petrosian, Ptuj
White comes crashing through. 1 998 turning out advantageous for White
25 . . . tUhS atter 1 0 tL'lxd7 'i'xd7 1 1 b3 cxb3 1 2 axb3
25 ... fxg5 26 'iVxf7+ �d8 27 l:txd7+ 'iVxd7 .i.e7 13 iLb2 0-0 14 ttdl tL'lcb4 1 5 e4 tL'lb6
28 'iWf8+ �c7 29 'iVc5+ �b7 30 .l:tb l ! and 1 6 tL'lc3 l:tad8 17 tL'la2 as 1 8 tL'lc3. The cor
Black cannot defend himself. rect approach is 9 ... tL'lxe5! 1 0 .i.xa8 'iVxa8 1 1
2S J:txd 7 ! �bS + dxe5 tL'le4 1 2 a4 (12 b3! is better) 1 2... 'iVb7 1 3
There is no defence, e.g. 26 ... 'iVxd7 27 axb5 axb5 1 4 f3 tL'lc5 1 5 e 4 tL'lb3 1 6 l:ta2
l:!.xf6 'iVa7+ 28 �hl and White's attack de tL'lxc1 1 7 .l:txc1 .i.c5+ 1 8 �g2 iLd4 1 9 'ifd2
cides. c5 and the two bishops and queenside major
27 'ith 1 fxg5 28 J:tfxf7 �gS 29 J:tfe7 + ity gave Black an excellent game in Janssen
'itf8 30 'ti'f3 + 'itg8 3 1 J:teS 1 -0 Piket, Rotterdam 1 999.
9 . . . iLe7
Game 53 Also possible is 9 ... .i.d6 10 e4 e5 1 1 dxe5
H a ba-Gorin .i.xe5 (not 1 1 ...tL'lxe5? 12 tL'lxe5 .i.xe5 13 f4
Pardubice 1999 .i.d6 1 4 e5 .i.c5+ 1 5 �f1 tL'lg4 1 6 e6 and
White wins) 1 2 tL'lc3 (1 2 tL'lxe5 tL'lxe5 1 3 h3
1 d4 d5 2 e4 eS 3 tUf3 tUfS 4 g3 dxe4 5 c6 1 4 iLe3 is unclear) 1 2 ... 0-0 1 3 .i.g5 iLxc3
iLg2 as S 0-0 tUeS 7 e3 iLd7 8 �e2 b5 14 bxc3 'ife8 1 5 eS .i.g4 16 h3 iLxf3 1 7
iLxf3 'iVxe5 1 8 'iVxe5 tL'lxe5 1 9 .i.xa8 l:txa8
with enough compensation for the exchange
according to Kaidanov.
1 0 tUe3
An interesting line is 10 e4 0-0 1 1 tL'lc3
l:re8 12 tL'le5 l:tb8 1 3 iLe3 h6, when White
came up with the complicated 1 4 tL'lxf7!?
�xf7 15 e5 in Cvitan-Dautov, Dresden 1 998.
Then 15 ... tL'lg8 16 'ii' f3+ �g6 17 'iVg4+ �f7
18 .i.xc6! .i.xc6 19 d5 gives White a winning
attack, the main point being 1 9 ... iLxd5 20
tL'lxd5 exd5 21 e6+ �f8 22 'ifg6, when mate
cannot be avoided. Dautov played 1 5 ... tL'lb4
9 J:td 1 1 6 exf6 iLxf6 1 7 tL'le4 'iVe7 1 8 tL'lc5 and both
1 09
Th e Ca t a l a n
26 g6 ! !
A fantastic move that opens up the king
side.
26 . . . �fd8? !
26 ... tiJxe6 is better. After 27 kIxh7+ �g8
28 .ll xe6+ kIf7 29 kIc3! White wins. One line
goes 29 ... .l:i.cc7 30 kIxf7 kIxf7 31 gxf7+ 'it>fB
32 kIg3 and it is all over. 26 ... .l:Ic7 was the
best try. Now after 27 �h3 h5 28 kIxc7
�xc7 29 'iNe3 tiJf5 30 �f3 tiJg7 31 kIel
White has a fantastic position, probably win
ning, but there is still some work to do.
1 7 e5? 27 'llVh 3 1 -0
An unsound pawn sacrifice which Black Black resii-,'11ed because 27 ... h5 is met by
should exploit. 17 h4 f6 1 8 e5 is complex. 28 'iNxh5+ tiJxh5 29 kIh7 mate.
1 10
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 a 6
1 1 1
Th e C a t a la n
liJd7 1 7 d 6 cxd6 1 8 liJxd6 .txd6 1 9 'fixd6 'ii'h 6 .tg4 20 .l:.e1 with a clear advantage to
liJe5 with complete equality according to White according to Haba.
Haba. An interesting alternative is 12 ... liJb4!? 1 3
9 . . . b5 exf6 .txf6 1 4 liJe5 when Black has three
It is dangerous to grab the pawn with possibilities.
9 ... liJxd4 1 0 liJxd4 'fixd4, e.g. 1 1 l::.d 1 'fic5 1 4 ... .l:te8?! 15 liJxd5 liJxd5 (1 5 .. J::tx e5? 16
1 2 .te3!? (this packs more punch than 1 2 e5 liJxf6+ 'ifxf6 1 7 'ii'x e5! etc.) 16 l:Ixd5 'fie7 1 7
liJd7 1 3 liJe4 'fixeS 1 4 .tf4 'fia5 1 5 'ii'x c4 e5 f4 and White i s well ahead. 1 4. . ..t b7?! 1 5 a3!
1 6 .td2 'iVb6 1 7 .te3 c5 1 8 liJc3 liJf6 which tIe8 1 6 axb4 J:Ixe5 1 7 'iVc2 c6 1 8 liJe4! was
was unclear in Klinger-Bonsch, Lugano clearly better for White in Raetsky-Astrom,
1 989) 1 2 .. :iVa5 1 3 'ii'x c4 0-0 1 4 a3 and White HafnarfJordur 1 997, Black without counter
has good compensation for the pawn as play on the dark squares. The sound option
Black's queen is in need of a safe haven. is 14 ... d4!, e.g. 1 5 a3 l:te8 1 6 axb4 d3 1 7 .tf4
1 0 �d 1 0-0 dxe2 1 8 .l:txd8 tIxd8 1 9 liJxe2 with chances
10 ... liJb4 1 1 liJe5 liJd7! 12 b3?! (1 2 'ii'g4 for both sides, although White's task is
g6 1 3 .th6 liJxe5 1 4 dxe5 liJd3 gives White a probably the easier.
slight edge) 1 2 ... liJxe5 1 3 dxe5 liJd3 1 4 .te3 1 3 exf6 i.xf6 1 4 it'e4
0-0 1 5 f4 ..tb4 16 'fic2 'fie7 17 liJe2 as! 1 8 After 1 4 liJe4 .te7 1 5 a4 d3 1 6 'iVd2 liJb4
h4 ..ta6 and Black was clearly better in Lalic Black has good counterplay for the piece.
Chandler, Hastings 1 999/2000. 1 4 . . . i.b 7 1 5 ttJd5 d3
1 1 d5 exd5 1 2 e5! 1 5 ... liJb4 16 liJxf6+ 'ii'xf6 17 'ii'f4 c5 1 8
'fixf6 gxf6 1 9 .tf4 and Black needs to be
careful.
1 6 'li'f5? !
White chooses the wrong strategy i n try
ing to deliver mate. Preferable is 1 6 liJxf6+
'ii'xf6 1 7 'ii' f4! when White has some advan
tage in the endgame due to his control over
the dark squares.
1 6 . . . i.d4 1 7 ttJg5 g6 1 8 it'h3 h 5 1 9 it'h4
i.g7
1 2 . . . d4! ?
Black has to give up the knight one way or
the other. 1 2 ...liJd7?! 1 3 e6?! liJb6! benefits
only Black, so White should play 13 liJxd5.
Then 1 3. ..liJb4 14 e6 liJxd5 15 exd7 ..tb7 1 6
liJe5 c 6 1 7 liJxc6?! (1 7 .tf4, with a mess, is
better) 17 ...i.xc6 18 ..txd5 .txd7 19 ..tc6
..txc6 20 l:txd8 tIbxd8 gives Black all the
chances, which leaves 14 liJd4! liJxd5
(14 ... i.b 7?! 1 5 liJxb4! ..txg2 1 6 �xg2 .txb4
17 liJc6 and White wins a piece) 1 5 liJc6 'it'e8 20 ttJf4?!
16 .ll. x d5 liJb6 1 7 i.e4! tIa8 18 'iVh5 g6 19 White continues down the wrong path.
1 12
4 . . . dx c 4 5 it.. g 2 8 6
After 20 i.f4 tLJe5 21 tLJc3 i.xg2 22 �xg2 b4 29 h3 c3 30 bxc3 bxc3 3 1 t"t::le 6 fxe6
J:1eS he is worse but can at least fight. 32 .l:!.g7 + Wh8 33 .l:!.e7 t"t::l g 8 0 - 1
20 . . . t"t::le S?
A big mistake that justifies White's ap Game 55
proach. Much stronger is 20 ... tLJd4! 21 tLJe4 K halifman-Ivanchuk
(21 i.xb7 .l:!.xb7 22 tLJxh5 f6! 23 tLJxg7 fxg5 Minsk 1986
and Black wins, as is the case after 21 tLJxh5
ttJe2+ 22 �h1 i.xg2+ 23 �xg2 'ii'd5+ 24 f3 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 t"t::lf 3 t"t::lf 6 4 g3 dxc4 S
gxh5 25 'iVxh5 'iVf5 etc.) 21 ..."ifxh4 22 gxh4 it.. g 2 a6 6 0-0 t"t::l c 6 7 t"t::l c 3 .l:!.b8 8 e4 bS!?
!:tfeS and White will not last long.
21 it.. x b7?
No doubt overlooking Black's 22nd
move. 21 tLJxh5! is correct, when Black needs
to play 21 ...f6! (21 ...gxh5? 22 i.xb7 J::.x b7 23
'i'e4! and White wins) 22 tLJxg7 fxg5 23
i.xg5 'it'd7 24 i.f6 with a complex position.
A possible continuation is 24 ... i.xg2 25
i.xe5 i.b 7 26 tLJe6!! 'iVxe6 27 'iYhS+ �f7 2S
'i'h7+ �eS 29 'iYxc7 'it'd5 30 "iixbS+ �f7 3 1
'ifc7+ �e6 3 2 f3 l:txf3 33 'iVb6+ i.c6 34 .l:!.d2
�xe5 and Black is a little better. Both sides
have alternatives along the way, of course,
but this variation illu strates the nature of Black wants to keep his pawn and emerge
these positions. with the better chances.
21 .. ..l::!.x b 7 22 t"t::lx hS? 9 'ii'e 2
9 e5?! is unnatural. After 9 ...tLJd5 1 0 tLJg5
i.e7 1 1 h4 h6 1 2 tLJh3 tLJcb4 Black is already
on top.
9 . . . t"t::l x d4 1 0 t"t::l x d4 'ii'x d4 1 1 it.. g S
White achieves nothing from 11 i.e3?!
'it'd3! 12 'it'el (1 2 'it'xd3 cxd3 13 e5 tLJd7 1 4
i.a7 .l:!.b7 1 5 i.xb7 i.xb7 1 6 f4 c 5 1 7 b 3 g5!
and White is in trouble according to Milov)
1 2 ... 'iVdS! 1 3 .l:!.d1 tLJd7 with a better game
for Black (Khalifman) . A reasonable alterna
tive is 1 1 .l:!.d 1 'iVb6 1 2 e5 tLJd7 1 3 tLJe4 tLJxe5
( 1 3 ... i.b7!? 14 i.e3 'ii'a 5 is unclear) 14 i.e3
c5 1 5 .i.f4 tLJd3 (1 5 ... tLJd7!? 16 i.xbS "iVxbS
22 tLJfh3 c5 23 i.e3 .l:!.c7 with a clear ad - unclear - is also sound) 1 6 i.xbS 'it'xbS 1 7
vantage to Black. White no longer has an b 3 i.e7 1 S bxc4 bxc4 1 9 'i'c2 0-0 20 'ifxc4
attack. tLJe5 21 'ilVc3 'iYc7 22 l1ac1 and White had a
22 . . . 'ii'x gS ! ! pull in Miton-J akovenko, Yerevan 2000.
This simplification completely destroys 1 1 . . . 'ifb6
White's offensive. The messy 1 1 ...i.b7!? 12 .l:!.fd1 'ii'e 5 1 3
23 �xgS t"t::lf 3+ 24 Wg2 t"t::l x gS 2S t"t::l x g7 i.e3 b4 1 4 f4 "ifa5 1 5 e 5 needs investigating.
t"t::le4 26 .l:!.e 1 t"t::lf 6 27 it.. h 6 .l:!.d8 28 .l:!.e7 1 2 eS
1 13
Th e C a t a l a n
1 2 .txf6?! gxf6 1 3 e5 runs into 1 3. .. fS! and Forced. 1 7 ... l:tc8 1 8 ttJxc 7+! and Black is
White does not get to the e4-square, while 1 2 mated on d8.
l:tad 1 ?! meets with 1 2. . .e5! 1 3 .txf6 'iixf6 1 4 1 8 'i'xg7 �d7 1 9 ttJf6 + �c6 20 ttJe4!
ttJd5 'ii'd 6, nullifying White's development White has a strong attack, against which
lead. defence is very aw1.-ward.
1 2 . . . ttJd5 20 . . . �c8? !
Khalifman gives the following line as win 2 0... l:thg8 21 ii'f6 l:tg6 2 2 'ir f3 i s neces
ning for White: 1 2 ...ttJd7!? 1 3 l:tadl .tc5 1 4 sary, although Black's chances of survival are
ttJe4 0-0 1 5 l:txd7!? .txd7 1 6 ttJf6+ gxf6 1 7 slim .
.txf6. However, Black can play 1 7 ... l:tfd8 1 8 2 1 'i'd4 �d7 22 ttJf6 ! �c8 23 i.e3 b4
'iih 5 WfS 1 9 'iVxh7 We8 2 0 'iVg8+ .tfS 21 24 a4
.tg7 'iVc5 and we see no win - after 22 .tf3 24 'iVe4+ 'lii>b 5 25 l:td5+! was simpler.
.tc8 23 .tc6+ .td7 24 .tf3 a draw is all there 24 . . . bxa3 25 bxa3 J::r b 3 26 �e4+ �b5
IS.
Game 56
Tukmakov-Hulak
Croatia 1999
1 14
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 8 6
.JigS iLe7 1 4 ttJd4 iLd7 1 5 l:!.ad1 ttJc5 1 6 and White has a very dangerous attack ac
'i'c2 and Black was under pressure in Gore cording to S.Ivanov. Black is forced to play
lov-Abramov, USSR 1 99 1 . 1 5 ... 'it>fB, when White has 1 6 iLg5 tt'lxc3 1 7
1 0 b3! ? iLxb 7 l:!.xb 7 1 8 'i¥xc3 iLd6 1 9 iLxf6 gxf6 20
White wants to blow the position open as 'iVf3 l:!.b6 21 1't'g4 .J:tg8 22 'iWh4 with a deci
he has completed kings ide development. sive attack. The problem for Black in this line
There is also 10 ttJe5 iLd6 1 1 f4 exd5 12 a3 is where improvements might be found.
ttJd3 1 3 ttJxd3 cxd3, when Miton-Jakovenko, 1 2 dxc6 tDxc6 1 3 nd 1
Oropesa 1 999 went 14 exd5?! iLc5+ 1 5 Wh 1
.Jif5 1 6 1't'e1+ 'iie 7 1 7 1't'e5 g6 1 8 h3 h5 1 9
l:!.e1 Wd7 20 'ii'xe7+ iLxe7 with advantage to
Black. Neistadt suggests 1 4 ttJxd5 ttJxd5 1 5
exd5 0-0 1 6 'ii'x d3 c6 with equality.
1 0 . . . cxb3
1 3 . . . 'iWb6
Black is in a difficult situation here. For
example 1 3 ... 'ii'c 7 14 iLf4 e5 1 5 tt'ld5 tt'lxd5
1 6 exd5 exf4 1 7 'i'c3! is excellent for White
according to Tukmakov. However,
1 3 ...tt'ld7!? might be an improvement. After
1 1 'iWxb3 1 4 i.f4 l:!.b 7 1 5 l:!.ac1 tt'la5 1 6 'iVc2 iLa3
White also has a very interesting option in White went for it in Raetsky-Barsov, Abu
the sharp 1 1 ttJd4!?, e.g. 1 1 ...c5 (1 1 ...e5 1 2 Dhabi 2001 with 1 7 tt'lxb5!? axb5 1 8 'ii'x c8
ttJxb3 c 5 1 3 a 3 ttJd3 1 4 1't'xd3 c4 1 5 1't'd1 iLxc1 19 "it'xc 1 0-0 20 iLd6 lle8 21 e5 tt'lb6
cxb3 1 6 'iVxb3 and White has a structural 22 tt'lg5 (22 tt'ld4!? tt'ld5 23 iLxd5 exd5 24
advantage) 1 2 dxc6 e5 1 3 ttJd5. In Cvitan tt'lf5 looks very dangerous for Black)
Luther, Germany 1 998 White emerged from 22 ... tt'ld5 23 l:!.xd5!? exd5 24 iLxd5 h6 25
13 ... iLd6 14 c7 iLxc7 1 5 ttJxb4 'iVxd4 1 6 tt'le4 with compensation for the two ex
'i'xd4 exd4 1 7 axb3 in front. 1 3. . .ttJbxd5!? is changes. If Black survives he is doing well,
an interesting alternative, e.g. 14 exd5 exd4 but it is not clear that he will.
1 5 l:!.e1+ iLe7 16 d6! (1 6 iLf4? ttJxd5! 1 7 1 4 i.f4 nb7 1 5 e5 tDd7
i.xd5 1't'xd5 1 8 iLxb8 b2 1 9 .l:1b 1 'iVxc6 and After 15 ... tt'lg4 16 tt'le4 White has a very
Black has healthy counterplay) 1 6 .. .'iVxd6 1 7 promising position, a sample line being
iLf4 'iVb4! 1 8 a 3 'i'a4 1 9 iLxb8 iLe6 2 0 iLe5 1 6 ...tt'la5 1 7 'iYc2 .:!.c7 1 8 'iYe2 tt'lc4 (1 8 ... i.b7
and White stands better, albeit in a tricky 19 tt'lfg5! h5 20 h3 iLxe4 21 tt'lxe4 tt'lh6 22
position. tt'ld6+ and White wins) 1 9 h3 tt'lh6 20 iLxh6
1 1 c5
. . . gxh6 21 tt'lf6+ We7 22 'iVe4 and there is no
Greed is dangerous - 1 1 ...exd5 12 exd5 adequate defence against 23 'iih 4.
ttJbxd5 13 l:!.e1+ iLe7 14 ttJd4 iLb7 1 5 tt'lrs 1 6 tDe4 tDc5 1 7 'iWe3 ! tDxe4 1 8 'iWxe4
1 15
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 16
4 . . . dx c 4 5 � g 2 a 6
1 5 ii.f4 0-0 1 6 ttJc3 .l:!.e8 and Black was on Also possible is 1 7...�d7 1 8 ttJa4 �e7 1 9
top. There is no reason to lose a tempo with ttJb6 � 5 20 ttJc8 exd5 21 ii.g5 dxe4 22
the bishop, which brings us to 14 dxe6 O-O! �xf6 gxf6 23 ttJd6+ .Jixd6 24 'it'xd6 when,
15 �e3 �c7 16 ii.xb7 'iVxb7 17 �c5 'iVd5 despite being two pawns down, White has
18 �xd6 1Vxd6 19 ttJxf7 'it'e7, when White compensation due to his opponent's poor
keeps the extra pawn but the situation re co-ordination.
mains unclear due to Black's strong bishop. 1 8 dxe6 fxe6
Returning to 1 1 'iib 5, we should consider 1 8 ... bxc3 gives White a strong initiative af
1 1 ...g6!?, when 12 ttJxg6?! fxg6 1 3 'ii'e 5 J:!.g8 ter 1 9 e5! c2 20 'it'd4 �xe6 21 exf6 etc.
14 .Jixe4 .Jig7 1 5 1V f4 .tIf8 1 6 't't'g4 .Jixd4 1 9 e5! ttJd7 20 ttJe4 ttJxe5 21 'iWh 5+
favours Black. ttJg6?!
1 0 . . . 'iWxb7 1 1 a4 ttJc6 Correct is 21 ...ttJf7, when after 22 ttJg5 g6
Also possible is l 1 ...ttJbd7 12 axb5 axb5 23 it'D ttJxg5 24 �xg5 �e7 25 �xe7 'i;;x e7
1 3 l:'txa8+ 'ii'x a8 14 ttJc3 b4 1 5 'iVa4 1Vxa4 1 6 26 1Ve4 White still has compensation due to
ttJxa4 ttJxe5 1 7 dxe5 ttJd7 1 8 .Jif4 �e7 1 9 Black's insecure king.
.tIel , given by Cebalo. White picks up a pawn 22 l:te 1 �e7 23 �g5 �a5
on the queenside and has excellent winning 23 ... 0-0 does not help Black in view of 24
chances. .Jixe7 ttJxe7 25 ttJg5 h6 26 ttJxe6 .l:!.f7 27
1 2 axb5 axb5 1 3 J:ba8 + 'iWxa8 14 ttJc3 ttJd8 and White wins material.
24 �g4 'iWd5
24 ... iff5? 25 ttJd6+ 24...iVb6 25 ii.xe7
<j;xe7 26 ttJc5! wins for White.
25 �xe7 ct;xe7 26 ttJg5 e5 27 h4!
1 4 . . .�b7
Another try is 14 ... b4 15 ttJxc6 'tWxc6 1 6
�a4 1Vxa4 1 7 ttJxa4 .Jid6 1 8 .Jie3 <j;e7 1 9
.l:!.el c 3 2 0 bxc3 b 3 21 ttbl .l:!.b8 2 2 �g5 h6
23 �xf6+ <j;xf6 24 <j;f1 and White is slightly 27 . . . h6
better in the ending. His pawns are on dark No better is 27 ... h5 28 it'f5 .l:!.h6 29 .l:!.al .
squares and thus dominate the bishop, while 28 ttJf3 �e6 29 �e4 l:td8 30 h5 ttJf8 3 1
the far advanced b3-pawn might prove vul ttJxe5 l:td5 3 2 'it'h4+ 1 -0
nerable.
1 5 ttJxc6 �xc6 1 6 e4! b4 Game 58
Or 1 6 ... ttJxe4 1 7 'it'D f5 1 8 .l:!.dl ! .Jie7 1 9 Vajnerman-Novikov
d 5 exd5 2 0 ttJxd5 and White's activity i s suf Lvov 1984
ficient to keep the fire burning.
1 7 d5 'iWa6 1 d4 d 5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
1 1 7
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 18
4 . . . dx c 4 5 Ji.. g 2 a 6
8 . . . Ji.. b 7
Another form of support is offered by
8 ... c6. Then White can try 9 axb5 cxb5 1 0
4Jc3 iLb7 (l 0. . .4Jxc3?! 1 1 bxc3 l':.a7 1 2 iLc6+
and 'W'hite picks up the b5-pawn with a supe
riour position) 1 1 4Jxd5 exd5 12 e4, when
20 Ji.. g 5?! 12 ... dxe4 1 3 'iVh5 'iVf6 14 iLg5 'iVe6 remains
Again White has a better move at his dis complicated. Black fared worse in Heck
posal in 20 iLa3, although 20 ... 4Jxe4 21 .l:!.xe4 Zude, Hessen 1 994, which continued
i.f6 still leaves Black holding his own thanks 12 ... iLd6?! 1 3 exd5 0-0 14 i.d2 f6 1 5 4Jc6
to the far advanced c-pawn. �c7 1 6 �f3 'iVf7 17 l':.ae 1 . White's doubled
20 . . . h6 21 Ji.. f4 ltJxe4 22 �xe4 Ji.. x d5 23 pawns in the centre are vulnerable but this
7 79
Th e Ca t a l a n
factor i s outweighed b y his aggressive stance. 'it'f3 ttJf6 1 7 ttJc6 with a clear advantage to
The immediate 9 e4 puts the question to White according to E.Vladimirov) 1 5 d5!
Black's knight, e.g. 9 ... ttJb6 1 0 d5!? 'i*'c7 1 1 cxb5 16 dxe6 (E. Vladimirov-Torhallsson,
Sl.. f4, when White is doing well. This brings Gausdal 1 991) 1 6 .. .'ii'x dl 1 7 exf7+ We7 1 8
us to 9 ... ttJf6, with a further branch. Zaichik l:txd1 when White has sacrificed a piece for
A.Ivanov, Beltsy 1 979 continued 10 d5!? two pawns but the superior development and
cxd5 1 1 exd5 exd5 12 axb5 Sl.. e7 13 ttJc3 Black's poor co-ordination provide adequate
Sl..b 7 14 bxa6, when Black could have limited compensation.
his opponent to a slight edge with 1 4 ... ttJxa6 1 3 exd5 iLxd5 1 4 iLe3
1 5 ttJxc4 ttJb4 16 lha8 Sl.. x a8 1 7 Sl..e 3. White Novikov suggests 14 Sl.. x d5 'it'xd5 1 5 'i*'g4
delayed d4-d5 for a move in Sosonko (more active than 1 5 Sl.. e 3 Sl..d 6 1 6 'i*'g4 0-0
Bouwrnester, Netherlands 1 973, 1 0 ttJc3 1 7 l:!.c1 Sl.. x e5 1 8 dxe5 ttJc6!, after which
Sl..b 7 1 1 d5!? cxd5 12 exd5 exd5 1 3 axb5 Black seized the initiative in G.Kuzmin
axb5 1 4 l:txa8 Sl.. x a8 1 5 ttJxb5 'i*'a5 1 6 ttJd4 Novikov, Kharkov 1 985) 1 5 ... ttJc6 1 6 ttJxc6
Sl..b4 17 Sl..g5 seeing the active blockading 'iix c6 as unclear. The knight is caught again
strategy providing good play for the pawn. and Black has strong pawns on b4 and c3,
9 b3 c3 but he also has some development problems.
9 ... cxb3 10 axb5 axb5 1 1 l:txa8 Sl.. x a8 1 2 1 4 . . . iLe7
'it'xb3 c 6 1 3 ttJc3 has also been tried. After 14 ... Sl.. xg2 15 Wxg2 'i*'d5+ 16 Wgl with
1 3 ... ttJd7 1 4 ttJxd5 exd5 1 5 'i*'e3 Sl.. e 7 1 6 play along the lines of 1 4 Sl.. xd5.
Sl.. a3 White's pressure outweighs the pawn 1 5 iLxd5 'ii'x d5
deficit, while Romanishin-Marjanovic, Yere
van 1 989 went 1 3 ... Sl.. e 7 1 4 ttJxd5 exd5 1 5
'iVa2! Sl..b 7 1 6 'i*'a7 'i*'c7 1 7 Sl.. f4 Sl.. d 6 1 8 :c1
'ii'e7 19 .l:.a1 with a big edge for White in
view of Black's problems on the queenside.
Meanwhile, White also has 10 'i*'xb3,
when 10 ... c6 transposes to 5 ... b5 6 a4 c6 7
0-0 Sl.. b 7 8 ttJe5 ttJd5 9 b3 cxb3 1 0 'it'xb3 a6
(Game 85 in Chapter 8), and 1 0 ...ttJc6 1 1
ttJxc6 Sl.. x c6 1 2 e4 ttJb6 1 3 'i*'c3 Sl.. b 7 1 4
axb5 axb5 1 5 llxa8 Sl..x a8 1 6 Sl.. a3 provides
enough for the pawn.
1 0 axb5
10 e4 b4!? is an interesting piece sacrifice, 1 6 'ii'c 2
trapping the b l -knight. Oil-Hoelzl, Pula 1 997 16 'i*'d3 f6 17 ttJc4 0-0 favours Black.
continued 1 1 exd5 Sl.. x d5 12 'tWh5 g6 1 3 'it'h3 White's knight should retreat to d3.
Sl..g7?! (Sosonko suggests 1 3 ... c6!?) 14 ttJxc3! 1 6 " .iLf6 1 7 4Jxc3
bxc3 1 5 Sl.. a3 .l:ta7 16 l:!.fel l:!.b7 1 7 Sl..x d5 17 ttJd3 ttJc6 18 ttJf4 'i*'d7! is not to be
'iVxd5 1 8 'iVh4 c6 19 'i*'f4 Sl.. x e5 20 dxe5 c2 recommended for White (Rogers believes
21 Sl..d 6 c5 22 J:tac1 with the better game for Black is clearly better) . The knight is not
White due to his influence on the dark better on f4.
squares. 1 7 . . . bxc3 1 8 'ii'x c3 iLxe5
1 0 " .axb5 1 1 l:txa8 iLxa8 1 2 e4 b4! ? Or 1 8 ... c5 19 J:tc1 0-0 20 'iix c5 'iixb3
Lputian gives 1 2. . .ttJf6 1 3 ttJxc3 b 4 1 4 with equality.
ttJb5!? c 6 (not 1 4. . .Sl.. xe4? 1 5 Sl.. x e4 ttJxe4 1 6 1 9 dxe5 4Jc6 20 f4 0-0 21 l:tc 1 4Je 7
1 20
4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii.. g 2 a 6
9 . . . 4JfS
Khalifman-Ruban, USSR 1 985 went
9 ... liJb6? 10 axb5 axb5 1 1 Iha8 i.xa8 1 2
'iVh5 g6 1 3 liJxg6! fxg6 1 4 'it'e5 with a deci
sive lead for White.
1 0 axb5 axb5 1 1 .l:!.xaS ii.. x aS 1 2 4Jc3 cS
White is well on top after 12 ... b4 13 'it'a4+
liJbd7 1 4 liJb5!, e.g. 1 4 ... i.xe4? 1 5 i.xe4
liJxe4 1 6 liJc6 'it'c8 17 iVa8! etc.
1 3 d5
Also possible is 1 3 i.g5 i.b7. Then a pa
tient continuation is 14 d5 i.e7 1 5 dxe6 fxe6
16 iVe2 0-0 17 h4 'it'e8 1 8 h5 liJbd7 1 9
22 ii.. c 5 liJxd7 liJxd7 2 0 i.xe7 'it'xe7 21 e5 liJc5 a s in
White should be careful here. 22 'it'xc7 Smejkal-Chandler, Germany 1 985, when 22
'it'xb3 23 i.c5 liJd5 24 'it'a7 and, due to his f4 would have provided compensation for
exposed king, White cannot take on £8. Black the pawn. More adventurous is 1 4 liJx£7!?
keeps his knight on the board and White's 'it'x£7 15 e5 h6, with a choice for the bishop.
king is more insecure - Black is better. The faulty 1 6 i.h4?! was seen in Khalifman
22 . . . .l:.eS 23 ii.. x e7 .l:!.xe7 24 'ii'c 5 'ii'd S 25 Novikov, Lvov 1 985, when Black should
.l:!.a 1 have continued 1 6 ...g5! 1 7 exf6 'it'xf6 1 8 liJe4
Black gets no opportunity to exploit the iVg6 19 iVaI liJa6. Later, in Nesis-Block,
enemy king position. Correspondence 1 987, White sacrificed a
25 . . . h5 2S .l:!.aS 'ii'x aS 27 'ii'x e7 'ii'c s 2S piece for an initiative after 1 6 .ixf6 gxf6 1 7
'ii'd S+ 'iit h 7 29 'ii'd 3+ gS 30 h4 % - % 'iVh5+ 'it'g7 1 8 l:tal , the subsequent 1 8 .. .f5!
1 9 liJe2 l:tg8 20 liJf4 'it'd7 21 oUa7 'it'h8 22
Game 60 liJxe6 'it'xe6 23 l:txb7 maintaining the dy
Romero-Antu nes namic balance.
Havana 199 1 Black can play the immediate 13 ... i.e7,
when after 14 'iVaI i.b7 15 iVa7 'iVc8 Flear
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 eS 3 4Jf3 4JfS 4 g 3 dxc4 5 gives 1 6 liJf3 h6 1 7 i.xf6 i.xf6 1 8 e5 i.e 7
ii..g 2 as S 0-0 b5 7 4Je5 4Jd5 S a4 ii.. b 7 9 1 9 liJd2 0-0 20 liJxb5 cxb5 21 iVxb 7 i.b4! as
e4 equal. Stajcic-Hoelzl, Austria 1 997 went 1 6
d 5 0-0 1 7 dxe6 fxe6 1 8 i.h3 liJa6 1 9 i.e3
i.d6 20 liJf3 .l:.e8 21 e5 i.b8 22 'iVd4 liJd7
23 l:1dl liJ£8 with chances for both sides -
Black has a pawn, but White is active.
1 3 . . . ii.. d S
Another option is 13 ...cxd5 14 exd5 i.xd5
15 liJxd5 exd5 16 liJg4 i.e 7 17 liJxf6+ i.xf6
1 8 l:1e 1+ 'it'£8 1 9 i.xd5 h5 20 'iVf3 g6 21 b3
'it'g7 22 bxc4 bxc4 23 i.xc4 'iVc7 24 i.d5
with the more harmonious force for White in
Cvitan-Ekstroem, Dresden 1 998. 1 3 ... i.e7 1 4
dxe6 fxe6 1 5 'iVe2 0-0 1 6 i.h3 'iVc8 1 7 liJf3
liJa6 18 liJg5 liJc7 19 i.f4 was the course of
12 1
Th e Ca t a la n
1 7 . . . bxc3
Or 17 ... .i.xe5 18 dxc6 0-0 19 cxb 7 bxc3 29 l:ta5 i.xf 1 30 l:ta8 + l:td8 31 'iVb4 'iVd7
20 .i.h6 and the bishop pair and passed pawn 32 'iVf8 + ! 1 -0
1 22
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i.. g 2 a 6
Summary
Let us compare the two S ... a6 main lines after 6 ttJeS and 6 0-0.
If 6 ttJeS practice has demonstrated that after 6 ... cS 7 ttJa3 cxd4 8 ttJaxc4 J:Ia7 White has
difficulties achieving an advantage.
The variation with 6 0-0 features more variations and promises much more interesting play.
After 6 ... ttJc6 White can choose between 7 e3 and 7 ttJc3 and, in the case of the former, with 7
e3 i.d7 8 'iVe2 bS 9 l:!.d1 , there is no reason to write off the older continuation 9 ... i.d6. Cer
tainly after 10 e4 the departure 1O ... i.e7?! is simply a loss of time, but the break in the centre
with 10 ... eS seems to be reasonable. Meanwhile, after 9 ... i.e7 10 ttJc3 a useful manoeuvre was
seen in the game Haba-Gorin, where Black found ...ttJb4-d3, exploiting the weakness of d3.
The position arising after 7 ttJc3 l:tb8 8 e4 i.e7 9 'iVe2 bS 10 J:f.d1 is critical. The impression
today is that after 10 ... 0-0 1 1 dS exdS 12 eS a sharp, open struggle occurs where White's
chances are preferable. As for Black, he should be looking out for the aforementioned ma
noeuvre ...ttJb4-d3. After 8 ... bS 9 'iVe2 ttJxd4 White's initiative and Black's material superiority
more or less cancel each other out, while 8 ... bS 9 dS ttJb4 1 0 b3!? seems to give White the bet
ter chances. Black should be cautious, perhaps avoiding this line altogether.
After S ... a6 6 0-0 bS 7 ttJeS ttJdS 8 a4 i.b 7 the challenge with 9 b3 allows Black to try a very
interesting piece sacrifice in 9 ... c3!? 1 0 e4 b4 or 10 axbS axbS 1 1 l:txa8 i.xa8 1 2 e4 b4!?, for
ever leaving the knight entombed on b 1 . Of course White can always return the piece with
tiJxc3, but it seems that he can expect little in terms of an advantage.
A kind of tabia occurs after 9 e4 ttJf6 1 0 axbS axbS 1 1 l:ha8 i.xa8 1 2 ttJc3 c6. Previously
13 i.gS was often played here, but it is not clear whether the bishop belongs here. Perhaps this
decision should be delayed. After 13 dS i.d6 14 ttJg4!? White has a strong initiative, and al
though this is not cut and dried, Black should probably resort to 13 ... i.e7, after which a degree
of accuracy is required to hold the balance.
6 ttJeS
6 ... i.b4+ - Game 47
6 ... cS (D)
7 i.e3 Game 48
-
6 ... bS 7 ttJeS
7 ... c6 - Game 57
7 ... ttJdS
8 ttJc3 Game 58
-
8 a4 i.b7 (D)
9 e4 - Game 60
9 b3: 9 ... c3 Game 59; 9 ... cxb3 1 0 'iVxb3 c6 Game 85 (Chapter 8)
- -
7 lZlc3
7 a4 - Game 5 1
7 e 3 i.d7: 8 ttJc3 Game 52; 8 'iVc2 Game 53
- -
7 ..l:lbS S e4
. .
1 d 4 d5 2 c 4 e 6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 often transposes to the line 5 ... a6 6 0-0 lbc6
�g2 ttJc6 (Chapter 5) and these two chapters are suit
5 ... lbc6 is a modern treatment of the Cata able for a parallel study in connection with
lan Opening, becoming popular in the 1 980s. this set-up. Here we shall treat only those
There is considerable reasoning behind this cases where Black manages without an early
development. The Catalan arises mainly from ... a7-a6.
the Orthodox Defence of the Queen's Gam White has several continuations at his dis
bit Declined and from the neo-classical posal after 6 0-0 J:tb8, although these options
Nimzo Indian Defence. In the Queen's are not of equal value. The aggressive 7 lbe5
Gambit the move ... lbc6 occurs very rarely at is not dangerous here, for after 7 ... lbxe5 8
higher levels as it obstructs the c-pawn and dxe5 �xd1 9 l:txd1 lbd5! the game is simpli
therefore hinders the freeing advance ... c7-c5 fied at White's cost. 7 �g5 enjoys litde popu
as well as the often helpful support of d5 larity as White can wait for this posting.
offered by ... c 7 -c6. (Only in the 1 990s did the Much more popular is 7 e3 (Game 61).
Chigorin Defence establish itself as a serious White defends the d4-pawn with the inten
defence for Black, due to the creative input tion of following up with lbd2xc4, but with
from Grandmaster Alexander Morozevich) . the knight going to d2 his control over the
However, in the Catalan ... lbc6 supports centre is reduced and Black will find it easier
the thrust ... e6-e5, an alternative to ... c7-c5 in to execute ... e6-e5, often with the assistance
the fight for space in the centre. Additionally of 7 ... �d6. But here it is perhaps even better
the knight attacks the d4-pawn, for which the to simply protect the c4-pawn with 7 ... b5,
natural defence is e2-e3, which causes a slight which offers sufficient counter-chances.
weakening of White's light squares. Finally, 7 a4 (Game 62), the most natural way to
the knight is prepared to go to as and defend prevent ... b7-b5, weakens both b3 and b4.
the c4-pawn and, if the occasion presents Then 7 ... a6 is considered in Game 51 in
itself, begin an offensive with ...lbb4. Chapter 5 (after the move order 5 ... a6 6 0-0
In reply to 5 ... lbc6 White usually plays ei lbc6 7 a4 l:tb8), and 7...�b4 and 7 ... lba5 are
ther 6 0-0 or 6 it'a4. After 6 0-0 l:tb8 with quite reasonable, but perhaps the most exact
the follow-up ... b7-b5 the lines are very simi is the simple 7 ... b6, when Black appears to
lar to those of Chapter 8. Moreover, ... a7 -a6 have an edge.
1 24
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 ltJ c 6
1 25
Th e C a t a l a n
continuation, which is still 6 'iVa4 .ib4+ 7 kingside with 9 0-0 (Game 75) does pose
.id2 lbd5. Here, apart from 8 .ixb4, White problems for Black. The games played from
occasionally essays a strange queen manoeu this position have often continued 9 ... l:tb8 1 0
vre with 8 'ifb5 in order to collect the c4- lbc3 a 6 1 1 lbe5 0-0 1 2 .ixc6 lbxc6 1 3 lbxc6
pawn. Black can keep the extra pawn by an iLxc6 14 'iVxc4 l:txb2 1 5 l:tabl l:tb6 1 6 �c5,
almost forced sequence: 8 ... .ixd2 9 lbbxd2 which is an important tabia for the evaluation
c3 1 0 bxc3 lbxc3 1 1 'iVd3 lbd5 1 2 0-0 0-0 of the whole variation. For Black, despite the
when, after having lost a pawn, White relies extra pawn, it is necessary to fight for equal
on his completed development with e2-e4, ity. White has more space and the knight is
establishing a strong pawn centre, when obviously stronger than the bishop on c8.
Black should try to avoid weaknesses and, Black is in the unenviable situation of having
with accurate manoeuvring, endeavour to to defend with some precision, and it is no
hang on to the pawn by sitting out White's wonder that in recent practice Black has
initiative. To play such a position as Black avoided this critical position.
can be rather unpleasant, especially for those
players whose style is on the aggressive side. White plays 6 0-0
Instead of 8 ... .ixd2 9 lbbxd2 c3 Black often
prefers 8 ... .ie7 or 8 ... 0-0 (Game 72). Game 6 1
The main position of the 6 'iVa4 complex Rustemov-Sax
arises after 6 ... .ib4 7 .id2 lbd5 8 .ixb4 Germatry 2000
lbxb4. The fascinating complications that
develop here have been tested for more than 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tZJf3 tZJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
half a century (since Aisenstadt-Taimanov, �g2 tZJc6 6 0-0 l:tb8
Leningrad 1 949, in fact) . 9 a3 (Game 73)
leads to fireworks after 9 ... b5 1 0 �xb5 lbc2,
when Black picks up the rook but loses the
c6-knight and, subsequently, the cornered
knight. However, the conventional 'advan
tage' of having two knights against a rook is
nullified by the unhappy lot of White's king,
which is stripped of the right to castle. The
practical results at the end of the last century
were so poor for White that the authors of
this book produced an article in Chess in Rus
sia in 1 997 that was dedicated exclusively to 9
a3 and went under the title The Dying Con
tinuation'. Then in 2001 in Wijk aan Zee 7 e3
Kasparov himself played it! The truth was A major alternative is 7 .ig5 .ie7 8 e3 0-0
that he was content with a draw in that game, 9 lbfd2 (9 lbbd2 b5 and Black holds on to
but of course 9 a3 took a step forward in its the pawn) 9 ... e5! 10 iLxf6 (10 iLxc6 bxc6 1 1
development. dxe5 lbg4 1 2 .ixe7 'iVxe7 1 3 lbxc4 lbxe5
9 lbe5 (Game 74), which immediately ex and White's weak squares leave him worse)
ploits the pin on the a4-e8 diagonal, has not 1 0 ... iLxf6 1 1 d5 e4!, which was the course of
received widespread attention. The reason is D.Gurevich-Adams, Biel 1 993. There fol
obvious - Black does not have any problems lowed 1 2 lbxc4 b5 1 3 lbc3 bxc4 1 4 dxc6
here. However, simple development of the l:lxb2 1 5 'iVc1 l:tb8, when Black had the
126
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL. g 2 ljj c 6
bishop pair and White's pieces lacked co leads to exchanges and a level endgame after
ordination. Adams offers 12 'it'c1 'ii'x d5 1 3 20 'ii'xg4 h5 21 'ii'h 3 i.xf3 22 �xf3 I:txf3 23
lLlxe4 lIVeS, when White regains the pawn 'iixe6+ 'it'f7) 20 iVxc7 l::t d7 2-1 'ilib6 l::t f6 22
and mass exchanges will follow, leading to a iVa5 'ii'a 8 with a complex struggle ahead.
level rniddlegame. 1 3 . . . iL.b7 1 4 e4 c5 1 5 e5 lDfd5
7 . . . b5 Another option is to protect c5 and in
7 ... �d6 8 4Jfd2 e5!? is interesting. Then stead put the bishop on d5, 1 5 ...4Jd7!? 1 6
after 9 �xc6+ bxc6 1 0 dxe5 1I.. x e5 1 1 4Jxc4 4Je4 �d5 giving chances for both sides.
1I..d6 1 2 it'c2 the vital light-squared bishop 1 S dxc5 iL.xc5 1 7 lDe4 iL.e 7
leaves the arena but White has play against More straightforward is 1 7 ... J:tc8 1 8 4Jxc5
Black's damaged queenside. Kozul-Plachetka, lIxc5 1 9 l:1ac1 ttxc1 20 l::t xc1 with compen
Charleville 2000 took a much different sation, although it makes a lot of sense to
course - after 9 d5 4Je 7 10 4Jxc4 0-0 1 1 e4 keep the dark-squared bishop.
1I.. d7 12 a4 4Jg6 1 3 4Jxd6 cxd6 14 4Ja3 4Je8 1 8 h4! ? 'it'e8?
15 �e3 b6 16 lib3 White stood better in this Better and more natural is 1 8 ... l::t c 8 1 9
King's Indian structure, with the bishop pair 4Je1 'ilib6 20 'it'g4 l::t fd8 21 I.Id2 with com
and easy play on the queenside. Note that pensation.
Black's counterplay on the kingside seems 1 9 lDfg5
rather slow. 1 9 4Jd6 �xd6 20 exd6 'iVd7 21 4Jg5 is
8 b3 another means of attack.
8 a4 a6 9 axb5 axb5 10 b3 cxb3 1 1 4Jbd2 1 9 . . . hS
1I..e 7 1 2 4Jxb3 0-0 1 3 �a3 �xa3 1 4 Iha3
lIVd6 1 5 'it'a I ! b4 1 6 l::ta2 4Je4! 17 4Jfd2
li'ixd2 1 8 .u.xd2 4Je 7 was instructive in
Steckner-Ionov, Dortmund 1 99 1 . Again
White is happy to play a pawn down, with
pressure on the c-ftle and control of the key
c5-square. Black, typically, is not without
chances of his own.
8 'ii'e2 �e7 9 lIdl 0-0 1 0 e4 �b7 1 1 4Jc3
b4 12 d5 exd5 1 3 4Jxd5 4Jxd5 1 4 l::tx d5!?
1I..d 6 15 'iVxc4 is interesting, while Kachiani
Gersinska-Rabiega, Germany 1 995 continued
14 exd5 4Ja5 1 5 i.e3 i.f6 1 6 1I.. xa7 I.Ie8 1 7
'iVc2 lIa8 1 8 1I.. d4 i.xd4 1 9 4Jxd4 'it'f6 20 20 'it'g4! ! f5
li'ic6 4Jxc6 21 dxc6 �a6, Black's pieces tak 20 ... hxg5 21 hxg5 lIVc6 (21 ...g6 22 4Jf6+
ing up influential posts. 1I.. xf6 23 gxf6 4Jc2 24 iVh4 and Black is
8 . . . cxb3 9 axb3 as 1 0 'ii'e 2 iL.e7 1 1 .l:!.d 1 about to be mated) 22 l::t ac1 (22 4Jf6+? 4Jxf6
0-0 1 2 iL.b2 lDb4 1 3 lDbd2 leaves Black a piece up) 22 ... lib6 23 4Jf6+
White played the immediate 13 e4 in i.xf6 24 gxf6 g6 25 'it'g5 and (again) the
Tratar-Tukmakov, Bled 1 996, which contin weak dark squares around Black's king will
ued 1 3 ... �b7 14 4Jc3 �e8 1 5 .:tac1 l:td8 1 6 prove decisive. Nor does 20 ...iVc6 21 l::t ac1
'Yi'e3 (1 6 e 5 4Jfd5 1 7 4Je4 and White con 'iVb6 22 4Jf6+ �xf6 23 exf6 g6 24 i.d4 help
trols the c5-square and therefore has full Black - a knight sacrifice on e6 is corning
compensation for the pawn) 1 6 ... h6 1 7 h4 next.
4Jg4 1 8 'ii'f4 fS 19 exfS exf5 (1 9 .. J::tx fS!? 21 exfS lDxfS 22 iL.xfS iL.xfS 23 lDxfS +
127
Th e Ca t a la n
l:txf6 24 �xb 7 l:txb 7 the modest 8 e3 is too slow: 8 ... ttJa5 9 .ltd2
24 ... hxg5 25 hxg5 l:tf8 26 g6 Will S for 'iVe7 1 0 ttJa3 ttJe4 1 1 i.xb4 'iVxb4 1 2 'iVe1
White. 'iVxe 1 1 3 .l:!.fxe1 ttJd6 and Black holds on to
25 ttJe4 the pawn. Maslov-S.Ivanov, St. Petersburg
Or 25 'iVe4 hxg5 26 'ii'xb7 gxh4 27 'iVe4 1 992 saw the more fluid 8 'iVc2 ttJxd4 9
with a huge advantage. ttJxd4 'iYxd4 1 0 .lte3 'iNd6 1 1 'iNxc4 0-0 1 2
25 . . . l:tg6 26 'i'e2 ttJc3 'iNe7 1 3 .ltxa7 l:ta8 1 4 .ltd4 l:ta5, and
now 1 5 .ltxf6 gxf6 1 6 l:tfd1 secures White an
edge in view of his superior pawns and de
velopment.
7 ... ttJa5 looks promising. Then 8 ttJbd2 c5
9 dxc5 .ltxc5 10 'iVc2 �c7 1 1 e4 e5 1 2
ttJxe5? soon led to disaster for White in
Gorodilov-Raetsky, Vladimir 1 987 (although
Black was already slightly better) after
1 2 ... 'iVxe5 1 3 ttJxc4 ttJxc4 1 4 .ltf4 'iYh5 1 5
.ltxb8 ttJg4 1 6 h 3 ttJge3! etc. Instead the
continuation 10 ttJe5 c3 1 1 bxc3 0-0 1 2 'iNc2
b6 steers the game to equality after 1 3 ttJb3
ttJxb3 14 'iVxb3 i.b 7 1 5 ttJc6 .ltxc6 1 6 .ltxc6
The party is almost over for Black. 'iYc7, when White has the bishop pair but
26 . . . l:tc7 27 h5 l:tc2 28 'i'f3 1 -0 weak pawns on the queenside. Black also has
The rook is trapped. 12 ... 'iVc7 here, Chashev-Raetsky, Makhach
kala 1 987 producing another equal position
Game 62 after the subsequent 1 3 ttJd3 .ltd6 1 4 c4 e5
Sandner-Luther 1 5 c5 b6 16 .lta3 bxc5 17 ttJxc5 .ltb7 1 8
Bad Zwesten 1999 llfc 1 .ltxg2 1 9 'iitxg2 nfc8. The possession
of the c5-square is not so relevant here.
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 8 ttJa3
�g2 ttJc6 6 0-0 l:tb8 7 a4 Again White can try 8 e3, and again it
seems a bit slow. Alburt-I.Ivanov, Long
Beach 1 989 is a good example: 8 ... .ltb 7 9
ttJbd2 ttJa5 1 0 'iVc2 ttJd5!? 1 1 ttJe5 (1 1
ttJxc4? ttJb4 1 2 'iVc3 ttJxc4 1 3 'iVxc4 .lta6
and Black is winning) 1 1 ...ttJb4 1 2 'iVd1 ?
(White has to b e satisfied with a repetition
with 1 2 'iVc3 ttJd5) 1 2 ... .ltxg2 1 3 'iitxg2 'iVd5+
1 4 'iYf3 f5! (closely monitoring e4) 1 5 e4?!
'iYxd4 1 6 'iVh5+ g6 17 ttJxg6 hxg6 1 8 'iVxg6+
�d7 1 9 ttJf3 'iNxe4 20 l:te1 'iVd5 21 'iNf7+
.lte7 22 .ltg5 nbe8 23 l:le5 'ii'c 6 24 l:tae1
l:lhf8 25 'iNh7 ttJd3 and Black won. White's
attack was simply too optimistic.
7 . . . b6 8 . . . �xa3 9 bxa3
7 ... a6 transposes to 5 ... a6 6 0-0 ttJc6 7 a4 Preferable to 9 l:lxa3 .ltb7 10 .l:!.e1 ?! (10
l:lb8 (Game 5 1 in Chapter 5) . After 7 ... i.b4 'iiVc2 ttJxd4 1 1 'iYxc4 offers White some
1 28
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 tD c 6
compensation for the pawn) 1 O ... ttJe4 1 1 l:te3 2 1 l:tbc 1 l:tfd8 22 iLb4 tDe8 23 iLd2
f5 12 b3 cxb3 13 .l::!.x b3 0-0 14 'i¥d3 .l:.f7 1 5 l:tbc8 24 as b5 25 iLg5 f6 26 iLe3 tDd6
J:tbl .l::!.d 7, when Black was in control o f the 27 a6 tDc4 28 a4 f5 29 axb5 cxb5 30
light squares in the centre in Chetverik exf5 exf5 31 iLf4
Siklosi, Kecskemet 1 995. Black has secured himself an outpost on
9 ... iLb7 1 0 iLb2 0-0 1 1 'ilt'c2 tDa5 1 2 c4, while White has a passed pawn in the
ltJe5 iLxg2 1 3 ..t>xg2 centre.
3 1 . . . 'ii'd 5 32 l:tb 1 l:te8 33 l:te 1 l:txe 1 34
l:txe 1 h6?!
34 ...ttJb6 35 l:tb 1 b4 36 .1i.d6 'iix b3 37
l:txb3 ttJd5 is equal.
35 l:te5
35 l:te 7!? is interesting.
35 . . . 'iIt'xd4 36 l:txb5 ..t>h7 37 'ilt'b 1 l:tc5 38
l:txc5 'ilt'xc5 39 g4 ..t>g6 40 'ilt'xf5+ 'ilt'xf5
41 gxf5+ ..t>xf5 42 ..t>g3
42 .1i.b8 ttJe3+ 43 �g3 ttJd5 44 .1i.xa7
ttJc7 45 .1i.d4 ttJxa6 46 i.xg7 �g6 presents
White with more chances to play for a win,
although a draw is the most likely result.
1 3 . . . tDe8 42 . . . tDe5 43 iLe3 % - %
The direct approach 13 ... c5!? 14 dxc5
'i'd5+ 1 5 Wgl 'i¥xc5 gives Black more Game 63
breathing space and better chances due to Ricardi-Smyslov
the extra pawn. Buenos Aires 1990
14 e4 tDd6 1 5 iLc3 tDb3
Also possible is the more forcing 15 ... f6 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tDf3 tDf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
16 �xa5 fxe5 1 7 dxe5 bxa5 1 8 exd6 cxd6 1 9 iLg2 tDc6 6 0-0 l:tb8 7 tDc3 iLb4
'i'xc4 with chances for both sides.
16 l:tab 1 'ii'e 8 1 7 tDxc4 tDxc4 1 8 'ii'x b3
ltJd6 1 9 f3 'ilt'd7 20 l:tfd 1 c6
8 e3
Three other important continuations have
been tried here. 8 ttJe5 simplifies too much:
White has the superior minor piece and R ... ttJxe5 9 dxe5 'it'xd l 10 l:!.xd l .1i.xc3 1 1
more space, but Black is solid. bxc3 ttJd5 with equal chances. 8 l:tel ttJd5 9
1 29
Th e Ca ta la n
1 30
4 . . . dx c 4 5 $i.. g 2 Ci'J c 6
13 1
Th e C a t a la n
1 32
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 CO c 6
iVxd3 cxd3 1 3 e5 4Jd5 1 4 4Jxd5 exd5 1 5 pawns for the exchange. Nevertheless a de
.ixd5 and both a7 and d3 are easy to attack) gree of caution is called for here as White
10 4Ja4 i.a6 1 1 e5 4Jd5 1 2 'iVe4 c3 and enjoys better development.
Black seized the initiative. 1 6 iLe3 iLc5 1 7 b3
9 tLie2 �b6 The less radical 17 J:tac1 i.xe3 18 fxe3
9 ... 4Jxe4?! runs into 10 4Jd2 fS 1 1 4Jxe4 3La6 19 4Jd4+ <;t>b6 is probably better, al
fxe4 12 i.xe4 i.b7, when Black has many though Black should be okay.
weaknesses and White steers the game to his 1 7 . . . tLid5
advantage after 1 3 i.e3 i.d6 14 'iWc2. 1 7 ... i.h3!? 1 8 l::r. fcl i.xe3 1 9 fxe3 c3 20 a3
1 0 d5!? as 21 axb4 axb4 seems like a good line for
The alternative i s 1 0 e5 4Jd5 1 1 i.g5 i. e7 Black.
12 i.xe7 'it'xe7 1 3 4Jd2 i.a6. Before White 1 8 iLxc5 Wxc5 1 9 bxc4 tLic3 20 tLixc3
gets his knight to the desired e4-square Black bxc3 21 �ac 1 Wxc4 22 �fe 1 �d8 23
completes development with this active �e7 �d7
bishop move, threatening a timely ... c4-c3. The more ambitious 23 ... c5!? 24 l:txf7 g5
Black is slightly better. 25 l:txa7 i.fS is worth a try.
1 0 . . . exd5 1 1 exd5 'ii'x d5 24 �e8 iLb7 25 �e3 �d3 26 �e7
The recapture with the knight is risky: White has infiltrated on the seventh rank
1 1 ...4Jxd5 12 4Jf4 (1 2 l:te l I?) 12 ... 4Jxf4 1 3 but the c3-pawn is very dangerous .
.ixf4 i.d6 1 4 l:te1+ i.e6 1 5 3Le3 and the 26 . . . iLd5 27 �xc7 + Wd4 28 a4
initiative is in White's hands. 28 l:txa7? c2! and White can do nothing
1 2 tLifd4 'ii'd 7 1 3 tLixc6 �xc6 14 �xd7 + about ... J:Id 1 .
The alternative is to keep the queens on 28 . . . a 5 29 Wf 1 iLb3 30 �d7 + Wc4 3 1
the board, 1 4 i.xc6!? 'iVxc6 1 5 4Jd4 offering �c7 + Wd4 3 2 �d7 + Wc4 3 3 �c7 + % - %
White a pull.
1 4 . . .'it>xd7 Game 66
The king is well placed on c6, making the Raetsky-Kelecevic
text preferable to 14 ... i.xd7 15 i.xc6 i.xc6 Silvaplana 1997
16 3Lf4 3Lc5 17 l:tac1 i.b5 18 i.e5, which is
difficult for Black. 1 d4 d 5 2 c4 e6 3 tLif3 tLif6 4 g3 dxc4 5
1 5 iLxc6+ Wxc6 iLg2 tLic6 6 0-0 �b8 7 tLic3 b5 8 tLie5
tLixe5 9 dxe5
1 33
Th e C a t a l a n
9 ...�xd 1 ?! 1 0 .l:!.xd 1 lbd5 11 a4! sees the dangerous queenside pawns. S.Ivanov &
White open the queenside and in doing so Yuneev offer the following: 22 lbe4 lbxe4 23
seize the initiative, while after 9 ... lbd5 1 0 "it'xh 7 e5! 24 1Lxe5 lbg5 25 "it'h8+ 'it>f7 26
lbxd5 exd5 1 1 1Lxd5 1Le6 1 2 1Lc6+ 1Ld7 1 3 iVh5 and the attack on Black's troubled king
�d5 White stands better. Delchev-Genov, compensates for the sacrificed piece, or
Pazardzik 1 99 1 continued 1 3 ... 1i.xc6 1 4 25 ... 1i.f8 26 l:td8+ 'it>xd8 27 'ikxf8+ "iNe8 28
�xc6+ "iNd7 1 5 "it'e4 1i.c5 1 6 .i.g5 0-0 1 7 1i.f6+, again with pressure against the black
.l:!.ad1 "iNe6 1 8 .l:!.d5 1i.e7 1 9 1Lxe7 "iNxe7 20 f4 king.
l:tfd8 21 .l:!.fd1 and White was still in the driv 1 0 . . . �b7
ing seat. Also possible is 1O ... c5 1 1 'iVf4 "iNc7 12
1 0 'iVd4 ! ? .l:!.d1 'iVb6 13 a4 b4 14 lbb5 'ii'd 8 1 5 lbd6+
1 0 1Lc6 has also been played. Kaidanov 1i.xd6 1 6 exd6 0-0 1 7 as when White was in
Serper, Gausdal 1 99 1 went 1O ... a6 1 1 'ikd4 charge in Prakken-Ippolito, Ubeda 2000 .
.l:!.b6?! 1 2 'ike4 1i.c5 1 3 1Lxd7+! 1Lxd7 1 4 Even worse is 1 2 ...'iVxe5? 1 3 .l:!.xd7!, while
'ilVg4. Thi s i s the usual stuff, Black winning a 1 2 ... lbxe5 1 3 a4 a6 1 4 axb5 axb5 1 5 1i.c6+!
pawn but White generating sufficient play. �xc6 1 6 'iVxe5 is very pleasant for White.
Black has problems with g7. Play continued 1 1 l:td 1
1 4...'it>f8 1 5 .l:!.d1 h5 1 6 �f4 h4 1 7 lbe4 1Le7 The greedy 1 1 'ii'x a7?! is less convincing as
1 8 1i.e3 hxg3 19 fxg3! (the f-file opens and 1 1 ...1Lc5 1 2 'ii'a 5 1Lxg2 1 3 'it>xg2 'iVc8 1 4 f3
White goes on the offensive) 19 ... .l:!.c6 20 .l:!.f1 iVb7 looks good for Black. White's e5-pawn
1Le8 21 .l:!.ad1 'iVc8 22 'iVf3! 'it>g8? 23 1Lg5 is weak and Black's queenside majority seems
'it>f8 24 1i.xe7+ and White won. the more useful.
Black should instead look to the follow 1 1 . . . �xg2 1 2 'iit x g2
ing: 1 1 ...1i.b7 1 2 1i.xb7 l:txb7 1 3 .ll d 1 c5 1 4
'ikg4 'iVc7 1 5 1Lf4 'YWc6 1 6 f3 f5 (Black has to
free himself somehow, and this is a creative
solution) 1 7 exf6 lbxf6 1 8 'iVg5 1Le7 1 9
"iNxg7 .l:!.g8 2 0 'iVh6 .l:!.g6 2 1 "iNh3 b4!
1 2 . . . 'iVc8
12 ... c5 is also possible but it is IOglcal to
keep this square free for a piece. After the
further 1 3 'iVe4 'iVc7 1 4 a4! the opening of
the a-file helps only White.
We are following Gleizerov-Werle, Hoo 1 3 a4 a6 1 4 axb5 axb5 1 5 f3 �e7
geveen 2000, which witnessed the rather 1 5 ... 1i.c5 16 �g4 g6 17 1i.h6 lbxe5 1 8
passive 22 lbb 1 ?!, to which Black responded �e4 lbd7 1 9 'iVc6 and Black i s struggling
22 ... .l:!.d7! 23 lbd2 c3 24 lbc4 cxb2 25 lbxb2 against the tide .
.l:!.xd 1+ 26 .ll x d1 c4 with advantage thanks to 1 6 l:ta5 b4
1 34
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 CU c 6
Black seeks counterplay. After 1 6 ... c6 1 7 i.e8 20 'iYb 7 then left White with the supe
lLle4 h 6 1 8 lLld6+ i.xd6 1 9 "iVxd6 lIb 7 20 rior pawn structure, while control of the c
.1i.e3 his dark squares are too weak. ftle and the c5-square also remained intact.
1 7 CUb5 CUb6 1 S 'iWg4 'it>fS S 'iWd3
Something has gone wrong for Black. The queen is worse on c2 than d3 because
1 9 l:ta7 l:tb7 20 'iWe4 l:txa7 21 CUxa7 'iWa6 of the semi-open c-file, e.g. 8 ... lIc8 9 ttJe5 c5
22 CUe6 'iWa4 10 ttJxd7 'ii'xd7 1 1 dxc5 .i.xc5 12 ttJc3 ttJd5!
22 ...lLld5 23 lLlxe7 �xe7 24 �g5+ f6 25 13 .i.xd5 exd5 1 4 0-0 0-0 1 5 '¥id3 d4 16 ttJe4
exf6+ ttJxf6 26 �xf6+ gxf6 27 'iVg4 leaves .i.e7 1 7 .i.f4 'iVd5 when Black had sufficient
Black's king walking on thin ice. play to compensate the isolated d-pawn in
23 l:td4 '/WaS 24 i.e3 f5? Vaganian-Taimanov, USSR 1 974. Tratar
The final mistake, although the correct Plachetka, Charleville 2000 continued 9 0-0
24 ... h6 25 lId1 'iVa4 26 lIc1 is still good for c5 to ttJc3 cxd4 1 1 ttJxd4 i.c5 1 2 lId 1 'iVb6
White. 1 3 e3 0-0 1 4 ttJb3 ttJxb3 1 5 'iVxb3 'iVxb3 1 6
25 exf6 i.xf6 26 'iWxe6 'iWeS 27 l:tdS! 1 -0 axb3 .i.c6 1 7 .i.d2 .i.xg2 1 8 �xg2 lIfd8 with
Coming next is i.c5. no problems for Black throughout.
S . . . e5 9 0-0
White plays 6 '/Wa4 The more aggressive 9 ttJe5 was tried in
Shipov-Kacheishvili, Berlin 1 995: 9 ... ttJc6 to
Game 67 0-0 cxd4 1 1 i.f4 .i.c5 12 ttJd2 0-0 13 lIac1
Tkachiev-Solozhenkin .i.b6 1 4 ttJdc4 (14 ttJxc6 i.xc6 1 5 �xc6
France 2000 bxc6 16 lIxc6 '¥idS is only equal) 14 ... ttJd5
1 5 lIfd 1 ttJxf4 16 gxf4 ttJxe5 17 ttJxe5 nb8
1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 CUf3 CUf6 4 g3 dxe4 5 is instructive, White exerting some pressure
i.g2 CUe6 6 '/Wa4 i.d7 7 'iWxe4 on the queenside, with Black generating suf
ficient play to maintain the balance.
9 . . . i.e6 1 0 CUe3
Another option is 10 lId1 c4 1 1 'iVc2 .i.e4
(note that this move is made possible by the
omission of ttJc3) 12 'iVd2 h6! 1 3 'iVe1 ttJc6
14 'iVf1 .i.d5 1 5 ttJc3 �b4 as in Lautier
Karpov, Ubeda 1 994, when Black could suc
cessfully fight for e4 thanks to 1 6 ttJxd5 exd5
17 ttJe5 O-O!, with eyual chances.
1 0 . . . exd4
to ... lIc8 1 1 .l:.d 1 c4 merely gives White a
free hand to get busy in the centre, e.g. 1 2
'iVc2 .i.b4 1 3 d5!? 1 3. .. exd5 1 4 e 4 .i.xc3 1 5
7 . . . CUa5 exd5 ttJxd5 1 6 bxc3 0-0 1 7 ttJg5 g6 1 8 ttJe4
7 ... i.d6 8 ttJc3 0-0 9 0-0 h6 to .i.f4 .i.xf4 and (again) the weakness of the dark squares
1 1 gxf4 gives rise to White's typical grip on proved a good investment in Ftacnik
the dark squares in the centre. Consequently Lechtynsky, Czechoslovakia 1 979. Then
Black tried to ... lIb8?! in Tukmakov-Barle, 1 8 ... f5!? is interesting, while 1 8 ...'iVe7 1 9 .i.g5
Bled 1 996, but 1 1 lLle5! b5 1 2 �d3 ttJb4 1 3 f6 20 l:txd5! was a little combination that
'ii'd2 ttJbd5 1 4 lIac1 ttJxf4 1 5 iVxf4 nb6 1 6 returned the pawn, 20 ... i.xd5 21 ttJxf6+
ttJe4 ttJxe4 1 7 'iVxe4 lIa6 1 8 a3 lIa4 1 9 e3 lIxf6 22 i.xd5+ rj;g7 23 i.xf6+ �xf6 24
1 35
Th e Ca t a la n
1 6 ii.f4! .l:!.c8
The tempting 16 ... eS? loses material due to
17 lDf5 exf4 18 lDxg7+ WfS 19 'iiVx d7. 8 'ifd3 e5
1 7 ttJf3 ttJc4 1 8 ttJa4 b5 1 9 b3! ttJcb6 20 Another idea is 8 ... lDb4, e.g. 9 'iiVb 3 eS 1 0
ttJxb6 ttJxb6 21 'ifxd8+ ii.xd8?! lDgs "iIIe7 1 1 a 3 lDc6 1 2 .J1i.xc6+ bxc6 1 3
21 ...lIxd8 22 l:txd8+ .J1i.xd8 23 .l:!.c1 is the dxeS h 6 1 4 lDf3 .J1i.h3 with unclear play ac
lesser evil. cording to Shipov, or 9 'iiVc 3 eS 1 0 dxeS i.f5
22 e4 1 1 0-0 ii.xb 1 1 2 ltxb 1 lDxa2 1 3 'iiVb 3 lDxc1
The b6-knight is deprived of the last good 1 4 l::tb xc 1 , Shipov-Gofstein, Paris 1 995,
square. White has a clear advantage. when White had a lead in development.
22 . . .16 9 ii.e3! ?
22 ... lDd7 23 l:tac1 l:txc1 24 Ihc1 lDf6 2S A home-made idea from one of your au
eS lDdS 26 :c8 and Black is trailing. After thors! In Gasimov-Zvjagintsev, Yurmala
the text the queenside pawns come under 1 992 a draw was agreed in the equal position
attack. that resulted from 9 dxeS "iIIx d3 1 0 exd3
23 .l:!.d6 c,t>e7 24 ttJd4 e5 25 ttJf5 + c,t>f7 lDb4 1 1 'it>d2 ii.f5 1 2 a3 lDxd3 1 3 lDh4
26 ii.e3 g6 27 ttJh6 + c,t>g7 28 .l:!.ad 1 lDxc1 1 4 Wxc1 .J1i.xb 1 I S l:txb 1 . Meanwhile,
Suddenly White is very active. in Poluljakhov-Brodsky, Krasnodar 1 999 the
28 . . . .l:!.b8 29 .l:!.d7 + ! continuation 9 ii.gS ii.e 7 1 0 ii.xe 7 'iVxe7 1 1
A nice exchange sacrifice. lDxeS lDxeS 1 2 dxeS 'iiVx eS 1 3 lDc3 0-0 14
29 . . . ttJxd7 30 .l:!.xd 7 + c,t>f8 31 ttJf7 .l:!.g8 0-0 c6 I S l::tfd l .J1i.e6 16 'iVd4 'iIIc 7 saw Black
32 ttJd6! entering the rniddlegame phase with no
Mate cannot be avoided without heavy problems.
loss of material. 9 . . . ttJb4
32 . . . g5 33 .l:!.f7 mate! 9 ... exd4 10 lDxd4 lDb4?! 1 1 "iIIe4+ i.e7 12
1 36
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 l"iJ c 6
lDc3 ttJc4 1 3 l:td1 !? ttJd6 (13. .. ttJxb2 1 4 ttJc6 White's Catalan bishop. Also possible is
lDxd1 1 5 ttJxd8 ttJxc3 16 'iVe5 clearly favours 14 ...ttJ4d5 15 ttJxd5 ttJxd5 16 .Jtxd5 'iWxd5
White) 1 4 'iWb1 0-0 1 5 0-0 'iVe8 1 6 .i.f4 .i.d7 17 'iWxd5 cxd5 1 8 ttJb5 with an endgame that
17 a3 ttJc6 1 8 ttJdb5 and, after some weird is generally slightly better for White and here
manoeuvring, Black was drifting into trouble also features a lead in development.
in Filippov-Short, Batumi 1 999. In fact after 1 5 l"iJdb5 iLeS
18 ...l:k8 1 9 ttJxc7! .l::!.x c7 20 ttJd5 .i.f5? 21 1 5 ... .Jtf5 16 l:td 1 ttJc2+ 17 'it>f1 ttJxe3+ 1 8
lDxc7 White won. A lesser evil is 1 O ...ttJxd4 fxe3 'ikc8 1 9 ttJd5 and in return for his dam
1 1 .Jtxd4 .Jtb4+ 12 ttJc3 0-0 1 3 a3 .Jte7 1 4 aged pawns White has a strong attack.
�d1 c 6 1 5 'iVe4!, although Black has prob 1 S 'iWd 1 iLf5?!
lems with the co-ordination of his pieces. A waste of time, but the alternative
10 'iWb5 + 1 6 ... 'ikxd1+ 1 7 .u.xd1 ttJc2+ 1 8 'it>f1 ttJxe3+
1 9 fxe3 is also good for White. Again the
doubled e-pawns are balanced by White's
more rapid deployment.
1 7 0-0
White is better, with pressure against
Black's queens ide.
1 7 . . . aS 1 8 'iWxd8+ .l:lxd8 1 9 l"iJc7 + �d7
20 l"iJ7d5 l"iJ4xd5 21 l"iJxd5 l"iJc4 22 .l:!.fd 1
l"iJxb2?
Losing immediately. After 22 ... .i.d6 23 b3
ttJxe3 24 ttJxe3 Black loses at least a pawn as
b 7 is hanging.
23 .l:!.d2 l"iJc4 24 l"iJbS + 1 -0
1 0 . . . l"iJd7
1O ... .Jtd7!? is a clever move with which Game 69
Black sacrifices a pawn in order to seek to Polovodin -Zviagintsev
exploit the insecure position of White's St. Petersburg 1994
queen. In J.Horvath-Rabiega, Austria 1 996
this did not work out for Black after 1 1 1 d4 d5 2 c4 eS 3 l"iJf3 l"iJfS 4 g3 dxc4 5
�xe5+ .Jte7 1 2 ttJa3 0-0 1 3 0-0 ttJ6d5 1 4 iLg2 l"iJcS S �a4 l"iJd7 7 �xc4 l"iJbS 8
.i.d2 .u.e8 1 5 .i.xb4 ttJxb4 1 6 'iVf4 .Jte6 1 7 �d3 e5 9 l"iJxe5
ttJb5! ttJd5 1 8 'iVd2 .Jtb4 1 9 'iVc2 c 6 20 ttJc3.
However, there is an improvement in
1 4 ... .Jtf6 1 5 'iVh5 g6 16 'ikh6 .Jtg7 17 'ikh4
'ikxh4 1 8 gxh4 nfe8, when White's kingside
structure is compromised and Black has
some compensation for the pawn deficit.
1 1 'iWa4 exd4
1 1 ...b5?! 12 'iVb3 .Jtb7 13 ttJxe5! is bad for
Black, and after 1 1 ...e4 1 2 ttJg5 ttJd5 1 3 'iVb3
White has numerous threats (e4 is weak and
Black is behind in development) .
1 2 l"iJxd4 cS 1 3 l"iJc3 l"iJbS 1 4 'iWb3 c5
Perhaps this is too ambitious as it helps
137
Th e C a t a l a n
9 . . . ttJb4 1 5 �d2
After 9 ... ttJxd4 10 e3 ttJe6 1 1 'iVxd8+ In Kaidanov-Shariyazdanov, Elista 1 998
ttJxd8 the game is equal, while 1 0 .i.e3 .i.c5 White preferred 1 5 ttJd2, and after the fur
1 1 ttJc3 .i.f5 12 .i.e4 .i.xe4 13 'iWxe4 f5 1 4 ther 1 5 ... f6 1 6 ttJc6 ttJxc6 1 7 .i.xc6+ �f7 1 8
'it'd3 'iWd6 i s unclear. White's best i s 1 0 0-0 f6 'it'c2 .i.c5 1 9 ttJb3 .i.xf2 2 0 : f1 .i.d4 21 .tf4
1 1 ttJf3 ttJxf3+ 1 2 �xf3 .i.d6 1 3 ttJc3 with a Black returned the material with equality after
slight edge. 21 ....i.xb3+ 22 �xb3 ttJd5.
1 0 �b3 1 5 . . . f6 1 6 ttJc6 ttJxc6 1 7 �xc6 + 'it'f7 1 8
In the event of 1 0 �dl 'iWxd4 1 1 'it'xd4 'it'c2 �c5
ttJc2+ 1 2 'it'd 1 ttJxd4 1 3 e3 ttJe6 Black Black's activity compensates for the pawn
shouldn't experience any problems. Gelfand deficit.
Ivanchuk, Sochi 1 986 continued 14 ttJc3 f6 1 9 f3 ttJc4 20 �e4 .l:!.d6 21 �d3 .l:!.b8
1 5 ttJd3 ttJc5 1 6 ttJxc5 .i.xc5 1 7 'it'c2 .i.f5+ Now all of Black's pieces are in play.
1 8 e4 .i.e6 1 9 f4 0-0-0 20 b3 h5 with equal 22 �c 1
chances. 22 b3 ttJe5 23 .i.e4 f5 24 .i.c3 fxe4 25
10 'iWc3 'it'xd4 needs investigating. After .i.xe5 l:td5 26 f4 e3 is to Black's benefit.
1 1 'i*'xc7!? .i.e7 1 2 ttJf3 �c4 1 3 'i*'xc4 ttJxc4 White has problems mobilising his forces
14 ttJd4 .i.f6 1 5 a3 .i.xd4!? 1 6 axb4 ttJxb2 1 7 and his light-squared bishop has a bright
.l::ta2 Black wins the pawn back but White future.
keeps an edge, while Haba-Klovans, Leinfel 22 . . . �d4 23 ttJc3 .l:!.c6 24 �e4 .l:!.c5 25
den 2001 saw instead 1 5 ... ttJxa3 1 6 ttJxa3 .l:!.d 1
.i.xd4 17 0-0 0-0 1 8 :d 1 .i.f6 1 9 ttJb5. Again Another move is 25 e3 but Black has a
Black managed to collect the invested pawn, strong reply - 25 ... ttJa3+! 26 'it'd2 .i.xc3+ 27
but White's pressure on the queenside se bxc3 l::t d8+ 28 'it'e2 ttJb5 and Black both
cured an advantage. The earlier encounter regains the pawn and maintains the offen
Beliavsky-Adams, Madrid 1 998 went 1 1 0-0 sive.
'iVxc3 12 ttJxc3 .i.d6 1 3 ttJf3 c6 14 lIdl .i.e7 2S . . ..bs 26 f4 ttJxb2!
1 5 ttJd4 0-0 16 a3 ttJ4d5 17 ttJxd5 ttJxd5
with a level game, but 1 5 e4!? is interesting
and seems to give White some advantage
after 1 5 ... 0-0 1 6 a3 ttJa6 1 7 .i.f4.
1 0 . . . �e6 1 1 �d 1 �xd4 1 2 �xd4 ttJc2 +
1 3 'it'd 1 ttJxd4 1 4 �xb7 .l:!.d8
1 38
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 0, c 6
his bishop is far better than the rook. 55 'it>g6 i.xf6 56 'it>xf6 'it>c3 57 .lte2 'it>d4
30 a4 f5 3 1 l:te 1 ? doesn't help White.
After the more circumspect 3 1 .i.f3 .i.xal 55 . . . i.g7 56 �e4 �e3 57 i.g4 �d2 0-1
32 '.t>xal .i.b3 Black wins a pawn but White's
forces then enjoy sufficient freedom with Game 70
which to secure equal chances. Zsu . Polgar-Benjamin
3 1 . . . i.xa 1 32 ':'xe4 l1xe4 33 i.d5 + �f6 Dortmund 1985
34 i.xe4 i.d4
This opposite coloured bishop ending is 1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 0,f3 0,f6 4 g3 dxe4 5
far from a draw. Had White's king been on i.g2 0,e6 6 'i'a4 i.d6
the kingside the draw would have been obvi
ous. Now these pawns make easy targets for
the enemy bishop.
35 �e2 i.g 1 36 h3 i.h2 37 �d3 i.xg3
38 e3 h6 39 �e2 g5 40 �f3 i.e 1 41
�e2 i.b4
Black already has one passed pawn but to
win the game he has to create a second.
42 �f3 i.d2 43 i.a6?!
Better is 43 fxg5+ hxg5 when Black has to
work to make progress on the kingside.
43 . . . g4+ !
7 0-0
In the event of 7 ttJbd2 (note that with the
moves ... i.b4+ and i.d2 inserted this is not
possible) 7 ... 0-0 8 ttJxc4 Black must not allow
the exchange of his potentially useful dark
squared bishop for White's knight. Therefore
in this position practice has seen the forcing
8 ... b5!? 9 "iVxb5 �b8 1 0 'iVxc6 i.d7 1 1 'iVa6
i.b5 1 2 "iVa5 .i.xc4 1 3 a3. Then 1 3. .. ttJe4!? is
worth a try, with compensation after 14 ttJe5
.i.d5 1 5 0-0 c5. Instead Jo.Horvath-Van Der
Werf, Haarlem 1 995 continued 1 3 ... c5 1 4
Forcing an exchange that results in a sec 'iVxd8 �fxd8 1 5 dxc5 .ltxc5 1 6 b 4 .tb6 1 7
ond, decisive passed pawn. .i.b2, when 1 7 . . .ttJe4 1 8 e 3 ttJc5! 1 9 ttJe5
44 hxg4 fxg4+ 45 �xg4 i.xe3 46 �f3 ttJd3+ 20 ttJxd3 .i.xd3 21 �c1 as gives Black
i.e 1 47 �e4 �e6 48 i.e2 a5 49 i.h5 slightly less than a pawn's worth of compen
�d6 50 i.d 1 �e5 51 �e5 �b4 52 f5 sation.
White also has a passed pawn that needs 7 . . . 0-0 8 l:td 1
attention, but the win is uncomplicated. If I f White is not prepared to forget about
necessary Black will sacrifice his bishop for the c4-pawn he should play 8 'iixc4 e5 9
the f-pawn so that his two runners cannot be ttJc3 exd4 1 0 ttJxd4 ttJe5 1 1 'iVa4 .td7
held at bay by White's lone bishop. (1 1 ...c6!? is interesting) 1 2 �b3 c5 1 3 ttJdb5
52 . . . e5 53 f6 i.b2+ 54 �f5 e4 55 f7 c4 14 'iVc2 .i.c5 1 5 .i.f4 'iVe7 1 6 �ad l , when
1 39
Th e C a t a l a n
White had a n edge i n Gleizerov-Dzhakaev, viding compensation for the missing pawn.
Hoogeveen 2000. The ambitious thrust of Finally, after 1 1 ...�6 1 2 ir'a5 li:'lc2 1 3 l::ta2
the c-pawn seemed to have helped White li:'ld5 1 4 'i'xb6 axb6, we have another com
more than Black. plex battle to look forward to.
8 . . . tDb4 1 1 tDc3 "ikc7
An interesting approach to the position is Black can try 1 1 ...li:'ld5 1 2 li:'le4 b5 13 ir'c2
8 ... ir'e8?! 9 'iVxc4 e5 10 d5 li:'lb4, when the but the resulting dark square weaknesses give
queen monitors both the e-file and the a4-e8 White something to aim at. You might have
diagonal. Filippov-Loeffler, Ubeda 1 998 con noticed that after 1 2 ir'xc4?? li:'lxc3 1 3 bxc3
tinued 1 1 li:'lc3 li:'lc2 12 l:tb1 e4 1 3 li:'ld4 i.xe5 Black is winning.
li:'lxd4 14 llxd4 i.f5 1 5 CDxe4 b5 1 6 �d3 1 2 "ikxc4 .i.xe5 1 3 dxe5 "ikxe5 1 4 .i.f4
i.xe4 1 7 i.xe4 i.c5 1 8 i.f3 i.xd4 1 9 'i*'xd4 "ikh5 1 5 .i.d6
and White enjoyed a greater share of territory The dark squares again give White enough
and decent attacking chances in return for play.
the exchange. 1 5 . . J�e8 1 6 .i.f3 "ikf5 1 7 .i.xc6?!
9 tDe5 c6 A more quiet approach with 1 7 b4!?
Another option is 9 ... li:'lfd5!? 10 a3 li:'lb6 should be preferred.
1 1 'iVa5 li:'lc2 12 .l:!.a2 f6 and the position 1 7 . . . bxc6 1 8 "ikxc6 �b8
remains unclear. 1 8 ... i.d7 1 9 'iVxa6 li:'le4 20 li:'lxe4 'iVxe4 21
1 0 a3 'ifd3 slightly favours White.
1 9 .i.xb8 tDxb8 20 "ikb5 "ikh3
After 20 ... 'iVxb5 21 li:'lxb5 a6 22 li:'ld6 l:tfB
the exchange of queens helps White's cause,
whereas the text at least draws attention to
White's king.
21 tDe4
21 'i*'xb8?? li:'lg4 and mate is on the menu.
2 1 . . . tDbd7 22 tDxf6 + tDxf6 23 f3 e5 24
e4 "ike6
24 ... h5 25 l:td6 h4 26 ir'fl sees White ex
change queens to leave Black with only a
small edge.
25 J:tac 1 .i.d7 26 "ikb4 "ika6 27 Wf2 "ike6
1 0 . . . tDa6 Yo - Yo
Black can also head directly for the end
game with 1O ... b5!? 1 1 li:'lxc6 bxa4 12 li:'lxd8 Game 71
li:'lc2 1 3 .l:!.a2 li:'ld5 14 li:'lc6. White's rook Bauer-I ppolito
looks a bit silly at the moment but he has New York 2000
made progress in the centre and Black's
queenside has seen better days. Not surpris 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tDf3 tDf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
ingly this is a difficult position to assess. We .i.g2 tDc6 6 "ika4 .i.b4+ 7 .i.d2 .i.d6 8
should not forget that Black has two other tDe5
possibilities after 1 1 li:'lxc6, the most obvious White has a range of possibilities here. In
being 1 1 ...li:'lxc6 1 2 'ii'x b5 i.d7 1 3 i.xc6 ttb8 the case of 8 li:'la3 the most direct response is
14 'iVa4 'iVc7 1 5 i.xd7 li:'lxd7 with a lead in 8 ... i.xa3, when after 9 "it'xa3 li:'lxd4 10 li:'lxd4
development and pressure on the b-ftle pro- 'iVxd4 1 1 lld1 White has sacrificed two
1 40
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 l"jj c 6
sure against Black's queenside make life 9 dxe5 ltJd5 1 0 f4 ltJb6 1 1 .i.xc6+ bxc6 1 2
rather awkward for the defender. An unclear 'it'xc6+ 'it'd7 i s unclear because, while Black's
position arises after 8 ... a6 9 ltJxc4 b5 1 0 pawns look fragile they are not easy to attack
tLlxd6+ cxd6 1 1 'iVa3 .i.b7, which leaves and, in the meantime, he has the b-fue.
8 ... ltJe4 9 ltJxc4 ltJxd2, Black making use of 9 . . bxc6 1 0 dxe5 'ii'd 5
.
the 'extra' .i.d2 to remove a potentially influ Also possible is 1 O ...ltJd7 1 1 .i.c3 ltJb6 1 2
ential bishop. After 10 ltJfxd2 .i.d7 Beliavsky 'fixc6+ 'ii'd 7 1 3 'ii'xd7+ �xd7 1 4 ltJa3 .i.a6
gives 1 1 e3!? 0-0 1 2 'itb3 as an interesting 1 5 0-0-0+ �c6 1 6 lld4 (Ilincic) . Compared
choice, while in Beliavsky-Anand, Dortmund with the previous note featuring 9 dxe5,
1 998 the continuation 1 1 ltJxd6+ cxd6 1 2 White has clearly improved and his forces are
ttJe4 0-0 saw Black sacrifice a pawn for a much better placed.
more fluid deployment of his forces: 1 3 1 1 f3 l"jjd 7
tLlxd6 'it'c7 1 4 ltJe4 l:tfd8 1 5 'it'c4 'it'b6! 1 6 e3 1 1 ...'it'xe5? 12 'iWxc6+ �d8 13 'it'xa8
!lac8 17 'iVb3 'ii'a5+ 1 8 ltJc3 e5! 19 d5 ttJd4! 'ii'xb2 1 4 0-0 'iix al 1 5 'it'xa7 nets a pawn for
20 exd4 exd4 21 0-0 dxc3 22 bxc3 .l:!.xc3 23 Black but he will soon feel the power of his
'i'xb7 'it'c5! with a balanced game. opponent's pieces.
Another option is 8 .i.c3 0-0 9 'it'xc4 with 1 2 l"jjc 3 'ii'c 5
a space advantage for White. This was trans 12 ...'it'xe5 13 'it'xc6 l%.b8 1 4 .i.f4 'it'd4 was
lated to a general lead in Wojtkiewicz-Goldin, tested in Ilincic-Marjanovic, Yugoslavia 1 998.
Oak Bridge 2000, which went 9 ... 'ii'e 7 1 0 After 15 'ii'x c7 0-0 16 l:i.dl 'it'b6 17 'it'xb6
ttJe5 .i.xe5 1 1 dxe5 ttJd5 1 2 0-0 .l:!.d8 1 3 l:t d 1 1:txb6 1 8 .i.d6! :e8 1 9 .i.a3 f5 20 l:td2 ltJf6
i.d7 1 4 ltJd2 ttJxc3 1 5 'fixc3 .i.e8 1 6 ltJb3 21 �f2 e5 22 l::t h dl White's control of the d
.l:!.xd 1+ 17 l:!xd 1 J:td8 1 8 nc 1 . fue and more sound structure secured the
O f course White can capture on c4 imme better prospects. Perhaps Black should look
diately. For example D.Gurevich-Beliavsky, to 14 ... 'iVf5!? 1 5 .i.xc7 .l:txb2 1 6 .i.d6 .i.b7 1 7
Las Vegas 1 999 went 8 'it'xc4 e5 9 dxe5 (9 'iVxc4 'iVa5! with good counterplay. I n return
d5!? is interesting) 9 ...ltJxe5 10 ltJxe5 .i.xe5 for leaving his king in the centre Black can
1 1 'it'b5+ (the point of the exchange on e5, generate pressure of his own.
but Black is still okay) l 1 ...ltJd7 12 .i.c3 O-O! 1 3 f4
(a temporary piece sacrifice) 1 3 0-0 (1 3 i.xe5
c6!) 1 3 . .. c6 14 'it'c4 l:te8 1 5 a4 ltJb6 16 'it'c5
i.g4! and Black was doing fine.
Finally there is 8 0-0 0-0 9 'fixc4, when
9 ... e5 presents White with a decision regard
ing the d-pawn. 1 0 dxe5 ttJxe5 1 1 ttJxe5
i.xe5 1 2 .i.c3 doesn't seem to pose Black
any problems, e.g. 1 2 ... 'it'e7 1 3 .i.xe5 'it'xe5
14 ttJc3 c6 1 5 .l:!.fd 1 .i.e6 1 6 'iVb4 .l:!.ab8 1 7
.l:!.d2 a s 1 8 'iVb6 ltJd7 1 9 'it'd4 'it'xd4 20
l:txd4 J::t fd8 21 l:tadl �f8 with a draw in
Karpov-Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 1 998. In
stead in Raetsky-Shariyazdanov, Biel 1 999
White pushed with 10 d5, which earns a terri 1 3 . . . 0-0
torial advantage after 1 O ...ltJe 7 1 1 ttJc3 a6 1 2 The situation after 1 3 ... ltJb6!? 14 'it'c2
i.g5 ttJe8 1 3 e4. .i.b7 1 5 0-0-0 0-0-0 16 ltJe4 'it'e7 17 .i.e3
14 1
Th e C a t a l a n
.l:Id5 is given a s unclear b y Bauer. 2S exd7 .l:!.dS 29 e6! 'ii'xe4 30 exf7 + Wf8
1 4 0-0-0 .l:!.bS 1 5 ttJe4 'iWb5 1 6 'ii'c 2 c3?! 3 1 i.g7 +
After 16 ... .l1.b 7 17 ttJg5 g6 18 .l1.c3 Black
keeps the c4-pawn but the question is how
much is it worth, as without the pawn Black
has more room for manoeuvre - hence the
text.
1 7 i.xc3 ttJb6 1 S ttJg5 g6 1 9 h4 ttJd5 20
h5! !
The direct approach. Time is more impor
tant than material.
20 . . . ttJe3 21 't\Ve4 ttJxd 1 22 .l:!.xd 1 Wg7
Other moves are clearly worse, e.g. 22 ... h6
23 hxg6! hxg5 24 .l:Ih 1 ! with the cruel threat
of .l:Ih8+!, or 22 ... c5 23 "iYh1 !, heading for h7.
23 g4 3 1 . . . We7 32 fS'iV + .l:!.xfS 33 i.xfS + Wxf8
Here 'W'hite misses a great opportunity to 34 dS'iY + 1 -0
continue in gambit style with 23 f5!! gxfS Mate is unavoidable.
(23 ... exfS 24 e6+ f6 25 'iVh4 wins - h 7 is the
problem) 24 h6+ 'it>g8 25 'iVh4 and 'W'hite is Game 72
winning (it is safe to say that Black is weak G rabliauskas-Benjamin
on the dark squares!). New York 2000
23 . . . i.a6
23 ... h6 24 ttJxf7! 'it>xf7 25 'it'xg6+ 'it>e7 26 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
'iVxh6 and 'W'hite's attack looks dangerous. i.g2 ttJc6 6 'iYa4 i.b4+ 7 i.d2 ttJd5 8
24 .l:!.d7 'iWc4 25 h6+ WgS 26 f5! 'iYb5 0-0
8 ... �xd2+ 9 ttJbxd2 c3 10 bxc3 ttJxc3 1 1
'iVd3 ttJd5 nets Black a pawn but 'W'hite has
compensation, e.g. 1 2 0-0 0-0 1 3 e4 ttJf6!? 14
.l:Ifd1 'iVe7 15 .l:Iac1 nd8 16 ttJf1 �d7 17
ttJe3 .i.e8 1 8 a3 h6 19 d5 .l:Iac8 20 'iVb 1 ttJa5
21 .l:Ic3 Iljushin-Aleksandrov, Smolensk,
2000. In Van Heste-Barsov, Netherlands
1 998 Black tried 1 3 ... ttJb6 with some patient
manoeuvring after 14 ttJb3 'ii'e 7 1 5 .l:Iac1
�d7 1 6 ttJc5 ttJd8 1 7 .l:Ife 1 �e8 1 8 h4 h6 1 9
'iVb3 ttJc8 2 0 ttJe5 c 6 21 ttJc4 b 6 2 2 ttJd3
ttJb7 23 e5, although 'W'hite emerged with a
pull.
26 . . . .l:!.bdS Well worth considering is the retention of
Even the exchange of queens doesn't help dark-squared bishops with 8 ... .l1.e7!?, when
Black: 26 ... 'ii'x e4 27 ttJxe4 gxf5 28 gxfS �c8 Paunovic-Zvjagintsev, Yugoslavia 1 995 went
29 .l:Ixc7 .t!.b7 30 .l:Ixc6 with a huge advantage 9 'ii'xc4 ttJb6 1 0 'iVd3 0-0 1 1 0-0 e5 1 2 .l1.c3
to 'W'hite. exd4 1 3 ttJxd4 ttJxd4 14 �xd4 �fS 1 5 'iVxfS
27 fxe6 .l:!.xd7 'iixd4 1 6 ttJc3 c6, Black succeeding in neu
'W'hite's win is practically forced. tralising 'W'hite's aggression. Instead of 12
142
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 l2l c 6
i.c3 White can try 1 2 ttJxe5, e.g. 1 2 ... ttJxe5 1 8 bxa5 iLh3!
(1 2 ... ttJxd4 13 .i.c3 is an edge thanks to
White's modest development lead) 1 3 dxe5
'i'xd3 14 exd3 J:td8, when the attack down
the d-ftle provides Black with compensation.
9 'WiVxc4
Also possible is 9 .i.c3, when the forcing
9 ... .i.xc3+!? 1 0 ttJxc3 ttJxc3 1 1 bxc3 �d5 is
okay for Black. An alternative to the bishop
trade is 9 ... e5!?, e.g. 10 dxe5 i.e6 1 1 0-0 a6
12 'ilt'a4 jus 1 3 ttJh4 .i.xb1 (13. .. b5!? might
be better, when 1 4 'it'd 1 ..lte6 1 5 a4 l:tb8 is
unclear) 1 4 l:taxb1 .i.xc3 1 5 'ii'x c4 ..ltxe5 1 6
i.xd5 with the easier game for White in Ro
manishin-Brodsky, Nikolaev 1 995. Note that Black's is a sensible pawn sacrifice.
10 O-O?! is not in White's interest in view of White's king is kept in the centre for the time
1O ... a6 1 1 'it'xc4 e4 1 2 .i.xb4 (directed against being.
...ttJa5) 12 ... exf3 13 .i.xfS fxg2 14 �xg2 ..lte6! 1 9 'WiVc3
and the resulting rook versus rwo minor In the event of the greedy 19 ..ltxb 7 Black
pieces middlegame clearly favours Black. generates a formidable attack after 19 .. J::ta e8
9 . . . l2lb6 1 0 'WiVd3 e5 20 .i.e4 ttJg4.
1O ... .i.xd2+ 1 1 ttJbxd2 e5 12 ttJxe5 ttJb4 1 9 . . . l2lxf3 + 20 l2lxf3 'ife4 21 'ifd4 'ifc6
13 'it'b 1 'it'xd4 14 ttJdf3 'iVd8 1 5 a3 ttJ4d5 1 6 22 'ifc3 'ifa6
0-0 'it'e7 1 7 �c2 a s was fine for Black in De No exchange of queens. By now White
Boer-S.Polgar, Netherlands 1 996. really misses his Catalan bishop!
1 1 iLxb4 23 l2ld4 l:!.fe8 24 f3?
1 1 ttJxe5 i.xd2+ 12 ttJxd2 ttJb4 13 �c3
'iVxd4 1 4 0-0 'l'xc3 1 5 bxc3 ttJ4d5 is pleasant
for Black.
1 1 . . . l2lxb4 1 2 'ifd2 a5 1 3 a3 e4! ?
1 3. .. ttJc6 1 4 dxe5 'ilt'e7 1 5 'YWf4 a 4 1 6 0-0
l:ta5 17 ttJc3 ttJxe5 with a draw in Konopka
Grabliauskas, Litomysl 1 996. The text is
more ambitious.
14 axb4 l2lc4!
14 ... exf3? 1 5 ..ltxf3 ttJc4 16 �d3 ttJxb2 1 7
�c3 and the knight i s lost.
1 5 'ifc 1 ? !
1 5 'iVf4 has more bite. Benjamin gives
1 5 ... exf3 1 6 ..ltxf3 'iVe7 1 7 ttJc3 (1 7 bxa5 White tries to repair the light squares, but
'ifb4+ 1 8 ttJc3 'i¥xb2 19 'it'c1 'iYxc1+ 20 he cannot afford the time. 24 b4 ':ad8 25 e3
l:txc1 c6 leads to equality) 1 7...'iVxb4 1 8 0-0 �f6 is necessary.
'iVxb2 19 ttJd5 ttJd2 20 lIfd1 ttJxf3+ 21 'it'xf3 24 . . . c5! 25 'ifxc5 iLg2 26 'it'f2
c6 22 ttJe7+ 'i£th8 23 .l:.ab1 'iVc2 24 e3. White The point behind Black's play is seen in
wins back the b 7 -pawn with an equal game. the line 26 l:tg1 i.xf3 27 'i£tf2 ':xe2+ 28
1 5 . . . exf3 1 6 iLxf3 'WiVxd4 1 7 l2ld2 l2le5 'it'xf3 �d3+ 29 'it>g4 ':xh2, when White's
1 43
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 3 . . . c5!?
The main alternative is 1 3 ... .l:.b8, e.g. 1 4 b4
c5! 1 5 ttJc3?! cxd4 1 6 ttJe4 .ltb5 1 7 'iVa2 d3
with considerable counterplay for Black in
Zilberstein-Raetsky, Voronezh 1 988. After
1 8 l:txa 1 .l:.c8! 1 9 ttJc5 I1xc5! 20 bxc5 'iNa5+
21 �e3 'iVc3 22 exd3 'iVxd3+ 23 �f4 g5+ 24
9 . . . b5! ttJxg5 'iVf5+ Black's attack is indeed very
Simagin. dangerous.
1 0 'ilfxb5 tDc2+ 1 1 Wd2 White should go for the knight immedi
This is better than 1 1 �f1 �d7 12 .l:.a2 ately, Kozlov-Chernikov, Vladivostok 1 978
ttJ2xd4 1 3 ttJxd4 ttJxd4 14 'it'c5 ttJb3 1 5 being a good example of model play after 1 5
'iVxc4 l:tb8 1 6 � f3 0-0 1 7 �g2 e 5 1 8 ttJc3 c6 'iNc3! cxb4 1 6 axb4 as 1 7 'iVxal axb4 1 8 ttJe5
19 .l:.dl 'iNe7 20 �g4 �xg4 21 'iNxg4 nfd8 0-0 1 9 .l:.dl ! b3 20 �e1 b2 21 'it'a7 .ltb5 22
with an advantage to Black in Bogdanovsky- ttJc3 'iVd6 23 'iVa5 nfd8 24 �e4 (24 ttJxb5?
1 44
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 ltJ c 6
'i"xe5! is a nice little trick that illustrates the and with this king position White can't ex
power of the b2-pawn) 24... �e8. White has pect to survive much longer.
two minor pieces for the rook, a fIne centre 2 1 . . . iLc4 22 ltJd2
and his king is about to feel safer on the
kingside, but the b2-pawn is dangerous.
1 4 it'a2 'ili'a5 + ! 1 5 b4
1 5 lbc3 is also interesting and has been
tried at the highest level recently: 1 5 ... cxd4 1 6
lbxd4 .l:td8 1 7 l:txa 1 e 5 (17...'iib 6!? 1 8 e 3 e5
1 9 lbd5 "iVh6! offers Black counterplay, or 1 9
ltJde2 �e6+ 20 .ltd5 'iVc5 and White cannot
hold on to f2) 1 8 b4 iVb6 19 lbc2 .lte6+
(19 .. :ihf2 20 .ltd5 0-0 21 'ii'c4 .lte6 22 lbe3
'iVxh2 23 "iVh4 'iVxh4 24 gxh4 f5 25 'it>c2 'it>f7
26 l:tdl f4 27 lbc4 gave White the smallest of
edges in Kasparov-Adams, Wijk aan Zee
2001 , the game eventually ending in a draw) 22 . . . it'g5 +
20 i.d5 "iVxf2 21 J::td l !? (White wants to 2 2... .ltxd3! 2 3 exd3 'ii'g5+ wins o n the
transfer the king to the gueenside) and now spot.
in Kir.Georgiev-Timoschenko, Panormo 23 ltJf4 e5 24 ltJxc4 exf4+ 25 gxf4 'it'f5
200t there followed 21 ...0-0?! 22 'it>c1 i.xd5 26 ltJd6
23 lbxd5 'it>h8 24 'ii'c4 'iVxh2 25 g4 "iVg2 26 26 i.e4 .u.c3+ 27 i.d3 (27 'iVxc3 "iVh3+)
ttJde3, when White was well co-ordinated 27 ... J::te8+ 28 'it>d2 "iVxf4+ 29 'it>dl "iVxd4 and
and had the better prospects. Timoschenko Black has a decisive advantage.
proposes 21 ...'iVxh2! 22 'it>c 1 �xd5 23 ttJxd5 26 . . . it'e6 + 0-1
l:tc8 24 'iVb3 'iVxe2 25 'iVa4+ 'it>f8 26 ttJc7 g6
27 'iVd7 rj;;g7 as an improvement (with two Game 74
pawns and an insecure king to aim at, Black Vakhidov-Ziatdinov
should be satisfIed with his lot) . Tashkent 1987
1 5 . . . cxb4 1 6 it'xa 1 .l:!.c8 1 7 ltJe5
Not to be recommended is 17 e4 0-0 1 8 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ltJf3 ltJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
'it>e3 bxa3, when the a-pawn looks menacing iLg2 ltJc6 6 'ili'a4 iLb4+ 7 iLd2 ltJd5 8
and White's king might prove awkwardly iLxb4 ltJxb4 9 ltJe5
placed.
1 7 . . . iLb5 1 8 'it>e3?
White should address the threatened infil
tration. 1 8 i.e4?! 0-0 19 'it>e3 f6 20 ttJd3 f5
21 i.f3 �xd3 22 'it>xd3 'iVa4 saw White ex
perience problems in Raetsky-Pushkov, Po
dolsk 1 992, when 23 'iib2 bxa3 24 'iVxa3
'iVc4+ 25 'it>e3 e5! 26 'ii'd 6 iVb3+ led to a win
for Black. The best course is 1 8 a4!? 0-0 1 9
i.e4 f6 20 lbf3! (Byrne & Mednis) and the
struggle continues.
1 8 . . . .l:!.c2 1 9 iLf3 0-0 20 a4 f6 21 ltJd3
21 lbd2 fxe5 22 axb5 J::tc3+ 23 'it>e4 'iVxb5
145
Th e Ca t a l a n
146
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i.. g 2 tLl c 6
22 .l:td2 d4! blows away the defences. l:!.ac1 ttJb3 1 8 .l:tcd 1 ttJb4 1 9 e3 cS with equal
22 . . . g6 23 'ilVg5 'ilVxb2 chances.
Black is winning. 1 0 . . . a6
24 ..t>d2 .l:!.e4 25 .l:!.c1 .l:!.c8 26 .l:!.xe4 dxe4 10 ... 0-0 1 1 a3 ttJdS 12 "it'xc4 ttJaS 13 'ir'd3
27 'ilVa5 i.. b 5 0-1 favours White, but l O ... .i.d7 leads to compli
cated play, e.g. 1 1 a3 bS 1 2 ttJxbS ttJdS
Game 75 (1 2 ... a6 1 3 ttJc3 ttJxd4 14 'ilkaS! ttJb3 I S 'fieS
Filippov-Rausis f6 1 6 �e4 ttJxal 17 axb4 ttJb3 1 8 �xc4 'i'e7
Dubai 1999 19 'i¥xb3 and the knights are stronger than
the rook) 1 3 ttJc3 (1 3 e4 ttJce7 14 exdS
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tLlf3 tLlf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 .i.xbS I S 'ilVxa7 c3 and Black has good coun
i.. g 2 tLlc6 6 "iVa4 i.. b4+ 7 i.. d 2 tLld5 8 terplay) 1 3. .. .l:txb2 14 'iVxc4 ttJaS I S 'i'd3
i.. x b4 tLlxb4 9 0-0 .l:tb3 1 6 .l:tfc1 cS 1 7 �d2! c4 1 8 ttJeS ttJxc3
19 .l:txc3 and White's centre was the differ
ence in Romanishin-Aleksandrov, Pula 1 990.
1 1 tLle5
1 1 a3 bS 12 "it'dl ttJdS is nice for Black.
1 1 .l:tfc 1 , on the other hand, is more to the
point: 1 1 ...0-0 1 2 'iVdl bS 1 3 b3 ttJaS 14 ttJe4
ttJdS I S ttJcS ttJb6 1 6 ttJeS f6 1 7 b4 fxeS 1 8
bxaS exd4 1 9 axb6 (Nedobora-Sjodahl, La
Coruna 1 993) 1 9 ... cxb6!? with an unclear
position.
1 1 . 0-0
. .
147
Th e Ca t a la n
148
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 tD c 6
Summary
After 6 0-0 l:[b8 White's strongest seems to be 7 lbc3. Then after 7 ... i.b4 White can claim a
slight advantage after both 8 i.gs and 8 'ii'c 2. In reply to 7 ... bS, reacting with 8 e4 is not in
White's interest, but Black should probably avoid the unclear 8 ... b4 and develop naturally with
8 ... i.e7. It is interesting that the game can transpose to the 'normal' variation S ... i.e7 6 0-0 0-0
7 lbc3 lbc6 8 e4 .l:tb8 followed by 9 ... bS, as seen in the notes to Game 27 in Chapter 4. Instead
the best way to meet the early push of the b-pawn is undoubtedly 8 lbeS. Sufficient research
has been carried out on the line 8 ...lbxeS 9 dxeS lbd7 10 i.xc6 a6 1 1 'ir'xd4 i.b7 12 i.xb7
l:txb7 1 3 l:[dl . Here it is not so easy for White to demonstrate compensation for the pawn, so
it is necessary to pay attention to 10 iVd4!? (Game 66) .
Now w e turn t o 6 'ii'a4. The strategy beginning with 6 ... i.d7 appears not t o offer Black
equality. In the main variation 7 'ii'x c4 lbaS 8 'ii'd 3 cS 9 0-0 i.c6 1 0 lbc3 Black can choose
between the plan with ... cS-c4 (immediately or - as is seen more often - after 10 .. .11c8 I I l:tdl )
o r the less ambitious exchange o n d4. In the former case White i s given the pawn majority in
the centre and often develops an initiative through the positional breakthrough d4-dS (see, for
example, Ftacnik-Lechtinsky in Game 67, note to Black's 1 0th move). After 1 0 ... cxd4 the game
tends to be simplified and it is not so easy for Black to neutralise the slight but often enduring
superiority enjoyed by White.
After 6 ... lbd7 7 'it'xc4 lbb6 8 'ii'd 3 eS 9 i.e3 White cannot realistically claim a genuine ad
vantage, but Black must be careful to avoid quickly running into trouble (see Raetsky-S.Ivanov,
Game 68 - including Filippov- Short) . In the case of 9 lbxeS lbb4 the queen moves to dl and
b3 fail to furnish White with anything positive, and nor does 1 0 'it'c3 if Black plays 1O ...'ir'xd4
1 1 0-0 'ii'x c3 1 2 lbxc3.
As a whole the variation starting with 6 ... lbd7 contains numerous areas for new discoveries.
For example 9 ...lbd4 has never been tested despite the fact that we do not see how White
should achieve any appreciable advantage.
Another deviation from the main line (which, of course, is 6 ...i.b4+), namely 6 ... i.d6, is
quite playable. After 7 0-0 0-0 8 lldl Black can exploit the absence of White's bishop from d2
(as opposed to the modern line 6 ... i.b4+ 7 i.d2 i.d6 8 0-0 0-0) by playing 8 ...lbb4, illustrating
the downside to the posting of White's queen on a4 (polgar-Benjamin, Game 70). If White is
not suited to these complex positions it is better to allow ... e6-eS with 8 'ii'xc4, or to play an
other line starting with 7 lbbd2.
The theory of the line with 6 ... i.b4+ 7 i.d2 i.d6 has only just begun to develop. It is
particularly difficult to evaluate how the chances are divided after 8 lbeS. A fter 8 'ir'xc4 0-0 9
0-0 eS 1 0 dxeS almost all games have ended in a draw, and White, if he is looking to achieve
something in the opening, should go for 1 0 dS lbe7 I l lbc3.
After 6 'ii'a4 i.b4+ 7 �2 lbdS the manoeuvre 8 'ii'b s loses time and is not dangerous for
Black, who should simply continue with 8 ... 0-0. For example in Grabliauskas-Benjamin (Game
72) an important feature is the potentially precarious situation of White's king, which is stuck
in the centre.
In the very sharp line 8 i.xb4 lbxb4 9 a3 bS 1 0 'ii'x bS lbc2 1 1 'itd2 several recommenda
tions can be made for Black. First there is 1 1 ...i.d7!? 1 2 'itxc2 lbxd4+ 1 3 lbxd4 i.xbS 1 4
lbxbS .l:tb8 (Chetverik-Grabliauskas in Game 73, note t o Black's 1 1 t h move), which i s not
often quoted, although Black's queen does not seem to be inferior to White's three pieces.
Secondly, Black no longer plays l 1 ...lbxal 12 'ii'x c6+ i.d7 13 'it'xc4 1Ib8 14 b4 cS!, but all the
possibilities have not been refuted here. Finally, the modern line 1 3 ... cS 14 'ii'a2 'ii'a S 1 s lbc3
1 49
Th e Ca t a l a n
cxd4 1 6 ttJxd4 l:td8 also gives Black sufficient counterplay (according t o analysis b y Timo
schenko) due to White's vulnerable king.
In the solid variation with 9 0-0 we have seen considerable changes in recent fashion. The
position after 9 ... l:tb8 1 0 ttJc3 a6 1 1 ttJe5 0-0 1 2 i.. x c6 ttJxc6 1 3 ttJxc6 i.. x c6 1 4. 'ii'xc4 'ii'd 6!?
has become critical:
Black prevents the enemy queen from taking up a dominating position on c5. If White does
give up the b2-pawn Black's rook will have other qualities than those of a savage killer on the
b-file (1 5 b3 i:tb4 and 1 5 ttJe4 'iVd5 1 6 'iVc2 "it'xd4 17 b3 i:tb5 should be noted) . We do not see
anything special for White here. More attention might be given to Wojtkiewicz' 10 ttJa3, which
sees the knight monitor both c4 and b5. If Black doesn't play 1 0 ... a6 White regains his pawn
with the familiar manoeuvre 'itb5-c4.
7 a4
7 ... a6 Game 51 (Chapter 5) ; 7 ... b6 Game 62
- -
7 ttJc3
7 ... i.. b4
- 8 e3 Game 63; 8 'it'c2 Game 64
-
7 ... b5
- 8 e4 Game 65; 8 ttJe5 Game 66
-
6 . . . �b4+
6 ... iLd7 Game 67
-
7 �d2 1LJd5
7 ... i.. d6 Game 71
-
8 �xb4
8 'itb5 Game 72
-
8 . . . lLJdxb4 (D)
9 a3 Game 73; 9 ttJe5 Game 74; 9 0-0 Game 75
- - -
6. . 1:.bB
. B . e5
. . B. . . lLJdxb4
1 50
CHA PTER SEVEN I
4 . . . dxc4 5 .192 c 5
151
Th e C a t a l a n
achieved nothing for White in Balashov Black can also equalise with 9 ... ltJb6 10
Beliavsky, Vilnius 1 980. 'ii'd 3 cxd4 11 ltJbd2 i.e7 1 2 ltJxd4 i.xg2 13
This leaves 7 ltJeS ltJdS (7 ... i.d7 8 ltJxc6 'it'xg2 0-0 etc.
i.xc6 9 i.xc6+ bxc6 to 0-0 transposes to 6 1 0 �xf6
0-0 ltJc6 7 ltJeS i.d7 8 ltJxc6 i.xc6 9 i.xc6+
bxc6 10 'iWa4, dealt with in Game 79) 8 ltJxc6
bxc6 (8 ... �d7 9 'ii'xc4 'iVxc6 10 ltJc3 cxd4 1 1
'ii'xd4 'itb6 1 2 'iVxb6 ltJxb6 1 3 0-0 favours
White because Black is behind in develop
ment and is under pressure on the long di
agonal) 9 dxcS i.b7 to 'iVxc4 'iY'aS+ 1 1 i.d2
'iVxcs 12 'iVxcs i.xcs 1 3 ltJc3 and White has
a slight but enduring edge.
7 'i'xc4 �c6 S 0-0
Another possibility is 8 dxcS, when
8 ...'iVdS 9 'iVxdS ltJxdS to ltJeS should fa
vour White. Indeed 1 O ... ltJb4 1 1 ltJxc6
1 52
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i.. g 2 c 5
1 53
Th e C a t a l a n
1 54
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i.. g 2 c 5
no more than perpetual check - 22 iff4+ White plays 6 0-0 ttJc6 7 ttJe5
rl;e7 23 'iWf7+ 'iitd 6 24 tDe4+ 'it>dS! 25 tDd2+
'iYtd6 26 tDe4+ 'it>dS and White cannot make Game 78
progress. Ksieski-Enders
14 i..e 5 'i'c5 1 5 l:tfd 1 ttJg4 Bad Harzburg 2000
Both the lines l S.J:tfdS 1 6 lId4 and
lS ... i.c6 16 �xf6 gxf6 17 �c3 give White 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
good compensation for the pawn on the i.. g 2 c5 6 0-0 ttJc6
kingside.
1 6 i.. d 4 �a5 1 7 1j'e4
17 i.c3!? .l1.a4 1 8 "iVc 1 is a possible im
provement.
1 7 . . .f5? !
1 7 ... eS is necessary. After 1 8 i.xa7 the
game can swing either way.
1 S 1j'xb 7 .l:!.c 7 1 9 1j'b2 i.. a4 20 .l:!.dc 1 l:tbS
7 ttJe5
This is probably the most ambitious
choice. Indeed 7 dxcS 'iWxd1 8 lIxd1 �xcS
appears insufficient for an advantage, e.g. 9
tDbd2 c3 1 0 bxc3 0-0 1 1 tDb3 i.e7 1 2 tDfd4
�d7 1 3 �gS .l::!. a c8 1 4 i.xf6 .l1.xf6 1 5 tDcs
tDxd4 1 6 cxd4 �bS with equality in Speel
man-Van der Sterren, Yerevan 1 996. 7 �a4
Allowing a nice queen sacrifice, but by features in Games 81 -83 below.
now Black is already walking on thin ice. 7 " 'ttJxe5
20 ... h6 21 h3 tDf6 22 tDeS illustrates White's This is, of course, not forced. 7 ... i.d7,
complete control over the centre. which is considered in the next two main
21 1j'xbS + ! ttJxbS 22 l:txbS + �f7 23 games, should be the strongest alternative.
ttJg5 + �e7 24 i.. c 3 1j'a6 25 J:!.gS e5? 7 . . . tDxd4??, on the other hand, spells disaster
Black can still put up some resistance with for Black due to 8 e3 tDf5 9 'iNxd8+ 'it>xd8 10
2s .. :iNb6 26 lIxg7+ 'it>e8 27 .l::!.g8+ rJJ e 7, al tDxf7+ and White wins. 7 ...tDdS 8 tDxc6 bxc6
though White can look forward to a power 9 dxcS �xcS 10 ifa4 'iVb6 1 1 tDd2 favours
ful attack after 28 e3. White, e.g. 1 1 ...�a6 1 2 tDxc4 'iVbs 1 3 �xbS
26 .l:!.xg 7 + �f6 cxbS 1 4 tDeS b4 l s lId1 �b7 1 6 �d2 i..e7
26 ... �d8 27 �aS! and White wins. 1 7 lIac 1 as 1 8 e4 tDf6 1 9 �gS i.d8 20 tDc4
27 l:txc7 �xg5 2S l:txc4! ()-() 21 tDd6 with a pleasant game for \x'hite
Now Black can no longer defend. in Savchenko-Galliamova, Rostoy 1 996.
2S . . . i.. b 5 29 .l:!.c7 'ilfb6 30 i.. d 2+ �h5 3 1 S dxe5 ttJd5
e 3 h 6 32 i.. b4 i.. a4 3 3 i.. d 5 i.. e S 3 4 h3 Black cannot equalise here. 8 . . .tDd7 9 f4
ttJf6 35 i.. f3 + �g5 36 l:tg7 + 1 -0 l:tb8 1 0 a4 i.e7 1 1 tiJa3 b6 1 2 tiJxc4 i.b7 1 3
1 55
Th e C a t a la n
b 3 .Jtxg2 1 4 �xg2 'iYc7 1 5 .Jtb2 'iVc6+ 1 6 White should play with energy. After the
�g1 0-0 1 7 'it'c2 .l:!.bd8 1 8 e4 was better for quieter 1 1 b3 White achieved little in Raet
White in ljngnau-Klovans, Berlin 1 996, and sky-Enders, Forchtenberg 1 997, when
8 ... 'it'xd1 9 J:txd 1 ttJd7 1 0 f4 l:tb8 1 1 a4 .Jte7 1 1 ...ttJb4 1 2 .Jtb2 .Jtxg2 1 3 �xg2 'it'd5+ 14
12 ttJa3 0-0 1 3 ttJxc4 is also very pleasant for 'iVxd5 exd5 15 ttJd6+ .Jtxd6 16 exd6 �d7 17
White, who was successful in Hajtun-Gecsei, .Jtxg7 l:thg8 18 .Jtc3 ttJc6 saw the game drift
Budapest 1 9 5 1 : 13 ... b6 14 ttJd6 l:td8 1 5 .Jte3 into equality .
.Jtxd6 16 ':xd6 .Jtb7 17 l:tad 1 .Jtxg2 1 8 1 1 . . . ttJb6 1 2 ttJd6 + i.xd6 1 3 exd6
�xg2 lIb 7 1 9 fS h6 20 g4 � f8 2 1 g5! exfS 22 This pawn can easily be underestimated.
gxh6 gxh6 23 l:txh6 l:tdb8 24 l:[xd7! and Karpov and Kramnik are known masters in
White won. exploiting such circumstances.
9 ttJa3 1 3 . . . ttJe4? !
Another strong option is 9 'it'a4+!? .Jtd7 A lesser evil is 1 3 ... 0-0 1 4 .Jtd ttJd7 1 5
1 0 'ii'xc4, when Black needs to find an im 'iVc2 with a clear advantage for White.
provement on Vaulin-Koc, Koszalin 1 997, 1 4 'We2!
which went 1O ... .Jtc6 1 1 ttJc3 'it'd7 12 lId1 Black will soon find that winning the
b5 1 3 'iVg4 'iVb7 1 4 ttJxd5 .Jtxd5 1 5 .Jtxd5 pawn is not much fun.
exd5 16 e6 l:[d8 17 .Jtg5 .Jte7 1 8 .Jtxe7 'iVxe7 1 4 . . . ttJxd6 1 5 .l:I.d 1 'fie 7 1 6 i.e3 b6 1 7
1 9 'it'xg7 and White was already close to i.xe5! bxe5 1 8 'fIxe5 'fIb7 ? !
wmrung. 1 8 ....Jt b7 1 9 J:lxd6 i s more accurate, al
9 . . . i.d7 though White still has a pawn for nothing.
Black does not have time for 9 ... c3 1 0 1 9 'fIxd6 1 -0
bxc3 ttJxc3 1 1 'iVc2 ttJd5 1 2 l:td1 .Jtd7 1 3 Black has had enough.
ttJc4 which put the defender under too much
pressure in Andersson-Guyot, France 1 993, Game 79
when 13 ...'it'c8 14 .Jtb2 .Jte7 15 ttJd6+ .Jtxd6 Shipov-Volzhin
16 exd6 0-0 17 .Jtxd5 exd5 1 8 .l::lx d5 left Hastings 1997/98
White with a clear advantage. However,
Black's capitulation soon followed as 1 8 ... b6? 1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxe4 5
met with immediate punishment in the form i.g2 e5 6 0-0 ttJe6 7 ttJe5 i.d7 8 ttJa3 !
of 1 9 .Jtxg 7! �xg7 20 llg5+ �h8 21 l:th5 etc. This has become the modem way t o han
1 0 ttJxe4 i.e6 dle the position, taking over from continua
tions such as 8 ttJxc6 .Jtxc6 9 .i.xc6+ bxc6 10
'it'a4, e.g. 1 O ... cxd4 (1O ... 'iib 6 1 1 dxc5 .Jtxc5
12 'i'xc4 l:td8 1 3 ttJd2 'iVb5 14 'i'xb5 cxb5
1 5 ttJb3 .Jtb6 was even in Belichev
Mukhametov, Yalta 1 995) 1 1 'iVxc6+ ttJd7 12
'i'xc4 .Jtc5. Then 13 ttJd2 0-0 1 4 ttJe4 .Jtb6
1 5 .Jtg5 ttJe5 1 6 'i'b5 might look like Black is
under pressure but after 1 6 ... 'iYd5! 1 7 'it'xd5
exd5 1 8 ttJd2 f6 1 9 .Jtf4 ttJc4 20 a4 l:He8 it
was actually the other way around in Pav
lovic-Byrne, New York 1 997. Salov
A.Sokolov, Sochi 1 982 went 1 3 b4 .i.b6 14
.Jtb2 l:tc8 15 'iVb3 0-0 1 6 ttJd2 ttJe5 17 .l:lad 1
1 1 e4! 'i'f6 1 8 a4 a6 and Black was no worse.
1 56
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 c 5
Worth further investigation is 8 ttJxc4 .l:tb4! 'ilif6 1 9 l:hb7+ �c8 20 J:!.c1+! and
cxd4 9 .i.f4 ttJd5 10 ttJd6+ .i.xd6 1 1 .i.xd6. White wins) 1 8 .l:f.d1 .i.xe3 1 9 .l:tb4 ttJc5 20
Gelfand-Dokhoian, Sverdlovsk 1 987 contin J:!.xb6 ttJxa4 21 lIxd8+ .l:txd8 22 .l:[xb7+ �c8
ued 1 1 ...'fib6 12 'iVc1 f6 1 3 ttJd2 �f7 1 4 23 fxe3 with a clear plus according to Moro
ttJb3 ttJa5! 1 5 ttJxa5 it'xa5 1 6 'it'c4 and zevich. A more sober approach was essayed
White emerged with good play for the pawn, in Cvitan-Gyimesi, Baden 1 999, when
while 1 1 ...ttJde7 1 2 ttJd2 0-0 1 3 'fib3 .i.c8 1 4 1 2 ... .i.c5 1 3 .i.f4 .l:.d8 1 4 ttac1 0-0 1 5 b4
.i.a3 e 5 1 5 .l:tac1 it'c7 1 6 ttJc4 .l:.d8 1 7 .i.c5 'iWxb4 1 6 'it'xb4 .i.xb4 1 7 .i.c7 l:tde8 1 8
.i.g4 18 l:tfe 1 .l:!.d7 19 'ili'a3 l:tad8 20 b4 also .i.xb7 .l:.e7 1 9 i:tb 1 ttJb6 20 .i.xb6 axb6 21
resulted in compensation in Romanishin J:!.xb4 l:hb7 22 ':xd4 ended in a draw.
A.Sokolov, Cannes 1 998. There is an interesting alternative in 1 1
8 cxd4
. . . b4!?, White making no secret of his quest for
Black can also try 8 ... ttJd5!?, when 9 the initiative, e.g. 1 1 ...it'xb4?! 1 2 .i.f4 .i.a4 1 3
ttJaxc4 seems harmless, e.g. 9 ... ttJdb4 1 0 it'c1 .i.e7 1 4 .l:i.b1 it'c3 1 5 .i.xb7 .l:td8 1 6
ttJxc6 .i.xc6 1 1 .i.xc6+ ttJxc6 1 2 dxc5 .i.xc5 ttJc6 .i.xc6 1 7 .i.xc6+ � f8 1 8 it'xc3 dxc3 1 9
13 .i.f4 0-0 14 it'xd8 .l:!.fxd8 15 ttfd1 f6 1 6 i:tfc1 and the endgame indeed looks like a
.i.d6 .i.xd6 1 7 lIxd6 � f7 1 8 l:tad 1 � e7 1 9 grim ordeal for Black. Brodsky-Ulibin,
.l:.xd8 l:txd8 with a draw in Raetsky Bydgoszcz 2001 went 1 1 ...l:td8 1 2 a3 .i.e7 1 3
ASokolov, Biel 1 996. Instead White should .i.b2 it'a6 1 4 .i.xd4 0-0 1 5 e 3 .i.b5 1 6 l:1e1
consider 9 ttJxd7 it'xd7 10 e4 ttJdb4 1 1 d5!? .i.d6 17 a4 .i.xe5 18 axb5 it'd6, when Ulibin
with possibilities of stepping up a gear. gives 1 9 l::t xa7 it'xb4 20 l:txb7 .i.xd4 21 exd4
9 ttJaxc4 ttJxe5 l::t xd4 22 'iWb 1 ttJd5 23 b6 with a pull for
For 9 ... .i.e7 see the next main game, White.
which also covers Black's alternatives. 1 1 iLb5 1 2 a4
. . .
1 1 i.f4
Not surprisingly this is not White's only
opportunity. In the event of 1 1 ttJxd7 ttJxd7
1 2 it'a4 Black should avoid the risky
1 2 ... 0-0-0?! 1 3 .l:.d1 .i.e7 1 4 .l:.xd4 .i.c5 1 5
l:!.c4 �b8 1 6 '.t> f1 e5, which was seen in To
palov-Morozevich, Madrid 1 996. Now White
could have played 1 7 .i.e3! f5 (17 ... .i.xe3 1 8
157
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 58
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 c 5
.ixdS exdS 1 5 4JaS 4JxaS 1 6 it'xdS .ie6 1 7 White plays 6 0-0 l2lc6 7 �a4
'i'xaS b 6 1 8 it'a4 'ifb 7 1 9 4Jc6 with a slight
plus. Game 8 1
14 gxf4 l:tbS 1 5 iLe4 �c7 1 6 �f3 H . Olafsson-Hjartarsson
1 6 4JaS i.d6 1 7 'i!fh3 h6 1 8 .ixc6 bxc6 1 9 Reykjavik 1984
ttJaxc6 i.xc6 20 l:txc6 'iYe7 and Black holds
his gtound. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 l2lf3 l2lf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
1 6 . . . iLf6 1 7 e3 ! ? g6 1 8 exd4 l:tfd8 1 9 iLg2 c5 6 0-0 l2lc6 7 �a4
tiJe3
If White is too optimistic and plays 1 9
dS?! Black should respond 1 9 ... exdS 20 .ixdS
.ie8 21 iLxc6 iLxc6 22 4Jxc6 l:txd1+ 23
l:txdl bxc6 with play against both the b2-
and f4-squares.
19 . . . i.e8 20 l2lxc6
Not 20 dS? which runs into 20 ... i.xeS 21
fxeS exdS 22 4JxdS 'iVxeS when Black nets a
pawn.
20 . . . bxc6 2 1 iLxc6 'iiVa 5
In the case of 21 ...iLxc6 22 l:txc6 'ifb7
White must push with 23 dS!? in order to
keep the game flowing. 7 . . . cxd4
22 iLxe8 l:txe8 23 a3 l:ted8 24 �e4 l:tb3 The modern 7 ... iLd7 is considered in the
25 d5 exd5 26 l2lxd5 iLxb2 27 l:tc7? ! next two games.
Too optimistic. White should settle for the 8 l2lxd4 �xd4 9 iLxc6 + iLd7
'passive' 27 l:tb 1 with the point that after 9 ... bxc6?! is best avoided, 10 'ii'xc6+ 'i'd7
27 ... l:tbS 28 4Je7+ <:J;;g7 29 l:txd8 'i/t'xd8 30 1 1 'i'xa8 iLcs 1 2 4Jc3 0-0 1 3 l:tdl �c7 1 4
l:txb2 l:txb2 31 'iWeS+ f6 32 'iWxb2 Black is 'iY f3 leaving Black with insufficient compen
forced to take perpetual check. sation for the exchange in Christiansen
27 . . . 'iiVx c7 ! Lhagva, Lucerne 1 982. Indeed after 14 ... iLb7
Black can resist anything - except tempta 1 5 .if4 'iYb6 1 6 e4 4Jxe4 1 7 4Jxe4 fS 1 8 b4!
tion. iLd4 1 9 iLc7 'iYxc7 20 l:txd4 fxe4 21 'iVe2
28 l2lxc7 l:txd 1 + 29 �g2 l:tb8 White was in the driving seat.
Black cannot win with 29 ... iLxa3?! because 1 0 l::td 1
after 30 'iYe8+ iLfB White has 31 4Je6! and After 1 0 iLxd7+ 'iVxd7 1 1 'irYxc4 l:tc8 1 2
the game is drawn after 3 1 ...l:tb8! 32 'it'xb8 "iVb3 iLcs Black i s doing fine, but 1 0 .ie3!?
fxe6 33 it'xa7 l:tdS, when Black will put the looks good. In Gulko-Zsu.Polgar, Bid 1 987
rook on f5 and erect a solid fortress. He Black failed to solve her opening problems
would never defend the e-pawn - why after 10 ... iLxc6 1 1 'iixc6+ 'iYd7 12 'it'xc4
should he? iLe7 1 3 4Jc3 0-0 1 4 l:tfdl 'iVc8 1 5 'iYbs a6 1 6
30 'iiVa4 l:tbd8? ! it'b6 iLd8 1 7 'ilVb4. Also possible is
But here there i s a n improvement in 1O ... 'iYxb2 1 1 iLxd7+ 4Jxd7 12 l:tdl bS 1 3
30 ... l:tdd8 31 'iYxa7 iLd4 with play against 'iYa6 when White has a strong initiative.
White's king. The text leads to a draw. However, Black also has two pawns, and
3 1 l2lb5 .l:t 1 d7 32 l2lxa7 iLxa3 33 l2lc6 after 1 3 . ..l:!.d8 the situation is far from clear.
iLfS 34 tiJxd8 l::t x d8 % - % 1 0 . . . 'iiVx d 1 +
1 59
Th e C a t a la n
1 O. . .�xc6 1 1 'iixc6+ bxc6 1 2 J.:txd4 �e7 parov-Andersson, Niksic 1 983 White earned
1 3 .l:!.xc4 cS 14 �f4 0-0 1 5 ttJd2 ttJd7 1 6 good chances of gaining the full point after
ttJb3 a s 1 7 l:ld 1 ttJb6 1 8 l:tc2 left White with 1 2 ... bS 1 3 a4 �e7 1 4 axbS �xbS 1 5 ttJxc4
the easier ending in Vladimirov-Ghaem 0-0 1 6 b3 l:[fd8 1 7 'ilVc2 l:tdc8 1 8 �a3 �xa3
Maghami, Kelamabakham 2000. 1 9 J::txa3 h6 20 'iVc3 �xc4 21 bxc4 l:tc7 22
1 1 'ifxd 1 iLxeS 'it'd4 l:tac8.
There is an interesting line in 12 ... hS!? 1 3
ttJxc4 h 4 1 4 �f4, when White should be
somewhat better. However, Black managed
to do well in Vanheste-Blauert, Groningen
1 989 after 1 4 ... l:td8 1 5 �3 hxg3 1 6 �xg3
ttJe4 1 7 ttJeS ttJxg3 1 8 'iVxg3 �d6 1 9 'it'xg7
�xeS 20 'iVxeS l:!.g8+ 21 'it>f1 �g2+ 22 'it>e1
i.c6 with a draw by repetition.
1 3 bxe3 0-0-0 1 4 'ifb3 iLe5 1 5 liJf3 liJe4
1 S ... ttJg4 1 6 ttJd4 i.dS 1 7 'iVbs i.b6 1 8 a4
is excellent for White.
1 S liJd4 �xd4
Black essays an exchange sacrifice, but it is
1 2 liJd2 not enough. In the long-run the queen will
White has two important alternatives. 1 2 reign. Unfortunately for Black 1 6 ... �dS 1 7
�gS seems only to give Black a tempo, but 'ii'c 2 e S 1 8 i.e3! i s unpleasant anyway ac
in fact White gets in f2-f3 for free. Neverthe cording to H.Olafsson.
less, there is no advantage: 12 ... ttJe4 1 3 �e3 1 7 exd4 iLxd4 1 8 �b1 iLxf2+
hS 1 4 f3 ttJf6 1 5 ttJd2 l:td8 1 6 �c1 h4 1 7 18 ... ttJxf2? loses to 19 �e3.
ttJxc4 hxg3 1 8 hxg3 lIdS! and Black was no 1 9 >tof 1 h5
worse in Mochalov-Sturua, Moscow 1 979. 19 ...l:td8 20 'iVc2 i.cs 21 l:.b3 .l::tdS 22
The game continued 19 g4 �e7 20 �xa7 i.e3 and White is much better.
ttJxg4! 21 fxg4 .l:th1+! 22 'it>xh1 l:thS+ 23 20 iLf4
'it>g 1 !Ih 1+ 24 'it>f2 �h4+ 25 'it>e3 �gS+ 26 White also has 20 �e3 h4 21 g4 �g3 22
'it>d3 Ihc1 27 ':xc1 �xc1 and a draw was l:tc1 ! �xh2 23 l:txc6+ bxc6 24 'iVa4 with a
agreed. clear plus in Hjartarsson-Hardarson, Ne
1 2 'iVc2 demonstrates that Black cannot skaupsstadur 1 984.
really hold on to the pawn. Polugaevsky 20 . . . g5?!
Andersson, Moscow 1 98 1 went 1 2 ... �e7 1 3 20... .l:td8 21 nc1 �cS is necessary, al
'ilVxc4 0-0 1 4 ttJc3 l:tfd8 1 5 �e3 ttJdS 1 6 though White is still doing very well after 22
ttJxdS �xdS 1 7 �g4 J::td c8 1 8 �d4 �ffi 1 9 �e3.
e4 �c6 20 h 4 !Id8 21 �c3 ':d3 2 2 h S h 6 23 21 iLxg5 h4 22 gxh4 iLxh4 23 'ii'b2 f6
ne1 .l:tad8 24 'it>h2 a6 with a slight plus for 24 iLxh4 �xh4 25 �e 1 >tod7
White. But Andersson has some affection for 2s .. Jhh2 loses to 26 l:Ixc6+! bxc6 27 'ilVc2
these passive positions, so he was probably and White will pick up all the enemy pawns.
not too uncomfortable here. 2S 't'ia3
1 2 . . . e3?! Black is lost.
This helps only White because it wastes a 2S . . . liJdS 27 'ifg3 �h5 28 �d 1 iLd5 29
tempo and opens the b-ftle. However, Black 'ii'g 7 + >toeS 30 �e 1 + iLe4 31 'ifg4 �f5+
anyway has difficulties equalising. In Kas- 32 >toe 1 b5 33 h4 e5 34 h5 �f4 35
1 60
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 c 5
161
Th e Ca t a l a n
hxg5 2 3 lIxb 7 White i s a pawn up, but no i.d6 1 2 tLlxd7 'ifxd7 1 3 tLlc3 a6 1 4 d5 exd5
more. 1 5 tLlxd5 tLlxd5 1 6 'it'xd5 'it'e6 1 7 lIdl ..te5
21 . . :ii'x b3 18 a4 gave White a slight plus in Stefanova
After 21 ...f6 22 �2 lId8 23 1Ixd8+ 'it'xd8 Zhu Chen, Groningen 1 999.
24 h4 f5 25 hxg5 fxe4 26 gxh6 Black is in 10 tDc3
serious trouble. After this move Ivanchuk successfully
22 tDxg5 hxg5 23 'iYxg 5 + �h8 24 l:tad 1 tries for the initiative. It seems more natural
'iYc2 25 'iYf6 + �g8 26 l:t 1 d4 "ii'g 6 to play 1 0 dxc5 �xc5 1 1 tLlc3, when Black
26 ...lIc4 27 lIxf7! and Black is mated. has more than one path to follow. 1 1 ...0-0 12
27 "ii'f 3! h5 28 l:txb7 e5 29 l:th4 l:td8 30 �g5 (1 2 tLlxb5? tLlb4 1 3 'ifc4 ..txf2+ and
'ii'x h5 'ii'x h5 31 l:txh5 f6 32 l:txa7 l:td2 33 Black wins) 1 2 ... tLlb4 1 3 i.xf6 gxf6 1 4 'Yid2
e3 l:tc 1 + 34 �g2 l:tdd 1 35 l:tf5 1 -0 �c6 1 5 'it'h6 .l:te8 1 6 lIadl ..tfS 1 7 'iVh5
'ike7 1 8 a3 �xf3 (1 8 ... tLld5 1 9 tLld4) 1 9 .i.xf3
Game 83 with a winning position for White in Anasta
Korchnoi-Ivanchuk sian-Kaidanov, Lucerne 1 997.
Istanbul 2000 l 1 ...tLlb4 12 'iVd2!? 'iVb6 (1 2 ... tLlbd5 13
tLlxd5 tLlxd5 14 a3 0-0 15 b4 �b6 16 .i.b2
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 tDf3 tDf6 4 93 dxc4 5 and White is better placed thanks to the co
i.g2 c5 6 0-0 tDc6 7 'ii'a4 i.d7 8 'iYxc4 ordination of his bishops) 1 3 tLle5 l:td8 1 4 a3
b5!? tLlc6 1 5 tLld3 0-0 1 6 'ifg5 e5 1 7 tLlxc5 'ikxc5
1 8 'iVh4 favoured White (..tg5 is coming) in
Vladimirov-De La Villa, Marchena 1 990.
l 1 ...b4 puts the question to the knight. In
Hansen-Van Der Sterren, Kerteminde 1 991
White chose 12 tLle4 tLlxe4 13 �xe4, when
there followed 1 3. .. tLle7 (13. .. 0-0 1 4 l:tdl
'ife7 1 5 �g5 f6 1 6 �e3 gives White a little
something as Black's queenside pawns are
potentially weak) 1 4 tLle5 ..tb5 1 5 ..te3 0-0
1 6 lIfd 1 'iVb6 1 7 ..txc5 lIxc5 1 8 tLld7 �xd7
1 9 lIxd7 tLld5 20 �h4 h6 and Black was no
worse. After 21 l:!.dl l:tc2 22 �xd5 l:txe2!? 23
'iVd4 exd5 24 l:!.xa7 'it'xd4 25 l:txd4 l:!.xb2 the
The most energetic move. game was drawn. Khalifman-Dokhoian,
9 'ii'd 3 Germany 1 99 1 saw instead 1 2 tLlb5 0-0 1 3
Black should be advised against 9 'iVxb5? tLld6 tLld4! 1 4 ..tf4 tLld5 1 5 �e5 tLlxf3+ 16
tLlxd4 10 tLlxd4!? (1 0 �d3 i.b5 clearly fa i.xf3 'ifg5 1 7 tLlc4 ..tb5 18 h4 'ike7 1 9 b3
vours Black) 1 O ... �xb5 1 1 tLlxb5 tLld5 1 2 lIfd8 and Black had been very successful in
tLl l c3 a 6 1 3 tLlxd5 axb5 1 4 tLlc3 b 4 1 5 �c6+ the opening. White has problems getting his
We7 1 6 tLle4 .l:tc8 and there was clearly not pieces into play, and the queen is struggling
enough compensation for the queen in to contribute.
Hodgson-Karolyi, Kecskemet 1 988. 1 0 . . . cxd4
9 . . . l:tc8 1O ... c4 1 1 �1 (1 1 'tidl ! b4 12 tLla4 'ifa5
Completing queens ide development and results in an interesting position with chances
stepping off the long diagonal. With 9 ... c4 for both sides) 1 1 ...b4 1 2 tLle4 tLld5 1 3 tLleg5
Black loses options: 10 'it'd l lIc8 1 1 tLle5 h6 1 4 e4 tLlf6 1 5 tLlh3 �e7 1 6 l:!.dl 'ifa5 was
1 62
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 c 5
1 63
Th e Ca t a l a n
Summary
The position after S ... cS 6 0-0 ttJc6 7 'it'a4 cxd4 8 ttJxd4 'it'xd4 9 .i.xc6+ .i.d7 10 l:txdl
'it'xdl + 1 1 'it'xdl .i.xc6 remains very important for the overall evaluation of the S ... cS system.
It used to be thought that Black has two plans of approximately equal value - to play for sim
plification in the hope of achieving a draw or to strive for an initiative on the kingside by ad
vancing the h-pawn. Now it has been established that the aggressive approach fails. However,
the 'drawing' fortress seems quite feasible, which partly undermines the reputation of 7 'it'a4.
The positive contribution 7 'ii'a4 received from Portisch-Radulov (Game 82) was only tempo
rary as after 7 ... .i.d7 8 'it'xc4 cxd4 9 ttJxd4 J:Ic8 10 ttJc3 ttJxd4 1 1 'ii'xd4 .i.cs 12 'ii'h4 .i.c6 1 3
l:tdl Black made a n error with 1 3. . .'iVb6?; 1 3 . . .'iIi'aS steers the game towards equality.
In the 1 990's the following variation became fashionable for Black: 8 ... bS 9 'iVd3 l:tc8, when
Korchnoi-Ivanchuk (Game 83) illustrates that 1 0 ttJc3 is hannless for Black. After 1 0 dxcS
.i.xcs 1 1 ttJc3 both 1 1 ...0-0 and 1 1 ...ttJb4 are not quite satisfactorily for Black, but 1 1 ...b4 se
cures a level game after 12 ttJbS and 12 ttJe4. Consequently 7 'ili'a4 is no longer considered
dangerous for Black. Therefore White's attention has turned to 7 ttJeS. Now on 7 ... .i.d7 White
should not hurry with 8 ttJxc6 .i.xc6 9 .i.xc6 bxc6 1 0 'iVa4 because Black has time to get his
game going despite the ruined pawn structure. Also not so popular these days is the complex
continuation 8 ttJxc4 cxd4 9 .i.f4 ttJdS 10 ttJxd6 .i.xd6 1 1 .i.xd6. The main line is 8 ttJa3 cxd4
9 ttJaxc4, when White has achieved a lead in development. Nevertheless the (extra) d4-pawn
restricts White a little. In the modern line 9 ... ttJxeS 1 0 ttJxeS 'iVb6 White must consider 1 1 .i.f4
.JibS 1 2 b4 (fukmakov) and 1 1 b4 (Brodsky), and in the case of 9 ... .i.cS 1 0 'iVb3 0-0 he can
probably grab the b7-pawn. Thus it is preferable for Black to play 1 0 ...'iIi'c8 with chances of
gradually equalising, as is demonstrated in Piket-Van Wely (Game 80).
S. . . cS 8 'iix c4 9 t'Llaxc4
1 64
CHA PTER EIGHT I
4 . . . dxc4 5 .,tg2 b 5
1 65
Th e Ca t a l a n
9 . . i.b4
. Mikhalchishin, Volgodonsk 1 98 1 , Black re
9 ... �b7?! is a dubious alternative as 1 0 sponding to 1 2 bxc3 with the poor 1 2 ... f6?,
ttJxb5 ttJc3 1 1 ttJxc3 .i.xg2 1 2 l:.g 1 (polo running into serious trouble after 1 3 'iVh5+!
vodin) might net Black the light-squared g6 1 4 ttJxg6! ttJxg6 1 5 e5 ttJc6 1 6 .i.xc6+
bishop but the price of time is a more impor .i.d7 1 7 .i.xa8 'iYxa8 1 8 �h6 Wf7 1 9 exf6.
tant factor. White exerts pressure on the Of course this can be avoided with 1 2 ... 0-0,
queenside and is clearly better. but then 1 3 1t.a3 f6 14 ttJxc4! bxc4 1 5 e5
9 .. .f6 looks risky. Indeed Black was pun ttJd5 16 .i.xfS 'iWxfS 17 it'a4 is pleasant only
ished in Hackel-Rausch, Germany 1 996, for White who, despite having a rook for two
which continued 10 e4!? ttJxc3 1 1 'Yi'h5+ g6 minor pieces, has the open flies on the
1 2 ttJxg6 hxg6 1 3 'iix h8 'iVxd4 1 4 1t.h6 ttJd7 queenside with which to generate play.
1 5 0-0 f5?! 1 6 'Yi'g8 ttJxe4 17 'Yi'xe6+ Wd8 1 8 In the event of 1 1 ...ttJf6 1 2 bxc3 1t.b7 1 3
l:i.ad 1 'Yi'c 5 1 9 1t.xe4 fxe4 20 l:i.d5 'Yi'b6 21 1t.a3 'iVc7 1 4 'iVe2 ttJbd7 1 5 ttJxd7 'iVxd7 1 6
1t.g5+ Wc7 22 1t.f4+ 'it>d8 23 'iVe5 1t.b7 24 d 5 White has compensation for the pawn
.i.g5+ and White won. An improvement is due to the dark-squared bishop.
15 ... ttJe2+ 16 'it'h1 e5 17 .i.xfS ttJxfS 1 8 1 2 exd5
'tWxf6 when Black has two minor pieces for a The alternative is 1 2 .i.xb2 ttJe7 1 3 d5! 0-0
rook but White enjoys more activity and has 1 4 1t.a3, when 1 4... ttJd7? 1 5 ttJxf7 �xf7 1 6
the safer king. dxe6+ �xe6 1 7 'iih 5 g6 1 8 'iVxh 7 ttJe5 1 9
1 0 0-0 i.xc3 1 1 e4! l:i.ad 1 ttJd3 saw Black walking o n thin ice in
Polovodin-Zhelnin, Moscow 1 983. In fact
the game ended 20 .i.h3+ We5 21 'iVg7+
Wxe4 22 ..ig2+ Wf5 23 ..ixe7 "iVe8 24 .i.h3+
'it'e4 25 l:i.fe H ttJxe1 26 'iVd4+ and Black was
mated. Instead of the faulty 1 4 ... ttJd7?, 011
assessed the situation after 14 .. .f6 1 5 d6
ttJec6 1 6 ttJxc6 ttJxc6 1 7 d 7 b4! 1 8 dxc8'iV
l:i.xc8 as unclear, thanks in no small part to
Black's has three connected passed pawns.
1 2 . . . i.xa 1 1 3 i.a3
1 66
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 b 5
Chernin's 1 5 liJxf7! g6 1 6 �f3! l:tfB 1 7 l:tel this open position but Black's dangerous
Wd7 1 8 l::t x e6, when White wins) 15 �f3 and pawns contribute to an evaluation of unclear.
White has a strong initiative, e.g. 1 5 .. .f6 1 6 1 9 'ilfxh6 iLe6 20 .l:!.e 1 'ilfe7 21 ttJxc4
J:tel ! 1Le6 1 7 1Lh3! f5 1 8 liJxg6 hxg6 1 9 21 liJxf7!? 'iVxf7 22 .l:txe6+ 'iit d7 23 .l:td6+
J:txe6+ <j;} f7 20 .ixf5 .ixd4 21 1Lxg6+! and 'iit c 7 24 f4 and Black's slightly troubled king
Black is crushed. confers White the more pleasant game. Again
14 'iVg4 Black's pawns are dangerous!
Also possible is 1 4 dxe6 1Lxe6 1 5 .ixa8, 21 . . . dxc4 22 d5 �d7 23 "ii'e 3!
when Kengis-Mejster, Toljatti 1 985 contin White has a strong attack.
ued 1 5 ... .ixd4? 1 6 liJc6! .ixf2+ 17 'itxf2 23 . . . 'ilfd6 24 'ilfa7 + 'ilfc7 25 dxe6 + fxe6
'i'c7 1 8 .id6! 'iVb6+ 1 9 'iVd4 'iixd4+ 20 26 'iVd4+ �c8?
tL'lxd4 b4 21 l:tal ! 'it>d7 22 .if4 l:tc8 23 .ib7! Better is 26 ... 'iid6 27 'iig7+! 'iie 7 28 lieS
J:td8 24 l:txa5 'ite8 25 liJxe6 fxe6 26 l:b5 and but White still has a strong initiative.
White won. Black's queenside pawns were 27 .l:!.xe6
inferior to White's active pieces. Dunnington
gives 1 5 ... b4 1 6 'iVxal 0-0 1 7 1Lel with at
tack, while 1 5 ...�xd4 1 6 �xal �xal 1 7
J:txa 1 b4 1 8 .iel 0-0 1 9 ':xa5 .l:td8! i s analysis
by Kengis.
14 . . . b4
After 1 4 ...g6!? 1 5 'i!kf4 f6 1 6 .l:hal l:ta6 1 7
tL'lg4 e 5 1 8 dxe5 .ixg4 1 9 'iVxg4 b 4 20 1L c 1
c3 21 d6 (011) the siruation is highly complex.
1 5 'iVxg7 �f8 1 6 .l:!.xa 1 .l:!.a6
16 ... bxa3 17 dxe6 .ixe6 18 .ixa8 'iixd4
19 l:tb 1 liJd7 20 .ic6 and now Chernin
Yudasin, Sverdlovsk 1 984 continued
20 .. :ifd6? 21 .ixd7+ .ixd7 22 liJxc4 'iic 5 23 White is winning.
J:tb8+ 1Lc8 24 l:.xc8+ and White won. Black 27 . . . c3 28 iLh3 �b7 29 'iVd5 + �a7
should play 20 ... a2! 21 .ixd7+ .ixd7!, sacri Or 29 ... liJc6 30 1Lg2 l:tc8 3 1 l:txc6 �xc6
ficing and relying on the dangerous a2-pawn. 32 'iVbS+ and White wins.
Then after 22 .l:tb8+ 'it>e7 23 �xfB+ 'iit e 6 24 30 iLg2 ttJa6 31 .l:!.c6 ! 1 -0
'i'xf7+ 'it>xe5 25 �e7+ 1Le6 26 nbS+ <j;}e4 27
'i'xe6+ c;t>d3 the battle rages on with chances Game 85
for both sides. Mochalov-Spirin
17 iLc 1 exd5 Correspondence 1986
1 7 .. .f6 is also possible, Balashov giving 1 8
tL'lxc4 l:. f7 1 9 'iih 6 exdS 20 liJe3 1Le6 2 1 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 ttJf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
.to. White is the exchange down but has iLg2 b5 6 a4 c6 7 0-0 iLb7 8 ttJe5
attacking prospects against Black's exposed After 8 liJc3 b4 9 liJb 1 cS 10 liJbd2 c3 1 1
king, while Black has rwo dangerous con bxc3 bxc3 1 2 liJc4 cxd4 1 3 �xd4 lixd4 1 4
nected passed pawns. liJxd4 .ixg2 1 5 'it>xg2 1Lb4 Black had no
18 iLh6! �xh6?! problems in Grinshpun-Rabinovich, Tel
Better is 18 ...�e7 1 9 l:tel .ie6! 20 'iixh7 Aviv 1 997. Moiseenko-Kharlov, St. Peters
tL'ld7 21 liJxd7 'iitx d7 22 .ixdS when White burg 1 998 took a different course: 8 ... a6 9 e4
has clear compensation for the exchange in liJbd7 10 e5 liJd5 1 1 liJgs liJ7b6 1 2 �h5
167
Th e Ca t a l a n
�d7 1 3 a s 4Jxc3 1 4 bxc3 4JdS 1 5 jixdS tating attack: 20 ... fxeS 21 �xeS+ �f7 22
cxdS 16 4Jxh7 0-0-0 17 4Jxffi l:tdxffi with l::t f5+ and White won. In Vladirnirov
chances for both sides. Gedevanishvili, Daugavpils 1 978 the queen
S . . . ltJd5 side saw all the action: 1 2 axbS jie7 1 3 4Jxc4
Also possible is 8 ...'iVb6 9 b3 cxb3 1 0 0-0 1 4 4JaS 'it'b6 1 5 4Jxb7 'ii'x b7 1 6 4Jc3
'it'xb3, offering the d4-pawn. I n fact after l:td8 1 7 �3 4Jc6 1 8 4JxdS exdS 1 9 l::td l
1 0 ... 'ii'xd4 1 1 jib2 �6 1 2 axbS cxbS 1 3 4Jb4 20 jid2 'it'xbS 21 jixb4 'ii'xb4 22
jid4 'iixd4 1 4 jixb7 �xal 1 5 �xbS+ 4Jbd7 'ii'xb4 jixb4 23 jixdS nab8 24 .l:txa7 and in
16 4Jxd7 4Jxd7 17 jixa8 White has compen this opposite-coloured bishop ending White
sation for the pawn due to his lead in devel had good winning chances.
opment. 9 . . . cxb3
Khalifman-Sveshnikov, Elista 1 996 went
1O ... 4Jbd7 1 1 jie3! cS, prompting White to
open up the centre with 1 2 4Jxd7 4Jxq.7 1 3
dS!, when there followed 1 3 ... bxa4 1 4 'iVxa4
exdS (1 4 ... jixdS 1 5 4Jc3 jixg2 1 6 �xg2
'it'b7+ 1 7 �gl .l:!.d8 1 8 .l:tabl 'iVc8 1 9 4JbS!
a6 20 4Ja7 'iVc7 21 I:.fd l ! 'iVxa7 22 'iVc6 'iVa8
23 I:.b7 'ii'c 8 24 nc7 is clearly better for
White - Khalifman) 1 5 4Jc3 with an excel
lent game for White. After I S ... d4 1 6 4JdS
jixdS 1 7 jixdS .l:!.d8 1 8 jif4 'iVf6 1 9 'iVbs
jid6 20 l:ta6 l:tb8 21 jib7! this had been
translated to a decisive advantage.
Finally there is 1 0 ... a6 1 1 lldl 4Jbd7 1 2 1 0 'i'xb3
4Jc3 4JxeS 1 3 dxeS 4JdS 1 4 jixdS!? exdS 1 5 Also possible is 10 axbS cxbS 1 1 'ii'x b3 a6
axbS axbS a s in Raetsky-Z.Yarga, ZUrich 12 e4 4Jf6 13 dS!, e.g. 13 ... exdS 14 exdS
2000, when White's development lead was �xdS 1 5 �e3 �e7 1 6 jixdS 4JxdS 1 7 'iVe4
balanced out by Black's consolidation in the 'ii'e 6 1 8 l:tdl with comfortably enough for
centre. After 1 6 jie3 �d8?! 1 7 jia7! 'iVc7?! the two pawns. 1 3 ... �cS!? is interesting but
18 e4 b4 19 exdS! bxc3 20 d6 �d7 21 jicS! appears inadequate in view of Agzamov's 14
White stood better despite being a piece dxe6 fxe6 15 'iixe6+ �e7 16 �xe7+ �xe7
down. Black should play 1 6 ... jicS 1 7 .l:!.xa8+ 1 7 4Jc3 0-0, when White is slightly better
jixa8 1 8 l:tal jib7 1 9 4Ja4 bxa4 20 �xb6 because the centre pawns are more mobile
jixb6 21 jixb6 �d7 22 �xa4 l:ta8 with than Black's a- and b-pawns.
equality. 1 0 . . . a6 1 1 ltJc3 ltJd7 1 2 axb5
9 b3 12 4JxdS exdS 13 e4 4JxeS 14 exdS!?
9 4Jc3 a6 transposes to 8 ... a6 9 4Jc3 4JdS cxdS! 1 5 dxeS �cS 16 axbS 0-0 17 b6!? with
9 e4 4Jf6 1 0 dS!? (1 0 4Jc3 leads to equality a slight advantage for White.
after 1 O ... b4 1 1 4Je2 cS) l O ... cxdS 1 1 exdS 1 2 . . . axb5 1 3 J:txaS .ixaS 1 4 ltJxd5 exd5
4JxdS, when Raetsky-Sofrigin, Leukerbad 1 5 e4 ltJxe5 1 6 dxe5 d4? !
2002 continued 1 2 4Jc3!? b4 1 3 4JxdS jixdS 1 6 ... dxe4 1 7 �xe4 �e 7 1 8 �d 1 gives
14 jigS! jie7 (14 ... 'ii'xgS 1 5 jixdS iVxeS 1 6 White compensation by way of the usual
jixa8 'iVxb2 1 7 .l:!.c1 favours White) 1 5 jixe7 development lead.
�xe7 16 'it'hS g6 17 'ii'h4+ f6 1 8 jixdS exdS 1 7 e6 f6
1 9 nfe1 ! gS 20 �h6 and White had a devas- Mochalov gives 1 7 .. .fxe6 1 8 'it'xe6+ 'ii'e7
1 68
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL. g 2 b 5
1 9 �a2! .1b7 20 e5! c5 21 .1g5! 'iixg5 22 After 26 ... 'ii'e 7 27 'it'xe5 'ii'xe6 28 'iix e6
.1xb 7 with an excellent game for White. l:txe6 29 i.fS White wins a piece and the
1 8 e5! game.
27 'ii'g 7 + 'ii'e 7 28 'ii'x e5 + Wb6 29
'ii'x d4+ Wc7 30 'ii'e 5+ Wb6 31 l:tb8 + 1 -0
Game 86
Filippov-Pridorozhni
Ekaten'nburg 1997
1 69
Th e C a t a l a n
1 70
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 b 5
Summary
After 6 a4 c6 7 axb5 cxb5 8 ttJe5 ttJd5 9 ttJc3 �b4 1 0 0-0 �xc3 1 1 e4 it is difficult for White
to achieve an advantage as Black is provided good counterplay by his queenside pawns. Con
seljuently the line with 6 a4 c6 7 0-0 �b 7 8 ttJe5 holds more potential for White. The prob
lems with 8 ... 'ifb6 (such as reducing Black's influence over d5) were pointed out in Khalifman
Sveshnikov, while after 8 .. ttJd5 White can successfully generate an with either 9 e4 or 9 b3.
.
Perhaps Black should play 8 a6, when White has control over the centre, while 9 b3 is less
...
6. . . c6 7 . . . cxb5 8 ttJe5
171
I CHA PTER NINE I
4 . . . dxc4 5 Ji.g2 c6
1 72
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i. g 2 c 6
try is 1 4 lUI !? tLld5 1 5 i.c5 tLld7 1 6 'iVd4 f6, After 1 6 ... tLlc6 1 7 i.c3 tLle4 1 8 i.xg7 l:1.g8
when Pankratov-Kharlov, Moscow 1 998 saw 1 9 i.c3 tLlf2+ 20 l:I.xf2 'iWxf2 21 'iWd6 Black
1 7 e4 tLlxc5 1 8 ir'xc5 'iVb6! 1 9 'iVxb6 tLlxb6 restores the points score but the weakness of
20 0-0-0 cJ;;e 7 21 .l::td4 l:I.c8 22 l:I.fdl with a his dark squares spells serious trouble.
very pleasant ending for White. At the mo 1 7 f5! ttJa6
ment only the d-ftle is open so it is difficult 1 7 ...l:th6 1 8 fxe6 .l::t x e6 1 9 'iWfl favours
for White to break through. After a further White.
opening up of the position the difference in 1 8 fxe6? !
strength between the rook and knight will More clear-cut is 1 8 i.c3 0-0 (1 8. . .tLlf2+
show. Instead of 1 7 e4 White should con 1 9 l:txf2 'iWxf2 20 i.xg7 l:tg8 21 i.f6) 1 9
sider castling long, as 17 O-O-O! tLlxc5 1 8 'iWd4 with a superior endgame for White.
'iWxc5 fS 1 9 e4! fxe4 20 fS ! creates a formida 1 8 . . . 'iWxe6 1 9 a3
ble attack against Black's stranded king. In the event of 1 9 i.c3 Black can consider
1 4 . . . 'iWb6 + 1 9 ... h4!? because 1 9 ...0-0 20 'iWd4 'iWg6 21
In Shipov-Maljutin, Moscow 1 99 1 Black's �xa7 is preferable for White.
knights were busy after 14 ... tLlc6 1 5 i.c3 1 9 . . . ttJxb4 20 axb4 ttJg5 21 J:l.f2
tLle4 16 a4 (1 6 i.xg7 l:I.g8 17 i.d4 h5 gives 21 ::!.xa7 'iWc6 is equal.
Black counterplay) 1 6 ... b4?! (1 6 ...tLlxc3 1 7 21 . . . 0-0 22 'iWd4 'iWc6 + 23 J:l.g2 a6 _24
bxc3 b 4 1 8 cxb4 'iVxb4 1 9 e 3 is a lesser evil) J:l.d 1
1 7 i.e 1 0-0 1 8 'iVc2 tLld6 1 9 i::td 1 tLlfS 20 24 'iVh4!? is worth a look.
i.f2 but were nevertheless short of outposts, 24 . . . ttJe4
resulting in insufficient compensation for the Black's forces enjoy good co-ordination.
exchange. The knight stands well on e4 and White has
1 5 'it;h 1 pawn weaknesses, thus affording Black com
pensation for the exchange.
25 �d7 �f6
Also good is 25 ... 'iVxd7 26 l:I.xd7 l:I.e8 but
Black prefers to keep the queens on the
board. This makes sense as the white king is
susceptible to attack.
26 'iWd4 'iWe7 27 e3 J:l.e8 28 'iWd7 'iWe5 29
J:l.d5 �b8 30 J:l.d4 ttJf6 31 'iWd6 'iWb7 32
h3 J:l.xe3 33 'it;h2 J:l.e6
1 5 . . . h5?!
Black should prefer 15 ...tLlc6 16 i.c3 tLlg4
1 7 'iWd6 tLle3 1 8 l:I.f3 (not 1 8 .l::t fdl ?? 'iVb7,
when White resigned in Pasman-Stean, Beer
Sheva 1 978) 1 8 ... tLlf5 1 9 'iVd2 b4 20 i.e5 0-0
and White found his bishop stuck on e5 and
his centre weakened, leaving the situation
unclear.
1 6 J:l.f3 ttJe4
1 73
Th e Ca t a l a n
1 74
4 . . . dx c 4 5 Ji. g 2 c 6
Summary
This line is a bit too obscure and lacks something in flexibility for today's top players. If White
wants he can transpose to the sharp S ... bS line with 6 0-0 bS 7 a4, while another option is a
guaranteed advantage after 6 ttJeS .i.b4+ 7 .i.d2. It is then very dangerous for Black to take the
pawns in the centre, and White enjoys an enduring lead after 7 ... .i.e7 8 .i.c3 followed by ttJxc4.
5 . c6
. . 7 . . flixd4
. • 7 . . Ji.e 7
.
1 75
CHA PTER TEN I
4 . . . dxc4 5 i.g2 i.b4 +
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 4:Jf3 4:Jf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 pawn with 7 ... bS?! thanks to 8 �gS with a
i.g2 i.b4+ double attack. However, alternatives also
This check is designed to throw a (small) leave Black passive and without counterplay,
spanner in the works as far as \'Vhite's co which explains why avoiding the exchange
ordination is concerned, as well as the de with 6 ... �e7, 6 ... cS and 6...aS (Game 90) is
fence of the d4-pawn. However, the idea is preferable.
seen rather seldom with this particular move
order. Game 89
The positions in this line can usually be Kozul-Lju bojevic
compared to those of the Bogo-Indian De Belgrade 1989
fence (1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 .i.b4+), while
6 ttJc3 0-0 7 0-0 transposes to the Nimzo 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 4:Jf3 4:Jf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
Indian Defence (1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJc3 i.. g 2 i.b4+ 6 4:Jbd2
.i.b4 4 g3 0-0 S ttJf3 dS 6 .i.g2 dxc4 7 0-0) -
In reply to 6 i.d2 Black rarely trades bish After 6 ... c3 7 bxc3 �xc3 Black wins a
ops, and after 6 ...i.xd2+ 7 �xd2 Black strug pawn. Then 8 �b 1 ttJe4 9 0-0 �xd2 1 0
gles if he tries to hang on to the extra pawn i.xd2 ttJxd2 1 1 'Yiixd2 ttJd7 1 2 �fc1 left
1 76
4 . . . dx c 4 5 iL g 2 iL b 4 +
White with the usual 'development' compen ltJh4 l:tfd8 1 7 l:[xd8+ l:lxd8 1 8 lIdl with an
sation in Haba-Hiibner, Germany 1 993, edge for White.
which was soon unclear after 12 ... 0-0 13 a4 A simple, albeit rather unambitious ap
as 14 'iVc2 c6 15 e4 ltJf6 1 6 l:td1 . proach is to anticipate the coming capture on
Another option for Black is 6 ... ltJc6 7 0-0 c4 and prepare a trade of queens with
i.xd2. Tukmakov-Lputian, Novosibirsk 7 ...ltJc6 8 'iVxc4 'ii'd 5, although 9 0-0 i.xd2
1 986 continued 8 i.xd2 ltJxd4 9 ltJe5!? 0-0 1 0 'iVxd5 exd5 1 1 i.xd2 i.g4 1 2 lIfc1 l:lac8
10 .l:r.c1 c5 1 1 llxc4 ltJd7 1 2 ltJd3, White 1 3 e3 ltJe4 1 4 i.el resulted in White having
winning back the invested material with the the more comfortable game in D.Gurevich
better game, retaining his lead after 12 ... e5 1 3 Young, Reno 1 992 thanks to the bishop pair.
ltJxc5 ltJxc5 1 4 :xc5 'iVe7 1 5 SLb4 i.g4 1 6 There followed 1 4 ...lIfe8 1 5 b4 ltJd6 1 6 a4
f3 SLe6 1 7 e 3 ltJc6 1 8 SLa3 etc. a6 1 7 nab 1 i.f5 1 8 lIb3 ltJa7 1 9 ltJe5 c6 20
White can adopt a different set-up by re g4 i.e6 21 f3 f5 22 h3 l:tcd8 23 SLh4 l:!.a8 24
capturing with the queen, e.g. 8 'iVxd2 l:tb8 9 i.g3 .l:!ac8 25 :tbc3 g6 26 i.f1 and Black had
b3!? cxb3 1 0 i.a3, when White is trying to failed to drum up worthy counterplay, being
keep Black's king stranded in the centre. This reduced to the unenviable policy of waiting
plan was used in Kozul-Vukovic, Banja Vru to see how White chose to continue the bat
cica 1 99 1 which went 1 0 ... ltJe7 1 1 axb3 i.d7 de.
1 2 ltJe5 i.b5 1 3 l:tfc1 a6 1 4 g4 0-0 1 5 g5 7 c3
. . .
ltJe8 1 6 Uc3 and White's kingside offensive Raetsky-Gipslis, Senden 1 998 went 7 ... b5
was up and running. Instead of 8...1:!.b8 Black 8 a4 c6 9 'it'c2 as 10 b3 cxb3 1 1 ltJxb3 bxa4
has 8 ... 0-0 9 'iVc3 b5, when after 10 ltJe5 1 2 l:ha4 i.a6 1 3 SLg5 SLb5 1 4 J:ta2 h6 1 5
ltJxd4 1 1 l:!.el l:!.b8 12 e3 White hits the piece SLxf6 'ii'xf6 1 6 ltJe5 l:td8 1 7 l:tb 1 a4 1 8 ltJc5
that defends against the fork on c6. Conse when, for the pawn, White had managed to
quendy Black should maintain the momen generate a formidable initiative.
tum by parting with the knight, although S lLlc4 lLlc6
1 2 ... c5 1 3 exd4 cxd4 1 4 'iVa3 anyway favours
White.
7 0-0
Creating a genuine threat against c4 by lift
ing the pin. 7 'iVc2 is the alternative means to
hit c4, when Black is not obliged to react.
7 ... b5 8 a4 bxa4 sees Black voluntarily
weaken his pawn structure in return for piece
play, Haba-Hiibner, Germany 1 99 1 continu
ing 9 0-0 SLb7 1 0 ltJxc4 c5 1 1 i.g5 ltJc6 1 2
dxc5 i.xc5 1 3 'iVxa4 'iVe7 1 4 �ac1 l:!ac8 1 5
SLe3 i.xe3 when a draw was agreed, al
though White is slighdy better in this posi
tion. Black can also play 7 ... c5 8 dxc5 c3 9 9 fid3
bxc3 i.xc5 1 0 0-0 ltJc6 1 1 ltJb3 i.e7 1 2 l:i.dl Quite different is 9 b3, White hoping to
'iVc7 13 i.f4 e5 14 i.e3, this time White win the c3-pawn. Haba-Ostrowski, Czehia
accepting a litde structural damage in order 1 999 developed as follows: 9 ....l:tb8 10 a3
to generate pressure on the queenside. This i.e7 1 1 'iVc2 b5 1 2 ltJce5 i.b7 1 3 ltJxc6
seemed to work in D.Gurevich-Tiviakov, i.xc6 1 4 'iVxc3 i.e4 1 5 i.b2 ltJd5 1 6 'iVc1
New York 1 998 after 1 4... i.g4 1 5 h3 i.h5 1 6 'iVc8 1 7 ltJe5 and White was ready to ad-
1 77
Th e Ca t a l a n
6 . . . a5
Of course Black has other options. After
6 ... .i.xd2+ 7 'iVxd2 a mistake is 7 ... b5?! in
view of 8 'iVg5 with simultaneous threats
against b5 and g7. Instead 7...0-0 8 tt:Ja3 ii.d7
9 tt:Jxc4 �c6 1 0 0-0 tt:Jbd7 1 1 l:tfc1 �d5 1 2
b 4 left White i n charge o n the queenside in
Portisch-P.Nikolic, Ijnares 1 988.
6 ... ii.e7 7 0-0 leads only to equality after
7 ... 1Ld7! 8 'il'c2 ii.c6 9 'iVxc4. Unander-Plato,
Sweden 1 995 saw the more combative 7 'iVc2
3 1 .ll. d 1 .i.d7 8 tt:Je5!? tt:Jc6 9 'iVxc4 tt:Jxe5 10 dxe5
Perhaps White might try 31 e5!? �c6 32 tt:Jd5 1 1 0-0 0-0 12 tt:Jc3 c6 1 3 a4 'tIVb8 14 f4
ii.d 1 , thus avoiding Black's next, which as 1 5 'YWd3 'iVc7 1 6 l:tac 1 and White enjoyed
opens up the centre. more space.
31 . . . f5! 32 exf5 exf5 33 ttJe5 ttJe4 34 An interesting situation arises after 6 ... c5 7
1 78
4 . . . dx c 4 5 s... g 2 s... b 4 +
jLxb4 cxb4 8 4Je5 0-0 9 4Jxc4 4Jc6 1 0 e3, tried in Gulko-Makarychev, Moscow 1 974,
when Chetverik-Ziabari, Prague 2002 con when 10 4Jc3!? jLb7 1 1 4Jxa4 �xd2 1 2
tinued 10 ... e5!?, the point being that after 1 1 �xd2 4Jbd7 1 3 l:tfc 1 4Jb6 1 4 4Jc5 4Je4 1 5
jLxc6 bxc6 both 1 2 dxe5 'YWxd1+ 1 3 'it'xdl �e 1 4Jxc5 1 6 dxc5 4Jd5 1 7 4Je5 c3 1 8 bxc3
4Je4! 1 4 'it'e2 �a6 1 5 l:tc1 l:tad8 and 1 2 f6 19 l:tcb 1 favoured White. The advantage
4Jxe5 jLh3 1 3 'i¥ f3 l:tc8 Black has compen remained intact after the subsequent 1 9 ...l:ta7
sation. Consequently White chose 1 1 d5, 20 c6 jLa8 21 4Jd7 l:te8 22 c4 i.xc6 23 4Jb8!
when the counter l 1 ...b5! 12 dxc6 'iVxd1+ 1 3 jLb7 24 l:txb7! l:txb7 25 4Jc6 'iVd6 26 cxd5
'i.t>xd 1 bxc4 1 4 4Jd2 c 3 1 5 bxc3 bxc3 1 6 4Jc4 exd5 27 'it'xa5 l:tb2 28 'iVxd5+ 'it>fS 29 e3, the
e4 17 'i.t>c2 i.e6 1 8 'it>xc3 i.d5 19 4Ja5 i.xc6 two minor pieces being stronger than the
would have led to equality. rook (although Black can still fight on).
7 0-0 0-0 10 . . . s... b 7 1 1 s... x b4 axb4 1 2 lha8 s... x a8
After 7 ... b5?! 8 a4 c6 9 axb5 i.xd2 1 0 1 3 ttJbd2
'YWxd2 cxb5 White again has 1 1 iVg5 with the 1 3 �xc4 leads only to equality after
now familiar double threat against b5 and g7. 1 3 ... �d5 1 4 'YWxb4 4Jc6 1 5 'iVc5 jLxf3 1 6
Voloshin-Fiodorov, Polanica Zdroj 1 997 saw jLxf3 4Jxd4 1 7 4Jc3 4Jxf3+ 1 8 exf3.
1 1 ...4Jd5 1 2 'it'xg7 �f6 1 3 �xf6 4Jxf6 1 4 1 3 . . . c5
4Je5 4Jd5 1 5 4Jc3 f6 1 6 4Jxd5 exd5 1 7 4Jf7! Black can clear the queenside with 13 ... c3
i.e6 18 4Jd6+ 'it>d7 1 9 4Jxb5. 14 bxc3 bxc3 1 5 iVxc3 4Je4 16 4Jxe4 jLxe4
8 'iVc2 b5?! 17 4Je5 jLxg2 1 8 'it>xg2 'iVd5+ 1 9 'it>g1
Babula-Jirovsky, Zlin 1 997 witnessed an (piket), when White can claim a lead in view
other exchange of queens: 8 ... 4Jc6 9 'iVxc4 of his superior pawn structure.
�d5 1 0 l:tc1 l:td8 1 1 �xd5 exd5 1 2 �f4 1 4 dxc5 'iVa5 1 5 �xc4 s... d 5 1 6 �d4
i.g4 1 3 e3 l:td7 1 4 4Jc3 4Jh5 1 5 4Jb5 4Jxf4 1 6 iVc2 l:tc8 1 7 e4 l:txc5 1 8 iVd3 gives
1 6 gxf4 f6 1 7 a3 jLfS 1 8 4Je 1 a4 1 9 jLfl l:ta5 White something to bite on.
20 jLd3 g6 21 4Jc3 4Ja7 22 jLc2 b5 23 4Jd3 1 6 . . . �d8 1 7 ttJc4 s... x c4 1 8 'iVxc4 .l:!.c8 1 9
and White's pull on the queenside was ttJd4?!
enough for an advantage. Better is 1 9 l:td 1 h6 (1 9 ...l:txc5?! 20
9 a4 iVxb4!) 20 h3 with a minimal advantage to
White.
1 9 . . . .l:!.xc5 20 'iVd3 .l:!.c8 21 .l:!.d 1 h6
21 ...l:td8 22 iVc2 g6 23 e3 e5 is level.
22 h3 'iVa2 23 'iVb3 �xb3 24 ttJxb3 ttJfd7
25 f4 �f8 26 s... e4 �e7
The king comes to the centre. Black has
equal chances in this endgame.
27 .l:!.d4 f5 28 s... d 3 ttJc6 29 .l:!.c4 ttJb6 30
.l:!.c 1 �d6 31 �f2 g5 32 e4
32 fxg5 hxg5 33 jLb5 4Je5 34 l:txc8 4Jxc8
35 h4 with approximate equality.
32 . . . gxf4 33 gxf4 fxe4 34 s... xe4 ttJe7 35
.l:!.xc8 ttJexc8 36 ttJd4 ttJa4 37 b3 ttJc5 38
9 . . . bxa4 1 0 .l:!.xa4 s... c 2 ttJe 7 39 �f3 e5 40 ttJe2 exf4 41
White has an interesting idea in picking up ttJxf4 �e5 42 ttJd3 + ttJxd3 43 s... x d3 ttJc6
the a4-pawn with the knight, an approach Y:z - Y:z
1 79
Th e Ca t a la n
Summary
In the variation with 6 lbbd2 lbc6 Black usually exchanges on d2 and holds on to the gambit
pawn. In return White enjoys better development and has definite compensation. After 6 ... 0-0
White has a choice between taking direct aim at c4 with 7 'ifc2, with a slight edge, or seeking
an initiative with 7 0-0, allowing Black to hang on to the material (after 7 ... bS or 7 ... c3) .
In reply t o 6 .Jtd2 a ll of 6 ... .Jte7, 6 ... cS and 6 ...a S are reasonable for Black. Note than after
6 ... iJ... e7 7 0-0 Black can bring his other bishop (via d7) to c6 because 7 ... .Jtd7 S lbeS?! lbc6
makes the bishop look misplaced on d2. White has a modest space advantage after 7 'iVc2 .Jtd7
S lbeS.
In the variation with 6 ... cS 7 .Jtxb4 cxb4 S lbeS 0-0 9 lbxc4 lbc6 10 e3 it was thought that
1 0 ... eS was dubious due to 1 1 .Jtxc6 bxc6 1 2 dxeS 'ii'x d1 1 3 'iit x d1 lbg4 1 4 'iit e 1 (Bareev), but
Black can certainly improve on 1 3 ... lbg4? with 1 3 ... lbe4, guaranteeing compensation for the
pawn. Perhaps White should prefer 7 dxcS, with a slight lead in a standard Catalan position,
rather than 7 .Jtxb4.
After 6 ... aS 7 0-0 0-0 8 'iVc2 lbc6 9 'ir'xc4 iLd6 we have a position which belongs in the line
starting with S ... lbc6 6 'it'a4 iJ... b4+ 7 .Jtd2 .Jtd6 S lfxc4 0-0 9 0-0 but with the additional ... a7-
as. The continuation 9 'iVxc4 'iVdS differs from the well known variation in the Bogo-Indian
Defence - namely 1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 e6 3 lbf3 .Jtb4+ 4 .Jtd2 as S g3 dS 6 'iVc2 lbc6 7 .Jtg2 dxc4 S
'iVxc4 'it'dS - in that neither player has castled in the Bogo. Here, apart from 1 0 'iVxdS and 1 0
'iVd3, White has the additional possibility o f 1 0 l:!.c1 with a small but steady advantage.
5 . . . .i.b4 + 7 . . . c3 6 . . . a5
1 80
CHA PTER ElEVEN I
4 . . . dxc4 5 �g2 et:Jbd 7
181
Th e Ca t a l a n
better thanks t o his healthier pawns and .i:!.ac1 with a slight advantage for White due
queenside pressure. In Budnikov-Thesing, to his lead in development.
Germany 1 992 Black sent his knight on a 1 1 lLlce5 �b6
tour: 7 ... tDd5 8 e4 tDb4 9 tDa3 tDd3 10 .ig5 Another try is 1 1 ...'iVc7 12 .ie3 �b6
f6 1 1 tDxc4 b5 1 2 axb5 cxb5 1 3 tDa5 tDxb2 (1 2 ... .ib7? 13 tDxd7 tDxd7 14 tDg5 and
14 'W!Vb3 tDc4, and now after 1 5 .id2 tDdb6 White wins) 1 3 it'xc7 1I.. xc7 1 4 .i:!.ac1 with a
16 �xb5+ �d7 17 'iVh5+ g6 1 8 'iVh4 .ie7 1 9 considerable lead for White. Again Black has
�h6 White was in charge, in no small part problems on the h l -a8 diagonal.
thanks to Black's poor king. 1 2 b4! i.xb4 1 3 i.e3 'iWd6 1 4 .l:.ad 1
7 lLla3 a6 1 4 tDg5?! is tempting but Black pounces
7 ... cxd4 8 tDxc4 'iVc7 9 �xd4 b5 10 tDce5 with 14 ... tDxe5 1 5 11.. xa8 tDc4 .
.2i.c5 1 1 �d3 looks nice for White, while 1 4 . . . lLld5
Raetsky-Lechtynsky, Pardubice 1 992 contin
ued 7 ... 1I.. e7 8 tDxc4 0-0 9 1I.. f4 tDd5 10 .l:i.c1
tDxf4 1 1 gxf4 .l:i.b8 12 dxc5 �xc5 13 �c2
tDf6 1 4 .l:i.fdl �e7 1 5 tDfe5 tDd5 1 6 e3 a6 1 7
a3, again with a queenside pull for White.
After 7 ... tDb6 8 1I..g5 Atalik gives 8 ... c3! 9
bxc3 cxd4 1 0 tDb5 �d7 1 1 'iVbl ! a6 1 2
tDbxd4 h 6 1 3 1I.. xf6 !,,"X f6 as unclear in view
of the pawn weaknesses on both sides.
Korchnoi-Miles, Rotterdam 1 984 went 8
tDxc4 tDxc4 9 1Wa4+ .2i.d7 1 0 �xc4 �6
(1 0 ... b5 is a bit too early, as was demon
strated in Quinteros-Schweber, Buenos Aires
1 998, which continued 1 1 it'd3 c4 1 2 �c2 1 5 lLlg5! f5
.2i.c6 1 3 �g5 �e7 14 .2i.xf6 �xf6 1 5 e4 �b7 15 ... tD7f6 16 tDg4! and White wins at least
16 .l:1ad 1 0-0 17 e5 .2i.e7 1 8 tDg5 .2i.xg5 1 9 a piece. 1 5 ...g6 is more stubborn, although
.2i.xb7 nb8 20 .ie4 g6 21 h4 .ih6 22 d5 White wins after 1 6 tDexf7! .l:i.xf7 1 7 tDxf7
exd5 23 .ixd5 'iVe7 24 .l:i.fe l and Black was Wxf7 1 8 .if4 �c5 19 �xc5 tDxc5 20 .l:i.xd5!
left to contend with e5-e6) 1 1 dxc5 .ixc5 1 2 etc.
b4! 'iYxb4 1 3 it'xb4 .ixb4 1 4 .l:i. b1 .id6 1 5 1 6 lLlxe6! lLlxe3 1 7 fxe3 'iWxe5 1 8 lLlxf8
.l:i.dl �e7 1 6 tDg5 tDd5. Korchnoi then gives 'iWxe3+ 1 9 �h 1 1 -0
1 7 tDxf7!? �xf7 1 8 .l:i.xb7 We8 1 9 e4 .ia4
(1 9 ... .ic6 20 .l:lxg7 .2i.e5?! 21 exd5 .2i.a4 22 Game 92
llg5! is excellent for White) 20 .l:i.d3 .l:i.c8 21 Kasparov-Korchnoi
.ib2 .ic2 22 .l:i.d2 �b4 23 .l:i.xc2 .l:i.xc2 24 Candidates Semifinal (9), London 1983
�xg7 tDe3 25 fxe3 as a route to advantage
for White. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 lLlf6 4 g3 dxc4 5
8 dxc5 i.xc5 9 lLlxc4 0-0 i.g2 lLlbd7 6 0-0 J:tb8 7 a4 b6
9 ... b5? runs into 10 tDce5 .ib7 1 1 tDxf7! Not Black's only configuration on the
<j;xf7 12 tDg5+ �e7 13 .ixb7 and White was queenside. After 7 ... a6 8 as b5 9 axb6 cxb6
close to winning in Raetsky-Andersen, Bad 10 .2i.f4 .l:i.b7 1 1 .l:i.xa6 tDd5 12 tDc3 Black
Raga? 1 994. played 12 ... .2i.e7?! in Tukmakov-O.Rodriguez,
1 0 'iWc2 b5?! New York 1 987, but following 1 3 tDb5! 0-0
1 O ...�e7 11 .ig5 h6 1 2 .ixf6 tDxf6 1 3 1 4 it'c 1 tDxf4 1 5 gxf4 .i:!.b8 16 .i:!.a7 .2i.b 7 1 7
1 82
4 . . . dx c 4 5 i.g 2 0, b d 7
'iVxc4 emerged a pawn down for nothing, his Also possible is 1 7 'iitg2!? 11e8 1 8 e5
situation taking a turn for the worse after 'iixf3+ 19 'it'xf3 ctJh5 20 l:tad1 ctJxf4 21 gxf4
1 7 ... ctJf6 1 8 ctJe5 ctJd5 1 9 f5! .i.g5 20 ctJxf7! with a better endgame.
Itxf7 21 fxe6 l:.f5 22 l:.xb7 .l::t xb 7 23 e4, 1 7 . . . b5
when White won. Black can consider 1 7...'iVc6 1 8 b3 ctJxd5 1 9 exd5 'iVf6 20
12 ... ctJxf4, when 1 3 gxf4 b5 1 4 l:ta8! ctJb6 1 5 .uac 1 is a lesser evil.
l:.a5 favours White, the b5-pawn being weak 1 S 0,a5!
and Black lagging behind in development. In
Gulko-Shapiro, New York 1 987 Black man
aged to use the b5-square (temporarily) for
his own knight after 8 ... ctJe4 9 'ilVc2 ctJd6 1 0
ctJe5 ctJb5 1 1 l:.d 1 ctJxe5 1 2 dxe5 .i.d7 1 3
'iix c4 c 5 1 4 ctJc3, when White collected the
gambit pawn with a more active position.
Indeed after 14 ... 'it'c7 1 5 ctJe4 .i.e7 1 6 .i.f4
0-0 1 7 ctJf6+! .i.xf6 1 8 exf6 e5 1 9 .i.e3 ctJd4
20 lhd4! exd4 21 .i.f4 White won material.
S 0,fd2
8 ctJbd2 .i.a6 9 'iVc2 c3 10 bxc3 .i.xe2 1 1
lie 1 .i.a6 was tried in Lutikov-Klovans,
Vladivostok 1 978, when White could have 18 ctJe5 forces too many exchanges and
obtained the better chances after 1 2 c4! .i.e7 results in equality after 1 8 ... ctJxe5 19 .i.xe5
1 3 d5 ctJc5 1 4 ctJe5 .i.b7 1 5 dxe6 ctJxe6 1 6 ctJxd5 20 exd5 .i.d6 21 .i.d4 l:.b7 when, sud
.i.c6+ .i.xc6 (Neistadt gives 1 6 . ..'.ti> f8 1 7 denly, Black is no longer cramped on the
ctJdf3 with initiative) 1 7 ctJxc6 ctJd4 1 8 queenside.
l:.xe7+! 'it'xe7 1 9 ctJxd4 'ilVe1+ 20 'it'g2, with 1 S . . . bxa4? !
two pieces for a rook. Far better is 1 8 ... l:.e8! 1 9 ctJxc7 'iVxe4 20
S . . . e5 'it'xe4 1he4 21 axb5 axb5 22 ctJxb5 l:.a8 with
8 . . . .i.b7 9 .i.xb7 l:.xb7 10 ctJxc4 .i.e7 1 1 chances to fight on despite White's extra
ctJc3 ctJd5 1 2 e4 ctJxc3 1 3 bxc3 ctJf6 1 4 'it'e2 pawn.
is an edge for White, while 14 e5?! ctJd5 1 5 1 9 l:tfc 1 ! i.d4
'it'g4 ctJxc3!? 1 6 .i.b2 h5 1 7 'iWxg7 ctJe2+ 1 8 Or 1 9 ... .i.d6 20 ctJc6 .i.xf4 21 ctJxf4 l:.b7
�g2 'ilVd5+ 1 9 f3 l:.f8 is unclear. 22 e5 ctJe8 23 11xa4 with a decisive lead.
9 0,xc4! 20 l:txa4 i.xb2?
9 d5?! as! 10 ctJc3 .i.a6 1 1 ctJb5 .i.xb5 1 2 Losing the exchange. After the more accu
axb5 .i.d6 1 3 ctJxc4 0-0 i s equal. rate 20 ... ctJxd5 21 exd5 .i.xb2 22 11c2 .i.f6 23
9 . . . exd4 1 0 'iWxd4 i.c5 1 1 'it'd3 0-0 1 2 .i.e3! ctJb6 24 11g4 White stays on top thanks
0,c3 i.b 7 1 3 i.xb 7 l:txb 7 1 4 'liVf3 ! to his attacking chances and Black's poor co
1 83
Th e Ca t a l a n
Summary
Practice shows that the S ... ttJbd7 system is difficult for Black, which is why it is seldom seen
on the tournament circuit these days. After 6 ... cS 7 ttJa3 (Game 91) 7 ... ttJb6 our attention is
drawn to the standard collection of the pawn with 8 ttJxc4! ttJxc4 9 'ifa4+ .i.d7 10 'ifxc4 (note
that this is possible after 6 ...ttJb6 7 ttJbd2 cS 8 ttJxc4) . After 6 ....l:tb8 7 a4 b6 (Game 92) Black's
defensive task seems sufficiently difficult to prefer 7 ... a6 8 as ttJe4.
6 0-0
6 ... cS (D) Game 9 1 ; 6 ... l:tb8 (D) Game 92
- -
5. . . liJbd7 6. . . c5 6. . . 'D.b8
1 84
I CHA PTER TWEl VE I
4 . . . dxc4 5 �g2 i.d7
1 85
Th e Ca t a l a n
stores material equity with a n unclear posi .bg5 'iVe8 1 7 i.e4! :!:tf5
tion. 1 7".gxhS 18 'it>hl �f7 19 l1g1 and White
7 " .b5 wins.
7".i.xd2+ 8 i.xd2 i.c6 9 'iVxc4 i.dS 10 1 8 'it'h 1 ! e5 1 9 .l:!.g 1 �xg5 20 hxg6
'it'd3 ttJc6 1 1 0-0 leaves White with the dark Also good is 20 'iixgS i.e7 21 �d2.
squared bishop. However, 7".i.bS! looks 20 . . . l:!.xg 1 + 21 .l:!.xg 1 'it'g7
best, when play has continued 8 0-0 ttJc6 9 21 ...'iie7 22 'iYh7+ does not help Black.
lId1 . One game went 9".ttJaS 10 e4 0-0 1 1 22 'ii'h 7 + 'it'f6 23 g7
ttJeS i.xd2 1 2 i.xd2 'it'xd4 1 3 i.c3 'iVb6 1 4
'iYd2 ttJc6 I S 'it'gS h 6 1 6 'iVh4 ttJxeS 1 7
i.xeS ttJd7 1 8 Si.d4 c S 1 9 i.c3 and the
bishop pair gave White compensation in
Kozul-Liang Jinrong, Novi Sad 1 990. In
Sosonko-Korchnoi, Wijk aan Zee 1 984 Black
accepted the invitation to take on d4:
9".ttJxd4 10 ttJxd4 1lVxd4 1 1 ttJe4 �b6 1 2
Si.e3 1lVa6 1 3 i.d4 i.e7 1 4 i.xf6 gxf6
(1 4".i.xf6 I S ttJxf6+ gxf6 1 6 1lVc3 eS 1 7 '€Vf3
<j;;e 7 1 8 1lVxb7 �xb7 1 9 i.xb7 lIab8 20 i.f3
with equality) IS 'iYc3 eS and White had the
trademark Catalan activity in return for the
material investment. 23 . . . ttJa6 24 l:!.g6 + 'ilixg6 25 '(/ixg6 +
8 a4 0-0 'it'e7 2 6 dxe5 1 -0
Game 94
Sulava-Farago
Vinkovci 1993
1 86
4 . . . dx c 4 5 ii.. g 2 ii.. d 7
�d5 1 3 0-0 l:tfd8 1 4 'ilfxd5 l:txd5 1 5 ttJb3 as 1 2 . . . ltJxe2 + 1 3 'it>f 1 ltJd4 1 4 ii.. e 3
and a draw was agreed in Dorfman-Psakhis, Not to be recommended is 14 i.xa8?!
Lvov 1 984. Black's doubled c-pawns are �xa8 15 l:lxd4 'iVhH 16 'ite2 'iVxc1
weak and White has fIrm control of the c5- (Farago), when White will pay for his
square, but Black is very active and has pres cramped queenside and exposed king.
sure both against d4 and down the b-flie. 1 4 . . . c5 1 5 ltJc3? !
Also possible is 8 ... �d7 9 �xc4 ttJxd4 1 0 White should prefer 1 5 ttJa3 l:tb8 1 6
..txb7 l:tb8 1 1 i.g2 ..tb4+ 1 2 ttJd2 0-0 1 3 e3 �xa7 ttJd5, e.g. 1 7 ttJxc4 (1 7 ..txd4 cxd4 1 8
ttJf5 14 ..tc6!? 'ilVd6 1 5 a3 ttJg4 1 6 it'c2, ttJxc4 ..tf6 is unclear - White has a danger
which was unclear in Wojtkiewicz ous queenside majority but Black has central
Timoshenko, Fredericksburg 1 999. control) 1 7 ...l:ta8 1 8 'iVb7 .l:tb8 and a draw
8 . . . ii.. e 7 was agreed in Raetsky-Sax, Munich 1 994.
Black's 8 ... ttJxd4?! in Gulko-Korchnoi, 1 5 . . . .l:!.b8 1 6 'ilixa7 '!:!xb2 1 7 ii.. x d4 cxd4
Amsterdam 1 989 shouldn't be repeated. Af 1 8 '!:!xd4 ii.. d 6 1 9 a4 ltJd5!
ter 9 ..txb7 l:tb8 1 0 i.g2 i.c5 1 1 ttJd2 c3 1 2
bxc3 ttJb5 1 3 'ilfc2 0-0 1 4 a 4 ttJxc3 1 5 'iVxc3
.i.d4 1 6 'iVa3 i.xa1 1 7 �xa1 the rook was
no match for White's bishops.
9 'i'a4
9 e3 has also been played, when Black
must choose his next step carefully.
Zsu.Polgar-A.Maric, Tilburg 1 994 went
9 ...'ilfd7 10 'it'a4 ttJb4 1 1 'iVxd7+ ttJxd7 1 2
ttJd2 ttJb6 1 3 i.xb7 l:tb8 1 4 i.f3 c 5 1 5 dxc5
.i.xc5 16 i.e2 0-0 17 a3! ttJd3 1 8 b4! i.e7 1 9
ttJxc4 i.f6 20 .l:ta2 ttJxc1 21 l:txc1 l:tfc8 22
l:'Iac2 ttJxc4 23 l:!.xc4 .uxc4 24 l:txc4 with
good winning chances for White. 20 ii.. x d5
Krasenkow-Nei, Juvaskyla 1 99 1 saw 9 ... ttJd5 After 20 ttJxd5 exd5 21 l:txd5 �f6 Black
10 'iVe2 ttJb6 1 1 ttJd2 ttJa5 12 ttJe4 0-0 1 3 again has the better prospects. The c-pawn is
ttJc5 'ilVc 8 1 4 i.d2 ttJc6 1 5 l:tac1 l:td8 1 6 more dangerous than the a-pawn and it is
l:tfd1 a s 1 7 b3 a4 1 8 b4 l:ta7 1 9 a3 ttJb8 20 easier for Black to create threats against his
b5 c6 21 l:tb1 cxb5 22 l:txb5 and White had opponent's dark squares.
the initiative. Tratar-Wells, Bled 1 995 fea 20 . . . ii.. e 5! 2 1 .l:!.dd 1 ii.. x c3 22 ii.. x c4 'ilif6
tured Black's best response: 9 ... e5!? 1 0 Black has sacrifIced his c-pawn but the at
i.xc6+ bxc6 1 1 dxe5 'iVxd 1 1 2 ':'xd1 ttJd7 1 3 tack is very strong.
f4 0-0-0 1 4 ..td2 f6 1 5 e 6 ttJb6 1 6 ttJc3 f5 1 7 23 .l:!.a2?
e4 i.c5+ 1 8 Wg2 g6 1 9 a4 a6 and the situa No better is 23 l:tab 1 ? i.d4!, but White
tion can justifIably be evaluated as unclear. could try 23 l:tac1 .i.a5 24 'iVd4 'iVxd4 25
9 . . . 0-0 1 0 li!.d 1 ? ! l:txd4 ..tb6 (25 ... l:txf2+ 26 'iit x f2 .i.b6 27
A more solid approach is 1 0 e3 ttJb4 1 1 a3 We3 e5 28 We4 ..txd4 29 l:tb 1 is less con
ttJbd5 12 'iWxc4 c6 1 3 l:td1 with a small but vincing - Black should keep as many pieces
solid advantage for White due to his centre, on the board as possible) 26 l:tf4 g5 27 l:tf3
extra space and bishop pair. l:tc8, when White's co-ordination is very
1 0 . . . b5! 1 1 'i!Vxb5 ltJxd4 1 2 'ilia4 poor but at least he can still fIght.
Forced ( 1 2 'ilVxc4? ttJf3+) . 23 . . . 'i!Vf3 0-1
187
Th e Ca t a la n
1 88
4 . . . dx c 4 5 � g 2 � d 7
Summary
In reply to S ... .td7 the continuation beginning with 6 ttJbd2 has been played by Catalan ex
perts grandmasters Sosonko and Kozul. Nevertheless White fails to achieve an advantage here
- with 6 ... .tb4 7 'iic 2 .tbS! (as in Sosonko-Korchnoi) Black managed to retain the extra pawn,
while it seems White is struggling to fmd sufficient compensation. Consequently ttJbd2 has left
tournament practice at the highest level.
After 6 ttJeS .tc6 7 ttJxc6 ttJxc6 White achieves nothing from 8 'iia4. Black can aim for
simplifications and equal chances with 8 ... .tb4+ or play the more complex positions that oc
cur after 8 ... 'iid 7. The positions after 8 e3 and 8 0-0 will often simply transpose but, after 8 e3,
Black's 8 ... eS is not bad, either. In the event of 8 0-0 .te7 the reputation of 9 'iia4 was harmed
by the game Sulava-Farago. However, after 9 'ii'a4 0-0 White is not obliged to play 10 l::td 1 ?!
(there is 1 0 e3!?, for example) which, incidentally, was partly rehabilitated in Raetsky-Sax.
Finally, after the important 8 0-0 'it'd7 9 e3 l::tb 8 10 'iVe2 bS it would appear that White's ini
tiative more than compensates the absence of a pawn.
7 flxc4 8 0-0
1 89
INDEX OF COMPLETE GAMES I
1 90
Index o f Comple te G a m e s
19 1
Th e Ca t a la n
1 92
· .... . ..
ISBN 1 -85744-346-2
9
£ 1 4.99 $ 1 9.95